The Jefferson County Commissioners today published a draft of a new version of the letter about their level of support for the proposal to transfer the two National Wildlife Refuges into the sovereign nation of the Jamestown S’Kallam tribe. The final letter would have been sent to U.S. Representative Emily Randall, the politician who has bought into this proposal on behalf of the Tribe, and who has done zero public engagement on this issue. The Commissioners debated the issue and ultimately, after debate, the Commissioners decided not to send the letter and simply pass along the written comments to Representative Randall. This is a positive step, allowing Randall to go get the public input she should have done all along. Randall’s junior status as a Representative has been on display during this entire process, and we are hoping she has learned something from this.
The draft letter significantly tempered their support, clarifying a few key points. For sake of the public understanding the debate, here’s points from the draft letter:
Public Input:
“One central piece of input we’ ve gotten from residents of Jefferson County is a desire for more public engagement about this proposal.” – That is perhaps an understatement.
Importance of the lands in question:
“These sites are not only central to the Tribe’ s heritage but are also integral to the ecological health and quality of life for our entire region.”
Is title transfer necessary?
“…there is concern about losing protections provided with oversight by the USFWS.” Finally the Commissioners are recognizing the very real concerns that moving these lands into sovereign nation status would possibly create.
Hope instead of concrete assurances from the Tribe:
“It is our sense (emphasis mine) that if the island were transferred into trust, the Tribe would continue to manage it to a standard that would meet or exceed federal requirements.” There is absolutely no guarantee that is being given nor could one be enforced if promised once the lands are transferred. It is all based on faith that nothing would ever change. The very fact that this transfer is being considered now is proof enough that some future tribal council would decide on a very different use of Protection Island and Dungeness Spit.
Admission of commercial concerns:
“However, we’ve also heard concerns from several constituents that the Tribe may take a more business- forward approach in managing Protection Island and, in neighboring Clallam County, Dungeness Spit Refuge lands.” Never heard the use of “Business-forward” to describe actual conversion of tide lands into an aquaculture farm before. Also they heard from constituents as if this is a secret project of the Tribe. The Tribe has been very open about this and it has been known publicly for many years. Are the Commissioners that out of touch? Or are they wanting to blame the opposition to the transfer for somehow bringing the Commissioners new information? The answer is “yes” they are trying to blame opponents of the transfer. They did so in the next paragraph:
The Opposition:
“…we have observed a recurring argument among some opponents who use the phrase “public land in public hands” to justify federal retention. Within the context of our region’ s history, there is a certain irony and arrogance in this framing. It overlooks the historical reality of colonization and the systemic dispossession of Indigenous peoples from their ancestral lands. To claim these areas are only ” public” when under federal control ignores the thousands of years of stewardship practiced by Tribes prior to European arrival.”
The opposition doesn’t claim that the lands are “public lands”, they are public by definition. The legal national definition of “public lands” which the Commissioners themselves should be aware of is this Statutory definition: Under 43 U.S.C. § 1702, “any land and interest in land owned by the United States within the several States and administered by the Secretary of the Interior through the Bureau of Land Management… except... Outer Continental Shelf; and lands held for the benefit of Indians, Aleuts, and Eskimos.”, as stated in the U.S. Code. General federal usage: Commonly refers to all real property owned collectively by the American people and managed by various federal stewardship branches.
The opposition doesn’t appear to be ignoring the historical reality, and anyway, what does that have to do with the proposed transfer of these lands to the Tribe? Does the historical reality dictate that we give back the Wildlife Refuges we fought so hard to create by keeping them from “business forward” real estate development? If there is any irony to be found at all in this it is that the Tribe, who claims to have the protection of these wildlife refuges as their reason for doing it, are already engaged in putting a commercial oyster farm of up to 80000 bags of oysters against the very shores of the Dungeness Spit, burying the bottom where many of the birds we are protecting feed.
Who are these two refuges supposed to be for? They were established to recognize that before the Europeans arrived, and actually before the tribes arrived, this island and Spit were “owned” by the wildlife on them. The birds. The American public are currently protecting the habitat of these animals for all of humanity, not just for a “business-forward” entity, no matter who they are or however many generations they have been here.
Given the definition of the Commissioners in this ill worded paragraph, then *all* lands in the U.S. are not public or somehow deserve to be given back to all tribes because we took them all.
The Commissioners should strike that paragraph. It serves no purpose other than add fuel to the idea that somehow anyone opposing this is anti-tribe or racist. The opposition simply wants this co-management to continue.
Finally
“For these reasons, Jefferson County urges the delegation to carefully consider these complexities before advancing the Act.” As usual, when confronted with public opposition, the politicians decided to simply ask for more information and public input by Representative Randall.
To the public and Commissioners, let me simply state that I know the opposition people quite well. Virtually all of them have worked for and possibly even donated to your campaigns. Most of them own homes and businesses in Jefferson County. They pay taxes to this county. They appreciate that you listen to them as well as you listen to the Tribe, a sovereign nation demanding something that no one but them has asked to be given away.
Here is the DRAFT letter
Filed under: Around the Salish Sea, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Government, Jefferson County, legislation, Protection Island, Straits of Juan de Fuca, Washington State | Tagged: County Commissioners, U.S. Representative Emily Randall | 1 Comment »





