Contact Us
Questions or comments about the podcast episodes? Contact us!
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-
African American "Buffalo Soldiers" - Joe Certaine - Season 2 Episode 1
Starting off our second season, we have the honor to speak with Mr. Joe Certaine - historian and historical re-enactor, and creator of the Descendants Jubilee Project. He has intimate knowledge of the 19th Century African American solider who often ended up "in the shadows of American history." **Links mentioned in podcast** https://www.descendantsjubileeproject.com/
- Credit / Author:
- NPS/Southern Arizona Office
- Date created:
- 06/11/2019
Music IntroMatthew Guebard (MG): Hello and welcome to the National Park Service Southwest Archeology Podcast, brought to you by the Southern Arizona Office. My name's Matt Guebard.
Sharlot Hart (SH): And I'm Sharlot Hart
MUSIC
MG: ...in this episode we are going to talk about Buffalo Soldiers. This is just one part of a series. Uh, it's worth mentioning before we start that we really wanted to release this episode in February to co-inside with African-American History Month. Unfortunately, because of the partial government shut down, we weren't able to get everything together in time. Of course, we don't need a certain month to talk about African American military history, so with that said, let's get to it.
Uh, so our interview today is with Mr. Joe Certaine. Mr. Certaine is a historian and a historical reenactor. His work focuses on African American Military History, particularly the period of time between the American Civil War and the end of what is collectively called the Indian Wars. What you'll get from the interview is that he is a wealth of knowledge about military history but also the fact that he is a historical reenactor gives him some insight into the day to day lives of soldiers in that period of time. And it also makes him a really powerful educator because he's able to go into schools and uh, portray the parts of history that aren't often part of the school curriculum.
SH: I'm especially excited to offer this interview with Mr. Certaine. And I was excited to be able to do the interview um, for a number of reasons. As I mentioned before, I am an archeologist, but came up through the National Park Service as an interpreter. And I spent a season at Chiricahua National Monument in uh, southeastern Arizona, in the Chiricahua mountains. And there is a um, an encampment there for Buffalo Soldiers that were dispatched from Fort Bowie, which is also a National Historic Site. So, while I was there, I put together a program on the encampment, but I was never able to really bring it to life. So, this interview with Mr. Certaine really brings the day to day to life. You know, in my day coming up through school, history focused on military movement not necessarily the social aspects and the lasting impacts of um, of these decisions that were made and uh, and so bringing those two together in this interview is really exciting for me.
MUSIC
MG: This is Matt Guebard and Sharlot Hart. We're hear with Mr. Joe Certaine historian, historical reenactor and founder of the Descendants Jubilee Project. Hi Mr. Certaine!
Joe Certaine (JC): Hello, Matt how are you?
MG: I'm doing well. Thank you. So we have some questions for you, about some of the work you do, uh, whenever you're ready.
JC: I'm ready!
MG: Alright. Well, uh, you're the founder of what's called the Descendants Jubilee Project. Can you provide the listeners a little bit about what that project is, uh, and how it started?
JC: Well, the Descendants Jubilee Project is a program that I've uh, used for oh, I guess 15 years to acquaint people with the uh, part of history that's been ignored. Um, primarily with black military heroes and western heroes and it is really, it was really started because, uh, most of my life, I never encountered any black heroes, in American History. And I always wondered why that was, given our involvement in every conflict that the United States has ever been involved in. And our involvement in the um, the development of the fronteir and so many other things. And so I went about researching to find out, first of all, why that was, and secondly, to uh, learn about who some of those people were. Where they were involved and what they did, uhm, to make them historical. Uhm, as I was researching some things, I uh, found out about the uh, role of the United States Colored Troops of the American Civil War, and how involved they were in the Union victory over the Confederacy, and how the Union forces, the United States forces, could have lost the Civil War, had they not involved Black soldiers at the time that they did, which contributed to the victory, uh, over, over the rebels, from about, I guess, 1863 or thereabouts, to the end of the war. So, I went further trying to find out what happened to those men, and what kinds of things were they involved in beyond that. But as I was doing the research, you know, I learned a lot about American History, from uh, especially military history, from the French and Indian War, before we were the United States, uh, right up through present day. And I learned that during that time period, there were no heroes other than white Anglo Saxon heroes in American history. Um, they were not allowed. Most mainstream historians never acknowledge the role that people of color had, in major events in American history. Part of what I was looking for and I'm still looking for now, is um, why is it that there are no roles for people of color or women, for that matter, um, in American history until recently. There were, in fact, there were more roles for, for women, more publicized roles for women in American history, than there were for people of color. And I just learned that, you know, that it was pretty much agreed upon that that part of history uh wasn't really the um, stories that would be projected about the building and development of the United States, especially as we talk about west of the Mississippi, during the time of the frontier west, up until 1890. So, I went about researching a lot of that. And pulled together, compiling it and presenting it to audiences, and then I decided to uh, as I presented it to audiences it was called the Shadow Warriors Project, and as I developed the website, I decided to call it the Descendants Jubilee Project, first of all, because I'm a descendant of a Civil War Sergeant and 1st South Carolina Volunteer Infantry, and also because the Jubilee was a word and a symbol to black folks during the antebellum period, uh, it was, We look for and fought for the coming of jubilee, which was a triumph over slavery. So the Jubilee could be equated with another word, um, Freedom. Um, and there were, there's a lot of music about it. There's songs, there's stories. And in black culture, the jubilee has a true day to day meaning. It's not just a word that's used, there's a whole history that goes along with it. So, that's why I did the Descendants Jubilee Project.
MG: Hmm. So, as part of that, you're a historical reenactor, which for the listeners means that you help to recreate historical events or periods, and you actually wear the period clothing, including all the equipment and the weapons, and you're on horse back as soldiers would have been. Do you have a sense for how your experiences as a re-enactor might inform your knowledge of the past?
JC: Well, um, that is... It was interesting. As I was developing my character, I um, I ride as umm, I decided to ride as George Goldsby. He was a solider during the Civil War and was a, was a man servant to a Confederate officer who had come from Selma, Alabama. And served with the United States Colored Troops during the Civil War, and then joined the 10th Cavalry after the Civil War, and became what's now called a Buffalo Soldier. But, um, with the 10th Cavalry, he was the 3rd Sergeant Major of the 10th Cavalry. And then he mustered out after his first tour and re-enlisted and was a 1st Sergeant through the 2nd tour of duty. Um, and actually, there's a story about him and how he left, left the military, um, that contributes to the tales of the Black Outlaws of the old west. It allowed me to learn about um, the clothing, the, the, the, geography of the old west, uh, some of the traditions and habits of the western frontier from a black perspective. And also about a lot of the prejudices and complexities of the day to day life, on the, um, during the Civil War period, and also later on, on the western frontier.
MG: That's a pretty good lead in to the next question that I had. Um, on your website, and we'll put a link to that, so that folks can take a look at it, you refer to African American soldiers during the 1800s as in the shadows of American history. I thought that it was a really sort of poetic way of saying that their contributions have been willfully ignored, aside from the basic fact that soldiers and their families deserve a lot of recognition for the sacrifices that they made. One question I wanted to ask, how do you think that that lack of recognition can affect people in today's world, uh, especially children.
JC: Well, it, it affects kids the same way it affected me: when you don't know who you are, you don't really understand who you can be. You don't recognize any potential. You don't recognize what the possible accomplishments can be. If you look, you look and everywhere that you see something that's exciting, that you are thrilled with, it's not done by any person of color. It's not, there's no participants of people who look like you. Which was one of the things that used to baffle me. And you know, I know when I was in elementary school, and in high school, I would ask questions that teachers couldn't answer or wouldn't answer. Uh, I think back then it coulda been they couldn't answer, and now it's more that they wouldn't answer, but it's largely because of the way that history is written, and the way that history is projected. And so, I think it has a lot to do with who people become, uh, as they grow into adulthood. And what they think of themselves um, socially and culturally, as they transition into um, um, productive citizens.
MG: So, in your role of historical reenactor, you're providing that information about the past, but also you're like a piece of living history. You're allowing, especially kids, to sort of see the person in the flesh and see it as living history. I think that's probably a really, really effective, effective tool, um, for folks to interact with somebody sort of from the past.
JC: Well, yeah, it's the best way to learn about things that you don't really have, uh, an interest in. Uh, you can tell somebody a story about the frontier west, but if you kinda re-enact the story that you're telling, with all of the props and acoutrements, and create the environment that you're talking about, people pay more attention, and they participate more fully. So, I, I always do presentations that are interactive. I don't just lecture, I allow people to ask questions, and I, I talk to them about different things. I... With kids, and when I have, when I'm doing it with my horse, we talk about the different kinds of saddles, and I show 'em to 'em, tell 'em why those saddles look like they do.
MG: Mhmm.
JC: What the chevrons on an army coat are for. What the stripes on the legs are for. What the different colors of the army branches are, and how soldiers can tell each other apart on the battlefield, or, and when they're away from their garrison. So, people have a better understanding when they watch something, or they see something, you know the difference between a corporal and sergeant and a sergeant and a commissioned officer, things like that. They also learned about uh, why western hats are the way they are. And why there's a reason for a high heeled boot with cowboys, and what the lariat was for, and things like that. So, that they can identify more closely not only with you the presenter, but the character you're portraying.
MG: Sure. Sure. So, uh, your character served as a Buffalo Solider. I wanna to talk a little about the name. Um, I'm curious to know where the name "Buffalo Solider" originated, and if that's the way that they would have referred to themselves.
JC: Well, listen, there's no way to really verify what I'm about to tell you, but it's commonly thought and also from the, uh, regimental reports of uh, some of the um, units and the company reports, that the soldiers of the 10th Cavalry, the mounted soldiers of the 10th Cavalry, got their name from the Cheyenne Nation in 1867. Um, at a, at a battle, uh, with Cheyenne along the Saline River [Battle of the Saline River]. And it was largely due to the way that they met each other in combat. Um, the Cheyenne were great warriors and in their warrior society they had uh, respect for uh, fierce combatants. They recognize valor and honor, and they recognize courage. And it was mostly uh, it was kind of heroic combat; they didn't, it was one on one, you distinguish yourself as a fighter. The Native, the warrior society didn't plan necessarily the way a US Military company would plan to fight. They fought as individuals. And no matter how large the group was, each individual was trying to distinguish himself in battle. And what they recognize first of all, that they out numbered this group of soldiers whom they had never seen before. Uh, in Kansas on the open plains. They had never seen them before, and they had never seen their battle tactics before and they way they thought. So, um, descriptively when they, when they sang songs and told songs after battle, about the group of men they encountered, they described them as Wild Buffaloes. And buffaloes which the Cheyenne and the plains tribes depended on for their existence, would fight when cornered, and would fight until they just couldn't, until they were exhausted, and they would drop, or they would die, but they would never quit at a fight. So, those kinds of stories kept being told until the title emerged as Wild Buffaloes, or Buffalo Soldiers. It's a lot like the name the Cree gave the Canadian Mounted Police, when they called them Pony Soldiers. [coughs]
MG: Hmm, So, I think probably a lot fo listeners are familiar with the term Buffalo Soldier, so did the name persist sort of, after that Indian War period?
JC: Well, what happens was the soldiers themselves didn't call themselves Buffalo Soldiers. That, the nickname that was given them by the Native Americans who were descriptive of black soliders in blue uniforms, especially in the winter, because they wore buffalo skin overcoats, and their hair was thick and woolly, like the coat of a, of a buffalo. So there was an immediate identification um, the name, the nickname uh, really got more public identification in the 20th century. In the 19th century it was only used in the black community, because of the stories that had uh, filtrated into, into the home communities about the deeds about the 9th and the 10th Cavalry. And by the way, the eventually, all black soldiers of the United States, during the frontier days, whether they were infantry or were cavalry, or were even some of the limited artillery units, were called, um, you know they adopted the name buffalo soldiers. But it was originally a name that was given to the 10th Cavalry. In fact, their battle flag, their regimental flag, has a buffalo in it's crest. I dont' know if you've ever seen one, but the crest of the 10th Cavalry contains a buffalo.
MG: Hm. So, when we were talking before, uh, you mentioned that, you're from Philadelphia, and you mentioned that you remember growing up, and actually seeing pictures of, of, of soldiers in people's houses. I wonder if you could talk a little bit about how soldiers were sort of portrayed in African American communities, uh, particularly, as, because we've already talked about how sort of in white culture, er- in white communities they weren't given any credit at all. Um, so I wonder if you can just talk a little bit about maybe seeing photographs or hearing stories about soldiers growing up.
JC: Oh, yeah! There were always stories. And the reality is that there were, there were few photographs. There were pictures and likenesses, but during that time period because of the remoteness of their battle stations, there was not too much of an opportunity, especially soldiers in the cavalry to be photographed. But toward the latter part of the 19th century, I guess, after the, especially after the uh, period of the Civil War photography came into it's own, there were opportunities for pictures to be made of black soliders in uniform, uh, with all the regalia and acoutrements of the cavalry in the west. And what would happen is that black community has always been proud of it's military history. And very very often, uh, you'd hear the stories about ... families um, who had a you know, a father or uncle, or grandfather or something who was either part of the 9th or 10th Cavalry. And they would have a picture of that person on the wall. And you know, in the old days, you'd have a picture of Jesus Christ, you'd have a picture of Lincoln, and in cases like here in Philadelphia, because the 10th Cavalry was heavily recruited in Philadelphia, uh, because when the 9th and 10th Cavalry were first being formed they needed people who could read and write to make up the ranks of the non-commissioned officers. So, there was a recruitment specifically, here in Philadelphia, to recruit soldiers for the military. And they had a recruitment office, and a recruitment officer, for uh, 10th Cavalry, for Colonel Grierson's Cavalry. So, a lot of black soldiers were recruited from Philadelphia. And not just for the Indian Wars, the Civil War there were a lot of recruitments, a lot of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania recruits for the United States Colored Troops in the Civil War. So the families identified with that, because that was one way to prove that their men were making a contribution. And secondly, that black men could do anything a white man could. So, that was very important because we had to constantly prove that we were worth recognition, worth getting the vote, worth being able to get a job, and all those kinds of things were important so they were used for inspiration.
MG: So, you, uh, you gave us a book, uh, or you keyed us into a book called "The Buffalo Soldiers" by William and Shirley Leckie. Really interesting book. A lot of in depth information in there. In reading through it, one of the things I sorta picked up on, there were a lot of dangers sort of threatening any soldier in the American west during the period of, of what's colloquially called the Indian Wars. The environment was harsh, there were outlaws everywhere, they were dealings with combatants, Native American combatants, but Buffalo Soldiers also had to contend with a lot of unjust treatment um, as we've mentioned very little recognition from the military, and really a general lack of respect and sometimes blatant violence from some of the frontier communities that they were ordered to protect. It sounds like young men in communities were aware of those hardships, but they still enlisted, so one question I wanted to ask is what are some of the reasons that young men continued to join up, given the, given the hardships that they knew they would probably face.
JC: [clears throat] Well, there are a lot of reasons, uh, one of them is a steady job, okay. Uh, and it was difficult after the Civil War for black men to find work, honorable work anywhere doing anything. But, um, the-- the uh, way they were treated in the frontier west, if I may add, I'd like to tell you a little bit of a story to flesh out the character of George Goldsby.
MG: Yeah, of course!
JC: Uh, George Goldsby came from, as I said, during the Civil War, Selma Alabama.And he switched sides, he was a teamster. And he started, he switched sides and joined the Union Army and was a teamster for the Union Army and after the uh, after, at the end of the Civil War, he's one of the people who, uh, when he mustered out of the United States Colored Troops, joined -- the 10th Cavalry was just being formed in 1866. He went to the 10th Cavalry and rose up through the ranks of the non-commissioned officers to become Sergeant Major, which is the highest ranking enlisted man in the military. Um, but um, he was stationed in 1872, uh, in uh, Texas where he mustered out and when he re-enlisted he was dropped back to 1st Sergeant rather than Sergeant Major, which is a regimental rank. He was regimental Sergeant Major, he was dropped back to 1st Sergeant. And as a 1st Sergeant he was assigned to Fort Concho Texas, right outside of San Angelo. And San Angelo was a very, was very much a racist town like most of the towns in Texas at the time. They didn't want to see any northern soldiers, and a black soldier in a blue uniform was definitely something they just did not want to see. Unless they were in trouble. When they were in trouble from outlaws or marauding Indians or something like that, then they were needed. But uh, during the regular course of things, they were not accepted or wanted to be uh, even in town. And uh, in San Angelo they had a habit of harrassing black soldiers when they came in to town from Ft. Concho. George Goldsby was the 1st Sergeant during a time when some men from the 10th Cavalry went into San Angelo Texas, and they were harassed by the townspeople, and one of his NCOs had the stripes removed, um, were cut off his jacket and stripped from his pants' leg. Which is something-- I don't know if you were ever in the military... But, for an NCO to have his rank, his visible rank stripped from him by people who are not authorized to do so, you can get into a world of hurt like that. These men, when they left town they went back to Fort Concho and they reported what happened to them. George Goldsby, being the 1st Sergeant of the company at that time, allowed his men to uh, pick up their carbines and go back into San Angelo to teach the cowboys and you know, the drovers, and some of the other miscreants there, that you didn't mess around with a soldier of the United States Army. Uh, a gun fight ensued, and uh, townspeople died, and I think one Buffalo Solider died. But, during that time period um, the Texas Rangers were also in authority in Texas, and they were about as racist as you could be. Um, they went out to Fort Concho to see Colonel Grierson to try and take into custody the soldiers who had been in the gun fight in San Angelo. The town was in an uproar. I don't need to tell you how, how, how troublesome the environment was. But one of the things that Colonel Grierson did, and that's one of the reasons that he's revered today, is that he wouldn't let the Texas Rangers take his men. And one of the things that he did, is that he allowed their 1st Sergeant, who was George Goldsby, he allowed him to ride out of the east gate of the fort, at Fort Concho, and Goldsby left his wife and a child, and went AWOL, so as not to be taken by the Texas Rangers. Um, and that was the kind of environment that they existed in. He was hunted for, and there're stories after that he had joined Pancho Villa, and he had uh, that he was riding, that he was actually riding with the comancheros. There are all kinds of stories, but in fact, his son grew to become Cherokee Bill. Have you ever heard of Cherokee Bill?
MG: I have, yeah!
JC: Well, that was George Goldsby's son.
MG: Wow.
JC: Uh, and that's how, he was the son of a, of a 10th Cavalry First Sergeant. So, that's how this stuff is interlinked, but it also points to uh, how difficult for-- how difficult things were for black soldiers. Black troopers on the frontier were not accepted by anybody, even the townspeople that they saved, and the railroads that they protected, and the stagecoaches that they rescued from peril. They were not accepted as uh, oh uh, what they did was not heroic to those people. They found a way of justifying their continuing hatred for black soldiers. Part of it had to do with the Civil War. But a lot of it had to do with just the pure hatred and racism that existed, and in some places still exists today.
MG: Sure.
JC: So, those are the kinds of things that black soldiers had to fight through, even as they protected the developing west from outlaws and um, Indians, and other kinds of marauders, that had western towns and railroads and stagecoaches in jeopardy.
But they also did a lot of mapping of the frontier. They mapped border holes and um, they did a lot of the surveying that resulted in a railroad moving west and telegraph lines and things like that. So, it was a mixed bag, but it had to be done by valiant people. And those were the people who were ignored by mainstream historians. They never wrote or even acknowledged that those kinds of things that happened, even though the records, in all this stuff that I'm saying, you can find it in county records, newspaper clippings, all kinds of things. The regimental returns, the post returns. The mainstream historians just chose to overlook that part of history when they were writing about the history of the uh, of the heroes of the frontier west.
MG: And we even talked in one of our previous discussions, about movies. Like, uh, movies that have been made in the last 25 years or so. And how there are scenes in movies that are related to actual happenings uh, that African American soldiers participated in, but in the movies its always white soldiers.
JC: That's absolutely correct. A full 20% of the cavalry in the west was black. That's all documented, that's part of the historical record. Uh, I'll give you an example. The Lincoln County War, in Lincoln County, New Mexico of Billy the Kid fame. That was quelled by troopers from the 9th Cavalry, from Fort Stanton. They were all black troopers! The troopers that hunted Billy the Kid were black troopers. The ones that hunted Cochise and Victorio and Nana, and Mangus Coloradas, all of those stories that movies have been made of were all black soldiers. When you talk about the mountain men, a lot of the, well quite a few of the mountain men were black. Jim Beckwith was one - he's always portrayed as a white man in movies. Uh, Dead Wood Dick was a black, was a former black soldier who became chief of a clan of the Crow Tribe. You know, part of the, some of the people who rode with the Hole in the Wall Gang were black. There were black gun fighters, there were black merchants, hotel keepers, all kinds of things. And whole black towns that were formed after the Civil War by formerly enslaved people, but those kinds of things were never written about, never acknowledged, never recognized as a part of the development of the frontier west. So, that's what I went about trying to correct. And with the uh, Descendants Jubilee Project.
MG: So, uh, what ended up happening to Buffalo Soldiers following the Indian Wars in the west?
JC: The uh, the 9th and the 10th Cavalry um, rotated through posts that were peace time uh, they, first of all they were regular army soldiers, so during peace time they rotated through different posts. They were stationed at West Point, they were stationed at different places around the country. But uh, when the call went out for combatants for the Spanish-American War, the only combat ready units were available for duty in Cuba were the 9th and 10th Cavalry, and the 24th and 25th Infantry. So those troopers, those soldiers, were gathered from around the west, and they were marshaled into locations in Florida, and they were sent to Cuba.
MG: I also read somewhere that as part of their military duties Buffalo Soldier units also served sort of as the very first park units at places like Yellowstone and Sequoia/Kings Canyon.
JC: Yeah, yeah. They were, they were the first-- heh, believe it or not, they were the first Border Patrol. [Laughs] Trump would love to hear that. And they did serve as uh, But they were among the first of the people sent in to protect the national parks, during their infancy, to the US Forest Service. So, yeah, there is a long, long proud history of the 9th and 10th Mounted Cavalry, uh, right up until the time when they got rid of horses and went to mechanized cavalry.
MG: And in fact one of the very first superintendents for I think, Yellowstone, was an army man named Charles Young, a Buffalo Soldier. And he now has his own national monument in Ohio.
JC: Yeah, uh, Charles Young was one of the people who was scheduled to attain the rank of General, who the US government mustered out of service so that they wouldn't have to raise him in rank, to a, he was a Bird Colonel, but they wouldn't allow him to proceed to a uh, never let him get his star. But, you know, we used to do, during the 90s, we used to go on rides around the country, that we would call the Charles Young Ride. We did a ride once a year, about 90 of us, or 100 of us, in full regimental uniform with battle flag. The whole nine yards. In his honor. At the, the reason it was in his honor, when he tried to prove to the United States government that he was still fit for duty as they were telling him that he was not fit for duty and mustered out, he rode from Ohio to Washington DC on horse back.
MG: Oh, wow.
JC: And that's why we did those rides. And uh, guys from all over the country would muster at certain locations, um, to mount up and ride trail in honor of Charles Young.
MG: Wow. Amazing.
Well, I only have one more question for you. And uh, I think there's maybe a couple components to it. Do you think in the, I don't know, 10 or 20 years or more, has the Park Service improved the way that it talks about the contributions of African American soldiers? And the second component of that question is what ways do you think that the Park Service can continue to improve.
JC: Well, let me give you a couple examples, one in the east and one in the west. Um, I'll start with the east. Um, are you familiar with the Battle of the Crater in the Civil War?
MG: I'm not, no.
JC: Okay, well, uh, there was an incident where a tunnel had to be dug through some fortifications. This was done by the Union. And black soldiers dug the tunnel, and uh, at the last minute against all of the battle plans that were done, the generals decided to send in white regiments to try and win the glory for what they saw was an easy victory. Well, the whole thing blew up in their faces. And uh, this was in, this was around uh, the town of Petersburg Virginia. The Battle of the Crater was a Union fiasco. And, but it led to the taking of Richmond, and contributed toward the end of the Civil War. But the National Park Service, when you go to the Crater Battlefield, or when you go to the Petersburg Battlefield, up until recently they never mentioned the black regiments that were involved in that battle. When the tourists would come in to be seated in the diorama, um, when the guides would talk about the battle, and the different positions, and light up the battlefield and tell people where different units were, and how the battle evolved, they never acknowledged that black units were a part, a major part of that battle and that battlefield. What has happened recently, and I would say in the last 10-15 years, I'm not sure when they actually did it, is that they expanded the story to include the United States Colored Troops. And it was largely because the National Park Service wanted to get people of color involved in visiting the battlefields and national parks. And it was a way to expand the participation of Americans in the history of the county. So they stopped just reaching out to um, white tourists, and they expanded it to include things of interest to the black community.
In the west, have you ever been to Little Big Horn?
MG: I've -- I've never been there. I'd like to go though.
JC: In Montana at the Battle of the Greasy Grass, is what the Indians call it, but the Little Big Horn river battlefield was always told from the perspective of the while combatants. Now the National Park Service is allowing the story from the Indian perspective to be told. And they have now hired and trained Native American guides and employees who can tell that story. And there's a difference [laughs] there's a real difference between the way the story was told by the Park Service earlier, and the stories that have been passed down through uh, Native American history, especially the history of the tribes that were involved: the Crow, the Cheyenne, and the Sioux, or I should say the Lakota. But the National Park Service has made an effort in the last, oh I would say the last couple decades to really expand um, the story of what took place in different parts of the country, and what the true history of the United States really is. I don't know if they're doing it everywhere, but just from what you're doing now, Matt, um, it leads me to believe the expansion is on-going, and that history is gradually being corrected. And the National Park Service is at the forefront of that. It's late! Uh, but it's still being done. And I think for a government to recognize it's own mistakes in presenting history to it's people, and attempt to correct it without a lot of fan fare, there's no, you know, there's no brass bands, or advertising campaigns that go along with this. This is just something that they've done, trying to be more accurate about what happened at different places around the country. And what the contributions were for the people who actually participated in the historical events.
MG: I think you touched on this kinda early in interview, the idea that history needs to be relevant to everyone. And that includes telling the stories of folks, those stories haven't been told in the past. I do think that the Park Service is trying, and I think that that's happening everywhere in the service.
JC: And that's good! And there's uh, a serious attempt for accuracy. And that's important because that will make, I know, I know in the black community it makes people more interested in visiting National Parks now, or historic battlefields and things like that. And people have a better vision of what government can actually do to contribute to the day to day life of an ordinary person in the country. So I think it's a good thing.
MG: Well, I don't have any other questions, but I just wanna say thank you. This has been a great interview, and I really appreciate the time that you've taken to share all of your knowledge with us.
JC: Well, I appreciate being asked.
MUSIC
MG: There's a lot to talk about with this interview, and we really can cover it all. But if I had to pick one thing, I would say it was really interesting to me the discussion about his role kinda as an educator int he schools, and how he can go in and meet with kids dressed in the period clothing and they have an opportunity in a lot of cases, to see somebody that looks like them, that's portraying an important part of history, that maybe they're not getting in the curriculum, and that can make history more relevant to them. And so he can play a really important role in that way.
SH: Yeah, definitely Matt. One of the quotes that really stood out to me, and I copied down when I was re-listening to the interview, is "when you don't know who you are, you don't really understand who you can be." So, doing interviews like this with Mr. Certaine, doing archeology of the under-represented, and looking at social history is so important. You know, as Mr. Certaine said again, 20% of the cavalry at that time in the west were African American and they're not represented in popular media today at all. Not in movies, not in retrospectives. So hopefully the National Park Service can continue giving a voice to the Buffalo Solider, as Mr. Certaine said that he'd seen some change over the years. And um, and hopefully these changes will inspire these heroes descendants.
MG: Thanks for listening. In our next episode we'll be talking to Marty Tagg who excavated a Buffalo Soldier Camp at Bonita Canyon.
SH: The National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast is a production of the Southern Arizona Office of the National Park Service. Our artwork was designed by Laura Varon-Burkhart. Justin Mossman composed music. We look forward to hearing from you. Matt and I will be with you again next month.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-
"Buffalo Soldiers" at Chiricahua - Ann Huston - Season 2 Episode 2
In this episode we continue the discussion of African American Buffalo Soldiers, specifically at Chiricahua National Monument in southeastern Arizona. Park Ranger/Interpreter Ann Huston shares stories of the men who lived in Bonita Canyon for over a year; stories that still resonate today. Check out www.nps.gov/subjects/buffalosoldiers/ and Chiricahua National Monument at https://www.nps.gov/chir
- Credit / Author:
- NPS/Southern Arizona Office
- Date created:
- 02/25/2020
MUSIC INTROMatthew Guebard (MG): Hello and welcome to the National Park Service Southwest Archeology Podcast, brought to you by the Southern Arizona Office. My name's Matt Guebard.
Sharlot Hart (SH): And I'm Sharlot Hart
MUSIC
MG: So in this episode we'll be continuing our discussion of Black Solider history, but we'll be focusing specifically on Chiricahua National Monument. And we'll be interviewing Ann Huston who's a former interpretive ranger from Chiricahua, now at Capitol Reef National Park. So, for those listeners who don't know much about Chiricahua, there is thousands of years of Ancestral Native American history, as well as more recent 19th Century history that includes homesteading, ranching, and the Apache War Period. So this interview is a follow up to our discussion with Mr. Joe Certaine, who is an historian and historical reenactor, who focuses on Buffalo Solider History, so if you like this interview with Ann, make sure you also check out that interview with Mr. Certaine.
MUSIC
SH: So we're here today with Ann Huston. She was, until recently a Park Guide with Chiricahua National Monument, and now is a Park Guide with Capitol Reef National Park. That means that she's one of those front-line rangers, those awesome people that you get to meet when you go in to a park as a tourist. And Ann did a lot of research about the Buffalo Soliders who were encamped at Bonita Canyon in Chiricahua, so we're here today to take with her. Thanks for joining us Ann!
Ann Huston: Thanks for having me!
SH: Can you tell us about your background with the National Park Service?
AH: Sure! I've been with the National Park Service for about five years. Most of the parks where I've worked have been in the southwest, but I had one summer in Alaska at Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park in Skagway; and that's where I first really learned about the Buffalo Soldiers and their connection to various National Park Service sites. And we all -- all the rangers at Klondike Gold Rush, did programs on Company L which was a unit of the 24th infantry, and they were sent to Skagway to help keep the peace during the Klondike Gold Rush. So that was one of the untold stories that the park was working really hard to share with our visitors from all over the United States as well as the world. And when I moved to Chiricahua National Monument, I was really happy to see that there was a Buffalo Solider connection there as well. And i had a lot of opportunities to really dive into the story of all the men who were stationed in Bonita Canyon during 1885 and 86 - The Apache Campaign in southern Arizona.
SH: Wow, and I ...
AH: Indecipherable.
SH: Cool!
AH: [Laughs] Thanks!
SH: So we normally interview cultural resource specialists, um, and so your job is coming at the history of these encampments is a little bit different as a ranger and an interpreter. Um, an interpreter in the sense, not in a language, but kind of interpreting the resources at a site for the public who might not be able to see what's underground, essentially. So, that's really cool with your history of being at Klondike and then coming to Chiricahua. So, I guess, how did -- how did you go about doing your job at Chiricahua.
AH: That's a really good question. I guess the first thing that I had to do was, of course, learn alot more about the 10th Cavalry, because when I was at Klondike Gold Rush that was the 24th Infantry. So, generally, men patrolling on foot as opposed to on horseback. So, just learning a lot about the 10th Cavalry and what their role was in the west, as the United States continued to expand, and as people -- settlers came into conflict with people who were already living in that area. So, in Chiricahua National Monument, that was usually the Chiricahua Apache. So just, really, wrapping my head around this complex story of peoples who were in one area who had been living there for generations encountering other people who were new comers. And sort of, the difficulties and conflict that arose from that. And Chiricahua has an amazing tangible to the Buffalo Soldiers that we can talk about on a fairly regular basis. And that's the chimney at Faraway Ranch, the Ranch House. And I think we'll be talking more about that later on in the interview.
SH: Awesome. Well, so we also interviewed Joe Certaine, and he's a historical reenactor and descendant of Civil War soldiers. And he in his interview -- it was one of our longer interviews but he just had so many vignettes that exemplified how easy it was to go from Buffalo Solider to Black Outlaw. And that's kind of based on prejudices, you know, this trope in history books or in social histories of uh, Black People at this time, that they filled certain roles as far as you know, looking back. And so, um, if you weren't a Buffalo Solider, then you have to be an outlaw, because those are the two roles that are allowed for Black people to inhabit. Um, and that was based on prejudices of the day, and the real prejudices that these men had to face. So, I was wondering if you found stories from Bonita Canyon of evidence of prejudice or any other social mores of the time.
AH: Yes! Like the Henry Flipper connection, in the fire place.
MG: I don't actually remember the history, so you might -- maybe it wasn't a -- he was involved with a woman?
AH: Embezzling.
MG: Oh! He was embezzling!
AH: Well, he wasn't! He was wrongly accused of it.
MG: Okay.
AH: So, Henry Flipper was the very first black graduate of Westpoint. Up until that point, any black soldier, no matter how smart they were, or skilled they were, they capped out at First Sergeant, as an enlisted solider. But Henry Flipper was able to become a commanding officer and he still faced a lot of discrimination. While he was stationed at Fort Davis in Texas, he was wrongly accused of embezzling money. But basically, to cover up the facts that he had not embezzled any money, he lied. And for lying, he was court martialed and given a dishonorable discharge. And if he had been a white officer, most likely, he would not have had such a harsh punishment.
So, by the time our Buffalo Soldiers in the 10th Cavalry are stationed in Bonita Canyon in 1885 and 1886, Henry Flipper was no longer in the US Army. He worked as a land surveyor, in southern AZ, and he eventually became a mining engineer in Mexico and Venezuela, but he was never officially stationed in Bonita Canyon and we don't have any record that he was surveying in Bonita Canyon. So we have a stone in the Garfield Fireplace that has Henry Flippers name on it. So, who carved his name into stone?? If you look at it, it's in this perfect block print that looks like it could have been typed. And most likely it wasn't Henry Flipper - he probably wasn't there. But he probably was such a great role model for these soldiers and for their children to aspire to become commanding officers themselves, that someone out of admiration decided to carve his name into stone. Eventually --
SH: That's so cool!
AH: Yeah! It is SO cool.
MG: And then he was later, much later on after he died, was exonerated. Is that --Am I making that up?
AH: Yeah, yeah. First by the army, in like the 70s, and then President Bill Clinton gave him a presidential pardon.
MG: That's right.
AH: In 1999. [Laughs]. I don't know as many stories about Buffalo Soldiers and black outlaws, but one of the men who was stationed in Bonita Canyon, had a really long military career, and over that time, he was stationed a lot in the southwest. And in Texas, at Ft. Davis. And while he was in Texas, he was married to a woman who was from Mexico. We don't have her exact name, the court records and his military records from that time, sometimes have illegible handwriting. Try as hard as you can, it's hard to read that cursive. And so, he was married to this woman, and they were separated but they never had an official divorce. Which came in to play when he married his second wife, after his enlistments were over. And this was back in his home state of Missouri. And she was black, and he was black, and so that was fine, but there was a question of whether he was ever actually properly divorced from his first wife, who was Mexican. And some of the court documents said that because it was an interracial marriage at that time, it wasn't necessarily legal. So, there were a lot of hangups about his relationship with his first wife, and then you know, his second wife. They stayed married until she passed away. And John Casey's third wife was white! And if you think about this time period, he was living in Missouri, and interracial was illegal marriage was illegal in Missouri until 1967, thanks to the Supreme Court decision, Loving vs. Virginia. So, John Casey had to get married in Kansas, where it was legal for him to have an interracial marriage. So I think that his story really highlights some of the difficulties he had in his personal life, trying to live with the woman that he loved. So, I think that's one that probably would stand out in my mind.
SH: Wow, that's so fascinating that you can find all this information about soldiers' personal lives. Even from military documents.
AH: Yeah, a lot of what we know about some of the men in Troop H in particular in the 10th Cavalry, was first complied by this man, named Harold Sayer. And he was a historian who did a lot of work at Ft. Davis. And he wrote a book called "Warriors of Color," and he did a lot of the leg work on finding that research.
SH: Interesting. And so the same troops that were at Bonita Canyon and Fort Bowie were at Fort Davis as well?
AH: Yes. A lot of the men went through Fort Davis. It was one of the major forts as you headed out west. And so a lot of them, if they weren't permanently stationed there, were stationed for a few years the way John Casey was, they would have passed through there on their way to various outposts in Arizona and New Mexico and other places.
SH: So, Mr. Certaine also described African American Soldiers during the 1800s as uh, "In the shadows of American History." Do you feel like small encampments like the one in Bonita Canyon have any power to assuage that issue? You know, being so small you might think there's not enough there.
AH: Certainly. I think that it's really true that a lot of these Buffalo Soldier sites and stories are in the shadow in a lot of major events that have happened in the United States. A number of the men who were stationed in Bonita Canyon had really long military careers. Some of them fought for their own freedom during the Civil War, in the US Colored Troops. And some of them continued their military careers through the Spanish American War, and fought in Cuba. Some of them fought in the Philippines. So, I think it's pretty remarkable to think about men who were really able to travel the world and see the world, and get this broader perspective just because they had joined the army. So, that, you know, that really gives the men a wide range of places that we can connect them to. You know, all over the world, as well as all over the United States.
And if we zoom in on Chiricahua National Monument, and the Faraway Ranch House which is in the vicinity of where that temporary camp in Bonita Canyon was, we probably have one of our most fascinating connections tot he 10th Cavalry. And they made a stone monument to President Garfield, while they were stationed there, over the winter of 1885 and 1886. And we can make some educated guesses as to why they chose to honor President Garfield, but there is a giant stone, that says "In Memory of James A Garfield." And he had been recently assassinated in 1881. And prior to his presidency, he spent almost 20 years in congress, and was always an advocate for black rights during reconstruction era in the south. And then prior to that, he commanded black soldiers during the Civil War. So, we can make an educated guess as to why they chose to honor him, with this giant stone. And then around that giant center piece stone a lot of the men carved their names, and initials, Troop H, E or I, and the 10th Cavalry. So, we have this monument that they made in 1886. But by the early 1900s it was beginning to crumble down, and Neil Erikson who was an early pioneer in Bonita Canyon was an army man himself. He was a Swedish immigrant himself. And he really liked this monument, he probably saw it shortly after it was built, when he and his wife moved out to Bonita Canyon in 1888. And he always wanted to see the monument restored to it's former glory. But he was unable to really get anyone interested in preserving it. And the monument just continued to disintegrate, and people would take stones away as souvenirs, so it was in some ways in danger of being lost to history. Eventually, Neil's daughter Lilian, and her husband Ed Riggs decided that the best way to save the monument was to dismantle it and turn it into their fire place at Faraway Ranch. So, this is completely undoing a monument to President Garfield made by these Buffalo Soldiers with their hand-carved stones, but it was preserving it in a different form, as their fireplace. Which is pretty fascinating, re-purposing and sort of re-identifying this monument into something that they would use for decades to come to help heat their house. But, because all these stone are cemented into the fireplace they aren't in danger of wondering away or being taken as souvenirs. So, it is pretty unconventional, but we often talk about this as an act of conservation because we have this tangible connection to the Buffalo Soldiers, even though it's not in its original form anymore.
SH: Wow. That's amazing. And can visitors still see it today?
AH: Definitely! So, the grounds around Faraway Ranch are always open, so you can see the outside part of the fireplace and the guest dining room. And if you want to see that center stone that says "In memory of James A Garfield" you can go on a tour inside the ranch house with a ranger.
SH: That's great. You know, so often small sites like this are so ephemeral, and especially ephemeral camps by definition are ... but that's great that there's this lasting physical, tangible item that visitors can still see and get that connection.
AH: Yeah! And I'm always hoping that there will be some descendant of one of the Buffalo Soldiers, who's heard stories about this stone monument that his or her grandfather made so many years ago. And I just keep hoping that, you know, something will come out of the woodworks, and we'll be able to learn a little more about the lives of these men. Because with John Casey, everything we know is just based on court documents, and military records. So, we don't have any diaries, we don't have any letters to go off of, so until we have those documents and we can talk about them from the soldiers own point of view, anything that we say is incomplete and imbalanced.
SH: So, speaking of you know, these tangible objects, the camp in Bonita Canyon, was excavated by Marty Tagg, when he worked for the National Park Service. How do you connect the artifacts that he found, um, that you know, these physical objects that soldiers leave behind to the men being researched?
AH: Well, sometimes it's hard to know if any artifact can go with a specific man, but I would say that's not necessarily the case for the blacksmith. John Robinson was Troop H's blacksmith, and he probably used some of the horseshoes and horseshoe nails that have been found in Bonita Canyon. So, I really enjoy just thinking about those, you know, they're now artifacts, but at the time they were just useful objects that helped him do his job, helped him protect the army horse hooves. And you know, just imagining him shaping the horse shoes and nailing them into the hard walls of the hoof. And John Robinson has two stones in the Garfield Fireplace, as we call the Fireplace at Faraway Ranch. And his first stone says, you know, his name, John Robinson, and then it says "Blacksmith", so he's proud of his occupation. But his second stone is really impressive. It's carved in high relief, which takes a whole lot more skill than just engraving your name into a stone. So here, in high relief, you're sort of chiseling away everything that you don't want, so it's a lot easier to make mistakes or ruin what you're working on when you're doing it in high relief. And he chiseled out a horseshoe and a hammer as well as his initials. So, he was really skilled, you know, a skilled stone worker, and probably a skilled blacksmith! And we know that he's Canadian. We know that he enlisted in Detroit, Michigan. But that's all that we know. I could only find one enlistment record. And I ... tried to trace a lot of different paths, but right now that's all we know about him. And I just think from those few little facts, he seems like a pretty fascinating person.
SH: Seriously. That's, um, one of the reasons that I love archaeology. You can get these, you know, very simple things, that look like they're trash, right?
AH: [laughs] yeah.
SH: That someone left behind, and yet that can start to connect you with someone who lived 150 years ago.
AH: Yeah! And I like to think about what maybe they ate. One of the artifacts is a Royal Baking Powder tin. So, maybe someone was using that to bake bread in an outdoor oven. You know, because you need baking powder to help things rise, baking soda. And so, just imagining them making their bread. Of course, we usually buy our bread at the store, and if we make it from scratch, it's really easy to get the ingredients that we need. It's just a short drive to the grocery store. But for these men, that bread would, you know, take a lot more effort in a lot of ways to make sure that you had all the ingredients that you need, and you had the time to do it, and you had the fire and the oven at the right temperature. So, I love that little connection as well to the kitchen.
SH: Seriously! That's probably a lot better than the thin - or not thin, but dense - hard tack that they would have had 20 years earlier in the Civil War.
AH: Right. Definitely.
MG: One of the interesting things -- I've had the opportunity to actually look at the collection from Bonita Canyon, and also the collection from Fort Bowie, and they're really very similar, and that's not surprising of course, because a lot of it's you know, military issue things like uniforms and accouterments and like you mentioned, uh, food cans and things like that. Um, it makes me think, so for the listeners, Fort Bowie is about, less than 20 miles away from Bonita Canyon. Can you talk a little bit about the reasons that Buffalo Soldiers would have been in a temporary encampment, as opposed to being at Fort Bowie?
AH: Certainly. So, in the Chiriachua Mountains, there were lots and lots of temporary camps, during the Apache Campaign. So the US government was trying to capture all of the Chiricahua Apache, who in their eyes were causing a lot of trouble. And their military strategy to do that was to have soldiers stationed at every water hole along the US-Mexico border. So, even though Bonita Canyon is more or less 60 miles north of the border, they have springs, they have creeks there, so they have soldiers there. And it just happened that Bonita Canyon, the only soldiers in that temporary camp, were black soldiers in the 10th Cavalry. Other temporary camps had white soldiers and different cavalry and infantry units. So, there were lots of temporary camps, just scattered throughout the Chiricahua Mountains as the US Army tried to capture Chief Mangas, Chief Nana, and a whole bunch of other people, including Geronimo. And Geronimo ended up being captured, and taken to Fort Bowie. And so he was held there before he was transported by train, all the way to Florida. So, this was a big military push to capture all of the Chiricahua Apache.
MG: I've heard it described, for maybe lack of a better term, as sort of search and destroy missions. Where they would be, sort of chasing down these smaller groups of Apache combatants. From the stories that we heard from Mr. Certaine, and some of the things I've read, it sounds like, uh, that was a really hard lifestyle. That would have been really difficult to chase down these groups and live in some of these temporary encampments, far away from the fort.
AH: I think that that's really true. A lot of the men in Bonita Canyon were, I imagine, mostly bored, during their time. I mean, they're guarding the water hole, they're carrying mail, they were escorting civilians so that they could get from place to place safely, but a lot of them didn't actually see any action during that year that they were stationed in Bonita Canyon. But after Chief Naiche, who was Chief Cochise's son, and Geronimo surrendered, they were taken to Fort Bowie and there was one more major Chiricahua Apache Chief who hadn't been captured, and that was Chief Mangas. And some of the men in Troop H went with their commander, and were able to capture Chief Mangas, and his family. And this was a peaceful surrender, and it was partially negotiated by John Casey. Because you think about these different groups of people that we have interacting: the Buffalo Soldiers spoke English, the Chiricahua Apache had their dialect, and you know, there could be some possible translation errors. And John Casey, probably because he had been married to a woman from Mexico, spoke Spanish. So, he was able to translate Spanish from Mangas' mother, into you know, just English, and they were able to negotiate a peaceful surrender. So, he played an important role in translating, you know, Spanish because she was speaking Spanish to her son, who was speaking the Chiricahua dialect, and it was a safe surrender, no one was hurt. Of course, Chief Mangas and all of his family were then transported to Florida with all of the other Chiricahua Apache. So, they were no longer allowed to live in their homeland, but it sounds like that was a pretty impressive surrender to have...
SH: That's pretty amazing, you know, to have the last big surrender takes place in three different languages.
AH: Yes. And it was negotiated by Buffalo Soldiers. They did, of course, have a white captain. His name was Charles Cooper, and his daughter wrote a pretty impressive memoir about her time as a "child of the fighting 10th." Her name was Forrestine Cooper Hooker. And reading her memoir there are some references to Bonita Canyon, and some of the individual soldiers, who she sort of grew up with in a way.
SH: Wow.
MG: Hmm.
AH: Yeah.
SH: So that's fascinating. You have a child that was following them. Would she have stayed in the forts, rather than being at some of these advanced, or field encampments? You know, we were talking about baking soda, or baking powder, and you know, that seems very much like a luxury for these men who are out in the middle of nowhere guarding a waterhole.
AH: Yes! Normally she and her mother would have stayed at the fort, but I think that her father had been in the field for quite a while, and her mother wanted to go out and visit him. And so she brought her daughter along, and there's this story that Forrestine was trying to bring back a cow, that still had a calf, because they wanted a cow to milk, and she was having a hard time herding it though the canyon on her horse. And at one point her horse bolted and she was screaming and her hat fell off, and one of the soldiers thought that she was being attacked, and so he rushed to her rescue, and everyone got a big laugh out of it afterwards. But, I don't think that they were really supposed to be in that temporary camp, it was just, I think Captain Cooper's wife missed her husband.
SH: Excellent. So Buffalo Soldiers are connected with many National Park Service units throughout the American West and Southwest and Northwest as you've shown. They even, you know, after the Indian Wars close up, the Buffalo Soldiers who.. uh, then end up serving in leadership in National Parks. It's not just National parks about Buffalo Soldiers, or that encompass Buffalo Soldier sites or remains. It's um, park rangers who are at the Presidio of San Francisco, and Yellowstone and Sequoia/Kings Canyon. Um, yet, many people don't know that history, um, what can listeners do to become more educated on that history, and what can the park service do to better tell their story?
AH: That's a really great question. I would right now, one of the best places to go to learn more about Buffalo Soldiers and national park sites, is the Buffalo Soldier subject site on nps.gov. So that's ...
SH: We can put links for our listeners too, on the website.
AH: Oh perfect! Yes, that's perfect. So that's a great place to start. And highlight a lot of the different parks that have connections to Buffalo Soldiers. But I would say, one of the things that visitors can do, is ask a ranger if there are any untold stories in their park. Because there are so many more things that we can talk about as park rangers than just the main reason that the park is established. So, Chiricahua was established to protect the geology, but that's not the only story that we share. We talk about Faraway Ranch, and the Swedish immigrants, and about the Buffalo Soldiers. We talk about the plants and the animals, so there are lots of different stories that you can learn about in different national park sites. So, I would definitely encourage you to ask a ranger about any untold stories. And I think that the park service is really becoming more aware, and trying to share a lot of these diverse stories, and multiple perspectives, because the whole point of the park is to protect stories as well as the natural and cultural resources that we have. A lot of park sites have not just beautiful scenery, but really complicated stories that highlight why we are American. You have stories not just about Buffalo Soldiers, but about Civil Rights in the United States. The Selma to Montgomery national historic trail. You have Manzanar where Japanese and Japanese Americans were kept during WWII. You have StoneWall Inn that commemorates the ongoing struggle for LGBTQ rights in the United States. There are all sorts of complicated stories that are woven together into the fabric of who we are as Americans. And it's not just the beautiful places that the park service protects, it's this complicated that makes us who we are, and highlighting the connections that we have from the past to the present, and thinking about the way all of these stories are intertwined - the fact that John Casey couldn't get married in his home state. And if he had lived to be you know, if he had lived into the 1960s he eventually would have been able to get married there, in Missouri, after the Supreme Court decision. But, I mean, that's a long time to wait! And so, there are a lot of these stories that are just on going. And history doesn't really end, it just keeps on going, and I think that's something that the park service can continue to highlight. It's not just dead guys in the past. It's a lot of issues that we're continuing to grapple with today.
MG: One of the things that we've talked a lot about in some of our other episodes is relevancy and making sure that these places are relative to all of different groups of people that might come visit. So, telling a lot of different stories, from different perspectives is a great way to do that.
AH: Yeah! And i think that there are some really simple things, I mean, we're talking about soldiers. There are so many people who serve in our armed forced across the country and across the world. You know, we have a whole month dedicated to African American history, we have a month for women's history. We have all of these things that we value, and dedicate time to, and I do think that when we highlight those in our national park sites, it's a great way to connect the park to the people, and the people to the park.
SH: Well, thank you Ann. This is awesome. And I totally agree. I hope this episode has helped a little bit to highlight some of those as well. Thank you so much for joining us.
AH: Thank you for having me! This has been really fun.
MUSIC
SH: So I love this interview with Ann. It's one of our shorter ones, but she really has a way of bringing forward complicated stories, and her quote about you know, complicated stories really reveal who we are. And that really is all about relevancy and why these sites, why all of our national park service units were set aside. And with talking with her, it seems like there are all of these little individual stories, and it's cool to learn about this person. But you know, Matt, your back and forth with Ann about Flipper, you know, you have this story about the first black cadet to graduate from WestPoint, and how it has these ripples into the stones that were carved at Chiricahua, and someone who probably revered him, since we don't have the data that he was there. And then how that continues out, uhm, all the way to modern history with President Clinton pardoning him. You know, this really is not just relevancy from the 19th Century, but relevant for today, and the society we're in, and the complicated stories we're all still trying to navigate.
MUSIC
MG: In our next episode we'll continue to talk about complicated stories by discussing Children's Village at Manzanar with Karyl Matsumoto.
MUSIC
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-
Making It Rain - Andy Hubbard - Season 2 Episode 3
In this 3rd episode of our 2nd season, Sharlot starts out saying that it's the opening episode. Sorry for that! Otherwise, please enjoy listening to Sharlot and Matt discuss one of their own projects - climate change and adobe architecture in Tucson. For more information on the Desert Research Learning Center: https://www.nps.gov/im/sodn/drlc.htm
- Credit / Author:
- NPS/Southern Arizona Office
- Date created:
- 04/10/2020
Matthew Guebard (MG): Hello and welcome to the National Park Service Southwest Archeology Podcast, brought to you by the Southern Arizona Office. My name's Matt Guebard.Sharlot Hart (SH): And I'm Sharlot Hart
MUSIC
SH: Hi and welcome to the second season of the National Parks Services Southwest Archaeology Podcast. We're starting out this season with an episode about a project that we're actually running. So, Matt and I have intimate knowledge about the project and are excited this historic preservation endeavor with you. So first we'll talk about the project a bit, and Matt will give some background. And then, uh, we actually have our interview today with a natural resource expert, and then we'll have our take for you. I should also note that our interview with Andy Hubbard was done in the field. So, as you start listening to the interview portion, you'll get to hear water application to adobe walls in our historic preservation project. So, take it away Matt!
MG: So the history of this project is really interesting, but the history of the national park service as a national agency, thinking about climate change impacts, goes back several years. And that's both for natural resources, so plants and animals and ecosystems, as well as archeological sites and so places. But this can be a really hard thing to do collectively because there are a lot of different resource types, and they are located in different areas, with different climate regimes. So, we think about archeological sites, just as an example, we have 418 units of the park service. Most of those have archeological resources, but they're all in different places. They're also different ages and comprised of different materials, so they're experiencing the weather differently. Ah, so the earliest examples of the park service thinking about climate change impact for archeological sites happened on the coast, in places like Jamestown, where archeologists wanted to understand impacts that might be caused by sea level rise. So, things like archeological sites being covered in sea water, or affected by storm surges.
In the American Southwest, we're obviously not concerned about sea level rise, but we are concerned about rainfall. Uh, we have a lot of resources like adobe walls, at places like Tumacácori National Historical Park, that are really fragile and can be affected by rainfall. And anecdotally, a lot of the park service archeologists who deal with adobe resources have recognized that rainfall events, particularly high intensity rainfall events where we get a lot of rain in a short period of time, like 24 hours, can have a big impact on adobe walls and can actually cause them to collapse. So, this project was an attempt to try to understand the relationship between increasing intense rainfall events, and damage to adobe walls. The hope is that we can figure out some strategies for dealing with climate change impacts. We know that we can't change the weather, but we can adapt and create some strategies that will hopefully protect and preserve fragile resources in the future.
MUSIC
SH: Thank you Andy Hubbard for joining me today. Um, I'm here with Andy Hubbard, he is the Program Manager for the Sonoran Desert Inventory and Monitoring Network. Um, which has a physical location in the Desert Research Learning Center, here in Tucson at the end of Broadway Road. Thanks for joining me!
Andy Hubbard (AH): Thank you for having me.
SH: So, this is a little odd, because normally Matt and I interview folks who uh, have titles like archeologist, archivist...
AH: People who know things?
SH: Right, people who know things. And you are a biologist by trade. So, um, so, it's a little bit different for us, but I'm interviewing you because we are partnering on a project looking at climate change affects on adobe walls. So we talked about historic preservation in the podcast and listeners might be interested to get a really 360 view of how historic preservation actually involves a lot of other disciplines. So, thanks for joining me again.
AH: Yep.
SH: And uh, I wanted to start off, just, can you tell us a little bit about the Learning Center and your program? And then we'll kind of look at how that fits into this adobe wall project.
AH: Yeah, so, the Desert Research Learning Center, the intention of this place and what we build our programs around, is exposing the public to science in parks. We focus on the 11 Sonoran Desert parks, 10 in Arizona and 1 in New Mexico. So, we have public programs that are you know, educational. So we'll have school groups out here, or other clubs, things like that. But we also have folks actually doing science, analyzing data.
SH: Excellent. So, you're essentially looking at the ecological problems of natural resources in those 10 southern Arizona parks.
AH: Right.
SH: And Gila Cliff in New Mexico. Can't forget about them. So, um, how does a historic preservation adobe wall project fit in with your uh, your operation here in Tucson?
AH: For the learning center, we're trying to bring the public into the science that we're doing on parks. But the primary goal of our program, Inventory and Monitoring Program, which is a national program, is to collect information on natural resources that park decision makers, that's superintendents in parks can make decisions. And the idea is that we're providing early warning of problems and we're also documenting [inaudible] trying management techniques preservation techniques. And in the cultural resources world, you're also doing monitoring. In the natural resources world where the focus is maybe more on climate or water quality or biology, um, but honestly at the park level its the same thing. Parks are managing natural and cultural resources it's almost seamless.
SH: Right
AH: You can't base the focus on one and pretend the other doesn't exist.
SH: Exactly! Exactly, we've talked a lot in the podcast about how they're intertwined. And so things like erosion from increased rainstorms or climate change, stream quality and my very pretty adobe walls.
AH: They affect lots of things. Yeah. Um, a lot of people would say soil is the ecological foundation. So, beyond even just localized erosion, or effects on streams and water quality which is enormous. You have affects in those terrestrial systems too.
SH: So can you tell us a little bit about the atmospheric data that went in to designing the research design?
AH: So, in addition to our 11 parks, most parks in the southwest have a long term climate change -- climate station or weather station. These were established in many cases by NOAA -- the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Um, and so the reason they picked parks was because the thought was these were spots that were not going to change dramatically, not gonna have development happening, for example in parks. And so they wanted to situate these in sites where long term data record would be stable in respect to what's going on around the parks. Now, that hasn't always been the case. We have parks like Casa Grande where they've changed dramatically: a small park and the areas around it. But because of this early siting my NOAA we have some of the best climate data on parks of anywhere in the southwest. So, what we do, is that we build on that existing partnership with NOAA, we're using those long term data sets which are continuously being added to. We've also added additional climate stations to try to pick up things like variability in topography. So, if you have a mountain within a park, there's a huge variability and a huge impact that that has on air temperature, precipitation and other climate attributes. And that really sets the stage for ecosystems in there. So, we've actually added to that, but we're still partnering with NOAA on these newer stations. Uh, we have one actually sitting right next to the test walls. So, these relatively inexpensive but fairly precise stations um, are what's called the citizens weather observer program. Which NOAA manages. So, we access that data, and all of our parks as well as all the parks in the Chihuahuan Desert, I believe most, if not all, in the Mojave Desert, and throughout most of the Southern Plains area, are actively monitoring climate and weather patterns. [Inaudible]
SH: And you said citizen data. Does that interlink with citizen science? A term that's become really popular.
AH: It can. So, the cooperative observer stations, so even those, and those are the traditional NOAA stations that go back a lot further, if you're as old as I am, which is old!
SH: [Laughs]
AH: Um, or even older, you may remember the white boxes. You would see these louvered boxes, wooden boxes in parks.
SH: Oh, I've taken data out of those!
AH: Exactly. Most park visitor centers had those. Many of those have been replaced with automated stations, which have more precision and [inaudible] um, but those, many of those were established and operated by the public. Um, [inaudible] in the Midwest for farms. You know, you have a farm where they would be operating that same station for generations. The citizen observer program was an additional add on piece. And there are data sources coming in from all over the southwest from people who have these in their backyard. Um, if people are interested in that, you can google NOAA citizen weather observer program, and you can join!
SH: Excellent! And for our listeners, I'll put links in our website, so you can click and see all that data. Um, so we have 20 test walls out here. Mini adobe walls that look a bit like an "adobe henge." And, so we have four um, test levels that we are spraying the walls with an artificial rain machine. Can you tell us about the four different levels that were spraying?
AH: Sure. So what we did is that for this initial experiment. And this is the first in what we're seeing is a whole series of these, um, this is a really unknown area as I understand within archeology: the sort of specific impacts that they -- different specific weather events can have on adobe architecture and maybe historic architecture in general.
SH: Definitely.
AH: So, essentially, what we did, as you said, we're going to focus this at Tumacácori. Which is Tumacácori National Historical Park, is where a lot of the initial questions were. And these walls were replicating um, walls that, you would know better than I, were apparently from those sites.
SH: [laughs]
AH: So, what we did is we went to the data record, and again there's data from Tumacácori going back to 1930s. And so that's a rich record of data, gives you a lot of veracity where you can identify major rainfall events. So, what we're replicating here is we have a control, which isn't truly a control. So, a control would be in this sense what would happen in a normal year. What we're actually doing with the control is completely protecting these from any rainfall.
SH: Excellent.
AH: So this is... our assumption is that this is our null hypothesis. There should be no change. At least from not from water.
SH: Okay.
AH: There might be wind erosion, there could be people touching the walls and a little loss. But um, these should be, we should see no difference.
Then the first level of the experiment is what is the average rainfall we would see over a 30 minute period in an average year. So, the return frequency on these, based on this long term data record is what we'd see in an average year. That's going to be .71 or 71 hundredths of an inch, over a 30 minute period.
Um, The second level is like a 25 year storm. That's higher, I believe it's over an inch, I can't remember the number off the top of my head. And then we're kinda, um, the higher end treatment, the fourth treatment.
SH: Yeah?
AH: It's a hundred year rain storm.
SH: Oh wow.
AH: So, again, does this mean that you get one of these in one hundred years? Not necessarily. What it's doing is expressing the probability of how often these events might occur. You could have multiple 100 year events within a short timeframe.
SH: Okay.
AH: You could have fewer than that if our data records are long enough to show that.
SH: Gottcha.
AH: So, to be clear it's not to say, "hey! we got our hundred year rainfall event, we're good for the next 99." Not actually how it works.
SH: Okay.
AH: Now, with climate change, we're seeing... one of the more reliable predictions that we have for the southwest, in terms of kind of the finer scale we're looking at within seasonal patterns, is for precipitation. We'll have an increase in these sort of extreme events.
SH: And I know, um, from our just kind of qualitative data, you know, cultural resource managers and historic preservationists talking together about standing architecture at our sites, we're seeing the effect of this, you know, these big very intense storms are creating more damage, we think. So that's you know, why we're trying to start with this pilot project and baseline data.
AH: The other thing I would point out is that right here, in town, in Tucson here, at the University of Arizona, there's a climate change response program. Um, it's a combination of the university and then the US Geological Survey. And it's a big research program, and so they're getting a lot more fine scale research data on the occurrence of these events. And what I mean by fine scale is sort of temporally. What happening - how often are they happening over time? and trying to move towards being able to predict these more. And so, again, this isn't a one to one, we're not saying we know how many of these more extreme events are necessarily going to happen. Specifically at Tumacácori in a given year. But the weight of evidence suggests that we're going to have more of them, and they'll be more frequent.
SH: Right.
AH: They might not be on that 100 year frequency.
SH: Ha, okay. And that is really important for us, so that we can actually have a replicable experiment here that leads to better management decisions. [inaudible]
AH: Yep. Absolutely.
SH: So, it's quiet now, but there's been a lot of noise behind us. Can you explain uh, what you're seeing behind me, while we've been talking?
AH: Sure! So, my understanding is that um, in the archeological world there have been similar test projects with test walls. But, typically on the rainfall end it's been literally somebody standing there with a garden hose perhaps. Which again, maybe the volume you could measure out and be somewhat similar. Um, there's a lot more complexity about how rain actually falls and what impact it might have on walls or on soil. So, one of the really fascinating collaborations that are spinning up out of this is not only between the natural resources and cultural resources folks of the park service, we've connected with an agency within the US Dept of Agriculture, called the Agriculture Research Service. And here in Tucson they have their wildland watershed research unit. And so they've been doing for decades research on the impacts of different rainstorm events, as well as management treatments - grazing, burning, etc. - on soil erosion. And so they've developed some really sophisticated technology for replicating rainfall. So, rather than stand there with a garden hose and saying "we put a little on, we put a lot on" we're using the existing climate record and the best representation science can give us for what these rain storm events are gonna look like.
SH: Excellent. So, even though is sounds like a um, front lawn kind of watering device, it's actually a nozzle uh, that's been calibrated ...
AH: And will be repeatedly calibrated throughout the experiment.
SH: Excellent. Cool. Well, what are you most excited about getting out of this whole, um, endeavor?
AH: Uh, so I guess to me, I've been reporting to park management, --managers and superintendents, climate information for a long time. And that has a lot of fairly obvious natural resources purposes. Maybe finding areas that we're going to have different events of visitation happening, planning fire events or fire management activities, uh, trail maintenance etc. But this to me, is really helping to get at using natural resource data, using climate data; it's another great application or all these cultural resource parks, this may be one of the more important data pieces you have. Um, the better --better to have an early warning, to how to expect to do these things. So, the thing we always like to say to park managers is bad news early is always better than bad news late. You can predict, or have some indication of a problem, you're much more likely to be able to fix that problem, and probably [inaudible] to fix that problem, in terms of going in.
SH: Definitely. Cool.
AH: So, in a sense, this is a response from you know, both you and I have been hearing for a long time from folks at the park, that we need better information to predict when we need to get out there and do preservation activities. And how to plan better for it.
SH: Definitely. Cool. Well, I thank you for your partnership in this project. I know we've had some random set backs and time delays. But I'm really excited that we're finally out here and spraying these walls. We're makin' it rain today!
AH: Well, it's gonna happen. there are a variety of side bets on what may be the outcome of some of these heavier storms, so we'll see.
SH: HAHA. Exactly. We'll have to report back to our listeners.
AH: Yeah - stay tuned!
SH: Cool. Thank you so much for joining me today.
AH: Thank you.
MUSIC
SH: So, Matt, this was a great project with Andy and his crew, and the USDA folks, and our team. Since that interview with Andy, we have been able to look at some of the data. And even though a lot of it is what we would expect, um, it's still interesting and it's still giving us a base for future work and future understanding of how intensified rain, um, is damaging the walls and what we can do, uh, to mitigate that. So, for instance, there is some damage in just one year storms. And there's damage in all of the storm intensities on the surface of the walls, before moisture even reached the center of the walls. And we know that because we had um, moisture sensors embedded at different points in the walls. So, that can tell us a lot about what kind of different wall failures we might have. If it's just the surface, or if it's gonna be the entire wall, or sections of a wall.
We also found that there's major storm damage with the 25 year storms and the 100 year storms. So, that gave us a lot more testing ideas to run with in the future. For instance, if we test the storm intensity between 1 year and the 25 year, that might give us a better understanding of where the tipping point for um, significant damage actually occurs.
We also want to test a full season of storms. You know, what happens to a wall if it's not fully dried out. Does the moisture reach the center quicker? So we have a long way to go before we can actually come up with some really solid management suggestions on how to mitigate damage. But this has been an excellent pilot project and first step.
MG: I think this project is a really fantastic example of interdisciplinary cooperation. And that's something that we've talked about in previous episodes to try to create a project that's really comprehensive. This is a perfect example of that.
SH: Cool. Well, I hope everyone out there is excited to hear updates, because we'll have updates on the project as it unfolds. And until next time, when we have an episode focusing on Buffalo Soliders and African American History in the Southwest, and an interview with Mr. Certaine, a historical re-enactor and historian.
MUSIC
SH: The National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast is a production of the Southern Arizona Office of the National Park Service. Our artwork was designed by Laura Varon-Burkhart. Justin Mossman composed music. We look forward to hearing from you. Matt and I will be with you again next month.
MUSIC
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-
Historic Preservation - Francis P. McManamon - Episode 1
To start off our NPS Southwest Archeology Podcast, we interview Francis P. McManamon about the beginnings of historic preservation and the Antiquities Act. Frank is the former Chief Archeologist for the National Park Service, and current Executive Director of the Center for Digital Antiquity (https://www.digitalantiquity.org/).
- Credit / Author:
- NPS Southern Arizona Office
- Date created:
- 08/31/2017
NPS Southwest Archeology Podcast Episode 1 - PreservationMusic Intro
Matthew Guebard (MG): Hello and welcome to the National Park Service Southwest Archeology Podcast, brought to you by the Southern Arizona Office. My name's Matt Guebard.
Sharlot Hart (SH): And I'm Sharlot Hart
MUSIC
SH: So both Matt and I work for the National Park Service and specifically for the Southern Arizona office. We're both archaeologists and in our jobs we get to help lots of parks and out in Arizona and and also throughout the southwest. So that makes us lucky enough to see archaeology throughout the state and throughout the southwest. And this podcast is a growth of that excitement that we get to be out in the field seeing all the different types of archaeology and all the different types of tools and the methodology that the National Park Service uses and our partners use in investigating the past. So this podcast is here to help share our enthusiasm for this subject with you.
MG: So we want this podcast to give you sort of a behind-the-scenes view of how National Park Service archeology works because a lot of times you may go to a park and there's archaeology occurring all around you, but you may not see it. So we want to provide you with information directly from the source by interviewing National Park Service archaeologists, University researchers, and tribal folks so you can hear their voice and get a sense for how the National Park Service does archaeology.
SH: We also want to hear back from you, so if you're listening to this podcast from an aggregator like iTunes please go to our website at www.nps.gov/soar. That's for the Southern Arizona Office. That's where our podcast is hosted and you can send us an email or listen to the podcast directly there. We will also have links any links that are mentioned in our interviews will-- we'll make sure that they're there for you as well.
MUSIC
SH: So, to start off the podcast, this episode focuses on the origins of the historic preservation movement. This is partially because this month August the National Park Service is celebrating citizen science month. So we invited Frank McManamon former Chief Archaeologist for the National Park Service and current Executive Director of the Center for Digital Antiquity to share those beginnings with us. The Center for Digital Antiquity preserves archaeological information and ensures that it is accessible. One tool that digital antiquity uses is tDAR or the Digital Archaeological Record. tDAR is an online database, a repository for cultural resource records, that makes accessible digital files, and not just a bibliographic record. It's used at all scales from academics researching large projects to art historians looking at pottery collections, to even public education. In his role with the National Park Service Frank was instrumental in working with teams and the nationwide maintenance program to define archaeological sites as maintained. This allowed the stabilization and preservation projects of these sites that we have the National Park Service preserve to qualify for different funding sources and also helped park based archaeologists to put in place cyclical preservation programs to address chronic issues such as erosion and weathering. Frank also help them think about resource management as a collaborative method. He also first saw the need for a nationwide archaeological database to facilitate the inventory of archaeological resources and thus helped affect the birth of the Archaeological Sites Management Information System, or ASMIS, that we continue to use today.
Before the interview Matt and I will discuss historic preservation in action at his site. And after will answer some frequently asked questions from you.
MUSIC
SH: So before we get into our interview with Frank McManamon, Matt and I wanted to discuss a little bit about Historic Preservation in action. So Matt, I know you have your office at Tuzigoot National Monument and serve as the Chief of Resources there and have long served as the archeologist. What do you and your crew do at Tuzigoot and can you tell us about the historic preservation there?
MG: Sure, so we have a crew that consists of an archeologist and some preservation masons. And their job is really to do preservation work at the sites, so they're repairing the walls and really protecting what archaeologists would call the integrity of the sites, so protecting the information that is part of that site so that it can be studied by future archaeologists and also so that information can be used in future interpretations of the site.
SH: Nice, so how did we get to this point today with historic preservation? Where did Tuzigoot come from?
MG: So Tuzigoot is an Ancestral Native American site. It was built and occupied sometime between the 1100 and the 1400s. But it was excavated in the 1930s as part of a depression-era project, so folks from the local community of Clarkdale and Jerome, who were out of work during the Depression were actually hired to help archaeologists excavate the site. The idea being that it could be turned into a tourist location that would create revenue for the local community.
SH: So even though they wouldn't have had the term citizen science back in the 30s Tuzigoot really is a homegrown tourist and archaeological site.
MG: It is, absolutely. So, Tuzigoot is a really good example of a local community taking pride in its history. But then promoting that history for the benefit of the community so in a lot of ways it's what we might think of today as heritage tourism. It's an early example of that. So there's sort of two things at play if we use Tuzigoot as an example: the National Park Service is protecting the physical remains of the site, but then also making sure that those remains are safe for visitation and that they convey all of the information that we want visitors to get about the site. So they're educational and they provide an experience
SH: Well, thanks Matt. I'm really excited to hear what Frank McManamon has to say about the early days of historic preservation so let's get to his interview.
MUSIC
MG: So this is Matt Guebard and Sharlot Hart. We're here with Dr. Frank McManamon. He's the Executive Director of Digital Antiquity and former Chief Archaeologist for the National Park Service. Hi Frank.
FM: Hi. Nice, nice to be here.
SH: Hi. Good morning.
MG: Thanks for coming.
FM: My pleasure.
MG: So this this episode is talking about sort of history of preservation. For a lot of listeners they may be familiar with historic preservation through the National Register of Historic Places, or through any of the historic preservation laws or regulations that are out there. But what they might not know is that a lot of this sort of early historic preservation efforts were actually funded or planned by private citizens or private groups. So at what point did the federal government to become involved, and why do you think that was?
FM: I'm going to-- this is the story of the Antiquities Act.
MG and SH laugh
FM: You can read all about it in a very interesting, about 60 page publication called the "Antiquities Act of 1906" by Ron Lee, Ronald F. Lee, who was the Park Service historian, and official, he was one of the regional directors in Philadelphia at one point in time. And the way he tells the story, which I think is it's certainly engaging, and I think correct, is that the notion of the need to protect American antiquities goes back into the 19th century, into the-- at least the last quarter of the 19th century. And it was that certain private citizens who were interested in antiquities, which were beginning to become known because-- and this really a lot of this happened in the southwest --not only in the southwest but in the southwest antiquities certain kinds of them (you two know better than I do) they're seen more, they stick up above the ground. So people can see them. They're not invisible not below the ground. And you know some people-- as more Euro-Americans began to move into the Southwest to colonize the southwest for agriculture for ranching, for minerals, you know to run railroads from the Mississippi Valley to California, they began to encounter these kinds of things. They saw petroglyphs. They saw graffiti on rock faces. They saw was cliff dwellings, what we now call the cliff drawings and you know they were interested what's going on here. And some of them were more than interested; some of them, particularly people who were homesteading kind of needed resources. And I mean you know you've lived here, and it's hard to find a big log to build a house. It was hard thousand years ago, and it still is and so some people began taking --not just you know as a trophy or something or you know memento. Some people began taking rocks and structural timbers and things like that out of these ancient structures to build their their contemporary things. So for for whatever reason people began to notice that these Antiquities, that's why that's why they act out the name, it did were being in some cases destroyed, in some cases taken away for reuse. And they became concerned about it. And in the, in the, I say in the last last third of the 19th century groups of private citizens began to come together to say 'well, what can we do about this?' And, of course, they knew a lot of this was happening on government land, these were public lands, and what could they do about it? So, one of the first stories that Lee's history talks about is a group in Boston. And Boston plays an important role in this. Some of the citizens in Boston, (Francis Parkman the American historian; Frederic Putnam, early archeologist, who was instrumental also in saving some of the ancient sites in the midwest, some of the mound sites there, Serpent mound in particular, he had a direct role there) got together with-- with other you know prominent Boston Brahman people, the establishment for sure, when there really was one. And they began to do things like write to their senator in Massachusetts and say 'there's this terrible thing that's happening out here, but what can you do to? We want to save this things,' And so there were a couple episodes of sort of general sense of the Senate, or really they weren't really laws as much as proclamations, and this is, you know, we want to protect these things, and they need to be-- we need to be-- we need to be cognizant of their importance and stuff like that.
Casa Grande ruin was one very specific instance where this particular problem came to came to the floor. And the Boston grouping asked its senator, I think George Hoar, (H Oh A R., I think) at the time to actually have that-- have the quarter-section that that --the big house, where the big house is and the other things that are close enough to it, set aside so that it wasn't so it was public lands but it was set aside for special protection. And I think Benjamin Harrison was president, and he did that. And then he also, or someone in the Senate, maybe the Senate passed an appropriation for preservation of the ruins. So that's but that's where the antiquities act gets its start. And it it-- so there are certain phases, there's this this early phase that involves the Casa Grande Ruins and then more general statements about 'take care of these things' and 'how we're going to do that,' 'this is a problem.' And then finally about 1900, people begin to actually put together, to draft -- statutory language and the-- and of course this is just around the time when who becomes president? President Theodore Roosevelt. And while the Progressive Era of American politics got its start before Roosevelt he was-- he was really keen on progressivism. So, you know, government could do good things in those days. We might not agree with everything it did, we wouldn't agree with everything government did. But people saw using science and using history, and using knowledge, what passed for knowledge at the time, as important things to take advantage of in managing different sorts of resources. So we have Gifford Pinchot with forests, right: we're gonna conserve forests. We're gonna reuse forests. We're gonna come up with a sustainable way of ensuring that America has enough lumber. Basically, so Roosevelt starts creating when he becomes president after McKinley's death, starts setting aside forest reserves with that as the rationale although I think a lot of people even at the time would argue some of these forest reserves, they don't have a lot of timber. What's really going on here?
And this was this was a very progressive kind of approach. Well, you know, we manage the public lands, we sort of know what's valuable, we think we know what's valuable, we think you know there are some problems that we could solve if we could just make it so. And then that-- and so that becomes sort of the, part of the kernel of the-- of the-- of what ultimately becomes the Antiquities Act. Part of the text from 1900 survives in the final versions. And it goes through, I don't know, three, depends on how you count 'em, iterations before gets the name in 1906. And by 1906 there are a couple of primary provisions: one is what we now refer to as the National Monument authority and the second, I think really important, I mean national monument authority is great, I'm a big fan of national monuments and that authority. The way it's been used.
SH: Yeah.
FM: I'm sure. For sure, from 1906 on. And uh, but the section 3 which most people don't know even exist, makes some very important commitments or policies I guess we want to call 'em, about cultural-- what we now talk about is cultural resources. One thing it says, and it's only talking about antiquities in this-- and you know objects of scientific interest. That litany of things that the Antiquities Act covers whether it applies whether it's the national monuments section or this-- or section 3. Section 3 talks about regulate-- they didn't use the word regulate, but it's the permits. Requiring permits to remove antiquities, objects effectively from public lands. That's regulation. And what it says is-- the implication there is that these are important resources. The government is concerned about this and wants to be part of the process. We may not be sending government archaeologists cause there weren't any, out to do the taking away. But we want know who's going to do it; we want to make sure that they do it in a way that is up to the scientific standards of the age and the results are, I think the wording is, for the benefit of scientific, museum, and educational institutions.
SH: Right.
FM: Key! Right? This isn't permitting somebody to go make a coal mine. Or cut down a forest. It's permitting and the end product is public interpretation and care of the-- the resource as a historic or archaeological or cultural or natural resource. To me that's really foundational in terms of what we do, here. And it-- you know, and I think you can draw a straight line from the Antiquities Act through the 1935 Historic Sites act, to the National Register or the National Historic Preservation Act, which is what we all kind of know and love and battle with on a daily basis in these days. So, so section three of the Antiquities Act, I think really is that kind of a foundational thing, because it shows a general interest in these types of resources. A public-- these are a public resource. It is legitimate for the government representing the people by the United States to be concerned about it. And here's-- here's the-- here's how we're going to be concerned about it. We have a policy that you can't remove them unless you have the right end product or end point in mind. And when you remove them you have to do it in a way that is sort of up to snuff and technical techniques and methods and procedures and all that stuff.
MG: Sort of the beginning of archeology and preservation for the public good, but we also talked earlier about sort of trying to standardize what information is collected and reported, which is something that we struggle with now. But that's really sort of an early effort to try to do that: to make sure that everybody's sort of on the same page with how they collect their information and report it.
FM: Exactly. So, the Antiquities Act is a good-- is a good thing, and it still-- it still has relevance, I think, and I hope the national monuments part of it doesn't get downgraded or changed. But I really hope nobody messes around section three. Or just decides you know, to throw up a whole wall.
MG: Well, so that gets the kind of one of the other questions is as you mentioned the Antiquities Act gives the president the power to establish national monuments without congressional approval. That's been sort of a contentious topic recently. The new Trump administration relatively early, I think in March or April, did a review of national monuments that have been created since the Clinton administration.
FM: Yeah, sure.
MG: And a lot of them are here in the west. And so I think you know the president was-- I think he referred to it as contributing to a federal land grab, and this idea that it's a overreach of executive branch. But has the-- has the Antiquities Act always been a contentious political topic?
FM: The issue of size of national monuments was one of the issues that was debated, or at least discussed, in Congress when the final text of the law was going through. But probably even before that. And there was some trepidation by western, typically western political representatives, that this would-- would result in a federal land grab. So there was certainly that point of view, that this would be a problem. I think-- I think I don't know exactly who came up with the phrasing, you know, as large as needed to manage the resource or whatever, and I'm not getting that quite right, but that's-- that's the key phrase that does-- has been interpreted by the courts to give the executive a wide range of discretion in size. But I think it would certainly fair to say and historically accurate to say that the size-- size was a question at the at the very beginning. But you know it did pass. So you know House and Senate both passed it with that language, with that language in it, and they rely upon the discretion and the knowledge of the Executive and how that's carried out.
I think from a from a scientific or historical perspective, the one that we might have as archaeologists or historians or even historical architects, is that since 1906 size has become important and the things we do too. We look at ecosystems now. Of course this isn't just us: natural scientists really take that-- at least see sciences the natural world is fitting into an ecosystem kind of framework. And so, you know, thank goodness there's that leeway there. So the-- the president can declare a monument that you know is the size of a relatively postage stamp-sized and If you're familiar with the African Burial Ground in New York City, you'll know that that, you know that is kind of postage size right for New York, certainly for out here.
MG: Yeah.
FM: You wouldn't even see it. So, and he thought that was appropriate-- and this was George Bush, who I don't think anybody ever thought would use the Antiquities Act. Turns out George Bush, until Obama past him by, and in terms of his marine National monuments, created the biggest marine National Monument that had ever existed. And I don't know, by two or three times...
SH: Yeah, the acreage is huge.
FM: the square acreage of any of the terrestrial monuments that Clinton produced. So, presidents have lots of reasons they do things and ways to do things, and I would say in my reading of the history and then my own professional experience so far, It's it's been good. And I think-- I think the ones that Obama created will prove to be prescient and more valuable than other, more, maybe more immediate economic gains that might be possible from someplace like Bears Ears. And longer term the value of it that is has for Americans and for the local population. History, I mean history shows that that's the case, if you look at the ones that have been created up to this point.
MG: So there are, I think, 125 natural monuments. Some of those are National Park Service managed, others are managed through the Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management most often. So I think they comprise about a hundred million acres is what I saw so it's quite a large land mass. I think-- and you mentioned this kind of early on in the sort of history of the Antiquities Act, monuments were usually relatively small: several acres or a couple hundred acres maybe. One of the largest national monument designations is several mill-- uh, 56 million acres I think is one of the largest. And that-- that was with Carter and Alaska. So there have been larger ones so the concept of as we mentioned sort of what constitutes the smallest area compatibles changed over time. But I think the idea behind the National Monument hasn't changed all that much. And it's interesting to think about the idea that the Antiquities Act, which as you mentioned is the date for that is 1906 and the natural establishment of the National Park Service which is 1960 happened within a ten year period. You kind of touched on this a little bit with progressive politics, but can you talk a little bit more about in what ways is the creation of the antiquities act in the national park service related, do you think? Is there is there a connection there political or otherwise?
FM: I think there's a-- I think there's a cultural and a administrative connection. I think-- I think cultur-- I said cultural-slash-political, that the creation of the National Park Service as an entity to manage the national parks really which is what they focused on, in-- in creating-- in creating-- in identifying the need for a National Park Service. Stephen Mather and Horace Albright the two movers. Mather in particular, as an operator and very wealthy person, saw the need for what at that time I think passed for professional management as opposed to Yellowstone being managed by the military by the US Army. Or any of them. So Mather and Horace Albright, who really was the kind of the doer. Mather's doer. Fixer?Or uh, show runner? What are those called?
SH: There you go.
FM: Runner, park runner. You know saw the need for professional management. And I think that actually is-- hearkens back to the progressive era. But not so much-- They weren't really selling biology. They weren't selling archaeology or historic structures. They were selling scenery. But they were seeing that you know things were-- the way that things were being done it Yellowstone was different from what was going on in Yosemite. And what was happening in Rainier or Sequoia-- and really this needed-- really needed some consistency and a certain kind-- and they needed these things needed to be valued in certain ways. And so, so I think this might, you know, who knows where the progressive era actually stops. Is it World War One? Well that was-- The United States got in to the war like a week before the Park Service was created or something like that or something very close. That, you know, people instead of getting out of the park service bandwagon they were sort of detoured over to the domestic program. Let's go over there, take care of things.
So, but I do think it's it's it's, administratively and politically, and to some extent culturally comes out of the progressive approach to resource management and the need for professionalism, and competence, and science in doing that, doing those sorts of things.
SH: And comes out of the constituency like you were saying in the last half of the nineteenth century with letter-writing. You know the story goes that Mather, you know, was this wealthy businessman in Chicago and writes letter to the Secretary of Interior complaining about the lack of competence and-- and gets an invitation to come fix it and he does.
FM: Yeah, yeah. Yeah, it's very much the same this Boston Brahman.
SH: Yeah!
FM: It's sort of a new-- the next generation. Things spread out of Boston: Chicago gets-- and even Los Angeles. Albright's from, California. And so yeah, but it's the same kind of attention. I really-- I don't know the extent to which the national monuments as a group were a large part of that argument. They could easily have been, I just am not remembering, or-- or it wasn't-- hasn't been looking into. But, Hal Rothman's book about the national monuments would be the place to find-- to look for hints of that. I mean one of the things that he points out is that the national monuments that were brought under the wing of the new National Park Service for management really, were kind of, step children. You know, they weren't really...
MG: They weren't quite pretty enough to be parks.
FM: Or big enough. And so scenery, I think, really was the sort of driving-- I think Dick Sellers makes that point in his book about natural resource management in the park service, was this wasn't about ecology or biology, this was about stunning scenery. TR looking out over the grand canyon.
SH: Well, and I like to point out what I do outreach that all three of the national parks in Arizona, Grand Canyon, Saguaro and Petrified Forest, all started out as national monuments. Under that Antiquities Act and then wanted that status of being a park.
FM: Thank God.
SH: Yeah.
FM: Really. I mean thank God that TR was TR and that and at least in that instance. A lot of people don't like TR, because he did some things that offend us now, or would if he-- he wouldn't be able to get away with them if he tried to do them now. But-- but having the chutzpah to use the Antiquities Act to declare the Grand Canyon National Monument, that was a good one. And Supreme Court agreed eventually; TR was dead for three or four years.
MG: Uh, is there a historical figure associated with the preservation movement who you're particularly fond of?
FM: Well clearly I'm fond of Teddy for some of the things he did, but he didn't-- I don't think he-- I think he did a lot of this stuff sort of on instinct. And now I've looked around in general histories of Roosevelt and I haven't really found anything about archaeology or really even historic structures with things like that. But for I mean, I think he's clearly an important figure with the Antiquities Act. And then the other one, we hadn't talked it all about because he comes out along a little later, but he's related to the Antiquity Act is Jesse Nusbaum.
SH: Right.
FM: Who was the first, as best I can tell, the first NPS archeologist. First archeologist hired by the NPS; not the first one to do work in a park. And he's a superintendent at Mesa Verde, and he did a lot of public outreach. And then he-- he really-- most of his career he was involved with the Antiquities Act and that he was the-- kind of the liaison represented the Secretary in, I think, in evaluating permit-- permittees, people who go to-- come to Interior say I wanna do some archaeology, and on Interior land, BLM land, General Land Office land at the time. And I think-- and he would-- one of his jobs was to go around and he would inspect how they were doing, you know, make sure things were done properly.
MG: Well so, so last question. How can the-- any suggestions on how the public can support historic preservation efforts?
FM: You know this one, I actually wrote down three points.
MG: Oh, cool.
FM: One is they can get involved locally or regionally in land-use planning. I just finished editing a book that has a chapter in it by Linda Mayro and Bill Doelle. They've been part of a regional and a local planning process that involves natural and cultural resources. And you know ancient resources and historic cultural resources and sort of ongoing ranching and things like that. And so people can make their voices-- if they think these are valuable resources make their voices heard in that. And if they have the inclination and the ability and the connections get involved personally in local planning efforts, regional planning efforts. And if not make sure that when they're voting for people at the local and the county of a regional level. Not to mention national. That they have a sense that these people are ones that would support historic preservation kinds of-- kinds of activities. So you know pay attention as citizens would be one. And become informed about it. There are newsletters. There are blog posts there are, you know sort of outreach stuff that you are involved in. You know stay tuned in that way. So that's one thing.
Then they can also as individuals be good stewards. They might actually-- again, this you know if they're so inclined and physically and in terms of where they're living-- become a site steward. Arizona's got a great program for site stewards. And even if they can't do it formally, you know, and you know not be responsible for every month checking out sites or things like that, when they're out on the land be responsible stewards. So did see something you know, don't pick it up necessarily. Make a note for where you found it, take a picture. Everybody's got photos with cameras with them nowadays. And you know, let people know like you two, when they get back to the visitors center or whatever, that they saw something and they thought it might be important. Maybe they saw something bad. You know somebody dug a whole, bones scattered around, or things like that. So-- so that would be another thing be good site stewards one way or the other.
And then, and this is a much more general thing, recognize the value of professionalism in public resource management and be willing to pay for it.
MG: Well, so Frank, thanks for talking with us today. We appreciate it.
FM: Thank you very much. I appreciate appreciate it very much. It's a lot of fun. And hopefully be interesting to people.
SH: Yeah, we enjoyed it.
MUSIC
MG: So Frank's interview really highlighted the level of public involvement in historic preservation and the idea that it's not just something that the government decided to do, it's something that small communities around the country particularly in the west and southwest were really pushing for. They wanted the federal government to take a more active role in protecting and preserving archaeological sites and historic places.
SH: Yeah, so when I've done research into the history of the National Park Service and the history of our monuments and parks I've always been, you know, really just struck with the, you know, fortitude and the-- the tenacity that local communities had from Clarkdale in Arizona with Tuzigoot, to the Colorado Cliff Dwellings Association that was formed by Virginia McClurg and Lucy Peabody to save Mesa Verde. You know throughout the West there were these small groups that really-- kind of came together and affected huge amounts of change for Historic Preservation.
So now we'd like to start answering your questions. In the future send us a letter, but for the moment we're gonna answer some questions that we get a lot. So when I'm out on the trails in the National Park or National Monument, I often get the question "Why don't archeologists for the National Park Service excavate anymore? What are we actually doing? Matt, do you have any comments on that?
MG: Sure. So a lot of what we do is historic preservation. So here in the southwest it's maintaining a lot of the Ancestral Pueblo ruins for instance. You know big architecture that requires a lot of I guess repair work. Excavations, by their nature are destructive so you get a lot of information from excavations, but you're also destroying what archeologists would call the context of those artifacts. So you lose a lot of information in the process so because we have a preservation ethic in the Park Service we try to do as little harm as possible and that means staying away from excavations.
SH: Awesome, do you get any questions about historic preservation when you're out actually doing work?
MG: Yeah, we get a lot of questions about sort of like 'What are you doing?' Or 'why are you doing that?' Or sometimes if we have folks who have done masonry work for example they may have little technical pointers for us or something. But yeah, we do get that a lot and typically it seems like folks are interested in learning a little bit more about it. Because it's something that they don't often associate with archaeology.
SH: I know I've definitely been out on the trail at Tuzigoot, we were talking about Tuzigoot earlier, and seeing the masonry crew out there, and it does look like, you know, it looks like they're doing work you might do on your house.
MG: Yeah, absolutely, but it it's a lot more than that. It's a very specific type of masonry work. So there are a lot of components of it that are different than what you would do in your house you have to take a lot of photographs and take a lot of notes and meticulously record the materials that you use and how you're doing work. And the idea there is that you're recording all that information for future managers that that might want to learn more about the materials you used or how you applied them.
SH: Yeah, that's something I think that gets looked over a lot when we talk about historic preservation is all the notes that that we take. And sometimes we're living with a legacy of archaeologist or manager who didn't take a lot of notes. I know I've seen Archaeological site cards that say the site is located you know 30 meters from the tree. And so who knows what what tree that was.
MG: Yeah archaeology like sort of all Sciences is cumulative. So, you know, you're really only learning more if you have good information about what was done in the past. You don't want to reinvent the wheel, so taking good notes is super important.
SH: Cool. So, this is our first podcast so we were answering questions that we get on the trail. But we'd love to hear from you if you have questions that you would like us to answer please email us. And the link to email us is on our website www.nps.gov/soar. So that's for the National Park Service Southern, Arizona Office.
MG: Alright, so thanks for listening. Next episode we'll be talking to Rebecca Renteria at the Linking Hispanic Heritage Through Archaeology program.
SH: The National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast is a production of the Southern Arizona Office of the National Park Service. Our artwork was designed by Laura Varon-Burkhart. Justin Mossman composed music. We look forward to hearing from you. Matt and I will be with you again next month.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-
Linking Southwestern Heritage Through Archeology - Rebecca Renteria - Episode 2
In our second installment of the podcast we interview Rebecca Renteria, Program Manager for Linking Southwestern Heritage Through Archaeology.* We discuss archeological and heritage education for Parks to Classrooms and National Hispanic Heritage Month. *The program was re-titled (after recording) in September 2017 from Linking Hispanic Heritage Through Archaeology (LHHTA) to Linking Southwestern Heritage Through Archaeology (LSHTA). Rebecca is now the Program Manager. For more on the LSHTA program visit: https://www.facebook.com/lswhta/ For more on education within the NPS visit: https://www.nps.gov/teachers/index.htm
- Credit / Author:
- Southern Arizona Office
- Date created:
- 09/29/2017
NPS Southwest Archeology Podcast Episode 2 – Linking Hispanic Heritage Through Archaeology (LHHTA) – now known as Linking Southwestern Heritage Through Archaeology (LSHTA).Music Intro
Matthew Guebard (MG): Hello and welcome to the National Park Service Southwest Archeology Podcast, brought to you by the Southern Arizona Office. My name's Matt Guebard.
Sharlot Hart (SH): And I'm Sharlot Hart
MUSIC
MG: Alright so in honor of parks the classrooms month, we'll be talking about archaeology and education; we'll be interviewing Rebecca Renteria, graduate assistant with the Linking Hispanic Heritage Through Archaeology program and as always we'll be answering your questions. MUSIC SH: So the Linking Hispanic Heritage Through Archaeology program has been funded by the Washington office of the National Park Service for a couple years now and I was lucky enough to get to talk to some of the -- to some of the this year's participants before they graduated back in June. And it was just a really inspiring conversation Matt. MG: So great and education programs and archaeology are not a new thing; they've been going on for years and years, but this is a special program. SH: Yeah, this program. Specifically is aimed at reaching out to indigenous and Hispanic youth and also teachers. It's a really interesting cohort that's put together where you have high school kids as well as some high school teachers. And that way the idea is that the education will kind of compound and become this, you know, domino effect of outreach from the Park Service. So the teachers and the youth apply in the winter time and then spend the spring and early summer visiting national parks. They actually get to participate in an archaeological excavation, and just investigate, you know history and heritage throughout southern Arizona and central Arizona both in the national parks and then also through through their own families.
MG: Cool and I think that it's important to mention that archaeology has always been a study of people but often there hasn't been as much inclusion as we would like and so this is an opportunity for kids to actually participate in archaeology, that's focused on their own ancestry in some ways.
SH: Exactly, yeah. And the cohort ends up becoming a little bit of a, you know, familial group themselves. I talked to Joy Noriega who's a local highschool teacher in the Tucson area, and she and then one of the students Rosenda, um, both talked about how having essentially mixed ages - having teachers and students together - they were able to learn far more out of the program and get far more out of it for themselves and bring back to their families.
MG: Cool.
SH: Yeah. They also talked about how being on site whether it was at the archaeological excavations or whether it was at a national park they were able to see technologies and tools that hearken back to their own experiences. And that that made the connection all the deeper to the national parks.
MUSIC
SH: So I'm here with Matt Guebard and we're talking with Rebecca Renteria who is the graduate assistant for the Linking Hispanic Heritage Through Archaeology program. So thank you for joining us today Rebecca.
Rebecca Renteria (RR): Yeah, thank you for having me
SH: So Rebecca to start us off, just tell us a little bit about the Linking Hispanic Heritage Through Archaeology program.
RR: So Linking Hispanic Heritage Through Archaeology or LHHTA is a program that essentially brings together high school students and high school teachers, all from high schools around Tucson. And the goal is to provide an archaeology experience and education for the students, but in the context of the the local histories that kind of tie to the personal heritage of the students and and the teachers as well the high school teachers.
SH: So you have a mixed cohort of students.
RR: We do exactly yeah, so we have freshman through senior students, senior high school students, and then we have three high school teachers or high school educators. Who, you know, even if they're not a teacher in the traditional aspect they have a lot of contact with high school students who provide them with opportunities. SH: Nice. And what activities do they do?
RR: So, because it's so so based around archeology education we have a lot of really good community resources. So we we visit sites like Mission Garden that are kind of in-- in I guess more urban Tucson and it has a very rich historical and and preContact aspect to that site. And we have a lot of Park Service sites that we visit archeological sites. So this year we visited Saguaro National Park, East and West at Saguaro West they worked with archaeologists out there and worked on cleaning up Conservation Corps camp site. We visited Casa Grande Ruins national monument and we did preservation work on one of the compounds there. So you know we really try and do a lot of hands-on work but also-- also with the goal of getting the students involved in these sites that directly tied to maybe some of the places that they came from. And we also visited Montezuma castle and Well and Tuzigoot and the Grand Canyon. And we just do a variety of activities at these sites, and we kind of try and contact and and work with archaeologists specifically at these parks to kind of talk with us about how archaeology is being done today and and in the context of modern times. And in addition to our park visits and site visits we also are based out of the University of Arizona as well, and so we do activities at different archaeology related labs on campus. So we visit the the AMS lab or the radiocarbon lab and the Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research and the Southwest Ceramics lab and zooarcheology and bioarchaeology. And we essentially just try and you know, connect the dots with all of the places that we visited and-- and heritage and the scientific scientific aspect of things and-- Yeah, it's just tying everything together and trying to create these very enriched experiences that hopefully the students will get something from.
SH: Nice. So you do a lot of like hands-on activities. Do you find that that really is a better way to connect heritage?
RR: Yeah, absolutely. One of the coolest experiences that I felt like we had with the hands-on experiences was at the Arizona State Museum, where we met with Dr. Nancy Odegaard and Gina Watkinson. And they kind of put together a bunch of little different workshops for us, but there was one where there was a big granary made out of local plants and so they kind of helped involve us in the the conservation aspect of this big granary. So the kids basically helped vacuum it to get it to a state where they could continue working on it. But in that process there were a couple of girls who were like 'Oh like-- like my grandma like has baskets that she's woven like these' or that they recognize from from being passed down and their families and so while we go to-- to National Parks, and while we go to the labs at the U of A and we just see these things, it was an entirely different experience to-- to be working with the materials themselves and to have the students have like a personal connection to what they're working on but then Related to their their history.
MG: So it sounds like the program isn't necessarily aimed at making high school students into archaeologists. It's just using archaeology as a vehicle to sort of get at all of these other subjects.
RR: Yeah. Um, I definitely think that's the case ideally it would be really neat to-- It would be really neat to kind of have the students realize how much, um, power they kind of have with archaeology. I feel very much that way, it took you know, I dropped out of school for many years and once I kind of discovered what archaeology was and kind of how it can create histories for people who-- who don't have a written history or who haven't been given that chance to kind of, be more present in in history. That's-- that's the way I felt about it, and so while we aim to give students these experiences, kind of the the underlying, hope is that some of the students can, and it won't be every student, but you know some of the students will will take this and realize that-- that they can really do something with it to kind of give a voice to people who haven't always had it in the past. And I do feel like we've had some conversations with some of the students where you know they really get it. So my hope is that we get some archeologists out of the program.
SH: So you also consider an archaeological field school out in New Mexico, that's run by a non-profit also local here to Tucson called Archaeology Southwest. And unfortunately I didn't overlap with you...
RR: I know!
SH: ...but I was there the week after, talking about careers in the Park Service, so-- So I just wanted to know how did you make digging in that hot sun exciting for those students?
RR: It was hard but, you know, you get students out there and in the heat and in the humidity and in like mosquito territory like so it's really hard to kind of like as an adult like it's like I-- I have a hard time doing this. But but the students kind of don't feel that way. Sure they're irritated by all of those things, but once you get them digging and kind of finding artifacts and-- and-- and relating what they're finding to what they've seen in the program up until that point, all of that kind of like doesn't-- all of those factors don't really seem like they play into getting the students excited. And sure we leave at the at the very last day and everyone's pretty like tired but-- but while we're there, it's-- it's the camaraderie with the students from Archaeology Southwest, who are the students in the program, who are kind of, teaching our students it's just such a an amazing combination of--
SH: That nice, so the students in the field school who are college age students are then teaching your participants as well.
RR: Exactly yeah, and it's it sounds like it's been a really good opportunity for the field school-- college field school students with Archaeology Southwest to kind of talk about what they've learned. Because I think up until that point they've just been learning from the instructors, from the professors out in the field. So up until this point they've just been students, but once our program was able to kind of go out there and you know, it was a good opportunity for those students to just really talk about how much they knew how to do archaeology at that point and really guide our students in how to excavate and record and identify artifacts.
SH: Nice. So, when I was there and got to just go out for a couple hours in the morning one of the-- one of the field school students found like in quick succession a piece of a perforated plate and then 3/4 ax with like pigment on it and was just like this site was so rich and it kept like you know, this one student specifically just had like, you know he was he had all the luck. But so I was wondering if your students had any aha moments when they were there.
RR: Yeah, absolutely. I think one of-- one of the big moments is-- so when we go out to the field school half our time is spent with the field school students out in the field excavating and recording. The other half is spent with Allen Denoyer who does a lot of experimental archeology with us. So, you know, we spent time with Allen, and he does flint knapping with us specifically. And so we're out flint knapping and we're making projectile points and we're making a mess. We're making a mess everywhere with these flakes, and we just have piles and everyone has different types of piles and because everyone flint knapps a little bit different. And so this this was our experience and so when we're out in the field and the students see that they're coming across a bunch of debitage, and they see it's just like just tons of flakes and-- and they just kind of think about it and they keep you know excavating and finding flakes. And and I feel like one of the aha moments was kind of like hearing one of the students say 'Oh like I made a mess just like this yesterday.
SH: Brilliant.
RR: And it's just like-- like I get the chills thinking about it because it's-- it's just this moment at which you see everything kind of coming together in the experiences the students have had in the program, so that's really cool. [laughs].
SH: Nice.
RR: Yeah. SH: So what inspired you to apply to be the graduate assistant for the program?
RR: I think initially I had heard a little bit about it from Dr. Barbara Mills at the University of Arizona and you know I was kind of trying to piece together some-- some work experience, archaeology work experience at the U of A. And just kind of, I kept bugging her about it once I kind of heard a little bit about the program and-- But what inspired me about it, what-- what kept me really bugging her was the fact that, you know after having been an archaeologist in Tucson for a little bit, which-- It's-- it's what I enjoy doing it's it's my passion, but I hadn't really quite yet seen a program that really tried to take in and consider groups-- local groups. And so once I heard about this program, it was like all right well linking Hispanic Heritage and then through archaeology was just-- it seemed like too good of a program to exist. But it existed and so-- so for me that's what inspired me. It was not-- it was not having heard about a program like this and then and then realizing that like there's a lot of opportunity in this program for for for students and the community.
SH: Um so and as a graduate assistant, you're supposed to be also getting something out of it. What what have you gotten out of the program?
RR: Oh, my goodness! That is-- I have just gotten so much. I mean, it's in a sense kind of rerouted the trajectory that I initially saw for myself when I started grad school. Yeah, I had done like some community service as an undergrad and-- and so-- so that was nice, and I kind of you know have continued to like figure out a way to continue doing work and community service. But-- but in terms of how do I continue doing archaeology and community service that I think is kind of what I've really gotten out of the program.
SH: So the parks to classrooms, or parks as classrooms programming from the National Park Service aims to develop inquiry and police based programming in national parks. How has LHHTA done that for archaeology and Hispanic heritage? RR: I think LHHTA has done that by getting at-- the little-- at getting at what it what it means to be number one Hispanic, it's a very loaded term, but it's kind of the one that's used and-- and-- but it's it's the one that kind of seems to be
SH: And ends up being a catch-all.
RR: Yeah, it ends up being a catch-all. And so but what that means is in this program we have students from from from Tucson, but but in reality we have students who have Tohono O'odham ancestry or Yaqui ancestry or Hopi or Zuni or Navajo ancestry and it's really much more than than-- than while they felt fall under this umbrella of being Hispanic the fact is there is so much more to the identity of these students. And so by visiting these sites that have Native American or indigenous histories, a lot of this-- the students I think really are able to put more of a voice or words to-- to understanding a little bit more about where they come from rather than just having their entire lives to say that they're Hispanic really. There's there's so much more to-- to it. And it is a catch-all word, but it's also-- there's there's a lot to it and so by visiting these sites, it just allows some of the students to kind of figure out some things. And it helps us as instructors and and kind of teachers of these students to learn things as well. I don't know it's--
SH: I think something that we struggle with in the Park Service, and maybe this is me having my background being a frontline Ranger, is that any given National Park has their enabling legislation and so you have a park or a monument that was created for X. Right? But really that's a multi vocal story and so how do we as interpreters end up being able to tell all of the different stories? And for me, I think archeology is the best way, and I think you said there's a couple questions ago that you can really get at, you know, the stories that we're told, but then the-- you can see people on the land who didn't necessarily get to to write their own history at that point. So is that-- can can your students see that in when they visit parks?
RR: Yeah, absolutely. And I think it's really empowering to kind of be at these places and a lot of the students have never left Tucson, so once we can kind of travel a little bit further, farther north or south and get these you get provide an experience for the students to actually be in places where they came from. It's-- it's honestly like an experience that's just beyond words because it's-- It's just feelings and emotions that you get from being in a place. So yeah, right.
SH: What connections do the participants draw from NPS sites and-- as we're talking I'm thinking about you mentioned that you do preservation work at Casa Grande this last year or that the participants, um you got at least a chance to try their hand at it, so was there anything there or in one of the other sites you visited that was a particular connection?
RR: Yeah, I would say when we visited Casa Grande and we were doing some of the preservation work essentially what we were doing was, we were capping with adobe one of the wall areas in one of the compounds. And one of the students particularly, she she was doing it and was just like super into it like even more so than like anyone else. And man, 'you're like really really good at this' and and she-- I mean she like said that it was like you know in in her blood, and it was like the way, you know, she she had heard about how her family used adobe to build because they use adobe to build structures. And so that was that was really cool. Yeah.
SH: Sweet!
RR: Yeah, yeah, that was neat.
SS: That's great. Do you know if she's gonna like go on and be an adobe master?
RR: Um, that would be cool. I mean so she-- she's she was one of the younger students for sure and-- But has taken advantage of visiting the University for different, for different, for different reasons different opportunities. And I I do see that she would continue at least questioning things that are related to archeology.
SH: Cool. Yeah, what other impacts have you seen from the program?
RR: In the time that I've been involved with the program the, the impacts that I've seen have been that with the students kind of maintain communication with us about what they've learned in the program. So like one of the students still sends me photos of projectile points that he's like flint knapped and that he's continuing to develop his techniques and his style. And, you know, another one of the students who hears about different archaeology things going around town, and you know she'll just email me and say 'oh, I heard about this' and so that's that's really neat. So I think the biggest thing that I've seen is through through engagement and continuous engagement just continuing to keep the students intrigued up until this point because while it is high school and they have just so many other things on their plate besides even just going to school, you know, it's just maintaining that that interest, but also the trust that we kind of created in the time that we had them in the programs.
SH: Nice, so it's not just like a one-and-done kind of program. That's-- part of it is linking personal connections.
RR: Exactly. And I mean a huge part of it for me is-- is that I want students from the community to be able to go out and do archaeology and to feel like they can-- can pack the same punch that any other archaeologist says. But it is really important for-- for students who have grown up in communities to kind of be that next generation of archaeologists and-- and maybe it's one-sided, but you know that's-- that's my history. That's that's where I came from and it took me a long time to kind of realize that but, but I'm hoping that that through this program we can just get students exposed to this at a much earlier age. So that way once they do get to a university or community college They can just kind of hit the ground running with that knowledge already.
SH: Thanks, uh, What are your plans after you graduate?
RR: My plans once I graduate are to continue doing archaeology. I really enjoy the research aspect of it, and I think eventually will pursue a PhD program somewhere, but for the time being, the current kind of-- the climate is such that it's a really important time to get students involved in in archeology. But with the ends of being able to empower communities and that's kind of the work that I think I'm going to do for a while before going back to school. So yeah.
SH: Sweet!
MG: You might might have sort of addressed this but has your participation in this program has it affected your research interests? Has it-- has it changed what you think you might want to do if you go on to get a PhD?
RR: Absolutely. I mean my my thesis I had an idea that was really well developed as soon as I started. Even before I started it was work that I was doing as an undergrad. But it was kind of reframed once I started working with this program; and reframed in the way of having more of a consciousness about the the people that I'm looking at in my thesis and kind of took on more of an angle of looking at ethnicity and what it means to people. And Why it's important, and why it's important for descendants of these people to-- to have a tangible connection to the past and that's something that hasn't always been present in my research.
SH: Nice.
MG: That's certainly not something that's been present in archaeology in general until, I guess you could say recently. And still needs to be developed more.
SH: Certainly.
MG: Be better to tell the stories and the peoples who have ancestors who lived them.
RR: Exactly.
SH: Yeah, we need more archaeologists from a variety of backgrounds in the park service. So, the program is called Linking Hispanic Heritage Through Archaeology, but as we mentioned Hispanic ends up being kind of a catch-all term and-- and it's essentially a colonial term do you want to speak to that?
RR: Yeah, I mean I have received you know some some comments from the community basically with that sentiment as well. And it's you know it's this idea that kind of on paper forms together a group of people to-- to make progress or whatever in some sort of way. But-- But it is a very complicated term that, you know, some of the feedback from the community has been such that it obscures the Native American ties or indigenous ties that that people have to to a place or to a history. And It's you know, it's a term that that I have issue with because of those reasons as well, but-- but you know it's it's something that I think in the future will be addressed and for the time being it's --
SH: It is what it is.
RR: It is what it is.
SH: So as a catch-all it ends up obscuring everything that it's catching?
RR: At times. Yeah, for sure.
SH: So thank you for joining us today Rebecca. I appreciate your time. Is there a place that our listeners can go to find out more about the program?
RR: There is we have a Facebook page. If you search for LHHTA you will be able to find our page where we have photos and kind of little blurbs about our visits to the places that are part of the program. We post different opportunities kind of related to to the program as well and-- Yeah, it's a good place just to kind of see what we're doing as a program and, you know, the students were working with and the teachers were working with and all of our partners and yeah.
SH: Awesome, thank you. We'll also put that link on our website, and thank you again so much for joining us!
MUSIC
SH: Wow so you know this month being Parks to Classrooms month a lot of the time I tend to think of education as as kind of a one-way street where teachers are imparting knowledge to students, which is really important, but what I'm hearing from Rebecca is that it ends up being kind of like a two-way street with folks looking at their own identities.
MG: Right yeah, it sounds like these these young people are really taking a role in sort of their their own education and actively participating as much as they are learning directly from the instructors.
SH: I hope that that's a role that all of our national parks and monuments can can play in education.
MG: So, one of the questions that we've gotten is how can teachers get help from the National Park Service in teaching about archaeology and history?
SH: So, that's a really good question. And there are a number of ways that I can think of that teachers can get involved or get help. And the first and very basic one is that teachers should contact the local National Park or National Monument, that's closest to them. So each National Park and monument or Historic Site they all have their own ability to do outreach on their own rangers that could either facilitate a field trip at the national park or can sometimes come to the classroom if, you know, if funding is an issue. We all know that busing is is a big issue and cost more and more each year. So-- so that's the first step is getting to know you know your local parks and monuments. The next idea is that on all of our web sites we have lesson plans that teachers can take advantage of. So if you go to NPS.GOV, there's a for teacher section, and that'll group all of the lesson plans from parks and monuments and historic sites across the country.
MG: Great.
MUSIC
SH: The National Park Service Southwest archaeology podcast is a production of the Southern Arizona Office of the National Park Service. Our artwork was designed by Laura Varon-Burkhart. Justin Mossman composed our music. We look forward to hearing from you. Matt and I will be with you again next month.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-
Historic Preservation II - Charlie Steen - Episode 3
In our third episode Matt and Sharlot interview Charlie Steen III, the son of NPS Archeologist Charles R. Steen. We reminisce about Steen's contributions to archeology in the southwest and throughout the world. **Links from the episode:** Charlie Steen's email: csteen@unm.edu Tonto National Monument's webpage with monthly reports by Charles R. Steen: https://www.nps.gov/tont/learn/historyculture/charlie_steen.htm Casa Grande Ruins National Monument page on chemical preservatives: https://www.nps.gov/cagr/learn/historyculture/chemical-preservatives.htm
- Credit / Author:
- NPS Southern Arizona Office
- Date created:
- 10/27/2017
Matt Guebard: Hello, and welcome to the National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast, brought to you by the Southern Arizona Office. My name’s Matt Guebard. Sharlot Hart: And I’m Sharlot Hart. {Musical Interlude} SH: Thanks for joining us today. Today, we have an interview with Charlie Steen III, who’s the son of Charlie Steen – some of you may know as one of the first archaeologists who worked here in Arizona for the National Park Service, starting his career at Tonto National Monument as the Junior Archaeologist. And, uh, moving from, uh, park to park, also serving at Casa Grande and other sites here in Arizona. So we’ll first talk about, um, an example of his work at one of these parks. We’ll have the interview, and then after the interview, we’ll, um, talk about, uh, preservation here in Arizona and answer some of your questions. {Musical Interlude} SH: So Charlie Steen’s mark is found throughout National Park Service Archaeology, and there are tons of projects that we do today, that, um, you know, harken back to something that he did previously. And one of my favorite examples of this, um, is an artifact that we have in the Casa Grande Ruins National Monument Collection that for the last 75 years or so has been described as a rubber ball. Um, so this rubber ball, supposed rubber ball, is just part of a larger object – it’s kind of a mass that doesn’t look like a ball itself, but it’s this mass that, to me, I never would have picked up as something rubber, or as a ball. It has a greenish hue to it that makes me think that it might be some sort of derivative of, um, copper, or copper ores. And, um, and it’s certainly not something that I would have necessarily thought would be, you know, an amazing item that could tell us a lot about Hohokam activities. But, um, Charlie Steen did see something in this artifact and, uh, broke off a piece and burned it and it smelled like rubber. So that’s where he got this idea that it was a rubber ball. Um, and there were two pieces, and he – being the person that he was and thinking that science and archaeology, um, go hand in hand, and that we needed to investigate – he sent off a piece to be analyzed and get more information about it. MG: So, Charlie Steen sends a piece of what he thinks is a rubber ball to, uh, the Engineering Defense training facility, which is at, well, which was at the University of Southern California, and – I think it’s April, 1941 – and he sends it to this chemist named Dr. Stringfield. Uh, and what’s interesting about this is, uh, Charlie Steen has this concept of interdisciplinary nature, so he wants to find out more about the ball, he sends it to a laboratory, um, but, uh, it gets lost somewhere, uh, after 1941, probably because of the war, and uh, the efforts of this particular chemist, and other things. So it gets lost, uh, and time just goes on and nobody knows what happens to it. Um, Steen takes the other half of the ball and he puts it at the park somewhere, uh, and then he’s called off to the war, and when he returns, he doesn’t find it. So this ball is lost, or, or seems to be lost, uh, until the 1980s, when an archaeologist working at the park ends up finding it in a desk drawer. SH: So that archaeologist, Andresen, he picks up where Charlie Steen left off, and thinks that the same concept of interdisciplinary research is essentially important. And he ends up collaborating with, uh, Warner Zim, who’s uh, a chemist, um, and they test the ball to find out what it’s actually made of, and come back with amazing results: that it’s not rubber as we know it – it’s actually composed of upwards of 40% of sulfur. Which turns everything that we’ve been saying about this ball, um, kind of on its head. MG: So, uh, we’ve kind of picked up this research now, and we’ve tried to build on kind of what some of the earlier work was. And we don’t really know yet, um, but one of the theories is that perhaps the thing that Charlie Steen thought was a rubber ball may actually be an example – the earliest example – of the vulcanization of rubber. So, adding sulfur to rubbers to increase its durability. Now, all of that may be subject to change depending on what we find, but what’s interesting is this whole idea of kind of science building on earlier science, so, um, what we end up learning about this object, um, will invariably be related to all of the other things and questions that were asked in the past, which is really interesting. SH: So all of this really interesting research that we do today, as Matt said, is based on work that, um, early archaeologists did, and even if we look back and think, like, “Oh, they didn’t have the tools that we have today,” they still did pioneering research and set us up to do, um, to do the work that we’re doing, so I’m excited to hear from Charlie Steen III, the son of Charlie Steen. MG: Hi, Charlie. Thanks for being here. Charlie Steen III: Thank you for having me, yes. MG: Well, so, we’re here to talk a little bit about your father, but before we do that, could you tell us a little bit about yourself? Uh, what your job is and what your research interests are? CS: Yes, I cover Early-Modern European history here at the university, which means I do European history from the Reformation through the French Revolution. And I do the freshman class, Western Civilization – a class I adore – and senior seminars, when, uh, for the graduate students, when needed. My research interests are in cultural history. I’ve written on the Netherlands, and uh, at present I’m writing sort of a textbook on cultural history from 1500 to 1800, trying to use as much literature and art that hasn’t been deeply covered before. Sort of… my passion is Grade B art, the art of ordinary people. And I’m trying to write a book on the basis of as much of that as possible. But that’s about it. I’ve been here for years, I came here in 1969. Uh, my association with the university is very long. I did my BA here and then went to UCLA to do a doctorate. I came to my profession, not through what my father did, but through what he read, and the influence he had on me in terms of admiring material culture, and the interaction with people and place. And that led me into history rather than into archaeology. MG: Interesting. SH: Cool. MG: Yeah, we, uh, I found just in my experience that, um, the children of archaeologists often don’t want to become archaeologists themselves. I don’t think that that’s probably unique to archaeology; that’s probably, uh, something that happens in a lot of families. But, um, your interests are really similar, and it sounds like your father had a big influence on you. CS: Oh, indeed. MG: Interesting. CS: Yes, uh, it is. Every time I look at a building, I deconstruct it. {They laugh} MG: Yeah, me too. CS: I mean, not just to… we took this research trip recently, we’re just back from that, and I was trying to gather material on Renaissance cities, that were left in eastern France and western Germany, and then the Netherlands. And it’s the same sort of thing that he would have done. Sometimes I can’t tell, when I’m going over our photos, which he took and which I took. MG: [Laughs] Also, uh, for our listeners, uh, who may not know who your father is, uh, he is one of, uh, several, um, I guess we could say early National Park Service archaeologists, so he was sort of, um, the first generation of professional archaeologists to be stationed in National Park areas. One of the first places that he worked was Tonto National Monument, which today is a very remote place. Uh, he was… he started there in 1934, and his title was Ranger-In-Charge. And he kept some notes about his experiences there, and from those notes it seems as if the working and the living conditions were pretty difficult, uh, and often really lonely. Um, today, Tonto is— is, again, an incredibly remote place, but back in the 1930s, it must have been, um, like living on the Moon, maybe. Uh, what do you think about this job appealed to him? CS: One: it was a job in his field. Uh, shortly after he graduated and… I know that he was enormously happy to get it. And happy to stay in the, uh, in the southwest. He’d gone to school in Colorado, grown up for a long time in Colorado. And, uh, was… already had made visits with his archaeology class into Arizona and New Mexico, and was happy to stay here. It was what he wanted to do. And it was hard living out there. I remember some stories – mostly about nature. He just the… the sort of loneliness for granted, that… was surprised by visitors and pleased to have them. But, uh, he didn’t mind the solitude in many ways. He had one story that I remember clearly. It was one of those rare full moons when it’s closest to Earth. And he said it was the first time that he’d ever been able to read by moonlight. And it was that bright, he said it was astonishing, even, I think, took a couple of pictures. SH: Wow. CS: But he really loved the place. And he loved the Park Service. Said, in southern Arizona, well, he met my mother in Tucson, uh, where she was finishing at the University of Arizona. And so that was the origin of the family as well. MG: Hmm. I think, um, in my… in my experience, one of the things that kind of connects Park Rangers, uh, from past to present, is… is our interests. I mean, it attracts a certain type of person. Uh, and certainly there are lots of National Park locations now which are still… can be lonely spots, uh, and it seems like Park Rangers often enjoy that solitude. So, one of the things that I appreciate about some of the things that your father wrote is that I feel like I can often relate to some of the things that he experienced in his career, uh, and that I think builds kind of a certain connection in some ways. CS: I agree. So many of the people that met throughout his career that were still with the Park Service, uh, they were in touch with not only the profession, but with where they were, and had a real appreciation for what they were doing, even if it was in the natural part, um, of Glacier or something like this, they still had this keen sense of place and of history and of the importance, particularly, of the unique site that they were protecting. MG: Right. Well, so… so following his tenure at Tonto National Monument, he served in, well I think it’s a number of different positions. Uh, just [laughing] a couple of ‘em I found, was, uh… He had the title of Junior Naturalist for a period of time, and uh, then he served as the Headquarters Archaeologist for a period of time. And all of these jobs gave him access to some of the most incredible National Park locations for archaeology. Uh, arguably in the American southwest, and certainly in Arizona. How do you think some of his early career experiences influenced his views on historic preservation, and the role of the National Park Service and protecting some of these really iconic places. CS: Oh, I figured it had a profound effect, uh, when he was most active, he had in terms of dirt archaeology, he was so aware of the contest between, um, rebuilding, and trying to preserve what was, and realizing that if you're simply trying to leave things as they were, it was not going to last. And so what do you do about it? And, uh, I remember he was trying to use some chemical applications that were… been used by, I think University of Texas and some of their sites… and he tried other things, uh, instead of just roofing something over, uh, trying to leave it exposed so that people could see it as it was… as much as it was. Um, that was remaining. But, no, he always thought in terms of, if you uncover it, if you dig it up, how do you keep it from falling apart? And so that was something he then began to apply to his view of historic buildings as well, uh, you know, post-Colombian. MG: And that’s… and that’s, again, very similar to kind of how we do business today – we’re always, uh, thinking toward the future and trying to develop preservation strategies, um, that will, you know, have a long-term effect— a positive effect on the resources, so I think in some ways, um, that mindset and that sort of process of trying to figure out the best treatment options for these places… I think it started with his generation in the parks and the work that they did… and we always reference, um, that early work, uh, sort of as lessons learned, uh, for how to do business, and then also of course of things not to do, because they were important things that… that were discovered over the sort of, um, over that process that are important for us today, so um, your father’s influence is really important to how we do historic preservation in the parks, even today. CS: Right, and he tried to do some this also after his retirement, when he went to Jordan, um, for a second time, and then Ashdod in Israel, where again, the subject wasn’t excavation, but preservation. Uh, and trying to just maintain what was and determining how to show the public in best possible way what was without doing further damage. MG: Oh, interesting, I wasn’t aware that he, uh, he did that. Can you tell us a little more about that? CS: He was working particularly with helping the Jordanians to establish their own park system, and was assisting a new generation of post-British archaeologists there, uh, young Jordanians, in trying to find a positive way of… to limiting access to sites that were in urban areas, and preserving as best possible the sites that were still rural and couldn’t be easily, oh, walled off and made into regular zones for visit. As opposed to those that were in urban areas and susceptible to foot traffic and had been for generations. Uh, but it was a— it was a very interesting time, and a number of the archaeologists he worked with there came here for several months at a time to see how places as different as, um, Grand Canyon and Pecos would work. Because they had the same… the same issues with [inaudible] canyon lands as well as open sites. MG: Sure, huh. That’s really interesting. Well, so uh [laughs], this… we talked about this a little bit before, but this is kind of a silly question, but um, we know your father from what he wrote, uh, particularly his technical reports, and to be honest, technical reports are often very boring. CS: You’re not joking. MG: Um, but… {Laughing} MG: But, um, your father is kind of known for his humor. He often interjects humor into the reports, which in my experience makes them much easier, uh, to read. Um, can you talk a little bit about what his personality was like out of work? CS: Well, essentially, he was a serious individual. Uh, he did have humor and there were many light times, but many more serious ones. But he had a keen sense of the absurd, and a keen sense of how funny things happen or come to you, even when you’re doing serious business, um, when traveling, when… the mistakes, the accidents that will occur when working on a site or working with other people. And I think that’s what he sort of, oh, grounded his responses to life on… but it wasn’t a consistent thing, I mean this wasn’t a… a joke-ridden life for him, but it was one with laughter. MG: Sure, sure, of course. Well, so he eventually became the Regional Archaeologist in Santa Fe, and for our listeners, that means that he had quite a lot of influence, um, over the… the development and the implementation of National Park Service archaeology in the southwest. Um, do you have any sense for some of the challenges that he might have faced during that time? CS: I remember quite a bit of discussion of this because of the… [laughs] It’s silly now, but at that time, budget cuts were a serious issue. This was in the 1950s. And there was not enough money to hire a sufficient number of professionals. And so it’s at this time that they… the Park Service started very serious contract archaeology with the universities in the southwest. And particularly, when it became a crisis, as oil pipelines were being placed across the southwest. Uh, and so there was this discussion of how best to have this sort of university/Park Service cooperation on, uh, digs, and on surveys. And he spent a lot of time on the road doing that. MG: Interesting, um, so he… so, this… so this period of time when he’s the Regional Archaeologist, is this in the 1950s or 60s… CS: Yes. MG: Or 1960s… okay. So this is sort of the… in some ways, the birth of contract archaeology, particularly with the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act, that was in 1966, um, for our listeners who maybe, uh, aren’t aware, uh, that was something that was passed in part, um, because of the interest of the public in protecting historic places that were being damage by, uh, you know, government-funded projects, for things like – you mentioned, like pipelines, for instance. So, uh, your father was really instrumental in advocating for the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act. Can you talk a little bit more about his role in the creation or the development of, uh, this piece of really important preservation, uh, law? CS: Well, he really got into it in terms of trying to go to the places that were most threatened, uh, whether by dam construction or by the expansion of… well, particularly, he was very sensitive to what the Corps of Engineers was trying to accomplish on waterways. And so that took him into the Mississippi and Missouri areas, but so also into the ends of the Colorado. He spent a lot of time trying to photograph everything that was in the canyons prior to the finishing of the big dam. And so it was very mixed in terms of where he could find time and enough, oh, sort of involvement… to have the energy to try to identify places for preservation. Sometimes small areas were easy, but then often he would try to cooperate with states on that, because of limited funding. At least, this is my memory. I mean, he was so often on the road that… and sometimes he’d talk extensively about what had gone on, when he came back, but it was too often the same sort of story of trying to preserve what you could, uh, with the inevitability of… particular with dam construction or canal construction along the river systems… of irretrievable loss. MG: So it sounds like he was involved both on the field work side, actually doing the documentation work onsite, but also involved with working with local governments or other agencies to make sure that… CS: Right. MG: Yeah. Interesting. It’s such… the 1960s, and the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act… it’s such an important part of the way that we do archaeology today. It kind of frames, uh, how we do business, um, in some ways both in the Park Service, but also, um, on federal land at large. And so many archaeologists are employed in part through contract firms that work within the confines of the National Historic Preservation Act. And, uh, until the passage of that law, there weren’t as many archaeologists around, and so that’s a really big turning point for, I think, the discipline at large. So today, archaeology is pretty big business, uh, again, in part because of the National Historic Preservation Act. Do you have any feeling for… for how your father would feel about the current state of archaeology in the country? CS: Well, he was very pleased with the effects that would sort of generalize archaeology, making… But I think… I think that he would be disappointed in the sort of… some of the professional groups that have grown up in recent times. Uh, but he liked some of them very much. There was one that was doing some pipeline archaeology here for a CO2 pipe that was going from the Four Corners to Texas. And it cut across wide swathes of New Mexico while he was still alive. And he kept up with what was happening there. And I was… one of my former colleagues was one of their archaeologists, and so he had personal contact with this [inaudible]. And he was pleased with that work, but not so pleased with other work, which was often done, uh, [laughing] with an eye to the bottom line, rather than to the science. SH: So it sounds like he was frustrated with a lot of things that we still get frustrated with. CS: I think that’s a never-ending story, I really do. {Laughing} SH: Did you get a sense, um, when he, you know, was still working in the… in the 60s, and would come back from these longs trips, that he still had some hope for the future of archaeology. CS: Well, he did. After his retirement, his last engagement was working for… as the archaeologist for the Los Alamos National Labs, and he did, to his great pleasure, a good deal of dirt archaeology up on the Pajarito Plateau. And was talking to people who were interested in archaeology and he would have some people who would come in as students and work for a while as part of their academic career. But above all else, it was the interest that the labs brought to it that please him the most, and gave him some real insist into what he hoped would happen… is to have more biological and natural sciences come into archaeology so there was more scientific examination of findings, even in addition to what was already there. Uh, he was very pleased to send things off to biology labs, for example, and he felt that this was going to be an area of considerable interest, uh, and I realize that this has gone on since and has improved enormously. SH: Definitely. And you know, starting with efforts like your father’s to, um, to collaborate with universities and other agencies for, um, you know, chemical analyses and other, like you said, natural and biological studies. CS: One other place where he really got into the history of… and how to preserve it… was at Tumacácori. MG: Oh. SH: Wonderful. CS: Uh, and this, this was also in the, oh… ’51, ’52, I can’t remember the exact date. And we spent a summer at, uh, Tubac, while he was at Tumacácori, um, and went back and forth. And he… one of his real concerns there – I even remember despite my youth at that time – was how to go about preserving the place without remaking it, because it was in such poor repair at that time. SH: That again is still a question that we have today. I have, um, been helping out… both Matt and I have been helping out with the project down there to, um… not necessarily at Tumacácori, they’re still doing work there as well. But the project we’ve been helping out with is at another associated church called Guevavi that… CS: All right. SH: You know. Uh, and asking and trying to answer to the best of our abilities that same question. MG: Right, so is there anything else that you think listeners should know about your father’s career. CS: No, it’s just that it was his… interests were very wide. I was preparing his photos and slides to be sent down to the Tucson Archive of the NPS, and I still have some work to do on, uh, some black and white photos that he took while he was in the Army in Burma… that sort of interruption in his archaeological career… and that’s where he is more anthropologist than archaeologist, but um, there’s this undercurrent of, uh, sort of a general interest in human endeavor. And what its remains, uh, both materially and intellectually, in printed or crafted or painted results, uh… I really appreciate his ideas on that. Uh, we had excited times, oftentimes, in terms of discussion of findings, but they weren’t necessarily just archaeological. Uh, it was an appreciation of Nature as well as of the past. But that’s, you know, again, these are memories of… some stronger than others, uh, and like all family memories, somebody on the outside might recollect something quite different. But in terms of his professional interests, I think rather not that he was… I think well-known for having a very eclectic view toward humanity and the world. SH: Right, so your conversations kind of focused on the human condition. CS: Human condition, and also the natural condition, and where they met. SH: Right, that intersection is so important. CS: Yes, and still, that we… you could… at the same, well, or… we’re all having these subjects revived again and again for us. SH: Right. Do you have any favorite memories from going, um, out to work with him? CS: Uh, my favorite memories are in Canyon de Chelly. And this is when I was little, the… 1949, 1950. Uh, we lived out there. He was working at Tse Ta'a and at, uh, White House. And I just remember the solitude, the work, the… it was strange, one of the things I remember the most is how my father had to sort of manage, um, using Navajo labor and their beliefs, and they were very old-fashioned then, on uh, these prehistoric sites, where the Navajos had a certain appreciation for what they were doing… but very little overall appreciation for Anasazi culture. Uh, it was always a very careful dance, um, and that’s what really cemented the relationship between my father and this group, was the death of the father of one of his workers. And uh, my dad helped out quite a lot, um, and from that point on we had good Navajo friends. SH: Nice. MG: Great, um, so thanks for sharing, uh, all of these stories today, we really appreciate it. And I think it’s worth mentioning that if the listeners are interested in reading some of, uh, what your father wrote, particularly about Tonto National Monument, they can go to www.nps.gov and navigate to the Tonto National Monument site, and there is a collection of some of his observations about his time at the park in the 1930s, and they’re really interesting, so I would encourage everybody to check those out. CS: If anyone has questions that I can deal with, contact me. MG: All right, thanks so much for talking with us today, Charlie. CS: And I thank you for talking to me. {Musical Interlude} MG: Now is the part of the podcast where we answer a question from the listener. Um, and maybe we don’t have a question specifically about Charlie Steen or about the history of the Park Service, but, uh, listeners may be interested in being able to find more information. So, Sharlot, where can the listeners go to get more information, either on Charles Steen, or on the early history of the Park Service here in the southwest? SH: So Tonto National Monument has a webpage that has snippets from some of the monthly reports that Charlie Steen would write. And those are really cool because that’s, uh, you know, right from Charlie Steen’s mouth, what was going on the time, and the excitement about what he was doing as preservation treatment. So they have a webpage dedicated to that, and then Casa Grande has a webpage, um, that excellently details all of the different… his chemical treatments that have been done to ruins there. So those are two online resources that you can go to, and I’ll have those links in the note for, um, this episode of the podcast. And then also as, um, Charlie Steen III in the interview mentioned, he’s happy to have people email him and ask more questions. MG: So, when we first kinda decided that we were gonna do this interview with Dr. Steen, I think our original intent was to talk a lot about the National Historic Preservation Act and how it came into being. And we certainly talked about during the interview, but there was a lot of other interesting topics that came up as well, that I think are… are worth mentioning also. Uh, one of the really interesting things about Charlie Steen is that throughout the entire course of career, is he was really interested, uh, in sort of pushing forward the science of historic preservation by testing, uh, products and materials that could increase the durability of fragile walls, or help them protect those walls, for, you know, periods of time, that would allow the National Park Service to do a better job of protecting and preserving them. SH: A lot of the work that Charlie Steen was doing was on the actual, um, resources that we have at park units. Today, uh, because we’ve learned so much, we will end up building test walls to test out new products, so that we know the full extent of, um, of the product’s capability before we actually apply it to the resource that’s in the field. To do that, we need another interdisciplinary team, so just like Charlie Steen was looking at scientists outside of the Park Service to help with his research, and his efforts to preserve these, uh, American, uh, National Park Sites. He, um… today, we use interdisciplinary teams with masons and other traditional craftspeople so that we’re making walls in the same method that, um, that these resources that we’re trying to preserve we made so that we can, um, make sure that we’re getting our preservation treatments just right. {Outro} SH: The National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast is a production of the Southern Arizona Office of the National Park Service. Our artwork was designed by Laura Varon-Burkhart. Justin Mossman composed our music. We look forward to hearing from you! Matt and I will be with you again next month.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-
Recognizing Native American Perspectives - Lloyd Masayumptewa - Episode 4
In honor of National Native American Heritage Month we interview Lloyd Masayumptewa, Superintendent of Hubbell Trading Post National Historic Site. He discusses how being Hopi influences his work and what we at the NPS can do better. **Links in this episode** Hubbell Trading Post NHS: https://www.nps.gov/hutr/index.htm Council for Indigenous, Relevance, Communication, Leadership and Excellence (CIRCLE): https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1244/ergs.htm
- Credit / Author:
- Southern Arizona Office
- Date created:
- 11/17/2017
NPS Southwest Archeology Podcast Episode 4 – Lloyd Masayumptewa Music Intro Matthew Guebard (MG): Hello and welcome to the National Park Service Southwest Archeology Podcast, brought to you by the Southern Arizona Office. My name's Matt Guebard. Sharlot Hart (SH): And I'm Sharlot Hart MUSICMG: Today we talk with Lloyd Masayumptewa who is the superintendent of Hubbell Trading Post. But he's also a trained archeologist. So we're gonna talk a little bit about Hubbell Trading Post, what it is, what you can see if you visit there, but then we're gonna talk to Lloyd about what it means to be a Hopi person working for the National Park Service and how his background affects his job and as archeologist. We're gonna spend some time talking about that during the interview and afterwards. And we're going to answer a listener question. So, let's get to the interview.
MG: Hey Lloyd.
Lloyd Masayumptewa (LM): Hey, how's it going?
SH: Hey Lloyd.
LM: Hey Sharlot.
MG: So, just to start off can you tell us a little bit about Hubbell Trading Post and why it was established.
LM: Uh, Hubbell Trading Post is located in the northeastern part of Arizona. And it's establishment was basically because of the Hubbell family, Lorenzo Hubbell, who built an empire basically, in the southwest, developing multiple trading posts. And the one thing that he's really well known for is his hospitality and his willingness to help native folks. The other thing that he's been noted for is the Ganado Red style of rug weaving that he incorporated, or requested, of the local ladies who wove in this area. And through that he built -- or at least built a recognition of rug weaving in this area. And from there it just kind-of like, spread. And a lot of the product that, well, in particular the rugs that were woven in this area were shipped off to many different places. And through that, you know, the name itself and the people he brought out here. He was also a politician and was pretty well connected and a lot of noted politicians came this way, visited him. And also he provided tours out to other places, other reservations, particularly Hopi for some of the dances. And so a number of reasons why this was set aside. And when the family decided to move on, they wanted, they wanted to keep this as a living trading post. So, currently we try to mimic what had gone on in the past.
MG: So, it's actually an operating trading post?
LM: Yes.
MG: Are there any other national park units like that?
LM: Not that I know of, nothing like this that I know of. We have a trader in the trading post. We've had numerous trading--traders, excuse me. Traders that have gone-- well, that have been hired by um, our cooperating association. And so you know, they continue that. And right now we're trying to establish a mentoring program where we develop, or at least WNPA develops new traders, so that this can carry on.
MG: Hmm, interesting. So, for our listeners that maybe don't know exactly where the park is, it's located on the Navajo reservation. And if you don't live on the reservation, it can be kinda hard to get there, it can be a remote place. What do you think visitors should know as far as how much time they should plan if they come to the park, or what time of year is best to be there?
LM: Well, it's umm, it's open throughout the year. And the best time for me personally is probably in the Spring. Um, because you know, we have things that are blooming. We have a lot of activity going on. I think for me personally, that's the best time of year. Also the Fall, that's not too bad. But this time of year, depending on how much moisture we get, we can get a lot of mosquitoes so it's not too fun to be walking outdoors.
SH and MG: Laughter
LM: But aside from that any time of the year is fine. Just to mention that we do observe day light savings time. Be prepared-- if you're wanting to take a tour, um, you could spend um, maybe about two hours here.
MG: Okay, great.
SH: And Western National Parks Association does an annual rug sale, is that right?
LM: No, it's a friends group. And of late they have been starting to do the rug sales, or auctions, off-site.
SH: Oh, okay.
LM: But we do have rugs in the ware room--or in the rug room, excuse me. That are for sale. But they are kind-of looking into possibly having their own action. That's been talked about for a number of years, but nothing has ever transpired.
SH: Okay.
MG: Great. So, you're the superintendent, which for people who don't know, that means that you're in charge of all of the operations at the park. Can you tell us a little bit about what the role of the superintendent of managing cultural resources and archeological sites?
LM: Well, for me personally, I think that every superintendent has their own ideal. For me personally, having that archeological background that Matt mentioned, it's trying to maintain the structures as they are. And um, if anything should happen trying to repair them so that there are really no obvious clues that anyone has done any work on them. But also, in the same token, documenting everything that we're doing to these resources. And so that goes hand in hand in trying to find people that can do this type of work. And it's kind-of difficult when your funding is limited, and you know I think most parks have that issue. But there are resource parks that do have the luxury so to speak, of having programs developed so that they are really focused on preserving sites and unfortunately here at Hubbell Trading Post we've kind-of not developed anything like that. But I'm trying to start a little bit of a program, but you know, it's just a start-up thing. And one of the things that I wanna start doing is really documenting historic buildings, and make sure that we are documenting everything that we're doing to them.
MG: Great. So, you sort-of answered my next question, but do you think that being a professional archeologist gives you a perspective that is beneficial to your role? And do you think that that is a perspective that maybe a superintendent with a different professional background may not be able to tap into?
LM: Yes, I do think that it's beneficial depending on what your background is and I think that it's always good to look at those avenues when upper management is hiring individuals to fill management positions, because I-- you know, things can go by the wayside and other things can happen where if you're not careful, you know, there's been numerous examples out there, um, and if you can just look at some of the recent incidents that have been revealed you can get an understanding of things related to um, doing compliance and consultation and things like that. So, you know, having that background it's a plus, but not to say that it can't be learned. And right now I think that the Service is actually trying in a system...
MG: Right, right. And again, just for our listeners who might not know, um, superintendents often have really diverse professional backgrounds. And the park service hires, you know, people from-- to do any number of jobs, from I don't know, a diesel mechanic up to a, you know, a mountaineer. So, a superintendent can be hired because they have leadership qualities but they may have any number of sort-of different professional qualifications. And um, as you alluded to, often times they'll bring their experiences in their past jobs into their role as superintendent.
So, um, you're also a member of the Hopi Tribe. Can you tell the listeners a little about Hopi, particularly where it's located?
LM: The Hopi Tribe is smack dab in the middle of the Navajo Reservation, pretty much. We're also in the northern part of Arizona. We have uh--how many mesas do we have? I don't think I can say all our mesas, but I think we've got... one, two, three... seven or so. I can't, well, anyway there's a number of mesas out there. I grew up in the village of Old Oraibi, raised by my grandparents. You know, having that um, I guess being lucky that I had grandparents who um, were still alive at the time and raised me in a more of a traditional way that um, there are nuances that I had to deal with in getting into this profession, my prior profession that is. And you know, I don't know, it's just kind of a lifeway that we've gone through and things that we have to be cautious of, and I hate using the word taboo, um, but you know, you just have to be respectful of things is a better word for it. And being cautious of the things that we do to things while we're out there. But you know, being a Hopi and particularly knowing that in this region there are footprints that were left by our ancestors, it gives me pleasure to work in places like this, because you know, everywhere I go it's basically home, because my ancestors walked through these places, they built dwellings and left their marks in these areas. And the pleasure working for the park service because it's given me the opportunity to preserve my history.
MG: That's really interesting. And that's I think, a perspective that those of us who don't have that background, maybe struggle to understand sometimes. How do you think, uh, your connection with ancestral sites in the park service has affected or influenced your job either as an archeologist or a superintendent.
LM: Well, I wouldn't say influenced too much. But, you know, I-- and I don't know if there's a word for it, but I think that-- just like I said um, being raised in a traditional setting and the things that we were taught about these places and you know, knowing that-- at least hearing about these places that existed out there, and then actually seeing that these places still exist, um, that, that, you know, that they're basically alive and well, that it um, it brings some wholeness to me because you know you hear about things and then you're actually out there to um, be there in these places with, I guess, basically our ancestors' spirits and such. It may sound hokey but that's, you know, how I feel. And you know, just having that sense of feeling does I guess, somewhat influence you in how you approach things.
MG: Yeah, I don't think it sounds hokey at all. It must be a very powerful thing, the experience.
SH: Yes.
MG: Um, so, do your beliefs as a Hopi person - have they ever conflicted with your professional responsibilities, particularly as an archeologist? And if so, how do you balance that?
LM: Well, it's difficult initially. And so you know, when I first got in to the program at um, Northern Arizona University, I had to actually talk to my grandparents because my father didn't want to answer me. But in talking to my grandparents they basically said 'just so long as you're not doing any harm purposefully. And that you pray to--to whoever is living there before you doing anything that you're not there to do any harm, you're just basically doing your job.' And um, one of the things that I really had a problem with was excavation. Because I've always found that there's been so much already excavated that there's so much that hasn't been looked at, researched. That they're just sitting on shelves. That we don't need to do any more excavation, unless we're, you know, doing some recovery stuff where something is being affected and we have to do some mitigation work, and you know, that is somewhat justifiable. But even then I still question that.
MG: Sure.
SH: Yeah, I think um, being a frontline ranger for a long time, it was always an interesting conversation that I would have with visitors because their, um, the popular concept of an archeologist is not the preservation archeologist, you know, the archeologist who's going out and doing those compliance digs and always excavating.
LM: Mmm.
SH: So it was always a nice, educational moment um, but I was always surprised that most of our work is not that and that the popular concept is very different.
LM: Mhmm.
MG: So, one of the things that the National Park Service has always tried to do, and has tried harder to do in the last several decades is incorporate Native American perspectives of the archeology and the history of park units, particularly of those here in Arizona. But, honestly, there's a lot of room for improvement. So, how do you think that the National Park Service could do a better job of representing both ancestral Native American people, and living people?
LM: I think that what park service needs to do is really invest in bringing native folks into the service. And having a few folks to do our interpretation of our peoples' places. Um, I think that's something that we've struggled with; we've talked about it a lot. But to me nothing has ever really been done about doing something like that. So, um, in areas like this. [cough] Sorry - my voice is giving out. In areas like this where you having a setting in a Navajo reservation, we have primarily Navajos that are employed here, and particularly at Hubbell, Canyon de Chelly, and Navajo National Monument. Hubbell is a good example, or a good place, to have Navajos because Navajos had that connection to the Hubbell family, um, more so than the other tribes. But you know, there are still connections to Hopi, Zuni and other Puebloan groups and event the Apache, and the um, some of the southern tribes as well. But, you know, having at least a few folks to talk about things, I think it makes it more personal. And um, you know, even visitors that come to the parks, and when I started my career in Flagstaff, you know, you're out there repairing walls and such or documenting, and drawing maps and you have visitors going by, and you know, ask questions that a person who has that background, or grew up in--on the reservation or village can answer some of those questions where an interp ranger who is--I don't like to use, well, I'm going to have it anyway--Anglo, may not have that perspective and can't fully answer a question and so... And then you hear things like that where - "how come you guys don't have any Natives or the descendants um, doing these programs themselves?"
MG: I think makes sense for visitors to um, be able to hear about the sites from the people who's ancestors used them, and then it makes a lot of sense.
SH: Do you see, um, do you see a fundamental problem with how the park service in general runs it's interpretation programs with only seasonal employment for most of the front line rangers?
LM: I do. Um, but you know, it's -- it won't -- once you get in to a position like this you can understand why you would do something like that. I mean, you have seasons where you have a lot of folks coming in, during the summer season of course, and so that's when you want to staff up.
SH: Right.
LM: And during the winter months you know, when it's -- people aren't going to be... especially like if you're in Wupatki and places where it's a little cooler, that you're not gonna have a ton of folks going through there, but then again you still have folks going through. And so, you should consider maybe bringing on one or two people that are on a permanent basis.
SH: Thanks.
MG: So, Native American tribal governments and also individuals have sometimes been at odds with federal archeologists. Particularly over issues regarding the treatment of ancestral places and ancestral people, meaning human remains and objects. And it seems like a lot of times when you hear about that in the news it's often a very negative and contentious situation. But I think here in the Southwest there can also be examples of cooperation. Can you think of any examples of projects that you've been involved in that have had a positive and mutually beneficial results for both archeologists and tribal folks?
LM: Umm, well there's a few of them, I know that. But I think for the most part, um, well, let me go ahead and mention you know, some of the-- well, at least one example where um, the park went through a NAGPRA process in Flagstaff, and I thought that the Flagstaff folks should be a model for the rest of the park service. Where, they did their own NAGPRA, they didn't use the regional folks, because, going to the regional realms they're so inclusive it makes the work more cumbersome. And there's just so much that you have to do when you utilize that help, it's just, not really help. And so, um, when they took it upon themselves they only invited a number of folks that they really felt had affiliation to the park, and so I think when working through -- even though it was somewhat contentious, and questions asked after the fact, but you know, nothing else really developed from that. And I think that was a good example, and I think that developed from the fact that they also looked at the Coconino Forest who did something similar, and um, you know, I think that as far as NAGPRA goes we have different ways of dealing with that, and that you know, we -- it just makes it more complicated and we do that to ourselves.
But the other things-- one other thing that has been really positive between archeologists was the development of the Vanishing Treasures initiative. I think that was a huge thing, where um, that enabled people like myself to get into a program, working with the Hopi Tribe to bring in Hopi people to actually be a part of that program and even get employment through that process--or that program. And um, you know, and working with the archeologist there and then going through a program to become an archeologist. You know, and I think that benefited not just the park service, but the tribe and the archeologist that worked in the area.
MG: Okay, and just so our listeners know, NAGPRA is the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. And it's uh, a law that creates the process wherein, representatives of the federal government will consult with representatives from tribes to repatriate human remains and objects that may have been removed during archeological projects, and often times those remains and objects will be reburied in a way that is appropriate to the tribes.
So, I think those are really good examples and it sounds like maybe there's a couple of take-homes here which would be more inclusion for tribal people in the parks and in positions like, like, an archeologist. But also, maybe improved communication between archeologists and tribal folks as well.
LM: That's correct. And you know, what you mentioned, you know, it's improved quite a bit, and if you look at some of their reports that were generated early on, you know, there was -- there were instances where even though an archeologist consulted with-- they didn't use that information to put in their report. And after the fact, certain things came up, and it should have been included in the reports because you know, they aligned with what they told them. And so, you know, putting-- using that information would have been good to get things going early on. And um, you know, we wouldn't be running into some of these issues that we do have now, and trying to um, retract from previous claims of things like that.
MG: Sure. So, that is all the questions that I have. Is there anything else that either of you wanna expand on?
SH: I guess, uh, following up on the idea that we should hire more native folks, are there any educational initiatives out there that we could focus on to-- help get us to that place?
LM: Educational initiatives... you know I think there are opportunities within the park service that we don't tap into. Um, and creating avenues-- other minorities have developed certain um, career paths and are able to get into those and they're being developed for their -- what do you call it? -- uh, their history or, or, or -- can't put it into words -- but anyway, where they're connected to.
SH: Right.
LM: So, developing something like that for Native peoples it would you know, just be a matter of generating, or putting that out there, and hoping that somebody in upper management can take that on and go with it. And you know, that would really benefit the park service in a huge way. And this is not just in Arizona, I think nation-wide would mean every place, just about every place that has been set aside, has some connection to some native population in their area. And so we're missing a lot because we don't interpret those connections. And so um, trying to enable folks to to to engage in something like that is something that is probably a bit more far reaching, but it's gotta start somewhere.
SH: Well, thank you so much. We've been talking with Lloyd Masayumptewa, the superintendent of Hubbell Trading Post National Historical Site. Thank you so much for your time and uh, and talking with us.
LM: It's been my pleasure.
MUSIC
SH: So I think it's really important to reiterate a lot of the take home points that Lloyd gave us at the end of the interview. You know, I'm a white woman from Phoenix, and I might be an archaeologist, but I don't have that same background that a Native American would. Having those multivocal view points is so important for management decisions at our park units.
MG: It is, and uh, a really good example of that is at Tuzigoot National Monument several years ago we were developing museum exhibits. And we were looking at artifacts and trying to figure out how to interpret those objects to the public. And we had a lot of archeologists with different specializations who were involved in those discussions, but we also invited tribal people as well. And interestingly, their interpretations were very different from the ones that were created by the archeologists, but they were really insightful and it was very helpful to get a different perspective and it really helped us to come up with interpretations that were not only more inclusive, but in some ways, um, provided more information about the object itself and gave some perspective on it. So, it's, I think, really important to note that archeologists don't have all of the answers. And the way that you do good science in archeology is to listen to as many different perspectives as possible, and consulting with tribal folks who have a lot of traditional knowledge that archeologists don't have access to is a really critical part of developing a good interpretation an object or a site.
SH: So now is the time when we would answer listener questions. Um, we still don't have any, so please do use that contact us button on our um, on our podcast webpage where the podcast is hosted. And let us know what you're thinking and if you have any questions you'd like us to answer. But, so in the mean time we thought we would highlight some of the internal um, ways that the park service is trying to address inclusion and relevancy.
MG: Right, so one of those groups is called the Council for Indigenous Relevance Communication Leadership and Excellence, known as CIRCLE. And that's the group that was formed in 2013 and it's a resource for helping uh, employees in the park service to understand more about Native American issues. Uh, if you're interested in getting more information on it, you can contact the CIRCLE group at uh, CIRCLE@NPS.GOV. That's C I R C L E at N P S dot G O V.
SH: Thanks for joining us today. Hope you enjoyed it. Join us again when we talk with Angelyn Bass of the University of New Mexico and Doug Porter of the University of Vermont. They're both academic partners who help us in historic preservation in our monuments.
MUSIC
SH: The National Park Service Southwest archaeology podcast is a production of the Southern Arizona Office of the National Park Service. Our artwork was designed by Laura Varon-Burkhart. Justin Mossman composed our music. We look forward to hearing from you. Matt and I will be with you again next month.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-
Partners in Preservation - Angelyn Bass and Douglas Porter - Episode 5
This December at the National Park Service we celebrate our partners. Partnerships both internally and externally help us to ensure a bright future for the NPS. Angelyn Bass (University of New Mexico) and Douglas Porter (University of Vermont) are two such partners. Their partnership and research into our historic and pre-contact sites has been invaluable for us to understand, interpret, and manage our sites better.
- Credit / Author:
- NPS - Southern Arizona Office
- Date created:
- 12/18/2017
NPS Southwest Archeology Podcast Episode 5 – Angelyn Bass and Douglas Porter Music IntroMATT GUEBARD: Hello, and welcome to the National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast. Brought to you by the Southern Arizona Office. My name’s Matt Guebard.
SHARLOT HART: And I’m Sharlot Hart.
[MUSIC]
SH: We have a special episode for you this December. The Southwest Archaeology Podcast from the National Park Service. This month is supporting the park’s month at the NPS. Where we get to celebrate our partners. National Parks and our programs were built on partnerships, and we’d like the highlight the importance of these relationships, which range from citizen donations, to friends groups, cooperating associations, and volunteer time. So today, we’ll take a look at one aspect of partnerships by talking with Angelyn Bass, of the University of New Mexico, and Doug Porter of the University of Vermont. They’re both academic partners through a program called Cooperating Ecosystem Studies Units, who help us in historic preservation at our monuments.
SH: Well, uh, before we got to that interview, we’ll have, um, some introduction to the topic of historic preservation, uh, as, um, as they do it with an example that, uh, from a park that we’ve worked at with them recently. We’ll have the interview, uh, we’ll talk a little bit more about the, um, about historic preservation, and then we’ll get to listener questions. So without further ado, let’s get to their work at Montezuma Castle.
MG: All right, so, I first met Doug and Angelyn probably five years ago, uh, when they were brought in to help with a project at Montezuma Castle. Um, we brought them in because they are specialists in what they do. They specialize in historic preservation, and in understanding, uh, ancient architecture. So, we wanted to bring them in, uh, to try to, um, better understand How Montezuma Castle was built, and also to develop kind of a preservation plan for how to take care, uh, of the cliff dwelling in the future, so, understanding particular issues that might affect, uh, the cliff dwelling over time and how to possibly, um, treat those issues. But, what’s interesting is that they, um, are specialists themselves, but they have access to lots of other, uh, scientists and preservation experts, uh, in the field. Um, through their affiliation with the university. And so they were really our conduit, um, to be able to, uh, reach out to other scientists and kind of get this very comprehensive view of how we should take care of the cliff dwelling, which was very, very useful. What we ended up learning from this project, uh, and we’re still learning, but what we’ve learned so far, uh, is, in what order the rooms were constructed, and how they changed over time, how people in the past might have used them, uh, and that means how they were decorated particularly. Uh, what we found is that certain rooms were decorated with different colored plasters for instance, so there are rooms that have yellow plasters, very bright, yellow plasters. Uh, and other rooms that had red plasters and white plasters. That’s very interesting, and that, um, raises a lot of additional questions about how people use the rooms, how they viewed them, uh, maybe what certain colors meant to people in the past. Um, but I think maybe most interestingly is by studying the rooms in a lot of detail, and by utilizing experts like-like Doug and Angelyn. What we found is that the people who built Montezuma Castle weren’t just farmers, uh, who happened to build a cliff dwelling, the will-er-they really were architects, and engineers, and they had a lot of, sort of basic knowledge about how to put these things together and they did a lot of pre-planning, and that’s very different than, uh, maybe the way that the National Park Service has interpreted cliff dwellings like Montezuma Castle in the Past. So it gives us a lot of insight, uh, into the people that lived there, and maybe a more realistic view, um, of what those people’s lives were like, and, uh, knowledge and skillset that they had in constructing some of these really iconic, uh, buildings that are now part of the-the National Park Service system here, in the American Southwest.
SH: That’s really cool, that all of that, you know, information feeds together to form such a much better picture of people. I know, when I’ve been on the trail at Montezuma Castle it’s sometimes hard for people just even to imagine how you would get up into the castle, let alone what, um, daily life would have been like, or-or what, you know, jobs people would have had, um, a thousand years ago.
MG: Right, and that-I think there’s, uh, maybe a tendency in the past for, uh, and maybe, today, for people to sort of think about, um, ancestral people, no matte-no matter where in the world as sort of somehow, uh, less sophisticated than we are today. And that’s of course not true at all, and so, by looking at the architecture, and sort of understanding, um, the knowledge and the skillsets that these folks in the past had, uh, and by acknowledging their accomplishments as engineers and architects, that sort of gives us a window into understanding, um, how, sort of, I guess sophisticated their-their culture was. And, um, helps us to understand that they’re not all that different from, uh, from modern folks.
SH: That’s great. Well why don’t we get to their interview and hear about some of their other projects.
[MUSIC]
MG: So this is Matt Guebard and Sharlot Hart, we’re here with Doug Porter, who’s an assistant professor of engineering at the University of Vermont, and Angelyn Bass who’s a research assistant professor of anthropology at the University of New Mexico. Hey guys.
DOUGH PORTER: Hey.
ANGELYN BASS: Hi Matt, Hi Sharlot.
SH: Hey, that’s for being here.
MG: Kay, so, uh, just to orient the listeners a little bit, um, so far we’ve done a couple of different episodes, and we talked about historic preservation, mostly how developed over time, uh, how it became a law, uh, or said laws, um, but we haven’t talked a lot about what it is, and it’s worth mentioning there’s a lot of variety in historic preservation with how it’s done, and kind of, who’s involved. And that can depend on the resource type or the type of issue, um, that can occur to a particular building, for instance. So, you guys are, I think, are the perfect guests ‘cause you have a lot background, uh, and a lot of experience and often times you guys kind of work as a team, right, that focuses on historic preservation, and you’ve conducted work all over the world, including a lot of National Park Service, uh, units here in the American Southwest. So, just so the listeners understand, can you guys talk separately about what each of you specialize in?
DP: Sure, um, I work for a school of engineering, so, I’ve been focused on, um the roles of engineering in historic preservation. Um, and, this has included structural and geotechnical disciplines which, you know, I think everybody kind of expects. Um, but, the-the there are lots more roles for engineering in this work, and, uh, w-we’ve ended up using engineering d-disciplines that have included non-destructive testing, uh, industrial hygiene, oddly, on the-some prehistoric structures. Uh, fire safety, um, and environmental engineering. Um, and I’ve also had a lot of experience with the-with-with structures, so, uh, those interest me as well.
AB: Well, I, um, I’ve specialized in, uh, I always joke with Doug that the-I specialize the-in the use of the small tools and he specialize in these big tools. Um, but I focus primarily on archaeological site conformation, and within that context, um, architectural finishing. Um, that would include, uh, lime and earthen wall plasters, with and without decorations, uh, built-in architectural features, or, food protection, or weavings. Um, and, I work on both, the ancient archaeological sites and historic sites, so, um. They, um, give me some very delicate material and earth, um, to very hearty, uh concrete plasters from the mid-20th century.
DP: And I think just, e-uh, as a biographical note, uh, probably the first time Angelyn and I worked together, it was one of those big tools, little tools things where, um, I had a contract to evaluate painted wood in a mission church on the mid coast of, uh, California on ceiling boards and a retablo, and all the little tool places in the church, and, uh, I think that was the first time we partnered to get our arms entirely around the-the scope of work that, uh, neither of could have done, uh, on our own. I was excited to work on the structural wood of vigas, the things that were holding up the-the roof, and, um, these were, uh, big timbers that they were decoratively painted, but I was not so much concerned with the decorative paint as I was with what was happening to them. Uh, in terms of deterioration, and um, Angelyn came on to do all the little tool stuff that she just described, uh, uh, wood retablo, uh, in the church altar, and, uh, painted ceiling. [OVERLAP]
SH: That’s great.
MG: So, there’s a, so, sounds like there’s a difference in scale in sort of how you guys may look at projects, but, it compliments well, uh, wait-when you look at a project as a whole. So, you guys were just at Grand Canyon, um doing some work, can you talk a little bit about what you were doing there? And, um, how you’re, uh different focuses kind of came together to-to do the project?
AB: Uh, well I’ll chime in, Doug. Um, this is a fantastic project, is it a fantastic project. Um, and muliti-phases, [plum?], but it’s supposed to keep on the, the wall paintings on the interior of the watch tower, um, that’s a Mary Colter designed building from the 1930’s. Uh, the paintings, uh, are on each level, uh, and they were made by three artists, two Hopi painters, one of them Fred Kabotie and the other’s Jeff [Tedune?], and then an anglo artist from the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe railroad, uh, by the name Fred Geary. So the, um, the paintings portray, uh, the ease of interpretations of Hopi mythology. Um, and, they’re also recreations of designs from pictographs and petroglyphs throughout the southwest. Um, the building is, uh, sort of an extraordinary combination of, uh, the best of the ancient southwest, in it was built so that visitors coming to the rim of the Grand Canyon to get the sweeping views of the landscape, uh, and within that landscape, imagine the sort of decorative arts of the people who lived there, and they combined, it, just, a combination, they combined a lot of different, um, pictographs and petroglyphs in one building. Um, to get sort of the sweeping view of the art and large picture of the ancient pueblo people in one room. Um, so, there are a lot of things going on in that, and, um, in that building. But, so, um, the problem with the wall paintings was that the, um, they’ve been damaged from water leaks, um, over 80 years of water leaks. Uh, and, um, the, uh, the paintings were hard to read, um, through all the soluble salts staining, just the water streaks that run down the wall. So, our job was to, uh, clean and conserve all the wall paintings. Uh, and, our approach to it, um, was to focus on the integrity of the painting, uh, we weren’t there to restore the paintings to over paint them. Um, but we focused on cleaning up the stains around it so that the paintings come to the foreground. And second, we were trying to, think preserve the authenticity of the site. On one level the authenticity of the artists intent, um, so no re- painting was going to the dump, um, but also the authenticity of, uh, the visitor experience. And, uh, building the-only 80 years old, but, it has a patina of age that was important to preserve as well, we weren’t coming in to give it an entire face-lift, uh, we wanted to preserve its patina. So, uh, our approach to wall-paintings conservation was little different than, um, than usual. Um, and I’ll explain that in a minute. Um, but, uh, one would take that, uh, the important part of, um, preserving a building is to focus on the causes of the problems, which is, in that case, water leaks into the building. The one part about projects which Doug-Doug will discuss was to, um, look at the building envelope and look at the reasons for the-for the leaks, and not, and to, design ways to, um, reduce the amount of water infiltration to the, um, interior of the building. Uh, the wall paintings part, um, was to use, uh conservation-grade materials, um, to help preserve the integrity of the painting, um, but also to help protect them in light of the building, um, having frequent leaks, um, really on the, uh, on the scale of every storm that passes through, part of the building would leak.
DP: Um…
AB: Well why don’t you talk a bit about the exterior.
DP: Yeah, the big tool piece of this is, uh, has to do with how the-the tower was put together. And, like, Mary Colter was looking to, uh, recreate in some sense, uh, uh, uh, composite building that, uh, captured elements from towers that Hovenweep, and Mesa Verde, and give her, or, give the accent, because Santa Fe railroad visitors, um, kind of uh, uh, an experience of that landscape all in one spot. And, um, she did this by, uh, combining, uh, a steel frame, this is, uh, 1931 or two. Um, with, uh, a wall construction of, uh, unreinforced masonry that was supported in steel channels on every floor, and, um, the-the particular combination of materials and-and the ways that the stonework relates to, uh, the steel frame, it has resulted in, uh, in leaks that we think probably started soon after the building was completed. Um, and, it’s this leaking, and the salts that are brought in, um, water coming through the building envelope that, uh, uh, do so much damage to the-to the paintings. So, um, we are, while we’re conserving the paintings, trying to understand, uh, the performance of the building envelope, and, provide designs for improvements. Um, we’re working with the friends and colleagues from Atkinson-Noland & Associates, an engineering firm in Boulder. Um, and the work has focused on characterizing the expansion and contraction behavior for raw materials, um, so that, uh, we can accommodate those movements in a-a finished envelope. Um, that work is ongoing, and, um, we expect the, um, conservation of the interior to kind of move, uh, parallel with, uh, the work on the exterior of the building.
MG: So, I-the sense that I get from-from your answers is that this project, and probably all historic preservation projects are incredibly complex, um, what-what role d-do you guys think the scientific process plays in kind of diagnosing and treating some of these issues? Uh, and you touched on this, but how important are multidisciplinary teams, so, for our listeners, that’s, you know, people with different backgrounds and d-different levels of experience, how important are those teams, uh, in planning these types of projects?
DP: The more complex the-the projects, the more important it is that the team, uh, be made up from several disciplines. Um, we think that, uh, that the analysis of building performance, um, we’re talking about buildings right now, um, is, uh, that frequently, uh, one of, uh, primary keys to understanding the deterioration conditions that, uh, repair what they intended to address, so, uh, you know, we, we were talking about the desert view watchtower and the building envelope, and, um, there’re several large, vertical cracks that run through, uh, many stories of that building. Um, and, repointing those cracks has been ineffective, that, the cracks re-appear shortly after the repairs are made. Um, and, part of the work that we’ve done there, with, uh, Atkinson-Noland has involved, uh, monitoring those cracks, and then modeling the behavior of the building, um, given uh, changes in temperature, and wind pressures. And, um, we’ve come to the conclusion on the basis of the data that we’ve collected that the cracks are unplanned, undersigned movement joints that, um, an architect, uh, today w-would design into her or his building, um, that movement has to be accommodated, um, because it’s the result of diurnal and seasonal changes in temperature and the stresses imposed by the wind. Um, and closing the joint is gonna require a flexible sealant that’s designed for movement of a particular amount. And, uh, rather than filling them over and over again with brittle mortars that are, uh, based on Portland cement. Um, we also use measurement to, um, sometimes to determine the amount of treatment that’s necessary. Um, some of the archaeological sites that we’re working on have had relatively little intervention, and, uh, their scientific or research value resides largely on the fact that they-they haven’t been changed in-in recent memory, um, and, we feel that sometimes the impacts of repair interventions can be minimized by, just by knowing what loads the repaired structures are gonna need to support. And I guess, we also use science and measurement as ways of understanding risk, um, when you approach buildings, um and are kind of surrounded by the results of decades or centuries of deterioration kind of on all sides, um, the inclination is to think in terms of, uh, of, of painting everything with one brush of, kind of treating all of the cracks equally, and, so on. Um, and, uh, we know frequently that-that this is not the case, that, different parts of structures, uh, have differing levels of risk, and by understanding the risk in advance, um, we’re able to focus our treatment on those places most at risk. Uh, letting a lot of the rest go.
AB: I have a comment too that’s, um, I have this thing, um, of, need for science, uh, and mulipli-disciplinary, um, involvement, um, w-we have that same need on every site we go to. Uh, especially the ancient sites, where we don’t, um, know or understand the building, the technology, or the materials combinations very well. Um, we have a hard time, um, understanding how something decays if we don’t understand how it was constructed, and what it was constructed with. Um, so science helps us also, um, look at the composition of the material, the combination of those materials, and, and how they are, um, put together. The multidisciplinary aspect of it is important, um, because you need so many specialists to help unders-help you understand, um, uh, that building technology, uh, the, um, the earth and plasters, uh, and lime plasters, um, it’s important to understand, um, the modern technology, um, and their appearance in the modern times, so that you can understand why they fail the way they do.
SH: Using these teams and, um, and, new science that comes out helps you essentially, you know, re-invent the wheel a little bit, um, we always talk about not re-inventing the wheel, but, in this case, if we were just doing the same thing over and over again, we wouldn’t actually be ameliorating any of the situations that you see.
DP: Yeah, I think that’s-I think that’s exactly right. It, at the beginning and kind of as we move through every project that we do, we are exercising some judgment about where, uh, we need more information. And, um, most of these sites are, they’re all bigger than an easel painting, they are all more complex than an easel painting, and, uh, we know that we can’t collect exhaustive information. And, so we-we have to make judgments about what’s important, uh, frequently those judgments that we make at the, uh, beginning of a project has to be [INAUDIBLE] uh, in response to information that we-we gather along the way, um, uh…
AB: [OVERLAP]
DP: …we-we just talking about this in terms of-of structures, um, and, uh, I know, Angelyn has had a number of projects, um, and I have two, and we’ve worked on some together that-that are rate-um, really, about landscape features. Um, and, um…
AB: Doug, can I chime in a minute? I’ll just…
DP: Yeah.
AB: …talk with her with this one, sort of before we discuss issues at a landscape level. But, uh, when I first started to work with Doug, um, I told him that I try to reduce my scope in a project from the beginning to the end. And he kind of laughed, ‘cause he thought I was trying to get out of work. [LAUGH]
SH: [LAUGH]
AB: Um, but, [LAUGH] what I trying to do was to minimize the inve-interventions that we were going to make. And at the beginning of their project, you have big plans about all of the things, um, that you want to do, and all the repairs that you want to make, but as you start to understand the building technology, or the materials, then you start to focus on where the problems occur, uh, and what the goal of minimizing your interventions to focus specifically on where the problems occur, um, you, uh, you end up reducing your scope. Um, and your treatments become, uh, more focused on protecting the material integrity and physical authenticity of the site, and less on, um, those knee-jerk reactions to treating a building. So the science is important to understand the materials and the building technology so that we can minimize interventions.
DP: At Bandelier we were asked to look at the structural stability of a small prehistoric masonry wall, uh, one of the last walls surviving on, uh, a cavate there. Um, but we couldn’t miss the fact, all the time that we were doing this work, that, uh, what was so much more interesting was, everything surrounding the wall, there was a boulder that had detached above the wall from the rock outcrop, and was now sitting on the wall, uh, damage to the rock below the wall had resulted in erosion of the rock, undermining part of the wall, and, so, while we-we-we did our, you know, what was in our scope, we very quickly, uh, got onto the issue of the stability of the outcrop itself. And, uh, and in pursuing that, we noticed this-this was a project that required several years, um, we noticed that, a lot of, uh, outcrop faces that, uh, appeared to be stable, and hard, and competent, um, were covered with lichens and other microflora, and uh, that got us on to the topic of how those lichens and microflora contributed to the case hardening of those outcrop surfaces over, uh, periods of time. Um…
AB: You know, and we even noticed that the hand and toe hold trails, and the petroglyphs that has been carved into the tough cliff space, uh, had a case hardening effect to ‘em, so that it-it was clearly something that had occurred since the time they were made, which is uh, relatively fast.
DP: Um, that issue of-of how the case-hardened surfaces formed, uh, hadn’t been studied for this volcanic rock that the cavates of Bandelier carved in, it turned out to be an exceedingly complex issue, and the-the team that formed around that research, uh, before it was, I started to say before it was over, we’re not done yet, but, um, uh, it very quickly came to include, uh, conservators and geologists, and geochemists, and geomorphologists, and mineralogists, and soil scientists, and lichenologists, and archaeologists, um, all to, uh, answer a question that, uh, we feel at this point, um, definitely touches on the stability of those resources, but, may or may not ever, uh, throw off an approach to treatment apart from, um, don’t remove the lichens, whatever you do. Um, so, anyway, I’ve-that’s one of my favorite examples of, uh, multidisciplinary, uh, research team taking on a-a-a research task that, uh, uh, continues to open the-the longer we pursue it.
AB: And, Matt and Sharlot, uh, an important plug, uh, I’m going to make here at this point is that, um, a lot of the science that, um, is done through the CESU projects, um, and that’s the beauty of that program, is that you can make the resources of, um, multi-disciplinary group, um, um, the resources, the scientific resources of universities together to do research that’s not commonly done, um, under, uh, under a contract. Um, so it’s a, um, through those CESU projects, we’ve been able to pursue, um, the, um, case-hardening, phenomenon of the tough, the, um, plaster, uh, earthen plaster characterization, um, uh, paints analysis, um, looking at the, um, how color, uh, is a important component of earthen plasters in our sites, um, it’s specialized research that, um, has, uh, been able to flourish through the CESU program.
MG: Right, so, um, just for the listeners, uh, the CESU program allows the Park Service to partner with universities to reach out to people with specializations that may not be a part of the federal government, so, it is a really important tool for us, um, a-and, to sort of touch on a point, you know, the history of a-of historic preservation everywhere, but in the Park Service as an example, um we’ve made the mistake in the past in the distant past of making treatment decision sort of in a vacuum, so you have one or two people, they think they know what’s best, they make a decision, that ends up, you know, maybe damaging the structure over time, so it’s so important to have multiple disciplines, multiple opinions or perspective on a problem, uh, and to sort of consider all of those possible variability’s and all of the complexity that may come along with, as you guys mentioned, making a treatment decision in the short term but also, how, uh, that treatment will affect the sites in the long-term as well, so, uh, it is really important. I-I-I don’t wanna miss out though, uh, on the fact that, um, interdisciplinary teams can consist of scientists, but, uh, also traditional craftspeople as well, so, for the listeners, that can be, um, folks that are trained in using traditional materials, uh, like adobe, um, for instance. Um, and, and, uh, traditional construction techniques. So, how important do you guys think it is to work with craftspeople to understand traditional building and maintenance techniques, and is it difficult to combine the science and the tradition?
DP: I think it’s critically important, I, uh, while you were talking, I was thinking about the fact that a lot of, uh, uh, wood structure work that I’ve done in recent years, uh, the teams have included, uh, usually an engineer, at least one engineer, a wood scientist, and, at least one timber framer, somebody familiar with archaic framing forms, um, so that the team has, um, a leg up in understanding what they’re looking at initially. Um, I-I-I think if, if, uh, if you want to know, it seems obvious in the saying of it, but if you wanna know how something has changed over time, it’s important to know how it started out, and, um, frequently, how it started out, uh, involves tons of details that aren’t available to scientists looking at something that’s 500 years old, for example. Um, there may be pieces of a truss that are, uh, gone. Um, uh, things like, uh, water content of a lime or mud plaster, um, that’s not something that scientist encounters in-in their work, uh, so, um, I think on nearly every, um, project that we work on, um, there are traditional craftspeople involved, uh, um, in making repairs to an old structure, um, it’s almost always critical, that, uh, repair materials are physically compatible with the original materials if, uh, the repaired structure’s gonna perform correctly. And, um, that means a lot of times, using traditional materials, the same materials, um, uh-uh, the best option for repair. Um, the craftspeople that are skilled in the use of these materials have knowledge about, uh, harvesting the materials, the mixes, the layout, and so on, but, uh, are really not, uh, discoverable by scientists, but, directly impact the-the durability of the repair. Um…
AB: That doesn’t preclude the use of modern materials in combination [OVERLAP]...
DP: Not at all.
AB: …materials, so, um, but the, um craftspeople have, um, uh, a familiarity with the-with the working properties of the material that ends up in a repair that has, uh, performance properties that are appropriate, um, but that also has aesthetic properties that are essential for sites where you-visitors, um, uh, uh, interact with the sites.
DP: A wonderful development in the way that so many of us pursue our work, um, that, uh, kind of starting from the history of technology piece, uh, having the advantage of someone, um, on the team who knows how the thing, the building, the structure, whatever it is, um, likely looked at-at the beginning, and, um, why the materials were selected the way that they were for their different roles in a complicated piece, um, that, uh, sort of f-fills in a gigantic blank that, um, n-no amount of, uh, understanding that fungi that are attacking the wood truss for example, would ever, um, uh, offset, um, Angelyn and I was thinking about, uh, the, back at desert view again, where the, um, w-where you are using, uh, conservation grade materials to create a barrier layer over parts of the background plaster.
AB: Rather than modify or alter the integrity of the painting, we are trying to tone the background without the stains are not as noticeable and the paintings come to the forefront. Uh, and, um, the walls, um, because they’re 80 years old, and not have had a variety of, uh, types of stains, um they’re very mottled in appearance, and so, uh, we have, uh, had a team of decorative painters, um, with small paintbrushes and a palate, um matching, um, trying to out, um, to tone the stains away, um, so that, um, the paintings, which are the important part are, uh, are uh, are highlighted. And, that was the approach the conservation that seems, um, oh, a little, uh, different people think paintings are restored to repaint the paintings, but instead, we painted these things out of the background so the integrity and authenticity of the paintings could stand proud. And craftspeople, decorative painters were essential to the success of that treatment coat.
MG: Mm. Doug, o-one thing that you mentioned, um, caught my attention, uh, y-you said that, uh, craftspeople can be important for understanding the way that, for instance, builders in the past, uh, would process materials, or apply materials, um, which makes me think that, o-often in the Park Service, we interpret prehistoric buildings, particularly, places like Casa Grande ruins, or Chaco Canyon, or, Montezuma Castle, you name it, um, at the product of unskilled laborers, so, we have, we’ve been guilty in the past of saying, you know, look at-look at what these farmers built, um, but do you think that’s true, uh, or, perhaps, um maybe some of these amazing places were built by people who had a lot of engineering, uh, and construction knowledge, and were purposefully choosing materials or construction techniques for certain purposes c-can you guys talk about that a little bit?
DP: Yeah, I, um, I guess I think, just to point out first, that, um, prehistoric builders probably were not always setting out to create monuments and, um, some of what was built was almost u-undoubtedly intended for a very short period of service, and, um, and, some of that stuff comes down to us, and-and we look at it, and, think, uh, what were they doing, um, what were they thinking? Um, I also think that-that the construction is sometimes interpreted as unskilled or uninformed because of, uh, uh-differences…
AB: I think we’re uninformed. [LAUGH]
DP: …in its aesthetic or function, and I think when we’re dealing with structures that are several hundred years old or older, uh, uh, maybe the first question to ask is, what the builders got right, and, I think, um, that frequently, results in a pretty long list, uh, especially when you consider that a lot of the materials used in the American Southwest, for example, um, earth and wood, a lot of it, um, are considered ephemeral, or, at best, moderately doable, um, and, we just found, i-in our own experience that sometimes by paying close attention to the materials, um, we’re able to see that they’ve been carefully manipulated, a-and, I-Angelyn and I both know archaeologists who have said, um, earth and plasters, they are-they are just mud. And, paying close attention to them, you’re gonna see anything but what kind of mud is readily, or was readily available at that site, um, but, um, you know, we’ve sort of entered a-a time period where, uh, the instrumental techniques available to us, uh, can make use of exceedingly small samples to yield, um, huge amounts of information. And, uh, you know, we-sampling, to do the kind of work that we’re doing with southwest and plasters, right now for example, uh, was, uh, uh-uh, not possible, uh, not so long a-ago in the future, just because the samples had to be so big to extract, uh, the information, that, uh, that the impact of, uh, on the resources was thought too great, um, but, with these kind of very up-to-date techniques, um, we’re finding that earth and plasters, while they reflect the-the soils that are available on different sites, and so they vary from place to place to place. They also, uh, reflect and attempt to, uh, manipulate the components in those plasters to optimize performance for a particular use. And, we think that suggests that, um, um, these builders working in building traditions that are hundreds or thousands of years old. Uh, that they are not uninformed, that are armed kind of with the, uh, uh, information produced by their predecessors over long periods of time, um, and certainly operating without the scientific vantage point that we possess today, but, not on that account, operating without, um, well-developed, uh, engineering and structural, uh, information that, um, probably informed nearly everything that they did build.
MG: And, I-I think that, that’s important for us because, that allows us in our interpretations of these places to kind of judge the buildings on their own merits, essentially on the competsy-the competency that the builders as-as you said, um, instead of making assumptions, uh, th-that are you know, m-maybe unfounded, so, um, I, you know, we’ve really appreciated the work that-that both of you have done, uh, at many of our sites because it kind of gives us the-the data to-to make interpretations that are more informed, uh, a-and maybe in some ways more interesting to our visitors. I think it’s more interesting to think about, uh, the things that the builders did right, than to assume that, you know, they were just farmers kind of cobbling something together.
DP: You know, I’m sure we encounter buildings cobbled together by farmers…
MG: Ha-ha, sure.
DP: …and, um, i-and, sorting the-the different, I-you know, sometimes, it’s obvious I-I’m guessin’, and sometimes maybe, maybe less so, um, in the National Park System, we’ve got tons of resources that, uh, um, thinking specifically of, uh, extraction structures that, uh, are frequently made of wood and-and that I end up working on quite a bit, and, boy that, uh service lines for those things were thought of in just a handful of decades. Um, mine structures frequently were, uh, in service for, uh, less than a quarter century um, and, uh, National Parks now have, uh, conservation responsibilities for-for these structures, um, even these structures, uh, have, uh, evidence of, or, kind of embody in a way, the, uh, collective wisdom of, uh, builders who went before. Um, and, I agree with you that, uh, we can sort of, uh, maybe take, um, a more neutral, uh, approach to the-to the buildings, uh, just acknowledge that, uh, if the great house at Casa Grande has been there for 750 years and only sheltered for 100 years or so, in that time period. Um, that there’s a-a-a great deal that the-the original builders did, uh, correctly, and that, uh, resulted in a-in the longevity of that-that place. By focusing on how the different pieces work together to, uh, deliver that-that longevity, uh, I think we start to get an idea of how complex, uh, of system the, their, um, approach to construction was.
SH: Yeah, and I think at so many of these parks, like Montezuma Castle, and Casa Grande, the average visit time is so short, that it’s easy to fall back into very-answering very simple questions, you know, how did they get up into Montezuma Castle? Um, y-you know, what was this building used for? And, it’s a lot more fun to have those m-you know, complex conversations about who these people were, and, um, you know, what kind of skills they had, and how their society was probably very stratified, and, um, a lot-people a lot more like us than, um, than we often give them credit for, right? Um, and it’s data that we get out of agreements that the CESU, and-and the research that you guys are doing that allow us to be able to have those conversations in a way that still recognizes that people are on quick road trips, and just making a stop.
DP: [LAUGH] Um, I probably should let Angelyn weigh in on this, we ha-I don’t think we’ve mentioned during this interview that, uh, our work at Montezuma Castle and two or three other, uh, ancient southwestern sites, uh, w-where we’re specifically concerned with earth and plasters, that work is ongoing. Um, b-but at Montezuma Castle, uh, we’ve become aware of, uh, of the fact that plasters that builders were using, uh, more than one barrow site for, uh, uh, mortars and plasters, we don’t understand yet, um, why they’re-they were using two different kinds of, um, of soil to make this stuff, um, we’ve come to suspect that the colors of washes found on the [data?] portions of, uh, many of the anterior walls, uh they have a-a significant, um, uh, beyond…
AB: [OVERLAP] performance? [LAUGH]
DP: …beyond performance.
AB: Montezuma Castle also has some, um, some very interesting aspects to it, we learn a lot while we’re on these sites, uh, and, um, and that’s m-that’s the joy that we get out of, um, out of working at these, uh, at these places, but at Montezuma Castle, um, there are, um, handprint finger, and, um, hands impressions, and you can see the, sort of the soft tissue application that the builders, um, through the plaster you can see the sweeps of tools that they used to smear that, uh, and the, uh, finger impressions where they’ve tried to, um, smash the mortar or plaster in between joints, or around um, uh, roofing elements, um, it’s those aspects of, uh, humanity that are also so important, um, in these sites, um, they, like you said, Doug, the, um, connect us all. Yeah, ‘cause they’re, um, Montezuma Castle’s a jewel.
MG: Uh, so, architecture, uh, can contain really a wealth of information about the past, um, particularly about the lives of the people that built the places, um, and-and, about the lives of the occupants. Uh, can you give the listeners an example of a project where your study of architectural features, uh, told us something that we didn’t already know?
AG: Well, [INAUDIBLE] uh, we had a, um, we were at, um, a, looking at a 12th century kiva at Natural Bridges National Monument, um, our goal was to, pretty straightforward, to survey the interior conditions and, do a condition assessment and make recommendations on conservation, uh, and we-we started, we knew there were, um, incisings on the interior plaster, um, some plaster glyphs of, uh, uh, sandals primarily. Um, but, through our investigation, we started to realize that there was a very practical function to the room, uh, and that, um, it was primarily dedicated to weaving. But not only of sandals, um, but of textiles. There are over 150 incised, tiny incised designs on the interior of these kiva walls, and the kivas are only about, uh, three and a half meters in diameter. So, they were images of, um, of sandals, of, all different types of sandals, with different toe jogs, um, uh, fabrics such as the tumplines and blankets, uh, a lot of, um, the, scoring marks that may have had to do with the weaving, um, that took place in the room. Uh, we found loom anchors all over the floors, um, that were just below the surface, um, you know, the, um, the room was just filled with, uh, with dust and debris, and packrat droppings, but, um, the, um, just by moving, uh, in the room we started to notice a series of loom-makers, uh, in the ground. Um, there were traces of hair, human hair, and, uh, cotton, uh, im-imbedded in the floor material. Um, the, um, in the nichos, there were weaving tools, like a spindle whorl, and, um, some other, um small weaving implements, um and we finally started to realize that, um, this was a room dedicated to one type of, at least at this point, um, at the end point, uh, to one type of, uh, of, uh, production. The, um, the misunderstanding too, didn’t just come from us spending time in the room, it came, again, from using some multidisciplinary, um, uh, group of-of investigators, uh, there was an archaeologist who was dedi-who specialized in sandals, who was dedicated to just, um looking at the, uh incisings. Uh, there was a, we had a, uh professional photographer there, um, the interior of the kiva is very dark, uh, and it has an in-tact roof, uh, and Doug can address some of the, um, sort of sophistication of the roofing element, um in its construction, but, um, it was very dark in the room, so we had professional photographer finally take some, um photos where we could see, uh, everything, uh, and raking lines, he did a-a and RTI, or, a, um, uh, form of photography where we are allowed to move the light source around on the computer to get, uh, the leaf of, um, so see overleaf, uh, with a, um, with a raking light affect to study low relief incisings. Um, we had, uh, an engineer look at the construction of the roof, as they could understand the load that would be imposed by visitors walking over the site, which sort of informed our decision of whether, of how to treat the site in the future. Wasn’t so much trying to treat, or, conserve the plaster, as it was t-trying to reduce visitor load on the-on the roofing elements. Uh, but, from that study, came an understanding of how the room was used, um, at least in its later stages, and, it was the beginning of our understanding that earth and plasters are-are engineered, um, manipulated to suit performance properties. The floor plasters were very different from the wall plasters, which were different from the mavidish-margin plasters, which were different from the roofing material plasters. They all basically used the same materials, but, the combination of particle sizes, the porosity, the water content, all made a difference in terms of, um, their performance properties. So, long story, but, um, analysis by a multidisciplinary group, um, and sustained analysis both at a microscopic level and at a physical level, by surveying, um, and studying photography, um, shed light on a very, very important, um, kiva, uh, that preserved some of the day-to-day domestic activities that might have taken place at that site.
MG: So, uh, Doug and Angelyn, thanks so much for talking with us today.
DP: Matt, thank you, um, this was a lot of fun, and, um, I think the questions kind of, um, it put some of the information together for us in ways we hadn’t entirely anticipated, that was cool too.
SH: Awesome thank you.
AB: Thank you Matt, thank you, Sharlot.
MG: So, I think one of the big, uh take-homes from Doug and Angelyn’s interview is this idea of inter-disciplinary cooperation. Um, in historic preservation and in archaeological research. And, they do a really good job of illustrating, um, their partnership, and how they work well together, and they sort of work at different scales. Uh, so Angelyn and Doug, a lot of the sort of, uh, smaller scale preservation of plasters and paints for instance, while-while Doug is looking at, um things on a-a sort of larger, maybe engineering scale, so, the way that they work w-they really complement each other nicely. Um, and that is kind of a good tie-in to how the National Park Service works with cooperators in general, um, the Park Service has archaeologists in a lot of the parks here in the American Southwest, um, but each archaeologist may have a different specialization, so, uh, we all have a degree in anthropology with a specialization in archaeology, but we may be interested in different things, um, so we can’t cover everything, we don’t know everything about archaeology all over the southwest. And so, by bringing in these folks who have different specializations, we kind of are able to, um, get the right information about what we need, uh, and we don’t have to necessarily learn it ourselves. Uh, and if we bring in a lot of cooperators into these big, interdisciplinary teams, then we’re able to cover a lot of ground and, um, like the instance with, uh, some of the things that were talked about in the interview, we get a really comprehensive view of how to take care of, um, these very important places.
SH: So now’s the time when we answer listener questions, and, uh, I have one here. And it says, um, when I’m hiking around somewhere like Fort Louis, and I find something I think might be historic, like a bottle, I-that looks really, really, old, maybe, what should I do with it? Should I bring it to a ranger? Should I let it be? Should I take it home? Um, so, uh, we actually get a fair number of people bringing in, like historic nails, and things like that, uh, to the visitors center at Fort Louis, and we are really, really, happy that visitors are excited about objects on public land, and about visiting their National Park Service sites in general. Um, at the same time, we need to make sure that everyone out there knows that, um this is illegal, uh, you can’t pick up objects from Park Service, and certainly take them home, and even if you’re bringing it to a ranger, um, that actually takes away the context of the artifact, um, and context means, uh, that everything that’s around the artifact, all the other artifacts, the, even the soil type that-the artifact is in, um, that helps give us a better picture of what happened at that place. So for instance, Matt, what are three things in your living room at home?
MG: Oh my gosh, uh, my couch, uh, my bookshelf, and my television.
SH: Okay, so, say in about 50 years, you’re long gone from your house, um, and we’ve all disappeared, uh, someone comes along and is like, that’s a really nice couch, and so they take the couch. And then in another, uh, couple years, someone comes along and is like, I really like that historic TV, and so they take that TV. So when I, as an archaeologist come along in 100 years, I’m gonna see those bookshelves and think, you know, I think that this dwelling was a library. So, because of all the context that was lost in those intervening hundred years, I don’t have a really good picture of what actually happened in that place, and I make some, uh, erroneous, uh, conclusions. Um, so, for everyone out there, please leave items where they are, um, you know, definitely, we want you to be excited, and-and to get an idea of, um, the parks that you’re visiting, so-so definitely check ‘em out, but leave them where they are, take note of the location, and then let, uh, a ranger at the visitor’s center, or an archaeologist that you might run into know about them, um, and they can, uh, can go and get more information about them, and make sure that they’re, um, uh, all of the information and data that we can collect about them is put into our management system, so we can better manage, um, all of these places in perpetuity.
MG: Thanks for listening, join us next month when we will talk with, uh conservation professionals who work at the Western Archaeological and Conservation Center in Tucson.
[MUSIC]
SH: The National Parks Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast is a production of the Southern Arizona Office of the National Park Service. Our artwork was designed by Laura Varon-Burkhart, Justin Mossman composed our music. We look forward to hearing from you. Matt and I will be with you again next month.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-
Of Cliff Dwellings and Mentors - Larry Nordby - Episode 6
For National Mentor Month Matt gets to interview his longtime mentor, Larry Nordby (retired Research Archeologist, National Park Service). Larry discusses cliff dwellings, research, Mesa Verde National Park, project management, and so much more.
- Credit / Author:
- NPS - Southern Arizona Office
- Date created:
- 01/31/2018
MATT GUEBARD: Hello, and welcome to the National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast brought to you by the Southern Arizona Office. My name’s Matt Guebard.SHARLOT HART: And I’m Sharlot Hart.
SH: Thanks for joining us today for the National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast. Today we have an interview with Larry Nordby, um, he’s a former NPS archaeologist, he’s spent part of his career at Mesa Verde, and then part of is at the regional office, and was the regional archaeologist for, uh, the intermountain region, which stretches from Arizona up to Montana. Um, so we’ll be discussing a whole range of, um archaeology topics and historic preservation topics with Larry. Um, as January is National Mentoring Month, we’ll also start with, um, and aside from that, about, uh, Larry as a mentor. And, um, then we’ll discuss a little bit about, uh, Larry’s, um, impact on us, as, uh, as we go forward.
MG: We’re talking to Larry Nordby today, who is a really interesting person, and a really well-known archaeologist in the National Park Service. I’ve been lucky enough, over my career, to, uh, have Larry as a mentor. And I’ve learned a lot about what I know, um, about park service archaeology, and the study of prehistoric architecture from Larry. What I think is interesting about, uh, mentors is that Larry in turn learned, uh, a lot of he knew, uh, or knows about archaeology from, uh, other National Park Service archaeologists that came before him, so there’s this lineage, really from the 1930’s until now, uh, represented by all of these different and interesting people who have, uh, contributed to our knowledge of park service archaeology. So, it really connects back to some of the other discussions that we’ve had, um, where we’ve talked about historic preservation, and how, uh, park service archaeologists working in the field today have learned, uh, from the mistakes and the successes of the people that came before them.
MG: So this Matt Guebard, and Sharlot Hart, we’re here with Larry Nordby, who is a retired research archaeologist from Mesa Verde. Hey Larry.
LARRY NORDBY: Hello, how are you?
MG: Doin’ well, thanks. So, I-I should say before we start, um, Larry, we’ve know each other for, oh gosh, probably 10 years? And, um, we met, uh, many years ago, when you were on a project at Tonto National Monument, and, uh, you’ve been a big influence on me, uh you’re a cliff dwelling guy, uh, you’ve spent a lot of time studying cliff dwellings, and that’s kind of my focus as well. So I’ve learned a lot from you over the years. And, um, I’m really excited that-that you’re talking to us today about cliff dwellings, so, again, thanks for-thanks for being here.
SH: Yeah, thank you.
LN: Well, you’re more than welcome, so. Nice to be with you.
MG: So, you, uh, had been retired for a number of years, but, while you were working, you were a research archaeologist for the National Park Service. Um, there are not many research archaeologists left anymore, uh, can you tell the listeners a little bit about what that job entailed?
LN: Well, I started out as a temporary survey archaeologist, uh, with the National Park Service’s Southwest Regional office, in Santa Fe. And, moved through the, uh, research archaeologist position there at that point, and became the regional archaeologist and had so by about 1993. At that time, I moved to Mesa Verde, and my title was research archaeologist there. Uh, I had done graduate work at the university of Colorado in the late ‘60’s and early 70’s, and, so this new job was very exciting to me. My job at Mesa Verde was to establish a new research program that focused on the cliff dwellings, which had gradually degraded, ‘cause not enough, uh, funding had been available to either pursue more current research objectives, or to preserve the ruins. So, my job as a research archaeologist became, uh, to raise money, and create partnerships using whatever sources I could. Uh, park management, and both archaeologist and non-archaeologists at the park were very supportive of the effort. And, money came from traditional in-house project requests as well as two new funding sources. The Vanishing Treasures program that the park service had, and the Save America’s Treasures program that was initiated under the clizn-Clinton presidency. Other fu-funds were sought from competitive grants programs. For example, the state of Colorado had a historic preservation fund, that-with a competitive grants program, and I wanted to leverage all these various funding sources. Matching them with federal dollars. So my job then became marketing the program to donors and colleges, more specifically Fort Lewis College in Durango. And, uh, some of the examples of the donors included the Tauck Travel Foundation and the World Monument’s Fund. And the Center for Southwest Studies at Fort Lewis was the source for some of the students that we help train. And they wanted work on the cliff dwellings also. Once again, using grant funds. So, the target for this was about 600 cliff dwellings at Mesa Verde. Uh, which range only from a few rooms in size up to mega villages like Cliff Palace and Spruce Tree House. Which ever-each of which has over 100 rooms. We hope that we could meet the preservation documentation needs of about 150 of these sites over a 10 year period. I think we succeeded at that because of the staff that we were able to put together. And, uh, our staff over that several year period was, uh, 50-60 people, but only during the summer field season. Winters were spen-spent planning and preparing funding proposals. So, that was sort of the context for the job, but what I was hoping to accomplish was to create an interdisciplinary research program that proactively linked, uh, archaeology with historic architecture, uh, some various conservation disciplines such as sight stabilization, making stone and mortar repairs. Uh, conducting plaster documentation, preservation studies using tree ring studies. Um, civil engineering, uh, and history was and impo-important component, because early archaeologist produce notes, photos, and maps, although, most of ‘em lack detail and organization of those records was inconsistent somehow in-inadequate ‘cause of the time they were collected. Also, a lot of ‘em were from museums that were elsewhere. That it, uh, in the state it was collected a long time before there was even a National Park Service, and it-sometimes, so. Um, we had to s-scurry around and try and find those things. So, to connect, uh, these various kinds of study or work required a database, it would somehow link all these various interests, so we needed to staff up with database designers and computers graphs persons as well to utilize non-governmental, uh subject matter experts by contract. Um, and because numerous cliff dwellings are difficult to get into, a couple of the teams of staff members had to be trained in rock climbing, repelling, and that kind of thing. And, we needed to find a workspace, and get new staff, and get new computers and vehicles, and, e-everybody in Mesa Verde w-bought into this idea, and they were great. So, during that period, we um, also carried out cliff dwelling projects at a lot of other parks. We went to Navajo National Monument, Hovenweep, Gila Cliff Dwellings, Canyonlands, Canyon De Chelly National Monuments, and others, and we did some projects for other federal land managing agencies such as the forest service or the bureau of land management. So, the outcome of this was, um b-had become known as the Archaeological Site Conservation Program by the time we were done. And, uh, uh my job involved, uh, working in the field on these cliff dwellings, uh, conducting administrative duties, hiring, training, identify support needs, I had an administrative assistant that helped with a lot of that part of it. But the main thrust of it was to develop a database that linked these various pr-professions together. And, the idea was that collaborators would put material in using a descriptive set of observations. And then they would be able to draw out the information that they needed. So it had to do with sort of spending some design work making sure that, um, the needs of these various collaborating professionals would be net-met. And, uh, I think that’s about it. In terms of the description.
SH: That’s quite a lot.
LN: Well, it seemed like it was at the time too, but I had a lot of really talented people came into the park service during this time period, and they were able to help out quite a bit. In fact, I was helping them sometimes, so.
MG: That-that fits really nicely with some of the other episodes, um, because we’ve talked so far a lot about, uh, interdisciplinary work, and kind of the importance of having people with different perspectives on resources working together, um, but we’ve also spent a little bit of time talking about, uh, how important it is to standardize the information that gets collected. Um, so, i-a-I think, you know, what y-you were doing then is-is really a, kind of a perfect example and it-in fact, uh, as I kind of alluded to earlier, has-has been a big influence on, uh, me, but, also I think a lot of archaeologists in the southwest. Y-um, that is kind of how we try to do business today, I think we’ve-we look at that model and-and try to replicate it as-as we can.
LN: Well, it’s good to know that somebody is carrying on that-that those objectives, ‘cause I-I feel they’re pretty important.
MG: Yeah, absolutely. Um, so, I-my next question, you-you kind of touched on this, but-but maybe, if we can get into a little more detail, um, we’ve talked a lot in previous episodes also about historic preservation a-and we’ve talked about what it is, and, a little bit about how it’s done, uh, and even a little bit about the history of it, uh, in the US. But, can you talk, uh to the listeners a little bit about how, um, some of the research objectives that-that you spoke about, uh, previously can help archaeologists and resource managers make good decisions, uh, about where and how to conduct preservation treatments.
LN: Well, uh, in my mind, historic preservation is more than simply repairing the walls or the other physical manifestations of the sites. It’s really about preserving scientific and heritage values inherent in the remains. We need to know what’s important. If you launched into heavy-handed historic preservation measures without some forethought, it’s really embracing a process that can transform the resources into something that may have never been there. And that’s not really historic preservation at all in my opinion. It’s just a process of semi-controlled change. I think of it as preservation paradox. The more the-the-the thought goes towards, uh, what is important at each site, the more likely you are to get close to historic preservation goals. So documenting what remains on the ground is as important as making the physical repairs to the walls, because it identifies what is the most important. Sort of an example of what I mean is making repairs with modern materials. If you use cement to repair masonry wall, it’ll stand up for a long time, but is it really preservation when the original walls were made of mud and stone? What gets lost when that decision to use modern material gets made? Another example is this, for safety and other educational and interpretive groups is, um, ancient pedestrian traffic flow through some cliff dwellings is lost by creating new walls or openings when previously there were none. In many cases, these efforts are necessary, but is it really preservation in the purest sense? Probably not. Many of the biggest cliff dwellings were excavated prior to the development of modern archaeological and mapping techniques, and, uh, sometimes these were done over a century ago, so that research, especially of early archaeological or site stabilization records is necessary to pinpoint the nature of modern al-alterations before the original character of the site is lost to people who visit these places in the next hundred years or beyond. So, in terms of the way I think about it, records research is the first step in modern preservation work. It’s a matter of getting into the files, if you can find ‘em, and, uh, figure out which parts of the site are original and which have resulted from our attempts to stabilize the site. From this, we can assess the original characteristics of the site, or, wall, or room, or-to derive a better understanding of how it was originally built and why. If we don’t do that, everything is just the same, so you have to figure out what, uh, what we did to change the site, and a lot of times those records are not adequate. Uh, the next stage after you do that records research is to document and figure out which original materials remain, and what the remains tell us about ancient life in the cliff dwelling. It also identifies what the current threats are to that original material and why it’s important. And attempts to tailor-make the best reci-uh, remedy to, um, resolve a particular problem. Is an area breaking down because of visitor traffic, rodent burrowing, groundwater moisture, wind brown-blowin’-wind borne, uh, precipitation, or some other factor? And what do we do about it? If a location within a site can’t be saved, what should we do? As the documentation occurs, it creates a file structure then-then can be used to organize all these various facts about the place. Architecture is muli-scalar. It consists of little things, which combine to form bigger things, and which combine to form even bigger things, so the idea is, organize your file structure in such a way that you can target which of these entities you wanna look at. Uh, so, you might have individual stones, you might interest-be interested in that, and the way that most technicians who are now working on their, uh, sites, um, the way their brains operate, is they wanna know stuff about specific locations within the site. In other words, a room, or an open space, or something like that. Um, but we wanna make sure that we think about these things from an overall perspective so we don’t get too focused, and at the same time have a method for expanding outta that focus. Um, and then we-we want to, uh, perpetuate this knowledge and the file structure that exists, so. That’s kind of the goal for that part of it. Once we make an assessment of the prior documentation, then we augment that with new information on the current form function of the site, and the deterioration a-agents that are operational there. We can get specialists in that determine what best-the best procedures might be for preserving the physical materials, and what the physical materials can actually tell us. So, the procedure’s usually in-involve intensive photographic and other methods of graphic documentation, completing detailed forms when needed, and may extend up through making major wall repairs. Along the way, certain kinds of specialized studies can include plaster assessment and-uh-and, uh, assessment of any decorations that are on that plaster. Conducting tree-ring studies, uh, making descriptions of wood use and roof construction. That kind of thing. The point though, is, that we will know what is gained and what is preserved, and what is lost during these various processes. Whenever possible, the goal is to carry out preservation strategies that can either have lesser impact, or, constitute a reversible process. In other words, a lot of the problems that have existed with past work is that it was too heavy-handed. We used to method-build things. Uh, to repair walls. Sometimes you need to do that, and many places in the Southwest are still present because somebody did do that long ago. But now, the goals have changed to something where, well, when the-if this doesn’t work, what are you gonna do to get rid of it? This needs to be a reversible process. Uh, whatever you do in terms of the preservation work. And of course, uh, the less-lesser of all evils, and lef-lesser of impact, um, to these sites is probably the documentation part of it. So in practice, uh, the work consists of looking at, uh, lots of walls and trying to de-code how they were built. If possible, we can use laser scans, which is a technology that’s become available over the last, oh, 10 or 15 years or so. But otherwise, uh, we may just use photographic montages of walls, but the observations that we collect are usually structured. We’re not in-it’s real easy to come up with a lot of idiosyncratic observations about individual walls that don’t really take you anywhere. Um, because people left out something else that was more important, that’s the reason why we use the forms. So, uh, in the-in cliff dwellings, w-wall surfaces are pretty complex. There’s plaster with and without anc-ancient decoration, with and without historical inscriptions left by early explorers. There’s often more than one layer of plaster or other kind of surface finish. Individual building stones can be shaped by hammering, or some other method, or left unshaved. Some walls are chinked with chinking stones, and only parts of walls are chinked with chinking stones, well, if people aren’t-don’t have structure, they can’t record all this information. There are beam socket holes in the wall, some of which were manufactured and some of which were retro-fitted onto the wall. There are doorways that were moved and remodeled. Um, each of these various events leaves evidence of how people used the houses that they lived in, and, when they got fed up with their neighbors or relatives, or wanted to-or someone moved in that was new, and was related to them, they needed to graft on a new room suite. So, these are all sort a human interest stories to me, and they, taken all together these events that are recorded in the walls combine to form a pretty fascinating tapestry that is awaiting to be unraveled and decoded. Open sites simply don’t have that kind of information and-for in the main. So, preservation process is when-which has to assess what kind of natural im-um, processes operate to destroy the damage on these previous listed kinds of information, and what we’re gonna do about it.
MG: So, it sounds like it’s the, it’s kind of the structure and the organization of all the information that’s collected that allows us to see patterns and then, hopefully, uh, interpret-interpret the site, which is maybe a way of kind of getting at-at-at meaning that can then sort of inform what we wanna preserve or-or how we wanna preserve it.
LN: Yeah, that-that’s true, I think, probably the-most fundamental thing that, uh, people ask about, usually has to do with how many people lived here. And the answer to that question is, probably not so different than how many people lived in a individual house, or in a ne-a neighborhood in our residences. Um, the answer to that is you have to count the households. The only way you can count the households, is to really spend some time thinkin’ about, well, how did this place develop? Um, and it, uh, works pretty well if you do that. And it changes how you think of things in terms of, a lot of the rooms, some of the big cliff-dwellings, they didn’t live in all of those rooms at once. And some of ‘em were converted into storage rooms after they were lived in first, and so, people lived elsewhere. So, it’s kind of difficult, you have to think about a lot of factors, and if you don’t record all this information and with specificity, you don’t ever get down to a really good answer to that question of how many people lived here.
MG: right.
SH: You know, it’s interesting that you say that question, um, because I’ve gotten that trail-that question on the trail a lot, um, about how many people lived here. Some of-very basic questions, and, I think what’s hidden to the, um, to the average visitor to a National Park Service site, um, is how much time goes into the research. And all those other logistical, um, elements that you’re mentioning, like, Matt and I have talked, um, very briefly on a previous episode about how important documentation is, and-and how sometimes we’re not working with the best historical documentation. Um, but you also mentioned a lot of, um aspects of your position that required, um, uh, that were essentially project management. You know, all those, uh, so I was wondering, um, do you have an idea looking back of how much of your time you spent, um, doing project management and documentation, things that-that our listeners might not think of as-as direct research, um, in your position?
LN: Uh, that’s a fair question. In the winter time, of course, a lot of it goes to project management. Um, you’re writing proposals, you’re-you’re seeking money of course, that’s the number one thing. And you’re also figuring out which-which projects, um, require external support because we don’t-the agencies, the park service, um, didn’t have any in-house specialists in those areas. So, you’re making a decision about, are-is it easier to go find somebody who has this skillset outside the service, or, are you gonna try and staff up to carry out this particular function?
SH: Yeah.
LN: Um, that’s part of it. Plus, you need to think about the number one thing, uh, for that is, repelling and getting into some of these difficult places, gettin’ in and out. Um, so, you have to have the equipment to do that, you have to schedule training, that means, since that doesn’t exist in every park, you need to connect with other parks to make sure that happens, so it’s, matter of forging these partnerships for the-in the main [OVERLAP].
SH: And in that instance, having very specialized, um, repellers who don’t, you know, do more harm than good when they’re repelling down and hit a wall, right?
LN: Yeah, that’s great. That-that’s true, and the number one thing though, is you-you have to train ‘em to first aid, you know? How do you…
SH: Right?
LN: …how do you, how do deal with injuries in the back country? You’re gonna have some, you know, you’ve got a staff of 50 people out there, um, they’re a ways from help, so.
SH: Yeah.
LN: You know, it’s some stuff that’s as simple as radio contact with other emergency responders, that kind of thing. For those types of things, so, that’s what you work on in-in the winter, and then as you come out of the winter, you’re headed into that, or you’re writing. Um, when you actually get on a line though, I always wanted be in the field, with staff and, one of the best parts of it for me was-was sort of, it-natural built-in team-building enterprise when you go to repelling training with your-with your staff. I always looked forward to that time, ‘cause I could be out there actually with ‘em, they’d have to count on me as somebody who was gonna help ‘em get in and out of the places, or, get-what we’re figure out what we we’re gonna do when we got there. Scheduling, um, all of those things are part of what you end up doing, um, during the field season, uh, especially if we were working away from the park, I would usually run those crews. Not always, um, but, I would usually run those c-crews, and you’re-I always believed in putting the people as close to the resources I could. Which meant camping.
SH: Yeah.
LN: So, if you’re gonna camp with people out there, you have to r-get a cook, because you’re expecting them to work, um, a 10 hour day, and it’s too much to expect ‘em to work a 10 hour day out there each day, and then to come home and figure out how they’re gonna eat that night. So, we had field camps, uh, that, uh, on many of the jobs that we did, that were outside the park, especially, and, uh, the best part about that is everybody really builds these, er, relationships that you don’t ever forget. They’re friendships that last a lifetime.
SH: And that just makes the work go, you know, so much better, and the research so much more in depth.
LN: Uh yeah, it does, and you can-they’ll ask you questions, if you’re not there, you can’t answer those questions, so…
SH: Right.
LN: …need to be out there with the-with the folks and stuff, and then, the site that was the best part of it anyway.
SH: Right. Hm.
MG: Well, uh, we-you know we’re focused-we’re focused on cliff dwellings, uh, in part I think because everybody loves cliff dwellings, um, uh-maybe not everybody, but, m-I think most people probably love cliff dwellings, and certainly, if you look back in the history, uh, that the American public seems to have this kind of ongoing fascination with cliff dwellings for at least the last 150 years, and when you see information about cliff dwellings, and photographs show up in newspaper articles from the 1860’s and ‘70’s probably, maybe, right?
LN: Sure, yeah right.
SH: Mm-hmm.
MG: And so, uh, wha-in your opinion, Larry, w-why do you think cliff dwellings are so special? W-what do you think it is about them that captures the public’s imagination?
LN: Well, I think there’s-there’s a couple of different factors, but the primary one is the degree of preservation that many of ‘em have sets ‘em apart. A-and some of it also is how difficult they are to get to, like we were just talkin’ about, the need to use ropes and stuff to get into a few. Uh, that’s not the case with all of ‘em, but, um, once you-people feel like they had to work to get to a place, um, that automatically elevates them in their minds, I think. Uh, with respect to the preservation factor, uh, it’s much easier to visualize and to relate to cliff dwellings as, in the human experience, um, you get in there, and there’s-there’s small units, there’s kind of an intimate setting a lot of times, and people can start to see them as homes, residences, small-scale villages, and that’s a c-but that is a scale that we can connect with because, we have families. And, uh, families are probably of comparable size, although, some cliff dwellings that are larger probably represent the residents as-of extended families. Um, or, maybe lineages or clans. So, people today have that same scale of interaction, probably. Uh, so they’re-they think about ‘em in the same sense as they think about reaching those people from ancient households. Um, so people try to make a transference back in time, um, they can start to appreciate it a little bit more. Um, s-a good example is, you know, Asian people had dogs as pets. I mean, you all have dogs, maybe, I have a dog, um I like.
SH: We do.
LN: But I an-I don’t know what we’d do without our dog. These people loved their dogs, and they had turkeys too. They loved their pets the same way as we do. And it’s a different kind of, uh, intensity of the human experience when you stop and think about it like that, you have to solve problems [INAUIBLE] um, situations, you know where you-you ripped up a [CUTS OFF] um, people, uh, during ancient times blocked off-off doorways, maybe they didn’t like that particular relative. The point is, they leave tangible evidence of all of these choices. Um, if you stop to think about ‘em. There’s no place else that does that in my experience in the-in the human archaeological record, so, um, I think that’s why people really like ‘em. So, what this leads to, is-it’s my way of thinking, a being in a special place, or having the experience, the sense of discovery to get into places like that. And, uh, people who, uh, really care about them, um, uh-uh-they just-they have a-uh-there’s just, you come around the corner, here’s a cliff dwelling. Gee, I didn’t know that was there, but you can be in it, not much has happened there since 1300 or whenever the people left there. Um, so you, uh, you have the opportunity to sort of experience it in a pristine way in the same sense that they do, and you don’t get that in olden-open site, so people have love affairs with, uh, cliff dwellings, uh, a lot of times, you know, early explorers came into these places, they wrote their names with bullet lead on walls. Uh, to record them, uh, v-various biblical sayings occasionally are incised on walls, or written in bullet lead on walls in cliff dwellings and not that we like that nowadays, but, it’s a record of who was once there. Uh, for example, at Casa Grande, there’s a place where, um, when they were doing the enabling legislation set up Casa Grande back in Washington, they were having a conversation, part of the congressional record, relates of a trapper who was, uh, uh, living in the area, and there’s a reference to him in the-in enabling legislation and somebody said, well, yeah, this guy lived here long ago when, and so, unless you know something about the legislation, you don’t know that that’s happened. You go out there, and you’re looking, and at Casa Grande in particular, there was a photographic class that-during the ‘80’s and ‘90’s went out and photographed the wall in scrip-strips. And part of what they were trying to capture was these, um, signatures. And, uh, when the J.W. Fewkes was one of the early Archaeologists. He, uh, knew the enabling legislation, he went out and looked for that inscription, and he could not find it anywhere. Uh, but he referenced it in his-in his writings. And so, when I’m going through to consolidate the records research for Casa Grande, I find a photograph that has this inscription on it. By this person who was reference as-sort of a long lost person who is-was important to the creation of Casa Grande. That’s the kind of the think, if you combine all of these, uh, observations together, that you learn. Even though Ca-Casa Grande is not a cliff dwelling, we’re studying the architecture there as-as closely as we study cliff dwellings, so, that’s the kind of thing that is produced when you-when you spend the time looking at this. So our human interest part of it, I think is very high with this-with, uh architectural, uh, archaeological sites, it’s difficult to find elsewhere.
MG: I-I think there’s an interesting connection with-with a few things that you mentioned earlier in the interview a-and this idea of there bein’ a connection with the past, and, how our management decisions, uh, will affect that, so the way that we treat these sites, and the way that we maintain that sort of tangible representation of what happened there in the past, has a lot to do with the way the people in the future will experience those places, and-and invariably what they’ll learn about them, so, uh, I-I don’t kn-I don’t know what else to say about that other than it’s an-it’s an interesting connection, and it’s something that I know that park service archaeologists think a lot about. How-how, uh, what we do at the sites will affect what people learn about them, and-and how people experience them in the future.
LN: Yeah, that’s correct, if somebody would have come in and decided they needed to re-plaster the wall at Casa Grande, as part of this preservation measure, they stick a bunch of plaster up there, away goes the inscriptions. You don’t get to see that, unless it’s recorded first. And if you’re-you jump to the-uh, to the, end game really quick there, which is preserving the site without, uh very much forethought, uh, you impact our ability to know what kind of what happened at that place. So, I think part of what we’re talkin’ about here is to make sure that we e-eliminate those-those errors. Uh, instead of compounding ‘em.
MG: Right. Well, I-so, I-I don’t know what your experience has been over the years, but certainly, working at Montezuma Castle, I-I get, uh, I get a lot of interpretations from visitors, and often they’ll-they’ll look at the site, and they’ll say, well, this is what the site was used for, or this is why it was built. And-and often that’s based on, sort of their-their just-their perception of what it is, they’re looking at it, they’re looking up at it, they’re impressed. Uh, you know, they-they interpret it, that’s kind of, I guess, what-what all of us do. Uh, as humans, and-and-and often, uh one of those interpretations is that all cliff-dwellings are defensive in nature for instance. Um, so, c-wha-what do you think the biggest misconception about cliff-dwellings is? Um, in-in your experience studying them.
LN: I think, uh, just what you mentioned is a real good example, and that is in most cliff dwellings were used for defense. I don’t think most of ‘em were used for defense, um, I think there are some that obviously were Montezuma’s Castle, is an interesting study. E-w-e-y-even the name of it suggests a castle, you know, that this was somehow a defensive refu-refuge. And it probably, in that case, I think it’s warranted because if you go up and look inside the-the, uh, what’s there, you see that there’s various view sheds as you look out through these openings there, that they’re all different, and they cover what could be considered strategic locations on the landscape below. So that’s part of it, and I don’t think there’s any denying it, but, the one thing you have to think about with cliff dwellings is, what did these people do for water? Almost none of ‘em have any water. And it doesn’t necessarily make any difference whether the cliff dwelling is little or-or big, i-in terms of room counts. If anybody gets in there, they’re-they’re not gonna have a whole lot of water usually. Sometimes there is, uh, a spring in the back, or something like that, that probably flowed mo-more readily than it now does, but, I think the main question is, what are people gonna do there if-if they get into a place like that? If they wanted to-decide that they want to get out, or have to get out? A couple of other issues that are related to this defense idea, and, allow me understa-or to state that I’m not debunking that entire idea, I’m just thinkin’ it’s-doesn’t have much to do with most of ‘em. Um, a lot of ‘em, i-way to think about is this. They’re discovering ledges, or discovering small caves or alcoves, um, and they don’t really modify those localities very much in terms the bedrock features. If a knob sticks out, it mean it’s difficult to walk along a ledge. Uh, they don’t figure out how they’re gonna reduce that problem by m-knockin’ off the knob so that it’s easier to get in and out, it’s just not feasible for you to do that if you have stone tools. Um, so, I think part of it has to do with just the natural location of some of these alcoves, I’m thinkin’ about the ones at Mesa Verde that are u-and all of these 600 aren’t multi-room units, they’re-a lot of ‘em are 10 u-room units. And what they’re storing up there, if those are storage rooms, is probably food. But, whoever comes and goes to that cliff dwelling, whether they have access to it in the-uh, in parenthesis, “legally,” or not, um, they still have to go through the same problems as anyone else who wants to get in there. So those places are probably, if you are in there already, it’s probably defensible, but you have to think about what people are wanting to defend. Th-are they worried about th-saving their lives, or the-their families lives, or are they worried about, um, reserving their food sources? Those kinds of things. Um, so, the absence of water in most of ‘em, and, kinds of spaces that are in most of ‘em, and the kinds of features, in other words, locations of-of holes that you can look out and see who’s there, um, are a major factor. Whether or not there were walls, there’s a wall built, uh, uh, probably three quarters of the way up at cleef-Cliff Palace, on a ledge behind the ruin. This is one of the larger places at Mesa Verde, of course, and, uh, that ledge has a little opening at the top, and, the question there is, well, why they leave that opening? Were they shooting arrows out at whoever was down below? Probably not in my mind, they just wanted some light back there and there’s a little, little corridor, and you couldn’t see what you were doin’ if you didn’t leave some space at the top. So these are, um, some things that I think we have to think about more systematically. Uh, by the way, out of all of the cliff dwellings at Mesa Verde, although there were a couple of instances of broken bones and that kind of thing, uh, there’s not anybody that was died from an arrow, or anything like that, an-although, we wouldn’t necessarily see soft dama-soft tissue damage to a per-person, so. Um, but the-no place, there were somebody who beat someone’s head in at Mesa Verde during the cliff dwelling period. There are plenty of cases of violence at other locations, but cliff dwellings don’t seem to be one of those places.
MG: Though, get-getting back to what you said, um, earlier in the interview about sort of different scales. Uh, and understanding cliff dwellings, um, o-o-on sort of a scalar level, uh, d-do you-would you say that while cliff dwellings may all sort of look the same generally, or-or are all built in alcoves. Um, there probably maybe all different, uh, an-and the w-maybe not the way they were built is different, but certainly the way that they might have been used, or, or, um, you know, the ideas that-that-that that builders had as they were constructing them were different, and so-so maybe it’s important to look at each cliff dwelling on its own, as well as looking at them all collectively.
LN: I think that’s the only way you can do it, I-the way I think about is, you, uh, I try and envision what the cliff dwelling, the-the cave looked like before anybody built a house in it. Then I got to s-I study the abutments, and the patterns in which the buildings were combined within the-within the village. And, try and find out which are the first ones, and th-whether or not there was an architectural core represented by each of these, um, dwellings. Uh, buildings within the-within the cliff dwelling. And so, I start th-there, okay, first this building was added. What’s the nature of that building? Almost always, those places are residential or storage. As time goes on, the alcove starts to fill up with other people coming in, and maybe they were relatives, maybe they were progeny, children, who knows. But anyway, as the cliff dwelling fills up, that the thing that I find interesting about it is, option, uh, decrease in terms of how they’re gonna use that space. So, if you, um, look at those spaces, you can see, there’ll be two, uh roo-suites of rooms that are built next to each other, but not contiguous, and there’ll be a space left in between. So, one of those households probably will capture that space in the dwelling, ‘cause space is at a premium inside the dwelling. So, you can kind of see the evidence of those choices, um, that’s what makes it interesting to look at ‘em. Then at some point, what will happen, is the site gets large enough, and they start thinking about or the village gets large enough, and they start thinking about well, maybe we should have a specialty type of building. And what kind of specialty building are we gonna-are we gonna have? And are we gonna have kivas like they do in some places in the southwest, um, or are we, uh, gonna have another household come in here, because you have to do-you can’t do all of those things. The-the-the size of the alcove is finite, so you have to make a choice about how you’re gonna allocate that space. Do you want more residents? Or do you plan on using a different cave for, uh, ceremonial or social gathering? Those are the types of questions that I find are so fascinating about, uh, the cliff dwellings. And, each one of these cliff dwellings is dimensionally different, the ceiling is higher on some, lower on some, that means the sun comes in at different times of day. For example, at inscription house you have a building that was, uh four to five stories high built on this little, narrow ledge. And the way that the alcove, um, was shaded as the sun moved through on the, uh, during the day, was that spaces that were higher up on the cliff got more shade. So that’s where they spent their time. So the down-places down low, which we, obviously they were built first, but, they probably weren’t the primo places for carrying out the activities that they wanted to do there. So they built up high enough so they could get out of the sun. Um, those kinds of decisions are so different, uh, from the way an open site is perceived. Um, the room shapes and-and cliff dwellings are odd and-and not very quadrilateral a lot of times. Sometimes they are, of course, but, um, sometimes they can’t be that way. Um, so I think that th-they’re-they’re just such a fascinating, uh set of decisions that there is tangible evidence at each of-at cliff dwellings that you have to choose how you wanna live. So, uh, I-I think that, uh, to me that’s why I never find ‘em boring or, uh-you-everyone’s different, I don’t see any two that I’ve ever been in that are exactly the same, although, there are some of the big ones they have sort of a a-a, uh, th-very, uh, similar type of E-shaped or, uh, U-shaped configuration to the rooms if there’s enough people in them. Spruce Tree House, a cliff dwelling at Mesa Verde National Park is laid out in an E-shaped design that is very similar to Chaco-style, um, cliff-uh open sites. But it occurs quite a bit later than the Chaco style site, so that architectural form was perpetuated in some of these, uh, later cliff dwellings. There’s just a lot to think about. It’s, uh, uh, surface textures of individual walls, you know, we talk li-briefly about plasters, stuff like that, um, plasters have different textures, they have different colors. Mortars have different colors, so what does that tell us about where they’re going to get the mortar, and how-what kind of methods are being used to shape this material? You can find evidence that, uh, relates to those particular issues if you spend time looking for it. Um, almost every cliff dwelling I’ve ever been in has at least two different colors of mud that were used to set the stones. Um, that’s at minimum. Sometimes, uh, a different type of material is used to repair walls. Those are all things that guys workin’ in this cliff dwellings in 1800’s-late 1800’s, early 1900’s didn’t think about that very much. Uh, now we do. So what we’re really interested in in this-this is sort of confluence of two factors. One is, the technology that they were using to build the walls, the roofs, whatever, and the other one is social structure. How many social units were they in? Were there big ones? Were there little ones? Almost every cliff dwelling that you go into that has more than 30 rooms has some sort of public building in it to integrate, uh, the residents of the cliff dwelling. Um, but you have to think about it from that perspective before you can find it, or all the rooms maybe look alike, is it-but the social context for most of ‘em is different.
MG: So, jus-jus-just to build off of what you said, Larry, I-I think it’s really interesting to think about how some of those decisions were made, um, who was making the decisions, and-and how were they made and-and how were they ultimately, uh, implemented, you know, once the decisions were made, who was in charge of sort of doing the building and the designing, and, uh, I-I’ve always thought that that was one of the sort of interesting things about-about looking at cliff dwelling architecture.
LN: Yeah, I agree with that, there, who makes those choices about where to build, and who figures out the layout. That kind of question, and how do they do that, what’s the process? You know, we don’t really understand that very well in terms of how it applies to cliff dwellings, um, do they have professional architects, um, and of a sort during ancient times. Uh, probably they-th-th-some of the buildings at Chaco, which was a little earlier than most of the cliff dwellings we’re lookin’ at a-are massive buildings that couldn’t really build without, uh some sort of professional expertise. Um, so, how does that translate to cliff dwellings? There’s sort of two trajectories, the way I think of that, one is open site methods for construction, and, the other one is the cliff dwelling method. And we don’t really know much about how these, uh structures come together if you’re comparing cliff dwellings with open sites, there are-there are good comparisons that can be made, but what would be the differences between all of ‘em? That’s not necessarily well known. ‘Cause usually, person like me comes in, I’m a cliff dwelling specialist, I don’t-I-I know some things obviously about open site development, but they’re different things than other people. And, frankly, some people don’t really know what to make of-of s-the study of cliff dwellings and how the can incorporate that with their open site research. And, uh, so, sometimes that works, sometimes it doesn’t work. Um, but, um, that’s what makes it fascinating. The other thing that is real important about cliff dwellings is, because they’re will preserved and a lot of ‘em have roofs, or a number of ‘em have roofs, you can study roofs, uh, and roof technology, and, that kind of thing, in a much more interesting way, and it adds that dimension of, uh, a verticality that you don’t have in an open site. A lot of open sites, all you have is the lowest 50, 60 centimeters of wall. A-and so, rest of it’s all rubble. So when people look at they want to assign an abutment pattern to the walls, but, when you study cliff dwelling, you realize that the-those-those abutment patterns change from the base of the wall to the ceiling of the wall. Montezuma’s Castle’s a excellent example. Most of that stuff is captu-those-those stuff that’s on the main ledge there, is all, uh built together, and then subdivided, and then if you get up above there, so it’s all bonded-those are all bonded. If you get up above there, there-the-there’s abutments going on. Um, so if you only had portion of that’d wall, you’d come up with a different conclusion than if you have the whole thing there. Um, also, uh, Montezuma’s Castle’s another good example of how roof hatches are built, you can study that, but you can study how they’re-how they change because, some of those roof hatches are blocked off, and they build a new roof hatch. W-what does that tell you about they were using that space, and also the longevity of the cliff dwelling. Had a system that I was usin’ for a while called, the sort of a-a longevity index, or recycling index, which had to do with how many s-stones in the wall had been recycled from other locations based on those stones were, uh, sooted, and the overall wall was not sooted. Or, those individual stones were plastered, and the main wall was not plastered. So that’s sort of a recycling index was a way to sort of get at that, and if you were lookin’ at that from the logical standpoint, you would probably make the assertion that, well, late walls have better chance of being-using recycled materials. Uh, than earlier walls, so, but you don’t know, um, and so far as they could have left that dwelling and gone elsewhere to get recycled materials from a different site, which did happen, so. I think, uh, it’s, there’re just many fascinating dimensions of it, uh, you just don’t see if you’re workin’ open sites, one of the major things that you don’t get much of in open site, or, in cliff dwellings, that you do have a better opportunity for, in open sites, is, uh, artifact capture. There’s more artifacts in open sites. And there’s usually more sediment in there. And the deposits in-in, uh cliff dwellings are oftentimes churned by rodent activity or they’re very dry and dusty, and they don’t give good stratigraphic information. Um, so, artifacts are different in the context for those is little bit different in cliff dwellings, than it is in open sites, so. That’s good for cliff dwellings that do artifacts, most of a l-many of them, those sites have-were visited by early explo-explorers who took out a lot of the materials that were there, so we don’t really know context for that-those artifacts is gone.
MG: Okay.
SH: Mm-hmm. I think one of the-a couple of the, um, things that you’ve touched on with, um, architecture and-in-um, cliff sites is that it’s fantastic to have all of that documentation and research kind of support interpretations for visitors, but, um, you know, decisions on where to put a site even, you know, is a mix of, um, personal decisions and taking practical considerations into account like light and wind. Um, and I think that sometimes even just that kind of connection, the-that these were people like us, um, can be hard to get to for visitors, and to-and being able to have that there is, um, is like I said, fantastic.
LN: Uh, yeah, I think of it as-as real key to be able to give ‘em that information. And also, the-one source of that information is to-you talk to native populations about the place. And, uh, what they will tell you is material that is very, uh, supplemental and can’t be left out when you’re evaluating these structures. If they have an association with place.
SH: Definitely.
LN: I had a-a guy on one of my crews that, um, he had been he-uh-the people have lived at the place where his-his ancestors, and they actually had a, uh, story of connection between his modern day pueblo and what happened at that site, and there was tangible evidence of what he was talking about, if you go to that site. Lot of times it’s in images that are left on the-on the masonry, or on the walls, or on the alcove face. Um, and the-it really helps fill in a lot of things, and makes it quite real for me. Uh, when I go to those places, so.
SH: That’s great.
LN: Yeah, it’s an excellent example of-of, uh, how non-destructive research can be used to connect with-with modern native populations, and get something that you can’t get by not visiting with the native population, so.
SH: Yeah.
MG: There-there’s a lot of information on cliff dwellings out there. Uh, and a lot of it is technical information, so, it can be maybe a little dry and-and boring for people who aren’t archaeologists to kind of wade through. Do you have, uh, a recommendation for any of listeners that-that, uh, uh, for a good book that is easy to read that talks about cliff dwellings?
LN: Um, yes, uh-um, of course there’s plenty of archaeological site reports that are floatin’ around. Uh, on cliff dwelling research, there’s a number of ‘em for sale at the Mesa Verde bookstore for example. Um, but, and other bookstores. But, it-the type of book you’re asking about, um, is from my perspective, hands-down the best one that I know of is called the cliff dwellings speak, and it was written by, uh, Beth and Bill Sagstetter and it was published in 2010. They have a very, uh, user-friendly approach to this, it’s based on years of visiting, um, the-uh, one of the authors, Bill Sagstetter was-he was a doctor, and was flying over Mexico and his plane crashed. And so he lived among people. He got out of the crash, but he couldn’t get out of the-out of the region, so, he lived among people who lived in cliff dwellings for a year or two. And so, he was piqued by these, or his curiosity was piqued is more appropriate, I guess, but, um, by how people were actually using these cliff dwellings, and there is a-a wonderful cliff dwelling tradition that extends across the border, into northern Mexico. Um, and he talks about plenty of places, he and his wife, that they have visited in the-in the United States, and they always try and make it into sort of a-a series of things to look for, if you were visiting, and what you can expect to know from, uh, lookin’ at walls that are sooted, in other words, that’s probably a living space where they had a f-hearth. If it’s not, it’s probably some other kind of room where they didn’t live. Those types of things, which seem obvious if you think about it, but, there’s probably many visitors who go into places, and they don’t really think about that question. And sometimes the alcove ceilings were sooted by people who lived there before, or sometimes the walls were sooted by people who were early explorers who came in there, uh, in the late 1800’s, and wanted to dig up artifacts or visit, so they built a fire against the wall, and it sooted up the wall. So, you have a lot of facts to figure those kinds of things out, and there is-there are some equivocations that everyone has to make when they’re lookin’ at those things. But by and large, you’re looking at how to make the best guess of what actually happened in that place, and that book, uh by the Sagstetters helps you, uh, develop an eye for the best guess.
MG: Great. Well.
SH: That’s great thank you.
MG: You feel good about it, Sharlot? Anything else you wanna ask?
SH: No, I think this has been a-an wonderful interview, thank you so much.
LN: Well, you’re more than welcome, um, I think of Matt as among those people that I had the opportunity to work with, and I’m glad that he’s still carrying on some of the stuff that I tried to get started, in fact, he’s gonna expand upon it, I’m sure.
SH: Well, thank you so much, we’ve talking with Larry Nordby today, and we really appreciate your time.
LN: Well, it was nice to be with you, and appreciate your havin’ me on.
SH: So I learned a huge amount from Larry’s interview, and not having worked, um directly with Larry before. And what-part of what really s-strikes me, is that even a park archaeologist hired to be in a research program for a park, like they can’t do it alone, and that really goes back to, um, to a lot of what we’ve been talking about with partnerships, and Larry’s a great example of, um, starting partnerships both within and outside of the park service, um, with researchers, and, um, and with other folks all kind of aimed at better management of the-the sites. Um, and really interdisciplinary was the word of the day for his interview, um, and it brought together archaeology with standing architecture to lead to better management decisions for historic preservation.
MG: Right, a-a-and just to touch on what you’ve already said, uh, Larry is a great example of one of the very first people who started thinking about combining research, uh particularly research about ancestral Native American architecture, um, with management, so the idea again of-of learning as much as you can about an important place, so then you can figure out how to best take care of it.
SH: Seriously, and that’s so important with standing architecture as we, um, see, you know, extreme weather events, and, um, and visitors, you know, if he-height increased visitor use, um acha-the standing architecture is kind of a lightning rod for all of that.
SH: Thanks for joining us today. We look forward to our next episode where we continue this discussion about historic preservation.
SH: The National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast is a production of the Southern Arizona Office of the National Park Service. Our artwork was designed by Laura Varon-Burkhart. Justin Mossman composed our music. We look forward to hearing from you. Matt and I will be with you again next month.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-
The Secrets of Saving Time - Western Archeological and Conservation Center - Episode 7
In our latest episode we interview archivist Khaleel Saba and conservator Dana Senge who both work for the Intermountain Region's Western Archeological and Conservation Center (WACC). They give us an idea of the work that goes in to preserving archeological records and objects after all the "work" is done. **Links in this episode** WACC: https://www.nps.gov/WACC Grand Teton National Park: https://www.nps.gov/GRTE
- Credit / Author:
- NPS - Southern Arizona Office
- Date created:
- 02/27/2018
MATT GUEBARD: Hello, and welcome to the National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast brought to you by the Southern Arizona Office. My name’s Matt Guebard.SHARLOT HART: And I’m Sharlot Hart.
MG: In this episode, we’ll be talking about the Western Archaeological and Conservation Center, known by its acronym WACC. WACC is the federal repository for objects and archives from the National Park Service’s Intermountain Region, which includes the American Southwest. WACC curates nearly 14.5 million objects and archives on behalf of 71 parks. And while their focus is our region, they can also assist park units in other regions as needed. WACC also provides a centralized space for scholarly research with diverse collections in, uh, one single location. We’re talking today specifically about how WACC partners with parks, and then we’ll get to in an interview with Khaleel Saba, who is the archivist at WACC, and Dana Senge, who is the senior objects conservator.
SH: So I know I’ve talked a lot on this podcast about my experiences, uh, from back when I was frontline ranger, and-and the interpretation side of things. My first experience with WACC comes from that time period, um, of being a frontline ranger and not having any experience yet of professionally working directly with objects or archives. But, still interpreting them to the public, and knowing how important they are to fill out the story, not just for archaeologists, but also our visitors. And so WACC, as the repository for the objects and archives of the park service sites, um, m-in our region, um, and from where I was working in southern Arizona, um, all the way up to Montana. It became like my Graceland, you know, I really had to see this place, and what treasures it held. Um, and I finally got that chance during one of their marcart-March Archaeology and heritage awareness, um, tours one year. Uh, that’s the only time of year that WACC is opened to the public, and ha-they have a few tours of the repository and the archives. Getting to be on that tour highlighted everything that I had built WACC up to be in my mind. Um, a couple years later though, I went back to grad school, and I applied for and got the opportunity to be a graduate assistant in the archives division at WACC. And seeing WACC from that perspective, of being an employee who came in and clocked out every day, it turns out that WACC is just another place that people work. That work that they do is super important, um, and super helpful to the parks that they serve. Um, and it’s oftentimes hidden because I think we have put this sheen, just like I did, originally, over all of these objects that they’re conserving, and protecting, and preserving. Um, and all of that is very important, but the day in and day out of that work is just as fascinating, and isn’t talked about as much. So I’m excited to get to our interviews today, and give a behind-the-scenes listen of WACC for our, uh, for everyone today.
MG: Okay, so this is Matt Guebard, and Sharlot Hart, we’re here with Khaleel Saba, who is the acting regional archivist for the Intermountain Region Museum Services Program. Hey Khaleel.
KHALEEL SABA: Good morning.
SH: Good mornin’.
MG: Well, so, uh, we have some questions for ya, we wanna learn a little bit about what you do here. Um, we’ll start off by, can you talk a little bit, uh, about what your job is, um, and what the archival repository is here at, uh, WACC, the Western Archaeological Conservation Center.
KS: Well, I am the site manager for the archival repository. And, my duties include, I am the technical expert for a group of contractors that perform most of the archival duties here. So I oversee their work, and I assist them with their duties. I also am responsible for research requests from the public, and from park service staff who are seeking information on archival collections that we do store here. So I’m the lead in assisting with researchers, and, identifying archives and helping them find those archives.
MG: So, what-what are park service archives, I mean, what do they-what do they consist of?
KS: The records we have here, um, from over 60 national parks in the intermountain west, mainly contain what we call resource management records. So these are field records created by park service professionals, or contractors in mostly the cultural or natural history realm. So we have the field notes and the final reports and the photos. We also have personal paper collections, and administrative files from these numerous park service units.
MG: Okay. So that’s important for managers who are in the field because that’s sort of the continuity between all of the past projects, uh, and all of the things that are going on now, or might go on in the future.
KS: Yes, and the archives record the decision-making for a particular project or event, or circumstance, so managers can go back and re-create and discover why a certain decision was made, or why a decision wasn’t made for that matter.
MG: Sure. Sure, and that’s-and that’s super important for, um, for instance, archaeologists in the field because a lot of what we learn about how to do our jobs better comes from what people experienced in the past, particularly mistakes. Uh, and so we learn about how to do our jobs better by learning how folks did things right or wrong in the past.
KS: And then you don’t need to re-create the wheel.
MG: Right.
KS: If you know-if you knew-if you already know that somebody did a survey of an area that’s gonna be disturbed, you don’t have to invest into that survey again.
MG: Right.
KS: If you know what was already there.
MG: Right. All right, so, uh, how many archives are stored at WACC?
KS: We have archives from approximately 60 park service units in the Intermountain West, and there’s approximately 4.9 million items in the archives.
MG: Wow, that’s-that’s a lot. Holy cow. Okay, cool.
SH: What does an item mean?
KS: An item, well, and-we, in the archives world, you record archives by linear footage, so, one linear foot equal 1,600 pieces of paper.
SH: Okay.
KS: And it’s a management tool, we have to report, it’s a reporting tool.
SH: Mm-hmm.
KS: But in the archives world, you need to record it by linear feet. But to report to management, we have to record it by items, ‘cause the museum program is based on items, just historically artifacts.
SH: So an item could be a one-page memo documenting a trip report? Photograph? Okay.
KS: Could be a photograph, yes. An item-an item could be a hundred page report.
SH: Okay.
MG: All right, so, in the National Park Service, we think of, uh, protecting and preserving resources like archives, uh, in perpetuity, so, forever. Um, can you talk a little bit about what that means for-for you guys, uh, ‘cause that’s a really long time.
KS: Well, for-for resource records, they can be revisited years or decades after the final study was done, so it’s not uncommon for a researcher, or, park staff to return to a project that may have been completed decades ago. And they want to revisit the conclusions of that project, and maybe they have a new perspective of what those conclusions are, and so, that is one of the most important reasons why we keep these records, is because that resource is still at the park, and, the park managers still have to preserve that resource. So they always need access to these legacy records that were created. And they may find new and better ways to manage that resource. Even though they’re dealing with records that are decades old.
MG: So in a lot of ways, um, the archives, so for instance, and archaeological site, uh, we think about preserving that in perpetuity as well, but, there’s sort of this whole other side of it, the archives are associated with the site, so they’re being preserved together in a lot of ways as a-as a package.
KS: And they reflect the-the changes and the progress, and, the modifications to how that resource was preserved.
MG: Right.
KS: From 70 years ago, as opposed to modern day.
MG: Right, yeah, so, that makes me think of, um, in the parks often, uh, the bookstores will sell what are called administrative histories, which are, of course, a record of the way that a resource was managed over time. Seems like it would be really boring, but it’s not.
KS: And that is ultimately the value of the archive, is to have a body of records that reflect that evolution and change. As opposed to just one event that took place at one time. You’re looking at a whole evolution of a management policy.
MG: Right. Okay. Um, so, uh, what-what excites you most about this job?
KS: Discovering resource records that park staff didn’t know they had is probably one of the most rewarding things. ‘Cause a lot of times these records get shoved into attics, and basements, and outbuildings. And, staff doesn’t physically have access to it, and then, when we come in and do a survey, and organize it, and describe it, and give greater access to it, it’s rewarding to see staff say, oh, if I only knew about this, or I didn’t know we had that. And it-it’s rewarding to me, ‘cause it’s a sustain-it’s making their job easier. Park staff jobs easier.
MG: Mm-hmm. So is there something, uh, in the collections, uh, that you have a particular affinity for?
KS: Well, probably it would have to be the Little Bighorn, um, collection. The Elizabeth Bacon Custer collection, and, associated records. This institution has been working with Little Bighorn for over 20 years, and I’ve been to the park dozens of times, and so, I probably have an affinity to the 7th Calgary and the-the Little Bighorn archives.
MG: So can you, um, is there something in that collection that you could describe to the listeners that you think is really impressive?
KS: Well, what’s interesting is, we have a large portion of Elizabeth Bacon Custer’s, um, personal letters, so you can see the evolution and just, the history of the decades that she survived after the battle, and the correspondence she had with other generals, and, the general public, and newspapers, and you really get a sense of the perspective of where, um, Miss Custard was coming from.
MG: Interesting.
SH: Well.
MG: Interesting.
SH: Does that change your perspective on, um, the, like the pre-conceived notions you had about the battle, or about Little Bighorn at all? [OVERLAP]
KS: Well, she was an advocate for the general. And so, it-it’s there. It’s clearly a one-sided story from Elizabeth Custer, and, it’s-it’s clearly there, and that’s not a surprise.
SH: Right, [INAUDIBLE]
MG: Well, and that’s a good-that’s a good example of sort of changing public perceptions, right? Because now we try to incorporate other perspectives…
KS: The Native American perspective, yeah.
MG: …particularly Native Americans, and that’s, so you kind of get the other side of the story, which didn’t always happen particularly, yeah.
KS: For decades, yes, for decades, it was a one-sided telling of that story.
MG: Right.
KS: Based on a grieving widow.
MG: Right. Yeah, yeah. Cool, um…
SH: Fair enough.
MG: So, uh, can you talk a little bit about what, uh, preservation is in the National Park Service? About from-from your perspective?
KS: Well, I mean, it all starts with the organic act, and then, from that, flows the legislation for produ-for l-legislating these park service units, so the archives is intimately connected to that resource. Even though it may say, in the legislation, we’re protecting this ruin, by default, those archives are attached to that ruin, so even though there are legislations that say, we created this monument or park because of the archives, but those are few, those are few and far between. But, the fact that the legislation says you will protect this historic landscape, or, these-these Native American ruins, or these historic barns, it’s con-you can’t de-couple that from the archival record of those resources. Be it whatever they are. Natural, cultural, and for the public to do research. The-we-we are open to the public on-on-a-r-on a reservation basis, so.
MG: Right, okay, so, can you talk a little bit more about that? ‘Cause, uh, listeners, uh, particularly in Arizona might be…
KS: So, we do cater to, uh, particularly the-the work we do is, a historian will have a contract to write an administrative history, but we are open to the public by reservation, and you have to have a specific topic or need. You can’t come in and just say, “I want to browse archives.” There needs to be a reason, why are you want to look at a particular document, or, you have a particular topic to look at.
MG: Okay.
SH: Okay.
MG: Okay. So, uh, it-in addition they’ve kind of givin’ folks a behind the scenes view of what the park service does, um, I think we also want people to feel like maybe they can help participate in preservation, so is there anything that, uh, that listeners can do, um, to support, uh, archival preservation?
KS: The most important thing for the public to do, is be involved when the National Park Service or the Department of I-Interior is asking for comments on a particular policy. It’s important that the public weigh in on that particular issue. That’s one of the most important things, is the public to be involved in the scoping period, or the open period for comment. Because the powers that be need to know that the public is involved and engaged in whatever that may be. Whatever policy that is, or whatever comments that the government is seeking. It’s crucial that the general public get involved, and voice their opinion.
MG: Okay, cool. Um, so, we asked this question, uh, to Dana, um, yesterday, uh, so-so in your job, uh, you’re focused on preserving archives, does that d-does what you do at your job, does that affect your personal life? Are there things that you do at home that, um, sort of mirror what you do here?
KS: Oh, of course, like, my siblings, I am the default to digitize and organize…
MG: [LAUGH]
SH: [LAUGH]
KS: …the-the family papers, of course. Yeah. So, but, beyond that, it’s kind of the-the cobblers children have no shoes, I’m not as-I need to be more organized at home with my paper records.
MG: [LAUGH]
SH: [LAUGH]
KS: Than I am here at work.
MG: Yeah.
SH: I think we all agree it’s-that that is how we-we all behave at home.
KS: Yeah. [LAUGH]
MG: Yeah. Absolutely. ‘Kay, so, uh, thanks for talkin’ with us, Khaleel, it was, uh, it was great.
KS: Yes, it was my pleasure, and, enjoy your parks.
SH: Yeah, thanks. Thank you.
SH: So, I think it’s really important to highlight something that Khaleel said in that interview. Um, he responded to one of Matt’s questions, saying that, to have a body of records that reflect the evolution and change in park management is the whole point of archives, and, um, and I think that that’s something that I didn’t necessarily realize as a frontline ranger, um, and certainly, um, learned when I was in grad school, uh, and an archives intern, is that, um, we’re not just saving every scrap of paper that the park produces, that-that would be, um, unimaginable, um, but, showing, um, how the management decisions on how we preserve places is vital to the continuing management of those places, so that we can learn from our mistakes, um, and, uh, essentially make better mistakes the next time around. Um, so that was the archives side, let’s hear what Dana has to say about conservation at WACC.
SH: So, Matt Guebard and I are here today with Dana Senge, who’s the head conservator as Western Archeological and Conservation Center in Tucson. Um, and the Western Archaeological and Conservation Center is a place that supports our parks throughout the Intermountain Region. Um, so we’re just gonna talk with Dana and find out how she supports our parks. So Dana, tell me about your job.
DANA SENGE: Well, um, thanks, Sharlot for inviting me to do this. Um, my job is to lead the conservation team and contribute to the museum services program here at WACC. And, um, we have the-the building hosts the conservation facilities for the region, which is a really wonderful thing that we have to support our parks, so we have, uh, a couple of conservation labs, and we have a team of specialists who work directly with the repair and care of artifacts. Um, so my job is to lead on those projects, and to work directly with a lot of our parks to understand the needs and help get to their preservation needs.
SH: Nice, and before, you were the lead conservator, the-or the head conservator, you were the assistant conservator, how was that job or position different?
DS: Um, I was a little more directly involved in implementing the projects, so, um, project management, but also doing direct conversation treatments and, um, and teaching maybe more often. Our concer-our conservation technicians as well as, um, getting a little bit more into the longer part of projects with our park staff.
SH: Nice. Um, so artifacts and, um, and the archival documentation that goes along with them are stored here at the Western Archaeological and Conservation Center at WACC, uh, for, um, for what’s called in perpetuity. Which mean forever, essentially. Um, and that’s a really long time. So, um, for a lot of folks, they might think that once an excavation or discovery is done, that’s the end, but your work really starts there, and lives in that kind of end space for the rest of us, so, um, do you have any thoughts on that? Or, um, or, can you speak to that?
DS: Well, it is hard thing for a lot of people to remember, when they wanna use artifacts that, um, they’re-they’re thinking, I wanna put this on exhibit, and they’re not thinking about the length of the exhibit, or what that exhibit conditions will, um, how that will affect the object, so I do come into this every once in a while, and what I tend to, um, to go to is, a hundred year cycles. And we kind of think that way in conservation, I hope it’s-I hope other conservators will be okay with me saying that, um, that we try to think about, okay, what I’m going to do, how is that going to last in the next hundred years, and will the next person be able to remove what I’ve done, and change it once new-new materials are available, and new technologies out there. So, one of the things that I’ve been able to tap into, is the centennial, and say to people we-we have this after hundred years today, and we’re trying to preserve it ‘till the next, um, the bicentennial, and, kind of think about it in those terms, and sometimes people get a little closer to understanding, um, uh, of the-in perpetuity, which is a little bit harder to-to quantify.
SH: Right? Yeah.
DS: And we-we can’t make a decision today that will last for in perpetuity, what i can do today only lasts a little while, and it may be a hundred years, but if-if you say in perpetuity, a hundred years is only a little while. [LAUGH] Uh, but the materials that we use to-to store objects, and to repair objects, they do, um, deteriorate with time, it’s just, we’re trying to select things that do that very slowly, and in a way that isn’t going to be harmful to the object when we have to remove the material from the object or the object from the container, or something like that.
SH: Great. So, something you just said reminded me that-back when I was a park ranger at Tuzigoot, and we, um, put in the new museum that, um, after your lab had done a lot of work on the pots there. Um, we showed the cracks, and, the voids in these artifacts, where we didn’t have necessarily a piece to make the pot whole. Um, and so, what we would tell visitors, uh, when-when they were asking about the pots, or if we had a program about them, that, um, the conservators who had worked on the pots in the 1930’s, and then put them together with really hard glue, um, that they were doing the best they knew how at that time. Um, do you think that that still holds true? Or, um…
DS: I think that’s a very fair way to say it, I think we commonly, as human beings, I’m not gonna throw all the conservatives under the bus, but everybody kind of looks at the past and goes, what were they thinking? And I g-often sit in the lab going, oh, gosh, what is somebody gonna say about me in 50 years’ time. We are doing the best we can with the information we’ve got, and the materials we’ve got right now. And, um, which is why we try to test n-now we try to test materials to see, we’ll put them into artificial aging situations to see how they could be reacting, um, over time, and, there’s and advantage now to testing materials that I don’t know that we had 50 years ago, or was thought of doing 50 years ago, I’d have to say, I don’t even know what was available to test those materials 50 years ago. So, or 100 years ago. But we are very fortunate that the materials selected for a lot of those pots, for example, was very reversible.
SH: How nice.
DS: So, even though it degraded, and it weakened, which meant that the-the fragments, or the sherds were starting to collapse, and the pots were starting to fall apart, we could safely remove all of that material and, um, put new adhesive in. So, we were very fortunate with the-that particular material selected. There was a lot of other odd ones out there…
SH: [LAUGH]
DS: …that we run into, but…
SH: I imagine those make for interesting days in the lab, when you don’t know what’s in front of you?
DS: Really, uh, yeah. [LAUGH] We try to do a lot of testing before we even start, but there are times when something, our s-little spot tests on a material aren’t, um, giving us as accurate of information as we think, and we’ll be in the middle of a treatment and discover we misread the information we were gathering earlier and misunderstood. And we’re in for a battle. [LAUGH]
SH: [LAUGH]
DS: We’re-we’re really just in for a lot longer treatment than we estimated, so.
SH: Hm. What are you working on in the lab now? Or what is your staff working on [LAUGH] in the lab now?
DS: Um, we have three, or four-four projects going on in the lab right now. We’re just wrapping up a really big project for Yellowstone. They have a map, that, in the Mammoth hotel that is, uh, was made in the ‘30’s, and they were doing renovations in the hotel, so when they took the map down and brought it down here to WACC for some cleaning, and some replacement of coatings, and that kind of stuff, so. That’s been a really neat project to have around, um, and we have some prehistoric ceramics getting treated for exhibit, we have some historic silver that’s, uh, um, being cleaned and getting ready for exhibit. And then, uh, we have ethnographic material from the Grand Teton collection that’s, um, a wide range of cultures that were brought together for that collection, and, we have been treating that one for, um, that group of material for about a decade, so…
SH: Oh, wow.
DS: …we’ve got, about a hundred more pieces out of that collection to take care of, so, we’re pretty excited to have gotten this far, although, it’s a beautiful collection to have in the lab, so we’ll be sad when it’s done as well. [LAUGH]
SH: I have to say, your lab has windows to the hallways, um, so that visitors and the rest of the staff can see, um, a little bit of what you’re working on, and, uh, and it’s been very nice to be able to look in and see these very colorful, um, objects come through, it’s been very nice.
DS: Yeah, yeah, they’re-they’re a treasure and, a lot of people really appreciate having got to see them through the last decade.
SH: Yeah.
DS: Getting-getting their treatments done, it’s…
SH: Will they be going back on display?
DS: There are a few pieces on exhibit at Grand Teton right now, and those were actually recently, one exhibit came down and a new one went up. And there’s a rotation schedule, I’m not exactly sure of the timing, if it’s like, a four-year, um, four-year rotation, but, um, so, about a hundred objects at a time are getting up on exhibit up there, and, unt-the park is working on some other stuff, so I don’t know if in the long-run they’ll have larger exhibits or not, but, we have an ex-an active program with the curator up there.
SH: Okay. Um, can you tell me what a rotation schedule is, and how your lab helps with one?
DS: Yes, um, there are objects-some objects are more sensitive to light damage than others, um, light and heat, um, start off deterioration reactions, if you remember high school chemistry, that is commonly, um what can give it reaction to go. And so, we are…
SH: It’s also in the fire triangle, for any wildland firefighters out there, you need-you need your heat, and, yeah. [LAUGH]
DS: [LAUGH] There ya go. So we’re-we’re thinking about the same, it, um-um, less, less extreme situation. Um, however, um, it’s, um, something that we use as a guideline in exhibit planning, and-and thinking about how long is something going to be on exhibit, what is the environment of that space, and, what is the intensity of light that’s hitting that material? Um, so some pieces of dyed quillwork for example, on ethnographic objects from Grand Teton, they’re very beautiful, very vivid, and we don’t want them to fade any further than they may have already faded. And so, we recommend short exhibits at low light levels, so, two to four years, depending on the situation, and then about 50 lux, which is five foot candles, if anybody’s interested. Um, and that, uh, helps us slow deterioration, and that’s something that I often and talking about, is, saving those materials for the next hundred years, and-and so on, so we-so not only we can appreciate them, and learn from them, but, our grandkids and so on, so. Um, your to your original question with what is an exhibit rotation plan, w-in designing an exhibit these days, we are trying to understand, can we rotate, um, do we have enough objects of similar-that tell us some more story that we can create a rotation plan? So, sometimes it’s very specifically designed at the beginning of the exhibit, and other times it’s just knowing that in four years, we need to change the exhibit, and rotate it off, so, at Grand Teton, it’s completely changed by the curator, um, to bring in another park, Tonto National Monument has a set exhibit, that has-we’ve identified rotation groups that will tell the same story of tec-in the textiles exhibit. So we have three plain-weave textiles that are similar size that can all fit in the same slot, and we can take one off and put the other one on, and we have a cycle for that, so.
SH: That’s an incredible amount of planning.
DS: It is. I actually have a calendar that goes out 40 years for that particular…
SH: [LAUGH]
DS: Because the last exhibit, I think was up for about 40 years, so. Don’t know if we really want to admit that. [LAUGH]
SH: [LAUGH] They were doing the best that they knew.
DS: Feel free, well, the-the and feel free to take any of this out, but, I-what I feel is that we-we’re-we were doing the best that we knew, we know better, we can’t do better. And that’s part of the challenge in the park service is, uh, I think a lot of us are fighting, uh, or tr-not fighting, but, we’re trying to find efficient ways to do better, how can we actually, um, make sure that’s not a 50 year old exhibit.
SH: Right.
DS: Or it doesn’t last for 50 years, and, my best effort was to make it an exhibit rotation instead of saying you have to change this in 20 years, because, who’s gonna be around to remember that? And are we gonna have the funding, and, that kind of stuff.
SH: Right, right.
DS: So, that is-that is a challenge.
SH: So the world that you work in is-is kind of like you’ve-you’ve got the knowing, knowing is half the battle, so now you’re in the second half of the battle of being creative. So in all this work that you’re doing with, um helping parks come up with rotation schedules for their museums, and, um, just caring for the objects, the-that are in storage until they are maybe rotated out, I’ve heard you before talk about customer service, um, when you’re talking about parks, and the curators at parks that you’re working with. Um, and what-so why do you use that phrase?
DS: Well, I, um, I think about it a lot as, uh, all of the parks are our clients, and, we’re here to hear what they know, hear what they’re concerned about, and then match what we’re, um, what we know to what they know, and, um, I just, I think part of it is, I use it a lot when I’m talking to my staff to remind them, we’re not in charge, we are the reference. We can recommend, but we don’t-we m-we don’t make decisions, actually, in conservation. We’re here to be a reference to everyone else, but the curators make the decisions about the collections. That’s my understanding of-of o-our setup. And, um, so I-I really, um, use that a lot to just kind of remind people what-what we’re here for, and really, an attitude to go out, to talking to the parks as, um, not that we swoop in with all of the knowledge. That we swoop in, and we learn a heck of a lot.
SH: [LAUGH]
DS: [LAUGH] And then we provide some information to s-um, to augment what’s already happening, and what people already know. We have real diverse, uh, body of knowledge in the parks, and, um, it’s-I’m learning every time I go into the park so much, um, not just about the museum collections, but how they fit into the parks, and how people have been able to care for them, and-and movements of preservation within the park service, so, how used to try to teach, and put the-put, um, the tools in the park, um, staff hands, and then, what I’m imp-im-excuse me. What I’m inspired to do today based on what was successful 30 years ago, and-and how I’m gonna wanna try to explain something today, or, just recognize that it’s hard to, um, keep a program going as our park staff move around the country.
SH: Nice. So, do you find, um, that you’re essentially working with, uh, a team that’s really integrated, but a different team every time?
DS: A lot of times, yeah, and I think that, um, the other thing that we-the other role that we play in conservation is trying to be a bridge of information, so not just recognizing, um, uh, well-well, we did this this way with this park last year, but now we have a whole new curator, so I can give them some information that I, uh, from the last curator that I learned, and then within a few months’ time, they’re gonna be teaching me a whole new c-um, group of things, because they’re seeing a whole different array of issues, because they have a different body of knowledge, and, s-so.
SH: Wow, hm.
DS: It is, um, it is a lot of learning, and-and sharing.
SH: Cool.
DS: But, rather than, um, just walking in and teaching, if that makes any sense, the difference to me there, so.
SH: No, it does, I think, um, another thing from-form back when I was a frontline ranger was that we used to say, you know, science isn’t dead, and a lot of kids lear-I think learn in school, like, that, um, this is how chemistry works, and so, because they’re given, um, uh, you know static ideas and-and laws of physics, essentially, that then that science is static, so maybe not science is dead, but stati-science is static, and it’s not, it-it is always evolving.
DS: Yeah. Yeah, and so not only is the field of conservation always evolving because it has a lot of science in it. [LAUGH]
SH: Right.
DS: But, also just how successful we are in each park, at, um, at-at our preservation activities changes, as the different staff comes in and out, and different restrictions, um, exist or are lifted, so. There are always influx.
SH: Cool. So, how often do you get to do research on the collections as well?
DS: Um, r-rarely. [LAUGH]
SH: [LAUGH] Yikes.
DS: I would say never, except for, you brought a research project to me, recently. [LAUGH]
SH: [LAUGH]
DS: Um, it-it-is-that’s the first research project I’ve really done with collections. In conservation we do some research related to materials to be used around collections, so we do take samples of materials that we’re curious about, to see how well they, um, how-if they cause reactions with, uh, metals, which is a good indicator to us that they could be corrosive, or otherwise damaging to other materials. Um, so, we-we do a tiny bit of research in that area. Um, but, um, and the other thing that we were trying to is, not just understand the materials that we’re using, but then, how easily we can help people implement them, so, um, w-we might come up with a solution that, if you had a, uh, c-conservation lab at your disposal at all times, and you could complete very successfully, and then we’ll try to come up with a solution that if you don’t have a conservation lab at your disposal at all times, you can go and buy things off the shelf and construct, so.
SH: Which is especially useful for most of our parks that are 30 miles away from the nearest grocery store?
DS: Yes. And that. [LAUGH]
SH: Yeah. Nice. Um, what excites you most about your current projects?
DS: Um, it, honestly, helping parks. I get really excited when we get to go into a new place, and learn from a new group of people what’s been going on, and then start to help understand, um, the priorities, uh, that we see from conservation, and how those can marry with the parks priorities, whether it’s just the-the museum collection priorities or the greater park. And then starting to help achieve those, I just-that’s, of course, I think a lot of us are excited by the new, um, so, I-I have to be honest that I get excited there too. And then, of course, being successful at that, and actually getting through a project and, um, having truly been able to help, that’s pretty cool, so.
SH: Nice. Um, is there an artifact that you have a personal affinity for? [LAUGH]
DS: [LAUGH] I, um, I get excited a-I will honestly say I get excited about basically the last thing that I was working on. We have some really incredible collections here at WACC, some prehistoric material from the southwest that, um, I get very excited to look at, and, um, there’s some s-um, fragments of prehistoric textile that I find, having-having worked in weaving in the past, I find really fascinating to look at. And then, of course the prehistoric ceramics, some of the design work on those is just, uh, stunning, so, I love it when we pull those materials out, in particular.
SH: Nice. Um, are there any collections, or-or even just a simple artifact that really strike you as being a good example of the preservation movement that you were speaking to?
DS: Um, sure, we have in the-I can actually speak to something where I was around for the beginning of, so, the-in the early, um, early years of me-my being here, and I’ve only been here for just over seven years, so. In, uh, 2010, I was part of, um, a couple of surveys of museum collections that, um we were able to understand the need of the prehistoric ceramic collections, and then start to seek funding, um, the National Park Foundation got excited about the data we had gathered, and wanted to help us seek funding, so they started to also do some fundraising, and we have, through their help, been able to actually start addressing some of those treatments.
SH: That’s great.
DS: O-one of the things about prehistoric ceramics, um, is-we’ve kind of touched on it earlier, I-I think, too, there were construc-re-constructed by archaeologists to learn design, form, um, and a lot of work was done to them, but those materials are aging, and in some cases, those, um, pieces are starting to fall apart on the shelf. So, a sherd might fall and hit another part of the pot, and damage, it. It might hit another pot and damage it, so there are-are reasons for us to actually go in at least to-to stabilize those materials, and so it’s great to, um, to do that from…
SH: Yeah.
DS: …to minimize harm, I also love that we’re preserving what somebody did 100 years ago to learn, and we of course are learning more from that, from-as the conservators, we’re not necessarily changing, um, uh, the archaeological knowledge, but, um, I just really, I like that we’re kind of doing a two-fold there, in, um preserving its original, um, it’s not original state, preserving its, um, preserving what’s left of the object, excuse me. Um, but also preserving the park service’s impact on the object too.
SH: Right. Definitely. Um, and how has that project progressed?
DS: We are, um, we’ve been able to treat, I think, 30 of those objects, if I remember correctly. Um, we have hundreds to treat, and so we’re still seeking money for that. [LAUGH]
SH: [LAUGH]
DS: Through various sources, so.
SH: Excellent. Um, how do you prioritize objects when you have hundreds, and, money to treat 30?
DS: Um, it really does depend on the situation. The first thing we’re gonna do is, if it’s actively falling apart, that’s the first thing we really want to treat. Um, sometimes exhibit comes into play, so, this is-these we might have 50 that are actively falling apart, and 10 of them, we want to put on exhibit, so those 10 will be the first 10 that we [INAUDIBLE]. So, it-it really is balanced with the needs of the park, and that’s really, um, the decisions that we made in what is going to be treated and when, and what money’s going to be spend on conservation really is, um, not just from the conservation perspective, it is weighing in these other, um, the-the other issues from a curation perspective. What is the history of the piece? What is the significance to the park? Um, to s-the significance to, um academia, I believe i-is appropriate to say, and then, of course, do we want to put it on exhibit, and, um, so we’re gonna-we’re going to be prioritizing based on that, so I’m usually saying to a curator, here’s my urgencies, and then they’re gonna say back, okay, I’m gonna skip over three, but we’re gonna go one, two, and four, and five, or something like that, so.
SH: Okay, all right. Um, how can our podcast listeners learn more about preservation, and, um, and what you do? What conservationist-conservators do? [LAUGH]
DS: Um, I think w-what-there’re a lot of online resources for learning more about preservation and conservation. One of the things that may be helpful to keep in mind when a c-um, one of the podcast listeners, is that a museum is to understand the light levels are low for a particular reason, or, um, understand why we’re choosing the-the material we’re choosing. Some museums, I’ve n-I haven’t yet seen a park do this, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t one. Um, may have an adopt an object program, and you can contribute a little bit of money to preserve that in one way or another, and so, I encourage you to not feel like it’s a lot of money to help, but if you wanna put a little something towards, um, something a park is working for, it’s a r-or, a museum in general. Uh, that is a way to support a preservation of doing so. And there some things out there for, um preserving your own treasures, um, so there’s some website out there to even just, um, I think one can just search for, um, uh, conservation of-of cultural heritage and start to understand… There used to be a book, like preserving o-our own treasures, or, preserver treasures, or something like that.
SH: Nice. I think the, um, website for WACC also has s-some of those links that you’re mentioning on it, so, we can re-direct our listeners there.
DS: Yes, yes, thank you. [LAUGH]
SH: Yeah. Definitely.
MG: I have a few that aren’t on the list.
DS: Let’s go.
SH: [LAUGH]
MG: All right, so, um, WACC has probably what h-hundreds of thousands of-of objects…
DS: Mm-hmm.
MG: …in their repository representing thousands, and thousands of years of-of history. Um, for me, so-so I spend a fair amount of time here, but for me, one of the more interesting objects was Custer’s jacket.
DS: Oh, yeah?
MG: So, uh, one of the things, w-why it’s so interesting is because I have this picture of him in my head, which was based on, in part being a kid, and, reading about him, or seeing, you know, depictions of him on the television and I was surprised by how small the jacket was, how sort of, demure it was. And how ornate it was, and it was very different than what, um my idea of him was, so, are there any objects that you’ve worked on in the past that have sort of changed your opinion about, um, uh, a group or a-or a person?
DS: Well, I-i-i-your story brings to mind a very similar experience of mine, prior to working with the park service. I ended up working on one of Elvis’ jackets.
SH: No way. [LAUGH]
DS: And it was the same exact thing, [LAUGH] it was much smaller than I anticipated.
MG: Was like, a rhinestone [INAUDIBLE]?
DS: It was-it was not, it was from his earlier years, so.
MG: Oh, Okay.
DS: Anyway, I just-I know that’s not completely related, but it is one of the first times where I’m, whoa. [LAUGH]
MG: What’s interesting, I think it speaks to the importance of, um, conservation because the actual objects can help you to understand the people that they’re associated with in ways that you wouldn’t otherwise be able to do.
DS: That scale in a picture can’t quite relay, yeah, yeah, I think that’s really, I think the, um, objects w-specifically will add-are so similar to w-what we might think today, on the ones that are most effective with that, so clothing, um, and then, of course, utilitarian items from around our, um, lives. One of my favorite places to work was actually up in Alaska, because you get to start to see solutions, problem-solving from the cultures that is so different, but is so, um, so successful. Um, to, if you r-um, were to compare contemporary, um, boots to, um, boots made a few hundred years ago, with um, the different skins, and that kind of stuff, of the-even just the different stitches that people came up with. To live successfully in such a remote environment with access to such different materials, I love that, to see that contrast, it’s one of my favorite things, so.
MG: Interesting. Um, I think another question I have it to-so you spend, y-you’ve spent your career, uh, conserving these objects, oftentimes historic object, which, like you mentioned, are very similar to the things that we sort of have in our houses. Um, how does your job affect the way that you, uh, curate your own objects at home, or-or the way that you take care of things at your home, or does it?
DS: Um, it’s-it doesn’t fully. [LAUGH]
SH: [LAUGH]
DS: I will admit that I have been an unofficially named the family archivist, so I have taken care of the family things, but I also in my downtime, um, I make art, and I-I-I break the rules.
MG: Hm.
DS: [LAUGH] I glue it together with stuff from the hardware store, instead of making my own glue, like I would in the lab. So, um, that’s-I-I kind of save it all up for here. Um, and I tend-I tend to be a little bit more, um, I run into things a little bit more outside of the building than I do in the building. It’s like, I save all of it-all of my-my persh-precision out for being at work, and then I-I’m a little less precise, so.
SH: That’s funny, I have, um, the-the printouts of the, um, uh, sonogram photos from my baby that I should have put in sleeves, you know, being trained as an archivist, I should have put in sleeves a year and a half ago. Um, and they’re still just on the fridge, because, you know, that’s-that’s where I get to see them, and, um, and, yeah, I save a lot of it for my work.
DS: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I will say that I chuckle at myself more than when my [OVERLAP] ‘cause I know that I’m doing it.
SH: [LAUGH]
MG: [LAUGH]
DS: Um, but I, um, but I’m probably no better than anyone else in taking care of my personal stuff.
SH: Well Dana, thank you so much for talking with us today, this has been an awesome discussion. And, uh, we appreciate your time.
DS: Thanks a lot, I really enjoyed it.
MG: Hm. That’s great, thanks.
MG: So the general public might sometimes think of artifact conservation as occurring right after, uh, an archaeological excavation. Which it certainly does, but there’s this whole other side, uh, that Dana really did a good job of illustrating, uh, that’s much more long-term. Thinking about how to protect artifacts when they’re in the repository, uh, in part so that future archaeologists, uh, can study them in, um, greater detail and understanding how to rotate collections in museum exhibits. Um, all things that are really important to understand, and are part of, uh, historic preservation, um, at large.
SH: Definitely, I think that both Dana and Khaleel today really exemplified, um, some of those hidden parts of historic preservation that aren’t necessarily out in the open, or shiny. Um, but are essential to, um, to what parks do, and without their help, parks couldn’t, you know, complete the cycle of historic preservation.
SH: Thanks for listening today. The US maps made of different woods that Dana described is now back at Yellowstone National Park, and up in the Mammoth Hotel. Plan a trip to see it for yourself. We’re looking forward to our next episode where we continue our conversation about historic preservation.
SH: The National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast is a production of the Southern Arizona Office of the National Park Service. Our artwork was designed by Laura Varon-Burkhart. Justin Mossman composed our music. We look forward to hearing from you. Matt and I will be with you again next month.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
-
A Woman Who Digs Deep - Jan Balsom - Episode 8
To celebrate both Women's History Month and Arizona Archaeology and Heritage Awareness Month our March interview is with Jan Balsom, archeologist by trade, and Senior Adviser to the Superintendent at Grand Canyon National Park. Listen along as Jan shares her career experiences and helps Sharlot and Matt realize whatever work they face, Jan's been there! **Links in this episode** Grand Canyon National Park Archeology: https://www.nps.gov/grca/learn/historyculture/arch.htm
- Credit / Author:
- NPS - Southern Arizona Office
- Date created:
- 03/29/2018
TRANSCRIBED BY SAMANTHA DORR MARCH 23, 2010MATT GUEBARD: Hello, and welcome to the National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast. Brought to you by the Southern Arizona Office. My name’s Matt Guebard.
SHARLOT HART: And I’m Sharlot Hart.
SH: Welcome to episode eight of the National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast. March is both Arizona’s Archaeology and Heritage Awareness Month, and it’s Women’s History Month. So today, we’re interviewing Jan Balsom of the Grand Canyon. Matt will give some background for Jan, then we’ll get to her interview, and as always, discuss some takeaways.
MG: So Sharlot, you had the opportunity to interview Jan Balsom, and, unfortunately, I wasn’t able to be a part of that interview. But, uh, she has a really remarkable career at Grand Canyon. She started, uh, working at the park in 1981. She became the park archaeologist in 1984. Served in that position until 1995, then, went on to be the chief of resources, meaning that she was in charge of the natural resource and cultural resource programs from 1995 until 2006. After that, she became the deputy chief for science and resource management, and now she’s the senior advisor to the superintendent. So, it’s worth mentioning that these are all really high profile jobs, at one of the world’s most well-known national parks. And, the work that she’s done over the years has really helped to influence not only the way that the cultural and natural resources are treated at Grand Canyon, but really, throughout the National Park Service, and certainly in the West, and in the Southwest, so she’s a really important and influential figure, uh, in sort of the development of-of archaeology, uh, in the National Park Service today.
SH: Good morning, I’m here with Jan Balsom, senior advisor to the superintendent of Grand Canyon National Park. Um, who started out as an archaeologist, and has, uh, risen through the ranks. Thank you for joining me today.
JAN BALSOM: My pleasure.
SH: Um, so, I guess we’ll start with some basic things about the Grand Canyon, most people have an idea in their head, uh, of what the Grand Canyon is. But can you give a brief overview of why the park was set aside, and the breadth of resources that, um, you’ve helped, uh, protect and preserve over the years?
JB: I’d be happy to, so, you know, Grand Canyon, it’s really funny, because when I first moved to Arizona, I had no idea what the Grand Canyon was, I’d never been west of Chicago. And, here I was, uh, driving from New York to Arizona to start graduate school, and I saw the signs for the Grand Canyon, and I said, oh, it’ll be my only opportunity, I better go.
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: And, I’m driving, and I’m driving, and I’m driving with one of my old roommates, um, we’re driving, we’re driving, and, it just takes a long time, like, it seemed. And, it’s like, there’s this open landscape, I’d never really seen such a vast, open, western landscape before, so it was, I kept thinking, where are they hiding it?
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: It-it’s so big, I should be able to see it by now. And we finally got up to the park, and to Mather Point, and I did what most tourists did, which is I went to Mather Point, as was like, oh my gosh, then I went and bought a T-shirt and had lunch, and left.
SH: Right.
JB: So, it was a typical, um, Grand Canyon visit of less than three hours. Um, less than a year later, I ended up coming back, and working with a-a friend of mine who I met in graduate school, um, as an archaeologist at the Grand Canyon. And my world changed, and I think most people, when they have that opportunity, they come to the Grand Canyon, they think that it’s-it’s just like the painting a picture, but once you get to the park, you actually can see, and y-the smell the pine trees, you can hear the wind, you can, the n-night skies, I mean, all of the range of resources is a-it’s-it can be overwhelming, I’m like, from the natural side. And then there’s the layers of human history. And, all of those things together, just, give you a-a very robust idea of why the Grand Canyon was set aside, why Teddy Roosevelt said it’s one of the places every American should see. Why, um, it’s something that preserve for your children, and your children’s children, and, um, I’m hoping that the legacy that, of protection that we have now, will continue into the future, so everyone, really can enjoy the-the grand canyon as it is today.
SH: So what should visitors know about coming to the Grand Canyon so they can enjoy it?
JB: You know, when vi-folks come to the canyon, it’s funny, because I tend to, um, serve as a lot of my family’s tour guides.
SH: Yeah.
JB: Um, uh, the-the first thing is, um, hope for weather. Hope for something more than just sunny blue skies. Um, hope f-for opportunities to walk along the rim without being with a lot of other people. A-arrange your visit so you can come at early in the morning, so that you can come off-season. Um, set expectations for that, if you come in the middle of the summer, you’re gonna have middle of the summer crowds. Um, but take the time to even walk a trail for five minutes down below the rim. Even five minutes below the rim gives you a sense of your place in the landscape, and in the world. And the immensity of the canyon, and what that resource is, it doesn’t take very long. Um, so, go for a-a hike, walk along the rim. Take the time to smell, look at different times of the day. Um, you know, and enjoy the canyon, the forest surround it, and folks don’t, I don’t think a lot of people understand just how precious those forests are…
SH: Definitely.
JB: …as well. And then, the opportunities that we have, um, whether it be at, uh our visitors center in Mather Point area, whether it’s at the Desert View area that we’re currently working on, um, as a tribal heritage area. All of those things offer great, um, and-and diverse opportunities for enjoying the park. Um, so, have some time, um, spend more than I did my first visit. Less than, uh, three hours.
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: Uh, try to spend a day, spend a night. I mean, it’s great to be able to see the sky at night, and wake up to the sunrise. Take the time, spend the night. Um, and if you’re like me, you start out saying, I’ll just come for a few hours, and you’ll end up making it a lifetime.
SH: Yeah.
JB: So.
SH: And your interpretive division does excellent star parties, and…
JB: Yep.
SH: …and-and night sky programming, too. That’s…
JB: Our, uh, night sky programs are so popular, that even those of who live there can’t, um, get up to the telescope.
SH: [LAUGH] Sounds about right. So, what is your role as a senior advisor, um, in managing all of these resources?
JB: The, uh, complexity of the resources of Grand Canyon, sort of lead me through a career that was a little different than I ever anticipated. Um, working directly for the superintendent now, puts me in a position to help, um, the superintendent’s office recognize the threats and opportunities that are posed. A lot of the work that I’ve done over the years has been addressing those threats from outside interests. Whether it be uranium mining, or, aircraft over-flights. Um, water and development outside the park. Um, operations of Glenn Canyon Dam, things that affect the cultural and natural resources, and visitor experiences, so. Um, it’s brining the, um, experiences and the information from my history at Grand Canyon so that we can apply it to decisions that we make today in terms of resource management, so, um, Grand Canyon’s not known for its cultural resources despite the fact that we have over 4,300, more than that now, recorded archaeological sites. We estimate there’s somewhere around 50,000 in the park.
SH: That’s amazing.
JB: Um, y-and it’s an amazing resource.
SH: Yeah.
JB: And, but it’s subtle. We aren’t Mesa Verde, we aren’t Chaco Canyon, um, you don’t see it, unless you know it’s there. because the people live differently on the land. And it’s such a vast landscape that you don’t necessarily notice it.
SH: Right.
JB: Th-that humans on that landscape, um, from the tribal perspective, from [INAUDIBLE] memorial, from, a archaeological s-perspective for about 12,000 years. So, huge history, um, that’s right there in the-and it’s invisible unless you take the time.
SH: Wow.
JB: But it’s a-it’s a fascinating resource.
SH: Excellent.
JB: Yeah.
SH: So you’ve spent the majority of your professional career at the Grand Canyon, um, starting out as a volunteer, um, while you were still in graduate school, and then after obtaining your degree in 1984, um, you started as the-as a park archaeologist, so, uh, what’s kept you at the Grand Canyon?
JB: You know, I, um, when I finished, uh, m-my graduate work, I all of a sudden was the park archaeologist at the ripe old age of 24. And, it was way too much.
SH: Yeah.
JB: Um, in a lot of ways, I was not prepared for that job. Um, but there I was. And, the thing about Grand Canyon is that, y-you can’t get bored unless you’re not doing something, I mean, there is always something to do. And I started out, um, s-simply, uh, simply, as the park archaeologist, as an archaeologist, then the park archaeologist, and I began to realize that all of these resources are connected. Um, we had a, uh, uh, joint natural cultural, uh, resource management program, so it’s a-both sides and then, you know, the, uh, recreation wilderness piece was always s-sort of our there. Which is a really important piece.
SH: Yeah.
JB: That most resource programs don’t address, that we really need to. Because those things, social resources, social values that are associated with them all-all part of it. And I ended up being, um, officed with the natural resources managers. Um, so, uh-I started realized early on that there was so much that was overlapping between what did…
SH: Yeah.
JB: …and that we needed to be working more together and, what always frustrated me was when I was putting in, um, proposals for regional funding to, the-the SCC program now was something different in the f-in years ago. Um, that there was no place to put in for joint projects between the resource categories. It had to either be in a cultural resource, NRPP, or CRPP.
SH: Mm-hmm.
JB: Couldn’t have, it was really hard to get those joint programs. Um, but we kept workin’ on ‘em, and we kept tryin’ to figure out ways to work together, so, we started, you know, s-a lot of the work was early on, just doing compliance archaeology. And then, I ended up as a tribal liaison as part of this, um, because I realized that that the law said we were supposed to consult, it wasn’t anybody doing that.
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: And, I sent a letter-we were doing a project with Denver Service Center on the East Rim drive to build a parking lot for the New Hance trailhead. Um, and if anybody has, tried to park at the parking lot at the New Hance trailhead, you’ll find there is none.
SH: Right.
JB: Um, ‘cause we started the project, and, there-I was doing the archaeology, 106, and there was a pretty big lithic scatter there, and we didn’t know what else was there. And I knew we were supposed to consult. I didn’t really know how. I ended up as the 106 person as well. So I sent out these letters to all the tribes, um, that I knew of, that were associated with Grand Canyon at the time, there was only five. We have 11 now.
SH: Right.
JB: Um, and the entire Havasupai tribal council showed up at the superintendent’s office. And that was a good indication that maybe there was a concern.
SH: Yeah.
JB: And at that point in time, the superintendent, um, said, I guess we need somebody who does that. I guess it will be you.
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: Um, so, the tribal liaison got added to my position at that point in time. And, i-it’s kind of interesting, because I think most archaeologists find themselves working with tribal people.
SH: Yeah.
JB: And, it’s good in a way, because, it’s we’re-we’re talking about ancestors, and whether, um, there y-you know, you’re American, um, or native peoples archaeologists deal with, um, the past and it’s the recent past as the distance past, so, connecting with the descended populations is great. Although most archaeologists go into archaeology because they don’t want to deal with living people.
SH: Right.
JB: So, m-many of us find ourselves in awkward situations where, we’re pretty much introverts, we don’t wanna actually do that stuff, um, and here we are doing that. So, working with the tribes brought a whole new dimension to the archaeology.
SH: Yeah?
JB: Because it-it wasn’t just stuff anymore, it was my grandparents, my great-grandparents. These are eras I know from, um, family’s histories. Um, and I say histories because many of my tribal colleagues have said, these are not stories. They are histories.
SH: Right.
JB: Um, so each time those things happened, my job changed. And it got m-more interesting, more complex, um, and more engaging. And, working with the tribal communities, the park had a pretty, um, difficult relationship with many of our tribal communities, especially the Havasupai. And, after eight years, the Havasupai finally started to talk to me. And, we bridged that gap, and, um, our relationship with the tribes in general is-is great.
SH: Excellent.
JB: I mean, we’ve worked from having a terrible relationship, to having a great relationship, and in most of the publications on American Indians and National Parks, Grand Canyon gets at least one, and sometimes two chapters.
SH: [CLEARS THROAT] Yeah.
JB: Because the difficulty of those situations um, but we’ve worked through it all to a point where, um, our tribal colleagues are-are really that, and, there’s, um, a-a really good way in which that we work together on moving those programs forward, and I think when I look at why, and what allowed me to stay at Grand Canyon so long, it was because I could continue to develop a program, ‘cause there really wasn’t one. I started out as the archaeologist, um, the woman who had hired me, who’s a former Park Service archaeologist had moved on. Um, so I kinda was it. And then, I needed to start the-
SH: For a park that big.
JB: For a park that big, and I started, needed to develop a program, so, compliance archaeology, fire archaeology, and then, I started realizing the just the breadth of the resources, and that’s-that shift got me into cultural resource management as a whole, looking at landscapes, and buildings, and, um, at the graphic resources, history, all of the sort of the, f-fuller range museum collections. All of those things, and, the-the reason why National Parks are set aside, is because people care about ‘em. And it’s that human dimension that allows us the protection and preservation stewardship, you know? It was us, our ancestors who passed the Antiquities Act through congress. Who set aside the National Parks. And, i-you know the-the myth of these, you know, these idyllic natural landscapes, well there are always people part of ‘em.
SH: Right. Yes.
JB: And, so I think our job is to help connect people and place. And, as archaeologists, we have an opportunity to use the material culture of-that we find, to create those histories to get the broader public more interested in what we’re doing. And once you know, you get that engagement, you have a stewardship. And you have people who care, and you have advocates. And all of those things help with what we do today, and it helps us move forward, it helps the parks move forward. It helps keep us relevant.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: And I think that that’s so much of what, you know, my career has ended up being, not, anything I planned, um, but it’s a way to engage, and it’s a way to keep those things engaging. And, there’s the-the purists out there, um, but, I think that they’re getting f-uh, more isolated, because, w-we have a society that really needs to f-find relevance and connect.
SH: Right, right.
JB: So, I think that those are all of the-the reasons why, and then, uh, you know, I ended up with some amazing projects. Um, starting out as, you know, as a sole archaeology Grand Canyon with a, you know, two percent inventory. Um, uh, Glen Canyon Dam…
SH: Wow, a two percent inventory.
JB: At the time.
SH: Yeah.
JB: Yeah, we’re up to about six percent, so, you know.
SH: Excellent.
JB: I-it’s more than double.
SH: That’s, yeah.
JB: You know? Um, so we start with a relatively small amount, and it was, really, compliance-based. And my first big project was, uh, working in Glen Canyon Dam operations. Um, this was in the late ‘80’s, we’d had a series of very high water, years outta Glen Canyon Dam, there’s a lot of resources that were exposed, I mean, I was a graduate student, and I’m on the river w-uh, evaluating archaeological sites, and, one of our, uh, uh, boat operators came walking over all-while I was, um, monitoring known, uh, resources, and, um, not sure I can say this, but I’m gonna say it, he goes, I think you got a god damn city over there.
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: And, I kinda looked, and I walked over to where he was, and there was a series of really deep arroyos that had been cut through the, um, the sand. And they were this huge walls that were exposed. Artifacts coming out, it turns out the-the main arroyo was a kiva.
SH: Oh my lord.
JB: That was all buried in river sands. Because, for-for years people thought that people didn’t live a-along the Colorado River, that, uh, which was kind of silly to even think that.
SH: Right.
JB: Um, it’s a river in the west. Of course they’re gonna live there. Um, but years, and years, every year the Colorado River would flood, and, h-huge flood plains, people lived on the flood plains. Just like they do n-now. Uh, sediment lain [INAUDIBLE] river buried all of them. The materials. So, everything was just buried under these huge sand dunes. And, it kind of shifted again, my whole thinking on this. And at the same…
SH: That’s a watershed moment. [LAUGH]
JB: It is. It is, exactly a watershed moments, like, okay.
SH: Yeah.
JB: So, here we have a shift. And it’s like, okay. And then, I’m a grad student, and I’m, like, I didn’t know what to do. Um, one of my-my mentors and predecessor, uh, Bob Euler at Grand Canyon. We got off this trip, and I go to Bob, I was like, you’re not gonna believe this. And, I started explaining to him, and, his first response was, oh, it’s just another stinkin’ P2 site. And it’s like, no, it’s more than that.
SH: And I should say to our listeners, P2 is pueblo two, it’s one of the…
JB: Pueblo two period. One of the most common, uh, archaeological periods in the southwest. And, as a soon to be graduate, but as a graduate student. It’s like this is the-no, it’s more than this, I’ve seen a lot of pueblo two period sites, um, this is not that. There are-the walls that I saw were the size of Volkswagens, they were huge, and this is not what anybody thinks of as Grand Canyon archaeology. So, I convinced him, and we were-got a helicopter, we did-did some helicopter work, did a helicopter, went down. And did, spent a day with him taking photographs, and he, uh, was impressed. He was surprised. He a-was su-‘cause he had been there countless times. Same place.
SH: Right.
JB: But, it was all buried. So it really was a shift in our thinking of what archaeology was at Grand Canyon, too. So, that moment, and it happened that the secretary of the interior at the time called for recl-Bureau of Reclamation to do a new EIS on dam operations, there was a lot of pressure from the environmental community, from the public to how Glen Canyon Dam operations were affecting Grand Canyon. It was a different time politically, um, to allow those things to happen as well. And, um, we went from secretary Lujan at the time, telling reclamation to do an EIS, to, the Grand Canyon protection act being passed in 1992. And, I can claim that in the purpose of the act, the words cultural resources came from me.
SH: That’s wonderful.
JB: Um, so, working with our superintendent, our natural resource manager, and, congressional staff, we’re working on the bill, uh, we are faxing back and forth, and was always gonna be about natural resources, and I-I just kept saying, but what about the cultural resource? I was a little kid, I was like, what about the cultural resources? And they-they stuck it in, and it’s in the bill. Uh, I wish I would have used different language, um, ‘cause I-there were some c-confusion at times as to what does a cultural resource mean? We as managers have a very clear understanding, but sometimes the public doesn’t, nor do the other, um, the Grand Canyon protection act really addresses how the secretary manages Glen Canyon oper-dam operations, but it also includes, um, stakeholders. The seven basin states who have interest in how water is released. Uh, power and water interest from municipalities to power producers. Um, Indian tribes, all of our tribal colleagues are part of this, so, um, the tribes see cultural resources, everything, from a tribal perspective as a cultural resource. Um, and it is.
SH: Yeah.
JB: Um, ‘cause that’s where those values come from, is from our cultures. Um, and so it gets a little confusing at times, but cultural resources are there, and we’ve then started with an archaeological inventory survey of the Colorado River corridor, that, um, sites c-that could be potentially affected by Glen Canyon Dam. Um, that’s lead to a lot of additional work over the years. Um, and also tribal engagement, the first tribal river trip we did, was in preparation for doing the archaeological inventory survey. At-at the time, I didn’t know what I was doing. I, I guessed at what would be right, what I thought would be right. To make, s-to invite everybody, I didn’t know that they had never, none of the tribal folks who had-whose ancestors lived in the canyon, never been. I-I didn’t know any of that, I just kind of like, like, it seems like a good idea, and people said, yeah, so I guess, this’ll work. And I just kept working on it.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: So, you know, when you talk about kinda career paths, and, what keeps you a place. It’s-it’s recognizing that’s like, those moments, those watershed moments where things change. And all of a sudden, there’s a new enlightenment. I mean, to be able to bring, you know, religious leaders from the pueblo Zuni into the canyon for the first time, and being with them, and knowing that they are seeing places that they only know from oral history. And they know them well enough in their minds, and that we’re there on site, is an amazing connection.
SH: Wow.
JB: And when you talk about those things that keep you, those are the things that make it worth it.
SH: Wow.
JB: And-and they continue, I mean, it’s like, you know, I know these places they describe them to me, and I know where they’re talking about, they’ve never seen ‘em. But I know where it is. And, being able to-knowing how strong those connections are, even though they themselves have been removed from place for generations. They still know it.
SH: And that’s that history. That’s not a story.
JB: And it’s that history. It’s not a story. And they know it. And, um, and it continues, I mean, their connects are getting stronger because of the work that we’ve been able to do. And I’ve-I’ve been criticized for that. You know, why is it that you think that you should ac-accept what they say? And it’s like, well why shouldn’t I?
SH: Right.
JB: And it-there’s, I-there was a s-I think it was, there have been, um, letters that we’ve gotten, um, from folks who really do-have taken us to task for this approach. And, um, it’s like, why would somebody, why would a tribe lie?
SH: Yeah.
JB: Like, what-what, because working with a federal agency is so much fun?
SH: Right. [LAUGH]
JB: There’s no red tape involved? There’s not endless meetings? You know, why would, you know? And, it’s like, what arrogance on our part to-to dismiss these histories, and-and again, because I’ve seen these connections first-hand, it’s like, you have-you over there, you have no right.
SH: No, no. Yeah.
JB: This is not your history, it’s their history. And, I’m not gonna tell them you’re wrong. You wanna tell them they’re wrong, go ahead. And then it never-they never, never goes that direction.
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: But that’s the sort of thing that’s like, and I go back, and it’s like, th-okay, as an archaeologist, I never, ever thought that I was gonna be in this position. But, here I am. And I what I bring to my current position with this-is-with the superintendent is, all of this experience, and when things, you know, pop up in the Grand Canyon, things are always popping up. Can go back to what I understand of the cultures of the people, of the relationships to help, um, us manage better into the future, and it’s really about long-term protection preservation of all of the resources, because, for me, they’re all cultural resources too.
SH: Right.
JB: So. That kind of, um, so when you back to w-h-why am I still there? That’s why.
SH: So is, um, the interactions with tribes on of the biggest changes you’ve seen in cultural resource management while you’ve been there?
JB: I think that, um, certainly, the interactions that the park service has in general. The w-work with tribes, I think, has definitely changed over the years. The, um, the regional offices, the, or, you know, Washington office. They all have very prescriptive programs, well, they weren’t, uh, they didn’t start-they weren’t very robust at first, and I think we pushed the envelope on some of those.
SH: Yeah.
JB: I mean, we started doing a fee waiver for, um, local tribes back in the late ‘80’s, and it was, um, people, especially our rangers, were very nervous about that. But we came up with a-a protocol for that. Nobody-nobody got really scared afterward it was implemented. Um, and then working on consultation policies as well. And, working on NAGPRA agreements after NAGPRA was passed, I mean, one of the-one of the first parks to actually come up with a-and agreement that all of the tribes agreed to.
SH: And NAGPRA is the Native American groups. Yeah.
JB: Right, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, sorry. Um, so when-when we established, you know, working relationships. Some of s-it comes back to relationships.
SH: Yeah.
JB: Um, ‘cause if you don’t have trust, then you can’t just talk to people. You can’t leave that on, and I think for us as resource managers, we’re the humanists in our organizations. Uh, we are the social scientists, we are those who deal with, I think the harder science, because people don’t replicate behaviors, so what we do is not easy.
SH: Right.
JB: And sometimes, you know, it’s referred to as soft science and hard science. But I think it’s more hard ‘cause social science is not replicable, and o-in the same way, you don’t get the same answers from a human twice.
SH: Right.
JB: And I think within our profession, most of the time my answer is gonna be, it depends.
SH: [LAUGH] Yes.
JB: ‘Cause it does, it’s gonna depend. Uh, in a lot of the other sciences, I mean, the-you can repeat the experiment. And, and the idea is to actually get the same result every time. I think with win-with what we do, it’s not replicable in that same way, so, it really does make a difference as to how we look at it. And, I think for many of us, getting out of our comfort zone at just looking at stuff.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: And then taking the stuff and saying, well, what does that mean for people?
SH: Right.
JB: And what does that mean for preservation? And how do we go about preserving what’s important, and making it relevant for the descendants? Um, of those populations, but also for our visitors, and, you know, certainly in the parks. Grand Canyon is one that has, you know, huge w-international visitation. S-and people are fascinated with the American west, they’re fascinated with the native, uh, story. Um, they’re fascinated to know that people are still here. I mean, one of the projects, I think, I’m proudest of is the instillation of what we call the tribal medallion at Mather Point.
SH: Oh.
JB: Uh, if you go to Grand Canyon, you go from the visitor center to Mather Point, you walk from, uh, the buildings up to the overlook, and you walk right through an area we call the medallion. And all of the tribes of the area are, um, represented. Uh, as part of the landscape.
SH: That’s wonderful.
JB: Um, and it’s-it’s really cool, because they all helped design it. And, one of the questions that I’ve gotten more than once is, how did you get them all to decide, because, folks are familiar in the-in the southwest with some of the, um, disputes amongst the tribes, uh, Hopi and, um, Navajo in particular come up as, how did you get them to decide? It’s because they all have a shared history, and I think if-if we don’t allow the divisions to bind our working relationship, they won’t either.
SH: Right.
JB: So, we, say, everyone was here. We know everyone was here. The archaeological record is, um, no so, um, divisive as to suggest that there was no overlapping of people or culture.
SH: Right.
JB: And, I look at myself, um, and this comes up in the, uh, Native American Graves Protection Repatriation Act discussions.
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: Um, but, when you find human remains, who-who claims them? At Grand Canyon, all of these people lived here for all of these years. And, traditionally, archaeologists would say, oh, well, they had puebloan pottery with them therefore they must be puebloan. Well, I think about myself, and if I was to be buried with my favorite things, I have a, um, I’m wearing right now some Hopi jewelry.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: Um, my earrings are Hawaiian. Okay, there’s two things, I have lots of Navajo rugs, I have lots of Hopi pottery. I have, um, greenstone from New Zealand. So, if you were to bury with all of my favorite things, and presume that, um, the stuff I’m buried with identifies who I was culturally, i-where you-where would I end up?
SH: Right.
JB: And then if you were to do my DNA, you’d find out that, uh, my ancestors are from Lithuania. So, i-am I Lithuanian? Is that where you would put me? It’s like, no, I’d say, how do you identify yourself, and I think, it’s one of the traps that we fall into a-as archaeologists, is presuming that material culture, um, the-the things equal who the person was, and how they identified themselves. And I think that that’s a real challenge for us moving forward. And I think that’s part of the dialogues that we have with, um, native peoples today, is to understand, I mean, I think all of us have worked with, um, folks out of, uh, in reservation communities who, you know, uh, might be an apache married to a Hopi, who’s living in Supai. I mean, the boundaries are not nearly as clear and I think, uh, archaeology in general tried to put things in very discreet boxes. And people don’t work that way. And I think we, today, are realizing that, I think that’s-that’s one of the-the challenges. Um, but it’s also one of the opportunities.
SH: Yeah, yeah.
JB: So.
SH: Well, so speaking of opportunities, um, we also, uh, interviewed Lloyd Masayumptewa, superintendent of Hubbel Trading Post, and, um, that was for an interview back in November. And, we asked him two questions that I’d like your perspective on, um, so the National Park Service is always working to incorporate Native American perspectives, and to interpretation. Um, but there is room for improvement, so, how can we do a better job, what are the opportunities out there? Of representing ancestral and living Native American people?
JB: I love that question. Because that’s-I think what we’re trying to focus on.
SH: Yeah,
JB: Um, my whole career has been at kind of pushing the envelope and trying to push the boundaries of getting away from sort of the traditional, um, approach of talking about somebody else’s history. And, this is really, it’s gonna be about first voice.
SH: Right.
JB: How do we bring first voice into this? And, um, one of the projects we have ongoing right now, is, that entire, um, reboot of our desert view area. So the desert view area of the na-of Grand Canyon is the, um, eastern boundary of the south rim. Uh, the d-desert view watchtower itself is a national historic landmark. Um, it was constructed by Santa Fe railroad and Fred Harvey in 1932, 1933. Uh, the architective record is Mary Elizabeth Jane Colter. It’s an NGL, um, because of her architectural prowess. Um…
SH: Which is a National Historic Landmark, the NHL.
JB: Yeah, Natural Historic La-Landmark.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: Um, it’s also, um, [LAUGH] there’s also a second NHL on the same landscape for the 1956 mid-air plane crash.
SH: Oh.
JB: That happened over Grand Canyon.
SH: [OVERLAP] that.
JB: So it’s multiple levels of history.
SH: Yeah.
JB: So you’ve got indigenous history, native history. You’ve, um, you know, 10,000, 12,000 years ago to the present. It’s an amazing view, looking out, into the Col-Little Colorado River and Marble Canyon area of the park. You’re looking to the East, to Navajo Nation and Hopi. Um, you’re looking to the North and West towards, um, southern Paiute areas. You’re looking to the south, to the San Francisco Peaks. So it’s got this amazing vista and landscape that are all significant places for native people. We have a 1932, um, 33, uh, uh, historic building sitting there. With a few outbuildings. Um, you’ve got the National Historic Landmark plaque for the mid-air crash site. It’s also right there. And, it’s an opportunity to start re-shaping desert view as a cultural heritage area for the native people. And, what we’ve been working on, and, um, will continue to do this, the-it means, so there’s multiple components, and I think this is what’s really interesting about this project. Every project I do has multiple components, none of ‘em are gonna be easy.
SH: Anthropology’s pretty messy. Yeah.
JB: It is very m-it’s a messy, messy discipline. And it-and I think it’s because we are all trained more as humanists, that we to think. Um, and actually, deduce things and actually be critical thinkers.
SH: Right.
JB: That allows us to kind of get more engaged than just lookin’ at stuff.
SH: Mm.
JB: Um, so, we have formed an intertribal advisory committee. Um, that work, is working with us on this. They’re not necessarily government to government representatives.
SH: Excellent.
JB: Um, they are com-more community based. They-some may be on council, some may not, there’s-they’re a little bit fluid. And we have a tribal program lead who has coordinated all of-all of this, a woman named Janet Cullen who’s been with the park for, I think about eight years now. Um, and, th-the she has put together this group that’s working, uh, with us on this project. Um, to really change how we do Desert View. The watchtower had been part of the, uh, Xanterra contract, it was removed from the contract, uh, two years ago.
SH: Okay.
JB: Two and a half years ago. So, it’s Park Service managed now. Um, and we are in the redesign, to really allow that to be first voice, we have a huge cultural demonstration program that is ongoing that, um, we got grant money, um, and-and that’s been a huge par-piece of that too, is how do we fund this? When you for the park service, we’re used to using coupons for most things.
SH: Right, right.
JB: Um, we don’t have a lot of money, so-
SH: You mentioned the SCC earlier, the Servicewide Comprehensive Call, which is essentially us writing grants for project money from the park service.
JB: From ourselves.
SH: From ourselves, yeah.
JB: But there’s not that much of it.
SH: No.
JB: And it’s-it’s really competitive. And, so we have a project at Desert View, where we got, uh, halfway into our grant from American Express to start doing the conservation work, so there’s different pieces, so. You’ve got historic preservation that’s happening within the tower itself. At the same time as you’re looking at changing contemporary uses. And actually setting it up for the future.
SH: And you, um, uh, you did a CESU project for that, right? With Doug Porter and Angelyne Bass?
JB: W-we did.
SH: We interviewed them earlier in the series as well.
JB: So, they were the recipient, they got a lot of the grant money.
SH: Yeah.
JB: Was-went to that agreement for them to do the work.
SH: Excellent, excellent.
JB: Um, and, that work has been done, um, and then the other part of those funds went, um, the st-start the cultural demonstration program.
SH: Right.
JB: Um, the Grand Canyon Association, which is our cooperating association, um, is, um, raising money, it’s one of their capital campaign project, uh, areas. Um, because what we wanna do is really transform that place. And we talk about transformation.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: It’s like, we want-when visitors go to desert view, we want it to be different than a national-than the typical National Park Service, somebody green and gray telling you about somebody else’s history. The idea for Desert View is-it really is gonna be about tribal people talking about tribal history. And not just the past, but present and future.
SH: That’s great.
JB: And using Desert View as a catalyst for that first voice, and to get our visitors out to Indian country.
SH: Yeah.
JB: How do we-how do we engage folks, six million people a year. Even if a small percentage went to Indian country, it would a huge boon to their local economies as well.
SH: Certainly.
JB: But we have to set it up with the tribal communities to make sure that they’re ready for it too.
SH: Right, right.
JB: Um, in 2016, there was an act called the Native Act, that was passed, which is about tribal tourism in Indian country. And, w-we are kind of poised to be, I think, one of the first areas that can really use the-the legal backing of that act, um, with the help of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
SH: That’s great.
JB: To help the tribal communities figure out better ways for them to accept visitors too. So, it’s gonna be done in concert. So, if we look at Desert View is that, out of that catalyst, and have that first person interpretation happening here, having it really be more of a-a tribal approach with the Park Service’s sort of, um, structure. But, those voices, I think that that’s gonna start changing sort of the dialogue in a lot of other places.
SH: Yeah.
JB: So, that-that’s a biggie. Um…
SH: That’s great, and I feel like you actually answered the-the second question as well, um, that we asked Lloyd, which was, that Native American governments and people have, and federal archaeologists, um, have often been at odds over issues regarding the treatment of ancestral places, human remains, and objects. Um, but there’s also examples of cooperation, and collaboration, um, and can you think of any examples or projects that you’ve been involved in that had positive and mutually beneficial results? Um, that’s…
JB: I think Desert View is-is an ongoing one.
SH: Yeah.
JB: I mean, even the tribal medallion, I mean, nobody thought that we could get everybody to agree to it. And, I mean, I’ve got, um, you know, uh, pencil drawings f-that from, uh, meetings that we were in, we were talking about another project that we did, which was called grand archaeology where all good tribes actually helped us interpret all of the materials from Colorado River sites, so that we could get a better understanding of what all of this meant. These folks’ ancestors, um, help us understand what these things are, and it was great.
SH: Yeah.
JB: But, you know, each one of the, you know, Navajo suggested doing this, Hopi suggesting, and I’ve got these pencil drawings, and those went to the artist, and the artist then created what became the medallion, we went through a lot of iterations with the tribes, and I think it was probably version 12 where somebody realized we’d spelled Hualapai wrong.
SH: [LAUGH] Yeah.
JB: Uh, whoops. Um, but, you know, so, um, but, I mean, that was a really great collaborative effort.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: Um, and, you know, everybody was on board with that. Um, so, you know, we’ve worked on that, we’ve worked on the grand archaeology, Desert View, obviously, we have Heritage Days are ongoing, um, that we do the cultural demonstrations. It started, we were hoping that we’d get enough, um, artists who wanted to. Now there’s waiting lists.
SH: Wow.
JB: And, um, so, all of those things. You know, and just continues to be really positive opportunity. Um, the Native Land Corps, we’ve had them up in the park, and we’re gonna continue workin’ on native youth programs like, how do we start getting the next generation of native youth, and youth from the area interested in actually working for the park, working in the park. Um, in-in ways that are meaningful. And, so, i-we have an opportunity now to kind of set, um, a new foundation for this next generation and, we’re gonna look at every opportunity we can and do it.
SH: Nice. Oh, that’s wonderful.
JB: Yeah.
SH: Um, so, tribal perspectives often don’t see a difference between natural and cultural resources. Um, and I have often been drawn to the intersection of natural and cultural resources. Um, and, you, as a resource manager, are not just an archaeologist. Um, you, in 2011 won the NPS natural resource management award for three projects, including, the supporting the development of a 10 year protocol for high flow releases from Glen Canyon, which we talked about a little bit earlier. Which, uh, removed non-native fish within the Colorado River within an area sacred to traditionally associated Indian tribes. And the withdraw of over a million acres of public land surrounding the park from uranium mining. Um, so, how does your background as an archaeologist influence your management priorities and the goals for the park?
JB: So, i-you know, as an archaeologist, I mean, one of the things i-is that we’re trained to think.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: And, archaeology is part of anthropology and it really is that larger discipline of people and people can’t be divorced from the land, and I think that as we, um, kind of evolved within our own disciplines, we realize those connections. I mean, working on the projects I’ve worked on, it-and I do think that I might be the only, uh, 193 series archaeologist to ever receive the director’s natural resource award. Um, it-and-no-I ended up working on it, i-in a lot of ways it’s because, um, because of my academic training, I could see the bigger picture. That it-there was the archaeology and the piece on the land that we could connect with tribal people, um, but then we have to connect it with what’s going on within the-the relevance, again, of, um, where our nation is politically, I mean, uranium mining is a, no pun here, but hot topic for some people.
SH: [LAUGH] Yeah.
JB: Um, and it certainly is for us, I mean, i-and we had to start thinking about future generations as well as like, what is the legacy of land management we’re gonna be leaving, so. Um, when I think about how I ended up doing, and being involved, and sometimes I don’t think I ever thought, well, I never did think I was gonna go that direction in terms of my work. And I didn’t say no.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: And, I could-I could see how things could connect in a way that, I think many of my more traditional natural resource colleagues don’t think about the human side, the people side, the way we think about the natural side.
SH: Right.
JB: People use natural resources. So I think for us, it’s a-it’s normal…
SH: Right, right.
JB: …to kind of think about that. When e-even recording archaeological sites on all of our archaeological forms, you’re always looking at, you know, water sources. Plant communities. You know, w-we’re thinking about w-how were people living here, what were they eating? What were they getting a-all of those things, so we’re always thinking more in that landscape, it’s like, what’s around us?
SH: Right.
JB: Where I think a lot of our natural resource colleagues are focused very much on the fish, or, the squirrel, or the-you know, whatever it might be.
SH: Right.
JB: But they don’t necessarily see how that’s the-they’re-they’re not looking necessarily as an-as an ecosystem, and I think that despite the fact that we don’t necessarily u-use those terms in anthropology a lot, that’s what we do all the time.
SH: Right, right.
JB: And so I think that when I look at the projects that I-that I was working on, and, um, and I’m pretty proud of-of actually having a hand in these.
SH: Yeah.
JB: Um, protection, you know, withdrawal of, you know, a million acres of land around Grand Canyon from new mineral entry.
SH: That’s huge.
JB: Um, it’s huge, uh, it’s, there is an assault on that right now. Um, we may lose those protections, but it was huge, and it’s huge through the tribal communities who have been plagued with the, um, the fallout from the down-winders, but also just the un-reclaimed mines all over Indian country. Just around Cameron alone, there’s hundreds of un-reclaimed, um, mining areas from uranium.
SH: Wow.
JB: From the big buildup years from the ‘50’s. So, you know.
SH: And I should say for our, uh, listeners, down-winders are people who, um, were affected, who were down-wind of uranium, uh, production, and-and were affected by the, um, f-radicals, and…
JB: It-yeah, it’s-it’s and also from some of the tests from the nuclear testing.
SH: Right, right.
JB: Um, they were living down-wind of, uh, where they tested the atomic bombs.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: And, they’ve suffered immense health issues over the years.
SH: Right.
JB: Um, in many of the tribal communities. And then-th-are part of that. And then, just the-the legacy of mining, especially in Navajo Nation lands, um, there’s still hundreds of superfund sites out there that need to be cleaned up, so.
SH: Yeah.
JB: You know, recognizing that what we do today has a-an effect on people and these communities. I-is really important, I think that we as anthropologists are in a really good s-space to be able to connect those things together. Um, in a way, and-and be f-pretty articulate with it too, and, and, you know, I’m always challenged with, it’s just your opinion.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: It’s like, well, we-we may actually have a way to have more than just an opinion, we actually might be able to bring some academic science to it.
SH: Right?
JB: And it doesn’t mean it’s just numbers. There’s a lot of tools that anthropologists can use, you know, that we as archaeologists have had, I mean, uh, many of us had four field trainings, and I did as well.
SH: Yeah, yeah.
JB: Um, but to use those tools, and I think that’s one of the-the benefits, and, you know, the blessings that we have is being, um, from a discipline that realizes that-that there’s more to it.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: And teaches us really, to think.
SH: That’s great. I agree.
JB: Yeah.
SH: Um, so this episode is air-airing during, uh, both Arizona’s March Archaeological and Heritage Awareness month, as well as National Women’s History Month. Um, has being a woman influenced you as an archaeologist, or as a park manager?
JB: I don’t think I could be doing what I’m doing if I wasn’t a woman. I think that, um, the acceptance I had with our tribal colleagues, a lot of it was, um, because I was female.
SH: Interesting.
JB: Like, um, and I’m-I was challenged by some of my male colleagues, um, especially when it came to like, sacred sites and thing like that, and you can’t go there because you’re a woman, and it’s like, you know what? I don’t think you can go there either ‘cause you’re white. I don’t think it has to do with being, you know, male or female. If you’re not part of a tribal community, um, it doesn’t matter. And because I was not challing-challenging any of them, you know, w-my male colleagues, and-and the tribes. You know, most tribal societies are matrilineal, matrilocal, so, they’re kinda used to having women in charge.
SH: Right.
JB: And I think that might be why some of it works so well, because, they were used to being bossed around by women, and then I fit that category.
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: You know, and I also listened.
SH: Yeah.
JB: And, I wasn’t trying to tell ‘em what to do. Um, and it-it-it evolved over the years and, um, I think that it’s affected, I mean, it-I don’t think I could have done what I-I’d done, had I not been a woman.
SH: Wow. Um, were there any historical female archaeologists who inspired you?
JB: Yeah, I-I was thinkin’ about, um, some-some of sort of my mentors, and-and I think it was more that they were my colleagues. That really, I mean, the woman that I started working with, um, at Grand Canyon is a woman named Trinkle Jones who, uh, was a Park Service archaeologist, and, she brought me in, I’d never-I’ve been to one National Park my entire life, I had no idea what it was that she was even asking me to do. We met in graduate school, um, we were the only two brave enough to take a class at ASU on cultural resource manager-management where the, um, the professor had a history of failing all the students.
SH: Okay.
JB: Um, well, if you didn’t get an A or a B you failed the class, I mean, it-C in grad school doesn’t count. So, we were the only two in this class, so it ended up being a seminar.
SH: Wow.
JB: Um, I was new to the southwest, I had no idea. And so Twinkle and I, formed a bond, we interned in the state historic preservation office together. Um, and we’ve been friends ever since. We’re still friends.
SH: That’s wonderful. Yeah.
JB: And, you know, so I look at that, and, um, uh, Twinkle, and there were-and there were other-there was actually quite a few females in, uh, my graduate program. Uh, one went on to be the Arizona SHIPO. I mean, uh, the-i-you know, there were number of-of women who had worked within the field, um, when I started coming outta graduate school who were doing some amazing things. And it wasn’t so much that there was a lot of women archaeologists in the field prior to my going there, I mean, there was one, uh, nah, there were two f-females at ASU, one of ‘em was having her 90th birthday this coming year.
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: Um, who actua-who really, um, encouraging to all of this.
SH: That’s great.
JB: And, you know, I thought about it, and it’s like, everyone of w-I think we were all kind of moving together, and at just different levels of where were, so I think a lot of it came from the encouragement of my peers and my colleagues. Um, and a couple professors along the way. Um, and I-and I think my family as well who-my father never said I couldn’t do anything.
SH: Right.
JB: They were a little concerned about my choice of careers, they didn’t quite understand what that was f-coming from western New York, and, uh, the great outdoors was not what the great outdoors is here. And then had no idea why I wanted to be an archaeologist, and what that meant. Um, and on the flip side, um, he’s like, honey, if-if this something that you’re passionate about, great, go for it.
SH: That’s great, yeah.
JB: Um, and I was lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time, and I think many of my tribal colleagues have reminded me that I was the right person at the right time.
SH: Mm-hm.
JB: And it just, it just is the way that those things happen as the people connect, I mean, my colleague at Hopi, who recently retired, uh, Leigh Kuwanwisiwma. He and I started about the same time. And, uh, he likes to joke that, uh, we started in diapers and now we’re shoppin’ for depends.
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: And I’ve reminded him that he may be shopping for them, but I am not.
SH: That’s great. Yeah.
JB: Um, but he retired at the end of December. And, it was, we were both the right people at the right time to allow these things to happen, and to make those connections of, I think so much of it is being open to the possibilities of looking for those opportunities.
SH: Right, you mentioned earlier that the relationships are so important, and that’s…
JB: It’s all about relationship.
SH: Yeah.
JB: If you don’t have that, you can’t have any successes in this program.
SH: Um, so we have just a couple minutes left, and, um, I guess I, um, I hear that you also participate in reenactments from time to time? At least, of Bert Loper’s demise as 24 and a half mile rapid, can you tell us more about that?
JB: I’m not sure how you heard about that.
SH: There’s a video on YouTube, um, of a, um, of a speech you gave about the, um, the project to preserve river running boats and the Grand Canyon, and the introduction, um, there a-there’s a mention.
JB: Yeah, so, over my, uh, my career, I’ve had, uh, the opportunity to spend a lot of time on the Colorado River, and one of the projects, uh, that I spent a number of years on, most projects take me like, 10 years to get anybody interested in and to-to do, I’m sort of used to having to wait. Um, but that Colorado River history is one that I got pretty engaged in, and including the preservation of the historic boats that we had in our collection. And, um, um, some of my early trips, um, um, there was a fella who was working as a river guide, uh, who’s also a-a-a historian. And, um, on our very first trip together with the Arizona Archaeological and Historical society trip, um, we decided to do a reenactment of Bert Loper having his heart attack in 24 and a half mile. And he would play Bert Loper, and all of a sudden, he would, uh, reenact having a heart attack, and, um, getting slumped over his oars, and I would be in standing, or, sitting in front of him saying, look to your oars, Bert.
SH: [LAUGH]
JB: And then, look behind, and, um, he would be slumped over, and then the next thing, we would crash and burn, and, um, Bert’s body wasn’t s-found for another 27 years, and, uh, Wayne, um, did live.
SH: Awesome. [LAUGH] Good, good.
JB: Um, but the remains of the bat, um, that Bert’s boards we call it is at, uh, uh, downstream, um, of 24 and a half mile kind of buried in the sand, so.
SH: They’re buried in the sand, they weren’t part of the boat, uh, preservation project.
JB: No, there wasn’t enough, no, and actually, it was an area of the canyon, this had happened in 1949, the, when Bert passed away and his-his, uh, remains weren’t found ‘till ’69, but…
SH: Oh.
JB: …um, that part of the canyon actually had Marble Canyon Dam been built, that would have been underwater.
SH: Oh, wow.
JB: I mean, there’s so many layers of history, um…
SH: Yeah.
JB: …a bit, about this, but yeah, so…
SH: Yeah.
JB: …the re-the remains are-are kind of, they’re-they’re, withered, and, they’re, um, there’s not much too it, there’s a little plaque there now, but anyways, so, so Richard and I would periodically recreate, uh, Loper’s demise.
SH: That’s awesome.
JB: Yeah.
SH: Um, well, so, mentioning the boats, you were instrumental in that project to preserve river running boats, um, and-and boats are a pretty big artifact, do you, um, have a favorite example, um, big or small, of how artifacts play a part in telling the canyon story?
JB: You know, the-the art, it, I mean, the place itself is an artifact in a way, I mean, i-you-you look at different levels of them, and, um, uh, the historic river boats, I mean, each one of them tells its own story, and it-each-each artifact tells its own story.
SH: Yeah.
JB: And, yeah, there are some that are, that one of the boats was called the Julius Stone, it is such an elegant water craft. You know, you just-you just wanna sit with it, because it’s so pretty.
SH: Yeah.
JB: Um, you know, and certainly are split twig figurines tell a-a story of archaic hunters. And some of the-the-the large, um, vessel pots we have, and the pendants, I mean, just the-the art-artistry of the past is just, so amazing, and, um…
SH: Yes.
JB: …each, each one of those pieces tells its own story, so I don’t think I have a favorite, although I really do like going to sit with the Julius Stone boat, because it’s just, the elegance of it. And, the conservation work that was done by, uh, Western Archaeological Center, um, Brynn Bender was our conservator. They did an astound job, and, um, it’s-it’s a rich history, on so many different levels. From, um, the, uh, earliest inhabitant to Grand Canyon, um, until sort of the most recent, uh, historic artifacts, I mean, each and ever-piece-each and every building, it’s all part of the much larger landscape of-of the human history of i-of Grand Canyon, and why we care.
SH: Yeah. Well, Jan, thank you so much for joining me today, I appreciate it, this has been wonderful.
JB: I’ve enjoyed it too, thank you.
MG: One of the things I really liked about your interview with Jan, uh, was the way that she was able to, um, really kind of synthesize and articulate, um, the efforts of Grand Canyon, uh, in doing tribal consultation. And the way that they’ve been able to use the information that get from those consultations, to understand and manage their resources. That’s something that all National Parks are engaged in all the time, but it’s also something that we struggle with. Um, how do we use that information and-and how do we use it in-in the right ways?
SH: Yeah, definitely. Um, talking with you about this has made me think about, um, an article by T.J. Ferguson, and Chip Colwell. Where they talk about the collaborative continuum. And that, you know, on one side you have true collaboration where, um, all sides are bringing something to the table, and-and getting something from the process. And on the other side, where, you know, you have no collaboration at all, um, not even information sharing. And I feel oftentimes, that in the-the park service, and working for the federal government, we have mandates that we are legally required to fulfill, and, um, and a little bit of time to do all of that, and, so it’s very easy to get pulled into the middle of that continuum where, um, where you’re doing consultation, you’re sending out letters, but, um, but it-that’s really just information sharing, that’s not collaboration. And, um, and Jan’s, you know, experience and-and background of the grand canyon, you know, really, um, inspires us to, um, to really keep pushing for the collaboration side of that continuum.
MG: Absolutely.
SH: Well folks, that’s it for the inaugural season of the National Park Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast. We’ll be busy over the summer recording interviews so that we can bring you behind the scenes of archaeology and preservation in the southwest. We hope you’ll join us in the fall for season two.
SH: The National Parks Service Southwest Archaeology Podcast is a production of the Southern Arizona Office of the National Park Service. Our artwork was designed by Laura Varon-Burkhart, Justin Mossman composed our music. We look forward to hearing from you. Matt and I will be with you again next month.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Last updated: April 10, 2020