There is great diversity among the
indigenous peoples of this continent. Nevertheless, there are key and
heartfelt beliefs that continue to underlie the existence and identity of
peoples who would identify themselves as what is known in the contemporary
vernacular of the United States as Indian tribal nations.
My people descend from the Yurok and Tolowa tribes. I am fortunate to be
part of a culture that has a continuing and rich spiritual history. In
northern California we have practiced our traditions and ceremonies from
time immemorial. We actively engage around the value-based issues of
maintaining and strengthening tribal identity.
Prior to non-Indian contact, this land was peopled by distinct
communities, each with traditions that tell of their creation as integral
parts of the lands they occupy. Traditionally, we are land-based people.
In the first instance, we are placed by our creator on our ancestral
lands, of which we are stewards and must maintain through a system of
respect, reciprocity and reverence.
My people have a continuing and unshakable commitment to our ancestral
lands. In our actions, we never think only of ourselves; we live with
respect for all things, in balance. This is a ''holistic'' concept. We can
only understand balance in context - relative to definable systems that
operate in optimal ways - with integrity and in good health.
A holistic approach to modern tribal life requires that we acknowledge the
harsh realities of our historic interactions with the Western world. As
the targets of a genocidal onslaught who have been confronted with
unrelenting efforts to exterminate us through war and acculturation, we
have suffered to the brink of extinction. Still we persevere. We do this
though adaptation, guided by adherence to traditional value systems.
Some tribal leaders, comfortable overseeing vast gaming empires, are quick
to assert that our legitimacy as sovereigns is directly tied to the fact
that tribes live on the homelands they have occupied since time
immemorial, or that leaving one's homeland causes a loss of identity and
the end of tribal existence. Such claims are, to a significant extent,
fact-based, but they are also gross oversimplifications.
Ties to ancestral lands are always significant. But there are exceptional
circumstances that have required tribes to create ties to areas beyond
their traditional borders. This does not and will not mean the end to
tribal existence when tribes remain true to their value-based identity. On
behalf of California tribal leaders who toss about such rash statements, I
extend an apology to the Cherokee and countless other tribes who survive,
despite being ''relocated'' and forced to forge new relationships with
land areas due to events of history.
A holistic approach to modern tribal life requires that we acknowledge the
changing and interconnected nature of our contemporary world. Tribes have
governing authority, or jurisdiction, within Indian country (reservations
and trust lands). This authority is a responsibility that must always be
exercised with the utmost care. Tribes may also have an array of interests
in areas beyond reservation boundaries - for example, cultural resource
and historic areas (generally aboriginal territory); service areas; state
boundaries; and federal agency regional divisions.
Further, the action of a single tribe may impact all tribes due to the
overriding power of Congress and federal courts. Essentially, modern
tribes operate in many overlapping concentric circles of territories and
boundaries of various sorts. When we consider our actions in context, it
quickly becomes evident how a tiny tribe in the far north of California
has ''interests'' throughout the state. The designation of California as a
region by most federal agencies frequently brings us to the table with
tribes throughout the state. The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988
requires tribes negotiate compacts with the state.
As Native peoples confront the complexities of contemporary life -
including economic developments that thrust tribes into the forefront of
the American economy, environmental degradation that threatens survival,
and social ills that are epidemic in Indian country - we are challenged to
create balanced and healthy communities. We need to use traditional and
contemporary methods and strategies in the development of new approaches.
We believe this can be effective when firmly grounded in traditional
values as a framework for our efforts. This allows us to move forward on
many fronts simultaneously, without losing our essential identity.
The Big Lagoon Rancheria has signed a gaming compact with the state of
California that calls for the development of an off-reservation facility
at the opposite end of the state. It also contains provisions that some
have mischaracterized as concessions in sovereign rights. This follows
years of protracted litigation and occurred only after careful balancing
of all circumstances.
Our preference has always been development at home. We envisioned
something of a ''Lake Tahoe'' of the far north, with a destination
development on the lagoon complimented by a growing ecotourism industry.
However, we are in fact located on one of the few remaining naturally
functioning coastal lagoons in California. The only reason this is
''off-reservation'' is because the state of California, through both the
governor's office and the attorney general, entered into a binding
settlement agreement obligating the state to find an appropriate site
outside of Big Lagoon Rancheria in order to protect important state
environmental interests.
We believe that the compact provided an opportunity to maintain this
resource for all, while still meeting the needs of our people. Our
exceptional circumstances warranted exceptional measures, including
certain concessions or sacrifices on our part. We appreciate that the
compact departs from other gaming developments, but to the fullest extent
possible it reflects and respects the established framework of laws,
policies and programs impacting Indian affairs. To the extent it does not,
it meets standards governing ''exceptions'' under existing law and policy.
Exceptions exist to address exceptional circumstances such as ours. This
does not open the floodgate, nor toll the ruin of Indian country by
eroding good will or generating divisiveness.
Much has been made of ''reservation shopping,'' a process by which
landless tribes seek to acquire choice land-in-trust status in order to
establish gaming. Whether this is true or not, it is of little relevance
to our situation. Big Lagoon has a site for development. Exceptional
circumstances render us willing to forego that development and allow us to
meet, at the state and federal level, law and policy allowing
off-reservation development.
Rather than create a backlash by attempting to squelch competition, gaming
tribes would be well-served to support efforts like ours that are
consistent with the very law and policy that allows them to prosper.
Virgil Moorehead is chairman of the Big Lagoon Rancheria. |
