Sacred Mountains and Profane Dollars: Discourses about Snowmaking on the San Francisco Peaks

Abstract

This research examines media, interview and legal-historical documentation surrounding the current proposal to manufacture snow using reclaimed water at the Snowbowl ski area located on the San Francisco Peaks mountains near Flagstaff, Arizona. The proposal has drawn sharp protest from both American Indian Nations who call the area sacred, and environmentalists who question the safety of the reclaimed water. We examine the process by which local coalitions attempt to define environmental, spiritual, and economic values that will resonate with others. These highly mediated activities create contested territory whereby groups attempt to package and frame specific definitions of these values. This debate exposes hegemonic assumptions that aid us in deconstructing conflicting understandings of colonialism, racism, and other issues that typically go unacknowledged. Weber's discussion of rationality and commensurability is employed for understanding why sacred justice claims continue to be largely ignored. This research indicates that not only is this a case of epistemological incompatibility, but an active attempt to discredit and disenfranchise a specific group. Two interwoven themes emerged from our analysis: `Indians as Greedy' and `Indians as Hypocrites'. These themes are also found in the legal history of sacred site protection in the United States. We argue the fundamental lack of acknowledgement of Indian cosmology persists via a dichotomous conception of religion and civic society, which also suggests a separation of dominant forms of civic decision-making.

The clock is ticking: contexts, tensions and opportunities for addressing environmental justice in sport management

“…With warmer winter weather and more sporadic snowfall in the area [3], the Snowbowl requested permission from the US Forest Service in 2002 to make artificial snow with reclaimed sewage water in order to maintain a more predictable ski season. While the Snowbowl claimed that the artificial snow would pose little environmental risk, local tribes regarded the project as a blatant disregard for the culture, tradition, physical, and spiritual health of their communities (Sefiha and Lauderdale, 2008). For example, former Navajo President Joe Shirley, Jr., described the San Francisco Peaks as "the essence of who we are .…”

“…collecting medicines from its plants and soil). In the 1970s, the USA government approved the expansion of the ski resort, which has since faced a strong backlash from local tribes who believe that the mountain should be protected from such development (Sefiha and Lauderdale, 2008). With warmer winter weather and more sporadic snowfall in the area [3], the Snowbowl requested permission from the US Forest Service in 2002 to make artificial snow with reclaimed sewage water in order to maintain a more predictable ski season.…”

“…With warmer winter weather and more sporadic snowfall in the area [3], the Snowbowl requested permission from the US Forest Service in 2002 to make artificial snow with reclaimed sewage water in order to maintain a more predictable ski season. While the Snowbowl claimed that the artificial snow would pose little environmental risk, local tribes regarded the project as a blatant disregard for the culture, tradition, physical, and spiritual health of their communities (Sefiha and Lauderdale, 2008). For example, former Navajo President Joe Shirley, Jr., described the San Francisco Peaks as “the essence of who we are … a Holy place of worship,” “a place where we gather and collect our sacred herbs for healing and our way of life ceremonies yearlong”, and warned that the snowmaking with reclaimed wastewater would constitute the “desecration of the essence of our way of life” (as cited in Schlosberg and Carruthers, 2010, p. 21).…”

Victims of "adaptation": climate change, sacred mountains, and perverse resilience

“…One could consider it as a desecration of indigenous lifeways (Dunstan 2010;Glowacka et al 2013) or utilize an environmental justice framework (Lagasse 2008; see also Powell and Curley 2008: 124;Schlosberg and Carruthers 2010). It has been considered in light of rhetorical exclusion (Boggs 2017), racist discourses (Sefiha and Lauderdale 2008), as well as the legislative and jurisdictional limits of sacred site protection (Dunstan 2018;Tsosie 2006). 3 All of these approaches are important dimensions of the political ecology of this conflict.…”

“…Snowbowl has recently expanded operations and commenced artificial snowmaking, despite more than a decade of litigation and grassroots opposition. This conflict revolves around a number of issues, including sacred land desecration, religious freedom, environmental health, public land uses, framing of Native Americans, and critiques of state-corporate collusion, themes addressed by myself as well as other scholars (Boggs 2017;Dunstan 2016Dunstan , 2017Glowacka et al 2009;Richland 2017;Sefiha and Lauderdale 2008;Tsosie 2006). However, in the course of ethnographic and sociolinguistic research in northern Arizona since 2009, it has become increasingly clear to me that the snowmaking conflict is also a conflict about climate change and the proper adaptation to it.…”