Wind Cave National Park (NP) in South Dakota has a long and complex history with local indigenous peoples, including the Lakotas. Wind Cave is the location of the Lakotas’ traditional origin story, and is now protected by a park representing a federal government that many indigenous peoples view negatively. The purpose of this exploratory study was to understand the attitudes of Lakotas toward Wind Cave NP and the interpretive stories it shares with visitors. Seventeen in-person interviews were conducted with Lakota people to understand their thoughts and feelings. Content analysis was used to uncover positive and negative themes about the park and various forms of interpretation. Findings indicate that park interpretation should include more Native perspectives, and recommendations are noted. The park should attempt to work more closely with Lakota and other local tribes, and can follow the examples of other National Park Service sites to accomplish these changes.
AlbersP. C. (2003). The home of the bison: An ethnographic and ethnohistorical study of traditional cultural affiliations to Wind Cave National Park.Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota.
2.
AllendorfT. D. (1999). Local residents’ perceptions of protected areas in Nepal: Beyond conflicts and economics (Doctoral Dissertation). University of MinnesotaSt. Paul, MN.
3.
AnthonyB. (2007). The dual nature of parks: attitudes of neighbouring communities towards Kruger National Park, South Africa.Environmental Conservation, 34 (3), 236–245.
4.
BeltránJ. (Ed.) (2000). Indigenous and traditional peoples and protected areas: Principles, guidelines and case studies.Gland, Switzerland: IUCN/WWF International.
5.
BrowneK. (2005). Snowball sampling: using social networks to research non-heterosexual women.International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8 (1), 47–60.
6.
DustinD. L., SchneiderI. E., McAvoyL. H., & FraktA. N. (2002). Cross-cultural claims on Devils Tower National Monument: A case study.Leisure Sciences, 24 (1), 79–88.
7.
Federal Preservation Institute. (n.d.). Consultation with Native Americans: A historic preservation responsibility. Retrieved from http://www.achp.gov/docs/nafolder.pdf.
8.
Fernández-BacaJ. C., & MartinA. S. (2007). Indigenous peoples and protected areas management innovations in conservation series, parks in peril program.Arlington, VA: The Nature Conservancy.
9.
HsiehH. F., & ShannonS.E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.Qualitative Health Research, 15 (9), 1277–1288.
10.
KellerR. H., & TurekM. F. (1998). American Indians & National Parks.Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona Press.
11.
KingM. A. (2007). Co-management or contracting?: Agreements between Native American tribes and the U.S. National Park Service pursuant to the 1994 Tribal Self-Governance Act.Harvard Environmental Law Review, 31, 475–530.
12.
LaVelleJ. P. (2001). Rescuing Paha Sapa: Achieving environmental justice by restoring the great grasslands and returning the sacred Black Hills to the Great Sioux Nation.Great Plains Natural Resources Journal, 5, 40.
MarshallM. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research.Family Practice, 13 (6), 522–525.
15.
McAvoyL., McDonaldD., & CarlsonM. (2003). American Indian/First Nation place attachment to park lands: The case of the Nuu-chah-nulth of British Columbia.Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 21 (2), 84–104.
16.
MorrisonS. (2014). In kind or monetary restitution: Historic wrongs and indigenous land claims.Journal of Politics and Law, 7 (2), 50–62.
17.
OstlerJ. (2010). The Lakotas and the Black Hills.London, United Kingdom: Penguin Books.
18.
PalinkasL. A., HorwitzS. M., GreenC. A., WisdomJ. P., DuanN., & HoagwoodK. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research.Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42 (5), 533–544.
Rights and Resources Initiative. (2015). Protected areas and the land rights of indigenous peoples and local communities: current issues and future agenda.Washington, D.C.: Rights and Resources Initiative.
SteelmanT. A. (2001). Elite and participatory policymaking: Finding balance in a case of national forest planning.Policy Studies Journal, 29 (1), 71–89.
24.
StevensS. (Ed.). (1997). Conservation through cultural survival: Indigenous peoples and protected areas.Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
25.
TurnerD. W.III (2010). Qualitative interview design: A practical guide for novice investigators.The Qualitative Report, 15 (3), 754–760.
26.
TuxillJ. L., MitchellN. J., & ClarkD. (2009). Stronger together: A manual on the principles and practices of civic engagement.Woodstock, VT: Conservation Study Institute.
27.
WhisnantA. M., MillerM. R., NashG. B., & ThelenD. (2011). Imperiled promise: The state of history in the National Park Service.Bloomington, IN: Organization of American Historians.
28.
WorsterD. (1992). Under western skies: Nature and history in the American West.Oxford, England, U. K.: Oxford University Press.
