Kimberly Teehee is actually the #2 position in Indian country

Jackie Johnson Pata said [Kim Teehee's] job was really going to hone in on those [domestic] policy issues. Pata also said, Kim's job was like the No. 1 position in Indian Country.

Well that was before Larry Echohawk's second [or were there more?] swearing in ceremony, after which Larry issued his first editorial declaring that "The historical Cherokee Nation as it existed in 1934 no longer exists as a distinct political entity."

Echo Hawk declared a new nation, a new government, a new-tribe-that-will-have-to-negotiate-a-treaty-because-they-didn't-exist-before, until now, when Larry says they do! Larry presented the "New and Improved" Cherokee Nation with two governments for the price of none! A drum roll should have played before he declared the C-N-O! The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma and the United Keetoowah Band!

Wow! Shiny enit?

So, I'm curious, if Kim Teehee is No.1, what does she do if an "underling" declares her tribe "moot?" If there is no Historical Cherokee Tribe, since he just dissolved it in his own mind, which tribe does Kim Teehee declare herself a part of? And how does Larry handle the real No.1 position in Indian Country from such a long distance from the President's desk?

Now I'm confused, is there a historical Cherokee Tribe and if it did "sunset" doesn't that mean that since it dissolved, they don't have trust status? If it dissolved, they don't have a government-to-government relationship with the Federal Government right? So, if it really did dissolve before our very eyes, Larry Echo Hawk just outran Congress in the race to dissolve a Tribe.....wow.......he's quick.

Didn't a past BIA employee declare plenary decision-making over tribal governments such as the Northern Cheyenne? Are we right back where we were trying to get away from? Wow, he does work quickly.

Have a "nice" day, and thank you for visiting the "historical" Cherokee Tribe formerly known as a sovereign nation, declared "moot" by a second and successive Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs, Larry Echo Hawk.

The (RE)Confirmation hearing of Larry Echo Hawk

The Confirmation hearing of Larry Echo Hawk held in the Senate Indian Affairs Committee chambers is really not a confirmation hearing as much as it is a re-confirmation hearing. This is an assumption based on the witless list prepared by.....whom? Who knows, who cares? It is obvious that the confirmation has already taken place based on the fact that the list is a fairly short and lonely list. It lacks objectivity, it lacks an outside view, it is probably the best that anybody could come up given the extreme views of their wonder-boy Larry. I just hope the the vetting will take place someplace back here in the real world. It's somebody's idea that this is going to settle the question Indian Country-wide of whether Larry will continue to serve the Morman (sic, yes I know) beliefs that the tradition of gaming which pre-dates any European church does not fall under the Sovereignty of the Tribes to decide their own fate. This is supposed to settle the question of whether Larry still believes that Tribes should deal with states instead of the Federal Government--never mind that Tribes never made treaties with states, never mind that Tribes are still in the midst of Trust Issues that have never been fulfilled and continue to be neglected. This is supposed to settle the question of whether Larry was really sincere in his silent apologies to the Tribes in this area. Never mind that the minutes from his "Last Stand" against Tribal Gaming taking place in Idaho are on file at the University of Idaho Law Library, and that they clearly show he and his staff were absolutely taking a stance against Tribal Sovereignty. His excuse was that he had a "duty" to the state. What is never discussed is that his duty was to point out ALL options for the state of Idaho in its reaction to the Tribal Gaming Stance. He never points out to "his" state of Idaho that one of the options was to honor the sovereignty of the Tribes in Idaho and allow the gaming to take place under the current wording of the law that Idaho had set for its own state non-tribal citizens. Instead he made a case that it was of the most importance that the will of the people of the good state of Idaho be shown by the legislators and that they pass the end-run around their own law to effectively ban the tribal gaming in Idaho. Surprisingly (really?) the people of Idaho passed their own initiative which allowed the same gaming which Larry Echo Hawk sought to ban.
But then I'm sure that all of this will come out in the re-confirmation hearing of Larry Echo Hawk when Alonzo Colby and Larry himself speak to the Senate Indian Affairs Committee.

Amen to expressing a Native American's point of view

The politics of Larry Echo Hawk's vetting

A further review of Larry Echo Hawk's reaction to state-tribal sovereignty disputes

Larry Echo Hawk urged Tribes toward an intergovernment relationship with ...STATES

Larry Echo Hawk's record on Indian Casinos

Larry Echo Hawk

More on Larry Echo Hawk

Larry Echo Hawk a poor choice among many great ones

The Sovereign masses

Yakama's dairy leasing mess

[Script in Green is Jan Whitefoot, reprinted in entirety with her permission]

"Please forward this. Thank you, Jan Whitefoot (509)-848-2539

Subject: Landowners beware

Letter to the editor

Landowners Beware

Have you taken the time to examine your leases before signing them? After talking to several people about leases, here is some information you might find interesting.

Trust land is being leased to dairies and or LLCs (Limited Liability Corporations) in dairy’s names. These leases includes some land owned by the tribe. Why should you be concerned? The dairies are still being encouraged to do business on the Yakama Reservation.

The Dairy Industry has made it legal to compost their dead cows on site. What’s wrong with this? Many feedlot cows die from disease, not old age. These animals are not being tested for prions (Mad Cow). All the law requires is 2 feet of manure under the dead animal and 3 feet of manure on top. No barrier under the animal is required. In some places our water table is 4 foot deep. Do you see the potential for disaster? According to John H. Kirk’s, University of California Davis, “Pathogens in Manure,” study, there are over 400 pathogens in manure. Over 200 of these pathogens are harmful to humans. Some paid dairy experts will try and tell you that composting destroys all harmful pathogens. Not true. If you get on WSU’s, mortality composting website and dig a little deeper, you will find neither composting and or digesters can destroy all the heavy metals, prions and diseases in feedlot manure. To make matters worse, a local manure composter says he gets ponch from the local slaughterhouse and has seen dead cows in the manure he uses. He calls his manure “organic compost.” I see these piles of manure stacked near tribal members backyards. These piles of manure have the potential to pollute individual tribal wells and make people sick.

Another issue with some leases I have examined is that the bonding which is on a lease to protect the land, is being waived. What’s wrong with that? In Chino, CA, where many of the Yakima Valley Dairies have migrated from, dairies have created a “Brown Zone,” where nothing will grow. Who pays for these ecological disasters costing millions of dollars to clean up? Take a look at the Sunnyside feedlot that was supposedly cleaned up. It created a 700 foot pile of manure. After several years nothing will grow on this property. What is the value of this land now? Who is cleaning the groundwater?

According to government guidelines on leases, when the lease is up, your property is supposed to be returned to you in good condition. Who is monitoring this situation? No one. There is no enforcement, no protection on these leases.

What happens if the ground water is contaminated on your property? Who pays? Who is liable?

The huge mega dairy trying to go in near the Tri Cities is proposed to use 1 million gallons of drinking water a day. We have a 14,000 cow dairy near Harrah. Do the Math. How much of our drinking water are these factory farms depleting? Did you know some of these dairies are getting this drinking water for free? What is happening to the aquifer underneath your property?

Last summer, a Sunnyside dairy brought manure in from Sunnyside and applied it on land on Pumphouse Road. What’s wrong with that? Dairies are supposed to apply manure in agronomic rates. Some local dairies/feedlots are using poop sprinklers to get rid of their manure. This may super saturate the soil where some crops may become poisonous for consumption by animals and or humans.

The WA State Dept. of Ecology's Granger Drain Study said 150 tons of nutrient loading (manure) a day was going into the Yakima River. The report by Greg Bohmn said the source of this manure was 5 dairies. What about the fish? Who's watching out for them? No fines. No one cares.

No one monitors this either. Do we want the Yakama Reservation to become the dumping grounds for the whole state? Our we willing to let these mega, corporate polluters lease our land, and leave when they have used up and destroyed our health, land, air and aquifer? What can you do as an individual? Question the officials preparing your leases. Demand that your land and resources be protected from outside exploiters. Jan Whitefoot , Harrah, WA 509-848-2539"

Smart land owners, lessors, and activists, and advocates will educate every tribal member and every other concerned land owner to aggressively negotiate leases in favor of the land owners or to have the Tribal Councils nation-wide pass resolutions specifically addressing the ownership of the waste materials generated on these CAFOs (concentrated animal feeding operations). The problem may lie in that your lease may say:

..."Joe Farmer will only farm Ben Dover yearlings delivered by Ben Dover, and sell any of the yearlings owned by Ben Dover Corporation to an authorized Ben Dover Buyer, while feeding Purino grain and feed products in accordance with an agreement between Ben Dover Corporation and Purino"....

The problem is that

• the Corporate (farm) Interests will own the delivered young animals
• The Yakama Owner/Operator/Land Owner will raise the animals to a marketable size
• The Yakama Owner/Operator/Land Owner will only use approved feed products (the corporation's friends)
• The Yakama owner will then sell the Corporate "cash cow" to the Corporate's friends or to the corporation itself.
• When it's all a done deal, the corporation walks away with a profit, and the Yakama land owner walks away with a profit.
• Then the waste is left behind, owned by........the Yakama Land Owner....

How come the corporation doesn't own the waste? The corporation will claim the millions of pounds of nitrogen and phosphorous, and hormon- injected manure left behind is a "resource" off of which the tribal farmer can make money. Well, if it didn't come in such large amounts maybe it would be a profitable business. But there is no way to safely and regularly get rid of that much waste. The Yakama land owner who was a farmer a few minutes ago raising the livestock for the corporation, minutes after the sale is now a waste-source-technician trying to figure out what to do with the mountain of manure that now outweighs the weight of the grown animals which just left the farm by several times .

The antidote to the entire fiasco? It's your lease. Aggressively negotiate the leases ahead of time to include language that when the animals leave the lot, the waste must be removed by the corporate owner of the animals. Or have tribal councils pass land lease resolutions that specifically stipulate that any waste generated by corporate operations on tribal land must be removed with the animals. The Land owner didn't own the animals, they didn't own the feed, they didn't own the medicine given to all the animals, so why should they be left holding the bag full of you-know-what, and now be responsible for finding some safe way to get rid of the waste generated by the Corporation's animals? I would think that tribal councils would be the safest way to ensure that BIA doesn't sign off on leases that can't be negotiated with these corporations. Somewhere in recent, memory I believe that BIA officials thought that "best use of the land" was spelled out in the Reservation-Wide-appraisals with the damning statement, "agricultural use" or whatever term the appraiser uses. That means that if you disagree with the corporations offer and refuse to sign, (let your land go idle) that the BIA has a right to come in and say they are acting in your best interest and will get you money from a lease that they will sign--since you won't.

Either it goes in the lease before-hand, or Tribal Councils outlaw leases which leave land owners (including Tribal Councils themselves) holding onto 20 million pounds of Bullshit that is now toxic waste and endangers the water table of not only the tribe but the surrounding community members as well. That is a whole different liability issue I would think, when a community would come in and request relief (damages) from a tribe because their water table was polluted by the "tribal" dairy, chicken, or hog farm operation.

Like Jan Whitefoot asked all of us land owners to do, "examine your leases". Examine them early and often. If you don't understand it, ask someone to help you understand what is in in your lease, and what isn't in your lease that needs to be in the lease language. Fulfill the notion that we truly are the guardians of the land.

Here's how you manage leasing

http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2009_02_01_archive.html

The only good Indians

http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2008/11/good-indians.html

Tribal Chairmen arrested defending the use of their land

http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2008/11/another-american-indian-tribal-chairman.html

Hog Farm Protest leads to arrests in South Dakota

http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2008/04/protest-over-battle-for-of-all-things.html

Hog Farm Protest

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr8SM8-WQg8

This is only Chicken manure! Think of Dairy manure on a grander scale

http://www.rezkast.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=1065&title=FRONTLINE__quot_Poisoned_Waters_quot____Sneak_Peek_4___PBS

President Obama's Contract Reform Memo, a fix to the Grand Contracting Mess

Recently President Obama issued a memorandum directing his Departmental and Agency Heads to re-think the whole government contracting process.
Specifically he called for a move away from non-competitive and cost reimbursement contracts except in exigent circumstances. He called for a move toward competitive and fixed-price (performance-based I assume) contracts. President Obama said that the contracting process should not interfere with inherently governmental activities either.
I would like to propose that the treaty obligations are part of the governmental activities. The oversight of the government's accountability to oversee the land held in trust for Indians must not be held by a contracting vendor. They are afterall "vendors," these contractors. They are not the U.S. Government. When an appraisal firm in a city near a reservation assumes an appraisal contract from the Northwest Office of Special Trustee, Office of Appraisal Services and then allows two levels of sub-contracted vendors onto the project, where has accountability gone? I would think that since it resulted in grave errors in more than one appraisal, and that project had to be re-appraised, that the accountability was gone along with a good dose of pride. When discrepancies are discovered by the Tribe for whom the appraisal was being done, how do they address the issue with the Office of Special Trustee? There is no "real" grievance processs that is working. When the vendors make serious (grade schoolers could probably do better) mistakes where is the record for their performance? Why aren't tribes being listed as clients on the appraisals for reservation-wide appraisals? Why aren't tribal land owners being listed as clients on the appraisals for their land? If they aren't listed as clients, they cannot access the documentation that is used to appraise their land, their crops, their timber, their minerals. Only the client can access that information. Who is the client? The client is the Office of Special Trustee, and asking them questions will result in tirades where they question your own qualifications for appraising according the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practices. What remains to be answered is how Appraisers reach their conclusions in "States of Non-Disclosure." But since the tribes aren't "clients" on the appraisal contract, somebody else will have to ask OST how the appraisers reach their conclusions. OST officers have not-too-kindly pointed out that the Tribe is not a client so they should just take the OST officer at his word.
When the vendors for surveying projects include contracted surveyors who are state, county, and city-hired surveyors who may also have a great deal of interest in boundary disputes and land taxes for the local tax payers, I would assume that there is a conflict of interest. When the Certified Federal Surveyors are state, county, city, and local government-elected officials, I would assume that they have a conflict of interest when they perform cadastral surveys for land being put into trust, for land that is in boundary dispute with either the local government or one of its constituents.
I would assume that if the CFEDS surveyors are members of an anti-sovereignty, or anti-indian organization, that there is a possiblity for a conflict of interest. If they display behavior that is less-than-objective what punishment exists to right the injustice? What happens? We jerk their contract and they go home to their home agency with their full-time job intact? If they bend the rules for themselves and they get caught, who will really press the issue for them to lose their licenses? The point is, appraisals, surveys, and wills are all of such a grave nature to the balance of accountability to the U.S. government that they should all be completed under the colors of the U.S. Government, not by a "vendor," over whom Indians hold no influence and no hope of justice in the event of any unjust actions.
For all these vendor-driven tasks, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Office of Special Trustee will tell you that the Tribes can make their own decisions about whether to accept the contracts or to reject them. That may be true in a perfect world but when the list comes to the Bureau of Indian Affairs employee, is it plausible to believe that they will tell superiors that the situation requires more work, more background checks? Will the BIA employees really reject a surveyor who is already on a list titled "CERTIFIED Federal Surveyors?"
I doubt it. Most Indians are oblivious to the entire process and therefore are not the ones to question about the problem. There are a few tribal land owners who are very conscious of the situation and can tell you that this is not the way things should be. Land owners, even though the vocal ones may be in the minority, are the fairest assessors of the impact from sending government responsibilities out to sloppy vendors, who will come back next year to sell us their services once again.
I am hopeful that President Obama and Secretary Salazar will steer the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee into spending the budget dollars in such a way as to have more GOVERNMENT surveyors, more government APPRAISERS, more government EMPLOYEES perform the trust duties. Since the great and holy probate judges require that trust land be probated with a will separate from non-trust interests, since they require such a level of sophistication that not every attorney will be familiar with the requirements--the Federal government should create more positions for probate specialists, more attorneys to work the probate process from creation of an "appropriate" will to probate hearing to probate appeal.
The budget process should be re-vamped; the services for which the U.S. Government is responsible should be maintained by the Government employee, not a vendor who despite his knowledge is not required to know all that is contained within the phrase "trust responsibility" as it applies to the honored tasks for which they have clearly not "just volunteered."

This isn't new.....
President Obama Contracting Memo
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Memorandum-for-the-Heads-of-Executive-Departments-and-Agencies-Subject-Government-Contracting/

The Only Good Indian..... (11-5-08)
http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2008/11/good-indians.html


Dirk Kempthorne had it right (9-11-08)
http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2008/09/two-cheers-for-dirk-kempthorne.html

Lacking a Contracting Accountability (3-21-08)
http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2008/03/grand-contracted-mess.html

Appraisals: Keeping the poor poor (3-18-08)
http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2008/03/poorest-of-poor.html

Here's how you manage leasing (2-20-08)
http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2009/02/heres-how-you-manage-leasing.html

Where Surveying Money should be spent (1-09-08)
http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2008/01/run-numbers.html

Contracting for Customers (1-8-08)
http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2008/01/yet-more-motivations.html

Fraudulent leadership plagues the Office of Special Trustee (12-18-07)
http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2007/12/return-to-scene-of-crime.html

A Penney for your thoughts on Reservation Appraisals (12-4-07)
http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2007/12/penney-for-your-appraisal.html

Indian Reservation Surveys (11-30-07)
http://nativelandguardian.blogspot.com/2007/11/surveys-on-reservation.html

Here's how you manage leasing!

If you ever wanted to know why land owners complain about the BIA leasing process, about Gross Revenue Crop Share versus Cash Rent Leases, read about how the Fort Hall Landowner's Alliance led by Ernestine Werelus has been effecting major change in how the leasing process is conducted on their land.

Read about how nefarious deals between a willing or un-educated employee and a farmer who bids low is now being stopped. Farmers will mail bids to the owners. No more Agency Letterhead sent to land owners who mistakenly have believed the bids to be under the approval of the agency employees.

A cautionary note to all landowners: make sure that the appraisals are kept under lock and key (literally) so farmers do not have access to the information of which they are not clients. (REMEMBER OFFICE OF SPECIAL TRUSTEE DOES NOT EVEN LIST THE TRIBE AS A CLIENT ON APPRAISALS THAT PASS THROUGH THEIR OFFICE SO IN ALL EQUALITY, KEEP THE INFORMATION FROM BEING SHARED OPENLY WITH THE FARMERS)

There are a lot of subtle changes that make a vast world of difference: BIA and OST officials should not allow single-low-bids to substitute for competitive bidding. Ask Donna and Ross if they have audited any agencies who are allowing single bids to be a competitive bid. They have been made aware of this practice, and so have BIA officials but we still don't seem to have any changes, a year later.

One more note of caution: Somebody should really explain to the rest of the world after they explain to Indians, how appraisers reach appraisal Fair Annual Rental Rates in states of Non-Disclosure. Idaho is one such state so, if nobody is required to disclose information, how do appraisers reach conclusions?

Amen to expressing a Native American's point of view

Talk Left .com ran an article during the recent presidential campaign.
It is relevant to discussing any of the appointments in President Obama's Administration.

Accordingly, it is also relevant that Native Americans should be following the appointments at every level of government. Question the footprints left in the appointees' history, not the person who made the footprints.

That's all this is about. And it's all that Evon Peters was purported to have been talking about: ("It's unfortunate that across America, our communities don't tend to dig deeper into the actual decisions that different leaders have made in their previous offices. ... My hope is that Native American people will be inspired to look into all candidates' track records on the tribal, state and national level.")

It's a recurrent issue: looking at who will have an impact on our way of life. Maybe we can be forgiven for pointing out the significant facts that are related to the people who the Federal Government appoints to serve the relationship between Native America and the Federal Government.

It would seem an easy thing to say that Heather Kendall-Miller fits the bill for evaluating how the Federal Government nurtures the relationship between Native America and the Federal Government.

http://www.adn.com/adn/features/indian_country/05a5.html
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/environment/july-dec08/alaskawarming_07-10.html
http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20124560,00.html
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/hpaied/people/miller.htm

Larry Echo Hawk debated on Native America Calling

[Click here for most Recent article on Larry Echo Hawk's (Re)Confirmation hearing...]

Native America Calling had a recent interview with attorney Scott Crowell and Shoshone Bannock Tribal Chairman Alonzo Colby on Monday February 16, 2009 regarding Larry Echohawk's possible appointment to Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs.

An informative, depending on who you are and what you're willing to accept, pod cast can be found at http://nac.unm.edu/archives/2009/feb/021609.mp3.


excerpts:

"Larry was clearly doing his job"

"I would opt for his brother Walter"

"not simply advising the governor...traveled the state advocating for the change in the constitution"

"You negotiate with Indian tribes in good faith based upon the laws of the book of the time"