American Indian Natural
Resource Management:
Intergovernmental Agreements
By
Michael Kotutwa Johnson
AED 615 Investigation and Studies in Applied Research
Personal Background
B.S. in General Agriculture-Cornell University
M.P.P in Public Policy-Pepperdine University
District Conservationist-NRCS
Research Associate-FNDI
CHAPTER I
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.
Need for Study
Federal Govt.
EPA
Tribal Govt.
State Govt.
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.
Objectives of Study
1.
Attempt to describe the federal, state and tribal
relationship through an examination of relevant
policy.
2.
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.
Limitations
1. 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.
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.
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.
CHAPTER II
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
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
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.
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
CHAPTER III
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
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.
An Idea…
Proposal to Committee
Literature Review: Writing
Search for Documents
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
Questions or
Comments
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.
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.