Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2019
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2181. Mr. Chairman, this is yet another piece of legislation advanced by my colleagues on behalf of the radical environmental movement. This bill will unilaterally lock up oil and gas development on 316,000 acres of federally owned land in New Mexico.
The Department of the Interior is in the process of drafting a resource management plan for this area, but this process is still under review and the resource management plan has not yet been released. This bill would permanently ban all energy development in the area before we know all the facts and before a science-based environmental review is completed.
Decisions made in Washington regarding how to manage federally owned land have implications beyond the borders of the acreage in question. Those who own land or operate businesses near federally owned parcels are oftentimes significantly impacted by poor management decisions made by the Federal bureaucrats who do not live there or understand the needs of the rural Western communities.
Similarly, my colleagues claim that this bill will do no harm to those who own lands and mineral rights in the surrounding area, but this bill could mean millions in lost revenue for those who own lands along the proposed withdrawal boundary.
While it is technically true that the acreage off limits to development under this bill is federally owned, there are lands located throughout the withdrawal area that are privately owned by the members of the Navajo Nation.
If you take a look at this map, anything you see in this purple area--particularly in this area is what we are talking about--is owned by the Navajo allottees. So when you are looking at the expansion of this park, it impugns access to that area.
Now, as you see, the Navajo-owned lands and minerals are scattered throughout and are located outside the withdrawal area. But if these lands are unavailable for development, they become restricted and further cut off from access points and from development opportunities. If the neighboring land can never be developed, as required under this bill, the economic value of these private minerals is diminished and the Navajo owners will have a harder time attracting investments on their land.
Once again, you see the skirting all the way through this area, particularly in this band alongside there, so access is critical.
We heard testimony to this fact in the Natural Resources Committee this summer. Ms. Delora Hesuse testified in opposition to this bill, stating: ``Our voices as allotted landowners are being silenced by environmentalists claiming to speak for all of us. These lands were given to our great-great-grandparents in exchange for citizenship, and we have rights as citizens and landowners to develop our lands for oil and gas as we see fit.''
She continued: ``If BLM lands are withdrawn around our allotments, that means oil and gas companies cannot access our lands, because they won't be able to access the Federal lands.''
Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record her testimony. Delora Hesuse, Navajo Indian Allottee, Nageezi Chapter Testimony Before the House Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Legislative Hearing on H.R. 2181 Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act--June 5, 2019
Chairwoman Haaland, Ranking Member Young and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to bring voice to those Navajo tribal members who are being forgotten with this bill--Indian allottees.
I am Delora Hesuse, a citizen of the Navajo Nation, Nageezi Chapter. My chapter is in the Greater Chaco region and near the Chaco Culture National Historic Park. My grandmother was a Councilwoman for the Nageezi Chapter for eight years, and my father was a Navajo Nation Council Delegate for the Nageezi Chapter for twenty years.
Many people don't understand our Native American heritage and the fact that many individual Navajo Nation members such as I own private lands and the minerals underneath them. This is a steadfast personal property right that sustains our livelihoods and way of life. H.R. 2181 would put many of our mineral rights off limits and stop a much-needed source of income to feed, shelter, clothe and protect our families. I'm not exaggerating the importance of this income. In 2015, the Federal Indian Minerals Office distributed $96 million to 20,835 allottees. That's a significant source of income in an area that continues to struggle with unemployment.
My ancestors were allotted the land and mineral rights by the United States government many generations ago, and it pains me to see that my own leaders, both tribal and in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate, are supporting a bill that would put my oil and natural gas rights off limits and/or seriously prevent my family from receiving income from the valuable energy resources that we own.
I am not alone. Many other Indian allottees in the Greater Chaco region agree with me. In fact, I have here a petition signed by 131 of us allottees opposing this buffer zone bill.
I also have with me another petition signed by many allottees that states that the environmentalists' voice is not our voice. Our voices as Allotted landowners are being silenced by environmentalists claiming to speak for all of us. These lands were given to our great, great grandparents in exchange for citizenship, and we have rights as citizens and landowners to develop our lands for oil and gas as we see fit.
I also have two resolutions from the Huerfano and Nageezi chapters signed by our chapter presidents supporting us Navajo Allotment landowners and recognizing our opposition to this bill. These chapter resolutions call for a meeting with Senators Udall and Heinrich so that we can express our concerns with the bill and how it will limit our rights.
I am disappointed that the Department of the Interior, which is supposed to manage our mineral rights in trust to the benefit of my family and all other allottees, has stopped leasing for a full year. This action delays income to us allottees in the short term, but more importantly, sends a strong signal to oil and gas companies that generate the income on our behalf that investment in the area is risky and uncertain in the long term.
I have been participating actively in the Resource Management Planning (RMP) process which is under pressure from environmental groups and others opposed to responsible oil and natural gas development in the area. I continue to feel that the Interior Department and members of Congress are ignoring the voice of Indian allottees and listening only to environmental groups like Dine Care and other outside groups that want to keep oil and natural gas from being developed at all.
Besides not being realistic, it would deprive my family of income to sustain our way of life. Our voices should and must be heard equally along with the environmental special interest groups. In fact, with the Interior Department's trust responsibility, our voices should carry much more weight than that of outside special interests, but that is not the case with this bill.
The bill would put off limits my mineral rights and the mineral rights of thousands of allottees. While the bill claims not to affect my mineral rights, in fact, many allottee lands are surrounded by federal lands that would be withdrawn by this bill. If BLM lands are withdrawn around our allotments, that means oil and gas companies cannot access our lands, because they won't be able to access the federal lands.
Furthermore, since the oil and gas is accessed using horizontal drilling, putting the federal lands and minerals off limits will mean my minerals are also off limits. Because of the checkerboard pattern of lands, where allottee lands are often surrounded by BLM lands, particularly in the northeast segment of the buffer, if companies cannot access all minerals along the lateral of a horizontal well, they will not access any.
Companies will simply be discouraged from developing the minerals on my behalf because it just doesn't make sense economically or technologically to pinpoint my small amount of minerals stranded amongst federal minerals. What may be small to them, however, is not small to me. Companies will be discouraged from developing in all areas of the buffer at all, even on allottee lands.
I too care deeply about the Chaco cultural heritage. After all, I'm a Navajo who lives right in the Greater Chaco region. But the Chaco Culture National Historic Park already protects the Great Houses. Artifacts that may be outside the park are protected through the National Historic Preservation Act. Any development of my minerals and the minerals of other allottees is done in strict accordance with the act, to make sure they are protected. Not only do we insist upon it, but that is the law of the land.
I urge the committee not to pass this bill. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Further, two chapters of the Navajo Nation representing a combined 6,000 residents passed resolutions opposing this bill because it would jeopardize development and potentially ``infringe on their royalty payments.''
Mr. Chairman, I also include those in the Record. Resolution of Huerfano Chapter Resolution # Hue-090-18
Supporting the Navajo Allotment Owners in Opposition of ``The Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018'' and Furthermore
Requesting U.S. Senators Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich to meet with Navajo Allotment Owners in Northwest New Mexico to Explain the Proposed Senate Bill 2907. Whereas:
1. Huerfano Chapter is a certified governmental entity of the Navajo Nation charged with the responsibility to solicit, promote, and protect the interest and the welfare of the chapter and its community pursuant to the Navajo Nation Resolution CJ20-55, December 02, 1995 and Resolution CAP 34- 98, adopting the Local Governance Act (LGA); and
2. Huerfano Chapter has a population of 3000 plus residents, both registered voters and nonregistered community members. The chapter is one of the largest land based chapters comprised of 553,528 acres in Eastern Agency, Navajo Nation and has nine {09) subcommunities including Adobe, Blanco, Bisti, Carson, Gallegos, Jacquez, Hogback, Huerfano, and Otis; and
3. The Navajo Allotment owners met on Jun 12, 2018 at Nageezi Chapter where over eighty-five (85) attended to voice their opinions on the proposed ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act'' or Senate Bill 2907; and
4. Navajo Allotment Land Owners expressed their concerns that the ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018'' might infringe on their royalty payments they are presently benefitting from oil and gas development on their allotment lands. The Navajo communities, including the Navajo Reservation has always been in a very depressed economic state for many years and such development of natural resources gives Navajo families benefit for their daily lives; and
5. Navajo Allotment owners are concern that self-serving special interest organizations are violating the rights of Navajo Allotment Land Owners, that such publicized demonstrations and meetings by these special interest and outside groups have over shadowed the Navajo allotment land owners who benefits from oil and development on their allotment lands; and
6. Navajo Allotment Land Owners do not share opinions of environmentalists voicing their objectives on natural resources developments. These are over publicized objectives by the environmentalists have drowned out and overshadowed Navajo Allotment Land Owners Rights; and
7. Navajo Allotment Land Owners are truly the impacted people of the Chaco area. These lands were patented and allotted to the Navajo People in New Mexico and handed down through many generations. These lands were given in exchange for land taken by the U.S. Government in exchange for citizenships. Therefore, as Navajo People being land owners, they have the right to lease, develop, or excavate their lands; Now therefore be it
Resolved That: 1. The Huerfano Chapter hereby supports and recognizes the opposition by the Navajo Allotment Land Owners of the ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018'' or Senate Bill 2904.
2. Huerfano Chapter herby further supports and requests U.S. Senator Tom Udall and U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich to attend a meeting with Navajo Allotment Land Owners of the ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018'' to explain the content and reasons of the proposed ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018''. The meeting will allow Navajo Allotment Land Owners to express their concerns of the proposed ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018'' and how it will limit their rights. CERTIFICATION
We hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly presented and discussed at a duly called meeting of Huerfano Chapter, Navajo Nation (New Mexico), at which a quorum was present, and that the same was passed by a vote of 12 in favor, 00 opposed, and 08 abstained this 08th day of July 2018.
Motion by: Larry J. Bonney. Second by: Cecil Werito Jr. Ben Woody Jr., Chapter President. Irene L. Harvey, Chapter Vice-President. Lois Y. Werito, Secretary/Treasurer. ____
Resolution of Nageezi Chapter--Eastern Agency, District 19 RESOLUTION # NC-18-077
Supporting the Navajo Allotment Owners in Opposition of The ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018'' and Furthermore
Requesting U.S. Senators Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich to meet with Navajo Allotment Owners in Northwest New Mexico to Explain the Proposed Senate Bill 2907 Whereas:
1. Pursuant to 26 N.N.C. Sec. 1(B), the Nageezi Chapter is delegated the governmental authority to make decisions over local matters consistent with Navajo Law, Custom, and Tradition and under 11 N.N.C., Part 1, Section 10, is delegated authority to make local decisions in the best interest and welfare of the community members; and
2. Nageezi Chapter with the population of 2500 to 3000 residents, registered and nonregistered voters, is made of up of nine (09) sub-communities including and not limited to: Nageezi, Lybrook, Twin Pines, Blanco, Kimbeto, Chaco Canyon, Escavada, Betoni Wash, Kinnadiz, and Dzilth-na-o-dith-hle, being one of the largest land base chapters in the Eastern Agency of the Navajo Nation; and
3. Navajo Allotment Land Owners met on June 12, 2018 at Nageezi Chapter where over eighty-five (85) attended to voice their opinions on the proposed ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018 or Senate Bill 2907; and
4. Navajo Allotment Land Owners expressed their concerns that the ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018:'' might infringe on their royalty payments they are presently benefitting from oil and gas development on their allotment lands. Navajo communities, including the Navajo Reservation has always been in a very depressed economic state for many years and such development of natural resources gives Navajo families benefits to their daily lives; and
5. Navajo Allotment Land Owners are concerned that self- serving special interest organizations are violating the rights of Navajo Allotment Land Owners. That such publicized demonstrations and meetings by these special interest and outside groups have over shadowed the Navajo Allotment Land Owners whom currently benefitting from oil and gas development on their allotment lands; and
6. Navajo Allotment Land Owners do not share opinions of environmentalists voicing their objections on natural resources developments. These over publicized objections by the environmentalists have drowned out and overshadowed Navajo Allotment Land Owners Rights; and
7. Navajo Allotment Land Owners are truly the impacted people of the Chaco area. These lands were patented and allotted to the Navajo People in New Mexico and handed down through many generations. These lands were given in exchange for land taken by the U.S. Government in exchange for citizenships. Therefore, as Navajo People being land owners, they have the right to lease, develop, or excavate their lands; Now therefore be it
Resolved That: 1. Nageezi Chapter hereby supports and recognizes the opposition by the Navajo Allotment Land Owners of the ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018'' or Senate bill 2907; and
2. Nageezi Chapter hereby further supports and requests U.S. Senator Udall and U.S. Senator Heinrich to attend a meeting with Navajo Allotment Land Owners on the ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018'' to explain the content and reasons of the proposed ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018''. The meeting will allow Navajo Allotment Land Owners to express their concerns of the proposed ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2018'' and how it will limit their rights. CERTIFICATION
We Hereby Certify that the Foregoing Resolution #NC-18-077 was duly presented and discussed at a duly called meeting of Nageezi Chapter, Navajo Nation (New Mexico), at which a quorum was present, motioned by Delora Hesuse, seconded by Leon Sam, was voted on with 52 in favor, 00 opposed, and 03 abstained, this 01st day of July 2018. Ervin Chavez, Chapter President. Jessica Platero, Secretary/Treasurer.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. I should note, these are significant sums which the Navajo allottees depend on each and every year. According to a 2017 Department of the Interior IG report, 20,855 Navajo allottees receive a collective $96 million per year from revenues raised through responsible oil and gas development on their allotments. Quite simply, infringing on their right to develop their mineral resources jeopardizes their quality of life.
Further, oil and gas development has blessed the State of New Mexico with significant budget windfalls in recent years. Just last week, the Department of the Interior announced that the State of New Mexico would receive $1.17 billion in revenues from Federal oil and gas development, the highest disbursement in the State's history.
2018 was a record-breaking year for oil and gas development in New Mexico, with State revenues reaching $2.2 billion, total. Roughly half of these revenues will return directly to the State's schools, investing in higher pay for teachers and staff, while other funds were allocated for infrastructure projects and public services.
These funds were provided by oil and gas operations on not only Federal lands, but on State trust lands, as well. Roughly 8 percent of the withdrawal area in this bill is owned by the State of New Mexico and can be developed for the benefit of its citizens. Enacting this bill will cut off the revenue streams from both Federal and State energy development, reducing future revenues for educational initiatives like those signed into law earlier this year.
Mr. Chairman, the Chaco Cultural History Park is already protected and off limits to oil and gas development. If leasing were to occur in the surrounding area, it would be subject to a multitude of Federal laws and regulations before any development could begin, including the National Historic Preservation Act, designed to protect culturally significant areas and artifacts on all Federal lands.
Before we declare a permanent ban on energy development in such a large area, we need to have all of the facts. We need to have a complete scientific review and stakeholder engagement process that is already underway. We need to thoroughly weigh the benefits and concerns, and we need to consider all those who are impacted. Not doing so could have significant consequences for the Navajo allottees and for the State of New Mexico's budget and priorities for its citizens.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I love the passion in the gentleman's voice, but, once again, it is not me. It is the allottees who brought their voice forward, the Navajo allottees. They have seen, time and time again, promises made by the Federal Government and promises not kept.
So, once again, who would you rather believe, the allottees or the BLM? Personally, I would side with the allottees.
When you look at the map, it tells you the story you need to know. If we are going to make an amendment, we should guarantee access through any of that application through this area, not just through the BLM, but all this area, because those are the resources of the State.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Yes.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, once again, it says it takes it off of mineral exposure, but it doesn't give access.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Johnson).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would love to engage with the gentleman from New Mexico if the gentleman would not mind.
Mr. Chair, Members are bringing up this concept of methane capture. There is an easy solution.
Is the gentleman in favor of providing a pipeline, because what ends up happening, we can recover almost 100 percent of the methane emissions when we have a pipeline nearby, because then it becomes profitable and it becomes something that we can actually utilize.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I would let the gentleman know that I am one of these technology nerds. I have been visiting with people who have revolutionized and have new ideas in regard to pipelines that would set this on fire.
So if we are looking at technology, we ought to be looking at in the right way. It is beneficial. We are living longer, not like what we were at the turn of the 1900s, which was shorter.
My point is, if there is technology out there for pipelines that is very consistent with almost 100 percent capture, wouldn't the gentleman entertain that?
I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, reclaiming my time, I have no problem. What I would ask in return is let's turn around and go back to Petra Nova down in Texas where we have a coal-fired plant that actually captures 100 percent of any emissions. It takes it down into the gas areas and actually injects it back in, squeegeeing what the rest of the oil and gas is, and then it condenses into limestone. It is pretty interesting technology.
So I appreciate the gentleman for his back-and-forth, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop), who is the ranking member of the full committee.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, for the record, I would like to reiterate a number of institutions that are against H.R. 2181. To preface that, we set precedents and we codify precedents. So that is why, Mr. Chairman, you will have multiple States disagreeing with H.R. 2181.
So for those who are against H.R. 2181, you have the American Exploration and Mining Association, there is a group letter; Arizona Liberty, group letter; Arizona Mining Association, group letter; Arizona Pork Producers, group letter; Arizona Rock Products Association; group letter; Conservatives for Property Rights, a letter; Denver Lumber Company, a letter; enCore Energy Corporation; Mohave County Supervisor Buster Johnson, a letter; New Mexico Business Coalition, a letter; New Mexico Cattle Growers Association; New Mexico Federal Lands Council; New Mexico Wool Growers Association; Western Energy Alliance; and Women's Mining Coalition. These are just some of the people who are against it.
When we look at this board, we have this designation, you see it here in Chaco Canyon.
What wisdom did they have when they first put this together?
That is what I want to ask. The dimensions here are for a reason.
Why are we expending this, particularly when there is so little trust in the Federal Government?
I think we have just realized that we had to move a part of our government--I think the BLM, if I remember right--out to Grand Junction, Colorado, so that we actually had some bureaucrats who actually understood the dilemmas that are out there in Western culture and in Western States.
Yes, Western States gave up a lot. They gave a lot up compared to our Eastern cohorts. We gave property to the Federal Government for stewardship, however, that has been abused. The products that we were supposed to get off those lands as public lands have dwindled.
Eastern States call us beggars in regard to payment in lieu of taxes because we can't tax these Federal lands. And we are begging for pennies on the dollar.
Something is wrong with that.
We are also vested in the community application of the best management of these resources and getting the highest yield out of it. It is like an investment.
How do we get the best out of this area?
When you look at this, no wonder the Navajo allottees don't trust the Federal Government. Tell me when the Federal Government has honored their promise.
Look at the Navajo generating station in Arizona. This was a promise to the Navajo and Hopi Tribes to have work that was dependent upon them, that gave them the benefits of that entrepreneurship and that reflection of minerals. Sixty percent of the Navajo economy is based off of the Navajo generating station at the mine. That is gone. Eighty percent of the Hopis on the mine and NGS. That is gone. So it is no wonder these Navajo allottees don't trust the Federal Government. I don't blame them.
Trust is a series of promises kept. Until we can start honoring our promises, we have got to stop this foolishness. There is plenty of land there. I want to see my sites, but I also want my energy, too. There is a way of going about it.
We engaged with the gentleman from New Mexico. It is going to be a wonderful aspect to start talking about technology in regard to recouping 100 percent of the methane and anything else that comes out of it.
I do come from northern Arizona where I can see the stars. I don't want to ever lose sight of that, because I think it was Buzz Lightyear who said: To infinity and beyond. That is the way we should also be.
But it is not about victimization, it is about empowerment. I believe these Navajo allottees deserve their rights to make sure that the government honors their promise. I want cultural sites to be honored. But I wonder what the difference is when this site is held in this parameter and why we are going about the business to expand it even further.
Once again, enough is enough.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for that. But, once again, trust is a series of promises kept.
When has the Federal Government held their trust up to the Tribal men or even allottees?
It doesn't matter if they are Native American. We have had a number of mining claims that have been stymied because the Forest Service or the BLM will not give them access, even though they have allowed and stated that they would have access to that claim.
So, once again, it is a hollow promise; and, once again, I beseech individuals until the government starts honoring promises, they are not entitled to the hierarchy of trust. That is just it. I trust people more than I do the government. A government that can give all can take all. I'm not for that. I'm for empowerment. I'm not for victimization.
What I have seen, I don't like. I have seen that the promise to the Navajo people and to the Hopi people is lame.
We are going to take these good-paying jobs in northern Arizona, and we are going to give them welfare?
How discouraging is that?
Does that lift a person's spirit?
No, it doesn't.
It doesn't give them upward mobility. I thought that was the American experience. It is sad that we are at this point in time. I think we need to have more dialogue on these bills. We need to have more discussions. Yes, the ranking member made the comment: good process, builds good policy, builds good politics. None of that exists right now. None of that exists.
Until we get back to the civil debate on this, it continually won't exist.
Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to vote against this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I include the following letters in the Record. Western Caucus, Chairman Paul Gosar Opposition to H.R. 2181
So far H.R. 2181 is opposed by: American Exploration & Mining Association (Group Letter), Arizona Liberty (Group Letter), Arizona Mining Association (Group Letter), Arizona Pork Producers (Group Letter), Arizona Rock Products Association (Group Letter), Citizens For America (Group Letter), Conservative Coalition of Northern Arizona (Group Letter), Conservatives for Property Rights (Letter), Denver Lumber Company (Letter), enCore Energy Corp (Letter), Mohave County Supervisor Buster Johnson (Letter), New Mexico Business Coalition (Letter), New Mexico Cattle Growers Association (Letter), New Mexico Federal Lands Council (Letter), New Mexico Wool Growers Association (Letter), Western Energy Alliance (Letter), Women's Mining Coalition (Group Letter). ____ July 16, 2019. Hon. Raul Grijalva, Chairman, House Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC. Hon. Rob Bishop, Ranking Member, House Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Grijalva and Ranking Member Bishop: I write to you today to express my strong opposition to H.R. 2181, the ``Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2019''. This bill permanently bans oil, natural gas, coal and other minerals from federal leasing and future development on 316,000 acres in New Mexico while also permanently terminating leases in the area that have yet to go into production.
H.R. 2181 places our economic and energy security at risk by putting an area rich in oil and gas resources permanently off limits to production. This bill will harm tribal members, reduce general fund and education revenues infringe on private property rights and negatively impact local economies.
The area in question has proven to hold large reserves of oil and gas resources. BLM recognized the potential in this area and proposed to include several parcels near Chaco Canyon in its oil and gas lease sale on March 28, 2019.
The so-called ``buffer zone'' imposed by this bill is completely unnecessary, as oil and gas production has taken place in this area for decades, with no damage to the national park. In fact, the expressed purpose of the park was to protect the culturally significant ruins and great houses of the Chaco people, and the boundaries of the park were drawn for that very goal.
H.R. 2181 will harm education. In fiscal year 2018, oil and natural gas production generated $2.2 billion for New Mexico's general fund and accounted for one-third of all revenue in the fund. More than $820 million of these funds flowed to k-12 schools, providing enough revenues enough to cover the salaries of nearly 11,500 teachers.
It was clear from the manner in which the committee treated this bill that the voices of tribal members were not adequately considered. In fact, no allottees were invited to speak at the site visit or at the subcommittee hearing in New Mexico discussing this legislation.
Delora Hesuse, a Navajo with private mineral rights in New Mexico, claims the concerns of Indian allottees have not been heard and that the proposed 316,000-acre ``buffer'' is a solution in search of a problem. According to Western Wire, Hesuse stated, ``How come we don't have a voice in this? . . . Environmentalists and others claiming to speak on their behalf have `not even consulted us or asked our permission . . . Her fellow allottees were passed over for [opponents] and environmental activists and not included in the panel discussions at the field hearings. We oppose the buffer zone because it's never been an issue. Everyone knew their boundaries. She said residents near Chaco have been receiving royalties since the 1970s and they don't want that critical income to go away.''
H.R. 2181 imposes an assault on Indian allottees that hold private mineral rights in the withdrawal area and tramples on property rights. This bill makes their assets worthless, taking away valuable royalty payments from these impoverished communities. To put this in perspective, in 2015 alone, the Federal Indian Minerals Office distributed $96 million to 20,835 allottees throughout the country.
Allottees in the Chaco region have consistently expressed opposition to this proposed withdrawal. Instead of listening to all local voices, the proponents of this bill have pandered to environmental groups who claim to represent all the relevant stakeholders on this matter, but clearly do not.
There are already numerous federal and state laws and regulations on the books that adequately protect the Chaco National Park. The oil and gas industry has both a legal and moral obligation to protect the artifacts of the Chaco people, as well as avoiding impacts on newly discovered artifacts, which it has always done. American energy production and protecting the environment are not mutually exclusive goals. Chaco will continue to be protected while responsible oil and gas production occurs, benefitting education and reducing carbon emissions in the process.
Again, I oppose H.R. 2181 and urge its rejection. Sincerely, Buster D. Johnson, Mohave County Supervisor, District III. ____ IPAA Independent Petroleum Association of America October 25, 2019. Hon. Raul Grijalva, Chairman, House Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC. Hon. Rob Bishop, Ranking Member, House Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Grijalva and Ranking Member Bishop: The Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA) strongly opposes H.R. 2181, the Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act. IPAA did not object when Interior Secretary Bernhardt issued a one-year freeze on leasing in order to complete the ongoing Resource Management Plan (RMP) in the area. We believe it is important to have all the facts before making any land management decision involving public lands. However, despite the fact that the RMP has not yet been released, House Democratic leadership plans to bring H.R. 2181 to the floor for a vote in the coming weeks. This legislation is premature and locks-up land in the region before we have all the facts from the RMP. This bill would permanently ban federal oil and natural gas leasing on roughly 316,000 acres of land in New Mexico and terminate existing leases. It is bad policy to act before we know the facts.
While the sponsors of this legislation claim it will not affect Native American allottee mineral rights, the reality is far different. H.R. 2181 will create significant access and extraction complications for the Tribal allottees along with any companies they partner with and will lead to a de facto mineral extraction ban on their lands.
At a June 5, 2019 hearing in the Natural Resources Committee on the legislation, a witness with allottee land from the Navajo Nation, Nageezi chapter testified against the bill stating that H.R. 2181 would ``put many of our mineral rights off limits and stop a much-needed source of income to feed, shelter, clothe and protect our families.'' The witness also submitted for the record a petition signed by 131 Navajo allottees opposing this legislation, as well as two resolutions from the Huerfano and Nageezi Navajo chapters, which are closest to this area, expressing support for the Navajo allotment landowners and recognizing their opposition to this bill.
IPAA has been content to let the Chaco Canyon RMP process proceed to its conclusion. However, we cannot support any efforts to increase the area's boundary before all the RMP is completed. The main purpose of establishing the Chaco Culture National Historical Area was to protect every area of historical significance. That goal has been accomplished. Extending the boundaries and adding acreage to the Heritage Area will not enhance protection of areas of historical significance. There are no areas outside the currently designated boundaries that qualify for protections. However, the park expansion would have economically devastating impacts on those who live closest to the area.
For these reasons, IPAA urges you to vote ``NO'' on H.R. 2181. Sincerely, Daniel T. Naatz, Senior Vice President, Government Relations and Political Affairs, Independent Petroleum Association of America. ____ WESTERN ENERGY ALLIANCE July 16, 2019. Hon. Raul Grijalva, Chairman, House Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC. Hon. Rob Bishop, Ranking Member, House Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Grijalva and Ranking Member Bishop: Western Energy Alliance strongly opposes H.R. 2181, the Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act. This bill permanently bans new federal oil and natural gas leasing and development on 316,000 acres in New Mexico while also terminating existing leases.
H.R. 2181 puts at risk the local economy and the livelihoods of thousands of Indian allottees in the area by making it very difficult if not impossible for them to develop the energy resources they own. While the bill purports to leave Indian allottees unaffected, the reality is that the interlocking nature of the federal and allottee estates means that companies will avoid developing in the area. With today's horizontal drilling of two-mile laterals it is not possible to avoid the federal mineral estate while still producing on pockets of allottee minerals. If the bill passes, companies will have no recourse but to avoid developing Indian allottee energy resources.
For this reason, Indian allottees oppose this bill. When Indian allottee Delora Hesuse testified before the committee in June, she attached to her testimony petitions with signatures of other allottees who also oppose the threat to their families' oil and natural gas income. As she testified, the money she and 20,835 other Indian allottees earn from their energy property is about $96 million annually. That huge source of income in an area otherwise plagued by unemployment and poverty is threatened by this bill.
The area containing the highly productive Mancos Shale that would be excluded from federal development has been proven to hold large reserves of oil and natural gas. But the exclusionary zone imposed by this bill is completely unnecessary, as oil and natural gas production has taken place in this area for decades, with no damage to the national park. In fact, the expressed purpose of the park boundaries is to protect the culturally significant ruins and great houses of the Chaco people.
We urge the committee not to pass this bill. Thank you for considering our input. Sincerely, Kathleen M. Sgamma, President.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, when I look at this, I see the aptitude to try to amend this to give access. I have to tell the gentleman, though, it doesn't go far enough.
Mr. Chair, I think what we have to do is guarantee access so that Congress is specifically and intentionally demanding that they have that access because you know as well as I know that, once again, government problems exist. I will give the gentleman an example.
In the last land package, we have a land package that included the La Paz land exchange by BLM. Do you know what the big problem now has been? It was signed into law. It has been about access. Our legislation actually said that it did not impugn any of the mineral estates, but then the BLM came back and said, listen, that doesn't guarantee you access to it.
That is why I think it doesn't go far enough.
I would love to see it say that it requires the allottees access to those lands. But I am not opposed to it. I think it slightly makes it better.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop), the ranking member of the Committee on Natural Resources.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I think we need to devolve this back to the people of interest, the Native peoples, the people of the State, the private owners.
Mr. Chair, I lay no opposition to this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would allow Federal lands included in the withdrawal area to be conveyed or exchanged with State trust entities, as well as Native American Tribes.
Currently, over one-third of the land in New Mexico is owned by the Federal Government. The 316,000-acre withdrawal this bill creates includes substantial parcels of Native American-owned private land and State trust lands.
State trust lands are an essential part of funding public services in the West, especially education. However, Federal overreach, such as this legislation, puts that funding at risk. Allowing the conveyance of certain lands in the withdrawal to State trust agencies and private businesses will help to mitigate the effects of this withdrawal on essential public services and local infrastructure.
Allowing the conveyance of federally held land will also go a long way to addressing one of the critical problems with this legislation, which is access. Denying access to these lands to private landowners and Native American allottees is simply wrong. The growing Federal estate is not a good thing for the long-term future of the West.
Instead of locking up more land, like the majority is trying to do today, we should be focused on increasing multiple use on public lands. We can have our cake, and we can eat it, too.
To put it simply, instead of needlessly locking up more land, we should be focused on unlocking the potential of the West, empowering people to enjoy it.
Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I am not from New Mexico, but I do have an interest in education because that was one of the standard operating procedures that we were promised on public land.
If I am not mistaken, the Tribes are beneficiaries, as well, of that educational fund. And so, when you start looking at this, depriving that fund of its due resources--I don't know about New Mexico, but Arizona has got a problem paying for its educational system. It is not because we don't have enough money; it is because we don't have enough land. That is a problem.
I am here on behalf of the beneficiaries that the government promised. So, from that standpoint, I don't see a dichotomy in the argument until we can understand, until we have a better facilitation of that exchange, once again, doing something expediently, as we had the discussion earlier about access to those allottees.
Once again, government hasn't been the solution that it had claimed to be. We almost have to guide them hand and foot, pushing them to the right decision.
Mr. Chair, I still rise in favor of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would ensure this bill would not take effect if the withdrawal in question is proven to affect development or economic value of Native American mineral rights on allotments.
Private property rights are a fundamental American ideal. The 316,000-acre withdrawal this bill creates includes substantial parcels of privately held land, much of which is owned by Native American allottees.
The benefits of owning mineral rights are obvious for Native communities. In 2015 alone, the Federal Indian Mineral Office distributed $96 million to more than 20,000 allottees around the country.
At the June 5, 2019, hearing on H.R. 2181, the Committee on Natural Resources heard testimony from Delora Hesuse, a citizen of the Navajo Nation, Nageezi chapter, and a Navajo allottee, who owns mineral resources in the proposed area.
Ms. Hesuse testified that H.R. 2181 would ``put many of our mineral rights off limits and stop a much-needed source of income to feed, shelter, clothe, and protect our families.''
Apparently, the voices of Ms. Hesuse and other allottees who have spoken to the committee have not been heard. This amendment is an effort to acknowledge that their livelihoods could be drastically diminished by this legislation.
I ask the Members of this body to put themselves in the shoes of the Native American allottees who have staked their livelihood on the mineral rights on their properties that are rightfully theirs, only to have the Federal Government strip them of their rights. I believe that is an injustice.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I would have loved to hear that argument in the discussion on ANWR. That would have been interesting to have.
When I look at this, it has become very evident, in my time here in Congress, to find programs that had no authorization by Congress that were enacted. Interesting. Interesting, once again, in a government that is not trusted.
Trust is a series of promises kept. Once again, this reiterates the private property ownership of these allottees to make sure that it is not impugned. I do not see the definition of that causing a quandary.
Once again, these are allottees who are deserving for us to require to make sure that they are held whole.
So, once again, I find it shortsighted in the application that the other side doesn't want to accept this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I wish everyone would vote for this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source