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 authors 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 Marshalls 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
  PressTucson.
• 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 maters
  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 Americas 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.