Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment that seeks to eliminate the Ironwood Forest National Monument, which is in my district. The fact that it is in my district is…
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment that seeks to eliminate the Ironwood Forest National Monument, which is in my district. The fact that it is in my district is secondary to the callous disregard to the public input, the wishes of the people of southern Arizona, the history of the area, and the biodiversity that this amendment attacks.
This amendment effectively repeals the monument, returning the lands back to multiple-use status, and opening them up for unfettered mining and other harmful activities.
The sponsor of the legislation says that it is necessary to restore access for recreational shooting and to generate revenue for local schools, which I understand is a nod to the potential revenue garnered from future mining operations that he envisions will pop up once the monument is eliminated. He speaks for the mining industry, not Arizonans, and certainly not my constituents.
A recent poll found that 73 percent of the people of Arizona oppose eliminating protections for national monuments. Arizonans don't want mining in their monuments, but that doesn't seem to matter to the sponsor of this amendment, who will seemingly do whatever it takes to roll back public lands protections.
I also take issue with the sponsor of the amendment's notion that this amendment is about protecting access for recreational shooting. When the monument was established, recreational shooting was allowed, as it is on a large percentage of public lands. Unfortunately, some bad actors forced local land managers to rethink access for the entire shooting community. People were shooting up endangered cacti, leaving bullet hole-ridden sofas and other trash throughout the desert. Those were used as targets.
One of the great things about living in Tucson and southern Arizona is that we are surrounded by public lands. Our protected desert landscapes support wildlife and an abundant biodiversity to a wide range of recreational activities.
Unfortunately, this amendment views these rare landscapes as commodities, only available for extraction of resources and nothing more. It is kind of a corporate radar approach and mentality to our shared public assets and lands: use them, abuse them, discard them, and see how much we can make out of them, in terms of money.
The spirit of conservation and preservation is very important to the people of southern Arizona, and this is one of our special places. This amendment is an attack on the people, its history, and our traditions in southern Arizona. This amendment is an attack on the Antiquities Act, and this amendment is an attack on our public lands.
This monument was created in the year 2000 by President Clinton after the Pima County Board of Supervisors, the elected officials for the county, petitioned for it; the Tohono O'odham Nation petitioned for it; the people of southern Arizona petitioned for it; and that monument was created.
The vice chairman of the Tohono O'odham Nation, Mr. Verlon Jose, said, today: ``The Tohono O'odham have lived in this region since time immemorial, and the Ironwood Forest National Monument has tremendous cultural and historical importance. More than 200 important archeological sites with remains from our ancestors are within the monument, including two areas listed on the National Register of Historic Places. We must oppose misguided efforts to withhold funding from Ironwood, as it would have a devastating effect on efforts to protect this national treasure.''
Mr. Chairman, the issue here today is about trying to relive and undo a decision that was made with public participation, public input, the support of local elected officials, the support of affected Tribes, and do it for the specific interests of a mining company that feels they have a right, even though it is a foreign-owned company, to come in on our public lands, withdraw minerals, pay no royalties, and exploit the area.
The Ironwood Forest National Monument is a landscape treasure. It is a rare treasure, and it needs to be maintained. I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.