CM. Yes the Fraser fishery in the San Juans has a higher catch of sockeye and Chinook in the treaty fishery than nonIndians. My point was that for those Chinook stocks that have minimal to no terminal fishery which is mostly treaty catch, the sum of pre-terminal fishery Chinook catches (or dead fish) in the treaty troll and net fisheries may be less than 50% of the total. Strait of Juan de Fuca Chinook fit this pattern. So for JDF Chinook stocks, the non treaty fisheries would need to be reduced to get down to a 50:50 split on dead fish. To get to 50:50 may require significant reduction in the Area 5 fishery. Of course, reducing Area 5 catch would also reduce the catch of other stocks passing through the area. Reduction of the catch of these other stocks could aggravate the 50:50 sharing such that the non treaty share gets further away from getting up to 50%. It becomes very difficult to restrict some fisheries and increase others to get all of the stocks at a 50:50 sharing level. There are just too many fisheries to juggle to get everybody at 50:50 while meeting the management objectives of the most constraining stock(s). In reality it can't be done for all stocks everywhere.

The state and the tribes each have their list of highest priority fisheries. For the state, this might mean that having a fishery in one area is the highest priority and to get that it may not be the most efficient way to achieve biological objectives or 50:50 sharing. During the preseason process, the "negotiation" is we need this and will accept not having that (which may be 50:50). Presumably the advisory groups and constituents help the department to identify those high priority fisheries, recognizing that you can't always get what you want.