Native Americans and the Environment: A survey of twentieth century issues with particular reference to peoples of the Colorado Plateau and Southwest (page 7 of 10)

Author: David Rich Lewis. Adapted from: Lewis, David R. 1995. "Native Americans and the Environment: A survey of twentieth century issues." American Indian Quarterly, 19: 423-450, by permission of the University of Nebraska Press. Visit the University of Nebraska Press website at nebraskapress.unl.edu/.

Waste Storage and the Atomic Threat

Radioactive pollution may be the most serious threat to the long-term welfare of Native peoples. In the 1950s, as part of the call to national defense, the Navajo Tribal Council approved mineral agreements with Kerr McGee Corporation to mine uranium. Non-union Navajo miners were exposed to high levels of radioactivity in mines and mills. One 1959 report found radiation levels ninety times acceptable limits. Radioactive mill tailings dumped on the banks of the San Juan River crept into that drainage, and in 1979 a United Nuclear uranium mill tailings pond near Churchrock gave way, spilling its 100 million gallons of sludge into the Rio Puerco River. Navajos still cannot use the water. Cancers, respiratory ailments, and birth defects related to radiation exposure among miners, mill workers, and Navajo families in the region increased dramatically.

The pressure to generate some form of reservation development has led tribal governments to consider housing even more toxic wastes, posing long-term environmental problems that might outweigh any short-term economic benefits. Navajos and Kaibab-Paiutes in Arizona, and Kaws in Oklahoma initially accepted then backed out of deals with Waste-Tech Services, a subsidiary of Amoco Oil, to host hazardous waste incinerators. Using $100,000 study grants, the U.S. Department of Energy has enticed tribes and rural communities to explore storing nuclear waste in monitored retrievable storage facilities until a permanent national DOE site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, can be licensed. The Skull Valley Goshute, Mescalero Apache, Northern Arapaho, Fort McDermitt Paiute-Shoshone, Lower Brule Sioux, Chickasaw, Sac and Fox, Alabama-Quassarta, Ponca, Eastern Shawnee, Caddo, Yakima, and other Native groups applied for the study grants.

Across the country, the atmosphere has become so charged that even the decision to explore retrievable storage sites raises a howl of protest. "It's genocide aimed at Indian people who will suffer the consequences of poisoning our rivers and our land with nuclear waste," Klickitat chief Johnny Jackson of the confederated Yakima Nation told a 1992 gathering of tribal leaders. "Even if tribes say they just want to study it, the government intends to hook tribal governments with the money. I know from experience that the government never gives you money for nothing."

Several tribes continue to explore the projects. In February 1994, Mescaleros signed an agreement with Minnesota's Northern States Power Company, representing thirty-three nuclear energy companies, to establish a private site for 40,000 metric tons of spent fuel from commercial power plants. Wendell Chino, council president, told reporters, "Over the last 20 years, the Mescalero Apache Tribal Council has sought to achieve economic independence through the creation of jobs in tribal businesses. Our agreement with Northern States represents another step along our road to self-sufficiency. If we are successful in concluding a joint venture agreement ... it will provide jobs and other economic benefits for nearly forty years." Those benefits include an estimated tribal profit of $250 million with total revenues exceeding $2 billion over the forty-year life of the project.

Some of Chino's constituents disagreed, dubbing him "Chernobyl Chino." They worried that the temporary site might become permanent, abandoned by the companies and government. "Every single treaty we've ever made with the U.S. government has been broken," said opponent Joseph Geronimo. "What recourse do we have if the government breaks this?" In a January 1995 referendum, tribal members turned down the agreement. "Right or wrong they made a decision," Chino said. "I don't have a problem with it. I just recognize the fact that the people have shut the door on themselves in not accepting a great opportunity."

But the "great opportunity" resurfaced almost immediately. Blaming "outside interference from environmentalists and other anti-tribal groups," tribal officials orchestrated a petition drive and second vote which approved council plans to strike a deal with the nuclear utility consortium. The issue has divided the tribe. Some members are angry and scared, alleging vote-buying and intimidation. Others accept Chino's argument that such economic development is essential for survival. "With the project, our children will learn the skills to prepare them for life in tomorrow's world while honoring our tribal customs and heritage."

The issue becomes even more complicated when state officials voice their opposition - it becomes a matter of state versus tribal sovereignty. After the Mescalero votes, the New Mexico Legislature tried to prohibit the transportation of spent nuclear fuel on state highways and roads. "It's ironic that the state continues to fight the tribe when New Mexico has enjoyed the benefit of nuclear projects since 1945," responded Mescalero Vice Chairman Fred Peso, adding "The state has no jurisdiction over our lands." When the Skull Valley Goshutes streamlined talks with the Department of Energy in 1994 about housing nuclear waste on their small reservation seventy-five miles west of Salt Lake City, Governor Mike Leavitt thundered, "This is not something we want in Utah." Calling the DOE-Goshute agreement "somewhere between impolite and arrogant," he pronounced the project "dead." Goshute general counsel Danny Quintana reminded the governor that "the tribes have sovereignty as a matter of federal law," and would do what was in their best interest, dealing "with issues on the basis of fact and on the basis of knowledge and not on the basis of hysteria."

One senses the tribes' catch-22 and the racial overtones in the politics of sovereignty and waste - people are stuck with what they do not want, or they are not allowed to pursue viable plans for self-sufficiency. The concern that such economic development strategies might adversely affect reservation environments is genuine, tempered by the knowledge that reservation peoples desperately need some alternative to poverty and unemployment. Above all is the issue of tribal rights to pursue genuine self-rule.

The problem is that when alternatives are limited and need begins to dictate immediate resource exploitation rather than carefully planned development, tribes threaten themselves with what Russell Jim calls "self-cannibalism."  Tribes are doubly susceptible because most have relatively weak environmental laws or have waived them in order to attract outside industries. While tribes are subject to federal environmental laws, they are exempt from state acts that often are stricter, and enforcement by the BIA and Environmental Protection Agency has been notoriously lax. The struggle to balance federal trust responsibility with tribal sovereignty has constrained action, allowing businesses to take advantage of this regulatory vacuum and cut environmental corners and costs. This is what makes some people fear the "great opportunity" of monitored retrievable storage siting. Nevertheless, as populations and development increase, tribes are studying the issues, demanding federal enforcement, and creating their own regulations to protect Native people and resources.

Follow these links to:
Tourism
Stereotypes and Interests in Conflict
Conclusion
Selected References