U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

78–095 PDF 2013

S. HRG. 112–686

IMPACTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES ON

TREATY RIGHTS, TRADITIONAL LIFESTYLES,

AND TRIBAL HOMELANDS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

JULY 19, 2012

Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Vice Chairman 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii 

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

JON TESTER, Montana 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska 

LORETTA A. TUELL, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

DAVID A. MULLON JR., Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on July 19, 2012 ............................................................................... 1

Statement of Senator Akaka ................................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Barrasso ............................................................................... 16

Statement of Senator Cantwell .............................................................................. 43

Statement of Senator Murkowski ........................................................................... 17

WITNESSES

Akutagawa, Malia, Assistant Professor, William S. Richardson School of Law . 49

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 51

Chase, Joann K., Director, American Indian Environmental Office, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency .............................................................................. 2

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 4

Dardar, Jr., Hon. Thomas, Principal Chief, United Houma Nation .................... 37

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 39

Davidson, Margaret A., Acting Director, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource 

Management, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce ...................................... 10

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 12

Hall, Hon. Tex ‘‘Red Tipped Arrow’’, Chairman, Mandan, Hidasta and Arikara 

Nation ................................................................................................................... 28

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 30

Frank, Jr., Billy, Chairman, Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission .............. 44

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 45

Williams, Hon. Mike, Chief, Yupiit Nation ........................................................... 24

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 26

APPENDIX

Intertribal Timber Council, prepared statement .................................................. 67

National Congress of American Indians, prepared statement ............................. 70

Nisqually Indian Tribe, prepared statement ......................................................... 72

Office of Hawaiian Affairs, prepared statement ................................................... 73

San Carlos Apache Tribe, prepared statement ..................................................... 74

(1)

IMPACTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES

ON TREATY RIGHTS, TRADITIONAL

LIFESTYLES, AND TRIBAL HOMELANDS 

THURSDAY, JULY 19, 2012

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:34 p.m. in room 

628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA,

U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII 

The CHAIRMAN. I call this hearing of the Committee on Indian 

Affairs to order. 

Aloha and welcome to all of you to the Committee’s oversight 

hearing on impacts of environmental changes on treaty rights, traditional lifestyles and Tribal homelands. 

Across this Nation, Native peoples were the first stewards of 

these lands we now call America. The relationship between Native 

nations and their environment is sacred. It is a foundation of their 

cultures and world view. Their knowledge is valuable to all of us, 

because it was acquired by studying this place over thousands of 

years and for hundreds of generations. In this way, Native cultures 

hold the oldest records of this environment and utilize the most 

sustainable practices for living in harmony with nature, with it, respecting nature and Mother Earth. 

As a Native Hawaiian, we have a concept called malama ‘aina, 

caring for the land. But it means more than this simple translation 

can convey. Malama ‘aina teaches us that we must care for the 

land and nature so it can continue to care for us and also sustain 

us and our future generations, as well. 

It means that the relationship between man and the environment is a reciprocal one. I learned as a young boy that malama 

‘aina is more than a good idea; it really is a foundation of how we 

live and who we are as a people. 

This concept is not unique to my people. It is something all Native people share. The idea that we have a responsibility to steward 

our lands, fulfilling that responsibility is part of who we are as indigenous peoples. 

As a result, Native people are often able to notice subtle changes 

in our environments well before the data exists to verify it. Native 

2

communities have faced tremendous difficulties over time, but now 

they are facing perhaps their most daunting challenge: a changing 

environment. 

While environmental changes are widespread, studies indicate 

that Native communities are disproportionately impacted because 

they depend on nature for traditional foods, sacred sites, and to 

practice ceremonies that pass on cultural values to future generations. 

Although there is no easy solution, collectively we can address 

these issues. 

Several Tribes and Native communities are leading the way by 

creating adaptation and mitigation plans. At the Federal level, 

agencies are providing resources and programs to address climatic 

changes. 

Today I look forward to hearing from the EPA and NOAA about 

the resources and programs they offer to Native communities, and 

from Native leaders about their ideas on how to address environmental changes. 

So I look forward to that with the Committee. As Chairman, it 

is my goal to ensure that we hear from all of you who want to contribute to the discussion. The hearing record is open for two weeks 

from today, and I encourage everyone to submit your comments 

through written testimony. 

I want to remind the witnesses to please limit your oral testimony to five minutes today, and I would like to invite the first 

panel to the witness table. As I call you, please come forward. 

Ms. Joann K. Chase, Director of the American Indian Environmental Office, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, 

D.C. Welcome. 

Ms. Margaret Davidson, Director of the Office of Ocean and 

Coastal Resource Management at NOAA in Charleston, South 

Carolina. 

I want to welcome everybody here. As I take time to look at those 

who are present, it is so good to see so many of you that we have 

been able to work with over the years and continue to do so to help 

our people. 

Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms. Chase. I would like to ask 

you to please proceed with your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF JOANN K. CHASE, DIRECTOR, AMERICAN

INDIAN ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICE, U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY 

Ms. CHASE. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Good afternoon. 

Ms. CHASE. Thank you for the opportunity to be here today. 

I have the good pleasure of serving as the Director of the American Indian Environmental Office at EPA, and I think that this is 

a very important opportunity to discuss with you some of the Agency’s efforts to strengthen human health and the environment in Indian Country. 

I would also like to, in the tradition of our people, just acknowledge the Tribal leadership that is here today, including my own 

Tribal chairman, Tex Hall. I, too, very much look forward to hearing the thoughts and recommendations, and perhaps even the conVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:50 Jan 30, 2013 Jkt 078095 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\DOCS\78095.TXT JACK
3

structive criticisms of the work that we are doing from the leadership that is presenting testimony today. 

Thank you also, Mr. Chairman, just for reminding us of the 

unique perspectives that Tribes have on the environment. Protection and preservation of the environment is integral and important 

and essential to the continued survival of Tribal cultures and traditions. Indeed, the environment is sacred. 

As a citizen of the Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation, I can 

say with confidence that the work of the Agency is an important 

factor in protecting this unique way of life. EPA has a long history 

of working with federally-recognized Tribes, and our commitment 

to strengthening Tribal partnerships begins at the very top of EPA. 

This, indeed, is one of Administrator Jackson’s top seven priorities 

for the Agency, and one of her first actions was to reaffirm the 

1984 Indian policy. This reiterates our unique legal relationship 

with Tribal governments. 

Our primary goal continues to be to bring Tribes to the table as 

co-regulating partners with environmental authority and responsibilities for their communities. 

In my capacity as the director, I have had the opportunity to engage extensively with Tribal leaders across the country and with 

environmental program directors of Tribes, and there are a few 

emerging—say emerging. They are not emerging. They are continuing themes that we have heard that are indicative of some of 

the concerns that the Tribes have, and we are doing our best as 

an Agency to be responsive to those concerns. 

One of those is effective consultation. It is critical for Tribes and 

an essential component of the government-to-government relationship, and it is certainly essential in addressing the impacts of environmental changes. Since the implementation of the Agency’s consultation policy, we have had over 100 consultations with Tribal 

governments. 

This week the National Tribal Operations Committee and the 

NTC have been meeting, and yesterday the Agency’s top leadership, along with our Tribal caucus advisors, had a vibrant and candid and, I think, very informative discussion about how we can continue our efforts to continue the implementation of this policy. 

We also heard frustration expressed by many Tribal leaders that 

there is a need for Federal employees to have a better basic understanding of the fundamental principles of Federal Indian law and 

policy, and I am pleased to announce that very soon we will be instituting an annual mandatory training for all EPA employees. I 

am confident that this will create a better, more-informed EPA 

work force. 

Another theme that we hear from Tribes is frustration over the 

lack of and a desire for better interagency coordination. Accordingly, EPA is working diligently within the Federal family to advance better coordination efforts and to leverage knowledge and resources. 

Mr. Chairman, the impacts of environmental changes are indeed 

causing extraordinary challenges for Tribes across the Nation. 

These challenges include rising sea levels, loss of species, habitat 

degradation, and a host of other devastating impacts, including relocation of entire communities. 

4

This past fall I visited several villages in Alaska and witnessed 

first-hand dramatic impacts of climate change on these vibrant cultures and traditional lifestyles. Addressing these issues requires cooperation between many partners. EPA is the leader in working 

diligently with our government partners, including Tribal governments, to ensure that we act now to address the impacts of climate 

changes that are currently faced by the Tribes. We have developed 

and submitted our climate change adaptation plan to fulfill our responsibility under Executive Order 13514. This blueprint will guide 

the development of specific adaptation planning activities. We are 

in the consultation process now. It is essential for us to have Tribes 

at the table and to hear and have their input into this adaptation 

plan. 

We also have established the adaptation work group at the request of the Tribes. This is an active work group that will help to 

enhance the agency’s work in this area. And the work group, itself, 

is supporting a workshop this fall that will leverage Tribal expertise to develop climate change adaptation strategies to ensure food 

security and protect traditional plant use. 

As you know, traditional plant use is among the many examples 

of how Tribes have long relied on natural resources to sustain traditional lifeways. The United States has many treaties with Tribes 

that provide the right to these natural resources, such as the taking and gathering of plants and the right to take fish. 

We are charged with protecting our environment. As such, we 

have a duty and responsibility to protect these natural resources 

alongside our Federal partners. For almost a year now we have 

been working very closely with NOAA, with USDA, and other agencies to address concerns raised by the western Washington treaty 

Tribes regarding habitat losses in the Puget Sound. Tribes have 

been providing input throughout this process and will continue to 

be critical leaders and partners in this important work. 

Finally, as we address the impacts of environmental changes, we 

recognize that we must better incorporate centuries worth of traditional ecological knowledge into our work. Last year the Administrator embraced this as a priority in our work with Tribes. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, again for the opportunity to appear 

before you. Mahalo for your many years of advocacy on behalf of 

Native peoples. 

I will be happy to answer any questions that the Committee 

might have. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Chase follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOANN K. CHASE, DIRECTOR, AMERICAN INDIAN

ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICE, U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Good morning Mr. Chairman and other members of the Committee and thank you 

for the opportunity to testify today. My name is JoAnn Chase and I am the Director 

of the American Indian Environmental Office in the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency’s Office of International and Tribal Affairs. I’m pleased to be at 

this oversight hearing on the ‘‘Impacts of Environmental Changes of Treaty Rights, 

Traditional Lifestyles and Tribal Homelands’’ to discuss EPA’s work to strengthen 

human health and environmental protection in Indian country within this context. 

Tribal perspectives on the environment are unique. As so eloquently articulated 

by the National Tribal Environmental Council, there is no artificial separation 

drawn between air and water quality, between the ‘‘environment’’ and ‘‘natural resources’’—all are seen as a whole which is connected, interrelated and participatory 

5

in nature. Protection and preservation of the environment is integral to the continued survival of tribal cultures and traditions. The integrated relationship of land, 

water, humans, animals and plants is a central facet of tribal life. As a citizen of 

the Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation, I can say with confidence that the work 

of the Agency is an important factor in protecting this way of life. 

EPA has a long history of working with the 566 federally-recognized tribes. 

In summary, the nine points of the EPA 1984 Indian Policy are:

• EPA stands ready to work directly with Indian tribal governments on a oneto-one basis (the government-to-government relationship), rather than as subdivisions of other governments.

• EPA will recognize tribal governments as the primary parties for setting standards, making environmental policy decisions and managing program for reservations, consistent with EPA standards and regulations.

• EPA will take affirmative steps to encourage and assist tribes in assuming regulatory and program management responsibilities for reservation lands.

• EPA will take appropriate steps to remove existing legal and procedural impediments to working directly and effectively with tribal governments on reservation programs.

• EPA, in keeping with the Federal Trust responsibility, will assure that tribal 

concerns and interests are considered whenever EPA’s actions and/or decisions 

may affect Reservation environments.

• EPA will encourage cooperation between tribal, state and local government to 

resolve environmental problems of mutual concern.

• EPA will work with other federal agencies which have related responsibilities 

on Indian Reservations to enlist their interest and support in cooperative efforts 

to help tribes assume environmental program responsibilities for reservations.

• EPA will strive to assure compliance with environmental statutes and regulations on Indian Reservations.

• EPA will incorporate these Indian Policy goals into its planning and management activities, including its budget, operating guidance, legislative initiatives, 

management accountability system and ongoing policy and regulation development processes.

Since that time we have adopted many other policies to support our work with 

tribes and maintain that work within our trust responsibility to tribes and the federal-tribal government to government relationship. As it has been since the adoption 

of the 1984 Indian Policy, EPA’s primary goal is to bring tribes to the table as coregulating partners with environmental authority and responsibilities for their communities. 

One of the first actions EPA Administrator Jackson took as it related to Tribes 

was to reaffirm the Indian Policy. With this action, EPA reiterated its recognition 

that the United States has a unique legal relationship with tribal governments 

based on the Constitution, treaties, statutes, Executive Orders, and court decisions. 

EPA recognizes the right of tribes as sovereign governments to self-determination 

and acknowledges the federal government’s trust responsibility to tribes. EPA works 

with tribes on a government-to-government basis to protect the land, air, and water 

in Indian country. 

EPA’s tribal program has evolved since the Indian Policy was first adopted. Many 

significant milestones and successes in the EPA-tribal environmental partnership 

during these years can be directly attributed to the EPA Indian Policy. These include, but are not limited to, the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribes, announced last May, which reflects the principles of the 1984 Indian 

Policy. 

Yet, we still face many challenges that require a strong federal-tribal partnership. 

These challenges include reducing carbon pollution and addressing the impacts of 

climate change on tribal communities. A clean energy environment is critical, and 

as America moves forward, tribes are essential partners in this future. 

Strengthening Tribal Partnerships 

The commitment to strengthening tribal partnerships begins at the very top of 

EPA. It is one of Administrator Lisa Jackson’s seven priorities for the Agency. In 

this spirit of respect and cooperation with tribes, Administrator Lisa Jackson announced the release of the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes in May of 2011. We are proud to have just celebrated our one-year anniversary. 

6

EPA’s Policy serves as the overarching framework for consultation across EPA. It 

establishes consistent and transparent EPA practices developed through a consultation process with tribes. EPA standards for the consultation process, include defining the what, when, and how of consultation; designating specific EPA personnel responsible for serving as consultation points of contact in order to promote consistency in, and coordination of, the consultation process; and establishing a management oversight and reporting structure that will ensure accountability and transparency. Most importantly, the policy sets a broad standard for when EPA should 

consider consulting with tribes based upon Executive Order 13175 and the principles expressed in the 1984 EPA Policy. To ensure that tribes are aware of EPA’s 

upcoming and current consultation opportunities, and to ensure that the tribes have 

all the necessary information to review and analyze prior to consultation, EPA developed the Tribal Consultation Opportunities Tracking System as a one-stop shop 

for all EPA consultations. This system, which is found on EPA’s Tribal Portal 

website, allows tribal users to view EPA consultation information and to directly 

submit comments to EPA. 

An additional example of tribal partnership is the Tribal ecoAmbassadors Program, piloted in 2011. Working closely with the American Indian Higher Education 

Consortium, a national organization comprised of the Presidents of all 37 Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), EPA solicited project proposals for innovative, community-based solutions to an environmental issue. As a ground- breaking initiative, 

the Tribal ecoAmbassadors program engages professors, students and local communities on social science and natural science research including energy efficiency and 

innovative uses of technology for education. TCU professors serve as the principal 

investigators, and work with a group of their students, who earn college credit and 

a small stipend. Each Tribal ecoAmbassador is paired with an EPA scientist knowledgeable in the area of their proposal. 

Now approaching the end of the pilot year, the eight selected Tribal 

ecoAmbassadors worked with a total of 63 students. Each student presented project 

results to their families and neighbors, garnering community involvement. Capitalizing on the use of technology, two online courses were developed that both promoted distance learning opportunities and used on-line applications to monitor and 

analyze project data. Moreover, each project is sustainable and transferable to other 

tribal nations, of which there are 566 nationwide covering approximately 56 million 

acres of our land base. Thousands of tribal citizens have increased their awareness 

of the role they play in protecting human health and the environment in Indian 

country and the broader community through both direct and indirect participation 

in the Tribal ecoAmbassadors program. 

We are in the pilot year of this program, and our eight ambassadors are concluding their projects, ranging from non-point source pollution assessments to developing manufacturing techniques for carbon-negative building products. This past 

June the pilot program projects were presented to EPA’s joint EPA-tribal Tribal 

Science Council. I am pleased to announce that this program will continue for the 

2012–2013 academic year, with funding available for at least six new Tribal 

ecoAmbassadors projects. 

Training the Agency 

In addition to strengthening the work with external advisory groups, EPA has 

built upon its long tradition of internal staff training in tribal matters to launch its 

newest training program called Working Effectively with Tribal Governments, which 

was publically announced by the Administrator just yesterday. This is an annual, 

mandatory training for all EPA employees, that creates a better informed EPA 

workforce on how to work best on tribal issues and with tribes and includes a full 

understanding of the unique legal and historical relationship between the federal 

government and tribes. This latest version is based upon our previous versions of 

Working Effectively with Tribal Governments which were the foundation for the Office of Personal Management’s federal work force-wide Working Effectively with 

Tribal Governments training. 

Inter-Agency Partnerships 

EPA is working closely with other federal agencies to more effectively address 

tribal concerns and to leverage knowledge and resources. Providing greater access 

to safe drinking water and wastewater facilities for tribes serves as an example of 

this work. EPA continues to play a major role within the federal Interagency Infrastructure Task Force to Improve Access to Safe Drinking Water and Basic Sanitation in Indian country. This task force examines concerns and develops solutions to 

those concerns regarding access to water and wastewater facilities. This active partnership includes the Department of Agriculture, Department of Health and Human 

7

Services, Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of 

the Interior. Of course, the tribes are right there with us at the table. 

The EPA has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department 

of Energy and the Department of the Interior to develop a multi-agency program 

to address the highest priority challenges associated with safely and prudently developing unconventional natural gas and tight oil resources. An important part of 

this group’s mission will be to understand the implications of developing unconventional energy resources on tribal lands. 

Climate Change 

Mr. Chairman, we know the impacts of climate change are causing extraordinary 

challenges for tribes across the nation. In Alaska, climate change impacts are immediate. Rapid erosion and less protection from winter storms due to reduced coastal 

sea ice have forced tribal communities to prepare to abandon their homes and traditional lands in order to survive. Federal, state, and tribal officials have identified 

31 villages that face imminent threats from these impacts. At least 12 of the 31 

threatened villages have decided to relocate—in part or entirely—or to explore relocation options. Federal programs that could offer assistance to these threatened villages to prepare for and recover from disasters and to protect and relocate them are 

limited and unavailable to the majority of villages. 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency has several disaster preparedness 

and recovery programs, but villages often fail to qualify for these programs because 

they may lack approved disaster mitigation plans or have not been declared federal 

disaster areas. Tribes are frustrated by the fact that there is no single comprehensive proactive federal program to assist villages with their relocation efforts, nor is 

there a designated lead Federal agency to provide a coordinated federal and state 

response to climate change related impacts, such as village relocations. However, individual federal agencies can assist villages on specific projects, such as funding the 

construction or relocation of homes. 

Tribes are experiencing other impacts, including damage to traditional food cellars, permafrost melting, and dropping water tables. In many rural tribal communities, their water is drawn from tundra lakes and these are disappearing with the 

permafrost. Another potential impact of melting permafrost is the loss of a stable 

foundation, endangering the sewer and water infrastructure that EPA, and the 

American taxpayer, has invested billions of dollars in. 

These risks are increased by the open dumps that exist in close proximity to most 

rural communities. Human waste and solid waste are often comingled and when 

there are floods or storm surges from the loss of protective ice, viable bacteria and 

contaminants are carried through the community and into people’s homes. Often, 

running water is not available for sanitation, and so consequentially contamination 

results in significant and dangerous impacts to both the environment and human 

health of rural Alaskan communities. Most dumps are unlined, but permafrost partially contains their toxic materials. Without permafrost, however, the untreated 

leachate can become a contamination risk for their water supply. 

Tribes are more vulnerable to transboundary contaminants, and with the melting 

of glaciers, dioxins and pesticides previously retained for decades are now being released back into circulation. Researchers from Canada, China and Norway say some 

persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are being ‘‘remobilized’’ into the Arctic atmosphere. These pollutants accumulate in animal and plant species that tribes are dependent on to sustain themselves and their traditional way of life. 

Tribes throughout the Pacific Northwest are facing similar issues. These similarities are especially acute in coastal Tribes that face erosion, sea level rise, salt water 

intrusion into coastal wetlands, invasive species encroachment, loss of species of traditional importance due to habitat changes, and changes in seasonal timing leading 

to traditional spiritual and cultural ceremonies no longer being aligned with animal 

and plant availability. There are also concerns over paralytic shellfish poisoning, 

ocean acidification, and impacts to water resources. 

With a changing climate comes habitat and ecosystem changes. Northward migration of invasive species and pests is another issue that threatens both ecological and 

human health in Tribal coastal communities. Also, seasonal changes mean that 

some pests that used to die out in cold winter temperatures are now surviving to 

emerge in greater numbers the following spring. Some pests are able to add another 

reproduction cycle with the lengthening of the growing season due to warmer air 

temperatures. Many species, both plant and animal, are shifting to new ranges. This 

creates a problem for Tribes with fixed boundaries or traditional use areas, which 

no longer may be able to access the resources that sustain them. 

Salmon of the Pacific Northwest are central to the lives of native peoples; they 

bring spiritual, physical and cultural well-being. Climate change is bringing proVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:50 Jan 30, 2013 Jkt 078095 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\78095.TXT JACK
8

found habitat challenges, from rapidly changing stream flows to warming waters. 

The consequences of agricultural runoff and clear-cut forest techniques further degrade water quality. Addressing these issues will require large scale cooperative restoration and enhancement projects between many partners. Also, some species loss 

will occur before solutions can be found and implemented. 

For those tribes more inland, water may be a primary issue. They may be facing 

longer and hotter dry seasons and heavier seasonal and more frequent peak 

rainfalls events, creating a greater risk of flooding and erosion as the heavy rains 

fall on land too dry to absorb it. Habitat loss contributes to this. 

Warming and inadequate water supplies may not sustain key fish species and 

may not fully recharge aquifers. Diminishing snow pack changes water availability 

drastically, making stream flows much more variable and dependent on rainfall. 

Without snow pack, the waters also do not stay cool enough, creating more stress 

for fish. 

As aquifers are not recharged, wells could begin to fail, which may cause hardship 

to communities, farmers, and private landowners. This could also put more stress 

on the infrastructure, as more sediments are brought up, causing more wear and 

tear on the water system. 

In direct response to these issues, and at the direction of EPA Administrator Lisa 

Jackson, several high-level initiatives have been created to coordinate EPA’s work 

on climate change and specifically in regard to EPA’s climate change work with 

tribes. EPA has developed and submitted a Climate Change Adaptation Plan as part 

of their 2012 Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan as required under Executive 

Order 13514. This plan serves as an Agency-wide blueprint for assessing vulnerably 

to climate change impacts and the associated plans for addressing those risks to 

EPA mission, program, and operations. This plan will guide the development of subsequent EPA regional- and program-level adaptation planning initiatives. Again, 

tribal input is critically important to us and we are actively seeking tribal input to 

make sure EPA adequately addresses tribal needs. During the development of the 

Agency Climate Change Adaptation Plan, EPA engaged the Tribes in three informal 

teleconference roundtable discussion and conducted three additional teleconference 

dialogues to provide formal briefings on the development of the Plan and to hear 

additional comment from Tribal leaders. Concurrent with review of the Agency’s 

draft Plan by CEQ and OMB, EPA has opened a formal draft review and written 

comment period for the tribes to help the Agency craft an acceptable strategy for 

working with the Tribes on this issue. To further insure adequate consideration of 

tribal issues and concerns in agency adaptation planning, EPA has formed, at the 

request of tribes, a Tribal-EPA climate adaptation workgroup. The goal of this group 

is to improve tribal capacity, coordination, and engagement in climate change adaptation activities, and to develop proposals for additional work or more specific recommendations that would be most effective in Indian country. 

To continue to elevate the issue of climate change with EPA’s external tribal partners, just last week, on Tuesday, July 10, the Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI) FACA voted to establish a standing workgroup on Water Resources 

and Climate Change. Invitation letters will be sent out soon inviting non-federal organizations and federal agencies to join the workgroup. The National Tribal Water 

Council and the National Congress of American Indians are on the list to receive 

an invitation to join. 

ACWI is a long-standing and important forum that includes many federal agencies and associations and citizen stakeholders. The ACWI represents the interests 

of water information users and professionals in advising the Federal Government 

on Federal water-information programs and their effectiveness in meeting the Nation’s water information needs. 

In addition to the agency adaptation plan and EPA’s work with external partners, 

EPA is working with the Canadian government and an indigenous not-for-profit organization to host a workshop this fall that will leverage tribal expertise to develop 

climate change adaptation strategies to ensure food security and protect traditional 

plant use. 

An example of the way in which EPA is currently acting to address tribal climate 

change concerns is found in EPA Region 10 located in Seattle, Washington. EPA is 

working with the state and tribal governments on a way to reduce temperature 

stress on salmon in the South Fork Nooksack River in Washington. EPA is working 

with the State of Washington’s Department of Ecology, the Lummi Nation, and the 

Nooksack Tribe to identify the best way to integrate available climate change data 

into the State of Washington’s Total Maximum Daily Load water parameters process. Examining the way temperature can be improved in the Nooksack watershed 

in order to support salmon restoration is a high priority for the Nooksack Tribe and 

Lummi Nation. This work will produce a number of models that include potential 

9

future climate change scenarios and effects on salmon for 20 to 80 year periods. This 

cooperation is providing a case study of an effective process to use to support future 

tribal consultation on climate change science issues and the co-management of this 

invaluable resource. 

Treaty Rights 

Courts have long held that Indian treaties are binding on the United States unless abrogated by Congress. Many of these treaties provide certain rights to resources, for example, ‘‘a right to take’’ fish. 

In an effort to protect tribal resources, EPA works with many federal agencies. 

For example, EPA recently funded the Puget Sound National Estuary Program 

(NEP) at approximately $160 million over the last five fiscal years. Approximately 

21 percent of this funding has gone to tribal restoration and protection projects and 

to support tribal engagement in the governmental processes established to recover 

Puget Sound and to protect tribal resources. The remaining funding has gone to 

projects related to marine, nearshore and watershed protection, reduction of toxic, 

nutrient and pathogen pollution, education, outreach and stewardship and management. 

In September 2011, the White House Council on Environmental Quality designated EPA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Department of Agriculture, National Resource Conservation Service as co-leads for a renewed federal effort to contribute to the protection and restoration of Puget Sound 

and the Washington coast. This endeavor responds to concerns raised by Western 

Washington Treaty Tribes about continued habitat losses and associated diminishment of fishery resources. Under the leadership of the three co-chairs, federal agencies with authorities in Puget Sound and western Washington coastal river basins 

are re-focusing existing efforts and working better to protect and restore habitats 

important to salmon, shellfish, and other species. This improved interagency effort 

includes a critical review of existing policies, authorities and funding programs to 

contribute to the overall objectives for Puget Sound and western Washington coastal 

habitat restorations. A Puget Sound Region Federal Agency Action Plan was developed and specifically includes language that the federal partners, including EPA, 

will coordinate with each other, the state and the tribes to affirm commitments to 

the Treaty Tribes of western Washington. The Puget Sound Region Federal Agency 

Action Plan also creates a Tribal-Federal Habitat Forum for addressing unresolved 

priority habitat implementation measures. 

EPA has undertaken several measures to address specific tribal habitat concerns 

including developing a summary of EPA’s authorities regarding habitat protection 

and restoration. For each of these activities, EPA has developed roles, timeframes, 

geographic scope, and measures to provide for accountability. We have obtained this 

same set of information from the other 14 members of the Puget Sound Federal 

Caucus. This document was cross-walked with tribal information on barriers to 

salmon recovery in each watershed of tribal interest to determine the extent to 

which federal agencies’ current activities and new commitments will address the 

tribal issues. This will help identify gaps in EPA efforts and authorities, and opportunities for better coordination of federal habitat work. 

Use of Traditional Ecological Knowledge 

By definition Traditional Ecological Knowledge is based on the acknowledgement 

that indigenous peoples who live on the land and harvest its resources have an intimate understanding of their environment grounded in a long-term relationship with 

the surrounding land, ocean, rivers, ice and resources. This understanding includes 

knowledge of the anatomy and biology of resources based on centuries of harvesting 

and processing, distribution of resources, animal behavior, seasons, weather and climate, hydrology, sea ice, currents, how ecosystems function, and the relationship between the environment and the local culture. EPA has acknowledged this definition 

and the bases that support it and has begun to use this invaluable resource in EPA 

work. 

During development of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) General Permit for Oil and Gas Exploration, Development and Production 

Facilities located in State and Federal Waters in Cook Inlet, EPA contracted to collect Traditional Ecological Knowledge information to assist in understanding the 

linkage between oil and gas development and production in Cook Inlet and tribal 

subsistence uses. This effort was initiated in direct recognition of the value of Traditional Ecological Knowledge and the need for EPA decisionmaking to be informed 

in a meaningful way by Traditional Ecological Knowledge. 

Traditional Ecological Knowledge data were collected from seven Cook Inlet area 

tribes by trained professionals through individual or workshop interviews within 

10

tribal and subsistence communities on a set of focused questions developed by EPA 

[to assist EPA with obtaining information relevant to the action.] Tribal members 

from multiple villages, identified as spokespeople by their communities, expressed 

consistent observations, concerns and questions based on an informed traditional 

understanding of the Cook Inlet aquatic environment. Observations included Cook 

Inlet flow, current and waste deposition history, declines and changes in species 

availability and range, and health and safety concerns regarding traditional food 

quality and contaminant load. In general, concerns fit into two main categories: (1) 

the potential for environmental impacts from catastrophic events such as oil spills—

especially considering the age of the platforms and associated pipelines, and (2) the 

effects from routine platform operations that include the discharge of contaminants. 

EPA utilized the Traditional Ecological Knowledge observational data in 

reissuance of the Cook Inlet General Permit. The Traditional Ecological Knowledge 

process influenced the Cook Inlet General Permit issuances in the following ways: 

revised the setback distances for discharges from exploratory facilities by increasing 

the prohibition of the discharge of drilling fluids and drill cuttings within 1,000 meters of sensitive areas, such as coastal marshes, to 4,000 meters; eliminated discharges of produced water, drilling fluids, and drill cuttings from new sources; established new limits on both the amount of treatment chemicals added, and toxicity, 

for discharges such as water flood waste water and cooling water; established more 

stringent limits for total residual chlorine; required two new studies to gain a better 

understanding of the potential impacts of the discharges—specifically that operators 

of all new facilities are required to conduct baseline monitoring and large volume 

produced water dischargers are required to conduct a study of the water and sediment concentrations in the vicinity of the discharges. 

I am happy to report that this use of Traditional Ecological Knowledge by EPA 

is not new. We used it in 2007 for the NPDES Cook Inlet General Permit reissuance 

and again during 2010–2011 for the reissuance of the Arctic Exploration NPDES 

General Permit which is ongoing. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear before you today and 

highlight some of the work EPA is accomplishing for, and with, tribes. I am happy 

to answer any questions you or the Committee may have.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Ms. Chase. 

Ms. Davidson, would you please proceed with your testimony? 

STATEMENT OF MARGARET A. DAVIDSON, ACTING DIRECTOR, 

OFFICE OF OCEAN AND COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, 

NOAA, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Ms. DAVIDSON. Aloha Senator Akaka and other members of the 

Committee, Senator Barrasso. Thank you for this opportunity to 

represent and speak a bit about NOAA’s efforts to better understand the impacts of environmental change on the land, resources, 

and people of indigenous communities throughout this Country and 

the Pacific Rim. 

My name is Margaret Davidson, and I am the acting Director of 

the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management at the Department of Commerce of NOAA. I also want to acknowledge why 

so many people are here today. It was, in fact, the leadership of 

coastal indigenous people led by the Hoh, Makah, and Quileute 

Tribes, the Quinault Indian Nation, Tribes located in Washington 

State, that reached out to their colleagues in the Pacific island indigenous communities, as well as NOAA and the Nature conservancy and other Federal and non-Federal agencies, to convene the 

first steward symposium this week. This national event is an inaugural event, we anticipate that it will be but one in a series and 

provide an excellent forum to discuss how environmental and climate change affects traditional Tribal cultures and treary rights 

and how traditional ecological knowledge can provide insights 

about how these cultures and, indeed, the Country as a whole, can 

adapt to change. 

11

NOAA remains concerned about the risks and vulnerabilities of 

the indigenous communities from a number of impacts of our 

changing environment and climate. Ms. Chase has just identified 

some. EPA and NOAA each have slightly different authorities, and, 

of course, areas of expertise and capabilities, but at the end we are 

all concerned about fundamentally the same issues that affect our 

communities and our economies. 

At NOAA, although we are little bit smaller than EPA, we have 

a fairly long tradition of supporting people, what I call boots on the 

ground, to work with indigenous and other peoples. We started the 

regional climate centers in conjunction with State agencies back in 

the late 1980s. With our universities we have supported the RISAs. 

I know, Senator, that you are familiar with Sea Grant and its work 

throughout the Pacific islands and beyond. And then we have a 

host of, of course, university and State partnerships. More recently, 

we established the Regional Climate Service Directors to provide 

access to NOAA and its capabilities and work more effectively with 

our colleagues across all governments. 

One of the areas that we have focused a lot on working with our 

colleagues is the whole issue of risk and vulnerability, and have 

worked with State and Tribal and local partners to collect data, assess vulnerability, a range of resources, and help communities to 

understand, plan, anticipate, and take action to reduce possible impacts. I want to mention a few of those. 

Recently NOAA co-led, with the Department of Interior and the 

Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the development of a national fish, wildlife, and plants climate adaptation strategy. There 

was very strong Tribal representation from several regions of the 

Country. This strategy is a key step towards addressing climate 

impacts on natural resources in the communities, cultures, and 

economies that so heavily depend upon them. We believe it is the 

first nationwide strategy, and it will help all of us to work more 

effectively to help safeguard important natural resources in the 

communities that depend upon them. 

Also, the national climate assessment, which NOAA helps to deliver on a five-year basis, this year, for the first time ever, there 

will be new chapters about coasts, the oceans, and, most importantly, traditional knowledge is a whole chapter in and of itself. We 

had over 150 different entries from various Tribal communities and 

nations into that process. Those reports will be published this winter. 

NOAA has also worked very closely with USGS and the Department of Agriculture on the National Integrated Drought Information system. Tribal groups have been key players in helping to 

identify the impacts of drought, as well as helping our scientists to 

be much more useful to people who are so dependent upon the 

landscape. Prototypes of that early warning system have been undertaken in the Colorado River basin and in the southeastern U.S. 

More recently, we have been working on western Native lands in 

Wyoming and with Tribes in the four corners region, as well. 

Additionally, NOAA continues to collaborate with EPA as part of 

the national climate assessment. NOAA built on some earlier work, 

and EPA finished it off. We have developed a prototype for social 

vulnerability indices for coastal counties around the U.S. and the 

12

Pacific islands. Not surprisingly, indigenous folks, as you well 

know, are among the most vulnerable. 

Our Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, of course, has been 

active in many regions, as have Sea Grant and the Natural Estuarine Research Reserves, we have also worked closely with the NGO 

community, the Nature Conservancy, and other groups like the 

Moore Foundation, to develop a range of tools, capabilities, and 

training programs for Tribal communities and nations. 

NOAA has many mandatory and statutory authorities that require us to look at the impacts of change on fisheries, estuarine resources, and coastal communities throughout the Country. We 

work closely also with other Federal and State governments on marine protected areas, which are some of the areas in which we are 

first beginning to observe some of these impacts most clearly, as 

well. 

Climate impacts on federally-recognized Tribes and other indigenous people within this Country and our territories, of course, is 

already occurring. We need to work closely with our colleagues in 

the Native American community to provide tested experiences and 

lessons. We have created numerous partnerships specifically with 

indigenous groups. We are always looking for ways to establish 

more meaningful discussions. We welcome your insights, as well as 

your directions. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, again for the opportunity to appear 

before you today. Mahalo. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Davidson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARGARET A. DAVIDSON, ACTING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF

OCEAN AND COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, NOAA, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

COMMERCE

Introduction 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for this opportunity to 

testify on the efforts of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) to better understand climate change impacts on the people, lands, and resources of Indigenous communities in the United States, including Alaska and the 

Pacific Rim. My name is Margaret Davidson, and I am the Acting Director of the 

Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management at the Department of Commerce’s NOAA. 

NOAA is concerned about the risks and vulnerabilities of Indigenous communities 

from a number of impacts resulting from our changing climate. Impacts of climate 

change such as higher temperatures, altered rainfall patterns, rising sea levels, increasing ocean acidification, and the loss of sea ice are causing widespread changes 

in the nation’s terrestrial, coastal, and marine habitats, ecosystems, and communities that depend on them. These changes are driving increased frequency and intensity of wildfires; threatening tribal access to traditional habitats and species such 

as salmon, shellfish, crops, and marine mammals; and impacting cultural, economic, 

medicinal, and community health for countless generations. 

NOAA is a leader in efforts to identify these risks and vulnerabilities. NOAA is 

working with federal, state, tribal, and local partners to collect data, assess the vulnerability of a variety of resources, and help communities to plan and take action 

to reduce possible impacts. I would like to take this opportunity to identify some 

impacts that tribal communities are currently experiencing as well as highlight the 

ways that NOAA is working with indigenous peoples to adapt to climate change. 

Assessing Impacts on Tribal, Indigenous, and Native Lands and Peoples 

NOAA conducts a variety of activities to measure, track, and assess the state of 

the climate and climate impacts on the nation. One of the most significant has been 

our work with the other agencies of the U.S. Global Change Research Program 

(USGCRP) to complete the next National Climate Assessment (NCA). For the first 

time ever, the 2013 Assessment will include a chapter specifically on impacts of cliVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:50 Jan 30, 2013 Jkt 078095 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\78095.TXT JACK
13

mate change on tribal, indigenous, and native lands and peoples. To receive information from as broad a range of interested parties as possible, the USGCRP released a Request for Inputs in July of 2011. This request resulted in more than 150 

technical inputs identified as pertinent to the Tribal, Indigenous, and Native Lands 

and Peoples chapter. These technical inputs focused on a number of key areas, including a significant decrease in water availability; ecological changes affecting traditional foods such as salmon, shellfish, crops, and marine mammals; declining sea 

ice in Alaska and its impacts on native communities; changes in community health 

and livelihood due to permafrost thawing; and forced relocation of indigenous communities in Alaska, Louisiana, and the Pacific Islands due to sea level rise, loss of 

sea ice, or permafrost thawing. 

Another significant effort is the development of the pending National Fish, Wildlife, and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy. NOAA co-led the development of the 

Strategy with the U.S. Department of Interior, Association of Fish and Wildlife 

Agencies, and tribal representatives. Development of this Strategy is a key step toward addressing climate impacts on the nation’s natural resources and the communities, cultures, and economies that depend on them, including tribal, indigenous, 

and native peoples. The Strategy will be the first nation-wide climate adaptation 

Strategy developed by federal, state, and Tribal governments to help safeguard the 

nation’s living natural resources and communities that depend on them. Over 90 

natural resource professionals, including tribal representatives, have contributed to 

the Strategy. In addition, and representatives of a number of tribal groups are active participants on the Steering Committee for the Strategy. 

NOAA Efforts to Assist Tribal, Indigenous, and Native Communities 

Vulnerability Assessment, Monitoring, and Warning 

NOAA’s National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS, created under 

Public Law 109–430) is developing a number of tools to examine drought and its 

impacts in various regions of the country. Tribal groups have been key players in 

helping to identify the impacts of drought as well as to make the tools useful to end 

users and are part of the NIDIS implementation team. Prototypes of the national 

early warning system have been undertaken in several parts of the country most 

affected by drought, including the Colorado River Basin and the Apalachicola—

Chattahoochee—Flint Basin of the Southeast. Two workshops and reports have been 

developed to specifically solicit the participation of native communities in the design 

of the system: Climate Change Drought and Early Warning on Western Native 

Lands in Wyoming in 2009, and Drought Preparedness for Tribes in the Four Corners Region in 2010. These have led to collaboration on drought impacts and monitoring in the Four Corners region. More recently, as a result of the agreement between the Western Governors’ Association and NOAA, NOAA is working with the 

Columbia River InterTribal Fisheries Commission and other Federal and state partners on climate information needs for salmon management. 

NOAA’s Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments (RISA) Program research 

has been directly involved in assisting tribes, and has carried out projects and research with tribal applications. One recent example involves the Climate Assessment for the Southwest (CLIMAS), which continually addresses tribal-related research, providing impact assessments, water management and policy recommendations, and data collection and drought monitoring support, working directly with 

NIDIS. In May 2009, CLIMAS, in affiliation with Arizona Cooperative Extension 

representatives, visited the Hopi Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to provide 

advisory and technical support to better understand, monitor, and record the extent 

and severity of drought conditions on Hopi lands. CLIMAS involvement with tribal 

members provides a framework for cross-agency and Tribal support. In Hawaii, the 

Pacific RISA program continues to play an advisory role in coastal issues affecting 

Tribes, while the RISA program in the Pacific Northwest, Climate Impacts Group 

(CIG), is involved with water quality and salmon fisheries tied to regional Tribes. 

NOAA’s Office of National Marine Sanctuaries has for the past several years been 

working with the four coastal treaty tribes on the Olympic Peninsula of Washington 

State in addition to mainland U.S. Indian Tribes, Alaska Natives, and Pacific Islanders to identify risks and vulnerabilities related to climate change. Results of 

these efforts show that climate change impacts are widespread. In the Pacific and 

the Gulf of Mexico, increased sea levels have caused salt water intrusion into drinking water aquifers of native peoples. In the Pacific Northwest, two tribes have asked 

to be moved to higher ground due to sea level rise and their increased vulnerability 

to tsunamis. Spring flooding caused by earlier snow melts have caused damage to 

fish and aquatic habitat, leading to loss of fertilized eggs and young salmon. 

With National Sea Grant support, Washington Sea Grant led a collaboration 

among the West Coast Sea Grant programs, NOAA West, the Moore Foundation, 

14

and the University of Washington’s Climate Impacts Group to develop an innovative 

framework for assessing vulnerability of fisheries to climate change. The effort culminated in a workshop attended by federal, state, and tribal fisheries management 

agencies and members of the fishing, non-profit, and academic communities. The 

project laid the groundwork for West Coast fisheries managers and industry leaders 

to develop a more complete understanding and plan for management of the fisheries’ 

vulnerability to climate change. NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 

is discussing its application to other U.S. and international fisheries, and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary is building on this approach to develop its Climate-Smart Sanctuary Action Plan. 

Climate Change Adaptation Planning 

NOAA’s NIDIS will be holding a workshop in October 2012 to engage with tribal 

communities on how to develop a tribal climate adaptation plan and develop contacts between tribal leaders and resource managers who have successfully developed 

and implemented adaptation plans or are interested in doing so in the future. In 

addition, the workshop aims to convey information about tribal climate adaptation 

needs to federal agencies, highlight climate, energy, and drought policies that are 

relevant to tribal adaptation needs, and clarify support available for tribal adaptation planning. 

With a grant from NOAA’s National Sea Grant Office, Alaska Sea Grant will help 

the community of Shaktoolik, AK decide whether or not to relocate farther from the 

coast in the face of increasing shoreline loss. Alaska Sea Grant is leading a community-driven project that will build on efforts by Shaktoolik and other at-risk communities, mainly Alaska Native villages on the Bering Sea coast, to adapt to potentially 

devastating effects of climate change. The project will result in a well-defined process that may be replicated by other at-risk communities in the region. A final report 

will document lessons learned, adaptation methods for Shaktoolik, potential funding 

sources, and a step-by-step action plan to implement the community’s decision. The 

primary objective is that Shaktoolik and its partners develop a final adaptation plan 

that identifies risks and responses to climate change. This adaptation plan will 

allow Shaktoolik to participate in the Alaska Climate Change Impact Mitigation 

Program and will be used by the State of Alaska in allocating financial and technical resources to implement the plan. 

Through a 2010 Climate Engagement Mini-Grant from NOAA’s National Sea 

Grant Office, Sea Grant supported a regional project to sponsor the Native Peoples 

and Native Homelands II Workshop to give NOAA and Sea Grant the opportunity 

to engage Native American, Alaskan and Hawaiian people on climate variability 

and impacts on tribal communities. 

On a broader note, NOAA was actively involved in preparing the UN Report 

‘‘Weathering Uncertainty: Traditional Knowledge for Climate Change’’ which was 

released earlier this year. 

Coordination and Collaboration 

NOAA has many management and statutory authorities that allows for the agency to interact with tribes in a number of ways, including addressing the impacts of 

climate change on fisheries, estuarine resources, and coastal communities throughout the country. These interactions range from formal consultation under treaty 

processes, executive order, and other interactions that support research, education, 

training, and resource protection through the National Estuarine Research Reserve 

System. A few examples of how NOAA is using its authorities to assist Tribes with 

climate change vulnerabilities are described below. 

On July 3, 2012, the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) announced it is accepting public comments on a proposed policy, ‘‘Tribal Consultation and Coordination 

Policy for the U.S. Department of Commerce,’’ establishing how DOC consults with 

federally-recognized Indian tribes on policies that have tribal implications. These 

consultations promote DOC’s mission in part by supporting strong and stable tribal 

economies able to participate in today’s national and global marketplace. The proposed policy responds to President Obama’s 2009 White House Memorandum and 

the 2000 Executive Order 13175 by reaffirming the unique government-to-government relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribal governments. 

The Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary and the Hoh, Makah, and 

Quileute tribes, the Quinault Indian Nation, the State of Washington, and NOAA’s 

Office of National Marine Sanctuaries created the Olympic Coast Intergovernmental 

Policy Council (IPC) in 2007. The first of its kind in the nation, the IPC provides 

a regional forum for resource managers to exchange information, coordinate policies, 

and develop recommendations for resource management for Washington State’s 

Olympic Coast. One of the key successes of this collaboration has been the developVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:50 Jan 30, 2013 Jkt 078095 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\78095.TXT JACK
15

ment of a national symposium focusing on climate change and impacts on indigenous people being held July 16–19, 2012 at the National Museum of the American 

Indian. NOAA also played a role in the National Museum’s meeting on ‘‘Conversations with the Earth: Indigenous Voices of Change’’ at the National Museum last 

year. 

Rhode Island Sea Grant worked with the state’s Coastal Resources Management 

Council and partners, including the Narragansett Indian Tribe, to develop and implement a coastal planning tool known as Special Area Management Plans 

(SAMPs). SAMPs are scientific ecosystem-based management plans that comprehensively review ecosystems, regulatory environments, and social structures, and propose guidance on regulations to be adopted by the state. After adoption and approval by NOAA, the SAMP becomes a part of the state’s coastal management program. On July 22, 2011, Rhode Island’s 7th SAMP became the largest ever, covering 

nearly 1,500 square miles. The SAMP incorporates extensive research and input 

from state, federal, tribal and local agencies that address healthy habitats, commercial and recreational fishing, cultural heritage, recreation and tourism, renewable 

offshore wind energy, and global climate change. 

Reducing Impacts Related to Coastal Development 

NOAA OCRM is currently coordinating with Pacific Northwest Tribes (primarily 

through the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC) to address tribal concerns with state and local decisionmaking related to coastal development and the 

ensuing environmental impacts that may affect water quality and salmon habitat. 

By addressing these activities through the local land use plans, environmental impacts may be avoided. Local government plans become part of Washington’s NOAAapproved CZMA program and Washington’s Coastal Nonpoint Source Pollution Program, and thus enforceable policies. 

NOAA, in cooperation with the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, is working with tribal environmental professionals in the Bristol Bay region of Alaska to 

understand ongoing and future impacts of climate change to community infrastructure. In early 2011, the cooperation resulted in a climate change short course, offered as a continuing education module through University of Alaska—Fairbanks 

Bristol Bay Campus. This training was a three-day intensive class, providing both 

background material on the biophysical and socioeconomic dimensions of climate 

change, and concluding with examples of adaptation planning approaches as well as 

exposure to how tribal environmental professionals can contribute through citizenscience to our understanding of climate change impacts in Alaska’s coastal zone. 

Managing Resources 

The largest dam removal in the Northeast began on July 2, 2012 in Maine. The 

removal of the Great Works dam will kick-off a larger effort that will improve access 

to 1,000 miles of river habitat on the Penobscot River, which is the traditional 

homeland of the Penobscot Indian Nation. This will open up the river to eleven species of migratory fish, such as endangered Atlantic salmon, sturgeon, and river herring. Estimates show that river herring, which once numbered roughly 14–20 million-but are now reduced to just a few thousand—could rebound to 4–6 million once 

the removals are complete. The removal of the Great Works Dam, which was partially funded by NOAA through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, will 

yield nearly $5 million in jobs for the region including engineering, hydrology, construction, science, and local contracting services. The project is part of collaboration 

between the Penobscot River Restoration Trust, NOAA and other federal and state 

agencies, the Penobscot Indian Nation, and seven conservation groups. 

The National Marine Protected Area Federal Advisory Committee (supported by 

NOAA’s National Marine Protected Area Center) has recommended a Cultural 

Landscape Approach to management in the National MPA System. This approach 

is analogous and complementary to ecosystem-based management, and will help 

MPA managers nationwide to identify and adopt policies and practices that manage 

cultural and natural resources in an integrated manner at the ecosystem and landscape level. The ecosystem-based management called for in the National Ocean Policy recognizes that the connections between living things and the physical environment are multifaceted and often inseparable. Managing places using an ecosystembased approach requires the simultaneous understanding of cultural and natural 

factors and resources. This approach can bring together all available knowledge of 

cultural heritage resources, including the incorporation of tribal and indigenous 

sources. A Cultural Landscape Approach can also integrate traditional knowledge 

of landscape-level changes with Western science to assess climate change impacts 

on natural, cultural and heritage resources, and contribute to developing appropriate adaptation strategies. 

16

Oregon’s South Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR) and the 

Coquille Indian Tribe hosted members of eight sovereign tribal nations from Oregon, 

Washington, and California at the South Coast Lamprey Summit held May 22–24, 

2012 in Charleston, Oregon. The objectives of the summit were threefold: (1) to 

share scientific information about the species through presentations and discussions; (2) to consider ways to share scientific information among a consortium of 

tribes, without raising privacy concerns for the data; and (3) to cement working relationships between tribes in the Coos Bay region and South Slough NERR. South 

Slough hosted scientific presentations with the aim of sharing information among 

tribal scientific programs and interested state and federal agencies about the status 

of efforts to conserve native species that are of particular importance to sovereign 

tribal nations in the Pacific Northwest, including Pacific Lamprey, California Condors, and marine and freshwater native shellfish species that live in Oregon waters. 

Education, Outreach, and Capacity Building 

Hawaii Sea Grant, the NOAA Integrated Data Environmental Applications 

(IDEA) Center, and the Joint Institute of Marine and Atmospheric Research provided funding to the Hawaiinuiakea School of Hawaiian Knowledge and Awaiaulu, 

a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization that is dedicated to the publication of scholarly 

texts in Hawaiian, to hire 6 graduate students with backgrounds in Hawaiian language training to translate selected articles on weather and climate from the Hawaiian Language Newspaper archive. Over 4,000 articles were identified and ranked 

on their relevance for containing weather and climate related information in the 

previous reporting period. 

NOAA, through the RISA Program, contributed curriculum regarding climate 

change scenarios and basic concepts regarding vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning to a day-long Climate Change Adaptation Planning training workshop 

organized by the Institute for Tribal Environmental Professionals (ITEP) and delivered concurrently with the 2011 meeting of the Alaska Council of Tribal Environmental Professionals. 

Conclusion 

Climate change impacts on the Federally-recognized tribes and other indigenous 

people within the United States and our Territories are already occurring. NOAA 

is working hard to help these indigenous communities understand the risks and 

vulnerabilities related to sea level rise, drought, and other factors. NOAA is also 

looking for different ways of knowing and practices to help the nation respond to 

a varying and changing environment. We have created numerous partnerships specifically with indigenous groups and are always looking for ways to establish meaningful discussions with additional communities. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear before you today. I look 

forward to answering any questions that you or the Committee may have.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Ms. Davidson. 

Now I would like to ask our Vice Chairman to provide his opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,

U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and 

thank you to all the witnesses for coming here today. Today’s hearing brings up some very important topics. 

I note that many of our witnesses today come from coastal areas 

of the Pacific northwest. They will describe what we have heard, 

the effects of erosion, flooding, and other environmental conditions 

on their coastal homelands. We will hear more. 

I understand and appreciate the challenges that all of these folks 

are facing, and know that they are looking for ways to adapt to environmental changes. 

We must not forget that Federal policies that are supposed to address environmental conditions almost always have other consequences. Some of these consequences can negatively affect people, 

negatively affect communities, and even entire regions. Those kinds 

17

of consequences deserve just as much attention and just as much 

scrutiny as any other of the consequences of Federal policy making. 

Mr. Chairman, one of our witnesses here today is Chairman Tex 

Hall of the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation in North Dakota. Tex 

will tell the Committee about some of the impacts that Federal policy has had in his homelands in North Dakota. Excessive regulation can and often does unduly burden the economy and interferes 

with economic growth. It can cost jobs. It can affect productivity. 

It can impact the standard of living of whole communities—Indian 

and non-Indian communities, alike. 

The Navajo generating station on the Navajo Indian Reservation 

in northern Arizona, Mr. Chairman, is another example. The EPA 

is considering requiring that this state be fitted with what they call 

the best available emission control technologies. It is debatable 

whether these requirements will have any improvement on the environment of the four corners region, but what is less debatable is 

the drastic and dramatic effect that too much regulation will have 

on the Navajo Nation. 

In a recent letter to the Washington Post an EPA official in 

Washington, D.C., wrote that these proposed regulations will actually, they say, create jobs. She said that the new regulations will 

require hiring workers to install the new pollution control equipment on the Navajo generation station. Mr. Chairman, her argument reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of how our economy 

works. What she fails to mention is that somebody actually has to 

pay for that equipment and the salaries of the people who will install it. It may cost the Navajo generating station more than $1 billion to implement the emission control technology. This cost will 

have to be absorbed by someone, probably ratepayers, the households, and the businesses within that service area. Someone always 

has to pay the costs from regulations. Always. 

Increased regulatory costs can impact the profitability or even 

the viability of these businesses that use this power. These costs 

impact their ability to provide a community with jobs. 

Just last December this Committee received testimony about how 

the EPA’s regulations might affect the Navajo power plant. That 

testimony spoke to how the proposed regulations could have very 

serious consequences for the Navajo Nation in terms of the employment of hundreds of Navajo citizens who work in the region’s 

power plants or the coal mine that serves them, and in terms of 

vital revenues used to run the Tribal government. 

Mr. Chairman, I understand environmental responsibility. I 

know how very important it is. We must be careful—we must know 

what our policies will do to people and their livelihoods. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator and our Vice 

Chairman. 

I would like to now call on the Senator from Alaska, Ms. Lisa 

Murkowski, for her opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI,

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the 

opportunity to hear today’s witnesses, to welcome them, and to 

18

hear their observations, their concerns about the impact of climate 

change on our Native communities. 

In my State of Alaska we see a changing climate, particularly in 

our coastal communities. I note on the map that has been passed 

out to each of us and is on the chart board up there, in the State 

of Alaska we highlight Shishmaref. Shishmaref is just but one 

coastal community that faces the threats of erosion. Erosion comes 

about because we see the sea ice receding further, the multi-year 

ice moving further from the shore, that allows for a level of buildup with the waves that batters our coastline and erodes the shore, 

putting some of our communities in threat and danger. Shishmaref 

is just one of many. 

We did a study some years ago to evaluate the threats, and unfortunately there are a significant number of small Native villages 

that are in threat, danger. How we act to provide for a level of reinforcement, adaptation to move, these are significant struggles for 

us because it is moving individuals from a place that they may 

have been for thousands of years, but also the cost is extraordinary. It is monumental and most daunting. 

I am pleased that the Committee will have an opportunity to 

hear from one of our leaders in the State on not only the issue of 

climate but in other issues, as well. Mike Williams will be joining 

the second panel. He is from Akiak, Alaska. He is a noted dog 

musher, an Iditarod veteran many times over, and he has passed 

that heritage down to his son, Mike Jr., who is an accomplished 

musher in his own right. It is good to be able to welcome Mike 

here. 

In addition, he has been a leader in the sobriety movement in 

the State of Alaska, an issue that, unfortunately, takes far too 

many of our fine young men and young women. 

I appreciate that he has traveled this far to speak to the Committee on an issue that, as Alaskans, we are all aware of our surroundings and remain concerned about how we address them—address them in a manner that meets the needs of the community 

but, again, does not put us in a situation where our economy falters because of the costs associated with them. 

So I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to better conversation here. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Murkowski. 

I would like to now ask Ms. Chase, you state that there is no 

designated lead Federal agency to provide a coordinated Federal 

and State risk response to climate change related impacts. Will you 

please describe some of the issues this creates? Would having a 

lead Federal agency lead to more efficiency? 

Ms. CHASE. Mr. Chairman, as my colleague from NOAA noted in 

her testimony, we, as Federal agencies involved in addressing the 

impacts of environmental changes, have a variety of different authorities. There are a number of different agencies involved in addressing these issues. So one of the challenges really is how we, as 

a Federal family, better coordinate and how we still fulfill our statutory obligations and responsibilities. So I think the burden is on 

us to continue to engage with each other and to continue to hear 

from the Tribes on ways that we can more effectively collaborate. 

19

I mentioned some work that is being done in Washington with 

the western Washington treaty Tribes between EPA, NOAA, 

USDA, and several other entities, including some State agencies. 

We have been looking very closely at this model, and assessing the 

work that is being done will help to inform how we as a Federal 

family can continue to step up our efforts with improved coordination in addressing the magnitude and multitude of Tribal issues 

that are before us. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Davidson, in your testimony you mention a 

wide array of services offered to Tribal nations by NOAA. My question to you: what is the best way for Tribes to become aware of and 

utilize these resources? 

Ms. DAVIDSON. I presume, Mr. Chairman, that you mean specifically the services and capabilities that NOAA provides. I do want 

to say that over the last three years all the agencies worked together to provide a draft interagency climate adaptation plan so 

that we better understood how we all fit together as an ecosystem 

of Federal capabilities to address impacts and strategies at the 

landscape level, which is where everything from the economy to our 

cultures is the most meaningful. 

Within the Department of Commerce, the Secretary of Commerce 

has recently appointed a senior advisor for Native American affairs. My colleague, Dee Alexander, is right here. She is the principal point within the whole of the Department of Commerce. And 

there are resources within Commerce beyond NOAA, as you are 

certainly aware. 

Commerce has drafted and is now apparently accepting public 

comment on a proposed Tribal consultation and coordination policy, 

and we do need your input on that. Of course, the purpose of that 

is to formalize a process that ensures that we are having the engagement with the Tribal communities and that folks in D.C. and 

beyond are also aware of proposed policies and actions that have 

Tribal implications. 

In addition, NOAA, itself, has over the last few years established 

two different kinds of individuals. We have established regional coordinators within each region that—well, it is kind of complex, because we have weather service regions and we have fishery regions, 

and they may not look exactly the same, but we have regional coordinators, one for Alaska, for instance, one for the Pacific islands, 

one for the west coast, just to name a few of seven. So these folks 

can help to access the range of NOAA services and capabilities. 

And then very specifically within each of those regions we have 

also, in the last year, identified someone to serve as a regional climate service coordinator so that you can access not just NOAA directly, but also those programs that we support with other Government entities and throughout the university communities, as well, 

sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Let me call on our Vice Chairman for questions he may have. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Chase, before issuing or implementing regulations, Federal 

agencies should consider the effects of such regulations on, among 

other things, the businesses that will be regulated. Implementation 

20

of the regulations can cause delays or perhaps even shut down energy development on Indian reservations. 

What kind of economic analysis does your agency conduct on the 

negative effects that regulations such as the proposed regional haze 

rule will have on Tribal businesses? 

Ms. CHASE. Mr. Vice Chairman, in order, I think, to provide you 

the thorough and comprehensive answer that you deserve to that 

question, what I would like to propose to do is to engage with my 

colleagues at the agency that are on the lead positions on this issue 

and provide the Committee with a thorough, comprehensive written answer. 

Senator BARRASSO. Yes or no. Do you do an economic analysis of 

negative effects of regulations on businesses? 

Ms. CHASE. I believe we do, but I cannot say with absolute certainty, which is, again, why I would like to confer with my colleagues in the appropriate media to provide you with a more informed and more comprehensive answer. 

Ms. CHASE. It certainly doesn’t sound like it is a big priority if 

you can’t even answer whether it is a yes or no with certainty, so 

it certainly is not a priority of the Administration or the EPA to 

show concern for the economic needs of the communities that are 

impacted by the regulations. 

Let me go on. Many of the natural resources on Indian reservations are held in trust by the United States for the benefit of either 

a Tribe or Tribal member. As we will hear in testimony later today, 

the Tribes are interested in developing their resources for cultural, 

traditional, and even financial purposes. How does your agency factor in the trust nature of these resources before implementing regulations that apply to how those resources can be developed? 

Ms. CHASE. We certainly have a long history of respecting the 

government-to-government relationship and the trust responsibility 

that the agency has, and certainly one of the most important exercises in engaging this relationship is in consultation with the 

Tribes. So we have engaged and we engage in extensive consultation with Tribes. We take the input of Tribes very seriously in the 

consideration and deliberation of our decisions. 

Senator BARRASSO. Ms. Davidson, the Committee has received 

testimony that Federal regulations purporting to address environmental changes or conservation in fact create more burdens for 

Tribal resource development. Burdens, not help, but burdens. 

Moreover, prior testimony has stated that the regulatory compliance would be so costly that resource development could be effectively stopped on some reservations. 

Do you think that a good approach for addressing risks or 

vulnerabilities to Tribal resources is to stop or to burden their development? 

Ms. DAVIDSON. I personally do not think that unduly burdening 

development is a good strategy for any community. I do think that, 

as indigenous people would have us do, we should consider our relationship to the landscape and how we can maintain those assets 

and derive, if you will, the interest from them into the future. So 

I would take almost a banking approach to this issue. 

Senator BARRASSO. Your written testimony states that NOAA 

has been collaborating with Native communities, including Tribes 

21

in my home State of Wyoming, in designing what you called an 

early warning system for upcoming drought. You mentioned that. 

Your testimony also mentioned that this system has already been 

undertaken in several parts of the Country. Could you talk about 

how that works and what successes you have had? 

Ms. DAVIDSON. Certainly. The original prototype was developed 

for the upper Colorado River basin at the specific direction and 

support of the Western Governors Association because, as you may 

know, the Colorado River feeds a lot of real estate from its headwaters to the sewer ditch down near Los Angeles, so it is a problem 

throughout the whole of the watershed. We began in the upper watershed, and that does, of course, require that we consult with local 

communities and governments, the idea being that drought is a 

natural phenomena. A steep and deep drought, however, imposes 

a whole range of complex decisions about planting of specific crops. 

Are they crops that are drought resistant, particularly forage crops. 

As you know, in your State there is a fair amount of livestock. You 

have to be concerned both about the plants’ response to drought, 

as well as the livestock response to drought. 

So these kinds of early warnings of continuing drought allows 

particularly farmers and other communities to make some choices 

based upon the best knowledge that they have, which often proves 

to be better than just continuing to do what they had been doing. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My time has expired. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Vice Chairman Barrasso. 

Let me now ask our Senator from Alaska for any questions she 

may have. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Chase, Senator Barrasso has brought up the issue of Tribal 

consultation. Last year the administrator announced the release of 

the EPA policy on consultation and coordination with the Indian 

Tribes. In Alaska we have got about 40 percent of all federally-recognized Tribes, and then, pursuant to AKNSA, our land claim settlement, the resources are managed by our Alaska Native corporations. 

Can you tell me what your agency has done to implement the 

EPA’s policy in Alaska? What future plans might be underway for 

further coordination with the Alaska Tribes? 

Ms. CHASE. Certainly. Actually, Senator, I have actually had the 

good privilege of maybe five times now in just over a year as the 

director of the American Indian Environmental Office, been to 

Alaska and engaged directly with the Tribes on a variety of issues, 

including the very important general assistance program that is 

utilized by Tribes in Alaska to build capacity. 

So we take very seriously our commitment to Tribal consultation. 

We have a very broad standard, which is what may affect Tribal 

governments. And we certain comply with the Executive Order, as 

well, in recognition of the Alaska Native corporations. 

So I have very much enjoyed my opportunities to engage with the 

Tribes there. I think we have a very open and productive relationship. The consultations that we have conducted, whether it be myself or the regional administrator, Mr. McClaron, or other officials 

in the agencies, we continue to receive positive feedback from the 

22

Tribes that we are doing a good job and we are addressing the concerns of the Tribes in Alaska. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I appreciate the outreach that you have 

made personally to go to Alaska. I do think that is important. I 

have raised the issue of consultation and the failure within certain 

agencies to fulfill that obligation pursuant to the Executive orders 

that have been issued. I think you talk to anybody up north and 

they would say that, well, consultation is required. Unfortunately, 

they are not seeing enough of it. So I would encourage you to make 

sure that when we talk about consultation, not only in your area 

but as you have an opportunity to speak with others, that we are 

not dropping the ball there. 

Ms. CHASE. Absolutely. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I want to ask about the consultation then 

with our Alaska Native corporations. Within OMB it states that 

Alaska Native corporations should be consulted with on the same 

basis as Indian Tribes pursuant to Executive order. You have got 

a draft policy out of the Department of Interior that provides that 

Federal agencies are required to consult and coordinate with the 

Tribes. 

Again, because the land resources are managed by our ANCs, I 

think it is important that our Native corporations be apprised of 

EPA decisions, the actions that could impact the Native corporation 

interests. So I would ask if you could tell the Committee whether 

or not EPA has included the Alaska Native corporations within the 

consultations that you have conducted and what the plans are. 

Ms. CHASE. With respect to the consultations that I have personally been involved in, they have been directly with the Tribal governmental entities. I believe certainly that the agency has taken 

every step to fulfill its obligations under the Executive order, and 

beyond what is required by the Executive order. I would be happy 

to go back again and confer with my colleagues, ask across the 

agency and within the region if there have been some specific consultations that have involved the Alaska Native corporations. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Again, I would just cite you to the Department of Interior and the draft policy on consultation that they have 

advanced. Again, when you have the resources, the land resources 

that are managed by the ANCs, I think it is important that, 

through every step of the process, all those that are involved have 

an opportunity to weigh in as part of that consultation process. 

Another question for you, and then I have one quick one for Ms. 

Davidson. This relates to the EPA’s decision on the draft watershed 

assessment of Bristol Bay. I had asked the Administrator for additional time for comment on that decision. She decided not to extend 

it beyond July the 23rd. It is a somewhat arbitrary deadline. It is 

not anybody’s deadline other than within EPA. As most who know 

Alaska, this is the time of year, certainly within Bristol Bay, that 

everybody is out fishing. 

Ms. CHASE. Sure. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. And so my concern was that there not be 

a full opportunity for Alaskans and particularly those out in the affected region to weigh in. I have heard from many Alaska Tribes 

and Tribal organizations that the amount of time given for public 

comment was inadequate. The Administrator has ruled on this, but 

23

I would ask whether or not you can inform the Committee what 

specific steps the EPA has taken in consultation with the Tribes 

and the ANCs to make sure that they really did have adequate 

time to review a pretty substantive draft there before the public 

comment period closes on the 23rd. 

Ms. CHASE. Sure. Obviously, this is a very significant undertaking. The assessment has been one that the agency has taken 

very seriously. There have certainly been a number of consultations 

that have taken place. 

I personally have not been involved in those consultations, and 

I can appreciate that there has been a significant amount of consideration in the agency to ensure that there is ample time for the 

Tribes to engage in the consultation process. 

I would be happy to, again, confer with the lead on the Bristol 

Bay issues, work more closely with our region, and provide you 

with a more thorough answer after I confer with our colleagues. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Well, I would appreciate a response. Our 

dilemma here is that July 23rd is just around the corner. 

Ms. CHASE. Just around the corner. Absolutely. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Again, a lot of folks are still out fishing. So 

what I am interested in learning is whether or not there was truly 

that consultation with our Tribes and some of the ANCs to ensure 

that they really did have adequate time. So if you could help me 

out on this I would appreciate it. 

Ms. CHASE. Sure. I would be happy to help you out. 

Senator, let me just again underscore the importance that the 

agency, EPA, places on the consultation with Tribes. This is a fundamental tenet of the government-to-government relationship. It is 

a critical factor in our relationship with the Tribes, and we take 

very seriously the implementation of that policy and every step 

that we can take to ensure full participation by the Tribes is something that we will continue to aggressively pursue. So I will look 

forward to getting back to you and providing you an answer in a 

timely way. I realize that the time is just around the corner. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My time is expired. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Murkowski. 

I would like to thank our first panel. 

Do you have any further questions for this panel? 

Senator BARRASSO. Just briefly, Mr. Chairman. 

With regard to this early warning system for upcoming drought, 

I think I would like to submit some questions in writing. I understand how early warning systems work for flash floods like we had 

here in Washington yesterday, and how early warning systems 

work for things like tornadoes and hurricanes. It sounds like if 

they are seeing already drying crops, that is maybe not an early 

warning system, so I am going to have some additional written 

questions to see if actually there is some value in this or if actually 

this is just another episode of taxpayer money being wasted on 

projects of limited value. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will submit those questions in writing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. We will submit questions. I have further questions, also. 

24

Thank you very much for being here and telling us some of your 

programs. 

Ms. CHASE. Thank you. 

Ms. DAVIDSON. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. That will certainly help the Tribes and the indigenous people in our country. 

Thank you. 

Ms. CHASE. Thank you. Mahalo. 

The CHAIRMAN. Now I would like to invite the second panel to 

the witness table. 

Serving on our second panel will be The Honorable Mike Williams, Chief of the Yupiit Nation in Akiak, Alaska. It is good to see 

you again, Mike. 

And The Honorable Tex ‘‘Red Tipped Arrow’‘ Hall, Chairman of 

the Mandan, Hidatsa & Arikara Nation in New Town, North Dakota. It is good to see you, Tex. Good working with you over these 

years, too. 

Mr. HALL. Absolutely. 

The CHAIRMAN. Also The Honorable Thomas Dardar, Jr., Principal Chief of the United Houma Nation in Golden Meadow, Louisiana. Welcome. Good to have you hear. 

Mr. Billy Frank Jr., Chairman of the Northwest Indian Fisheries 

Commission in Olympia, Washington. Good to see you, Billy. 

Mr. FRANK. Good morning. 

The CHAIRMAN. And Malia Akutagawa, assistant professor of law 

at the University of Hawaii at Manoa in Honolulu, Hawaii. Good 

to have you here, Malia. 

I want to welcome all of you, our panelists. Please proceed with 

your testimony. 

I would like to call first on Chairman Williams to proceed with 

his testimony. 

Chairman Williams? 

STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE WILLIAMS, CHIEF, YUPIIT NATION 

Mr. WILLIAMS. My name is Mike Williams. I am a Yupiaq from 

the small village of Akiak, Alaska, located in western Alaska. Currently I am the Chief of the Yupiit Nation, a Consortium of federally-recognized Tribes in the Kuskokwim River, and also the secretary-treasurer of the Akiak Native Community, a federally-recognized Tribe. 

Climate change is having substantial and adverse impact on 

Alaska’s indigenous peoples. Our temperatures are increasing, our 

ice is melting, our animals are becoming diseased and dislocated, 

our oceans are acidifying, our sea levels are rising, and our villages 

are sinking. These impacts are affecting our daily existence and 

every other facet of life, such as traditional and customary hunting 

and fishing and gathering practices, travel, and consequently viable 

future for our homelands. 

Our elders, in particular, are deeply concerned about what they 

are witnessing. In Alaska, unpredictable weather and ice conditions 

make travel and time-honored subsistence practices hazardous, endangering our lives. Coastal impacts, sea level rise, greater storms, 

storm surges, flooding, and erosion, all tied to climate change, are 

endangering my people, the Yupiaq and Cupiaqs. 

25

Alaska’s indigenous villages are literally being swept away into 

the sea because of coastal erosion. According to the U.S. Corps of 

Engineers, at least three Tribes—Shishmaref, Kivalina, and 

Newtok—must relocate, while over 180 other communities are also 

at risk. 

Two reports prepared for Congressional requesters by the U.S. 

Government Accountability Office indicate that 86 percent of Alaska indigenous villages are threatened by erosion and flooding due 

to warming temperatures. Yet, Alaska’s indigenous villages cannot 

access some Federal program assistance due to prohibitive funding 

criteria. There are no over-arching Federal plans or lead agencies 

to address the fact that many of the residents of these villages are 

becoming climate change refugees. 

Everything is changing so quickly. Lakes are drying. New insects 

are appearing. Permafrost is melting. Berries are disappearing. 

Storms are fiercer. Animal populations are changing. Our fish are 

spawning on drying racks. And polar bears are drowning. Our ice 

is so much thinner that it is entirely gone in some areas. And our 

coastlines are eroding, washing away ancient artifacts, gravesites, 

as well as modern infrastructure. 

Those are the coastal impacts. Inland impacts are, in the summer of 2009 the interior of Alaska had the driest July in 104 years. 

And 2.9 million acres of forest burned, and the salmon runs are the 

weakest in memory. Just this summer some started to fish even 

during the closed subsistence fishing due to the need for survival. 

A warming climate contributes to increased forest fires, devastating millions of acres of forests. Many lakes and ponds on the 

tundra are rapidly drying up as a result of warmer temperatures. 

Melting of permafrost compounds climate change by releasing additional CO2 and methane into the air. A loss of permafrost also reduces habitat and increases energetic demands on migrating wildlife. 

Warming events have altered the route and time migration for 

the porcupine caribou herd, thereby impacting the subsistence lifestyle of such peoples as the Gwich’in Athabascan. The forage habitat of caribou is shrinking with increased forest fires and shifting 

tundra. The increased frequency of freezing rain due to rising temperatures has resulted in crust covering lichen, which has diminished the caribou’s ability to forage for their primary food source. 

With respect to adaptation, communities like Newtok, Alaska, 

have already taken action to move from dangerous sites to higher 

ground. It is important for Congress to recognize that the adaptation needs are very great. We require planning assistance, Federal 

coordination, and significant financial resources to execute these 

crucial relocations and to fund other adaptation needs. In all instances, it is important that our traditional knowledge be incorporated and respected, that they be consulted, that we be consulted, and that our values needs to be honored. 

Alaska’s indigenous villages and Indian Tribes as a whole have 

borne the disproportionate and negative impacts of climate change. 

I implore you to consider the circumstances unique to our villages 

by mandating climate change legislation, that Federal agencies 

help develop, fund, and implement a strategic plan that addresses 

the climate change impact on our villages and Tribal communities. 

26

In conclusion, I would like to share my own personal experience 

with climate change and its impact on one of my great loves. We 

have used dogs for transaction for thousands of years. Since 1992, 

I have had the good fortune of participating in the Iditarod, widely 

referred to as the last great race on earth. As a participant, I have 

seen the race change in a number of ways; notably, the lack of 

snow covering in recent years. On one occasion the race was moved 

to Fairbanks. It has been permanently moved to Willow from more 

southerly Wasilla. Since the days are now too warm, we have to 

run mostly at night to keep our dogs cool, and myself. 

There is much at stake. I implore you to take meaningful action 

to address climate change and resource development now to help 

assure that the traditions of Alaska’s indigenous people and American Indian Tribes, which have withstood the test of time, continue 

for generations into the future. 

Quyana. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Williams follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE WILLIAMS, CHIEF, YUPIIT NATION

My name is Mike Williams. I am a Yupiaq from a small village of Akiak, Alaska, 

located in western Alaska on the Kuskokwim River. Currently, I am the Chief of 

the Yupiit Nation, a consortium of Federally Recognized Tribes and Secretary/Treasurer of the Akiak Native Community, a Federally Recognized Tribe. I also serve on 

the National Tribal Environmental Council. 

Climate change is having substantial and adverse impacts on our Alaska Indigenous Peoples. Our temperatures are increasing, our ice is melting, our animals are 

becoming diseased and dislocated, our oceans are acidifying, our sea levels are rising, and our villages are sinking. These impacts are affecting our daily existences 

and every other facet of life, such as traditional and customary hunting and fishing, 

and gathering practices, travel, and consequently a viable future for our homelands. 

Our elders, in particular, are deeply concerned about what they are witnessing. In 

Alaska, unpredictable weather and ice conditions make travel and time-honored 

subsistence practices hazardous, endangering our lives. 

Coastal Impacts 

Sea level rise, greater storms, storm surges, flooding, and erosion—all tied to climate change—are endangering my People, the Yupiaq/Cupiaqs. Alaska’s Indigenous 

villages are literally being swept away into the sea because of coastal erosion. According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, at least three tribes—Shishmaref, 

Kivalina, and Newtok—must relocate, while over 180 other communities are also at 

risk. 

Two reports prepared for congressional requesters by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), indicate that 86 percent of Alaska Indigenous villages are 

threatened by erosion and flooding due to warming temperatures. Yet, Alaska’s Indigenous villages cannot access some federal program assistance due to prohibitive 

funding criteria. There are no overarching federal plans or lead agency to address 

the fact that many of the residents of these villages are becoming climate change 

refugees. 

Everything is changing so quickly. Lakes are drying; new insects are appearing; 

permafrost is melting; berries are disappearing; storms are fiercer; animal populations are changing; our fish are spoiling on drying racks; and polar bears are 

drowning. Our ice is so much thinner or entirely gone. And our coastlines are eroding, washing away ancient artifacts, gravesites, as well as modern infrastructure. 

Inland Impacts 

In the summer of 2009, the interior of Alaska had the driest July in 104 years. 

2.9 million acres of forest burned and the salmon runs are the weakest in recent 

memory. Just this summer, some started to fish even during the closed subsistence 

fishing due to the need for survival. A warming climate contributes to increase forest fires and devastating millions of acres of forests. Many lakes and ponds on the 

tundra are rapidly drying up as a result of warmer temperatures. Melting of permafrost compounds climate change by further releasing additional CO2 and methane 

into the air. The loss of permafrost also reduces habitat and increases energetic deVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:50 Jan 30, 2013 Jkt 078095 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\78095.TXT JACK
27

mands on migrating wildlife. Warming events have altered the route and time of 

migration for the Porcupine Caribou Herd, thereby impacting the subsistence lifestyle of such peoples as the Gwich’in Athabascan. The forage habitat of caribou is 

shrinking with increased forest fires and shifting tundra. The increased frequency 

of freezing rain due to rising temperatures has resulted in a crust covering lichen, 

which has diminished the caribou’s ability to forage for their primary food source. 

Larger Patterns 

Throughout the nation in Indian Country, traditional foods are declining, local 

landscapes are changing, rural infrastructure is being challenged, soils are drying, 

and lake and river levels are declining. Tribes are experiencing droughts, loss of forests, fishery problems, and increased health risks from heat strokes and from diseases that thrive in warmer temperatures. If climate change is not addressed, the 

impacts on Alaska Indigenous Peoples and American Indians will be immense. Models and the best scientific data and traditional knowledge indicate that if we don 

not reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the entire Arctic ice cap will melt, endangering the culture and subsistence needs of the Indigenous Peoples of the North. 

Furthermore, flooding, sea level rise, storm surges, and greater storms will endanger my people, the Yupiaqs, as well as tribes in Florida and elsewhere. Hotter temperatures threaten American Indians, but especially in the southwest and Florida, 

where we often do not have adequate means of escaping the heat. Increased global 

warming will also endanger salmon in the Pacific Northwest, which are crucial to 

tribes there, as well as Alaska. Finally, on almost all tribal lands, enhanced global 

warming will threaten our sacred waters, essential to our physical and cultural survival. Clearly, climate change presents one of the greatest threats to our future, and 

must be addressed by Congress as soon as possible. 

Low Carbon Opportunities and Initiatives 

There are many economic opportunities for Alaska’s Indigenous Peoples and 

American Indians in a low-carbon future, especially renewable energy. Tribes offer 

some of the greatest resources for helping the nation with renewable energy development, particularly wind, solar power, biomass, and geothermal power. 

In Alaska, for example, we are installing wind power in very remote communities 

that has also been installed on Indian reservations. Some of the small villages are 

assessing biomass facilities using forestry waste. Some are analyzing geothermal 

power plants. They are installing systems in the southwest for solar power. 

To achieve Indian Country’s and Alaska’s renewable energy potential, however, 

we need investment capital, infrastructure, and technical capacity. Any renewable 

energy program must include opportunities and incentive for tribes. Also, with 

training, American Indian and Alaska Indigenous youth and adults can be actively 

engaged in renewable energy jobs, from engineering, to manufacturing, to installation. There are also economic opportunities associated with energy conservation. We 

would welcome tribal based initiatives to better insulate our homes, to convert our 

lighting, and to educate our members regarding energy efficiency practices. We want 

jobs that save us money and reduce our carbon footprint. In general, we believe that 

a low-carbon economy will provide multiple local benefits by decreasing air pollution, creating jobs, reducing energy use, and saving money. 

Actions Needed 

In recognition of tremendously serious impacts that global warming poses to 

American Indians, Alaska Indigenous Peoples, our most important organizations 

have passed resolutions outlining problems, threats, and needed actions by Congress. These organizations and tribal governments are Akiak Native Community, 

Alaska Federation of Natives, Rural Community Action Program, the National Congress of American Indians, and various non-profits and native corporations. 

With respect to adaptation, communities like Newtok, Alaska are already taking 

action to move from dangerous sites to higher ground. It is important for Congress 

to recognize that the adaptation needs are very great. We require planning assistance, federal coordination, and significant financial resources to execute these crucial relocations and to fund other adaptation needs. In all instances, it is important 

that our traditional knowledge be incorporated and respected, that we be consulted, 

and that our values and needs be honored. Alaska’s Indigenous villages and Indian 

Tribes as a whole have borne the disproportionate and negative impacts of climate 

change. I implore you to consider the circumstances unique to our villages by mandating climate change legislation that federal agencies develop, fund, and implement a strategic plan that addresses the climate change impacts on our villages and 

tribal communities. 

The plan could need to be developed in consultation with Alaska’s Federally Recognized Tribes with our free, prior, and informed consent and include the 

28

prioritization and coordination of assistance to our villages; the permanent relocation of qualified Alaska Indigenous villages in a manner that obtains our free, prior, 

and informed consent in the planning and implementation of such relocations (and 

removal of barriers for accessing federal funds for such efforts), and also include the 

mitigation of climate change impacts upon the traditional and subsistence practices 

of Alaska Indigenous Peoples. 

In addition, Alaska Indigenous villages should be provided with adequate apportionment of the allowances made available for domestic adaptation purposes, if any. 

Conclusion 

Alaska’s 231 Federally Recognized Tribes are being seriously threatened by climate change and it impacts. It is therefore imperative that Congress take action to 

protect the nation’s many tribal communities against such impacts and help protect 

and preserve our lands, cultures, and our existence for the current generations and 

those to come. Many non-renewable resources development projects will also impact 

our languages, cultures, health impacts, housing, and our ancestral lands, waters, 

and air. We must be at the table to have meaningful input before development occurs. In conclusion, I’d like to share my own personal experience with climate change 

and its impact on one of my great loves. We have used dogs for transportation for 

thousands of years. Since 1992, I have had the good fortune of participating in the 

Iditarod, widely referred to as the ‘‘Last Great Race on Earth.’’ As a participant, I 

have seen the race change in number of ways, most notably the lack of snow cover 

in recent years. On one occasion, the race was moved to Fairbanks. It has been permanently moved to Willow from the more southerly Wasilla. Since the days are now 

too warm, we have to run mostly at night now to keep dogs cool. 

There is much at stake. I implore you to take meaningful action to address climate change and resource development now and to help assure that the traditions 

of Alaska Indigenous Peoples and American Indian Tribes, which have withstood 

the test of time, continue for generations into the future. 

Quyana.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Chief Williams. 

Chairman Hall, will you please proceed with your testimony? 

STATEMENT OF HON. TEX ‘‘RED TIPPED ARROW’’ HALL, 

CHAIRMAN, MANDAN, HIDASTA AND ARIKARA NATION 

Mr. HALL. Thank you, Chairman Akaka, Senator Murkowski, 

Senator Cantwell. I want to have Rollie pass out a picture. They 

say a picture is worth a thousand words. 

One of the first things I am going to talk about is the impacts 

of the Garrison Dam hydroelectrical dam. This is our Tribal chairman in 1948. He is crying due to the forced flooding and destruction of 156,000 acres of lands of our homelands. So we hang this 

in our Tribal chambers today so our young council members never 

forget the impacts of what happened to us. 

I appreciate this hearing today on the impacts of environmental 

changes on our treaty rights, our traditional lifestyles, and Tribal 

homelands. My testimony is focused on impacts of these changes to 

our homelands. 

The impacts of climate change and environmental impacts on 

Native peoples are a serious and growing issue. It is an issue that 

I believe Congress and this Nation needs to address. One of the 

most important things we can do today to address climate changes 

is to listen to Native people, Native leaders, listen to our elders, 

and learn how Tribal management practices sustained these lands 

for thousands of years before our Federal agencies attempted to do 

so. 

We need the Federal Government to work in partnership with 

Indian Tribes and Indian nations to restore full Tribal authority 

over our lands. If we had full Tribal authority, this picture would 

29

have never happened. We had Tribal resolutions opposing this 

dam. There were studies that said that the dam should have been 

higher up, closer to Williston, which is northwest of us, yet the 

Army Corps of Engineers and our elders—they renamed that agency the Army Whore of Engineers—did not listen, and instead destroyed all this 156,000 acres. So that is why my number one recommendation is to restore Tribal authority. It has to happen. This 

is an era of self-determination. This is not an era of Federal agencies like the Army Corps tell us this is what we are going to do, 

and if you don’t accept this we are going to condemn your land, so 

here is ten cents on the dollar. It divided our people right down the 

middle. 

My family was part of the no bunch. They didn’t believe the Government and they didn’t trust the Government, and a portion of 

our people said we’d better take what we can, and so they did, and 

we received a clinic like 60 years later, a 20 million clinic, and it 

flooded our hospital. So we know full well as the Mandan, Hidatsa, 

and Arikara the impacts of a Federal agency decision to wipe you 

out, to flood you out. We know that. 

Again, we need to restore full Tribal authority so that we can 

protect our homelands from further environmental impacts, and 

also so that we can provide leadership to the Nation on these 

issues of climate change. 

I want to make sure I spend some time on the oil and gas issues. 

I think one of the second important reason or issue the Federal 

Government can do is to stop treating Indian lands as public lands. 

So when we are talking about oil and gas today on Fort Berthold, 

EPA will issue an air quality minor source rule, and we will get 

it. We received it August 31, 2011. No time to actually really provide our comments that hey, maybe we want to have our own rule. 

The Bureau of Land Management is now in a hydro fracking rule, 

and again we as a Tribe never had full consultation until I asked 

for it to come to Fort Berthold. They wanted me to go to Farmington. They wanted me to go to Oklahoma. They wanted me to go 

to Billings. I said the Bakken oil formation is not in New Mexico, 

Oklahoma, or Montana; it is in North Dakota. You need to come 

to Fort Berthold. 

I was also shocked that many of the people at BLM had actually 

never saw hydro fracking actually occurring on an oil well, so I said 

July 12th I am going to actually host on an oil rig a hydro fracking 

tour, because people who are making rules need to at least see and 

witness first-hand an actual hydro fracking on an oil rig. And the 

depths of these are 10,000 feet. These are deep oil wells, deep 

depths. And our water aquifer is, like, 2,000 feet. So this is 8,000 

feet below. 

So I asked the BLM, I said, what if our Tribe wants to put our 

own hydro fracking rule that meets or exceeds yours? EPA doesn’t 

regulate North Dakota. North Dakota is treated as its own State. 

I said the Tribes are not treated as their own separate sovereign. 

You need to allow our Tribe—because this is our homelands. The 

State has no jurisdiction there. Needs to be treated the same, and 

give us that ability, give us that right. And the Blackfeet Nation 

in Montana has its own hydro fracking rule. Our Tribe passed its 

own environmental code. It is a $1 million offense if any oil comVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:50 Jan 30, 2013 Jkt 078095 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\78095.TXT JACK
30

pany dumps on our reservation. No Federal agency gives that to 

us. Nobody helped draft it. We did it on our own to protect our own 

homelands because we live there. 

So I find it kind of odd that Federal agencies will tell us, well, 

we are trying to protect you. Well, if you are trying to protect us, 

why didn’t you do that in the first place? But they didn’t. 

And one of the reasons BLM and EPA will say this rule applies 

to you is because you are part of the public lands. I said, We are 

a treaty Tribe. We have never consented to be treated as public 

lands. Where did you get your authority? And the answer will be 

either FLPMA, which is the Federal Land Policy Management Act 

of 1976, or they will say it is the 1938 Indian Mineral Lease and 

Oil and Gas Leasing Act. 

Well, we haven’t found that authority in any one of those two 

pieces of legislation, so I have asked BLM to answer that question. 

Just answer the question. Don’t tell us how many times you have 

consulted with us, because you haven’t. Simply answer the question of where do you get your authority to treat us as public lands. 

That is why my testimony is like let’s go back to providing that 

Tribal authority so Tribes can do its own regulation, its own energy 

codes, its own rules, and protect our own environment, because we 

know full well what happened to us. 

That is where I will close, Mr. Chairman. We know. We lived it. 

We have seen what Federal policies that we had opposing Tribal 

resolutions didn’t matter and divided our people. So this is like 60 

years later. This is a new era. We need to go in and finally have 

full taxation authority. Governments don’t tax governments, and 

we have to share disproportionately a bigger percentage of our oil 

and gas proceeds to the State of North Dakota, which is not fair. 

They have received about $180 million and we received about $90 

million. That is not a fair tax agreement. 

But we didn’t want to impose our own 11.5 percent oil and gas 

production and extraction tax. If we did, that would be a 23 percent 

tax. There is no oil company that is going to come out. So we are 

protecting our oil and gas development so we can have an economy 

that will not be destroyed. We had an agricultural economy in 1948 

and it was destroyed on us. So that is why we are protective of this 

economy, this oil and gas economy, so it is not destroyed. 

So we are going to be at the forefront, but we need help from the 

Committee, legislation from the Committee to provide Tribes to be 

not treated as public lands like our treaty said, but to be treated 

as Tribal and Indian lands, and so these rules do not apply for us. 

And if Tribes want a Federal rule, then fine. I am just saying if 

Tribes do not want a Federal rule and you have your own rules 

then those should be allowed to opt out of the federal rule if Tribal 

rules meet or exceed federal rules. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. TEX ‘‘RED TIPPED ARROW’’ HALL, CHAIRMAN, 

MANDAN, HIDASTA AND ARIKARA NATION

Introduction 

Good afternoon Chairman Akaka, Vice Chairman Barrasso and members of the 

Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. My name is Tex Hall, or Ihbudah Hishi, which 

31

means ‘‘Red Tipped Arrow.’’ I am the Chairman of the Mandan, Hidatsa and 

Arikara Nation of the Fort Berthold Reservation (MHA Nation). I appreciate the opportunity to present this testimony and I hope that the Committee will take legislative action in response to the testimony presented today. 

Environmental changes have had a tremendous impact on our treaty rights, traditional lifestyles and tribal homelands. The most significant and disastrous environmental changes we face have been at the hands of the Federal government treating 

our lands as public lands. First, the Federal government flooded our most valuable 

homelands and economic resources for the public purposes of navigation, irrigation 

and flood control on the Missouri River. Then, the Federal government expanded its 

authority over our lands, displacing tribal authority and, in some significant cases, 

applying public lands policy to Indian lands. 

Despite these actions, we all know that Indian lands are not public lands. Fort 

Berthold Reservation lands are not public lands. Our lands were set aside by treaty 

for the use and benefit of the MHA Nation. Our treaties intended that we would 

manage our lands and use our resources for the benefit of our communities as we 

see fit. Outside Environmental groups or other members of the public have no right 

to dictate or influence how we develop our land or our resources. Unfortunately, the 

Federal government often violates this basic principle. Whether flooding our lands 

for public purposes or imposing public lands policy, the Federal Government caused 

disastrous environmental changes and displaced traditional tribal authority for 

managing our lands. We need greater protection from these environmental changes 

and we need to restore tribal authority so that we can adapt to the ongoing environmental impacts we face. 

Congress and this Committee must do more to support us in this effort. We have 

long been living in the era of self-determination, yet Federal actions, laws and policies continue to unnecessarily intrude on tribal governments or limit our ability to 

utilize our resources. We need this Committee to lead Congress and propose legislation that will prevent our lands and resources from being treated as public lands 

and will promote returning authority over our lands to our tribal government. Only 

with these protections and authorities will we be able to adapt to the environmental 

changes we face and be able to manage our resources to sustain our rights, lifestyles 

and homelands. 

Impacts from Environmental Changes 

Little more than a generation ago, in the 1950’s, the MHA Nation’s most abundant and fertile resources were flooded by the massive Garrison Dam, one of a number of dams constructed as a part of the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Project. 

Originally authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1944, Pub. L. No. 78–534, § 9, 58 

Stat. 891 (1944), the Pick-Sloan Project was intended to fulfill national public purposes of flood control, navigation and irrigation. However, from the MHA Nation’s 

perspective the Project was an appropriation of Indian lands and resources for public purposes. 

The MHA Nation was pressured and steam-rolled into signing away our prime 

river bottom lands in the 1940s to make way for Garrison Dam. Other sites were 

available to construct the Dam, but the site that would flood the most Indian lands 

and have the least impact on non-Indian towns was selected. Even with tribal resolutions opposing the Dam, by May of 1948, MHA Nation Chairman George Gillette 

had little choice but to travel to Washington, D.C. to sign the final agreement with 

the Department of Interior. A photograph of that event shows Chairman Gillette 

weeping as Interior Department officials sign away our trust lands to be flooded for 

public purposes by Garrison Dam’s giant reservoir, Lake Sakakawea. Chairman Gillette said, ‘‘Right now, the future does not look too good for us.’’ I have attached 

to my testimony an article from a North Dakota historical foundation that describes 

those events and that includes this photograph. 

As a result of this Project and its public purposes, the MHA Nation’s land and 

most of our social and economic resources were devastated. The Garrison Dam flooded more than 156,000 acres of our Reservation. It flooded much of our prime agricultural lands, 84 percent of our roads network, more than 400 homes, our Hospital, 

schools and churches, and 90 percent of our tribal membership was forced to relocate to higher ground. The Dam also flooded forests and wildlife that MHA Nation 

members harvested. 

The Missouri River and its rich bottom lands provided infrastructure and an economy that sustained us. These days, the Missouri riverbed is used to produce 

hydroelectricity, the water is used by municipalities and for irrigating the Great 

Plains, commerce travels up and down the river, and flat water recreation is provided. Promises were made that the MHA Nation would also receive many new benefits with the construction of this Project, but these promises have not been fulfilled. 

32

Compensation provided to the MHA Nation was far too little to make up for what 

was lost and did not compensate us for the use of our lands to provide hydroelectric 

power and navigation. In addition, projects to make the MHA Nation whole were 

promised but not fulfilled, including: irrigation and drinking water systems, preferential electric power, financial assistance for reservation farms, development of 

recreational shoreline opportunities, and replacement of infrastructure that was 

flooded. These promises remain unfulfilled and the new economy brought by Garrison Dam provides little benefit to the members of the MHA Nation, yet we live daily 

with the most impacts. 

To adapt to these changes, the MHA Nation is forced to develop new economic 

opportunities while we continue to seek the recovery of our traditional economic resources. However, impacts from the flood persist. For example, the flooding divided 

our Reservation into six isolated segments, making it difficult and costly to provide 

basic government services. Currently, we use the funding that was intended to compensate us for the flooding to pay for the shortfall in federal programs providing 

services to the Reservation. The failure of the Federal government to fulfill promises 

of electric and irrigation infrastructure, as well as a lack of full compensation, damaged the MHA Nation’s economy to the point where we are still working to recover. 

Impacts from Treating Indian Lands as Public Lands 

While the MHA Nation is working to overcome these ongoing environmental impacts and restore our tribal economy and authority, the Federal government continues to treat Indian lands as public lands by imposing public lands laws and policies on our lands. This has two negative consequences for Indian lands. First, the 

Federal government is replacing its own trust responsibility for Indian lands and 

with public interest standards that violate both our treaty rights and the federal 

trust responsibility to the MHA Nation. Second, tribal authority is displaced and 

limited by these federal authorities. The result is that our lands are managed according to public interest standards by federal bureaucrats who are influenced by 

a powerful environmental lobby that seeks to impose its views on how we develop 

our resources. Meanwhile, the MHA Nation is denied the tools and authorities we 

need to reestablish our rights, maintain our lifestyles, and regrow our economy. 

The best example of this is the MHA Nation’s efforts to rebuild its economy with 

the energy resources located on our Reservation. In these times, our most abundant 

economic resources come from the Bakken Shale Formation underlying the Reservation. The Bakken Formation is the largest continuous oil accumulation within the 

lower 48 states. In 2008, the United States Geological Survey estimated that the 

Bakken Formation contains between 3 billion and 4.3 billion barrels of recoverable 

oil or more. 

In the past four years, oil and gas development on the Fort Berthold Reservation 

went from zero producing wells to almost 300. In 2012, we expect more wells to be 

drilled on the Reservation than were drilled in the first four years combined. In 

2013, we expect another 300 wells to be drilled. 

The economic benefits of this oil and gas development are far reaching and will 

have short term and long term benefits. The MHA Nation and other Great Plains 

Tribes often face with unemployment above 70 percent. These days our unemployment is at an all-time low of 6 or 7 percent. In much of Indian Country unemployment levels that low are unheard of. More importantly, many of our members have 

become entrepreneurs, establishing their own businesses to support the oil and gas 

industry and hiring and supporting both tribal members and nonmembers alike. 

At last count, we have 905 vendors providing services directly to the oil and gas 

industry. Each of those vendors employs between 4 and 24 people. Based on an average employment of 12 jobs per company, that is in excess of 10,000 jobs. Our energy development will result in hundreds of millions of dollars in direct and indirect 

economic activity and provide the MHA Nation and our members with a substantial 

opportunity to fund government operations and invest in our communities. 

Even with these successes, the MHA Nation still struggles for every single oil and 

gas permit. Although we live with environmental impacts from the flooding like few 

have experienced, our ability to succeed and sustain ourselves is further impacted 

by Federal laws and policies that treat our Indian lands as public lands. Our lands 

are supposed to be set apart for our benefit and managed according to the trust responsibility and tribal standards. Yet, the most pervasive standards imposed in the 

oil and gas development process are public interest standards. 

Public lands policies and standards are imposed on the MHA Nation through the 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, 

and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) oil and gas permitting regulations. These 

Federal laws have a variety of impacts on the MHA Nation and our ability to manage our resources. 

33

In some cases, these laws allow people from across the Nation to comment on and 

influence federal decisions on our Reservation. The MHA Nation’s treaty and trust 

relationship is with the Federal government. The Federal government even prohibits the states and individual citizens from interfering in this Federal-Tribal relationship. But, these days, under NEPA, the CAA or the CWA, a private citizen living in Anytown, U.S.A. can file comments and impact our ability to manage and use 

our resources. In other cases these Federal laws, actually impose public lands policy on Indian 

lands. I believe the Federal government needs to keep its public lands policies separate from its trust responsibility for Indian lands. This kind of confusion about the 

management of Indian lands and resources can lead to the mismanagement of our 

trust resources and potential litigation. 

For example, the BLM is currently developing new regulations for hydraulic fracturing used in the oil and gas development process on public lands. Because the Department of the Interior has delegated some permitting responsibilities on Indian 

lands to the BLM, the BLM intends to apply its public lands regulations to Indian 

lands. This is a serious mistake. Indian lands should not be managed according to 

public interest standards. Indian lands should be managed according to the federal 

government’s trust responsibility and, even better, should be managed in cooperation with tribes in a manner that promotes tribal authority. 

Even Congress was clear on this point. When Congress passed the Federal Land 

Policy and Management Act of 1976 and created the BLM, Congress specifically 

stated that the BLM does not have authority on Indian lands. Congress provided 

BLM with authority over ‘‘public lands’’ and specifically said that ‘‘lands held for the 

benefit of Indians’’ are not a part of ‘‘public lands.’’ The MHA Nation should have 

the right to be excluded from BLM regulations for public lands. If we do not have 

the right to determine for ourselves if a public land regulation is in our best interest 

or not, then it will result in our treaty rights and our sovereignty being made subordinate to public lands policies, in violation of the federal government’s trust responsibility and our treaty rights. 

Finally, the application of NEPA and other Federal public land laws and policies 

on our lands displaces the authority of MHA Nation to manage and regulate its own 

resources. The MHA Nation should have the right to make its own decisions on how 

our resources are used and developed. We know how best to protect our land. We 

have done it for centuries. When we need the help of our federal trustee we have 

always asked for it. In the case of the BLM’s proposed rule which would add an 

additional layer of regulation to hydraulic fracturing, I am not convinced that it is 

necessary in light of the existing safeguards. What does concern me is the potential 

chilling effect these additional regulations could put on development of our oil and 

gas resources, because the federal regulations impose more expensive requirements 

than those that industry is subject to just outside of the Fort Berthold Reservation. 

Legislation Needed to Address Impacts and Promote Tribal Authority 

In order to ensure that MHA Nation and other tribes can adapt to environmental 

changes and revitalize their economies and build new markets, Congress and the 

entire federal government must fulfill their solemn trust responsibility and take 

steps to promote the true self-determination of tribes. Congress and Federal Government must support laws and policies that:

• affirm and protect our treaties and our tribal government’s civil and regulatory 

authority over its own territory, including the authority to tax without the everpresent threat of economy killing dual state taxation of Reservation commerce;

• reduce regulatory burdens that limit tribal economic development;

• provide appropriate funding levels for tribal infrastructure needed to facilitate 

economic development;

• provide low interest loans and grants large enough to allow tribes to invest in 

the types of businesses which will enhance our long term economic growth; and

• give industry and investors incentives to partner with the MHA Nation in 

building and owning its own energy resources.

The MHA Nation’s struggles to develop its energy resources into long-term economic prosperity demonstrate the need for these kinds of laws and policies. Congress needs to enact legislation to clarify and reaffirm that Indian lands are not 

public lands. This would prohibit federal land managing agencies from regulating 

activities on Indian lands according to public lands policies and ensure that Indian 

lands are managed for the exclusive use and benefit of Indian tribes. 

Alternatively, legislation could allow the Secretary of Interior to delegate authority to the BLM to regulate oil and gas activities on Indian lands, but require that 

34

BLM develop separate and specific regulations in consultation with Indian tribes according to timelines, requiring meaningful involvement of tribes and promotion of 

the federal trust responsibility, treaty rights, and federal and tribal policies unique 

to Indian Country for any regulations or permitting processes. 

To remove public involvement from the management of Indian lands, we need 

changes to NEPA and other environmental laws. First, Indian lands should, at the 

election of a Tribe, be specifically excluded from the public application of NEPA. 

Second, authority similar to ‘‘treatment-as-a-state’’ authority that is successfully 

used under the CAA and the CWA should be extended to all environmental laws 

including NEPA, and the unnecessary regulatory restrictions on achieving this status must be removed, with deadlines put in place that require federal agencies to 

act in a timely manner. Third, Congress should provide for the ability of Indian 

tribes to ‘‘contract’’ these environmental functions under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, Public Law 93–638, to obtain resources needed 

to implement these ‘‘treatment-as-a-state’’ provisions. Fourth, Congress should limit 

NEPA participants and participants in other permitting decisions to the affected 

area or reservation boundary. An environmental activist from Pennsylvania should 

not have a say in how we can chop our wood. 

Finally, and most important, Indian tribes need the same tax revenue that other 

governments rely on to oversee energy development and provide infrastructure and 

services needed to support the energy industry. Current federal case law allows 

states to impose dual taxes on certain activities on Indian lands without regard to 

the chilling effect such a burden puts on Reservation energy development. Legislation should prohibit dual state taxation where a tribe taxes the same activity. To 

protect the states interests, such legislation could, under the supervision of the Secretary of the Interior, require tribes to fairly reimburse states for any substantiated 

services that have a nexus to oil and gas production impacts on Indian lands. 

We need Congress to affirm the exclusive authority of the MHA Nation to raise 

tax revenues on our Reservation so that we can rely on the same revenues that 

state and local governments use to maintain infrastructure and support economic 

activity. The MHA Nation needs to maintain roads so that heavy equipment can 

reach drilling locations, but also so that our tribal members and others who use our 

roads can safely get to school or work. We also need to provide increased law enforcement, fire, emergency response, ambulance and other services to protect tribal 

members and the growing population of oil workers. And, we need to develop tribal 

codes and employ tribal staff to regulate activities on the Reservation. 

Under current federal case law, the MHA Nation must share its tax revenues 

with the State of North Dakota to avoid development killing dual taxation even 

though the State provides few services on the Reservation. To avoid double taxation 

and encourage energy development, the MHA Nation had no choice but to enter into 

a one sided tax agreement with the State. While the State is sitting on more than 

a $1 billion in surplus revenue, the MHA Nation struggles to make ends meet and 

keep up with demand. 

Just on our Reservation, in 2011, the State collected more than $75 million in 

taxes from oil and gas development on the Reservation, but spent less than $2 million of that for state roads on the Reservation and $0 for BIA and tribal roads. If 

the Tax Agreement is not corrected, projections are that the State will get more 

than $100 million in oil and gas tax revenues from the Reservation in 2012. This 

is funding that the MHA Nation needs to maintain Reservation infrastructure so 

that we can support energy and economic development on our lands the same as 

the State. 

The MHA Nation has current unmet needs, including the need to repair damages 

and pay for the impacts that the same companies that the State is taxing are causing. If we raise our tribal tax rates to meet these needs, the oil and gas businesses 

who are currently operating on our Reservation can simply move off the Reservation 

to avoid any dual taxation, and if we do not raise our tribal tax rates, we cannot 

pay for the actual governmental costs we are incurring and the actual damage our 

roads and other infrastructure is sustaining. To put an end to this problem, Congress should clearly affirm the exclusive tribal authority to tax activities on Indian 

lands. Where the State provides services on the Reservation, the State can be fairly 

reimbursed out of that tribal tax revenue. 

Conclusion 

Chairman Akaka and members of the Committee, thank you again for the opportunity to testify today on the environmental changes the MHA Nation has suffered 

at the hands of the Federal government. We hope that you will propose legislation 

that will ensure that tribal lands will never be used again to fulfill public purposes 

35

and return to us the authorities we need to protect our rights, homelands and lifestyles. 

Attachment


719a1.eps

OFFICIAl. PUSLICATION OFTH£ fORT ABRAHAM LINCOJ.N fOlJNDATION 

D~fending Theil: Lands 

The Sil'llggle of Three Tribes to S(lVIJ 

Theil- Reseruation bt the 194us 

e, ""';.. .. j, H..,,,,, 

"T no PI''''''*' '!\>I ,,~ ~, ~" !c Ill« .... ' '<'< ~t"" I><s''''',,,,, ..... ""'1><""1 . .... on • ." 6,..,.,.., .. ,t."""""t!W you "'" "Y"".t '. w.. r- \~ ""'"'I'· -.-.:..,. 11""1,,, ooJ M\)r" 

~' ..... 0..,., ......... M",\ "'.I'r'~ 

11W,i'l!''''' D.C..F' 1>, 111'· 1, ~~,. loiII<r '';'"j' O"""S 

''''''''' w .. ,~ "hi" ~ M .. .,.,n. Iltd" .. ""d ,_. IMI .. .",.. 

11011"'" odol' =n ltolm <1>01, 

"""""",,,,,-"-'''0 ".','. f4,h"J; 

"'r""'-'" 11>.""""''''1'"' ""11» ......... .... ~,..""""'.'''-~~ ...... iD ""'"'Y ""', -..,,,,,,, IMI=l 

I:> "'"". ~!!'., "'W"'\w ~ I'I>io rot..!!W ~ d=> ~"""wu 

l\oo;l ~'.""'''01 ~,"Fo" ~"'""'" """' ...... "" ,,'" t'., hof. ...... of"" 

~1~'""7'~o;:!rllf~ 

dlons "" Mk"""j ~I'.. (o, 

IIIl"dtt<h <,' )"<0"" 110<)' ",." 

rOol< ",Itu .... ""'"~ ,'''' !I>'~ 

"Ti>< ;~ 

l:;i!''':: .. ,'': ~=1.t \~";': _''-,,,,,,,,,>,.(11)'''''_ 

,""~ ........, .I ,I" -... ~"""r 

"''''''' ";!.M.,-..I •• """"",, h !1 .. 1<" oI'~L" t~UCTI ... "«l.!" ",00 k<""..,..,,,,,,,,, ... ~ fM{" __ lr.tl".~!1I£S. 

." DfJI.~ 1'IITr.l\U;" "","",·10 

roo ltD'" c."'~ &!MIll' ","k:l. F',,,,,, .. ,,,n,,,,u..ru..",,,,,",,,S.,ol 

I"'n",~ " .. ,.1.,,,_ 

f'~'Y '?~Ojl 

Lh<y d<;><ndod 

up"" tho 

Uig. ",,;ldy 

to """" '" "'"~ t.r.c~ -ooJ"""". A. 1=1 • .";",,., 

'''"''"""",, u., ",,,,,oil.. ~ 

Il~o~r'·'·~· 

""""' ciMold ,'"'~ ,~" 

~"'i~Ild"'..ru.... 

'"'''''''''''-~''''''' I ........ "'",~\.~'''''''~''' i.", ~",,; .... ,,;u.. .. ,~ ,,,~'" ,,",II, 

oth<,tri"'-'" To .. " """,,,,,,,,,.1 

I""rl< lI.m"", 1 ,;00,. Then .--

TABLE Of 

CONTENTS 

TM Th!.tlm a~ 

M~tt Thclt End 

During Failed 

Robbery 

l'll~c 2 

l .... t. CIIOr!." 

W,u,j'llpl1 S'lrviVel; 

Lftd~ Digrum> 

Pn~3 

FALF OJnti~u~ 

Pmr~ ;rl ~009' 

!'>Ir,"", 

tir.;. Gm:~r:J Cu&t<:r 

Rto;<mnts Ftb. Ere 

:P~1l'l S 
36


719a2.eps

~;-;;::'L;:';;-~;~;:':f~Lr;; 

.. Ok!< '''l7'''''''m.nl "i.-I 0, 

~""""""""",,,,,,"000>1 ! ..... oilho"*""' .. _~'-I: 

"").,,,,--,,,,,,,,,, of. I~L !IImi .. 

~=.B""""",U..~,..I""'= 

""PO In .. h!<h ""." It<l,,,,,.,, ~[OJ\ I"'"', ""'" IDhn '.,..1 ..... tho ''''1 """<vi d Iho """" .. ~'" !bet! ,,.. d~;Mod_ 

In IIm\ 'h, """ ...... ,,". ''',. 

><,*,;»iI)",wilC«! ..,. """'J~'" 

0fIl« ], ....., n'oiun<\ "ll'ln fa 

'=" ."' .... In L2 mI'U"" =~, 

,~.""""h·~'~cI'" Free !=I m II" M"",,-r.afi" 

IWl""",,- .... lUd' " wu'~ ,.., '" ",.1"" 'l1=,tn )r;$', ,..,~..,.! 

"1Io1l;<"'1"<ld,t._.""\'~Ill' ' __ ,Id .... 1<00;;",,):<>1<1 ,110 

=>~o-"",~"",""""""",,,,,,, 

""""~~I","""hI>I~,,,,,,J~",, 

='11""~ ,W=rnl"" ,""" Q •• 

_""':op_IIr .. ,....'\.U""'""~, 

I,a .m_lno«<l ,;, ... .;",1Oy 01 

1M """',lIon-",""'- "" ooId 

In "'" !:"""mrncr,t. Tho t4<s .......... "'lllf~ .. "" ... 1.'0 do'OR'" """"'" ',_~"," 

1~IO, Ef U_ II" """,,,,troo ......... ,...mh n, O<!Vtt>\ ,~'" 

wIIh ,.,"" _ .. '" ''''''' ""J", 

tho o~'P d no"" Thloe. 

-~ 

l!!I'.~ ~lr<Otl>u...._;'1I 

... ,10.0> 1: "'" ,/». 'O<r 0>lil "'~ 

U .. n- ~ •. 1h<l: _.J.ottl~~1!<4 

g"fuo,. Q,'!?nll 1loJ,1" 1..0"",. 

),100"", I""~"" Slid! """'" 11<0,.., I::rroII ",. "'r<= Bu'''' 1,,,""""'00 ~ .,""_ or f .. ,,,,l .... ~ .,," ~~r.t 

"'''OWDO~ lo",,~ Tho ... 1 m,,.. ,,~ •• ...,"~ Ib_ "", .. r.~I'. 

on II>c Gn.~l PLo ...... Thr '''"''' ""'.0 .. lh<1' III< .. .\I'.<I-l"" ... 'O~I'"'off"""IfII:"""'""_ ""'Ioy .• ",HoB "h." '" ,t..ll' ""'''' ""dl~ .... l ""I"" M"", ,1<010,'"".01 ,,, ""Ill< aM ""do 

","<h!or. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,"on'>""""'" .... '" "'~o>I!J' Thoj.'.!~ '" ",.It !!'~, ~""'$ ,t-<"~'r:='" ~(,~~ 

l!I<itI>,",,"'u.....;;hkJ'""""" 

1""'0<0)' ,"'« """"""I "',,;\-M _",. ",,'" ,bot DI ... "",,".JInr, ,.j,U~''''~'1fIrnfL>'~:!>t.<d 

m!t~ p<eJ'1. ~,,,,, .... t \l<. 

d,,, ....... m ",. V'."[;J""'''' Th .... ~ Wi:t.. =l """"" 

B""" du"".!; 1110 _" WOOd M; ,,!.D. '" """1 01 "', ""'" """".""y, Ih, fom»m'-""&<d '" 

,. " 
37

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Tex, for your testimony, 

Chairman Hall. 

Now I will call on Principal Chief Dardar for your testimony. 

Please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS DARDAR, JR., PRINCIPAL 

CHIEF, UNITED HOUMA NATION 

Mr. DARDAR. Thank you. Bonjour, and good afternoon Chairman 

Akaka and Vice Chairman Barrasso and other members of the 

Committee. My name is Thomas Dardar, Jr. I am Principal Chief 

for the United Houma Nation. I am humbled and honored to be 

here to provide this testimony on behalf of our Tribe. 


719a3.eps
38

At the end of the 18th century, in our effort to live peacefully 

with settlers and avoid relocation, the United Houma Nation made 

the coast of southeast Louisiana our homeland. Today, the majority 

of our 17,000 citizens reside in six parishes that span from St. 

Mary to St. Bernard however, to live in harmony with the land and 

water. 

The abundant wildlife, seafood, plant life have always provided 

for our families. It is how we survived. However, due to the rapid 

environmental changes affecting our communities, we are faced 

with the reality that our culture and our way of life is threatened. 

Today our people are fighting an invisible enemy. We cannot fight 

this enemy alone. Our communities, homeland, and our very life 

blood is disappearing from under our feet. 

The first act that caused this crisis was the damming of the Mississippi River in 1920 to protect the settlers who chose to live along 

the river’s path. By damming the river, the estuaries were left to 

starve and were cut off from the vital nutrients, the silt that naturally feeds and builds up these lands. 

The second incident was the discovery of oil and gas along the 

coastline of Louisiana. Here the oil companies dredge miles of 

checkerboard canals and waterways to transport their product further inland. These manmade waterways allowed for saltwater intrusion that sped up the erosion problem that has gone unchecked 

for nearly 70 years. 

Since 1930, the coast of Louisiana has lost area the size of Manhattan Island. Scientists currently estimate that we loose a football 

field every half hour. These football fields are where our Tribal 

communities live. We are the front line of this crisis. 

Today there are more complications that even further escalate 

our land loss. The repetitiveness of the assault of hurricanes, sea 

level rise, is bringing the Gulf of Mexico closer to our communities. 

Louisiana’s coastal sea rise is rising at a faster rate than any other 

coastal areas, bringing the problem to crisis proportion. 

With the Deepwater Horizon oil spill when millions of gallons of 

crude oil and dispersants spilled into the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, 

the coastal estuaries received a huge blow. Marshlands that once 

served as protection is dying. Wildlife reserves are deteriorating. 

The seafood life cycle was disrupted. Not only does this further 

threaten our home, but it also threatens our livelihood. 

However, in all this havoc, the biggest obstacle we face is lack 

of Federal recognition. United Houma Nation submitted our petition for Federal acknowledgment in 1985 and we are still in the 

same process today. We have testified before Congress repeatedly 

on how the system is broken, but in all that time our people still 

suffer. 

It is the lack of this acknowledgment that leaves our people on 

the outside of the decision-making. It is what has allowed our 

homeland and communities to bear the brunt of the environmental 

injustice being played out along the coast of Louisiana. Federal acknowledgment would mandate that our people have a seat at the 

table. We would be protected and we could not be arbitrarily dismissed. 

In looking to the future, I want to first thank Senator Landrieu 

and the Louisiana delegation on their hard work in pushing the 

39

RESTORE Act forward. However, this alone is only the beginning 

of the work that needed to be done. 

I would first urge to invest and protect the existing United 

Houma Nation homeland, thus preserving our culture, tradition, 

and way of life. 

Secondly, I would ask to support the legislation to protect and 

support Louisiana’s wetlands. 

Finally, the Houma people ask you to evaluate and implement 

the necessary changes needed to the Federal recognition process. 

In conclusion, I would like to leave you with a story of one of our 

elders. He remembers outsiders visiting our community when he 

was a child. The outsiders were offering aid, believing that our people were poor. In return, our people sent the outsiders away with 

even larger amounts of fur, baskets, seafood, homegrown fruits, 

and vegetables. So he always ended with a laugh and said that he 

never knew he was poor until the outsiders told him he was poor. 

You see, ladies and gentlemen, our way of life may not seem 

much to outsiders, but to us it is something beyond value, precious, 

and worth fighting for. I urge you to fight with us. 

On behalf of the United Houma Nation, I thank the Committee 

and those of you here today sharing your own experience. We look 

forward to working with you in addressing these issues. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Dardar follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS DARDAR, JR., PRINCIPAL CHIEF, UNITED

HOUMA NATION

Introduction 

Halito, Bonjour, and good afternoon Chairman Akaka, Vice Chairman Barrasso 

and members of the committee. I am honored to be able to provide this testimony 

on behalf of the United Houma Nation. 

Background and Brief History of Tribe 

I serve as the Principal Chief of the United Houma Nation, located in South Louisiana. My tribe consists of over 17,000 members, many of whom live in the coastal 

bayous and swamps of Terrebonne, Lafourche, Jefferson, St. Mary, St. Bernard and 

Plaquemines parishes, which lie south of the city of New Orleans. The vast majority 

of our citizens continue to reside and trace their family roots to Terrebonne Parish. 

Stemming from the French culture, the word Terrebonne means ‘‘good earth,’’ but 

this earth is disappearing below our feet. This pressing assault is what I’d like to 

talk to you about today. 

As the Chief of my Nation, I am charged with the responsibility of maintaining 

and fostering our Houma culture and traditions. In ensuring the long-term wellbeing and continued existence of our Tribe, I must admit that I feel overwhelmed 

by that responsibility due to the rapid environmental changes affecting our communities. The Houma homelands and people are the frontline of the environmental disaster facing coastal, southeast Louisiana. 

As I stand here today before you, I am fighting an invisible enemy that we cannot 

fight alone. Our homeland is disappearing and with it our culture is at risk of fading as well. Disappearing with that land are the stories of our elders, the bones of 

our ancestors and the very cultural fabric that makes up our nation. Today, I respectfully ask that you lend your time, turn your eyes, and open your ears to the 

plight of my people. I ask that you help me to uphold my duty to my people—the 

continued existence of the Houma people, our way of life and the preservation of 

our homeland. 

For hundreds of years, tribal members have not just lived, but thrived, off these 

low-lying lands where we carved our way of life off of the land and water. Rich in 

natural resources, our homelands are rich in trapping, hunting and fishing grounds 

as well as bountiful vegetation. In fact one of our elders fondly tells the story of 

how when he was a child outsiders visited his community to offer aid believing our 

people were poor. In return for the ‘‘gifts’’ brought, our people sent those outsiders 

away with large amounts of furs, baskets, seafood and homegrown fruits and vegeVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:50 Jan 30, 2013 Jkt 078095 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\78095.TXT JACK
40

tables above and beyond what was received. By living off the land, the Houma people have always been rich. 

Common wildlife located in our homeland that historically provided for our people 

included rabbits, ducks, deer, and other wild game as well as fur bearing animals 

such as the mink and muskrat. Additionally crawfish, crabs, shrimp, oysters and 

many varieties of fish have always been plentifully available. Naturally growing 

plants include sage, roots, palmetto and other plants that we’ve gathered for our 

traditional medicine and basket-weaving. From this land comes many traditions we 

still practice today. ‘Traiteurs’ or Treaters provided our members with spiritual 

guidance, advice, and medical treatment from roots and plants of the area. Our people made baskets from the heart of the Palmetto plant, mattresses and dolls from 

Spanish moss, and canoe-style boats, called pirogues, made from dugout cypress 

trees to navigate the bayous and swamps. 

The irony of this situation is that our ancestors sought haven in this rich area 

to escape enslavement or forced relocation after French and Spanish settlers came 

to the area and Congress passed the 1830 Indian Removal Act. To avoid conflict 

from the increasing number of settlers and to escape the plight of many of our Indian counterparts who would be removed from their homelands, our ancestors chose 

to flee deeper and deeper south into areas that were believed to be uninhabitable 

by these settlers, but we called home. Today, we are facing a different relocation, 

not enacted by Congress, but equally forceful, as the very land that once provided 

a haven is now disappearing from under our feet. 

Environmental Changes to the Complex Ecosystem of Our Region 

To get a better understanding of why climate change is having such disastrous 

effects here, some background in our geography and the many forces affecting it, 

is necessary. 

First, the rich swamps and estuaries our people thrived upon were created from 

thousands of years of build-up from the Mississippi river carrying deposits of silt 

and mud. In the 1920’s, when the Mississippi River was dammed and canals built 

off of it, the flow ceased. This had the desired effect of preventing floods to the settlers who built settlements along the banks of the river, but it robbed the marshland of the necessary sediment. After the flow ceased, the estuary could not naturally rebuild and sustain itself leaving it vulnerable to the next onslaught. 

The next blow to our area was the oil and gas industry, which dredged ten thousand miles of channels through the wetlands beginning in the 1930s. With the invasion of these man-made waterways, the landscape rapidly changed and coastal Louisiana became a checkerboard. Unfortunately, the vast majority of these dredged 

waterways took place well before oil and gas companies were environmentally regulated and required to mitigate the damage caused by their efforts. As a result, these 

channels have been allowed to grow wider and wider and opened the door to saltwater intrusion creating further encroachment of waters further and further into 

tribal homelands. 

Now, the rising sea level is adding to an already destructive problem. We are now 

seeing water levels at the highest they have ever been. At the same time that our 

land is sinking, the water level is rising. What you have as a result is an environmental crisis with rapid land loss and coastal erosion taking place at phenomenal 

rates. The average sea level in southeast Louisiana is rising at a rate of three feet 

every 100 years, which is an unusually high level. Scientists state that, as the planet’s temperature increases, the oceans also warm causing the water to expand. This 

dilemma is at crisis proportions. The combination of rising oceans and sinking land 

means that Louisiana’s coastal sea level is rising at a higher rate than any other 

coastal areas. All of these factors interplay to create a dire situation of land loss 

and sinking wetlands with the people of the United Houma Nation trapped in the 

center of this battle. 

Land is disappearing below our feet at an astonishing rate. Since 1930, the Louisiana coast has lost 1,900 square miles of land equal to the size of Manhattan every 

year. Each year, 25 square miles of wetlands—or a football field every half an 

hour—is lost. In less than the time that we will sit in this room, talking about climate change, we will have lost that much land. Places where our tribal members 

used to walk to visit a neighbor, they now have to boat. Roads once built up on land 

are now covered in water. Electricity poles that were once along that road are now 

in water. Coastal erosion affects our Tribe more than it does any other group of people. It is our tribal members that live along those swamps, fish these waters, hunt 

this marshland and depend on the land that is disappearing. Years before Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, Gustav and Ike we knew this was a critical problem. I remember hunting on lands that are now underwater as a child. As a grandfather, 

41

my heart hurts that I will never be able to share that land and experience with my 

grandchildren. 

Alone, these factors would be enough to wreak havoc on any tribe. Now, add two 

more factors: hurricanes and man-made disasters. Our people always knew how to 

live in balance with nature and hurricanes have always been part of that balance. 

However, with so many environmental changes the intensity and damage caused by 

hurricanes today is very different and a huge challenge for our people today. There’s 

scientific evidence that shows that hurricanes have become more and more intense 

in the last 50 years. Due to escalated erosion along the coast, hurricane winds and 

flooding are reaching further inland than ever before. Our people don’t need scientific evidence to prove it. With every storm, our members lose their homes, they 

lose their boats, their livelihood to the repetitive flooding waters and the damaging 

winds. Everyone here saw the devastation that Hurricanes Katrina and Rita 

brought to our area in 2005. What was not as publicized were hurricanes Gustav 

and Ike in 2008, which brought an additional 10 feet of water in areas that were 

still struggling to recover. We are faced with a horrible cycle here. Stronger hurricanes—the storm surge, the rushing, flooding waters, and the saltwater intrusion—

cause and escalate the land loss. At the same time, the more land we lose, the less 

protection our homelands have from hurricanes leaving our communities vulnerable 

to the damages caused. Scientists estimate that every 2.7 miles of marsh reduces 

storm surge by roughly a foot. 

Just as our communities were recovering from these Hurricanes and our people 

had felt some sense of normalcy back in their lives, repaired their boats and were 

returning to shrimping and crabbing, the United Houma Nation was hit with another environmental disaster, a man-made disaster—Deepwater Horizon Disaster 

and oil spill on April 20, 2010. As a result of the spill, 600 miles of the Gulf coastline was oiled and over half of that was in Louisiana. According to NOAA Fisheries 

Services, less than 2 months from the date of the oil spill 88,522 square miles of 

waters were closed to fishing equating to 36.6 percent of the Gulf of Mexico coverage 

area, resulting in an estimated $2.5 billion loss for the fishing industry. While it 

is too early to know the long term effects of the spill and how the oil and the 

dispersants will affect our ecosystem, we do know already that many of our tribal 

members have lost their jobs and subsistence lifestyle as a result. Now many who 

were exposed to the oil and chemicals are suffering from things like upper respiratory infections, headaches, seizures and abdominal pain. Our people are very 

concerned that the health affects of this disaster are only just beginning. 

Today the Houma people find ourselves in a perfect storm. With less land, our 

members, their homes and boats are less protected from these spills and hurricanes. 

Today’s weakened marshes allow oil to penetrate more deeply, killing vegetation 

and destroying habitat deep within the wetland. As the vegetation dies, the natural 

eroding forces of the ocean quickly churn the soil into open water, eroding Louisiana’s natural buffers from storm surge and leaving our tribal communities in even 

greater danger from erosion and hurricanes. As you can see Louisiana’s coast is in 

an environmental crisis and the United Houma Nation is at the frontline of that 

crisis. If Louisiana cannot overcome this looming disaster, the heart of our Houma 

Nation, the land and our way of life, will disappear as quickly as the land. 

Effect of Environmental Changes on the Tribe 

I probably don’t have to tell the people in this room that Indian people, our culture, the very fabric of our being is tied to the land. It is what binds us as indigenous people. When we lose our land, land the size of a football field every half hour, 

we are losing our culture just as quickly. 

First, the physical loss of land is a huge detriment to our Tribe. Many tribal members own much land that has been in their families for many years. Losing this land 

means less ownership of our own property and area available for practicing tribal 

traditions. There is no way to get this back. 

Second, the loss of land causes a loss of traditional wildlife and plants critical to 

our traditional way of life. The wildlife, plants, animals, and the bayous themselves 

are critical to so much of our traditional knowledge, whether it comes from palmetto 

leaves to weave baskets or passing on the trade of shrimping that our tribe has done 

for hundreds of years, the loss of such practices is invaluable. Because we have limited access to these resources, our people are challenged in their ability to pass this 

traditional knowledge on to our children. These environmental changes are stealing 

those things that are crucial to our survival as Houma people. 

In addition to the loss of wildlife, plants, and land tied to our traditional way of 

life, these factors have already forced many tribal members to leave the area taking 

our people away from their homeland and distancing them from their culture. So 

many people lost so much and, instead of choosing to rebuild again in the path of 

42

repetitive hurricanes, many are choosing to relocate. Without these elders to teach 

the culture and children to learn it, how can we carry it on? Without the people 

and tie to the area, our culture is challenged to survive. 

All of this is exponentially more difficult to deal with because of the fact that the 

United Houma Nation is not a federally acknowledged tribe. We are recognized by 

the state of Louisiana, but not the federal government. For instance, in the recent 

Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, the United Houma Nation reached out to British Petroleum (BP) for assistance to help tribal citizens adapt and recover from the disaster. In the response from BP was that although they valued their relationship 

with the UHN, because we are not a federally acknowledged tribe, the oil pollution 

act and mandated assistance to tribal governments did not apply to our Tribe. 

Additionally, when Louisiana passed recent legislation including a $50 billion 

plan over 50 years to restore the coast, the State in the planning phase disclosed 

that some coastal communities were going to be sacrificed or trade-off communities 

in order to save other communities. Many of our tribal communities, including our 

most treasured, oldest communities that the vast majority of our citizens trace their 

roots to, are left out of these plans. The State’s explanation is that these communities are too costly to protect; however, our people contend that our culture and 

homelands were not duly valued. We do not believe that the State of Louisiana considered the cultural loss. In contrast, had the United Houma Nation been federally 

acknowledged we would not be so easily dismissed and would be afforded federal 

protections guaranteed to state recognized tribes. 

Unfortunately the United Houma Nation’s pursuit of federal recognition is closely 

tied to the repetitive disasters we faced. At this time, the UHN’s petition for federal 

acknowledgement with the Bureau of Indian Affairs is on hold due to our Tribe 

being under a state of emergency following Hurricane Katrina. When our citizens 

are still fighting a daily struggle to get back on their feet after these environmental 

disasters, you can imagine this is a difficult choice to make. Moreover, it is incredibly draining on my people to have to fight these battles for our homes, while at 

the same time, fighting a battle here to simply be recognized as ‘‘Indians.’’ My hope 

is that our people have a reprieve from these disasters and focus our full efforts and 

resources towards recognition as that status is a major barrier in fighting the environmental onslaught. 

What Is Being Done to Address These Issues? 

Just recently, less than 2 weeks ago, President Obama signed the RESTORE Act, 

which directs 80 percent of any Clean Water Act penalties paid by BP for the spill 

to be placed in a trust fund for restoration efforts in the five coastal states damaged 

by the spill. The RESTORE Act will establish the Gulf Coast Restoration Trust 

Fund. According to the act’s language, the funds are supposed to be used to restore 

the ecosystem, establishing a Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Counsel and to support research on coastal wetland restoration and protection, wildlife and fisheries 

monitoring, mapping and recovery, improving the safety in exploration and development of oil and gas resources and other key areas. While this Act is very necessary 

for our area, the main problem is that we do not see any of these funds unless and 

until BP is fined. Also, the amount we get is dependent on how much BP is fined. 

That means we have to wait until a settlement or a trial to determine if BP was 

negligent and to decide how much money, if any, we will received as part of this 

fine. Time is not something that is on our side, especially now that another hurricane season is upon us. In addition although our homeland sits at the frontline, 

there is no guarantee that our tribal communities will benefit from the RESTORE 

Act without the protections of federal acknowledgement. 

The UHN is working hard to work collaboratively with the many other efforts 

being made as a result of local researchers and truly joint community efforts. Last 

year, our tribe took part in the Restore America’s Wetland Foundation, Terrebonne 

Parish Government and several community agencies to deploy a new technology developed in Baton Rouge that could help to rebuild the land. Volunteers went out 

in the marshland and placed hundreds of floating mats of marsh grass in critical 

areas where the marsh is being eroded. The grass is supposed to send down roots 

through the mats and form new land as soil and plant material attach to these manmade marsh islands. We are pleased with the results thus far and are waiting to 

see the long-term results. The nature of our people is to roll up their sleeves and 

get to work. It is projects like this that give us hope that the environmental damage 

can be stopped and potentially corrected. 

Recommendations for the Committee 

While there is some movement in the right direction, especially after the passing 

of the RESTORE Act, there are still areas where we can use your help and support. 

43

First, investments must be made to protect our existing areas so that we can protect that land that we do have left. Second, we ask for your support in legislation 

to protect and restore the wetlands. We also would like to extend our utmost gratitude for your support of the RESTORE Act, but we also ask that you ensure that 

these funds are properly allocated. Third, we need more support for research into 

the long-term effects of the oil spill and how it will affect the eroding wetlands, our 

ecosystem and the wildlife, plants and animals that live in these waters. We need 

efforts toward not just the short-term, but monitoring the long-term health of the 

Gulf. Finally, we ask that you evaluate and implement changes to the Federal Recognition process. As I stated earlier, many tribes such as ours, are fighting battles 

at home just to keep our members and culture afloat. Getting federally recognized 

should not be the complicated process that it is. Our tribes are facing enough battles 

and need the same federal protections as our brothers and sisters. 

Conclusion 

Why stay on sinking lands in hurricane alley? That is a question our people have 

been asked many times in recent years and you may have even thought so yourself. 

But to us, this land is paradise. Our Tribe migrated to what we now refer to as 

our homeland generations ago in an effort to avoid the encroachment of settlers and 

avoid relocation. This land has provided us with a haven, sustenance, homes, and 

our traditions and culture. The thought of ever leaving is heartbreaking and a final 

move I don’t think our people can survive without a huge loss to our way of life 

and culture. 

A very famous American Indian proverb says, ‘‘Treat the earth well: it was not 

given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children.’’

We are failing to live up to this wisdom. Because of the environmental changes 

we are facing right now, this land has been taken from our children, and with no 

efforts to correct it, we will leave them nothing. Ladies and gentlemen something 

needs to be done and I hope and respectfully request that you consider some of 

these recommendations I discussed today. Our children are depending on you. 

On behalf of the United Houma Nation, I thank the Committee and those of you 

here today sharing your own experiences. We look forward to working with you in 

addressing these issues.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Chief Dardar. 

Before I call on Mr. Frank, I would like to call on our Senator 

from Washington, Ms. Cantwell, to make an introduction to our 

next witness. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Well thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank 

you for holding this important hearing. I would like to thank one 

of our witnesses, although it is good to see all of our witnesses here 

today, including those Tribes that have had TV recognition for 

their incredible roles that they play in their communities. 

We are going to hear from the chairman of the Northwest Indian 

Fisheries Commission, Billy Frank, Jr. He certainly is a legend in 

the northwest and has worked all throughout Indian Country and 

was part of an event to focus on first stewardship, what to do to 

help with impacts of climate change. 

So our northwest economy counts very much on salmon, as does 

the Ranking Member’s. I am sure that Mr. Frank will give us a lot 

to think about as it relates to planning and moving forward, but 

he has been involved in these efforts for quite a long time. I am 

sure there are many other members of northwest Tribes in the audience today that will be looking forward to his testimony. 

So thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome, Mr. Frank. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Please proceed, Mr. Frank. 

44

STATEMENT OF BILLY FRANK, JR., CHAIRMAN, NORTHWEST 

INDIAN FISHERIES COMMISSION 

Mr. FRANK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Cantwell, and 

Senator Murkowski. Good morning. I am really glad to be here. 

This hearing is very important to the northwest Tribes. 

The 20 Tribes that I represent ceded the land from Canada on 

the western side of the mountain in the State of Washington, right 

here, ceded all of that land from Canada clean to the Columbia 

River to the United States Government in 1855. The United States 

forgot about us. They turned their authority over to the State of 

Washington and they forgot who the hell we are. 

We are Indian Tribes. We signed a treaty with the United States 

and we had to fight our way back into existence on recognition, and 

we did that throughout 1960 all through the 1960s clear up until 

1974 when U.S. v. Washington, United States took the State of 

Washington to court and won that case and interpreted our treaties 

and made us co-managers with the State of Washington and with 

the Federal Government. 

So now I am 81 years old and I have been back here for over half 

my life testifying right here in front of the United States Senate, 

United States Congress across the way, House of Representatives. 

But now today we put a treaty at risk paper together, because I 

have not seen any change in the United States Government. They 

still have their authority, the State of Washington has their authority. Our Country, our Pacific salmon is declining. It is going 

down. Not unless the United States changes, makes the institutional change—and you hear the change right here today—that has 

to take place; otherwise, our Pacific salmon is gone in Puget Sound 

and along the Pacific coast. 

We are seeing right now poison in the ocean. The Pacific Ocean 

is poisoned from Claylock Beach in the State of Washington to Oregon coast. Salmon, everything is coming to shore dead. This happened over five years now. No oxygen out in the ocean. 

The weather is changing. You see it right here in Washington, 

D.C. Yesterday we witnessed it, you know. 

Senator Ted Stevens, before he left, he used to protect the Pacific 

salmon along the Pacific coast, and I would ask him to protect our 

salmon, and he would do that. Senator Inouye the same. Senator 

Cantwell, Senator Murry, yourself, Senator Murkowski now. These 

are very important things that I am talking about. 

We have dead zones in Hood Canal, dead zones in south Puget 

Sound, where I live, where our salmon is migrating out to the 

ocean and heading up into the great Alaskan cold water in the 

Aleutian Islands and then comes home after five, six, seven years. 

These are important things that we talk about. 

The ocean is important to all of us. It is dying. And who in the 

hell is in charge? Nobody that I see. There is no change to the 

ocean. There is no plan out there 100 years to tell us that we are 

going to be here, that we are going to be able to eat that salmon 

in clean water and quantity and quality. Nobody is telling us that. 

Right now they are telling us that they turned over the State of 

Washington, the recovery of salmon to the State of Washington. 

They are broke. They don’t have no money. We are the only ones 

that are natural resource people. We manage salmon from Mexico 

45

1 United States vs. Washington, Boldt Decision (1974) reaffirmed western Washington tribes’ 

treaty fishing rights. 

to Alaska. We belong on all the committees—the Halibut Commission, the Whaling Commission, all our committees, as everyone else 

does. We are on them committees. Two hundred miles off the 

ocean. We need a change. Treaty rights at risk. We took it to 

Washington, D.C., last July, to the President. We went to CEQ. We 

went to our delegation—Senator Murray, Senator Cantwell, Congressman Norm Dixon, our delegation in the House of Representatives—making them aware of what we are doing right now. And we 

are here to tell you that we are in trouble. 

Who do we go to? If this Committee could tell me who we can 

go to? We can’t go to the United States Supreme Court any more. 

They are not on our side. They don’t understand treaties. We can’t 

go to the President, the past President. This President has helped 

us in natural resource. I hope we get another four years with him, 

but who knows. 

So here we are today making a statement to our great Senator 

Akaka and our Committee. We need help. We need help on a 

change. We need somebody in charge to tell the Federal agencies 

what they have to do to make a change. That change has to happen. The salmon is declining, Pacific salmon. And if the change 

comes, we will go out 100 years to put the habitat back, clean the 

water up, the quantity, get the poison out of Puget Sound along the 

ocean. We have got to make that change. It has got to happen, or 

otherwise our salmon is gone, and that is our culture, our way of 

life. 

I eat salmon. I am 81 years old now. Damn, I eat a lot of salmon. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. FRANK. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Frank follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF BILLY FRANK, JR., CHAIRMAN, NORTHWEST INDIAN

FISHERIES COMMISSION

Introduction 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to 

provide testimony on the Impacts of Environmental Changes on Treaty Rights, Traditional Lifestyles and Tribal Homelands. My name is Billy Frank, Jr. and I am the 

Chairman of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC). The NWIFC is 

composed of the 20 tribes with rights reserved by treaties with the United States 

and that are party to United States vs. Washington (U.S. vs. Washington 1 ).

Treaty Rights at Risk 

Last summer we launched our Treaty Rights at Risk (TRAR) initiative to call on 

the federal government to take charge of salmon recovery in western Washington. 

The treaty rights of the western Washington treaty tribes to harvest salmon are in 

imminent danger. The danger exists due to diminishing salmon populations, which 

limits or eliminates our right to harvest. This is due to the inability to restore salmon habitat faster than it is being destroyed. 

We have called on the federal government to implement its fiduciary duties by 

better protecting salmon habitat and assuring that our salmon recovery plans are 

implemented. The federal government has a trust responsibility to the tribes and 

the tribes’ treaties are constitutionally-protected. It is imperative that we are successful with this initiative as salmon are critical to the tribal cultures, traditions 

and their economies. 

In summary, we requested that the federal government:

46

• Assume federal control and responsibility over the implementation of salmon recovery plans in the region to assure that the federal obligation to the tribes to 

protect their treaty-reserved rights is met.

• Direct all federal agencies to stop allowing their other statutory obligations to 

supersede their obligations to the tribal treaty rights by applying disparate conservation burdens on the tribes.

• Support the tribes by initiating litigation to declare the treaty-reserved right for 

instream flows needed for protection and restoration of salmon.

• Conduct a White House summit in the northwest to identify the state of salmon 

recovery and the solutions for achieving protection and recovery. We also requested that Congressional hearings be held to clearly identify the factors that 

are threatening the tribes’ treaty rights and the impediments to achieving recovery.

Meaningful change needs to happen soon as our economies, culture, traditions and 

way of life don’t exist without these natural resources. Without these natural resources our treaty rights are meaningless. Salmon are disappearing due to the continued loss of habitat and federal agencies are using the Endangered Species Act 

as a tool to place a disparate conservation burden on tribes. They are applying more 

stringent conservation standards to tribal fisheries and hatchery programs than to 

those in the region that degrade salmon habitat. The federal government needs to 

enforce its own laws and stop placing an inequitable application of the conservation 

burden for recovery on the tribes. 

The federal government has not focused sufficient attention on improving the 

habitat. These resources are dependent on good habitat. Our habitat is on a downward spiral and we need to reverse this trend. Despite millions of dollars being 

spent on salmon recovery, we are losing habitat faster than we can restore it. Our 

resources are disappearing because the state and federal governments are allowing 

critical habitat to be damaged and destroyed. 

With that said, we are encouraged by the initial response from the federal government. We all agree on the need to strengthen the tribal and federal relationship to 

address obstacles to salmon recovery. We have already developed recovery plans and 

identified barriers to salmon recovery in most watersheds. Now we need a commitment from the federal government to coordinate the effort to tackle the most pressing obstacles in each watershed and to provide the leadership necessary to achieve 

successful implementation of our salmon recovery plans. We need a fundamental 

change in the way the federal agencies conduct their business if we are to be successful in achieving recovery. 

Treaty Times to Modern Day 

When our ancestors signed treaties, ceding millions of acres of land to the United 

States government, they reserved the right to fish, hunt and gather in all traditional areas. These constitutionally-protected treaties, combined with the federal 

trust responsibility and extensive case law, including the U.S. vs. Washington decision, all consistently support the role of tribes as natural resource managers, both 

on and off reservation. In Washington State, these provisions have developed into 

a successful co-management partnership between the federal, state and tribal governments. This collaboration has helped us to deal with many problems, but still 

requires additional support to meet many new challenges such as ocean acidification 

and climate change. 

The tribes have developed sophisticated natural resource programs designed to 

protect and enhance their treaty rights. Tribal programs have served as the backbone of salmon recovery, providing the technical, policy and legal framework for this 

incredibly difficult task. Tribes perform complicated harvest, hatchery and habitat 

management tasks that neither the state nor the federal government can effectively 

carry out. 

Climate Change 

Indian people have always lived along the coastlines of Washington State where 

our salmon, shellfish and other foods come from. For many thousands of years we 

migrated from the shore to the upper reaches of our watersheds, gathering foods, 

medicines and materials as each came into its season. 

Through our treaties with the U.S. we ceded most of the land that is today western Washington. But in doing so, we were also placed on reservations and lost the 

ability to move away from the harm that climate change is already causing to our 

way of life. Our reservations cannot escape the rising seas, coastal erosion and the 

many other effects of climate change that threaten our existence as Indian people. 

47

As our climate changes, it impacts our homes, our cultures, our economies and the 

treaty protected resources upon which we have always depended. 

Our glaciers are fast disappearing, and with them the cold, clean water that salmon need to thrive. Ocean acidification is threatening the survival of shellfish by preventing the shells of their young from forming and the food supply for salmon and 

other important fish species. Expanding low oxygen zones are appearing more frequently off our coasts, resulting in massive fish-kills. Storms are becoming more violent. Floods are increasing and so is the damage they cause. 

Indigenous coastal people are among the first affected by our rapidly changing climate. Because we know our natural systems better than anyone else, we are the 

first to realize changes. This traditional knowledge that combines our heart and 

minds comes from our place-based way of life. This information has been gathered 

over the centuries through our everyday lives and shared through our songs, stories 

and ceremonies. 

Sharing that traditional knowledge to help address the many aspects of climate 

change on indigenous communities is the aim of the inaugural First Stewards symposium being held this week in Washington, D.C. at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian. Regional panels of tribal and indigenous leaders, policy makers, scientists and others will share climate adaptation strategies from 

coastal and island ecosystems nationwide. 

The symposium is a joint effort of the Makah, Hoh and Quileute tribes and the 

Quinault Indian Nation in Washington State in cooperation with indigenous communities throughout the nation, scientists and governmental and non-governmental 

organizations including the NOAA Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, 

Smithsonian’s National Museum of the American Indian, The Nature Conservancy, 

and Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council. 

Salmon Recovery 

Just as we are a place-based people, our treaty rights are place-based too. For 

those rights to have meaning there must be resources for us to harvest. Otherwise 

our treaties are relegated to empty promises, which is an all too common theme in 

Indian Country. Restricting our right to harvest continues to be much of the focus 

when habitat is the real problem. A steadily increasing population, combined with 

poor land use choices, increasing pollution, loss of viable salmon habitat and other 

factors contribute to the loss of habitat and our right to harvest. 

Because salmon live out their lives in both fresh and marine waters, they are one 

of the best indicators of the overall health of our ecosystems and the effects of climate change and habitat loss. The reality is that wild salmon populations continue 

to decline at an alarming rate throughout western Washington, primarily because 

of lost and degraded spawning and rearing habitat. This trend shows no sign of improvement and comes despite drastic harvest reductions, careful use of hatcheries, 

extensive habitat restoration projects and a huge investment of effort and funding. 

As a result, our treaty rights are at risk as never before because we are losing ecosystems faster than we can restore them. 

That’s why we are asking the federal government to align its agencies and programs, and lead a more coordinated salmon recovery effort. We want the United 

States to take charge of salmon recovery because it has a trust obligation to the 

tribes and the authority to ensure both the recovery of salmon and protection of 

tribal treaty rights. 

Until now, the federal government’s main response to declining salmon runs has 

been to restrict harvest. That’s a recipe for failure. Activities effecting habitat must 

be held to the same standard as harvest if we are going to recover salmon. 

Before tribes can fish, we are required to show that our fisheries will contribute 

to salmon recovery under the Endangered Species Act. We feel strongly that those 

who damage or destroy habitat must be held to the same standard. No amount of 

fishery restrictions can restore salmon unless they have enough good spawning and 

rearing habitat. 

We believe that salmon recovery must take place at the watershed level because 

that’s where salmon begin and end their lives. We have already developed recovery 

plans and identified barriers to salmon recovery for most watersheds in western 

Washington. Those plans must be implemented and the barriers identified need to 

be fixed, and it needs to happen soon. 

Protecting and restoring salmon habitat has always been the key to salmon recovery in western Washington. Hatcheries help provide limited fishing opportunities, 

but over time we have become increasingly reliant on hatchery salmon to help make 

up for the loss of natural salmon production from our rivers and streams. 

Most hatcheries were built to make up for lost natural salmon production caused 

by habitat damage and destruction. Today, the Chinook and coho we harvest are 

48

largely supported by hatchery production. This is a direct reflection of the huge 

amount of natural salmon production we have lost, and continue to lose every day. 

Hatcheries are not a substitute for wild salmon because they also require good 

salmon spawning and rearing habitat. Hatchery salmon were never intended to replace naturally spawning salmon. But that is what is happening after more than 

a century of habitat degradation. We’ve become dependent on hatcheries and the 

fish they produce because we are losing the battle to recover naturally spawning 

salmon and their habitat. Tribes currently depend on hatcheries to support our treaty fishing rights, to provide salmon for our tables, our cultures and our economies. 

All fishermen—Indian and non-Indian—rely on hatcheries, because to some extent, hatcheries support most fisheries. Some facilities produce fish for harvest, 

which helps reduce fishing pressure on naturally spawning salmon. Others are dedicated nurseries where weak wild stocks and their offspring are protected from disappearing altogether. 

Western Washington’s White River Chinook wouldn’t be here today if not for 

hatcheries. By 1977, fish-blocking dams and other habitat losses resulted in only 66 

adult Chinook returning to the river. An egg bank was created that year to save 

White River spring Chinook from extinction, which was almost too late. In 1986 just 

six adults returned, but today those fish have a future. The Muckleshoot Tribe’s 

White River Hatchery opened in 1989 in an effort to protect, preserve and restore 

those spring Chinook. Annual returns today number in the thousands and are a direct result of good hatchery management practices, habitat improvements in the 

upper watershed and collaborative efforts by the tribes, state and others. 

Hatcheries are not a long-term solution to salmon recovery. But when they are 

managed as part of a river’s ecosystem and are combined with conservative fisheries 

and habitat improvements, they can be effective tools that provide fishing opportunities for everyone. 

If we are going to succeed in salmon recovery, the federal government must use 

its authority to honor our treaties. Because our treaty rights are both civil rights 

and property rights, they are protected under the U.S Constitution. The U.S. Attorneys’ office was instrumental in helping us defend our treaty rights under U.S. vs. 

Washington. It may be time once again for the United States government to exercise 

its trust responsibility through the Department of Justice to protect tribal treaty 

rights and cultures. 

Field Hearings 

We respectfully request that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs conduct field 

hearings in western Washington to better understand the significance of the threat 

to our treaty rights that is resulting from the continued decline in the resources 

those rights depend on. Western Washington tribes are leaders in protecting and 

sustaining our natural resources. The tribes possess legal authority, as well as extensive technical and policy expertise. They effectively manage programs to confront 

the challenges that face our region and the nation. The activities and functions the 

tribes perform benefit all citizens of the state of Washington and U.S. 

We are facing many environmental and natural resource management challenges 

in the Pacific Northwest caused by human population expansion and urban sprawl. 

Those challenges include increased pollution problems ranging from storm water 

runoff to de-oxygenated or ‘‘dead’’ areas in the Hood Canal, parts of Puget Sound 

and in the Pacific Ocean. The pathway to the future is clear to us. Federal, state 

and tribal governments must strengthen our common bond and move forward with 

the determination and vigor it will take to preserve our heritage. 

The tribes are strategically located in each of the major watersheds, and no other 

group of people is more knowledgeable about the natural resources. No one else so 

deeply depends on the resources for their cultural, spiritual and economic survival. 

Tribes seize every opportunity to coordinate with other governments and non-governmental entities to avoid duplication, maximize positive impacts, and emphasize 

the application of ecosystem management. We continue to participate in resource recovery and habitat restoration on an equal level with the state of Washington and 

the federal government because we understand the great value of such cooperation. 

Conclusion 

Chairman Akaka and members of the Committee, our future and existence hangs 

in the balance right now. Together, we must focus on the needs of our children, with 

an eye on the lessons of the past. We have no illusions that we can leave a better 

world for our children, but we can leave the groundwork for recovering wild salmon, 

slowing the effects of climate change, and developing strategies for adapting to those 

changes. 

49

In the end, our treaty fishing rights are based on abundance, and it is that abundance that must be restored for those rights to have meaning. That abundance must 

come from a combination of improved habitat and hatchery production. The federal 

government must honor its treaties and exert it’s authority by exercising its trust 

obligation to the tribes to protect those resources. We look forward to continuing to 

work with the federal government on these vitally important issues and ask for Congress to continue to support our efforts to protect and restore our great natural heritage. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Billy Frank. 

Now I would like to call on Ms. Akutagawa to please proceed 

with your statement. 

STATEMENT OF MALIA AKUTAGAWA, ASSISTANT

PROFESSOR, WILLIAM S. RICHARDSON SCHOOL OF LAW 

Ms. AKUTAGAWA. Aloha, Senator Akaka. 

The CHAIRMAN. Aloha. 

Ms. AKUTAGAWA. Aloha, Committee members. Thank you for this 

opportunity to testify. My testimony will focus on the effects of climate change on Native Hawaiians and our cultural practices. 

Surface air temperature in Hawaii is steadily increasing and 

causing reduced cloud cover and a 15 percent decline in rainfall. 

We are noticing reduced stream flow; the drying of our Native forests and destruction from wild fires; drying springs that impact the 

availability of certain edible seaweeds and other species in estuarine habitats; irregular and late seasonal changes that have altered 

the number of consistent, good fishing days; prolonged drought and 

crop losses suffered by farmers and Hawaiian homesteaders. 

While rainfall decreases, rain intensity has been increasing, 

bringing frequent flash floods, mudslides, and damage to roads and 

infrastructure. Excess water and sediment choke our reefs and fish 

ponds. 

Sea level rise is causing chronic beach erosion. For example, 72 

percent of Kaua’i’s beaches are eroding. Global sea level is expected 

to rise three feet above current levels by the end of this century. 

Exposure of our iwi kapuna, our ancestral burials, are occurring 

along eroded shorelines. Sea level rise is preventing Hanapepe families on the island of Kaua’i from making salt for bartering, gifting, 

food preparation, traditional hearing, and ceremonial blessings. 

Hawaii’s surface water temperatures are increasing, making our 

corals vulnerable to bleaching. 

Elevated levels of carbon dioxide from greenhouse emissions are 

absorbed by the ocean. This is causing our ocean to acidify and 

threatening the development of shellfish, corals, calcereous algae, 

and marine plankton. Entire fisheries worldwide are at stake. 

Endangered species and special food sources to Native Hawaiians 

have been impacted. The stunning cycle of the manini fish dependent on harboring fertilized eggs within the spit of humpback 

whales may have been interrupted by the late migration of the 

whales this past year. 

Certain native plants within pristine, upland forests are flowering and seeding outside of their normal periods of reproduction. 

Climate change and environmental degradation impacts Native 

Hawaiians deeply because they alter our relationship to place, the 

foods, and the cultural practices that sustain us. 

50

I recommend Federal support for increasing Hawaii’s food security as a strategy for climate change adaptation and resilience. Specific areas where Federal involvement will help include: 

Express prohibitions on the development of prime agriculture 

lands for other than agriculture, especially projects financed with 

Federal dollars; 

Elimination of Federal subsidies for industrial agriculture to 

even the playing field for small, local, family farms; 

Maintaining biodiversity through support of indigenous initiatives on heritage seed saving and cultivation of ancestral plant varieties as a strategy to lessen vulnerability to crop failure; 

Support Hawaiian community efforts to restore and revitalize 

fishpond production by making the permitting process less cumbersome. 

I recommend the reduction of building new homes and infrastructure within the coastal zone in preparation for sea level rise. 

Federal guidance and conditions to continued funding of coastal 

zone management programs administered by the States are needed 

to help places like Hawaii adopt and implement a comprehensive 

climate change adaptation plan for coastal management. 

I encourage increased Federal funding for the Center for Island 

Adaptation and Policy and the work of agencies at all levels of government, as well as grants for NGOs, indigenous organizations, 

and educational institutions and programs that conduct reforestation work, watershed and marine management and restoration, 

fire suppression, invasive species removal, and the endangered species and critical habitat preservation work as they relate to 

strengthening our natural systems climate change resilience. 

In recent years the State of Hawaii has acknowledged the need 

to integrate Hawaiian traditional ecological knowledge through the 

Aha Moku system, and adaptive management tools. The Aha Moku 

process provides greater inroads for local and indigenous stakeholders to work effectively with Government in the management 

and protection of natural resources critical to our way of life. I 

would also urge Congressional support of initiatives like this that 

place Native indigenous stakeholders in positions of leadership to 

manage natural and cultural resources essential to their people’s 

wellbeing and traditional pathways. 

Mahalo for this opportunity to testify. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Akutagawa follows:]

51

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MALIA AKUTAGAWA, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, WILLIAM S. 

RICHARDSON SCHOOL OF LAW


719b1.eps
52


719b2.eps

In my testimony I would like to covet scme <)1 the m~jor clim~te <;h~nge \Iariabhl~ affecting 

H3wai1 a~ tlltt!enced b;' weslern s<;lent1fi~ rCSMt~~ and Indice[Jall5 ahSaN3tklns, These 

Viirla~fe51n~ludi!; 

Rls;ng a!!' t!!m;t!!fatuffl 

Dscre-allad rain fail and strelll'l'l flow 

h=rea;~cll'illn int"'mlty 

Rlslnguf$$iI ~Iltfa(<! t<!mpcr~turc and Si!~ 1~\1I!15, <lnd 

Ocean aCldifiution 

~rface AIr Ttl)mpgrijtufS & Impact to iJeland Forests. Watershed S~ti!n% Estuarine 

Environments. anq Acriculture 

Hawan has ~!1l!n ~ltfI"'rieJlctO'\g a slgnU'icaN )nrrQn~e 111 ~f;-tamp'erature aver tire pas;i: sa~ars. at 

In ~ver~il:e rate of o.3"f pel'" decade! This: warm!ng trend Is ~ prQnQ\l!'ltle;\ at de1l<llions 

~OOv-l': 2,600 fuetwlth an a'.mrage ll'iaeass {Tj .48"f lrn:,.ilS'" Il'lf llewlW, whl~!l is (:!srenhan the 

;;/<mal :?n:rase? As ; res'.lll;, t«!\lt:d ciCl!d cover ab~lg tile =-.m~i!ln roms"" "nd a m<'rl\ej 

nriucllen 11'1 rlllnt.!l1 has oceurred. Haw£J'j rec:::rd$lndkil~""" a ned!t'" <.Jf 1"5% in f<linf~1 Ci'Ja" the 

past 2(1 ~ars which has led to klss stream flow MO a '~[[llcli(Jn in wse floW frl'lm gfQundwater 

sour~ll~ to m~rntatn streamsdllring dry-perl~ds.J 

My personal tlbs(lrv~tiQn, arld those of ~th~r N~ti~e Haw~iiarls in their n~tural Island 

envlr!lnmlmts Indude: 

Sporaci'i\; flCCUrrijm.ll;lli (Jfwl1at tlslird to be Ilormald$l'mofrlingand e\'e:'l!rm I'lItnslJ.O\If!!u. 

StreilffiS that Itcwe-d v~ar tllund or most of the tim," now ifuw only dur#lg ~<l;j\l\l f3i:l>. 

The forgt$ a", drym,g mit. Wllefln>s:lre. more mmrrwn oand hwe lleen tme...->b:::-nfilg I~e 

greel\ upper fe?~S af .~:;;tiw focest$ to ill'! l!l:ts::'1tth~t r>a. not l:Ie!m wjt<les~eci bflr..:re~i 

I! .. d~ of ,"dilll", seaweed de);C3:;!es SIKh .. ~ lim!! 'elI!'eTe :l!'lO huluim\U1.llaenl! which fJ'.ror 

f,~,hwol~r saall,1 along the marine ~hornlJl1t a~ drillS gut lind their c(1IIer1lgc area !las 

bewme grallnv reduced due to ~rgll>nged drol.lght imd rei:luctlon of spril'lZ ww~r ~I"ng the 

co.os'tline. Ar~a~ rich in edlille Ilmu ara ~IKornl1g dominated by "pp"rt~t\jj;\ie, weedy, 

inedible seaweeds. 

The season~ ~re fU'riving late; ~"metime3 a tertaln rew;gn lorn fur il veryshorl dUraliofl'or is 

5kippen ~It~fle.tber. There is also i! ~ertdency of seasons to mix, with ~npradictable 

~lterf':tJM coo! l'I"rl warm temp!<'<rtUtH en an~· i!viln ";:0'1. The dfeet h~s OO(!\l that r:sh~'1f: 

=5Q1~ 11M beccmlt pl'otrlicted. IntreaWd water dlo]. imo tie.q~$etf vi:>ihl1ty fwm 

stom;w"ter d~hll!ge mak& ..:.,:,r,citions unfavorabk; furfubiog. 

1 fletcher, Chip. ~1l1l\Val1's Chm'lg!ng Climate Brlefin;:: >t,eet 2012.~ Depr<rtml.'r)t('/6eo/oyy and 

Geophysics,. Schaal rif O~on omi ~orth Science rmr! TecimD/ogy, University of HIlW.:1f'1 (it M/i'noo:l. 

University rU Hov/O/'1 SeD ~((mt College Prggraffl, tr.niR,r for 1510nd ClimDte AdoptlJtkm and 

Pc/icy. 

1 FIet~her. ChiJl, "J;i\W<li'j's Changing Climate BrlafingSheat 2012." 

a Flet~hcr, Chip. "l-I~W<li'l's Chaf1:h1g dimatta 6riafi."IgShet 2012." 

~ Crotter, ~':nnilllk~11(~'lla\l"iD, Comment, at tilt) rsl:.rl\(j C!lmat~Adaptilti!ln 3)'ld I"otk'l"~ Nat:ve 

H.awalian S;,mptlsi1.lm onC!illl;m, Ch.mg,,~ MardI 22--23, 2(111, O'al'>ll, HiffilIi1. 
53


719b3.eps

Molokai f~rm~m ilO~ Hijw~iiijo HQme't~ad f~rl~iI1Z fIJmilics ~II ci~~d Ilh~ervallon~ of 

prol<>ng",d draught '''rldTlion~ th.! havQ (;~{rt14,ed aaft fajlure ~nd l~fI: ~l'(Ipj mare 

vulnen!:)!'" ttl llasts aile predation bl'ferai UJ\l!u!~t'5 seek,ng mois.turean<l fw,ritlon.s 

Whlle rainfall (wenU hal' decreased, the "mIlunt ofh~l!"'{j'"aimal; 005 incr<'..lSM bv all ilstlmate!;i 

12% ~il'l~ft 19511." Mar" <lOG mo~, there h~~\/V r~ln~tmm~ ;,~v,., h"~11 t~lJ~lnli fl;;sh floods, 

mudslides, dam~a~ to ro~ds and infrilsl;rl,lctur.;!, ihi, p1enomencn Is also ob.~<l!rv~d on Moloka!. 

We have 311t runoff from the mountaim that thOKf! our reefs. Heavy r"lns regularly cause 

mutlslldes, bring bQI']ocr.; down thC! mountilin ~t'ld blr;!d.: roads.. and damage our brldge~, 

Hi'ilel Kawelo, oper1!tQF of ?ilepae a Heela R5hflOI\(,\ M tha windwlIrd ~,,~st oj O'ah'.! recounts 

her IlllservatioM th~t there h«. b~en« del:nMs!C lro t!:ade wind s.hower:s atld an Il'\crea!Al: In p\l~se, 

ffacGlI1g.' DwlnS these heavy rall> C',"'mts, ,...diffient 'lM B."((e.;s water washes into iliep;;rnd aad 

illtlln iu. bI!Xh~mist<y, lbi, lntparu her ability tn M(W~:'; gond e!lvir~r.lfIalt ro,fuh to Sl';;rw. 

'ne stramgy I>f Oll: 'm:;;jlOnt kiJ:PIlffil. {illWllstcr~) jr. fa;hiornng th€se fishpnnds el!lltt.!rl1<s lljOlNilS 

to create 11 miCT'.1·envirclTlment fur h<:,biIl(lIQ,"S liS", to tnr,ve_ ,ill" W1!le;w!le, or prodllctive 

waters, whue ir@h ~nd salt water m;~, prQvlde Id~(I1l;Onditions fur <llpl m~t~ eslled mlcrophyto benthoB (MPBj t" fQrm alons Ine pond o(1lttlil1 and feed mUllet.' T~e fN<~hw~ter mMI'lg 

With th~ sea seMi!~ a~ 8 cooling agent and hel~$ t;Q maif1tain Qptim;ll dissoll'''1i oxygen levels 

important to k~eplng fuh alive ilnd healthY,~ 

Rf,jing Seil l!;",~], Il~~ch I.o!is. Exposure of "t4HN..!diav.ralian Burlal~, and fm2~.!£....1)wjrtlQnal 

Salt-Making 

QI'~' the ;lllSt eel'Itwy, Stl;J I""',,, in H~i'I rose at a:-; ~ll!M 0 . .5 Incl!ei per 1Ir.r-•• 'llia. Tm. 

c>lmuiat1'"o'e ;nt;e~ io $<i;a j~el has led to eoastal $'oIion and flotidlng, and dilrr;\lg~ W i1rtf.itial 

draillilglit $YSt~~.1GChrcnic roasteal erosion llffil~t$ be"thesth~tw!!re once .stabkl. The ave.-a~ 

r"te of be~<:.h loss lslal'id-wjde j, 1 fuot pH Y~M. \l n% of kaua'fs bea~hes :Ire (t,I(p~riellcinll 

~hr~mi~ er(ls!(tn. h~ developed Jreas, the prev"'lel)'~ 'If seawall Mnstru~tfon hw~ I~d to bea~h 

loss. Seawalls on O'~hv h~ve causcd ~ ZS% IM~ (If beaches on Ihat island.'" It Is expe!;t~rj that 

global warmIng will e),.ilcerb~te and accclc",!", trll-llds In sea level rise. Research models show 

that by the end of In Is cC!nt~ry. glabal seil levEl m:oy rr$~.3 or more het above 19:10 ]!lvills.» 

5 A~,It.Jg3W<l, M3IJa. t~hela l'lan,Ha~ 'Nilliams, Emlfifa NwrdJwroll, S~[ Vitrc b1~ Mllldt"ar 

- Mvro/mf AgricuiW'2: IVl':t'ds Affe5Smell~ riWt· lOll. 

~ Flelcher, Cr-r\p. ~11~'1I~~'l's Ch~nlllng Climate Brlefinr: SI1eet2ll12." 

7 Kawe)o, Helle!. PresentatIon at the Papahi'lfU!~mo~l,Iakea M~rine National M~nHrnent Climate 

Chal1ge W(lrk!:;b(l~, 0'",,1.1, Hawal·l,Jl.lne 12-14, 20l2. 

I K~wcl(l, Hi~loi" pr~$ent~tlon 2012 • 

• Kawelo, Hi'ilei. Pr~.'i~nl~tlon 2012. 

10 Fletch~r, Cnip. ~Hawai'i's Cllanging Climate Srlellni ShC!~t2012." 

11 Fletchet, (hip. ~Hawal'l's Ct>anglng Cl1mat~ Bfi~1'inll ~heet20l1." 

IJ F1<!tthu, Chip. ~f!~wa!'1'5 Changlng Climate Ilrlcline Shcct20lZ." 

n Pl!td>~f, eMp .. "HaWlll'j's Chlnglni ClImate !lrJefj!'lg sn,,1!l; 2012..'c 
54


719b4.eps

Low-lying 151:and~ In the South PadRc are already e~periencine th~ full brunt of di"I~h' chante in 

ri5illg 5ea levels I;h~t have completely inundlrted l~lancls, floo~d 11Omes, covered CIlmeteries, 

in"ndated areas impOJt:!nt for agriculture arid leaving people as refugees in th~:r homeland, 

depel'1dent:m food ~rld WllMrdtop_off! by Cllher countries conductlng humanitarian wqrk.'~ 

cn Mololun, we lIri! wtl;nEl;slng tlw llXpD$Ure Ilf ~.vj k~ptma (ance5tri!1 buria!» ~lollg en .. lled 

shorelines. Assea level conlinlll!5 to rise anri Iw~t:hes crade further, we will need to rnspectfuEv 

rel<'Kate lwl !wptm~ to hither eround. 

Dr. Chip Fletchel' of the University of Hawai'i h; documented the impacts of elimate r.hange In 

the South Pacific IslMds. He has found that saltwaWI'lntruslon accompanies lea [evIII me ~nd 

has compromiSl'ld springs feeding low-lying agrictlltural are~s." F~mllies h~y'l been forced te 

abandon their taro fields which h~ve been eXllosed to salt water. The <l.qulfer hs~ been 

damaged, !1mit!ng their ability til a~cess drlnkl", wate •• l~ In time, areas]n Haw~I'i wlU I!~ fJc1ng 

s ~im1filr :;It;JaUon. Taro 15th .. sta?l~ E;(QP t>f Nillrvc Hawa~al1S. low lyIng taro Ilelris throur;nnut 

Hawal'll'Iili be cumprolllised ~s wen ",ilO rising OC($f\ w;:tcrs. 

ctm<rte ch~nge h~s direaty impact.m H1mapiijlii famOles who ma~e salt for bartering and 

giftingP It also affect! traditional I~'au lapa'au hearing prilctlcl!S ilnd ~er~moni,,1 ble~ings (fllr 

new homes, buildings, boats, etc.) that utUlze pa'aka; (salt)." Hawaiian familie$ in the Hanapepe 

reslon af Kaua'i Island haw milintained for generations the traditional p"ll:tlco of sca salt 

milking. In tt11s are~ of Kaua'] th~re e~Tsts s<.!a shetves and a ~ystem of law tube5 Ih~t (any 

o(ean water Inland and fin up puna (springs) de~lgnated specifically for s~lt l'l1aklng.llI Families 

clean <lnd maintain these ,"una kai.:!O During the'mo"'Jt.~ nf April to September, families harvest 

seawater from Ihese pu,)a and fashion outwalktl aIlC [0'1 out ofn;.tural d~y fourld In the area!' 

These waikfl lmd 10'1 are a series of e~rthen troughs or oo!Jn~ shap!HI hy hand !lnd made. 

Impermeab!e to bold ~eaw.atF.rhllrvested from the. punil.~> The~Bawater b; IHllired fim into til .. 

~ .. alkQ an£! thentran5ferred to we Io'i forfurtherlir;'lng ~nd aystall!~atlon.nThe N(llm:ga familv 

who malt'ltalns thl. tJ';!dltton obtaIns on ilYflr~g;: 7:; buckets of 5alt per harv,"'5t and makes 

several harvests throuehout the salt-making sea~on.21 Two ye<lfS ago, however, families in 

Hanapepe could not harvest any salt due tn ri~ing sea level that overflowed the puna and 

flooded the enttr~ llrM utilized for ~alt-maklng,l1I Just a month aGo In June" the Nobrega'. were 

... Miss South Pacific: Beautl' and the Sea. Dire~'ted by Mary L<lmbert. 2011. A dor.umMtary film 

depicting beal,l~y p~gcant contestants tI'Ir<l1!8hout til" Soi.lth Pac1fi~ islands addreS$inG the 

dll'last3tlng elfe"s of '~m"te ~h~r.ge in their homeloods. 

11 F!et~h&, Ci'llj:!. Pr(!Scntation ill tl>c 15land Climal(;- AWpt~tion and Policy's Matm Hawaiian 

SymposIum O') Cllmat€ C!;ange, O'aho, Hawa,,,, March Z2-23, ZO:;,2. 

:K Retther, Chip, Presentation 2Ql2. 

17 Malia NQbreg~, intenilew by Mal!:>. AkutagaWoll,Julyl0, Z012. O'ahu, Hawa!'i . 

•• MalTa Nobrega, lntl!;rvll!;w 2012. 

I'l Malla Nobrega,lntl!;rvlew Z012. 

,. Malia Nobrega, Inlt:rview 2m2. 

>I Malia Nobrega, Interview 2012. 

lZ Malia Nobreg~, Interview 2012. 

>J Mal1a Nobrel9, lntervl\lw 2012, 

,. M"'i" ~brega, i!\telview Z012. 

2$ Mali3 rtomcga, lm(!T'Iiew 2012. 
55


719b5.eps

able to make salt anf.'i halve.t in July a total of n btAdu?ts.H Ttlls Is the fjrsttlme oonditlQns have 

been Qptlm~1 to m:o~e s~lt and the family Is nCluutl! When gcad IXlmlltlQn5 will Q~cur ~l:ain.27 

&gula, sl.u'i'are water t-ern;l&alli,e T£atiw,gs (eveal a l),:2:2'T Ir,cre<l~e per de.~d" il) f!awaii:;;n 

waers. ScIentist; amkl,,-ate ti:!ls figll,il tr! ;jS(l With gl"boil warming.~Ri$ing mmpef-lltllre;: wm 

e~pm;e cor~l~ t<'J bleaching ,,-~ents wher" they mily permanent:y lase Itilli, svmbiotic 

mlcro~rE~e.l.!1 €Ievated levels of carbon die»:If.'i1! In the atmosphere calls~d by emIssion of 

greenhouse 83$~~ by Inrlu5trialiled natitms ~n(l developing countries are absorbed by Iha oooan 

and ~Iters its cl)l!l'tIl6try to more acid condition. that Ilmltthe ilVllilability ofdls~(lI~eQ cilrbon<rte. 

This limitation Impilct:i a[1 sheJifish, ~or~I., e.!i::ilr(1()\IS ~Ig<te, and marine fllanktcHl.10 Ocean 

addTflt:<llion h~, Ill« jlot~ntial to (ollafllB elltlri! fl~hlllrias worleiwlde. For the reel' ~p\lcifj(~lty. if 

they are Imable to recover, flsh who feed on coru! Inse tru:!ir food murre. E~'mtua!l~ Ine de.ad 

tDral malr',:< t!!SintcSf'!lt~~ and habitat b lost to a nllmher of Ina-fine >pedes. This \11 t~m Im!lacts 

ttte he"'lth pf OOf t!5hMEs. for N~ H~\~ali3J'l5" it means t!te 10-2 of food sotlf[~ and the 

d=rualan ofiWllng groun!ls crltkal to tfil!:!ltkI!liI1. sohs~~. 

The efferu of climate change are lIelrli fett mar .. Immediately by Iflo:. ol!J~r, IDwer Iylnl: 

Northwest H<lw~ilnn 1~land& that ~re collectll~ly desiBnated as the Papahfil1~umoku;;kea 

National Marine Monumel'lt. Ob.;ervatlon~ of tc.our<:e man"ters arid sci",flIl~W in dude the 

followins:" 

,hG jEillnd~ aN;! dlsap~tr!ll: 'ileneatn ~he oeea!! du~ to ~ea le\ie! rh'" 

M~re loss :Of habitst is anticipated due to .rei! level ~ t:ct!p!~d with ft,tilMr. ~tmm W~'Je$ 

th!!tmoYe [uland anI! takE C(!t nesl\flgseubltd$. 

R2t1u~llon of mook ~eal pll.p>llng~ea5,md turtle nestlr,g £lte;rlIlE ro ~ach lOiS. 

Raclueed oceani~ productivity along: the Haw;,!I"n Mchtpeiago due to shifting tltl'rent ane 

atmosph~ri~ wind patterns that no IOflger ~romote upwelling of nutrIent!: in Huw~n This 

will impact f1~hl!rle.'j throughout the archlpet~go, 

Endangered .. ~~~~d FOQd Sources Im~or:aru: ~g futly!! Hgwallans 

Sever<lll*ltl"l! lia'lo.oatfal1s eJj)Jert In umlerstilN!ing moon Ilbasu and tydes lind th<:l CI:l!Tal"U(lIls 

with id~1 ptMtmg and MNestir;s l'lerrods for varl<.>u5 fQOd Cl"0p5; :tre (!;<prod(jeU..e .:y.:1~ of 

pWnh and $pawnin!ll"'ried~ of fish c"ntr'hutl!.d va!!l:3bl!! input G!l tOO wa'.!S c!!mate ~ll'g£ l~ 

::!l;Malia NClbrega, Int~rview 2Qll. 

en Malia f.!obrega, lrll~rvlew 2012. 

11 Fletcher, Chip. "Bavrol'I's Changing Climate !lrl~fjnll Sheet 2012." 

Z!I fletcher, Cl1lp, "Haw~j'i's Cha~girlg CiTmate fltI~finl! Sheet 2012." 

In ftetch~ .. , Chip. "Hilw<li'i's Changillg Climate Brtefll'\ll ShElet201Z" 

n Presentat,Orll and O!stu~~lons at th!1: Pa!laMna\Jmoku~kua M:!tr~ Na1;i(11'\<l1 Manumerlt 

Cilmate Change W()rk1ihop, 0'<100, n<lWil;'I, June 12"14, 2012. 
56


719b6.eps

jmp~~ting th~$o wd~s, H~waii~n bot~njsts, fore~t and watershed managers also corrtrlbuted 

th~ir knowledge of ch8ngesseen lrl the field. 

Kale; Nu'..mi .... " $nMed her k"owtedge of the sp<lWfling ~yde ofth", m,m;n; fl$h <::e>in<:l<It:'1t with 

the anivai of mIgrating humpback whllles!~ Fartmu:l egg; of the m<mlnl ~ tW1~eale<;l fw;n 

prediltcrs and devt'lop int'J 'chua (newly hatchet! fry 1;IT fingerliniri) "es:;:l~d wrth'n the bubbles 

of wwle :;.pit, As the wrrents (;my the whale spit tCl ShClTf<, the 'iihua are rnllr.i!!ed and find 

shelter alMg th" ~horeline Md tidep<mis, This winter season, the whales weN!! I~tll in their 

migration to Hamll'l. ThIs may have adversely Impat;ted manini spawning and surviv~1 r;Jtcs of 

their yotlng. 

Pomalka'i Kaniaupio. Crazier who assists in the management of Pu'u Kukul Watersh~d Preserve 

and Ma Kal C:onnrv~tion Areas on the Island of Maul has observed that certain nati~~ pl~nts 

within prl,tine. upl~nd forests ;:rm fIDW~rir1f, ~nd sel}djng outside of their normal perio.ds of 

re;JroduCliOl'l,ill 

Dr. Senten l\eaii1 Pa!1g noted the Haw<liian people's C(l51f":;\ogical, genc;l!og1wl, nr-...h~;aa!ogica!, 

"nd ed\l~a:i(IO,jJ1 tvnnectiOil to the papah:in.1umof:uftea !Ncrtf!wru;t Hawallan blonds). '"' 

Climate cO'l!nge I~ resulting in ecological 2Xtll1ctioJ\!i and degradation •• These In turn result in a 

loss o.f kInship and a d~gradatlon of oolt\lr~ - ~ 10$s of or reduction in our ability tQ practice our 

culture, to le~rn fl'QnI what our kupuna (ancestors. elders) clTd,!S 

Fishpond op~rator Hrilei Kawelo, speaks fondly of her one /ltim:w, her blrthplace, ~The function 

o.f my place, m~ ~hupu<l'iI, is to produl:e foocl, anti m~ function i~ to care fur this place. As 

H"waqaru;. w€ make conl'ecllons through food ;)[lfJ r€iy on our 'lke kupuna, our ancestral 

ImowledgIC, of ~thMlng ~nd preparing these-food.>.."'" The ronne.ctlnn to place and our kl.!!e~na 

{resf)o!l!ibilityJ to (are for our place Is the ~en(e of cur culture. Cifm<'lt<l dla~ and 

en .. ln;l!lmerrt~! d'i!jffilQation lmpEcts Niltj~e Haw<JUans dl!"Jlly beeaus" the". alter uur ~Ia!ior:ship 

tc place, Ihe rood~, and 6e culttra! practices that 'l!stain us. 

Recommendation:; 

Increase Food Security. As we beGin to look at climate challie adaptation and re~iIIl!nce, the 

ability to pro dues ollr own food IQcally and .trerlgtherllng HaW311's food security will be 

key. Govcrnfl'1~nt ~hnlltd no long~r take a blind eye tn appropriating tha we of prime 

agricultllfe lands 1M housIng, !UXllry gentlemen I!~tates, and commllrda! developments that 

Iru:apacltate the Islands fro.m producing WOO for its dtf>ens, Th<e approval of proiC(ts r:n~nced 

., N~'uhiw1l, Ka[€!, Comments anhe ls1~nd Climate Ad.ptation ilnd Pelicy's Niltive H~waiiarl 

Symposium on r:nm~te Chan~e. March 22~23, 2012, O'~Il(l, H~wal'f, 

... Croller. Pom~ikil'i K~niauplo. Comments ~tth~ 1~land Climat~ Adaptation arld Policy's Native 

Hawaiian Symposium o.n Climate Change, March 22·:23, 2012, O'ahu, Hawal1. 

"'Pang, Benton Ke~l1'l. PresentatIon at the Pap~h;'jn~umo"uakea M~rine Natiollffil Monument 

Clim~le Change WorkshClp, O'anu, Hawai'i,JuM 12-14, 201:2. 

*"Pang, Benton Kealn Presentation 2012. 

J. Kawai!;>, Hl'tlej, I'r(:lSentalion"t the P.:lpEhanJum"kuiikea- M<!rine Natlolkll MooulTIMtCllmat!! 

Ch~nge Workshop, o'ahu, H<!wa;'I, June 1:2-14,2012. 
57


719b7.eps

with feeler;;1 t!\lll~r~ -\11~lIld provide e~pre~!i to~t!ltiom that prime aBrlr:ulturalland~ I:re 'rar~d 

from (onstrllcli()(l. 

rerlerol ,m:! 5t<;ti laws. and poUcias ;'1eed to tharll,\l" t" suppmt sm~lI famnv farms that will In. 

tum In!:Tl!as~ lecal seif.5ufficlepey and n:sl!ierlC(lln ... lI w."IImlJml1e~ throughout t[awa!'i. The.!! 

small famlty f<!rms aob:e t;mrl to ~-eserlie green- $p<\CIi! ~,.;pcrtar.t to eaft)on sequelIt!'1lticn aN! 

p«st:Mng"the noiii<mt; in th~ wii. ~edeml subsidies for -ewpcnte aIJrlr:ulture l'leQd l(l «nil, a~ 

they se~ fill~<! pritl"" that Je<l1leS the small farmat cut of the equation and .ma!.>!", ~o make ;; 

Jjving. 

Federal fUl'ld~ 8nd pol1de5 that encourage Ii~wal'l .md other SIMes to set a;ltle more ~griculture 

IBnd for leas~5 tu $m~n farmers should be ad(l~d. Presstlre must be appli~d to the Slate in 

discontinuln& l\bw;lv"'l)ra~t1ces that allow for leali~s and sub-leasing of agrl~ull\!r'l) ~ill'k lands tE'> 

huge, olotc(h M~d ~mpan1M. T~Il.H! a!.mP'llnlus ta~ awa'{ from ~w,,"i<s food ~!Itutlt'F aruf 

da:moy the Hf~ <If tlla !ann through MallY i!pplir~ltj,]f\ of ~hemk;t pe;ti:cidu an:.! fertlll!ers, 

monocrDppinlt aild ~I:sins pr!1;;i~ l!)psoil ttl weni ~nd w&er wosi"::lI'I. ~ ~l¥kultvrs! 

,l!arks; were tre .. "ted to Ixndi! ro.:~~ milia farm ~tM!; no! ror iru:h;s:trIl!J >'Igrit:rnture 

wrnpwlles. 

Resilienc(! to climate ~h.anc~ also r~~ujrlM pre$~rvatlpn of biodiversity in our jUCld aop. 3nd 

supporting ~tt$t~inable. ecological farmlnll pr"ctic~, mat grow 5everal I/:Jirfetll)$ Qf many 

different crops, In thlll way, farmers are mora IiM,IV to ~l/o!cI total crop foiluffl Qnd ~lIlact for 

cmp varietii5 that ilr~ more ~dapt1Ve to dlrmlt~ th~nge. FumJing local community and 

indigeno~s intti~tiV\l5 O{l ~ed saving, ccll~(ltn~ ~nd ~ropag~tlng heritagl! u~da. ij(ld f<lr u' in 

Hawafl t~ presllrval!tm and: plantirtg d canoe tn::,IlI; ami t~ many "!lJi",IjO;:S that c~,r:(lMeston 

cull(v;Jted Ihrougnc(;.Flturie$, wm h~ cri!ialto (nmate thilllge res~~efl~e "nd a¢lptl!{!ru:_ 

HO"J2i'fs lrrlcier.t fi;lwonC~ ST'" "",>lerut1liiled, y~t !lose a ~i:ga;fkMtt oppl:irtenlty for foo-d 

procuctlon. GU\1.erom~nt n!ful~t,or. "ill: lh~ feall,a), state, arid -.:ounty !I>'J"! ba:, m~,J" "h, 

permlWl'1; proCI1$ll rl~\lflting am! tost prQhiiJittVll tv the ~verilge PeT30;'1. lnforl'!l~j pmC~S5e5 

shmlld b~ {'~pll,)J'(!d further such <IS memcrand~ Qf agre~ment b~tw",eFl gOllernment and 

H<lWaiian growps ~eOl~lnB to restore these ponds for fish produclion. In this m<l.nner same of the 

environmentally protective me~sures around 1l'I(lll'Jt~l~l(lg water quality would be followed, but 

nQtseNe ilS a complete oorrier to revitali.ing (lur fi~bp:)nds to produce food. 

Redudl"lG b\.\lf<!lfl~ of !leW hames and ,nrrastlUd;url wltMn the roastal wne ill rm:lpll(<ltlon of 

sua fNel rlre. Ferlerai!yflioced c'Casta! wile man~genlf:lflt~rCl:r<lm~ <m~ ';!lIHr\ies i\l1plern~ting 

,he ri!W t/Jr::ll!gh trtll moulliw 3etbs~ ,lr1ci Spedal Managemem Are~ reg'-1fl!ti~!'I$ mutt lIlfO 

wRsit thll1rlw.'ld tI~!l lind pel'mltt!ng r",~t!ons ~r~{lnd rle\l€1Ilpm!!!1t £)fnu~tI!lTe pr~perti!!~ in 

light of sea !evel rl~c. Feder;:,i guld<!.nte !"In mew IsSJIlS a~d WrltHtlons to CCl'ltiolied funding 

WQl!ld .heh~ W ent01.ll<lge States 1ike J-i~w3i' to adopt and lmplemEnt a crJfl1prtlh~llslve climate 

change.ad3pt~fiM pl~n for ~oast:l[ milnagernent. 

A c:ompreheo~lvl1\ plan h~s to be c,lablishcd that r,"n!lders the use of eminent domain p(lWers 

and a mechani~Li). fOf land swaps for famllie~ liVing In orBas th~t will become ir1ll)ltla~itd hI' risin~ 

~wa" levels wtt~ifl th~ Il~:rt several decades. SomiJthhs mllst be done now bd(lre- m~rlY <.'If Oll~ 

islander~ h(lco~ dlmMe refugees_ 
58


719b8.eps

Increase funding for the work of ~gem:le5 at ~Tllev",l$ of government ~s W!!II a5 €rants for 

NGOs, indlgtlf'lOus organ,'zatrons, ~ncl edllcallonai institutions and programs that conduct 

reforestation wotk, watershed and marine mllfl~gem;mt and restoratIon, ilr() ::;uppre:;5ion, 

Invasive spede~ n!moval, ami endarlge~d specie ,md tritical n<lblt<lt p~ervatlon work. 

More work e;;trl be done to Improve Hawai'l's forests and watersheds. Feder~1 funding ,;Imuld 

slIpport th~ wor!<; or ilge,,~!es, NGO., ",.,d other entitles doing reforestatio" .. nd wat"r~Md 

man~gement W()ri:. With every effort made to prKerve a:..lst1ng ronms al1t1 watershed "n'''';; 

S(l!)p[emer.t~d by n;:~air ef an;:as that h",,'c become denl>ded thHlugh poor hmd management, 

we can n(!ip tn "'ttr;;ct more cloud rover anti rain. These stratesies address th~ need to 

strengthen the health of our blo ~nd ecological SV$t~ms to cre~te r:reater dln'l~t(! msllienca. 

Often overlooked ~re the ways that urbanization contributes to YI~ter lo~ throu~h modern 

culvert and elralnage systems tIlat transport water uff th~ l~nd and directly intl.l Ifle sea. Thi~ 

ell.PCJ5es the marinO! I1fwironment te ~hemJcal to~lns as well ill lin overabundance of freshw~ter 

Input dllrlng heaVi' rains. Much of this water can be hilrvested pil,slvely In urban land,capes 

through sutltle e<.lrthWorks (,v:~le wl1strud;c>f1, t.macing, permeable p"ving, etc.) that weli:tlme 

and Incor;:>Oflltc w;rter into )a<ldscaplng. Through cOntlr.ua: soakage of ralnwater Into the hmd, 

i't!charge of g'oumlwater at lDwer elevatief\; "ml the creation of rew spline I'MS are posdble 

ami would ~er\le to m;tig~te the negative Impacts of Siiltwat~r intrusion aU('l~lMec with rising 

sea levels. 

A decrease In anthropogenic disturbance on n~tural eooSY5tem5 and ~ CQrnll'litl)lent to 

restorative work whether it ba rarnovlne ungulates from damaging upland forests; enllsglnB In 

responsible, ~llst3rMble ranching; or decreasing non-point sourre pollution discharge 1rW;> the 

aC!!an, allr fbhpon<is, ~ntl reef - these new. r'.l$pofjsible pr;;cUc{!s wiG 31d 5pecles and the 

naUiral systems In recovery am! m~k{! them that muth stronger to face tile challenges th~t 

Wm€ with climate d:allie. 

SuppOrt the contlnued work aT1he Center for bland i:UmateAdaptatlol1 & Policy (leAP). !CA? 

has been lnstru.'1lontalln bringing together the scIence. Nativa Haw~llan Jnd other community 

stakeholders, and tile legal experience 10 mak!!' policy recommendatlol1s that !ileveHlmcnt and 

the public can act en tocay. Feder~1 funding Is n~od(>d to help ICAP contirnJl'1 il.l work for the 

berlefit of our isi'JIlII,. As <l result of the Native H~\Vaiian Symposium on Climate Chenge,lCAP is 

moving forward with recommenclatlons to cre6te II KIlo Honua (Earth Ob5erver~) Plogram th~t 

w~1 outreach IrltQ N;}tiv~ HawaIIan wmmunltles and aide in discourse around cUm ate change 

Issues. Tto~ proJet1 w1l! also ~lltail an assessml!r\t of tht issues and ~oi1cles needed to respect, 

preserl>'l1 ar,d malnteln Hawa1!an traditional knowlndge, ;n;'lovatloos, and pr"etlclls. It w~! 

highlight tile ImlIQrtarn:e of Irrdigerlous Hfe,t\'llls to oomerva~kll ;mel sustaJl'lab!e use of narurii: 

resourcru:. 

Papahanaumol;uakea. We need to antiCipate that In the years ahead birds, monk sc~ls, ami 

turtles may begIn mIgration from the Northwest HaWiJliiln Islands te the maIn HawaOan islands. 

We ar~ already witn"'ssin~ this with mcmk seals naturally relocating to the main Hawaiian 

islands. AI their numbers Increase In the main Hawaiian jslartl,;, th~re h~"e Ilc~n repe~led and 

deliberate kilJjng~ of monk s~al5 by humarlS. It is Su~p~tteel that fisllermen ara kIlling th~m due 

to an innacurata perception that monk seals ~re ~ompetlntl far the same food sour~"€. Actions 

must be taken to educata the pub", ami prOVide a p!aceforthem endanili!reclilawallan specIes 

to co·ex!st peaceably wltll us. This rna, e~tal! estabnsNng natllral felieIVeli {or varioos 5p~de5 
59

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Ms. Akutagawa, for your 

testimony. 

Now I would like to change in order here and ask Senator Cantwell for any questions she may have, and I will follow with my 

questions. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, thank you 

for this hearing. 

Mr. Frank, many Tribes in our State are feeling the impact of 

ocean acidification, primarily the shellfish are being impacted, obviously other fish species are being impacted. This has had a major 

impact on our fish runs. 

What do you think we need to do on the mitigation side? We 

were able to get some money from NOAA as it related to monitoring water CO2 and water levels so that people on the seeding 


719b9.eps
60

of shellfish could do a better job, but what else should we be doing 

on mitigation? 

Mr. FRANK. I think what we have got to do is we have got to hold 

hearings, oversight hearings, right in the northwest, right in our 

country throughout our witnesses here. Oversight hearings has got 

to be addressing exactly what Senator Cantwell is talking about. 

We have to start listening to us Indian people, the traditional 

people that have lived here all their lives, as you just said, and listen to us. Nobody listens to us. You don’t listen to us. You don’t 

listen to us when we talk. We tell you what has to be done. We 

play to the choir. We talked to each other in this conference. We 

talked to one another. We learn about each other, about our problems. 

We have to have oversight hearings held right on our reservations, right where the dead zone is, where the salmon is floating 

in dead, where the shellfish is dying in Hood Canal, where our migration is dying in south Puget Sound. We have got to hold hearings there and we have got to have the energy to make that happen. 

Senator CANTWELL. Mr. Williams, did you have a comment on 

that from Alaska’s perspective? 

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes. I am from Alaska. We have 229 federally-recognized Tribes and many people there, in terms of our salmon, our 

chinook salmon, is declining up there. And I think, in regards to 

the ocean, we need to have oversight hearings to make sure that 

our salmon return in perpetuity. The way things are going, as I 

talk to Joe Garnie from Teller and from those in Nome area, the 

king salmon quit showing up. He caught only one king salmon so 

far this summer and two sockeye in Teller River, and also some 

chums. They are declining up there. That is my biggest concern. 

I think if we could have—and I fully agree with Billy Frank that 

we need to hold meaningful hearings to begin addressing all of the 

rivers, all of the Bering Sea, and also some of the Pacific Ocean 

where our salmon are rearing before they head back up to our rivers. 

But I think we need to get that traditional knowledge, the elders 

engaged, the Tribal governments and others that, if we are going 

to do something, we need to do something right now. We cannot afford to wait any longer. 

Thank you. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Cantwell. 

Chief Williams, two GAO reports outline the vulnerability of several coastal village in Alaska. The reports identified obstacles the 

villages faced in accessing Federal programs. To your knowledge, 

have those issues been resolved? 

Mr. WILLIAMS. It has been very difficult, and in this meeting 

with the new stewards, with the symposium, we have heard testimony from Newtok, Shishmaref, and other communities, as well as 

mine. The place where I was born, my house is underwater. I set 

a fish net there and I am catching salmon where I was born, and 

that was from the erosion. Also, our old village is in the middle of 

the river from erosion. 

61

There is probably about 80 percent of the communities that are 

vulnerable now, but three of the communities must be moved, but 

there has been lack of coordination by agencies and, while the communities like Newtok are suffering that need to be moved now, are 

having lack of capacity, lack of capital to achieve those moves. 

I think we cannot afford to wait, and that young man, Nelson 

Kanuk, testified or is in You Tube that the village is receding so 

fast that they need to move now. I think that is one thing that I 

think the Federal agencies—and I think that requires another 

hearing to deal with those issues in Alaska in our areas, to have 

a viable plan to address those communities that are vulnerable, 

and in 50 years 180 communities are going to be in the water. How 

can we afford that? It is going to take, I think, if we don’t do anything about them now, it is going to cost more lives, more capital 

for the Government in the future. But I think right now the trust 

obligations that the United States has to our people, we need to 

start doing now. 

It is not us that created this problem, and we always lived off 

the land, lived off the waters, and continue to do that, but we are 

bearing the burden of living with these conditions today. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Chief Williams. 

Chairman Hall, you state in your testimony, ‘‘We know how best 

to protect our land,’‘ your Tribes and your people. ‘‘We have done 

it for centuries,’‘ you said. Can you please discuss the actions that 

your Tribal nation is taking to respond to and prepare for environmental changes? 

Mr. HALL. Yes, Mr. Chairman. As I testified earlier about environmental code that the Tribe had adopted, we were having a lot 

of spills and hazardous material dumped on our reservation due to 

the oil and gas industry, the oil boom that we are experiencing. So 

we just took it upon ourselves to say this is our homelands. We 

need to draft a code. And so we put it under our civil code under 

our civil jurisdiction that allowed our Tribal environmental office 

and our Tribal law enforcement officials the authority to cite and 

to have fines. As I mentioned, there is an intentional and there is 

an unintentional dumping, like an accident, but intentional, if they 

are intentionally dumping on a weekend or at night when supposedly everybody is sleeping, a third offense is $1 million. It is a 

tough penalty, but our homelands are worth it. 

It is really hard to mitigate once hazardous materials go into 

your water or go into your soils, and so whatever we do on development we are trying to do on reclamation. We have to balance that. 

So that way we reduce the footprint 

Traffic and safety, we adopted a code on traffic and safety. Our 

police did not have the authority to make the arrests of speeding 

trucks that were—too many accidental deaths. Too many of our 

Tribal members were getting killed on the roadways, and we didn’t 

have the authority, because we don’t have criminal jurisdiction because of the Oliphant decision. But Tribes have retained civil jurisdiction, so we passed our traffic code under our civil jurisdiction, 

giving our Tribal police the authority. 

If the truckers say we are just going to go off the reservation, 

then we say we are going to go after the oil companies tarot card, 

62

which is about the size of a driver’s license, and that card is very 

important. It could bring a billion dollars onto our reservation. But 

whatever that card costs, $500 to get that card, you have to maintain it; otherwise, you can’t drill on this reservation. 

So you have to make sure that whoever you are contracting with 

to do your truck driving are driving in a safe manner, and if they 

are cited they are going to pay their tickets. 

And then finally we passed a water theft code, because companies were stealing water from our rural water lines. And so it is 

a $10,000 fine for those that are going to steal water from our reservation, because it takes about a million gallons of water to do a 

hydro fracking, and so water is a real expensive asset, and so in 

order to protect that, again, we put this third code together and we 

put fines. 

And then, finally, we cross-deputize. Not only our water office, 

our Fort Berthold Rural Water Department, but our game and fish, 

our law enforcement. We created a Tribal DOT. That way seven 

days a week are covered, 24 hours in a day are covered, because 

we found a lot of the thefts were occurring on weekends and at 

night after everybody has gone home. 

So there is a cost to this, and, of course, the Tribe has had to 

bear all of these costs, but at the end of the day it is worth it for 

us to do that. 

We have demonstrated and we have shown that we can regulate, 

produce our own codes, and put fines that are going to stop either 

dumping, water theft, or speeding trucks. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Hall. 

Principal Chief Dardar, would you please answer this one. In the 

last decade your Tribe has dealt with numerous hurricanes, and an 

oil spill, and continued erosion of the coastline. What resources are 

available to the Tribe to help address these issues? 

Mr. DARDAR. That could be answered real simply. None. The assistance that we do receive is from the donations from agencies 

that we have been contacted with and working with from the past 

that have seen the devastation in our communities, so they came 

in and helped us restore back to normalcy after the hurricane. 

And then, as we are getting back on our feet, the oil spill came 

in, which pretty much knocked out, which in my testimony you will 

find, the life cycle and the repetitive erosion factors. The estuaries 

where fish and shrimp and crabs spawn at are being threatened by 

salt water, heavy inundation of salt water. 

So as far as the help that we receive, that is why it is so important, I hear these guys talking about Federal recognition, if we 

would receive Federal recognition, then we would be able to help 

ourself get out of some of these circumstances that we are in. 

Just due to the lack of the coastline that is receding, as everyone 

knows, and bringing the hurricanes full force strength to our doorsteps, you know, for every mile of land there was, it knocked down 

at least 2.7 feet of the tidal surge and allowed these islands and 

the estuaries there. It brings them further and further inside. 

And then again when the BP oil spill happened these all came 

in and, like I said, we are in sick parishes along the coastline, and 

these areas were oiled. There was 600 miles of oiled land. The oil 

hit the coast, and 300 of it was in our area, where our estuaries 

63

and our fishermen were. And it happened just in 2010 as our fishermen were getting ready to go out. They had fueled up their boats, 

iced it down, and were getting ready to go when the oil spill happened and they had to come back in because all those areas that 

were normally fishing ground were all closed. So that puts a big 

damper on our fishermen, because now they are not able to go out 

and fish these waters because it is all contaminated. 

And then add to that a lot of our men in the same area worked 

in the oil industry, and the moratorium came in and all these areas 

were shut down until, you know, they could come up with a plan 

and procedure to go forward in drilling. 

So not only did the fishing industry suffer; the guys that worked 

in the oil industry suffered also because there was nowhere for 

them to make a living. Normally, when one of them was up you 

could go in the oil field and work, and if that was down you could 

go in the fishing industry, but unfortunately both of them went 

down at the same time, which put us in a real bind because we 

were not able to work either one of them. 

BP came to us and they asked us to put a paper together, that 

they would help us, help the fishermen in the claims process, and 

in the process of doing that they sent us a letter back after a couple 

of months saying, due to the fact that you are not a federally-recognized Tribe, though we appreciate the relationship we have with 

you, there is nothing we can do for you because you are not a federally-recognized Tribe. So being a federally-recognized Tribe would 

put us at the table with the negotiation where we could help our 

people and help our fishermen and our communities also because 

we do span six parishes in the southeast corner of Terrebonne in 

Louisiana. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Dardar. 

Mr. Frank, you talked about how the treaties reserved the right 

to fish, hunt, and gather, and how treaty rights are place based. 

Will you please describe how treaty rights are impacted as those 

resources shift to new areas? 

Mr. FRANK. Well, they are impacted by the poison that is in 

Puget Sound and along the Pacific coast, and we have the Puget 

Sound Partnership that the governor has put together, and it 

hasn’t done anything as of now. There is no change. There is a lot 

of money that is being spent out there, but there is no change, and 

the bleeding is going on continually, poison, pollution, and everything is going into the Sound, and it is destroying the steelhead in 

Puget Sound, the coho in Puget Sound, the chinook salmon, the silver salmon, the pink salmon. It has destroyed all of our salmon, 

they are declining. That affects the treaties, all of our treaties, the 

five treaty areas that we talk about. 

The water quality, nobody is looking at the water quality. The 

whales are dying. They need salmon. They need the food chain that 

is affected by the climate, by the poison that is going into Puget 

Sound. And we need somebody that is in charge, somebody. The 

United States Government? Down here at the Gulf of Mexico the 

President of the United States, he put somebody in charge down 

there in that oil spill, but nobody could get it done until the admiral came along, and the admiral got things done. 

64

I deal with Fort Lewis across the river, the United States Army, 

and I deal with the general. That general, his word is the word, 

and nobody else tells him no. They follow his direction. He quit 

driving his tanks across the river. He quit shooting over the 

Nisqually Indian Reservation, my reservation, to the impact area. 

They took that land, two-thirds of our reservation, on the Pierce 

County side across the river in 1916, the First World War. Then 

they continued shooting. 

I told my Tribe, I am going over and talk to this general. The 

general told me, we are going to quit shooting over your reservation. We are going to quit driving tanks through your river. We are 

going to quit shooting up your spawning beds. And that happened. 

Now, that didn’t happen overnight. He built bridges. They quit 

shooting over the reservation. We now have a communication with 

him. We have keys to his gate. We have decals to go through the 

Army to come over to our hatchery on his side of the river. 

These are working together that we know happens. And we work 

with the United States continually, but then we need a change. We 

need a change in NOAA, EPA. EPA is working with us right today 

from the top to the bottom, but NOAA isn’t. NOAA, the region is 

working but not up here at the top. We need these agencies from 

the top to the bottom to work with us and listen to us. Listen. 

Judge Boltz said, you 20 Tribes, you will have an infrastructure. 

You will have an infrastructure when we get done. You will put the 

Northwest Indian Fish Commission together to coordinate with the 

Tribes. That is us. And then you will be self-regulatory. When we 

get through, and it is going to take time, you will put your infrastructure together, you will have your science, your lawyers, your 

policy people all together. We are there right today. We have the 

best. We are ready to sit down with the United States Government 

and try to work on a plan, a long-range plan. We have to do that. 

And we have to do it now. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Frank. 

Ms. Akutagawa, your testimony discusses the effects climate 

change has on Native Hawaiian culture. How can traditional 

knowledge help in finding solutions to the changing environment? 

Ms. AKUTAGAWA. Absolutely, Senator. In our traditional ways of 

management, it was by ahupua’a, these land divisions within 

moku, various districts of our islands. Our traditional land managers were very intimate in their understanding of the resources 

in their localized areas. So they were able to make changes on the 

ground immediately, whether it was a lack of certain type of fish, 

then they would place a couple, or withholding of fishing in that 

area, or fishing a specific type of fish so that the resource could be 

abundant. And it was an integrated management system from the 

mountaintops to the sea. 

As we explored our system within the State and integrated that 

within the State regulatory system, what we are seeing on my particular island, Moloka’i, in meetings by over 100 people in each 

moku, in each district, and they are making decisions on the 

ground on how we should manage our resources. We are discussing 

directly with county and State and Federal officials on what works 

for our ’aina, our particular place. 

65

So, just as Mr. Tex Hall has said, restore Tribal authority, allow 

indigenous people to manage their resources. Because of our intimate understanding and our passion and our kuleana, our responsibility to our land, we have the wherewithal and the fashion to 

malama ’aina, to care for the resources. 

It is very encouraging for us to have this system in place and 

that the State is recognizing that. I believe if the Federal Government does the same in supporting our traditional ecological knowledge systems and allowing us to utilize our adaptive management 

tools, especially in a climate of uncertainty, that it will be effective 

for all. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Ms. Akutagawa. 

I know we can go on with this, but I think you all made the point 

here that, as indigenous people and Tribes we have to help set 

things up ourselves. We need the help of the State as well as the 

Federal Government, wherever your locations are. And we need to 

speak to the different cultures. What I mean by that is that every 

Tribe is a different culture in a way. It depends on whether you 

are from Alaska or the west coast or the southern coast like Louisiana. I mean, these cultures are different, so we cannot say all 

of this will be the same. So we need to really pick it up here and 

begin to work with our Federal Government agencies, as well, because they do have responsibilities and they understand that. 

But what we need to do is to really get to the point where we 

can begin to make things change. 

Now, all of these things we have been talking about here have 

been the result of the changing environment, and what has happened is that we have not kept up with changing with the environment or preventing the change of environment, and I feel strongly 

the Native Americans respected nature, so they didn’t violate nature, and therefore things were pretty well on earth. But as we violate nature we get into problems. This is what has been happening. 

Somehow this problem is so huge we all have to get into it and 

begin to take steps to make things proper, and also since some 

things have happened already where his village is now underwater 

where he was born, Chief Williams. We need to deal with that. 

So I look upon this hearing as one that has, again, provided information for us to continue to do this. We need to move on it. 

I want to thank our witnesses for participating in today’s hearing. On Tuesday night I had the opportunity to attend the first 

steward gathering at the National Museum of the American Indian. I heard Native leaders talk about how ideas can become actions, representing a planting of seeds to bear fruit for future generations. I want to commend the four Tribes from the Pacific northwest for including all of America’s Native peoples in their discussions here this week in their symposium. Native peoples have 

much to contribute on how best to address environmental change. 

Embedded in their cultures are excellent resources and ideas for 

developing adaptation and mitigation strategies that work for everyone. 

In closing, I want the witnesses to know that many ideas you 

have shared with us today with the Committee have been valuable, 

and as some of you testified I could think back of my own childhood 

and some of the things that, even during those times, where now 

66

when I talk about the kind of fish I used to catch they say, oh, we 

don’t have it. I can remember those things. So it is very unfortunate, but we need to do something about this, and this is what we 

are going to try to do. And we have got to do it, as was mentioned, 

now. So we will try our best here in Committee and in the Congress to try to take the kind of steps that are necessary to bring 

this about. 

So I am so happy during this period of time where we are talking 

about stewardship, which means us and our caring for nature and 

the lands. This is something, when Billy Frank mentions the poison ocean, you know, coming from Hawaii I have thought about 

this for years. What are we doing to the ocean? We really don’t 

know because, as you know, you talk about sewage, we pour it into 

the ocean. We have been doing that for years. So across the Country this has been happening, too. So we need to be aware of what 

we are doing to ourselves and especially to nature. 

As this so-called poisoning comes about, I think if you talk about 

the ocean it will affect the food chain, then all of a sudden there 

is one of the fish that cannot get the kind of food that they are accustomed to because we have violated something and have done 

away with their foods. So we need to understand that. 

We need to all work together on this and try our best to come 

about and to take steps to begin a journey back to respecting nature and our environment and helping ourselves. 

Again, thank you so much for being here and for your valuable 

information, and thank you, those of you who traveled so far to 

come here, for doing that. We really appreciate it here. 

This hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:35 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(67)

APPENDIX

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE INTERTRIBAL TIMBER COUNCIL

Dear Chairman Akaka and Vice-Chairman Barrasso: 

The Intertribal Timber Council (lTC) is pleased that the Indian Affairs Committee 

has convened an Oversight Hearing on Impacts of Environmental Changes on Treaty Rights, Traditional Lifestyles, and Tribal Homelands. Because of their intimate 

relationships with the lands they have cared for thousands of years, Tribal peoples 

are acutely aware of the far-reaching impacts of environmental change which are 

already affecting our homes, cultural sites, water, fish, plants, animals, foods, and 

medicineslthe places and natural resources that have sustained tribal cultures and 

economies for countless generations. 

The influence of tribal stewardship has waned over the last 500 years while environmental degradation and change caused by non-Indian development has taken its 

toll. As timber-dependent tribes, we are fully aware that environmental protection 

and economic utilization go hand in hand. Our member Tribes have a profound and 

deeply-felt imperative ethic for environmental stewardship which is reflected in our 

approach to braid western science and traditional knowledge to ensure that future 

generations will be able to enjoy the gifts our natural resources can provide. We are 

witnessing unprecedented changes in our forests, water, soils, fish, animals, insects, 

and plants. Wildfire, pests, insects, diseases and invasive species are wreaking 

havoc on our forests, diminishing this important resource’s wide range of critical 

values for our people and increasing the costs we bear in working to sustain them. 

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and others have noted that tribal 

communities are among the most vulnerable to environmental change. There is little need or value in adding to the growing list of potential consequences for our resources and cultures. Our purpose in submitting our testimony today is to urge the 

Committee to pursue efforts to increase the capacity of tribal governments to substantively engage in efforts to develop and implement policy to help prepare for and 

contend with environmental change. 

It is beyond the ability of individual tribes to address the causes of environmental 

change without the support of others. Our reservation homelands are islands surrounded by fragmented property ownerships and administrative jurisdiction. Conditions on neighboring lands, many of which have been neglected for decades, are posing threats to the lands and resources held in trust for Indians; the potential to address problems on lands administered by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of 

Land Management under the Tribal Forest Protection Act has hardly been realized. 

Today, tribal involvement in environmental stewardship extends beyond the confines of the nearly one hundred million acres of land within our reservations and 

set aside for Alaska Natives. Many tribes reserved rights to fish, hunt, trap, and 

gather resources and share co-management responsibilities with federal, state, and 

local governments. Collaborative partnerships involving tribal, federal and state 

governments, industry, and academia will be needed to try to address the challenges 

posed by environmental change. 

We have generations of place-based wisdom and knowledge on contending with 

and adapting to environmental change, yet scientists, administrators, and policy 

makers are only just now becoming aware of the potential contributions that indigenous peoples might be able to make if given the opportunity. But we are not being 

afforded that opportunity because we are not given a place at the table to substantively participate in the development and implementation of environmental policies and programs. Discriminatory federal policies fail to provide us with the means 

to engage issues politically and fiscally. For example, for FY 2012, the Department 

of the Interior, requested just $200,000 for climate change activities for the BIA 

(taken from BIA real estate services) while asking for $175 million for other entities 

within the Department, including $15 million for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Without the financial wherewithal, Tribes will not .be able to engage in the plethora 

of processes and forums dealing with environmental change, allowing these activities to proceed ignorant of Tribal interests and perspectives. The discrepancy beVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:50 Jan 30, 2013 Jkt 078095 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\78095.TXT JACK
68

tween funding provided to federal agencies and tribes to address environmental 

change is shocking and unconscionable, especially in light of the trust responsibility 

of the United States towards Indian tribes (see attached letter co-signed by representatives of several organizations). 

We cannot rely on the Federal bureaucracy to develop effective approaches for 

dealing with environmental change. The limited and often conflicting scope of authority, and jurisdictional morass will prove incapable of dealing with the local 

manifestations of global environmental change on the resources and values of interest to individual Tribal governments. Inherent conflicts of interest in the administration of Indian Affairs and environmental policies determined by the majority will 

prove unlikely to protect the rights, resources and values of tribal communities. 

Consultation with federal agencies has proven to be wholly and woefully inadequate 

to address our concerns. Despite requirements for tribal consultation on any action 

that could adversely affect tribal rights or interests under Executive Order 13175, 

federal agencies and entities retain full discretionary authority and are reluctant to 

collaborate with tribal governments as an integral part of the government-to-government dialogue necessary to reconcile differences and develop a common course of action. 

The ITC recognizes the need for and strongly supports substantive engagement 

of Tribal governments in the development and implementation of measures to prepare for and contend with environmental change. 

Background 

The ITC is a thirty-six year old, nation-wide association of over sixty Indian tribes 

and Alaska Native organizations. Our membership collectively manages more than 

90 percent of the 18 million acres of forest land held in trust by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The lTC is dedicated to improving the management and protection of 

the environment and its natural resources, the forests, fish, wildlife, plants, soils, 

air, and water. 

The ITC has actively engaged in the development of policy and law pertaining to 

the management of Indian forest lands by participating in enactment of the National Indian Forest Resources Management Act (‘‘NIFRMA’’, P.L. 101–630, 1990) 

and has recognized the need to address growing concerns for conditions on neighboring lands administered by the USDA Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management by pressing for the Tribal Forest Protection Act (P.L. 108–278, 2004). 

NIFRMA mandates an independent assessment of Indian forest lands every ten 

years. To fulfill t his requirement, the IF MAT (Indian Forest Management Assessment) team conducts an analysis of tribal forest management practices, compares 

them with similar practices in federal and private forests, and surveys the health, 

productivity and condition of Indian forests. The third decadal assessment is currently underway. Two IFMAT reports that have been completed (in 1993 and 2003) 

provide some observations that may be helpful to the Committee:

• Tribal forest management can serve as valuable models of innovation and sustainability;

• Indian forestry receives only a fraction of the per acre federal funding provided 

to public land management agencies like the Forest Service and BLM. The gap 

between available appropriations and that required for fiduciary management 

is wide and is getting wider. The lack of adequate Federal appropriations is 

placing the health of Indian forests at risk of loss as threats from forest insects, 

pests, disease, wildfire, climate change, and invasive species increase; settlement of cases involving alleged mismanagement of Indian forests illustrate the 

magnitude of liabilities looming from the failure to protect and properly administer Indian lands and resources;

• Tribal forests are more ecologically complex than other federal forests—a reflection of tribal values and foresight implemented by the competence and dedication of tribal and BIA managers;

• Tribes are learning to use grants, tax credits, cost offsets, and funding from private and public sources to patch together functional natural resource management programs. While innovation and resourcefulness are to be applauded, tribal capacity to maintain continuity for environmental protection and natural resource management is tenuous.

We hope that our comments and recommendations for enhancing tribal roles in 

environmental change will prove helpful to the Committee. 

Attachment

May 20, 2011

Congressman Mike Simpson, 

69

Chairman, 

Subcommittee on Interior and Environment, 

House Appropriations Committee, 

H–307, The Capitol, 

Washington, D.C. 

RE: APPROPRIATIONS FOR TRIBES IN DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR CLIMATE

CHANGE ADAPTATION INITIATIVE

Dear Congressman Simpson,

On behalf of a coalition of Indian tribes and tribal organizations, collectively representing the majority of the nation’s 565 federally recognized tribes, we are writing 

to request that equitable support and resources be provided to the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs (BIA), and Indian Tribes and Alaska Natives, via the Department of the Interior’s (DOI) Climate Change Adaptation Initiative (Initiative). The Administration’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 budget request for the Initiative is $175 million, of 

which $8.75 million should be allocated to the BIA and tribes for tribal climate 

change adaptation efforts. 

DOI began a Climate Change Adaptation Initiative in 2009, an undertaking that 

Indian tribes support in principle. The Administration’s FY 2012 budget request for 

the Initiative is $175 million, an increase of $39 million over FY 2010/2011 CR. The 

$136 million for the Initiative in FY 2010/2011 CR did not include any funding for 

tribes. Despite a substantial increase in the overall funding request, the situation 

for tribes is nearly as bad in the 2012 budget. Of the $175 million, only $200,000 

(taken from an existing BIA Real Estate Services account) will be used to involve 

and assist Indian tribes in the North Pacific Landscape Conservation Cooperative 

(LCC). As such, tribes are accorded a mere .001 percent of the funding for participation in only one of twenty-one Landscape Conservation Cooperatives. This is highly 

inequitable, especially considering the disproportionate effect of climate change on 

tribes and their homelands. Sovereign tribes deserve a broader seat at the table in 

the DOI Climate Change Adaptation Initiative and a more equitable share of the 

funding. 

Given that tribal natural resources have been historically underfunded and there 

is no federal program or funding that specifically supports tribal climate adaptation 

efforts, we request that the allocation to tribes via the BIA should be increased to 

$8.75 million, or 5 percent of DOI’s Climate Change Adaptation Initiative, for tribes 

to address and adapt to the impacts of climate change. To achieve this equitable 

increase for tribes, the money provided to the various Interior agencies for the Initiative must be reallocated. Language must be included in the appropriations bill 

directing the Secretary to allocate these funds for tribes. 

The attached document, ‘‘Tribal Recommendations for the Fiscal Year 2012 Department of the Interior Climate Change Adaptation Initiative,’’ provides background information and justification for our request. We look forward to working 

with you and the subcommittee to achieve this equitable support for tribes. 

Sincerely, 

COLUMBIA RIVER INTERTRIBAL FISH COMMISSION

INSTITUTE FOR TRIBAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS

INTERTRIBAL AGRICULTURE COUNCIL

INTERTRIBAL TIMBER COUNCIL

NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS

NATIONAL TRIBAL ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL

NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION

NATIVE AMERICAN FISH AND WILDLIFE SOCIETY

NORTHWEST INDIAN FISHERIES COMMISSION

RED LAKE BAND OF CHIPPEWA

SWINOMISH TRIBE

TULALIP TRIBES

The Tribal Recommendations for DOI CC Adaptation Initiative.pdflTribal Recommendations for 2012 DOI Climate Change Adaptation Initiative has been retained in Committee files and can be found at http://www4.nau.edu/

tribalclimatechange/resources/docs/

reslTribalRec2012DOICCAdaptInitl52011.pdf

70

* The information referred to has been retained in Committee files and can be found at http:/

/www.tribesandclimatechange.org/docs/tribesl345.pdf and http://www.ncai.org/attachments/

ResolutionlMZlrscMWUDNfPdJGEJQVODCZZtiNPdZRrWVaNmDdEYTmqgYqTatlPDX-11-

036lfinal.pdf

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS

Introduction 

The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) is the oldest and largest national organization of American Indian and Alaska Native tribal governments. Since 

1944, tribal governments have gathered as a representative congress through NCAI 

to deliberate issues of critical importance to tribal governments. NCAI is pleased to 

submit testimony for the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs to supplement the 

oversight hearing on ‘‘Impacts of Environmental Changes on Treaty Rights, Traditional Lifestyles, and Tribal Homelands.’’

NCAI thanks the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs (Senate Committee) for 

their work to identify the current challenges around tribal natural resources and environmental changes through its round tables and this hearing. NCAI also appreciates the long-standing commitment of the Senate Committee in working, in a bipartisan fashion, to address key challenges in Indian Country. 

NCAI resolutions ABQ–10–086 and PDX–11–036 regarding climate change are attached. * Resolution PDX–11–036 supports the value of Traditional Ecological 

Knowledge and the need for consultation with tribes, especially as federal actions 

are being planned in preparation for continuing efforts on sustainability and climate 

challenges. Resolution ABQ–10–086 supports the tribal concern that the DOI climate change initiative does not fairly provide funds to climate change-related Indian programs at the Bureau of Indian Affairs. In this testimony, we would like to 

outline necessary concerns and policies to support tribes in the face of major environmental changes to help inform future legislation. 

Requested Congressional Actions 

Responding to the effects of climate change is a priority for many tribes. A central 

concern is their inability to migrate in order to adapt to the effects of climate 

change. Due to modern day political boundaries, tribes are less able to move to adjust food sources, trade with one another for resources and navigate other cultural, 

societal and commercial challenges related to natural resources. The tribal commitment to addressing climate change is evidenced by the recent First Stewards Symposium hosted at National Museum of the American Indian. The Symposium included tribal leaders from all coastal regions of the United States and was also a 

demonstration of rebuilding ties across tribal nations. 

Another important and current result of tribal initiative and leadership in climate 

change is the inclusion of tribal concerns in the 2013 National Climate Assessment—the 3rd report since 1990 and the first to include a chapter specific to climate 

impacts in Indian Country. The 2013 National Climate Assessment is a result of the 

Global Change Research Act of 1990 which requires periodic reports to Congress regarding the status of climate impacts to the nation. These reports serve to inform 

policy as well as adaptation planning on the federal, state, local level and, now more 

effectively, because it includes the tribal level. 

The most efficient use of funds involves coordination between federal agencies and 

collaboration across geographical areas as well as among governments. As natural 

resources change, regions will adapt more quickly by working together to understand the changes and establish new patterns. Tribes already show great initiative 

and leadership in natural resource management, conservation and preparation for 

climate change. Supporting tribes and helping them strengthen their leadership 

would aid regional management of resources and adaptation planning. 

To fully leverage tribal leadership and contribution, and to reach government parity, Congress should take the following four recommended actions:

1. Provide direct funding at adequate levels to tribes to address climate change 

and protect existing funding streams.

Department of Interior Secretarial Order 3289, ‘‘Addressing the Impacts of Climate Change on America’s Water, Land, and Other Natural and Cultural Resources,’’ from September 14, 2009, has helped to organize federal resources for the 

purposes of climate change adaptation. Tribes are included as research partners and 

stakeholders through this initiative. This initiative includes the establishment of 

two components: Regional Science Centers and Landscape Conservation Cooperatives. The DOI has established eight Regional Climate Science Centers, through 

USGS, to coordinate climate change research. Twenty-two Landscape Conservation 

71

Cooperatives provide a forum for tribes, states, Federal Government, non-governmental organizations and universities to develop tools for conservation and develop 

shared conservation goals between the partners. 

While tribes are included in the DOI initiative and the outcomes will strengthen 

the U.S. preparedness for climate change, it is imperative that tribes also receive 

direct assistance at fair and adequate levels. As described in the NCAI resolution, 

ABQ–10–086, ‘‘Ensuring Tribal Equity in the Department of Interior’s Climate 

Change Adaption Initiative,’’ other non-tribal DOI programs included in the initiative received significantly larger portions of the budget even though Indian tribes 

are responsible for major land bases and are already working to overcome a history 

of insufficient federal assistance. Direct assistance is also needed to address unique 

circumstances such as the relocation of Alaska Native villages.

2. Improve government parity by making tribes eligible for federal natural resource assistance programs.

Many natural resource federal assistance programs are available to states but not 

to tribes. As we have noted, the ability of our nation to prepare for and withstand 

the impacts of our changing climate is to work in regional collaborative efforts. By 

statutorily making tribes eligible and increasing government parity for tribal natural resource programs, tribes can conserve and manage tribal resources more effectively while strengthening the natural resources of their regions. The technical and 

financial assistance provided by federal natural resource programs would not only 

reduce compounded impacts on flora and fauna and ecosystems but also help native 

people to build capacity for adaptation to changing food sources. Two key programs 

that should be amended to statutorily include tribes include the Forest Legacy Program, to retain forests as forests, and the Soil and Water Resource Conservation Act,

which provides for cooperative agreements and data collection on soil and water resources. As we have witnessed, forests, soil and water will continue to be heavily 

impacted by climate change and tribes should be able to access federal support to 

better manage and protect these resources.

3. Strengthen consultation policies and ensure tribal inclusion in planning.

Tribes are extraordinarily vulnerable to climate change as well as learned and resourceful potential partners in addressing the related challenges. Statutes that reinforce inclusion of tribes in planning processes and further require meaningful consultation are essential to tribal and federal planning and actions to adjust to the 

new normal resulting from climate change. The October 2011 progress report from 

the Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, called, ‘‘Federal Actions for 

a Climate Resilient Nation,’’ recommends that federal agencies incorporate climate 

change into their programs and involve tribal governments in those efforts. NCAI 

has seen, especially recently, federal agencies selectively choosing when to consult 

and lacking an ability or desire to use such consultations to gain useful information, 

benefits and partnerships. Though many agencies have adopted consultation policies, these policies are not consistently followed. Binding consultation programs and 

processes combined with meaningful exchange and engagement for consultation in 

climate change and natural resources would ensure that consultation occurs and is 

useful for all parties.

4. Minimize economic and resource challenges that will compound with climate 

change.

Tribal economies face a multitude of challenges that need to be reduced and removed as tribes face climate change impacts and expenses. Infrastructure and tribal 

budgets that are already tight will be strained by the need to relocate, respond to 

natural disasters and modify food sources. Support for energy efficient housing and 

building codes would be made possible by passing legislation such as S. 1000, the 

Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2011. S. 1000 remedies past 

exclusions of tribes in federal assistance for building codes—federal assistance that 

has allowed state and local governments to make homes across the U.S. more energy efficient. 

The Senate Committee should continue to take action to make tribal economic development more attainable, especially in the realm of renewable energy. The DOE 

Tribal Renewable Energy Program has seen some 129 tribal small-scale energy and 

feasibility projects over the last decade. These projects are a demonstration of tribal 

interest in renewable energy—but renewable energy still has not been widely adopted in Indian Country, and there have been very few utility scale tribal renewable 

energy projects. NCAI would like to see more barriers to tribal renewable energy 

development removed so that tribes can build their economies and proactively respond to climate change. 

72

Conclusion 

NCAI appreciates the Senate Committee’s attention to this issue of environmental 

change and urges timely action and a focus on the broad recommendations set forth 

above so that tribes can adapt and mitigate environmental effects in the safest and 

most sustainable way possible and help their communities and regions thrive. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE NISQUALLY INDIAN TRIBE

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, on behalf of the Nisqually Indian 

Tribe I would like to submit the following statement on the Impacts of Environmental Changes on Treaty Rights, Traditional Lifestyles and Tribal Homelands. The 

issues before your committee are of utmost importance to the Nisqually Indian 

Tribe, our people, our culture, and our very existence. 

We want to offer our full support for the testimony provided to you by Billy Frank 

Jr. on behalf of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC). We have 

been intimately engaged with the NWIFC and our member tribes in the development of the Treaty Rights at Risk (TRA) initiative and the principles identified in 

that white paper. The Nisqually Indian Tribe feels the threat to our treaty rights 

every day as our fish leave the Nisqually River on the way to the ocean and die 

on the way in numbers that we have not seen before. If our fish cannot survive their 

journey through Puget Sound they certainly cannot survive in numbers sufficient to 

support our people and our culture. We are strong in our insistence that the Federal 

Government, with the leadership of President Obama, step up and take the necessary actions to honor the agreements made by our ancestors in the Treaty of Medicine Cree in 1854. 

In particular, the Nisqually Indian Tribe fully supports the call from the NWIFC 

for field hearings to be conducted as soon as possible to better understand the impacts, challenges, and actions necessary to halt the decline in our resources protected in our treaty. We are facing many challenges in the Northwest to our way 

of life, from projected sea level rise in Puget Sound of 12′′ in the next 10–15 years, 

to the loss of 8 minor glaciers and significant retreat of the major Nisqually glacier 

on Mount Rainier, to the significant change in weather patterns resulting in a significant shift in rain and snow events and the impacts to our aquatic and terrestrial 

systems at a pace that threatens our very. existence as a people. Field hearings in 

the Puget Sound region would allow the sovereign tribal nations to share our stories 

with you in ways that cannot happen 2,500 miles from home. 

It must be understood that we are a placed based people located for thousands 

of years in the Nisqually watershed. Everything we need to survive and thrive as 

a people have always existed for our people in abundance. In the 1854 Treaty of 

Medicine Creek, we reserved for our future generations access to all of these resources in return for the control of our homelands ceded to the U.S. for peaceful settlement. Where non-Indian citizens move, sometimes frequently, for a number of 

reasons we tribal members are bound to our homelands for cultural and spiritual 

reasons. It is our home and will be the home for our people for generations to come. 

But as the climate around us changes, the fish, animals, and plants that are central to our way of life are changing their distributions in the Nisqually making them 

either less abundant, only remotely available, or leaving the watershed all together. 

From salmon to elk, from huckleberries to princess pine, we are losing critical pieces 

of our way of life; losing what was secured in our Treaty. We cannot move and follow the animals, follow the fish, follow the plants. We are of the Nisqually and we 

exist here as long as these things exist for us. 

Finally, in considering actions to address this most important issue facing our 

peoples throughout this great country, we need to recognize that status quo is not 

adequate nor acceptable. We are in a crisis situation in Puget Sound where we have 

lost so much critical habitat that we have Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed 

salmon and steel head in every major river. We have ESA listed birds, rockfish, 

orca, prairie species, that are telling us loudly that we have significantly disturbed 

and reduced their habitats to the point that many are faced with extinction. 

Holding on to the habitat that we have now is clearly not enough. It is not a giant 

intellectual leap to say we need to stop the destruction of our critical habitats as 

a first and important step. Sadly, in Puget Sound, the region has not taken this step 

and we are still losing habitat in Puget Sound and along our rivers at an alarming 

rate. Federal leadership is needed to deliver and implement this message through 

actions in coordination and consultation with the Tribes. Improving current mechanisms, including incentive programs and mitigation programs, is critical but to fulfill the promises of the treaty requires a significant and sustained investment in restoration above and beyond the current investment. We understand that there are 

73

1 H.R. 4314. Coastal State Climate Change Planning Act. 

many difficult budget decisions facing all of us in the coming years, these necessary 

investments in restoring our natural capital will bear economically sustainable fruit 

for generations to come as well as provide for significant employment opportunities 

now to our Nisqually community and the region as a whole. 

The rights and very existence of the Nisqually people is tied to, and dependent 

on, the abundance of our resources we secured in our Treaty. That abundance is 

disappearing through no fault of our own. We are doing everything in our power 

and control to make a difference in our watershed and our region but we need your 

help. We look forward to working with this Committee in the scheduling agenda development of a field hearing in the Puget Sound region. We are also committed to 

working with the federal government on these critically important issues and ask 

Congress to continue to support our efforts to protect and restore our natural resources and honor the treaties made by our ancestors. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE OFFICE OF HAWAIIAN AFFAIRS

Aloha e Committee Members. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) thanks you 

for taking the time to conduct a legislative oversight hearing on July 19, 2012. OHA 

is a unique, quasi-independent state agency established by the Hawai‘i State Constitution and state statutes to better the conditions of Native Hawaiians (Hawai‘i’s 

indigenous people). Guided by nine trustees elected by the voters of Hawai‘i, OHA 

advances the interests of Native Hawaiians and serves as a fiduciary for Native Hawaiian public trust funds and other resources. One of the ten strategic results identified in OHA’s strategic plan is to achieve the a ̄ina sustainability—i.e., to increase 

the amount of Hawaiian land that is managed in a sustainable and balanced manner to create economic value and to preserve cultural and natural resources and historic properties. Another strategic result is to encourage Native Hawaiians to participate in cultural activities that involve interaction with the a ̄ina (land) for cultural, spiritual, religious, and subsistence purposes. Accordingly, OHA offers the following testimony in support of developing policies that address environmental 

changes. 

Impact of Environmental Changes on Native Cultural Practices 

Climate change has impacted the environment in which Native Hawaiians live in 

significant ways. Indigenous observation and western scientific research support the 

conclusion that environmental changes—markedly reduced rainfall, increased rainfall intensity, dangerous rising sea levels, and rising sea temperatures—are occurring that may alter the very existence of Native Hawaiian culture. Hawai‘i’s environmental changes are contributing to drying forests, crop failure, shoreline and 

beach erosion, and reduction or elimination of native foods. Such changes impact the 

traditional and customary practices that Native Hawaiians have exercised since 

time immemorial. Given that Native Hawaiian culture thrives in the traditional 

practices that tie the people to the islands, their ancestors, and each other, the 

health of the environment is intimately connected to the health of the people and 

the continuation of their culture. 

Environmental changes are having particularly disconcerting impacts on food security. Specifically, the rise in water temperature and overall environmental degradation has affected the food security of indigenous peoples. For example, ocean 

acidification threatens marine life—an essential food source for indigenous peoples—

and the reduction in rainfall decreases fresh water resources for agricultural production. Chairman Billy Frank from the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission in 

Washington urged action be taken to address the dangerous decline of salmon along 

the Pacific Coast. Echoing his sentiment, University of Hawai‘i Assistant Law Professor Malia Akutagawa shared how climate change has led to the suffocation of 

fishponds, coral reefs, and subsequent loss of fishing grounds critical to traditional 

subsistence for Native Hawaiians. 

Summary of Pending Legislation on Climate Change 

Currently, pending legislation is attempting to address the harmful effects of climate change and prepare for impending negatives consequences on native communities. For example, the Coastal State Climate Change Planning Act proposes to establish a coastal climate change adaptation planning and response program, including financial assistance to coastal states. 1 Another bill proposes a climate change 

74

2 H.R. 2482. Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 

2011. 3S. 46. Coral Reef Conservation Amendments Act of 2011. 

4S. 1201. National Fish Habitat Conservation Act. 

5S. 1401. Pacific Salmon Stronghold Conservation Act of 2011. 

1See e.g., S. HRG. 111–94, Hearing before the Subcommittee on National Parks of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate One Hundred Eleventh Congress, First Session, To Consider Climate Change Impacts on National Parks in Colorado and 

Related Management Activities; S. HRG. 110–516, Hearing before the Committee on Energy 

And Natural Resources, United States Senate, One Hundred Tenth Congress, Second Session, 

To Receive Testimony on Energy and Related Economic Effects of Global Climate Change Legislation. 

strategy through research, including a call to establish an Inter-Agency Task Force 

on Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia. 2

We urge the Committee to support legislation that protects native lands and communities, particularly when native stakeholders are included in the planning and 

implementation of climate change strategies. For example, there are pieces of legislation currently pending that promote food security for native communities. The 

issues they cover range from the conservation of the coral reef ecosystem 3 and fish 

habitats 4 to the creation of a salmon stronghold that would be overseen partly by 

representatives from Indian tribes. 5

General Recommendations 

OHA supports increased opportunities for native communities to exercise their 

sovereignty in the area of resource management and to participate in meaningful 

collaboration to address environmental changes. OHA urges the support of climate 

change policies that incorporate specific and place-based knowledge and communitybased management. Working closely with local indigenous stakeholders with an ancestral understanding of their environment will produce effective solutions to combat the impacts of environmental changes. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE SAN CARLOS APACHE TRIBE

My name is Terry Rambler and I am the Chairman of the San Carlos Apache 

Tribe (the ‘‘Tribe’’). Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony to the Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs on the Impacts of Environmental Changes 

on Treaty Rights, Traditional Lifestyles and Tribal Homelands. 

The impacts of climate change have been the subject of several congressional 

hearings in recent years. 1 This Hearing is the first that addresses the impacts of 

climate change and related environmental consequences upon American Indians and 

Native Americans. I wish to express the appreciation of the San Carlos Apache 

Tribe and its members for the Committee’s consideration of this important topic 

upon indigenous peoples. 

Traditional Guiding Principles 

The Tribe believes in managing our resources as close to the natural ecological 

process as possible. Because of industrial pollution, huge increases in human population and the development of towns and cities, ecosystem processes have been severely altered if not irrevocably changed. Pre-European settlement conditions have 

been used to describe a healthy ecosystem and used as a measuring stick for ecological health. 

The Tribe, through the Elders Council, has developed Four Traditional Guiding 

Principles used to manage our natural resources, which the Committee may consider. The principles are based on Tribal Ecological Knowledge (TEK) built from our 

traditional Apache knowledge base through experience from and observation of our 

living treasurers. The Tribe feels strongly and recommends the United States use 

these Four Guiding Principles in management decisions related to climate change. 

These include:

I. Respect all aspects of the natural world. The base of traditional Apache culture is maintaining strong and healthy relationships with all of the elements 

of the natural world; with one’s friends, relatives, and community; and with 

one’s self. This requires an indepth ecological education, whether traditional, 

non-Indian, or both.

II. All activities must ensure the long-term health of the natural world, especially 

emphasizing the prime importance of water. The traditional guidelines governing land-management practices—such as agriculture, hunting, wild food and 

75

natural resource harvesting, and obtaining water for drinking and irrigation—

emphasize minimizing impacts on the natural world, and preserving the most 

natural state of the land as possible. This includes, above all, ensuring the longterm health of natural water resources. We must resolve to utilize and profit 

from natural resources without harming them.

III. All activities must benefit the entire community. We all belong to the land. 

All activities impact the natural world, and affect us all. We must ensure that 

our activities are for the benefit of all, by working openly together as a community.

IV. Economic activities must be broad-based and varied. Apaches have survived 

all kinds of climatic extremes, both environmental and economic, by depending 

on a multitude of economic endeavors—even when neighbors have perished. 

Traditional culture emphasizes distributing economic sustenance over a broad 

range of practices—such as agriculture, hunting and gathering, and trading—

rather than emphasizing just one. This creates a healthy buffer to environmental and economic crises.

Climate Change Impacts on San Carlos Apache Reservation 

Over the course of the past several years, the Tribe’s managers and professionals 

have witnessed and documented the impacts of climate change such as higher temperatures, drought and altered rainfall patterns. The specific consequences of climate change to the Tribe include: 

1. Impacts of Above Average Temperature 

The Climate Prediction Center (CPC) Outlook for June to November 2012 indicates above average temperatures for this time of year. Temperatures over 95 degrees Fahrenheit and extended dry periods, as experienced on the Reservation, 

cause high levels of thermal stress on aquatic species, forests, livestock and wildlife, 

particularly if water is unavailable. Thermal stress negatively impact performance 

factors in livestock and wildlife including growth, reproduction, and milk production. 

The lack of free-standing water that results from low rainfall or poor water quality 

can be deleterious to wildlife and livestock. In the summers of 2009, 2011, and 2012, 

the San Carlos Recreation and Wildlife Department estimated over 75 percent of the 

stock tanks and water catchments were dry. 

2. Stock Tanks and Wells 

There are approximately 250 stock tanks and 100 wells on the San Carlos Apache 

Reservation. Initially, the stock tanks were built to provide water for livestock operations; however, both wildlife and fish have benefited from their presence. Some of 

the tanks are stocked with trout, bass, and catfish to provide fishing opportunities 

for Tribal members and non-members. The Tribe benefits economically from these 

tanks through the sale of fishing and hunting permits and livestock operations. 

Fishing revenues generate approximately $500,000.00 annually, but this fluctuates 

according to the water levels on the Reservation. With more reliable water levels, 

those revenues would be more consistent and could potentially increase with more 

waters for stock tanks. Wildlife benefits from these tanks as they provide a direct 

water source and they create habitat for some species, such as waterfowl, wading 

birds, and frogs. The Tribe generates approximately $1,000,000.00 annually through 

its Recreation and Wildlife Department. San Carlos is well known as one of the best 

Reservations for fishing and hunting. In order to maintain that reputation and ensure the availability of fish and wildlife for income generation, sufficient water is 

a primary concern. 

3. Wildlife and Livestock 

Current drought conditions on the Reservation are characterized as severe, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor (Arizona Department of Water Resources). The 

current drought in Arizona will likely have some major impacts on wildlife living 

on the Reservation. The current drought has had major impact on livestock operations on the Reservation with increased livestock mortality. Due to drought, less 

food, water, and cover are available to wildlife and livestock. Less food means reduced reproduction by adult animals. Less food for adult wildlife and livestock results in less food available for the young. Milk production is impacted. With the production of less milk, more fawns and calves starve or succumb to diseases, parasites, 

and predation. With less food, deer in particular will enter the winter months with 

less fat reserves, which can result in higher starvation. With the growth of less 

grass, which provides hiding cover for wildlife, waterfowl nests and young, as well 

as the young of deer, antelope, elk, and other species will be more vulnerable to 

predators. Decreased rainfall means less water and habitat for waterfowl, fish, beaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:50 Jan 30, 2013 Jkt 078095 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\78095.TXT JACK
76

2 A small number of acres on the San Carlos Apache Reservation were destroyed by the Wallow Fire. However, the Tribe’s Forestry Department’s forest management minimized the impact 

to a few hundred acres on the extreme eastern boundary of the Reservation. 

ver, and other species which may crowd them into smaller areas and make them 

more vulnerable to diseases, predators, and competition with other members of their 

own species. With less grass forage available, ranchers may view elk as competition 

for forage with their livestock. Lost grass lands increases desertification. 

Desertification leads to the decline or extirpation of species that are culturally and 

financially significant to the Tribe. Most important, there also exists a major, adverse impact on native vegetation, including willows and acorn trees, greasewood 

and bear grass, important to the Tribe and its members, as a matter of culture, religious practice and ceremonial traditions. 

4. Off-Reservation Water Consumption Impacts 

With increased temperatures and extended drought and dry periods, water diversions for off-Reservation agricultural uses impact the water resources that have traditionally been available on the Reservation. The Tribe has no control over these 

diversions. Upstream from the Reservation, irrigation diversions reduce water flows 

of the San Carlos River coming onto the Reservation. Downstream from the Reservation, irrigation diversions from San Carlos Lake deplete one of the premier recreational fisheries in the Southwest. San Carlos Lake has dropped to less than 1 

percent full, resulting in a fish kill. Tens of thousands of dead fish and the closure 

of the lake for human health and safety reasons have resulted in substantial revenue loss to the Tribe. 

5. Wildland Fires 

The Committee is aware of the devastation wrought by catastrophic wildland 

fires. In 2002, the Rodeo-Chediski fire destroyed 468,638 acres of land immediately 

to the north and west of San Carlos Reservation. In 2011, the Wallow fire destroyed 

538,049 acres of land to the immediate north and east, and another 9,030 on the 

Reservation. These fires, even through off the Reservation, 2 have had ravaging impacts on the Reservation. Ash from the Wallow Fire has killed fish in the Black 

River and Eagle Creek. Concerns about flooding due to upstream bank erosion (as 

well as the fish kill) have forced the closure of the Black River to recreational uses 

resulting in revenue losses to the Tribe in 2011 and 2012 and for the foreseeable 

future. 

6. Economic Disadvantage 

A disproportionate impact of climate change always falls on the economically disadvantaged. This includes the difference between urban and rural reservations. 

Rural tribes are impacted by economic disadvantage more so than urban tribes. 

Urban tribes obtain the indirect benefits of state and federal projects and monies, 

which are devoted to urban areas. Rural tribes never obtain this benefit. For example, the Wallow Restoration funding amounted to some $39 million for the U.S. Forest Service, but the Tribe received a mere $14,000. 

Nationally, according to the Indian Forest Management Assessment Team for the 

Intertribal Timber Council—Second Assessment 2003 page 9, the federal allocation 

for Indian Forests in 2001 was $2.83 per acre, compared to the U.S. Forest Service 

Land $9.51 per acre. The other Federal Land Management Agencies have historically been funded at levels higher than Tribes. Although they are experiencing cuts 

in their budget, they are not facing layoffs or serious reduction to service to the public. The Bureau of Indian Affairs and Tribes are bearing a cut that is disproportionate to the funding level. The following table compares neighboring national forest Tonto and Coronado to San Carlos Apache Indian Reservation. These forests 

have similar forest types but are funded at a much higher level. Personnel staffing 

is four times greater that San Carlos.

77

These are just the more obvious impacts of climate change on the San Carlos Reservation. 

What the San Carlos Apache Tribe is Doing about Climate Change 

The Tribe has endeavored to engage in a variety of activities to address climate 

change. Foremost among the Tribe’s efforts is the philosophy and methodology used 

to manage all of the Reservation’s natural resources. Traditional Apache culture and 

a deep abiding respect and love for the land, the water and all species together inform the Tribe’s management of the Reservation, its land and associated wildlife 

and natural resources. As discussed above, TEK is a key and fundamental principle 

of conservation and land management on the Reservation. TEK incorporates concepts of an ecosystem-based approach to water, land and species management and 

preservation. It incorporates concepts of adaptive management by the Apache people. 

The Tribe has adopted an interdisciplinary team approach to all natural resources 

matters. The Tribe’s interdisciplinary team works together to provide an ecosystem 

management approach to develop strategic plans and management plans incorporating intimate sensitivity and knowledge of Apache culture and Reservation environment. Under this interdisciplinary team approach the Tribe has adopted the 

Mexican Spotted Owl Conservation Plan (2003), the Forest Management Plan 

(2004), the Wildland Fire Management Plan (2003), the Integrated Resource Management Plan, Range Management Plans (2002), Fisheries Management Plan (2005) 

and the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Management Plan (2005). 

The Tribe’s Forest Management Plan and Wildland Fire Management Plan have 

positively contributed to the avoidance of catastrophic wild fires on our Reservation. 

The Tribe is actively engaging with the District Rangers of neighboring National 

Forests to share our traditional resource management techniques with our neighbors who have been plagued by these fires. The Tribe is proud of the efforts made 

by the Forestry Department in preserving the Reservation’s lands. 

The Tribe is examining improved modern water catchment systems, innovative 

agricultural irrigation techniques, and modern water conservation procedures. The 

Tribe is exploring the utilization of fish kill for fertilizer for use in garden plots and 

larger agricultural enterprises. 

Drought in the Southwest is not new to Apaches. In the centuries past, Apaches 

adapted to drought conditions based upon their mobility. That mobility has been 

taken away from Apaches by reservation system. Unlike other American Indians, 

Apaches did not cede their lands by treaty rights. Apache lands were simply taken 

from us. With the loss of mobility, there is a need for more creative adaption systems. 

What the Committee Can Do to Help 

The Tribe is asking the Committee and the federal government to implement its 

fiduciary duties by helping us create adaptive systems to deal with climate change 

and to block ill-advised federal legislation. 

The federal government’s trust responsibility to the Tribe can be honored through 

the initiation of pilot programs to advance and implement improved modern water 

catchment systems, innovative agricultural irrigation systems, and modern water 

conservation techniques. The funding for such pilot programs need not be great; virtually any assistance and guidance from federal partners will have a positive impact. 

The Committee can encourage federal agencies to learn from the Apaches’ traditional knowledge that help address the many aspects of climate change. Because 

Apaches know our natural systems better than anyone else, we are the first to realVerDate 0ct 09 2002 09:50 Jan 30, 2013 Jkt 078095 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\78095.TXT JACK

719c1.eps
78

3 Attached is the testimony which I provided in opposition to H.R. 1904 to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

ize changes. The Committee can encourage programs with adjacent National Forest 

and Bureau of Land Management officials to utilize successful tribal forest management techniques to reduce the impact of devastating wild fires. 

Most importantly, the Committee can assist in preventing federal programs and 

legislation which will magnify and worsen climate change impacts. For instance, 

H.R. 1904, Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011, is a 

proposed federal land exchange for the benefit of foreign mining interests. H.R. 1904 

eviscerates the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Federal Land 

Policy Management Act (FLPMA) requirements to conduct interdisciplinary studies 

and closely scrutinize the inevitable and destructive impacts of the mining project 

to the region. As part of the normal NEPA and FLPMA processes, federal decision 

makers would be required to evaluate the depletion and potential contamination of 

the region’s water supplies. H.R. 1904 guts these requirements. Nothing could be 

more foolhardy then for Congress to give federal land away without assuring, in 

compliance with existing federal laws, that water resources will not be depleted and 

contaminated during these periods of climate change. 3 The Committee assistance in 

encouraging full studies of the implications of this land exchange, including USGS 

water studies and full NEPA studies, before the exchange occurs cannot be overstated. 

Conclusion 

The impact of climate change truly hits home for the Apache people when our 

young people are cognizant of the effects on traditional Apache ways. Dale Dillon, 

a young intern with the Tribe’s Historic Preservation and Archaeology Department, 

was asked to comment about climate change. He wrote about the importance of the 

Emory Oak to his grandparents as a traditional food source and the wholesome nutritional contents of the acorns as a protection against high blood-glucose levels in 

the prevention of diabetes. He noted that the Emory Oak was dependent upon good 

winter snowpack conditions but had observed that recent winter snows were declining thus reducing acorn harvests. Dale gathered acorns with his grandparents as 

a staple of their traditional diet. It is our fervent hope that Dale will be able to 

gather acorns with his grandchildren. 

As the climate changes, it impacts the Tribe’s homes, culture and economy. The 

Tribe’s resources, upon which we have always depended, are threatened. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to express the San 

Carlos Apache Tribe’s views on the important topic of climate change and its impacts on indigenous peoples. The Committee’s concern is appreciated and the San 

Carlos Apache Tribe looks forward to working with the Committee in addressing 

these issues. 

Attachment

79


719d1.eps

TESTIMONY OF THE SAN CARLOS APACHE TRIBE 

By 

TERRY RAMBLER 

TRIDAL CHAIRMAN 

CONCERNING 

H,R,1904: SOUTHEAST ARIZONA LAND EXCHANGE 

AND CONSERVATION ACT OF 2011 

Presented to 

Chairman Jeff Bingaman 

Ranking Member Lisa MUl'kowski 

Members of the U,S, Senate 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resour~(!s 

366 Dirksen Senatll Office Building 

February 22, 2012 

My name is Terry Rambler and I am the Chairman of the San Carlos Apache Tribe 

{the 'Tribe';' Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony to the Senate Committee 

on Energy and Natural Resources concerning H.R.1904 and S. 409 as reported in the! ll11h 

Congress. 

Sin~e 2005, the Tribe has conSistently opposed legislation that would convey an 

aN!a called Oak Flat in Ari~ona's Tonto National Forest to Res[)luti[)u Cappel' Mining (RCM). 

TIt(! Tribe's opposition is multi-faceted. As Apaches, our opposition is based upon culturnL 

sodal, and religious g[[)unds. As Arizonans, our opposition stems from the adverse impacts 

of this mining operation on the future of Ari20na, including Its limited water resources. As 

Amerkans, our opposition is based upon the depletion of our nation's trcasure and threats 

to national security with no commensurate adv..ntage to our nation or the American 

people. 

Under H.R. 1904, the Secretary of Agriculture is directed to cOllvey ovel' 2,4QO acres 

of U.S. Forest Service land in southeast Ari20na to RCM to fac!lltate the development and 

operation of an unprecedented, large-scale block cave copper min!!. RCM is a subSidiary of 

two foreign mining giants - Rio Tinto, PLC (United Kingdom) and BHP Billiton, Ltd 

(Australia), whose owners indude the countJ:y of China. Rio Tinto parmers with the 

Iranian government in a uranium mine in Namibia. 

Of principal concern to the Tribe are the devastating impacts the mine will have on 

the Oak Flat area. The mine will swallow giant swaths of the land above ground, including 

the Oak Flat area, which contains one of the holiest of Apache sites. When the land under 

Oak Flat collapses int[l an enormous sinkhole, the nature of the land and its ecology will be 

destroyed forever, and an area of profound reUglous and cultural significance to the Tribe, 

Yavapais and other Native Americans will be permanently desecrated :md lost 
80


719d2.eps

In considering H.R. 1904 and S. 409, I respectfuHy request th<lt you question the 

merits of this legislation. This legislation is a special interest give-away to a foreign owned 

entity with no att~chment to our country. The legislation fuils to protect Indians, 

Ari7.onans, other Americans, and future generations. 

£o'or these reasons, the Sail Carlo~ Apache Tribe has joined with the Inter Tribal 

Council of Arizona. other tribes throughout the nation, minew(lrkers, environmentalists, 

md residents of Superior, Miami and Globe, to oppose this legislation. Our spcrlflc 

concerns follow. 

Th~ Oak Flat Region is a Holy and SacfBd Site 

Throughout our history, Oak Flat continues as a vital part of the Apache religion, 

traditions, and culture. In Apaeh~, our word for the area of Oak Flat is Chich'f/ Bf/dagowal en 

"Flat with Acorn Trees"). Oak Flat is a holy and sacred site, and a traditional cultural property 

with deep relil,<ious, cultuml, arGhaeologic~l, historical and environmenlal significanre to 

Apaches, Yavapais and other tribes. At least eight Apache Clans and two Western Apache 

B~nds have documented history in the area. Apa~he clans originated from this men nnd Apaches 

on the Reservation rove aucestors who came from the Oak Flat area before they were foro:d to 

Old S~n CurIos. Tribol members' nncestors passed their Imowledge nbout Oak Flat to their 

dnsccndants who are alive today. 

A nwnher of Apache religious ceremonies will be held at Oak Flat this Spring, just as 

~imilar ceremonies and other religious and traditional praelice~ have bC\:n held for as long ElS 

Apaches can recalL We do so because Oak Hal is a place filled with power, a plactl Ap~ches go: 

for preyer Ill1d c~remony, for healing Ill1d ceremonial items, or for peace and penmnal cleansing. 

The Oak Flat area and everything in it belong:; to powerful Dtyln (Medicine Men) who we 

respect, and the horne ofa particular kind of Gaan- powerful Mountoin Spirits and Holy Beings 

on whom Apaches depend for our well-being. 

The O~k Flat area is bounded on the west by portions oflhe large =rpmentlmowll as 

D/hactlc! Nsdl/ (Apache L..eap), to the east by Gaen Blkoh (Crown Dancer's, Mountain Spirit's, 

or Gaan Canyon and known as Devil's Canyon), and is intersreted to the nOl1h by Ga.an Daszin 

(Crown Dancer's or Mountain Spirits Standing, and Imown as Queen Creek Canyon). 

In the Oak flat area. there nrc hundreds of troditiooal Apache species of plants, birds, 

insects and many other living things in lile Oak Flat area that arc erucialto Apache religion and 

culture. Some of these species are among the holiest of medicines - medicines that arc only 

Imown \() and hnrvested by gifted Apache spiritunl or healing practitioners. Only the species 

within the Oak Fiat are~ are imbued with the tlniqml power of tins area. The ancient oak groves 

provide an abundant SO\IfCe of :.tenms that for many centuries and today serve as an important 

traditional food source for the Apache people. 
81


719d3.eps

Any mining on Oak Flat will adversely impact the inteb.nLy of the area as a whole - both 

as a holy and religious place and as a place of continued tl1lditional and cultural importance to 

Apaches and other tribal people. There are no bwnnn actions or steps thaI can ever make Ihis 

place whole again or restore to the Apache wh~t will be lost. Mining on Oak Flat will dcsccrnte 

our Geen's home and could greatly diminish the power of this place, as well as our ability to 

most effectively conduct our ceremonies. The destruction of Oak Flat will add to the mnny 

problems and sufferings that our community already faces. We will becolDe vumerable Lo a willil 

VlIriety of illness, and our Apache spiritual existence will be threatened. 

The unique nature of the Oak Flat ar~a has long been recognized, and no! just by the 

Apache. Oak Flat was expressly set aside from approprill.lion under Ule public laws, including 

the mining laws, by President Eisenhower and reaffirmed by President Nixon. Public umd 

Orders 1229 (1955) !LIld 5132 (1971). Secretary Vilsack re.::ently acknowledged Oakfla! as a 

"special place", onl' th~t should be protected from harm "ror future gcncrations". See Secretary 

Vilsack letter to Senator Wydcn, daled July 13,20(19. Oak Flat and other nearby In<:ations are 

also elisible r01' inclusion nnd protection underth .. Natioillli Hi.toric Preservation Aot of 196G, as 

well as other laws and policies. 

Article 11 of the Apnehe Tremy of 1852, requires the United States t(l "legisl3te and act 

10 seeure the permanent prosperity and happin~ss" aflhe Apache people.! H.R. 1904 mils to live 

up to this promise. While the Oak flat Withdrawal and its ~urrounding lands stand outside of the 

physicul bOUlldarics of the San Carlos Apache Indian Reservation, this area is part of our and 

other Western Apaches' ab(lriginal lands, and it hRS alWllYs played un ~ssentinl role in Ule 

Apache religioll, traditiolls, and (;l)lturc. 

H .R. 1904 Fails to Require Meaningful Consultation witlll ndian Tribes 

NUlDerous laws, executivc and secretarial orders und policies of the United States require 

meaningful govemment-to-govemment cOIlsultation with Indiilll tribes. The United States' 

obligatiOll to engage ill good mith eonsultatio::t with Indian tribes arises from the unique legal, 

political and tmst relationships that the Go,ernmCllt owes to tribes under the Constitution, 

treaties, slatutes, and judicial decisions. 

Congrcss has understood and articnlal~d the importance of consultation as a matter of 

law. The respect for tribal cultural beliefs, especially for sacred ~it"s, bas become all cssential 

component of consultation process and reflects the Government's trust relationship with Jndian 

tribc$. The National Historic Prcservation Act (NHPA) requires that fedeml agencies oonsult at 

all stages with any "Indian tribe ... that attaches religious and cultural significancc" to 

tradilional cullnral properties, such as the Oak Flat area. 16 U.S.C. §470(a)(d)(6)(B). Federal 

regulations require that the Government assess the impact~ orR.R. 1904 and the mining project 

1 Trooly ",alt thO)Apacho, 10 StU!. 979 (July 1. 1852), mtified March 23, 1853, procbimcd M~rch 25, 1853. 
82


719d4.eps

Oll Oak Flut b~cau~ it is an eligible hi~torie. propcl'ty. 36 C.F.R. §800.'s. Avoid:utcc and 

mitigation ofadve:rse cff<'X:ts are ~nlled forunderNPllA l\lId its rcgulatkms. 

E,o:=tTvC Order 1317S requires exectrti,<'C departments fa CIlllduM !rllm! gt)Vl:rnment-to· 

g.ovllmmenl !lOOsulUltlon W!:th L'IdiJo.n tribef vm,* proposed kgislll.tiOllS lm1le substantial Uil'll(;t 

effects .f1J". <Jlre 1ll":n.'IQft lnd1.:m Tribes. 59 Fed. Reg. 22951 (Aprll29, !994). Secretmy::.f 

Agricllitllm Vlisack bn aclmowiedged "it is important tl!1rt this bm engage In a p,cc~ c!ibrmal 

tribai consultation to CI1S11re boli! tribal participation and the protection of this site." See 

Secretary Vilsack i..etref dated July 13, 2D09, .bov~. p,e~ident Ohama stated In Ws 2009 

Memorandum issuing E.Q. 13175. thal "[h]islor,y has MOwn that failure.to includ~ the voices of 

trjbn! Officials in fonnulating policy affecting their ttil,1i).! cotmnunitics bas all too often led to 

undesirable and, at timc$, d~V{lst~tins and tragi~ l'~sults." 74 Fed. Reg. 57881 (November S. 

:\009:). 

Nothlng in H.lt. 1904 requires informed mid adwneed govern."mln~·ro-go\h~mll!f:!lt 

ci,h"l5u,tatilJn with sffectoil IttdiJtU t:'.bc&, such as. the San C&i~ Ap .... hr" Tribu., lIS cQot=pfuted 

by :111: Unite.;! S!llli,;s' trust re:;p-oosfuilily !Ill!! me l~,vs am:!. Ffilic:es describe;'! above, To fulloontrary, Se~. 4(e) only roqni!{;$ wnaaltlllro., aner Wtctrnent ofthe H.P~ 19()4, and not be.c"ore, 

re.nderiDg the act of (louwltation lIlllen': forrnnlity. 

S~cti[Jn 4(c) would oIrcumvent Executive Order lJD07 which directs Fcden::Il ag~ncit:S to 

manage FedernllaIld~ in a manner that accommodat~~ Native American re1illious praotItloners' 

aecc~~ tll and ccremo.nial use ofNal!ve American 5~cl1l4 sit~s lind 10 "avoid advcriPCly affocting 

the physical integrity of~uch sllcred sill'S." 61 Fe-d. Reg. 26771 (May 29, 1996). 

Me~ni!lgf;;d g<}vcrnment-tc--gnverrmw."lt consultation !loSUillC<l koowl~. The &In 

Csrlll5 Api>U.1.c Trioo, the Inwr Tribal CQtmC'il of Arimn\!, tlle 1';1.."\ McDowell Y~\'av~l Netioo, 

:l;nd ofums 1'-.:'.,'" rep"~ledly ~uastai!full the UrJted SL11<:8 uml"ru.k" ~d'''''llOO(] studies m ooUer 

ur..demlMd the impact of too p.~ min« on the v.'lI,er supplies. hmdsC'ilpO- and cuvironment of 

thi5 region. &.-oh studies ar.e needed fur inftmued ~(Imm!t81iotl. ThiE pulicy is cl;X111mvented by 

the Inndexclmnge ~on\'e)'anee. mandated by H.R. 1904. 

Proponents of'E.R. 1904 have cdtici2cd the 'l.'libe for not having met and c(1!1;ulted with 

RCM. l-Iowever, the tn.J~l f.::lationship rests not with ReM but with the United Stall:G. 

Ther:> continu'l~ to. be> sufticient time to engage illlne3llillgful CO!1.ultati~ns with the 

Tribe and ollwraffi::*d Iudiatllribes beflln: any dedshms are 1713& whe.tbe.r to ct}J:).vey Oak Flat 

(0 RCM, To do olhcrwise, !IS H.R. 1 W4 lIDHld<ltIlS, wuuld scrW!1s\y undermine the intenJ: of 

NHP A and other feder~l bws. a"d eo.'en t.':e mUI relationship of'thc United Stale,<: to T~fue.s. 

Rio Timo.has Questionable Ties to Cbina 1'!.l1d.lran 

Nine pert:ent of ReM's controlling partner, Rio Tinto, is I:Urrently QVvn(!(] by China 

through its state-controlled Aluminum Corpcmlti~n of 4hina. If this land e-xchilnge goes 
83


719d5.eps

through, China will end up holding a 4.5% interest in Arizona's Tonto National Forest and 

our ancestral lands. Rio Tinto is also a partner with Iran In the Rossing Uranium Ltd. mine 

in Namibia. While ReM seeks to minimize its connections to Iran, Rio Tinto remains on the 

State Department's list of foreign corporations in the supply chain of strategic minerals to 

hostile governments, induding North [(ore;l and Iran. 

Under the President's recent Ilxecutive Order on Iran sanctions, induding measures 

to implement section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act [NDAA], the U.S. 

Department of Treasury is Issuing generailicenses to maintain existing authorizations for 

certain transactions involving the Government of Iran. Reso\utilln Copper will need to 

apply. 

Executive Order 13175 requires executive departments, induding the Department 

of State, to conduct tribal consultations based on the Tribe's concern regarding the 

business relations of Resolution Copper and its parent companies with Iran and China. The 

Tribe is aware of recent U.s. actions at the United Nations Sct:urity Council [UN Resolution 

1929) and Presidential Executive Order 12957, Induding the Comprehensive Iran 

Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (CISADA), which strengthens the 

support of U.S. s~nctions with respect to the Ir<1ni::m energy industry. As a result of Iran's 

continued intransigence, the U,No's resolution is the most extensive package ofsanclions 

against Iran. U.S. offkials have adamantly reiterated that Iran be held accountable for its 

nuclear program and continued human rights violation. 

Currently, the u.S. is conducting offiCial talks about transnational criminal 

organizations and global efforts to increase pressure on tbe Iranian regime and isolate Iran 

f!'Om the international financial system. Thl:I"c arc also two primary federal stututes govcrning 

reporting by foreign investors about investmel!ts made in the United States, which RCM may not 

have complied with as of yet: the Inteination~l Investment and Trade in Services Survey At;t; 2 

and, tho Agriculturnl Foreign Investment Disclosure Act.] The Tribe does not have any means 

1- (" US,C, §3101 &.<"'IJ("t!TSA")_ Tho R"""" nfr"'.(lnomle. AM.ly"" (REA) (lf,he Il'p.rtmont nff:nmmo",o 

.dmlnlSl0rllllTSSAj see 15 C.F.R. 805. TOO llTSSA requires reports of all foreign "'V"SlmOnl Ina u.s. busi,"", 

.nl"'Jlrl'"' in whioh 3. !breign person or corporation owrs 10% or more oftho voling interest, unlo .. Ihe invest""",! i. 

undor",1 million. Is undor 200 "ores, or Is rMl .stoto inl,ndod Illr porr.onat WI!:. 

1 (7 U.S.C. §3301 8Isaq.) ("AFIDA"). AFIDA fs admlnislered bylho UB. Dop.rtmontof A£rieulture;"". 

Reguta!ions at 7 C.F.R. §78L If'gricullUrnllalld is Required by or h., title tran!fmed to n f"re!SI! Individual or 

corpornlion, AFlDA requires Ih. !ndMdu.llo suomil a '''Port (Form FSA·153, Agriculture Investmenl D;"Io,urc 

Act Report) to tbe Secretary of Agrioullure within ;0 days oflbc lrnnsaction. Exception; !o tlll.< ''''Iulrcm.nt inol""" 

trans,ollons Involving: ~.ou'lly l"",reSls; ",.sobotds under 10 )'Oars: oo~ling.nt fi,ture interest,; non-conlins""! 

future interests Ib,t do nol beoome pos~essmy t'ron termin"tion onlle present poss,soory 05131<>; o,-",mont. and 

rights of=y (surf"ce or ,ul>--~ltrfit"") unmhl.d 10 agrico,lrurnl prodnotion; inl<rests sotely in mineral right!. In Ih' 

'"cni ofoo exchange. RCM \Voutd haV(lIO tomply. 
84


719d6.eps

to fully investigate a for<llgn company or it:; afflllations, but it understands that the 

Congress and federal agencies can investig<tte these matters. 

Based 011 the history of Rio Tinto's business relat::ons • ... 'lth Iron and China and in 

light of the u.s. reoontsancti..ons agtinstlran, jt"''1)llld be inappropdate to trade U,S. soit to 

a questionable foreign mining eompany. 

H.R. 1904 is a Give":wr.,yto Foreign, SpedatJnterests 

Under thB cnrrr;tnt mining laws, tile land exchnnge would result in a give"away of 

American wealth. Based upon RCM's own calculation of the ore body at modest prices of 

copper of $2.00 per pound and molybdenum at $10..00 per pound would result in a give 

away to twu foreign mining wmpanies in excess of$7 billion. Undertoday's ~opperprices, 

the saleahle copper extt<'l.cted from D<'l.k FintWl:luld have a value ofabout $185.6 biJllon. 

The appraisalrel'juiraments of H.R. 1904 do not adeq[lfltdy ensure that the public 

will receive fail' value. RCM and its foreign corporate parents wot<ld not pay for the true 

i:Osts of environmental C<lmpli~nre. As a result, Ameriean taxpayers W(luirl bo left without 

any revenue and on the hook for the future cost of any environmental remediation. 

Any Jobs Benc1its from lJ.R.1.904 Are Dwarfed by Enormous Economic and F.coJogical 

Costs to Arizona and Amorica 

RCM and its proponents tout local job r.:reation <IS the primary jus lineatIon {or this 

land ex& ... mge. HowtlVel'. ifH.R. 19114 were to be enacted, It would came atthe expense IJf 

an Americans, including Indians andArnonans. 

ReM claims that the mine atUakFlatw!l1 p:-ooucc a wlde varlet}' of Jobs, from 1,000 

to as many as 3.700. This lilst estimate comes from RCM's hired expert R11d not rrom an 

independent analysis. In re~lity, the number of j(lbs is highly speculative; the majority of 

these jobs (assuming th()y were ~reated) would not appear until a number of years fr(lm 

now, offering little to help today's economy. Furthermore, Rio Tinto pl~ns to ma\{e the ReM 

mine highly automnted and to be able to oper~te it from remote [(lcalions. potentially 

rendering local Job <reation meaningless. 

Other mining companIes m the area such as PreeportMcMoRar: and Teryl ResoUJ'ces 

recruit employees from as far away as Phoenix and Thesor., and ~vcn outside the State .. As 

a rllSult ofl'ec.entincrcascs In copper prices, 1.tne.'llployme.'l:t ill the Superior - Globe r~gi(ln 

has fallen well below the national average. 
85


719d7.eps

While some jobs will be created by the proposed mine, it Is certaIn that Il.R. 1904, If 

Elnacted, will result in tragic consequences that ReM seeks to downplay, ifnot avoid. Any 

economic benefit that may exist will be negated by the very real, long-term Impacts to the 

regional water supply and environmentlll <lIld the economic cleanup costs that American 

bxjxlyer cannot ~ford. 

There has been no credIble cost benefit or other analysis of certain environmental 

impacts, Once Congress permits Oak Flat to be lraded to the private ownership of RCM, 

RCM would be able to develop and operate its mine with only limited envIronmental 

permitting, water quality requirements, cultural protections or financial assurances 

requIred under Federal law. As a limited liability corporation, RCM could sImply walk 

away from potentially billions of dollars in environmental and infrastructure damages. 

Indeed, it is very likely that H.1t 1904 will assure the creation of a future Superfund 

Cleanup site, We all have to ask ourselves why H,R, 1904 does not provide assunmces that 

a rutUTe environmental catastrophe will he remediated, Who will pay that cost7 Certainly 

not RCM; Instead, the American taxpayerwlll be left on the hook. 

The Tribe has been m!sch~racterized ~s being philosophically opposed to mininG. 

To the contrary, we support responsible mining. We recogni7.C that mining Is an essential 

Pilrt of lU'!zona's economy, Many Apaches are miners. IJowever, we must agree that any 

mining should be calTied out responsibly and that it should not destroy our holy sites, 

What is proposed here is the highly destructive hlock and cave mining method. 

mock cave mining consumes massive amounts of water that will severely shrink the water 

supply of an already drought stricken reBion. The mine will most certainly Benel'o.te 

gigantic amounts of waste and tailings pile~ that may poison the region's water supply, and 

it remains uncertain even today where the ore will be processed and where the mountains 

ofhlilings and dElv~lopmellt and waste rock for this mine will be dumped. RCM has publicly 

admitted that its proposed block cavine mine would create significant land subsidenw and 

collapse of large portions of the Oak Flat area. Despite these f.Jcts, H.R, 1904 removes all 

administrative discretion and decision-making authority, rendering tribal consultation 

useless, and provides no protections to the lands, water or Integrity of holy, sacred and 

rnlturalsites. 

No independent assessment has been made available to the public regarding the 

proposed mine's Impact on the water resour~s, environment, natural el:osysterm; or the 

landscape of the Oak Flat area. No provision ill H.R 1904 offers any protections for the 

large-scale water depletions and environmental scarring and toxins that will result from 

the mine, The absence of requirements for independent assessment or NEPA review In 

H.R. 1904 before the land exchange ensures that the pubUc will never know the true 

impacts of the proposed mining operation until it is too late. 
86


719d8.eps

Of partirular concern Is the fa~t th~t the mine's dewatering would substantially 

deplete groundwater aquifers that supply the Globe-Superior region. The (u,"ulative 

impact of ReM's mine and the other mines already operating In the area on the region's 

water suppiles and qmilitywiil never be <l5sessed because of the iao;k ofNErA review, The 

mine will h1rely dry up Bnd otherwise contamin!lte su.rface fhlWS, SprillgS, soops lind othe:.-

water featuros Within the Oak Flat i1reil - all of which are fcr.damental to the integrity <of 

the area as i'i holy site and traditional cultural property for the Tribe. Adver"" impacts wll1 

occur through the depletion of groundwater aq\lifers and surface supplies that support the 

base flows in Qut!:~n Creek and the p~rennial pools in Gaan Canyon. The- 105s to the local 

aquifers ranDat be remediated by banking Central Arizona ?roject water elsewhere. 

At present, no water management plan BXi~ts for this already drought stricken 

regie,". ReM has not volulltm~rcd its studit!S. No Independent study has assessed the 

potential impact of the proposed mine on the region's water-supply, No independentstndy 

been made of the amount af t;}lIins or other contllwin~nts that will he produced hy the 

mine. RR.1904 guarant"es rhat no suell lnde?<mdentre\'iews\\lili e>.~rbe carried out. The 

potenti:ll. costs of the proposed Il'.lne ~ the en\1nmm"l!lt, the Apache's holy ~ite. and tile 

region's water supply will certainly outstrip ,my accnomic benefits of any jobs. 

H.R.1904 Allows a Land El{Change without NEllA Ro;>view 

The publiC should be m~de ~w.lre Df the potential impacts stemming from this 

proposed land exchange. However, Sec.4(iJ ofH.R. 1904 mandates that tht!: c:.:change occur 

withiu one year of enactment This proviSion effectively prohibitscompJianctl with NF.PA. 

NBPA reqUires the government to study, de'relop, and descrihe appropdate 

altematives to courses of Redan for liny proposal that involves unresolved confllcts 

concerning uses.of available reSllIln:es. 42 U.s.C. § 4332(Z)(llj. The NEPA prD<:%S also 

must be integrated with other planning at the earliest possible time in order to ensure th~t 

decisions reflect environmental values and head off potential conflicts. 40 C.F.1t § 1501.2, 

1f.R. 1904 fails to protect the public because: (1) it does not require or even pennit 

the Secretary of Agl'iculture to take a "hard look" at the land exchange befor<:: the exchange 

is consummated; (2) It f~il5 to vest ~ny discretiDn in the Secretary of Agriculture til 

consider appropriate altermttives; [3] it does not provide Dr permit mitigation of lmpac"..s 

related to the exchange and/or ~ mining projxt; and f4] it would n:'lt perlllit [he 

S&retaIyto re;ectthe exchange iflhe Secre>ary fin:!s :hat the e-;:cl18n!lei~ a bad deal fer the 

American taxpayer or puhlic. 
87


719d9.eps

Contrary to what proponents of H,R. 1904 contend, th~ bill waivell the requirement 

of a jIIEPA analysis berlll'l,! the exchange. H.R. 1904 further waives the Federal Land Policy 

and Managemmlt Act and tither criticall~ws that guide land exchanges and protect the 

American public. Because of ttlese wRivers, there ca!l be no in':cp(mcicnt determ!natlon of 

what is in the public intt!rest. Nor will tllere be a!1y disciQsure of envtror:mentat impacts. 

llldeed, under JUI., 1904, even if the Secretary find;;: ::.Idverse impacts tQ religi011s interest..;; 

or environment~l, C1l1tur~l, wat(lf or other hat'ms, nothing C:ln be done, The land will 

already be owned by ReM and most federal laws would not apply. 

S. 409, as reported, did provide some protections prior to deciSions on r,onvcyance 

by requlrtng a more active involvement by the Secreta\y and !imit~d consultation with 

trib~s; however, we oppose S, 409, as reported, because it (among other things) f\lUs to 

acknowledge the import~n~~ of Oak I'lat to the religiOn.. traditions and cultura of the 

Ap:lche and Yavapai People and because it contains no guarantees that the integrity of Oak 

Fbt as a Apat;he holy s\.te and traditional clllturnl property 'WQuld be prote~~ed "'-fler 

transfer tt> Rot, Whll" both bills are unacceptable to the Apaehe Tribe, }f,R. 1904 is noJCn 

worse thall S. 409, as it completely removes most of the Secretary's discretion and 

(:Onsultiltion functions, Sec, 4(i) of H.R. 1904 removes the rights that the Tribe or other 

concerned citizens would normally have under the law before the exchallSa becames final. 

So, even if the Secretary's NEPA efforts after the eltchange were found flawed, it is likely to 

be .-rgued that no one ~an seek rcvlcwfrom govemment agencies or the courts. 

R.n. 1904's NEPA Requirementsafter [he 6xchange are Rollow 

Under Se.;, 41)1 of fiR-19M, the Secretary of Agrl~ulture has no discretion t(} 

exercise: any meaningful Oluiliorfry over ReM's plan of operations- or its mining actlvlt:cs on 

private land absent a federol nexu:s:. Or.Oil foltdel'al l~nds an" transferred to privatt! 

ownership uuder H,R. 1904, ReM may contend that It Is able to mine without having ill 

comply with fedel'ollaw.< ReM wl1i only have to submit ~ plan of operation in advance of 

producing commerd~l quantities of minerals. However, the Secretary of AgrIculture has no 

authority to reject till') plan of operations if the tnformation is insufficienl' to conduct the 

review caUed for under Sec. 401(2). 

Under H.R. 1904, no interim exploratory activities, pre-feasibility and feasIbility 

operations, or facillty construction will be giVen federal scrutiny before production. 

Completion oftlte exchange prlorto an Env!nmmental Jl;llpactStatement nllgates the utiliI;\' 

• Larnls in pri;,ut~ ""'n~lsh;p are ex~'Up-t from most or tho normal p="'" fer minin.!: Oil. fod<:tat lands, wllkh 

inciudc;juri,diolionoflb} 1i:<lcml governmenlunderlbc l'C<lm.1 t.Dd PolicyManilllcmcnl A~l Qf 197~, 43 US.C. 

§§ 1101_1785; tho MultipIc,U!c SUitamod·Yleld ht of 1960, 16 U.S.C. H 528.531; NaPA, 42 U.S.C. §§ -1121-

4347; and36 C.F.R Subparls Anoo B. H.R. 1904 furtber b)'llllS,';~~thaNalion.1 F=l M.n.gcnlC:IIIA(! (16 U.S.C. 

§ 1600) and the I!nd.nllc:red Specie:.: Aot (16 U.S.C. § 1531). 
88


719d10.eps

ofthl:! EIS process and evis~erates NEPA protection. As a result, ReM's activities will be 

subjectmerc1yto the limIted and Inadequate provIsIons of AIizona law. 

Many mining companies have a long history of complying with federal laws ~nd 

regulations, Publlt input ~nd close strutiny under NEPA provides ~ssurantes that the 

public interest will be served. NEPA provides a vital, structured process to assess the 

impacts of the mine on the land, watel', cultural resources, animals and plants, while also 

assessing the extent, quality and value of the ore body to be conveyed to foreign mining 

companies. Only then can the American people fully understand the amount of taxpayer 

wealth hcingtransfcrred by the: Govarnmant 

It is only because oflhe federal laws which are in place that other miners in Arizona 

and throughout the country are ex~mples of environmental respons!blllty. ReM and Its 

pfIlponents h~ve rompletely failed to artlcu13te any credible reason why the NEPA process 

and other federal laws should be bypassed and ~Ircumventcd by H.R. 1904. 

Responsible Stewardship for Apaches, il.riz.unans, and olher Americans 

n.R. 1904 would lead to irrespon~ible development with <.iisastmns consequences. In the 

words of Theodore Roo~evelt: ''To waste, to destroy, our natural resources, to skin lind exh<lUst 

the land instead of using it so as to increase its usefulness, will result in undennining in the days 

of our children the very prosperity whicl1 we ought by right to hand down to them." Theodore 

RoosevcJl was a champion of Edmund BJrkc's idealthm a moral partnership exists between Ihe 

living, the dead and those to be bom. That view helped instruct his passion for conserv:ng 

America's natural reSOlln:us. ThaI view in some aspects also parallels the Apache wILy of Ere. 

We should all honor this vision. 

Oak Flat sllOuld be preserved :Or fulure generations of Americuns, Arizonans Dnd 

Apaches and other Indian Tribes. Theodore Roosevelt also observed that; "Conservation means 

de .... elopment as much ns it does protection. 1 recognize the right and duty of this generation to 

dC'.'elop!lIld usc the natural resources of our land; but I do not IC<:ognizc the right to waste th~m, 

or to rob, by wasteful means, the generations that come nfter us." That sentiment is ret1ecteC: in 

the San Carlos Apache Tribe's opposition to this legislative land exchange. 11mt sentiment Is 

shared by II substantial coalition of Americans. 

RCM's proposed mine would waste natural resources ~ud would rob generations yet to 

come. It should not be permitted to happen by those entrusted with the solemn trust 

resporn;ibilities for Indians and all Americans. 
89


719d11.eps

Tribes, Arizonans, and other Americans Need Pl'otections from H.R.1904 

The Tribe has been Jained by tbe 20 member Tribes wthe IIMr tribal Council of 

Arizona, !ceal community organization;; miners, environmentalists and dOl'.UtL~ of athers in 

its Cll?ositio:1 t<> fI.R. 1904 and any ether legislation that would convey or otherwire 

negatively harm tll<; Oak Flat area. I respe>::tfullrsubmit that lLR. 1904 should nat moye 

out Gfthe Committee for the fol:ow!ngl'easons: 

1. GDVernment-to·govemment consuitatlon must (I=r with ~n int<lf[)Stca 

tribes thruullhlJut the land exchange process and proposed uses: 

2, II.R, 1.904 offers no. protections for Oak Flat area as a TradJtion~1 Cultural 

Property, pursuant m Section 106 nf the NHPA Of, alternativoly, ma:lusion 

from tl'ansrerto ReM under the legislatiom 

3. Tbe:e are no guarantees of cantinucd acress for tribal members to the Oak 

Flat area; 

4. Certain restrictive covenants should be developed by the Secretaries of 

Agriculture, Interior and State in consultation with affected Indian tribes, fur 

the Oak Flat area due to its signifh:<lnt tribal archae<}logiC<ll, religious, 

historical and cultural significance: 

5. H.R. 1904 does not include critical water balance measures to ensure 

protections forthe region's future water supply; 

6. ReM doe!; not have to comply with appHr.ab!e fcderallaws and ret,"TUlations 

h!'lf{)rll allY ciecisinlls on whether to convey federal land and wealth, illduding 

comprehenSive NEPA, FLPMA ilnd CEQ review; 

7. H.R. 1901 does not require feda!'".!! environmental compliance; and 

8. Thc!re are no meaningful sanctions in H.R. 1904 iFRCM violatns federal laws. 

Conclusion 

hi 1871, the United S~tes establisbed our Reservation. Within just a few years, 

some of the most procil!ct!ve lands within thil bOllnrlarle:s of the Reservatlon were taken 

avro.y by the United States lind ronl'eyed to settiers and miners for their sole benefit. That 

was repeated fiv<l more times over the Yeilr5. Our burial Sites, IMng areas and furmlands 

on our Reservation Wolfe flooded to make way for a federal dam for the benefit of others. It 

is in this historical context that we assess the minln!): proposal and this land exchange. 
90

Æ


719d12.eps

H.R. 1904 and S. 409, as reported, do not provide the requisite transparency to 

address many of the fimdament:Ji concerns mining projects like these present. The billions 

of doll:'lrs WhIch ReM :'Ind its foreign corporate p:'Irents would reali2e In mlnlng proflts and 

avoidance costs for environmental compliance by the premature passage of these bills are 

staggering. There is no unbiased analysis of the potential economic benefits or costs of 

potential environmental damages and impacts on the region'swater supply. 

The proposed mine presents an untenable threat to the security and sustainability 

of Oal( Flat and all it contains, which would be an incalculable cultural loss, Under the bills, 

there is an absence of quantifiable royalties for the American treasuro that would be given 

to foreisn entities in exchange for our amestrallands. 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commiltee, thank you for the opportunity to 

express our opposition to H.R. 1904 and S, 409 as reported.