[env-trinity] Petition Circulating to Revisit Hoopa Commercial Fishing

[Tom Stokely]

Petition Circulating to Revisit Hoopa Commercial Fishing
http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2011/05/petition-circulating-to-revisit-hoopa-commercial-fishing/
By ALLIE HOSTLER, Two Rivers Tribune

A petition to put commercial fishing back on the Hoopa Tribal ballot is circulating amongst Tribal members, receiving more than the required 253 signatures on Monday, May 2. It is unclear if the issue will be placed on the June general election ballot or on a special election ballot.

Tribal member and petition carrier, Dana Rose Colegrove started the movement three weeks ago and has garnered the support of several more tribal members, mostly women, who decided to take the matter into their own hands rather than rely on their elected leaders to change the status quo.

“I speak up for the fish, since they can’t do so for themselves,” Colegrove said.

Colegrove spends most of her free time and extra money organizing and attending public hearings, protests and meetings as a grassroots activist. Her focus for the past nine years has been on un-damming the Klamath River so that naturally spawning Chinook salmon can swim to their natal waters to spawn.

Although there is no evidence that commercial or subsistence fishing by Hoopa people has caused salmon population declines, Colegrove is concerned that the fishery will eventually be depleted because of its monetary value.  

Last year during the fall run of Chinook salmon various Hoopa tribal members spoke out against commercial fishing—a practice that began to gain momentum amongst several Hoopa fishermen who earned as much as $40 per fish. A few fishermen sold several hundred fish.

Some tribal members complain that the opportunity to sell fish and buyer information was not properly announced and monetarily benefited only a select few. They also argue that the tribal law on commercial fishing lacks actual regulations. And, that the act of selling fish is not conducive to Hupa tradition and culture.

The membership outcry and subsequent threats of violence spurred Vice Chairman, Byron Nelson Jr. to place a temporary moratorium on commercial fishing last September.

Although the above arguments are made redundantly the complaint about who is selling fish is just as common—the director of the Tribal Fisheries Department, Mike Orcutt and the Tribal self Governance Coordinator, Daniel Jordan are taking the brunt of the criticism.

Petition carrier and tribal member, Jill Sherman lives and works in the San Diego area, but is rooted in Hoopa. She formerly served as a Hoopa Tribal Council member and has several years of experience working to enhance and protect tribal natural resources on the Hoopa reservation and off. She traveled to Hoopa last week to collect signatures for the petition.

“I’m concerned about the fish. We’ve allowed people who are assigned with the trust duty to care for and protect the fishery, to rape the resource,” Sherman said. “The reason I came is because I’m not financially reliant on the Tribe. They can’t take my job away. They can’t take away my freedom of speech. Unfortunately that’s the case with many of the tribal members who live here and work for the Tribe.”

Orcutt, a life-long tribal fisherman, has spent more than 20 years working to protect Trinity River fish from both biological and political fronts. He was named the Director of the Tribal Fisheries Department in 1989 and saw the Tribe through several court battles and a historical victory that restored nearly 50 percent of Trinity River flows back to the river. It’s no secret that Orcutt is a fisherman for subsistence and for the past few seasons, for income.

Orcutt believes all tribal fishing , including  for commercial purposes, is a exercise of tribal sovereignty and that the closer the Tribe comes to meeting its annual allocation of harvestable fish, the better the Tribe’s chances are to retain and strengthen its claim to Trinity River water needed to restore the fishery. 

 “It’s unfortunate that politics have driven issues to this point.  I agree regulations need to be developed that address individual concern over commercial fishing,” Orcutt said. “This issue has been taken to an unnecessary emotional level having the fire flamed with misinformation that is simply not true.   We should be more concerned about the outside politics and water grabs or we can simply continue to regulate Tribal members if we have enough fish and water.  I’ve always went to wall on fishery and water negotiations trying to get as much as we could use, but if  we are comfortable not harvesting our share of the fishery,  and feel we have too much water, than the tribe needs to reassess its  goals.”

In 1989 the fishery resource began to look like a potential industry for economic development. The idea didn’t come without criticism. When the question was placed on the ballot, the membership voted 152 to 100, making it legal to commercial fish, however the referendum language caused some confusion as to whether or not regulations needed to be in place prior to the sale of any fish.

Legal opinions vary on the interpretation of the law, however, the Tribe’s long-time attorney, Tom Schlosser believes it was legal for an informal commercial fishery to occur under the 1989 Referendum.

During a politically volatile time with elections fast approaching, in February, the Tribal Council convened a fish commission. The Commission was assigned the task of developing commercial fishing regulations for the Council to consider. The Fish Commission’s work is scheduled to be complete later this month.

Now, with nearly 850 voters making it to polls in the primary, some feel it’s time to re-vote on the issue. Not all petition signors are saying they are against commercial fishing, they are saying they want the issue back on the ballot.

The petition reads:

We the undersigned members of the Hoopa Valley Tribe, and the citizens of the Hoopa Nation, hereby petition the Election Board to conduct a Referendum Election to overturn the July 1989 referendum on Resolution 89-104 in order to reinstate the ban on commercial fishing found in the Tribe’s Fishing Ordinance in its entirety. The July 1989 Referendum on Resolution 89-104, provides for commercial fishing on the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation.

In order to ensure and enhance the preservation of the Cultural and Traditional Hoopa Tribal fishing rights, commercial fishing shall not continue.

Question: Shall the Hoopa Valley Tribe continue commercial fishing on the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20110505/607e5dda/attachment.html>