I mean, they were here before the CA gov, it's just that the CA gov has more firepower, tasers, and handcuffs, so we listen to them.

Otherwise I wish the natives would give us some tax cuts too.

I'm not taking sides, I'm trying to understand the politics of this announcement.

I'm trying to understand it too.

> We do not seek the permission of other governments

> these waters are also claimed by the State of California, who through its California Natural Resources Agency Pathways to 30x30: Accelerating Conservation of California’s Nature Report, support the concept of Indigenous Marine Stewardship

So I guess the State of California theoretically supports IMSAs, but does the state support this one? Does the state need to approve an IMSA for it to be official? Or are tribes independent enough that they can just declare it?

I think they run the casinos up around Redwood.

The statement notes that the waters are “also claimed” by the California state government, which “supports the concept” of tribal stewardship. This whole thing seems pretty insubstantial.

Good question. I have no idea. I doubt there is precedent!

And I can’t wait to see how this gets legally tested — native rights haven’t been properly respected and these kinds if tests are deeply important in restoring rightful sovereignty and tribal agency to our hosts and neighbors.

I’m chuckling as I imagine they’re going to do a better job of protecting and managing the Earth than the government of California and Oregon have done over the last 150 odd years.

"We do not seek the permission of other governments and can no longer wait to act to preserve and protect this culturally and ecologically important place"

This is SOP for California politics. CA jurisdictions have been ceding territory to Indian tribes for a while. This is purely an economically motivated cash grab layered under miles of politically correct double-speak. There is an indian tribe in Montana that has a massive coal mine that wanted to run a rail line to a port through the area that was shut down last year. This is possibly another strategy to do the same thing.

Sure but also;

> and be it further resolved, these waters are also claimed by the State of California, who through its California Natural Resources Agency Pathways to 30x30: Accelerating Conservation of California’s Nature Report, support the concept of Indigenous Marine Stewardship

Do you have any evidence pointing towards this being a money grab? That’s a serious accusation.

Yes, the evidence is that they said it in the same press release.

"Tribal and State co-management of critical ecosystems to protect and support cultural lifeways and economies"

Follow the money. Everything else is bullshit.

The evidence is that they used the word “economies?” Am I missing something?

To me that line reads as “some of our people fish a bit.”

Dont forget Newsome wanting to give $100M+ to tribes to buy back 'ancestral land' despite multiple groups claiming ancestry. Sounds like a money grab to me

I’m not in California so I don’t know about that proposal. But it sounds like a separate issue. Does it even involve the same tribes?

I’m asking, as gently as I know how, if there’s anything here besides “because they’re Indians.” Because that’s not a very good reason.

> I’m not in California so I don’t know about that proposal.

Its not a proposal, it is a program established by law and which the first deadline for the early round of grants has already passed.

> Does it even involve the same tribes?

Potentially, since the grant program is open to all California tribes, whether or not federally recognized.

The joint declaration here could plausibly be a foundation for the tribes to establish one or more projects within the declared protected area and apply for grants to carry them out, so it could be directly related.

Thanks for sharing the information. It appears not only do they not have to be federally recognized to apply but they can also apply if they are a 501c3 corporation. I would like to see some nature restoration, tribal based or otherwise, and hope this resource is used properly.

> Dont forget Newsome

Newsom…

> wanting to give $100M+ to tribes to buy back ‘ancestral land’

…proposing, and the legislature establishing, a $101M grant program for tribes to carry out “multi-benefit nature-based solutions projects located within the state of California.” [0]

It is not solely or primarily for acquiring land, and to the extent land is acquired, it may or may not be ancestral land. (There is a separate and earlier deadline within the program for grants applications for up to $25M of “Time-Sensitive Shovel Ready Ancestral Land Return Projects” for projects that meet that description and are already partially funded and which also meet the other requirements of the program.)

> despite multiple groups claiming ancestry.

To the extent projects under the grant program are ancestral land return projects, and are in “shared ancestral territority”, there is explicit approval priority for those which “will be jointly owned and/or managed by inter-tribal consortium, tribal conservation district, or partnership”.

[0] Program homepage: https://resources.ca.gov/Initiatives/Tribalaffairs/Tribal-Na...

I don't know what economic value this part of the ocean has. There aren't any fish left. We're currently in the planning stage of a wind farm here, but that's in deeper water outside of this zone.

Do you live on the California coast? There are plenty of fish, mostly because of so many protected areas. Maybe you are talking about commercial trawlers or something but if its coming to subsistence fishing there is more than enough to eat. Apparently, these groups claim they know how to harvest mussels during blooms ... Maybe they are immune to cyanotoxins etc. I just wonder where they have been practicing.