Hoopa appendix supporting summary judgment - Schlosser Law Files

For example, along the northern boundary of the Hoopa Square, a wedge ofBLM land has
become known as the “no man’s land.” The origin ofthose BLM lands seems to be found in the
conflicting efforts oftwo federal surveying parties, the Bissel-Smith group and the Haughn group,
to project the northern boundary of the Hoopa Valley Reservation. Section 2(d) ofthe Settlement
Act provides that the boundary of the Hoopa Valley Reservation and the Yurok Reservation after
partition shall be that established by the Bissel-Smith survey. However, that boundary did not
resolve the disposition ofthe BLM parcels in that area which are adjacent to the Hoopa Valley
Reservation but do not touch the Yurok Reservation. The Hoopa Valley Tribe and BLM staff have
discussed the procedure for transferring these lands to tribal ownership for a number of years, but
it is clear that direct legislative authorization is the simplest way to achieve this. Accordingly,
conveyances to the Tribe should occur. 8
C:\WINDOWS\TEME’\HYSARpt.wpd
ajd:07/20/O1
8 Specifically, these parcels are: T.9N., R.4E., HUM, Section 8, Lot 3, Section 9, Lots 19
and 20, Section 17, Lots 3-6, Section 18, Lots 7-10 (317.16 acres); T.9N., R.3E., HUM,
Section 13, Lots 8-12, Section 14, Lot 6, Section 23, Lots 7 and 8, Section 26, Lots 1-3 (228.68
acres); and T.7N., R./4E., HUM, Section 7, Lot 6, Section 7, Lot 1, Section 18, NENE
(59.24 acres). The total transfer of BLM land would be 605.08 acres.
-22-