Originally Posted By: OncyT

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.


I didn't say "ever." I thought it was implied that I was talking about this year (or at least recent history). I think the state *does* deserve criticism for its previous failure to honor treaty rights.

As for tribal management, they arlread have a large hand in managing my fisheries. They are one of the co-managers. They have no more obligation to look out for the 99% than any other 1% does, but that doesn't mean they can or should be free from criticism for it.


Edited by MPM (09/14/16 03:27 PM)