Wa She Shu It’ Deh Festival this Weekend (July 24 & 25, 2010)

Click

Wa She Shu Flyer

to download the flyr

Read Full Post »

California Indian Basket Weaver’s Annual Gathering

Read Full Post »

Webinar on Decision-making Context for Tribal Uses of Marine Resources in State Waters

Blue Ribbon Task Force Meeting on MLPA.

May 17, 2010 at 2:00 p.m.
via teleconference and online meeting
Toll-free conference call
Dial-in number: 1 (877) 615-4337
Passcode: 6384800#
Presentations via GoToMeeting
Make your reservation now at
https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/167242792

Agenda Item:

Discuss the Decision-making Context for Tribal Uses of Marine Resources in State Waters
Potential Action: Approve additional guidance regarding tribal uses of marine resources in marine protected area proposals

Read Full Post »

Articles regarding May 1, 2010 Stewarts Point Closure

Here is a re-posting of an article by Dan Bacher regarding the closure of a Sacred Site off Stewarts Point in Sonoma County. Another article on the story was published by Robert Digitale in the Press Democrat at http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20100430/ARTICLES/100439928/1349?p=1&tc=pg

Originally posted at: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/05/10/18647586.php

Tribal Leaders Mark MLPA Closure of Sacred Site with Historic Ceremony

by Dan Bacher
Monday May 10th, 2010 5:38 PM

640_stewarts_point_photo….
Tribal Leaders Mark MLPA Closure of Sacred Site with Historic Ceremony

By Dan Bacher

Members of the Kashia Pomo Tribe and other tribes are now banned from their traditional seaweed, abalone and mussel harvesting grounds by the creation of a massive new no-take marine reserve off Stewarts Point in Sonoma County.

The reserve is the largest in a network of 21 marine protected areas (MPAs) that took effect on May 1 along California’s north central coast under Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative.

To mark the final day before the unprecedented closure, tribal leaders held a historic ceremony to bless an area where the Kashia Tribe of Pomo Indians has gathered seaweed, mussel, abalone, clams and fish for centuries. Stewarts Point, called “Danaka” by the tribe, is sacred to the tribe since it is regarded in their creation story as the place where the tribe first stepped on land, according to Eric Wilder, former chair of the Kashia Pomo.

The gathering on a bluff overlooking the ocean drew 145 people, including members of the Kashia Pomo and other California Indian Tribes, recreational anglers, seaweed harvesters and environmental justice advocates to thank and bless the ocean for the food it has provided to native peoples for thousands of years.

“We are here today to talk about what the Fish and Game Commission is doing to us,” said tribal elder Violet Chappell. “They’re interfering with our religion, the food that we lived off before the white man came.”

Attired in a buckskin dress decorated with abalone shells that her mother, spiritual leader Essie Parish, gave her, she emphasized that the tribe has used ocean food for subsistence and ceremonies for centuries. She spoke in the native Pomo language while her sister, Vivian Wilder, translated as she blessed seaweed and an ancient notched round rock used as a fishing sinker by the Pomo.

“We used this food every day – we call it health food,” Chappell stated. “The food was created by our creator – we treated it with care and respect. We are here to say respect us for our food – don’t close this area down because its part of our religion. I don’t think the Fish and Game would be allowed to close down a Catholic Church, would they?”

The event was the idea of Arch Richardson, the landowner and avid recreational angler who hosted the event. Richardson, whose 891 acre ranch is now in escrow, and his family have shared ocean resources with the Kashia Tribe for 130 years. Richardson has attended MLPA and Fish and Game Commission meetings over the past 3 years in defense of the rights of tribal fishermen and other fishermen.

“This is not a protest,” Richardson told the crowd as an icy northwest wind swept off the churning waters of the Pacific. “It is a blessing and ceremony of a sacred area that has provided food, culture and religion for the Kashia Tribe since the beginning of their culture here on earth.”

After Chappell delivered her blessing, Eric Wilder threw the sinker into the surging surf off Stewarts Point. Richardson found the sinker 10 years ago at the same site – and gave it back to the tribe to throw back into the ocean.

The Fish and Game Commission voted 3 to 2 in their meeting on August 5, 2009 to close “Danaka,” in spite of moving testimony by Lester Pinola, past chairman of the Kashia Tribe, to not close it because the tribe has used the area for centuries.

“Our people have been here for over 300 years,“ Pinola told me at the gathering. “Now we are being told that we can’t come here anymore. The Fish and Game Commission has no right to tell that we can’t gather seaweed, mussels, abalone and cabezon. It is not right to have our food supply taken away from us.”

Pinola said the tribe has tried to contact Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger regarding the closure, but they haven’t responded to date.

“We as coastal tribal people have always been caretakers of the land,” said Eric Wilder. “It is hard to see that this is happening. I think of coming here with my dad and grandfather to fish and pick seaweed and abalone. It’s hard to think that my kids won’t be able to do this now that these reserves will go into effect. To allow this to happen here at Danaka will be the destruction of everybody.”

Recreational anglers and seaweed harvesters showed up in solidarity with the Kashia Pomo and other tribes that are being denied their fishing and gathering rights.

“It was inspiring to see so many people come together,” said Jim Martin, West Coast Director of the Recreational Fishing Alliance. “The significant thing is that this was all easily avoidable, since there was a proposal that would have met all of the science guidelines but not closed this area to fishing and seaweed gathering.”

A few days before the gathering, MLPA Initiative advocates sent out a news release portraying the closures as “visionary” actions that would “protect” the ocean.

“We need a healthy ocean for a healthy economy and environment, but our coastal waters face threats that require visionary action,” gushed Karen Garrison of Natural Resources Defense Council. “The Marine Life Protection Act allows us to create a legacy of healthy, resilient oceans for our kids and grandkids.”

“A decade ago we had a vision to create the nation’s first state-wide network of marine protected areas here in California,” said Samantha Murray of the Ocean Conservancy. “These new protections extend our stewardship of California’s land to its sea.”

However, Nelson Pinola, chair of Point Arena Pomo Rancheria, disputed the claims of Garrison, Murray and others that this process, which has discarded the input and rights of native people and other fishermen, is “visionary.”

“It is ironic that some of the people for responsible for the destruction of ocean resources are the ones that are now telling us that we need to be stewards, even though we have been the stewards of the ocean for centuries,” said Nelson Pinola, chair of the Point Arena Pomo Rancheria. “We need to change this law.”

Pinola’s statement is backed up by John and Barbara Stephens-Lewallen, who attended the ceremony, and other North Coast environmentalists and fishermen. They charge that the MLPA Initiative has been hijacked by “marine guardians” representing oil industry, real estate, marina development and other corporate interests and agency officials that have presided over the destruction of California fisheries and the environment.

“To us, this is not just a resource, but a way of life, a religion,” said Pinola. “Each year the government has eroded more and more of our rights until we have nothing. This is a loss for all of us, not just our tribe. I will look to getting this overturned or modified so it makes sense for everybody.”

The adoption of these new regulations off Stewarts Point, Point Arena and other areas without any respect to sovereign tribal subsistence and ceremonial rights points to a larger issue.

“This issue is larger than the MLPA,” said Troy Fletcher, Yurok Tribe policy analyst, who spoke at the Annual Legislative Fisheries Forum at the State Capitol in Sacramento on April 26. “The state of California and tribes need to have a larger summit, initiative or effort to properly define and express the tribal-state relationship.”

A series of marine protected areas are now being developed for the North Coast from Alder Creek to the Oregon border, the area north of the zone where the closed areas went into effect on May 1. The Yurok Tribe is one of 25 tribes that are now attempting to pressure the State of California to address tribal subsistence and ceremonial rights in the MLPA process.

“As tribal members, our people will continue to conduct ceremonial and subsistence harvesting of seaweed, shellfish and surf fish in a responsible manner as we have always done in the intertidal and coastal zones,” Fletcher affirmed.

“The Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) has not taken into account that which is most important to the indigenous people of the land – our cultural landscape and what that is made from,” summed up Meyo Marrufo, a member of the Robinson Rancheria of Pomo Indians. “We have shown over ten thousand years of sustainable harvesting and we will continue to do so.”

For more information and to view photos of the event, go to Violet Wilder’s facebook page, “KEEP THE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA BEACHES ACCESSIBLE FOR THE COASTAL TRIBES” (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=105945012781743).

Read Full Post »

Public Comments on MLPA goal 3 guidelines due May 13, 2010

For more information go to: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/goal3.asp

Read Full Post »

4/22 Action Alert from California Indian Environmental Alliance

CIEA Needs Your Help: Public Hearing for the Delta Methylmercury TMDL this Thursday 4/22!

Do you, your family members, or your community members eat fish? Do you want to support those who do? The proposed plan to clean mercury from the Delta will only allow you to eat one meal per week of large fish! This will not protect cultural and subsistence use for you, your family, or future generations.  Join CIEA and our partners this Thursday at the public hearing for the Sacramento River / San Joaquin River Delta Methylmercury TMDL and control program.

Hearing Information:
Date: April 22, 2010
Time: 8:30 a.m.
Place: Central Valley Water Board, 11020 Sun Center Dr., Suite 200, Rancho Cordova, CA

The Water Board needs to see your faces and hear your stories.   One meal of fish per week is unacceptable and threatens the continuation of California Native peoples!  We need your help to send the message that environmental and public health interests must come before the financial interests of dischargers!

To speak at the hearing contact Patrick Morris at: pmorris@waterboards.ca.gov ASAP! 

If you can’t attend, CIEA can make sure your voice is heard!

CIEA reserved time to speak and can read statements from tribal allies during our time.  If you are unable to attend but would like your brief comments read, please send them to CIEA’s Executive Director Sherri Norris at sherri@cieaweb.org or call us at 510-848-2043.

Click here for the hearing agenda and to read the proposed plan for the Delta TMDL and stakeholders comments:

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/board_decisions/tentative_orders/1004/index.shtml

Read Full Post »

Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation Donates $1.5 million to NARF

for original posting from Native American Rights Fund (NARF).

Read Full Post »

Alert Reminder — National Planning Rule Region 5 Round Table April 6, 2010

Here is another reminder that the National Planning Rule Region 5 Round Table will be tomorrow  April 6, 2010.  For the Agenda Go here.

Remember that this Round Table, while important for ensuring tribal comments in the drafting of the Draft Planning Rule does not qualify as consultation.  This is the first of multiple opportunities to contribute comments and insight into the development of the Rule. Likewise, Tribes still have an opportunity to officially consult on a government to government basis with the Forest Service.

The National Planning Rule sets out what priorities and issues are to be addressed in Forest Management Plans as well as some procedural aspects for how those are accomplished.  Specifically the Rule identifies the minimum items that must be included in a Forest Management Plan, it spells out when and how plans are revised or amended, who makes decisions regarding Plans, how the public is involved, what types of analysis, assessments and evaluations will need to be made for plan decisions, how appeals can be used to address objections to the plans, and how plans affect projects.[1]

The following bold statements are the priorities and issues that are being discussed as the minimum priorities for Forest management plans.  Below are topics of discussion based on conversations we have had with Tribal elders, leaders, members and Governments. These are not recommendations or all inclusive statements but merely suggestions on some types of discussions that may fall under the specified topics.

1. Land management plans could address the need for restoration and conservation to enhance the resilience of ecosystems to a variety of threats.
Discussion Topics:

• Need for coordination and consultation with Tribal governments and acknowledge Traditional tribal practices (gathering, land management/stewardship, etc.)
• Holistic approach to ecosystems protection (plant, water, species).
• Look to traditional methods of restoration and conservation (prescribed burns) to improve ecosystem resilience.
• Improve and  increase native plant populations.

2. Plans could proactively address climate change through monitoring, mitigation and adaptation, and could allow flexibility to adapt to changing conditions and incorporate new information.

Discussion Topics:

• Need for coordination with Tribal governments and acknowledge Traditional tribal practices (gathering, land management/stewardship, etc.)
• Coordinate with Tribes and tribal organizations willing to share tribal knowledge regarding plant growth, and animal activity to gauge change in seasons.
• Coordinate plant management with traditional tribal practices to accommodate changes in traditional gathering times and locations based changes in growing cycles.

3. Land management plans could emphasize maintenance and restoration of watershed health, and could protect and enhance America’s water resources.
Discussion Topics:

• Need for coordination with Tribal governments and acknowledge Traditional tribal practices (gathering, land management/stewardship, etc.)
• Coordination of efforts across jurisdictions to comply with water and other environmental regulations.
• Holistic approach to ecosystem care (lands, watersheds, waters, etc.)
• Look to traditional methods of restoration and conservation (prescribed burns) to improve ecosystem and watershed resilience.
• Coordinate with Tribes to improve native plant populations for watershed management.
• Plans should include in their scope of minimum issues, increased efforts to consult with Tribes regarding culturally important areas and resources including meadows.  (Could include the reduction or revocation of access for OHV use in important meadow areas, improve native plant populations in meadows, allow for removal of invasive species like large diameter pine or other trees in meadows, greater opportunities for prescribed burning in meadow areas to restore health and improve resiliency.)

4. Plans could provide for the diversity of species and wildlife habitat.

Discussion Topics:

• Need for coordination with Tribal governments and acknowledge Traditional tribal practices (gathering, land management/stewardship, etc.)
• Holistic approach to ecosystem care (lands, watersheds, waters, etc.).  Look to traditional methods of restoration and conservation (prescribed burns) to improve ecosystem and watershed resilience. For example prescribed burns improve the health of trees used by certain species for nests.  Meadow restoration improves water quality downstream for fish and amphibian species which provide food to larger species it also an important component to various ecosystems. (these examples would be more applicable in Project based discussions, but demonstrate the importance of prioritizing tribal collaboration at the planning level.

5. Plans could foster sustainable national forest lands and their contribution to vibrant rural economies.

Discussion Topics:

• Plans could prioritize opportunities for local/rural businesses contracting on forest restoration work.
• Greater coordination with Tribes regarding crew training and hiring.
• Plans would include coordination of efforts to develop sustainable wood processing businesses: For example wood chip production, or biomass facilities.
• Prioritizing the development by all forests of forest restoration contracting that is not primarily dependent on the value of large diameter wood removed from the forest.

6. Land management planning could involve effective and pro-active collaboration with the public.

Discussion Topics:

• Public collaboration should occur after Tribal notice and opportunity to consult, coordinate and collaborate.
• Early tribal coordination permits assessing potentially important cultural sites, assessing tribal interests, and tribal practices that are beneficial to project and plan development.
• Need for coordination with Traditional tribal practices (gathering, land management/stewardship, etc.)
• Planning Rule should acknowledge and defer to regional planning rules and priorities. For Example the Sierra Nevada Framework

7. Plans could incorporate an ‘all-hands’ approach by considering the relationship between national forest lands and neighboring lands.

Discussion Topics:

• Public collaboration should occur after Tribal notice and opportunity to consult, coordinate and collaborate.  Tribes should also be consulted, coordinated, and collaborated with as early as possible preferably before local and state governments.
• Coordination of efforts across jurisdictions to comply with water and other environmental regulations.
• Planning Rule should acknowledge and defer to regional planning rules and priorities. For Example the Sierra Nevada Framework

8. Plans could be based on the latest planning science and principles to achieve the best decisions possible.

Discussion Topics:

• Latest Planning science and principles should acknowledge the value and relevance of traditional Tribal knowledge and practices.
• Planning Rule should acknowledge and defer to regional planning rules and priorities. For Example the Sierra Nevada Framework –Native American Relations.

[1] In contrast Land Management Plans discuss multiple goals and objectives, they assess what standards and guidelines will apply with the management plan area, they designate management areas (i.e. zoning for different types of management methods), timber designation, wilderness designations,  and what types of monitoring and evaluations are required to review the success of the plans.

Read Full Post »

Native American Provisions of the Sierra Nevada Framework.

NATIVE AMERICAN PROVISIONS OF THE SIERRA NEVADA FRAMEWORK

Read Full Post »

Region 5 Round Table Agenda.

Below is the Region 5 Round Table Agenda.

Please note that Round Table is intended to be the first collaborative session regarding the National Planning Rule and it is certainly not meant to replace Tribal Consultation.  That said it will be a good opportunity to get tribal interests out on the table and at the fore-front of discussions.   The substantive topics being addressed in this round table were identified in the December 17, 2009 Notice of Intent.

AGENDA | April 6, 2010

USFS Region 5 Roundtable on National Planning Rule

Afternoon Session

1:00-5:00

Meeting Goals

• Share Perspectives on What the New Planning Rule Should Include
• Discuss Key Issues related to Proposed Planning Principles

Time	Agenda Item	Method
1:00	Welcome Regional Forester Randy Moore
1:10	Meeting Overview Center for Collaborative Policy Facilitator	Brief Presentation from Sacramento
1:15	Planning Rule Definition and Collaborative Process Overview Ron Pugh, Region 5 Deputy Director of Planning	Presentation Question & Answer
1:40	National Roundtable & Science Panel Synthesis and Overview Richard Cook, Deputy Director for Ecosystem Management Coordination, Washington D.C. Martha Twarkins, National Team Lead for Collaboration on the Planning Rule, Washington D.C. Office	Brief Presentation Question & Answer
2:00	Discussion on Proposed Principles for New Planning Rule What issues and concerns should the rule writing team consider as it explores these principles? Method: Participants to choose 2 themes to discuss for 30 minutes. Time permitting, we will consider a third principle.  Each table will discuss only one principle per round of conversation. Participants to change principle for each round. If you don’t want to discuss a principle, you can form a separate table discussion topic.	Small Group Discussions with Facilitator
3:45	Insights and Observations on Planning Principles What issues and concerns should the rule writing team consider as it explores these principles?	Large Group Discussion
4:20	What Other Issues or Challenges Should the Rule Writing Team Consider?	Large Group Discussion
4:50	Meeting Feedback and Wrap-up	Please Complete Meeting Evaluation Form

AGENDA | April 6, 2010

USFS Region 5 Roundtable on National Planning Rule

Evening Session

6:30-8:00

Meeting Goals

• Explore the difference between the Planning Rule and a Forest Plan
• Share Perspectives on What the New Planning Rule Should Include
• Discuss Key Issues related to Notice of Intent Proposed Principles

Time	Agenda Item
6:30	Welcome Angela Coleman, Deputy Regional Forester
6:35	Meeting Overview CCP Facilitator
6:40	Presentation Planning Rule Definition and Collaborative Process Overview Ron Pugh, Region 5 Deputy Director of Planning National Roundtable & Science Panel Synthesis and Overview Richard Cook, Deputy Director for Ecosystem Management Coordination, Washington D.C. Martha Twarkins, National Team Lead for Collaboration on the Planning Rule, Washington D.C. Office
7:10	Review Insights Gained from Afternoon Session CCP Facilitator
7:20	What Other Issues or Challenges Should the Rule Writing Team Consider? CCP Facilitator
7:50	Wrap-up, Individual Questions with Staff and Meeting Evaluation

Read Full Post »