Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Statutory Construction—Wildlife Protection Versus Indian Treaty Hunting Rights—United States V. Fryberg, 622 F.2d 1010 (9th Cir.), Cert. Denied, 449 U.S. 1004 (1980), Karl Forsgaard
Washington Law Review
While hunting for deer on his reservation, Dean Fryberg, an Indian, shot and killed a bald eagle. Although he had a treaty right to hunt on the Tulalip Reservation under the 1855 Treaty of Point Elliot, Fryberg was charged by information with taking a bald eagle in violation of the Eagle Protection Act of 1940. He did not possess a permit which would have allowed such a taking under the Act. This note concludes that the loose test used to find abrogation in Fryberg is unsatisfactory where a statute regulating a nonendangered resource is involved and instead proposes an alternative …
Contrary Jurisprudence: Tribal Interests In Navigable Waterways Before And After Montana V. United States, Russel Lawrence Barsh, James Youngblood Henderson
Contrary Jurisprudence: Tribal Interests In Navigable Waterways Before And After Montana V. United States, Russel Lawrence Barsh, James Youngblood Henderson
Washington Law Review
In 1974 the Crow Tribal Council enacted a resolution restricting reservation hunting and fishing to tribal members. No distinction was made between lands owned by the tribe or its members and the nearly thirty percent of the reservation area held in fee simple by non-members and the State of Montana. The resolution also purported to govern the Big Horn River, the bed of which the tribe claimed under its 1868 treaty with the United States. The State of Montana refused to recognize the tribe's jurisdiction to enact and enforce this restriction and continued to license non-member hunting and fishing within …
Contrary Jurisprudence: Tribal Interests In Navigable Waterways Before And After Montana V. United States, Russel Lawrence Barsh, James Youngblood Henderson
Contrary Jurisprudence: Tribal Interests In Navigable Waterways Before And After Montana V. United States, Russel Lawrence Barsh, James Youngblood Henderson
Washington Law Review
In 1974 the Crow Tribal Council enacted a resolution restricting reservation hunting and fishing to tribal members. No distinction was made between lands owned by the tribe or its members and the nearly thirty percent of the reservation area held in fee simple by non-members and the State of Montana. The resolution also purported to govern the Big Horn River, the bed of which the tribe claimed under its 1868 treaty with the United States. The State of Montana refused to recognize the tribe's jurisdiction to enact and enforce this restriction and continued to license non-member hunting and fishing within …