The vast and diverse landscape of Alaska is home to a rich tapestry of Native cultures, each with its unique history, traditions, and relationship to the land. Unlike the contiguous United States, where the reservation system is a prominent feature of Native American land tenure, Alaska presents a different model. While numerous Alaska Native tribes thrive throughout the state, only one officially designated Indian Reservation exists: the Metlakatla Indian Community. This unique situation stems from the distinct historical and legal context surrounding land claims and settlements in Alaska. This article delves into the intricacies of this system, exploring the reasons behind the limited number of reservations, the landmark legislation that shaped land ownership, and the alternative structures that govern Alaska Native communities. This is the story of Alaska Indian Reservations.
The Singular Case of Metlakatla
The Metlakatla Indian Community, located on Annette Island in southeastern Alaska, stands as the sole officially recognized Indian Reservation in the state. This community, primarily composed of Tsimshian people, has a unique history that sets it apart from other Alaska Native groups. In the late 19th century, under the leadership of William Duncan, a lay missionary, a group of Tsimshians migrated from British Columbia, Canada, to Annette Island seeking a place to establish a self-governed, Christian community.
Duncan successfully petitioned the U.S. government for the establishment of a reservation on Annette Island in 1891. This reservation provided the Tsimshians with a protected land base and the opportunity to develop their community according to their own values and principles. The Metlakatla Indian Community continues to thrive today, maintaining its distinct identity and exercising its sovereign rights within the boundaries of its reservation. It is an island of difference in the story of Alaska Indian Reservations.
The Alaska Native Allotment Act and its Repeal
The absence of widespread reservations in Alaska can be attributed to the historical treatment of Alaska Native land claims. Unlike the Dawes Act, which aimed to allot communal tribal lands to individual Native Americans in the Lower 48, the Alaska Native Allotment Act of 1906 governed land distribution in Alaska. This act allowed individual Alaska Natives to claim up to 160 acres of land for individual use and occupancy.
However, the Allotment Act proved to be inadequate in addressing the complex land claims of Alaska Native communities. It failed to recognize the traditional collective land use practices of many groups and often resulted in the loss of valuable resources and traditional territories. Furthermore, the process of obtaining allotments was often cumbersome and fraught with bureaucratic challenges. The Act was eventually repealed in 1971, marking a significant shift in federal policy towards Alaska Native land claims.
The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA): A Paradigm Shift
The discovery of oil at Prudhoe Bay in 1968 dramatically altered the landscape of Alaska Native land claims. The prospect of constructing a trans-Alaska pipeline to transport oil to the southern part of the state brought the issue of land ownership into sharp focus. The proposed pipeline route crossed vast areas of land traditionally used and claimed by Alaska Natives.
To resolve these competing claims and pave the way for oil development, the U.S. Congress passed the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in 1971. This landmark legislation represented a radical departure from previous federal Indian policy. Instead of establishing reservations, ANCSA extinguished aboriginal land claims in exchange for monetary compensation and the conveyance of land to newly formed Alaska Native corporations.
Under ANCSA, Alaska Natives received approximately 44 million acres of land and $962.5 million in compensation. This land and money were distributed among twelve regional corporations and over 200 village corporations, each representing a specific geographic area or community. A thirteenth regional corporation was later established for Alaska Natives residing outside of Alaska.
ANCSA aimed to provide Alaska Natives with the resources and tools necessary to participate in the state’s economy and preserve their cultural heritage. The corporations were tasked with managing the land and resources for the benefit of their shareholders, the Alaska Native people. ANCSA fundamentally reshaped the landscape of Alaska Indian Reservations.
The Implications of ANCSA
ANCSA had a profound and lasting impact on Alaska Native communities. While it provided significant financial resources and land ownership, it also created new challenges and complexities. The corporate structure of ANCSA, while intended to promote economic development, sometimes clashed with traditional cultural values and governance systems.
The extinguishment of aboriginal land claims also raised concerns about the long-term protection of Alaska Native rights and access to traditional resources. While ANCSA granted land ownership to the corporations, it did not necessarily guarantee continued access to hunting, fishing, and gathering areas that were vital to the cultural and economic well-being of many communities.
Furthermore, the corporate structure of ANCSA introduced new forms of social and economic stratification within Alaska Native communities. The distribution of benefits and opportunities often varied depending on an individual’s connection to a particular corporation, leading to disparities and tensions. The story of Alaska Indian Reservations is incomplete without understanding ANCSA.
Tribal Sovereignty and Self-Determination
Despite the unique land tenure system established by ANCSA, Alaska Native tribes continue to exercise their inherent sovereign rights. The U.S. Supreme Court case Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government (1998) affirmed the existence of tribal sovereignty in Alaska, even in the absence of reservations. The Court recognized the authority of Alaska Native tribes to govern their members and regulate activities within their traditional territories.
Many Alaska Native tribes operate under traditional forms of governance, while others have adopted modern constitutions and legal systems. These tribal governments provide essential services to their communities, including healthcare, education, housing, and social services. They also play a critical role in protecting Alaska Native cultural heritage and advocating for the rights and interests of their members.
The Tsimshian Exception and Treaty Negotiations
The Tsimshian people, unlike many other Alaska Native groups, were not included in the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA). This omission stemmed from their unique historical circumstances and ongoing efforts to negotiate a treaty with the Canadian government.
The Tsimshians had expressed interest in preserving their villages and fishing sites on the Skeena and Nass Rivers as early as 1879, but formal treaty negotiations did not begin until July 1983. Over a decade later, fourteen bands in Alaska and British Columbia, Canada, united under the Tsimshian Tribal Council to pursue a comprehensive treaty settlement.
In 1997, the Tsimshian Tribal Council signed a framework agreement with the British Columbia Treaty Commission, outlining the principles and objectives of the treaty negotiations. The Tsimshian Nation continues to engage in negotiations with the BC Treaty Commission to reach an Agreement-in-Principle, which would address their outstanding land claims and provide them with greater self-governance.
Village Corporations: A Unique Form of Governance
In lieu of traditional reservations, many Alaska Native communities are governed by village corporations established under ANCSA. These corporations, while primarily focused on economic development, also play a significant role in community governance and cultural preservation.
The village corporations are responsible for managing the land and resources conveyed to them under ANCSA. They often engage in a variety of business ventures, including resource extraction, tourism, and construction. The profits generated by these businesses are used to benefit the shareholders, the Alaska Native people who reside in the village.
In addition to their economic activities, village corporations also play a role in community governance. They often work in partnership with tribal governments to provide services and address local issues. They also serve as important cultural institutions, promoting traditional values and practices.
Conclusion: A Complex and Evolving Landscape
The landscape of Alaska Indian Reservations is complex and multifaceted, shaped by a unique history, landmark legislation, and the enduring resilience of Alaska Native peoples. While the Metlakatla Indian Community stands as the sole officially designated reservation, Alaska Native tribes continue to exercise their sovereignty and govern their communities through a variety of mechanisms, including tribal governments and village corporations.
The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) fundamentally altered the landscape of land ownership and governance in Alaska, creating new opportunities and challenges for Alaska Native communities. The ongoing efforts to address outstanding land claims, promote self-determination, and preserve cultural heritage demonstrate the ongoing evolution of the relationship between Alaska Native peoples and the state and federal governments. The story of Alaska Indian Reservations is a testament to the enduring strength and adaptability of Alaska Native cultures.