Talk:State-recognized tribes in the United States/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

The Occaneechi

"The Occaneechi are not officially recognized as a tribe by the state of North Carolina or by the federal government."

Is that no longer true? If so, do you have a citation for the change of status? Thanks. -Harmil 20:00, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Here's another reference from 2001: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=nc&vol=appeals2001/&invol=000561-1 -Harmil 20:05, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Hamil,

Occaneechi are officially recognized.

If you read the case you cite, you will note that the court held for the Occaneechi that the decision of the Administrative Law Judge, who recommended that the commission grant tribal recognition to the Petitioners, became the final decision of the case because the agency failed to issue a final decision within the time limits set forth in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-44 (1991). The Agency did appeal this decision, but the Supreme Court of North Carolina denied review (and disolved a temporary stay) in 2001. see 354 N.C. 365, 556 S.E.2d 575 (2001).

Xlation, 28 July, 2005

Good enough! Thanks for the info. -Harmil 15:51, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Very incomplete

I would think that it makes more sense to organize this page by state, and we really need a much more complete list. There should be at least as many entries here as there are at List of Native American Tribal Entities (which is the federal list). -Harmil 13:37, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Scratch that. I just read the "but not" section... I now understand. Can we get citations for each of these groups? Thanks. -Harmil 13:38, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup is badly needed

Some current problems with this page:

External links in section titles
Huge run-on sentence fragments are linked
Links strewn in with text in inconsistent ways

This is a good list to have, as distinct from List of Native American Tribal Entities, but it really needs work. -Harmil 02:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Also:

The link to the Four Winds Tribe, Louisiana Cherokee Confederacy website is apparently not a good link.

--Starfyredragon (talk) 19:42, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. CJLippert (talk) 20:04, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Georgia

I've removed the chunk of unencyclopedic advocacy text in the Georgia section (diff). If there is some sort of controversy over one of these groups, some sort of reliable sources would need to be provided, and much different wording. Quietvoice 06:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

New material from ncsl and Sheffield

I added a bunch of new material from a couple sources, along with citations. I didn't put citations on any of the groups from states that had links to state government pages, but perhaps double or triple citing these would be smart. I assumed that the state's page was a more up-to-date list, and was as strong or a stronger source than mine. Should I mark (with citations) the groups that Sheffield and ncsl mention that already have state links? Also, feel free to remove/discuss any groups that you know of which have had state recognition revoked.

Also, Sheffield notes that Florida, Maryland, and New Mexico have processes in place by which a group might be state recognized, but have not recognized any groups. Should that go in? Finally, usually lists have articles that go with them. Is there an article on state recognized groups? If not, what title would be appropriate? Best, Smmurphy^(Talk) 18:45, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

It would be useful to have a full page cite for that - it's dated, as Maryland recognized two tribes in 2012. Parkwells (talk) 21:11, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Native American tribes in Virginia

The article Native American tribes in Virginia has the following:

"There have been various bills before Congress with the goal of acquiring Federal Recognition for six Virginia Tribes. Sponsors of such Federal recognition bills have been Senator George Allen, R-Va and Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va. These bills would grant federal recognition to the Chickahominy, Eastern Chickahominy, Upper Mattaponi, Rappahannock and Nansemond Tribes, and Monacan Indian Nation."

"On May 8th, 2007, the US House of Representatives passed a bill extending federal recognition to the six tribes mentioned above."

Is a House bill sufficient, or does this still have to go through the BIA or the Senate? Does anyone have a source handy? Best, Smmurphy^(Talk) 20:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

The House bill is not sufficient. It has to pass the Senate and be signed by the president. Later bills also passed the House but not the Senate.Parkwells (talk) 12:38, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Choctaw Nation of Mississippi River Clan

A user just made this adition to the article. Though seemingly sincere it just doesn't seem encyclopedic or appropriate to this article. I moved a short mention over to the unrecognized tribes article, and raise the issue on that talk page. This appears to be a group that had federal and state recognition at one point (though not under the current legal designations), but was later denied on a claim that the tribe ceased to exist. What should a tribe, tribe member, or anyone else do to establish the notability and validity of a tribe's existence (as opposed to its claim for government recognition) to the point where it's appropriate to include on Wikipedia? I think the usual notability, verifiability, and reliable sources criteria have to apply, but we should be extra understanding because of the sensitivity of the issue and because the things that unfairly keep a tribe from state and federal recognition are the very things that make them hard to argue for on Wikipedia. We don't want to perpetrate the injustice by applying standards that deny the truth of the past. Wikidemo 02:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

To me, http://www.ncsl.org/programs/statetribe/tribes.htm is rather convincing and authoritative. If you want to add something that isn't listed there, you should be sure to have a reference. Smmurphy^(Talk) 14:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

It was hard for me to understand exactly what the claim was about this tribe/band. As far as I could tell the claim is that it was historically "recognized" but that it does not currently have formal federal or state recognition. Hence, I moved the material to the new article-in-process for unrecognized tribes. But even there, I'm not sure it's sourced. If you are interested you can see the discussion there. Wikidemo 19:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Etowa Cherokee Nation

What was the reason for removing this tribe? Smmurphy^(Talk) 15:43, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I guess its in the unrecognized tribes article. There it says that they petitioned in 1990, is that refering to a federal petition or state? Smmurphy^(Talk) 15:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but I suspect it means Federal since tribes don't need to petition a State for recognition (you know, that government-to-government interaction thing) but simply be acknowledged in a state bill or be specifically be the the state's constitution and its ammendments. A good example of the hair-splitter is where a governor recognizes a tribe, but since wasn't in a state bill or be specifically be in teh state's constitution and its ammendments, a tribe wasn't recognized by law according to the state, or the case of a state's Indian commission recognizing a tribe only as part of the historical context, i.e. as part of the state's cultural stake-holder. CJLippert 17:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Vermont

The statement for this state is unclear: "Currently, Vermont law only recognizes Abenakis as Native American Indians, not the tribes or bands." Vermont calls Abenaki individuals as Indians, but doesn't recognize bands? Rmhermen 23:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

That's confusing to me and I don't know the legal situation in Vermont. It would be nice if someone could find a source or even another Wikipedia article to link to, and explain that a little more. Wikidemo 23:35, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Michigan

The Gun Lake tribe is now federally recognized. Does this not make the intro here slightly incorrect/incomplete? Rmhermen 23:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes that would. To avoid duplications this list is only for state recognized tribes that are not federally recognized. Once a tribe is recognized it should go into Federally recognized tribes instad of here, preferably with a citation to an article or notice about it's recognition. The list is changing, as you can imagine. Wikidemo 23:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Hold on, there. The Gun Lake Band of Potawatomi, now called Match-e-be-nash-she-wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians of Michigan is federally recognized but the Gun Lake Band of Grand River Ottawa Indians is not. CJLippert 00:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't catch that. Thanks. Rmhermen 15:03, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Turns out they are the same tribe: [1]. So I removed them from this list. Rmhermen (talk) 16:37, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Missouri and Ohio

An anonymous editor added a claim that the article was incorect as these two states do not have an recogition process. Our linked sources show these tribes as listed but perhaps they are incorrect? Rmhermen 16:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll check up on Missouri, but I can say that though Ohio has no formal recognition process, it was the Ohio Senate passed a recognition bill to recognize the one Shawnee tribe there. When I find more on Missouri, I'll post something. CJLippert 16:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I was at the State of Missouri's site and it seems that they, too, have no formal recognition process, nor did I come across an office/commission/agency of the State to establish a government-to-government dialogue. However, I did find that Missouri State Senate Bill SCR 008 of August 28, 2001, passed, recognizing "Northern Cherokee Indian people of Missouri," which if we go the various list, it seems to imply that it is the same tribe as the one calling themselves "Northern Cherokee Nation of the Old Louisiana Territory" or the "Northern Cherokee Nation of Missouri and Arkansas," but I couldn't find a darn thing about the "Chickamauga Cherokee Nation" other than at the NCSL site, and that based on other lists there are two different tribes named "Chickamauga Cherokee Nation." So, should we keep the Chikamauga Cherokee Nation on the State list since they're listed by the NCSL or should we move them to Unrecognized tribes since I couldn't find them on State of Missouri's government site? CJLippert 18:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Another wikipedia site lists Ohio as recognizing the Shawnee, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unrecognized_tribes_in_the_United_States — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sara.koopman (talk • contribs) 16:47, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

California

I think some of the info with regard to the G-T tribes should be put in another page that deals specifically with the G-T tribe.Ceqa (talk) 16:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Until a more detailed article covering the full G-T tribe's situation (historical background, loss of recognition, gaining of State recognition, fracturing into smaller groups, etc.) the format right now is just fine for this listing. Once that detailed article is created, the briefly mentioned information then can be pared down even further. CJLippert (talk) 02:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Controversy Regarding State Recognzied Tribes

I beleive a seperate section should discuss the controvesy regarding State Recognized Tribes. Such as the clause in the Untited States Constitution that says only Congress and the US goverment can have relatioships with Indian Tribes. Also, a definition of just exactly what is an Indian Tribe should be defined first. This definition may or may not eliminate the possilbility of the existance of State Recognized Tribes. Also, it would be appropriate to list as side notes the enrollment policies of each State Recognized Tribes. For example, some State Recognized Tribes do require proof of Indian ancestry. However some tribes require Native American ancestry, but that ancestry does not nessasarliy have to be from that particular tribe. For example one of the State Recognized Cherokee Tribes requires proof of Native American ancestry, but that proof could be from any Indian Tribe. Some state recognized tribes however do not require any proof of Native American ancestry. Also, for the tribes that do require proof of Native American ancestry, how this proof is obtained should be explored. Federally Recognized Tribes policies on proof are strictly enforced and have high standards. How do the policies of State Recognized Tribes match up regarding proof. Would old Bible records or signed affadavits be considered proof?

Federally recognized tribe membership policies vary just as widely and are set individually by each tribe. You may be cofusing the blood quantum requirement for some federal benefits programs. Rmhermen (talk) 17:33, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

The policies for enrollment do vary widely amongst Federally Recognized Tribes but not in regards to proof of Native American blood. Of the 563 Federally Recognized Tribes, virtually all of them require proof of Native American blood. There are a few notable exceptions, and even they are controversial. The Freedmen of the Cherokee Nation and the Seminole Nation are two cases. The Freedmen are the decedents of African Slaves that were owned by Cherokee and Seminole citizens. There is a controversy as to whether or not they and their decedents were granted Tribal citizenship in an 1866 treaty with the Federal Government, and their case has been in and out of both Federal and Tribal courts. However, proof of a direct lineal blood connection to a Native American by blood on some sort of Tribal Roll is the cornerstone of the overwhelming majority of Indian Nations. The Dawes Rolls is just one such example. Where policies do vary widely amongst Federally Recognized Tribes is the issue of blood quantum. For example, the Seminole Tribe of Florida requires a minimum 1/4 blood quantum for Tribal enrollment, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians requires a minimum 1/16 blood quantum for Tribal enrollment, and the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma and the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma require an enrolled member to be a direct lineal descendant of a Native American by blood from their respective Tribes but they have no blood quantum. Meaning, you do have to have proof of Native American blood, but the issue of how much does not matter.

However with State Recognized Tribes, many of them do not have Native American blood requirements, and the ones that do, do not abide by the same strict standards to prove Native American blood that the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Federally Recognize Tribes follow. In the future, I think it would be appropriate to list enrollment policies and procedures for most, if not all State recognized Tribes to give the reader a more accurate understanding of State Recognized Tribes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LightingBug (talk • contribs) 20:01, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think we have the requirements for all of these groups and finding it for some of them would be quite difficult because of the nature of the groups. I also think you are overestimating the "same strict standards" used by federally recognized tribes - as the blood quantum requirements vary widely by tribe, can be from several tribes for some tribal memberships or are not required by others. In some cases DNA testing is required, in others historical records are accepted. Rmhermen (talk) 20:31, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree that obtaining enrollment standards and procedures for State Recognized Tribes, yes may be difficult to obtain. However since they are recognized by State Governments, I would assume that these groups have set professional standards regarding their enrollment procedures. I do not however, believe I am overestimating the strict enrollment standards set by Federally Recognized Tribes and the Bureau of Indian Affairs in comparison to the enrollment standards and procedures set by State Recognized Tribes. I believe the cases your talking about regarding Federally Recognized Tribes are the exception to the rule rather then the norm. You do have a good point though about some of the Federally Recognized Tribes. I know some of the cases you are talking about. I think the only way to really set the record straight would be to do a professional documented investigation regarding the standards and procedures for enrollment set by both State and Federally Recognized Tribes. LightingBug (talk) 22:55, 17 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by LightingBug (talk • contribs) 22:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Suggest more discussion of what state recognition means, as it varies by state and, as noted, cannot affect a tribe being recognized as a sovereign nation. If a tribe has a WP article, deal with its membership requirements there. Not all states have a recognition process for tribes, and not all states have recognized tribes. As noted, some have simply acknowledged one or another tribe in some way but not by official recognition.Parkwells (talk) 12:45, 20 October 2014 (UTC)