I don't know if this question or solution has been addressed yet but I believe it is the most economical and fair.

There are 7 places on a fish that I can think of that can be used to mark a fish safely.

We have three major management programs and they are state, Native American, and wild.

Why can't the state and the Native Americans have different designated places on a fish to mark their signature?
This way it is easier to tell the difference between fish between the 3 different groups.

No nets are needed with this system because the Tribes can harvest their fish directly at their hatchery.

Sports fishermen will only harvest fish marked by the state hatchery.

And no one is allow to harvest wild stock (unmarked).

Oh, and don't forget the combinations of the 7 spots that can produce 315 different ways to mark a fish.

The research industry thanks you for providing them with enough studies to keep them busy as a whole through 2050.

Actually the concept has merit for the practical purpose of truly seperating wild fish from hatchery fish. Right now only the 'white' hatcheries mark their fish, the Indian hatchies don't - the official reason is lack of funds and stress to the fish, the real reason is they don't want them selectively caught and they don't want to really know how many wild fish they are unselectively catching. Now if they did at least remove a ventral fin and leave the adipose then they would be assured that none of their fish got caught by us sporties and they would have plenty to egg and throw in the water to lower the DO (ok, I apologize like Larry the Cable Guy). And we would really know what the wild return was and would be able to truely seperate out wild fish in those areas where seperators are in use, without mixing in unmarked hatchery fish and further screwing up their genetics. But yeah, like everyone is going to agree to do a little extra work for the benefit of fish :rolleyes: