Now that it snowed they need to lock up Watt Canyon

[Stein]

Don’t feed the troll

i am not a troll,i am being honest.all this hate for something that is heard from other haters.give facts and quit bashing other groups is all i have to say.i will not sit by while people bash for no reason that can be proven.jackelope dont go,you posted what i was looking for give me a min. to reply to your request.

I'll bite - Why are some people allowed to use rifles to shoot game in a winter refuge area during archery season?   Why not have "all hunters" use the same weapon during prescribed seasons?  Out of season these units can be controlled by locking the gates, this might help these winter refuge areas that game migrate to.  This would not prevent some people from hunting during the season

It's pretty simple, there are two separate regulations.  Tribes have treaty rights and the rest of us are governed by state regulations.  They systems are separate and not equal.  It doesn't make sense asking why tribes don't comply with regulations that don't apply to them.  I'm not saying it's good or bad, but it is the law of the land right now.

Like others, I wish there was much more coordination with big game like there is with fish.  The fish program is far from perfect, or even close to, but there are quite a few good things going on and at least they all sit down and agree on quotas.  I think both sides should do better as WDFW doesn't even seem to have a big game conservation plan at all.

[outdooraddict]

They should be on their horses with their long bow. Not a truck and a rifle

[NOCK NOCK]

Late to the show but I thought “commercial” was something that happened in between TV shows 

[birdshooter1189]

Don’t feed the troll

i am not a troll,i am being honest.all this hate for something that is heard from other haters.give facts and quit bashing other groups is all i have to say.i will not sit by while people bash for no reason that can be proven.jackelope dont go,you posted what i was looking for give me a min. to reply to your request.

I'll bite - Why are some people allowed to use rifles to shoot game in a winter refuge area during archery season?   Why not have "all hunters" use the same weapon during prescribed seasons?  Out of season these units can be controlled by locking the gates, this might help these winter refuge areas that game migrate to.  This would not prevent some people from hunting during the season

It's pretty simple, there are two separate regulations.  Tribes have treaty rights and the rest of us are governed by state regulations.  They systems are separate and not equal.  It doesn't make sense asking why tribes don't comply with regulations that don't apply to them.  I'm not saying it's good or bad, but it is the law of the land right now.

Like others, I wish there was much more coordination with big game like there is with fish.  The fish program is far from perfect, or even close to, but there are quite a few good things going on and at least they all sit down and agree on quotas.  I think both sides should do better as WDFW doesn't even seem to have a big game conservation plan at all.

In my opinion there are two problems here that are fueling a lot of frustration among us.
1. There are not enough animals (game and fish) to meet the desires of us humans.
2. We have different groups of humans following different rules based on skin color.  This is especially problematic when combined with the first problem.

I think the best solution would be to re-write the rules and treaties to make everyone follow the same rules regardless of skin color or ethnicity.  I understand that native americans have special privileges because my white great great grandparents forced their native great great grandparents onto reservations.  I also understand that their great great grandparent "braves" raided and scalped some of my great great grandparents. Wrongs were definitely committed on both sides.  Somehow we have to find a way to move past this though and realize that we are all Americans and ought to work together as one team.  Especially as sportsmen we ought to be working together for the common good of us all instead of bickering among ourselves.

I fish a lot and I have in the past taken time off work and driven 3+ hours to go salmon fishing on a river, only to realize after I got there that the river is BARREN of fish because native americans have had nets in the river, or accross the mouth of it, for the past couple days.  That's extremely frustrating and it is difficult to not start blaming others.  It's pretty difficult to not start asking "why do they have the right to net the whole river and I am limited to single hook and line?"  And the answer is: because their great great grandparents had a "tradition" of fishing the river and their traditions are now protected as rights.  I am expected to forget that my great great grandparents also fished and hunted, but somehow my ancestor's traditions are not protected as rights for me.

I do understand that the tribes are very active and effective at running fish hatcheries and promoting fish and game conservation efforts.  It is my understanding that they tend to run them more efficiently than WDFW. For this work I am very appreciative.  I applaud and thank them for their work and dedication.

As a white american I understand the frustration towards native americans because they have additional fishing and hunting priveleges than me.  I also understand Oh Ma's frustration though at being a conscientious native american and being blamed continuously for the shortage of hunting and fishing opportunities.

In the end I go back to the first two problems I stated at the start of my post.  Somehow we need to find a way to level the playing field and make the same rules for everyone, regardless of skin color or ethnicity.  Whether the tribes are given full control of fish and game and WDFW is done away with and everyone follows their rules, or whether WDFW takes full control of fish and game and the tribes follow their rules.
 Just make the same rules for everyone. Until that happens I'm afraid the conflict and "hate" between these groups will continue.

In the mean time we will continue to do our best to work together and keep reminding ourselves to get along and refrain from blaming.

[idahohuntr]

Your point number 2 is flawed.  Skin color is not the determining factor.  Being a member of a Tribe which negotiated a Treaty with the United States reserving said rights is what creates a different set of "rules". 

They should be on their horses with their long bow. Not a truck and a rifle

Their treaty right reserved the taking of game and fish, it did not specify methods/means.  Should your constitutional rights be limited to the technologies available at the time such rights were established?  Think 2nd amendment circa 1776 

[dvolmer]

I was going to try and not say any more but I have a big mouth so here it goes.

Yes Natives have treaty rights on hunting and fishing.  Here's my problem, What is a native and what is not?  We have to honor their rights and treaties but they get to determine who has these rights.  Stay with me here.  After a little research I found that to be a member of the Yakima tribe you have to be 25% native.  Muckelshoot tribe is 10%.  In the past, your % had to be higher.  They get to make these rules and they are fluid in that they can change the percentage as they choose.  So when a Muckelshoot with 10% native blood gets to hunt, what is the other 90% of him or her doing?  Poaching???

100% natives should be able to keep their treaty rights.  Anything less is a wicked evil American like the rest of us!  If this rule was followed the problem would be solved.

Like Obama, supposed to be are first black president.  Nonsense!  He was half white!  So I guess people in this country get to choose and pick what % nationality they get to be determining on what special interest or benefit it will get them.  Hogwash!  This is Racism at its finest.  But we are called racist by talking about it and or challenging the validity of it all.

[boneaddict]

I was going to try and not say any more but I have a big mouth so here it goes.

Yes Natives have treaty rights on hunting and fishing.  Here's my problem, What is a native and what is not?  We have to honor their rights and treaties but they get to determine who has these rights.  Stay with me here.  After a little research I found that to be a member of the Yakima tribe you have to be 25% native.  Muckelshoot tribe is 10%.  In the past, your % had to be higher.  They get to make these rules and they are fluid in that they can change the percentage as they choose.  So when a Muckelshoot with 10% native blood gets to hunt, what is the other 90% of him or her doing?  Poaching???

100% natives should be able to keep their treaty rights.  Anything less is a wicked evil American like the rest of us!  If this rule was followed the problem would be solved.

Like Obama, supposed to be are first black president.  Nonsense!  He was half white!  So I guess people in this country get to choose and pick what % nationality they get to be determining on what special interest or benefit it will get them.  Hogwash!  This is Racism at its finest.  But we are called racist by talking about it and or challenging the validity of it all.

If I was Elizabeth Warren.......I'd be cashing in on these hunting privileges

[NOCK NOCK]

I was going to try and not say any more but I have a big mouth so here it goes.

Yes Natives have treaty rights on hunting and fishing.  Here's my problem, What is a native and what is not?  We have to honor their rights and treaties but they get to determine who has these rights.  Stay with me here.  After a little research I found that to be a member of the Yakima tribe you have to be 25% native.  Muckelshoot tribe is 10%.  In the past, your % had to be higher.  They get to make these rules and they are fluid in that they can change the percentage as they choose.  So when a Muckelshoot with 10% native blood gets to hunt, what is the other 90% of him or her doing?  Poaching???

100% natives should be able to keep their treaty rights.  Anything less is a wicked evil American like the rest of us!  If this rule was followed the problem would be solved.

Like Obama, supposed to be are first black president.  Nonsense!  He was half white!  So I guess people in this country get to choose and pick what % nationality they get to be determining on what special interest or benefit it will get them.  Hogwash!  This is Racism at its finest.  But we are called racist by talking about it and or challenging the validity of it all.

Well stated 

[pianoman9701]

"In my opinion there are two problems here that are fueling a lot of frustration among us.
1. There are not enough animals (game and fish) to meet the desires of us humans.
2. We have different groups of humans following different rules based on skin color.  This is especially problematic when combined with the first problem."

birdshooter1189, On what data do you base your statement in #1? If you're talking about salmon and steelhead runs, for example, a very compelling argument could be made that the greatest detriment to salmonids has been the construction of dams by white people and the pollution of our water with the use of pesticides. As far as our ungulate herds are concerned, it may be successfully argued that loss of habitat, disease, and predation are the leading factors affecting populations. In statement #2, the first part is inaccurate and, assuming you have no data to support statement #1, the second part of #2 doesn't make any sense. Different people follow different rules not because of "their skin color", but because the US Congress passed those treaties and the President signed them into law. We do this with many sovereign nations when we need to make a deal which benefits both parties in some way. Apparently, we can also back out of those if the agreement no longer benefits us. But, I think it'd be a long row to hoe getting Congress or the President to change the treaties based on your emotional assessment, as opposed to scientific hypotheses based on empirical data. Just because you don't like it that Indians have rights that you don't does not a convincing argument make. Collecting data and presenting a scientific approach would possibly carry some weight.

[2MANY]

What would Colin Krapperneck do?

[pianoman9701]

  He'd still be out looking for a job.

[Pinetar]

I was going to try and not say any more but I have a big mouth so here it goes.

Yes Natives have treaty rights on hunting and fishing.  Here's my problem, What is a native and what is not?  We have to honor their rights and treaties but they get to determine who has these rights.  Stay with me here.  After a little research I found that to be a member of the Yakima tribe you have to be 25% native.  Muckelshoot tribe is 10%.  In the past, your % had to be higher.  They get to make these rules and they are fluid in that they can change the percentage as they choose.  So when a Muckelshoot with 10% native blood gets to hunt, what is the other 90% of him or her doing?  Poaching???

100% natives should be able to keep their treaty rights.  Anything less is a wicked evil American like the rest of us!  If this rule was followed the problem would be solved.

Like Obama, supposed to be are first black president.  Nonsense!  He was half white!  So I guess people in this country get to choose and pick what % nationality they get to be determining on what special interest or benefit it will get them.  Hogwash!  This is Racism at its finest.  But we are called racist by talking about it and or challenging the validity of it all.

  Excellent and well stated!!

[2MANY]

Mercy if that doesn't cause ED in the TeePee I don't know what would.

[Platensek-po]

The problem with of course being that white slave owners would routinely rape Indian slaves and then enslave their children. So if you are going to say someone has to be 100% Native American in order to get treaty rights that’s going to be difficult. I have first hand accounts of a Native American woman who was spit on and called half breed by her classmates and teachers while attending school in the 50s and 60s. She should not be considered Native American though cause a white man raped her mom? The tribes are autonomous nations and can decide, like most autonomous nations, who gets to become a member or citizen. As much as I don’t like Obama I don’t ever recall someone disparaging him because of his white ancestry yet people would disparage him because of his black skin color and ancestry. Not saying he isn’t half white just saying that to a lot of people that still means he is black.

I was going to try and not say any more but I have a big mouth so here it goes.

Yes Natives have treaty rights on hunting and fishing.  Here's my problem, What is a native and what is not?  We have to honor their rights and treaties but they get to determine who has these rights.  Stay with me here.  After a little research I found that to be a member of the Yakima tribe you have to be 25% native.  Muckelshoot tribe is 10%.  In the past, your % had to be higher.  They get to make these rules and they are fluid in that they can change the percentage as they choose.  So when a Muckelshoot with 10% native blood gets to hunt, what is the other 90% of him or her doing?  Poaching???

100% natives should be able to keep their treaty rights.  Anything less is a wicked evil American like the rest of us!  If this rule was followed the problem would be solved.

Like Obama, supposed to be are first black president.  Nonsense!  He was half white!  So I guess people in this country get to choose and pick what % nationality they get to be determining on what special interest or benefit it will get them.  Hogwash!  This is Racism at its finest.  But we are called racist by talking about it and or challenging the validity of it all.

[idahohuntr]

I was going to try and not say any more but I have a big mouth so here it goes.

Yes Natives have treaty rights on hunting and fishing.  Here's my problem, What is a native and what is not?  We have to honor their rights and treaties but they get to determine who has these rights.  Stay with me here.  After a little research I found that to be a member of the Yakima tribe you have to be 25% native.  Muckelshoot tribe is 10%.  In the past, your % had to be higher.  They get to make these rules and they are fluid in that they can change the percentage as they choose.  So when a Muckelshoot with 10% native blood gets to hunt, what is the other 90% of him or her doing?  Poaching???

100% natives should be able to keep their treaty rights.  Anything less is a wicked evil American like the rest of us!  If this rule was followed the problem would be solved.

Like Obama, supposed to be are first black president.  Nonsense!  He was half white!  So I guess people in this country get to choose and pick what % nationality they get to be determining on what special interest or benefit it will get them.  Hogwash!  This is Racism at its finest.  But we are called racist by talking about it and or challenging the validity of it all.

As a sovereign the Tribe determines their membership requirements. If the Yakamas say 25% or the muckelshoots say 10%...their prerogative.