Colville Confederated Tribes

News Article about Rising Tribal Enrollment Numbers (Excluding the Disenrollment Tribes, of course)

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here, via Pechanga.

Good news:

The swelling membership of the Tulalip Tribes, based near Everett, Washington, for example, is a point of pride for tribal member and state representative John McCoy, who believes improved health care and an above-average birth rate are at play.

“We’re living longer. Our babies are surviving birth,” says McCoy, adding that more jobs on reservations, led by tribal gaming, is another reason for the growth. “So we have our peoples coming back from other states. They’re coming home because there is an economy.”

At Tulalip, that adds up to a 22 percent growth rate over the past decade. Other tribes around the country have grown even faster.

And not so good:

At the other end of the spectrum are tribes whose enrollments are stagnating, including for example the Colville Confederated Tribes in northeast Washington.

Tribal councilmember Ricky Gabriel has proposed a referendum to relax the blood requirement in the tribal constitution so more children of mixed marriages can enroll.

“I’ve had a lot of very positive [reactions],” he says. “The elders are extremely happy about this. They’re pushing hard. They’re seeing their grandchildren not be able to be enrolled.”

Enrollment in the tribe currently requires a minimum of one-quarter Colville blood. But when you have intermarriage, that bloodline is diluted. It takes just a couple of generations of intermarriage to put the children at risk of being disqualified from membership.

Then the tribal population withers. The proposed referendum would change the rules to count any Indian blood toward the minimum.

Washington SCT Decides Five Corners Family Farmers v. State — Groundwater Allocation Case

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the majority and here is the dissent.

Here is the tribal amicus brief.

Challenge to Colville State Tax Agreement Dismissed

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here are the materials in Tonasket v. Sargent (W.D. Wash.):

Colville Motion to Dismiss

Tonasket Response

Colville Reply

DCT Order Granting Colville Motion

Challenge to Colville Membership Decision Dismissed by Federal Court

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in Desautel v. Dupris (E.D. Wash.):

DCT Order Dismissing Desautel Complaint

Colville Motion to Dismiss

Desautel Response

Colville Reply

Pakootas v. Teck Camino: Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of CERCLA Citizen Suit Filed by Colville Members

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion.

An excerpt:

As the district court correctly concluded, it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the Pakootas and Michel claims for penalties for the 892 days of noncompliance with the unilateral administrative order, and properly dismissed their claims.

Ninth Circuit Affirms Wapato Heritage v. Evans — UPDATED

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is today’s opinion. A related unpublished opinion disposing of other claims presumably will appear later in the day is here.

The briefs are here.

Lower court materials.

An excerpt detailing the issue:

Plaintiff-Appellant Wapato Heritage, L.L.C. (Wapato),appeals the district court’s order denying its motion for summary judgment and motion for reconsideration, and grantingDefendants-Appellees’ motion for summary judgment andmotion to dismiss. We address whether Wapato’spredecessor-in-interest, William Wapato Evans, Jr. (Evans),effectively exercised his option to renew a lease agreement(Lease) between Evans and certain Native American landowners (Landowners) covering real property known as MosesAllotment No. 8 (MA-8). The district court ruled that Evansdid not comply with the Lease’s requirements that he notifyall the Landowners that he intended to renew the Lease.Wapato, the current holder of all the Lessee’s rights under theLease, timely appealed.

Trial Court Orders in Wapato Heritage LLC v. United States — Allotment Case

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here are the opinions out of the Eastern District of Washington:

Wapato Heritage DCT Order Granting Partial Summary J

Wapato Heritage DCT Order to Dismiss

An excerpt:

On May 19, 2006, Plaintiff submitted to Defendant a proposed “Replacement Lease” for MA-8, which would run for a term of 99 years and allow housing development on part of MA-8. In order to secure approval of the Replacement Lease, Plaintiff needed to obtain the consent of a majority of the beneficial owners of MA-8. To that end, Plaintiff and the BIA scheduled a number of meetings in the summer of 2006 with Indian landowners to provide information about the Replacement Lease. During the summer of 2006, Plaintiff asserted that a majority of beneficial owners had consented to the Replacement Lease, and included its own approximately 24% ownership interest in calculating that majority. Plaintiff’s interest is a life estate, with the remainder reverting to the Colville Confederated Tribes (“Tribe”).

Court Dismisses Teck Camino Counterclaim against Colville

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Pakootas v. Teck Camino (E.D. Wash.) in which the court dismisses counterclaims by the polluter (Teck Camino) against one of the plaintiffs (the Colville Confederated Tribes) on grounds that tribes cannot be liable under CERCLA — DCT Order Dismissing Teck Camino Counterclaims

Here are the briefs:

Colville Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims

Teck Camino Response to Motion to Dismiss

Colville Reply re Motion to Dismiss

Colville Employment Case in Tribal Court — News Coverage

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From the Wenatchee World:

NESPELEM — A judge for the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation has upheld an administrative law judge’s decision ordering the tribe to rehire and give backpay to five employees who were fired during budget cuts last November.

But the July 23 ruling by Colville Tribal Chief Judge Steven Aycock also asks the employees and tribal government to “sit down and discuss a resolution that all can live with” given the tribe’s budget troubles.
Aycock wrote that relief is “problematic,” due to the tribes’ financial problems. “The positions are not budgeted. No monies have been budgeted for backpay,” he wrote. Instead, he’s asked each party to file a recommendation for appropriate relief within 60 days, and the court will revisit the issue of relief on Sept. 15.

Continue reading →

Yakama-Colville Dispute over Fishing Territories

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The federal district court held that the two tribes, which had disputed fishing rights over places along the Columbia River, had to share. aug-2008-dct-order

From the opinion:

The dispute is part of a longstanding case brought by the United States to define certain Indian tribes’ treaty rights to take fish at all usual and accustomed places along the Columbia River and its tributaries. Colville sought to intervene in the case on two occasions, once in 1989 and once in 1999, but its requests were denied. See United States v. Oregon, 29 F.3d 481 (9th Cir. 1994) (“Oregon I”). In 2002, instead of moving to intervene yet again, the Colville Wenatchi began fishing at Icicle Creek.

On August 18, 2003, I granted Yakama’s motion for injunctive relief, enjoining Colville and its constituent tribes from fishing at Icicle Creek and holding that Colville was precluded by res judicata from asserting the arguments it raised in opposition to Yakama’s motion. Colville appealed that holding, and the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded the case “for trial on the merits.” United States v. State of Oregon, 470 F.3d 809, 818 (9th Cir. 2006) (“Oregon II”). Upon remand from the Ninth Circuit, the matter was tried to the court on May 6, 7 and 8, 2008. Upon conclusion of the trial, Yakama, Colville, the United States, and the State of Washington submitted post-trial briefing.

For the reasons stated below, I find the Wenatchi and Yakama have joint fishing rights to fish at the Wenatshapam Fishery, which is located at the confluence of the Wenatchee River and Icicle Creek. Due to the alteration of this site by white settlement, and the fact that the evidence demonstrates fishing on Icicle Creek, in addition to fishing on the Wenatchee River, the nearest location for the Wenatshapam Fishery is the Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery on Icicle Creek.