This whole incident is being described as a legitimate subsistence taking by those who want to defend the actions of those involved. I came to this region in 1971 and have lived here continuously since that time. I can remember even as a newcomer my immediate dependence on wild and edible plants and animals and the traditional use of those that were here before me on wild plants and animals. We didn't really have one name for what were doing, but we all realized how important it was. About that time Ebon Hobson came along and put a universal name: subsistence, to this activity and it's ethos and we as well as the rest of state and the world for that matter have tried lived within that definition. Does this taking fit into that definition. I don't think so. Does the rational that there were no other food resources available and this was 
justified to prevent food scarcity. My own gillnet says otherwise.