57 



GLIFWC's co-management activities illustrate the types of bodies and committees in 

 which tribes must participate as full partners. These include processes under international 

 agreements such as the Convention on Great Lakes Fisheries Between Canada and the 

 United States, §ee 16 USC § 93, et seg., federal legislative initiatives addressing issues of 

 common concern, such as the Aquatic Nuisances Species Control Act, P.L. 101-646, 104 Stat 

 4761, as well as agencies of the federal government, such as United States Forest Service 

 in its management of national forests, the Environmental Protection Agency in its 

 implementation of the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act, and the United States Fish and 

 Wildlife Service in its implementation of the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act 



3. Recognition of trust responsibility by all federal agencies. 



When tribes entered treaties reserving their hunting, fishing and gathering rights, 

 those treaties were with the United States, not with a single agency. The federal trust 

 responsibility arising out of those treaties applies to aU federal dealings with the tribes, and 

 is not limited to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Yet, in dealing with issues affecting tribal 

 treaty rights, the federal agencies differ markedly from one another. 



GLIFWC's experience has been that - in addressing tribal natural resource issues - 

 the BIA has typically recognized that its actions must comport with the trust responsibility, 

 and has supported GLIFWC's self-regulatory efforts. But certain other agencies have, in 

 some respects, not dealt with GLIFWC in the manner of a trustee. The result has been an 

 uneven and inconsistent relationship between the tribes and the various federal agencies 

 whose actions affect natural resources. 



We would suggest that federal legislation should clarify that the federal trust 

 responsibility applies across the board to all federal agencies in their dealings with tribal 

 natural resource issues. The legislation should also mandate that the govemment-to- 

 govemment relationship be institutionalized by these agencies, through establishing Indian 

 desks and other means. 



4. Adequate and stable funding to support tribal self-regulation. 



As GLIFWC's natural resource management program illustrates, the tribal right to 

 self-regulation requires certain elements of infrastructure if it is to be effectively exercised. 

 These elements ~ many of which are mandated by court order - include a natural resource 

 management program involving conservation codes, biologists, conservation law enforcement 

 officers, tribal courts and judges, natural resource enhancement activities, public information 

 and education activities, and co-management activities with other governments. 



GLIFWC is proud of its natural resource management program and of its many 

 accomplishments. In particular, GLIFWC's role in the LCO case and the resulting 

 management system in Wisconsin is noteworthy. But there remain significant unmet needs. 



GUFWC Tetlimony 

 Febnuiy 18. 1993 

 Pi(e8 



