1. It's their money...they can do whatever they want with it. It is not "our" tax money, and it has absolutely no connections to any rights or privileges that tribal members have through federal treaty rights.

2. There is only one provision in the U.S. v. Washington case (the "Boldt" decision) that talks about ending the 50/50 split of harvestable fish, and that is when treaty right holders are making a moderate level of income. That hasn't been defined in any court case, yet, but $96,000 a year for a family of four sounds like more than moderate to me.

Remember, there are two reasons why treaty fishermen fish, one minor and one major. The minor one is the one that gets all the lip service, and that's to preserve tribal identity and heritage. The major one is money.

If they don't need the money from fishing, which doesn't make all that much anyway, then they'll fish less. Why would anyone on this board complain about that possibility?

Most everyone has some sort of privilege that others don't have, and most everyone takes advantage of it. That folks like someone else's privilege better than their own doesn't change that.

Go fishing!

Fish on...

Todd.