Figure 5: Lake Nighthorse Reservoir
be repatriated promptly and with diligence to the tribes to whom they belong. In most cases, the specific tribe is unclear and, in accordance with NAGPRA, all tribes with some historic claim to the region must be consulted. Unlike Section 106 proceedings, non-response is taken seriously – contact with tribes is required by a certain date and U.S. compliance is tightly enforced. The exhaustive nature of the legislation speaks to the essential nature of remains and burial sites in Indigenous societies, as well as the extent to which those sites have been systematically desecrated. Indigenous peoples adhere to a non-linear perspective on the passage of life and heritage. Ancestors who have passed away live on in the present through the interrelatedness of land, the
Lake Nighthorse from afar – it’s scenic beauty belies its artificial origin and the controversy surrounding the flooding of the valley, which is home to ancestral remains and artifacts. Securing water availability for nearby communities, the reservoir is increasingly being utilized by the city of Durango (recreation), with ancestral interests taking a noticeable backseat. Source: Melissa Youssef.
cycling of nature, and the continuous
with deference to tribal interests. To a degree, the heavy-
habitation of ancestral territory (Sun Dance, personal
handedness of NAGPRA has brought attention to other
communication 2017). “The spirits are still there…,”
areas of Indigenous cultural property loss and given tribes
recounts a tribal member, “It is very sensitive” (Lake
the leverage to be more demanding and forthright with
Nighthorse, personal communication 2017). Uprooting
their concerns in all phases of consultation. The successful
burial sites severs those ties, not only between native
re-interment of remains has also created the opportunity
peoples and those who came before, but to the land
to expand the relationship of trust between agency and
itself. Anna Cordova, in her Master’s Thesis, speaks to
tribal partners (House, Jr.; Krall; Jim Pitts, personal
the connection between the rootedness of ancestors in
communication 2017).
traditional territories and contemporary Indigenous communities: “Native scholar Vine Deloria (1973, p. 275) noted that there are ‘places… of unquestionable, inherent sacredness on this earth, sites that are holy in and of themselves’… Kelley and Francis (1994, p.1) note that they [these landscapes] are ‘a material anchor for those stories and thereby store them as a physical link between people of the present and their past’” (Cordova, 9). The robbery of ancestral remains is a destruction of memory, as well as living heritage, and resembles a form of cultural genocide. NAGPRA provides tribes the legal backing with which to maintain and fight to restore those ties to ancestral lands. Indeed, the legislation has heralded great success. When NAGPRA is triggered, both U.S. and tribal entities take those proceedings very seriously and
According to Krall, NAGPRA proceedings done right build “cache” within the tribal and federalcommunities. Rio Grande National Forest and the San Luis Valley – which has seen eleven reburials since 2008 – is taken as a regional model for tribal collaboration. The relationship has developed sufficiently to where, now, people “can talk about anything in meetings,” e-mail has become an informal, yet productive means of communication, and issues totally unrelated to the topic remains often get brought up and, subsequently, resolved in NAGPRA round-table discussions (Krall, personal communication 2017). For instance, an Indigenous partner may mention “We need crane feathers.” Krall, through her role as the Heritage Program Manager for Rio Grande National Forest, can cross-reference the claim, open streamlined
81