Speakers came from as far away as Yuma and southern Utah to make their voices heard on the proposal to designate 1.1 million acres of land around Grand Canyon National Park as a monument.

While there have been efforts to create a Grand Canyon National Monument in the past, none of them, like the most recent tribal-led effort, have garnered the attention it deserves. In April, a coalition of tribes began asking the Biden administration to build a new memorial.

Throughout the conference, tribal leaders spoke of the importance of how the new monument protects land of deep historical and cultural significance in connection with the Grand Canyon.

On the other hand, many locals in the Arizona Strip and Mojave County considered the potential memorial to be federal overreach.

Comments made at the meeting will be reviewed by the leadership of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior, the people said.

Havasupai Tribal Councilor Stuart Chavez was one of many who spoke to the assembled panel of federal officials.

The panel heard comments included Laura Daniel Davis, Assistant Chief of Staff for Land and Mineral Administration, and Homer Wilkes, Under Secretary for Natural Resources and the Environment.

Chavez said federal officials are listening to the tribes and hopes that the protection of the culturally significant lands that the tribes have asked for each year may finally be achieved.

“I really hope they understand where we come from, our perspective as an Indigenous people and as stewards of the place, especially that this is our ancestral home. We want them to respect that,” Chavez told the Arizona Daily Sun. [told the panel]If we weren’t kicked out of our house, we would still be there. ”

For Havasupai Vice-Chairman Edmund Tiluci, the main goal of the monument proposal is to eliminate what he and other tribal leaders see as a threat to the region’s continued uranium mining, especially groundwater survival.

“To the indigenous peoples of this region, we thank our Creator for giving us the most important element, water.

Tiluci said he hopes that in 100 years, the land around the Grand Canyon will be preserved for the benefit of all and that Americans will be able to reflect on the wisdom of the present-day people designated in the monument.

The meeting comes after Interior Secretary Deb Haaland visited the area in May and met with tribal leaders, locally elected officials and local residents to hear about their vision for the monument.

However, not everyone in attendance supported the tribe’s proposal. Residents of Fredonia and Mojave County in particular expressed opposition.

Colorado Mayor Howard Ream was among those who expressed opposition and concern. Liam said he believes the proposed memorial poses a near-existence threat to small communities like Colorado, robbing them of growth opportunities and further isolating them from the rest of the state.

“Why should it be designated as a national monument?” [the area] Should it be properly managed? It’s well managed,” Ream said. “It really limits our ability to grow and be a healthy community. It’s a huge impact on us.”

Mojave County Superintendent Travis Lingenfelter also said residents of Mojave County and the Arizona Strip have felt left out of the debate.

“We were late for the game not because we weren’t interested, but because we weren’t invited when Secretary Harland visited with officials in May,” Lingenfelter said. “We still fully support Coconino County and the tribe if they want to do it in Coconino County. [creating] 19th National Monument in Arizona. But let’s leave Mojave County alone and keep working as we’ve been working very collaboratively with our tribes at the state and federal level. ”

Lingenfelter said he handed letters to federal officials requesting another face-to-face meeting in Colorado.

Mr. Chavez and other leaders met with Mr. Harland during that visit, and Mr. Harland said he saw this week’s visit and meeting as a good sign that the memorial proposal could move forward.

“I think being able to keep repeating our message over and over again is at least laying some sort of foundation.” [for success]. At this point, I have my fingers crossed. I think they’ve done their due diligence, and we’ve done our due diligence, so I’m very hopeful that things will actually develop,” Chavez said.

Those who spoke out in support of the memorial proposal included members of the Coconino County Board of Supervisors and several local leaders, including Flagstaff Mayor Becky Daggett. Both groups passed resolutions supporting the proposal.

Coconino County Superintendent Lena Fowler represents a large portion of the county that overlaps with the Navajo Nation and the portion of Fredonia that passed a resolution opposing the monument proposal.

But Fowler said he fully supports the memorial.

“I support monuments because they don’t take private property and they protect it.” [the area] From future mining rights claims. This protects the grazing rights of people who graze cattle, continue hunting, and are used for logging and other existing uses,” Fowler said.

Tribal coalitions promoting the construction of the monument include the Havasupai, Hopi, Hualapai, Kaibab Paiute, Las Vegas Paiute Tribe Band, Moapa Paiute Tribe Band, Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah, Navajo Nation, and the San Francisco Paiute Tribe. Includes representatives of the leadership of the Juan Southern Paiute. Tribes, Yavapai Apache Tribe, Zuni Pueblo, Colorado River Indian Tribe.

The meeting was held following the introduction of two bills in Congress to build a new monument, one in the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. Raul Grijalva and another in the U.S. Senate by Arizona Senator Kirsten Cinema.

A few members of the Arizona legislative delegation were also present at the meeting, but mostly just listened.

Rep. Eli Crane and Rep. Paul Gossar spoke out against the memorial proposal. A statement from Gosar’s office said the tribal-led proposal was an example of the Biden administration’s “environmental justice agenda above all else.”

Representatives and leaders of nearly every tribe in the coalition spoke out throughout the conference.

Richard Bigey, who spoke on behalf of Navajo President Boo Nigren, was one of many who spoke of the dangers of uranium mining as an important reason for building the monument.

The tribes, especially the Navajo, have a long and tragic history of uranium mining on tribal lands. More than 500 uranium mines abandoned during the Cold War still exist across the Navajo Nation and continue to affect the health of the population.

Bigey said their main wish for the monument is to prevent further uranium mining around the Grand Canyon, and that the tribe should be fully involved in its construction and management if the monument goes ahead.

“Monuments should clearly state that their tribes will work with appropriate federal agencies to guide the development of land use and management plans,” Begay told the commission. “From the beginning, the Tribe has been at the forefront of this effort to protect the Grand Canyon area, and regardless of federal decisions, the Tribe will remain involved. This land has been our home for countless generations and will continue to be for generations to come.”

Hopi Chairman Timothy Nuvangaoma told the Federal Commission that part of holding a listening session is genuinely listening to the views and needs of the Indigenous community.

“There is a very important meaning behind this. For the Hopi and many tribal nations, we are closely associated with this. It is no different for the Hopi people. It is the place of our apparitions and where we still make pilgrimages and offerings in the area,” Nvangyoma said. “Throughout history, our homeland has been polluted. Mining, scars, scars on them that don’t heal. Those scars never heal today. You need to bring some protective equipment here.”

Uranium mining has long been controversial in northern Arizona. New mining claims around the Grand Canyon are now on hold after the Obama administration implemented a moratorium in 2012.

Despite the suspension, some existing uranium mines are still operating around the Grand Canyon, although most have not begun full-scale mining activity.

Existing mines, such as the Pinyon Plains uranium mine just south of the canyon, are not affected by Monument designation as they had title and mining rights prior to the Monument.

Curtis Moore of Energy Fuels, which owns and operates the Pinyon Plain Mine, said he sees the memorial as a hasty process and a long-term negative impact on green energy in the United States.

“What really worries me as an American is permanently shutting down some of our best clean energy assets for no scientific reason,” Moore said. “Pignon Plain could advance, and it would produce a lot of clean energy for a while, but like all mines, it would eventually run out. And the few remaining [deposits] What we think are existing rights in force will eventually dry up. But what about 10, 15, 20 years from now? I need uranium. ”

Energy Fuels has long claimed that uranium mining has evolved since the Cold War to become cleaner and safer, a claim challenged by conservation groups and tribes. Moore said he feels the memorial proposal is aimed almost entirely at energy fuel.