River Resource Management in the Grand Canyon (1996) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
8 CULTURAL RESOURCES
8 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Pages 137-164
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 137... ...
The task of GCES, however, was not to study all aspects of cultural resources but ratherto focus on those particular resources or locations that might be affected by various alternative means of operating Glen Canyon Dam. The distinction between studies of cultural resources generally and studies of resources potentially affected by operations was never clearly established or maintained by GCES.
|
From page 138... ...
Ethnographic studies, performed primarily by tribal people or consultants hired through the tribes, dealt with present and historical cultural uses of the lands along and above the river between Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Mead. Both of these categories of study will be discussecl in this chapter.
|
From page 139... ...
123,944 43.6 Arizona only 87,577 43.9 Hopi 7,061 38.1 Hualapai 801 42.5 Havasupai 400 41.8 Southern Palute Kalbab 102 41.2 Shivwitsa 85 San Juanb 150 Not available Zuni 7,073 38.4 The number of "Paiutes of Utah" enumerated in Washington County, Utah. bEstimated; the San Juan Palutes are counted with the Navajos.
|
From page 140... ...
It is also important to note that the relative importance of cultural and religious resources in the canyon varies significantly from tribe to tribe. Also, in terms of the potential economic effects of dam operations, Native American peoples are the poorest and thus the group most at risk within the region.
|
From page 141... ...
$3~805 $1 1'532 Hopi $4~566 $13~917 Hualapai $3~630 $11~731 Havasupai $4l 1 1 2 $20~1 79 Southern Palute Kalbab Shivwits San Juan $5,245 $21 ,250 Not available Not available Zuni $3,904 $15,502 SOURCE: Bureau of the Census (1 993 b)
|
From page 142... ...
1300 small groups of non-Puebloan peoples began to occupy the Grand Canyon at least seasonally. The occupants of the entire north side of the canyon and the south side as far west as the Little Colorado River appear to have been ancestors of the modern Southern Palutes.
|
From page 143... ...
The Navajos together with the Apachean tribes of the Southwest are Athapaskan speakers. The Athapaskan-speaking peoples were the last Native Americans to arrive in the region; their arrival may have been as late as A.D.
|
From page 144... ...
While tourism generates some incomeforthe tribe, the reservation boundaries do not extend to the river, and tourism is not directly related to recreational use of the river. Southern Palute Consortium The consortium originally included four distinct groups of Palutes: the Shivwit Palutes, the Band of the Palute Tribes of Utah, the Kalbab Palutes, and the San Juan Palutes.
|
From page 145... ...
Palute residence areas or reservations today are 25 to 75 air miles from the river. There is no indication that operation of Glen Canyon Dam will directly affect the economy of these three tribal entities.
|
From page 146... ...
The "Bennett Freeze" remained in effect until 1992 and then was reimposed in 1995 (Clemmer, 1995~. The Navajo Tribe has voiced a range of economic concerns relative to the operation of Glen Canyon Dam.
|
From page 147... ...
, the Zuni reservation is about 250 air miles from the Colorado River. Dam operations appear to have no direct economic consequences for the Zunis.
|
From page 148... ...
Not until the 1880s did any Navajos come to Grand Canyon (Jones and Euler, 1 979~. The foundation for understanding the importance of and potential vulnerabilities of archaeological resources is given in the report, The Grand Canyon River Corridor Survey Project: Archaeological Survey Along the Colorado River Between Glen Canyon Dam and Separation Canyon (Fairley et al., 1994~.
|
From page 149... ...
~,, Despite these minor caveats, the archaeological survey report is well organized and presents important data on sites along the river corridor. Its value is enhanced by two studies relating archaeological sites to surficial geology in the eastern Grand Canyon.
|
From page 150... ...
Field observations along the river in the eastern Grand Canyon attest to the channel erosion that has occurred at archaeological sites since the completion of Glen Canyon Dam. If the geological studies are accurate, large-scale mitigation efforts, including excavation by the NPS, are overdue.
|
From page 151... ...
In this regarcl, "the loss of native plants is viewed by the Southern Paiute representatives as more damaging than the potential loss of archaeological sites in the banks" (Stoffle et al., 1995~. Sacred Sites Even more difficult is a special category of cultural resources that, for lack of a beKer term, is called "sacred sites." Within the canyon specific locales have sacred significance.
|
From page 152... ...
Destruction of these sites could jeopardize the continuity of their traditional religious beliefs and practices. Disclosure of the locations of sacred sites or of sacred knowledge concerning these sites, however, presents a major problem, particular for Hopi and Zuni religious leaders.
|
From page 153... ...
Public disclosure of site locations and the cultural significance of sites may, however, expose them to looting and desecration. The Hualapai Tribe The report of the Hualapai Tribe to GOES (Hualapai Cultural Resources Division, 1993)
|
From page 154... ...
122) , they need more information about the operation of Glen Canyon Dam and about the potential effects of dam operations (p.
|
From page 155... ...
This report covers the research and study designs, ethnography of the constituent Paiute political units, and the tribal concerns for natural and cultural resources. A separate chapter discusses legal relations between the Southern Paiute forthe Colorado River corridor, the Havasupai, and the U.S.
|
From page 156... ...
indicate their progress in evaluating cultural resources but provide no conclusions as yet. Mentioned in these progress reports are two studies: a draft historical report entitled "Hopi and the History of Grand Canyon Exploration" by Gail Lotenberg and a cultural resources inventory of the lower Little Colorado River from Blue Springs to the confluence with the Colorado.
|
From page 157... ...
and the Little Colorado River." Also, "we are confident that many of the cultural resources identified by archaeologists within the area affected by dam operations are culturally affiliated with the Zuni Tribe...." The Zuni have requested that biologists assist them in protecting natural resources that are identified as having significance to the tribe's traditional and religious concerns. Still, no Zuni archaeological sites have ever been documented along the Colorado River or in the Grand Canyon.
|
From page 158... ...
The authors then state that, since Zunis emerged in the Grand Canyon, "all culturallyaffiliated cultural resources in the Grand Canyon are important to Zuni traditional and cultural values because of the spiritual linkage to the place of emergence for the Zuni Tribe." It also claims that over 400 archaeological sites along the river corridor have significance to the Zuni Tribe. On a recent river trip, Zuni religious leaders visited 28 sites and identified two previously unrecorded Zuni shrines, each on a different site.
|
From page 159... ...
Most of the tribal studies are far broader and more comprehensive than are needed for protecting cultural resources from possible destruction caused by clam operations, and the actual risks associated with operations have remained poorly defined. Only cultural resources that are located on the beaches and other areas along the river corridor need to be considered.
|
From page 160... ...
, the tribes probably need to worktogether more extensively on their common concerns. It would be in the long-term interest of all of the tribes to cooperate with each other in the monitoring and protection of Native American cultural resources in the Grand Canyon.
|
From page 161... ...
4. A determination should be made as to which archaeological sites are in danger of damage because of the operation of Glen Canyon Dam, and monitoring as well as mitigation need to be specified for the future.
|
From page 162... ...
1993. River Resource Management in the Grand Canyon Review Draft, Summary Report for the 1993 Glen Canyon Environmental Studies Monitoring of Archaeological Sites from Glen Canyon Dam to the Paria Riffle, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area.
|
From page 163... ...
1994. The Grand Canyon River Corridor Survey Project: Archaeological Survey Along the Colorado River Between Glen Canyon Dam and Separation Canyon.
|
From page 164... ...
: Navajo History and Cultural Resources of the Grand Canyon and the Colorado River. Window Rock: Navajo Nation Historic Preservation Department.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.