Are parts of Indian reservations public property?

I tried googling this but the answer isn’t so clear.

I was watching a BBC travel documentary where a sort of eclectic guy from the UK was trying to get across the USA with no money by hitchhiking and staying with people. I don’t know if he had a camera man or not, some shots were clearly done with a cheap digi cam held by him.

I’m not sure how but he some how ended up on a Indian reservation and started talking to a young woman and they talked for a while, she said no to his request to stay or get transport. Then a young man who was her brother came up to him and told him he needed to leave the reservation right now. This was the sole break in continuity and next he was back on the road with no indication how.

Can a resident of a reservation order someone to leave? Or was this just a threat worded very politely? To be clear he didn’t say leave our property, but leave the area. It would be like a random person telling someone to leave the town they were in.

I see tribal courts can expel people:

EDIT:Whoops not a tribal court, a US court.

http://www.bia.gov/FAQs/

General Rules Criminal Jurisdiction in Indian Country

WAG - He was asked to leave because he was a “foreigner” who apparently was disrespectful.

I live a few miles from the Flathead (Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation) Reservation in NW Montana. I know that parts of the reservation have been sold to private land owners, so they would certainly have free access to move through the reservation, and US Route 93 cuts right through the reservation and is of course open to everyone, but if you we were wandering around the reservation, and especially if you were acting suspiciously or disrespectfully, I would think they would have the right to ask you to leave if you were not a member of the tribe. If you refused they could call the tribal police and I believe they would escort you off the reservation. It’s not public land like a national park is public land, it is there for the use of the members of the tribe and their invited guests. I used to ride my horses on the reservation but I had to buy a permit to do so. I was stopped once by a tribal game warden and was asked to produce my permit, which I luckily had in my possession at the time, otherwise they could fine me.

There’s a reservation just to the East of Scottsdale. Although there are no signs saying that public access is forbidden (in fact, there is a casino on the reservation), it’s well know that Tribal police don’t like people using the reservation as a shortcut, and are quick to ticket non-tribal speeders (even 1mph).

It would be like a random person telling someone to leave the town they were in.

Not really. Reservations are tribal lands. You don’t have any “right” to be there. If a member of the tribe asks you to leave, you’d best be on your way.

Back in the day, I did my share of hitchhiking in the Southwest and “hippies” were not welcome on tribal lands. Just another white man trying to get something for nothing at the expense of people who have very little to begin with.

So this guy shows up and after a little conversation starts asking for favors and I would assume offers nothing in return? Of course he needs to leave.

Yes, it’s public property. But you are not a member of that particular public.

I understand where you’re coming from with that idea, but I’m not sure it really applies in most cases. None of the public facilities in my area (libraries, parks, administrative offices, streets, bus and train stations, etc.) require US citizenship to use. A few places charge extra fees for non-local residents (irrespective of national citizenship), or e.g. allow residents to park for for longer periods of time, but claiming that only legal residents of Podunk are, or should be, allowed to enter Podunk City Park would be met by stares.

Is this sort of thing true to any meaningful extent outside of reservations? For example, are there public parks in Pennsylvania that only residents of Pennsylvania are allowed to enter, Marylanders stay away under penalty of law, and New Yorkers are right out?

I think it’s more like land owned by a corporation. The Indian Tribe is an organization run by the members for their own benefit (actually, it has some properties of a government). It owns the land. As a result, it can decide exactly how it wants to allow or not allow people to use that land. It may disallow some people, or all outsiders, or only certain ones, from being on their land.

If it is like Canada, there are some rules about public thoroughfares or other state or federal highways, allowing people to drive through, etc. (Not that this stopped Canadian Indians from blocking them when the mood struck them). But, the rest is private property if you are an outsider. Just like the mall cops can ask you to leave a mall, the tribe can ask you to leave their property.

In fact, there have been issues on Canadian reservations (like any small town politics) where even a married couple where one is not a tribe member, the non-member spouse has been told to leave.

You’re very naive if you think First Nations Tribes actually ‘own’ reservation lands. They have been granted say over several aspects of the land, but they do not own it, in my understanding.

Resident parking at most town beaches along Cape Cod. Some beaches are open to the public, the rest are for locals. Granted you can walk or bike there, but the intent is to limit or eliminate most access for visitors.

But it’s wrong to think of Native Reservations as giant public parks. They are like (but not the same as) sovereign nations. Just like the US can kick out foreigners pretty much when they want, the same idea is valid on reservations.

Here’s an example from the Red Lake Reservation in Minnesota:

To make it clear I really had no sympathy for someone making a TV doc who for whatever bizarre reason thought he deserved free food, room, and transport for his bizarre quest. Town was the only phrasing I could think of.

I was just curious how things worked legally, that is all.

By public property I meant roads, sidewalks, parks etc alongside private property like homes and businesses. Not like a national park.

Well, the status of reservations is interesting. A tribe cannot just buy a plot and make it part of the reservation. (Although you see something similar in Canada, where a tribal group will buy some lands and then go through a big long process of negotiation with several levels of government to have it added to their reserve. It’s certainly not automatic, nor even guaranteed) Nor can they sell or give away any land without consent of the government. However, they pretty much exercise full control over the land otherwise. (Not sure of mineral rights issues).

So…if they can’t mortgage or sell…they don’t own the land!

They are granted, by government fiat, some say over some aspects of ‘their’ land.

Again, not sure what the legal status of reservations in USA is, but I assume similar to Canada, where the federal government holds the land “in trust” for the band. Yes, the band cannot sell it. Obviously, if they cannot transfer title, nobody’s going to give them a mortgage. In a way, this is a good thing - from what I’ve heard, band politics is no different than small town politics, except a greater degree of relatedness among the inhabitants. So a crooked or misguided band administration cannot sell the homes out from under the inhabitants or deprive future generations of a birthright. (Only the feds can do that.)

It’s a two-edged sword. The reserve members cannot lose their land, but AFAIK they also cannot have full title (and all that implies) to their own plot of land.

I believe this was a German show and the guy didnt think he ‘deserved’ it but wanted to see if he could travel around the world without money. He worked often along the way to make enough for the next part of his journey.

If there’s no law to back up that order, said member of the tribe can best shove it.

Tribal casinos are public property.

So First Nations people should be treated like children, unable to manage their own affairs? Shouldn’t the government be looking out for you in the same way? What if you sell your land in a bad deal? You’d be up in arms if the government was ‘protecting’ you in this way. Even if I point out, in a way…it’s a good thing?

The government owns the land, straight up. It’s distateful and Canadians don’t like to look this ugly, uncomfortable truth in the eye, but that doesn’t change the facts. And nothing will change until people face the truth.

They DON’T own the land. Period. Any say they have over it is entirely by government fiat and can and has been retracted on any pretext, any time. That’s NOT ownership, by any measure.

That applies to all property, ever, especially in the US.