Tribal hunting/fishing compacts expiring

[BobbyV]

No, I don't have a "beef" and I don't lose sleep over it. I'm just commenting on the fact that hunting and fishing licenses, valid everywhere in the state, are sold at a deeply discounted price to some people solely based on race.

Two large tribal governments negotiated a deal with the state. Various organizations negotiate better prices for their members every day.

We also have access to "free" healthcare via the Indian Health Service as tribal members.

We've been told for so long that doing so is wrong.

Doing what? Treating people different based on race?

What if it were flipped an a member of the tribe had to pay 7 times more for the same license as a non-tribal member?

Then I'd imagine those that wanted to pay the same rates for licenses as others would do so and move on . . . I did for years before the compact.

A race based discount is entirely different than giving a discount to the elderly or disabled veterans. Surely you can see the logic of that discussion.

You seemed to initially have a problem (and seem to still have one in this very post) about the cost. My comment was simply to point out that all sorts of folks get discounts for one reason or another.

 

[BobbyV]

Is there a link that didn't get posted? I just saw several posts that said the state was getting the money. Yes the ODW is a state agency, but the inference was that the state was getting the money and not ODW, so I had to assume those posting that may have been seeing something I wasn't and the general budget was getting the money not the ODW.
I just was wanting to get the entire story before further comment.

The link was in my comment . . . added it to the word "this" . . .

 

[zeronight6r6]

No, I don't have a "beef" and I don't lose sleep over it. I'm just commenting on the fact that hunting and fishing licenses, valid everywhere in the state, are sold at a deeply discounted price to some people solely based on race. We've been told for so long that doing so is wrong. What if it were flipped an a member of the tribe had to pay 7 times more for the same license as a non-tribal member?

Something else to consider here is that the 5 Civilized Tribes were guaranteed their hunting and fishing rights in past treaties with the federal government and those rights have never been relinquished or taken away. Based on this, every tribal citizen of all the 5 Civilized Tribes has the right to hunt or fish anywhere within their tribal boundaries (not just on tribal land). The state knows this and has always been nervous trying to contest it. The compacts are agreements that benefit both parties, the state gets a boost in revenue and the tribal citizens have licenses provided to them at no cost to them and they have the right to hunt and fish wherever they want within the state.

If the compacts were not renewed or extended then those tribal citizens that are used to getting “free” licenses would technically have the right to hunt and fish without licenses. I know that would be contested in the courts but the tribes would have a very strong argument if it ever got to that point.

Seems like a win win for the state and tribes to keep the compacts. If I where the state I would be trying to have compacts with every tribe. The ODWC would get to claim all of those licenses as additional licenses sold and would increase the amount of funds received from the Dingell Johnson and Pittman Robertson pools of money that the feds provide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Neanderthal]

I would wager that less than 25% of the tribal citizens who get the licenses will ever use them, another reason for the greatly reduced price.

P.S. Stitt is hardly more than Fallin with a pecker.

 

[CHenry]

If that's the case it's not a very smart move IMO . . . speaking of the gaming compacts, Stitt needs to do a much better job of explaining his position IMO. Press conferences at noon or during the day aren't winning when the tribes are spending thousands on commercials with former governors (one who didn't even sign a compact I don't think) endorsing the tribes.

Hes trying to get the Tribes to play fair n even with the rest of the states. Right now they are raping us at a 5% payback to the state. You wont find a casino anywhere like Riverwind or Thackervile that only pay 5%. More like 12-15% and I back him 100%

 

[CHenry]

P.S. Stitt is hardly more than Fallin with a pecker.

Really? LOL

 

[BobbyV]

Hes trying to get the Tribes to play fair n even with the rest of the states. Right now they are raping us at a 5% payback to the state. You wont find a casino anywhere like Riverwind or Thackervile that only pay 5%. More like 12-15% and I back him 100%

Yes . . . I've heard that mentioned, but I haven't seen any data actually comparing the rates various casinos pay out to states. Or how those rates are established in the various states with tribal gaming compacts. So saying that Oklahoma tribes need to play fair and even when compared to other states I'd really like to see the data to support that claim.

How is the percentage for Oklahoma tribes determined? By tribal member? By profits?

Has the Gov provided anything to support his stance that the percentage needs to jump that much?

 

[Shadowrider]

Hes trying to get the Tribes to play fair n even with the rest of the states. Right now they are raping us at a 5% payback to the state. You wont find a casino anywhere like Riverwind or Thackervile that only pay 5%. More like 12-15% and I back him 100%

Play fair? Demanding they ass up more money when they have a standing contract that both sides agreed on is fair? It's nothing more than strong arm robbery. There are several former governors that disagree with him too. I support Stitt, I think he's trying to do what he promised overall, but he's dead wrong on his "dealings" with the tribes.

 

[CHenry]

Play fair? Demanding they ass up more money when they have a standing contract that both sides agreed on is fair? It's nothing more than strong arm robbery. There are several former governors that disagree with him too. I support Stitt, I think he's trying to do what he promised overall, but he's dead wrong on his "dealings" with the tribes.

Do you understand his every angle?

Robbery is what the Tribes are doing to every Oklahoman.
Stitt is trying to curtail their theft.

 

[Shadowrider]

Do you understand his every angle?

Robbery is what the Tribes are doing to every Oklahoman.
Stitt is trying to curtail their theft.

It's not robbery. The tribes are paying and have paid exactly what the state agreed to. The state doesn't get to move the goalposts just because they need the money.