Arrgggh!!!

I feel this important lesson is being lost:
WHY DO THE tribes get 87% of the ESA impact?
IT'S BECAUSE WE (THE STATES) TRIED TO SUE ALREADY OVER ESA IMPACT SHARING, AND WE LOST!!!!!! Some of you need to wake up and smell reality!! The tribes have us over the perenial barrel if you think we can somehow renegotiate a larger % of ESA impacts in the Columbia R! The only way we get more than 2% is IF THEY DECIDE TO GIVE IT TO US OR NOT!!

REREAD my previous post why eyeFish is wrong about ESA impact sharing between the States and the Tribes:

History lesson: After US v OR came down and guaranteed them treaty rights to fish and then Boldt came down and guaranteed them a 50% share, but then Snake River falls got listed under ESA in the early 90's. The tribes said ESA didn't apply to them, as US v OR guaranteed them harvestable fish....and the states sued, guessing that Boldt caselaw would require the feds to split ESA sharing 50:50.....EHH!! Wrong!! The judge ruling on the case pulled the litigants into his court and said he was going to decide in this order of priority:
1. Conservation
2. Tribal ceremonial & subsistence
3. Tribal commercial
4. Nontribal fisheries

Or the parties could work out an impact sharing agreement themselves. So based on this the States went into a room and negotiated the sharing impacts with the tribes. Hence the current rate of 2% we get as that's what we negotiated. The case was never ruled on, as you can see the judge was going to give the tribes essentially preference for ALL of the ESA impacts, and they wouldn't technically have to let us have any ESA impacts as they were both #2 and #3 priority.

We get 2% simply because the tribes LET US HAVE some. Furthermore the essence of what is known as Boldt II.....we f'd up the habitat and so our ESA impacts are used through habitat destruction and so we're off the water. We don't sit on a very justified position of bargaining for anything, especially additional ESA impacts. Just part of your CR springer 101.

This is caselaw. Call the WA Attorney General's office and ask for Fronda Woods, or if you ever get a chance talk to WDFW Director Phil Anderson about it. If you want to go back to court over ESA impact sharing both of them will tell you the above story I just described, and it's the reason we DON'T PUSH THE TRIBES OVER ISSUES OF ESA IMPACT SHARING, IT'S A LOSER!!!