Case Studies in Tribal Water Quality Standards Programs: The Hoopa Valley Tribe

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) | July 24th, 2006

The Hoopa Valley Tribe has lived in its valley for over 10,000 years and has always depended on the migration and spawning runs of steelhead trout, and chinook and coho s

The Hoopa Valley Tribe has lived in its valley for over 10,000 years and has always depended on the migration and spawning runs of steelhead trout, and chinook and coho salmon in the Trinity River for a large portion of its diet. The Trinity River is also where the Hoopa hold their ceremonial Boat Dance and immerse themselves after using sweat houses built next to the river. In 2001, the Hoopa adopted Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) water quality standards to protect these and other uses of their waters.

Colorado River Basin August 2022 24-Month Study

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | August 16th, 2022

Colorado River Basin Ten Tribes Partnership Tribal Water Study

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | December 13th, 2018

The Colorado River Basin Tribes Partnership (a.k.a. Ten Tribes Partnership) and the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) initially undertook the Colorado River Basin Triba

The Colorado River Basin Tribes Partnership (a.k.a. Ten Tribes Partnership) and the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) initially undertook the Colorado River Basin Tribal Water Study to augment the data produced for the Colorado River Basin Supply and Demand Study of 2012. With five tribes in the Upper Basin and five tribes in the Lower Basin, and between us, holding rights to more than 2.8 million acre-feet per year of water from the Colorado River and its tributaries, the Ten Tribes Partnership was uniquely positioned to explore these issues. However, in so doing, we learned that the effort would also serve to facilitate a broader and, we hope, a better understanding of the role tribal water plays, and will play, in the Colorado River Basin over the coming decades. In addition to producing technical information, the Tribes had other goals. First, we wanted to better understand how, at present, each of our individual water use scenarios fits into the overall scheme of Colorado River Basin management. Second, we wanted to know how future development of tribal water resources will alter Basin operations and affect other water users who are now using water to which a tribe may hold legal title, but which the title-holding tribe has not yet developed for its own use. Finally, we wanted to assess – to the extent present information allows – the role future development of tribal water rights will have on Basin operations. Along the way, we encountered data gaps, modeling limitations, and uncertainties, but nonetheless, with the support of Reclamation, we managed to address those issues sufficiently that we now provide this Report. If there is a ‘take-away’ that was surprising, it is that, even under the most favorable of circumstances for rapid tribal water development, the amount of water that will be used by the Tribes is dramatically overshadowed by the effect of climatic conditions on the overall supply of water in the Basin. Nature is still in charge. Challenges remain, but opportunities are in the offing. We hope this Report informs, resolves some uncertainty about how tribes perceive the future for their water uses, and establishes a baseline for discussions and development of relationships among tribes, states, the federal government, water managers, and water users throughout the Basin.

Colorado River Storage Project of 1956

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | April 11th, 1956

Culture Card: A Guide to Build Cultural Awareness of American Indian and Alaska Native

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) | April 18th, 2009

The purpose of this guide is to provide basic information for Federal disaster responders and other service providers who may be deployed or otherwise assigned to provide

The purpose of this guide is to provide basic information for Federal disaster responders and other service providers who may be deployed or otherwise assigned to provide or coordinate services in American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) communities. This guide is intended to serve as a general briefing to enhance cultural competence while providing services to AI/AN communities. (Cultural competence is defined as the ability to function effectively in the context of cultural differences.) A more specific orientation or training should be provided by a member of the particular AI/AN community. Service providers should use this guide to ensure the following Five Elements of Cultural Competence* are being addressed: 1. Awareness, acceptance and valuing of cultural differences 2. Awareness of one’s own culture and values 3. Understanding the range of dynamics that result from the interaction between people of different cultures 4. Developing cultural knowledge of the particular community served or to access cultural brokers who may have that knowledge 5. Ability to adapt individual interventions, programs, and policies to fit the cultural context of the individual, family, or community

Developing the Next Framework to Manage the Colorado River: Flexible Tools to Benefit Tribes and the Basin

Water and Tribes Initiative | August 2nd, 2022

Drowned Memories: The Submerged Places of the Winnemem Wintu

Journal of the World Archaeological Congress (Springer) | July 7th, 2009

This article is a brief overview of an instance where landscape inundation has disconnected culture from place. The Winnemem Wintu, a Native American tribe in Northern Ca

This article is a brief overview of an instance where landscape inundation has disconnected culture from place. The Winnemem Wintu, a Native American tribe in Northern California, had most of their ancestral landscape along the McCloud River submerged by the construction of Shasta Dam just after World War II. The tribe’s remaining traditional cultural properties are under continual threat of loss and/or destruction, leaving the tribe’s ability to practice traditional ceremonies crippled by legal battles and fights against the continual assertion of United States hegemonic power over tribal cultural identity. As part of archaeological research on these submerged places, the tribe’s spiritual leader, Caleen Sisk-Franco, and Tribal Headman, Mark Franco, spoke with the author about these threats and how their culture must adapt to meet them.

Early California Laws and Policies Relating to California Indians

California Research Bureau (CRB) | September 1st, 2002

Did the State of California enact laws that prohibited California Indians from practicing their religion, speaking their languages or practicing traditional ceremonies an

Did the State of California enact laws that prohibited California Indians from practicing their religion, speaking their languages or practicing traditional ceremonies and customs?  Senator John L. Burton requested that the California Research Bureau research this question. The initial investigation and research contained in this report led to a focus on four examples of early State of California laws and policies that significantly impacted the California Indians’ way of life: ·  The 1850 Act for the Government and Protection of Indians and related amendments; ·  California militia policies and “Expeditions against the Indians” during 1851 to 1859; ·  The State of California’s official response to federal treaties negotiated with California Indians during 1851 to 1852; and ·  Early and current state fish protection laws that exempt California Indians from related prohibitions. The 1850 Act for the Government and Protection of Indians facilitated removing California Indians from their traditional lands, separating at least a generation of children and adults from their families, languages, and cultures (1850 to 1865). This California law provided for “apprenticing” or indenturing Indian children and adults to Whites, and also punished “vagrant” Indians by “hiring” them out to the highest bidder at a public auction if the Indian could not provide sufficient bond or bail. The California Legislature created the laws that controlled California Indians’ land, lives and livelihoods, while enforcement and implementation occurred at the county and local township levels. Some examples include: ·  County-level Courts of Sessions and local township Justices of the Peace determined which Indians and Indian children were “apprenticed” or  indentured pursuant to the 1850 Act for the Government and Protection of Indians. ·  Under the same act, Justices of the Peace, mayors or recorders of incorporated towns or cities, decided the status and punishment of “vagrant” Indians. ·  Under the California Constitution and state militia laws, California governors ordered local sheriffs to organize the men to conduct the “Expeditions against the Indians.” From 1851 to 1859, the California Legislature passed twenty-seven laws that the State Comptroller relied upon in determining the total expenditures related to the Expeditions against the Indians. The total amount of claims submitted to the State of California Comptroller for these Expeditions against the Indians was $1,293,179.20. The California Legislature was involved in influencing the U.S. Senate’s ratification process of the 18 treaties negotiated with California Indians during 1851 to 1852. These treaties were never ratified, and kept secret from 1852 until 1905. Prior to the President submitting the treaties to the Senate, the California Legislature conducted considerable debate, made reports, drafted and passed resolutions that mostly opposed ratification of the treaties. The California Legislature also enacted laws during the first fifteen years of statehood that accommodated Indian tribes’ traditional fishing practices. California laws exist today that continue to protect fish and exempt California Indians from related prohibitions.

Estuary News, August 2004

San Francisco Estuary Partnership (SFEP) | August 15th, 2004

Estuary News, March 2020

San Francisco Estuary Partnership (SFEP) | March 15th, 2020