Silver

Decades ago they commercially harvested steelhead on the Columbia until it was made a sport fish. Once that was done, the commercial intentional targeting was terminated in our rivers and in our coastal off shore waters. I could be wrong, but I believe that the State controls all fishing rights with the states limits of their off shores waters. That may only be 3 to 12 miles out, but it would make a sufficient difference when it came to gill netting. So I do not see how our hatcheries would be affected by any federal rules in those areas.

As far as the tribes go, in my opinion, it would not affect or change their rights to half of the harvestable fish. Most likely there share would increase considerably just as would the sport fishers. What may change could be the method and ways that the courts would allow them to harvest those fish. Like now, they are entitled to use the same methods and ways to harvest fish as the none-natives are allowed to use. That may all change if there was no net fishery allowed by the commercials.

In fact, the tribes may be even more responsible for paying a bigger share for some of the hatchery fish if they are no longer being targeted by nonnative commercial fishers. There are lots of different things that can be discussed on this issue, and that is why I have bought this subject up for debate.

Thanks for your impute Silver, and I hope others will follow yours. All of these different views may lead to a solution.

Cowlitzfisherman