U.S. v. State of Wash., No. 96-35082
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | TROTT; BEEZER |
| Citation | 157 F.3d 630 |
| Parties | 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7417, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 10,299 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.D.C.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 Of The Yakima India |
| Decision Date | 25 September 1998 |
| Docket Number | 96-35142,96-35200,No. CV-89-00003-ER,96-35082,No. 96-35082,96-35223,96-35196,Nos. 96-35014 |
Page 630
D.A.R. 10,299
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. No. 96-35082 D.C. No.
CV-89-00003-ER 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 Of The Yakima Indian Nation;
Nisqually Indian Tribe; Jamestown Tribe; Lower Elwha
Klallamtribe; Port Gamble Bands; Skokoish Tribe;
Sauk-suiattletribe; Stillaguamish Tribe, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., Defendants,
and
James Hadley; James Carter; Ann Carter; Charmond Adkins;
Larry Alexander; Shirlee Alexander; Grace Boyd; Pierce
Davis; Rosemary Duncan; May Davis; James C. Johnston;
Sarah Johnston; W.K. Kirch; Jo Ann Kirch; David Mitchell;
Louis Nawrot, Jr.; Boon Ho Woo; Harold Bauer; Billie
Bauer; William Chase; Frances Fellows; George Grader;
Earl Hunsperger; Millicent Hunsperger; Edward Krenz;
Eleanor Krenz; H.J. Merrick; Moss Gordon; Margaret Moss;
Sewall Reynolds; Emma Reynolds; John Riach; Alva Hazel
Robb; Irene Smith; Providence Worley,
Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants.
UNITED STATES of America, et al., Plaintiff,
and
Lummi Tribe; Muckleshoot Tribe; Nooksack; Upper Skagit;
Squaxin Island; Makah Tribe; Swinomish Indian Tribal
Community; Tulalip Tribe; Puyallup Tribe; Quileute Indian
Tribe; Hoh Indian Tribe; Suquamish Tribe; Nisqually
Indian Tribe; Jamestown Tribe; Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe;
Port Gamble Bands; Skokoish Tribe; Sauk-suiattle Tribe;
Stillaguamish Tribe, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellants,
and
Quinault Indian Nation; Confederated Tribes & Bands Of The
Yakima Indian Nation, Plaintiffs-Intervenors,
v.
STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
UNITED STATES of America, et al., Plaintiff-Appellant,
and
Muckleshoot Tribe; Nooksack; Upper Skagit; Squaxin
Island; Lummi Indian Tribe; Makah Tribe; Tulalip Tribe;
Swinomish Indian Tribal Community; Puyallup Tribe;
Quileute Indian 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-Intervenors,
v.
STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., Defendant-Appellee.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
and
Lummi Indian Tribe; Muckleshoot Tribe; Nooksack; Upper
Skagit; Squaxin Island; Makah Tribe; Swinomish Indian
Tribal Community; Tulalip Tribe; Puyallup Tribe; Quileute
Indian 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-Intervenors-Appellees,
v.
STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., Defendant,
and
Puget Sound Shellfish Growers, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants.
Ninth Circuit.
Decided Jan. 28, 1998.
Amended Sept. 25, 1998.
Page 636
Phillip E. Katzen (Argued), Allen H. Sanders, Columbia Legal Services, Seattle, WA, for Jamestown, Lower Elwha, Port Gamble Bands of S'Klallams, Nisqually, Nooksack, Sauk-Suiattle, Skokomish, Squaxin Island, Stillaguamish, 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 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, WA, for defendants-appellants-cross-appellees.
James M. Johnson (Argued), Olympia, WA, for, 26 Tideland and Upland Private Property Owners ("UPOW").
Howard M. Goodfriend (Argued) and Malcolm L. Edwards, Edwards, Sieh, Hathaway, Smith & Goodfriend, Seattle, WA, for Private Owners.
Michael Himes (Argued), Albert Gidari, Jr., Perkins Coie, Seattle, WA, for Puget Sound Shellfish Growers.
Eric Richter, Skeel Henke, Evenson & Roberts, Seattle, WA, for Adkins, et. al.
Mason D. Morisset, Seattle, WA, for Tulalip Tribes.
Riyaz A. Kanji, Williams and Connolly, Washington, DC, for Jamestown, Lower Elwha, Port Gamble Bands of S'Klallams, Nisqually, Nooksack, Sauk-Suiattle, Skokomish, Squaxin Island, Stillaguamish and Upper Skagit Tribes, Indian Tribes.
John Sledd, Mary Linda Pearson, for the Suquamish Tribe.
Daniel A. Raas, Harry L. Johnsen, for the Lummi Tribe.
Richard Berley, John Arum, Mark Slonim, for the Makah Tribe.
Bill Tobin, Christina Berg, for the Nisqually Tribe.
Annette M. Klapstein, John Howard Bell, Debra S. O'Gara, for the Puyallup Tribe.
Kevin R. Lyon, Ronald Whitener, for the Squaxin Island Tribe.
Robert L. Otsea, for the Muckleshoot Tribe.
Kathryn Nelson, Amy C. Lewis, co-counsel for the Port Gamble, Lower Elwha, Jamestown Bands of S'Klallams and the Skokomish Tribe.
Leslie Barnhart, Lori Salzarulo, Ruth Kennedy for the Quileute Tribe.
Nettie Alvarez, Richard Ralston, for the Hoh Tribe.
Jeffrey Jon Bode, co-counsel for the Nooksack Tribe.
Edward G. Maloney, co-counsel for the Upper Skagit Tribe.
Harold Chesnin, co-counsel for the Upper Skagit Tribe.
Page 637
Allan E. Olson, for the Swinomish Indian Community.
Daniel W. Wyckoff, Olympia, WA, Tom D. Tobin, Winner, SD, for amicus curiae Inner Sound Crab Association and Washington Dungeness Crab Fishermen's Association.
Stephanie L. Striffler, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, OR, for amicus curiae State of Oregon.
Nancie Marzulla, Washington, DC, for amicus curiae Defenders of Property Rights.
Robin Rivett, Sacramento CA, John M. Groen, Bellevue, Washington, for amicus curiae Pacific Legal Foundation.
Toby Thaler, Seattle, WA, 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.
Order Amending Opinion And Denying Petition For Rehearing And Rejecting Suggestion For Rehearing En Banc And Amended Opinion
The Opinion filed January 28, 1998, slip op. 783, and appearing at 135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir.1998), is amended as follows:
1. At slip op. 829, last sentence of the first full paragraph; 135 F.3d at 640, first full sentence on the page beginning with "All Grower beds ..."; delete the sentence and replace it with, "The other Grower beds will be subject to the allocation analysis below."
2. At slip op. 830, first full paragraph; 135 F.3d at 640, third full paragraph beginning with "We therefore apply ... "; delete the entire paragraph and replace it with a new paragraph and revised footnote as follows:
"We therefore apply the following analysis to Grower beds where the Growers, or their predecessors, began their enhancement efforts on a natural bed. For such natural beds, the Growers shall demonstrate what portion of their harvest is due to their labor, as opposed to what portion would exist absent the Growers' enhancement. See Shellfish II., 898 F.Supp. at 1462. For such enhanced natural beds, the Tribes shall be entitled to fifty percent of the pre-enhanced sustainable shellfish production from those beds.12/ Of course, this allocation analysis does not apply to artificial beds, that is, to Grower beds that did not support a sustainable commercial density of shellfish prior to cultivation. As the Tribes have acknowledged, the Tribes have no right to harvest such beds. 898 F.Supp. at 1460-61."
3. At slip op. 834, third full paragraph carrying over to p. 835; 135 F.3d at 642, third full paragraph beginning with "The Tribes argue ..."; delete the paragraph and replace it with five paragraphs as follows:
"Of particular concern to the Tribes is the restriction that allows the Growers to control access to natural clams by choosing not to harvest them in favor of the oysters under which the clams are found." The Tribes describe this restriction as a "gaping loophole" that has the capacity at the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Buchanan, No. 66054-9
...United States v. Hicks, 587 F.Supp. 1162 (W.D.Wash.1984); United States v. Washington, 384 F.Supp. 312; United States v. Washington, 157 F.3d 630 (9th Cir.1998); State v. Arthur, 74 Idaho 251, 261 P.2d 135 (1953). See also Wilkinson, supra, at 447-48; Dana Johnson, Native American Treaty Ri......
-
Quechan Indian Tribe v. U.S., No. CIV 02CV1096 JAH AJB.
...of Washington brought a case seeking a declaration of rights to shellfish under certain treaties in United States v. State of Washington, 157 F.3d 630 (9th Cir.1998). The court found the treaties granted the tribes a right to take shellfish from "within the Tribes' usual and accustomed fish......
-
Morris v. Tanner, No. CV 99-82-M-DWM.
...Flathead Reservation. Treaties were a grant of rights from the Tribes, not an assignment of rights to them. United States v. Washington, 157 F.3d 630 (9th Cir.1998); United States v. Winans, 198 U.S. 371, 380-82, 25 S.Ct. 662, 49 L.Ed. 1089 (1905). Therefore, the Tribes never gave up their ......
-
Skokomish Indian Tribe v. U.S., No. 01-35028.
...tribes, the state's Fisheries and Game Departments, and one commercial fishing group were joined as parties); United States v. Washington, 157 F.3d 630, 638 (9th Cir.1998) (suit brought by numerous Indian tribes and the United States (on the tribes' behalf) against the State of Washington t......
-
State v. Buchanan, No. 66054-9
...United States v. Hicks, 587 F.Supp. 1162 (W.D.Wash.1984); United States v. Washington, 384 F.Supp. 312; United States v. Washington, 157 F.3d 630 (9th Cir.1998); State v. Arthur, 74 Idaho 251, 261 P.2d 135 (1953). See also Wilkinson, supra, at 447-48; Dana Johnson, Native American Treaty Ri......
-
Quechan Indian Tribe v. U.S., No. CIV 02CV1096 JAH AJB.
...of Washington brought a case seeking a declaration of rights to shellfish under certain treaties in United States v. State of Washington, 157 F.3d 630 (9th Cir.1998). The court found the treaties granted the tribes a right to take shellfish from "within the Tribes' usual and accustomed fish......
-
Morris v. Tanner, No. CV 99-82-M-DWM.
...Flathead Reservation. Treaties were a grant of rights from the Tribes, not an assignment of rights to them. United States v. Washington, 157 F.3d 630 (9th Cir.1998); United States v. Winans, 198 U.S. 371, 380-82, 25 S.Ct. 662, 49 L.Ed. 1089 (1905). Therefore, the Tribes never gave up their ......
-
Skokomish Indian Tribe v. U.S., No. 01-35028.
...tribes, the state's Fisheries and Game Departments, and one commercial fishing group were joined as parties); United States v. Washington, 157 F.3d 630, 638 (9th Cir.1998) (suit brought by numerous Indian tribes and the United States (on the tribes' behalf) against the State of Washington t......