[NukeNet] IS THIS THE ANSWER TO WHY? wHY? (The U. S. is freezing Solar on Federal Land))

[Dolph Honicker]

>  This story ran June 26, 2008 in Gallup Independent, > and kind of gives you "the rest of the story." -- Kathy> > > Uranium mining temporarily halted at Grand Canyon.> > By Kathy Helms> Dine Bureau> WINDOW ROCK – The House Natural Resources Committee invoked an > emergency withdrawal resolution Wednesday to require the Secretary of > Interior to withdraw public lands adjacent to the Grand Canyon from > uranium mining activities.> > The resolution was introduced by Arizona Rep. Raul M. Grijalva, > chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public > Lands. It now requires action from the Secretary.> > “We have a responsibility to defend the Grand Canyon,” Grijalva said. > “Given the importance of the resolution, the Republican leadership > decision to leave the committee instead of upholding their duty to > side with one of the country’s greatest treasures was petulant and > childish.”> > Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley Jr., expressed gratitude to the > committee for its resolution, and especially to Grijalva and the > subcommittee for hearing the concerns of Native people about > protecting the Grand Canyon from uranium mining.> > “On behalf of the Navajo Nation and Navajo families who have been > harmed by uranium mining, I’m very grateful that our voices were at > last heard in the sacred halls of Congress,” he said.> > “Our Nation has passed a law to protect ourselves from further > uranium mining on our lands, and we did our best to approach the > Congressman’s committee with heart, integrity, diplomacy and a > sacredness of mind to seek protection for the Grand Canyon. We’re > pleased that our prayers were heard.”> > Shirley testified March 30 at a subcommittee field hearing in > Flagstaff hosted by Grijalva designed to gather testimony on > community impacts from proposed uranium mining near Grand Canyon > National Park. There are more than 2,100 mining claims for uranium in > the Tusayan district alone.> > The Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club, and Grand Canyon > Trust filed suit March 12 against the U.S. Forest Service and Tysayan > District Ranger Richard Stahn challenging the December 2007 approval, > using a categorical exclusion, of up to 39 new uranium drilling sites > by VANE Minerals.> > The Independent contacted VANE's office in Tucson Wednesday afternoon > and left a message on the company's answering machine. The call had > not been returned at press time.> > However, during a previous interview, Clark Arnold of VANE, said, > “There are a number of safeguards in place to ensure that proper > procedures are followed. ... Our activities are closely monitored.”> > Arnold said the company has been exploring for uranium on the > Colorado Plateau, drilling on state and private land for almost a > year in northern Arizona and southern Utah.> > On March 6 Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano asked Interior Secretary > Dirk Kempthorne to withdraw the Grand Canyon area from mining, but > the administration refused to do so without a congressional request.> > In his statement to the committee, Grijalva said the vast majority of > federal land in and around Grand Canyon National Park is already > withdrawn from mining. “This resolution simply covers the last > remaining acreage open to new claims.”> > The resolution will have no impact on valid, existing claims, he > said, adding that the authority to compel such a withdrawal has been > on the books for more than 30 years, and the committee has exercised > that authority four times.> > “While I support permanent withdrawal, this resolution is not > permanent,” he said. It gives the Secretary up to three years to > comply with assessment and reporting requirements, however, the > Secretary retains authority to determine the actual length of the > withdrawal.> > Chris Shuey of Southwest Research and Information Center of > Albuquerque, who also testified at the hearing, said the committee's > action “is a prudent, short-term step to protect public health, the > environment and Native lands around the Canyon.”> > “It gives all parties some time to examine the cumulative impacts of > past uranium development on the Arizona Strip and the potential > impacts of new mining on both sides of the park.”> > David Taylor, senior attorney for Navajo Department of Justice and > the primary attorney responsible for uranium related matters, said > the committee's action is consistent with and supports the spirit of > the Dine Natural Resources Protection Act of 2005 that bans future > uranium mining and processing in Navajo Indian Country.> > Grijalva said the uniqueness and fragility of the Grand Canyon > ecosystem, combined with the legacy of pollution, illness and death > left by previous uranium mining, “make this the last place on Earth > new mining should take place.”> > He reminded the committee that accidents do happen, citing the > Churchrock tailings spill that released 94 million gallons of > radioactive sludge into the Puerco River as an example.> > Grijalva said the suffering of the Navajo, Kaibab-Paiute, Havasupai, > Hualapai and Hopi has been well documented. “Contaminated soil and > water from uranium mining and processing led to deadly cancer > clusters, birth defects, and unusually high rates of chronic illness, > persisting even today.”> > He quoted Navajo Resources Committee Chairman George Arthur, who > testified that “we are still undergoing what appears to be a never- > ending federal experiment to see how much devastation can be endured > by a people and a society from exposure to radiation in the air, in > the water, in mines, and on the surface of the land.”> > Grijalva said dollar signs are blinding the uranium industry to the > devastation, and motivating unsupportable claims that this time, > everything will be different.> > “Sadly, things are not different. The woefully inadequate mining law > which allowed this disaster to occur remains on the books, unchanged > in a century and a quarter. And the Bush Administration argues that > exploratory drilling for uranium should even be exempt from more > recent laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act.> > “It is simply naive to claim that a ten-fold spike in price, combined > with a lack of federal action to stop it, does not constitute an > emergency regarding uranium mining at Grand Canyon.”> > President Shirley said the Nation's position continues to be that “it > would be unconscionable for the federal government to allow uranium > mining to be restarted anywhere near the Navajo Nation when we are > still suffering from previous mining activities.> > “But today, we our very pleased that one of the country’s most sacred > places is on its way to being protected.”> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.energyjustice.net/pipermail/nukenet_energyjustice.net/attachments/20080627/12d668dc/attachment.html