I am wondering about perspective here. Do people believe that the abuses of Tribal fishing rights are to blame for declining fisheries? There certainly are abuses, under reporting, etc., but I'm not convinced that this is the reason our runs are declining on all or even most rivers.

One poster cited nets across the Columbia R. The dams are the primary reason for the monumental declines on the Columbia basin. Period.

Another cited large runs on the Skokomish R. I do not believe large runs of steelhead will consistently occur on a river that floods year after year after year like the Skoke. I also do not believe that all those people who get flooded out every November would have built there in the first place if historically, the river didn't maintain a reasonable floodplain. Logging and agriculture has filled this river in such that nothing can spawn there and there's no place for the water to go but over the banks.

Several noted wastage. This is a shame and a PR problem, but not a direct cause of declining runs. I think its the Indians business if they want to sell only the row. Commercial herring fisheries do this all of the time. I do wish the Indians would make more of an effort to donate edible carcasses to food banks and sell the rest to fish meal plants. Or if this isn't feasible, at least throw the carcasses back in the river where their nutrients can benefit young salmon.

As far as being an American goes, unless people want to weaken the Constitution, we can't go around dropping laws just because we don't like them. Bottom line is that the Indians were here, the rest of us immigrated, and non-Indians made legally binding agreements for the land. I'm afraid it does make a difference. As far as being a conquered nation, again, take this argument to the Feds. There are lots of ways to conquer people (just look at the news), the way things turned out was the decision of the Federal Government and we just can't say...oops this isn't working so we're going to unilaterally change this.

I do agree with some of the arguments that greater scrutiny is needed to monitor both catch and wastage. Human nature dictates that if we can get away with something, we'll continue to do it. No different with Tribal fisheries. In the long run I think greater monitoring will benefit both the Tribes, who are contantly bombarded by groups who oppose them, and of course the fisheries, which would benefit by greater escapement.

This piss, moan, and bash session is truly futile and unproductive. Tribes and non-Indians have to work around the Treaties because they're not going anywhere. Treaty rights have to be treated like a commodity; the Indians have this commodity, how can it be used to the benefit of all parties and the resource. And before anyone says the Indians won't have anything to do with this, look at the Quinault--a trophy steelhead stream where the Indians make more guiding than fishing, and anglers have the best chance at catching true trophies.