Oh, I know you are right on in your analysis of the current situation Eddie..... I am not for getting RID of the treaties at all. That would probably be impossible in todays legal arena. But I do feel they could be amended as they were (or interpreted) and that when the treaties were written the population was nill and the resources were seemingly endless....
Just as the tribes have embraced modernisms into their culture such as cars, electricity, TV, fiberglass hulls and outboards, so they also must realize that with time change come custom changes. I dont think ANYONE has a problem with tribal members going out and fishing for religeous purposes or even for true subsistance (ya know, kill to eat). But taking and taking for nothing more than $$ is not what the treaty signers ever had in mind.... It was to preserve a way of life, not create a new one.
Take the Geoduck harvest as just one example... How many tribes back when the treaty was written ever dove for geoducks? Possibly found a rare one on low tides, but it was not a customary part of their "subsistance". Now they are taking $350,000,000.00 a year in Geoduck and paying no license fee, no taxes on sales, etc? Can anyone justify that and not see that practices such as that were not what the treaty had in mind?? I just think a big stink needs to be created, people need to be educated, and then the whole package needs to be looked at...... Hell, look at the casinos... Did not have them when the treaties were written, but now we let them have them and that is "a change"...... Time for other "changes" I think.....

MC