Washington Tribe Files 3rd Lawsuit Over City Dam
The Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe, based in Washington, has filed its third lawsuit this month against the city of Seattle over the operations of City Light’s hydroelectric dams on the Skagit River.
The latest legal action is based on laws of nature, the tribal and Indigenous peoples’ centuries-old belief system and “customary law” rooted in the concept that nature can’t be owned and has rights of its own. In this case, the Sauk-Suiattle Tribe asserts the city’s dams harm salmon by cutting off access to miles of habitat. Salmon, according to the tribe, are akin to family members and are part of their worldview, and as such have rights that the tribe is responsible to protect.
The Skagit Project is one of the only hydroelectric facilities in the Pacific Northwest that does not include infrastructure known as fish passage. That means salmon and other species of fish have no way to reach above or below the massive dams.
Data provided by tribes and the state of Washington show stark declines in salmon populations on the Skagit River over the last 20 years. The Sauk-Suiattle and Upper Skagit Indian Tribes assert that their treaty rights to fish are threatened by the dams, as they have historically been.
Seattle’s dams are up for relicensing by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. In the years-long process so far, the Sauk-Suiattle and Upper Skagit Indian Tribes, as well as government regulators, Skagit County government and environmental nonprofits have criticized City Light’s reluctance to admit their dams hurt salmon, including species headed toward extinction.
Tribes Sue to Protect the Gray Wolf
Since the gray wolf was taken off the endangered species list last year, hundreds have been hunted and killed in states like Wisconsin, Idaho and Montana. Now, tribes are leading efforts to stop the hunts.
Wisconsin is facing a federal lawsuit from six American Indian tribes that accuse the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) of violating treaty rights and endangering an animal they consider sacred. Under 19th-century treaties, the tribes retain rights to half of any wolves killed in territory they ceded to the United States. But rather than hunt wolves, the tribes want to protect them.
Wisconsin’s DNR policy board approved a quota of 300 wolves for the fall hunt, more than twice the number recommended by DNR wildlife officials. In a complaint filed last year, the tribes say the Natural Resources Board’s decision was a deliberate move to nullify the tribes’ share, failed to use “sound biological principles” in establishing the quota and is managing wolf hunting in a way that violates treaties of 1837 and 1842.
Supreme Court to Consider Limiting Oklahoma Ruling
The Supreme Court agreed this month to decide a question left open by its landmark 2020 decision declaring that much of eastern Oklahoma falls within an Indian reservation. The 2020 decision, McGirt v. Oklahoma, ruled that American Indians who commit crimes on the reservation, which includes much of Tulsa, cannot be prosecuted by state or local law enforcement and must instead face justice in tribal or federal courts.
The question the Supreme Court agreed to decide was whether non-Indians who commit crimes against Indians on reservations could be prosecuted by state or local law enforcement.
The court held in McGirt v. Oklahoma that part of the state once within the boundaries of the Creek Nation qualifies as Indian Country for the purposes of prosecuting major crimes. Since then, state courts have reached the same conclusion regarding the remainder of the Five Tribes in Oklahoma, meaning “almost 2 million Oklahoma residents — the vast majority of whom are not Native American — suddenly live in Indian Country for purposes of federal criminal jurisdiction,” the state wrote.
The Supreme Court is due to hear the case in April and rule by the end of June.
Leave a Reply