Opinion ID: 771494
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: ICC Testimony

Text: 44 The Muckleshoot point to the findings of fact made by the ICC in 1966 in a case involving the Puyallup Tribe. The ICC found that the testimony before it tend[ed ] to show that the islands in southern Puget Sound were used jointly by a number of treaty-time tribes, including the ancestors of the Muckleshoot. The Muckleshoot maintain that this finding supports a broad reading of saltwater of Puget Sound in Judge Boldt's decision. This is incorrect. 45 In a post-trial substantive order, Judge Boldt said that an ICC finding in a case involving land claims of the Nooksack Tribe 5 in no way dealt with asserted Indian treaty fishing rights. United States v. Washington, 459 F. Supp. 1020, 1042 (W.D. Wash. 1978). The evidence in the ICC report is insufficient to support a broad reading of Dr. Lane's phrase the beaches of Puget Sound or Finding 76's phrase the saltwater of Puget Sound. Even assuming fishing did take place, there is nothing in the ICC finding to indicate that it met the requirements of usual and accustomed.