Editorial: California tribes don't need land-into-trust process

"The ancestors of the present-day Indians never asked the Europeans to come to these shores, and surely did not request to be sequestered on small, agriculturally poor and isolated "reservations" where they were generally unable to grow enough to feed their families.

And so the news that many tribes are taking their casino earnings and investing them in purchasing land adjacent to their federally defined reservations seems to us entirely reasonable. When places and features with sacred or historical meaning to these communities were not included in their reservations, or their historical community reach was far larger than the parcel handed them by the federal government, it created a tear in those communities.

That many of these tribes now have the ability to go out and purchase these properties on the open market can only be seen as progress.

At the same time, we would caution federal officials against being too quick to add these properties to the official reservation holdings ---- which removes those new acquisitions from state tax rolls."

Get the Story:
EDITORIAL: Ownership yes, sovereignty no (The North County Times 2/3)

Related Stories:
California county cites concerns about land-into-trust bids (1/30)

Join the Conversation