4 ms·

Does this mean the tribes are basically (unilaterally?) claiming economic rights over these waters? It's not clear from this article if this statement is expli

Does this mean the tribes are basically (unilaterally?) claiming economic rights over these waters? It's not clear from this article if this statement is explicitly supported by the CA gov.

dheera 3y ago
I mean, they were here before the CA gov, it's just that the CA gov has more firepower, tasers, and handcuffs, so we listen to them. Otherwise I wish the natives would give us some tax cuts too.
- pphysch 3y ago
  I'm not taking sides, I'm trying to understand the politics of this announcement.
  - junofan 3y ago
    I think they run the casinos up around Redwood.
  - genter 3y ago
    I'm trying to understand it too. > We do not seek the permission of other governments > these waters are also claimed by the State of California, who through its California Natural Resources Agency Pathways to 30x30: Accelerating Conservation of California’s Nature Report, support the concept of Indigenous Marine Stewardship So I guess the State of California theoretically supports IMSAs, but does the state support this one? Does the state need to approve an IMSA for it to be official? Or are tribes independent enough that they can just declare it?
jker 3y ago
The statement notes that the waters are “also claimed” by the California state government, which “supports the concept” of tribal stewardship. This whole thing seems pretty insubstantial.
happytiger 3y ago
Good question. I have no idea. I doubt there is precedent! And I can’t wait to see how this gets legally tested — native rights haven’t been properly respected and these kinds if tests are deeply important in restoring rightful sovereignty and tribal agency to our hosts and neighbors. I’m chuckling as I imagine they’re going to do a better job of protecting and managing the Earth than the government of California and Oregon have done over the last 150 odd years.
redavni 3y ago
"We do not seek the permission of other governments and can no longer wait to act to preserve and protect this culturally and ecologically important place" This is SOP for California politics. CA jurisdictions have been ceding territory to Indian tribes for a while. This is purely an economically motivated cash grab layered under miles of politically correct double-speak. There is an indian tribe in Montana that has a massive coal mine that wanted to run a rail line to a port through the area that was shut down last year. This is possibly another strategy to do the same thing.
- genter 3y ago
  I don't know what economic value this part of the ocean has. There aren't any fish left. We're currently in the planning stage of a wind farm here, but that's in deeper water outside of this zone.
  - thghtihadanacct 3y ago
    Do you live on the California coast? There are plenty of fish, mostly because of so many protected areas. Maybe you are talking about commercial trawlers or something but if its coming to subsistence fishing there is more than enough to eat. Apparently, these groups claim they know how to harvest mussels during blooms ... Maybe they are immune to cyanotoxins etc. I just wonder where they have been practicing.
- zopa 3y ago
  Sure but also; > and be it further resolved, these waters are also claimed by the State of California, who through its California Natural Resources Agency Pathways to 30x30: Accelerating Conservation of California’s Nature Report, support the concept of Indigenous Marine Stewardship Do you have any evidence pointing towards this being a money grab? That’s a serious accusation.
  - redavni 3y ago
    Yes, the evidence is that they said it in the same press release. "Tribal and State co-management of critical ecosystems to protect and support cultural lifeways and economies" Follow the money. Everything else is bullshit.

Does this mean the tribes are basically (unilaterally?) claiming economic rights over these waters? It's not clear from this article if this statement is explicitly supported by the CA gov.

dheera 3y ago

I mean, they were here before the CA gov, it's just that the CA gov has more firepower, tasers, and handcuffs, so we listen to them. Otherwise I wish the natives would give us some tax cuts too.

pphysch 3y ago
I'm not taking sides, I'm trying to understand the politics of this announcement.
- junofan 3y ago
  I think they run the casinos up around Redwood.
- genter 3y ago
  I'm trying to understand it too. > We do not seek the permission of other governments > these waters are also claimed by the State of California, who through its California Natural Resources Agency Pathways to 30x30: Accelerating Conservation of California’s Nature Report, support the concept of Indigenous Marine Stewardship So I guess the State of California theoretically supports IMSAs, but does the state support this one? Does the state need to approve an IMSA for it to be official? Or are tribes independent enough that they can just declare it?

jker 3y ago

The statement notes that the waters are “also claimed” by the California state government, which “supports the concept” of tribal stewardship. This whole thing seems pretty insubstantial.

happytiger 3y ago

Good question. I have no idea. I doubt there is precedent! And I can’t wait to see how this gets legally tested — native rights haven’t been properly respected and these kinds if tests are deeply important in restoring rightful sovereignty and tribal agency to our hosts and neighbors. I’m chuckling as I imagine they’re going to do a better job of protecting and managing the Earth than the government of California and Oregon have done over the last 150 odd years.

redavni 3y ago

"We do not seek the permission of other governments and can no longer wait to act to preserve and protect this culturally and ecologically important place" This is SOP for California politics. CA jurisdictions have been ceding territory to Indian tribes for a while. This is purely an economically motivated cash grab layered under miles of politically correct double-speak. There is an indian tribe in Montana that has a massive coal mine that wanted to run a rail line to a port through the area that was shut down last year. This is possibly another strategy to do the same thing.

genter 3y ago
I don't know what economic value this part of the ocean has. There aren't any fish left. We're currently in the planning stage of a wind farm here, but that's in deeper water outside of this zone.
- thghtihadanacct 3y ago
  Do you live on the California coast? There are plenty of fish, mostly because of so many protected areas. Maybe you are talking about commercial trawlers or something but if its coming to subsistence fishing there is more than enough to eat. Apparently, these groups claim they know how to harvest mussels during blooms ... Maybe they are immune to cyanotoxins etc. I just wonder where they have been practicing.
zopa 3y ago
Sure but also; > and be it further resolved, these waters are also claimed by the State of California, who through its California Natural Resources Agency Pathways to 30x30: Accelerating Conservation of California’s Nature Report, support the concept of Indigenous Marine Stewardship Do you have any evidence pointing towards this being a money grab? That’s a serious accusation.
- redavni 3y ago
  Yes, the evidence is that they said it in the same press release. "Tribal and State co-management of critical ecosystems to protect and support cultural lifeways and economies" Follow the money. Everything else is bullshit.