Should Tribes Manage Public Lands?

by Lisa and Roland Morris

On Wednesday, April 2, 2003, the Chairman of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and Paul Hoffman, Deputy Assistant to the Interior Department, held a press conference to announce the Draft Plan for the management transfer of our Nation’s Bison Range. What was ignored at this press conference was not only the Regional Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), who wasn’t even told about the press conference but the very values United States citizens have a concerning land management and racial hiring. The FWS had stated seven years ago that unless the Tribe removed it's cattle that are currently grazing on National Refuge land, removed the power lines which are on refuge land (and have killed many refuge birds, including three rare trumpeter swans,) and moved the Tribes speedway, which is all on refuge land, it would not resume negotiations. However, the tribe had gone straight to the Dept. of Interior this time, and it has ordered the FWS to negotiate anyway. The DOI wants an agreement signed by the end of June, Congress to sign by the end of Sept, and to have the transfer of management enacted by Oct. 15th.

The DOI is pushing this even though none of the breeches of refuge land have been remedied. The CSKT has signed a concept paper that outlines how it will resolve the breeches, but they had signed a similar letter two and a half years ago. Nothing was done in that two and a half years, not to mention the seven years since the last Bison Range negotiations were halted.

We currently have a National Refuge system operating under uniform management and priorities. Through the years, this system has developed standards that always put wildlife first. No other country has anything like it. The NBR itself has become a leader in the nation for its biological weed control, and an independent survey from the University of Idaho indicated a very high visitor satisfaction rate. This proposal removes the refuge area from the uniform system. Transferring management of various FWS programs to other entities will produce a checkerboard system with varying administrative priorities. It also sets precedence for all Service policy regarding future tribal agreements on Service lands." including any National Park Service (NPS) Program, National Fish Hatchery, Ecological Service Program, Bureau of Land Management Program, Bureau of Reclamation, Endangered Species Programs, or geological survey.

Many of our nations tribal communities have done a great job at the various tasks they have put their hand to. However, in matters of national assets, one of the difficulties with tribal government administration is that the tribal government is too close to the tribal departments. Not only is there little separation of powers, but many councils micromanage every program. Decisions are made at council level, not at the department level. In the matter of the refuge, the tribal council would make many decisions, not the tribal biologists. Thus the council, having responsibility for the tribal economy and other matters, is forced to prioritize and unlike a departmental focus, wildlife won’t always on the top of the list. This is where the difference in the values between our national refuge system and the various tribal councils will be most noticeable.

Unfortunately, current negotiations are to be guided by Indian law – not refuge or public land law. The FWS would like to find common ground, but the DOI has given the tribe the rights in the negotiations and FWS has been told to keep quiet. Interestingly, the FWS Regional Director had turned down an Alaskan proposal recently because it was deemed not good for refuge system. The ruling was appealed and upheld. Mr. Hoffman has the Alaska proposal, which some have said is identical to the CSKT proposal, but is pushing the CSKT proposal anyway. From our understanding, this is known as racket negotiation and has been initiated by Mr. Hoffman’s boss, Steve Griles.

Finally, the National Park system is currently an Equal Opportunity employer. Under tribal management, it will absolutely not be. Tribal preference in hiring will be the rule. (Tribal members of that particular Reservation first, then descendents, then tribal members from other Reservations, and finally, non-Indians) Although the Tribal Chairman has stated that current employees will be allowed to stay, he has also admitted that future hiring will not be Equal Opportunity, but tribal preference. Tribal members have also said that as soon as the transfer is complete, current employees will be harassed until they quit. Duncan Brown, Indian Liaison for the DOI, also stated a few years ago that once a tribal compact is completed, the DOI has no interest in how hiring is done. Tribal Preference in hiring will be the standard and racial discrimination in hiring will occur on federal land with federal dollars. At this point in time Affirmative Action is being challenged in our Supreme Court, with the White House arguing that the system used by the University of Michigan perpetuates stereotype by creating "a separate path and a separate door for preferred minorities." We believe that that type of system does more harm than good in a nation that values Equality, and our National Refuge System should remain an open working opportunity for all people. It is understood that all jobs except for that of the Bison Range Manager would be at stake. However, there is also an understanding that the manager’s job is being left in the hands of the FWS only to make the proposal more palatable. Some have said that leaving him there gives the agreement credibility it doesn’t deserve.

The CSKT Chairman also states that the NBR is of geographic, historical and cultural importance to the tribes and legally, this allows for the transfer of management. However, this denies historical evidence that indicates various Salish speakers lived together in British Columbia before separating into bands. Some bands remained inland; others migrated to the ocean shores. The band constituting the Salish crossed the Rockies eastward before turning south. Their traditions were progressively diluted to the point that they combined features of both Plateau and Plains cultures. In fact, older Blackfeet consider them a Plains people. It also denies factual history that after tribal members acquired horses and guns, buffalo rapidly disappeared. Until western bison were almost exterminated, this tribal community ventured onto the plains to hunt. The hunter now collected more skins than he could use and discarded less desirable buffalo products. Despite dwindling herds west of the Rockies, the Buffalo were considered inexhaustible. After having lived quite some time in the valley south of Missoula, the Flathead Reservation was established a little over 100 years ago and the tribe moved up to the Mission Valley. The history of CSKT ancestor and Bison herd entrepreneur, Michel Pablo, also includes his statement that he "saw where he could sell his buffalo to parks and museums and make a good thing of them." His partner, Charles Allard, wrote in 1886, "buffalo breeding is as good an investment as real estate," for hides sold for $100 a piece, and mounted heads at $200 to $500." In addition, when the CSKT was given buffalo in the 1980’s to raise, the herd was sold to the Missoula Livestock Exchange only a few years later.

Further, the National Bison Range had never been run for the benefit of the Tribes. A 1926 article written by Cora E. Van Dusen notes that the Range was established in 1909 for the purpose of preserving the American Bison. A letter written for former Rep. Pat Williams in the summer of 1995 reiterates that the purpose of the Range was "...for a permanent National Bison range." And according to the 1905-1907 annual report of the American Bison Society, CSKT ancestor Duncan McDonald, upon hearing of the Bison Range plans, stated, "I hope they will do it...every Indian will be glad if the Government can and will save them, and keep them where they can be seen. And if there is anything I can do to help, I want to do it!"

We must also be careful not to deny the historical, cultural and geographic ties the non-tribal member population has to the Bison. The National Bison Range was the brainchild of the American Bison Society for the preservation of Buffalo. In 1908, The National Bison range was created by an act of Congress and established at the request of President Theodore Roosevelt. The lands were reserved from mostly unallotted lands on the Flathead reservation. To purchase the initial buffalo from the Conrad family in Kalispell, the Society raised $10,560 through the donations of the American Public, including the nickels and dimes of children throughout the nation. Total federal appropriations for the 18,500 acres, fence and miscellaneous items, including the payment to the CSKT came to $50,700. This amount represented fair appraised value at the time. Later, in 1972, when the tribe determined that they desired more for the entire reservation land, including the Bison Range, the US Claims Court agreed and Congress paid the Tribes a second time. This time, it was over 6 million dollars plus interest.

The Honorable Senator Conrad Burns stated April 2, in a letter to Mr. Hoffman, that he will not support any transfer of NBR assets to the CSKT and that the FWS should retain all ownership of NBR lands and easements. We urge all United States Citizens to continue to contact Senator Burns, thank him for taking this stand, and urge him to withhold his consent for the transfer of management of this refuge as well as any other program currently under the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. We also request that negotiation responsibilities be given back to the FWS, which has 100 years of experience in taking care of the nations wildlife programs with the best interest of the wildlife in mind. Put the clout back with service so they can represent the people. To do this, please calling Senator Burns at 202 -224-2644, (or if calling from MT -1-800-344-1513) in addition to signing the petition currently circulating. This petition can be downloaded from this link. We urge people to call Senator Max Baucus as well at 202-224-2651, (or if calling from MT - 1800-332-6106)

Roland and I receive many letters and calls from tribal members and non-members asking us to continue our efforts concerning Federal Indian policy. Unfortunately, tribal members that contact us always ask for anonymity. The latest writer, a member of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, asked us to use the information he has given us while at the same time keep it anonymous.

As a tribal member himself, Roland knows the way many tribal council's work and understands the need for anonymity. If one could see the pain he has felt for the way people on his own reservation and other reservations are treated, one might begin to understand. Now let me share with you a little of what this latest CSKT member told us:

"I was raised to respect Mother Earth and all of her people and animals....I think the Tribal Council will try to change (the wildlife Refuges) for the worse if they manage them. I have some information that I think that you should consider in making your position on the plans."

The writer describes various mismanagement and abuse of power by the CSKT tribal Council, then states, "The tribal members don't dare to complain or they will be marked by the Tribal Council...The Tribal Council can be hard on people that don't agree with them..."

About tribal preference in hiring, the writer says:

"Council members treat employees that are not tribal members very bad. They openly bad-mouth them and run them down during the Council meetings and badger supervisors not to hire them even though there are not tribal members who qualify for some jobs. They make jokes about white people in meetings... No white employee dares to disagree with a tribal member or they might lose their job"

"…The Council is talking (publicly) about how they will welcome the Bison Range workers as tribal employees. I feel sorry for those people…those people will be harassed all the time to try to get them to quit their jobs. I have already heard that some of them should be replaced with tribal members as soon as possible because they have spoken up against this takeover…I heard today that the Council is forcing employees to get signatures on petitions in favor of taking the Bison Range over. I heard that some employees who do not want to sign the petition are getting harassed to sign it."

... "I wish that I could sign your petition or speak up at meetings, but I am afraid of what the Council might do to me and my family." "I also want to ask you not to show anyone this letter, but use the information on it."

I'm hoping that through this letter, you will understand a little better where some of our motivation comes from. In fact, I was getting so tired of being maligned this last week; I was considering backing off our efforts. But a letter likes this encourages us to continue.

I would like to encourage everyone to continue. Please take and spread both the S. 578 petition and the Bison Range petitions. Please also call US Senator Conrad Burns and remind him that the Bison Range management transfer will set precedent for all US National refuge policy, and is not in the best interest of United States citizens or our wildlife.

The FWS had stated seven years ago that unless the Tribe removed the cattle currently grazing on National Refuge land, removed the power lines (which have killed many refuge birds, including three rare trumpeter swans,) and moved the Tribes speedway, which are all on refuge land, it would not resume negotiations. However, the tribe had gone straight to the Dept. of Interior this time, and it ordered the FWS to negotiate anyway. The DOI wants an agreement signed by the end of June, Congress to sign by the end of Sept, and to have the transfer of management enacted by Oct. 15th.

The DOI is pushing this even though none of the breeches of refuge land have been remedied. The CSKT has signed a concept paper that outlines how it will resolve its priority differences in the Pablo refuge, but they had signed a letter two and a half years ago that also intended to solve these problems. Nothing was done in that two and a half years, not to mention the seven years since the last Bison Range negotiations were halted.

We currently have a National Refuge system operating under uniform management and priorities. Through the years, this system has developed standards that always put wildlife first. No other country has anything like it. The NBR itself has become a leader in the nation for its biological weed control and an independent survey from the University of Idaho indicated a very high visitor satisfaction rate. This proposal removes the refuge area from the uniform system. Transferring management of various FWS programs to other entities will produce a checkerboard system with varying administrative priorities. It also sets precedence for all Service policy regarding future tribal agreements on Service lands

Please calling Senator Burns at 202 -224-2644, (or if calling from MT -1-800-344-1513) in addition to signing the petition currently circulating. This petition can be downloaded from www.citizensalliance.org. We urge people to call Senator Max Baucus as well at 202-224-2651, (or if calling from MT - 1800-332-6106), and Steve Griles, Dept. Sec. of the Interior, at 202-208-6291