NAVAJOS RESIST FORCED RELOCATION · of the Hopi A. t the time it was created, Navajo whso had been...

NAVAJOS RESISTFORCED RELOCATION

BIG MOUNTAIN & JOINT USE AREACOMMUNITIES FIGHT REMOVAL

Ufl a fall day in 1977, a government constructioncrew set out for a remote part of Black Mesa, at theheart of the Navajo Reservation in Arizona. Near BigMountain, which rises above the mesa, the crew wasto build a barbed wire fence across the desert. Butsoon after their arrival, they were confronted by Paul-ine Whitesinger, a 43-year-old Navajo widow andmother, who ordered them off her land. When theforeman responded with an obscene remark, sheknocked him to the ground, and drove the crew awayby hitting them with sticks and throwing dirt at them.

Pauline Whitesinger's action marked a turning pointin the Navajo people's struggle to hold onto the landthey have inhabited for over 400 years. The fence isbeing built as a result of the Navajo-Hopi Land Settle-ment Act passed by Congress in 1974, supposedly tosettle a widely publicized, but fabricated, "land dis-pute." In actuality, according to many people of bothtribes, the two peoples have no quarrel.

The real dispute is between the traditional people ofboth tribes and the pro-development tribal councils.The tribal councils are allied with energy interests whoare intent on getting hold of the multi-billion-dollarresources—high-quality coal and uranium—found onthe land that the Hopi and Navajo Tribes have held incommon.

After staging a fake range war, the energy specula-tors successfully lobbied Congress to devise a "divideand conquer" solution to the "dispute"—split theterritory, build a fence along the partition line, andforce the Navajos on the Hopi side, and the Hopis on

the Navajo side, to relocate. In the process, over10,000 self-sufficient rural Indian sheepherders andfarmers-mostly Navajos-are being uprooted,deprived of their livelihood, and made landless. Theremoval of the people is necessary before the energycompanies can take the minerals.

The People ResistThe Navajo women, particularly the elder women,

have continued to lead the resistance to removal fromthe land. Navajos respect their elders as teachers andleaders in maintaining the cultural traditions. In theNavajo way, the women are responsible for the familyland. They are a matrilineal people—the homes, live-stock, and land pass from generation to generationthrough the women. The land is sacred to the Navajoand to all Native American people. They recognizethat the earth is a living being and the source of all thatis needed for life.

In September 1979, Pauline Whitesinger's 60-year-old half-sister, Katherine Smith, was arrested for firing arifle to stop a fencing crew. The fence was to comewithin fourteen feet of the entrance of a ceremonialhogan on her land. After her sister had stopped thefencing in 1977, according to Katherine Smith, "Wecame to learn many things at Big Mountain. We lear-ned that there is a lot of corruption in our tribal gov-ernment and that the federal government is ripping usoff. And then they came in with the fencing crewagain. Something had to be done, so I went out. Theywere fencing right across the wash from my house. Iwalked across and loaded my gun and shot at thefencing crew so they would stop. Sure enough, theystopped and left." When the tribal police came toarrest her, she sent them away: "They were all Indians.I told them they could not arrest me because they aremy sons and my blood." The tribal police left, but thenwhite federal officers came and arrested her.

Katherine Smith was acquitted of all charges againsther in a courtroom filled with supporters. She said,"They told me I had broken the laws of the white manand I told them I had my own laws. We, the Dinepeople (the Navajo people's name for themselves intheir own language), have our sacred laws. They weregiven to us in the beginning and I don't recognize theirlaws and I told them thafs why I wasn't afraid of them.Thafs why I would shoot at them again." A day later,seventy Big Mountain residents issued a Declaration ofIndependence, declaring that the federal governmentno longer had any authority "to intrude or disrupt thesacred lands at Big Mountain."

A fencing crew came again in September 1980 andagain was confronted by the people. Several elder

Navajo women took the keys from a fencing crewtruck while younger women began pulling up fenceposts. There was a scuffle with Bureau of Indian Affairs(BIA) officers which ended with four women-sistersMarlene Benally, 16; Louise Benally, 19; and SallyTsosie, 34; and their mother, Alice Benally, 62-maced,wrestled to the ground, handcuffed, and arrested. Thejudge had an extremely difficult time selecting jurorsfor their January 1981 trial, as the entire jury panel wasmade up of Navajos who live in the area. Most wantednothing to do with the trial as their sympathies werewith those facing relocation. A mistrial was declaredwhen one of the selected jurors did not show up forthe second day of the trial. The charges against AliceBenally were dismissed in September 1981. Althoughcharges against her three daughters are still pending,the government has not set court dates, possibly toavoid further publicity and escalated resistance.

"We won't stop," says 62-year-old Ruth Benally,Alice's sister. "I've lived here all my life. Big Mountainis sacred to us. It is where we collect our herbs andmedicines...When the time comes (of forced removal),if we don't have any other choice, we are going to useour fists. No matter how small I am, I'll fight all the wayto the end."

"We've reached the point where now we have tofight for our land," says Pauline Whitesinger. "I willnever leave this land. If they come to move me, theycan shoot me right here."

The Navajos have been pressured for years to giveup their traditional way of life and be absorbed intothe white man's way of living. The children have beentaken away to schools and taught a different value sys-tem. Then they stay away to hold jobs. The men oftenhave to go away also to get jobs. Therefore, it ismostly the elder women who are left living on theland and left to defend the land.

How the "Land Dispute" HappenedPolitical boundaries and exclusive land entitlements

are foreign concepts to both the Navajo and the Hopi.The Hopi were a sedentary people, building their vil-lages on the mesas and farming on small plots nearby.The Navajos were pastoral, living in scattered familygroups and travelling between summer and winterhomes with their flocks. There was no conflict in theirownership of the land.

Although the Indian people did not believe in exclu-sive land ownership, the US government did. In 1882,the Hopi Reservation was created for the Hopi and"such other Indians as the Secretary of Interior maysee fit to settle thereon." Although there are thosewho argue that the 1882 Hopi Reservation was cre-ated to resolve Hopi-Navajo disputes, historical docu-ments show that it was created at the urging of BIAofficials in order to give them legal authority to re-move whites who were supporting Hopi resistance to

NAVAJO RESERVATIONand

FOUR CORNERS STATES

JOINT USE AREAand

HOPI RESERVATION

JUA BOUNDARY

PEABODY COAL COMPANLEASES

ALBUQUERQUE

NEW MEXICO

EZ! Navafo fCkt* ol Partition Lin*)&Z2 Hop) (tkto of Partition Llrw)• Navajo Chapter HOUM

-2-

Mormon and US government kidnapping of Hopichildren for "Americanization" at distant boardingschools.

The 1882 Hopi Reservation was established to assureUS power over the Hopi and their land. It was ahurriedly and arbitrarily drawn neat rectangle onedegree of longitude wide and one degree of latitudelong. It was not based on Hopi land use and complete-ly left out the Hopi farming community of Moencopiby fifteen miles. It also left out the original homelandof the Hopi. At the time it was created, Navajos whohad been settled there for generations were livingwithin its boundaries. In the 1930's the BIA establishedGrazing District 6, the 640,000 acres immediately sur-rounding the Hopi villages, as the exclusive Hopi area.The rest of the rectangle was designated as a shared"Joint Use Area" (JUA).

In 1921 Standard Oil Company discovered oil onNavajo Reservation land. After Navajo elders voted75-0 against a lease deal proposed by Standard, theBIA set up a puppet "tribal council" made up of threeNavajo men who were persuaded to sign a lease. Asimilar council was set up for the Hopi, against thestrenuous objections of Hopi spiritual leaders, elders,and villagers.

The tribal councils—created, funded, and operatedby the BIA-have continued over the years to signaway Indian minerals to energy companies. In the1950's and 1960's, energy development boomed onthe reservations as large corporations became inter-ested in Indian oil, coal, uranium and natural gas.Energy conglomerates were attracted by lax environ-mental regulation (federal environmental laws don't

apply) and the lucrative lease terms they found inIndian country.

In 1950 Peabody Coal Company discovered theextensive Black Mesa coal field in the Joint Use Area. Itis the richest coal field in Arizona, containing over 21billion tons of high quality coal easily accessible bystrip mining.

Black Mesa coal is very attractive economically.Utilities are now turning more towards coal for electri-cal generation because it has proven to be cheaperand less controversial than nuclear power. The Sun-belt states are experiencing the fastest growth in elec-trical demand. The government and energy companiesexpect demand for coal in the Southwest to double inthe next 10 years. Black Mesa coal has been targettedas one of the most economic energy sources for rapid-ly growing southern California cities. Black Mesa coalalso could be used for electricity in Texas or exportedto Japan.

However the coal is used, the land is ripped up forsomeone else's needs and profits, not the localpeople's. The Navajos who live on the land do nothave control of their own destiny.

Even though energy companies are looking for waysto make big profits with Black Mesa coal, it may not beneeded at all. The need for more electricity is decreas-ing nationwide due to conservation practices. Alterna-tive energy sources such as solar and wind can providepower at much less human and environmental cost.

After a long and bitterly fought struggle with the tra-ditional people, the Navajo and Hopi Tribal Councilssigned leases with Peabody Coal Company in 1964and 1966 which gave Peabody rights to two billion

tons of Black Mesa coal, which it is presently strip-mining. The Hopi spiritual leaders sued because evenunder the white man's laws the lease was illegal. TheHopi Tribal Council should not have been givenleasing powers because it was not properly constituted.The case went all the way to the Supreme Court, butthe traditional Hopi leaders were told they had noright to sue "their" government.With the exception of the Peabody leases, the

energy companies have not been able to get theminerals on the land held jointly by the two tribes.Neither tribal council alone was empowered to leaseit. The BIA has worked continually in the interest of theenergy companies for a solution to the thorny legalproblem of leasing JUA mineral rights. The Hopi TribalCouncil's attorney began a long legal effort in the1950's to gain exclusive ownership of land in the JUAfor mineral leasing, thus creating the "Navajo-Hopiland dispute." The tribal council worked under theinstructions of attorney John Boyden, a former arch-bishop in the Mormon Church. At the same time,Boyden did legal work for Peabody Coal Company,the largest US coal company, which at the time wasowned in part by Mormons.

Not only did Boyden write the relocation legislationin 1958 and 1974, he also filed a "land claim" with theIndian Land Claims Commission which resulted in theloss of millions of acres of Hopi original homeland.Although the Hopi "won" the land claim, Boyden hadsued for only money, not for the return of the land. Tothis day, even the Hopi Tribal Council has refused toaccept payment for the land, saying their homeland isnot for sale.

When the 1964 mineral leases brought suddenwealth to the Hopi Tribal Council, it voted to payBoyden a million dollars for his legal services. And thatwas only the first million that he would make from hiswork for the Hopi Tribal Council.

While Boyden was lobbying in Washington, DC forthe bill to divide the JUA in 1974, the Salt Lake Citypublic relations firm hired by the Hopi Tribal Council,David Evans and Associates, staged a range war. Thefirm took newspaper and television reporters onto thereservation to see fabricated evidence of burnedcorrals and shot-up stock tanks, and wrote speechesfor Hopi Tribal Councilmen. At the time it also repre-sented WEST-a group of 23 utility companies buildingpower plants in the Southwest.

The Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement ActThe lobbying and publicity campaign paid off when

Congress passed Public Law 93-531, sponsored byBarry Goldwater at the end of the 1974 session. Thislaw supposedly resolved the alleged dispute, but infact opened the land up to coal mining. The lawordered a 50-50 split of the JUA, construction of abarbed-wire fence to separate the Hopi and theNavajo, 90% reduction of livestock herds, and a halt toall building and improvements to property. It also

established a Relocation Commission to plan for theremoval of what was then estimated to be 3,300Navajos. Under the law all lawsuits have to go throughthe tribal councils and all legal fees are paid by US tax-payers. It is another "gold mine" for the lawyers.

By 1977 boundary lines were drawn and construc-tion started on the 300-mile long barbed wire fencethrough an area that had never before been fenced.The few Hopis who live on the "Navajo Side" of theJUA outside of the Hopi villages (about 100) havealready moved. Over 10,000 Navajos scatteredthroughout the JUA, one out of every 15 Navajos, arebeing uprooted from the land they have inhabited forgenerations.

According to the government, the livestock reduc-tion is supposedly "to protect future Hopi propertyfrom Navajo overgrazing." Katherine Smith's herd ofsheep was reduced from 200 to 20. The Navajos seethe seizure of their animals as a provocation and anattempt to starve them off their land. Their animals aretheir main source of food and income and are impor-tant to their spiritual well-being. Said one Navajo, "Ourlivestock is our food, our money when our childrenneed clothing, we make rugs from the wool, we payour medicine man with it, and eat it during ceremonies.We want to retain our livestock as much as we can. Itis everything that makes us what we are today." A 90-year-old Navajo was arrested, jailed, and fined $160for watering his cattle at a spring he had used for 60years.

When the BIA tried to enforce livestock reduction inApril 1981, it met massive resistance all over the JUA.After a few weeks it was forced to call off its efforts.The Interior Department announced in August 1981that livestock impoundment would be resumed andthat the January 1982 deadline for completion of stockreduction would be met. The announcement was metby warnings from JUA Navajos that they would protecttheir livestock by all available means.

Despite their announcement, the federal govern-ment made no efforts to resume livestock impound-ment until March 1983. In April, Mae Tso, a 45-yearold Navajo woman was arrested by BIA police for"assaulting an officer" who was taking away her

-4-

horses. To avoid publicity, the federal governmentdeclined to prosecute, but the Hopi government ispressing charges in Hopi Tribal Court.

Since 1966 an economic blockade has been in effectin the JUA outlawing all construction, repairs, andimprovements on homes and land. Schools, roads,and health facilities have not been maintained since1966. Many families have had to live in severely over-crowded homes, and others have been forced toleave their homelands in the JUA for lack of housing.Some JUA Navajos have ignored the construction ban.In the spring of 1982 a federal court ordered the bull-dozing of eleven "illegally" built homes. That ruling isbeing appealed in court.

Those who do not "voluntarily" relocate will beforceably "removed" in July 1986. Relocation began in1981 and is supposed to be completed by July 1986.When Arizona Senator Barry Coldwater stated inCongressional hearings that the Navajos had "literallytens of thousands of acres that are not being used,"the Navajos were incredulous. One of the starkestfacts of life on the Navajo Reservation is that the landis already filled to its capacity. Navajos living outsidethe JUA are struggling to eke out a subsistence livingand don't have room for relocatees from the JUA.

Because the reservation is so overcrowded, the gov-ernment's "solution" is to buy them houses in racist,hostile border towns such as Flagstaff and Gallup,where they have to learn to live a new and alien life-style.

Under the 1974 Land Settlement Act, the NavajoTribe is entitled to acquire 400,000 acres of land nearthe reservation as compensation and to provide landfor the relocatees to settle on. This plan has drawnheated political opposition. New Mexico politicianswere able to get a limit of 35,000 acres set on lands tobe selected in their state. The Navajo Tribe's first landselection was vetoed by Congress, and another choiceran into strong opposition from white ranchers.

The tribe's attempt to acquire 35,000 acres in theheart of the San Juan Basin coal region of New Mexicohas been stalled for two years over the question ofwho would get rights to the coal. A powerful utility,Public Service Company of New Mexico, is planningto build a coal mine and power plant on the site.

The seven Navajo chapters in the area have allexpressed strong opposition to any mines or powerplants, and environmentalists want the area to bedesignated as wilderness to protect rare fossils, spec-tacular land forms, and fragile ecosystems. The tribe

-5-

has begun negotiations to share the mineral rights,thus planning to participate in the coal mining in spiteof the opposition of its own people.

A new choice of Arizona land has been made—fivelarge ranches that are believed to be for sale if theprice is right. Even if all the land selections are ap-proved, 400,000 acres will not provide a living for the10,000 Navajos who are being relocated. A Navajotribal commission estimated that the land can supportless than 20% of the relocatees.

If this relocation is carried through, it will be one ofthe largest forced removals of Indians in Americanhistory, and a permanent scar on America's already-battered conscience.

The Hopi SplitEver since the white man began imposing his ways

on the Hopi, the Hopi have been split into two factions.The traditional Hopi led by the traditional religiousleaders seek to resist assimilation and maintain thetraditional Hopi way of life. The Christian and Mormon"converted" Hopis accept and benefit from absorptioninto the American political and economic system andparticipate in the Hopi Tribal Council bueaucracy.These differences have derived specifically from theinterference of Mormons, missionaries, and the USgovernment in Hopi life.

The Hopi Tribal Council does not have the supportof a majority of Hopis, but it holds enormous legal,political, and economic power due to US governmentsupport. From the time of its origin, the tribal councilhas been seen by traditional Hopis as a tool createdand used by the white man to control the Hopi peopleand gain access to the mineral resources on Hopi land.The tribal council is willing to barter over land rights aswhite Americans do and is eager to lease Hopi land formineral ventures, over the strenuous objections andlawsuits by the traditional Hopi leaders.

Traditional Hopis have protested unceasingly to USCourts, Congress, and Presidents that the Hopi TribalCouncil is not a legitimate representative of the Hopipeople. The majority of the Hopi people opposed thecreation of a tribal council in 1934 by boycotting the"democratic" referendum for its formation. Forexample, in one village of 250 eligible voters, only 13voted. After functioning only nine years, it collapseddue to an almost complete boycott by the Hopipeople. Then oil was found on the reservation. In 1951the BIA appointed John Boyden to restore the HopiTribal Council so that the oil could be leased. Boyden'stask was to subvert the power and authority of thetraditional Hopi who were opposed to the revival ofthe tribal council.

In a 1970 letter to President Nixon traditional Hopileaders said, 'The white man, through his insensitivityto the way of Nature, has desecrated the face of theMother Earth. The white man's advanced technologicalcapacity has occurred as a result of his lack of regardfor the spiritual path and for the way of all living things.

The white man's desire for material possessions andpower has blinded him to the pain he has causedMother Earth by his quest for what he calls naturalresources..The path of the Great Spirit has becomedifficult to see by almost all people, even by manyIndians who have chosen instead to follow the path ofthe white man."

Traditional Hopi leaders formally protested everystep made by the Hopi Tribal Council towards parti-tioning the JUA. They did not want to fight the Navajoin court action or legislative action, and they did notwant the land divided, partitioned, or stripmined. In a1972 letter to an Arizona Congressman they said, "Wewant to meet with the Navajo traditional and religiousleaders to work out a common stand against this billwhich wJll again cut up our homeland and create moredivision. We want no interference from outsidepeople."

In 1979 Hopi traditional and religious leaders issueda statement of support to the Navajo people, declaringthat the law "must be repealed and the fencing muststop now..The time has come for all Native people tocome together as Sovereign Nations and solve thisproblem created by the BIA among themselves." At agathering in 1981, traditional Hopi leaders spoke oftheir solidarity with the Navajos against both the Hopitribal government and the US government. They saidthat the traditional Hopi people do not want to relo-cate anybody, that it is not the Hopi way.

Both Navajo and Hopi agree that their ancestorslived in peace—trading, attending each other's dances,and intermarrying. The two peoples have different lan-guages and histories, ceremonies and dances, buthave also shared and borrowed many customs fromeach other. From time to time, disputes over grazingareas, water, or other matters have arisen, just as con-flicts arise between many white neighbors. But thesedisputes have been settled among themselves withoutoutside interference. Never before in US history have10,000 people been forceably and permanently relo-cated supposedly due to such ordinary situations as

these occasional conflicts. And throughout the historyof the US only Indians have been torn from the land inthis wav.

Since the birth of the "land dispute," relations be-tween the peoples of the two tribes have becomemore strained. Will Mase, son of the chief of the HopiCoyote Clan has said, 'The so-called conflict is veryrecent and not of the Indians' own making." AnotherHopi Leader, Fermina Banyacya, has said that the BIA isusing the two tribal councils to fight this way, but thelocal people do not battle.

The Navajos agree. One has said, "We hear about allthis fighting between Navajo and Hopi, but I've neverseen it. It is the white man who wants that." VioletAshke has said she does not believe that the Hopi arebehind the relocation program: 'The US governmentand the companies interested in coal and uranium areusing the Hopi Tribe to get rid of us from this land."

The average Hopi isn't going to benefit much fromthe land settlement. Most Hopis do not want to moveaway from the mesa top villages. Any Navajo threat toHopi farmlands was checked by the establishment ofexclusively Hopi Grazing District 6. Navajos living inthe JUA represent no threat to Hopi culture. But theyare a hindrance to the few Hopi elite who havereached relative affluence, mostly through tribalgovernment salaries and contracts, and who want theJUA land for large scale cattle ranching and mining.The Hopi Tribal Council has made it clear that it plansto use the partitioned land for cattle grazing and stripmining. The Hopi family with the most to gain is one ofthe least traditional and most affluent of the tribe—theMormon Sekaquaptewa family, which has the largestcattle herd of all. Abbott Sekaquaptewa was HopiTribal Chairman until 1982, and his brother Waynepublished the tribal newspaper and was president ofthe Mormon Church on the reservation. Both have

used their influential positions to stir animosity againstthe Navajos and ridicule the Hopi traditionalists.

For Hopi Mormons, economic development is themeasure of success. Economic development is the keyto the existence of the Hopi Tribal Council, since itsonly income comes from mineral leases. The only wayit can expand its operation is to lease more land formineral development.

The Navajo Tribal CouncilThe Navajo Tribal Council has also been aggressively

pursuing oil, gas, coal, and uranium development formany years. Within the Navajo Reservation or nearby,there are four operating coal stripmines of between11,000 and 64,000 acres each, and four giant coal-firedpower plants. In the 1970's there were thirty-eightactive uranium mines, and five active uranium mills.Many of the uranium mines and mills have shut downwith the slump in the uranium market, but their radio-activity continues to pose a clear and present dangerto Navajo and Hopi peoples.

Peter MacDonald, Navajo Tribal Chairman from1970 through 1982, and head of the pro-developmentCouncil of Energy Resource Tribes, takes pride in theenergy development he brought to the Navajo Nation.Over the years he signed leases with energy com-panies that caused the removal of a number of tradi-tional Navajos from leased areas. MacDonald, one ofAmerica's wealthiest and most powerful Indians,completely dominated the affairs of the Navajo Nationand centralized power in his office. Many Navajoshave accused him of manipulating the tribal counciland attempting to squash dissent. Despite his out-spoken opposition to relocation, many Navajos didnot trust him, and he was defeated in his 1982 re-election bid.

Unfortunately, the new chairman, Peterson Zah,former director of the Navajo legal aid organization,has refused to take a strong stand against relocation.Despite campaign statements about his concern forthe land and the ways of the traditional elders, Zah hasco-operated with the relocation effort.

Zah opened negotiations with the Hopi Tribal Chair-man, but so far the only result has been plans for anew paved road through the JUA, from the Hopimesas to Peabody Coal Company's mines. The road,called the "Hopi-Navajo Turquoise Trail," is beingfinanced in part by Peabody. It will be the first pavedroad through the region, bringing in more non-Indianinfluences that will further undermine the traditionalculture. It will also provide access into the JUA for BIApolice vehicles and livestock impoundment trailers.

Zah has also co-operated with relocation by selectinglands for relocatees and by opening negotiations withthe Public Service Company of New Mexico to obtainthe controversial coal-rich land selected in NewMexico. He claimed that his land selections "shouldencourage some people to make the move." Onceagain the Navajos are learning that the politicians tend

-7-

to sell out the traditional values and the traditionalpeople for "economic development" and revenuesfrom coal companies.

Effects of Coal StripminingNavajo Tribal Council members, Navajo government

employees, and especially Peter MacDonald haveprofitted from the royalty payments received frommineral leasing, even though the Navajos receive farless than market value for their resources. However,the majority of the Navajo people do not benefit. Theyare still, after 30 years of energy development on theirland, the poorest cultural group in the US.

The Navajo people must suffer the damage coal anduranium mining cause to their land, air, water, andhealth, even though they have welcomed the few jobsthat energy development brings. But when they workat the mines, they are forced to participate in the des-truction of their own land.

The Navajo wells and springs are severely depletedor contaminated when coal stripmining disturbs ordestroys aquifers, the underground pathways for high-quality water. Already water is being taken from theaquifer that underlies Black Mesa at the rate of 3 milliongallons per day by Peabody Coal Company to trans-port the coal it mines in a slurry pipeline to a powerplant 275 miles away. Wells are going down andsprings are drying up, but company officials and poli-ticians deny responsibility, maintaining that there is noproof that coal mining is the cause.

The semi-arid, low-rainfall desert where the Navajoslive is one of the most environmentally sensitive areasin the US. The National Academy of Sciences hasreported that it is "virtually impossible" to reclaim theland after stripmining and warned that such areas mustbe declared "National Sacrifice Areas" if mining begins.

A haze of pollution from the coal-fed power plants inand surrounding Navajoland covers the once-crystalline Southwestern skies and creates healthproblems for the people. Visibility in the Southwest ishalf of what it was 15 years ago. Even with the latestpollution control equipment, the Four Corners Power

Plant, the worst single industrial polluter in the world,emits 350 tons of sulfur compounds and 270 tons ofnitrogen compounds each day. As a result, the Navajossuffer from respiratory and heart disease.

Sulfur emissions from the power plants around Navajo-land combine with water in the air to form acid rainswhich destroy fish and plant life. Increasing amountsof carbon dioxide emitted into the air by coal powerplants "could induce climatic changes with the poten-tial for generating global socio-political disruptionwithin fifty years," concluded a committee of the USDepartment of HEW.

Ancient Hopi prophesies warn against the destruc-tion of Mother Earth. They tell of a time when thewhite man will destroy himself by destroying theMother Earth for greed. That time, which was to beheralded by the first atomic bomb explosion, is uponus now.

The RelocationThe Joint Use Area is one of the most remote and

culturally isolated regions of the Navajo Nation, leasttouched by white influences. The Navajo cultureflourishes here, inspiring less traditional Navajos whoreturn home for spiritual nourishment. The cost ofrelocation will fall heavily on all Navajos, who will losethe heartland of their culture.

Many JUA Navajos don't speak or understand English.They don't understand the white man's laws, and theydon't understand tribal council laws. The laws theyunderstand are the natural laws. The prayers, the cere-monies, the songs—those are the laws that the peoplelive by. The people's religion, livelihood, and way oflife are tied to the land where they live, land which hasnurtured them and their ancestors for centuries. Asone woman put it, "We believe the Holy People arestill around this area, that is why we don't want to giveup the land." Another has said, "We don't want thiscoal to be taken out from our Mother the Earth. It ispart of her flesh."

Navajos have very strong and long-standing ties totheir customary use areas and to their livestock. The

-8-

Navajo culture and identity are passed on by thewomen to the children through the ties to the land.The women are severely stressed by relocationbecause they will have no land or sheep to pass on totheir children and grandchildren. They fear the child-ren will lose their Navajo identity. The Indian HealthService found that because of the stress, Navajosfacing relocation are using mental health facilities at arate far higher than other Navajos.

Some Navajos have already been persuaded tomove or forced from their land by the constructionfreeze and livestock impoundment. When childrengrow up and begin families, they have no place to livebecause they are not allowed to build a home, andhave no sheep for income or food. The RelocationCommission is moving many Navajos who don't speakEnglish, don't have city job skills, and don't knowabout city living or a cash economy into tract homeswith two-car garages, dishwashers, and plenty of bills.Because of the severe culture shock, many are suffer-ing from alcoholism, poor health, severe mental andemotional stress, family break-ups, and high rates ofsuicide and death.

As the relocatees have no way to pay taxes, utilityand medical bills, get a vehicle or provide for theirchildren, they quickly run into financial troubles. Halfof the families relocated to Flagstaff have already lostthe homes provided for them. Loan companies en-courage them to use their homes as collateral forloans they know cannot possibly be repaid. Otherhomes have been exchanged for deeds to worthlessland or sold for less than a quarter of what they areworth.

A serious question is who is bringing together therelocatees and these less than honorable realtors andloan companies. The Relocation Commission has re-purchased homes previously owned by relocateesfrom real estate companies sometimes two or threetimes, with no concern about what happened to thefamilies.

Once homeless, the families cannot legally return tothe reservation, and are denied further assistance bythe Relocation Commission and the Tribe. They endup living in public housing, trailers, substandard hous-ing, moving in with relatives, or squat illegally on thereservation. The stories of those already relocatedprove beyond a doubt that to tear traditional land-based people from their land and place them in an ur-ban environment is cultural genocide-exterminationof a people and a culture. It is clear PL 93-531 violatesthe 1948 United Nations Convention on Genocide,the language of which precludes the forced relocationof any identifyable racial, ethnic or religious groupunder conditions which bring about the destruction ofthe group as such.

The high rate of relocation failures raises questionsabout the Relocation Commission's compliance withPL 93-531. The legislation requires relocation to takeplace with "minimum adverse impact." The commis-sion has also been accused of violating the federaltrust responsibility, in which the government has a"moral obligation and trust" to protect Indian rightsunder the U.S. Constitution.

While the human costs of relocation cannot bemeasured in dollars, the financial cost to U.S. tax-payers is now estimated to be at least $500 million,and may reach $1 to $2 billion, far more than theoriginal 1974 estimate of $40 million. At a time whenCongress is making drastic spending cuts, there is nojustification for such a large expenditure that will turnself-sufficient people into miserable refugees depen-dent on government services for their survival. Nor isthere justification for spending money on a programthat produces a 50% failure rate.

On January 1, 1982, Leon Berger, the ExecutiveDirector of the Relocation Commission, the federalagency set up to oversee the relocation, resigned, say-ing that relocation was "an unprecedented disaster"and "would not work." He announced that he would

-9-

start working for the repeal of the law. In May of 1982,Roger Lewis, one of the three federally appointedRelocation Commissioners resigned, saying theCommission was "as bad as the people who ran theconcentration camps in World War II."

As resistance to relocation and international publicoutcry have grown, Congress has attempted to"soften" its impact. A 1980 ammendment offered "lifeestates" to those Navajos fifty-five and older, allowingthe elders only to stay at their homes for the rest oftheir lives. Although the deadline was extendedseveral times, only one application was received. TheNavajo elders overwhelmingly rejected life estatesbecause they did not want to be separated from theirfamilies. Said one, "Life estates are the same as waitingin the hospital or prison to die."

Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater has proposed aland exchange in which the Big Mountain area wouldremain Navajo in exchange for other Navajo landswhich would be given to the Hopi Tribal Council. TheBig Mountain people have rejected this plan to buyout their resistance forcing their relatives to move in-stead.

Arizona Senator Dennis DeConcini has proposed ex-tending the 1986 deadline for relocation to 1993. TheNavajo people object that they want an end to therelocation program, not a lengthening of its agony.

The Relocation Commission, in a desperate scram-ble to bury the problems of relocation, is crowdingfamilies into cluster housing projects on the reserva-tion where there is no land for sheep, and thereforestill no food or income for the people. Although at-tempts are being made to acquire 400,000 acres adja-cent to the reservation for relocatees, the cattle ran-ches being acquired have insufficient water for theplanned housing developments.

Officials concede that the 1986 deadline for reloca-tion cannot be met, and a report by the House Sub-committee on Interior and Related Agencies conclud-ed that the relocation program is not working. Clearlyit is creating more problems than it was supposed tosolve.

It is the only Indian land claim in U.S. history in whichthe government is evicting people instead of offeringmoney compensation. The difference is that all otherIndian land claims would have removed white peoplefrom their homes.

The Navajo people's resistance to relocation hasbecome one of the most potentially explosive situa-tions in the energy exploiters' assault on the South-west. As one Navajo wrote in a letter to President Car-ter, "Someday it's going to get to the point wherewe're going to have to take the law into our ownhands to prevent future destruction of our lives andour land. You're trying to force us to commit a crimejust to protect our land."

PL 93-531 will add yet another chapter to the dis-honorable history of ill treatment American Indianshave suffered at the hands of the U.S. governmentunless Congress has the vision and courage to reverseits course of action. Most people in Congress do notrealize the extent to which the law is a fundamentalviolation of the human rights and civil rights of over10,000 Navajos. It is an unnecessary injury of an inno-cent people by a misinformed government. Since Con-gress created the law, Congress will have to act to cor-rect its error.

Any Congressperson claiming to be truly concernedabout the hardships of relocation should not besatisfied to simply "adjust" the act by extending thedeadline or reworking the partition line, but will get tothe root of the act's failure. The only real solution is tohalt the relocation program, repeal the law, and repairthe damages it has already caused. The Hopi Tribeshould be compensated for the mistakes of the U.S.government in some other way, not at the expense ofthe Navajo people. Those Navajo people already vic-timized by relocation should be compensated andshould have the right to return to their land.

The movement to repeal the law is building nation-wide. Your actions can make a difference. Repealingthe law is the only way to prevent this national prob-lem from turning into a national disgrace. Don't letthese people be swept away.

All people should be alarmed that any Indian peoplefor any reason could abe forceably removed fromtheir lands. Those same economic, social and politicalforces which are destroying their lives surely willdestroy others.

If the Navajos are forced to move, we will have lostone of the few remaining ties to the originalknowledge that at one time all peoples on the earthhad of the relationship between the creator, the earth,and the people. At this time when the "civilized"world is rushing toward ecological, economic andspiritual disaster, we desperately need the example ofa living self-sufficient culture of people who know howto live in balance with the earth, how to live so thatnothing is destroyed and everything continues toprosper.

-10-

What You Can Do

1. LOBBY FOR REPEAL OF PL 93-531Pressure must be exerted nationally on Congress to

repeal the law. Letter-writing campaigns do work.Write individual and personal letters, call, or meetwith your Senators and Representatives. Send copiesto the Arizona Senators and Rep. Morris Udall, Chair-man of the House Committee on Interior and InsularAffairs. Advise them that Congress has made a tragicmistake based on erroneous information and advice,and lack of a true understanding of the situation. UrgeCongress to repeal the law. The Indian people shouldnot be subject to the political manipulation of the U.S.government and energy interests.

2. EDUCATE OTHERSInform your local community and raise support by

holding educational events. Search out effectivemedia contacts. A slide show, this booklet, a periodicnewspaper, "Big Mountain News," and a newsletterfrom the legal office are available.

3. SUPPORT JUA RESIDENTS IN THEIR LEGAL DEFENSEThe Big Mountain JUA Legal Defense/Offense Com-

mittee, staffed by members of the National LawyersGuild, provides independent legal services for all JUAresidents affected by relocation. Tax-deductible con-tributions toward the committee's work are being col-lected by the Capp St. Foundation. Solicit contribu-tions and plan a fund-raising event.

text by Pelican Leedrawings by Rini Templetonthird printing

RESOURCES AND CONTACTS

Big Mtn. (JUA) Legal Defense/Offense Committee

124 N. San Francisco, Suite BFlagstaff, Az. 86001(602)774-6923

newsletter:"BMLDOC Newsletter"

Big Mountain Support Group1412 Cypress St.Berkeley, Ca. 94703

slide show:"In Defense of Sacred Land"

newspaper:"Big Mountain News"

booklet:"Navajos Resist Forced

Relocation"

contributions:Capp St. Foundation294 PageSan Francisco, Ca. 94102

LOBBY

your SenatorsSenate Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20510

your RepresentativesU.S. House of RepresentativesWashington, D.C. 20515

Senator Barry Goldwater337 Russell Senate Office

BuildingWashington, DC 20510(202) 224-2235

Senator Dennis DeConcini3230 Dirksen Senate

Office BuildingWashington, DC 20510(202)224-4521

Rep. Morris Udall235 Cannon House

Office BuildingWashington, DC 20515(202) 225-4065

For More Information:Jerry Kammer, The Second Long Walk, UNM Press,

Albuquerque, N.M., 1980.Report to the Hopi Kikmongwis and Other Traditional

Hopi Leaders on Docket 196 and the ContinuingThreat to Hopi Land and Sovereignty, Indian Law Re-source Center, Washington, DC, 1979.

"Techqua Ikachi—The Traditional Viewpoint from theHopi Nation,"Box 174, Hotevilla, Az. 86030.

Peter Matthiessen, "The Battle for Big Mountain," GFOMagazine, March 1980.

Jerry Mander, "Kit Carson In a Three-Piece Suit," Co-Evolution Quarterly, Winter, 1981.

$1.00 each, quantity discount available

Big Mountain Support Group1412 Cypress St.Berkeley, Ca. 94703

•11-

.