Post by: Bob33 on February 10, 2012, 07:11:53 AM
OLYMPIA — In a ruling issued Thursday morning, the state Supreme Court determined that state wildlife authorities had no right to give a Yakama fisherman a ticket for catching undersized fish with a net at a tribal fishing site.
In a 6-3 decision, the state's highest court said that the state had no jurisdiction when it issued a citation to Lester Ray Jim, an enrolled Yakama, at the Maryhill Treaty Fishing Access Site on the Columbia River.
On June 25, 2008, state Department of Fish and Wildlife officers gave Jim a ticket for unlawfully retaining five undersized sturgeon and unlawful use of a net at Maryhill. Jim told officers he planned to release the sturgeon back into the river after bringing them onto shore, a common practice among tribal fishermen.
The sturgeon, which can survive out of water for several hours, were released back into the river.
Tribal law allows Yakama members a reasonable opportunity to release alive any sturgeon of prohibited length incidentally caught in authorized fisheries.
The fishing site where the incident occurred is one of several established by the U.S. Congress in 1988 to make up for traditional fishing grounds flooded by Columbia River dams.
Jim appealed in Klickitat County District Court, which dismissed the citation. Klickitat County Superior Court then overturned the dismissal, saying the state indeed had jurisdiction anywhere except within reservation boundaries.
Jim appealed again, this time to the State Court of Appeals, which ruled in his favor. The state then appealed to the Supreme Court.
Post by: pianoman9701 on February 10, 2012, 07:36:27 AM
Whether or not we agree with the netting of these fish by Native people is another discussion. I think the ruling was probably just.
Post by: PlateauNDN on February 10, 2012, 08:19:58 AM
I was going to post it but I didn't want anybody to get the impression I was rubbing it in anyones faces so I didn't.
Post by: pianoman9701 on February 10, 2012, 08:43:44 AM
Post by: PlateauNDN on February 10, 2012, 08:46:40 AM
c'mon Plat, you know you like rubbing people's noses! Sorry, that's Inuits. Never mind! :chuckle: :chuckle:
Wrong region :chuckle: eh? I'll rub noses as long as it's with a hot looking Inuit! :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: HairTrigger on February 10, 2012, 09:01:36 AM
Post by: Mike450r on February 10, 2012, 09:43:24 AM
There are thousands of examples of case law in Washington, any time a person or the state wins an appelate court case it basically adds to the RCW's that applied to the case. You won't find them in the RCW's but they can sure come in handy.
This is why the state will cave in many times as it is better to let one case go at the lower level rather than have exceptions to the RCW for everybody.
There was a bear baiting case years ago that went in favor of the hunters at the superior (county) court level, the state could have appealed but if they would have lost on appeal everybody would been allowed to bait again so they just took the loss.
Post by: PlateauNDN on February 10, 2012, 10:37:49 AM
Now this becomes what they call "case law". If another tribal member gets that same citation all he/she needs to do is cite Lester Ray Jim V. Wa. State to get it dismissed.
There are thousands of examples of case law in Washington, any time a person or the state wins an appelate court case it basically adds to the RCW's that applied to the case. You won't find them in the RCW's but they can sure come in handy.
This is why the state will cave in many times as it is better to let one case go at the lower level rather than have exceptions to the RCW for everybody.
There was a bear baiting case years ago that went in favor of the hunters at the superior (county) court level, the state could have appealed but if they would have lost on appeal everybody would been allowed to bait again so they just took the loss.
There were other court cases prior to this one as I stated earlier and not just fishing issues but hunting, land issues and right-of-way cases etc. etc. etc. WDFW didn't want to accept that their officer was wrong in his approach and so they continued to fight even though they already knew they were going to continue to lose.
The officers I've encountered knew they didn't have jurisdiction and were courteous and curious at the same time within the exception of one that could not except that he was not going to find anything wrong but kept searching any ways and afterwards went on his way. Wasn't rude or offensive, just trying to find something and even IF, which he wouldn't have with me, IF he did find something with me I know my rights and would've contacted the Tribal Police myself if he wanted to be an a$$hole and waste time and money on his behalf.
Post by: HairTrigger on February 10, 2012, 10:41:33 AM
Post by: PlateauNDN on February 10, 2012, 10:56:41 AM
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on February 10, 2012, 03:44:54 PM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on February 10, 2012, 04:20:08 PM
Post by: Gringo31 on February 10, 2012, 04:36:10 PM
Quote
the WDFW Officer should have turned the case over to the proper jurisdiction (Yakama Nation Game Wardens) and they would have handled the situation accordingly per Tribal Law
I think that is probably the right answer......I'm curious if the Yak Nation Wardens have made a move of their own now?
Post by: buckhorn2 on February 10, 2012, 05:26:48 PM
Post by: Houndhunter on February 10, 2012, 05:59:42 PM
Post by: Gringo31 on February 10, 2012, 07:53:46 PM
Post by: Gringo31 on February 11, 2012, 07:31:11 AM
Post by: buckhorn2 on February 11, 2012, 08:06:43 AM
Post by: bigtex on February 11, 2012, 08:11:03 AM
Where I live if you are speeding or if there is a game violation the reservation cops are there and ticket non indians
The only way tribal officers can cite/arrest non-tribal members on/off reservation is if they are commissioned (deputized) by the county sheriff.
Off the top of my head I know Colville Tribal Police are commissioned by both Okanogan and Ferry counties. Tulalip by Snohomish County. The police department for the Muckleshoot and Snoqualmie tribes are actually King County Sheriff Deputies that the tribes pay for so obviously they can cite/arrest anybody they want. I am sure there are other tribes who have been given this authority I just don't know of it.
Post by: Gringo31 on February 12, 2012, 08:47:46 PM
Post by: JLS on February 12, 2012, 09:13:53 PM
Post by: Gringo31 on February 13, 2012, 06:38:00 AM
Quote
This was announced yesterday at our General Council and the WDFW Officer should have turned the case over to the proper jurisdiction (Yakama Nation Game Wardens) and they would have handled the situation accordingly per Tribal Law since the WDFW has no jurisdiction over Tribal Members while exercising their Treaty Rigths and could've saved the State a lot of time and money that could've been spent better somewhere else.
Post by: PlateauNDN on February 13, 2012, 08:24:52 AM
I suppose I'm thinking what I am because of this statementQuoteThis was announced yesterday at our General Council and the WDFW Officer should have turned the case over to the proper jurisdiction (Yakama Nation Game Wardens) and they would have handled the situation accordingly per Tribal Law since the WDFW has no jurisdiction over Tribal Members while exercising their Treaty Rigths and could've saved the State a lot of time and money that could've been spent better somewhere else.
No, because he released the sturgeon from the shore and per Our Law that is permissible. No law violated, No foul.
Post by: Gringo31 on February 13, 2012, 08:36:11 AM
Thanks Plat.
Post by: h2ofowlr on February 13, 2012, 09:12:36 AM
I think the mentality become norm for most that they do what they want and it becomes legal in there minds as everything seems to fly as there is virtually no consequence for anything anymore.
We have talked to the tribal GW at the boat launch several times and he could care less what we have to say. If the WDFW guy had turned the case over to the Yakima GW, nothing would have happened, probably related.
It's a joke what they get away on the CR. The other joke is how many fish they report that they catch. That is another story for another day. It is slowly reverting to the days of no laws.
Post by: PlateauNDN on February 13, 2012, 12:33:19 PM
Post by: biggdogg on February 13, 2012, 12:40:39 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on February 13, 2012, 12:47:55 PM
Post by: HairTrigger on February 13, 2012, 03:15:54 PM
We is it the yakamas always get the short end of the stick when it comes to fishing the columbia river, who r first one to clean out the lower river, who always catches more fish then us the sportsmen. I think the tribe needs to step up and start getting the share of the fish we are allowed to catch. U can look at the numbers every year and see who catches the most fish, and who gets shut off everyone fishing above the bonneville dam, and i do agree our tribal game wardens need to start cleaning house on yakamas partying and doing dumb sh*t on the river.yup all the commercial fishermen below the dam before they even get there need to be more regs or stopped never see any of there reports on there catches
Post by: biggdogg on February 13, 2012, 06:25:28 PM
Post by: PlateauNDN on February 13, 2012, 07:31:09 PM
Post by: biggdogg on February 13, 2012, 08:50:33 PM
Post by: h2ofowlr on February 13, 2012, 10:56:27 PM
Post by: biggdogg on February 14, 2012, 05:48:40 AM