by Cheyenne Sherri Reynoso, Master of Arts in American Indian Studies, University of California, Los Angeles, 2022. Professor Shannon E. Speed, Chair.
Abstract
The Sogorea Te’ Land Trust and the Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa Conservancy provide an alternative space (outside of our settler-colonial present) for Indigenous peoples to connect and practice their cultures; allowing for people to reimagine and Indigenize the present and future. This thesis examines the process and impact of land rematriation and “land back” for unrecognized California Native communities. The process and practice of both land rematriation and “land back” is foundational in supporting access and caretaking for ancestral homelands, cultural revitalization, Indigenous sovereignty, and self-determination efforts for these communities. California Native communities have survived three waves of colonial governments, laws, policies, and actions that continue to create enormous barriers for nonfederally recognized California Native communities. This has not stopped unrecognized California tribal community members from building upon the inter-generational movement work that their families and communities have been a part of to advocate and practice land rematriation and “land back.” This thesis focuses on the work of the Sogorea Te’ Land Trust and the Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa Conservancy, two case studies that exemplify and uplift the impactful work of land rematriation and “land back.” By establishing and building restorative relationships with their ancestral homelands and community, Sogorea Te’ Land Trust’s and Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa Conservancy’s praxis reimagines and provides a space for people to re-engage and practice deep radical relationality, healing, and supports reestablishing a relationship with their homelands, culture, and one another in meaningful ways. In this thesis, through the experience of these two Native-led organizations, I focus on local “land back” struggles and how the collaborative, Indigenous-centered focus and practice they engage in have shaped the outcomes as land rematriation. I conclude my thesis by highlighting community voices on the impact of land rematriation work and suggestions that these communities recommend to support “land back” efforts.
“We shouldn’t be just striving for land-based pedagogies. The land must once again become the
pedagogy.”1
The Sogorea Te’ Land Trust2 and the Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa Conservancy3 provide an alternative space (outside of our settler-colonial present) for Indigenous peoples to connect and practice their cultures; allowing for people to reimagine and Indigenize the present and future. The important work of land access and recovering ancestral land has become a main objective for many Indigenous peoples involved in what is referred to as the “land back” movement.
My research examines the process and impact of land rematriation4 and “land back” for unrecognized5 California Native communities. I argue that the process and practice of both land rematriation and “land back” is foundational in supporting access and caretaking for ancestral homelands, cultural revitalization, Indigenous sovereignty,6 and self-determination efforts for these communities. California Native communities have survived three waves of colonial governments, laws, policies, and actions that continue to create enormous barriers for nonfederally recognized California Native communities. These barriers include not having access to or being able to protect their homelands and sacred sites, practice and teach futures generations ceremonies, gather their medicines and plants, and fulfill their ancestral duties as the original caretakers of the land. This has not stopped unrecognized California tribal community members from building upon the inter-generational movement work that their families and communities have been a part of to advocate and practice land rematriation and “land back.” I highlight the Sogorea Te’ Land Trust and the Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa Conservancy, two case studies that exemplify and uplift the impactful work of land rematriation and “land back.” By establishing and building restorative relationships with their ancestral homelands and community, Sogorea Te’ Land Trust’s and the Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa Conservancy’s praxis reimagines and provides a space for people to re-engage and practice deep radical relationality, healing, and supports reestablishing a relationship with their homelands, culture, and one another in meaningful ways. In this thesis, through the experience of these two Native-led organizations, I
will focus on local “land back” struggles and how the collaborative, Indigenous-centered focus and practice they engage in have shaped the outcomes as land rematriation.
“Land back” can be as diverse and complex as it is literal and transparent. It is central to Indigenous reclamation, cultural revitalization, relationship building, and combatting colonialism. Depending on who you are speaking to or what community you are engaged with, “land back” can refer to language revitalization, repatriation efforts, stewardship of ancestral lands, waters, foods, and cultures. Ultimately, it is a movement that encompasses diverse and creative tactics with the overall goal of returning Indigenous lands to Indigenous care and decision making. “Land back” centers Indigenous self-determination and sovereignty, with the understanding that connection to ancestral land is directly related to cultural revitalization, consent, health, and community well-being. “Land back” also highlights the importance of consent and acknowledges the violations of non-consensual relationships, interactions, and actions that have historically been forced upon Indigenous peoples. “For the Tongva, our true goal is to be good stewards of our homelands again. This is the objective behind the “land back” movement, which simply seeks to return available land back to the Tribal communities from which it was taken.”7
See source here for the complete 135 page thesis: https://escholarship.org/content/qt0rm7g69d/qt0rm7g69d_noSplash_240e3f4c7a31bfa28b6a0d22cf2fdeae.pdf?t=rwux1n
- Simpson, Leanne Betasamosake Simpson, “Land as Pedagogy: Nishnaabeg Intelligence and Rebellious Transformation,” Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society 3, no. 3 (2014): 14. ↩︎
- “Land trusts are nonprofit organizations that raise funds to purchase conservation easement or accept and oversee donated easements on properties within their area of focus.” (Beth Rose Middleton, Trust in the Land: New Directions in Tribal Conservation (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 2011), 26.). Learn more about Sogorea Te’Land Trust at their website: (The Sogorea Te Land Trust, “Homepage,” accessed June 8, 2021, https://sogoreatelandtrust.org/.) ↩︎
- Native American land conservancies affirm tribal sovereignty by recognizing and reaffirming tribal members’ rights to their homelands. The land conservancy structure has provided a useful way for some tribes to organize, build alliances with other Native and non-Native groups, and raise funds for the protection of sacred sites. Tribes can adapt the basic format of a conservancy to fit their own cultural, social, and political patterns of organization, or to address a particular land-based struggle or need.” (Middleton, Trust in the Land, 224) Although the Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa Conservancy was not created by the Gabrieleno (Tongva) San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians and is not a tribal non-profit conservancy; it is similar in its effect on the Tongva tribal community. The Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa Conservancy supports and affirms tribal self-determination and sovereignty for Tongva community members, was created by Gabrieleno Tongva community members, and includes an all Tongva board. It was created to support land access, Tongva self-determination, cultural and language revitalization efforts, and land rematriation of Tongva homelands for Tongva community members. Learn more about the Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa Conservancy at their website: (Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa Conservancy, “Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa Conservancy,” Accessed June 16, 2022, https://tongva.land/.) ↩︎
- I use the definition of rematriation provided in Sogorea Te’s Purpose and Vision webpage (“Purpose and Vision,”Sogorea Te’ Land Trust, accessed September 5, 2021, https://sogoreate-landtrust.org/purpose-and-vision/.): “Rematriate: to restore a people to their rightful place in sacred relationship with their ancestral land.” I discuss land rematriation further in the following paragraph. ↩︎
- Throughout this thesis, I refer to unrecognized and non-federally recognized tribes interchangeably. I do this intentionally in order to highlight the complexities and varying identifiers that California Native community members have used throughout my time interviewing and conducting my research for this thesis. When I use these terms, I am referring to California Native communities that are not legally recognized by the US federal government
and, thus, do not have access to their ancestral homelands through the federal recognition process. The term unrecognized does not represent the recognition, acknowledgment, histories, and relationships with other California Native communities, local governments, or other entities. By using the terminology of local community members who are unrecognized, it allows for the reader to contextualize the complex histories that have situated the
Gabrieleno Tongva and Lisjan Ohlone within my research and the important processes and outcomes of land rematriation and “land back” movement work within their homelands. ↩︎ - There are numerous discussions, critiques, and ways that sovereignty is defined and used that are beyond the scope of this thesis. When I mention sovereignty throughout this thesis, I am referring to the way that Corrina Gould, CoFounder of Sogorea Te’ Land Trust, used it in my second interview with her on August 12, 2021. She stated: “Having that one little piece of land that actually says this is who I am that gives us that sovereignty again. That allows us to make decisions about who we are going forward is an amazing thing. It transforms us back into human beings.” It gives Native people the ability to make decisions for themselves. I feel as though Corrina’s use of sovereignty is best aligned with how I wish to articulate and use it for the purpose of this thesis. ↩︎
- Wallace Cleaves and Charles Sepulveda, “Native Land Acknowledgments Are Not the Same As Land,” Bloomberg, August 12, 2021, (accessed September 1, 2021), https://www.bloomberg.com/tosv2.html?vid=&uuid=b3f609d2-2faa-11ed-810f625a6c644d6f&url=L25ld3MvYXJ0aWNsZXMvMjAyMS0wOC0xMi9uYXRpdmUtbGFuZC1zdGV3YXJkc2hpcC1uZWVkcy10by1mb2xsb3ctYWNrbm93bGVkZ21lbnQ=. ↩︎