Posh', that's a graph from the devil's advocate. It looks official, right? It looks like it came out of a crayon book.

All kidding aside, does anyone in their right mind think that Washington Tribal leaders and lawyers would settle for those skewed numbers in that graph since the Boldt decision without a lawsuit for their 50% share?!? No.

They would be all over that faster and harder than Superfly on a bobber down! I haven't heard much grumbling about their take of the Boldt decision share. Have you?

Wherever it came from, the Indian harvest amounts on that graph would have had to come from Indian fish netter's reports. Even if that thing were real, the Indian leaders/lawyers didn't fall for it (see paragraph 2 above). ... Someone may have added non-Treaty rivers to up the sportcatch stats in that 'thingy', instead of comparing numbers for each entity on rivers under Treaty law. And the following is for sure - several Washington tribe's take on the Columbia River was not included in that graph! Or there would be one hell of a lot more green on there!!! I say it's safe to ignore that piece.