Originally Posted By: MPM

The "bad behavior" in my view is taking a share of fish greater than their share allocated by treaty, and using the deck-stacked legal/political system to force WDFW to agree to that.

Has WDFW taken any position that would deny a treaty tribe their share of harvestable fish allocated by treaty? If not, then why would they deserve equal derision?


Your question about whether or not WDFW has ever taken a position that would deny a treaty tribe their share of harvestable fish is really funny. The fact that they did this was the whole point of US v. WA. As far as your point about them taking more than their share allocated, I seriously doubt if you or anybody can show that they have done that. Finally, regarding your contention that the tribes have some responsibility to ensure you get your share of the fish, I only have one comment. I guarantee that you do no want the tribes to help manage your fisheries.