Searching for a Voice, Nuclear Weapons and Waste in the Western U.S.
If you're looking for directions on how to use this page look to your right, click on "directions". If you'd like to post your answers to the DBQs here, look to your right and click on "answers".
The purpose of this blog is to provide a series of Document Based Questions (DBQs)in order to further my readers' understanding of how the Cold War and the arms race impacted America through the irradiation of large portions of the American west, and via the weather, most of the lower 48 states.
The irradiation of much of the lower 48 states is one of the greatest unpunished crimes in American history. According to KUED a public station in Utah, people in the West were exposed to three times as much radiation as victims of the Chernobyl Disaster, and while there was a compensation bill eventually passed by congress this only covered people who were affected by 13 specific cancers and restricted the geographical location of the people compensated to a far smaller area than the actual fallout's spread.
Not only were people affected by the radiation, but soon after the open air tests began in full swing in the early 1950s but cows began producing irradiated milk that made their milk dangerous to drink. Also, sheep in the area began to fall ill much the same as humans would also do.
In a series of New York Times articles that you will read you will learn the full impact of this radiation. In summary: women miscarried, children got Leukemia, adults began to see many, many forms of cancer manifest themselves that were previously rare, even Kodak experienced a "fogging" effect on its film so that customers began complaining.
Why did this all happen? Again, according to KUED's exhaustive research the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)choose the American West because it was deemed "unpopulated" or sparsely populated. However, as evidenced by lawsuits brought by the survivors and farmers economically impacted by the fallout there were many people who lived in the area. What this is called now is environmental injustice, or in some cases environmental racism or classism. While the population of the rural American west is mostly white it is not a rich area. As with most rural areas the population earns its income from seasonal farm labor, travels very long distances to work, or lives off the land as best they can. In short, these are not the kind of people who can mount a successful opposition to a large government agency like the AEC, which at the time was one of the most influential bodies of the American government due to the primacy (important position) of nuclear weapons as a military and political tool during the Cold War.
However, the impact on rural inhabitants of the West is not over. There has been a long running legal and political battle over where nuclear waste should go. When nuclear bombs are made, and when nuclear power plants run there is waste generated. This waste is radioactive and still in many cases capable of causing serious injury, and eventual cancer if people are exposed to it. Its half-life, the time it takes to become safe, can be up to hundreds of years. Where do we put all of this dangerous waste? A group of Indians in the West Desert in Utah volunteered to house some of this waste in order for payment for use of their land.
This move by the Goshute Indians in Utah sparked a legal and political battle that has stretched from the 1980s, to the 1990s, and even into the 2000s. While the battle appears dead now we still need facilities to store this waste. Sadly, the same reasons for exploding nuclear bombs in the West are the same reasons for housing nuclear waste in the West - much of the west is relatively unpopulated and people in more populated areas are likely to mount successful defenses if politic ans attempt to place the waste in their areas.
There has been a long and storied history, much of it being very sad and unfortunate, of atomic weapons and energy sources in the American west. It represents an often untold story of the government victimizing vulnerable areas of the country because they do not have the power to fight back. However, in the 21st century there is a new chapter in the history of nuclear material in the west. Now, powerful outside forces are preventing the storage of nuclear waste in poor rural areas in the American West despite improvements in safety and the economic benefits that would result in allowing storage of the material.
The people of the rural west, during the Cold War, and in our present times have not had their voice recognized - this page is a tribute to them and the struggles they went through, and are currently experiencing.
Source: www.kued.org
For further reading: if you feel like you need a little bit more background on this subject please navigate your browser to these URLs:
Background on Fallout in Utah and the Western United States
Specific Information about Utah, Nuclear Fallout, and Chemical Weapons
Friday, December 31, 2010
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Interview with Leon Bear, Goshute Leader
Leon Bear has been the most prominent member of the Skull Valley Band on the subject of creating a temporary nuclear waste storage site on his tribe's reservation lands in Tooele County.
With his father a former Chairman of the tribal council, Leon Bear has been involved with tribal leadership positions through the nearly 12 years of study that have gone into the Skull Valley Band's decision to sign a contract with Private Fuel Storage.
Leon Bear was interviewed by Ken Verdoia in the Band's office, which is located in South Salt Lake City.
Ken Verdoia: Chairman, I'm going to begin with a simple question. How did the Skull Valley Band of Goshute ever become involved with consideration of storing high level radioactive waste?
Leon Bear: Well, it all started back in 1989 when the DOE, the Department of Energy, came to us offering grants to study to be a host for interim storage facility called the MRS. And at that time my father and my uncle were the Chairman and the Vice-Chair and they decided that they should learn about this cause this is coming. And somebody's going to have to host this facility.
Verdoia: So phase one, you kind of took a look at it and, if I'm correct, weren't you involved with economic development at the reservation?
Bear: No, I was the Tribal Secretary at the time.
Verdoia: Tribal Secretary. So you take a first look at it. What's your reaction?
Bear: Well at first we thought that we're kind of leary of the federal government, because of all the broken treaties, but we were leary of the federal government and their offer, thinking it was something, some way to tie us into this and get us to take this waste at that time. And we got the grant, $100,000 to do the phase one study and as we proceeded to do the study we realized that actually hosting a interim storage was not a bad idea for the Band. And so we proceeded into phase two of it which was a $200,000 grant and we went to different countries, France, Sweden, England and Japan to study this thing and the one thing that interests us was the Japanese because they had been bombed and we we wanted to see what the effect or the impact nuclear had on them. And now their country is almost all nuclear. You know, the power they get is from nuclear power.
Verdoia: Phase two, closely study it. Department of Energy is encouraging that interest and then all of a sudden politics weighs in and the Department of Energy pulls the rug out from underneath you.
Bear: Well, they pulled the funding. They didn't actually stop the program, they just pulled the funding which killed the program. That was in 1993, almost 1994. In fact at that time we had negotiated a contract or a lease with the Office of the Negotiator and in January of 1994 we had actually gone up to Idaho with the lease pretty much negotiated in hand. As we found out they had pulled the appropriations out of it.
We had done some tours. We took the many members of the Band, actually, whoever wanted to go, and understand this thing fully, we took them up to INEL (the Federal Nuclear Research Facility in Idaho) and showed them what a spent fuel, I mean, what a dry cask storage is. We also toured Yucca Mountain. We took them all to Yucca Mountain, to tour the repository. We actually took them also to Prairie Island, Northern States Power, which is now Xcel. We took them over and showed them that dry cask storage also. So we've been trying to educate our people. Out of the phase one and phase two programs though, we put together two reports and two videos for the tribe, for information. And we showed those videos and those phase reports to the Band and gave them a copy.
Verdoia: So what originally is begun as the Department of Energy federal program, the funding gets pulled, how did it become a private sector tribal program?
Bear: Well, we pretty much had a lease in hand when we went up to, when we went up to the [Department of Energy] Office of Negotiator, ready to sign it. And the Chairman at the time wanted to, well after they closed that office, he wanted to make sure that we cover all our bases and if there's anyway we could do a storage facility we should look around and find out. And so that's where we proceeded to look for a private entity to help us store this.
Verdoia: So, Private Fuel Storage just kind of walked through the door or did you walk through their door or how did this come about?
Bear: Well from 1994 to 1996 it took us two years to find a corporation or entity to partner up with us, to do this storage. So it's been awhile. We stayed in the game and we continued educating ourselves. We continued going to conferences, high level nuclear waste conferences and other conferences that deal with environmental issues or environmental justice issues. We also went to the state, at the time Governor Leavitt, and we had told him that this was our plan, this is what we were going to do, open up the storage facility, and asked him if the state of Utah wanted to be involved we would appreciate it. We also asked him that if he knew of anything that could harm us in anyway, to let us know because we want to study it. To make sure that we were doing the right thing. So in 1994, we had included the state in this process.
Verdoia: So, you've been studying more than ten years. You're in contact with the state since 1994. You signed the contract with PFS and elected officials are saying, "Oh my gosh, how can you do such a thing? We would have been glad to help you." How do you respond to that type of comment that's made to you now?
Bear: Well, the thing is that we kind of set ourselves up. We went to the governor and asked him, asked the state if they want to be involved and at that time the comment was, "Over my dead body." That was the governor's comment to us. So we were set up. I mean, we set ourselves up on that issue because we wanted to know how the state was feeling about this whole project and apparently that was how they felt, so in 1997 when we signed the lease and it started picking up momentum, we knew that the state was against it already, going into this. We knew the politics were going to be there. The only thing we didn't know is how much of it was going to be. And you know, that's the politicians they're kind of scary guys. You go up to the Capitol, or you go to Washington, D.C., and it's all politics. It's a game that they play.
Verdoia: There are people who intimate to us that you and your Band have been taken advantage of by public utilities. . .that the Skull Valley Band lacks the sophistication to negotiate these very deep waters. How do you respond?
Bear: Well, people are people no matter where you go. Whether they're stupid or not, people need people. How do you think this country was built? Not because of stupidity, same with the reservations. How do you think we survive? Not because of stupidity, so to answer that question, it's kind of irrelevant to answer that question because of that. We're here and we will continue to be here. We're not going anywhere. The Goshute people are here and we're going to be here and we're not going anywhere. No matter how stupid people think we are, we're still here.
Verdoia: Is there racism that enters into this? If this was a white community out in Skull Valley that decided this would be a good idea but because it's a Native American Band?
Bear: It does enter the mind about racism and I have mentioned it a couple of times. There are different types of racisms. One that I've always talked about was environmental racism because of the way the governor speaks about how we're not being good neighbors and we're devaluating the property because of this project and all this stuff. I'm very uncomfortable with that because of what's already out in the West Desert. We have nerve agents, we have biological labs, hazardous and toxic waste depots, low level radioactive waste depots, incinerators but yet this project specifically will devaluate the property which I believe is not true. I'm more scared of nerve agent or biological chemicals then I am of spent fuel, of the radiation.
Verdoia: Many people struggle with the concept of Native American sovereignty. In the treaty of 1863, your people really did not give up your land. You really did not move to different lands. You weren't pushed onto different lands. Help the average person out there understand this notion of your sovereignty, your right as a people to self determent.
Bear: Well, the treaty was signed in 1863 in Tooele Valley and this treaty, this specific treaty, there's others that are designed in this same fashion, but this treaty was designed to take away rights and it did take away rights. It took away our labor rights. It took away our mineral rights. It grounded passage because the pioneers were going out to the California to the gold fields at that time, so this treaty was the one to take away rights and there's some rights that they did not take. One was the right to have the land. The other right was hunting, fishing. The other right was gathering. So we still retain those rights under our treaty, which hasn't been taken away. And as you state these rights, that's what makes the Skull Valley Band of Goshutes a sovereign nation because these rights were not taken away. We still retain those rights as of today.
Verdoia: One thing that you issued in January of 2001 was a "State of the Skull Valley Band" and you deliberately released that on the day that the Governor of the state of Utah, Michael Leavitt, was giving his State of the State address. But you hit the governor's message about how great things are going. That was the message of the governor's State of the State address. And you said that the people of Utah need to know there's another issue in this. The state of my people.
Bear: Well, there's a few points that I tried to make. One was that even though the state of Utah is prospering, the Skull Valley Band is not and our people are suffering because of that. I've said there's environmental issues out there, and our ribe does not receive any benefits from those issues and we have no protection out there to fight against those issues. And this is one of the things that we hope that when we do get the storage facility, it will provide us with money to protect ourselves, to monitor, to help our people, as far as health insurance goes. Because the closest health IHS, Indian Health Service, is 250 miles away. It's east of us here, and if you're sick or you've got a broken leg, you have to go 250 miles. That's a long ways to go for for medical care.
So the issues in that state address that I published, those are some of the issues that we're involved in it. And yeah, the state may be looking good, but the Skull Valley Band and I believe for other tribes in the state, I believe I could speak for them too, that it's not looking so good. I mean, we have a tribe north of us, the Northwestern Band of Shoshones who don't have a land base and if they do it's very small. Then we got the the Northern Utes and the Southern Piutes and Confederate Tribes of Goshutes who all, on their reservations, they're trying to develop economics just as we are and the same, in the same broad sense, but if the state is going to do things like they're doing today how does that look? I mean, I really don't understand how the state can on one hand say we're going to help you economically, and on the other hand try to divert or try to take something away from us.
Verdoia: Let's talk about what the state has recently done, because during the Utah State Legislature several bills were put forward, not all of them passed, but bottom line is the Legislature went on the record to try to do everything it can to block the creation of a temporary storage site for radioactive waste. What's your reaction to the State Legislature and what they tried to do?
Bear: Well I respect them, They're trying to do a job which know this is purely political. It has nothing to do with economics. I has nothing to do with equality, it has nothing to do with anything but politics. I believe that our economic development out in Skull Valley, we're going to keep pushing and we're going to keep going forward with that whether the state wants to be a party to it or not. I mean this is our survival. This is what we have to do because the state's not helping us. Federal government is being cut down. The Bureau of Indian Affairs are being cut and we're a small tribe.
You know, we only have 112 members and so we pretty much have to take care of ourselves out here. According to some of the bills that have been passed, we got some outrageous things going on. As far as the taxation goes, as far as bonding, as far as transportation, as far as economic developments. But the issue that we're looking at today is that we're looking at the state of Utah, they're sending us a signal and a message and we're picking up that message and you know, we hear it. I don't know if it helps but we do hear the message they're trying to send us.
Verdoia: You're Chairman of the Skull Valley Band, your people in the Band are saying, "Well we've made this choice." Is it just a matter of we've got to disagree, we've got to do what we think is right for the Skull Valley Band?
Bear: If we haven't learned from history. . .the federal government came to us, signed a treaty with us, broke those treaties with us and we're out today. The state of Utah is following that same mode of what they're doing. On one hand they promise us in Senate Bill 199, they promised us $2 million for economic development. The bill passed but there's no appropriations in the bill. It's an empty shell of a bill. I mean, is that the messages that the state of Utah want to send to the Goshute people or to any Indian nation, to that to that fact? And on the other bill, I think it's Senate Bill 81, then they put the strong language in there about taxation and about bonding. In the United States there's a thing called the Uniformity Act that everything's got to be equal. I don't know if the state's read that act before or not and there's another act, the Interstate Commerce Act. I don't know if they've read those acts, but these bills, that's when you talk about constitutional, these bills are not.
Verdoia: There are members of your own Band who claim the whole process is corrupt. People are being bought off. Their support of this is being purchased. How do you respond to those people who say that people are being bought off, that money is making this go?
Bear: You know, I hear it and there's no proof to that fact, but there's allegations out there. I watch what's going on in the state of Utah. It's just like the other waste facilities. You hear it in the paper about Envirocare paying off one of their regulators to do something. You hear that and you read it. There's evidence that somebody went to court on that, but I don't see that here. I don't see anybody getting paid off. I really don't know how to answer those allegations because it's not true.
Verdoia: Are you guilty?
Bear: Of what? Of being, being here? Being human? Trying to provide economics for my people? Yes, I'm guilty of that.
Verdoia: The state takes issue with the contract being secret. We've asked to see the contract and have been refused access. Why? There must be something wrong otherwise why can't we look at the contract? Why can't people look at the contract?
Bear: It's like a business. I mean you signed a contract with a corporation. Another corporation signed a contract with another corporation, and you can't look at that contract. It's none of your business. In the same essence, this is the same thing. We signed a contract or a lease with Private Fuel. It's nobody's business but the Band's and Private Fuel's. And you know, that's why you can't see the contract.
Verdoia: What do you say to people who say, well if the rumors we heard are true, every man, woman and child alive in the Skull Valley Band today is going to make $2 million or $3 million over the life of this contract.
Bear: Well, if they do make that much money I'll be doing my job now, won't I? That's why they put me in office - so that we can make money and so that we can prosper and build infrastructure on our reservation. That's the whole purpose of this whole thing. And also, to keep our traditions and our cultural resources intact at the same time.
Verdoia: How tough is keeping the culture, keeping the people together? In the face of everything that is going on. How difficult is it to hold the people, the culture, the life together?
Bear: It's up to the people. That's probably the simplest answer I could give. It's up to the people to decide what they want to do and how far they want their traditions and culture to be maintained. It's up to the people. I can't force them to do anything. I'm just, I'm a leader, of course, and I'm leading them to a certain point that I believe is good for the people, but it's up to the people themselves to determine how much culture or traditions they want to maintain.
Verdoia: What about those people who say sure the Skull Valley Band says it's temporary, but once that waste gets out there it's never going to leave?
Bear: Well, the facility is not designed to be permanent. That's the first thing. The second thing is that we actually have a lease with the PFS and once the 40 years is up, they have to leave, according to the lease unless they renegotiate the lease to extend it. And they can't do that unless the NRC extends their license. So the license with the NRC is only for 40 years. So there's a lot of roadblocks into this thing becoming a defact repository . I always tell them, "I don't believe you guys want to leave the spent fuel with us, the tribal government." You know, because we don't look at it as waste. We look at it as a commodity. There's a lot of countries out there that are looking for this spent fuel, used spent fuel so they could reprocess it. So we understand that there is a market for this spent fuel.
Verdoia: So if they leave it with you too long, you'll market the commodity?
Bear: We may. We may do that. That would be up to the federal government and the private entities.
Verdoia: You talk about this as an act of self-determination and the Skull Valley Band doing what is right to secure its future. And then other people say this is all being dictated by Minneapolis. This is Xcel Energy telling the Goshute people what to do. Telling the Skull Valley Band what to do. That all the decisions are made in Minneapolis. How true is that?
Bear: Well if they are, this is the first time I've heard about it. We do have meetings with PFS continuously and we are all brought up to date on what's going on out there in the other states. Minnesota is one of them. So we are aware of what's happening out there. We talk about self-determination, and it's just like being educated. At the beginning we didn't know anything about spent fuel. So somebody had to tell us about it. And once they did tell us about it and once they showed us the technology, it made sense. So somebody has to tell us. Somebody has to tell somebody what's going on, whether it be the truth or not the truth. And that's where we're standing right now. Whether the decisions that PFS makes are coming out of Minnesota or Wisconsin or wherever, for PFS I believe they are. But as for the Band, the decisions are made by the Executive Committee, which are taken back to the general Counsel to decide whether this is good or bad for them.
Verdoia: Has this issue split the tribe? Split the Skull Valley Band?
Bear: When you say split, I don't believe so because we got 2/3 signing off on a resolution to do this project. I don't believe that's a split.
Verdoia: But you can't make everyone happy.
Bear: Oh no. You never can.
Verdoia: And the most unhappy ones are the loudest ones?
Bear: That's right. Those will be the loudest. That's what we believe. We're in this project for the economics of it. We believe that it's a safe facility. It's a clean facility. We don't believe that there's any environmental issues surrounding this storage.
Verdoia: Would you accept it if it was dangerous?
Bear: No. You know that's one of the things I've always said is that the state of Utah snuck one in on us because at the time, we did not understand what hazardous, toxic waste was and we did not understand what nerve agents were or biological. And I think the federal government snuck one in on us also because surrounding our reservation we have all those things. And we were never consulted on those issues whether we liked it or not. They didn't tell us that these things were dangerous. They didn't come out and tell the Goshute Band or the Counsel that, "How would you guys like to have a hazardous and toxic waste dump by you? Or how would you like to have a low level radioactive dump by you? Or how would you like to have the biological labs by you? Or the storage of nerve agents by you?" See those are the things that we don't want to be like that. We want to let everybody know and that was why in 1994 we approached the governor and told him what we were doing. Because we're trying to be good neighbors. We're trying to do everything right at this point. And we're still continuing to do that by answering everybody who has a question on this. The NRC has contentions that are coming out, questions all the time and we're trying to answer those questions as fully as we can.
Source: http://www.kued.org/
Questions:
1. Leon Bear mentions that two thirds of his people supported the reserve, do you feel this is a large enough majority to justify a nuclear waste site?
2. Leon Bear is very concerned with the sovreignty of his people; do you believe that he has the right to do what he wishes on his people's lands (assuming he rules with their consent)?
3. Do you believe that Leon Bear is truly concerned with the welfare of his people? The interviewer seems to question this, and they are almost combative at times.
4. Hypthetically, if the Nuclear Waste site does turn out to be a hazard will the "two or three million dollars" for every person be adequate compensation for childhood cancers, miscarriages, and other medical complications that radiation can bring about?
5. After reading this interview do you think the efforts to store irridatated materials in the Goshute preserve is similar to the Atomic Energy Commissions irridation of large sections of the Western United States 50 years earlier?
6. Do you believe Leon Bear that this facility will not be harmful?
With his father a former Chairman of the tribal council, Leon Bear has been involved with tribal leadership positions through the nearly 12 years of study that have gone into the Skull Valley Band's decision to sign a contract with Private Fuel Storage.
Leon Bear was interviewed by Ken Verdoia in the Band's office, which is located in South Salt Lake City.
Ken Verdoia: Chairman, I'm going to begin with a simple question. How did the Skull Valley Band of Goshute ever become involved with consideration of storing high level radioactive waste?
Leon Bear: Well, it all started back in 1989 when the DOE, the Department of Energy, came to us offering grants to study to be a host for interim storage facility called the MRS. And at that time my father and my uncle were the Chairman and the Vice-Chair and they decided that they should learn about this cause this is coming. And somebody's going to have to host this facility.
Verdoia: So phase one, you kind of took a look at it and, if I'm correct, weren't you involved with economic development at the reservation?
Bear: No, I was the Tribal Secretary at the time.
Verdoia: Tribal Secretary. So you take a first look at it. What's your reaction?
Bear: Well at first we thought that we're kind of leary of the federal government, because of all the broken treaties, but we were leary of the federal government and their offer, thinking it was something, some way to tie us into this and get us to take this waste at that time. And we got the grant, $100,000 to do the phase one study and as we proceeded to do the study we realized that actually hosting a interim storage was not a bad idea for the Band. And so we proceeded into phase two of it which was a $200,000 grant and we went to different countries, France, Sweden, England and Japan to study this thing and the one thing that interests us was the Japanese because they had been bombed and we we wanted to see what the effect or the impact nuclear had on them. And now their country is almost all nuclear. You know, the power they get is from nuclear power.
Verdoia: Phase two, closely study it. Department of Energy is encouraging that interest and then all of a sudden politics weighs in and the Department of Energy pulls the rug out from underneath you.
Bear: Well, they pulled the funding. They didn't actually stop the program, they just pulled the funding which killed the program. That was in 1993, almost 1994. In fact at that time we had negotiated a contract or a lease with the Office of the Negotiator and in January of 1994 we had actually gone up to Idaho with the lease pretty much negotiated in hand. As we found out they had pulled the appropriations out of it.
We had done some tours. We took the many members of the Band, actually, whoever wanted to go, and understand this thing fully, we took them up to INEL (the Federal Nuclear Research Facility in Idaho) and showed them what a spent fuel, I mean, what a dry cask storage is. We also toured Yucca Mountain. We took them all to Yucca Mountain, to tour the repository. We actually took them also to Prairie Island, Northern States Power, which is now Xcel. We took them over and showed them that dry cask storage also. So we've been trying to educate our people. Out of the phase one and phase two programs though, we put together two reports and two videos for the tribe, for information. And we showed those videos and those phase reports to the Band and gave them a copy.
Verdoia: So what originally is begun as the Department of Energy federal program, the funding gets pulled, how did it become a private sector tribal program?
Bear: Well, we pretty much had a lease in hand when we went up to, when we went up to the [Department of Energy] Office of Negotiator, ready to sign it. And the Chairman at the time wanted to, well after they closed that office, he wanted to make sure that we cover all our bases and if there's anyway we could do a storage facility we should look around and find out. And so that's where we proceeded to look for a private entity to help us store this.
Verdoia: So, Private Fuel Storage just kind of walked through the door or did you walk through their door or how did this come about?
Bear: Well from 1994 to 1996 it took us two years to find a corporation or entity to partner up with us, to do this storage. So it's been awhile. We stayed in the game and we continued educating ourselves. We continued going to conferences, high level nuclear waste conferences and other conferences that deal with environmental issues or environmental justice issues. We also went to the state, at the time Governor Leavitt, and we had told him that this was our plan, this is what we were going to do, open up the storage facility, and asked him if the state of Utah wanted to be involved we would appreciate it. We also asked him that if he knew of anything that could harm us in anyway, to let us know because we want to study it. To make sure that we were doing the right thing. So in 1994, we had included the state in this process.
Verdoia: So, you've been studying more than ten years. You're in contact with the state since 1994. You signed the contract with PFS and elected officials are saying, "Oh my gosh, how can you do such a thing? We would have been glad to help you." How do you respond to that type of comment that's made to you now?
Bear: Well, the thing is that we kind of set ourselves up. We went to the governor and asked him, asked the state if they want to be involved and at that time the comment was, "Over my dead body." That was the governor's comment to us. So we were set up. I mean, we set ourselves up on that issue because we wanted to know how the state was feeling about this whole project and apparently that was how they felt, so in 1997 when we signed the lease and it started picking up momentum, we knew that the state was against it already, going into this. We knew the politics were going to be there. The only thing we didn't know is how much of it was going to be. And you know, that's the politicians they're kind of scary guys. You go up to the Capitol, or you go to Washington, D.C., and it's all politics. It's a game that they play.
Verdoia: There are people who intimate to us that you and your Band have been taken advantage of by public utilities. . .that the Skull Valley Band lacks the sophistication to negotiate these very deep waters. How do you respond?
Bear: Well, people are people no matter where you go. Whether they're stupid or not, people need people. How do you think this country was built? Not because of stupidity, same with the reservations. How do you think we survive? Not because of stupidity, so to answer that question, it's kind of irrelevant to answer that question because of that. We're here and we will continue to be here. We're not going anywhere. The Goshute people are here and we're going to be here and we're not going anywhere. No matter how stupid people think we are, we're still here.
Verdoia: Is there racism that enters into this? If this was a white community out in Skull Valley that decided this would be a good idea but because it's a Native American Band?
Bear: It does enter the mind about racism and I have mentioned it a couple of times. There are different types of racisms. One that I've always talked about was environmental racism because of the way the governor speaks about how we're not being good neighbors and we're devaluating the property because of this project and all this stuff. I'm very uncomfortable with that because of what's already out in the West Desert. We have nerve agents, we have biological labs, hazardous and toxic waste depots, low level radioactive waste depots, incinerators but yet this project specifically will devaluate the property which I believe is not true. I'm more scared of nerve agent or biological chemicals then I am of spent fuel, of the radiation.
Verdoia: Many people struggle with the concept of Native American sovereignty. In the treaty of 1863, your people really did not give up your land. You really did not move to different lands. You weren't pushed onto different lands. Help the average person out there understand this notion of your sovereignty, your right as a people to self determent.
Bear: Well, the treaty was signed in 1863 in Tooele Valley and this treaty, this specific treaty, there's others that are designed in this same fashion, but this treaty was designed to take away rights and it did take away rights. It took away our labor rights. It took away our mineral rights. It grounded passage because the pioneers were going out to the California to the gold fields at that time, so this treaty was the one to take away rights and there's some rights that they did not take. One was the right to have the land. The other right was hunting, fishing. The other right was gathering. So we still retain those rights under our treaty, which hasn't been taken away. And as you state these rights, that's what makes the Skull Valley Band of Goshutes a sovereign nation because these rights were not taken away. We still retain those rights as of today.
Verdoia: One thing that you issued in January of 2001 was a "State of the Skull Valley Band" and you deliberately released that on the day that the Governor of the state of Utah, Michael Leavitt, was giving his State of the State address. But you hit the governor's message about how great things are going. That was the message of the governor's State of the State address. And you said that the people of Utah need to know there's another issue in this. The state of my people.
Bear: Well, there's a few points that I tried to make. One was that even though the state of Utah is prospering, the Skull Valley Band is not and our people are suffering because of that. I've said there's environmental issues out there, and our ribe does not receive any benefits from those issues and we have no protection out there to fight against those issues. And this is one of the things that we hope that when we do get the storage facility, it will provide us with money to protect ourselves, to monitor, to help our people, as far as health insurance goes. Because the closest health IHS, Indian Health Service, is 250 miles away. It's east of us here, and if you're sick or you've got a broken leg, you have to go 250 miles. That's a long ways to go for for medical care.
So the issues in that state address that I published, those are some of the issues that we're involved in it. And yeah, the state may be looking good, but the Skull Valley Band and I believe for other tribes in the state, I believe I could speak for them too, that it's not looking so good. I mean, we have a tribe north of us, the Northwestern Band of Shoshones who don't have a land base and if they do it's very small. Then we got the the Northern Utes and the Southern Piutes and Confederate Tribes of Goshutes who all, on their reservations, they're trying to develop economics just as we are and the same, in the same broad sense, but if the state is going to do things like they're doing today how does that look? I mean, I really don't understand how the state can on one hand say we're going to help you economically, and on the other hand try to divert or try to take something away from us.
Verdoia: Let's talk about what the state has recently done, because during the Utah State Legislature several bills were put forward, not all of them passed, but bottom line is the Legislature went on the record to try to do everything it can to block the creation of a temporary storage site for radioactive waste. What's your reaction to the State Legislature and what they tried to do?
Bear: Well I respect them, They're trying to do a job which know this is purely political. It has nothing to do with economics. I has nothing to do with equality, it has nothing to do with anything but politics. I believe that our economic development out in Skull Valley, we're going to keep pushing and we're going to keep going forward with that whether the state wants to be a party to it or not. I mean this is our survival. This is what we have to do because the state's not helping us. Federal government is being cut down. The Bureau of Indian Affairs are being cut and we're a small tribe.
You know, we only have 112 members and so we pretty much have to take care of ourselves out here. According to some of the bills that have been passed, we got some outrageous things going on. As far as the taxation goes, as far as bonding, as far as transportation, as far as economic developments. But the issue that we're looking at today is that we're looking at the state of Utah, they're sending us a signal and a message and we're picking up that message and you know, we hear it. I don't know if it helps but we do hear the message they're trying to send us.
Verdoia: You're Chairman of the Skull Valley Band, your people in the Band are saying, "Well we've made this choice." Is it just a matter of we've got to disagree, we've got to do what we think is right for the Skull Valley Band?
Bear: If we haven't learned from history. . .the federal government came to us, signed a treaty with us, broke those treaties with us and we're out today. The state of Utah is following that same mode of what they're doing. On one hand they promise us in Senate Bill 199, they promised us $2 million for economic development. The bill passed but there's no appropriations in the bill. It's an empty shell of a bill. I mean, is that the messages that the state of Utah want to send to the Goshute people or to any Indian nation, to that to that fact? And on the other bill, I think it's Senate Bill 81, then they put the strong language in there about taxation and about bonding. In the United States there's a thing called the Uniformity Act that everything's got to be equal. I don't know if the state's read that act before or not and there's another act, the Interstate Commerce Act. I don't know if they've read those acts, but these bills, that's when you talk about constitutional, these bills are not.
Verdoia: There are members of your own Band who claim the whole process is corrupt. People are being bought off. Their support of this is being purchased. How do you respond to those people who say that people are being bought off, that money is making this go?
Bear: You know, I hear it and there's no proof to that fact, but there's allegations out there. I watch what's going on in the state of Utah. It's just like the other waste facilities. You hear it in the paper about Envirocare paying off one of their regulators to do something. You hear that and you read it. There's evidence that somebody went to court on that, but I don't see that here. I don't see anybody getting paid off. I really don't know how to answer those allegations because it's not true.
Verdoia: Are you guilty?
Bear: Of what? Of being, being here? Being human? Trying to provide economics for my people? Yes, I'm guilty of that.
Verdoia: The state takes issue with the contract being secret. We've asked to see the contract and have been refused access. Why? There must be something wrong otherwise why can't we look at the contract? Why can't people look at the contract?
Bear: It's like a business. I mean you signed a contract with a corporation. Another corporation signed a contract with another corporation, and you can't look at that contract. It's none of your business. In the same essence, this is the same thing. We signed a contract or a lease with Private Fuel. It's nobody's business but the Band's and Private Fuel's. And you know, that's why you can't see the contract.
Verdoia: What do you say to people who say, well if the rumors we heard are true, every man, woman and child alive in the Skull Valley Band today is going to make $2 million or $3 million over the life of this contract.
Bear: Well, if they do make that much money I'll be doing my job now, won't I? That's why they put me in office - so that we can make money and so that we can prosper and build infrastructure on our reservation. That's the whole purpose of this whole thing. And also, to keep our traditions and our cultural resources intact at the same time.
Verdoia: How tough is keeping the culture, keeping the people together? In the face of everything that is going on. How difficult is it to hold the people, the culture, the life together?
Bear: It's up to the people. That's probably the simplest answer I could give. It's up to the people to decide what they want to do and how far they want their traditions and culture to be maintained. It's up to the people. I can't force them to do anything. I'm just, I'm a leader, of course, and I'm leading them to a certain point that I believe is good for the people, but it's up to the people themselves to determine how much culture or traditions they want to maintain.
Verdoia: What about those people who say sure the Skull Valley Band says it's temporary, but once that waste gets out there it's never going to leave?
Bear: Well, the facility is not designed to be permanent. That's the first thing. The second thing is that we actually have a lease with the PFS and once the 40 years is up, they have to leave, according to the lease unless they renegotiate the lease to extend it. And they can't do that unless the NRC extends their license. So the license with the NRC is only for 40 years. So there's a lot of roadblocks into this thing becoming a defact repository . I always tell them, "I don't believe you guys want to leave the spent fuel with us, the tribal government." You know, because we don't look at it as waste. We look at it as a commodity. There's a lot of countries out there that are looking for this spent fuel, used spent fuel so they could reprocess it. So we understand that there is a market for this spent fuel.
Verdoia: So if they leave it with you too long, you'll market the commodity?
Bear: We may. We may do that. That would be up to the federal government and the private entities.
Verdoia: You talk about this as an act of self-determination and the Skull Valley Band doing what is right to secure its future. And then other people say this is all being dictated by Minneapolis. This is Xcel Energy telling the Goshute people what to do. Telling the Skull Valley Band what to do. That all the decisions are made in Minneapolis. How true is that?
Bear: Well if they are, this is the first time I've heard about it. We do have meetings with PFS continuously and we are all brought up to date on what's going on out there in the other states. Minnesota is one of them. So we are aware of what's happening out there. We talk about self-determination, and it's just like being educated. At the beginning we didn't know anything about spent fuel. So somebody had to tell us about it. And once they did tell us about it and once they showed us the technology, it made sense. So somebody has to tell us. Somebody has to tell somebody what's going on, whether it be the truth or not the truth. And that's where we're standing right now. Whether the decisions that PFS makes are coming out of Minnesota or Wisconsin or wherever, for PFS I believe they are. But as for the Band, the decisions are made by the Executive Committee, which are taken back to the general Counsel to decide whether this is good or bad for them.
Verdoia: Has this issue split the tribe? Split the Skull Valley Band?
Bear: When you say split, I don't believe so because we got 2/3 signing off on a resolution to do this project. I don't believe that's a split.
Verdoia: But you can't make everyone happy.
Bear: Oh no. You never can.
Verdoia: And the most unhappy ones are the loudest ones?
Bear: That's right. Those will be the loudest. That's what we believe. We're in this project for the economics of it. We believe that it's a safe facility. It's a clean facility. We don't believe that there's any environmental issues surrounding this storage.
Verdoia: Would you accept it if it was dangerous?
Bear: No. You know that's one of the things I've always said is that the state of Utah snuck one in on us because at the time, we did not understand what hazardous, toxic waste was and we did not understand what nerve agents were or biological. And I think the federal government snuck one in on us also because surrounding our reservation we have all those things. And we were never consulted on those issues whether we liked it or not. They didn't tell us that these things were dangerous. They didn't come out and tell the Goshute Band or the Counsel that, "How would you guys like to have a hazardous and toxic waste dump by you? Or how would you like to have a low level radioactive dump by you? Or how would you like to have the biological labs by you? Or the storage of nerve agents by you?" See those are the things that we don't want to be like that. We want to let everybody know and that was why in 1994 we approached the governor and told him what we were doing. Because we're trying to be good neighbors. We're trying to do everything right at this point. And we're still continuing to do that by answering everybody who has a question on this. The NRC has contentions that are coming out, questions all the time and we're trying to answer those questions as fully as we can.
Source: http://www.kued.org/
Questions:
1. Leon Bear mentions that two thirds of his people supported the reserve, do you feel this is a large enough majority to justify a nuclear waste site?
2. Leon Bear is very concerned with the sovreignty of his people; do you believe that he has the right to do what he wishes on his people's lands (assuming he rules with their consent)?
3. Do you believe that Leon Bear is truly concerned with the welfare of his people? The interviewer seems to question this, and they are almost combative at times.
4. Hypthetically, if the Nuclear Waste site does turn out to be a hazard will the "two or three million dollars" for every person be adequate compensation for childhood cancers, miscarriages, and other medical complications that radiation can bring about?
5. After reading this interview do you think the efforts to store irridatated materials in the Goshute preserve is similar to the Atomic Energy Commissions irridation of large sections of the Western United States 50 years earlier?
6. Do you believe Leon Bear that this facility will not be harmful?
Interview with The Director of Indian Affairs in Utah
Forrest Cuch
Director, Utah Division of Indian Affairs
Forrest Cuch is the Executive Director of the Utah Office of Indian Affairs in the state's Department of Community and Economic Development. Born and raised on the Uintah and Ouray Ute Indian Reservation in Utah, Cuch has served as tribal administrator for the Wampanoag tribe in Massachusetts. He is the editor of "A History of Utah's American Indians," recently published by his office and the Utah State Historical Society.
Forrest Cuch was interviewed in his Salt Lake City office by program Producer Ken Verdoia.
Ken Verdoia: Let's begin, Mr. Cuch, with this difficult and very large issue of sovereignty. We hear it tossed around in many different ways when it comes to Native Americans. As Executive Director in Indian Affairs for the State of Utah, how do you view sovereignty?
Forrest Cuch: Well, first of all, sovereignty was here before the American colonists ever arrived here. It was here before the Spanish even arrived here. It was something that existed here among the American Indian people and it had to do with self-governance and decision making that is made in the best interest of the Indian people. So that's my first response.
Verdoia: It would seem then that the attempts to redefine sovereignty come with, what we call, pioneering settlement, with the incursion of settlers to traditional Native American lands, where a different definition of sovereignty is imposed. Is there a different definition in the contemporary setting of what constitutes a sovereign status for a Native American Nation?
Cuch: No. It goes back to that original concept because that was the colonists' response to American Indians, and that response came as a result of war. Conflict eventually resulted in treaties, and treaties are international instruments of law that recognize a relationship between to peoples. That law, that agreement is binding on both parties. It has benefits going to both, accorded to both and it has responsibilities as well. So, that agreement, that recognition of sovereignty goes back to colonial times. A lot of people fail to look at the historical aspect and consider the accuracy of the information going back to historical times. We take history too lightly; we don't realize the significance of history and how the actions of the past have effected law and our actions today.
For example, the King Phillip war was a major conflict that occurred in New England. There were thousands of colonists and Indians killed. In fact, the author James Lewyn points out in his book "Lies My Teacher Told Me" that the King Phillip war was larger than five similar wars around that time. It was larger then the American Revolution. It was larger then the Spanish American War. It was larger then the French Indian War and two other conflicts. In that war, more villages were destroyed in New England than in any other previous war. It was a major conflict and it was a conflict that followed fifty years of peaceful relations between the New England Indians and the Colonists.
So it was a major conflict that resulted in treaties. Those treaties are binding to this day and one of the most notable legal precedents was when the Cherokees took the state of Georgia to court over their issue of removal. The Cherokees won that battle, legally, in the Supreme Court in "Cherokee vs. Georgia." The Supreme Court ruled that Georgia had violated the treaty rights of the Cherokee nation. Nevertheless, Andrew Jackson, who was known for his famous statement, "The Supreme Court has spoken, now let them enforce it," removed the Cherokee in the well-known "Trail of Tears" episode. American Indian people are aware of that kind of situation, and we don't want to forget those things. In fact, our most powerful ally nowadays is the courts' recognition of that sovereign right. It is central to the issue of the Goshute nuclear storage proposal.
Verdoia: You speak of the limitations. If not imposed by courts but imposed by governments and it seems, as an outsider without the well read history that you understand so well, that when government has perceived value among Native Americans, it has taken that value regardless of issues of clearly established sovereignty.
Cuch: Certainly. It's always been at the expense of Indian peoples' land or their resources, and in interest of government.
Verdoia: So we look at a handful of individuals, the Skull Valley Band of the Goshutes, and we look at what might be viewed as their sovereign right to enter into economic development agreements. Can that be limited by the state?
Cuch: I am not a lawyer or a legal scholar; my understanding of federal law is that it will probably end up in a legal showdown between state vs. federal law. And, similar to the issue that happened a couple of years back with the state of Arizona, I forget the governor, and the U.S. Park Service, regarding the closure of one of the national parks, I would hate to see that happen here. I don't think that it's necessary and it would only serve to weaken the state and tribal relations. So I would hope we could avoid such a showdown but I'm afraid that's probably what's going to happen.
Verdoia: As the Executive Director of Indian Affairs you are well versed in the challenges faced by contemporary Native Americans, not just in Utah but throughout the West, the nation, perhaps even the world. We look at the Skull Valley Band, decidedly impoverished, in a section of the nation that does not enjoy great natural resource wealth, does not offer timber opportunities or oil and gas exploration opportunities. A tribe that has, through its leadership, expressed to us a sense that they are in fact fighting for survival. Can you appreciate the struggle faced by the Skull Valley Band?
Cuch: I can. I truly can. I'm not comfortable with the vilification of the Goshute people. I really struggle with the fact that now we have a nuclear storage issue, when in fact we've been involved in mining uranium for the nuclear industry for many years now. Ever since the 40s and 50s, we've been part of that industry. I'm uncomfortable with the fact that now we're concerned about pollution and destruction of the earth when in fact Magcorp has been operating for many years out there and is one of the top ten polluters in the country. I'm not comfortable with the simple solutions and quick reactions to very complex problems. And I'm a strong believer in dialogue. I'm a strong believer in the review of history, and study, and research, and then entering into serious dialogue, discussions that will lead to meaningful decisions that will benefit all of society, not just a few.
In this case, I look at this from different points of view, from the Indian, from red eyes, so to speak. One of the responses I have is that the Goshutes have been victims of genocide now for about 150 years. Now that their traditional culture is almost dead, meaning about 2/3 of their people, no longer operate from a traditional belief system and are in fact progressive and value material possessions like homes, cars, money in the bank, they want the same things we do. That they do and that they've found a way to accomplish it, we're upset at them for not being Indian, for not being traditional. That seems to me an unfair arrangement.
Verdoia: Is it a little too convenient to turn to this Skull Valley Band and say, "Why won't you be more Native American?"
Cuch: Exactly. They are convenient. They're available to be the brunt of all of this confusion and frustration and I don't think that's fair. I think that those people have been victims of a great suffering, and I think we need to be working with them instead of working against them. Once again, I strongly believe in dialogue, discussion. Traditional governmental system for American Indians in this area use to be consensus forms of government. You would sit down and discuss an issue. It may take days, it may take weeks. When the decision was finally made, that was it. Everyone stood by that decision. I don't think the nuclear storage or waste question has been answered yet for the nation. There's no national policy on what to do with nuclear waste and it's not answered because we haven't entered into a discussion. We haven't sat down and carefully weighed all of the information and research that's available. We haven't looked at the facts.
Verdoia: So when people, within the government realm, make statements such as, "This will not happen," that adamancy, that confrontation, you've expressed your desire but we're telling you, "No, the answer to your desires is no." Is that helpful?
Cuch: It is not. What it does is it implicates the issue. It comes on as a challenge and it brings in emotion; the reaction that accompanies that is a very complex issue and I think it needs to be treated as such. I'm well aware of the governor's position on this matter and the fact that he's taken that position. And I appreciate that he is opposing the nuclear waste in the state of Utah. I don't personally like the idea of storing waste in this state either. I don't think it's a good idea. On the other hand, I have an also belief that they could probably, based on the information I've reviewed, store that waste safely. I think they can probably contain it from the information that I have read.
So there are those two extremes operating, and what I would prefer is in between. I cannot say that just because I don't think it's a good idea, the Goshutes shouldn't look at it. I mean, they're suffering from poverty. They're coming from a completely different point of view, a different experience than I am. But I can also identify with them, culturally, to understand why that happens. It happened at the cost of their traditional belief system that our society is basically at war with. We are attempting to destroy that cultural belief system, and I think we're learning that it's at a cost because when we destroy that traditional belief system that is in love with the earth, we lose that wisdom and philosophy. In other words, we have contributed to that situation out there in Skull Valley. Our society, our culture has contributed to that situation out there and I think we need to sit down and examine what's happened and how we contributed to it and have a discussion with the Goshutes. I think we can learn something from this about ourselves and about the Goshutes.
Verdoia: It sounds like you're saying that when you ignore a people for 150 years and through ignoring, through taking their children out and sending them to Indian schools to change them, to teach them to dress in a different manner, to teach them to embrace a different lifestyle, that when that's been your pattern for a 150 years, you really haven't set the stage for building a consensus to work with those people when an issue like this comes up.
Cuch: The only part I would qualify is that it hasn't been a matter of ignoring. When you take children out of the homes and transport them thousands of miles away and educate them, that is not ignoring. That is genocide. That is a deliberate attempt to destroy a culture and a way of life. So I would put it a little stronger there. When you commit genocide against a people, there are going to be consequences. And the consequences may come around and bite us.
Verdoia: Yes.
Cuch: In fact, if we would have treated that traditional belief system with respect, maybe they wouldn't be supporting this idea right now. And maybe, maybe we could learn something from this process. The other side of this, governmentally, is consultation. Nobody consulted the Goshutes out there when it came to all of the waste that is conducted out there. Envirocare is nearby. The Dugway waste disposal area's incinerator is nearby. Nobody consulted those people when it came to setting up those installations. An example would be the fact that the Tooele County Commissioners and people support the Goshutes in this endeavor for that very reason. I've heard the comment from those officials and read the papers where they've said, "Well, we weren't consulted either about these installations when this whole area was zoned for waste. We were not consulted. We don't like the idea of everyone else benefiting from this designation except us." So for that reason you have an Indian Tribe that's joined with a city and a county government there to try to obtain some benefit from this development. I know the rhetoric in this area's always been local control and state's rights, but I also think that state's rights applies to towns and to tribes as well. That concept of local control has its benefits, but it also has its liabilities. If we start violating federal law in the process of conducting our own governmental activities, then I think we are paying a cost and there will be consequences for that as well.
Verdoia: And you can't say we believe in the principle of local control or control closest to the issue except when we disagree.
Cuch: Exactly.
Verdoia: You're either for it or against it.
Cuch: Right. And for that reason you have to sit down and examine all of the various aspects of that issue. The historical aspects, the scientific aspects, the socio-cultural aspects, you have to examine all of those issues.
Verdoia: One thing that's been offered to us, time and again, by Native American voices and by white government voices, is the sense that Native Americans have a unique commitment to the land. They have a unique spiritual, scared tie to traditional lands and therefore they should honor those ties.
Cuch: Well, it's the same analogy. There's the presumption that Indian people should be Indian, even though we have committed 150 years of genocide in our state and over 450 years of genocide throughout this country against those very traditional beliefs and ideology that once existed. The truth of the matter is that in our own state there's only one language spoken by one tribe, the Navajo, that is not in danger. The languages of the Shoshones, the Utes, the Goshutes and Piutes are in danger. Along with those languages are the culture, the belief system and the ideology. The reality is that Indians should be Indians, but there very few Indians around anymore because their culture has really taken a major hit over the last couple hundred years. There very few people that really have that sacred connection with the earth. There are very few traditional Shamen alive that understand and can articulate that connection. I was blessed with a relationship with the Sundance Chief of our Tribe, and he taught me a lot of wonderful things. That's why I'm able to speak to this, but he passed on. When he passed on a lot of that knowledge and wisdom went with him. The contention that Indians should and ought to be something that they're not is very faulty, inaccurate, and needs to be examined. People need to sit down and find out what the situation really is and then we can start discussing the issues from that point on.
Verdoia: It has been expressed to us that this storage proposal might well have been avoided if the state would have sought, in the past, to develop some sort of relationship with the Skull Valley Band, let alone any Native American people.
Cuch: I would have to agree with that because I think those discussions would have resulted in a meaningful relationship. Right now we don't have that meaningful relationship with the Goshutes. I think that's what's missing and I think that's what the problem is. Relationships are everything. That's how you move mountains in government, through relationships. And if relationships are lacking, things aren't going to happen. If things do happen they're probably going to be negative, and painful, and destructive.
Verdoia: The state Legislature has stepped forward and put their opposition tot he storage project into the form of law.
Cuch: They're looking for quick solutions and it's just not going to work because you are dealing with human beings, and human beings are complex. I guess the point I'm making here is very, very poignant. I'm saying those Skull Valley Goshutes are human beings also, and it's time our state recognized that.
Source: http://www.kued.org/
Question:
1. Does the Director of Indian Affairs take a sympathetic stance towards the Indians?
Director, Utah Division of Indian Affairs
Forrest Cuch is the Executive Director of the Utah Office of Indian Affairs in the state's Department of Community and Economic Development. Born and raised on the Uintah and Ouray Ute Indian Reservation in Utah, Cuch has served as tribal administrator for the Wampanoag tribe in Massachusetts. He is the editor of "A History of Utah's American Indians," recently published by his office and the Utah State Historical Society.
Forrest Cuch was interviewed in his Salt Lake City office by program Producer Ken Verdoia.
Ken Verdoia: Let's begin, Mr. Cuch, with this difficult and very large issue of sovereignty. We hear it tossed around in many different ways when it comes to Native Americans. As Executive Director in Indian Affairs for the State of Utah, how do you view sovereignty?
Forrest Cuch: Well, first of all, sovereignty was here before the American colonists ever arrived here. It was here before the Spanish even arrived here. It was something that existed here among the American Indian people and it had to do with self-governance and decision making that is made in the best interest of the Indian people. So that's my first response.
Verdoia: It would seem then that the attempts to redefine sovereignty come with, what we call, pioneering settlement, with the incursion of settlers to traditional Native American lands, where a different definition of sovereignty is imposed. Is there a different definition in the contemporary setting of what constitutes a sovereign status for a Native American Nation?
Cuch: No. It goes back to that original concept because that was the colonists' response to American Indians, and that response came as a result of war. Conflict eventually resulted in treaties, and treaties are international instruments of law that recognize a relationship between to peoples. That law, that agreement is binding on both parties. It has benefits going to both, accorded to both and it has responsibilities as well. So, that agreement, that recognition of sovereignty goes back to colonial times. A lot of people fail to look at the historical aspect and consider the accuracy of the information going back to historical times. We take history too lightly; we don't realize the significance of history and how the actions of the past have effected law and our actions today.
For example, the King Phillip war was a major conflict that occurred in New England. There were thousands of colonists and Indians killed. In fact, the author James Lewyn points out in his book "Lies My Teacher Told Me" that the King Phillip war was larger than five similar wars around that time. It was larger then the American Revolution. It was larger then the Spanish American War. It was larger then the French Indian War and two other conflicts. In that war, more villages were destroyed in New England than in any other previous war. It was a major conflict and it was a conflict that followed fifty years of peaceful relations between the New England Indians and the Colonists.
So it was a major conflict that resulted in treaties. Those treaties are binding to this day and one of the most notable legal precedents was when the Cherokees took the state of Georgia to court over their issue of removal. The Cherokees won that battle, legally, in the Supreme Court in "Cherokee vs. Georgia." The Supreme Court ruled that Georgia had violated the treaty rights of the Cherokee nation. Nevertheless, Andrew Jackson, who was known for his famous statement, "The Supreme Court has spoken, now let them enforce it," removed the Cherokee in the well-known "Trail of Tears" episode. American Indian people are aware of that kind of situation, and we don't want to forget those things. In fact, our most powerful ally nowadays is the courts' recognition of that sovereign right. It is central to the issue of the Goshute nuclear storage proposal.
Verdoia: You speak of the limitations. If not imposed by courts but imposed by governments and it seems, as an outsider without the well read history that you understand so well, that when government has perceived value among Native Americans, it has taken that value regardless of issues of clearly established sovereignty.
Cuch: Certainly. It's always been at the expense of Indian peoples' land or their resources, and in interest of government.
Verdoia: So we look at a handful of individuals, the Skull Valley Band of the Goshutes, and we look at what might be viewed as their sovereign right to enter into economic development agreements. Can that be limited by the state?
Cuch: I am not a lawyer or a legal scholar; my understanding of federal law is that it will probably end up in a legal showdown between state vs. federal law. And, similar to the issue that happened a couple of years back with the state of Arizona, I forget the governor, and the U.S. Park Service, regarding the closure of one of the national parks, I would hate to see that happen here. I don't think that it's necessary and it would only serve to weaken the state and tribal relations. So I would hope we could avoid such a showdown but I'm afraid that's probably what's going to happen.
Verdoia: As the Executive Director of Indian Affairs you are well versed in the challenges faced by contemporary Native Americans, not just in Utah but throughout the West, the nation, perhaps even the world. We look at the Skull Valley Band, decidedly impoverished, in a section of the nation that does not enjoy great natural resource wealth, does not offer timber opportunities or oil and gas exploration opportunities. A tribe that has, through its leadership, expressed to us a sense that they are in fact fighting for survival. Can you appreciate the struggle faced by the Skull Valley Band?
Cuch: I can. I truly can. I'm not comfortable with the vilification of the Goshute people. I really struggle with the fact that now we have a nuclear storage issue, when in fact we've been involved in mining uranium for the nuclear industry for many years now. Ever since the 40s and 50s, we've been part of that industry. I'm uncomfortable with the fact that now we're concerned about pollution and destruction of the earth when in fact Magcorp has been operating for many years out there and is one of the top ten polluters in the country. I'm not comfortable with the simple solutions and quick reactions to very complex problems. And I'm a strong believer in dialogue. I'm a strong believer in the review of history, and study, and research, and then entering into serious dialogue, discussions that will lead to meaningful decisions that will benefit all of society, not just a few.
In this case, I look at this from different points of view, from the Indian, from red eyes, so to speak. One of the responses I have is that the Goshutes have been victims of genocide now for about 150 years. Now that their traditional culture is almost dead, meaning about 2/3 of their people, no longer operate from a traditional belief system and are in fact progressive and value material possessions like homes, cars, money in the bank, they want the same things we do. That they do and that they've found a way to accomplish it, we're upset at them for not being Indian, for not being traditional. That seems to me an unfair arrangement.
Verdoia: Is it a little too convenient to turn to this Skull Valley Band and say, "Why won't you be more Native American?"
Cuch: Exactly. They are convenient. They're available to be the brunt of all of this confusion and frustration and I don't think that's fair. I think that those people have been victims of a great suffering, and I think we need to be working with them instead of working against them. Once again, I strongly believe in dialogue, discussion. Traditional governmental system for American Indians in this area use to be consensus forms of government. You would sit down and discuss an issue. It may take days, it may take weeks. When the decision was finally made, that was it. Everyone stood by that decision. I don't think the nuclear storage or waste question has been answered yet for the nation. There's no national policy on what to do with nuclear waste and it's not answered because we haven't entered into a discussion. We haven't sat down and carefully weighed all of the information and research that's available. We haven't looked at the facts.
Verdoia: So when people, within the government realm, make statements such as, "This will not happen," that adamancy, that confrontation, you've expressed your desire but we're telling you, "No, the answer to your desires is no." Is that helpful?
Cuch: It is not. What it does is it implicates the issue. It comes on as a challenge and it brings in emotion; the reaction that accompanies that is a very complex issue and I think it needs to be treated as such. I'm well aware of the governor's position on this matter and the fact that he's taken that position. And I appreciate that he is opposing the nuclear waste in the state of Utah. I don't personally like the idea of storing waste in this state either. I don't think it's a good idea. On the other hand, I have an also belief that they could probably, based on the information I've reviewed, store that waste safely. I think they can probably contain it from the information that I have read.
So there are those two extremes operating, and what I would prefer is in between. I cannot say that just because I don't think it's a good idea, the Goshutes shouldn't look at it. I mean, they're suffering from poverty. They're coming from a completely different point of view, a different experience than I am. But I can also identify with them, culturally, to understand why that happens. It happened at the cost of their traditional belief system that our society is basically at war with. We are attempting to destroy that cultural belief system, and I think we're learning that it's at a cost because when we destroy that traditional belief system that is in love with the earth, we lose that wisdom and philosophy. In other words, we have contributed to that situation out there in Skull Valley. Our society, our culture has contributed to that situation out there and I think we need to sit down and examine what's happened and how we contributed to it and have a discussion with the Goshutes. I think we can learn something from this about ourselves and about the Goshutes.
Verdoia: It sounds like you're saying that when you ignore a people for 150 years and through ignoring, through taking their children out and sending them to Indian schools to change them, to teach them to dress in a different manner, to teach them to embrace a different lifestyle, that when that's been your pattern for a 150 years, you really haven't set the stage for building a consensus to work with those people when an issue like this comes up.
Cuch: The only part I would qualify is that it hasn't been a matter of ignoring. When you take children out of the homes and transport them thousands of miles away and educate them, that is not ignoring. That is genocide. That is a deliberate attempt to destroy a culture and a way of life. So I would put it a little stronger there. When you commit genocide against a people, there are going to be consequences. And the consequences may come around and bite us.
Verdoia: Yes.
Cuch: In fact, if we would have treated that traditional belief system with respect, maybe they wouldn't be supporting this idea right now. And maybe, maybe we could learn something from this process. The other side of this, governmentally, is consultation. Nobody consulted the Goshutes out there when it came to all of the waste that is conducted out there. Envirocare is nearby. The Dugway waste disposal area's incinerator is nearby. Nobody consulted those people when it came to setting up those installations. An example would be the fact that the Tooele County Commissioners and people support the Goshutes in this endeavor for that very reason. I've heard the comment from those officials and read the papers where they've said, "Well, we weren't consulted either about these installations when this whole area was zoned for waste. We were not consulted. We don't like the idea of everyone else benefiting from this designation except us." So for that reason you have an Indian Tribe that's joined with a city and a county government there to try to obtain some benefit from this development. I know the rhetoric in this area's always been local control and state's rights, but I also think that state's rights applies to towns and to tribes as well. That concept of local control has its benefits, but it also has its liabilities. If we start violating federal law in the process of conducting our own governmental activities, then I think we are paying a cost and there will be consequences for that as well.
Verdoia: And you can't say we believe in the principle of local control or control closest to the issue except when we disagree.
Cuch: Exactly.
Verdoia: You're either for it or against it.
Cuch: Right. And for that reason you have to sit down and examine all of the various aspects of that issue. The historical aspects, the scientific aspects, the socio-cultural aspects, you have to examine all of those issues.
Verdoia: One thing that's been offered to us, time and again, by Native American voices and by white government voices, is the sense that Native Americans have a unique commitment to the land. They have a unique spiritual, scared tie to traditional lands and therefore they should honor those ties.
Cuch: Well, it's the same analogy. There's the presumption that Indian people should be Indian, even though we have committed 150 years of genocide in our state and over 450 years of genocide throughout this country against those very traditional beliefs and ideology that once existed. The truth of the matter is that in our own state there's only one language spoken by one tribe, the Navajo, that is not in danger. The languages of the Shoshones, the Utes, the Goshutes and Piutes are in danger. Along with those languages are the culture, the belief system and the ideology. The reality is that Indians should be Indians, but there very few Indians around anymore because their culture has really taken a major hit over the last couple hundred years. There very few people that really have that sacred connection with the earth. There are very few traditional Shamen alive that understand and can articulate that connection. I was blessed with a relationship with the Sundance Chief of our Tribe, and he taught me a lot of wonderful things. That's why I'm able to speak to this, but he passed on. When he passed on a lot of that knowledge and wisdom went with him. The contention that Indians should and ought to be something that they're not is very faulty, inaccurate, and needs to be examined. People need to sit down and find out what the situation really is and then we can start discussing the issues from that point on.
Verdoia: It has been expressed to us that this storage proposal might well have been avoided if the state would have sought, in the past, to develop some sort of relationship with the Skull Valley Band, let alone any Native American people.
Cuch: I would have to agree with that because I think those discussions would have resulted in a meaningful relationship. Right now we don't have that meaningful relationship with the Goshutes. I think that's what's missing and I think that's what the problem is. Relationships are everything. That's how you move mountains in government, through relationships. And if relationships are lacking, things aren't going to happen. If things do happen they're probably going to be negative, and painful, and destructive.
Verdoia: The state Legislature has stepped forward and put their opposition tot he storage project into the form of law.
Cuch: They're looking for quick solutions and it's just not going to work because you are dealing with human beings, and human beings are complex. I guess the point I'm making here is very, very poignant. I'm saying those Skull Valley Goshutes are human beings also, and it's time our state recognized that.
Source: http://www.kued.org/
Question:
1. Does the Director of Indian Affairs take a sympathetic stance towards the Indians?
2. Given that the Bureau of Indian Affairs eventually denied the Skull Valley facility the lease necessary to have the facility why do you think the Utah director of Indian Affairs supported it?
3. Do you buy Mr. Cuch's argument that because the Native-Americans had no say in the creation of dangerous facilities that surround the area the Goshutes should be able to develop potentially dangerous facilities as well?
4. Do you think that the Indians are being unfairly judged as Mr. Cuch states? On one hand they are told they should be traditional, but on the other hand if they do not act like Americans it is likely that they will stay very poor.
5. Given that Mr. Hugens cited an interviewee who cites "Lies My Teacher Told Me", do you think that Mr. Hugens should get an A++ on this assignment?
6. Overall do you find Mr. Cush to be more, or less, balanced in his opinions about nuclear waste than the other interviewees that you've read about so far?
Skull Valley Defeated
Hard Won Victory Against Environmentally Racist Nuke Waste Dump Targeted at Native Lands!
NIRS is overjoyed to announce that it has helped defeat the environmentally racist Private Fuel Storage (PFS) high-level radioactive waste dump targeted at the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation in Utah.
On Sept. 7, 2006 the U.S. Bureau of Land Management rejected transportation plans for shipping 44,000 tons of highly radioactive waste from commercial nuclear reactors across the country to PFS. The U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs likewise rejected the lease agreement between the nuclear utility consortium comprising PFS and the pro-dump, disputed Skull Valley Goshute tribal chairman Leon Bear.
Although PFS may appeal these rulings, this dump has very likely been defeated, once and for all, after a bitter decade-long struggle. This tremendous environmental justice victory also sets an important precedent against the nuclear establishment's 20 year long effort to dump radioactive wastes on scores of Indian reservations across the country, and casts further doubt on the proposed national burial site for high-level radioactive wastes targeted at sacred Western Shoshone land at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
NIRS wishes to extend its heartfelt congratulations and thanks to all the organizations and individuals who contributed to this tremendous environmental justice victory. PFS first began targeting Skull Valley in 1996. And for many years before that, the “Nuclear Waste Negotiator” from the U.S. Department of Energy – with cash in hand – tried wooing the Skull Valley Goshute tribal council into “temporarily hosting” America’s irradiated nuclear fuel.
The greatest commendations, of course, go to Margene Bullcreek and her organization Ohngo Gaudadeh Devia Awareness (OGDA), Sammy Blackbear, the Bullcreek and Blackbear families, and other Skull Valley Goshutes who have suffered tremendous sacrifices and painful punishments for many long years, for their tireless opposition to the proposed dump. Through it all, they have persevered and now triumphed. Their victory not only protects their own community and its future generations, but countless millions who live along the routes through dozens of states that were targeted for transporting the atomic wastes to Utah.
Now is no time to simply forget about the Skull Valley Goshute community. The State of Utah, the County of Tooele, the City of Salt Lake, and even the federal agencies that for so many years have been complicit in targeting this community for an atomic waste dump must now help provide resources for alternative, healthy economic development. All those communities across the country spared “Mobile Chernobyls” should also help out. As has been the case for many long years, non-profit groups such as OGDA, Indigenous Environmental Network, the Seventh Generation Fund, HEAL Utah, and the Shundahai Network will continue to advocate and organize for healthy economic development at the Skull Valley Goshute Reservation. Especially meaningful is Honor the Earth’s work with the Skull Valley Goshute community to install solar power panels there. This effort deserves the fullest support.
PFS proceeded further than any such dump ever had before, even scandalously receiving a license to operate from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission earlier this year. But numerous tribes had fended off similar threats in the past two decades. The five Native Nations of the Colorado River (the Quechan, Chemehuevi, Fort Mojave, Colorada River, and Cocopah Tribes) successfully fought off a so-called “low” level radioactive waste dump targeted at their sacred Ward Valley in southern California, a struggle that lasted throughout the 1990s and was only won within recent years. Rufina Marie Laws with Humans Against Nuclear DumpS (HANDS), and others at the Mescalero Apache Reservation in New Mexico, first fended off the Nuclear Waste Negotiator, and then PFS itself, before PFS set its sites on Skull Valley. Grace Thorpe, founder of the National Environmental Coalition of Native Americans, not only stopped the high-level radioactive waste dump targeted at her Sauk and Fox Reservation in Oklahoma; she also then hit the road, and helped other Reservations organize against similar threats. Grace even helped abolish the Office of the Nuclear Waste Negotiator once and for all, in 1994. Western Shoshone spiritual leader Corbin Harney and his Shundahai Network, as well as the Western Shoshone National Council and the Western Shoshone Defense Project, have for decades not only opposed dumping radioactive wastes at their sacred Yucca Mountain, but have also resisted nuclear weapons testing at the adjacent Nevada Test Site. Joe Campbell of the Prairie Island Mdewakanton Dakota Tribe has devoted decades of his life to warning and protecting his community against the threats posed by the twin reactor nuclear plant and its stored wastes on the Mississippi River flood plain, just hundreds of yards from the tribal day care center.
Winona LaDuke at Honor the Earth and Tom Goldtooth at Indigenous Environmental Network, and their stellar staffs, deserve tremendous thanks for the decades of leadership they have provided in this fight to defend Indigenous communities and Mother Earth against the deadly risks of radioactive wastes. Chris Peters at the Seventh Generation Fund has played a vital role sustaining such work.
Additional Indigenous and non-Native allies -- too numerous to list – also deserve thanks and congratulations for their tireless defense of Native lands, which has defeated dozens of proposed atomic waste dumps aimed at Indian lands in the past.
It is right and proper to celebrate the defeat of PFS. But the broader fight against radioactive racism is far from over. Sacred Western Shoshone Indian land at Yucca Mountain, Nevada is still being targeted for the national permanent dumpsite for high-level radioactive waste, despite the Treaty of Ruby Valley of 1863, and despite the site’s seismic, volcanic, and hydrological hazards. The U.S. Department of Energy is now targeting the Walker River Paiute in western Nevada for a rail route to ship 77,000 tons of high-level radioactive waste from all over the country to Yucca Mountain. Uranium mining companies, with NRC complicity, are attempting to circumvent a Navajo ban on uranium mining, milling, and processing on tribal territory. Nuclear utilities are pressing to extend by 20 years the operations at the already 40 year old, dangerously deteriorated Palisades nuclear plant in the predominantly African American town of Covert, Michigan; the reactor site almost certainly contains Native American archaeological and perhaps even burial sites that remain unprotected. And nuclear giant Entergy wants to build a new reactor in the impoverished, predominantly African American County of Claiborne, Mississippi. The list goes on and on – the vigilance of atomic watchdogs must go on and on too, to counter this outrageous radioactive racism.
NIRS has been honored and privileged to work with all of those listed above, to be a part of these many struggles against radioactive racism, and for environmental justice.
---Prepared by Kevin Kamps, Nuclear Waste Specialist, NIRS, Sept. 18, 2006
Source: http://www.nirs.org/
Questions:
1. What do you think the Leon Bear would have to say about this?
2. Do you believe that this facility was actually "environmentally racist"?
3. Despite the conflicting claims that the waste side would be safe or unsafe, is there a level of acceptable risk for an impoverished people, such as the Goshutes to undertake economically profitable industrial actions?
4. Do you believe that the call to action in favor of helping the impoverished Goshute tribe in western Utah will be honored?
5. Are there any parallels that you see, after reading this article, between the irradiation of large sections of the U.S. with fallout in the 1950s and early 1960s and the fight to store nuclear waste in the American west today?
6. In the interview you read with Leon Bear he mentioned that his tribe has the sovereign right to do anything they want to their land, this is protected by a 1863 treaty. Do you think this was honored? Why or why not?
NIRS is overjoyed to announce that it has helped defeat the environmentally racist Private Fuel Storage (PFS) high-level radioactive waste dump targeted at the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation in Utah.
On Sept. 7, 2006 the U.S. Bureau of Land Management rejected transportation plans for shipping 44,000 tons of highly radioactive waste from commercial nuclear reactors across the country to PFS. The U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs likewise rejected the lease agreement between the nuclear utility consortium comprising PFS and the pro-dump, disputed Skull Valley Goshute tribal chairman Leon Bear.
Although PFS may appeal these rulings, this dump has very likely been defeated, once and for all, after a bitter decade-long struggle. This tremendous environmental justice victory also sets an important precedent against the nuclear establishment's 20 year long effort to dump radioactive wastes on scores of Indian reservations across the country, and casts further doubt on the proposed national burial site for high-level radioactive wastes targeted at sacred Western Shoshone land at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
NIRS wishes to extend its heartfelt congratulations and thanks to all the organizations and individuals who contributed to this tremendous environmental justice victory. PFS first began targeting Skull Valley in 1996. And for many years before that, the “Nuclear Waste Negotiator” from the U.S. Department of Energy – with cash in hand – tried wooing the Skull Valley Goshute tribal council into “temporarily hosting” America’s irradiated nuclear fuel.
The greatest commendations, of course, go to Margene Bullcreek and her organization Ohngo Gaudadeh Devia Awareness (OGDA), Sammy Blackbear, the Bullcreek and Blackbear families, and other Skull Valley Goshutes who have suffered tremendous sacrifices and painful punishments for many long years, for their tireless opposition to the proposed dump. Through it all, they have persevered and now triumphed. Their victory not only protects their own community and its future generations, but countless millions who live along the routes through dozens of states that were targeted for transporting the atomic wastes to Utah.
Now is no time to simply forget about the Skull Valley Goshute community. The State of Utah, the County of Tooele, the City of Salt Lake, and even the federal agencies that for so many years have been complicit in targeting this community for an atomic waste dump must now help provide resources for alternative, healthy economic development. All those communities across the country spared “Mobile Chernobyls” should also help out. As has been the case for many long years, non-profit groups such as OGDA, Indigenous Environmental Network, the Seventh Generation Fund, HEAL Utah, and the Shundahai Network will continue to advocate and organize for healthy economic development at the Skull Valley Goshute Reservation. Especially meaningful is Honor the Earth’s work with the Skull Valley Goshute community to install solar power panels there. This effort deserves the fullest support.
PFS proceeded further than any such dump ever had before, even scandalously receiving a license to operate from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission earlier this year. But numerous tribes had fended off similar threats in the past two decades. The five Native Nations of the Colorado River (the Quechan, Chemehuevi, Fort Mojave, Colorada River, and Cocopah Tribes) successfully fought off a so-called “low” level radioactive waste dump targeted at their sacred Ward Valley in southern California, a struggle that lasted throughout the 1990s and was only won within recent years. Rufina Marie Laws with Humans Against Nuclear DumpS (HANDS), and others at the Mescalero Apache Reservation in New Mexico, first fended off the Nuclear Waste Negotiator, and then PFS itself, before PFS set its sites on Skull Valley. Grace Thorpe, founder of the National Environmental Coalition of Native Americans, not only stopped the high-level radioactive waste dump targeted at her Sauk and Fox Reservation in Oklahoma; she also then hit the road, and helped other Reservations organize against similar threats. Grace even helped abolish the Office of the Nuclear Waste Negotiator once and for all, in 1994. Western Shoshone spiritual leader Corbin Harney and his Shundahai Network, as well as the Western Shoshone National Council and the Western Shoshone Defense Project, have for decades not only opposed dumping radioactive wastes at their sacred Yucca Mountain, but have also resisted nuclear weapons testing at the adjacent Nevada Test Site. Joe Campbell of the Prairie Island Mdewakanton Dakota Tribe has devoted decades of his life to warning and protecting his community against the threats posed by the twin reactor nuclear plant and its stored wastes on the Mississippi River flood plain, just hundreds of yards from the tribal day care center.
Winona LaDuke at Honor the Earth and Tom Goldtooth at Indigenous Environmental Network, and their stellar staffs, deserve tremendous thanks for the decades of leadership they have provided in this fight to defend Indigenous communities and Mother Earth against the deadly risks of radioactive wastes. Chris Peters at the Seventh Generation Fund has played a vital role sustaining such work.
Additional Indigenous and non-Native allies -- too numerous to list – also deserve thanks and congratulations for their tireless defense of Native lands, which has defeated dozens of proposed atomic waste dumps aimed at Indian lands in the past.
It is right and proper to celebrate the defeat of PFS. But the broader fight against radioactive racism is far from over. Sacred Western Shoshone Indian land at Yucca Mountain, Nevada is still being targeted for the national permanent dumpsite for high-level radioactive waste, despite the Treaty of Ruby Valley of 1863, and despite the site’s seismic, volcanic, and hydrological hazards. The U.S. Department of Energy is now targeting the Walker River Paiute in western Nevada for a rail route to ship 77,000 tons of high-level radioactive waste from all over the country to Yucca Mountain. Uranium mining companies, with NRC complicity, are attempting to circumvent a Navajo ban on uranium mining, milling, and processing on tribal territory. Nuclear utilities are pressing to extend by 20 years the operations at the already 40 year old, dangerously deteriorated Palisades nuclear plant in the predominantly African American town of Covert, Michigan; the reactor site almost certainly contains Native American archaeological and perhaps even burial sites that remain unprotected. And nuclear giant Entergy wants to build a new reactor in the impoverished, predominantly African American County of Claiborne, Mississippi. The list goes on and on – the vigilance of atomic watchdogs must go on and on too, to counter this outrageous radioactive racism.
NIRS has been honored and privileged to work with all of those listed above, to be a part of these many struggles against radioactive racism, and for environmental justice.
---Prepared by Kevin Kamps, Nuclear Waste Specialist, NIRS, Sept. 18, 2006
Source: http://www.nirs.org/
Questions:
1. What do you think the Leon Bear would have to say about this?
2. Do you believe that this facility was actually "environmentally racist"?
3. Despite the conflicting claims that the waste side would be safe or unsafe, is there a level of acceptable risk for an impoverished people, such as the Goshutes to undertake economically profitable industrial actions?
4. Do you believe that the call to action in favor of helping the impoverished Goshute tribe in western Utah will be honored?
5. Are there any parallels that you see, after reading this article, between the irradiation of large sections of the U.S. with fallout in the 1950s and early 1960s and the fight to store nuclear waste in the American west today?
6. In the interview you read with Leon Bear he mentioned that his tribe has the sovereign right to do anything they want to their land, this is protected by a 1863 treaty. Do you think this was honored? Why or why not?
Directions (delete before final publish date)
The assignment will be broken down into ?four? components including:
1. collection (6) of photos and developed DBQ’s
2. collection of (6) editorial cartoons and/or other primary sources and developed DBQ’s,
3. collection of (6) participant accounts or other primary source material and developed DBQ’s, and
4. a summary narrative and rationale on the main page that guides the reader through the collection of primary sources. The narrative should refer to your primary sources and your own conclusions. It should indicate the importance of DBQ’s and the rationale of historical reasoning via primary sources.
5. Opportunities for your students to interact with the resources in the blog format.
1. collection (6) of photos and developed DBQ’s
2. collection of (6) editorial cartoons and/or other primary sources and developed DBQ’s,
3. collection of (6) participant accounts or other primary source material and developed DBQ’s, and
4. a summary narrative and rationale on the main page that guides the reader through the collection of primary sources. The narrative should refer to your primary sources and your own conclusions. It should indicate the importance of DBQ’s and the rationale of historical reasoning via primary sources.
5. Opportunities for your students to interact with the resources in the blog format.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Monday, November 29, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)