Introduction to United States v. Washington
Treaties with tribes in the Pacific Northwest reserved their right to fish. E.g., the Treaty of Point Elliott (Jan. 22, 1855), provided:
Article 5. The right of taking fish at usual and accustomed grounds and stations is further secured to said Indians in common with all citizens of the Territory, and of erecting temporary houses for the purpose of curing, together with the privilege of hunting and gathering roots and berries on open and unclaimed lands. Provided, however, That they shall not take shell-fish from any beds staked or cultivated by citizens.
But by the 1950s and 1960s, there were conflicts between commercial fishing interests and Natives. The state enforced fishing regulations against tribal members. After protests on the Puyallup River, in September 1970 the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Washington filed a suit against the state of Washington on behalf of the United States and as trustee for seven tribes. Other tribes intervened, the State Department of Fisheries and the State Game Commission, and the Washington Reef Net Owners Association were included as defendants.
The judge assigned to the case was George Boldt, who issued his first decision on Feb. 12, 1974. The decision gave the tribes who were parties to the treaties the right to half the catch, with the tribes and the state managing the fishery together. Even though a judge issues hundreds or thousands of rulings in a career, this case became known to the public as the Boldt decision.
The district court retains jurisdiction over disputes arising in the case.
- Boldt Decision: United States v. State of Washington [HistoryLink]Article by Phil Dougherty (8/24/2020) provides background and discusses impact of the case.
Agencies
Judge Boldt's initial ruling required the state and the tribes to manage the fishery together.
Opinions in United States v. Washington
"We cannot think of a more comprehensive and complex case than this."
United States v. Washington has generated many published opinions, from the district court, the Ninth Circuit, and even the Supreme Court.
Over 30 years ago, Judge Eugene Wright remarked, "We cannot think of a more comprehensive and complex case than this. Since 1974, there have been numerous supplemental proceedings with voluminous filings. In the proceedings below, this was one of 14 sub-proceedings and over 11,000 papers had been filed with the district court." United States v. Washington, 901 F.2d 772, 775 (9th Cir. 1990). And the case has continued to generate filings since then.
Most of the links below are to the Caselaw Access Project, since many readers of this guide might not have access to premium online databases. For each case, CAP has both a text version and a PDF (with copyrighted headnotes redacted). There are also links to other public sources, such as Google Scholar and the Supreme Court's website.
1970s
- United States v. Washington, 384 F. Supp. 312 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 12,1974) (Boldt, J.)Boldt I.
"Because the right of each treaty tribe to take anadromous fish arises from a treaty with the United States, that right is reserved and protected under the supreme law of the land, does not depend on state law, is distinct from rights or privileges held by others, and may not be qualified by any action of the state."
p. 402 - United States v. Washington, 520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975)Digitized case briefs available here
- Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n v. Tollefson, 87 Wash. 2d 417 (Aug. 12, 1976)Washington Supreme Court declined to issue advisory opinion on question state law gives Director of State Department of Fisheries the power to regulate fishing in the waters under its jurisdiction with the object of making a greater number of fish available to the Indians at their usual and customary fishing grounds, in compliance with the order of Judge Boldt.
Digitized case briefs available here - Puget Sound Gillnetters Ass'n v. Moos, 88 Wash. 2d 677 (June 9, 1977)Holding that state Director of Fisheries lacked authority to issue regulations to follow United State v. Washington ruling.
Digitized case briefs available here - Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n v. Tollefson, 89 Wash. 2d 276 (Nov. 23, 1977)"We hold that the director of the Department of Fisheries of the State of Washington does not have authority to apportion fish to conform to the Federal District Court decision,
- Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n v. Tollefson, 89 Wash. 2d 276 (Nov. 23, 1977)"We hold that the director of the Department of Fisheries of the State of Washington does not have authority to apportion fish to conform to the Federal District Court decision,
- United States v. Washington, 573 F.2d 1118 (9th Cir. April 24, 1978)Dismissing state's appeal as moot.
Digitized case briefs available here - United States v. Washington, 459 F. Supp. 1020 (W.D. Wash. June 30, 1978)Boldt II.
Compilation of major post-trial substantive orders. - Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n, 443 U.S. 658 (July 2, 1979)Digitized case briefs available here
"Because of the widespread defiance of the District Court’s orders, this litigation has assumed unusual significance. We granted certiorari in the state and federal cases to interpret this important treaty provision - Puget Sound Gillnetters Ass'n v. United States District Court, 605 F.2d 492 (9th Cir. Sept. 14, 1979)On remand from Supreme Court, remands cases to W.D. Wash. and D. Ore.
Digitized case briefs available here - Washington v. United States, 444 U.S. 816 (Oct. 1, 1979)Granting motion to modify footnote 16 of opinion.
- Puget Sound Gillnetters Ass'n v. Moos, 92 Wash. 2d 939 (Nov. 30, 1979)"We modify our earlier decisions in Puget Sound Gillnetters Ass'n v. Moos, 88 Wn.2d 677, 565 P.2d 1151 (1977) and Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n v. Tollefson, 89 Wn.2d 276, 571 P.2d 1373 (1977) and order the State and the Director in henceforth undertaking management of the state's fisheries to do so in a manner consistent with the United States Supreme Court's treaty interpretations and our opinion here today."
1980s
- United States v. Lower Elwha Tribe, 642 F.2d 1141 (9th Cir. March 23, 1981)Dispute between Lower Elwha and Makah tribes
- United States v. Baker, 641 F.2d 1311 (9th Cir. April 9, 1981)Upholding convictions of 9 people for fishing in violation of injunction in United States v. Washington.
Digitized case briefs available here - United States v. Washington, 694 F.2d 1374 (9th Cir. Nov. 3, 1982)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 694 F.2d 188 (9th Cir. Dec. 7, 1982)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 730 F.2d 1314 (9th Cir. 1984)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 761 F.2d 1404 (9th Cir. May 28, 1985)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 761 F.2d 1419 (9th Cir. May 29, 1985)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Skokomish Indian Tribe, 764 F.2d 670 (9th Cir. June 25, 1985)Dispute between Suquamish and Skokomish tribes over "usual and accustomed fishing places."
Digitized case briefs available here - United States v. Washington, 774 F.2d 1470 (9th Cir. Oct. 29, 1985)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 626 F. Supp. 1405 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 31, 1985)compilation of major post-trial substantive orders, from July 1978 through Dec. 31, 1985
- United States v. Washington, 18 F. Supp. 3d 1082 (W.D. Wash. 1986)compilation of major post-trial substantive orders, Jan. 1, 1985, through Dec. 31, 1986
- United States v. Washington, 813 F.2d 1020 (9th Cir. 1987)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 873 F.2d 240 (9th Cir. 1989)Digitized case briefs available here
1990s
- United States v. Washington, 935 F.2d 1059 (9th Cir. 1991)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 969 F.2d 752 (9th Cir. 1992)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 18 F. Supp. 3d 1172 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 31, 1993)compilation of major post-trial substantive orders, Jan. 1, 1991, through Dec. 31, 1993
- United States v. Washington, 19 F. Supp. 3d 1126 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 31,1994)compilation of major post-trial substantive orders, Jan. 1, 1994, through Dec. 31, 1994
- United States v. Washington, 86 F.3d 1499 (9th Cir. June 12,1996)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 98 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. Oct. 23, 1996)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 19 F. Supp. 3d 1184 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 31, 1996)compilation of major post-trial substantive orders, Jan. 1, 1995, through Dec. 31, 1996
- United States v. Washington, 135 F.3d 618 (9th Circ. Jan. 28, 1998)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 19 F. Supp. 3d 1252 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 31, 1999)compilation of major post-trial substantive orders, Jan. 1, 1997, through Dec. 31, 1999
2000s
- United States v. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, 235 F.3d 429 (9th Cir. Dec. 13, 2000)Muckleshoot Tribe’s saltwater usual and accustomed fishing area under the Boldt Decision limited to Elliott Bay; grant of summary judgment for the Puyallup, Suquamish, and Swinomish Tribes affirmed.
- United States v. Lummi Indian Tribe, 235 F.3d 443 (9th Cir. Dec. 13, 2000)Scope of Lummi Indian Tribe's fishing areas under Boldt decision.
- United States v. Washington, 19 F. Supp. 3d 1317 (W.D. Wash. 2003)compilation of major post-trial substantive orders, Jan. 1, 2000, through Dec. 31, 2003
- United States v. Washington, 394 F.3d 1152 (9th Cir. Jan. 6, 2005)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 20 F. Supp. 3d 777 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 31, 2006)compilation of major post-trial substantive orders, Jan. 1, 2004, through Dec. 31, 2006
- United States v. Washington, 573 F.3d 701 (9th Cir. July 13, 2009)Digitized case briefs available here
- United States v. Washington, 593 F.3d 790 (9th Cir. Dec. 11, 2009) (as amended Jan. 10, 2010)"[T]he Samish Tribe is not entitled to reopening of Washington II because of [its] subsequent federal recognition." p. 800
Digitized case briefs available here
2010s
- United States v. Washington, 20 F. Supp. 3d 899 (W.D. Wash. 2012)compilation of major post-trial substantive orders, Jan. 1, 2008, to Dec. 31, 2012
- United States v. Lummi Nation, 763 F.3d 1180 (9th Cir. Aug. 19, 2014)Fishing territory dispute between the Lummi Nation Tribe and several other tribes. Remand.
- Tulalip Tribes v. Suquamish Indian Tribe, 794 F.3d 1129 (9th Cir. July 27, 2015)Dispute over usual and accustomed fishing grounds of Tulalip Tribes and Suquamish Tribe.
- United States v. Washington, 864 F.3d 1017 (9th Cir. May 19, 2017)Denial of rehearing by panel and denial of rehearing en banc
- United States v. Lummi Nation, 876 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. Dec. 1, 2017)Lummi have treaty right to fish in area west of Whidbey Island.
- Washington v. United States, 584 U.S. ___, 138 S. Ct. 1832 (June 11, 2018) (per curiam)Affirming United States v. Washington, 864 F.3d 1017 (9th Cir. 2017), by an equally divided Court
2020s
Other Fishing Rights Cases in Washington
1900s
1910s
1930s
1940s
- McCauley v. Makah Indian Tribe, 128 F.2d 867 (9th Cir. 1942)Digitized case briefs available here
1950s
- Makah Indian Tribe v. Schoettler, 192 F.2d 224 (9th Cir. 1951)Digitized case briefs available here
1960s
- State v. McCoy, 63 Wash. 2d 421 (Dec. 19, 1963)Digitized case briefs available here
- Department of Game v. Puyallup Tribe, Inc., 70 Wash. 2d 245 (Jan. 1967)Digitized case briefs available here
1970s
- Sohappy v. Smith, 529 F.2d 570 (9th Cir. Jan. 28, 1976)Fishing rights on Columbia River
Digitized case briefs available here - Department of Game v. Puyallup Tribe, Inc., 86 Wash. 2d 664 (April 8, 1976)Digitized case briefs available here
- Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n v. Tollefson, 87 Wash. 2d 417 (Aug. 12, 1976)Washington Supreme Court declined to issue advisory opinion on question state law gives Director of State Department of Fisheries the power to regulate fishing in the waters under its jurisdiction with the object of making a greater number of fish available to the Indians at their usual and customary fishing grounds, in compliance with the order of Judge Boldt.
Digitized case briefs available here - Puget Sound Gillnetters Ass'n v. Moos, 88 Wash. 2d 677 (June 9, 1977)Holding that state Director of Fisheries lacked authority to issue regulations to follow United State v. Washington ruling.
Digitized case briefs available here - Purse Seine Vessel Owners Ass'n v. Moos, 88 Wash. 2d 799 (July 21, 1977)Digitized case briefs available here
- Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n v. Tollefson, 89 Wash. 2d 276 (Nov. 23, 1977)"We hold that the director of the Department of Fisheries of the State of Washington does not have authority to apportion fish to conform to the Federal District Court decision,
1980s
- United States v. Sohappy, 770 F.2d 816 (9th Cir. Sept. 4, 1985)Digitized case briefs available here
1990s
- Sohappy v. Hodel, 911 F.2d 1312 (9th Cir. Aug. 3, 1990)Digitized case briefs available here
Dockets
United States v. Washington began before electronic case filing. The court has posted PDFs of early docket entries:
- Docket entries 1-4888 (9/18/70-8/31/78) 12MB PDF
- Docket entries 4889-10106 (8/31/78-7/10/85) 10MB PDF
- Docket entries 10107-13268 (7/10/85-6/9/93) 10MB PDF
See Special Case Notices (W.D. Wash.) (scroll to the bottom for United States v. Washington).
- United States v. Washington docket (RECAP Archive)Coverage begins June 2, 1983 and continues to present (currently 38 pages).
Case Briefs
In an effort to increase access to materials related to the United States v. Washington and other Washington State tribal fishing rights cases, the Gallagher Law Library digitized all of the relevant Ninth Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court briefs available in its print collection. All of those briefs are freely accessible on the UW Law School's institutional repository, Digital Commons:
Archives
The National Archives at Seattle holds federal district court records—but not for United States v. Washington, since the case is still open. It does have court records for earlier fishing rights cases.
Related records:
- U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Boldt Decision Litigation Background Files, ca. 1974 - ca. 1978 (Record Group 22)
- U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, Records Relating to Fishing Rights, 1972 – 1985 (National Archives in Washington, DC) (Record Group 75)
- U.S. Dep't of Justice, Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Judicial District of Oregon, Records 1899-1973 (Includes some material related to fishing rights. Ask Archives staff for finding aid for Record Group 118.)
- U.S. Dep't of the Interior, Office of the Regional Solicitor, Portland, OR, Selected Litigation Case Files Relating to Indian Fishing and Hunting Rights, 1960 - 1997 (ask Archives staff for finding aid for Record Group 48)
- Bureau of Indian Affairs Records at the National Archives at Seattle
The Washington State Historical Society (Washington State History Museum, in Tacoma) has a collection of Judge Boldt's papers, including 11 boxes of material from United States v. Washington, described in this finding aid.
University of Washington Libraries Special Collections
The University Libraries' manuscripts and archival collections include many materials related to United States v. Washington, including those listed below. For more, search Archives West, which includes other Northwest libraries as well as the UW.
- Alfred John Schweppe papers, 1919-1988Call Number: Suzzallo and Allen Libraries Special Collections Manuscripts/ArchivesFrom finding aid: "The Boldt file contains material collected and generated by Schweppe about the Indian fishing rights case. Schweppe disagreed with Judge Boldt's decision and with the reasoning which sustained it."
- Cooper Family Focus Group and Oral History Interviews, 2000Call Number: Suzzallo and Allen Libraries Special Collections Manuscripts/ArchivesFour interviews (January-February 2000) with members of the Harry Cooper Family, who are enrolled members of the Nooksack Indian Tribe of Washington and fishermen. Focus Group discussion and interviews were conducted by Kristen Shuyler for her Master's thesis in Geography at the University of Washington. Topics are associated with salmon fishing, including traditional native fishing in North Puget Sound, effects of the "Boldt Decision" (U.S. v. Washington, 1974) on fisheries user groups, conflicts among these groups, family life, opinion on current events in fishing regulation and politics, and related topics. Family members interviewed include Harry E. Cooper, Nooksack Tribal Chairman during the 1980s; his wife Laverne Cooper; their son Harry B. Cooper, head of Nooksack Tribal fisheries in the 1970s; Jack Leathers, Harry E. Cooper's cousin; and Jack's wife Pearl Leathers.
- Kenneth McLeod papers, 1934-1985Call Number: Suzzallo and Allen Libraries Special Collections Manuscripts/ArchivesCorrespondence, speeches, writings, reports, legislation, campaign material, and statistics, relating to McLeod's work as secretary of Washington State Sportsmen's Council, primarily concerning the Sockeye Salmon Treaty of 1934-1937, and Initiative 25, campaign against Cowlitz dams, 1956-1961. Includes tape-recorded interview on his efforts to protect fisheries.
From finding aid: "McLeod was an outspoken critic of the Boldt decision on Indian fishing rights. He commented on behalf of the WSSSC on settlement plans proposed by the Federal Task Force on Washington State Fisheries, circa 1977-78." - Lonnie Nelson papers, circa 1930-2000Call Number: Suzzallo and Allen Libraries Special Collections Manuscripts/ArchivesPapers, subject files, petitions, flyers, publications, newsclippings, and correspondence relating to Lonnie's activism on behalf of labor, peace, civil rights, social justice, and Indian rights causes. . . .
- Michael R.Thorp PapersCall Number: Suzzallo and Allen Libraries Special Collections Manuscripts/ArchivesReports, memoranda, and court papers, accumulated by Thorp, while preparing the federal government's case against the State of Washington in phase II of the Boldt fishing rights case, concerning the rights of Indians and salmon fisheries in Washington waters.
Other Unpublished Material in the University Libraries
- Oral History Interviews About Squaxin Island, Washington, 1993Call Number: UW Tacoma Pacific Northwest Studies CHP 1993 no. 01Publication Date: 1993Tribal members Mark, Calvin, and Josephine Peters and James Krise share their connections to Squaxin Island, a reservation located in the southern part of Puget Sound. . . . Mark and Calvin Peters, both tribal fishermen, also comment on the 1974 Boldt Decision, which reaffirmed fishing rights for Washington tribes.
Political and Economic Aspects of Indian-White Culture Contact in Western Washington in the Mid-19th Century by Call Number: Suzzallo and Allen Libraries Stacks E78.W3 L36 1973Publication Date: 1975This is two bound volumes of the individual reports that were prepared by Ms. Lane for the U.S. Dept. of the Interior and the individual Native American Tribes. Washington State Library has a manuscript collection of 8 reports titled Identity, Treaty Status and Fisheries of Washington State Indian tribes, 1975 that are considered supplemental to this title.
Selected Books About United States v. Washington & Related Topics
Treaty Justice by Publication Date: 2024
Empty Nets: Indians, Dams, and the Columbia River, 2d ed. by Publication Date: 2007- Handbook of Western Washington Indian Treaties, with Special Attention to Treaty Fishing Rights by Publication Date: 1979Published by Lummi Indian School of Aquaculture and Fisheries
The Last Fish War: Survival on the Rivers by Publication Date: 2016
A Lawyer in Indian Country: A Memoir by Publication Date: 2009Ebook. Also available in print
Ziontz represented the Makah tribe in United States v. Washington.
Messages from Frank's Landing: A Story of Salmon, Treaties, and the Indian Way by Publication Date: 2000
The Nature of Borders: Salmon, Boundaries, and Bandits on the Salish Sea by Publication Date: 2012Print. Also available as ebook.- Political and Economic Aspects of Indian-White Culture Contact in Western Washington in the Mid-19th Century by Call Number: Suzzallo and Allen Libraries Stacks E78.W3 L36 1973Publication Date: 1975This is two bound volumes of the individual reports that were prepared by Ms. Lane for the U.S. Dept. of the Interior and the individual Native American Tribes. Washington State Library has a manuscript collection of 8 reports titled Identity, Treaty Status and Fisheries of Washington State Indian tribes, 1975 that are considered supplemental to this title.
- Salmon and His People: Fish & Fishing in Nez Perce Culture by Publication Date: 1999
The Si'lailo Way: Indians, Salmon, and Law on the Columbia River by Publication Date: 2006Coauthored by Prof. Bill Rodgers.
Tell the Truth: The Collected Columns of Billy Frank by Publication Date: 2015Columns written as chair of Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission.- To Fish in Common: Fishing Rights in the Northwest by Publication Date: 1978
To Fish in Common: The Ethnohistory of Lummi Indian Salmon Fishing by Publication Date: 1999- Treaties on Trial: The Continuing Controversy over Northwest Indian Fishing Rights by Publication Date: 1986
- An Uncommon Controversy: An Inquiry into the Treaty-Protected Fishing Rights of the Muckleshoot, Puyallup, and Nisqually Tribes of the Puget Sound by Publication Date: 1967Prepared for the American Friends Service Committee [by Mary B. Isely and others], published by National Congress of American Indians
Where the Salmon Run: The Life and Legacy of Billy Frank Jr. by Publication Date: 2012
Videos
Salmon Defense and the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission have posted a collection of videos on the Internet Archive, including 9 videos from Boldt 40, an event held Feb. 5, 2014.
- The Billy Frank Story (DVD)Call Number: UW Bothell/CC Library Media - 1st floor DVD BOT-2363Publication Date: 2009
- Empty Promises, Empty Nets (VHS) byCall Number: Suzzallo and Allen Libraries Media Storage - ask at Circulation desk VHS WHM 002Publication Date: 1994
Selected Law Review Articles
The literature about United States v. Washington (and Northwest Indian fishing rights more broadly) is vast. This selective list will grow.
One step was searching the UW Law Digital Commons for articles in UW Law journals or published by UW Law faculty, so the list is has a large UW representation.
Articles are in alphabetical order by last name.
Links are often to free sites. HeinOnline is a licensed database available throughout the University of Washington (and in many other universities' libraries).
A
- Jason W. Anderson, Comment, The World Is Their Oyster? Interpreting the Scope of Native American Off-Reservation Shellfish Rights in Washington State, 23 Seattle U. L. Rev. 145 (1999), [Seattle U Digital Commons]
- Robert T. Anderson, Federal Treaty and Trust Obligations, and Ocean Acidification, 6 Wash. J. Envtl. L. & Pol'y 473 (2016), [UW Law Digital Commons]
B
- Jacqueline M. Bertelsen, "Fed" up with Acidification: "Trusting" the Federal Government to Protect the Tulalip Tribes' Access to Shellfish Beds, 6 Wash. Env't L. & Pol'y 495 (2016), [UW Law Digital Commons]
- Michael C. Blumm, Indian Treaty Rights and the Environment: Affirming the Right to Habitat Protection and Restoration, 92 Wash. L. Rev. 1 (2017), [UW Law Digital Commons]
- Michael C. Blumm, Hydropower vs. Salmon: The Struggle of the Pacific Northwest's Anadromous Fish Resources for a Peaceful Coexistence with the Federal Columbia River Power System, 11 Env't L. 211 (1981), [HeinOnline]
- Michael C. Blumm & Brett M. Swift, Indian Treaty Piscary Profit and Habitat Protection in the Pacific Northwest: A Property Rights Approach, 69 U. Colo. L. Rev. 407 (1998), [HeinOnline]
- Karol de Zwager Brown, Symposium, Truce in the Salmon War: Alternatives for the Pacific Salmon Treaty, 74 Wash. L. Rev. 605 (1999), [UW Law Digital Commons]
C
- Cloie M. Chapman, Student Article, Fighting on Behalf of the Salish Sea, 8 Am. Indian L.J. 127 (2019), [Seattle U Digital Commons]
- Judith W. Constans, Recent Developments, The Environmental Right to Habitat Protection: A Sohappy Solution—United States v. Washington, 759 F.2d 1353 9th Cir.), cert. denied, 106 S. Ct. 407 (1985), 61 Wash. L. Rev. 731 (1986) [UW Law Digital Commons]
D
- Richard Du Bey, Andrew S. Fuller & Emily Miner, Tribal Treaty Rights and Natural Resource Protection: The Next Chapter United States v. Washington - The Culverts Case, 7 Am. Indian L.J. 53 (2019), [Seattle U Digital Commons]
F
- Richard A. Finnigan, Comment, Indian Treaty Analysis and Off-Reservation Fishing Rights: A Case Study, 51 Wash. L. Rev. 61 (1975), [UW Law Digital Commons]
G
- Thomas C. Galligan, Jr. & Michael T. Reynvaan, Comment, Pacific Northwest Indian Treaty Fishing Rights, 5 Seattle U. L. Rev. 99 (1981), [Seattle U Digital Commons]
- David H. Getches, Dedication to Professor Ralph W. Johnson, 72 Wash. L. Rev. 995 (1997), [UW Law Digital Commons] (discussing Judge Boldt's reliance on a 1972 article by Johnson)
H
- Lindsay Halm, Notes and Comments, Putting Flesh on the Bones of United States v. Winans: Private Party Liability under Treaties That Reserve Actual Fish for the Tribal Taking, 79 Wash. L. Rev. 1181 (2004), [UW Law Digital Commons]
J
- James T. Johnson, Comment, Treaty Fishing Rights and Indian Participation in International Fisheries Management, 77 Denv. U. L. Rev. 403 (1999), [HeinOnline]
- Ralph W. Johnson, The States Versus Indian Off-Reservation Fishing: A United States Supreme Court Error, 47 Wash. L. Rev. 207 (1972), [UW Law Digital Commons] (discussing Puyallup Tribe v. Department of Game, 391 U.S. 392 (1968)) (article cited by Judge Boldt)
K
- Lillian Kaide, Student Article, A Wholistic, Environmental Approach to Washington’s Repair Methodology of its State-Road Culverts, 6 Seattle J. Env't L. 107 (2016), [Seattle U Digital Commons]
M
- Bennet A. McConaughy, Recent Developments, The Interaction of Federal Equitable Remedies with State Sovereignty—Puget Sound Gillnetters Association v. Moos, 88 Wn. 2d 677, 565 P.2d 1151 (1977), 53 Wash. L. Rev. 787 (1978), [UW Law Digital Commons]
N
- Bradley I. Nye, Comment, Where Do the Buffalo Roam? Determining the Scope of American Indian Off-Reservation Hunting Rights in the Pacific Northwest, 67 Wash. L. Rev. 175 (1992), [UW Law Digital Commons]
O
- Andrea G. Oakley, Note, Not on Claims Alone: Determining Indian Title to Intertidal Lands—United States v. Aam, 887 F.2d 190 (9th Cir. 1989), 65 Wash. L. Rev. 713 (1990), [UW Law Digital Commons]
- Catherine A. O'Neill, Fishable Waters, 2 Am. Indian L.J. 181 (2017), [Seattle U Digital Commons]
P
- David P. Papiez, Note, Conservation Easements: A Flexible New Tool for Washington Tribes, A Case Study of the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, 6 Am. Indian L.J. 325 (2017), [Seattle U Digital Commons]
- Kenneth E. Petty, Comment, Accommodation of Indian Treaty Rights in an International Fishery: An International Problem Begging for an International Solution, 54 Wash. L. Rev. 403 (1979), [UW Law Digital Commons]
R
- William H. Rodgers, Jr., Judicial Regrets and the Case of the Cushman Dam, 35 Envtl. L. 397 (2005), [UW Law Digital Commons]
S
- Allen H. Sanders, The Northwest Power Act and Reserved Tribal Rights, 58 Wash. L. Rev. 357 (1983), [UW Law Digital Commons]
- Thomas P. Schlosser, Dewatering Trust Responsibility: The New Klamath River Hydroelectric and Restoration Agreements, 1 Wash. J. Env't L. & Pol'y 42 (2011), [UW Law Digital Commons]
- Kristi Stanton, Comment, A Call for Co-Management: Treaty Fishing Allocation in New Zealand and Western Washington, 11 Pac. Rim L & Pol'y J. 745 (2002), [UW Law Digital Commons]
T
- Zachary Tomlinson, Note, Abrogation or Regulation? How Anderson v. Evans Discards the Makah's Treaty Whaling Right in the Name of Conservation Necessity, 78 Wash. L. Rev. 1101 (2003), [UW Law Digital Commons]
V
- George William Van Cleve, Saving the Puget Sound Wild Salmon Fishery, 2 Seattle J. Env't L. 85 (2012), [Seattle U Digital Commons]
W
- Sims G. Weymuller, Comment, Phoenix from the Ashes—The 1999 Pacific Salmon Agreement, 10 Pac. Rim L & Pol'y J. 815 (2001), [UW Law Digital Commons]
- Ron J. Whitener, The Personal Impact of the Boldt Case: A Tribute to Professor William H. Rodgers, Jr., 82 Wash. L. Rev. 497 (2007), [UW Law Digital Commons]
- Charles F. Wilkinson, The Northwest Indian Fishing Decisions: Luminous Events in Ninth Circuit History, 14 W. Legal Hist. 19 (2001), [HeinOnline]
- Charles F. Wilkinson, The Belloni Decision: A Foundation for the Northwest Fisheries Cases, the National Tribal Sovereignty Movement, and an Understanding of the Rule of Law, 50 Env't L. 331 (2020), [HeinOnline]
- Charles F. Wilkinson, The Law of the Pacific Salmon Fishery: Conservation and Allocation of a Transboundary Common Property Resource, 32 U. Kan. L. Rev. 17 (1983), [HeinOnline]
Dissertations & Theses
United States v. Washington has been studied by scholars from many fields. Here is a selected list of works. Links in the first group are to ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
- After Celilo Falls: The Dalles Dam, Indian Fishing Rights, and Federal Energy Policy on the Mid-Columbia RiverKatrine Elise Barker, Washington State University,
- Dilemmas in American Liberalism: The Case of Indian Fishing RightsJanna Carol Merrick, University of Washington, 1978
- Fishermen's evaluation of the management of fisheries in the Puget Sound, WashingtonJanel Spaulding, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 2008
- “In common with all citizens”: Sportsmen, Indians, fish, and conservation in Oregon and WashingtonTimothy Mark Rawson, University of Oregon, 2002
- Lummi stories from high school: An ethnohistory of the fishing wars of the 1970sMichael Marker, University of British Columbia, 1995
- Resource allocation and control on the Lummi Indian reservation: A century of conflict and change in the salmon fisheryDaniel L. Boxberger, University of British Columbia, 1986
- State Legislators and Federal Courts: Indian Fishing Rights in Washington StateCharles Franklin Broches, UC Santa Barbara, 1981
- A Systems Analysis of Puget Sound Commercial, Indian, and Recreational Salmon FishingGary Irwin Green, University of Washington, 1976
- Treaty implied rights to habitat protection: Impacts on the Elwha River controversyJohn C. Ruple, Michigan State University, 1997
Dissertations, Theses, and Student Papers Available in University Libraries
Most are by University of Washington students. Many of the UW Law papers were written for Prof. Ralph W. Johnson seminar.
- After the Boldt Decision: The Question of Inter-Tribal Allocation byCall Number: Suzzallo and Allen Libraries Stacks G 59 Th37616; Suzzallo and Allen Libraries Special Collections Collections Thesis 37616Publication Date: 1989Thesis (M.A.), UW Geography
- After the Boldt Decision: The Question of Inter-Tribal Allocation byPublication Date: 1989Thesis (M.A.), UW Geography
- The Comprehensive History of Fishing Areas Closed to the Columbia River Off-Reservation Indian Treaty Fishery byPublication Date: 19751975 Thesis (M.S.), UW Fisheries
- Constitutional Principles in the Interpretation of Indian Treaties byPublication Date: 1975Student paper, UW Law
- The Creation of an "Indian Problem": Nisqually and Puyallup Off-Reservation Fishing byPublication Date: 1973Thesis (M.A.), UW Anthropology
- Description of Usual and Accustomed Fishing Places and the Potential Conflicts Involving Private or Public Use of These Site byPublication Date: 1988Student paper, UW Law
- Impact of the Boldt Decision upon the Fidalgo Island salmon industry byCall Number: Suzzallo and Allen Libraries Stacks SH348 .C37Publication Date: 1975Student report, UW Marine Studies
- Indian Hunting and Fishing Rights: Northwest Developments byPublication Date: 1970Student paper, UW Law
- Indians Right to Fish: The Background, Impact and Legacy of United States v. Washington byPublication Date: 1990Student paper, UW Law
- The Pacific Salmon Treaty: The Equity Principle and Pasturage byPublication Date: 1994Student paper, UW Law
- Political and Social Ecology of Contemporary Makah Subsistence Hunting, Fishing, and Shellfish Collecting Practices byPublication Date: 2001Thesis (Ph. D.), UW Anthropology
- The Troubled Waters of Medicine Creek: An Investigation into the Nature of the Fishing Rights Arising from the Medicine Creek Indian Treaty of 1854 byPublication Date: 1971Thesis (M.A.), Pacific Lutheran University
- United States v. Washington: A Last Stand for the Indian? byPublication Date: 1973Student paper, UW Law
- What Happens to Treaty Indian fishing Rights When the Federal Government Is Manager of the Resource? byPublication Date: 19771977 Thesis (LL. M.), UW Law
- Working Towards Equity Through the U.S./Canada Pacific Salmon Treaty byPublication Date: 1987Student paper, UW Law