```

[House Report 115-1087]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

115th Congress    }                                    {        Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session       }                                    {      115-1087

======================================================================

 
                RUFFEY RANCHERIA RESTORATION ACT OF 2018

                                _______
                                

 December 20, 2018.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Bishop of Utah, from the Committee on Natural Resources, submitted 
                             the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 3535]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 3535) to restore Federal recognition to the 
Ruffey Rancheria of California, and for other purposes, having 
considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment 
and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
    The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Ruffey Rancheria Restoration Act of 
2018''.

SEC. 2. RESTORATION OF FEDERAL RECOGNITION, RIGHTS, AND PRIVILEGES.

  (a) Federal Recognition.--Federal recognition is hereby restored to 
the Tribe. Except as otherwise provided in this Act, all laws and 
regulations of general application to Indians and nations, tribes, or 
bands of Indians that are not inconsistent with any specific provision 
of this Act shall be applicable to the Tribe and its members.
  (b) Restoration of Rights and Privileges.--Except as provided in 
subsection (d), all rights and privileges of the Tribe and its members 
under any Federal treaty, Executive order, agreement, or statute, or 
under any other authority which were diminished or lost under the Act 
of August 18, 1958 (Public Law 85-671; 72 Stat. 619), are hereby 
restored, and the provisions of such Act shall be inapplicable to the 
Tribe and its members after the date of the enactment of this Act. Such 
Federal treaties and other authority shall not include any treaty, 
Executive Order, agreement, statute or other authority entered into in 
the Territory or State of Oregon or affecting any tribe or band of 
Indians whose historical territory was located therein.
  (c) Federal Services and Benefits.--
          (1) In general.--Without regard to the existence of a 
        reservation, the Tribe and its members shall be eligible, on 
        and after the date of the enactment of this Act, for all 
        Federal services and benefits furnished to federally recognized 
        Indian Tribes or their members. For the purposes of Federal 
        services and benefits available to members of federally 
        recognized Indian tribes residing on a reservation, members of 
        the Tribe residing in the Tribe's service area shall be deemed 
        to be residing on a reservation.
          (2) Relation to other laws.--The eligibility on the part of 
        the Tribe and its members for, or receipt of, services and 
        benefits under paragraph (1) shall not be considered as income, 
        resources, or otherwise when determining the eligibility for or 
        computation of any payment or other benefit to such tribe, 
        individual, or household under--
                  (A) any financial aid program of the United States, 
                including grants and contracts subject to the Indian 
                Self-Determination Act; or
                  (B) any other benefit to which such tribe, household, 
                or individual would otherwise be entitled under any 
                Federal or federally assisted program.
  (d) Hunting, Fishing, Trapping, Gathering, and Water Rights.--Nothing 
in this Act shall expand, reduce, or affect in any manner any hunting, 
fishing, trapping, gathering, or water rights of the Tribe and its 
members, provided, that any such rights shall not extend into the 
Territory or State of Oregon.
  (e) Certain Rights Not Altered.--Except as specifically provided in 
this Act, nothing in this Act shall alter any property right or 
obligation, any contractual right or obligation, or any obligation for 
taxes levied.
  (f) Rights of the Quartz Valley Indian Reservation.--Nothing in this 
Act shall be construed as infringing upon or diminishing the 
territorial rights or sovereignty of the Quartz Valley Indian 
Reservation.

SEC. 3. TRANSFER OF LAND TO BE HELD IN TRUST.

  (a) Lands to Be Taken in Trust.--Upon application by the Tribe, the 
Secretary shall have the authority under this section to accept into 
trust for the benefit of the Tribe real property located in Siskiyou 
County, California, after the property is conveyed or otherwise 
transferred to the Secretary and if, at the time of such conveyance or 
transfer, there are no adverse legal claims to such property, including 
outstanding liens, mortgages, or taxes.
  (b) Former Trust Lands of the Ruffey Rancheria.--Subject to the 
conditions specified in this section, real property eligible for trust 
status under this section shall include Indian owned fee land in 
Siskiyou County, California, that is held by persons listed as 
distributees or dependent members in the distribution plan approved by 
the Bureau of Indian Affairs and published in the Federal Register on 
April 11, 1961, or such distributees' or dependent members' Indian 
heirs or successors in interest, provided, that such lands shall not 
include any lands located within the boundaries of the State of Oregon.
  (c) Lands to Be Part of the Reservation.--Any real property taken 
into trust for the benefit of the Tribe pursuant to this Act shall be 
part of the Tribe's reservation.
  (d) Lands to Be Nontaxable.--Any real property taken into trust for 
the benefit of the Tribe pursuant to this section shall be exempt from 
all local, State, and Federal taxation as of the date that such land is 
transferred to the Secretary.

SEC. 4. MEMBERSHIP ROLLS.

  (a) Compilation of Tribal Membership Roll.--Not later than 1 year 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall, after 
consultation with the Tribe, compile a membership roll of the Tribe.
  (b) Criteria for Enrollments.--
          (1) Preconstitution roll.--Until a tribal constitution is 
        adopted pursuant to section 6, an individual shall be placed on 
        the Ruffey Rancheria membership roll if the individual is 
        living, is not an enrolled member of another federally 
        recognized Indian tribe, and if--
                  (A) such individual's name was listed on the Ruffey 
                Rancheria distribution list compiled by the Bureau of 
                Indian Affairs and approved by the Secretary and 
                published in the Federal Register on April 11, 1961, 
                under Public Law 85-671;
                  (B) such individual was not listed on, but met the 
                requirements that had to be met to be listed on the 
                Ruffey Rancheria distribution list; or
                  (C) the individual is a lineal descendant of an 
                individual, living or dead, identified in subparagraph 
                (A) or (B), and has never been an enrolled member of 
                any other Federally recognized Indian tribe.
          (2) Roll after adoption of constitution.--After adoption of a 
        tribal constitution under section 6, such tribal constitution 
        shall govern membership in the Tribe.
  (c) Conclusive Proof of Ruffey Rancheria Indian Ancestry.--For the 
purpose of subsection (b), the Secretary shall accept any available 
evidence establishing Ruffey Rancheria Indian ancestry. The Secretary 
shall accept as conclusive evidence of Ruffey Rancheria Indian ancestry 
information contained in the letter regarding certain lands purchased 
for the use of Ruffey and other Indians near Etna, California, sent by 
Charles E. Kelsey, Special Agent for the California Indians, to the 
Commissioner of Indian Affairs dated June 24, 1913; residence on or 
adjacent to lands purchased or leased in Siskiyou County, California, 
by Special Agent Charles E. Kelsey, provided that such lands were 
occupied by an individual with a bona fide relationship to the Ruffey 
Rancheria; and in the Ruffey Rancheria distribution list compiled by 
the Bureau of Indian Affairs and approved by the Secretary and 
published in the Federal Register on April 11, 1961.

SEC. 5. INTERIM GOVERNMENT.

  Until a new tribal constitution and bylaws are adopted and become 
effective under section 6, the governing body of the Tribe shall be an 
Interim Council. The initial membership of the Interim Council shall 
consist of the members of the Executive Council of the Tribe on the 
date of the enactment of this Act, and the Interim Council shall 
continue to operate in the manner prescribed for the Executive Council 
under the tribal constitution of the Tribe adopted on December 19, 
2014, as amended by Tribal Resolution 18-02, to the extent that such 
constitution is not contrary to Federal law. Any new members filling 
vacancies on the Interim Council shall meet the enrollment criteria set 
forth in section 4(b) and be elected in the same manner as are 
Executive Council members under the tribal constitution adopted 
December 19, 2014, as amended by Tribal Resolution 18-02.

SEC. 6. TRIBAL CONSTITUTION.

  (a) Election; Time; Procedure.--After the compilation of the tribal 
membership roll under section 4, upon the written request of the 
Interim Tribal Council, the Secretary shall conduct, by secret ballot, 
an election for the purpose of ratifying a final constitution for the 
Tribe. The election shall be held consistent with sections 16(c)(1) and 
16(c)(2)(A) of the Act of June 18, 1934 (commonly known as the Indian 
Reorganization Act; 25 U.S.C. 5123(c)(1) and 5123(c)(2)(A), 
respectively). Absentee voting shall be permitted regardless of voter 
residence.
  (b) Election of Tribal Officials; Procedures.--Not later than 120 
days after the Tribe ratifies a final constitution under subsection 
(a), the Secretary shall conduct an election by secret ballot for the 
purpose of electing tribal officials as provided in such tribal 
constitution. Such election shall be conducted consistent with the 
procedures specified in subsection (a) except to the extent that such 
procedures conflict with the tribal constitution.

SEC. 7. LIMITATIONS ON INDIAN GAMING ON ACQUIRED LANDS.

  In addition to any other requirements under applicable Federal law, 
gaming conducted pursuant to an exception under subsection (b)(1)(B) of 
section 20 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2719) shall 
not be conducted on any land taken into trust by the United States for 
the benefit of the Tribe unless the Secretary determines, on the date 
that the land is taken into trust, that--
          (1) the Tribe has received a written determination by the 
        Secretary that the land is eligible to be used for gaming under 
        such section; and
          (2) the land is located in the county of Siskiyou, 
        California, 5 miles or less away from lands within such County 
        taken into trust under section 3 of this Act.

SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS.

  For purposes of this Act:
          (1) Interim council.--The term ``Interim Council'' means the 
        governing body of the Tribe specified in section 6.
          (2) Member.--The term ``member'' means any person meeting the 
        enrollment criteria under section 4(b).
          (3) Reservation.--The term ``reservation'' means those lands 
        acquired and held in trust by the Secretary for the benefit of 
        the Tribe pursuant to section 3.
          (4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
        the Interior.
          (5) Service area.--The term ``service area'' means Siskiyou 
        County in the State of California. Neither the Tribe's service 
        area nor its near-reservation area shall be extended into or 
        located within the State of Oregon for any Federal or State 
        program or service.
          (6) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of California.
          (7) Tribe.--The term ``Tribe'' means the Ruffey Rancheria of 
        California.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 3535 is to restore federal recognition 
to the Ruffey Rancheria of California.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Overview of the Ruffey Rancheria Recognition Claims

    The Ruffey Rancheria is a group from Siskiyou, California, 
seeking federal recognition as an Indian tribe. The entity has 
provided testimony and other information reporting the 
following about its history:
    The Ruffey group reports that it consists of Indian people 
who have historical connections to the vicinity of Etna, 
California. According to the group, the tribal entity has 
strong social bonds in Siskiyou County at Etna, Salmon River, 
Ager, and Bogus, and whose families intermarried. They shared 
the cultural, spiritual, and political leadership of elders 
such as Moffett Creek Jake and Old Man Ruffey. The group's 
ancestors participated in the negotiations for California's 
unratified ``Treaty R'' in 1851.\1\ The California State 
legislature petitioned Congress to provide the group with a 
reservation in 1874.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\``Treaty R'' in The Eighteen Unratified Treaties of 1851-1852 
Between the California Indians and the United States Government. Robert 
F. Heizer (Berkeley: University of California Archaeological Research 
Facility, 1972), 97-101.
    \2\U.S. Congress. House of Representatives. Mis. Doc. No. 177, 43d. 
Cong. 1st.Sess. (1874).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1907, Special Agent for California Indians C. E. Kelsey 
purchased 441 acres of land for the ``Etna Band of Indians,'' 
as the group was then known, pursuant to the Act of June 21, 
1906.\3\ By 1915, a census of the group had enumerated some 56 
individuals as part of the Ruffeys.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\Public Law 59-258.
    \4\Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs to the Secretary of 
the Interior. June 1915.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Termination of Rancherias

    During the termination policy era of the 1950s, Congress 
terminated the Ruffey Rancheria, along with others, under the 
Rancheria Act of 1958.\5\ The termination of the Ruffey 
Rancheria proceeded in 1959 with the involvement of only the 
three surviving descendants. The termination went into effect 
in April 1961 and was published in the Federal Register.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\Public Law 85-671, 72 Stat. 619.
    \6\26 Fed. Reg. 3073.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the 1980s, aided by California Indian Legal Services, an 
Indian named Tillie Hardwick filed a lawsuit against the Bureau 
of Indian Affairs challenging the Congressional termination of 
her Rancheria and others. In 1983, the U.S. District Court for 
Northern California approved a Stipulated Settlement negotiated 
between the government and several terminated Rancherias under 
which the government would recognize the Rancherias as tribes. 
The settlement provided that the Ruffey Rancheria claims were 
dismissed without prejudice.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\Tillie Hardwich et al. v. U.S. et al. No. C-79-1710-SW. 
Stipulation for Entry of Judgment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary of H.R. 3535

    H.R. 3535 would provide for the federal recognition of the 
Ruffey Rancheria of California located in Siskiyou County, 
California. The bill would allow the Tribe to apply to have 
approximately 441 acres placed into trust to be made part of 
its reservation. The bill sets forth a process by which the 
Secretary of the Interior would determine Tribal membership 
rolls prior to the interim Tribal Council's compilation and 
adoption of a Tribal constitution. The Tribe would be eligible 
to game on lands that meet the restored lands exemption under 
the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act; \8\ however, the Tribe must 
satisfy two criteria under the bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\25 U.S.C. 2719(b)(1)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        SELECTED SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF BILL AS REPORTED

    Section 2. Restoration of Federal Recognition, Rights, And 
Privileges. This section provides that the Rancheria would be 
given many of the same powers and benefits as other federally-
recognized tribes. Due to the absence of an initial 
reservation, members located within the Tribe's service area 
will be available for federal services furnished to federally-
recognized tribes.
    Section 3. Transfer of Land to be Held in Trust. This 
section provides that after the Tribe submits a trust 
application, approximately 441 acres of land in Siskiyou 
County, California, shall be placed into trust to be part of 
the Tribe's reservation. Former trust lands of the Tribe may be 
eligible for trust status. Any lands taken into trust for the 
Tribe as part of the reservation shall be exempt from federal, 
State and local taxation.
    Section 4. Membership Rolls. Section 4 sets forth 
enrollment criteria for the Tribe. Until a Tribal constitution 
is adopted, the Secretary of the Interior shall list an 
individual on the Tribal membership roll if an individual is: 
not a member of another federally-recognized tribe; whose name 
can be traced to a Bureau of Indian Affairs distribution list 
published April 11, 1961; was not listed but met requirements 
of the list; or an individual is a lineal descendant of a 
person who meets the previous criteria. The Secretary shall 
accept any available evidence establishing tribal ancestry. 
Conclusive evidence shall be contained in the Ruffey Rancheria 
distribution list published in 1961. The Tribal constitution 
shall govern Tribal membership after its adoption.
    Section 5. Interim Government. Prior to adoption of a 
Tribal constitution, an interim Tribal Council is to be 
established consisting of the Executive Council of the Tribe as 
it exists on the date of enactment of this Act.
    Section 6. Tribal Constitution. After the compilation of 
the Tribal membership roll under section 4 and at the request 
of the interim Tribal Council, the Secretary shall conduct an 
election to ratify a final constitution for the Tribe. The 
election shall be consistent with provisions of the Indian 
Reorganization Act of 1934 relating to tribal constitutions. No 
later than 120 days after the Tribe ratifies the Tribal 
constitution, the Secretary will conduct a secret ballot to 
elect Tribal officials.
    Section 7. Limitations on Indian Gaming on Acquired Lands. 
Section 7 provides that gaming may be conducted on lands 
acquired by the Tribe if the Tribe meets the restored lands 
exception under section 20 of Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. 
However, the gaming must be in Siskiyou County and be 5 miles 
or less from the land placed into trust under Section 3.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 3535 was introduced on July 28, 2017, by Congressman 
Doug LaMalfa (R-CA). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Natural Resources and within the Committee to the Subcommittee 
on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairs. On September 26, 
2017, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the legislation. On 
May 8, 2018, the Committee on Natural Resources met to consider 
the bill. The Subcommittee was discharged by unanimous consent. 
Congress LaMalfa offered an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute designated 051. No amendments were offered to it, 
and the amendment in the nature of a substitute was adopted by 
voice vote. The bill, as amended, was ordered favorably 
reported to the House of Representatives by a roll call vote of 
19 ayes to 18 noes, as follows:

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

            COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee on Natural Resources' oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

      COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII AND CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT

    1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act. 
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) and (3) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
sections 308(a) and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974, the Committee has received the following estimate for the 
bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, June 8, 2018.
Hon. Rob Bishop,
Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3535, the Ruffey 
Rancheria Restoration Act of 2018.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Robert Reese.
            Sincerely,
                                             Mark P. Hadley
                                        (For Keith Hall, Director).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 3535--Ruffey Rancheria Restoration Act of 2018

    Summary: H.R. 3535 would restore federal recognition to the 
Ruffey Rancheria Indian tribe in California. Federal 
recognition would make the tribe and individual members 
eligible to receive benefits from various federal programs. The 
bill also would allow the Department of the Interior (DOI) to 
take into trust property currently owned by the tribe which 
could permit certain types of gaming on those lands if DOI 
determines that the land is eligible to be used for such 
purposes under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
    CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 3535 would cost $5 
million over the 2019-2023 period, assuming appropriation of 
the necessary amounts.
    Enacting H.R. 3535 would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
    CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3535 would not increase 
net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four 
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2029.
    H.R. 3535 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary effect of H.R. 3535 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of the legislation fall within budget function 450 
(community and regional development) and 550 (health).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             2018      2019      2020      2021      2022      2023    2019-2023
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 INCREASES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
 
Estimated Authorization Level............         0         1         1         1         1         1          5
Estimated Outlays........................         0         1         1         1         1         1          5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 
3535 will be enacted near the end of 2018 and that the 
necessary amounts will be appropriated each year beginning in 
2019. Estimated outlays follow historical patterns for similar 
assistance to other tribes.
    H.R. 3535 would provide federal recognition to the Ruffey 
Rancheria of California. Federal recognition would allow the 
tribe and about 350 tribal members to receive benefits from 
various programs administered by DOI and the Indian Health 
Service (IHS). DOI, primarily through the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs, provides funding to federally recognized tribes for 
various purposes, including child welfare services, adult care, 
community development, and other general assistance. IHS 
provides health services to federally recognized Indian tribes.
    Using information provided by DOI, IHS, and the tribe and 
accounting for anticipated inflation, CBO estimates that 
providing services to the tribe under the bill would cost $5 
million over the 2019-2023 period. About 60 percent of those 
costs would be for health care services.
    Pay-As-You-Go considerations: None.
    Increase in long-term direct spending and deficits: CBO 
estimates that enacting H.R. 3535 would not increase net direct 
spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 
10-year periods beginning in 2029.
    Mandates: H.R. 3535 contains no intergovernmental or 
private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Robert Reese 
(Department of the Interior) and Robert Stewart (Indian Health 
Service); Mandates: Zach Byrum.
    Estimate reviewed by: Kim P. Cawley, Chief, Natural and 
Physical Resources Cost Estimates Unit; H. Samuel Papenfuss, 
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
    2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or 
objective of this bill is to restore federal recognition of the 
Ruffey Rancheria of California.

                           EARMARK STATEMENT

    This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined 
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                       COMPLIANCE WITH H. RES. 5

    Directed Rule Making. This bill does not contain any 
directed rule makings.
    Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not 
establish or reauthorize a program of the federal government 
known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was 
not included in any report from the Government Accountability 
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139 
or identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic 
Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program 
Information Act (Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law 
98-169) as relating to other programs.

                PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

    This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or 
tribal law.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    If enacted, this bill would make no changes to existing 
law.

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

    We are strong believers in tribal sovereignty, self-
governance, and self-determination. As such, we strongly 
support the right of Congress to restore wrongfully terminated 
tribes.
    However, Congress must also ensure that any restoration or 
recognition legislation does not have unresolved issues before 
enactment. This is to protect the rights of the restored tribe 
as much as it is to protect the rights of existing tribes and 
local municipalities. H.R. 3535 fails in this regard.
    Four individual tribes--the Karuk Tribe, the Quartz Valley 
Indian Community, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians, 
and the Klamath Indian Tribe of Oregon--have all expressed 
serious concerns regarding H.R. 3535. Collectively, these 
tribes represent over 12,000 individual tribal members across 
California and Oregon.
    Coalitions representing over 70 California tribal 
organizations have also voiced their concerns. These include 
the Northern California Tribal Chairman's Association, the 
Southern California Tribal Chairman's Association, and the 
California Nations Indian Gaming Commission. Issues with the 
bill have also been raised by non-tribal stakeholders, such as 
the Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations and 
Stand up for California.
    The legislative creation of water, fishing, hunting, 
trapping and gathering rights for Ruffey is problematic. The 
existence and extent of these rights remain unknown. 
Specifically, the sudden re-creation of unspecified tribal 
fishing rights could disrupt and destabilize the current 
federal, state and tribal salmon allocation systems for the 
entire Klamath Basin and much of the west coast. Tribal water 
rights have frequently been determined by federal and state 
courts to be the most senior existing water rights. Re-creating 
a new, but undefined, set of tribal water rights in the middle 
of Siskiyou County could seriously disrupt the current State 
water rights allocation system.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\H.R. 3535 allows the restored reservation land to be sited on 
the Sacramento or Klamath rivers, even though their original 
reservation was located in Etna. This could impact the local 
communities existing water rights, as well as commercial and sport 
fishermen and local irrigators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R. 3535 also dictates that the Secretary take land into 
trust for the Ruffey Rancheria, and mandates that it become 
part of the Ruffey reservation. The bill originally limited the 
land acquisition to 441 acres, which was the size of the 
original rancheria. The adopted Amendment in the Nature of a 
Substitute (ANS) removes this size stipulation, thereby 
permitting unlimited, mandatory land acquisition in perpetuity 
anywhere within Siskiyou County, CA. Subsequently, Ruffey would 
be allowed to take the aforementioned unknown water, fishing, 
hunting, trapping and gathering rights and transfer them to 
these lands. Since the rights that would be restored originate 
from the ``Tribe and its members,'' Congress has no idea what 
rights would actually be restored. Assessing this impact 
becomes all the more difficult because the exact location of 
the Ruffey Rancheria's land could ultimately be located nearly 
anywhere within Siskiyou County, CA.
    Typically, a congressional restoration of an Indian tribe 
limits membership to the descendants of the actual tribe that 
was terminated. H.R. 3535 deviates from this precedent. The 
bill opens membership up to the descendants of anyone that may 
have been eligible to be part of the original Ruffey Rancheria, 
whether they were enrolled or not, as long as they had a ``bona 
fide relationship'' to the Rancheria. This is quite vague, as 
``bona fide'' is undefined in the bill, but could possibly 
include non-Indians like spouses or in-laws.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\This is the definition of ``bona-fide relationship'' in other 
legal documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Finally, both the Karuk Tribe and Quartz Valley Indian 
Reservation have expressed concerns that this bill would 
preempt their service areas, which would impact both themselves 
and tribes with whom they have fund-shifting agreements. The 
ANS removes the state of Oregon and Shasta County, CA from the 
proposed Ruffey service area, but does not address the issue 
within Siskiyou County, CA.
    Prior to the markup, Ranking Member Raul M. Grijalva, along 
with Subcommittee Ranking Members, Norma Torres and Jared 
Huffman, officially requested that the Committee hold an 
additional legislative hearing on H.R. 3535 to allow the area 
tribes to voice their concerns. The request was denied by the 
Chair.
    Even with the changes incorporated in the ANS, many 
lingering unanswered questions and serious concerns still 
remain. Until these issues are addressed, we cannot support 
H.R. 3535.

                                   Raul M. Grijalva,
                                           Ranking Member, Committee on 
                                               Natural Resources
                                   Jared Huffman.

                                  [all]
```