ENSTU 300: Critical Thinking & Communication in Environmental Studies

Bears Ears Protection Policies

Marrion Gestat, Environmental Studies Program, California State
University Monterey Bay

View of the Bears Ears buttes from Cedar Mesa Ruin (Ewing, 2017).

Policy Context commission is in full support for the H.R.

4518 bill proposing expansion and protection
The fight for protection of the Bears Ears of the land. Shortly followed by H.R. 4532
National Monument in the San Juan County bill proposing a restructured and separated
of Utah has been a long-time journey for Bears Ears. The future of this national
Native American tribes across the nation. monument lies within the efficacy of these
Serving as religious, cultural, and sacred potential policies, still undetermined and
grounds to numerous tribes, 5 of which are currently awaiting Congressional judgment.
so heavily impacted by the history and are
now leading the Inter-Tribal Bears Ears
Trump’s Executive Order
Coalition; An advocacy group for the
permanent protection of Bears Ears lands, On April 26, 2017 Executive Order 13792 a
resources, archaeological artifacts and the Review of Designations Under the Antiquities
cultural significance within (Bears Ears Act was announced and produced by
Coalition, n.d.). President Donald Trump. The review requires
Department of Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke
The coalition envisions a collaborative land to review all national monuments recognized
management plan to preserve and protect under the Antiquities Act of 1906 by past
Bears Ears from President Trump’s presidents since January 1st, 1996 and decide
Executive Order to reduce the landmark in whether the monument meets the standards
size. Tribal representatives are formally under the E.O (E.O. 13792). Presidential
comprised by members of each of the 5 authority to rescind national monuments is
leading tribes including: Terry Knight of the currently debated and yet to be followed into
Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, Davis Filfred from court. However, Congress has repealed and
the Navajo Nation, Carleton Bowekaty from even converted monuments in the past. Extent
the Zuni Pueblo of Zuni, Ute Indian, and of presidential authority on expansion policies
Alfred Lomahquahu of the Hopi Tribe all holds controversy in the litigation and
making up the Bears Ears Commission legislation processes that follow (Vincent &
(Bears Ears Coalition, n.d.). The
 Hanson, 2017). Act was introduced into the House of
Representatives by Congressman Ruben
Secretary will be required to consider all the Gallego with the proposal to expand the
following for each national monument: boundaries of the land (H.R. 4518, 2017). The
 Following original guidelines of the Bears Ears coalition has been consulted prior to
1906 Antiquities Act. In that the the proposal and is in full support of its passing.
established land is “the smallest area The bill reflects the Tribe’s visions for the land
compatible with the proper care and and its development (Bears Ears Coalition,
management of the objects to be n.d.). The coalition has now even garnered 98
protected” co-sponsors for the bill (Bears Ears Coalition,
 Appropriately classified as “historic 2018). The Department of Interior along with
landmarks, historic and prehistoric the USDA will be expected to mitigate
structures, or other objects of historic expanded land under jurisdiction in addition to
or scientific interest” the monument and accordance to the
Presidential Proclamation 9558, Barack
 Effects of Federal lands within and
Obama’s establishment of the national
beyond monument boundaries
monument (H.R. 4518, 2017).
 Use and enjoyment of non-Federal
land beyond monument boundaries
The DOI and USDA will be required to follow
 Concerns of State, tribal, and local Bears Ears Commission provision including:
government involved
 Proper care and management of
 Available Federal resources for monument boundaries
management
 Management plan will reflect historical
 And other standards the Secretary and cultural Tribal knowledge
wishes to include  Provide guidance and open
collaboration for development of
In the development of planning the secretary management plans
will be required to consult with the Secretary
of Defense, Department of Agriculture, Expanded boundaries will be acquired
Department of Commerce, Department of through the National Park Service (H.R.
Energy, Homeland Security, Governors of 4518). This expansion fulfills the coalition’s
State in which national monument is in, other original proposal for 1.9 million acres of
officials, tribes, and local governments protection for the national monument’s land
affected (E.O. 13792). and resources (Bears Ears Coalition, 2018).
Neighboring landmarks such as the Natural
Sizing of lands, expansion, and inclusion of Bridges Monument and sections of Glen
surrounding non-federal land within the Canyon National Recreation Area will be
monument boundaries, land use, resource included into the proposed expansion of the
protection, and public involvement all raise monument (H.R. 4518).
criticism and concern among stakeholders
involved. Some stakeholders hope for state The DOI and USDA will be allowed to attain
and local management of the land and land, water, and any other interests within the
resources as well as permitted public access additional expansion through donation,
for recreational use. Numerous factors purchase, or exchange.
compile into the controversy of this issue, but Shash Jaa and Indian Creek National
the undetermined extent of how much federal Monument
government reduce or expand public lands H.R. 4532 also known as the Shash Jaa
will create conflict within all parties (Vincent National Monument and Indian Creek
& Hanson, 2017). National Monument Act is a proposed bill
introduced to the House on December 4, 2017
Expansion Act by Representative Curtis Stewart, Rob
On December 1st, 2017 H.R. 4518 known as Bishop, and Mia Love. The bill is stated as the
the Bears Ears National Monument Expansion first to introduce a tribally managed National
Monument and other practices. Plans consist lands
of establishing 2 separate national  Location, entry, patent under mining
monuments: the Shash Jaa National laws
Monument comprised of 142,337 acres and  Mineral leasing practices, materials
the Indian Creek National Monument at and geothermal leasing laws
86,447 acres (H.R. 4532, 2017), reducing
the size of the national park by 85%. The consensus with the Federal Land Policy
Proclamation 9558 will be null and void, and Management Act of 1976, the council
leaving countless ancient artifacts and will be expected to:
resources on the premises unprotected  Present and progress the development
(Bears Ears Coalition, n.d.). The of the monument
monuments will be managed by the Shash  Develop collaborative management
Jaa Tribal Management and Indian Creek practices with resource managers,
Management Council. private landowners and the public
 Acknowledge and continue historical
The Bears Ears Coalition will be responsible and cultural Tribal practices through
for advising the Council groups who create hunting, gathering, wood cutting, and
and organize the sub units, leaving the 5 religious practices
tribes with no position to manage and only
allowed suggestions (Bears Ears Coalition, Members of the coalition have expressed
n.d.). Management councils will develop disagreement with the proposals of this bill.
plans while regularly communicating with The name “Shahs Jaa” alone is seen as a
local and state groups, those impacted by the conflicting issue, with the use of Navajo
land, and the Bears Ears Coalition to ensure language it is seen as a tactic to divide tribes.
Native American traditions into the plans Violations of the U.S Treaty and Indian Law
(H.R. 4532, 2017). The coalition has not jeopardize government relations with tribes in
been consulted prior to the proposal and the false claim of tribal management in the
even excludes 3/5 of their most involved council (Bears Ears Coalition, n.d.).
tribes of the land from a management role
(Bears Ears Coalition, n.d.). Resource Conclusion
protection units will also be created by the Since release of the E.O., controversy and
council to preserve archeological, natural, debate have been the main focus in the 2
and cultural resources and artifacts within proposed bills that followed. H.R. 5418
the monument. planning to expand national monument
boundaries, while H.R. 4532 cuts the
The bill plans to redefine federal lands and monument over half in size. Costs and
neighboring boundaries of Bears Ears efficacy of these proposed bills have yet to be
National Monument restricting: determined and are currently awaiting trial in
 Entry, appropriation, use of public Congress.
Literature Cited

Bears Ears National Monument Expansion

Act of 2017, H.R. 4518, 115th Cong.
(2017-2018).

Bears Ears Coalition. (n.d.). Bears Ears

Commissioners Selected, Focus on
the Future of the National
Monument. Retrieved from
https://bearsearscoalition.org/bears-
ears-commissioners-selected-focus-
on-the-future-of-the-national-
monument/

Bears Ears Coalition. (n.d.). Native American

Tribes Oppose H.R. 4532, A Bill to
Codify the Repeal and Replacement of
Bears Ears National Monument.
Retrieved from
https://bearsearscoalition.org/native-
american-tribes-oppose-h-r-4532-a-
bill-to-codify-the-repeal-and-
replacement-of-bears-ears-national-
monument/

Exec. Order No. 13792, 3 C.F.R. 20429-

20431 (2017).

Shash Jaa National Monument and Indian

Creek National Monument Act of
2017, H.R. 4532, 115th Cong. (2017-
2018)

Testimony on H.R. 4532, 7 (2018) (testimony

of Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition).