|
Description |
— 314— A History of Utah's American Indians
Hoskaninni Begay. ( USHS)
Conclusion: The Contemporary
Status of Utah Indians
Robert S. McPherson
The preceding tribal histories have brought the reader through the
period of termination to more contemporary times. But what direction
has Indian affairs taken over the past decade or so, and what does the
future promise? Significant adjustments have been made in the past to
accommodate the shifting economic, social, and political events and developments
that have inundated the tribes following white contact. The
direction and rate of change increased in tempo as fresh challenges confronted
Native Americans. The only element that appears to have remained
constant is that something new seemed to rear its head each year.
In the fast- paced world of contemporary Indian America, one looks
for basic themes that have remained consistent through history and into
the present. This concluding chapter points out that even though the
type and nature of the problems from the past have been altered, they
are still very visible in a modern form. The physical battles of the nineteenth
century have been moved from the canyons, hills, and basins of
Utah to the legal courts and government offices of the city. Still, many of
the same issues are at stake. For Native Americans, the safeguarding of
lands, the maintenance of an economy, and the preservation of tribal
goals and individual ethnic identity are just as real now as they were fifty
or 150 years ago. There remains just as much determination to hold on
to these cultural ideals and autonomy as there was in the past. The difference
lies in how it is done.
Traditional Native American ties to the land through religious beliefs
and practices are well known. Every tribe has its sacred sites as defined
in their teachings and history. Today, many of these places have felt
the pressure of increased use by the dominant culture that does not know
or care to recognize the spiritual importance attached to these sites.
One of the finest examples of this problem is the controversy surrounding
Rainbow Bridge, a national monument created in 1910. To the
315
• 316— A History of Utah's American Indians
Navajos, this 290- foot- tall and 275- foot- long sandstone bridge is spiritually
powerful, associated with rain- producing ceremonies, supernatural
protection, and curative powers. 1 Until the completion of the Glen
Canyon Dam and the creation of Lake Powell in the mid- 1960s, access to
this remote area was limited to intrepid river runners or saddle- sore tourists
on horseback. The numbers were small, their impact minimal.
Today, however, the National Park Service estimates that 1,000 people
a day arrive by boat at the area's docking facilities for a leisurely stroll to
the monument and the mandatory picture- taking ritual. Navajo medicine
men believe these activities have greatly reduced the spiritual power
that once resided at the site. That is why on 11 August 1995 a small group
of Navajos called Protectors of the Rainbow closed the monument to
any outside interference, then held a cleansing ceremony for four days.
The National Park Service enforced the group's wishes, re- routing scheduled
boat tours and closing down any activities beyond the dock facility.
It has also implemented policies to remove graffiti and to prevent climbing
on the bridge. 2
While this was a peaceful resolution of the problem, it was only temporary.
Underlying the issue is the question of how much and what type
of protection can be afforded such sacred sites. And it is not just Rainbow
Bridge: rangers at Devil's Tower National Monument in Wyoming
have discouraged rock climbers from ascending its face; Chaco Canyon
National Park in New Mexico closed its Great Kiva after Pueblo people
and Navajos complained of the site being defiled; and park rangers now
prevent tourists from going to the Lion's Shrine at Bandelier National
Monument in New Mexico for the same reason. 3 Indian people do not
want to see their sacred sites profaned.
Part of the problem is in trying to fit Native American practices into
Anglo- American law. While the National Park Service is able to grant
temporary closure of these sites, it cannot totally prevent general public
use of them. One court ruling said, " We do not believe [ the Navajos]
have a constitutional right to have tourists visiting the Bridge ' in a respectful
and appreciative manner.' Were it otherwise, the monument
would become a government- managed shrine" an obvious infringement
of First Amendment rights separating government from religion. 4
Certainly some of these concerns to maintain the sacredness of a site
from outside interference were part of the Northwestern Band of
Shoshones' decision to leave the Bear River Massacre site alone. Located
two miles north of Preston, Idaho, this 120- acre area holds the bones of
the 250- 400 Shoshone killed in that tragic fight. The band's vice- chair-
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 317—
A Ute father with two children. ( Marriott Library, University of
Utah— U of U)
man, Tom Pacheco, said that the " Number one [ priority] is to leave the
site undisturbed" since to do otherwise would bother the ancestors. 5
Therefore, the National Historic Landmark remains undeveloped.
In 1997, Box Elder County, Utah, opened a landfill in the Little Mountain
area, twenty miles west of Brigham City, in spite of Shoshone protests.
The Indians' claim that some of their people were buried there was
— 318— A History of Utah's American Indians
not enough to prevent the building of the dump. 6 At the same time, the
Kanosh Band of Paiutes protested a Bureau of Land Management ( BLM)
chaining of " tens of thousands of acres of fire damaged federal land" in
the Richfield area. Preservation of archaeological sites, pictographs, and
human remains are the reason for these complaints. The court ordered a
ten- day work stoppage, which, because of the limited seeding time, prevented
the BLM from continuing with its chaining and planting project.
At this time, the project has been abandoned, although reapplication to
work on specific locations may be considered in the future. 7
The issue of burial remains is not limited to those in the ground. In
November 1990, President George Bush signed into law the Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act ( NAGPRA). Its purpose was
to protect burial sites, artifacts associated with those sites, and Indian
remains now in the custody of museums and other repositories. A major
part of this law directs that skeletal remains be returned to the appropriate
tribe when origin can be determined.
This law set in motion a flurry of events by various agencies. The
Utah Museum of Natural History, for instance, has 1,500 pieces that fall
under the jurisdiction of the repatriation law. In 1993 the Utah legislature
appropriated $ 60,000 to pay for reburial costs of Northwestern
Shoshone remains recovered from public lands throughout the state. The
money purchased a burial vault, located in Pioneer State Park in Salt
Lake City, that could hold up to 500 wooden caskets. 8
An increased sensitivity towards the reburial of Indian skeletons has
also captured the attention of much of the public. One Boy Scout for his
Eagle project became interested in Black Hawk, Ute leader during the
1865- 68 conflict with the Mormons. No one knew where the Native
American leader's remains were located after they had been removed from
their original burial site at Spring Lake in Utah County. Eventually, because
of the scout's persistence, what is believed to have been Black Hawk's
skeleton was found in the LDS Historical Department's holdings. The
bones were transferred to the museum at Brigham Young University and
have recently been reinterred near Payson under the direction of the U. S.
Forest Service. 9
The issues of repatriation are not always so nicely resolved. What
seems to be a straightforward solution to problems created in the past
has proven to be far more complex. To begin with, there are only two
tribes— the Northern Utes and the Navajos— in Utah who have cultural
preservation offices and museums to deal with returned artifacts and
remains. Second, once One moves beyond clearly identified historic tribal
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 319—
Members of the Northwest Shoshone Band on board a Salt Lake City
sightseeing bus, actual date unknown but probably in 1920s. ( Courtesy Mae
Parry)
remains, a gray area of ownership arises. Anasazi and Fremont skeletons
and artifacts have been claimed by modern- day Hopis, Paiutes, Utes, and
Navajos, who live in areas once used by these prehistoric groups. The
acknowledged relationship to the earlier peoples now holds political and
economic ties to land that extend beyond the moral and geneaological
questions of ancestry. 10
Native Americans have always recognized the pragmatic side of making
a living from the land, a view entwined with religious, economic, and
political values. Today, as in the past, tribal groups continue to depend
on their land holdings for survival. And, as in the past, these rights are
often challenged. One of the most interesting— and as yet still unresolved—
examples of these issues is found on the Uintah and Ouray Ute
Reservation. The complexity of the questions raised would give even King
Solomon pause to consider.
Twenty- one years after President Abraham Lincoln established the
initial reservation in 1861, the federal government added more land to
the tribe's control, boosting Ute holdings to more than 4 million acres.
Around the turn of the century, substantial lands were lost through the
effects of the Dawes Allotment Act and the creation of national forest
lands. Added to this was the loss of territory on the western part of the
reservation for the Strawberry Reservoir Project and acreage given to
mixed- blood Utes as part of the termination settlement during the 1950s.
— 320— A History of Utah's American Indians
A young Navajo in Monument Valley, 1938. ( Utah State Historical
Society— USHS)
It can thus be seen how the reservation by 1970 had shrunk to a quarter
of its original size. 11
Beginning in 1975, questions concerning jurisdiction, boundary
rights, and land control led to ten years of litigation and a final court
decision that pushed Ute tribal boundaries back to the 4 million acre
mark. Rather than solving the issues of jurisdiction with white neighbors,
however, new ones arose, adding to some of the old issues never
resolved. All of these questions, however, spring from use rights of the
land for those who live on it.
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 321—
At present, the complexity of these issues can be categorized into
three general related areas. The first one is jurisdiction. There are about
40,000 people who live in the Uinta Basin, and only about 3,200 ( 8 percent)
of them are Utes. However, 90 percent of Duchesne County and 60
percent of Uintah County are within the reservation boundaries. The
Anglos living on previously homesteaded lands that are now located
within the reservation want to have a clear understanding of what their
relationship is going to be with the Ute tribal government. According to
one report, while " homesteaded lands fall under the laws of local and
state government, former Indian lands— no matter who owns them today—
are under tribal jurisdiction." 12
The question of taxation and control of non- Indians is still a thorny
issue. The tribe has suggested that its members remain exempt from paying
taxes throughout these counties and that it be responsible for handling
all of its members who become involved in misdemeanor cases on
homestead lands, which includes the city of Roosevelt. To the Anglos,
this could be the first steps taken to return some of their lands to a reservation
status— what they view as a form of creeping control. 13
A second issue that the Utes face is that of water rights. The federal
government and the Central Utah Water Conservancy District in 1965
agreed with the tribe to use some of its water in exchange for the building
of a water- control project on the reservation. By 1992, the government
admitted that it had not followed through on its word and wanted
to make amends by building the water project and settling past wrongs.
After thirty years of promises, however, the Utes are slow to enter a deal
that could turn against them in the future. They fear that anything that
will give the state more control over Ute resources will do nothing but
harm their chances for future use of the resource. In 1994 they presented
the Central Utah Water Conservancy District with a bill for $ 33 million
for water lost in the past. As Ron Wopsock, member of the tribal council,
pointed out, " History tells us we can't trust white people. The trust just
isn't there, and probably never will be." 14
That is the third point of contention— beyond the land and water
issues, beyond the question of jurisdiction— how much trust and good
will can each contending side muster, given the friction and conflicts of
the past. A recent newspaper article summarized underlying attitudes
between the two groups in the Uinta Basin, maintaining that the real
problems are between two conflicting sets of values— those of the Indian
and those of the white man. Some Utes have suggested that there be
separate Indian and non- Indian school districts, that voting should be
— 322— A History of Utah's American Indians
done in " blocs" for those candidates who voice a pro- Ute campaign platform,
and that at least one county commission seat be occupied either by
an Indian or someone who will work for Indians. Where these issues will
go from here maybe a question as much of attitude as of the letter of the
law. But as Roland McCook, vice chairman of the tribe, said, " The white
settlers came here by choice. They live here today by choice. They should
be the ones to get along with us." 15
The Goshutes in Skull Valley have their own problems in getting
along, but this time it is with the state government. They have chosen to
make 450 acres of their 18,000- acre reservation the home for 10,000
metric tons of nuclear waste. If the federal government builds a repository
there, radioactive materials will come by road and rail from as far
away as Minnesota. The Monitored Retrievable Storage ( MRS) sites are
expected to be in use for about fifty years until a more permanent facility
can be built in Nevada. In the meantime, the approximately 130 members
of the tribe would participate in the hiring for the 1,500 temporary
and 500 permanent jobs derived from the construction and maintenance
of the site. 16
Many people outside of the tribe see the MRS as a threat to the environment
that is far greater than the chemical and biological weapons
being stored and now destroyed at nearby Dugway Proving Ground, also
in Tooele County. The two commercial hazardous- waste incinerators,
the hazardous waste dump, and the low- level radiation dump found near
Tooele, as well as a private company that test- burns rocket motors on the
reservation, do nothing to calm the fear of environmentalists and state
officials. They envision the nuclear repository as an even greater threat
to the quality of life than already exists in the area. 17
But many Indians feel that they are forced by their poverty and neglect
to take advantage of such economic opportunities. In the words of
U. S. Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, a Cheyenne Indian from Colorado:
" It's like the old treaties. The government is playing the same game.
If you're hurting bad enough, you'll sign anything." 18 On 7 February 1997
the Skull Valley Band signed an agreement with ten utility groups to build
the repository. Governor Michael Leavitt has been quoted as saying, " Over
my dead body" and state agencies have claimed the right to close roads
and the transportation system that would start bringing the radioactive
materials to the reservation. 19 The Goshutes have examined the idea of
building their own roads. Beyond the most obvious part of the disagreement
lies the important issue of sovereignty of the tribe as well as issues
of state's rights versus federal control. Thus, the roots of this conflict
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 323—
extend far back to the nineteenth century, but the branches from the
main stem of Goshute history have a very contemporary posture.
There is disagreement among Native Americans on environmental
issues, just as there is in society as a whole. There are many Indian groups
who oppose nuclear waste dumps and want reservations to remain nuclear
waste free. The international Indigenous Environmental Network, as well
as the national group Native Americans for a Clean Environment, the
National Environmental Coalition of Native Americans, and the Southwest
Research and Information Center encourage resistance to what they
consider environmental exploitation. All of these groups point to the
history of abuse and mismanagement of federal, state, and corporate use
of reservations as dumping grounds for problems in the society at large.
That is why, when the White Mesa Utes protested certain aspects of a
federal clean- up of mill tailings from a site thirty miles north of the Indians'
land, the protest received widespread attention. The storage facility
for this waste was already in place, at a closed uranium mill next to the
Utes' reservation. Still, the people of White Mesa feared that the estimated
110,000 dump truck round- trips over a three- year period would
endanger tribal members traveling the road, contaminate underground
water, place more radioactive materials in the air that would be carried
downwind to their lands, and disturb ancestral burial sites. Whether or
not these concerns were totally justified can be debated, but the 200 people
who marched in protest drew many Native Americans and part of the
white community together long enough for the Department of Energy
to change its mind and bury the tailings near the original mill site. 20 The
people at White Mesa can now breathe easier, literally.
South of the Ute Reservation lie the oil- producing lands of the Navajo
Strip in the Montezuma Creek- Aneth area. In December 1997 an
explosion at a Mobil Oil pumping station raised once again the issue of
the oil company's relationship with the people who live nearby. Reminiscent
of the 1978 " takeover" that closed 800 wells for two weeks and
the 1993 blocking of a road used by another oil company to drill on a
nearby mesa, the protesters set up a tepee in the parking lot of the Mobil
Oil offices near Aneth. Their concerns, echoes from past demonstrations,
centered on environmental degradation, health problems, employment
opportunities, and renegotiating leases.
Mobil Oil officials reacted calmly. The company set about negotiating
the reopening of sixty- three wells closed by request of the demonstrators.
There were other people just as anxious to see the closure end.
With 500 oil wells on the Utah strip annually producing around $ 16
— 324— A History of Utah's American Indians
A World War II Navajo code talker on Saipan in July 1944. ( USHS)
million for the Utah Navajo Trust Fund and $ 1.5 million in San Juan
County property taxes, many area residents— both Navajo and Anglo—
wished to have the problems solved quickly. 21 Albert Hale, president of
the Navajo Nation, arrived in time to play an important part in the negotiations.
Seventy- two hours later the various factions had signed a thirty- two-point
agreement. In addition to paying partial salaries for two Navajo
public liaison specialists, Mobil pledged to follow Navajo hiring practices
and to settle further issues in the tribe's " peacemaker" courts, which
follow a community- level conflict resolution format. Hale promised to
have more of the tribe's royalties ( approximately two- thirds of all of the
money that comes to the Navajo Indians from the oil field) go to the
Utah Navajos. 22 With that, the Aneth oil field resumed normal operations.
In addition to contemporary issues surrounding usufruct rights, there
are also issues concerning religion. One of the most interesting questions
to be raised recently involves the status of Indians in prison. This
has proven to be a national concern as well, there having been over fifty
lawsuits in various states since 1970.23 Utah has had more than its share
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 325—
of the controversy. Starting in 1986, when the correctional facility in
Draper denied nineteen Navajo inmates access to a sweat lodge, the prison
system came under increasing fire. The protesters invoked their rights
under the Native American Religious Freedom Act ( 1978), claiming that
the government denied their entitlements and had not consulted with
traditional practitioners as it should. These denied rights came in many
forms— not providing space to hold ceremonies, an absence of sweat
lodges, forbidding prisoners to grow their hair long, restricting paraphernalia
necessary for ceremonies in the prison, and treating Indian
religious leaders who performed the ceremonies suspiciously and differently
than ministers from other faiths. 24
Advocacy groups continued to form. Beyond a national network of
protesters, there developed a number who became particularly representative
of Indians in Utah, including the Native American Brotherhood
Organization, the Aboriginal Uintah Nation of Utah, the Navajo
Inmate Spiritual/ Social Development Organization, and the Navajo Nation
Corrections Project. In 1993 the United States Congress passed the
Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which encouraged litigation on behalf
of Native American inmates if their rights were not honored during
incarceration. What this meant in layman's terms is that: ( 1) prisoners
have equal access to Native American religious ceremonies that are comparable
to what is allowed for Judeo- Christian practitioners; ( 2) prisoners
can wear their hair according to tribal customs; ( 3) there can be no
discrimination against those who practice these beliefs; and ( 4) non- Indian
workers within the penal system must receive training to increase
their sensitivity to these rights and their obligations. 25
In 1996 the Utah Legislature passed Senate Bill 128, " Indian Worship
at Correctional Facilities" which guaranteed the state's commitment
to equality. One section itemized some of the objects permitted for use
in ceremonies: cedar, corn husks, corn pollen, corn meal, eagle and other
feathers, sage, sweet grass, willows, drums, gourds, lava rock, medicine
bundles, bags or pouches, staffs, pipes, and tobacco. 26
This last object has raised the eyebrows of some prison officials. Tobacco,
as contraband, cannot be used by inmates. The fear now is that it
will become a black market item and that the allowing of it shows favoritism
to a small sector ( in 1996,1.4 percent) of the state's prison population.
27 Native Americans counter that tobacco is an integral part of their
traditional religious practices and is used in the rehabilitative process to
combat substance abuse. Leonard Foster, Director of the Navajo Nation
Corrections Project, argued, " Approximately 95 percent of those Native
— 326— A History of Utah's American Indians
Americans incarcerated are serious substance abusers and under the influence
of alcohol while committing a crime and this rate is 30- 50 percent
higher than that of other ethnic groups in the institutions." He indicated
elsewhere that when Indians participate in indigenous religious
rituals while in prison only 7 percent become repeat offenders, compared
with the 30- 40 percent who do not. 28
Issues still arise involving the contents of medicine bundles, the type
of tobacco to be used, and whether pipes or cigarettes are acceptable.
Guards have interrupted the middle of some ceremonies to perform accountability
or contraband checks, thus killing the spirit of the rite. Also,
spiritual advisors often are not consulted when an interpretation of what
is or is not acceptable is made by prison officials. 29 While many things
have improved for Native American inmates, there is room for greater
progress.
The same can also be said for the treatment of members of the Native
American Church ( NAC). This organization's history, even after it
was officially formed and recognized in 1918, has seen it be the object of
attacks and litigation. Central to the conflict is peyote, a hallucinogenic
drug whose use is viewed by participants as a sacrament. Estimates of
membership in this loosely organized church vary within each reservation,
ranging from 90 percent of Southern Utes, to 50 percent of Goshutes,
to 2 percent of Western Shoshone in 1972. Even with the passage of the
U. S. Drug Abuse Act ( 1972), which exempted peyote from prosecution
when used by members of the NAC, and the American Indian Religious
Freedom Act ( 1978), harassment and persecution of NAC members have
continued. 30
For instance, Indians serving in the military during the 1970s and
1980s were not allowed to practice NAC ceremonies. As late as 1996 the
Marines rejected for reenlistment a Navajo member of the church when
they learned that he had participated in a ceremony. It was not until
April 1997 that the barrier was dropped and the stigma removed for practitioners.
31 From a Utah standpoint, this and the acceptance of other
aspects of Indian religion have come in support of the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act ( 1993), championed by both the Mormon church
and U. S. Senator Orrin Hatch ( R- Utah). 32
To some people in the Native American community, the involvement
of the LDS church as an advocate on behalf of Indian religious
practices is somewhat strange. The long history of Mormon and Indian
relations in Utah has been discussed in previous chapters and has not
often been a very positive one. However, one program that has only been
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 327—
lightly touched upon is that of the LDS Indian Placement Program, officially
inaugurated in 1954 after some tentative first steps.
In order to qualify for the program, a child that was to be placed in
an Anglo home in a white community needed to be a member of the
LDS church, accepted for placement, have a physical examination, obtain
written consent from his or her biological parents, and show a basic
understanding of English. It was a strictly voluntary program. Once a
person was accepted, he or she would arrive at their new home, where
they would stay for nine months of the year to attend school. The adopting
family would cover the costs of food, clothing, and other expenses,
without reimbursement. The child might return to the same family for a
number of years until either the educational process was completed or a
necessary change was made.
During the first year of the program in 1954, 253 children entered
foster homes; fifteen years later, an estimated 4,500 students from thirty-two
tribes were placed with Mormon families in thirty states and two
provinces in Canada. 33 By 1978 there were 2,000 Navajos from New
Mexico and Arizona alone being placed in LDS homes, with another 500-
700 from the Utah portion of the reservation. 34 This growing number of
students coincided with the cultural activism of the 1960s and 1970s and
turned what started as a benevolent educational endeavor into a hot- bed
of contention. Spokespeople from various tribes began accusing the program
of cultural genocide, as a prisoner exchange for free labor, and as a
violation of the Indian Child Welfare Act ( 1978). Those in favor of the
program pointed out its voluntary nature, the academic progress of those
who participated as contrasted with those who did not, and the success
of graduates who returned to the reservation to help their people. Both
groups freely admitted that there were problems.
The LDS church's position on the issue changed with the times. The
previous age of eligibility of eight years old was raised to students entering
the ninth grade, some fourteen or fifteen years old. Beginning in 1990
the program took on such a selective spin that it was reduced to 450
participants; by 1996 it had dwindled to fifty. Enrollment is now described
as only a " handful" who are completing their course of study. 35 No new
students have been enlisted recently; thus, for all intents and purposes,
the program has ended.
Unfortunately, some of the animosity towards the Mormons has not.
This became particularly apparent as the state celebrated its centennial
anniversary of statehood in 1996 and then, the following year, its pioneer
sesquicentennial festivities, marking 150 years since the Mormon
— 328— A History of Utah's American Indians
pioneers arrived in Utah. Larry Cesspooch, public relations director for
the Ute Tribe, described the latter as not being a celebration for Utes. " It's
a celebration for [ non- Indians] taking over our culture and land." 36 Even
though the LDS church and state agencies encouraged Indian participation
in the events, little was done to effect it, nor was there much participation
from Indians.
While the Mormons, because of their conspicuous presence in Utah,
may take the blame for some of the wrongs committed in the past against
Native Americans, their chastisement is mild compared to what the state
and federal government have received. The number and complexity of
issues of each tribe as it interacts with state and federal agencies is bewildering
and worthy of an entire volume to sort them out. What can be
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 329—
Wallace Zundell of the Northwest Shoshone Band scraping a deer hide.
( Courtesy Mae Parry)
said, however, is that these dealings are best characterized as a " love- hate"
relationship that has existed from the beginning. Tribal groups are dependent
upon the trust relationship established by the federal government,
from which comes economic aid and a special " domestic, dependent"
status that allows a certain autonomy. At the same time, the tribes
want to enjoy a freedom that at times conflicts with what state and federal
agencies would like to see accomplished. Money and power reside at
the root of the turmoil.
While each tribe has its own history of relationships with various
government entities, one example may illustrate the complexity of what
they face. The Utes on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation have 490 oil
wells that have produced almost a steady 1,250 barrels per day over the
last ten years. 37 They, along with the Navajos and White Mesa Utes, are
among the Utah tribes that have filed a suit against the government for
money that has been misplaced, mismanaged, or lost through the federal
trust- fund system. The Utah tribes joined national Indian leaders in
applying for some $ 450 million that has been controlled by the government
for over one hundred years.
— 330— A History of Utah's American Indians
A Navajo woman at an outdoor loom with an exhibit of native
vegetable dyes used in Navajo rug making. ( U of U)
There are two types of accounts in question— the tribal trust funds
that come mostly from lawsuits and the tribal and individual accounts
that come from royalties on natural resources, land leases, and investments.
The exact amount of money that the government held for various
tribes is unknown. As one reporter explained, " The amount of money
tied up in all the various trust funds is mind boggling.... The Office of
Trust Funds Management in Albuquerque said in 1995 that it handled
$ 2.6 billion in American Indian trust funds, about $ 2.1 billion for 1,500
tribal accounts and $ 453 million for nearly 390,000 individual American
Indian accounts." 38 The latter is what is in question.
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 331—
The Government Accounting Office is struggling to solve the question
of who gets what. Bad accounting practices and the sheer volume of
transactions have led to a confusing mess that will only be settled through
litigation. How much money the Utah tribes may receive at the conclusion
is unknown, but the whole controversy breeds mistrust. Robert Allan,
an attorney for the Navajo Nation, summarized the hope of all the Native
Americans when he said, " We might stand to get money rightfully
ours, but wrongfully taken." 39
Another example of how mistrust colors Anglo and Indian relationships
is found in the talk of splitting San Juan County into two entities.
The division, if accepted, would create an Indian ( primarily Navajo) and
a non- Indian county. The friction that has existed on both sides for many
years came to a head through deliberations on whether or not this split
was feasible. The contention focused on a myriad of issues but can be
summarized as two different social, economic, and political philosophies
at odds with each other.
The roots of the conflict reside in questions of Navajo tribal sovereignty,
which creates problems that the county cannot solve by itself.
Who is supposed to pay for services on the reservation, support the
schools, define school district policy, maintain the roads, determine the
jurisdiction of tribal courts and law enforcement, and so on? Some of
these questions have been satisfactorily answered, but others have not.
In 1996 Navajo Nation President Albert Hale signed a memorandum of
understanding to work with Utah's newly established Native American
Legislative Liaison Committee to try to find solutions. Founded in 1995,
this organization's purpose is to work with reservations throughout the
state to formulate answers to problems and then propose appropriate
bills to Utah's legislature. 40 While the splitting of a county was a huge
issue, similar problems of sovereignty existed with most Utah tribes.
Fundamental to this type of political issue is an economic issue. In
San Juan County, property owners felt they had paid, and would continue
to have to pay, taxes to solve reservation problems. Since Navajos
living on the reservation do not pay county property taxes, it did not
seem fair that the white minority ( though only by a small percentage
fewer than the Indians) should have to support the growing Navajo population.
41 Some people expressed the feeling that everyone should be
treated equally and that the special status of the reservation should be
done away with entirely.
This was the environment that the Center for Public Policy and Administration,
an independent arbitrator from the University of Utah,
— 332— A History of Utah's American Indians
stepped into. Its task was to form a blue- ribbon committee to study the
issue and then present its findings. That was in 1995. By 1997 the final
report was available to county residents; but it held nothing very surprising.
It stated that if the split were carried out the southern county
( Indian) would have a difficult time meeting its financial obligations,
since most of the businesses are in the north. The report did not recommend
any particular course of action, but, in order for the split to be
accomplished, it would require 25 percent of the voters in San Juan
County to sign a petition to get the process underway. 42 At this point, the
issue appears dead. What is important, however, are the feelings engendered
by the trust relationship and special status of reservations. Similar
questions and feelings have existed since the beginning of the federal
government's program of establishing enclaves for Indian people.
The special status afforded Native Americans has led to other questions
on a state, local, and tribal level. For instance, a Navajo man, Loren
Crank, recently filed a lawsuit against the Seventh District Court, claiming
that the number of Indians represented on juries was far below what
it should be. The court claimed that because of a reservation Indian's
special status, such Native Americans could not be required to serve on a
jury the same way that other people could. The court's findings indicated
that jury lists should be expanded to include those living on the
reservation, and the tribe agreed to help enforce the ruling that these
people fulfill their obligation as jurors. 43
Litigation also led to a court order requiring the San Juan School
District to build a small high school ( at an estimated cost of $ 4.1 million)
for students living in the Navajo Mountain area. Although there
were only thirty- five student enrollees as of October 1997, the county
and the state have committed to this outreach project to eliminate bussing
and boarding students. 44
The Uintah Utes were not as fortunate in having a recent school problem
solved: the placement of a Ute on the Uintah School Board. Although
there was an opportunity to have a Native American serve in a vacated
position, none of the three Indian candidates was selected, sending signals
to the tribe of mistrust and prejudice. Talk of boycotting three Uintah
County schools that have a significant number of Indian children did
not bring results. At the time of this writing, there is no Native American
on the school board. 45
Even the most basic issue— who is an Indian— has become a question.
To be eligible for BIA services, a person must be a member of a
federally recognized tribe and have one- fourth or more Indian ancestry.
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 333—
On the other hand, the tribes define their own membership requirements.
In Utah, this means that the Utes insist on one having one- half Indian
blood; the Goshute, Navajo, and Paiute require one- quarter Indian blood;
and the Shoshone one- eighth.
This appears to be straightforward. However, if what is happening in
the rest of the nation is any indication of what the future holds for Utah's
Native Americans, there will be a gradual shift in acceptance. Some tribes
in the East have dropped the bloodline issue ( for example, for the Pequot
in Connecticut it is one- sixteenth) and have moved to insisting that applicants
for tribal status prove their relationship to a member on the
census rolls of 1900 or 1910.46 The Southern Utes in Colorado and the
Shoshone Indians in Wyoming report an ever- increasing number of
people trying to have their names placed on the tribal roles, even though
some of these people do not know where the tribes are located or the
names of their grandparents. 47
Why is there suddenly a high interest in Indian ancestry? Part of it
can be explained through the increasingly positive image of Native Americans
in film and literature. It is generally considered an honor to be a
member of a tribe. Just ask Karl Malone, star player for the Utah Jazz
basketball team, who emotionally accepted the name of " The Bear Who
Leads with Dignity" given him by the White Mesa Utes. 48 Another reason
is that more people are claiming Indian ancestry on census data; the
figure of 800,000 Indians found on the 1970 census record jumped to
some 1.9 million twenty years later— an increase of 140 percent. 49 And
finally, there are economic advantages that can come from money specially
earmarked for Native American education or disbursement from
royalties or tribal earnings. This is particularly true with eastern groups,
where the profits from tribally owned casinos have proven to be substantial.
Tied directly to the issue of tribal status is that of marriage. Until
1997, Native Americans had to be married by a duly recognized authority
figure of the dominant society. This person could be a justice of the
peace, a Mormon bishop, a minister or priest from another Christian
denomination, or a Jewish rabbi. Many Indians were offended by the
fact that spiritual leaders from their own tribe were not given the same
status and that often a traditional wedding needed to be followed by a
ceremony with one of the other " recognized" authorities.
Utah House Bill 186 changed all of that in 1997. Now, an Indian
religious leader— defined as one who " leads, instructs or facilitates a
Native American religious ceremony or service and is recognized as a
— 334— A History of Utah's American Indians
lilll
ill
ISIS!
Illil
John Duncan, a leader of the Uintah Band of the Ute Tribe, in
ceremonial dress. ( U of U)
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 335—
spiritual advisor by a federally recognized Native American tribe"— can
perform the service. 50 The certificate provided at the end of the ceremony
is just as binding in a court of law as any other provided by an already
accepted source.
One of the most vocal advocates of Native American rights and a
player in the midst of most issues is the Utah Division of Indian Affairs
( UDIA). Established in 1953, it serves as the official organization in voicing
concerns of the tribes. It has four legislatively created committees
that represent and unify efforts on behalf of Utah's approximately 25,000
Indian people. 51 These committees are: ( 1) the Utah Indian Cooperative
Indian Council, ( 2) the Outreach Subcommittee, ( 3) the Native American
Remains Review Committee, and ( 4) the state Native American Coordinating
Board.
The activities of this organization are so far- ranging that just to name
the eighty different projects listed in its annual report for 1996 is beyond
the scope of this chapter. Suffice it to say, it has assisted tribes with everything
from grant writing to collecting oral histories, from assessing health
care to supervising construction of the Indian Burial Repository, and
from training Job Service staff in hiring Indian employees to assisting
the BLM in producing an educational video. 52 The UDIA's work is felt
throughout the state.
As people think of Utah's diverse Native American population, they
often envision life on a reservation. The scene is almost stereotypical,
with elders huddled around a woodburning stove, youngsters herding
livestock on horseback, and the ubiquitous pickup truck hauling wood,
water, or the family to town. While these are all very real images, they
ignore a growing sector of Utah's Indian community. According to the
1990 U. S. Census, the second largest group of Native Americans in the
state— 6,111— live in Salt Lake County, the largest group being in San
Juan County ( 6,859), with the third largest in Uintah County ( 2,335). 53
What this means is that the urban Indian population, at 25 percent
of the state's total Indian population, is growing and will play an important
part, now and in the future, in determining the direction of Utah's
Native American cultural heritage. While individuals may get lost in the
sea of other cultures found in the city, their presence becomes particularly
noticeable when they come together.
There are some two dozen organizations along the Wasatch Front
that are designed to do just that— bring Native Americans together. They
include Native American Community Services ( LDS Social Services), Indian
Christian Center ( non- denominational), Utah Inter- tribal Veter-
— 336— A History of Utah's American Indians
ans Association, American Indian Resource Center, Intertribal Students
Association ( University of Utah), and Native American Educational Outreach
( Brigham Young University). All of these organizations help bring
together Native Americans to either receive specific services or to celebrate
their unique heritage.
A look at two organizations helps one appreciate the importance of
this type of institution in fostering a pan- Indian environment in an urban
setting. One is the Indian Walk- In Center. Having now been established
for twenty- three years, this non- profit organization supported by
the United Way Agency has a mission to materially assist, promote cultural
values and heritage, and strengthen the families and communities
of Native Americans.
The volume and scope of the Center's accomplishments are impressive.
In 1996 more than 18,000 people, half of whom were under the age
of eighteen, received help with emergency food. While this service is available
to all low- income families, members from all of Utah's tribes as well
as forty- three other tribes who had members living along the Wasatch
Front were among the recipients of this aid. The Center also provides
counseling services, cultural enrichment programs for Indian youths, an
elders program, and a rehabilitation program for alcohol abuse. Each
month there is a powwow that draws an average of 400- 500 participants,
while at Christmas time an average of 600 needy people receive a Christmas
dinner and toys for the children. 54
To support many of these activities, the Center sponsors a variety of
fund- raising activities. For instance, it rents parking space for Salt Lake
Buzz baseball games, the fees from which go to its programs. Indian arts
and crafts shows raise money while giving talented Native American artists
an opportunity to gain public exposure. Local businesses and individuals
are canvassed for support of special programs such as the Christmas
dinner. Auctions bring in yet another group of contributors. 55 One
reason that the Center has remained viable for so long, when many similar
programs blossom and die within a short period of time, is its flexibility
to reach many different parts of both the Indian and non- Indian
community of Salt Lake City.
Five blocks south of the Walk- In Center is another organization, the
Indian Training Education Center ( ITEC), which has enjoyed similar
success. This Utah- based, private non- profit corporation, funded in part
by a federal grant, was established in 1988 to provide short- term ( usually
three to nine months) job training and education for Native Americans.
An applicant must be over the age of fourteen, economically disad-
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 337—
Members of the Northwest Shoshone Band Tribal Council. ( Courtesy Mae
Parry)
vantaged, and living off reservation in Utah. Programs available include
adult basic education, GED preparation, high school completion, occupational
skills training, and assisting in the acquiring of short- term college
certificates or degrees.
ITEC conducted a study of its first five years ( 1989- 1994) of operation
to determine who was using its services and what kind of barriers
and successes they had encountered. An interesting profile emerged, based
upon the 1,044 individuals served by that time. The " typical" person who
walked through the door was a Navajo ( 71 percent) male who was twenty-seven
years old, supported a family of two, earned less than $ 8,000 per
year, held a high school diploma but was unemployed, and who, at the
end of the program, entered unsubsidized employment that provided a
wage per hour increase. 56 Subsequent data essentially confirms this profile.
Upon entering the program, the new enrollee encounters personalized
counseling and placement services. Monitoring of progress in the
form of class attendance and satisfactory grades is tied to a monthly stipend
for living expenses. At the end of the training, the participant is
assisted in job search and placement. During the past eight years, ITEC
has achieved an 80 percent success rate, meaning that its graduates have
either " finished their programs successfully and/ or entered into the job
— 338— A History of Utah's American Indians
A Navajo grandmother with her granddaughter in Monument
Valley. ( USHS)
market better prepared than when they started." 57 All through this experience,
cultural sensitivity ensures an open dialogue between students
and counselors.
Thus, the present situation in Utah for the urban as well as the reservation
Indian is one of change. As Native Americans enter the twenty-first
century, they can look back with pride at the obstacles they have
overcome and the progress that has been made. Their values and heritage
at times may have been at odds with those of the dominant culture,
but they nevertheless provided a firm support when grasped. Native
peoples today still retain those values. Although there may be changes on
the surface, there still remains the bedrock foundation that ties people to
the land, to their families, and together as a community.
Conclusion: Contemporary Status of Utah's Indians — 339—
Photograph taken about 1880 of the Ute leader Guero,
one of many Indians who can be looked back upon
with pride by contemporary Native Americans. ( USHS)
It is upon this bedrock that the future reposes. The challenges and
changes ahead most likely will be just as disquieting and rapid as those in
the past. They will take new forms and create obstacles never before imagined.
Most of them probably will not be life- threatening but will tend to
remove future generations from those principles that have been such a
strong support in the past. The " new and improved" world of modern
America will entice the youth as never before to stray from the traditional
past.
But it will be their choice. Just as their elders made their choices as
young people in the past, so will today's youth. The hope is that they will
make these decisions based upon the wisdom of the past seasoned with a
view to future generations. As they do so, the momentum will move them
through the present and into the future, providing for the next generation
a solid foundation of example upon which to live and build. |
