And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: *From: "Robert Quiver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> *Subject: Fwd: Freeman Courier: Standing for the Past In Peace *Date: Saturday, May 1, 1999 -- Conflict Stems from Treaty Interpretations "State, Sioux disagree on Lone Wolf, Laramie treaties." by Amy Bennett Freeman Courier-Freeman SD Saturday, May 1, 1999 Freeman Courier-Freeman SD Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://members.tripod.com/freecour One of the issues being protested is the Mitigation Act. The act involves taking nearly 200,000 acres of land along the Missouri riverbanks from the Army Corps of Engineers and transferring it to the state of South Dakota and two tribes. The Sioux want the return of land that is rightfully theirs as promised by the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868. The Mitagation Act gives some of that land to the state - which goes against the 1868 treaty. Sen. Tom Daschle (D-SD) and Gov. William Janklow (R-SD) crafted the Mitigation Act. It was passed in October 1998 as part of the 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act. The Mitagation Act came out of an inquiry made by Daschle into riverbank jurisdiction in the mid-'90s, said Bob Mercer, Janklow's press secretary. At first, Daschle backed away from the issue because of its controversy, Mercer said. But then, Mercer said Daschle and Janklow wondered what it would take to have the riverbanks that are controlled by the Army Corps of Engineers back in the control of the state and the tribes. Negotiations began and all the river tribes were invited to participate, Mercer said. Both the Crow Creek and Standing Rock reservations declined to be a part of the transfer. The act was defeated when introduced to the House of Representatives as a bill. But when included in the Appropriations Bill, it passed Oct. 21, 1998. Mercer said the bill had problems passing in the House because the Army Corps is powerful politically. When an opportunity presented itself to reintroduce the bill as part of the Appropriatons Bill, Daschle took it, Mercer said. Both the Lower Brule and Cheyenne River Sioux tribes were offered Missouri riverbank land along their reservation boundaries, which are presently controlled by the Army Corps of Engineers. The two tribes were also offered $57 million to share. In return for the land transfer, South Dakota would gain nearly 200,000 acres of land to use for hydro-electric power, wildlife and recreational development, control of the land on both sides of the Missouri River the entire length of the state, including jurisdiction over American Indian fishing rights. Some members of the tribes claim the legislation was added as a budget rider without a hearing and against the wishes of the five S.D. Sioux tribes who opposed the land transfer because it violates the Treaty of 1868. And according to the campers on LaFramboise Island, the land transfer is not valid unless three-fourths of the males of all of the Sioux tribes in the Great Sioux Nation agree to any changes in the treaty. Before the act was passed, only the Cheyenne River and Lower Brule Sioux tribes agreed. The others - the Oglala, Standing Rock, Rosebud, Yankton, Crow Creek, Sisseton and Flandreau Sioux tribes - continue to oppose the act. The Cheyenne River, Lower Brule, Standing Rock and Crow Creek reservations all have land along the riverbanks although, according to an 1868 treaty, all of the Sioux tribes have water and mineral rights to the land in question. A history lesson South Dakota is home of the Great Sioux Nation, which consists of Dakota, Lakota and Nakota tribes. By the early 19th century, the Great Sioux Nation dominated the northern Plains, which included most of the Dakotas, northern Nebraska, eastern Wyoming and southeastern Montana. With the U.S. government's purchase of land in 1803 - the Louisiana Purchase - westward expansion began. The Great Sioux Reservation system was established in 1868 at Fort Laramie. The reservation encompassed much of present-day South Dakota west of the Missouri River, including the Black Hills. This treaty essentially prohibited non-American Indians from entering reservation territories and diminished the amount of land available to a culture that was once nomadic. If any land were to be transferred, three-quarters of the males of the entire Great Sioux Nation would have to agree on the transfer. In 1889, the Great Sioux Reservation was split into six smaller reservations. Heads of households and single people older than 18 years were given parcels of land according to the General Allotment Act of 1887, or Dawes Act. The Dawes Act opened up West River for settling and allowed individual Indians to settle their own land or sell it, as some did. While the 1868 treaty recognized the Great Sioux as a sovereign nation, the Lone Wolf case of 1903 says otherwise. In the Lone Wolf case, the Supreme Court decided that Indian tribes were "wards of the nation" and "communities dependent upon the United States." The court said after 100 years of treaty-making, no Indian nation or tribe should be recognized as an independent nation, tribe or power that the government could contract by treaty; therefore, any treaty lawfully made and ratified with any nation or tribe prior to 1871 was considered invalidated. Lone Wolf also said that if Congress takes any land from tribes, the tribes must be fairly compensated. The conflict The Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 is what the stand at LaFramboise is about. The Sioux say the treaty gave them all the land west of the east bank of the Missouri River. "To be more specific, it said they would not encroach upon our land and mentioned specifically the east bank of the Missouri River," Robert Quiver said. Quiver, an Oglala Sioux from the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, was one of the original protesters on the island. But the state says the Lone Wolf decision has set a precedent and only an act of Congress or the Supreme Court can recognize the Fort Laramie Treaty. "Even if the state wanted to recognize the treaty of 1868, it can't," Mercer said. Mercer said Daschle's bill marks the first time that tribes would be able to regain land and jurisdiction along the riverbanks. The land along the banks of the Missouri River is often callded "take land" because it was taken by the Army Corps of Engineers when the dams on the river were built. Both the tribes and individual landowners who had land along the riverbank received compensation for the land, as required by Lone Wolf. "The tribes signed settlements; they (the ACE) may not have been as fair with the settlements as they could have been," Mercer said. And the Mitigation Act came out of an inquiry as to how the tribes along the river could get back jurisdiction of their land. State's position Some Sioux met with Janklow after the initial March 22 demonstration. Janklow's told them was the Treaty of 1868 is no longer valid because he did not sign the treaty and none of the people present signed the treaty. "He has to deal with things the way they are today," Mercer said. And the governor thinks transferring the land to the state and the tribes would be a way for both entities to move forward, together. With South Dakota, instead of the Army Corps of Engineers, in control of the riverbanks, Janklow envisions a river more accessible to the average South Dakotan. Mercer said Janklow thinks the state can better manage recreation and better protect cultural resources along the Missouri River. The corps doesn't spend a lot of time on recreational development, Mercer said, and the state would make development of recreation a priority, although Janklow doesn't want 10,000 condos along the riverbanks, either, Mercer said. The protesters are calling for an environmental impact statement; Mercer said if it's necessary by federal standards, it will be done. It would be more than one year before any changes along the river would take place, he said. The state is hoping to get boat ramps in the water in the next 18 months, depending on surveying. It could be five to six years before a marina could be built. The state intends to fund a cultural resource commission to protect indigenous gravesites along the riverbanks. Mercer said the way the commission is envisioned now is that tribes will have representation. Three affiliated tribes from Fort Berthold in North Dakota will also be involved because the majority of the burial sites along the river are of their ancestors. "There's no fight here between the state and the tribal governments," Mercer said. "We're trying to move forward together." Reprinted under the fair use http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html doctrine of international copyright law. &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit) Unenh onhwa' Awayaton http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/ &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
