Mountain Buzz banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Vendor
Joined
·
207 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The Grand Canyon Private Boaters Association is asking everyone, not just those of us who enjoy boating in the Grand Canyon, to take action on the matter below.

CALLING ALL CANYON & RIVER ADVOCATES -- The unthinkable has happened. Legislation has been submitted within the Navajo Nation for the Grand Canyon Escalade proposal (421 acres of development above the sacred confluence of the Little Colorado and Colorado Rivers, with a gondola/tramway that could bring 10,000 people down to river level every day). The tram would be highly visible from the river as it parallels the river down the side of the cliff face. It would also include vending kiosks, a walkway, and a restaurant and gift shop at the river.

If approved, this massive development would forever change Grand Canyon, one of the seven natural wonders of the world. If the Navajo Nation government approves this development, the integrity of values for which Grand Canyon was created will be severely compromised and degraded.


This is a grave threat to Grand Canyon and we need your help to attempt to stop it. We hope you share our concern and heartbreak at the idea of such a violation of this sacred location. Not only is it sacred to us, as lovers of Grand Canyon, it is important and sacred to many of the tribes that are culturally affiliated with Grand Canyon.

A fragile, delicately balanced ecosystem is at stake. Proposed development raises serious questions about water, sewage, noise, impacts to endangered species (such as the humpback chub that spawn in the Little Colorado River), dark skies and wilderness values.

We hope you share our concern and heartbreak at the idea of such a violation of this sacred location. Not only is it sacred to us, as lovers of Grand Canyon, it is important and spiritually sacred to many of the tribes that are culturally affiliated with Grand Canyon.

The development is on land belonging to the Navajo Nation. Legislation to allow the development has been introduced before the Navajo Nation Council and we have been given only 5 days for public comment. Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m. MDT this Saturday, September 3rd.

Please take the time to encourage them to vote no. This is the email address you can use:
[EMAIL="[email protected]"][email protected][/EMAIL]


Or, you can mail comments to: Executive Director Office of Legislative Services P.O. Box 3390 Window Rock, AZ 86515.

The Navajo Nation enjoys sovereign nation status, so it is their decision to make. We are sensitive to the fact that we are also an outside group asking them to consider our wishes with regard to their land. We also acknowledge that there is a great need for jobs and economic opportunity on the Reservation. The agreement between the Navajo Nation and the developer is heavily skewed toward the developer, providing only 8-18% to the Navajo, and the remainder to the developer. We are also concerned that this proposal does not include plans for sewage treatment down at the river. This development is not in the best interest of the Navajo people and certainly not the Grand Canyon.

Read the legislative proposal at http://www.navajonationcouncil.org/Legislations/2016/AUG/0293-16.pdf

Sign the petition against this proposal! The petition link can be found at www.savetheconfluence.com
For a 2 page summary of the proposed legislation: http://www.grandcanyontrust.org/sites/default/files/gc_Confluence_Partners_Escalade.pdf

For more information on what's at stake: http://www.grandcanyontrust.org/stopping-grand-canyon-escalade

And also: http://savetheconfluence.com/news/proposed-grand-canyon-escalade-bill-starts-move/




GCPBA RiverNews is a service of Grand Canyon Private Boaters Association.
Join and Support GCPBA. Visit our website www.gcpba.org.
We are on Facebook –
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1424392787831584



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
Thanks for the news, my comment is sent.


I'm surprised the Navajo Nation Council is allowing outsiders to comment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,049 Posts
Hi,

My opposional comments are in, and I have signed the associated petition.

I know there is wide variation on this in some quarters, with tribal sovereignty and historical matters driving others to a different conclusion that the one I have come to. But the proposed contract is so one sidedly biased to favor the non tribal developer as to be blatantly exploitative.

One has to wonder -- when this has been rejected by another tribal administration -- what unofficial considerations have gone into reviving this project on such short notice.

FWIW.

Rich Phillips
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
399 Posts
Put in a year round play spot and a bar. It's not like the Grand Canyon is real wilderness anyway. That's place is just the government and front rangers getting "wild".



Sent from my iPhone using Mountain Buzz
 

·
Misspellingintothefuture!
Joined
·
1,901 Posts
Put in a year round play spot and a bar. It's not like the Grand Canyon is real wilderness anyway. That's place is just the government and front rangers getting "wild".
Sent from my iPhone using Mountain Buzz


Was wondering when he'd surface, must have gotten hear using his special kayak TROLLING motor. :rolleyes:
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
207 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Can you believe this???!!! From savetheconfluence.com, 9/7/2016:

Navajo officials: Most online comments on Escalade bill missing

Navajo tribal officials said on Wednesday they counted only one-eighth of the tens of thousands of comments filed online last week opposing the proposed Escalade development.

Even though more than 55,000 online petition comments were submitted to the tribe’s official e-mail address, only a few thousand were counted, according to the officials, who also said they do not know what happened to all the other online submissions.

The Navajo Nation Council’s Legislative service opened comment about Bill number 0293-16 for a five-day comment period, which started Monday, Aug. 29 and ended Saturday, Sept. 3. The bill asks the Navajo Nation Council to approve a $65 million loan, a 420-acre land withdrawal and a master contract with the nation. The agreement would begin construction of the Escalade resort at Grand Canyon Eastern Rim.

An online petition that Save the Confluence launched during the comment period collected more than 25,000 verified signatures from around the world last week. Similarly, a group called American Riverrunners says that it collected nearly 30,000 signatures, for a combined total of 55,000 online comments that were sent between the two groups to the tribe’s official e-mail for receiving public comment on the proposed development.

However, tribal officials said they only counted 8,417 people protesting the Escalde development through letters and online comments. The tribe’s legislative officials said that the 8,417 online comments is the most they have ever received on a controversial issue. Officials said that they will re-check and search for the missing comments.

Only 131 comments supporting the Escalade were received. This means that opposition outnumbered support by 800 to 1.

Here is how numbers broke down:

  • 8,417 individuals submitted their opposition through hand-written petitions, an online petition count, e-mail, letters and prepared statements against the Escalade.
  • 131 turned in paperwork favoring the Escalade that include 123 letters and eight online comments.
The total will be wrapped into a report for the Navajo council’s Law and Order Committee, which is scheduled to meet 10 a.m. Monday, Sept. 12. The committee’s agenda will post Friday, Sept. 9.

Tribal officials also said the count for the Escalade bill is unfinished. The first five-day comment tests to find how out how the bill is received.

People are encouraged to write and send comments up to the time the bill is introduced, officials said. You can send comments directly to the Navajo Nation via the information on this page: Contact members of the Navajo Nation Council - Save the Confluence
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,261 Posts
Well they got their public opinion question answered.

Small caveat, I think someone added an extra zero as the ration is closer to 80 to 1. Either way it obvious those against outnumber those in favor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
Thoughts

Thanks for the heads up on the issue. I truly believe in keeping wild areas free of human development, but..... this issue is really unique.

Personal thought is that the Navajo people are free to do as they wish. I currently live in Glenwood Springs, and as I understand it, the whole town (more/less) was sacred Ute land, but their opinions weren't listened to. Wonder how they feel about the million dollars homes along the Fork and the Hot Springs. Same goes for pretty much all the land in the west and country for that matter.

Perhaps this is all fair in the greater scheme of things. If the Navajo people put this in, I hope it serves them well. If they choose not to, I am thankful. However, I will not send in an opposition letter in this situation as I do not feel it my place to tell others, whose land has been taken away, how to treat the small tract they have left.
 

·
Misspellingintothefuture!
Joined
·
1,901 Posts
Hey wamsley, so i have one thought regarding the issue of not telling the Navajo what to do with there land.
At least as far as far as emailing the tribal elders, don't tell them what to do.
However, if you believe as I do, that this would be very damaging to the Grand canyon, what would be wrong with simply ASKING, them not to approve this project? Be respectful, but it can't hurt to ask.

It sounds as though this project could be very damaging to the Navajo people, and many of them oppose it, along with neighboring tribes. It is possible that if the Elders decision is swayed by wilderness lovers from around the world, that they may even avoid a $65 million mistake, and a major blow to the Grand canyon on the scale of what our culture has been doing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
163 Posts
Wamsley, here's something to think about. It's not their land, they stoled it from the Hopi. The Navajo post date the Spanish arrival in the southwest. They are an Athabscan(sic?) people who migrated from southeastern ak/yukon area. The Navajo were a colonial empire who treated the locals pretty much the same way us euro's treated them. Human nature I guess. Regarding the missing emails, the Navajo government seems to have a well deserved reputation of running things like a 3rd world banana republic. Corrupt, enrich themselves while doing nothing of real benefit for the Navajo people.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,229 Posts
This just in:

‎Helen Howard‎ to Grand Canyon Private Boaters FB Page

The Law And Order Committee of the Navajo Tribal Council met this morning and by a 4 opposed, 0 for vote did not recommend that the Navajo Tribal Council go forward with the Escalade Project. Extremely moving meeting and I will will post more later. This is a start. 3 more committees in the next few weeks apd probably to the NavajoTribal Counil at the end of January.Ever one of those council members quoted the 66,000 against and the 139 people for in the comment period. Still a ways to go, But such a great start.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
882 Posts
Can I still post my No Gondola in the Grand stickers on my boat, garage shop, car, etc.? My outrage hasn't fully subsided yet.

Thanks to all who have made this first step and hopefully the end result happen.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top