|
A Short Chronology of Treaty Fishing on the Columbia River1979 - Columbia River, Puget Sound, and Washington coastal tribes sued the Secretary of Commerce over ocean fishing regulations because a large percentage of treaty fish were being caught in waters managed by the Department of Commerce. Columbia River tribes also sued in 1980, 1981, and 1982 (Confederated Tribes, et. al. v. Kreps; Yakima, et. al v. Klutznik; Hoh v. Baldrige; and Yakima, et. al. v. Baldrige). As a result, the federal government was held to have a legal obligation to regulate the ocean fishery to insure that a reasonable number of salmon reached tribal fishing places on the Columbia River.1980 - Congress passed the Northwest Power Act, which - for the first time - mandated that Columbia River power production and fisheries be managed as co-equals. It called for a fish and wildlife program to make up for losses caused by federal water development in the basin. 1980 - The Federal District Court issued the U.S. v. Washington (Phase II) decision that affirmed a right to protection of the habitat that supports fish runs subject to treaty catch. 1982 - The Northwest Power planning Council - the body charged with implementing the Power Act - adopted a Fish and Wildlife Program that drew heavily on recommendations made by the tribes. Unfortunately, the program has been amended at least three times since its inception, effectively filtering out or ignoring most of the tribes' original recommendations. 1985 - President Reagan and Canadian Prime Minister Mulroney signed - and Congress later ratified - the U.S./Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty, which reduced Canadian and Alaskan harvest of Columbia River salmon and reserved a seat at the table for Indian tribes along with other government fish managers. 1988 - After five years of negotiation, the states of Oregon, Washington, and Idaho, federal fishery agencies, and the tribes agreed to the Columbia River Fish Management Plan, a new, detailed harvest and fish production process under the authority of U.S. v. Oregon. Judge Marsh entered the plan as an order of the U.S. District Court.
|
|
||
|
| search | employment opportunities | | sitemap | © 2010 |
|
|