Selling Off Apache Holy Land

[n2doc]

Tucson

ABOUT an hour east of Phoenix, near a mining town called Superior, men, women and children of the San Carlos Apache tribe have been camped out at a place called Oak Flat for more than three months, protesting the latest assault on their culture.

Three hundred people, mostly Apache, marched 44 miles from tribal headquarters to begin this occupation on Feb. 9. The campground lies at the core of an ancient Apache holy place, where coming-of-age ceremonies, especially for girls, have been performed for many generations, along with traditional acorn gathering. It belongs to the public, under the multiple-use mandate of the Forest Service, and has had special protections since 1955, when President Dwight D. Eisenhower decreed the area closed to mining — which, like cattle grazing, is otherwise common in national forests — because of its cultural and natural value. President Richard M. Nixon’s Interior Department in 1971 renewed this ban.

Despite these protections, in December 2014, Congress promised to hand the title for Oak Flat over to a private, Australian-British mining concern. A fine-print rider trading away the Indian holy land was added at the last minute to the must-pass military spending bill, the National Defense Authorization Act. By doing this, Congress has handed over a sacred Native American site to a foreign-owned company for what may be the first time in our nation’s history.

The Apache are occupying Oak Flat to protest this action — to them, a sacrilegious and craven sell-off of a place “where Apaches go to pray,” in the words of the San Carlos Apache tribal chairman, Terry Rambler. The site will doubtless be destroyed for any purpose other than mining; Resolution Copper Mining will hollow out a vast chamber that, when it caves in, will leave a two-mile-wide, 1,000-foot-deep pit. The company itself has likened the result of its planned mining at Oak Flat to that of a nearby meteor crater.

The land grab was sneakily anti-democratic even by congressional standards. For more than a decade, the parcel containing Oak Flat has been coveted by Rio Tinto, Resolution’s parent company — which already mines on its own private land in the surrounding area — for the high-value ores beneath it.

more
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/29/opinion/selling-off-apache-holy-land.html?&_r=4

[silenttigersong]

1. unbelievably

Pathetic.

[Enthusiast]

2. Kicked and recommended to the Max!

This is just more bullshit! I believe the President could stop this. But.............................


[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[840high]

3. ....x10

[historylovr]

4. K & R

This is so shameful.

[marym625]

5. so much for the White House Petitions doing anything

Even the response was bullshit.

Evidently screwing the Native Americans never goes oout of style

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/stop-apache-land-grab

[veness]

6. Terrible. K&R. n/t

[Orrex]

7. If they don't like it, then they should go back where they came from.

God damn it, we simply can't stop fucking over native civilizations and cultures.

[johnnyreb]

8. Dear Apache and all Native Americans

The comments to this New York Times article show that you have much love and support from your American neighbors. Please take heart and keep pushing us to be as worthy as you.

[johnnyreb]

9. The Antiquities Act

Just copying one article comment that may be useful:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiquities_Act

Nicholas Morrell Port Washington, WI 2 days ago

there is another way that Oak Flats can be saved- the antiquities Act. When Congress passed the Act in 1906, they gave the president authority to act to conserve areas like Oak Flats at his discretion. Congress debated whether to require it sign off on monuments as well, but ultimately decide that would defeat the purpose of fast action. time has proven that Congress to be wise and far-sighted. something we cannot say about this current Congress. If the president acts to declare Oak Flats a monument- it will nullify the provision.

Can the president do this? Yes, the President power to create monuments is equal to that of Congress as long as the land is federal. the courts have upheld every monument that has been challenged in the courts, including Jackson Hole in Wyoming, Carters monuments in Alaska and Grand Staircase Escalante in Utah. Now, while Congress has intended to transfer the land, the transfer has not taken place due to the tribes protest. the courts have said that an area can become a monument so long as the feds retain some control over it, and since the control over the land is disputed, the feds still retain control. a monument declaration by the president would be upheld as courts have very limited review of monument creation by the president- they can only check to see if the declaration is a legitimate use of discretion. In this case, it would clearly be a matter of discretion, and the courts would uphold it, under the Cameron vs US precedent.

[Pooka Fey]

10. "The deal is an impressive new low in congressional corruption"

Reading the article, I learned that John McCain and Jeff Flake received fat campaign contributions from the mining company to sneak this land grab through. This is so incredibly corrupt.