Hunting Washington Forum

Community => Advocacy, Agencies, Access => Topic started by: haus on February 13, 2013, 12:33:15 PM

Title: Tribal Rule Change
Post by: haus on February 13, 2013, 12:33:15 PM: Started to reply to the topic regarding tribal hunting related bills, but didn't want to hijack the whole topic so:

HOUSE BILL 1496......already a common place occurrence, I'd venture to say it is the standard.
------------------------
Since we are on this subject I also have a question. I heard the wdfw director and gov oversaw and signed off the creation of a document in 2008 that legally authorized tribal members to hunt within their treaty rights on privately held property 'if' they are allowed access. I've been told this was sparked via a battle between our game wardens and the tribes to stop them from hunting under treaty on privately held property(a regular occurrence). Needless to say several attorneys and our game wardens got snuffed in their efforts and essentially overruled. I was also told several local media sources were provided with full detail of this matter, but their investigation came to a halt two weeks in.

There is a little more that I know here, but I'm single sourced so I'd like to hear what others may know on this subject.......and please no posts from the tinfoil armada(wishful thinking).
Title: Re: Tribal Rule Change
Post by: Green broke on February 14, 2013, 03:24:44 PM: This is a very complicated issue to say the least. I don't know your source but I know I was told(by the WDFW) that if I shot a deer in my yard I would be cited for hunting outside of a state season(i do not live on my rez). I was also told that I could not hunt any farmland (for ducks) even with written permission.
If you are talking industrial timberlands I think that situation is murky at best and a final stance will probably be decided via case law after a whole lot of litigation and appeals.
If you want to know the states stance look at the Chambers case. I know of several cases that have been successfully prosecuted by the state from southeast Washington to Northwest Washington.
Title: Re: Tribal Rule Change
Post by: Practical Approach on February 14, 2013, 03:38:07 PM: Essentially, WDFW enforcement will cite a tribal hunter hunting under their tribes regulations on private property even with permission from the landowner (farms, ranches, etc) However, private industrial timberlands is a gray area. WDFW views these areas as private and off limit to tribes, while tribes view these lands as open and unclaimed consistent with hunting. Right now I believe the state is not pressing the industrial timberlands issue and the tribes are currently hunting them where they are open to hunting.
Title: Re: Tribal Rule Change
Post by: bigtex on February 14, 2013, 05:26:54 PM: Industrial timberlands will come from case law. I know of one timberland company which requires a permit (fee) to access has said their lands are not considered "open and unclaimed" and are closed to tribal hunting. But that is their opinion.
Title: Re: Tribal Rule Change
Post by: haus on February 14, 2013, 05:42:41 PM: Quote from: Practical Approach on February 14, 2013, 03:38:07 PM
Essentially, WDFW enforcement will cite a tribal hunter hunting under their tribes regulations on private property even with permission from the landowner (farms, ranches, etc) However, private industrial timberlands is a gray area. WDFW views these areas as private and off limit to tribes, while tribes view these lands as open and unclaimed consistent with hunting.
That first part is what I'm specifically referring to. wdfw Directors office sent a notice out to our game wardens stating they had come to agreement with the tribes to allow them to hunt under tribal harvest rules on private property if they have permission from the land owner.