Quote:
Originally posted by Salmo g.:
What makes the concept fairly workable is that it is simply a purchase of fish. That is, via whatever funding mechanism selected and whatever agent, i.e. WDFW, a fish purchase contract can be made with a treaty Indian tribe for X number of salmon or steelhead from the treaty harvest allocation.
But speaking as someone who has seen it from the other side, that would not work. They already do a very poor job of record keeping. Saying that a good 50% of the catch goes unreported is not stretching it in my opinion. I have to wonder how many of the fish I witnessd being sold at the marina the other day were "counted". No tribal fishery people around in the 3 days I was there fishing. Many tribal members resent having to report anything to the white man and do not cooperate. So, lets say they "Sell" 10,000 fish. What would the penalty be if they take the money and still allow members to take all or a portion of that "sold" lot of fish? There would have to be a severe penalty to assure compliance, and a stringent reporting process to assure numbers were correct. I'm afraid that with a severe penalty attached the plan would probably not make it through tribal approval.

MC
_________________________
MasterCaster


"Equal Rights" are not "Special Rights"........