8/7/2019 3 15 2011 Forgotten People to US Forest Service on Sacred Site Protection

1/6

Forgotten People Comments for the Official Record of the Sacred Sites Listening Session3115/2011

g.~.(Qi .~e . . ~$' fina l t\'O -

CDCForgotten PeopleP.O. Box 1661

Tuba City, AZ 86045http://www .forgottennavaj opeople.orgE-mail: info@forgottenpeople.org

(928) 401-1777Forgotten People Comments

Dated: Tuesday, March 15,2011Via Hand Delivery to USDA US Forest Service Representative at Coalmine Mesa ChapterHouse Sacred Sites Listening Sessions - 9:00AM - 4:00PMFrom: Forgotten PeopleRe: Public Comments for the Office Record on Sacred Sites Protection

1. Forgotten People is herewith submitting Comments for the official record pursuant toU.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Thomas J. Vilsack's directive to theForest Service to work with the USDA's Office of Tribal Relations (OTR) to reviewexisting laws, regulations, and policies and examine their effectiveness in ensuring aconsistent level of protection for American Indian and Alaska Native sacred sites locatedon National Forest System lands athttp://www.fs.fed.us/spf/tribalrelations/sacredsites.shtml

2. Forgotten People is aware that Secretary Vilsack asked the Forest Service to consult withTribal leaders to determine how the Agency can do a better job addressing sacred siteissues while simultaneously balancing pursuit ofthe Agency's mission to deliver forestgoods and services for current and future generations.

3. The USDA Forest Service mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity ofthe Nation's forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations.Your motto is Caring for the Land and Serving People. Your vision says you arerecognized nationally and internationally as a leader in caring for the land and servingpeople.

4. As you all know we have many sacred places, waters, and lands that are not beingrespected today. Norris Nez, Hathalie, Medicine Man: As Dine we are connected close to

1

8/7/2019 3 15 2011 Forgotten People to US Forest Service on Sacred Site Protection

2/6

Forgotten People Comments for the Official Record of the Sacred Sites Listening Session311512011

the land and our spiritual connection and ties to the land are spiritually tied to where thesacred sites are located and where we are surrounded. That is why the prayers orceremonies that were conducted are lost. It is because the land is destroyed. Uraniummining desecrates the land and will devastate our ability to heal through ceremony.Without our ability to carryon traditional Dine ways on lands we hold Sacred we willloose our solid foundation with the Holy People. I5. In light of your mission and vision, how can State regulators approve permits in March,201lfor uranium exploration in the Grand Canyon watershed for EZ, Pinenut and Canyonin northern Arizona -- two north of the Grand Canyon, and one near Valle, south ofTusaya when the Interior Department is considering whether to put about 1 million acresof federal land on either side of the Grand Canyon off-limits to new mining. The newmines are on federal lands in the withdrawal area.

6. It is still in dispute whether these mines would be grandfathered and included in awithdrawal. That would make a total of four mines in northern Arizona, all operated byinternational company Denison Mines, with ore to be processed in southeastern Utah anduranium transported across narrow Navajo Nation roads with open range.

7. Take heed of the reclassification of nearly 1 million acres of land around the GrandCanyon to prevent new mining claims comes with a fundamental change in how the U.S.Forest Service does business with mining companies. Companies that file to doexploratory drilling and other projects on more than 560 square miles of the KaibabNational Forest now must prove they have valid existing rights to their claims. Thechange affects as many as 10,000 existing mining claims on federal lands for all types ofhard-rock exploration around the Grand Canyon and some 1,100 uranium mining claimswithin five miles of the canyon. 2

8. There is widespread concern about renewed uranium mining. Flagstaff has joined fiveArizona tribes in opposition to uranium mining near Grand Canyon National Park. Thecity council has voted 6-1 to support a 20-year moratorium on new mines proposed byU.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. (Public News Service Dec. 10,2010)9. Forgotten People supports the Center for Biological Diversity, the Grand Canyon Trustand the Sierra Club's challenges to block mining on the claims, saying the ArizonaDepartment of Environmental Quality oshould not have issued some of the permits. 3

10. It is premature for these permits to be issued when the U.S. Department of Interior iscurrently considering a bar on the filing of any new mining claims on 1 million acresaround the Grand Canyon for 20 years.

Who benefits and Who Pays the Price?11. Dennison mines are endangering the crown jewel of the National Parks and are Sacred to

tribes living in and around the Grand Canyon. Dennison was issued more than 60citations since 2009 by the Mine Safety and Health Administration relating to operationsat Denison's Arizona 1 mine north of Grand Canyon and the company's Pandora uraniummine in Utah, where there was a mining fatality in early 2009.

IDeclaration of Norris Nez, Hathalie Stating Facts on Information and Belief, Answer to Interrogatory toOSM, 12/9/092 (AP Aug. 14,2009)3 (Arizona Daily Sun / Arizona Republic Mar. 11,2011)

2

8/7/2019 3 15 2011 Forgotten People to US Forest Service on Sacred Site Protection

3/6

Forgotten People Comments for the Official Record of the Sacred Sites Listening Session3115/2011

12. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a notice of violation to Denison in2010 for starting the Arizona 1 mine without obtaining Clean Air Act permits relating toradon emissions. Conservation groups and tribes are suing the Bureau of LandManagement in federal court for allowing Denison to open the Arizona 1 mine in 2009without updating 1980s-era mining plans and environmental reviews.

13. Neither the state nor the feds - nor Denison - can ensure that mining won't permanentlydamage Grand Canyon's aquifers, and they can't ensure such damage can be fixed if itdoes occur. 414. In a 2010 U.S. Geological Survey report examining the impacts of uranium mining on

Grand Canyon concluded that: "Uranium mining within the watershed may increase theamount of radioactive materials and heavy metals in the surface water and groundwaterflowing into Grand Canyon National Park and the Colorado River, and deep miningactivities may increase mobilization of uranium through the rock strata into the aquifers.In addition, waste rock and ore from mined areas may be transported away from themines by wind and runoff."

Indigenous Nations Pleas Ignored15. Forgotten People is active submitting comments to NFS for the official record dated

January, 2011 and July, 2009 to NFS opposing uranium mining in the Grand CanyonWatershed. In April, 2010, Forgotten People submitted testimony to the Subcommitteeon National Parks and Public lands of the Committee on Natural Resources with BBClinks on Community Impacts of Uranium Mining Near Grand Canyon National Park.

16. In September, 2009, the Hualapai (WAHL'-uh-peye) Tribe renewed a ban on uraniummining on its land near the Grand Canyon, joining other American Indian tribes inopposing what they see as a threat to their environment and their culture. 5

17. In December, 2008, the Hualapai Tribal Council voted to ban uranium mining on itsTribal lands which are located near the Grand Canyon in Arizona. 618. In April, 2005, Navajo Nation President Joseph Shirley Jr. signed the Dine NaturalResources Protection Act outlawing uranium mining and processing on the Navajoreservation stating: "No person shall engage in ~ranium mining and processing on anysites within Navajo Indian Country." 7 These mining claims present a real threat tonational parks and all public places across the West.

Environmental Organizations Pleas Ignored19. "The Grand Canyon Trust e-believes that the current uranium boom poses one of the

greatest threats to Grand Canyon National Park in its history," said Dave Gowdey, GrandCanyon Program Director for the Trust. "Uranium development at the borders of the parkthreatens to contaminate Park waters with radioactive waste, poses public health

4 Taylor McKinnon with the Center for Biological Diversity.5 AP Sep. 16,20096 Pacific Bay Minerals Ltd. Dec. 1,20087 (Farmington Daily Times, Apr. 20, 2005, Arizona Republic, Apr. 30,2005). Ban approved April 29, 2005,

3

8/7/2019 3 15 2011 Forgotten People to US Forest Service on Sacred Site Protection

4/6

, 1 - .' f W t Forgotten People Comments for the Official Record of the Sacred Sites Listening Session3115/2011problems for those downstream communities dependent upon Colorado River water, anddisrupts the Park's unique natural areas. 8

20. However, in defiance of Resolutions banning uranium mining and legal challenges and au.s. Government moratorium, National Forest Service allowed Canadian companyDenison Mines to start mining uranium on the north rim of the Grand Canyon. The ForestService decision to allow drilling for uranium near the Grand Canyon endangers ourSacred Grand Canyon.

Dine, Acoma, Laguna, Zuni & Hopi Sacred Mountains are under attack21 The National Forest Service has failed to adequately protect Sacred mountains belonging

to the Dine, Acoma, Laguna, Zuni & Hopi Nations. Mt. Taylor, located on ForestService managed lands in New Mexico between Albuquerque and Gallup, has faced thethreat of uranium mining. The mountain sits upon one of the richest reserves of uraniumore in the country, it is held holy by the Dine, Acoma, Laguna, Zuni & Hopi Nations.Those five groups successfully petitioned the state to permanently designate Mt. Tayloran official Traditional Cultural Property in 2009. However, that designation doesn't givethe tribes veto power over mining proposals within the almost 400,000 acre expanse ofland, but it does give them an avenue to provide more substantive input on developmentdecisions that come before the federal and state agencies in charge of permitting.

22. The owner of the Mt. Taylor mine is Rio Grande Resources, a wholly owned subsidiaryof the same company that owns the Cotter Mill-General Atomics Corporation. Theenvironmental record of General Atomics at the Cotter Mill is cause for concern in NewMexico, said Eric Jantz, attorney for the New Mexico Environmental Law Center. TheCotter Mill was designated a federal Superfund site in 1984, due to excessive uraniumcontamination of both the groundwater and the soil under the mill as well as under thesurrounding community. It has also been cited for violating a laundry list of Coloradoenvironmental regulations. There is only one mill in the United States that is currentlyoperating-the White Mesa Mill in Utah, which has its own environmental problems. 9

23. In June 2009 Indigenous Nations and environmental groups unified to protect the holyMountain and through their efforts Mt. Taylor was given temporary protection as aTraditional Cultural Property but according to traditional indigenous belief, protectingpart of a mountain is insufficient. The whole mountains must remain undisturbed toprotect the power of the prayers of the people.

24. The San Francisco Peaks Doko '00 'sliid, "Shining On Top," is the sacred mountain of thewest, a key boundary marker and a place where medicine men collect herbs for healingceremonies. The peaks are one of the "sacred places where the earth brushes up againstthe unseen world. However, in 1979, the Forest Service approved a new lodge, a pavedroad, additional parking, four new lifts and 50 acres of trails to be added to the existingski area, which soon grew to 777 acres. The native people in the area protested that thisinvasion imperiled their religious freedom. In the 1980s, the fashion for "stone-washed"

8 Environmental Working Group: Grand Canyon Threatened by Approval of Uranium Mining Activities c.., January29,2008) Report: Grand Canyon Threatened by Approval of Uranium MiningActivitieshttp://www.ewg.orglreports/grandcanyon9 Proposed Mt. Taylor uranium mine faces new obstacle 5/10/10http://newmexicoindependent.com/53589/proposed-mt-taylor-uranium-mine-faces-new-obstacle

4

8/7/2019 3 15 2011 Forgotten People to US Forest Service on Sacred Site Protection

5/6

Forgotten People Comments for the Official Record of the Sacred Sites Listening Session3 1 1 5 1 2 0 1 1

denim jeans added another layer to the jumble of land-use claims on the San FranciscoPeaks.25. The White Vulcan Pumice Mine, 7,500 feet up on the eastern slope of the mountain,

supplied pumice used to create the "stone-washed" denim effect and also used in cementand agriculture. Pumice mining is a destructive process that involves completelyremoving all vegetation and topsoil. The Forest Service went further when itrecommended to Babbitt that 74,000 acres of the Peaks be protected from all new miningclaims for 20 years.

26. The Forest Service has also petitioned to have the area designated a Traditional CulturalProperty under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. As a TraditionalCultural Property, the San Francisco Peaks would be permanently protected from miningbut it is still under attack. While both the Forest Service and Babbitt recognized that thePeaks should be off limits to mining, they seemed to have no problem with a ski resort.Due to drought conditions, the resort has sought to manufacture extra snow usingwastewater from the city of Flagstaff and once again, area tribes and communitymembers attempted to fight this proposal.

27. The history of the ongoing conflict at the San Francisco Peaks is a good example of thesometimes contradictory positions taken by a single government agency and conflictinginterpretations of federal religious freedom laws. The Forest Service (part of theDepartment of Agriculture) and the Department of the Interior ultimately preventedmining at the San Francisco Peaks; this campaign was made more difficult due to theantiquated 1872 Mining Law, which allows companies to mine on public land forminimal or no fees.

28. Meanwhile, the same two agencies encouraged skiing on the Peaks, nominated the areafor permanent protected status, and then approved resort expansion. Tribal members andnon-Indians sued the U.S. Forest Service in 2009. They said the agency failed to considerthe environmental, health and safety aspects of using reclaimed sewage to make snow.

Antiquated 1872 Mining Law and Legislation29. An antiquated 1872 Mining Law and legislation passed by Secretary of Interior Ken

Salazar that will not halt the development of existing claims violates Executive Order No.12898, "Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations andLow-Income Populations" issued on February 11, 1994.

30. EO 12898 requires all federal agencies (including the BLM) to "make achievingenvironmental justice part of its mission" by "identifying and addressing ...disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of' programs,policies and activities. Order at 1-101 (Agency Responsibilities). All federal programsare required to conduct their "programs, policies, and activities" that may "substantiallyaffect human health or the environment" in a manner ("way") that "ensures" that thoseactivities do not exclude persons from participation in the given project or subject them todiscrimination. Id. 2-2. The Executive Order specifically applies to activities in IndianCountry and to aggregations of American Indians as "populations" under 2-2.

31. As applied to this issue, the Executive Order requires that there must be a particularizedexamination of the impact of protection of sacred sites from uranium mining, waste waterto make artificial snow or other activities in any given portion of Indian Country, or nearIndian Country to prevent the harm identified in the order and to assure maximumparticipation by the individuals who will be affected by the given activity. They have

5

8/7/2019 3 15 2011 Forgotten People to US Forest Service on Sacred Site Protection

6/6

ForgottenPeopleCommentsfortheOfficialRecordof the SacredSitesListeningSession3/15/2011

rights to traditional property that are often ignored, and they are seldom permitted toadequately voice their need to protect their traditional lifestyles.

32. The Forgotten People believes assuring environmental justice includes consideration ofhealth and environmental impacts of a given initiative, and inclusion of people affectedby it to consider impacts on indigenous lifestyles and economies, and other disruptionsof existing indigenous property and cultural practices.

Solutions33. Forgotten People respectfully requests the Forest Service extend the comment period to

ensure greater participation. Forgotten People is aware that the Forest Service itself bearsdirect responsibility for the destruction of Sacred sites, including a rich cultural recordcontained in the Los Padres where the Forest Service has failed to adequately monitorand even identify the location of heritage sites.

34. The National Forest Service has consistently refused to allow input to impact theoutcome of the environmental review processes and allowed uranium mining, oildevelopment desecrate one of the greatest wonders of the world and Indigenous peoplessacred land, air, water resources and cultural and sacred sites.

35. The National Forest Service issued permits in spite of Denison's history of worker safetyviolations in several of its mines in the United States including Utah and Colorado.These violations have had the potential to expose workers to dangerous conditionsincluding airborne contaminants which compromise the integrity of the Grand Canyon.Uranium mining operations endanger Grand Canyon's seeps, springs, streams, river,drinking water source and the people, plants and wildlife to feed nuclear power plants. 10

36. Leana Hosea, British Broadcasting Corporation World News Service (BBC) journalistprepared the following links of footage of Denison AZ-l mine, Denison mines interviewand an interview with uranium miners at the Arizona 1mine and reporter piece to camerawhere no one was wearing any masks, including the reporter, the mine floor was bothmuddy and dusty and there was a discussion about how safety regulations and. I I' I h d 11 12environmenta regu ations c as e .

37. The fight to save sacred places has become a major focus of Indigenous Nations battleagainst the National Forest Service's approval of oil, natural gas, uranium mining andlogging permits on federal lands. Who, we ask, is the National Forest Service servingand how serious is your intention to listen?

~ Sec'y/TreasurerMarsha MonesterskyProgram Director

10 AP June 25, 200811htto:iiwwv,:. voutube.com/watch ?v=Ro4pvTtvwxE, http://www ..{outube.com/watch?v=2TXj A8kq W 0 I,http;!/www.youtube.comiwatch"!v=ZK41 OrY FUoc&teature=re lated,htlp:ilW\.vw.'{outube.com!watch?v=LewBwozOOPU&teature=related,http;/ /www ..{outube.com/watch ?v=xoOvso06 fSo& feature=re lated12LeanaHosea +447588596286 Leana.Hosea(v.bbc.co.uk

6