IDRS, Inc.

Below is the agenda for the Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians’ upcoming Cultural Monitor’s Training.

Cultural Monitors Training Program Agenda

Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California

Purpose: Equip participants with relevant knowledge to enable them protect and manage cultural resources on Tribal lands and within the aboriginal boundaries. Build capacities through institutional collaboration and partnerships for Resource protection

Day one Monday September 13, 2010

Day two: Tuesday September 14, 2010

Day Three: Wednesday 15, 2010

Day four: Thursday 16, 2010

Day five: Friday September, 17, 2010

Reprint of USDA Release No. 0406.10
Contact: Press Office (202) 205-1134
Agriculture Secretary Vilsack Announces Selection of Collaborative Forest Restoration Projects
Projects in 9 States Will Help Improve Forest Health and Water Quality
WASHINGTON, August 13, 2010 – Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack today announced the selection of Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration projects in nine states that promote healthier, safer and more productive public lands. The projects include partnership efforts on forest restoration treatments that reduce wildfire risk, enhance fish and wildlife habitats, and maintain and improve water quality.

“Working collaboratively with partners at the state, local and private level is an important part of the all-lands approach to improving the health our nation’s forests,” said Vilsack. “These projects will address forest restoration across landscapes, irrespective of ownership boundaries and helping create not only healthy forests and waterways and create green jobs and economic opportunity in rural communities.”

The projects, funded at $10 million, were selected based on the recommendations of a 15-member Advisory Committee. Advisory committee members were selected based on their technical expertise, the points-of-view represented, which geographic region of the country they represent and diverse backgrounds.

“With the announcement of these selections, this valuable restoration work can begin to promote healthier, resilient, and more productive forested landscapes,” said Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell. “We look forward to working with our community partners to achieve this vitally important work.”

Additional information about the program can be found at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/spf/cfrp/.

Project List:

4 Forest Restoration Initiative – $2 million Arizona

This initiative, located on the Apache-Sitgraeves, Kaibab, Coconino and Tonto National forests, focuses on the restoration of the southwestern ponderosa pine ecosystem and will treat up to 50,000 acres per year. The work will include prescribed fire and management of natural fires for restoration objectives. Mechanical thinning will also engage new industry to insure that nearly all of the cost of removal of the thinning byproducts is covered by the value of the products.

Colorado Front Range – $1 million Colorado

The Colorado Front Range Landscape Restoration Initiative, located in the Arapaho, Roosevelt, Pike and San Isabel National forests, seeks to increase resilience and lower wildfire risk in a ponderosa pine forest ecosystem. Prescribed burns will result in lower severity of future wildland fires, increased resistance to insects and disease, reduced threats to communities and watersheds, and improved habitat for fish and wildlife species. These more resilient forests will also have increased capacity to adapt to the impacts of a changing climate.

Uncompahgre Plateau – $446,000 Colorado

The Uncompahgre Plateau includes restoration of seven plant types on 160,000 treatment acres and includes key watersheds that feed the Colorado River. Three separate weed management plans use multiple techniques to control the spread of invasive noxious weeds, including chemical and biological control measures critical to restoration and preventive measures to control invasive species.

Selway-Middle Fork Clearwater – $1 million Idaho

The Selway-Middle Fork Clearwater Project is a joint effort between the Clearwater Basin Collaborative and the Nez Perce and Clearwater National Forests. The restoration project will protect communities from wildfire and restore land and water ecosystems. The basin is renowned for pristine waters, fisheries, big game species and scenic vistas. The project work includes: 2,600 acres of commercial harvest and prescribed burning, application of prescribed fire to approximately 10,000 acres, replacement of a culvert to restore fish passage, and the decommissioning of 75 miles of road.

Accelerating Longleaf Pine Restoration -$1.171 million Florida

This project in Northeast Florida is comprised of 234,995 acres in the Osceola National Forest. The proposal seeks to restore forest ecosystems that have been significantly altered by fire exclusion and hydrologic alteration. The work includes: increasing prescribed fire acreage, reducing hazardous fuel loads while harvesting the woody biomass, thinning small diameter trees, restoring historic groundcover, and decommissioning trails and roads.

Southwestern Crown of the Continent$1.029 million Montana

The Southwestern Crown covers 1,449,670 acres, 70 percent of which is public land. It is one of the most biologically diverse and intact landscapes in the western U.S. It supports 250 bird species, 63 species of mammals, five species of amphibians, and six species of reptile. Restoration will focus on stream and forest habitats using prescribed fire and natural ignitions as tools to restore species composition and structure. Removal of exotic species followed by planting of native species will be used to restore the landscape. Bridge and culvert replacements and upgrades, road restoration and upgrades, removal of fish barriers, and stream channel manipulation are also included.

Southwest Jemez Mountains – $392,000 New Mexico

The Southwest Jemez Mountains area is 210,000 acres, 93 percent of which is divided between the Santa Fe National Forest and the Valles Caldera Trust-Valles National Preserve. The project will improve the resilience of ecosystems to recover from wildfires and other natural disturbance and sustain healthy forests and watersheds. This will be accomplished by thinning and prescribed burning to restore more natural fire regimes. Additional project components include streambank stabilization, invasive plant control, road and trail decommissioning, riparian and wildlife habitat improvement, conservation education, and rehabilitation, closure, and improvement of roads.

Deschutes Skyline – $500,000 Oregon

This project is located on 97,000 acres in the Deschutes National Forest. The majority of the landscape is ponderosa pine and dry mixed conifer forest types. The goal of the project is to restore forest ecosystems to be resilient to natural processes. This will also help to achieve a variety of community goals such as job creation, reduced risk of high-severity fire in Wildland Urban Interface residential areas, protection of drinking water source watersheds, preservation of the scenic and environmental quality of extremely high use recreational areas, and wood fiber for local economic benefit.

The Dinkey Landscape Restoration Project $829,900 California

The Project includes 130,000 acres on the Sierra National Forest and 20,000 acres of private land. Targeted ecosystems include coniferous forest, foothill hardwood and chaparral vegetation, montane meadows and riparian forests. The project aims to create resilient ecosystems and enhance the ability to adapt to wildfire. It will promote fire resilience, public and firefighter safety, key habitat for sensitive species, proper watershed function, healthy ecosystem processes, and landscape diversity.

Tapash – $1.63 million Washington

The Tapash Sustainable Forest Collaborative aims to enhance the resilience and sustainability of forests by treating 168,617 acres over ten years. This project is a joint effort between the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest, the Yakama nation, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources and the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. The restoration strategy uses a diverse array of treatment methods including pre-commercial and commercial thinning (including biomass removal), prescribed fire of natural and activity fuels, and trail management activities.

The mission of the USDA Forest Service is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation’s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations. The Agency manages 193 million acres of public land, provides assistance to State and private landowners, and maintains the largest forestry research organization in the world.

[Federal Register: August 12, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 155)] [Notices] [Page 48927-48928] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12au10-26] ———————————————————————– DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Sierra National Forest, Bass Lake Ranger District, California, Fish Camp Project AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. ———————————————————————– SUMMARY: The Sierra National Forest, Bass Lake Ranger District is proposing to conduct a comprehensive series of treatments near a Wildland-Urban Interface area known as the community of Fish Camp. Strategically Placed Landscape Area Treatments (SPLATs) have been initially identified to provide a means to reduce the intensity and spread of wildland fires across the landscape and near communities. Additional treatments within these SPLATs have been identified where forest stands are densely stocked and thinning is needed. This thinning is needed to reduce inter-tree competition and improve tree vigor and increase stand resistance to drought conditions, insect and disease attack. DATES: Comments concerning the scope of this analysis should be received no later than 30 days after the publication of this notice in the Federal Register. The draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) is expected in November 2010 and the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) is expected in March 2011. ADDRESSES: Send written comments to U.S. Forest Service, Sierra National Forest, Bass Lake Ranger District, 57003 Road 225, North Fork, CA 93643, Attn: David Martin. Comments may also be sent via e-mail to comments-pacificsouthwest-sierra@fs.fed.us (use Rich Text format (.rtf) or Word format (.doc)) or via facsimile to (559) 877-3308. It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times and in such a way that they are useful to the Agency’s preparation of the EIS. Therefore, comments should be provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly articulate the reviewer’s concerns and contentions. Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record for this proposed action. However comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Lemon, Interdisciplinary Team Leader, at Sierra National Forest, Bass Lake Ranger District, 57003 Road 225, North Fork, CA 93643. Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Information: The Fish Camp Project (Madera and Mariposa Counties, California) lies within the Big Creek watershed, where during the period before significant Euro-American influence, natural fires occurred frequently and were of low intensity with return intervals ranging from five to 10 years. During the past century, management activities (including harvesting operations, fire exclusion/ suppression, etc.) and increased human habitation, have changed the composition of vegetation. Currently, vegetation within the Fish Camp Project has changed from one where frequent, low intensity fires occurred to one with increased susceptibility to moderate to high intensity wildland fire. Forest stand densities are above what can be sustained, with inter-tree competition increasing and tree vigor beginning to decline. Pockets of insect and disease attack are beginning to show in the stands as well as drought induced mortality. The Fish Camp Project was originally to be documented in an Environmental Assessment (EA). The Fish Camp Project lies within the elevational bands for the Southern Sierra Fisher Conservation Area and the American marten. Public concern and management review surrounding the significance of potential impacts to the Pacific fisher, a candidate threatened and endangered species, the California spotted owl, a sensitive species, and American marten during past projects, has led to the decision to document the environmental analysis with an environmental impact statement (EIS) for this project. Purpose and Need for Action The Sierra National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (as amended in January 2004) has identified Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) areas as places where human habitation is mixed with areas of flammable wildland vegetation and has the highest priority for treatment. As directed in the Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment (2004), national forests are to integrate fire and fuels management objectives with other resource management objectives and address the role of wildland fire in the ecosystem. The forest-wide standards and guidelines state that “vegetation within treatment areas should be modified to meet desired surface, ladder and crown fuel conditions as well as stand densities necessary for healthy forest during drought conditions”. The community of Fish Camp (Mariposa County, California) lies in the western portion of the project area. On the northern portion of the project boundary is Yosemite National Park. Many of the homes in Fish Camp do not have sufficient clearance to protect them if a fast moving wildland fire were to move into the area. Vegetation in the Fish Camp Project area includes mixed conifer stands with some small areas of True Fir. Insect and drought induced mortality is beginning to appear in pockets within both natural stands and conifer plantations. Scattered throughout the project area are pockets of heavy dead and down material (branches, limbs and logs) resulting from natural accumulation and past management activities. In lower to mid-elevations of the project area and on the steeper slopes, brush (manzanita/ceanothus) is the main vegetation cover. Based on the current conditions described above the Fish Camp Project objectives are to: (1) Reduce fuel ladders and excessive ground fuels that pose a potential for the propagation and sustainability of a crown fire, (2) minimize the effects of wildland fire in [[Page 48928]] high risk (probability of ignition occurring), high hazard (availability of fuels to sustain a fire) wildland urban intermix area, (3) increase the vigor and health of mixed conifer stands and plantations, and (4) prevent and control the spread of noxious weeds. Proposed Action The proposed action includes vegetation treatment areas designed to create SPLATs to reduce the intensity and spread of wildland fire across the landscape and near communities and reduce inter tree competition to improve tree vigor and increase stand resistance to drought induced mortality, insect and disease attack. To accomplish the goals listed above, the Bass Lake Ranger District is proposing a 5700 acre project area with approximately 2,130 acres in vegetation treatment. The proposed action includes silvicultural and fuel reduction treatments used to accelerate the development of old forest characteristics and improve the resiliency of conifer stands and plantations to natural disturbances. In summary these treatments would include: Commercial thinning from below and mechanically treating approximately 45-50 year old pine plantations and 85-110 year old pine and mixed conifer forests to remove fuel ladders and reduce competition between remaining trees to maintain or improve forest resiliency and vigor. Mechanical treatment of brush/shrub patches and failed plantations to reduce wildland fire effects and to tie treatment areas together. Re-establish conifers in areas lacking appropriate stocking. Hand-pull noxious weeds, prior to project implementation, in order to minimize the likelihood of spread into recently treated forests (invasive weeds tend to spread opportunistically into freshly disturbed areas). Estimated acre accomplishment of the gross vegetation treatment: Commercial thinning of approximately 1,250 acres of pine plantations (550+/-acres), pine and mixed conifer stands (700+/-acres). Masticating brush fields and pre-commercially thinning non-commercial size reproduction areas on approximately 215 acres; Treating slash concentrations on 1,450 acres by a combination of tractor and/or hand piling and burning. Of these 1,450 acres 1,000 may be available for under story burning. Prescribe burning approximately 200 acres. Possible Alternatives To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, the Forest Service will evaluate additional alternatives to the proposed action developed based on public comments. A no action alternative to provide a baseline for comparison to the action alternatives will be included within the EIS. Each alternative will be explored and evaluated, or rationale will be given for eliminating an alternative from detailed study. Responsible Official The Responsible Official is Scott G. Armentrout, Forest Supervisor, Sierra National Forest, 1600 Tollhouse Road, Clovis, CA 93612. Nature of Decision To Be Made The Forest Supervisor will decide whether to implement the proposed action, take an alternative action that meets the purpose and need or take no action. Scoping Process This notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. The project is included in the Sierra National Forest’s quarterly schedule of proposed actions (SOPA). Information on the proposed action will also he posted on the Sierra National Forests Web site, http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/ sierra/projects, and will also be advertised in both the Fresno Bee and the Oakhurst Sierra Star. This notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. Comments submitted during this scoping period should writing and should be specific to the proposed action. The comments should describe as clearly and completely as possible any issues the commenter has with the proposal. It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times and in such manner that they are useful to the agency’s preparation of the environmental impact statement. Dated: August 4, 2010. Scott G. Armentout, Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 2010-19797 Filed 8-11-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-M

There is $10 Million available for eligible projects through the Sierra Nevada Conservancy.

Eligible project types include:
• Category One – Acquisition or Site Improvement/Restoration ($5,000 to $1 million)
• Category Two – Pre-project Planning (up to $250,000)

The Sierra Nevada Conservancy is offering Webinars today (Aug. 11) and Aug. 17, to help navigate through the application process.  In addition you can contact local area representatives for additional information.  Here is the Webinar announcement below:

The Sierra Nevada Conservancy (SNC) will be hosting a series of webinars to discuss the application procedures for our current Proposition 84 Grants Program.  SNC staff will review the applicable Grant Guidelines and Grant Application Packets associated with this grant cycle and answer questions about the process.

The public may attend the webinar by accessing it through a personal computer or may participate in a session at one of our area offices.  The webinar will be offered on two different days, with two sessions each day.  Please note the dates, times, and locations, as they vary widely in order to allow for maximum attendance.  All participants, remote or hosted, must register for a specific session.  To register for one of the webinars please visit the registration page.  Those attending by computer will receive log in instructions the day before the session for which they are registered.  It is recommended that participants download the Grants Guidelines and Grant Application Packets (Category One or Category Two) from the SNC website to review in advance of the meeting and to refer to as the webinar proceeds.

Please contact Lisa Forma toll free at (877) 257-1212 direct line (530)823-4688 or lforma@sierranevada.ca.gov if you have any questions.

Times and locations are as follows:

For Immediate Release: Indian Land Tenure Foundation, Prescott College Faculty Dr. Jared Aldern to Develop Native American Lands Curriculum

(August 2, 2010 ) Fresno, Calif. -  If you want to fish from the richest waters, you need to pay your respects to snakes that live there.  The deergrass, redbud, and other plants used to create traditional baskets won’t grow if the land isn’t renewed by fire.

These are just a few of the kinds of lessons revealed by the traditional stories of Native American Indian tribes of California – stories which, until now, were rarely heard outside of Native American homes and gatherings. That’s going to change: the Indian Land Tenure Foundation (ILTF) has contracted with Prescott College’s Fresno, California-based faculty member Dr. Jared Aldern to customize for California “Lessons of Our Land,” a Head Start and K-12 classroom curriculum focused on American Indian perspectives on land and contemporary land policy.  Aldern will coordinate the effort as Director of the College’s newly established Land Tenure Education and Restoration Project.

With funding provided by the San Manuel Band of Serrano Mission Indians of Highland, Calif., ILTF is investing $450,000 over three years in the curriculum program and in associated professional development for classroom teachers.

“This contract represents a groundbreaking opportunity to develop innovative curriculum that aligns California state academic content standards with American Indian culture, history, and lore, while addressing current land tenure issues at the core of the lessons,” says Aldern.

“Our goal is to get the curriculum as widely implemented as possible.  We will use State standards as tools to communicate ideas rather than viewing standards as an imposition of a requirement.  There’s so much to learn from traditional stories. It’s possible to engage students in discussions or writing exercises that meet the standards while the Native story content is driving the discussion.”

“Indian stories are our history,” adds Ron Goode, Chairman of the North Fork Mono Tribe, who will be a principal consultant for the program.  Aldern and Goode, who have previously collaborated on curriculum development and research, will travel throughout California to consult with elders and other tribal community members in order to adapt the curriculum to every region of the state.  “The stories connect us to the land, water, elements, resources, animals, and plants,” says Goode. “They promulgate our culture and traditions.  They restore our rights to land, reiterate our tribal water rights and validate our spirituality with he who gave life to all the universe.”

“The Indian Land Tenure Foundation is proud to be working with the best team possible,” says Terry Janis, Program Officer with the Indian Land Tenure Foundation.  “Dr. Jared Aldern and the Honorable Ron Goode bring impressive expertise to this effort, and Prescott College’s commitment to cultural awareness and social justice is unmatched in the Southwest. Teaching these materials in California will help students to know the land they walk on and the air they breathe…It has the capacity to change people’s lives.”

“We are honored to collaborate with the Indian Land Tenure Foundation on this project,” notes Prescott College Chief Academic Officer Dr. Paul Burkhardt. “The support of the Foundation enables a model partnership that brings together our expertise in transformative curricular design with community leaders’ knowledge of culture, history and place to create together culturally relevant and highly effective educational programs.  The resulting curricula will benefit K-12 schools, local communities, and the natural world that sustains us all.”

About Dr. Aldern

Jared Aldern is Director of the Land Tenure Education and Restoration Project and a faculty member in Prescott College’s Humanities and Environmental Studies programs.  He taught in elementary and high schools for a total of twelve years in San Diego County, and has taught American Indian Studies at Palomar College and San Diego State University.  He has developed various Indigenous language and ecological field research programs in collaboration with Native American nations and natural resource agencies, and he has helped to develop community-based curriculum for a number of K-12 school districts. Aldern earned both his M.A (in 2002) and Ph.D. (in 2010) from Prescott College.  His doctoral research in Sustainability Education focused on the stories of the North Fork Mono Tribe as educational lessons that demonstrate environmental jurisdiction and teach about the Tribe’s land tenure and stewardship.

About Ron Goode

The Honorable Ron Goode is the Tribal Chairman of the North Fork Mono Tribe.  Goode has been conducting research on the Mono for over forty years.  He conducts archeological, ethnographic,  and ethnobotanical studies through Eagle Eye Enterprises, a consulting firm that published his 1992 book titled Cultural Tradition Endangered.  Goode retired from Fresno Unified School District, where he worked as an Indian Liaison and a Dropout Prevention Counselor.  He taught American Indian Studies for the State Center Community College District in Fresno for 15 years.

About the Indian Land Tenure Foundation

The Indian Land Tenure Foundation (ILTF) is a community foundation located in Little Canada, Minnesota, whose mission is to ensure that all lands within the original boundaries of every reservation and other areas of high significance where tribes retain aboriginal interest are in Indian ownership and management.

ILTF provides grants and collaborates with those holding similar interests on Indian land tenure issues.  One of our primary strategies is to educate Indian landowners and the broader community about the importance of land to Indian people. “The goals come from the hearts and souls of tribal community members striving to make reservations a better place to live, now, and for future generations.” (www.indianlandtenure.org)

About Prescott College

Prescott College offers a resident undergraduate program at its main campus in Prescott, Ariz., as well as low-residency bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees in which students complete their studies in their home communities with the help of faculty mentors. All programs emphasize student-directed, experience-based learning-by-doing, environmental and cultural awareness, and social justice.

For more information please contact Jared Aldern, Ph.D., Director of the Land Tenure Education and Restoration Project, at 760-533-5700 or jaldern@prescott.edu.  More information is also available from Terry Janis, Program Officer at the Indian Land Tenure Foundation, at 651-766-8999 or tjanis@indianlandtenure.org.

On the web, visit www.prescott.edu and www.indianlandtenure.org .

Comments by Sonia Tamez on National Planning Rule

Tribal Relations and Land Management Planning

We’re the advocates for the salmon, the animals, the birds, the water. We’re the advocates for the food chain. We’re an advocate for all of society. Tell them about our life. Put out the story of our lives, and how we live with the land, and how they’re our neighbors. And how you have to respect your neighbors and work with your neighbors.

Billy Frank, Jr., Nisqually Tribe

Quoted in “Messages from Frank’s Landing: A Story of Salmon, Treaties, and the Indian Way”,

By Charles Wilkinson 2000.

Billy Frank’s words came to mind as I reviewed and discussed the various documents presented to participants at the Fourth Roundtable for the Forest Service (FS) Planning Rule in Washington, DC. (July 29-30, 2010). While it was clear that the agency was attempting to address its relationship with Tribes in the write-ups on “Collaboration”, “Diversity”, and other topics, it was also evident that there needed to be a more precise and accurate account of how the FS was going to consult, collaborate and incorporate tribal rights and address tribal interests in the process and the substance of the land management planning rule.

The government-to-government relationship with trust obligations is not well reflected in the documents I’ve seen to date. Tribal consultation is lumped in with public collaboration and consequently diluted. Additionally, referring to Tribes as “users” and other like terms diminishes the governmental, political, legal, cultural, stewardship and other roles they have and their relationship with their lands and ancestral forests. While treaty rights merit the highest respect, the planning rule needs to acknowledge other rights that Tribes may have, e.g., water rights that are often superior to that of other governments or individuals. The planning documents only mentioned treaty rights and fails to address these other legal rights.

I want to turn now to the process of tribal consultation and collaboration. The planning documents reference consultation, but fail to address how the agency will consult and collaborate. There is an urgent need for an explicit tribal consultation strategy worked out with tribal leaders that is responsive to tribal protocols, transparent, accountable and acknowledges the higher duty the agency has to Tribes. I won’t recommend a particular process; that needs to be worked out with Tribes, who may have already articulated their protocols and entered into consultation agreements with the agency. I’ll just mention that as the former Regional Tribal Relations Program Manager and Land Management Plan Coordinator, we collaborated with Tribes to develop a number of approaches that worked at the time: tribal council briefing sessions, leadership summits, listening sessions, and formal consultation with representative decision-makers. In order to facilitate early collaboration with Tribes, a clear strategy must be developed that promotes government-to-government consultation as well as collaboration.

I hope that this message assists in developing a planning rule that reflects the best collaboration between Tribes and the FS. Please let me know how I might help.

Sonia Tamez is a FS retiree who has had the honor of working with Tribes and indigenous groups for over 40 years.

Consultation: Forest Service is still working out how to collaborate with Tribes while still meeting its government to government consultation obligations.  Tribes have had input on this issue that has not been incorporated in the National Planning Rule. Tribal input on how these two components will work together in implementing and constructing the Forest Planning Rule.

Tribes as Original Stewards: A major issue with the draft concepts for the Planning Rule is that Forest Service is still struggling with the concept of Tribes as stewards of the National Forests.  Much of the language in the Planning Rule reinforces the situation where Forest Service is the manager and classifies everyone else (including the Tribes and tribal communities) as “users” of the National Forests.   Tribes are not “users” they are the original stewards of national forests and their resources, the planning rule must reflect this in its language and implementation.  The Planning rule must acknowledge tribal rights and interests and respect government to government relationship and the forest service’s trust obligations.  Forest Service must work with Tribes in a bilateral way.

Prioritizing Tribal Comments: Forest Service must prioritize addressing and including tribal comments and concerns on the National Planning Rule in the draft concepts and draft planning rule.  Since there is no consultation strategy the Forest Service must direct all FS employees on a local, regional, and national level to forward all tribal input regarding the planning rule to a designated person to distribute to the entire planning rule team.  Tribal letters, comments, and responses should be delivered to the entire rule drafting team and incorporated early to all materials prepared.

Tribal rights cannot be solely relegated into one section of the rule or reviewed by only part of the rule drafting team; all sections of the planning rule address tribal rights and thus must incorporate tribal comments.  For example trust and treaty resources should be addressed in plant and animal as well as restoration/resilience sections. (see also comments on Traditional Ecological Knowledge).

*********************************

Below is a list of additional comments/talking points that could be stressed to supplement what the Planning Rule Team has already put together.

Accountability — Final Decision on Management Plans will be done by Unit Line officer or Regional (Forest Supervisor or Regional Forester). There needs to be oversight of final decisions (currently the objection procedures allows for objection before final decision).

Collaboration and Consultation — Collaboration must be bilateral consistent and coordinated with consultation protocols and agreements developed between the Forest Service and Tribes.  Consultation cannot be solely based on notice and comment; it must include actual face to face discussions.

Consultation must include the tribal leaders and Forest Service decision maker — The people that are implementing or drafting up the agreements and contracts for implementation must be in the room. Key points made by Tribes must be conveyed into the actual implementation.

Collaboration should occur with Tribes and tribal communities before public meetings. Collaboration strategies must be consistent with consultation strategies without diluting the tribal rights to government to government consultation.

Multiple Uses — Tribal rights to Forest Service lands is not the same as recreation and other “multiple uses.”  The Federal government has specific obligations both through laws and based on treaties that put Tribes at a higher level than the public, state, and county officials.

Cultural Practices — “Desired Conditions” for the Planning Rule must include the support and protection of tribal rights to cultural resources on NF lands.

• Tribal cultural uses are not a part of the social or economic dimensions. Cultural does not mean just sacred sites. It also means resources and land use. Tribal cultural uses are different from general public cultural uses.
• Tribes rely on National Forests for both traditional and contemporary practices.

Tribal Traditional Ecological Knowledge – The Planning rule references Tribal Ecological Knowledge as part of the consultation process.  The Planning Rule must require inclusion of Tribal Ecological Knowledge in every aspect of the Forest Service’s assessment of management plans, determining “desired conditions,” monitoring the effectiveness of plans/projects, and in determining how to revise plans/projects.

Plan content – Currently the “Plan Content” does not include a commitment to tribal interests and interests but only addresses “social, economic, and ecological elements of sustainability, the landscape character and recreation settings, maintenance or restoration of ecosystem resilience, maintenance or restoration of water resources, designations that exist in the plan area, and the NFMA timber requirements.

Suggested language: “Plan Content MUST in no way infringe on the rights of the indigenous people or with any treaty, and should promote, protect and enhance the indigenous people’s right to live their spiritual way of life.” Quoted from First National Tribal Conference Call.

Plant and Animal Diversity – Plans should focus on developing sustainable populations of native plants and animals relied on by indigenous populations and that are subject to tribal treaty and other rights.   Currently the sections on Plant and Animal Diversity do not address the need to monitor, assess and protect populations of plant and animals that Tribes depend on for their cultural, spiritual, medicinal,  and subsistence needs that are protected pursuant to trust and treaty rights.

I and Sonia Tamez attended the 4th National Round Table on the planning rule last week.  (click here for Sonia’s comments). We had the opportunity to review the draft concepts for the Planning Rule and discuss gaps and needed revisions to the language in these concepts at the 4^th National Forum.  The materials we received, our comments and revisions are available at the IDRS, Inc. planning portal page (Click Here to See). The documents posted are what the Forest Service has prepared at this point (revisions will be posted on the same site as available), these are drafts and not finalized.  Below is a list of general observations and suggested talking points to focus on in the National Tribal Conference Call and related written comments.  These comments are based on discussions with Tribal leaders, review of tribal forum reports, and review of current concepts prepared by the National Planning Rule.  Please feel free to use or disregard these talking points as you see fit.

General Observations from 4^th National Forum:

Consultation: Forest Service is still working out how to collaborate with Tribes while still meeting its government to government consultation obligations.  Tribes have had input on this issue that has not been incorporated in the National Planning Rule. Tribal input on how these two components will work together in implementing and constructing the Forest Planning Rule.

Tribes as Original Stewards: A major issue with the draft concepts for the Planning Rule is that Forest Service is still struggling with the concept of Tribes as stewards of the National Forests.  Much of the language in the Planning Rule reinforces the situation where Forest Service is the manager and classifies everyone else (including the Tribes and tribal communities) as “users” of the National Forests.   Tribes are not “users” they are the original stewards of national forests and their resources, the planning rule must reflect this in its language and implementation.  The Planning rule must acknowledge tribal rights and interests and respect government to government relationship and the forest service’s trust obligations.  Forest Service must work with Tribes in a bilateral way.

Prioritizing Tribal Comments: Forest Service must prioritize addressing and including tribal comments and concerns on the National Planning Rule in the draft concepts and draft planning rule.  Since there is no consultation strategy the Forest Service must direct all FS employees on a local, regional, and national level to forward all tribal input regarding the planning rule to a designated person to distribute to the entire planning rule team.  Tribal letters, comments, and responses should be delivered to the entire rule drafting team and incorporated early to all materials prepared.

Tribal rights cannot be solely relegated into one section of the rule or reviewed by only part of the rule drafting team; all sections of the planning rule address tribal rights and thus must incorporate tribal comments.  For example trust and treaty resources should be addressed in plant and animal as well as restoration/resilience sections. (see also comments on Traditional Ecological Knowledge).

*********************************

Below is a list of additional comments/talking points that could be stressed to supplement what the Planning Rule Team has already put together.

Accountability — Final Decision on Management Plans will be done by Unit Line officer or Regional (Forest Supervisor or Regional Forester). There needs to be oversight of final decisions (currently the objection procedures allows for objection before final decision).

Collaboration and Consultation — Collaboration must be bilateral consistent and coordinated with consultation protocols and agreements developed between the Forest Service and Tribes.  Consultation cannot be solely based on notice and comment; it must include actual face to face discussions.

Consultation must include the tribal leaders and Forest Service decision maker — The people that are implementing or drafting up the agreements and contracts for implementation must be in the room. Key points made by Tribes must be conveyed into the actual implementation.

Collaboration should occur with Tribes and tribal communities before public meetings. Collaboration strategies must be consistent with consultation strategies without diluting the tribal rights to government to government consultation.

Multiple Uses — Tribal rights to Forest Service lands is not the same as recreation and other “multiple uses.”  The Federal government has specific obligations both through laws and based on treaties that put Tribes at a higher level than the public, state, and county officials.

Cultural Practices — “Desired Conditions” for the Planning Rule must include the support and protection of tribal rights to cultural resources on NF lands.

• Tribal cultural uses are not a part of the social or economic dimensions. Cultural does not mean just sacred sites. It also means resources and land use. Tribal cultural uses are different from general public cultural uses.
• Tribes rely on National Forests for both traditional and contemporary practices.

Tribal Traditional Ecological Knowledge – The Planning rule references Tribal Ecological Knowledge as part of the consultation process.  The Planning Rule must require inclusion of Tribal Ecological Knowledge in every aspect of the Forest Service’s assessment of management plans, determining “desired conditions,” monitoring the effectiveness of plans/projects, and in determining how to revise plans/projects.

Plan content – Currently the “Plan Content” does not include a commitment to tribal interests and interests but only addresses “social, economic, and ecological elements of sustainability, the landscape character and recreation settings, maintenance or restoration of ecosystem resilience, maintenance or restoration of water resources, designations that exist in the plan area, and the NFMA timber requirements.

Suggested language: “Plan Content MUST in no way infringe on the rights of the indigenous people or with any treaty, and should promote, protect and enhance the indigenous people’s right to live their spiritual way of life.” Quoted from First National Tribal Conference Call.

Plant and Animal Diversity – Plans should focus on developing sustainable populations of native plants and animals relied on by indigenous populations and that are subject to tribal treaty and other rights.   Currently the sections on Plant and Animal Diversity do not address the need to monitor, assess and protect populations of plant and animals that Tribes depend on for their cultural, spiritual, medicinal,  and subsistence needs that are protected pursuant to trust and treaty rights.

See links below that were shared with us.
Website:
http://www.klamathjustice.blogspot.com

Klamath Media Video on Youtube.com:
6.29.10 California Tribes Protest MLPA Science Meeting
http://www.youtube.com/user/klamathmedia#p/a/u/0/Qcox-tHsJNw

Times Standard Article
Native American groups protest MLPA Scientific Advisory Committee
http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_15408043

The Global Realm Article
Blaming the Tribes, Greenwashing Big Oil
http://theglobalrealm.com/2010/07/18/blaming-the-tribes-greenwashing-big-oil/

Should Oil Lobbyists Write and Implement California’s Environmental Laws?
http://yubanet.com/cal