When is someone going to introduce a note of sanity in this Indian fishing rights controversy? To speak of treaties is nonsense. The Indians act as if they were a separate nation and could not avail themselves of all the rights and privileges (and responsibilities?) of U.S. citizens. At any rate, nations do not commonly hold treaties valid with non-existent nations. The claim to "inherited rights" is no more valid than if I tried to seek redress of grievances against my Scandinavian grandfathers. Or should I lay claim to part of Scandinavia because my ancestors once owned it, but were perhaps moved out by war, government action, etc.? At any rate, I am not responsible for either the virtues or the faults of my predecessors. I have enough to do worrying about my own. Quite aside from the question of rights, what about conservation? The salmon are nearly gone already. Do the Indians want to be the ones to catch the last ones there are? Are they trying to get even with Buffalo Bill?