Ruling sought on Indian hunting, fishing rules
Official says 1836 treaty rights no longer apply
 |
Story Tools
|
LANSING, Michigan (AP) -- Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox wants a federal court to decide whether five American Indian tribes should follow the same inland hunting and fishing rules as the rest of the state's residents.
Cox filed paperwork on Wednesday that says the state believes the hunting, fishing and other rights retained by the tribes under an 1836 treaty no longer apply. The state is only focusing on inland areas covered by the Treaty of Washington.
The five Michigan tribes in recent years have set their own game and fish regulations on certain lands and waters in the northwestern Lower Peninsula and eastern Upper Peninsula.
Cox, however, wants American Indians to follow the rules issued by the state Natural Resources Commission. Seasons and bag limits set by the NRC are more restrictive than those established by the tribes.
"The current confusion over inland tribal hunting and fishing rights benefits no one and casts doubt over Michigan's ability to appropriately manage its natural resources," Cox said.
The federal government and tribes filed a lawsuit in the 1970s seeking enforcement of rights granted in the treaty signed in 1836, the year before Michigan became a state.
About 37 percent -- nearly 13.9 million acres -- of the state is covered by the treaty. Cox said the language of the treaty gives the tribes the rights until "the land is required for settlement." Cox said it's the state's belief that the tribes no longer have those rights.
Cox's action would be "perceived as a direct threat to tribal sovereignty," said an attorney for one of the five tribes covered by the treaty.
"The tribes are convinced these rights have survived, and they will vigorously oppose" the state's attempt to override them, Traverse City lawyer William Rastetter told the Detroit Free Press.
The five tribes are the Bay Mills Indian Community, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Little River Band of Ottawa Indians and Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians.
Tension over the issue has been growing, said James Ekdahl, a tribal affairs specialist with the Department of Natural Resources. DNR conservation officers every year report 20 to 30 actions by tribal members that would be violations of state game laws if committed by others, he said.
The issue posing the greatest potential for conflict is the belief of some tribal members that the treaty gives them access to private as well as public lands, Ekdahl said.
At least three of the tribes have renounced rights to private lands, and try to maintain rules that are consistent with those of the state, said Rastetter, who represents the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa.
