"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. "SUBSISTENCE AND THE LAW"
(Part 8 of 16)
[Jasper Joseph] We do not put the limit on
how many cattle or how many cows or how much food should outsiders
have. We do not
make any regulations on that. When we try to hunt and provide ourselves
and feed our family, our children, somebody comes around and tells
us, "If you catch birds, if you catch moose, or if you gather
food, we will put you in jail." We have been promised punishment
for trying to survive.
[NARRATOR] THE SUBSISTENCE WAY OF LIFE CONTINUES TO BE VITAL TO
VILLAGES ALL OVER ALASKA. MONUMENTAL CHANGES IN LAW CAME WITH ALASKA
STATEHOOD. AND THEN IN 1971, CONGRESS PASSED ANCSA, THE ALASKA
NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT, WITH MORE REGULATIONS. NOW ALASKA'S
NATIVE PEOPLES ARE TRYING TO DEVELOP LAWS THAT MEET THEIR NEEDS.
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.
[Peter Goll, Juneau] The people would go out
to a certain area, they would harvest the abalone. In would come
the divers from the
commercial vessels and they would move into this area and clean
it out. The people went to the Department of Fish and Game and
they said "We are going to our traditional area to get abalone
and we are being competed with unfairly by people with more elaborate
equipment", and they were told to get some diving equipment
themselves. Well, the solution isn't to get some diving equipment
themselves, the solution is to develop a legal mechanism to protect
the local Indigenous use from outside intervention, if you will,
or outside exploitation. And the issue that's raised is, whose
resource is it? Is it the public's resource? Is it the States resource?
Is it the Nation's resource?"
NATIVE PEOPLES NEVER HAD TO CONSIDER SUCH QUESTIONS UNTIL RUSSIA
SOLD ALASKA TO THE UNITED STATES. THERE IS PLENTY OF EVIDENCE SUGGESTING
THE RUSSIANS THOUGHT THEY WERE SELLING ONLY TRADING RIGHTS AND
A FEW FORTS. THE AMERICANS THOUGHT THEY BOUGHT ALL OF ALASKA AND
ITS RESOURCES.
TOM LONNER.
With the coming of American dominion over the land, and without
the consent or knowledge of Alaska Native people, their wealth
had been usurped by the American government. Lands, waters, fish,
wildlife, minerals, and forests all passed into government hands
and were converted into common property resources, that is, wealth
held by the government on behalf of all Americans. Over the last
two centuries, millions of immigrants from Europe and elsewhere
have come to America and were awarded citizenship. To my knowledge,
none have been required to surrender at their point of entry
into the country, all of their wealth to the government for common
use in order to obtain citizenship. That seems to me to be the
unwritten contract: an exchange of great wealth for simple citizenship.
AS MORE IMMIGRANTS CAME TO ALASKA, LANDS WERE USED LESS AND LESS
FREELY BY THE NATIVE PEOPLES. THE MOST DRAMATIC CHANGES CAME WITH
STATEHOOD IN 1959. A YEAR LATER, THE STATE TOOK CONTROL OF FISH
AND GAME MANAGEMENT FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. IN 1971, CONGRESS
PASSED ANCSA, THE ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT. THAT ACT
EXTINGUISHED ABORIGINAL LAND TITLE ALONG WITH ABORIGINAL HUNTING
AND FISHING RIGHTS. ALASKA NATIVES WERE LEFT WITH ABOUT ONE-TENTH
OF THE LAND THEY HAD TRADITIONALLY USED AND OCCUPIED. BUT THE LAND
WAS NOT GIVEN TO INDIVIDUALS OR TRIBAL GROUPS, IT IS HELD INSTEAD
BY PROFIT-MAKING NATIVE CORPORATIONS, CREATED BY THE CLAIMS ACT.
TWO MAJOR FORCES ACCELERATED THE LAND CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT. ALASKA
WANTED TO SELECT STATEHOOD LANDS AND OIL COMPANIES WANTED NORTH
SLOPE OIL. THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF PRESSURE TO SETTLE.
The purchasing party, the United States was interested primarily
in extracting resources from the land, not settling on the land.
(TOM LONNER) The compensated party, Alaska Natives, was relinquishing
rights to the rewards of that extraction, but did not intend to
relinquish rights to chase and harvest the wild resources which
traversed or inhabited all the lands.
NATIVE CORPORATION LANDS ARE NOW TREATED AS PRIVATE PROPERTY IN
THE EYES OF THE LAW. THE CORPORATION DECIDES WHAT HAPPENS ON NATIVE
LANDS.
BETTY THOMAS-DENNY OF TANACROSS
...Because of the land claim I think it restricted the land use to many of
our people. I know that currently people can't trap, hunt, fish, or even
pick berries anywhere because they have this fear of trespassing.
We cannot live without our land, without trapping, without fishing,
without hunting. (CATHERINE ATTLA OF HUSLIA) If they ever tell
us where not to go or where not to trap that's when it's it's going
to get tough, because we've been living like our ancestors all
these years and if we cannot do that no more it's going to be a
lot of unhappy people, unhealthy mostly.
MARIE ADAMS OF BARROW
... There are traditional subsistence laws within the community and they have
their own laws, basically their own structure, and how they hunt, what is
acceptable, what is not. And what's been happening the last several years
is with the new federal government, the state government coming in and basically
imposing laws without clearly understanding or going out to see what is out
there has created a lot of confusion.
SUBSISTENCE IS MORE THAN HUNTING, FISHING, AND GATHERING. IT IS
THE WORK OF MANY PEOPLE IN THE VILLAGES, AND IT CARRIES WITH IT
CULTURAL AND SPRITUAL TRADITIONS.
CHIEF JONATHON SOLOMON OF FORT YUKON:
We are not a visitor upon these lands, we are in the same ecosystem as the
animal on these lands. The caribou is part of the Gwich'in people religion,
but we also believe that the population of the Gwich'in people in the Yukon
Flat goes up and down with the numbers of these animals. This is why it is
very important to us when we talk about the Porcupine Caribou herd that it
be protected for our generations to come, because this is our belief.
WHEN THE CLAIMS ACT EXTINGUISHED SUBSISTENCE HUNTING AND FISHING
RIGHTS, THE STATE WAS LEFT TO HANDLE IT. ALASKA NATIVES WORKED
VERY HARD TO GET SUBSISTENCE ACTIVITIES RECOGNIZED BY STATE AND
FEDERAL LAW.
CALEB PUNGOWIYI OF NOME.
This extinguishment should not have been accepted. It is surprising
though, that after the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act there
were several acts that were passed by the Congress that either
provided for protection or provided for provisions of subsistence
hunting and fishing for Alaska Natives.
PUNGOWIYI REFERS TO ANILCA, THE ALASKA NATIONAL INTEREST LANDS
CONSERVATION ACT, PASSED BY CONGRESS IN 1980. IT DEFINES SUBSISTENCE
USERS AS RURAL RESIDENTS AND DEMANDS THEY GET PRIORITY. THE STATE
OF ALASKA KNEW ANILCA WAS COMING, AND IN 1978, THE STATE LEGISLATURE
PASSED A SUBSISTENCE PRIORITY ACT WHICH GAVE SUBSISTENCE USERS
PREFERENCE IN TIMES OF SCARCITY.
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL LARRI SPENGLER.
Before 1978, as long as you caught it and ate it, basically, it
was subsistence, it was personal use. But now subsistence use
was defined as customary and traditional use.
THE STATE HAS TROUBLE DEFINING CUSTOMARY AND TRADTIONAL USE, THE
LANGUAGE USED IN THE ANILCA LAW.
TOM LONNER WAS THE FIRST TO HEAD THE ALASKA FISH AND GAME SUBSISTENCE
DIVISION, WHEN IT WAS CREATED IN 1979.
While it talks about customary and traditional uses, it very rapidly reduces
those to economic uses only, and then proceeds to limit those.
LONNER'S SUBSISTENCE DIVISION CREATED REGULATIONS TO DEFINE SUBSISTENCE
CRITERIA, BASICALLY A LONG TERM PATTERN OF CONSISTENT RESOURCE
USE NEAR THE USERS HOME, TRADITIONAL METHODS OF HANDLING AND PRESERVING,
ALONG WITH SHARING THE RESOURCE AND THE TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE HANDED
DOWN THROUGH GENERATIONS.
We were trying to get back into patterns of tradition and custom
and so on and get off of this purely economic mode that the State
had adopted in its very protective subsistence law. Laws that were
used to control subsistence prior to the State's subsistence law
were done essentially without any specific recognition for subsistence
and what would be meant by customary and traditional use, or just
the basic necessities of life in rural Alaska.
SOME URBAN HUNTERS DISAGREED WITH THE STATE REGULATIONS. IN 1982,
AN INIATIATIVE TO REPEAL THE STATE SUBSISTENCE LAW WAS BROUGHT
BEFORE ALASKA VOTERS AND SOUNDLY REJECTED. STATE REGULATIONS REMAINED
INTACT. SOME URBAN SUBSISTENCE USERS HAD ALREADY BEEN ACCOMMODATED
UNDER THE EXISTING RULES, BUT IN 1985, THE STATE'S HIGHEST COURT
BROADENED THE SUBSISTENCE USE CATEGORY TO MORE URBAN RESIDENTS.
THAT DECISION DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE FEDERAL ANILCA LAW, WHICH
CLEARLY STATES SUBSISTENCE IS DONE BY RURAL RESIDENTS.
STATE SENATOR MITCH ABOOD MADE SURE NO ACTION WAS TAKEN IN 1985
ON NINE SUBSISTENCE BILLS INTENDED TO CORRECT THE LAW.
Yes, I guess you could call it my fault. I said those bills are going to
stay right in this committee until someone will come to their senses and
come together from all walks of this thing, this problem, and sit down and
discuss it and each one give a little bit.
IN THE ABSENCE OF A NEW LAW EMERGENCY REGULATIONS WERE PUT IN
PLACE BY THE FISH AND GAME BOARDS, REGULATIONS THAT EMPHASIZE HISTORICAL
USE AND LOCAL RESIDENCE. SOME URBAN HUNTERS FELT SLIGHTED BY THOSE
EMERGENCY REGULATIONS, AND RURAL SUBSISTENCE USERS FEARED INCREASED
COMPETITION. ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, WILLIAM HORN,
NOTIFIED THE GOVEROR THAT ALASKA'S OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL
LAW REGULATING SUBSISTENCE BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO URBAN
HUNTERS AND FISHERS. UNLESS THE STATE COMES BACK INTO COMPLIANCE
BY JUNE 1, 1986, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL TAKE OVER FISH AND
GAME MANAGEMENT. SENATOR ABOOD SAYS HE WILL INTRODUCE A SUBSISTENCE
BILL EARLY IN 1986 TO COMPLY WITH THE FEDERAL LAW.
CUSTOMARY AND TRADITIONAL USE MUST BE DEFINED BY THE STATE, ALONG WITH A SYSTEM
THAT RECOGNIZES DIFFERENT SITUATIONS. SUBSISTENCE DIVISION CHIEF BEHNKE SAYS
THAT SUBSISTENCE USERS CAN BE PROTECTED ON A PRIORITY BASIS AND THERE WILL
BE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITY FOR OTHER HUNTERS AND FISHERS AS WELL. SOME URBAN
HUNTERS DISAGREE AND SAY THEY WILL TAKE THEIR CASE OF EQUAL ACCESS TO STATE
AND FEDERAL COURTS. IN SEVERAL OTHER STATES WHERE INDIANS LOST SUBSISTENCE
RIGHTS, THEY HAVE BEEN REINSTATED.
STATE, FEDERAL, AND CORPORATION RULES DON'T ALWAYS MAKE SENSE
TO PEOPLE LIVING IN THE VILLAGES. WHILE MOST NON-NATIVE HUNTERS
ARE ACCUSTOMED TO GETTING A PERMIT FOR ONE ANIMAL, TRADITIONAL
CUSTOMS ARE QUITE DIFFERENT.
DARRYL TRIGG OF NOME.
It has always been our custom to allow the good hunters to catch
more than the current limits and share with people who are berry
pickers or green pickers or fishermen, who in turn would share
their crop and catch with the hunters. The lands that were to
be ours are now controlled by a Board of Directors with restrictions
on the use of that land by about every Federal and State agency
that exists. Now, they don't seem to recall that the Eskimo has
lived and survived up here for thousands of years without scarring
the land. Before they came with their laws and regulations, there
was always a good balance of game to feed our people. It is proven
that the Eskimo has never hunted themselves out of game, and
probably never will.
Subsistence is a living, breathing, dynamic human activity. (TOM
LONNER) Regulatory regimes tend to place the steel web of exactness
on the activity, in the form of exact definitions, exact locations,
exact numbers. This exactness cannot respond to the ever-changing
human needs or ever-changing environmental conditions which comprise
subsistence.
THE ARBITRARY SETTING OF SEASONS BY THE STATE IS SOMETIMES SEEN
AS INAPPROPRIATE. THE TRADITIONAL REASON FOR HUNTING AT A CERTAIN
TIME IS DIFFERENT THAN THE STATE OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS REASON
FOR A SEASON.
JIMMY WALKER OF HOLY CROSS.
The fish and moose we eat, that's pretty much our diet, like up north they
got to have their whale. Same thing you know, that's our regular diet. If
we're restricted to hunting seasons, you know, and that's making it hard
on the village. We'd like to see more local control. For the Elders and middle
aged, it's really a problem. Some went out and got arrested when they had
nothing, nothing to eat. They were just scrounging for the next meal. What
are you going to do? You going to leave your family hungry when there's a
big healthy moose running by and somebody else tell you what you can eat,
can't eat, when to eat that meat?
Our culture is not based on beef. It's not based on corn. (SHELDON
KATCHATAG OF UNALAKLEET) It's based on those resources which have
gotten us from primitive times to where we are today. And even
now, in this very modern age, we still derive approximately 70%
of the food we need from the land and not from the supermarket.
THE CASH ECONOMY IS NOW PART OF REMOTE ALASKA, BUT TO A LIMITED
DEGREE. ELDERS TEND TO DEPEND MORE ON SUBSISTENCE THAN YOUNGER
PEOPLE WHO ARE MORE ACQUAINTED WITH WESTERN FOODS. FOOD IS ONLY
ONE PART OF SUBSISTENCE LIVING AFFECTED BY RELATIVELY NEW REGULATIONS.
ELLIE STICKMAN OF NULATO.
Before the land claims came, my people before me used to go out
into the woods and get whatever they want from the land for free.
It's there to use, the wood, the fish in the river, the moose,
the berries, tea, everything. It was there to be used. And now
the way it is, we have to find out whose land it is first before
we can do anything, before we can go out and get logs, before
we can even go out and get wood to burn for our winter heat.
JUDGE THOMAS BERGER TRAVELLED TO VILLAGES IN ALL REGIONS OF ALASKA
TO ASK PEOPLE ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF THE ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT
ACT. BERGER RECOMMENDED THAT TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS SHOULD HAVE EXCLUSIVE
JURISDICTION OVER FISH AND WILDLIFE TAKEN ON NATIVE LANDS, AND
SHARE MANAGEMENT WITH THE FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS ON OTHER
LANDS.
In Alaska, Native societies large and small were erected on a subsistence base.
Today subsistence gives continuity to village life, and given the limited opportunities
for wage or salaried employment in rural Alaska, it is seen to be the key to
the survival of village life in village society. Although ANCSA extinguished
aboriginal hunting and fishing rights, Alaska Natives still regard subsistence
as their birthright. Even those not engaged in subsistence regard it as essential
to their future well-being.
We're really concerned about our lifestyle in the villages, due
to no development and jobs for our young people, (JIMMY WALKER)
in this immediate area, it looks pretty glum. So it's, getting
back to the issue of subsistence, we've got to have that, otherwise
we're not going to survive.
THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, NATIONS HAVE TAKEN STRONG MEASURES TO PROTECT
THE SUBSISTENCE LIFESTYLES OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES. CANADA HAS GIVEN
EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS TO FUR-BEARING ANIMALS AND SHARED JURISDICTION
OF MOOSE AND CARIBOU TO THE NATIVES OF QUEBEC AND THE WESTERN ARCTIC.
IN ALASKA, NATIVES HAVE TAKEN THE LEAD TO PROTECT SEVERAL SPECIES
THAT ARE USED FOR SUBSISTENCE. IN 1977, THE INTERNATIONAL WHALING
COMMISSION SUPPORTED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, BANNED BOWHEAD
WHALING.
MARIE ADAMS.
When they were asked to stop whaling, it was incomprehensible,
and people were deeply hurt.
BURTON REXFORD IS A BARROW WHALING CAPTAIN
...In spite of the Native people's knowledge of the great bowhead whale, the
Eskimos have been repeatedly put on a chopping block by the world scientists
and regulatory government agencies.
ESKIMO WHALING CAPTAINS FORMED ALASKA ESKIMO WHALING COMMISSION
AND CONVINCED THE U.S. GOVERNMENT THEY SHOULD HAVE SOME WHALES.
A STRINGENT QUOTA SYSTEM WAS DEVISED BY THE INTERNATIONAL WHALING
COMMISSION. IN 1981, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SIGNED OVER MANAGEMENT
AUTHORITY TO THE ALASKA ESKIMO WHALING COMMISSION. THE NORTH SLOPE
BOROUGH SET UP A SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND HELPED COORDINATE
RESEARCH ON THE BOWHEAD WHALE. IN 1985, THE INTERNATIONAL WHALING
COMMISSION RECOGNIZED THE WHALING CAPTAINS REQUEST FOR AN ENLARGED
BOWHEAD QUOTA.
IN 1975, OIL DEVELOPMENT ON ALASKA'S NORTH SLOPE BROUGHT NATIVE
POEPLES TOGETHER ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ALASKA-CANADA BORDER. THE
ALASKANS NEGOTIATED A POSITION TO SECURE THE ARCTIC WILDLIFE RANGE,
AND THEN GOT TOGETHER AGAIN WITH CANADIANS FROM EIGHT VILLAGES
IN 1982.
JONATHON SOLOMON.
Indigenous people met in Arctic Village and we formed what is known
today as the International Porcupine Caribou Commission. And
we filed it with the United Nations. We did not file it with
the United States, we filed it with the United Nations under
their agreement in Stockholm.
VICTOR MITANDER IS A LAND CLAIMS NEGOTIATOR FOR THE COUNCIL OF
YUKON INDIANS.
We want to ensure that there is cooperation in terms of the management of the
herd and its habitat, and to first of all insure that there is conservation
of the herd itself with the view of providing ongoing subsistence needs of
the Native users. Secondly is to provide for the Native users to participate
in the Porcupine Caribou management. Thirdly is to recognize and protect certain
harvesting rights of the Porcupine Caribou for the Native users, while at the
same time acknowledging that there are other users, non-Native users of the
herd itself. Also to provide communication amongst governments and government
to Native users and amongst Native user communities.
THE STATE OF ALASKA HAS WORKED DIRECTELY WITH THE INTERNATIONAL
PORCUPINE CARIBOU COMMISSION AND IT LED TO A MEETING WITH THE ALASKA
GOVERNOR IN OCTOBER OF 1983.
JONATHON SOLOMON.
The governor of the state of Alaska called us into his office and said "You
guys been working on this caribou treaty for many years" he says, "It's
about time we move on with it" and he formed a task force. And today with
the Fish and Game of State of Alaska we have worked out the wording.
THE REMAINING STEPS WILL BE WORKED OUT WITH THE U.S. FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE, AND THEN THE U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT WILL NEGOTIATE
THE TREATY WITH THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT.
IN 1984, NATIVES LIVING IN THE YUKON-KUSKOKWIM DELTA DEVELOPED
INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS TO PROTECT GEESE POPULATIONS.
HAROLD SPARCK HEADS NUNAM KITLUTSISTI, A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
WHICH REPRESENTS NATURAL RESOURCE ISSUES FOR 56 VILLAGES IN SOUTHWEST
ALASKA.
The Federal Fish and Wildlife Service showed up and said,"the sky is falling,
the sky is falling" and the Native people of the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta
are responsible for it, solely responsible for the loss of all these geese.
The first thing that came out of several of the Elders mouths was "Wait
a minute, they're talking about these animals that we eat. Now, when we were
young, when these animals were strong in numbers, the little birds that fly
around like clouds were very strong too. Nobody eats them, how come they are
very few in number too? They go to the very same places that these big birds
go. And maybe what these guys are saying is that they're looking for somebody
to blame all this problem on. So our concern is number one, we gotta make sure
we're not stuck with the onus of being responsible for this whole thing, but
number two, we have to watch out for our children.
THE VILLAGERS DISCOVERED THERE WERE PROBLEMS IN DIFFERENT PARTS
OF THE FLYWAY.
[Harold Sparck] We linked take in the Yukon Delta to conversion
of wetlands in the Central Valley of California to the take by
gringos out of Los Angeles going down into Mexico and hunting without
any enforcement whatsoever.
HELICOPTER INTERFERENCE WAS STOPPED AT ONE FEEDING GROUND IN ALASKA,
CALIFORNIA BOUGHT BACK WETLANDS IN CALIFORNIA'S CENTRAL VALLEY,
AND THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT AGREED THEY WOULD PAY ATTENTION TO HABITATS
AND RECORD THE TAKE OF WATERFOWL THERE.
[Harold Sparck] Our villages voluntarily agreed to lay down their
guns and to stop taking eggs, in exchange for California reducing
their take by 50 per cent. So we went around the federal government
in order to get this taker-to-taker agreement, and then California
supported our habitat concerns. Lo and behold, our villages complied,
California's complied and again the guiding principle was birds
at the turn of the century, that's what they wanted, our villages
wanted.
PEOPLE ARE WATCHING CLOSELY TO SEE IF THIS TAKER-TO-TAKER AGREEMENT
WILL ALLOW GEESE POPULATIONS TO INCREASE FOR PEOPLE WHO DEPEND
ON THEM. SUBSISTENCE USERS SAY THAT STATE AND FEDERAL AUTHORITIES
SHOULD RELY MORE ON THEIR KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE IN GAME MANAGEMENT.
WOODROW MORRISON JR. OF HYDABURG.
The people's lives are governed by these natural cycles, that seasons do change,
sometimes you have an early winter here in Anchorage, sometimes you don't.
Well, the animals' lives are geared to those changes, rather than to dates
on the calendar. And if people are going to be able to live in a time-honored
way, and be able to pay respect to their relatives in a proper way, then
they should be able to follow those cycles.
WHILE THE STATE SUBSISTENCE LAW IS CURRENTLY IN TURMOIL, THERE
ARE SUCCESS STORIES TO BE FOUND WHERE SUBSISTENCE USERS HAVE MADE
THEIR CASE TO THE STATE GAME BOARD.
FRED BISMARCK IS CHAIRMAN OF THE FISH AND GAME BOARD FROM TYONEK.
This year, I spent 21 days at the hearings and we finally got our
winter moose hunt, but the winter moose hunt depends on the snow.
We have a different herd of moose that live up on the hills.
They don't come off the hills until there is heavy snow. The
board made it flexible for us. If the heavy snow came in November,
they could of had their season in November, but if the snow don't
come 'til January, then we got the last fifteen days in January
for the January moose hunt.
NON-SUBSISTENCE HUNTERS HAVE ACCESS TO THE SAME MOOSE DURING A
REGULAR FALL SEASON. LOCAL CONTROL OF RESOURCES IS IMPORTANT TO
PEOPLE WHEREVER THEY LIVE. NEXT WEEK A LOOK AT HOW ALASKA NATIVE
PEOPLES EXERT THOSE GOVERNMENTAL POWERS IN A PROGRAM CALLED SOVEREIGNTY:
HOW IT WORKS. PLEASE JOIN US. FOR HOLDING OUR GROUND, THIS IS ADELINE
RABOFF.
[PRODUCTION AND FUNDING CREDITS]
THIS PROGRAM IS PRODUCED BY JIM SYKES, WRITTEN BY BILL DUBAY AND SUE BURRUS.
ALSO EDITED AND RESEARCHED BY SUE BURRUS. SPECIAL THANKS TO THE COMMUNITY
OF GAMBELL FOR DANCING, SINGING, AND DRUMMING. AND ALSO TO THE INUIT CIRCUMPOLAR
CONFERENCE. "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.
The
University of Alaska Fairbanks is an Affirmative
Action/Equal Opportunity employer, educational
institution, and provider is a part of the University of Alaska
system. Learn more about UA's notice of nondiscrimination.
Alaska Native Knowledge
Network University of Alaska Fairbanks
PO Box 756730
Fairbanks AK 99775-6730
Phone (907) 474.1902
Fax (907) 474.1957