Tribal Case Study: Data and Tribal Sovereignty

1. Tribal Case Study:Data and Tribal Sovereignty Nate Herbst Southern Ute Indian Tribe

2. Introduction • Monitoring provides data that allowstribe to make important decisions • Data • Can protect tribal development rights • Help protect health of tribal members • Help tribe make knowledgeable environmental decisions • All aspects of tribal sovereignty

3. History of Tribal Sovereignty • 1934 “Indian Reorganization Act”, part of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “New Deal” • Tribes have “inherent powers of a limited sovereignty which has never been extinguished” • Act provided foundation for tribal sovereignty, though few legal rights granted

4. History of Tribal Sovereignty (cont.) • 1973In McClanahan vs. Arizona, Supreme Court ruled against income tax on individual Native Americans living on reservations--tribal sovereignty issue • 1997 In Idaho vs. Couer d’Alene Tribe, Supreme Court: “Indian Tribes…should be accorded the same status as foreign sovereigns, against whom states enjoy 11th amendment immunity.”

5. Recent Tribal Sovereignty Cases • United States vs. White Mountain Apache Tribe: Tribe sued because of un-kept property • United States vs. Navajo Nation: Tribe sued govt. for monetary compensation ($600M) for unpaid mineral leasing monies • Inyo County vs. Paiute-Shoshone Indians: Tribe claimed law enforcement searches on tribal property without tribal consent are illegal

6. Tribal Sovereignty and the EPA • 1984 EPA Administrator William Ruckelshaus signed EPA Policy for the Administration of Environmental Programs on Indian Reservations • Recognized tribal sovereignty in environmental areas • Policy reaffirmed by EPA Administrator Christine Whitman in 2001 • In January 2001, OECA issued Final Guidance on the Enforcement Principals Outlined in the 1984 Indian Policy

7. Tribal Sovereignty Issues • U.S government officially recognizes tribal sovereignty • Tribes have many rights that states have • Rights cover environmental monitoring and compliance issues • Data necessary to support environmental decisions/ tribal sovereignty

8. Four Corners Environmental History • Steady growth in population, natural resource development • Increased public awareness of environmental issues • Many live here because they love outdoors, pristine environment • Residents do not want further deterioration of environmental quality

9. Ozone in the Four Corners • Southern Ute Air Quality Program (SUAQP) began in 1981 • One of the first tribal air programs • Local ozone levels always “reasonable” • Few new air quality programs in area

10. Regional Ozone Data • SUAQP data show recent decresed ozone levels • Bloomfield and Mesa Verde data show ozone increase • Ozone formation complex • Southern Ute Reservation in a geographically, topographically and meteorologically unique area • Reservation has different types of sources

11. Development on Reservation • Southern Ute Tribe • Developing its natural resources • Environmentally conscientious • Tribes has drawn criticism from different “fringe” groups • These groups often cite Bloomfield’s increased ozone levels as basis for their concerns

12. Development in San Juan County • Bloomfield may surpass ozone 8-hr NAAQS • San Juan County entering agreement with EPA • Agreement • Designed to protect San Juan County in case of “nonattainment” • Will limit economic development in county • Will protect San Juan air quality

13. The “Situation” • Local activist groups believe same reduction strategy good for La Plata County • Such an agreement would decrease tribal economic growth • If reservation ozone levels elevated, similar agreement might be good • Local activists haven’t used any data

14. Southern Ute Tribal Sovereignty • EPA limitations on tribal development would undermine tribal sovereignty • Cautious, environmentally conscientious development has occurred • Developing economic resources while maintaining reservation environmental health is an illustration of responsible tribal sovereignty

15. The Importance of SUAQP Ozone Data • Without reservation ozone data, limitations would be imposed • Tribe has 22 years of ozone data • Data confirm ozone levels reasonable, decreasing • Continued responsible development is OK • Data have helped preserve tribal sovereignty Note: Importance of data illustrates need for good data QA/QC

16. Actual 8-hr Ozone Data

17. Actual Ozone Design Values

18. Different Ozone Levels • Reservation ozone levels at record lows • Data confirm responsible economic growth has occurred • San Juan County, NM emits 22 times Nox, 7 times VOCs as La Plata County,CO • San Juan County warmer, more arid • San Juan County ozone levels not representative of Southern Ute Reservation or La Plata County

19. Data to the Rescue • Without data, tribal economic development would be limited • Direct infringement on tribe’s sovereignty • Tribe’s data priceless • Data have • Preserved environmentally responsible economic development • Helped preserve tribal sovereignty Note again: data QA/QC were vital here

20. Data will Help Your Tribe • Ozone monitoring is beneficial • If data show ozone problem, your tribe can implement control strategies • If data show no problem, your tribe can encourage environmentally responsible economic development • Data help tribes make good decisions • Data help protect tribal sovereignty

21. Summary • Federal government beginning to recognize tribal sovereignty • Tribes must exercise sovereignty • Rights include decisions on health and economic development on reservation • Data necessary to make well informed decisions • Without data, tribal sovereignty is limited • Without good QA/QC, data are worthless