Tulalip News

Financial implications of return to Kingdom of Hawaii

By Tom Yamachika June 1, 2014

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs was just in the news because its CEO, Kamanaopono Crabbe, wrote a letter to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry asking for a legal opinion on Hawaii’s sovereign status. One of the key questions raised in the letter is “Does the Hawaiian Kingdom continue to exist?”

I will leave it to others to answer that question, but, supposing the Kingdom coexists with the State of Hawaii, what tax and public finance implications can we expect?

Throughout its history, the U.S. government has had to coexist with independent sovereign entities known as Native American tribes. During this time, rules and procedures have been adopted allowing both to exist with a fair amount of autonomy and dignity for each. The Akaka Bill aimed to reconstitute a Native Hawaiian governing entity and then have it recognized by the federal government the same way Native American tribes are.

Typically, tribes have space set aside within a state, which we call a “reservation.” On the reservation, the tribal government not only provides governance, but also provides the services necessary to maintain a civilized society. Those services, like any others provided by any other government, need to be paid for. So the tribal government has the power to impose taxes upon those living on the reservation. Those on the reservation pay tribal taxes, not state or federal taxes. But neither the state nor the federal government is obligated to provide the reservation with infrastructure, police, fire protection, a militia, or anything else people typically look to government to provide.

By the same token, anything off the reservation is part of the state. An individual living off the reservation, even though ethnically or otherwise a member of a tribe, is considered a state resident and pays federal and state taxes like any other resident. This makes sense because that person is a beneficiary of the services and society provided by the federal and state governments, and should pay for those services like any other person living there.

The same theories apply for the island possessions of the United States, such as Guam and American Samoa. Each island has a government that imposes its own tax and provides its own services. For example, those living in Guam pay Guam tax, while ethnic Guamanians living in the U.S. pay federal and state taxes.

Applying these concepts to the Native Hawaiian situation raises familiar issues. The Kingdom of Hawaii currently has neither a monarch nor anything generally recognized by its members as a government. That’s why the Akaka Bill proposed, and the Native Hawaiian Roll Commission is moving toward, a process for getting a number of Native Hawaiians together and having them organize themselves.

Once that happens, however, some kind of dedicated space is needed for the nation-within-a-nation model to work. We certainly hope that no one is thinking the citizens of the reconstituted Kingdom living on state lands, and taking advantage of the benefits and services offered by the state and federal governments, will then claim they don’t have to pay for them. That’s simply not reasonable. People paid taxes in the old Kingdom, and those in the reconstituted Kingdom shouldn’t expect something different. We all need to be aware that both benefits and burdens flow from being a part of civilized society.

Tom Yamachika is interim president of the Tax Foundation of Hawaii.

The 81-Year-Old Newspaper Article That Destroys the Redskins’ Justification For Their Name

George Preston Marshall, founder and owner of the Washington Redskins, in 1935.CREDIT: AP — George Preston Marshall, founder and owner of the Washington Redskins, in 1935.
CREDIT: AP

By Travis Waldron May 30, 2014

ThinkProgress

As challenges against the name of the Washington Redskins have persisted for more than four decades, the team’s ownership and management has held on to a consistent story: that the team changed its original name, the Boston Braves, to the Boston Redskins in 1933 to honor its coach, William “Lone Star” Dietz, who maintained at the time that he was a member of the Sioux tribe.

But in a 1933 interview with the Associated Press, George Preston Marshall, the team’s owner and original founder, admitted that the story wasn’t true.

“The fact that we have in our head coach, Lone Star Dietz, an Indian, together with several Indian players, has not, as may be suspected, inspired me to select the name Redskins,” Marshall said in the AP report. The quote was originally referenced in a story on the team’s name at Sports Illustrated’s MMQB site. Jesse Witten, the lead attorney in a lawsuit challenging the legality of the team’s federal trademark protection, unearthed the actual AP report this week, and provided it to to Washington Post columnist Robert McCartney. ESPN’s Keith Olbermann reported it on his show, “Olbermann,” Thursday night.

Here’s a copy of the news clip, which ran in the Hartford (Conn.) Courant on July 5, 1933:

The team’s owner, Daniel Snyder, and top management have justified the team’s name as an “honor” to Native Americans in letters to fans and the public. So too has NFL commissioner Roger Goodell. And both have leaned on the story that Marshall chose the name to honor Dietz to make that case.

Snyder referenced the history without using Dietz’s name specifically in a letter to season ticket-holders last October:

As some of you may know, our team began 81 years ago — in 1932 — with the name “Boston Braves.” The following year, the franchise name was changed to the “Boston Redskins.” On that inaugural Redskins team, four players and our Head Coach were Native Americans. The name was never a label. It was, and continues to be, a badge of honor.

The team has also used Dietz’s heritage — and the claim that the Redskins were named in his honor — to defend itself in the lawsuits challenging its federal trademark.

The NFL, too, has rested its case on that history. Goodell did so in a letter to 10 members of Congress who wrote him to challenge the name last June. The commissioner called the name a symbol of “strength, courage, pride, and respect” and specifically referenced Dietz’s role in the name:

In our view, a fair and thorough discussion of the issue must begin with an understanding of the roots of the Washington franchise and the Redskins name in particular. As you may know, the team began as the Boston Braves in 1932, a name that honored the courage and heritage of Native Americans. The following year, the name was changed to the Redskins — in part to avoid confusion with the Boston baseball team of the same name, but also to honor the team‘s then-head coach, William “Lone Star“ Dietz.

Asked for their response to the news clip, neither the NFL nor the Washington Redskins responded by the time of publication.

Dietz’s history was already in question at the time thanks to the work of historian Linda M. Waggoner, whose exhaustive account of Dietz’s life found that he almost certainly was not a Native American, as he had claimed. In fact, Dietz faced a federal trial alleging that he had falsely represented himself as a Native American to avoid the World War I draft. After the first trial ended with a hung jury, Dietz pleaded no contest to the same charges in a second trial and served 30 days in jail.

When ThinkProgress asked the franchise about the claims that Dietz was not a Native American last year, the team’s president and general manager, Bruce Allen, called the questions “ignorant requests” and suggested that we speak to Dietz’s family instead.

Amid scrutiny about Dietz’s history, the team has given the appearance of backing away from relying on the claim that he inspired the name. Notably, Allen did not cite Dietz or the origins of the name in his written response to a letter from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and 49 other senators who called on the team to drop “Redskins.”

If Marshall didn’t choose the name based on Dietz or the presence of Native Americans, what was his reason? As Olbermann notes in his report, the team chose its original name — the Boston Braves — because it shared a field with Boston’s baseball team by the same name. Marshall explains the AP story that he gave up the name “Braves” because it was too easily confused with the baseball team, and he chose “Redskins” to keep the Native American imagery as the team moved away from the Braves and into Fenway Park, the home of the Boston Red Sox.

Until recently, that story was more commonly told than the one about Dietz. In 1972, freelance writer Joe Marshall wrote a story on team nicknames in a promotional program from a game between Washington and the Atlanta Falcons. Joe Marshall didn’t reference Dietz in his story, instead writing that the team wanted to “change names but keep the Indian motif”:

The Redskins also copied a baseball team, the Boston Braves. George Preston Marshall started with his team in Boston on Braves Field. When he switched playing sites, he wanted to change names but keep the Indian motif. Since he was now sharing a park with the Red Sox and at the same time liked Harvard’s crimson jerseys, Redskins seemed appropriate. Redskins they have remained, a proud tradition. Until now, that is.

In that sense, it seems obvious that the name “Redskins” was chosen more as a marketing ploy than anything else, a way to tweak the team’s name without changing the image it had established. Regardless of the original motive, however, this much is clear: the story the team and NFL have used to justify the name’s existence as a “badge of honor” is not true, and the man who founded the team refuted it himself more than 80 years ago.

Public Schools Outperform Private Schools, Book Says

Published in Print: May 14, 2014, as Authors Contend Public Schools Outperform Private Schools

By Holly Yettick Education Week

The recent publication of a scholarly book has reopened the debate surrounding the academic achievement of public vs. private schools.

Public schools achieve the same or better mathematics results as private schools with demographically similar students, concludes The Public School Advantage: Why Public Schools Outperform Private Schools, published in November by the University of Chicago Press. The authors are Christopher and Sarah Lubienski, a husband-and-wife team of education professors at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Central to the controversy is their suggestion that vouchers, which provide public funding for private school tuition, are based on the premise that private schools do better—an assumption that is undercut by the book’s overall findings.

The Lubienskis’ analysis draws on data from the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP, as well as the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99.

After accounting for socioeconomic status, race, and other demographic differences among students, the researchers found that public school math achievement equaled or outstripped math achievement at every type of private school in grades 4 and 8 on NAEP. The advantage was as large as 12 score points on a scale of 0 to 500 (or more than one full grade level) when the authors compared public school students with demographically similar 4th graders in conservative Christian schools.

The Lubienskis also used NAEP data to conclude that regular public schools outperformed independently operated, publicly funded charter schools in 4th grade math and equaled them in 8th grade math.

Finally, the Lubienskis used their longitudinal data to find that public school students started kindergarten with lower math achievement than demographically similar private school peers. By the time they reached the 5th grade, however, they were outperforming those same peers in the subject.

On the basis of the data they analyzed, the Lubienskis offer two possible explanations for their findings.

First, public school teachers are more likely to be certified, meaning they are required to continue to take professional-development courses that expose them to the latest research on teaching math.

Second, perhaps as a result of that professional development, their instructional approaches more closely align with recent studies suggesting that test results improve when students know how to reason and communicate mathematical concepts rather than merely learning to add, subtract, multiply, and divide.

The Lubienskis conclude that “private, autonomous, choice-based schools are not necessarily more innovative or academically effective but instead often perform at lower levels even as they attract more able students.”

Their book adds to a growing and controversial body of research questioning the conventional wisdom that private schools are superior to their public counterparts.

One source of contention is that private schools serve a different and often socially and economically more privileged set of students. So efforts to compare the two sectors necessarily require researchers to account for demographic differences between the groups.

Different Studies

Anytime researchers must consider those kinds of differences, they face the frustrating reality that results can change dramatically depending on the particular combination of demographic factors that they select and how they use them in their analysis.

In 2006, for example, researchers at the Educational Testing Service, the nonprofit Princeton, N.J.-based organization that administers and contributes to numerous high-profile exams, including NAEP, reached conclusions similar to the Lubienskis’ when the ETS scholars used the same 2003 database to conduct an analysis of both reading and math for the federal National Center for Education Statistics.

Shortly after that report was released, Paul E. Peterson, a professor at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, led an analysis in which he used the same data with a different combination of demographic variables. His results suggested that private schools actually equaled or surpassed public schools.

With this latest study by the Lubienskis, criticisms about demographic factors and other issues have also arisen, this time in a variety of venues including The National Review, a leading conservative magazine, and The Atlantic, which ran an interview with the Lubienskis in October.

Range of Responses

University of Arkansas scholar Jay P. Greene, who was once a researcher for the free market-oriented Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, mocked the study on his blog. At the other end of the ideological spectrum, New York University research professor Diane Ravitch, an outspoken critic of school choice, provided a blurb for the book.

One of the more detailed critiques appears in the summer edition of the school-choice-friendly publication Education Next. In that article, Patrick Wolf, a professor in the department of education reform at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville, disputed the idea that the study was even relevant to the voucher debate.

“Voucher recipients make up a tiny fraction of private school students in the data sets the authors examine, especially since the data predate most of what still are very small programs scattered across the country,” he wrote.

Mr. Wolf also raised several methodological issues. For example, he noted that private schools do not necessarily participate in government initiatives such as the free and reduced-price meal program that the Lubienskis used as one measure of poverty, suggesting the Lubienskis’ numbers may be inaccurate.

If the results are biased, they are likely biased in favor of private schools, Christopher Lubienski countered in a response to Mr. Wolf and other critics that was posted on the Education Policy Blog in April. That’s because no data are available to account for what he describes as one of the biggest differences between public and private schools: highly motivated parents.

Two public and private school children may be identical in every measurable way, from income to race to special education status.

But the private school child’s family has still “demonstrated particular interest in their children’s education,” Mr. Lubienski wrote, by investing the time to select a particular private school and the money to pay for the tuition.

Because that family-level difference is unmeasured and unmeasurable, the Lubienskis argue, public schools are likely doing even better than their conclusions might suggest.

Lunch Demographics

Marcus Weaver-Hightower is an associate professor of educational foundations and research at the University of North Dakota who is familiar with the Lubienskis’ work but did not contribute to their book. He commented on some of the points raised in Mr. Wolf’s critique.

“Wolf is completely right that school lunch eligibility is a problematic indicator, though not necessarily because it separates the private schools from the public,” said Mr. Weaver-Hightower, an expert on school food policy.

“How much would kids be further behind without the program and its nutritional benefits, for example?” he said, “[What about] problems in certifying kids accurately, declining participation with age, and so on?

“Where Wolf’s critique is wrong, I think, is that a large number of private schools do actually participate in the National School Lunch Program.”

For instance, Mr. Weaver-Hightower said, although private schools are less likely to offer the program, past research has found that 94 percent of all schools, public and nonprofit private included, do participate.

Existing research does not address whether private schools that participate differ from those that do not, he said.

In addition to critiquing the way in which the Lubienskis accounted for demographic differences between sectors, Mr. Wolf also questioned their use of a “narrow definition of school performance” that excluded reading results and relied on the “use of tests that align more closely with public school than with private school curricula.”

In their book, the Lubienskis explain that they focus on math because it “is thought to be a better indicator of what is taught by schools than, say, reading, which is often more influenced directly and indirectly by experiences in the home.”

In addition, the Lubienskis have said that they limited their study to mathematics because it is their area of expertise, and that they did not feel comfortable straying beyond it.

Responses to Critics

In his response to Mr. Wolf, Christopher Lubienski noted that private schools are represented on the expert panels that oversee the creation of exams for both data sets that the Lubienskis’ study uses.

“Really, the tests are more aligned with public school curriculum, but that’s the point,” Mr. Lubienski said. “These tests reflect professional, expert perspectives on the most effective ways of teaching and learning. Both test-makers and public schools have embraced those perspectives more than have private and charter schools.”

Mr. Weaver-Hightower of the University of North Dakota suggested that the Lubienskis had done a thoughtful job of trying to account for as many complexities as possible.

“In the end, no study of public versus private schooling is going to be methodologically perfect,” he said. “It’s just too complicated to try to find a definitive answer when the sectors are so diverse, the confounding factors so many, and the data sets so limited.”

9th Annual Vine Deloria, Jr. Indigenous Studies Symposium

Source: Northwest Indian College

Event Date: July 10, 2014 – 8:00am – July 12, 2014 – 2:00pm

Since 2006, Northwest Indian College (NWIC) has honored the life and work of one of Indian Country’s most recognized and respected leaders by hosting the Annual Vine Deloria, Jr. Indigenous Studies Symposium.

In his lifetime Deloria, a Sioux scholar, was an advocate for tribal sovereignty, Executive Director for the National Congress of American Indians, a professor, an activist for social justice, a critic of western science and society, a champion of Indigenous values, and wrote nearly 25 books and 200 published articles.

The purpose of the symposium is celebrate and continue Deloria’s work by bringing together Native and non-native scholars, tribal elders, traditionalists, and others who are interested in honoring the causes Deloria devoted his life to, and building upon the foundation he and others helped build.

The symposium is organized as a series of intellectually driven panels – no workshop-type presentations. Individual presentations may be formal or informal, but in keeping with the spirit of Deloria, there will be no PowerPoint or other electronic presentations.

Bobby Bridger will be delivering the Vine Deloria, Jr. address at the 9th annual symposium. Past keynote speakers have included Billy Frank, Jr., Hank Adams, Oren Lyons, Suzan Shown Harjo, Tom Holms, and Hennrietta Mann.

Registration costs $150, which will cover continental breakfasts and lunches each day of the event and a celebratory salmon dinner.

Hotels fill up fast during the summer, so book your reservation soon. Small blocks have been reserved for symposium attendees at the Silver Reef Casino (five minutes from NWIC’s campus) and the Hampton Inn (ten minutes away). The Silver Reef can be reached at (360) 383-0777 and the Hampton Inn at (360) 676-7700. To receive a special rate, be sure to say you are with the Vine Deloria Symposium when you book.

For more information or to register, contact Angel Jefferson at (360) 392-4287 or ajefferson@nwic.edu.

Student built rain gardens are key to salmon recovery

Hanna Bridgham, Cassidy Forler and Tessa Rurup, students at Eatonville High School, inventory plants in a new raingarden built in a courtyard at their school.

Source: Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission

Eatonville will keep its title as the “rain garden capital” because of some work being done by the Nisqually Indian Tribe and the Nisqually River Council. Working with local high school students, the tribe and the council are building six rain gardens in Eatonville this year, continuing several years of stormwater mitigation work in the community.

“If we don’t do something, growth in Eatonville will have a massive detrimental impact on salmon and water quality,” said David Troutt, natural resources director for the Nisqually Indian Tribe. “But, if we can handle the growth the right way, we can have salmon and a healthy community. Rain gardens are an important tool in making that happen.”

Dozens of rain gardens have already been built throughout Eatonville, giving the city the distinction of the highest density of rain gardens of any community in the country.

Rain gardens landscape amenities that are designed to capture and absorb polluted runoff from impervious surfaces, like roofs or parking lots. They reduce runoff by allowing stormwater to soak into the ground instead of flowing into storm drains causing pollution, flooding, and diminished groundwater.

As a part of the project, the council’s Nisqually River Education Project is engaging local high school students in building and caring for the city’s growing collection of rain gardens. The education project is working with four students from Eatonville High School to design each new rain garden. Each student also participated in the tribe’s Stream Stewards training course this summer.

Poor stormwater management leads to high flows in the winter and low flows in the summer. The Mashel River, which runs through Eatonville, already is too low and too warm for fish.

Low flows in the Mashel typically occur just as adult chinook salmon are making their way back to spawn. “Adult salmon need cool, deep pools to rest as they swim upriver,” Troutt said.

“This kind of effort is what we’d like to see across the watershed and across the region,” Troutt said. “When we end up saving salmon and Puget Sound, it will be because we’ve found ways to handle the population growth that is going to come.”

Snoqualmie Tribe Sues to Recover copy.5M Investment in Fiji Casino

Indian Country Today

In mid-2011, the Snoqualmie Tribe was approached by Larry Claunch’s One Hundred Sands corporation to invest copy.5 million in the developer’s $290 million luxury resort and casino in Fiji. Plans called for a destination casino on Denarau Island, on the west coast of Fiji, and potentially building a second casino at Suva, on the southeast coast.

In February 2012, Larry Claunch on behalf of One Hundred Sands, Ltd. issued a promissory note that gauranteed it would repay the tribe copy.5 million, plus interest, by February 2, 2012. When the project was slow to start, the tribe pulled out of the deal with developer One Hundred Sands, which is headquartered in Fiji and has an exclusive 15-year gaming license to be the only casino operator in Fiji. One Hundred Sands finally broke ground on the Denarau Island resort earlier this month. The tribe has yet to be repaid.

On May 27, 2014, the Snoqualmie Tribe filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court in Washington State seeking to recover its copy.5 million, plus interest and other fees. The lawsuit names Larry Claunch and three of his business entities associated with the Fiji project as defendants.

“We have been trying for months to recover the copy.5 million without having to file suit,” said Carolyn Lubenau, the chairwoman of the Snoqualmie Tribal Council. “But no one responded to the Tribe’s demand. The Note is past due and must be repaid in full.”

Lubenau added, “Snoqualmie Tribal Council’s primary job is to protect the welfare of the Tribe and the Snoqualmie people. Our goal with this lawsuit is to recover the money that was loaned to Mr. Claunch for Fiji so that it can be used to benefit our Tribal members here at home.”

The Snoqualmie Indian Tribe is a federally recognized tribe in the Puget Sound region of Washington State. The Tribe owns and operates the Snoqualmie Casino in Snoqualmie, Washington.

Tribal Journeys to Bella Bella 2014

Source: First Nations in British Columbia

From Date: Sunday, July 13, 2014

To Date: Saturday, July 19, 2014

Location: Journey to Bella Bella for Qatuwas II

Description: Following traditional protocol the Heiltsuk sent canoes to invite both the North and South coastal First Nations once again to Bella Bella for the Qatuwas “People gathering together”- Festival from July 13th – July 19th 2014. We expect over 100 canoes with over 1,000 pullers and about 5,000 visitors to join us for this important event.

Invitation to Bella Bella for Tribal Journey in 2014

Helitsuk hosted the Qatuwas Festival in Bella Bella in 1993, and have been actively involved in modern day canoe resurgence. The Heiltsuk leadership invite the canoe nations to once again journey to Bella Bella for Qatuwas II “people are coming together” in 2014. Our intent is to host the gathering in our new Bighouse.

Pulling Together

The ocean going canoe is our traditional mode of transportation. Participants in Tribal Journeys learn traditional ecological knowledge of weather and tides, gain respect for the ocean and its power, and work together as a team to build on individual strengths.

This year, Helitsuk youth had the opportunity to paddle to Neah Bay, Washigton. Helitsuk acknowledge the generosity of our hosts, the Makah Tribe. we also acknowledge our Hemas (traditional leaders) and elected leaders who endorsed the journey, and are thankful for the support of the community organizations.

The Heiltsuk Integrated Resources Management Department (HIRMD) is building capacity to achieve long term sustainability of not only natural resources, but also Heiltsuk human resources. HIRMD is working with QQS Projects Society and out youth on an engagement strategy related to science and culture, to ensure that youth are ready, willing and able to replace the HIRMD managers and staff over time. We plan to train coordinators and facilitators in planning processes, and employ youth to organize and participate in a canoe gathering in Bella Bella in 2014.

For decades the Hemas and elders have seen the need for a Bighouse in Bella Bella. Funds were raised to support some of the anticipated costs of construction and projects management. A team of supporters with the Kvai Projects Society are moving forward to realize the Bighouse goal.

The Journey Ahead

In the year ahead we will research and develop a strategic plan for Qatuwas II and the Bighouse project. We are interested in trade and barter to secure financial resources for project implementations.

The Heiltsuk territory still contains stands of old growth cedar. We would like to explore the idea of Nation to Nation protocols to allow us to share access to old growth cedar from Heiltsuk territory for canoes and ceremonial house logs, in exchange for financial resources to cover the costs of building the Heiltsuk Bighouse to host the 2014 Tribal Journeys. Another goal is to organize an intertribal exchange between the Heiltsuk and Washington State tribes to share information about governance, resources management, business and investment.

Please support Qatuwas 2014

We are a small community with limited resources, however, we are determined to make Qatuwas 2014 a success. We are seeking support from other First Nations, private and public donors.

Your support will allow us to organize this gathering with a dedicated team of staff and volunteers to take care of accommodation, transportation, food, sanitation needs, festival logistics, protocol planning, support for Big House construction, programming and communications.

We believe that bringing together youth and elders to celebrate our traditions and culture will strengthen us as a people and a community.

Qatuwas 2014 will let our youth experience the importance of the Glwa that connects us so much to our lands and seas. It fills our elders with pride to see our culture and traditions continue to live on through our young people.

The Heiltsuk Hemas (Hereditary Chiefs) and the Heiltsuk Tribal Council are proud to support Qatuwas 2014.

To discuss trade and barter possibilities contact:

Kathy Brown Email: canoe1993@gmail.com | Heiltsuk Tribal Council, Box 880, Bella Bella, BC, V0T 1Z0

The Bella Bella Big House – Heart of our Culture

Tribal Journeys to Bella Bella 2014

Fresh Columbia River Chinook Salmon! Tribes Open Sale Memorial Day Weekend

Courtesy Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish CommissionFresh-caught fish for sale on the Columbia River — Courtesy Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission
Fresh-caught fish for sale on the Columbia River

Indian Country Today

For Memorial Day weekend, leaders from the Umatilla, Yakama, Warm Springs and Nez Perce tribes opened a two-night commercial gillnet fishery that will bring ample amounts of fresh spring chinook to the salmon-loving public. The latest fishery comes on the heels of an above average spring chinook run which should reach 224,000 returning adults. This spring’s commercial fishery will be the largest in the last four years.

“The tribes are just one the many communities benefiting from this year’s spring chinook run,” said Paul Lumley, Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission’s executive director. “For the first time in four years, we are thrilled to share the coveted spring chinook salmon with our loyal customers that appreciate fresh and locally-caught fish.”

A tribal fisher checks his nets along the Columbia River. (Courtesy Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission)

Indian fishers may be found selling fish at a number of locations along the river including Marine Park at Cascade Locks, Lone Pine at The Dalles, and the boat launch near Roosevelt, Washington as well as other locations. Commercial sales will not occur on Corps of Engineers property at Bonneville Dam. Information on where the day’s catch is being sold is available by calling Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission’s salmon marketing program at (888) 289-1855 or visiting the salmon marketing website http://www.critfc.org/harvest. Price is determined at the point of sale and sales are cash only.

The tribal fishery is protected by treaties made with the federal government in 1855, where the right to fish at all usual and accustomed fishing places in the Columbia River basin was reserved. The tribal treaty right extends beyond ceremonial and subsistence fisheries to commercial sales. The Columbia River fisheries are adjusted throughout the season in accordance with management agreements and observed returns.

Grain Car Derailment Could Have Been Oil: Quinault Raise Alarm Again

KXRO: If this grain were oil…. The third train-car derailment in as many weeks has Pacific Northwest tribes that oppose oil-rail transport on edge. — KXRO
: If this grain were oil…. The third train-car derailment in as many weeks has Pacific Northwest tribes that oppose oil-rail transport on edge.

Indian Country Today

It has happened again, this time not with oil but with grain.

However, the Quinault Nation pointed out on May 16, the derailment of a grain train in Grays Harbor County is all the affirmation needed to show that transporting something more hazardous, namely oil, in this manner has too much chance of ending badly.

“Another train derailment in Grays Harbor County? Three in three weeks? Rails ripped up, Cars tipped over. Cargo spilled out,” said Quinault Indian Nation President Fawn Sharp in a statement. “That cargo may have been grain this morning, but it might just as well have been oil, and that would have been disastrous.”

Sharp was alluding to a May 15 incident in which seven cars carrying grain tipped over when 11 cars on the train they were part of derailed. It was the third such occurrence in as many weeks on the network of tracks operated by Puget Sound & Pacific Railway in the Grays Harbor area, the Quinault statement said. This came right on the heels of two earlier derailments—one on April 29, when a grain car tipped over in Aberdeen, and another on May 9 in east Aberdeen, when some cars came off their tracks, the Quinault said.

The cargo was different, but the propensity of train cars to derail no matter what they were carrying says that transporting oil via this method is not safe, the Quinault said. Around the country and in Canada, derailments of trains bearing crude oil, much of it from oil sands and deemed especially flammable, have resulted in destruction and even death.

Lynchburg Oil Train Explosion Refuels Rail-Terminal Opposition in Northwest

However, Puget Sound & Pacific Railway, a division of Genessee & Wyoming, said it was investigating the cause of the derailment.

“This series of minor derailments is a highly unusual, unacceptable occurrence and subject to a rigorous investigation,” company spokesperson Michael Williams, Genesee & Wyoming, told radio station KXRO on May 16. “The first two derailments were caused by localized failure of railroad ties that were saturated with moisture from recent heavy rains. Other locations experiencing this issue have been identified and are being corrected prior to receiving another train. The cause of yesterday’s derailment is still being determined.”

Several tribes in the Northwest are opposing railroad terminals in or near their territory that would handle oil and coal. Oil traffic in particular has troubled the Quinault.

“Now, one-two-three, it’s as easy as that. Any argument in favor of bringing Big Oil into our region has been knocked out cold,” said Sharp in the statement. “As we have consistently stated, our people and our treaty-protected natural resources are jeopardized by these oil shipments. This danger is real. We have invested millions of dollars to protect and restore the ecological integrity of our region, and we will not allow Big Oil to destroy it.”

Free days at Washington State Parks during June

Monica Brown, Tulalip News

This June, Washington State Parks (WSP) will be hosting three “free days”, June 7, 8 and 14^th and will not require payment for day-use. In honor of National Trails Day and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Free Fishing Weekend, June 7^th and 8^thand National Get Outdoors Day on June 14^th will all be “free days”. Some nearby popular WSP include Deception Pass, Mount Pilchuck, Fort Casey, Birch Bay and Larrabee State Parks.

All WSP’s “free days” apply only to day use (not overnight stays or rented facilities). A Discover Pass is still required to access lands managed by the Washington state departments of Natural Resources and Fish & Wildlife.

Discover Pass and Day-use

$30 annual Discover Pass and $10 day pass’s can be purchased at a license dealer, by phone or online. *transaction fees do apply.

Fort Casey State ParkPicture source:Washington State Parks — Fort Casey State Park
Picture source:
Washington State Parks

Snohomish County Parks

These “free days” do not apply to Snohomish County parks of which only some require a day-use or annual permit. For frequent users of Snohomish County Parks, they offer an annual permit pass that can be used at all county parks that charge a day-use fee (Flowing Lake Park, Kayak Point Park, Wyatt Park, and Wenberg Park).

Permits can be purchased for $7.00 at the Welcome Center Pay for day use, $70 for annual *transaction fees do apply. Purchases can be made online, at the Parks Administration office (Willis Tucker Park) and, in most cases, at the parks where day-use fees are required.

Willis Tucker ParkSource: Snohomish County Parks — Willis Tucker Park
Source: Snohomish County Parks

WSP Information Center
Ph: (360) 902-8844 (8 a.m. – 5 p.m. Monday – Friday)
E-mail: infocent@parks.wa.gov

Snohomish County Parks and Recreation information

6705 Puget Park Dr. Snohomish, WA 98296

Ph: (425) 388-6600