1842 Treaty

Federal Court Dismisses Individual Tribal Member’s Attempt to Invoke Treaty Rights

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in Turunen v. Creagh (W.D. Mich.):

56 DCT Order to Show Cause re Rule 19

57 Plaintiff’s Brief

58 DNR Brief

61 KBIC Letter

62 Fond du Lac Band Letter

63 Red Cliff Band

64 LCO Brief

66 Plaintiff’s Response to Tribes

67 DCT Order Dismissing Complaint

An excerpt:

Plaintiff, Brenda Turunen, is a member of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC), a federally recognized Indian tribe in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula that is the successor-in-interest to the L’Anse and Ontonagon bands of the Lake Superior Chippewa Indians. In 1842, the Lake Superior Chippewa  Indians signed a treaty with the United States of America, 7 Stat. 591 (the 1842 Treaty), in which the Indian signatories ceded large portions of the western Upper Peninsula of Michigan, but reserved “the right of hunting on the ceded territory, with the other usual privileges of occupancy.” 7 Stat. 591.

Plaintiff owns property that is within the “ceded territory” at issue in the 1842 Treaty. Plaintiff asserts that the “the usual privileges of occupancy” reserved by the KBIC on the ceded territory included commercial farming and animal husbandry. Based on that interpretation of the 1842 Treaty, Plaintiff seeks a declaration that she may—as a member of the KBIC—raise animals free from state regulation on her property within the ceded territory.

Plaintiff’s claim rests on the twin propositions that the KBIC retained certain rights in the 1842 Treaty, and that she may exercise such rights based on her membership in the KBIC. Although the Court must determine the scope of the rights retained by the KBIC to resolve Plaintiff’s claim, the KBIC is not a party to this action. Thus, the Court previously sought briefing from the parties regarding whether the KBIC should be joined pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19, and whether the case  should be dismissed if the KBIC could not be joined. After the parties responded, the Court—at Plaintiff’s urging—ordered Plaintiff to notify the KBIC of the pending action and the opportunity to intervene. The KBIC followed up to that notification with a letter to the Court stating that it would not intervene in the action, and further urging that the action be dismissed under Rule 19. For the following reasons, the Court concludes that the matter should be dismissed.

We have posted on this matter here, here, here, here, and here.

Keweenaw Bay Indian Community Wolf Management Plan

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

From 2013.

An excerpt:

The purpose of this plan is to provide a course of action that will ensure the long-term survival of a self-sustaining, wild gray wolf (Canis lupus) population in the 1842 ceded territory in the western Upper Peninsula of Michigan. It is written to encourage cooperation among agencies, communities, private and corporate landowners, special interest groups, and all Michigan residents. The Plan conforms to the provisions of the Federal Eastern Timber Wolf Recovery Plan, which includes Michigan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1992), Michigan Gray Wolf Recovery and Management Plan (Michigan Department of Natural Resources 1997), and the Michigan Wolf Management Plan (Michigan Department of Natural Resources 2008).

Michigan DNR Makes Arrests for Illegal Gillnetting

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From the Escanaba Daily Press:

GARDEN – Three men were arrested Monday in an alleged illegal gill netting operation on Big Bay de Noc, Department of Natural Resources conservation officers said.

The 1,100 pounds of fish seized consisted mainly of whitefish, with smaller quantities of burbot and walleye.

The wholesale value of the whitefish was placed at $860. In addition a 14-foot boat, motor and trailer were also confiscated, along with 1,200 feet of gill net and other gear used in the operation.

According to Debbie Munson Badini of the DNR Regional Office in Marquette, a misdemeanor charge is being sought through the Delta County prosecutor’s office for fishing with an illegal device. Additional charges being sought include felony resisting, obstructing a police officer for one of the men who fled the scene on foot.

Continue reading →

25th Anniversary of Voigt Decision in Wisconsin

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

From the Wisconsin State Journal:

Northern Wisconsin marks an anniversary this year, but not everyone is celebrating. It involves 19th century Indian treaties that brought walleyes, fork-like spears, rock-throwing protesters and claims of racism to the forefront.

Twenty-five years ago, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago affirmed that Chippewa Indian tribes retained off-reservation fishing and hunting rights in 1837 and 1842 treaties that ceded millions of acres of what is now the northern third of Wisconsin to the U.S. government.

It led to a revival of an ancient Chippewa practice — spearing spawning walleyes from lakes in the spring — and led to fears from hook-and-line anglers that the fisheries would be ruined by a fishing method they claimed wasn’t sporting at all.

Continue reading →