United States Of America Et Al Plaintiffs V State Of Washington Et Al Defendants

Author : United States. District Court (Washington : Western District)
Publisher :
ISBN 13 :
Total Pages : 112 pages
Book Rating : 4.:/5 (416 download)

DOWNLOAD NOW!

Download or read book United States of America, Plaintiff, Quinault Tribe of Indians on Its Own Behalf and on Behalf of the Queets Band of Indians, Et Al., Intervenor-plaintiffs, V. State of Washington, Defendant, Thor C. Tollefson, Director, Washington State Department of Fisheries, Et Al., Intervenor-defendants, Civ. No. 9213 written by United States. District Court (Washington : Western District) and published by . This book was released on 1974 with total page 112 pages. Available in PDF, EPUB and Kindle. Book excerpt: "United States v. Washington, 384 F. Supp. 312 (W.D. Wash. 1974), was a 1974 court case that affirmed the right of most of the tribes in Washington to continue to harvest salmon. The case was decided by Judge George Hugo Boldt of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Specifically, the court held that, when the tribes conveyed millions of acres of land in Washington State through a series of treaties signed in 1854 and 1855, they reserved the right to continue fishing. For example, the Treaty of Medicine Creek (1854) includes the following language: "The right of taking fish, at all usual and accustomed grounds and stations, is further secured to said Indians in common with all citizens of the Territory." Most of the treaties negotiated by Territorial Governor Isaac Stevens included this, or very similar, language. The court also looked at the minutes of the treaty negotiations to interpret the meaning of the treaty language "in common with" as the United States described it to the Tribes, holding that the United States intended for there to be an equal sharing of the fish resource between the Tribes and the settlers. As the court stated: By dictionary definition and as intended and used in the Indian treaties and in this decision, 'in common with' means sharing equally the opportunity to take fish ... therefore, non-treaty fishermen shall have the opportunity to take up to 50% of the harvestable number of fish ... and treaty right fishermen shall have the opportunity to take up to the same percentage. For years preceding the Boldt decision, the state of Washington had attempted to limit the treaty fishing rights of the tribes. The federal government filed suit in the support of Native American rights. Non-Native fishermen in the state opposed the decision."--Wikipedia (viewed April 10, 2012).