Free: Contests & Raffles.
I know everyone is beyond the point of caring about the tribal perspective, but.........I decided I'm going to spout off again.I personally like to see these types of posts because it emphasizes the fact that there is tension between state/tribal hunters...and it needs attention. For the record I thought the OP did a better job than most describing the situation only because he gave testimony to the tribal members breaking a law and being unethical. In some cases like "Good day 4 the tribe" and "They're at it again" it was simply someone seeing tribal members with elk in the back of their truck...and that alone was enough to start an uproar. As a tribal member I would be happy if the only tension between state/tribal hunters was because of the difference of seasons/bag limits/regs...but that's not the case. A lot of times the resentment starts when someone witnesses a tribal member doing something illegal or unethical...and then it's a downward spiral. Because of this, tribes should take extra precautions to protect their public image...by policing and making examples out of abusers, especially with wasting. I see some improvements on this in my area and from what Bigdogg said earlier it sounds like the Yaks may be hiring some additional enforcement officers. Obviously there is some work to be done still in order to come remotely close to meeting my desired future condition above. I understand if non tribal hunters will always hold a grudge, but as long as they still have the "abuse" argument to fall back on they will continue to pass the hatred on to another generation of hunters...maybe in their mind it's justifiable, but that would still be unfortunate.I have no problems with people making posts about witnessing poachers, whether tribal or nontribal. The only thing that really ticks me off about this whole thing is that WDFW game wardens don't think its worth their time to at least respond when there is no confirmation as to whether or not they're tribal, although that's already been said.On a more serious matter...I challenge anyone to dig deep in their heart and come up with one positive thing that would have come from killing ALL Native Americans in the name of conquest...isn't that similar to some of the situations we send our soldiers over seas to try to prevent? Would you really be a happier hunter if a few more native American women and children were murdered? I understand the mods frustration, but is that really the message that hunters from Hunt Wa want to portray...this is the current state of hunting in washington?
I have two questions.1) How many "rights" do you think Indians would have if say the Portuguese, Spaniards or one of the Asian countries would have landed here first? Do you really think they would have taken the "natives" into account and given them anything except a death sentence or a slave collar. My point is that someone was going to land on this continent and though things certainly didn't go picture perfect I think all "native americans" should be somewhat thankful it was "whitey" that landed here and stuck around and not someone else. Now before you go and get all spun out of control, sit and think how BAD it could have gone. Then reply.2) How does everyone think things would go if we left big game management up to the Indians? Say we throw our hands in the air and make a general open statement that the gloves are off and Indians can do freely as they want without ANY retaliation and bitching from anyone. All indians could shoot kill and do whatever they want to big game animals. Does ANYONE think they would use ANY kind of self control or would it just be an all out slaughter with dead animals laying in waste???
the fish r not wasted we sell every fish we catch damn good money 2 i do it
