
The
eagle is found in most Native American Tribes as a symbol of courage, wisdom
and strength (Warpaths2peacepipes). When people see an eagle they more often
than not will have a reaction to the bird. An eagle is seen as a strong and
courageous being. It shows pride. The Orme Dam was to be built on land that was
given to the Yavapai Nation and was home to an endangered species; the bald
eagle. The Yavapai Nation printed a picture of a bald eagle that is barely
floating above water. The eagle represents both the Yavapai Nation and the bald
eagle and the water represents the water of the Orme Dam. If the Dam were to be
built it would ultimately “drown” both the Yavapai Nation and the bald eagles.
Both would cease to exist.
The
Yavapai Nation used this t-shirt as their main symbol of protest. It was used
because it was a clear message that if the dam were to be built the water would
take over the home of the Yavapai Nation and the nesting places of the bald
eagle. “The bald eagle was listed on the
Endangered Species act in 1973 within the lower 48 states, except in Michigan,
Minnesota, Organ, Washington and Wisconsin” (National Wildlife 2010). By having
the nesting places in and near the Yavapai Nation’s reservation the “environmentalist”
also backed the Yavapai Nation in the fight against Orme Dam.

During
the negotiations of the building of Orme Dam the taxpayers were being told that
the water that was going to be stored at the Orme Dam were going to be used for
public use. However 80% of the water was going to be used for agriculture to grow
surplus crops. A surplus crop is a crop that “is not sold but often purchased
by the government at a profitable price to the farmer“ (Businessdictionary).
This cartoon shows a depiction used to enhance the public’s awareness on how to
water from the Orme Dam was going to be used. The farmers would be charged a
very low cost for the water in order to farm high yields surplus crops. The
farmers that were for the Orme Dam saw the Dam as a lifesaver. They believed that
if the Dam were to be built that they would be able to improve their yield and
therefor improve their revenue. The water would be sold to them at a discount
price the farmers would be able to tap into the source whenever they needed an
extra few thousand gallons. Especially if the farmers were to farm rice.
Agriculture uses about 70% of fresh water around the world, and rice uses
35%-45% of the 70% of fresh water. If the Dam were to be built it would have
only benefited a few people and not the population as a whole. Carolina Butler
an activist for the Yavapai Nation explains that an Economic study was done
from a professor from Montana on the Orme Dam, the study showed that subsides
cotton and alfalfa were the main crops that were going to be grown with the
Orme Dam water. However the water would have to travel uphill to the dam, which
would be an energy hog. Unlike the Hoover dam which produces energy when the
water is released down stream. Down stream is the key word. The Orme Dam would
have to travel up stream.
Throughout
the process of the Orme Dam protest many of the Yavapai Tribal members felt as
if the Government were treating the site of the Orme Dam as if there were
nobody living there. And that exactly how the Bureau of Reclamation presented
the plans to congress, as the main activist for Fort McDowell Carolina Butler
remembers the senator of Florida’s reaction when he heard from the Yavapai
Nation in their meeting with congress, "We
were told there was nobody living at Fort McDowell."
At the confluence of the salt and Verde
Rivers is where the dam would be built. Although there were people living on
the future site of the Orme Dam the Bureau of Reclamation saw it as more of a moneymaker
than choosing a different site. The Bureau of Reclamation were blind to the
fact that there were people living there. They didn’t want to believe that
people lived there in order to make it easier for them to build the Dam.
In order for the Yavapai Nation to
make them known to congress they needed to get up and go to congress and not
wait for congress to come to them. “The Yavapai decided to send a congregation
to Washington to argue their cause. Twelve-year-old Kimberley Williams was part
of the group”(AZPBS). If the Yavapai
Nation didn’t go to congress, congress would have had the perception that there
was nobody living where they wanted the Orme Dam to be built. Carolina Butler
explains that most of the Tribal leaders took a back seat when it came time to
take a stand, only President of the Yavapai Nation Robert Doka was willing to
rally those apposed to the building of Orme Dam. President Doka was the leader
of the Yavapai Nation and when it was time to stand up and take a stand he was
willing to be the one to help the members of the Nation to realize what was
happening and how it was going to affect them.
In order for the Yavapai Nation to
be successful they needed to stand up and not stand-alone. They were willing to
bring in others from outside the Nation to help, one of those were activist
Carolina Butler, and Bob Witzeman. They both helped the Yavapai Nation to get everything
ready for congress, such as the telegrams, travel, directions to congress, and
a place to stay. Carolina Butler believes that the Orme Dam was successful
because of the relentless fight from the Yavapai Nation and from the Secretary
of the Interior James Watt visited the reservation and discovered that there
were people living on the site where the Orme Dam was going to be built.

Harold,
ReplyDeleteA few questions I am unsure about in the artifact, is the eagle tshirt the only artifact? Or is the court hearing also an artifact? In paragraph five you reference Kimberley Williams, which I remember from your historical context draft, but you do not say anything more about her besides her name. I think if you moved the paragraph about Kimberley and how her testimony was used in court as an emotional appeal, then I think this would be much more effective. I was left feeling like I wanted more information on their case with congress, not just the case against the tribe.
I was also wondering about your section about the people for the building of the dam, and that they were farmers. This reminded me of your rhetorical context section where you say that the farmers work with the Yavapai tribe and that the building of the dam would hurt that relationship. So if the farmers benefit from water would that benefit the Yavapai? Or was the negative affect on the Yavapai that they had to relocate too harmful of an economic blow that this water did not make a difference? I think this needs to be cleared up in both of these sections.
In the conclusion I would expect to see more about how the case was effective in reaching its goals, and also possibly what affect there was on the bald eagle.
I know this looks like a lot but just some things to think about when editing your paper! Overall I think you just need to clear up a few ideas and then your paper is good to go!
Answering Anna's question, I believe that you have 3 artifacts you are analyzing: the eagle and the 2 cartoons. I think you do an excellent job and would argue that this is the best part of your essay thus far. I think you picked 3 really good artifacts that help with your goal of the essay.
ReplyDelete1) I think your artifact analysis is logically organized, and does attend to the artifact's immediate rhetorical situation, and also the different strategies it uses (however, I would like to see more key terms within this part). One thing you could work on is the Bald Eagle analysis. You go in a brief overview of the Eagle, but I don't necessarily see an analysis of it. The Eagle to Americans means freedom and pride, and I think that the same applies to Yavapai tribe. The image of the bird in water is then VERY effective. Water in this case is used as an image and symbol of "entrapment." The Eagle, as mentioned, is an image of "freedom." Now you must solve the equation- entrapment + freedom = what? Then explain the answer to that equation. The idea of the bald eagle being trapped in water is a historical reference to a time when Native Americans we entrapped by Colonists and later Americans. It is a stunning image, because as is the custom of America, the government attempts to forget their past monstrosities. However, in the case of your protest, the government is trying to do it again. The fact that the Bald Eagle is both a symbol for the tribe as well as America as a whole, I think we also see the artifact being used as a way to connect to American viewers. The idea of the nation's bird being entrapped evokes a sense of pride, because we want to free the bald eagle from its cage of oppression and let it live in freedom; so the direct connection that the bald eagle has on Americans (when I say Americans I mean to say non-natives, although I do understand that natives are Americans its just easier to explain it this way) directly connects Americans to the protest.
2) I think that this goes well with your other parts of your essay.
3) I think the obvious thing you will be addressing in your paper, something that Anna has already brought up, is the protests ability to achieve its goals, and you could even look at the historical/political/social consequences of the protest. What did it mean for the Native community in their victory? Politically, how would it change future decisions? Historically what does it mean for the natives in their attempts to garner respect for the lands from the American government?
I really got into your essay and I am very excited to see what you can do with our suggestions.