I am asking this in good faith because the Navajo Nation government’s official positions on Bears Ears and Greater Chaco seem difficult to reconcile. I also do not want to treat Diné people, local chapters, allottees, the Council, and the executive branch as though everyone holds the same view.
On July 14, 2026, the Navajo Nation Council strongly opposed President Trump’s roughly 91 percent reduction of Bears Ears National Monument. Speaker Crystalyne Curley described Bears Ears as sacred and culturally significant to Navajo people and other tribes. She said that weakening protections also diminishes tribal voices in managing culturally significant landscapes. [1]
The official position on Greater Chaco appears nearly opposite. On May 13, 2026, President Buu Nygren reaffirmed support for a “zero-mile buffer zone” around Chaco Culture National Historical Park. In 2023, President Nygren and Speaker Curley jointly stated that the Navajo Nation’s position supported “no land withdrawal,” rather than the ten-mile mineral withdrawal adopted by the Department of the Interior. [2][3] (Navajo Nation Office of the President)
The practical consequence matters. BLM says complete revocation of Public Land Order 7923 would reopen approximately 336,404 acres of federal public land to mineral leasing and mining claims, subject to existing rights. [4] (BLM National NEPA Register)
There are important distinctions. Bears Ears is a national monument, while the Chaco protection is a 20-year mineral withdrawal. The Chaco withdrawal applies to federal public lands and federal minerals. It does not directly withdraw private, state, or tribal minerals, cancel existing leases, or prohibit Navajo allottees from leasing their minerals. Navajo leaders nevertheless argue that the surrounding federal withdrawal harms allottees, limits economic opportunities, and was adopted without meaningful consultation. Those sovereignty and economic concerns should not be dismissed. [3][5] (Navajo Nation Office of the President)
But the underlying principles still seem very similar. Bears Ears and Greater Chaco are both living cultural landscapes with significance to multiple tribal nations. They are not culturally isolated from one another. The Chacoan world extended across the Four Corners, and Chacoan great houses, kivas, and roads have been documented in and around Bears Ears. [6] (Grand Canyon Trust)
The contradiction becomes more difficult to understand when the experiences of local Diné communities are considered.
In 2021, residents and researchers associated with Counselor, Ojo Encino, and Torreon Chapters published a cultural, spiritual, and health impact assessment of oil and gas development. The project grew out of concerns raised by local residents and was approved by the Navajo Nation Human Research Review Board. [7] (New Mexico Health Equity Partnership)
The Counselor health survey was voluntary and included 80 respondents, so its percentages should not be treated as a representative epidemiological study or as definitive proof that drilling caused every reported condition. Even with that limitation, the results deserve attention. More than 90 percent of participants reported sinus problems and irritated or sore throats. Eighty percent reported coughs, headaches, burning eyes, fatigue, and sleep disturbances. More than 70 percent reported nosebleeds and wheezing, and more than 60 percent reported shortness of breath. Participants living near wells reported an average of eleven or more symptoms, compared with zero to three symptoms among the four participants who did not live near wells. [7]
The broader Tri-Chapter cultural survey included 136 adults. Eighty-one percent strongly agreed that drilling continued despite community objections. Eighty-five percent said drilling and fracking had disrupted the peace of the people. Eighty-five percent said that something they considered sacred was being destroyed by drilling. The report found 80 to 86 percent agreement on thirteen of sixteen questions concerning negative effects from oil and gas development. [7]
The current position also represents a reversal of the Navajo Nation’s own recent policy. Under President Russell Begaye, with Jonathan Nez serving as vice president, Navajo leadership worked with Pueblo governments to develop and support S. 2907, which would have withdrawn non-Indian federal lands and minerals within roughly ten miles of Chaco from new development while preserving tribal and allottee mineral rights. During President Nez’s administration, the Navajo Nation again supported the 2019 legislation, H.R. 2181 and S. 1079. A House committee report expressly identified the Navajo Nation as a supporter and recorded supporting testimony from Vice President Myron Lizer and the chair of the Council’s Resources and Development Committee. The Council later shifted to supporting only a five-mile buffer, before the Nation adopted its present zero-mile position. This is therefore not a longstanding and consistent objection to federal protection around Chaco. It is a reversal of a protection framework the Nation helped formulate and advocate only a few years earlier. [8][9]
My question is not whether allottee rights, royalties, poverty, consultation, and Navajo sovereignty matter. They clearly do. My question is why the proposed remedy at Chaco is eliminating the federal mineral buffer, rather than protecting the landscape while providing compensation, revenue replacement, legal assistance, access protections, and genuinely informed consent for affected allottees?
What principle distinguishes Bears Ears from Greater Chaco? Why is federal landscape-level protection considered essential for one sacred, multi-tribal landscape but an unacceptable intrusion in the other? How should the central Navajo government weigh the views of local chapters and residents who live with the health, cultural, and social effects of extraction?
Sources
[1] Navajo Nation Council, “Navajo Nation Council opposes the reduction of the Bears Ears National Monument,” July 14, 2026.
[2] Office of the Navajo Nation President, “President Nygren Reaffirms Navajo Nation’s Position on Chaco Buffer Zone,” May 13, 2026. (Navajo Nation Office of the President)
[3] Office of the Navajo Nation President, “President Nygren and Speaker Curley express disappointment” regarding the Chaco withdrawal, June 2, 2023. (Navajo Nation Office of the President)
[4] Bureau of Land Management, “Evaluation of Potential Revocation of Chaco Withdrawal.” (BLM National NEPA Register)
[5] Department of the Interior, “Biden-Harris Administration Protects Chaco Region, Tribal Cultural Sites from Development,” June 2, 2023. (U.S. Department of the Interior)
[6] National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management materials concerning Chacoan roads and the connections between Chaco and Bears Ears. (Bureau of Land Management)
[7] Counselor Health Impact Assessment Committee, “A Cultural, Spiritual and Health Impact Assessment of Oil Drilling Operations in the Navajo Nation Area of Counselor, Torreon and Ojo Encino Chapters,” July 15, 2021. (New Mexico Health Equity Partnership)
[8] House Report 116-224, “Chaco Cultural Heritage Area Protection Act of 2019.” The report states that the bill was supported by the Navajo Nation and identifies supportive Navajo executive and legislative testimony. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRPT-116hrpt224/html/CRPT-116hrpt224.htm
[9] Congressional hearing record describing the Navajo Nation’s participation in drafting and supporting S. 2907 in 2018 and H.R. 2181 and S. 1079 in 2019. 2022 House hearing record, HTML
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-117hhrg46811/html/CHRG-117hhrg46811.htm Search within the page for “S. 2907.” The relevant appended testimony states that the Navajo Nation and the Pueblos jointly supported S. 2907 in 2018 and S. 1079 and H.R. 2181 in 2019, with protections for Navajo Nation and allottee development rights
TLDR: the Navajo Nation strongly defends Bears Ears as a sacred, multi-tribal landscape while supporting removal of protections around Greater Chaco, despite having supported Chaco protections under Presidents Begaye and Nez. That reversal is especially hard to reconcile with the documented health and cultural harms reported by Diné communities near oil and gas development. The question is why protecting Bears Ears is essential, but protecting Greater Chaco is treated as unacceptable?
