Hey Bob how do you feel about this issue of WT lawsuit?

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you ... I'm a little under the weather right now ... actually my temp has been running on a level comparable to that of the river's height's

I'm certainly not one to condone petty suits, but as I mentioned in my early post on the thread (I haven't really looked at since, but will again), IF there is evidence that hatchery plants are endangering the wild chinook, then it's certainly something to look at.

Many stocks of different types up and down the west coast fail to rebound under increased protection for them, so obviously, something, somwhere is having is some sort of an influence. If there is proof that says some human interaction is continuing to fuel the decline ... then we ought to look at it.

Sometimes relatively small influences may end up with big impacts.

I'm not supporting the specific suit nor am I discounting it at this point, because frankly, I don't know enough about it. As an avid angler and as a concerned angler ... I think it would be wrong to jump to a conclusion either way without first looking at the facts.

As I mentioned in the other thread, we often look out for our personal interests ... it's natural human behavior and isn't necessarily a "bad trait" ... I'd be the first to admit that I pay more attention to the fisheries that I'm involved in vs. those that I never particpate in. But sometimes we have to realize that in some cases, we have to put the welfare of the fish first above all else.

That being said, it's one of the reasons I argue so strongly for protection / decreased harvest of many stocks ... I hope that I don't have to see the fisheries I participate in get to the point where immensely drastic measures are needed to keep the runs going. I'd much rather see some middle ground taken before it's too late.