Proposed Finding Against Federal Acknowledgment of the Choctaw Nation of Florida Tribe, 39703-39705 [2010-16939]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
• Bureau of Indian Affairs
• Indian Affairs Bureau

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 132 (Monday, July 12, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39703-39705]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-16939]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs


Proposed Finding Against Federal Acknowledgment of the Choctaw 
Nation of Florida Tribe

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of proposed finding.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to 25 CFR 83.10(e), notice is hereby given that the 
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs (AS-IA) proposes to decline to 
acknowledge that the group known as the ``Choctaw Nation of Florida'' 
(CNF), Petitioner 288, c/o Mr. Alfonso James, Jr., Post Office 
Box 6322, Marianna, Florida, 32447, is an Indian tribe within the 
meaning of Federal law. This notice is based on an investigation that 
determined that the petitioner does not meet one of the seven mandatory 
criteria set forth in 25 CFR Part 83.7, specifically criterion 83.7(e), 
and therefore does not meet the requirements for a government-to-
government relationship with the United States.

DATES: Comments on this proposed finding (PF) are due on or before 
January 10, 2011. The petitioner then has a minimum of 60 days to 
respond to those comments. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 
this notice for more information about these dates.

[[Page 39704]]


ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed finding or requests for a copy of 
the report which summarizes the evidence, reasoning, and analyses that 
are the basis for this proposed finding, should be addressed to the 
Office of Federal Acknowledgment, 1951 Constitution Avenue, NW., MS-
34B-SIB, Washington, DC 20240. Interested or informed parties must 
provide copies of their submissions to the petitioner.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R. Lee Fleming, Director, Office of 
Federal Acknowledgment, (202) 513-7650.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is published in accordance with 
authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to the 
AS-IA by 209 DM 8.
    The petitioner claims to be a group of Choctaw Indians that 
migrated from North Carolina to Georgia and then Florida following the 
Indian removal of the 1830s. None of the available evidence in this 
petition or that found by OFA researchers demonstrates the validity of 
this claim.
    All the available evidence in the petition record indicates the CNF 
is an association formed in 2003 of individuals who claim but have not 
documented Indian ancestry. Indeed, the evidence shows the group's 
ancestors were consistently identified as non-Indians and as living in 
non-Indian communities. The group incorporated in the State of Texas in 
July 2003, but has an office in Marianna, Florida, on the eastern part 
of the Florida panhandle. Available evidence indicates the group began 
holding meetings probably no earlier than September 2004. The 
regulations provide that the Department may not acknowledge 
associations, organizations, corporations, or groups of any character 
formed in recent times. Since early 2004, the membership of the group, 
as reflected on various membership lists, has fluctuated from a low of 
52 to a high of 158.
    To meet criterion 83.7(e), the petitioner must demonstrate Indian 
ancestry through descent from a historical Indian tribe, or tribes 
which combined and functioned as a single entity. The petitioner claims 
its members descend from the historical Choctaw Indian tribe. Most 
members of the petitioner claim to descend from the historical Choctaw 
Indian tribe through their direct ancestors Burton Hunter (ca. 1833--
bef. 1907) and his wife Lucy (ca. 1842--1907). None of the available 
evidence demonstrates this claimed descent for Burton Hunter or his 
spouse Lucy from the Choctaw Indian tribe or any other Indian tribe. To 
reach this conclusion, the Department examined an extensive body of 
documentation submitted by the petitioner and obtained by Department 
researchers. The documentation included Federal and State censuses from 
1850 to 1945, probate records from Jackson County, Florida, birth, 
marriage and death certificates from the State of Florida and 
elsewhere, church records from Jackson County, Florida, World War I 
civilian draft registration records, homestead application records from 
the General Land Office, Indian Agency rolls (with application 
materials) and censuses from 1848 to 1940, and historical treaties 
dealing with the Choctaw Indian Nation.
    All the evidence clearly shows that Burton and Lucy Hunter, their 
relatives, and descendants were not identified as Indian and do not 
descend from a historical Indian tribe. No Federal or State censuses 
between 1870 and 1945 demonstrated that these individuals identified 
themselves, or that the census enumerators identified them, as Choctaw 
or Indian, or as belonging to Choctaw or any other Indian tribe. No 
county court, property, or probate records identified them as Choctaw 
or Indian, or as belonging to Choctaw or any other Indian tribe. No 
marriage, church, military, or vital records stated that the 
petitioner's ancestors were identified as Choctaw or Indian, or as 
belonging to Choctaw or any other Indian tribe. Rather, the evidence 
clearly shows Burton and Lucy Hunter, their relatives and their 
descendants were consistently identified as non-Indians living in non-
Indian communities.
    The Department also examined evidence, submitted by the petitioner 
or obtained by the Department, for six current members or their family 
lines that apparently descended from an individual other than the 
Burton or Lucy Hunter named above. This evidence included Federal and 
State censuses from 1850 to 1945, birth, marriage, and death records, 
and Indian agency rolls and censuses from 1848 to 1940. None of this 
evidence for these individuals or their ancestors demonstrated descent 
from the historical Choctaw Indian tribe or any other Indian tribe. 
Instead, all of the evidence showed they were consistently identified 
as non-Indians living in non-Indian communities.
    To summarize, the petitioner claims to have descended as a group 
from the historical tribe of Choctaw Indians. There is no primary or 
reliable secondary evidence submitted by the petitioner or located by 
OFA showing that any of the named ancestors or members of the group 
descended from the historical Choctaw Indian tribe or any other Indian 
tribe. None of the documentation on the petitioner's members and their 
individual ancestors, submitted by the petitioner or found by OFA 
researchers, supports the petitioner's claims of descent from the 
historical Choctaw Indian tribe or any other Indian tribe. The 
extensive evidence does not support any Indian ancestry. In fact, the 
evidence clearly shows the petitioner's members and ancestors were 
consistently identified as non-Indians living in non-Indian 
communities.
    The Department proposes to decline to acknowledge Petitioner 
288 as an Indian tribe because the evidence clearly 
establishes that the members of the group do not descend from a 
historical Indian tribe as required under mandatory criterion 83.7(e). 
The AS-IA concludes that the CNF clearly does not meet criterion 
83.7(e), which satisfies the requirement for issuing a PF under 
83.10(e). If, in the response to the PF, the petitioner provides 
sufficient evidence that it meets criterion 83.7(e) under the 
reasonable likelihood standard, the Department will undertake a review 
of the petition under all seven mandatory criteria. If, in the response 
to the PF, the petitioner does not provide sufficient evidence that it 
meets criterion 83.7(e) under the reasonable likelihood standard, the 
AS-IA will issue the final determination based upon criterion 83.7(e) 
only.
    Publication of the Assistant Secretary's PF in the Federal Register 
initiates a 180-day comment period during which the petitioner and 
interested and informed parties may submit arguments and evidence to 
support or rebut the conclusions in the PF (25 CFR 83.10(i)). Comments 
should be submitted in writing to the address listed in the ADDRESSES 
section of this notice. Interested or informed parties must provide 
copies of their submissions to the petitioner. The regulations at 25 
CFR 83.10(k) provide petitioner with a minimum of 60 days to respond to 
any submissions on the PF received from interested and informed parties 
during the comment period.
    At the end of the periods for comment and response on a PF, the AS-
IA will consult with the petitioner and interested parties to determine 
an equitable timeframe for consideration of written arguments and 
evidence. The Department will notify the petitioner and interested 
parties of the date such consideration begins. After consideration of 
the written arguments and evidence rebutting or supporting the PF and 
the petitioner's response to the comments of interested parties and

[[Page 39705]]

informed parties, the AS-IA will make a final determination regarding 
the petitioner's status. The Department will publish a summary of this 
determination in the Federal Register.

    Dated: July 2, 2010.
Donald Laverdure,
Deputy Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2010-16939 Filed 7-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-G1-P