Bugenig

Bugenig v. Hoopa Valley Tribe

Good Law
266 F.3d 1201·2001 WL 1083735
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 11, 2001No. 99-15654California12,111 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Graber, J.

Opinion by Judge GRABER; Dissent by Judge FERNANDEZ.

The issue for decision is whether the Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe (Tribe) has authority to regulate logging by a non-Indian on fee land that she owns, located wholly within the borders of the Tribe’s Reservation, in order to protect tribal lands of cultural and historic significance. The district court held that Congress expressly delegated such authority to the Tribe. We agree, and we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

We begin with a brief overview of the historical context in which the present question arises.

A. Establishment of the Rese rvation

In the middle of the Nineteenth Century, numerous conflicts erupted between White settlers and Native Americans in northern California. As California grew, due in part to the discovery of gold, clashes between the White settlers and the tribes increased in frequency and severity, usually to the detriment of the Native American populations. In response, Congress determined that “the best policy was to set aside small tracts of land In the new state for the tribes,” in order to protect them from the worst effects of settlement. See Partitioning Certain Reservation Lands…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.