Citation: Yau I-H, Davenport JR, Rupp RA (2013) Characterizing Inland Pacific Northwest American Viticultural Areas with Geospatial Data. PLoS ONE 8(4): e61994. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0061994

1. What Is Continuity And Change

Instructor’s Manual to accompany O’Connor. Sabato ESSENTIALS OF AMERICAN GOVERNMENT: CONTINUITY AND CHANGE 2004 Edition Sue Davis Denison University New York Boston San Francisco London Toronto Sydney Tokyo Singapore Madrid Mexico.

Editor: Ben Bond-Lamberty, DOE Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, United States of America

Received: September 24, 2012; Accepted: March 18, 2013; Published: April 16, 2013

Copyright: © 2013 Yau et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: Funding from: Northwest Center for Small Fruits Research (http://www.nwsmallfruits.org/); Washington State Grape and Wine Research Group (http://www.washingtonwine.org/about.php). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

In Connecticut, two Indian tribes, the Mohegans and the Mashantucket Pequots, years ago built shiny monuments to American capitalism in the form of their casinos, which have made them extraordinarily wealthy.

Then there are the Schaghticokes. They would also like a piece of the lucrative casino industry. Instead, the tribe owns three modest houses on 400 acres of tribal land that almost cannot be built upon because it slopes so steeply, along the state’s western edge.

The contrast in the tribes’ fortunes underscores a phenomenon in the world of contemporary Native American politics: the sharp divisions that prevail between the tribes that have grasped the brass ring of federal recognition and the resulting largess, and those, like the Schaghticokes, that have fallen short.

Richard L. Velky, the chief of the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation, likes to point out that “Connecticut” means “long tribal river.” The name, he says, is both apt and ironic — apt because of the prolonged, relentless campaign the tribe has waged for federal recognition; ironic because the state, which recognized the tribe in 1736, has thwarted that effort at every turn.

Now Connecticut is exploring the possibility of opening a third casino, to compete with one planned across the border in Springfield, Mass. And once again, the state is working to keep the Schaghticokes (pronounced SCAT-uh-cokes) out of the action, granting only the Mohegans and Pequots the right to pursue another casino — even though this one, in the Hartford area, would not be on an Indian reservation.

“We’ve been here 300 years,” Mr. Velky said in an interview at the tribal offices in Derby, Conn. “Whether Connecticut likes it or not, we are one of the state’s first families, and we will continue to be.”

The Schaghticoke tribe’s plight dates back to the early 1800s, when the state began selling off its land to pay for the members’ health care; the original 2,500 acres soon fell by half. But the current travails extend back to the 1980s, when Connecticut embraced casino gambling as a way to rejuvenate its economy.

The Schaghticokes applied for federal recognition — a prerequisite to being allowed to pursue gambling — beginning in the early 1980s, but the Bureau of Indian Affairs sought more documentation. The Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation and the Mohegan Tribe leapfrogged ahead, securing recognition and the freedom to develop Foxwoods Resort and Casino, which opened in 1986, and Mohegan Sun, which opened 10 years later.

By the time the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation finally won federal recognition in 2004, Connecticut officials had decided that two casinos were enough. The state appealed the federal recognition, with M. Jodi Rell, the governor at the time, and Richard Blumenthal, then the state attorney general, urging the Bureau of Indian Affairs to reconsider. They argued that the Schaghticokes’ application did not show high enough intra-tribal marriage rates in the 1800s to prove social and political continuity.

On Capitol Hill, congressional hearings were convened. Finally, on Columbus Day in 2005 — a bitter coincidence for Mr. Velky — the Bureau of Indian Affairs rescinded the tribe’s recognition.

Nevertheless, the next year, Aurene Martin, the former acting assistant secretary of Indian Affairs, vouched for the Schaghticoke application under oath.

The tribe’s recognition petition was “among the best and most thoroughly researched petitions ever reviewed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs,” she said, in a declaration that the Schaghticokes used in a lawsuit challenging the revocation.

One of the state officials who was intent on thwarting the Schaghticokes was Joseph I. Lieberman, the former Democratic and Independent senator. Today his law firm is representing the tribe in its continuing quest for recognition and an entryway into the gambling business.

In an interview, Mr. Lieberman explained that in the mid-2000s there was growing resistance to casino gambling and that officials thought a third casino could cannibalize the existing two.

“There was a popular response also that Connecticut was changing as a result of the two casinos and the brakes should be put on before other tribes were recognized and new casinos established,” he said.

The town of Kent, where the tribe has its 400 acres, was particularly anxious, given that the tribal lands overlapped with the Kent School, an exclusive private boarding school; Connecticut Light & Power; and the Preston Mountain Club.

Federal recognition would allow the Schaghticokes to bring land claims against the private property owners. In recent years, the tribe has tried to reclaim its land in court, but to no avail.

Now that the climate for casinos has changed, Mr. Lieberman believes that continued opposition to the Schaghticokes is unfair.

“We are at a very different time,” he said. “Today, Connecticut is not worried about more casinos in the state. The concern is about competition for the two existing casinos from the new casino” in western Massachusetts.

Mr. Lieberman and Mr. Velky are especially angry about a special act passed by the General Assembly, designating the Mashantucket Pequots and the Mohegans as the sole authorized parties to pursue a third casino. The tribe has filed a lawsuit challenging the legislation, arguing that since a third casino would be strictly commercial in nature — since it would be off tribal land — then any commercial entity should be granted the right to bid.

Mr. Lieberman called the favoritism shown to the Mohegans and Pequots “unfair and unjust in general, but particularly to the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation, as a Native American tribe recognized by the State of Connecticut for centuries.”

Before it filed its lawsuit, the tribe tried an end run around the special act by quietly applying to the Connecticut Department of State to form a limited liability corporation for the purpose of developing a casino. The agency initially accepted the application, but then, after officials in Kent and elsewhere protested, it did an about-face.

Denise Merrill, the Connecticut secretary of state, said the application had been accepted in error. In an interview with a local television station, she said “99.99 percent of the time, our only job is to say, yes, you have a name, address and an agent for process, you’re a business.”

But, in an analogy that made the tribe bristle, Ms. Merrill added: “We do not record anything about the purpose of that business. To give you an example, if someone said we’re in the business of robbing banks, we wouldn’t have even recorded that.”

State officials point out that the special act did not provide approval of a third casino, but simply gave the two tribes the right to propose a project. The tribes say they are zeroing in on a location for a casino, which would need final approval from the legislature and the governor’s office.

The Schaghticokes’ fortunes appeared to improve last year, after the Bureau of Indian Affairs set out to streamline the process of federal recognition, which would have allowed the tribe to reapply and, many believed, succeed. But after another vociferous campaign by state officials, including most forcefully by Mr. Blumenthal, now a Democratic United States Senator, the bureau, in the end, inserted language saying that any tribe that had previously been denied recognition could not reapply.

“The Schaghticoke Tribal Nation was already denied federal recognition by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and should not have two bites at the apple,” Mr. Blumenthal said in an email.

Asked about the Schaghticokes, a spokeswoman for Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, a Democrat, said simply, “We oppose recognition and we’re confident they do not meet the criteria for recognition.”

Complicating matters for the Schaghticokes is the fact that a smaller splinter group, the Schaghticoke Indian Tribe, submitted its own application for federal recognition. Because this is the first time the tribe is applying, it is not subject to the same restrictions as the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation.

Beginning in the 1600s, European settlers first described the Schaghticoke tribe as inhabiting lands in northwestern Connecticut. The tribe, then with 500 to 600 members, moved with the seasons across the Housatonic Valley, setting up villages and smaller camps where they hunted, fished and made brooms and tin crafts.

After the Schaghticoke reservation was established by the state in the early 1700s, however, the tribe began to struggle. In the 19th century, after the state had appointed a series of overseers, much of the tribe’s land was sold off. From 1925 to 1972, Connecticut intensified a “policy of detribalization and termination, making it extremely difficult” for members to live and gather on the reservation, according to the tribe’s website. Today, the tribe’s remaining 300 members are scattered across a few counties.

Whether or not Connecticut eventually gives its blessing to a third casino, the Schaghticokes will keep pushing for recognition.

What Is Continuity And Change

“It’s kind of sad when you say you have to prove your existence,” Mr. Velky said. “We had to go back 300 years to prove our first encounter with Europeans. It’s not easy when you have an overseer, who is the state, who is overseeing you and fighting against you at the same time.”