Ethnographic Overview And Assessment: Zion National Park, Utah ...

names for plants or animals have been changed (in some cases multiple times). The nomenclature
changes have been noted in parentheses below the name currently being used by the National
Park Service. The middle column of the table lists the most frequently encountered common
names. The last column contains the Southern Paiute names found in historical and
contemporary sources for the plant or animal in that row. In some cases, Southern Paiute names
were only found for the genus and not the species level of plant identification. Since this was
the case, the genus category on the plant tables was expanded to include all of the Southern
Paiute names found that correspond with the genus regardless of whether the names refer to a
specific species or the genus as a whole.
Contrast what we know about plants and how to use existing knowledge of plants with
what we do not know about natural resources for whom there has never been a systematic
ethnographic study. For example, there has not been a study of the cultural meaning of air or
water in Southern Paiute culture. These are critical components of Southern Paiute life that
were neither appreciated nor recognized by early travelers and later ethnographers. Unlike
plants, the NPS does not have its own list of types of air and water against which to compare
Southern Paiute nomenclature. Springs, creeks, rivers, and waterfalls each are perceived by
Southern Paiutes as separate living organisms. Air too is a living organism that exists in different
forms. There has never been a systematic study of the cultural meaning of either air or water
among Southern Paiutes. Nonetheless such cultural resources are important to Southern Paiute
people today and should be taken into consideration in land use management deliberations.
Future resource-specific studies of these and similar cultural components are needed before
even a beginning consultation can occur regarding potential project impacts and possible
resource protection strategies.
A final use of this report is to understand cultural affiliation with these two NPS units.
During various reviews of this manuscript, the NPS asked questions about who are the Paiutes?
Where did they come from? What is their relationship with the Anasazi? Are they the Fremont?
While these are valid questions, they are much beyond the scope of this study. The questions
are important for both the NPS units and the Southern Paiute people to resolve to their own
satisfaction. The message of this study is that most Southern Paiute people believe they were
created in this land and all the evidence of Indian use of the land reflects the activities of their
ancestors. It is also important that the Indian Claims commission define the Southern Paiute
people as the aboriginal owners of this land.
The Southern Paiute position is disputed by some archaeologists and by some other
American Indian ethnic groups. A key problem in cultural affiliation is that "labels" have been
attached to contemporary people and to prehistoric archaeology types. Because of these labels,
contemporary Indian people are often excluded from discussing their cultural affiliation with
types of prehistoric archaeological remains. So for the area under study in this report, people
called today the Western Shoshone claim cultural affiliation with an prehistoric archaeology
type called the Fremont. Both the people called the Navajo and the Hopi claim cultural
affiliation with the prehistoric archaeology type called the Anasazi. Historically, people called
the Utes were known to visit these lands and leave archaeological evidence which is usually
called Paiute. Unraveling the multiple ethnic affiliations with cultural resources of these two
NPS parks and the region in general is a task for future studies, but one that should be addressed.