[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 25 (Monday, February 7, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5880-5883]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2635]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs


Proposed Finding Against Federal Acknowledgment of the Steilacoom 
Tribe of Indians

AGENCY:  Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

[[Page 5881]]


ACTION:  Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY:  Pursuant to 25 CFR 83.10(h), notice is hereby given that the 
Assistant Secretary proposes to determine that the Steilacoom Tribe of 
Indians, c/o Mrs. Joan Ortez, P.O. Box 419, Steilacoom, Washington 
98388 does not exist as an Indian tribe within the meaning of Federal 
law. This notice is based on a determination that the tribe does not 
satisfy all of the criteria set forth in 25 CFR 83.7 and, therefore, 
does not meet the requirements for a government-to-government 
relationship with the United States.

DATES:  As provided by 25 CFR 83.10(i), any individual or organization 
wishing to challenge the proposed finding may submit factual or legal 
arguments and evidence to rebut the evidence relied upon. This material 
must be submitted within 180 calendar days from the date of publication 
of this notice. As stated in the regulations, 25 CFR 83.10(i), 
interested and informed parties who submit arguments and evidence to 
the Assistant Secretary must also provide copies of their submissions 
to the petitioner. Names and addresses of commenters on the proposed 
finding are generally available under the Freedom of Information Act.

ADDRESSES:  Comments on the proposed finding and/or requests for a copy 
of the report of evidence should be addressed to the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street, N.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20240, Attention: Branch of Acknowledgment and Research. Mail Stop 
4660-MIB.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  R. Lee Fleming, Chief, Branch of 
Acknowledgment and Research, (202) 208-3592.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  This notice is published in the exercise of 
authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant 
Secretary--Indian Affairs by 209 DM 8.
    The Steilacoom Tribe of Indians (STI) asserted that it was eligible 
for consideration under 25 CFR 83.8 as the continuation of the 
Steilacoom band which signed the Treaty of Medicine Creek on December 
24, 1854, and that the Steilacoom were recognized as a tribe by the 
Federal Government in the 1930's. The evidence did not show that the 
STI descends from the ``Steilacoom'' group which was a party to the 
treaty. In addition, the evidence demonstrated that the Steilacoom 
organizations of the 1920's and 1930's were dealt with only for the 
purpose of prosecuting claims against the Federal Government. 
Therefore, because the petitioner did not provide substantial evidence 
of unambiguous prior Federal acknowledgment, the STI petition has been 
evaluated under the provisions of 25 CFR 83.7. The STI meets criteria 
83.7(d), 83.7(f), and 83.7(g), but does not meet 83.7(a), 83.7(b), 
83.7(c), and 83.7(e).
    Criterion 83.7(a) requires that the petitioner have been identified 
as an American Indian entity on a substantially continuous basis since 
1900. For the period from 1900 through 1925, the evidence did not show 
any external identifications of an existing Steilacoom Indian entity. 
In 1925, seven people described in BIA minutes as ``Steilacoom 
Indians'' attended a claims meeting. The claims group appeared in BIA 
records through the late 1930's. There was also an effort in the later 
1930's to organize a Steilacoom Tribe of Public Domain Indians of 
Washington under the IRA. There were no Federal identifications of any 
Steilacoom entity between 1941 and 1951. Federal identifications of the 
claims organization resumed in 1951 and continued until the final 
judgment award in 1974. In 1953, it was included on the list of groups 
with which the BIA discussed proposed termination legislation.
    In 1952, a longtime local resident of the Steilacoom, Washington, 
area, testified on behalf of the claims organization that she could 
still identify a Steilacoom tribe. During the 1950's and 1960's, the 
State of Washington Department of Fisheries recognized the BIA ``blue 
cards'' issued to persons listed on the rolls of claims organizations. 
On this basis, an official of the Washington State Game Department 
stated in 1971 that he considered the STI as a bonafide tribe 
representing a continuation of the historical Steilacoom band.
    The evidence in the record for this proposed finding did not 
include any other identifications of an existing Steilacoom entity in 
local newspapers, by local or regional historians, or in scholarly 
works for the period prior to the 1970's. In February 1974, the 
Steilacoom Indian Tribe incorporated within the State of Washington as 
a nonprofit organization. From 1974 to the present, the Steilacoom 
Tribe of Indians has regularly been identified as a non-recognized 
Indian tribe by Federal and State agencies, in newspaper articles, by 
local historians, and by scholars.
    The evidence was not adequate to demonstrate that STI has been 
identified as an American Indian entity on a substantially continuous 
basis for the entire period since 1900. The STI does not meet criterion 
83.7(a).
    Criterion 83.7(b) requires that a predominant portion of the 
petitioning community comprise a distinct community and have existed as 
a community from historical times until the present. The petitioner did 
not demonstrate any of the five forms of evidence listed under 
83.7(b)(2) at any point in time since the beginning of sustained 
contact with non-Indian settlers.
    Section 83.7(b)(1)(iii) states that a petitioner may show 
significant rates of informal social interaction which exist broadly 
among the members of a group. In order for this to occur, there must 
first be a group. The evidence showed that the ancestors of the current 
STI membership did not, historically, constitute a group whose history 
could be traced through time and place. The petitioner's ancestors in 
the 19th century consisted of several different categories of 
unconnected people (see discussion below under criterion 83.7(e)).
    The evidence did not demonstrate that persons from any one of these 
different categories regularly interacted either with persons from 
other categories or with persons identified in the historical record as 
Steilacoom Indians (83.7(b)(1)(ii)). The petitioner did not show 
significant rates of marriage within the group at any time since record 
keeping began in the mid-19th century (83.7(b)(1)(i)). From first 
sustained contact with non-Indians until the present, the ancestral 
families and current members of the STI have intermarried primarily 
with non-Indians.
    There was no evidence that there was a significant degree of shared 
or cooperative labor or other economic activity among STI ancestral 
families in the past (83.7(b)(1)(iv)). Participation by STI members in 
commercial fishing in the 1970's was by invitation of federally 
acknowledged tribes, and did not involve a significant degree of shared 
or cooperative labor among the STI membership. For the modern period, 
the evidence showed that there was intra family social and economic 
interaction, but little interfamily association. The petition contained 
no evidence of patterns of institutionalized discrimination or other 
social distinctions by nonmember either in the past or in the present 
(83.7(b)(1)(v)). There was no evidence that the ancestral families or 
current members of the STI had any shared sacred or ritual activity, or 
cultural patterns, that encompassed most of the groups (83.7(b)(1)(vi) 
and (vii)).
    Section 83.7(b)(1)(viii) lists one possible form of evidence for

[[Page 5882]]

community as: ``[t]he persistence of a named, collective Indian 
identity continuously over a period of more than 50 years, 
notwithstanding changes in name.'' There was no named, collective 
identity between 1854 and 1925. At different times during the 1925-1941 
period, two Steilacoom claims organizations existed. There are no 
membership lists of these organizations. Therefore, it was not possible 
to determine to what extent, if any, the petitioner's ancestors 
identified with either or both, or to what extent the membership of the 
earlier period overlapped with that of the post-1951 group, the 
petitioner. Regardless, these organizations did not continue for a 
period of 50 years. There was an approximate 65 percent overlap between 
the 1950's lists and the lists for the group from the mid-1970's to the 
present. The STI incorporated in 1974 and has existed continuously 
since that date. The identity asserted by the formal organization of a 
group is entitled to weight as representing the views of the 
membership. However, the existence of a formal organization is not in 
itself sufficient evidence to show collective group identity.
    The evidence in the record was not sufficient to demonstrate the 
existence of community from historical times to the present. The STI 
does not meet criterion 83.7(b).
    Criterion 83.7(c) requires that the petitioner has maintained 
political influence or authority over its members as an autonomous 
entity from historical times until the present. The evidence in the 
record does not show the post-treaty existence of an autonomous 
Steilacoom band. The STI petition did not present the types of evidence 
described under 83.7(c)(2). The evidence in the record under 83.7(c)(1) 
did not demonstrate the exercise of political authority of influence 
over the petitioner's ancestors as a group, whether as members of a 
``Steilacoom'' entity or any other entity. The individual extended 
ancestral families of the modern STI, throughout the second half of the 
19th century and first quarter of the 20th century were not connected 
with one another in such a way as to permit any kind of bilateral 
political relationship.
    Because there was no identifiable entity in the later 19th and 
early 20th centuries, there were no identifiable group leaders or 
governing bodies prior to 1925. In so far as the petition mentioned 
individual 19th century Steilacoom Indians as leaders, there was no 
evidence that most STI ancestral families associated with them. In so 
far as it mentioned identified STI ancestors as leaders, there was no 
evidence that their influence extended beyond their own family line.
    There was very little evidence concerning mobilization of resources 
from members of family lines ancestral to the STI for any common 
purposes from the mid-19th century until the formation of the 
Steilacoom claims organization in 1925. Since the membership of the 
Steilacoom claims organization in the 1920's and 1930's is unknown, 
there was no evidence to show the level of support provided by its 
members even for this limited function. There was no data indicating 
that there were any common purposes among the STI ancestral families 
other than the prosecution of claims prior to the development of 
concern over fishing rights in the 1950's.
    For the modern period, approximately 30 out of 612 members attend 
meetings. Other STI activities such as work toward Federal 
acknowledgment and representational and educational activities directed 
at the wider community have been conducted primarily by a small group 
of members. There was very little evidence concerning communication 
between leaders and members and the minutes provided little data 
concerning internal conflicts, if any, and their resolution. The STI 
does not meet criterion 83.7(c).
    Criterion 83.7(d) requires that the petitioner provide copies of 
the group's current constitution and by-laws. The STI meets criterion 
83.7(d).
    Criterion 83.7(e) states that the petitioner's membership must 
consist of individuals who descend from a historical Indian tribe or 
from historical Indian tribes which combined and functioned as a single 
autonomous political entity. Of the 612 STI members, only three from 
one nuclear family have been documented as descendants of persons who, 
in the 19th century and first quarter of the 20th century, were 
identified as Steilacoom Indians. The 91 per cent of the current STI 
members for whom the petitioner submitted data descend primarily from 
two other categories of Indian ancestors.
    Just under two-thirds descend from Indian women who, between 1839 
and 1870, married men who had recently come to the region of Fort 
Nisqually in Pierce County and Cowlitz Prairie in Lewis County, most as 
employees of the Hudson's Bay Company (HBC). The petition asserted that 
these Indian women were Steilacoom and that they maintained their 
Steilacoom tribal affiliation. Contemporary records did not verify this 
assertion. Their children and grandchildren described them variously as 
Nisqually, Puyallup, Cowlitz, Clallam, Chimacum, Quinault, Duwamish, 
Skokobish, Yakima, and Snohomish in affidavits made between 1910 and 
1918. None of these affidavits described an ancestress as Steilacoom.
    The other one-third of the STI members with documented Indian 
ancestry trace their lineage to Canadian Indian tribes through Red 
River metis families from Manitoba. The petition asserted that these 
Red River families were adopted, sometimes by way of intermarriage, 
into a continuously existing Steilacoom tribe during the second half of 
the 19th century. However, the few documented intermarriages did not 
take place between Red River immigrants and Steilacoom Indians. Rather, 
they took place between Red River immigrants and the non-Steilacoom 
Indian/HBC descendant families described above.
    The identified STI ancestral family lines can all be documented to 
the mid-19th century, but the limited documentation available 
concerning the claims organization did not indicate that a significant 
proportion of the families were associated with the Steilacoom claims 
organization of the 1920's and 1930's. The family lines adopted into 
the STI in the 1950's included families whose Indian ancestry was 
Cowlitz, Cowlitz/Quinault, Lummi, Red River, and Colville, and who were 
previously unconnected with one another. Thus, although the 
petitioner's membership consists of Indian descendants, it does not 
consist of ``individuals who descend from a historical Indian tribe or 
from historical Indian tribes which combined and functioned as a single 
autonomous entity.'' The STI does not meet criterion 83.7(e).
    Criterion 83.7(f) states that the petitioner's membership must be 
composed principally of persons who are not members of any acknowledged 
North American Indian tribe. The STI meets criterion 83.7(f).
    Criterion 83.7(g) states that neither the petitioner nor its 
members can have been the subject of congressional legislation that has 
expressly terminated or forbidden the Federal relationship. The STI 
meets criterion 83.7(g).
    Based on this preliminary factual determination, the Steilacoom 
Tribe of Indians should not be granted Federal acknowledgment under 25 
CFR Part 83.
    As provided by 25 CFR 83.10(h) of the revised regulations, a report 
summarizing the evidence, reasoning, and analyses that are the basis 
for the proposed decision will be provided to the petitioner and other 
interested parties, and is available to other parties upon written 
request. Comments on the proposed finding and/or requests for a copy of 
the report of evidence should be

[[Page 5883]]

addressed to the Office of the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, 
Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20240, 
Attention: Branch of Acknowledgment and Research, Mail Stop 4660-MIB. 
Comments on the proposed finding should be submitted within 180 
calendar days from the date of publication of this notice. Third party 
comments must be provided to the petitioner as well as to the Federal 
Government. After the close of the 180-day comment period, the 
petitioner has 60 calendar days to respond to third-party comments.
    After the expiration of the comment and response periods described 
above, the BIA will consult with the petitioner concerning 
establishment of a time frame for preparation of the final 
determination. After consideration of the written arguments and 
evidence rebutting the proposed finding and within 60 days after 
beginning preparation of the final determination, the Assistant 
Secretary--Indian Affairs will publish the final determination of the 
petitioner's status in the Federal Register as provided in 25 CFR 
83.10(1).

    Dated: January 14, 2000.
Kevin Gover,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 00-2635 Filed 2-4-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-02-P