Originally Posted By: Larry B
Originally Posted By: jgreen
They don't own the stream bed (including gravel bars). Why can't the state just tell them that until the litigation is finished things will at least continue as scheduled? Shouldn't the state have judiciary power in this matter? It is a state funded hatchery, not federal. Unless I'm missing something.


The stream bed ownership/reservation boundary is, I believe, the issue. An opinion from the Dept. of Interior supporting the tribe is no different than that of a parent supporting their child. In short, not necessarily the most rationale, impartial posturing.

I strongly object to the WDFW closing what has been State waters absent a court order.

And while I understand the argument for closing what is a State hatchery so doing would, IMHO, undermine the State's position in ongoing litigation. Keep that closure idea on the shelf but clearly visible.



I agree. And to rub salt, they say they'll have someone out there patrolling to make sure their idiotic ruling is strictly enforced.

I told my buddy a couple years ago when they started construction on these big new hatchery projects that we'd never get a crack at those fish because the Skok tribe was going to lay claim to the river and boot us off of it. I just didn't think WDFW would actually assist them in doing so by being such pussies.

You're pathetic WDFW.
_________________________
She was standin' alone over by the juke box, like she'd something to sell.
I said "baby, what's the goin' price?" She told me to go to hell.

Bon Scott - Shot Down in Flames