American Indian Natural Resource Management: Intergovernmental Agreements

1. American Indian Natural Resource Management: Intergovernmental Agreements By Michael Kotutwa Johnson AED 615 Investigation and Studies in Applied Research

2. Personal Background • B.S. in General Agriculture-Cornell University • M.P.P in Public Policy-Pepperdine University • District Conservationist-NRCS • Research Associate-FNDI

3. CHAPTER I

4. Introduction Public, state and tribal lands in the United States include a number of natural resources (e.g. coal, water, timber, wildlife and natural gas). It has been estimated that American Indians who reside on Indian trust land control 65% of natural resources in the United States. Although most natural resources are most abundant on public lands those lands are dotted with Indian trust land (e.g. allotted lands, ceded lands, surplus lands and fee lands) (J. King, personal communication, July 22, 2002). As of today, there is no real clear understanding of how the three main players (federal, state, and tribal) work together in managing natural resources in the United States, especially in areas of joint jurisdiction.

5. Need for Study Federal Govt. EPA Tribal Govt. State Govt.

6. Purpose Statement The purpose of this study is to understand the relationship that exists between federal, state and tribal governments in the context of natural resource management that include intergovernmental agreements between the parties previously mentioned. A thorough understanding of this relationship is necessary in order to preserve our natural resources today and in the future. However, in order to do this one must first understand the complex relationship between all three of the entities involved.

7. Objectives of Study • Attempt to describe the federal, state and tribal relationship through an examination of relevant policy. • Establish an analytical approach in gathering important documents involving natural resource management practices on federal, state and tribal land. 3. Examine past agreements between the federal, state and tribal natural resource management entities and then document successes and failures.

8. Limitations • The theme of this dissertation will only deal with issues related to American Indian natural resource management across jurisdictional boundaries. 2. The author’s personnel bias will affect the content of the dissertation.

9. Assumptions 1. Future intergovernmental agreements between the federal, state and tribal governments will continue to be achieved in the future. 2. Federal policy in relationship to American Indian sovereignty will remain unchanged including acts by Congress. 3. Conflicts in the areas of natural resource management will continue into the future. 4. Federal Courts will continue to set American Indian policy.

10. Definition of Terms Domestic Dependent Nation- Status given to tribes describing a domestic dependent relationship by Supreme Court Chief Justice Marshall’s ruling in 1831. Fee Land- Land sold to private citizens, corporations, etc. Indian Tribe- A tribe is simply a group of Indians that is recognized as constituting a distinct and historically continuous political entity for at least some governmental purpose. Intergovernmental Agreement- A agreement between parties where there is mutual benefit for those parties. Plenary Power- Power reserved for Congress in regards to laying out policy and laws in the context of Indian governance and negotiations.

11. CHAPTER II

12. Literature Review Intergovernmental agreements between federal, state and tribal governments have been found to enhance greater control and opportunities for economic development initiatives on tribal lands. Cahill & Cornell, 2005 One example of intergovernmental agreements between states, federal and tribal governments can be found in regional water management issues. Colby & Smith, 2005

13. Literature Review Cont. The Federal Government, Arizona Municipalities and Southern Arizona Tribes have worked out an agreement in which all derive benefit from. The Arizona Water Settlement Act of 2004. P.L. 108-451 Water rights experts agree that innovative approaches such as intergovernmental agreements can be employed to settle disputes and to address issues such as water management disputes. Colby and Hodgins, 2006

14. Significance of Study The significance of the study is that all important documents pertaining to federal, state, and tribal entities in the field of natural resource management will be consolidated into one place. Also, the study will provide a further look into what has worked and what has not worked in the tri-management aspect of natural resource management. Once we have examined these issues, then perhaps policymakers in the field of natural resource development may develop sound policy to further preserve natural resources for the benefit of all.

15. Understanding of Tribal, State and Federal Natural Resource Intergovernmental Agreements Tribal Federal State Water, Wildlife, Mineral, Timber Trilateral Natural Resource Intergovernmental Agreements Policy Recommendations Creation of Tribal, State and Federal Economic Opportunities and Control Over Natural Resource Development and Conservation Figure 1. Conceptual Framework on Tribal, State and Federal Natural Resource Management Relationship

16. CHAPTER III

17. Methods and Procedures A historical research method was used for this study based on the qualitative subject matter as discussed in this dissertation (i.e. intergovernmental agreements). There are four basic steps used for historical research. They are as follows: 1. Definition of the Problem. 2. A in depth search for the subject matter being discussed. 3. A thorough evaluation of the sources found. 4. Interpretation of the evidence and developing conclusions based on that information. Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006

18. Advantages and Disadvantages This topic may only be analyzed from a historical perspective because it cannot be studied in any other way. A threat to validity in most cases is a problem because of the authors own internal bias.

19. An Idea… Proposal to Committee Search for Documents Literature Review: Writing Initial Contact with Natural Resource Experts Interview Experts Write Draft Version Submit to Editors Final Draft: Sent to Committee Presented to Committee American Indian Natural Resource Management: Intergovernmental Agreements

20. Questions or Comments

21. References • Cahill, M., & Cornell, S. (2005). Power-Sharing in intergovernmental resource management agreements with north American indigenous nations. Unpublished Manuscript. • Canby Jr., W.C. (2004). American Indian law in a nutshell (4th ed.). St. Paul: West Group Publishing. • Colby, B. (2004). Tribal water settlements in Arizona (85th Town Hall Report) Tucson, Arizona: University of Arizona. • Colby, B.G.,Thorson, J.E., & Britton, S. (2005). Negotiating tribal water rights: Fulfilling promises in the arid west. University of Arizona Press:Tucson. • Colby, B., & Hodgins, B. H. (2006,October). Innovations for water management and regional supply reliability in agreements with native American tribes. Symposium conducted at the Water Law and Policy conference, Tucson, Arizona.

22. References • Gatewood, D. E. (2003). Regulation wildlife resources on tribal lands. Unpublished mater’s thesis, University of Arizona,Tucson, Arizona. • Getches D.H., Wilkinson C.F., & Williams Jr. R.A. (2005). Cases and materials on federal Indian law (5th ed.). St. Paul: West Group Publishing. • Glennon R. (2002). Water follies: Groundwater pumping and the fate of America’s freshwaters. Washington, DC: Island Press. • Griffin, R.C. (2006). Water resource economics: The analysis of scarcity, policies, and projects. Cambridge: MIT Press Books. • Pevar, S.L. (1992). The rights of Indians and tribes (2nd ed.). Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.