Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n

What happened

In 1854 and 1855 the United States made a series of treaties with Indian tribes in what is now Washington State. The tribes relinquished their interest in lands in exchange for payments, relatively small parcels reserved for their exclusive use, and other guarantees, including protection of their "right of taking fish at usual and accustomed grounds and stations ... in common with all citizens of the Territory."

In 1970 the United States, on its own behalf and as trustee for seven Indian tribes, sued the State of Washington in federal district court. It sought an interpretation of the treaties and an order requiring the State to protect the Indians' share of runs of salmon and steelhead. The District Court held that the Indians were entitled to a 45 to 50 percent share of the harvestable fish passing through their tribal fishing grounds. The Court of Appeals affirmed. But the Washington Supreme Court then ruled that the Fisheries Department could not comply with the federal order, because the treaties gave no right to a share of the runs.

On July 2, 1979, the Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Stevens, held that the treaty words were not meant merely to guarantee access to fishing sites and an equal chance for individual Indians to catch fish. They instead secure to the tribes "a right to harvest a share of each run of anadromous fish that passes through tribal fishing areas."

The Court said an equitable measure should initially divide the harvestable portion of each run into approximately equal treaty and nontreaty shares, then reduce the treaty share if tribal needs can be met with less.

Good to know. The Court's measure is approximately equal treaty and nontreaty shares, reduced if tribal needs can be met with less, rather than a flat 'up to half.'

Summarized with AI assistance from 3 sources and checked against their words; not yet reviewed by historians or by the nations. Report an error