U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

84–655 PDF 2003

S. HRG. 107–837

GALISTEO BASIN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

S. 2776

TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES IN

THE GALISTEO BASIN IN NEW MEXICO, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

AUGUST 7, 2002

SANTA FE, NM

(

Printed for the use of the

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

(II)

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota

BOB GRAHAM, Florida

RON WYDEN, Oregon

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana

EVAN BAYH, Indiana

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware

FRANK H. MURKOWSKI, Alaska

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico

DON NICKLES, Oklahoma

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho

BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming

RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama

CONRAD BURNS, Montana

JON KYL, Arizona

CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska

GORDON SMITH, Oregon

ROBERT M. SIMON, Staff Director

SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel

BRIAN P. MALNAK, Republican Staff Director

JAMES P. BEIRNE, Republican Chief Counsel

DAVID BROOKS, Democratic Senior Counsel

NANCIE AMES, Bevinetto Fellow

(III)

C O N T E N T S

STATEMENTS

Page

Bingaman, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator from New Mexico .......................................... 1

Dant, Buck, Local Landowner Near Village of Galisteo, NM .............................. 16

Jenks, Robert, Assistant Commissioner for Surface Resources, New Mexico

State Land Office ................................................................................................. 18

Lovato, Ernest, Governor of Santo Domingo Pueblo ............................................ 8

Michel, Mark, President, The Archaeological Conservancy ................................. 11

Quintana, Andrew, Governor of Cochiti Pueblo .................................................... 7

Romero, Robert, President of La Cienega Valley Association .............................. 14

Whitley, Richard, Acting State Director–New Mexico, Bureau of Land Management ................................................................................................................. 3

(1)

GALISTEO BASIN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 7, 2002

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Santa Fe, NM.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9 a.m. at the

Genoveva Chavez Community Center in Santa Fe, NM, Hon. Jeff

Bingaman, chairman, presiding.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF BINGAMAN,

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Let me thank you all for coming today.

This is a hearing of the Senate Committee on Energy and National

Resources, and the purpose is to receive testimony related to a bill

that I have introduced, called S. 2776. This is a bill to protect archaeological sites in the Galisteo Basin. I thought it was important

that we have this hearing here in Santa Fe to let those interested

in the issue attend and participate.

We will have a second hearing in Washington, at which time we

will get formal views from the administration on the bill. That will

probably be sometime in September. S. 2776 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to protect approximately two dozen important

archaeological sites in the Galisteo Basin containing the ruins of

pueblos dating back almost 900 years, including what I understand

are the largest pueblo ruins ever found. In addition, many of the

designated areas contain historic artifacts and sites related to the

Spanish colonization of the area.

While the Galisteo Basin sites represent some of the most significant archaeological sites in the country, they are also spectacular

scenic areas and some are virtually unspoiled. Because of their

proximity to Santa Fe and Albuquerque, however, many are now

threatened from increased development pressures, including increased use of the land, exposure to the elements and vandalism.

Through the protection and interpretation of these sites, we have

the opportunity to learn more, not only about the history and culture of these pueblos, but also about the first interaction between

the European and Native American cultures. The Cochiti and

Santo Domingo Pueblos, in particular, are culturally and historically tied to these sites, which have a tremendous historical and religious significance. We are very grateful that we have two Governors here to testify today. Governor Quintana, from Cochiti Pueblo, and Governor Lovato, from Santo Domingo Pueblo, will both

give testimony on the second panel.

2

Some of the archaeological sites are located on Federal land administered by the BLM. We will hear, this morning, from the Bureau of Land Management on the research that their archaeologists

have undertaken on some of these sites. Although the BLM will not

provide its official testimony until September, at the hearing in

Washington, I was very pleased that the agency supported a similar bill that I introduced to the previous Congress, and I hope that

they will support S. 2776.

Many of the sites identified in the bill are on non-Federal land,

and I think it might be useful to take a minute and explain what

the bill does and what it does not do, especially with respect to

these private lands.

The bill designates 24 sites in the Galisteo Basin as archaeological protection sites. For sites that are located on Federal land, it

directs the Secretary of the Interior to manage the sites in a way

that will protect and preserve the archaeological resources while

also allowing for further archaeological research.

With respect to a site that is located on State, tribal or private

land, the bill does not give the Secretary any management or regulatory authority over those lands. It does authorize a landowner to

voluntarily enter into a cooperative agreement with the Department of the Interior. The terms of the agreement are whatever the

landowner and the agency would agree to. My hope is that the Federal Government will be able to provide landowners with assistance

in protecting their sites, either with technical advice or financial

assistance.

In return, I know that some of the owners are willing to allow

for some research or public interpretation of the resources on their

land. This bill authorizes voluntary participation in that. Because

this can be a sensitive issue, I have added language to this year’s

bill to explicitly state that the Secretary of the Interior has no authority to administer sites on nonfederal lands, except to the extent

provided for in a cooperative agreement entered into between the

Secretary and the landowner.

Similarly, the bill authorizes the Federal Government to purchase a designated site, but only if the landowner is a willing seller. I have also added new language to clarify that nothing in this

bill limits or restricts a tribe from protecting cultural or religious

sites on tribal lands.

As most of you know, I introduced a similar bill three years ago.

That bill did not get enacted. In those three years, many irreplaceable archaeological resources have been lost. There is very little

legislative time left in this Congress, but I am hopeful that following today’s hearing, we will be able to show strong local support

so that we can move the bill forward through both the House and

Senate in the remaining weeks.

We are going to start today with testimony from Mr. Richard

Whitley, who is the acting New Mexico State director of the Bureau

of Land Management in the Department of the Interior. I understand that he is accompanied by his chief archaeologist, and so we

will hear their testimony, and I will ask them a few questions, and

then we will go to the other witnesses.

Mr. Whitley, thank you for being here.

3

STATEMENT OF RICHARD WHITLEY, ACTING STATE

DIRECTOR–NEW MEXICO, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Mr. WHITLEY. Thank you, Senator. Can you hear me? Is this

working? I have with me today Steve Fosberg. He is the State archaeologist for BLM and has done a lot of work out at the Galisteo

Basin.

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this hearing on

the protection of archaeological sites in the Galisteo Basin in New

Mexico. I understand the committee will hold a hearing in Washington, D.C., on a later date, at which a witness representing the

Department of the Interior will be invited to provide the committee

with the administration’s views on S. 2776. My statement today

will discuss the BLM’s active work over the past several years to

protect archaeological resources on public lands in the Galisteo

Basin.

The lands surrounding Santa Fe in the area known as the

Galisteo Basin contain a rich cultural heritage of national significance. The first Spanish explorations in this area found thriving

Pueblo Indian communities dating back to prehistoric times. Today,

the ruins of these pueblos commemorate both the achievements of

the ancestral Pueblo people and the events which shaped the early

colonial history of New Mexico and the Southwest. Other important

historical events which have left traces on this landscape include

the development of the Camino Real, the Pueblo Revolt of 1680, the

establishment of the Santa Fe Trail, a major Civil War battle, the

coming of railroads and the mining booms of the territorial period.

Lands to the north of Santa Fe are Pueblo Indian reservations,

while the lands to the east and the west are largely public lands

managed by the BLM and the U.S. Forest Service. Portions of this

land, such as the Pecos Wilderness and the La Cienega Area of

Critical Environmental Concern, have been set aside for special

protection. Other areas are managed under the principle of multiple use and other laws, such as the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act.

The southern part of Santa Fe County has a pattern of mixed

ownership, with private lands predominating. Development of this

area is proceeding at a rapid pace as the population of Santa Fe

County continues to grow. Both the State of New Mexico and the

BLM manage key parcels in this area.

Natural processes take a toll on the cultural resources, but the

threats posed by human uses are potentially more serious. Vandalism and careless excavations in the prehistoric and early historic

ruins are a source of great concern to modern Pueblo peoples and

threaten some of the most important archaeological sites with

wholesale destruction. Centuries of woodcutting and livestock grazing have altered the vegetative communities as well as the riparian

areas and the watersheds that support them. Development of both

residential and commercial real estate presents risks to the ruins,

trails, petroglyphs, and other traces of history and prehistory that

remain in this landscape. Illegal trash dumping and other activities

of this type have had a serious adverse impact on the natural and

cultural resource values.

Of the 24 sites referenced in S. 2776, nine are currently managed

in whole or in part by the BLM. The other sites are on State or

4

private land. BLM archaeologists have done extensive research on

these sites, and have developed long-standing, positive working relationships with the local communities of La Cieneguilla and La

Cienega Pueblo Indian communities, the affected State agencies,

the University of New Mexico, and local conservation organizations

on all aspects of the protection of archaeological resources of the

Galisteo Basin.

Through its planning process, the BLM has set aside land near

La Cienega for special protection in its Resource Management

Plan. The area encompassed by this plan includes the BLM-managed portions of La Cienega Pueblo and Petroglyphs, La Cienega

Pithouse Village, and La Cieneguilla Petroglyphs. Management

prescriptions for the BLM sites include grazing exclusions, withdrawal from mineral entry, and a no surface occupancy stipulation

for oil and gas development. These management prescriptions were

developed by the BLM in consultation with Native American tribal

governments, State and local governments, stakeholders, and the

general public, through participation opportunities afforded by the

land use planning and environmental review process.

The BLM manages additional sites in the Galisteo Basin: 68

acres of Burnt Corn Pueblo; 40 acres at Petroglyph Hill; 190 acres

at Pueblo Blanco; 70 acres at Pueblo Galisteo/Las Madres; and 80

acres at San Lazaro Pueblo, a national historic landmark. The

BLM’s decisions on appropriate uses of the areas must take into

consideration the impact of approved activities on the rich cultural

and archaeological resources which are present there.

The BLM’s Taos field office has been very involved with local

government, stakeholders, and interest groups over the past several years to improve our resource management efforts in the

basin. In keeping with Secretary Norton’s four Cs: consultation, cooperation, communication, all in the service of conservation, our

goal is the development of a comprehensive community-based management program for the Galisteo Basin.

BLM is working with the Trust for Public Lands, Santa Fe County, the county lands commission, and local community groups to acquire critical lands within a 5,000-acre green belt, to protect its

open space and national resource values. The BLM, Santa Fe

County and the local community have been working together to develop a management strategy for the Cerrillos Hills, a prehistoric/

historic mining district in the west central part of the Basin. The

BLM plans to continue these efforts to protect the cultural resources of the Galisteo Basin.

Thank you again for inviting BLM to participate in this field

hearing. I will be glad to answer any questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Mr. Fosberg, did you want to make any comments at this point?

Mr. FOSBERG. I will just be happy to assist in answering any

questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. Let me ask, to what extent does the BLM

pursue its own archaeological research on these sites? Is this something that is an ongoing part of your program? As well as protecting these sites, do you conduct research to determine the significance of them?

5

Mr. FOSBERG. The Bureau of Land Management forms partnerships with universities to cosponsor field schools at archaeological

sites when those sites are deemed to be threatened, either by natural erosion or vandalism, problems of that nature. Currently, we

are sponsoring a field school at the Burnt Corn Pueblo. Dr. James

Snead is currently out there, with students, conducting mapping

and testing of that important site. And we have also worked with

community groups in the La Cieneguilla area to help map and

record the impressive rock art in that region. So our mode of operation, if you will, is generally not to undertake those studies with

our own staff, per se, but to work in partnership with community

groups and universities so that that research can take place.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER. Excuse me. Could you speak a little

louder?

The CHAIRMAN. I think maybe if you could, just hold the mike

the way I am holding this one. Take it out of that stand, and hold

it up, and that will help.

Let me ask another question, and you can try and see if the mike

works better in response to that question.

This legislation contemplates cooperative agreements with landowners that wish to participate and wish to enter into such agreements. Could you give us any idea of how that would work if a

landowner did want to work with the BLM to protect a site that

was on private land that that landowner owned? Do you know how

that would function?

Mr. WHITLEY. We at the Bureau of Land Management enter into

quite a few cooperative agreements in which Federal funds can be

leveraged to accomplish worthwhile public purposes, but the problem that we have with our current authorization in the Federal

Lands Management Policy Act is that our authority to enter into

those cooperative agreements is restricted to public lands, to the

use of funds for public lands. And we have run into this problem

before; the Chaco and the Outlier Protection bill, for example, gave

the responsibility to the BLM to work with private landowners to

encourage their preservation and protection, but it was often difficult to come up with a mechanism to help underwrite efforts for

site monitoring, site recording, and so on, on those private lands.

So the language that I have seen in this bill, which is very explicit,

to give that authority to work with the private landowners, I think

would be helpful.

What I would envision would be the Bureau using some of its

funds in working with organizations like the State Historic Preservation Office, to help establish site stewardship programs where we

could have more active monitoring of these sites, where we could

act as a go-between and arrange for students and researchers to

come out and complete archaeological surveys and recordation, and

to work with other Federal agencies that have expertise in the area

of stabilization, to see what we could do to arrest erosion and

decay. So I think the arrangements contemplated in the bill and

the language would be helpful in that regard.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me also ask, the bill is very explicit as to

which of the sites the BLM is given authority to work to protect,

and I think there are 24 of these. Are these the right sites? Is this

6

a complete list of the ones that we ought to be trying to assist with

protection of?

Mr. WHITLEY. Our archaeologists have been consulting and working with The Archaeological Conservancy on this list, and I believe

that it is an accurate list that encompasses the primary sites

known at this time, although there are provisions, of course, in the

act for additions to that list, if we discover additional properties

that need to be added.

One of the properties that was on the original bill 3 years ago,

I noticed that been removed, but it has since been transferred over

to——

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER. Can we speak a little louder? We still

cannot hear you.

Mr. WHITLEY. Sorry.

The question was: Is the list of sites in the legislation an accurate and complete listing of the primary sites that merit protection

in the basin? And my response was that I believe it is; The Archaeological Conservancy and our staff and others have been working

to update the list, and it does represent the primary pueblos that

merit protection and rock art sites that merit protection in the

basin. There are, of course, provisions in the act for additions to

that list, which is important, because there are discoveries still

being made of additional important sites.

One of the pueblos that was in the bill 3 years ago has since been

removed. That was Toke Pueblo, I think, and that has since been

transferred to one of the pueblos, so it enjoys protection through

the administration of the pueblo and there is not a need to retain

it in this version of the bill, but I believe that the list is a comprehensive list based on what we know at this time.

The CHAIRMAN. I think we make it very explicit in section 4 that

additions to the list would only be made by statute, by congressional action, so if there are additional sites identified that the

BLM believes ought to be protected, then we would have to go back

to Congress to make a change.

All right. Any other points that we need to know about, about

the BLM view on this? Mr. Whitley, did you have any other comments?

Mr. WHITLEY. No, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Well, we will allow you folks to go

about your business, and let me call forward the remaining witnesses. We have five other witnesses here that I would like to give

a chance to testify. Governor Quintana from Cochiti Pueblo, Governor Lovato from Santo Domingo Pueblo, Mark Michel, president

of The Archaeological Conservancy, Mr. Robert Romero, who is

with La Cienega Community Association, and Mr. Buck Dant, who

is a resident here in Santa Fe. If all of you would come up, please,

and take a chair, that would be great.

Let me also ask Bob Jenks—where is Bob? Bob was here. Would

you like to come up? You are from the State Land Office and have

some testimony you would like to make. Please come on up here.

We will just find another chair.

Let me also announce that Raul Alvillar is here representing

Congressman Tom Udall’s office. Where is Raul? Thank you for

being here. Congressman Udall is also sponsoring this legislation.

7

He has introduced it in the House of Representatives, just as I

have introduced it in the Senate, and we very much appreciate

that.

Why don’t we start with our two Governors. Governor Quintana,

we will start with you down at the end of the table there. Thank

you very much for being here, and we appreciate your willingness

to testify. Would you hold that microphone there the same way I

am holding this one, so that everyone in the audience can hear you.

Thank you.

STATEMENT OF ANDREW QUINTANA, GOVERNOR OF

COCHITI PUEBLO

Governor QUINTANA. Good morning, Chairman Bingaman. My

name is Andrew Quintana. I am Governor of the Cochiti Pueblo,

and good morning, everybody.

Chairman Bingaman, thank you for providing me the opportunity to testify before your committee. We appreciate the opportunity to have met with Jill Halverson of your staff on June 18,

2002. Ms. Halverson shared with us adiscussion draft of proposed

legislation to establish a list of Galisteo Basin archaeological protection sites.

The purpose of this bill, as we understand it, is to facilitate the

protection of archaeological sites in the Galisteo Basin of New Mexico. I have reviewed this draft bill with the Cochiti Tribal Council

on June 19, 2002, and based on that review, I am providing testimony to convey the Pueblo de Cochiti’s strong support for this legislation. Securing protection for archaeological sites, and in particular former pueblo areas located on private lands in the Galisteo

Basin, are of great importance to us. The draft legislation calls for

the Secretary of the Interior to seek voluntary cooperative agreements with private owners of the sites to be protected. This same

approach has been applied in an informal way in regards to the old

San Marcos Pueblo, and we have already contributed $10,000 of

our own money to The Archaeological Conservancy to help secure

protection of this site.

The draft legislation will make it easier to arrange public/private

partnerships to secure protection of these sites located on private

land. Passing this legislation will advance important interests of

our pueblo and other pueblos in New Mexico by improving the ability of the Secretary of the Interior to secure that protection.

We believe the bill would be dramatically strengthened and more

widespread pueblo support would be generated if additional provisions were added: A, to provide that the pueblos will be consulted

as to maintenance and protection procedures for protected pueblo

sites and as to identification of new sites; B, to ensure pueblo access to protected pueblo sites for ceremonial and other traditional

purposes; C, to provide that the provisions of NAGPRA and ARPA

would apply to pueblo sites protected under the act just as if they

were located on existing Federal lands; and D, to add reference to

ARPA and NAGPRA at section 8(a) of the bill as regards to protected pueblo sites.

We wish to make clear that our support for protecting these sites

from unauthorized or commercial looting and other disturbances or

destruction should not be construed as support for intentional excaVerDate 11-SEP-98 15:39 Feb 06, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 J:\DOCS\84-655 SENERGY3 PsN: SENERGY3
8

vation of human remains or funerary objects interred with human

remains, even if done for organized scientific or archaeological research purposes. Basic respect for the deceased requires that they

be left alone and promptly reburied after consultation with surrounding pueblos if inadvertently disinterred.

If we can provide any further elaboration or explanation of why

this bill and the recommended revisions is so important to us,

please do not hesitate to contact us.

In closing, I want to commend you for the tribal consultation

process which you have initiated in connection with this legislation

and for engaging in that consultation before you introduce the bill.

I also want to commend you for giving legislative attention to this

important issue.

Thank you very much, and I will be open to questions.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Governor. I appreciate

your testimony, and I will have a question or comment when we

finish with all the other witnesses here, but first, let us hear from

Governor Lovato, the Governor of the Santo Domingo Pueblo.

STATEMENT OF ERNEST LOVATO, GOVERNOR OF

SANTO DOMINGO PUEBLO

Governor LOVATO. The Honorable Senator Bingaman, my name

is Ernie Lovato, Santo Domingo Pueblo. This is my fourth term as

Governor of Santo Domingo. Today you are going to hear a different voice than ever before in the USA. I am nothing new, as you

know, Senator. I have been to the Congress, I testified—I have a

track record in the House and Senate over the many years since

I lived and raised here in the pueblo land. Today you are going to

see a new history. You are going to find a new history, and I want

the historians of this State to make this as the true record, for you

have now been told the truth.

Today, I come before this committee here, but first of all, before

I go on with my prepared statement, I am taught to stand when

I speak, is the reason that I am standing. I have called upon my

spiritual guides to be with us. They are here today. My ancestors

are here today, at this moment, hour. This is part of your protection by law for our own aboriginal religious-connected, and so on,

so please listen carefully.

First of all, let me qualify my statement initially. I wish you had

the opportunity at this legislation, first attempt, years ago, Senator

introduced. I am sure he did well. Apparently, there was not much

Indian leadership participate at that time. This year, the year

2002, we are here, and I am going to make sure that I am going

to be with Senator all the way through Congress. Let the members

of Congress hear from the true Americans that were here first.

This bill, S. 2776, is going to fly through, but they hear it from

us First Americans, in Congress. That is what needs to be done,

because who else knows better in America? We. And I want to

speak for Santo Domingo leadership. I have been around long, long

time in this State. I have been member of my council 31 long years.

I served the whole State, 19 pueblo governments, 6 long years. I

served in this State very well, all the way through Congress. I have

a track record. I have been through the mill in this State, so I am

9

nothing new to the politics. I am nothing new to the bill. I have

been there. I testified on land recovery projects in my homeland.

But anyway, I just wanted to let the American people know that

we are now coming forward. The true facts are facts that must be

brought up in this area, on the Senate bill that we are speaking

of today, is nothing new to us. We know the history. We know the

aboriginal history, the true history before USA, before State government, before Spanish encroachment. We should be the first and

forefront in this whole issue all the way to Congress, because we

are the true inhabitants by rights of our ancestral rights. We

walked this terrain when I was a young boy.

As recent as 1980, 1990, when I was involved with land investigation for land recovery project for my tribe, illegally taken from

my people, we saw Galisteo Basin, we saw San Marcos Pueblo, we

saw La Cienega, we saw the whole area that is classified here. We

have our own name sites. All of this listed here on archaeological

sites are Spanish surname sites. I respect that, don’t get me wrong,

but I also know my own history, by aboriginal rights and identification of sites. It is more than 24 sites, to my knowledge, as a young

Indian leader. I know my history, because it was taught to us from

generation on down, and that is very important for archaeologists

to know, historians to know, members of Congress to know, all the

way to White House to know. Who else knows better, but us first?

So I just want to set that record straight, so that the members

of Congress will know exactly who is speaking the truth in America

in the—in the Galisteo Basin. Anyway, we walked that area, so we

know the sites. And I am glad that the Senator has taken the forward step necessary as an interested Senator. I have a high respect

for the Senator. I worked with him many, many years. He knows

that. I am his strong right-hand supporter. I support him every

election; therefore, I stand ready to protect this with him, and I am

going to make sure this time the Senate pass all the way to the

Senate—House and Senate, and I am going to be right in there

with him, if he needs me in Congress, to support this all the way

through.

So I just wanted to let you know that. We know the history. We

have Indian names, but I cannot publicly tell you that. I have

many reasons why. So the things that identify here by Spanish surname sites is well taken, to some extent; we respect that, but we

also know we should—we should also come forward to protect our

interest.

Every time when someone speaks in New Mexico for archaeological sites, burial ground disturbance, we get disturbed, too. And I

am the one that always fight it. Many of you probably know my

positions in the past. Whenever there is going to dig up or mining,

or things of that sort, I take a position, strong, forcefully, immediately. So as you can see, Santo Domingo Tribe is very strong,

very strong, as many of you can witness during the August 4 celebration. You saw the people, crowd; you saw the cultural collection;

you saw the religion intact. That is how strong our government of

Santo Domingo. Yes, we do not have a gaming tribe, but we are

strong culturally, we are strong religiously, we are strong in everything that has to do with the land and earth, and so on.

10

Now, at this time, I wanted to read to you a prepared statement,

and I wanted to thank Senator Jeff Bingaman’s staff for coming to

our Indian land. Remember, I did not say ‘‘reservation,’’ I said ‘‘Indian land.’’ That is more appropriate. In every speech that I make

in Congress, State legislature, I say ‘‘Indian land.’’ I never say ‘‘Indian reservation.’’ That doesn’t fly with me, the word ‘‘reservation.’’

It is not reservation, it is Indian land, and that is true.

So let me go ahead and read you this prepared statement, and

I hope this will at least highlight in Congress to make sure the

Senate is heard properly in Congress.

The Honorable Jeff Bingaman, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Dear Senator Bingaman, we are writing in support of the proposed legislation regarding—the Galisteo Basin protection legislation that was first introduced in 1999

by you and Congressman Udall, and that is being reintroduced this year again.

Santo Domingo Pueblo is one Nation that strongly—has strong historic ties to the

Galisteo Basin entirely, and many cultural resources found there is belonging to us.

They include some of the largest pueblo ruins in the United States, spectacular rock

art, mission churches, and early Spanish settlements. The region played a key role

in the Pueblo Revolt of 1680 and was largely abandoned at the time. Both Santa

Fe and Albuquerque are expanding into the basin at a rapid rate. We are becoming

increasingly alarmed by the threats to these resources, such as looting, urban development, erosion, and so on.

The cultural resources this legislation seeks to protect are located on Federal,

State, county, private lands. Sorry, it’s got left out here. It should say Indian land

also. The proposed legislation seeks to arrange public/private partnerships to secure

the permanent protection of these resources. It would facilitate planning and interaction between the pueblos and non-native governments and landowners with regard to the protection and management of these ruins.

With all the pressures on the basin, now is the time to act to protect these priceless resources. They are an untold part of our history and heritage. They are also

a vital part of the history of New Mexico, the United States, and the world. This

legislation deserves the support of all New Mexicans, and I encourage every one of

you people in New Mexico to come forward and strongly support this, and hope that

the Congress will act quickly to enact it.

And I, again, certainly as a Governor of this Nation of ours, to protect this, and

I will take the position strongly in Congress, if I need to. There is a way to do this,

and I stand ready for you, Senator Bingaman, to be with you in Congress all the

way through to support this, and I want to make sure that this is done.

So let me repeat again, last, as a prepared statement, please, please understand,

all of you in America and New Mexico, we were here first and we are going to continue to stay here, but from here, forth, from now on, anything that involves New

Mexico land, I want to make sure my Indian people is included in the testimonies.

I want to make sure that every step of the way, the State, of Nation, that Native

American be consulted.

Gladly to say, at least BLM came forward recently, to the congressional act several years ago. Now BLM is allowed to interact with Indian people in this State for

land exchange program, and I want to be—gladly, publicly make the statement. Recently we had a land exchange program with the BLM people, and I was very glad

to do that. Now at least we gained some more on the east side of our Indian land.

Inclusive of that, we are buying some more land over on the west side.

As you can see, I am here telling the Congress and public and the legislature that

I will hope the ownership there, Joe Miller and rest of you, if you are here, I stand

ready to sit with you, talk to you; we may work something out. I would like to see

that some of that area return back to my Indian people. That way it will show the

American people like you and I will be protected. I can assure you we know how

to protect the cultural and religious sites. So if that can be possible, Senator, I

would like to see on the sites some kind of negotiation be discussed, at all possible,

return back to the site, because after all, anyone—there is nobody in the world can

argue with me. It is our aboriginal inhabitants’ home sites.

San Marcos is good example. I heard the other day, somebody wrote a bit in the

New Mexican News, that I haven’t read, somebody’s talking on our behalf that we

should be the ones telling the people in New Mexico that San Marcos Pueblo belonged to my people. We studied that during my land investigation, San Marcos

Pueblo area. We have four or five tribes that live there many years before USA, beVerDate 11-SEP-98 15:39 Feb 06, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 J:\DOCS\84-655 SENERGY3 PsN: SENERGY3
11

fore Columbus, before Spanish government. It is all evidenced across this New Mexico. La Cienega area, I have my people live there. The ruins are still there.

So Senator, I just wanted to make sure that I am here, glad today, that you all

invited me to come forward. But here on, I want to be out there on the forefront,

every time there is something come up like this, because Santo Domingo is very

strong, very strong in this situation. We are a very, very conservative Indian Nation, Santo Domingo, and we have a strong government. And like I say, I am nothing new to this State and Nation. I have gone through the mill. I know what I am

talking about when it comes to Indian Nation, culture, religion, and so on, so I hope

the Senator—and I wanted to assure you, Senator, I’ll be right in there with you

all the way, to make sure that this time, Senator—and I want to make sure on the

Republican side, Senator—what is his name, Senator Republican? Domenici. I forgot

it for a while, but I remembered it.

I heard that he did not support this initially, way back, Senator. This time, I am

going to get Senator Domenici getting in side by side with Udall, no problem, Heather Wilson, and the rest of the folks. I want to make sure that they support, because

they are part of the New Mexico citizens and they represent all of us, but more importantly, Senator, I hope the Congress and I hope both the House and Senate will

listen to us, and please invite us, Senator. I will protect this for you, and you will

protect this for us. Together we will go in partnership to make sure it is protected.

Thank you very much for allowing me.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Thank you, Governor. I appreciate

your strong statements. Our next witness is Mark Michel, president of The Archaeological Conservancy. And let me just mention,

I think what is obvious to everyone who has followed this issue is

that Mark has been a leader in not only promoting protection of

these sites, but also in urging that we move ahead with legislation

of this sort. So thank you very much for all your help, Mark.

STATEMENT OF MARK MICHEL, PRESIDENT,

THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSERVANCY

Mr. MICHEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for having me here. I want to especially thank you and Congressman

Udall for introducing this legislation and sticking with it. You

know, often time legislation, particularly good legislation, takes a

long time to get through our process here, and I assure you that

I will be with you for as long as it takes to get it done, and hopefully, we will get it done this year.

I have prepared a written statement for the committee, that I

would like to summarize for you today. I would like to address,

first, the significance of the resources, from an archaeological point

of view, in the Galisteo Basin. These resources include the largest

pueblo ruins found anywhere in the United States, some with up

to 2,000 ruins. In fact, 10 of these 24 sites have more than 1,200

ruins—surface ruins, and just to give you an example, Pueblo Bonito in Chaco Canyon, which is a spectacular stone ruin, has 800

ruins, total, on five stories, so some of these ruins might have as

many as 5,000 ruins, so many times the size of Pueblo Bonito, and

there are 10 of these of that massive size, along with a number of

earlier ones.

The basin also includes world-class rock art, and over here, we

have a poster showing an example of some of the rock art that is

found here. I would hesitate to say that there is any better rock

art or any better concentration of rock art anywhere in the United

States than the Galisteo Basin. They include some of the earliest—

they contain some of the earliest European settlements in the

United States, dating to 1600, where the first Spanish settlers to

come into New Mexico were established.

12

And many of these sites were abandoned at some time or another, many of them during the Pueblo Revolt of 1680, some a little

bit later, and not built over again, so they are preserved, and they

will give us a very interesting picture, snapshot, if you will, of

Spanish colonial life in New Mexico that cannot be obtained in

Santa Fe or Albuquerque, or places where the earliest ruins have

been destroyed by remodeling and rebuilding of the Spanish towns.

The basin contains at least four of the earliest Roman Catholic

missions established in the United States, and so it is really the

birthplace of the Christian Church in the United States, and these

missions were destroyed during the Pueblo Revolt of 1680 and have

never been rebuilt, but they are there intact. In the last couple of

years, archaeologists have been excavating the one at Pueblo San

Marcos and found fascinating things that will tell us much of the

early Spanish missions. Archbishop Sheehan has been out to visit

these, and is very impressed, very much interested in seeing them

preserved.

The region is nationally significant and it has attracted nationally important archaeologists from all over the country in recent

years, including people from the American Museum of Natural History in New York; George Mason University in Arlington, Virginia;

University of Chicago; Columbia University; and our local Museum

of New Mexico and the University of New Mexico. All of these people have been working in the basin in the last couple of years.

Recently, the Field Museum of Chicago, the University of Colorado, and the University of California at Santa Cruz have also been

here, so it is attracted national attention.

S. 2776 would establish a program to protect 24 of these sites

through public/private partnerships. The bill is patterned on the

highly successful Chaco and outlier legislation of 1980 that has

protected 39 outlying villages of Chaco Canyon for the last 22

years. As with the Chaco bill, S. 2776 relies on the cooperation of

private landowners, Federal, State and county governments, the

pueblos and the general public. The Secretary of the Interior would

enter into voluntary cooperative agreements with nonfederal owners to assist in protecting the archaeological sites. Public lands

would receive an enhanced level of protection.

Since the heart of this legislation is to aid non-Federal landowners, I think it would be appropriate to indicate in the bill, or

perhaps to report, some of the types of aid that would be available;

in other words, to be more specific, and that would include things

like fencing and security, erosion control, stabilization of ruins, and

so forth.

Thank you again for having me here today, Senator. Thank you

again for your great leadership on this issue, and as Chairman of

the committee, we are very honored to have you as our Senator.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Michel follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARK MICHEL, PRESIDENT,

THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSERVANCY

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. My name is Mark Michel and I live

in Albuquerque, New Mexico. I am President of The Archaeological Conservancy, a

non-profit organization formed in 1980 to acquire and permanently preserve the

most important remaining archaeological sites that are located on private land in

the United States. We have completed about 250 projects in 37 states. We also pubVerDate 11-SEP-98 15:39 Feb 06, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 J:\DOCS\84-655 SENERGY3 PsN: SENERGY3
13

lish American Archaeology magazine and have about 25,000 members. The Galisteo

Basin, located between Albuquerque and Santa Fe, New Mexico, contains one of the

largest concentrations of prehistoric and historic ruins found anywhere in the

United States. These ruins tell a story of at least 700 years of American history and

of the first interaction between Native Americans and Europeans.

Sometime around A.D. 1250, numerous small pueblos in the Galisteo Basin of

New Mexico, just south of Santa Fe, coalesced into a number of very large pueblo

villages. New immigrants, perhaps from the collapsing centers of Chaco Canyon and

Mesa Verde, swelled the towns to unprecedented size, including the largest pueblo

ruins in the United States.

These pueblos flourished, then dwindled, then disappeared, leaving only large

ruins of adobe and stone, with millions of shards of pottery and thousands of graves.

The Spanish called these pueblos Cienega, San Cristobal, San Lazaro, Pueblo Blanco, San Marcos, etc.

We know from Spanish accounts that the Galisteo Basin was a thriving community when Coronado arrived in A.D. 1541. Castano de Sosa followed in A.D. 1591

and gave Spanish names to the Indian towns. Juan de Onate, New Mexico’s first

governor, visited the Galisteo Basin in 1598, and noted the decline in the population, perhaps as a result of European diseases. Mission churches were established

soon after at four of the pueblos. These are four of the first Christian churches established in the United States. Their ruins are part of this legislation.

In 1680, the Pueblos rose in revolt against the Spanish. Haciendas were destroyed, priests were martyred, churches destroyed, and the Spanish were forced to

flee to El Paso. Santa Fe was occupied by Native American warriors. Twelve years

later, the Spanish returned under Diego de Vargas to find the Galisteo region largely deserted and in ruins. In this period, 1540-1692, the destiny of the American

Southwest was shaped in the Galisteo Basin. Native and European cultures clashed

and finally came to an accommodation.

S. 2776 designates 25 Spanish and Native American sites in the greater Galisteo

Basin as archaeological protection sites and provides for their protection through

public-private partnerships. These sites cover the entire history of the region—from

the 2,000 surface rooms of Pueblo San Marcos to world class rock art to a one-acre

Spanish hacienda destroyed in the revolt of 1680. There is nothing like this concentration of multi-ethnic sites anywhere else in the United States.

This incredible resource is under assault from a number of directions. Surging

arroyos are threatening to wash away major parts of many of these sites. At Pueblo

Blanco and Pueblo San Marcos, for example, erosion has damaged several large portions of the ruins and remedial efforts have been only partially effective. Two years

ago, a flash flood swept down a newly paved county road and came within a foot

of washing away large parts of the best preserved pre-revolt Spanish settlement in

the country.

Sprawling growth from Santa Fe and Albuquerque is also putting intense pressure on these ruins. Subdivisions are already in progress or planned for several

areas of the basin, and land prices are sky-rocketing. This development is beginning

to have a major impact on the cultural resources, including trespass, roads to formally remote areas, and construction impacts on nearby sites.

Finally, uncontrolled excavations or looting is a constant threat to these irreplaceable resources. Artifacts from these large sites bring high prices on the international

antiquities market, and landowners and managers have an increasingly difficult

time stopping professional looters.

S. 2776 would protect these incredible resources through public-private partnerships. For the past several years the Bureau of Land Management has been developing an Area of Critical Environmental Concern in the La Cienega part of the

basin. They have moved to acquire lands and provide additional protection to public

lands under their jurisdiction. This legislation would strengthen their authority to

provide protection.

The bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to enter into voluntary, cooperative agreements with private landowners to ‘‘protect, preserve, maintain, and administer’’ their sites. This concept is central to legislation adopted in 1980 that protects Chaco culture sites in Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico (P.L. 96-550). With

twenty-two years of experience with the Chaco sites, we are confident that this concept works well. The sites have been protected and so have the rights of private

landowners. S. 2776 closely parallels the 1980 statute.

S. 2776, like the Chaco outlier law, allows for the voluntary acquisition of sites

listed in this bill by the Department of the Interior. A number of the private owners

want these resources to be in the public domain and this legislation provides authority for so doing. The total area is small, only 4,591 acres at 25 sites, and nearly

14

half is already publicly owned. Technical assistance would also be provided to landowners that request it.

We feel the bill would be improved by specifying some of the types of aid the Secretary can provide to private landowners under the cooperative agreements, like

such as aid for fencing, erosion control, ruins stabilization, site mapping, monitoring

and so forth. Perhaps this could be in the committee report if not the bill itself.

S. 2776 also provides for the development of a general management plan for the

25 listed sites in the greater Galisteo Basin. For the first time there would be a

mechanism to manage the cultural resources of the region as a whole. Local, state,

and federal governmental units as well as private parties would work together to

develop a plan for the region. The nearby Pueblos would be included. The public at

large would also have ample opportunity for input.

The bill designates the Secretary of the Interior as the management authority. We

feel the bill would be strengthened by designating one agency to be in charge. Our

experience with the Chaco legislation, tells us that if no one agency is placed in

charge, it is difficult get anything done. The Bureau of Land Management has taken

the lead in this region, and it would be appropriate to put it in charge of the project.

The archaeological resources of the greater Galisteo Basin are a national treasure.

They are outstanding examples of Native American and Spanish colonial culture.

But more importantly, perhaps, it is here that these two great cultures first

interacted and helped forge a very important part of our American heritage. It was

here that the only successful Indian revolt against European rule took place. And

it was here that two cultures learned to live together.

This is a place of national significance that attracts scholars from all over the

country. In the past two years, scholars from the Museum of New Mexico, University of New Mexico, the American Museum of Natural History in New York, the

University of Chicago, Columbia University, and George Mason University have

conducted research at various Galisteo sites. The Field Museum of Chicago, University of Colorado, and the University of California at Santa Cruz have been here recently. More are on their way.

Since this legislation was first introduced in 1999, New Mexicans have rallied to

its support—Native Americans, Spanish heritage groups, our Archbishop, neighborhood groups, conservationists, the City and County of Santa Fe, Sandoval County,

and more. Santa Fe County has used its open space funds to acquire two of the most

endangered sites, and they are in the process of acquiring a third. I cannot remember a legislative initiative with such a broad range of support.

We urge the Congress to adopt S. 2776. It will provide a framework for the permanent preservation of one of the most important archaeological resources in the

nation.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much. I did not really anticipate that endorsement, but thank you very much. Let me now

turn to Robert Romero who is with the La Cienega Community Association, and who gave us an excellent tour of some of the sites

that are covered in this legislation. What was it, about 2 years ago

now?

Mr. ROMERO. Probably.

The CHAIRMAN. It seems about 2 years ago.

Why don’t you go right ahead, Mr. Romero.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT ROMERO, PRESIDENT OF

LA CIENEGA VALLEY ASSOCIATION

Mr. ROMERO. Senator Bingaman, I would like to thank you for

having us here today. It is really a privilege and a pleasure. I rarely speak from a prepared statement. I usually speak from my

heart, and I will go ahead and continue to do that today, and—I

am president of the La Cienega Valley Association, which represents the community of La Cienega and La Cieneguilla. We have

recently achieved traditional historical status by State designation

and by Santa Fe County. I also sit on the County Open Lands and

Trails Committee. I have sat on that since its inception.

15

I would also like to express my gratitude to my Native American

brothers here. My cultural history goes back to when Onate first

came into this area and my grandfather Bartolo Romero, my great,

great, great, great grandfather came up here with Onate, initially,

and eventually we settled here over the years, not so much as conquistadors, but as colonists. And I can tell you this, the Hispanic

culture would not have survived or existed here without the assistance of our Native American brothers, and we would have very

well perished in this land without their help.

And I would like to go ahead and speak from my experience in

La Cienega. We have worked as a community to preserve some significant archaeological sites in La Cieneguilla area, which were

slated for development: over 350 acres were going to be developed

out there, and we have since, through the county’s open lands program and also cooperation with the BLM, have acquired those

lands for protection.

And by sitting on the COLTC committee, I have been involved

in numerous acquisitions throughout the Galisteo Basin. I have become quite familiar with some ruins that I have never even have

known about. I think, right now, we have acquired over 1,000 acres

of property, and our local community has shown their commitment

to preservation of these sites through their continuing to pass bond

issues. Our initial bond issue was $12 million, and it went forward—we had a second bond issue for 8 million, and now a gross

receipts tax initiative was passed to allow $1 million annually to

come into this program.

What we are faced with now is the management of these properties. We can continue to acquire properties, but without management, they will be subject to degradation, further degradation, and

we really need to focus on that aspect, because we can continue to

try and acquire these sites and protect them from development by

acquiring them, but without open space surrounding these sites

and proper management in place, they are still subject to some of

the—the possibilities that are out there, that may lead to their further degradation.

We really need to focus on that, and it has got to be a consolidated effort. I don’t think any one entity alone can do this, and we

all really need to focus and work together on the management of

these properties.

I am also an official site steward of the La Cienega Area of Critical and Environmental Concern, and I do coordinate with the BLM

to allow site visits up to the petroglyph area there in La Cienega.

We need, also, to bring forward an educational process to our

young children to make them aware of the importance of these

sites, as well, because if we do not educate, our past would be long

forgotten, and we really need to focus on education and getting our

children more involved with our history and our culture. Without

that, I don’t think we stand a chance to really preserve anything

that is left here.

I have been active in fighting development as it has come into

our community, but the reality of the situation is that you can only

fight so hard, because our Government allows for private property

rights to be protected and people to have a right to develop their

land, as such. But without that educational process, how can we

16

expect developers to respect these sites? And how can we, without

providing an avenue for them to be involved, how can we expect

them to be involved, as well?

So we need to really, really coordinate, not just with our government—with our local government, but our Federal Government,

our State government. We need to really consolidate this effort into

a holistic effort and bring forward the private property owners and

the developers, as well, into this process.

And you know, money shouldn’t be the issue here, but it is, and

we really need to focus on the getting the funds necessary to continue to acquire these properties when they become available, because the timing is a key issue. It is here one day and gone the

next, and we really need to focus on having that funding available

when it is needed, and the management available, also, to steward

these properties once they are acquired—or should I say these sacred sites, rather than properties, as they may be considered by developers.

I am going to keep it short, and I will stand for any questions

when we are through with the presentation here. Thank you for

having me.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. I appreciate your testimony and your help with the effort we have been making.

Mr. Buck Dant is here to testify. Thank you, and we appreciate

you coming very much.

STATEMENT OF BUCK DANT, LOCAL LANDOWNER NEAR

VILLAGE OF GALISTEO, NM

Mr. DANT. Thank you, Senator. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Buck Dant, and I am a landowner on County

Road 42 between Highway 14 and the village of Galisteo. I have

been a resident of New Mexico since 1965 and have lived in this

area since 1980.

In 1998, I purchased a tract of land which contains prehistoric

Native American cultural sites, and most significantly, approximately one half of a pueblo ruin known as Burnt Corn, which was

mysteriously burned and abandoned around 1250 A.D. Prior to the

time of my purchase of this property, the plan was for the land to

be subdivided and sold off in lots for residential development. Although I respect the legal rights of landowners to develop their

property, it became apparent that there was other value to the

land that transcended financial speculation. Fortunately, the owners were willing to sell the property in its existing condition.

The impact of what I had done came shortly after the purchase.

I knew next to nothing about the history or archaeology of the

Galisteo Basin. I had little idea what I had become the owner of.

I was even afraid to walk on the land where the pueblo was, for

fear of disturbing intelligence I knew nothing about. I felt that the

whole thing was much bigger than I am, and perhaps, I had bitten

off more than I could chew; however, the responsibility for protection was instinctive.

The other half of the Burnt Corn Pueblo is on land owned by the

Bureau of Land Management, an organization about which I admittedly had dubious thoughts. There is no fence dividing our properties, but I imagined a division much more portentous in the

17

emerging mission to protect the pueblo and the land around it from

further intrusions.

Through the eyes of a few helpful and dedicated archaeologists,

I was able to understand the unique significance and importance

of the Burnt Corn Pueblo and why it is so special, but I also

learned about the dark side of looting and destruction that has

taken a heavy toll and caused irreparable damage, denying future

generations valuable knowledge about the physical, social and spiritual heritage of these First Americans, and I am sad to say that

this activity is still continuing today.

Above all others, I would like to acknowledge and honor Mr. Paul

Williams, the BLM archaeologist from the Taos field office, which

has local jurisdiction over this area. His personal commitment and

devotion to protecting these sites with the highest integrity and

sensibility is exemplary and should be commended. Even to a skeptic such as myself, a bridge of trust and respect has been built between a wary landowner and a huge Government agency; a highly

capable and caring face has replaced a faceless bureaucracy.

Since 1998, this tract of BLM land, approximately 2,000 acres,

has moved from the disposal list to a heightened priority, and recently new sites have been identified on the BLM and private lands

in the proximity of Burnt Corn Pueblo. Fortunately, these sites

have not been looted or disturbed and can still be protected intact.

The trust and relationship that has built up between myself and

Mr. Williams, and by extension, the BLM, will help ensure further

protection for the remains of Burnt Corn Pueblo in the foreseeable

future.

Change is coming at an accelerated pace, and a friendly chat and

a handshake will not be enough to safeguard sites like this from

the dynamics of a rapidly changing landscape. Speaking from personal experience, the personal experience being the steward of an

important piece of history such as Burnt Corn is an awesome and

sacred responsibility. It requires a sustained vigilance of time and

resources and knowledge that I don’t always have. I have no illusions that I own a part of Burnt Corn Pueblo, only that I am a

caretaker until, one day, the pueblo will hopefully be reunited

under one guardian and protected in a way that gives this venerable site the respect it deserves.

In my opinion, any group or individual who legally controls land

on which there are historic and prehistoric cultural sites has a

moral responsibility to safeguard them from any risk or harmful

trespass.

Finally, protecting and saving the archaeological sites in the

Galisteo Basin is not only the culturally correct thing to do, but

also politically popular. When Santa Fe County voters were first

presented with a referendum, in 1998, to approve general obligation bonds for acquisition of open space, they overwhelmingly endorsed the measure by 65 percent, and again, by a higher 69.8 percent, in the 2000 election. Clearly, interest is rising, and these were

bipartisan mandates. Some of these acquisitions and proposals,

such as Lamy Junction, contain the historic and prehistoric sites

in the Galisteo Basin, reflecting the value of these precious resources from the perception of Santa Fe County voters.

Thank you for your time.

18

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your testimony.

And our final witness this morning is Bob Jenks, who is here

representing the State Land Office, and we appreciate you being

here and your willingness to testify. Go right ahead.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT JENKS, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

FOR SURFACE RESOURCES, NEW MEXICO STATE LAND OFFICE

Mr. JENKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I am assistant commissioner for surface resources

at the New Mexico State Land Office, and on behalf of the commissioner of public lands, Ray Powell, I want to express our appreciation for the opportunity to speak to you today concerning the proposed Galisteo Basin Archaeological Protection Act. We sincerely

appreciate and applaud the initiative you have taken to identify a

positive process for protecting some of New Mexico’s most precious

links to its past.

Prior to and upon statehood, Congress granted to New Mexico

approximately 13 million acres of State trust land for the benefit

of public institutions such as our public schools. These lands are

managed by the State Land Office to generate revenue that provides critical economic support for these institutions. Due to the

fact that State trust lands are located throughout New Mexico,

these lands also hold a wealth of cultural and natural resources.

Recognizing this, the State Land Office views its responsibility to

not only manage these lands to optimize today’s economic benefit,

but also to perpetuate and protect for future generations the legacy

left by our predecessors.

The New Mexico State Land Office, for the last several years,

has made great strides in our effort to better understand the myriad of natural and cultural resources located on State trust land.

With the support and assistance of many local, State and Federal

agency partners, such as the Bureau of Land Management, and

private entities, we have made much progress. With that information and support we have embarked on numerous initiatives to conserve cultural resources located throughout the State. Recent prospects include the stabilization of centuries-old sites that are at risk

due to the rigors of time and human visitation. And in fact, next

week, we will be implementing protective measures at the Folsum

site in northeastern New Mexico, a location of nationally significant

research and educational value. These efforts have been successful,

in large measure, due to the cooperation of our lessees, agencies

and private organizations.

There are several thousand acres of State trust land in the

Galisteo Basin. In this area, we are fortunate to have the archaeological site Pueblo Blanco, situated primarily on State trust land.

Pueblo Blanco is identified in the Galisteo Basin Archaeological

Protect Act, as well. Pueblo Blanco is a very large stone masonry

ruin, which contains an estimated 1,450 rooms in 16-room blocks,

with seven or eight plazas located around it. In fact, the photograph located over there, the one farthest to your right, is that of

Pueblo Blanco. As with many other sites in the Basin, evidence

suggests this particular site was occupied—it is estimated that it

was occupied between the 1400’s and 1600’s.

19

The significance of Pueblo Blanco, from a research perspective,

lies in its large information potential regarding the subsistence, climate and cultural dynamics between the Native Americans and

Spanish explorers. There were limited excavations in the early

1900’s, but the majority of the site remains buried and untouched.

As with many locations, erosion is a threat to the stability and integrity of this particular site. In response, a few years ago, the

State Land Office implemented remedial measures that arrested

the immediate erosion threats, but nonetheless, there are still opportunities for us to do more work out there.

The Galisteo Basin Archeological Protection Act presents welcome opportunities to protect and conserve irreplaceable archaeological treasures such as Pueblo Blanco. Our experience has been

that the most successful projects are those that involve partners

and collaboration. The act will provide a means for interested parties to work together and accomplish goals that otherwise might

not be attainable. It stipulates that the Department of the Interior

will consult with the commissioner of public lands through the development of a general management plan, and we look forward to

working with them to do that.

It also provides that any involvement of non-Federal lands would

be voluntary. We believe that this provision will actually provide

or serve as an incentive to conserve cultural resources in the basin.

The State Land Office views the provision for the development of

cooperative agreements as a practicable method for dealing with

management issues best addressed through collaboration.

Lastly, the bill provides that should the State Land Office and

the Department of the Interior, if they should agree, may exchange

land to provide for the protection of archaeological sites, which provides flexibility for those circumstances where this may be the best

alternative. The State Land Office views the Galisteo Basin Archaeological Protection Act as a constructive approach to providing

alternatives for dealing with complex issues.

We truly appreciate the efforts you have made, Senator, to protect New Mexico’s rich cultural heritage and we also appreciate the

willingness of you and your staff to work with us to better understand and incorporate provisions recognizing the unique responsibilities of the State Land Office.

Thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, and let me particularly

thank our State Land Commissioner, Ray Powell, for his support,

his cooperation and his suggestions on how to improve this bill,

which we certainly have taken to heart.

Let me also just respond now. Governor Quintana, you had indicated several suggestions, which we want to study in greater detail.

However, we did include some revisions in here, which I hope will

address some of your concerns. We have a section—in section 9,

and subparagraph 4 of that, which says that nothing in the act will

be construed to restrict or limit tribes from protecting cultural or

religious sites on tribal lands, so we are trying to ensure that that

is clear in the law.

It is also my understanding that the two acts you referred to, the

Archaeological Resources Protection Act, that is ARPA, and

NAGPRA, which is the Native American Graves Protection and ReVerDate 11-SEP-98 15:39 Feb 06, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 J:\DOCS\84-655 SENERGY3 PsN: SENERGY3
20

patriation Act, already apply on pueblo lands, but we will certainly

study that and try to be sure that that is the case. But that is an

extra point that you made.

Governor Lovato, we appreciate your strong statement and look

forward to working with you, as well, as we try to move forward

here.

Let me ask Mark Michel, your organization, The Archaeological

Conservancy, has spent a great deal of time and money in an effort

to protect some of these sites already. What do you see as the benefit of this legislation if it goes forward? Do you believe that the

BLM will be in a better position to assist you in further acts to protect some of these sites? Is that the main motivation for your support of this legislation?

Mr. MICHEL. I wouldn’t say it is the main motivation. I think

that as a small nonprofit organization, our ability to protect the

sites of this size and magnitude is limited. We have most—one of

the big sites that we own, we have another 80 acres at Pueblo

Blanco, and that’s just parts of two of the 24 sites, so I think, for

a private organization, it is difficult to protect the whole thing.

I think the real heart of this legislation is the cooperative agreements, Mr. Chairman, where the Department of the Interior, with

its resources and, hopefully, some appropriations and its expertise,

can help private landowners to voluntarily protect these sites, and

that kind of help comes in the way of expertise in stabilization. It

comes in the way of expertise in erosion control, which is a really

big issue out here. If you look at these photographs that we have

here, almost every single one of these sites is being damaged by arroyo cutting, so I think that those are the key things that we are

looking for here.

The other thing I think, is that your initiative, Senator, has

sparked all kinds of other people to get involved in trying to protect

archaeological sites in the Galisteo Basin already, and I want to

particularly point to the county of Santa Fe, that has already acquired two of these in the last 2 years, and is in the process of acquiring one more, using its bond issue, publicly voted bond issue,

open space bonds, and so—they are looking for help in managing

these sites. They have no resources whatsoever for managing archaeological sites, so they are looking for help in managing these,

as well.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me also ask, there has been some suggestion

that there continue to be threats due to looting of these sites, even

at the present time and in recent years. Is that your impression?

I mean, is this legislation something that needs to be passed in the

near future, rather than the distant future?

Mr. MICHEL. Yes, I think that the threat is increasing with every

year that goes by. Just in the last—since the last time we had a

hearing on this, we have had several incidents of looting that I am

aware of in the basin, because there’s more people around. There’s

more things around, but there’s also a lot more development.

I mean, these sites—and if you go out there today, as you know,

Senator, compared to 10 years ago, you see subdivisions all over

the place, and development going on all over the place, and the

price of land is skyrocketing, and so, what I am suggesting is that

maybe it is not an imminent crisis for most of these at this time,

21

but why don’t we get ahead of the curve a little bit before the bulldozers are at the door, and save a little taxpayer money and try

to protect these things before the bulldozers are at the door for a

change?

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Thank you very much.

Mr. Romero, let me ask you about your suggestion regarding the

need for better education, public education, about the importance

of some of these sites and the importance of protecting them. Are

you aware of any formal programs to do this at the current time?

Is there anything you are aware of that either your organization

or any of the other organizations you deal with are engaged in

along these lines?

Mr. ROMERO. Right now, at the present time, it is very limited.

There are some educational initiatives being taken on. There are

some field trips being conducted in the public schools, out to La

Cieneguilla, to make aware to the children that there are these

sites that are in need of protection. I think it is very important to

educate our children, at an early age, of the significance of these

sites. Not only do they hold history on the part of the Native Americans, but also on—as Mark had mentioned, also in the Spanish colonial period.

You know, our children are going to be our future developers, our

future archaeologists, our future—they are our future. And I think

if we start this process of emphasizing education, I think there will

be more awareness in the future as the pressures continue to occur,

and there will be more sensitivity to it. I really feel that education

is ultimately going to be the saving grace of these sites. And we

are talking about Galisteo Basin here, but if you go throughout

New Mexico, there’s numerous sites that have yet to be encroached

upon, but as development occurs, as I have seen in my 37 years

of living here in New Mexico and in the local area here, development has occurred beyond my wildest beliefs.

I never thought that my small community of La Cienega would

be on the verge of becoming part of the city of Santa Fe, and that

is one of the reasons why we went for traditional historic preservation, was to try to protect our identity and some of the heritages

that are there in our village. And we did this through education,

you know, to educate our representatives there at the county level

to grant us this designation, and at the State level, as well.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Thank you very much.

Mr. Dant, you obviously have a strong commitment to the protection of sites on the land you own and other sites as well. Is your

view on this shared by other landowners in this area, as you understand it, or are you the exception?

Mr. DANT. That is a bit difficult for me to answer, because I do

not know of any other landowners specifically that are in my position. I would say that in speaking to the adjacent landowners, they

are certainly aware of what’s going on. I agree with Mr. Romero.

I think education is a very important component here. I think that

these sites could be much more publicized, which kind of opens the

door for people coming who, perhaps, could injure the sites in some

way. So I think there has to be a lot of thought given to how this

is done in terms of public awareness and opening these sites to research and invitation.

22

As far as the other landowners, I think it is just a matter of

working on the ground level, community involvement, and trying

to, you know, get people to be, first, aware, and then, perhaps, enthusiastic, and then, perhaps, to participate in the protection of

these sites.

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. Well, thank you very much for your testimony.

Yes, Governor Lovato, go ahead.

Mr. LOVATO. I would like to make a strong recommendation to

you, as the chairman of the managing committee, there’s several

things that need to be done that no one has done. One is the enforcement. Yes, we have all kinds of Senators, Congress enacting

some of the protection laws such as Native American protection

laws, and so on, but I don’t see anyone out there in the Federal

Government really, truly enforcing it. There’s still a lot of looting

going on, there’s still a lot of damages going on, there’s still a lot

of digging going on. And no one seems to be doing the prosecuting.

That is my contention right now, so I would like to see that enforcement being made in order to do that.

See, Senator, I do not want to go home today empty look in hand.

I am not that way. When I go to Congress, I want to come home

with something concrete that I can tell my people, ‘‘Your people are

going to be protected, your ancestry rights.’’ I do not want to go

home back today empty looking, Senator. I want to recommend

that to you strongly, that we get some kind of enforcement going

in terms of education.

The comment made here by brother Robert Romero pointed out

is well taken. If anybody is well qualified in New Mexico for teacher of youngsters, multicultural, Hispanic, Indian, and so many people in New Mexico, to teach what is cultural relevant. There is significant area sites, you have got to have a multicultural involvement to do public education. I do not see no one in New Mexico’s

qualified to do public education only that because it takes a strong

feeling from my heart. Right now, I am sitting here wondering if

anybody was to teach your youngsters, multicultural students, is

going to have to be people like our American Indian people and my

brothers of Hispanic race because they came to settle. They know

the feeling.

American Indians, when they lived here before USA, we know

that they left behind many things, and I am suggesting another

thing, Senator, not only the Galisteo Basin should be addressed at

the national level in Congress. I would like to see or take a strong

position in reference to the San Marcos Pueblo area. I heard somebody came out with the news the other day in The New Mexican.

I haven’t read it. I am going to take a strong position on that San

Marcos Pueblo because nobody consulted my people, and yet, I

have a five or six ancestry claimship on. My pueblo live there long

before Spanish encroachment, long before United States, and we

walked that terrain in that San Marcos Pueblo. We know the history.

I have more than Ph.D. when it comes to history of New Mexico

land, so no one in the audience could ever tell me I am not educated. I have been educated from the time immemorial, as young

as I am. So I have all this way of that qualification, Senator, but

23

I do want to leave with this substance, like I said, I do not want

to go home empty, Senator, and you know me. I am nothing lightly

taken by Congress. I have been there. And so I wanted to assure

the public of New Mexico that we be inclusive every step of the

way, public education, walking through the sites, and please do not

leave us out all the way through Congress, if we are going to pass

this. Because I am going to be the first to be heard in Congress

if my people are bypassed in Congress, and I am going to take the

strong position in Congress when the time is right.

So anyway, those suggestions, public education is well taken by

multicultural understanding, presentation, and management skills.

I want my Indian people to be inclusive in the management. How

can anybody manage that area with the absence of Indian people?

No one is qualified to do that. So you need to be inclusive of multicultural people, get the Federal dollars. Let’s go support one another. Let’s be inclusive of multicultural and preserve that area

and manage those areas equally. Those are the things that I am

more interested in.

Like I said, I do not want to go home empty, because I have—

I have gone through this kind of business before, and usually, I

find myself on the site and someone else doing talking for my people. Those property over there, burial grounds, San Marcos, the

Lamy area, La Cienega, those are my people’s property. They are

mine. My people’s ancestral property. No one has a right to take

out and display in archaeological museum. That is not right for display. Those are our spiritual connected, so we have got to protect

that.

So I hope we can understand this, Senator, and all of you out

there in the public, let’s get together and really, really come together to understand this, share the values and really enforce

those laws and protect. So Senator, again, I hate to sound this way,

but I am very—I get pretty keyed up when somebody speaks on my

behalf where they do not even know the history of themselves, so

I want to qualify that for my record. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, thank you very much. Let me just thank

all the witnesses. If anyone in the audience wishes to make a statement on the legislation or put in a statement for the record, we will

be glad to include that, and review that before we move ahead. We

ask that you get that to us within the next 2 weeks. You can send

it to my office over on Marcy Street, here in Santa Fe, or to our

office in Washington. Either way, we will be glad to receive it and

include it in the record. You can state your views for or against the

legislation and for or against any particular changes of the legislation.

Well, again, thank you all very much for testifying, and we have

had a good——

Yes, ma’am.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER. Can I ask Governor Lovato, are the

young people who you are alluding to, there, are any of them really

learning how to teach?

Mr. LOVATO. In public schools?

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER. Not necessarily public schools, but you

know, about your heritage.

24

Mr. LOVATO. I don’t worry about my cultural youths and the cultural—my religion. My young people, from the time of birth, are

taught at home. Santo Domingo is strong, young kids. They are

taught the history in their own native tongue, so there is no reason

for anyone to worry. We know how to preserve. We are teaching

our people how to protect. I am not sure if that is your question.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Well, why don’t we terminate the hearing, and we appreciate all of you coming very much. Thank you.

[Whereupon, at 10:24 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

Æ