Rising floodwaters seen in Calgary this weekend. Photo: Wayne Stadler/cc/flickr
Andrea Germanos, June 24, 2013, Common Dreams
Might the torrential rainfalls that have set off record floods in the Canadian province of Alberta—home of the massive tar sands project—jolt action on climate change?
Widespread flooding has left homes and business submerged, washed out roads and left rivers swelling. In Calgary, Canada’s dirty energy capital, tens of thousands of residents have been displaced due to the flooding, while thousands have had to flee the southeastern city of Medicine Hat, which is still bracing for more floods on Monday.
“This is like nothing we’ve ever seen before in Alberta,” Alberta Premier Alison Redford said on Sunday.
The heavy rains also hit farther north, closer to the tar sands belly of the beast, triggering an oil spill that forced oil giant Enbridge to shut three of its major pipelines serving the tar sands.
The crude oil giant reported on Saturday that “unusually heavy rains in the area may have resulted in ground movement on the right-of way that may have impacted” its Line 37 pipeline causing a spill of 750 barrels.
The spill prompted the company to shut its Athabasca and Waupisoo pipelines as well.
But the disastrous flooding that has hit the province is a disaster foretold, Calgary resident and journalist Andrew Nikiforuk wrote in The Tyee Monday:
In 2005 the Prairie Adaptation Research Collaborative promised warming temperatures, melting glaciers, variable rainfall, changes in stream flows, accelerated evaporation and more extreme events.
In 2006 climate scientist Dave Sauchyn told a Banff audience that “droughts of longer duration and greater frequency, as well as unusual wet periods and flooding” would be the new forecast. Meanwhile researchers documented a 26-day shift in the onset of spring in Alberta over the past century.
Five years later the Bow River Council concluded that “Our rapidly growing population demands much of the land and water. Our climate is changing and the future of our water supplies is uncertain.”
In 2010 the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy, an agency that the Harper government killed last year because it didn’t like its messages on climate change, reported that changing precipitation patterns were “the most common gradual, long-term risk from a changing climate identified by Canadian companies.” […]
In 2011 the NREE published more inconvenient truths in a document called Paying the Price. It concluded that annual cost of flooding in Canada due to climate change could total $17 billion a year by 2050.
A 2011 document on climate change’s impact on the Bow River warned that events could be far more severe than modern water management has previously experienced.”
And then came the kicker. In 2012 Insurance Bureau of Canada produced a report by Gordon McBean, an expert on catastrophes. It bluntly warned that Alberta “will be greatly affected by drought and water scarcity under changing climate conditions, and can expect potential increases in hail, storm and wildfire events.” Spring rainfall could increase by 10 to 15 per cent in southern Alberta too.
Maybe, though, wrote Nikiforuk, this will be “Calgary’s Manhattan Moment” in which the people of Calgary “may even reassess their government’s carbon-laden pipeline fantasies as well as the pace and scale of the tar sands.”
By Anne Petermann, Executive Director, Global Justice Ecology Project
At 1:45 today, President Obama announced his new Climate Action Plan in a nationally televised speech.
He described the emerging climate crisis and its impacts–both past, present and future, while be suffered the heat of an abnormally warm June day in Washington, DC. His arguments for climate action were compelling and hard to argue with. Unfortunately his actions do not match his words.
Unlike Bill McKibben, I do not believe that “the solutions agenda [Obama has] begun to advance moves the country in a sane direction.” (Did you read the actual Climate Action Plan, Bill?!?) No, what I read in Obama’s Action Plan was a rehashing of the same old dangerous false solutions that many of us have been fighting for years and years. But what’s really criminal is that even though Obama clearly understands both the science and implications of climate change, he still pushes an agenda that will drive us all over the climate cliff.
First the plan’s “Case for Action” reiterates Obama’s pledge to decrease carbon emissions by a paltry 17% below 2005 levels by 2020–but only if all other major economies agree to do so as well. Climate scientists are not calling for 17% reductions by 2020. In fact, countries like the US need to reduce our emissions by 80-90%. And not in seven years, but immediately. Last year preferably.
The main takeaway from Obama’s horrific bit of greenwashed nonsense? We can continue our unsustainable way of life indefinitely with just a few key tweaks.
“Deploy clean energy.” Ain’t nothin’ clean about this. Obama’s “clean energy” plan includes more fracking, more oil, more nukes, more biofuels and “clean coal.” Yes, Obama wants to stop climate change by screwing over rural communities through promotion of more hydrofracking and increased natural gas exports; expanding domestic oil production–including the hellish Bakken shale oil fields (but don’t worry, it will be clean Bakken oil–no really, that’s in there); devoting more land to growing feedstocks for plant-based liquid fuels (i.e. less land for biodiversity, growing food or for peasant communities to survive on); protecting forests that store carbon while cutting down trees to burn for electricity production; building more nuclear power plants (apparently never heard of Three Mile Island, Chernobyl or Fukushima); and maintaining the fantasy of that wonderful oxymoron “clean coal.” Sane direction?
Spur Investment in Advanced Fossil Energy Projects. Like “clean” coal, we can burn our fossil fuels and stop climate change too!
Maintain Agricultural Sustainability. For this one, Obama wants us to trust the vehemently pro-GMO US Department of Agriculture to “deliver tailored, science-based knowledge to farmers, ranchers and forest landowners.” ‘Climate ready’ GMO crops anyone?
Negotiate Global Free Trade in Environmental Goods and Services. Right, cuz global free trade has served biodiversity, ecosystems and the 99% so well!
But the most ludicrous item is the last on the menu: “Leading efforts to address climate change through international negotiations.” (I know, I know, stop laughing)
This section excels in its newspeak. It highlights the disastrous 2009 UN Copenhagen Climate Conference as “historic progress,” and insists that the secretly negotiated Copenhagen Accord (that was booed even by reporters when Obama announced it late in the negotiations) was a breakthrough in developing “a new regime of international transparency.” Omitted is the fact that this Accord was never actually consensed upon, but merely “noted” by the official body. Well history is “his story” after all…
The section goes on to trumpet the accomplishments of the equally disastrous UN Climate Conference in Durban in 2011–about which Nature Magazine wrote “It is clear that the science of climate change and the politics of climate change, now inhabit parallel worlds.”
Nnimmo Bassey, Chair of Friends of the Earth International similarly condemned Durban’s outcomes, “developed countries, led by the US, accelerated the demolition of the world’s international framework for fair and urgent climate action. And developing countries have been bullied and forced into accepting an agreement that could be a suicide pill for the world. An increase in global temperatures of four degrees Celsius, permitted under this plan, is a death sentence for Africa, small island states, and the poor and vulnerable worldwide. This summit has amplified climate apartheid whereby the richest 1% of the world have decided that it is acceptable to sacrifice the 99%.”
But Obama’s Climate Action Plan insists Durban was “a breakthrough”–because countries agreed to come up with some kind of new climate agreement that would not go into force until 2020.
Gee, guess who won’t be in office anymore in 2020…
1. He won’t duck the climate implications of Keystone XL, even though he may still end up approving it. Obama declared, “Our national interest will be served only if this pipeline does not significantly exacerbate the climate problem.” That means the administration will be analyzing whether approving the project will generate more greenhouse gas emissions than blocking it would. However in its draft environmental impact assessment, the State Department indicated that even if the president denies a permit to TransCanada to build the project, the oil in Alberta may be shipped to the U.S. by rail, leading to comparable emissions. So Obama’s final decision will largely depend on how his deputies crunch the numbers.
2. Electric utilities will face stricter carbon limits, but we won’t know for a year what they will look like. Obama said when it comes to power plants being able to emit unlimited carbon for free: “That’s not right, that’s not safe, and it needs to stop.” But under the timeline he issued today, the Environmental Protection Agency won’t issue a proposed rule on existing power plants until June 2014, and won’t finalize it for another year after that. As American Electric Power’s president and CEO Nick Akins said in an interview after the speech: “So the devil’s still in the details.”
3. The president is willing to demonize climate skeptics. “We don’t have time for a meeting of the Flat Earth society,” the president said, a shot across the bow given the fact that most congressional Republicans question the link between human activity and global warming.
4. The Obama administration will apply the climate test broadly, to decisions ranging from flood insurance to federal road projects. One of the least-trumpted and most significant elements of the new initiative is that the White House will now factor in climate impacts to a host of decisions, including how to construct new projects and rebuild after federal disasters.
5. Obama hopes to secure a few international climate agreements by the end of his second term. It’s not unusual for second-term presidents to focus on foreign policy; Obama made it clear in his speech that it was time for the U.S. “to lead” on climate, by striking a handful of accords on greenhouse gas emissions. That could include a global agreement to phase out hydrofluorcarbons, potent greenhouse gases used in refrigerants and air conditioning, as well as a bilateral climate agreement with China.
From bee-killing companies pretending to love bees to researchers frantically trying to create a disease-resistant superbee, it’s been kind of a rough week for bees, who have already been having a rough couple of years due to dying off left and right. But why should you care? It’s not like bees are delivering your mail or making you dinner or sewing your clothes, Cinderella-style.
But bees DO pollinate a bunch of shit that you probably like to eat. Need a visual? Check out these before and after pics from Whole Foods that illustrate the amount of produce that would vanish if all the bees died off:
One of every three bites of food comes from plants pollinated by honeybees and other pollinators. Yet, major declines in bee populations threaten the availability of many fresh ingredients consumers rely on for their dinner tables.
To raise awareness of just how crucial pollinators are to our food system, the University Heights Whole Foods Market store temporarily removed all produce that comes from plants dependent on pollinators. They pulled from shelves 237 of 453 products – 52 percent of the department’s normal product mix.
Freaky, right? At least we’ll still have chili-cheese Fritos.
Anybody new to Seattle might wonder about the city’s name. It’s not like New York, named after a place in the “old country,” or Madison, named for a dead president.
Seattle is named for a peace-loving Indian chief — a little classier than Chicago, derived from a native word for wild garlic.
When you’ve been here long enough to be settled in and have a favorite coffee order, it’s time to learn more about your hometown’s heritage. Make a ferry-ride pilgrimage to the Kitsap Peninsula, to the winter home and final resting place of the city’s namesake, Chief Seattle.
And now’s a good time to go, because the chief’s tribe, the Suquamish, has opened a handsome new museum where you can learn all about Chief Seattle’s people and their culture.
One surprise: The chief himself gets a conspicuously modest mention.
A Red Hat Society group from Poulsbo learns about a 300-year-old canoe hoisted by sculpted figures of tribal people at the new Suquamish Museum. Mike Siegel / The Seattle Times
The 9,000-square-foot, $6 million tribal museum, which opened in September a few hundred feet from the chief’s grave in the village of Suquamish, replaces a well-respected museum dating to the 1980s.
In part with newfound wealth from its Clearwater Casino, the tribe hired Storyline Studio of Seattle to design new exhibits, and Mithun Architects created a stained-wood building surrounded by native plantings of sword fern, wild currant and cedar.
Inside, it’s a gleaming example of modern museum concepts with a topical “less is more” orientation that doesn’t overwhelm. A single, compact hall showcases artifacts from tribal archives, or even from contemporary tribal members’ attics or family rooms (giving the sense that this is truly “living history”).
In the permanent exhibit, “Ancient Shores — Changing Tides,” simple island-like displays communicate large themes:
• “Teachings of Ancestors” includes a bone sewing needle and a cedar-root basket from the site of Old Man House, the longhouse on a nearby beach where Chief Seattle spent much of his life.
• “Spirit and Vision” has a mystical Tamanowas Stick, a personal-spirit symbol usually buried with a person, and a cedar mask with wild eyebrows and blushing cheeks.
• “Gifts from Land and Water” includes, among other things, a utilitarian clam-digging stick and a mean-looking wooden club used to kill salmon.
• “Shelter, Clothing and Tools” displays old and new, such as a dress astoundingly made of shredded cedar alongside a championship jacket from the 1984 national Indian Slo-Pitch Tournament.
• “Opportunity and Enterprise” are represented by 21 baskets of cedar bark, historically used for gathering clams and berries. (The modern representation of enterprise might be the tribal casino, which collects many “clams” from its patrons.)
• “Wisdom and Understanding” gives a puzzlingly brief nod to Chief Seattle. Context comes from this narrative: “(He) is perhaps the most famous of tribal leaders from the Salish Sea. But for the Suquamish people he was just one of many admired leaders throughout our history, each celebrated for their own unique skills.”
Six other leaders from across the years get the spotlight, with artifacts such as the gavel of Grace Duggan, the tribe’s first judge.
Why not dedicate more space to the leader for whom the big city is named?
“I think that the tribe is consciously trying to move away from (Chief Seattle) being the beginning, middle and end of the tribe,” explained museum director Janet Smoak. “It’s in no way a reflection of less esteem or less respect.”
Exhibits briefly reference Chief Seattle’s famous 1854 speech when he played a key role in treaty negotiations as his people were moved to reservations (see the speech’s full text on the tribe’s website at www.suquamish.nsn.us; search for “speech”). A peaceable man in tune with the Earth, he noted with melancholy that “my people are ebbing away like a fast receding tide that will never flow again.” Yet he also delivered a burning message that his people’s spirits will forever inhabit this land.
Something the museum does well: a historical multimedia production, creatively projected from above onto three child-level platforms, showing happy times — old-time salmon roasts — and less happy, when tribal children forcibly attended military-type schools after Teddy Roosevelt declared America “would make good citizens of all the Indians.”
The museum’s trumping centerpiece is a carved canoe, more than 300 years old, used in the 1989 Paddle to Seattle, the first of a now-annual series of intertribal-canoe journeys around the Salish Sea. Hoisting it are six sculpted figures representing the Suquamish from ancient times to present, including two sea otters “from before the great changer came and made people into people and animals into animals,” Smoak explained, citing the kind of beliefs that defined the tribe.
Closer to the man
If you want to feel closer to the man Seattle, head a short ways down South Street to the cemetery adjacent to St. Peter’s Catholic Mission, circa 1904.
Reflecting varying spellings of both his name and that of his tribe, based on changing interpretations of the native language, a white marble marker is inscribed “Seattle, Chief of the Suguampsh and Allied tribes, died June 7, 1866, The firm friend of the whites, and for him the City of Seattle was named by its founders.” Below that, the other name by which he was commonly known: “Sealth.”
Here you’ll see more plainly how the tribe honors him, in the form of significant improvements made to the gravesite in 2009 with $200,000 plus in grants split between the tribe and the city of Seattle. Flanking the stone are beautifully carved 12-foot cedar “story posts” that highlight moments from the chief’s life, such as his childhood sighting of Capt. George Vancouver’s exploration ships in1792.
Also added was a retaining wall etched in the native Lushootseed language and in English with messages such as “The soil is rich with the life of our kindred.” A wheelchair-friendly path connects to the parking lot, and visitors may rest on benches shaped like Suquamish canoes.
Ending your journey
Walk through the village to see more changes new money has brought to Suquamish, such as the charmingly named House of Awakened Culture, a waterfront community center devoted to such activities as classes in language, weaving and carving.
Browse native art at Rain Bear Studio or grab lunch at Bella Luna Pizzeria, a rub-elbows nine-table eatery perched on pilings over the waterfront.
Better yet, on a sunny day, pack a lunch to Old Man House Park, historic site of the chief’s longhouse, five minutes away. Sit on a log and take in the view that Chief Seattle’s people still love: narrow and scenic Agate Passage on one side, and on the other a panorama of snowy mountains across diamond-glinting waves of the salty sound.
In its day, this beach was where a native leader could take in all of his world, or all of it that mattered.
Brian J. Cantwell: 206-748-5724 or bcantwell@seattletimes.com
If you go
The land of Chief Seattle
Source, ESRI TeleAtlas
Where
From Seattle, take Washington State Ferries from Pier 52 to Bainbridge Island. Follow Highway 305 north toward Poulsbo. After the Agate Passage bridge, take the first right to Suquamish Way. In 1.2 miles, turn left at Division Avenue and then immediately right on South Street to the Suquamish Museum, 6861 N.E. South St. ($3-$5, www.suquamishmuseum.org).
Go a short distance further east on South Street to Chief Seattle’s gravesite. Continue downhill to the village center.
To reach Old Man House Park, from Suquamish Way take Division Avenue south and follow the arterial for .3 mile.
Special event
At 3 p.m. Feb. 23, the museum dedicates a new 40-foot-long wall-mounted timeline of tribal history with a lecture/presentation by Tribal Chairman Leonard Forsman and Tribal Archaeologist Dennis Lewarch.
Lodging
Stay at the tribe’s 85-room waterfront hotel, part of Clearwater Casino Resort. Free daily breakfast in lobby with tribal art, fireplace and expansive views. Pool, hot tub, spa. Winter rates: $169 for a view room on a weekend. 15347 Suquamish Way N.E., www.clearwatercasino.com/hotel
Restaurants
The casino has a buffet, cafe and a steakhouse. On Wednesday and Thursday nights, 2-for-1 specials for club members can overcrowd the buffet (the Thursday I visited, there was a 90-minute wait for a buffet table at 6 p.m.). That steered me and my wife to an endearingly corny checkered-tablecloth bistro in old-town Poulsbo, That’s-a-Some Italian Ristorante, 18881 Front St. N.E.; www.thatsasome.com.
For lunch, try the $2.50 slices at Bella Luna Pizzeria, 18408 Angeline Ave. N.E., Suquamish; www.bellalunapizza.com.
Full moon at Tulalip, February 19, 2013 by Mike Bustad.
Jamie Mooney, Coastal Resource Specialist and NOAA PMEL Liaison, Washington Sea Grant
During the next week the full moon associated with the summer solstice will bring extreme high tides called King Tides to our coast. The term ‘King Tide’ is a non-scientific term used to describe naturally occurring, exceptionally high tides that take place when the sun and moon’s gravitational pull align making the oceans “bulge.” While the King Tides during the summer are not as large as winter King Tides, these exceptionally high tides depict what could be the new normal as sea level rise progresses. This June high tide event marks a good opportunity to select your favorite locations to photograph both now and in December to compare!
Photos taken during king tide events document impacts to private property, public infrastructure, and wildlife habitat across the state, highlighting areas most vulnerable to sea level rise. We want to continue capturing what happens during extreme high tides, and we need your help to do it! Be safe! Take extra precautions when you walk on slippery areas or near big waves, and always be aware of your surroundings and the weather conditions.
Please participate in the Washington King Tides initiative by photographing these high tide events and uploading them to Flickr!
Little ‘Baby Veronica’ was adopted for more than two years, but an obscure law preventing the breakup of Native American families had forced her return to her father.
Richard Wolf, USA TODAY 1:01 p.m. EDT June 25, 2013
WASHINGTON — A sharply divided Supreme Court delivered a 3-year-old girl back to her adoptive parents from her biological father Tuesday despite her 1% Cherokee blood.
In doing so, the justices expressed skepticism about a 1978 federal law that’s intended to prevent the breakup of Native American families — but in this case may have created one between father and daughter that barely existed originally.
While four justices from both sides of the ideological spectrum found no way to deny dad his rights under the Indian Child Welfare Act, five others — including Chief Justice John Roberts, an adoptive father — noted that the adoptive parents were the consistently reliable adults in “Baby Veronica’s” life.
That the nation’s highest court was playing King Solomon in a child custody dispute was unusual to begin with. It had jurisdiction because Veronica is 3/256th Cherokee, and the law passed by Congress 35 years ago was intended to prevent the involuntary breakup of Native American families and tribes.
In this case, however, the family that got broken up was the adoptive one in South Carolina, led by Melanie and Matt Capobianco. They had raised Veronica for 27 months after her mother put her up for adoption. The father, Dusten Brown of Oklahoma, only objected to the adoption after the fact.
Brown won custody 18 months ago after county and state courts in South Carolina said the unique federal law protecting Native American families was paramount. The Capobiancos’ attorney, Lisa Blatt, had argued in court that the law was racially discriminatory — in effect banning adoptions of American Indian children by anyone who’s not American Indian.
Associate Justice Samuel Alito ruled for the majority that the law’s ban on breaking up Native American families cannot apply if the family didn’t exist in the first place. He noted the father had not supported the mother during pregnancy, texted his willingness to give up parental rights, and only changed his mind much later.
“In that situation, no Indian family is broken up,” Alito said.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who dissented along with liberals Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan and conservative Antonin Scalia, said Veronica now will have her life interrupted for a second time.
“The anguish this case has caused will only be compounded by today’s decision,” she said.
Only once before has the law been tested at the nation’s highest court. Nearly a quarter-century ago, the court took Native American twins from their adoptive family and handed them back to a tribal council in a case that Scalia recently said was the toughest in his 26 years on the bench.
Only Scalia and Justice Anthony Kennedy were on the court for that 1989 case, in which the court ruled 6-3 for an Indian tribe’s custody rights. Scalia sided with the majority, while Kennedy joined the dissent. They were in similar positions this time as the court ruled against the law’s intent — Scalia again on the father’s side, Kennedy with the adoptive couple.
The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation will celebrate the opening of a $50 million salmon hatchery Thursday on the Columbia River.
The Chief Joseph Hatchery will raise chinook salmon for subsistence tribal fishing and non-native sport fishing in the nearby towns of Bridgeport and Brewster. The hatchery is adjacent to Chief Joseph Dam, which is as far north as salmon can swim up the main stem Columbia.
Each year, the hatchery will release up to 2.9 million salmon smolts, which will swim 500 miles downstream to the ocean. A certain percentage will return as adult fish that can be harvested.
John Sirois, chairman of the Colville Tribes, hailed the hatchery as a testimony to the “meaningful work” that can occur when federal, tribal and state governments cooperate on river restoration. In 2008, federal agencies responsible for salmon in the Columbia Basin signed agreements with the tribes and the states, pledging greater cooperation as well as additional funding for salmon projects over 10 years. The completed hatchery is due in part to that accord.
The hatchery will help mitigate for the construction of Grand Coulee Dam, which was built without fish ladders. When the dam opened in 1941, it cut off salmon runs to the upper third of the Columbia Basin. Grand Coulee also flooded Kettle Falls, where one of the Northwest’s most prolific salmon fisheries had flourished for 10,000 years.
The day’s events are open to the public. The celebration begins with an 8 a.m. first salmon ceremony at the hatchery administration building and concludes at 3 p.m. after tours of the hatchery. The hatchery is located on State Park Golf Course Road east of State Route 17.
Stephanie Woodard, Indian Country Today Media Network
The Crow Creek Sioux Tribe’s chairman and casino are boycotting suppliers of goods and services in Chamberlain, South Dakota, following the refusal of the local high school to allow a Sioux honor song at the recent graduation ceremonies. See “Crow Creek Sioux Boycott Border-town Businesses Over Banned Honor Song,” for more on how the embargo got underway. The boycott has thrown a spotlight on the economic relationship of South Dakota tribes, their border towns and the state as a whole.
South Dakota is fourth in the nation for dependence on Washington for its state budget, with federal dollars paying the tab for nearly half of everything from health care to law enforcement. The state is eighth in the nation for receipt of farm subsidies. South Dakota is a place where individuals and government depend—a lot—on other people’s money. That includes Indian money.
We saw in the first article in this series that the dearth of businesses on many reservations means residents looking for anything from groceries to home repair spend their money in border towns. Nick Tilson, of Thunder Valley Community Development Corporation, in Sharps Corner, South Dakota, calls the border town–reservation symbiosis “a parasite-host” relationship.
Shopping is just the beginning. In his book The Rights of Indians and Tribes, attorney Steven Pevar cites several academic research papers on tribes’ shares of their states’ economies. One study found that from 1979 to 2002 Wyoming received $283 million more in taxes from one Indian nation’s mineral production than it returned in services and other funding. In another paper Pevar describes, economist Steven Peterson determined in 2009 that five Idaho tribes together contributed nearly copy billion in economic activity to the state, while producing nearly $25 million in state and local taxes.
Dr. Malia Villegas, Alutiiq/Sugpiaq and policy research center director of the National Congress of American Indians, noted additional studies revealing that tribes and tribal entities are economic engines in California, North Dakota, Oregon and Washington, among others.
Gaming at casinos, such as the Crow Creek’s Lode Star Casino and many others, is the source of much tribal money. The National Indian Gaming Association has published nationwide figures for 2009: $26 billion in gross revenues; $3.2 billion for associated expenditures such as entertainment and lodging; $9.4 billion in federal taxes and other payments; and $2.4 billion for state taxes and other payments. Indian gaming’s job creation was substantial—628,000 jobs for American Indians and others, said NIGA.
In Connecticut, according to Pevar, a 2005 study calculated that tribal casinos created 65,000 jobs and contributed copy billion to the state budget, while rescuing the deteriorating economy of the southeastern portion of the state.
Casinos are not the only reservation employers; non-Indians as well as Indians work at additional enterprises, tribal departments, nonprofits and schools. The many powwows and other Native events generate even more economic activity. The United Tribes Technical College in Bismarck, North Dakota, reckoned in 2011 that its annual powwow had a direct contribution to the local economy of $4.7 million (excluding taxes and other associated impacts). Also that year, Alaska television station KTVA reported that the Alaska Federation of Natives meeting was Anchorage’s biggest convention, bringing in $7.2 million in spending on hotels and more, according to the city’s convention and visitor’s bureau.
We must not forget leasing, said Native American Rights Fund attorney Brett Lee Shelton, who is Oglala Lakota. He noted that farmers, ranchers, mining operations, oil companies and many more individuals and businesses lease Indian land—benefitting from access to tribal resources, as well as from the bargain-basement prices the Bureau of Indian Affairs sometimes charges.
The United States has a long history of valuing Indian resources at below-market rates when it leases or sells those resources to outsiders, according to Shelton. “This is a huge drain on Indian economies and is essentially a taking of resources that hadn’t yet been taken in the treaty-making process. If you wanted to design a system to keep Indian landowners poor, you would use exactly this sort of trick.”
In 2011, Indian owners of 42,000 acres of allotments on the Fort Berthold Reservation, in North Dakota’s Bakken oil-producing region, sued the U.S. government. The allottees alleged that the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which is responsible for leasing Indian land in the “best interests” of its owners, approved leases for as little as copy10 per acre. The suit charges that the leases were then “flipped” for as much as copy0,000 per acre. The lawsuit is still before the courts. (Related story: Beckoning the Bakken: Will the oil Boom Reach Montana’s Impoverished Fort Peck Tribes?)
At Crow Creek, Sazue and a forward-thinking tribal council have their eyes on a better economic future for their people. Recently, the group has announced an innovative home-construction program that trains youngsters in building trades while producing homes for tribal members, the development of a business incubator, participation in a wind power deal announced at the 2013 Clinton Global Initiative America, and farmers markets and healthy food initiatives throughout the reservation.
Sazue continues to pursue the idea of an on-reservation bank. He would not provide further details about the talks involved, other than to say a local bank would provide enduring benefits. “With a bank, we would keep as much of our economy here as possible,” he said. “It would be very good for us.”
This article is part of a series appearing this week about Crow Creek Sioux Tribe, the boycott of a South Dakota border town and ways the tribe is addressing its economic issues through innovative business-formation and housing programs.
John F. Banzhaf III, Indian Country Today Media Network
Celebrity chef Paula Deen admits that she used the word nigger “a very long time” ago in strictly private conversations, and she, like so many others, is immediately banned from broadcasting, but team owner Dan Snyder is not only responsible for the repeated use of the word “redskins” on hundreds of radio and TV stations, but is so proud of it that he publicly vows he will “never” change the team’s name. Why? What’s different?
Deen is certainly not alone. Jimmy “The Greek” Snyder was ousted over a few ill-chosen stereotyped remarks about black athletes. Don Imus was suspended for using the racially charged term “nappy.” Pat Buchanan was fired by MSNBC because of ideas – not offensive words – expressed in a book, but not on the air. Juan Williams, a minority himself, was fired by NPR for admitting some trepidation when he saw people in Muslim garb boarding airplanes. An ESPN reporter was fired for using the well known phrase “chink in the armor” in connection with Asian American athlete Jeremy Lin.
In connective with the Lin firing, WRC-TV anchor Jim Vance – a long-time friend and supporter of the football team – said on the air: “What I find curious is how some people I’ve talked to are offended by a derogatory term for Asians, but not by the word redskin. Folks, redskins is not a term of endearment, any more than the N word or any other racial or ethnic slur. From its inception and inclusion in our language, it was meant to be an insult.”
Yet Snyder is proud to continue using a word which three judges found to be “a derogatory term of reference for Native Americans” and tends to bring them “into contempt or disrepute”; which the D.C. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments condemned as “demeaning and dehumanizing”; which both chairmen of the congressional Native American Caucus, and other members of Congress, blasted as “offensive epithets,” “disparaging to Native Americans,” and “racial slurs”; which several states have found too offensive to be permitted to be used on personalized vehicle license plates; and which has been denounced and condemned as the most racist of all terms relating to Indians – the R-word is to them what the N-word is to Blacks – by dozens of leading organizations representing American Indians.
Recently, the former chairman of the FCC, several former commissioners, and other broadcasting law experts concluded that “Redskins” is an “unequivocal racial slur,” and warned that its deliberate, repeated and unnecessary use by broadcasters may no longer serve the “public interest, convenience, and necessity.” As the public interest law professor who first developed the idea of using broadcasting law as a weapon against this racist word, based upon my earlier success in challenging the racist policies of some major DC-area TV stations, I agree. This could jeopardize the licenses of stations which continue to repeatedly use the term on the air.
The broadcasting law experts likened the use of the term to “obscene pornographic language on live television,” and to broadcasting the names of teams like the “Blackskins” or the “Mandingoes.” They concluded that “[i]t is inappropriate for broadcasters to use racial epithets as part of normal, everyday reporting. Thankfully, one does not hear the ‘n’ word on nightly newscasts.”
Now several media outlets are even asking whether team owner Dan Snyder is paying spin master Frank Luntz “to spin his team’s name,” and predicting that such an attempt “will not end well.” Another asked more bluntly: “Is Dan Snyder Secretly Maneuvering to Change Redskins Name?”
On still another front, some members of Congress are pressing Snyder to change the name of the team or they will revoke his federal trademarks, and the D.C. City Council is preparing a resolution which will reportedly call upon DC-area stations to cease using the racist term on the air. This would make it more difficult for stations to defend themselves against a petition opposing the renewal of their broadcasting licenses, since stations must first assess community concerns and then respond to them.
Some defenders of the name have argued that, while the term “redskins” may be racist and derogatory when addressed to or used to refer to persons of a specific heritage, it is not racist or derogatory – and therefore may properly be used on the air by broadcasters – when it refers to the name of an entity such as a team, group, or organization.
But, for example, the complete and proper name of the former musical group Niggaz Wit Attitudes was never said on the air, even by black stations, and even though the N-word was used here to refer to a group and not in any racial or derogatory sense, and the group was made up of African Americans who freely chose the word “Niggaz” to describe and express themselves. In contrast, Indians are not on Snyder’s football team, and did not choose the name “Redskins” for themselves.
It has also been argued that, if they cannot use the word “Redskins” on the air, radio and TV stations cannot report the news, and that their freedom of speech, and the right of fans to keep up to date about the team, would be unduly restricted. But broadcasters certainly remain free to report all the news and developments about the team and its players by simply using readily-available non-offensive alternative words. For example, one can say “DC beat Dallas 28-0” or “Washington bested Philadelphia” or “Dan Snyder’s team is in trouble with too many injuries,” etc.
Indeed, some broadcasters, as well as some newspapers, have announced that they will no longer use the word “Redskins” in their reporting because it is racially offensive. In this regard, remember that broadcasters had no problems playing the music of, interviewing, or reporting news about the former musical group Niggaz Wit Attitudes, simply by referring to them as NWA, and not by the full and proper name they chose for themselves.
For those who might still doubt that “Redskins” is a derogatory racist term, the Huffington Post published what it termed my “eyebrows-raising challenge”: “walk into a bar frequented by Indians and loudly ask: ‘How are all you redskins doing tonight’.”
John F. Banzhaf III is a law professor at George Washington University Law School and a practitioner of public interest law.
