HELENA, Mont. -- Groups in Montana are petitioning to change the names of three geographic features that now bear the name of Jefferson Davis, the former president of the Confederacy who supported slavery. They're proposing to replace his name with Salish words to honor the state's first inhabitants.

Travis McAdam, program director for combating white nationalism and defending democracy at the Montana Human Rights Network, said the change would make the state more inclusive.

"This idea of renaming these features using Salish terms, we thought, really recognizes and celebrates the importance of the people who really first cared for and occupied this land," McAdam explained.

The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, along with social justice, human rights and conservation groups, are petitioning the U.S. Board of Geographic Names for the changes.

They want to change Jeff Davis Peak in Beaverhead County to Three Eagles Peak in honor of the Salish Chief Three Eagles, who welcomed Lewis and Clark on their expedition in 1804. The meeting is depicted in a mural in the Montana House of Representatives.

The petition aims to change Jeff Davis Creek, also in Beaverhead County, to Choos-wee Creek, the Salish word for Chinese people, in honor of Montana's early Chinese immigrants. And Davis Gulch outside of Helena could be renamed as well.

John Todd, deputy director of the Montana Wilderness Association, said names on the map matter, especially on public lands that are supposed to be for everyone.

"Public lands may not feel welcoming to some folks, and so we're excited to see these with a more appropriate name that folks can look at on a map and consider a gathering place," Todd stated.

McAdam agreed naming has a greater significance. He added renaming places was part of the European colonization process after native people were pushed off their lands.

"The vast majority of the time, those names totally obscured and erased the presence of Indigenous people," McAdam recounted. "And that was really purposeful and was part of that colonization process."

With new voting maps for Montana's Legislature to be revealed soon, Native American communities are being encouraged to watch the process closely.

Billings-based Western Native Voice wants the Montana Districting and Apportionment Commission to respect tribal sovereignty in the process. One of the commission's goals is to keep communities of interest, such as tribes, intact.

Ta'jin Perez, deputy director of Western Native Voice, said keeping communities whole is important, as is ensuring representation in the Legislature.

"Candidates of choice are from your community and that these communities should be able to have the opportunity to elect someone that shares their values and shares who they are and the unique history and the unique cultures of these tribal areas," Perez outlined.

The commission has scheduled nine public meetings in August and September, so Montanans can comment on the maps, including three meetings online: Aug. 30 for the western region, Sep. 9 for the central region, and Sep. 19 for the eastern region.

Perez pointed out Montana has an independent redistricting commission, and contended it has done a good job of ensuring the Legislature is proportionally representative of the population of Native Americans in the state. He noted the independent setup of the commission has many upsides, including it is not beholden to the governor or lawmakers.

"An entire Legislature, their voice is intended to be just as loud as that of the public because of this independent commission that we have," Perez explained. "Other states don't enjoy this kind of thing."

Perez added voters should be engaged in the process.

"Representation that reflects communities as they are is important, and the only way that a body like the redistricting commission can do that is through public comment," Perez concluded.

The deadline for the redistricting plan is the 10th day of the 2023 legislative session.

New research shows COVID-19 caused life expectancy to drop for all groups of Americans, but none as much as American Indians and Native Alaskans.

Research from the University of Colorado estimates during the 2020-2021 pandemic, life expectancy for U.S. Native Americans declined by nearly five years, about three times that of white residents.

Ryan Masters, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Colorado-Boulder and co-author of the study, said after noting longevity had slipped three-and-a-quarter years among Black Americans and nearly four years among Hispanics, he did not expect worse news.

"The horrific drops among Hispanic population were really sobering," Masters recounted. "We were expecting something of that magnitude, but to see declines that were even greater was really a tragic, terrifying result that we saw."

Native Americans make up just 1.7% of the U.S. population, but more than 10% of the New Mexico population. Masters reported by 2021, life expectancy for Native Americans had slipped to about age 70 for women, and just under 64 for men. Overall, U.S. life expectancy decreased from around 79 years in 2019 to about 76 years in 2021, or approximately 2.5 years.

As vaccines became available last year, Masters pointed out peer countries began to rebound from a historic 2020 dip in life expectancy while the U.S. experienced even higher losses. He added deaths among minority groups played a huge role, including for those younger than 60.

"There was also some substantial losses of life in these midlife years," Masters outlined. "Due to cardio-metabolic diseases, drug overdoses, and unfortunately due to injuries caused by firearms and transportation accidents."

Masters added a similar life-expectancy decline hasn't been seen since World War II. The study, which has not been peer-reviewed, noted nearly one-million Americans died from COVID-19 during the two-year pandemic, blamed partly on the quality of public health options and the high cost of insurance and prescription drugs.

Tribal advocates are closely analyzing the potential impact of a new U.S. Supreme Court ruling dealing with state investigations of certain crimes on reservations. A common sentiment is that the protected rights of Native Americans are being chipped away.

The Supreme Court case stemmed from Oklahoma, about whether the state can prosecute non-Native Americans for crimes committed against an Indigenous person on tribal land. In a five-to-four decision, the court sided with the state.

Melody McCoy - staff attorney with the Native American Rights Fund - said while it's a complex matter, it's a clear blow to tribal sovereignty.

"It's an unauthorized and unconsented intrusion," said McCoy, "of state authority within Indian country."

McCoy said how it affects future investigations depends on the motivations of each state. But she said the ball is now in hands of tribal governments, and whether they want to appeal to Congress.

South Dakota, which has nine federally recognized tribes, has optioned for at least some jurisdiction under a 1953 law that gave certain states power to prosecute crimes on tribal lands.

McCoy said in theory, adding more resources to an investigation isn't always a bad thing. But she noted that in these situations, there are culturally sensitive matters that tribal and federal authorities are often better equipped to handle.

"Not everything is cut and dry," said McCoy, "and you're dealing with vulnerable populations."

Other tribal advocates worry that state investigators might not carry out a thorough investigation if a non-Native comes to a reservation and commits a crime. They also worry about the court's interpretation expanding to other areas, such as environmental regulation.

In issuing its opinion, the court majority argued that a state has jurisdiction over all the areas within its borders.