JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
No one has to go to Casino's. I work on a reservation and drive by a casino every day. Never been there. I have no issue with them fulfilling their treaty rights to fish and take game though. If you dont like it then maybe you can get Donald Trump to renegotiate the deal. Good luck with that.

Although I work on a reservation with 100+ other people in a chemical plant not a single Indian works there.
YEP go in the casino they don't work there either lol that's point if the casino and the government support 's them then change the treaty one out of ten casino employees is native American that's not a fact that's just what I see
 
Ok, so here's my thoughts, worth less than you just paid for them....

First off, I get the idea of casino gambling being traditional for the tribes. They did indeed get together during the year throughout history for tribal trading at central locations and gambling was something they did just like dance and songs. And let's face it, the native people got screwed six ways from Sunday every time they turned around. The government would sign a treaty, break it because it was to the advantage of the white man to do so and take possession of the Indian land for the (insert resource here). They were hustled, hassled, and outright killed for doing absolutely nothing wrong. Their traditions, language and culture were stripped from them and it was all done in a horrible fashion... That was all a long time ago, but it destroyed their self esteem and self reliance.

Fast forward to today.. is it right to let them run rampant on shared natural resources without any consequences? Of course not. Treaty aside, the fish must be managed properly to exist for anyone Indian or white in the future. That requires cooperation and records of fish harvested. If I were involved, I would make some assumptions based on anacdotal evidence, multily those numbers by a factor of 3 for a conservative estimate and reduce the next year's tribal allotments accodingly. They will scream, but right now they have no accountability... kind of like being a crook and expecting the crook to follow background checks... why would he? Make the consequences of no records impact their next year's catch, and I guarantee you they will take notice.

By the way; I am of native descent, have worked on and for tribes, and have a good idea of what goes on there.
 
Ok, so here's my thoughts, worth less than you just paid for them....

First off, I get the idea of casino gambling being traditional for the tribes. They did indeed get together during the year throughout history for tribal trading at central locations and gambling was something they did just like dance and songs. And let's face it, the native people got screwed six ways from Sunday every time they turned around. The government would sign a treaty, break it because it was to the advantage of the white man to do so and take possession of the Indian land for the (insert resource here). They were hustled, hassled, and outright killed for doing absolutely nothing wrong. Their traditions, language and culture were stripped from them and it was all done in a horrible fashion... That was all a long time ago, but it destroyed their self esteem and self reliance.

Fast forward to today.. is it right to let them run rampant on shared natural resources without any consequences? Of course not. Treaty aside, the fish must be managed properly to exist for anyone Indian or white in the future. That requires cooperation and records of fish harvested. If I were involved, I would make some assumptions based on anacdotal evidence, multily those numbers by a factor of 3 for a conservative estimate and reduce the next year's tribal allotments accodingly. They will scream, but right now they have no accountability... kind of like being a crook and expecting the crook to follow background checks... why would he? Make the consequences of no records impact their next year's catch, and I guarantee you they will take notice.

By the way; I am of native descent, have worked on and for tribes, and have a good idea of what goes on there.
yep but that's why this thread was started because they say they caught no fish mmmmm if you want to manage the fishery then you need everyone involved to be honest even the guys like me that catch 5 or 6 fish s year salmon that is and crab
 
My brother inlaw owner of two fishing boat 's he has a deck hand that is native American that has worked for him for 20 year's but he could work other boats with native owner 's and has but always comes back too work on my brother inlaw I don't know why I never asked HERE is a fact the coastal tribes in WA AND OREGON HAVE IT MADE go to CUT BANK MONTANA Black feet res and see how they live with no fishing and no casino it's s hell hole wouldn't wish it on my enemies
 
now based on that statement if you changed it to we the people and the government would you also say we are a "Conquered people - we should follow the rules the government sets for us??."
If we have to follow the rules or the Law's why shouldn't they just because they got a treaty over a hundred years ago if that is the way you want to think then they should have to fish the way they did over a hundred years ago no Gill nets no hydraulic winch and in there canoe 's
 
A poacher is only a poacher if he's taking resources illegaly. If its not in their treaty that they have to report catches to the state then its not poaching
 
If we have to follow the rules or the Law's why shouldn't they just because they got a treaty over a hundred years ago if that is the way you want to think then they should have to fish the way they did over a hundred years ago no Gill nets no hydraulic winch and in there canoe 's


And you should have flintlocks and bronze cannons to fulfill your 2nd amendment rights
 
We don't have to because we and they signed a treaty. Time for both parties to follow it and for the rest of us to stop bubbleguming about it. Done deal.
 
We don't have to because we and they signed a treaty. Time for both parties to follow it and for the rest of us to stop bubbleguming about it. Done deal.
Yep you probably right no matter how much we argue bout it it's not going to change and in a few year's nobody will be catching fish and all the problems will be solved for us
 
Any body who knows the history of Anacortes WA knows that it used to be the salmon capitol of the world but the salmon were all but wiped out and it wasn't the natives that did it but things change and rules were put in place to save them and now we have come full circle except now they are on the other side of the deal and got a whole pod of killer whale 's that only eat salmon that resides in the San Juan islands so when they start dying more people will turn on the natives and it is what it is OK got to go to work HAVE GOOD NIGHT
 
A poacher is only a poacher if he's taking resources illegaly. If its not in their treaty that they have to report catches to the state then its not poaching

This is about the most ignorant statement I have come across in awhile. We are supposed to be co-managers of the resource with the tribes. The intention of this collaboration is to craft seasons to both allow enough escapement for the runs to be sustainable and provide fisheries that allow a 50% split of the projected harvestable surplus. It is hard to provide effective management when 1/2 of the management team is not forthcoming with information. This deceptiveness does nothing but drive a deeper wedge in an already contentious relationship and it is at the peril of the resource. This should be a very transparent process but it has become anything but. Some major changes need to take place and both sides need to be held accountable for this to work. I sincerely hope we can effect a change and have cooperation from both parties and start making decisions for the good of the resource instead of decisions based on greed.
 
Years ago I was talking to a guy who had just returned from a University of Washington sponsored fisheries internship on a Russian salmon processor that was operating off Puget Sound.
He said that when he asked his Russian counterpart for samples of the catch, the guy would only select the largest salmon for the ongoing scientific data.
He said that all the data being collected was biased and basically worthless in determining how healthy the salmon run was at that point.
 
This is about the most ignorant statement I have come across in awhile. We are supposed to be co-managers of the resource with the tribes. The intention of this collaboration is to craft seasons to both allow enough escapement for the runs to be sustainable and provide fisheries that allow a 50% split of the projected harvestable surplus. It is hard to provide effective management when 1/2 of the management team is not forthcoming with information. This deceptiveness does nothing but drive a deeper wedge in an already contentious relationship and it is at the peril of the resource. This should be a very transparent process but it has become anything but. Some major changes need to take place and both sides need to be held accountable for this to work. I sincerely hope we can effect a change and have cooperation from both parties and start making decisions for the good of the resource instead of decisions based on greed.


Who said they are supposed to be co managers? You? I'm pretty sure they don't give a damn about your interpretation of their treaty rights.
 
Who said they are supposed to be co managers? You? I'm pretty sure they don't give a damn about your interpretation of their treaty rights.
I was waiting to say something. About this but I waited they are not Co managers of any thing except there own Wallet they don't give a s*@! Bout the land or sea they being the native American's THEY STILL THINK THIS IS THERE LAND LOL THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND WE STOLE THIS LAND FAIR AND SQUARE it's only a matter of time till they are extinct
 
Last Edited:
Well Wired you have heard a few comments on here bout how people feel about this and sense I see your from Yakima I'm guessing you're Native America or you are related to them in some way why else would you live in Yakima lol any way so you're on the inside it's up to you because they might have a treaty that protects them now but you can bet that that will change when it comes time guaranteed
 
I'm not native although my family landed here almost 400 years ago. We took land from the natives and wrote treaties with them . Some of which we were pretty bad at upholding. As far as I'm concerned they can have every damned thing they have spelled out in their treaty. We got the better side of the deal.

Yakima compared to Anacortes? Yakima every single time. You can have that miserable swamp. Life is good in the desert.
 
I'm not native although my family landed here almost 400 years ago. We took land from the natives and wrote treaties with them . Some of which we were pretty bad at upholding. As far as I'm concerned they can have every damned thing they have spelled out in their treaty. We got the better side of the deal.

Yakima compared to Anacortes? Yakima every single time. You can have that swamp.
I'm not native although my family landed here almost 400 years ago. We took land from the natives and wrote treaties with them . Some of which we were pretty bad at upholding. As far as I'm concerned they can have every damned thing they have spelled out in their treaty. We got the better side of the deal.

Yakima compared to Anacortes? Yakima every single time. You can have that miserable swamp.
Lol OK now that we got that settled let's talk bout your Bleeding Hart Liberal ways that you have just exposed on this thread I don't know if I trust you you might be a plant on this site LOL only time will tell
 

Upcoming Events

Oregon Arms Collectors March Gun Show
Portland, OR
Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

Back Top