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

[ 1 5 1 ] The world is constantly changing. Change affects individuals, communities , and cultures. Sometimes it is almost imperceptibly slow, while other times it comes fast and in a dramatic fashion. In the first half of the twentieth century, after an initial flurry of activity, the sleepy, remote little town of Black Rock moved along at its own pace, and the people who worked for the Indian Service plodded along directing the Zuni’s affairs; they came and went while the Zunis did their best to cope with it all. However, as the second half of the century began to wind down there was significant change in federal Indian policy that greatly impacted how this place—Black Rock—would move into the new millennium. U .S. IND IAN POLICY COMES UNDER FIRE By 1934, the dual policies of allotment and assimilation had been experiencing a slow, but seemingly inevitable, death. Despite attempts to liberalize various provisions of the Dawes Act in the first decades of the 1900s, the policy of allotment was fundamentally contradictory; namely, it forced Indian people to accept the responsibilities of land ownership and American citizenship, but deprived them of the political system necessary to carry out these responsibilities. This led to the loss of tribal lands to non-Indian ownership, which, together with the lack of financial resources, gave rise to an increase in Indian poverty. The result was a decline in tribal self-esteem and cultural heritage caused in part by the absolute and heavy-handed authority wielded by many of the Indian Service agents and superintendents.1 The Pueblo of Zuni resisted the continuous government efforts to allot lands. As early as 1914, Zuni governor Henry Gaspar wrote to the secretary of the interior: “I do not think at this time that it would be altogether best to be free from the Indian Bureau because many of these people [Zunis] are ignorant of the laws and customs of the Whites.”2 Taking Back Black Rock: The Indian New Deal and Self-Determination CHAPTER 7 [ 152 ] TAKING BACK BLACK ROCK: INDIAN NEW DEAL, SELF-DETERMI N ATI O N Although every Zuni Agency superintendent, from William J. Oliver in 1906 to R. J. Bauman in the 1910s and ’20s, and finally George Trotter in the late 1920s, vigorously pursued allotment of Zuni lands, Commissioner of Indian Affairs Cato Sells believed that allotment for tribes living in the Southwest was a futile effort given the region’s aridity and their lack of preparedness for such a culture change.3 Nonetheless, as late as 1927, Superintendent Trotter wrote the commissioner of Indian Affairs complaining that little work had been done in the farm fields because of ceremonial activities. He suggested that allotment efforts should be stepped up. Trotter wrote, “While just at the present time it may not be too popular among certain organizations, I believe the very best thing that could be done for these Indians would be to allot them all the irrigable land on the reservation.”4 However, the “ceremonial activities ” alluded to by Trotter as reason to pursue allotment were part of the very reason why governmental policies to force Zunis to abandon their “pagan rites and rituals” were unsuccessful. Their intractable and indefatigable will to survive as a culture, together with their inherent ties to the Middle Place and the land surrounding it, gave Zunis the strength to survive much of the government’s assimilation efforts. Change and adapt to some of the White Man’s ways—yes. Become a part of them—no. Of course, another major reason that allotment did not take place at Zuni was simply the fact that the Zuni Dam and irrigation project was an abject failure. Despite repeated attempts to fight the silt problem and increase the dam’s reservoir capacity, the government engineers finally had to admit that the project’s irrigation capabilities would never reach the lofty goals first envisioned at the turn of the century. As such, Zuni farmers continued to irrigate and farm the Zuni River valley, but there was never enough irrigable land to divide up among the population and encourage the creation of individual farmsteads. On the national scene, Indian reform groups, spearheaded by the American Indian Defense Association, had since the early 1920s been pushing hard for Indian civil rights, the restoration of reservation lands, the preservation of Indian culture and society, and an increase in federal financial assistance for economic development, education, and public health. Their efforts, and...

Share