PAGE 6 APRIL 13, 1979
ATNI Spring Conference Close-ups
by Cynthia stoweii
Water, Other Resources Vital To Indians’ Future
“If I have no reservation or the Montana legislation, sail’
In Utah the Utes are on the
no land then I have no life.” Krulitz.
brink of a compact with the state
These words spoken by Bearhead
Swaney of the Flathead Tribe set
the tone for discussion of natural
resource development at the
Affiliated Tribes spring confer
ence April 10-12.
Water seemed to be the most
critical concern since most
reservations cannot exist with
out it. Department of Agriculture
representative Stewart Jamison
echoed Swaney. “If you don’t
have water, you don’t have
development. If you don’t have
development, you won’t have a
reservation for very long,” said
Jamison. Indian tribes have been
carefully guarding their water
rights while proposed legislation
has sought to reduce' them and
Carter’s national water policy
failed to acknowledge them.
The big news in water was
offered at the banquet by Inter-'
ior Solicitor Leo Krulitz. He
announced that four major law
suits had just been filed by the
Department of Interior on behalf
of Montana tribes whose water
rights had been threatened by
State Legislation. SB 76 estab
lished an adjudication system for
review of water claims and may
be amended to include Montan
a ’s Indian reservations. Al
though no action would be taken
on Indian water rights until 1982
to allow time for negotiation
between the state and the tribes,
the legislation is perceived to be
a violation of rights guaranteed
in treaties.
The water rights suits pre
cede the actual effective date of The Dome Room at the Ft. Hall Business Center, site of the spring
conference of The Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians April 10-12.
Resolutions Address Health, Education
Nearly half of the eighteen
resolutions passed by delegates
to the Affiliated Tribes spring
conference were directly related
to health concerns. Others dealt
with education, support to the
efforts of other tribes, employ
ment, and senior citizens.
Resolution No. 1 - Endorses
resolutions passed by the Muck-
leshoot and Suquamish Tribes
proposing solutions to the loca
tion of the Northern Tier Pipeline
on the Puget Sound.
Resolution No. 2 - Endorses
the Northwest Washington Ser
vice Unit Health Board resolu
tion calling for increased train
ing funds.
. Resolution No. 3 - Requests
the extension of warranty
periods for wells and pumps
installed by Indian Health Ser
vice contractors from one to two
years and a higher quality of
workmanship on standardized
replaceable equipment, fixtures
and materials.
Resolution No. 4 - Endorses a
Northwest Portland Area Indian
Health Board resolution regard
ing the recruitment of Indian
students into health careers re
commended as a joint action
with The Seattle Indian Health
Board.
Resolution No. 5 - Supports
the efforts of the Lummi Tribe to
obtain the soon-to-be phased out
Blaine Air Force Station, to be
utilized for the benefit of all
Indians.
Resolution No. 6 - Joins
Western Indian Program Admi
nistrators Council in its request
to the Department of Interior
that it include California in its
series of meetings dealing with
land concerns and acquisition.
Resolution No. 7 - Endorses a
Northwest Washington Service
Unit Health Board resolution
recommending a scientific study
of the health and environmental
effects of a proposed nuclear
power plant.
Resolution No. 8 - Supports
the Spokane and Kalispel Indian
Tribes’ request to the Secretary
of Health, Education and Wel
fare that the Wellpinit Service
Unit’s contract health service
delivery area be redesignated to
include the entire county of
Spokane, including the city of
Spokane.
Resolution No. 9 - Urges the
President and Congress to reaf
firm the Indians’ right to self-
determination in the care of their
elderly citizens by appropriating
no less than $25 million for fiscal
year 1980 under Title VI of the
Comprehensive Older American
Act of 1978.
Resolution No. 10 - Requests
that the Indian Health Service
provide additional funds for or
thodontic care under contract
health services.
Resolution No. 11 - Endorses
a resolution by the Uintah and
Ouray Tribal Business Commit
tee supporting water rights ne
gotiations currently underway
between the Ute Tribe and the
State of Utah.
Resolution No. 12 - Endorses
a Colville Confederated Tribes
resolution recommending co
sponsorship of an Indian educa
tion conference by the United
Indians of All Tribes and the
Spokane Tribe.
Resolution No. 13 - Supports
the Congressional intent of Title
XI of P.L. 95-561 that the
Director of the Office of Indian
Education Programs be in direct
lihe of authority to the Assistant
Secretary of the Interior for
Indian Affairs, and not the
Commissioner of Indian Affairs
as the B.I.A. seem s to be
misinterpreting.
Resolution No, 14 - Desig
nates Indian Employment and
Manpower as a regular Affili
ated Tribes conference agenda
item.
Resolution No. 15 - Supports
testimony by the Northwest
Portland Area Indian Health
Board regarding funding and
staffing deficiencies in the Port
land Area of the Indian Health
Service.
Resolution No. 16 - Express
es appreciation to former Com
missioner of Indian Affairs-
Robert L. Bennett for his contin
ued services to Indian people.
Bennett suffered a heart attack
recently and is in serious condi
tion. The assembled group
paused in prayer and recogni
tion immediately upon passing
the resolution.
Resolution No. 17 - Requests
the amendment of P.L. 93-641,
the National Health Planning
Law, to provide Indian Tribes
with direct federal funding and
the Submission of all Tribal
Specific Health Plans to the
.Secretary of Health, Education
and Welfare without state Health
Systems Agency review.
Resolution No. 18 - Supports
the resumption of the Bureau of
Indian Affairs’ role as complete
and sole source of funding for
Indian students attending college
and recommends the implement
ation of the self-determination
act so that tribes may contract
for management responsibilities
over scholarship programs.
regarding water, fishing, and
hunting rights. According to
council chairwoman Ruby Black
the tribe has agreed to quantify
its water resources in return for
the state’s recognition of their
water rights as well as their
hunting and fishing rights within
the old boundaries of the Ute
reservation. Although negotia
tions broke down for a time over
the hunting portion of the com
pact, Black is “optimistic” about
settlement.
Mel Tonasket of the Colville
Tribes refused to acknowledge
that the recent Walton Case on
his reservation was a blow to
Indian water rights. In clarifying
his ruling, the judge apparently
stated that the Tribes own the
water in question and can do
what they want with it. The
original ruling gave the . Tribes
jurisdiction over reserved wa
ters and the state jurisdiction
over non-reserved, alienated
water.
Tonasket accused the gov
ernment of fostering a “defeat-
est attitude” among Indian? by
making it appear that they are
losing ground ,in their assertion
of treaty rights. The government
has gone as far as to drive water
rights advocate William Veeder
out of his Interior job and into
private practice, said Tonasket.
Bearhead Swaney indicated
that Indians and non-Indians
both have cause to worry when it
comes to water in the Northwest.
“The water of the Northwest is
being planned and programmed
to be sent to the Sunshine Belt,”
he observed. It is in the interest
of Indian and non-Indian to
establish rights to* that water.
Opinion was divided when it
came to the development of other
resources, particularly energy-
related. Indian Tribes have come
to realize that they are living on
top of “treasurehouses” , in the
words of Ute Tribal Councilman
Jason Cuch. “The non-Indians
are watching like vultures for the
Indians to make m istakes. . . It’s
essential to know what you have
and implement the best manage
ment you can,” said Cuch. .
Gilbert Teton chairman of
the Sho-Ban Tribal Council, was
less eager to jump in. He
paraphrased Navajo Chairman
Peter McDonald, who has ad
vised that Indians tribes keep
their resources in the ground and
let their descendants develop the
expertise to use them wisely.
There was consensus, how
ever, that tribes should develop
their own resources and not let
the money go off the reservation.
Richard Monteau of the mineral-
rich Northern Cheyenne warned,
“If you don’t exercise your
resource rights, the state will do
it for you — and that’s an erosion
of self-government.” But he
echoed Teton by saying, “I would'
like to put the Tribe in a position
where they know as much as any
oil company coming in. Then
drill the w ells.”
Education Concerns
Continue A fte r Successes
Recent successes in the area
of education legislation did not
prevent the expression of con
cerns and complaints about the
availability of funds for Indian
programs. Education was as
usual an emotional topic, stirring
challenges and resolutions at the
Affiliated Tribes spring confer
ence.
'A Johnson-O’Malley public
hearing in Ft. Hall drew some
participants from the last day of
the ATNI conference and gave
education specialists two fronts
on which to fight.
One of six hearings being
held nationwide to revise regula
tions, the Ft. Hall JOM meeting
received a formal' statement
from the Advocates for Indian
Education, an arm of the Affili
ated Tribes. The Advocates were
critical of the JOM funding
formula that they say results in
hardships to the small Indian
populations in remote areas.
They recommended a different
formula based on population and
adjusted by such factors as
distance, training needs and the
nature of learning problems.
Regulations are being for
mulated for implementation of
the 1978 Tribally Controlled Com
munity Colleges’ Act, according
to Leroy Falling of the B.I.A.’s
Office of Indian Education. By
August, rules should be final and
in the fall over $57 million in
direct and technical assistance
grants should be available to
Indian junior colleges.
The act requires that no
fewer than eight and no more
than 15 colleges be granted funds
this fall. By next year 23 colleges
can be included in the funding,
five more than currently exist.
However, Falling said that the
bill was passed too late for a
fiscal 1980 appropriation and the
Bureau is hoping for a congres
sional add-on to get the legisla
tion implemented.
The Community Colleges Act
provides for general operating
funds for Indian colleges at the
rate of $4,000 per full time
student. Monies are available
only if a feasibility study for a
proposed college is completed,
an existing institution s accred
ited, or a college has existed for a
year or more. The act also
guarantees technical assistance
to tribes in their efforts to meet
accreditation criteria.
Lorraine Misiaszek of the
Advocates for Indian Education
described her organization as
“exhausted” from fighting the
transfer of Indian Education
programs from the Bureau of
Indian Affairs to a new Office of
Education. They were success
ful, but Misiaszek stressed the
importance of beefing up B.I.A.
programs as a way of preventing
future threats to the Bureau’s
education component.
The security of high educa
tion funds was a matter of
concern to many who felt that the
administration of funds should
be centralized in the B.I.A. A
resolution was passed to this
effect (see No. 18 in resolution
review). Sho-Ban Education
Committeewoman Maxine Ed-
mo echoed the resolution’s lang
uage regarding the exercise of
tribal self-determination in the
use of higher education funds.
“We’re being formulized out
of money even though education
has always been a high priority
of our tribe,” said Alta Guzman
of the Nez Perce.