INITIAL IMPLEMENATION PLAN

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

December 18, 2012

T RI BAL N AT I ON S

LAND

Buy - Back Pr ogr am

for
LETTER FROM SECRETARY SALAZAR

To unify sovereign lands across Indian Country, we 

are launching the Buy-Back Program to fairly 

compensate individuals who willingly transfer 

fractional land interests to tribal nations. A $1.9 

billion Trust Land Consolidation Fund from the 

Cobell Settlement enables these payments.

The Buy-Back Program is designed to help 

individuals unlock lands from the failures of past 

policies, to benefit tribal nations and the American 

Indian populations they serve. By transferring fractional interests, which will be retained in trust or restricted 

status for tribes, individuals can honor their ancestors and preserve the legacy of traditional land use tenures.

The Settlement also allows for a substantial educational trust fund that will help American Indians and Alaska 

Natives gain access to higher education for years ahead.

Recognizing the size and importance of the Settlement, I have established an organizational structure in the 

Department that will provide high-level attention and accountability for the Buy-Back Program, including an 

oversight board that I chair. We are bringing together a dynamic, dedicated team of experienced staff from 

across the Department to see this effort through.

This plan is our initial path forward. It incorporates feedback received during consultation in the summer 

and fall of 2011 and subsequent input on a draft plan published earlier this year. We want to work closely 

with tribes to go ahead as soon as possible, with the flexibility necessary to adapt to the unique priorities, 

needs, and circumstances of the various tribal nations having jurisdiction over lands impacted by allotment. 

The Department will refine the approach in response to the input and direct involvement I hope tribal leaders 

will provide during the continued tribal consultation efforts we propose in the coming months and 

throughout the life of the program.

Leadership and support from tribal leaders are instrumental to the success of the program. Thank you for 

your interest in this effort.
CONTENTS

Summary............................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction......................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations

Key Parameters .................................................................................................................................................... 7

Operational Concepts ......................................................................................................................................... 9

Primary Processes.............................................................................................................................................. 15

Organizational Structure................................................................................................................................... 22

Next Steps.......................................................................................................................................................................... 25

Appendices

A. Summary of Tribal Consultation

B. Fractionation Statistics by Reservation

C. Secretarial Order No. 3325
Page 1

SUMMARY

The Cobell Settlement, as confirmed by the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 and approved with finality on 

November 24, 2012, after appeals were exhausted through the U.S. Supreme Court, provides for a $1.9 billion 

Trust Land Consolidation Fund (Fund). The Settlement charges the U.S. Department of the Interior 

(Department) with the responsibility to use the Fund within a 10-year period1 to acquire, at fair market value

as define in the Indian Land Consolidation Act (ILCA), fractional interests in trust or restricted land that 

individuals are willing to sell to the Department. Acquired interests will remain in trust or restricted status 

through transfer to tribes. As an additional incentive, when individuals sell fractional interests, up to $60 

million from the Fund will go to an Indian Education Scholarship Fund for American Indian and Alaska 

Native students. The Secretary has established the Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations (Buy-Back 

Program) to implement the land consolidation aspects of the Settlement.

There are approximately 150 reservations with 2.9 million purchasable fractional interests owned by more 

than 219,000 individuals (the whereabouts of approximately 18% of these individuals are currently unknown). 

The number of fractional interests grew by about 12.5% from 2007 to 2011. While the American Indian 

Probate Reform Act of 2004 appears to be slowing the growth of fractionation, the number of fractional 

interests remains high. The overall goal of the Program is to reduce the number of fractional interests

through voluntary land transfers to tribes. Individuals’ transfers will reclaim consolidated trust land bases for 

conservation, stewardship, and beneficial use by sovereign nations.

This Initial Implementation Plan (Plan), which is based on preliminary planning and tribal consultation thus 

far, has six purposes:

 Address comments received on the Draft Plan dated January 31, 2012, and during the public 

comment period through March 15, 2012;

 Outline initial goals and priorities;

 Summarize key parameters and operational concepts for the Buy-Back Program;

 Facilitate tribal participation in the Buy-Back Program;

 Describe the primary land consolidation processes – outreach, land research, valuation, and 

acquisition; and

 Lay out next steps for additional tribal consultation, public comment, and continued 

program planning and implementation, including pilot efforts that will allow for 

improvement of the Buy-Back Program.

 

1 The 10-year period began on the date of Final Approval of the Settlement, which was November 24, 2012.
Page 2

To provide context for planning efforts and to respond to tribes’ requests for more complete information, 

this Plan also includes additional data about fractionation.

This Plan is intended to be flexible and will be subject to change based on continuing consultation. As the 

Buy-Back Program is implemented, the Department expects to update its plans to reflect lessons learned, best 

practices, and tribal feedback and involvement.

The following sections briefly summarize the Plan.

Tribal Comments. With court approval, the Department held tribal consultations regarding land 

consolidation in the summer and fall of 2011. That period of consultations led directly to the publication of 

the Department’s Draft Plan in January 2012. The Department received comments on that plan from 38 

tribes, various organizations, and individuals, and this Plan incorporates that feedback. For example, it 

clarifies Buy-Back Program processes and potential allocation of the purchase portion of the Fund among 

reservations with fractional interests. It reiterates the Department’s decision to not place liens on Buy-Back 

Program purchases.2 This Plan also responds to tribes’ requests for additional information about 

fractionation; to further respond to this request, the Department is creating mapping data that depicts

fractionated tract boundaries and ownership status. The maps, which will be shared with tribes, will 

accelerate valuation efforts and facilitate tribal consultation and the tribes’ identification of acquisition 

priorities. A summary of the comments received and Departmental responses are provided in Appendix A. 

The Department will pursue continued consultation on this Plan. 

Goals and Priorities. The Secretary has identified primary goals and priorities for the Buy-Back Program. 

First and foremost, the Buy-Back Program will seek to reduce the number of fractional interests in trust or 

restricted lands, using reasonable efforts to prioritize the consolidation of the most highly fractioned tracts of 

land as required by the Settlement. The Buy-Back Program will structure acquisitions to maximize the 

number of tracts in which the tribe gains a controlling ownership interest in order to unlock the land for 

beneficial use or conservation by tribal nations. Reducing fractionation will increase the number of acres in 

tribal land bases, thereby promoting tribal sovereignty and self-determination. In order to best achieve this 

goal, the Buy-Back Program will target fractionated tracts that are amenable to cost-efficient, mass valuation 

techniques. The Program also includes the corollary benefit of providing educational scholarship funds to 

Native American students with each land transaction.

 

2. See Applicability of the Indian Land Consolidation Act's Lien Provisions to the Cobell Settlement, M-37026 

(August 10, 2012).
Page 3

The Buy-Back Program must also manage administrative expenses in the most cost-efficient manner possible, 

in a way that facilitates effective long-term trust management and systems integration. The Buy-Back 

Program will be structured in a manner that provides the flexibility to allow as much opportunity for tribal 

participation and assistance as practical at targeted locations. Finally, the Buy-Back Program will seek to 

maintain and establish clear communications throughout its operation. The Buy-Back Program will actively 

consult with Indian tribes to identify and accommodate their acquisition priorities to the fullest extent 

possible. The Buy-Back Program will report progress and communicate with Indian Country throughout the 

life of the Buy-Back Program. And, the Buy-Back Program will provide clear, concise information and 

guidance to individual Indian land owners about their fractional land holdings and the opportunity to 

participate in the Buy-Back Program at their discretion.

Key Parameters and Concepts. The Buy-Back Program described in this Plan is designed to successfully 

achieve these goals and priorities. Flexible purchase ceilings are proposed to achieve as broad a use of the 

Fund as possible, and to ensure that the Fund is not expended in a limited number of locations. Such ceilings 

are established using a formula based on the proportional number of fractionated tracts, interests, and 

associated acres at each reservation.

A significant portion of the fractionated tracts, interests, and acres are located within the Great Plains and 

Rocky Mountain Regions. Moreover, approximately 90% of the purchasable fractional interests are located 

within 40 of the 150 reservations with purchasable fractional interests. The Department intends to focus its 

initial efforts among these 40 reservations while exploring the purchase of fractional interests at additional 

locations, especially where specific criteria or conditions are met, such as a critical mass of interested sellers. 

After the Department obtains additional information and experience, the Department will be expanding its 

effort to determine whether and how it can cover additional reservations.

Tribal Involvement. The Department is interested in partnering with tribes to gain their direct participation

in the Buy-Back Program, as the Buy-Back Program will best succeed with tribal leadership. The Secretary 

and Deputy Secretary recently assured tribal leaders that the Department is committed to working with tribes 

to identify tribal acquisition priorities and involve them in outreach efforts. This Plan provides additional 

information about how tribes can become involved. In particular, the Department requests information 

about individual tribal acquisition priorities and it will work with tribes to ensure that tribal acquisition 

priorities are targeted for priority attention. In addition, tribes may wish to participate actively in certain 

aspects of the Buy-Back Program. The Department hopes to enter into cooperative agreements with many 

tribes and take advantage of tribes’ ability to minimize administrative costs and improve overall effectiveness 

and efficiency of the Buy-Back Program.
Page 4

Processes and Organization. There are four basic phases involved in land consolidation: outreach, land 

research, valuation, and acquisition. The size of the Fund will allow the Buy-Back Program to utilize 

economies of scale to gain efficiencies while minimizing administrative costs. High-level involvement within 

the Department will improve coordination between various Departmental offices and bureaus involved in the 

land consolidation processes. The Buy-Back Program is building on the best practices of past land 

consolidation efforts and, where possible, streamlining the land consolidation process to purchase fractional 

interests effectively and efficiently at the scale provided for by the Settlement.

Next Steps. The Buy-Back Program will pursue additional tribal consultations regarding this Initial 

Implementation Plan. A major next step will be to consult with individual tribes to secure their involvement 

in initial pilot efforts. If they have not done so already, tribes are encouraged to plan for and identify their 

specific acquisition priorities as soon as possible. The Department anticipates that general outreach to 

individual land owners will begin this spring. Now that the Settlement has reached Final Approval, the 

Department will begin to add the additional staff and resources necessary to further plan and implement the 

Buy-Back Program.

Future updates and additional information relevant to the Buy-Back Program will be made available at 

www.doi.gov/buybackprogram.
Page 5
Page 6

INTRODUCTION

Fractionation of Indian land stems primarily from the General Allotment (or “Dawes”) Act of 1887, which

allowed tribal lands to be allotted to individual tribal members, often in 80 and 160-acre parcels. The

expectation was that the United States would hold the resulting allotments in trust for individual Indian 

owners for no more than 25 years, after which the Indian owner would own the land in fee. These time 

frames were extended by various acts of Congress. As a result, the heirs of original allottees of tribal lands 

received increasingly diffuse ownership interests in the allotments that have remained in trust. Such 

fractionation has been repeated over successive generations, causing the number of fractional interests to 

grow exponentially. As a result, many allotted tracts now have hundreds and even thousands of individual 

owners.

Currently, the Department holds approximately 56 million acres of land in trust. More than 10 million acres 

are held for individual Indians and nearly 46 

million acres are held for Indian tribes. More 

than 200,000 tracts are held in trust by the 

Department, including tracts wholly owned by 

tribes. Of those, approximately 92,000 tracts 

have multiple owners with fractional interests 

that are subject to purchase and consolidation 

through the Buy-Back Program. Many of these 

tracts are severely fractionated. For example, 

there are more than 2.2 million fractional

interests of 2% or less contained in over 32,500 

tracts. The table (at right) shows current 

fractionation data for ten Bureau of Indian 

Affairs (BIA) Regions as of November 2012.3

Unless an individual or a tribe owns a controlling interest in a fractionated tract, they must seek and obtain 

approval from co-owners to lease or otherwise use the tract for economic development or other purposes. 

When tracts have hundreds or thousands of co-owners, there is no practical way to obtain the required 

approvals to lease or otherwise use such lands. As a result, highly-fractionated tracts lie idle, unable to be 

used for any economically beneficial purpose or for direct use by tribal nations for the benefit of their 

 

3. For additional information about the data in this Plan, see Appendix B. The Eastern and Alaska Regions are 

not represented as the Eastern Region contains no fractionated lands held in trust, and the Buy-Back Program is barred

by statute from purchasing fractional interests located within the Alaska Region. 25 U.S.C. § 2219.

BIA Region Fractionated 

Tracts

Fractional 

Interests

Fractional 

Acres

Great Plains 28,784 1,006,052 4,173,763

Rocky 

Mountain 20,487 687,054 3,381,057

Western 9,425 322,621 300,341

Northwest 13,071 267,181 1,012,884

Navajo 4,355 255,472 685,949

Southern Plains 7,237 193,161 564,272

Midwest 2,437 128,997 136,063

Eastern 

Oklahoma 5,088 38,967 320,593

Pacific 1,484 30,154 26,314

Southwest 206 4,372 22,768

Total 92,574 2,934,031 10,624,004
Page 7

members. It is estimated that more than half of the 92,000 fractionated tracts containing purchasable 

interests generated no income during 2006-2011. All interests purchased by the Buy-Back Program will 

remain in trust or restricted status and be transferred to tribal ownership, increasing the tribe’s ability to put 

the land to better use for the community as a whole.

Recognizing that the Settlement provides a unique opportunity to have a substantial impact on fractionation 

in Indian Country, the Department is working to learn from past efforts to reduce fractionated ownership of 

land. Previous land consolidation efforts were underfunded and focused on purchasing only the smallest of 

fractional interests in a limited number of tracts. The Buy-Back Program will be much more expansive. It 

will be able to target a large number of tracts and owners at once, allowing efficient and effective purchases 

that will reduce fractionation in the locations where it is most prevalent. The Department is identifying best 

practices developed by past land consolidation efforts and is seeking to incorporate those processes, as 

appropriate, into the planning, implementation, and overall management of the new Buy-Back Program.

This Plan provides a basis for moving forward with implementation as soon as possible. Additional planning 

and continued consultations are necessary, and the Department will continue to seek additional input from 

tribes and individuals as it moves forward. The Department looks forward to a cooperative implementation

of the Buy-Back Program with active tribal involvement.

White House Tribal Nations Conference, Breakout Panel on Strengthening and Advancing the Government-toGovernment Relationship (December 5, 2012). Pictured above are tribal leaders from among 566 Federally Recognized

Tribes. Pictured above right (center) is Deputy Secretary David J. Hayes, U.S. Department of the Interior, Panel CoChair.
Page 8

LAND BUY-BACK PROGRAM FOR TRIBAL NATIONS

Key Parameters

The terms of the Settlement are the primary guide for the design and implementation of the Buy-Back 

Program. The Settlement establishes a $1.9 billion Trust Land Consolidation Fund that will be available to 

the Secretary to purchase fractional interests in trust or restricted fee lands for a period of no more than 10-

years, beginning upon Final Approval of the Settlement, which occurred on November 24, 2012. The 

Settlement limits the use of the Fund to the following purposes:

(1) acquiring fractional interests in trust or restricted lands; (2) implementing the Land 

Consolidation Program; and (3) paying the costs related to the work of the Secretarial 

Commission on Trust Reform, including costs of consultants to the Commission and audits 

recommended by the Commission. An amount of up to a total of not more than fifteen 

(15%) percent of the Trust Land Consolidation Fund shall be used for purposes (2) and (3) 

above.

Additionally, as an incentive to individuals to choose to sell their individual interests, the Settlement provides 

that up to $60 million of the $1.9 billon can be transferred to the Indian Education Scholarship Fund to 

provide financial assistance to Native Americans to facilitate attendance at both post-secondary vocational 

schools and institutions of higher education.

Thus, the Trust Land Consolidation Fund has various components, summarized as follows:

Acquiring Fractional Interests (minimum available for purchase payments) $1,555,000,000

Administrative Costs (capped at 15%) $285,000,000

Education Fund (maximum available, depending on interests sold) $60,000,000

 Total $1,900,000,000

In particular, there are several overarching parameters that influence or control design and implementation of 

the Buy-Back Program. Five such parameters are highlighted below.

First, not all reservations across Indian Country contain fractional interests. The Department has identified

more than 2.9 million fractional interests across approximately 150 reservations that are purchasable by the 

Buy-Back Program. Moreover, these fractional interests are concentrated within a few regions within Indian 

country. Nearly 90% of these purchasable fractional interests are located within 40 of the 150 reservations

(even so, individuals who own fractional interests can be living on other reservations and still benefit from 

the Buy-Back Program).
Page 9

Second, as indicated above, the Settlement limits the amount of money that can be used for administrative 

expenses. By law, no more than 15% of the Fund ($285,000,000) may be used for administrative expenses in 

order to maximize the amount available for purchasing fractional interests. Furthermore, the Settlement 

requires that that Fund be used within 10 years after Final Approval (i.e., by November 24, 2022); therefore, 

the Department must act expeditiously and focus on acquisitions that can be completed in a timely manner. 

A goal is to expend a majority of the Fund within the next 4 years.

Third, despite the size of the Fund, the Fund may not supply sufficient capital to purchase all fractional 

interests across Indian country. More specifically, it is likely that the value of the land corresponding to the 

2.9 million purchasable fractional interests would exceed $1.55 billion. Accordingly, the Department will 

focus on those acquisitions that best reduce fractionation and promote economic development. It is 

imperative that the fund be used thoughtfully to have maximum impact. 

Fourth, a consistent theme expressed through tribal consultation and public comment is a desire for land 

consolidation purchases to benefit as many reservations as possible. This request presents a major challenge

because increasing the number of reservations, tracts, individuals, etc., encompassed by the Buy-Back 

Program will increase the administrative costs. Moreover, given that 40 of the 150 fractionated reservations 

contain approximately 90% of the total fractional interests, it is possible that the Fund could be fully 

expended by purchasing interests at only a small number of those highly-fractionated reservations (assuming 

that numerous individuals decide to sell their interests).

Fifth, it is not clear how many of the 219,000 individual owners4 will be interested in selling their fractional 

interests. Except for the specific provisions contained in the Settlement for purchasing interests from land 

holders whose whereabouts are unknown,5 participation in the Buy-Back Program is strictly voluntary. The 

success of the Buy-Back Program will depend upon the number of individual owners who decide that they 

would like to sell their interests. If the rate of participation is too low, the Department will need to increase 

the number of targeted locations. The hope is that the ability to contribute to the Indian Education 

Scholarship Fund, and the active assistance of tribal leaders in promoting the program, will incentivize 

individuals to sell their interests.

 

4. The whereabouts of approximately 40,000 (18%) of these individuals is currently unknown. In addition, there 

are currently approximately 20,000 deceased individuals with estates that have one or more fractional interests in the 150 

reservations.

5. The Settlement provides for an outreach effort to locate individual owners whose whereabouts are unknown. 

If those owners are not located after the Department undertakes the outreach effort and the passage of 5 years, the 

owners shall be deemed to have consented to the conveyance of fractional interests that are located on a parcel of highly 

fractioned Indian land. 
Page 10

Given that the Fund is a finite, time-limited resource with competing and uncertain demands, the 

Department has sought to develop a balanced approach that features flexibility and reflects careful purchase 

planning measures. That is why the Buy-Back Program needs to be implemented according to prioritized 

criteria that effectively utilize the purchasing power of the Fund, while obeying the administrative cost limit. 

Accordingly, the Department proposes the following concepts to guide the Buy-Back Program, which are 

described in greater detail below:

 Use flexible purchase ceilings for each reservation where the Buy-Back Program is active in 

order to maximize the number of reservations that could participate in the Buy-Back 

Program and prevent expenditure of the entire Fund in just a few locations.

 Focus implementation among the 40 reservations with a significant portion (about 90%) of 

the fractional interests and allocate a significant percentage of the minimum purchase 

amount of the Fund for those reservations.

 Allocate the remaining percentage of the minimum purchase amount of the Fund for

possible use at other reservations where certain criteria have been met.

 Utilize cooperative agreements to allow tribes to carry out Buy-Back Program processes 

within their reservation to maximize effectiveness of the Buy-Back Program and avoid 

unnecessary duplication or reinvention of efforts.

Operational Concepts

Purchase Ceilings. In order to maximize the number of reservations that have the opportunity to 

participate in the Buy-Back Program, the Department is planning to utilize initial purchase ceilings at each 

reservation where the Buy-Back Program is active. In particular, the Department expects to apply a formula 

that takes into account three factors relevant to fractionation: the total number of purchasable fractional 

interests within a reservation; the number of fractionated tracts within a reservation; and the number of acres 

related to those fractional interests. This formula would establish an initial, maximum amount of the Fund 

that could be used to purchase fractional interests within any one reservation. Table 1 below lists the 40

most-highly ranked reservations according to the formula and illustrates initial purchase ceilings, assuming a 

pro rata application to the minimum purchase dollars available for compensating individual owners.6

 

6. For each of the three data points (i.e., tracts, interests, and acres), the Department will calculate the proportion 

of the total for each reservation. The three proportions are then averaged to produce the evenly weighted proportion. 

That proportion is then multiplied by, e.g., the minimum purchase amount of the Trust Land Consolidation Fund 

($1.555 billion) to produce a purchase ceiling amount for each reservation. To illustrate, consider Pine Ridge 

Reservation as an example. The 1,194,669 acres associated with it fractionated tracts are 11.24% of all such acres across 

Indian Country. Its 5,982 fractionated tracts with purchasable interests are 6.46% of all such tracts in Indian Country,

and its 194,401 purchasable fractional interests are 6.63% of all such interests. These proportions average out to 8.11%, 
Page 11

Table 1 – For Illustrative Purposes – Subject to Change7

Rank Land Area Name BIA Region

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts

Associated 

Acres

Number of 

Purchasable 

Fractional 

Interests

Weighted 

Proportion

Estimated 

Initial 

Purchase 

Ceiling

1 Pine Ridge Great Plains 5,982 1,194,669 194,401 8.11% $126,110,500

2 Standing Rock Great Plains 6,268 761,758 214,947 7.09% $110,249,500

3 Blackfeet Rocky Mountain 4,793 892,122 188,894 6.67% $103,718,500

4 Crow Rocky Mountain 4,803 922,907 177,530 6.64% $103,252,000

5 Navajo Navajo 4,355 685,949 255,472 6.62% $102,941,000

6 Fort Peck Rocky Mountain 4,481 718,048 113,183 5.15% $80,082,500

7 Cheyenne River Great Plains 4,026 730,114 64,833 4.48% $69,664,000

8 Gila River Western 4,669 83,840 172,551 3.90% $60,645,000

9 Rosebud Great Plains 3,068 560,021 90,734 3.89% $60,489,500

10 Fort Berthold Great Plains 3,208 464,106 90,976 3.64% $56,602,000

11 Fort Belknap Rocky Mountain 3,007 570,883 55,329 3.50% $54,425,000

12 Wind River Rocky Mountain 2,514 172,503 136,834 3.00% $46,650,000

13 Fort Hall Northwest 2,574 268,830 50,968 2.35% $36,542,500

14 Yakama Northwest 2,190 175,135 53,239 1.94% $30,167,000

15 Colville Northwest 2,039 165,298 35,939 1.66% $25,813,000

16 Sisseton - Wahpeton Great Plains 1,316 93,018 52,882 1.37% $21,303,500

17 Minnesota Chippewa Midwest 979 60,213 71,139 1.35% $20,992,500

18 Quinault Northwest 1,421 103,823 35,838 1.24% $19,282,000

19 Spirit Lake Great Plains 932 56,261 60,075 1.19% $18,504,500

20 Chickasaw Nation Eastern Oklahoma 1,882 111,219 14,297 1.19% $18,504,500

21 Winnebago Great Plains 642 35,888 74,105 1.19% $18,504,500

22 Cheyenne Arapaho Southern Plains 1,129 96,787 39,264 1.16% $18,038,000

23 Salt River Western 1,403 21,673 48,562 1.12% $17,416,000

24 Crow Creek Great Plains 902 98,139 43,217 1.12% $17,416,000

25 Ute Western 1,058 76,738 43,547 1.12% $17,416,000

26 Yankton Great Plains 778 45,248 38,730 0.86% $13,373,000

27 Northern Cheyenne Rocky Mountain 889 104,594 15,284 0.82% $12,751,000

28 Lower Brule Great Plains 594 76,257 30,242 0.80% $12,440,000

29 Umatilla Northwest 1,014 66,832 18,701 0.79% $12,284,500

30 Turtle Mountain Great Plains 582 32,924 25,806 0.61% $9,485,500

31 Seminole Eastern Oklahoma 952 37,627 8,022 0.55% $8,552,500

32 Bad River Midwest 617 29,440 20,382 0.55% $8,552,500

33 Nez Perce Northwest 622 44,498 12,083 0.50% $7,775,000

34 Ponca Southern Plains 403 20,882 25,149 0.50% $7,775,000

35 Washoe Western 409 59,310 14,073 0.49% $7,619,500

36 Muscogee (Creek) Eastern Oklahoma 780 45,130 5,528 0.49% $7,619,500

37 Osage Eastern Oklahoma 609 73,434 2,988 0.48% $7,464,000

38 Salish & Kootenai Northwest 693 38,409 9,250 0.48% $7,464,000

39 Omaha Great Plains 421 22,022 21,374 0.46% $7,153,000

40 Fort Yuma Western 708 6,879 13,060 0.42% $6,531,000

Total Top 40 79,712 9,823,427 2,639,428 89.51% 1,391,569,500

Remaining Reservations 12,862 800,577 294,603 10.49% $163,430,500

Overall Total 92,574 10,624,004 2,934,031 100.00% $1,555,000,000

 

which, once multiplied by $1.555 billion, would provide an initial purchase ceiling of $126,110,500 for the Pine Ridge 

Reservation. For relevant definitions, see Appendix B.

7. The Initial Purchase Ceilings shown are estimates and are subject to change due to tribal consultations and 

corrections to underlying data. Amounts shown are meant to illustrate how purchase ceilings will be determined, but do 

not reflect final amounts.
Page 12

The purchase ceiling amounts are not fixed allocations, nor are they irrevocably dedicated to any one 

reservation. Rather, they are initial planning ceilings to provide guidance on when land acquisitions within a 

reservation must be halted to ensure that funds are available to purchase interests at other locations. If 

acquisitions at one location reach that reservation’s purchase ceiling, the Buy-Back Program would cease 

acquiring fractional interests within that reservation unless more funding becomes available. For those 

reservations where the response from willing sellers falls below that location’s purchase ceiling, the excess 

funds will be used to purchase interests at a different location where individuals are willing to sell.

Order of Implementation. The Department cannot immediately implement land consolidation at all 

locations at once. In general, the Department proposes to implement the Buy-Back Program at the 40

reservations listed in Table 1 in descending order of fractionation. Proceeding in this manner is objective and 

ensures that the Buy-Back Program focuses its attention in the places where fractionation is most prevalent. 

While the formula will generally guide the order of implementation, the Buy-Back Program also will consider 

other factors to determine the best sequence, such as location,8 status of title records, availability of valuation 

related-information, staffing, and tribal priorities and involvement.

While the Department expects that the Buy-Back Program will be active at multiple reservations at once, it is 

likely that the Buy-Back Program will only be active at each location for a limited period of time. As the BuyBack Program completes land consolidation activities at initial locations, it will start operations at successive 

locations within the 40 most-highly ranked reservations. The Department will regularly analyze its ability to 

conduct operations outside of the 40 most-highly ranked reservations throughout implementation.

The scope of the Buy-Back Program is by far the largest endeavor ever undertaken by the Department to 

address land consolidation in Indian country. Because the potential challenges, issues, and opportunities that 

may be encountered have not yet been fully identified, the Department believes that the most effective 

approach is to conduct initial land consolidation efforts at pilot locations. This approach will allow the BuyBack Program to gauge the effectiveness of its initial operating processes and procedures. Additionally, pilot

 

8. The Department’s order of implementation will consider a reservation’s location in that it will consider

simultaneous implementation for nearby or adjacent reservations, regardless of their ranking within Table 1. For 

example, when the Buy-Back Program targets the Crow Indian Reservation, the Department will also conduct land 

consolidation activities on the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation because it is contiguous with the Crow Indian 

Reservation. There are various reasons why the Department plans to use location as an implementation factor. First, 

the Department expects administrative costs to be minimized by conducting activities on nearby locations concurrently,

rather than adhering to an order of implementation based strictly on level of fractionation. Second, many individuals 

own fractional interests on multiple reservations. By conducting operations on adjacent or proximate reservations at 

once, the Buy-Back Program will increase the likelihood that individuals are able to sell more, if not all, of their 

ownership interests at the same time. By grouping reservations the Department can minimize the number of 

transactions and leverage deployment of staff in the field, which should reduce administrative costs. 
Page 13

efforts will allow the Department to begin operations soon while steps are taken to hire additional staff, direct

existing resources, build capacities, and test processes.

Thus, the Department will focus initially on a small number of pilot locations within the 40 reservations listed 

in Table 1. Ideally, the pilots will include locations with strong tribal support and varying levels of direct 

tribal involvement. Through these pilot efforts, the Department expects to learn valuable information about

the planned processes, the time required for reservation-wide valuations, the level of willing sellers, etc. The 

experience gained at these pilot locations will be adopted as the Buy-Back Program expands further into 

Indian Country. To make the Buy-Back Program as efficient and effective as possible, the Department will 

continue to refine the Buy-Back Program as challenges are identified and addressed.

Remainder of Fund. Based on input received through tribal consultation, the Department’s objective is to

maximize the number of reservations where fractional interests can be purchased within the administrative 

cost limitations. Using pro rata purchase limits at the forty reservations listed in Table 1 still leaves

approximately $130,000,000 to purchase fractional interests at other reservations. Currently, the Department 

does not expect that the Buy-Back Program will target all of these less-fractionated reservations due to the 

administrative cost limitations found in the Settlement. More particularly, the economies of scale expected to 

be realized at reservations with higher degrees of fractionation (e.g., through the use of mass appraisal 

valuation techniques) may not apply at many of the remaining reservations. 

The Department may use various criteria or factors to guide use of the remaining purchase funds at locations 

outside the 40 most-highly ranked reservations, including the following.

Interested Sellers. If a tribe, or the individuals themselves, demonstrate that 50% or more of 

the fractional interests within a reservation are owned by interested sellers, the Department 

would include such reservations in the Buy-Back Program, cost permitting. For example, a 

reservation with 1,000 purchasable fractional interests would be targeted if 500 of those 

interests are owned by individuals who have expressed the desire to sell.

Owner Age. For those individuals 65 years of age or older who identify themselves as 

interested sellers, the Buy-Back Program could seek to value and acquire those interests, 

regardless of their location.

High Percentage of Ownership in a Tract. The Buy-Back Program could seek to acquire those 

interests which are greater, e.g., than 10%, or more, of the tract. Acquiring larger interests 

would prevent further fractionation of that interest and provide tribes a larger ownership in 

the tract more quickly than focusing solely on smaller interests.

If the response from tribes and/or individuals within these less-fractionated reservations is not sufficient to 

exhaust the remaining percentage of the Fund, the Department will pursue other options to make sure that 
Page 14

the Fund is fully expended within the 10-year timeframe. The Department may, for example, use the 

remaining amounts to purchase interests in locations that have reached their purchase ceiling or acquire 

interests owned by individuals whose whereabouts are unknown. Future adjustments or refinements to the 

Plan will be the subject of further consultation throughout the duration of the Buy-Back Program.

The Department seeks additional input from tribes and others to develop criteria and details for this aspect of 

the Buy-Back Program. Moreover, the Department will continue to explore whether fair market values can 

be developed in a time- and cost-efficient manner for tracts within a significant number of reservations 

beyond the 40 listed in Table 1, which would provide greater, overall flexibility and could allow additional 

reservations to participate.

In summary, a primary planning challenge is balancing a broad utilization of the Fund within the timeframe 

and administrative cost limitations found in the Settlement. The Buy-Back Program outlined in this Plan will 

target the most highly-fractionated reservations while reserving funds for those locations where, for example, 

a significant number of interested sellers come forward. This approach will efficiently achieve the goal of 

reducing fractionation while providing all affected tribes and individuals an opportunity to participate. 

Overall, these proposals will effectively and efficiently target fractional interests across Indian Country while 

minimizing administrative costs.

Alternatives Considered. As part of its planning, the Department identified other alternatives to implement

the Buy-Back Program. First, the Department considered the possibility of using no purchase ceilings or 

thresholds for any reservation. But under this approach, based on the number of interested sellers, all of the 

Program’s funds could be exhausted after purchasing interests at a small number of reservations. The 

Department decided against this approach because the majority of feedback received through tribal 

consultation favored the incorporation of as many reservations as possible. 

The Department also considered but rejected the idea of guaranteeing implementation on all reservations

affected by fractionation. This concept is not proposed because the administrative cost limitations preclude

implementation at all reservations. The Department will remain open, however, to finding ways that increase 

overall participation.

The Department also could have proposed to implement the Buy-Back Program at a set number of locations 

(20, 30, 40, etc.) without the possibility of other locations participating. This idea was rejected in favor of 

providing the potential opportunity for broader participation in the Buy-Back Program by all affected 
Page 15

reservations. There may also come a point at any location where the effectiveness of fractional interest 

purchases is diminished, such that purchase dollars can be spent more effectively at a different location.

Tribal Involvement - Cooperative Agreements. The Department is interested in partnering with tribes.

The Department recognizes that a number of tribes have existing land consolidation programs, including 

some that have outstanding, proven track records. Also, tribes currently operate various Departmental

programs and functions under P.L. 93-638 agreements, including some that address relevant issues such as 

realty, appraisals, land title and records, forestry, and probate. Unfortunately, the Indian Land Consolidation 

Act prohibits tribes from utilizing P.L. 93-638 contracts to operate Buy-Back Program activities.

However, the Department strongly supports the spirit of self-governance and hopes to utilize cooperative 

agreements with tribes, as done in the past. The continued use of cooperative agreements will allow tribes to 

carry out various aspects of the Buy-Back Program. In particular, tribes may be able to perform some of the 

most important functions of the Buy-Back Program, based on their interests and capacities, including

prioritizing tracts, identifying landowners, and administering the acquisition of fractional interests through 

Department systems.

Cooperative Agreements might be utilized in two ways. First, as the Department targets a specific 

reservation, the Department will consult with the tribe to ascertain whether the tribe wishes and has the 

capacity to conduct any of the land consolidation activities within its reservation. Additionally, as the 

Department will be active only at a limited number of reservations at any one time, tribes not initially targeted 

by the Buy-Back Program may be able to utilize cooperative agreements to begin activities within their 

reservation. Utilizing a cooperative agreement that includes valuation-related work might, for example, allow 

for Buy-Back Program activities to begin before the time initially scheduled by the Department. 

As described in greater detail below, the Department has broken down the land consolidation process into 

four basic phases. Most cooperative agreements will not include all phases of the Buy-Back Program. But the 

Department expects many tribes to participate in the Buy-Back Program through the use of cooperative 

agreements, especially with respect to outreach. Cooperative agreements to conduct land consolidation 

activities should follow the reservation-wide model that the Department will utilize in order to maintain 

consistency and cost-effectiveness of the Buy-Back Program. The use of cooperative agreements may also be 

limited in recognition that much of the land consolidation process will be automated in Departmental systems 

of record, like the Trust Asset and Accounting Management System (TAAMS). This type of automation is 

necessary to achieve efficiencies in order to meet the administrative cost limits set forth by the Settlement.
Page 16

Tribes should submit formal proposals for cooperative agreements to the Buy-Back Program as specified in 

the Next Steps section below. The proposals should include a scope of work, proposed administrative costs, 

and a schedule for the steps necessary to complete the work. The Department will compare the tribes’

proposals against the Department’s expected performance of the same functions and approve only those

cooperative agreements that result in an equally or more efficient and cost-effective process. When

evaluating tribal proposals, the Department will consider various factors, including tribal capacity (established 

tribal programs, certified staff, etc.) and access to TAAMS (where relevant): 

Tribal Capacity. The Department will consider the tribe’s capability to conduct outreach through inperson meetings, print advertisements, and other forms of media outreach. Capacity to conduct 

appraisals will include a tribe’s current certified staffing levels and/or hiring ability. No single factor 

will determine whether a cooperative agreement is approved or disapproved, as many factors will be 

relevant in comparing tribal and Departmental capacities.

Tribal Access to Department systems of records. In order to implement the Buy-Back Program as efficiently 

as possible, the Department anticipates that much of the administrative processes will be automated 

through various systems of record. It will therefore be difficult for a tribe to conduct land 

consolidation activities (except for outreach or valuations) in a more efficient and cost-effective 

manner than the Department without access to these systems. Many of the comments the 

Department received on the initial Draft Plan stated that access to these systems should not be a 

limiting criteria, because not all tribes have been granted access by the Department. While the 

Department understands this concern, administrative costs would increase significantly if the 

Department approved cooperative agreements with tribes utilizing processes that differ significantly 

from or are less efficient than those found in Departmental systems.

Primary Processes

The Department’s planning efforts have broken down the land consolidation process into four phases: 

outreach, land research, valuation, and acquisition. Initially, once a reservation is targeted by the Buy-Back 

Program, the Buy-Back Program will conduct extensive outreach with the tribal community so that 

individuals are aware of the opportunity to sell fractional interests. The outreach phase will also entail 

consultation with the tribe about various planning matters such as tribal priorities and tribal involvement. As 

outreach is occurring, research concerning reservation lands will occur, with the goal of maximizing the 

number of fractionated tracts that can be valued within the reservation, including those identified as tribal 

priorities. Once the research has been completed, the Buy-Back Program will value as many fractionated 

tracts of land as possible within a reasonable amount of time using mass appraisal valuation techniques. 

Finally, once fair market value determinations have been made, the Department will mail application packets 

to individuals with ownership interests in those valued tracts and seek to acquire those interests that 

individuals are willing to sell voluntarily.
Page 17

Outreach. The Department will disseminate information about the Buy-Back Program to increase overall 

awareness of the land consolidation aspects of the Settlement. Outreach will include land consolidation 

information and notices along with regular communications that the Department provides to individual land 

owners. The Department recognizes that significant outreach is necessary given that communication 

restrictions in place during the Cobell litigation have been lifted only recently as part of the Settlement. 

Outreach will also be vital in contacting those individuals owning fractional interests who no longer reside on 

a reservation or near a field office. 

In addition to broad outreach concerning the Buy-Back Program, the Department will conduct more 

extensive communications with a tribe and its community once a particular reservation is targeted by the BuyBack Program. The outreach phase has two primary functions.

Foremost, individuals owning fractional interests within a reservation will need to be informed that the BuyBack Program will be actively valuing fractionated tracts of land within the reservation and that they may be 

able to sell some or all of their fractional interests. This outreach will explain the timeframes in which the 

Buy-Back Program expects to complete its work for the reservation and how individuals may take advantage 

of the opportunity to sell their fractional interests.

In addition, the Department will meet with the tribe to discuss tribal priorities for acquisition, how best to 

conduct tailor outreach on the reservation, and to determine the tribe’s interest and capacity to conduct BuyBack Program operations through cooperative agreements. Tribal priorities could be identified in a number 

of ways, such as by specific tract identification; geographic regions within the reservation (i.e., county; 

chapter; district; specific section, township, and range designations; or aliquot parts); tract type (e.g., tracts 

that fall within a certain land use planning area or zone); or ownership status (e.g., tracts in which the tribe 

already has some ownership interest regardless of location); or other factors. An exchange of maps – both 

tribal and Departmental - will often be instrumental in working with tribes to identify their acquisition 

priorities. The Department is mapping tract boundaries and looks forward to sharing such data with tribes if 

necessary.

Because the Buy-Back Program expects to value as many fractionated tracts as possible, many tracts identified 

by the tribe as priorities for acquisition will automatically be included in the valuation phase of the Buy-Back 

Program. The Department will work with tribes to develop methods to maximize the acquisition of tribal 

priorities. 
Page 18

The Department understands that tribes often have efficient methods to conduct outreach with their tribal

members. The Buy-Back Program expects to send information to individuals owning fractional interests in

tracts that have been valued, and many individuals will receive this information in the mail without expressing 

a prior interest to sell. It is imperative that individuals are made aware of Buy-Back Program activities, 

incentives, and benefits. So, too, they must understand that their decision to sell is voluntary, and know how 

to complete the Application Packet if they want to participate. This type of informative outreach is often 

best performed by tribes. The Department has utilized cooperative agreements in the past for this type of 

outreach and, to the extent possible, will continue to do so. In addition to discussing cooperative agreements 

regarding outreach, the initial meetings will determine how extensive tribes will be involved in other phases of

the Buy-Back Program process.

Land Research. During this phase, the Department will collect the data necessary to establish fair market 

value for the tracts containing fractional interests that might be acquired.9 In order to determine fair market 

value, adequate information about the tracts to be valued must be compiled. The land research effort will 

include an identification of the fractionated tracts within a reservation that contain purchasable interests. In 

particular, using data from TAAMS and other sources, the Department will create a map that depicts 

fractionated tracts within a reservation. Maps will facilitate the valuation process by enabling tract acreage

categorization (range, dry crop, irrigated crop, etc.), geographical analysis, and comparison to surrounding 

uses and values.10

It is anticipated that some tracts may require additional information outside of TAAMS before values can be 

determined. Additional information could be required, for example, to clarify metes and bounds descriptions 

or other legal descriptions. Most information will be gathered during the land research phase. However, 

some tracts may require additional information such that valuations cannot be requested contemporaneously 

with the remainder of the reservation without diminishing the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the BuyBack Program. The Department will work with tribes to ensure that tracts identified as tribal priorities are 

included in the valuation request to the greatest extent practicable.

Implementing the Buy-Back Program on the scale established by the Settlement requires information for 

thousands of tracts to be generated from TAAMS and other sources in order to provide the necessary data 

for determining fair market value. Additionally, valuation requests will be automated through TAAMS and 

 

9. The Indian Land Consolidation Act provides that the Secretary may develop a system for establishing fair 

market value, including a system based on geographic units. 25 U.S.C. § 2214.

10. In addition, maps will be utilized to create visual layers that will depict the status and progress of the Buy-Back 

Program. Maps can also help identify acquisition priorities. 
Page 19

the Department’s Office of Appraisal Services Information System (OASIS). Due to limited access to 

TAAMS and other databases, some tribes may not be able to perform this step as efficiently or in as costeffective a manner as the Department. This situation may preclude many tribes from utilizing cooperative 

agreements for this phase of the process. However, a tribe that can provide the necessary information for a 

reservation-wide valuation request may include such capability in its cooperative agreement proposal.

 

Valuation. After the reservation-wide valuation 

request is generated (containing the necessary land 

related data and information), the Department will 

determine the fair market value of those fractionated 

tracts. The Settlement provides that the Department 

“shall offer fair market value in accordance with 25 

U.S.C. § 2214 to owners” of fractional interests in 

trust or restricted lands.11 The Department 

anticipates using various valuation methodologies, 

relying most heavily on mass appraisal valuation

techniques such as market studies, cost estimates,

and project appraisal reports. Site specific valuations, 

and other appropriate methods and techniques, may 

be used as warranted and as cost permits. To ensure 

that the valuation methods and techniques meet 

industry standards, the Department will obtain thirdparty substantiation, review, and/or validation of its 

valuation techniques, while recognizing the unique fair market value standards set forth in the ILCA.

The Department estimates that the majority of tracts within many of the most highly-fractionated 

reservations will be amenable to mass appraisal valuation techniques. Non-homogenous or more 

complicated tracts may be difficult to value contemporaneously with the remainder of the reservation without 

diminishing the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the Buy-Back Program. The Department understands 

that an inability to value certain tracts may preclude individuals from selling all of their interests and it may 

preclude acquisition of some tribal priorities. The Buy-Back Program will work with tribes to ensure, to the 

greatest extent possible, that tracts identified as tribal priorities are valued, regardless of the valuation

methodology required. Tribes should identify tribal priority tracts as soon as possible so that the Department 

 

11. See Cobell Settlement Agreement at ¶ F(3), p. 35 and supra note 8.

TRACTS, PARCELS, AND INTERESTS

A tract of land, as referenced throughout this Plan, is the trust 

asset in which an individual and/or tribe has an ownership 

interest. It is a defined area, often the boundary of an original 

allotment, and can include the surface estate, mineral estate, or 

both the surface and mineral estate. A tract can be owned by 

one or more individuals and tribes. A tract with multiple 

owners is considered a fractionated tract.

An interest refers to an individual’s ownership in a tract of 

land. If a tract of land is owned by only one individual or a 

tribe, the ownership interest is 100%. Fractionated tracts have

more than one owner – often tens or hundreds of different 

owners, all with varying levels of interests.

A tract of land can be composed of one or more parcels. 

Parcels also have defined areas, but are not necessarily 

adjoining plots of land. In other words, a tract may be 

composed of just one single parcel of land, multiple adjacent 

parcels, and in some instances multiple non-adjacent parcels 

that are separated by other tracts or parcels of land. 

While sales will be based on fractional interests, fair market 

values are determined at a parcel level. If a tract contains a 

parcel that cannot be evaluated for whatever reason, offers for 

interests in the whole tract cannot be made. 
Page 20

can assess the resources required to determine fair market values for those tracts. This information will 

enable the Buy-Back Program to plan accordingly. However, there may nevertheless be instances where a

particular tract may not be able to be valued in a timely and cost-effective manner.

The Department anticipates using mass appraisal valuation techniques as much as possible in order to comply 

with the administrative cost limitations. Tribes seeking cooperative agreements to determine fair market 

values must demonstrate the ability to perform reservation-wide valuations in a manner that is as efficient and 

cost-effective as those performed by the Department. Valuations performed by a tribe may be reviewed or 

verified by the Department. Given these constraints, it is unlikely that many cooperative agreements will 

include valuations within the scope of work. Tribes that currently perform valuation or appraisal work for 

the Department through a P.L. 93-638 agreement or self-governance compact may be better positioned to 

provide fair market values for the Buy-Back Program through a cooperative agreement.

To the extent possible, a tribe could use its own resources to provide valuations to the Buy-Back Program

that, once verified by the Department, could be used to begin acquisitions within the reservations. Tribes not 

initially targeted by the Buy-Back Program could provide valuations which would allow for acquisitions. In 

these cases, the Department would be able to conduct acquisitions at reservations not initially identified for 

inclusion in the Buy-Back Program. Any acquisitions made by the Buy-Back Program based on triballyprovided valuations would count towards the purchasing ceiling established for that reservation. 

Acquisition. Once fair market value determinations are made, the Buy-Back Program will seek to acquire 

fractional interests in those tracts that were valued. Information will be sent to individual owners as part of 

an Application Packet to sell their fractional interests. To make the acquisitions process more efficient, 

TAAMS will automatically generate Application Packets. The Application Packet will include:

 Cover Letter; 

 Sale Application; 

 Deed (including a legal description of the valued interests that the individual may elect to sell);

 Reservation-wide map(s) depicting the spatial location of the valued tracts, cost permitting;

 As an incentive, information about contributions to Indian Education Scholarship Fund when 

individuals sell fractional interests under the Program (contributions are made from the Fund and are 

not deducted from payments to individuals);

 Information about how selling one’s fractional interests may affect their eligibility to receive benefits

such as Social Security, BIA General Assistance, etc.; and

 Return envelope, postage prepaid, if the individual wants to return the deed and sale application.

Individuals will then have a set amount of time to apply to sell some or all of their fractional interests that 

have been valued. It is up to individuals to voluntarily decide whether to sell their fractional interests, with 
Page 21

the exception of individuals who are not locatable. The fair market value of the interests as stated in the 

Deed will be the sale price.12

Individuals can return the sale application and deed by mail, and Buy-Back Program staff will process those 

items for approval. In addition, the Buy-Back Program will have staff at local field offices to answer 

questions or assist any individuals wishing to complete the Application Packet in person. There will be a

specified timeframe in which to complete and submit the Application Packet, whether by mail or in person.

Depending on the number of willing sellers within a reservation, the Department may not be able to approve 

all sale applications without exceeding the location’s purchase ceiling. The Department has identified two 

different approaches for approving applications and deeds, the choice of which becomes more important in 

the event that the value of the interests that individuals seek to sell greatly exceeds the available purchase 

ceiling. First, the Department could review and approve sale applications and deeds as they are received until 

that location’s purchase ceiling is reached. This method would be efficient, but it may not fully capture or 

satisfy tribal or Departmental priorities as it assumes that all sales carry equal merit.

Second, applications and deeds could be gathered and analyzed as a group, with approval going to those that 

best achieve the goals and objectives of the Buy-Back Program, such as acquisitions that maximize the 

number of tracts with majority ownership and/or those that relate to a tribal priority. This second approach 

recognizes that not all acquisitions are equal; certain sales may best achieve acquisition goals. This method 

would allow the Department to make more effective purchases for the tribe (e.g., by getting the tribe to 

majority control for economic development purposes), as well as incorporate tribally-identified priority tracts. 

But it may also extend the acquisition (and payment) period because applications would be finally acted upon 

only after the Department receives a critical mass of applications, which it would then review judiciously to 

identify an optimal mix of acquisitions. The Department is considering utilizing the latter method, but is 

open to feedback from tribes on both options, as well as other ideas.13

Regardless of the approval approach used, completed Application Packets would be scanned and loaded into 

TAAMS as received. If an application is approved, TAAMS will automatically update title and trigger the 

process of posting payments to Individual Indian Money (IIM) accounts. Because these processes are heavily 

 

12. The Department does not expect to utilize incentive payments, but a tribe would be free to offer some 

incentive of its own to encourage sales of fractional interests in priority tracts. 

13. While the Department could send Application Packets and/or offers only to those individuals owning 

fractional interests in tracts identified as tribal priorities, it could diminish efficiency. The Buy-Back Program is striving 

to use procedures designed to quickly accommodate the voluntary sale of interests through the elimination of duplicate 

conveyance documents and transactions.
Page 22

automated and centralized, the efficiency of generating and processing Application Packets by tribes is not 

advisable. Accordingly, the Department does not envision cooperative agreements for the acquisition phase.

During the acquisition phase, the Department will also carry out the notice requirements provided by the 

Settlement in order to purchase those interests from individuals whose whereabouts are unknown. But it is 

possible that a location’s purchase ceiling amount may be reached by purchasing interests from individuals 

actively engaged in the Buy-Back Program. In those instances, the Buy-Back Program may not utilize the 

authority to purchase those fractional interests from individuals whose whereabouts are unknown. The 

Department may, however, purchase those interests in order to ensure that the Fund is used in its entirety. 

EXAMPLE OF PROGRAM PROCESSES

To illustrate the four Buy-Back Program processes, consider an example reservation with 3,000 tracts that contain 

90,000 fractional interests owned by 10,000 individuals.

1. Outreach. In cooperation with the tribe, outreach must occur to inform the 10,000 individuals that the Buy-Back 

Program will be valuing tracts and purchasing fractional interests from those who desire to voluntarily sell their 

interest(s). During this time, the Department will consult directly with the tribe to ascertain any priorities the tribe may 

have for acquisition. However, because all purchases will be made from willing sellers at this phase, the Buy-Back 

Program cannot force acquisition of interests even for tracts identified as tribal priorities. Direct tribal involvement 

through cooperative agreements will be key to generating interest in selling lands that are tribal priorities alone. 

Partnerships with tribes will be key to generating interest in selling lands that are tribal priorities.

2. Land Research. While the Buy-Back Program and/or tribe is conducting outreach in the communities, the BIA 

and other Departmental agencies will be gathering data necessary to determine the fair market values of the 3,000 

fractionated tracts within the reservation. For a number of reasons, a tract may require extensive research to determine 

its fair market value. For this example, assume 10% of the tracts require extensive research that would require 

excessive time or cost to complete. In order to remain efficient and cost effective, the Buy-Back Program would 

simply initiate a valuation request for 2,700 tracts, omitting those 300 tracts that require further data or extensive 

analysis before values can be determined (it is recognized that such an omission will necessarily preclude the 

Department from acquiring all the interests owned by certain individuals). At this stage, the Department will work with 

the tribe to ensure that as many tribal priorities as possible are included in the valuation request.

3. Valuation. At this point, the OST Office of Appraisal Services (OAS) will receive a request to value 2,700 tracts 

within the reservation. In order to achieve efficiency and cost-effectiveness, OAS will primarily utilize mass-valuation

techniques. The number of tracts these techniques may capture will vary between reservations, but for this example, 

only 80% of those tracts are amenable to some mass appraisal valuation technique. Thus, the Buy-Back Program can 

expect fair market values for 2,160 of the 3,000 tracts. The Buy-Back Program will work with the tribe to ensure that 

as many tribal priority tracts as possible are valued.

4. Acquisition. Now that the Buy-Back Program has received the fair market value for 2,160 tracts, it can send 

Application Packets to individuals who own interests in those tracts. At most, Application Packets would go to all 

10,000 individuals who own fractional interests within the reservation (or some subset because some of those 10,000 

individuals may own interests only in the 840 tracts that were not valued). Application Packets will have a specific 

response deadline date (i.e., 30 or 60 days after they are mailed). If too few individuals sell their interests at this 

reservation, the excess purchase amount will be used at other locations where individuals are willing to sell. If the BuyBack Program receives too many applications, it will approve applications until the location’s purchase ceiling is 

exhausted, and any remaining applications will be held and processed only if more funds become available.
Page 23

Outreach

Inform community about the Buy-Back Program and opportunity to sell interests (ongoing during 18 

months); initial meeting with Tribe (first month) and periodically thereafter as needed.

Land 

Research 

(1-3 months)

Buy-Back 

Program

Processes

and 

Necessary 

Timing 

Goals

Valuations of Tracts Amenable to Mass Valuation

(3-12 months)

Acquisitions

(3-6 months)

6 months 1 year 18 months

The Buy-Back Program will be active at any one location only for as long as it takes to complete the four phases of the 

process. Once the four phases haves been completed at the reservation, the Buy-Back Program will focus its efforts on 

the next targeted location. 

Organizational Structure

The Buy-Back Program is a high priority of the Department, and acquiring land at the scale and in the limited 

timeframe provided by the Settlement poses an unprecedented challenge. The effort will require strong,

centralized leadership to ensure effective coordination among the various offices and bureaus involved. It 

will also require substantial leadership from the tribes targeted by the Buy-Back Program.

The Department’s proposed organizational structure is being designed to meet these challenges and to 

conduct land consolidation activities effectively and efficiently, with significant communication and 

collaboration. The Secretary has established the Buy-Back Program within the Office of the Secretary. See

Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations (Secretarial Order No. 3325) at Appendix C. The Buy-Back Program 

is headed by a Program Manager that reports directly to the Deputy Secretary. There will be staff in the 

Office of the Secretary that will provide expertise and support in areas such as budget, performance 

management and reporting, systems integration, program analysis, communications, cooperative agreements, 

and administrative records. Extensive expertise and services within the Department, primarily in the BIA and

the OST, will be utilized to implement the Buy-Back Program. An oversight board also has been established, 

to include the Solicitor, Director of the BIA, and the Special Trustee for American Indians.

An Acquisitions Director, housed within the BIA, will lead operations in the field. Field operations will be 

conducted primarily out of three regional Acquisition Centers, located in Aberdeen, South Dakota; Billings, 
Page 24

Montana; and Albuquerque, New Mexico. The centers will focus on reservations within the BIA Regions 

indicated in the charts above and below. Each center covers roughly one-third of the fractional interests 

throughout Indian Country. One or more teams at each center will be dedicated to particular reservations as 

targeted by the Buy-Back Program. Once a team completes activities at one reservation, it will move to the 

next targeted location.

The three Acquisition Centers will request fair market value determinations for the locations targeted by the 

Buy-Back Program and conduct acquisitions once those values are obtained. Fair market value 

determinations will be carried out by the OST Office of Appraisal Services (OAS) and mineral interests will 

be evaluated by the Office of Valuation Service’s Office of Minerals Evaluation (OME). Timber values may 

also be supplied to OAS where applicable by the BIA Forestry Division. The Department will utilize 

Reimbursable Service Agreements (RSAs) with Departmental offices and bureaus to track administrative 

costs, increase accountability, and ensure that work is completed in a timely manner. The Buy-Back Program

will also utilize existing Department resources and functions including, but not limited to, Information 

Technology, the BIA Land Title and Records Offices, and the OST Call Center. 

Rocky Mountain

Northwest

Great Plains

Midwest

Navajo

Southwest

Western

Pacific

Southern Plains

Eastern Oklahoma

Billings, MT

Albuquerque, NM

Aberdeen, SD
Page 25

The following chart illustrates the overall structure, including some new positions shown in blue. Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians Office of Valuation Services

(Minerals Evaluation)

Tribes

Bureau of Land Management

Office of 

Appraisal 

Services

Trust 

Services

(Trust Funds 

Management)

Business 

Management 

(Printing & 

Mailing)

Office of Budget

Deputy Secretary

Secretary

Field 

Operations

(Call 

Center)

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Director

Deputy Director

Trust Services

Interior Business Center

Senior 

Advisor

Tribal Liaison

Program 

Manager

Buy-Back Program

Possible Cooperative Agreements Deputy Director

Buy-Back Oversight BoardSecretary (Chair or the Deputy Secretary as designee)SolicitorAssistant Secretary-Indian Affairs

Director, Bureau of Indian AffairsSpecial Trustee for American Indians (or designee, Principal Deputy Special Trustee)

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Technology, Information & Business ServicesDirector, Bureau of Land Management

Acquisition Director

Regional 

Team Lead -

Acquisitions

Albuquerque, NM

NavajoPacificWesternSouthwestSouthern PlainEastern Oklahoma

Regional 

Team Lead -

Acquisitions

Billings, SD

Rocky MountainNorthwest

Regional 

Team Lead -

Acquisitions

Aberdeen, SD

Great PlainsMidwest
Page 26

NEXT STEPS

Efforts thus far have focused on planning for the Buy-Back Program, including tribal consultation and public 

input. The Department intends to continue such efforts. In particular, the Department proposes continuing 

consultation, including the following sessions:

January 31, 2013 Minneapolis, Minnesota

February 6, 2013 Rapid City, South Dakota

February 14, 2013 Seattle, Washington

The Department encourages comments on this Plan and will incorporate tribal input and public comments to 

improve plans for the Buy-Back Program. Written comments should be submitted by March 4, 2013. 

Comments should be submitted in accordance with a notice that will be published in the Federal Register, 

which will include the ability to submit comments electronically via following email address: 

buybackprogram@ios.doi.gov. Comments will be addressed by the Department either in a published 

addendum or in conjunction with other regular reports.

Additionally, the Department will immediately pursue consultations with individual tribes to determine initial 

pilot locations. The Department will likely select 4-8 pilot reservations from among the 40 reservations listed 

in Table 1 above (page 10) so pilot work can begin at each of the three intended acquisition centers. 

As soon as possible, the Department hopes to receive specific tribal input so that planning efforts can reflect 

the nature, extent, and location of tribes’ acquisition priorities. In particular, because the Department 

anticipates extensive use of mass appraisal valuation techniques, the Department wishes to assess whether the 

tracts that tribes identify as priorities will be captured through mass valuation processes. The Department is 

interested in learning about tribes’ specific acquisition priorities now so those may be incorporated into 

planning efforts and inform pilot selection. Some tribes have already provided information related to 

priorities. Tribes that have not already done so should send their priorities and their formal proposals for 

cooperative agreements to the U.S. Department of the Interior, attention: Mr. Anthony Walters, 1849 C St. 

NW, MS-7328-MIB, Washington, DC 20240. Mr. Walters can also be reached via telephone: (202) 513-0897; 

or via e-mail: Anthony.Walters@bia.gov.

While tribal consultation efforts are ongoing, the Department will pursue general preparatory work and take 

other important next steps. For example, it will:

 Conduct general outreach by providing individuals with information about the Buy-Back Program

along with regularly-scheduled account statement mailings, such as the following
Page 27

March Rocky Mountain and Great Plains

April Eastern, Southwest, Midwest, and Southern Plains

May Western, Pacific, and Northwest

 Continue to process ownership transactions and update title records in TAAMS to ensure that 

acquisitions are as complete as possible;

 Complete additional land mapping to facilitate tribal consultations, valuation efforts, and the 

identification of tribal priorities;

 Automate processes to enable the Buy-Back Program to efficiently and consistently process a high 

volume of transactions;

 Develop activity plans, milestones, performance measures, reporting mechanisms,14 and operating 

budgets in light of additional tribal feedback and program analysis; and

 Secure the additional staff and other resources needed to further plan for, implement, and operate 

the Buy-Back Program now that the Department may access the Fund. The Department had no 

ability to use the Fund until after the Settlement was finally approved and monies were apportioned.

 

14. Successful completion of specific steps within the Buy-Back Program process will be reported externally 

through regular progress reports, which will provide various, often-localized data points such as the number of tracts 

valued; the number of Application Packets sent, returned, and accepted; the number of interests acquired; the costs 

incurred by the Buy-Back Program (both administratively and for acquisitions); and other relevant data. Additionally, 

the Buy-Back Program may prepare special or annual reports to describe overall progress and outline plans for future 

years.
Appendix A-1

Appendix A – Summary of Tribal Consultation Thus Far

The consultation process is fundamental to the government-to-government relationship between the 

United States and tribes. Although the Settlement was not yet final, the Department recognized the 

benefit of early stakeholder engagement. In June 2011, the Department initiated tribal consultations, 

with permission from the court, regarding the land consolidation component of the Settlement that 

included seven regional consultation meetings and a public comment period (for written 

submissions) from June 13 through November 1, 2011, where tribal leaders, members of the public, 

and organizations could provide input on the Department’s proposed land consolidation program. 

On January 31, 2012, the Department published the Cobell Land Consolidation Program Draft Plan. 

The Draft Plan incorporated feedback received through tribal consultations and suggested two 

primary areas of potential focus: targeted locations for land consolidation activities and 

accommodating interested sellers regardless of their location. To achieve success in these areas, the 

Draft Plan described the Department’s intention to reduce land fractionation in a time-efficient and 

cost-effective manner given the administrative cost limitations, while allowing tribes to participate 

through cooperative agreements and affording individuals an opportunity to voluntarily sell interests. 

The Department received additional input on the Draft Plan from tribal leaders, tribal organizations, 

individuals, and members of the public through the 45-day public comment period that followed 

publication of the Draft Plan (January 31 – March 15, 2012). The Department received comments 

from 38 tribes, organizations and individuals. The following summarizes the common themes 

expressed within those comments.

Acquisitions

Tribal comments ranged from focusing on reducing the number of small interests in trust lands to 

stating that the Department should authorize purchases of fractional interests regardless of size, 

status, or type of interest. Further, comments received mentioned that fee interests within trust 

property should also be purchased, acquisitions should be made from any fractional interest owner, 

even if non-Indian, and that acquisitions should include improvements on the property. Finally, 

comments stated that local businesses and persons be involved in the acquisition process. 

Department Action. As stated within this Plan, to maximize the number of fractional interests 

acquired, the Department is largely focusing on efficient and effective land consolidation, relying on 

mass appraisal valuation techniques. This process should capture the majority of fractional interests

held in trust or restricted status, though the Department cannot utilize the Fund to purchase fee 

interests. Despite tribal comments urging otherwise, the Department maintains that it does not have 

the legal authority to take improvements into trust although improvements may be part of the land

valuation approach. The Department will utilize the local workforce as appropriate, which may 

include federal, tribal, and/or contract employees.
Appendix A-2

Valuations

Many comments stated support for the Department’s use of mass appraisal valuation techniques 

where appropriate, but demanded greater clarity in what exactly is included in an appraisal and 

purchase by the Tribal Communities Land Buy-Back Program ( Buy-Back Program). Tribes also 

stated that tracts identified as priorities should still be included as tracts to be valued, even if the 

mass valuations are not applicable. Many comments expressed concern with the Department’s 

valuation process and the ability to conduct as many valuations as will be needed. Comments also 

stated that tribes should be able to produce appraisals, and the role of the Department or a third 

party should be clarified as it pertains to approval or verification of appraisals.

Department Action. As described in this Plan, the Buy-Back Program will seek to utilize mass 

appraisal valuation approaches. While this determination has been made, in part, to comply with the 

administrative cost limitations and maximize the number of fractional interests acquired, the 

Department does expect to determine values through other means as appropriate and to incorporate 

tribal priorities to the extent feasible. The Plan does provide for tribal participation, including in the 

valuation process, through cooperative agreements. The Department is considering the principles 

relevant to the review of valuations.

Communication

Comments received reiterated the importance of ongoing communication between the Department 

and tribes throughout the planning process and implementation of the Buy-Back Program. 

Department Action. The Department is committed to maintaining open communication with tribes 

regarding the Buy-Back Program. This Plan is just one step in the overall planning and 

implementation of the Buy-Back Program, and the Department expects to conduct continuing 

consultations regarding overall progress of implementation and improvement of the Buy-Back 

Program, especially as the Buy-Back Program is being established. Further, the Department expects 

to continue close collaboration and direct consultation with every tribe that becomes specifically 

targeted by the Buy-Back Program.

Cooperative Agreements

Similar to the comments received during consultation prior to the release of the Draft Plan, the 

majority of written comments urged the Department to use cooperative agreements and rely on 

tribal participation to the greatest extent possible. Many comments also stated the need for clarity 

on how cooperative agreements would be utilized and the roles carried out by the Department 

agencies versus the tribes.

Department Action. As discussed in this Plan, the Department is committed to working with tribes, 

in the spirit of self-governance, to utilize cooperative agreements to the greatest extent possible 

while staying within the administrative limitations provided by the Settlement. The Plan outlines the 
Appendix A-3

various phases of the land acquisition process and how tribes could implement some of those 

processes under a cooperative agreement.

Data

Most comments received stated the need for the Department to provide complete, accurate, and 

detailed data of fractional interests across Indian Country. Comments also emphasized the 

importance of tribal access to the Trust Asset and Accounting Management system (TAAMS).

Department Action. The Department understands the need for sharing accurate and detailed 

information with tribes regarding the level of fractionation on their reservation. As such, updated 

and extensive data has been provided in Appendix B of this Plan. Additionally, the Department will 

develop maps of fractionated reservations as they are targeted by the Buy-Back Program to further 

assist tribes in determining their priorities for acquisition.

Allocation of Funds

Many comments suggested that the Department develop a way to allocate both the purchase and 

administrative components of Trust Land Consolidation Fund (Fund). Several comments suggested 

a distribution formula based on specific criteria such as the number of fractional interests, 

fractionated tracts, historical allotments, etc. The majority of tribes requested that any distribution 

be done transparently and that all reservations affected by fractionation should be included. Other 

comments suggested that the Department commit to releasing periodic reports regarding the 

amount of administrative costs expended.

Department Action. As described in this Plan, the Department suggests an initial planning formula 

- based on fractional interests, fractionated tracts, and acreages. The Department wants to make 

clear that such a formula does not result in or guarantee a particular distribution or allocation to any 

one reservation, but rather acts as an initial purchase ceiling amount that will be available to acquire 

fractional interests within a particular reservation. The actual amount of funds required or available 

may depend, for example, on the number of willing sellers. Not all reservations will necessarily be 

targeted by the Buy-Back Program, but as described in this Plan, the Department intends to 

establish an approach where all affected reservations might have the opportunity to participate. The 

Department is committed to conducting the Buy-Back Program in a transparent manner and the 

data used for the formula is provided in Appendix B. The Department has also committed to 

quarterly newsletters or periodic reports that will contain such information as administrative costs, as 

well the location and quantity of acquisitions.

Estate Planning and Probate

A number of comments suggested that the Department should devote resources to estate planning 

and utilize the purchase at probate provisions within the Indian Land Consolidation Act (ILCA) and 

the American Indian Probate Reform Act (AIRPA). 
Appendix A-4

Department Action. While the Department understands the importance of estate planning, and 

dedicates some annual appropriations to carry out its obligations under AIPRA, the Trust Land 

Consolidation Fund provided by the Settlement cannot be utilized for these services. Accordingly, 

this Plan does not address issues pertaining to estate planning. The Department may, however, 

consider utilizing the purchase at probate authority where appropriate and when requested by a 

tribe. 

Incentive Payments

Several comments stated that incentive payments should be utilized to increase the rate of sales. 

One comment stated that the Department should prioritize acquisitions on reservations where the 

tribe has pledged to provide some incentive payment.

Department Action. The Settlement does create an incentive for individuals to sell their interests by 

providing funds to a scholarship fund for American Indian and Alaska Native students for each 

fractional interest purchased by the Buy-Back Program. The Settlement does not provide for any 

further incentive payments, though tribes themselves would be able to provide additional incentives

as a means to drive sales of tribal priority tracts. Further tribal feedback, and the rate of acquisitions, 

may affect the Department’s determination of whether incentive payments are needed. 

Liens

The large majority of comments received by the Department stated that liens should not be placed 

on fractional interests acquired with the Trust Land Consolidation Fund. Most comments stated 

that the lien provisions found in the Indian Land Consolidation Act (ILCA) contradicted the intent 

of the Cobell Settlement Agreement and that liens should be waived. As a result of this 

determination, liens will not be placed on interests acquired with the Fund.

Department Action. After reviewing the provisions of the Settlement and applicable law, the 

Solicitor reviewed the specific question of whether the lien provisions in ILCA apply and 

determined that the lien provisions of ILCA do not apply to the land consolidation program 

established under the Settlement. See Applicability of the Indian Land Consolidation Act's Lien 

Provisions to the Cobell Settlement, M-37026 (August 10, 2012).

Scholarship Program

Many comments regarding the scholarship component of the Settlement stated that the scholarship 

fund should be administered at a local level and tied to the reservations from which acquisitions 

were made. One comment stated that the scholarship fund should not be used for administrative 

costs incurred by the non-profit organization administering the fund.

Department Action. Decisions regarding the management of the scholarship fund are specifically 

addressed by provisions of the Settlement, which provide for a five member Board of Trustees to 

oversee the management of the scholarship fund. Accordingly, this Plan does not address issues 

pertaining to the administration of the scholarship fund.
Appendix A-5

Staff/Training

Comments ranged from calling for the Department to begin the hiring process immediately to 

suggesting the Department utilize contract workers and refrain from hiring extra full-time staff. 

Other comments suggested that any staff hired should be located at the regional and tribal area level. 

Department Action. The Department’s ability to hire has been limited because the Fund was not 

available to the Department until the Settlement received Final Approval from the courts. The 

Department believes that the organization structure described in this Plan, which includes staff at 

several field locations, will be able to effectively implement the Buy-Back Program. Existing staff 

have been extensively involved in the planning process and will be utilized to some extent to begin 

operations while new staff is hired.

Targeting Land Fractionation Program

Comments received on the “Targeted Land Fractionation Program” varied widely, ranging from 

assertions that the Department should terminate this program because it does not target all 

reservations to requests that the Department should target the 25 most highly-fractionated areas. 

Other comments stated that the Department should not limit which reservations are targeted based 

on past activity, size of reservation, or minimal preparatory work, and other various factors.

Department Action. As described in this Plan, the Department is not ruling out targeting any 

specific reservation. However, due to the limitations on administrative costs, the Department is 

targeting reservations relatively in order of fractionation over the life of the Buy-Back Program. The 

Department is proposing to set aside some portion of the Trust Land Consolidation Fund to 

conduct acquisitions in locations not initially targeted by the Buy-Back Program.

Timeframe

Many Tribes raised concerns with the Department’s ability to effectively spend $1.9 billion on 

purchasing fractional interests in land within the 10-year timeframe. Many comments requested 

specific information on DOI’s plan to utilize the Trust Land Consolidation Fund within the 10-year 

timeframe.

Department Action. The Department understands these concerns based on past funding levels of 

the historical Indian Land Consolidation Program. However, the Department plans to move with 

urgency to address the problem and complete sufficient acquisitions to exhaust the Trust Land 

Consolidation Fund within the 10-year timeframe. The Department will accomplish this goal by 

utilizing the processes outlined in this Plan, as amended by tribal feedback, consultation throughout 

the duration of the Buy-Back Program, and continuous program analysis.
Appendix A-6

Willing Seller Program

Many comments regarding the Cobell Land Consolidation Program Draft Plan called for 

clarification of the “Willing Seller Program.” Comments stated preferences regarding which criteria 

should be utilized over others. The comments also stated that the Department should make clear 

that the willing seller component of the program should be operational immediately. One comment 

mentioned that any acquisition under this program should be approved by the tribe. There were a 

number of comments that also expressed confusion about a ‘Willing Seller Program’ which implies 

that some acquisitions are not from willing sellers.

Department Action. First, the Department wishes to clarify that all acquisitions by the Buy-Back 

Program will involve willing sellers, with the limited exception of unlocatable individuals. As 

described above, the concept has been modified to emphasize individuals who have expressed 

interest in selling their fractional interests. Understanding the number and location of these

“interested sellers” will help the Department estimate the level of acquisitions that might occur in 

any given reservation. The Department listed several criteria that might trigger valuation efforts. 

For example, if sufficient interest is demonstrated in a reservation, the reservation could be added to 

the list of targeted locations. As described above, the Buy-Back Program expects to set aside a 

percentage of the Trust Land Consolidation Fund to purchase fractional interests in locations 

satisfying “interested seller” or other criteria.
Appendix B – Fractionation Statistics by Reservation

Overview

The fractionation related data and statistics used throughout this document were generated primarily from the Trust 

Asset and Accounting Management System (TAAMS) as of November 30, 2012. The following table lists the data in 

further detail by land area codes within TAAMS, which generally results in a grouping of trust lands by BIA Region. 

An electronic version of the data will be published at www.doi.gov/buybackprogram, where additional data points 

and future corrections or updates may be included.

The data and approximations in this document are subject to change. The Department will continue to refine its 

analysis of fractional interests and the owners thereof. Feedback is encouraged. In particular, if tribes or others have 

reason to believe that any of the information is inaccurate or that a reservation is excluded in error, they should 

contact: U.S. Department of the Interior, attention: Mr. Anthony Walters, 1849 C St. NW, MS-7328-MIB, 

Washington, DC 20240. Mr. Walters can also be reached via telephone: (202) 513-0897; or via e-mail: 

Anthony.Walters@bia.gov. 

Definitions and Explanations

It is important to distinguish “aggregated” and “segregated” interest counts. There are many instances where a single 

individual owns multiple fractional interests in the same tract of land. Such multiple ownership occurs when an 

individual inherits interests in the same tract of land at different times. For example, an individual may receive an 

interest in a tract of land when their father passes, and the individual may receive an additional interest in that same 

tract upon their mother’s passing. This document combines/adds these multiple “segregated” interests and represents 

them as a single “aggregated” interest. Aggregated interest counts will be used going forward.

The following table begins by listing the “Total Number of Tracts Held in Trust” within a specific land area code. 

This column includes both 100% tribal tracts as well as allotted tracts with multiple undivided ownership interests. 

The next column narrows those tracts down to only those “Number of Fractionated Tracts Containing Purchasable 

Interests.” The term “fractionated tract” is defined as a tract held in trust or restricted status that has two or more 

unique owners (one of which may be the tribe). A “fractionated tract” is defined as a tract with either of two or more 

fractional interests, each being less than a 100% interest (the sum of the fractional interests equals 100%). The term 

“purchasable interest” is an aggregated fractional interest in a fractionated tract that is held in trust or restricted status

(i.e., not a fee interest) where a recognized tribal government exercises jurisdiction, excluding interests owned by a 

tribe or the Government and excluding beneficial interests such as life estates.

The “Number of Fractionated Tracts with corresponding Levels of Tribal Ownership” lists the number of 

purchasable tracts by whether the tribe already has or does not have majority ownership. The “Number of Highly 

Fractionated Tracts” is a statutory definition found within the Indian Land Consolidation Act (ILCA) at 25 U.S.C. § 

2201(6). The “Number of Acres” column lists the amount of acreage within the “Fractionated Tracts Containing 

Purchasable Interests.” This number does not remove the acreage corresponding to non-purchasable interests.1 The 

acreage number is the sum of the acres of surface-only, mineral-only, and combined estate acreages. For example, if 

the surface and mineral estates encompassing the same 80-acre tract of land have been severed or split, the acreage 

count would include them separately.

The next section of the table describes fractional interest information. The “Number of Purchasable Fractional 

Interests” follows the definition described above. The “Number of <2% Interests” is a data point listed as a 

discretionary priority within ILCA. The “Number of <5% Interests” also has statutory significance; such interests 

should not be further fractionated by intestate succession as a result of the “single heir” rule enacted as part of the 

American Indian Probate Reform Act of 2004. 

The final section of the table provides information about unique or individual owners. First, the “Number of Unique 

Individuals owning Purchasable Fractional Interests” identifies the total number of people that own fractional 

interests at a given reservation. This column includes individual owners that are deceased. The sum of this column 

exceeds the total number of unique individuals owning fractional interests because this column counts individuals 

 1. For example, if there was an 80 acre tract with two distinct owners (i.e., with a tribe owning 40% and an individual owning the 

remaining 60%) the purchasable acres is 48 acres.
multiple times, i.e., for each reservation in which they own fractional interests. The final columns are the number of 

individuals who are currently identified as whereabouts unknown and the number of individuals who are over 65 years 

of age.

A primary difference between the figures in this document and the figures published within the Draft Plan released in 

January of 2012 is that latter sometimes used segregated interest counts (e.g., at Table 2 therein) rather than aggregated 

interest counts as is used in this document. Segregated interests counts increase the number of fractional interests, as 

well as the number of the number of highly-fractionated tracts and the number of <2% and <5% fractional interests. 

The following table also includes several reservations that had been omitted inadvertently from the January 2012 

Draft Plan. Other differences include the passage of time during which additional transactions have occurred. To 

ensure consistent reporting going forward, the Buy-Back Program will continue to utilize the definitions and data 

queries used to generate this document.
Land Area Name [Federally Recognized Tribe with Jurisdiction] BIA Region BIA Agency

Land 

Area 

Code(s)

Tract & Acreage Information Information on Individuals

Number of 

Tracts Held

in Trust

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts 

Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Number of 

Highly 

Fractionated 

Tracts [50-99 

owners w/ no 

interest >10%;

100+ owners

(25 USC

2201(6))]

Number of Acres 

Associated with 

Fractionated 

Tracts Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership Interest in 

Fractionated Tracts 

Containing Purchasable 

Interests

Number of 

Purchasable 

Fractional 

Interests

Number of <2% 

Interests [25 USC

2212(b)(2)

priority]

Number of

<5% Interests 

[AIPRA 

Intestate 

Descent Rule

25 USC 2006]

Number of 

Unique 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are under 

Legal 

Disability 

(Non-Compos 

Mentis, Minors, 

etc.)

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests 

over 65

Years of

Age <50% >=50%

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are WAU

Number of 

Fractional 

Interests 

owned by 

WAUs

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least one WAU 

owner

1

Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Washington (101) Northwest Colville (03) 101 6,295 2,039 104 165,298 1,431 608 35,939 24,287 29,336 5,941 774 3,288 1,009 153 1,013

2 Spokane Tribe of the Spokane Reservation, Washington (102) Northwest Spokane (12) 102 1,265 390 21 24,276 374 16 8,765 5,960 7,063 2,154 203 685 200 54 355

3

Kalispell Indian Community of the Kalispell Reservation, Washington

(103)

Northwest Spokane (12) 103 164 74 0 2,296 54 20 968 508 681 232 17 81 48 6 46

4

Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation, Washington (105) Northwest Olympic Peninsula (06) 105 139 62 12 1,376 61 1 2,088 1,455 1,856 786 44 114 37 13 134

5 Lummi Tribe of the Lummi Reservation, Washington (107) Northwest Puget Sound (10) 107 1,096 344 16 5,516 341 3 6,858 4,710 5,536 1,935 373 1,125 187 31 266

6

Makah Indian Tribe of the Makah Indian Reservation, Washington (108) Northwest Makah (16) 108 714 256 13 1,941 226 30 5,818 4,078 4,837 1,270 141 652 145 12 217

7

Muckleshoot Indian Tribe of the Muckleshoot Reservation, Washington

(109)

Northwest Puget Sound (10) 109 295 79 11 1,441 77 2 1,912 1,168 1,548 800 85 138 37 11 114

8

Nisqually Indian Tribe of the Nisqually Reservation, Washington (110) Northwest Puget Sound (10) 110 70 17 3 893 15 2 1,060 949 991 690 43 67 13 14 125

9 Nooksack Indian Tribe of Washington (111) Northwest Puget Sound (10) 111 151 48 4 2,204 48 0 1,191 834 984 587 70 123 26 3 89

10

Suquamish Indian Tribe of the Port Madison Reservation, Washington

(114)

Northwest Puget Sound (10) 114 225 66 5 2,272 64 2 1,683 1,204 1,365 1,113 181 246 44 35 192

11 Puyallup Tribe of the Puyallup Reservation, Washington (115) Northwest Puget Sound (10) 115 137 16 0 19 15 1 92 9 26 69 12 28 8 5 5

12

Quileute Tribe of the Quileute Reservation, Washington (116) Northwest Olympic Peninsula (06) 116 65 30 3 5 30 0 545 292 408 286 16 31 15 6 48

13 Quinault Tribe of the Quinault Reservation, Washington (117) Northwest Taholah (17) 117 2,103 1,421 117 103,823 1,367 54 35,838 24,785 29,591 4,366 394 2,231 631 48 947

14 Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe of Washington (119) Northwest Puget Sound (10) 119 66 33 8 1,173 32 1 1,593 1,372 1,487 508 70 190 25 10 64

15

Skokomish Indian Tribe of the Skokomish Reservation, Washington

(120)

Northwest Olympic Peninsula (06) 120 128 79 12 2,448 79 0 3,322 2,477 3,003 1,032 75 192 50 4 223

16

Squaxin Island Tribe of the Squaxin Island Reservation, Washington

(121)

Northwest Olympic Peninsula (06) 121 44 20 6 1,014 17 3 1,371 1,252 1,311 748 66 110 18 7 120

17

Swinomish Indians of the Swinomish Reservation, Washington (122) Northwest Puget Sound (10) 122 163 78 11 3,842 77 1 3,157 2,427 2,806 1,161 151 302 47 26 155

18 Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip Reservation, Washington (123) Northwest Puget Sound (10) 123 641 147 2 3,384 144 3 1,840 876 1,225 921 164 279 90 22 120

19

Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington

(124)

Northwest Yakama (11) 124 6,407 2,190 175 175,135 1,823 367 53,239 37,542 44,717 4,779 289 1,162 621 63 784

20

Confederated Tribes of the Siletz Indians of Oregon (previously listed as 

the Confederated Tribes of the Siletz Reservation) (142)

Northwest Siletz (01)

142 62 1 0 47 1 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1

21 Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation, Oregon (143) Northwest Umatilla (07) 143 1,534 1,014 43 66,832 973 41 18,701 10,520 14,145 3,142 151 456 223 53 530

22

Burns Paiute Tribe of the Burns Paiute Indian Colony of Oregon (144) Northwest Warm Springs (09) 144 86 75 3 11,938 75 0 1,709 1,034 1,357 210 20 151 40 0 29

23

Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation, Oregon (145) Northwest Warm Springs (09) 145 2,300 380 7 43,697 119 261 3,809 2,725 3,150 922 53 221 117 37 128

24

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall Reservation of Idaho (180) Northwest Fort Hall (04) 180 5,278 2,574 108 268,830 2,042 532 50,968 31,880 40,481 3,119 188 1,735 912 89 457

25

Coeur D'Alene Tribe of the Coeur D'Alene Reservation, Idaho (181) Northwest Coeur d'Alene (18) 181 1,176 300 3 38,457 246 54 3,159 1,392 2,011 1,056 95 237 122 22 190

26

Nez Perce Tribe, Idaho (previously listed as Nez Perce Tribe of Idaho) 

(182)

Northwest Northern Idaho (05) 182 989 622 26 44,498 506 116 12,083 7,900 9,806 2,038 108 327 173 24 400

27 Kootenai Tribe of Idaho (183) Northwest Northern Idaho (05) 183 31 23 0 1,821 21 2 220 124 164 63 5 19 9 6 1

28

Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation of Montana (201) Rocky

Mountain

Blackfeet (51) 201 11,799 4,793 718 892,122 4,666 127 188,894 143,548 167,946 7,672 810 13,833 2,882 105 1,385

29

Crow Tribe of Montana (202) Rocky

Mountain

Crow (52) 202 9,940 4,748 599 914,275 4,519 229 175,939 134,272 154,798 4,791 358 5,590 2,031 165 767

34

Crow Tribe of Montana (202) Rocky

Mountain

Crow (52) 208 146 55 7 8,632 55 0 1,591 1,093 1,360 914 46 65 28 30 155
Land Area Name [Federally Recognized Tribe with Jurisdiction] BIA Region BIA Agency

Land 

Area 

Code(s)

Tract & Acreage Information Information on Individuals

Number of 

Tracts Held

in Trust

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts 

Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Number of 

Highly 

Fractionated 

Tracts [50-99 

owners w/ no 

interest >10%;

100+ owners

(25 USC

2201(6))]

Number of Acres 

Associated with 

Fractionated 

Tracts Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership Interest in 

Fractionated Tracts 

Containing Purchasable 

Interests Number of 

Purchasable 

Fractional 

Interests

Number of <2% 

Interests [25 USC

2212(b)(2)

priority]

Number of

<5% Interests 

[AIPRA 

Intestate 

Descent Rule

25 USC 2006]

Number of 

Unique 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are under 

Legal 

Disability 

(Non-Compos 

Mentis, Minors, 

etc.)

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests 

over 65

Years of

Age <50% >=50%

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are WAU

Number of 

Fractional 

Interests 

owned by 

WAUs

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least one WAU 

owner

30

Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation, 

Montana (203)

Northwest Flathead (13) 203 3,889 693 21 38,409 541 152 9,250 5,545 6,921 2,966 551 1,412 407 41 440

31

Fort Belknap Indian Community of the Fort Belknap Reservation of

Montana (204)

Rocky

Mountain

Fort Belknap (55) 204 5,325 3,007 106 570,883 2,808 199 55,329 31,913 42,090 3,889 386 4,070 1,333 102 647

32

Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, 

Montana (206)

Rocky

Mountain

Fort Peck (56) 206 7,443 4,481 346 718,048 4,289 192 113,183 76,547 93,741 10,727 1,104 7,850 2,228 301 1,543

33

Northern Cheyenne Tribe of the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, 

Montana (207)

Rocky

Mountain

Northern Cheyenne (57) 207 2,432 889 39 104,594 622 267 15,284 10,029 12,335 2,995 387 1,983 545 109 373

35

Arapahoe Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming (281), 

Shoshone Tribe of the Wind River Reservation, Wyoming (282)

Rocky

Mountain

Wind River (58) 280 5,223 2,514 480 172,503 2,248 266 136,834 116,105 126,763 7,242 657 8,448 1,443 270 897

36

Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, North Dakota

(301) (Mandan, Hidatsa & Arikara)

Great Plains Fort Berthold (04) 301 9,551 3,208 304 464,106 3,005 203 90,976 63,705 76,802 4,821 326 3,722 1,276 100 660

37 Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of North & South Dakota (302) Great Plains Standing Rock (10) 302 10,042 6,268 857 761,758 3,985 2,283 214,947 177,345 196,850 19,593 3,028 30,583 4,261 727 2,308

38 Spirit Lake Tribe, North Dakota (303) Great Plains Fort Totten (05) 303 1,366 932 232 56,261 768 164 60,075 52,504 56,869 5,790 625 5,890 621 142 771

39

Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians of North Dakota (304) Great Plains Turtle Mountain (11) 304 1,310 582 80 32,924 575 7 25,806 21,607 23,405 8,607 1,419 4,005 420 93 1,833

40

Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe of the Cheyenne River Reservation, South

Dakota (340)

Great Plains Cheyenne River (01) 340 12,303 4,026 119 730,114 3,685 341 64,833 35,168 47,545 7,983 1,099 7,256 2,062 179 1,222

41

Crow Creek Sioux Tribe of the Crow Creek Reservation, South Dakota

(342)

Great Plains Crow Creek (14) 342 1,767 902 130 98,139 741 161 43,217 36,269 39,726 8,649 1,113 5,448 606 192 1,110

42

Lower Brule Sioux Tribe of the Lower Brule Reservation, South Dakota

(343)

Great Plains Lower Brule (15) 343 1,795 594 119 76,257 308 286 30,242 26,780 28,840 4,848 757 4,141 372 103 636

43

Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation, South Dakota (344) Great Plains Pine Ridge (06) 344 11,975 5,982 775 1,194,669 4,195 1,787 194,401 158,423 175,936 22,346 3,956 28,088 3,800 574 2,907

44

Rosebud Sioux Tribe of the Rosebud Indian Reservation, South Dakota

(345)

Great Plains Rosebud (07) 345 6,896 3,068 430 560,021 888 2,180 90,734 80,086 85,822 14,992 2,979 19,623 2,277 384 1,745

45 Yankton Sioux Tribe of South Dakota (346) Great Plains Yankton (08) 346 1,028 778 163 45,248 546 232 38,730 33,376 36,488 6,632 762 4,057 548 126 994

46

Sisseton - Wahpeton Oyate of the Lake Traverse Reservation, South

Dakota (347)

Great Plains Sisseton (09) 347 1,979 1,316 226 93,018 980 336 52,882 44,662 49,129 5,096 529 5,072 798 79 1,040

47 Omaha Tribe of Nebraska (380) Great Plains Winnebago (13) 380 603 421 74 22,022 394 27 21,374 17,261 19,613 2,695 428 2,627 322 61 321

48 Santee Sioux Nation, Nebraska (382) Great Plains Winnebago (13) 382 138 65 19 3,338 53 12 3,730 3,139 3,502 1,809 265 499 49 36 294

49 Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska (383) Great Plains Winnebago (13) 383 732 642 291 35,888 488 154 74,105 69,768 72,421 4,208 625 10,458 545 98 722

50 Upper Sioux Community, Minnesota (401) Midwest Midwest Region (50) 401 10 2 0 52 2 0 44 21 36 44 8 8 2 0 15

51

Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota (400) (Six component 

reservations: Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake); Fond du Lac Band; Grand 

Portage Band; Leech Lake Band; Mille Lacs Band; White Earth Band

Midwest Minnesota Agency (53)

404 429 200 87 15,505 157 43 15,152 13,916 14,754 1,859 289 2,091 188 18 277

52

Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota (400) (Six component 

reservations: Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake); Fond du Lac Band; Grand 

Portage Band; Leech Lake Band; Mille Lacs Band; White Earth Band

Midwest Minnesota Agency (53)

405 587 347 151 21,372 193 154 26,818 25,304 26,214 4,562 1,242 6,225 311 66 618

53

Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota (400) (Six component 

reservations: Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake); Fond du Lac Band; Grand 

Portage Band; Leech Lake Band; Mille Lacs Band; White Earth Band

Midwest Minnesota Agency (53)

406 486 116 40 8,380 72 44 5,536 4,856 5,340 609 93 1,001 103 5 126

54

Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota (400) (Six component 

reservations: Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake); Fond du Lac Band; Grand 

Portage Band; Leech Lake Band; Mille Lacs Band; White Earth Band

Midwest Minnesota Agency (53)

407 645 247 64 12,303 231 16 19,140 17,044 18,160 6,429 1,543 4,730 217 86 750

55

Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota (400) (Six component 

reservations: Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake); Fond du Lac Band; Grand 

Portage Band; Leech Lake Band; Mille Lacs Band; White Earth Band

Midwest Minnesota Agency (53)

408 724 41 11 2,511 41 0 3,770 3,365 3,594 3,000 631 781 39 31 352
Land Area Name [Federally Recognized Tribe with Jurisdiction] BIA Region BIA Agency

Land 

Area 

Code(s)

Tract & Acreage Information Information on Individuals

Number of 

Tracts Held

in Trust

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts 

Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Number of 

Highly 

Fractionated 

Tracts [50-99 

owners w/ no 

interest >10%;

100+ owners

(25 USC

2201(6))]

Number of Acres 

Associated with 

Fractionated 

Tracts Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership Interest in 

Fractionated Tracts 

Containing Purchasable 

Interests

Number of 

Purchasable 

Fractional 

Interests

Number of <2% 

Interests [25 USC

2212(b)(2)

priority]

Number of

<5% Interests 

[AIPRA 

Intestate 

Descent Rule

25 USC 2006]

Number of 

Unique 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are under 

Legal 

Disability 

(Non-Compos 

Mentis, Minors, 

etc.)

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests 

over 65

Years of

Age <50% >=50%

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are WAU

Number of 

Fractional 

Interests 

owned by 

WAUs

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least one WAU 

owner

57

Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota (400) (Six component 

reservations: Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake); Fond du Lac Band; Grand 

Portage Band; Leech Lake Band; Mille Lacs Band; White Earth Band

Midwest Minnesota Agency (53)

410 334 28 0 144 27 1 723 411 601 199 41 189 26 2 22

56

Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, Minnesota (409) Midwest Red Lakes Agency (52) 409 1,548 1 0 102 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0

58

Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians of the

Bad River Reservation, Wisconsin (430)

Midwest Great Lakes Agency (55) 430 1,321 617 94 29,440 245 372 20,382 18,440 19,384 4,845 1,733 7,659 506 77 514

59

Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of

Wisconsin (431)

Midwest Great Lakes Agency (55) 431 808 312 81 20,477 75 237 18,309 17,530 17,915 3,843 1,454 6,195 264 72 450

60

Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of the Lac 

du Flambeau Reservation of Wisconsin (432)

Midwest Great Lakes Agency (55) 432 485 199 29 12,355 23 176 5,148 4,857 5,008 1,301 344 1,295 166 25 182

61

Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin (433) Midwest Great Lakes Agency (55) 433 431 23 1 217 21 2 321 239 247 297 120 130 19 0 31

62

Forest County Potawatomi Community, Wisconsin (434) Midwest Great Lakes Agency (55) 434 68 7 1 360 7 0 309 256 279 181 48 82 6 3 24

63

Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin (435) Midwest Great Lakes Agency (55) 435 114 37 14 1,806 12 25 3,411 3,307 3,363 1,469 475 1,091 34 20 170

64

Stockbridge Munsee Community, Wisconsin (438) Midwest Great Lakes Agency (55) 438 157 3 0 19 3 0 33 8 14 26 10 16 3 0 3

65

Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin (439) Midwest Great Lakes Agency (55) 439 210 100 12 3,105 94 6 3,145 2,365 2,741 1,582 249 478 72 42 251

66 Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin (440) Midwest Midwest Region (50) 440 1,321 14 0 63 14 0 22 0 0 22 21 21 13 0 1

67 Saginaw Chippewa Indians of Michigan (472) Midwest Michigan Agency (60) 472 97 25 5 723 25 0 1,006 781 903 734 145 193 20 5 100

68 Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, Michigan (475) Midwest Michigan Agency (60) 475 260 116 31 6,968 47 69 5,469 5,080 5,320 2,188 743 1,881 104 39 276

69 Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, Michigan (475) Midwest Michigan Agency (60) 476 4 2 2 160 2 0 257 234 255 231 41 48 2 4 46

70 Big Sandy Rancheria of Mono Indians of California (506) Pacific Central California (51) 506 12 3 0 31 3 0 7 0 0 7 3 3 2 0 0

71

Big Valley Band of Pomo Indians of the Big Valley Rancheria, California

(507)

Pacific Central California (51) 507 27 12 0 7 12 0 57 4 6 49 25 27 12 0 1

72 Cloverdale Rancheria of Pomo Indians of California (510) Pacific Central California (51) 510 2 2 0 13 2 0 8 0 0 4 4 8 2 0 0

73 Robinson Rancheria of Pomo Indians of California (516) Pacific Central California (51) 516 16 4 0 53 4 0 20 0 5 10 7 13 4 0 0

74 Guidiville Rancheria of California (???) Pacific Central California (51) 520 2 1 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 3 3 3 1 0 0

75

Hopland Band of Pomo Indians of the Hopland Rancheria, California

(521)

Pacific Central California (51) 521 25 11 0 44 11 0 105 40 48 74 32 37 6 0 10

76

Fort Independence Indian Community of Paiute Indians of the Fort

Independence Reservation, California (525)

Pacific Central California (51) 525 47 28 0 88 28 0 240 73 134 99 61 156 28 0 8

77 Northfork Rancheria of Mono Indians of California (532) Pacific Central California (51) 532 2 1 0 80 1 0 7 0 0 7 5 5 1 0 0

78 Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians of California (534) Pacific Central California (51) 534 8 1 0 26 1 0 6 0 0 6 6 6 1 0 0

79

Pinoleville Pomo Nation, California (formerly the Pinoleville Rancheria of

Pomo Indians of California) (535)

Pacific Central California (51) 535 11 6 0 28 6 0 14 0 0 14 7 7 3 0 1

80 Redwood Valley Rancheria of Pomo Indians of California (539) Pacific Central California (51) 539 6 2 0 5 2 0 38 26 32 19 2 4 2 2 6

81

Round Valley Indian Tribes of the Round Valley Reservation, California

(540)

Pacific Central California (51) 540 362 185 22 5,018 183 2 6,806 5,192 6,049 1,595 600 2,347 168 10 208

82 Greenville Rancheria of Maidu Indians of California (545) Pacific Central California (51) 545 2 1 0 1 1 0 8 0 7 8 0 0 0 0 0

83 Table Mountain Rancheria of California (551) Pacific Central California (51) 551 16 1 0 6 1 0 4 0 0 4 3 3 1 0 0

84

Karuk Tribe (formerly the Karuk Tribe of California) (555) Pacific Northern California (52) 555 22 1 0 14 1 0 7 0 0 7 1 1 1 0 0

85

Blue Lake Rancheria, California (558) Pacific Northern California (52) 558 20 4 0 7 4 0 6 0 0 6 5 5 3 0 0

86

Elk Valley Rancheria, California (559) Pacific Northern California (52) 559 13 1 0 2 1 0 4 0 0 4 3 3 1 0 0
Land Area Name [Federally Recognized Tribe with Jurisdiction] BIA Region BIA Agency

Land 

Area 

Code(s)

Tract & Acreage Information Information on Individuals

Number of 

Tracts Held

in Trust

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts 

Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Number of 

Highly 

Fractionated 

Tracts [50-99 

owners w/ no 

interest >10%;

100+ owners

(25 USC

2201(6))]

Number of Acres 

Associated with 

Fractionated 

Tracts Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership Interest in 

Fractionated Tracts 

Containing Purchasable 

Interests

Number of 

Purchasable 

Fractional 

Interests

Number of <2% 

Interests [25 USC

2212(b)(2)

priority]

Number of

<5% Interests 

[AIPRA 

Intestate 

Descent Rule

25 USC 2006]

Number of 

Unique 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are under 

Legal 

Disability 

(Non-Compos 

Mentis, Minors, 

etc.)

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests 

over 65

Years of

Age <50% >=50%

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are WAU

Number of 

Fractional 

Interests 

owned by 

WAUs

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least one WAU 

owner

87

Hoopa Valley Tribe, California (561) Pacific Northern California (52) 561 447 101 0 657 100 1 1,080 428 649 450 86 192 56 7 45

88

Yurok Tribe of the Yurok Reservation, California (562) Pacific Northern California (52) 562 220 168 8 4,113 168 0 4,554 3,145 3,851 1,369 584 1,763 159 8 112

89

Quartz Valley Indian Community of the Quartz Valley Reservation of

California (563)

Pacific Northern California (52) 563 6 2 0 23 2 0 5 0 0 5 2 2 1 0 0

90

Smith River Rancheria, California (564) Pacific Northern California (52) 564 44 8 0 23 8 0 25 0 0 25 11 11 5 0 3

91

Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, California (formerly the Augustine

Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians of the Augustine Reservation (567)

Pacific Southern California (54)

567 6 3 0 120 1 2 17 0 4 17 0 0 0 3 0

92

Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, California (568) Pacific Southern California (54) 568 22 9 0 211 9 0 114 57 74 56 1 1 1 5 9

93

La Jolla Band of Luiseno Mission Indians, California (formerly the La

Jolla Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the La Jolla Reservation) (576)

Pacific Southern California (54)

576 79 38 0 380 38 0 542 288 396 275 27 57 19 5 40

94

Morongo Band of Mission Indians, California (fomerly the Morango

Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians of the Morongo Reservation) (582)

Pacific Southern California (54)

582 698 199 7 715 198 1 2,979 1,834 2,229 971 112 309 66 30 120

95

Pala Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pala Reservation, 

California (583)

Pacific Southern California (54) 583 479 237 10 866 237 0 5,467 3,908 4,480 851 131 709 115 21 109

96

Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians of the Agua Caliente Indian

Reservation, California (584)

Pacific Palm Springs (53) 584 481 175 0 8,205 175 0 1,117 166 390 219 5 10 8 14 15

97

Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pechanga

Reservation, California (586)

Pacific Southern California (54) 586 157 104 6 1,373 102 2 3,685 2,853 3,255 881 221 729 95 9 114

98

Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Rincon Reservation, 

California (587)

Pacific Southern California (54) 587 103 38 0 159 38 0 494 246 351 223 52 115 31 3 24

99

Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation (formerly the Sycuan Band of

Diegueno Mission Indians of California) (594)

Pacific Southern California (54) 594 28 19 2 321 14 5 525 421 451 158 33 92 18 4 20

100

Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, California (formerly the TorresMartinez Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians of California) (595)

Pacific Southern California (54)

595 229 114 4 3,712 114 0 2,193 1,272 1,654 523 74 212 63 22 52

101

Colorado River Indian Tribe of the Colorado River Indian Reservation, 

Arizona and California (603)

Western Colorado River (51) 603 896 528 5 5,192 444 84 8,564 5,138 6,632 1,507 195 1,003 296 28 246

102 Fort Mojave Indian Tribe of Arizona California & Nevada (604) Western Colorado River (51) 604 28 2 0 160 2 0 22 0 14 11 1 2 2 0 0

103 Hopi Tribe of Arizona (608) Western Hopi (65) 608 25 11 5 220 11 0 934 773 886 539 98 162 11 5 123

104 Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona (610) Western Papago (54) 611 310 279 64 39,037 279 0 13,958 10,838 12,762 1,729 189 929 178 59 221

105

Gila River Indian Community of the Gila River Indian Reservation, 

Arizona (614)

Western Pima (57) 614 5,627 4,669 581 83,840 4,653 16 172,551 127,426 150,092 10,381 1,423 19,662 3,205 291 1,287

106

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River

Reservation, Arizona (615)

Western Salt River (55) 615 1,826 1,403 161 21,673 1,395 8 48,562 34,286 41,467 5,770 788 6,653 1,107 144 665

107

California Valley Miwok Tribe, California (formerly the Sheep Ranch

Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California (628)

Pacific Central California (51) 628 1 1 0 1 1 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0

108

Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake, California (formerly the Upper Lake

Band of Pomo Indians of Upper Lake Rancheria of California) (636)

Pacific Central California (51)

636 9 4 0 11 4 0 14 0 0 14 10 10 4 0 0

109 Ely Shoshone Tribe of Nevada (644) Western Eastern Nevada (64) 644 4 1 0 160 1 0 24 7 13 24 3 3 1 0 6

110

Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribes of the Fort McDermitt

Indian Reservation, Nevada and Oregon (646)

Western Western Nevada (61) 646 16 4 3 145 4 0 561 495 545 466 92 111 4 5 66

111

Walker River Paiute Tribe of the Walker River Reservation, Nevada

(656)

Western Western Nevada (61) 656 505 348 11 6,634 342 6 6,656 3,893 5,070 1,423 263 904 219 14 246

112

Yomba Shoshone Tribe of the Yomba Reservation, Nevada (661) Western Western Nevada (61) 661 9 5 0 352 5 0 109 69 89 104 31 32 5 2 18
Land Area Name [Federally Recognized Tribe with Jurisdiction] BIA Region BIA Agency

Land 

Area 

Code(s)

Tract & Acreage Information Information on Individuals

Number of 

Tracts Held

in Trust

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts 

Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Number of 

Highly 

Fractionated 

Tracts [50-99 

owners w/ no 

interest >10%;

100+ owners

(25 USC

2201(6))]

Number of Acres 

Associated with 

Fractionated 

Tracts Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership Interest in 

Fractionated Tracts 

Containing Purchasable 

Interests

Number of 

Purchasable 

Fractional 

Interests

Number of <2% 

Interests [25 USC

2212(b)(2)

priority]

Number of

<5% Interests 

[AIPRA 

Intestate 

Descent Rule

25 USC 2006]

Number of 

Unique 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are under 

Legal 

Disability 

(Non-Compos 

Mentis, Minors, 

etc.)

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests 

over 65

Years of

Age <50% >=50%

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are WAU

Number of 

Fractional 

Interests 

owned by 

WAUs

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least one WAU 

owner

113

Washoe Tribe of Nevada & California (Carson Colony, Dresslerville 

Colony, Woodsford Community, Stewart Community, & Washoe 

Ranches) (672)

Western Western Nevada (61)

672 490 409 39 59,310 400 9 14,073 10,231 12,211 1,264 195 1,875 324 7 236

114 Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray Reservation, Utah (687) Western Uintah & Ouray (62) 687 2,101 1,058 182 76,738 916 142 43,547 33,796 39,323 2,297 194 2,615 644 82 295

115

Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation, California (696) Western Fort Yuma (63) 696 903 708 7 6,879 701 7 13,060 7,348 9,610 1,592 118 586 233 39 245

116 Pueblo of Acoma (703) Southwest Southern Pueblos (20) 703 40 1 0 320 1 0 3 0 0 3 1 1 1 0 2

117 Laguna Southwest Laguna (21) 707 69 29 2 3,372 28 1 686 416 547 407 65 106 17 3 96

118 Pueblo of San Felipe (712) Southwest Southern Pueblos (20) 712 36 1 0 71 1 0 43 31 36 43 0 0 0 0 10

119 Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Mexico ( 721) Southwest Zuni (70) 721 44 12 1 1,861 12 0 515 412 466 457 52 54 7 6 55

120 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico & Utah (780) Southwest Ramah (75) 722 429 211 16 29,975 211 0 6,325 4,490 5,276 1,229 304 1,444 181 16 181

121 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico & Utah (780) Navajo Navajo (00) 723 133 104 19 16,455 104 0 5,443 4,394 4,901 1,079 287 1,372 93 16 158

122 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico & Utah (780) Navajo Navajo (00) 724 75 44 3 6,874 44 0 1,030 538 778 529 140 259 39 4 83

125 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico & Utah (780) Navajo Navajo (00) 790 1,281 508 74 73,767 508 0 20,605 15,119 18,073 5,605 1,843 6,324 413 26 963

126 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico & Utah (780) Navajo Navajo (00) 791 4,299 3,446 812 552,489 3,435 11 220,811 184,089 205,270 26,469 4,188 24,446 2,673 335 4,830

127 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico & Utah (780) Navajo Navajo (00) 792 178 42 2 6,389 42 0 1,258 789 1,053 736 150 242 39 1 138

123

Southern Ute Indian Tribe of the Southern Ute Reservation, Colorado

(750)

Southwest Southern Ute (40) 750 686 106 13 9,487 90 16 2,180 1,587 1,785 861 48 123 41 26 107

124

Ute Mountain Tribe of the Ute Mountain Reservation, Colorado, New

Mexico & Utah (751)

Southwest Ute Mountain Ute (45) 754 104 57 2 7,658 53 4 945 454 654 348 61 158 43 13 28

128

Cheyenne & Arapaho Tribes, Oklahoma Southern

Plains

Concho Agency (05) 801 1,326 1,129 145 96,787 1,129 0 39,264 28,439 34,039 6,436 526 2,159 595 221 721

129

Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma (802), Comanche Nation, Oklahoma

(808), Apache Tribe of Oklahoma (809)

Southern

Plains

Anadarko Agency (06) 802 4,519 2,939 116 249,506 2,925 14 55,123 32,434 41,587 9,323 837 3,794 1,275 218 1,546

130

Fort Sill Apache Tribe of Oklahoma (803) Southern

Plains

Anadarko Agency (06) 803 76 50 1 3,097 50 0 634 274 412 271 19 29 12 6 47

131

Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, Keechi, Waco & Tawakonie), 

Oklahoma (804), Caddo Nation of Oklahoma (806), Delaware Tribe of 

Western OK (807)

Southern

Plains

Anadarko Agency (06)

804 1,105 839 38 73,604 839 0 16,552 9,964 12,810 2,700 185 958 364 59 447

132

Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians, Oklahoma(811) Southern

Plains

Pawnee Agency (07) 811 461 356 45 25,689 355 1 12,426 9,595 10,984 2,037 190 902 201 50 354

133

Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma (812) Southern

Plains

Pawnee Agency (07) 812 452 362 29 26,625 361 1 9,991 6,661 8,357 2,003 185 597 181 31 374

134

Ponca Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma (813) Southern

Plains

Pawnee Agency (07) 813 498 403 91 20,882 402 1 25,149 21,341 23,324 2,797 355 2,661 260 81 350

135

Tonkawa Tribe of indians of Oklahoma (814) Southern

Plains

Pawnee Agency (07) 814 10 7 0 321 7 0 273 204 239 115 17 34 6 2 17

136

Absentee Shawnee Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma (820) Southern

Plains

Southern Plains (00) 820 437 258 30 15,726 258 0 8,590 6,381 7,457 2,191 234 854 138 17 464

137

Citizen Potawatomi Nation, Oklahoma (821) Southern

Plains

Southern Plains (00) 821 110 63 11 5,059 61 2 2,378 1,902 2,161 1,465 194 316 51 8 436

138

Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma (822) Southern

Plains

Southern Plains (00) 822 65 50 11 2,077 47 3 2,616 2,169 2,427 843 82 227 35 23 154

139

Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma (823) Southern

Plains

Shawnee Agency (08) 823 218 127 7 5,647 127 0 3,293 2,171 2,697 1,073 162 465 80 30 150

140

Sac & Fox Nation, Oklahoma (824) Southern

Plains

Southern Plains (00) 824 391 245 15 18,057 245 0 5,558 3,680 4,333 1,491 218 555 122 21 283

141

Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska (860) Southern

Plains

Horton Agency (04) 860 45 5 1 180 5 0 153 114 136 108 9 13 5 0 28

142

Kickapoo Tribe of Indians of the Kickapoo Reservation in Kansas (861) Southern

Plains

Horton Agency (04) 861 198 78 4 2,843 72 6 1,467 906 1,136 616 50 102 36 15 110
Land Area Name [Federally Recognized Tribe with Jurisdiction] BIA Region BIA Agency

Land 

Area 

Code(s)

Tract & Acreage Information Information on Individuals

Number of 

Tracts Held

in Trust

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts 

Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Number of 

Highly 

Fractionated 

Tracts [50-99 

owners w/ no 

interest >10%;

100+ owners

(25 USC

2201(6))]

Number of Acres 

Associated with 

Fractionated 

Tracts Containing 

Purchasable 

Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership Interest in 

Fractionated Tracts 

Containing Purchasable 

Interests

Number of 

Purchasable 

Fractional 

Interests

Number of <2% 

Interests [25 USC

2212(b)(2)

priority]

Number of

<5% Interests 

[AIPRA 

Intestate 

Descent Rule

25 USC 2006]

Number of 

Unique 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are under 

Legal 

Disability 

(Non-Compos 

Mentis, Minors, 

etc.)

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests 

over 65

Years of

Age <50% >=50%

Number of 

Individuals 

owning 

Fractional 

Interests who 

are WAU

Number of 

Fractional 

Interests 

owned by 

WAUs

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least one WAU 

owner

143

Prairie Band of Potawatomi Nation, Kansas (862) Southern

Plains

Horton Agency (04) 862 577 324 39 18,110 316 8 9,581 6,749 8,194 2,169 240 932 217 37 374

144

Sac & Fox Nation of Missouri in Kansas and Nebraska (863) Southern

Plains

Horton Agency (04) 863 8 2 1 62 2 0 113 101 107 113 7 7 1 0 22

145

Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma (905) Eastern

Oklahoma

Cherokee Nation (08) 905 367 135 0 4,621 134 1 689 120 228 441 120 186 95 0 66

146

Chickasaw Nation, Oklahoma (906) Eastern

Oklahoma

Chickasaw Agency (03) 906 2,436 1,882 4 111,219 1,882 0 14,297 5,307 8,475 3,593 784 2,271 896 7 681

147

Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma (907) Eastern

Oklahoma

Talihina (09) 907 626 407 0 28,938 407 0 2,213 760 1,037 1,087 222 394 229 3 237

148

Muscogee (Creek) Nation, Oklahoma (908) Eastern

Oklahoma

Okmulgee (07) 908 1,216 780 0 45,130 780 0 5,528 1,534 2,823 1,975 283 748 344 2 446

149

Seminole Nation of Oklahoma (909) Eastern

Oklahoma

Wewoka (10) 909 1,217 952 4 37,627 952 0 8,022 3,220 5,030 1,708 507 2,046 637 4 237

150

Quapaw Tribe of Indians, Oklahoma (920) Eastern

Oklahoma

Miami Agency (04) 920 295 222 9 16,337 216 6 3,477 2,275 2,897 388 23 162 63 2 112

151

Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma (921) Eastern

Oklahoma

Miami Agency (04) 921 47 30 1 485 30 0 283 162 199 160 18 29 12 1 56

152

Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma (923) Eastern

Oklahoma

Miami Agency (04) 923 162 71 1 2,803 70 1 1,470 1,033 1,217 751 131 267 52 18 156

153

Osage Nation, Oklahoma (formerly the Osage Tribe) (930) Eastern

Oklahoma

Osage (06) 930 10,616 609 1 73,434 606 3 2,988 488 968 700 47 121 69 28 121

Total 200,539 92,574 10,136 10,624,004 79,339 13,235 2,934,031 2,243,475 2,577,807 319,759 52,425

Number of LACs = 153