MEETING CLIMATE CHANGE AND RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL DECAY APPROPRIATELY:
LEARNING FROM INDIGENOUS THINKING

Stephen M. Sachs

Now that it is exceedingly clear that climate change, from mostly human induced global warming, and other environmental degradation from pollution and over use of resources, faces the entire world with an immediate critical crises, that effects everyone on the earth,(1) it important that we shift away from the modern western world view that has brought us to this impending global catastrophe, and approach the complex set of environmental problems facing us all, appropriately.

We need to find real solutions, and avoid making the environmental situation worse with quick fixes, or narrow actions that address one aspect of the problem, only to create new difficulties in other areas. It is time to return to an older Aboriginal perspective, and learn from the lessons of Indigenous thinking, developed from long experience, demonstrating the importance of living in harmony with the natural environment, upon which they were closely reliant for their survival and well being.(2)

All traditional Indigenous people consider themselves to be part of nature, with a responsibility to keep it in balance, both for their own good, and that of all other beings.(3) From experience they understand the necessity of taking into account the short and long term effects of actions,(4) being aware of the full set of relationships that are involved in all human activity.(5) If the world’s leading public and private policy makers of the last two centuries had been Indigenous thinkers, climate change would not be a major world crises, today.

The key learnings from Indigenous thinking for the world in dealing with climate change are that everything is connected, but each location is unique.(6) Actions and events have developing consequences over time, so that in making decisions, it is necessary to take into account the full range of relationships that are involved, considering how they will be affected over an unfolding, and lengthy, period of time. Western science has long focused on taking things apart, and reducing consideration of phenomena to focus on a limited number of factors, in order to isolate essential forces or rules.

This approach has great power, but its reductionism tends to miss the interconnections that contemporary ecology, the cutting edge of physics, and developing chaos or complexity theory are beginning to demonstrate to the West, are the true nature of the world. It is an exceedingly complex, interactive system. Climate change and other ecological issues are essentially issues of how we use resources (broadly defined to include energy and matter, that which is animate and inanimate), including the chains of direct and indirect effects of finding, acquiring, transporting, processing, and applying those resources and disposing of (or allowing to disperse) the byproducts of that use.

This requires analyzing holistically, in terms of complex systems with interacting subsystems, so that decisions are made in the course of examining the full range of relationships and interactions involved, over time. It involves understanding that every action has a wide range of effects that need to be taken into account. This means not only examining all of the physical aspects of an ecological problem over time, but the full range of human concerns as well: social, cultural, economic, political,.., in order to develop an appropriate balanced set of actions across time.

Another tendency of traditional western science and thought has been to develop general conclusions, and to apply them universally, often without thinking through how they properly apply in different circumstances. This has caused untold problems.(7) For example business or technical consultants often take a program that worked well in one place, or a set of similar sites, and “can it”, simply presenting the program in other locales without first assessing the conditions and needs of that location. When those conditions and needs are different from what the presenter assumed, the program does not work.

This is an especially serious problem in making cross-cultural transfers. For example, several years ago agricultural scientists developed a new variety of cotton that was more hardy and produced more cotton per plant than traditional varieties. They took it to villagers in one location in India, without asking what the local people used the cotton plants for. Most of the villagers decided to try the new cotton. But when the scientists returned five years later, they found only a small amount of the cotton being grown was the new variety. The reason was that the villagers used the plant both to produce cotton, and for fuel by burning the stalks. The stalks of the new cotton plants did not burn nearly as well as those of the old plants.

In dealing with environmental issues, it is important to realize that what works in one place may not work, and may have negative results, in another. General principals – when correct – may generally apply everywhere, but to apply properly, they have to be adapted to the differing conditions of each particular place, including taking into account (so far as possible) how those conditions will change over time. If the world’s decision makers can take an Indigenous perspective on what needs to be done, there is still a good possibility that the worst potential effects of global warming and environmental destruction can be avoided, and much of the already occurring damage can be reversed or ameliorated.

Global Warming and What Can Be done About It: Applying Indigenous Thinking

Applying this Indigenous perspective, global warming needs to be understood as part of a complex interactive ecological system in which human action, particularly resource use, have a large impact. There is now almost complete scientific agreement that global warming, bringing horrendous climate change, that is already having serious impacts on human life around the planet, is primarily caused by human activity, resulting in carbon dioxide, methane and other green house gasses entering the atmosphere, that then trap heat.

The relevant direct human action is first the burning of fuels (and other burning) that result in the release of green house gasses, but such gasses are also directly put into the atmosphere by other human acts; and secondarily as a result of the warming that has been occurring because of people increasing green house gas levels in the atmosphere (such as the melting of permafrost in the Arctic releasing huge amounts of carbon dioxide, and 14 times more heat increasing methane, and the heating of the oceans which reduces their capacity to absorb green house and other gasses – directly, and from the reduction, which occurs with raising sea water temperatures, of ocean plant life that transforms huge amount of carbon dioxide into oxygen and carbon). (8)

Global warming is also increased by human action, such as deforestation, that kills trees and other green plants that convert carbon dioxide into oxygen and carbon (used by the plants). Thus global warming can be reduced in several ways: 1) by reduction in the burning of green house gas producing fuels, by increasing fuel use efficiency, reducing fuel burning, and switching to non-green house gas producing sources of energy, including wind power, photovoltaic cells and other direct solar power, wave action, hydro electric power, ocean temperature differential power, atomic energy (which may be too dangerous to use because of possible meltdowns, and the problem of dealing with highly radioactive waste that remains dangerous for as long as 100,000 years), geothermal energy, using hydrogen and possibly other non-green house gas producing fuels, using as fuels green house gases that would enter the atmosphere without producing energy for human endeavor, if not captured and burned (e.g. capturing and burning methane escaping from landfills), and capturing carbon produced by green house gas producing fuel use; 2) by increasing the number of trees (ending deforestation, and reforesting) and other carbon dioxide transforming plants; 3) increasing the amount of particulate matter in the atmosphere, which blocks incoming sun light, and has a cooling effect. This, however, almost always has major detrimental side effects for human beings, including causing major health problems (to consider only the simplest of the many aspects of putting dust into the air).

As this last method of reducing global warming suggests, there is much more to the ecological problem facing human beings than simply reducing global warming. Human activity causes a great many other impacts on the environment, some of which tend to change the ecological system of the planet, and/or its local and regional subsystems, often negatively from a human perspective, and which in many cases have direct negative effects for human beings, including the production of a wide range of pollutants from simple dust, to toxic chemicals, radiation, and biological hazards.

So while global warming is often considered the most obvious current environmental threat for humanity (though some would say that radiation from bombs, accidents and nuclear waste is a greater danger, or that human caused or spread disease is a greater threat), global warming cannot properly be looked at in isolation. It has to be considered as part of a larger set of relationships among human beings (physical, social, economic, political. Etc,) and considering human beings as part of the Earth’s environmental system and subsystems. Indeed, in that context, global warming is only one of the negative side effects of human activity that needs to be considered. For example, destruction of the ozone layer (leading to toxic levels, for many – and at some point virtually all – forms of life) of ultra violate radiation penetrating the atmosphere, as the result of the use of certain chemicals that escape upward and destroy the ozone layer of the upper atmosphere, is again increasing because of the growing use in some developing counties of refrigerants and propellants, whose use has been greatly reduced in the rest of the world.

One aspect of the global warming problem in particular, and of environmental protection generally, is resource use: the finding, processing, transporting, using of resources, and disposing of residual material in that whole process, including all the results (positive, negative and neutral), direct and indirect, of that activity. In the case of energy, the most used source world wide, oil, is approaching the point where demand overwhelms supply, largely because of the huge and growing increases in oil consumption by China and other developing nations.

Compounded with interruptions and uncertainties about some major oil production, because of war and political instability, this has spurred the development of biofuel, particularly ethanol, most notably in Brazil and the U.S. While increasing ethanol production has economic, political and security advantages, ethanol production currently increases global warming, and other polluting, because its production requires significantly more energy than does gasoline and other oil product production. (That may change as more effort, money and energy is required to mine oil, whether in pumping steam into no longer free flowing oil wells, or in mining oil from shale and tar sands).

Also, despite what some advertising claims, burning ethanol simply produces a different combination of pollutants than does burning gasoline. While it might make sense to have some increase in ethanol use as a bridge to develop non-greenhouse gas producing energy, and to include economic and human concerns properly in the process of energy transformation, to overcome global warming and reduce dangerous pollution more generally, it is far better to emphasize non-greenhouse gas producing sources of energy (taking into account the pollution, including greenhouse gas production, and cost of such development – e.g. manufacture of photo voltaic cells is not entirely clean). The politics and public relations of powerful established economic interests, in many cases, resists changes that are beneficial to whole societies and the population of the planet. And that resistance must be overcome, and where possible transformed (as has been happening, as even some oil companies have been moving to “greener” business practices).

One of the ways of reducing green house gas emission, and major pollution, as well as scarce resource use, is to reduce automobile use, which is one of the major and fastest growing sources of pollution, including greenhouse gases. Increasing public transportation, including high speed trains between cities, will help this, and incentives and encouragement to use such transportation will further help (reduced fares, etc.). A problem in the U.S. is that automotive and truck use is governmentally subsidized, while railroads are not. Increasing automobile efficiency, introducing electric and highbred vehicles – which can be supported by subsidies and other incentives, while penalizing (e.g. taxes) greenhouse gas producing emissions, especially by highly inefficient engines. Encouraging, rewarding use of bicycles and walking can also reduce vehicle use. Careful urban, land use and traffic planning by governments, business and NGOs can also be a major method for reducing vehicle use, and resulting pollution.

Production of power for electricity, manufacturing, etc., can also be switched from higher to lower polluting – particularly of greenhouse gases – while machines, devices, equipment, appliances, etc. can be made more energy efficient, and such use encouraged/subsidized/advertised. Providing public information about the problem and what people can do about it, with specific information about helpful products and actions, can be a major help in all aspects of dealing with environmental-human protection.

A major aspect of reducing greenhouse gas emission and other pollution and environmental degradation is the development of new and improvement of old technology, methods, energy sources, etc. A great deal of investment needs to be made in this area (and some of that is happening) with the support of public and private funding.

Almost all of the aspects of the problem can be better met with increased intra and inter organization, and interpersonal, collaboration and efficiency. Government and private organizations and persons can play an important facilitating and communicating roll here (such as planning locations of facilities for shorter travel/shipping, coordination of research, sharing of information, timing of work shifts to avoid traffic jams, etc).

A critical aspect of protecting human life, economy, health, etc. by protecting the environment is in a variety of public policies at every level of government, from direct regulation (which should be smart regulation - as set out in Reinventing Government),(9) subsidies, encouragements, penalties, planning, voluntary planning – encouraging collaboration/coordination, smart seeding of research and production of better products (e.g. the government ordering large numbers of a better product to bring the price down to make it competitive), spreading information, encouraging environmentally friendly activity, etc. To achieve this requires political action, including public expression (hence the need of public and private public education), by individuals, groups, corporations, and government entities.

Green business policies and actions are also an extremely important aspect of meeting environmental threats, including global warming. Government policy can encourage this, as must public caring about the issues and demand for green business activity. Education of business leaders and personnel is also critical. Understanding that moving in a greener direction can create jobs (some very well respected analysis shows clearly that moving to protect the environment will produce far more jobs and business opportunities than it destroys, though some vested interests do, and will continue to, resist that proposition).

Already quite a number of firms, and in some areas chambers of commerce, see that their future is dependent on protecting the environment, while others now want to seem that they are acting in a green way (investigative reporting and environmental group research needs to expose false green claims, encouraging real green action). Professional organizations can play an important part by developing, publicizing, encouraging, and at times enforcing a green ethic.

Public education is critical, in schools, by government and community leaders, and by nongovernmental organizations, to insure that here is public demand for environmentally friendly public and corporate policy. It will help if people at large are informed and encouraged to take ecologically positive actions, from recycling and careful use of toxic materials, to efficiency in using energy and other resources. Small individual acts do help, when widely carried out. But the doing of them is important in developing a general green consciousness

These are a few of the many interrelated aspects, briefly presented, of meeting the massive environmental threat we human beings are bringing down on ourselves. In proceeding to take protective action, it is important to join Indigenous people in seeing that all the aspects of the problems involved are interrelated, and to analyze them and act upon them holistically, and so far as possible (with out co-opting oneself) work collaboratively to reclaim the circle of the world, to the extent realizable, minimizing the damage, so, as Native people say, life will be good for the seventh generation to come.

FOOTNOTES

1. Elizabeth Rosenthal, “UN Report on Climate Change Details Risk of Inaction: Scientists Final Accounting Is Forceful on Temperatures and Seal Levels,” The New York Times,
November 17, 2007, pp. A1 and A5. The article, with links to similar articles and the text of the full report is available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/02/science/earth/02cnd-climate.html?_r=1&oref=slogin. The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change website contains the panels reports at: http://www.ipcc.ch/.

2. See Willis Harman, Global Mind Change, Second Edition (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc, 1998), as a whole, and particularly pp. 135-136, 142-143, 175; and Gregory Cajete, Native Science: Natural Laws of Interdependence (Santa Fe: Clear Light Publishers, 2000), Ch. 2, 3, 6, and 8.

3. For traditional American Indians, the ideal for individual and social life is harmony, and balance (which the Navajo call beauty [hozo], based upon respect for all beings (and everything is alive, even the rocks are living), in accordance with the natural order of which human beings are a part and all are related. The Lakotas, for example, state this at the end of prayers: Mitakue Oyasun: "all my relations - amen!" - a word, which like the Hindu Om, when fully stated contains all the vowels (See Gerald Mohatt and Joseph eagle Elk, The Price of a Gift: A Lakota Healer's Story (Lincoln: the University of Nebraska Press, 2000), pp. 3, 35, 145-146, 298-199; and Joseph M. Marshall III, The Lakota Way: Stories and Lessons of Living (New York: Viking Compass, 2001), pp. 211, 227. The Muscogee, like numerous other indigenous nations, have a very similar approach to interrelatedness, and when they dance the first friendship dance, recognizing and honoring the creator that surrounds all things and beings, they chant "iyabileyuppe," which also contains all the vowel sounds (Jean and Joyotpaul Chaudhuri, A Sacred Path: The Way of the Muscogee Creeks (Los Angeles: UCLA American Indian Studies Center, 2001), p. 26). On the Navajo, See Clyde Kluckhohn and Dorothy Leighton, The Navaho; James F. Downes, The Navajo (New York: Holt Reinhart and Winston, Inc., 1972), particularly chapters 2, 3 and 8; Robert W. Young, A Political History of the Navajo Tribe (Tsaille, Navajo Nation, AZ: Navajo Community College Press, 1978); and Alice Reichard, Navaho Religion (New York: Pantheon Books, Bollingen Series, 1950).

For the Muscogee (Creek), the totality of interrelatedness is seen in their creation story, and in all their related stories showing how everything is interrelated and must be kept in balance, as set forth by in Jean and Joyotpaul Chaudhuri, A Sacred Path. The Chaudhuris tell us, for example, "The beautiful astronomical legends give us a picture of the balance of male and female energies, thereby showing the patch of darkness in light and light in darkness, all circling in the search for harmony in motion. The legends provide a humanities parallel of the science of the Creeks which also sees the search for balance between the four elements and the synergy linking the cycles of dynamic energies of the earth, the water, the sun (fire), and the sky (air). This is no romantic pipe dream, but the vision of an earth-centered culture with sacred trust responsibilities. The Earth centered physics involves exchanges between and transformations of various forms of energy and the cycles of energy among soil, water, nutrients, animals, sunlight, air and rain in an environmentally balanced manner (p. 19)". This dynamic balancing, that is necessary in the physical sphere, is also necessary in society, in which all the elements: men, women, the different clans and the two moieties - indeed all individuals - each have their unique and essential functions that must be kept in, and returned to, balance (Ch. 5-10). The same is true of the individual, who if internally out of balance can not act socially in a balanced way. "In the Muscogee Creek cosmos, all things consist of particular combinations of body, mind and spirit. When these are not in harmony, one is truly lost and healing becomes necessary for the entity to continue (p. 23, the theme pervading chapter 4)." But harmony, balance, beauty, peace is not automatic, one has to work continually to attain and maintain it at every level, including in and with the natural environment. As the Chaudhuris say of the Muskogee, "Given the unpredictable .elements of nature and the quirks of human nature, the search for harmony takes sustained effort in all social institutions"(p. 68, see all of Ch. 9). Hence, in personal inner work and in all relationships, including with the natural environment and all its nations of plants, animals, etc., one continually participates in processes for returning to harmony. Each Native culture did this in a different manner, but almost all followed the same general principles (at least until they become too large or events put them sufficiently out of balance).

4. Cajete, Native Science, p. 63-69.

5. As discussed in footnote 2.

6. For a discussion of the relevance of traditional Native thought to western science, and growing convergence of the two, see, Stephen M. Sachs, “The Cutting Edge of Physics: Western Science Is Finally Catching Up with American Indian Tradition,” IPJ, Vol. XVIII, No. 2.

7. Stephen M. Sachs and Deborah Escobel Hunt, "Appropriate Consulting with Indian Nations: Facilitating Returning to the Wisdom of the People," Proceedings of the 2000 American Political Science Association Meeting (Washington, DC: American Political Science Association, 2000).

8. For a short overview of appropriate ways to deal with global warming and other environmental degradations see Stephen M. Sachs, “Global Warming and What Can Be Done About It,” in Nonviolent Change, Spring 2007. NCJ regularly reports on major climate change and other environmental developments. A good ongoing source for environmental information is the World Watch Institute: http://www.worldwatch.org/.

9. See David Osborne and Ted Gabler, Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming the Public Sector, From Schoolhouse to Statehouse, City Hall to the Pentagon (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., 1992).

 

 

 

Leetsoii means “Yellow dirt” in the Navajo Language:
Troubling Uranium Mining on Navajo Lands

By Al Henderson, Patricia Rife and Perry H. Charley
April 25, 2008

I. Uranium is found in Navajo Land

In the eastern Navajo land near the small towns of Milan and Grants, New Mexico stand two majestic landmarks separated by about 15 miles. The western landmark is a mesa known as Haystack. Surrounding Haystack are numerous scattered homes, most of them occupied by Navajo families.

The eastern landmark is a mountain, towering 11,301 feet at its highest peak, known as Mt. Taylor. Navajos call it Tsoodzil, the sacred mountain of the south. Both landmarks can easily be seen by travelers going east and west from Interstate 40.

It was there in 1950 that Patricio “Paddy” Martinez, who is part Spanish and Navajo and spoke the Spanish, English, Navajo and Laguna languages, walked into a trader's store to buy cigarettes when he saw two men examining a fist-sized, yellow-streaked piece of rock. He heard them say, in Spanish, that it was a sample of uranium ore, and that the federal government was offering a $10,000 prize to any prospector who made a “big strike.” Paddy decided to find some and that same day, as he rode his horse back home, he spotted an outcropping of the odd-looking rock. He took a piece of the rock and had it analyzed in the town of Grants.1 The rock, as it turned out, contained streaks of a low-grade uranium ore called carnotite. Paddy was very surprised.

After having the low-grade uranium ‘find’ confirmed, Paddy staked out a 160-acre claim for himself, a few more for his sons and waited for the U.S. Federal government agent to come and pay him $10,000 – which never came. It turns out the $10,000 prize was offered only to those who found deposits of “high-grade” uranium ore! Nevertheless, Navajo history would recognize Paddy Martinez as the discoverer of uranium on their land near Mt. Taylor who sits north of the city of Grants, New Mexico.

II. A Brief Scientific History of Uranium

Uranium is a metallic chemical element in the actinide series of the periodic table, atomic number 92 -- which stands for 92 protons and electrons in its core. After the American Revolution, in Germany during 1789, the “discovery of uranium” in the mineral pitchblende was credited to chemist Martin Heinrich Klaproth, who named the new element after the planet Uranus.2 Uranium has the highest atomic weight of any naturally occurring elements: it is approximately 70% more dense than lead (hence, heavy!) and is weakly radioactive in its natural state under the ground. Similar to thorium and plutonium, uranium is one of the three “fissile” elements, meaning it can easily break apart to become lighter elements – it ‘fissions’ or divides, releasing energy.

Uranium was mined by the Belgian explorers of the African Congo as early as the 1920s, and it is mined throughout parts of southern Russia. Uranium occurs naturally in low concentrations (a few parts per million) in soil, rock and water, but is normally commercially “extracted” from uranium-bearing minerals such as uraninite that began when commercial mining companies set up factories in the 1940s.3

In nature, uranium atoms exist as uranium-238 (99.275%), uranium-235 (0.711%), and a very small amount of uranium-234 (0.0058%)4. Uranium decays slowly by emitting an alpha particle. The half-life of uranium-238 is about 4.47 billion years and that of uranium-235 is 704 million years,5 making these derivatives useful to geologists in dating the age of the Earth.

As early as 1896, Antoine Becquerel in France, who was the discoverer of X-Rays, thought uranium might be useful for medical purposes. Sadly it is not -- the health products of radium, not like uranium, are used in treating cancers worldwide. There were many ‘nuclear pioneers’ in the 1920s who were experimenting with radioactive properties of all the elements in the Periodic Table. The Berlin team of Lise Meitner and Otto Hahn, the French team of Frederic and Marie Joliot-Curie (daughter of Madame Marie Curie, who won the Nobel Prize in Physics for her discovery of radium) and in Italy, research teams led by Enrico Fermi and others experimented with uranium and other heavy metals to learn more about the structure of the inner nucleus and properties of radioactive decay, when electrons are emitted from atoms.6

In the face of rising fascist tactics in Nazi Germany and Italy, Austrian born Lise Meitner fled secretly out of Hitler’s capital, Berlin, and with the aide of Niels Bohr, she went to Stockholm. Enrico Fermi left Rome with his Jewish wife. They secretly took a boat departing for America after the 1939 Nobel Prize ceremonies. It was ironic that in 1938, the “discovery of nuclear fission” by Meitner and her nephew Frisch, both refugees from Nazi Germany, led the entire scientific world – from Russia to Germany to the U.S. – to focus upon “harnessing” nuclear energy.

Albert Einstein had warned President Roosevelt in a famous letter he was urged to write in 1939 that uranium in the Congo might be captured by Hitler7 – which led the U.S. President, years before America entered World War II, to create an Army project in Los Alamos, New Mexico to continue research on harnessing uranium fission for the potential production of weapons.8 Many emigrant scientists were extremely concerned that Hitler could – and would – produce a “nuclear weapon” by the 1940s.

Discoveries of any naturally-caused element and its properties are often documented differently by many different cultures. Of course, in Navajo, minerals are described in the native language, and hence when research at the top secret labs in Los Alamos, New Mexico began, many in the tribal government as well as local people were not aware that the “top secret” laboratories there were working on weapons. [Navajo] locals were just as surprised as most U.S. citizens with the explosion of the world’s first atomic bombs at the end of the war.9 But many scientists, looking
back, also tell us that they had no idea if the nuclear fission of uranium would work to end the horrible war in the Pacific.

By the end of the 1940s, uranium research on atomic fission weapons led to its use as a fuel in the nuclear power industry. As the encyclopedia Wikipedia.com states:

“An ensuing arms race during the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union produced tens of thousands of nuclear weapons that used enriched uranium and uranium-derived plutonium. The security of those weapons and their fissile material following the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991 along with the legacy of nuclear testing and nuclear accidents is now a major concern for public health and safety worldwide.”10

III. Dine Creation and Traditional Beliefs

Dine as most Navajos prefer to be identified, believe that when they entered into this world they emerged from the underground. Upon their emergence, they saw a place of salvation from the underground flood that had forced them to climb up through the reed plant. Their salvation dimmed almost immediately when they noticed they were not the only living beings in the new world.

These beings did not welcome the newcomers who were the holy people or Diyin Dineh.11 To win their right to become neighbors the newcomers were asked to select one of their members to past a physical test. The test required the member to withstand the passing through of his body an arrow from four different directions. If the member survived the test, the newcomers would win their right to become new neighbors.

After much discussion, cicada the insect was selected to take the test because, as the traditional elders say, the insect has a hollow body. Cicada emerged from the underground and announced that he has been chosen to take the test. Four times the arrows passed through his body. Each time an arrow passed through his body cicada was unfazed. Eventually he won the right for everyone to exist in the new world.

From the underground world emerged the newcomers who quickly embarked on homesteading. They began by recreating the land they knew. With a huge breath of air they released onto Earth, churning up the ground to form a large land mass sending them in four directions.12 The land masses became the sacred mountains: To the east is Sis naajini, to the south is Tsoodzil, to the west is Dook’o’oosliid and in the north is Dibe Nitsaa. The English names for these mountains are Mt. Hesperus, Mt. Taylor, San Francisco Peak and Blanca Peak in the same order.

 

The holy people anchored each sacred mountain with stones. Sis naajini was anchored with white shell. Tsoodzil was anchored with turquoise. Dook’o’oosliid was anchored with abalone shell and Dibe Nitsaa was anchored with jet stone. These stones became known as the four sacred stones of the Navajo people.

Next, the holy people placed atop each mountain a feather to give it life and the ability to communicate with one another and throughout the universe. With these tasks completed the holy land, or Diyin tah, was formed. Finally, the holy people put out instruction that “for eternity this land is where the Navajo people shall live. Do not disturb what has been created. Honor all things within these four sacred mountains. Live in harmony and respect all things. When you do this, you will live a life of abundance and happiness.”13 The traditional elders are the caretakers of the Navajo cultural teachings, history and practices. To them, it is the way the world is – a balance between all things they designate that are in existence between Mother Earth and Father Sky. To this day, it is a common occurrence throughout Navajo land where traditional ceremonies are being conducted to heal and protect one’s self from adversity or disharmony.

There are many traditional ceremonies which are conducted by medicine men/women and all of them are done in the Navajo language. In each of the ceremonies the songs and prayers acknowledge and recognize the sacred mountains, holy people, plants and animals. Each ceremony focuses on restoring harmony between the person and the environment.

According to traditional Navajo teachings, the subject of uranium must be approached with an understanding of its placement in the natural order and of its properties. Uranium is a heavy metal. It has been regarded as the antithesis to the sacred corn pollen that is used to bless the lives of Navajos.

The ultimate goal of the Navajo is to maintain the delicate balance between humans - Bila’ashdla’ii, the five fingered ones - and nature.14 The traditional Navajo’s belief system taught Navajos that their illnesses maybe related to an imbalance in their lives. Uranium mining and milling was regarded as a disruption in the balance of Earth and Sky, and is therefore disrespectful to Mother Earth.15

Navajo people view Earth according to the four related elements: Air, land, water and fire/sunlight. Earth is viewed as the female counterpart to Sky, who is male. Their relationship is reflected in the sphere of human existence, a delicate balance of harmony between human and nature. Navajos refer to this as Hozho or the “beauty way.” Unknowing to the Navajo people the delicate balance was about to be disrupted.

Traditional Navajos see uranium and materials used for nuclear power as a monster or Nayee, in the Navajo language. The Nayee was conceived in 1896 upon the discovery of radioactivity by Madam Curie. In 1938, it started assuming shape into a Nayee when nuclear fission was achieved. On July 16, 1945, Nayee was born, thus, bringing the entire world into the nuclear age when, at Alamogordo, New Mexico the first atomic bomb was detonated. It assumed a full-fledged Nayee, capable of mass destruction when, on August 6 and August 9, 1945, over 220,000 human beings died in a split second with the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan.

By joining the war effort and the subsequent “cold war” the Navajo people unwittingly played a role serving as the midwife of the Nayee. Over 2,000 uranium mines were dug and four mill processing sites were constructed on Navajo lands by the U.S. government. The “Manhattan Engineer District” was the U.S. Government entity that was established on August 13, 1942 to administer and oversee the entire Manhattan Project.16 However small, the Navajo people had played a role in the development of the atomic weapon.

The central principle in traditional teachings of moderation and balance were forever disrupted. Not only was holistic healing disrupted, but along with it, the delicate balance between our physical, emotional, psychological and spiritual existence was disrupted. In their place, many Navajos started experiencing diseases they never heard of: non-malignant and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases, lung cancers, birth defects, involuntary human research, contaminated homes, lands, air and water. The Navajo way of life, their songs, chants and ceremonies were disrupted. Without these rites, chants and ceremonies, death came upon the Navajo people with increasing frequency.

To complicate these problems, one of the strictest taboos forbade speaking about death or the deceased. These impeded discussion and dialogue of health and environmental affects from uranium exposure. Traditional Navajos believe talking of the deceased may call their ghosts (Chiidii) and bring harm to the speaker.17 In addition to not being warned of the potential health hazards associated with mining and milling, many of the non-English speaking traditional uranium workers and their families did not recognize or understand that their uranium work was likely the cause of their health problems. There are no Navajo words for many common nuclear terminologies. Words such as radiation, radon gas, gamma, alpha, beta decay and many other terms used in the English language [did not exist in their language.]18

This angered traditional Navajo elders who forbade discussions to the outside world of nuclear technology capable of mass destruction. The thought of thousands of people dying at the hands of another was so horrible that many wanted no further mention of such an immoral act. After all, death and dying was already a taboo and must not to be discussed under any circumstance.

The thought that uranium mining and milling had disruptive potential went beyond the Navajo concept of Hozho. There is no doubt that uranium is a powerful Nayee. The Navajo could not control uranium and its enormous power. Its power is the nexus which stands in the way of Hozho and is therefore a Nayee.

Traditional stories often tell us the Nayee was born when Navajos committed evil. Oftentimes, these evil are affiliated with disrespect and abuse of power, powerful forms of coercion. To the Navajo, coercion is a form of witchcraft and dwelling in the area of witchcraft that are strictly taboo. It requires specialized chants, prayers and ceremonies to combat and free it’s victims of its influence. It is an area of life to avoid at all costs.

IV. Role of the Federal Government and Mining Companies

At the end of World War I in Europe, around 1918, a Caucasian trader named John Wade had discovered small outcropping of uranium ore in the eastern Carrizo Mountain,19 located in northern Navajo Nation near the Arizona and New Mexico state line. The mines produced small quantities of uranium which he sold to the U.S. Government. At that time, the Navajo reservation was closed territory to prospecting and mining, but not for long.

The Congressional Act of June 30, 1919, opened the Navajo reservation to prospecting and locating mining claims under the same manner as prescribed by the United States 1872 Mining Law. By 1930’s, there were several mining operations underway to mine uranium and produce radium and vanadium.

Mining by corporations began on the early land claims of Mr. Wade. The first mines were in Cove and Red Valley, Arizona. Years later, deep mine shafts were dynamited in Monument Valley (along the Arizona and Utah borders) and in the Tuba City region (near Dook’o’oosliid.) The by-products from these mines would, in later years, be identified as the source of cancer that began to afflict Navajo mine workers and members of their families.

Mother and child doing laundry, circa 1940.
Smithsonian Institution Cultural Resources Center,
Suitland, MD. Photo by Paul J. Woolf

Water in the wind-hollowed red rocks and earthen dams became radioactive. Along with the water, the surrounding plants and vegetation eventually tested out as contaminated. These are food sources for the animals, particularly sheep, which Navajo families routinely butchered for food. People became ill and sicknesses that could not be identified began to emerge.

No one knew the long-term health effects of uranium mining at the time. If anyone did, it wasn’t publicized. So, quietly, the Navajo miners kept mining in unventilated mines. On the surface, uranium was milled to separate out the yellow ore – the valuable mineral that was needed to fuel the U.S. atomic energy program.

The mine ore was hauled to mill processing sites where the ore was sampled, crushed and turned into fine white sand that lay stockpiled near the mills. These unsecured and unmarked stockpiles became known as mill tailings. One of the mesa-like waste piles grew to be a mile long and 70 feet high.20 Children of families living near these mill tailings have been observed playing in the fine white sand–like tailings – not knowing how very, very dangerous radioactive materials can be.

Some Navajo families even used the fine white sand. They mixed it with other sand and concrete and used it for home foundations and wall plaster. Not much information is available on how many of these “radioactive” homes exist on Navajo land nor how many families are affected. What is known is that those who lived in these houses have succumbed to increased incidents of respiratory illnesses, sicknesses and cancer. Many eventually died.

V. The Role of Treaties and Mining on Navajo Land

It’s been nearly 140 years since the Navajos returned to their homeland in Dinetah.

In 1864 many of the Navajos who lived and thrived within the four sacred mountains were rounded up and forced marched to Ft. Summer, New Mexico or Hweeldi (the place of hardship to the Navajos). The U.S. removal policy was done to prevent the Navajos from warring with white settlers traveling west and raiding and stealing property from neighboring villages.

In 1868, a treaty between the Navajos and U.S. allowed the return of some 7,000 to their homeland. Twenty nine Navajo leaders signed the treaty agreeing to lay down their weapons and cease all wars against the U.S. in exchange for peace and protection.

By the early 20th century federal Indian agents reported the resurgence of economic vitality among the Navajos. They had taken their allotted provisions under the treaty and turned themselves into successful farmers, livestock herders, weavers and silversmiths which had been their principle occupation before Hweeldi.

The pastoral and agrarian way of life lasted until around1923 when oil was discovered in the Tocito Dome area located south of the famed Ship Rock formation known to Navajos as Tse Bit’a’i or “rock with wings.” Geologists report this to be the remains of a volcanic cone that has weathered away over millions of years.

When oil was discovered, the federal trustee found himself in a perplexing position when oil companies asked for permission to explore and develop oil properties on Navajo lands. Since the Navajos’ return from Hweeldi no formal body was in existence to grant such permission. What were in practice at the time were those who were interested in prospecting and mining merely laid claims to parcels of land and obtained a lease from the trustee as was permitted by the Congressional Act of June 30, 1919. Navajos had no say in the matter.

Guilty conscience must have dictated what happened next. Rather than continuing with approving mineral leases, the federal trustee let out word to Navajo leaders to meet with him to approve the oil and gas leases. This first formal gathering in 1923 of Navajo leaders gave birth to the contemporary tribal government.

On March 25, 1936, the Secretary of the Interior closed the Navajo reservation to claim location and prospecting for minerals until further notification. In July 1936, an application to prospect was made to the Executive Committee of the Navajo tribal council requesting the council to pass a resolution asking the Secretary to open the reservation for mining. The resolution was rejected by the Executive Council who did not want mining or prospecting on the reservation at the time.

The Navajo reservation was opened again to prospecting and mining by a Congressional Act of May 11, 1938 with new procedures. The Act gave the tribal council the authority to enter into leases for the reservation lands with approval of the Secretary of the Interior. Prospectors could no longer stakes claims similar to the Mining Law of 1872. The new regulations stipulated that the lessee must pay escalating annual rentals, royalty of 10% value, bond requirements, acreage limitations and a term of 10 years which could be extended by production.

By the early 1950’s the Navajo tribal council adapted a series of resolutions dealing with uranium mining. Also, mining permits could only be assigned to Navajos. Due to their lack of capital, many assigned their permits to non-Navajos. Mining leases were no longer subject to competitive bidding, thus, greatly increasing prospecting and mining throughout the Navajo reservation. The first of many uranium exploration and mining leases were issued to such companies as Vanadium Corporation of America, U.S. Vanadium Corporation, Navajo Uranium Mining Co., Climax Uranium Company, Kerr-McGee and United Nuclear Corporation.

By the early 1970’s, when demand for uranium was low, companies merely packed up and left behind its “contaminated” machinery and equipment, as well as leaving dangerous abandoned mines and radioactive mill tailings. Once the sickness, illness and cancer was linked to these mining activities, companies were no where to be found. There were no companies for victims to sue to make claims of liability.

Only when public pressure was exerted on both the companies and the federal government did Congress step in and in 1990 they passed the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA). Although some of the victims were compensated, many more have filed claims, but were denied or told they need to provide more documentation. There it stands today, tied up in bureaucracy and red tape. The result has been that many victims have simply given up because they say it’s a hopeless case and “…the lawyers took a portion of [the money] from us”21 – alluding that they weren’t the ones making money from RECA.

The U.S. Department of Justice reported in February 2007: “there have been 25,696 claims filed and more than $1.1 billion has been awarded to 16,867 claimants.”22 The report does not mention how many Navajos filed claims and how much those determined to be eligible received in compensation. “There are a total of about 5,000 Navajo uranium miners, and so far, only 10 to 12% of them have been compensated,” said Phil Harrison, a Navajo Nation council delegate from Red Valley who has been working with the afflicted miners and their families to qualify for RECA compensation.

VI. Strengthening Dine Sovereignty

Navajos refer to uranium in a descriptive form, calling it Leetsoii or yellow dirt,23 whose legacy has not been good. Yes, the money was good, but it has caused cancer among the miners and their family members, embedded emotional stress on many, built radioactive homes, contaminated plants, animals and drinking water. How much and for how long must human suffering and environmental damage occur before powerful politicians and corporations listen?

The Navajo Nation has answered this question many times. The first uranium ban was in the form of an Executive Order Moratorium on Uranium Mining issued by former Navajo Nation president Peterson Zah in December 1992. That order placed a "moratorium . . . on uranium mining activity until such time that the Navajo people can be assured that all safety and health hazards related to such activity can be addressed and resolved." This moratorium was in effect until 2005.

On April 29, 2005, the Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley, Jr., signed the Dine Natural Resources Protection Act (DNRPA) of 2005 which is believed to be the first Native American tribal law banning uranium mining and milling. In part, the act states, "No person shall engage in uranium mining and processing on any sites within Navajo Indian Country." The law is based on the Fundamental Laws of the Dine, which are already codified in Navajo statutes. The act finds that based on those fundamental laws, certain substances in the Earth (doo nal yee dah or “not to be handled”) that are harmful to the people should not be disturbed, and that the people now know uranium is one such substance so its extraction should be avoided to conform to traditional practice and as prohibited by Navajo law.24

Gradually, over the last ten years, companies have renewed their interest in uranium mining. They include United Resources, Inc., Strathmore Minerals Corporation, Energy Metals Corporation and Neutron Energy.25 These companies plan to either mine by in-situ leaching or conventional method. No matter which mining technology is used it will likely displace land and water much like it has done in the past.

VII. Looking Back ~~ and Forward

By 2007 the global market price hit a high of $138 for a pound of uranium -- more than enough to maintain peak interest of uranium mining executives. Couple the market price with rising demand for alternative fuel sources to meet U.S. energy requirement, the questions being asked are: Will the Navajo ban on uranium mining hold up against political and economic pressures?
Have we learned from the mistakes of the past? How can we be reassured that this won’t happen again? Or will children and Navajo workers, as well as all those living near the radioactive tailings, be affected for generations with horrible health conditions due to uranium mining on Navajo land?

The Henry Draper Collection, Navajo silver and turquoise
necklace, before 1917. Smithsonian Institution Cultural
Resources Center, Suitland, MD.
Photo by NMAI Photo Services Staff.

Leaders of the Navajo Nation are confident that their sovereign actions to protect the environment will prevail -- as long as they practice the traditional cultural teaching of respect for Mother Earth and Father Sky. After all, it was the traditional cultural practices that released them from captivity at Hweeldi nearly 140 years ago.

Since then, they have been under the protection of the four sacred mountains, surrounded by Naat’sii’liid (rainbow) that for many traditional Navajos is the foundation of their sovereignty. This sacred protection is visibly depicted in traditional art forms, such as we see in the early 20th century squash blossom necklace (pictured on the left) whose pendant tips show hands that are embracing Mother Earth. What is astounding in this symbol is that she embraces to protect all Creation– and her people -- from harm

 

References

1 Oral conversation with Darryl Martinez, Window Rock, Arizona, 1986.
2 See Dictionary of Scientific Biography, V. “Martin Heinrich Klaproth.”
3 The early mining companies in New Mexico, now large corporations, included Kerr-McGee, United Mining and Hydro-Resource Inc.
4 See Wikipedia, 2007.
5 See “Uranium” in Chemical and Engineering News, The History of the Periodic Table 50th Anniversary issue, Sept. 8, 2003.
6 See Patricia Rife, Lise Meitner and the Dawn of the Nuclear Age (Boston: Birkhauser, 1999); Emilio Segre, Enrico Fermi: Physicist (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970); and Spencer Weart “The Discovery of Fission and a Nuclear Physics Paradigm”, pp. 91-133 in Wm. Shea, editor, Otto Hahn and the Rise of Nuclear Physics (Boston: Reidel, 1983).
7 See Patricia Rife, “Einstein, Ethics and the Atomic Bomb”, American Physics Society News, June 2005 (delivered at the Einstein Centennial Conference, American Physics Society, L.A., CA, March 2005, Social Responsibility section); Alan Beyerchen, Scientists Under Hitler (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1977); Mark Walker, German National Socialism and the Quest for Nuclear Power 1939-1945 (Cambridge University Press, 1989). The original letter from Albert Einstein to President Roosevelt, August 12, 1939, has been reprinted in Gertrud Szilard and Spencer Weart, editors, Leo Szilard: His Version of the Facts (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1979).
8 See Tom Shachtman, Laboratory Warriors: How Allied Science & Technology Tipped the Balance in World War II (N.Y.: HarperCollins, 2002); Richard Rhodes, The Making of the Atomic Bomb (N.Y.: Simon and Schuster, 1986); Patricia Rife, Lise Meitner and the Dawn of the Nuclear Age (Boston: Birkhauser, 1999).
9 Interview with Navajo woman in Alamogordo, NM by Patricia Rife, 1983: also see Richard Rhodes, The Making of the Atomic Bomb (N.Y.: Simon and Schuster, 1986).
10 Retrieved from WWW. Wikipedia.com, “Uranium”, Nov. 9 2007.
11 Oral conversation with Johnson Yazzie, Flagstaff, Arizona, October 4, 2007.
12 Ibid.
13 Oral conversation with James Peshlakai, Flagstaff, Arizona, October 10, 2007.
14 Csordas, 1999; Eischstaedt, 1994; Woody, et al., 1981.
15 Dawson & Charley, 2004, Markstrom & Charley, 2003.
16 See Tom Shachtman, Laboratory Warriors: How Allied Science & Technology Tipped the Balance in World War II (N.Y.: HarperCollins, 2002); Richard Rhodes, The Making of the Atomic Bomb (N.Y.: Simon and Schuster, 1986); Patricia Rife, Lise Meitner and the Dawn of the Nuclear Age (Boston: Birkhauser, 1999).
17 Kluckhohn & Leighton, 1946
18 Dawson & Charley, 1992
19 History of the Uranium Mining on the Navajo Nation: Cove and Red Valley Chapters, Report prepared under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Western Region Restoration of Abandoned Mines Sites (RAMS) Program for the Navajo Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Program (NAMLRP), October 2005.
20 Johansen, Bruce E., The High Cost of Uranium in Navajoland, Akwesase Notes New Series, April May June, 1997, Volume 2 #2.
21 Brugge, D., Benally.T., and Harrison, P. 1997. Memories Come to Us in the Rain and the Wind: Oral Histories and Photographs of Navajo Uranium Miners & Their Families. Navajo Uranium Miner Oral History And Photography Project. Red Sun Press, Jamaica Plain, MA. P.24.
22 U.S. Department of Justice, Radiation Exposure Compensation Act Trust Fund, FY 2008 Performance Budget Congressional Submission, February 2007.
23 The Navajo Language Grammar and Colloquial Dictionary, Revised Edition, (Young & Morgan)
24 Navajo Tribal Council Resolution, 20th Navajo Nation Council, Third Year, 2005, Tracking No. 0886-04, April 2005.
25 See “Companies hope to jump-start uranium mining,” Gallup Independent, Kathy Helms, October 31, 2007; “Uranium Mining in the Navajo Nation,” Sprol, July 19, 2006. Available also at <http://www.sprol.com>; and “Mining firms again eyeing Navajo land,” Los Angeles Times, Judy Pasternak, November 22, 2006

Mr. Al Henderson would like to thank the Smithsonian Institution Native American Community Scholars program for their support for his research during the summer of 2007 in conducting archival and artifacts research for this article.

 

 

 

JOURNALISTIC RHETORIC AND ORIENTALISM: ATTEMPTS AT INFLUENCING FEDERAL INDIAN POLICY AND RULE-MAKING ON THE TAKING OF EAGLES (1)

Margaret Mortensen Vaughan, Ph.D.,

Generally speaking, mainstream environmentalists and Indigenous peoples (both diverse groups of people) have had complicated relationships.2 Under-examined are the cases of how media in particular environmental media and the genre of nature magazines, are involved in that complicating process. Print images and rhetoric influences readers who may not have an extensive knowledge of Indigenous (this article uses the political/ethnic labels of American Indian, Native, and Indigenous interchangeably) and Federal policy issues. Journalists may not have such a background and fall back on their knowledge of environmental law without considering Indigenous policies that apply to cases and situations on which they are writing. The following exegesis of rhetoric used in two articles focuses on the rhetorical strategies of opposition which include the belittlement, exaggeration, and demonization against American Indian religious freedom and silence on U.S. federal trust obligations and Indigenous treaty rights. This discourse is not new, but the more current cases in which these occur should be closely examined. These articles are cases in which environmentalist journalism depicts Indigenous peoples and certain groups of Indigenous peoples with negative imagery in order to influence readership opinion so that readers will not support changes in rule-making or policy that supports Indigenous cultural practices.

Audubon magazine, a respected environmental magazine in the mainstream environmental community, featured two articles on the uses of eagles and eagle feathers by Indigenous peoples.3 These were written by the same author. The articles were written to persuade the readership that policies and proposed rule changes toward Native Peoples’ access and use of live bald and golden eagles as well as eagle parts and feathers are misguided because this access contradicts the protection of eagles and unfairly favors the religious freedoms of American Indians. These articles were written before the delisting of the bald eagle from the endangered species list, an action on which the National Congress of American Indians and other communities disagreed (the desert bald eagle population were re-listed shortly after being delisted).4

A full-length article by Ted Williams in September 1986 focused on the American Indian harvesting of eagles and strongly criticized the Indigenous use of eagle feathers in ceremonies. This article “A Harvest of Eagles” was excerpted from his book, Don’t Blame the Indians: The Mechanized Destruction of Fish and Wildlife.5 The second article appeared in the March-April issue in 2001, “Golden Eagles for the Gods.” This article’s goal was to convince readers to write to the National Park Service to protest a proposed rule to open Wupatki National Monument in Arizona to members of the Hopi Tribe to collect golden eaglets for ceremonial purposes. The following passages will show how this journalist drew on argumentative strategies that belittled, exaggerated, and demonized Indigenous peoples. In “A Harvest of Eagles,” Williams referred to “American Indians” and Indians” as the subject of his criticism. In addition, his specific examples of “errant” Native American individuals who had faced legal prosecution were depicted with tribally-specific affiliations, including Red Lake Chippewa and Yankton Sioux. In “Golden Eagles for the Gods” the journalist continued these rhetorical strategies, writing about a “Hopi faction” and also “Indians” as a generalized group. The 2001 article appeared in a regular column of Audubon magazine called, “Incite.” The column title is wordplay concerning the word “insight” and “incite” meaning “to make angry.” In my observations, this is an unusual column appearing in environmental journalism, but it is a column that permits highly opinionated editorializing on an assortment of topics. As stated before, this style is not new, but its use in environmental writing in these cases speaks of a large perception gap between the Indigenous groups depicted in the article and this environmental journalist.6 The perception gap begins with the first line of the earliest article.

Williams starts out his 1986 article with an exaggeration, “AMERICAN INDIAN [sic] religion cannot be practiced without a copious flow of eagle feathers. Or so say the Indians. It seems very strange.”7 Williams set up his argumentative strategy of exaggeration and generalization in these first sentences. He combined all “Indian” religions and all “Indians” when he wrote “American Indian religion” and “so say the Indians.” He used exaggeration to call attention to “Indian” activities: “copious flow of eagle feathers” and “It seems very strange” (underline added for emphasis). The rhetorical strategy of exaggeration evoked imagery of a large amount of feathers versus the implied small amount of eagles.

Secondly, this journalism exaggerated about the easy access to eagle parts distributed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s eagle depository. He wrote, “from this supply to the Indian faithful flows a cascade of eagle feathers.”8 The term “Indian faithful” seems to indicate an organized religious movement, as well. The phrase “cascade of eagle feathers” also sets up an image evoking an image of a greedy, “Indian faithful.” The term “Indian faithful” seems to indicate an organized religious movement, as well. In actual practice, an irregular supply of eagle parts went in and out of the depository because the supply was based on accidental killings of eagles. Applicants were put on a waiting list. This distribution did not provide immediate access or a plentiful supply to Native American applicants, or a “cascade of eagle feathers.”

Thirdly, the article included exaggerations about the power of the Endangered Species Act, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. “It is against the law, plain and simple. No exceptions. Still, America’s legal system has excused Indians when they have killed eagles.”9 Williams sidelined an entire body of Federal Indian law, as well as laws and sovereignty of Native Nations. This body of Federal Indian law included treaties and the trust responsibility doctrine. Treaties and the trust doctrine pre-date environmental laws regulating hunting and feather ownership. Ranco and Suagee in a 2007 article write to emphasize the necessity of an environmental “participation that is cognizant of tribal sovereignty and colonial histories” which is not exemplified in this article by Williams. Ranco and Suagee begin their article with the following: “The unique political arrangement between Indian tribes and the United States is based on a complex body of law that includes treaties, acts of Congress, executive orders, and decisions of federal courts. This body of law distinguishes American Indians and Alaska Natives from other cultural and racial minorities in the United States, framing a political arrangement that reflects recognition of the aboriginal rights of the tribes, rights that predate the existence of the United States and even the concept of ‘race’ itself.”10 Williams belittled and side-stepped Federal Indian law such as high court rulings recognizing the exercise of treaty rights. Williams labeled this recognition of treaty rights as “excus[ing] Indians.” At another point he described the courts’ action with the phrase “appears to permit.”11 By doing so he entered the territory of the next argumentative strategy: belittlement.

Several examples of belittling Indigenous peoples appeared in the article. The journalism piece discursively shifted away from the significance of treaty rights toward the idea that the high courts had “excused” Native communities from environmental protection laws. This discursive move was belittling to Native communities’ positions as sovereign nations, managers of their own affairs, and separate from states and environmental organizations. Furthermore, Williams’ constant use of the terms “American Indian religion” and “Indians” belittled diverse cultural communities with diverse spiritualities. In an opinionated manner, the journalist also belittled “Indian” religious activity for, in his eyes, it did not fit in the same category as “other serious religions.”
With all other serious religions the artifacts of worship are much less important than the overriding ideals and principles of the order, the application of central belief to day-to-day living, a supreme being, the worship itself.12 Somehow the ceremonial use of eagle feathers set Indian religious activity apart from “serious religions” or organized, “civilized religions.”13

Williams also insinuated in this passage that “serious” (civilized religions) perpetuated themselves with abstract belief systems, and, in contrast, Native American religions relied on material objects or “artifacts of worship” and hence it can be interpreted to fit into the category of “idol worshipers.” “Idol worshipers” are akin to demon worshipers in some forms of major world religious thought. It is as if the journalist sought to demonize Native Americans in order to protect eagles.

Williams applied specific analogies to demonize “Indians.” He repeatedly referenced “Indians” as criminals who were prosecuted for killing eagles. Williams discussed an investigation in which “forty-one people (thirty-three of them Indian)” were caught harvesting eagles. In just one area, “perhaps [emphasis added] as many as 300 eagles, mostly balds had been killed in the vicinity of the Yankton Sioux Indian Reservation in South Dakota.”14 The number of birds killed was an estimate by qualified government estimators so Williams probably felt comfortable using the estimate. Furthermore, Williams argued that the decline of the eagle population on the wildlife refuge that bordered the Yankton Sioux reservation was a result of Indian hunting. He identified a Yankton Sioux father and son, “the Dions,” who were among thirty-three Indians arrested in an investigation. “For a sparsely populated Indian reservation already stocked with eagle feathers, an additional harvest requiring the dispatching of 300 birds would seem to indicate religious fanaticism of the sort one might encounter in the Middle East.”15 The 300 birds was an estimate when it was previously referenced in the article, but here it is set down as an established fact. The interpretation of events of the late 70s and early 80s fueled this comparison to Middle East fanaticism: Ayatollah Khomeini’s and Muslim fundamentalism’s take-over of Iran in 1979, Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) oil embargo in 1973, the Iran hostage crisis from 1979-1981, and the Iran and Iraq War.16 The allegation of religious fanaticism clearly was part of a discourse of opinion that drew on stereotypes about the “Middle East” to vilify Indian eagle hunters. Williams was referencing hot-button current events of the time to play on the emotions and the images within the minds of readers. He used one stereotype of “Middle Eastern fanaticism” to fuel discomfort or hate for Native Americans.

This approach, whether the journalist realized it or not, used the orientalizing of one “group” of people to orientalize American Indians (the idea of Orientalizing stems from the Palestinian American scholar Edward Said). The following quote explains the work of orientalizing:

“The depiction of this single ‘Orient’ which can be studied as a cohesive whole is one of the most powerful accomplishments of Orientalist scholars. It essentializes an image of a prototypical Oriental—a biological inferior that is culturally backward, peculiar, and unchanging—to be depicted in dominating and sexual terms. The discourse and visual imagery of Orientalism is laced with notions of power and superiority, formulated initially to facilitate a colonizing mission on the part of the West and perpetuated through a wide variety of discourses and policies.”17 The binaries between “civilized and savage,” the comparison to religious fanatics and “terrorists” attributed to a “Middle East” and the exaggerations and generalizing all are facets of orientalizing discourse.

Williams also drew on a well-known platitude to insinuate the evilness of the eagle hunters. “In any case, religion is what the Dions said made them do it.”18 This statement evoked the platitude, “The devil made me do it.” This statement in the article is also in the passive tense, so it appears that the Dions are saying it, rather than being mediated through a journalistic representation. Williams intentionally or unintentionally reworded this platitude to amplify his negative view of “Indian” religions. However, he was not able to provide definitive proof that Native American harvesting of eagles was detrimental to regional eagle populations.

In the last decade wintering eagles have declined on the Mundt refuge [the refuge adjacent to Yankton Sioux Indian Reservation]. Peak counts in the mid-seventies flirted with 300. By the early eighties peaks were down to 120. Weather conditions played a role, but Indian poaching probably did too.19
After demonizing Yankton Sioux eagle hunters, Williams based the cause of eagle population decline on assumptions. His statement on weather conditions was written with finality, but his statement on Indian poaching was written with the rather weak qualifier, “Indian poaching probably [emphasis added] did too.”20

Another point in the article discussed the eighth Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling involving the Yankton Sioux father and son, the Dions. The Court supported the treaty stipulations regarding hunting on reservations, recognizing the Dions’ rights to hunt eagles. Williams reacted with these words, “State and federal statues notwithstanding, bald or golden eagles passing through reservation air space were fair game for Indians.”21 Williams used the phrase “reservation air space” as if reservations were enemy territory. This imbrication of “enemy territory” and Indian Country or “reservation air space” contains roots in military parlance: The term “Indian Country” in communiqué signified enemy territory.

Williams reached the pinnacle of demonization of Indians, foreshadowed by the phrase “religion is what the Dions said made them do it” when he compared Native Americans to Satanists. Williams stated:

“Those who worship Satan certainly are practicing a genuine religion, but because sundry satanic rites not only are unacceptable to the public but dangerous to it as well. Satanists find themselves severely restricted by law.”22

Through harnessing particularly revolting images of the time period, such as Satanists and “Middle East fanatics,” mixing in exaggeration, and misinterpreting the significance of treaties, Williams created an article to jar readers into opposing Native American utilization of eagle feathers. The journalist was interested in protecting and preserving eagles, not preserving or protecting cultures or American Indian sovereignty.

In his lengthy 2001 “sequel,” “Golden Eagles for the Gods,” Williams continued to use the strategy of demonizing Native Americans using untrustworthy and essentializing claims. The motive for the article’s publication was to persuade readers to contact the National Park Service and voice an opinion against the newly proposed Federal Register rule to allow the Hopi to take eagles at Wupatki National Monument. In this article, Williams essentialized Native Americans by referring to them as a “race.” Williams wrote, “The truth about Indians, like the truth about other races, is that one can’t generalize about them.” Williams revisited the concept of race at the end of his essay, categorizing people into “white, black, and red.”23 In choosing the term “race,” the journalist declined to represent Native Americans as individuals within diverse cultural and ethnic groups. Williams’ nod to diversity was based on an essentializing racializing classification rather than on a cultural differentiation.24 For an uninformed reader, “race” and behavior may be closely associated, despite Williams’ caveat about generalization. From the article’s context, it was difficult to interpret if Williams meant the term “race” as a socially-constructed classification or as a biological term sometimes used in nature writing in conjunction with plant and animal species. Evidence that he subscribed to race as a biological classification appeared in one of his books where he questioned the authenticity of Indians with “blonde hair, blue eyes and freckles”25 The term “race” contains powerful categorical associations that may be absent from “ethnic or cultural group.” The term “race” deterministically implies or asserts inherent genetic or biological characteristics. Williams implied that people fit neatly within the confines of diverse “races”—a contradictory assertion. Terms such as “ethnicity” and “culture,” would have signified identities that were flexible, changeable, and learned, not inherent.26 By twisting the discourse into one about race, Williams enabled the perpetuation of several fallacies: that “Indian” identity was a racial identity with unchangeable associated characteristics that outsiders have the power to define, and in an even further discursive twist, “Indians” were exercising rights based on “race” rather than a political category influenced by the processes of colonization.

This article attacked one Hopi “faction” for their eagle gathering activities at Wupatki National Monument (not understanding Hopi eaglet gathering processes).

In Arizona…a faction of the Hopi tribe, which for centuries has captured and killed young golden eagles for ritualistic sacrifice, is lobbying the National Park Service (with apparent success) to let it collect eagles from the 54-square-mile Wupatki National Monument, just north of Flagstaff.27

In this case, Williams’ assertion clashed with a Hopi Tribe’s press release. He wrote this as though Wupatki was a new gathering area for the Hopi. In a press release in 1999, the Hopi Tribe stated that going to Wupatki for eagles is an “annual pilgrimage…exercised for as long as the Hopi can remember.”28 Williams does not present Wupatki National Monument as an ancestral Hopi gathering place. In Williams’ view, Wupatki signified a bundle of meanings that included, patriotism, access for all American visitors, environmental protection, and a park without human predation. Williams held to the strict definition of parks without people (although parks are actually heavily managed areas), and presented this as the naturalized legally and socially correct state of affairs.

Throughout the article this journalist drew from personal opinions and second-hand information about Hopi eagle-gathering practices from identified and anonymous wildlife biologists. Williams drew on two statements by two government raptor biologists who clearly opposed Hopi eaglet gathering. These biologists do not speak from the point of “hard” Western science with numbers or studies to back up their claims. One compared the Hopi harvest of eagles to the effects of DDT: “We might as well be putting DDT out there.” 29 Another raptor biologist explained that what exacerbated the diminishment of eagles was “overgrazing” on Hopi and Navajo land. This factor combined with “get[ting] hit by Hopi” (with permits) and Navajo (without permits) was what contributed to eagle population decline.30

Williams finally did include some numbers of eagles harvested by permit: “from 1986-1999 was 208” and stated, “That’s a lot of mortality for a predator perched atop the food chain.”31 Then on the same page he turned to the acts of “Indians” in general that “the illegal kill by Indians (not necessarily Hopi) is many times more than that.” In “fact,” Williams argued, “Some Indians…some Hopi…think the ritual should be consigned to the past as was the sacrifice of children, from which anthropologists believe it may have derived.”32 The author tapped into an image historically used to demonize, propagandize, and persecute “the Other.” Kamen (1985) described how this child killer accusation was used during the Spanish Inquisition regarding alleged Jewish torturers sacrificing Christian children.33 The same accusation continued into the twentieth century.34 In this case, Williams attributed his source for ritual child murder among ancient Hopi to anonymous “anthropologists.” First of all, this journalist does not seem to be steeped in anthropology, especially shown in how he still subscribed to the concept of “race.” Second of all, I believe he acted unethically and mean-spirited when he does not name his source, the anthropologist, but still associated Hopi people with child killers.

The article continued to use second-hand information when describing a Fish and Wildlife worker reporting on a Hopi Eagle Clan member sneaking off to release Hopi eaglets because the Eagle Clan “reveres free, living eagles.”35 This journalist’s representation contradicts a report in High Country News. High Country News reported in August of 1996, nine men of the Eagle Clan were arrested for gathering eaglets.36 This is also a piece of journalism that may have misreported. However, it is safe to state that Williams presented a misperception when he assumes the eagle’s signification for Eagle Clan members was the same as non-Indian environmentalists desire to protect eagles.37

The article presented the Hopi people as sneaky, exploitive and criminal, specifically as robbers in one passage: “the robbing [emphasis added] of eagle nests at Wupatki.”38 And, also Williams stated,

The Hopi are also trying to take eagles and hawks from three other park units in Arizona—Grand Canyon, Sunset Crater Volcano, and Walnut Canyon. But if one tribe is allowed to take wildlife from the national park system, how can other tribes, or even Anglos, legally be denied?39

He also asserted that the feathers were not utilized for the legally religious purposes but for black market profits or in powwow outfits that indirectly provide more profits. Williams depicted Native Americans as greedy and underhanded.

Some dancers make their livings going from powwow to powwow, competing for cash prizes….Powwow contestants are judged, in part, by the feathers they wear. During the “grand entry” dance at the annual Albuquerque powwow, you can see the remains of at least 20,000 eagles bouncing around the floor at one time.

It is the powwow circuit that keeps eagles and eagle parts moving so briskly on the black market.40
Williams then recounted how members of the Hopi, “Indians of various tribes in Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah,” and Jemez Pueblo were prosecuted for selling eagle parts.

While there is no evidence that the Hopi use immature golden eagles for anything other than their religious rituals, no one can reasonably expect them simply to place feathers worth this kind of money on Kachina dolls that never get sold or to piously scatter them under robbed aeries.41
The article also characterized Native Americans as impulsive, corrupt, and cruel. The cruelty factor was expressed in the case of a Jemez Pueblo man’s description of how he “dispatch[ed]” an eagle. Williams drew on another quote from a former Park Service employee:

I had one Indian tell me: “I’m like most Navajos. If I see an eagle, and I’ve got a gun, I’m taking a shot at it.” I’ve been with them when they’ve said: “I wish we had a gun.” Another time I was out with Hopis and an eagle jumped off a carcass out in the sand hills, and they were all bemoaning the fact that they didn’t have a rifle. 42
Within the second article was a “What You Can Do” box illustrated with two hands gesturing toward a distantly shining yellow globe: “The National Park Service has asked to hear what you think of its proposed rule to let the Hopi Indians take golden eagles from a national park unit for ritualistic slaughter. Don’t disappoint it.” 43
Throughout the 1986 and 2001 articles, Williams remained silent about a whole body of Federal Indian law and tribal law. Invisible in the discourse as well was the extensive history of non-Indian eagle hunting, pollution, and other environmental factors contributing to eagle endangerment. In 1986, Williams drew on demonization, orientalizing, belittlement, and exaggeration to make his points about Native Americans. In 2001, he attempted to depict a faction of the Hopi people, but momentarily in the article the discourse resorts back to generalizing about Native Americans in negative terms. In 2001, Williams used secondhand sources presented as trustworthy, clear inaccuracies, and demonizing portraits of Hopi cultures. Such representation can build resentment between mainstream environmental organizations, groups, and individuals and Indigenous governments, organizations, and individuals instead of building allies. These representations are in contrast to Ted Williams’ representation of the Nez Perce Wolf Recovery Project in the May-June 2007 issue of Audubon magazine.44 Without background about the subject, little knowledge about Indian Country, and little knowledge of Indigenous law in the U.S., readers would have been susceptible to this opinionated journalism.

Following both articles, dialogical responses to the Hopi eagle controversy appeared in the letters-to-the-editor sections in which writers worked hard to displace the orientalizing discourse. The 1986 letters-to-the-editor, (the Dialogue section) regarding “A Harvest of Eagles” were subtitled “On the Warpath,” a cliché playing on an Indian warfare image representing readers’ passionate responses.45 These letters fell into the category of calling Williams’ article “insulting,” arguing that religious substitutes were not acceptable in Western religions nor in American Indian religions, and asserting Williams had not fully researched the issue. One letter was from a Wayne State University Law School professor who wrote that treaties were enforceable legal documents that preceded environmental laws.

In May-June of 2001, the letters-to-the editor regarding Williams’ article were subtitled “All that Glitters.” A quote from one of the letters from the Chief of Staff in the Chairman’s Office in the Hopi tribe, Eugene Kaye, was excerpted as a call-out in the letters section. “Defiling a sacred Hopi religious ceremony with crass allegations of torture is a disservice to the readers of Audubon as well as the Hopi Tribe.”46 More letters were published in favor of Williams’ (2001) article than against the article. However, the letters from Eugene Kaye, a member of the Hopi Tribe and Boyd Nystedt, a Navajo Nation member, added a dialogical mode to the discussion. Kaye charged, “Williams makes no effort to present the importance of eagles in Hopi religion. Rather, he depicts the practice in a most derogative manner and dismisses Hopi beliefs as pious hocus-pocus.”47 Kaye described Audubon as behaving like a “trashy tabloid” using “crass allegations of torture” and pointed out that the Eagle Repository gathered their eagle collection largely because of the actions of non-Indians. Nystedt asked Audubon and its readers, “Were the Hopi or Navajo or Paiute consulted when Wupatki was created? 48 Nystedt interrogated the “parks without people” discourse pointing out that national parks were created by banishing Indigenous peoples from the parklands. Williams wrote a reply to Kaye’s letter in which Williams’ recycled his article’s arguments and stated, “it’s time for them [Hopi] to modernize their religious practices (italics deleted).49 Kaye’s voice was asserted in the dialogical space of the letters-to-the-editor, and Williams answered back in a way that clarified a behind-the-scenes attitude, and a belief in the savagery/civilization dichotomy. For Williams, “civilization” was equivalent to “modernized” religious practices. This was also encompassing an assimilative approach: Assimilation through the coerciveness of Western environmental practices and philosophies.

In a nutshell, a regularly contributing Audubon columnist, portrayed Native Americans and Hopi communities as practicing environmentally and socially offensive religions that were depicted as criminal and ecologically unsustainable. This journalism used the devices of demonizing, orientalizing, essentializing and exaggerating about Native Americans as an argumentative strategy. These are not new strategies or ways of depicting Indigenous Peoples Understanding this strategy of rhetoric is important to Indigenous peoples and allies to deflect and provide alternative imagery and explanations that humanize and also show how federally recognized American Indian Nations and the federal government rely on a specific body of doctrines and laws and rule-making that interact in both simple and complicated ways than what environmental journalism may depict. Such representations are important to what Ranco describes as “getting to the table” or being a powerful part of the policy decision making and contributing to the type of “table setting”50 in the struggle for environmental justices according to the often intertwined cultural, religious, and environmental contexts for American Indians.

 

ENDNOTES

1. Large sections of this paper are excerpted from my dissertation, which benefited greatly from my dissertation committee: Jay Stauss, Tsianina Lomawaima, and Joe Hiller.

Margaret Ann Mortensen Vaughan. “How Can You Love the Wolf and the Eskimo at the Same Time?” Representations of Indigenous Peoples in Nature Magazines. Doctoral Dissertation University of Arizona (Dissertation Abstracts International, 65 09A, 2004).

2. See the 2002 Fall Issue of the 7 Great Plains Natural Resources Journal 3 for statements on this from the 7th Biennial Indian Law Symposium: Indian Law, Culture, and the Environment: A New Dialogue for a New Century Panel 1: Tribal People and Environmentalists: Friends or Foes?

3. Ted Williams, “A harvest of eagles,” Audubon, Vol. 88, No. 5 September 1986 pp. 54-57. Ted Williams, “Golden eagles for the gods,” Audubon, Vol. 103, No.2, 2001 March-April, pp. 30, 32, 34-39.
For a legal analysis of the issue of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and its affects on Native communities and individuals see Matthew Perkins, “The Federal Indian Trust Doctrine and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act: Could Application of the Doctrine Alter the Outcome in U.S V. Hugs?” Environmental Law Vol. 30, pp. 701-727. Changes in the eagle permitting system to take eagles, hold eagles’ parts and feathers for religious purposes, and run an eagle aviary in an Indigenous community can be found on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife internet site: http://www.fws.gov/permits/mbpermits/birdbasics.html.

4. See The National Congress of American Indians Resolution #ECWS-07-0004 Title: Opposing Endangered Species Act De-listing of the Bald Eagle Resolution. This can be found on this website: http://www.ncai.org/ncai/resolutions/doc/07-004_Bald_Eagle.pdf.

5. Ted Williams Don’t blame the Indians: Native Americans and the mechanized destruction of fish and wildlife. (South Hamilton, MA: GSJ Press, 1986).

6. The concept of the perception gap is applied to this new context, but is influenced by the book by Leonard Steinhorn and Barbara Diggs-Brown, By the Color of Our Skin: The Illusion of Integration and the Reality of Race (New York: Plume 2000), pp. 181-196.

7. Ted Williams, “A harvest of eagles” p. 54.

8. Ibid.

9. Ibid.

10. Darren Ranco and Dean Suagee, “Tribal Sovereignty and the Problem of Difference in Environmental Regulation: Observations on ‘Measured Separatism’ in Indian Country.” Antipode Vol. 39, No. 4, 2007, pp. 693-707 and quotes from pages 704 and 693-694.

11. Ted Williams “A harvest of eagles” p. 56.

12. Ted Williams “A harvest of eagles” p. 54.

13. Tsianina Lomawaima (Director of American Indian Studies at the University of Arizona) brought to my attention the nuances of “civilized versus savage” that runs through Williams’ article.

14. Ted Williams “A harvest of eagles” p. 54.

15. Ted Williams “A harvest of eagles” p. 54, 56.

16. George Brown Tindall, America: A narrative history. (Vol. 2 2nd ed. NY: W.W. North & Company, 1988.

17.Danielle Sered, “Orientalism,” posted Fall 1996, retrieved February 8, 2007, from
http://www.english.emory.edu/Bahri/Orientalism.html.

18. Ted Williams “A harvest of eagles” p. 56.

19. Ted Williams “A harvest of eagles” pp. 54.

20. Ted Williams “A harvest of eagles” p. 54.

21. Ted Williams “A harvest of eagles” p. 56.

22. Ted Williams “A harvest of eagles” p. 57.

23. Ted Williams “Golden Eagles for the Gods pp. 30, 39.

24. Stephen Small, The contours of racialization: Structures, representations and resistance in the United States. In Roldolpho D. Torres, Louis. F. Mirón, & Jonathon Xavier Inda. (Eds.), Race, Identity, and Citizenship: A Reader. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1999) pp. 42-64.

25. Ted Williams, Don’t blame the Indians: Native Americans and the mechanized destruction of fish and wildlife. (South Hamilton, MA: GSJ Press, 1986) p. 119.

26. Stephen S. Cornell & Douglas Hartmann, Ethnicity and race: Making identities in a changing world. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press, 1998).

27. Ted Williams, “Golden eagles for the gods,” p.30, 32.
28. The Hopi Tribe, Press release: Hopi denied access to religious sites by Wupatki National Monument officials, Posted June 29, 1999, at: www.nau.edu/~hcpo-p/current/pressreleases/archive/eagles.htm.

29. Ted Williams, “Golden eagles for the gods,” p. 32.

30. Ibid.

31. Ibid.

32. Ibid.

33. Kamen, Henry, Inquisition and society in Spain in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985), pp. 15-16.

34. David J. Hogan, (Ed.), The Holocaust chronicle: A history in words and pictures. (Lincolnwood, IL: Publications International, 2000), p. 42.

35. Ted Williams, “Golden eagles for the gods,” p. 32.
36. George Hardeen, Two tribes, two religions, vie for a place in the desert. High Country News.org Vol. 28, no. 4, August 5, 1996. [On-line].
37. See Paul Nadasdy, “ Transcending the Debate Over the Ecologically Noble Indian: Indigenous Peoples and Environmentalism,” Ethnohistory Vol. 52 No. 2 Spring 2005, pp. 291-331.

38. Ted Williams, “Golden eagles for the gods,” pp. 34-35

39. Ibid p. 36.

40. Ibid p. 37.

41. Ibid p. 37-38

42. Ibid p. 39.

43. Ibid p. 37.

44. Ted Williams “Back Off” Audubon May-June 2007, Posted: May 4, 2008, at:
http://audubonmagazine.org/features0705/incite.html paragraph 20.

45. “On the warpath” [Letters-to-the-Editor], Audubon, Vol. 88 No.6, November, 1986, pp. 125-127
46. Eugene Kaye, “All that glitters,” [Letter to the Editor] Audubon, Vol. 103, No. 3, May-June 2001, p. 12.
47. Ibid.

48. B. Nystedt, (2001, May-June). “All that glitters” [Letter to the Editor]. Audubon, Vol. 103, No. 3, p. 12.

49. Ted Williams, (2001, May-June). “All that glitters,” [Letter to the editor] Audubon Vol. 103 No. 3, May-June, 2001, at: http://audubonmagazine.org/letter/letter0105.html.

50. See Darren Ranco , “The Trust Responsibility and Limited Sovereignty: What can Environmental Justice Groups Learn from Indian Nations? Society and Natural Resources, Vol. 21, pp. 354-362. Quotes from p. 355.

 

TRADITIONAL GOVERNANCE: A CASE STUDY OF THE OSOYOOS INDIAN BAND AND THE APPLICATION TRADITIONAL OKANAGAN LEADERSHIP PRINCIPLES

Ethan Baptiste, Nk’mip (Osoyoos Indian Band), Okanagan Nation
PhD Student, University of BC – Okanagan, ebaptiste12@hotmail.com

This paper was first presented on June 11, 2007 at the Sharing Indigenous Wisdom Conference, Green Bay, Wisconsin.

Abstract

There are traditional Okanagan governance and leadership principles and guidelines that have been informed through language terms and traditional stories. These have been interpreted and taught to us by our elders of the Okanagan Nation. Five principles of traditional Okanagan leadership will be discussed; will of the people, leadership training, protection of the land, leading by example and continuously validated authority. These are the principles that will be applied to the leadership of today. The focus of such analysis will be on the application of these traditional principles to current governance systems, including accountability, transparency, consultation, communication and decision making. The Osoyoos Indian Band (OIB) will be the case study used to contextualize this analysis. There are several Western leadership principles that have been accepted and adopted by our leadership, at OIB and other bands and Nations. These are the Western principles that need to be Indigenized so they will benefit our communities. However, I will not stop there, as it is easy to criticize without proposing any real changes. So, following each criticism I will add my own propositions or beginning proposals to change that is needed to re-vitalize our systems of governance in order to rightly incorporate traditional values.

Introduction

It is very difficult to go into any in-depth analysis of traditional Okanagan leadership, given the sensitivity issues involved with traditional knowledge. I have been guided, from my elders, in order to be safe and not offend anyone; I should only share our knowledge that has already been published. I must also note that, the correct interpretations of such published information available on Okanagan history has been shared by my elders. This paper will begin by introducing a short survey of Okanagan leadership principles and standards and background will be provided on the Osoyoos Indian Band (OIB). This will be followed by discussions on five traditional Okanagan leadership principles; will of the people, leadership training, protection of the land, leading by example and continuously validated authority. These principles will be applied to OIB and their leadership and governance structures. It will be shown that the leadership today have strayed away from the traditional values and standards our societies upheld for a millennium. Furthermore, it is these traditional values and standards that our leadership need to move toward if they hope to truly benefit our people.

Traditional Okanagan Leadership

In terms of setting the framework for traditional Okanagan leadership the first place to start is the traditional Four Foods Chief’s story. The Four Food Chief’s, Bear, Bitterroot, King Salmon and Saskatoon Berry, met to decide what is to be done about the people coming. The other chiefs had asked Bear what he felt they should do, they had named him head chief because of his age and wisdom. All the chiefs had decided to give their bodies for the people. The story is about the “willingness of a chief to sacrifice for the survival of the people. Bear was willing to give up everything he had but all he had was his body, he was the first to sacrifice for the people” (Armstrong, 2006, January 24). The chiefs had put the people before themselves, and even their own lives.

There are several reoccurring themes that provide an excellent indication of the requirements of an Okanagan chief. The chief “represented the will of the people in carrying out the rights of being Syilx (Okanagan) and protected the land and the natural law. It was their responsibility to balance human needs with the natural laws … the chief is the center of people’s strength and was always in emotional, physical, spiritual and mental balance and most important of all, the chief was a good role model for the youth and all the people” (Armstrong, 1994, p. 9). Thomson (1986) outlines the training needed to become a chief as being, “the chief assumed leadership in mid-life when his managerial abilities and moral behaviour were well known to the group, and was the man who best expressed the value system of that group” (p. 68).

It is clear that the chief didn’t think of himself above the people in any way, but someone who was the pinnacle of what a true Okanagan individual should be. “Leadership was chosen through spiritual testing and speaking clearly of our inherent right to the land, and to the people. Based on how you approach things, how we pray and how we keep peace, and not for ourselves or for glory, but for our entire people. In times of plenty, the chief is wealthy; in times of scarcity the chief was the poorest” (Gateway Project, 2007).

Thomson (1986) believed the chiefs had “no means of exerting their authority other than exhibiting a record of good management, morality, prudence, fairness and consistency in expressing the people’s will … the moral authority had to be continually validated. Chiefs maintained their prestige as long as they expressed the will of the people or were responsive to their needs” (p. 69).

The chief’s authority was so effective that it baffled the cognition of any outsiders. Alexandar Ross had commented that “the government or ruling power among the Oakenackens is simple yet effective, and is little more than an ideal system of control … it is wonderful how well the government works for the general good, and without any coercive power to back the will of the chief, he is seldom disobeyed; the people submit without a murmur” (As cited in Dolby, 1973, p. 138).

To summarize the traditional chief’s office was one that required a different leadership style than that of today. Traditionally, the chief put the people before himself, represented their will, protected the land and natural law, was well trained, led by example and continuously validated their authority. These are traditional principles I will be holding today’s leadership to.

Osoyoos Indian Band(1)

OIB is seen by many as one of the most successful Indian bands in all of Canada. The Band is mostly known for its aggressive economic development strategies and as Chief Operating Officer Chris Scott says “we were prepared to act on business opportunities, to seek successful businesses that were strategic to the vision. We knew what we were looking for and when we saw it we were quick to act. We now have businesses with an annual budget exceeding $10 million (McBride, 2001, p. 10).

Currently, the band is said to enjoy revenues of 13 million (Pulfer, 2007, February 26). Also, it is widely believed that the major key to the bands success has been their devotion to business principles and leadership style:

Effective leadership with strong vision and good knowledge of business has allowed the First Nation to form consensus around an objective of economic success. Another part of OIB’s success is the rigorous application of business principles. We follow fundamental business practice – it’s simple – revenues must exceed expenses. Succeeding means learning about business, and dedicating band time, money and energy to business development, in addition to the resources given to social programs and treaty rights. It means hiring managers on the basis of merit and training, and not being shy about bringing in expert help (Graham and Heather, 2007, p. 27).

OIB is seen as one of the most progressive bands in Canada. Also, it has been heralded as the model for all other bands as the correct way to run a band and correctly develop an economy.

To begin this discussion I will first need to frame my analysis. Consider the following account:

“I had gone to the United Nations (UN) in New York for meetings and after attending a presentation at the UN, I stood outside the UN and observed what was going on. I had seen all kinds of people with no food or homes. There were big buildings that were built to house cars, big buildings that were built to house visitors and even buildings that were built to house books and paper, so much paper and books. All these buildings and still there were people without homes, they don’t look after their own people. What we see in a country is a direct relation to the wisdom that guides that country and is a direct indication of leadership. Their leaders are not groomed or taught well enough as Western education cannot prepare leaders effectively,” Comments from an Indigenous Chief from Africa after visiting the United Nations (The Leech and the Earthworm, 2003).

This is the lens through which we all need to start evaluating our communities, as the effectiveness of leadership is indicated by the well-being of the individual members of the community.

Will of the People

The Will of the People is a traditional leadership principle that instructs leadership, in a sense to follow and not lead, because the direction taken will be set by the People. In terms of OIB their philosophy has been expressed by Chief Clarence Louie, “trying to involve everyone on reserve in business decisions is a failure. I like the corporate motto of the Norway House Cree: ‘If every objection must be overcome, nothing will ever be accomplished’. Leadership means developing a critical mass of support, not total agreement” (McBride, 2001, p. 13). This philosophy is great, if the leadership is mainly concerned with time and efficiency; however, there is risk of alienating band members, if strictly followed. The critical mass needed could, in practice, mean only 26% of eligible voters.(2) The last OIB referendum, where the membership was asked to vote on a FotisBC power line, passed with only a 28% overall majority.(3)

To me that does not constitute a valid process. I know there is the argument that we cannot allow apathy or a minority to continuously turn down referendums.(4) However, this argument is based on the presumption that all membership essentially welcomes Capitalism and desires development. The assumption and decision has already been made that the development is what the people desire. Under this reasoning, it is up to leadership to focus on validating the referendum and proposal. It seems we have reversed who really guides the community direction as leadership establishes that direction, and sustains it with a small minority of supporters. It appears we have adopted a new Will of the Leadership principle.

I believe the greatest problem to implementing the Will of the People has been our leadership’s inability to distinguish the true meaning of Indigenous consensus, and unknowingly replace this concept with a Western definition. Within the Western definition of consensus, consensus can only be realized if everyone votes ‘yes’. Of course this is impossible and Indigenous elders recognize such a limitation. The main difference in Indigenous consensus is the requirement of an understanding of all community members on what direction needs to be taken. Armstrong (1999) explains it best in her description of the traditional Okanagan process of En’owkin:

Your responsibility is to see the views of others, their concerns and their reasons, which will help you to choose willingly and intelligently the steps that will create a solution — because it is in your own best interest that all needs are addressed in the community. While the process does not mean that everyone agrees—for that is never possible—it does result in everyone being fully informed and agreeing fully on what must take place and what each will concede or contribute (p. 6)

Adhering to the minimum requirement of the second referendum, effectively an attendance majority, should be avoided whenever possible. Although there is external validation, often it creates internal alienation and continued marginalization. We should not be so quick to only comply with the limitations set forth by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC). As a People, there is nothing that limits us from setting the requirements beyond the low threshold imposed on us. We need to Indigenize our processes and re-define the regulations we are willing to accept. We cannot leave these decisions up bureaucrats who do not, or care to, understand our way of life and worldview.

Finally, I would like to touch on members of our community that are often forgotten, the youth. Unfortunately, through democracy the youth are alienated first. Stelkia (2005) expressed concern that “it is my strong belief that the youth of the community should be allowed to vote in all referendums regarding the development of our economy. My reasoning is that we are the one’s that will have to live with the foolish decisions of today” (2005, April 20). This is understandable, because within Western, representative democracy there is often no motivation to seek out the opinion of those who cannot cast a deciding vote. This is contrary to traditional Okanagan thought that actively engages youth in decision making because it is the youth who bring creative energy and innovation (Armstrong, 1999). Indigenous decision making requires the participation of all members of the community, not just those who are of voting age. The simplest way to include youth is to lower the voting age, but that would be just re-defining an INAC regulation. I believe at the very least, we should be allowing our youth to present to the community their beliefs on issues. This can be done either through written interventions or community presentations; however, the youth feel comfortable. Ideally, the youth would be consulted at the earliest point possible for their input, so that they are not just reacting to band proposals but are helping shape them.(5)

Leadership Training

As Thompson (1986) outlined above, there was training of potential chiefs and that training needed to be concluded before any position was taken. Today, there are no training requirements, only age restrictions and criminal records check.(6) I believe this is one of the greatest barriers to Indigenizing leadership. Currently, at OIB we have only one elected representative that holds a university degree(7), although, I am sure this is not uncommon in other Bands. However, that is not the main problem, as a university degree comes with its own drawbacks. It forces Indigenous People to adopt foreign Eurocentric beliefs and thought, often with no incorporation of the Indigenous knowledge that is ultimately needed to benefit Indigenous communities.(8)

With no formal training in traditional leadership, business management or governance in general, leadership is forced to gain the bulk of their education through mentorship of non-native business experts or, simply, trial and error. This is fine, in the real world(9), but can be detrimental to Aboriginal communities. First, the validation of such expert’s knowledge is never questioned, a skill gained through formal education. Second, non-native experts are limited to only one Eurocentric mechanistic worldview and theories, such as capitalism, individuality, and exponential growth. These have been instilled through a Western education system, which they themselves never question and often uphold and defend. Third, leaders begin to accept that Indigenous knowledge is backward and primitive and that progress can only be achieved through Western frameworks. Eventually, leadership becomes susceptible to any outside expert projecting such Eurocentric ideals or equally complex analysis. Especially, if that analysis is coupled with complicated graphs, projections, statistics and equally frightening dialogue. All present to instill apprehension in leadership to not want to appear backward or primitive.

Regrettably, the right answer will never be found in the analysis of non-native lawyers and consultants. Simply because they do not possess the appropriate knowledge or tools needed for the job. For example, when you ask a lawyer or consultant who owns communal lands, they simply point to the band council because, to them, the leadership has been elected and therefore can only decide on property the band owns. However, to Indigenous People everyone in the community holds communal lands, from elders to children. This is a concept that many lawyers and consultants cannot grasp. Although the real problem begins when Indigenous leaders adopt that same lawyer and consultant analysis and begin welcoming outside opinions as validation to their position and authority.

Smith (1999) comments on writing, that “it can be dangerous because, by building on previous texts written about Indigenous Peoples, we continue to legitimate views about ourselves which are hostile to us” (p. 36). This can be applied to not only writing but to governance as a whole and the hostile views that we continually adopt. It must be remembered that there is nothing new or innovative in a lawyer or consultants comprehensions or viewpoints, as they are only interpreting in a way that thousands of other similarly trained experts would. I must pause and admit that there are some non-native lawyers and consultants that are doing good work within our communities, a rare occurrence, but present nevertheless. However, this only occurs if the non-native lawyer or consultant is willing to learn from Indigenous People and accept and adapt to the Indigenous principle of humility. This allows the Indigenous People and experts to grow together. This process is seen in traditional story telling. As my elders have informed me, during a traditional story telling both the story teller and listener are engaged in a reciprocal teaching and learning experience. Both become the teacher and learner. I will leave it up to you to determine who the storyteller is and who the listener is. From my own observations, humility is rarely found in experts and is the main reason this Indigenous learning process is seldom experienced. Too often, humility is either abandoned or unlearned during an undergraduate degree.

This kind of leadership is fine for the real world but Indigenous communities require Indigenous leadership with Indigenous values. Therefore, if there is no formal university training available to leadership they should at least seek out knowledgeable elders. These elders can train them on their own People’s traditional values and beliefs. Furthermore, leadership should make it a priority to attend cultural events, ceremonies, practice traditional activities on the land and hold regular council with elders. At least then, it will allow them to incorporate and scrutinize outside advice through a traditional mindset. Thus, ensuring that at the very least, our core values will continue and we will not forget who we are. Lawyers and consultant analysis is needed, but it is not the correct answer, if left unquestioned and unaltered. Leadership needs to adapt expert analysis through traditional knowledge filters, to Indigenize it and make it truly appropriate. This is the type of analysis that will benefit our People.

Protection of the Land

Indigenous People have a strong, well known connection to the land, which must be maintained. Our elders have always taught us that if we lose our land we will loose our language, culture and knowledge, which is tied to our land and then cease to be Okanagan. However, OIB is beginning to adopt Eurocentric beliefs that the land is dead and inert, malleable from the outside and exploitable for profits. As OIB’s website proclaims “some of the most desirable industrial commercial land in the South Okanagan is conveniently located just off of highway 97 on the edge of the reserve. We have a vision of this area becoming an attractive well planned industrial park. This beautiful scenery will enhance the appearance of any well designed commercial development” (OIB Holdings, June, 2005). As for myself, and I’m sure many other Indigenous People would agree, it is hard to see how an industrial park could be attractive scenery.

I understand the argument that we need to have an economic base that is independent of any Federal money. However, that does not mean we should tear up any and all land in our haste to become independent. If we are going to abuse our beloved land, development needs to entail long-term benefit to the community and people. The Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development defined two strategies: the jobs and income and the nation-building approaches. The jobs and income approach is shortsighted where Indigenous leadership simply try to invent a business with the goal of creating more jobs and income. Conversely, the nation-building approach is more proactive in nature and the solution is to build a nation in which both business and human beings flourish, one which raises the quality of life in the community (Helin, 2006, p. 199).(10)

Unfortunately, I believe OIB has been following a jobs and income approach. This can be seen in the recent FortisBC power line deal. The FotisBC deal only created twelve short-term jobs. These jobs were centered on the ground preparations needed to construct the power lines and lasted around two months. Furthermore, in the last five economic development initiatives only 12% of the jobs created were filled by OIB members (‘Number of People Working’, November 2005).11 There is danger in entering developments that are mainly focused on initial employment. By that, I mean developments where the bulk of the workforce is needed in the initial construction. This would create a continuous cycle in which land turnover is high. More land is needed to create short-term jobs and when those are done; more is torn up and developed to fill that void.

At the core of the issue is our cultural integrity that must be maintained. We need an economic base, however, as Alfred (2005) comments, “economic power is the foundation of independence. But I (am) more keenly aware that maintaining our connection to our cultural roots is the only thing that ensures we remain Onkwehonwe (original people); we need to possess both economic power and cultural authenticity” (p. 222). If the end result is self-sufficiency, self-determination or, simply, independence, Indigenous People need to be conscious of the process taken. However, outside experts are not trained to view the whole situation; this situation has been discussed above, but I will reiterate a few points for further clarity. The analysis of how Indigenous People, or their communities, are transformed through our revitalization strategies is not even considered. However, even if they were aware of the importance, they are, again, not equipped to develop that analysis. Experts do not even know or understands what Indigenous principles and beliefs make up the root of our existence, and what needs to be conserved. So, out of fears of appearing to not know everything, experts will stick to what they know, finance or western definitions of transformations. So, if a Band’s revenues are rising, then their lives must be improving.

Indigenous People need to develop a holistic understanding of the path they are on. To me, if we do achieve full independence in the end, it is worthless if we lose who we are. That is, if our governments become mere shells of our former existence, reducing them to brown skinned extensions of the Canadian economy and, worse, our lands to municipal plots within Provincial government boundaries. To start, we need to relearn what our traditional societies used to be. This understanding will ground our future analysis. As my elders have taught me, by understanding who we were, only then can we see where we are going. Furthermore, we need our own definitions of well-being so we can fully determine what it means to improve life as an Indigenous person. I’m sure money and jobs will be a factor. However, I know there will be other indicators, such as language loss, drug and alcohol levels, feelings of safety, access to traditional foods, etc. They will be different for all communities but need to be defined, so that we can appropriately assess the paths we follow will improve what we have defined needs improving.

Led by Example

As Armstrong expressed above, the chief was a good role model for the youth and the people. Chief Clarence Louie is famous for his belief that “if your life sucks, it is because you suck” (Findlay, 2006). This is easy to proclaim but it must be understood that we cannot explain individual problems through such a simple, limited and restricted analysis. As Chrisjohn states:

It is a form of reductionism, one which says that complex, orderly phenomena (like economies, institutions, wars, etc), are built up from orderly phenomena that involves individuals, and what individuals are capable of doing. Thus, there is an implicated causal order, in that the variability of the more complex phenomena (wars; depression) are ultimately the result of what individual people think and do (2006, p. 108)(12).

This oversimplification cannot take into account the broader social, political, economic and cultural factors and, really, anything outside the individual. For example, stripping Indigenous People of their sovereignty and cultural ties to the land would not factor into the analysis because these features cannot be found within individuals nor can they be statistically analyzed or graphed.

So, if we cannot easily determine what makes people suck, that it is not simply a need of work ethic that will solve the Band’s problems, we need to re-evaluate our approach. We should not simply feed into racial stereotypes, however safe those positions appear. Of course, there are some people who would enjoy hearing such statements, mainly because it feeds and reinforces their own racist beliefs and shifts or masks their own responsibility. For one, I know the Canadian government welcomes such proclamations. As Alfred (2005) asserts, “self-government and economic development are being offered precisely because they are useless to us in the struggle to survive as peoples and so are no threat to the Settlers and, specifically, the interests of the people who control the Settler state” (p.37). Cornell (2006) adds, “central governments (Canada) have been reluctant to engage with the issues that form the core of Indigenous concerns. They have preferred to focus on the socio-economics of integration and typically have interpreted self-government as an administrative project in which Indigenous populations are allowed to manage programs designed—usually by central governments—to address social problems and economic marginality” (p. 15).

In terms of our communities, it is sending our youth the wrong message. It is teaching them to think individually and not as a community. The phrase you suck sounds a lot like the capitalist principle of only the strong survive. It creates an individualist mentality where people lose sight of a community. Thus, the Indigenous principle of looking after everyone within your community is replaced by the belief that some people are just meant to be poor or, at the extreme, end poverty by killing the poor. Eventually, if we are not careful, instead of helping those in need we would walk over them, even with feelings of resentment. Not realizing that within development, as an institution, wealth was never meant to trickle down to the poor. Aghion and Bolton (1997) argue, “wealth can trickle down to the poor through borrowing and lending, as more funds will become available to the poor for their own investment” (p. 151). However, in Mexico, which has an economy rated fifteenth in the world and the highest income per capita in all of Latin America(13), the Indigenous People still suffer from high rates of poverty (World Bank, 2005).

Therefore, in terms of our Bands, I believe some of our People will still continue to suffer regardless of the amount of revenue the Band brings in. However, that statement must be qualified to include individuals that cannot adapt to Western ideals of capitalism. As a community we need to establish a plan to include those Indigenous People who just can’t seem to adapt, or should we say assimilate. We still need to make room for those who want to remain Indigenous, as there will always be people that believe our lands are held communally, who do not want to simply borrow money for commercial enterprise, who believe the land is alive and worth saving, etc. We cannot continue forward with the objective of get the money, and then solve the problem, as capitalism is not meant to end because it is based on infinite growth and resources. Also, there can be no real indication of how much money we really need in order to solve all of our social, political, cultural and economic problems.

To begin, we need to move away from treating an Indian Band like a business. I agree with Lyons (2005) that “you can’t run a Nation like a corporation; a Nation is not a corporation. We never lost sight of what it was all about in terms of protecting the nation, the land, and so forth. Those other people, they got sidetracked. They wanted to become very wealthy, they did if for money, and that’s the whole deal. The idea of casinos is, for our nations, probably the most problematic thing right now” (As cited in Alfred, p. 242). Lyons is referring to casinos, but to me, casinos are just an accelerated form of economic development that still needs to adhere to the principles of traditional leadership. There is still the underlying motivation of money. Also, communities need to think more in terms of the collective, or long-term. Money now would be beneficial this month, but how about long-term benefits such as a youth center or elders residence. For OIB members and I’m sure this has been the case on many other reserves, a youth center has been promised in the last four referendums, and we have yet to see one. There needs to be an evolution in our thinking as leadership. Internally racist positions should be abandoned and replaced with a determination to see our sovereignty realized or at the very least, fight any non-recognition or elimination policies and expose them for what they are.

Continuously Validated Authority

Traditional leadership required authority to be continuously validated every year. In addition, the chiefs exhibited a moral authority and that authority was unquestioned and didn’t require any coercive measures. This is contrary to the leadership of today, as many have completely embraced the imposition of a set term of office and the security it brings and are, arguably, no longer mindful of their actions. From my own observations, the chiefs aren’t mindful and some seem to do as they please, even though I believe the youth are still very attentive. It seems that the only time the chiefs are careful is two months before elections. There is an open joke in our communities that everyone gets jobs around election time. It seems there is privilege in only having to validate your authority every two or three years, but that is the nature of democracy.

We need to evolve our government structures to allow for direct democracy(14), and not the typical Western representative democracy. This would mean consultation, transparency and accountability. Chief Clarence Louie exclaims:

You have to pay attention to the support you need to continue your work. The best way to do that is to be a good communicator: to let your members know what you are doing and why you are doing it. We talk about partnerships with outsiders, but we need to form a partnership with our members to go forward together and make economic development a success (as cited in McBride, 2001, p. 18).

Regrettably, this is not the case. Chris Scott recently commented on a proposed developments on the North end of the OIB reserve “while information is still being assembled, Scott has high hopes of taking a full and detailed proposal to the Reservation community, in about six months” (Knelson, 2007, May 2). I believe there is no reason why OIB, or any Band, should wait six months until they share their plans with the membership. This is a basic consultation principle, where individuals and People affected should be informed at the earliest possible stage. If government or industry implemented this level of consultation to the Band or Okanagan Nation, where the terms of reference, document drafting and framework had already been set, there would be enormous backlash. So why do we object, that many of the consultation policies of governments are inadequate, but then turn around, and subject our People to those same inadequate policies? Not even government guidelines advise to wait till the documents are drafted and then approach the People.15 Many view these guidelines as the minimum requirement, but still bands choose to not even adhere to that low threshold. Band membership needs to participate at the outset, in the initial discussions of the proposal. If not, we will continue the jobs-and-income cycle discussed above and, more importantly be maintaining a top-down development process. Having the membership vote at the end of a development proposal is inadequate, the document has already been drafted, the level of effects already determined and, at this point, all input is futile. Direct democracy seeks input of all the individuals represented and traditional leadership requires direction to come from the people. That does not mean a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ vote at the end of the process; it means real and adequate participation from the outset. It does not appear that OIB is willing to fix this problem anytime soon. I recently learned that the Band, based on a proposed land code, is developing an Official Community Plan that will determine the appropriate level of consultation membership will receive within land code discussions. However, that Plan is being worked on by an outside engineering firm (C. Scott, personal communication, May 24, 2007). Ironically, the study on the level of consultation deemed appropriate to membership has been contracted to outside consultants, with no input from the community members. It appears, the membership is unable to determine that level for themselves.

There are also communication matters. The usual Band referendum process involves a distribution of the proposal package, a few information meetings and the referendum vote. The problems begin with the information packages. The documents are written in technical language. Although they are based on the actual lease agreement, which requires legal terminology, it doesn’t mean leadership needs to burden membership with the tedious task of sifting through and interpreting such jargon. Although, the Band is more than willing to interpret these documents for membership, their analysis is usually during information meetings and is one-sided and focused on jobs and income sections. This is the main problem to the process, a biased interpretation that often turns meetings into a sales pitch and not a forum for dialogue. To add to the problem, administration staff or lawyers usually run the band meetings. Administration staff and lawyers should not be presenting referendum proposals. It is not their position as it is the responsibility of leadership to be informed and speak to the issues involving the community. Additionally, when leadership delegates that responsibility to others it erases any accountability. Without taking a position publicly, there is no way for membership to gauge who is listening to the concerns of the community or how well their leadership is representing them. When voting day rolls around, there is confusion because leadership cannot be traced back to a definite position.

However, it must be understood that I am not advocating for an all out public debate of chief and council on issues. There is a line between public bickering and constructive dialogue. Membership needs to know that their concerns have been addressed and these can be revealed, constructively, though the En’owkin process. To reiterate, the En’owkin process in one based on Indigenous consensus, where everyone comes to an agreement on what direction is needed. This can be the boundaries that direct the dialogue. Publicly, council can discuss their position on the issues and focus on the positives and negatives. The negatives are critical because they inform membership of the previous discussions that took place, and the concerns that were raised. Most importantly, membership will be able to directly relate to the negatives council members discuss and this will form their opinion on the leadership qualities individual council members possess. The level of dialogue and number and type of negatives raised will inform membership how diligently and effectively council represents their people. More will be known about how council came to an understanding, if decisions were made narrowly based on jobs and income or if a wide range of concerns were factored in. This could be introduced in the following way: “I didn’t agree with this for the following reasons … but, will accept that this is the direction we need to take, because ….”

Additionally, there are accountability issues related to financial accounting. By this, I do not mean the potential for creative accounting, which will always be present, but the problems in the actual financial accounting process. Titus (2007) observes that, what Osoyoos does to be accountable is; first, demonstrate transparency through showing financial statements, showing results (non financial), be visual and show future plans; and second, communicate, through annual reports, newsletters and community meetings (Slide 12). OIB community meetings have been addressed above, but I will comment on the Band newsletters. The newsletters, even more than the community meetings, are very one-sided. I believe the newsletters are worse that the community meetings because of the censorship process involved in creating the newsletters. This media censorship has been directly learned from non-native government and business, and overall, is not new to Indigenous People. We see it every day in the portrayal of our People and the images presented in mainstream media. The Band ensures that the right message is sent out every month and diligently screens the material that is, and isn’t, allowed to be published. Personally, I have had some of my own material denied publication, and within OIB there are several other stories like mine. Obviously, media control is not good governance and should be avoided, but as with the consultation issue above, we have discovered and learned ways to control our own People, which now include the management of information.

The other issues involved in Titus’s description of finances are related. Financial statements, showing results, future plans and annual reports are great but that should not end the accountability process, because at this point, real accountability as not been achieved at OIB. First, we are again burdening the people with more technical documents, except this time we have replaced legal terminology with financial figures. It is good that some are simplified and graphed, but that can be dangerous as well. As the more simplified the reporting becomes the more general and vague the information needs to be. For example, within the Band Revenue and Taxation Expenditures section, there are several questions including; were the professional fees the fees paid to the lawyers who came to our meetings to tell us how to think, what is miscellaneous, where did council travel and why, etc (Titus, 2007, slide 18). I can continue on to the other slides but by now I believe the point has been made. Also, it is nice that the Band is publishing their year-end reports, but this is not real engagement with the community, other than a response of well, that’s nice. By that, I mean there is no feedback mechanism or allowance for input to next year’s expenditures. Therefore, I see it as courtesy and not accountability because it is simply reporting end results, and that’s it. For example, after reading this presentation I had a question regarding post-secondary education. If in the last 2005/2006 OIB fiscal year our “Sources of Revenue equaled 24.5 million” (Titus, 2007, slide 16) and our total “Band Revenue and Taxation Expenditures totaled 1.177 million”, why are we spending only $3,851 last year on post secondary education (Titus, 2007, slide 18). While we are in a finance mode, the total amount spent on education works out to 0.015% of Revenue and 0.32% of total Expenditures. Either way we look at it, there is very little money spent on post secondary education. Real accountability begins with real input. To use the definition Titus (2007) has given us:

Accountability is a concept in ethics with several meanings. It is often used synonymously with such concepts as answerability, responsibility, blameworthiness, liability, and other terms associated with expectations of account-giving. As an aspect of governance, it has been central to discussions related to problems in both the public and private (Corporate) worlds.

Which rounds out our discussion on accountability, as broad based and vague statements about what accountability is, mean nothing to the average band member. This term needs to be defined to have any purpose and teeth. Accountability not only needs to involve feedback and input but has to be defined by all the People affected, or the ones who are supposed to benefit from the principle.

In terms of transparency there are still problems within OIB. Just as the community hasn’t been approached with the North end development proposal, as discussed above, this seems to be the norm with communications. The first time the membership heard of the OIB’s Forest and Range Agreement was from the Ministry of Forests website and membership first learned of the Bands agreement with Mt. Baldy when it was announced to Premier Campbell. Also, the CEO of FotisBC was appointed to co-chair the Nk’Mip Desert Endowment fund advisory committee, effectively giving an outside corporate entity a huge influence into our environmental protection, cultural education and environmental stewardship programs. This was learned through a FortisBC press release and the implications of such an appointment are still not known.

More transparency is required within the Band and Band operations. As an OIB youth indicated “What IS needed is one story that everyone hears and that is in the public records where anyone can access it if need arises. OIB may attract national attention but the things said to the entire country are more often than not things to distract from the political discontent and lack of democracy” (Stelkia, 2007, May 14). She also called for public records, something I would have to whole heartedly agree with.

Community members are entitled to know what decisions are being made on their behalf, ideally beforehand so that they could provide input. If we are going to resolve these 100 year old disputes through economic arrangements, it only makes sense that everyone should have input. In keeping with Western governance, only a few made the decision to hand over traditional territory needed for a ski resort and our aboriginal rights to harvest trees. The biggest problem I see is the legitimacy of the assumed authority that these treaty-like agreements were signed. Economic Development Bards do not have the mandate to negotiate agreements on traditional territory that is held by the Okanagan Nation. Additionally, they do not have the authority to speak for the people and cede title of land or sell aboriginal rights to the government. I know there will always be the argument that; if we do nothing, then we will get no money from it. This is a defeatist attitude, one where they have come to believe that: All is lost and no solution will ever be found in the future. To this, I believe it should be required that these people resign from office. If they are unable to continue the struggle for our Title and Rights, than it is time to step aside before more of our children’s inherent rights are signed away. At the very least, it is time to go back to their traditions and ceremonies and find strength to continue fighting, and remember what they were fighting for. As an Okanagan elder, Joey Pierre, once proclaimed at a gathering “This is our land, I believe that, and feel the need to say it now, because no one says if anymore.” Not only do we require Indigenous values in our communities but we need authentic Indigenous leaders to make those values become a reality.

Conclusion

In recognizing that intellectuals were trained and acculturated in the West, Fanon identifies three levels through which ‘native’ intellectuals can progress in their journey ‘back over the line’. First there is a phase of proving that intellectuals have been assimilated into the culture of the occupying power. Second comes a period of disturbance and the need for the intellectuals to remember who they actually are, a time for remembering the past. In the third phase the intellectuals seek to awaken the people, to realign themselves with the people and to produce a revolutionary and national literature” (As cited in Smith, 1999, p. 70).

This can be applied to governance as well. Unfortunately, at OIB, we are still struggling to realize the second phase. We are still coming to the realization that maybe non-natives do not hold all the answers in terms of what is best for us, as a People. This is the greatest hindrance to solving our problems. Because within OIB, as with all Indigenous communities, we still have drug and alcohol abuse, diabetes, youth deaths, violence against women, unemployment, etc. These problems will not be fixed by making more money or development alone. Poverty is one of many, many factors that reproduce the conditions we find our lives in. We need to turn back to our traditional knowledge for the answers to our problems. Only Indigenous solutions can help Indigenous communities. But this revitalization will not begin until we realize and respect the importance and power within our own knowledge. This must be realized before we lose who we are, as only Okanagans can cease to be Okanagans.

Notes

1 I apologize for the excessive citations and referencing of sources in this section, but I felt it was the best way to effectively represent the situation of OIB, by illustrating what the current research has produced.
2 Section 39 of the Indian Act outlines the requirements for a Second Referendum. Section 39 (2) allows for a Second Referendum to be called if the overall number of voters in the First Referendum did not exceed 50+1 percent of the overall eligible voters, but there was a majority in favor of the Referendum. Section 39 (3) requires a majority of eligible voters to cast a ballot (50+1), and of that voter turnout, requires a majority to pass the Referendum. In terms of numbers, if there are 100 eligible voters, and 51 participate in the second referendum, than it could pass with 26 voting in favor, allowing the referendum to pass with an overall majority of 26%.
3 These FotisBC Referendum results were provided by the Osoyoos Indian Band; 264 eligible voters, 137 voter turnout in Second Referendum, 75 For, 62 Against, 2 Spoiled. Overall eligible voters For: 28.4%.
4 This argument stems from the 1st Referendum process and overall voters needed (see Note 2). Membership could simply not show up to vote to halt the process and development proposal. Therefore, we need the 2nd Referendum if we want anything to pass.
5 I address the broader issue of consultation within the “Continuously Validated Authority” section.
6 For eligibility requirements see the Indian Act. ( R.S., 1985, c. I-5 )
7 Tony Baptiste holds a Journeyman Electricians Degree from the University College of the Cariboo (currently TRU)
8 See Smith, L T., Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (New York, NY: Zed Books Ltd, 1999); and Battiste, M., & Youngblood Henderson, J., Protecting Indigenous Knowledge and Heritage: A Global Challenge (Saskatoon, SK: Purich Press, 2000).
9 The real world is a concept often referred to by Clarence Louie, (MacGregor, 2006, September 21) and has been adopted by others, such as Calvin Helin (2006). It implies that life on and Indian reservation isn’t real and somehow not as tough as life off the reserve. This assumption is mainly focused on earning a living; where it is believed many Indigenous People wouldn’t be able to handle life off the reserve where there is no job that allows Indian Time or readily available welfare. This theory is simply buying into racial stereotypes of the lazy Indian and is a gross oversimplification of the real problem. For a criticism of such a narrow analysis review the work done on Misrepresentation Theory, see Chrisjohn, et al., (Penticton, BC: Theytus Books, 2006) (pp. 262-315).
10 I will be using some work from Helin, although I do not agree with his conclusions or the arguments he has drawn and developed, I do believe he has done some excellent initial analysis that can be built on. This was discussed in a book review, on Dances with Dependency, I recently finished, it is awaiting publication within The Canadian Journal of Native Studies and I will share it with those interested.
11 The following calculations were drawn directly from an Osoyoos Indian Band Development Corporation PowerPoint slide titled “Number of People Working on Reserve” and were last updated November 2005. They included Sonora Dunes Golf Course 2/12 (band members employed/total jobs); Spirit Ridge Resort and Spa 3/12; Mission Hills Vineyard 4/34; Greyback Construction 6/88; and Nk’mip Desert and Heritage Center 4/6. I did not include the FotisBC numbers because the positions were only temporary, but were 12/12.
12 For a broader analysis of Methodological Individualism and its application to problems and limitations, statistical issues, examples of and ideological foundations see, Chrisjohn, R. et al., (2006, pp. 106-24)
13 For additional figures see “Economy of Mexico” Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Mexico>
14 For a further discussion on the history of democracy and the meaning of direct or pure democracy see Lowes, D. E., The Anti-Capitalist Dictionary: Movements, Histories, and Motivations (New York, NY: Zed Books, 2006).
15 It is unfortunate that many government and industry guidelines base consultation on ‘strength of claim’, as Okanagan Nation Grand Chief Stewart Phillip pointed out it is a racist requirement because if they applied that same reasoning, it would invalidate their claims to most of the Artic, where only Indigenous People live. However, this is not a factor in terms of the discussion here, as all Osoyoos Indian Band members communally own the land. For more guidelines see Ministry of Environment: Draft Guidelines for First Nations <http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/epd/epdpa/ipmp/first_nations_cons_guide/index_pg2.html>; or, Ministry of Forests: Consultation Guidelines <http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/haa/Docs/MOF_Consultation_guidelines_final.pdf>

Bibliography

Aghion, P. & Bolton, P., (1997). A Theory of Trickle-Down Growth and Development. Review of Economic Studies. 64, 151-172

Alfred, T., (2005). Wasase: Indigenous Pathways of Action and Freedom. Peterborough: Broadview Press.

Armstrong, J., (2006, January 24). Topic: Connection. Indigenous Studies 246: En’owkin Center.

Armstrong, J., (1999). Let Us Begin With Courage. Center for Ecoliteracy. Retrieved 14 April 2007. < http://www.ecoliteracy.org/pdf/jarmstrong_letusbeginwithcourage.pdf>

Chrisjohn, R., Maraun, M. & Young, S., (2006). The Circle Game: Shadows and Substance in the Indian Residential School Experience in Canada. Penticton: Theytus Books.

Cornell, S., (2006). Indigenous Peoples, Poverty and Self-Determination in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States. Joint Occasional Papers on Native Affairs. Retrieved 4 May 2007 <http://jopna.net/pubs/jopna%202006_02_coverandinside.pdf>

Dolby, E., (1973). The Fur Trade and Culture Change Among the Okanagan Indians. 37th Report of the Okanagan Historical Society. Vernon, BC.

Dorff, J. A., (2005). First Nations Commercial Land Development, Competitive Advantage. Master’s Thesis: Simon Fraser University.

Findlay, A., (2006, June). Ruffling Feathers: The tough-talking, no-bullshit genius of Chief Clarence Louie. BC Business.

Graham, J. & Edwards, H., (2003). Governance and Commercial Enterprises in First Nations Policy Brief No. 17. Institute On Governance, Ottawa, Canada

Helin, C., (2006). Dances with Dependency: Indigenous Success Through Self-Reliance. Vancouver: Orca Spirit Publishing and Communications Inc.

Knelson, K., (2007, May 02). More Development Planned by OIB. The Oliver Chronicle.

McBride, J., (Ed.). (2001). Our Own Vision – Our Own Plan: What Six First Nations Organizations have Accomplished with their Own Economic Development Plan. Simon Fraser University: Community Economic Development Center.

MacDonald, M., (2005, February 2) Presentation, Aboriginal Rights and Title Law ConferenceHosted by the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council, Kamloops BC.

National Aboriginal Achievement Awards (2004). Chief Clarence Louie, Business & Community Development. Retrieved 29 April 2007. <http://www.naaf.ca/html/c_louis_e.html>

New Relationship Trust (2007). Chief Clarence Louie: Osoyoos Indian Band. Retrieved 9 May 2007. < http://www.newrelationshiptrust.ca/about/2006-regional-engagement-process/chief-clarence-louie>

Number of People Working on Reserve. (2006) Osoyoos Indian Band Development Corporation Power Point Presentation. Retrieved 12 May 2007. <http://www.sgog.bc.ca/uplo/OlChrisScott.pdf>

OIB Holdings: Leasing (2005, June). Osoyoos Indian Band Website. Retrieved 24 April 2007. <http://www.oib.ca/lease.htm>

Pugh, M. & Silver, M., (2003) The Leech and the Earthworm. Produced by Debra Harry. A Yeast Directions and IPCB production.

Pulfer, R., (2007, February 26). Band on a Run. Canadian Business Magazine.

Smith, L., (1999). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. New York: Zed Books Ltd.

Stelkia, L., (2007, May 14). OIB Student Wants Public Record. The Oliver Chronicle.

Stelkia, L., (2005, April 20). Native Heritage Sacrificed in the Name of ‘Progress’. The Oliver Chronicle.

Syilx Nation (Okanagan Nation). Gateway Project c/o En’owikin Center. Retrieved March 05, 07 <http://www.okanaganfirstpeoples.ca/governance.htm>

Titus, B., (2007) Aboriginal Management Series: Providing Accountability Information: A Focus on Performance and Results. PowerPoint Presentation. Aboriginal Financial Officers Association 2007 National Conference. Retrieved 12 May 2007 <http://www.afoa.ca/afoa/pdf-2007/Brian%20Titus.pdf>

Thomson, D. D., (1986). A History of the Okanagan: Indians and Whites in the Settlement Era, 1860-1920. Ph.D. thesis, Ottawa: National Library of Canada.

World Bank (2005). Indigenous Peoples, Poverty and Human Development in Latin America: 1994-2004.

 

 

 

WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THE APOLOGY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA FOR THE INDIAN RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS

Michael (Mickey) Posluns, Ph.D, Pickerel River, Ontario, mposluns@accglobal.net, June 25, 2008.

For more than a century the Government of Canada maintained contracts with four different Christian churches to administer Indian Residential schools. Most schools were operated as joint ventures with Anglican, Catholic, Presbyterian and United churches. Children were commonly taken away from their parents for ten months at a time, returning only in the summer months. Some did not come home even then.

The 1996 Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP Report)(2) documented in graphic detail the physical, sexual emotional and cultural harm done to these children by the schools. No short list can do justice to the harm and suffering inflicted on these children but this discussion is not the place to review the book length study of the RCAP Report or to second guess the recently appointed Commission on Truth and Reconciliation regarding the residential schools.

Most widely discussed in the last twelve years has been the sexual abuse suffered at numerous residential schools and the long term consequences for children isolated from their families. Also widely discussed are the frequent beatings for minor offences and for such ordinarily acceptable acts as speaking one’s own language. Less frequently discussed is the fact that these schools “achieved” a mortality rate nearing 50%: nearly half of the students going into the schools came out in pine boxes. The RCAP Report quotes Dr. P.H. Bryce, then Medical Officer of Health of the Indian Affairs Branch in a popular article published in 1907 saying that the schools had a higher mortality rate “than most wars.” A distinguished lawyer who had negotiated some of the church contracts is quoted in the same paragraph saying that the government’s conduct, in maintaining these schools in such a poor condition (poorly heated, poor food, bad ventilation) and taking in children already known to be ill (often with tuberculosis) was “dangerously close to homicide.” What would we say about a family whose doctor and lawyer offered such opinions and who, nonetheless, persisted in their treatment of their children for many more years?

On Wednesday, June 11 2008, the Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, stood up in the House of Commons and, in a strongly worded statement that he is reported to have written himself, apologized in considerable detail for the harm done by Canada to First Nations, Inuit and Métis people in Canada by the residential school. The Prime Minister was followed by the Leader of the Opposition, Stephan Dion, who admitted that his party had formed the Government of Canada for more than half the time of the residential schools and, he also apologized.

What I wish to do in this article is to review the apologies, the responses of the national Indigenous leadership and some of the news coverage and then to consider the question embedded in the title of this essay, “What is the meaning of the Apology of the Government of Canada for the Indian Residential Schools from a policy perspective?” Does it represent a change in any of the government’s current policies or practices? If the acts for which the apologies are offered are seen as part of my counting series on “the metaphysics of Indian hating” does the Government’s apology represent an end to the attitudes epitomized by the metaphysics of Indian hating? (So far as church leaders had earlier offered their own apologies there is a need to consider whether the nature of Christianity has fundamentally changed from the conduct of the clergy, religious leaders and lay teachers of earlier times, and, if so, to what extent and in what direction. The discussion for which this question very much calls out will need to wait for another article.)

The Apologies and the National Aboriginal Leaders’ Responses

There can be no doubt that the day of the apologies was a day for making parliamentary history. Sage was burned in the House of Commons, and drums were beaten in that solemn chamber. Jack Layton, the leader of the New Democratic Party (NDP) put a proposal to the Prime Minister at the last moment which allowed the national Aboriginal leaders to speak from the floor of the House of Commons.(3)

The Prime Minister recounted the legacy of the century-long assimilation policy that wrenched 150,000 Aboriginal children from their parents and forced them to live in so-called schools characterized by brutality, sexual abuse and unhealthy living conditions.

The Government of Canada sincerely apologizes and asks the forgiveness of the Aboriginal Peoples of this country for failing them so profoundly. We are sorry.

The Prime Minister repeated these words in Ojibwa, Cree, Inuktutuk and French. He went on to say
The government now recognizes that the consequences of the Indian residential schools policy were profoundly negative and that this policy had a lasting and damaging impact on Aboriginal culture, heritage and language.

While some former students have spoken positively about their experiences at residential schools, these stories are far overshadowed by tragic accounts of the emotional physical and sexual abuse and neglect of helpless children, and their separation from powerless families and communities.

Assembly of First Nations Chief Phil Fontaine, who personally suffered abuse at a residential school and was one of the first to go public about it years ago, said the apology marked “a new dawn” in race relations. “I reach out to all Canadians today in a spirit of reconciliation,” he declared provoking thunderous applause and pounding drums.

Inuit leader Mary Simon also said she believed “a new day has dawned.” Métis leader Clement Chartier told the survivors, M(Ps) and others in the packed galleries of the Commons that he considered the apology a sincere one, not just theatrics.(4)

Willie Blackwater, a 53-year old First Nations man who wept through much of the Prime Minister’s ten-minute speech said, “If I am able to forgive my perpetrator I can forgive Canada.” Blackwater was the lead plaintiff in two court cases that helped put a teacher in prison for eight years for having assaulted 31 boys In Blackwater’s case the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government was directly responsible for abuses at the church-run schools.(5)

Numerous other First Nations people who had listened to the Prime Minister from the galleries or from an overflow room or on a giant TV outdoors under the Peace Tower told reporters how important this event was to them. At the risk of summarizing many profoundly individual experiences, much of the importance described by First Nations and other Indigenous people was that the apologies established the reality of their own personal experiences.

This policy of assimilation was wrong, caused great harm and has no place in our country.”

On behalf of the government of Canada and all Canadians, I stand before you in this chamber so central to our life as a country to apologize to Aboriginal peoples for Canada’s role in the Indian Residential Schools system. We are sorry.

This is more than a repudiation of the policies that prevailed from Confederation, in 1867, until very recently. It is also a repudiation of the policies of the Reform Party (later renamed the Alliance Party), the western and larger precursor of the Conservative Party that presently forms the Government of Canada. Throughout the 1990s, when Liberal Governments concluded a number of modern land claims agreements, the Reform and later the Alliance Party fought tooth-and-nail against the bills ratifying these agreements. Admittedly there is a difference between land claims agreements and residential schools. However, one of the most often repeated refrains throughout the Nisga’a Agreement Ratification Bill debate (and debates on other similar bills) was the assertion, long after the Liberal Government had officially abandoned a policy of assimilation, that an earlier Liberal Government had “gotten it right” when, in 1969 they introduced a White Paper announcing a policy of renewed assimilation and denying that Aboriginal rights were any basis for negotiation.

At the apology, Ted Quewezance, a residential school alumnus and director o the National Residential School Survivors’ Society described the historic policies as “cultural genocide.”

Compensation and other Remedies

Kevin Rudd, the Prime Minister of Australia, made a similar apology in February 2008. The Australian apology did not include any financial compensation. The Canadian residential schools were modeled after the US-Indian industrial schools of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In Canada, each “residential school survivor” has been offered a cash settlement based on the time they attended a residential school plus claimed abuses. Political and popular support for an apology came about only after the courts established the legal liability of both the federal Canadian Government and the church administering each of the various schools.

In the U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback has been promoting a bill since 2004 providing for a limited apology. His bill was included as a provision in the Indian Health Care bill. Brownback said in a release, “While we cannot erase the past, this amendment hopefully helps heal the wounds that have divided America for so long. We can acknowledge our past failures, express sincere regrets and establish a righter future for all Americans.” Clearly, Sen. Brownback, like the Canadian political leaders contemplate these apologies as the start of a new era. This, in itself, justifies asking, as I will below, what evidence there may be of a reconsideration of current policies based on assimilationist premises.

Although the Government of Canada acceded to a program of healing and of compensation only when the courts found the Government responsible the payment of compensation has been a substantial expression of the harm done, at least to those who survived. Ironically, there appears to be no available means for compensating families whose children did not survive the “school” experience.

Likewise, the residential school experience is often credited by First Nations social service workers; with the difficulties many families have in providing adequate care for their children. Family breakdown, drugs and alcohol are so prevalent in some First Nations communities that more than half the children in care in some provinces are from First Nations communities. The argument relating this to the residential school experience is two-fold: (1) the generations of First Nations parents who were cut off from their own parents had no sound models on which to build parenting skills; and, (2) that the abuse suffered in residential schools has aggravated drug and alcohol abuse and has led survivors to pass the abuse they suffered on to their children and grandchildren.

Whether such losses can be remedied or compensated is not clear. Nonetheless, the contrition supposedly underlying the apologies would be incomplete if it did not attempt to address these questions.

The Media

The apologies should also have made the wrong-headedness of the policies that gave rise to the residential schools undeniable. As we will see below there remains amongst the media commentators who continue to deny either the reality of the experiences of First Nations people or to claim that the government and churches were acting for the good of their young charges. As the apologies become integrated into the Canadian national psyche these denials will come to be seen as the moral equivalent of Holocaust denial.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission

The Government has also named a panel of three persons, chaired by Justice Harry LaForme, the only Aboriginal person presently sitting on a Court of Appeal in Canada, to serve as a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission.” However, unlike its South African counterpart, it will not be able to offer amnesty in return for full disclosure. Its role is to hear evidence but not to assign blame or legal responsibility. So far as it will provide a large body of evidence, largely from the perspective of former students, it will make a significant contribution to the history of the residential schools. It will not, however, bring perpetrators to justice. Neither will it discuss current policies arising out of the same fundamental attitudes.

Non-Indigenous Canadian Responses

Three days before the parliamentary apologies an Ipsos-Reid poll conducted for Canwest News Service and Global Television found that two in three Canadians agree that “it’s about time that the government and Canadians come to terms with its past actions, and so issuing apologies for past transgressions and mistakes is appropriate.” John Wright, a senior vice-president at Ipsos-Reid, said that while the poll shows a high level of support for recognizing injustice through apology, it does not mean that apologies, in and of themselves, are enough.

Wright said an apology can “kick start” a process that, in the case of the residential school abuses, will involve the work of the truth and reconciliation commission. Whether the present popular disposition in favour of an apology will last through the five years of projected work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission remains to be seen. So also does it remain to be seen whether it will extend to an examination of currently repressive policies.

A survey conducted in the two days following the apologies by Innovative Research Group found that 83 per cent of those surveyed were aware of the apologies and that 71 per cent agreed or strongly agreed that the government should apologize, while only 18 per cent disagreed or strongly disagreed. About half of the respondents said that they were left with a more favourable view of the government while 13 per cent were left with a less favourable view.

Will the Expressions of Reconciliation be Reciprocated: The Meaning of an Apology from a Policy Perspective?

NDP Leader Jack Layton told the House of Commons:

"It’s a profound day, the survivors I have had a chance to speak to have been waiting for a long time for the country to acknowledge the wrongs that have been done and I am hopeful the apology will take responsibility for the totally unacceptable and racist policies of the past, but most important, it’s got to be a day when we make a commitment to real change."

Stephane Dion, the Leader of the Opposition said that:

"Today’s apology is about a past that should have been completely different. But it must also be about the future. It must be about reconciliation and fundamental change."

Reconciliation is a particularly large and complex idea in this context. The Supreme Court has spoken, in a series of decisions, about the need to reconcile the common law and Aboriginal law, as well as of the need for reconciliation between federal and provincial governments and Aboriginal communities and their governments.

The notion that Aboriginal communities have historically had their own governments, including their own bodies of law and legal thought, and that Canadian and Aboriginal governments need to be reconciled may not be part of the foundational thought of the two-thirds of Canadians who support an apology. Certainly, non-Aboriginal discussion does not commonly relate the residential school experience to this kind of conscious and knowledgeable reconciliation.

The very notion of reconciling legal systems – both courts and legislatures – requires that not only judges and lawyers but also parliamentarians become knowledgeable in the other’s legal system. Prof. Kent McNeil in a paper entitled “The Jurisdiction of Inherent Right Aboriginal Governments” discusses the concept of First Nations self-governments having powers parallel to and concurrent with federal and provincial governments in Canada.(6)

Far from being knowledgeable about the workings of First Nations governments, most constitutional scholars in Canada today could not likely tell you the name of the First Nation on whose traditional lands they lived or worked. The idea of reconciling legal systems conjures, at least in my mind, lawyers who are no less able to compare Anishinabek and Haudenausonee legal thought with Canadian and American practice, and to compare the recognition of various kinds of rights in different First Nations legal systems with federal and provincial Canadian systems.

Apology and the Metaphysics of Indian Hating

Perhaps it seems like a stretch from apologizing for the Indian Residential School experience to reconciliation of legal systems. The stretch is not as might appear at first blush. The first Canadian statute dealing with “Indians” was the pre-Confederation 1857 statute entitled ­An Act for the Gradual Civilization of the Indians. In 1876, when David Laird, then the Minister of the Interior, with responsibility for Indian Affairs, introduced the first Indian Act he devoted a large part of his speech to the idea of making “enfranchisement” attractive, and if it were not attractive to Indians, the government would make enfranchisement compulsory. The difference is that “enfranchisement” in an Indian context meant loss of membership in one’s Indigenous community, and a corresponding loss of land rights as well as hunting and fishing rights.

Residential schools grew out of the same root belief that the sooner Indians gave up being Indians the better off the country would be and, from the government’s point of view, the better off they would be. It was all part of a piece.

Nobody appears to doubt the sincerity either of Prime Minister Harper or the other three leaders who offered apologies. The question on which I wish to close this discussion is not Were they sincere? But What did they sincerely mean?

At the very least, a functional apology ought to lead to a good deal of humility and an end to the arrogance that led previous governments to claim that they could determine the best interests of Indian communities and Indian persons. Or the parliaments that passed acts declaring that “a person was someone other than an Indian.” Or the ­British Columbia Evidence Act that declared, as recently as 1960, that an “Indian was a person destitute of the knowledge of God” and requiring instruction in the meaning of truth.(7)

If the apologies are not followed by a sudden onset of humility, not only amongst ministers and MPs and Senators but also amongst the senior officials of the Indian Affairs Branch and the “old Indian hands” on the interdepartmental Committee of Senior Officials.

The Supreme Court of Canada, in its decisions interpreting section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, the section recognizing and affirming “the existing Aboriginal and treaty rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada” have set out a series of tests for justified infringements of these rights. The first test is that an infringement must serve a specific and identified public purpose. The second is that the infringement must be the least intrusive means for accomplishing that purpose. Thirdly, there must be fair compensation. (There is a substantial list of other tests that I will not explore here.)

A corollary of the least intrusive rule has been the requirement for consultation. “Consultation” to the Court, as to the Oxford English Dictionary requires the actual decision makers to give serious consideration to one another’s viewpoint. It is not hard to see how a relationship founded on consultation might progress to reconciliation.

So far the Government of Canada, and the governments of most of the provinces have steadfastly refused to take the injunctions for consultation seriously. If the fine words of the apology – the denunciation of assimilation and racism – mean a recognition of the humanity of First Nations people and their capacity for political and legal organization then consultation must follow hard on the heels of the apologies.

Just hours before the Prime Minister rose in the House to give his apology, a Conservative MP, Pierre Poilievre, the parliamentary secretary to the President of the Treasury Board went on a local Ottawa radio show to say that Canada’s aboriginals need to learn the value of hard work more than they need compensation for abuse suffered in residential schools. The Prime Minister demanded that Poilievre apologize the next day but he did not ask for his resignation as a parliamentary secretary.

It remains to be seen whether the present Conservative Party, dominated as it appears to be by former members of the Reform Allliance Party can abandon that party’s deep commitment to forced assimilation in favour of policies founded on humility, consultation and reconciliation.

For the past several years, Indian Affairs budgets have been capped at two per cent, i.e., any given budget is not to increase by more than two per cent over the previous year. Yet, each instance in which a band has taken over the administration of a program previously administered by federal civil servants has resulted in funding reductions coupled with a contractual requirement to meet provincial standards. This, of course, is a recipe for failure. No one else is asked to produce more results with decreasing amounts of money.

When First Nations schools were receiving about $3,200 per student, if the student attended school every day of the school year, the Indian Affairs Branch paid non-First Nations Catholic and public schools $4,500 tuition by the end of October for each student regardless of attendance. Needless to say, the non-First Nations schools were seen to offer greater resources and to retain good teachers longer than on-reserve schools.

Each and every program that has been transferred has been found to be skewed in a fashion similar to the education programs.

The Auditor General has said that First Nations governments are required to do far more reporting and accounting to the federal government than any municipal government or any other small agency. Yet, a few days after the apologies, the present Minister of Indian Affairs, Chuck Strahl declared that First Nations people have a right to full accounting. No doubt they do have such a right no less than everyone else. But Mr. Strahl’s declaration sounded very much like another Minister of Indian Affairs proposing to “rescue” First Nations communities from their own elected leadership.

What would we call these “Schools” in Another Setting?

A Vancouver Sun editorial ran under the headline “Apology to First Nations will be meaningless without atonement.” I don’t think Canadians have begun to ask what atonement might look like in this context. I do not mean to play with words when I challenge whether the creation referred to can properly be called an educational system. Or when I often put the word “school” in quotation marks in this context.

When I co-authored George Manuel’s autobiography, The Fourth World: An Indian Reality, he observed that at the school he attended the children often worked in the fields while the horses were free to play. The per student payments for room and board paid by the federal government to the churches were significantly less than those paid by the Ontario provincial government for a residential school for the deaf in the 1920s. The effects on a child’s desire for learning of corporal punishment for speaking one’s own language further raises the question of whether there ever was a serious expectation of learning attached to the government’s policies in regard to these schools.

What would we call an institution with a 46% mortality rate if the inmates were Jews or Roma, Communists or homosexuals How would we respond to a recidivist whose history of committing the same offences over and over again ran close to a century?

The Government and Parliament of Canada, in offering their apologies, have taken on the burden of demonstrating not only that their words were sincere but that the Government and each other party are prepared to translate their fine words into actions; and, that those will not be actions based on their own impulses but on genuine consultation and authentic efforts at reconciliation.

Government officials and parliamentarians will need to become functionally literate in First Nations history and geography. When they look at a map of Canada they will need to see not only the provinces and territories but also the traditional lands of the various First Nations.

I look forward to revisiting the Apologies of June 11, 2008 a year from now to see what, if any of these fine words still ring true.

End Notes

1 I am grateful to Rarihokwats and Four Arrows for the publication of seven “e-notes” including the original apologies and responses of the First Nations, Métis and Inuit leaders and the media reports, analyses and opinions from the following ten days. Copies of these and other e-notes can be obtained by writing to four_arrows@canada.com.

2 Much of the Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples can be found online at the web site of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development of Canada. My references are taken from the CD-ROM version of the RCAP Report, Georges Erasmus and Associate Chief Justice René Dussault, Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, on Seven Generations: An Information Legacy of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, CD-ROM, Ottawa: Libraxus Inc., 1997.

3 Normally, when the House of Commons is in session only Members may speak. The procedural workaround suggested by Jack Layton was for the House to move into what is called “Committee of the Whole House,” i.e., the Speaker leaves the Speaker’s Chair and the Chair of the Committee of the Whole sits at the Table in the aisle between the Government and the Opposition. Committee of the Whole is much less formal and can invite witnesses and guest speakers.

4 This summary draws particularly on a report for Canwest News Service by Juliet O’Neill and Tobin Dalrymple.

5 Initially both the government and the hierarchies of the Catholic and Anglican (Episcopalian) churches had denied responsibility.

6 Kent McNeil, “The Jurisdiction of Inherent Right Aboriginal Governments” Research Paper for the National Centre for First Nations Governance, Oct. 11, 2007.

7 “Indian Testimony Receivable in Certain Cases”, ss. 12-14, Evidence Act, Chapter 143, Revised Statutes of British Columbia, 1960.

 

 

ANDEAN SUCCESS STORIES AND REPRESENTATIONS OF NATURE IN ANDEAN TEXTILES

Catherine Joslyn, MFA Textiles, cjoslyn@clarion.edu

The late anthropologist Ed Franquemont wrote, “No other people in history put so much cultural energy into fiber arts as the Andeans. Even though the superlative weavers of the contemporary Andes are only the impoverished reminder of a far more brilliant past that is gone forever, cloth remains the quintessential Andean art and the best forum to enter into a dialogue with the remarkable Inca mind.” Schoeser writes that the ancient Andeans in the earliest known New World urban centre, Caral (ca. 2600 BCE), used “knotted reed bags filled with stones to form the inner walls of buildings.” (2003:13) Not only clothing, and the unique texts made from knotted cords called quipus, but even buildings were made using textile techniques and materials. These were peoples who were deeply in touch with the nature of textile fibers and what their hands and imaginations could craft out of them. Textiles were made in techniques so elaborate, so difficult to achieve, so time consuming and labor intensive as to take one’s breath away. Likewise the Andeans were--and the modern Runa or Quechua speakers still are--in close touch with the natures and needs of the animals and plants from which the fibers came, how to cultivate and care for them, how to utilize certain plants, insects and minerals as dyestuffs to color them, to produce exquisite or utilitarian textiles for any type of need from everyday carrying bags to exquisite offerings for the gods and divine rulers.

Now in this contemporary age, after centuries of oppression at the hands of European conquerors, more and more indigenous groups in the Andes have dedicated themselves to taking control of their own destiny. Visitors to Cuzco, Peru, for example, can visit a young museum and shop, the Center for Traditional Textiles of Cuzco, directed by its indigenous founder, Nilda Calleñaupa of Chinchero.

Chinchero is a well-known weaving town fifty minute drive from Cuzco and has 12,000 inhabitants divided in four communities cultivating potatoes, beans, wheat, and barley for the brewery in Cuzco, as well as sheep and cattle; at the higher altitudes they tend llamas and alpacas (1991:36). There is a school since 1920, and a health center, police station, municipal office, justice of the peace, administrator and tiny shops. Touristically Chinchero is noted for its Inca ruins, colonial church, and its market, with a small museum and a restaurant. Ten years ago, I spent most weekends for the better part of a year in Chinchero. Victoria KusiHuaman is a traditional weaver I got to meet; there are three weavers associations. The town’s big annual festival takes place in September.

One of Chinchero’s oldest motifs, called loraypo (Isabel Huaman Puma, personal communication, 1997), “is a diamond divided into four by the addition of four smaller diamonds, one placed at the top and bottom of the larger diamond, and two found in the middle.” (1991b) “According to Chinchero men, (it) refers to the four part division of Chinchero into suyus (regions) as well as denoting the water sources in each part.” It also shows the agricultural fields with their ridges. Ancestrally I suppose it also stood for the four suyos of the I
nca empire, whose name Tawantinsuyo meant four regions.

A skilled weaver since childhood and the first Chincherino to get a university education, Nilda Calleñaupa has devoted her life to preserving Peru’s textile heritage. I met her in 1997, when her Center for Traditional Textiles of Cusco was a year old. Now she works with at least 800 weavers in nine communities.

By “community” I mean tiny villages often many hours by foot from the nearest small rural town. She shows the weavers fine antique examples, encouraging their best production, and works hard at developing the market for their products. Through the textile preservation project she has given weavers a means to support their families. Nilda encourages excellence, and the level of quality in the weavers’ production has grown exponentially.

During my visit last May I was astonished at the fineness of handspun, traditionally dyed weavings, particularly coming from the community of Chahuaytire, especially compared with the weavings of factory spun synthetic yarns that I observed just ten years before. Some of them are getting up to the quality of Bolivian weaving now. As Nilda documents in her newest book, “The weavers of Chahuaytire now wear their traditional garments with pride. They report that people in the cities sometimes come up to them and greet them with, “Brother, how good that you are wearing our traditional clothing and keeping it alive.” “If people in the cities still try to discriminate against them, they resist.” (2007: 20) She quotes a woman of Pitmarca: “We no longer feel we have to accept these insults. If we hear some bad comment about us, we immediately tell the speakers that we are people equal to them and that there is no difference between us. We can say that because of us, there are enough tourists in Cusco.” (2007:19)

Other groups in the Cuzco region are having success too: the weavers of Parobamba—you have to ride for 5 hours in a 4-wheel drive to get there from the city. Also Crisantino Montes of Ayacucho is weaving wonderful tapestries of handspun baby alpaca dyed with traditional dyes.

In Bolivia, Artesanía Sorata is an indigenous women’s cottage industry producing and selling a variety of high quality handmade items to better the quality of life of the women’s families. Likewise, the indigenous people of Otavalo, Ecuador, have gained economic and political power in recent years, and are working to improve their artisanry production. These situations exemplify native peoples’ determination to succeed on their own terms, holding on to native culture and determining their own values and defining success in their own terms. In many of these communities we see the expression of Andean concepts linking humans with nature and the cosmos.

“There are many ways in which cloth can serve as historical text. It can be an alternative means of encoding cultural information. Aspects of ethnicity, economic relationships, and personal data are all proclaimed in cloth and clothing." (Berlo 91:447) The imagery in traditional textiles consists of symbols that can still be read by the most traditional weavers and shamans, the ones who bear traditional knowledge at the deepest levels. The motifs present a kind of precursor to pictographic writing, with the ability to document many kinds of information about space and time as well as history and accounting.

It is important to realize that the meanings of the images come from oral tradition, in which details are guarded in the memory of the one who knows how to read them. In the case of the knotted quipus that accounted for stored goods, among other things, Cummins (1993:106) reminds us that “The quipu also communicated through (its keeper/reader) “but in an oral form, and the information it represented could be extensive.” (my translation) and not only that, but many Quechua terms convey complex meanings that take many words to explain in a western language.

Even the imagery of the deliciously varied patterned beans in a cloth from the Nasca culture of the first 650 years CE, though they obviously speak of the importance of farming and foodstuffs, according to Frame the symbolism goes much deeper. She says that beans and severed heads appeared interchangeably in Nasca imagery. The desert culture was naturally preoccupied with water, and the Nasca people buried severed heads, the associated flow of blood made as an offering to ensure the water supply. “This practice, and the associated blood flow, may equate with the sowing and watering (of) seeds in the ritual domain.” (1999:262)

Since ancient times Andean cultures have had an extraordinary relationship with the natural environment. As shown by Spina (1994:6) in his studies of Peruvian anthropologist Jose María Arguedas’ works, the native peoples of the Andes do not conceive of humans as separate from nature. In fact, they see themselves as intended to collaborate with nature. The natural state of humans is to be civilized, that is to plant and tend animals and work in close harmony with the natural world. When they encountered forms in nature that spoke to them of their world of ideas, they didn’t hesitate to modify those forms to create images that reflected their worldview. Just as they didn’t see themselves as separate from nature, nature also included the supernatural, especially in transitional images that bridge worlds.

In her cataloguing of designs used by the weavers of Choquecancha, Seibold found the largest category to be religious and cosmological designs (169). Andean cosmology was organized around sky, earth, and water deities that weavers still put into textiles, which she characterizes as woven prayers due to the significance of the imagery. The sky was primarily represented by the condor, the earth by the feline, and the water by the serpent or toad (170).

The condor not only is a giant bird, but more importantly it eats carrion and therefore is not like other birds. Runa of Choquecancha, according to the author, “say that the condor flies up from Pachamama” (Mother Earth/Time) “and lives with the Apus” (sacred mountain lords)… (that condors) “guard the Incan treasure buried in the earth; that drinking the blood of a condor will make your teeth grow again; that a condor flying over the church is a harbinger of death…and that when weavers use a pick made of condor bone, their fingers fly in picking designs.” Other creatures considered both inside and outside the category of birds, and therefore extraordinary enough to include in these woven prayers—include bats, considered rats changed into birds whose blood will cure epilepsy; and owls, which like bats fly at night and rest in the daytime. The owl is a harbinger of death, according to Seibold. The hummingbird hovers, flying and yet remaining in one place; the butterfly seems to cross between insect and bird categories; the duck is equally at home in water or air; the tinamou, a large-bodied bird that can fly, and yet--unlike most birds-- prefers to run to safety.

Going on to transitional power symbols relating to the cosmological realm of the earth, Seibold and others mention the feline as the most ubiquitous one. It is a powerful animal because it is a preditor and undomesticatable. (175) The city of Cuzco itself is laid out in the form of a puma, with the sacred center located at its genital organs.

Special qualities of water animals, relating to the lower world, made them magical as well, such as the snake as a symbol for the earth and for rivers, since snakes transform themselves by shedding their skins. A magical snake could convert itself into a river. It also has the same form as a bolt of lightning, and this form of light, akin to the reflected light of the moon, was thought to have magical power just as important as the radiant light of the sun. In fact a person who survives being struck by lightning is automatically considered to have been transformed into an insipient shaman. Returning to Seibold, “The category of transitional power symbols includes those animals with some social distance from the runa that are either related to the coming of the rains (the toad, lizard, and serpent” who hibernate until the rainy season) “and those which inspire awe on their own merits (the condor and predator felines.)”

She continues, “As one shaman explained it to me, the designs of the sky, earth, and water correspond to the three worlds of the Runa universe: Kay Pacha, the middle world the Runa and the Apus inhabit; Hanan Pacha, the world in the sky in which live God, the sun and moon; and Ukhu Pacha, the underworld, which is a great sea, the world the dead inhabit. Another (ritual specialist) told me that lightning and rainbows link the three worlds. The condor, as represented by the woven motif, lives in the sky above the Apus. The feline… represents the earth and lives firmly on this earth with the Runa. And the water animal motifs, the serpent, toad, and lizard, hibernate underground in (the earth,) Pachamama, returning to Kay Pacha with the coming of the rainy season. The zigzag water motif, representing lightning and the river, and the thin colored stripes, representing the rainbow, connect the three worlds together. Based on what the weavers and shamans told me, the heavy concentration of sky, earth, and water designs in the (shawls) emphasizes (their) purpose as a prayer to the spirit world. By visually linking the three worlds in one textile and connecting it to a request for agricultural fertility during the dry season festivals, the weaver is directing her message to the supernatural world. (177)

Andean cultures likewise had a very special relationship with textiles which grew out of that special relationship with nature itself. Their understanding of the native camelid fibers such as alpaca, vicuña, guanaco and llama hair, as well as plant fibers like cotton, was so intimate that spinners and weavers were capable of making garments waterproof or as soft as butter, or to make patterns visible in yarn all of one color but made with alternating stripes of oppositely twisted yarns. Their royal and sacred textiles were made using incredibly labor-intensive techniques, as the investment of labor gave them the high value that was appropriate for their sacred or royal use. Many of their favorite motifs revolved around their perceptions of their relationship with nature and the supernatural, and thereby reveal that multitude of varieties of bean, for example, or the of the fields that provide other important foodstuffs. The few cultural heirs of pre-conquest peoples that remain continue that special relationship with their materials, as well as continuing and in some cases relearning textile techniques their ancestors used.

In the Department of Cuzco, it is in the remote province of Q’ero that the most traditional ways of the ancestors have been preserved. Rowe points out that Q’ero is the only place in Peru where a special ceremony to bless textiles has been documented, indicating their high level of cultural importance (2002:15). Her book with John Cohen makes use of his travels there beginning in the 1950s when he was a graduate student in painting at Yale. Josef Albers and his wife Anni, who was herself an expert in Peruvian weaving, encouraged students to study such things.

Q’ero shamans retain knowledge of the oldest meanings of textile designs. In fact Q’ero has the same name as the Inca and pre-Inca cups that had tokapu designs on them that could be read just like the ones on Inca tunics. For example, this Inca tokapu motif signifies a soldier, being a miniature copy of the actual tunics soldiers wore. Between this and the quipu of symbolic knotted cords, it isn’t too much of a jump to think of Andean textile imagery as pictographic writing.

Silverman’s work with Q’ero textiles shows that they maintain a complex form of weaving mostly lost in the rest of the region. For example the inti, or sun (1994:72): “…the diamond placed inside the rectangular frame is called Inti, the sun…when referring to temporal ideas; and llacta, village, when referring to spatial concepts….The diamonds placed one inside the other in decreasing size are called pata, elevated land, and pupu, time period. Sevaral (sic) Q’ero weavers related pata to the three ecological zones…they exploit:” the highest zones above the tree line, or puna, where certain potatoes are grown and where alpacas graze; the qheswa or temperate zone where most crops can be grown; and the yunga lowlands where warmer weather crops thrive “in this way: ‘Field. River. They are in three high parts.’ They say that the light rays are “the rising sun…while the dark colored lines signify the setting sun….Last, the series of triangles” bordering both sides the weavers refer to as mountain points while the men call them Apu, mountain diety.” Silverman explains that “the natives (sic) reading of these two…motifs illustrates the dual” (nature) “of the sign” alluding “to spatial ideas such as the mountain peaks” bordering “the Q’ero highland village, with their” mountainside “fields in the different ecological zones in which they live and work, and the second” meaning denoting “ideas about the rising and setting sun in relation to the mountain peaks in order to tell daily and seasonal time.” (1999: 814-15) Her informants say designs from other less traditional parts of Cuzco that do not represent both space and time are of absolutely no value. (816) .

Silverman demonstrates that the Q’ero preserved the legacy of this inti motif from earlier cultures, at least the pre-Inca horizon Wari tapestries originating in the modern-day Ayacucho area, and Tiahuanaco ceramics (from the Lake Titicaca region), meaning that it has been important over a great deal of space and time.

Silverman lived with the Q’ero for some 20 years. She asked informants why they weave motifs in the shawls, coca bags and ponchos. A response taped in 1985 was “We know how to read like that.”

Silverman writes that in Q’ero textiles, men read in “listas” records of descriptions and quantities of goods, such as a black stripe for black llama wool or a black variety of potato, and red for red wool or corn. She says lista is woven in other places as well, for example, “A woman living in Markapata read the listas woven in a belt sample…I made as denoting a color classification for corn….the yellow stripe (was) for a furrow of yellow corn…the white stripe…for white corn placed in a furrow…the red one for red corn, and so on….While the multicolored …stripes are signs for goods, the alternating white and red stripes are signs for people. She has no doubt that the stripes are similar to the knots and color coding in the quipu, and she thinks both are related to the same concept from which contemporary bar coding arose. That is, that they can be read as a book of cultural knowledge that shows how people view their world.

Seibold points out that an important feature of Runa textiles is not just symmetry, which we can notice immediately, but the principle of dualism, of which bilateral symmetry is one aspect, and “the male-female, sun-moon dichotomies are” another. She goes on, “Andean dualism is heavily documented”…as “a cultural principle that structures the Runa universe and life within it....In textile design… dualism appears in the positive and negative patterning, where the background becomes just “as important as the design itself, the two working dynamically together to form one identifiable whole.

These examples demonstrate some of the ways in which textile designs can be read to understand Runas’ perception of their relationship to the natural world.

References:

Arguedas, Jose María
1978 Deep rivers. Translated by Frances Horning Barraclough from Los ríos profundos. Buenos Aires: Editorial Losada, 1958. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Berlo, Janet
1991 Beyond Bricolage: Women and aesthetic strategies in Latin American textiles. In Margot Schevill, Janet Berlo and Edward Dwyer, eds. Textile traditions of Mesoamerica and the Andes: an anthology. Austin: University of Texas Press, Pps. 437-479.

Callañaupa Alvarez, Nilda
2007 Weaving in the Peruvian highlands; dreaming patterns, weaving memories. Cuzco: Center for Traditional Textiles of Cuzco

2005 Weaving lives: traditional textiles of Cusco preserving the textile tradition

Cummins, Thomas
1993 La representación en el siglo IVI: La imagen colonial del Inca. In Enrique Urbanor, compiler Mito y simbolismo en los andes: La figura y la palabra. Cuzco: Centro de Estudios Regionales Andinos “Bartolomé de las Casas.” Proceedings of the 46th Congress of Americanists.

De la Jara, Victoria
1967Vers de Dechiffrement des Ecritures Anciennes du Peroú. Paris: Sciences Progress.

Frame, Mary
1999 Textiles of the Nasca style. In Jose Antonio de Lavalle Vargas and Rosario de Lavalle de Cardenas, eds. Ancient Peruvian textiles. Lima: AFP Integra

Franquemont, Ed
1991 Dual-lease weaving: an Andean loom technology. In Margot Schevill, Janet Berlo and Edward Dwyer, eds. Textile traditions of Mesoamerica and the Andes: an anthology. Austin: University of Texas Press, Pps. 283-308.

Kauffmann-Doig, Federico
1969 Manual de Arqueología Peruana. Lima: Edicciones PEISA.

Rowe, Ann Pollard
1978 Warp patterned weaves of the Andes. Washington, D.C.: Textile Museum.
2002 Hidden threads of Peru: Q’ero textiles. Washington, D.C.: Textile Museum

Schoeser, Mary
2003 World textiles: a concise history. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd.

Silverman, Gail
1991 Chinchero pallay. Lima: CONCYTEC
1994 El tejido andino: un libro de sabiduría. Lima: Banco Central de Reserva del Perú
1999 Cusco and it’s (sic) relation to Inca tocapu. In Jose Antonio de Lavalle Vargas and Rosario de Lavalle de Cardenas, eds. Ancient Peruvian textiles. Lima: AFP Integra

Silverman, Gail, Sergia Chauca, Nilda Callañaupa
1991 Chinchero pallay. Lima: CONCYTEC

Spina, Vincent
1994 Nature in the Andean cosmology of Jose María Arguedas and in the contemporary ecology movement. Paper presented at the Diversity and Dreams Conference, SUNY-College at Oswego, Oswego, NY.
2008 Personal communication

 

 

THE QOLIQOLI IN TOWN:
TRADITIONAL FISHING GROUNDS AND SQUATTING IN URBAN FIJI

Dr. Jenny Bryant-Tokalau, Senior Lecturer in Pacific Studies, Te Tumu (School of Maori, Pacific and Indigenous Studies), University of Otago, Dunedin, Aotearoa New Zealand.

Abstract

Life for the urban poor is becoming increasingly difficult throughout the Pacific. Despite a great deal of emphasis on modern development and apparent concern for the poor by governments and donors, living conditions are not significantly improving. In Fiji where squatting accounts for a growing proportion of urban dwellers, the possibility of the introduction of the Qoliqoli Act 2006, intended to return coastal land and traditional fisheries to indigenous owners, may lead to even more complex urban problems.

Fiji Today

From the outside the perceptions of Fiji are contradictory. Happy, relaxed, sunny, a ‘beach’ culture that is also coup-ridden, dangerous, racist and so on are common (mis)understandings, but like any place there are other, more complex interpretations and views. Fiji is physically and economically quite developed. There is an important industrial sector, and tourism, mining and sugar provide most of GNP. Suva has around 250,000 people in the greater Suva area. It is busy, congested, and noisy. There is also misery. Housing ranges from high class expensive to less than basic. People mostly have food, but a growing number has limited access to land. There are opportunities for many (and for others there are few chances). Extremes exist and poverty and inequality are increasing, but so too is wealth and opportunity (see Bryant, 1993; Lingam, 2005). Like any developing country, the economy and social life are undergoing dramatic stress and change. Land ownership is always an issue.

There has always been a great deal of debate over Fijian land and land rights (Pacific Islands Forum, 2001). Much of this surrounds the expiry of agricultural leases and the impact on rural cane farmers. Other commentary surrounds the migration of dispossessed farmers to urban areas and the impacts on land there, particularly in the mushrooming squatter settlements of the main towns, but there has been very little commentary on the possible consequences of returning the qoliqoli to traditional landowners.

As is now well known, political circumstances for Fiji underwent several dramatic shifts between the late 1980s and 2006 resulting in a change in ethnic representation in urban areas, and in the squatter settlements surrounding them. People of all ethnic groups have moved in growing numbers to the towns, but there has been very limited assessment of who lives where. What has continued to be obvious is growing international migration of both Indo-Fijians and indigenous Fijians, as well as more obvious representation of indigenous Fijians in urban areas (see, for example Mohanty, 2006), despite the fact that unemployment is higher there (Narsey, 2006: 23).

Political Change and the Qoliqoli

The most recent Fiji coup in 2006 was partially carried out as a response by the military commander, Commodore Frank Bainimarama to three pieces of legislation being debated by the then Qarase government. One of those proposed pieces of legislation was the Qoliqoli Act. This Act was intended to ensure that the rights to the seabed, foreshore and indigenous fisheries of Fiji are invested in indigenous land owners. Management would be under a Qoliqoli Commission. This is an important piece of legislation. It has been a long time in the making, and in essence would recognize the rights of customary owners to their coasts.

The Qoliqoli Act has raised a number of fears in Fiji, not least from hoteliers, many of whom are afraid that recognition of indigenous ownership will lead to exploitation, conflict, and ‘the end of tourism’. Other tourist operators, particularly those who operate small resorts and have always worked closely with the traditional owners are more sanguine and already have in place systems of support, employment and payments to the communities, recognizing that fair payment for the use of Fijian land is only as it should be, considering the impact that tourism has on Fiji in terms of cultural, environmental, social and economic change.

Of particular concern, and an issue which has not been adequately discussed or even recognized is how would the Qoliqoli legislation (if ever enacted) impact upon the urban poor, specifically (but not solely) the squatters? Many people, including indigenous, rely to a large extent on gathering from the sea shore, fishing, and recreational use. The legislating of the foreshore into landowner hands will at times lead to conflict and misunderstandings and this has already occurred to some extent. In Suva for example, where squatter settlements on coastal areas are growing rapidly, indigenous owners are preparing for ownership by demanding rent, or outright removal of communities who have lived in these areas, sometimes for generations. Whether or not some compromise is ever reached over the details of the Act and whether or not it ever becomes law is still in doubt. The question of ownership of traditional fishing grounds and rights to the foreshore will come up again in the future, despite its suspension by the interim Prime Minister, Voreqe Bainimarama. Consultation on and recognition of the squatter situation with respect to the Qoliqoli is therefore imperative.

Much of Fiji’s urban housing and businesses, recreation facilities and sources of livelihood are found in the Qoliqoli. Urban areas are largely located on the coast, and despite the departure of many people from their traditional land areas to urban settlements, large numbers continue to utilize the qoliqoli for fishing, gathering shellfish, building and gardening. Most of the one hundred and eighty squatter settlements are coastal, but others are on watercourses running inland from the sea and will also come under the Qoliqoli Act. Potentially, if the Act is passed, there will be conflict (Bryant-Tokalau, 2006a&b).

Political and Social Change

Since 1987 there have been four military coups in the Republic of Fiji. With each one life has become more difficult for greater numbers. Despite political upheaval the economy has grown and overseas investments continue. Tourism, the greatest income earner, has survived several slumps, but since the last coup the outside world is looking elsewhere and for the first time a sustained drop in visitor arrivals has been seen (Harrison, 2003; Fiji Times, 2007). Coups have damaged Fiji’s socio-economic status and a generation now exists which has seen no other way to have government except through force.

Squatter settlements are growing, with some current estimates of between 80 -100,000 people living in informal housing or ‘squatter’ settlements. The total Fiji population of 900,000 is estimated to have between 25 and 33 per cent living in poverty, many of these in the settlements (Mohanty, 2006:66.) Health and social implications for those living there are significant. Thousands face an intermittent and unclean water supply, yet formal statistics claim that 97.5% in urban areas have access to safe drinking water (Fiji National Planning Office, 2004: 58). The health disaster that was ‘waiting to happen in, for example, Suva, Nadi, Ba and Labasa’ in the 1990s (Bryant, 1993) has pretty much come to pass.

Urban land, access and rights of the homeless are becoming a worrying issue. Added to that urban households, particularly of indigenous Fijians, are larger than before and than those in rural areas (Narsey, 2006: 2). Pressure for the small amount of freehold is intense, making it unaffordable for low-income housing. Competitive interests for state and native lease make it difficult to find suitable land for low-cost housing, and squatters are becoming more aggressive in their movement onto State land. The legislation introducing the Qoliqoli Act, which was under discussion in 2006 and dropped by the military government in the coup of November of that year, could have implications for the burgeoning urban populations.

Fiji Urban Squatters

In 1986 the capital city of Suva was estimated to have 26 squatter settlements with one in every eight persons in Suva living there. Of these, 5349 (56.7 per cent) were Fiji-Indian, 3733 (39.6 per cent) were indigenous Fijian and the remaining 348 of other races demonstrating a slight increase in the proportion of ethnic Fijian squatters since 1983 (Bryant, 1992).

By the mid-2000s, urban population numbers had grown from 35 per cent of total population in 1970, to 53 per cent with the expectation of 69 per cent by 2030 (Mohanty quoting United Nations, 2004). This is in sharp contrast to the situation in 1983 when around 39 per cent of the total population lived in urban areas (Bryant, 1993: 11). By 2005 there were estimated to be around 82,000 squatters living in more than 180 informal settlements (Lingam, 2005), with some very high densities, particularly in the older settlements.

If squatting may be taken as an index of increasing poverty and vulnerability, then indications are that the two major ethnic groups are living in worsening circumstances. with the level of poverty increasing by the 1990s, but life appears to have become more difficult for indigenous Fijians, in contrast to the relatively worse situation for Fiji-Indians in 1989 (see Bryant, 1993: 71-81; Bryant-Tokalau, 1995b:112; UNDP, 1997).

Urban inhabitants depend very heavily upon their gardens, farms and fishing for subsistence with few members of the household working in formal employment (Bryant-Tokalau, 1995a: 6). Despite the level of gardening in some of the settlements (see Thaman, 1988), it is obvious that households living in peri-urban situations need cash for necessities such as food, transport, school fees, books and uniforms, as well as traditional and other obligations. Such pressures have meant that households are increasingly moving closer to the urban areas where employment and other means of earning an income are more possible. Squatter settlements on native and state land have thus burgeoned in the past decade, many of these on the i-qoliqoli.

Urban Squatting and Poverty

Whatever the ethnicity of Fiji’s squatters, what is most obvious is that life for the poor is becoming increasingly difficult. Numbers living below the government estimated poverty line have increased annually. In the mid 1990s around 25% were considered poor (UNDP, 1997). By 2005, although hotly debated, the figures cited range from 34 to 55 per cent of employed workers earning below the poverty line (Narsey, 2005). Consecutive governments have attempted to address the issues of poverty, squatting, urbanization and failures in health, education and services, but the approaches have been scattered and often contradictory. For example, the Laisenia Qarase led Soqosoqo Duavata ni Lewenivanua Coalition Government in 2004 allocated F$55.59 million to address issues of poverty and in 2005 this was increased to $59.71million.

Contradictory approaches to issues of poverty and squatting have meant that successive governments have introduced policy which has alternately attempted to remove squatters, supported and condemned non-government efforts, and upgraded settlements. As the then Minister of Housing in 2006, one Government Minster commented that “the more than 10% of the country’s population who are forced to survive as squatters are like thieves because they live illegally on someone else’s land … and police should make very effort to round them up and remove them”. (Fiji Sun, 26 September, 2006). It was in such a climate that the Qoliqoli Act was drafted. This Act which looks like a positive attempt to restore land and foreshore to the rightful indigenous owners could have significant consequences for the poor throughout Fiji, but most notably in urban areas.

Fiji’s i-Qoliqoli

The Qoliqoli Act 2006 was intended to recognize the rights of indigenous customary owners to their coasts, foreshore and indigenous fisheries. The recognition of these rights means a transfer of ownership from the State (The Republic of Fiji) to the proprietary owners and for the establishment of a Qoliqoli Commission. This piece of legislation is intended to right an historical wrong whereby under the Deed of Cession of 1874 the signatories’ (chiefs) gave Fiji unconditionally to Queen Victoria. Land has since been returned, but such a process was never completed for the Qoliqoli, despite persistent demands (Bryant-Tokalau, 2006b).

Although this piece of legislation is now on hold (or even dropped altogether depending on the outcome of the coup) it may resurface in the future and as such needs sustained discussion and understanding. The Qoliqoli, loosely translated, means fisheries, but it is much more complex than that. Qoliqoli is, according to the proposed Act:
…any area of seabed or soil under the waters, sand, reef, mangrove swamp, river, stream or wetland or any other area, recognised and determined within customary fishing grounds under the Fisheries Act … and includes any customary fishing grounds reclaimed before or any qoliqoli area reclaimed after the commencement of this Act…
This means that all internal waters, archipelagic waters, territorial seas and waters within the exclusive economic zone would be subject to the new Act and as such would include fisheries resources in their broadest sense, including ‘any water-dwelling plant or animal, at whatever stage of development, and whether alive or dead, and includes all types of eggs of a water-dwelling animal…’

Management of the rights to these areas will be under a Qoliqoli Commission, appointed by the Fijian Affairs Board. The Native Land Trust Board shall administer the i-qoliqoli area on behalf and for the benefit of the i-qoliqoli owners and the Commission shall administer and manage fisheries operations within i-qoliqoli areas for and on behalf of, and for the benefit of traditional owners.
While indigenous rights to the i-qoliqoli are both fair and just, the issue is very complex and likely to lead to divisions both within indigenous Fijian mataqali and other non-indigenous groups, including hoteliers, and the large numbers of people living on land which is not traditionally theirs. In Fiji, land is registered and managed by the Native Land Trust Board. The process of land registration took place over a lengthy period under British administration and the leadership of Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna who established the NLTB both as a ‘solution’ to providing land for Indo-Fijian farmers and providing income to the indigenous owners and returning land to those whose land it was. The process was long and not without conflict and disagreement but eventually land was registered and placed under the NLTB. There continue to be rival claims over this land. Such a process has not ever taken place for the i-qoliqoli and this is where doubts now arise.

As stated above, the most publicized opposition to the Act has been from hoteliers, and it is their fears that Bainimarama has been most vocal about. Issues surrounding tourism and the Qoliqoli are largely resolved at the personal level between land and hotel owners, and although rights remain contested, the real problems will emerge in areas where populations who are not traditional owners reside upon and use the Qoliqoli.
As urban areas are largely coastal, housing the majority of squatters and other poor, and despite the removal of many from their traditional land areas, many continue to utilize the qoliqoli for subsistence and shelter. Although most live very near the foreshore and traditional fishing grounds, many more live on watercourses running inland from the sea which will also come under the Qoliqoli Act. Potentially, if the Act is passed, there will be conflict. Already people (including indigenous Fijians, Indo-Fijians and others) have been asked to move from their settlements, to pay fees, or prevented from utilizing the Qoliqoli by indigenous traditional landowners. Although these incidents are still few, the potential for displacement and uncertainty is large. Just who the real owners are will take a long time to determine and there will always be disagreement.

Urban settlements which have existed for as long as forty years in mangrove areas around Suva, and where permission to build has been granted by agreement with land owners through a sevusevu or traditional presentation of kava(1) or a tabua (whales tooth), may no longer have long-term security. Younger generations of landowners, seeing the possibility to earn large rents or to utilize land for other purposes, may terminate long-held agreements. Some of this is happening already and the impact will be greatest on poorer sections of the community (both indigenous and otherwise) who have limited options.

The Qoliqoli issue is therefore complex. Obviously rights to land should be returned to traditional owners and this has long been demanded. Practically however, with growing numbers of poor, the displacement and movement of people from traditional villages in other parts of Fiji, as well as from expiring cane leases, will combine with the need for populations to obtain a livelihood from the Qoliqoli, making the area highly contested. It is hoped that fairness and reason will prevail and that landowners will be open to use of their Qoliqoli, but under the current circumstances of political uncertainty and growing poverty this is less likely. The legislation is currently stalled under the interim regime and before it is revived there needs to be considerable discussion and debate, not only amongst landowners but also amongst those likely to be affected.

 

Footnote
1. kava, or piper methysticum, is a drink made from the pounded root of the pepper plant. It is widely drunk both on formal, ceremonial occasions, as well as socially.

References

Bryant, J. 1992 Urban poverty in Fiji: Who are the urban poor? Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 13(2): 90-102

Bryant, J.J., 1993. Urban Poverty and the Environment in the South Pacific. Department of Geography and Planning, University of New England: Armidale.

Bryant-Tokalau, J. 1995a Fiji Poverty Study, Revised scoping study for comment by Fiji Poverty Study Technical Working Group, July, UNDP: Suva

Bryant-Tokalau, J. 1995b The myth exploded: urban poverty in the Pacific. Environment and Urbanization, Vol 7(2): 109-129

Bryant-Tokalau, J. 2006a. ‘Bainimara risks alienating many countrymen’ Opinion Piece. Otago Daily Times, November 8th, Page 15.

Bryant-Tokalau, J., 2006b Fiji’s Qoliqoli Act. Opinion Piece. Otago Daily Times, December 18th, Page 19.

Fiji National Planning Office, 2004. Millennium Development Goals: Fiji National Report. Ministry of Finance and National Planning, Suva.

Fiji Sun, 27 September, 2006. “Squatting is like stealing: Caucau”.
Fiji Times Online. 2007. “Coups cost 12 years of growth”, Wednesday, July 04, 2007. www.fijitimes.com/story.asp. Accessed May 12, 2008.

Government of Fiji, 2006. Qoliqoli Act 2006 (Bill No. 12 of 2006). www.fiji.buzz.com/bills-and-acts/the-qoliqoli-bill-2006.html. Accessed 9th October 2007 2:19pm.

Harrison, D. 2003. Themes in Pacific Island Tourism. Pp.1-23 Harrison, D. (ed.) Pacific Island Tourism . Cognizant Communication Corp: New York.

Lingam, D. 2005. The squatter situation in Fiji, A Report by the Ministry of Local Government, Housing, Squatter Settlement and Environment, Suva, Fiji.

Mohanty, M. 2006. Urban squatters the informal sector and livelihood strategies of the poor in Fiji Islands. Development Bulletin, No. 70: 65-68 April, Australia National University, Canberra, Australia.
Narsey, W. 2005. Just Wages For Fiji. The Ecumenical Council for Research and Advocacy, Suva.
Narsey, W. 2006. Report on the 2002-3 Household Income and Expenditure Survey. Vanuavou Publications, Suva.
Pacific Islands Forum. 2001. Land Issues in the Pacific. Paper prepared for the Forum Economic Ministers Meeting, Rarotonga, Cook Islands, June.

Thaman, R.R. 1988. By the People and for the People: home gardening and national development in the Pacific Islands. Pp. 167-182 in J. Hirst et. al. (eds) Small-Scale Agriculture. Commonwealth Geographical Bureau & The Australian National University.

United Nations. 2004. World Urbanisation Prospects: The 2003 Revision, Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations, New York.
United Nations Development Programme, 1997. Fiji Poverty Report UNDP, Suva.