There is a few new anti-Indian netting threads on the BB here. I have been staying out of them this time, because of poor response to past solution suggestions. But in one of the new threads I got asked my opinion, and gave the following information. I'm putting it to a separate thread for others to see. It is a better solution than hay bales, but I'm not going to tell you that those won't help because I don't know; it could bring media attention to growing discontent over non-adhered to mandates. See below for a better way than that though. ... Here is why much of what's going on is allowed by government. And what you can and should do about it. >

The Treaties signed with the Columbia Tribal Indians in the 1800's, and most of the Treaties signed with individual tribes in the state of Washington in the 1800's, called for salmon and steelhead runs to be "shared in common with", between Indians and non-Indains. Many non-Indians considered this to mean fishing for them in a like manner and the same amount of fish per person. Many Inidans considered otherwise. Yet they were allowed via these treaties to fish in an accustomed manner - which was with mostly dipnets, and also some canoe set crude river nets. Both sides have since then contended they were not getting their fair shares of fish by Treay laws signed. So the NW states and Columbia tribes and Washington tribes went to landmark Federal Court cases in the early 70's. Judge Belloni presiding over the Columbia case and Judge Boldt over the Washington cases. Both cases and rulings came down alike - Federal Court mandates that the fish deemed harvestable (salmon and steelhead getting enough escapement to sustain the run; the rest deemed havestable) were to be split evenly - 50/50. This is still Federal law. It also mandated that if one party got more fish one year then the other party get more thte next to make up for it. The dams that both parties used, and are still using, were not considered part of the 50/50 split for the fish they impeded.

Yet under the more recent threat by the tribes that they will sue the government to have all Columbia and Snake dams removed (their behind the scenes trump card - because of fear there's an outside chance they could win such a suit, that would economically devistate our region), the U.S. Dept. of the Interior came out under this pressure to issue Secretarial Order No. 3206, which states that in times of limited harvest the Indian tribes will be the last to be restricted from harvest of fish. Since the advent of the ESA, all harvests are limited hence forth. Unfair! This Order has been the machine that has driven the NMFS (National Marine Fishery Services) to over-ride Federal law in favor of the Tribes. And now in times of plenty they are giving the Columbia Tribal Commissioned net fisheries a very unfair 6 1/2 times higher quota of spring chinook, followed by attempts to close the fall chinook Columbia sportfishery altogether, so the tribes could have bigger shares of the ESA impact (Fed. Endagered Species Act protection of wild fish) in their netting harvests; which kill native fish while we release non finclipped native fish!

At the start of the new millenium, this caused the states of Oregon and Washington into a joint lawsuit against the NMFS and Tribes to get a fairer share of the ESA impact affected allocation of fish deemed harvestable for the sportfishers. It was settled out of court by getting the "Unfair Pair" (NMFS/Tribes) to allow a fall salmon sportfishery in the Columbia and by allowing the non-Indian ESA fishing impact to go up from 0.9% to 2% (which was 1% for commercial non-indian netters/ocean trollers and 1% for sportfishers). BUT, they would only go along with the increase to 2% if the Indians got an increase from 8% ESA impact in 2000 to the 13% ESA impact in 2001; and they got it! How could they get away with this genuine fiasco? Along with many unfair complexities, the main trump card is the threatened law suits to take out all the dams! It appears the Indians have our weak administration by the balls! It is a similar situation in Washington state, due to many other complexities in addition to No. 3206 out of Wash, DC. The WDFW also has a weak administration in dealing with allocation of fish. I must also say they are very weak in dealing with non-Indian snagging and litering too; as is Oregon. >

What can the hundreds of thousands of NW sportfishers do about this? Again - write letters using this info in my post here and from other's posts to your reps, asking Federal and state legislators to enact a modern justifiable law that prevents an Indian lawsuit to take down all the dams. And for them to circumvent the wrongful Dept. of the Interior Sec. Order No. 3206, so that we get our Federally mandated 50% share of the fish! That WE pay for. It can't hurt to mention in your letters that the Indians have been using electricity from these dams for as long as non-Indians have. And at a very high rate in the brightly lighted Indian gambling casinos, which were allowed to the Indians partly in compensation for lost fish income potential. These are very highly profitable! In fact, enough so that it's allowed the Indians to become big campaign contibuting constiuents to politicians in Wash, DC. The only way to get back our rightful fish is a huge letter campaign outlining these things, and that we are ready to vote in politicians that will get this back to the Federal Court mandated 50/50 even split. Go do it this time!

RT

[ 01-21-2002: Message edited by: RT ]

The best thing that I can think of is to get an organized sportsman lobbying group or have a fund to hire a set of lawyers to counter act the tribes moves. It all takes money though. Until the sportsman get enough organized funding, not much will be done.

Money talks, BS walks.

A friend of mine saw 3 gutted and abandoned wild steelhead on the Washougal on Friday. The carcases we left at a very popular boat ramp.
Some " sport angler" did it and other "sport anglers" had to have seen him do it. 3 wild female steelhead here is like is like 30 on rivers anywhere else in the state. Soprt anglers have no place whatsoever to be yelling at the tribes. A scum sucking ******* is one no matter what his method of capture is or what his race is. Until there are no more "sport anglers" doing this kind of selfish crap we have no room to talk NONE!

Rob,

You are a passionate advocate for the natural resources we still have intact. I wish there were more like you. But I have to finally call you on something, and a few others that miss the point also, that is often brought up when the over-netting that Indians get away with against Federal law is a posted issue. >

As much as I detest the few blatant poachers out there, and as much as I want more enforcement available to curtail snagging, litering, and private property abuses ... the fact that they occur DOES NOT mean the majority shouldn't be addressing the wrongs of bypassing Treaty and Federal mandated laws that are stealing fish we have paid for and have a right to our fair share of! In fact, all of those above things have had many of their own long threads!

Don't you recall the many long threads about non-Indian snaggers, literers, and poachers on here and other BBs? Of course you do. Yet I haven't seen you come into those threads and say we shouldn't be addressing those non-Indian wrongs because the NMFS and Indians are cheating and breaking Federal law (which is the opposite of what you are doing here)! Quit making these things a matter of race and a matter of who angers you the most; and which wrong should be addressed first. They all need to be address together - now. And are being addressed. ... This thread is about the LAWS and about modern era FAIRNESS! It is not a subject that should be put on the back burner while we complain about a few poachers some more. >>>

Phish, there are at least 4 organized efforts with some money and some Wash, DC lobbying efforts toward getting fair allocations for NW sportfishers. They are the RFA (Recreational Fishing Alliance), NSIA (Northwest Sportfishing Industry Association), ANWS (Association of NW Steelheaders), and WSA (Wild Steelhead Alliance). You are right about needing to organize our efforts. You can join and contribute to any or all of those organiztions to help accomplish what you suggested in your post. So thanks for bringing that up. But it's not enough! We also need many thousands of letters to our Fed. and state reps so they know that a lot of people will be voting for candidates with fair fish allocations as a part of their platform agendas! Why won't more fishermen do these simple and inexpensive tasks, that are not very time consuming? I'm not asking anyone to do something that my friends and I haven't done. I have joined 3 of those 4 organizations and donated time and money to their causes on our behalf. I have written many letters, one of which I got a personal letter back from Oregon Senator Ron Smith that I posted the previous year on ifish, saying he would persnally look out for the Columbia situation. We need more than him from our 2 states. It wasn't that difficult to do. It will be easier on a less involved level. What will it take to get the majority of sportfishers off their lazy asses to do a little for a cause that can bring a BIG RETURN of fishing opportunity on your small amount of time and contribution invested?!?

Excuse me cranking so hard about this. It's a passionate and frustrating subject.

RT

RT for Pres. or at least senator

Thanks for the support 'bentpole'. ... btw, I'm not 'bentpole' nominating myself for pres/senator. And this time I don't have to prove it. I posted in G-Man's "RT / TODD - No bashing replies" thread at the exact same 2:12 am time. ... Don't know this person either, but it's sure nice to have a little support for a change (some of you know what I mean by that).

Theres really no good solution for netting because the commercials as well as the Indians are involved. Dont get me wrong, I have fished for the past 15 years and an sick of it BUT this is what I've seen. Several years ago I remember that the State was predicting very dismal salmon returns from the ocean. A ban on commercial netting was in affect that year. Guess what?? So many salmon came back ( because they got thru the commercial nets ) that you could almost walk across the river on them. Also, didnt we recently have a chance to Ban ALL Nets. We as sportsfisherman need and must come together to get a loud and powerful voice with the politicians who treat us like were on the bottom of the food chain.

being new to the bb her i have found and read some good info from you all.but on the issue of nets i htink the sportfishers would stand a better chance of getting nets out of the water with some different politicians in this state.start with the govener who is totally against taking nets out.then we lost our only ali with slade gordon to patty murray who spent millions of her one money for a job that pays 150000 wow! talk about not having anything better to do.just my 2 cents worth.

Jim E.

You may be right about the Governor in Washington. Thanks for that opinion. ... But use the search feature on the upper BB page and plug in Slade Gorton. I know you are a conservative, but the threads about Slade will be eye openers for you, and show how damging his run as senator was to fish and sportfishing. His voting record toward big businesses that harmed fish habitat was atrocious. We know you publicly advocate hatchery steelhead over native steelhead, at least on your home NF Nehalen River, but you should note that surveys indicated a majority of Washington anglers support going to release all wild steelhead regs, as is the case in Oregon. I believe Senator Patty Murry came down on the side of C&R regs state wide to protect wild runs of native steelhead.

RT

[ 01-21-2002: Message edited by: RT ]

Just to play devils advocate here, the following chart indicates that tribal harvest, in most of the last 20 years, has been less than half the total Statewide harvest, especially in the 90's:



I will allow that there is probably a fair margin of error on both sides, sport and tribal.Taking this into consideration though, I would guess that harvest rates would hover around 50/50.

I'm not trying to be a **** disturber, just trying to add some objective evidence.

What is the source of your graphic and where can it be verified.....

It is amazing to me the deep concern about the "net" situtation. As a recent Oregon transplant. I have spent four incredible years in WA and have fished almost every weekend and a few weekdays on a great many rivers. This seems to be the norm. There has always been hostility between Indians and white man, we all have studied it in school. The problem that I see is that we are living in the 21st century. Things have changed dramaticly in 200 years. Especially the decline in salmon and wild steelhead. Yet everyone is still hung up on treatys that were signed many, many years ago. I think that the status quo needs to be changed. I would even go as far to say ban all nets for no less than 5 years. And those who choose to fish, fish only with a rod and reel. Taking only enough to feed their families. This would apply for all, Indian and white. Even the odds. No nets. Period. Then after the five years go and evaluate the situtation, and reassess. If the Indians aren't satisfied with all the money from the casinos, federal monies,and all the other hand outs that they recieve, the problem lies with them and not the rest of the population. I am sorry, but I don't understand the lack of respect of everyone involved. Both sides. These creatures are too valuable a resource to be "harvesting" them in a manner that threatens the future runs. And just think, in a few years, there will be so many fish in the rivers, there will be more than enough to go around.
Tight Lines.

Very perceptive of you RT. His semi-illiterate writing style gives him away every time.

Posh', that's a graph from the devil's advocate. It looks official, right? It looks like it came out of a crayon book.

All kidding aside, does anyone in their right mind think that Washington Tribal leaders and lawyers would settle for those skewed numbers in that graph since the Boldt decision without a lawsuit for their 50% share?!? No.

They would be all over that faster and harder than Superfly on a bobber down! I haven't heard much grumbling about their take of the Boldt decision share. Have you?

Wherever it came from, the Indian harvest amounts on that graph would have had to come from Indian fish netter's reports. Even if that thing were real, the Indian leaders/lawyers didn't fall for it (see paragraph 2 above). ... Someone may have added non-Treaty rivers to up the sportcatch stats in that 'thingy', instead of comparing numbers for each entity on rivers under Treaty law. And the following is for sure - several Washington tribe's take on the Columbia River was not included in that graph! Or there would be one hell of a lot more green on there!!! I say it's safe to ignore that piece.