DOCSLIB.ORG

Indian Linguistic Families of America

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Indian Linguistic Families of America I I INDIAN LINGUISTIC FAMILIES OF AMERICA NORTH OF MEXICO. BY J. W. POWELL. 7 ETH-1 1 PORTLAND STATE COLLEGE LIEBRARY 63 1932 51 I 99 . .......... ...... ......... uoiwilndoj 99 .. ...................... saq!i4 lvdiaumlj q9 ..................... .......................... ..X I UL uB31 0 lndoa ,F9 ~~~~~~................ .......... ....... P S3l~0sqlZ~!U!J £9 ...............XIndl~l. tXa~~t £'9 ......... ...... ............. .... SWg lA 0 soq!.i4 lvdioUlau ..... ..... K.UUB X~sa~ ltul; elexlD £:989 . ................ ............. ............... ....... .........*.*.*.-.saqTr4 1iidiouili 89 ................... Xlimse uvnpiruluiq 89 zg..... -.... .saq!u;........ ........ .......... .. ....... s q .i W(n3IUIJaulvd ia m d o 09 ........................ u........................owulbludoa 09 ...... ................................... n...o....usq dlOa l 09 ...... ... ........ ! .... dnoa6 uOaPlPIoA 89 ..... ... .l ........... ul Opp oiqldiu~oaO 9S8S5-2-uo~LnqIlqsTp ,... .. ............. .. .. ' '''X!tluj uuedeta AS ............. .Xju j jn n...............oag S ........................... uouip ndoa LUS ................. .. .............. Sl~ -- u mdnilS tlnoa £S .... ................ .............. S ........oS o lm*usaqllInotatl uat1ndod -- 8.ZS'''''''' 85 . I..d.o................................................. .................. .. .. .. .. .. dno.2ui. d. saq!.iUJoMJO lol p joud n uol ISQ ........ .... .................... ............... .. d o .. oltuj!usudelv 8it ................... ...... ..................... n J u~olllnom 8E------~~~~.. .. .. .. .. saqidupuenbogi 'd'lJ St .............................................. .uoitqlndoj SP ..................... ''''''.......spunbuoj pIVdii St - ......... ... ................ vavt, irrrnbuoylV ............. ....... SITuvjonawoXei~nbudi .~~~~~~~~~~~~...suononpop jo XSttrnrnn Zt ................... .......................... .siu!uja 2uiUtunH O ' .. ..................... .................... ... * 04!**--ssa~tvllA ££ ................................................................ --- * - *uoln(lod 02? ... .. .. ... ............................'' '' ' ' '' *' ''-* Xxojuapas soq!.i uBppuj SZ .... .... ..... .... ............. .. ................. dri-- io ''lsin u lS Zl* * - ~~~sa.,ftn'lutl ueP!utI Jo uoptoq.!ssujo ailz 04ne4ulf}Julll ,,, ..... --saolltaujo o!sim.ull Jo amnjlaaJOA ,OlW<j 'Su N I'N O-D I ~~~M_ MMMMWM~~~~~~~~~-' I 4 CONTENTS. Page. Linguistic families-Continued. Linguistic fain Chitimachan family .............................. 66 Muskhoge; Chumashan family ..... ............................................ 67 Geogr Population ............... ............. ... ........ 68 Princi Coahuiltecan family ................................................ 68 Pi Principal tribes. .......... .. ... 69 Natchesar Copeban family ......................... ........ .... ...... 69 Princi Geographic distribution ........... ....... .............. 69 PI Principal tribes .................... .................. 70 Palaihnihl Costanoan family. ................... .................. 70 Geogt Geographic distribution ...................................... 71 Princ Population ................. ...... ........ 71 Piman fai Eskimauan family ........... ........ .. ... 71 Princ Geographic distribution ............................. 72 P Principal tribes and villages.................................... 74 Pujunan Population ................................ .... .............. 74 Geogi Esselenian family. ...................... ...... 75 Princ Iroquoian family........ ........................... 76 Quorateai Geographic distribution ............................ 77 Geog Principal tribes ............ ....... 79 Tribe Population .............. ........................ 79 I Kalapooian family............. .. 81 Salinan fi Principal tribes .............................................. 82 I Population .............. ... ................. 82 Salishan Karankawan family ....................................... 82 Geog Keresan family ........... .............................. 83 Prin Villages .................... ............................ ....... 83 I Population .............. ... .... .. 83 Sastean f Kiowan family .................................................... 84 Geog Population.................................................. 84 Shahapti Kitunahan family ............................................... 85 Geop Tribes ........ ........................................... .. 85 Prin Population .............. ..................................... 85 Shoshoni Koluschan family ..................... 85 Geom Tribes . ............................................... 87 Prin Population .................................... ... .... 87 Siouan f: Kulanapan family ................................................. 87 Geom Geographic distribution ...................................... 88 Prin Tribes ........................................................ .. 88 Kusan family ...................................................... 89 Skittage Tribes .. .. ..... .............. 89 I Geof Population ..................................... ... ... 89 Prin Lutuamian family. ...................................... 89 Tribes ................. .. ...... ............ 90 i Takilma Population .......................................... ........ 90 Geol Mariposan family ............. ........... 90 Tafioan Geographic distribution ........................................ 91 Geo, Tribes ... ................................................... 91 Population ............. ... ....................... 91 I Timuqu. Moquelumnan family ... .... .... ....... ...... ....... 92 i Geo Geographic distribution .......................................... 93 i Prir Principal tribes. ...................................... 93 I Tonikar Population ................................................... 93 Geo i i I L ii t I iL f CONTENTS. 5 Page jPae Linguistic families-Continued. 66 Muskhogean family ............................... .................. 94 67 Geographic distribution ., .................... 94 68 Principal tribes ........................................ ...... 95 68 Population .95 69 Natchesan family................................................... 95 69 Principal tribes. ...................................... 97 69 Population .97 7() Palaihnihan family ............... ,..,,, .... -.... 97 70 Geographic distribution ....... 98 71 Principal tribes ........... ........ 98 71 Piman family ...................................................... 98 71 Principal tribes ..... ... ...................................... 99 72 Population .99 ......74 .Pujunan family .................... ... ,, . ....... 99 74 Geographic distribution......................................... 100 ...... be Principal.. tribes .......... 1001.......................0.0............ 76 Quoratean family...........................10 ....................... 100 .......77 Geographic distribution ...... ................................... 101 ...79 Tribes ........... ........................ 101 ......79 Population ............... 101 81 Salinan family ., , ................,, 101 82 Population ....................... .......................... 102 82 Salishan family .......... .......................................... 102 82 Geographic distribution ............. ... ........................ 104 83 Principal tribes ........... .................................... 104 ......83 Population ......................... ........... ....... 105 83 Sastean family.............................1.......0.5I..... ....... 105 84 Geographic distribution ........ ... ............................. 106 84 Shahaptian family ...... ..... ...................................... 106 85 Geographic distribution . ..... ............. ................. 107 85 Principal tribes and population ....................... ........... 107 85 Shoshonean family ............. ...................................... 108 85 Geographic distribution ............ 10 0..................9 87 Principal tribes and population. .... 110 ......87 Siouan family .......... 1....................................1........11 87 Geographic distribution . .,. , , .,........ 112 88 Principal tribes ........... ....................... 114 88 Population ............................. .................... 116 .......89 Skittagetan family ....................................... 118 89 Geographic distribution ... , . , , , . .......... 120 89 Principal tribes ..... , .,.,,... ., 120 89 Population ....... ,,,, 121 90 Takilman family ...................................................... 121 90 Geographic distribution .......................................... 121 90 Tafloan family . .............................. ,........ 121 91 Geographic distribution ......................... ,,.,,...... 122 91 Population ................................................... 123 91 Timuquanan family ................................................. 123 92 Geographic distribution ........................................... 123 ...... .. Principal tribes ................................... ......... ,,124 93 Tonikan family ................................................ .. ... 125 Geographic distribution ............ , , , .......... 125 6 CONTENTS. Page. Linguistic families-Continued. Tonkawan family ..................................................... 125 Geographic distribution .................. .... 125 Uchean family. ........... 126 Geographic distribution ................. ......................... 126 Population ...................................... 127
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ecosystem Use by Indigenous People in an Oregon Coastal Landscape
    3220 Donald B. Zobel, Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331- 2902 e-mail: [email protected] Ecosystem Use by Indigenous People in an Oregon Coastal Landscape Abstract Data regarding probable uses of biological materials by the indigenous people of the Salmon River-Cascade Head area of the Oregon coast were used to estimate the peoples use of various ecosystems near villages. Of 308 uses identified, 256 were attributable to a given species; 124 species were identified. All local ecosystems were important sources of organisms for the people, with no apparent concentration of highly used species in any particular ecosystem. One species was cultivated, one domesticated, and five acquired by trade. Four major plant resources, camas, yew, hazel, and beargrass, are not known from the Cascade Head landscape, but may have been available from elsewhere in village territory. House construction without use of cedar planks, as indicated by ethnographic records, may have resulted from the paucity of western redcedar in the Salmon River lowlands. The scarcity of several widely used taxa near coastal village sites, especially western redcedar, may have limited the wealth of this indigenous population, even on the resource-rich Oregon coast. Introduction Tillamook, who resided near Cascade Head on the north-central Oregon Coast, in an area where Indigenous people used resources primarily from information about historic and modern plant and the landscape in which they resided. The natural animal species distribution is unusually complete. distribution of resources governed the pattern and The list of taxa used was compared to historic richness of their lives.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterizing Tribal Cultural Landscapes, Volume II: Tribal Case
    OCS Study BOEM 2017-001 Characterizing Tribal Cultural Landscapes Volume II: Tribal Case Studies US Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Pacific OCS Region This page intentionally left blank. OCS Study BOEM 2017-001 Characterizing Tribal Cultural Landscapes Volume II: Tribal Case Studies David Ball Rosie Clayburn Roberta Cordero Briece Edwards Valerie Grussing Janine Ledford Robert McConnell Rebekah Monette Robert Steelquist Eirik Thorsgard Jon Townsend Prepared under BOEM-NOAA Interagency Agreement M12PG00035 by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of National Marine Sanctuaries 1305 East-West Highway, SSMC4 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Makah Tribe Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community of Oregon Yurok Tribe National Marine Sanctuary Foundation US Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of National Marine Sanctuaries US Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Pacific OCS Region December 31, 2017 This page intentionally left blank. DISCLAIMER This study was funded, in part, by the US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), Pacific Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Region, Camarillo, CA, through Interagency Agreement Number M12PG00035 with the US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). This report has been technically reviewed by BOEM and it has been approved for publication. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the US Government, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. REPORT AVAILABILITY This report can be downloaded from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s Recently Completed Environmental Studies – Pacific webpage at https://www.boem.gov/Pacific-Completed-Studies/.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Item – Staff Report
    AGENDA ITEM – STAFF REPORT TO: HONORABLE CHAIRPERSON AND COMMISSIONERS FROM: JEFFREY O’NEAL, AICP, CITY PLANNER SUBJECT: APPLICATION NO. 20-23, THE VALLEY AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS, LLC COMMERCIAL CANNABIS PROJECT DATE: DECEMBER 29, 2020 ISSUE In the matter of Application No. 20-23, the Valley Agricultural Holdings LLC project, shall the Planning Commission: 1. Make a determination pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, make a determination of General Plan consistency for the disposal of real property, and approve a conditional use permit; and 2. Make recommendations to the City Council regarding a general plan amendment, rezone, and development agreement? BACKGROUND The State of California’s Medical and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) is the primary statute that regulates personal, medicinal, and commercial cannabis activity in the state. In addition to MAUCRSA, Chapters 8.37 (Commercial Cannabis Businesses) and 17.99 (Commercial Cannabis Overly District) of the Mendota Municipal Code (MMC) provide regulations applicable to non-personal cannabis activities at the local level. Pursuant to these local regulations, an applicant wishing to undertake commercial cannabis activities must meet certain location criteria, receive approval of a conditional use permit, and enter into a development agreement with the City. Dating to early 2019, the City has been in discussions with various entities regarding development of a commercial cannabis facility on a portion of a City-owned parcel (APN 013-030-68ST) adjacent to the City’s wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). In October 2019, the City entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Valley Agricultural Holdings, LLC. On October 13, 2020 the Planning Department received an application from Valley Agricultural Holdings, LLC requesting a variety of entitlements and actions to facilitate the construction and operation of a commercial cannabis facility as discussed.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015-17 Biennial Energy Plan
    2015-17 2015-17 STATE OF OREGON BIENNIAL ENERGY PLAN Oregon Department of Energy 625 Marion Street N.E. Salem, Oregon 97301 Oregon.gov/energy Oregon Department of Energy 1-800-221-8035 625 Marion Street N.E. 503-378-4040 Salem, Oregon 97301 Oregon.gov/energy 1-800-221-8035 503-378-4040 State of Oregon Biennial Energy Plan 2015-17 State of O n Energy lan Oregon Department of Energy 625 Marion St. NE Salem, OR 97301 503-378-4040 or toll-free in Oregon 1-800-221-8035 www.oregon.gov/energy 2 State of Oregon Biennial Energy Plan 2015-17 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................4 ENERGY MATTERS ........................................................................................6 ENERGY SUPPLY AND DEMAND .................................................................. 11 ENERGY TRENDS AND ISSUES ..................................................................... 29 REDUCING ENERGY COSTS .......................................................................... 40 Appendix A – Energy Glossary ................................................. 47 Appendix B – Energy Legislation .............................................. 54 Appendix C – Final BETC Awards by County ............................. 68 Appendix D – Success Stories ................................................... 75 Appendix E – Government-to-Government Report .................. 77 Appendix F – Oregon’s Electric Utilities ................................... 81 3 State of Oregon Biennial Energy
    [Show full text]
  • The Spirit of the Tillamook People by Brian D
    The Spirit of the Tillamook People By Brian D. Ratty © 2016 The terrain of the Northwest Coastline is rugged and untamed, in many ways as forbidding as the natives that flourished on its shore. This narrow strip of land was home to dozens of different Indian nations. Just south of Tillamook Bay were many other nations, including the Siletz and the Siuslaw, while to the north were the Clatsop and Chinook tribes. Unlike most inland Indians, these nations didn’tnomadically follow game or move with the seasons. Instead, they stayed close to the bays and the sea, establishing permanent homes and villages. Within each Indian nation there were tribes, and within these tribes there were bands, and within these bands there were different clans. Each nation lived to the dictates of the resources Mother Nature provided, and their ability to hunt and gather food. When Captain Robert Gray discovered Tillamook Bay in 1788, the Tillamook nation numbered roughly 2,200 natives. These people lived in nine different villages, from the Nestucca River in the south to the Nehalem Bay in the north. The largest Tillamook village was Kilharhurst, which occupied the land that is the present-day site of Garibaldi, Oregon. The river next to this village was called Kilharnar, known today as the Miami River. This village had about fifty lodges and five hundred inhabitants. Over time, the Tillamooks assumed most of the customs, habits and dress of their powerful neighbors to the north, the Chinooks. Although both nations spoke the Salish language, their dialects were so different that, when they talked, they had to sign, as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Sustainment: the North Fork Mono Tribe's
    Native Sustainment The North Fork Mono Tribe's Stories, History, and Teaching of Its Land and Water Tenure in 1918 and 2009 Jared Dahl Aldern Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy from Prescott College in Education with a Concentration in Sustainability Education May 2010 Steven J. Crum, Ph.D. George Lipsitz, Ph.D. Committee Member Committee Member Margaret Field, Ph.D. Theresa Gregor, Ph.D. External Expert Reader External Expert Reader Pramod Parajuli, Ph.D. Committee Chair Native Sustainment ii Copyright © 2010 by Jared Dahl Aldern. All rights reserved. No part of this dissertation may be used, reproduced, stored, recorded, or transmitted in any form or manner whatsoever without written permission from the copyright holder or his agent(s), except in the case of brief quotations embodied in the papers of students, and in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews. Requests for such permission should be addressed to: Jared Dahl Aldern 2658 East Alluvial Avenue, #103 Clovis, CA 93611 Native Sustainment iii Acknowledgments Gratitude to: The North Fork Mono Tribe, its Chairman, Ron Goode, and members Melvin Carmen (R.I.P.), Lois Conner, Stan Dandy, Richard Lavelle, Ruby Pomona, and Grace Tex for their support, kindnesses, and teachings. My doctoral committee: Steven J. Crum, Margaret Field, Theresa Gregor, George Lipsitz, and Pramod Parajuli for listening, for reading, and for their mentorship. Jagannath Adhikari, Kat Anderson, Steve Archer, Donna Begay, Lisa
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Ethnographic and Historically Recorded Dentaliurn Source Locations
    FISHINGFOR IVORYWORMS: A REVIEWOF ETHNOGRAPHICAND HISTORICALLY RECORDEDDENTALIUM SOURCE LOCATIONS Andrew John Barton B.A., Simon Fraser University, 1979 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY Q Andrew John Barton 1994 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Burnaby October, 1994 All rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means without permission of the author. Name: Andrew John Barton Degree: Master of Arts (Archaeology) Title of Thesis: Fishing for Ivory Worms: A Review of Ethnographic and Historically Recorded Dentaliurn Source Locations Examining Committee: Chairperson: Jack D. Nance - -, David V. Burley Senior Supervisor Associate Professor Richard Inglis External Examiner Department of Aboriginal Affairs Government of British Columbia PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENSE I hereby grant to Simon Fraser University the right to lend my thesis or dissertation (the title of which is shown below) to users of the Simon Fraser University Library, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or in response to a request from the library of any other university, or other educational institution, on its own behalf or for one of its users. I further agree that permission for multiple copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by me or the Dean of Graduate Studies. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Title of ThesisIDissertation: Fishing for Ivory Worms: A Review of Ethnographic and Historically Recorded Dentalium Source Locations Author: Andrew John Barton Name October 14, 1994 Date This study reviews and examines historic and ethnographic written documents that identify locations where Dentaliurn shells were procured by west coast Native North Americans.
    [Show full text]
  • Shipwreck Traditions and Treasure Hunting on Oregon's North Coast
    Portland State University PDXScholar Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations Anthropology Summer 2018 The Mountain of a Thousand Holes: Shipwreck Traditions and Treasure Hunting on Oregon's North Coast Cameron La Follette Oregon Coast Alliance Dennis Griffin Oregon State Historic Preservation Office Douglas Deur Portland State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/anth_fac Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, and the Biological and Physical Anthropology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Cameron La Follette, Dennis Griffin, & Douglas Deur. (2018). The Mountain of a Thousand Holes: Shipwreck Traditions and Treasure Hunting on Oregon's North Coast. Oregon Historical Quarterly, 119(2), 282-313. This Article is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. The Mountain of a Thousand Holes Shipwreck Traditions and Treasure Hunting on Oregon’s North Coast CAMERON LA FOLLETTE, DENNIS GRIFFIN, AND DOUGLAS DEUR EURO-AMERICANS in coastal communities conflated and amplified Native American oral traditions of shipwrecks in Tillamook County, increasingly focusing the stories on buried treasure. This focus led to a trickle, and then a procession, of treasure-seekers visiting the northern Oregon coast, reach- ing full crescendo by the mid to late twentieth century. The seekers’ theo- ries ranged from the fairly straightforward to the wildly carnivalesque, with many bizarre permutations. Neahkahnie Mountain and its beaches became the premier treasure-hunting sites in Oregon, based on the mountain’s prominence in popular lore, linked to unverified stories about the wreck of a Spanish ship.
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution List
    table of contents Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment – Distribution List Distribution List The lists that follow show tribes, federal, state, and local government agencies, elected officials, and libraries who were on the mailing list to receive the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Record of Decision as of December 11, 2000. In November 2000 the 15,000 people and organizations on the Sierra Nevada Framework Project mailing list were sent a return postcard by which they could request a copy of the Final EIS. As of December 11, 2000 the Forest Service had received approximately 1300 requests. FEIS Volume 1, Distribution List Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment – Distribution List California and Nevada Tribes Rancheria (Tribe) Local Office Name Last Name First Name Title Big Sandy Rancheria Baty Loren Chairman BIA Office Western Nevada Field Office Hunter Robert L Chairman Cedarville Rancheria Northern California Agency Lash Virginia Chairperson Choinumni Choinumni Tribe Alec Stanley Chairman Eel River Blue Lake Rancheria Brundin Claudia Chairperson Maidu Chico Rancheria Ward Arlene Chairperson Maidu Enterprise Rancheria Angle Harvey Chairman Maidu Greenville Rancheria Timmons Angela Chairman Maidu Maidu Nation Lecompte Clara Chairperson Maidu Mooretown Rancheria Pursia Shirley Chairperson Me-Wuk Tuolumne Me-Wuk Rancheria Kevin Day Sonny Chairman Miwok Buena Vista Rancheria Potts Donna Marie Spokesperson Miwok Calaveras Band of Miwok Indians Jeff Virginia Spokesperson Miwok Ione Band of Miwok
    [Show full text]
  • In the Recent Dear Colleague Letter 99-30, OCSE Notified You of A
    Location Codes Workgroup FIPS Coding Scheme Recommendation Summary Position 1 Position 2 Positions 3-5 Interstate Case FIPS State Identifier County/Functional Entity 9 0 BIA Tribe Identifier Tribal Case (Federally recognized) 8 0 ISO Country Identifier International Case Exception 0-9, A-Z (Canada – sub- jurisdiction) Tribal and International Case Location Codes 1 OCSE Case Locator Code Data Standards Tribal locator codes coding scheme Tribal Case Locator Codes • Classification code - 9 in position 1 • “0”(zero) in position 2 • Tribe Identification - BIA code in positions 3-5 Example: Chickasaw Nation 90906 • Addresses for tribal grantees– provided by tribes to IRG staff List of current tribal grantees: http://ocse.acf.hhs.gov/int/directories/index.cfm?fuseaction=main.tribalivd • Link to tribal government addresses web site: http://www.doi.gov/leaders.pdf 11/15/2006 2 OCSE Case Locator Code Data Standards Tribal Identification Codes Code Name 001 Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of North Carolina 006 Onondaga Nation of New York 007 St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians of New York 008 Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York 009 Tuscarora Nation of New York 011 Oneida Nation of New York 012 Seneca Nation of New York 013 Cayuga Nation of New York 014 Passamaquoddy Tribe of Maine 018 Penobscot Tribe of Maine 019 Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians of Maine 020 Mashantucket Pequot Tribe of Connecticut 021 Seminole Tribe of Florida, Dania, Big Cypress, Brighton, Hollywood & Tampa Reservations 026 Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida 027 Narragansett
    [Show full text]
  • Federally Recognized Indian Tribes
    Appendix C: Federally Recognized Indian Tribes The following tribal entities within the contiguous 48 states are recognized and eligible to receive services from the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs. For further information contact Bureau of Indian Affairs, Division of Tribal Government Services, 1849 C Street N.W., Washington, DC 20240; Telephone number (202) 208-7445.1 Figure C.1 shows the location of the Federally Recognized Tribes. 1. Absentee-Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma 2. Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians of the Agua Caliente Indian Reservation, California 3. Ak Chin Indian Community of Papago Indians of the Maricopa, Ak Chin Reservation, Arizona 4. Alabama and Coushatta Tribes of Texas 5. Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town of the Creek Nation of Oklahoma 6. Alturas Rancheria of Pit River Indians of California 7. Apache Tribe of Oklahoma 8. Arapahoe Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming 9. Aroostook Band of Micmac Indians of Maine 10. Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, Montana 11. Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians of the Augustine Reservation, California 12. Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians of the Bad River Reservation, Wisconsin 13. Bay Mills Indian Community of the Sault Ste. Marie Band of Chippewa Indians Bay Mills. Reservation, Michigan 14. Berry Creek Rancheria of Maidu Indians of California 15. Big Lagoon Rancheria of Smith River Indians of California 1Federal Register, Vol. 61, No. 220, November 13, 1996. C–1 Figure C.1.—Locations of Federally Recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations. C–2 16.
    [Show full text]
  • Devils Postpile and the Mammoth Lakes Sierra Devils Postpile Formation and Talus
    Nature and History on the Sierra Crest: Devils Postpile and the Mammoth Lakes Sierra Devils Postpile formation and talus. (Devils Postpile National Monument Image Collection) Nature and History on the Sierra Crest Devils Postpile and the Mammoth Lakes Sierra Christopher E. Johnson Historian, PWRO–Seattle National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 2013 Production Project Manager Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Copyeditor Heather Miller Composition Windfall Software Photographs Credit given with each caption Printer Government Printing Office Published by the United States National Park Service, Pacific West Regional Office, Seattle, Washington. Printed on acid-free paper. Printed in the United States of America. 10987654321 As the Nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural and cultural resources. This includes fostering sound use of our land and water resources; protecting our fish, wildlife, and biological diversity; preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places; and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to ensure that their development is in the best interests of all our people by encouraging stewardship and citizen participation in their care. The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under U.S. administration.
    [Show full text]