Junta de Acequias and Land Grants, Rio Arriba-style

Yesterday, Saturday, November 21st, I attended the umpteenth Junta de las Acequias y Mercedes. It was held in the Oñate Monument and Cultural Center in Alcalde, New Mexico. This event, organized by Rio Arriba County (Commissioners) and its Planning Department representatives, brings together parciantes and land grant commission members from around the state to discuss what might be politely termed the "Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo" cultural hangover. To be clear, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo applied to all residents of New Mexico at the time of 'transfer' to the United States from Mexico. While Hispanos recite this Treaty like mantra, it's only recently that the Pueblos have started investigating what the Treaty meant and means for them currently (see Hopi case). And I mean this with all due respect - what's crucial to understand here is how imminent and current the land grants (not to mention acequia) issue is for residents of New Mexico of Hispano-Mexican descent. That they occupied a good portion of the state (see the map), and its best agricultural lands, is not lost on land grant heirs and descendants. As the 1879 map makes clear, however, the General Land Office and the later Court of Private Land Claims, severely reduced the size of these grants if they were awarded at all.

The morning sessions, first of all, were squarely focused on the acequias, sub-divided between "legal and scientific" and then the following "economic & social implications." The first panel included lawyers Connie Ode and Mary Humphrey from the Taos area (reporting on the Gavilan case re: Cook), similar to the Chupadero case we've written about, Ralph Vigil from the New Mexico Acequia Commission and their current concerns (see last post), and Steve Guldan (NMSU-Alcalde) who quickly ran through some of the hydrology research data on acequias already presented at the October Acequia Hydrology Symposium organized by NMSU that I discussed previously in this blog.

The second morning session (economic/social implications of acequias) included some 2007 Census data and cursory review and analysis by R. Edmund Gomez (NMSU-Alcalde) focused on Rio Arriba County. Then, Glenna Dean (former NM State Archaeologist) presented an interesting framework for possible protection of acequias from a historic preservation angle: the "traditional cultural property" designation the state uses to set-aside historically and culturally important properties. Normally, this would include historic buildings (which in the U.S. case means a pretty low bar, older than 50 years), and the first cases of these designations have largely focused on important places like Mt Taylor (important to several tribes in the state). This was an intriguing possibility for parciantes, if they are willing to engage with some paperwork and some hearings on the (traditional cultural) values of acequias and the water in them. It would, at the very least, add yet another bureaucratic state-level protection if anybody tried to engage in water transfers or brokering. If the water in the acequia is considered a vital "contributing factor" to the acequia's traditional cultural property, then there's a strong case to be made. Only 5 (five!?) acequias in the state have designations for historic recognition, but none of them have used the "traditional cultural property" route, seemingly, because they perceive or fear that doing so might mean they couldn't modify the system. Dean made clear that is not the case. And let us be blunt: if the (damn) Elephant Butte Dam can be registered on the National Register of Historic Places, then so can acequias that pre-date it by centuries. So, parciantes and commissioners, do not fear to enter the Matrix of government bureaucracy because you are already part of it! ["The Matrix is all around you..."] Use the Matrix to your advantage - build alliances, seek out a wider network for support, the keys to institutional survival and success. That session ended with some planning folks from Rio Arriba County, including one of the organizers Lucia Sanchez, and Mr. Boyle, while Alberto Baros preferred to stay out of the lime-light. They discussed the county's efforts to set-aside and create zoning rules (and land-use codes) that specified a percentage formula on agricultural lands so that residential development wouldn't eat up the irrigated acreage as is occurring elsewhere in the state.

Then things got interesting with a certain Mike Scarborough, apparently a former attorney (?) from the Espanola area and a native to that area, who presented on the GAO (Government Accountability Office) and its hearings and final report (2004) on the most recent round of discussions regarding the land grants in New Mexico ("Mercedes"). While using some of the original text of the GAO (2004) report, and previous vitriol from late 19th century and even 20th century  politicians on the racial dynamics of New Mexico, he then argued that Teddy Roosevelt "stole" previous forested area land grants (like Chama, Petaca, Valdez) to protect the future Elephant Butte Dam site from sedimentation. That forests, such as the one in the Jemez, were seen as vital to watersheds is nothing new; engineers a century ago knew that dams have a life-span to them and were not infinite creations. Just visit the Santa Fe relics, like Two Mile Dam (photo), now part of a nature reserve, to get a sense of how fleeting formal reservoirs can be. Intriguing - but unproven? I'd like to see this in print with a real history journal soon, to see if it passes muster with other historians of the period. Of course the GAO white-wash was fairly lambasted by land grant activists and scholars of the period, and rightly so. The solutions would be tricky, depending on the specific circumstances and current land tenure mosaic of the former land grants, but they could be done. And land grant organizers are busy trying to get ready for that possible day, if and when state and federal officials are willing to recognize this history of viol...err..theft.

I don't doubt Scarborough's material and findings, but he was getting a bit coy with the interpretive aspects of cartography, mapping dates, and designation dates for protection which can be notoriously difficult to do. Yes, maps lie as Mark Monmonier argued long ago, but they also carry power relations as Harvey also argued long ago. But Scarborough really didn't detail how the theft occurred, and if you're interested, I'd recommend the excellent work of David Correia, fellow geographer who carefully reconstructed the details for one of these (Petaca) and how the claims proceeded to divvy up former land grants. You can also listen to his (mp3 format) audio clip on land grants in Tierra Amarilla here. No doubt this was, for Hispanos, the darkest of eras as community property slipped away at the hands of both surveyors and the Santa Fe Ring. The Ring, for those who have not heard of it, was headed by the infamous Thomas Catron.

Suitably, the next speakers revolved around the partial legal victory of the La Sierra (Sangre de Cristo land grant) communal property owners in San Luis, Colorado (and surrounding villages). Shirley Otero, from the SdeG Land Grant, presented a bristling overview of the recent legal fight between the heirs of the grant (100+ plaintiffs) and Jack Taylor, a land-owner from North Carolina. She brought it through the period of legal wrangling and land flipping, as Taylor sold to Lou Pai (fromer ENRON executive) and then Pai sold it to two new owners (two families). Mike deBonis (Forest Guild) then tag-teamed with Shirley to discuss the forestry management land-use plan for the land grant, to prioritize areas for the community's use. The process of identifying land grant heirs is on-going, with the community and county collaborating to track people down. These people then have key assignments for the gates to get onto this new hybrid of communal-private lands. The heirs can do some wood collection, grazing, and now have access. But they are restricted on plant collection, an odd "partial" victory for the former ejidatarios of the Sangre de Cristo grant. Tijerina (yes, that Tijerina) told Shirley that the La Sierra decision, now established in the Colorado State Supreme Court, is the first sign of total victory on the land grants issue. This may be optimistic, but an interesting perspective, since "precedent" is so important to U.S. jurisprudence. More needs to be on land grants research, and there are numerous places to start, like the Southwest Research collection at UNM (to name but one example). And it was yet another reminder that the San Luis Valley, in Colorado, really should be part of the Rio Arriba region given their overlapping land grant history (see map by Baumann).

The afternoon closed with a flurry overview by Juan Sanchez, from the Chilili Land Grant (read a bit more about all this here). Juan gave an overview of the Governor's Commission on Mercedes, and also the upcoming meetings in December for the Land Grant Committee. This is separate from the committee established by the legislature. He gave a wide-ranging, and highly detailed, presentation on the range of challenges and property regime challenges (such as what "hijuela" means for different land grant heirs). All in all, a really interesting day, even if it was a bit poorly attended. Most of the participant at this junta were, to be diplomatic, "mature." It illustrated how critical continuing, and earlier, education will be to keep these issues at the forefront and active for the next generation. And hopefully, the advertising and outreach for the next junta will be a bit more widespread. As it was, I only learned about it on Friday at the Acequia Commission meetings. Thanks again to Alberto Baros, Lucia Sanchez, and to Alfredo Montoya (Rio Arriba County Commissioner in attendance) for a great acequia-Mercedes conference.