Native connection to place: policies and play.
A late Cheyenne traditionalist, William Tallbull (1921-1996), once explained his tribe's connection to a place this way:The Northern Cheyenne have developed a relationship to this place. It is marked by the birth bundles they placed in the trees to ensure that children will always know their way home. To protect the living, they place the powerful medicine bundles and graves in the hills away from the sites.
Tallbull's description of the Cheyennes' ties to the land is similar to Native people's ties to thousands of places across the Native American landscape on and off public lands.
As a child I learned that my cultural landscape encompasses a place where a stillborn aunt was placed in a tree, places where my grandmother and I made mud toys for the rains to play with, and powerful places of patrimony. And, like most Navajos, I have no desire to leave this place and call another my home.
WORD PLAY AND NATIVE PLACES
Recently at a meeting of non-Native New Mexico archaeologists I made a comment about not having a meaningful voice in the management of my cultural heritage located on public lands. Although there was some verbal agreement, it was offered only after a comment typical of many non-Native locals: "the Dinetah [the Navajo homeland] is also a part of my cultural heritage." To me Dinetah is a place of my ancestry and that of other neighboring tribes.
I know there is a difference between how Native people and non-Natives feel about cultural resources. The difference between myself and the non-Native archaeologist who referred to Dinetah as "his" cultural heritage is interesting. When I say "my heritage or cultural resource," I am referring to the connection of the place to my culture. I do not and will not refer to places like Mount Rushmore and Plymouth Rock as "my cultural heritage" because they are not directly associated with my culture.
Then, there is the phrase "Trust me, I work for the government." This old line is also used by tribal officials, not just federal servants. Asking Natives to disclose tribal, communal, and personal knowledge about cultural and natural resources does jeopardize cultural patrimony, as Alexa Roberts discussed. If government agents do not have confidence in their own policies, I don't know why Natives should trust these people with their ancient traditions (especially given legislation like FOIA). For example, during one consultation session I recall a non-Indian scholar "waiting at the gate" with his FOIA petition, requesting a seat at the table so he could add the information being discussed to his own research efforts.
I am not arguing that non-Natives are not connected with their environment -- there is just a difference in how words like "connection" or "ties" are used. Relationships defined are ancient and tied to community knowledge and religion. Robert Begay's references to "traditional" Navajo people needs to be noted; traditionalists continue to practice "lifeways" that are intertwined with the natural landscape.
PUBLIC LANDS AND NATIVE CULTURAL PLACES
While the NPS may be attempting to manage national parks "in such a manner" that does not impair their qualities for future generations, other public land managers are actively signing leases for the mining of nonrenewable resources located on or adjacent to significant tribal cultural resources. In my region of the country I believe the number of oil and gas pads is larger than the entire population of Native Americans.
The once-unpopulated public lands set aside for the enjoyment of the national public are now being threatened by visitors and subjected to development. The country does need wilderness areas and places set aside for enjoyment of the magnificent landscape. But I cringe every time I see another travel trailer being towed or driven into a local park. I ask myself, If people want to be a part of nature, why do they haul in houses that are bigger and better equipped than most Native homes? It begins to seem as if only the wealthy can afford to visit most parks. Why not take the time to just sleep under stars and eat a can of Spam, like the Natives do?
We heard Robert Begay report that 7.5 million people visited the Grand and Glen Canyon Parks in 1999. That would equal taking all of America's Indians to the two parks seven times a year. We are but a small portion of America's population, but we seem to cause a lot of controversy in our attempts to keep a "connection to place" while at the same time negating federal and tribal policies.
SEPARATION OF CULTURE AND LANDSCAPE
In his book Red Earth, White Lies: Native Americans and the Myth of Scientific Fact (1995), Vine Deloria Jr. states,
The push for education in the last generation has done more to erode the sense of Indian identity than any integration of programs the government previously attempted.... People want the good life and they are prepared to throw away their past in order to get it. (p. 14)
While education has helped tribes to understand the meaning of self-determination, it has also led tribal people to embrace American culture; the results are loss of language and traditions as Miranda Warburton, Robert Begay, and John Welch and Ramon Riley have all discussed here.
Internal struggles with scientific theories are commonplace for tribal people who desire to maintain traditions. I am in agreement with Warburton and Begay when I add that though a Navajo child may be taught at home of the importance of Mesa Verde, he or she nevertheless may ignore or choose to break the connection. The connection may be broken because of an acceptance of the academic theory that Navajos arrived in the Southwest after the occupants of Mesa Verde left, or because it is just too complicated to live by two sets of values and traditions.
Struggles with choosing between living with or without, or with less, are commonplace for people living on Indian Lands. Robert Begay has addressed situations facing tribes that stem from leasing lands for immediate comforts, and not having proper mechanisms for mitigating the effects on traditional livelihoods and the environment. Parents take jobs at reservation coal mines for many reasons, including a decline in the economics of the traditional livelihood. Our children like Gap clothing and want to "hang out" at the malls like the White Mountain Apache children. So do I -- I like to shop, too!
FEDERAL LAWS AND TRIBAL PEOPLE
Federal laws are a part of tribal people's lives, and most tribal governments attempt to follow established laws and regulations, including those of cultural preservation, even when they contradict Native values. During my years of working with the consultation process I often asked myself if I was helping to maintain my people's connection to the land and to our ancestors or if I was simply assisting the bureaucracy and adding complexity to our already complicated lives. This dilemma still haunts me; I am left wondering if I can balance on the cusp of oral traditions and government policies. As Deloria says,
While it may appear that Indians are adopting the values and practices of American culture, in the field of human knowledge -- in science, in religion, and in forms of social interaction, most prominently in government -- there is still a tremendous gap between the beliefs and the practices of both whites and Indians (Red Earth: 15).
Writing policies and procedures for managing tribal heritage places is difficult even for federal officials like Marietta Eaton. Native people and public officials need to be creative in fulfilling legal obligations and duties. Eaton discussed how one process might work for one tribe and not another; this is also the case for tribes who work with several agencies. Tribes are forced to prioritize consultation commitments, and many times commitments at home take precedence over those located off the reservation.
Warburton and Begay recommend that federal agencies hire more Native Americans, but it is highly unlikely that this will happen anytime soon; it is not even happening at home on some reservations. Conversations pertaining to employment of tribal people by the National Park Service (NPS), other federal agencies, and even my own tribal government are always uncomfortable. While political and social science scholars continue to debate how minority people can enter "coveted" employment, including government positions, it is just not happening for Native people. The reasons for this are multifaceted, including meeting educational requirements, having the "required" experience, and, most important, being able to leave one's community -- many of us do not seem to be able to leave our immediate landscapes for places foreign to us.
Consultation does work in indirect ways. For instance, through consultation meetings with the Mesa Verde National Monument Native American Consultation Group, members learned of a "unique and irreplaceable" Navajo stabilization crew who had been working for years as temporary seasonal workers with no benefits. A few of the gentlemen were more than sixty years old and had worked most of their lives for the NPS. Through the insistence of the tribal consultants the gentlemen are, finally, permanent park employees (even though their families lost many years of financial support and benefits).
While tribes do need to support the training of tribal members, they also need to promote and retain them. Losing capable tribal members with advanced degrees to public agencies not only disheartens me, it leaves tribal entities having to fill the vacancies often with non-tribal members, and we are back to where we started. I have seen too many non-tribal people come to work for my nation to gain experience and pad their portfolios, and then leave for higher-level federal jobs. I have also seen too many non-tribal servants who occupy positions that should have gone to tribal people decades before. Outsiders are hired even when the unemployment rate on the Navajo Reservation is between 40 percent and 50 percent, as Robert Begay stated.
CONSULTATION EFFORTS
I often sat in consultation meetings wondering why I was there, and not listening to the presentations by federal officials. These meetings brought me "face-to-face" with many personal issues (including ones expressed by the other presenters), and uncomfortable tribal politics, historical treatment of my people by the government, and even trying to imagine how I would translate what was being said into Navajo. But always present was that feeling of being overwhelmed by another bureaucratic system.
I often wished that my people did not have to be a part of consultation meetings, but it was an impossible thing to wish for. Presenters Miranda Warburton and Robert Begay described some of the reasons why it is important for one tribe to continue consulting under all the federal laws that pertain to natural and cultural resources. I say this because for Native Americans, natural resources are cultural resources.
If it will help, I want Eaton to know that while I sat in consultation meetings I did not see persons; I saw institutions and nations. Federal officials should not feel like "they are targets of negative feelings," because Natives feel the same. I will explain why in my conclusion.
NATIVE LANDS
Cultural resource laws do not differ for Native lands, but some tribes are quite creative in managing their own resources as Welch and Riley, and Pablo, describe. Native people can choose to accept historic places like Fort Apache for many reasons, including that of accepting historic tragedies and triumphs. Fort Apache, once a powerful "symbol of oppression," now serves as an educational resource for the White Mountain Apaches. The site reminds them to celebrate life, and that is important for all tribal people -- we need to remind ourselves of our very existence, and celebrate our triumphs over losses of people, land, and tribal traditions.
Progressive and traditional Native differences will exist for governmental entities as long as traditions and tribal values are taught. This means that the Navajos, Salish and Kootenais, the White Mountain Apaches, and others will have to continue to make concessions for both ends of culture, progressive and traditional, when they plan for the future of their people.
The revitalization of tribal traditions with new tools by tribal members is exciting. The place name project of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribal Historic Preservation Department is infusing values and truths to evaluate and preserve the landscape, and to give back to their communities. Technology is keeping the interest of native children while they are learning their histories connected to specific cultural landscapes. The youth are also learning native environmental science while learning that of the western world. But such projects are only possible because they are initiated and implemented by tribal members and not "outsiders."
In conclusion, I will tell you of a predicament I got myself into for wanting to be an educated Indian. When I entered graduate school at UNM, I faced an "uncomfortable" situation much like Eaton described. I was hired to work in the Maxwell Museum's Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) Consultation process. In my second day of employment I was introduced to a "now" well-known Southwest physical anthropologist. Shortly after I returned to my desk following the introduction, my supervisor took me aside rather uncomfortably and asked if I had a problem working in the department. When I asked why, she was surprised that I had not recognized the professor, whom I had apparently met at a NAGPRA meeting I attended as a tribal representative. But truly, I did not recognize him; perhaps it was because he is a white man, and you know all white men look alike to us Indians.
So please, all you federal agents, don't take things personally. Perhaps when Native children are no longer able to repeat the traditions and ceremonies associated with landscapes, our jobs of protecting their heritage will be easier than it is today.
 Printer friendly
 Cite/link
 Email
 Feedback
| |
| Author: | Martin, Rena |
|---|---|
| Publication: | The American Indian Quarterly |
| Geographic Code: | 1USA |
| Date: | Jan 1, 2001 |
| Words: | 2303 |
| Previous Article: | Consultation on Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument from planning to implementation. |
| Next Article: | "Place-meant". |
| Topics: | |