Anyone else catching wind of this? I spend a lot of time fishing Hood Canal (and pretty much any chance I get on the Satsop) and have been hearing rumbling about this. Today I stumbled upon this gem from the October 2016 Chehalis tribal newsletter.

http://imgur.com/a/8MFkt

More or less a tribal disagreement that could drag the QIN & state into it. I remember looking at the history back some and having lived in the Satsop area most of my life I was a bit taken back on the history of the people. In fact there is a old tribal burial ground around CC's home. Anyhow they have a real good argument on where the tribal members ended up and what tribal entity they came to identify with. It will be interesting. Years ago the Skoks used to drive over and drop illegal nets in the upper Satsop but not much now that I know of. Long running disagreement between three tribes and the state.

It would really complicate things for QIN if they had to share with a Treaty Tribe.

It really increase the local hay sales.

QIN has ways of making things happen, or not, depending on if they want it. They are the Russia of tribes.

What will make this interesting is that U&A is a Treaty issue that is handled by the Federal Court. There will have to be some public record of testimony and such. Time to buy lots of popcorn.

Answer: No.

So, people have pretty much given up on the Skokomish river, either because they aren't local, or think its just a snagfest anyways (or really just don't care and will move on to the next river).

So, what if the QIN and Skoks come to an agreement on the Satsop? What if the Skok tribe lays claims to the entire east fork or God forbid the whole river? Can the recreational fisherman come together finally? The next logical step would be the QIN taking the whole humptulips. What then? Do we just move on to the next river while we bitch and moan?

I have ran into people this year that actually refuse to work with people who floss. Drift fisherman won't work with bobber fisherman. Fly fishing a-holes won't get involved with bait chucking morons. Thats part of the problem. No one agrees on coming together. I draw a line at working with anyone from the WFC (they just want all the rivers as nature preserves anyways).

Why won't 1,000+ fisherman show up at the skok and just start fishing? I mean really. Who cares if I'm chucking bobber and eggs and the guy next to me is flossing. Its not about that. Its about keeping the fishery open for all to enjoy. This case will set a precedent for other tribes to move their boundaries. Why not? Why not just take the whole puke? nisqually? Samish? Tribes could technically stake a claim to every stream or body of water in the state on the grounds of accustom areas or whatever that non sense is.

We will lose. Sooner or later, the tribes will own every Salmon and Steelhead stream in this state. They have liberal white guilt and now they will have a judicial leg up with precedent set in this case.

I know this is long winded, but the writing is on the wall. Either fisherman come together, or we all lose. We are the majority, the finance base and the ones the state are sworn to serve, it should be us winning, instead...we are losing everything.

The bigger problem is that most people do not understand the issues at hand. The skok's claimed the Skokomish under the assumption that it was fully included in the original boundaries. While I feel this is incorrect, I won't go into that now. Showing up and fishing will do nothing, because the department will cite you for fishing out of season, while the Skokomish won't have to do a thing. You can go to court, but you will not be able to bring up the owner ship because that will have nothing to do with your citation.

Now the following is my belief, but I fully acknowledge I do not know enough about the Chehalis system to say for sure. What I believe is that
they can not claim the Satsop, as it is not within or adjacent to their original reservation. What they can do is claim half of the tribal share of the fish. This could be a better deal for recs, as it leaves open the possibility that it could be harder for the Quinault tribe to low hole anyone. The Skok's, if successful, would be still be pushed to the upper river. This should mean less taken in the bay. I am not sure about this, but it also may require a specific river allocation rather than a basin wide allocation system that I believe they now use. Those who understand the allocations for this area would know the impact better, but other than perhaps dodging nets, I think the net effect should be zero to us, and could actually be a better deal in the long term.

Think of it this way. The Skok claim the Satsop drainage down to the confluence of the Satsop and Chehalis which would mean a small stretch taking in the Chehalis at the mouth. Also they get to firm ground in the tribal composition by the fact that the tribes that existed almost died out from disease and outside influence did move once then again to Skoks and became part. I could have messed up a bit as I am going from memory and that is always a weak thing for me. There was a Satsop Tribal reservation way back but long gone. Two distinct tribal cultures http://www.native-languages.org/chehalis.htm in this basin so it really breaks out that the tribal Satsop natives went to the Skoks vs Chehalis.

Looks like Indian wars are on the horizon. Maybe they can fight it out in the ancient custom of casino wrestling. I hear it's an ancient tradition like their gill nets, jet sleds and booze and cigarette sales.

jgreen: I feel your frustration. In fact, I DID bring exactly your point up to the Commission at the meeting on the 4th in Olympia. In my limited opinion, the Skok was a "test" to see if the tribes could get away with claiming a river...it worked, so as you said, the precedence has been set. Once again the recreational community just roles over and takes it in the a%$! So, my crystal ball says the Nisqually will be the next to go.

In any case, you say the recreational community must "come together". The issue is, many give suggestions, few are really willing to do the work. Sitting back and bitching, waiting for someone else to DO.

A small group of us have been working on the Closed door Tribal North of Falcon meetings now of almost a year. Working hard, everyday. Working on the Petition, writing letters, contacting groups, the WDFW Director, the Commission, Law makers and any one else. We now have near 4000 supporters and we are still fighting, and fighting hard.

We aren't some organized group. Just some old fishermen who saw something wrong and said "we have got to do something!"

At the last Commission meeting, NO ONE showed up to give any public feedback about the Skok. So, imagine the priority the Commission and WDFW will give to it. It is not a lost cause, not if the people fight, but when they just roll over to take another one up the keister, it signals the tribes to do more.

The people with money and influence want the recreational citizen to feel defeated and hopeless. To that end, they ARE winning.

I hear that the tribes are going to donate land and a building for a museum dedicated to the Recreational Salmon/Steelhead Fishermen of Washington. RIP! Became extinct due to apathy!

What a tribe can claim as U&A has been adjudicated in court, and has been published and was freely available. Has nothing to to with their reservation, or even in som cases of land the ceded in the treaties. Yakima has U&A at least in the Nisqually, and possibly in PS around the delta as they were able tp demonstrate aboriginal use.

For the Skoks, what land is included in their cession at treaty time. That would be the place to start, the metes and bounds of each of the treaties.

Boldt also allowed challenges if new information shows up.