Wailaki Descendants to Speak During Public Comment Period at Great Redwood Trail Meeting in Ukiah January 25

[Photo: Alicia Hamann via the Coastal Conservancy]
A group of Wailaki Descendants and their allies, calling themselves the Kinest’e Community Coalition, are planning to address the Great Redwood Trail Agency during public comment at the GRTA Board meeting in Ukiah on January 25th. The meeting will take place at the Ukiah City Council Chambers at 300 Seminary Avenue from 10:30am-12pm.
On January 8, the group’s attorney Shannon Wilhite wrote a letter requesting the Wailakis be added to the GRTA’s January agenda to discuss Native concerns about the proposed route of the trail, which winds through the heart of the ancestral territory of several local tribes in the Eel River Canyon. The GRTA denied this request, despite the Agency’s repeated assertions that they are taking input from local tribes. Attorney Wilhite spoke with GRT General Manager Elaine Hogan, who “indicated that anything other than participating in the general public comment period would not be available to us.”
The ambitious “rails to trails” project involves the defunct Northcoast Railroad, which was built in 1914 through an area that had been densely populated by Native communities until settlers perpetrated ethnic cleansing of their villages. Wailaki, Yuki and other tribal Descendants trace their ancestry to specific sites within the GRT’s planned route through the canyon, and they assert that the GRT puts their heritage and culture at risk. In addition to untold historic and sacred sites along the river, the land has diverse uses and cultural meaning for tribal members still living there today. They want to be included and at the table during all phases of planning for the GRT, not just asked to weigh in on a lengthy document after the fact.
“The first people of this area are respectfully requesting that they be treated as the original peoples of the land and to give them the respect due,” wrote Attorney Wilhite in the letter. “It is concerning that the GRTA is not actively engaging with these individuals and ensuring the cultural sites will be protected and preserved in a way that honors these people whose land the Trail is on.”
A number of state and federal laws are in place to protect Native cultural resources, archaeological sites, and even elements of the natural landscape that have cultural significance. As a state agency, the GRTA must be in compliance with CEQA, the 1906 Antiquities Act, National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, National Trails System Act, Native American Graves
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
The folks pushing this thing don’t give a shit about how the tribes feel. Since it appears the tribes oppose the plan, theGRTA will seek to minimize tribal opinion. If the tribes supported the trail, I’ll bet the GRTA would trumpet it.
If it was a logging road the ecofreaks would be right behind the tribe.
Let’s take the trail to the train station!
So the railroad wasn’t a problem but a walking trail is
The railroad was and is still a problem. Tribal people were not considered citizens until 1928. Our voices did not matter then.
The Northcoast Railroad system went bankrupt and left a huge mess behind. Toxic railroad ties and metal on the land and in the Eel River. Look it up on YouTube under..Hard times on the Railroad- Eel River Canyon.
Here you go! One benefit of the trail will be cleaning up the river.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhCjYNKXNvk&t=10s
Well, I bet it was. The railroad may have showed up a generation after the massacres. And the survivors were probably not invited to any railway planning.
The trail agencies today don’t want to invite anybody who’s sole intent is to scuttle the entire trail. Some of the early reactions to the trail plans kinda came off as such. I just hope the Wailaki don’t let the Good become the enemy of the Perfect. A walking trail brings some risk of disturbance, but also an opportunity to teach. Killing a hiking trail does not equal reparations. Re-establishing Tribal ownership of property out along the old right of way is a whole other project. What happens if the trail idea is dropped? What happens if for some weird reason rail service were ever reestablished? What if the railroad property was sold to adjacent land owners? What if just the railway was given to the Wailaki? Presumably the ancestral territories extended further than 40 feet off the tracks.
Then, while there isn’t necessarily a connection in this case; wasn’t there a local tribe getting courted by a shady enterprise for some reason, looking to establish a wacky rail line to ship coal to Humboldt Bay a year or two ago?
If the only protections for Tribal resources along the railway NOW is that they’re Hard-to-Get-to, then again: whole separate project than saying yes or no to a trail. Presumably any hillbilly with a motorcycle can get to these areas NOW. Are the Go-lightly Subaru trailhead Patagonia puff coat Roxanne Dunbar Ortiz students the ones the Tribe should be worried about?
Look,you can see their bones poking out of the ground!!!!
“The first people of this area are respectfully requesting that they be treated as the original peoples of the land and to give them the respect due,” wrote Attorney Wilhite in the letter. “It is concerning that the GRTA is not actively engaging with these individuals and ensuring the cultural sites will be protected and preserved in a way that honors these people whose land the Trail is on.” Boy is this a loaded gun. What is the respect due? Clearly such people have a better chance of knowing where and what the liabilities of trail construction are. And should be heard out of common interest in preserving the past. But then claiming ownership of the land oozes with demands of a primacy that doesn’t exist in the present either. With every choice, it’s going to be settled in court.
GRTA needs to hold their horses. Every single word the first peoples have to say should be heard and they should be part of the the planning process every step of the way!
I have a problem with the term ‘first people,’ because there were most certainly many different peoples occupying the area since the settlement of North America which has been estimated to be as long ago as 90,000 years…
Kennewick man. Washington State.
Maybe they should be called the ‘before’ people, then. As in, before you.