So in many of the discussions regarding Columbia River springer allocation, it appears one of the primary reasons sporties want more of the allocation pie is because we fish selectively and the commercials do not (yes I know they say they do). But suppose the commercials were to step up to the plate and say "we want to fish selectively using traps and fish wheels" and hypothetically those methods have a 10% mortality rate on wild fish (which I believe would be reasonable given that they are simply going to be dipnetting them out of a live box and putting them back into the river) and further that the commercials then say "now that we are fishing selectively with similar mortality rates, we want an allocation of wild fish impacts that is equal to that of the sporties". Would we as sporties seriously consider such a proposal? Or would we simply fall back to the economic benefit arguement? What if the commercial selective fishing techniques have a LOWER mortality rate than the hook and line rates? And finally, what if the tribes embrace selective fishing and then say they want a bigger piece of the pie? I'm losing hair over this just writing it down. Thoughts?