The Bureau of Reclamation is trying to part ways with just under 60,000 acres of federal land on the Wind River Reservation.
The land was originally removed from the reservation in 1905 as part of the Riverton Reclamation Project. The project aimed to turn a portion of Muddy Ridge into irrigable farmland, but it didn’t quite work out that way.
Even though the land wasn’t used for the project, the federal government never returned it to the tribes.
Now, a portion of Muddy Ridge could go to either the Bureau of Land Management or to other interests like the tribes, who say they want it back.
Wyoming Public Radio’s Chris Clements spoke with Wes Martel, a senior Wind River conservation associate for Greater Yellowstone Coalition and an Eastern Shoshone tribal member who spent decades in the tribe’s government.
Editor’s Note: This transcript has been lightly edited for brevity and clarity.
Chris Clements: First of all, thank you for being here with me today. What are your thoughts on the news that the Bureau of Reclamation is trying to give up management of part of muddy ridge and that it could go to either the BLM or (to other entities like) the Eastern Shoshone and Northern Arapaho Tribes? Do you think that it should be repatriated to the tribes?
Wes Martel: Of course. It's reservation land. [It] never should have been opened up for a reclamation project in the first place. The Treaty of 1863, we had 44 million acres. Five years later, [Chief] Washakie was able to negotiate the 2.5 million acres that we have right now. Gen. Frederick Lander didn't want us here. He wanted to move us clear up north on the other side of the [unintelligible]. And so at least Washakie had enough influence at that time, where we were able to acquire this under the Treaty of 1868. So in the Christian, colonial conniving, what they couldn't get by negotiating through a treaty, they went kind of behind the back and came up with a reclamation Act [of 1905], which opened up all the land north of the Big Wind, which is about 1.4 million acres on the rez, after the treaty was signed. You know, the more you think about it, the more you think about this whole doctrine of discovery and what the federal government and attorneys have done to us – we've really got to stand up for ourselves, we have to protect what little we have. There should be no question that that land reverts back to the tribes.
And in 1943, there was actually a letter that said that. [It was] from the Bureau of Reclamation to the Indian office, officially, a letter that said, ‘This land is excess to the project and should be returned to the,’ – in fact, the actual wording of the letter said, ‘should be restored to tribal ownership.’ Normally, they say, ‘should be returned to the [Bureau of Indian Affairs] and trust for the tribes.
CC: Would you be able to describe to me and listeners what this part of Muddy Ridge – I know it's 60,000 acres on Muddy Ridge – could you tell us a bit about what it looks like?
WM: It's kind of buttes and bluffs and hilly and desert looking in some areas, and pretty dry here and there. But those types of areas are very important to us, not only culturally and traditionally, but there's a lot of our traditional medicines and plants and foods. A lot of our relations grew up in that country.
CC: In a recent Cowboy State Daily news report, some ranchers near Muddy Ridge have said they're afraid they won't be able to keep their grazing [leases] for cattle if the Eastern Shoshone and Northern Arapaho become land trustees of the area and, and Midvale Irrigation District stops managing it. Do you think that their concerns are valid there? What do you think of that?
WM: But it wasn't designated for grazing. That's a violation of the [1905] Act. It wasn't created for grazing, it was created for agriculture.
CC: Ranchers have said that if the Bureau of Indian Affairs manages Muddy Ridge on the tribes’ behalf it could impose restricted grazing strategies more broadly, which these folks don't want. Is that something that you think might happen?
WM: [It] could.
CC: So do you oppose the grazing that's going on right now, these folks who are grazing cattle?
WM: Well, like I said that wasn't the purpose of the act. It wasn't made for grazing. There might be good, good grazing, but that's not the purpose of what the reclamation act was established for.
CC: How might the two tribes manage the land in Muddy Ridge differently if it was returned to them? I mean, what might the return mean for tribal members across the reservation?
WM: There's hunting and gathering and cultural and archaeological resources out there that are very important. And we're very spiritually connected to a lot of those areas of land. A lot of our elders lived out there in some of those areas. There used to be a silver mine up in the mountains up there at one time and I actually found – I was up there one time, just north of this area, and the water that came out of that silver mine was an old log water pipe made out of wood. And then it had wire wrapped all around it. But it was a perfectly round water pipe made out of wood. And we've found some of that up there.
This is the aboriginal homelands of the Eastern Shoshone Tribe and many other tribes, but there's a lot of meaning to that land: spiritually, culturally and economically, at some point. And we’ve got an adjudicated water right. And when the water starts getting [into a] shortage, there’s definitely going to have to be some change of plans, and how do we manage our lands? And how do we consider grazing and agriculture in all areas of our land? And so that's really the way things are going right now, of course, there's going to be change; we all have to change. We have to adapt. And we're just trying to protect what little we have. We had 40 million acres at one time. Now, we're down to about 2,220,000.
This reporting was made possible by a grant from the Corporation For Public Broadcasting, supporting state government coverage in the state. Wyoming Public Media and Jackson Hole Community Radio are partnering to cover state issues both on air and online.
