||| FROM JAIME BEECHUM and CAITLIN LECK |||
In recent public discourse around the San Juan County Conservation Land Bank’s proposal to open up hunting at Turtleback Preserve and North Shore Preserve, there have been opinions articulating the unfair nature of having a two week period for Tribal only hunting, or of having Tribal hunting occur at all. The proposal – sponsored and supported by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, and the Swinomish Tribal Community – has looked to reestablish Treaty hunting rights for Tribal members in the region. A recording of the meeting and more information can be found on the San Juan County website.
Within this proposal is the stipulation that the North Shore Preserve would be open only to Tribally-managed hunts in the beginning of November, which is outside of the state hunting season. As our San Juan County community explores the ethical merits of Tribal hunting in the islands, we must first look at the legal frameworks for Tribal hunting – namely the Treaty of Point Elliott, the supreme Law of the Land as per Article VI of the U.S. Constitution.
In the freezing temperatures of January 1855, sovereign Tribes traveling by canoe gathered to negotiate with Washington Territory Governor and superintendent of Indian affairs, Issac Stevens. This binding agreement, signed by sovereigns from both the United States and local Tribes, negotiated upwards of 5 million acres of ancestral homelands and established current day reservations including Tulalip, Port Madison, Swinomish and Lummi. As stated in Article 5 of the Treaty, in exchange for land for white settlement, Tribes reserved the right to fish at usual and accustomed grounds and stations, as well as the right to hunt and gather on open and unclaimed lands.
This historic agreement made non-Native settlement possible, and guaranteed future generations of Native peoples access to hunt and fish in their ancestral homelands. This document is still active today. Jay Julius, Lummi fisherman, councilman, advisor and father, reminds us that the Treaty “is a peace agreement,” and that “it is not just our Treaty; it is yours, too.”
We applaud the Land Bank for actively attempting to uphold the Treaty agreement – as the United States has failed to do in countless ways since Treaty ratification in 1859 – by opening up access to land in the islands for Tribal hunters. We recognize that this is no easy task, as the current cultural and political environment does not lay even ground for such accountability. It is up to each of us islanders and organizations to shift our stride toward right and respectful relations to place and to the Original Stewards, and from these relations to guide our practices of citizenship and governance.
We witness the challenges that arise if residents feel that there isn’t enough for everyone, or that Tribes are getting special treatment. We want to identify that this is not fundamentally a discussion of opinion, but one of legal rights established by those who walked before us so that their descendants could be here in these islands. Project partners will be publishing subsequent articles on other legal cases that establish precedent for the legal interpretation of the Treaties, specifically regarding Tribal rights to harvest on public lands, including federal, state, county, and town properties. As US citizens and government representatives, it is our responsibility to understand and uphold those agreements made in the Treaty. Otherwise, we risk ending up with words and signed legal documents that hold no merit or accountability.
It is at crossroads such as this that we have an opportunity to re-examine what we think we know, as well as our relations to place and to future generations. We don’t need to relive the 1960/70’s Fish Wars.The North Shore Tribal hunting proposal is a small step our County must take for the health and prosperity of the Land, local Tribes, and, inevitably, all of us. As was made evident in the Land Bank meeting, hunting is also a time-tested and scientifically sound practice to care for deer herds and keep ecosystems in balance.
At this important time, we are calling on our neighbors and community to discern within each of us where this responsibility stands, and ask that you please submit your thoughts to the Land Bank by emailing erinh@sjclandbank.org, by 5pm on April 20th. Your comments can be a part of the larger Truth and Reconciliation work we need to do in San Juan County – a process where we more fully examine how land ownership changed from Coast Salish people to European settlers; the injustices and trauma that took place in this process; the ongoing effects of coloniality; and the steps we can take today to uphold not only the Treaty of Point Elliott, but our responsibility as islanders to open access for Coast Salish peoples to practice their lifeways and reconnect to the lands and waters they have tended since time immemorial.
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
I also recommend listening to the Land Bank’s 90-minute presentation by the biologists and tribal managers and discussion. https://www.sanjuancountywa.gov/m/newsflash/Home/Detail/2122.
Some of the benefits include increasing biodiversity (by allowing some plants to thrive that deer otherwise decimate), offering hunters more chances for relationship building, restoration to the tribes of more sense of soverignty, and allowing the rest of us a way to express our respect for descentants of indigenous peoples.
Some of the objections include the potential for stray shots, litter, and distrubing behavior, closures of the parks to the public during the hunting periods, the inhumanity of attacking the deer, successfully and not, with modern bows and shotguns, and the unfairness to non-tribal members which results from reserving hunting spots for tribal members. Replies explained that hunters are trained, educated, licensed, and registered, which weapons are allowed, where substantial hunting already occurs on private lands (inculding for migratory birds !), and how tribal members have been denied substantial treaty rights.
What persuaded me to support the proposal was hearing the biologists and tribal land managers say that allowing a short deer hunt in these limited areas is NOT the solution to declining biodiversity, and NOT the solution to tribal injustice: instead, it’s only an effort to improve things a little bit. I thank the Land Bank for arranging wholesome community gatherings where people express support and objection and even acknowledge responsive arguments.
Now, … can we close Crescent Beach Road ?
I’ve noticed a real lack of deer in the Deer Harbor area recently and suspect Adenovirus Hemorrhagic Disease (AHD) might be on the rise again. On a normal day, several would walk through my yard; now, I haven’t seen one in months. On a recent woodland walk, I didn’t see any live deer, but I caught that same smell of decay I remember from the 2021 outbreak. It’s definitely starting to feel like that period again. What are other islanders noticing?