133 



riod to try to reenact dollars that were added by Congress to the 

 programs, like Tribal Management Development Funds, fish hatch- 

 ery operations, cyclical maintenance rehabilitation. 



Basically what happens here is that the tribes will come to Con- 

 gress during appropriation period and ask for these appropriations. 

 And what will happen the next go around is that the Administra- 

 tion will take them out, and the tribes will have to be here again 

 to ask for the same dollars. 



So basically, we always take two steps forward and one step back 

 word every appropriations period. 



Last year, for example. Congress specifically said within their ap- 

 propriations language, that Fiscal Year 1993 add-ons would be or 

 should be, and directing the Bureau of Indian Afiairs to put it on 

 the base. 



You know, through the transition, the Bush Administration basi- 

 cally went ahead and wiped it all out. So we don't really know 

 where we stand right now. But hopefully, we're not going to have 

 to do that with the Clinton Administration. 



It's the inconsistent funding that really gives us the problems in 

 terms of planning. We have 25 people that work for our Natural 

 Resource Department that are doing very good jobs in trying to 

 protect, conserve and enhance the resource, but as program man- 

 agers, it's very difficult to plan for future development and for re- 

 source protection because of the inconsistent funding problem. 



It's a major concern. 



So I guess, in summary, I believe that, if Congress decides to put 

 legislation forward, we do need a consistent and concise definition 

 of how the trust responsibiUty pertains to natural resources in 

 order for all the federal agencies the tribes deal with to have an 

 idea how to deal with Indian tribes. 



I firmly believe that inconsistent funding is very much of a prob- 

 lem for planning purposes. 



Mr. Faleomavaega. I just want to ask the question again, and 

 please forgive me if I'm going to terrorize your name, as usually 

 the members have terrorized my name. 



Mr. Wawronowicz, can you give me, by a scale of ten, one to ten, 

 the one being the best and ten being the worst, your experience 

 with the BIA. In your honest opinion, how do you rate the BIA in 

 its working activities with your organization in the past, as you've 

 started. 



Can you give me just a sense of your best opinion? 



Mr. Wawronowicz. One being best and ten being worst? 



Mr. Faleomavaega. One being the best and ten the worst. 



Mr. Wawronowicz. Six. 



Mr. Faleomavaega. Six. All right. 



Mr. Maulson? 



Mr. Maulson. Yes. That was a technical question to my director. 



But as a tribal chairman, I think regarding the obligation and 

 the responsibility of the federal government to the Indian people 

 across this country that we've just scratched the surface on these 

 issues. So to ask me, as a tribal chairman, fi*om one to ten, I prob- 

 ably couldn't give you that number because it's so high. 



So I would say we need a lot of work on that, Mr. Chairman. 



