TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY AND TRUST RESPONSIBILITY
Protect The Wolves™ adds: Today we know that the United States must ensure that the purposes for which reservations were created are not undermined and the fiduciary obligations that arise from the trust responsibility must be met by all federal agencies and in a manner that does not interfere with Tribal rights. The FWS did not take the best course of action in Slaughtering “Phoenix”. She should have been captured and sent back to a captive Breeding Program.
Further it was wrongly reported by some news outlets that the WMAT contacted FWS, After our Investigation, We now know that that is not True after speaking with White Mountain Apache Tribes Game and Fish.
We need all 57,000 plus people to step up so We are enabled to take the needed action against the Crooked elected Officials that are influenced by Special Interest Cattle Groups. It is time that you take the Power back that you have available, and use it through our Voice to put these Government branches into Court!
To gain an overall perspective and appreciation of how Tribes view the ESA as it relates to Tribal interests, it is important to present some discussion on the basis of and the general principles embraced by all Tribal governments, namely Tribal Sovereignty and Federal Trust Responsibility. Tribal Sovereignty The inherent sovereignty of Indian Tribes and Nations has long been recognized by the United States Constitution, the Federal Government, and Federal Courts. See, Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831); United States v. Winans (1905) (Indian nations reserve all governmental powers and individual rights not specifically abrogated by Congress, or granted away by the Tribes in their treaties or agreements with the United States). As a result of a constitutionally established government to government relationship, the Federal Government has a responsibility to protect Indian trust resources (Indian trust resources generally include land, water, air, minerals, and wildlife, reserved or otherwise owned or held for the benefit of Indian Tribes and nations). That legal principle has been reiterated extensively in recent years within the context of natural resource management, Parravano v. Babbitt (1995) (Federal Indian trust responsibility extends not just to the Interior Department, but to the entire Federal Government as a whole) and Covelo Indian Community v. FERC (1990). As sovereign nations, Tribes and Tribal lands are not subject to the same public domain laws that govern other lands within the United States, either public or private. It has been legally established that inherent in the establishment of a reservation is the right of Indians to hunt and fish on reservation lands free from state regulations, lawfully exercise substantial control over the lands and resources of its reservation, including its wildlife, and to regulate the use of its resources by members as well as nonmembers. Cases such as the Menominee Tribe of Indians v. United States (1968), Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Association (1979), New Mexico v. Mescalero Apache Tribe (1983), Arapahoe Tribe v. Hodel (1990), and Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians (1999), have affirmed this precept. Some of these rights are based on treaty rights, but many follow from the mere establishment of a reservation and the self-governance powers inherent therein. Congress may limit the powers of Indian self-governance, including the denial of treaty established hunting or fishing rights, as it did when it prohibited Indians from hunting eagles under the Eagle Protection Act. But to do so, the Congressional act abrogating those powers must be clear and explicit. See Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock (1903). Tribes retain their rights and powers, comprehensive of all Tribal properties and interests; United States v. Winans (1905), Winters v. United States (1908). In general, however, Congress has not abrogated Tribal interests and utilization of Indian trust resources and the matter has been, for the most part, left to Tribal regulation.
Tribal Perspectives on Mexican Wolf Recovery 6 Trust Responsibility
It is well established that Indian Tribes in the United States are sovereign entities, and that the U.S. is legally required to protect Indian trust resources for the benefit of each respective Indian Tribe and Nation. Those legal responsibilities are intended to ensure that Tribal lands remain capable and sufficient of serving as viable homelands. In managing trust lands or assisting Tribes in doing so, the government must act for the exclusive benefit of the Tribes, and ensure that Indian lands and resources are protected and maintained for their exclusive use. Tribal lands are not public lands and are not set aside or designated for the purpose of conserving endangered species, critical habitat, or for the primary purpose of conserving flora or fauna, except as it may directly benefit the Tribes. As a practical matter, Tribal lands comprise some of the most remote, wild and scenic places on the continent and Tribal lands often support a far greater biological diversity than surrounding private or public lands. Nevertheless, it is important to point out that Tribal lands (reservations) are first and foremost the homelands to Indian people, established to provide for their respective traditional, spiritual, cultural, social, and economic benefit. As trustee, the United States must ensure that the purposes for which reservations were created are not undermined and the fiduciary obligations that arise from the trust responsibility must be met by all federal agencies and in a manner that does not interfere with Tribal rights.