State, tribes reach deal on Indian fishing, hunting rights
TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. -- Five American Indian tribes would regulate hunting, fishing and plant gathering by their members on millions of acres in Michigan under a tentative agreement announced Wednesday with the state.
Supporters hope the deal will end decades of bickering over what rights Indians retained when signing away ownership of land that amounts to 37 percent of the state. The 1836 treaty helped lead to statehood for Michigan the next year.
State officials and the leaders of most tribes and sporting groups were lining up behind the agreement, saying it doesn't give all they want but is a fair compromise that protects their primary interests.
It "will provide stability and predictability in an area of former legal uncertainty," said Rebecca Humphries, director of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
The proposed consent decree needs approval of each tribe's government and Federal Judge Richard Enslen to take effect. Several have already signed on, while the largest tribe _ the Sault St. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians _ has submitted the pact to its 23,870 adult members for a referendum.
Both sides hope to submit the document to Enslen before the next court hearing, scheduled for Oct. 22.
A coalition of 13 conservation and property rights groups that were allowed to observe and comment on the negotiations described the agreement as "tough but fair."
"We have worked to ensure healthy and sustainable game and fish populations, to protect private property rights and to preserve Michigan's sportspersons' heritage," said Dennis Muchmore, executive director of the Michigan United Conservation Clubs.
The settlement allows the tribes to deviate from state rules in some ways. For example, they could have a four-month firearm deer hunting season during which they could take up to five deer. Non-tribal members can pursue deer with firearms for just two weeks in November, although there is a separate muzzleloading season and limited firearms hunting of antlerless deer in parts of southern Michigan.
Tribal hunters also could take two turkeys per season, while non-Indians would be limited to one. And tribal hunters could take about twice the state's daily bag limits for most small game species.
In a statement, the Burt Lake Preservation Association voiced "disappointment with the negotiation process because there was little public involvement." The group said it feared the deal would put the lake's walleye fishery at risk.
"But we must accept the conclusion and work towards a positive resolution with the state and the tribes," the association said.
Tribal leaders say they have demonstrated over many generations their responsible stewardship of natural resources.
"We've wanted all along to make sure people wouldn't feel the need to lash out because they were afraid we were going to destroy the resource," said Jimmie Mitchell, natural resources director for the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians based in Manistee.
The out-of-court settlement, prompted by a state lawsuit in 2003, does not involve Indian fishing in the Great Lakes, which is covered by an earlier agreement. Instead, it provides a framework for regulating tribal fishing on inland waterways such as lakes and rivers _ plus hunting and gathering _ within the area that natives ceded under the 1836 treaty.
It affects much of the western and northern Lower Peninsula and the eastern Upper Peninsula.
The five tribes are the Bay Mills Indian Community; The Sault Tribe; the Little River Band; the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians and the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians.
Both sides made concessions to reach the settlement and avoid a trial.
The state acknowledged that tribal rights in the treaty zone remain intact. Previously, state officials contended those rights no longer existed because the treaty guaranteed them only "until the land is required for settlement." They said tribal members should have to abide by the state's fishing and game regulations.
The tribes agreed their treaty rights pertain to hunting, fishing and gathering only for subsistence purposes _ not commercial activities.
Tribal rules will observe many of the state's policies for protecting resources from overharvesting and abuse. For example, they will limit use of nets on inland waterways and prohibit gill netting, a highly efficient tool that kills virtually any fish it snares.
The tribes also acknowledged their treaty rights don't grant access to private property unless the owner gives permission. But tribal members can go onto private lands already open to the public, such as forests owned by timber companies, plus 4.5 million acres of federal and state lands.
The case reaches back to the early 1970s, when the federal government sued on behalf of the tribes, seeking state recognition of treaty rights. The fight produced some tensions between sport anglers and tribal fishermen _ particularly over gill netting.
"It was just a very bad situation," said Joseph C. Raphael, a member of the Grand Traverse Band tribal council and its former chairman. "We all wanted to keep that from happening again. Is everyone going to be satisfied? Absolutely not, but this is something for the good of all."
___
On the Net:
Michigan Department of Natural Resources: http://www.michigan.gov/dnr
TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. -- Five American Indian tribes would regulate hunting, fishing and plant gathering by their members on millions of acres in Michigan under a tentative agreement announced Wednesday with the state.
Supporters hope the deal will end decades of bickering over what rights Indians retained when signing away ownership of land that amounts to 37 percent of the state. The 1836 treaty helped lead to statehood for Michigan the next year.
State officials and the leaders of most tribes and sporting groups were lining up behind the agreement, saying it doesn't give all they want but is a fair compromise that protects their primary interests.
It "will provide stability and predictability in an area of former legal uncertainty," said Rebecca Humphries, director of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
The proposed consent decree needs approval of each tribe's government and Federal Judge Richard Enslen to take effect. Several have already signed on, while the largest tribe _ the Sault St. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians _ has submitted the pact to its 23,870 adult members for a referendum.
Both sides hope to submit the document to Enslen before the next court hearing, scheduled for Oct. 22.
A coalition of 13 conservation and property rights groups that were allowed to observe and comment on the negotiations described the agreement as "tough but fair."
"We have worked to ensure healthy and sustainable game and fish populations, to protect private property rights and to preserve Michigan's sportspersons' heritage," said Dennis Muchmore, executive director of the Michigan United Conservation Clubs.
The settlement allows the tribes to deviate from state rules in some ways. For example, they could have a four-month firearm deer hunting season during which they could take up to five deer. Non-tribal members can pursue deer with firearms for just two weeks in November, although there is a separate muzzleloading season and limited firearms hunting of antlerless deer in parts of southern Michigan.
Tribal hunters also could take two turkeys per season, while non-Indians would be limited to one. And tribal hunters could take about twice the state's daily bag limits for most small game species.
In a statement, the Burt Lake Preservation Association voiced "disappointment with the negotiation process because there was little public involvement." The group said it feared the deal would put the lake's walleye fishery at risk.
"But we must accept the conclusion and work towards a positive resolution with the state and the tribes," the association said.
Tribal leaders say they have demonstrated over many generations their responsible stewardship of natural resources.
"We've wanted all along to make sure people wouldn't feel the need to lash out because they were afraid we were going to destroy the resource," said Jimmie Mitchell, natural resources director for the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians based in Manistee.
The out-of-court settlement, prompted by a state lawsuit in 2003, does not involve Indian fishing in the Great Lakes, which is covered by an earlier agreement. Instead, it provides a framework for regulating tribal fishing on inland waterways such as lakes and rivers _ plus hunting and gathering _ within the area that natives ceded under the 1836 treaty.
It affects much of the western and northern Lower Peninsula and the eastern Upper Peninsula.
The five tribes are the Bay Mills Indian Community; The Sault Tribe; the Little River Band; the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians and the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians.
Both sides made concessions to reach the settlement and avoid a trial.
The state acknowledged that tribal rights in the treaty zone remain intact. Previously, state officials contended those rights no longer existed because the treaty guaranteed them only "until the land is required for settlement." They said tribal members should have to abide by the state's fishing and game regulations.
The tribes agreed their treaty rights pertain to hunting, fishing and gathering only for subsistence purposes _ not commercial activities.
Tribal rules will observe many of the state's policies for protecting resources from overharvesting and abuse. For example, they will limit use of nets on inland waterways and prohibit gill netting, a highly efficient tool that kills virtually any fish it snares.
The tribes also acknowledged their treaty rights don't grant access to private property unless the owner gives permission. But tribal members can go onto private lands already open to the public, such as forests owned by timber companies, plus 4.5 million acres of federal and state lands.
The case reaches back to the early 1970s, when the federal government sued on behalf of the tribes, seeking state recognition of treaty rights. The fight produced some tensions between sport anglers and tribal fishermen _ particularly over gill netting.
"It was just a very bad situation," said Joseph C. Raphael, a member of the Grand Traverse Band tribal council and its former chairman. "We all wanted to keep that from happening again. Is everyone going to be satisfied? Absolutely not, but this is something for the good of all."
___
On the Net:
Michigan Department of Natural Resources: http://www.michigan.gov/dnr
No comments:
Post a Comment