7/26/2016. NCRCRD July 18, 2016 East Lansing, MI

Transcription

1 NCRCRD July 18, 2016 East Lansing, MI Assessment of Tribal natural resources needs and services: Challenges to governance, management, and sovereignty in the Upper Great Lakes Jubin J. Cheruvelil MSU Extension - Health & Nutrition Institution Specialist Support & funding 1

2 Roadmap Goals to demonstrate Nature & resource sovereignty is continually contested Ontological and epistemological dissonance contribution to policy Background Treaty relationships and obligations Communities, territories and Federal government Periodicals and media analysis of environmental concerns Study Institutional needs and concerns Survey and interviews Discussion Categories of differences Contested indigeneity Ontological and epistemological dissonance Conclusions Treaty relationships and obligations UM Map: Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission Co-trustee relationship United States has charged itself with moral obligations of the highest responsibility and trust Seminole Nation v. United States, 1942 *Participation and consent 2

3 Relative % Unique Topics Environmental concerns 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 1980s & 2010s concerns Management Concerns Priority Topics Priority Topics Cheruvelil - In prep Communities 30 federally recognized Tribal communities Upper Great Lakes - Michigan to Minnesota 3

4 Surveys and interviews Assessment of services and needs Interviews and survey 72 respondents Rural (61% responses) Tribal environmental specialists (72%), community members (22%) Ages Young cohort of specialist and members(<10 years) 90% of communities have dedicated Natural resources management departments Diverse professional groups and affiliations (i.e., Tribes, EPA brownfields, Intertribal Orgs, BIA, Climate Change scientists, ecologists, biologists) Varied roles in natural resources (i.e., councils leaders, elders, stewards, directors, legal professionals, ricing chiefs) Challenges consultation sovereignty governance Sovereignty obligations Drains representation Legal permitting treaties cultural use Regulations Pollution Non tribal inputs regulation Non point pollution Medicinal Resources subsistence Toxics harvest Sustainability Agricultural Industrial Protection extraction Land development Indigenous access 4

5 Management dissonance Cultural vs. management frameworks Skewed view of management as a economic policy Management of resource vs. ecosystem Preservation and management of cultural and medicinal plants not prioritized. Funding not sufficient to address the variety of programs vs. federal policy mandated funding Species vs. ecosystem (biome) Beaver removal as a mitigation to protect singular species Beaver as a nuisance to road building and wetland management Transformation of nature to economic places Wetland drainage Pipelines oil and gas distribution through great lakes vs. environmental protection. Entertainment and game vs. subsistence Whitefish scarcity and management, prioritizing sport fisheries Management dissonance Underlying values of development Resources are there to be managed vs. taken care of (stewardship) Lack of protections and adherence to Tribal management values and goals Land preservation/conservation originally intended for cultural practices undermined To prevent erosion More aesthetically pleasing Increased non-tribal traffic and use of sacred spaces Powerless to effect Policies of non-tribal communities County and state level management at odds with Tribal priorities 5

6 Management dissonance Powerless to effect Negating the rights of Tribes in development (i.e., land leases, mining, pipelines) through treatied territories Lack of State recognition of culturally valued and threatened resources manoomin (wild rice), ash Traditional (alternative ways of knowing) knowledges and contribution to resource management Inability (resources and rights) of Tribes to mitigate damage to the land - toxic groundwater & soil contamination Toxic dissonance Toxicity as the priority concern of Natural Resources Carcinogens Direct impact to people, animals and places Pollution regulation Standards vary Parts per million Regulations contingent on special interests Pollution in place Water vs. land vs. animals vs. people Interrelationships between pollution and aspect of Indigenous livelihood and wellbeing Rarely recognized or prioritized clean air and water -> food Relationship use, extraction vs. reciprocal relationship Stewardship vs. management Lifeways vs. policy Federal regulations based on private, commercial interests Reorient policies and address proximate wellbeing 6

7 Tribal recommendations to the Federal government Exercising federal authority to protect tribal natural resources and the ecosystems on which they depend. Aligning federal agencies and programs to better coordinate protection of treaty rights and tribal natural resources. Funding essential tribal treaty rights management Protecting and restoring water quality and quantity in recognition that water supports fish, wildlife and plants - recognize tribal water rights and adopting standards that ensure sufficient instream flows for people, fish and Wildlife. Conclusions Nature & resource sovereignty is continually contested Ontological and epistemological dissonance contribute to policy Transformative and prescriptive Relationships as policy Consultation vs. sovereignty Management vs. governance 7

8 Contact Information: 8