Cooperative Aquaculture Agreements between Private Tideland Owners and the Native Tribes in Puget Sound - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 22
About This Presentation
Title:

Cooperative Aquaculture Agreements between Private Tideland Owners and the Native Tribes in Puget Sound

Description:

This continues until 1969, when between 60 and 80 percent of tidelands were privately owned. ... Monthly fecal coliform monitoring with DOH. Lease Program ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:24
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 23
Provided by: scsea
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Cooperative Aquaculture Agreements between Private Tideland Owners and the Native Tribes in Puget Sound


1
Cooperative Aquaculture Agreements between
Private Tideland Owners and the Native Tribes in
Puget Sound
2
Brief History of Private Tidelands
  • 1855 Point no Point treaty signed Tribes given
    fishing and hunting rights in usual and
    accustomed areas in exchange for land.
  • 1889 Washington State begins selling tidelands
    to private owners. This continues until 1969,
    when between 60 and 80 percent of tidelands were
    privately owned.

3
  • 1974 Boldt Decision (US v Washington) Tribes
    right to fish in their UA is affirmed for salmon
    and groundfish. Did not address shellfish.
  • 1994 Rafeedie Decision Extended the ruling of
    Judge Boldt to include NATURALLY OCCURRING
    shellfish both in public waterways and on private
    and public tidelands.

4
  • Rafeedie decision brought up the issue of
    shellfish growers, and the missed opportunity of
    tribes in harvesting the original natural stock.
  • 2007 Shellfish Growers Settlement allowed
    growers who had evidence of cultivation prior to
    Rafeedie exclusive rights to pre-existing farmed
    tidelands. The tribes, in exchange, received
    funds for tideland purchase and enhancement.

5
Reestablishing tribal clam harvests
  • Suquamish Tribe did a qualitative shellfish
    population study throughout its exclusive
    (non-overlapping) UA in the late 1990s.
  • Determined that the area that best combined
    shellfish density, historical significance was in
    Dyes Inlet.

6
Dyes Inlet
7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
Dyes Inlet Study
  • Cooperated with County Health, State DOH, US Navy
  • Dye release and drogue studies done to model
    impacts of storm water and sewage spills to area
  • Study changed classification in North Dyes from
    unclassified to conditional.

10
Drogue and Current Meter Study
11
Open Areas in N. Dyes Inlet
12
Dyes Inlet Manila Clam Harvest
  • Approx. 180 private properties
  • Three year rotational harvest of tribes 50 of
    shellfish. Average of 95 recovery in 3 years of
    manila clams.
  • Actively harvested since 2004 by individual
    tribal members
  • Hand forks only, individual quotas, 40-70 tribal
    members per harvest.
  • Most often lower income tribal members
    participate.

13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
50-80 Shellfish Biomass Surveys per year
16
Monthly fecal coliform monitoring with DOH
17
Lease Program
  • Began leasing properties for harvest and
    enhancement in 2005
  • Property owner signs a 10 year, 3 harvest
    contract. Paid by stumpage fee after each
    harvest.
  • Grant Funded- tribal members still have full
    income opportunity. Mostly used by lowest-income
    individuals.
  • 1-3 properties (0.5-1 acre) planted annually with
    plans for expansion.

18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
Future Plans
  • Expansion to other areas Concentration in Dyes
    inlet leaves harvest vulnerable to CSO events
  • Tideland Purchase and Enhancement Working with
    realtors to find new areas within UA to purchase
    and plant.

21
Questions?
22
Thanks to
  • Suquamish Tribal Fisheries
  • Suquamish Museum
  • US Navy, Washington DOH, Kitsap County Health
    District, WDFW, NWIFC
  • Kitsap County Assessors office
  • NOAA
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com