RA3, Plunker, etc.,

Interesting discussion, to say the least.

I have no problem with a 1 or 2 fish per day limit, I also have no problem with a -0- retention policy on Wild Steelhead, either.

RA3: It does seem, based on the submitted facts, that before we make any attempts to get a "no retention" policy on wild fish that we FIRST have to get the tribes on board. Without that, any efforts on the fishes behalf will most certainly back-fire.

Seems the tribes attitude is: "If the Sportsmen don't catch them, we will."

The "0 Retention" team fought a great battle against other Sportsmen (in essence a "civil war" scenario) to get the 1 fish limit.

What none of us realized was that there was an entirely different, and far more powerful enemy, just over the hill, waiting to come in and take all the spoils of the war. Neither side (WSR or no wsr) wins.

And there's not a thing we can do about it.

At one time I was fairly anti-Native fishery. I was anti-Boldt amendment. I still hate any gill net.

To be PC, and clear, about it, I have no prejudice against the native American tribes. I do have a problem with their fisheries practices when they destroy work non-natives have done to preserve a potentially endangered shared resource.

Mike

p.s. RICH: Even though this thread is about where we got screwed by WDFW, etc. I find the language your "Title" a bit harsh. We know what the word is. So did my young daughter and her friend as they watched me as I showed them catch pic's on the board. We (board readers) can understand, just as well, someone saying "We got screwed", or "We got hosed". etc. Just an opinion from one who has/does respect for your posts.