Boston College Law School Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School

Snail Darter Documents The nS ail Darter and the Dam

2-1-1978 Brief of Amicus Curiae, Eastern Band of Indians in Support of Respondents, TVA v. Hill, No. 76-1701 Ben Oshel Bridgers

Follow this and additional works at: http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/darter_materials Part of the Environmental Law Commons, Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons, Land Use Planning Commons, and the Water Law Commons

Digital Commons Citation Bridgers, Ben Oshel, "Brief of Amicus Curiae, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians in Support of Respondents, TVA v. Hill, No. 76-1701 " (1978). Snail Darter Documents. Paper 38. http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/darter_materials/38

This Archival Material is brought to you for free and open access by the The nS ail Darter and the Dam at Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Snail Darter Documents by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. In The SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 1977

NO. 76-1701

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTI-IORITY, Petitioner, v.

HIRAM G. HILL, JR., ZYGMUNT J. B. PLATER , DONALD S. COHEN, THE AUDUIDN COUNCIL OF , INC., THE ASSOCIA TION OF SOUTHEASTERN BIOLOGISTS, Respondents .

On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE, EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS

The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians is a federally recognized Indian tribe, occ upying a reservation located in the mountains of western North Carolina. Prior to the Treaty of in 1835 and the cession of their remaining lands east of the Mississippi River, the had resided in Tennessee along the Little Tennessee Valley, the site of the , which is the subject of the present lawsuit.

;: ;:

s s

-

1 1

addi addi

thes thes

.0.) .0.)

as as

appe

t:here t:here

be be

Prese Prese

sites sites

A A

sites sites

federa federa

B.C.) B.C.)

In In

Such Such

of of

arche arche re­

, ,

A.O.), A.O.),

centur centur

Act.

the the

a a

7500 7500

Block­ (Patrick, (Patrick,

project

such such

determinE determinE

all all

case case

Calloway Calloway

heritage. heritage. of of

Act

and and

by by

Island, Island,

1300 1300

1000 1000

1550 1550

to to

era era

act. act.

-

3 3 -

700A.0.), 700A.0.),

(/Tana (Chota/Tana

-

for for

site, site,

dangerous dangerous

and and

-

Historic Historic

this this

laws laws

sites. sites.

site, site,

a a

Tellico Tellico

Acre Acre

900 900

conceivably conceivably

eighteenth eighteenth

on-gOing on-gOing

arguments arguments

very very

the the

2500 2500

Species Species

sites sites

done done

300 300 1330 1330

archeological archeological

archeological archeological

and and

"set "set

Preservation Preservation Secretary Secretary

SA. SA.

Archaic Archaic

historical historical

Indeed Indeed

two two

Howard Howard

culture culture

this this

with with

their their

historic historic

could could

p. p.

Patrick Patrick

of of

town town

and and

been been

(Thirty (Thirty

and and

Farm, Farm,

the the

Act Act

consultatioIi

construction construction

Late Late

for for

,,2 ,,2

on on

Branch, Branch,

Bottom, Bottom,

(, (Toqua,

found found

to to

for for

era era

'consultation' 'consultation'

sites sites

Loudoun Loudoun

have have

2 2

Island, Island,

Bend, Bend, Petitioner's Petitioner's

(1970). (1970).

Endangered Endangered

Act. Act.

exempt exempt

era era Historical Historical

to to

are are

number number

Appendix. Appendix.

Cherokee Cherokee

(Martin (Martin

complied complied

Species Species

eq. eq.

to to

the the

prior prior

a a

Cherokee Cherokee

s

A.O.), A.O.),

required required

historical historical

the the

to to

other other

TuSkegee) )

these these (Fort (Fort

not not

(Iceland (Iceland

precedent precedent

Harrison Harrison

era era

(Bacon (Bacon

et. et. area area Archaic Archaic of of

of of

Solicitor Solicitor

of of

f. f.

TVA TVA

that that

Act Act

construction construction

Calloway Calloway

with with

-300 -300

TVA, TVA,

era era

National National

sites sites

and and

Petitioner. Petitioner.

era era

the the

such such

§470 §470

of of

out out

§§470 §§470

mile mile

that that

contains contains

agencies agencies

Each Each as as

Early Early

That That

the the

appears appears

the the

Preservation Preservation

C. C. "overhill" "overhill"

important important

Endangered Endangered

number number

B.C. B.C.

to to

question question

Mississippian Mississippian just just

S. S.

for for

a a

by by

eight eight

Bottom, Bottom, brief, brief,

Bottom Bottom

such such

effect effect

doubt doubt

U. U.

u.s.c. u.s.c.

points points

the the

500 500 four four

Valley Valley

Tommotlyand Tommotlyand the the

Woodland Woodland

Act. Act.

sites sites

16 16

for for Brief

an an

16 16

and and

Woodland Woodland

Late Late

Mississippian Mississippian

compliance compliance

his his

-American -American

B.C.). B.C.).

to to

2 2

3 3

1 1

Historic Historic

Middle Middle

ding ding

some some In In

present present

This This

the the

sites sites

consultation consultation

adverse adverse is is

vation vation tion tion to to

agency, agency,

the the

precedent precedent

Interior Interior

gar gar from from

protected protected

Icehouse Icehouse

4500 4500

Icehouse Icehouse Island, Island,

Ea:dy Ea:dy and and

Early Early

Middle Middle

Toqua, Toqua,

of of

house), house), Within Within

logical logical Anglo Anglo 3

eligible for the Historic Register will be destroyed, in­ eluding all but three of the sites listed in the previous paragraph. Such destruction is important to the Cherokee people because this is the last valley available with such historical and archeological remnants available for study and preser­ vation. The Eastern Cherokees also note the arguments pro­ vided by the Petitioner and amici curi a e on behalf of t.he local governments within Monroe County, Tennes se e , that the economic realities of this case support their interpretation of the Endangered Species Act. However, the Cherokees believe that most of the people in the Little Tennessee Valley have no idea of the extent of the histori­ cal and cultural significance of this Valley. The loca l residents quite naturally fear only the economic conse­ quences portrayed to them by the Petitioners. The North Carolina Cherokee Reservation is located in the Smoky Mountains adjoining the Blue Ridge Parkway. The economy of the Tribe is heavily dependent upon the tourist industry and many members of t.h.e Tribe are actively engaged in businesses on the Reservation. During 1977 some 8 .6 million people came onto the Cheroke e Reser vation and spent approximately 20.5 million dollars in Cherokee. The success of the Chero­ kee people in the tourist industry is due to a number of factors, not the least of which are their ready access to the Parkway and being adjacent to a National Park which funnels tourists into Cherokee. Inasmuch as the Little Tennessee Valley contains some of the same geographical features, the Cherokees believe the potential for the economic development of the Little Tennessee Valley area is excellent. 4

Paralleling this litigation, the General Accounting Office conducted a study of the Tellico Project and issued a report in October 1977 . The GAO Report found that the project area has potentially valuable alternative de­ velopment options that have not been considered and the Report stated that tI[N]umerousalternate uses exist for the if the reservoir is not com- pleted. 4 Because the Little Tennessee valley is also adjacent to the Blue Ridge Parkway and the Cherokee historical and archeological sites lie along the river in close pro xir ity, based on Cherokee 's own experience in the tourist industry under similar geographical conditions, they conc lude that the economic disaster portrayed by Peti­ tioner is inaccurate and misleading . Based on the altern tives discussed in the GAO Report , there is every rea SOl to believe the economy can grow in the Valley eve n if the Court denies the relief sought by Petitioners. In short, the scope of historic preservation and en­ dangered species could be dr amatically short-circuited by the legal position of t.1-tePetitioner. The Cherokee people are sensitive to the goal s of the Endang er ed Spec i Act since their own survival was a matter of serious cor cern in the last century. It is implicit from the enactment of the National Historic Preservation Act and tt'1e Endangered Species Act that cultural and biological patterns of the past have value and are worth remembering < Obviously they can

4 GAO Report: "The TVA's Tellico Dam Project - Costs, Alternati ' and Benefits." EMD - 77 - 58, Oct. 14, 1977 at p. 26 . 5 best be remembered by keeping them visible and intact. By standing on the shoulders of the past we can see more clearly into our future. For these reasons the Cherokee people ask the Court to enforce the Endangered Species Act and affirm the Sixth Circuit decision.

Respectfully submitted,

HOLT, HAIRE & BRIDGERS, P.A.

BY: Ben Oshel Bridgers P.O.Box248 Sylva, North Carolina 28779 704-586-2121 Attorney for Amicus Curiae