Klamath River advocates warn federal permitting bill threatens hard-won tribal protections

The Karuk Tribe is urging California’s U.S. Senators to reject changes to the permitting process

October 31, 2026

The Karuk Tribe is urging California’s U.S. Senators to oppose legislation that would make changes to federal permitting, historic preservation protections, and environmental review requirements.

The legislation, known as the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026, or S. 5653, would make broad changes that tribal organizations, including the Karuk Tribe, say would alter the way federal agencies assess the impacts of projects on tribal cultural sites and historic properties, change water quality certification requirements, extend the term of pollution permits, and alter certain aspects of the endangered species review.

Craig Tucker, a natural resources policy consultant for the Karuk Tribe, said the proposal would impact the laws that tribes have long used to protect their cultural and environmental resources.

“It’s a 430-page bill; there’s a lot of going on in this thing. The thing that really pops for tribes is that it really guts the National Historic Preservation Act, and that affects tribes. It also affects other kinds of historic properties around the country,” said Tucker. “The National Historic Preservation Act creates opportunities for tribes to protect cultural resources and for tribes to have their own historic preservation officers, which have certain authorities to protect natural tribal resources.”

“I think it undermines communities’ ability to seek environmental justice and protect environmental resources that are important to communities,” said Tucker. “Tribes have had to work really hard over the years to have a seat at the table in the decision-making process.”

As Tucker sees it, the bill would diminish a tribe’s ability to stop a project while issues related to cultural resources are being reviewed.

“If a tribe said, ‘That highway you’re building goes right through a cemetery,’ the complaint would not stop the project from moving forward,” Tucker said. “Even if the tribe was eventually proven right, it’s too late. The highway has already been built.”

Tucker said several provisions the bill targets relate to the laws tribes and environmental groups relied on during the Klamath dam removal process.

“It really undermines this concept of tribal sovereignty, and we would argue undermines the ability of the United States to meet its trust obligations to tribes. We’ve been working on the Klamath for all these years. Some of the laws that S. 5653 targets to weaken are the very laws that we relied on to get dam removal,” said Tucker. “The ability of the wildlife agencies like U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the National Marine Fisheries Service to issue mandatory conditions on a new dam license would be taken away in this bill. The authority of states like California to provide the water quality certification or deny the water quality certification of a dam project could be taken away.”

Karuk Vice Chair Kenneth Brink said the bill raises broader issues around tribal authority over cultural resources.

“A federal agency cannot fulfill its trust responsibilities to our people by putting themselves in charge of identifying which sacred places count. We are the only experts in our culture, our religion, and what is sacred to us,” Brink said in a statement. “Early consultation prevents conflict and costly delays.”

Brink said weakening those authorities could make similar outcomes more difficult to achieve in the future.

“Klamath dam removal showed what happens when tribal nations make government and industry confront the harm done to our people,” said Brink. “Congress should help communities achieve that kind of justice. This bill would make it harder, if not impossible.”

Concerns have also focused on proposed changes to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), which requires federal agencies to consider impacts to historic, cultural, and religious sites before approving projects. Tribal organizations, including the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, have argued the changes could reduce tribal participation in the review process and weaken protections for culturally significant places.

Rep. Jared Huffman, whose district encompasses much of the Klamath watershed, said he supports permitting reform but questioned whether the current proposal strikes the right balance.

“I’m all for streamlining transmission and clean energy buildout, but the threshold requirement before making major policy concessions is to actually end Trump’s war on renewables so that hundreds of bottled-up clean energy projects can bring that affordable power to the grid,” said Huffman. “Further, we can’t throw states, tribes, impacted communities, and threatened and endangered wildlife under the bus. And as we streamline and cut red tape, we must make sure the American people, not just powerful corporate interests, have a say in government decisions about what happens to our air, water, and public lands.”

Huffman also asked whether Congress should be pushing the proposal forward at this stage, suggesting that Democrats might have a better negotiating position after the election.

“There’s a way to get there, and parts of this deal are helpful, but some of it concedes too much. Hollowing out the Endangered Species Act through the delegation of authority and problematic definitions,” said Huffman. “From what I’ve seen, Sens. Whitehouse and Heinrich have done some good work, but they’ve been negotiating from a position of weakness, and the tentative deal unveiled today raises significant questions and concerns that would have to be resolved before most Democrats could support it.”

Adam Schiff’s office said that the senator has spoken directly with tribal leaders and is actively working to secure amendments to the proposed changes to the National Historic Preservation Act.

“The senator takes seriously any adverse impacts this bill could have on the tribal nations of California when considering his vote on this legislation, and he has spoken directly to a number of tribal leaders to get their input and consultation,” said a spokesperson for Senator Schiff. “He is leading a push to amend the bill’s proposed changes to the NHPA.”

While the Karuk Tribe opposes several provisions in the bill, its leaders say they are not opposed to energy development itself. Instead, they are calling for an approach that includes tribal consultation and protections for culturally significant places.

“Through meaningful consultation, we can create clean energy and protect sacred sites. Sens. Heinrich and Whitehouse need to explain why building a modern electric grid requires dismantling protections for Tribes, our sacred places and landscapes that our people have cared for since time immemorial. We must work together as sovereign nations,” said Karuk Chairman Russell “Buster” Attebery. “A secure energy future must respect the people and places it is supposed to protect. Our sovereignty should not be sacrificed to fast-track energy development.”

Sens. Martin Heinrich, Sheldon Whitehouse, and Alex Padilla did not respond to the request for comment before the article was published.


By:  Maranda Vargas
Source: Eureka Times Standard