This letter states the views of the U.S. Department of the Interior regarding tribal fishing rights in Maine and the relationship between those rights and water quality.
Combined document including 1/30/15 letter from US Interior Solicitor Hilary Tompkins to EPA General Counsel Avi Garbow; Responses to Public Comments Relating to ME's January 14, 2013 Submission to EPA for Approval of Certain of the State's New and Revised Water Quality Standards (WQS) That Would Apply in Waters Throughout Maine, Including Within Indian Territories or Lands; 2/2/15 letter from EPA Region I Administrator H. Curtis Spalding to Maine DEP Commissioner Patricia Aho; & Analysis Supporting EPA's February 2, 2015 Decision to Approve, Disapprove, and Make No Decision on, Various Maine Water Quality Standards, Including Those Applied to Waters of Indian Lands in Maine
MITSC's January 23, 2014 letter to the Marine Resources Committee regarding LD 1625, An Act To Clarify the Law Concerning Maine's Elver Fishing License.
MITSC expresses multiple concerns about the Elver Project.
The testimony of MITSC Executive Director John Dieffenbacher-Krall before the Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Committee on May 9, 2013 in support of LD 1399 An Act To Provide for the Aroostook Band of Micmacs Certain Rights Regarding Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife Management.
The testimony of MITSC Chair Jamie Bissonette Lewey on LD 72 An Act To Open the St. Croix River to River Herring given before the Marine Resources Committee March 25, 2013.
This controversial Opinion was issued in the midst of a major dispute between the Wabanaki Tribes and the State regarding State regulatory authority over elver fishing by Tribal citizens who were fishing with Tribal licenses. Dozens of tribal people were prosecuted under newly enacted state criminal laws. The Opinion concluded that Tribal citizens are subject to State regulatory authority over marine resources to the same extent as other Maine citizens and that MITSC has no particular authority or role regarding saltwater fishing issues. However, the question of whether the Tribes and Tribal citizens possess retained saltwater fishing rights has not been decided in any State or Federal appellate court decision, and MITSC has continued to be actively involved in tribal saltwater fishing issues pursuant to its statutory responsibilities, including continually reviewing the effectiveness of the Settlement and the legal, social, and economic relationships between the Tribes and the State.
The policy position statement adopted by MITSC at its October 17, 2012 meeting concerning the restoration of river herring in the St. Croix Watershed.
Maine Attorney General William Schneider's 8/8/12 response to Stephen Perkins, EPA, concerning the Federal Government's contention that Maine was in violation of its overall water quality standards due to the law passed in 1995 to block river herring passage on the St. Croix River. Schneider chose to assert that because the EPA failed to raise in its July 9 letter certain jurisdictional issues that have been in dispute concerning the St. Croix River “it will never suggest that Maine’s environmental regulatory jurisdiction is in question.”
On July 9, 2012, Stephen Perkins, Director, Office of Ecosystem Protection, US Environmental Protection Agency Region I, wrote to William Schneider, Maine Attorney General. The EPA found 12 MRSA §6134(2), the law passed by Maine in 1995 to block river herring passage on the St. Croix River, in noncompliance with the overall water quality standards set by Maine for that stretch of river which must support naturally occurring species. EPA concluded its letter by stating, “To address EPA’s disapproval and protect designated and existing uses, Maine should take appropriate action to authorize passage of river herring to the portions of the St. Croix River above the Grand Falls Dam.”
The 5/31/12 letter from the Maine Office of the Attorney General to the US EPA and Attorney General, US Dept. of Justice, notifying the Federal Government of the State of Maine's intent to sue for the failure to perform a non-discretionary duty under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
MITSC Chair Paul Bisulca informed Col. Philip Feir, Co-Chair, International Joint Commission St. Croix River Watershed Board, of the Commission's fishery responsibilities in the St. Croix Watershed.
The MITSC analysis of LD 72 An Act To Open the St. Croix River to River Herring, LD 584 An Act To Provide for Passage of River Herring on the St. Croix River in Accordance with an Adaptive Management Plan, and LD 748 An Act Regarding the Passage of River Herring on the St. Croix River.
MITSC regulates fishing on certain waters within and bordering Indian territory under the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act of 1980. You can find our current fishing rules here. We are in the process of updating them, so please check back for updates.
The MITSC testimony presented to the Inland Fisheries and Wilflife Committee on LD 1456 An Act Regarding the Right of Native Americans to be Issued Hunting, Fishing and Trapping Licenses.
Public Law, c. 708 LD 2145 An Act Concerning the Taking of Marine Resources by Members of the Passamaquoddy Tribe was sponsored by Passamaquoddy Tribal Representative Fred Moore. It was an attempt to resolve the dispute between the Passamaquoddy Tribe and State of Maine concerning the taking or marine organisms. This conflict arises from opposing interpretations of how the 1980 federal Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act (MICSA) and the Maine Implementing Act (MIA) impact the Passamaquoddy fishery. The Passamaquoddy Tribe stands on its retained Aboriginal rights to fish within its traditional territory beyond reservation boundaries without interference from the State. They hold that these rights have never been abrogated since they are not mentioned in the extinguishment provisions in the MICSA. The State of Maine maintains that the tribes have no rights except as specified in the MIA and that the State of Maine has the authority to regulate the Passamaquoddy saltwater fishery and prosecute Tribal fishers who fish according to tribal law rather than state law. It became effective April 3, 1998.
We'd like to know! Please reach out to us here.
I'm looking for a document
