U.S. v. State of Washington
| Decision Date | 28 January 1998 |
| Docket Number | 96-35200 and 96-35223,Nos. 96-35014,96-35196,96-35142,96-35082,s. 96-35014 |
| Citation | 135 F.3d 618 |
| Parties | 28 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,619, 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 717, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 1087 UNITED STATES of America; Muckleshoot Tribe; Nooksack; Upper Skagit; Squaxin Island; Lummi Indian Tribe; Makah Tribe; Tulalip Tribe; Swinomish Indian Tribal Community; Quileute Indian Tribe; Puyallup Tribe; Hoh Indian Tribe; Suquamish Tribe; Quinault Indian Nation; Confederated Tribes & Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation; Nisqually Indian Tribe; Jamestown Tribe; Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe; Port Gamble Bands; Skokoish Tribe; Sauk-Suiattle Tribe; Stillaguamish Tribe, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, Defendant-Appellant. UNITED STATES of America; Muckleshoot Tribe; Nooksack; Upper Skagit; Squaxin Island; Lummi Indian Tribe; Makah Tribe; Tulalip Tribe; Swinomish Indian Tribal Community; Puyallup Tribe; Quileute Indian Tribe; Suquamish Tribe; Hoh Indian Tribe; Quinault Indian Nation; Confederated Tribes & Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation; Nisqually Indian Tribe; Jamestown Tribe; Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe; Port Gamble Bands; Skokoish Tribe; Sauk-Suiattle Tribe; Stillaguamish Tribe, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., Defendants, and 26 Upland and Tideland Private Property Owners, (Dan Buehler, Robert L. Davis, Bruce I. Fielding, Arthur J. Gerdes, Joe Hoots, Keith C. Huetson, Commander J.C. James, Richard Sayre Koch, Elaine C. Lefler, Joan Lemonds-Roush, John S. Lewis, Steven L. Luke, Edward R. McMillan, Robert F. Newman, Mark A. Nysether, Arthur I. Price, Ray D. Randall, Cynthia Ramussen, Robert G. Shanks, Axel Strakeljahn, Leana Tracy, Stuart W. Turner, George B. Usnick, Lee S. Vincent, Joan Walker and William E. Whitney, Jr.), Defendants-intervenors-Appellants. UNITED STATES of America, et al.,; Muckleshoot Tribe; Nooksack; Upper Skagit; Squaxin Island; Lummi Indian Tribe; Makah Tribe; Tulalip Tribe; Swinomish Indian Tribal Community; Puyallup Tribe; Quileute Indian Tribe; Suquamish Tribe; Hoh Indian Tribe; Quinault Indian Nation; Confederated Tribes & Bands |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Phillip E. Katzen (Argued), and Allen H. Sanders, Columbia Legal Services, Seattle, Washington, for plaintiff-appellee cross-appellant Jamestown, Lower Elwha and Port Gamble Bands of S'Klallams, Nisqually, Nooksack, Sauk-Suiattle, Skokomish, Squaxin Island, Stillaguamish and Upper Skagit Tribes, Indian Tribes.
Evelyn S. Ying (Argued), Ann C. Juliano, Martin W. Matzen, Peter C. Monson, Attorneys, United States Department of Justice, Environment & Natural Resources Division, Washington, DC, for appellee/cross-appellant United States.
Jay D. Geck (Argued), Fronda Woods, and Robert C. Hargreaves, Assistant Attorneys General, John W. Hough, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Attorney General's Office, State of Washington, Olympia, Washington, for defendants-appellants cross-appellees.
James M. Johnson (Argued), Olympia, Washington, for intervenor defendant-appellant, 26 Tideland and Upland Private Property Owners ("UPOW").
Howard M. Goodfriend (Argued), and Malcolm L. Edwards, Edwards, Sieh, Hathaway, Smith & Goodfriend, Seattle, Washington, for Private Owners.
Michael Himes (Argued), and Albert Gidari, Jr., Perkins Coie, Seattle, Washington, for intervenors defendants-appellants, Puget Sound Shellfish Growers.
Eric Richter, Skeel Henke, Evenson & Roberts, Seattle, Washington, for intervenor defendant-appellant Adkins, et. al.
Mason D. Morisset, Seattle, Washington, for Tulalip Tribes.
Riyaz A. Kanji, Williams and Connolly, Washington, DC, for plaintiffs-appellees cross-appellants Jamestown, Lower Elwha and Port Gamble Bands of S'Klallams, Nisqually, Nooksack, Sauk-Suiattle, Skokomish, Squaxin Island, Stillaguamish and Upper Skagit Tribes, Indian Tribes.
John Sledd, and Mary Linda Pearson, Suquamish, Washington, for Suquamish Tribe.
Daniel A. Raas and Harry L. Johnsen, Bellingham, Washington, for Lummi Tribe.
Richard Berley, John Arum, Mark Slonim, Seattle, Washington, for Makah Tribe.
Bill Tobin and Christina Berg, Seattle, Washington, for Nisqually Tribe.
Annette M. Klapstein, John Howard Bell, and Debra S. O'Gara, Tacoma, Washington, for Puyallup Tribe.
Kevin R. Lyon and Ronald Whitener, Olympia, Washington, for Squaxin Island Tribe.
Robert L. Otsea, Seattle, Washington, for Muckleshoot Tribe.
Kathryn Nelson and Amy C. Lewis, Tacoma, Washington, co-counsel for Port Gamble, Lower Elwha and Jamestown Bands of S'Klallams and Skokomish Tribe.
Leslie Barnhart, Port Angeles, Washington, Lori Salzarulo and Ruth Kennedy, Seattle, Washington, for Quileute Tribe.
Nettie Alvarez and Richard Ralston, Seattle, Washington, for Hoh Tribe.
Jeffrey Jon Bode, Bellingham, Washington, co-counsel for Nooksack Tribe.
Edward G. Maloney, Sedro Woolley, Washington, co-counsel for Skagit Tribe.
Harold Chesnin, Seattle, Washington, co-counsel for Upper Skagit Tribe.
Allan E. Olson, La Conner, Washington, for Swinomish Indian Community.
Daniel W. Wyckoff, Olympia, Washington, Tom D. Tobin, Winner, South Dakota, for amicus curiae Inner Sound Crab Association and Washington Dungeness Crab Fishermen's Association.
Stephanie L. Striffler, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, Oregon, for amicus curiae State of Oregon.
Nancie Marzulla, Washington, DC, for amicus curiae Defenders of Property Rights.
Robin Rivett, Sacramento, California, John M. Groen, Bellvue, Washington, amicus curiae Pacific Legal Foundation.
Toby Thaler, Seattle, Washington, for amicus curiae Washington Environmental Council.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington; Edward Rafeedie, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-89-00003-ER.
Before: LAY, * BEEZER and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by Judge TROTT; Concurrence by Judge BEEZER.
I. OVERVIEW
The State of Washington, groups of private tideland property owners ("Private Owners"), and commercial shellfish growers ("Growers") (collectively, "Appellants") appeal the district court's judgment following two bench trials in an action brought by numerous Indian Tribes 1 (the "Tribes") and the United States (on the Tribes' behalf) seeking a declaration of rights to shellfish under the Stevens Treaties ("Treaties"). The United States and the Tribes cross-appeal the district court's order implementing the Tribes' rights.
In 1855, the United States negotiated five Treaties with the Tribes in the Western Washington Territory. The Tribes ceded their aboriginal lands to the United States for settlement, receiving in exchange exclusive title to defined lands, free medical care, schools, occupational training, and annuity payments. The Treaties also reserved to the Tribes the "right of taking fish, at all usual and accustomed grounds and stations ... in common with all citizens of the Territory...." In a series of decisions beginning in 1974, federal courts, including the Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court, held that this treaty language entitles the Tribes to take fifty percent of the salmon and other free-swimming fish in the waters controlled by Washington State. The Tribes' rights to shellfish under the Treaties, however, are limited by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York
... ... United States of America, Plaintiff-Intervenor, ... The State of NEW YORK; George E. Pataki, Governor, State of New York; Bernadette Castro, Commissioner, Parks, ... Page 451 ... Samuel C. Alexandra, Indian Resources Section, Washington, DC, Alexandra C. Page, Indian Resource Center, Washington, DC, Arlinda Locklear, Jefferson, MD, ... Meetings amongst ourselves and with you and from all that you have said to us thereon, we have at length come to a final resolution concerning it, and we hope that what is now ... ...
-
U.S. v. State of Wash.
...Suggestion For Rehearing En Banc And Amended Opinion ORDER The Opinion filed January 28, 1998, slip op. 783, and appearing at 135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir.1998), is amended as 1. At slip op. 829, last sentence of the first full paragraph; 135 F.3d at 640, first full sentence on the page beginning ......
-
Robbins v. Mason Cnty. Title Ins. Co.
...to include shellfish. United States v. Washington , 873 F. Supp. 1422, 1430 (W.D. Wash. 1994), aff'd in part, reversed in part, 135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998). The Ninth Circuit agreed that this right to take fish includes the right to harvest shellfish from private lands within the usual and......
-
Iwanowa v. Ford Motor Co.
...(holding that "a treaty should not be interpreted so as to render one part inoperative"), rev'd in part on other grounds, 135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998); see also Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 203(a) (1981) (stating that "an interpretation which gives a reasonable, lawful and effective ......
-
Case summaries.
...Cir. 2002) (listing the individual Stevens Treaties by name and the tribes that were party to each). (286) United States v. Washington 135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998), amended and superceded by 157 F.3d 630, 639 (9th Cir. (287) 16 U.S.C. [subsection] 1801-1883 (2000). (288) H.R. REP. No. 94-44......
-
United States v. Washington: the Boldt decision reincarnated.
...1453, 1457 (W.D. Wash. 1995) (Shellfish II), amended, 909 F. Supp. 787 (W.D. Wash. 1998) (Shellfish III), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir.), amended and superseded on denial of reh'g, 157 F.3d 630 (9th Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 119 S. Ct. 1376 (5) Shellfish I, 873 F. Sup......
-
Case summaries.
...dissented, stating that the deposition of Dr. Lane had been properly considered by the district court. United States v. Washington, 135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998), amended by 157 F.3d 630 (9th Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 119 S. Ct. 1376 This case involved a dispute between the State of Washingt......