Incorporating Indigenous Partnerships in Vegetation Management Wabitsabi Nanna to Care for Each

1. Incorporating Indigenous Partnerships
in Vegetation Management:
WABITSABI NANNA – to care for each other
Presented by M.K. Youngblood – ACRT Pacific safety manager

2. Abstract
Incorporating indigenous partnerships in vegetation management
regarding current modes of execution within the utility fieldwork,
specifically in California where recent wildfires have raged into
cataclysmic monsters threatening all lands: Indigenous, private,
State, and Federal.
A mixed method strategy of qualitative and quantitative analyses
will be conducted using case studies, personal interviews, and
data review to develop a balanced plan for future generations.
While Western Society tends to put more validity in words written
by academics with degrees designated by letters on present-day
versions of papyrus and sinew, the lack of indigenous partnerships
and knowledge of the land tended for thousands of years has led
our current society into an upcoming apocalypse.
Based upon the information gathered in the paper and its
subsequent findings, it is recommended that the vegetation
management field is more inclusive of indigenous partnerships
and place them in the Unified Command aspect of the National
Incident Management System instead of stakeholders.

3. Overview
Looking at how indigenous knowledge and tribes can be
included in the Incident Command System as an integral
part of Unified Command instead of stakeholders.

4. History
Significant laws, statutes, and cases that have affected the relationship and
status of indigenous peoples and land in the United States
Papal Bull
Inter Caetera
Johnson v. McIntosh
Cherokee Nation v.
Georgia
1493 1823 1831
The Bull stated that any land
not inhabited by Christians was
available to be "discovered,"
claimed, and exploited by
Christian rulers and declared
that "the Catholic faith and the
Christian religion be exalted
and be everywhere increased
and spread, that the health of
souls be cared for and that
barbarous nations be
overthrown and brought to the
faith itself.
Chief Justice John Marshall
upholds the McIntosh family's
ownership of land purchased
from the federal government.
It reasons that since the federal
government now controls the
land, the Indians have only a
“right of occupancy” and hold
no title to the land.
The Supreme Court established
that tribes are “domestic,
dependent nations” and stated
that the relationship between
tribes
and the United States
“resembles that of a ward to
his guardian.”

5. History
Significant laws, statutes, and cases that have affected the relationship and
status of indigenous peoples and land in the United States
Cherokee Nation
v. Georgia
Worchester v.
Georgia
18 unratified
treaties of CA
Termination Act
1831 1832 1851-1892 1953
The Supreme Court
established that tribes are
“domestic, dependent
nations” and stated that
the relationship between
tribes
and the United States
“resembles that of a ward
to his guardian.”
The Supreme Court defined
the interactions between
tribes and states. The Court
held that states could not
impose their laws
or policies within Indian
territories absent consent
from the tribe or in
conformity with treaties or
acts of Congress.
United States Army forced
California's tribes to sign 18
treaties that relinquished
each tribe's rights to their
traditional lands in
exchange for reservations.
Due to pressure from
California representatives,
Congress failed to ratify the
treaties and ordered them
to remain secret.
From 1953-1964 109 tribes
were terminated and
federal responsibility and
jurisdiction were turned
over to state governments.
Approximately 2,500,000
acres of trust land was
removed from protected
status and 12,000 Native
Americans lost tribal
affiliation.

6. Making Fire Illegal
1850 Act for the Government and Protection of Indians
It outlawed intentional burning in California even
before it became a state.
• The National Forest Service determined “Indian burning”
was destructive and primitive with no value to the overall
health of the forest.
• For the next 100 years fires became more destructive due
to unchecked fuel loads.
• In 1968, after realizing that no new giant sequoias had
grown in California’s unburned forests, the National Park
Service changed its prescribed fire policy and in 1978 the
Forest Service followed suit.

7. Native American Leaders: Fire & Land Restoration
Ron Goode, Honorable
Chairman of the North Fork
Mono Tribe, is a staunch
proponent of cultural burning
and a well-respected subject
matter expert in cultural
burning practices.
Sage LaPena, Nomtipom
Wintu, is a Traditional
Ecological Knowledge (TEK)
practitioner with subject
matter expertise in
Ethnobotany and
Environmental studies
including restoration ecology
and watershed management.
Raymond John Gutierrez
Wuksachi, is part of the next
generation of indigenous
peoples advocating for
cultural burning and
restorative land stewardship.

8. Typical
Incident
Command
System

9. Inclusive
Incident
Command
System

10. Why is this so important?
By including indigenous knowledge and getting
tribal inclusion a “whole community” approach to
all-hazards planning can be achieved.
• Consistent with Homeland Security Presidential Directives
• Fosters increased trust within tribal communities towards
the government
• Shared understanding of community needs and
capabilities
• Greater empowerment and integration of resources from
across the community
• Stronger social infrastructure
• Establishment of relationships that facilitate more
effective prevention, protection, mitigation, response, and
recovery activities
• Increased individual and collective preparedness
• Greater resiliency at both the community and
national levels

11. Conclusion
Tribes using cultural burning techniques are aware and able to integrate into a
unified command structure for the mutual benefit of society, not just their own
through their knowledge of traditional cultural practices and integration into ICS.
This integration should be carried further into the private sector to coordinate with
utility companies as well as vegetation management companies on a local level.
When utilizing tribes in the planning and operations phases of vegetation
management, a whole community buy-in occurs, and fewer stressors result from
miscommunication or even lack of communication. However, this communication
must be at the ICS level and within the Unified Command structure, not at the
stakeholder level. In doing so, long delays can be mitigated upfront instead of
after the fact with cooperative agreements and MOUs. This is evident within
California where no ratified treaties exist, and Public Law 83-280 has muddied the
waters of land ownership, stewardship, and civil and criminal jurisdiction.

12. Does anyone have questions?

13. Resources
• Alec, Ron. Interview. Conducted by MK Youngblood on 31 July 2022.
• Atwell, Clarence “Kaya”. Interview. Conducted by MK Youngblood 16 Mar. 2011.
• https://oaks.cnr.berkeley.edu/california-oaks-and-deer/ 1992.
• https://www.bia.gov/service/tribal-leaders-directory/federally-recognized-tribes 2022.
• https://www.fire.ca.gov/media/4jandlhh/top20_acres.pdf 2021.
• https://www.karuk.us/index.php/departments/natural-resources/eco-cultural-
revitalization/wildland-fire-program 2015.
• https://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/nims/NIMS_core.pdf 2008.
• https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fseprd628285.pdf 2019.
• https://training.fema.gov/is/courseoverview.aspx?code=is-100.c&lang=en 2022.
• Goode, Ron. Interview. Conducted by MK Youngblood 16 Jan. 2011.
• Goode, Ron 2016 https://portal.knme.org/video/ron-goode-on-restoring-cultural-burning/
• National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) 2021.
• Reed, Ron Co-management as a Catalyst: Pathways to Post-colonial Forestry in the Klamath
Basin, California Human Ecology Vol. 44, No. 5 (OCTOBER 2016), pp. 533-546 (14 pages) Springer.
• Roos, Dave. 2021. Native Americans Used Fire to Protect and Cultivate Land Indigenous people
routinely burned land to drive, prey, clear underbrush, and provide pastures.
https://www.history.com/news/native-american-wildfire.
• Peck, Douglas T. “Re-Examination of Spanish Colonial Period Documents Related to Prehistoric
Maya History and Mythology.” Revista de Historia de América, no. 136, Jan. 2005, pp. 21–35.
EBSCOhost, https://search-ebscohost-
com.fresno.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=31h&AN=27679161&scope=site.
• Youngblood, MK. California Fire Foundation grants October 2019.