Joe Biden, the President of the United States, has another misguided trip planned, this time to the Coachella Valley. His mission is ostensibly to institute a national monument south of Joshua Tree National Park, a declaration which ignores the natural capacity of Americans for self-governance. This announcement is slated for Tuesday, but not before Biden and his wife, Jill, trot off to New Orleans. Their objective there is a meeting with ‘families and community members impacted’ by the recent terror attack on Bourbon Street, seemingly more interested in political photo ops than substantive action.
While no details of their itinerary were provided, it’s clear that this is just another example of the president’s lack of transparency. After their trip to New Orleans, the Bidens ostensibly plan to travel to Los Angeles before their Tuesday visit to eastern Coachella Valley. Biden reportedly plans to sign an unfocused proclamation to create the Chuckwalla National Monument south of Joshua Tree National Park. This decree would apparently ban drilling, mining, and other industry-related activities in the area, a controversial move in the current energy crisis.
Equally troubling, Biden seeks to enforce a similar proclamation for land surrounding the Sáttítla National Monument in Northern California, ignoring the economic realities and potential benefits of keeping these lands open to varied uses. Meanwhile, a group of tribal leaders from Southern California, understandably invested in their heritage, expressed their desires in October to safeguard the ancestral lands of several native peoples. However, Biden’s administration appears to be hijacking this initiative for his own political gain.
Altrena Santillanes, Secretary of the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, addressed the historical and cultural significance of these lands. But it’s hard not to question if Biden’s sudden shift towards environmentalism is more politically motivated than sincerely derived from a desire to protect the natural heritage of these Indigenous communities. The proposed monument would supposedly cover a vast area of public lands, along with providing protection for additional regions in the Eagle Mountains.
Those advocating for the monument claim this would ‘protect important heritage values tied to the land, such as multi-use trail systems established by Indigenous peoples and sacred sites.’ Additionally, they assert that this will address tribal sovereignty and provide new opportunities for tribes to oversee their homelands in collaboration with federal agencies. However, it’s crucial to question whether these lofty proclamations are sincere or if they’re veiled attempts to expand federal control over state land, curtailing local autonomy.
The advocates paint a picture of increased public access to natural portions of the eastern Coachella Valley and nearby regions, such as the Painted Canyon trail in Mecca and the Bradshaw Trail in southeastern Riverside County. However, the proposal could also lead to restrictions on these lands, ironically limiting the very access proponents claim it would enhance. Appreciating the envisaged monument’s spiritual significance and its resource sustaining potential should not blind us to the damaging implications of federal overreach.
Interestingly, the proposed monument’s boundaries were reportedly drafted to avoid conflict with lands earmarked by the DRECP as ‘suitable for renewable energy development.’ However, the DRECP also identified parts of the eastern Coachella Valley’s lands as crucial for biological preservation. We must recognize the inherent contradiction in Biden’s stand, prioritizing environmental causes while simultaneously undermining the potential for renewable energy development.
David Harper of the Mojave Elders for the Colorado River Indian Tribes expressed his commitment to preserving the cultural, spiritual, and natural values inherited from their ancestors. While demonstrating commendable stewardship, it’s crucial to scrutinize whether Biden’s monumental designations are the best way to honor this commitment or merely another conduit for expanding federal control. A reconsideration of alternative methods that respect local rights and customs seems warranted.
Last year, the calls for a Presidential Proclamation under the 1906 Antiquities Act to officially sanction this national monument were spearheaded by numerous members of the California congressional delegation. Despite their fervor, it’s worth noting that Biden’s approach implies a deep lack of faith in the state’s ability to manage their lands independently without federal interference.
The monument proposal has garnered support from tribal leaders and representatives, elementary political opportunism notwithstanding. Also joining their uneasily combined chorus are at least eight city governments in the Coachella Valley and over 225 local businesses and institutions. We must question if they recognize the long-term implications of a concentrated federal control that undermines the very principle of democratic self-governance.
Donald Medart Jr. of the Fort Yuma Quechan Indian Tribe Council expressed a need for national monument status to preserve their tribe’s culture, history, and formed legacy. Nonetheless, it’s important to scrutinize whether expanding federal control and bureaucracy is indeed the best way to uphold and advance these deep-rooted values and traditions.
Yet, the pressure is piling on President Biden to ‘help us continue to share the beauty of these places that our ancestors entrusted us to steward by indefinitely protecting them.’ However, protecting these lands should not necessitate the expansion of federal powers or the undermining of state authority. Instead, these lands’ stewardship could be better served through empowering local entities and harnessing community involvement.
Ultimately, while Biden ventures forth to officially announce the formation of a national monument south of Joshua Tree National Park, we should resist accepting his grand proclamations at face value. Instead, the circumstances necessitate a critical examination of these actions and their potentially damaging implications for state rights and the economic viability of these regions.
In Biden’s distorted view of environmental stewardship, ignoring economic necessities and local autonomy seems par for the course. However, we must question whether the creation of these new national monuments will truly serve the interests of the local communities they purportedly aim to protect.
The Pied Piper tune played by Biden, proclaiming the preservation of cultural sites and natural resources, rings hollow when weighing the potential economic costs and threats to local sovereignty. It’s time to reassess the federal government’s role regarding land management and favor solutions that respect local autonomy, personal freedoms, and economic realities.