Tribal leaders and officials at the Department of the Interior continue to support the restoration of tribal lands through the fee-to-trust process. From 2009 to the end of 2012, the BIA had acquired approximately 200,000 acres in trust – a dramatic increase from the previous 8 years. This work has been criticized by some members of Congress, state and local officials, and others as harmful to state and local governments. This article addresses and/or refutes much of that criticism, especially as it relates to taxes and jurisdictional concerns. (I’ve long thought many of the criticism related jurisdiction and zoning tend to get overblown, as a vast majority of tribal fee-to-trust applications are for lands within, or contiguous to, existing reservations). The continued loss of trust lands across Indian Country isn’t news. But, Prof. Pommersheim’s work quantifies how efforts to put lands into trust are hindered by the continued erosion of trust lands due to Allotment-era policies. Two steps forward, and one step back. People who advocate for the protection of Indian lands, and for a strong fee-to-trust program, must emphasize these data. The Indian Reorganization Act’s fee-to-trust process was intended to combat the loss of Indian lands through the policies of the Allotment era. The loss of Indian lands did not end with the Indian Reorganization Act’s passage in 1934, but continues to this day.Get the Story:
Bryan Newland: Reaction to Pommersheim Article on Fee-to-Trust (Turtle Talk 7/26)
Join the Conversation
