All the stuff in the two PSA letters have been addressed in the other threads, ad nauseum, so there's not really any need to hash it out here again.

Jacob and SSF,

The "they can, so I wanna, too!" reminds me a lot of me and my sister arguing over toys and candy...only we were 3 and 5 at the time.

Why can they do it and not you? Because they're not you, and you're not them.

They can use nets...are you mad that you can't? Why not? What's the difference?

Also, the "they're just going to end up in a net, anyway" argument is the biggest chunk of BS I've ever heard...whoever actually tries to use that one is either really out of touch with reality, or really thinks that the rest of us who hear it are not very bright.

First off, 90% of the tribal fisheries are way downstream of anywhere we fish...the fish we're catching have already made it by the nets. And in the few tribal fisheries that take place farther upstream, believe it or not, just like the fisheries downstream, they don't catch every single fish...or even close. If they did we'd never catch any fish in rivers with tribal fisheries.

As far as the Reel News goes, I think it's a pretty good rag. It provides people the opportunity to openly spread their opinions...but there's not much in the way of fact checking. I've written editorials for it before, and they were just as happy to print my opinion as the opposite one. As with anything else, opinions presented as facts are still opinions, and most of us can tell the difference.

Lastly, SSF, don't confuse "fishing" with "harvesting fish"...harvest can't occur without fishing, but lots and lots of fishing without harvesting takes place every day all over the state. With longer seasons we'll be fishing MORE than we were before over those runs, not less.

Fish on...

Todd