Page 147 - Early Naturalists of the Black Range

Standley was a respected and influential botanist who explored the Black Range and made major contributions to our understanding of the botany of New Mexico.
Lyndon L. Hargrave
The famed archaeologist worked throughout the American Southwest, including along the margins of the Black Range. His work in the Southwest started in 1926. Among his many accomplishments was the development of a comparative collection of more than 300,000 bird bones to be used to determine the identity of bird bones found at archaeological digs. His efforts in that vein were important in his studies of the Wild Turkey in relation to early Southwest cultures. He published numerous articles about his bird studies (in Condor, Auk, etc.). His Mexican Macaws, Comparative Osteology and Survey of Remains from the Southwest was a truly significant work.
G. W. Evans
Not a naturalist, per se, but of interest to us is G. W. Evans, who reported that he killed a:
“. . . large grizzley bear in April, 1930, on the east slope of the Black Range just north of Hillsboro Peak after following the trail about 10 miles from the extreme headwaters of the Mimbres on the south slope of Reeds Peak. According to local residents this bear had been killing livestock in the vicinity for the past many years. The skull shows that it was a very old bear with much worn teeth, possibly 15 or 20 years old. At the time this bear was killed tracks were found of a smaller grizzly that had been traveling with it, but the smaller one had not been reported as killing stock, so it could not then be legally killed.
It seems probable that many grizzlies killed in the Mimbres and Mogollon Mountains of New Mexico within recent years are also of this species (Ed. - Taxonomy determinations, at this time, were different than at present.) It is very desirable that more skulls and skins should be obtained from this region to satisfactorily clear up the distribution of the forms of bears found there.” From Mammals of New Mexico; Vernon Bailey, 1931, pp. 359-360.
In Summary
This survey of the naturalists who have added to our knowledge of the Black Range is far from comprehensive. Instead, it is meant to reflect how the continuous study of this region has evolved. There are many ways to describe how the study of natural history in the Black Range has changed since the 1500’s, but it seems that two are especially useful: who the sponsors of studies were, and the shift from generalists to specialists.
The “sponsors” of studies in the Black Range have shifted over the years. The indigenous people sought to understand and exploit the natural world so that they might survive. This study, for them, was cultural and deeply engrained.
In this area, the views of those who entered during the Spanish and Mexican periods were not dissimilar to the perspective of the indigenous peoples, except as a matter of focus. The Europeans (Spanish, Mexican, and Northern European) who first entered the area were here to exploit its resources, to stay alive, surely, but certainly to get rich.
The first structured studies were organized and funded by the U. S. Federal Government. These expeditions were typically led by military officers and were primarily expansionist in nature. The study of natural history was frequently added on to the government survey work of this period. Although much of the natural history work done at this time was “pure science”, there was a strong motivation to learn what “was there to be exploited”.
By the end of the 1800’s, academic institutions (universities and museums) became major sponsors of the studies in this region. The federal government continued its studies via institutions like the United States Geological Survey and the Biological Survey. Both of these institutions were driven by economic considerations. The federal land agencies became more involved in studies as the 1900’s began.
At first, the students of natural history were generalists, and indeed many might be called polymaths - meaning that they had interest in, and knowledge of, multiple fields of inquiry. By the end of the 1800’s, many of the researchers were more specialized (or were knowledgeable in two or three - at the most - fields of inquiry). In this they followed a general world wide trend.
In the mid 1900’s, and later, there was an attempt to counter the specialists’ perspective with a more generalist approach. Studies in ecology, for instance, became more generally accepted.
This play between generalists and specialists continues today and is one of the major issues/problems/opportunities in the accumulation of knowledge. The nature of the sponsor- researcher relationship continues to be the same generally, but the particulars of those relationships continue to evolve. Commercial institutions, for instance, are becoming more active in some fields than they have been in the past.
This work is characterized more by what was left out than what was put in. It is for that reason that it contains a significant number of links to other sources — but there are many more.
- R. A. Barnes
Hillsboro, New Mexico May 2021
146