Thayer Scudder is the world's leading expert on relocation effects 



<Hr>





TO: Abdelfattah Amor, Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights



<Br>FROM: Thayer Scudder, Professor of Anthropology, California Institute of  Technology



<Br>DATE: January 30, 1998

<Br> 

<Br>

<Br>Dear Mr. Amor:

<Br>

<Br>I had hoped to be able to present this testimony to you in person but en-route back from Hong Kong last week I



caught the flu which I has kept me from traveling to Black Mesa this weekend. I deeply regret that because I



believe that the forced relocation of Navajo and Hopi people that followed from the passage in 1974 of Public Law



93-531 is a major violation of the people's human rights, including more specifically a violation of their religious rights.



Indeed, this forced relocation of over 12,000 Native Americans is one of the worst cases of involuntary community

resettlement



that I have studied throughout the world over the past 40 years. While you are at Black Mesa you will be given up-to-date



information on the current situation. My testimony is intended to provide background this I hope you will find useful.



 

<Br>

<Br>Mr. Amor, please excuse me for describing my background in the paragraphs that follow. They are intended to inform you that



my conclusion about the serious human and religious rights violations in the Navajo-Hopi case is based on a unique

world-wide



familiarity with involuntary community resettlement . As a social scientist, my research specialty since 1956 has been

involuntary



community relocation, with special emphasis on resettlement in connection with large-scale dam construction. As a result



of that research, I have frequently worked as a resettlement consultant in Africa, Asia and the Middle East for a number of UN



agencies including UNDP, FAO, and WHO as well as for the World Bank family. Currently I am a  World Bank Consultant

for



one of the first Bank projects to attempt the  rehabilitation of communities previously relocated in connection with the dam



construction (in this case in Zambia), as well as a member of the Panel of International Environment and Resettlement Experts



on World Bank-financed projects in China, Lao Peoples, Democratic Republic and Lesotho. 

  

 

<Br>

<Br>Acknowledged as the Dean of community resettlement studies, over the years I have developed a theory on how a majority of



rural people with strong ties to the land can be expected to respond to forced relocation. The research on which that theory is



based led to the World Bank's original 1980 Operational Manual Statement 2.33 on "Social Issues Associated with



Involuntary Resettlement in Bank-Financed Projects." Briefly the theory explains why such resettlement, for a majority of those



involved, can be expected initially to lead to higher mortality and morbidity rates and psychological stress among individuals as



well as to cultural disorganization. In 1974 I was asked by the Navajo Nation to inform the United States Congress through

testimony



before the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs of my opinion that the still-to-be-passed Public Law 93-531 could



be expected to have equally serious impacts on a majority of those involved. 

  

<Br> 

<Br>

Toward the end of my 1974 testimony I noted "that the compulsory relocation of entire communities is an incredibly complex



process which no governments have handled satisfactory" and that such governments tend to underestimate not just the



complexities involved but also the number of people involved, and "the capital costs by a factor of two or three when we take

into



consideration the extreme human costs involved, it is clear why forced relocation should be required by informed policy

makers



only as a last resort. In the Navajo case, it is not too late to pursue a more humane alternative." I quote from the 1974

testimony



in some detail to show that prior to passage of Public Law 93-531 the US Congress choose to ignore warnings from



such informed scientists as myself. Actually even I underestimated the serious impacts that subsequent resettlement would



have. Not only have the number of people removed increased from an original estimate of under 3,000 to over 12,000 with



the financial cost estimates rising from approximately $50 million to well over $300 million, but the psychological stress has



been unbearable for countless people (especially women) . In addition the predictable resettler-host population tensions



have adversely affected Navajo-Navajo, Navajo-Hopi, and Navajo- State or Arizona and State of New Mexico

relationships.



<Br> 

<Br>

This tragedy arises through a history of errors compounded by the insensitivity of the United States Judicial System and the



United States Congress to the issues involved. Since you will be familiarized with them, let me highlight just a few. Two are



the 1962 and 1966 court decisions to freeze all development in the Joint Use Area and the Bennett Freeze Area,



respectively, until the land dispute between the Hopi and Navajo was solved. Those were incredibly insensitive decisions

which



not only stopped provision of basic social services, but also construction of new housing and expansion and improvement of



old housing in areas that are among the most poverty-stricken not just in the United States but within the Navajo Reservation

itself.



So, for example, as children married they were either forced to move out of those areas or move into already overcrowded

housing.



<Br> 

<Br>

Another aspect of this tragedy was the extent to which outsiders made the land dispute into a strickly Navajo-Hopi dispute



when its origin was due far more to confused Federal Government involvement over an extended time period. The situation



was made worst by the senior Democrat in the area (Udall) and Republican (Goldwater) advocating the Hopi Tribal

Government



position for personal reasons that had very little to do with the basic issues involved. But because of their similar views, the



U.S Congress gaven those issues far less attention than they deserved.



<Br> 

<Br>

Mr. Amor, please bear in mind that this forced relocation of over 12,000 people whose ties to their customary use areas



(that is, their land) have very strong religious, political, economic and psychological ties may well be the largest forced



removal of rural Americans since that of Japanese Americans during the Second World War. Not only has it adversely

affected



the human rights and living standards of the majority of people involved, but it has been largely implemented in a fashion that



does not even met the minimum guidelines that the World Bank and the OECD countries require for projects that they assist



in other countries! First, World Bank and OECD Guidelines require that compulsory resettlement be minimized to the extent



possible. Second, those guidelines require that resettlement projects must be development projects. Yet aside from the

minority



of Navajo resettlers moved to the New Lands over $300 million has been spent to date to make a majority of Navajo

resettlers



worse off along with an unknown number of Navajo hosts who must now share a smaller land base with a larger population.



<Br><Br>Mr. Amor, such a situation would never have arisen in the United States if the people involved had been Anglo-Americans.



That alone, illustrates the extent to which the human rights of one of the poorest minority groups in the United States have



been violated.



<Br>

<Br>

Frankly, the situation as it has developed over the years appalls me for it is one of the worse resettlement efforts that I have



observed during a research career of over 40 years. Certainly no further forced removal should be required which I sincerely



hope will be the position that results from your investigation.

<Br>

 <Br>

<Br>

Yours sincerely, 

 <Br><Br>

<Br>

Thayer Scudder 

<Br>Professor of Anthropology

<Br> 

<Br>

<a href="http://www.solcommunications.com/breakingnews/unsummit.html">UN SUMMIT</a>