poaching and tresspassing rights

[shefland]

http://www.bemidjipioneer.com/news/region/3979795-treaty-rights-lawsuit-lands-court-cass-lake-men-charged-killing-deer-out-season I don’t care who you are, you cannot shoot a deer before season opens, out a window of a vehicle on someone else’s private land, wrong period what ever race or what you think a treaty says.

[sunkinboat]

What a load of crap, unfortunately it probably gets dismissed after too much taxpayer funds used to fight it

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same" Ronald Reagan
2014 LSF Fall Trolling Get Together Champion

[CaughtABuzz]

Sounds like Operation Square hook all over again….SMH

[snow]

Well ain’t that a beech! special rights for the selected few and we pay for it(non native tax dollars) I also remember some knuckle head native getting pulled over on hwy 169 speeding past the casino,80mph I think,told the trooper he couldn’t tag him because he was on tribal land,this is where these stories stop,never here the end game as a rule,unless ya dig into it.

[iceman22]

Idk what race they ate hahaha says the white guy in this situation

[pailofperch]

Wow. They even knew/admitted it was wrong when they left the deer behind………can’t say as much for their lawyer. One race is always screaming for equality, and another is doing the opposite……….

If a man is in a tree in the forest and there is no woman there to here him, is he still wrong? " title="" class="bbcode_smiley" />

[MNdrifter]

The only thing sadder than this story, is yet to come when our DNR loses this case. 😢

he gone.

[otter]

Something is missing in this article. This is just speculation, but I believe the attorney believes that this case belongs in tribal court and not state court. I’ve seen first hand how the media screws up these stories, and I have a hard time believing really any of their news.

[MNdrifter]

otter wrote:
Something is missing in this article. This is just speculation, but I believe the attorney believes that this case belongs in tribal court and not state court. I’ve seen first hand how the media screws up these stories, and I have a hard time believing really any of their news.

Rite Otter……. The news story must be all wrong. They were just driving around shooting deer out the car window, same as their ancestors did hundreds of years ago. .

he gone.

[Bobber]

snow wrote:
Well ain’t that a beech! special rights for the selected few and we pay for it(non native tax dollars) I also remember some knuckle head native getting pulled over on hwy 169 speeding past the casino,80mph I think,told the trooper he couldn’t tag him because he was on tribal land,this is where these stories stop,never here the end game as a rule,unless ya dig into it.

I heard that they might not need insurance on the vehicle either on the Reservation? second hand info shared…

Bob "Bobber" Carlson

You can tell how big a person is, by what it takes to discourage them! "Hooks"

[BigWerm]

A dead deer is a dead deer, and if it goes to court the supreme court already ruled in their favor, and umm you guys are just racist for thinking this is wrong… (I think that’s all the pro-treaty talking points, but I probably forgot one or two) SMDH!

Crush 'EM

[JJ]

BigWerm wrote:
A dead deer is a dead deer, and if it goes to court the supreme court already ruled in their favor, and umm you guys are just racist for thinking this is wrong… (I think that’s all the pro-treaty talking points, but I probably forgot one or two) SMDH!

This is an exercise of off reservation harvest that was specifically addressed in most of the treaty rulings. Generally, it has been restricted to public lands, and certain private lands that are open to hunting:

http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/hunt/documents/tribalFAQ.pdf
“Chippewa tribal hunters must complete a shooting plan which
details the location where they will be hunting, and are limited to hunting only at locations identified on a shooting plan. The location may be on any land where public hunting is permitted, including private Managed Forest Law or Forest Crop Law lands open to the public.“

http://www.glifwc.org/Regulations/Hunting37and42_82514.pdf

“6. Where You May Hunt.
A. Public Lands. You may hunt on most public lands in the ceded territory with the following exceptions and restrictions in all ceded territories:
a) Designated public campgrounds, public
beaches, public picnic areas, and public
water access sites.
b) Public land within incorporated areas except
where hunting is permitted under Minnesota
state law. In those cases you may use the
same methods that state law allows.
1) Minnesota 1837 Ceded Territory only: No hunting
allowed in the following:
a) All public parks, game refuges, forests, scientific
and natural areas, and wildlife management areas. Note: Hunting
is allowed in some of these areas under special conditions and, in
some cases, a special permit is required. Your tribal conservation
department or GLIFWC can provide additional information about
hunting in these areas.

…snip…

B. Private Lands. You may hunt only on private lands that are
enrolled in Minnesota’s tree growth tax program or in Wisconsin’s
forest cropland/managed forest tax law program. Note:
1. These are the only private lands where you may
hunt under your Band’s treaty regulations. Landowner
consent regarding other private lands does not change
this.”

It would appear that these guys were straight up poaching of private land. It would also appear an enterprising lawyer has picked up their case, and is now making an attempt at a further expansion of their rights based of court ruling.

This is wrong, and only highlights all the issues with how the State and Federal government have to jump through hoops to keep a balance. I certainly hope that cases such as this one, and the netting on Hole in the Day, are ruled in favor of all citizens rather. Unfortunately for the rest of us, judicial precedence has fallen mostly on the side of the treaties.

There is a difference between understanding the current reality, and being “pro-treaty”. The SCOTUS has come down on the side of treaties pretty consistently, and the current makeup of the court would likely continue ruling in a close split. All the more reason that understanding whom is sitting in the seat that appoints those positions, and why presidential politics can be such a dangerous game.

Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus

[MNdrifter]

I was raised to believe “one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all”. If that makes me racist, than yeah I guess I’m racist.

he gone.

[BigWerm]

I appreciate you posting from the current reality perspective, and certainly wouldn’t consider you pro-treaty JJ. In my personal opinion at this point approaching any treaty related issues from the legal side is a lost cause. BUT that doesn’t mean we need to just sit back and let things slide. The State has the ultimate power over the Tribes via gaming. If you look back at the Racino proposals the Tribes were severly threatened by that and spend millions to prevent it (through campaign contributions to both parties and ultimately a huge payout to Canturbury). If the State leveraged those rights against Fish and Game harvest rights, we would all be under the same laws in short order. It’s just a matter of having politician’s/Governor with the backbone (I know it is rare to find one with any backbone) to address it. Just my

Crush 'EM

[JJ]

BigWerm wrote:
BUT that doesn’t mean we need to just sit back and let things slide. The State has the ultimate power over the Tribes via gaming. If you look back at the Racino proposals the Tribes were severly threatened by that and spend millions to prevent it (through campaign contributions to both parties and ultimately a huge payout to Canturbury). If the State leveraged those rights against Fish and Game harvest rights, we would all be under the same laws in short order. It’s just a matter of having politician’s/Governor with the backbone (I know it is rare to find one with any backbone) to address it. Just my

Now there you have your angle (and likely the only exploitable one).

GLIFWC is an extension of BIA. BIA is under Dept of Interior. Any tangible “attack” on GLIFWC is going to result in a pile of lawsuits, and not just here in MN. Every ruling even in district court can and does affect other tribes in other states. An attack on treaty rights here will have lawyers nationwide lining up to fight on behalf of the tribes (many of which are cash heavy).

I would agree that the gaming is the best leverage citizens have to apply real pressure. The problem is, there is a very rag-tag group of individuals all infighting, and not looking at the big picture. Now, if all those individuals, companies, etc came together in some sort of consortium, you might have strength enough to get something done, like effectively lobbying the legislature. You don’t need a political figurehead with strength, you need a strong backing of people/businesses who will show up and lobby their individual legislators. Get enough individual legistlative support and you can get things done.

Part of such a consortium would be actively branding and managing the message. There are a lot of people with their hearts in the right place that come off as raving racists in these arguments. Having a metered and prepared media strategy would help overcome these isolated individuals/events.

Chess, not checkers.

Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus

[Author]

Posts