FOLLOW US

SEATTLE — U.S. District Judge Ricardo S. Martinez ruled Wednesday in favor of the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe in a long-running dispute over fishing rights near Puget Sound, concluding that the Stillaguamish Tribe failed to demonstrate historical evidence of fishing in the contested marine areas. This decision marks a significant moment in a legal battle rooted in the landmark 1974 ruling by U.S. District Judge George Hugo Boldt, which affirmed Native American tribes' rights to fish in their "usual and accustomed" (U&A) fishing grounds under an 1855 treaty.

The dispute arose when the Stillaguamish Tribe sought a legal determination that their U&A fishing grounds included saltwater areas around Whidbey Island and Camano Island, including Saratoga Pass, Penn Cove, and Skagit Bay. The Upper Skagit Indian Tribe opposed this, arguing that the Stillaguamish Tribe had no historical basis for claiming these marine areas as part of their traditional fishing grounds.

On remand from the Ninth Circuit, Judge Martinez reviewed expert testimony and historical evidence before concluding that the Stillaguamish Tribe had not established that they customarily fished in the claimed marine waters. The judge noted that the evidence presented by the Stillaguamish's expert, historian Chris Friday, was speculative and failed to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the tribe fished in saltwater areas near Puget Sound during treaty times.

"Critically for this order, all of Stillaguamish's testimony and exhibits are speculative as to the question of fishing in the claimed waters," Judge Martinez wrote in his ruling.

The decision to close this subproceeding under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(c) comes after the Upper Skagit tribe's successful motion for judgment on partial findings. The Stillaguamish Tribe had previously appealed a similar ruling to the Ninth Circuit, which directed Judge Martinez to reexamine the evidence. However, after the latest review, the judge found the historical record insufficient to support the Stillaguamish's claims.

The underlying case is part of the broader U.S. v. Washington litigation, which stems from the Boldt decision that recognized tribal fishing rights in the Pacific Northwest.

The Stillaguamish Tribe is represented by Rob Roy Smith of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP and in-house by Raven Arroway-Healing. The Upper Skagit Indian Tribe is represented by David S. Hawkins in-house and by Tyler L. Farmer and Ariel A. Martinez of Harrigan Leyh Farmer & Thomsen LLP. The state of Washington is represented by the Washington State Office of the Attorney General.

The ruling could have significant implications for the fishing rights of the Stillaguamish Tribe, although it remains to be seen whether they will seek further appeals following this decision.