Andy,

I appreciate your enthusiasm, but you need to review the history. The federal court found that hatchery fish are stocked by and large to offset losses of wild stocks. The treaty tribes have the right to fish. They may catch whatever is in the water. If that includes hatchery fish, regardless of who paid for them, that is a part of exercising the fishing right. Sorry.

We are first a nation of laws. Laws work better for some interests than others, but that's how it is, unless and until laws are modified.

However, there is no requirement that the state stock hatchery fish. It might be appropriate to evaluate various hatchery programs in terms of who reaps the benefits, and modify hatchery production to steer the benefits toward those who finance them, if possible. If it really bothers non-treaty citizens to have treaty fishermen catching hatchery fish, we could elect to forego hatchery fish entirely. Would you really wish to do that?

BK,

Sorry you dislike the fishing methods employed by treaty Indians. However, think through your logic path. Although the treaty is dated 1855, neither party intended to limit itself to then-current technology. Treaty Indians should no more give up power boats and nylon nets than you should give up your nylon fishing line, graphite rods, drift boats, jet sleds, waders, etc., etc. Technology works for all, and nothing in the treaties or the intentions of the treaties was intended to deny anyone from enjoying the benefits of progress. Do you actually think either party would have limited itself like that? No, I don't think so either.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.