Funny how no one mentioned the Bolht decison.....flatly, the biggest rip off of sportmen to date. OK, so it's gone to the highest court and been upheld and I'm just pissin' against the wind.....doesn't change the facts. No one ever, in their wildest imagination, would have interpretted the words, "in common with" as meaning any sort of percentage. If you go fishing ("in common with") me, you are not guaranteed 50%.....so why is anyone else??

One more thing and I'm thru with my rant.....I saw someone state previously in a recent thread that, (my words, but close) ..... "there were fish runs in trouble before the infamous Bolht Decision......" Really? and just how many of those runs that were in big trouble were not being already netted?? (for subsistance and cermonial purposes, of course)

OK, I'm done now....

Sincerely, Just another White native American.