#964706 - 09/21/16 09:36 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: GutZ]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 07/18/08
Posts: 234
|
... is that the Tribes, who probably get low-holed the worst . I thought all men were created equal. [Bleeeeep!] the treaties, lets renegotiate and see that that is the way it is. They should have the same rights as anyone else, and nothing greater. Let them participate in the commercial or sport fisheries in kind with every other citizen in the State of Washington. Boldt was wrong. The treaties don't reflect reality. Lets fix it by any means necessary. You're joking, right? If not, you live in a f'n dream world my friend. These aren't agreements or trade deals or some other bs you can wish or vote away...they are in PERPETUITY! Get a different f'n hobby.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964728 - 09/22/16 10:19 AM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: Carcassman]
|
Spawner
Registered: 12/09/08
Posts: 764
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
And give them back title to the land in Case Area? I bet they'd make that trade. That's the rub. When people talk about scrapping the treaties or renegotiating the treaties, they seem to think we should get everything we already have plus more. Now, if we want to revert to "might makes right," that is precisely what would happen. But let's not pretend we're talking about justice in that case. I think there's a term for someone who agrees to a deal and then decides to go back on it when they want something better...hmm.... let me think...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964734 - 09/22/16 01:28 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3034
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
|
Since there are a lot of opinions floating around let me add mine.
The treaties were established by agreements between two entities - the tribes represented by their leaders representing their tribal members and the U.S. Government by its leaders representing its citizens. Each negotiated for their citizens keeping in mind that the tribes were Governments then and continue to demand Government to Government relationships today. Sovereign Nations??
But what has happened is that the tribal members became U.S. citizens in the early 1920s but the tribal organizations and memberships were retained - call it dual citizenship. Frankly, that was the point at which the issue of the continuation of treaties and treaty rights should have been addressed; a quid pro quo.
What we have now is the U.S. Government (remember, it was the non-Indian Government at the time) now enforcing the treaties on the State but also failing to protect the rights of the citizenship it represented at the time of Treaty signature.
So, if the Feds feel obliged to sue the State to enforce the Treaty rights for the tribes then the Feds need to also take the appropriate actions necessary to protect the rights of the other citizens covered under those treaties.
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!
It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964741 - 09/22/16 03:33 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: Larry B]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 07/18/08
Posts: 234
|
From the BIA website:
Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution vests Congress, and by extension the Executive and Judicial branches of our government, with the authority to engage in relations with the tribes, thereby firmly placing tribes within the constitutional fabric of our nation. When the governmental authority of tribes was first challenged in the 1830's, U. S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall articulated the fundamental principle that has guided the evolution of federal Indian law to the present: That tribes possess a nationhood status and retain inherent powers of self-government.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964742 - 09/22/16 03:36 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: JustBecause]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 07/18/08
Posts: 234
|
and...
While tribal sovereignty is limited today by the United States under treaties, acts of Congress, Executive Orders, federal administrative agreements and court decisions, what remains is nevertheless protected and maintained by the federally recognized tribes against further encroachment by other sovereigns, such as the states. Tribal sovereignty ensures that any decisions about the tribes with regard to their property and citizens are made with their participation and consent.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964750 - 09/22/16 04:58 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: JustBecause]
|
The Original Boat Ho
Registered: 02/08/00
Posts: 2917
Loc: Bellevue
|
... is that the Tribes, who probably get low-holed the worst . I thought all men were created equal. [Bleeeeep!] the treaties, lets renegotiate and see that that is the way it is. They should have the same rights as anyone else, and nothing greater. Let them participate in the commercial or sport fisheries in kind with every other citizen in the State of Washington. Boldt was wrong. The treaties don't reflect reality. Lets fix it by any means necessary. You're joking, right? If not, you live in a f'n dream world my friend. These aren't agreements or trade deals or some other bs you can wish or vote away...they are in PERPETUITY! Get a different f'n hobby. Maybe I will take up hunting.
_________________________
It's good to have friends
It's better to have friends with boats
***GutZ***
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964754 - 09/22/16 08:56 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: JustBecause]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3034
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
|
and...
While tribal sovereignty is limited today by the United States under treaties, acts of Congress, Executive Orders, federal administrative agreements and court decisions, what remains is nevertheless protected and maintained by the federally recognized tribes against further encroachment by other sovereigns, such as the states. Tribal sovereignty ensures that any decisions about the tribes with regard to their property and citizens are made with their participation and consent. And I repeat that the Federal Government has, in my opinion, reniged on its obligations to the citizenry it represented when the treaties were signed.
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!
It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964755 - 09/22/16 09:05 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: Larry B]
|
Juvenile at Sea
Registered: 09/05/14
Posts: 195
Loc: Stanwood WA
|
[quote=JustBecause]and...
And I repeat that the Federal Government has, in my opinion, reniged on its obligations to the citizenry it represented when the treaties were signed. Totally agree with this but good luck trying to get anything straightened out with what passes for representation for citizens here these days in this fractured society :-/
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964756 - 09/22/16 09:23 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 11/21/07
Posts: 7588
Loc: Olema,California,Planet Earth
|
Reneged on obligations? Set up reservations and then allowed them to be settled by non-Indians. Guaranteed food, etc, and didn't provide it. Guaranteed fish and let them be destroyed.
The Feds have done a piss-poor job of just about everything associated with the treaties.
Edited by Carcassman (09/22/16 09:24 PM)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964759 - 09/22/16 10:32 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: Carcassman]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/22/09
Posts: 3034
Loc: University Place and Whidbey I...
|
Reneged on obligations? Set up reservations and then allowed them to be settled by non-Indians. Guaranteed food, etc, and didn't provide it. Guaranteed fish and let them be destroyed.
The Feds have done a piss-poor job of just about everything associated with the treaties. Was it the Feds' responsibility to not allow the sovereign nations to sell portions of their Reservations? Oh, I know, those non-Indians certainly must have taken advantage of the tribal land owners but that has been an age old problem; not unique to what went on here. And we could discuss ad naseum how and why fish runs have been decimated by activities of both Indians and non-Indians. Fact is that everyone lost on the fish and everyone benefited from that same development that adversely impacted fish runs. But I do agree fully that the Feds have screwed the pooch on treaties to include not ensuring that the tribes currently operate within the terms of the treaties and subsequent court decisions.
_________________________
Remember to immediately record your catch or you may become the catch!
It's the person who has done nothing who is sure nothing can be done. (Ewing)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964767 - 09/23/16 03:19 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: FleaFlickr02]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 11/06/05
Posts: 394
Loc: Western Washington
|
...Personally, since they are now neck-deep in our politics and getting all sorts of tax breaks on their growing, expanding enterprises, I'm not sure they're any different than any other American special interest at this point, and I wonder why we still treat them differently.
Wait, are we still talking about Indians here or has this changed to a discussion about Boeing... and the likes??? Sure sounds like Boeing to me.
_________________________
You're welcome America!
George W. Bush
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964770 - 09/23/16 05:55 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
It all boils down to this - I'm right, everyone else is wrong, and anyone who disputes this is clearly a dumbfuck.
Registered: 03/07/99
Posts: 16958
Loc: SE Olympia, WA
|
lol
That cracked me up.
Don't hate the playa - hate the game.
_________________________
She was standin' alone over by the juke box, like she'd something to sell.
I said "baby, what's the goin' price?" She told me to go to hell.
Bon Scott - Shot Down in Flames
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964773 - 09/23/16 06:10 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: FishBear]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3339
|
Sure sounds like Boeing to me.
Indeed. Well played.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964774 - 09/23/16 06:28 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: rojoband]
|
Repeat Spawner
Registered: 12/06/07
Posts: 1393
|
I think Curt and others have touched on this a lot but the closer one gets to the stream the less likely a salmon is to strike a lure or bait (staggers and flossers exempted).
The mindset, and legal basis, for salmon management is to take the full harvest right down to the escapement number. If one side does not take the fish, the other does. You are not allowed (and I tried) to pass "harvestable" fish into escapement.
Factor in that the State prefers the marine mixed stock fisheries for sports because the fish bite and lots of money is spent chasing them. That maximizes economic return to the state.
FleaFlicker2 hits a really good point, which bugs me a lot, is that WDFW emphasizes boat-based fisheries over land-based. Walleye, kokanee, bass, OD trout, Tiger Musky, salmon, even steelhead are now primarily the province of boat-based fisheries. Access is a problem, but it does seem-to me- to limit recruitment of new anglers.
This is an interesting point. But I don't know the last time you went to NOF Carcassman? When agencies perform public processes they tend to bend to the will of those that show up, and for those meetings that I've been to, the heavy representation has always been the salt/pre-terminal/boat crowd. If they are the sector of the public that shows up when its time to give input, well sometimes that's the way the cookie crumbles. While it's probably more common for a larger % of license holders to simply be bank angling salmon fishers, If there is a currently a way to do things differently it would be interesting to hear how you think you would dice up the pie here. Oh and then the other thing on this thread is that the assumption of these non-tribal commercial fisheries are 'new'. Looking at this link: http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/commercial/salmon/hotlines.html Seems to be that the month of September for the last 8 years (as the online hotline posts only go back that far) all have these exact same fisheries ongoing for coho. SO are these fisheries simply part of the year-to-year always there nontribal commercial package? Seems to be the case, but the question is whether they were planned in this year's agreed-to-fishery package or not...as the sport coho fisheries obviously weren't. Here is a link to the original agreement for 2016-17: http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/tribal/2016-17agreement.pdf Looks like these fisheries are in it...but its fairly hard to decipher, so I might be wrong, but there are commercial coho nontreaty fisheries in it preseason that seem to match up with the areas Todd posted. So.... Time to chime in! Rojo, where do you, or any of you, get off criticizing lack of participation in NOF? Although many would like, not many of us have the LUXURY to get to those meetings. As far as all you boat owning primadonna's that get preference based on your NOF participation, FU! I am a boat owner and fish all the fisheries and never have I ever thought I am any better to deserve more opportunity than the bankies. I was one of them once, and most of you probably were to! You all need to understand fishing starts somewhere. IMO fishing is a progression. I think most here started on some lake or small stream from the bank and got hooked, except some rich kid with a Grady White dad. We all need to stick together and support all fishing opportunities, and that includes terminal areas. As far far as you guys that jumped in with your big $$ boats and attitude, it won't be long when I get the chance to participate, refuting the current salt preference that is going on now. my 2cents. Flame on!
_________________________
"Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.” – Ferris Bueller.
Don't let the old man in!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964786 - 09/24/16 11:08 AM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: cobble cruiser]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 3339
|
I have no idea. Inslee must be a good governor, cuz I never understand what he's telling us. It's a great question, though. What does "commercial fishing failure" mean? If the way WDFW crafts our seasons is any indication, that sounds like only the Tribes will be fishing from now on to me. If there aren't enough fish for non-tribal commercial harvest, how can there be enough for sporties to "play with?"
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#964805 - 09/24/16 06:28 PM
Re: Their 50%: Central sound tribal Coho Fisheries
[Re: Sky-Guy]
|
Returning Adult
Registered: 09/20/01
Posts: 379
Loc: Seattle
|
When is he going to declare a sports fishing failure?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
11499 Members
17 Forums
72912 Topics
824695 Posts
Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index
