Micro,

I appreciate your frustration, but it's just as easy for the other users of the resource to use the same argument...

"I'm a commercial fisherman. I'm not netting fish in the rivers, nor am I raping the habitat, diminishing the water quality, or catching the poor fish right out of their spawning grounds. I'm not stopping what I do until the others do."

"I'm a tribal fisherman. I don't put out miles of ghost nets in the ocean, rape the habitat, pour pollution in the water and air, or line up right outside the hatchery creeks and foul hook the fish with 150 of my favorite fishing buddies, while throwing my trash all over the place. I'm not stopping what I do until the others do."

"I'm a developer. True, I screw up the habitat and water quality, but it sure makes a lot of money for poor communities around here. If it wasn't for the damn natives and commercial fishermen, not to mention those damn sporties, there'd be plenty of fish in the river. I'm not stopping what I do until the others do."

Seals would have plenty to eat if it wasn't for all the rest of us, too.

There's no rule that you can only support one type of enhancement, and taking responsibility for your role is in no way denying other factors. As long as no one addresses their own impacts unless others do, no one will do a damn thing.

Not only do I try to modify my own impacts to reduce their effects on fish and fish runs, I also work to modify the others so that they also can reduce their effects.

It makes sense politically, too, to be the only ones to say "I've fixed up my backyard, whattabout you?".

Fish on...

Todd.