Top Story Archives - Page 113 of 156

Rosebud Sioux Tribe Unveils New Resources in the Fight Against Diabetes

Wellness Center and Mobile Medical Unit Boost Education and Screening Efforts through Partnership with Novo Nordisk

Novo Nordisk, Aug 23, 2013

ROSEBUD, SD, August 23, 2013 – Addressing one of the biggest health problems facing Native American communities everywhere, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe today unveiled a new, state-of-the-art wellness center and a first-of-its kind mobile diabetes medical unit. These resources will allow the Rosebud Sioux Tribe Diabetes Prevention Program (RSTDPP) to improve screening and intervention in children, as well as promote healthy lifestyles for people of all ages on the reservation. The center and mobile unit were made possible through funding from global healthcare company Novo Nordisk as part of its Native American Health Initiative.

“Diabetes is a serious problem for my tribe, but we know we can turn it around,” said RSTDPP Director Connie Brushbreaker. “Education and screening can help raise awareness about diabetes. The wellness center and mobile unit are smart ways to help us reach more people on our reservation and provide valuable disease education.”

Overall, American Indian and Alaska Native adults are more than twice as likely to have diagnosed diabetes compared with non-Hispanic whites.[1] In some American Indian/Alaska Native communities, diabetes prevalence among adults is as high as 60%.[2]

The new wellness center will house exercise facilities, diabetes education and nutrition training space, and exam rooms. The facility will also provide secure storage for the mobile medical unit, which can travel to the remote corners of the reservation to promote diabetes education, screening and prevention to residents that have limited access to care.

The enhanced diabetes prevention and screening efforts were recommended as part of a thorough, four-month assessment of the diabetes care and educational programs currently available to residents of Rosebud by the internationally-recognized Park Nicollet International Diabetes Center, a nonprofit diabetes care, education, and clinical research facility based in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

“This program has several important components to addressing diabetes in Indian country,” said Donald K. Warne, MD, MPH, professor at North Dakota State University and advisor to the project. “One of the most important issues is making an early diagnosis before complications start to occur. Too often, once a diagnosis is made there are barriers to accessing medical care, so bringing professional medical services to people through a mobile unit is both innovative and essential to improving quality of care.”

The initial investment of $3 million from Novo Nordisk also enables the formation of a diabetes education program for healthcare professionals and patients, the implementation of a community awareness initiative for diabetes prevention, and the creation of scholarships through the support of the American Association of Diabetes Educators that will allow tribe members to be trained as certified diabetes educators.

Curt Oltmans, corporate vice president and general counsel at Novo Nordisk, grew up near the Rosebud Reservation and witnessed the disparities in care facing the Native American population first-hand. He is leading Novo Nordisk’s Native American Health Initiative.

“For more than three years Novo Nordisk has engaged with the Rosebud Sioux Tribe to design this initiative,” Oltmans said. “As a leader in diabetes, we believe that diabetes education and prevention are essential. Our Diabetes Educators have trained the community’s health representatives and members of the Diabetes Prevention Program. It has been a privilege for our employees to learn about the tribe’s traditions and culture. We are committed to the program and we want it to become a model for others.”

For the latest on the RSTDPP, visit www.rstdpp.org.

About Rosebud Sioux Tribe

The Rosebud Sioux Tribe, a branch of the Lakota people, is located on the Rosebud Indian Reservation in south central South Dakota. The federally recognized Indian tribe has more than 31,000 enrolled members and over 11,300 individuals currently residing on the reservation and its lands. The reservation has a total area of 1,442 square miles, while the total land area and trust lands of the reservation cover 5,961 square miles. The reservation includes all of Todd County, S.D. and extensive lands in four adjacent counties. The tribal headquarters is in Rosebud, S.D. For more information, visit www.rosebudsiouxtribe-nsn.gov.

[1] Source: American Diabetes Association, Native American Complications (http://www.diabetes.org/living-with-diabetes/complications/native-americans.html)

[2] Source: Special Diabetes Program for Indians Overview, May 2012 (http://www.ihs.gov/MedicalPrograms/Diabetes/HomeDocs/Resources/FactSheets/2012/Fact_Sheet_SDPI_508c.pdf)

– See more at: http://www.noodls.com/view/559834ED9E32BB3F409145101A8FDB17D6EB63FD#sthash.6L0U3kz4.dpuf

Genetically Pure Bison Returned to Fort Belknap After a Century Away

Rion Sanders/Great Falls TribuneThirty-four genetically pure bison were released onto a 1,000-acre pasture on the Fort Belknap Reservation on Thursday, August 22. — Rion Sanders/Great Falls Tribune
Thirty-four genetically pure bison were released onto a 1,000-acre pasture on the Fort Belknap Reservation on Thursday, August 22.

Source: Indian Country Today Media Network

Onlookers hooted, hollered and cheered as bison were coaxed off the trailer and went racing off onto the plain of the Fort Belknap Reservation in Montana. On Thursday, 34 genetically pure animals were set loose. It marks the first time in a century the animals have roamed the area.

“It’s a great day for Indians and Indian country,” Mark Azure, who heads the tribe’s bison program, told the Great Falls Tribune moments after the final two big bulls rumbled out of a trailer and trotted away onto the prairie. The bulls were kept in a trailer separate from the others.

The animals had traveled the 190 miles from the Fort Peck Indian Reservation where Fish, Wildlife and Parks had put 70 of them last year from Yellowstone National Park. Fort Peck already had a herd of some 200 animals, but the Yellowstone bison are the only remaining genetically pure and free ranging wild bison in the United States, the same animals that covered the western plains 200 years ago and numbered in the millions.

The intention was to move half of the Yellowstone bison to Fort Belknap, but the move was stalled by legal actions. Until the Montana Supreme Court finally ruled that it was legal earlier this summer, paving the way for the bison’s return.

“The fact that we’re assisting in preserving the genetically pure buffalo out of Yellowstone is significant—the fact that we’re ensuring the long-term survival of the species,” Mike Fox, tribal councilman, said in a Great Falls Tribune video report about the bison release. “But, on the cultural side… they took care of us and now it’s time for us to take care of them.”

The bison were released into a 1,000-acre pasture with an 8-foot fence, reported the Tribune, and just one of the animals was not released due to an injury.

Before being released all the animals were tested and found to be disease-free.

Fox told the Tribune that Fort Belknap will manage a herd and use it as seed stock for other places looking to reintroduce bison.

The release meant a lot to those gathered to watch. There was a pipe ceremony to welcome the bison back.

Fox told the Tribune the last few bison disappeared from Fort Belknap around 1910. “It’s a homecoming for the animals.”

Can’t Bead the Real Thing: Fakes, Frauds and What You Can Do About It

source: DHGate.comAnyone can buy seed beads like these -- but not just anyone can be a Native craftsperson. — source: DHGate.com
Anyone can buy seed beads like these — but not just anyone can be a Native craftsperson.

AJ Earl, ICTMN

Whether you’re Assiniboine, Nʉmʉnʉ, Skokomish or otherwise, you’ve probably got some beadwork somewhere. It might be a gift for your family, for friends or maybe a co-worker who’s done an exceptional thing for you. It’s important and it’s a heartfelt thing, but where did it come from? Is it handmade or is it fake? If it’s fake, could you tell?

Although we sometimes take for granted our talented craftspeople, it’s important to know that there are threats to their very livelihoods. Much of the problem stems from fakes. The market for various Native arts has been flooded for years with fakes and knock-offs, and bead-work is no different. For the last few decades the craftspeople who make a living off of bead-work have had to contend with competition from non-natives and from overseas. Spotting these fakes and knowing why it’s important to call them out is only part of the solution. Knowing what to do and then acting is key.

Even if you buy from a pow wow, it’s not always guaranteed that the bead-work you get will be authentic. No matter how observant you are, if you roll it over in your hands, look it up and down, it’s sometimes hard to tell what exactly you’re buying. Many fakes simply look convincing. AAA Native Arts, a website devoted to selling native arts, says that bead-work is often imported from China and Taiwan. Still other problems exist with non-Natives selling imitations or art “inspired by” Native crafts, often times unlabeled as such. This can be a problem for the broader Native community.

A quick search online for “imitation native american bead-work” brings up 14,300,000 results on Google.com, and similar numbers on other search engines. Searching for “imitation native american headdress” gets 10.3 million results. A look for “native american costume” nets almost 4.4 million results. Almost none of the pieces look quite as good as something you’d get from a cousin or from one of our skilled elders, it’s missing something vital.

One of the most important aspects of Native bead-work, one thing that fakes lack, is its deep cultural value. Many of us can identify a friend or family member who beads. One such person is Cynthia Parrott from Washington State. A junior at the Tacoma campus of the University of Washington, Cynthia has been working with beads for years. She started working with beads in 5th grade after watching her mother for years, saying “ it was either this or weaving.” It’s a family matter as much as it is a personal one.

Parrott also brings up a second important aspect of bead-working: sustaining their families and themselves. “In college we all need extra money, so my bead-work is the way I make extra money,” says Parrott, “it’s my own little business”. For this reason she’s keenly aware of the fakes and fraudulent Native crafts that flood the market from time to time. “My craft is mass-produced in Guam and is brought here,” Parrott adds, “I think it is so disrespectful and there is no way we can compete with these prices.”

In order to help stem this tide the United States Congress passed the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990. This act sets out to create standards for labeling and representation. It sets clear limits on who can call their art Native, how they can label it when they sell it, and who exactly is able to benefit from this protection. The reason was wholly cultural: bead-working and many other crafts can be traced back centuries, well before Columbus landed here. Beads, for example, originally started as bits of stone, shell, clay, bird bones or the leg bones of small animals. Pre-Columbian archeological sites often contain beads of all sorts. Protecting this art is vital to ensure the continuation of the multitude of Native cultures.

Of course, this act did not create a series of agents trolling pow wows and craft fairs in Brooklyn for fake Native crafts, so what do you do if you suspect what you’ve bought or what a dealer is selling is a fake? You get in contact with somebody! In order for it to be successful, it requires an attentive population calling out items they suspect of being fake or artists selling Native art that they think may not be Native. To that end, the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 needs you to be effective! The law allowed for the creation of the Indian Arts and Crafts Board. This board is tasked with oversight of enforcement and reporting and is the place you bring complaints and reports of violations. It also has brief reports, examples of violations and info brochures for you to download at its website: iacb.doi.gov.

To protect our culture we need to be aware of what we’re looking for and what to do if we find it. The problem is clear and the solution is there. Now let’s do something about it!

On voters’ plates: genetically engineered crops

JUAN MABROMATA / AFP/Getty Images, 2012Transgenic soy plants are seen in an Argentina farm field. — JUAN MABROMATA / AFP/Getty Images, 2012
Transgenic soy plants are seen in an Argentina farm field.

Washington voters will decide whether to label food that contains genetically engineered ingredients, a debate that’s roiling the food industry nationally.

By Melissa Allison, Seattle Times

Get ready for a food fight.

When Washington voters decide Initiative 522 this fall, they will do more than determine whether to label food that contains genetically engineered ingredients.

They also will take sides in a national battle that has raged for two decades about the benefits and safety of manipulating the DNA of food — something many people view suspiciously but do not really understand.

“There’s a lot of uneasiness among consumers on the topic,” said Amy Sousa, managing consultant at the consumer research firm Hartman Group in Bellevue. “They don’t like the sound of it but have a difficult time articulating exactly why.”

GMO stands for genetically modified organism. Technically, any plant or animal that has been bred for particular characteristics is genetically modified. The difference with so-called GMOs is that their DNA is directly manipulated by inserting or modifying particular genes. Some call such targeted work “genetic engineering.”

The first genetically engineered food to appear on grocery shelves was a tomato that failed because consumers didn’t buy it. By contrast, the handful of genetically engineered crops that have been widely adopted by American agriculture — corn, sugar beets, soybeans, canola — are designed to appeal to growers by withstanding certain herbicides or creating their own internal pesticides.

Many of these genetically engineered seeds are owned by chemical companies such as Monsanto and Bayer — which has fueled some people’s mistrust.

GMO advocates, however, also include powerful non-business players, such as the Gates Foundation, that say the technology can be used to enhance nutrition and other qualities desired by consumers.

To Neal Carter, founder of a British Columbia company seeking regulatory approval for genetically engineered apples that don’t brown, GMOs conceived to appeal to consumers constitute a “second wave.”

“We’re going to see the next generation of biotechnology,” he said.

What he calls his “arctic” apples are a start. Carter grows them at test sites in Washington and New York states but will not disclose specific locations for fear anti-GMO activists could disrupt the work.

“It’s a huge investment, and we can’t afford to let folks know where we’re doing this because of that kind of risk,” he said. He wants to avoid the type of GMO crop sabotage that appears to have happened this summer in Oregon, where 6,500 genetically engineered sugar beets were uprooted.

Monsanto has said it also suspects sabotage in the discovery of genetically engineered wheat in Oregon during the spring, which prompted Japan to stop buying a popular Northwest wheat for two months. GMO wheat is not approved for commercial use, and it was found miles from where the company tested genetically engineered wheat almost a decade ago.

But the real war over GMOs is happening in the political arena.

Airing the arguments

The most recent skirmish took place last year in California, where the biotech industry and others spent $44 million to fight a labeling measure similar to I-522. Labeling supporters spent about $10 million.

The measure lost, but the idea of labeling GMOs appears to be gaining traction.

Maine and Connecticut recently passed labeling laws, although they are contingent upon other states participating. The grocery chain Trader Joe’s said in December that its private-label products contain no GMOs, and Whole Foods said earlier this year that within five years it will require suppliers to label products with genetically engineered ingredients.

The Hartman Group advises clients, which regularly include major food companies such as Kraft Foods, General Mills, ConAgra Foods and Kellogg’s, to discuss the matter openly.

“Trying to suppress labeling and skirt around the issue is not a sustainable approach, especially as more and more food retailers get on board with crafting their own position,” Sousa said.

People who oppose GMOs want labeling because they say genetically engineered crops have not been studied or regulated enough to know whether they are harmful.

They also argue it would be hard to return to non-engineered crops if damage is discovered later. And they point to dozens of other countries, including Japan and those of the European Union, that ban or label genetically engineered food.

“We already have the right to know as Americans what the sugar and fat content is, whether flavors are artificial or natural, whether fish is wild or farmed, what country our fruit comes from — and we have a right to know whether our food is genetically engineered,” said Trudy Bialic, director of public affairs for PCC Natural Markets, which helped write I-522 and led signature-gathering for the measure. It garnered about 100,000 more signatures than were required.

Other authors were Washington wheat farmer Tom Stahl and lawyers from the nonprofit Center for Food Safety and a Washington, D.C., law firm that helped write the California measure.

GMO proponents say the changes made to food using genetic-engineering techniques are not that different from changes that occur when plants and animals are bred conventionally.

They also point out that every independent science group to look into the issue, including the National Academy of Sciences, has found no evidence of ill health effects. And, they add, millions of people have eaten genetically engineered food for 20 years.

“It’s fine for people from rich, well-fed nations with productive farms to decline the use of GMOs. But they should not be allowed to impose their preferences on Africa,” Bill Gates said in a 2011 speech.

Processed-food manufacturers oppose labeling because labels could hurt sales, said Dave Zepponi, president of the Northwest Food Processors Association.

Removing all genetically engineered ingredients to avoid labeling would create enormous expenses, both in tracking down GMO-free ingredients and in segregating GMO and GMO-free ingredients, he said.

“Most of our companies are or attempt to be GMO free, but the risk of having a small amount of genetically engineered material in the product is too great. They would have to put a label on it, which is probably going to hurt their sales,” Zepponi said.

Although most food in the produce section is not genetically engineered, several major U.S. crops are — along with many processed foods.

More than 90 percent of soybeans, field corn and canola grown in the United States is genetically engineered. So is more than 80 percent of the sugar beets.

Those crops are turned into dozens of ingredients — cornstarch, soy lecithin, non-cane sugar — that are in processed foods.

But that is not how the GMO industry began.

The first genetically engineered food, which appeared in supermarkets in the early ’90s, was the Flavr Savr tomato. It was designed to last longer than regular tomatoes, but it flopped in the market.

“The tomato variety they worked with wasn’t that well suited for fresh use; it was more of a processing variety,” said Carter, the orchardist developing the non-browning apple. “It was remarkably ignorant or naive, and it goes to show how technology by itself isn’t the be all, end all.”

The market has not seen more products like the Flavr Savr, with traits that appeal directly to consumers, in part because it costs so much to develop GMOs.

“It’s very hard to get a payoff,” said Daniel Charles, author of the 2001 book “Lords of the Harvest: Biotech, Big Money, and The Future of Food.”

“If you come up with, say, a soybean with maybe healthier oil content, how are you going to make money on that? You have to first convince the consumer they want to pay more for that.”

Making a better apple

While the focus has been on growers, other GMOs are in the pipeline that have functions unrelated to herbicides and pesticides.

One is a genetically engineered salmon that grows to maturity more quickly. Another is rice with higher levels of vitamin A, known as “golden rice”; it has been a project of the Gates Foundation and others for years.

Then there are Carter’s non-browning “arctic” apples from British Columbia.

He said apple consumption has been in decline for years, and one reason restaurants and industrial kitchens don’t want to use them is that they brown.

So Carter, a former agricultural engineer, set up a research facility to create apples that do not brown. His company of seven employees is awaiting regulatory approval in Canada and the U.S. for arctic apples.

Like the Flavr Savr tomato, his genetically engineered apple turns off a gene rather than inserting one. But unlike the Flavr Savr, Carter said, his apples are derived from popular varieties — Granny Smith and Golden Delicious, to start.

Carter plans to label them as arctic apples, not specifically GMO. But information about their GMO origin will be available on the company’s website and elsewhere.

“We’re pretty confident by the time it hits stores, people will know exactly what it is,” he said.

Melissa Allison: 206-464-3312 or mallison@seattletimes.com. Twitter @AllisonSeattle.

Seattle Times science reporter Sandi Doughton contributed to this report.

Klamath Tribes Annual Restoration Celebration is Full of Fun-Filled Activities

Levi Rickert, Native News Network

CHILOQUIN, OREGON – The Klamath Tribe’s 27th Annual Restoration Celebration kicks off tomorrow. The theme of this year’s celebration is Time of Change “Ho Winna.”

The Restoration Celebration includes activities for the whole family. If you are in the area, make plans now.

Friday:
Noon – 3:00 pm Fun Run/Walk & Healthy BBQ
7:00 pm Competition Powwow Grand Entry

Saturday:
10:00 am Parade on Main Street in Chiloquin, Oregon
Noon Competition Powwow Grand Entry
7:00 pm Competition Powwow Grand Entry

Sunday:
1:00 pm Crater Lake Youth Rodeo
7:00 pm Competition Powwow Grand Entry

Editor’s Note: We attempt to publish a complete list of powwows in Indian country. Please let us know if we missed one in your area so that we may update our calendar: levi@nativenewsnetwork.com

POWWOW Calendar

This weekends powwows include:

12 Powwows this weekend

27th Annual Klamath Restoration Celebration
August 23 – August 25
Chiloquin High School Football Field
Chiloquin, Oregon

32nd Annual Cha Cha Bah Ning Traditional Powwow
August 23 – August 25
Inger, Minnesota

137th Rosebud Fair & All-Indian Rodeo
August 23 – August 25
Rosebud Powwow Grounds
Rosebud, South Dakota

20th Annual Potawatomi Trails Powwow
August 24 – August 25
Shiloh Park
Zion, Illinois

Chippewas of Rama First Nation Competition Powwow
August 24 – August 25
5884 Rama Road
Rama, Ontario

Metis of Maine Fall Gathering & Powwow
August 24 – August 25
105 Gould Road
Dayton, Maine

Three Fires Homecoming Powwow
August 24 – August 25
2789 First Line Road
Hagersville, Ontario

Third Ga-Lo-Ni Powwow
August 24 – August 25
293 Ditto Landing
Huntsville, Alabama

Pala’s Sixth Annual Powwow
August 23 – August 25
Pala Rey Campground
Pala, California

10th Annual Native American Style Powwow
August 24 – August 25
Smoky Mountain Visitors Center
Cosby, Tennessee

Spirit of the Wolf Native American Powwow
August 24 – August 25
Pine Park Campground
Broadalbin, New York

Mashantucket Pequot Schemitzun
August 24 – August 25
Mashantucket Cultural Grounds
Mashantucket, Connecticut

Power Brokers IV, Pacific Northwest: The Most Tribes, But Few Legislators

Brian Daffron, ICTMN

The “Power Brokers” series travels to the Northwest and West Coast, whose traditional tribal lands house some of the most ethnically diverse cultures in the United States. Yet, among the states along the West Coast and Northwest, there is little representation in state government. Indian Country Today Media Network contacted the administrative offices—as well as legislative assistants—for the states of Alaska, California, Oregon, Washington State, Idaho and Nevada. Among these states, only two—Alaska and Washington—have Native people within its legislative body – an interesting statistic given California is home to the second largest federally recognized tribes within a state at 103, and Nevada is home to more than 20.

Alaska

According to the Environmental Protection Agency website, there are 229 federally recognized tribes, villages and Native village corporations within the state of Alaska. From the 229 tribal governments, the 2012 U.S. Census shows that the American Indian and Alaskan Native percentage is 14.8 percent. The halls of Alaska’s state legislature have six Native members overall—two in the Senate and four in the House.

Senator Lyman Hoffman (D)

Tribal Afflilation: Yupik

Senate District: S

Years in Office: 1991-1992 and 1995-Present

Previous Legislative Experience: Alaska House of Representatives, 1986-1990 and 1993-1994

Committees: Community and Regional Affairs; Fish & Game Subcommittee; Transportation & Public Facilities—Finance Subcommittee; Legislative Centennial Commission; Finance; Governor-Finance Subcommittee; World Trade; Alternate, Legislative Council; Commerce, Community & Economic Development–Finance Subcommittee; Legislature—Finance Subcommittee; Alaska Arctic Policy Commission

Key Legislation: Co-Sponsor, Energy Assistance Program; revision of state brand board

Senator Donny Olson (D)

Tribal Affiliation: Inupiaq (Golovin)

Senate District: T

Years in Office: 2001-Present

Committees: Part of a Republican/Democrat Coalition—One of two Democrats invited within coalition; Finance; Judiciary; State Affairs

Key Legislation: Creation of Native Language Preservation Council; controlled substances classification; legislation concerning U.S. Coast Guard operations in the Arctic; request for U.S. government to open oil and gas exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; establishment of Alaska Mining Day; reduction of salmon catch by trawl fishers

Representative Bryce Edgmon (D)

Tribal Affiliation: Choggiung Village Corporation

House District: 36

Years in Office: 2006-Present

Additional Experience: President, Choggiung Village Corporation

Committees: Chair, Subcommittee on Corrections; Chair, Subcommittee on Public Safety; Finance; Subcommittee on Health and Social Services; Alternate, Alaska Arctic Policy Commission

Key Legislation: Change of the terms “mental retardation” and “mentally retarded” in Alaska statutes; act relating to performance reviews, audits and termination of Alaska executive and legislative branches, the University of Alaska and the Alaska Court System; request to the Department of the Interior and Bureau of Land Management to plug legacy well drilling sites; reinstatement of child and adult immunization programs in the state Department of Health and Social Services; renewable energy grant fund; loan for commercial fishing entry permits; act making regional Native housing authorities eligible for grants from the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation; law requiring the Department of Natural Resources to deliver a fishing stream access report to the legislature and governor’s office; Village Safe Water Act

Representative Neal Foster (D)

Tribal Affiliation: Sitnasuak Native Corporation

House District: 39

Previous Experience: Vice-President, Sitnasuak Native Corporation

Years in Office: 2009-Present

Committees: Co-Chair, Military & Veterans Affairs; Community & Regional Affairs; Public Safety-Finance Subcommittee; Judiciary; Transportation & Public Finance Subcommittee; Natural Resources-Finance Subcommittee; Energy

Key Legislation: Legacy well sites; creation of a state food resource development group; opposition to Food & Drug Administration’s findings on genetically-engineered salmon; act relating to performance reviews, audits and termination of Alaska executive and legislative branches, the University of Alaska and the Alaska Court System; revolving bank loan fund; request for United States Congress to adequately fund United States Coast Guard Arctic missions; act making regional Native housing authorities eligible for grants from the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation; law requiring the Department of Natural Resources to deliver a fishing stream access report to the legislature and governor’s office; relocation of the Coastal Villages Region Fund home port; Village Safe Water Act

Representative Charisse Millett (R)

Tribal Affiliation: Inupiaq

House District: 24

Years in Office: 2009-Present

Committees: Co-Chair, Energy; Select Committee on Legislative Ethics; State Affairs; Labor & Workforce Development-Finance Subcommittee; Judiciary; Administration-Finance Subcommittee; Labor & Commerce; Commerce, Community & Economic Development—Finance Subcommittee; Task Force on Sustainable Education

Key Legislation: Vulnerable adult prompt response and notification; Alaska Challenge Youth Academy; police standards; creation of a state food resource development group; commercial use authorization for the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation; legacy well sites; Change of the terms “mental retardation” and “mentally retarded” in Alaska statutes; proclamation of Alaska as a Purple Heart State; opposition to Food & Drug Administration’s findings on genetically-engineered salmon; laws concerning sale and possession of switchblades and gravity knives; encouragement of firearm and firearm accessory manufacture; Alaska Minerals Commission membership; establishment of the Alaska Gasoline Development Corporation; self-defense definitions; establishment of Vietnam Veterans Day; Statewide Suicide Prevention Council; no charge for death certificates of deceased veterans; establishment of Alaska National Guard Day; renewable energy grant fund; authorization of Native housing authorities to receive grants through Alaska Housing Finance Corporation; requirement of Department of Natural Resources to submit report on fishing stream access; urging of U.S. Congress to open coastal plain of Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration; opposition to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to create new protected habitat within upper Cook Inlet and Kachemak Bay; prevention, evaluation and liability for concussions in student athletes

Representative Benjamin Nageak (D)

Tribal Affiliation: Inupiaq

House District: 40

Years in Office: 2013

Committees: Co-Chair, Community & Regional Affairs; Education & Early Development—Finance Subcommittee; Health & Social Services; University of Alaska—Finance Subcommittee; Court System—Finance Subcommittee; Energy

Key Legislation: Law regarding abandoned and derelict vessels; legacy well capping; changing of statute language regarding phrases “mental retardation” and “mentally retarded”; opposition to FDA findings on genetically-engineered salmon; establishment of the Alaska Gasoline Development Corporation; allocation of funds to the Special Education Service Agency

Washington

Washington State—the home of Chief Seattle and Sherman Alexie—has 30 federally recognized tribes within its borders, making up 1.8 percent of the state’s total population. Out of 97 members of the Washington House of Representatives, two are Native.

Representative John McCoy (D)

Tribal Affiliation: Tulalip

House District: 38, Position 1

Years in Office: 2003-Present

Committees: Chair, Community Development Housing & Tribal Affairs; Vice-Chair, Environment; Education

Recent Key Legislation: Initiative to increase STEM education; authorization of state-tribal compact schools; protection of state’s cultural resources; Yakima River Basin resource management; access of tribal members to state land; music education initiatives; academic credit for military training; visitation rights for grandparents; Small Rechargeable Battery Stewardship Act; modification Native child care costs; hunting regulations for tribal members; recognition of Native American Heritage Day; regulation of sibling visitation for foster children; excuses of work and school absences for reasons of faith or conscience; increasing capacity of school districts to respond to troubled youth; limiting liability for habitat projects; job order contracting procedure for Department of Transportation; insurance coverage of eosinophilia gastrointestinal associated disorders; initiatives in high school to save lives for cardiac arrests; housing trust fund investments; tribal conservation easements; prohibiting liquor self-checkout machines; high school equivalency certificates; powers and duties of gambling commission; contribution limits to school board candidates; law requiring state to retrocede civil jurisdiction over Indians and Indian territory, reservations, county and lands; creation of state Indian Child Welfare Act; enhancement of Pacific Salmon production; creation of Washington Investment Trust; decommissioning of coal-fired power generators; establishing state-tribal relations; enactment of Middle Class Jobs Act; creation of Clean Energy Partnership; air quality protection; regulation of aviation biofuels production; clarification of rights and obligations of domestic partners in regards to parentage; creation of Indian Education division within office of Superintendent of Public Instruction; bullying prevention; oil spill program requirements; traumatic brain surgery strategic partnership.

Representative Jeff Morris (D)

Tribal Affiliation: Tsimshian

House District: 40, Position 2

Years in Office: 1996-Present

Committees: Chair, Technology & Economic Development; Environment; Transportation

Previous Experience: Speaker Pro Tempore and Floor Leader, Washington House of Representatives

Recent Key Legislation: Joint Center for Aerospace Technology Innovation; business and government streamlining projects; early learning opportunities; wireless communication structures; restriction of crab fishery licenses; extending business and occupation tax credits for research and development; assessment of energy storage systems; using marijuana-related revenue to fund agricultural production research; modification of renewable energy cost recovery program; authorization of small consumer installment loans; stewardship of household mercury-containing lights; scrap metal licensing; renewable energy options for electricity company customers; grandparents’ visitation rights; increase of regulatory oversight for the Office of Minority and Women’s Business Enterprises; renewable energy jobs; elimination of traffic safety cameras; reduction of littering by retail carryout bags; firearm safety funding; tribes and conservation easements; establishment of energy efficiency improvement loan fund; child abuse investigation and proceedings statutes; decommissioning of coal-fired power generators; establishments of energy efficiency standards for consumer products; establishing government-to-government relationship between state and tribes; privatizing management of state ferry system; limits on fertilizer containing phosphorus; defining of municipal solid waste as a renewable resource; procedure of retrocession of civil and criminal jurisdiction over federally recognized tribes; implementation of Blue Alert System; Higher Education Opportunity Act; restriction of television viewers in motor vehicles; expanding rights of domestic partners in regards to parentage; embalmer regulations; improvement of fishing opportunities in Puget Sound and Lake Washington; creation of Indian Education division within office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; epa.gov; Washington Governor’s Office of Indian Affairs; Open States; and Project Vote Smart

Coal port faces huge obstacle in Lummi opposition

The totem pole Jewell James is carving to protest coal exports. Photo: Paul K. Anderson, Chuckanut Conservancy.

Cultural concerns and treaty rights to protect fish loom large for a shipping terminal near Bellingham.

Floyd McKay, CrossCut

Lummi Master Carver Jewell James at work. Photo: Paul K. Anderson, Chuckanut Conservancy.

Lummi master carver Jewell James is taking another ceremonial totem pole on a long trip, but this time it won’t be going as a healing pole — like those he carved for the three 9-11 sites — this pole is a political and cultural statement aimed at the export of coal from ports in the Pacific Northwest.

The pole is taking shape only a few miles from the proposed site of the largest coal terminal in the region, at Cherry Point north of Bellingham on Georgia Strait.

It’s a site that James and other Lummis regard as sacred; their ancestors lived, fished and died at Cherry Point through the centuries before white men discovered the area, imposed treaties on the natives and pushed them onto reservations.

The reservations are still there, as are the natives, and pressure continues to bring industry with its economic development, jobs, shipping, railroads, pollution, threats to native fishing areas and trampling of ancient grounds. Over the last two centuries, Cherry Point has seen two oil refineries, an aluminum plant and now plans for yet another giant industry.

Now, the Lummis appear to be well-positioned to play a key, perhaps the most critical role, in determining the fate of a huge proposal to export coal to China from Cherry Point. If the tribe’s objections to the port hold and their treaty rights under federal law withstand any legal questions, the path to approval of the port planned by SSA Marine of Seattle faces a giant obstacle. Company officials, for their part, say they believe the plan can win support from the tribe.

SSA Marine wants to export 48 million tons annually of Powder River Basin coal, and this time the Lummis are deeply dug in. Their line was first drawn a year ago when Lummi elders burned a ceremonial million-dollar check on the beach at Cherry Point and declared no compromise or financial offer would change their opposition to the Gateway Pacific Terminal (GPT).

Lummi speakers were forceful at seven public meetings last year hosted by public agencies charged with reviewing the proposal. Tribal leaders have hosted public events in Whatcom County, where the fate of two key permits will be decided. They even wrote a play, “But What About Those Promises?” to dramatize exploitation of their ancestors.

Up next is the totem pole, which begins its journey about Sept. 19 at the Powder River Basin coalfield in Wyoming and follows by truck the long and winding rail route to Cherry Point. Ceremonies and rallies along the way will reach Seattle and Cherry Point about Sept. 27 to 29.

The Lummis, with regional tribal support, are mounting a two-pronged attack on GPT: the cultural side, headed by James and associates in the Lummi Sovereignty and Treaty Protection Office; and a resource side, relying on key federal court decisions protecting “Usual and Accustomed” fishing rights granted in treaties dating to 1855.

Lummi Nation then-Chair Cliff Cultee (left) and Hereditary Chair Bill James with the check they will burn at Cherry Point. Photo: Floyd McKay

Lummis are quick to say the two items are inseparable because salmon is integral to every aspect of their — and all Salish tribes’ — life. Scholars support that claim and note that Salish tribes have never deviated from their relationship with salmon.

“Prior to and following the arrival of Euro‐Americans, the shorelines of Cherry Point were used as fishing villages and the tidelands and waters of Georgia Strait were used to harvest fin‐ and shellfish for commercial, subsistence, and ceremonial purposes,” Lummi chairman Tim Ballew II said in a 24-page letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in January. “Although the Lummi Nation still fishes the waters of Georgia Strait, the resources have been degraded by human activities and shoreline development has precluded the use of traditional hunting, fishing, and gathering sites along the shorelines.”

The Corps has jurisdiction over wetlands and piers and it must deal directly with the 5,000-member tribe in a “government to government” manner honoring tribal sovereignty.

Native American Chiefs Honored, Revered on New Website

New NativeAmericanChiefs.org features essays, photos of legendary Native American chiefs.

Source: PRWeb

Native American chiefs are supremely honored, and hold the highest position within individual Native American tribes. Before generals and politicians ruled the land, the United States was filled with indigenous Native American tribes, and was host to many small societies existing beneath chiefdom.

In Native American culture, an elder was considered to be the wisest. Elders were thought to deliver just decisions, and often rose to the rank of chief. Native American chiefs have accomplished many important feats for Native Americans, and have been recorded within American history.

Now, a new website dedicated to legendary Native American chiefs has been launched.

“Many Native American chiefs have been regarded as great warriors, and have spearheaded campaigns to protect their people from danger at overwhelming odds,” said NativeAmericanChiefs.org spokesperson James Heldon. “Chiefs have led entire civilizations, expelled enemy occupants and have led tribes into profitable lands, filled with hunting grounds and fertile soil.”

The Native American leader, Geronimo, was an Apache warrior who fought the United States and Mexico to protect his people’s land. His father-in-law, Chief Cochise, was considered a fearsome warrior, and spent much of his life at war with Mexican forces to protect his tribe’s culture.

The Navajo chief, Manuelito, evaded capture by American forces in the 1800s, and additionally led his people into battle against overwhelming odds against the American Army. He took part in several battles, and participated in the Long Walk, where the United States forced the Navajo tribe to walk—at gunpoint—from their Arizona reservation to eastern New Mexico.

The Sioux chief, Sitting Bull, is arguably the most famous Native American leader. He’s considered a figure of deep conviction, cunning and bravery, and led his people to a decisive victory against opposing forces during the Battle of Little Bighorn. The Sioux, themselves, were fierce combatants, and entered battle with traditional war shirts, decorated with human scalps and ceremonial beads. Camouflage wasn’t used, as war garments were worn to inspire fear within the enemy. A chief normally stuck out, and was decorated with elaborate clothing and jewelry.

“The many stories of Native American chiefs are passed down through history, and tribes keep them alive—even today,” said Heldon. “Their tales of bravery and heroism are inspiring legends, and will likely exist for centuries. Chiefs have historically led their tribes through struggles, famine and war, and continue to lead modern tribes through hardships.”

To learn more information about Indian chiefs, as well as their accomplishments, take a look at NativeAmericanChiefs.org. Visitors will encounter stories of battles, and access biographical information pertaining to Native American leaders.

What Protection Of Traditional Knowledge Means To Indigenous Peoples

By Catherine Saez, Intercontinental Cry

World Intellectual Property Organization member states in July concluded the biennium work of the committee tasked with finding agreement on international legal tools to prevent misappropriation and misuse of genetic resources, traditional knowledge and folklore.

Indigenous peoples and local communities are holders of a substantial part of this knowledge and are demanding that it be protected against misappropriation but also against its use without their consent.

Intellectual Property Watch conducted two interviews with different indigenous groups attending the 15-24 July WIPO Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IGC) (IPW, WIPO, 25 July 2013).

The IGC is working on the protection of genetic resources (GR), traditional knowledge (TK), and traditional cultural expressions (TCEs or folklore) against misappropriation mainly by commercial interests. Other concerns include knowledge that has been claimed for collection purposes, or research, or has been used for a long time and is considered part of the public domain.

Indigenous peoples’ groups have said that the public domain was basically created at the same time as the concept of intellectual property and their particular knowledge had been put in that public domain, by default, without their consent.

Preston Hardison, policy analyst representing the Tulalip Tribes, Jim Walker of the Foundation for Aboriginal and Islander Research Action (Australia), and Ronald Barnes of the Indian Council of South America answered questions about the protection of traditional knowledge, on the issue of the public domain, and what would be an optimum result of the IGC.

“I work for a tribe of 4,600 people, on a very small 6 mile square reservation. They’ve lost 90 percent of their land. They are surrounded by a sea of non-indigenous peoples. Their habitat has been fragmented. When they reserved their treaties they reserved a lot of ‘off reservation rights’,” said Hardison.

“They have this small reservation but they get to hunt and gather fish all around because they knew the reservation was going to be too small to sustain them,” he said. “But now all these lands are getting fragmented, polluted, broken up, rolled over by cities and urbanization, [and] climate change is causing species to move away from their territories, invasive species are coming in.”

The whole IGC discussion started with the problem of biopiracy, he said, and how to protect knowledge from being patented. “However the problem in the IP system, is that the best way to protect against patents is through the public domain because that is prior art.”

“What we very quickly found out is that this defensive approach was not helping us because the patent problem is really just a problem of temporary monopoly and the solution was for us to permanently lose control of our knowledge by putting it in the public domain.”

There are also issues when the knowledge is a pathway to discover the natural resources, “so people discover the value of cultural heritage through the traditional knowledge but the resource itself may not be protected,” Hardison said. “By solving the patent problem, by making your knowledge available, you may have opened yourself up to petty exploitation, to non-monopolistic exploitation.”

“The main problem is not the monopoly [inherent in a patent],” he said. “It is people finding out what the value of our medicinal plants is and coming and taking every single one they can find.”

Ronald Barnes, of the Indian Council of South America told Intellectual Property Watch: “When we talk about protection we want protection against exploitation so that the protection remains in the control of the holders of TK and the owners so that their right to self-determination is recognized and respected.”

People wanting to use the knowledge “have to register and let us know how they acquired it and how they are using it. Perhaps if it is sacred we don’t want it to be developed,” he specified. “Sometimes we try to keep it close to ourselves but it leaks out. There is always a way to go to one person and compensate that one person and then they say we have acquired this from you and now we have the right to develop it but it is still our collective property.”

Colonizers Put Traditional Knowledge in the Public Domain

There are some stewardship obligations that go with the knowledge, Hardison said. “When you receive it you don’t receive it freely to do whatever you want with it, you have obligations to the land, to whatever it is referring, to the spirits or the ancestors. This is a real problem with the public domain. Tribes have often shared their knowledge in the past but they shared it with people who had similar views and concepts and understood these obligations. But now we are in this world with 7 billion people on the internet.”

“If we decide to exchange knowledge, the problem is that the public domain exhausts all of our rights. It destroys the stewardship obligations that go with the knowledge,” he said.

Some of the indigenous peoples’ knowledge has been in the public domain for a long time, he explained, and allowed to be accessed for all these years, “but we never agreed to that,” he insisted. “We are not looking for monetary compensation but looking get the recognition of our right to control access.”

“We’ve held our traditional knowledge for thousands of years. It is ours,” said Barnes. “Then comes another peoples and we are colonised, why should we be held to a limitation to the knowledge control and the right to protect it?”

Optimum Outcome of the IGC, Carveout from Public Domain

One outcome of the IGC would be the identification of certain kinds of TK associated with GR, TK and TCEs that could be protected in perpetuity, some carved out of the public domain, said Hardison. “We don’t think all can, and we are open to discussion on what is protectable and what is not.”

“We are interested in creation and creativity too and some tribes and indigenous peoples would like to engage in this and some won’t, that is their business,” said Hardison. “For those who engage in it we don’t want the price of that to be the public domain, and that’s how it works.”

In the world system today, “there are very few examples of intangible cultural heritage laws which treat our knowledge in this holistic way,” Hardison said, adding, “what we have is IP law.”

“Our problem is if we ever exchange knowledge with an outsider in any way, the second we exchange it, it falls within the IP regime. We’ve never had a chance to negotiate that. We are not considered in the Berne convention [Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works], or any other WIPO conventions,” he noted.

“We know all cannot be protected but we want a regime to respect our rights where it can, and have that discussion about what can be protected and what can’t. We never put it in the public domain. That was the colonizers who put it in there for us.”

Common Thread, but Common Positions Hard to Achieve

“We might have different views on how we might get there, to achieve certain outcomes,” said Walker.”Circumstances might be different in different countries.”

“Some issues are easier than others,” said Hardison, Part of the problem is financial support, he said. Indigenous groups “are only funded for the minimum amount of time,” he said. “For example, we get three hours on Sunday before the meeting to meet together. That is not a lot of time to start working out common positions, especially on the kind of things that we have now.”

“It has gotten better now that we have translation, generally, coordinated by DoCip (Indigenous Peoples’ Center for Documentation, Research and Information),” he said. “But it is still hard to talk cross-culturally.”

“You need to have the resources back at home,” said Walker. “Getting prepared for those meetings is very difficult because generally you have your other obligations to your organization or to the people back home. Often you don’t have the time or the resources to get around and start consulting everyone to get a unified view or to get other opinions or inputs,” Walker said.

Barnes said that getting a common view was a tough exercise. “Whether or not we like it, we have some indigenous peoples who are paid more, given more funds and they are more willing to cooperate, whereas some of us refuse those funds and they want to retain their property.”

This Interview originally appeared at

www.ip-watch.org

National Congress of American Indians Joins National Action to Realize the Dream March

Source: Native News Network

WASHINGTON – Fifty years after the March on Washington where the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered one of the most dynamic speeches of the last century on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, thousands are expected to be in Washington on Saturday, August 24, for the National Action to Realize the Dream March & Rally.

In an act of solidarity, the National Congress of American Indians has partnered with the National Action Network, and numerous other national conveners, to help organize and assist in planning for this historic march and rally.

The March commemorates the 50th Anniversary of the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, where Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his famous ‘I Have a Dream’ speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.

The March will take place from 8:00 am until 2:00 pm on Saturday, August 24, and will focus on Jobs, Justice, Voting Rights and Freedom. In the wake of the Trayvon Martin tragedy, the Supreme Court’s decision impacting the Voting Rights Act (Shelby County v. Holder ), and the Baby Veronica adoption case – where the statutory requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act were wrongfully evaded – it is more important than ever for our collective voices to unite for justice and dignity for all people.

The National Congress of American Indians calls on friends and allies nationally to participate, and for those in the Washington DC area to volunteer for the March; bring their families and friends in a show of support; and to help spread the word. The National Action Network is requesting volunteers for the following areas:

Marshalls
Cleanup
Medical (licensed nurses to assist with health needs)
Volunteers are asked to contact the volunteer office at 800.311.7020 or by email at MLK50volunteers@gmail.com

Also, while the March will occur on Saturday, events are taking place beginning August 21 through August 28. Click here for the most up to date list of events throughout this week of mobilization.