MY DEAR SENATOR MURRAY: We have your letter of April 17, 1958, requesting information as to Indian lands, and the questionnaire on the disposition and acquisition of Indian lands in the last 10 years. There is submitted herewith the information requested, as follows: 1. Data on questionnaire on the disposition and acquisition of Indian Lands in the Last Ten Years for the Six Reservations Organized as the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe. 2. Form, as submitted by your office, completed as to transactions in the past 10 years, on the 6 reservations and public-domain allotments in Minnesota. 3. Copies of 7 resolutions prepared by the executive committee of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, pertaining to lands on the 6 Chippewa reservations. 4. Data on questionnaire on the disposition and acquisition of Indian lands in the last 10 years for the Red Lake Indian Reservation in Minnesota. 5. Statement of additional data on Indian land status in Minnesota. It is hoped that the information supplied will be sufficient in your study of the Indian land situation on the various reservations. If additional information is desired, please advise and we will make every effort to supply you with same. Sincerely yours, W. W. PALMER, Superintendent. A. MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA AND SIOUX DATA ON QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE DISPOSITION AND ACQUISITION OF INDIAN LANDS IN THE LAST 10 YEARS FOR THE 6 RESERVATIONS ORGANIZED AS THE MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA TRIBE PART I 1. How many acres were there in tribal ownership on July 1, 1947? How many acres in trust? How many acres which the tribe had acquired in fee? Answer. The Chippewa reservations and Sioux communities had a total of 100,066 acres in tribal ownership on July 1, 1947, all of which was held in trust status. 2. How many acres of trust or restricted land were there in individual Indian ownership on July 1, 1947? Answer. There were 152,387 acres of trust or restricted land in individual Indian ownership on July 1, 1947. 3. How many transactions, by which tribal or individually owned lands were disposed of (including the placing of unrestricted fee title in the hands of the owners by issuance of patents in fee, certificates of competency, etc.), were consummated during each fiscal year since. July 1, 1947? Answer. Statistics are supplied on the prepared form. 4. How many acres were so disposed of or removed from Bureau jurisdiction during each fiscal year since July 1, 1947? Answer. Statistics are supplied on the prepared form. 5. Give the numbers of transactions for each year which will be shown in answer to No. 3, above, broken down by the type of transaction. Answer. Statistics are supplied on the prepared form. 6. Give the acreages for each year which will be shown in answer to No. 4, above, broken down by the type of transaction. Answer. Statistics are supplied on the prepared form. 7. How many transactions, by which tribal or individual Indian lands were acquired, were consummated during each fiscal year since July 1, 1947? Answer. In section 2 of the prepared form there is shown figures which give the number of allotments and acreages of trust allotted lands which were purchased in the name of the United States of America, in trust for the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe. It will be noted that the number of allotments involved is high, compared to the acreage. This is due to the issuance of 282 allotments of 5, 712, or 10 acres to the nonremoval Mille Lacs Indians, of which all but 26 allotments were conveyed by the allottees or heirs to the tribe for a nominal sum, in order to eliminate and curtail the complicated heirship status that was developing. 8. How many acres were so acquired during each calendar year since July 1, 1947? Answer. Acreage is shown on the form. 9. Give the numbers of transactions for each year which will be shown in answer to No. 7, above, broken down by the type of transaction. Answer. Figures supplied on the form. 10. Give the acreages for each year which will be shown in answer to No. 8, above, broken down by the type of transaction. Answer. Figures supplied on the form. 11. How many acres were there in tribal ownership on December 31, 1957? How many acres held by the United States in trust? How many acres which the tribe had acquired in fee? Answer. There were 102,585 acres of tribal-owned land on the Chippewa Reservations (except Red Lake Reservation) and Sioux communities of Minnesota, and all held in trust. 12. How many acres of trust or restricted land were there in individual Indian ownership on December 31, 1957? Answer. There were 80,408 acres of individual Indian trust allotted or restricted lands. 13. Cite and discuss briefly any special acts of Congress which are rel affected the acquisition and disposal of Indian lands (termination act private acts directing the issuance of patents in fee, etc.). What stud is being made of the cause and effect of sales? Has the tribal coun passed or considered any resolutions on this subject? Please elabora and include any resolutions approved. Answer. The Chippewa Indians of the allotted reservations in M: nesota are all under the Indian Reorganization Act of June 18, 19 which provided that Indian allotments could not be sold. The act or May 14, 1948, provided for the sale of Indian allotments; however, st sale must have the consent of every heir or legal guardian for a minor or incompetent heir, and under such procedure it is impossible to dipose of complicated heirship allotments, either through sale to th public or the tribe, for the reason that whereabouts of heirs is ur known, interests are so small and of such low value that heirs will not take time to sign the required papers, and in case of minors or incompe tents, the cost of appointing a legal guardian is $50, and often ther interest is valued at less than a dollar. The executive committee of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe has beer very active in efforts to have Congress appropriate funds for the purchase of heirship allotments within the boundaries of the Chippewa National Forest by the United States Forest Service, and this has beer very helpful in disposing of heirship allotments in isolated areas and not being used or occupied by the heirs. At the present time, there are 60 sales which cannot be completed because of the requirements to have 100 percent consent, or consent of legal guardian where interest is of a low value, making the appointment of a guardian impractical The executive committee of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe has made repeated attempts to get legislation introduced and passed by Congress which would alleviate the rigid requirements demanded in the sale of Indian land to the public, or purchase by the tribe. They have passed several resolutions, copies attached, on this question and have made strenuous efforts to get action on H. R. 7877, introduced by Congressman Fred Marshall. 14. To discuss further information given under No. 13. (a) There are a few cases where undivided interest of trust allotments have gone into tribal ownership and sale to the tribe cannot be made because of lack of tribal funds and the additional fact that the heirship situation is too complicated. (b) This problem is becoming very great in the Minnesota area. A study made of one reservation shows over 40 percent of the allotments are either in whole or in part held by non-Indians, or alien Indians. It has taken 2 years to complete the issuance of such fee patents on another reservation, which involved over 30 percent of the allotments in whole or in part. The value of remaining trust interests in allotments which have become partially unrestricted, is seriously affected by such ownership, and the management of such lands is impossible. (c) As mentioned previously, the cost of guardianship often far exceeds the value of the minor. (d) There is frequently one heir, often with a very minor interest, who will refuse to cooperate and prevents a transaction under present regulations. In addition, when an heir dies and his estate is probated, very frequently there are claims made against the estate, and which are approved by the examiner of inheritance in accordance with law. Often these claims will be equal to the entire estate, and in attempting to sell allotments in which the deceased had a share, the heirs will refuse to sign because they will not receive any benefits of such sale. It appears authority should be such as to provide for sale of such interests on lands to settle the debts without the consent of the heirs. (e) This authority is not applicable with tribes under the Indian Reorganization act. PART II-MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA AND SIOUX Under the questions asked in part II, there has not been completed in recent years the sale of key tracts to either non-Indians or the tribe. The purchase of a number of key tracts by the tribe has been planned and started in the past year, however, progress has been slow because of the heirship problems and difficulties. The desired purchases are tracts on lakes which produce wild rice, and control of which is desired and badly needed by the tribe; however, the rigid requirements will have to be eliminated before purchases can be completed. PART III-MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA AND SIOUX 1. Give the position of each tribal real-estate employee, his annual salary, and the nature of his work. Answer. The Minnesota Chippewa Tribe has 3 individuals employed in the management of all phases of tribal government, as follows: Manager, $3,900 per annum; secretary (part time), $1,200 per annum ; stenographer, $2,700 per annum. 2. Give the position of each agency real-estate employee whose salary, in part or in full, is paid by the tribe, the salary of such employee, the amount of such salary paid by the tribe, and the nature of his work. Answer. None. 3. Does the tribe have a regularly employed real-estate adviser or consultant to advise the council with regard to tribal real-estate activities? Explain. Answer. No. They are assisted by Bureau personnel. 4. Does the tribal organization have a real-estate committee with authority to approve tribal real-estate activities? Explain. Answer. The tribal manager has authority to negotiate leases and approve same up to $500. Leases in excess of $500 are approved by resolution of the executive committee. 5. Does the tribal organization have a real-estate committee which advises the tribal council with regard to tribal real-estate activities? Explain. Answer. No. 6. To what extent has the tribe employed private consultants to study particular phases of its real-estate activities? Explain. If the Bureau has disapproved such employment, explain why. Answer. None. 7. Does the tribe have, or has it had, a tribal land enterprise or similar organization? If so, discuss the history and effectiveness of such organization. Answer. No. 30451-58-31 8. Has the tribe or the area office been instructed to turn real-estate operations over to the Bureau? Please comment on the differences in effectiveness of Bureau and tribal operations. Answer. No. MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA RESOLUTION No. 39 Whereas the Federal Government has appropriated moneys for the acquisition of lands for the various tribes; Whereas the heirs of Leech Lake Allotment No. 1, described as lot 1, and the SWSW section 29, 146–31 Beltrami County, have requested this parcel be sold; Whereas the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe desires to acquire this allotment to retain homesites for six Indian families living thereon, and to retain a cemetery still in use; Whereas the 38 living heirs (involving 17 probates) do not object to a negotiated sale; Whereas the heirs of the following FDL allotments have also requested sale of their allotments: FDL 62 lot 5, sec. 30, 49-18_. Acrea 21.75 39.00 FDL 75 lots 8 and 9, sec. 30; lot 5, sec. 29; lots 2, 6, and 7, sec. 31, all in 49-18 160.05 Whereas the sales of these allotments to private interest would jeopardize the sole rites of the Indians to harvest the wild rice crop on Perch Lake, FDL Reservation which has exceeded $40,000 annually. Whereas the purchase of the above-mentioned tracts by the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe would simplify management of allotments now in multiple ownership: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Commissioner of Indian Affairs make $10,000 available for the acquisition of these lands. MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA RESOLUTION No. 15 Whereas the committee created by this council with delegated responsibility to program for local social and economic improvement have submitted a report showing the trust allotments on the reservation to have an important part to contribute in the mangement of band and tribal lands on the reservation; and Whereas due to Canadian ownership in a number of cases we understand that the Indian Bureau is obligated to issue patents-in-fee and certain heirs have requested that their lands be sold; meaning that if action to retain these lands in Indian ownership is not promptly taken they will likely soon pass to various non-Indian owners; and Whereas to receive the potential inherent in these allotments they should be converted into tribal or band ownership: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That immediate steps be taken to arrange funds for acquiring all of the trust allotments on the Grand Portage Reservation; and be it further Resolved, That the committee's report on the importance of the allotments be accepted. MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA RESOLUTION No. 16 Whereas the Grand Portage Band and the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe have gone on record as strongly favoring the purchase of the allotments on the Grand Portage Reservation; and Whereas such allotted land has forest or timber value almost totally as now known, and said land fits into the band and tribal land holdings; and Whereas the act of June 18, 1934 (Public, No. 383, 73d Cong.) provides that the Secretary of the Interior may acquire land for the general benefit of Indians an dthat funds may be requested or provided therefore: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Secretary of the Interior purchase the allotments from individual Indians on the Grand Portage Reservation for and in the name of the United States of America in trust for the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe. |