United States of America, and Lummi Indian Tribe, Intervenor-Appellant v. State of Washington

Good Law
92 Daily Journal DAR 9124·969 F.2d 752·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 14726
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 30, 199290-35887California1,894 words

Opinion

Opinion

Leavy, J.

FACTS

This interlocutory appeal is about the location of the eastern boundary of the Lummi Indian Reservation in the State of Washington. The State of Washington contends that the eastern boundary of the reservation is the line of low tide on the eastern side of the peninsula that contains the Lummi Reservation. The Lummi Indians contend that the eastern boundary is a straight line from Point Francis to Treaty Rock because that is what Governor Stevens represented to them in 1855 at the Treaty of Point Elliott and because the Executive Order of 1873 is ambiguous. According to the Lummi, the reservation includes the waters of Bellingham Bay west of that line.

This controversy arises in the context of continuing efforts to allocate the fish resources of the northwest United States between Indians and non-Indians: in this instance, the fish in the waters of Bellingham Bay. The court could not rule on the prop er allocation of fish until it decided whether, according to an Executive Order of 1873, part of Bellingham Bay is included in the Lummi Indian Reservation. If so, the Lummi Indians would have an exclusive right to fish within the boundaries of their reservation. Washington v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.