CDA Tribe Increases Non-Resident Fees

[westbranch]

This seems in line with a lot of other recent posts. However, also important to note that many (most?) reservations do not allow any big game hunting within tribal boundaries for non-tribal members, even on private land.

Non-residents (so including Idaho residents not living within CDA Tribe boundaries) will have to pay $600 for a big game permit. $150 for upland game.

https://www.cdatribe-nsn.gov/nr/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2021/02/2021_resident_nonresident_regulations-final.pdf

 

[El Jason]

Whoa....that’s on top of what the Idaho tags cost as well!

 

[TheTone]

I’d wait to see how this plays out before I’d spend a dime. Decent chance it will end up in the court system

 

[bobbydean]

CHEYENNE?

 

[44hunter45]

Are there people just dying to hunt GMU 5?

As long as I get to fish the chain lakes, I'm happy.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Doesn’t look like there are public (federal) lands within the reservation. Seems legal and reasonable for tribal lands, no different from National Wildlife Refuges or state agencies requiring tags and permits beyond those of the state DNR.

The gray area in my mind would be private lands owned by non-tribal members within the reservation.

 

[westbranch]

Are there people just dying to hunt GMU 5?

As long as I get to fish the chain lakes, I'm happy.

There are almost double the hunters in unit 5 for both deer and elk compared to 15 years ago. No sign of the growth stopping. I was planning on checking spots out for turkeys and whitetails around unit 5 this year. Haven't hunted it before. Easy to get to for day hunts for me, especially during the week when I can get out.

I do not think IDFG enforces the tribe's hunting permits at all. But they do enforce the tribe's fishing permits.

 

[morley.tyler]

There are so many great spots in that area that are NOT on the Rez. If you object to their fee policy, vote with your wallet.

 

[westbranch]

Doesn’t look like there are public (federal) lands within the reservation. Seems legal and reasonable for tribal lands, no different from National Wildlife Refuges or state agencies requiring tags and permits beyond those of the state DNR.

The gray area in my mind would be private lands owned by non-tribal members within the reservation.

The small parcels of state land are open to hunting. And the majority of the corporates timberlands are open to hunting through the large tracts program. $1/acre lease using license $s. Due to this I think IDFG is going to have to come out with some sort of position on the tribal position relatively soon. https://idfg.idaho.gov/access/large-tracts

There are no open seasons on private non-tribal land located within WA, MT, OR, AZ reservations from what I can tell. So ID reservations seem to be the exception.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

The small parcels of state land are open to hunting. And the majority of the corporates timberlands are open to hunting through the large tracts program. $1/acre lease using license $s. Due to this I think IDFG is going to have to come out with some sort of position on the tribal position relatively soon. https://idfg.idaho.gov/access/large-tracts

There are no open seasons on private non-tribal land located within WA, MT, OR, AZ reservations from what I can tell. So ID reservations seem to be the exception.

How much jurisdiction does the tribe have over non-tribal members within the bounds of the res?

Speeding tickets, property taxes, etc for non-tribal members living within that boundary.

Is it like a quasi country or county within the start or so tribal laws only apply to members of the tribe?

 

[westbranch]

There are so many great spots in that area that are NOT on the Rez. If you object to their fee policy, vote with your wallet.

I definitely agree with that, and I am sure reducing pressure is one of goals of the new fees. But with the state and corporate timberlands that are open to hunting within reservation boundaries I am interested to see where this goes.

 

[morley.tyler]

Are you coming from North or South of the Rez?

 

[westbranch]

North, I live in CDA.

 

[Mica Man]

$10.00 for a yearly tribal permit to hunt on the rez was a bargain while it lasted and I utilized the shit out of it! Was my go to for deer, turkeys, and pheasants. Just minutes down the road from my house. Lots of private timber land owned by Bennett and Stimson.

 

[westbranch]

How much jurisdiction does the tribe have over non-tribal members within the bounds of the res?

Speeding tickets, property taxes, etc for non-tribal members living within that boundary.

Is it like a quasi country or county within the start or so tribal laws only apply to members of the tribe?

Not sure at all, I have searched some but haven't found a whole lot. I grew up near a reservation in MN and you could get pulled over on state hwys by reservation police.

 

[44hunter45]

I thought I should actually follow the link and read the document before I post any more snide remarks. Thanks @westbranch for posting.
I might have stumbled into a violation of this without knowing. I've now saved this so I can dive deeper later.

In practice it means I will now simply make sure I'm not in this geography hunting or fishing. I still maintain there is a lot of good hunting to be had close to the city of CDA that is not in GMU 5

Opinion wise - The tribe does run their own management program and they need to fund it. Alaskan Tribal trespass fees run into 4 digits. However, if you are going to charge for a resource, you better make sure folks can't get it somewhere else. I retain the right to hunt elsewhere.

I feel for the tribe when I see all the glass palaces and gated communities being built along the shore of the lake. There have been ongoing legal issues with the definition of trespass with the treaty hunting rights. If you google "CDA Tribal trespass case", you get a list going back years. The local real estate agents should be informing all these out of state buyers that the tribe still claims right of access to ALL lands within the Reservation boundaries.

There are also landowners gating some of the fishing access roads on the east side of Chacolet. I suspect they are actually blocking easements, but I am not going to be the guy to test it. I spent a lot of time and gas finding a legal route in to The Trestle to fish, I see now that is within the tribal boundary. I'll either have to pay the tribal fee, or go else where for northerns.

@wllm1313 - Yes, you can get ticketed or arested by a CDA tribal LEO. They are sworn LEOs and have been through Idaho POST certification.

 

[44hunter45]

BTW-

Here is handy file for Google Earth. You can export to OnX and know which side of the line you are on.

https://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/GENZ2018/kml/cb_2018_us_aiannh_500k.zip

 

[Hunting Wife]

How much jurisdiction does the tribe have over non-tribal members within the bounds of the res?

Speeding tickets, property taxes, etc for non-tribal members living within that boundary.

Is it like a quasi country or county within the start or so tribal laws only apply to members of the tribe?

A lot, at least in Montana. They are a sovereign nation, and manage their own wildlife, permitting, and enforcement.
Even if you own land within the boundary of the res, you can’t hunt it without following tribal laws.
EDIT: looks like there is some big game hunting on some reservations.

Other states may have other arrangements with resident tribes.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

A lot, at least in Montana. They are a sovereign nation, and manage their own wildlife, permitting, and enforcement.
Even if you own land within the boundary of the res, you can’t hunt it without following tribal laws. For most of Montana, I believe that means no big game hunting for non-tribal members as well.

Other states may have other arrangements with resident tribes.

I guess that's what I'm driving at; seems like you should either get your tag from the tribe or the state not both. If you get the tag from the state then the tribe should only be able to regulate access to "public" tribal lands. If you get your tag from then tribe then yeah, full jurisdiction, just like Canada.

I can't think of another situation where an agency or group has jurisdiction for land they don't own.

 

[morley.tyler]

I can't think of another situation where an agency or group has jurisdiction for land they don't own.

Do you know who hasn't asked this question in a couple of hundred years?

The Coeur d'Alene Indains