Bill Overview
Title: Katimiîn and Ameekyáaraam Sacred Lands Act
Description: This bill takes approximately 1,031 acres of specified lands in Siskiyou and Humboldt Counties, California, into trust for the benefit of the Karuk Tribe. Land taken into trust may be used for traditional and customary uses for the benefit of the tribe. Additionally, the land taken into trust must allow for continued access by the Forest Service for managing the component of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System that flows through the land. The Department of Agriculture must enter into a memorandum of understanding with the tribe to establish mutual goals for the protection and enhancement of the river values of such component. Further, the bill prohibits gaming on the land taken into trust.
Sponsors: Rep. Huffman, Jared [D-CA-2]
Target Audience
Population: Members of the Karuk Tribe and associated stakeholders
Estimated Size: 5000
- The primary group impacted by this bill is the members of the Karuk Tribe, as the land is being taken into trust specifically for their benefit.
- The legislation may also impact other Native American tribes in the region slightly, through changes in land management practices that may serve as a precedent.
- The impact on the general American public is indirect, mainly involving the conservation and management of natural resources within the specified lands.
- The bill ensures continued access for the Forest Service, indicating that those involved in forest and river management will also be affected in terms of their management practices.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily benefits the Karuk Tribe and its members, who may see improvements in wellbeing due to better land management and preservation of cultural practices.
- People working in forest management will need to collaborate with the tribe, which might lead to a modest improvement in job satisfaction and sense of purpose.
- Local residents in Siskiyou and Humboldt Counties might not feel the effect directly but could experience indirect advantages from better-managed natural resources.
- Budget constraints mean that the benefits have to be efficiently managed and are unlikely to result in financial or economic gain outside of non-monetary improvements such as cultural preservation.
Simulated Interviews
Tribal Member and Cultural Advocate (Orleans, California)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a crucial step towards maintaining our culture and traditional practices.
- Having the land in trust ensures that our future generations will have a strong connection to their heritage.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Forester, Forest Service (Eureka, California)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This Act will require us to work closely with the Karuk Tribe, which might change some of our management practices.
- I see this as a positive change, as it aligns with conservation goals.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Student (Happy Camp, California)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy gives me hope that I can contribute to environmental sustainability as a part of my heritage.
- It also opens up opportunities to connect my studies with real-world applications on tribal land.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Local Business Owner (Weaverville, California)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the policy is good for the environment and the local community's rights.
- However, it might not directly affect my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Environmental Lawyer (Sacramento, California)
Age: 49 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act is a testament to recognizing the importance of sacred lands for tribes.
- It sets a precedent for future laws and collaborations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired Teacher (San Francisco, California)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel positive about the land going into trust, even though it's far from where I live.
- It's important to support these acts as they protect cultural heritage.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Graduate Student (Humboldt County, California)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The protection of sacred lands is essential for cultural research and preservation.
- This policy is a step in the right direction.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Farmer (Yreka, California)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm glad the tribe gets their land back, though I'm unsure how it'll affect agriculture in the area.
- It might influence how we work with local watersheds.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Wildlife Conservationist (McKinleyville, California)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The transfer of land may influence animal habitats positively.
- It’s good to see land management aligning with tribal wisdom.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Tourism Guide (Orick, California)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is likely beneficial for eco-tourism as it enhances land preservation.
- My clients value natural and culturally significant landscapes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $200000 (Low: $150000, High: $250000)
Year 2: $100000 (Low: $80000, High: $120000)
Year 3: $100000 (Low: $80000, High: $120000)
Year 5: $100000 (Low: $80000, High: $120000)
Year 10: $100000 (Low: $80000, High: $120000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The primary focus is preserving the land for cultural and traditional use by the Karuk Tribe.
- Ensures continued access for the Forest Service, facilitating current river and land management efforts.
- Prohibition on gaming may limit potential revenue streams from the land.