"VibraJet" wrote in message
...

"JR" wrote...


Certainly grossly exceeding the allotment should be punished, if
possible.



As I understand it, the Makah had a "season" in which they could fish, and
the length of the season was determined to be about the length of time
they
would need to catch 500 fish. I think - but don't know for sure - that
the
tribe knew they were expected to be able to catch 500 fish in that time.
If
that's the case, then it appears they intentionally pulled a fast one.

What will happen now is, the seasons for other fisheries will be adjusted
to
compensate for the huge unexpected Makah catch; the overall yearly catch
will remain what it was going to be, everybody else gets to catch fewer
fish.

Ironically, the name "Makah" means "generous with food". I don't know
what
their situation is out there, but I'm pretty sure their economy is based
on
fishing and whaling. So that big salmon catch might be pretty important
to
them. It's a good bet none of it will go to waste.

Way I see it, every time the Ndn's win one, everybody makes a big stink.
If
I was out there, I'd go to Neah Bay, look for a restaurant, and order the
salmon. Ain't no point in getting all urinated over a fish.


Hm......

I think people sometimes allow themselves to get carried away by their own
interests. This is perfectly natural, of course. I mean, who can blame
folks for wanting to provide for their own families......especially in times
of economic instability.....times when the future can be glimpsed only dimly
through a fog and what little can be seen doesn't look all that
good.....right? Yeah, I can certainly understand that a conscientious
father would, at least occasionally, want to treat his kids to a bit of
fresh salmon......****, I certainly would.....um......if I had any kids.
O.k., so a couple of extra fish have to die in the process. So what? In
the long run, does it really make any difference?

Still, there's always that lingering doubt, isn't there? Hell, Chas's point
may be hard to grasp, but it's always there nevertheless. In situations
like this, I always find it useful to take the situation at hand and push it
to the extreme, just to see where it goes. In this case, for instance, I
might suppose that it's not just a bunch of fish that are at stake. I
might.....oh......I don't know, postulate that the thieving redskins had
been guilty of REALLY "grossly exceeding the allotment"
by.....um.......well, let's say stealing a whole continent.....or two.....or
something. Wouldn't you agree that in such a scenario they "should be
punished, if possible"?

Wolfgang
i know i would.