I don't begrudge anyone from exercising their cultural heritage. However, we need to also consider that many non-tribal citizens are also dependent on fish for subsistence. If the tribal elders were transparent and fair in this request, they would insure that those tribal members who are in need of fish for subsistence, should have to collect those fish in the same manner and within the same regulations that non-tribal citizens have to comply with. There should also be a very clear and fully transparent policy as to a limited number of fish that can be "harvested" for cultural use.
There should not, and cannot be a dual standard in the application of the regulations fully because of ones race, creed, color or religion. If there is no treaty, then there is no federal mandate which supports preferential treatment under the law. WDFW is opening itself to a slippery slope which could very easily evolve into commercial harvest.

Uhhhhh...I just can't believe people just keep letting this stuff creep on.

I JUST SENT THIS COMMENT ON THE BILL TO MY THREE DISTRICT REPS:
I do not begrudge anyone from celebrating their cultural heritage. I do ask that you consider the many non-tribal citizens whom are also dependent on fish for substance. Many are your constituents. These people, a large number who are low income, elderly or single parent families must comply with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife policies and regulations in their attempts to harvest fish they depend on to feed themselves and their children. What message are you sending to these citizens through this bill which singles out a section of our population for preferential treatment in the harvest of fish for subsistence? Are not all hungry people equal in your eye's? If you are truly concerned about allowing your constituents to harvest fish for substance, then amend this law to allow ALL citizens in need of subsistence harvest to use the same means and methods to harvest those fish!