Holding Our Ground Part
14
"Programs are presented as broadcast in 1985
and 1986. Some of the issues may have changed. A new series is
looking at how these issues have changed over time. For more program
information please contact the producer: Jim Sykes, PO Box 696,
Palmer, AK 99645. The address given at the end of the program
is no longer correct."
TapeAlaska Transcripts, PO Box 696, Palmer, AK
99645
HOLDING OUR GROUND
(c) 1985 Western Media Concepts, Inc.
"OTHER SETTLEMENTS WITH INDIGENOUS PEOPLES"
(Part 14 of 16)
We have been seeing how similar the questions relating to land
rights questions, to cultural rights, are around the world, how
similar our problems are to the problems of Indigenous peoples
in the colonial areas.
ALF ISAK KESKITALO IS A SAAMI, OR LAPLANDER FROM NORTHERN NORWAY.
THE SAAMI, LIKE ESKIMOS, INDIANS, AND OTHER ABORIGINAL PEOPLES
OF THE WORLD ARE SEEKING A LAND BASE, ACCESS TO SUBSISTENCE RESOURCES,
AND SOME FORM OF SELF-GOVERNMENT. ALASKA NATIVES MADE A HISTORIC
LAND CLAIMS SETTLEMENT IN 1971, THEY ARE NOW LOOKING AT OTHER INTERNATIONAL
SETTLEMENTS FOR IDEAS TO IMPROVE THEIR OWN CLAIMS ACT. THIS IS
HOLDING OUR GROUND.
FUNDING FOR "HOLDING OUR GROUND" IS
PROVIDED BY THE ALASKA HUMANITIES FORUM, THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT
FOR THE HUMANITIES,
RURAL ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM, THE NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH,
AND ZIONTZ-PIRTLE LAW FIRM.
[Shorty O'Niel] We set up a tent embassy outside of Canberra and
played a very major role in the elections of 1972 getting a labor
government into power. Through many protests, many movements, in
1975 we were successful in setting up land councils in the Northern
Territory.
IN 1971, WHEN CONGRESS PASSED ANCSA, THE ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS
SETTLEMENT ACT, IT SPURRED OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TO SEEK SETTLEMENTS
WITH THEIR NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS. CHANGES HAVE BEEN MOST DRAMATIC
IN AUSTRALIA.
IN 1788, THE BRITISH FORMED A COLONY IN AUSTRALIA. NO ATTEMPTS
WERE MADE TO GET CONSENT FROM THE ABORIGINAL PEOPLES, NO TREATIES
WERE NEGOTIATED AND NOTHING WAS DONE TO PROTECT ABORIGINAL LANDS.
ALMOST TWO CENTURIES LATER CHANGES STARTED TO TAKE PLACE.
SHORTY O'NIEL OF THE NATIONAL LAND COUNCIL, ALICE SPRINGS, NORTHERN
TERRITORY.
In 1976, the Northern Territory Land Rights Bill was passed through federal
parliament and immediately all of the desert lands and the swamp lands
were handed back to aboriginal people. But the other lands in Northern
Territory, something like 75 per cent of the state, is very rich pastoral
industry and we've had major struggles to get any of that land back to
the traditional owners. In Northern territory if you want to claim land,
then the traditional owners must go to court and show their association
with land. And for most of the traditional owners to do this, it's a very
traumatic situation because they have to release information that is very
sacred and very secret to them.
STANLEY SCRUTTON IS CHAIRMAN OF THE CENTRAL LAND COUNCIL IN THE
NORTHERN TERRITORY WHERE SOME LANDS HAVE BEEN RETURNED TO NATIVE
CONTROL.
The tribe itself, picks out six or seven elderly people and they form a land
trust and they're the one who holds it for their people and the children
of the future. And they're not allowed to sell it. They're not the bosses
and don't tell the people what to do.
THE LAND TRUSTS ARE ALSO EXEMPT FROM TAXES. SINCE THE FIRST TERRITORIAL
LAND RIGHTS BILL PASSED THE NATIONAL PARLIAMENT IN 1976, OTHER
SETTLEMENTS HAVE BEEN NEGOTIATED WITH THE TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS.
In 1980 the Pittjatjanarra Land Rights Bill went thru the South
Australian parliament and it was quite different to the Northern
Territory bill (SHORTY O'NIEL) mainly because the traditional owners
there were still very much on their own land and they were able
to force the South Australian government into a negotiation and
not a land claims situation. And when the bill went thru one-tenth
of South Australia, which is mainly desert lands, were handed over
to those people.
ONE MAJOR STICKING POINT IS SELF-GOVERNMENT, A PROBLEM FOR INDIGENOUS
PEOPLES ALL OVER THE WORLD.
[Shorty O'Niel] When we first opened up negotiations with the
government we were told point blank that there was no way that
the Australian government was going to look at sovereignty. We
decided to continue with the talks, the federal government started
to talk about a national land rights bill, and entered into talks
with the National Federation of Land Councils and the National
Aboriginal Conference.
ELSEWHERE IN AUSTRALIA, THE GOVERNMENT OF NEW SOUTH WALES IS SETTING
ASIDE 15 PER CENT OF LAND TAXES TO RUN A LAND COUNCIL. LEFTOVER
MONIES CAN BE SAVED TO BUY BACK LAND THAT WILL BE TURNED INTO ABORIGINAL
TITLE. ABORIGINAL LAND COUNCILS HAVE NOW BEEN FORMED IN MOST REGIONS
OF AUSTRALIA AND A RECENT INQUIRY IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA MAY BE A
STARTING POINT FOR A LAND SETTLEMENT THERE.
[Alf Isak Keskitalo] We regard ourselves as one people, despite
living in several different national states. We regard our land
area as being our traditional ancestral land. We call it the Saame.
That is the land that is now in traditional use for reindeer breeding,
hunting, fishing and which we regard as the land base for our people
today.
ALF ISAK KESKITALO LIVES IN THE LARGEST SAAMI COMMUNITY CALLED
KAUTEKEINO, LOCATED IN NORWAY. THE 65 THOUSAND SAAMI RESIDE IN
WHAT IS NOW NORTHERN NORWAY AND SWEDEN, WITH A FEW THOUSAND IN
FINLAND AND THE SOVIET UNION. THEY BEGAN ORGANIZING IN 1907 TO
PROTECT THEIR LANDS. A JOINT CONFERENCE OF SAAMI FROM SCANDINAVIAN
COUNTRIES MEETS EVERY THREE YEARS. THEY ADOPTED A COMPREHENSIVE
CULTURAL POLICY IN 1971 AND IN 1980 A JOINT SAAMI POLITICAL PROGRAM.
In Finland, there was a probational election in 1972, based on
a census that the Nordic Saami council itself had arranged. Later,
in 1973, there was passed a presidential bill in Finland recognizing
and structuring the registration of the Saami population in Finland.
IN 1979 AND 1981, DEMONSTRATIONS AND HUNGER STRIKES BY SAAMI YOUTH
IN OSLO HELPED MOVE THE NORWEGIAN GOVERNMENT TO ACTION. TWO SPECIAL
COMMITTEES WERE CREATED, ONE ON SAAMI STATUS AND LAND RIGHTS, THE
OTHER ON LANGUAGE AND CULTURE.
[Alf Isak Keskitalo] The former government of Norway, expressly
promised that it would recommend a constitutional amendment to
get recognized the status of the Saami people as an ethnic Indigenous
group in Norway, and to promote the erection of a Saami census
and an elected body which could be raised on the fact of such a
registration of the Saami population.
THE SAAMI HAVE ORGANIZED LOCALLY AS WELL AS BY REGIONS AND AS
A NATION. THEIR MAJOR GOAL IS PROTECTION OF THE LAND AS A SECURE
LAND BASE FOR TRADITIONAL ECONOMIC SYSTEMS. KESKITALO EMPHASIZED
THE SAAMI'S NEED FOR SELF-DETERMINATION.
What we want, broadly, is to take the consequences of what democracy
really is in the Nordic countries. And claim not only the individual
rights, but the right of being a people with a certain self-determination.
We are Saamis, we are not Norwegians, Swedes, Finns, Russians,
and so on. We want to have the right to elect our own political
organs to represent us towards the government and to regulate matters
among ourselves.
NATIVE PEOPLES OF CANADA, LIKE PEOPLES IN AUSTRALIA, ARE NEGOTIATING
THEIR AGREEMENTS REGION BY REGION. THE INUIT AND CREE OF JAMES
BAY AND NORTHERN QUEBEC WERE THE FIRST TO SETTLE AFTER ALASKA.
THEY TOOK A HARD LOOK AT THE ALASKA SETTLEMENT AND DECIDED AGAINST
SHAREHOLDER CORPORATIONS WITH LIMITED ENROLLMENT AS A WAY TO HOLD
THE LAND.
MARK GORDON IS VICE-PRESIDENT OF MAKIVIK, ONE OF THE CORPORATIONS
FORMED FROM THE AGREEMENT IN 1975.
We set up a membership corporation where if you are an Inuit and you are enrolled,
and you become a beneficiary of the agreement, then your descendants automatically
become beneficiaries or shareholders of this corporation, as well.
The land areas, we went for ownership, but protected ownership.
And the lands are not held by the regional corporation. The lands
are held at the community level by what we call the land-holding
corporations. Each village has a land-holding corporation that
has the rights to administer the lands and there's no corporate
link, other than a moral one, between the land-holding corporation
and our regional one.
THE PROTECTION OF SUBSISTENCE RIGHTS WAS DONE THROUGH LAND PROVISIONS
SETTING UP EXCLUSIVE HUNTING AREAS AND A SPECIAL
MANAGEMENT BOARD.
[Mark Gordon] There's about 3,500 square miles in total for the
whole region that have been set aside for exclusive hunting activities.
That means only the Inuit can use these areas for hunting.
WHILE THE INUIT AND CREE HAVE MADE SIGNIFICANT STRIDES IN MANAGING
THEIR SUBSISTENCE RESOURCES, THEY HAVE JUST BEGUN TO ADDRESS THE
ISSUE OF SOVEREIGNTY.
THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT HAS ALSO STARTED TO
DEAL WITH SOVEREIGNTY. IN 1982, "EXISTING ABORIGINAL AND TREATY RIGHTS" WERE
MADE PART OF THE CANADIAN CONSTITUTION. IN 1983, INDIAN SELF-GOVERNMENT
WAS PROPOSED AS A THIRD ORDER OF GOVERNMENT WITHIN THE CANADIAN
SYSTEM. THE DETAILS ARE STILL BEING WORKED OUT.
IN CANADA'S NORTHWESTERN ARCTIC, COPE, THE COMMITTEE FOR ORIGINAL
PEOPLES ENTITLEMENT FIRST MADE A LAND CLAIMS PROPOSAL IN 1977.
AN AGREEMENT IN PRINCIPLE WAS INITIALED IN 1978. THE CANADIAN PARLIAMENT
FINALLY PASSED AN AGREEMENT IN AUGUST OF 1984. THE INUVIALUIT PEOPLE
GOT FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO ABOUT 35 THOUSAND SQUARE MILES OF LAND,
AND SPECIAL RIGHTS IN AN AREA FIVE TIMES THAT SIZE, LARGER THAN
CALIFORNIA. OIL, GAS, AND SOME MINERALS STILL BELONG TO THE CANADIAN
GOVERNMENT IN MOST OF THE LANDS.
DWIGHT NOSEWORTHY NEGOTIATED THE SETTLEMENT FOR THE GOVERNMENT
OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES.
One of the goals of the agreement is to provide the Inuvialuit with a
strong and enduring economic base.
THE COPE SETTLEMENT FEATURES A COMPLEX STRUCTURE OF CORPORATIONS
TO HANDLE LAND, DEVELOPMENT, AND INVESTMENT. THE LAND IS BASICALLY
HELD IN TRUST BY THE INUVIALUIT THEMSELVES. THEY HAVE EXCLUSIVE
HUNTING, FISHING, AND TRAPPING RIGHTS OVER THEIR OWN LANDS AND
PREFERENTIAL SUBSISTENCE RIGHTS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE REGION. CANADA
STILL CONTROLS WATER AND WATERWAYS FOR MANAGEMENT OF FISH, NAVIGATION
AND FLOOD CONTROL, AND GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS CAN ENTER INUVIALUIT
LANDS FOR THESE PURPOSES.
[Dwight Noseworthy] The land ownership is subject to certain conditions.
It can only be expropriated by order in council or by federal cabinet
approval. There are provisions for things such as public roads
right of way, acquiring sites for national parks, and the ownership
also includes ownership of sand and gravel, which is a very important
resource in the Western Arctic Region.
THE GENERAL LAWS OF THE NATION AND TERRITORY APPLY EXCEPT AS WRITTEN
IN THE SETTLEMENT. THERE IS A COMPULSORY ARBITRATION PROCESS IF
THERE ARE DISAGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE INUVIALUIT AND THE GOVERNMENT.
THE COPE SETTLEMENT LEFT THE BASIC SYSTEM OF TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT
INTACT.
AFTER 13 YEARS OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT, THE
COUNCIL OF YUKON INDIANS SIGNED AN AGREEMENT IN PRINCIPLE FOR A
LAND CLAIMS SETTLEMENT IN 1984. TEN OF THEIR TWELVE INDIAN BANDS
MUST APPROVE THE SETTLEMENT IN ORDER TO SEAL THE DEAL, BUT ONLY
EIGHT HAVE AGREED. YUKON INDIANS WOULD RECEIVE 620 MILLION DOLLARS
OVER A PERIOD OF TWENTY YEARS. THE MONEY WOULD BE HELD IN TRUST
CORPORATIONS. THE PROPOSED AGREEMENT WOULD SECURE ABOUT FIVE PER
CENT OF THE YUKON TERRITORY FOR THE INDIANS.
[Mike Smith] These lands would be held by the band corporation
and only the improvements on the land would be taxed, raw land
would not be subject to taxation. While the lands would be available
for sale to anybody, the lands cannot be subject to seizure for
nonpayment of taxes.
MIKE SMITH OF WHITEHORSE IS VICE-CHAIRMAN FOR LAND CLAIMS, COUNCIL
OF YUKON INDIANS.
Our hunting agreement provides that we'll set up a management board
and this will have total management of all game in the Yukon Territory
and the Indian people who are Yukon beneficiaries would have one-half
participation in that board.
YUKON INDIANS WOULD BE ENTITLED TO HALF OF THE ANNUAL HARVEST
QUOTA FOR MOOSE AND WOODLAND CARIBOU. EXISTING TAKES OF FISH WOULD
BE MAINTAINED.
[Mike Smith] ....for example, in the Tatshenshini, we catch something
like 90 percent of the fish that come up that river. This quota
would be protected forever for Native food fishery.
QUOTAS ALSO EXTEND TO TRAPPING.
[Mike Smith] 70 percent of the land mass in Yukon Territory would be reserved
forever for Native trapping.
YUKON INDIANS SAY THEY NEED MORE THAN JUST GUARANTEED QUOTAS.
THEY HAVE REJECTED PLANS WHERE NON-NATIVES WOULD HAVE CONTROL OVER
THEIR LANDS. OWNERSHIP DOES NOT ALWAYS MEAN CONTROL PARTICULARLY
OVER SUBSISTENCE RESOURCES. NOW THAT NATIVE ABORIGINAL RIGHTS HAVE
NOW BEEN INCLUDED IN THE NEW CANADIAN CONSTITUTION, PEOPLE ARE
QUESTIONING THE NEED TO HAVE THEIR ABORIGINAL RIGHTS EXTINGUISHED,
ALONG WITH THE VALIDITY OF THE ONE-GOVERNMENT APPROACH CONTAINED
IN THEIR PROPOSAL. THE COUNCIL OF YUKON INDIANS WILL MAKE CHANGES,
AND THEN RETURN TO THE NEGOTIATING TABLE.
NUNAVUT IS A PROPOSAL FOR A NEW TERRITORY IN CANADA'S EASTERN ARCTIC. IT WOULD
FEATURE PARLIAMENTARY STYLE GOVERNMENT AND THE ESKIMO INUKTITUT LANGUAGE
AS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE.
NUNAVUT NEGOTIATOR RANDY AMES.
They wanted to put people on an equal footing with the outside
world. And it wanted, I think, to give people freedom of choice
in the future. We got the federal government to agree that the
primary purpose is economic self-sufficiency. In order to meet
that goal, Inuit have to be able to own lands for reasons of subsurface
or mineral value, commercial or industrial value, of conservation
value, of areas that were important to people for spiritual and
cultural reasons.
THE LAND SELECTION PROCESS IS STILL IN NEGOTIATION, BUT THEY HAVE
ESTABLISHED A GAME MANAGEMENT BOARD WHICH IS NOT ADVISORY, IT HAS
AUTHORITY. IT IS MADE UP OF FOUR INUIT AND FOUR GOVERNMENT PEOPLE,
FEDERAL AND TERRITORIAL. IT BROUGHT GAME MANAGERS TOGETHER IN A
COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT.
We managed to establish that people had the right to hunt, trap
and fish over the whole Nunavut territory. We proposed that there
be a harvest study that would identify basic level of need, basically
what people were taking. And this was going to be a benchmark by
which we would measure allocation and the future management decisions.
This benchmark wasn't frozen in time. People could take more than
that. They shouldn't drop below that unless conservation needs
required it. If there's not enough wildlife to go around to meet
all needs, peoples' food needs are met first.
INUIT HAVE THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO HUNT SPECIES SUCH AS POLAR BEAR,
MUSK OX, WALRUS, AND WHALES BASED ON NEED.
[Randy Ames] We got people the rights of first refusal when it
came to any sport or commercial operation dealing with wildlife.
We also argued successfully that the definition of wildlife should
include flora, the plant life.
DEVELOPMENT ON NUNAVUT LANDS IS SUBJECT TO AN APPLICATION PROCESS
WHERE IT GOES TO AN IMPACT STUDY, IF THE DEVELOPMENT IS SEEN AS
APPROPRIATE. NUNAVUT LEADERS PLAN TO NEGOTIATE CLAIMS TO OFFSHORE
AREAS, INTERESTS IN SEABED RESOURCES AND ICE AREAS.
NUNAVUT IS PROPOSING A PUBLIC FORM OF GOVERNMENT WHICH WILL HAVE A VERY HIGH
NATIVE MAJORITY OF 85-90 PER CENT IN THE EARLY YEARS. IF THEY GET A TERRITORIAL
GOVERNMENT, IT CAN BE CREATED BY AN ACT OF THE FEDERAL PARLIAMENT WITHOUT CONCURRENCE
OR INTERFERENCE FROM THE OTHER PROVINCES.
DENNIS PATTERSON.
We are looking for some model of allowing Elders to advise the
government of Nunavut and we're also being pressed very strongly
by the communities to give even stronger emphasis to the incorporation
of customary law and traditional methods of dispute resolution
to build those into the constitution of Nunavut. We have determined
that it is necessary to entrench a bill of rights in order to protect
the rights of minorities. We wish to ensure that individuals of
all cultures and races are free to fulfill themselves in Nunavut.
It may be that this bill of rights might eventually need to be
used to protect the interests of a Native minority if that should
ever occur in Nunavut.
NUNAVUT SEEMS CLOSER TO REALITY AFTER TEN YEARS OF NEGOTIATIONS
WITH THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT, BUT NO ONE IS PREDICTING WHEN AN
AGREEMENT WILL BE REACHED.
THE DENEH AND METIS PEOPLES ARE JOINTLY TRYING TO SORT OUT BOUNDARIES
WITH THE EASTERN INUIT, THE WESTERN INUIT, AND THE YUKON INDIANS.
THE DENEH AND METIS HAVEN'T ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO AGREE AMONG THEMSELVES.
STEVE KAKFWI IS PRESIDENT OF THE DENEH NATION.
The general objective of the Aboriginal people together, in spite of their
differences is they want the right of Aboriginal people to self-government
to be recognized and entrenched in the constitution.
LIKE THE NUNAVUT PROPOSAL, A LONG RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT IS DESIRABLE.
STEVE KAKFWI OUTLINES A GOVERNMENT UNDER CONSIDERATION.
We would call a senate made up of the Aboriginal people within
Denendeh. There would be an elected government, operating much
the same as any other place, that would operate on consensus, and
that it would be seen in terms of an assembly of people, an assembly
of community representatives that would meet and make decisions
as a government for people.
STEVE KAKFWI SAYS PROVISIONS MUST BE MADE IN CASE THE DENE AND
METIS BECOME A MINORITY IN THEIR OWN HOMELAND. THEY ARE WORKING
ON WHAT TYPE OF GOVERNMENT THEY WANT, WHAT JURISDICTION IT WILL
HAVE, AND HOW IT WILL MAKE DECISIONS. NEGOTIATIONS HAVEN'T BEEN
EASY.
What the Federal government and the provincial
governments insist on saying "We don't know what Aboriginal rights is," and
so what we do is we place an empty box in the middle of the table
and as we identify rights, we then throw those in the box, right
to go hunting, right to trap, you have a right to a certain amount
of land, but let's extinguish all the other rights first. The view
of most of the Aboriginal people, in the country, is that they've
got it all wrong, that in fact, all Aboriginal people still have
a degree of sovereignty, that they have not given those up. And
therefore when they come to the table, what they have is a box
full of rights. It's not totally full because if it was we would
be independent nations. So there is a little bit of your rights
removed when you go to the table, but it is a full box and that
is how you negotiate with the federal government. That is generally
why it is, for us, difficult to buy the extinguishment policy because
the empty box approach is taken. The bottom line of it all is that
they have to give up their Aboriginal rights, whatever they are.
And that is what we have the disagreement with, that we don't think
it is actually possible for that to happen.
INTERNATIONAL LAW SUPPORTS THE EFFORTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES TO
SEEK A LAND BASE AND SELF-GOVERNMENT. POPE JOHN PAUL THE SECOND
PROCLAIMED IT IN YELLOWKNIFE, CANADA ON SEPTEMBER 18, 1984.
Today, I want to proclaim that freedom, which is required for
a just and equitable measure of self-determination, in your own
lives as Native people. In union with the whole church, I proclaim
all your rights and their corresponding duties. Peoples have a
right, in public life, to participate in decisions affecting their
lives. Participation constitutes a right which is to be applied
both in the economic and in the social and political fields. This
is true for everyone. It has particular application for you as
Native peoples, in your strivings to take your rightful place among
the peoples of the earth, with a just and equitable degree of self-governing.
For you a land base, with adequate resources, is also necessary
for developing a viable economy for present and future generations.
THE MOVEMENT OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES SEEKING SELF-GOVERNMENT AND
A LAND BASE IS WORLDWIDE.
DALEE SAMBO RUNS THE ANCHORAGE OFFICE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ESKIMO ORGANIZATION,
INUIT CIRCUMPOLAR CONFERENCE.
Whatever terms we use and whatever approaches we use within our own respective
countries, we're all working towards the same end; a security of a land
base, security of the resources, self-government, all of those things.
And I think that the bottom line is that we're all moving and making basic
efforts to be kept from being wiped off the face of the earth.
JOIN US FOR THE CONCLUDING PROGRAM IN THIS SERIES WHEN ALASKA
NATIVES LOOK AT THE DREAMS, REALITIES, AND CHOICES FOR THE FUTURE.
FOR HOLDING OUR GROUND THIS IS ADELINE RABOFF.
THIS PROGRAM IS PRODUCED AND WRITTEN BY JIM
SYKES AND SUE BURRUS, EDITED BY SUE BURRUS, AND RESEARCHED BY
FRANKIE BURRUS. SPECIAL
THANKS TO THE COMMUNITY OF GAMBELL FOR SINGING, DANCING, AND DRUMMING.
THANKS ALSO TO U-L-O RECORDS OF GREENLAND FOR MUSIC FROM THE 1980
CIRCUMPOLAR CONFERENCE, AND TO THE MUSIC GROUP "KUCKLES" FOR
THE SONG "BRAND NEW DAY"--RECORDED BY IMPARJA IN AUSTRALIA'S
NORTHERN TERRITORIES. "HOLDING OUR GROUND" IS A PRODUCTION
OF WESTERN MEDIA CONCEPTS WHICH IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTENT.
FUNDING FOR "HOLDING OUR GROUND" IS
PROVIDED BY THE ALASKA HUMANITIES FORUM, THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT
FOR THE HUMANITIES,
RURAL ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM, THE NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH,
AND ZIONTZ-PIRTLE LAW FIRM.
[Western Media Concepts no longer exists. Please Contact
TapeAlaska, PO Box 696, Palmer, AK 99645 for information about
Holding Our Ground.]
PROGRAM SUMMARIES:
1. The People, the Land, and the
Law
Comprehensive 30-minute survey of the burning issues facing Alaska's Native
community in the second half of this decade. This tour over the vast landscape
of Alaska Native affairs serves as an overview of the topics to be treated
in depth during the other 14 segments.
2. The Land and Sea
The ages-old Native feeling about the land comes across the airwaves like a
fresh breeze. Two starkly different realities are presented—the Native
concept of oneness with the land and the Western notion of land ownership
and development. How do these contrasting philosophies fit the Native in
rural Alaska?
3. Subsistence—A
Way of Life
Far from the political and legal controversies surrounding subsistence, Natives
carry on their traditional subsistence lifestyles. Hear their very personal
descriptions of subsistence, what it is, and what it means to them. An important
aspect of this documentary will be to delve into the mix of subsistence and
cash economies.
4. Sovereignty—What
it Means to People
Self-determination is the heart of a rising grassroots political movement.
The listener will learn that this quest by Native people to control their own
futures reaches far into the past. And the listener will discover that American
political theory is not as much at odds with the sovereignty movement as one
might think.
5. Traditional Councils and Corporate
Boardrooms
Who calls the shots in the Native community: A look at power, history, and
decision making. The audience will consider change from the perspectives of
traditional village rule to government and corporate bureaucracies.
6. The Land and the Corporations
Traditional Native lands became corporate assets because the Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act created profit-making Native corporations to hold the
land. This segment will look at one of the toughest questions facing the
Native community today: "Do these Native corporations have an obligation
to develop their lands to earn a profit for their shareholders, or do they
have an obligation to preserve those lands for subsistence and for generations
to come?"
7. Risking and Saving the Land
Land owned by Native corporations can be lost through sales, corporate takeover,
bankruptcy, or taxation. This has generated so much concern among Natives
trying to save their land that there are now a number of options to prevent
loss of these lands. This program is an exploration of the major risks and
what alternatives are available.
8 Subsistence and the Law
Carrying on the subsistence lifestyle without interference from the law is
a thing of the past. Traditional ways of hunting fishing, and gathering are
now subject to political and legal changes and challenges in what may well
be Alaska's most bitter controversy. Hear discussion of the new role of Alaska
Natives as treaty-makers and game managers.
9. Sovereignty - How it Works
in Real Life
Local government control is a reality in some areas of Native Alaska. In other
areas Natives are working to implement their own unique forms of self- government.
Some have found self-determination in traditional government. Take a close
look at the communities where sovereignty is becoming a reality.
10. The Newborns—Left
Out of ANCSA
When the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. passed on December 18, 1971,
all those yet to be born were left out. Now thousands of teenagers and toddlers
alike are on the outside of ANCSA looking in. The Native community is divided
into ANCSA shareholders and newborns, and the problems could get worse. Natives
young and old speak out in eloquent terms.
11. From Hunter, Fisher, Gatherer
to Corporate Director
The corporation idea—how and why it was chosen as a vehicle
for land claims. Was this a good way to give Alaska Natives
a piece of the American
dream, or was it a way of assimilating them? This program examines how Natives
have made the transition from traditional life to corporate director or shareholder
12. Changing
the Claims Act—The
Key Players
Nearly every Native organization in the state is jumping on
the "Let's
do something about ANCSA" idea. What began as grassroots dissatisfaction
with the act has now shifted into a well-organized movement. There is the Inuit
Circumpolar Conference, the United Tribes of Alaska, the Alaska Federation
of Natives, and Association of Village Council Presidents, and others.
13. Recommendations of the Alaska
Native Review Commission
An historic journey by Canadian Judge Thomas R. Berger has culminated in some
provocative recommendations about the options open to Alaska's Natives. Listeners
will hear a cross-section of views about what Berger reported and how this
may affect changes in the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.
14. Other Settlements with Indigenous
Peoples Settlement Act
The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act inspired other indigenous peoples in
the world to seek land claims in the settlements with their countries. This
program will look at those efforts in Canada, Greenland, Australia, Norway,
and elsewhere. Now some of the land claims proposals of others are being studied
by Alaskans seeking to improve ANCSA.
15. The Dream versus the Reality
The final segment considers what people wanted all along in land claims and
what they got. Should all the hard work of the past be scrapped? How has
the dream changed? Voices of many people speak of the future, what they want
and how they will go about getting it for themselves and their Children.
16. Special Program--Berger's
Recommendations
|