Locals oppose proposed Fort Belknap land transfer in water compact

Some local residents and government officials are up in arms about Fort Belknap Indian Community requesting some additional land so it can manage its water.

More than 100 years after the Grinnell Agreement of 1895, Fort Belknap is working to have 14,496 acres of land in the agreement returned to the reservation as part of federal approval of the Fort Belknap Water Compact.

But people who own land within the boundaries of the proposed transfer are deadset against it happening.

"I don't want to be part of the tribe, period," landowner Dennis Broodbrooks said. "I'm part of the United States of America, I do not want to belong to the tribe."

Fort Belknap Indian Community, or FBIC, Council has requested multiple land transfers it says are needed to properly manage water on the reservation, particularly on the southern where much of the water, which that section of the reservation depends on, comes from the watershed of the Grinnell Lands.

An executive summary of the Water Rights Settlement Act of 2019 FBIC has requested to be introduced in Congress adds that the problem is exacerbated because mining in that region has shifted the flow of water off the reservation and some water that still flows onto the reservation is polluted due to past mining.

"Importantly, the Tribes have identified the critical need to restore and improve the water quality and otherwise protect the headwaters of the Tribal water rights that flow to the Reservation through the Grinnell Lands," the summary says.

Land sold after gold discovered

The Fort Belknap Indian Reservation, whose peoples include the Assiniboine, or Nakoda Tribe and the Gros Ventre, or Aaniiih Tribe, was created in 1888 when the federal government broke up the former Blackfeet Reservation, created in the Laramie treaties of 1851 and 1855, into the much-smaller Blackfeet, Fort Belknap and Fort Peck reservations.

After gold was discovered in the the southern edge of reservation, the federal government bought land from the tribes under the Grinnell Agreement of 1895.

The legal status of Indian reservations is complex. Federally recognized tribes are recognized as sovereign nations, and negotiate and relate with federal, state and local governments under that status. Bureau of Indian Affairs "Frequently Asked Questions" webpage says that "as U.S. citizens, American Indians and Alaska Natives are generally subject to federal, state and local laws. On federal Indian reservations, however, only federal and tribal laws apply to members of the tribe, unless Congress provides otherwise."

Negotiators worked with the Fort Belknap tribes to make the purchase of the land from them, although FBIC representatives say the sale was made under duress.

The transfer, as well as ability to manage the water, would help the tribes regain and manage the land they once had, the summary says.

"The Grinnell Lands are former Reservation lands that the Tribes have long considered to be sacred lands supporting the spiritual and cultural practices of the Tribes," it says.

Water compact negotiations

The summary says the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1908 that the federal government had reserved water rights for the Gros Ventres and Assiniboine tribes when the reservation was created, but mismanaged those rights.

It says instead of filing lawsuits over damages, the FBIC Council passed in 1981 a resolution proposing negotiating the tribes' water rights.

After 15 years of negotiations between the FBIC Council, the Montana government and the federal negotiating team, the council approved the compact in 2001.

It also passed the Legislature in 2001 with overwhelming support, with the state Senate approving it 42-6 and the House approving it 94-6 on their final readings.

But it has been stalled in Congress.

Fort Belknap Indian Community Council last fall passed a resolution to move forward with the Water Rights Settlement Act, hoping to have it introduced in Congress to get federal approval of the compact. The previous council members have put a large amount of time and work into the compact and, with the implementation of the settlement, the compact will go into effect on a federal level, Council President Andrew "Andy" Werk Jr. said.

And a key component to the settlement is the tribe requesting the transfer of Grinnell Lands, now managed by the Bureau of Land Management, back to the reservation. In 1895 the Grinnel Lands were purchased from the tribe for $360,000

The 1895 agreement said 40,000 acres were included in the purchase, but the actual acreage is closer to 68,000 acres, Werk said, adding that the tribe is not requesting the full amount but only the 14,496 acres in the settlement.

The tribe is looking to have the land returned to the tribe for a number of reasons, he said, including the water rights and a return of sacred land. Werk said sites and locations exist in the land such as Spirit Mountain - also known as Golden Butte - which has cultural and spiritual significance to the tribes of the Fort Belknap Indian Community.

The compromise written in the water compact and what is proposed in the act will also benefit the surrounding communities, he added, because the tribal government has the most interest in preserving the land and is in the best position for restoring, conserving and protecting the important cultural, archaeological and historical resources on the land.

If the land is transferred, it will remain open to the community, tribal and non-tribal, for 25 years, he said, for current uses such as hunting, fishing and other access. After 25 years, tribal law would be enforced on the land, Werk said, adding that non-tribal people could still access the land, but would have to abide by tribal laws and regulations.

Werk said the act specifies that it would not impede on anyone's private property rights, including that mineral rights would remain in perpetuity and the tribe will not restrict access in or out of private property.

Landowners say rights being taken

But some of the landowners say they will lose rights to their property.

Property owner Dale Ployhar said he is opposed to the land transfer because it infringes on private property. The transfer would not respect his, or other property owners' private property rights. He added that about 1,500 acres of private property would be within Grinnell Lands transfer and finds the transfer illegal and a federal offense.

Fort Belknap Tribes Public Relations Officer Alissa Snow said FBIC Tribal Water Engineer Wold Mesghinna, Ph.D., has calculated a total of 222 acres of private land within the area of the Grinnell Lands proposed for transferral to the reservation in the lands in question. These private lands are not included in the land transfer.

Landowner Broadbrooks said that if the transfer happen he would be four miles within the reservation and his private property rights would be impeded within the reservation with the tribes restricting his access to his own land.

He said that will happen even though the act says his access cannot be restricted.

He added that he also wants the land to stay public rather than owned by the reservation.

Ployhar said that the tribe's are lying, his rights are already being infringed, and the settlement does not accurately portray the information.

He added that another reason the reservation wants the land is for the water, but they cannot interfere with miner's water rights according to a federal statement, Mining Law, which states that miners are entitled to water. Ployhar added that the tribes also don't need the water.

It's totally deceptive against the American citizens, he said. Ployhar added that the tribes have been trying to get the land for a long period of time, and because they are a sovereign nation they are able to do what they want with the land and would steal his property.

He added that it is an international conspiracy with the tribe intending to sell it to China.

"They are doing it because China is pushing them to get the land," he said. "They are using the tribe to take it from America."

Broadbrooks said he wants the land to remain the way it is, adding that he doesn't know what the tribes are heading toward but they will be able to have the land in their back pocket, adding that nobody wants this transfer outside of the reservation.

The Grinnel Lands were purchased from the tribes and not stolen from them as they say, with this agreement they are trying to get back the land, which is still rich with minerals and rare earth metals, for free.

"That's not the way things work. When you sell something it's transferred to somebody, you move on," he said. "If you want to buy it, you bring money and you purchase it, it's just not given to you."

He said no matter what, there will always be people who say it was stolen from them, no matter what anyone does.

"There is a reason they lost the land; it was because they needed the money to survive," he said.

But Werk said that if anyone reads the Grinnell agreement it was obvious that it was not just a purchase, but also an ultimatum from the federal government.

"It was taken by force," he said.

A transcription of negotiations included in the federal documentation of the treaty includes negotiator George Bird Grinnell speaking to the Gros Ventre Tribe about opposing the land sale.

"I see some of you are pretty blind, you can't see far. You see things that are close to your face, but things that are farther off you can't see at all. You are like people looking through a fog - you see things nearby, but things far off are hidden," the transcript says.

"You think that because for seven or eight years years you have had plenty to eat and have lived well, and for the next year of two you are going to have plenty, that it will always be like that. That is not true, it is not going to last," the transcript continues.

"Two years from now, if you don't make any agreement with the government, you will just have to kill your cattle and then you will have to starve," he added later," ... I can not tell how, after these two years are gone, you are going to live - you or your wives or children."

A transcript of a William C. Pollock negotiation in the document has similar language.

"If we do this and you come to the agent three years from now and ask him for something to eat, or a wagon, or for some cattle, you will be very much disappointed when you can not get it," he said. "If, then, you go back to your women and babies without anything, and they are crying for something to eat, you will be sorry that you did not think better at this time."

Werk said that it was handled badly.

"That's where it really starts, is at the beginning, that it was taken by force," he said.

Negotiations with local governments stalled

Werk said that earlier this month he also met with Phillips County Commissioners to discuss the support of the settlement, but they told him they would not support it.

"I'm glad that they told us that," he said, adding that they made it clear that it was not something that the community wanted.

He said they want the land to stay the way it is, but he offered to compromise or even to make a deal with them to work with them on a project they needed, but they still refused.

"They want things to stay the way they are," he said. "They don't want it to become part of the reservation, although it originally was."

Phillips County Commissioner Bruce Christofferson said the land has been in Phillips County for more than 100 years and they are just not going to agree to any land transfer.

He added that everybody that they have spoken to supports the decision to oppose the transfer. People have told him why they oppose the transfer, he said, but Christopherson declined to say what those reasons are.

"It's a water issue, it's not a land issue," he said. "We support the water compact, we just don't support the land transfers. You don't need to own the land to control the water."

He added that the commissioners are not working with any negotiations with the tribe, and have had the same position on the land transfer since it was first brought to them in 2005.

Werk said that their response was what he was expecting, but at least they were honest.

He added that the commissioners were also worried because many people used the land for recreational purposes, and it could affect the economy of the nearby towns. But the reservations also support those same economies, he added that many non-tribal members also still recreate on tribal land now, it's just that they need to follow the tribal rules and laws.

Talks with members of congressional delegation

Both sides of the issue also have approached the members of Montana's congressional delegation, with the landowners holding May 11 in Malta a meeting with representatives of the offices of Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., and Rep. Greg Gianforte, R-Mont.

Werk said he and the tribes also have been working with Daines and Gianforte and with Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., about seeing about the act passed by Congress.

An email from Tester's office said that Tester is in frequent contact with Werk as the tribe circulates the bill among local communities and the rest of Montana's Congressional delegation.

It added that since the state Legislature passed the Compact in 2001, federal ratification is the next step to develop water resources for the tribe and clarify water rights for all users in the area.

"Jon is committed to that goal and will continue to help usher this bill through the legislative process, but he also believes that in order to get it over the finish line, it needs the entire delegation's support," it said.

Daines' Press Secretary Julia Doyle said local consensus regarding the Grinnell lands is critical before the senator will support the transfer.

"The senator wants to see strong local support from local landowners and Phillips County before he could support the Grinnell Notch Transfer," it said. "The senator has encouraged the tribe work towards resolving their concerns, and he remains actively engaged during negotiations."

Gianforte also called for local input.

"Water is a precious resource in Montana, and I will continue to engage with the stakeholders and local community regarding the Fort Belknap water compact. That local input is vital to any decision made regarding Montana's public lands and its resources," Gianforte said.

Werk said that he has worked closely with Daines, over the past few months, and visited with him, Gianforte and Tester, when he visited Washington, D.C., last month.

He said Daines is big on trying to get community support behind the land transfer. But he has been trying to get community outreach, get the community engaged for years, and although he understands Daines' point, the tribe has been trying for years to come to an agreement with non-tribal members in the area.

The tribe has made a number of sacrifices over the past years to try to come to a middle ground and has held several community meetings for people to voice any concerns or ideas, he said.

"The frustrating part is getting people engaged with us," he said.

The meetings they have held with community members aren't productive discussions, with attendees not even being able to agree to disagree, he said. He is open to working with people, but no one is willing to work with them unless they sacrifice the land transfer.

When people compromise and make an agreement, each side gets something and loses something, he said.

After speaking with Daines and the other congressional members Werk said he felt he had made some progress, but is becoming frustrated that the tribe is struggling to get local support.

"I think I've been reasonable," he said. "... I have to take a stand here. I am more than willing to continue discussions with people if we are making progress."

He added that he told Daines that he is happy working with the local community, but if they are not willing to work with him he will have to push forward.

"If it is a flat no and no compromise can be met, I will have to take a stand," he said, adding that time is of the essence.