[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 31 (Monday, March 18, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2008-S2009]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS--MARCH 14, 2002

      By Mr. BINGAMAN:
  S. 2018. A bill to establish the T'uf Shur Bien Preservation Trust 
Area within the Cibola National Forest in the State of New Mexico to 
resolve a land claim involving the Sandia Mountain Wilderness, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Indian Affairs and the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources; jointly, pursuant to the order of March 
14, 2002, with instructions that if one Committee reports, the other 
Committee have twenty calendar days, excluding any period where the 
Senate is not in session for more that three days, to report or be 
discharged.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce a bill 
that would create a unique area within the Cibola National Forest in 
New Mexico, entitled the T'uf Shur Bien Preservation Trust Area. The 
importance of this bill cannot be overstated. It would resolve, through 
a negotiated agreement, the Pueblo of Sandia's land claim to Sandia 
Moutain, an area of significant value and use to all New Mexicans. The 
bill would also maintain full public ownership and access to the 
National Forest and Sandia Mountain Wilderness lands within the 
Pueblo's claim area; clear title for affected homeowners; and grant the 
necessary rights-of-way and easements to protect private property 
interests and the public's ongoing use of the Area.
  The need for this bill and the basis for Sandia Pueblo's claim arise 
from a 1748 grant to the Pueblo from a representative of the King of 
Spain. That grant was recognized and confirmed by Congress in 1858, 11 
Stat. 374). There remains, however, a dispute over the location of the 
eastern boundary of the Pueblo that stems from an 1859 survey of the 
grant. That survey fixed the eastern boundary roughly along the top of 
a foothill on the western slope of the mountain, rather than along the 
true crest of the mountain. The Pueblo has contended that the 
interpretation of the grant, and thus the survey and subsequent patent, 
are erroneous, and that the true eastern boundary is the crest of the 
mountain.
  In the early 1980's, the Pueblo approached the Department of the 
Interior seeking a resurvey of the grant to locate the eastern boundary 
of the Pueblo along the main ridge of Sandia Mountain. In December 
1988, the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior issued an opinion 
rejecting the Pueblo's claim. The Pueblo challenged the opinion in 
federal district court and in 1998, the court issued on Order setting 
aside the 1988 opinion and remanding the matter to Interior for forther 
proceedings. Pueblo of Sandia v. Babbitt, Civ. No. 94-2624, D.D.C., 
July 18, 1998. The Order was appealed but appellate proceedings were 
stayed for more than a year while a settlement was being negotiated. 
Ultimately, on April 4, 2000, a settlement agreement was executed 
between the United States, Pueblo, and the Sandia Peak Tram Company. 
That agreement was conditioned on congressional ratification, but 
remains effective until November 15, 2002.
  In November, 2000, the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia 
Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the 
District Court's action was not a final appealable decision. Upon 
dismissal, the Department of the Interior proceeded with its 
reconsideration of the 1988 Solicitor's opinion in accord with the 1998 
Order of the District Court. On January 19, 2001, the Solicitor issued 
a new opinion that concluded that the 1859 survey of the Sandia Pueblo 
grant was erroneous and that a resurvey should be conducted. 
Implementation of the opinion would therefore remove the area from its 
National Forest status and convey it to the Pueblo. The Department 
stayed the resurvey, however, until after November 15, 2002, so that 
there would be time for Congress to legislate the settlement and make 
it permanent.
  To state the obvious, this is a very complicated situation. The area 
that is the subject of the Pueblo's claim has been used by the Pueblo 
and its members for centuries and is of great significance to the 
Pueblo for traditional and cultural reasons. The Pueblo strongly 
desires that the wilderness character of the area continue to be 
preserved and its use by the Pueblo protected. Notwithstanding that 
interest and use, the Federal Government has administered the claim 
area as a unit of the National Forest system for most of the last 
century and over the years has issued patents for several hundred acres 
of land within the area to persons who had no notice of the Pueblo's 
claim. As a result, there are now several subdivisions within the 
external boundaries of the area, and although the Pueblo's lawsuit 
specifically disclaimed any title or interest in privately-owned lands, 
the residents of the subdivisions have concerns that the claim and its 
associated litigation have resulted in hardships by clouding titles to 
land. Finally, as a unit of the National forest system, the areas has

[[Page S2009]]

great significance to the public and in particular, the people in the 
State of New Mexico, including the residents of the Counties of 
Bernalillo and Sandoval and the City of Albuquerque, who use the claim 
area for recreational and other purposes and who desire that the public 
use and natural character of the area be preserved.
  Because of the complexity of the situation, including the significant 
and overlapping interests just mentioned, Congress has not yet acted in 
this matter. In particular, concerns about the settlement were 
expressed by parties who did not participate in the final stages of the 
negotiations. I have worked with those parties to address their 
concerns while still trying to maintain the benefits secured by the 
parties in the Settlement Agreement. I believe the legislation that I 
have introduced today is a fair compromise. It provides the Pueblo 
specific rights and interests in the area that help to resolve its 
claim with finality but also, as noted earlier, maintains full public 
ownership and access to the National Forest system lands. In that 
sense, using the term ``Trust'' in the title recognizes those specific 
interests but does not confer the same status that exists when the 
Secretary of the Interior accepts title to land in trust on behalf of 
an Indian tribe.
  Most importantly, the bill I am introducing today relies on a 
settlement as the basis for resolving this claim. Although other 
approaches have been circulated, this bill is the only one with the 
potential to secure a consensus of the interested parties. Not only is 
a negotiated settlement the appropriate manner by which to resolve the 
Pueblo's claim, it also allows for a solution that fits the unique 
circumstances of this situation. To my knowledge, Sandia Pueblo's claim 
is the only Indian land claim that exists where the tribe may 
effectively recover ownership of federal land without an Act of 
Congress. Nonetheless, the parties have negotiated a creative 
arrangement to address the Pueblo's interest, protect private property, 
and still maintain public ownership of the land. That is to be 
commended and I am proud to introduce this legislation to preserve the 
substance of that arrangement.
  

                          ____________________