Tribe Claims 'Victory'
WINDOW ROCK--Navajo tribal officials Tuesday were claiming a
"major victory" because of a federal court ruling that they claim
gives the Navajos exclusive rights to 6.9 million acres of land
in the Bennett Freeze area.
An attorney for the Hopi tribe, however, said the ruling issued
Monday by District Court Judge Earl Carroll was a little unclear
about Navajo and Hopi holdings and the Hopis plan to go into
court to straighten out the confusion.
Carroll's decision involves the 1934 reservation and has nothing
to do with the century-old land dispute between the two tribes
over what is now know as the Former Joint-Use Area.
Filed in 1874, the lawsuit claims on behalf of the Hopis one-half
of seven million acres of Navajo Reservation land in Arizona.
That includes most of the Navajo holdings in Arizona.
According to Navajo representatives, the 80-page ruling by
Carroll gives to the Hopis exclusive rights only to about 30,000
or 40,000 acres of land in and around Moenkopi, a small Hopi
village just east of Tuba City.
The ruling creates a new joint-use area of about 60,000 to 70,000
acres around the Moenkopi village. A hearing will be held on
June 2 to partition that area.
Navajo Nation President Peterson Zah said in a press conference
that Navajos estimate that only about 20 Navajo families live in
the partitioned area. No Navajos live in the area given
exclusively to the Hopis. There are no Hopis living in the
partitioned area, although Navajos said some Hopis do graze their
livestock there.
James Scarboro, an attorney for the Hopis, said the problem the
Hopis have is with Carroll's hand-drawn map attached to the
ruling. He said that the written ruling appears to give the
Hopis more land than Carroll's hand-drawn map does.
Both tribes agree that Carroll's ruling will have no affect on
the development freeze that has been placed on families in the
Bennett Freeze area since 1974. Zah said he plans to ask tribal
attorneys to file a motion to have the freeze lifted on the 6.9
million acres of land given to the Navajos.
That, however, may not happen because of expectations that the
Hopi Tribe will appeal the Carroll decision.
Zah said the ironic thing about the whole situation is that the
Navajos offered back in 1986 a compromise that is basically the
same as Carroll's ruling. Since then, he said, both tribes have
spent millions of dollars in legal fees.
Scarboro said the main argument of the Hopis was rejected by
Carroll. That argument was that since the Hopis went onto the
land that is now exclusively Navajo for ceremonial and other
religious practices, this use should constitute the basis for
half rights to the land.
Carroll rejected this argument saying that limited use does not
warrant half-rights to the land.
Navajo officials said the reason this decision came out different
than the one for the Former Join-Use Area was because the 1882
reservation (which comprises the FJUA) was set aside for Hopis
and any other Indians who reside thereon and the 1934 reservation
was reserved for Navajos and any others. [sic]