Gila Cliff Dwellings An Administrative History

Interpretation of the cultural resources at Gila Cliff Dwellings National Monument has focused primarily on the cliff site. Until 1963, interpretation was largely incidental to the task of monitoring those ruins—initially by a nominal custodian and later by local men hired for the summer. For a long time, interpretation relied on discoveries made incidental to stabilization activities at the cliff site and on general observations about the Mogollon culture that were gleaned from the literature of excavations made at other—sometimes distant—sites. Despite a major excavation of the cliff dwellings in 1963, more specific interpretation of the site was constrained by the untimely death of Gordon Vivian, the excavator, before a formal report could be produced. Most of the items recovered by Vivian were not reported scientifically until 1986.

A brief review of interpretative activities divides easily into four periods: 1907 to 1933, when the Gila National Forest staff initially administered the monument; 1933 to 1962, when the Park Service administered the monument prior to expansion; 1962 to 1975, when the Park Service administered the monument after expansion; and 1975 to the present, when administrative responsibility was returned to the Gila National Forest. During this last period, formal plans to manage cultural resources were developed, as well.

Interpretation I
1907 to 1933

No formal interpretive program for Gila Cliff Dwellings National Monument was developed by Gila National Forest staff. In 1915, however, in response to a request from the Department of the Interior, a forest ranger did write a four-page description of the cliff dwellings, which included general directions for reaching the remote site. [1] Details of this description, after some editing, were included on the official 1915 map of the forest. [2] One of the memorable liberties taken by the editor was to attribute the cliff dwellings to an ancient race of dwarfs, an imaginative idea first reported in a 1913 issue of the popular Sunset magazine. [3]

The idea of ancient dwarfs was subsequently dropped for the more reasonable but vague attribution "ancient cliff dwellers," but the gist and most details of the original 1915 description continued for many years to appear in Gila National Forest publications and later in leaflets printed by the Park Service. As late as 1955, Dale King, a naturalist with Southwestern National Monuments, took exception to the numerous—and in his opinion belittling—inaccuracies of the description, [4] but a substantially better version was not written until 1963.

Interpretation II
1933 to 1962

After the Park Service became responsible for Gila Cliff Dwellings, the site appeared in an official brochure promoting visits to all the southwestern monuments except Yucca House, which was reserved for future scientific research. Included in the 1940 brochure were rough hand-drawn maps to the various monuments, and conspicuously isolated in the midst of white paper was Gila Cliff Dwellings National Monument. [5] During the late 1930s, the Works Progress Administration supported a few unofficial descriptions and histories that relied on such various sources as Bandelier's report, the Silver City Chamber of Commerce, and plain imagination. [6]

In 1941, after his visit on horseback to the remote site, the new director of Region III recommended that visits to Gila Cliff Dwellings be discouraged and that the monument be managed as a reserve unit without interpretation. [7] Small numbers of visitors continued to tour the ruins, however, usually as part of their stay at one of the two nearby guest ranches—Lyons Lodge and the Gila Hot Springs Ranch—much as guests had done since the 1890s. "Doc" Campbell, the nominal custodian, owned the latter guest ranch and occasionally brought people to the monument himself. In 1947, casting about for more than the cursory information contained in the official leaflet, Campbell wrote to the Smithsonian Institution and subsequently to Erik Reed and Charlie Steen. [8] Ultimately, the responses were two brief overviews of the Mogollon culture that included contradictory attributions for the prehistoric cliff site: Reed guessed the dominant influence was Tularosa, Steen intuited a major Mimbres component, which was followed after a hiatus by an Anasazi presence.

This difference of opinion could have arisen for two reasons. For one, very little archeological research had taken place along the headwaters of the Gila. In 1949, Bandelier's description [9] from 60 years before of the cliff dwellings still stood as the most detailed scientific report. The only other formal report [10] about the vicinity was not published until 1947. It briefly described a season of salvage excavations that had occurred in the 1920s and that had skipped Gila Cliff Dwellings. Furthermore, no general overview had yet been written to integrate the still limited research that had taken place in the Mogollon area, a culture not identified until 1936 and still poorly understood and not universally accepted in 1949. Without a clear taxonomy of Mogollon cultural branches or sub-cultures, the distinction between Tularosa and Mimbres remained arguable. [11] In short, interpretation at the unexcavated Gila Cliff Dwellings was informal, unofficial, and—given the exceedingly small amount of research—vague.

In 1955, a year after Marjorie Lambert had expressed her dismay about vandalism at Gila Cliff Dwellings, "Doc" Campbell was hired for the summer as a uniformed seasonal employee. [12] At the mouth of Cliff Dweller Canyon, he set up a small desk that was shaded with a tent fly, but he spent most of his time monitoring visitors to the prehistoric dwellings. There were 711 in that year. Also in 1955, the quantity and value of archeological resources in the vicinity was reassessed when a proposal to abandon the monument triggered a closer look at its assets by Campbell, Richert, and his superior at the Mobile Stabilization Unit, Gordon Vivian. Together these men discovered material evidence for an unbroken 2,000-year sequence of prehistoric occupation along the headwaters of the Gila. [13] A formal interpretive program, however, was still not developed at the monument until eight years later. [14] Information about the cliff dwellings continued to rely largely on the very general cultural overviews written in the previous decade at Campbell's request and on what the nominal custodian gleaned from his own explorations and from his friendships with visiting archeologists. Each summer until 1963, Campbell—or when he was unavailable another seasonal—greeted visitors at the field desk or in the ruins.

Interpretation
1963 to 1975

In March 1963, a few months before paving of the Copperas road reached the confluence of the East and Middle forks, James Sleznick was assigned to Gila Cliff Dwellings National Monument as its first ranger and its first professional interpreter. As the road improved, visitation to the monument increased. In 1963, 10,000 visitors toured the site—more than 12 times the number of visitors in 1955. [15]

In May 1963, a trailer for the ranger office was moved to the edge of the monument, replacing the field desk and tent-fly. [16] Years later, Sleznick recalled that he would greet visitors at the trailer, direct them to the trail up Cliff Dweller Canyon, and then run up a back way to the ruins. There he again met the visitors and interpreted the site. [17] The following summer a seasonal ranger was hired to help the undoubtedly breathless Sleznick. In December 1965, a second full-time ranger—William Gibson—was hired. [18] Sleznick reported that interpretation at the cliff dwellings was limited primarily to spontaneous talks by himself or the seasonal ranger at the ruins. [19] In the dwellings, Vivian's excavation the year before had cleared a room with several fire-pits, and these were used for interpretation. At the mouth of Cliff Dweller Canyon, Sleznick planted a demonstration garden of corn, squash, and beans—vegetables believed typical for the Mogollon. The TJ site was closed to visitors except by appointment. A single-sheet mimeographed leaflet provided additional information for visitors. This leaflet was a simple resource that could be amended as additional information became available. Sleznick noted that expansion of the interpretive program would rely on reports about the recent 1963 excavation. [20] Little new archeological information was forthcoming, however, because Vivian, who had excavated the ruin, died before his report could be written. The excavation at the cliff dwellings was not formally reported until 1986.

In 1966, Ranger Gibson developed a self-guiding trail and an accompanying booklet for the increasing number of visitors who came to see the cliff ruins. [21] Keyed to numbered stakes along the trail, the typed booklet briefly described likely prehistoric uses of the local natural resources, and it drew attention to interesting architectural features of the ruins. Still relying on the overviews of Steen and Reed, this written interpretation suggested 250 years of occupation for the cliff site (A.D.1100-A.D.1350), with two distinct components—both Tularosa but the second heavily influenced by Anasazi. The booklet suggested that most of the rooms had once been roofed and that the smaller rooms at the east end of the site may have been the first ones built.

All of the previous architectural inferences have been discarded or radically revised in the years since. Obviously, without a report on Vivian's excavation, interpretation for Gila Cliff Dwellings was difficult and still relied on insufficient information.

In 1968, interpretive policies were established for Gila Cliff Dwellings National Monument that are essentially guiding principles today for the deployment of interpreters and the display of exhibits. To interpret the cliff dwellings, Superintendent Lukens proposed in early 1968 the presence of a uniformed employee every day, starting in April and lasting through October—the peak visitor season. [22] Lukens' primary concern was still protection of the ruins, which were often unattended because the staff was too busy dispensing [23] information from the contact trailer at the mouth of Cliff Dweller Canyon. For the winter season, Lukens planned to initiate guided walks for groups of 20. [24] A year later, Lukens had abandoned the idea of guided walks, noting that twice as many visitors could be accommodated along the narrow trail and the close confines of the ruins by roving interpreters—350 visitors a day as opposed to 160 during the off-season, and 650 a day as opposed to 320 during the summer. [25] Lukens' system of roving interpretation is essentially the policy practiced today.

In 1968 the visitor center began operations. New brochures and other information previously dispensed from the contact trailer became available in the lobby, and exhibits for the 600-square-foot display room were installed in time for the 1969 dedication of the center. These exhibits reflected the dual nature of the visitor center as an instrument of the Park Service and of the Forest Service. Some of the exhibits were displays of archeological artifacts and specimens relevant to Gila Cliff Dwellings and the prehistoric Mogollon culture in general. Artifacts and information pertinent to the historic era of the Chiricahua Apaches were included, as well. Other exhibits comprised maps and photographs of the surrounding Gila National Forest and its wilderness. In addition, there were representations of local flora and a narrated slide show. After a very brief introductory summary of local geology and the arrival of miners in the 19th century, the slide show focused on wildlife typical to the forest, with a quick series of photographs depicting animals and their specific habitats. Archeology was not discussed in the slide show. With only a few minor exceptions, the exhibits installed in 1968 are those that inform the visitor today.

During the planning of the exhibits, it was noted that interpreting Gila Cliff Dwellings remained difficult given the lack of specific archeological information about the Mogollon people of the immediate area. The initial plan called for a very general archeological exhibit that could be filled out with artifacts recovered from the proposed TJ excavation. [26] For the time being, some employees found the display cases "stark and empty." [27] The sparseness of the display denoted an old problem, of course. The lack of substantive archeological research on the forks of the Gila still constrained interpretation of the monument's prehistory. Nevertheless, in 1968, shortly before the visitor center opened, an archeological research management plan was formulated that did at least outline an official theme for interpretation. This research plan was written by Superintendent Lukens and Don Morris, [28] who had just finished stabilizing the cliff dwellings and surveying archeological sites around the visitor center.

This survey identified 106 archeological sites, 33 of which occurred within the boundaries of the monument. [29] Based on these archeological resources as well as the new more sociological orientation in the discipline, Lukens and Morris identified the monument's principal archeological theme as "[t]he development of the Mogollon culture over time as a result of the complex interplay among the cultural and ecological factors of their total environment." [30] The theme highlighted changes in settlement patterns, improvements in subsistence techniques, progressive refinements of material culture, and the increasing complexity of Mogollon society. In short, it looked back to the reasons proposed in 1955 for expanding the monument—namely, to encompass a nearly 2,000-year sequence of cultural development.

Obviously, this theme looked forward, as well. The scale of interpretation anticipated formal analysis of the excavation that had already occurred, additional digging at the TJ Ruin, and the opening of more sites to visitors. Unfortunately, almost none of those expensive projects was financed—at least not for years. Although no sites other than the cliff dwellings were prepared for interpretation on the monument, in 1968 a two-room ruin was developed not far away by Gila National Forest staff. The ruin in Adobe Canyon was stabilized and included on a self-guiding "Trail to the Past" that began at the pictographs near Scorpion Corral.

The value of interpreting these pictographs and small ruins between the TJ site and the cliff dwellings had been noted in the revised 1955 prospectus, [31] but the land between the TJ Ruin and Gila Cliff Dwellings was not transferred to the Park Service during the expansion of the monument. On their own initiative, staff of Gila National Forest developed the self-guiding trail, and later the ruin was roughly stabilized with concrete mortar. In 1969, as an informal cooperative gesture, the southwest regional curator for the Park Service assessed the "Trail to the Past" project for Wilderness District ranger. [32] Ever since this initial and informal cooperation, the "Trail to the Past," its small ruin, and the large panel of red pictographs have been included in the monument's interpretive program as complementary sites and as alternative destinations for people arriving too late to see Gila Cliff Dwellings. These archeological sites are now part of the regular Park Service stabilization program, having undergone repair by that agency as recently as May 1991.

Interpretation
1975 to the present

After 1975, when the Gila National Forest began managing the monument again, the interpretive program changed very little from the policies established in the 1960s. By cooperative agreement, the Park Service continues to maintain the displays located in the visitor center. Roving uniformed staff also continue to be the primary interpretive resource for visitors to Gila Cliff Dwellings. [33] Furthermore, the monument rangers have been hired since 1986 from the ranks of the Park Service, in order to bring to the monument that agency's formal interpretive training as well as experience. These employees are transferred to the Forest Service for the duration of their assignment to the monument, which must last at least two years and not extend past three years.

In 1978, to assess the current program of interpretation and to make recommendations for improvements in the future, an Interpretive Prospectus was drafted by Jane Harvey, a planner with the Park Service's Harpers Ferry Center. [34] Three years later and after some revisions the prospectus was approved. [35] Recommendations in the prospectus focused more on interpretive media than personal services, and most of these comments addressed the visitor center. The prospectus recommended a greater concentration on exhibits that displayed the material culture of the Mogollon, a recommendation that echoed observations about sparsity and vagueness made 10 years earlier. In addition, for the slide show, a broader vision of the wilderness was suggested to explain environmental processes as well as to summarize terrain. To date, no specific plans have been scheduled to fully implement the changes recommended in the Interpretive Prospectus.

One sizable change at the monument was the replacement in 1980 of the old contact trailer with a new trailer at the mouth of Cliff Dweller Canyon. [36] The contact station's function, however, remained the same: to dispense information about the monument and about the surrounding wilderness. The new trailer is regularly manned by a uniformed interpreter in the summer, and it also contains a few exhibits "of the 'home-made' variety," [37] including replicas as well as a few authentic prehistoric tools, a scale model of the cliff ruins, and displays relating to natural history. Audio tapes that interpret the cliff dwellings are available at the contact station, and so is a Spanish translation of the trail guide. The English version is available at the bridge just past the contact station.

Deleted from the 1978 draft of the Interpretive Prospectus were suggestions to develop interpretation of the TJ Ruin, a revision generated by the decision to hold the site in reserve for the future. A partial consequence of the decision not to excavate at the TJ site and elsewhere has been an informal but substantial scaling back of the monument's theme of interpretation as proposed in 1968. No longer aspiring to interpret nearly two millennium of Mogollon development and the evolutionary interplay of environment and culture, the primary purpose of the monument was formulated in the 1986 Statement for Management as providing visitors "a glimpse of the homes and lives of the people who lived in the area in the 13th and 14th centuries." [38] Later, in the 1988 statement for interpretation, the monument's archeological theme was reduced to "[t]he world of the Prehistoric Cliff Dwellers," [39] a scope that excludes all but one or two of perhaps 40 generations represented on the monument.

One thing that has very much enhanced the interpretation of the cliff dwellings was the publication in 1986 of The Archeology of Gila Cliff Dwellings, [40] which includes the first formal descriptions of items recovered by Vivian in 1963. Unfortunately—for reasons that include the brevity of the architecture's occupation, its anomalous character, its intrusive cultural affiliation, previous looting, and problems with the records of provenience—it seems that Gila Cliff Dwellings "is a site with few implications for regional prehistory." [41]

In addition to the Interpretive Prospectus, two additional documents important to the long-term management of cultural resources have been drafted since responsibility for the monument was transferred to the Gila National Forest: the 1981 and the 1987 resources management plans. [42] There were some antecedents to these plans—including the 1968 archeological research management plan, and a three-page plan developed in 1973 [43] —but these were brief. Reporting on the resource management program in 1975, the superintendent wrote that the program was so limited that "the value of a summary (Form 10-401) would be negligible." [44]

The 1981 and 1987 plans were more extensive. Each described 14 distinct projects for the improved management of cultural resources, and both plans sought to balance the needs of preservation and protection with the interests of research. [45] Constrained by limited budgets, not all of the proposed projects have been funded, of course, and as a result there is considerable overlap between the two plans. For practical reasons, the work that was funded has occasionally subsumed several of the proposals into one project. To date, the TJ Ruin has been mapped and a limited collection of surface samples from that site analyzed. [46] The entire monument has been resurveyed for archeological sites with an accompanying assessment currently in draft form, [47] and this administrative history is a product of the 1987 plan, as well. Notably, these projects contribute to a broader interpretive potential for the monument. They also provide specific information needed to plan and assess strategies to protect cultural resources.