Sandia Pueblo asked for its mountain back. New Mexico’s conservation groups are showing us exactly where their support for tribal sovereignty runs out.
Great piece. I'm reminded of the quote from the latest Odysseus, "The power of a sacrifice is in the cost to the person making it." I've been a part of weighing similar issues when coalitions we've been a part of are confronted with supporting Tribal water rights, even when some Tribes may want to (god-forbid!) use the water, not just leave all of it in the river for conservation purposes. I've also been reading about the history of the Havasupai and their struggles with federal land maneuvers that eventually led to Grand Canyon National Park and connected Forest Service areas. Combined it all makes me think that both federal land management and conservation groups could use a long-needed reorientation around humanity as an inextricable part of the land. Of course, many Native people and nations have lived this reality for centuries, but if there is to be a shift in how we "do conservation" in our country, I wonder if this is the essential cultural shift that must accompany it.
The history of conservation has always been: first, let's get rid of the people living here. Has anybody actually read John Muir? These folks are in fact upholding the traditions of their deeply racist forefathers.
Land back, no compromise. Access for recreation is the weakest argument for disregarding a treaty with a sovereign people (who are not trying to take away access).
And wtf, Access Fund? Suing over Cave Rock? We have other climbing areas in Tahoe.
Thank you for illuminating this. I'm moving to Albuquerque next year and had read about the Sandia closure but not a rigorous history and analysis like this. Hope you are graced with more time to pursue writing projects.
Thanks for a great essay. Maybe put the question of “title” aside for a while, and think about how to create new institutions that share management authority. “Title” doesn’t necessarily imply total control.
Great piece. I'm reminded of the quote from the latest Odysseus, "The power of a sacrifice is in the cost to the person making it." I've been a part of weighing similar issues when coalitions we've been a part of are confronted with supporting Tribal water rights, even when some Tribes may want to (god-forbid!) use the water, not just leave all of it in the river for conservation purposes. I've also been reading about the history of the Havasupai and their struggles with federal land maneuvers that eventually led to Grand Canyon National Park and connected Forest Service areas. Combined it all makes me think that both federal land management and conservation groups could use a long-needed reorientation around humanity as an inextricable part of the land. Of course, many Native people and nations have lived this reality for centuries, but if there is to be a shift in how we "do conservation" in our country, I wonder if this is the essential cultural shift that must accompany it.
The history of conservation has always been: first, let's get rid of the people living here. Has anybody actually read John Muir? These folks are in fact upholding the traditions of their deeply racist forefathers.
Land back, no compromise. Access for recreation is the weakest argument for disregarding a treaty with a sovereign people (who are not trying to take away access).
And wtf, Access Fund? Suing over Cave Rock? We have other climbing areas in Tahoe.
Oh yeah that access fund history is one that isn’t brought up by the org at all - skeletons in the closet
Thank you for illuminating this. I'm moving to Albuquerque next year and had read about the Sandia closure but not a rigorous history and analysis like this. Hope you are graced with more time to pursue writing projects.
Thanks for a great essay. Maybe put the question of “title” aside for a while, and think about how to create new institutions that share management authority. “Title” doesn’t necessarily imply total control.