ࡱ> []Z gHbjbjR|R| .b00g@""""Df$"*:X*Z*Z*Z*Z*Z*Z*$,7/d~*~**:X*X*'|<)ƻa@(D**0*R(//$<)/<)~*~*{*/ : TEACHING NOTES WATER QUALITY, ENVIRONMENT AND ETHICS UNDER CONDITIONS OF CLIMATE CHANGE: WHO SPEAKS FOR THE PEAKS? Linda Moon Stumpff Learning Objectives Develop verbal ability to articulate how conflicts on the use of public lands become long-term controversies for Tribes and federal agencies.. Demonstrate an understanding of how climate change plays into this controversy through working in groups of contributing to discussions. Develop skills in locating and critically reviewing research materials especially the use of online resources appropriate to science, policy and applied Native American studies on governance. Find and use academic materials to prepare written position papers, charts and visuals that summarize evidence. Identify and articulate an understanding of the environmental and cultural factors in the decision-making process under the National Environmental Policy Act. Understand weather systems and water quality as they interconnect within the environment. Develop ability to generate alternatives and priorities that reduce the conflict between different cultural and scientific perspectives. Audience This case can be adapted for upper division college and graduate classes by choosing one, or a combination of the teaching techniques described here. It is most appropriate for classes in political science, public health, land management, environmental studies, planning, public health, native studies, law, pre-law, hydrology, public policy, outdoor recreation, public administration and tribal governance. Update and Additional Information (9-5-16): Controversy over snow-making from Flagstaffs reclaimed sewage water and further development of the Snowbowl ski area on the San Francisco Peaks continues to rage and spawn a series of lawsuits. The conflict is littered with new lawsuits, appeals, and failed settlements. In December 2012, the Hopis withdrew the Endangered Species Act lawsuit over impacts to the groundsel plant due to technicalities. This lawsuit, though withdrawn for now, may not be over. The Forest Service included a major expansion of the ski resort facilities as part of its decision to allow the reclaimed sewage water pipeline and snow-making. This part of the decision seemed to be based on the idea that a commercial business could not be restrained in its profit-making trajectory, even on federal land with a conservation mission. The owner of the Snowbowl did not move on the expensive expansions, but used the economic advantage of the approval for the expansions to find a buyer who did have the capital. James Coleman, owner of Purgatory, Sipapu and Parjarito Mt. ski resorts was in line for the purchase. Further thought from some of the shareholders and the obvious fact that a transfer of ownership would require a new permit from the Forest Service led to a withdrawal from the full ownership sale. Instead the shareholders dodged the bullet by selling Coleman a significant number of shares. He then made the investment in the major expansions as a major shareholder. In another key lawsuit, the Hopi filed a suit on Flagstaffs sale of the water to the Snowbowl because it resulted in an infringement on the Tribes water rights and a public nuisance. Meanwhile, Flagstaff extended the original 5 year agreement to sell the sewage water to a 20 year agreement. The Arizona Court of Appeals let the Hopi charges stand, and the Hopi Tribe attempted a settlement with the city. They designed an earthen filtration system that would cost 1.6 million dollars plus $181,000 a year for maintenance and operations. The Navajo Nation did not support this alternative, since they were left out of consultations and no set water quality standards or monitoring system for the proposed filtration system came with the proposal. The proposal died when the Flagstaff City Council voted against it 5-2, At least one city councilor was cognizant of the fact that the Tribes would have strong prior rights in the ongoing Little Colorado River water allocation and management dispute. The deeply offended Navajo and Hopi Nations, along with several other Tribes, would now be in a strong negotiating position for any water allocation that Flagstaff might hope to get from the Little Colorado River. On the international front, the Navajo Nation has taken the issue to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, a function of the Organization of American States (OAS). Although U.S. laws have historically failed to protect Native religions, international law has a higher standard. The OAS determination may affect the U.N. complaint already made by the Navajo Nation and make it stronger. Each of these strands continues to weave a complex fabric of conflict, partial resolution and return to conflict. One significant fact emerges---the Tribes are acting for all-time, while the venture-capitalist orientation of Snowbowl developers leads to actions for relatively short-term profit. Another question remainsWhat are the reasons that the City of Flagstaff and the Forest Service continue to fail in their roles as mediators of conflict? Sources for continuing updates:  HYPERLINK "http://www.pechanga.net" www.pechanga.net and  HYPERLINK "http://www.pechanga.net/content/hopi-seeks-injunction-stop-snowmaking" www.pechanga.net/content/hopi-seeks-injunction-stop-snowmaking Arizonadailysun.com/news/ Nava-Hopi News at http://navahopinews.com Discussion Questions Tier One questions emphasize the interpretation and application of factual material with critical thinking skills. Tier Two questions encourage the development of analytical skills. Tier One How did climate change affect the recreational skiing business on the San Francisco Peaks? 2. What are the pros and cons of Snowbowl expansion? 3. What religious beliefs and practices motivate Tribes to persist in their resistance to Snow bowl development? What kinds of ideas did the tribal speakers express? 4. Do you think the use of treated wastewater for snow-making is a safe practice? Why or why not? 5. In what ways are indigenous understandings of meteorological cycles and climate change similar to those of Western science? 6. Why didnt the idea of using potable water for snow-making alleviate conflict? 7. Why is traditional ecological knowledge important for understanding and adapting to climate change? How is the San Francisco Peaks controversy connected with international indigenous issues? Tier Two. The 1970s proposal for major expansion of the Snowbowl was greatly modified after participation of citizens, nonprofits and Tribes. The 2005 decision on the most recent proposal for artificial snow-making from wastewater and a major expansion of the operations received almost no modifications through the permitting process or the courts. What would explain this change in outcomes? What part did science play in the policy/permitting process? What part should it play? Where should tribal science fit into the process? Why isnt wastewater tested for many of the potentially dangerous and toxic contaminants that show up in tests ranging from endocrine disruptors and various pharmaceuticals to salts and caffeine? Should these new contaminants be regulated when peer-reviewed science points to their destructive impacts? What alternatives would you suggest to resolve the conflict if you were a scientist? A Forest Supervisor? A lawyer? What does the Forest Service need to do to balance its responsibilities to: 1) protect the public from risk 2) protect the religious rights of Tribes and 3) support economic development and general recreational opportunities? Did the Forest Service do an adequate job of analyzing all of the environmental regulations and religious protection laws when they implemented the NEPA process to make their decision? This case has five appendices. They are not necessary for any of the options, but they will help more advanced students go deeper into the issues. All but A and B are derived from public documents. Specific appendices may be useful for course content. They cover five different subject areas: 1. Appendix A includes descriptions of the weather, biological and hydrological systems of the San Francisco Peaks as a basis for assessing impacts from development and climate change adaptation. It also includes material on water quality issues of the effluent water used for snow-making by research scientists. 2. Appendix B includes a summary of legal opinions on how to better support Native American religious rights. 3. Appendix C is the Forest Services summary of the Sacred Sites Review which was conducted by order of the Secretary of Agriculture. Many points appear to be in conflict with the Record of Decision from 2005 approving the development through their assessment in the Final Environmental Impact Statement. 4. Appendix D provides information about the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Congressional Testimony of Duane Yazzie, Director of the Navajo Commission on Human Rights, and information from the World Parliament of Indigenous Peoples on indigenous rights. 5. Appendix E includes a summary of public comment on the Final Environmental Impact Statement summarized by the Forest Service. It may be useful to review the hi-lights of the decision by reviewing Arizona Snowbowl Proposal Hi-lites: 2011 at:  HYPERLINK "http://www.fs.usda.gov/detailfull/coconino/landmanagement/projects?cid-stelprdb5347973&width+full" www.fs.usda.gov/detailfull/coconino/landmanagement/projects?cid-stelprdb5347973&width+full Option One The questions above can be used as a basis for a class discussion. This is a tried and true method and it is particularly useful if the class is not too familiar with the content of the case. To implement this approach, have students read the case before class. During class, break them into small groups of 4-7 to discuss the case. After 10-15 minutes of small group discussion, you can facilitate a class discussion based on a selection of the questions. This works especially well when class time is limited. If you can obtain the video The Snowbowl Effect by Klee Benally it is a good introduction before a discussion. (It is currently available for video streaming on the Indigenous Environmental Network website). The video focuses on the tribal perspective. It is particularly useful if the class is not familiar with issues and controversies around Native American religion, culture and knowledge of the environment. The video includes interviews with Forest Service personnel and Snowbowl representatives. Faculty or students can facilitate the class discussion. It is helpful to have a blackboard, large paper or a video projection system to record the major points as participants bring them up. An alternative might be for one participant to write the pros of expanding the Snowbowl on one blackboard, while another writes the cons on another board. Option Two: The Public Meeting Using a public meeting scenario, have the Forest Service host the meeting as would be the case if they followed the required National Environmental Policy Act process. The case and the appropriate Appendix should be assigned reading before class. Students can bring forth the issues by representing the different speakers. The central issue is whether the Forest Service should grant the permit to the Arizona Snowbowl to expand the facility and pipe treated effluent water to the ski area in order to make artificial snow on the San Francisco Peaks. Students can form voluntary or assigned groups and work on presenting one of the positions during one class period. The group should work to develop a position that they think may reduce conflict, while staying on target with their aims. Collaboration and priority-setting in developing the position are valued over straight argument. Groups should have a full class meeting of 50 minutes to discuss and develop their position. This scenario encourages creativity and new approaches. Plants, animals and the mountain could testify as well as speakers from different positions. A list of groups follows that are matched to the Appendix that might be most useful to them. All groups can benefit from reviewing the chronology of events set out in Appendix F. The Appendices are not required to play this scenario, but they do provide good background information. Groups can look at the Appendix assigned for another group to go deeper. 1. Snowbowl representatives and skiers who want to use the Snowbowl Appendix E 2. Research scientists Appendix A 3. Native American Law group Appendix B 4. Representatives from tribes and indigenous peoples. Appendix D 5. Hiking/picnicking/wilderness recreationists and environmental organizations Appendix A and E 6. Forest Service Supervisor (the decision-maker) and planners. Appendix E and C.* They contain a sampling of public comment that the Forest Service had in its possession and a detailed description of the alternatives that the Forest Service considered) Note: Appendix C and D ad E are public documents. They are provided here in full text since there is a possibility they may be removed from online sources at any time. Some have formatting issues and it may be easier to read them online. Most can be located quickly by using Google. An additional class meeting is needed for holding the public meeting. If a dramatic emphasis is desired, other groups representing medicinal plants, animals and the mountain could testify. They might include endangered species, animals and plants displaced by climate change that were moving up the mountain, medicinal plants, the mountain itself and other sacred mountains. Each group prepares a written speech not longer than 5 minutes and provides appropriate visuals. Participants review and edit their speech together in their groups. They should present as groups, with as many people as possible participating in the presentation. In this scenario, there is no decision, only an opportunity to present perspectives from different position, raise voices that are not commonly heard and present alternatives. If desired, the Forest Supervisor and the planners may end by prioritizing the concerns they have heard. In this case, they will need extra time for a brief meeting, or they can come back with their priorities for the next session. Reading the appropriate appendix helps students to gain further information for their position. If you want to develop research skills, you can assign students to do further research beyond the appendix to support their position at home or in another class through a written assignment. Online research in this case is the most productive. Option Three: The Public Meeting with Video This scenario can be further developed as a video/media exercise. Student in this case would develop their group positions and one group would coordinate this into a script. Students would then perform in the various roles and video their presentations or speeches. The class could view the videos when they were completed and make comments. With proper instruction, this option builds skills in videography, public media and public presentation. For a briefer exercise, students could use phones and pads, many of which are now equipped with video cameras, to make short clips of the presentation of different positions. Groups of students could then assemble the clips into a video notebook. Additional Resources This complex case benefits from visual images and innovative approaches to an intractable problem. The two videos below encourage thinking outside the box while they provide unique perspectives on these conflict-producing issues. 1. Bear Tung (Canada 2010, 9 min.) producer/director: Travis Skilling (Ojibwe) This film explores the relationship between animals and people that bring a Native hunter together with his prey at a meeting in the woods. 2. The Snowbowl Effect, (2005) Video recording directed and edited by Klee Benally Jr. (Navajo). It may be available through Indigenous Action Media or other online sources. Check Indigenous Action Media for latest information. svwx 1 2 S U V \ l z { | B   - 5 m o w x y z P X j мȸȼĸĴЬܧܣğğěğh7Ihh:u h5h hcl5h hh}r6h-Fh&h h%|uhclhyhcl5 hcl5 h%|u5h3"h(wi5 h(wi5hhcl5CJaJ<wy3 | n o x z AB dgd=0 & Fgdcl@&gdclgdcl$a$gdcl$a$gd(wi $@&a$gdclAB9:<=bcstyz  QRfghlmz().0GK_hǸǸ䱩~w~w~w~p~ h=0h[7 h=0h h=0hh=0h5 h=0h}r6 h=0hLS[ h=0h h=0h_0h=0hcl5 h=0hcljh=0h=0>*PJUh=0h=0>*PJjh=0h=0PJU hnPJh=0h=0PJ h=0h=0h=0h=05h=0+U<(R()"B i!j!!!! & Fgdcl & Fgdcl@&gdclgdcl dgd B dgd=0 -.~ ! 3 A '!f!h!!!!!!w""""f#q###$,%/%S%k%%%%%%ȺϳϬ띺묏 h=0h h=0hy h=0h*l, h=0h7I h=0hm#5h=0hcl5 h=0h h=0h ! h=0h h=0h h=0h}r6 h=0hLS[ h=0h(wi h=0h_0 h=0hb h=0h[7 h=0hcl h=0h:u2!q##/%%&D'E'5.6.=23333;;??6ABBBgd(wigdzDgdcl @&^gd !@&gdcl@&gdg @&^gd & F@&gdcl & Fgdm#5%%%=&@&`&&&&&C'E'S'X''''''(E(n(o(r(z()1)E)N)))))))))*?**K+M+},,, --Y-Z-[-\---&.'.).¾ʶʯʶʫʧ—h~hHX90JjhHX9Uhhgh4Rh*l, h7h7hHX9h75h7IhHX9h-Fh7 h=0hg h=0h7h=0h5 h=0hLS[ h=0h*l, h=0h7I h=0h7).*.5.6.I.z......./;/n/o///000;0Y0k0l0m0000#1;1@11111111122;2<2=2d2j2223333333333!4ÿӻӻӷÖhDf<h(wi hcl5 h !5hcl h2hclhn.h[ h7IhghX)hhWhh !hS hh2 h2h2 h25hHX9h25hHX9h(wi5;!424`4h444 55555555556`6a6E7f7t777781848M8V8^8b88888X9\9999999999999:::/:s:~::::::::::::::::::::;;%;';7;8;=;>;hKehChS hnhLS[hKhchzDh hX)h(wihC0"R>;?;;;;;;;;;;;< <<===Z=_=h=q=======>>(>,>>>>P?Q?X?????@@/@H@I@~@@3A5A6A7ACAXAgA8BUBBBBBBCCDDyEÿ׻ǻ糫ǻ߻h2bhcl5h2bhLS[5h2bhclh(wihch hhMhLS[hX)hKhu<hgh ! hKe5hKehzDhS CBBzE{EEEaHdHeHfHgHgdX@&gdXgd2bgdcl yE{EEEEEEE}F~FFFGG4G5GGGGGGGGGHHH&H@HAH]H`HaHcHgHhXhpxhc hmQ5hmQh hK hKhK hK5 hX5h@RhX5hcl",1h/ =!"#$% ^ 2 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p8XV~_HmH nH sH tH @`@ clNormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA`D Default Paragraph FontRiR  Table Normal4 l4a (k (No List 6U`6 X Hyperlink >*B*phPK![Content_Types].xmlN0EH-J@%ǎǢ|ș$زULTB l,3;rØJB+$G]7O٭V$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3N)cbJ uV4(Tn 7_?m-ٛ{UBwznʜ"Z xJZp; {/<P;,)''KQk5qpN8KGbe Sd̛\17 pa>SR! 3K4'+rzQ TTIIvt]Kc⫲K#v5+|D~O@%\w_nN[L9KqgVhn R!y+Un;*&/HrT >>\ t=.Tġ S; Z~!P9giCڧ!# B,;X=ۻ,I2UWV9$lk=Aj;{AP79|s*Y;̠[MCۿhf]o{oY=1kyVV5E8Vk+֜\80X4D)!!?*|fv u"xA@T_q64)kڬuV7 t '%;i9s9x,ڎ-45xd8?ǘd/Y|t &LILJ`& -Gt/PK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 0_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!0C)theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK] %).!4>;ⷡ%')+,-.0!&(*/<bsy [%%&&g@XXX8@0(  B S  ?I O T ] K%P% 4 4i@02 Q lo!/13AOUl m **1112*292@2s2t22222&3@3D3699>>??i@33333333333333333333Q'fCESXo o %%[%'&)&)&n'o'k(m(;)@)**++22333344696979C9X9g98:U:::c@c@f@i@Q'fCESXo o %%[%'&)&)&n'o'k(m(;)@)**++22333344696979C9X9g98:U:::c@c@f@i@]8k+GB"aJ%(DH}K䫮 [izEvP^`o(. ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.^`5o(. ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.^`o(. ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.^`o(. ^`hH. pLp^p`LhH. @ @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PLP^P`LhH.^`o(. ^`hH. pL^p`LhH. @ ^@ `hH. ^`hH. L^`LhH. ^`hH. ^`hH. PL^P`LhH.^`OJPJQJ^Jo(^`OJQJ^Jo(hHop^p`OJQJo(hH@ ^@ `OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoP^P`OJQJo(hH]"aJ+GBH}K [izEv                                                     <;[ zDu<Mn.cKe !C0"*l,=0_0m#5}r6[7HX9Df< B-FmQLS[m^b2bg(wi:u%|upxynCa"h 4RW2I$&XclK 7IX) !n7S g@i@@69696969g@@UnknownG.Cx Times New Roman5Symbol3. .Cx Arial7.@Calibri?= .Cx Courier New;WingdingsA$BCambria Math"qh2IG2IG 6 t 6 t24G@G@3qHX ?cl2!xx TEACHING NOTESstumpfflBarbara$      Oh+'0<x   $,4TEACHING NOTES stumpfflNormalBarbara2Microsoft Office Word@@ʣa@ʣa 6՜.+,D՜.+,T hp  THE EVERGREEN STATE COLLEGEt G@ TEACHING NOTES Titlel 8@ _PID_HLINKSA$Xbhttp://www.fs.usda.gov/detailfull/coconino/landmanagement/projects?cid-stelprdb5347973&width+fullHFhttp://www.pechanga.net/content/hopi-seeks-injunction-stop-snowmakingHZhttp://www.pechanga.net/  !"#$%&'()*+,-./013456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIKLMNOPQSTUVWXY\Root Entry F˻a^1Table2/WordDocument.bSummaryInformation(JDocumentSummaryInformation8RCompObjr  F Microsoft Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q