Indigenous People, Land and Space: The Effects of Law on Sacred Places, the Bear Butte Example

Conflicts over access to and utilization of Native American sacred sites is an ongoing dilemma. Although the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) was passed by the United States Congress in 1978 in recognition of Indian rights to religious freedom, this Act has done little to actually protect sacred sites. AIRFA can be described as a cooptation technique. Cooptation occurs in a power system when the power holder intentionally extends some form of political participation to those considered a threat to the existing state. But, this political participation never leads to the empowering of the people considered threatening. In fact, Indian oppression continues today through due process and federal and state statutes. This study addresses the politicized nature of AIRFA. Bear Butte, a Lakota holy ground was chosen to illustrate AIRFA as a cooptation tool. Bear Butte is at the forefront of contested realities of space between the Lakota Sioux and South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks. The Lakota contend that they have legal sovereign rights to the Butte and feel that any activity, other than religious, desecrates the site. The battle over control of this sacred place has occurred at the judicial level, with the case Fools Crow vs. Gullett. It continues, after Lakota lost their case, at the administrative level, with the Lakota questioning multiple-use policies that equate tourism and the construction of a water pipeline with their religious freedom. Through a critique of litigation and mitigation strategies surrounding Bear Butte, this study demonstrates that society and society\u27s laws are not consensual and justice is not always the end result. The study concludes that without adequate Congressional, judicial, and administrative protection, Indian people will continue to be victims of cultural genocide and remain a marginalized minority within the United States