Monument foes reply to Campbell

Monument foes reply to Campbell

Oct. 3, 2000

By Janelle Holden
Journal Staff Writer

The Southwest Colorado Landowners Association is continuing its battle to overturn the newly proclaimed Canyons of the Ancients National Monument, despite a lack of support from congressional representatives.

On Sept. 28, the group wrote a letter to Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell’s responding to his refusal, at the request of the association, to introduce a resolution to abolish the monument.
A week before, Campbell had told the group that he would not introduce the measure unless the group could produce supporting resolutions from state and local political bodies, including the Montezuma County commissioners, Cortez City Council and Colorado General Assembly. Rep. Scott McInnis likewise said he would not support the group’s request to try to overturn the monument designation.

“Your letter also requested us to submit support or resolutions from six different governmental authorities. Did you and McInnis have the support or resolutions from these same authorities prior to submitting your NCA legislation?” asked the letter, which was signed by Chester Tozer, president of the association.

The group had submitted a petition to Campbell asking him for support.
“The 384 signatures on the copy of the petition submitted to you were obtained in 1 1/2 days,” the letter stated. “We have hundreds more signatures now and are still working. We already have resolutions in support of our petition from the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, Aneth Chapter of the Navajo Nation, San Juan County Utah Commission and the Coalition of Counties in New Mexico and Arizona.”

Tozer offered Campbell an apology if Campbell had misunderstood the group’s appreciation for his past legislative efforts.

“We understood that when you and Rep. McInnis introduced your NCA legislation, due to the threat from Secretary Babbitt, you both thought you were acting in our best interests. At the time your legislation was introduced, not many people understood what a National Conservation Area was, or how it would affect our community,” the letter stated.

After Babbitt warned that the 164,000-acre area might be proclaimed a national monument without further protection, Campbell and McInnis sponsored legislation to designate the area a national conservation area. But after the landowners opposed the measure this spring, Campbell withdrew the legislation.

“We researched and investigated past NCAs and came to the conclusion that all of these special land designations, such as National Monuments, NCAs, Land Conservation Areas, Wilderness Areas and the President’s Roadless Initiative, can be, and have been destructive of private property, the environment, local communities, multiple-use, and rural influence from so-called environmental groups to lock up our public lands,” the letter said.

Friday morning, Tozer said Campbell’s explanations that overturning the monument would be politically infeasible were wrong. “Some of those congressmen don’t understand what the law says. They don’t take the time to read what the law says and what they can do,” he said.

Tozer warned that if Campbell does not introduce a resolution to abolish the monument his group will persuade other congressmen to support a measure. “We was in hopes that Campbell would present this, but if he don’t, maybe someone else will,” he said.

The letter also asserted the landowners’ belief that the 1976 Federal Land Policy Management Act provides an easy out for Congress. FLPMA allows Congress to overturn a monument by a concurrent resolution within 90 days of the monument’s designation, or through an act of Congress.
“We have researched this section of FLPMA and our interpretation is that, the Secretary of Interior must submit a report to congress regarding the withdrawal (has not happened). Congress has 90 session days to react (concurrent resolution), but the time doesn’t start until the Secretary starts following the law. FLPMA states each side has 30 minutes to debate the issue, then vote yea or nay,” the letter stated.

Tozer said the landowners cannot live with the monument and must try to have it overturned.
“We have been called radical and unbending by members of your staff and others in the media,” he wrote. “We feel we have been misunderstood and misrepresented. We sincerely think that being involved and by taking a stand against something so evidently wrong, that is totally against the human environment, is the right thing to do.”

Campbell could not be reached for comment Monday.