nile paper says muck's shot 140+/- deer last weekend?

[CedarPants]

I was literally just typing this:  "Glad to see we are all getting along on page 25 .... but this is the point where someone will derail the conversation yet again"

Couldn't even finish typing it before it actually happened.  So predictable

I wasn't trying to start a fight. He asked me questions about what I thought, so I answered them. Do you want me to lie? It's also predictable to have someone that disagree's with someone else to try and make that person feel bad for what he believes in. How unfortunate.

I was referring to your delivery, not your points.  Intent was not to make you feel bad

[igotbigbulls]

Posted by: hunter360
« on: Today at 06:57:39 AM » Insert Quote
Quote from: igotbigbulls on Yesterday at 03:01:44 PM
colock i agree with you on the point of just cuz it legal doesnt make it right. i am not yakama so i can not speak for them on what they do or dont do. i am not one who would advocate taking more than 1 BAB a year either. no point in it. IMO


hunter 360
are you saying that for hunting in our ceded area only or for on reservation rights too? you want WDFW to regulate the game on the reservation? or would you want us to give the reservation land back for all to hunt on also?

Yes I'm saying make everyone equal. To make everyone equal either give everyone reservations, or get rid of them all. This isn't the united states of america with little indian countries inside of our country. We are all referred to as citizens of america, not citizens of the united states of indian reservations.
You said you have rights to hunting and I have privileges.....that's bullsh!t in itself. My great grandparents that went through the great depression used hunting as a huge (and sometimes only) source of food for our family. We have been hunting from the beginning of time too, there is no difference between your indian family and my white family.
Everyone screams equal rights until it comes down to taking special privileges away from themselves.
Do you really think you should have more rights than I do just because of your skin color? That would be discrimination against me now wouldn't it? Isn't this country against that?

my comment is this.
i disagree with whats hilighted in red.

U.S. vs. Washington states, "Indian tribes cannot rescind a treaty agreement or limit non-Indian fishing pursuant to the agreement, but off-reservation fishing by other citizens and residents of the state is not a right but a privilege which may be granted, limited or withdrawn by the state as the interests of the state or exercise of the treaty fishing rights may require."

and as far as discrimination goes in this country. isnt that how this country came to be about, fighting wars with other countries and indiginous people for there own want and gain? thats how the treaties came about and reservations and so on. so that the people here first would still have a place to call home and contiue their practices for future generations.

[hunter360]

I was literally just typing this:  "Glad to see we are all getting along on page 25 .... but this is the point where someone will derail the conversation yet again"

Couldn't even finish typing it before it actually happened.  So predictable

I wasn't trying to start a fight. He asked me questions about what I thought, so I answered them. Do you want me to lie? It's also predictable to have someone that disagree's with someone else to try and make that person feel bad for what he believes in. How unfortunate.

I was referring to your delivery, not your points.  Intent was not to make you feel bad

Well if my delivery was bad I apologize. It wasn't intended to be bad.

[hunter360]

Posted by: hunter360
« on: Today at 06:57:39 AM » Insert Quote
Quote from: igotbigbulls on Yesterday at 03:01:44 PM
colock i agree with you on the point of just cuz it legal doesnt make it right. i am not yakama so i can not speak for them on what they do or dont do. i am not one who would advocate taking more than 1 BAB a year either. no point in it. IMO


hunter 360
are you saying that for hunting in our ceded area only or for on reservation rights too? you want WDFW to regulate the game on the reservation? or would you want us to give the reservation land back for all to hunt on also?

Yes I'm saying make everyone equal. To make everyone equal either give everyone reservations, or get rid of them all. This isn't the united states of america with little indian countries inside of our country. We are all referred to as citizens of america, not citizens of the united states of indian reservations.
You said you have rights to hunting and I have privileges.....that's bullsh!t in itself. My great grandparents that went through the great depression used hunting as a huge (and sometimes only) source of food for our family. We have been hunting from the beginning of time too, there is no difference between your indian family and my white family.
Everyone screams equal rights until it comes down to taking special privileges away from themselves.
Do you really think you should have more rights than I do just because of your skin color? That would be discrimination against me now wouldn't it? Isn't this country against that?

my comment is this.
i disagree with whats hilighted in red.

U.S. vs. Washington states, "Indian tribes cannot rescind a treaty agreement or limit non-Indian fishing pursuant to the agreement, but off-reservation fishing by other citizens and residents of the state is not a right but a privilege which may be granted, limited or withdrawn by the state as the interests of the state or exercise of the treaty fishing rights may require."

and as far as discrimination goes in this country. isnt that how this country came to be about, fighting wars with other countries and indiginous people for there own want and gain? thats how the treaties came about and reservations and so on. so that the people here first would still have a place to call home and contiue their practices for future generations.

Yes I understand, but just because it says that doesn't mean it is right. They make laws all the time that I think are not right at all. If everyone in this country is equal like they all say we are, then you shouldn't have any more rights then I do and vice versa when it comes to things like this.
You really think if all the food got cut off from the united states that people wouldn't just go out and harvest animals to feed their families just because the government says we can't. Hell no! I know that would never happen, but I'm trying to make a point here. There is no reason to give you special rights just because your race. That is racism and discrimination.
As far as your discrimination statement, your race is not discriminated on in any way imo. I think it has to be the first time in history that someone was conquered in a war and got more rights then the people that conquered them.

"so that the people here first would still have a place to call home and contiue their practices for future generations"

You would still have a place to call home right here in America with our without your reservation or special rights. We are not kicking you out of the country. Three things on the "continuing your practices" statement. One, who says you were the only race to practice feeding your families by hunting? Second, was your "practices" to go out and attempt to harvest enough animals to fill their non existent freezers for ten years (serious question) Third, Do you realize that times have kind of changed and you don't need to kill enough animals to fill your freezers for ten years because there are such things as grocery stores and what not now?

I understand you're going to defend the special priviliges given to your ancestors, but that doesn't mean that it is right. Anyone can try to justify anything to benefit their agenda, but that doesn't mean it is right either.

I also want to tell you that in no way am I trying to be mean or try to start a fight or arguement, I am just giving you my opinion as asked. If I come off the wrong way for some reason like cedarpants suggested, I apologize.

[Wenatcheejay]

The way I see it is the problem with Washington is that it's government is corrupt. The purpose of WDFW enforcement is to fine it's citizenry for whatever it's Officers can make up. It's the same with cops and State Patrol. If they can't tax it or make us pay for a license an application, or registration then it is a tax in the form of petty laws. No ethics, no honor, just pay the Queen. (It is her deer.)

There is no money in going after the tribes so WDFW does not care. If they could get money by policing them I think they would. But tribes will fight everything in court, we just pay fines and move on. So we are suckers and well, they are not. The way to tackle this is head on. The Tribes are also all about money. Between fish and wildlife and casinos they are swimming in revenue that every other citizen could never dream of. Mostly because they are free of the socialism that we face. No taxes, no regulations, I envy them. I also admire them. They don't take it. We do. If you don't like the system, if you don't like the game vote. Most of us should have gotten a ballot. This year, next year are very important ones. VOTE. Change the game. Want to get their attention, tax their casinos, there is some revenue for WDFW.
What I would like the Tribes (Yakima) to do? Make some fair rules and hunting seasons, punish true Tribal crimes, enforce their own or loose the tax free gravy train, end of that sweet gambling money. Then tax them in all other industries as any other American Company OR as a Foreign Business working inside of the United States, whatever they classify themselves as.

[CedarPants]

No hard feelings Hunter360, and I apologize as well. 

[Curly]

Wenatcheejay - 

[Ddog73]

The way I see it is the problem with Washington is that it's government is corrupt. The purpose of WDFW enforcement is to fine it's citizenry for whatever it's Officers can make up. It's the same with cops and State Patrol. If they can't tax it or make us pay for a license an application, or registration then it is a tax in the form of petty laws. No ethics, no honor, just pay the Queen. (It is her deer.)

There is no money in going after the tribes so WDFW does not care. If they could get money by policing them I think they would. But tribes will fight everything in court, we just pay fines and move on. So we are suckers and well, they are not. The way to tackle this is head on. The Tribes are also all about money. Between fish and wildlife and casinos they are swimming in revenue that every other citizen could never dream of. Mostly because they are free of the socialism that we face. No taxes, no regulations, I envy them. I also admire them. They don't take it. We do. If you don't like the system, if you don't like the game vote. Most of us should have gotten a ballot. This year, next year are very important ones. VOTE. Change the game. Want to get their attention, tax their casinos, there is some revenue for WDFW.
What I would like the Tribes (Yakima) to do? Make some fair rules and hunting seasons, punish true Tribal crimes, enforce their own or loose the tax free gravy train, end of that sweet gambling money. Then tax them in all other industries as any other American Company OR as a Foreign Business working inside of the United States, whatever they classify themselves as.

I think we covered the tax thing...

[hunter360]

No hard feelings Hunter360, and I apologize as well.

There is no hard feelings here. Thanks for understanding 

[724wd]

telling people who have hunted and fished since time immemorial that have faced opposition and reserved a right to continue to hunt and fish in there usual and accustomed places to now change there way drastically and suddenly is not going to fly.

So igotbigbulls, have non-indians not hunted since we oozed out of the primordial swamp, stood upright and started using tools, just like your ancestors?  last i heard, non-indians didn't just spring-up one day shopping at safeway, or were dropped off by some benevolent aliens (except the scientologists...).  my family used to dip net salmon on the columbia before the dams came in, they killed deer to feed the camps, traveled to california to cut redwoods, hunted and fished all over the country.  if your logic holds true, why should i not be afforded the same opportunity?  my ancestors did it, i should get to do it, right?  and this wasn't just in the 1800's; my dad remembers traveling to california to cut redwoods, making millions of shakes to sell out of some monster trees.  that was in the early 50's, and was a practice the family had done for generations. 

I'm not advocating the abolishment of all treaty rights, but it's almost 2012.  this isn't the wild west anymore.  can you honestly say an indian family cannot survive without multiple animals stockpiled in the freezer?  do trophy bulls taste better than a raghorn or cow?  is the current mentality of horn porn so prevalent in our society that indians are driven to kill multiple trophy animals just because they can, similar to poachers?  would the uproar over tribal hunting be what it is if indians were shooting cows and raghorns?

Would it be so oppressive to require the use of tags (let's assume these tags will be given for free or at a rate you already pay) and reporting to the WDFW like the rest of the population?  if you're providing for elderly, how would anyone know if they've already been provided for unless there are tags involved?  who's to say when you're seen shooting multiple animals that all you have to do is claim you're hunting for someone else, whether true or not.  without tags there is no accountability.  for ceremonial purposes, i don't see why the WDFW couldn't issue a free tag for the event to prevent multiple people from killing animals for one event.  if there is a tag issued, it would be recorded and counted with the rest of the tags issued to the entire population.  If someone calls in that indians were seen hunting out of season, there would be a record that they were legally involved in killing game for a ceremony.  the wildlife of the state is a shared resource and needs to be managed in a unified manner between all groups if sustainability is our goal.

harvest reporting would be a great step, but without the use of tags, who's to say the numbers given are accurate?  I understand anyone reporting a kill can lie about it, and i'm not sure there is any penalty if you lie on your report, say, claiming a 4 point when you shot a 6 point, etc, or even claiming  you didnt kill anything.  check stations would be the only way to curb the lying, and that would cost tons of money to staff and be a logistical nightmare - let's save that discussion for another time.

Coastal, your post

I would be opposed to anything that takes away the tribes ability to self regulate/govern themselves.  I would not be opposed to a process that allows for tribes to conduct gov to gov co managment efforts in ceded areas.  Both parties would chip in on population monitioring/management concerns and walk away with a baseline from which they can both develope regulations to meet the needs of their constituants and to ensure conservation.  Some of the the things I would like to see changed in my region are better enforcement, stiffer penalties for violations, a more strict process for determining eligible designated hunters, and a renewed effort to educate young tribal members on the cultural importance of fish and wildlife and determining what consitutes a need."

are all great points.  the one thing i have issue with though, is your first sentence "I would be opposed to anything that takes away the tribes ability to self regulate/govern themselves."  It's been stated here that in certain circumstances (murder, for one), the tribe does not govern themselves and relies on the US government to do it for them.  why does the tribe not handle their matters solely on their own if truly soverign? 

seems like on the reservation (your nation) you can make whatever laws you want and enforce them how you see fit, as is your right and I have no beef with that.  but once you leave the reservation, shouldn't you have to abide the laws of the locality?  It should be no different than a canadian coming to the US... they have to follow our laws.  if wolves are shoot-on-sight vermin in canada, canadians can't come to the US and blast away, as much as we might like them to!

[PlateauNDN]

Coastal, your post

I would be opposed to anything that takes away the tribes ability to self regulate/govern themselves.  I would not be opposed to a process that allows for tribes to conduct gov to gov co managment efforts in ceded areas.  Both parties would chip in on population monitioring/management concerns and walk away with a baseline from which they can both develope regulations to meet the needs of their constituants and to ensure conservation.  Some of the the things I would like to see changed in my region are better enforcement, stiffer penalties for violations, a more strict process for determining eligible designated hunters, and a renewed effort to educate young tribal members on the cultural importance of fish and wildlife and determining what consitutes a need."

are all great points.  the one thing i have issue with though, is your first sentence "I would be opposed to anything that takes away the tribes ability to self regulate/govern themselves."  It's been stated here that in certain circumstances (murder, for one), the tribe does not govern themselves and relies on the US government to do it for them.  why does the tribe not handle their matters solely on their own if truly soverign? 

seems like on the reservation (your nation) you can make whatever laws you want and enforce them how you see fit, as is your right and I have no beef with that.  but once you leave the reservation, shouldn't you have to abide the laws of the locality?  It should be no different than a canadian coming to the US... they have to follow our laws.  if wolves are shoot-on-sight vermin in canada, canadians can't come to the US and blast away, as much as we might like them to!

It's not that we rely on the US Govt. for the enforcement of Felonies it's the way the US Govt. set it up.  Our court systems are allowed up to Felonies anything Felony and above is turned over to the Feds (FBI).  On the rez Tribal Police have jurisdiction over Tribal Members unless they committed on offense on land/property that is owned by a different jurisdiction (that's a long discussion on its own so I'll skip the breakdown).

Off the Rez we are subject to the local jurisdiction except in the cases of hunting, fishing and gathering of traditional foods in Ceded Areas.  The Tribe "RESERVED" those rights (not granted or given) and have exclusive jurisdiction over Tribal Members.

Coastal's post was about the best way to approach these types of issues right now.

[PlateauNDN]

Hunter360, discrimination is still prevalant today as it was 20 to 30 years ago when dealing with Natives.  I still run into it even today when conducting business and leisure activities.  In Your Opinion it might not be here but that doesn't mean it's gone.

I quoted a story that hit close to home with my grandmother in regarding the New Lic. Plates the Tribe has started issuing Tribal Members.  If that wasn't racist or being discriminated against then I don't know what you'd call it.

I hear a lot on here as well regarding OUR Ceded Areas and why do we have to go so far?  That's because our Ceded Land was home to the 14 different Tribes and Bands that make up the Yakama Nation.  They all didn't live in one encampment and call it home they lived all throughout the Ceded Area and just so the US Govt. could save time they said we'll call you all one Tribe so we don't have to make more Treaties then we have to and we'll give you some land right in the middle of all your territories to relocate to and call your new home, Hence, the Yakama Reservation.

I've got a map if you'd like to see it showing the locations and names of the different Bands that make up the Yakama Nation at the time of the signing of the Treaty.

Just like Bigbulls, I to have spoken with many people here advocating some type of system that would reduce the overharvesting of big game and coming from the elders it probably won't happen in their life time because they've become accustom to this and to them it appears to infringe on their rights.

I'm not advocating changing the Treaties but, the reporting system is a good start and if the worst case scenario ever happened then that would be the best time to point out and prove what everybody already knew.

Colock, you're spot on with the evidence portion.  I'm not going to put my neck on the line for hearsay, rumors or third party information.  That would ruin the credibility of any information I passed on even if there was proof.  If there's no proof then it never happened.  If you have proof with pictures, video, notes, locations, dates, times and anything that would be helpful then yes, I would be willing to work with that.

The tax thing...?  I believe that's been covered more than a couple of times recently.

[724wd]

Plat, i appreciate your comments, but i'd like to know why, for the betterment of the resource, indians would not want to work with the wdfw (and i realize some tribes are doing so)?  with dwindling herds, do indians still believe they're great stewards of the wildlife when they shoot multiple trophy animals from a herd suffering from low male/female ratios or general low animal numbers?  my family eats almost exclusively deer & elk, and one deer and one elk get us through the year easily, and we eat a lot of meat! 

yes, reporting harvests would be a great start, but how will that stop people from exploiting their rights to the detriment of the herd by shooting multiple animals, shooting in wintering areas, etc? 

you have stated several times with the leaders you have in place now that changes will not happen.  what are indians afraid of?  that you'll lose your sense of 'self', your heritage?  last i saw, adhering to laws cannot change who you are.  parental/familial involvement and sharing you past is the only way to retain your heritage, which you and others seem to do a good job of.  you mention you take your family root gathering.  that's awesome!  but would you not be able to without treaty rights?  are there regulations saying a US citizen can't pick roots in the forest?  (honestly, i have no idea!) 

with the proliferation of humans throughout the US and the world, i can see your ability to wander in your 'usual and accustomed places' shrinking, much like that of non-indians who wish to get away from civilization.  you've stated in the past you refuse to hunt on the reservation, citing that if you don't continue to hunt off the reservation, you may lose the ability to do so.  i'd counter that's not exactly true, as you could purchase a hunting license and tag and join us for whatever season you choose!  I can see why indians would be hesitant to give up that freedom, but does it make sense in 2012 for you to have unfettered access to public land off the reservation while other tax paying citizens face stiff restrictions?  true, we can lay the blame at the feet of our elected officials, but is there no middle ground?  you see the passion that flows on both sides of this debate and with a level head have been a great advocate for indians in washington.  what would it take to open talks with those in charge to see if there might be some resolution to these issues?  could be difficult, i understand, given many indians want and see no need to change the way things are now.  I would counter that the same thing might be said of when the Bill of Rights was amended to allow women to vote, or blacks be free. 

off topic question, but as a soverign nation, can an indian possess a full auto weapon in washington on the reservation, or are you bound by some of the same laws as the rest of us?  just curious, as possession of FA arms is legal on a federal level, but restricted at this state's level, while legal in idaho. 

[Wenatcheejay]

The way I see it is the problem with Washington is that it's government is corrupt. The purpose of WDFW enforcement is to fine it's citizenry for whatever it's Officers can make up. It's the same with cops and State Patrol. If they can't tax it or make us pay for a license an application, or registration then it is a tax in the form of petty laws. No ethics, no honor, just pay the Queen. (It is her deer.)

There is no money in going after the tribes so WDFW does not care. If they could get money by policing them I think they would. But tribes will fight everything in court, we just pay fines and move on. So we are suckers and well, they are not. The way to tackle this is head on. The Tribes are also all about money. Between fish and wildlife and casinos they are swimming in revenue that every other citizen could never dream of. Mostly because they are free of the socialism that we face. No taxes, no regulations, I envy them. I also admire them. They don't take it. We do. If you don't like the system, if you don't like the game vote. Most of us should have gotten a ballot. This year, next year are very important ones. VOTE. Change the game. Want to get their attention, tax their casinos, there is some revenue for WDFW.
What I would like the Tribes (Yakima) to do? Make some fair rules and hunting seasons, punish true Tribal crimes, enforce their own or loose the tax free gravy train, end of that sweet gambling money. Then tax them in all other industries as any other American Company OR as a Foreign Business working inside of the United States, whatever they classify themselves as.

I think we covered the tax thing...

About as well as WDFW has. 26 pages of blame, ZERO fixing the problem. 

Priceless.

But I am not worried, there is always hope for page 27......

[runamuk]

The way I see it is the problem with Washington is that it's government is corrupt. The purpose of WDFW enforcement is to fine it's citizenry for whatever it's Officers can make up. It's the same with cops and State Patrol. If they can't tax it or make us pay for a license an application, or registration then it is a tax in the form of petty laws. No ethics, no honor, just pay the Queen. (It is her deer.)

There is no money in going after the tribes so WDFW does not care. If they could get money by policing them I think they would. But tribes will fight everything in court, we just pay fines and move on. So we are suckers and well, they are not. The way to tackle this is head on. The Tribes are also all about money. Between fish and wildlife and casinos they are swimming in revenue that every other citizen could never dream of. Mostly because they are free of the socialism that we face. No taxes, no regulations, I envy them. I also admire them. They don't take it. We do. If you don't like the system, if you don't like the game vote. Most of us should have gotten a ballot. This year, next year are very important ones. VOTE. Change the game. Want to get their attention, tax their casinos, there is some revenue for WDFW.
What I would like the Tribes (Yakima) to do? Make some fair rules and hunting seasons, punish true Tribal crimes, enforce their own or loose the tax free gravy train, end of that sweet gambling money. Then tax them in all other industries as any other American Company OR as a Foreign Business working inside of the United States, whatever they classify themselves as.

I think we covered the tax thing...

About as well as WDFW has. 26 pages of blame, ZERO fixing the problem. 

Priceless.

But I am not worried, there is always hope for page 27......

I'm up to 16 pages  you all must be set on defaults