Top Story Archives - Page 147 of 157

As casinos struggle, tribes seek more federal aid

Once the envy of Indian Country for its billion-dollar casino empire, the tribe that owns the Foxwoods Resort Casino has been struggling through a financial crisis and pursuing more revenue from an unlikely source: U.S. government grants.

By Michael Melia, Associated Press

LEDYARD, Conn. — Once the envy of Indian Country for its billion-dollar casino empire, the tribe that owns the Foxwoods Resort Casino has been struggling through a financial crisis and pursuing more revenue from an unlikely source: U.S. government grants.

The money provided annually to the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation through the Interior Department and the Department of Health and Human Services has risen over the last five years to more than $4.5 million, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press through the Freedom of Information Act. One former tribal employee says department leaders were encouraged to offset dwindling resources by seeking more federal grants.

The Pequots, who once distributed stipends exceeding $100,000 annually to adult members, are not alone among gaming tribes seeking more federal aid. Several, including the owner of Foxwoods’ rival Connecticut casino, the Mohegan Sun, say they have been pursuing more grants – a trend that critics find galling because the law that gave rise to Indian casinos was intended to help tribes become financially self-sufficient.

“The whole purpose of the 1988 law which authorized Indian casinos was to help federally-recognized tribes raise money to run their governments by building casinos on their reservations,” said Robert Steele, a former Congressman from Connecticut. “I would argue strongly that federal money was meant for struggling tribes. Certainly the Mashantucket Pequots and the Mohegans couldn’t under any circumstances be put in that category.”

As long as they have federal recognition, casino-owning tribes are eligible for the same grant programs as the larger tribes based on large, poverty-stricken reservations in the American West. The grants, which don’t need to be paid back, support tribal governments by paying for programs such as health screenings, road maintenance and environmental preservation.

“The Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation is proud of the work they do with the use of federal funds when it comes to assisting the region and fellow Native Americans,” said Bill Satti, a tribal spokesman, who said the grants have supported the tribe’s medical clinic and repair work on local roadways.

Thomas Weissmuller, who was chief judge of the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Court until 2011, said that near the end of his tenure the tribal council said they had distributed too much money to members and urged department leaders to pursue more federal grants. He said there was resistance from some council members, who raised questions about the effects on sovereignty, but he was personally encouraged to pursue grants by officials including the tribal chairman, Rodney Butler.

Weissmuller said he was not comfortable seeking such assistance for the tribal court system because most of the issues it dealt with were related to the casino, which is essentially a commercial enterprise.

“A billion-dollar gaming enterprise should fully fund the tribal government,” said Weissmuller, who said that he was forced out of the job by tribal officials who told him he did not appear to have the tribe’s interests at heart on other matters.

The reversal of fortunes for the Pequots began around 2008, when Foxwoods completed a major, costly expansion with the 30-story MGM Grand hotel and casino just as the recession began to show its teeth. The following year the tribe defaulted on debt exceeding $2 billion.

Since then, the tribe of some 900 people in rural southeastern Connecticut has ended its member stipends. The Pequots have kept some other benefits in place, covering payments for members pursuing higher education and offering supplemental pay for tribal members taking entry-level jobs at the casino.

The federal grants provided to the Pequots through the Interior Department and its Bureau of Indian Affairs, meanwhile, rose from $1 million in 2008 to $2.7 million in 2011, with partial records for 2012 showing $1.7 million in grants for the year. Grants provided to the Pequots through the Indian Health Service, a division of Health and Human Services, increased gradually from $1.7 million in 2008 to $1.9 million in 2012. That money is to support health care services such as community health, nutrition, substance abuse treatment and pharmacy services.

The federal money opened the door to scrutiny by the FBI, whose investigation of tribal finances led to the January indictments of the tribe’s treasurer, Steven Thomas, and his brother Michael Thomas, a former tribal chairman. The two are accused of stealing a combined $800,000 in tribal money and federal grants. The tribal council has expressed full confidence in its treasurer.

Mohegan Tribe officials said they took pride in refusing federal grants for years, in acknowledgment that there were needier tribes. But tribal officials said they had relaxed that position as their Mohegan Sun casino, like Foxwoods, has faced growing gambling competition from neighboring states.

“It’s a sign of the times. Everybody is” seeking grants, Mohegan Chairman Bruce “Two Dogs” Bozsum said. “There’s some that we qualify for and it helps us to keep everybody healthy and working. At the end of the day, why shouldn’t we apply for it? If we get approved, it’s always for a good cause, usually health or jobs created.”

Tribal officials said they receive modest grants to contribute to the cost of health care for their 2,000 members.

The tribe that owns the Soaring Eagle Casino and Resort in Michigan, one of the country’s largest Indian casinos outside of Connecticut, has been aggressively pursuing grants in areas including environmental protection and health services as it struggles with the weak economy, according to Sylvia Murray, grants and contracts manager for the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe.

Sam Deloria, director of the American Indian Graduate Center in Albuquerque, N.M., said he has no issue with tribes pursuing grants for which they are eligible. It’s no different, he said, from the state of Alaska participating in federal programs despite the annual payouts to residents from the state’s oil savings account.

As the federal money reflects financial distress for gaming tribes, however, he does worry that their struggles ultimately could have a ripple effect throughout Indian Country and affect the ability of tribes to participate in the marketplace.

“It has got to raise a set of issues that either in the courts, or in the Congress, or in the marketplace, eventually it will get people looking at tribal participation in business in a different light,” he said.

Chile’s Crimson Shore Under Investigation

Source: Indian Country Today Media Network

Thousands of dead sea creatures blanket the southern shores of Chile. photo: AP

Thousands of dead prawns washed ashore along with hundreds of dead crabs, blanketing the beaches of southern Chile in crimson.

These massive mounds of dead sea creatures on the shores of Coronel Bay are extremely disturbing to all, but the cause of death is still unknown and under investigation.

Chilean fishermen are accusing local thermoelectric plants for heating the waters while using it as a cooling agent for their generators. In an article by the Associated Press, Chilean prosecutor Ana Maria Aldana, told state television, “We’re going to be collecting as much evidence as possible to determine if this is an environmental crime.”

However, others believe this may have been caused by El Niño, a weather phenomenon that occasionally warms the Pacific Ocean, according to BBC News.

Endesa Chile, the country’s largest electric utility company, is rejecting any blame. The company said studies indicate these deaths are “due to the flow of deep waters coming from the continental platform, induced by currents of wind on the ocean,” the Associated Press reported. Experts are testing the water’s temperature and oxygen levels in search of an explanation.

Whether it’s due to a natural phenomenon or man-made pollution, local fishermen are worried about the future of their livelihood.

“The way everything is being destroyed here, come the high season in November, we’re already thinking we won’t have anything to take from the sea,” Marisol Ortega, a spokeswoman for the fishermen, told BBC News.

This is reminiscent of some of the bizarre, massive sea creature die-offs in Indian Country, such as the millions of lifeless sardines that floated into the Redondo Beach Harbor of southern California in 2011 and last year’s colossal fish kill on the Canadian shores of Lake Erie.

Historic Federal Lawsuit Dealing with Removal of Indian Children Filed on Behalf of Lakota

Levi Rickert, editor-in-chief in Native Currents, http://www.nativenewsnetwork.com

RAPID CITY, SOUTH DAKOTA – Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union Thursday filed a lawsuit on behalf of three American Indian parents, the Oglala Sioux Tribe and Rosebud Sioux Tribe for the illegal removal of Indian children from American Indian families in the US District Court in Rapid City, South Dakota.

ACLU and Tribal Leaders at Court House

The 39 page lawsuit pertains to the lack of adequate hearings when American Indian children are removed from their familial home.

In one case cited in the lawsuit, one custodial hearing lasted a mere 60 seconds. American Indian parents were not even allowed or permitted to see the court papers. The judge signed the documents to remove the children within in seconds.

The case has been in the making for months as American Civil Liberties Union attorneys reviewed the circumstances surrounding the procedures used in the Pennington Court system.

“This case is not about numbers, this case is about the procedural fairness,”

stated Stephen Pevar, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney.

“This lawsuit seeks to put an end to disgraceful and unlawful practices that unfortunately have been standard practice in Pennington County, South Dakota, for a long time.”

Signs say it all

Outside of the Andrew W. Bogue Federal Building in Rapid City, American Indians began to gather to protest shortly before 9:00 am. Facing brisk temperatures on the second day of spring that were in the low 20s, some 100 tribal members stood outside the federal building as the attorneys and Oglala Sioux Tribe President Bryan V. Brewer, Sr. went inside to file the lawsuit.

“This is the first step. Our children have been abused for far too long,”

stated President Brewer outside before he went into the federal building to file the lawsuit with American Civil Liberties Union attorneys.

“ This has to stop, we will not tolerate this any longer. Today is a historic day.”

People carried signs that read: “Protect our children from the state” and “No more exploitation of Indian children.”

Several tribal members were visibly upset as they took the microphone to tell their stories of how children were removed from their homes without due process by county or state of South Dakota officials.

Mary Black Bonnet, 38, a tribal citizen of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, spoke about being removed from her family when she was only 18 months old and adopted by a non-Indian family and ended up in Niles, Michigan.

“I fought for 22 years to get back to my people. I kept telling myself, “I have to get away from these crazy people.” I wanted to get back to my people,”

referring to her natural, American Indian family. As she spoke, her daughter clung to her.

Mary Black Bonnet – Rosebud Sioux

Some of the attendees discussed how the state of South Dakota and Pennington County officials have ignored the Indian Child Welfare Act, ICWA, that was passed by Congress in 1978 in response to the large number of American Indian children who removed from their homes in at disproportionate rates.

“This hits the heart of our tribe. With this lawsuit we want to see our rights that ICWA should guarantee to us. Pennington County is violating our rights,”

stated Juanita Scherich, ICWA director for the Oglala Sioux Tribe.

“I had to witness the actual filing of this lawsuit. This is so historic,”

said Sheris Red Feather, whose son, Patrick, committed suicide while in the custody of the State of South Dakota when he was 15.

She went upstairs of the federal building to watch the filing of the lawsuit at the federal court by the lawyers and President Brewer.

Tribal Councilors Robin LaBeau and Robert Walters of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe attended the event to demonstrate the support of their Tribe to the lawsuit.

“We are here to support this lawsuit 100 percent. It comes down to our support of all Lakota children,”

Native Americans march against coal trains

Idle No More
by LOR MATSUKAWA / KING 5 News, kgw.com, March 22, 2013

SEATTLE — Two-hundred Native Americans and their supporters marched through Seattle during Thursday night’s rush hour to protest proposed coal trains that would pass through the city on their way to a shipping terminal planned to be built near Bellingham.

The group called “Idle No More” represented several tribes who support the Lummi Nation, which opposes the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal because they say it would hurt the environment.

“There’s wind energy, there’s solar enegy, there’s tidal energy,” said one of the event organizers, Olivia One Feather of the Standing Rock Nation. “Now is the time to come together and brainstorm on what we can do to move past coal.”

The group rallied at Westlake Park before following a police escort to the headquarters of SSA Marine on Harbor Island. SSA Marine is the terminal’s developer. Senior Vice President Bob Waters said the company respects the right of people to express their opinions. He said the $700,000 project is undergoing a “vigorous” environmental study co-lead by the Washington State Dept. of Ecology, Whatcom County and the Army Corps of Engineers. He said construction is easily “a couple years out.”

As the participants played drums and sang songs of healing, Shania Belgarde, a senior member of the Chippewa Nation, clapped along. Her message to government leaders: “I’d just like them to listen to us, the Native Americans. We need our land.”

Watch video coverage here.

Obama to designate national monument in San Juan Islands

“The San Juan Islands will become the third national monument in Washington, joining Mt. St. Helens and Hanford Reach.”

March 21, 2013 at 9:00 PM

Posted by Jim Brunner of Seattle Times

President Obama plans to designate a national monument in the San Juan Islands, handing a long-sought victory to island residents and members of Washington’s congressional delegation.

Obama will sign a proclamation Monday creating the monument, a White House official said Thursday. The action will provide permanent protections for nearly 1,000 acres of undeveloped federal lands on the islands, including Lopez Island’s Iceberg Point and Chadwick Hill and the Cattle Point Lighthouse on San Juan Island.

The news was hailed by members of Washington’s congressional delegation who had worked for years to preserve the lands.

“We’re very pleased because it’s such an incredible unique spot in the United States… it will be permanently protected for generations to come,” Democratic U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell said in an interview Thursday.

The lands that islanders had sought to preserve are already federally owned and overseen by the Bureau of Land Management. While there were no apparent plans for the government to sell or develop the properties, the monument designation offers virtual certainty they will remain protected in perpetuity.

U.S. Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Everett, credited “years of persistence” by environmental and business leaders who built a coalition to campaign for the monument.

“San Juan Islanders have been shouting from the rooftops for years: protect these lands. Well the president heard our message loud and clear,” Larsen said in a written statement.

U.S. Sen. Patty Murray thanked Obama and outgoing Interior Secretary Ken Salazar for the action, saying in a statement through her office the San Juan Islands will now “join our nation’s most iconic parks, wildlife refuges, and landmarks as a permanent, federally protected national monument.”

The president’s authority to create national monuments was given by the Antiquities Act of 1906, first utilized by President Theodore Roosevelt to designate Devils Tower National Monument in Wyoming. There are now more than 100 national monuments across the country, including the Grand Canyon, Statue of Liberty and Colorado’s Canyon of the Ancients.

The San Juan Islands will become the third national monument in Washington, joining Mt. St. Helens and Hanford Reach.

Along with the San Juans, Obama on Monday also will designate new national monuments in Delaware, Maryland and New Mexico, according to the White House.

Complicit in Killing the Earth: Of Pepsi Challenges and Democrats and Republicans

By Gyasi Ross, Indian Country Today Media Network

A few months ago—right up until Election Day—many of our people messaged and pontificated like crazy to point out that there are serious and profound differences between the two political parties. This past election was presented as the ultimate Pepsi Challenge©; in a blind-folded taste test, Native people chose Barack Obama and Democrats 2 to 1!!

A few years ago, I was one of those people—I worked on the President’s campaign and honestly thought that we were entering a new generation of progressive politics, where Democrats moved back to respecting our people and the Earth. But at that time, I didn’t get the punchline of the Pepsi Challenge, the fine print that we never hear on the commercials:

“Whichever you choose will still kill you.”

That is, whichever choice you make—Pepsi or Coke—both are horrible choices. YES, one might taste better to you—you dig the spiciness of Coke or prefer to catch the wave of Pepsi. Still, when you finish that refreshing can of pop, you’ve just ingested exactly the same high fructose corn syrup, brominated vegetable oils. Both brands will kill your teeth, makes you fat, causxe erectile dysfunction, etc etc…No matter which one you choose, both Coke AND Pepsi do that. Therefore, while one might be nominally better, they both kill you.

And just like pop kills Native people disproportionately, this Keystone XL pipeline will disproportionately affect Native sacred sites, unmarked Native grave sites, our aboriginal homelands.

We’re seeing that same scenario play out in politics with the Keystone XL Pipeline. The party that is supposed to be pro-environment, the Democrats, are working hand-in-hand with the party that unabashedly loves scorching the Earth, the Republicans, to absolutely kill any possibility of yours and my grandchildren and great-grandchildren having a quality of life that even remotely approaches ours.

Make no mistake, our grandchildren are screwed if this thing goes through. The Keystone XL pipeline and our dependence upon fossil fuels generally will ensure that. Think Soylent Green. Think Children of Men. Think Planet of the Apes, except with no talking apes (I don’t think). As we speak, the supposedly different Democrats and Republicans are conspiring together to kill the Earth, trample over Native burial grounds and sacred sites. In fairness, President Obama has noted that the Keystone XL pipeline is not a major job creator, and perhaps that will be a basis for rejecting this especially since some 68% of his voters disapprove of this project.

I hope so.

Still, as noted previously, the President effectively gave himself cover when the State Department rubber-stamped the environmental impact statement and said the pipeline would have “no significant impact to the environment,”

Pepsi and Coke will both kill us—there really is no choice. Instead, we need to drink water, a radical choice, in order to live. Similarly, we need to start earnestly looking for a radical option to the political parties that are killing us—the Green Party, Ralph Nader and Winona LaDuke, help us please!! Funny, the things that get characterized as “radical” are the ones that will keep us alive.

We fell for the political Pepsi Challenge—God help us all. God help our kids, Native and non-Native, even more—they’re gonna need it.

Contact your Senator — the information is here. Tell them “no.”

Gyasi Ross
Blackfeet Nation
Activist/Attorney/Author
Twitter: @BigIndianGyasi
www.cutbankcreekpress.com

Native American artists take back the headdress

“Appropriation of cultural Regalia, such as the war bonnet …causes sacred objects to lose their power when they are represented out of context,” wrote Luger in his artist statement.

By Marianne Combs

When Dyani White Hawk Polk asked a group of artists for work for her exhibition “Make it Pop,” she was looking for contemporary pieces responding to issues of the day.

“We’ve had somber exhibits, politically driven, fine art,” says White Hawk Polk, sitting at her desk in All My Relations Gallery. “I wanted this to feel more playful and cutting edge, something that really speaks to our youth and people interested in pop culture as well as fine art lovers.”

White Hawk Polk got what she was looking for; the colorful show reflects and comments on popular culture in a number of ways. Interestingly, two artists – Frank Buffalo Hyde and Cannupa Hanska Luger – chose to focus on an issue that has many Native Americans upset: the appropriation of Native Regalia by popular culture – in particular, the headdress.

"In-Appropriate 3," a painting by Frank Buffalo Hyde responding to the use of a Native American headdress and jewelry on a Victoria's Secret model at a fashion show held on November 7, 2012. — “In-Appropriate 3,” a painting by Frank Buffalo Hyde responding to the use of a Native American headdress and jewelry on a Victoria’s Secret model at a fashion show held on November 7, 2012.

White Hawk Polk says she wasn’t surprised.

“It’s always been an issue,” reflects White Hawk Polk. “It’s always been there, but this past year, year and a half, it’s just been prolific.”

Native Americans belong to many different tribes spread across Native North America. But the headdress, or war bonnet, is a universal symbol of great spiritual importance worn only by highly respected individuals.

Read full article and see photos here

Lawmakers offer bill to ban ‘Redskins’ trademark

Participate in the poll here!

By Ben Pershing,

Mar 20, 2013 08:52 PM EDT

The Washington Post Published: March 20

A group of U.S. House members has offered a bill that would prohibit the term “Redskins” from being trademarked, as the debate over the NFL team’s name expands from the legal system and the court of public opinion to Capitol Hill.

Del. Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa) has authored the Non-Disparagement of American Indians in Trademark Registrations Act of 2013, which would cancel all existing federal trademarks using “Redskins” to refer to Native Americans and prohibit future trademarks as well. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) — a critic of the team’s name — is an original co-sponsor, along with Reps. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) and Karen Bass (D-Calif.).

A Redskins spokesman said the team had no comment on the bill.

There is no guarantee that the measure will even receive a committee hearing in the House, much less a vote. But it comes at a sensitive time: Earlier this month in Alexandria, a three-judge panel on the federal Trademark Trial and Appeal Board heard arguments over whether the term Redskins should be considered a slur and therefore not worthy of trademark protection.

It could be a year, the Associated Press reported, before the judges issue a ruling in the case, which stems from a petition by five Native Americans. And even if the Redskins lost their trademark, they wouldn’t necessarily have to change their name. But it would be easier for other businesses and people to cut into the franchise’s profits by selling paraphernalia with the name on it.

Critics of the team’s name also spoke up during a forum last month at the National Museum of the American Indian, saying that the term is demeaning, and dismissing the franchise’s argument that the word is meant to honor Native Americans rather than disparage them.

For her part, Norton recently told the Hill newspaper that the Redskins “should consider” a new moniker. “I am a fan of the Redskins. I’m just not a fan of their name,” she said.

District Mayor Vincent Gray has also weighed in on the subject, albeit carefully.

“I would love to be able to sit down with the team … and see if a change should be made,” Gray said in January, though he later clarified that he simply meant the subject would likely be discussed if the Redskins were to move back to the RFK Stadium site, which is on federal land.

Markets pledge not to sell genetically-modified salmon

Whole Foods Market, Trader Joe’s are among those who won’t sell the engineered salmon despite an FDA finding that it would be as safe to eat as conventional salmon.

By Andrew Pollack, The New York Times

Several supermarket chains have pledged not to sell what could become the first genetically modified animal to reach the nation’s dinner plates — a salmon engineered to grow about twice as fast as normal.

The supermarkets — including Whole Foods Market, Trader Joe’s and Aldi — stated their policies in response to a campaign by consumer and environmental groups opposed to the fish. The groups are expected to announce the chains’ policies Wednesday. The supermarket chains have 2,000 stores in all, with 1,200 of them belonging to Aldi, which has outlets stretching from Kansas and Texas to the East Coast.

“Our current definition of sustainable seafood specifies the exclusion of genetically modified organisms,” a spokeswoman for Aldi said in a statement that also said the policy might evolve over time.

She said the company would not comment further.

The salmon is now awaiting approval from the Food and Drug Administration, which in December concluded that the fish would have “no significant impact” on the environment and would be as safe to eat as conventional salmon. The agency is accepting public comments on its findings until April 26.

Under existing FDA policies, the salmon, if approved, would probably not be labeled as genetically engineered. The agency has said that use of genetic engineering per se does not change a food materially.

The campaign by the environmental and consumer groups suggests that the salmon could have trouble winning acceptance in the market, assuming consumers could identify it.

“Consumers do not want to eat genetically engineered fish, and stores are starting to pick up on it,” said Eric Hoffman, food and technology policy campaigner for Friends of the Earth, one of the 30 organizations that sent letters to retailers asking them to promise not to carry the salmon.

Other organizations involved include the Center for Food Safety and Consumers Union.

Still, the 2,000 stores covered by the pledges so far represent only a small fraction of the estimated 36,500 U.S. supermarkets, and some already had policies against genetically engineered seafood. Whole Foods, which recently announced that all genetically engineered food sold in its stores would have to be labeled by 2018, caters to consumers more likely than most to pay higher prices to avoid genetically modified ingredients.

Hoffman said he was confident that other grocers, including some more mainstream ones, would sign on.

“We haven’t heard any solid noes from anyone,” he said.

Ronald L. Stotish, chief executive of AquaBounty Technologies, which developed the salmon, said of the pledges: “I would be disappointed, but it’s their right. No one will ever be forced to purchase our products.”

But he added, “We think we have a safe and healthy product that we hope will be given a chance to be fairly judged by consumers.”

The fish, the AquAdvantage salmon, is a farmed Atlantic salmon that contains a growth hormone gene from the chinook salmon and a genetic switch from the ocean pout that keeps the transplanted gene continuously active. The salmon can grow to market weight in as little as half the time required by other farmed Atlantic salmon, AquaBounty says.

Critics say that the fish has not been tested adequately for safety and that it might outcompete wild salmon for food or mates should it ever escape. AquaBounty says its fish are sterilized and would be grown in inland tanks, with little chance of escape.

The groups against the fish say that Marsh Supermarkets, with about 90 stores in Ohio and Indiana, and PCC Natural Markets, with nine stores in Washington state, had also agreed not to carry the genetically modified salmon. Marsh did not return calls seeking verification.

AquaBounty, which is based in Maynard, Mass., has been close to running out of money. Friday, shareholders approved the sale of new shares worth $6 million, which the company has said would be enough to keep it afloat for at least another year.

Most of the new shares are being acquired by the Intrexon Corp., bringing its stake in AquaBounty to 53.8 percent. Intrexon specializes in synthetic biology, an advanced form of genetic engineering, and is controlled by Randal J. Kirk, a biotechnology entrepreneur.

Effecting Change for Future Generations on National Native HIV/AIDS Awareness Day

By Jessica Danforth, Indian Country Today Media Network

“The beginning of sexually transmitted infections laying siege upon Indigenous peoples’ self-determination occurred when Columbus’s syphilis infected crew sexually terrorized Indigenous women over 500 years ago. HIV has become the latest procession of this colonial legacy, linking violence to infection. Today, the responsibility of defending our self-determination against ongoing colonialism is an active right of Native peoples, but one that includes a call for accountability of non-Natives to claim. National Native HIV/AIDS Awareness Day is therefore a time when the gravity of this story and the strength of our efforts toward healing & health is most appropriate when observed by Natives and non-Natives alike.” —INSPIRE HIV Prevention, Initiative of Native Sisters Preventing Infectious Risks through Empowerment

2011 National Native HIV/AIDS Awareness Day red balloon release on the San Carlos Apache Reservation in Arizona. (National Native American HIV/AIDS Awareness Day Facebook)

Awareness days exist for many issues these days—for different types of cancers, to bullying, even bird-feeding and fair trade. While awareness and information sharing are important tenants of social change, what do these days really mean on the ground? How do we concretely effect change in one day alone?

Jessica Danforth, executive director of the Native Youth Sexual Health Network

This was a recent conversation we had at the Native Youth Sexual Health Network prior to National Native HIV/AIDS Awareness Day on March 20. In any given week our staff and youth leaders are working front-line in Indigenous communities throughout North America and it’s usually a time of the year we get more requests to speak to the realities of HIV and AIDS in our communities. And again, while this is critical and a great opportunity, we recently reflected on how far-reaching the issues of HIV/AIDS are to not just do prevention messaging but to specifically address historical traumas while not being solely relegated to deficit or disease control models of doing things. A common saying we have at NYSHN is that as Indigenous peoples or youth we aren’t “at risk” all alone, which is how we often have to read about ourselves. Colonization, racism, and not having access to culturally safe care are what actually put our lives at risk.

So what’s the importance of having a conversation like this on an awareness day to effect change? Krysta Williams, our advocacy and outreach coordinator, shared her perspective:

“The day is still important not only because of the issues of stigma and discrimination still faced by people living with HIV but because we are at a point where things will stay the same—annual events that talk about stats—or they will radically shift with the leadership of young Native people who are calling for more than just awareness. Every workshop we do we get more questions, they want to hear what else can be done, more than just knowing the facts but what are our options after diagnosis, how to improve quality of life and generally a big WHY about discrimination and stigma, even in the face of knowing the facts and having access to treatment.

“We are also seeing that it’s us as communities, nations and families that need to take charge—not the law, or mainstream public health or the AIDS industrial complex—but us. We aren’t waiting for a magical solution but actively making the real change of moving towards doing things our way, treating people with respect and love.”

I remember finding out when the first National Native HIV/AIDS Awareness Day happened and how appreciative I felt that there was finally a day where we could actually speak to what is specifically happening in our own Native communities—rather than being pressured to again join the line of “high risk statistic populations”. I spoke to Robert Foley, president and CEO of the National Native American HIV/AIDS Prevention Center, about the significance of the history of when the awareness day started:

“The first National Native HIV/AIDS Awareness Day was held on March 20, 2007, and was a collaborative effort between the National Native American HIV/AIDS Prevention Center, Colorado State University Commitment to Action for 7th-Generation Awareness & Education: HIV/AIDS Prevention Project (CA7AE: HAPP), and the Inter-tribal Council of Arizona with support from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). It takes place on the first day of spring each year as it was believed that this day best exemplifies the ceremonies that occurred on the Spring Equinox for American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian peoples—celebrations of growth, rebirth, healing and rejuvenation. The day was created in order to draw attention to the impact that HIV is having on Native people, and create an opportunity to commit resources and energy to ending this epidemic—both from the community side and the government side.

At the time when National Native HIV/AIDS Awareness Day was created, there were other national awareness days that had been diffused, and they have been shown to be an effective method to highlight the epidemic in certain communities. The National Native American HIV/AIDS Prevention Center, Colorado State University and the Inter-tribal Council of Arizona wanted to ensure that Native communities received the benefit of these efforts and the government contribute resources to make it happen. They created the day, but the real efforts were to lobby the CDC to recognize it, support it and dedicate monies to support the creation and diffusion of Native Awareness Day materials.”

I think it’s this history in lobbying and advocacy it took to create National Native HIV/AIDS Awareness Day in the first place that we can rally around this coming March 20 and build our collective strength from the ground up. More than just another awareness day, it’s a time of the year to make the realities of HIV/AIDS real for everyone, not just because of heightened statistics or risks but because our youth are asking us to remember the possibilities for change this day can have if we do make it real. As Shea Norris, member of the National Native HIV/AIDS Youth Council (NNYC-HIV) told me:

“I think part of the day represents being seen—within our communities, tribes, nations and internationally—as Native peoples. It’s a day to remember community members that have been lost and look forward to educating our peoples. It’s also to open discussions and reduce stigmas, taboos, and stereotypes. What I hope this day brings is awareness for not just anybody but for the youth, to give them as much knowledge as possible so that they can take the next step and educate their peers so that their peers can educate the next generation.”

Jessica Danforth is the founder and executive director of the Native Youth Sexual Health Network.