Plain and simple,, this garbage we do now,, how government and the corporate structure manage and divide resources does not work and is not inclusive to all the peoples... Production/consumption,, always expansion in order to measure success is contrary to how the earth works,, how life and abundance is sustained naturally...

The Banking Cartels have gained control over the environment,, over Gods abundance and resources to a level of managed production,,, manufactured scarcity in order to maintain control over all life... As a result everything sucks and is getting into an even worse position of sucking...

We need to shift to a system of abundance and only taking what we need to live a good life,, treat each other how we would like to be treated... Greed fuels and results in self destruction of the collective,, controlling what cant be controlled results in self destruction... Living in harmony with and not against,, seeking not to control but instead letting God Provide and graciously accepting the gifts...

Hey RichG, what drugs are you taking? I think I might like to try some.

Borax and Ivermectin...


The Borax will open your mind up as it supports Cerebral communications within the brain itself and is also oxidative so it cleans out the plaque and Calcification within the Pineal Gland which happens to be the gateway/doorway to expanded thinking...

No individual user group has the right or power to claim Salmon/Steelhead or any natural resource as an entitlement,, not via treaty or by a court order ...

These resources belong to the people because they are essential to life as we know it collectively...

Having naturally/supplemented abundant salmon/steelhead runs freely accessible for the purpose subsistence is the most positive possible circumstance for all the peoples of the Pacific Northwest and is vital to food and environmental security...

The key is to classify Salmon/Steelhead as a vital resource as food/energy/fertilizer/economic stability with all groups having equal access and opportunity...

We do not manage wild land animals as an entitlement resource for the purpose of commercial sale for profit why then should we manage wild fish any different? Managing wild fish populations for a global consumption market when the stocks are regional makes no sense... This is not sustainable as the Salmon are part of regional environmental systems and are much more valuable to food security and environmental health than for commercial exploitation/sale...

On second thought I'll pass on the borax and ivermectin. I guess I was sorta' hoping you'd say mushrooms and LSD.

If wild natural resources belong to the people and not commercial enterprize, does that also apply to fish resources in the ocean as well? Like sardines and tuna? I don't fish in the ocean for those fish species. Should they not be available to me via commercial enterprize? How would all groups have equal access and opportunity since most people don't have the gear or time to harvest subsistence amounts of ocean fish species?

It looks like you're saying that regional stocks of fish, like salmon and steelhead should be available for subsistence use by the people who live in that region. I see a problem with that. The natural abundance of wild steelhead could support subsistence fishing when the population of people in WA was 2.6 million. The population is now 7.8 million, and even restored populations of steelhead could not meet the subsistence fishing needs of that number. And in a few years, when the population reaches 15 million, any notion that subsistence fishing is practical melts away. And then when the human population increases to 30 million, subsistence fishing for both salmon and steelhead evaporates because the natural environment will necessarily be compromised by the sheer presence of so many humans.

Your subsistence fishing concept needs some serious homework.

Salmo raises an interesting point that has bothered me from an ecological perspective. In times of great resource abundance we certainly had fewer people but we also had many resources we did not harvest. All the benthic species, except, for example, halibut on landlines. But the high seas species were essentially unharvested as were the benthic species.

Take for example clams. What would be the water quality status vis-a-vis algae blooms in PS if no subtidal shellfish were harvested? A lot cleaner, I'll bet. We really don't know how, for example, albacore affected salmon but does the current extensive harvest of them depress salmon somehow? I don't know.

But I am confident that the ecosystem, when harvest removals were essentially limited to land-based, was a whole lot different and our removals of these previously unaccessible resources has to have had an impact.

We are in a manufactured situation all the way around.. Powers above the common people set it up this way,, tried to tame the land and gain control over all creation,, forced people to live under a system...

Its up to the people,, whats important to them,, how they want to live,, but that power the people have to determine the reality they desire to live in has gone unused for a very long time,, several hundred years if not longer... The people have been enslaved in a system of debt,, under a system of governance where permission must be granted by a title of nobility in order for the people to take action...

Back in the 70s, in a collection of paper put out by Small Tribes of Western WA (somewhere in my library), Ernie Brannon had an article where he proposed that all salmon management be terminal and controlled by residents of the terminal area (watershed most likely).

If that management scheme controlled all fisheries on that stock, plus fisheries on the food base and predators, then it might work well for the fish. I say might because I suspect that logging interests in some watersheds, urban interests in others, would win out as they would have the most votes on any scheme.

The management of our resources is much more complex than just who gets to kill how many. I was gonna say that think we are past that time, or population level, where one can move off the grid and live by what they can catch/grow/produce independent of Rich's controlling groups. Maybe one or a few people can do it but not a society with the current number of people.

In some respects I think that the endaangered Species Act is the worst thng that has happened to salmon management and salmon fishers. Before anyone dies of apoplexy let me give one example, but there are many many more. Back in '74 the Toutle was in my patrol area. In the fall it was stuffed full of chinook from the mouth all the way u into the Green and beyond. Lots of spawning activity. This was common for many, many years prior. The hatchery produced healthy fish. Ocean seasons were from April to October for both chinook and coho. Wild salmon spawned and crossed with hatchery in the river. Survival of the fittest (fish) prevailed and it seemed obvious that evolution worked. I think the same conditions worked on many rivers with strong hatchery programs. Admittedly ocean conditions were different.
Taking a step farther back in time, another fifty years or so, we, the government, decided to expand our population with associated construction and of course, dams. As we gradually lost our good fish habitat, the government said "don't worry, we'll build hatcheries to make up for the loss of salmon." Now where are we? Raising fish that we can't fish for because of ESA. Think about this from the tribal pespective.

The ESA was not passed into law in order to protect anything... It is a justification to manipulate and control,, a tool of control... The ESA is a way to let you know that there is no free market or freedom of choice...
Likewise the EPA is not an organization formed to protect anything its all about control over the collective peoples... Administrative law is a method of policy enforcement in a multi pronged approach at curtailing "Free Will"...

Just remember that the corporate system,, Government System is the mechanism that depleted abundance under expanded markets and persuaded/coerced effort/participation of the people via the promise of reward [money] and then after the depletion resulted in critical levels of abundance the control measures over the lands and peoples began... The peoples were blamed for not being good stewards of the resource and punished as a result...

The truth is the people are not to blame,, but instead policy is to blame... Currently we are under the exact same policy that got us into this mess and keeps us here...

Those who live on or use water wells know that when water is pumped out that there is a cone pf dep[ression around the WellPoint. Water is removed, the surface around the well declines. at some point, if you are removing water faster than it moves through the aquifer you may dry out the well, regardless of whether or not the aquifer is recharged. Stop pumping and the water returns .

While I doubt that petroleum is being created as fast as we are pulling it out I can see that, until you drain the whole pool, that individual wells will see "refilling".

Somebody who isn more chemically astute than I will need to explain how the earth's inorganic rock gets converted into organic petroleum in a manner other than conversion of fossil life forms.