Crow Tribe poaching vs Wyoming

[wind gypsy]

Wyoming court still has 2 issues to decide in Crow hunting case

Although a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Crow elk hunter Clayvin Herrera appears to be a win for the Montana tribe by affirming its 1868 treaty rights, his attorneys aren’t

billingsgazette.com

Seems it isn’t over yet.

Definitely a hot button issue. I grew up spending my summers at my aunt and uncles resort on Mille lacs and working a bit on the launch... seeing them reference the Mille lacs ruling makes my blood boil.

Reading the above article and ones linked below it, 40 elk killed out of season in two years in this area, fort belknap officers illegally detaining a warden who had cited natives for poaching, etc, paints an ugly picture.

 

[lilharcher]

I think some of you should look back at the history before jumping to a quick conclusion. The Crow protected the gov’t interests in a territory filled by many ruthless tribes, and for that, were handsomely rewarded with land and rights. Over time, the Crow kept relinquishing their rights when asked by the gov’t and ended up willingly giving much more land back than they obtained.....and their treaty to this day included the hunting rights in question. I think it is fair to be mad at the gov’t for making what most of you consider a stupid treaty though.......this was a fully executed treaty. A deal should be a deal. If you buy a house for $1mm and in 10 years it is worth $2mm, the new owner shouldn’t have to sell it back to the original owner for the original sales price.......or better yet, the original seller can’t just come back and take it back for free.

 

[JWP58]

I think some of you should look back at the history before jumping to a quick conclusion. The Crow protected the gov’t interests in a territory filled by many ruthless tribes, and for that, were handsomely rewarded with land and rights. Over time, the Crow kept relinquishing their rights when asked by the gov’t and ended up willingly giving much more land back than they obtained.....and their treaty to this day included the hunting rights in question. I think it is fair to be mad at the gov’t for making what most of you consider a stupid treaty though.......this was a fully executed treaty. A deal should be a deal. If you buy a house for $1mm and in 10 years it is worth $2mm, the new owner shouldn’t have to sell it back to the original owner for the original sales price.......or better yet, the original seller can’t just come back and take it back for free.

I thought in 2019 America we were all equal. There was this guy, his name escapes me, that dreamed of one day people no longer being judged or shown favor based on their ethnicity or color.

I guess we'll continue attempting to right the historical wrongs that occurred to people long gone, and perpetrated by people also long gone.

I get what was agreed to in 1868. I also know its 2019. But hey like I mentioned before, maybe this will help diversify hunting.

 

[Btaylor]

While this is a horrible ruling for lots of reasons, I cant help but smirk a little at the irony of this happening in WY where if you are a NR you cant hunt a wilderness area without a resident or guide. So the same folks who want to thumb their nose at the rest of us are getting a dose of their own medicine.

At a minimum, it should re-open the door to hunting wilderness diy as a NR.

 

[wind gypsy]

I think some of you should look back at the history before jumping to a quick conclusion. The Crow protected the gov’t interests in a territory filled by many ruthless tribes, and for that, were handsomely rewarded with land and rights. Over time, the Crow kept relinquishing their rights when asked by the gov’t and ended up willingly giving much more land back than they obtained.....and their treaty to this day included the hunting rights in question. I think it is fair to be mad at the gov’t for making what most of you consider a stupid treaty though.......this was a fully executed treaty. A deal should be a deal. If you buy a house for $1mm and in 10 years it is worth $2mm, the new owner shouldn’t have to sell it back to the original owner for the original sales price.......or better yet, the original seller can’t just come back and take it back for free.

Your post prompted me to read up a bit, thanks for that. Right, wrong, or indifferent, the history does make me feel more sympathetic towards them.

Doesn't make me feel different about unregulated poaching though.

 

[tdhanses]

Wonder if Yellowstone's included in any of the treaties

I would assume yes it is being it would be deemed unoccupied lands within this ruling.

 

[ChrisS]

I get what was agreed to in 1868. I also know its 2019.

You wanna really see some people squeal? Start voiding water rights deals that were written up in the 18th and 19th century. I mean it's 2019, no one knew or foresaw how many people would be living west of the Mississippi.

 

[jmez]

There are some places in the US with ceded land that are already like that. Also the state's wanton waste laws don't apply, they internally police the matter.

That is true. State laws do not apply on a reservation either. Law enforcement is a mess on and around the reservation. Has to be turned over to the Feds or the BIA police. Good luck getting either to do anything.

 

[KurtR]

After spending lots of time on reservations hunting rights are about the l

That is true. State laws do not apply on a reservation either. Law enforcement is a mess on and around the reservation. Has to be turned over to the Feds or the BIA police. Good luck getting either to do anything.

For tribal members but now tribal police on standing rock are federal so they can pick up and arrest non members just the same. The non members will need to be transported to a state jail not a tribal one but over all it is a big charlie foxtrot. My wife worked child protection for 7 years and the stories are horrible dealing icwa so bad a little girl got murdered because of the oversite

 

[jmez]

No one can truly grasp or understand how bad things are until they have lived on or near a reservation. My brother is a HP here.

 

[Poser]

Also noteworthy that I’ve seen multiple pro 2A groups praising this decision on social media and the subsequent comments from the pro 2A group followers goes something to the effect of “right decision. All they were doing was hunting. The government should stay out of our business”

 

[positivepete!]

Sad to see the outcome of this go that way. The backlash that could ensue from this could be horrible for elk and other species living on "unoccupied" lands. They just gave people endless seasons and no bag limits. Sad.

 

[jmez]

The only saving grace for the elk is that they inhabit tough country, usually away from roads. The deer and antelope populations is what will really take a beating.

 

[brsnow]

I thought in 2019 America we were all equal. There was this guy, his name escapes me, that dreamed of one day people no longer being judged or shown favor based on their ethnicity or color.

I guess we'll continue attempting to right the historical wrongs that occurred to people long gone, and perpetrated by people also long gone.

I get what was agreed to in 1868. I also know its 2019. But hey like I mentioned before, maybe this will help diversify hunting.

Do you still agree with what was agreed upon in 1776?

 

[NoWiser]

I thought in 2019 America we were all equal. There was this guy, his name escapes me, that dreamed of one day people no longer being judged or shown favor based on their ethnicity or color.

I guess we'll continue attempting to right the historical wrongs that occurred to people long gone, and perpetrated by people also long gone.

I get what was agreed to in 1868. I also know its 2019. But hey like I mentioned before, maybe this will help diversify hunting.

It sickens me to think about the likely consequences of this decision. BUT, upholding a treaty is absolutely not the same as "righting a wrong" that happened years ago. This was a legal contract signed by two "willing" parties. It's a real, tangible thing and it needs to be respected. The government can't just tear it up and take those rights away. If they could, they could do it to anyone. I suspect that if you live anywhere near all but a few reservations, you realize that the indians still got the raw end of the deal.

I can understand arguing over what constitutes "unoccupied lands" but not about whether the treaty is valid. I was really hoping for a different outcome here, but the Supreme Court made it's decision and it needs to be respected. Perhaps the US Government should approach this by renegotiating new contracts with the tribes. It's only going to get more expensive as more Supreme Court cases are lost by the states.

 

[JWP58]

Do you still agree with what was agreed upon in 1776?

Go ahead and explain wherever you're going with your silly rhetorical question and save the sarcasm. That is if you have a point (doubtful).

But to entertain your question, yes I do. I know its weird in this day and age where some people are "more better" than others, based solely on historical happenings and uncontrollable things (race, sex, gender, ethnicity, etc.) I believe all people are equal, with equal rights....or should be. But apparently not.

If only we had a magical time machine to go back and right all the wrongs throughout history......

 

[brsnow]

Go ahead and explain wherever you're going with your silly rhetorical question and save the sarcasm. That is if you have a point (doubtful).

Treaties carry the same legal weight as the constitution. If you are okay with invalidating or ignoring treaties it minimizes the constitution as well.

 

[wysongdog]

While this is a horrible ruling for lots of reasons, I cant help but smirk a little at the irony of this happening in WY where if you are a NR you cant hunt a wilderness area without a resident or guide. So the same folks who want to thumb their nose at the rest of us are getting a dose of their own medicine.

At a minimum, it should re-open the door to hunting wilderness diy as a NR.

Excuse me?? There’s none of us thumbing our noses at you. I understand the frustration of some laws that apply to NR. But insinuate we are thumbing our noses at you? I’ve got a great solution for you. Stay the hell out of Wyoming and hunt somewhere else.

 

[JWP58]

Treaties carry the same legal weight as the constitution. If you are okay with invalidating or ignoring treaties it minimizes the constitution as well.

I'm ok with U.S. citizens having equal rights.

Herrera willingly broke the law and is a poacher.

 

[brsnow]

I'm ok with U.S. citizens having equal rights.

Herrera willingly broke the law and is a poacher.

If you want to understand the law read the treaty.