Two Tribes Challenge Bureau Of Land Management

By Isaac White

In a significant development, two Native American tribes and the Center for Biological Diversity have initiated a legal battle against the U.S. government over the SunZia high-voltage transmission line. The lawsuit, filed by the San Carlos Apache Tribe and the Tohono O’odham Nation, along with Archaeology Southwest, challenges the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) permit approvals, alleging violations of laws protecting cultural sites.

The dispute centers on the BLM’s authorization of the SunZia project, a 550-mile transmission line developed by Canadian-owned Pattern Energy. The line is designed to carry renewable energy from central New Mexico, through Arizona, and into California. While the Biden administration has hailed the project as a crucial step in America’s transition to clean energy, the tribes and environmental groups argue that it threatens sites of immense cultural and historical significance, particularly in the San Pedro Valley.

Tohono O’odham Nation Chairman Verlon Jose has highlighted the deep cultural and historical ties that the O’odham and their Hohokam ancestors have with the San Pedro Valley. The lawsuit alleges that the BLM and Pattern Energy have not adequately respected these ties, with the BLM’s actions purportedly contravening the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the Administrative Procedure Act. The tribes accuse the agency of failing to properly analyze the project’s impact on culturally significant sites and of not engaging effectively with tribal communities.

After construction began, the BLM conducted brief consultations with tribal leaders but quickly resumed the project. This approach has drawn criticism and points to the complex position of Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, the first Indigenous person in a cabinet position, who must navigate between Indigenous perspectives and federal policy goals.

The SunZia project, estimated at $11 billion, is considered a linchpin in the U.S. transition to renewable energy, expected to provide clean power to around 3 million Americans. However, its route through the ecologically and culturally rich San Pedro Valley has sparked significant opposition. The valley, home to the San Pedro River – one of the last free-flowing rivers in the Southwest – is replete with archaeological areas and sacred sites for the Tohono O’odham, Hopi, Zuni, and Western Apache tribes. These areas are not just ecologically important, hosting a variety of wildlife species, but also hold great historical and religious importance.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, seeks to halt construction and compel the BLM to comply with legal requirements for protecting historical sites. The tribes argue that the BLM’s limited consultation and the rapid resumption of construction work exemplify a flawed process that neglects the NHPA’s mandate for federal agencies to consider the impacts on historic sites. They claim that despite their decade-long efforts to communicate the cultural significance of these sites, their concerns have been consistently overlooked.

The controversy underscores a broader challenge faced by governments and societies worldwide: balancing the urgent need for renewable energy infrastructure with the equally important need to preserve cultural heritage and respect Indigenous rights. The plaintiffs in this case are not only fighting for the protection of their ancestral lands but also advocating for a more inclusive and respectful approach to large-scale infrastructure projects.

The San Pedro Valley, with its unique ecological and cultural attributes, represents a test case for how renewable energy projects can be harmoniously integrated with environmental and cultural preservation. As the legal proceedings unfold, the outcome of this lawsuit could set a precedent for future energy projects and their impact on Indigenous communities and the environment. The tribes and conservation groups are calling for a reevaluation of the project’s route, suggesting alternative paths that would mitigate the impact on the valley’s cultural and ecological integrity.

This lawsuit is more than a legal dispute; it is a reflection of the ongoing struggle to find a balance between progress and preservation, between the demands of a modern energy infrastructure and the imperatives of cultural and environmental stewardship. It underscores the need for a more holistic approach to development, one that genuinely respects and incorporates the voices and concerns of Indigenous communities and environmental advocates.