Post by: gonehuntin68 on September 14, 2013, 10:16:40 AM
Post by: hntrspud on September 14, 2013, 10:18:46 AM
Post by: blindpig on September 14, 2013, 10:21:31 AM
Post by: Tbar on September 14, 2013, 10:51:41 AM
For shooting 2 different bulls that were coming in to my calls. Im archery hunting and they get to drive around in there trucks, listen for calls, and shoot them from the road. Wish we all had to follow the same rules.What part of the state?
Post by: elkh8me on September 14, 2013, 11:26:59 AM
Post by: elk247 on September 14, 2013, 11:58:55 AM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 01:14:11 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 14, 2013, 01:21:07 PM
Other than type of weapon I don't see the problem it happens all the time. :dunno: get further from the road next time. :tup:there will always be a problem with it until the Indians start playing by everyone else's rules. It's like having the governor tag delivered to your house every year, it's just wrong.
Post by: notellumcreek on September 14, 2013, 01:33:04 PM
Other than type of weapon I don't see the problem it happens all the time. :dunno: get further from the road next time. :tup:
How come indians don't get off the road? Sounds pretty lazy to me...
Post by: Bigtine96 on September 14, 2013, 01:35:12 PM
Other than type of weapon I don't see the problem it happens all the time. :dunno: get further from the road next time. :tup:
How come indians don't get off the road? Sounds pretty lazy to me...
Because that would actually be hunting and they dont want to break "tradition"
Post by: trophyhunt on September 14, 2013, 01:39:52 PM
thank God they (most) are lazy!! Could you imagine the damage they would do if they were good hunters!Other than type of weapon I don't see the problem it happens all the time. :dunno: get further from the road next time. :tup:
How come indians don't get off the road? Sounds pretty lazy to me...
Because that would actually be hunting and they dont want to break "tradition"
Post by: Bigtine96 on September 14, 2013, 01:41:05 PM
Post by: fastdam on September 14, 2013, 01:49:59 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 01:58:28 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 02:04:33 PM
Post by: inchtowntracking on September 14, 2013, 02:06:39 PM
Post by: KillZ 4 Thrilz on September 14, 2013, 02:10:01 PM
Post by: SCRUBS on September 14, 2013, 02:32:33 PM
Man these threads get old. Not all of us Indians are that way, just like not all of Washington hunters are good up standing individuals.
:yeah: :yeah:
Post by: bowhunterforever on September 14, 2013, 02:38:40 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 14, 2013, 02:39:14 PM
they do get old but they will never go away, I don't ever see our government making things right and changing the rules to make all on the same level. And for the record, I have respect for a few Indians but not the ones who don't respect the game.Man these threads get old. Not all of us Indians are that way, just like not all of Washington hunters are good up standing individuals.
:yeah: :yeah:
Post by: snowpack on September 14, 2013, 02:46:22 PM
I view it as a contract and would be concerned if the government decided to break it because of what else they would feel they could start breaking. Unless the Indians are violating their terms, I can't see the government amending on their part.they do get old but they will never go away, I don't ever see our government making things right and changing the rules to make all on the same level. And for the record, I have respect for a few Indians but not the ones who don't respect the game.Man these threads get old. Not all of us Indians are that way, just like not all of Washington hunters are good up standing individuals.
:yeah: :yeah:
Post by: Simcoe hunter on September 14, 2013, 02:52:27 PM
Man these threads get old. Not all of us Indians are that way, just like not all of Washington hunters are good up standing individuals.
You are correct Inch. There were some Yakama's that I worked with who were good hunters. Always got way back in on their rez and actually hunted. But they were few and far between. But with the "let's stick it to Whitey" attitude that is so prevalent clear to the tribal council level, there is a general lack of respect toward crackers. In fact it's more of a how far can we go, there isn't anything they can do to us.
There was one guy at the mill in White Swan who used to brag about coming off the rez wherever he wanted. I asked how he did that as there are a lot of fences along the top of the Simcoes to keep cattle off the rez. He just smiled and showed me his wire cutters.
I remember selling a couple of the old Marlin Camp Carbines to some Yakamas a few years back. We go to BS'ing and I asked what they were going to use them for. They said hunting, of course. I pried a little deeper and found out they drive the ridge road north of Goldendale from the end of August till the snow is too deep. One guy drives and 2+ characters with semiautos stand in the back of the truck. Then they just cruise until the driver sees an animal. Once an animal is spotted the driver floors it and the yahoos in the back open fire.
Hmmm...
I know there are good and bad, on and off of the rez, native and otherwise. But I agree that there ought to be some fair play required on both sides. The tribes could do more to foster good relations.
That being said, I have to agree somewhat with Mr. Plateau. It is completely possible for anyone to kill your animal on the way in to you. I had a blind the first week of the season that I thought was out of sight and out of mind. It was in a hole that was a pain to get to. It was still hot and the elk weren't moving during the day. The last evening I used I had some goof ball wanna-be bugler go off on the other side of the clearing. He almost choked on his cow call too. So even when we think we are alone, we may not be.
And I am guessing from the tone of his bugling and cow calling that he was a redneck *censored*, approximately 35 years old. Probably from the Vancouver area. The gurgle sound in the cow call was probably Budweiser induced. I also noted that he was mimicking a Primos outdoor video, circa 1993.
So I am sorry that your hunt didn't go well. But anytime we go it is a crapshoot. You may or may not be rewarded for your time and effort. If you must fill a tag to feel successful I suggest another hobby that will guarantee more positive endings. :twocents:
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 02:53:26 PM
I view it as a contract and would be concerned if the government decided to break it because of what else they would feel they could start breaking. Unless the Indians are violating their terms, I can't see the government amending on their part.they do get old but they will never go away, I don't ever see our government making things right and changing the rules to make all on the same level. And for the record, I have respect for a few Indians but not the ones who don't respect the game.Man these threads get old. Not all of us Indians are that way, just like not all of Washington hunters are good up standing individuals.
:yeah: :yeah:
:yeah: even though the govt. Broke the Treaties over and ovrr and over again. Oh and broke them first.
Post by: trophyhunt on September 14, 2013, 02:53:57 PM
it was written in way different times, many things have changed. Most tribes are well off, the mucks have more money than some small countries. The fish and game are the ones who get caught up in this mess. The Indians always say they are a separate nation, they want nothing to do with our government unless its a piece of paper giving them the right to net and fish at there free will. They need to change to damn treaty and get on the same playing field as us.I view it as a contract and would be concerned if the government decided to break it because of what else they would feel they could start breaking. Unless the Indians are violating their terms, I can't see the government amending on their part.they do get old but they will never go away, I don't ever see our government making things right and changing the rules to make all on the same level. And for the record, I have respect for a few Indians but not the ones who don't respect the game.Man these threads get old. Not all of us Indians are that way, just like not all of Washington hunters are good up standing individuals.
:yeah: :yeah:
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 03:04:05 PM
Post by: runamuk on September 14, 2013, 03:08:34 PM
Did you stop and talk with them? They couldve been Yakama or umatilla so if we're gonna bash then we might want to be accurate as to not offend one or the other for somethimg they didn't do?Actually doesn't it go a little further as well in holding individuals accountable if more info can be known about who is possibly hunting on the low end of the scale of decency? Kinda like the guy who got pics of the rig and and camp sight that was all messed up, he has an actual plate number to turn over to the correct authorities so something can be done even if its just noted that this person/people are acting like dweebs giving their tribe a black eye.
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 03:20:26 PM
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 14, 2013, 03:23:00 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 03:34:05 PM
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 14, 2013, 03:38:51 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 03:45:59 PM
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 14, 2013, 03:48:54 PM
Post by: runamuk on September 14, 2013, 03:50:45 PM
Plat is probably pulling his hair out about now...here we go again ;) :chuckle:
I actually am on the equal across the board side, however I cant change that I am one person, what i can do is make good note of individuals acting like asses and then make them known to the tribal authorities and press for some solutions, squeaky wheel theory of making changes even little ones.
however this is my agree to disagree because I think Plat and a few others here are really standup guys and I don't want to tear down friendships based on differing opinions. I think we can work together to make changes or we can divide another faction of hunters and further the governments agenda of letting us eat our own until they win and we are gone.
Post by: Bigtine96 on September 14, 2013, 03:51:36 PM
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 14, 2013, 03:54:44 PM
:chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:I don't disagree with you run. I don't know Plat, but based off of this site I believe him to be a standup guy. But that would make him the minority in my opinion.
Plat is probably pulling his hair out about now...here we go again ;) :chuckle:
I actually am on the equal across the board side, however I cant change that I am one person, what i can do is make good note of individuals acting like asses and then make them known to the tribal authorities and press for some solutions, squeaky wheel theory of making changes even little ones.
however this is my agree to disagree because I think Plat and a few others here are really standup guys and I don't want to tear down friendships based on differing opinions. I think we can work together to make changes or we can divide another faction of hunters and further the governments agenda of letting us eat our own until they win and we are gone.
Tribal hunting is tribal hunting, stay on your tribes land and I don't think there would be any more complaining. But coming off the Rez to hunt a limited draw area that will take a guy like me a lifetime to maybe draw a tag for an animal that wasn't even around before the "Whiteman" planted it is straight BS. :twocents::yeah:
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 03:54:52 PM
Turkey, I did and stated LIFE IS NOT FAIR and I deal with things everyday that are not fair. Its life/reality.
Post by: HHPro on September 14, 2013, 03:55:40 PM
Post by: Bean Counter on September 14, 2013, 03:56:46 PM
Other than type of weapon I don't see the problem it happens all the time. :dunno: get further from the road next time. :tup:
How come indians don't get off the road? Sounds pretty lazy to me...
Because that would actually be hunting and they dont want to break "tradition"
If they want special seasons based on "tradition" then they should have to do it the traditional way: hand carved long bow, riding on a horse, wearing leather mocassins. There's your tradition.
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 03:58:37 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 04:10:44 PM
Post by: runamuk on September 14, 2013, 04:15:56 PM
Other than type of weapon I don't see the problem it happens all the time. :dunno: get further from the road next time. :tup:
How come indians don't get off the road? Sounds pretty lazy to me...
Because that would actually be hunting and they dont want to break "tradition"
If they want special seasons based on "tradition" then they should have to do it the traditional way: hand carved long bow, riding on a horse, wearing leather mocassins. There's your tradition.
This is inaccurate horses and muskets came with the white man or Spaniards by the time the natives had horses they also would have had access in some areas to guns. People forget horses were not native to this continent, they had been but went extinct probably prior to the theorized arrival of our native populations across the land bridge near the end of the ice age. Really if we want to get seriously historical China was here first :chuckle:
about 10k years ago so maybe they are just trying to reclaim their people and lands now :)
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 04:20:49 PM
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 14, 2013, 04:36:11 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 14, 2013, 04:46:04 PM
Post by: Simcoe hunter on September 14, 2013, 05:24:37 PM
it was written in way different times, many things have changed. Most tribes are well off, the mucks have more money than some small countries. The fish and game are the ones who get caught up in this mess. The Indians always say they are a separate nation, they want nothing to do with our government unless its a piece of paper giving them the right to net and fish at there free will. They need to change to damn treaty and get on the same playing field as us.I view it as a contract and would be concerned if the government decided to break it because of what else they would feel they could start breaking. Unless the Indians are violating their terms, I can't see the government amending on their part.they do get old but they will never go away, I don't ever see our government making things right and changing the rules to make all on the same level. And for the record, I have respect for a few Indians but not the ones who don't respect the game.Man these threads get old. Not all of us Indians are that way, just like not all of Washington hunters are good up standing individuals.
:yeah: :yeah:
We could lobby our elected officials to cut off all monetary support to "separate nations" that have their own casinoes and sawmills, etc...
Except that I don't believe the Constitution allows for separate nations within out borders like they claim. So to be protected by the constitution You should have to play by the constitution. Fair is fair. You shouldn't be able to have it both ways. :dunno:
Post by: CAMPMEAT on September 14, 2013, 05:31:19 PM
Man these threads get old. Not all of us Indians are that way, just like not all of Washington hunters are good up standing individuals.
Exactly.............
Post by: buckfvr on September 14, 2013, 05:39:46 PM
Complain away........whats done is done. SO instead, lets abolish the government treaties, and while were at it, lets just let the government decide to abolish the constitution. Treaties are the governments contracts with the natives , same as the constitution is our contract...........both need to be upheld to disalloy further government destruction of all our ways of life. :twocents:
Post by: runamuk on September 14, 2013, 05:43:09 PM
If you see someone doing something that you feel isnt right document it get pics license numbers locations dates times and report to WDFW, local authorities, and yes tribal authorities if you know for sure its tribal. Or come on here and start a thread posting pics of vehicles and people, thats worked before :o
Post by: buckfvr on September 14, 2013, 05:48:10 PM
The powers to be and their lack of ethical and appropriate management of their charge...........or they're just ignorant and corrupt..........
Post by: PolarBear on September 14, 2013, 05:51:07 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 14, 2013, 06:23:00 PM
Post by: Special T on September 14, 2013, 06:33:54 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 14, 2013, 06:40:25 PM
I don't know if anyone can answer this question. What other states have Indian reservations that worked out deals for off Rez Rights? Obviously WA... Nez Pierce in ID? where else??? Does anyone know of a book that is written on the subject of How the treaties came to be and why they were so different? From ANY point of view...i may be wrong but I think the Oregon tribes don't have the same hunting rights as wa and or tribes.
Post by: The100Road on September 14, 2013, 07:02:23 PM
Other than type of weapon I don't see the problem it happens all the time. :dunno: get further from the road next time. :tup:
Why should he have to get further from the road? Or what if he was starting a 20 mile hike and seen elk. "damn, only if these elk where farther from the road i could call one in and shoot it" :dunno:
It doesnt matter what tribe it was. its messed up in general. Its basically a once in a lifetime tag given to these people yearly and taken for granted.
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on September 14, 2013, 07:10:25 PM
http://www.goia.wa.gov/Treaties/Treaties.htm (http://www.goia.wa.gov/Treaties/Treaties.htm)
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/tribal/treaty_history.html (http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/tribal/treaty_history.html)
http://www.fws.gov/pacific/ea/tribal/treaties/Middle_OR_Tribes1865.pdf (http://www.fws.gov/pacific/ea/tribal/treaties/Middle_OR_Tribes1865.pdf)
http://www.washington.edu/uwired/outreach/cspn/Website/Classroom%20Materials/Pacific%20Northwest%20History/Lessons/Lesson%2011/11.html (http://www.washington.edu/uwired/outreach/cspn/Website/Classroom%20Materials/Pacific%20Northwest%20History/Lessons/Lesson%2011/11.html)
Post by: Green broke on September 14, 2013, 07:15:58 PM
I don't know if anyone can answer this question. What other states have Indian reservations that worked out deals for off Rez Rights? Obviously WA... Nez Pierce in ID? where else??? Does anyone know of a book that is written on the subject of How the treaties came to be and why they were so different? From ANY point of view...The great lakes tribes have similar treaties. They have also negotiated resource allocation with the states, which has resulted in a larger harvest% by the tribes.
Post by: 6x6in6 on September 14, 2013, 07:25:18 PM
What other states have Indian reservations that worked out deals for off Rez Rights?In Montana, both the Blackfoot and Flathead's have the right to harvest an animal for ceremonial or cultural purposes year around, on or off rez as long as it's within the outlined areas agreed to in the treaty.
Not sure about others in MT like the Crow's, North Cheyenne, etc, since certain groups of tribes negotiated their treaty language separately.
I know the Blackfoot's exercise their right but not very often. They have an abundance of game on their rez, as do the Flathead's. To the degree that it's actually trophy quality.
My parents, who live about 75 miles from the Blackfoot Rez, have had tribal members harvest Cali Bighorns from the hillside right in front of their house. Also taken both bull and cow moose near their place also. This area is within their usual and accustomed land as detailed in the treaty.
Post by: Simcoe hunter on September 14, 2013, 08:14:55 PM
Tribal hunting is tribal hunting, stay on your tribes land and I don't think there would be any more complaining. But coming off the Rez to hunt a limited draw area that will take a guy like me a lifetime to maybe draw a tag for an animal that wasn't even around before the "Whiteman" planted it is straight BS. :twocents:
I have to agree with this. I don't care what rights you think some treaty gives you. This is my point about getting one over on Whitey. When their forefathers secured them the rights they have they had no idea they would be riding around in trucks and shooting anything other than primitive archery and firearms. It is time they were citizens like the rest of us.
So we bring up the we were here first argument. Hmmm... Do you know why the tribes wanted Kennewick Man so fast? Because it was about to proven through those remains that another race predated the native american. Now that would have changed everything. That whole first american thing was about to go right out the door, eclipsing their argument to keep them in the treaties.
Post by: Green broke on September 14, 2013, 08:34:35 PM
For shooting 2 different bulls that were coming in to my calls. Im archery hunting and they get to drive around in there trucks, listen for calls, and shoot them from the road. Wish we all had to follow the same rules.You were calling from the road? You called a bull to the road and it got shot so you did it again? I don't think this story was intended to do anything but stir the pot. If I had a highly coveted tag that took years to draw I don't think I would risk calling within range of the road, and I certainly wouldn'tdoit twice. :twocents:
Post by: bowhunterwa87 on September 14, 2013, 08:38:04 PM
Post by: Bigtine96 on September 14, 2013, 08:43:07 PM
Post by: Green broke on September 14, 2013, 08:47:56 PM
Post by: Simcoe hunter on September 14, 2013, 08:49:09 PM
itll never change..just like selling um whole to migrant workers in wapato and toppenish for $50
They can sell fish, why not game animals? I don't agree, just being devils advocate. I think it is wrong that they can sell anything they take for subsistence. I know the treaty probably says they can, but that doesn't make it right. Even more so in todays world than in the one the treaty was written in.
Post by: Bigtine96 on September 14, 2013, 08:51:04 PM
Post by: Simcoe hunter on September 14, 2013, 08:55:52 PM
If it's in an area where tribes are hunting also you would have to know this would be a risk. I would give it strong consideration if it was my tag and certainly wouldn't let it happen twice.
He may or may not have known. If he knew, shame on him. Sounds like he may have been being the lazy one. But are you aware that the Yakamas can hunt any unclaimed land by the Treaty of 1855. That means anything not privately owned. All federal, State, County, etc. Why do you think one of them got off with such little fallout for shooting an animal at the feeding station in Naches a few years back? You never know when they will turn up to pick up some meat to sell.
Post by: Green broke on September 14, 2013, 08:57:13 PM
If you have to worry about an indian shooting a bull from the road if you call it into an opening dont you think there might be a problem green broke?I will not call from the road. I am wary whenever I am in the woods. I would rather pack a little further than risk someone else harvesting my animal.
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 09:53:39 PM
itll never change..just like selling um whole to migrant workers in wapato and toppenish for $50
Do you work at valley gun and pawn?
Post by: hrd2fnd on September 14, 2013, 10:00:00 PM
I don't know if anyone can answer this question. What other states have Indian reservations that worked out deals for off Rez Rights? Obviously WA... Nez Pierce in ID? where else??? Does anyone know of a book that is written on the subject of How the treaties came to be and why they were so different? From ANY point of view...I've read that Runamuk has some background from her studies hopefully she can help shed some light :dunno:
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 14, 2013, 10:06:02 PM
Post by: furbearer365 on September 14, 2013, 10:14:27 PM
Post by: Green broke on September 14, 2013, 10:36:37 PM
Post by: Landowner on September 14, 2013, 10:53:34 PM
Responsible harvests and focus on preserving enough healthy game populations for years to come is important for all involved.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 14, 2013, 11:13:33 PM
Post by: The100Road on September 14, 2013, 11:17:20 PM
You guys that claim the op was calling from the road, how do you know that? How do you know the guy wasn't way off the road and the native wasnt a really good long range shot?
Exactly. Im thinking he was on the far hillside and calling a bull up from the bottom. truck comes driving down the ridge and shoots the bull across the canyon from the road. anything like that could have happened. its just wrong that you even have to worry about that in archery season.
Post by: Green broke on September 14, 2013, 11:21:07 PM
Post by: Green broke on September 14, 2013, 11:25:51 PM
How is it wrong? The tribal member was within his legal rights correct? Weather you or I or anyone else agrees with it we are here.You guys that claim the op was calling from the road, how do you know that? How do you know the guy wasn't way off the road and the native wasnt a really good long range shot?
Exactly. Im thinking he was on the far hillside and calling a bull up from the bottom. truck comes driving down the ridge and shoots the bull across the canyon from the road. anything like that could have happened. its just wrong that you even have to worry about that in archery season.
Post by: BAR C3 on September 14, 2013, 11:28:44 PM
For shooting 2 different bulls that were coming in to my calls. Im archery hunting and they get to drive around in there trucks, listen for calls, and shoot them from the road. Wish we all had to follow the same rules.Where did you go GoneHuntin68? Come on here and stir the *censored* up and can't follow up with a real story???? :hello:
How about you come back in few weeks after recovering from the ass whipping the Forty Whiners are going to take tomorrow! :tup: :lol4:
Post by: Simcoe hunter on September 15, 2013, 08:04:39 AM
I can't believe I am about to do this but....the treaties are in essence their constitution, thus if their treaties are due for a change due to times changing then so is our constitution. The treaties guaranteed rights same as the constitution guarantees rights. The issue I have is the treaties are not enforced in their entirety, there is some selective use of interpreting terminology and language that burns my biscuits, this is however a whole other can of worms. That isn't just about hunting and fishing and a few bad bad apples that manage to make entire tribes appear to be a bunch of jerks. Politics are politics, tribes, Us, UN its all about power and control, when really the average Joe or Joette just wants to carry on family traditions and enjoy their life without a bunch of hassle.
If you see someone doing something that you feel isnt right document it get pics license numbers locations dates times and report to WDFW, local authorities, and yes tribal authorities if you know for sure its tribal. Or come on here and start a thread posting pics of vehicles and people, thats worked before :o
Yes. I like that. Public humiliation whenever possible. Like the old days of putting them in locks in the public square.
Post by: Special T on September 15, 2013, 08:15:04 AM
Quick google search and I found these:Thx Blacktail. I've come up with a couple of the first ones but not the last one. Very interesting reading.
http://www.goia.wa.gov/Treaties/Treaties.htm (http://www.goia.wa.gov/Treaties/Treaties.htm)
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/tribal/treaty_history.html (http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/tribal/treaty_history.html)
http://www.fws.gov/pacific/ea/tribal/treaties/Middle_OR_Tribes1865.pdf (http://www.fws.gov/pacific/ea/tribal/treaties/Middle_OR_Tribes1865.pdf)
http://www.washington.edu/uwired/outreach/cspn/Website/Classroom%20Materials/Pacific%20Northwest%20History/Lessons/Lesson%2011/11.html (http://www.washington.edu/uwired/outreach/cspn/Website/Classroom%20Materials/Pacific%20Northwest%20History/Lessons/Lesson%2011/11.html)
I always pull 2 things out of these discussions/rants. When we elect stupid incompetent people to make decisions for us as a state, It is near impossible to undo, and we suffer for our bad choice for much longer than it takes us to fire their but.
Post by: WSU on September 15, 2013, 08:17:35 AM
I guess I fail to see why natives think they are special and therefore should get special priveledges.
They traded land for the rez and the right to hunt and fish. Maybe we should all give our houses back to whatever tribe was in our local area and the tribes can give up their right to fish. Would undoing the deal make you happier? I am guessing it would only make you happier if you got to keep the half that benefits you but reneg on the half that doesn't.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 08:26:52 AM
Nope, your wrong. I think we should all have to live by the same rules. I am just really tired of this you took our land crap. Your comment about keeping only what benefits you and renegging on the rest actually could be applied the other way. :twocents:I guess I fail to see why natives think they are special and therefore should get special priveledges.
They traded land for the rez and the right to hunt and fish. Maybe we should all give our houses back to whatever tribe was in our local area and the tribes can give up their right to fish. Would undoing the deal make you happier? I am guessing it would only make you happier if you got to keep the half that benefits you but reneg on the half that doesn't.
Post by: WSU on September 15, 2013, 08:31:55 AM
Nope, your wrong. I think we should all have to live by the same rules. I am just really tired of this you took our land crap. Your comment about keeping only what benefits you and renegging on the rest actually could be applied the other way. :twocents:I guess I fail to see why natives think they are special and therefore should get special priveledges.
They traded land for the rez and the right to hunt and fish. Maybe we should all give our houses back to whatever tribe was in our local area and the tribes can give up their right to fish. Would undoing the deal make you happier? I am guessing it would only make you happier if you got to keep the half that benefits you but reneg on the half that doesn't.
How?
Post by: TikkaT3-270Shortmag on September 15, 2013, 08:36:24 AM
Post by: gonehuntin68 on September 15, 2013, 09:07:52 AM
Aaahhhh...... yes how could I forget I'm a lazy roadhunting "indian". Never ever ever have I been outhunting and calling and somebody else has harvested or attempted to harvest the animal I was calling in, nope, never happened. Why don't you get further from the road because that's the only grioe I see? Sure they had rifles but you not them made it easy by sitting near the road calling. Actually, I recall reading a similar stoey last year and I don't remember that "hunter" getting flamed as bad...... :dunno: We're all not the same..........
I hunt where the elk are.
Post by: gonehuntin68 on September 15, 2013, 09:17:28 AM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 15, 2013, 09:38:05 AM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 15, 2013, 09:40:31 AM
itll never change..just like selling um whole to migrant workers in wapato and toppenish for $50
Anybody from yakima or surrounding area know if this gentleman works at the valley gun and pawn shop?
Post by: The100Road on September 15, 2013, 10:11:19 AM
So you were off road but close enough to the road for them to pullup shoot and load??? I know from experience if I don't want anybody, anybody, trying to harvest or claim my hardwork I get away from the roads as far as possible. I know natives and hunters in general are everywhere in the areas I hunt so I go the extra mile to minimize contact. I wouldve went into the canyons and got one rather than do all the work for someone else. My opinion and methods.
Why are you so concentrated on the road? i dont think he cares that they shot them from the road. its that they have the right to shoot them in general. its wrong.
Post by: ribka on September 15, 2013, 10:11:38 AM
Don't you know the long standing tradition of Natives harvesting game while sitting on their horses (Toyota pick up trucks)?
Toyota Corp just released a special native "funeral edition " truck used to harvest special funeral bulls and large muley bucks in their winter.( The special empty beer cans accessory in the truck bed are extra according to Toyota) Even blonde haired blued eyed native card holders can drive it! Proceeds form the racks sold on eBay and craigslist go to help children in native schools learn about their hallowed hunting traditions.
:chuckle:
Can hardly wait to dive behind a tree this year to avoid being shot by the great traditional hunters who to bail out their horses and shoot towards me while I am chasing a cow the late season in in the Nile.
Other than type of weapon I don't see the problem it happens all the time. :dunno: get further from the road next time. :tup:
How come indians don't get off the road? Sounds pretty lazy to me...
Because that would actually be hunting and they dont want to break "tradition"
Post by: The100Road on September 15, 2013, 10:13:26 AM
How is it wrong? The tribal member was within his legal rights correct? Weather you or I or anyone else agrees with it we are here.You guys that claim the op was calling from the road, how do you know that? How do you know the guy wasn't way off the road and the native wasnt a really good long range shot?
Exactly. Im thinking he was on the far hillside and calling a bull up from the bottom. truck comes driving down the ridge and shoots the bull across the canyon from the road. anything like that could have happened. its just wrong that you even have to worry about that in archery season.
Its wrong because he was in is legal rights. thats the wrong part. anyone in there right mind would agree with that except tribal members.
Post by: snowpack on September 15, 2013, 10:23:52 AM
I think it would've been just as legal for a bunch of non-tribal guys with bull permits to be cruising the roads and all bail out of their lifted F350s covered in hunting decals. Then they run up ahead of hunter already calling and basically low hole him flinging arrows. Same effect, different group. Still as unsportsmanlike.How is it wrong? The tribal member was within his legal rights correct? Weather you or I or anyone else agrees with it we are here.You guys that claim the op was calling from the road, how do you know that? How do you know the guy wasn't way off the road and the native wasnt a really good long range shot?
Exactly. Im thinking he was on the far hillside and calling a bull up from the bottom. truck comes driving down the ridge and shoots the bull across the canyon from the road. anything like that could have happened. its just wrong that you even have to worry about that in archery season.
Its wrong because he was in is legal rights. thats the wrong part. anyone in there right mind would agree with that except tribal members.
Post by: The100Road on September 15, 2013, 10:37:21 AM
I think it would've been just as legal for a bunch of non-tribal guys with bull permits to be cruising the roads and all bail out of their lifted F350s covered in hunting decals. Then they run up ahead of hunter already calling and basically low hole him flinging arrows. Same effect, different group. Still as unsportsmanlike.How is it wrong? The tribal member was within his legal rights correct? Weather you or I or anyone else agrees with it we are here.You guys that claim the op was calling from the road, how do you know that? How do you know the guy wasn't way off the road and the native wasnt a really good long range shot?
Exactly. Im thinking he was on the far hillside and calling a bull up from the bottom. truck comes driving down the ridge and shoots the bull across the canyon from the road. anything like that could have happened. its just wrong that you even have to worry about that in archery season.
Its wrong because he was in is legal rights. thats the wrong part. anyone in there right mind would agree with that except tribal members.
Very true, But running up and flinging arrows is okay in archery season. they never would have gotten a shot at the bull. it would have been long gone. but shooting a 300 yard shot from the road with a rifle during the rut is not the same.
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 10:40:56 AM
There are no rifle rut tags issued by the dfw?I think it would've been just as legal for a bunch of non-tribal guys with bull permits to be cruising the roads and all bail out of their lifted F350s covered in hunting decals. Then they run up ahead of hunter already calling and basically low hole him flinging arrows. Same effect, different group. Still as unsportsmanlike.How is it wrong? The tribal member was within his legal rights correct? Weather you or I or anyone else agrees with it we are here.You guys that claim the op was calling from the road, how do you know that? How do you know the guy wasn't way off the road and the native wasnt a really good long range shot?
Exactly. Im thinking he was on the far hillside and calling a bull up from the bottom. truck comes driving down the ridge and shoots the bull across the canyon from the road. anything like that could have happened. its just wrong that you even have to worry about that in archery season.
Its wrong because he was in is legal rights. thats the wrong part. anyone in there right mind would agree with that except tribal members.
Very true, But running up and flinging arrows is okay in archery season. they never would have gotten a shot at the bull. it would have been long gone. but shooting a 300 yard shot from the road with a rifle during the rut is not the same.
Post by: The100Road on September 15, 2013, 10:43:41 AM
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 10:44:37 AM
Your referring to a hypothetical, we are talking about an ACTUAL event that took place.There are no rifle rut tags issued by the dfw?I think it would've been just as legal for a bunch of non-tribal guys with bull permits to be cruising the roads and all bail out of their lifted F350s covered in hunting decals. Then they run up ahead of hunter already calling and basically low hole him flinging arrows. Same effect, different group. Still as unsportsmanlike.How is it wrong? The tribal member was within his legal rights correct? Weather you or I or anyone else agrees with it we are here.You guys that claim the op was calling from the road, how do you know that? How do you know the guy wasn't way off the road and the native wasnt a really good long range shot?
Exactly. Im thinking he was on the far hillside and calling a bull up from the bottom. truck comes driving down the ridge and shoots the bull across the canyon from the road. anything like that could have happened. its just wrong that you even have to worry about that in archery season.
Its wrong because he was in is legal rights. thats the wrong part. anyone in there right mind would agree with that except tribal members.
Very true, But running up and flinging arrows is okay in archery season. they never would have gotten a shot at the bull. it would have been long gone. but shooting a 300 yard shot from the road with a rifle during the rut is not the same.
Post by: snowpack on September 15, 2013, 10:48:00 AM
most rut permits don't overlap weapons. I think only the raffle/governor's tags do. The special draws and incentive tags make you hunt in between the seasons or with the weapon allowed during the open season.
There are no rifle rut tags issued by the dfw?
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 15, 2013, 11:04:08 AM
itll never change..just like selling um whole to migrant workers in wapato and toppenish for $50
Thanks for the response via PM and I'd like to respond in open since you chose to add your opinion on the matter. Maybe next time you and your best friends, who are Yakama, go hunting try not to harvest a truck full of bulls again by mud lake when its closed. Or all those other times you guys loaded up the truck and have so much extra (deer and elk) meat you don't know what to do with it. And yes, I recall all the stories and pictures you were so happy to share and so did several other Yakamas that told me you were willing to share them. You complaining sounds a little hypocritical to me.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 11:07:30 AM
So your saying bowhunter is one of "those guys"? Interesting!itll never change..just like selling um whole to migrant workers in wapato and toppenish for $50
Thanks for the response via PM and I'd like to respond in open since you chose to add your opinion on the matter. Maybe next time you and your best friends, who are Yakama, go hunting try not to harvest a truck full of bulls again by mud lake when its closed. Or all those other times you guys loaded up the truck and have so much extra (deer and elk) meat you don't know what to do with it. And yes, I recall all the stories and pictures you were so happy to share and so did several other Yakamas that told me you were willing to share them. You complaining sounds a little hypocritical to me.
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 11:07:54 AM
Your ignorance of native American hunting tradition and culture is mind boggling!Good stuff ribka.... Very ignorant statement. You have no clue how much importance and emotion is put into hunting for funerals. I am trying to keep it civil but statements like this make me want to exit these conversations. It is actually quite difficult to hunt with a heavy heart while a loved one is waiting for their final resting place.
Don't you know the long standing tradition of Natives harvesting game while sitting on their horses (Toyota pick up trucks)?
Toyota Corp just released a special native "funeral edition " truck used to harvest special funeral bulls and large muley bucks in their winter.( The special empty beer cans accessory in the truck bed are extra according to Toyota) Even blonde haired blued eyed native card holders can drive it! Proceeds form the racks sold on eBay and craigslist go to help children in native schools learn about their hallowed hunting traditions.
:chuckle:
Can hardly wait to dive behind a tree this year to avoid being shot by the great traditional hunters who to bail out their horses and shoot towards me while I am chasing a cow the late season in in the Nile.Other than type of weapon I don't see the problem it happens all the time. :dunno: get further from the road next time. :tup:
How come indians don't get off the road? Sounds pretty lazy to me...
Because that would actually be hunting and they dont want to break "tradition"
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 15, 2013, 11:09:42 AM
Your referring to a hypothetical, we are talking about an ACTUAL event that took place.There are no rifle rut tags issued by the dfw?I think it would've been just as legal for a bunch of non-tribal guys with bull permits to be cruising the roads and all bail out of their lifted F350s covered in hunting decals. Then they run up ahead of hunter already calling and basically low hole him flinging arrows. Same effect, different group. Still as unsportsmanlike.How is it wrong? The tribal member was within his legal rights correct? Weather you or I or anyone else agrees with it we are here.You guys that claim the op was calling from the road, how do you know that? How do you know the guy wasn't way off the road and the native wasnt a really good long range shot?
Exactly. Im thinking he was on the far hillside and calling a bull up from the bottom. truck comes driving down the ridge and shoots the bull across the canyon from the road. anything like that could have happened. its just wrong that you even have to worry about that in archery season.
Its wrong because he was in is legal rights. thats the wrong part. anyone in there right mind would agree with that except tribal members.
Very true, But running up and flinging arrows is okay in archery season. they never would have gotten a shot at the bull. it would have been long gone. but shooting a 300 yard shot from the road with a rifle during the rut is not the same.
What's hypothetical about it? I've seen this hapen not word for wordbut the scenario plus I've seen similar stories on youtube of unethical bow hunters. Wasnt there a video posted on here of a guy stopping and jumping out of his truck chasing down a buck with his bow?
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 15, 2013, 11:13:25 AM
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 11:22:56 AM
It's an area open to more than one user group, both attempting to harvest am animal.Your referring to a hypothetical, we are talking about an ACTUAL event that took place.There are no rifle rut tags issued by the dfw?I think it would've been just as legal for a bunch of non-tribal guys with bull permits to be cruising the roads and all bail out of their lifted F350s covered in hunting decals. Then they run up ahead of hunter already calling and basically low hole him flinging arrows. Same effect, different group. Still as unsportsmanlike.How is it wrong? The tribal member was within his legal rights correct? Weather you or I or anyone else agrees with it we are here.You guys that claim the op was calling from the road, how do you know that? How do you know the guy wasn't way off the road and the native wasnt a really good long range shot?
Exactly. Im thinking he was on the far hillside and calling a bull up from the bottom. truck comes driving down the ridge and shoots the bull across the canyon from the road. anything like that could have happened. its just wrong that you even have to worry about that in archery season.
Its wrong because he was in is legal rights. thats the wrong part. anyone in there right mind would agree with that except tribal members.
Very true, But running up and flinging arrows is okay in archery season. they never would have gotten a shot at the bull. it would have been long gone. but shooting a 300 yard shot from the road with a rifle during the rut is not the same.
Post by: furbearer365 on September 15, 2013, 11:28:24 AM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 15, 2013, 11:38:18 AM
All you Pro-Native hunting rights guys keep saying that they were within their legal right. THAT IS THE PROBLEM. YOU GUYS GET THE LEGAL RIGHT TO SHOOT ELK WITH A RIFLE FROM A ROAD WHILE WE ARE DOWN IN THE CANYON WITH A BOW. THEN YOU SAY THAT HE SHOULD OF GONE FARTHER OUT OF HIS WAY TO GET AWAY FROM THE TRUCKLOAD OF RIFLE WHEELING NATIVES JUST SO THEY DONT SHOOT IT OUT FROM UNDER HIM. YOU HAVE TO BE ABSOLUTELY KIDDING ME, HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT? THE TREATY AND YOUR "HUNTING RIGHTS" WILL ALWAYS BE GARBAGE TO ME. GOOD HUNTING TO YOU ALLunfortunetly they will sleep just fine, they know that their special rights will never be taken away. They really don't care how we feel, I just wish we could play cowboys and Indians again. It should have been handled differently 200 years ago, I won't say how because it would be very offensive but history should be different.
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 15, 2013, 11:38:27 AM
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 11:43:03 AM
All you Pro-Native hunting rights guys keep saying that they were within their legal right. THAT IS THE PROBLEM. YOU GUYS GET THE LEGAL RIGHT TO SHOOT ELK WITH A RIFLE FROM A ROAD WHILE WE ARE DOWN IN THE CANYON WITH A BOW. THEN YOU SAY THAT HE SHOULD OF GONE FARTHER OUT OF HIS WAY TO GET AWAY FROM THE TRUCKLOAD OF RIFLE WHEELING NATIVES JUST SO THEY DONT SHOOT IT OUT FROM UNDER HIM. YOU HAVE TO BE ABSOLUTELY KIDDING ME, HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT? THE TREATY AND YOUR "HUNTING RIGHTS" WILL ALWAYS BE GARBAGE TO ME. GOOD HUNTING TO YOU ALLCaps on. ... I hear you loud and clear. You sound a lot like the antis when it comes to gun rights. ..
Another thing I notice is your ability to sensationalize things, where did the op say a "truckload". Just saying.
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 11:46:58 AM
Ribka and green, I know where you're both coming from in regards to the funeral issue and there are timea where its abused and that does need to stop but not always. I've provided for families in that situation and its a difficult times. Again this isn't downplaying or saying the other side isn't any less emotional or insignificant.Really plateau? You aren't offended by the post?
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 11:49:19 AM
It can only be offensive if there is no truth to it. ;)Ribka and green, I know where you're both coming from in regards to the funeral issue and there are timea where its abused and that does need to stop but not always. I've provided for families in that situation and its a difficult times. Again this isn't downplaying or saying the other side isn't any less emotional or insignificant.Really plateau? You aren't offended by the post?
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 15, 2013, 11:50:08 AM
All you Pro-Native hunting rights guys keep saying that they were within their legal right. THAT IS THE PROBLEM. YOU GUYS GET THE LEGAL RIGHT TO SHOOT ELK WITH A RIFLE FROM A ROAD WHILE WE ARE DOWN IN THE CANYON WITH A BOW. THEN YOU SAY THAT HE SHOULD OF GONE FARTHER OUT OF HIS WAY TO GET AWAY FROM THE TRUCKLOAD OF RIFLE WHEELING NATIVES JUST SO THEY DONT SHOOT IT OUT FROM UNDER HIM. YOU HAVE TO BE ABSOLUTELY KIDDING ME, HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT? THE TREATY AND YOUR "HUNTING RIGHTS" WILL ALWAYS BE GARBAGE TO ME. GOOD HUNTING TO YOU ALLCaps on. ... I hear you loud and clear. You sound a lot like the antis when it comes to gun rights. ..
Another thing I notice is your ability to sensationalize things, where did the op say a "truckload". Just saying.
Good point.
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 15, 2013, 11:51:52 AM
It can only be offensive if there is no truth to it. ;)Ribka and green, I know where you're both coming from in regards to the funeral issue and there are timea where its abused and that does need to stop but not always. I've provided for families in that situation and its a difficult times. Again this isn't downplaying or saying the other side isn't any less emotional or insignificant.Really plateau? You aren't offended by the post?
I never said I wasn't offended or anything said wasn't true. I choose because I have very thick skin to put up with a lot unlike some on here that find almost anything offensive.
Post by: Special T on September 15, 2013, 11:52:28 AM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 15, 2013, 11:56:33 AM
It can only be offensive if there is no truth to it. ;)Ribka and green, I know where you're both coming from in regards to the funeral issue and there are timea where its abused and that does need to stop but not always. I've provided for families in that situation and its a difficult times. Again this isn't downplaying or saying the other side isn't any less emotional or insignificant.Really plateau? You aren't offended by the post?
I never said I wasn't offended or anything said wasn't true. I choose because I have very thick skin to put up with a lot unlike some on here that find almost anything offensive.
I wasn't referring to you green I was referring to peoole in general on this website. I have stated time and time again that there are things on here that do upset and offend me but I chalk it up to freedoms and RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY A PAPER OLDER THAN THE TREATIES that I and countleaa others defended and paid the ultimate price for.
Post by: Special T on September 15, 2013, 12:01:23 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 15, 2013, 12:04:46 PM
the constitution says that all men are created equal, that is NOT the case when it comes to Indian hunting (wrongs) rights. And thanks for yours and all who put there lives on the line.It can only be offensive if there is no truth to it. ;)Ribka and green, I know where you're both coming from in regards to the funeral issue and there are timea where its abused and that does need to stop but not always. I've provided for families in that situation and its a difficult times. Again this isn't downplaying or saying the other side isn't any less emotional or insignificant.Really plateau? You aren't offended by the post?
I never said I wasn't offended or anything said wasn't true. I choose because I have very thick skin to put up with a lot unlike some on here that find almost anything offensive.
I wasn't referring to you green I was referring to peoole in general on this website. I have stated time and time again that there are things on here that do upset and offend me but I chalk it up to freedoms and RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY A PAPER OLDER THAN THE TREATIES that I and countleaa others defended and paid the ultimate price for.
Post by: Special T on September 15, 2013, 12:09:06 PM
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 12:26:10 PM
I have stated time and time again that there are things on here that do upset and offend me but I chalk it up to freedoms and RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY A PAPER OLDER THAN THE TREATIES that I and countleaa others defended and paid the ultimate price for.I also volunteered my life to protect freedoms in that piece of paper (which most who did would be offended by you referring to it that way). However it is absurd IMO to compare our constitution to a treaty. They are not even remotely close to similar documents (again IMO). :twocents:
Post by: Special T on September 15, 2013, 12:40:34 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 15, 2013, 12:56:33 PM
Arguments are always directed by how they are stated/framed... What many of us SHOULD be upset about is how OUR government got out of control and how we are going to reign it in. Instead we fight amongst ourselves and only invite GOV to interfere MORE with our lives... Unfortunately that has worked for keeping hunters divided on MANY issues for a long time... Our infighting makes it easier for GOV to direct our frustration AWAY from the real cause.
:yeah: ill thank you turkey as I do all veterans because that's what I was taught. There us no question to my loyalties as a citizen of this Country because idefended it and continue to defend and standup for this Country. It just so happens I also am a member of a Tribe. My family has served this Country in every branch of the armed services going back to WWI so to say I insult or degrade anything is absurd.
I've gone above and beyond on my own to deal with the abuses and violations and will continue on my own regardless of what anybody he thinks and believes so good day and enjoy the rest of this debate.
Post by: trophyhunt on September 15, 2013, 12:57:22 PM
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 01:00:48 PM
It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 01:02:09 PM
But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 01:05:11 PM
I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: trophyhunt on September 15, 2013, 01:09:08 PM
i bet your tribe can't touch the mucks or yaks when it comes to hunting rights? Or have any effect on the tribes down by the blues in Idaho? I sure there are some good tribes, but they don't seem to help with the frustrations.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 01:09:23 PM
As I stated before Plat, you seem to be a stand up guy and I have no issues with you. It appears that you get it and understand or are at least willing to listen to the other side. I also commend you and thank you for your service, but I do find it a tad offensive to refer to the constitution as "a piece of paper". It is clearly much more than that to all of us that defended her. I meant no offense to you. I think we all agree on what the real offensive travesties here are.Arguments are always directed by how they are stated/framed... What many of us SHOULD be upset about is how OUR government got out of control and how we are going to reign it in. Instead we fight amongst ourselves and only invite GOV to interfere MORE with our lives... Unfortunately that has worked for keeping hunters divided on MANY issues for a long time... Our infighting makes it easier for GOV to direct our frustration AWAY from the real cause.
:yeah: ill thank you turkey as I do all veterans because that's what I was taught. There us no question to my loyalties as a citizen of this Country because idefended it and continue to defend and standup for this Country. It just so happens I also am a member of a Tribe. My family has served this Country in every branch of the armed services going back to WWI so to say I insult or degrade anything is absurd.
I've gone above and beyond on my own to deal with the abuses and violations and will continue on my own regardless of what anybody he thinks and believes so good day and enjoy the rest of this debate.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 01:11:20 PM
How can you successfully co-manage when you clearly have two different agendas? It's simply not possible and history has proven that.I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: trophyhunt on September 15, 2013, 01:13:41 PM
and that is the whole reason we are debating and why we have bad blood between us....... You guys don't want to play by the same rules! That's just a bit racist to me!I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 01:19:09 PM
View it as you see fit. I will continue to work for effective management of a shared resource.and that is the whole reason we are debating and why we have bad blood between us....... You guys don't want to play by the same rules! That's just a bit racist to me!I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 01:22:59 PM
To imply it's a shared resource implies it's available equally.View it as you see fit. I will continue to work for effective management of a shared resource.and that is the whole reason we are debating and why we have bad blood between us....... You guys don't want to play by the same rules! That's just a bit racist to me!I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: Special T on September 15, 2013, 01:24:54 PM
And why would We OR Indians want to with the way the WDFW manages game? If i was Indian i wouldn't want to join the love fest for predators that the WDFW seems to push...How can you successfully co-manage when you clearly have two different agendas? It's simply not possible and history has proven that.I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 01:25:32 PM
As in a 50/50 split?To imply it's a shared resource implies it's available equally.View it as you see fit. I will continue to work for effective management of a shared resource.and that is the whole reason we are debating and why we have bad blood between us....... You guys don't want to play by the same rules! That's just a bit racist to me!I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: snowpack on September 15, 2013, 01:28:51 PM
Seriously, why would the tribes want to rewrite a contract that is more or less working for them? Especially when the new version would make them subject to the BS we all have to go through. Why would they want to have to apply for 6 (or 20) years before being allowed to shoot a bull? Or have to give up using hounds? Or only having a 9 day season?and that is the whole reason we are debating and why we have bad blood between us....... You guys don't want to play by the same rules! That's just a bit racist to me!
I respectfully disagree.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 01:29:39 PM
I didn't say anything about WDFW. I think if sportsman of all races agreed on a set of standard playing rules we would have the authority to force WDFW to listen and not do as they please.And why would We OR Indians want to with the way the WDFW manages game? If i was Indian i wouldn't want to join the love fest for predators that the WDFW seems to push...How can you successfully co-manage when you clearly have two different agendas? It's simply not possible and history has proven that.I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 01:30:05 PM
Special T you are spot on. That's one thing I see with the wdfw, their commission is big on reintroduction and watchable wildlife.And why would We OR Indians want to with the way the WDFW manages game? If i was Indian i wouldn't want to join the love fest for predators that the WDFW seems to push...How can you successfully co-manage when you clearly have two different agendas? It's simply not possible and history has proven that.I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: trophyhunt on September 15, 2013, 01:30:13 PM
really? A 50/50 split? How big is the population difference? We are talking about playing by the same rules.As in a 50/50 split?To imply it's a shared resource implies it's available equally.View it as you see fit. I will continue to work for effective management of a shared resource.and that is the whole reason we are debating and why we have bad blood between us....... You guys don't want to play by the same rules! That's just a bit racist to me!I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 01:31:12 PM
Post by: trophyhunt on September 15, 2013, 01:33:33 PM
It was just a question. ;)oh, my bad!
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 01:35:52 PM
:yeah: exactly!really? A 50/50 split? How big is the population difference? We are talking about playing by the same rules.As in a 50/50 split?To imply it's a shared resource implies it's available equally.View it as you see fit. I will continue to work for effective management of a shared resource.and that is the whole reason we are debating and why we have bad blood between us....... You guys don't want to play by the same rules! That's just a bit racist to me!I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
Post by: bobcat on September 15, 2013, 01:36:18 PM
But equal, as in each person is allowed one deer tag and one elk tag. And where there are special restrictions in place, such as spike only for elk, and 3 point minimum for deer, EVERYONE should have to follow those same rules.
Post by: snowpack on September 15, 2013, 01:44:11 PM
50/50 split- no.There are some tribes that have agreements between WDFW and their tribal resources agencies about things affecting animals in certain areas. Example would be that tribes and state agreed no cows would be taken in some areas.
But equal, as in each person is allowed one deer tag and one elk tag. And where there are special restrictions in place, such as spike only for elk, and 3 point minimum for deer, EVERYONE should have to follow those same rules.
Post by: Simcoe hunter on September 15, 2013, 01:48:15 PM
Seriously, why would the tribes want to rewrite a contract that is more or less working for them? Especially when the new version would make them subject to the BS we all have to go through. Why would they want to have to apply for 6 (or 20) years before being allowed to shoot a bull? Or have to give up using hounds? Or only having a 9 day season?and that is the whole reason we are debating and why we have bad blood between us....... You guys don't want to play by the same rules! That's just a bit racist to me!
I respectfully disagree.
There in lies the rub. They are supposed to abide by federal law on the reservation, and still find as many ways around it as possible. Can give examples if necessary. It would be nice if they only had hunting privileges on the rez. Once they step off, whether unclaimed land or not, they should have to follow the same rules you and I do. They have left the rez of their own free will and shouldn't be allowed to interfere with other hunters as described in the OP. We would turn in antis for harassing hunters. Why not do the same with other individuals IF they did something wrong.
Post by: Simcoe hunter on September 15, 2013, 01:54:54 PM
50/50 split- no.
But equal, as in each person is allowed one deer tag and one elk tag. And where there are special restrictions in place, such as spike only for elk, and 3 point minimum for deer, EVERYONE should have to follow those same rules.
:yeah: At least off the rez. And if they have asked that WDFW not allow cows to be taken then they shouldn't be able to on the rez either.
Post by: trophyhunt on September 15, 2013, 01:58:56 PM
Post by: ribka on September 15, 2013, 02:01:01 PM
I see quite a few dehydrated non processed deer and elk on the Rez and rotting salmon dumped into ditches on the Rez. Is that part of the emotional and cultural heritage of worshipping mother earth?
I think it would've been just as legal for a bunch of non-tribal guys with bull permits to be cruising the roads and all bail out of their lifted F350s covered in hunting decals. Then they run up ahead of hunter already calling and basically low hole him flinging arrows. Same effect, different group. Still as unsportsmanlike.How is it wrong? The tribal member was within his legal rights correct? Weather you or I or anyone else agrees with it we are here.You guys that claim the op was calling from the road, how do you know that? How do you know the guy wasn't way off the road and the native wasnt a really good long range shot?
Exactly. Im thinking he was on the far hillside and calling a bull up from the bottom. truck comes driving down the ridge and shoots the bull across the canyon from the road. anything like that could have happened. its just wrong that you even have to worry about that in archery season.
Its wrong because he was in is legal rights. thats the wrong part. anyone in there right mind would agree with that except tribal members.
Very true, But running up and flinging arrows is okay in archery season. they never would have gotten a shot at the bull. it would have been long gone. but shooting a 300 yard shot from the road with a rifle during the rut is not the same.
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 02:03:30 PM
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 02:05:46 PM
Do they sometimes age the deer and elk by hanging them up for 6 to 8 months to prepare for the funeral?You are comical (and I don't find wastage funny)
I see quite a few dehydrated non processed deer and elk on the Rez and rotting salmon dumped into ditches on the Rez. Is that part of the emotional and cultural heritage of worshipping mother earth?I think it would've been just as legal for a bunch of non-tribal guys with bull permits to be cruising the roads and all bail out of their lifted F350s covered in hunting decals. Then they run up ahead of hunter already calling and basically low hole him flinging arrows. Same effect, different group. Still as unsportsmanlike.How is it wrong? The tribal member was within his legal rights correct? Weather you or I or anyone else agrees with it we are here.You guys that claim the op was calling from the road, how do you know that? How do you know the guy wasn't way off the road and the native wasnt a really good long range shot?
Exactly. Im thinking he was on the far hillside and calling a bull up from the bottom. truck comes driving down the ridge and shoots the bull across the canyon from the road. anything like that could have happened. its just wrong that you even have to worry about that in archery season.
Its wrong because he was in is legal rights. thats the wrong part. anyone in there right mind would agree with that except tribal members.
Very true, But running up and flinging arrows is okay in archery season. they never would have gotten a shot at the bull. it would have been long gone. but shooting a 300 yard shot from the road with a rifle during the rut is not the same.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 02:06:11 PM
If we cannot co manage the resource and I am a failure in my efforts, so be it. Nothing ventured nothing gained. We all have opinions.Let me ask you this? Why are you against playing by the same rules?
Post by: Green broke on September 15, 2013, 02:11:06 PM
I refuse to give up any right I have. I also don't see it as a necessity to manage. :twocents:If we cannot co manage the resource and I am a failure in my efforts, so be it. Nothing ventured nothing gained. We all have opinions.Let me ask you this? Why are you against playing by the same rules?
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 15, 2013, 02:19:01 PM
That's what I thought. You don't really want change, you want it all. Change means sometimes having to make sacrifices in order to benefit the greater cause. To you it's a right when to the rest of us it's a priveledge. That's a devisive attitude and the kind that causes problems. Your still only thinking of you and what do you get out of it. That's exactly the reason we are having this debate. :bash:I refuse to give up any right I have. I also don't see it as a necessity to manage. :twocents:If we cannot co manage the resource and I am a failure in my efforts, so be it. Nothing ventured nothing gained. We all have opinions.Let me ask you this? Why are you against playing by the same rules?
Post by: trophyhunt on September 15, 2013, 02:41:08 PM
BINGO!! GREED!That's what I thought. You don't really want change, you want it all. Change means sometimes having to make sacrifices in order to benefit the greater cause. To you it's a right when to the rest of us it's a priveledge. That's a devisive attitude and the kind that causes problems. Your still only thinking of you and what do you get out of it. That's exactly the reason we are having this debate. :bash:I refuse to give up any right I have. I also don't see it as a necessity to manage. :twocents:If we cannot co manage the resource and I am a failure in my efforts, so be it. Nothing ventured nothing gained. We all have opinions.Let me ask you this? Why are you against playing by the same rules?
Post by: furbearer365 on September 15, 2013, 08:18:28 PM
BINGO!! GREED!That's what I thought. You don't really want change, you want it all. Change means sometimes having to make sacrifices in order to benefit the greater cause. To you it's a right when to the rest of us it's a priveledge. That's a devisive attitude and the kind that causes problems. Your still only thinking of you and what do you get out of it. That's exactly the reason we are having this debate. :bash:I refuse to give up any right I have. I also don't see it as a necessity to manage. :twocents:If we cannot co manage the resource and I am a failure in my efforts, so be it. Nothing ventured nothing gained. We all have opinions.Let me ask you this? Why are you against playing by the same rules?
GREED, AROGANCE, SELFISHNESS, LAZINESS, AND NO OUTRIGHT SENSE EQUALITY OR PASSION FOR BIGGAME
Post by: Simcoe hunter on September 15, 2013, 10:52:57 PM
Do they sometimes age the deer and elk by hanging them up for 6 to 8 months to prepare for the funeral?
I see quite a few dehydrated non processed deer and elk on the Rez and rotting salmon dumped into ditches on the Rez. Is that part of the emotional and cultural heritage of worshipping mother earth?
quote]
Apparently there is an meat aging issue in the White Swan area as I too have seen carcasses hang for a month. Special aging process maybe? I don't know. Does it enhance flavor? Not sure I am willing to try. Would probably be ticketed by WDFW for wastage.
Post by: Special T on September 16, 2013, 07:49:46 AM
If not the WDFW WHO would enforce/co manage? Its not like we need another agency...I didn't say anything about WDFW. I think if sportsman of all races agreed on a set of standard playing rules we would have the authority to force WDFW to listen and not do as they please.And why would We OR Indians want to with the way the WDFW manages game? If i was Indian i wouldn't want to join the love fest for predators that the WDFW seems to push...How can you successfully co-manage when you clearly have two different agendas? It's simply not possible and history has proven that.I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.
I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
If you want to be upset at something be upset that only parts of the treaties are being enforced. Colockum elk always talked about it. In most of the treaties (at least the one with the Yakimas) It is illegal for tribal members to drink whiskey, and illegal to supply them with it. Now just because its inconvenient to enforce such a rule or it is not PC does not mean it couldn't be used as leverage for some other kind modification of the agreement/treaty. The only way that could happen is to force some of the limp noodles in Olympia to do some thing... Tribes will likely changed when they are confronted with a larger problem to deal with, but not until then. Its too bad that we lost Colockum Elk because he seemed to be up on all of the Legalese on the issue.
Now i'm not necessarily for making tribes abide by the same rules as us, HOWEVER i get frustrated now has a hands off approach to tribal issues because even IF WDFW catches them breaking tribal laws the WDFW has to recourse to make sure that the tribe holds them accountable EVEN BY THEIR OWN STANDARD!
Post by: elkaddict652 on September 16, 2013, 08:50:38 AM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 16, 2013, 09:35:53 AM
If not the WDFW WHO would enforce/co manage? Its not like we need another agency...I didn't say anything about WDFW. I think if sportsman of all races agreed on a set of standard playing rules we would have the authority to force WDFW to listen and not do as they please.And why would We OR Indians want to with the way the WDFW manages game? If i was Indian i wouldn't want to join the love fest for predators that the WDFW seems to push...How can you successfully co-manage when you clearly have two different agendas? It's simply not possible and history has proven that.I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.
I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
If you want to be upset at something be upset that only parts of the treaties are being enforced. Colockum elk always talked about it. In most of the treaties (at least the one with the Yakimas) It is illegal for tribal members to drink whiskey, and illegal to supply them with it. Now just because its inconvenient to enforce such a rule or it is not PC does not mean it couldn't be used as leverage for some other kind modification of the agreement/treaty. The only way that could happen is to force some of the limp noodles in Olympia to do some thing... Tribes will likely changed when they are confronted with a larger problem to deal with, but not until then. Its too bad that we lost Colockum Elk because he seemed to be up on all of the Legalese on the issue.
Now i'm not necessarily for making tribes abide by the same rules as us, HOWEVER i get frustrated now has a hands off approach to tribal issues because even IF WDFW catches them breaking tribal laws the WDFW has to recourse to make sure that the tribe holds them accountable EVEN BY THEIR OWN STANDARD!
It is against Tribal Law to possess, be under or even have empty cans or bottles of intoxicants and/or be intoxicated. The issues are not ours it's the Cities and Counties. I've voiced that on here multiple times that we have unsuccessfully challenged the cities/counties/state in Federal Court because we do not hold jurisdiction over non-tribal members on non-tribal land. County or State roads are utilized to deliver the intoxicants to cities and county licensed businesses on city or co. property and we don't have jurisdiction to enforce our laws on those businesses. We've tried multiple times in Federal Court but denied each time because jurisdiction.
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 16, 2013, 09:42:54 AM
I didn't think so. So tell me, why should I give up my rights? Yes, I agree there are things that need to be dealt with but, I'm not about to give rights that were secured and paid for by my ancestors just because a few bad apples are ruining it for the rest. Time will tell how things play out and since at the moment i'm not in a position of making Tribal decisions I have to stick to what I've been doing and providing them with information. It's what I can do now and hopefully it falls on right ears until someday soon, something is done.
Post by: Special T on September 16, 2013, 10:40:48 AM
It doesn't surprise me...If not the WDFW WHO would enforce/co manage? Its not like we need another agency...I didn't say anything about WDFW. I think if sportsman of all races agreed on a set of standard playing rules we would have the authority to force WDFW to listen and not do as they please.And why would We OR Indians want to with the way the WDFW manages game? If i was Indian i wouldn't want to join the love fest for predators that the WDFW seems to push...How can you successfully co-manage when you clearly have two different agendas? It's simply not possible and history has proven that.I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.
I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
If you want to be upset at something be upset that only parts of the treaties are being enforced. Colockum elk always talked about it. In most of the treaties (at least the one with the Yakimas) It is illegal for tribal members to drink whiskey, and illegal to supply them with it. Now just because its inconvenient to enforce such a rule or it is not PC does not mean it couldn't be used as leverage for some other kind modification of the agreement/treaty. The only way that could happen is to force some of the limp noodles in Olympia to do some thing... Tribes will likely changed when they are confronted with a larger problem to deal with, but not until then. Its too bad that we lost Colockum Elk because he seemed to be up on all of the Legalese on the issue.
Now i'm not necessarily for making tribes abide by the same rules as us, HOWEVER i get frustrated now has a hands off approach to tribal issues because even IF WDFW catches them breaking tribal laws the WDFW has to recourse to make sure that the tribe holds them accountable EVEN BY THEIR OWN STANDARD!
It is against Tribal Law to possess, be under or even have empty cans or bottles of intoxicants and/or be intoxicated. The issues are not ours it's the Cities and Counties. I've voiced that on here multiple times that we have unsuccessfully challenged the cities/counties/state in Federal Court because we do not hold jurisdiction over non-tribal members on non-tribal land. County or State roads are utilized to deliver the intoxicants to cities and county licensed businesses on city or co. property and we don't have jurisdiction to enforce our laws on those businesses. We've tried multiple times in Federal Court but denied each time because jurisdiction.
If it against tribal law, what are the enforcement numbers... How many people have been cited for those tribal laws?
This isn't a hate on Indians thing for me... This is an enforcement issue of a contract between the Different Tribes and the Fed Gov... On the Wet side tribes serve booze in casinos, and sell it at tribal owned shops. I am no expert but it would seem highly unlikely that it should be allowed per the treatys... If one part of a contract is boken that that usually means its up for renegotiation, the WHOLE thing...
I am by no means an expert, and i do not think it is wise to take away any citizens rights. I dislike how the $$$ on BOTH SIDES has corrupted the tribal agreements.
Post by: Green broke on September 16, 2013, 11:19:18 AM
Special T I get the feeling you are a little more in the "know" than most.It doesn't surprise me...If not the WDFW WHO would enforce/co manage? Its not like we need another agency...I didn't say anything about WDFW. I think if sportsman of all races agreed on a set of standard playing rules we would have the authority to force WDFW to listen and not do as they please.And why would We OR Indians want to with the way the WDFW manages game? If i was Indian i wouldn't want to join the love fest for predators that the WDFW seems to push...How can you successfully co-manage when you clearly have two different agendas? It's simply not possible and history has proven that.I respectfully disagree.But in order to co-manage we all need to be playing by the same rules.It's a one sided fight, the Indians have nothing to fight for. They have everything they want, they will never lose the rights they have. Our frustrations are probably not even on their radar, they could give two chits what we think. I bet they laugh their butts off when they have a pow pow about this subject.
I think I started a thread that would be to the contrary. We need to co manage, period. It's a shared resource regardless of what opinions individuals hold. We do care and are taking action.
If you want to be upset at something be upset that only parts of the treaties are being enforced. Colockum elk always talked about it. In most of the treaties (at least the one with the Yakimas) It is illegal for tribal members to drink whiskey, and illegal to supply them with it. Now just because its inconvenient to enforce such a rule or it is not PC does not mean it couldn't be used as leverage for some other kind modification of the agreement/treaty. The only way that could happen is to force some of the limp noodles in Olympia to do some thing... Tribes will likely changed when they are confronted with a larger problem to deal with, but not until then. Its too bad that we lost Colockum Elk because he seemed to be up on all of the Legalese on the issue.
Now i'm not necessarily for making tribes abide by the same rules as us, HOWEVER i get frustrated now has a hands off approach to tribal issues because even IF WDFW catches them breaking tribal laws the WDFW has to recourse to make sure that the tribe holds them accountable EVEN BY THEIR OWN STANDARD!
It is against Tribal Law to possess, be under or even have empty cans or bottles of intoxicants and/or be intoxicated. The issues are not ours it's the Cities and Counties. I've voiced that on here multiple times that we have unsuccessfully challenged the cities/counties/state in Federal Court because we do not hold jurisdiction over non-tribal members on non-tribal land. County or State roads are utilized to deliver the intoxicants to cities and county licensed businesses on city or co. property and we don't have jurisdiction to enforce our laws on those businesses. We've tried multiple times in Federal Court but denied each time because jurisdiction.
If it against tribal law, what are the enforcement numbers... How many people have been cited for those tribal laws?
This isn't a hate on Indians thing for me... This is an enforcement issue of a contract between the Different Tribes and the Fed Gov... On the Wet side tribes serve booze in casinos, and sell it at tribal owned shops. I am no expert but it would seem highly unlikely that it should be allowed per the treatys... If one part of a contract is boken that that usually means its up for renegotiation, the WHOLE thing...
I am by no means an expert, and i do not think it is wise to take away any citizens rights. I dislike how the $$$ on BOTH SIDES has corrupted the tribal agreements.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 16, 2013, 11:23:44 AM
Okay, so a show of hands, who is willingly going to give up their firearms???? How about right to vote??? Right to freedom of speech???? Anybody????Again your comparing our constitution to a treaty. Apples and oranges my friend.
I didn't think so. So tell me, why should I give up my rights? Yes, I agree there are things that need to be dealt with but, I'm not about to give rights that were secured and paid for by my ancestors just because a few bad apples are ruining it for the rest. Time will tell how things play out and since at the moment i'm not in a position of making Tribal decisions I have to stick to what I've been doing and providing them with information. It's what I can do now and hopefully it falls on right ears until someday soon, something is done.
Post by: Special T on September 16, 2013, 11:34:18 AM
I really dislike how Tribes are allowed to line the pockets of WA politicians that only have authority of WA residents and sell us out. Many of these politicians do agreements under the guise that tribes have so much money and are so powerful...
I kinda find it twistedly ironic that "we" are getting worked over by tribes, currently, since so many Indians were duped into trading for beads and whiskey and such.
Fortunately Tribes only seem to pick the low hanging fruit. With the lack of BS regulation tribes could be an economic power house if they went into more competitive businesses. :twocents:
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 16, 2013, 11:41:48 AM
Only because I have a clear understanding of how contracts, politics and $$$ influence works.I would agree with you on this T. This goes back to what others have said before in regards to the general attitude of just taking the easy path. I dont wanna say all but most natives I have every dealt with are lazy.
I really dislike how Tribes are allowed to line the pockets of WA politicians that only have authority of WA residents and sell us out. Many of these politicians do agreements under the guise that tribes have so much money and are so powerful...
I kinda find it twistedly ironic that "we" are getting worked over by tribes, currently, since so many Indians were duped into trading for beads and whiskey and such.
Fortunately Tribes only seem to pick the low hanging fruit. With the lack of BS regulation tribes could be an economic power house if they went into more competitive businesses. :twocents:
Post by: Special T on September 16, 2013, 12:08:39 PM
What you call LAZY may be just the priorities that many Indians have, and are likely very different than yours or mine.
Post by: snowpack on September 16, 2013, 12:09:22 PM
Only because I have a clear understanding of how contracts, politics and $$$ influence works.I hear that T, the tribes have an untapped gold mine in regards to manufacturing/business in this state.
I really dislike how Tribes are allowed to line the pockets of WA politicians that only have authority of WA residents and sell us out. Many of these politicians do agreements under the guise that tribes have so much money and are so powerful...
I kinda find it twistedly ironic that "we" are getting worked over by tribes, currently, since so many Indians were duped into trading for beads and whiskey and such.
Fortunately Tribes only seem to pick the low hanging fruit. With the lack of BS regulation tribes could be an economic power house if they went into more competitive businesses. :twocents:
Are there some tribal ballots that don't have state/county candidates? Like if a member lives on the rez? Kind of curious.
Post by: inchtowntracking on September 16, 2013, 12:12:45 PM
I know envious Washington hunters that are always worried about what others have, but there is no way I would come out and cry about it since it is just a small group.
This is the exact reason I don't post any of the deer or elk I get, only the predators because that is accepted we are able to kill those.
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 16, 2013, 12:28:36 PM
Okay, so a show of hands, who is willingly going to give up their firearms???? How about right to vote??? Right to freedom of speech???? Anybody????Again your comparing our constitution to a treaty. Apples and oranges my friend.
I didn't think so. So tell me, why should I give up my rights? Yes, I agree there are things that need to be dealt with but, I'm not about to give rights that were secured and paid for by my ancestors just because a few bad apples are ruining it for the rest. Time will tell how things play out and since at the moment i'm not in a position of making Tribal decisions I have to stick to what I've been doing and providing them with information. It's what I can do now and hopefully it falls on right ears until someday soon, something is done.
Our Treaties are our Constitution and if you look our Treaties were written in to be honored as any other Agreements with the US Govt and are the "Laws of the Land". They aren't different if two (2) Nations agreed to them and honor them.
Are they Lazy? NOPE! Likely many just have less drive to excel. If i could make 50k a year and not work too hard so i could spend more time on hobbies I just may do that... ALL people find a comfort level where $X is enough money. Few people in general have the drive to excel as far as possible.
What you call LAZY may be just the priorities that many Indians have, and are likely very different than yours or mine.
:yeah: I have relatives that are pretty smart and driven but they are in their comfort level and wish not to excel any further in management in their respective fields and that's their choice. They choose not to be in those positions because of high turnover rates and short employment terms so they choose to remain just below those positions for extended periods of time because they are secure, does that mean they are lazy? No.
Sure some are lazy and choose not to do anything but that is a select few not all or most.
It doesn't surprise me...
If it against tribal law, what are the enforcement numbers... How many people have been cited for those tribal laws?
This isn't a hate on Indians thing for me... This is an enforcement issue of a contract between the Different Tribes and the Fed Gov... On the Wet side tribes serve booze in casinos, and sell it at tribal owned shops. I am no expert but it would seem highly unlikely that it should be allowed per the treatys... If one part of a contract is boken that that usually means its up for renegotiation, the WHOLE thing...
I am by no means an expert, and i do not think it is wise to take away any citizens rights. I dislike how the $$$ on BOTH SIDES has corrupted the tribal agreements.
[/quote]
T, at least over here it is enforced all the time. A Tribal Member gets pulled over in possession, ticket/jail. You're seen walking the roads outside of city limits or county jurisdiction, ticket/jail. DUI, turned over to WSP. there is zero tolerance here for anything alcohol/drug related.
I can't speak for the westside tribes because I'm not a member from there but, that's their business.
I hear that T, the tribes have an untapped gold mine in regards to manufacturing/business in this state.
Are there some tribal ballots that don't have state/county candidates? Like if a member lives on the rez? Kind of curious.
[/quote]
Yes, economic growth/development is vital and from my stand-point I push it as much as I can and there are a lot of things on the table down here but lack of funding has hindered most of them.
I know way more natives that get out there and hustle, and set up cameras and scout then I know of lazy ones.
I know envious Washington hunters that are always worried about what others have, but there is no way I would come out and cry about it since it is just a small group.
This is the exact reason I don't post any of the deer or elk I get, only the predators because that is accepted we are able to kill those.
:yeah: As I said before I was lucky enough to finally draw an OIL tag after years of applying for it but, it will never see the light of day on here because there are so many that would offer their negative :twocents: to the conversation that I won't share it here. I did my homework and it paid off but the story means a lot to me and I'm not going to have it tarnished with negative attitudes.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 16, 2013, 12:29:51 PM
Are they Lazy? NOPE! Likely many just have less drive to excel. If i could make 50k a year and not work too hard so i could spend more time on hobbies I just may do that... ALL people find a comfort level where $X is enough money. Few people in general have the drive to excel as far as possible.I guess I can agree with that. :tup:
What you call LAZY may be just the priorities that many Indians have, and are likely very different than yours or mine.
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 16, 2013, 12:30:37 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 16, 2013, 12:45:04 PM
I respectfully disagree with you Plat. I think they are very different. :twocents:
The Constitution is the Law of the Land Correct? In the Consitution are the Laws at which we are governed by and must follow so if it says in there that our Treaties are our Constitutions and our Laws of the Land where does that leave them? It takes an act of Congress to change anything in the Constitution and the same goes for our Treaties. Only a supermajority vote of Congress can make those changes, so where are they different?
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 16, 2013, 12:56:11 PM
One was written to establish the foundation of a nation. The other was written to establish peace between two groups of people. One was written to establish gov't, the other was written to establish rules and priveledges by that gov't. Not the same in my book. :sry: Also, it takes an act of Congress to demote a E-9 in the military. That doesn't mean that he or she has the same authority as the constitution. Most all changes on a federal level take an act of congress. That doesn't mean anything.I respectfully disagree with you Plat. I think they are very different. :twocents:
The Constitution is the Law of the Land Correct? In the Consitution are the Laws at which we are governed by and must follow so if it says in there that our Treaties are our Constitutions and our Laws of the Land where does that leave them? It takes an act of Congress to change anything in the Constitution and the same goes for our Treaties. Only a supermajority vote of Congress can make those changes, so where are they different?
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 16, 2013, 01:03:29 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 16, 2013, 01:09:35 PM
Post by: Green broke on September 16, 2013, 01:58:56 PM
I know way more natives that get out there and hustle, and set up cameras and scout then I know of lazy ones.Inchtown I have lots of praise and respect for the approach your tribe has taken and their management of game. I also know many natives that truly get after it and work for their animal. If anything I see this tribal hunter trending to be the norm (like anything transition takes time).
I know envious Washington hunters that are always worried about what others have, but there is no way I would come out and cry about it since it is just a small group.
This is the exact reason I don't post any of the deer or elk I get, only the predators because that is accepted we are able to kill those.
Post by: Green broke on September 16, 2013, 02:10:32 PM
I will also say that I empathize with you guys (plat and greeny). You have a tough uphill battle of trying to convince the majority that things are ok the way they are and should be left alone. And I have been willing to listen but it comes down to one simple thing to me. If you wanna live under the protection of the stars and stripes we are all equal and nobody is better or deserves anything more than anyone else could have.Some things need change. I have repeatedly said I'm for a more active role in game management. We are doing exactly that. Fyi there are many countries that are under U.S. protection that don't conform to the American ways.
Post by: inchtowntracking on September 16, 2013, 03:31:18 PM
Post by: BAR C3 on September 16, 2013, 05:45:56 PM
Until this guy gets on here and gives an accurate story, this is nothing more than high school drama. Thus the reason why everyone gets upset on here on there respectful opinions on the subject of Native hunting.
Personally I have wanted to fight guys over it until taking a deep breath and realizing its all over someone's word. My intent is to get on here and read positive stories of hunts and see pictures. The drama has to go! We all like the same things and may have some different opinions, but we should be getting along. Hell I picked a fight with the Naches Guide on here because of someone telling me something on here. My bad! Won't happen again.
I don't know how many guys have came on here and stirred up crap on Natives for it not to be true. Some have been.
There are people in the world who love to stir the pot! If I'm the original author, your going to hear the whole story, instead it appears he is sitting back laughing!
At least spell Nez Perce right! :tup:
Till then, waiting to hear how you were in a Canyon and identified these guys has Natives, specifically Nez Perce.
GO SEAHAWKS!
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 16, 2013, 06:26:52 PM
Right......I remember you want it all.I will also say that I empathize with you guys (plat and greeny). You have a tough uphill battle of trying to convince the majority that things are ok the way they are and should be left alone. And I have been willing to listen but it comes down to one simple thing to me. If you wanna live under the protection of the stars and stripes we are all equal and nobody is better or deserves anything more than anyone else could have.Some things need change. I have repeatedly said I'm for a more active role in game management. We are doing exactly that. Fyi there are many countries that are under U.S. protection that don't conform to the American ways.
Post by: gonehuntin68 on September 16, 2013, 06:35:16 PM
You guys all took the bait and swallowed it!
Until this guy gets on here and gives an accurate story, this is nothing more than high school drama. Thus the reason why everyone gets upset on here on there respectful opinions on the subject of Native hunting.
Personally I have wanted to fight guys over it until taking a deep breath and realizing its all over someone's word. My intent is to get on here and read positive stories of hunts and see pictures. The drama has to go! We all like the same things and may have some different opinions, but we should be getting along. Hell I picked a fight with the Naches Guide on here because of someone telling me something on here. My bad! Won't happen again.
I don't know how many guys have came on here and stirred up crap on Natives for it not to be true. Some have been.
There are people in the world who love to stir the pot! If I'm the original author, your going to hear the whole story, instead it appears he is sitting back laughing!
At least spell Nez Perce right! :tup:
Till then, waiting to hear how you were in a Canyon and identified these guys has Natives, specifically Nez Perce.
GO SEAHAWKS!
What the hell story do you want? I was calling in some elk and boom some Indians shot them with rifles, bull was coming in, they listen for bugles drive to them and shoot. Its all legal for them and that makes me mad.
Post by: Tbar on September 16, 2013, 06:41:35 PM
Post by: gonehuntin68 on September 16, 2013, 06:44:10 PM
How far from the road were you? Just curious. Do you really think they were waiting on your calls? It sounds more like mission accomplished, pot stirred. :twocents:
About 500 yards or so. I never said it was a dumb way to hunt pretty smart really, just wish we all had to follow same rules.
Post by: BAR C3 on September 16, 2013, 07:26:04 PM
You guys all took the bait and swallowed it!
Until this guy gets on here and gives an accurate story, this is nothing more than high school drama. Thus the reason why everyone gets upset on here on there respectful opinions on the subject of Native hunting.
Personally I have wanted to fight guys over it until taking a deep breath and realizing its all over someone's word. My intent is to get on here and read positive stories of hunts and see pictures. The drama has to go! We all like the same things and may have some different opinions, but we should be getting along. Hell I picked a fight with the Naches Guide on here because of someone telling me something on here. My bad! Won't happen again.
I don't know how many guys have came on here and stirred up crap on Natives for it not to be true. Some have been.
There are people in the world who love to stir the pot! If I'm the original author, your going to hear the whole story, instead it appears he is sitting back laughing!
At least spell Nez Perce right! :tup:
Till then, waiting to hear how you were in a Canyon and identified these guys has Natives, specifically Nez Perce.
GO SEAHAWKS!
What the hell story do you want? I was calling in some elk and boom some Indians shot them with rifles, bull was coming in, they listen for bugles drive to them and shoot. Its all legal for them and that makes me mad.
Ok it makes you mad! Still haven't answered my questions! If you were in a canyon calling, how were you able to tell it was Indians? Nez Perce? Where was this? Blue Mountains? Don't need specifics, trying to eliminate which tribe, Nez Perce don't hunt Westside.
If your calling by a road, your asking for it.
You say you were calling in some elk? Was the whole herd coming? You said they shot them..... Did they shoot several???
Just calling it like I see it. Not adding up, and once again, guys are going back and forth over something that don't add up.
If you don't like the laws, title it as such and make the argument.
Post by: Mudman on September 16, 2013, 08:04:52 PM
Post by: stuckalot on September 16, 2013, 10:13:42 PM
1. If the state and the tribes can agree that the Colockum herd needs more mature bulls and makes stupid rules like true spike only, then the tribes should limit themselves to true spikes or cows, they can still have all year to hunt but at least there is a move toward some equality and co-management.
2. This gets to my major gripe, when archery and muzzleloading seasons are in progress, I believe that the responsible thing for the tribes to do is to limit their members to like weapons during those times, it's pure and simple a safety issue. I don't care if its a bunch of inbred rednecks from Darrington, I don't want to be in the woods all camoed up within bow range of a herd of elk and have a bunch of yahoos banging away with rifles from the next ridge over! I don't care if it is your right!
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 16, 2013, 10:40:12 PM
Post by: Yak-NDN on September 18, 2013, 11:29:04 AM
Your ignorance of native American hunting tradition and culture is mind boggling!
Don't you know the long standing tradition of Natives harvesting game while sitting on their horses (Toyota pick up trucks)?
Toyota Corp just released a special native "funeral edition " truck used to harvest special funeral bulls and large muley bucks in their winter.( The special empty beer cans accessory in the truck bed are extra according to Toyota) Even blonde haired blued eyed native card holders can drive it! Proceeds form the racks sold on eBay and craigslist go to help children in native schools learn about their hallowed hunting traditions.
:chuckle:
Can hardly wait to dive behind a tree this year to avoid being shot by the great traditional hunters who to bail out their horses and shoot towards me while I am chasing a cow the late season in in the Nile.Other than type of weapon I don't see the problem it happens all the time. :dunno: get further from the road next time. :tup:
How come indians don't get off the road? Sounds pretty lazy to me...
Because that would actually be hunting and they dont want to break "tradition"
I need one of these trucks. Im going to order mine today. I only order new rigs for hunting with air cooled cup holders to keep my beer cold do they offer that option.
Post by: Labs07 on September 18, 2013, 01:00:47 PM
Post by: Yak-NDN on September 18, 2013, 01:17:52 PM
Wow! There was some great sterotyping going on. Im sorry but I just dont believe that it is ever okay to generalize the behavior of a whole sect of society.
I would care if this crap goes on if it was allowed in non Tribal subjects. But its not people can't say the slightest thing about non Tribal issues and the the mods are all over it. But when its a Tribal issue the mods feed the fire.
Post by: 724wd on September 18, 2013, 01:19:02 PM
Your ignorance of native American hunting tradition and culture is mind boggling!
Don't you know the long standing tradition of Natives harvesting game while sitting on their horses (Toyota pick up trucks)?
Toyota Corp just released a special native "funeral edition " truck used to harvest special funeral bulls and large muley bucks in their winter.( The special empty beer cans accessory in the truck bed are extra according to Toyota) Even blonde haired blued eyed native card holders can drive it! Proceeds form the racks sold on eBay and craigslist go to help children in native schools learn about their hallowed hunting traditions.
:chuckle:
Can hardly wait to dive behind a tree this year to avoid being shot by the great traditional hunters who to bail out their horses and shoot towards me while I am chasing a cow the late season in in the Nile.Other than type of weapon I don't see the problem it happens all the time. :dunno: get further from the road next time. :tup:
How come indians don't get off the road? Sounds pretty lazy to me...
Because that would actually be hunting and they dont want to break "tradition"
I need one of these trucks. Im going to order mine today. I only order new rigs for hunting with air cooled cup holders to keep my beer cold do they offer that option.
i know, right?! there's some of us whiteys that could use them, too! :tup:
Post by: Special T on September 18, 2013, 01:44:17 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on September 18, 2013, 01:51:46 PM
Dont most people take advantage of thier opportunities? If we could all shoot multiple animals and do,it from the road in winter, my guess is ALOT of people would. Be frusterated with the government for discriminating and for creating such lop-sided circumstances. I dont blame the indians for doing what they can. fishing or hunting. I feel government should stop with the different rules and different classes they create.
:yeah: x2. Indian bashing is easier than trying to change laws and treaties, though.
Post by: Yak-NDN on September 18, 2013, 01:53:58 PM
Post by: Special T on September 18, 2013, 01:56:19 PM
Post by: snowpack on September 18, 2013, 02:02:05 PM
Post by: Northway on September 18, 2013, 02:16:48 PM
I really don't want to get into the treaty rights aspect of this much, except to say that I do believe we need to co-manage our resources and I don't believe that it necessarily means that tribes need to give up any of their rights. We will not likely ever play completely by the same rules, but I think we have to find some common ground. Tribes can maintain their rights and at the same time choose to set some rules for their members that are more in common with the rest of the state. Two examples:
1. If the state and the tribes can agree that the Colockum herd needs more mature bulls and makes stupid rules like true spike only, then the tribes should limit themselves to true spikes or cows, they can still have all year to hunt but at least there is a move toward some equality and co-management.
2. This gets to my major gripe, when archery and muzzleloading seasons are in progress, I believe that the responsible thing for the tribes to do is to limit their members to like weapons during those times, it's pure and simple a safety issue. I don't care if its a bunch of inbred rednecks from Darrington, I don't want to be in the woods all camoed up within bow range of a herd of elk and have a bunch of yahoos banging away with rifles from the next ridge over! I don't care if it is your right!
I think it's really nothing personal against first nation tribes.
Whenever you have groups of people with special rights and little or no oversight, there is a huge risk for abuse. In my mind, there is no question that there has been significant abuse of special hunting & fishing privileges. If there was a group of white people with the same special privileges and dysfunctional oversight, we would be having the same conversation.
Post by: 724wd on September 18, 2013, 02:26:12 PM
A guy I knew would just get a keg and put it in trashcan with ice in the bed; and he had a hole cut into the cabin so the hose from the tap came up to the front. Only problem was every now and then the passenger would have to get out an pump the keg some more. :bdid:
sounds foamy! :yike: :bdid: :brew:
Post by: PlateauNDN on September 18, 2013, 02:32:38 PM
A guy I knew would just get a keg and put it in trashcan with ice in the bed; and he had a hole cut into the cabin so the hose from the tap came up to the front. Only problem was every now and then the passenger would have to get out an pump the keg some more. :bdid:
sounds foamy! :yike: :bdid: :brew:
:yike: didn't even think of that back in the day! :dunno: was this submitted in the redneck inventionthread or what ever its called? :tup:
Post by: Special T on September 18, 2013, 03:05:19 PM
From your moniker and your use of "First Nations" I'm guessing your a Canadain trans plant? Am I right?I really don't want to get into the treaty rights aspect of this much, except to say that I do believe we need to co-manage our resources and I don't believe that it necessarily means that tribes need to give up any of their rights. We will not likely ever play completely by the same rules, but I think we have to find some common ground. Tribes can maintain their rights and at the same time choose to set some rules for their members that are more in common with the rest of the state. Two examples:
1. If the state and the tribes can agree that the Colockum herd needs more mature bulls and makes stupid rules like true spike only, then the tribes should limit themselves to true spikes or cows, they can still have all year to hunt but at least there is a move toward some equality and co-management.
2. This gets to my major gripe, when archery and muzzleloading seasons are in progress, I believe that the responsible thing for the tribes to do is to limit their members to like weapons during those times, it's pure and simple a safety issue. I don't care if its a bunch of inbred rednecks from Darrington, I don't want to be in the woods all camoed up within bow range of a herd of elk and have a bunch of yahoos banging away with rifles from the next ridge over! I don't care if it is your right!
I think it's really nothing personal against first nation tribes.
Whenever you have groups of people with special rights and little or no oversight, there is a huge risk for abuse. In my mind, there is no question that there has been significant abuse of special hunting & fishing privileges. If there was a group of white people with the same special privileges and dysfunctional oversight, we would be having the same conversation.
Post by: Northway on September 18, 2013, 03:34:37 PM
From your moniker and your use of "First Nations" I'm guessing your a Canadain trans plant? Am I right?I really don't want to get into the treaty rights aspect of this much, except to say that I do believe we need to co-manage our resources and I don't believe that it necessarily means that tribes need to give up any of their rights. We will not likely ever play completely by the same rules, but I think we have to find some common ground. Tribes can maintain their rights and at the same time choose to set some rules for their members that are more in common with the rest of the state. Two examples:
1. If the state and the tribes can agree that the Colockum herd needs more mature bulls and makes stupid rules like true spike only, then the tribes should limit themselves to true spikes or cows, they can still have all year to hunt but at least there is a move toward some equality and co-management.
2. This gets to my major gripe, when archery and muzzleloading seasons are in progress, I believe that the responsible thing for the tribes to do is to limit their members to like weapons during those times, it's pure and simple a safety issue. I don't care if its a bunch of inbred rednecks from Darrington, I don't want to be in the woods all camoed up within bow range of a herd of elk and have a bunch of yahoos banging away with rifles from the next ridge over! I don't care if it is your right!
I think it's really nothing personal against first nation tribes.
Whenever you have groups of people with special rights and little or no oversight, there is a huge risk for abuse. In my mind, there is no question that there has been significant abuse of special hunting & fishing privileges. If there was a group of white people with the same special privileges and dysfunctional oversight, we would be having the same conversation.
Born and raised in Washington State.
I do some business in Canada though, and I just like the term "First Nations" better than "Native American". Informally I use the term Indian since it's just one word.
Post by: Special T on September 18, 2013, 03:38:49 PM
Post by: KopperBuck on September 19, 2013, 11:30:56 AM
Post by: T-Dozzer on September 19, 2013, 04:27:20 PM
For shooting 2 different bulls that were coming in to my calls. Im archery hunting and they get to drive around in there trucks, listen for calls, and shoot them from the road. Wish we all had to follow the
For a group of people who say they love and respect Mother Nature, they sure do a lot damage when taking and doing what ever they want.
Sad part is....most don't care and act like it is owed to them
Post by: Green broke on September 21, 2013, 09:35:47 AM
For shooting 2 different bulls that were coming in to my calls. Im archery hunting and they get to drive around in there trucks, listen for calls, and shoot them from the road. Wish we all had to follow the same rules.I heard a Nooksack bull was taken this week, just curious did you call it in gonehuntin68?
Post by: Bigtine96 on September 21, 2013, 09:44:27 AM
For shooting 2 different bulls that were coming in to my calls. Im archery hunting and they get to drive around in there trucks, listen for calls, and shoot them from the road. Wish we all had to follow the same rules.I heard a Nooksack bull was taken this week, just curious did you call it in gonehuntin68?
This thread was over but thanks for continuing the pot stirring and adding yet another useful post :tup:
Post by: turkeyfeather on September 21, 2013, 11:19:52 AM
That's what one calls a d**k move there greenbroke. :bash:For shooting 2 different bulls that were coming in to my calls. Im archery hunting and they get to drive around in there trucks, listen for calls, and shoot them from the road. Wish we all had to follow the same rules.I heard a Nooksack bull was taken this week, just curious did you call it in gonehuntin68?
Post by: Green broke on September 21, 2013, 11:25:53 AM
Post by: motcha on September 23, 2013, 08:12:41 AM