New York Times 4 page story done before my felony charges.
headline "April 17, 1994 Looking back on 22 years as a bushrat, which is what wilderness homesteaders are called in Alaska, Miles Martin reflected that things began to go wrong in the spring of 1983," Story summed up, Times sided with me, making the Federal government look bad. Publicly at the time 'I won.' Year is 1994. 19 Years later the government got even with an arrest in 2013. Full story link The Vexing Adventures Of the Last Alaskan Bushrat - The New York Times |
Miles Felon story It's been over 20 years. Not much to say, that anyone will listen to. I was convicted of horrific fish and wildlife crimes in 2013
Nenana Man sentenced to six months in prison for illegal wildlife ... Most criminals say "I did not do it!" or "I was framed" "its a set up!" Even I laugh "Yea right!" Our legal system is sound, and finds the truth. It only makes things worse to scream as you get carted off in handcuffs. I am offering my side all these years later because? The feds succeed in shutting me up, making me ineffective for all these years. Can I say anything now? I can 'make a point' and get heard, through my books, posted video, or my art or offering expert advice on off grid life, 'but,' about the time I get heard by many, someone takes the time to do a background check, a google search, and there I am, all the dirt on me, announced by a fan. Now nothing I have to say holds credibility. I can not be about being nice, trying to save the planet, care about the environment as I say, for here I am! Killer of it all! So says the government. supposedly a jury of my peers decided, or I plead guilty because? I have no defense. So I offer my side to consider, with what I hope are some credible facts. |
My public defender suggest to me I ask the judge to sentence me to Arizona Federal prison "Because your mother lives there and maybe she can visit you!"
Arizona's 'concentration camp': why was Tent City kept open for 24 years? | Cities | The Guardian
Life in a tent. known for no medical help, no air conditioning , 'a concentration camp' I am a senior with medical issues, diabetic, used to Alaska down to 50 below. Tent City would have killed me for sure, my pub defender knows this.
Tent City Jail in Ariz.'s Maricopa County Officially Closed (VIDEO)
In his link "Arpaio said he spent more money on food for the jail's dogs than he did for inmates. He once joked about it being a "concentration camp."
The seven-acre facility that former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio built has shuttered. Back in April, the man who unseated Arpaio, Sheriff Paul Penzone, announced that he’d close the jail that Arpaio installed in his first year as sheriff in the early 90s. The open-air jail, where inmates endured extreme weather and forcibly wore pink underwear, came under heavy scrutiny for its inhumane practices, including lack of medical care and situations meant to shame prisoners. "Arpaio’s legacy is largely tied to Tent City. But this place that fills him with so much nostalgia treats people like subhumans. Arpaio himself has called it a concentration camp in the past. The former sheriff was recently pardoned by President Donald Trump after a judge convicted him of criminal contempt for racially profiling undocumented immigrants. So while this is an important step toward progress, it’s important to note that by pardoning Arpaio, the president of the United States of America has also made it clear he stands with white supremacy. And the activists who helped bring this crucial change are now focused on undoing all the damage Arpaio has caused immigrants and communities of color.
Arizona's 'concentration camp': why was Tent City kept open for 24 years? | Cities | The Guardian
Life in a tent. known for no medical help, no air conditioning , 'a concentration camp' I am a senior with medical issues, diabetic, used to Alaska down to 50 below. Tent City would have killed me for sure, my pub defender knows this.
Tent City Jail in Ariz.'s Maricopa County Officially Closed (VIDEO)
In his link "Arpaio said he spent more money on food for the jail's dogs than he did for inmates. He once joked about it being a "concentration camp."
The seven-acre facility that former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio built has shuttered. Back in April, the man who unseated Arpaio, Sheriff Paul Penzone, announced that he’d close the jail that Arpaio installed in his first year as sheriff in the early 90s. The open-air jail, where inmates endured extreme weather and forcibly wore pink underwear, came under heavy scrutiny for its inhumane practices, including lack of medical care and situations meant to shame prisoners. "Arpaio’s legacy is largely tied to Tent City. But this place that fills him with so much nostalgia treats people like subhumans. Arpaio himself has called it a concentration camp in the past. The former sheriff was recently pardoned by President Donald Trump after a judge convicted him of criminal contempt for racially profiling undocumented immigrants. So while this is an important step toward progress, it’s important to note that by pardoning Arpaio, the president of the United States of America has also made it clear he stands with white supremacy. And the activists who helped bring this crucial change are now focused on undoing all the damage Arpaio has caused immigrants and communities of color.
I recall the judge just staring at me after my request for Tent City. I had no clue about this place where my mother might visit me. After his long push the judge says "I see no victim in this crime." I had not thought of that. Correct. No one got hurt. No customer felt scammed or mad about anything. Not even the environment got hurt . Is there any such thing as a victimless crime? The judge refused to honor the request gave the minimum sentence possible. And sentenced me to 'Hotel Fed' in Oregon
Introduction To Federal Correctional Institution, Sheridan
Nestled in the scenic Yamhill County in Oregon, the Federal Correctional Institution, Sheridan spans over 182 acres. The institution is designed to facilitate the rehabilitation of inmates. It includes an array of amenities such as a library, a chapel, and a recreation yard, aiming to provide a holistic approach to rehabilitation.. Education is a key component of rehabilitation. Sheridan offers GED courses, English as a Second Language (ESL) classes. From carpentry to electrical work, these programs aim to equip inmates with skillsthat can help them once released. Balancing work and leisure, the institution provides recreational activities. This includes sports, music, and hobby craft programs, fostering a sense of community within the institution. It serves as a cornerstone for the local community, providing employment, and contributing to the local economy. end quote
At the time of sentencing I did not know the difference between Tent City and and Hotel Fed. So why did the judge deny my request for tent city? So now lets backtrack
Introduction To Federal Correctional Institution, Sheridan
Nestled in the scenic Yamhill County in Oregon, the Federal Correctional Institution, Sheridan spans over 182 acres. The institution is designed to facilitate the rehabilitation of inmates. It includes an array of amenities such as a library, a chapel, and a recreation yard, aiming to provide a holistic approach to rehabilitation.. Education is a key component of rehabilitation. Sheridan offers GED courses, English as a Second Language (ESL) classes. From carpentry to electrical work, these programs aim to equip inmates with skillsthat can help them once released. Balancing work and leisure, the institution provides recreational activities. This includes sports, music, and hobby craft programs, fostering a sense of community within the institution. It serves as a cornerstone for the local community, providing employment, and contributing to the local economy. end quote
At the time of sentencing I did not know the difference between Tent City and and Hotel Fed. So why did the judge deny my request for tent city? So now lets backtrack
Start at the beginning? I feel overwhelmed. The government is smarter then me, has lots of money, and good at what they do. Me, no money no skills of this sort, few computer smarts so 'what facts?' Google computer search was not as easy 20 years ago. No AI . Only now can I understand how to get information. 20 years ago there would have been no public knowledge of life at tent city. Now, it's mostly 'past administration,' fewer issues Making the past look bad and how it's so much better today under a new administration. My song and dance? ok
I went to a lawyer. The best in Alaska I was told. He has knowledge of Fish and Wildlife issues. He is himself is an avid hunter lover of the outdoors. Thus hoped he would defend me. It's a complicated case involving state and federal disagreement on the definition and qualifications of subsistence lifestyle, permits, and rights. Even today the battle between state and Federal interests goes on. The two sete of laws are not in agreement. Never were, worse situation back in the 90's.
Subsistance US Supreme Court will soon consider taking up Alaska’s battle over subsistence - Anchorage Daily News
'Link to lawer
Satterberg lawyer
For $40,000 Satterberg will talk to me, money up front 'now,' Before we talk.. I talk him into an hour of his time for minimal advice for $300. It was worth it. "Minimum cost to fight the feds, $100,000 and you can lose. In fact I think you will lose. If you killed or raped someone I might get you off. But you're accused of messing with cute fuzzy animals and I can not help you. The public will hang you." He was correct. I asked him to use his connections to help me get an honest public defender who is not corrupt. He did, but unsure how that worked out. Satterburg later tells a mutual friend, "We just tossed Miles to the wolves." So what did Satterberg mean by that? Why would the best lawyer in the state say this?
I learn eventually, like after my conviction..... a public defender is not my lawyer. He defends the public. I did not know much until I saw in action and find out a lot after I'm convinced. Defender tells me "The prosecution has at their disposal a trillion dollars. How much do you have? I have a few hundred dollars.'" and "You want to fight this, it would have to go to the Supreme Court. Not going to happen.." No-one told me the public defender gets a bonus for convincing his client to take the plea bargain. No plea discussion. Take the deal or leave it. it's an ultimatum, not a discussion. I talked to no one. Only 2 choices offered, guilty, or fight it. Not 'no contest' Want to fight? "I'll see you the day before the trial" (on his $100 budget?) Yea right.
Ok it's a longish story hmmm the real more full story is my 8 books, 'Going Wild Survival series.' Wise people can see the issue just in the title of my books. Link to books Miles books How deep do you want to go here? In truth, there is no quick easy way to explain your side of the story when facing government problems! I fin it interesting that as a youth in 1973 I wrote in book one, "My ending will not be bears, the cold or the isolation, it will be civilization'
I went to a lawyer. The best in Alaska I was told. He has knowledge of Fish and Wildlife issues. He is himself is an avid hunter lover of the outdoors. Thus hoped he would defend me. It's a complicated case involving state and federal disagreement on the definition and qualifications of subsistence lifestyle, permits, and rights. Even today the battle between state and Federal interests goes on. The two sete of laws are not in agreement. Never were, worse situation back in the 90's.
Subsistance US Supreme Court will soon consider taking up Alaska’s battle over subsistence - Anchorage Daily News
'Link to lawer
Satterberg lawyer
For $40,000 Satterberg will talk to me, money up front 'now,' Before we talk.. I talk him into an hour of his time for minimal advice for $300. It was worth it. "Minimum cost to fight the feds, $100,000 and you can lose. In fact I think you will lose. If you killed or raped someone I might get you off. But you're accused of messing with cute fuzzy animals and I can not help you. The public will hang you." He was correct. I asked him to use his connections to help me get an honest public defender who is not corrupt. He did, but unsure how that worked out. Satterburg later tells a mutual friend, "We just tossed Miles to the wolves." So what did Satterberg mean by that? Why would the best lawyer in the state say this?
I learn eventually, like after my conviction..... a public defender is not my lawyer. He defends the public. I did not know much until I saw in action and find out a lot after I'm convinced. Defender tells me "The prosecution has at their disposal a trillion dollars. How much do you have? I have a few hundred dollars.'" and "You want to fight this, it would have to go to the Supreme Court. Not going to happen.." No-one told me the public defender gets a bonus for convincing his client to take the plea bargain. No plea discussion. Take the deal or leave it. it's an ultimatum, not a discussion. I talked to no one. Only 2 choices offered, guilty, or fight it. Not 'no contest' Want to fight? "I'll see you the day before the trial" (on his $100 budget?) Yea right.
Ok it's a longish story hmmm the real more full story is my 8 books, 'Going Wild Survival series.' Wise people can see the issue just in the title of my books. Link to books Miles books How deep do you want to go here? In truth, there is no quick easy way to explain your side of the story when facing government problems! I fin it interesting that as a youth in 1973 I wrote in book one, "My ending will not be bears, the cold or the isolation, it will be civilization'
I'd had a previous volunteer encounter where Fish and Wildlife and I sat down and came to an agreement without going to court. I had gone to them. I kept some legal white ivory I had the I turned into art and did not want to Gave up and did not have to but gurney over all my legally owned white ivory for no other reason then it made them nervous and they'd rather not wonder. I now think this was a different previous administration that did not have a hidden agenda. I 'assumed' if there were issues I'd be informed and we'd talk and fix things as before.
Friday, May 19, 2006
Mr. Martin,
In addition, I am checking with John Rawls and believe we can work out the details of the white ivory. It is on that assumption that I am asking if you wish to go through with the rest of the deal as stated.
Thanks. Stephen Cooper
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 3rd day of March, 2006, at Fairbanks, Alaska.
DEBORAH M. SMITH Acting United States Attorney
STEPHEN COOPER Assistant United States Attorney
Friday, May 19, 2006
Mr. Martin,
In addition, I am checking with John Rawls and believe we can work out the details of the white ivory. It is on that assumption that I am asking if you wish to go through with the rest of the deal as stated.
Thanks. Stephen Cooper
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 3rd day of March, 2006, at Fairbanks, Alaska.
DEBORAH M. SMITH Acting United States Attorney
STEPHEN COOPER Assistant United States Attorney
The Federal funding to arrest me seems to have come from a huge government appropriation to stop the trade of illegal elephant ivory. I have nothing in the least to do with that. Out of the "900 pounds of illegal goods" I plead guilt to having, 850 pounds was legal mammoth ivory. However in the news was just the word 'ivory trade' With the 'assumption' being 'illegal elephant ' Out of 26 charges there were only 2 I felt I would have issues with defending myself against The major one was being n possession of a dead raven. The other was eagle feathers. The other charges were all bogus. or defendable. However if I lost on the raven charge, I face a maximum of $250,000 fine and 5 years in jail.
Raven Conflict Management | U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Under the federal migratory bird act. If I went to court I'd argue the raven does not migrate across state lines, thus a state issue, not Federal one. The state has no issues. Removing the raven from the migratory bird list is a Supreme Court decision. I say "Not my problem you put the raven on the list in error, that needs to be changed, or drop the case" Not going happen on our $100 defense budget. Not going to review here all the other 25 charges. It's meant to be overwhelming and mind boggling. I had a dead raven? Yes. A local Indian hit it with a truck . Te Indian doe won't know white man law., no reason to. He brings it to me because in Nenana I am viewed by many as a kind of shaman who deals with the dead in an honorable way. it would have been rude to say "Get that out of here, no way no how!" I took the raven and said 'Thank you.' I tossed the frozen bird on the floor in a shed planning to ptu it in the compost in the spring. A federal undercover agent who is wired poses as a customer buying thousand of dollars of inventory to open a shop ad now wants this raven.... and I gave it to him as gift as part of our multi thousand dollar deal. This was the only item with possible issues. it was all recorded on tape. So 'bla bla and bla" and moving right along I plead guilty to all of it.
Raven Conflict Management | U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Under the federal migratory bird act. If I went to court I'd argue the raven does not migrate across state lines, thus a state issue, not Federal one. The state has no issues. Removing the raven from the migratory bird list is a Supreme Court decision. I say "Not my problem you put the raven on the list in error, that needs to be changed, or drop the case" Not going happen on our $100 defense budget. Not going to review here all the other 25 charges. It's meant to be overwhelming and mind boggling. I had a dead raven? Yes. A local Indian hit it with a truck . Te Indian doe won't know white man law., no reason to. He brings it to me because in Nenana I am viewed by many as a kind of shaman who deals with the dead in an honorable way. it would have been rude to say "Get that out of here, no way no how!" I took the raven and said 'Thank you.' I tossed the frozen bird on the floor in a shed planning to ptu it in the compost in the spring. A federal undercover agent who is wired poses as a customer buying thousand of dollars of inventory to open a shop ad now wants this raven.... and I gave it to him as gift as part of our multi thousand dollar deal. This was the only item with possible issues. it was all recorded on tape. So 'bla bla and bla" and moving right along I plead guilty to all of it.
I am only now realizing something else. The state was more of a problem for me than the Feds, or only maybe. I was lead to believe the state is my more local government that would most likely understand local issues , not the far away Washington. However it now looks like the Feds back up Indian rights, and rural preference to resources, "those who need it most have first priority'" I had one of these substance special rights permits I felt I was in compliance with. I even had a private discussion with state officials to outline the grey area I operate in and had state understanding (I was verbally told). How could I prove such a conversation took place?
Subsistance US Supreme Court will soon consider taking up Alaska’s battle over subsistence - Anchorage Daily News
The battle over subsistence right is still not resolved today as above link shows, the issues were more volatile 20 years ago and have been since statehood. When Alaska became a state the agreement was for Alaska to retain control over its fish a game resources, as important to Alaska, as an isolated far off state depending on the land. I was good friends with Nenana Jack Coghill who helped write and signed the Alaska constitution. I felt Jack was qualified to understand the issues we discussed. Summed up, many Alaskans, including Jack, feel the Feds did not live up their agreement with the state
Left picture I chose , cover of Ruralite magazine. Of interest, I have an owl feather in my hat, later confiscated by Fish and Wildlife as illegal. Not under substance law , where owls are listed as a legally hunted edible bird.
Jack Coghill 100 Years of Alaska's Legislature Bio Page for Jack Coghill.
It appears only now, like I may have backed the wrong side? In other words it was the Feds supporting discrimination, not the state. The state argues we should all have equal rights to the resources. (all abide by the same laws) I see hunting interests are involved. Maybe white rich sport hunters with state political connections, fight for rights to trophy hunt, and do not want 'Indian rights' to interfere. As well as oil and timber interests who want full access to resource lands not wishing permits held up while a study on Indian subsistence life impact takes place . This would be hard to prove.
Left picture I chose the cover of Ruralite magazine. Of interest, I have an owl feather in my hat, later confiscated by Fish and Wildlife as illegal. Not under substance law , where owls are listed as a legally hunted edible birds. The mainstream public doe snot know this and may not care. "You killed a poor owl" is lynch mob material. As lawyer Satterberg pointed to.
Trump Administration Sells $164 Million in Arctic Oil Leases Despite Indigenous Community Opposition and Court Injunction - EnviroLink Network
The above link is just one recent example and Extreme Energy Injustice and Indigenous Rights Violations in Alaska - A Banking on Climate Change Case Study - The Understory - Rainforest Action Network
I may have been caught up in this conflict. 'Divide and conquer.' A lot of controversy over including white people in an issue concerning a way of life. What’s happening with subsistence law in Alaska? Keep in mind I was almost 'Mr Alaska' in the news, had thousands of followers writing books, and being in Alaska magazine 5 times
etc etc. putting Subsistence in the front page news when the government would prefer to keep the issues low profile. Keep in mind I controlled a trapline the size of the state of Rhode island, with potential subsistence rights. In fact an oil extortion company had to locate me and ask if it is ok to cross my trapline with. bulldozer. I was hard to intact as I lived remote nor just off grid but off the planet. it took months to contact me. i'm guessing the oil company was not pleased. Te subsistence issue is not gong way in one full swipe due to public sentiment about Indian rights,, and new power the natives got in the land settlement act at exactly the time I was out on federal lands Indians wanted. Getting rid of 'white subsistence' would weaken the big subsistence group. Indian subsistence now turns against white subsistence. Alaska Native Subsistence Rights: Taking an Anti-Racist Decolonizing Approach to Land Management and Ownership for Our Children and Generations to Come
In truth I 'somewhat agree' with the Native view. However this puts me in a serious bind. My life choice was to live like Indians ! I was accepted into the villages as 'one of us' (back in the 70's) The homestead I got was adverted by the state as "We expect you to live subsistence off the land if you hope to survive" I got the homestead ,cut trapline trail the knowledge needed and then get told I gave. try youth ad had no serious problem, Now, "No only Indians?" I'm taking time to set the backdrop as to what was going on and the intent of "Putting me out of business and shutting me up." So Indians turn on white. A quote - note the date. around the time of my issues.
'Apr 16, 20241990: The federal government begins managing subsistence hunting, trapping, and fishing on Alaska's federal public lands with the creation of the Federal Subsistence Board or FSB 1992: Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) are created All of this history, legislation, and the eventual lawsuits"
I was not informed of developments and change' going on. I lived a remote live in the wilds. My internet was at the village library. I did not even have electricity. My home was a remote homestead. What do I know about politics? All of Alaska at the time was a bit 'anti federal government.' legally a lawyer tells me, "You are responsible for knowing the law. The law is not responsible for keeping you informed or even offering ely access to the laws." And, "The way reality works is, someone gets chosen to be arrested, the words spreads and this is the cheapest most effete way to let everyone know. Bummer when you are the chosen one to take down."
Joseph Vogler Murder: Where is Manfried West Now? Update
The voglar story sums a lot up. 1993 right in the time period of my own issues. Summed up, Vogalr is the head of the Alaska Independent party. He was going to go to court showing how (in his view) Alaska was illegally taken as a state. True or not, many Alaskans believed him. I did not know him, but of him, and was close friends with his campaign manager. Who gave me insider information. Voglar himself said he expected the federal government will try to have him killed. When he in fact dies mysteriously at this exact time, many of us do not believe the official report. Tension at the time between the state and federal government was high. Voglar was extremely substance and individual rights minded. Those who agreed , lost their leader. No more talk of Alaskan independence.
Part of my own fault here I admit is I was 'pro Voglar' and independent party.' I had harsh things to say about the federal government. I see later that was not wise. I was younger then. One fault I have is, I can get more mouthy then is good for me and irritate people. I need attention, tend to say things that put me on the high horse. Example now ? As I felon I can be seen introducing myself as 'hi,, I'm a felon, want my autograph?" Big smile, hand out. Some chuckle and it's just me and fine. (now that this is out in the open..) Other people go ballistic. Many Alaskans rallied behind Voglar. He was a miner whose access to his claim was cut off in a President Carter move expanding Denali park. Many Alaskans at the time, felt there was a lot of corruption in the government. Big pipeline money was beginning to end. Huge resources getting pillaged, fish, oil timber mostly. Big oil big companies ,the little guys getting left in the dust. While the little guys take the fall and blamed! We'd had enough! "Let's end this corruption!" Ra ra. Vogar killed? Sounds like another Kennedy deal. No proof of coarse, there never is . This is the climate at the time of my bust. I know Don young. Not close, but we talked and he knows me by name.
Don Young - Wikipedia I knew him enough to trust him and his major views. I met him at the airport once and he recognized me. and my federal issues He was wearing bullets on the end of his bolo tie. He says to me, '"Just too piss off TSA ' A very 'pro gun' guy who I think understood our state. But honestly he was one of 'the good olde boys.' Ted Sevens, and what not. I now them all a little. I'm told by those who know more than naive me, they were all running scams, running with the money, selling our state out. I wouldn't know. Politics was not my thing. However, I figured I knew what was going on, believed what I was told, and was in fact a bit cocky about my rights. "I got friends in high places!" No. I did not. In my assumption I played my cards boldly out there at the edge. I felt 'without going over the line,' and I felt, kept close tabs on where the acceptable line is. Money is in taking chances, boldy going where your competitors dare not tread. I was at the time, honest subsistence. I had the same permit. as Indians have . Mine did not say 'white subsistence.'
Summed up "On July 1, 1990, the Federal Subsistence Management Program began managing wildlife resources on public lands. The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA) requires that rural residents have a priority over other users to take wildlife for subsistence uses " the full deal link Permits | U.S. Department of the Interior
The exact laws have been in flux, changing almost by the month, in the beginning. Note the date this begins. Right in there with all the my issues. New laws trying to blend state and federal and not succeeding. So I took advantage. For example some amount of money could be made selling arts and crafts and raw materials off subsistence taken game as incidental subsistence income. Vaguely defined but one court case was a 'for sure,' $500. Specifically bear claws , illegal for anyone but subsistence people. Well just my oh my! looky here!
"Marine mammals that died before 1972 do not fall into the same protected status, and Non-AlaskaNatives may use, sell and possess marine mammal parts that meet the standard of Pre-1972. There are of course other caveats to this seemingly simple statement. Any qualifying marine mammal part or product from that time, MUST have been in private possession PRIOR to 1972"
And who knows his hmmmm? Fish and Wilife officers nor the game book is not showing this. One must know how to look up laws. Google does not cover this. Usually just lawyers. So customers, animal protection PETA people can tell me all the wish about 'the law.' I looked it up. In court, I can point it to to the judge. "Pre 72 sir here is the paperwork" Most Fish and Wild ilife officers do to know the law. They know 'normal.' Do not mistake me for normal. My public defender sure did not know. nor want too. And I had no idea I would never be allowed my day in court to give my side. I was covered. I thought. No idea (at the time) why the Feds would be so excited. Study me for 4 years? How odd. In fact no one believed me. Dog and pony show Miles exaggerates his worth. How much money was I making? Lower class income. But true as I got better and made more money, it did get harder to argue I am just poor folk like all true Subsistance people. There at the time were 8 criteria to qualify, and income was just one factor. I was never asked. my arrest had written at the top "Not an Indian.' Obvious racial discrimination. I'd argue, if it went to court, "Then how is it I have a permit I did not lie to acquire, same as the Indian permit? Did you issue me a permit in error? Whose fault is that?" No one wanted this to get to court and have all this brought up! not going to happen. Me as well! I'd say "The simple solution is to drop the case. let this dog and pony show does his thing. Am. hurting anyone?" I may have been. Some items were going overseas (legally) Now it's an international issue. int view "So let us have lunch together and discuss the facts of life" "I'm sure we can come up with some arrangment we can all live with." I'd be happy to and find it a reasonable request to drop my overseas business." not gone to have such. conversation! My opinion? Back to the white supremacy issue. No way, no how a low life dumpster diver Indian lover is sitting at any table as an equal discussing anything whatever! My proper place is the back of the bus eyes down shuffling my feet not making eye contact saying "Yes Masta!" I say this because long ago I was upper class white, with privilege, and I see the difference.
So ok I admit I could be seen as a thorn and problem person. I'm selling on the internet? So ok, most natives will not be in competition here so I move in. Law says "Innovative methods of barter trade and Sale can be expected." So there you go. Important to me was the ethics. Not loopholes No animal is getting killed to supply me with body parts. it's all a by product of animals eaten, legally trapped for fur or killed in self defense. Just like the judge called it. Like, in the Indian village of Tanana where I am known, grizzly bears would sometimes show up right in town. They get shot 'because they are there' No one eats them no one wants them, so someone hooks the dead grizzly to their 4 wheeler and hauls him to the dump. No salvage of ny kind. left as so much garbage for the flies. So I had a friend there who would go cut the claws off for me. One subsistence guy to another. I sell the finished art .... North general police would not know the intricacies of such a law. Aske Fi d Ge nd the answer is "no!" Not going to get into the subtle exceptions. Public? "Oh my god this guy kills those poor endangered grizzly let's hang him!" Just like Satterberg said. This view was less prevalent 50 years ago when I got started. Maintain men were still more mainstream heroes . TV shows like Grizzle Adams, Daniel Boone, Roy Rogers, Zoro (with Indian Tonto) so people who looked p t those how's and wanted to live like this were understood better then today.
|
fOne of my grizzly claw necklace goes to Nikki Sixx from the band Motley Crue. 'Legal,' no hidden transactions. Many of my 'animal parts' end up being acquired by the wives of Fish and
Wildlife officers who arrest me. Fairbanks is a small enough city it is common to know people who know people and I sold openly and I assumed legally at the state Fair for 40 straight years! So why was a 20 crew assault rifle armed swat team sent to serve a search warrant?Why not just tell me there is an issue and let's have a talk? (my view) As the state did, where I heard there was a problem and went in had a talk, and made a handshake deal. I assumed we both honored the deal, I know I did. Opps (for the most part I forgot....) But geeze not 900 pounds of elephant ivory, walrus heads, polar bears, seals. Yikes! But no, we are never got to court. So they a say anything they like. I'm going to do what about it? Me and who else? |
|
I am a member of the paleontology group. I write for and donate fossils . The group supports legal and ethical practices. I got long well with the group. Many of our dealers get investigated by the government and is an on-going issue we discuss. Biggest relate issue is, universes and far museums want all fossils donated and under her control. Private fossil diggers are all considered outlaws by many who run universities. 'Those who dig in the mud' are of a lower class people? hard to get a handle on the real issue.
. I still sell ivory, as in 2,000 pounds in 2 weeks at the Tucson show. 2026 Legal mammoth .I'm considered an ethical respected dealer. Show spot by the pool, "sweet' (50 below and dark at home in Alaska) .
Relevant specific laws I found of interest.
I spent a long time looking all this up. I do not have flagrant disregard for the law. I know he law. Does law enforcement?
The Lacey Act makes it a federal offense “to transport ․ any wildlife ․ taken in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of the United States.” 16 U.S.C. § 3372(a)(1). A person who violates § 3372(a)(1) commits a felony “by knowingly engaging in conduct that involves ․ the intent to sell ․ wildlife ․ with a market value in excess of $350.” 16 U.S.C. § 3373(d)(1)(B)
I interpret the above to mean I need to be aware I am breaking the law. I have to sell the item (item can theoretical be gifted) and or the said item has to have a value over $350. (who decides the value?) Legal arguments to be debated?
The Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 provides the legal framework for most walrus management activities.
For a complete legal definition of “authentic native handicraft” for the purposes of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, see the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR 18.3)
A complete definition of “Alaskan Native” for the purposes of the Marine Mammal Protection Act is found in the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR 18.3) In
May authentic native handicrafts be sold?
Yes. Authentic native handicrafts, as defined in the answer to the second question above, may be sold by Alaskan Natives to anyone, and they may be resold and bought by anyone. However, for species listed as Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act, no import or export can occur in connection with the sale. Currently, none of the three species managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (sea otters, walrus or polar bear) are listed. For information on other marine mammals listed under the Endangered Species Act, contact the National Marine Fisheries Service .
Who may collect beach found parts?
Depending on land ownership, Federal regulations allow anyone (Alaskan Natives and non-Natives) to collect parts from dead sea otters, polar bears and walrus found on the beach or land within 1/4 mile of the ocean (including bays and estuaries). See answers below for limitations and requirements for collecting beach found parts of these marine mammals.
What parts may be collected?
Non-Natives may collect ONLY the skulls, bones, teeth and ivory from beach found sea otter, polar bear and walrus carcasses. In addition to those parts, Alaskan Natives may also collect the skins, meat and organs from these animals. Animal parts (including marine mammals) of an archeological or paleontological origin may not be collected from Federal or State lands.
Marking, Tagging & Reporting Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
What about fossil ivory?
Fossil ivory is ancient ivory whose composition has changed from ivory to mineral. Care should be taken to distinguish fossil ivory from recent ivory which has yellowed or discolored. Fossil ivory (including walrus, mammoth and mastodon) and other archeological and paleontological materials are regulated by an array of Federal and State laws. These items may not be collected on any Federal or State lands. Fossil ivory may be collected on private lands with the permission of the land owner, and is not regulated under the Marine Mammals Protection Act. Fossil ivory does not have to be tagged or registered. Anyone may sell fossil ivory without first handcrafting it.
permit is not required for handicrafts that are personal items if they are worn or carried in accompanying baggage, or are part of a shipment of household effects of persons moving their residence from the United States. A U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Declaration Form 3-177 should be completed prior to taking any personal marine mammal product out of the country, even it is intended that it will be brought back by the same person.
Exporters should inquire about foreign import restrictions, since some countries may not allow the importation of handcrafted sea otter or polar bear products. FCustoms Guide to Alaska Native Arts” maintained by the State of Alaska.
May walrus ivory be exported?
The answer is different for modern ivory versus fossil ivory. “A Customs Guide to Alaska Native Arts” maintained by the State of Alaska.
Fossil walrus ivory does not need to be made into an authentic native handicraft for sale, import or export. However, it does require a CITES permit for import or export.
I interpret the above to mean summed up, "it's complicated the the answer is not "No, no way no how" " For example I can have a Native friend create items for me from lego for him materials. I can barter trade buy them, own them and alter them tor resale (done all the time) I keep track of the origin for proof. Especially when I am also Subsistence. I need the $100 cities import export permit. No problem.
Mammoth and Mastodon Ivory
Mammoth and mastodon ivory are legal to export in personal baggage. Since these species are extinct, they are not protected by U.S. wildlife law. No paperwork is required to export mammoth or mastodon ivory to any country. However, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) prohibits their collection on public land. Before buying, ask how the ivory was acquired to determine if the ivory may have come from an illegal dig or excavation.
Is it legal for the sale of handicrafts made from
subsistence-harvested wildlife to occur outside of
Federal jurisdiction?
It is the opinion of the Federal Subsistence Board that Federal
regulations governing the sale of handicrafts made from subsistence-
harvested wildlife extend to any legally taken subsistence
wildlife regardless of where the actual cash transaction takes
place. However, be aware that State officials may disagree with
this interpretation and could decide to prosecute persons selling
subsistence harvested bear claws on State or private lands.
I interpret this to mean it's do-able but tricky. How might one 'prove' what land said bear was harvested on? Is the burden of proof on me? So an officer 'might' decide to agree, or not agree? There are a variety of interpretations in the law books I know of but do not list here.
In January 2005, the Federal Subsistence Board approved new restrictions on cash exchange for subsistence-caught salmon….exchanged for cash to 50 percent or less of a household's annual harvest……exchanges between a household in the district and non-rural residents to $500 annually.
Exchange of fish and other subsistence resources for cash is known as "customary trade," and is recognized by the State of Alaska and U.S. federal government as a legitimate subsistence practice.
“There could easily be further confusion among users as to what is expected of them… Current customary trade regulation is challenging to effectively communicate. There will need to be a focused outreach effort associated with implementation of the additional regulations to avoid further confusing this complex area of regulation,” staff members wrote to the Federal Subsistence Board.
And another source http://subsistmgtinfo.org/qa.htm#3) WHAT IS THE SUBSISTENCE PRIORITY
Subsistence has been elemental to Alaska Natives and their cultures for thousands of years. It also has become a way of life for many non-Natives in Alaska. Subsistence is recognized by the United States and by the State of Alaska as the highest-priority consumptive use of resources in the state.
Congress also saw a need to protect subsistence uses by non-Native rural residents, many of whom had adopted a subsistence way of living.
Legally, customary and traditional is defined as "a long-established, consistent pattern of use, incorporating beliefs and customs which have been transmitted from generation to generation (and) plays an important role in the economy of the community."
Interpret the above to mean, yes its is possible for non natives to qualify for subsistence. And yes customary tree can include money (up to $500 a year for sure) Elsewhere I read "as long as the cash is to purchase basic necessities" (no amount limit)
So if I am using the cash to buy fish nets, garden seeds, boat gas... this qualifies.
The term includes any Native, as so defined, either or both of whose adoptive parents are not Natives. It also includes, in the absence of proof of a minimum blood quantum, any citizen of the United States who is regarded as an Alaska Native by the Native village or town of which he claims to be a member
I interpret this to mean I could be considered a Native of the village of Nenana after half a lifetime living here as a native if the tribe accepts me as one of theirs, for the purpose of hunting fishing substance rights. (not for getting land and native money)
§ 18.25 Exempted marine mammals or marine mammal products.(a) The provisions of the Act and these regulations shall not apply:
(1) To any marine mammal taken before December 21, 1972,
I interpret this to mean the protection act is for products after 1972. Pre- 1972 is exempt . thus all walrus ivory before 1972 is exempt. it does not matter if it looks white, that is not the criteria.
ANILCA
The intent of all Federal subsistence
regulations is to accord subsistence uses
of fish and wildlife on public lands a
priority over the taking of fish and
wildlife on such lands for other
purposes, unless restriction is necessary
to conserve healthy fish and wildlife
populations.
I interpret this to mean subsistence rights takes priority over all other human resource needs including commercial and sport. I do understand the huge problem this could be for commercial interest, and sympathy. Imagine being the il compass with $1,000 a minute spinning by having to locate Miles Martin and ask for permission to run a bulldozer across his trapline as this might interfere with his $200 subsistence activity. One opioid is "get this guy out of there!'" I understand. But why not just talk to me about 'all the issues' and resolve this peacefully?
I spent a long time looking all this up. I do not have flagrant disregard for the law. I know he law. Does law enforcement?
The Lacey Act makes it a federal offense “to transport ․ any wildlife ․ taken in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of the United States.” 16 U.S.C. § 3372(a)(1). A person who violates § 3372(a)(1) commits a felony “by knowingly engaging in conduct that involves ․ the intent to sell ․ wildlife ․ with a market value in excess of $350.” 16 U.S.C. § 3373(d)(1)(B)
I interpret the above to mean I need to be aware I am breaking the law. I have to sell the item (item can theoretical be gifted) and or the said item has to have a value over $350. (who decides the value?) Legal arguments to be debated?
The Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 provides the legal framework for most walrus management activities.
For a complete legal definition of “authentic native handicraft” for the purposes of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, see the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR 18.3)
A complete definition of “Alaskan Native” for the purposes of the Marine Mammal Protection Act is found in the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR 18.3) In
May authentic native handicrafts be sold?
Yes. Authentic native handicrafts, as defined in the answer to the second question above, may be sold by Alaskan Natives to anyone, and they may be resold and bought by anyone. However, for species listed as Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act, no import or export can occur in connection with the sale. Currently, none of the three species managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (sea otters, walrus or polar bear) are listed. For information on other marine mammals listed under the Endangered Species Act, contact the National Marine Fisheries Service .
Who may collect beach found parts?
Depending on land ownership, Federal regulations allow anyone (Alaskan Natives and non-Natives) to collect parts from dead sea otters, polar bears and walrus found on the beach or land within 1/4 mile of the ocean (including bays and estuaries). See answers below for limitations and requirements for collecting beach found parts of these marine mammals.
What parts may be collected?
Non-Natives may collect ONLY the skulls, bones, teeth and ivory from beach found sea otter, polar bear and walrus carcasses. In addition to those parts, Alaskan Natives may also collect the skins, meat and organs from these animals. Animal parts (including marine mammals) of an archeological or paleontological origin may not be collected from Federal or State lands.
Marking, Tagging & Reporting Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
What about fossil ivory?
Fossil ivory is ancient ivory whose composition has changed from ivory to mineral. Care should be taken to distinguish fossil ivory from recent ivory which has yellowed or discolored. Fossil ivory (including walrus, mammoth and mastodon) and other archeological and paleontological materials are regulated by an array of Federal and State laws. These items may not be collected on any Federal or State lands. Fossil ivory may be collected on private lands with the permission of the land owner, and is not regulated under the Marine Mammals Protection Act. Fossil ivory does not have to be tagged or registered. Anyone may sell fossil ivory without first handcrafting it.
permit is not required for handicrafts that are personal items if they are worn or carried in accompanying baggage, or are part of a shipment of household effects of persons moving their residence from the United States. A U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Declaration Form 3-177 should be completed prior to taking any personal marine mammal product out of the country, even it is intended that it will be brought back by the same person.
Exporters should inquire about foreign import restrictions, since some countries may not allow the importation of handcrafted sea otter or polar bear products. FCustoms Guide to Alaska Native Arts” maintained by the State of Alaska.
May walrus ivory be exported?
The answer is different for modern ivory versus fossil ivory. “A Customs Guide to Alaska Native Arts” maintained by the State of Alaska.
Fossil walrus ivory does not need to be made into an authentic native handicraft for sale, import or export. However, it does require a CITES permit for import or export.
I interpret the above to mean summed up, "it's complicated the the answer is not "No, no way no how" " For example I can have a Native friend create items for me from lego for him materials. I can barter trade buy them, own them and alter them tor resale (done all the time) I keep track of the origin for proof. Especially when I am also Subsistence. I need the $100 cities import export permit. No problem.
Mammoth and Mastodon Ivory
Mammoth and mastodon ivory are legal to export in personal baggage. Since these species are extinct, they are not protected by U.S. wildlife law. No paperwork is required to export mammoth or mastodon ivory to any country. However, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) prohibits their collection on public land. Before buying, ask how the ivory was acquired to determine if the ivory may have come from an illegal dig or excavation.
Is it legal for the sale of handicrafts made from
subsistence-harvested wildlife to occur outside of
Federal jurisdiction?
It is the opinion of the Federal Subsistence Board that Federal
regulations governing the sale of handicrafts made from subsistence-
harvested wildlife extend to any legally taken subsistence
wildlife regardless of where the actual cash transaction takes
place. However, be aware that State officials may disagree with
this interpretation and could decide to prosecute persons selling
subsistence harvested bear claws on State or private lands.
I interpret this to mean it's do-able but tricky. How might one 'prove' what land said bear was harvested on? Is the burden of proof on me? So an officer 'might' decide to agree, or not agree? There are a variety of interpretations in the law books I know of but do not list here.
In January 2005, the Federal Subsistence Board approved new restrictions on cash exchange for subsistence-caught salmon….exchanged for cash to 50 percent or less of a household's annual harvest……exchanges between a household in the district and non-rural residents to $500 annually.
Exchange of fish and other subsistence resources for cash is known as "customary trade," and is recognized by the State of Alaska and U.S. federal government as a legitimate subsistence practice.
“There could easily be further confusion among users as to what is expected of them… Current customary trade regulation is challenging to effectively communicate. There will need to be a focused outreach effort associated with implementation of the additional regulations to avoid further confusing this complex area of regulation,” staff members wrote to the Federal Subsistence Board.
And another source http://subsistmgtinfo.org/qa.htm#3) WHAT IS THE SUBSISTENCE PRIORITY
Subsistence has been elemental to Alaska Natives and their cultures for thousands of years. It also has become a way of life for many non-Natives in Alaska. Subsistence is recognized by the United States and by the State of Alaska as the highest-priority consumptive use of resources in the state.
Congress also saw a need to protect subsistence uses by non-Native rural residents, many of whom had adopted a subsistence way of living.
Legally, customary and traditional is defined as "a long-established, consistent pattern of use, incorporating beliefs and customs which have been transmitted from generation to generation (and) plays an important role in the economy of the community."
Interpret the above to mean, yes its is possible for non natives to qualify for subsistence. And yes customary tree can include money (up to $500 a year for sure) Elsewhere I read "as long as the cash is to purchase basic necessities" (no amount limit)
So if I am using the cash to buy fish nets, garden seeds, boat gas... this qualifies.
The term includes any Native, as so defined, either or both of whose adoptive parents are not Natives. It also includes, in the absence of proof of a minimum blood quantum, any citizen of the United States who is regarded as an Alaska Native by the Native village or town of which he claims to be a member
I interpret this to mean I could be considered a Native of the village of Nenana after half a lifetime living here as a native if the tribe accepts me as one of theirs, for the purpose of hunting fishing substance rights. (not for getting land and native money)
§ 18.25 Exempted marine mammals or marine mammal products.(a) The provisions of the Act and these regulations shall not apply:
(1) To any marine mammal taken before December 21, 1972,
I interpret this to mean the protection act is for products after 1972. Pre- 1972 is exempt . thus all walrus ivory before 1972 is exempt. it does not matter if it looks white, that is not the criteria.
ANILCA
The intent of all Federal subsistence
regulations is to accord subsistence uses
of fish and wildlife on public lands a
priority over the taking of fish and
wildlife on such lands for other
purposes, unless restriction is necessary
to conserve healthy fish and wildlife
populations.
I interpret this to mean subsistence rights takes priority over all other human resource needs including commercial and sport. I do understand the huge problem this could be for commercial interest, and sympathy. Imagine being the il compass with $1,000 a minute spinning by having to locate Miles Martin and ask for permission to run a bulldozer across his trapline as this might interfere with his $200 subsistence activity. One opioid is "get this guy out of there!'" I understand. But why not just talk to me about 'all the issues' and resolve this peacefully?