PUB00021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

world will have direct and serious negative conse- quences in the contemporary physical world. These disparate cultural perspectives regarding the treat- ment of human remains continues to create disagree- ment and management conflicts betw'een Native Americans tribes and federal agencies. However, with the passage of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in 1990, Congress recognized that Native American human remains and associated funer- ary objects should be considered the property of either the lineal descendant, in the case of historic or recent remains, or the Native American tribe with a demon- strated claim of cultural affiliation, in the case of prehis- toric remains, and not the federal land managing agency. Moreover, there are many Basin states (e.g., Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado) that have passed burial laws that recognize tribal ownership of Native American human remains when they are inadvertently or inten- tionally unearthed on state or private lands. The recognition of Native American ov.mership to a property, whether it is located on federal, state, or pri- vate lands, is a positive acknowledgment that Native American tribal governments within the Colorado River Basin have a direct legal interest and manage- ment role. Thus, any Basin wide management plan must incorporate this aspect of tribal ownership and recognize the intrinsic major stakeholder role that Native Americans play. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AND TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTIES As is the case "With human remains, similar issues exist concerning the management of archaeological sites and properties of traditional cultural importance. The pri- mary issue centers around the conflict in the cultural perceptions of significance and associated values con- cerning the appropriate methods for management and preservation of archaeological sites and traditional cul- tural properties. For many Native Americans, archaeological sites are perceived as physical manifestations that validate their tradi tiona! histories and, in many instances, also serve as spiritually sacred places. Often, these historic places are not conceptually differentiated from the present, but are viewed as important living spiritual places that maintain an intrinsic and vital role in the continuing Native American culture and lifeways. Federal agencies, however, tend to view historic proper- ties, including archaeological sites and traditional cul- tural properties, from a Euroamerican perspective of history. That is, as important historic properties, they represent significant events, places, andlor person(s) that have contributed to the broad patterns of our nation's heritage. Moreover, in the case of archaeologi- cal sites, their importance stems from their ability to yield important scientific information that contributes to our understanding of past human lifeways and adaptation. This is very objective, non-emotional per- spective and clearly separates the past from the present. Cultural and spiritual values that are embodied in the Native American perspectives of these historic places are generally not apart of the federal agencies' evalua- tion of significance of these important places nor do these become a variable in the federal agencies man- agement decision-making equation. This creates poten- tial conflicts in the management of these cultural and historic resources when considering a Colorado River Basin wide management plan. Some of the management needs surrounding this issue is devising a plan that best protects the past human 33