Interesting poaching case from Wyoming going before Supreme Court

Joined
Dec 21, 2015
Messages
310
https://www.indianz.com/News/2018/09/25/tribal-hunting-rights-case-before-us-sup.asp

Interesting read if you are into legal cases. I haven't heard about this until today.
So apparently 3 guys (one of whom was a game warden in the Crow tribe!)started hunting on the Crow reservation but went off the reservation into Wyoming. Shot 3 elk. Got caught. Got convicted. Now the case is in front of SCOTUS.
The thing that is really interesting to me is, that if he is found to have hunting rights that supersede state game laws, does that mean any Native American can go hunt whatever and whenever he likes?!
Hoping I'm jumping to conclusions here and I'm way off.
 
Last edited:
Natives have a ton of fish and game rights in some places. The tribes here in California can net salmon from the rivers and sell them. Can’t wait to see what the SCOTUS has to say about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
https://www.indianz.com/News/2018/09/25/tribal-hunting-rights-case-before-us-sup.asp

Interesting read if you are into legal cases. I haven't heard about this until today.
So apparently 3 guys (one of whom was a game warden in the Crow tribe!)started hunting on the Crow reservation but went off the reservation into Wyoming. Shot 3 elk. Got caught. Got convicted. Now the case is in front of SCOTUS.
The thing that is really interesting to me is, that if he is found to have hunting rights the supersede state game laws, does that mean any Native American can go hunt whatever and whenever he likes?!
Hoping I'm jumping to conclusions here and I'm way off.
That is exactly what it means. It would be a disaster.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk
 
Does that mean only on unoccupied lands? Wonder what the definition of occupied lands was when the treaty was established. Also maybe the treaty needs to be relooked at in this modern age, not to start an argument on that though but in my opinion worth looking at.

If the SCOTUS does rule in favor this could change game management in all states as it would give all Indians this right not just one tribe, right?

Wonder how the closing of Federal lands in AK to everyone but the Natives will possibly play into this.
 
This could be a big deal...in the wrong way depending on the ruling.

Technically for it to apply to all states it would have to be appealed to the u.s. supreme court for a ruling.
 
Guess it's time to get one of those DNA tests and see how much Indian is in me. Sure would be nice to say good bye to collecting points.:p
 
Does that mean only on unoccupied lands? Wonder what the definition of occupied lands was when the treaty was established. Also maybe the treaty needs to be relooked at in this modern age, not to start an argument on that though but in my opinion worth looking at.

If the SCOTUS does rule in favor this could change game management in all states as it would give all Indians this right not just one tribe, right?

Wonder how the closing of Federal lands in AK to everyone but the Natives will possibly play into this.

I'd say it could be limited to the negotiating parties of the treaty. So I think for now it only applies to the Crow tribe. But this sets a dangerous precedent in other cases where other treaties have negotiated hunting rights. Depending on the ruling, a lot of tribal hunters are going to be brushing up on what a 150+ year old treaties says about hunting.
 
I'd say it could be limited to the negotiating parties of the treaty. So I think for now it only applies to the Crow tribe. But this sets a dangerous precedent in other cases where other treaties have negotiated hunting rights. Depending on the ruling, a lot of tribal hunters are going to be brushing up on what a 150+ year old treaties says about hunting.

Court precedence would affect other tribes with similar wording, not the just the Crow Nation. In the same way, Brown v Board didn't just apply the Topeka school district. While it doesn't change the law, lower courts will use this ruling to guide their rulings going forward.
 
This could be a big deal...in the wrong way depending on the ruling.

Technically for it to apply to all states it would have to be appealed to the u.s. supreme court for a ruling.
The US Supreme Court I'd going to make the ruling.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk
 
The tribe I work with can hunt into Canada and most of northern central Washington. You should see the bucks these dudes kill.
 
The tribe I work with can hunt into Canada and most of northern central Washington. You should see the bucks these dudes kill.

I believe it. I did some volunteer work up on a few reservations in northern Minnesota 20 years ago that involved a lot of knocking on doors. There were some VERY impressive whitetails nailed up on walls up there.
 
Oh boy this could be interesting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Please research the Burkett Treaty involving the Southern Utes near Ignacio, Co. I've had members tell me they have hunting rights in much of public land in San Juans that you and I are required to draw tags for including bighorn sheep.
 
Guess it's time to get one of those DNA tests and see how much Indian is in me. Sure would be nice to say good bye to collecting points.:p





“I used to get made fun of all the time for being French, but since my DNA test came back 12% Navajo- No ones laughing at at me anymore.


Or my people.”
 
Last edited:
The tribe I work with can hunt into Canada and most of northern central Washington. You should see the bucks these dudes kill.

Same in my corner of the state. Except they kill a lot of branched antlered bull elk. I guess they don't like cow elk meat.
 
I am curious to see how this ends up, on one hand if that's what the treaty says then so be it. The US Govt has already screwed over the natives enough, on the other hand that could turn out to be a disaster...
 
Back
Top