155 



Testimony of the NWIFC February 18, 1993 



on Fish & Wildlife Management Page 4 



that non-Indian settlers were allowed to monopolize the resources to the extent of 

 almost total exclusion of the Indians. Federal and state institutions also allowed the 

 urbanization and intensive development of the area, the rapid development of dams 

 for electric power, unbridled logging and irrigation, and pollution of the watersheds, 

 which reduced the quality and amount of accessible spawning grounds and rearing 

 habitat for the treaty protected fisheries resource. 



US V. Washington litigation a turning point in natural resource management 



As a result of the forgotten promises of the federal government, the tribes sought 

 redress and implementation of the treaties through the courts in the landmark 

 decision, U.S. v. Washington. In this case, the U.S. District Court confirmed that the 

 treaty Indian tribes have the right to take half the harvestable salmon originating in 

 Washington waters. Five years later, in 1979, this case was fully upheld by the U.S. 

 Supreme Court. While it was not the first time the federal judiciary upheld Indian 

 rights, it did prove to be a monumental and significant case for Indian fishing and 

 hunting rights across the country. 



State resistance to implement US v. Washington yielded to cooperation 



The state of Washington's resistance to the implementation of the case was 

 legendary. Through 1983, the state stubbornly fought the tribes in court and sought 

 to avoid implementing the federal court rulings upholding the tribes' fishing rights. 

 Because the state and tribes could not work together, the court took over 

 management of the fisheries resource by default. Almost every management 

 decision was made by the court, with state and tribal biologist arguing before a 

 federal magistrate every step of the way. 



It slowly became obvious that if the fish resource was of primary concern the job of 

 managing it must be taken out of the hands of the court and placed back in the 

 hands of professional managers--the tribes and the state of Washington. This 

 provided the impetus for the state and the tribes to move away from litigation as a 

 full time pursuit, and instead seek to develop cooperation. 



EVOLUTION OF CO-MANAGEMENT IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST 



In 1984, the state and the tribes met at Port Ludlow, Washington, to jointly structure 

 a cooperative management concept. State and tribal officials emerged from this 

 meeting cautiously proclaiming that the "new era of cooperation" had arrived and 

 that negotiation and cooperation would be totally explored prior to the filing of any 

 last resort litigation. 



It was not easy for tribes or the state leaders. Tribes had been used to winning 

 cases, but had not seen any substantive changes in management, in spite of court 

 orders. State officials were forced to reverse a century old tradition of dictating to 



