The United States government became involved in the Navajo and Hopi land dispute on several occasions. Its first involvement came on June 1, 1868, when the Navajo entered into a treaty with the United States government (Tehan, 1976). This treaty gave the Navajo less than a quarter of the land that their former territory encompassed east of the Hopis mesas (Billing, 1989). The treaty promised clothing, education, seed and farming implements. However, these promises were never fulfilled and the Navajo were placed on their 1868 reserve lands with only two animals each (Tehan, 1976). The conditions of the Navajo reserve lands continued to deteriorate and provided poor land use to the Navajo people. As a result of executive orders, the Navajo reservation size was increased. This increase in size was due to a decrease of pressure felt by the increasingly larger Navajo tribe and the white settlers. However, it wouldn't be long before the US Government was involved yet again. Settler presence in the Hopi land area and increasing pressure from expanding railways towards the Hopi and their land (Tehan, 1976).
This led to the creation of the 1882 Executive Order Reservation by United States President Chester A. Arthur (Billing, 1989). This executive order called for "…the tract of country, in the territory of Arizona, lying and being within the following described boundaries…is hereby withdrawn from settlement and sale, and set apart for the use and occupancy of the Moqui, and such other Indians as the Secretary of the Interior may see fit to settle thereon" (Healing v. Jones as in Tehan, 1976, p. 180). It is important to note that although this order makes specific reference to the Moqui or Hopi tribe it was known that the Navajo were also occupying the territory that was set aside for their reservation in the 1868.
The executive order also provided a Joint Use Area in which both Navajo and Hopi could graze their sheep and cattle. However the Navajo over-grazed the land with its large numbers of sheep and thus decreased the land's carrying capacity and use to the Hopi (Tehan, 1976). This Joint Use land area managed to become a great source of conflict for tribes. As well, this act laid out the boundaries of the Navajo Reservation while withdrawing all unreserved and unshared land equally by the tribal councils and awarded to a private company (Billing, 1989). The Navajo continue to claim that their survival was dependant upon this joint use area for grazing sheep, a job that has been done in this area for generations. Meanwhile, the Hopi want to reclaim their exclusive rights to their ancestral lands (Tehan, 1976). It is important to note however, that the boundaries of the two reserves were adjacent to one another thus aiding in a Navajo spillover effect into the Hopi area (Tehan, 1976). In Tehan's article Of Indians, Land and the Federal Government: the Navajo-Hopi Land Dispute (1976) he suggests that there is insufficient evidence to prove that the Hopi were in fact consulted prior to the establishing of their reserve lands. The boundaries of the reserve lands were also constructed without any mention of topography thus making it difficult to know exactly what lands were within the reservation boundaries (Tehan, 1976). The language used to construct the 1882 Executive Order Reservation was extremely wordy and far from the point of the order and nothing was resolved because of it. However, it was not long before the United States Government was involved yet again.
In 1934, the United States Congress created the Navajo Reservation Act as a part of a large revision on the status of Native tribes (Tehan, 1976). This act laid out the boundaries of the Navajo Reservation while withdrawing all unreserved and unoccupied lands that were described in the act for the benefit of the Navajo and any other Indians that may already be located on the land in question (Tehan, 1976). The only specific portion of land mentioned in the act was that of the village of Moenkopi or land that the Hopi was located on at the time of the act (Tehan, 1976). The language of this act appeared to represent the interest of the Hopi and several revisions were made to not highlight the interests of one group over the other (Tehan, 1976). However, little clarification of intent was provided in these revisions as to if the 1882 reservation lands were to be included or excluded (Tehan, 1976). " Congress was involved in some stark human facts, not some cold legal theory.... we were talking about land where people were living, as opposed to just raising cattle" (Kammer, 1979, p.6).
The 1958 Act and the Healing vs., Jones Case are yet two more instances of the United States Government involvement in the land in question (Tehan, 1976). The only specific portion of land mentioned in the act was that of the village of Moenkopi the government holding the title of the land in trust and to authorize the judging of the claims of the land in question by three judges in an Arizona district court (Tehan, 1976). The first goal expressed a beneficial interest of the lands in question to whatever tribe was found entitled to the land while the second goal encouraged the two tribes to bring their interests and voices forward (Tehan, 1976). It also expressed the interest of reaching an exclusive entitlement of the land not a joint one, an interest that was criticized (Tehan, 1976). In the Healing v. Jones case, the Hopi claimed the entire 1882 reservation lands while the Navajo claimed an exclusive Hopi interest in 488 000 acres of land and a Navajo interest in the remaining eighty percent of the 1882 reservation lands (Tehan, 1976). In the end of the lengthy and extensive case, the three judges found that the Hopi had an exclusive interest in district 6 and that both tribes had an equal interest in the remaining 1.8 million acres of land that made up the 1882 reserve lands (Tehan, 1976). However, this would not be the end of the dispute.
On December 22, 1974, United States President Ford signed a bill into law that provided the final settlement of the Navajo-Hopi land dispute, Public Act 93-531 (Tehan, 1976). This settlement gave a package of provisions to settle the joint land use area, the land surrounding the village of Moenkopi. According to Tehan (1976) this package contained the following provisions:
1. The forming of negotiating teams for both the Navajo and the Hopi under the wing of a federal mediator to reach a settlement for the joint land use area within six months of the act's implementation.
2. Should negotiations for the joint use land fail or the six-month negotiation period expire, a court partition would occur.
3. An enactment in which the land surrounding the village of Moenkopi is to be settled through the district court.
4. Authorization for the Navajo to purchase 250 000 acres of the Bureau of Land Management Lands.
5. The creation of a Navajo relocation program.
6. A program for livestock reduction.
In the final revision of the act, provision two was changed to call for action through the district court not a court partition (Tehan, 1976). The provisions in the act were seen as a compromise between the "Navajo fears of a mindless division of land on an absolute equality basis" and the Hopi's fear that "final adjudication could result in a 'buy out' of their land rights by the wealthier Navajo" (Tehan, 1976, p.211). In September of 1975 the six month negotiation period ended without a settlement being reached and the joint land use area went a third time to district court (Tehan, 1976).
Despite the involvement of the United States government in the Navajo-Hopi land dispute, the 1974 Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act known as public law 93-531 failed to satisfy either tribe (Tehan, 1976). For the Hopi this means minimal justification of a previously recognized claim in the joint land use area of the 1882 reserve lands and a hope for acquiring land near the village of Moenkopi (Tehan, 1976). To the Navajo the Land Settlement Act means the destruction of ties to a culture found within the land for generations and the acquisition of new lands upon which to build (Tehan, 1976). This dispute will eventually result in the relief of one tribe and the heartbreak of uprooting the ancestral culture of the other tribe who is forced to relocate.