Has the U.S. Government tried to fix the problems resulting from allotment?
In the Indian Land Consolidation Act Amendments of 2000, Congress found that “the problem of the fractionation of Indian lands … is the result of a policy of the Federal Government, cannot be solved by Indian tribes, and requires a solution under Federal law.” However, to come up with solutions to fix the problems resulting from allotment has taken nearly 50 years. Furthermore, many of these solutions are still considered unsatisfactory for a variety of reasons.

In 1934, after sharp criticism of the allotment policy and the workings of the Indian Service, the government prohibited the issuance of any further allotments to Indians by passing the Indian Reorganization Act. While the government stopped the policy of allotment, it did nothing to end further land fractionation and checkerboarding of reservations despite the fact that these problems were already manifest.

After nearly fifty years, in 1983 Congress passed the Indian Land Consolidation Act. In 1984 and again in 2000, Congress amended the act due to Supreme Court rulings on the constitutionality of one of the provisions and the need for other mechanisms by which fractionation could be reduced. In brief, these pieces of legislation aim to promote tribal land and interest consolidation by encouraging tribally created probate laws and greater tribal administrative control over acquired fractional interests.

There have been several bills proposed during the 106th, 107th, and 108th Congresses that would have further amended the Indian Land Consolidation Act. Most recently, the “American Indian Probate Reform Act of 2004” was signed into law by President Bush on October 27, 2004. For instructions on how to access this important amendment, visit the Recent Allotment Legislation section of this site.

What have tribes done to consolidate their land holdings or reacquire land?
Tribes have used a number of strategies to consolidate their land holdings or augment their tribal land base. These strategies include:

Is the Cobell vs. Norton class action suit related to allotment?
Yes. Cobell vs. Norton is a class action suit of approximately 500,000 Individual Indian Money (IIM) account holders filed against the Department of the Interior that intends to force the federal government to account for billions of dollars belonging to Indians and their heirs.

The history underlying the litigation is intimately connected to U.S. allotment policy. As mentioned in the introduction section of this site, Indians were allotted beneficial ownership of 40- to 160- acre allotments. Because these lands were initially held in trust by the federal government, it assumed full responsibility for management of the trust lands which included collecting and disbursing to the Indian allottees or their heirs any revenues generated by mining, oil, gas extraction, timber, grazing, or other leases.

However, due to irresponsible behavior on the part of the BIA and the Department of the Interior, the U.S. Government has no accurate records for hundreds of thousands of Indian beneficiaries or of billions of dollars owed to the beneficiaries covered by the lawsuit.

Click here to go to the Cobell vs. Norton website to learn more about this historic law suit.

HOME | ABOUT | BOARD and STAFF | FAQs | EVENTS | PUBLICATIONS | DONATIONS | GRANTS |
LINKS | RESOURCES | SHOPPING | CONTACT US | PRIVACY POLICY

© Copyright 2002-2008 Indian Land Tenure Foundation®. All rights reserved.