Of all the ways white society has exploited Native Americans (Indians, Aleuts, and Inuits), few have been uglier or more destructive than attempting to make them into something whites want them to be.
Ted Williams is better at describing this phenomenon than seeing it in himself.
The truth about Indians, like the truth about other races, is that one can't generalize about them.
Whereupon, Ted Williams proceeds to do just that.
Golden Eagles for the Gods
If a species is essential to religious practices of Native Americans, why would they recklessly kill it? And why would the Feds encourage them?
By Ted Williams
In the self-flagellation of the early Earth Days, America seized upon a passage reprinted in a now-defunct Native American tabloid and reported to have been uttered by Chief Seattle, patriarch of the Duwamish and Suquamish Indians of Puget Sound, to the territorial governor in 1855: "The earth does not belong to man. Man belongs to the earth. . . . Whatever befalls the earth, befalls the sons of the earth. Man did not weave the web of life; he is merely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself." Stirring words. But they did not issue from Chief Seattle; they were written for a TV movie by a Texas screenwriter named Ted Perry in the winter of 1970-71. Perry had urged the producers to explain in the credits that the passage was only what the chief might have (or, perhaps, should have) been thinking. The producers didn't get around to it, so for nearly three decades Chief Seattle's grand but make-believe sermon has been a mantra for the environmental community and the media in their condemnations of our nation's profligacy.
If Ted Williams had cared to research the Seattle speech, he would have found that it was not make-believe. Perry's version was based on an actual speech by a real-life Chief Sealth to US treaty negotiators.
Of all the ways white society has exploited Native Americans
(Indians, Aleuts, and Inuits), few have been uglier or more destructive
than attempting to make them into something whites want them to be. Who
really stands to benefit from the myth that Native Americans, when given
the opportunity, can't make as good exploiters as other Americans? Can
wrongs to people long dead be righted by wrongs to people living and yet
unborn? And can it really be that what is bad for wildlife is good for
Native Americans?
This is the counterchant of the racist
anti-Indians of today, the Upstate Citizens for Equality, the
eco-fascists, and the deceptively camoflaged "property rights
movement".
The truth about Indians, like the truth about other races, is that one can't generalize about them. Some Indians do indeed think like the movie version of Chief Seattle. For example, in 1995, when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service asked Idaho to manage wolves, the state decided it couldn't be bothered. So the Nez Perce Indians, who revere wolves, volunteered, doing such a spectacular job that wolves in Idaho were essentially recovered three years later. And only Trout Unlimited and the Nez Perce seem alarmed about genetic pollution of westslope cutthroat trout caused by the hatchery-produced rainbows that the Fish and Game Department flings around the state like gum wrappers.
Thus Williams sets up the all to familiar "good Indian -- bad Indian" dichotomy as theme for his piece.
In Arizona, on the other hand, a faction of the Hopi tribe,
"faction" is another attempt at framing the above dichotomy; the petition is in the name of the Tribe.
which for centuries has captured and killed young golden eagles for ritualistic sacrifice, is lobbying the National Park Service (with apparent success) to let it collect eagles from the 54-square-mile Wupatki National Monument, just north of Flagstaff.
Unlike national wildlife refuges, which have traditionally been open to state-sanctioned hunting and trapping, national parks and monuments have traditionally been closed. Save for a few in Alaska established by Congress in 1980, these units have always been sanctuaries where killing of wildlife by the public has been expressly forbidden. Of the 3,026,000 square miles in the contiguous 48 states, only 30,750 (about 1 percent) have been designated as parks and monuments; they act as reservoirs, replenishing wildlife elsewhere. Virtually all conservationists, including mainstream sportsmen, support this traditional sanctuary mission.
Williams blurs the distinction between national parks and national monuments to suit his purpose.National monuments, such as Wupatki, are established under the Antiquities Act, while national parks are establishe by special act of Congress. Wupatki was establish to protect its outstanding archeological resources, and is not a biologically unique area.
"Whatever [man] does to the web, he does to himself." That famous and accurate pronouncement by Chief Seattle's ghost writer is especially pertinent today in northern Arizona, where the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service hands out 40 permits a year to the Hopi for the collection of hatchling golden eagles. The Hopi may also take red-tailed hawks in any quantity they desire. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald Eagle Protection Act (amended in 1962 to include goldens) provide for such take by Indians, but only if it is "compatible with the preservation" of eagles. It is not. "If studies were done," declares one Interior Department raptor biologist who asked not to be identified for fear of political reprisals, "the criteria are there to list the golden eagle as at least threatened in northern Arizona. We might as well be putting DDT out there. There are no young birds coming along. We have absolutely no way to justify handing out 40 take permits a year. Some conservation group needs to sue us. It's a no-brain winner; if you can't win that one, you should get another lawyer."
This sets the pattern for Williams' reliance on anonymous (if not actually fictitious sources). Federal employees are protected by law in expressing this sort of opinion.
Another raptor biologist, David Ellis of the U.S. Geological Survey, was willing to go on record as saying: "The biggest problem the eagle has on the Hopi and Navajo reservations [which occupy about 20 percent of the state] is overgrazing. The primary productivity has been destroyed, so there aren't very many jackrabbits or cottontails. The eagles are hurting already, and then they get hit by Hopi. The Navajos kill them, too [without permits, for their feathers]. I view the Hopi reservation as an aquiline black hole."
Ellis is using generalized and unscientific terms to
emotionalize his position. Ellis is hardly a specialist in raptors; his
primary experience is with fisheries.
Ellis also brings a hidden
agenda, infra.
According to Fish and Wildlife Service records, the permitted take of golden eagles by Hopi from 1986 to 1999 was 208.
That averages 15 hatchlings per year over hundreds of square miles, a fraction of natural mortality. Predators routinely produce more offspring than will survive. In many years, the largest nestling will kill its nestmates.
That's a lot of mortality for a predator perched atop
the food chain. But the illegal kill by Indians (not necessarily Hopi) is
many times more than that.
Note the tricky segue here from Hopi at Wupatki to Indians anywhere. Note the tricky segue to illegal killing as a smear tactic.
If there are two hatchlings in the nest, the Hopi invariably take both.
Directly contrary to reported customs.
To do otherwise would be "an affront to the gods," reports The Indian Trader, a monthly newspaper on Indian culture and history.
Give me a break! This is a magazine for artifact collectors, not a responsible source See more about collectors and the illicit market, infra.
(But tribal history suggests that this is a new concern. In the old days, when goldens were more plentiful, the gods apparently had no objection to the traditional practice of leaving one.)
Note Williams' sneering and derisive interpretation
of
a) tribal history
b) Hopi theology
c) traditional
practice.
Not only is this unsourced, but Williams displays his
colossal ignorance of Hopi ways.
The eaglets are collected in early spring, then tethered to the tops of adobe buildings, where they are fed, given children's toys, and told how honored they should feel to be chosen for the ritual. In mid-July, they are ritualistically smothered in cornmeal or strangled by hand so that they may travel to the other world and explain, among other things, how well they were treated by the tribe. But the eagles may be delivering a different message. Occasionally their eyelids are sewn shut, and straps around their feet sometimes wear away the skin and sinew.
The animals are considered part of the Hopi family and would never be subjected to this kind of torture.
After the carcasses are plucked, the longer feathers
are used to make Kachina dolls. Other feathers are scattered under known
aeries in ceremonies said to encourage the parents to return and nest
again; but the practice appears to be increasingly ineffective.
Appears ineffective to whom? The Hopis have been collecting since time immemorial in the same areas. Again Williams uses the smear to denigrate the practice.
Some Indians--in fact, some Hopi--
Note that Ted Williams' "good Hopi" remain nameless,
perhaps angelic in William's own theology.
think the ritual
should be consigned to the past as was the sacrifice of
children,
Here Williams demonstrates he has no shame.
There is no evidence that the Hopi ever sacrificed children in ceremony.
This is pure and simple hatemongering.
from which anthropologists believe it may have derived.
Here again we see the reliance on anonymous
"anthropologists" without any citation. There were a great many stupid and
ignorant opinions offered about Hopi in the last two centuries; Williams
merely passes the tag of ignorance courtesy of
Audubon.
Hopi villages reportedly have suggested
changing the ritual so that the eagles would be set free after only
partial plucking.
Here again we have the anonymous "Hopi
villages", as to which there are 14. And who reported the
"reportedly"?
Or did Ted Williams merely report this "reportedly" to
sensationalize his story?
But the consensus among the Hopi practitioners is that this,
too, would displease the gods.
Who authorized Willaims to
release this "consensus"?
When was the "consensus" reached and who was
present?
Anyone familiar with Hopi would immediately laugh at this
term. There are a large number of clans with ceremonies important to the
tribe; they fit together in an age-old pattern. One clan's opinion would
not bind another clan.
I believe I am on safe ground here in accusing
Williams of complete fabrication of this point.
According to an Interior Department "report of
investigation," a member of the Hopi Eagle Clan--which reveres free,
living eagles--asked this of a Fish and Wildlife Service law-enforcement
agent working undercover: "How would you like to be chained in the sun for
80 days?" The subject then stated that Indians from the Hopi First Mesa
(the plateau on which the Eagle Clan lives) sometimes sneak up to the
Second Mesa and release the eaglets. Finally, he opined that the tribe
gets all the eagle feathers it needs from the Fish and Wildlife Service's
Eagle Repository near Denver, which collects dead eagles and distributes
about 1,500 of them a year, in whole or in part, to Indians who request
them.
Anyone familiar with law enforcement would be highly
skeptical of anything related by an informer or "snitch". Such people are
usually trying to get out of their own difficulties or gain immunity for
ongoing criminal activity, yet Williams treats this third hand alleged
"report" as unqualified Gospel according to Williams
The Navajo Nation allows the Hopi to take eaglets on its land,
Much "Navajo land " was given to the Navajos by the United States after oil was discovered on older Navajo land. This later land was carved out of traditional Hopi land. There are many hard feelings between some members of these tribes.
but tribal members--particularly elders--abhor the practice.
Here again Williams cites the anonymous Indians, who happen to
agree with him, in support of his dubious thesis.
Here he embellishes
the reference by invoking the opinion of anonymous "elders", not
understanding the difference between this term and "old people";
"Haasti'in" in Navajo does not have the connotation "elder" in
English.
In 1999 the Navajo's chief warden, Larry Spencer,
confiscated two dead eaglets from Hopi collectors, but they were later
returned. Spencer says he doesn't see many eagles on the reservation now.
"If you come around and take all the birds you can every year, it's going
to affect them."
The Navajo Reservation is one of the most
overgrazed areas in the United States. In the absence of vegetation on
which rabbits and other eagle prey can feed, it is no surprise that eagle
populations may be down over the Navajo line. Yet Spencer would apparently
blame the decline on "two dead eaglets". A classic non sequitur
The Hopi are the only Americans--native or otherwise--allowed to kill eagles and hawks. They legally collect them most anywhere they find an active nest--including their own land, Navajo land, and public land managed by the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.
More Williams ignorance. Collecting areas are reserved for a particular clan. Williams presents the image of a school of barracudas patrolling for prey instead of ancient ceremony which is geographically linked.
The trouble is, active golden eagle nests are getting harder to find in northern Arizona. So in May 1999 the Hopi tried to take eaglets from one place they legally cannot--Wupatki National Monument.
Williams, like many white men, assumes that the United
States owns Wupatki. The Hopi never fought with the United States, and
never signed a treaty to surrender one inch of their land. By what
arrogance does the United States claim otherwise? By a paper signed
hundreds of miles away by a Mexican government which never owned
Hopi
land either?
<snipped. I finally found a full paragraph with no objection>
The Park Service can no longer find any nesting golden eagles in Wupatki.
Another unsourced reference. If this is true, perhaps the Park Service is looking in the wrong season or the wrong place. The Wupatiki eagle nests are at the Doney Cliffs. Nesting season is spring and summer, for Williams' reference.
So how can the monument's golden eagle resource not be "impaired" if the first ones that hatch are removed and killed?
Mr. Williams' device here assumes the contrary to evidence. It is the old lawyer question: "When did you stop beating your wife?" Williams, being ignorant, assumes a practice to justify his attack.
Despite condemnation by certain Native Americans of Hopi eagle killing, Suzan Shown Harjo, who directs a Washington, D.C.–based Indian-rights group called the Morning Star Institute, blames environmentalists for fomenting intolerance of the ritual. "You find a lot of environmentalists who are only too happy to appropriate the words of Chief Seattle, or take the thinking of other great people of native history about the environment," she says. "Anti-Indian racism is rampant among the environmental community."
Williams lacks the integrity here to source this "interview", which he copied verbatim from an earlier AP story.
But confronting Native Americans on wildlife exploitation is
something the environmental community is terrified of, lest it be
perceived as unsympathetic toward liberal causes such as racial and
religious tolerance and the view of nature as ghost-written for Chief
Seattle.
Here Williams is echoing the ugly racist wing
of the self-proclaimed "deep ecologists" such as David Orton, Paul Watson,
and Williams' previously-named source, David Ellis. These authoritarian
personalities claim that the Indians weren't very good stewards after all,
and that Indian resources need the protection of well-meaning people like
Ted Williams.
In fact, some environmental groups--Friends of the
Earth, for example--have lobbied successfully for previously illegal
Native American take of desperately endangered wildlife, most notably the
bowhead whale.
Note here Williams' clever attack on a group
which differs with the "deep ecology" eco-racism (and which was founded by
David Brower). The bowhead whale is not endangered; its population is
about 8,000. There is a small native quota for Alaska bowhead whales,
approved by the International Whaling Commission, as is the gray whale
hunt of the Makah, another target of Bambi animal rights advocates.
An animal-rights group--the Humane Society of the United States--has vowed to sue Interior if it allows the Hopi to take eaglets from Wupatki, and the National Parks and Conservation Association has made noises of discontent. But the only environmental outfit that has dared to openly confront Interior is PEER. "We haven't seen anything this crude in quite a while," PEER's director, Jeff Ruch, told me. To Barry he wrote: "Your conduct and involvement in this issue have been nothing less than disgraceful. At your September 10, 1999, staff meeting held at the main Interior Building, you expressed the view that National Park Service officials should look the other way while federal law and regulations were being violated by the taking of eaglets and hawks at Wupatki National Monument. . . . Since it is your job to protect both the national park system and its wildlife, your directive on that date violates your oath of office."
Why, all of a sudden, are the Hopi so hell-bent to get official permission to collect? I put the question to Bob Moon, resource and technology chief for the Park Service's Intermountain Region. "I think the Hopi decided that this was a good time and place to press this precedent," he said. "But that's my opinion. The puzzling thing to [Superintendent] Henderson was that he felt there was an excellent dialogue with the Hopi over traditional uses. And he was baffled because in all of the years of discussion and as they were going through general management planning, the Hopi never mentioned eagles. . . . This proposal has stirred a lot of concern about what has been the service's perception of a clear mission. We've searched the existing records for 30 years, and we've not seen anything like this."
It is noteworthy at this point to observe that Williams has never asked the Hopi tribe his question. Nor has he found a single Hopi whom he can name.
The Hopi are also trying to take eagles and hawks from three other park units in Arizona--Grand Canyon, Sunset Crater Volcano, and Walnut Canyon. But if one tribe is allowed to take wildlife from the national park system, how can other tribes, or even Anglos, legally be denied? Radical sport-hunting groups such as the National Rifle Association covet the trophy horns and antlers attached to wild ungulates that roam parks and monuments, often until they die of old age. In 1984 the NRA went so far as to sue the Park Service on grounds that its no-hunting regulation was "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion," but because all Americans--including Indians--had always been prohibited from hunting in national parks and monuments in the contiguous states, the case was dismissed in 1986 by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. A quick survey of 40 park units by PEER last summer turned up 16 requests by Indian tribes to take wildlife. Species sought include eagles, hawks, desert bighorn sheep, Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep, mountain goats, Rocky Mountain elk, Roosevelt elk, deer, bison, moose, gulls (eggs), and bear. "I don't know how you stop it once it starts," says Henderson.
What the Bush administration will do with the special rule for Wupatki is anyone's guess, but even cancellation wouldn't slow current eagle killing. The 1,500 dead eagles distributed to Native Americans by the Eagle Repository are snapped up so fast, there's a three-and-a-half-year waiting period for whole birds. The waiting period for a pair of wings is a year; for 10 loose feathers, six months. By law, the stuff must be used only for "the religious purposes of Indian tribes." But the Indians sell some of it illegally.
Which Indians, Mr. Williams? Or is this
another cosmic racist generality? If you have names of these further
anonymous Indians, the public should know their names and the
names should be reported to law enforcement.
Much of it is used
in costumes worn on the "powwow circuit." Indians frequently argue that
commercial powwows are part of their religion, but they're no more
religious than rodeos. Some dancers make their livings going from powwow
to powwow, competing for cash prizes. The Mohegan Wigwam Powwow at
Uncasville, Connecticut, is typical, offering "over $50,000 in prizes for
Dance Competition." Powwow contestants are judged, in part, by the
feathers they wear. During the "grand entry" dance at the annual
Albuquerque powwow, you can see the remains of at least 20,000 eagles
bouncing around the floor at one time.
Some of these outfits and
feathers are decades old. Implying that 20,000 eagles are killed each year
to feed pow wow demand is irresponsible sensationalism.
It is the powwow circuit that keeps eagles and eagle parts
moving so briskly on the black market. An immature golden eagle tail, with
the 12 coveted white-trimmed feathers, can sell for $400. A single "deck"
feather from the center of the tail can fetch $300. A whole carcass, if
it's immature and in good condition, is worth $1,000.
Williams is either ignorant or unwilling to name white accomplices if he claims that the pow wow market is the principal demand for illegal eagle parts. The highest prices are from German colectors of "authentic Indian artifacts" for display in their homes or for wearing at faux pow wows of "Indian clubs" in Germany. Williams' source, Indian Trader, caters to such collectors.
While there is no evidence that the Hopi use immature golden eagles for anything other than their religious rituals, no one can reasonably expect them simply to place feathers worth this kind of money on Kachina dolls that never get sold or to piously scatter them under robbed aeries. Members of the Hopi tribe have succumbed to similar temptations. In 1998, for example, the Bureau of Indian Affairs busted nine Hopis for selling ceremonial items (some with eagle feathers attached) in violation of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. They served six-month jail sentences.
Again Mr. Williams' racism is apparent, attributing the sins of these offenders to Hopis in general, rather like blaming Euro-Americans in general for Columbine or the Oklahoma City bombing.
In 1995 and 1996, Kachina dolls, bustles, fans, and all manner of other powwow-circuit items containing feathers from golden eagles and 24 other species of protected birds were purchased from Indians of various tribes in Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah by special agents of the Fish and Wildlife Service, working undercover. One type of ceremonial fan requires the carcasses of 25 scissor-tailed flycatchers.
So many birds were being killed that the agency decided to
issue arrest warrants after only two years, thereby ending its sting
operation early. Had the investigation continued for another year or two,
as planned, agents believe they would have taken down several hundred
traffickers. As it was, they successfully prosecuted about 45 individuals
and businesses, many on multiple counts.
So what is the point of
this in a story about the Hopi permit other than to foment righteous
indignation against "bad Indians" and particularly "bad Hopis".
The agents found that a lot of the illegal selling was being done by traveling Native American Church leaders called roadmen. One roadman sold more than 90 eagles. Much of the contraband was finding its way to the Native American Church for ceremonies in which the hallucinogenic, mescaline-based drug peyote (illegal for non-Indians) plays a role as important as eagle parts. The church is much despised by elders who revere live eagles, and its ritual requiring peyote and eagle sacraments is a modern tradition among Native Americans, which may not even date to the 19th century.
Since I am not a member of the Native American Church, I will not comment in detail on these derogations. They appear to further Williams' "bad Indian" dichotomy. I have never seen a Native American Church lodge in Hopi land; that way is popular in Navajo country. It would not be extraordinary for persons claiming religion to be charlatans or profiteers, regardless of faith or race. Selling either eagle parts or peyote is contrary to orthodox Native American Church way. Here again Williams is totally lacking in verifiable references.
According to search warrant affidavits, most of the eagles purchased in the undercover operation had been caught in leghold traps. Special agents learned that eagles had escaped from sprung traps minus their feet, and they obtained eagles with crushed, dangling, or severed legs and feet. In New Mexico one member of the Jemez Pueblo claimed that he and his fellow tribal members had killed 60 to 90 eagles during the winter of 1995-96 and that he had caught six at once by setting traps around a dead cow. He explained that the best way to dispatch a trapped eagle is to sit on it, get it to bite a stick, then ram your thumb down its throat so it can't breathe. They jump around for 10 or 15 minutes, he said.
Here Williams uses another "snitch story" magnified by Williams to suit the Williams gospel. The crime of one sadistic, miserable individual is attributed to the entire Jemez pueblo by Williams.
A raptor biologist who used to work for the Park Service and who also requested anonymity told me this: "No one wants to confront the fact that so many eagles are getting killed. We have no data, but my sense is that more birds are being taken than are being hatched. I had one Indian tell me: ‘I'm like most Navajos. If I see an eagle, and I've got a gun, I'm taking a shot at it.' I've been with them when they've said: ‘I wish we had a gun.' Another time I was out with Hopis and an eagle jumped off a carcass out in the sand hills, and they were all bemoaning the fact that they didn't have a rifle. If Indians want to have eagles in their world, they need to consider changing their physical relationship with the bird; it's that simple."
I would venture that this source is either David Ellis or a "deep ecology" colleague of Ellis' "deep ecology" propaganda. The poor eagles need scientific and sincere white people to protect them from the "bad Indians". What kind of weight should Audubon give to an anonymous raptor biologist with no data? Clue: the correct answer is zero.
When I asked Suzan Shown Harjo if all Native Americans
should be able to take wildlife from all park units, she responded with an
emphatic "Yes." Then she said: "If you're exercising your religion, it
doesn't matter what other people think about it." But it does matter. In
America freedom of religious belief is absolute. Not so freedom of
religious practice. Religious practice has always been questioned when it
conflicts with the public good.
The undisputed power to
question religious practice does not automatically extend to the power to
forbid a religious practice.
"The principle that government may not enact laws that suppress religious belief or practice is so well understood that few violations are recorded in our opinions. "
CHURCH OF LUKUMI BABALU AYE v. CITY OF HIALEAH, 508 U.S. 520 (1993)
There is, for example, an obscure sect (not Native
American) whose members believe that evil spirits are best banished by the
screaming of dogs. Practitioners of this religion therefore hang dogs from
trees and beat them to death with sticks--but not in the United States
because we don't tolerate that kind of thing. Our courts acknowledge the
rights of dogs. What about the rights of eagles? And what about the rights
of Americans--white, black, and red; young, old, and yet unborn--who
cherish or will cherish the sight of living eagles? As the Hopi of the
Eagle Clan might put it: What kind of gods really want eagles dead instead
of soaring in our spacious skies?
Who in the hell appointed Ted Williams spokesman for the Hopi Eagle Clan? He is doing exactly what Ted Perry got unjustly blamed for -- attributing his own fiction to Indians.
A chapter from Ted Williams's 1986 book, Don't Blame the Indians, appeared in the September 1986 issue of Audubon under the title "A Harvest of Eagles."
Williams' book has been attacked by Indians for its lies and racism. Supporters of Indian sovereignty have joined this attack.
T O
A N T I - I N D I A N A C T I V I T Y
By Zoltan
Grossman
What You Can Do
The National Park Service has asked to hear what you think of its proposed rule to let the Hopi Indians take golden eagles from a national park unit for ritualistic slaughter. Don't disappoint it. Comments should be sent to: Kym Hall, National Park Service, 1849 C Street, N.W., Room 7413, Washington, DC 20240. Fax: 202-208-6756.
E-mail: WASO_Regulations@nps.gov.
© 2001 NASI
Sound off! Send a letter to the
editor
about this piece.