New Hopi Tribal Chairman Calls for Eviction of Dine'
On Monday, February 6, the newly elected Chairman and Vice-
Chairman of the Hopi Tribe took office. Ferrell Secakuku, the new
Chairman talked to the pres about the directions his administration
would take.
"Concerning relocation of Navajo families from Hopi land,
Secakuku said he believes the 1974 Settlement Act (P.L. 93-531)
needs to be enforced. The Hopis will return to the mediation table
only if the Hopi villages give their okay." Gallup, NM,
INDEPENDENT, 2/7/94, p. 2
This is essentially what Chairman Masayesva said at the last
mediation, Jan. 11, 1994. Judge McCue set a 45-day deadline for
the Hopi Tribe to consult with the villages and get Tribal Council
authorization for renewed talks. That deadline expires on February
25. At this time the official position of the Hopi Tribe is that
mediation is over, and that the United States must evict the Dine'
from the Hopi-partitioned Lands (HPL). (Hopi Tribal Council
Resolution H-127-93)
Most of the Dine' families have said they want mediation to
continue. The Hopi Tribe has several choices. They can refuse to
come back to the table and blame it all on the Dine' for not
"rejecting" the Agreement in Principle. They can come back and try
negotiate with the Dine communities. They can work on individual
families, try to get some of them to sign the 75-year lease, and
use that to pressure the hold-outs. They can negotiate on the
basis of the Navajo Nation's Aug. 6 1993 settlement offer, which
offers the Hopi Tribe a way to get the new sources of water which
they feel they need.
The mediation has taken the heat off of the U.S. Congress and
Administration for almost 3 years. The fact is that the U.S. does
not much want to evict the Dine', but no one wants to do the hard
political work it would take to settle the "land dispute."
Politically there is nothing for an ambitious man like Senator
McCain (Arizona) to gain from forcing a settlement on either the
Navajo Nation of the Hopi Tribe. At the same time, everyone has
had time to think about what an eviction would mean: the U.S. once
again committing human rights violations against its Native
peoples. There would be resistance. It would be on TV.
The Dine' may be able to move things toward a better outcome
through continued mediation. However, unless a lot of pressure is
brought against the Hopi Tribe, there will never be the land
exchanges that the families have said they want. Hopi internal
politics being what they are, the chances of even getting a humane,
just and generous lease agreement are not good, either.
The United States has been much more deferential to the Hopi
Tribe than to the Dine' families during the entire mediation. This
has shown the Hopi leadership that they can make demands, threaten
to walk away, etc., without suffering any consequences. It is only
the US government that can bring about changes in the Hopi
attitude, but the US has so far refused to take that course.
What Can Outsiders DO?
It is by writing to the U.S. that you can exert pressure.
Write to your Senator or Representative. Write to the U.S.
Attorney General Janet Reno, to the Asst. Secretary of Interior for
Indian Affairs Ada Deer, to President Clinton. If you are not from
the US, write to your country's foreign ministry. Bring the issue
up with your friends, your religious group, or with human rights
and indigenous peoples' rights groups in your country.
The letters people have sent have really helped I think. I
understand that the officials named above get mail on this issue
every day. One result is that, while livestock impoundment
continues, there has been no massive impoundment. I have heard
from BIA personnel that they are "taking it easy" on the HPL Dine'
and pretty much leaving sheep alone.
Speaking of Livestock Impoundment
The Hopi Tribe has provided at least the excuse for United
States government impoundment of Dine' livestock: the Hopi Tribe
has threatened to sue the U.S. over its alleged non-enforcement of
the HPL grazing regulations. These are the regulations under which
Dine' families are allowed to have a small number of livestock.
They were put in place under P.L. 93-531 as a replacement for the
old Navajo BIA permits. These regs are notable for having reduced
livestock by about 94%, to levels far below what the HPL Dine'
needed for survival.
It is likely that if the Hopi Tribe returns to mediation, they
will allow for a renewal of the previous moratorium on impoundment
of HPL Dine' livestock. It is to be hoped.
Wednesday I was driving back to Window Rock from Tuba City,
a little after noon. As I passed the BIA Hopi police building,
coming onto the long curve where the road goes under the shadow of
the mesa, I caught up with the livestock police. There were two
pickups pulling livestock trailers, a BIA jeep and a Hopi Ranger
four-wheel drive, all in a caravan with a bunch of cars backed up
behind them. They slowed down as they got to the livestock
impoundment corral at Keams Canyon and then turned in, in
formation, gracefully. I looked over, counted: two horses with
saddles, probably the ones they use themselves; another horse, a
big good-looking buckskin with black mane and tail; two or three
big hereford calves. I wondered whose they were as I drove on by.
We have not heard anything, so the livestock may be Hopi, although
Jack Hatathlie has a horse looks a lot like the buckskin.
Jon Norstog