Ahh... Such fun. It's amazing how on one hand they gripe about their rights being violated and yet on the other complain that there might be too many fish that only they can kill.
What is really funny is the fact that they complain that "Co-Management" is not happening. Well let's see... Washington manages the non-tribal to be non-kill on wild fish and the tribes manage it to be their way. Sounds like co-management to me! In fact this proves it!
3) Because we have no information leading us to believe the steelhead of the Quillayute watershed need to be in conservation status, we have not closed the tribal fishery.
They as much as admit that the conservation actions they have been pushing down our throats hasn't been working in the following statement.
"This action by the FWC raises a number of issues regarding opportunity, allocation and conservation that we have been attempting to deal with over the years through annual, river specific plans without having to resort to the federal courts to resolve our different perspectives."
In my mind when he says "Attempting to deal with" he is simply saying it's not working! Instead of being shortsighted here we should look at fish counts as far back as we have them and then graph them by likely cycles so we can see what each cycle of runs is doing. My GUESS is that they are all declining slowly but surely. People just don't want to believe it. Especially if we rule out the hatchery stock.
The thing that really gets me though is his saying that the rivers could be overstocked! What hogwash! Does he really think mother nature woudln't balance out the runs after a few cycles on her own?

I mean give me a break! The fish have been around a lot longer than humans have been fishing them. Too bad we will wipe them out due to such unfounded beliefs as that!
The thing is that more smolts in the river means more food for the larger smolts/and returning adults. So who wins? The fish that is the strongest of course. Does that mean that the river can't sustain more fish in the river? I don't think so. It just means more competition to survive so we end up with stronger fish. Hmmm Sounds good to me!
Now if we end up with more fish in the rivers then we need to make sure that those fish have adequate habitat in the rivers. This means we have to be more careful with the environment over all. Again, sounds good to me. I would love to see more rivers look like the upper reaches of the rivers that are in the Olympic National Park. Too bad we ruin them as soon as they cross that boundary! It's no different for the rest of the state either.
This letter just goes to show how greedy people are. It amazes me that the "Stewards" who are supposed to be so concerned about the natural wildlife can be so short sighted.
The kicker is the following..
The Quileute Tribe reserves the right to act as it may deem appropriate to protect its treaty rights to the steelhead fishery, in the future.
Basically they want to fish regardless of how the fish are doing and the moratorium is keeping them from feeling they can do that. Well guess what. If we don't do this there won't be any fish to fish for anyway!