WASHINGTON – Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today announced his decision to protect the iconic Grand Canyon and its vital watershed from the potential adverse effects of additional uranium and other hardrock mining on over 1 million acres of federal land for the next 20 years. Secretary Salazar’s decision will provide adequate time for monitoring to inform future land use decisions in this treasured area, while allowing currently approved mining operations to continue as well as new operations on valid existing mining claims.

“A withdrawal is the right approach for this priceless American landscape,” Salazar said. “People from all over the country and around the world come to visit the Grand Canyon. Numerous American Indian tribes regard this magnificent icon as a sacred place and millions of people in the Colorado River Basin depend on the river for drinking water, irrigation, industrial and environmental use. We have been entrusted to care for and protect our precious environmental and cultural resources, and we have chosen a responsible path that makes sense for this and future generations.” The Public Land Order to withdraw these acres for 20 years from new mining claims and sites under the 1872 Mining Law, subject to valid existing rights, is authorized by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. A Record of Decision was signed by the Secretary today during a ceremony held at the National Geographic Museum in Washington, D.C.

The withdrawal does not prohibit previously approved uranium mining, new projects that could be approved on claims and sites with valid existing rights. The withdrawal would allow other natural resource development in the area, including mineral leasing, geothermal leasing and mineral materials sales, to the extent consistent with the applicable land use plans. Approximately 3,200 mining claims are currently located in the withdrawal area. “The withdrawal maintains the pace of hardrock mining, particularly uranium, near the Grand Canyon,” said Bureau of Land Management Director Bob Abbey, “but also gives the Department a chance to monitor the impacts associated with uranium mining in this area. It preserves the ability of future decision-makers to make thoughtful decisions about managing this area of national environmental and cultural significance based on the best information available.”

During the withdrawal period, the BLM projects that up to 11 uranium mines, including four that are currently approved, could still be developed based on valid pre-existing rights – meaning the jobs supported by mining in the area would increase or remain flat as compared to the current level, according to the BLM’s analysis. By comparison, during the 1980s, nine uranium mines were developed on these lands and five were mined out. Without the withdrawal, there could be 30 uranium mines in the area over the next 20 years, including the four that are currently approved, with as many as six operating at one time, the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) estimates.

The withdrawn area includes 355,874 acres of U.S. Forest Service land on the Kaibab National Forest; 626,678 acres of Bureau of Land Management lands; and 23,993 acres of split estate – where surface lands are held by other owners while subsurface minerals are owned by the federal government. The affected lands, all in the vicinity of the Grand Canyon or Grand Canyon National Park, are located in Mohave and Coconino Counties of Northern Arizona.

“The decision made today by the Secretary will help ensure continued protection of the Grand Canyon watershed and World Heritage designated Grand Canyon National Park,” said National Park Service Director Jonathan B. Jarvis. “As stewards of our national parks, it is incumbent on all of us to continue to preserve our treasured landscapes, today and for future generations.”

Today’s decision is the culmination of more than two years of evaluation during which the BLM analyzed the proposed withdrawal in an EIS prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service.

Numerous cooperating agencies, tribes, counties and stakeholders were fully engaged in this process, which included an extensive public involvement period which generated more than 350,000 comments, including input from more than 90 countries. Substantive comments, including those on the economic impact discussion, were addressed in the Final EIS, released on October 27, 2011 for a final 30-day review period.

Information on the withdrawal is at http://www.blm.gov/az/st/en/prog/mining/timeout.html or can be obtained by calling (602) 417-9504.

The University of Michigan released a statement on January 12 that after “18 months of careful deliberation, U-M has completed a formal set of policies and procedures for handling Native American human remains and cultural objects from its museum collections under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA).” The statement noted that NAGPRA was passed in 1990, requiring museums such as the Ann Arbor-based institution’s Museum of Natural History to follow a mandatory process for transferring culturally affiliated human remains and associated funerary objects to individuals and groups that have requested them and have the legal right to them. On May 15, 2010, the law was expanded and clarified to embrace the transfer of culturally unidentifiable human remains.

Furthermore, read the statement, “Under the clarified law, unidentifiable remains must be transferred to the tribe or tribes that were historically located at the sites where the remains were collected. When more than one tribe has inhabited a particular area, the remains are transferred to all those that have made a request, and they then determine the final disposition among themselves.”

The University of Michigan has a small archaeological exhibit at the museum on campus that includes artifacts of various cultures, including Native American nations. In 2011, following complaints and suggestions from the public and various groups, the university removed several dioramas depicting Native American culture that had been judged outdated and in an incorrect context. The dioramas, depicting Native American life and ceremonies, had been juxtaposed with skeletons and fossils of extinct animals.

“Although the formal documentation of the policies and procedures has just been completed, we have been making steady progress since the law was clarified,” says Vice President for Research Stephen Forrest, whose office oversees the repatriation and disposition process. “Our approach is to follow both the letter and spirit of the law, and to respect the cultural requirements of the tribes in the process.”   U-M has received requests for all 221 sites in Michigan represented in its collections, and it has been systematically working closely with the tribes on the transfer of the requested items. The museum holds items from another 182 sites in North America outside of Michigan.

U-M’s total collections consist of the remains of just more than 1,600 MNI (Minimum Number of Individuals), including 1,200 from Michigan, and more than 16,000 funerary objects, about 7,300 from Michigan. The document “Policy and Procedures for the University of Michigan’s NAGPRA Collections” is available on the Web here. The report was prepared by a 13-member faculty advisory committee chaired by Toni Antonucci, associate vice president for research in support of social sciences and humanities; Elizabeth M. Douvan Collegiate Professor of Psychology, LSA; and research professor at the Institute for Social Research.

An example of archeological sites in Michigan that have come to the attention of local Native American tribes is an urban renewal project in the city of Flint. On Stone Street, in an older part of the city on a hill surmounted by Hurley Hospital and overlooking Atwood Stadium and Chevy-in-the-Hole, were discovered human remains that were identified as being Native American. The Flint Journal reported in August 2008 that initially knew very little about the remains but nonethless identifying as Anishinabek. The term is used to encompass indigenous nations including the Ojibwe, Potawatomi and Odawa. The digging of the remains was funded by the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe, which then had them examined. The Genesee County Land Bank, which had been developing the land when the remains were discovered, turned the land over to the tribe. The Stone Street site is now a small memorial park.

Source: Energy Publisher

On January 9, 2012 the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, CA will hear arguments in a legal battle that may decide the ecological integrity of Arizona’s San Francisco Peaks, a mountain near Flagstaff, AZ held sacred by over 13 Native American nations.

The Save the Peaks Coalition is planning a Caravan from Flagstaff, AZ to San Francisco where they will be contesting the environmental & human health impacts of wastewater snowmaking.

The Save the Peaks Coalition are fighting the United States Forest Service in a legal battle to protect children from hazardous endocrine disruptors and to protect this sacred site from desecration. On January 9th, 2012 The Save the Peaks Coalition et al vs. the United States Forest Service will be heard by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, CA.

The case argues that under the National Environmental Policy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act, the Forest Service failed to adequately consider the impacts associated with ingestion of snow made from reclaimed sewer water in its Environmental Impact Statement.

The Forest Service approved reclaimed sewer water for the use of snowmaking at a local Northern Arizona ski resort in 2004. The reclaimed sewer water in question is from Flagstaff’s Rio de Flag Sewage Plant that has proven to contain harmful bacteria, and endocrine disruptors such as pharmaceuticals and hormones amongst other known toxins.

Schedule of Events:

Sunday January 8, 2012; 6PM – 9PM. Evening dinner, welcoming reception, & discussion on environmental injustice impacts and how they affect sacred sites. The Women’s Building; San Francisco, CA RSVP here: https://www.facebook.com/events/195603233865761/

Monday January 9, 2012: 7AM: Sunrise Prayer Vigil Ceremonial gathering at a park located near the courthouse in downtown SF- TBA! Stay posted by visiting here:  https://www.facebook.com/events/195603233865761/

8AM: Protect Sacred Sites, Defend Human Rights March from the nearby park going to the James R.Browning US Courthouse – 9th Circuit; 95 Seventh Street; San Francisco, CA

9AM: Rally & Prayers outside the Courthouse.

9:30AM: Court Hearing. The Save the Peaks Coalition et al vs. the United States Forest Service.

10:15 – 11:00 (Estimated) Press Conference on the steps of the 9th Circuit courthouse afterwards.

For Immediate Release                                 Contact: Derrick Henry (202) 912-7526
Date: December 16, 2011                                                         Robin Hawks (202) 912-7241

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) today released a revision to its national programmatic agreement (PA) with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) and National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO).  The PA governs the agency’s activities on federal, state and private lands that may impact historic properties.

The revision authorizes efficient consultation between the BLM and State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPO) and clarifies how the agency consults with Tribes and other consulting parties on activities that could affect historic properties, including those historic properties of traditional religious and cultural significance to tribes.  The PA does not apply to tribal lands.

The PA guides BLM’s planning and decision making as it affects historic properties as defined under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).  That law requires BLM to consider, plan for, protect, and enhance historic properties that may be affected by its actions.

The revision emphasizes the requirement for the BLM to consult with Tribes in the context of an ongoing government-to-government relationship, to obtain their views on the potential impacts on resources of significance to Tribes, and encourages the development of tribe-specific consultation protocols.  It authorizes the BLM to maintain protocols with SHPOs that establish a more efficient alternative Section 106 compliance process, but institutes a requirement for tribal consultation and public comment on BLM-SHPO protocol revisions.  It also adds the BLM national tribal coordinator to the BLM Preservation Board.  That board advises the BLM on policies and procedures for NHPA implementation.

The BLM anticipates signing the revised agreement in February 2012.  The letter announcing the revision to stakeholders, the revised agreement, and comments about the PA and responses can be downloaded at http://on.doi.gov/uq4Fsd.

“The BLM’s stewardship of the public lands includes respecting our unique relationship with Tribes and carefully considering their views and concerns through consultation,” said BLM Director Bob Abbey.  “This PA implements those principles as the BLM examines proposals for activities on public lands, knowing that future generations will appreciate our efforts to preserve treasured resources on public lands.”

The original programmatic agreement was signed in 1997 by the BLM, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) and the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO).  The current revision was developed with the two other signatories following an extensive process of outreach and consultation with tribes and other stakeholders which began in August 2008.

The BLM manages more land – over 245 million acres – than any other Federal agency.  This land, known as the National System of Public Lands, is primarily located in 12 Western states, including Alaska.  The Bureau, with a budget of about $1 billion, also administers 700 million acres of sub-surface mineral estate throughout the nation.  The BLM’s multiple-use mission is to sustain the health and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations.  The Bureau accomplishes this by managing such activities as outdoor recreation, livestock grazing, mineral development, and energy production, and by conserving natural, historical, cultural, and other resources on public lands.

–BLM–

PRESCOTT, Ariz. (CN) – The Navajo Nation claims the National Park Service sacked more than 300 sets of human remains and cultural artifacts from Canyon de Chelly National Monument, in violation of an 1868 treaty and the U.S. Constitution.

The Navajo, who refer to themselves as Diné, meaning “people,” sued the National Park Service, the Department of Interior, the two agencies’ top officials and Canyon de Chelly National Monument Park Superintendent Tom Clark, in Federal Court.

Canyon de Chelly National Monument is on the Arizona portion of the vast Navajo Reservation. Famous for its dramatic rock formations and ruins of ancient cliff dwellings, the monument is one the of reservation’s top tourist attractions, and has been featured in countless cowboy movies.

According to defendant Clark, the canyon has been inhabited and considered a spiritual landscape by the Navajo, Hopi, Zuni and other tribes going back some 4,000 years. About 40 Navajo families still farm and raise livestock in the canyon.

The Navajo, the country’s largest tribe, gained title to Canyon de Chelly and its tributary Canyon del Muerto through the Treaty of 1868, which ended years of fighting between the tribe and federal troops and established the borders of the reservation. The tribe agreed to allow the federal government to establish the monument in 1930.

But attorneys with the Navajo Nation Department of Justice’s Natural Resources Unit say that the tribe would never have consented to that deal if it had known the National Park Service planned to take human remains from the canyons, which they say “constitute the very heart of the Navajo homeland (Dinébikeyah), which is bounded by the four sacred mountains of the Navajo People.”

“Since the establishment of the National Monument, without seeking or obtaining consent or permission of the Navajo Nation government, and contrary to Diné spiritual, religious and cultural practice, NPS has dug up and carried off human remains, and cultural objects, from Canyon de Chelly and Canyon del Muerto, and put them in its ‘collection,’” the complaint states.

“In the Navajo world view, exhuming human remains causes illness to human beings, including depression, arthritis, and family and intertribal disharmony, damages crops, natural ecosystems and the environment, and disrupts local and global weather patterns.

“By agreeing to the establishment of the Canyon de Chelly National Monument, the Navajo Nation Council would never have agreed, and did not agree, that the National Park Service, or any other party, was thereby allowed to exhume and carry off human remains and sacred and other cultural objects located on or in the monument.”

The service is holding 303 sets of human remains and various cultural artifacts from Canyon de Chelly at the Western Archeology Conservation Center in Tucson. The tribe has been trying to get the items back since at least the late 1990s, according to the complaint.

Most recently, the tribe sent a letter to Superintendent Clark in August, demanding that the Park Service halt a process of repatriation under way through the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). Tribal attorneys demanded that the service “immediately make arrangements to return the remains and cultural objects to the Navajo Nation.”

Clark told Courthouse News on Tuesday that the Park Service cannot do that because the agency is bound by NAGPRA to work with all of the tribes involved, not just the one that owns the land. “The tribe considers that it comes under property rights law,” Clark said. “But we have to follow NAGPRA.”

That means meeting with each tribe that may have claim to the human remains and artifacts to discuss “how they want to re-inter and repatriate the items,” Clark said.

“Everyone has a say,” he added.

Clark said that the service began the NAGPRA process for the Canyon de Chelly items last year by showing them – some of which were removed from the canyon in the 1930s or earlier – to several regional tribes, including the Navajos.

He said he was not surprised by the lawsuit because the Navajo Nation has been arguing the property-rights issue for years.

“We have a good relationship with them and we all work together,” Clark said. “There’s just this one issue.”

The Diné insist that the “ultimate disposition of human remains and cultural objects taken from tribal lands prior to the enactment of NAGPRA [in 1990] is subject to the consent of the Indian or Indian tribe which owns or has jurisdiction over such lands.”

“NPS intends to culturally affiliate and repatriate the 303 remains and objects to either the Hopi, Zuni, or Navajo tribes, or potentially some other tribe, even where all of the remains and objects were removed from the original treaty lands of the Navajo Nation and are the property of the Navajo Nation,” the complaint states.

The tribe says that if a court determines that either the 1930 law establishing the monument or NAGPRA had transferred title to the archaeological resources in the Canyon de Chelly National Monument to the federal government, then both laws would be in violation of the 5th Amendment’s takings clause.

The Navajo Nation seeks a permanent injunction prohibiting the defendants from “carrying out any further inventory, cultural affiliation, or disposition processes pursuant to NAGPRA for human remains and cultural objects, or any other archaeological resources … within the Canyon de Chelly National Monument.”

The tribe also seeks declaratory judgment that the trove of remains and artifacts belongs to the Navajo Nation, and a “mandatory injunction that NPS immediately arrange for, and cooperate in, the orderly repatriation of any and all human remains and cultural objects, and any other archaeological resources … which were removed from Canyon de Chelly National Monument.”

The tribe is represented by William Kelly with the Navajo Nation Department of Justice’s Natural Resources Unit, in Window Rock.

Source: Courthouse News

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact:
Susan Brandt-Hawley, Attorney
Brandt-Hawley Law Group
(w) 707.938.3900 (c) 707.732.0007
susanbh@preservationlawyers.com
http://preservationlawyers.com

Environmental Lawsuit Filed By Friends of Rattlesnake Island

LAKEPORT, CA – On November 18, 2011, the Friends of Rattlesnake Island filed a lawsuit in Lake County Superior Court (Case No. CV 410834) that seeks to set aside the Lake County Board of Supervisors’ approval of permits sought by John Nady to build three structures on Rattlesnake Island. The Petition for Writ of Mandamus asks the Court to order that the County Board reconsider the project only after preparing an Environmental Impact Report as required by the California Environmental Quality Act, commonly known as CEQA.

Upon confirmation of the filing, Jim Brown, a traditional Tribal leader of the Elem Pomo, said: “On behalf of Elem Nation, our ancestors and the direct living descendants of Elem-Modun, and the Friends of Rattlesnake Island, I am honored to be a part of this legal case to help preserve and protect the most ancient, sacred Tribal homeland Island village of Elem-Modun, also known as Rattlesnake Island.”

“When the Board of Supervisors overturned the Planning Commission’s unanimous decision to require an EIR for this project, it ignored the significant impacts of grading and construction on the Island, which is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and is a designated historic resource,” said Sarah Ryan, Environmental Director of Big Valley Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians. “The County must prepare an EIR to study impacts and consider feasible mitigation measures and alternatives, and it did not.”

The Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 to approve the project without an EIR. Without benefit of analysis of impacts or the scope and quality of the affected historic resources, nor any data recovery plan, the Board approved the project by simply requiring monitoring.

“CEQA is a citizen-enforced statute,” remarked Herb Gura, who runs the local Self Help Law Center and is assisting the Friends. “The law mandates an EIR process, not only for analysis of environmental impacts and mitigations, but so the public can weigh in and offer valuable information to the County. In this case, the Board of Supervisors skipped CEQA’s fundamental safeguards and approved the project prematurely.”

CEQA mandates that the County prepare an EIR if there is any “fair argument” of significant environmental impacts, even if environmental experts disagree. “That is because the EIR is CEQA’s preferred method of environmental review,” said Friends’ attorney Susan Brandt-Hawley. A fair argument of significant environmental impacts was provided by County Planning Commissioners, members of the Elem Pomo Tribe, a local archaeologist familiar with Rattlesnake Island, and even the California Office of Historic Preservation.

In a letter, State Historic Preservation Officer, M. Wayne Donaldson, advised the County that “given the significance of the cultural resources on Rattlesnake Island, we reiterate our recommendation that the County of Lake require an [EIR] for any projects … [t]he EIR needs to address, in detail, mitigation measures … that avoid any substantial change in the significance of an historical resource.”

Friends of Rattlesnake Island is dedicated to preserving cultural and environmental resources in Lake County and elsewhere
###

Jim Thorpe: He was born near Prague in 1888 of Pottawatomi, Sac and Fox, and white ancestry.
By RANDY KREHBIEL World Staff Writer
Published: 11/25/2011  2:26 AM

A lawsuit to return Jim Thorpe’s remains to his two living children and the Sac and Fox Nation can go forward, a federal judge in Scranton, Pa., has ruled.

On Wednesday, District Judge A. Richard Caputo denied a motion to dismiss the case by the borough of Jim Thorpe, Pa., which essentially bought the famed athlete’s remains from his widow in 1953.

“This is really a significant decision,” said Stephen Ward, the Tulsa attorney for brothers William and Richard Thorpe, Jim Thorpe’s last surviving children.

Specifically, Caputo ruled that the Thorpes’ claim to their father’s remains could go forward under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. The law has most commonly been applied to American Indian remains held by museums, but Ward said it was not meant to be limited to such cases.

“There is at least one other case in which NAGPRA has been used in moving a modern grave,” he said. “Overall, there have been very few cases brought under NAGPRA, probably fewer than 25, so this decision is significant in this general field.”

Thorpe was born near Prague in 1888 of Pottawatomi, Sac and Fox, and white ancestry. He first achieved fame as a multisport and ballroom dancing star at the Carlisle Indian School in Pennsylvania.

Thorpe won the 1912 Olympic pentathlon and decathlon gold medals and the designation of “World’s Greatest Athlete.” He later played professional football and baseball but found success fleeting. His Olympic medals were taken away in 1913 after it was revealed that he had played minor league baseball for $2 a game.

By the 1930s he was bouncing from one job to another, working as a movie extra, construction worker, bouncer and even sailor. Married three times, he died virtually penniless in 1953.

His third wife, Patricia Askew Thorpe, made an agreement with the towns of Mauch Chunk and East Mauch Chunk, Pa., for them to buy Thorpe’s remains and erect a monument to him. The two towns also agreed to reorganize under the name Jim Thorpe, Pa.

It is that agreement that William and Richard Thorpe, sons of Jim Thorpe’s second wife, Freeda Kirkpatrick Thorpe, are seeking to overturn. William and Richard’s brother, Jack Thorpe, who died earlier this year, originally brought the suit.

Ward said the Thorpe brothers are trying to honor their father’s request to be buried in the old Sac and Fox Nation in present-day east-central Oklahoma.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20111125_16_A20_CUTLIN874713

We speak on behalf of all Creation: the four legged/those that swim/those that crawl/those that fly/those that burrow in the Earth/the plant and tree Nations. This one life system includes the elements of fire, water, earth and air, the living environment of “Mother Earth”.

The Sanctity of the Creator’s Law has been broken. The balance of life has been disrupted. You come into life as a sacred being. If you abuse the sacredness of your life then you affect all Creation. The future of all life is now in jeopardy.

We have now reached the crossroads. As Aboriginal Indigenous People we ask you to work with us to save the future of all Creation.”

Aboriginal Indigenous Nations of the People’s Message 3.11.2011

The message above was brought forth, by Indigenous Elders and Medicine Peoples, at the threatened sacred mountain of the ancestors of the Huhugam. This message presented an opportunity to the United States of America for direct face-to-face dialogue with Indigenous Elders and Medicine People, which is necessary to assist and educate the Forest Service on how to conduct their activities to prevent damage, destruction and desecration to places held sacred by Indigenous Peoples.

As the Original Stewards of this Land, we are offended by the lack of sensitivity being shown to our position and we are discriminated against by having to respond in black and white with a foreign language that is not ours and does not convey the full depth of
our concerns. We maintain the inherent responsibility that was given to us by the Creator to care for all Creation and to speak for our relatives that cannot be easily understood by the newcomers. We are united under the Creator’s Law to protect and extend Life for our future generations. Today, your understanding of a sacred site does not reflect what Indigenous Peoples know to be true about the places that we hold Sacred and Holy.

The “Report to the Secretary – USDA and Forest Service Policy and Procedures Review: Indian Sacred Sites” is without spirit and fails to provide meaningful and effective direction for the development of policies for the protection of Indigenous sacred places. There is nothing in the report that offers any new or real mechanisms to protect sacred places that create the foundations of our Way of Life as Indigenous Peoples. The activities of federal agencies continue to damage, destroy, and desecrate these sacred places. For instance, there is no mention in the report of how the Agency is going to protect sacred places from special use permits, third party contractors or resource extraction. And, there is no recognition of the fact that the United States has treaty, agreements and statutory obligations to Indigenous Peoples; these obligations surpass the Agency’s mission to provide multi-use activities. Recreational activities on
our sacred lands do not reach the same threshold and should not be weighed equally with our Way of Life as Indigenous Peoples particularly when actions may result in negative consequences to the natural system of life.

Protection of what we hold Sacred as Indigenous Peoples surpasses domestic and international laws; it also requires adherence to the Creator’s Law, a Law that is indivisible and creates the spiritual foundations for Indigenous Nations and our Way of Life. For this reason, we specifically asked that the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples be included in the document and noted as “a minimum  standard”. This specific request was not included in the report. And, there is no mention of the Creator’s Law in the report. As Indigenous Peoples we do not separate ourselves from the Creator’s Law. The Creator’s Law is that All Life is Sacred, All
Creation is Sacred. That is the Natural Law we cannot change or challenge.

The Forest Service states it cannot delegate decision-making authority for actions on National Forest System land to entities outside the federal government. However, the Creator never delegated the right of Creation and Destruction to the Forest Service.
Yet, the Forest Service continues to destroy and desecrate the natural function of these lands, while trying to create new uses for these lands that have held their sacred purpose since the beginning of Creation. We, the Indigenous Peoples, have obligations
and responsibilities that go beyond man-made domestic and international laws. We must adhere to the Creator’s Law and protect and maintain these sacred places and honor their sacred purposes. The Creator’s Law does not change so our obligations and responsibilities have not and will not change.

The report speaks of keeping sacred sites confidential for their protection, yet the Forest Service continues to move forward with its plans to damage, destroy, pollute and desecrate known and identified Holy places with telescopes, treated sewage effluent,
resource extraction, further development, recreation and other damaging activities. As a result it is not prudent for Indigenous Peoples to provide federal agencies with information on sacred places and knowledge until a mutually acceptable and fully
responsible system has been established for protecting the sacred places that have already been identified. Our knowledge is for us to protect and not for federal agencies to abuse. Only when a sacred area is threatened or revealed will it be interpreted by the
Indigenous Elders and Medicine Peoples. Direction will then be given to the Forest Service on how to conduct their activities to prevent damage, destruction and desecration. Those born into this way of life understand that it is our responsibility not
to give away the inherited rights of our future generations to those who do not value and understand our Way of Life. The only way to legitimately include authentic indigenous knowledge is to include the Indigenous Peoples, who are the true keepers of that spiritual knowledge throughout the entire process especially when decisions are being made. So you must come to the Indigenous Peoples, face-to-face, in order to get our free, prior and informed consent before plans are initiated that may affect Indigenous Peoples and the Creator’s Creation.

When you decide to move forward in a correct manner (that is with respect and dignity as human beings), then you will come to the Indigenous Peoples to consult face-to-face with an understanding that we need consensus before proceeding. Anything less falls
short of developing a working relationship that is necessary with Indigenous Peoples to address critical issues and to benefit all Creation. The Forest Service has indicated that it wishes to engage in co-management of these lands with the Indigenous Peoples.
However, the Forest Service has failed to recognize that our obligations and responsibilities go beyond the limitations of man-made laws. Our responsibilities include an obligation to speak on behalf of all Creation, to protect that sacredness that has been given to us by the Creator. The word “co-management” itself is inappropriate, because we don’t view our role as managers, but rather to protect and to live in harmony with all Creation. Once these foundational principles are understood and respected, we can begin discussions on how this balance can be achieved.

The Forest Service needs to understand that it is fully responsible and liable for the activities and actions that it allows and undertakes on our sacred lands and which negatively impact Indigenous Peoples and our Way of Life. The report singles out Forest Supervisors as having final authority for these decisions, but we remind you that all administrators and staff within any given line of authority will be held responsible for fulfilling obligations to all domestic laws, international laws and the Creator’s Law, which protect the Creator’s Creation and our Indigenous Way of Life. Line officers are not the only staff that require performance measures for this to work; these measures must be required of all public servants from the President, Members of Congress, Supreme Court Justices, USDA Secretary and all Forest Service line officers, especially since there is such a strong record for violation of and past inconsistent implementation
of policies listed in the report. There is a need to immediately enforce and synthesize all current laws, policies and procedures and to create legitimate consequences for those who fail to follow these protocols.

We all need a healing. The report does not address how your Agency is going to right past wrongs and restore past damages that your Agency has caused. As Indigenous Peoples we strive to maintain balance and harmony with all Creation. Many years ago we received the message that this harmonious balance had been disrupted. We have sent messages of all types to every governmental body around the World including your Agency that we must begin to heal activities of the past that have led to damage, destruction, and desecration. To begin this healing process we must first stop these damaging activities to allow the natural healing process of Mother Earth to begin. The healing cannot begin until your Agency formally confronts the legacies of injustice to the water, air, land, plants, animals, trees, and all of the Creator’s Creation that you have damaged, destroyed and desecrated, including the Indigenous Peoples.

A healthy relationship between our Nations needs to be created. We noted your nondiscriminatory statement but also noted the omission of our spiritual way of life and sacred holdings in that statement. The United States of America has not honored its agreements to the original inhabitants of this land since the beginning of our relationship. This same lack of commitment to the agreements being made with the Indigenous Peoples continues to this day. For that reason we as Indigenous Peoples recommend that the Secretary as a first step towards reconciliation conduct an independent investigation into past and current human rights and environmental violations, including discriminatory practices, under both domestic and international law. The findings from this independent investigation should be made public and should include recommendations and plans to restore past damage and to prevent future harms to the Creator’s Creation and our Way of Life. Your laws get outdated and do not respond effectively to emerging threats such as treated sewage effluent, invasive species, antibiotic resistant genes and all other types of emerging and existing threats to the natural system of life. The United States’ 1872 mining law, for example, does not adhere to your best available science and does not adhere to the Creator’s Law. It must be changed if your laws as a Nation are to be taken seriously. Your science is flawed as
it cannot predict with absolute certainty how Mother Earth will respond to your activities. Because you are blinded by laws and science that are economically driven, Indigenous Peoples, as the Original Stewards of this Land, must be involved in every
aspect of your actions – planning, development and implementation– to ensure the protection of our Way of Life and to fulfill our obligations to the Creator and all Life.

Another concern stated in the report is that the Agency lacks personnel, knowledge and funding. This means you lack the resources to fulfill your obligations to your laws, international laws and the Creator’s Law and should not be allowed to proceed with any
plans until you are ready and able to be responsible for your actions and to fulfill all of your obligations.

We, as Indigenous Peoples, have a great responsibility to our children and all Life that must be honored and upheld. The covenant we have with the Creator requires us to consider the impacts of our decisions on the Creator’s Creation and the impact these decisions will have on the future of life. The Indigenous Elders, Medicine Peoples, Spiritual Leaders, Wisdom Keepers, Spiritual People and Those Who Carry Great Responsibilities for Their People will continue to fulfill their responsibilities to provide a future for the coming generations of Life and must be included in all planning and decisions affecting the natural system of life.

In order for us to move forward meaningfully we must first create a base understanding between us, to ensure that we are agreeing to speak about sacredness in a manner that is appropriate, respectful and with the dignity it requires. Otherwise, these discussions
will fail to address the concerns of the Indigenous Peoples and to honor the Secretary’s request to create more effective policies for the protection of Indigenous sacred places.

We have much more to share with you outside of this very limiting and discriminatory process, a process that does not reflect who we are as Indigenous Elders and Medicine Peoples. We want to be very clear that this is not consultation. True consultation requires those with decision-making authority to be willing to come to us formally, and sit with us face-to-face. Then we can initiate a true dialogue on how to proceed honorably to provide a future for All Life.

We are united under the Creator’s Law. We are from various Indigenous Nations and are spiritually related. We have been placed on our lands as Aboriginal Indigenous Nations of the People with sacred instructions and responsibilities placed within us by the Creator to follow the Laws of the Creator. Your Agency uses terms like federally recognized and federally unrecognized. We see this as your way of dividing the Indigenous Peoples. We are united under the Creator’s Law, as United Indigenous Nations, to protect and extend Life for all future generations.

We have worked through the Senior Advisor to Secretary Tom Vilsack to set up a two and a half hour meeting on October 12, 2011. The Indigenous Elders and Medicine Peoples intend to begin dialogue with Secretary Vilsack during this phone conference, rather than continuing to have these discussions filtered through his representatives. The Secretary is the representative for the United States regarding their position on the protection of our Indigenous Sacred Lands. The Secretary’s participation or lack of participation on this phone conference will reflect the United States commitment to creating a working relationship with the Indigenous Elders and Medicine Peoples to realign their way of life with the Creator’s natural system of life.

REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COUNCIL
Chief, Arvol Looking Horse
19th Generation Keeper of the Sacred White Buffalo Calf Pipe
Spiritual Leader
Lakota, Dakota and Nakota Nations

Bobby C. Billie
Clan Leader and Spiritual Leader
Council of the Original Miccosukee
Simanolee Nation Aboriginal People

-ADDITIONAL SIGNATURES TO FOLLOW ORAL
STATEMENT DELIVERED TO FRED CLARK, DIRECTOR OFFICE OF
TRIBAL RELATIONS ON OCTOBER 4, 2011

Public Information Office
Phone: (928) 734-3104                                    
Fax: (928) 734-6665

www.hopi-nsn.gov
 
October 11, 2011
 
The Hopi Tribal Council Does Not Support Navajo’s Proposal to Use Groundwater for Snowmaking on Nuvatukyaovi
 
Kykotsmovi, Ariz. – The Hopi Tribal Council does not join or support a recently proposed Navajo Nation Council Resolution recommending the use of groundwater for snowmaking on Nuvatukyaovi (the San Francisco Peaks in Flagstaff). 
 
Navajo Nation Councilman Walter Phelps has introduced a bill that would have the Navajo Nation support the use of groundwater for snowmaking on the San Francisco Peaks. 
 
Water – regardless of its source – is a limited and critical natural resource in the Southwest and the Hopi Tribe continues to oppose any artificial snowmaking by these means.  As set forth in the Hopi Tribe’s complaint against the city of Flagstaff, the city is already using more than its fair share of water, and any plans to sell water to the Snowbowl will only worsen this problem.  In addition, the sale of water for snowmaking so that a select few can benefit, violates the public interest in wise water use for our region.
 
Nuvatukyaovi is an important, sacred place for the Hopi which holds a central and essential role in Hopi culture, traditions and way of life. The Hopi Tribe has tirelessly opposed the issuance of the Special Use Permit to the Arizona Snowbowl, which allows for the installation of artificial snowmaking equipment.  The Hopi Tribe has maintained unwavering opposition to any type of artificial snowmaking on the San Francisco Peaks, whether from reclaimed wastewater, recovered reclaimed water or groundwater.  The only water appropriate for Nuvatukyaovi is natural water as provided by rain and snow, and there can be no exceptions.
 
The Navajo proposal is not a solution to the issues facing the tribes with respect to Arizona Snowbowl’s expansions on Nuvatukyaovi.  Hopi Tribal Chairman LeRoy N. Shingoitewa affirms, “The Hopi Tribal Council, all known Hopi religious practitioners, the Hopi Tribe and its people are still, and always will be, opposed to the use of any snowmaking operations on Nuvatukyaovi.” 
 
The Tribe continues to declare that the only solution is to prevent any and all artificial snowmaking on the Peaks and to void the contract between the city of Flagstaff and Arizona Snowbowl. 
 
For more information on the Hopi Tribe visit www.hopi-nsn.gov.

THE NAVAJO NATION LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

INTERNET PUBLIC REVIEW PUBLICATION

LEGISLATION NO: _0420-11______ SPONSOR:

Walter Phelps

TITLE: An Action Relating To Resources And Development And NAABIK’IYATI’; Supporting The Use Of Groundwater For Snowmaking On Dook’o’oosliid (San Francisco Peaks)

http://www.navajonationcouncil.org/Legislations/2011/Oct/0420-11.pdf