6 Tribes step in over concerns about "Conservation Policy"

[TriggerMike]

My concern would be that the tribes negotiating a deal excluding them from the conservation policy. Or fall back on the Bolt decision excluding them.

in the end they will do what the Boldt decision allows them to do which is a lot, but Boldt depends on a specific definition of conservation that the tribes can't allow to be changed or weakened.

How ironic if the Boldt decision ends up saving us WA sportsman in the end.

[SuperX]

My concern would be that the tribes negotiating a deal excluding them from the conservation policy. Or fall back on the Bolt decision excluding them.

in the end they will do what the Boldt decision allows them to do which is a lot, but Boldt depends on a specific definition of conservation that the tribes can't allow to be changed or weakened.

How ironic if the Boldt decision ends up saving us WA sportsman in the end.

At least long enough to bring about a regime change

[Boss .300 winmag]

My concern would be that the tribes negotiating a deal excluding them from the conservation policy. Or fall back on the Bolt decision excluding them.

in the end they will do what the Boldt decision allows them to do which is a lot, but Boldt depends on a specific definition of conservation that the tribes can't allow to be changed or weakened.

How ironic if the Boldt decision ends up saving us WA sportsman in the end.

At least long enough to bring about a regime change

No regime change until the Governor is charged.

[SuperX]

My concern would be that the tribes negotiating a deal excluding them from the conservation policy. Or fall back on the Bolt decision excluding them.

in the end they will do what the Boldt decision allows them to do which is a lot, but Boldt depends on a specific definition of conservation that the tribes can't allow to be changed or weakened.

How ironic if the Boldt decision ends up saving us WA sportsman in the end.

At least long enough to bring about a regime change

No regime change until the Governor is charged.

that's the regime I'm talking about

[NOCK NOCK]

Tribes/Treaty = sovereign nations.   Yes???

Why would ANY State level law/policy have any effect on how the tribes operate/hunt? 
(other than the obvious,  reduction of ungulates by poor mang. from WA ST)  I must be missing something. 

[HUNTIN4SIX]

Lotsa very odd false hope on here....

[idahohuntr]

Tribes/Treaty = sovereign nations.   Yes???

Why would ANY State level law/policy have any effect on how the tribes operate/hunt? 
(other than the obvious,  reduction of ungulates by poor mang. from WA ST)  I must be missing something. 

They do not have jurisdiction over tribes or how they operate/hunt - but there are a multitude of actions by WDFW which can have significant effects on treaty resources (fish, wildlife, etc.) and the habitats/ecosystems those species rely upon.  So yes - the obvious ones are clear - if WDFW starts using a 'conservation' policy more like preservation and allows predator populations to significantly impair other treaty resources like elk and deer...that becomes a real problem.  How WDFW manages their lands (logging, grazing, weed control, prescribed fire etc.), how they address depredation and/or set population objectives, how they structure harvest and much more all have a potential to effect tribal treaty rights/resources...which is why the Commission's dismissal and ignorance of needing to consult with tribes is appalling.  I hope they get an earful...and hopefully more powerful people in the Governor's office are hearing/seeing the disrespect that was on full display

[jstone]

The governor doesn’t care. Look at what he is letting done with the rest of the state.

[JimmyHoffa]

Tribes/Treaty = sovereign nations.   Yes???

Why would ANY State level law/policy have any effect on how the tribes operate/hunt? 
(other than the obvious,  reduction of ungulates by poor mang. from WA ST)  I must be missing something. 

Some of the listed have small areas for their u&a.  The gmus they hunt might be fine for deer, but elk can be scarce. They get state tags for elk for one area with good populations, then wait for an elk to slip up in their tribal areas. Boundary for their tag and state tag could be a road they live on.

[pianoman9701]

Tribes/Treaty = sovereign nations.   Yes???

Why would ANY State level law/policy have any effect on how the tribes operate/hunt? 
(other than the obvious,  reduction of ungulates by poor mang. from WA ST)  I must be missing something. 

Don't overthink it. They testified. The policy was knocked down. We appreciate that. 

[NOCK NOCK]

Oh I'm not, but some are.

Just a reminder of the obvious.




Some folks thought patterns remind me of an old saying.......
Wish in 1 hand, ______ in the other......see which one adds up first.  JS


LMAO, here I go again not sure why I bother