**CULTURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION PROJECT:**

**SAVING THE PAST FOR OUR FUTURE**

*A Partnership Between the*

*Shoshone-Paiute Tribes*

*and*

*Other Governmental Agencies*

> March 2008

**Cultural Resource Protection Project:**

**Saving the Past for Our Future**

**EXECUTIVE SUMMARY**

BACKGROUND:

Today, with the explosive growth in the population of southwest Idaho
and the increasing recreational use of the public lands, places and
things vital to the cultural and spiritual life of the Shoshone-Paiute
Tribes are in danger of disappearing forever under a crush of visitors.
The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and other governmental agencies hold a common
concern about the loss of these fragile cultural resources and are
committed, through the Owyhee Initiative, this Cultural Resource
protection Plan, ongoing consultation, and other actions, to protect
them.

PURPOSE:

The partnership is designed to accomplish three things:

1\. To develop strategies to protect and preserve both the tangible
cultural resources and the intangible cultural traditions and values
tied to the land;

2\. To develop sources of funding to implement these strategies;

3\. To allow the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, through
government-to-government consultation and the implementation of this
Cultural Resource Protection Plan, to share in the management of its
cultural resources and traditional cultural properties on public lands.

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The Plan recognizes that the public has a right to access and use the
public lands, and asserts that most people would become careful and
enthusiastic stewards of fragile cultural resources when educated about
their value. With that in mind, issues surrounding four general areas of
concern are discussed:

1\. Protecting Cultural Resources: Tangible and Intangible

2\. Allowing Multiple Use

3\. Increasing the Public's Understanding and Appreciation of Resources
and Traditions

4\. Increasing Public Stewardship

STRATEGIES

The Plan discusses a multi-pronged strategy with six key components:

1\. Resource Inventory and Information Administration

2\. Aerial Surveillance.

3\. Resource Monitoring and On-site Public Contact

4\. Site Preparation and Protection

5\. Public Education and Building Appreciation

6\. Tribal Outreach

BUDGET

The Plan proposes a five-year budget. Early emphasis would be on Public
Education and Building monitoring/enforcement capabilities.

***CULTURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION PROJECT:***

***SAVING THE PAST FOR OUR FUTURE***

*A Partnership between the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes*

*And other governmental agencies*

***STATEMENT OF PURPOSE***

Scattered across millions of acres of high desert in the southwest
corner of Idaho are the remnants of campsites, villages, hunting blinds,
rock inscriptions, trails, monuments, battlegrounds and places of
worship and ceremony that tell the story of thousands of years of human
life in a remote region. Today these places and things are still a vital
part of the culture and traditions of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, but
they are in danger of disappearing forever under the assaults of modern
civilization. The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and other governmental agencies
are concerned about the loss of these fragile cultural resources and are
committed, in partnership, to protect them. The purpose of this
partnership is threefold:

To develop strategies to protect and preserve both the tangible cultural
resources and the intangible cultural traditions and values tied to the
land; to develop sources of funding to implement these strategies; to
build and strengthen a working relationship between the Tribes and other
interested governmental agencies.

***BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY OF THE ISSUES***

***History of People in Southern Idaho***

The Shoshone and Paiute people of Duck Valley have been in what is now
Idaho for countless generations. The ancestors of the Duck Valley
Shoshone-Paiute inhabited the areas of northern Nevada, southeastern
Oregon and southern Idaho for many generations. For a relatively short
portion of their long history (a little over one hundred years), the
Tribes have been placed on a U.S. Government-established reservation in
an area that represents only a tiny portion of the lands they once
inhabited. For many years after the Shoshone-Paiute were placed on
reservations, the U.S. government pursued a policy of forced
acculturation, forbidding the Tribes to practice their traditional
religious and cultural ceremonies or even educate their own children or
speak their own language. Because of these policies, their traditional
culture and even their sense of identity as a people have been
threatened and nearly extinguished. In recent years, however, there has
been a rejuvenation of traditional cultural practices on the
reservation. In order to practice their religion and sustain their
cultural identity, the Shoshone Paiute, like many tribes, require access
to, and use and protection of places they consider sacred, both on and
off the reservation.

***BLM Management of Public Lands***

Today, much of the land outside the reservation that the Shoshone-Paiute
consider sacred or view in some way as contributing to the maintenance
of their cultural practices are federal lands, managed by the BLM. The
Tribes have ties to a vast area of southern Idaho, Northern Nevada and
eastern Oregon. While Shoshone-Paiute people have relatively free access
to these lands, this access is not exclusive to them. BLM manages most
of these lands under multiple-use, meaning that a variety of commercial
and recreational uses can occur on the lands as long as these activities
are sustainable and have compatible uses. Such commodity uses as
grazing, mining and logging have long occurred on public lands. In some
cases, these activities degraded natural biological conditions, and in
so doing had negative effects on the Shoshone-Paiutes\' abilities to
engage in traditional practices like gathering of native plants for food
or ceremonial uses, or hunting or fishing for game species. Until the
1980s, sacred and traditional use areas important to the Tribes, though
diminished in biological productivity, were relatively undisturbed and
rarely visited by anyone other than themselves.

***Current Issues and Future Trends***

***\*Population Growth in Southwest Idaho***

In the past 20 years the population of urban areas in southwest Idaho
has grown more than 65 percent. The Treasure Valley, which includes
Boise, Nampa, Caldwell and Meridian, now approaches a population of
500,000. Other surrounding smaller communities like Kuna, Homedale and
Marsing are growing rapidly as well. Also during this period, the
operations of the U.S. Air Force base in Mountain Home have expanded
several times. The most recent expansion, called ETI (Enhanced Training
in Idaho), has almost been completed With this change, a new more
complex set of problems face the Tribes in their use of federal lands
for sacred and/or traditional practices, and the BLM in its management
of these lands.

For many months before, during and after antelope bow season, virtually
every water hole and reservoir in the southern parts of the Boise and
Twin Falls Districts have one or more hunting blinds constructed on its
banks. The Owyhee and Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers in the remote southern
areas of the desert have seen an approximate 300% increase in
recreational boater use from just 12 years ago. There are new and
increasing conflicts between public land users, particularly between
grazing permittees and recreational users. In some cases, key access
roads that pass through private lands have been shut to the public
because of these conflicts.

**\* *Increasing Motor Vehicle Access ***

Interest in recreational use of BLM-managed lands is growing rapidly.
Not only are there many more people in the region than 20 years ago, but
this larger population is more affluent and mobile than ever before.
This means that they have leisure time and are statistically quite
likely to own a 4-wheel-drive vehicle or an ATV that gives them new ways
to explore the remote and formerly inaccessible desert. The Boise and
Twin Falls Districts of the BLM have begun to see off-road vehicle
impacts in many parts of the District including most of its 21
Wilderness Study Areas where people were rarely seen before.

**\* *Vandalism of Sacred Sites ***

Archaeological sites have been vandalized and looted since the mid
19^th^ century. Virtually every recorded archaeological site in the
district shows some evidence of disturbance from looting or vandalism.
These practices continue today. It is not difficult to determine whether
acts of deliberate vandalism or theft of archaeological sites have
significantly increased recently. Clearly, though, the opportunity for
damage to these places has risen as more people enter formerly
little-visited areas.

***\* Funding Cuts Resulting in Reduced Field Presence***

Ironically, because of funding, manpower cuts, and workloads shifted to
other priorities, BLM's field presence has diminished as the problems in
the field have apparently increased, making sensitive cultural and
biological resources more vulnerable than ever to damage, theft and
vandalism.

***\* "New Age" Uses Conflict with Traditional Sites***

There is a new fascination by "new age" religious groups towards Native
American sacred sites and archaeological sites found on remote
BLM-managed lands. These groups appear to have associated themselves in
varying degree with the religions of Native American and other
traditional societies. In several cases documented by BLM and the
Tribes, this includes appropriating and sometimes altering Native
American sacred sites for their own religious/ceremonial use. Such use,
from the Shoshone-Paiute view, represents a threat to the Tribes'
continued existence that must be resolved.

Few members of these groups have actually ever met or talked to a Native
American person and are unaware that the atrocities visited upon the
Tribes by their Euro-American ancestors are still vividly remembered on
the reservation.

Understandably, because of the tragic history of the last 150 years,
there is no great reservoir of trust for the federal government or
whites in general amongst the Shoshone-Paiute people. The Tribes want
polite relations with their neighbors and are willing to work with
Owyhee County, the State of Idaho, the BLM and other federal agencies to
educate the public on their values in order to protect what is sacred to
them, but have no interest in converting the world to their ways.

***GOALS AND OBJECTIVES***

***Protecting Cultural Resources***

***Tangible and Intangible***

The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, Owyhee County, and the BLM share a common
interest in protecting both the tangible remains of Native American
culture and the intangible associations of place and custom that are
crucial to the maintenance of Shoshone-Paiute culture on the public
lands of the Boise and Twin Falls BLM Districts, though the reasons for
protecting these resources can vary for each party.

BLM is directed by such laws as The Antiquities Act of 1906, The
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Executive Order 11593, and
the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 to protect a variety
of prehistoric and historic resources like archaeological sites, rock
art, historic cabins, etc. found on public lands The intent of much of
this legislation is to protect the ***scientific*** values of these
cultural resources, but federal law (National Historic Preservation Act,
Archaeological Resources Protection Act, American Indian Religious
Freedom Act (AIRFA), Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation
Act (NAGPRA), Executive Order 13007), also clearly identify the need to
protect those less tangible Traditional Cultural Property (TCP) values
that preserve and maintain the identities of Indian tribes.

While sensitive to the needs of the Tribes in protection of these sites,
BLM also views cultural resources as public resources that, in some
cases, can be made accessible to the general public for their education
and enjoyment without endangering them.

The Shoshone-Paiute are concerned with the protection of these resources
from a number of perspectives. Cultural resources can be significant to
the Shoshone-Paiute culture for their subsistence, economic,
religious/spiritual, medicinal, historical and other values. Any
particular resource may be valued at several levels, for example, an
object may have spiritual significance in addition to its utilitarian
function. The loss or improper use by others of these cultural resources
can therefore have a variety of significant impacts on the
Shoshone-Paiute culture. For this reason, archaeologists who come in
contact with cultural resources considered significant by the Tribes can
be viewed with mistrust by the Shoshone-Paiute.

Since the 1980s, the scientific archaeological community and cultural
resource managers in the federal government have become somewhat more
aware of and sensitive to Native American concerns about archaeology.
For example, since 1994 in the Boise and Twin Falls Districts,
prehistoric artifacts discovered in field are seldom collected. They are
measured, recorded, photographed and sketched, but usually carefully
returned to where they were found, or hidden nearby if they seem
vulnerable to theft. This policy is markedly different from just a few
years ago, when most diagnostic artifacts were collected and permanently
stored at a regional curatorial center. The Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) recognizes that archaeological
sites and objects may have religious or other intangible significance to
Tribal members, and it is a right of Native Americans to control the
disposition of certain sites and objects. Despite any differences about
what cultural resources are and what their value is, the aims of the
Owyhee Initiative are similar. All parties wish to stop the alarming
loss of a rare, non-renewable resource before it is gone. Since we live
in an era of shrinking government with less money and less people to do
an increasingly difficult job, our pooling of resources in order to meet
a common goal is essential.

***Allowing Multiple Use***

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) mandate that BLM
manage public lands on behalf of the public:

> "The public lands be managed in a manner that will protect the quality
> of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and
> atmospheric, water resource and archaeological values; that, where
> appropriate, will preserve and protect certain public lands in their
> natural condition; that will provide food and habitat for fish and
> wildlife and domestic animals; and that will provide for outdoor
> recreation and human occupancy and use;" 43 USC 1701 Sec. 102 (a) (8).

This means that most lands are accessible and are allowed to be used for
a variety of activities by anyone that wants to use them providing that
they do not damage their ability to sustain natural, ecological
processes or damage or destroy resources protected by law. Included in
this implied permission to use the land is use of the land for religious
purposes. This means that Native Americans as well as other religious
groups have a right to use public lands for worship if such use does not
damage the land or its resources. At the same time, the Shoshone-Paiute
and other Native American Tribes possess unique rights of sovereignty
issuing out of executive orders that established their reservations.
Tribal members usually have the sovereign right to continue traditional
practices of all kinds on their traditional homelands except for those
rights explicitly extinguished by treaty, executive order or other
specific mandate. In calculating the balance of maintaining free public
access and use of public lands while protecting vulnerable resources,
the federal government must also give weight to the Tribes' sovereign
rights.

When unrestrained public use threatens sensitive or fragile values like
rare plants, or archaeological sites, or Native American access to
traditional cultural sites, BLM has a number of administrative and legal
approaches it can employ to reduce or eliminate impacts to these
resources such as: closure of an area to public access; fencing to
exclude vehicles or livestock; signs; increased surveillance or patrol
by staff or law enforcement rangers; public outreach efforts to inform
and educate users on proper, minimum impact behavior; or development of
facilities in other areas to draw use away from more vulnerable areas.

***Increasing the Public's Understanding and Appreciation of Resources
and Traditions***

The public, for the most part, is fascinated by and sympathetic towards
Native Americans and would support the Tribes' efforts to preserve their
cultural and religious heritage, but often are unaware of how they can
help in that effort. Communication in a variety of media from individual
members of the Tribes to the public explaining how religious and
cultural practices are central to the existence of the Shoshone-Paiute
and how those practices are being threatened by what they do on public
lands would be powerful and could positively affect public behavior on
remote public lands.

***Increasing Public Stewardship***

Many of the areas of public land where cultural resources have been
vandalized, damaged or stolen are so remote and spread out over such a
vast area that monitoring, surveillance or patrol of any given site is
rare. Though increased field presence is a useful tool that needs to be
emphasized, clearly it is not the whole answer to limiting damages to
fragile cultural resources. Nor is wide-scale closure of sensitive lands
a realistic answer. The public is often resentful when land managers
declare even a small area of the public lands as off-limits to the
public for any reason, and may ignore or subvert such closures.

A better strategy than assuming that all public land users are potential
criminals is to instead appeal to their better nature. We need to enlist
the public's support for protection of cultural resources by emphasizing
that these resources belong not only to the Shoshone-Paiute, but to them
and their future descendants as well. The public needs to know that
protection of these rare and irreplaceable resources requires their
vigilant and sensitive efforts so that future generations may enjoy
them. The general public must be on our side in this issue, not against
us, so that those few people who are engaged in looting and deliberate
vandalism are viewed as criminals stealing from the public and are
turned in by the public when observed doing these things.

Using individuals in organized user groups that represent hunters,
motorized and non-motorized trail riders and other sportsmen's groups as
well as new-age religious groups to get the message out about the
problems and possible solutions is a good way to inspire responsible
behavior in their peers in a non-threatening way.

***WHAT CAN BE DONE?***

***A STRATEGY FOR ADDRESSING THE ISSUES***

***The Cultural Resources Protection Project***

The Cultural Resources Protection Project is proposed as a five-year
**cooperative project** between the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and other
interested governmental agencies such as Owyhee County, the BLM, US Air
Force, US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Idaho National Guard and
others; administered under an agreement based on the government to
government relationship. The agreement would allow for allocation of
funding to either partner and facilitate exchange of funding in order to
implement the elements of the strategy outlined below. Many of the
elements of the strategy would be implemented by the Shoshone-Paiute
Tribes because of their traditional connection with the public lands of
southwest Idaho. All activities would be in compliance with public land
laws, regulations, policies, procedures, and authorities.

During the five-year term, a fundamental goal of the project would be to
institutionalize the activities and components of the strategy,
integrating them into the participating agencies, and the
Shoshone-Paiute Tribe\'s operations as well. Other partners in the
project could include museums, academic institutions, The Wings and
Roots Program, The State of Idaho, and not-for-profit organizations.

The CRPP is a multi-pronged strategy with six key components. These
include:

1\. Resource Inventory and Information Administration

2\. Aerial Surveillance

3\. Resource Monitoring and On-Site Public Contact

4\. Site Preparation and Protection

5\. Public Education and Building Appreciation

6\. Tribal Outreach

***Resource Inventory and Information Administration***

An essential first step in identifying and controlling the problem of
loss or disturbance of tangible cultural resources and/or sacred sites
is inventory. This inventory would involve both office and records
search and some field survey by the tribes.

Sites that are significant need to be identified, described, and placed
on maps so that appropriate needed attention such as increased
surveillance, monitoring, signing, restriction of access, etc. can be
applied.

Site condition needs to be determined, and a monitoring protocol that
can detect disturbance or change over time needs to be established. The
Shoshone-Paiute Tribes are wary about telling anyone outside the Tribes
about what and where, specifically, sacred sites are. The sensitivity of
each site must be considered by the Tribes, and for places that they do
not want to disclose to anyone else, the Tribes themselves must
determine how to protect the site. Tribal Rangers would patrol
particularly sensitive sites and alert BLM or other law enforcement
officials when they observed actual physical disturbance, and affecting
arrests when so needed under the authority of negotiated agreements with
other agencies In the case of individuals or groups that are, in the
view of the Tribes, profaning the site by their presence (e.g., new age
religious groups) but have not disturbed any tangible cultural resource,
BLM may have no applicable law to enforce. Problems of this sort may
best be addressed through outreach and educational efforts to the public
by the Tribes. (See Public Education and Building Appreciation on page
13).

***Aerial Surveillance***

Native American sacred sites and significant archaeological sites are
spread over a huge and often remote area of southern Idaho. There are
typically few law enforcement personnel in the field at any one time,
but particularly few during the weekends when the most recreational use
occurs. This means that the chance of actually witnessing someone
looting or vandalizing a site is remote unless more efficient
organization and technology is employed to overcome the agency's
considerable limitations.

Aerial surveillance during periods of high use (hunting seasons, spring
through summer weekends, particularly Memorial Day, the 4^th^ of July
and Labor Day) could be targeted to focus scarce resources when and
where they are most effective. Sensitive areas could be flown during
high use periods, and using GPS and radio contact with enforcement
networks on the ground could dispatch officers to investigate suspicious
behavior, the presence of vehicles or people at sensitive sites, or
obvious disturbance of cultural resources.

Some members of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes are licensed pilots and with
financial support, ground support including flight following, and
coordination with Tribal Rangers and other local law enforcement
agencies, could be used for this surveillance project.

***Resource Monitoring and Public Contact***

Since recreation-related impacts to sensitive cultural and biological
resources are a rising concern, and much of the recreational use occurs
on or around weekends, BLM should consider altering the schedules of a
variety of its resource specialists so that they work these weekend high
use periods. Recreation Planners, Park Rangers and Law Enforcement
Rangers already do some of this, at least seasonally, but other resource
specialists like Wildlife Biologists, Rangeland Management Specialists,
Realty Specialists, Botanists and others who have substantial field
duties might be considered for schedule changes that would put them into
the field doing their normal field duties in sensitive areas during
these high use weekends, as well. This would increase surveillance
capabilities, establish an identifiable BLM field presence that does not
now exist and allow BLM employees to make more positive contacts with
the public. It would also send a message to the law breakers that they
can no longer assume that their chances of being observed on public
lands on a weekend are negligible. A specific route would be scheduled
and monitoring instructions and training provided for each visit.
Training in appropriate strategies for approaching people in the field
and getting a "Leave what you find" message to them in a non-threatening
way would be given to each patroller, as well.

The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes through use of Tribal Rangers would patrol
sites of importance to them. They will perform monitoring and document
disturbance and will make public contact and outreach. They would be
involved in enforcement or issuing citations, as well as serving as a
link to law enforcement if criminal or suspicious behavior is observed.

***Site Preparation and Protection***

After sites are inventoried and evaluated, it may be determined by the
tribes that specific measures must be taken to protect, prepare, or
interpret them for visitation. Such measures could include requests to
the BLM or other agencies for fencing, hardening, signage, or access
management.

***Public Education and Building Appreciation***

*"As soon as a virtue is honored and practiced by some few men, it
spreads through instruction and example to the young and eventually
becomes incorporated in public opinion."*

> *Charles Darwin*

Education is probably the only lasting means through which we change the
values of our society. The other methods we have outlined above are all
highly useful and effective but are doomed to failure if they are the
only means employed. Why? Because there are more of them (public land
users) than there are of us (Indian and non-Indian governmental public
servants). There are not enough enforcement officers or monitoring
specialists or volunteers to control the growing tide of people using
and sometimes abusing the sensitive resources of the public lands.
Increased surveillance and flights, more precise monitoring, and
increased enforcement of cultural resource laws are all good and
necessary approaches to protecting fragile cultural resources***.*** But
lasting effectiveness requires that individuals become aware of the
impacts of their actions and voluntarily make changes to lessen or
eliminate those impacts. Methods are required that reach a mass audience
and have the effect of making them think about what they are doing
before they do it.

Effective education could proceed in a variety of ways:

***School Curricula***

Each year every 4^th^ grade student in the State of Idaho is taught a
unit about Idaho history that includes information about the Indians of
Idaho. A lesson that taught ethics about respecting what is sacred to
Native Americans would be appropriate and well-received by teachers and
could be easily inserted into their current curriculum. This lesson
could be the collaborative effort of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes, Owyhee
County, BLM, and local school districts.

***Multi-media Campaign***

A targeted multi-media campaign would be the most effective approach for
reaching the relevant public land users and for affecting citizens\'
attitudes and behaviors about cultural resources and Native American
traditions. This CRPP proposes to contract with public affairs
professionals to work closely with the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and other
agencies to develop and implement a multi-media campaign to achieve the
Project\'s goals. Such a campaign would include concept development as
well as production and distribution of print, radio, and television
products.

***Public Education and Building Appreciation***

While public service announcements can be very effective (e.g., BLM's
fire safety awareness spots that have run on TV recently or the State of
Idaho's campaign to curb poaching) in order to reach the target
audience, the spots must run during prime time when there is a mass
audience. In order to run during those times, time must be purchased at
commercial rates. As mentioned above, Native Americans addressing the
public on the issue would likely be convincing and effective to a
sympathetic audience.

***Kiosks***

Construction of steel message boards, or kiosks at major entry points to
sensitive cultural/sacred areas with displays that educated users in
proper, ethical behavior would be an effective way to target the users
who are likely to have effects on sensitive cultural resources just
before they approach those resources. Care must be taken in exactly
where these kiosks are placed. Our intention is not to guide the public
to sensitive or sacred areas, merely to get a message to them as they
approach these areas.

***Leave No Trace***

The Federal land management agencies have developed a public/private
partnership in teaching and distributing information to the public about
low-impact practices for recreational use. This program has national
distribution, is financially supported by major outdoor equipment
manufacturers and retailers like Nike and Coleman, and has a logo and
principles that are increasingly recognizable by the general public.
Part of Leave No Trace (LNT) emphasizes the principle of "Leave What You
Find", that is, look and enjoy, but leave what you find undisturbed for
the enjoyment of others who come after you. This principle fits nicely
with what we are trying to accomplish in this project. The LNT program
has developed a great deal of useful material, including signs, lesson
plans, brochures, activities and exercises that can be used to instruct
clubs, schools or individuals in the field as to proper, low-impact
behavior. The program has a network of qualified instructors in
virtually every state that are eager to help in efforts such as this
one.

***Agency/Tribal Outreach***

Through the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, BLM has the
authority to contract with State and local law enforcement agencies, in
this case, the Owyhee County Sheriff. Contracts are to provide
enforcement of Federal laws and regulations, when BLM determines that
assistance in the area is needed. The specific citation is as follows:

> *Federal Land Policy and Management Act 43 USC 1733 (c) (1) -- When
> the Secretary determines that assistance is necessary in enforcing
> Federal laws and regulations relating to the public lands or their
> resources, he shall offer a contract to appropriate local officials
> having law enforcement authority within their respective jurisdictions
> with the view of achieving maximum feasible reliance upon local law
> enforcement officials in enforcing such laws and regulations.*

Under such contracts, the State or local agency (Owyhee County) would
receive reimbursements for services rendered. Such an agreement would
enable the Owyhee County Sheriff to enforce federal laws and provide
additional law enforce on public lands in Owyhee County, primarily
through the use of these Tribal Rangers serving as additional Owyhee
County deputies.

A force of five tribal rangers, working under the authority of the
Owyhee County Sheriff, will be created under the Cultural Resources
Protection Program. Tribal Rangers will be coordinated and dispatched by
Owyhee County, under the authority of the Owyhee County Sheriff. They
will be trained at the Idaho POST Academy and commissioned under the
authority of the Owyhee County Sheriff. It is the intent of this
agreement and would be desirable for the tribal rangers to also be
supplementarily trained in the Land Management Police Training course at
either the Federal Training Center (FLETC) at Marani, Arizona or through
the FLETC in Glenco, Georgia -- in order to fulfill federal agency
requirements for an as-of-yet still to be negotiated Law Enforcement
Agreement between the Owyhee County Sheriff and the BLM.

Joint County/State/BLM/Tribal cultural resource awareness presentations
could be given to interested groups and organizations. This requires an
investment in program preparation, production materials, personnel and
travel costs. The greatest bulk of the aforementioned programs will be
fulfilled by Shoshone-Paiute Tribal Rangers, authorized by the Owyhee
County Sheriff and working as Owyhee County deputies, with a focus of
trained individuals with multi-disciplines in education, media, cultural
resources, aviation and law enforcement.

Rangers will also have the opportunity to be trained as pilots for the
operation of monitoring and surveillance aircraft to be purchased and
operated by the tribes. It is anticipated that the tribal aircraft will
be available to assist the Owyhee County Sheriff in Search and Rescue
operations as well as general law enforcement assistance.

***Additional Information***

For additional information please see Appendix I and Appendix II.

Appendix I: Historic Preservation Legislation - A Brief Overview in
support of the Site Protection Plan for the BLM Lower Snake River
District Office and the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes

Appendix II: Cultural Resources: Tribal Definition and Interpretation of
Pertinent legal Mandates 15

Appendix I

**Historic Preservation Legislation**

**A Brief Overview in Support of the Site Protection Plan**

**for the BLM Boise and Twin Falls District Offices**

**and the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes**

Preservation legislation in the United States has been built on the
**Antiquities Act of 1906** which mandated fines and imprisonment for
damage to sites on public lands. The Antiquities Act protects and
preserves cultural properties without regard to minimum age. The
president can designate outstanding properties as national monuments for
long-term preservation. Members of the preservation community have
subsequently lobbied congress to pass further legislation that had more
"teeth" The result has been the passage of several laws since that time
that address a variety of interests and concerns regarding cultural
resources in this country. For purposes of the site protection project
in the Boise and Twin Falls Districts, we have outlined specific
legislation that addresses site protection on the ground for tangible
and intangible cultural resources.

The **Historic Sites Act of 1935** declares national policy to identify
and preserve "historic sites, buildings, objects and antiquities" of
national significance, authorizing the National Historic Landmarks
program of the National Park Service and providing a foundation for the
later National Register of Historic Places.

The **National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as amended** extends
the policy of the Historic Sites Act to include State and local as well
as national significance, expands the National Register of Historic
Places, and establishes the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation,
State Historic Preservation Officers, and a preservation grants in aid
program. **Section 106** directs all Federal agencies to take into
account effects of their undertakings on properties included in or
eligible for the Nation Register of Historic Places, and **Section 110**
sets inventory, nomination, protection, and preservation
responsibilities for federally owned cultural properties. **Section
101** states that properties of traditional religious and cultural
importance to an Indian tribe may be determined to be eligible for
inclusion on the National Register. It is important to keep in mind that
the sensitive nature of some types of traditional cultural properties
may require confidentiality. Locational data is exempt from **FOIA** and
**Section 304 of the NHPA** was amended to withhold information
regarding historic properties disclosure to the public. Information may
be withheld if disclosure would cause significant invasion of privacy or
impede the use of a traditional religious site by practitioners. This
expansion tends to blur distinctions between historic preservation and
religious practice, between tangible places and intangible ideas.
**Section 106** review states that a federal agency shall consult with
any Indian tribe that attaches religious and cultural significance to
the properties described. The **1980 amendments** to the **NHPA (section
502)** directed the Secretary of Interior and the American Folklife
Center to preserve and conserve the intangible elements of our cultural
heritage such as arts, skills, folklife and folkways\....to encourage
the continuation of the diverse traditional ethnic and folk cultural
traditions that underlie and are a living expression of our American
heritage. While cultural intangibles have long been recognized as an
inherent part of cultural resources it is time consuming and costly to
conduct the ethnographic research to establish socio-cultural use of a
historic or sacred site.

**Section 110 of the NHPA** requires that the agency's preservation
related activities are carried out in consultation with other Federal,
State and local agencies, Indian tribes\...(E) that the agency's
procedures for compliance with Section 106 provide a process for the
identification and evaluation of historic properties for listing in the
National Register and to develop and implement agreements regarding the
means by which adverse effects on such properties will be considered.

**Executive Order 11593 of 1971** "Protection and Enhancement of the
Cultural Environment," direct Federal Agencies to inventory cultural
properties under their jurisdiction, to nominate to the National
Register of Historic Places all federally owned properties that meet the
criteria to use due caution until the inventory and nomination processes
are completed and also to assure that Federal plans and programs
contribute to preservation and enhancement of nonfederally owned
properties. Some of the provisions are also found in Section 110 of
National Historic preservation Act.

The **Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979** provides
felony-level penalties, more severe than those of the Antiquities Act of
1906 for unauthorized excavation, removal, damage, alteration,
defacement, of any archaeological resource more than 100 years of age,
found on public lands or Indian lands. The act also prohibits the sale,
purchase, exchange, transportation, receipt, or offering of any
archaeological resource.

The **American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978** resolves that it
shall be the policy of the United States to protect and preserve for the
American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and Native Hawaiian the inherent right
of freedom to believe, express, and exercise their traditional
religions, including but not limited to access to religious sites, use
and possession of sacred objects, and freedom to worship through
ceremonials and traditional rites. Federal agencies are directed to
evaluate their policies and procedures to determine if changes are
needed to ensure that such rights and freedoms are not disrupted by
agency practices. The act, a specific expression of First Amendment
guarantees of religious freedom, is not implemented by regulations.
(Note: A U.S. Court of Appeals has determined that there is a compliance
element in the AIRFA , requiring that 1. The views of Indian leaders be
obtained and considered when a proposed land use might conflict with
traditional Indian religious beliefs or practices, and that 2.
Unnecessary interference with Indian religious practices be avoided
during project implementation, but specifying that 3. Conflict need not
necessarily bar Federal agencies from adopting proposed land uses in the
public interest.)

**ARPA** and **AIRFA** cover different domains of religious activity.
They overlap somewhat because both include the protection of
archaeological sites with sacred attributes. AIRFA covers sites
currently in use and ARPA applies to archaeological resources that are
at least 100 years old. In many cases both laws could be called into
play, i.e., an archaeological site over 100 years old being used for
current religious practices. AIRFA explicitly calls for consultation
(Sec.2) between Federal land managers and Indian communities while ARPA
stipulates only notification (Sec. 4c) The mechanisms for compliance
with these two laws as they relate to cultural resources should vary
with the likelihood of religious sites being affected by BLM permitted
actions. The probability of encountering sites with sacred attributes
will be largely dependent upon the **amount** and the **type** land to
be impacted by any proposed action. AIRFA will come into play when a
site, regardless of its relative antiquity is currently believed to
possess sacred aspects and / or is used for religious purposes. (Deaver
1986)

**ARPA 1979** Excavation and Removal Sec.4 (a) (c) states that "If a
permit issued under this section may result in harm to, or destruction
of, any religious or cultural site, as determined by the Federal land
manager, before issuing such permit, the Federal land manager shall
notify any Indian tribe which may consider the site as having religious
or cultural importance." Such notice shall not be deemed a disclosure to
the public for purposes of section 9. Any physical changes to a site
with sacred attributes such as routine collections of artifacts and
testing may constitute harm to such sites. Protection under ARPA applies
to archaeological resources which are at least 100 years old and has
civil and criminal penalties.

Two other important pieces of legislation regarding protection of
cultural resources are **National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA)** and **Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA).**
NEPA establishes national policy for the protection and enhancement of
the environment. Part of the function of the Federal Government in
protecting the environment is to "preserve important historic, cultural,
and natural aspects of our national heritage. **FLPMA** directs the BLM
to manage public lands on the basis of multiple use, in a manner that
recognizes the Nation's need for domestic sources of minerals, food,
timber, and fiber from the public lands" and will "protect the quality
of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and
atmospheric, water resource, and archeological values." The act provides
for long-range, comprehensive land use planning, for permits to regulate
the use of the public lands, and for the enforcement of public land laws
and regulations. FLPMA is the primary basis for managing cultural
resources on the public lands.

The **Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990**
establishes rights of Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations to
claim ownership of certain "cultural items" including human remains,
funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony held
or controlled by Federal Agencies and museums that receive Federal
funds. The act requires agencies and museums to identify holdings of
such remains and objects and to work with appropriate Native American
groups toward their repatriation. Permits for the excavation and / or
removal of "cultural items" protected by the act require Native American
consultation, as do discoveries of "cultural items" made during land use
activities.

**Executive Order 13007 of 1996** for protection of Sacred Sites
requires Federal agencies to accommodate access to and ceremonial use of
Indian sacred sites by Indian religious practitioners and to avoid
adversely affecting the physical integrity of such sacred sites. Where
appropriate agencies shall maintain the confidentiality of sacred sites.

**Cultural Resources**

**A Definition**

**BLM - 8100 - Policy Manual:**

**Cultural:** "of or pertaining to culture, the regularized, patterned,
learned behavior shared by members of an interacting social group and
passed from generation to generation, comprising the group's technology,
economy, religion, arts, social organization, and more. A group's partly
subconscious consensus on how things are done. Aspects of culture vary
among contemporary groups and change through time. Culture may be viewed
as a complex set of instrumental behaviors interposed between a group
and it's natural and social environment, and may be said to constitute
the group's adaptation to its environment."

**Cultural resource or cultural property:** "a definite location of
human activity, occupation, or use identifiable through field inventory
(survey), historical documentation, or oral evidence. The term includes
archaeological, historic, or architectural sites, structures, or places
with important public and scientific uses, and may include definite
locations (sites or places) of tradition cultural or religious
importance to specified social and/or cultural groups. Cultural
resources are concrete, material places and things that are located,
classified, ranked, and managed through the system of identifying,
protecting, and utilizing for public benefit described in this Manual
series."

**Traditional life way value:** "a social and/or cultural group's
traditional patterns of religious belief, cultural practice, or social
interaction. Traditional life way values sometimes imbue cultural
resources with significance. They can be identified through consultation
and considered through public participation during planning and
environmental review. The BLM does not manage people's values, beliefs,
or social systems.

Appendix II

**Cultural Resources: Tribal Definition and Interpretation of Pertinent
Legal Mandates**

In the previous discussion of cultural resource protection between the
Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and the Idaho BLM, both parties agreed on the
need to clarify the use of the term "cultural resources." While the BLM
and other federal agencies have tended to restrict the term to describe
archaeological resources, the Tribes have come to use the term in a more
broad, face-value sense of "any resource needed to continue to freely
engage in and preserve the practices and traditions of the
Shoshone-Paiute culture." The following lists several types of things
which the Tribes consider to be "cultural resources." It must be
emphasized that this list is not exhaustive, but is intended to provide
an idea of the range of what are considered to be "cultural resources"
for illustrative purposes only at this time. Purely intangible resources
are not listed.

A. Sacred sites and relevant aspects of their environmental context
(e.g. view shed, pristine surroundings)

B. Biological resources (plants, animals, fungi, lichens, mosses, etc.)

C. Mineral resources

D. Earth and Water resources

E. Archaeological sites

F. Burial grounds

G. Sites of historical significance (e.g. battlefields, treaty signing
sites)

H. Other resources to be identified during consultation

Cultural resources can be significant to Shoshone-Paiute culture for
their subsistence, economic, religious/spiritual, medicinal, historical,
and other values. Any particular resource may be valued at several
levels, for example, an object may have spiritual significance in
addition to its utilitarian function. A resource may also fall into more
than one of the above listed categories, for example a battlefield would
potentially fall simultaneously into categories A, D, E, and F,
therefore such categories are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Since
federal mandates regarding cultural resources tend to focus on certain
categories of resources, it is possible for several mandates to apply
simultaneously to a particular resource.

Applications of Federal Mandates

The Shoshone-Paiute Tribes have found the following mandates especially
useful for the protection of Tribal cultural resources. This listing is
not intended to be exhaustive but rather to provide a draft indicating
those mandates which are most relevant to the current cooperative effort
between the Tribes and the Idaho BLM to enhance protection of Tribal
cultural resources. The Tribes or the BLM may wish to add to this
listing as further discussion and consultation warrants.

A. American Indian Religious Freedom Act

B. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

C. National Historic Preservation Act and Bulletin 38

D. Executive Order #13007 on Sacred Sites

E. Archaeological Resources Protection Act

F. Executive Orders Establishing the Shoshone-Paiute Reservation

G. National Environmental Policy Act

H. Federal Land Policy Management Act

I. Endangered Species Act

J. Executive Order #12875 on required Government-to-Government
Consultation

K. Executive Order #12898 on Environmental Justice

The following discussion illustrates some Tribal interpretations and
applications associated with the above listed mandates.

Most of the above listed mandates require government-to-government
consultation as part of the implementation process. The Wings and Roots
program between the Tribes and the BLM is becoming a model for effective
consultation. Bulletin 38 suggests a comparable approach as a means of
identifying potential impacts to cultural resources (specifically TCPs)
during the agency planning process thus offering the opportunity to
protect the resource through avoidance. By extension, Wings and Roots is
a process where potential impacts to all cultural resources (not only
TCPs) can be evaluated, and where relevant federal mandates can be
identified and applied to specific situations.

Intangible aspects of cultural resources are integral to their
significance to the Tribes Bulletin 38 discusses how intangible elements
can apply to properties that otherwise have no evidence of human
activity, making them eligible for inclusion in the National Register.
Obviously, in such case an agency cannot know of the intangible
significance until this has been indicated by the Tribes. The procedures
used for nominating sites to the National Register are useful for
establishing significance with section 106 of NHPA by using this method
without actual nomination in the interest of preserving Tribal
confidentiality. Similarly, determination of which items are subject to
NAGPRA, or what const constitutes a sacred sit also frequently depend on
their intangible aspects (e.g. beliefs and practices associated with
them), hence input from knowledgeable Tribal members is essential.
Again, intangible aspects of these resources determine their status
under law, and only Tribal members can know the intangible aspects.

Archaeological sites and their contents have until recently been treated
as public property valued as a scientific resource largely under the
control of archaeologists, anthropologists, and similar professionals.
Resource protection mandates such as ARPA were largely intended to
protect these interests. NAGPRA recognizes that archaeological sites and
objects may have religious or other intangible significance to Tribal
members, and it is a human right of Native Americans to control the
disposition of certain sites and objects. When considering the
intangible significance of archaeological sites, such places may also be
considered to be sacred sites and/or traditional cultural properties,
affording them additional protection from institutional disturbance. The
Tribes seek protection of archaeological sites and their contents from
scientific disturbance such as collection, excavation, or display. ARPA
allows scientific research to be permitted, but also requires
consultation with Tribes likely to be affiliated with such sites as part
of the permit granting process. If during such consultation the Tribes
object to scientific disturbance on the grounds that such sites are
sacred or have religious significance (which has been ethnographically
documented and summarized in the NAGPRA Executive Summary), human rights
mandates such as AIRFA, NAGPRA, and E.O. 13007 should weigh in the
agency's decision whether or not to grant a research permit.

Various mandates also apply to plant, animal, and mineral resources.
Bulletin 38 notes that areas where significant resources (e.g.
biological or mineral resources for subsistence, medicinal, or religious
purposes) are available and can be eligible for inclusion on the
National Register. Again, intangible aspects can be involved, such as
where a certain area containing an otherwise widespread resource is
particularly valued. The Endangered Species Act may enter the picture in
some cases. The intangible aspects associated with these resources may
tie them to AIRFA or E.O. 13007 in instances where their spiritual
importance is emphasized.

The executive orders establishing the Duck Valley Indian Reservation and
other legal principles surrounding the formation of reservations also
afford various sovereign rights to Tribal resources. The Department of
Interior notes that Tribal members generally have the sovereign right to
continue traditional practices of all kinds (sometimes referred to as
"the law of the land") on their traditional homelands except for those
rights explicitly extinguished by treaty, executive order or other
specific mandated. Under this concept, destruction or reduction of
resources can be viewed as a violation of such rights in many instances,
such as the current situation of the salmon. The concept of "usual and
accustomed places" underlies legislation such as E.O. 13007, and
protects the unextinguished rights of Tribal members to access areas and
resources of cultural importance.

This discussion has outlined a Tribal interpretation of cultural
resources and the mandates which can apply to their protection. Central
principles include:

1\. Frequently more than one mandate applies to a particular cultural
resource.

2\. The legal status of a particular resource often depends on its
intangible aspects, i.e. the cultural context of beliefs, practices, and
values associated with it.

3\. Only the Tribes can establish the significance of such intangible
aspects.

4\. Intangible aspects often tie cultural resources to religious rights
protection or other human rights mandates.

5\. Tribal sovereignty establishes a unique relationship between Tribes
and the federal government. In weighing factors pertaining to the
"multiple use" concept of land management, the unique sovereign rights
of Tribes should be carefully considered in cases of potential conflict
with the interests of special interest groups or the general public.

A critical issue which is not addressed here is the confidentiality of
cultural information. The Tribes are aware of potential problems arising
from inappropriate parties gaining access to cultural information,
especially descriptions of location and certain "intangible" aspects of
22

various resources. At the same time such information is critical to
on-the-ground protection of these resources. Discussion and resolution
of this issue is a logical next step in the goal of cultural resource
protection.