296 



lead in developing comprehensive, cooperative and coordinated agreements with 

 state and local governments cind private interest groups to protect and manage 

 natural resources, especially those resources essential to the survival of salmon jmd 

 trout. 



The drive for such agreements arose out of decades of successful litigation brought 

 by treaty tribes and the United States against the State of Washington to protect tribal 

 fishing rights to salmon and other fish, including the right to fish off-reservation in 

 usual! and accustomed fishing cu-eas. Decisions in federal courts so far have not only 

 ensured these tribal treaty fishing rights but have established the treaty tribes as co- 

 managers of the fisheries resource. 



In the process, courts also declju-ed that the tribal fishing rights are meaningless if 

 there are no fish to harvest. The courts noted that certain environmental conditions 

 are prerequisite to the survival of salmon. These conditions include; 



• Access to and from the sea; 



• Sufficient and suitable gravels for spawrung and incubation of eggs; 



• An ample supply of food; 



• Sufficient shelter in aO stages of development; and 



• An adequate supply of good quality water. 



A federal court ruling which held that state and federal governments must refrain 

 from degrading fish habitats put the matter this way: 



"Were this trend to continue (environmental degradation), the right to ttike fish 

 would eventually be reduced to the right to dip one's net into the water and bring it 

 out empty." 



From the Washington State Attorney General's office then caime the observation that 

 the ruling could confer upon treaty tribes the power to co-manage all activities in 

 many of the state's watersheds: 



"...the ruling could lead to the tribes' having veto power over real estate projects, 

 logging practices, highway construction and the use of pesticides in the western half 

 of the state..." 



Such litigation, however, taxed tribal time, staffs and treasuries. It also taxed the State 

 of Washington and complicated already highly complicated fisheries. Tribal and 

 other participants all observed that litigation was not producing any more fish, nor 

 was it making the state's fresh cind marine waters any cleaner. 



More broadly, out of the actioiis in the courts, some of them still ongoing, grew an 

 earnest desire among tribal leaders to seek coordinated cooperative agreements on 

 managing ruitural resources that would achieve the same management ends as 

 litigation. The same desire arose within present and past administrations of the State 

 of Washington. Private obser/ers of how the court decisions might impact their 

 enterprises, especially those hjirvesting timber, also became interested in such an 

 approach. 



