Traditional Use of Piiion-Juniper
Woodland Resources
Maria Teresa ~ a r c i a '
-
Abstract
For generations New Mexicans of American Indian and
Hispanic descent have relied upon pinon-juniper woodland resources to
satisfy such subsistence needs as food, fuel and building materials.
Although this system of resource utilization is based in economics, it also
is linked to deeply rooted traditional value systems. These values should
be considered in evaluating present conditions and ,developing proposals
for ecosystem management.
INTRODUCTION
Development of a pifbn-juniper ecosystem initiative is a
direct outgrowth of current Forest Service philosophy regarding
its official motto to "care for the land and serve people." This
philosophy, as outlined in a June 4,1992, letter by Forest Service
Chief F. Dale Robertson commits the agency to ecology based
management for multiple use of land under its jurisdiction
Ecology is the study of reciprocal relations between
organisms and their environments (Hoebel 1972). It is my
contention that any valid ecological study must consider the
human organism and be concerned with the ways in which
humans relate to and affect their surroundings.
The following quotation illustrates the gravity of the situation:
!In the current crisis of potential overpopulation with its
severe environmental strains, exacerbated by stepped-up
industrial exploitation and negative feedback of waste
into the environment, human ecology has suddenly
become a popular issue, taking on the emotional
overtones of a holy war floebel 1972)."
The fact that this observation was made by an anthropologist
twenty y e m ago and is vahd today suggests that the holy war
is still o n
For genemtions, New Mexicans of American Indian and
Hispanic descent have relied upon piiion-juniper woodland
resources to satisQ such basic subsistence needs as food, he1
and building materials. Although this system of resource
utilization is based in economics, it also is linked to deeply
rooted traditional value systems. These values should be
considered in evaluating present conditions and developing
'
Assistant Forest Archeologist, USDA Forest S e ~ c e ,Carson
National Forest, Taos, NM.
proposals for ecosystem management. The purpose of this
presentation is to i d e m specific past and continuing use of
the piibn-juniper woodlands by tmditional peoples; to suggest
that although we all live in the same world, we view it
Weerently; and to actvocate the need for recognizing and valuing
traditional lifeways in making management decisions.
At the risk of generalizing and within the constraints of this
symposium format, I will attempt to contrast American Indian
and Hispanic world views, including human ecology, with those
of dominant or mainstream U.S. society. These remarks should
be taken as applicable to Hispanics of New Mexico, Pueblo
groups in general, the Navajo and the Jicarilla Apache living in
the area of the Colorado Plateau and the New Mexico Rocky
Mountain and Rio Grande region.
WORLD VIEW AND HUMAN ECOLOGY
Anthropologists define world view as the cognitive view of
life and the total errvironment which an individual or members
of a particular society or group hold (Hoebel 1972). World view
is so ingrained in each of us that, on a dady basis, we make
observations and judgments we simply assume are immediately
intelligible to othes.
As an example, I recently attended a meeting where the
phrase "return the area to pre-settlement conditions" was used.
As an archeologist and as a Hispanic, my immediate reaction
to this wording was, "Whose settlement? Humans, in general,
American Indians, the Spanish, or more recent Euroamericans?"
In this case, the reference point in time was the turn of the
centwy. From my personal pespective, I would categorize this
as the recent past when you consider the archeological record
documents human use of the area dating back thousands of
years. While the speaker and I may have had the same physical
landscape in mind, our world views created vastly different
perceptions of it.
Cultures, like ecosystems, are dynamic entities. Contemporary
American Indians and Hispanics are neither frozen in time nor
relics of an idealized past. They are modern peoples who, in
spite of formidable odds, reflect the principle of cultural
continuity. That is, they retain certain common traits by whlch
they can be identified as distinct cultural groups when
considered within the context of modem U.S. culture. These
common traits include observable behavioral patterns and norms
related to such aspects of life as language, religion, kinship,
social organization, and subsistence patterns. Characterization of
these traits as "traditional" indicates they derive from each
group's historic past.
Prior to the arrival of the Spanish in New Mexico, American
Indians had developed complex economic systems in response
to their physical and cultural needs. The archeological and
ethnographic records document substantial information about
their settlements, technology and material culture, tool
manufacture and use, religion, techniques of food extraction and
production, diet, and social organization Given population
estimates and distributions at the time of contact, it is safe to
characteriz their ecological adaptation as successful rather than
marginal.
The piiion-juniper woodland is an example of what can be
called a micro-environment within the Southwestern
environmental setting. For prehistoric and historic peoples, it
was viewed as a storehouse of resources dominated by piiion
and juniper species but also included various species of shrubs,
herbs, grasses, roots, tubers, berries arbd large and small game.
These resources were used to meet personal and group needs
ranging from food, he1 and building materials to tools, clothing,
and medicine. American Indian world view fostered then, as it
does now, a holistic sense of place and reliance upon one's
surroundings. More important, it ascribed little difference
between people and the natural world (Bane 1990).
This perception is embodied in Robert Lake's (1990) writing
on the Law of Reciprocity: "By following the Law of
Reciprocity, we will receive the energy, spirit, and power of the
thing we harvest and use; not just its physical part. Life is a
reciprocal relationship.
We have a mutual dependence upon each other for survival,
and we should always remember that in our dealings with our
relations in Nature, the Spirits, the Great Creator, and each
other...that it is an exchange of privileges."
In addition to this precept, American Indian views on
landholding also are relevant to this discussion. Throughout the
Southwest, concepts of land tenure varied to some extent from
group to group, but in general, all Pueblos, the Navajo and the
Jicarilla Apache recognized various forms of what we would
term private ownership of agricultural lands (Jorgensen 1983).
Ownership might be vested in individuals, clans or extended
families, but there was a mechanism for establishing and
delimiting personal space. Access to hunting and gathering areas,
such as the pifion-juniper woodland, on the other hand, was
communal or influenced by what has been called a
communitarian ethic (Jorgensen 1983). This ethic prescribed that
individuals organized into a unit, such as a pueblo or tnbe,
shared or used available resources w i t h certain territorial
limits.
The ramifications
of the Spaniards' arrival in the New World
were debated at length during 1992 and are not an issue here.
Rather, the focus is on the cultural legacy that has survived since
contact with native peoples and the reality that combination of
American Indian and Spanish traits has contributed the primary
components to what we i d e n e as contemporary Southwestern
culture. Further, it is significant that despite the fact the Spanish
came from what has been described as a world of
"...patron-client social relations, material wealth, iron tools, food
markets, domesticated animals, Aristotelian logic and divine
right (Ford 1987)," they shared with American Indians a deep
respect for land and water and held similar notions regarding
land tenure.
Alongside the original inhabitants of this region, the Spanish
devised a subsistence pattern or ecological adaptation suitable
to their newly adopted home. What developed as the tmditional
Hispanic land ownership system in New Mexico has been
characterized as:
"...in many respects the reverse of the Anglo-American
system. It included both individual and community land
grants, the latter being the most common form in
northern New Mexico. ... The community land tenure
system was not a fee simple system; rather it centered
on private agricultural landholding, encumbered by
various collective constraints, and communal pasturage
and woodlands with individual rights of usuj?uct (Van
Ness and Van Ness l98O)."
Usufruct is a legal term and can be defined as the individual's
right to utilize and enjoy the benefits and advantages of
something belonging to another or all, such as the woodlands,
as long as the use is judicious. This practice is in direct contrast
to the medieval English system whereby the King owned and
controlled all resources in the forest. Access to these resources
was restricted by the sovreign, and landless peasants were not
allowed to cut trees or harvest game. Violation of these
restrictions was dealt with by severe penalties.
Thus, because their world view was more similar to that of
American Indians, Spanish settlers of New Mexico developed a
similar economy based on what they could produce on private
agricultural lands coupled with what they could obtain from the
surrounding environment.
By the turn of the century or "pre-settlement times," both
American Indians and Hispanics had become part of a larger,
more diverse population in New Mexico. In response and as
part of the natural selection process, both groups attempted to
adjust to changed conditions and circumstances. Among the
most dramatic changes were a permitting process for obtaining
resources and grazing, and large scale, commercial harvesting
of forest commodities from what they both considered ancestral
lands. Wage labor in the mining, timber and grazing industries
also became a option People who for generations had been
essentially self-sufficient, and had used barter as a means of
obtaining products and services were drawn into a market
economy. Social and technological change continued to be
introduced into their environment, yet many American Indians
and Hispanics choose to live in culturally prescribed ways:
retaining what land is still theirs; fanning family plots; gathering
wood for heating and cooking; grazing family herds;hunting and
gathering in the woodlands each year to supplement their diet,
prepare traditional foods and obtain materials for producing
secular and ritual objects.
This is a subsistence pattern that persists today. It is a circular,
experiential pattern of living rather than one learned by taking
part in Earth Day activities or earning a degree in Environmental
Education It is a deeply rooted pattern held in high esteem by
its practitioners. Finally, it is a pattern that effectively integmtes
traditional peoples' articulation between their social and natural
environments.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, the relationship between traditional peoples
cultures and their environment must be considered as we pursue
strategies for sustainable stewardship of the pifion-juniper
woodlands. The wants and needs of these people must be
examined in terms of personal and special uses, economic
opportunities, recreational activities, and spiritual values. These
wants and needs, in turn, must be balanced with concern for the
physical and biological dimensions of the ecosystem. Failure to
do so would be nothing less than environmental ethnocentrism
whereby traditional ecology is judged according to the practices
and standards of non-traditional people or the hard sciences. It
is presumptuous to assume that meeting these wants and needs
correlates with irresponsible behavior or conspicuous
consumption of resources. For example, the cutting and burning
of green piiion was not an historic practice. It is a more recent
phenomenon that has increased with use of the chainsaw and in
proportion to population growth in the Santa Fe and
Albuquerque areas. It is a small scale, quick cash pursuit in
reaction to modem preference. And, for th~sreason, it is a
practice easily modified partxularly if replaced by an alternate
economic opportunity. People are part of the ecosystem.
Exploring and understanding the human dimension in ecosystem
management is a challenge we must accept if we are to be
sincere in our intent to formulate and make sound management
decisions.
LITERATURE CITED
Bane, G. Ray 1990 Through Native Eyes. pp. 3-6. In: J. Holmaas
(ed.) Interpretation: Fall 1990 Interpreting Native American
Cultures. National Park Service, Washington Office, Division
of Interpretation, Washington, DC. 38 pp.
Ford, Richard I. 1987. The New Pueblo Economy. pp. 73-91.
In: When Cultures Meet: Remembering San Gabriel del
Yunge Oweenge. Papers from the October 20, 1984
Conference Held at San Juan Pueblo, New Mexico. Sunstone
Press, Santa Fe, NM. 96 pp.
Hoebel, E. Adamson 1972. Anthropology: The Study of Man
McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, NY. 756 pp.
Jorgensen, Joseph G. 1983. Comparative Traditional Economies
of Ecological Adaptations. pp. 684-710. In: A. Ortiz (ed.)
Handbook of North American Indians Vol. 10 Southwest.
Srnithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. 868 pp.
Lake, Robert 1990 Law of Reciprocity. pp. 18-19. In: J. Holrnaas
(ed.) Interpretation: Fall 1990 Interpreting Native American
Cultures. National Park Sewice, Washington Office, Division
of Interpretation, Washington, DC. 38 pp.
Van Ness, John R.; Van Ness, Christine M. 1980. Introduction
pp. 1-11. In: J. R. and C. M. Van Ness (eds.) Spanish and
Mexican Land Grants in New Mexico and Colorado.
Sunflower University Press, Manhattan, KS. 119 pp.