Hoopa appendix supporting summary judgment - Schlosser Law Files

More documents

Recommendations

Info

REPORT TO CONGRESS HOOPA-YUROK, Pursuant to Section 14(c) Public Law 100-580 Submitted by the Secretary ofthe Interior, February 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS: Introduction Pg.1 History Pg. 1 Yurok “conditional waiver” Pg. 2 Entitlement to fund/benefits Pg. 2 Recommendations of the Department ~g. 3 Appendix Cover Sheet Pg. 5
Introduction This report is submitted pursuant to Section 14(c) of the Hoopa-Yurok Settlement Act of. 1988 (Public Law 100-580, October 31, 1988) (“Act”). The major purpose ofthe Act was to establish definitive boundaries for the Hoopa Valley Reservation and the Yurok Reservation. Section 14(c) of the Act directs the Secretary of the Interior to prepare and submit to Congress a report describing the final decision in any claim brought pursuant to subsection Section 14(b) against the United States, its officers, agencies, or instrumentalities. The Act further directs the Secretary to include within the report any recommendations of the Secretary for action by Congress. The Act provides that the Secretary shall submit the report to Congress within 180 days of the final judgment of any claim brought pursuant to the Act. Subsequent to the passage ofthe Act, the Yurok Tribe filed a “takings claim” against the United States. The Yurok claim was initially denied by the United States Court of Federal Claims, and was later denied a Petition for Writ of Certiorari by the U.S. Supreme Court on March 26, 2001. History - In August of 1988, Senator Cranston introduced S. 2723, a bill to partition certain reservation lands between the Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe and the Yurok Tribe in the northern California. Introduction of the legislation followed a long history of contention and confusion surrounding the establishment and boundaries of the Hoopa Valley Reservation, created in 1891 by an executive order of President Harrison(”1891 Reservation”). The 1891 Reservation in~1udedareas of land inhabited primarily by Yuroks, areas of land inhabited primarily by Hoopas, and a 25-mile strip of land that connected the two areas. The Hoopa-Yurok Settlement Act was enacted with the primary objective of providing finality and clarity to the contested boundary issue. The Act concluded that no constitutionally protected rights had vested in any tribe or individual, to the communal lands and other resources of the 1891 Reservation, and provided for a fair and equitable resolution of disputes relating to ownership and management of the 1891 Reservation. Pursuant to and in accordance with the Act the 1891 Reservation was partitioned between the Hoopa Valley Tribe and the Yurok Tribe. The section of the 1891 Reservation known as “the Square” was established as the Hoopa Valley Reservation, and the section known as “the Extension” was established as the Yurok Reservation. The Act also created a Settlement Fund initially comprised of funds derived from economic activity occurring on the 1891 Hoopa Valley Reservation and supplemented by additional funds appropriated by Congress. Particular benefits of the Act, i.e., the provisions related to the partitioning of the Reservation, potential expansion of the newly formed reservations, and participation in the Settlement Fund, were conditioned upon the tribes adopting individual tribal resolution’s granting their consent to the partition ofthe 1891 Reservation and waiving potential claims the tribes may have against the United States. —1—
Page 1 and 2:
Electronically Filed April 2, 2008
Page 3 and 4:
Exhibit 12 Notice to Convene Genera
Page 5 and 6:
Exhibit 37 Letter of Special Truste
Page 7 and 8:
2 Account 7153 - Proceeds of Labor,
Page 9 and 10:
App. 4
Page 14 and 15:
3 II 100TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION S. 2
Page 16 and 17:
5 3 1 (4) “Hoopa Valley Tribe”
Page 18 and 19:
7 SEC. 2. RESERVATIONS; PARTITION A
Page 20 and 21:
9 7 1 shall thereafter he held in t
Page 22 and 23:
11 1 SEC. 3. PRESERVATION OF SHORT
Page 24 and 25:
made pursuant to subsections (c) an
Page 26 and 27:
15 13 1 from applicants not include
Page 28 and 29:
1 can meet any of the enrollment cr
Page 30 and 31:
(4) Any person making an election u
Page 32 and 33:
21 19 1 (b) INTERIM CouNcn~EsT~LIsi
Page 34 and 35:
(5) Vacancies on the Interim Counci
Page 36 and 37:
25 1 merge with the Yurok Tribe and
Page 38 and 39:
27 25 1 SEC. 13. LIMITATIONS OF ACT
Page 194 and 195: United States Department of the Int
Page 198 and 199: Subsequent to enactment of the Act,
Page 200 and 201: IV. That Congress in coordination w
Page 202 and 203: FINANCIAL INFORMATONA.L SHEET - “
Page 204 and 205: —2— The balance due vas distrib
Page 206 and 207: YIJROK TRII3E -- ~ ~ ~ ~ 15900 Hwy
Page 208 and 209: BACKGROUND April 2, 2001 Page 3 rec
Page 210 and 211: REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE HOOPA-YUR
Page 212 and 213: In 1892, Congress opened the Kiamat
Page 214 and 215: esource management, and spending of
Page 216 and 217: The HYSA established procedures for
Page 218 and 219: Consistent with this reasoning, the
Page 220 and 221: On April 18, 2000, a sharply divide
Page 222 and 223: the funds. While the balance ofthe
Page 224 and 225: DRAFT REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF TH
Page 226 and 227: the Kiamath River and Hoopa parcels
Page 228 and 229: No. C 80 2908 TEH (N.D. Cal.). The
Page 230 and 231: the Yurok Reservation on December 7
Page 232 and 233: By memorandum to the Area Director,
Page 234 and 235: United States, 982 F.2d 1312, 1321
Page 236 and 237: claims brought pursuant to 25 U.S.C
Page 238 and 239: secured under the Constitution ofth
Page 240 and 241: After due consideration, the Secret
Page 242 and 243: The existing governing documents of
Page 244 and 245: On February 28, 2001, the Ninth Cir
Page 246 and 247:
S. HRG. 107-648 HOOPA-YUROK SETTLEM
Page 248:
C O N T E N T S Page Statements: Ca
Page 251 and 252:
2 STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE
Page 253 and 254:
4 ership and management of the Squa
Page 255 and 256:
6 The U.S. Court of Federal Claims
Page 257 and 258:
8 is not entitled to further distri
Page 259 and 260:
10 Mr. MCCALEB. Senator, I was hopi
Page 261 and 262:
12 never implemented. For example,
Page 263 and 264:
14 nues derived from one reservatio
Page 265 and 266:
Mr. Schlosser. 16 STATEMENT OF THOM
Page 267 and 268:
18 The committee said while it didn
Page 269 and 270:
20 big conference. In some places t
Page 271 and 272:
22 plus in timber revenues projecte
Page 273 and 274:
24 courts have said. No Indian trib
Page 275 and 276:
26 Be that as it may, we pray Congr
Page 278 and 279:
APPENDIX ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMIT
Page 280 and 281:
31 Unfortunately for all concerned,
Page 349 and 350:
100
Page 351 and 352:
102
Page 358 and 359:
II 108TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION S. 287
Page 360 and 361:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 362 and 363:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 364 and 365:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 366 and 367:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 368 and 369:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 370 and 371:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Page 372:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 18 mo
Page 384 and 385:
43 C.F.R. § 4.318, which allows th
Page 386 and 387:
the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affa
Page 388 and 389:
Special Trustee’s letters make no
Page 390 and 391:
In Short VI, plaintiffs pointed to
Page 411:
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby cer
show all

Hoopa appendix supporting summary judgment - Schlosser Law Files

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?