A clarification of the 50%

If you read the "fine print" of the treaties, or rather the interpretation of them by Judge Bolt, you will notice that what we catch does not directly affect what the Native Americans are allowed to catch. The interpretation reads 50% of the catchable fish, allowing for escapement (I'm paraphasing). The effect BAN will have on Native fishing, will be that there will most likely be more fish for them to net (more fish in the river, less escapement goals = more catchable fish).
This may cause you to wonder why the Native people would oppose BAN? In my opinion is they don't want to be the last group left netting, with all the scrutiny and focus being them and their fishing practices.
However, just because BAN may increase the number of fish killed by native nets, is no reason to oppose BAN. The initiative will still achieve its objective - more fish in the rivers.