Quillback
Offline
South of the Mason/Dixon line
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/08/02
Posts: 2618
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
Here's an interesting read, I wonder how many of the Lakota are part of this?
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/12/lakota-withdraw.html
--------------------
I'd rather be fishing
|
FWC_Cliff
Offline
dual red striper
Profile Status:
Reged: 08/21/05
Posts: 309
Loc: Seattle Area
|
|
I just want to know if they area sovereign nations, does that mean I can invade them?
I know I sure as hell embargo their products
--------------------
Watch the Fishing with Cliff episodes on YouTube!
Fishing with Cliff
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11056
Loc: Area 12
|
|
Cliff they wouldn't have just bows and arrows this time.
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
elwoodp
Offline
Big JuJu
Profile Status:
Reged: 03/29/03
Posts: 1183
Loc: Lake Forest Park, WA
|
|
As a South Dakota transplant, my reading of the Lakota story is that it doesn't appear that there is any tribal government involvement. Russel Means is one of the founders of the American Indian Movement, which started in Minneapolis in the late sixties. AIM has quite a few members on the Lakota reservations, but they are a minority. They frequently issue press releases declaring their independence and claiming land, and occasionally stage an "occupation" of some area for the media, but I doubt the Tribes are involved in this.
--------------------
Mike
Itinerant Philosopher and Free-lance Smart-A$$
Spiritual Guidance by Appointment
|
Trouthead
Offline
Subject of the Puritan Rep. of Washington
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/17/02
Posts: 4467
|
|
" think people around here would suffer some serious culture shock if they were to leave the PNW and start asking people about tribal fishing rights...they don't see or know the things that we do, and even if they did they probably wouldn't care."
Maybe not. Talk to people in the Great Lakes area about Indians spearing Walleyes at night during the spawn. In-Fisherman did a whole show about it a few years ago.
--------------------
Trouthead
ABU/Ambassaduer Rest Home - Maître d' (New residents welcome)
C.A.S.T. volunteer, supporter and advocate
http://www.castforkids.org/
|
Todd R
Online!
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 10/29/01
Posts: 888
Loc: Seattle, Washington
|
|
Perhaps, but my point doesn't change...of the millions of people in the US of A, there aren't more than a relative handful that give a rip...some here on the west coast, some in Alaska, some in the midwest...I'm sure there are some pockets of 'em around in other areas, too, but I doubt it all adds up to more than a drop in the bucket overall.
Fish on...
Todd
--------------------
http://www.rvrfshr.com
For all your fishing hardware needs!
"Correct in Design"
|
Trouthead
Offline
Subject of the Puritan Rep. of Washington
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/17/02
Posts: 4467
|
|
Your probably right, Todd. Our fish are not as important to the general public as a basketball team moving or a football team wanting a new stadium. Now, that is some important stuff right there.
--------------------
Trouthead
ABU/Ambassaduer Rest Home - Maître d' (New residents welcome)
C.A.S.T. volunteer, supporter and advocate
http://www.castforkids.org/
|
Quillback
Offline
South of the Mason/Dixon line
Profile Status:
Reged: 02/08/02
Posts: 2618
Loc: Arkansas
|
|
I worked for a company that was headquartered in San Jose, CA. I would sometimes have conversations with some of the folks down there about salmon/steelhead issues, and I can tell you the average non-NW Fisherperson is completely clueless when it comes to fish issues. And many of those that somewhat understood the issues were sympathetic to the tribes as far a fishing rights.
--------------------
I'd rather be fishing
|
chumstick1
Offline
egg
Profile Status:
Reged: 11/24/06
Posts: 1
Loc: W Wa
|
|
Sorry about the late post on this; just saw the subject. Basically, any legal ruling against a bonafide tribal member must pass 2 tests: cannot pre-empt federal law and cannot infringe upon the right of the tribe to govern themselves. In this case it looks like the tribe is taking responsibility to pass judgement on the accused.
|
Gooose
Offline
Ancient Mod
Profile Status:
Reged: 09/14/01
Posts: 11056
Loc: Area 12
|
|
The current status of the Makah prosecution of their tribal members is that they retired their tribal judge and replaced her with a new tribal judge who then recused herself from the case. Now they have asked the Quileute tribe to provide a judge. Of course the Quileutes and the Makahs don't have what one would call a friendly relationship so I wouldn't place any bets on that ever happening. So yes the Makah tribe in the end can tell a story that they certainly tried to prosecute the case against their 5 members but for some reason they just can't find a judge to preside over the case. Drag it out a couple years and it will just go away. But hey they were showing responsibility. 
--------------------
Independent Advocate For The Fish
Not Represented By Any Organization
Simple Solutions to Simple Problems
Simple Solutions to Complex Problems
There's lies, damned lies and then there are statistics......Mark Twain
|
pwcleaner
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 12/04/04
Posts: 578
Loc: Yelm, WA
|
|
Couldn't killing a whale be something like cattle rustling?? People get hung for that don't they??
--------------------
--
|
AuntyM
Offline
Looking for a few good fish!
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/07/01
Posts: 10189
Loc: Harstine Island
|
|
I haven't read anywhere that the federal charges have been dropped.
--------------------
Landslide: Stevie Nicks greatest song!
http://www.ccapnw.org
The Monster Breathes!
"Don't fall in!" Doug Richert Sr. 10/18/2008 
|
boater
Offline
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 05/03/01
Posts: 693
Loc: seattle
|
|
Quote:
Salmo_g said:
While treaties are the supreme law of the land, they are still like other laws in that they can be modified.
salmo g, if a treaty is the supreme law of the land why is sportfishing considered a privilege and not a right when according to the following the courts have ruled that under the treaty there is no difrence ?
Q: Why aren't tribal members required to follow the same state hunting regulations as non-tribal hunters?
A: Many of Washington's tribes signed treaties with the United States in the 1850s in which they "ceded" or gave up title to their lands but reserved the privilege of hunting on "open and unclaimed lands." Courts have ruled that under the treaty there is no difference between a privilege and a right. Each treaty tribe has the ability to set hunting regulations for its members. Federal treaties are recognized as the supreme law of the land under the U.S. Constitution and thus supersede most state laws and regulations. Only Congress can change the terms of a federal treaty.
|
Todd R
Online!
Chromer
Profile Status:
Reged: 10/29/01
Posts: 888
Loc: Seattle, Washington
|
|
boater,
The strange fact about that particular passage is that they are talking about a treaty...and within a treaty reserving rights to the tribes to hunt, they have ruled that calling that reservation of the right to hunt to be a "right", whether they call it a "right" or a "privilege".
The non-tribal "privilege" to hunt is not "under the treaty"...it's a different type of right altogether.
Simply put, the courts have ruled that if your ability to hunt is contained within a treaty, then it is a "right", no matter what they call it.
If your ability to hunt (or fish) is not contained within a treaty (us, for example), then no matter what they call it, it is a privilege that can be extended, restricted, modified, or done away with by the State.
Fish on...
Todd
--------------------
http://www.rvrfshr.com
For all your fishing hardware needs!
"Correct in Design"
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
