Anyone know when they net the forks area rivers? Is there somewhere i can look to see when they do it?
We aren't assuming it *can't* be challenged, what we are assuming is that any of the previous cases being brought back will be laughed out of the court room. If you want to come up with a novel new idea on how to challenge it, please go ahead. It just can't be a rehash of something old.let me try summarizing what has been posted over all of these pages. if i miss something, please addd it with your own addendum.
- native peoples came to the coasts of the PNW as a progney of the 6 women who walked across the ice from siberia (documentation via genome study has this nailed)
- native peoples occupied a narrow strip of land between the sea and the forest.
- their lives were focused on survival and as such developed a resource extraction mind set
- as is hard to imagine, their existence depended on catching and killing
- first contact with the 'outside', perhaps around the 1400's and subsequent introduced them to goods available via barter. yes, they also bartered among themselves in specific well known areas (celilo as an example)
- with contact, their lives changed dramatically (argue this any way you wish)
- many native americans were moved, physically, to dediticated 'reservations' so the white settlers could occupy the choice properties villages were built on.
- did the native americans 'understand' what was happenning? seems as though the s'klallam did, refused to move, assimilated, and were able to homestead.
- why didn't the other tribes do the same thing? don't know.
- extraction continued during this time with trade with the settlers occupying their lives
- until the settlers started fishing themselves and stopped relying on the native americans
- the few who acquired land shifted gears in order to survive in this new age
- there remained a feeling, however, of having been taken to the cleaners, without compensation, whatever that means in todays world
- enter boldt, a single human, making a single decision, never challenged
- did boldt mean that native americans were entitled to 50% of the harvest to maintain their traditional way of life? or did he mean they should become commercial fishermen in the true sense of commercial fishing?
- there is no arguement regarding subsistence, ceremonial, and recently added, barter
- traditional ways of fishing, traps, were employed because they were efficient, required little person power, freeing individuals for other survival tasks, and produced results
- the tribes seem more interested, today, in keeping members 'employed' not reducing the numbers of people necessary to carry out fishing
- the unregulated fishing, yes that is what it is and blessed by boldt, has and continues to degrade wild fish runs all over the PNW
- other factors important to address?? of course but we don't have 10-20-30-40-50 years to correct the problems non native americans have created
- removing ALL nets has zero to do with the 50%. it has a great deal to do with efficiency of fishing which the tribes will not support (remember it puts folks out of work)
- one man's opinion (boldt) has never been challenged and as long as the supply of fish seemed endless, what was the point
- the supply of fish is NOT endless, and the end is right around the corner, time to challenge boldt in a federal court of law
- the challenge?
1. All nets out
2. All traditional fishing (ceremonial, subsistence and barter-not sale of, exempt)
3. All commercial fishing regulated with strict quota enforcement by a single agency
add what you like but please don't assume that boldt cannot be challenged or modified. it set an important precident in a time of abundent fish. we are far beyond that time and the situation has turned grim and is getting more so.
The end result will be OUR problem indeed.. . . and here i thought that the extinction of fish was OUR problem
I didn't realize that the tribes (and BEFORE you scream racist, I'm 1/2 Cherokee, 200% sportsman/environmentalist) had jet boats, Loran, ghost nets, etc., 9,000 or even 100 years ago. Beat your head some more . . . we ALL need to sacrifice for the common good, when necessary . . . to date, only SOME do. In the meantime, I'll keep waiting for those who profess to be "one with Mother Earth" to clean-up the mess they seem to leave behind on the Yak & the Columbia every year.Your're dead wrong. The tribes had been fishing the runs sustainably for thousands of years. If they had been fishing them to extinction they wouldn't have been able to use the resource for over 9,000 years.