Guam, CNMI call for a balance between conservation and military readiness

An aerial view of Guam

By Pacific Island Times News Staff

With more defense infrastructure development and military training planned for Guam and the CNMI, local leaders seek to ensure that reinforcing the territories’ strategic role in the Indo-Pacific does not compromise their environments.

Guam Gov. Lou Leon Guerrero and CNMI Gov. David Apatang met with representatives from the Department of War and the Department of the Interior this week to establish a mechanism that will guarantee native species' viability and leverage shared resources across local and federal agencies.

The strategy, which federal officials termed a “Year One Action Plan,” aligns “critical conservation goals with local economic development in Guam and the CNMI with national defense priorities,” states a press release from the governor’s office.

“The Mariana Islands Conservation Strategy represents a vital commitment to both our environment and our future,” Leon Guerrero said.  “This is not just about protection; it is about partnership and progress.”

She stressed that aligning the territories’ priorities with federal partners aimed to create a framework that would enhance Guam’s and the CNMI’s species populations while accelerating the consultation processes associated with military construction and economic development.

“This strategy ensures that we can meet our defense and economic needs without compromising the rich cultural and ecological heritage that makes Guam and the Marianas unique,” the Guam governor said.

According to the governor’s office, the talks in Washington highlighted the strategic importance of the entire Mariana archipelago from Guam to Maug and Uracas—also known as Farallon de Pajaros—the two northernmost islands in the CNMI.

Last week, Guam. Sens. Telo T. Taitague and Sabina Flores Perez asked Leon

Guerrero to seek an extension of the public comment period for the draft 2025 programmatic agreement between Joint Region Marianas and the Guam State Historic Preservation Officer.

The senators asked for a 30-day extension of the public comment period to allow sufficient time to provide public notice and hold a public hearing, in accordance with Guam’s Open Government Law.

They emphasized that the current comment period does not allow adequate time for meaningful public understanding, education, or participation, given the scope and long-term impacts of the proposed agreement.

 “The proposed programmatic agreement expands the scope of the existing PA by automatically incorporating all future land acquisitions by the Department of Defense, as well as unilateral execution by the DoD that provides them with decision-making authority over archeologically sensitive sites that hold memories of CHamoru civilization, which prevailed at least 3,000 years in Guåhan,” Perez said.

“Given the lasting impacts of this agreement, it is critical that the people of Guåhan are afforded a meaningful opportunity to be heard and consulted.”

The draft 2025 programmatic agreement would replace the existing 2008 agreement and substantially alter how military undertakings on Guam are reviewed under the National Historic Preservation Act.

The Guam senators noted that the agreement affects projects that may impact historic properties, cultural resources, and ancestral remains, making public participation essential.

 Community members, cultural practitioners and advocacy organizations have raised concerns about transparency, consultation, and accountability within the draft.

Taitague and Perez stressed that a public hearing would allow these concerns to be raised on the record, provide clarity about the agreement’s scope and implementation, and ensure that impacted communities, particularly CHamoru cultural organizations, are not excluded from the decision-making process.

“Extending the Guam revised programmatic agreement comment period is vital. Significant updates to Stipulation VIII (Project Review) demand deeper scrutiny than the current window allows. The original agreement failed to ensure robust, enforceable protections for cultural sites, leading to irreparable damage,” Taitague said.

“We cannot repeat these mistakes; the community needs ample time to ensure this revision genuinely safeguards our ancestral heritage and guarantees public safety,” she added.

Subcribe to

our monthly

digital edition