Bitter fight blowing up over Columbia River/Willapa Bay tribal fishing rights

Published 1:30 am Monday, July 20, 2026

BAY CENTER — A high-stakes battle is heating up between the non-federally recognized Chinook Indian Nation and the Quinault Indian Nation over tribal sovereignty and lucrative fisheries along the Southwest Washington coast and the Columbia River.

Following a federal ruling in the Western District of Washington that blocked an initial Quinault effort to expand their fishing treaty boundaries, the tribe has officially vowed to explore all litigation avenues. The Quinault upped the ante earlier this month by asking the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn that lower court ruling.

“While the Ninth Circuit isn’t being asked to decide fishing boundaries at this stage, its decision could determine whether this litigation proceeds. The Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe is actively monitoring the case and remains committed to protecting our rights, our sovereignty, and the interests of our Tribal members throughout this process,” the Shoalwater Tribe said.

While Shoalwaters stand to be directly impacted by a successful expansion effort into Willapa Bay, at this time the most bitter dispute is between the Quinault and the Chinook.

This was demonstrated in a June 10 Facebook post by Quinault Chairman Guy Capoeman. His formal Quinault Tribal Council letter to Chinook Chairman Tony Johnson lays bare a deep-seated historical and legal divide regarding federal recognition and territorial waters.

Battle over lucrative waters

The ongoing battle centers on a bold push by the Quinault to expand their treaty-protected ‘usual and accustomed’ fishing and shellfish fishing grounds. The Quinault are seeking to secure half-shares of the highly valuable, lucrative Dungeness fishery along with fin-fish harvest extending into Willapa Bay, Shoalwater Bay and approximately 60 miles up the Columbia River.

Without treaty rights of its own at this time, the Chinook Tribe itself would not be directly impacted by a Quinault incursion. However, many individual members of the tribe harvest fish and shellfish under state licenses and longstanding private property rights. These individuals — along with nontribal recreational and commercial fishermen — would stand to lose 50% of their allowable catch if the Quinault are able to swallow up Willapa Bay and the Columbia estuary.

U.S. District for Western Washington Judge Ricardo S. Martinez denied the Quinaults’ motion on June 2, which sought to open a new sub-proceeding under the Boldt decision, United States v. Washington — and upheld the decision on appeal on June 9. Martinez determined that the Quinaults’ southern boundary was decided in a 2009 sub-proceeding, which places the contested waters more than 10 miles south of the legally recognized Quinault boundary.

Martinez’s ruling was celebrated by the Chinook and Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe as a legal win and affirmation of their ancestral lands. The Quinault responded by making it clear that the fight was far from over and pledged an aggressive appeal to the Court of Appeals.

Sovereignty and strife

The letter published by Capoeman provides a deep, unfiltered look at the ongoing political fallout between the two tribes. Addressed directly to Johnson, it delivers a stern rebuff to comments he and the Chinook have made publicly and outlines the Quinault’s demands before any “future reconciliation” could ever take place.

In the letter, the Quinault Tribal Council explicitly ties their opposition to the Chinook’s ongoing fight for federal recognition to the current boundary dispute.

“The Quinault Indian Nation is a principal signatory of the Treaty of Olympia, ratified by the U.S. Congress in 1856,” the tribal council said. “The present-day Quinault Indian Nation is comprised of several bands and tribes including the Quinault, Queets, Quileute, Hoh River, Chehalis, Cowlitz, and Chinook.”

The letter accuses Chinook leadership of making “politically provocative and factually misleading” claims on social media and in regional press — specifically regarding allegations that the Quinault are “stealing Chinook’s inheritance” or “taking over” overlapping territory.

“In good faith, Quinault Indian Nation proposed a framework for Chinook Tribal Recognition that does not infringe on Quinault’s governmental authority, harm our sovereign powers, or reopen long-settled treaty making and failed treaty ratification, including treaties previously proposed by former Superintendent of Indian Affairs, Anson Dart,” the council said.

“Instead, Quinault’s attempt to propose a path forward has been met with hostility and misrepresentation of facts in the public and political spheres. The most recent iteration of the Chinook Recognition Proposal includes language that could reopen the long-settled status of Anson Dart Treaty Making by leaving open the door for ratification of failed treaty councils.

“This proposal also failed to include language ensuring that the Quinault Indian Nation’s land and sovereignty would not be harmed if the proposal were enacted. This has and will remain a non-starter for the Quinault Indian Nation. No other modern day tribal recognition has included language that could create conflict with and potentially destabilize existing Federal Treaties that have been fully executed and enforced under Federal Indian Law.

“Your recognition effort then bled into our recent Request for Determination of the boundaries of Quinault’s usual and accustomed fishing grounds and stations protected under the Treaty of Olympia,” the council added.

The Quinault are fiercely defending their legal maneuvers and have asserted that the tribe is not seeking to create new rights and instead wants judicial recognition of “pre-existing rights as reserved by our People when they signed our treaty” on July 1, 1855.

One of the most striking portions of the letter issued by Capoeman is a response to an alleged quote by Johnson, asking the Quinault if the boundary dispute was “really a hill you want to die on?”

The Quinault response was one word — “Absolutely.”

What could be coming

With the formal appeal filed to the federal appellate court, the outcome could carry massive economic impacts on Pacific County as well as cultural implications for the Chinook, Shoalwater and other neighboring tribes. If the Quinault should prevail, it could fundamentally reorder commercial fishing rights and reshape the political dynamics of the coastal tribes for generations to come.

The impacts would also drastically upend the recreational fisheries with tighter restrictions, because a new tribal stakeholder would be drawing from the existing resource pool — the non-treaty shares of salmon, steelhead, Dungeness crab and other lucrative fisheries would shrink.

Local anglers could expect shortened fishing seasons, reduced daily catch limits and emergency closures that are designed to ensure the Quinault fleet meets its court-mandated half-share.

Adding to this trickle-down, introducing the Quinault to the Columbia River would upend long-straining, delicate inter-state management agreements, plunging regional fishing regulations into a period of prolonged uncertainty.

Johnson could not be immediately reached for comment.