Cowlitz - Misnomer was probably a poor choice of words. I wanted to point out that the decision was not simply based upon the Medicine Creek Treaty or any one treaty but rather upon many of the 11 treaties negotiated by Stevens and covered all of western Washington.

As shown in the title of the lawsuit:
"UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, Quinault Tribe of Indians on its own behalf and on behalf of the Queets Band of Indians, et al.,"

The Listed Plaintiffs Are:
"UNITED STATES of America; Hoh Tribe; Makah Tribe, Muckleshoot Tribe; Nisqually Tribe; Puyallup Tribe; Quileute Tribe; Skokomish Tribe; Lummi Tribe; Quinault Tribe; Sauk-Suiattle Tribe; Squaxin Island Tribe; Stillaguamish Tribe; Upper Skagit River Tribe; Yakima Nation."

"The case area is that portion of the State of Washington west of the Cascade Mountains and north of the Columbia River drainage."


A few more interesting quotes from the decision follow:

"[The] treaty was not a grant of rights to the Indians but a grant of right from them -- a reservation of those not granted"(to the US citizens).

"The Northwest Indians developed and utilized a wide variety of fishing methods which enabled them to take fish from nearly every type of location at which fish were present. They harvested fish from the high seas, inland salt waters, rivers and lakes. They took fish at river mouths as well as at accessible points or stretches along the rivers all the way to the headwaters. Some locations were more heavily utilized than others. Like all fishermen, they shifted to those locales which seemed most productive at any given time. Fishing methods varied according to the locale but generally included trapping, dip netting, gill netting, reef netting, trolling, long-lining, jigging, set-lining, impounding, gaffing, spearing, harpooning and raking."

"At the treaty negotiations, a primary concern of the Indians whose way of life was so heavily dependent upon harvesting anadromous fish, was that they have freedom to move about to gather food, particularly salmon, (which both Indians and non-Indians meant to include steelhead), at their usual and accustomed fishing places. The Indians were assured by Governor Stevens and the treaty commissioners that they would be allowed to fish, but that the white man also would be allowed to fish."

"There is nothing in the written records of the treaty councils or other accounts of discussions with the Indians to indicate that the Indians were told that their existing fishing activities or tribal control over them would in any way be restricted or impaired by the treaty. The most that could be implied from the treaty context is that the Indians may have been told or understood that non-Indians would be allowed to take fish at the Indian fishing locations along with the Indians."

"Acculturation of Western Washington Indians into western culture began prior to treaty times and has continued to the present day. Today most Indians wear traditional western clothing, speak English, utilize the western economic system and western technology, share western religious traditions and participate in the western socio-political organization. Traditional religious rites and ceremonies are no longer widely observed by most tribes. Modern Indians share similar goals with modern non-Indians to acquire most items of American material culture."

"An exclusive right of fishing was reserved by the tribes within the area and boundary waters of their reservations, wherein tribal members might make their homes if they chose to do so. The tribes also reserved the right to off reservation fishing "at all usual and accustomed grounds and stations" and agreed that "all citizens of the territory" might fish at the same places "in common with" tribal members. The tribes and their members cannot rescind that agreement or limit non-Indian fishing pursuant to the agreement. However, off reservation fishing by other citizens and residents of the state is not a right but merely a privilege which may be granted, limited or withdrawn by the state as the interests of the state or the exercise of treaty fishing rights may require."

I'll be honest here and admit that in my opinion much of the Boldt Ruling and other court decisions are total BS but my opinion is worth about as much as piss in the wind.

There is no reasonable way to construe that the treaties limited the citizens fishing to a privilege instead of a right held in common nor does the language of the treaties provide for the Indian harvest shellfish that is cultivated by non-tribal citizens.

I also have a serious problem with the idea of Indians having both exclusive tribal citizenship with special rights and US citizenship with exemptions from the responsibilities that go with that US citizenship.

If a tribe wants to be a sovereign nation that sovereignty should separate it and its citizens from the United States and not create a privileged class of people within the US.

It is my hope that the days of special people with special rights might be numbered.


Here are some words from Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce as previously posted:

"If the white man wants to live in peace with the Indian he can live in peace.
There need be no trouble.
Treat all men alike.
Give them the same law.
Give them all an even chance to live and grow...
all people should have equal rights."

"I only ask of the government to be treated as all other men are treated.
We ask that the same law shall work alike on all men...
with one sky above us and one country around us,
and one government for all...
that all people may be one people."

--Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce in a speech on January 14, 1879 to President Rutherford B. Haynes and a large gathering of cabinet members, congressmen, diplomats generals and others.