Fish-ins
Fish-ins were organized protests by Indigenous Americans in the Pacific Northwest during the 1960s, aimed at asserting their fishing rights in response to state restrictions. These protests arose from long-standing grievances related to treaties made in the mid-19th century, which guaranteed Indigenous fishing rights in exchange for land cessions. Over the years, state governments largely ignored these treaty provisions, leading to increased restrictions on fishing for Indigenous peoples. In reaction, various tribes united to challenge these limitations, culminating in public demonstrations known as fish-ins, where participants would fish in restricted areas, often facing aggressive police and game warden actions.
These events attracted significant media attention and support from various civil rights organizations, drawing involvement from notable figures in entertainment and activism. A landmark legal victory in 1974, United States v. Washington, affirmed Indigenous fishing rights and allowed tribes to benefit economically from fishing-related ventures. Despite this progress, Indigenous nations still confront challenges such as ongoing legal disputes, declining fish populations, and the need to balance conservation efforts with economic interests. Today, many tribes continue to advocate for their fishing rights and work collaboratively with state and federal agencies on fisheries management.
On this Page
Fish-ins
During the 1960s, Indigenous Americans in the Pacific Northwest began to stage fish-ins to protest restrictions on their fishing rights, especially within the states of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. In turn, sportfishing groups, commercial fishing operations, and canneries pressured the state governments to get Indigenous Americans off the rivers. Controversies overfishing rights stemmed from treaties negotiated with various Pacific Northwest Indigenous groups in 1854 and 1855. In those treaties, Indigenous people gave up claim to vast areas of land, but they specifically preserved fishing rights along waterways ceded to the federal government. Those treaties guaranteed to Indigenous Americans “the right of taking fish, at all usual and accustomed grounds and stations . . . in common with all citizens of the Territory.”
Almost from the start, the states ignored the treaty provisions, and by the 1930s, the states openly restricted Indigenous American subsistence and commercial fishing. Some Indigenous groups challenged the states; however, they had no legal success. During the next two decades, state restrictions increased, particularly in the state of Washington, and although some cases went to court, restrictions on Indian fishing were upheld.
In the 1960s, Indian nations began to push for economic development, and tribes began to demand their treaty rights. In the Pacific Northwest, the tribes openly challenged the states’ ability to exert regulatory authority over matters negotiated in treaties between the federal government and tribal nations. The state of Washington responded by issuing a series of orders forbidding Indigenous American fishing, and in 1964, Washington set aside the treaty guarantees.
Indigenous Americans from various affected nations attempted to channel their energies into a unified front and formed the Survival of American Indians Association in 1964. This organization began a series of actions designed to assert their rights. One important strategy was to engage in night fishing in restricted areas. Washington aggressively policed night fishing, confiscating boats, nets, and motors, ramming fishing boats, and prosecuting lawbreakers.
The most dramatic and effective protests sponsored by the Indian Association were fish-ins. These were highly publicized events, well attended by the media, in which Indigenous people, including many women and children, would assert their treaty rights and fish, despite state restrictions. The state response was aggressive: Often, large numbers of game wardens and police swarmed over the protesters and made many arrests. The media documented these incidents, and the fish-ins attracted national attention and even celebrity participants, including actors and entertainers such as Marlon Brando, Jane Fonda, and Dick Gregory. As more Indigenous Americans were arrested, various church organizations, the American Civil Liberties Union, and prominent lawyers began to provide legal assistance, and this, in turn, increased media coverage.
In 1970, the federal government brought suit to ensure that the states honored the treaties and allowed Indigenous American a fair harvest of fish. US District Court Judge George Boldt sent shockwaves through the Pacific Northwest when he ruled in favor of Indigenous fishing rights in United States v. Washington (1974) and determined that the treaties entitled the Indigenous Americans to half the fish passing through the waters.
This decision was challenged but remained in force, ultimately allowing many nations to develop successful economic ventures such as canneries, fish hatcheries, and aquaculture programs. The fish-ins also produced several Indigenous activists who went on to participate in the early years of the American Indian Movement, including Dino Butler, Sid Mills, Janet McCloud, Joseph Stuntz Killsright, and Leonard Peltier.
On April 2, 2014, Governor Jay Inslee of Washington state signed state House Bill 2080, which makes it possible for previous convictions for certain tribal fishing activities to be vacated. The law went into effect on June 12, 2014. Indigenous nations continued to advocate for their fishing rights in the twenty-first century. Many Indigenous nations co-managed fisheries with state and federal agencies. Public information campaigns, educating the public about the importance of Indigenous fishing practices, were also vital. Still, ongoing legal battles, declining fish populations, contaminated fish sources, and balancing conservation with economic development were challenges Indigenous nations continued to face.
Bibliography
Baker, Kyle. "The Right to Salmon: 'Fish-Ins' and a Tradition of Activism in the Pacific Northwest." Smithsonian Center for Folklife and Cultural Heritage, 19 May 2023, folklife.si.edu/magazine/salmon-fish-ins-pacific-northwest. Accessed 31 Oct. 2024.
Clausen, Jan. "One Fish, Two Fish." Nation, vol. 270, no. 3, 2000, pp 22–24.
"Hunting and Fishing Legal Rights of Native Americans." Justia, 30 July 2024, www.justia.com/native-american-law/hunting-and-fishing-rights-of-native-americans. Accessed 31 Oct. 2024.
Parham, Vera. "'It Was a Spearhead of Change:' The Fish-Ins of the Pacific Northwest and the Boldt Decision, Shifting Native American Protest Identities in the 1960s and 1970s." Native Studies Review, vol. 22, no. 1/2, 2013, pp. 1-26.
Phuong Le, Associated Press. "Bill Would Clear Convictions during 60s Fish-Ins." US News Online, 2014.
Schick, Tony, and Maya Miller. "The U.S. Promised Tribes They Would Always Have Fish, but the Fish They Have Pose Toxic Risks." ProPublica, 22 Nov. 2022, www.propublica.org/article/how-the-us-broke-promise-to-protect-fish-for-tribes. Accessed 31 Oct. 2024.
Shreve, Bradley G. "'From Time Immemorial:' The Fish-In Movement and the Rise of Intertribal Activism." Pacific Historical Rev., vol. 78, no. 3, 2009, p. 403.
"HB 2080—2013–14: Vacating Convictions for Certain Tribal Fishing Activities." Washington State Legislature.