The nearly 10,000-acre patch of land located near El Reno in western Oklahoma has been under federal government control since the 1800s and was once used for military purposes. It is now home to a Department of Agriculture center whose research includes forage, hydraulics and livestock. But for decades, the federally recognized Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes have fought for the land to be transferred back to them.
The nation may be gaining ground with one of President Donald Trump’s cabinet members: Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.
“[Burgum] did say it was going to be one of his priorities to investigate on whether those lands can be returned,” said Reggie Wassana, the governor of the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes.
In early May, Wassana and other tribal leaders met with Burgum, who had a reputation of working with the tribes on issues like public safety, education and tribal representation in his home state of North Dakota.
The Department of the Interior declined to comment on the meeting.
“Out of respect for the significance and oftentimes confidentiality of these discussions, the Department does not have a statement to offer on meetings between the Secretary and Tribal Nations at this time,” J. Elizabeth Peace, a spokesperson at the department, sent in an email.
The White House did not respond to requests for comment.
But Wassana said he hopes Burgum can discuss the issue with President Donald Trump.
“If the president wants to actually cut expenses in the federal government, if he wants to try to give people the opportunity to govern themselves, the best situation to be in for both the tribes and federal government is to return some of the property and let the tribes create their own revenue and their own ability to assist their tribal members,” Wassana said.
He added that the land could create job opportunities for tribal members.
In recent years, the tribes have succeeded in expanding their land under trust status. But this particular piece of land has remained elusive.
Wassana is hoping that more progress to return it to the tribes can be made under the Trump administration. Trump in his presidential campaign said he would strengthen tribal sovereignty and improve economic development for Native American tribes.
The Biden administration considered transferring the land back to the tribes. Biden’s USDA told The Hill that any transfer of land would be complicated, but it was “committed to finding a long-term workable solution.”
Ultimately, it didn’t happen because of a long-standing provision in the farm bill, which has been spearheaded for years by Oklahoma Rep. Frank Lucas, who represents the district the land is in. The Oklahoma and Central Plains Agricultural Research Center that’s on the land does “fundamental research,” Lucas said.
“And it is 6,500 acres of virgin grasslands, something we don’t have much of in western Oklahoma,” Lucas said.
Any transfer of the land is blocked by Congress through at least September. A USDA spokesperson said in an email that the land is unavailable for transfer.
“Due to limitations set by Congress in statute, this land cannot currently be declared as excess,” the spokesperson said.
Lucas has long argued the tribes have already been compensated for this piece of land, though the tribes, and Wassana specifically, disagree.
“They were compensated in the 1890s, and they were compensated in 1964,” Lucas said. “Being paid twice seems like a reasonable deal to me.”
The tribes contend the land was not part of the earlier deal as it was set aside for use as a military installation. Since the military no longer uses it, the tribes contend it should be returned.
In a 1999 opinion, the Interior Department agreed that the Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes had a credible equitable claim.
In 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld a district court ruling that the Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes were not entitled to time for discovery because the statute of limitations had expired.
“Because the district court correctly determined that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the Tribes’ claims, we do not reach the court’s alternative conclusion that the 1965 settlement of the Tribes’ ICC suit also bars their present action,” the court wrote.
This story was produced as part of a partnership between NOTUS, a publication of the nonprofit, nonpartisan Allbritton Journalism Institute, and Oklahoma Watch.
Oklahoma Watch, at oklahomawatch.org, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that covers public-policy issues facing the state.
