In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 [First Page] [156], (1) Lines: 0 t ——— 0.0pt PgV ——— Normal Page PgEnds: T [156], (1) FIVE. A MATTER OF VISIBILITY The United Houma Nation’s Struggle for Tribal Acknowledgment Sometime in the first half of the nineteenth century, the historic Houma Tribe that once lived along the lower Mississippi River of Louisiana disappeared from known historical records. Over 150 years later, a group claiming descent from this tribe, the United Houma Nation, petitioned the bia for federal acknowledgment. In December of 1994, after nearly a decade-long wait for a proposed finding, the animated leader of this group, Kirby Verret, received wordfromtheBranchofAcknowledgmentandResearch(bar)inWashington. His organization had failed to convince the bia that it was a tribe within the meaning of the federal acknowledgment regulations. The bar determined the group failed three of its criteria, finding that it did not prove it descended from the historic Houma Tribe, that it was not a community for certain periods of its history, and that it was not a functioning political unit for the modern era. As a people of Indian, European, and African ancestry, the United Houma members were accustomed to skepticism and challenges to their Indian identity from local people. But to hear from the experts of the federal government that tribal members were not who they said they were was a difficult blow for Verret and the others. Based on his experience with the bia process, a disgusted Verret says that the “bar” really stands for the “Branch Against Recognition” as far as southern Indian groups are concerned. Even with the bia’s negative ruling, the United Houma Nation still pushed forward into the new century. “The federal government cannot take away our spirit,” Verret says. “Whether recognized or not, we know who we are and that won’t change.”1 As its rebuttals and appeals lurched forward into 2003, the long-waiting group still hoped for a positive final determination on its tribal status. While devastating to Verret and the others, the encounter of the United Houma Nation (uhn) with the bia acknowledgment process was, in many ways, representative of the troubles many southern and eastern Indian groups 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 [157], (2) Lines: 16 to ——— 0.0pt PgV ——— Normal Page PgEnds: TEX [157], (2) faceinusinghistoricaldocumentationtoprovetheirIndiantribalism.Inparticular the Houmas’ experience represents the failure of one petitioner to succeed through the Federal Acknowledgment Process (fap) because, like many other eastern groups, it did not neatly fit the model of tribalism contained in the federal regulations. In their ongoing quest for recognition, Verret’s people apparently presented an ambiguous scenario to federal officials, challenging deeply held western conceptions of Indian tribes in terms of race, culture, community, and political organization. Although the United Houma Nation is recognized as Indian by nearby tribes and respected scholars and possesses documented Indian ancestry, it still failed to convince the bia that it was a tribe within the meaning of the acknowledgment regulations. In light of their history, the United Houmas’ experience reveals the subjective nature of the fap and the difficulties of relying upon Euro-American records when dealing with preliterate, Native societies. As detailed here, the United Houmas are an Indian people or “nation” sharing common descent, Indian identity, history, and territory. 2 Yet at the present they have failed to convince the federal bureaucracy that they are a “tribe” of Indians. As the following pages reveal, the complex issues of history and oral tradition in their case expose the puzzle that is so often the work of the bar in deconstructing, decoding, reconstructing, and then resurrecting the obscure and often invisible histories of unacknowledged peoples. When issues of specific tribal identity and racial motivebledintotheprocesswiththeLouisianagroup,the barteamrepeatedly asked: Was the United Houma Nation essentially an acculturated, multiracial enclave that chose to claim an Indian identity over the alternatives? Because the bar researchers determined that this was in fact the case, the bia is reluctant to acknowledge the United Houmas as a tribe of Indians. Beyond issues of proof, the United Houmas’ struggle also reveals the...

Share