Matt Miller

Southeast tribal officials are welcoming a decision by a state judge that’s based on their inherent right of self-governance. The latest opinion specifies that their jurisdiction includes the issuance of child support orders that the State of Alaska has, so far, refused to honor.

“I was just delighted,” said attorney Holly Handler who argued the case for the Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska. CCTHITA is the sovereign tribal government for over 27,000 Tlingit and Haida Indians worldwide.

“The Tribe has been waiting for sometime to get a decision in this case,” said Handler.

Tribal court orders specifying the garnishment of income tax refunds, unemployment benefits, and Permanent Fund Dividends were ignored by the State of Alaska. Tribal courts had issued the orders for either child support, or for reimbursement of benefits paid out by the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program, the tribe’s version of the Alaska Temporary Assistance Program.

CCTHITA filed the suit in January 2010. Oral arguments were held last April. Superior Court Judge Philip Pallenberg of Juneau issued the 16-page opinion on Tuesday, October 25 which referred to the recent State v. Native Village of Tanana opinion and the pivotal John v. Baker opinion issued by the Alaska Supreme Court in 1999. Justices ruled then that tribes had the sovereign authority to adjudicate custody of tribal children in their own courts, but they did not specifically touch on the issue of child support. Judge Pallenberg, however, writes that child custody and support are naturally intertwined. In State courts, for example, both issues are considered at the same time. Pallenberg considers monetary support as an integral part of any custody determination and a paramount duty that any parent has to their children.

“It’s not charting any strange and bizarre territory,” said Handler. “It’s really a direct application of John v. Baker to child support cases.”

David Voluck, chief judge for the Sitka Tribe of Alaska and family law magistrate for the CCTHITA, calls it a strong and solid opinion that’s based on centuries of precedent, principles, and legal reasoning of federal Indian law.

“Every other facet of family law that impacts a child — it is agreed — can fall under the inherent sovereighty of a tribal court,” said Voluck. “So it really makes no sense to argue that the financial support (or) the child support, that’s different.”

Voluck says he hears as many as thirty cases a month. He says he can recall at least ten cases that he’s heard where a poor working relationship between the tribe and the State has affected support for the family.

Attorneys who defended the State did not respond to inquiries seeking comment. But — among their claims outlined in briefing documents — the Central Council has no jurisdiction under Alaska’s version of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act, the law that allows recognition of support orders from different states.

Judge Pallenberg’s opinion notes an amendment by the Legislature two years ago that stemmed from federal welfare reform legislation; the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act included a ‘tribe’ as part of the definition of a ‘state.’

Jessie Archibald, a staff attorney for the Tribal Child Support Unit, says the tribe’s child support order should be processed just as any state child support case is processed. The Tribal Child Support Unit has handled about 500 cases since its inception four years ago.

“Initially, there was just a small number of cases,” said Archibald. “As we’ve grown, there are more and more cases.”

State of Alaska Child Support Division Director John Mallonee says they are still reviewing the opinion. He declined to immediately comment on it or any potential impacts on his division’s operations. He referred further questions to the State Department of Revenue’s Commissioner’s office.

Additional related claims still must be decided in the case before a final judgment is issued. Since state attorneys did not respond for comment, it’s unknown whether they plan to eventually appeal.

Federal prosecutors’ case against a former Juneau fishing guide initially accused of illegally selling bear and bird parts may be coming to an end.

37-year old Michael Patrick Duby is expected to plead guilty Monday, October 31st to violating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in U.S. District Court in Juneau. All other charges against him are being dropped as part of an agreement with prosecutors.

The single remaining charge concerns sale of at least eleven black-billed magpies on eBay from February of 2008 through June of 2009. That’s even after being warned by eBay officials that such sales could be illegal. Prosecutors say he sold the parts under the screen name of “Shortraker.”

Duby, who worked out of Juneau as a charter boat captain in his company “FishHunter Charters,” could be sentenced to as much as two years in prison, pay a $250,000 dollar fine, and spend three years on supervised release.

He’ll also forfeit fourteen magpie skins, four snipe skins, one crow, a black bear shoulder mount, and a compound bow and arrows used on illegal bear hunts.

Court documents indicate that the plea agreement was reached inlaate September, almost immediately after a federal grand jury returned with a superceding indictment against Duby.

In addition to selling as many as twenty-seven magpies, the more-recent six-count indictment also listed the illegal sale of two common snipes, one American crow, and parts of a black bear hide. All of the parts were allegedly sold as fly-tying supplies to buyers in Washington State. Sale of the birds is considered a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Duby was given a 20-year suspended sentence in September for illegal hunting in Montana. He was also ordered to pay $15,500 in fines and restitution. Duby pled no contest in April to felony charges of illegal possession of game animals related to the taking of at least two bull elk, eleven deer, and thirteen antelope.

Other hunters, including Duby’s father and a friend from Washington State, were also charged in connection with the poaching. They were either sentenced to suspended jail time or probation.

Two Vancouver-based mining companies say they’ve finished this year’s test drilling for gold and silver deposits at Herbert Glacier. Both companies have also finalized their joint venture agreement for development of a mine.

Quaterra Resources in June of last year partnered with Grande Portage for exploration and development of the area. Grande Portage committed to spending $1.25 million dollars in exploration costs before next June in exchange for a 65-percent interest in the project.

In late 2007, Quaterra Resources acquired the 1700 acre property, now with as many as 91 federal mining claims either staked or leased from three local prospectors. There are at least four to five significant veins that strike east-to-west and dip sharply to the north around the Herbert Glacier about 18-miles north of downtown Juneau.

In a statement issued Wednesday by both companies, the agreement appears to differ little from when it was first announced last year. It includes a new provision that if any party does not contribute their proportionate share of development costs, then a dilution formula will be invoked if any party’s interest is reduced to 10-percent or less. The partner’s interest will be automatically converted into a 1-percent net smelter returns royalty, which may be acquired by the other party for $1 million.

Field test drilling at Herbert Glacier is now over for the season. Both companies announced that they completed 46 drill holes from 9 platforms totaling 6532 metres of diamond drilling.

Some of that drilling has included high-grade concentrations of gold from 2- to 6-ounces per ton. One test drill revealed nearly 39-ounces of silver per ton.

Assays from the latest set of test drilling are still pending from a laborartory.

Grande Portage President Ian Klassen said in a printed statement that they’re delighted with the significance of the results. He says they intersected five separate high grade bodies, four of which are new discoveries.

“A new vein which was previously only hypothesized now shows as much potential for gold as our other big veins,” wrote Klassen.

A test drilling schedule for 2012 that will help define the ore bodies is expected to be submitted for permitting during the last quarter of 2011.

Admiralty Enviromental of Juneau has been hired to do baseline water studies that are required under State of Alaska’s Large Mine permitting requirements.