Similarly, courts have recognized the importance of tribal hunting, fishing and gath- 

 ering rights to tribal self-sufficiency. Economic interests in tribal fishing rights as 

 well as subsistence interests were considered by the courts in several cases in the 

 northwest. 



In United States v. Washington, 384 F. Supp. 312 (W.D. Wash. 1974), the district 

 court recognized the treaty fishing rights of the Tribes in Washington State and 

 held that those fishing rights could not be limited by the States to certain species 

 or type of fish, and these rights include wild fish and hatchery bred fish. 



In recognizing the rights of tribal regulation of hunting and fishing rights, the 

 Ninth Circuit held in Settler v. Lameer, 507 F.2d 231 (9th Cir. 1974) that: 



"[i]t would be unreasonable to conclude that in reserving these vital [fishing] 

 rights, the Indians intended to divest themselves of all control over the exercise of 

 those rights. Prior to the Treaty the regulations for fishing had been established by 

 the Tribe through its customs and tradition. The Indians must surely have under- 

 stood that Tribal control would continue afi^r the Treaty." 



The importance of fish and wildlife resources to Indian tribes have been and con- 

 tinue to be recognized by the courts. While the courts have recognized the impor- 

 tance of these resources, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior, 

 has provided little support or assistance to tribal efforts to manage these resources. 

 Efforts to improve fish and wildlife habitat, increase resident population of fish and 

 wildlife, and undertake conservation measures have been left entirely to Indian 

 tribes. 



HEARING 



This hearing will focus on fish and wildlife management issues for Indian tribes. 

 Indian tribes are faced with a multiplicity of issues surrounding the effective man- 

 agement and enhancement of Indian fish and wildlife resources. These resources 

 provide a significant resource base for subsistence, economic development and other 

 cultural purposes for Indian tribes and their members. Many Indian tribes have ex- 

 pressed concerns that existing federal laws do not adequately provide for the protec- 

 tion and management of tribal fish and wildlife resources and do not address the 

 operations of tribal facilities. 



The Committee will receive testimony from wide range of Indian tribes fi-om very 

 distinct regions of the country. The tribal witnesses will provide testimony on their 

 ongoing efforts to improve fish and wildlife habitat, to cooperatively manage these 

 resources with states and other Indian tribes, to increase native fish and wildlife 

 populations and to undertake conservation efforts on these lands. In addition, tribes 

 will testify about the federal trust responsibilities to enhance Indian fish and wild- 

 life resources. 



The hearing record is going to remain open for two weeks. 



I'd now like to recognize the ranking member, Mr. Thomas. 



Mr. Thomas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



I have no opening statement. I am interested very much in this 

 issue, and again, in my home state, why fishing and hxmting of 

 course on the reservation is a very important item, and it pertains 

 not only to the hunting and fishing itself, but the management of 

 water. And there are jurisdictional problems there, so I'm inter- 

 ested in what we're doing. 



Thank you. 



Mr. Richardson. I thank my colleague. 



Our first panel this morning will be the Honorable Wainwnght 

 Velarde, Vice President, Jicarilla Apache Tribe, fi*om Dulce, New 

 Mexico, accompanied by Rudy Velarde, Assistant Director, Game 

 and Fish Department, and Ms. Gloria Notah, Wildlife Manager, 

 Department of Fish and Wildlife of the Navajo Nation in Wmdow 

 Rock, Arizona. 



If you could please step up to the witness stand and take your 

 seats. 



I'd like to welcome you to the Subcommittee, especially smce 

 both of you are my constituents. 



