Noble sentiments, but your glossing over all of the complexities. In the first place, most fish that are harvested by the nets or rod/reel are hatchery fish. And the primary controversy is the allocation of these hatchery fish, particularly with ESA incidental take issues. In theory, WDFW should not allow any depressed wild run fish to be netted, although we all know this isn't always the case. But at least in theory, a reasonble management model is in place. So we need better implementation of management strategies and better enforcement.

The state of our runs are not in such whole sale shambles that we all have to "lay down our rods" or nets. We just have to be more selective on which stocks are targetted. No matter what anyone says, tribal nets are unlikely to cause a wild run to be extirpated, although in my opinion, they do target wild runs that are depressed. We do, however, have to be very careful regarding the incidental take of highly depressed runs like those in the upper Columbia. Some of these runs number in the double and triple digits on good years, and the chances of netting these fish in the lower river are far greater.

The biggest issue remains the equitable allocation of hatchery fish. A second issue is abuse.

I also have to say its much easier to "lay down your rod" than for a tribal or commercial fisher to quit fishing and get a new job. Someday it just might be necessary, but I'm not going to have less respect for a person for wanting to make a living; the comparison is not fair.