Pauly Denetclaw
ICT
In 1994, the federal government undertook the Northwest Forest Plan in an effort to protect the endangered Northern Spotted Owl. The entire plan revolved around protecting the old growth trees that the endangered birds made their nests or roosted in.
“When you manage for a singular species, there’s usually side effects for other species that were unintentional,” said Cody Desautel, executive director of the Colville Tribes.
As has become all too common, tribal leaders, whose nations have stewarded the Northwest forests for millenia, were not consulted or even privy to the conversations in 1994. Tribal leaders in the Pacific Northwest are ensuring that doesn’t happen again as the plan gets updated and amended. They are also advocating for co-land management.
“When we look at people that are doing positive management that’s benefiting species — that’s happened in Indian Country,” said Desautel. “You should have your best managers at the table giving recommendations and suggestions about what management of federal land should look like because what we do benefits not just the tribes but all of the constituents of this country, these states and the species that exist there.”
The lack of consultation with tribal nations isn’t limited to the Northwest Forest Plan but is another example of how Indigenous perspectives have been left out of important federal amendment and plan processes. Historically, the U.S. Department of Interior’s 2007 Interim Guidelines, which acted as a drought contingency plan for the Colorado River, also didn’t include tribal leaders — even though 10 tribes collectively hold 20 percent of the river’s water rights.
Tribal consultation is required under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriaction Act, and through former President Bill Clinton’s Executive Order 13175-Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments.
There are a number of issues with the tribal consultation process. Two of them are that consultation doesn’t require consent of tribal nations, and that if tribes don’t respond to a “reasonable and good faith effort” to engage, the federal government’s obligation is considered fulfilled.
The Northwest Forest Plan, which provides management direction for nearly 25 million acres managed by the federal government, is up for renewal and there are three main stages that must be completed. This time around, the U.S. Forest Service has made an effort to consult with tribal leaders but having them at the table during decision-making would be more impactful, according to members of the Intertribal Timber Council, a national consortium of almost 60 tribal nations committed to improving the management of natural resources.
“You just don’t make all the decisions then come to our tribal communities and expect that we’re just going to go along,” said Phil Rigdon, superintendent of the Yakama Nation’s Department of Natural Resources.
During this process, tribal leaders have been advocating for co-land management, like being able to set the management standards for old-growth forests known as Late Successional Reserves, and removing bureaucratic barriers like the “Survey and Manage” step that delays action.
“It (management standards) still doesn’t account for succession through time. We know that forests aren’t static. We think tribes should have the ability to continue to do that management, to set up what that next cohort of (old-growth forests) will be,” Desautel said. “The ones we have now won’t be there forever. We should have others coming up with the right age, and structured demographics, so that we always have that type of habitat in place.”
Currently, tribal nations aren’t part of the land management team for the Northwest Forest Plan. Essentially, tribal leaders are brought in as consultants who give their expertise but ultimately have no decision-making power in the Northwest Forest Plan.
“Our goal is that co-stewardship will lead to a place where we’re part of the team, working with our federal partners, working with the Forest Service and with anybody else to find the right solutions — to do the right (work) on the land and treat (it) in the manner that we should. Hopefully the Northwest Forest Plan will move into that direction,” said Rigdon, who also serves as vice-president of the Intertribal Timber Council.
The Regional Interagency Executive Committee, that governs the Northwest Forest Plan, doesn’t include tribal nations. The committee does include a representative from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, a federal agency tasked with protecting trust assets of American Indians and Alaska Natives. However, the agency has been mired in scandal from losing tribal funds to officials lining their own pockets.
Tribal nations retained their hunting, fishing and gathering rights, ratified through treaties – the highest laws of the land. In exchange for ceded territories, many tribal nations retained their inherent right to hunt, fish and gather on their ancestral lands.
“As you create a plan, that treaty has to be part of your thoughts and not just something that is secondary,” Rigdon said.
Bureaucratic barriers
The Northwest Forest Plan includes a “Survey and Manage” procedure. It requires the Forest Service to survey nearly 400 different species in old-growth forests, before any management actions can take place in that area, and could limit any action based on the findings.
This procedure was created to protect rare species in old-growth forest habitats. However, none of these species are listed as endangered, but there is limited knowledge of them, according to a preamble in the 2012 U.S. Department of Agriculture Planning Rule.
“A number of tribes have said they would like to see the elimination of the Survey and Manage protocols, because they delay action,” said Calvin Mukumoto, executive director of the Intertribal Timber Council. “There are mechanisms in the 2012 Planning Rule that allows them to look at species of concern so you don’t have to go out and survey and manage everything before you make plans.”
The other issue in the Northwest Forest Plan are land allocations, which were created to meet the habitat requirements of the northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, and salmon. Each land allocation comes with its own unique management standards and guidelines. The extra regulations, especially land allocations close to sovereign lands, hinder a tribe’s ability to manage their own land.
“Land-use allocations are overly prescriptive in their requirements, and we should be looking at ecological-based approaches,” Mukumoto said.
For example, extra regulations in Riparian Reserves, a land allocation that creates a protective buffer along streams, lakes and wetlands, delay the thinning of forests or prescribed burns. One way to protect sovereign lands from devastating wildfires is to control the amount of fuel in nearby federally managed forests.
Dense forests lead to high rates of tree mortality. Dead trees, dry leaves, fallen pine needles or dry grass can fuel wildfires, which is a concern for many tribal nations in northern California, Oregon and Washington.
“They (tribal nations) are concerned about some of the riparian barriers and other restrictions within close proximity of tribal communities because of the fire danger that’s out there from lack of action,” Mukumoto said. “I think they’d like to see more active management, not necessarily just timber production, but active management that reintroduces fire into these ecosystems to reduce vegetation.”
The amendment process has five main stages. The Regional Interagency Executive Committee has completed the third phase and is moving into the fourth, where the draft record of decision and final environmental impact statement will be published. Then, the objection process will begin – offering one last public comment period before the amendment is signed and approved.
Intertribal Timber Council members and staff remain hopeful that the new amendments will acknowledge and honor treaty rights, traditional ecological knowledge and, in a just world, include co-management with tribal nations.
“In my experience working with tribes, is that they believe in holistic management that respects all the parts in the forest and wants to maintain complexity, but seeks balance,” Mukumoto said.