Connecting Land Grant Institutions with Tribal Communities to Address Tribal Water Resources Research, Education, and Extension Needs

Introduction – This project originates from the results of a summit on October 28 and 29, 2010 hosted by the College of Menominee Nation (CMN) Sustainable Development Institute (SDI) in partnership with the Great Lakes Regional Water Program on. Attending the summit were Tribal and non-Tribal representatives from Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. The top water resource related issued identified at the summit was, “the conducting of tribal water resource management and education through the lens of local tribal culture”. In addition, attendees of the summit identified a need for further engagement of Tribal communities in Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin in dialog and action planning related to tribal water resource issues. In order to reach this objective, a multi-state coordination committee was established to oversee the project, and it was decided that a Project Coordinator and student intern would conduct the work.

The student intern, under the direction and guidance of the multi-state coordination committee and project coordinator organized meeting with tribes located within the three state areas. The purpose of the meetings was to share the outcomes from the summit; collect information related to tribal water resource issues; and to complete all other aspects of the project. The main objectives in collecting information were to: 1) investigate what we currently know about conducting water resource management on tribal lands, and 2) identify needs associated with tribal water resource management. We also investigated to what level the interviewees possessed knowledge about the 1862 and 1994 land grant colleges, universities, and Extension services. Representatives from these institutions were to attend the meetings; however, due to time conflicts could not. In 2012, Beau Mitchell, Sustainability Coordinator for the College of Menominee Nation, as well as the Director of the Sustainable Development Institute, Melissa Cook, left their positions with the College; therefore, there was a time of staff changes within the College during the project period. Rebecca Edler was hired as the new Sustainability Coordinator on May 13, 2013 and was assigned to oversee the project, and provide direction to the intern. The intern started, June 3, 2013 and immediately began familiarizing herself with the project.

Methods - When selecting which tribes were to be interviewed, geographic location, tribal land base, general tribal population, and summit participation were considered. In addition, we looked to visit as many tribes as physically possible within a very limited time period. First, we separated the visits into three geographic areas identified as Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin. During the interview-planning timeframe for Michigan and Minnesota, we interviewed the Wisconsin-based tribes of Menominee and Oneida. Minnesota site visits were also adjusted during this period to reflect interviewee availability. Reviewing general tribal

population was partial as not all enrolled members live in or near the reservation boundaries. In addition, non-tribal members may live within reservation boundaries. The Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin is an excellent model of this population geography.

Minnesota tribal visits were scheduled during the week of July 15-19, and the Michigan visits, July 23-26. The final selected tribes consisted of the following: 3 of the 11 Wisconsin tribes (Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, Oneida Nation, and Stockbridge-Munsee Band of Mohican Indians); 5 of the 12 Michigan tribes (Pokagon Band of Pottawatomi Indians, Saginaw Chippewa, Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, and Hannahville Indian Community Band of Potawatomi), and; 4 of the 12 Minnesota tribes (Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, White Earth Nation, and Mille Lac Band of Ojibwe). Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, and the Stockbridge-Munsee Band of Mohican Indians needed to cancel their interview because of an unforeseen scheduling conflict.

Prior to site visits, the intern worked closely with the project coordinator, and UW-Extension to develop proper questions and correct protocol for tribal interviews. The cultural component of tribal perspective needed to be included and respected to obtain meaningful information and follow the primary water resource issue identified at the summit which was; “the conducting of tribal water resource management and education through the lens of local tribal culture”. First, a multitude of questions were developed and reviewed by select SDI staff and the UW-Extension partners for content, cultural relevance, and appropriateness. From this first set of questions, 11 were approved, 5 of which focused on understanding the priority issue, and

the remaining questions referred to the roles of land grant universities, colleges, and Extensions. Next, the finalized questions were reviewed by the College of Menominee Nations IRB committee, who determined an IRB was not required. The interviews were not to be audio-recorded, and names of interviewees and tribe identity were to be excluded in any subsequent reports. Research was conducted to determine who from each tribe should be interviewed. It became apparent that if the tribe had a water resource person, they would be the best person to interview. If the tribe did not have a water resource person, an environmental expert, or Tribal Leader would be selected. All tribes were very welcoming and invited us to visit with their representatives. One Minnesota tribe had an excellent working relationship with an extension and initially did not want to be involved, but then changed their mind upon further communication and explanation of the scope of the project. However, they had to cancel at the last minute due to a time conflict. Approximately 1.5 hour interviews were set with each tribe, and the actual interviews did take this amount of time. The interviews were conducted face-to-face at the location determined by the interviewee. Most of the interviews occurred at the office of the interviewee; however, some of them were held in a conference room. From the College of Menominee Nation, Sustainable Development Institute, Rebecca Edler, Sustainability Coordinator, was the interviewer at the Wisconsin and Michigan sites, and Patrick Waukau, Multimedia/Outreach Specialist the interviewer for Minnesota. In addition, and to be consistent, two student interns were assigned the task of participating in all of the interviews. The interviews began with introductions, a brief overview of the summit, and then moved into the questions. The questions are listed below:

Topics for Interview Questions

(Primary water resource issue identified: “the conducting of tribal water resource management and education through the lens of local tribal culture”)

UNDERSTANDING THE PRIORITY ISSUE

1. From your experience, what are the common water resources issues affecting the Tribe? 2. What are the Tribes’ current strategies to address these water resource issues? 3. Are there other strategies need to address critical water resource issues? 4. Tell us about the Tribe’s capacity to address the water resource issues identified. 5. Does the Tribe work with a university or tribal college to address water resource issues?

ROLES OF THE TRIBAL COLLEGE AND EXTENSION

1. Are you familiar with Tribal Colleges and Tribal College Extensions in your state/area?

2. Are you familiar with your state’s land grant university and Extension?

3. What barriers may arise in the development of collaboration between your Tribal community, the Tribal College, and the state land grant university? Between the Tribal College Extension and State Land Grant Extension?

4. Would you be willing to be contacted in the future for water-related projects?SDI staff

established an open dialog of communication and presented the questions, asking follow-up questions for clarification if needed. It was easy to stay on task and the interviewees were excited to share what they knew about the subject. While the oral communication was occurring, one of the interns simply listened and the second recorded information on a laptop. When concluded with the questions above, the second intern asked several questions specific to culture, climate change and water resources.

After the interview, a summary of the interview was written so the information would not be

forgotten. Periodic phone calls were made to Libby Dorn, UW-Extension, keeping her informed on the status of the interviews. Interview summaries were e-mailed to Phil Deming upon completion of all interviews, who assisted us in entering the information for analysis. The established software, ATLAS.ti was selected as the analyzing tool to compile and evaluate the data. This particular software was chosen because it is a well-recognized standard for evaluating qualitative data, and because Rebecca Power, project investigator, highly recommended the use of this software for analyzing interview results. We elected to analyze the data by interview questions because we could compare and contrast answers to each specific question and review the answers in a common format. Considering the possible cultural differences within each Tribal Nation along with the words used to describe content was also a factor in selecting the method of data analysis.

Results - All tribes interviewed in the three states are currently monitoring water quality. While some of the tribes recognized water resource issues as being relatively new, others have been monitoring the water and have established a baseline of data. One tribe has just concluded a ten-year baseline study, while another recently created a water resource position. Tribes from all three states recognized water issues as being larger than the tribes’ capacity to address the issue, and recognized the need for collaborative efforts. However, the aquatic biologist from a Michigan tribe stated, “We don’t have terrible issues. It’s fairly clean but we have been proactive, monitoring it, and keeping an eye on it”.

The lack of funding was identified by all tribes interviewed as being a major barrier in the tribe’s capacity to address water resource issues, with four of the ten stating that sequestration negatively affected their funding. A Michigan tribe stated that their funding was cut between three to eight percent, yet they only have one person in each department and the need for expanding their staff was evident. Another Michigan water quality specialist stated, “We can’t build capacity with funding cuts, it only decreases projects and staff”. In addition, one Michigan tribe identified the fact that as they purchase land back, they endure the cost of restoring the land to a healthy ecosystem as land contamination is an issue.

Four of the five Michigan tribes stated air quality as an equally significant problem that needs to be addressed, and land contamination was brought up by all five of the Michigan tribes interviewed. Wisconsin and Minnesota tribes did not bring up air quality during their interview sessions.

Another major issue identified by five of the ten tribes interviewed was water contamination, with each of these tribes classifying agriculture and sedimentation being the major contributing factors. A Wisconsin tribe is particularly concerned about agricultural degradation, and the Water Resource Manager stated that, “Sixty percent of their land is and/or was in agricultural use, and originally the reservation was forested wetland that was cleared, ditched, tiled, and tilled”. Connected to agricultural use, is the loss of natural habitat either through the implementation of clear cutting or the installation of tile systems, sometimes both. High nitrates have been found in water bodies that listed agricultural concerns as a major issue, and arsenic has

been found in groundwater. One Michigan environmental specialist stated, “The whole state is over the mercury limit in the water”.

Invasive species is an area of high concern, and the interviewees thought part of the problem is that tribes have no control over water sources that originate off-reservation. For this reason, they felt collaboration with non-tribal entities is important if not essential. Some of the invasive species identified were: zebra mussel, flowering rush, phragmites, Asian carp, a faucet snail that attacks ducks, spinning water fleas, Eurasian milfoil, but by far the most eminent threat they identified was the Emerald ash borer. Eight of the ten tribes interviewed mentioned this invasive beetle. While the desolation of this tree species is forefront, equally significant is the cultural impact. Ash basket-making is a traditional practice identified by these tribes, some of which have tribal members who rely solely on this traditional craft for economic stability.

Water resources and the use of water are deeply imbedded into the culture of all the interviewed tribes, some going back to their creation stories. Several tribes identified traditional water ceremonies and practices that originate from water and/or the use of water. In addition, fish have also been identified as an overt link to cultural practice. One Minnesota tribe spoke of elders eating fish liver as part of a traditional practice, and eight of the ten people interviewed mentioned fish consumption as part of Tribal members’ diet. Due to the large number of fish consumed by a Michigan tribe, one interviewee spoke of a plan to establish their own

Tribal standards for fish consumption, and eight of the interviewees would like to see their tribe establish water standards. The interconnectedness of water, Tribal culture, health, and economic stability cannot be disputed.

A topic that came up consistently was climate change. All people interviewed believe that climate change exists; however, some stated that not all Tribal leaders, nor all Tribal members believe climate change is occurring. They related the following identifiers to climate change: warmer water in trout streams; change in the benthos; change in water levels; “weird weather”; strong storms; weather change; change in animal migration patterns; change in insect populations; and shorter or milder winters. One person stated, “You just don’t know when the ice will be there”. Each person interviewed identified the need to provide education to Tribal leaders, Tribal members, and the greater non-native community in the area of climate change and the associated impacts. The impact on culture caused by climate change was also mentioned by all of the tribes interviewed. The environmental scientist from a Michigan tribe stated, “An early thaw last year took out some ash trees near the river, and whole trees fell in the river. People are concerned the ash will be gone”.

Bureaucracy was identified by nine of the ten tribes interviewed as a major barrier in addressing water resource issues, and six of them named communication as an issue. They felt education could help.

All of the tribes visited were familiar with Tribal colleges and state land grant institutions; however, there is less knowledge regarding Extension services. While nine of them knew about the Extension services at state land grant institutions, only four knew about the Extension services associated with Tribal colleges. Again, communication was cited as a potential justification, along with distance, knowledge, and resources. Tribes that are working with Extension services shared positive feedback about them. A Minnesota tribe interviewee stated, “Yeah we work with them a lot and have a good working relationship. There’s an open line of dialogue between us”. Yet another Minnesota interviewee stated, “We’re aware of the Extension, but we don’t know of any close enough that we do much with”. In addition, eight of the ten tribes spoke of internship opportunities and shared a willingness to work with state land grant Extension services and Tribal college Extension services. All of the tribes visited are willing to be contacted in the future for water-related projects and other projects as well.

Discussion (and future path) - Water quality affects the economic state, quality of health, food source, cultural customs, and is intertwined in everyday activities and general well-being of Native Peoples. Tribes hold a relationship with their physical environment, understand interconnectedness, and hold valuable traditional ecological knowledge (TEK). Along with this, tribal nations are utilizing scientific ecological knowledge (SEK) and methods to regulate and monitor water quality. Climate change has been identified as real and is viewed as negatively impacting water quality. Currently, all tribes interviewed monitor water quality and recognize the need to

continue; most see the need to increase the level of work. There is an awareness of the deterioration of the water resources, and they are trying to combat the issue with present available means. However, human resources and funding are low compared to the desired efforts. Tribes are eager to collaborate with other entities as they see the issue as being larger than they alone can handle, and the quality of water is impacted by outside entities. Education is needed within the tribe and with outside community partners in all areas that affect tribal water quality, and the cultural component associated with water quality cannot be excluded. Education to inform the tribes of Extension services in needed as well, especially in regards to Tribal college Extension services. Internships are well received and offer a wonderful means to connect students with career training and possible job opportunities. All funding opportunities should be explored, with special focus on collaborative efforts, and the Extension services are a valuable collaborator to continue with this on this project. In addition, federal grants as well as state and private funding sources should be investigated.

It is strongly recommended to continue regional representation and inclusion of all tribes within the region. Understanding this issue through “the lens of local tribal cultural” is vital to its success.