JOHN,
Thanks for the Information.....I sorta felt it might be something political to cause such measures to be taken... apperantly the "bad apples" are high ranking within the tribe, or maybe I'm reading this situation wrong.. The Indians might have resorted to this measure because they couldn't get anything working with the state Government; since i'm not versed as to the fine details of this issue I can only guess....which is probally not the best way to figure out the situation. I agree with you about the route taken may not be the best route to go to resolve this issue. Is it possible for you to get in touch with any of your friends in the council & find out the "Skinny" about the situation??? I'd be very interested to hear the Council's side as well as the State Government's side on this. I've fished the Deschutes about 20 years ago for my first time to try for Steelhead & have always had a special place in my heart for the Deschutes. You can keep me posted about the situation off the list at mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] or keep everyone posted on the list. I'm fairly certian Byard won't mind...but don't hold me to that comment.....
Yes, the rivers "belong" to all of us & we all must work together to protect them & the wildlife that relies on them to live...
DEAN...
John Martinez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dean-
I agree with your point regarding people in general,
certainly it only takes a few to create a bad
situation for everyone involved. I worked for the
Confederated Tribes (Warms Springs Indian Reservation)
for a couple of years sometime back and still have
many friends there. My feeling is that this is a
political ploy on the part of the Tribal Council, a
while back they made a bid through Oregon Department
of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) to severely curtail the
number of boating permits issued by ODFW for the
section of the Deschutes that adjoins their lands.
Their plan was defeated and I believe this is a form
of political muscle flexing. Once their point is made
they will probably back off. The legality of it all is
up in the air, since the Treaty of 1855 gives them the
right to fish their traditional waters, but doesn't
define such things as whether they can restrict
non-indians fishing rights or even how much of the
river they "own", ie., middle of the mainflow or bank
to bank, etc.
They undoubtedly feel that what they are doing is in
the best interests of the river and the evironment and
their people. The rationale (or pretext, depending on
how you view it) is that they are protecting the
spawning redds of the native trout. However, the way
they have gone about it is only going to alienate a
large number of folks who also feel they have a right
to use the river.
Regardless of what perceived wrongs may have been done
historically, the river belongs to all of us and must
be shared and cared for by all. With that said, it's
certainly an interesting start to the season. Just
hope this all plays out without too much animosity on
either side.
-John
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
