Oklahoma Gov. Stitt won't renew hunting, fishing compacts with Cherokee, Choctaw tribes

Shadowrider

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
19,736
Reaction score
5,848
Location
Tornado Alley
When I got my license from the Cherokee Nation it wasn't sold to me . . . I had to submit a request to get it. Same for when I submitted requests to the Choctaw Nation for my wife and daughters' licenses. I'd imagine the tribes agreed to help fund the compact by contributing a minimum amount via grants, etc. The tribes aren't actually selling them to members at a discounted rate.
That's exactly what it sounds like to me. If so I really have to wonder just WTF is Stitt's beef? I saw a couple of articles that stated 32M and it was what has been brought in since the compacts started under Fallin. The tribes are handing over big money they get from the feds to the state. Way more than a measly license would ever bring. Orders (plural) of magnitude more.

I think Stitt has been a pretty good governor but his warring with the tribes is straight up confounding. :scratch:
 

SoonerP226

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
9,339
Reaction score
5,906
Location
Norman
I think Stitt has been a pretty good governor but his warring with the tribes is straight up confounding. :scratch:
Yeah, with that info you provided about how the compacts with the Cherokees and Choctaws really did benefit ODWC to the tune of $38M by making them eligible to get funding from the Feds, this move makes no sense at all.
 

steveo-85

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Dec 4, 2009
Messages
165
Reaction score
3
Location
Oklahoma
No, not detrimental. I believe the funding would have benefited the ODWC, and I would like to see them get it. If your native American, all you need to legally hunt and fish within the "Nation" is your tribal membership card, along with another form of ID to verify who you are. You must also still follow all tribal, state and federal laws. I believe the compact mostly served people like me who live way outside the nation boundaries and desired only to hunt/fish locally. I got my free license and never hunted, may have fished once in the past three years. Just too busy with work and life. But, the ODWC got their fees for my licenses even though it was at a reduced rate and my lack of activity in the field had no impact on ODWC which offsets that reduced fee. I would not have bought a license over the past three years otherwise, so the ODWC still benefited. I have no problem with buying my licenses I just wouldn't have until I had an opportunity to participate, which in my case would be slim. I suspect I'm not the only tribal member who requested a license, tossed in a tackle box and never gave it another look or use. That scenario is no detriment to the state or ODWC as far as I can see, but I'm not above being proved wrong.
This is very much true .. because it’s the Tribes Federal Right to hunt and fish without any license within there reservation, but have been buying them on good faith to help the state. Even if it’s at a discounted rate it’s giving the state money that they could just keep, so now they are exercising there Sovereign Right and will keep it. Looks to me like the deal got the state something over nothing…,
 

steveo-85

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Dec 4, 2009
Messages
165
Reaction score
3
Location
Oklahoma
Lets do some quick math here. The state made $38,000,000.00 from the tribes on discounted licenses; $72.00 license package for $2.00.
Now right off the bat I am getting "fell off the back of the truck" vibe.

$38M/$2 per license; so roughly 19,000,000 tribal licenses were paid for and issued. I am assuming that has been sense conception. Now lets remove the sweetheart deal.

19,000,000 licenses at the regular rate of $72.00 comes to 1,368,000,000.00 now to be fair lets take out that $38M and we come to...

1 BILLION, 330 Million dollars and no cents in lost profits that would otherwise go to wildlife conservation in our state.

Your brain cells would have to be racist against intelligence to not see why Stitt has made this decision.
Ok but you forget that the Federal government gives Natives the right to hunt, fish, trap and gather on there reservation without a license… so i would say majority of these native license holders that have been receiving them from the tribes more than likely live on there reservation can now hunt without a license because there exercising federal rights… so these big numbers you have the state losing from the discounted license is now going to be much bigger, because not only will they not pay full price now, they don’t even need to buy one.. they were only buying they on good faith anyway
 

TeamTomlyn

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Aug 18, 2020
Messages
209
Reaction score
389
Location
Shawnee, OK
You must have missed it in post #1 the 38M was the tribes number, not mine. The breakdown is literally basic math / word problem. So if it seems inflated or misrepresented you can take that up with the indian statisticians, its all their numbers lol. As I see it either the indians are blowing smoke and just having a pissing contest with Stitt or Stitt made a good business decision for the state. So either way its no skin off my nose.

Also as a card carrying cherokee let me clue you in on a few things, at least as I know them. Your right if I stay on tribal land I don't need a hunting license; I've taken advantage of that a time or two to fill freezers. After you leave tribal land however it can get hairy from there and you wont find many shops willing to process your deer or mount your buck without a tag. I'm sure this arrangement is fine for some but definitely limits you. Let me tell ya its not a fun talk with the GW "I swear i took this spike on tribal land over yonder, i dont need a tag" goes over like a fart in church. Its just more convenient to shill out $72 and not worry about it. Even better to get your lifetime and really not worry about it. It all goes to conservation anyways, always kinda proud of that.

Now when they started this free hunting license thing that's great, but its not automatic that every tribal member got one. You had to apply for it and just like with all other government bodies its a process. I am sure there are a lot of tribal members that dont need it or didnt bother with it BECAUSE they already have a lifetime license or hunt on tribal land. But for like my son he got a free license for the year and a couple free tags, who can be mad about that? This year he's getting his lifetime for christmas so no worries.
 

icarus_85

Marksman
Special Hen
Joined
May 19, 2016
Messages
43
Reaction score
43
Location
Green County
Honestly, if it's "tribal" lands and you can produce your tribal card as proof, why would you need a license/permit to hunt? Charge the white man to hunt but if I can show my tribal card in the field, I'm good to go.

Discuss amongst yourselves.
 

SoonerP226

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
9,339
Reaction score
5,906
Location
Norman
Honestly, if it's "tribal" lands and you can produce your tribal card as proof, why would you need a license/permit to hunt? Charge the white man to hunt but if I can show my tribal card in the field, I'm good to go.

Discuss amongst yourselves.
That's only good if you only want to hunt on your tribe's lands. If you're a Cherokee and want to hunt mulies around Black Mesa, you still need the Oklahoma permit. Same if you're a Choctaw who wants to go after those record paddlefish in Keystone.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom