OUR treaty rights

Lorraine can go fu.ck herself and die, and I hope every manager and the director at WDFW die in a fuckin' fire, too.

This is complete bullsh!t that should not be allowed to stand.

I hope people start poaching everywhere. I don't give a sh!t, and it's because of WDFW and their bullsh!t incestuous relationship with the tribes. They've made me so hostile that I'll line up to kill the last salmon myself, and then let it freezer burn and toss it out back. If I don't do it, the tribes will.

Disgusting. These pieces of sh!t make Wells Fargo Bank look ethical.

Well, I just sent this off to WDFW and my state reps and senator, and cc'd some news organizations. We'll see if I get any response. Feel free to use it if you'd like.

Dear Public Officials,

It is September, the time of year when salmon return to Washington waters. Nevertheless, as many of you know (and all of you should know), almost all of Puget Sound and the surrounding watersheds are closed to fishing for coho salmon. In fact, most areas are closed to all salmon fishing.

This is because the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and tribal biologists predicted a low return of coho salmon, and agreed to restrict fishing to protect coho runs. Unfortunately, now that returning coho salmon have passed Neah Bay, Port Angeles, and all of North Puget Sound without any sport or non-tribal fishing pressure, the Muckleshoot tribe has strung nets across the Duwamish river to catch and kill the returning coho. This is not ceremonial and subsistence fishing; it is commercial. Killing fish for money. The Muckleshoot tribe has decided to do this based on its independent determination that there is a "harvestable surplus" of coho. Of course, the Duwamish remains closed to everyone else, in accordance with the conservation-minded approach that WDFW agreed to earlier in the year.

In other words, everybody else in Washington let Duwamish coho pass by without fishing pressure in order to conserve the resource, only for Muckleshoot fishermen to catch them, kill them, and sell them at the end of their migration. I fear that other treaty tribes may soon follow the Muckleshoot's lead with other coho stocks. There is already commercial netting taking place in front of the Ballard Locks, but at least in that case WDFW has agreed that there is a harvestable surplus of coho, and has opened Lake Washington to non-tribal, recreational coho fishing starting September 16 based on that assessment.

It seems to me that there are two potential scenarios and responses that balance conservation goals and treaty fishing rights for any particular coho run. The first is that, as previously predicted, the coho return is not healthy enough this year, there is no harvestable surplus of coho, and nobody should be fishing for coho. The second is that biologists underestimated the coho return, there is a harvestable surplus of coho, and the surplus should be split evenly between tribal and non-tribal fishermen (as called for in the applicable treaties).

The current scenario, in which tribal fishermen are either (a) killing fish when there is no surplus, or (b) taking 100% of the harvestable surplus, represents the interests of the very few overwhelming the interests of the very many.

So, my question is whether you, the public officials of Washington, intend to do anything about this, and what that may be.

A direct response would be greatly appreciated.

I believe that the tribes have a right to their share (50%). The non-Indians have the privilege to the their 50%. There is a legal difference in the entitlement to the fish but it would take an (honest) lawyer to explain it.

As I understand this the state owns the game/fish but the Feds gave 50% to the tribes, 50% to Ak and 50% to Canada leaving the rest for the state of Wa.

Rough-looking habitat right there, Cobble Cruiser.

It is interesting that there is no provision for the NIsqually tribe to open at all, nor is there and provision for the Puyallup's to fish the sound. These appear to have outright closures. I am waiting to see if these stay true.

If I were going to protest, I would be very careful about what it is I am protesting. From reading the list of agreed to fisheries, it appears that it was agreed by WDFW that the Muckleshoots would conduct a test fishery to provide an in-season update starting the week of September 4th. Then if the ISU showed harvestable coho, they would begin fishing the week of September 11th. That appears to be what they are doing, although I have to assume that the ISU showed harvestable fish.

Are you protesting them doing what they said they would do? Are you protesting WDFW agreeing to let them do what they said they would do? Both? Or something entirely different?

(Edited: Looks like Krijak, above, noticed the same thing I did)

So evidently 50/50 of the harvestable fish doesn't apply in this case then AND there is no way to refer to what the treaty allows because it is now void?

It looks to me that if you have a beef, it is with the people that should be representing your interest in these discussions - WDFW. It is not up to the Muckleshoot Tribe to make sure you get your share. That is why I am saying to be very sure and very clear about what/who you are protesting.