South Dakota Senate Bill SR702

South Dakota 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/1/23
• Refer: 2/1/23

Caption

Supporting Tribal Nation members' access to fish on lands adjacent to tribal lands without a fishing license.

Impact

If enacted, SR702 would reaffirm the constitutionally protected rights of enrolled tribal members to engage in subsistence fishing activities without state-imposed restrictions such as licensing. This could positively impact the livelihoods of many tribal members who rely on fishing not only for food but also for cultural practices. The resolution highlights a collaborative relationship between tribal nations and the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, which has already recognized the significance of ensuring access to public lands for these communities.

Summary

Senate Resolution 702, known as SR702, seeks to support members of tribal nations in South Dakota by granting them access to fish on lands adjacent to their tribal lands without requiring a fishing license. This bill is particularly significant because it aligns with historical treaty rights established under the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, which reserves certain privileges to tribes concerning hunting and fishing within the treaty’s boundaries. The resolution aims to underscore the importance of these rights and acknowledges the cultural ties that Lakota, Nakota, and Dakota nations have to their traditional fishing grounds along the Missouri River.

Conclusion

Overall, SR702 represents a commitment to honoring treaty obligations and enhancing the rights of tribal nations in South Dakota. The resolution not only addresses historical grievances but also reinforces the need for respecting traditional practices within indigenous communities. It opens dialogues about the recognition of tribal sovereignty and the importance of maintaining cultural heritage through access to traditional resources, setting a precedent for future discussions regarding tribal rights and state regulations.

Contention

While SR702 has garnered support due to its acknowledgment of tribal rights, it may face opposition from those who argue about state control over fishing regulations. There could be concerns regarding how the resolution interfaces with existing laws and permits, particularly related to game and fish management by the state. Critics may raise questions about potential implications for local law enforcement and regulatory oversight, as the resolution suggests that tribal members would have minimal interactions with law enforcement while practicing their rights.