 South Dakota: First Mitigation Act Repealed!CPTnet October 4, 1999 Pierre, SD -- On September 30, President Clinton signed a bill which included the repeal of Title VI of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1999, or the Mitigation Act. A second version of the Mitigation Act, passed in August, still stands, so Oceti Sakowin campers on La Framboise Island are digging in for the winter, chopping wood and winterizing tipis and tents. The Oceti Sakowin camp has been on La Framboise Island since the lighting of the sacred fire on March 22, in protest of the Mitigation Act. The campers are determined to remain until the second version, which calls for the transfer of 92,000 acres of land to the state of South Dakota, is also repealed. US citizens who wish to follow up on the issue may contact Senators and Representatives to thank them for keeping Section 505 in the final conference version of Public Law 106-60. Remind them that there is a second version of this legislation, or the Mitigation Act, passed as Title VI of the Water Development Resources Authorization Act of 2000. This version also should be repealed or have hearings held on it so that Native American and other people opposed to the land transfer may register their concerns. Christian Peacemaker Teams is an initiative among Mennonite and Church of the Brethren congregations and Friends Meetings that supports violence reduction efforts around the world. Contact CPT at P. O. Box 6508 Chicago, IL 60680 Tel: 312-455-1199 E-mail: cpt@igc.org To join CPTNET, our e-mail network, fill out the form found on our WEB page at http://www.prairienet.org/cpt/ AWAITS CLINTON SIGNATURE Eagle Butte News, Vol. 90, No. 33 August 19, 1999 - p.1 The Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restoration bill, commonly known as the Mitigation Act, has been passed by both houses of the US congress and awaits the signature of President Clinton to become law. The bill, which was originally passed last year, was repealed in the US House of Representatives in late July; then revised in conference committee before its final passage on Aug. 5 as part of the Water Resource Development Act of 1999. The implementation of the act awaits the passage of a separate funding authorizationm which is expected in September. The bill will transfer approximately 200 square miles of land lost to the construction of the Missouri River Dams from the US Army Corps of Engineers to the State of South Dakota, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe. It will also establish trust funds for wildlife habitat restoration, develop recreational sites, provide public access and protect archaeological, historical and cultural sites along the Missouri River. The Mitigation Act is a piece of a larger bill, which provides for other water and conservation projects, and authorizes various construction by the Secretary of the Army. Some of those projects, not the Mitigation Bill itself, were in disputem leading to the House repeal. Those issues were resolved in conference committee, and on August 5 the final version was passed and published in the congressional record. The bill has been amended to include language extending local jurisdiction (state or tribal as appropriate) to the water's edge, as opposed to a legal land description for the boundary. The amendment was added to alleviate fears that a strip of land would be left between the legal division line and the water of the lake, with no clear definition of jurisdiction in the area. The mitigation bill has aroused a storm of protest, both from five South Dakota tribes who did not participate and from individuals within the Cheyenne River and Lower Brule Sioux Tribes. They say their chief concern is the return of traditional treaty landsm those on the west bank of the Missouri River, to the State of South Dakota and the possible quantification of water rights through a study of the effects of the transfer on the flow of the river. A group of protestors has been camped on LaFramboise Island near Pierre since March 22, and has permission to remain until Aug. 21. They maintain their treaty rights are being violated by the transfer and met with the Red Earth Coalition (of the Black Hills Treaty Council) and representatives of the five tribes to plan their next move. The five opposing tribes are the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, the Yankton Sioux Tribe, the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe, the Oglala Sioux Tribe and the Rosebud Sioux Tribe. Al Lundy, Pierre Capital Journal, reports tribal chairmen have been invited by Standing Rock chairman Charles Murphy to a summit in Fort Yates, ND. Members of the Black Hills reaty Council and Red Earth Coalition planned a meeting at Pine Ridge the same day. Both groups will be discussing what action to take next. Charmaine White Face, media coordinator for the Black Hills Treaty Council, says there will probably be legal action, but as a last resort, because it is so expensive. TRACKING MITIGATION There are two legislative tracks in Congress dealing with water projects, the Missouri River and the Mitigation Act. The Act provides for the transfer of certain lands managed by the US Army Corps of Engineers to the State of South Dakota and the Cheyenne River and Lower Brule Sioux Tribes. One track is the Water Resource Development Act of 1999 which has been approved by both the US House of Representatives and the US Senate. WRDA is the congressional authorization of a long list of water projects across the country, which also now includes the language from the Mitigation Act approved last October. The other track is the Energy and Water Appropriation Bill which has been approved by both houses, but in different forms. That legislation provides funds for projects that have been authorized. On July 27, it was the appropriation bill that was amended to provide for a repeal of the Mitigation Act which had been approved in October of 1998. Because of that amendment and other differences between the House and Senate versions, the appropriation bill is still being considered by a conference committee. According to staff members in the office of US Senator Tom Daschle, D-SD, the Aug. 5 approval of WRDA by both the House and Senate means the Mitigation Act will stand, even of the Energy and Water Appropriations Bill is approved with the Mitigation Act repealer.
Al Lundy CPTnet August 17, 1999 by Lisa Martens I have risen high and fallen hard a few too many times today. At the Seven Council Fires Spiritual Camp as a Christian Peacemaker Teams observer, I heard this morning that a complete rejection of the "Mitigation Act" has been submitted; more than any of us had dared to hope for. The "Mitigation Act" would transfer 200,000 acres of land from the Federal Government to the State, and this non-violent society (Oyate), against the transfer, was born March 22, 1999. In 1868, the Great Sioux Nation and the United States of America agreed that land including those 200,000 acres belonged to the "Sioux" (Lakota, Dakota, Nakota), and a treaty was drawn. I sit with a wise young man and a gentle warrior who have been praying, singing, sweating, and working daily at the Camp; knowing that prevention of the "Act" is one step toward honouring that treaty. A repeal is good news, but each new phone call adds confusion: Is it truly a repeal, or just a reintroduction of the Act under a new name? Restlessly, I sit with the two men, wondering about their thoughts. In answer to my question, I hear their words. "Things are better up there, aren't they?" the warrior asks the other; a young man of the Cree Nation from Alberta. They are discussing the differences between Canada's and the United States' treatment of Native Peoples. "They pay money for some of the land they took, don't they?" "Well," replies the young man, "That's what some say, but a lot of people don't realized that money isn't everything. Sometimes it does no good at all." "But," presses the warrior, "They give your land back once in a while, too. Wasn't there a place near your home where that happened?" The wise young man speaks sadly. "Yes. The government took it, ruined it and then gave it back." There is a long pause. "That may be true," responds the gentle warrior finally, "but that land will heal if it's left alone. Maybe not in your life-time, but think of your unborn. That's what I think of here at camp. Our grandfathers thought of us before we were born, struggling to protect the land, and we do the same." My mind wanders to the stories of this warrior's ancestors: In 1890, three hundred unarmed Lakota men, women and children were massacred at Wounded Knee as they prayed and danced for a return of the land to which they belonged. Members of the U.S. Calvary received medals for their efforts. Repeatedly since then, land promised to the Nation has been taken. Between 1973 and '76, thirty Native Americans were murdered on Pine Ridge Reserve, their deaths never investigated. Pine Ridge is this warriors home His talk about the unborn could be from one of the "politically correct" movies portraying quaint, "olden times Indians" as protagonists. But there is nothing quaint about his life: He's got grandchildren about whom he quietly boasts. He's worked on his home reserve with people addicted to alcohol. He's seen violence on many levels. There's a bullet permanently lodged in his face. Today he's watching the violence of a government trying to take his people's land again, knowing that even a true repeal of the Mitigation Act and its passing the Senate will only be a preliminary step in the struggle. Its 105' F The flies are biting And this gentle warrior takes a moment to add his voice to the chorus of his ancestors. Call President and Oppose Version II of Mitigation Act (Title VI) August 16, 1999
Pierre, SD -- Please call the President's Native American Inter-Government Affairs office and urge the President not to sign S507 until Title VI has been removed. In a questionable political maneuver, Congress has re-passed Title VI, a controversial transfer of land along the Missouri River from the federal government to the state of South Dakota, as part of a Water Resource Development Authorization bill, S507 and sent it to the President for his signature. Lakota people have protested the land transfer by camping on an island across from the state capital of Pierre since March 22, with CPTers as observers at their nonviolent camp. The Lakota were promised the land as part of the 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie and again after the Pick-Sloan Dam System flooded thousands of acres of reservation land. Last fall, Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD) inserted a bill to implement the land transfer as Title VI into the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1999 after the House refused to pass it. In July, the House of Representatives repealed Title VI, the land transfer as the Energy and Water Development appropriations bill, HR 2605. Section 505 of that bill repealed Title VI of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1999. The repeal must still go through a conference committee, scheduled for early to mid-September, before it becomes law. But on August 5, 1999, some Congresspeople made a move to undercut the repeal of Title VI. A joint conference committee passed a new measure that nearly duplicates the Title VI passed in 1998. This new Title VI is a part of SB 507. Opponents of Title VI believe the new version was passed in case the 1999 Title VI is repealed by the joint conference committee that meets in September. WHAT TO DO: Contact the White House Inter-Governmental Affairs Office at 202-456-2896. Request the Native American desk, whose director is Lynn Cutler. You may speak to the secretary; she is aware of the issue, and knows that people are concerned. Request that President Clinton not sign the S507, the Water Resource Development Authorization Act, until Title VI (the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe and state of South Dakota Wildlife Habitat Restoration bill) has been removed. * Mention that Title VI is already legislation, and that the House just passed a bill to repeal it in July. You may want to ask why or how Congress can pass the same bill twice! * You might mention that you are affiliated with the Oceti Sakowin Camp and/or the Christian Peacemaker Teams , and have visited or been concerned about the camp. Also note that the camp has been there for five months in opposition to Title VI. * Note your concern about the legality of the bill, given Treaty questions, possible legal problems with the Native American Graves Protection act, and the questionable way the bill was passed in the first place. Christian Peacemaker Teams is an initiative among Mennonite and Church of the Brethren congregations and Friends Meetings that supports violence reduction efforts around the world. CPT-South Dakota TEL: 605-222-6051; E-mail: cpt5@igc.org. Website: http://www.prairienet.org/cpt/southd.html Contact CPT at P. O. Box 6508 Chicago, IL 60680 Tel: 312-455-1199 Fax: 312-666-2677; E-mail: cpt@igc.org To join CPTNET, our e-mail network, fill out the form found on our WEB page at http://www.prairienet.org/cpt/ August 4, 1999 The Honorable Tom Daschle United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Re: Support Repeal of the "Mitigation Act" Dear Tom: The Black Hills Group of the Sierra Club strongly supports the repeal of the so-called Missouri River "Mitigation" Act in the House version of the energy and water development appropriations bill for FY'2000. We urge the Senate to support this repeal in conference. We strongly oppose the transfer of federal lands to the States, and especially to the State of South Dakota, which has a dreadful environmental record of managing its public lands (witness the logging of the Needles area of Custer State Park, and the labelling of native pine beetles and prairie dogs as "pests" to be exterminated). Tom, we are shocked that this controversial measure was inserted by you into the Omnibus Appropriations Act, without hearings and without ensuring compliance with other federal laws (such as the Mni Wiconi Act). This land transfer completely flouts the National Environmental Policy Act by interfering in the ongoing EIS for the Corps of Engineers Master Manual for the Missouri. This is the type of dead-of-night special-interest rider that we have come to expect from the anti-environmental Senators from Idaho and Alaska. This Act, and the manner in which it has been promoted, is a profound betrayal of the public interest of all Americans in our federal public lands. We strongly support the Oceti Sakowin Camp on La Framboise Island and the Sioux Nation's claims of clear violations of their treaties with the US Government. We urge you to withdraw your support for this indefensible land transfer, and to support the oversight hearings requested by the Great Sioux Nation on provisions of this Act that are in conflict with other laws and/or in need of further clarification. Please call for such hearings in the US Senate.
Brian Brademeyer, Chair Aug. 6, 1999 From: Paul Robertson epcloud@gwtc.net Hello Mitigation Act activists! Our website at http://www.fireonprairie.org is revamped and updated including urgent action section with email and phone and addresses, and text of Sec. 505 of HR 2605 and Janklow letter, etc. Please forward suggestions and information for the site to us. lila pilamaya Eon Ka Mani and Pte Tatonke Tipi (of American Indian Movement) to ride for peace and unity. The ride will take them through Camp Justice (White Clay, Nebraska), Oceti Sakowin (La Framboise Island, SD), and the Minnehaha Free State (Minneapolis, Minnesota). For more information, see http://www.robworld.net/unity/ Please forward and post where applicable. The ride does not cater to the media, so all updates will come through the above website. The riders have said that if the media wants to cover this, they will have to intercept them along the ride. There will be no planned photo ops. The following are excerpts from the article which appears at the above site: "All of these issues revolve around the genocide that's been committed against the Native American people, that is still being committed," he continues, "We're going to be riding and praying about these things, and about unity between brothers." "We need to bring an end to these ways forced on us by the states of Minnesota, South Dakota and Nebraska. They can't slap Dakota people around anymore. We won't stand for it. They're using police as their own personal thugs, and we're not going to allow it anymore." The conviction in their voices serves as a poignant reminder that when change through non-violent means is prevented, it inevitably comes about through violent ones. "That's what we want to avoid," Eon Ka Mani pleads, "There is nothing that can not be accomplished through prayer." So Eon Ka Mani and Pte Tatonke Tipi mount their steeds, Wiyohin Ya Ta Ta Omohie and Buddy respectively, and set out to ride for peace and for their people. "Many have asked what they can do aside from ride with us. To them, we simply say to tell your families, talk about what we're doing, at work and at home. Tell your friends that there are two crazy Indians out riding across the plains for their people, and tell them why." Others have offered to pray for them. To these offers they simply reply, "We don't want anyone to pray for us. We want everyone to pray with us." Links to related websites:
OCETI SAKOWIN
Indian Treaty Land - http://www.alphacdc.com/treaty/island-0615.html CAMP JUSTICE
Pine Ridge vs. White Clay - http://www.journalstar.com/slide_show/photos/pine_ridge/ 29 Jul 1999 Hello, Most of you probably know the good news, that the Mitigation Act was repealed by HR 2605 in the House of Representatives yesterday. A big struggle lies ahead to insure that this step can be followed up in a way that will make the crucial difference in conference committee between the house and senate. A copy of what John Thune (R, SD) had to say yesterday in the House and letter from Governor Janklow that Thune asked be inserted into Congressional Record follows:
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2000 (House of
Representatives - July 27, 1999)
Mr. THUNE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
(Mr. THUNE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.) * Mr. Chairman, this provision would repeal Title VI, division C, of Public Law 105-277, Making Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Fiscal Year 1999. That provision, known as the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, and State of South Dakota Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restoration Act, would transfer lands along the Missouri River in South Dakota from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to the tribes mentioned above as well as the State of South Dakota. The Act also would establish a fund to pay for wildlife habitats. * The Act is a major priority for South Dakota Governor William Janklow . The Governor has requested I submit a letter on this topic for the Record. I would like that letter from the Governor inserted at the conclusion of my statement. * The Act also has been the subject of much discussion for South Dakotans, and I have taken great interest in all comments on this issue. While I am aware of the concerns of some of my constituents over issues surrounding this Act, I share in the sentiments of many who support the objectives the Governor attempts to forward in this law. Because of the interest in this issue, I would like to see Section 505 stricken from the bill and hope the Act receives a full review and consideration in a conference committee between the House and Senate on this bill. * Mr. Chairman, I include a letter from the Governor in reference to this matter.
STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC. * Dear Congressman Thune: I am writing to reaffirm my adamant support for Title VI, division C, of Public Law 105-277 (Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, and State of South Dakota Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restoration). As you know, the House version of the Energy and Water Development Appropriation repeals it. I hope you will do everything you can to remove the repeal language from the bill and appropriate $3 million for the project. * Please explain to your fellow members of Congress that if the new law is allowed to remain a law, it will reduce future federal tax dollar spending, provide more access for people to use the Missouri River for recreation and give both the state and the participating tribal governments the opportunity to receive benefits we didn't receive when four of the five Missouri River dams were built in South Dakota. * As you know, over 600,000 acres of South Dakota's best river bottom and river adjacent land were taken in the 1950s to create the huge reservoirs of water behind the four Missouri River dams in South Dakota. The water held in these reservoirs has already prevented billions of dollars worth of flood damage to Omaha, Kansas City, and many other cities on the Missouri River and Mississippi River. * Unfortunately, South Dakota is the only state in the Union which as never been allowed to do even a modest amount of development along our greatest river resource. That's been or history because the land immediately adjacent to the Missouri River is owned by the federal government and managed by the Corps of Engineers. We were promised developmental benefits, such as irrigation. But, it didn't happen. * Nebraska sacrificed no land for dams and reservoirs, but it has received federally funded irrigation for over six million areas. North Dakota has only one dam and reservoir, but it has over 300,000 acres of federally funded irrigated land. South Dakota is between those two states and has sacrificed excellent land for four dams and four reservoirs. But, our people have received less than 20,000 acres in federally funded irrigation and very few other benefits from our sacrifices to prevent downstream flooding. URGENT ACTION: Urge Representatives to Pass Section 505 of HR 2605 to Repeal Mitigation Act Lakota people are camping on La Framboise Island in South Dakota to reclaim land promised to them in an 1868 treaty but wrongly transferred to the state of South Dakota in a 1998 bill. The U.S. House of Representatives is taking preliminary steps to repeal the bill that authorizes the land transfer. Please immediately call, fax or or e-mail your Representative and urge him or her to vote for H.R. 2605, a bill "Making appropriations for energy and water development for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2000, for energy and water development, and for other purposes." Specifically note that you support Section 505 of that appropriations bill. Section 505 repeals Title VI, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, and State of South Dakota Terrestrial Wildlife Habitat Restoration Act, an act which would have transferred 92,000 acres of land to the state of South Dakota. The repeal of this bill has been the objective of Lakota people who have protested the transfer by camping on La Framboise Island across from the South Dakota state capitol. As they camp on the island, waiting for the bill to be repealed, the Lakota have been praying every day for the last four months. The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on HR 2605 Tuesday, July 27, sometime after 2 p.m. House of Representatives Toll-Free Line: 1-800-224-3121. Call to request the office of your representative, to speak with a legislative assistant or to get an e-mail address or fax number. To find the Fax Numbers or E-mail Addresses for _some_ Representatives, you may check the world-wide web: http://www.house.org From: CPT South Dakota cpt5@igc.org Joanne Kaufman for the Oceti Sakowin Camp and CPT July 2, 1999
Background: The 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty recognized the Great Sioux Reservation as an independent sovereign nation. Its territory extended from the east bank of the Missouri River westward to the Big Horn Mountains in Wyoming. The U.S. government soon reneged on the Treaty with the result that within a generation the seven Lakota tribes were restricted to 20% of their rightful lands on non-contiguous reservations. The Flood Control Act of 1944 authorized the further seizure of treaty lands to construct a dam system in the Missouri River basin with the promise that any land found not to be necessary for the system's operation would be returned to the Lakota people. The Army Corps of Engineers determined that 200,000 acres on both banks of the Missouri are non-essential. However, instead of returning this land to its rightful owners, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (SD) and South Dakota governor Bill Janklow attached a last-miute rider too the 14,000- page Omnibus Appropriations Bill for 1999. The rider, called the Wildlife Mitigation Act, allows for the tranfer of 90% of the Missouri River Banks within South Dakota to be transferred to state control for development. Funding for the Act was provided by anoher rider attached to the Kosovo Bill in May. It is significant that the theft by the state of South Dakota of land rightfully belonging to the Lakotas is being accomplished through stealth legislation without discussion or input from the people most adversely affected. Please sign and forward the following letters or write your own to:
(202) 224-2921
(401) 453-5294
I was dismayed to learn that you think it unnecessary for your committee to hold oversight hearings on the Wildlife Mitigation Act and on the rider attached to the Kosovo Bill appropriating funds for this Act. I urge you to reconsider in order for your comittee to hear the views of those opposed to the Act -- members of the Sioux Nation, including those from the two tribes that have supported the Act and those from the five tribes opposed to it, as well as non-Indian interests such as ranchers, environmentalists, and the general public.
Phone: (202) 225-2801 Fax: (202) 225-5823
Phone: 1-800-755-5646 or (605) 331-1010 Fax: (605) 331-0651
Phone: (605) 342-5135 Fax: (605) 342-5291
Phone: (605) 622-7988 Fax: (605) 622-7995 Dear Congressman Thune: I urge you to convince Senator Chafee and the Oversight (?) Committee to conduct oversight hearings on the Wildlife Mitigation Act in order that its members might hear the views of those opposed to the Act -- members of the Sioux Nation, incuding those from the two tribes that have supported the Act and those from the five tribes opposed to it, as well as non-Indian interests such as ranchers, environmentalists, and the general public.
From: Robert Quiver tatankanajin@hotmail.com Subject: CPT meeting notes Mon, 14 Jun 1999 Please Post the following: Title VI - Land Theft trudges forward in Pierre SD But Janklow not seen in building..... Sun, 13 Jun 1999 Following is a compilation of notes taken by Christian Peacemaker Teams observers attending the following meetings: --Joseph Westphal meeting with Treaty Council, Rapid City, June 8 --2nd Partnership Meeting to Implement Title VI, Pierre, June 9-10 These are detailed notes and very long -- enter at your own risk :-) (notes are summaries of statements made, not direct quotes, unless in quotation marks) |
|||
|
COE = Corps of Engineers GSN = Great Sioux Nation BHSNTC = Black Hills Sioux Nation Treaty Council NAGPRA = Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act NEPA = National Environmental Policy Act OST = Oglala Sioux Tribe SRST = Standing Rock Sioux Tribe CRST = Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe |
CCST = Crow Creek Sioux Tribe RST = Rosebud Sioux Tribe LBST = Lower Brule Sioux Tribe BIA = Bureau of Indian Affairs EIS = Environmental Impact Statement USFWS = US Fish & Wildlife Service SDGF&P = South Dakota Game, Fish, and Parks |
||
Treaty Council Meeting with Asst Sec of the Army Joseph Westphal Tuesday, June 8, 1999: 2 - 5 pm Alpine Room, Rushmore Civic Center, Rapid City, SD -- notes by CPTers Carl Meyer, Jake Kaufman, and Patty Burdette Present: around 50 people. Primary speakers are from BHSNTC, Asst Sec of the Army Joseph Westphal for the COE, and representatives of SRST.
Joseph Westphal, Asst Sec of the Army and head of the COE: --COE is trying to have a relationship with both the state and the GSN that will allow them to efficiently complete the environmental and wildlife habitat mitigation work required by the Act. --COE is working across the country to improve relationships with tribes and improve tribal policy. There are serious issues related to cultural sites along the river, and COE would like to deal with those issues in a sensitive and appropriate way. Didn't mention treaty concerns.
Chief Oliver Red Cloud of BHSNTC: --Invited those present to ask Westphal whatever questions they might have.
Jesse Taken Alive, SRST Tribal Council member, representing the
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (which withdrew from negotiations
regarding the legislation, although it has land within
reservation boundaries along the river under Corps management),
was invited to speak by Chief Red Cloud: --Asked if participation in this meeting qualified as participation in the COE consultation process of implementing the legislation. Westphal said, in essence, that it did, and Jesse requested for the record that it be made clear that SRST participation in the meeting did not in any way convey their consent to continued implementation of the legislation. --Gave Westphal copies of the various SRST Tribal Council resolutions stating opposition to the Act. --SRST is in favor of land being returned to the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and Lower Brule Tribe, and is in favor of federal trust funds allowing those tribes to complete wildlife habitat mitigation and other work along the river, but is absolutely opposed to any land transfer to the state. --Washington DC thinks the tribes have been properly consulted and are OK with this legislation, but that is not true. --A hundred years ago, we were fighting over this land. Now we're here talking about it. The only thing that hasn't changed is that the land is still being taken from us. --In July of '97, in the process of forming the legislation, Daschle said that if the tribes along the river could not come to an agreement, the process would not continue. Yet he continued with the legislation even after all but two tribes withdrew and registered their opposition. --We are very concerned about the differences between what we are told will happen and what actually happens. --You need to get us a hearing in Washington DC regarding this legislation.
Westphal response:
Jesse Taken Alive:
Tex Hall, chairman of the Three Affiliated Tribes (Hidatsa,
Mandan, and Arikara), with reservations upriver in ND, but
ancestral remains in the land to be transferred: --We haven't been included in this process, we haven't been consulted. We request oversight hearings on this legislation.
Westphal: A CCST Tribal Council member addressed Westphal regarding other unrelated issues on Crow Creek Reservation. Westphal told a mostly irrelevant and somewhat offensive story about the Mapuche Indians in Chile, where he was born.
Jesse Taken Alive: --"All we're asking is, let's not break these treaties anymore."
Chip Smith, secretary to Westphal:
Westphal:
Elder Johnson Holy Rock of the BHSNTC: --The US doesn't claim the right to unilaterally alter or nullify treaties with other countries. Why do they do it to us?
Peter Capossela, attorney for SRST: --A 1994 Act of Congress required that the Corps return unused riverfront land within SRST reservation and Ft Berthold reservation (in ND). The Corps still has not implemented that transfer. Why does this new Act, passed just last October, get priority? We all know why -- because the state is getting land. So only tribes who agree to give up Treaty lands to the state will get their land back, it looks like.
--The Mitigation Act is self-contradictory and thus non-
implementable. Sec 605(a) requires that land containing Nat Am
cultural sites be transferred to the state of SD. Sec 605(h)
states specifically that NAGPRA will continue to apply to this
land, and yet NAGPRA specifically states that it only applies to
federal lands.
--Sec 605(a), mandating the transfer to the state, also contradicts Sec 607(a)(3), requiring that no treaty rights be affected, because 1868 treaty guarantees this land to GSN. Repeatedly asked if any COE representatives present could tell him which specific treaty rights are referred to by 607(a)(3), and how COE will deal with that clause. Westphal responded that COE needs to study the issue. Verbally committed COE to doing an internal "treaty analysis" as part of studying the issues involved in implementing the Act.
Eileen Iron Cloud, OST member from Pine Ridge:
Peter Capossela:
Westphal: 2nd Partnership Meeting to Implement Title VI (Mitigation Act) Wednesday, June 9, 1999 -- 10:30 am - 5:00 pm Tuesday, June 10, 1999 -- 9:00 am - 12:45 pm Iron Horse Inn, Pierre, SD
-- notes by CPTers Carl Meyer, Jake Kaufman, and Patty Burdette
|
|||
| David Vader, COE Nat Am Coordinator | Candace Thomas, COE Title VI (Mitigation Act) Project Manager | ||
| Paul Wemhoener, COE Operations Manager for Omaha District | James Crews, COE | ||
| Paul Blakey, COE | Peg O'Bryan, COE | ||
| Gordon Bailey, Army General Counsel | Chip Smith, aide to Asst Sec of the Army Joseph Westphal | ||
| Eric Washburn, aide to Sen Daschle | Tom Young, BIA Aberdeen (Day 1) | ||
| Paul Hoffman, BIA hydrologist (Day 1) | John Cooper, Sec of SD Game, Fish, and Parks (Day 1) | ||
| Rick Collignon, SD Game, Fish, and Parks | Tom McCulloch, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation | ||
| Nell McPhillips, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service | Michael Jandreau, LBST Tribal Chairman | ||
| Scott Jones, LBST public relations director | Joel Bich, LBST biologist | ||
| Louis DuBray, CRST Tribal Vice-Chairman (Day 1) | Haroll Frazier, CRST Tribal Council member | ||
| Steve Emory, CRST Attorney General | Tom Van Norman, CRST attorney | ||
| various other representatives of CRST, LBST, BIA, and COE | Reginald Cedar Face, Pine Ridge Oglala (Day 1) | ||
| Isaac White Face, Treaty Council elder, Oglala (Day 2) | Emily and Eileen Iron Cloud, Pine Ridge Oglala (Day 2) | ||
| Paul Robertson, South Dakota Peace and Justice (Day 2) | Tom Cheyenne, LaFramboise camp (Day 2) | ||
| Rich Shangreaux, LaFramboise camp (Day 2) | Clayton "Boots" Quiver, LaFramboise camp (Day 2) | ||
| Angelo Horse, LaFramboise camp (Day 2) | Melinda Martin, Pierre camp supporter (Day 2 | ||
| CPT observer Carl Meyer | CPT observer Bob Epp (Day 1 am, Day 2) | ||
| CPT observer Jake Kaufman (Day 1 pm, Day 2) | CPT observers Patty Burdette and Ron Friesen (Day 2) | ||
|
(Day 1) In review of Memorandum for Record from 1st Title VI Implementation Partnership Meeting (April 12-13, 1999, Wash DC), CRST rep Harold Frazier noted that two items (Items 9 and 41) dealing with treaty concerns were included in the list of issues yet to be resolved. Said he had understood that all present at the last meeting had agreed that those would be deleted. General agreement with that (no-one there to object), so items were deleted. [note: COE will still consider the treaties in doing their Title VI Implementation work. This larger partnership group, however, will not discuss them as an issue to be resolved in the implementation of Title VI.]
Washburn: --COE has been directed in Kosovo relief funding bill to reprogram $800,000 into implementation of Title VI for FY1999. --FY2000 Appropriations bill in Senate Appropriations Committee contains $3 million in funding for the COE to implement Title VI. House Appropriations Committee has not yet met to consider FY2000 appropriations. Expects that somewhere between $2 and $3 million will be appropriated for Title VI implementation in final bill. --Senate select committee on Indian Affairs has agreed to oversee process of applying NAGPRA to land that is not under federal control (ie land that will be transferred to the state under Title VI). This should not be an obstacle to implementation of Title VI.
Jandreau: --Let's get this transfer done and stop going over all this old ground in discussions.
DuBray: --We all know this transfer won't affect water usage, so let's not let the USGS water-flow impact study hold this thing up.
Cooper: --The Governor (Janklow) has "no ulterior motives" in this Act. His only goals are
b) maintaining recreational facilities along the river c) wildlife habitat mitigation --Rumors have been going around about planned industrial or commercial development along the river. They are not true. The Governor has no such plans. --State would like to lease recreation areas along river from COE within a month or two, prior to the actual land transfer, which will probably take years. --State wants to prepare for Lewis and Clark bicentennial celebration by making sure rec. facilities are up to par. COE has not maintained them adequately, and state would like to begin upgrades ASAP. --State is taking cultural resource concerns very seriously and wants them fully addressed in the implementation process. --Land surveys (which may take years) are not necessary for the transfer to take place. We know what land we're talking about.
Young:
Washburn: DuBray and Jandreau both objected to BIA taking implementation funding.
Emory:
Cooper:
Cedar Face:
Cooper:
Jones:
Hoffman:
DuBray: (break for lunch)
Jones: --COE has been "criminally negligent" in its caretaking of Lakota, Mandan, Arikara, and Hidatsa cultural sites along the river. --LBST views this legislation as best opportunity to finally get land back from COE and take care of sites properly themselves, but needs funding to do this. --Land was taken by COE over fifty years ago... now finally with this bill we have an opportunity to get back what is rightfully ours.
McPhillips: --USFWS sent COE a proposed General Plan every ten years or so, COE never acted.
Emory:
Thomas: --Is each party (COE, SDGF&P, BIA, LBST, CRST) ready to name one person as project manager, to be contact person and conduit for all information re Title VI implementation? These five people will then form the Coordinating Team.
-- Candace Thomas for COE
Emory, Frazier, Jandreau, Jones, etc: (Work team formation put on hold)
Washburn: Young: --Treaty issues involved here are major and important. Shouldn't they be discussed in this process somewhere?
Emory:
Thomas:
Emory: --COE, an arm of the Dept of Defense, is not an appropriate place for the US govt to address treaty issues. (funding issues discussed for rest of pm; covered more thoroughly in discussion below, day 2)
(Day 2) (Background: Emory said "The problem with this whole process is that I wasn't at the first Partnership meeting in Wash DC," to which an annoyed and stressed Thomas responded "As far as I'm concerned, you shouldn't be at any of these meetings.")
Thomas:
Emory: (Thomas later formally apologized to Emory and CRST on behalf of COE) Court stenographer at future meetings requested by CRST and LBST. introductions...
Tom Cheyenne, Lakota remarks:
Steve Emory, response in Lakota:
Isaac White Face, in Lakota:
Emory:
Emily Iron Cloud:
Eileen Iron Cloud:
Paul Robertson, SD Peace and Justice Center:
Rich Shangreaux, Teton Nation:
Charmaine White Face: Following these comments, COE called for break in meeting. Allowed bureacrats and functionaries time to stand around talking about fishing and clear the emotional energy from the room. Gov Janklo w arrived during this break and requested that COE lease all recreation sites along river to the state for improvements, immediately. COE responded that upon receipt of a formal request, sites could be leased to state within thirty days. (meeting reconvened)
Wemhoener, representing Col Robert Volz (district manager for
Omaha district):
Frazier:
Wemhoener: --(Proceeded to presentation re funding for Title VI implementation) --COE is funded by Congress on a project-by-project basis, it has no general program funds. Title VI is a project, Army is the action agent for implementation of Title VI. --Candy Thomas is COE Title VI Project Manager, responsible for budget, schedule and oversight. She is the responsible agent for COE. --COE can do work necessary for Title VI implementation in-house, contract it out, or any combination of the two. Contracts possible w/ tribes, state, any other federal agency. --U.S. Govt currently holds title to the lands affected by Title VI. Under Title VI, those titles will be transferred to the state of South Dakota and to the BIA to hold in trust for the tribes. --COE has been directed by Congress to reprogram $800,000 from other projects for implementing Title VI in remainder of FY1999. COE tentatively plans to use roughly $300,000 of those funds to do preliminary inventory work on protection of cultural sites, $400,000 to pay for partnership meeting costs, and the remainder is free for other necessary work. --COE is not a funding agency. It is not authorized to distribute funds from project budgets to other entities, apart from contracting for specific work on the project. --Once Congress actually appropriates funds for this project, COE will work with tribes and state to implement requirements of Title VI. To date this is an unfunded project. $800,000 was not appropriated, merely redirected from other COE projects. --Leasee of rec areas on river are responsible for upkeep, maintenance etc. This is a funding drain on responsible agency. Agency leasing sites (eg SD) must guarantee COE that they will get the funds somewhere. [implied: CRST and LBST don't have the money necessary to do this] --Title VI is silent on COE taken lands within SRST and CCST reservation boundaries. Some rec sites within those reservations are currently leased by SD. Under Title VI, US govt will retain title to those lands, and COE will continue to maintain them. COE will honor leases to state until term of lease expires. --New appropriations from Congress for FY2000 (possibly $3 million?) - use depends on how appropriations are written into law. In current Senate Appropriations version, $3 million is appropriated to COE as one lump sum for Title VI implementation. In the end, there may be other limitations, restrictions, or the money may be subdivided and allocated by Congress for specific purposes. Until that bill passes, no one can say how much money will be available for anything.
Emory:
Wemhoener:
Emory: --Also, funds from taxes on fishing & hunting licenses sold, etc, goes to state of SD. We get none of that money either. --Legislation needed to give tribes preference in contracting for services w/ COE anywhere in Indian Country to make up for these imbalances. Wemhoener: --At minimum, it will take two years to complete the land transfer process with all preliminary work necessary. That's an extremely optimistic estimate, only possible if COE is fully funded to complete work (EIS, cultural sites, wildlife work etc). If less than fully funded, will take longer. We may even have to survey the land to be transferred; that's a monumental task and could well take years by itself. --COE Draft Implementation Plan (w/ multi-year implementation budget) due for review in August.
List of work teams decided upon: Names from each party for teams to be submitted by June 18. Teams should meet and have something ready to present by next meeting.
Next meeting: | |||
Press articles, Aug. - Oct. 1999
Background, Mar. - May 1999
Top
