ALASKA NATIVES COMMISSION
JOINT FEDERAL-STATE COMMISSION
ON
POLICIES AND PROGRAMS AFFECTING
ALASKA NATIVES
4000 Old Seward Highway, Suite 100
Anchorage,
Alaska 99503
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Witness List | Exhibit
List
| PDF Version
ALASKA NATIVES COMMISSION
HEARING
Nome, ALASKA
SEPTEMBER 21, 1992
Deposition Exhibit
#2 - Testimony of Loretta Bullard
STATEMENT BEFORE THE FEDERAL STATE COMMISSION ON
THE STATUS OF ALASKA NATIVES
Good morning, Ladies and Gentlemen
of the Alaska Review Commission. My name is Loretta Bullard.
I am President of Kawerak Incorporated,
the regional Native non-profit corporation which provides social,
economic, employment and other services to the residents of the
Bering Straits Region of Alaska.
I would like to thank you for
this opportunity to testify on the policies and programs of the
United States and the State
of Alaska and to explain how I believe these policies and programs
should be modified to promote positive change in the lives of
Alaska's Native and rural peoples.
Government should be by the
people for the people and reflect the values and morals of the
people. Unfortunately, in many instances,
federal and state policies do not meet the needs or reflect the
values of Alaska's Native people.
Three years ago I had the opportunity
to attend the Inuit Circumpolar Conference in Sisimuit Greenland.
This past summer, I attended
the Inuit Circumpolar Conference in Inuvik, Northwest Territories.
These two trips were a real eye opener for me in that I had never
realized how extensive an impact governmental policies can have
on the lives of aboriginal populations.
In Greenland, the Danish
Government did not implement termination policies against it's
aboriginal populations nor did they force
the Danish language upon its people. Instead in 1953, the Inuit
residents of Greenland were extended Danish citizenship. According
to Conrad Steinpol of Greenland who spoke at the most recent
ICC conference, the Danish Government recognized that because
Denmark was 4000 kilometers away, it was in their best interest
to establish a home rule government. Conrad stated they received
a lot of support from the Danish Government, negotiations were
friendly, on an equal basis and they achieved home rule government
without a drop of blood being shed. In 1980, a Home Rule Government
was established in Greenland. Today, the Inuit population (which
comprises 75%of the Greenland population) fully participate in
the Home Rule Government as equals. The everyday language in
Greenland is Inuktituk or a variation of Inupiaq. Children routinely
learn Danish as their second language in school and many have
picked up English as their third language.
The Canadian Government
is in the process of amending the Canadian constitution to recognize
tribal government as the third legitimate
form of Government in Canada. They are in the process of creating "Nunavut" an
Inuit homeland in the Northeast Canadian Arctic.
Contrast the
Canadian and Danish Governments policies with those of the United
States. The assimilationist policies, the termination
era where the United States Government consciously sought to
terminate tribal governments throughout the United States.
Even
today, when we are in the era of Self-Determination, the United
States Government continues to refuse to recognize and
support the tribal governing authority of Alaska's Indian Reorganization
and Traditional Tribal Governing Bodies. I've looked at the IRA
constitutions which were signed off in the 1930’s, 40’s,
and 50's by the Assistant Secretary of the Interior -which recognized
the tribal governing authority of Alaska Tribes and been struck
by the similarities between the tribal and state constitutions.
It's ironic that one form of federally recognized government
is unwilling to recognize an equally legitimate federally recognized
form of government.
The State continues to refuse to recognize
tribal court authority or tribal jurisdiction. The Federal Government
actively supports
the State in their undermining efforts by it's unwillingness
to clearly recognize the status of Alaska Natives. This situation
results in valuable resources being spent trying to resolve this
situation -resources which could be better utilized addressing
the problems in rural Alaska. Who established the policy of the
State of Alaska to actively oppose the recognition of Alaska's
tribal governments? The Governor?
The Federal Government is not
fulfilling it's trust responsibility to the Alaska Native people.
Right now, we're placed in the position
of trying enforce federal laws which were designed to promote
the well-being of Alaska Natives and other Native Americans,
when this responsibility clearly rests with the federal government.
A good example is the Indian Child Welfare Act. The Federal Government
does not insure that the State of Alaska fulfills its mandated
responsibilities under the act.
Another example is the Native
Preference Clause (7b) of PL93-638 which mandates Native American
preference in employment and contracting
opportunities in federally funded projects which benefit Native
Americans. As you know, the IHS is now planning the construction
of a new Alaska Native Medical Center in Anchorage. Construction
will start in the spring of 93. Yet the IHS has been unwilling
to contract with an Alaska Native Organization to work with them
to ensure adequate language is included in the bid documents,
which in turn would ensure the Native Preference Hire provisions
are met. Instead, IHS's position is that they cannot fund any
of these activities until after the construction bid is awarded,
in which case the tribal contractor would spend a great deal
of time in enforcement activities which could have been avoided
if the appropriate language were included in the first place.
It's stances like these which we find incredibly frustrating
to deal with.
Alaska's Native and rural people are incredibly
over-- regulated in their daily lives. Present state fish and
game regulations
prohibit sharing and impose a sport hunting mentality on subsistence
activities. I think it's only a matter of time before a way of
life which has existed for thousands of years will be regulated
out of existence.
Actions taken by the urban dominated Alaska
Legislature continue to undermine the viability of the subsistence
lifestyle. The
recent entire special session on subsistence highlights the problem.
The net result of the special session was a law allowing the
Boards of Fish and Game to declare parts of the state "non-subsistence
use” areas. Yet we are supposed to regard this as progress.
During the Federal EIS process on subsistence,
we had recommended that subsistence users be appointed to the
Federal Subsistence
Commission. Instead, somewhere, someone made the decision to
appoint the heads of federal agencies in Alaska to serve as the
Federal Subsistence Commission for federal lands in Alaska. These
same federal management agencies in many instances seek to actively
curtail and undermine the rights of Alaska's Native and rural
people. A good example is the USF&WS attempt to curtail use
of sea otter pelts in arts and crafts. Another example is the
recent sting operation conducted by the USF&WS which received
national press. Thanks to the publicity activities, we now face
an uphill battle in the re-authorization of the marine mammal
protection act. No doubt the entire nation thinks Alaska Natives
wantonly slaughter walrus and trade tusks for drugs. At no point
in watching the publicity issued by the USF&WS, did I ever
hear the USF&WS acknowledge the many, many Alaska Natives
who prudently hunt and utilize our marine mammal resources.
Yet,
these are the agencies which are now making decision regarding
the subsistence use of resources. The individuals serving on
the Commission, with the exception of one individual, have never
lived a subsistence lifestyle. What this management action tells
me is that the Federal Government does not trust Alaska’s
Native and rural people to make the right decision when it comes
to subsistence, or perhaps they feel we're not capable. Either
way, the federal government has again imposed another management
structure on us, one which effectively excludes the equal and
meaningful participation of Alaska's Native people. One which
turns the federal government into an enforcement agency. This
when they had the opportunity to join in partnership with Alaska's
Native and rural people, to safeguard the animal and other resources
which we are so dependent on.
We're tired of fighting to protect
our subsistence lifestyle. We're not going away, our subsistence
lifestyle is not going
to cease. I think the Governor and the state legislature needs
to recognize this and get on with setting in place protections
which we need now and will continue to need in the future.
Present
state policies or lack thereof effectively deny Alaska's rural
and Native people equal access to common resources. A good
example is the False Pass situation and the lack of an effective
and enforceable mixed stock fisheries policy. I know the federal
government has really clamped down on high seas interception
of Alaska bound salmon - but when the policies of the State of
Alaska allow for massive interception of salmon stocks bound
for our area, the result is the same -the salmon are not returning.
Subsistence fishing for chum salmon was greatly restricted again
this past summer here in the Nome area - and we haven't had a
commercial fishery for years.
There seems to be an increasing
levels of racial intolerance. Rather than promoting that we're
all in this world together,
that we need to recognize, appreciate and support the diversity
of our many ethic and cultural groups, the federal and state
governments seem to continually adopt policies hostile toward
it's ethnic and minority citizens. Even in Nome, it's surprising
how many non-Native parents are opposed to having their children
exposed to Native culture and language in the school curriculum.
This in a school district which is 71% Alaska Native.
A lot of
time and resources has been spent studying Alaska Natives to
determine "what’s wrong with them, why do they
have such high levels of alcoholism, drug abuse, suicide, homicide,
all these social problems?"
My personal opinion is that
the well-being of Alaska's Native people is directly tied to
their ability to control what happens
in their life . . . which right now is minimal and getting smaller.
Because we're such a minority, we're powerless, even in the political
process. We're regularly outvoted and short changed. Urban needs
always take priority over rural needs. Powerlessness as a people
translates into massive social problems.
In exchange for taking
away our rights as aboriginal people, we have been given the;
opportunity to compete in a larger society
which does not respect or value us as human beings, except perhaps
as ethnic oddities. Our rights are continually compromised or
regulated away. We have lost the majority of our lands, our religion,
our language, our culture, and if the State and Federal Governments
have their way, the right to govern ourselves. It’s only
natural we want to continue our culture, language and lifestyle.
I propose that this commission seek a response
from the federal and state government as to why they feel the
need to suppress
and remove all authority from Alaska's Native people -except
that granted by themselves? Why won't the state government
recognize and support our tribal councils and tribal courts?
Why are many
non-Natives so reluctant to incorporate our language and culture
into the school curriculum? Why is the Governor unwilling to
set in place long term protections for the subsistence lifestyle?
Why won't the federal and state governments deal with Alaska
Natives as equals? As an Alaska Native, I would be very interested
in their responses.
In discussing this, we thought the answer
was probably related to fear. For some reason, Alaska Native
autonomy is threatening
to western society. I think it's time to quit operating from
a platform of fear and move on to a platform of partnership
and the policies of the State and Federal Governments should
reflect
that partnership.
There are some bright spots. I don't want
to sound completely negative, Kawerak as an organization has
been contracting
with the federal and state governments for years to provide
services
to region residents and I think we do an excellent job.
Several years ago the Congress initiated what is
called the Tribal Self Governance Project. Two years ago, Kawerak
was
one of ten
tribes/tribal organizations selected nationally to participate
in the Tribal Self Governance Demonstration Project.
This
demonstration project is a big step towards true self
determination. Through
this project, Kawerak and the region's Indian Reorganization
Act and Traditional Councils have the authority to redesign
BIA funded programs and services and direct resources
to more fully
meet the needs of tribal members. This is one step toward
Self-Determination where we were authorized to contract
to provide Bureau services
and programs. In this project, the region's Tribal Governing
Councils truly have the authority to make decisions.
In closing, I believe that on policy could truly
make a difference in the status of Alaska's Native people.
All
of the problems
and issues previously mentioned could have been avoided
had this policy been in place. That is, I believe the
federal and state
governments, when developing policies, programs, and
regulations affecting Alaska Natives, needs to consciously
implement
a policy of empowering and supporting it's Native peoples.
Federal
and
State programs which do not empower Native people but
which purport to solve our problems for us, have not
and will
not
work. By
empowering us, you lay the responsibility back in our
hands, where it rightfully belongs.
This document was ocr scanned. We have made every
attempt to keep the online document the same as the original,
including the recorder's original misspellings or typos.
