I guess I should have made myself more clear.... give us a better harvest plan that lets more of each years wild return actually hit the gravel, while preventing more of the hatchery return from straying onto that same gravel.

Spill and habitat protection/restoration/reclamation are no-brainers that EVERYONE here supports. Spill is already federally mandated. The habitat front can always use a helping hand. But all the habitat in the world is useless if you don't seed it with productive spawners.

Not quite sure how eliminating the commies helps anything.

By your same argument that eliminating gillnets does NOTHING for the fish, eliminating the commies by the same logic also does NOTHING for the fish. The impacts are simply transferred to the remaining NON-treaty user. Pretty convenient for us, and utterly crappy for them. But impact-neutral for the fish.... the same amount still die.

Try again?

And as Keith so astutely pointed out many threads ago, the commercial fishery has been the driving force for hatchery production. Without a viable commercial fishery, there is no incentive to maintain current levels of artificial propagation.... in other words fewer hatch fish for us to harvest.

So that really begs the question, Keith. Do we get rid of gillnets or do we get rid of the commercial fishery? On the one hand you say we need a viable commercial fishery to insure sustained hatchery production. On the other hand you seem to support gillnets as the preferrred gear-type. Is your preference really for them to continue exclusively using gillnets to get the deed done? Or do you just want them off the river?