Well, I just sent this off to WDFW and my state reps and senator, and cc'd some news organizations. We'll see if I get any response. Feel free to use it if you'd like.

Dear Public Officials,

It is September, the time of year when salmon return to Washington waters. Nevertheless, as many of you know (and all of you should know), almost all of Puget Sound and the surrounding watersheds are closed to fishing for coho salmon. In fact, most areas are closed to all salmon fishing.

This is because the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and tribal biologists predicted a low return of coho salmon, and agreed to restrict fishing to protect coho runs. Unfortunately, now that returning coho salmon have passed Neah Bay, Port Angeles, and all of North Puget Sound without any sport or non-tribal fishing pressure, the Muckleshoot tribe has strung nets across the Duwamish river to catch and kill the returning coho. This is not ceremonial and subsistence fishing; it is commercial. Killing fish for money. The Muckleshoot tribe has decided to do this based on its independent determination that there is a "harvestable surplus" of coho. Of course, the Duwamish remains closed to everyone else, in accordance with the conservation-minded approach that WDFW agreed to earlier in the year.

In other words, everybody else in Washington let Duwamish coho pass by without fishing pressure in order to conserve the resource, only for Muckleshoot fishermen to catch them, kill them, and sell them at the end of their migration. I fear that other treaty tribes may soon follow the Muckleshoot's lead with other coho stocks. There is already commercial netting taking place in front of the Ballard Locks, but at least in that case WDFW has agreed that there is a harvestable surplus of coho, and has opened Lake Washington to non-tribal, recreational coho fishing starting September 16 based on that assessment.

It seems to me that there are two potential scenarios and responses that balance conservation goals and treaty fishing rights for any particular coho run. The first is that, as previously predicted, the coho return is not healthy enough this year, there is no harvestable surplus of coho, and nobody should be fishing for coho. The second is that biologists underestimated the coho return, there is a harvestable surplus of coho, and the surplus should be split evenly between tribal and non-tribal fishermen (as called for in the applicable treaties).

The current scenario, in which tribal fishermen are either (a) killing fish when there is no surplus, or (b) taking 100% of the harvestable surplus, represents the interests of the very few overwhelming the interests of the very many.

So, my question is whether you, the public officials of Washington, intend to do anything about this, and what that may be.

A direct response would be greatly appreciated.