PIPE SPRING Cultures at a Crossroads: An Administrative History

Planning and Development with the Kaibab Paiute Tribe and Associated Water Issues (continued)

Land Exchange Proposal Revived

Yet another complicated matter was thrown into the mix. Discussions about a possible land exchange between the Tribe, BLM, and NPS were revived during late summer of 1969. Whereas in the monument's early years the Park Service had objected to a boundary expansion, now Geerdes had no trouble in finding allies. There had been two primary objections in the past: first, that the archeological site had nothing to do with the Pipe Spring story and the reasons for the monument's establishment, and second, such an expansion would almost certainly and immediately be opposed by the Tribe. Now that the Tribe appeared willing to consider a land exchange, a boundary expansion appeared to be possible. As for the archeological ruins not relating to Pipe Spring, attitudes about environmental education had advanced considerably since private citizens and their elected officials had first proposed the expansion. Now Regional Interpretive Archeologist Albert H. Schroeder and William E. Brown, special assistant to the regional director for Environmental Awareness, favored the land exchange. In late August 1969, Schroeder wrote regarding the proposed land exchange,

This archeological site fits into the historical theme of the area, for it can be tied into environmental aspects of man's occupation of this region. A comparison of the Pueblo and Mormon settlement and subsistence patterns can easily be linked to the water situation in the general region....

This matter was discussed with Bill Brown of this office who feels that the environmental aspects of the two culture patterns could play an important part in interpreting man's use of the local environment. We both feel that a decision should be made in the near future, before we lose the chance of acquisition... [2018]

One other factor was driving Park Service officials to expand the monument's boundary. Some believed that increased vandalism would accompany reservation developments due to increased numbers of people who would be camped or lodged outside the monument. It was hoped that the land exchange would add land to the north and to the south, thus providing an ameliorating protective buffer.

General Superintendent Gilbert wasn't satisfied that Schroeder's memorandum only commented on the interpretive value of the archeological site. He wrote Kowski asking that Schroeder and Brown visit the site to consider the value of adding the Powell survey monument as well as a proposed scenic easement between the monument and State Highway 389. Gilbert made one other point, that "boundary adjustment consideration should be made only with an awareness of future water supply and demand in the area and with an eye to obtaining potential water sources." [2019]

During November 1968, Geerdes was accompanied by Southern Utah Group Environmental Specialist Gil Lusk to examine the area of contemplated additions to Pipe Spring (the "Anasazi" ruins, Powell monument, and Heart Canyon area). The total acreage to be acquired by the monument under the proposed exchange was about 760 acres. [2020] Preliminary discussions were held with Tribal Chairman Bill Tom on a possible three-way land exchange between the BLM, BIA, and Park Service. Geerdes reported that Tom and local BIA representative Ross William showed great interest in the possible exchange. [2021] This potential exchange strengthened the conviction of Park Service officials that clear, legal ownership of Pipe Spring needed to be established in order to negotiate with the Tribe on all issues from what Geerdes referred to as a "position of strength." [2022] Unexpectedly, legal assistance to Geerdes became available from within the Park Service. Legal Assistant William L. McKeel spent a day at Pipe Spring reviewing water rights, legal ownership matters, and the proposed land exchange. McKeel, an attorney attached to the Washington office but duty-stationed at Rocky Mountain National Park, was assigned to water rights, land exchange, and acquisition matters for the Park Service. McKeel offered his assistance to Pipe Spring National Monument in achieving a coordinated approach to all three issues.

During 1969 BIA and tribal plans for development took shape in ways that alarmed Park Service officials. Now, instead of being grouped together in one concentrated area (as shown earlier on the 1968 sketch map, figure 118), proposed commercial developments lined both sides of the road to Moccasin, just north of its juncture with State Highway 389. Such developments, if carried out, would have created an extreme visual impact looking both northward toward the monument and southward from the monument. If the Park Service could acquire the archeological site below the monument, at least vistas there could be preserved. On December 12, 1969, Gilbert wrote Kowski about the proposed land exchange. Acquisition of the lands containing the Powell monument, the Heart Canyon petroglyphs, and the Pueblo ruins "would make for a total historical environmental area and would make possible the complete historical story of Pipe Spring," he wrote. The question was, how to bring about the exchange? Gilbert stated,

The Paiute Indians are aware of these features. They are also, at the time of this writing, willing to exchange the lands on which these features are located for nearby Bureau of Land Management lands, providing the mechanics for such an exchange can be worked out.

The possibility of an exchange has informally been discussed with BLM officials. Extreme cooperation seems apparent; however, the mechanics for making such an exchange are presenting difficulties. Seemingly, Indian lands can be exchanged only through Congressional action. [2023]

BLM officials informed Gilbert that the Paiute had to initiate action to set the land exchange process in motion. He sought Kowski's comments on the matter. His letter was forwarded by Acting Associate Regional Director Monte E. Fitch to Director George B. Hartzog, Jr. Fitch sought advice on how to proceed, given the fact that authorization for the land exchange had to be requested by the Tribe. Fitch informed Hartzog that Arizona Representative Sam Steiger was sympathetic to Indian affairs and would probably be receptive to introducing the needed legislation if properly approached. Timing was of the essence, however. While Tribal Chairman Bill Tom was "easy to deal with and sympathetic with this exchange," the person next in line for his position had "a relatively hostile attitude towards federal agencies in general," Fitch had been told, referring to Tribal Vice-chairman Ralph Castro. [2024]

On December 19, 1969, Al Purchase and Ralph Castro visited the monument to review pending issues involved in a land exchange. [2025] They informed Geerdes that on the evening of December 18 the Tribal Council had unanimously agreed "in principal" to the proposed land exchange. [2026] The two men wanted to walk over to visit the features included within the proposed exchange, and did so in the company of Ray Geerdes and Mel Heaton. A seep spring used by Theodore Drye was included in the land under consideration. The men discussed the possibility of piping the seep spring water off the land but then agreed a better solution would be to provide Drye with water from the new Park Service well to be constructed. Much discussion transpired about the Park Service's wish to have all the land between the monument and the highway, as the strip just north of the highway was viewed as "prime" for tourism development. (Purchase seemed more opposed to losing this land than Castro.) The possibility of a joint museum was also discussed. There was no enthusiasm on either side for having two separate museums, one Park Service and one Indian, as Purchase had previously discussed with Kowski. With acquisition of the archeological site, the museum's primary focus (as the men discussed it that day) was to interpret prehistoric, historic, and present Indian cultures. The fort and its historic buildings were to be their own museum for interpreting the "pioneer" phase of Pipe Spring's history. Geerdes made it clear to Purchase and Castro that their discussions that day were "informal understandings," not binding agreements. In reporting the meeting to Gilbert the following day, Geerdes wrote that the Park Service's fear of Ralph Castro opposing the proposed land exchange was "no longer a factor. He became completely sold on the idea and especially a joint museum for display of Indian Culture." [2027] Castro also approved of the monument's native grass restoration project and suggested it be expanded to include the area between the monument and the highway.

By the end of 1969, Geerdes was excited over the possibility of the land exchange with the Tribe that would give the monument (in his words) lebensraum. [2028] Development plans were going forward for the Tribe and Park Service to locate and construct a well and to share a water system, and talks about a joint-museum had been encouraging. In a briefing statement to Kowski, Geerdes wrote that what was happening at Pipe Spring provided "a unique opportunity to make a pilot project of the Secretary's Point 11 Indian assistance policy. There is nothing like an idea in its time." [2029] How the Park Service responded to the Tribe's development plans, he asserted, would make the difference between "triumph or tragedy" for Pipe Spring's future.

On the same day, getting all his political "ducks" in a row, Geerdes wrote to Tribal Chairman Bill Tom describing the lands the Park Service wanted to acquire and extolling the ways the Tribe would benefit from the exchange. The Tribe was to receive "first class grazing land" next to the reservation from the BLM in return for the "depleted" grazing areas turned over to the Park Service. (It is unknown what the BLM was to receive from the Park Service in return.) An expansion of the monument to include and interpret Indian prehistory at the Pueblo ruins and Heart Canyon petroglyphs "would draw in many more visitors and be an economic asset" to the Tribe's plans for developing a tourist complex, Geerdes assured Tom. He concluded his letter by enthusing,

In short, Bill, I think that this exchange would be a great thing for your people. One of Secretary Hickel's major programs for the Park Service is to cooperate with the Indians in situations such as ours for the betterment of the Indian people and the promotion (with them) of their own authentic Indian culture. Undoubtedly our future at Pipe Springs is very closely and intimately bound with yours and it looks as though we will succeed or fail together in the future. [2030]

In late 1969 the Park Service created an Indian Assistance Division in Santa Fe to help coordinate efforts between Indian tribes and Park Service units. Civil Engineer Bill Fields was appointed chief of the new division. Already familiar with the complex gamut of issues at Pipe Spring National Monument and the Kaibab Indian Reservation, Fields continued to be actively involved in developments there into the 1970s.

Still, no one knew if or how the proposed land exchange could be carried out. On December 24, 1969, Assistant Director Edward A. Hummel responded to the regional office's earlier memorandum to Hartzog seeking advice on the proposed land exchange. Hummel suggested that Kowski work with Field Solicitor Manges to determine if the exchange could be made under existing legislation. Hummel said he would ask the Western Service Center's (WSC) Office of Land Acquisition and Water Resources in Denver, Colorado, to render any assistance Kowski required in the matter. [2031] (The WSC took over the San Francisco Service Center's role in late 1969.) The WSC subsequently checked into the matter and its chief, John E. Ritchie, informed Kowski that a land exchange was not possible since the act establishing the reservation precluded transferal of title of Indian lands. In order for a land exchange to be authorized, an amendment to the act establishing the reservation would be required, Ritchie stated. He suggested that the Park Service work out a cooperative agreement with the Tribe similar to an agreement made at Canyon de Chelly National Monument. [2032]