Pechanga leaders urge Congress to return adjacent BLM parcels to tribal trust

House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs · November 20, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Pechanga Band councilman Mark Luker told the subcommittee that H.R. 5682 would transfer about 1,261 acres adjacent to the reservation, including parts of Paweska (Puesca) Mountain, into trust to preserve sacred sites and environmental corridors; he said the transfer would not change land use or create new development.

WASHINGTON — Councilman Mark Luker of the Pechanga Band of Indians told the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Nov. 17 that H.R. 5682 would restore tribal stewardship over about 1,261 acres of BLM land adjacent to the Pechanga reservation, including culturally significant portions of Paweska (also written as Puesca) Mountain.

Luker said the parcels are directly adjacent to reservation land and include sites central to Pechanga creation stories and cultural practice. “This legislation finally brings most of Paweska Mountain back under tribal protection, ensuring its preservation as part of the Pechanga Indian Reservation,” he said.

Luker told members the transfer would not change existing land use or create development opportunities; rather, it would allow the tribe’s cultural‑resources, environmental and fire departments to conduct surveys, map sites with GIS and manage the area as open space and a multi‑species habitat corridor. He said the tribe plans to continue coordination with local partners, including the Santa Margarita River Conservancy and San Diego State’s ecological conservancy.

Representative Darrell Issa, sponsor of the bill, said Pechanga has a track record of reinvesting revenues to reacquire and steward ancestral lands and that local counties and cities support the tribe’s plans.

Committee members asked whether the BLM currently maintains the land adequately and how tribal management would change outcomes; witnesses said BLM is doing its best with available resources and that tribal management has in other cases improved cultural protection and fire prevention outcomes.

No vote was taken; members requested further written responses and left the record open for follow‑up.