MAZINA’IGAN PAGE 10 WINTER 2018-2019 Inthiseraoftribalnation-building,tribesareexpand- ing their sovereignty by enacting laws addressing envi- ronmentalprotection,publicsafetyandcriminalconduct, andfood(amongotherareas).Whentribeslegislate,they are able to create indigenous responses to problems, and governmental systems that better address the needs and circumstances of their communities. In the area of food law, tribes like the Navajo Nation are using food policy to create system-level changes. The Navajo Junk Food Tax applies to the marketing and sales of unhealthy foods within the reservation. Its goal is to interrupt easy access that food corporations have to Navajo consumers, encouraging retail establishments to use marketing tools like food placement to promote healthy indigenous foods. A Native-led think-tank, the Indigenous Food and AgricultureInstitute(IFAI)oftheUniversityofArkansas LawSchool,isprovidingtribeswithtechnicalassistance on the development of indigenized food systems. IFAI Director, Janie Hipp, J.D., LL.M. (Chickasaw) is leading initiatives on tribal engagement for the 2018 Farm Bill and developing a tribal model food code. Once completed, the IFAI Model Food Code will be a template addressing many aspects of food law for tribes to modify and adopt according to their needs and enforcement capacities. GLIFWC is also working to provide its member tribes with assistance in this area. With support from the Administration for Native Americans, GLIFWC has recentlycompletedyearoneofitsthree-yearChippewaCededTerritoryTraditional Food Regulatory System Project. In the next two years, Commission staff will be working with tribal representatives and community members to develop a model food code for traditional Ojibwe foods, producing scientific reports on food safety for these foods and providing food safety trainings on handling and processing traditional Ojibwe foods. Food law is a highly specialized area of the law, involving the areas of agri- culture, international trade, consumer protection, liability and logistics. Most of the actors in this arena are big, multinational corporations, producing and manu- facturing the majority of foods that end up on our tables. Until very recently, tribal participation in commercially-available food has been virtually non-existent. However, many tribes, concerned about how processed food diets are impact- ing community members, are becoming engaged in food policy development and actual food production. Reducing dependence on foreign, processed foods and increasing access to local, indigenous foods, are goals of the tribal food sover- eignty movement. Food law plays an important role in realizing these goals and revitalizing indigenous food networks. In today’s globalized world, standards are required to ensure that all human food is safe and that consumers have access to accurate information about their food. Food law is complex and multi-jurisdictional, meaning that many different governmental agencies play a role. Eggs, for example, are regulated by multiple agencies.Chickenfarmerswhoproduceeggsonalargescalearerequiredtocomply with local, state and federal regulations regarding waste management, animal feeding and humane treatment of their egg-producing chickens. Once the eggs are laid United States Division of Agricultural(USDA)andFoodandDrugAdministration (FDA)regulation(andinspectionrequirements)applyto the storage of eggs. Transportation of eggs is regulated by the Department of Commerce; the USDA regulates liquefied eggs and egg package labeling; the FDA regu- lates freeze-dried eggs, egg substitutes and imitation egg products. If eggs are used for a commercial product in a restaurant—a cake, for instance—that cake must be produced in accordance with the applicable food code. Food codes regulate restaurants and other places where ready-to-eat food is made and sold on-site, including federally-funded feeding sites (school lunch programs, etc.). The FDA blesses a model food code, which is updated every four years and becomes the basis of state law (and the law of several tribes). Food codes would require that workers making the cake are not sick withacommunicabledisease,thatthecakeissoldwithin a certain time after it is baked, and it is produced in a commercial kitchen (among other requirements). The major federal laws that apply to food production include the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA), originally adopted in 1906, and the Food, Drug and CosmeticAct (FDCA), originally adopted in 1938.These laws have been amended over the years, with the most significant amendments to the FDCAcoming in 2011, with the adoption of the Food Safety and Modernization Act (FMSA). The FMIA regulates “meat” (meat from cattle, sheep, swine or goats), requiring that meat sold for human consumption within the United States comes from animals that are inspected before and after slaughter, certified by a veterinarian as disease-free, and are killed within a slaughterhouse. Meat from wild game animals is regulated by the FDA, and is not considered to be “from an approved source” due to the lack of veterinarian inspection. The food codes of most states require that all meat originates from an approved source, prohibiting the sale or provision of wild-harvested game.Tribes have been actively working to change this policy. Wild-harvested meats are a part of many tribes’traditional diets and constitute a healthy alternative to farmed meat products, which generally have a higher fat content. Native communities in Alaska have been leaders in this area, working with the State of Alaska to develop food safety standards in order to serve wild gameandothertraditionalfoodsinschools,hospitalsandotherfederally-regulated feeding sites. The 2013 Farm Bill also included a provision allowing federally- funded feeding programs primarily serving NativeAmericans to accept donations of traditional Native American foods, including wild game, to serve as part of regular programming. TheChippewaCededTerritoryTraditionalFoodRegulatorySystemProjectis about assisting tribes in navigating through the complex maze of food regulation, and developing templates specific to Ojibwe traditional foods, in order to increase tribalparticipationinfoodsystemsandpromoteaccesstohealthy,traditionalfoods. Tribes explore food policy options Wild-harvested meats are a part of many tribes’ traditional diets and constitute a healthy alternative to farmed meat products, which generally have a higher fat content. (see Food policy, page 22) • TRADITIONAL FOODS • Traditional foods research continues, community roundtables on deck GLIFWC, member tribes developing uniform food codes Another year moves to a close on the calendar but for the “GLIFWC Chippewa Ceded Territory Traditional Food Regulatory System Project” year two is just beginning. From eastern Minnesota, through Wisconsin and across Upper Michigan, GLIFWC traditional food specialists are making plans to visit Ojibwe reservations in 2019 to discuss development of tribal food codes. Year one’s capstone was the completion of a Traditional Food Safety Contaminant Report, which discussesknownrisksimpactingthesafeconsumption of identified traditional foods. Examples of known risks include mercury in fish and salmonella bacteria in birds. Identifying risks means steps can be identi- fied to reduce risk, for example, choosing smaller fish or cooking fowl and poultry to proper temperatures. Steps like these can help keep foods safe and healthy for consumers. For risks that lacked enough scientific evidence, a companion scientific-unknown report was created. This report will guide the sampling that scientific testing staff are undertaking this year. For example, exposure to lead in deer meat from animals harvested with lead ammunition is well-studied, however, little is known about lead in wild turkeys. Information from thetworeports,andtheresultsoftesting,willcreatethe scientific foundation in which a customizable model food code will be developed. While science and food safety staff were busy with the reports, policy staff performed an in-depth legal review and summary report. Staff worked with a legal firm to develop a report identifying regulations on federal, tribal, state, and local levels which impact small scale food production. Now that year two is underway, project staff are working with member-tribe communities to collect samples for analysis and testing. Starting in 2019, projectstaffwillvisiteachcommunitytohostaround- tablediscussionrelatedtomodelfoodcodes,aswellas meetingwithnaturalresourcestaffandfoodprocessing facilities. This will provide an opportunity for tribal members to learn about the project and provide input. Community input will drive the development of the model codes. By the end of year, the results of the scientific testing will be made available along with a food pro- cessing capacity report. Project staff will conclude year two by developing trainings to be taught in the third and final year of the project. If you are interested in attending the roundtable discussioninyourtribalcommunitykeepaneyeonthe GLIFWC Facebook page for the dates and location. By Owen Holly Maroney GLIFWC Community Dietician Mizise (wild turkey). (Robert Engberg/Flickr/CC by 2.0) By Philomena Kebec GLIFWC Policy Analyst