Response to Sanders: Ma'iingan as Property

American law has long recognized the state as the owner of wild game within a state’s borders, including gray wolves (or “ma’iingan” in Anishinaabemowin), within the States of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan. However, as Anishinaabe scholar Jason Sanders forcefully demonstrates, the Anishinaabeg...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fletcher, Matthew L.M., Reo, Nicholas J.
Format: Text
Language:unknown
Published: University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository 2013
Subjects:
Online Access:https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/2653
https://wlr.law.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1263/2014/01/Fletcher-Reo-Final.pdf
id ftumichlaw:oai:repository.law.umich.edu:articles-3657
record_format openpolar
spelling ftumichlaw:oai:repository.law.umich.edu:articles-3657 2023-05-15T13:28:40+02:00 Response to Sanders: Ma'iingan as Property Fletcher, Matthew L.M. Reo, Nicholas J. 2013-01-01T08:00:00Z https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/2653 https://wlr.law.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1263/2014/01/Fletcher-Reo-Final.pdf unknown University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/2653 https://wlr.law.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1263/2014/01/Fletcher-Reo-Final.pdf Articles ma-iingan Anishinaabe Anishinaabemowin wolf hunts Odawa Bodewadmi Ojibwe treaty rights intergovernmental cooperation Indigenous Indian and Aboriginal Law text 2013 ftumichlaw 2022-10-16T16:40:14Z American law has long recognized the state as the owner of wild game within a state’s borders, including gray wolves (or “ma’iingan” in Anishinaabemowin), within the States of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan. However, as Anishinaabe scholar Jason Sanders forcefully demonstrates, the Anishinaabeg — indigenous people of the western Great Lakes known as the Ottawa (Odawa), Potawatomi (Bodewadmi), and Chippewa (Ojibwe) — considered ma’iingan siblings, not property. One does not hunt one’s siblings. Sanders’s paper is a fine example of cutting edge, pragmatic legal scholarship that will allow the stakeholders, in time, to push through the adversarial rhetoric and move into a more useful cooperative mode. Federal Indian law, often through the assertion of American Indian treaty rights, has historically been a powerful engine for change. Treaty rights cases arising from Anishinaabeg treaties often do not result in a winner-take-all outcome, with either tribes or states prevailing over all opponents. Instead, the rule of law as exemplified by Indian treaty rights forces state interests to reckon with the interests of a discrete and insular minority. As such, regulation of hunting, fishing, gathering, and other activities on or near Indian country is an intergovernmental affair, dominated by cooperative fact finding and negotiation. Text anishina* University of Michigan Law School: Scholarship Repository Indian
institution Open Polar
collection University of Michigan Law School: Scholarship Repository
op_collection_id ftumichlaw
language unknown
topic ma-iingan
Anishinaabe
Anishinaabemowin
wolf hunts
Odawa
Bodewadmi
Ojibwe
treaty rights
intergovernmental cooperation
Indigenous
Indian
and Aboriginal Law
spellingShingle ma-iingan
Anishinaabe
Anishinaabemowin
wolf hunts
Odawa
Bodewadmi
Ojibwe
treaty rights
intergovernmental cooperation
Indigenous
Indian
and Aboriginal Law
Fletcher, Matthew L.M.
Reo, Nicholas J.
Response to Sanders: Ma'iingan as Property
topic_facet ma-iingan
Anishinaabe
Anishinaabemowin
wolf hunts
Odawa
Bodewadmi
Ojibwe
treaty rights
intergovernmental cooperation
Indigenous
Indian
and Aboriginal Law
description American law has long recognized the state as the owner of wild game within a state’s borders, including gray wolves (or “ma’iingan” in Anishinaabemowin), within the States of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan. However, as Anishinaabe scholar Jason Sanders forcefully demonstrates, the Anishinaabeg — indigenous people of the western Great Lakes known as the Ottawa (Odawa), Potawatomi (Bodewadmi), and Chippewa (Ojibwe) — considered ma’iingan siblings, not property. One does not hunt one’s siblings. Sanders’s paper is a fine example of cutting edge, pragmatic legal scholarship that will allow the stakeholders, in time, to push through the adversarial rhetoric and move into a more useful cooperative mode. Federal Indian law, often through the assertion of American Indian treaty rights, has historically been a powerful engine for change. Treaty rights cases arising from Anishinaabeg treaties often do not result in a winner-take-all outcome, with either tribes or states prevailing over all opponents. Instead, the rule of law as exemplified by Indian treaty rights forces state interests to reckon with the interests of a discrete and insular minority. As such, regulation of hunting, fishing, gathering, and other activities on or near Indian country is an intergovernmental affair, dominated by cooperative fact finding and negotiation.
format Text
author Fletcher, Matthew L.M.
Reo, Nicholas J.
author_facet Fletcher, Matthew L.M.
Reo, Nicholas J.
author_sort Fletcher, Matthew L.M.
title Response to Sanders: Ma'iingan as Property
title_short Response to Sanders: Ma'iingan as Property
title_full Response to Sanders: Ma'iingan as Property
title_fullStr Response to Sanders: Ma'iingan as Property
title_full_unstemmed Response to Sanders: Ma'iingan as Property
title_sort response to sanders: ma'iingan as property
publisher University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository
publishDate 2013
url https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/2653
https://wlr.law.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1263/2014/01/Fletcher-Reo-Final.pdf
geographic Indian
geographic_facet Indian
genre anishina*
genre_facet anishina*
op_source Articles
op_relation https://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/2653
https://wlr.law.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1263/2014/01/Fletcher-Reo-Final.pdf
_version_ 1766405457084153856