Navajo and GCNP. The River Left Bank is their Boundary

  Boundary Rectification I. 

Between Grand Canyon National Park and Navajo Reservation,

from the Paria junction to the Little Colorado River.

It is long past time to re-assert officially the too often erroneously stated and misunderstood western boundary of the Navajo Reservation that was located by congressional action (P.L. 73-352 of 14 June 1934) as coming ”west along the boundary line between the States of Arizona and Utah to a point where said boundary line intersects the Colorado River; thence down the south bank of that stream to its confluence with the Little Colorado River; thence following the north bank of the Little Colorado River to a point opposite the east boundary of the Grand Canyon National Park; thence south along said east boundary”.

I emphasize that the boundary goes “DOWN THE SOUTH BANK” of the Colorado. As befits a law written in 1934, there is much additional verbiage, relevant 90 years ago, that is now all a dead letter, yet lingers on to confuse official and unofficial cognizance of the line set along the south, or left, bank of the Colorado. 

FIXIN’ WHAT’S BROKE:

TO STRENGTHEN THE BOUNDARY OF GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK

AND RELATED MATTERS

This project makes proposals that gather up a number of issues, some near-trivial, others of great moment at this time of Deb Haaland’s Interior Secretaryship, the resolution of which could bring greater public recognition and understanding of the universal values embodied in the United States’ designation of a Grand Canyon National Park — a project started with John Wesley Powell and Benjamin Harrison’s legislative launch in 1884 of the first Grand Canyon National Park bill, which in its short history also started to gather in its relationship with the Canyon's long-standing peoples, in this case the Havasupai.*

Future work on the boundary must include correcting, updating, and otherwise recognizing the historic and current use and occupancy of Grand Canyon lands by the Southern Paiute, Hopi, Hualapai, Havasupai, and Navajo peoples, and others long-resident who live within the Canyon's spiritual reach.

Main changes:

Much of the boundary distinguishing administration and jurisdiction of that part of the Grand Canyon north and northwest of the Colorado River (i.e., in the area generally known as the Arizona Strip) is a source of concern for the  Club of Grand Canyon Friends &  Advocates. Boundary misalignments matter since 

1. maps in general use ought to delineate and present to the public as closely as possible the lands, canyon and plateau, that comprise the Grand Canyon; 
2. Users need to have as accurate a legal representation as possible of who has jurisdiction over the Grand Canyon lands they visit.

THE WESTERN NAVAJO LINE (CONTINUED)

KEEPING THE NAVAJO BOUNDARY ON THE RIVER BANK

Let us start from this point: 

There has been no adjudication on the Navajo Reservation western boundary, nor on the eastern Park boundary as set by the Grand Canyon National Park Enlargement Act of 1975. 

Therefore there are only opinions, based on events, governmental acts, documents, and arguments drawn therefrom. So…

In a very long blog post and several shorter ones, I laid out what I found to be the history of the western Navajo Reservation  boundary. (To see these essays, click on the blog tab for “Navajo”.) I concluded the Navajo Reservation western boundary lies, in the words of its 1934 boundary Act, “west along the boundary line between the States of Arizona and Utah to a point where said boundary line intersects the Colorado River; thence down the south bank of that stream to the confluence with the Little Colorado River; thence following the north bank of the Little Colorado River to a point opposite the east boundary of the Grand Canyon National Park; thence south along said east boundary” …

This Act contains several more clauses, more or less pertinent. The Act itself was followed in the 40-some years after 1934 by actions and events, more or less pertinent. I conclude that the end result of all this later activity is that the words of the 1934 Act hold firm: the Reservation boundary is along the banks of the two rivers. I am strengthened in my view that this is the correct position by the November 25, 1997 statement of Interior Solicitor J D Leshy (dealing with the Hualapai boundary) that “the canon of construction that doubtful or ambiguous expressions in treaties, statutes or documents involving Indians should be resolved in favor of the Indians.”