Dave Meissner
ESPM 3001
Discussion of Western cases
Supreme Court Won’t Hear Hunting Case
A man named Donald Buchanan shot two elk off reservation land in Yakima, Washington. The shooting of these animals created much conflict because he was ‘taking’ white peoples’ resources. The 1855 Treaty of Point Elliot reserved the Yakima (and 13 other tribes) right to hunt on “open and unclaimed” lands and where he shot the elk is located under these conditions. Two courts already said that he was just exercising his right and the Supreme Court would not even listen to the case (they also said that the state could do nothing with trying to get rid of treaties because that was federal government’s jurisdiction). After putting the state in its place…3 times, there is going to be another court hearing regarding Donald Buchanan and hunting on off-reservation land.
25 years after the Boldt Decision: The fish tale that changed history
This is a story of a man named Billy Frank, a Nisqually Indian from Washington
who had a story to tell about his history. When he was a boy he had to keep
a constant lookout for people against Natives. There was little understanding
when it came to Indians doing what they had a right to do (mostly hunting
and fishing) and they were taken to court many times. They did not have lawyers
and the only defense they held was that the right to practice their ways
of life according to century year old treaties. Since the state thought the
treaties were too old to be considered (thought of as junk) they tossed them
to the side when an Indian was in trial.
Billy mentioned how there was a treaty tree and how that spot was known for
Indians signing treaties that didn’t make sense to them. The governor
of Washington stated, “I can get these Indians to sign their death
warrant.” Hopes of the Indians dieing off was high with an anticipatory
attitude of making their reservations smaller and smaller until this was
accomplished.
All the Natives really wanted were maintaining their reserved right to fish.
That’s how the Nisqually tribe survived, by eating salmon. Luckily,
they kept this right only to have it taken away. Natives were blamed for
overexploiting salmon and were punished if caught fishing. No one blamed
the commercial fisherman for the decrease in salmon who caught millions of
pounds of this fish in the ocean…surprise, surprise.
Soon the Indians grew sick and tired of always taking the blame for everything
that dealt with the outdoors. Supporters (including some celebrities) started
to rally for them by their fishing grounds. This worked as well as a lead
balloon and shortly the Natives began retaliating by throwing rocks and fists,
which led to canoes being trampled, Indians getting shot, and more hatred
toward them.
The federal government finally got involved and filed a suit against the
state of Washington. The judge had a previous hearing involving the Natives
and ruled against them, so hope was low. The outcome, believe it or not,
was that the Indians could harvest 50% of the salmon that were in their rivers.
This soon spread to 50% of the game and shellfish. Boldt’s decision
was one of the most significant rulings in the history of Indian law.
Boldt decision (optional)
Only thing I wanted to point out is that the judge did note the fact that
when treaties were made, there was no comprehension between the Indians
and what they were signing.
Date created: June, 2002
Last modified: April, 2007
Copyright ©2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 George R. Spangler