In the IFMAT IV review, forestry program information was collected from 41 tribes nationwide including Alaska. In examining tribal governance structure, it was found that more than 80% of tribal forest acres were being managed in part or fully by tribes under P.L. 93-638 program contracts or compacts. As of the conclusion of the IFMAT IV assessment two additional tribes carry out forest management activities under Indian Trust Asset Management Plans (ITAMPs) authorized by ITARA. Numerous functions performed in the management of Indian forest lands have historically been identified as residual, non-contractable activities to be performed by a BIA designated official. The BIA uses compliance with CFR Part 163 regulations interpreted and implemented through manuals and handbooks
as the standard for fulfilling trust responsibility and the approval of documents and actions as a validation that trust responsibility is being met. Self-determination contract and self-governance compact tribes are not required to follow BIA policies, manuals, and handbooks (see Tasks G and H). ITARA tribes replace 25 CFR Part 163 regulations with tribal forestry regulations. Except for Forest Management Plans (FMPs), Wildland Fire Management Plans (WFMPs) and Forest Management Deduction (FMD) Expenditure Plans, ITARA tribes operating under tribal law and regulations approve all forest management documents and actions previously viewed as inherent federal functions of the BIA (trust responsibility). Prior and current IFMAT reports have referenced challenges and offered recommendations to establish standards to ensure
fulfilment of the federal trust responsibility. Past focus has been to ensure that forestry programs of the BIA fulfill the federal trust responsibility (see Task G). Due to an increase in forestry programs now being performed directly by tribes, IFMAT’s past focus on BIA delivery of forestry programs is becoming increasingly outdated. ITARA takes the change from the traditional concept of fulfilling the trust responsibility a step further. Under ITARA, tribes are authorized to conduct forestry programs under tribal law and regulations and to assume functions previously considered as inherent federal functions of the BIA (see Task H). Table SG.1. shows a comparison of the applicability of rules, policies and approval actions under different authorities and governance arrangements.
Table SG.1. A comparison of the applicability of rules, policies and approval actions under different authorities and governance arrangements.
ITAMP Approved Under ITARA
638 Contract & Cooperative Agreement
BIA Direct Service
638 Compact
Follow NIFRMA
YES YES YES
YES YES NO*
YES YES
YES
Follow 25CFR §163 Regulations Follow BIA Policies, Manuals & Handbooks Provide BIA With Standards for Administering Programs
NO NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
Have a BIA Approved Forest Mgt. Plan (FMP) Have a BIA Approved Wildland Fire Mgt. Plan^ Have BIA Approve Timber Sales Endangered Species Protection (ESA)
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
Sec 7
Sec 7
Sec 7
Sec 9 YES**
Comply with NEPA
YES YES
YES YES YES
YES YES YES
Have BIA Approve Prescribed Burn Plan Have BIA Approve FMD Expenditure Plan
NO
YES YES * While the tribal contractor is not required to comply with BIA policy directives, manuals and handbooks, some tribes agree to follow these guidance documents as the standards for carrying out the program. ^ Wildland Fire Management Plan may be incorporated into the Forest Management Plan and approved as a single document. ** Tribal regulations are created that are consistent with national NEPA compliance.
46 Assessment of Indian Forests and Forest Management in the United States
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator