Environmental Management

, Volume 38, Issue 6, pp 896–909 | Cite as

Environmental Justice in Indian Country: Dumpsite Remediation on the Swinomish Indian Reservation

Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines environmental justice as the “fair treatment for people of all races, cultures, and incomes, regarding the development of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.” The last decade has focused considerable national attention on the environmental pollution inequity that persists among the nation’s poorest communities. Despite these environmental justice efforts, poor communities continue to face adverse environmental conditions. For the more than 550 Native American communities, the struggle to attain environmental justice is more than a matter of enforcing national laws equitably; it is also a matter of a federal trust duty for the protection of Indian lands and natural resources, honoring a promise that Native American homelands would forever be sustainable. Equally important is the federal promise to assist tribes in managing their reservation environments under their reserved powers of self-government, an attribute that most distinguishes tribes from other communities. The PM Northwest, Inc. (PMNW) dumpsite is located within the boundaries of the Swinomish Indian Reservation in Washington State. Between approximately 1958 and 1970, PMNW contracted with local oil refineries to dispose of hazardous wastes from their operations at the reservation dumpsite. Almost two decades would pass before the Swinomish tribe was able to persuade EPA that a cleanup action under Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) was warranted. This article reviews the enduring struggle to achieve Indian environmental justice in the Swinomish homeland, a process that was dependent upon the development of the tribe’s political and environmental management capacity as well as EPA’s eventual acknowledgement that Indian environmental justice is integrally linked to its federal trust responsibility.

Keywords

Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Justice Indian Tribe Indian Land Tribal Land 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author wishes to acknowledge several of the many people who were responsible for pursuing the tribal environmental justice effort and carrying out the eventual cleanup action on the Swinomish Indian Reservation: WaWalton, former tribal chairman; Brian Cladoosby, tribal chairman; Lorraine Loomis, tribal natural resources director; Jim Wilbur and Larry Campbell, tribal environmental commissioners; Lauren Rich, former tribal environmental planner; Charlie O’Hara, tribal planning director; Jeff Hegedus, tribal environmental restoration manager; Elissa Kalla, tribal GIS technician; Andrea Nofke, former tribal water quality analyst; Ed Knight, former tribal environmental planner; Stewart Jones and Rich Doenges, former tribal planners; Allan Olson, tribal attorney and general manager; Sharon Haensley, former tribal attorney; Bill Black, former Superintendent, BIA; Steve Roy, BIA; Rich McAlister, EPA attorney; and Chuck Clarke, former Regional Director, EPA Region 10.

References

  1. American Indian Lawyer Training Program, Inc. (AILTP). 1988. Indian tribes as sovereign governments. Oakland, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  2. Ayer M. F. 1991. Meaningful implementation of the government-to-government relationship between each Indian tribe and the United States: a concept paper. National Indian Policy Center, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  3. Bryant B. (ed). 1995. Environmental justice: issues, policies, and solutions. Island Press, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  4. Bryant B., P. Mohai, (eds). 1992. Race and the incidence of environmental hazards: a time for discourse. Westview Press, Boulder, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  5. Bullard R. D. (ed). 1993. Confronting environmental racism: voices from the grassroots. South End Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  6. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund) (1980) United States Congress, 42 U.S.C. 9610 et. Seq.Google Scholar
  7. Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 1831. 30 U.S. 1Google Scholar
  8. Clinton W. J., President. 1994a. Executive Order 12898 of February 11, 1994. Federal Register 59:32, 7629Google Scholar
  9. Clinton W. J., President. 1994b. Executive Memorandum of April 29, 1994, http://web.em.doe.gov/public/tribal/whletter.html
  10. Clinton W. J., President. 1998. Executive Order No. 13084 of May 19, 1998. Federal Register, 63:96. Presidential Documents, 27655–27657Google Scholar
  11. Clinton W. J., President. 2000. Executive Order No. 13175 of November 6, 2000. Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, Federal Register, 65:218. Presidential Documents, 67249–67252Google Scholar
  12. Cohen F. 1986. Treaties on trial: the continuing controversy over Northwest Indian rights. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  13. Cohen F. S. 1942. Felix S. Cohen’s handbook of federal Indian law. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.CGoogle Scholar
  14. Cornell S., J. P. Kalt. 1992. What can tribes do? Strategies and institutions in American Indian economic development. American Indian Studies Center. University of California, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  15. Coursen D. F. 1993. Tribes as states: Indian tribal authority to regulate and enforce federal environmental laws and regulations. 23 Envtl. L. Rep. 10579Google Scholar
  16. Deloria V Jr. 1985. American Indian policy in the twentieth century. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OklahomaGoogle Scholar
  17. Deloria V Jr., C. M. Lytle. 1984. The nations within: the past and future of American Indian sovereignty. Pantheon, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Faber D. (ed). 1998. The struggle for ecological democracy: environmental justice movements in the United States. The Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Ferris D. 1993. A broad environmental justice agenda: mandating change begins at the federal level. Maryland J Contemp Legal Issues 5:115–127Google Scholar
  20. Goeppele C. 1990. Solutions for uneasy neighbors: regulating the reservation environment after Brendale v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of Yakima Indian Nation. Washington Law Rev 65:417–436Google Scholar
  21. Goldtooth T. B. K. 1995. Indigenous nations: summary of sovereignty and its implications for environmental protection. In Bryant B (ed.) Environmental justice: issues, policies, and solutions. Island Press, Washington, D.C. pp 138–148Google Scholar
  22. Harmon A. 1998. Indians in the making: ethnic relations and Indian identities around Puget Sound. University of California Press, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  23. Harris S. G., B. L. Harper. 1997. A Native American exposure scenario. Risk Analysis 17:789–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Harris G. R. 1997. A social critique of environmental justice. J Am Planning Assoc 63:149Google Scholar
  25. Helfand G. E., L. J. Peyton. 1999. A conceptual model of environmental justice. Social Sci Q 80:68–83Google Scholar
  26. Hines R. I. 2001. African Americans’ struggle for environmental justice and the case of the Shintech plant—lessons learned from a war waged. J Black Studies 31:777–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) of 1934, Section 16, 25 USC 476 et. seqGoogle Scholar
  28. Ishiyama N. 2003. Environmental justice and American Indian tribal sovereignty: case study of a land use conflict in Skull Valley, Utah. Antipode 1:119–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kuehn R. R. 2000. A taxonomy of environmental justice. 30 Environmental Law Rep 10581Google Scholar
  30. LaVelle J. P. 2001. Rescuing Paha Sapa: achieving environmental justice by restoring the great grasslands and returning the Sacred Black Hills to the Great Sioux Nation. Great Plains Nat Resources J 5:40Google Scholar
  31. Lester D. 1986. The environment from an Indian perspective. Envir Protection Agency J 27:1Google Scholar
  32. Lewis J. 1986. An Indian policy at EPA. EPA J 12:23–26Google Scholar
  33. Nance v. EPA. 1981. 645 F.2d 701, 9th Cir. 1981, cert deniedGoogle Scholar
  34. National Environmental Justice Advisory Committee (NEJAC). 2000. Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee. Guide on consultation and collaboration with Indian tribal governments and the public participation of indigenous groups and tribal members in environmental decision making. http://www.ejrc.cau.edu/compliance/resources/publications/ej/ips_consultation_guide.pdf
  35. Native American Rights Fund. 1988. Draft concept paper for the consideration of the establishment of an Indian environmental entity. NARF, Boulder, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  36. National Indian Policy Center. 1993. Tribal participation in the making of federal Indian law and policy under the proposed National Commission of Native American Government’s Recognition Act. Endreson DBL (ed.), Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  37. Newton D. E. 1996. Environmental justice: a reference handbook. ABC-CLIO, DenverGoogle Scholar
  38. Nixon R. M., President. 1970. Special message on Indian affairs, public papers of the President of the United States: Richard Nixon, 564–567Google Scholar
  39. Pulido L. 1996. A critical review of the methodology of environmental racism research. Antipode 28:142–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ringquist E. J. 1998. A question of justice: equity in environmental litigation. J Politics 60:1148–1165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Roberts N. A. 1975. A History of the Swinomish Tribal Community. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  42. Royster J. B., R. S. A. Fausett. 1981. Control of the reservation environment: tribal primacy, federal delegation, and the limits of state intrusion. Washington Law Rev 64:581Google Scholar
  43. Sanders A. H., R. L. Otsea Jr. 1982. Protecting Indian natural resources: a manual for lawyers representing Indian tribes or tribal Members. Native American Rights Fund, Boulder, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  44. Shrader-Frechette K. 1996. Environmental justice and Native Americans: the Mescalero Apache and monitored retrievable storage. Natural Resources J 35:703–714Google Scholar
  45. Slade B. A., L. Cowart. 2000. Are minority neighborhoods exposed to more environmental hazards? Allegations of environmental racism. Real Estate Rev 30:50–57Google Scholar
  46. State of Washington. 1985. State of Washington, Department of Ecology v. EPA, 752 F. 2d 1465, 9th CirGoogle Scholar
  47. Stephens P. H. G. 2000. Andrew Dobson, justice and the environment: conceptions of environmental sustainability and dimensions of social justice. Envir Politics 9:174–175Google Scholar
  48. Suagee D. B. 1991. The application of the national environmental policy act to development in Indian country. Am Indian L Rev 16:377Google Scholar
  49. Suagee D. B. 1994. Turtle’s war party: an Indian allegory on environmental justice. J Envir Law Litig 9:461–497Google Scholar
  50. Suagee D. B. 1999. The Indian country environmental justice clinic: from vision to reality. Vermont Law Rev 23:567–604Google Scholar
  51. Suagee D. B. 2002a. The supreme court’s ‘Whack-a-mole’ game theory in federal Indian law, a theory that has no place in the realm of environmental law. Great Plains Natural Resources J 7:90Google Scholar
  52. Suagee D. B. 2002b. Dimensions of environmental justice in Indian country and Native Alaska. Environmental Justice Resource Center website. Clark Atlantic University. http://www.cjrc.cau.edu/summit2/IndianCountry.pdf
  53. Towers G. 2000. Applying the political geography of scale: grassroots strategies and environmental justice. Professional Geographer 51:23–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tsosie R. 1996. Tribal environmental policy in an era of self-determination: the role of ethics, economics, and traditional ecological knowledge. Vermont Law Rev 21:225Google Scholar
  55. U.S. v. Kagama, 1886. 118 U.S. 375, 384Google Scholar
  56. U.S. v. Navaho Nation, 2003. 537 U.S. 488Google Scholar
  57. US. V. White Mt. Apache Tribe, 2003. 537 U.S. 465Google Scholar
  58. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1983. Administration of environmental programs on Indian Lands. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  59. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1984a. Indian policy implementation guidance. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  60. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1984b. EPA policy for the administration of environmental programs on Indian reservations. http://www.epa.gov/indian/policyintitvs.htm
  61. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. Final EPA/Tribal Agreements Template. March 13, 1995. http://www.epa.gov/indian/agree.htm
  62. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2000a. Superfund memorandum of agreement between the Swinomish Indian tribal community and the USEPA regarding tribal consultation during implementation of the superfund programGoogle Scholar
  63. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2000b. EPA Docket No. CERCLA-10-2000-0186Google Scholar
  64. Walker J. L., others. 2002. A closer look at environmental justice in Indian country. Seattle J Soc Justice 1:379Google Scholar
  65. Weiver T. 1990. Brendale: checkerboards, land and civil authority: managing the reservation environment. The Indian Law Section. Washington State Bar Association, Seattle, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  66. Winchell D. G. 1995. Tribal sovereignty as the basis for tribal planning. Indigenous Planners 1:1–4Google Scholar
  67. Wood M. C. 1994. Indian land and the promise of Native sovereignty: the trust doctrine revisited. Utah Law Rev 3:1471Google Scholar
  68. Wood M. C. 1995a. Fulfilling the executive’s trust responsibility toward the Native Nations on environmental issues: a partial critique of the Clinton Administration’s promises and performance. Envir Law 25:733Google Scholar
  69. Wood M. C. 1995b. Protecting the attributes of native sovereignty: a new trust paradigm for federal actions affecting tribal lands and resources. Utah Law Rev 1:109Google Scholar
  70. Worcester v. State of Georgia, 1832. 31 U.S. 554Google Scholar
  71. Zaferatos N. C. 1998. Planning the Native American tribal community: understanding the basis of power controlling the reservation territory. J Am Planning Assoc 64:395–410Google Scholar
  72. Zaferatos N. C. 2004. Tribal Nations, local governments, and regional pluralism in Washington state: the Swinomish approach in the Skagit valley. J Am Planning Assoc 70:81–96Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental Studies, Huxley College of the EnvironmentWestern Washington UniversityBellinghamUSA

Personalised recommendations