Eddie my son...we don't need to try to get rid of the treaties we just need to be more diligent in enforcing fish and wildlife laws that can and do apply to the tribes. We just seem to give up more and more every year. The geoduck example is a good one. The words "In Kind" come to mind in the Boldt decision. That never was intended to mean anything more than equal access in my opinion and yet we have given up way more than equal access. Not to mention the equal but sovereign bs...we (indians) are a sovereign nation when we want to hide behind that status but we are one of you (US citizens) when it suits us. Having it both ways is what most people really disapprove of I think. There are things that can be done. One of them is to try to work with the tribes for the greater good. Atleast try. The state has been doing that but at the end of the day it is a sham. We work together until something comes along that the tribes don't like and they just get their own way. Look at the proliferation of casinoes. What's up with that? A $7 billion dollar industry for the tribes in California with no taxes thanks to compacts done by Gray Davis in exchange for a $12 million campaign contribution for his failed attempt to stay in office or get Cruz Bustamante in. Hopefully Arnold will set an example and tax the tribes but Gray signed deals that last for the next 17 years.....And the tribes are pushing for huge expansions at their existing casinoes with new ones on the way all of the state...Same here in Washington...So why do they care about fish? Because they want to perpetuate their treaty rights and gain as much political power as possible. The tribes are winning the war this time around.