> I am posting this at the request of Diahoga Paths Community of Native
> Americans. It is one small sample, what one of the members are
> doing here in Pennsylvania, where the state senator believes there
> are "no Indians".
>
> The following letters were sent to PA Rep Matt Baker and to
> Congressman Joseph McDade...
Please refer to that article, a copy of which is available from the
NATIVE-L archives at TAMVM1 or via the NativeNet Web site (use the URL
"http://bioc02.uthscsa.edu/~gst/nl/") for more details on this issue.
--Gary (gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us) ]
Charlie recieved a reply from Donald C. Madl, Exec Director of the
Pennsylvania Game Commission:
March 1, 1996
Dear Mr. Harley:
Representative Baker has asked us to respond to your letters to him
of February 1 and 6, 1996. It is appropriate that you cite Article
VI of the Constitution of the United States in that I believe the
seventy year old law that your are rererring to is the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act which is a federal law. The language which you quote from
Article VI of the U.S.Constitution makes it clear that that law is
the supreme law of the land. The General Assembly of Pennsylvania
has essentially acknowledged that by incorporating the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act into the Pennsylvania Game and Wildlife Code through
Section 2103 of the Game and Wildlife Code (34 Pa. C.S.Secton
2103(a)). Incidentally, the constitutionality of the federal
Migratory Bird Treaty Act with regard to possession of bird parts was
unanimously upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in _Andrus v. Allard_,
100 S. Ct. 318(1979).
As a state agency with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act incorporated
into the law which it is charged with enforcing, the Pennsylvania
Game Commission has no choice about enforcing the provisions of the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. This would even include checking pow
wows. The federal courts have held that the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act does not apply to reservations. To the best of our knowledge,
however, there are no reservations in Pennsylvania. If there is some
other treaty or statute which you can point to which would exempt
American Indians from provisions relating to possession of protected
bird parts, we would be more than happy to consider it. It is also
my understanding that the Department of Interior has established a
source for American Inidans of migratory bird parts for religious
purposes. If you would like, we can provide you with more
information on that source.
You also raised the matter of the use of inedible parts of game by
the American Indian. Section 2312 of the Game and Wildlife Code
permits the buying, selling, or bartering of the inedible parts of
game provided that they are sold by the original owner within 90 days
after the close of the season. In addition, it is very likely that
many of the items that you mentioned are parts of game legally
imported and properly tagged from other states. As long as those
items are properly tagged, there should be no problem. We do not see
that assuring that items are properly tagged would be that
burdensome. To the best of our knowledge these provisions are
enforced with regard to all the people of Pennsylvania and you give
us no specific basis to conclude that they are being used to harrass
or discriminate against Indian people.
The Pennsylvania Game Commission and I, as its Executive Director,
have no desire to discriminate against the American Indian. Our
agency is, however, charged with enforcing the Game and Wildlife Code
and there is no provision which exempts American Indians from its
provisions. We will therefore continue to enforce the law to the
best of our ability and hope that all people in Pennsylvania will
abide by its provisions. We thank you for bringing these matters to our
and Representative Baker's attention. We hope that you understand
our positon and wish you well in your endeavors.
Very truly yours,
(signature)
Donald C. Madl
Executive Director
cc:Representative Baker