More blood and guts

[Duckslayer89]

Should just open the whole state to whatever the native rights are. I thought people were about equality nowadays? 

[bobcat]

Should just open the whole state to whatever the native rights are. I thought people were about equality nowadays? 

    I think that might be the only way to get the natives to work with us in the conservation of our state's deer and elk.

[trophyhunt]

Should just open the whole state to whatever the native rights are. I thought people were about equality nowadays? 

    I think that might be the only way to get the natives to work with us in the conservation of our state's deer and elk.

YES, I’ve been saying this for years!  Open it up state wide, same rules as the tribe has in those units, including fishing!  It will wipe out our herds and fish but will finnaly force the natives to the bargaining table!  It’s a great idea!!

[KFhunter]

In the last native bashing thread I posted that we should turn management of fish and game to the tribes that have hunting rights in certain ceded areas, since we can't manage them let them manage us. 

We would buy a tribal hunting license for those tribal managed ceded areas and since the treaties say "in common with" then all the bag limits, all the rules, would be the same for us white folk and for Indian folk.   We would all be Indians in essence, in ceded areas. 



Of course to hunt on the reservation a person would still need a tribal ID card for that reservation.

[JimmyHoffa]

In the last native bashing thread I posted that we should turn management of fish and game to the tribes that have hunting rights in certain ceded areas, since we can't manage them let them manage us. 

We would buy a tribal hunting license for those tribal managed ceded areas and since the treaties say "in common with" then all the bag limits, all the rules, would be the same for us white folk and for Indian folk.   We would all be Indians in essence, in ceded areas. 



Of course to hunt on the reservation a person would still need a tribal ID card for that reservation.

The cases where it is already in play are actually quite a bit better than any of the shared areas.  A couple rivers on the westside and a bear hunting area.  The fishing areas have tons more fish, but they also get limited to the amount of people that can show up.  The bear hunting spot you can hunt over bait.

[bearpaw]

Should just open the whole state to whatever the native rights are. I thought people were about equality nowadays? 

    I think that might be the only way to get the natives to work with us in the conservation of our state's deer and elk.

  Equal Seasons, Equal Bag Limits! That's the most fair statement I think I have ever heard regarding how to deal with the current situation. All parties would have equal opportunity! All parties would have to come together to save the resources!

[boneaddict]

"in common with"

That’s the huge part missed in most of this

[Naches Sportsman]

There's an Indian stuck somewhere off of the 1701/1712 with one cow killed. I know I'm not going up those icy roads.

He's asking for help on a few Facebook pages

[Jimmer]

There's an Indian stuck somewhere off of the 1701/1712 with one cow killed. I know I'm not going up those icy roads.

He's asking for help on a few Facebook pages

That's too bad....

[trophyhunt]

"in common with"

That’s the huge part missed in most of this

In legal terms that part meant 50% of the resource when it was litigated.

thats your interpretation , did you get my lump of coal in your stocking?  In common with means exactly what it says, doesn’t take a genius to figure that part out.  Now if I got to hunt under their rules, I might feel diferently, but I doubt it.

[Dan-o]

I hope he gets help.

A difference of opinion is one thing;   his safety is a totally different matter. 

[Naches Sportsman]

I hope he gets help.

A difference of opinion is one thing;   his safety is a totally different matter.

Not worth putting other people in harm over a stupid decision to go on icy roads. Sounds like family members are going up to try to get him.

[JimmyHoffa]

"in common with"

That’s the huge part missed in most of this

In legal terms that part meant 50% of the resource when it was litigated.

thats your interpretation , did you get my lump of coal in your stocking?  In common with means exactly what it says, doesn’t take a genius to figure that part out.  Now if I got to hunt under their rules, I might feel diferently, but I doubt it.

Well, in this day and age you shouldn't be too surprised about interpretations.  Think about all the confusion caused by 'Shall not be infringed'.

[KFhunter]

I hope he gets help.

A difference of opinion is one thing;   his safety is a totally different matter.

Not worth putting other people in harm over a stupid decision to go on icy roads. Sounds like family members are going up to try to get him.

I saw your original unedited statement prior to 11:31pm, hoping the guy doesn't get rescued that no one goes up there for him, and I debated doing something about it but decided to let your comments speak for themselves. 

 

[bearpaw]

If I was closer I would go help the guy. He was hunting a season that is open for him to hunt, he is no different than any other hunter going out when the season is open.