A federal judge has issued an injunction that further delays the transfer of Oak Flat, an Indigenous religious site in Arizona, to a multi-national company that plans to turn it into one of the largest copper mines in the world. This decision comes after the United States Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal in the case, allowing a lower court order to stand that approved the transfer. The district court judge in Phoenix has called for a 60-day delay to allow advocates for Oak Flat to review an upcoming U.S. Forest Service environmental impact statement.
The San Carlos Apache Tribe and a coalition of organizations, including the Center for Biological Diversity, a local Sierra Club Chapter, and Arizona’s Inter-Tribal Association, were the ones who requested the delay. The struggle over Oak Flat’s future has been ongoing for a decade. The final environmental review was released during the first Trump administration but was halted during the Biden administration. The current Trump administration has announced that it will reissue its environmental review, expected on June 16, which is necessary for the transfer of the land to Resolution Copper, a project from Rio Tinto and BHP, multinational mining companies.
There has been an issue with accessing this review before its publication, which according to Marc Fink, an attorney for the Center of Biological Diversity, is unusual in a legal process. The withholding of the review is seen as an indication that the Trump administration wants to fast-track the mine, despite the fact that it would sit directly on top of sacred sites and mine a thousand feet inside the earth.
The land in question is located about 40 miles east of Phoenix in the Tonto National Forest, and the Apaches consider it their land based on the 1852 treaty signed between the nation and the U.S. government. Amid a current trade war between the United States and China, proponents for Oak Flat are questioning conflicting national security interests. The San Carlos Apache Tribe believes that Resolution Copper poses a major threat to U.S. national security due to China’s financial influence over BHP and Rio Tinto.
Critics speculate that Resolution Copper will likely send raw material to China, where the world’s largest copper refineries exist. Additionally, a feasibility study to determine whether the costs will scale for net profit gain has not yet been conducted by Resolution Copper and can take years. However, if the companies find the expenditures to be too costly, it is unlikely that they would return the title back to Apache homeland under the Forest Service.
The tribal organization Apache Stronghold has also filed a separate injunction in the same Arizona court, and it was their suit that the Supreme Court declined to hear. Luke Goodrich, Vice President at Becket, a religious rights legal institute who has represented Apache Stronghold, stated that the fight is far from over. The Apaches are determined to continue defending Oak Flat through every possible avenue, whether in the courts, Congress, or with the President, to ensure that the destruction of this sacred site never takes place.
San Carlos Apache Tribe Chairman Terry Rambler has strongly condemned the Trump Administration’s plans to transfer Oak Flat to the two largest foreign mining companies in the world illegally. The upcoming environmental impact statement is expected to shed further light on the future of Oak Flat and the ongoing battle to protect this sacred site. In a recent controversial decision, the final step has been taken towards finalizing the land transfer to private title. This move has sparked outrage and concern among various groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity and the San Carlos Apache Tribe.
One of the main issues surrounding this decision is the lack of transparency in the process. According to Marc Fink, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, crucial studies such as the final EIS study and a feasibility study have not been shared with relevant parties. This lack of communication has raised suspicions and questions about the legitimacy of the land transfer.
Furthermore, the 1852 treaty signed between the Apache Nations and the U.S. government designates this land as Apache Land. This legal document presents a conflicting view with the federal government’s claim to the land. The historical and legal implications of this treaty add another layer of complexity to the already contentious situation.
Adding to the controversy is the national security concerns raised by the San Carlos Apache Tribe. The tribe’s chairman, Terry Rambler, has expressed worries about Resolution Copper’s connections to China and the potential impact on U.S. national security. With the current trade war between the U.S. and China, the conflicting interests of economic profit and national security have created a dilemma for all parties involved.
Moreover, the lack of a feasibility study by Resolution Copper raises questions about the profitability and sustainability of the mining project. Without a clear understanding of the costs and benefits, the long-term implications of the land transfer remain uncertain. The potential environmental and cultural impacts of the mining project also raise concerns among conservationists and indigenous groups.
In response to the controversial decision, Apache Stronghold has filed a preliminary injunction to halt the land transfer. The ongoing legal battle and advocacy efforts by various groups demonstrate the determination to protect Oak Flat and preserve its cultural and environmental significance.
As the fight continues in the courts, Congress, and the White House, the fate of Oak Flat hangs in the balance. The conflicting interests of economic development, national security, and cultural preservation highlight the complexities of land management and resource extraction in the modern world. The outcome of this contentious issue will have far-reaching implications for the future of Oak Flat and the communities that hold it sacred.
