In the shadow of the Hogan.
Annmarie Sauer
Chloride-Hoboken
December-February 2001
How it started
On 17 February, 2000, the European Parliament approved a draft resolution with the title Native Americans in the US – Dineh.. One of the cosigners of the resolution was Patsy Sörensen. Later, as the network of resisters and activists alerted concerned citizens and organizations around the globe that another crisis was imminent, Patsy was asked by ‘Mother Earth’ to go and investigate.
So we left, Patsy Sörensen, Belgian member of the European Parliament, Eliane del Do, working for the secretariat of the Green group, and myself.
People coming from Europe often see rural America in a different way than those who know the landscape and begin to read the land. Those who don’t like it, see poverty and hardship, rusted cars in the front yards and derelict gas stations along the road. Others see the romanticism of cowboys and pioneers and Indians. We decided to fly into Las Vegas and drive past Lake Mead and the Hoover Dam in the dark to Chloride, Arizona. A room had been ordered for my two friends. I would be sleeping in my old non-functioning gas station. Nobody was to be found at the bed and breakfast. A friend of mine with a few too many drinks in him –In Chloride we don’t have a local drunk; people take turns. - offered to help to open up my place. So, Patsy and Eliane ended up sleeping in my beautiful, but very cold and dusty, place (it had been locked up for 7 months) with a tiny electrical heater and only cold running water. The next morning, during a traditionally hearty American breakfast, they were interviewed by our local reporter who came running out of the kitchen with his pad and pen.
The learning began. Just out of Chloride they saw a trailer with solar panels and a large water tank. Not realizing that the city water stops at the cattle guards, my friends wondered what the tank was for… They saw that only the main road in Chloride was paved with asphalt. Some other roads were graded and some not. Is there a supermarket in town? Is there a doctor? No, the nearest fresh fruit and vegetables are in Kingman and so is the doctor and hospital, 26 miles away, almost inconceivable in Belgium!
We drove down the “mother road,” Route 66, thinking about crossing the land as pioneers, the urge, the need to go West. We stopped in Kingman, Hackberry, Peach Springs. There on the Hualapai Reservation we went to the supermarket, read all the notices, and visited the new and splendid Hotel run by the tribe. We saw that the houses in and around Peach Springs had electricity, water, telephones and propane gas tanks. We had lunch in Seligman, drove up to Flagstaff and, in the dark, found our way to Second Mesa. We mused about the long distances and the incredible challenges of living in a harsh but beautiful place like Arizona. We spent the night at the Hopi Cultural Center and talked about our own mixed origins, how Europeans very often perceive Native Americans only in stereotypes.
We love Indians, yet cannot see them as they are. We forget that they belong to hundreds of diverse cultures and language groups. The stereotype Native American was seen as a primitive, dangerous warrior attacking the pioneers going West. In the modern version he is the irresponsible drunk or junky on the reservation living on the taxpayers money. In both cases they are untrustworthy and don’t deserve any respect. The flip side of this coin shows the mythical Native American as a noble savage, living in harmony with the earth, depicting him as a native person full of wise spirituality. Against this background of expectations we commit one of three mistakes: denial, wanting to be Indian, and, in light of the European history of exploiting and destroying Native cultures, guilt associated with craving forgiveness.
The first mistake is a variant of the theory of ‘Manifest Destiny’, the task to ‘civilize’ the American continent which gave the ‘right’ to take away the land from the Native Americans: not only the land, but the buffalo, the language and culture, even their religious values. Often it is said that there are barely any Indians left. Sometimes people speak about the ‘protection of cultural heritage’, and don’t realize that they are once again taking away what the nations hold dear and sacred, their religion. The second trap one often falls into is identifying with ‘Indianness’ from within our own desire, oppression and alienation. The ‘Indian’ becomes our free self, our utopian alter ego. Romanticizing the First Nations it is said that women always were held in high regard and that the tribes were the first ecologists. (These are romanticized generalizations that may or may not have been true, depending on the Tribe.) These white people are commonly referred to as “Wannabe Indians”, because they would like so much to be Indian, or sometimes they believe they have been Indian in a former life. Note: a separate group of people is the 40,000,000 or so Americans claiming mixed heritage that have, in varying degrees, Native American “blood.” These people are not necessarily Wannabe’s but ‘Indian’ if they consider themselves so! (And/or if the particular tribe they claim affiliation with accepts them based on that Tribe’s “blood-quantum” membership requirements.) The third mistake is the horrific recognition of what European Culture caused, often leading to a confusing array of guilt. We then start looking for ‘Indians’ that tell us we are OK, to redeem us of that guilt.
This conceals today’s realities. The twisted, imaginary images make us deaf and blind to how Indians perceive their own lives.
This is about trying to really see and hear what the different groups we will be speaking to are really saying.
HPL-NPL
I. Brief historical background.
II. Meeting with representatives of the Hopi tribal Council and the land team
III. Meeting with Big Mountain residents
IV. Meeting with the Navajo Hopi Land team at Window rock
V. Conversations with the BIA
VI. Personal comments and recommendations
I. Brief Historical Background.
One of the things I learned about the Big Mountain issue during my research and visit was that one’s view depend, among other things, on what moment in history one starts to look at the issue. A broad historical perspective can increase our understanding of this very complex issue. Recognizing this, I felt the need to give a brief history of Navajo and Hopi.
“Land is certainly a key element in a tribe’s potential for self-sufficiency. But what land, at what cost, and to what end is worth consuming two cultures? One culture becomes consumed by a desire for more land while the other becomes consumed by the battle to save what little land it can in the face of a more intimidating and persistent aggressor.”
WM Havens (1995).
The following brief summary (and the above quotation) has been extracted from William Havens’ Masters thesis “Intercultural Dynamics of the Hopi-Navajo Land Dispute: Concepts of Colonialism and Manifest Destiny in the Southwest.” Any misquotes or misinterpretations are certainly my responsibility.
Navajo.
The Navajo Indian Reservation was created by treaty in 1868. Between 1868 and 1934, nine executive orders and no less than four acts of congress ultimately resulted in the expansion of the reservation from 3.5 million to almost 14 million acres. The interesting question is what made Navajos, relative newcomers to the Southwest, so successful in their acquisition of land while other tribes were having their land appropriated in the westward expansion of white settlers? After the Navajo return from imprisonment at Bosque Redondo, the Navajo Nation grew, due largely to its relationship with the United States Government. [1]
Hopi
The Hopis have lost a vast expanse of territory that once spread over much of Northern Arizona, part of Northwestern New Mexico, parts of South-western Colorado and Southern Utah. On this territory there were perennial sources of running water. Furthermore the Hopi lost approximately 40% of their original 1882 Executive Order Reservation, leaving them only with 1.6 million acres and no surface water. The Hopi reservation is totally surrounded by the Navajo reservation and depends on underground aquifers for potable water.
The growth of one nation has caused the shrinking of the other.
The Navajo Nation today is the largest Indian Reservation in the US and has 16 million acres. In 1864 there were approximately 9,000 Navajos and today over 220,000, many of whom still maintain traditional lives: living in Hogans in remote areas of the arid reservation, raising sheep and goats and growing corn. The Navajos and Apaches are Athapaskan Speaking Indians coming from Canada from the north and northwest through the Rockies. There is discussion on when exactly the Navajo, or “Dineh,” settled the Southwest. The earliest distinctly Navajo sites were found in the Gobernador, Largo canyon and Chaco regions of northwestern and north central New Mexico.[2]
The present day Dineh, or Navajo, have developed out of the combining Athapaskan-Apachean and Anasazi-Pueblean cultures. (Pueblo acculturation occurred mainly during the Pueblo uprising of 1680-1696)
Most areas that the Navajo claim as their aboriginal land actually was occupied by other tribes before the arrival of the Navajos. There are many legal considerations that complicate the determination of aboriginal title and occupancy. According to findings of certain courts, use alone does not constitute aboriginal title. Rather, exclusive use and occupancy must have allowed a long enough time for aboriginal title to take root.
The Hopi’s have experienced continual intrusions by non-Hopis. This has changed the boundaries of their reservation, although their perception of their traditional lands or Tutsqua remains unaltered. The government repeatedly readjusted the Hopi boundaries to accommodate the encroachments of Whites and Navajos and failed to accept the responsibility to protect the Hopi from further encroachment. The villages of the Hopi are to be found on a large plateau in north eastern Arizona called Black Mesa. Extending south from Black Mesa are several finger-like projections of the plateau commonly called from east to west: First mesa, Second Mesa and Third Mesa. It is upon these three mesas that Hopi has built its villages. There are currently 12 populated villages, including Moencopi to the west, which got cut off from the other villages by the establishment of the Hopi Reservation in 1882. The villages were built on the Mesa tops to find peace and protection from their aggressive neighbours. In the course of their history, Southern Paiute and Ute, Apaches, Mexicans, Spaniards and Navajos all raided Hopi villages and crops.[3]
It is generally accepted (Brew, Pilles, Peter and others) that Pueblo phases of prehistoric culture are to be found throughout the Hopi country… villages of 1500 and 1600 years ago led to their uninterrupted development, culminating in the life seen on the three Hopi Mesa’s today. Old Oraibi on Third Mesa is considered the oldest, continuously inhabited town in the US. Oraibi was established in 1150 A.D., recent evidence points to Shungopovi as being already there in 1050 A.D. but at a site lower on the mesa than its current location. Anyway, in the old days all roads lead to Oraibi…
All of this has influenced the final settlement of the Navajo-Hopi Land Dispute.
Timeline of the present dispute
The “1934 Land Case” began in 1974 and was finally brought to trial in 1989. Probably one of the main problems or points of conflict in this case lies in the use of the terms “used, occupied or possessed”. The Navajo way of ‘using and occupying’ land is more consistent with the “good and proper use” that whites make of the lands. They are developed out of the American philosophy early on in the establishment of the Nation, the lofty idea that God had somehow given Christians the lands in front of them with the mandate that they exploit it for their benefit. Any “use” of land other than what was viewed as “good and proper” in the eyes of Christians was not only contrary to God’s directives, but also, quite simply, negated any claim of title to the land. Furthermore, the burden of proof fell on the shoulders of the Hopi. It is a very hard thing to prove what happened in a remote area 50 years ago. It is even more difficult in a court system that relies on precedent like “fee-simple title” and “good and proper use” and “proof of occupancy” to establish that the spiritual use of Tutsqua by the Hopis and the mandate of the Hopi deity, Maasaw, to be stewards over Tutsqua establishes any rights for the Hopis to any title to the lands they claim. The Navajo position was at that time that the Hopi should only have the Mesa’s and Moencopi and the land on which it sits. They felt the take over of the Hopi’s lands, by virtue of their “occupancy,” a concept that the courts understood, should be completed and ratified by the courts of the US.
1972: The court ordered a livestock reduction to prevent further deterioration from overgrazing
1974: The Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act became law, authorizing the partitioning of the JUA. The NHIRC (Navajo Hopi Indian Relocation Commission) is established in order to move Hopi and Navajo from the reservation land of the other tribe and directed that measures should be taken to restore the land.
1980 July: The Navajo Nation receives 250, 000 additional acres of BLM land for the relocates and 150,000 acres of private land
1992 May: At the request of Navajo Chairman Peterson Zah the Hopi offer a lease proposal for the elders as a demonstration of good faith
1992 October: Navajo and Hopi tribes and the federal government signed an “Agreement in Principle” (AIP) that paved the way for the Settlement Agreement and the Accommodation Agreement
1994 May: majority of affected Navajo families vote to approve the Accommodation Agreement
1995: Navajo families again vote and accept the Hopi Tribe’s Accommodation Agreement, this time with clarification on their 18 concerns.
1996 September: Congress and senate pass the “Navajo Hopi Land Settlement Act of 1996”
1996 October: President Clinton signs the above act in to law
1996 December: first Navajo families sign the Accommodation Agreement/Lease so they can stay on Hopi land lawfully as tenants
II. Meeting with representatives of the Hopi Tribal Council and members of the Land team.
The Hopi representatives were very well prepared. We were shown a video that we will pass on and show to the different action groups. We were given a short historic review of the successive encroachments and losses of land. The Spanish and later the United States of America failed to protect the Hopi from the westward expansion of the Navajo. (Show blue map).
Even the 1882 reservation was neither a safe, nor exclusive use place for the Hopi. So the Hopi were confined to “District 6”. Matters became impossible and in 1958 Congress passed a law that the federal courts could decide who owned the 1882 Hopi Indian Reservation. The decision was that District six belonged entirely to Hopi and that the rest of the original Hopi reservation belonged jointly to the Hopi and Navajo tribes, once again sanctioning lawlessness and encroachment. Although neither Hopi nor the US government had officially authorized the Navajo to move into the 1882 reservation, the courts decided they were settled thereon by the Secretary of Interior by virtue of the fact that he had initiated no attempts to stop it. This could be interpreted to be a sort of de-facto settling thereon by the Secretary by non-feasance.
The Hopi have tried to work toward a peaceful solution of the problem very intensively, especially since 1994. They have tried to educate the Navajo families as to the meaning of the Accommodation Agreement. In May of that year Judge McCue determined that 80 % of the families had ratified the Agreement in Principle.
The AA was the means to introduce the lease concept so that the individual families that wanted to stay on Hopi land lawfully could do so. On the other hand, this established a recognition of title by the signing families that the land was indeed Hopi land.
The Hopi intend to deal fairly with religious concerns and permits for wood, grazing and building of temporary structures for religious purposes and feel that the Lease agreement is a necessary and reasonable way to let the Navajo families remain on Hopi lands if they make that choice. The deadline for signing of the lease has been twice extended to give every family full opportunity to consider their choices.