he Department of the Interior has
decided that Hopi Indians should be allowed to use golden eagle hatchlings
collected at a national monument in Arizona in an annual, ancient rite
in which the birds are smothered.
Department officials say they are trying to tread a difficult path to
protect wildlife, the park system, the rights of American Indians and religious
freedom.
But critics say the legal reasoning used by the agency to justify its
position, detailed in a rule the agency plans to propose next month, is
so broad that it could open the way to much wider hunting and trapping
by Indians in parks from Alaska to Florida.
National Park Service officials defend the proposal, which is still
in draft form, saying it would be applied only to a few clans in the Hopi
tribe that have a clear, historical link to the few eagle nests that dot
the windswept plateaus in the 56-square- mile park, Wupatki National Monument,
which was long tribal territory. For generations, young men have scaled
cliffs each spring to gather eaglets, which are considered messengers between
the physical and spiritual worlds. The eaglets are reared until July, when
they are sacrificed to send them to their spirit home.
A copy of the draft rule was provided to The New York Times. The section
that most concerns critics reads that it is possible that the National
Park Service "will receive requests from other tribes for similar rule
changes to address religious practices."
"Such requests will be addressed on their merits, and any rule changes
would follow the same process as being followed here," the proposal reads.
"It is also possible at some point that the N.P.S. may consider doing a
more generic rulemaking on the subject," it adds.
Jeffrey Ruch, the executive director of Public Employees for Environmental
Responsibility, a private group representing 10,000 federal and state conservation
workers, said a survey by his organization of more than 40 large parks
last spring found that half had received requests or demands from tribes
for hunting rights.
"It may be Wupatki today, but it's likely to be Yellowstone tomorrow,"
Mr. Ruch said.
In a telephone interview, officials at Olympic National Park in Washington
confirmed the trend and said it certainly applied to their park, which
has seven tribes along its boundaries that have been seeking to hunt elk
and other wildlife.
Hunting and trapping is banned in national parks and national monuments
but is permitted on a limited basis in some national recreation areas and
on other federal lands if specifically authorized by Congress.
The critics, including conservation and animal rights groups and some
department officials, say that it should be up to Congress, not agency
officials, to authorize any expanded taking of wildlife in the park system.
They say that they respect the Hopis' traditions but that baby golden
eagles should be collected somewhere other than the Wupatki monument, northeast
of Flagstaff, which was established in 1924 to protect pueblo ruins and
scenic mesas and to serve as a wildlife sanctuary.
Patricia L. Parker, the chief of the American Indian liaison office
of the park service, stressed that the rule was a work in progress, and
that even when it is published in the Federal Register — possibly as early
as the middle of November — "the whole purpose is to hear what the public
thinks."
"We will wait to form an opinion," she said.
Dr. Parker, who is an anthropologist, said that the issues are agonizingly
complex, but that the park service must find ways to mesh preservation
of natural resources with preservation of cultural riches.
"This is about the ancient needs of a Hopi clan to practice their religion
as part of the survival of their culture," Dr. Parker said. "When you put
that in the context of a national park, you raise some very complex issues."
The issues arose early last year, when several Hopis entered the monument
to gather eagles, presenting a general federal permit allowing them to
collect 40 hatchling golden eagles or red-tailed hawks.
They were turned back by park rangers and the monument superintendent,
who said that the permit did not apply to a national monument or park,
where taking of wildlife is prohibited except for research contributing
to preservation of a species.
Leigh J. Kuwanwisiwma, director of the Hopi Cultural Preservation Office,
then issued a statement complaining that park officials were not respecting
the rights of the Indians whose ancestors built the 900-year- old red-rock
settlements now frequented by tourists.
"On one hand," he said, "they eloquently preach about their relationships
and partnership with the Hopi Tribe and on the other hand, they systematically
interfere with and prevent practice of Hopi religion."
The Hopis complained to Bruce Babbitt, the secretary of the interior,
who said he favored a loosening of the park rules, at least in this case,
and asked the department's solicitor general to explore a change.
Mr. Babbitt was traveling on Friday and yesterday and was not available,
a spokesmen said.
Golden eagles are relatively plentiful in the United States, but they
are protected under a law intended to protect American bald eagles.
The process of drafting the rule has created rifts in the department,
the parks agency, and in private conservation groups, all of which have
been struggling to find ways to balance Indian rights and wildlife laws.
"We have a tradition of working very closely with Native Americans,
who for years have been environmental allies," said Rosalyn Fennell, the
director of national parks programs at the Wilderness Society, a private
conservation group. "I can think of no other issue we've worked on recently
that has caused this level of emotion."
She said she was hopeful that any final rule would be strictly limited
to the Hopis. "But if this portends the opening of the floodgates, where
any tribe with ancestral connection to any part of a national park can
take some animal, we are going to look at each case and will vigorously
oppose any where we think there is no strong connection."
One park service official involved with the Wupatki decision, who spoke
only on condition of anonymity, said he was "troubled" by some of the language
in the draft but was confident that the intent was to restrict permission
to the Hopis.
"It's a can of worms," he said. "In the end, it'll have to be battled
out in the courts, like most things."
Other park service officials noted that the issue could be moot in any
case, at least for the Wupatki monument. Some of the longstanding nesting
sites — and eagle gathering sites — have not been used by eagles in recent
years, possibly because so many tourists visit nearby ruins.
