If it weren't the English that conquered the Native Americans it simply would have been another country. Spain perhaps?

What is the gold paint thing?

Huffing, I’d presume.

Do the people on here that support this allow unregulated. subsistence hunting/fishing where they live and hunt?
I'd add trapping but apparently indigenous people don't use fur anymore

I watched the Crow hunters walk right through the bison last year to get to the big old bull elk that were forced down by the heavy snows we had. They killed a bunch of them right up till they dropped their antlers. That’s not subsistence hunting. It’s drug money, like the other fella said.

Think about how much this applies to the 2nd Ammendment.

Good point Muskeg.

Same old same old. The antis love it. Just saying.....

Such complaints are common in Alaska and may or may not be accurate. Rural subsistence hunters complain about urban Alaska hunters wasting meat. Urban Alaska hunters complain about rural subsistence hunters wasting meat. And both complain about non-resident hunters leaving meat on carcasses.

All are guilty from time to time, and many are innocently accused as wars rage over hunting opportunities

https://craigmedred.news/2023/10/02/deadly-flights/

We have New York Mohawks & other Haudenosaunee Iroquois who
are currently spearing, netting, & snagging pacific salmon in Lake Ontario
region's Salmon River at Pulaski, N.Y.

It's political brinkmanship between the State of New York & the tribes.

I don't have any problem with it especially if NYS is forced to the bargaining table
to fulfill their obligations set forth in the 1794 Treaty of Canandaigua between
the six nations of the Iroquois Confederacy & the United States of America.

walleyed

Wall eyed no skin in this thread but (Pacific salmon in lake Ontario kind of a long swim) ????

They were stocked back in the 60s.

upstateny thank you for the info interesting

Racist much?
(BTW, my opinion of you has not been lessened by your post, only because it was so low to begin with. Carry on making friends and influencing others...)

Personally, the way I see deer hunting regulations is that a State allows you to kill, lets say, 3 deer per season. One by bow, one by muzzleloader, and one by rifle/shotgun. How about just let me decide which tool to use to kill 3 deer on private land?
All of this banter about what Natives can use to kill their quota on their land rings empty on me.

Why should they enjoy OUR constitutional rights?They say they have Tribal Sovereignty on their treaty land.Then stay on that land to hunt and govern themselves.Step off the reservation,,then you have to follow OUR rules.Problem is,,they don't want to have to follow any rules or limits no matter where they are.And I don't agree with that.

Treaty lands & Reservation land are two different things.

When the United States Federal Government signed the
Fort Stanwix and Canandaigua treaties with the Iroquois in the
1790's, the Six Nations of the Haudenosaunee were guaranteed
hunting/fishing/trapping RIGHTS within their historical territories.

Indian Reservations had not yet been created during the era in
which those treaties were signed.

So restricting hunting / fishing / trapping rights only to current
Reservation lands is a clear cut violation of those treaties.

walleyed

Were those rights guarenteed by treaty clearly defined as unrestricted, anything-goes, RIGHTS? or simply the right to hunt/fish/and trap outside reservation boundaries, with resonable conservation restrictions that non-band members follow?

The restrictions were as long as the grass grows and the water flows.
That type of wording was almost always put in the treatys by the indians to reflect permanence.

Once again,

There were no Indian reservations in
New York State in the 1790's.

The treaties guaranteed hunting/fishing/trapping RIGHTS
to members of the Iroquois confederacy in perpetuity
within the historical territory they inhabited before Europeans arrived.

There were no boundary restrictions that were limited to reservations
because the concept of Indian Reservations did not yet exist
in the 1790's in New York State.

w

Walleye without reading all the treaties one wouldn't know there present rights. They may have given or gained rights in later treaties. Just because it was agreed to in past treaties doesn't mean they couldn't have agreed to different terms later.