Ecology and Mormon Settlement in Northeastern Arizona

  • William S. Abruzzi
Chapter

Abstract

The process of colonization has been important in the ecological understanding of evolution since Darwin’s observation of the radiation of finch species as they colonized new island habitats. Human colonization processes, however, though historically documented, have rarely been interpreted using ecological concepts and models. Abruzzi provides a start in filling this gap with a reinterpretation of the history of Mormon colonization of northeastern Arizona in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. Like other modern human ecologists, he takes great care to delineate details of local differences in environment and economy among the different settlements. In this arid region, perhaps the most critical variable is water availability, through rainfall as well as surface and groundwater, which are partially dependent on rainfall and also affected by geological features such as landform and soil characteristics. While drought was a periodic problem, flooding, which caused dam failures, was a significant problem that varied among communities. The physical environment, while directly affecting the potential and the limitations of human settlement, provides only part of its context here. The other significant factor is the social environment, both locally and at a distance. The relationship between the colonists and their home base in Salt Lake City is significant both in that the Mormon Church provided subsidies for the colonies and in that it laid down directives for local community interaction and interdependence. When individual communities suffered from crop failure or the destruction of a dam, they could acquire resources from their neighboring communities, which had been obliged by the church to set aside part of their production for tithes, and to share with their needy brethren. This interdependence provided for viability of vulnerable local communities over the long run. Other cooperative enterprises were also established among the settlements, though each eventually failed after initially prospering, perhaps because, unlike tithing, they did not incorporate all the settlements and hence were too small and too subject to local environmental problems. Eventually, other social and environmental conditions altered the context of Mormon colonization, as non-Mormons migrated into the area in numbers.

Keywords

Human Ecology Church Leader Lower Valley Colorado River Basin Intermediate Elevation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abruzzi, W. S. (1982). Ecological theory and ethnic differentiation among human populations. Current Anthropology 23: 13–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abruzzi, W. S. (1985). Water and community development in the little Colorado River Basin. Human Ecology 13: 241–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abruzzi, W. S. (1987). Ecological stability and community diversity during Mormon colonization of the Little Colorado River Basin. Human Ecology 15: 317–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abruzzi, W. S. (1989). Ecology, resource redistribution and Mormon Settlement in Northeastern Arizona. American Anthropologist 91: 642–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Abruzzi, W. S. (1993a). Dam That River! Ecology and Mormon Colonization of the Little Colorado River Basin. University Press of America, Landam, MD.Google Scholar
  6. Abruzzi, W. S. (1993b). Ecological Concepts in Anthropological Human Ecology: Illustrations from Mormon Settlement in Northeastern Arizona. In Wright, S. (ed.), Crossing Boundaries: Advances in Human Ecology. Society for Human Ecology. College Park, MD, pp. 255–271.Google Scholar
  7. Abruzzi, W. S. (1995). The Social and Ecological Consequences of Early Cattle Ranching in Northeastern Arizona. Human Ecology 23: 75–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Alexander, R. D. and Borgia, G. (1978). Group selection, altruism and the levels of organization of life. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 9: 449–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Arrington, L. J. (1958). Great Basin Kingdom: Economic History of the Latter-Day Saints, 1830–1900. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Google Scholar
  10. Brookhaven National Laboratory. (1969). Diversity and Stability in Ecological Systems. Brook-haven Symposia in Biology No. 22. U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield.Google Scholar
  11. Bureau of Reclamation. (1947). Snowflake Project Arizona. Project Planning Report 3-8b. 2-0. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  12. Bureau of Reclamation. (1950). Report on Joseph City Unit, Holbrook Project, Arizona. Project Planning Report 3-8b. 6-1. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  13. Carneiro, R. L. (1962). Scale analysis as an instrument for the study of cultural evolution. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 18: 149–169.Google Scholar
  14. Carneiro, R. L. (1967). On the relation between size of population and complexity of social organization. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 23: 234–243.Google Scholar
  15. Carneiro, R. L. (1968). Ascertaining, testing and interpreting sequences of cultural development. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 24: 354–374.Google Scholar
  16. Clark, P. J., Eckstrom, P. T., and Linden, L. D. (1964). On the number of individuals per occupation in a human society. Ecology 45: 367–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cody, M. L. and Diamond, J. M. (eds.) (1975). Ecology and Evolution of Communities. Belknap Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  18. Dames and Moore, Inc. (1973). Environmental Report, Cholla Power Project, Joseph City, Arizona. Arizona Public Service Company, Phoenix.Google Scholar
  19. Gibson, L. J. and Reeves, R. W. (1970). Functional bases of small towns: A study of Arizona settlements. Arizona Review 19: 19–26.Google Scholar
  20. Harrell, M. A. and Eckel, E. B. (1939). Ground-Water Resources of the Holbrook Region, Arizona. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 836-B. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  21. Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4: 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kennedy, S. A. (1968). A General History of the Hashknife Range under the Aztec Land and Cattle Company, Limited. Unpublished manuscript, Arizona Collection, Arizona State University Library.Google Scholar
  23. Kester, G. (1964). Soil Survey: Holbrook-Showlow Area, Arizona. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  24. Leigh, E. G. (1976). Population Fluctuations, Community Stability and Environmental Variability. In Cody, M. L. and Diamond, L. M. (eds.), Ecology and Evolution of Communities, Belknap Press, Cambridge, pp. 51–73.Google Scholar
  25. Leigh, E. G. (1977). How does selection reconcile individual advantage with the good of the group? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 74: 4542–4546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Leone, M. P. (1979). The Roots of Modern Mormonism. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  27. Levins, R. (1968). Evolution in Changing Environments. Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
  28. Lightfoot, K. (1980). Mormon sociopolitical development in Northern Arizona, 1876–1906: Implications for a model of prehistoric social change. Ethnohistory 27: 197–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. MacArthur, R. H. (1955). Fluctuations in animal populations and a measure of community stability. Ecology 36: 533–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. MacArthur, R. H. and MacArthur, J. (1961). On bird species diversity. Ecology 42: 594–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. MacArthur, R. H. and Connell, J. H. (1966). The Biology of Populations. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Margalef, R. (1968). Perspectives in Ecological Theory. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  33. May, R. M. (1973). Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems. Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
  34. Miller, M. L. and Larsen, K. (1975). Soil Survey of Apache County, Arizona: Central Part. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  35. Naroll, R. (1956). A preliminary index of social development. American Anthropologist 58: 687–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Odum, E. P. (1971). Fundamentals of Ecology, Third Edition. Saunders, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  37. Odum, H. T. (1971). Environment, Power, and Society. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  38. Peterson, C. S. (1973). Take Up Your Mission: Mormon Colonizing Along the Little Colorado River 1870–1900. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
  39. Pianka, E. R. (1966). Latitudinal gradients in species diversity: A review of concepts. The American Naturalist 100: 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pielou, E. C. (1975). Ecological Diversity. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  41. Ricklefs, R. E. (1987). Community diversity: Relative roles of local and regional processes. Science 235: 167–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rogers, D. and Hubbard, S. (1974). How the Behavior of Parasites and Predators Promotes Population Stability. In Usher, M. B. and Williamson, M. H. (eds.), Ecological Stability, Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 99–119.Google Scholar
  43. Rosenzweig, M. L. (1968). Net primary productivity of terrestrial communities: Predictions from climatological data. American Naturalist 102: 67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Salt River Project. (1974). Environmental Report, Arizona Station Project: Snoeflake and St. Johns Generating Station Sites. Salt River Project, Phoenix.Google Scholar
  45. Sanders, H. L. (1968). Marine benthic diversity: A comparative study. The American Naturalist 102: 243–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Slobodkin, L. B. and Sanders, H. L. (1969). On the Contribution of Environmental Predictability to Species Diversity. Diversity and Stability in Ecological Systems. Brookhaven Symposia in Biology 22: 82–95.Google Scholar
  47. Stegner, W. (1942). Mormon Country. Hawthorne Books, New York.Google Scholar
  48. Stegner, W. (1964). The Gathering of Zion: The Story of the Mormon Trail. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  49. Tanner, G. M. and Richards, J. M. (1977). Colonization on the Little Colorado: The Joseph City Region. Northland Press, Flagstaff, Arizona.Google Scholar
  50. Terborgh, J. (1971). Distribution of environmental gradients: Theory and a preliminary interpretation of distributional patterns in the avifauna of the Cordillera Vilcabamba, Peru. Ecology 52: 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Thomas, E. N. (1960). Some comments on the functional bases for small Iowa towns. Iowa Business Digest 31: 10–16.Google Scholar
  52. United States Geological Survey. (1975). Surface Water Supply of the United States, 1966–1970. Part 9, Volume 3: Lower Colorado River Basin. Water-Supply Paper 2126. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  53. Vandermeer, J. H. (1972). Niche theory. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 3: 107–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wilson, E. O. (1968). The ergonomics of caste in social insects. American Naturalist 102: 41–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • William S. Abruzzi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyPennsylvania State UniversityAbingdonUSA

Personalised recommendations