Background
The lands and the cultural resources within the boundaries of traditional Indigenous guardianship remain predominantly outside Tribal control and are often subject to the decisions of federal, state, and local land management agencies. If Native American Tribes, Pueblos, or Nations or the Indigenous Peoples of Hawaii (Native Hawaiians) so wish, Indigenous peoples should be encouraged and enabled to make land management decisions regarding their customary land, including protecting and preserving ecologically and culturally significant landscapes and practices on places managed by federal, state, and local governmental agencies.
Promoting a path for Indigenous Peoples to protect their customary traditional land through co-management between Indigenous entities and the government (federal, state, local) could prevent future conflicts over land use. Incorporating Indigenous Traditional Ecological Knowledge into land management strategies could benefit the land, and a combination of those two strategies could advance land restitution to help reconcile colonial/past wrongs. It should be noted that many places were incorporated into the government estate via violent evictions and/or treaties signed under militaristic and unfairly persuasive conditions without just and fair compensation; all treaties were later broken by the federal government and settlers.
Policy
The Sierra Club supports Indigenous co-management/co-stewardship of culturally significant landscapes and resources on publicly managed lands.
Governments (federal, state, and local) should make available to interested Indigenous entities the opportunity to develop and establish a co-management/co-stewardship structure to provide the development and implementation of management plans and ongoing decision-making affecting culturally significant landscapes and all resources; to develop a new framework that goes beyond “consultation” and enables Tribal entities to collaborate in decision making.
Governments should work collaboratively with Indigenous entities to establish land management frameworks, with equal value placed on Indigenous Traditional Ecological Knowledge (ITEK), Indigenous worldviews, and Indigenous values as the worth given to Western science, values, and worldviews (USDI 2023a;USDI 2023b). Sierra Club acknowledges that Indigenous Peoples are the rightful holders of Indigenous knowledge and information (including ITEK), therefore Indigenous knowledge and information should not be utilized without permission from Indigenous rights holders. Sierra Club supports co-management/co-stewardship as a step towards land restitution to help reconcile land-based injustices and colonial/past wrongs.
Co-management agreements are strictly between governments (federal, state, or local) and an Indigenous entity or multiple Indigenous entities. Sierra Club supports Native American land rights and advocates for tribes to have a place at the decision-making table regarding culturally significant landscapes. We support Indigenous sovereignty and co-management. However, it should be noted that the Sierra Club may not always support individual actions proposed by Tribes. Such individual actions fall within the respective Sierra Club Policies. https://community.sierraclub.org/page/jurisdiction-within-sierra-club
Review and attention to the guidance accompanying this policy is essential for compliance.
Definitions
Although there are multiple definitions of the following terms, for the purposes of this policy:
Co-Management -- an arrangement of shared governance of landscapes and resources between Indigenous entities and government (federal, state, local). Co-management agreements range from Tribal/Native Hawaiian management implementation on the ground to shared decision power over management plus implementation authority. Co-management is a shared responsibility of land management planning and implementation duties between Indigenous entities and government (federal, state, local). Government agencies often use co-management to refer to these arrangements from their perspective.
Co-stewardship – broadly refers to cooperative and collaborative engagements of land managers and Tribes/Native Hawaiians related to shared interests in managing, conserving, and preserving natural and cultural resources under the primary responsibility of Federal land managers. Such cooperative and collaborative engagements can take a wide variety of forms based on the circumstances and applicable authorities in each case. Forms of co-stewardship may include, among other forms, sharing of technical expertise; combining Tribal and government agency capabilities to improve resource management and advance the responsibilities and interests of each; and making Tribal Knowledge, experience, and perspectives integral to the public’s experience of Federal lands.
Indigenous people often prefer stewardship to more accurately reflect their relationship with nature.
Indigenous Entity – This document uses the term “Indigenous entity " to formally encompass recognized Tribes at the Federal or state level and Indigenous communities that have not been recognized formally. Other synonymous terms include Native American, Indigenous Groups, Native Nations, Indigenous Polynesian People of Hawaii (Native Hawaiians), Tribes, Pueblos, and Indians. Language and terminology varies across region and generation.
Federally Recognized Tribe – A federally recognized Tribe is an American Indian or Alaska Native Tribal entity that is recognized as having a government-to-government relationship with the United States, with the responsibilities, powers, limitations, and obligations attached to that designation and is eligible for funding and services from the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Furthermore, federally recognized Tribes are recognized as possessing certain inherent rights of self-government (i.e., Tribal sovereignty) and are entitled to receive certain federal benefits, services, and protections because of their special relationship with the United States. At present, there are 574 federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native Tribes and villages (Indian Affairs, n.d.). Some Indigenous Tribes are not formally recognized.
State and other Tribal Recognition - There are various levels of recognition. State-recognized tribes are tribes recognized by individual states, usually through the state legislature, a state commission, or similar organization. Some state-recognized tribes are also federally recognized. The Indigenous Polynesian People of Hawaii (Kānaka Maoli) are not organized in tribes but the state constitution of Hawaii commits the state to preservation of Hawaiian culture. State-recognized tribes are eligible for substantially fewer benefits than federally recognized ones. The main reason tribes petition for state recognition is to have their existence acknowledged and to continue a government-to-government relationship with the state. In many cases, unrecognized Indigenous entities' political leaders should be accorded the same level of respect as government officials, despite the lack of formal recognition. Indigenous governance structures are often imposed or influenced by US Government acts and often are dissimilar from traditional Indigenous governance structures. Be aware that there may be a parallel system of political and social authority to the US-imposed Indigenous government.
Land-back -- a transfer or purchase of ownership from Federal (or other ownership) to Federal trust land status held for the Indigenous people or transfer of ownership from Federal/state/local government or private ownership to a fully Indigenous entity (land trust, non-profit or corporation)
Landback Movement – The Land Back movement advocates for a transfer of decision-making power over land to Indigenous communities. The movement does not ask current residents to vacate their homes but maintains that Indigenous governance is possible, sustainable, and preferred for public lands. LAND BACK is a movement that has existed for generations with a long legacy of organizing and sacrifice to rematriate Indigenous lands back into Indigenous hands. According to NDN Collective, LAND BACK is more than just a campaign. “It is a political framework that allows us to deepen our relationships across the field of organizing movements working towards true collective liberation. It allows us to envision a world where Black, Indigenous, and People of Color liberation co-exists. It is our political, organizing, and narrative framework from which [NDN Collective] do[es] the work” (Landback 2021).
References
Bureau of Land Management. 2022. “Co-Stewardship with Federally Recognized Indian and Alaska Native Tribes Pursuant to Secretary’s Order 3403”. Last modified September 13, 2022. https://www.blm.gov/policy/pim-2022-011
Indian Affairs. n.d.”Featured Services”. Last accessed April 11, 2024.https://www.bia.gov/
Landback.2021. “Landback”. Last accessed April 11,2024. https://landback.org/
United States Department of the Interior. 2023a. “301 DM 7 Department Responsibilities for Consideration and Inclusion of Indigenous Knowledge in Departmental Actions and Scientific Research”. Last modified December 5, 2023. https://www.doi.gov/document-library/departmental-manual/301-dm-7-departmental-responsibilities-consideration-and
US Department of Interior. 2023b. “Biden Harris Administration Takes Steps to Increase Co-Stewardship Opportunities, Incorporate Indigenous Knowledge, Protect Sacred Sites”. Last modified December 6, 2023. https://www.doi.gov/press releases/biden-harris-administration-takes-steps-increase-co-stewardship-opportunities
Adopted by the Sierra Club Board of Directors, September 13, 2025