FORT BERTHOLD, NORTH DAKOTA Individually owned land [No. T.-Number of transactions. Ac.-Acreage] DISPOSALS-REMOVAL FROM INDIAN BUREAU JURISDICTION BY PLACING OF UNRESTRICTED FEE-SIMPLE TITLE IN OWNERS 3. PIERRE AGENCY A. CROW CREEK RESERVATON DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, Hon. JAMES E. MURRAY, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: In accordance with your request of April 17, 1958, we are enclosing the completed report covering the Crow Creek Reservation. The acreages shown in the table sent to us by your office have been rounded in order not to carry a fractional acreage. There are no estimates in the report as to acreages or numbers of transactions. The report is very general with reference to the portion covering key tracts (pt. II). The files do not show the basis for the past tribal purchases and there are no allegations that certain tracts are key tracts. The files do not contain information on the history and effectiveness of the tribal land enterprise; therefore, our report is not too lengthy on this subject. The tribal officials of the Crow Creek Tribal Council have requested my realty staff to assume full responsibility for this report and there will be no report made by the tribe. It is impossible for my staff to furnish the authorities dates of acquisition of Federal or Government-owned lands in the time allotted. We are furnishing the following information on Federal or Government owned land (acreages rounded): Submarginal land, total acreage__. Acreage in range units permitted to Indians_.. Acreage in range units permitted to non-Indians_. Acreage leased to Indians__ Acreage leased to non-Indians_ Government-owned lands, total acreage. Acreage leased to non-Indians____ 40 acres used for school purposes, Fort Thompson School. 20, 136 4, 580 14, 284 400 872 1, 800 1,760 We are very happy to have worked on this report for you and trust that you will find it helpful. Sincerely yours, C. H. BEITZEL, Superintendent. CROW CREEK QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE DISPOSITION AND ACQUISITION OF INDIAN LANDS IN THE LAST 10 YEARS PART I As to tribal and individually owned trust or restricted land: 1. There were 1,467.67 acres in tribal ownership on July 1, 1947. The Crow Creek Tribe had acquired no land in a fee status. 2. There were 151,210.43 acres in trust or restricted status in allotted or individual Indian ownership on July 1, 1947. Includes 9,417 acres taken for the Fort Randall Reservoir. 4. The acreage disposed of or removed from Bureau jurisdiction during each fiscal year is shown as a part of the answer to question No. 3. 5. The numbers of transactions for each year shown in answer to No. 3, broken down by the type of transaction is shown on the table which follows the questionnaire as follows: Lines 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 13, 14, and 15. 6. The acreage for each year shown in answer to No. 4, broken down by the type of transaction is shown on the table which follows the questionnaire as follows: Lines 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 13, 14, and 15. 7. The number of transactions consummated during each fiscal year since July 1, 1947, whereby tribal or individual Indian lands were acquired is as follows: 8. The acreage acquired during each fiscal year is shown as a part of the answer to question No. 7. 9. The numbers of transactions for each year shown in answer to question No. 7, broken down by the type of transaction, can be found on lines 21 and 22 or the table which follows the questionnaire. 10. The acreages for each year shown in answer to No. 8, broken down by the type of transaction, can be found on lines 21 and 22 of the table which follows the questionnaire. 11. The acreage in tribal ownership in a trust status as of December 31, 1957, was 9,986.81. The Crow Creek Sioux Tribe acquired no land in fee status. 12. There were 111,267.24 acres in trust or restricted status in allotted or individual Indian ownership on December 31, 1957. 13. Prior to the calendar year of 1955 a few Indian landowners secured legislation that gave them fee patents or unrestricted title to their lands. It is our opinion that these special acts had no effect on the acquisition and disposal of Indian lands. No study is being made of the cause and effect of sales. The Crow Creek Tribal Council has not passed or considered any resolution on this subject. 14. (a) The Crow Creek Sioux Tribe held an undivided interest in 23 allotments as of February 1, 1957. The individuals holding interests in these allotments are limited to sell only to the tribe at the appraised value. Furthermore, these individuals can sell their land if the tribe has the funds. The Crow Creek Tribal Council has, however, obligated the funds they received from the lands taken for the Fort Randall Reservoir for the purchase of the outstanding interests in sales of undivided interests to the tribe in allotments in which the tribe does not now hold an interest are not encouraged at this time. (b) The problem of the disposal of lands wherein an undivided interest is owned by non-Indians and alien Indians is not too great. The interest owned by Indians can be sold by bids and a fee patent issued to the purchaser. The purchaser can then negotiate with the non-Indians or alien Indians to acquire their interest. A problem can develop in determining the estate of a non-Indian or alien Indian who has been deceased for a number of years or in a case where the interest is very small. The acquisition of land by the tribe or an individual Indian in which an undivided interest is owned by nonIndians and alien Indians can become a problem if we are unable to locate the non-Indians holding an interest. In some cases it is necessary to secure an abstract of title from the county records and the cost of such abstract is not justified in view of the interest involved. (c) The acquisition by the tribe or an individual Indian of lands owned by minors or a minor holding an interest can be a problem on the Crow Creek Reservation, although it is not under the Reorganization Act. It is necessary to have a guardian appointed by the State courts in order that a deed can be executed. The appointing of a guardian by the State court poses a problem where the minors' interest is small and the costs of the proceeding cannot be paid from the minors' share. The disposal to fee status presents no problem when the land is sold through competitive bidding on a non-Indian reorganization reservation. (d) There has not been too much difficulty in reaching a use agreement among the heirs of lands in heirship status. In the disposal of lands, some heirs holding very small undivided interests have not consented to the sale of lands, thereby preventing the sale of lands by heirs holding majority interests. (e) To a certain degree, some use has been made of the Secretary's authority to sell heirship land by the use of an order transferring inherited interests. The order was executed by the Secretary or his authorized representative and conveyed heirship land to the tribe or another Indian if minor or incompetent heirs were involved. It was necessary to secure the signed applications or consents from many of the heirs, however, during the year of 1956 conveyances by this kind of order were prohibited. The tribe purchased land by this order and since the market was limited only to Indian purchasers or the tribe, individual Indian sellers may not have received the full return for their lands. 1. None. 2. None. PART II-CROW CREEK 3. A number of tracts have been purchased by the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe upon recommendation of Bureau personnel. These tracts were recommended for purchase by the tribe for the reason that they were located in an area of predominantly Indian and tribal-owned land or essential to the operations of an Indian unit. The tribe has not alleged any tracts to be key tracts. 4. None. 5. Not applicable. 6. Not applicable. |