BigHornRam
Well-known member
First the USFWS refuse to turn management of the wolves over to the states, and now they re-neg on their agreements with the CSKT over management of the National Bison Range. Is this another case of the Feds know best or proof of their heavy handed ways?
FWS pulls National Bison Range pact
By PERRY BACKUS of the Missoulian
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officially pulled its controversial agreement with the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes for shared management of the National Bison Range on Monday, saying the tribes have failed to live up to their responsibilities and have created an unacceptable workplace environment.
Tribal officials said the announcement was unexpected and denied the allegations contained in FWS Regional Director Mitch King's letter.
“It's taken us off guard. We were in the middle of something and trying to make it work,” said CSKT Tribal Council Chairman James Steele Jr.
King's letter said the agency was terminating negotiations for future annual funding agreements.
The letter ordered the tribes to immediately stop performing any activities at the Bison Range, return all FWS equipment, and withdraw all CSKT employees, contractors and volunteers from the refuge by the end of the workday Tuesday.
The decision marked the end of months of negotiations between the tribes and the Fish and Wildlife Service over future management of the National Bison Range.
The two entered into an agreement in 2004 that split management duties beginning in 2006. King's letter said the FWS wanted to continue that agreement into 2007 with some minor revisions, but the tribes argued for more management control.
After the 2006 agreement expired Sept. 30, the FWS agreed to extend it while negotiations continued.
The tribes sought a phased takeover of the refuge, which sits in the heart of the Flathead Indian Reservation, under provisions of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. The legislation allows tribes to apply to manage certain federal public lands where they can show a cultural, historical or geographic connection.
Matt Kales, a regional FWS spokesperson from Denver, said the legislation allows the government to sign annual funding agreements with tribes to manage selected federal lands.
While there are similar arrangements in other parts of the country, this agreement was the most far reaching, he said.
A report last summer indicated the tribes weren't satisfactorily accomplishing the work that had been agreed upon. The tribes vehemently disagreed with that report.
Kales said the FWS attempted to provide some leeway because this was the first year of the program, but the situation at the refuge continued to deteriorate. After a lengthy review, Kales said the tribes were not meeting management obligations and were creating a hostile work environment for FWS employees.
King's letter said the work environment was characterized by “harassing, offensive, intimidating and oppressive behavior on the part of the employees of the CSKT, including obscenity, fighting words and threats of violence and retaliation directed at employees of the Service.”
The decision was made at the “highest level” of the FWS that dual management of the refuge was not tenable, Kales said.
“This wasn't a hasty or whimsical decision,” he said.
Steele said the tribes don't agree with the Fish and Wildlife Service's reasons for terminating the agreement. This was the first time that anyone in the tribes had seen some of the allegations in King's letter, he said.
The FWS should have attempted to work within the guidelines established in the annual funding agreement to address the management issues with the tribes, he said.
“The AFA spells out ways of doing that,” Steele said. “There were ways to notify us and allow us to sit down and talk about these issues.”
The tribes are in the process of putting together a response to the allegations, and will appeal the decision, Steele said. In the short term, the tribes will attempt to find other work for the employees displaced by the federal government's action.
Steele said it's ironic that the FWS has decided the tribes are unable to manage the bison at the National Bison Range since the herd is descended from the Pablo-Allard herd cared for 100 years ago by tribal members.
“For the Fish and Wildlife Service to say to us that the Salish and Kootenai people do not know how to handle bison is just an ironic statement,” Steele said. “If it wasn't for the tribal connection, this herd likely wouldn't have been here in the first place.”
Tribal council member Steve Lozar said he grew up in Dixon in the “shadow of the Bison Range. I was one of those little kids who went over to see Big Medicine (a famous white bison) after school. When I see what's happening here, it absolutely hurts my heart. It's just wrong.”
The refuge management change was opposed by 129 refuge managers, by nearly 50 different environmental groups, and by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.
PEER's refuge keeper, Grady Hocutt, was a wildlife refuge manager for 30 years.
He says the agreement was a poor idea pushed by political appointees under duress and could have set a precedent harmful to the entire national wildlife refuge system.
Still, Hocutt didn't see the government's decision to pull the agreement as a victory. Too many people have been hurt, and it's going to take time for that to heal, he said.
There are other avenues for the tribes to be involved with management of those lands, including cooperative agreements and contracting, Hocutt said.
FWS pulls National Bison Range pact
By PERRY BACKUS of the Missoulian
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officially pulled its controversial agreement with the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes for shared management of the National Bison Range on Monday, saying the tribes have failed to live up to their responsibilities and have created an unacceptable workplace environment.
Tribal officials said the announcement was unexpected and denied the allegations contained in FWS Regional Director Mitch King's letter.
“It's taken us off guard. We were in the middle of something and trying to make it work,” said CSKT Tribal Council Chairman James Steele Jr.
King's letter said the agency was terminating negotiations for future annual funding agreements.
The letter ordered the tribes to immediately stop performing any activities at the Bison Range, return all FWS equipment, and withdraw all CSKT employees, contractors and volunteers from the refuge by the end of the workday Tuesday.
The decision marked the end of months of negotiations between the tribes and the Fish and Wildlife Service over future management of the National Bison Range.
The two entered into an agreement in 2004 that split management duties beginning in 2006. King's letter said the FWS wanted to continue that agreement into 2007 with some minor revisions, but the tribes argued for more management control.
After the 2006 agreement expired Sept. 30, the FWS agreed to extend it while negotiations continued.
The tribes sought a phased takeover of the refuge, which sits in the heart of the Flathead Indian Reservation, under provisions of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. The legislation allows tribes to apply to manage certain federal public lands where they can show a cultural, historical or geographic connection.
Matt Kales, a regional FWS spokesperson from Denver, said the legislation allows the government to sign annual funding agreements with tribes to manage selected federal lands.
While there are similar arrangements in other parts of the country, this agreement was the most far reaching, he said.
A report last summer indicated the tribes weren't satisfactorily accomplishing the work that had been agreed upon. The tribes vehemently disagreed with that report.
Kales said the FWS attempted to provide some leeway because this was the first year of the program, but the situation at the refuge continued to deteriorate. After a lengthy review, Kales said the tribes were not meeting management obligations and were creating a hostile work environment for FWS employees.
King's letter said the work environment was characterized by “harassing, offensive, intimidating and oppressive behavior on the part of the employees of the CSKT, including obscenity, fighting words and threats of violence and retaliation directed at employees of the Service.”
The decision was made at the “highest level” of the FWS that dual management of the refuge was not tenable, Kales said.
“This wasn't a hasty or whimsical decision,” he said.
Steele said the tribes don't agree with the Fish and Wildlife Service's reasons for terminating the agreement. This was the first time that anyone in the tribes had seen some of the allegations in King's letter, he said.
The FWS should have attempted to work within the guidelines established in the annual funding agreement to address the management issues with the tribes, he said.
“The AFA spells out ways of doing that,” Steele said. “There were ways to notify us and allow us to sit down and talk about these issues.”
The tribes are in the process of putting together a response to the allegations, and will appeal the decision, Steele said. In the short term, the tribes will attempt to find other work for the employees displaced by the federal government's action.
Steele said it's ironic that the FWS has decided the tribes are unable to manage the bison at the National Bison Range since the herd is descended from the Pablo-Allard herd cared for 100 years ago by tribal members.
“For the Fish and Wildlife Service to say to us that the Salish and Kootenai people do not know how to handle bison is just an ironic statement,” Steele said. “If it wasn't for the tribal connection, this herd likely wouldn't have been here in the first place.”
Tribal council member Steve Lozar said he grew up in Dixon in the “shadow of the Bison Range. I was one of those little kids who went over to see Big Medicine (a famous white bison) after school. When I see what's happening here, it absolutely hurts my heart. It's just wrong.”
The refuge management change was opposed by 129 refuge managers, by nearly 50 different environmental groups, and by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.
PEER's refuge keeper, Grady Hocutt, was a wildlife refuge manager for 30 years.
He says the agreement was a poor idea pushed by political appointees under duress and could have set a precedent harmful to the entire national wildlife refuge system.
Still, Hocutt didn't see the government's decision to pull the agreement as a victory. Too many people have been hurt, and it's going to take time for that to heal, he said.
There are other avenues for the tribes to be involved with management of those lands, including cooperative agreements and contracting, Hocutt said.
