Returning to a Tribal Self-Governance Partnership at the National Bison Range Complex: Historical, Legal, and Global Perspectives Brian Upton
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Public Land and Resources Law Review Volume 35 Returning to a Tribal Self-Governance Partnership at the National Bison Range Complex: Historical, Legal, and Global Perspectives Brian Upton Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/plrlr Part of the Environmental Law Commons Recommended Citation 35 Pub. Land & Resources L. Rev. 52 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The choS larly Forum @ Montana Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Public Land and Resources Law Review by an authorized editor of The choS larly Forum @ Montana Law. Upton 12.4PROOF WITH SALISH FONT (Do Not Delete) 12/4/2014 10:12 PM Returning to a Tribal Self-Governance Partnership at the National Bison Range Complex: Historical, Legal, and Global Perspectives Brian Upton* I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 53 II. A BISON REFUGE CARVED OUT OF TREATY-RESERVED LAND: BACKGROUND ON THE CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES AND THE NATIONAL BISON RANGE COMPLEX ......................................................................................... 56 A. The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes: A People of Vision ................................................................................... 57 B. The National Bison Range Complex ........................................ 61 III. THE IMPORTANCE TO TRIBAL CITIZENS OF BISON AND THE NATIONAL BISON RANGE COMPLEX ................................................ 67 A. Traditional Significance of Bison to CSKT .............................. 67 B. Tribal Members Bring Bison Across the Continental Divide as Conservation Measure .............................................. 69 C. Stewardship of the Flathead Indian Reservation Bison Herd .......................................................................................... 71 * Tribal Attorney, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Legal Department. J.D., Univ. of Montana; B.A. - International Relations, Mich. St. Univ. Thanks to Steve Lozar, Rhonda Swaney, Raymond Cross, Deena Mansour, Pat Smith and Maylinn Smith for reviewing this article and providing valuable input. Thanks also to: Steve Lozar for providing historical news accounts cited in this article; Tony Incashola and Thompson Smith of the Salish-Pend d’Oreille Culture Committee for their patient and generous assistance; Tim Cochrane for his time and assistance in illuminating the Federal-Tribal partnership experience at the Grand Portage National Monument; and the Public Land & Resources Law Review for inviting me to write this article. Special thanks to CSKT leaders past and present for the example they have set regarding Self-Governance, and to Ray Cross for first bringing to my attention CSKT’s efforts at the National Bison Range. This article is dedicated to Elmer and Jan Upton for setting the course of the road I have taken. UPTON 12.4PROOF WITH SALISH FONT (DO NOT DELETE) 12/4/2014 10:12 PM 52 PUBLIC LAND & RESOURCES LAW REVIEW Vol. 35 D. Creation, and Initial Population, of the National Bison Range ........................................................................................ 72 E. The Ongoing Tribal Relationship with the National Bison Range Complex......................................................................... 77 1. Ninepipe and Pablo: Refuges on Tribal Land ..................... 77 2. Big Medicine: A Local and National Icon .......................... 78 3. Judicial Compensation for Federal Takings of Bison Range Lands ........................................................................ 80 4. Continuation of Inter-Governmental Agreements at the National Bison Range Complex .................................... 81 IV. THE INTERWEAVING OF INDIAN SELF-DETERMINATION, TRIBAL SELF-GOVERNANCE AND REFUGE MANAGEMENT LAW .................................................................................................. 81 A. Congressional Adoption of Self-Determination and Self- Governance Legislation ............................................................ 82 1. The Birth of Indian Self-Determination as Federal Policy .................................................................................. 82 2. Indian Self-Determination Evolves into Tribal Self- Governance ......................................................................... 85 3. Self-Governance Thrives Within the BIA, But Struggles for Support Within Other Agencies .................... 91 B. Interpretation of the Tribal Self-Governance Act ..................... 93 1. Initial Solicitor Analysis and Interpretation of the Tribal Self-Governance Act ................................................ 94 a. The December 16, 1994 Memorandum ........................ 94 b. The May 8, 1995 Memoranda Package ........................ 95 c. The May 17, 1996 Memorandum ................................. 97 2. Self-Governance vis-à-vis National Wildlife Refuge System Legislation .............................................................. 99 a. Solicitor Analysis of the Federal Court Holding in Trustees for Alaska ....................................................... 99 b. The December 31, 2012 Memorandum Addressing the Refuge Improvement Act .................. 101 C. A Firm Foundation for Tribal Self-Governance in the Executive and Legislative Branches ....................................... 103 V. DRAWING LESSONS FROM OTHER FEDERAL-TRIBAL PARTNERSHIPS FOR PROTECTED AREAS MANAGEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES AND ABROAD ....................................................... 104 A. Other Non-BIA Self-Governance Agreements ....................... 104 UPTON 12.4PROOF WITH SALISH FONT (DO NOT DELETE) 12/4/2014 10:12 PM 2014 PARTNERSHIP AT THE BISON RANGE 53 1. A Thriving Partnership at Grand Portage National Monument ......................................................................... 105 2. Yukon Flats: the First Self-Governance Agreement at a National Wildlife Refuge ............................................... 109 3. After Two Decades, Limited Self-Governance Engagement Outside of the BIA ....................................... 110 B. Other Federal-Tribal Partnerships in the United States .......... 110 1. Navajo Nation and Canyon de Chelly National Monument ......................................................................... 110 2. Oglala Lakota Nation and the South Unit of Badlands National Park .................................................................... 112 C. Indigenous Partnerships Abroad in Protected Areas Management ........................................................................... 117 1. Canada ............................................................................... 118 a. Wood Buffalo National Park: Canada’s Premier Bison Reserve ............................................................. 120 b. Gwaii Haanas: Showcase of Canadian and First Nation Partnership ...................................................... 125 c. Nunavut: Incorporating Indigenous Knowledge and Involvement in National Wildlife Areas and Migratory Bird Sanctuaries ........................................ 128 2. Australian-Aboriginal Joint Management of Kakadu National Park .................................................................... 131 3. Commonalities Between Partnerships Abroad and the NBRC ................................................................................ 140 VI. THE LOGIC OF RETURNING TO A SELF-GOVERNANCE PARTNERSHIP AT THE NATIONAL BISON RANGE COMPLEX ................ I. INTRODUCTION The National Bison Range (Range) is an unforgettable place for many reasons. Home to its namesake bison as well as to a variety of other wildlife, it is one of the nation’s premier wildlife refuges. Established over one hundred years ago in western Montana, it was among the first such refuges in the country—predating the present-day National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System) of which it is now a part. The Range is further distinguished by its location in the center of the Flathead Indian Reservation (Flathead Reservation), where the spectacular scenery UPTON 12.4PROOF WITH SALISH FONT (DO NOT DELETE) 12/4/2014 10:12 PM 54 PUBLIC LAND & RESOURCES LAW REVIEW Vol. 35 includes mountain ranges in every direction. The Range bison descend largely from wild bison that had been saved by members of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) at a time when the animals were on the verge of extinction. The Range anchors a complex of refuges on tribal and federal lands, collectively referred to as the National Bison Range Complex (NBRC).1 Included within the NBRC are two ancillary refuges located on federally-held trust lands for which the CSKT are the beneficial owner: the Ninepipe and Pablo National Wildlife Refuges.2 Like the Range, the Ninepipe and Pablo Refuges, as well as almost all of the other NBRC lands, are located in the heart of the Flathead Reservation.3 Since 1994, the Range has been the subject of ongoing partnership efforts between the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT), upon whose reservation the Range is located, and the United States Fish & 1. The National Bison Range Complex consists of the following properties: the National Bison Range; Ninepipe National Wildlife Refuge; Pablo National Wildlife Refuge; Lost Trail National Wildlife Refuge; and the Northwest Montana Wetlands Management District (consisting of Waterfowl Production Areas). U.S. Govt., About the Complex, http://www.fws.gov/refuge/National_Bison_Range /About_the_Complex.html (last updated