|
Indian Law and The Environment
|
|
In honor of Earth Week 2000 here at Indianz.Com, Tribal Law is focusing on
Indian law and the environment.
|
Water Rights
Water rights and usage are important not only to tribes but to many communities,
particularly in the West where water is a highly valued commodity (See
Babbitt
hopes to resolve water wars.) The historic
Winters v. US in 1908 first defined the nature of
Indian water rights. Stemming from a situation on the Fort Peck
reservation in Montana where non-Indian landowners were depriving the tribes'
water supply, the Supreme Court stated that Indian water usage precedes
other water usage.
Today, tribes fight not only for water rights but for improved water quality
(See Reservations
see water problems.) The San Carlos Apache in Arizona require water with low levels
of salinity to irrigate their crops. The pueblo of Acoma in
New Mexico requires the water in the Rio Grande to be conducive to human bathing.
Both communities have succeeded in having upstream communities maintain
the quality of water each requires.
Get the case:
Winters v. United States 207 US 546 (1908) from
FindLaw.
|
Hunting and Fishing Rights
Hunting and fishing rights remain a constant source of debate both on and off the reservation.
Tribes that rely on hunting and fishing now have to compete with non-Indian demand for these
natural resources. In the Northwest and the Great Lakes region, the rights of Indians to hunt,
gather, and fish have been the subject of several recent articles. (See Racial tensions
build over dams, Treaty rights
heat up and Ojibwe fishing to
have no effect on non-Native catch.)
The Boldt decision, referenced by the name of its presiding judge, the late George H. Boldt, declared that
the Washington tribes who signed a series of treaties between 1854 and 1855 retained the right to half of the
entire fish catch. Affirmed by the Supreme Court in 1979, the landmark decision
recognized Indian fishing rights off the reservation.
For several Ojibwe bands in Minnesota and Wisconsin, their nine year battle ended last year
with a Supreme Court affirmation of rights guaranteed to them in an 1837 Treaty.
In 1990, the Mille Lacs band filed suit against the state of Minnesota, whose Department of Natural Resources
attempted to regulate off-reservation fishing, hunting, and gathering. They were soon joined by the
other bands in the region. With the final decision now in their favor, the bands can now exercise their
own hunting laws and regulations, as long as they do not endanger public safety and health or damage
natural resources.
Get the cases:
Washington v. Washington State Commercial
Passenger Fishing Vessel Association 443 US 658 (1979) from FindLaw.
Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band
of Chippewa Indians, 124 F.3d 904 from the Washington University in St. Louis 8th
Circuit library.
|
Resources
For more resources related to the environment, the Environmental
Law page at the Tribal Court Clearinghouse is your best starting off point.
For case updates and news on environmental protection and water rights, visit
NARF's Case Update.
|
|
|
Printer friendly version