Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAlaska Native Commission Final Report Vol 1 1994COMMISSION a. Pre ; LAR + Volume | of the Alaska Natives Commission's Final Report was prepared by the Commission staff for the purpose of providing an overview and summary of the Commission's substantial work product compiled through hearings, research and deliberations carried out since July of 1992. Mike Irwin, the Commission's Executive Director, is editor and principal author of Volume |. Other writing credits for this and subsequent volumes go to Edward Deaux, Ph.D., Bart Garber, William Hanable, George Irvin, Alexandra J. McClanahan and Harold Napoleon. This volume conveys the flavor, sense and direction of the Commission's conclusions and recommendations based on the three "Overarching Principles" found on page 20. A complete listing of all recommendations made by the Commission based on findings of its various task forces can be found in Part Three of this document. Volume | serves as an introduction to, and summary of, the Commission's full body of work. Those looking for greater detail — including findings, discussions and con- clusions on particular issues — should also refer to Volumes II and Ill of the Final Report. Each section of these additional volumes contains the full text and lan- guage crafted by the Commission and its task forces, as edited and adopted by the full Commission. Pe aa CA le Os IN The Alaska Natives Commission's work was concen- trated over the course of about 18 months. During that time Commission members and staff traveled throughout Alaska, gathering data and testimony for the report to Congress and the Governor. We were looking for answers to complex problems. vvv The real story behind the scene as we were doing our work, how- ever, were the 1,217 Alaska Natives who died and the more than 5,100 Alaska Native babies who were born.* vvv We regret that we were unable to do more for those who passed away before this work was com- plete, and we earnestly hope we have laid the foundation for a better future for the children. This report is dedicated to those in the Native community who died and those who began life while we worked. *Figures are based on records as kept by the State of Alaska Bureau of Vital Statistics. A READER'S GUIDE TO VOLUME I Volume | contains the essence of the Commission's findings, discussions and recom- mendations. It is not all-inclusive. Rather, it attempts to present the most funda- mental components of a "blueprint" for change in the course of Native affairs. The volume begins with a preface by Dr. Robert Alberts, a former practitioner with the Indian Health Service who for many years has studied the effects of accultura- tion on Alaska Natives. His thoughts set the tone and the spirit for Volume 1. PART ONE ssadocumentation of the physical, social and economic changes over the past two centuries that have affected the situation in which Alaska Natives find themselves today. It sets the stage for the recommendations of the Commission in hopes that, through a better understanding of Alaska Natives! history since contact with Western society, a greater appreciation of their present social and economic situation can be attained. PART TWO contains the fundamental recommendations of the Commission in key issue areas. These recommendations and accompanying dis- cussions relate directly to the overarching principles of Native self-reliance, self- determination, and the integrity of Native cultures. (Additional recommendations pertaining to each area of study can be found in the "Table of Recommendations" in Part Three of this volume.) Also included in Part Two are discussions entitled "Native to Native." These discussions, or essays, present the issues in basic human terms without unnecessary legalese or governmental jargon. PART THREE, in addition to the "Table of Recommendations" referred to above, contains key statistical facts and findings of the Commission. Again, while not being all-inclusive, the analyses and data contained in this section relate to the themes and recommendations of this volume. Also contained in Part Three is information on the Alaska Natives Commission and its members, and demo- graphic and geographic information based on census and other current data. Dispersed throughout this volume are excerpts from the Commission's significant boay of hearing testimony. These selections, identified as "Alaskan Voices," reflect the spirit of concerned Alaskans — Native and non-Native alike — who came for- ward at the Commission's request and, collectively, gave the entire undertaking its legitimacy and life. TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE pt pt The Tndoing of a People PF Native Solutions for Native Problems p-16 EMPOWERMENT & THE INTEGRITY OF NATIVE CULTURES PIT Introduction & Overarching Principles PID Regaining Social & Cultural Integrity: Recommendations & Discussions p-21 Looking to Sources of Strength Pine WHO WE ARE — WHAT WE DID p83 TLable of “Recommendations p85 Key Facts & Findings p09 Demographic & Geographic Sketches pant Commission Tackground p123 Hi BaweaRre Robert Alberts, M.D., M.P.H. s I wrote these words I remembered my feelings during the first few months after my arrival many years ago in the Yukon-Kusko- kwim delta area. I had gone through some difficult times in my own life and I was not sure what Alaska would have in store for me. It was difficult for me, in those early days, to understand why theze was so much frustration, anger and violence among the people in the villages. For these were people abundantly capable of support and genuine friendship and so free of prejudice toward others. It took time to develop insight into the sickness which had spread through the Native communities and which was causing so much self-destructive behavior, especially among the young people. é w WELL-BEING AND MENTAL HEALTH LW oncat health is the positive attitude toward life, together with the skills to cope successfully with life's stresses, which makes it possible for us to reach our highest potential as human beings. Our coping skills ave important to help us maintain a state of well-being. Lqually onportant are an understanding of the stresses we encounter in life and the sup- port we receive from our support systems: our families, feiends and the communities we belong to. Ox state of well-being is determined, then, by these three forces: stresskul life events, individual coping skills and social support systems. TOcll-being is also a state of hawmony between the individual and his oz hex total envizonment. It rwequires suc- cessful adjustment in the areas of physical, mental, cultural, spititual and economic interaction. All of us living in this word ave constantly exposed to the stresses and hardships of life. Croups of people, as time goes on, develop ways to ease the impact of these stresses in the form of cultural traditions. hese traditions guide us throughout life and become a healing force when we are faced with events that threaten our well-being. TOhen changes hap- pen too rtapidly and are forced upon us, our traditions may not be able to adapt and may thereby lose the ability to guide us. Chis is especially true when outside forces are destructive to our own culture. IN ALASKA J? cotang back on the recent history of Alaska, it appears that many of the problems of today are related to the attitude of the non-Native caregivers who came to the state in great nionbers to “save” the Native people. With some exceptions, these outsiders were thoroughly con- vinced - as is typical of members of most dominant societies - about the superiority and rightness of theit own culture. Due in part to ignotance and cultural nearsightedness, they believed that replacing the Native culture with their own was beneficial and therefore justified. Before the newcomers came to Alaska the Native people were not in need of salvation. For many centuries their cultuzal traditions and their knowledge had provided them with the skills to sucvive successfully in their own envitonment. The disinte- gration started when the non-Native culture, totally foreign to the natural environment of Alaska, caused great distuption between the land and the Native people. Fiest came the devastating epidemics of diseases to which Native people had never before been exposed. Nore recently, after the Native way of life became increasingly influenced by the dominant culture and society, the Native people them- selves - either by choice oz by coercion - became dependent on the outside world. Chis dependency, which is the single most damaging force with respect to Natives’ self-esteem, gives the FORCED ACCULTURATION “NV Y artificially created situation its life by means of the scores of federal, state and private agencies that are still in the business of “saving” the Natives. In this context, it is not difficult to understand the anger and frustration of Alaska Native people. Natives cannot help but observe that with the arival of every new service and each new non-Native provider comes more damage to the Native way of life and to the pride and independence of the people. DEPENDENCY Le unwillingness on the part of many non-Native providers to give up control has left Native people unprepared for the changes which have taken place. Jt continues to foster a state of dependency that destroys the self-esteem of the people who find themselves caught between two worlds. ‘Dependency is a terribly destructive force. As individuals we are born with a sense of being special. FSut this sense of self-worth develops only if we have the good fortune of growing up ina healthy envizonment. If that positive force is missing ducing our childhood, the tension between the natuzal need for selfh-fulfilment and the doubts about our self-worth leads to a chronic state of frustration. Chis frustration, in tuim, creates anxiety and anger; anger towards oneself as well as towards a word which fails to support us ot, even worse, stunts us in Out growth. ss fre ‘} * 14 ee malt THE STRENGTH OF ‘N CULTURAL TRADITION I t is impossible to make life meaningful unless we have been given the means to do so. In a rapidly changing world, this often becomes a serious problem. WOhen parents do not have the skills to prepare their children for changes yet to come, they often transmit their feelings of helplessness to their childzen. Cuvewwhelmed by the technical skills of the dominant culture, they fail to recognize the strengths which lie in the spizitual values of theiz own cul- tual heritage. 74s a result, the parents do not share those val- ues with their childzen. These childzen grow up without the spiritual foundation of theiz parents, but neither are they comfortable in the dominant culture which to them is foreign and confusing. CTOhen con- trol of life is lost and decisions surrendered to others, the spitit weakens and depression sets in. CTOhen, on the other | hand, spiritual values are alive and supported by a living cultural heritage, the chances of succeeding in a changing world ave greatly enhanced. Only after hope has been restored and depression has lifted can people become aware of theiz own strengths and the spiritual strength of theit cultural tradition. Che thought | , that cultural traditions retard development is totally wrong. Als long as a culture cemains alive and can incortporate new ideas while remaining true to its basic spiritual foundation, development and progress can become living realities. a V THE FUTURE AN occ: many years of research I agree fully with what Allaska Native eldezs have told me. Che true nature of the sickness which has spread throughout the Native villages is the state of dependency which led to the loss of dizection and self-esteem. Sverything else is of a secondary nature — merely symptoms of the underlying disease. SOrogzams which are aimed at relieving the symptoms but refuse to zelate to the sickness itself are doomed to fail and may even make things worse. The healing will have to come from within the Native com- munity. And it will have to come by means of the zeawaken- ing of the independence, the pride and the sense of purpose which at one time guided the people in their journey through the centuries. New skills are needed for that jouiey to con- tinue and succeed. Sut most of all theze needs to be a zetuin of the spiritual strength of a cultural tradition in ozder to make the journey meaningful again and provide future hope for those who have become lost on the trail. o * Dr. Robert Alberts is a psychiatrist in private practice and a member of the | Advisory Council of the Alaska Native Foundation. me MAN OF ONE person WHAT THE COMMISSION FOUND 1988 Pulitzer Prize winning series in the Anchorage Daily News characterized them as “A People in Peril.” Farley Mowat, a Canadian author writing about the similarly situated Inuit of his country used the term “A Desperate People.” Whatever words are chosen to depict the situation of Alaska’s Native people, there can be little doubt that an entire popula- tion is at risk. At risk of becoming permanently imprisoned in America’s underclass, mired in both the physical and spiri- tual poverty that accompany such social standing. At risk of leading lives, generation to generation, characterized by vio- lence, alcohol abuse and cycles of personal and social destruc- tion. At risk of losing, irretrievably, cultural strengths and attributes essential for the building of a new and workable social and economic order. And at risk, inevitably, of perma- nently losing the capacity to self-govern — the capacity to make considered and appropriate decisions about how life in Native communities should be lived. This report, mandated by the United States Congress and supported by both the federal government and the State of Alaska, paints a picture of 86,000 U.S. citizens living in the richest state of the union who, despite such fortunate geographic placement, have experi- enced — and are today experiencing — economic deprivation and social impairment at sometimes incomprehensible rates. The roots and causes of this economic and social displacement are numerous and com- plex, and may never be fully understood nor adequately appreciated by anyone, even those who live with them daily. Likewise, it is difficult to imagine that appropriate, timely and, above all, adequate solutions can ever be found to fully satisfy requirements of social and economic justice for Alaska Natives. So much cultural destruction has taken place, such a large proportion of Alaska’s most valuable natural resources have been taken from Natives’ ownership and control, and so much potential for social and political equity has been foregone that it is difficult to envision, let alone articulate, a basis for achieving total fairness for this and future generations of Alaska Natives. The mandate of the Alaska Natives Commission, however, was to attempt to do so. Vvvv Although limited to only 18 months of study and analysis, the Commission took on the challenge of finding ways to improve the social and economic status of Alaska Natives as the 20th century comes to an end. What the Commission found is, in many ways, less than hopeful. The lack of emotional, physical and social well-being on the part of count- less individuals, families and even entire communities is startling, if not completely stag- gering, in scope. This lack of well-being, or “dysfunction” as it is commonly referred to, was precipitated, the evidence suggests, by a century-long policy of cultural, social and economic assimilation. Rampant unemployment and the virtual non-existence of other economic opportunities for large portions of the Alaska Native population — together with the spiritually and psychologically debilitating intervention of governmental ser- vices to fill the social and economic void — has created a culture of dependency. If one theme can be identified as having emerged during the course of the Commission’s work, it is Alaska Natives’ seeming inability to take responsibility for local economies, govern- ments, and schools and other social institutions. Whether in the area of economic development or social “advancement,” the impact of government on the villages during the past quarter-century, while often materially benefi- cial in content, has been destructive in process. The federal government appears to have believed that “development” — social, political, economic and cultural — is something that can be done to one group of people by another. A more constructive belief that development is something one can do only for oneself and that the best others can do is to support those efforts seems never to have been recognized. If recognized, it certainly never took hold as a guiding principle. For its part, state government's interest has histor- ically been the development of resources, not people. The result of this systematic assumption of responsibility and control by outsiders is that village people lost hold of their communities and their children’s lives. That is a funda- mental fact underlying the contemporary Native social and economic crisis. ocial scientists have strug- gled for well over a centu- ry with the true meaning of culture. The question has never been fully answered. It can be said, though, that culture is an essential weapon against the chaos of life and death. It is a means by which continuity from generation to generation can be ensured, and an endorsement of order and meaning. Though the lifeways of present-day Alaska Natives still resonate with the unique cultures of their forebears, social chaos permeates their lives. A sense of order and meaning, to a large degree, has been misplaced. In pursuing the general policy during the past century of bringing Alaska Natives into the social and economic mainstream of Western society, Americans have required that the aborig- inal peoples of Alaska dismantle their value sys- tems, their traditions, their ways of acquiring knowledge, and their ways of living together as families and communities. They have been pres- sured — and in many instances forced — to defined and little understood which Western ways are based. laska Natives face social and ehavioral health problems that threat- ; n the future existence of the unique “7 Ce cultures on which healthy lifeways 3 were once based. Over the past several decades the lives of Alaska Natives have improved in a purely physical sense. But the quality of their lives, by many measures, has deteriorated. Improved housing and community infrastructure, greater life expectancy, and K A_N security against wide- OLCES spread hunger and . many forms of once ‘The suervivors did deadly diseases have not brought a sufficient amount of comfort or Alcohol abuse and violence run- inner peace. ning rampant in Alaska Native society have disheveled family and village life. Death, physical and psycholog- ical injury, and apathy touching all genera- tions of Alaska Natives are of alarming, and ever-increasing, propor- tions. Cultural values and mores that in the past provided clear instruction to tribal members and assured the social order of communi- ties have been seriously eroded and, in some instances, virtually lost. FRoot Causes t is difficult to make gener- alizations about the vari- ous Alaska Native tribes. But Native groups have enough in com- mon to make it possible to refer to them as, collectively, “Alaska Natives.” Their view of the world was, and remains, quite different from the Western perspective. Alaska Natives are descended from peoples who believed in a dual existence: the physi- cal and the spiritual. That is, the phys- ical world that they lived and walked in was only one aspect of existence; controlling the physical and giving it “life” and character was its spiritual counterpart. This basic belief was the foundation of all Alaska Native cul- tures and was their “world view.” The expression of this reality — a reality that non-Natives, to this day, do not understand — is the sum total of Alaska Native cultures: the arts, cere- monials, songs, feasts, social and politi- cal organizations, use and treatment of the resources, and ways of passing on knowledge that enabled a people to sur- vive and co-exist for millennia in a hos- tile physical environment. The achievement of harmony with each other and with all other living things was the essence of what their cultures provided to Alaska Native peo- ples. The fact that contemporary Native society is fraught with dishar- mony is testament that the crippling — and in some cases near eradication — of Native cultures lies at the heart of what is wrong in the lives of Native people. There is no singular villain in the story of the long-term and concerted assault on Alaska Native cultures, nor is the story unique in the world. But it is one that must be told and under- stood. As Ann Fienup-Riordan asserts: “The ongoing impact of epidemics and other traumatic disruption of Alaska’s Native peoples should be kept firmly in mind in future discussions of issues of personal identity among Alaska Natives.”2 The changes that occurred in Native cultures came, in large measure, suddenly. In time as measured by the development of intricate cultures and world views, the changes were almost, in fact, instantaneous. Disease and Famine n organizing the history of encounter between outsiders and Alaska’s aboriginal peoples, Fienup-Riordan lists seven overlapping stages: resistance, co-existence, popu- lation disruption, attempted assimila- tion, global incorporation, dependency, and empowerment.’ The first two stages, which have been richly docu- mented, occurred mainly in the Alaska maritime climate region (Aleutian Islands and North Gulf Coast). The initial intrusions of Europeans came primarily from Russian fur traders and explorers, with the Aleut people of the Aleutian archipelago bearing the brunt. Enslavement, physical abuse, and even annihilation of entire villages of Aleut and Koniag people at the hands of the Russians was commonplace during the first few generations following Vitus Bering’s initial landing in Alaska. But for the vast majority of Alaska Natives scattered throughout the territory, con- tacts with Europeans did not become as widespread or deadly until well into the nineteenth century. Both Fienup-Riordan and Harold Napoleon, a Yupik Eskimo born and raised in Hooper Bay, view the period of population disruption as the time when the seeds of the severest and most wide- spread destruction of Native cultures were sown. + These population disruptions were caused primarily by the introduction during the nineteenth century of European diseases against which Alaska Natives had no natural immu- nities. Brought by traders and miners and explorers, the plagues would take their toll in staggering numbers well into the current century. Famines throughout Alaska during this same era accompanied the deadly march of dis- ease. By 1910, the Native population of 25,331 was only one-third the size it was estimated to have been prior to European contact. Often cited as being among the deadliest of plagues is the smallpox epidemic of the 1830s. Ravaging com- munities in many parts of the state, the epidemic virtually wiped out entire villages.5 It is estimated that in the lower Yukon area alone, up to two- thirds of Alaska Natives lost their lives.6 Across Alaska and throughout the 1900s, Natives would feel the deadly hand of measles, influenza, diphtheria and pneumonia. Later, polio and tuberculosis, among others, would join the list of killers. These epidemics decimated the Alaska Native people physically. A reasonable assumption can also be made that their entire world — includ- ing the most important aspect, the spir- itual — was thrown into disarray. Researchers have found that the popu- lations of survivors, many of whom had lost their entire families and most of their fellow villagers, dispersed and shifted. The population decline also undermined leadership, disrupted per- sonal relations, and demoralized the people.’ The following is an excerpt from an eyewitness account by ethnol- ogist Edward William Nelson upon his arrival on St. Lawerence Island in the late 1800s. The scene that he found and the survivors that he encountered might be viewed as microcosms of Alaska Natives’ reality during the times of widespread death: The two families living there con- sisted of about a dozen people; the adults seemed very much depressed and had little animation...A curious trait noticed among these survivors was their apparent loss of the custom- ary fear which the natives usually show when near a spot where many persons had died. The death of all their friends and relatives seemed to have rendered them apathetic and beyond the influence of ordinary fear of that kind.’ The extent and depth of the dam- age such massive death and illness would have on Natives’ cultures and societies is only today being explored and identified. But it stands to reason that the damage was profound. To the plagues and famines were lost spiritual and social leaders, elders and parents, uncles, aunts, children and siblings. Artisans were swept away, as were those who knew best the oral traditions of the people, the historians. For a people whose existence was tied intimately to the spiritual realm, the failure of their medicine men to bring cures struck to the core of their cultural beliefs. The spiritual void that now existed for the survivors stum- bling away from mass death was filled by American missionaries who made greater inroads into the Alaska Native community as the nineteenth century neared its end. For a people whose social and cultural infrastructure was collapsing at their feet, it is little won- der that Native lifeways would become subservient to the alien social, political and economic systems and beliefs being brought to their shores. Collapse of the Cultural Framework ocial scientists and histori- ans generally view the period of attempted assimilation as a sea-change in the transformation of traditional Alaska Native cultures. At the vanguard of the march of Western civilization across the Alaskan territo- ry were three major groups: miners, trappers and assorted agents of Western commerce; religious mission- aries; and school teachers and other government agents. The potential richness of the Aleutian fur mammal trade was the impetus for European expansion into Alaska. Throughout the next century, miners, traders and other merchants made scattered inroads throughout most regions of Alaska. But, the most significant effects of the European mer- cantile system on traditional Native culture were confined largely to the Aleutian Islands, Kodiak, Bristol Bay and other maritime regions. The latter half of the nineteenth century was a period of significant cul- tural dislocation, profoundly affecting the traditional economic system: sub- sistence hunting, fishing, gathering and bartering. Expansion of the whaling industry in north and northwest Alaska and the commercial fishing industry in southwest Alaska resulted in population shifts towards centers of economic activity during this period. The fur trade and general commerce expanded into areas previously unsettled by traders and resource exploiters. Reindeer herding was introduced into the western and northern Eskimo regions by the federal government in the late 1800s. Again, centers of economic activity were created, drawing in the survivors of disease and famine. Major gold discoveries in west and northwest Alaska and in some areas of the interior brought new waves of outsiders to points seldom seen by non-Natives. The effects of the widespread intro- duction of Western commerce in Alaska were significant from a cultural and social perspective. First, the trend toward relocation of populations to areas of centralized economic activity was in direct contra- diction to the practi- cal requirements of the traditional sub- sistence economy. Subsistence hunting, fishing and gathering activities, which require small, scat- tered settlements able to move freely with the seasons and with the game, sea mammal and fish migrations, were dif- ficult to undertake given the population patterns emerging in the late 1800s. Second, com- mercialization of species created a downward push on the availability of fish and wildlife stocks for subsistence taking. Commercial pursuits also placed restrictions of time on tradition- al hunters and fishers. Accompanying European mercan- tilism were American missionaries tak- ing the path of the Russian Orthodox Church. Throughout the 1800s, mis- sionaries other than those representing the Russian Orthodox Church had found only limited success in making new converts among Alaska Natives. One of the reasons commonly given to the Russian missionaries’ success among the Aleut and Koniag is the emphasis they put on use of the Native languages in their teachings.!! It appears, however, that the final blow to the spiritual will of Native peo- ples was dealt by the worldwide influenza epidemic of 1900: “Before 1900 progress was slow except in the Aleutian Islands and on the Pacific rim, where the Russian Orthodox Church was firmly established. But following the epidemic of 1900, whole villages elsewhere converted.”!2 Frequently referred to as the “Great Death” by Native survivors, the newest and most widespread plague appears to have made survivors ripe for Christian con- version: “The Jesuits established the mission of Akulurak at the mouth of the Yukon River in 1893, but it was not until after the worldwide influenza epi- demic of 1900 that they began to make converts.”!3 In keeping with their humanitarian traditions, many American missionar- ies built hospitals for and otherwise tended to the sick and dying. They built orphanages for the children whose families the plagues and famines had ravaged, and they built missions to help feed and shelter many others. But the missionaries were, first and fore- most, agents of Western culture bent n “civilizing” the Natives and con- verting them to Christianity. Notwithstanding their humanitari- an practices, there is little to suggest that American missionaries gave any regard to the cultures, languages and rich traditions of the Native peoples they encountered. Playing heavily on the guilt of those who had not suc- cumbed to disease and famine, some missionaries convinced many Natives that they were dying because of who they were, the way they lived and what they believed. To the physically, psychologically and spiritually mangled Alaska Native people at the turn of the century, the message of the missionaries finally became compelling. Fienup-Riordan postulates that Natives, with all they had been through for one and one-half centuries, now saw the Christian teachings as “a novel spiritual solution to an unprecedented social and eco- nomic crisis.” !4 With passage of the Organic Act in 1884, the United States took on the role of “educating” Alaska Native chil- dren. Hand-in-hand with the mission- aries, the government teachers, who in many instances operated as de facto, all-purpose agents of government, set about the task of making modern Americans of the last of the continent’s aboriginal peoples: “We have no higher calling,” wrote William T. Harris, head of the Bureau of Education between 1889 and 1906, “than to be missionar- ies of our idea to those people who have not yet reached the Anglo-Saxon frame of mind.’”15 Several generations of Native peo- ple — many of whom are still alive today — would become targets of a tragic, frequently successful campaign of cultural elimination. Demanding that Natives abandon the cultures and languages of their grandfathers and grandmothers, Natives were given a clear message that one way of looking at the world was superior to the other. That the survivors did as they were told — abandoning their feasts and cer- emonials, their dances and even their languages — is testament not to the correctness of the Western message but to the survivors’ states of mind. Having lost multitudes of spiritual and political leaders, artisans, historians and elders, those who were left were orphans — spiritually as well as physi- cally — destined to live in a world of emotional and material poverty. In the schoolhouses and boarding schools, in the churches and in the orphanages, Native children would learn how to become good Christians and good Americans. As the Rev. Sheldon Jackson, a Presbyterian minis- ter assigned to oversee the education of Alaska Natives, would state: “The children must be kept in school until they acquire what is termed a common-school educa- tion, also a practical knowl- edge of some useful trade. We believe in reclaiming the Natives’ improvident habits and transforming them into ambitious and self-helpful citizens.”!6 The Loss of Self-Reliance laska Natives occupied Alaska’s formidable land mass for at least 10,000 years prior to Vitus Bering’s arrival in 1749. The reality of Alaska’s hos- WW IZ tile environment on both land and sea is common knowledge even among America’s elementary students. It is almost rhetorical to point out that in order to survive in the face of raging seas, arctic storms, and often- times scarce food supplies, Alaska Natives were capable, independent and strong of will. Ethnographers and other scientists traveling to areas of Alaska prior to the onset of significant Western influence in those areas confirm these very attributes among Alaska Natives. In addition, technological inventive- ness, physical and mental resilience, and a keen awareness of all the require- ments for survival were among the many other noted traits. This image of an independent, self-reliant people contrasts sharply with many of the images seen today within the Alaska Native commu- nity. Without necessari- ly even knowing that it was happening, Alaska Natives gradually adjust- ed to the relentless interference of non- Natives and, to a large degree, yielded their choices and decisions to outsiders who appeared to know what should be done and how to do it. The result is that several generations of Alaska Natives have been bound in a relationship of ever-increasing depen- dency on public service, subsidy and control by others. The situation did not come about overnight. Rather, the process from which it blossomed took hold and began to accelerate during the first quarter of the twentieth century. Over the next 60 years, Alaska Natives and their cultures would be transformed forever. The influenza epidemic at the turn of the century was followed by yet another in 1918, tearing the fabric of life even further for Alaska Natives. Missions, orphanages and schools pro- liferated during the first three decades of the 1900s, and Natives’ dependence on others to feed, educate and guide them and their children grew propor- tionally. The threads that tied them to their forebears and to their traditional lifeways were becoming fewer and few- er, even as their families and villages were growing increasingly unhinged due to the loss of parents and teachers and leaders. Discontinuities with respect to ancient, time-honored beliefs and traditions abounded. New forms of disease, mainly tuberculosis and polio, took over where smallpox and influenza left off and, in the post-World War II era, a new agent of social and cul- tural disruption — the boarding school program — emerged. In 1931 the Secretary of the Interior transferred responsibility for education of Alaska Natives from the Bureau of Education to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. When World War II came to Alaska in the early 1940s and Native and non-Native contact inten- sified throughout the territory, the BIA adopted a policy of assimilation. Instead of converting entire Native groups to Western culture, individual Natives would be conditioned for assimilation. To facilitate this new policy, the BIA in 1947 opened a high school for Natives (Mt. Edgecumbe}] at the site of a World War II Naval air station at Sitka. When Mt. Edgecumbe became full and could not accommodate all the Natives that the BIA sought to immerse in Western education, Alaska Native students were shipped off to boarding schools operated by the BIA in other states. The bureau also operated an elementary school at Wrangell for children from communities with no school facilities at all. Significantly, the philosophical emphasis of the BIA program changed from keeping Native children in their home communities to taking them out of their communities and encouraging them not to return.!7 From an economic perspective, the first six decades of this century — or, the period of global incorporation — set the pattern that still exists today: i.e. Alaska Natives, though integrating in varying degrees into Alaska’s expand- ing mercantile and resource extraction economies, remained largely on the sidelines. During the early part of the twentieth century, exploitation of Alaska’s resources kept pace as the United States industrialized. “Alaska Natives rarely reaped advantages from this development. Non-Native entre- preneurs employed them when it made economic sense and ignored them when it did not.” 18 In the Aleutian Islands, the federal government operated a lucrative fur seal industry. While Aleuts were employed in that industry, the role of the Aleuts has been characterized as one of “virtual involuntary servi- tude.”!9 And in Bristol Bay and Kodiak, where commercial fisheries were expanding year after year, most of the jobs in canneries and aboard for- hire fishing vessels operated by the can- neries went to imported laborers. The following passage, which pertains specifically to the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta area during this time period but which has a much wider descriptive application, is instructive: Ms Al h the Yukon-Kuskokwim regio. tegrated into the world- momy, albeit in a peripheral 4 7 , the Natives had less access to extremely disadvantaged people. The economic position of Alaska Natives had fallen further and further behind nationwide averages, reflecting a stag- a formation, productive resources, nant economic position of Alaska if and capital, and less control over Natives compared to the rise in the & a local business than did their USS. standard of living.22 (¢ white counterparts.2° In a physical sense, the federal War K AN on Poverty — designed to close the gap At the same time, pressures on fish and wildlife resources — “For many Natives, the sense of person- brought about by Alaska’s esca- al, familial and cul- lating non-Native population tural identity that is and intensified commercial har- a prerequisite to bey fet petec. vesting — compromised the ability of Natives to adequately meet their subsistence needs. Heightening political battles over resource rights and alloca- tions compounded the growing problem. Subsistence hunting, fishing and gathering as tradi- tionally practiced by Alaska Natives was the epitome of self- reliance. Yet, this one avenue still open to Natives to meet their own needs independent of outside interference or involvement was, itself, becoming narrower. Dependency and Self-Destruction 4 two centuries of physical, spir- itual and cultural death were the seeds of self-destruction, those seeds burst forth in the 1960s when the pressure just to keep physically alive was eased by the programs of President Johnson’s War on Poverty. By the time of statehood, Alaska Natives were seen in general as an nationwide between economic classes — brought benefits to Alaska Natives. But, finally able to catch their collective breath after generations of pursuit, Alaska Natives found themselves a cul- turally and spiritually crippled people. Rather than feeling comfort in govern- ment-built homes and contentment in government-funded food supplies, Alaska Natives felt, instead, emptiness and an overwhelming sense of loss. The statistics show that when the lev- els of public expenditures over the past 30 years are placed side-by-side with the data on individual, family and societal well-being, the social and psychological condition of Native people has varied inversely with the growth of govern- ment programs intended to help them. It was during the period when anti- poverty programs were being intro- duced throughout Alaska that Natives began to turn to alcohol in alarming numbers. Sadly, the result would be a new cycle of trauma and death — but this time self-inflicted. By the early 1970s, alcohol was identified as being a leading cause of death among Alaska Natives. The Alaska Native suicide rate, which did not significantly differ from nationwide averages through the 1950s, began to take a dramatic turn upwards.23 Other indicators of serious social and behavioral health breakdown — e.g. assault, murder, sexual crimes including those against children, avoid- able accidents, and psychological depression — began to multiply throughout the 1960s and 1970s. As with Native suicides, these anti-social behaviors and conditions were, by and large, directly related to the use and abuse of alcohol. These trends continued into and throughout the decade of the 1980s. Dramatic rises in social pathologies marched along in lock step with mas- sive infusions of the state’s oil wealth into rural programs, services and capi- tal projects. A successful mid-1970s lawsuit (Tobeluk v. Lind) — requiring construction of high schools in even the tiniest and remotest of Native vil- lages — brought the children home from the boarding schools. And, yet, hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of lives later, the social and psychological condition had spiralled ever downward to a situation character- ized by the Alaska Federation of Natives as a crisis.24 The “Native industry” that had evolved to encom- pass all aspects of life within the Alaska Native community had failed; things had not improved, they had only gotten worse. a> 16 A New Approach: /Native Solutions for Na tive Problems laska Natives expe- rience some of the highest rates of accidental deaths, suicides, alcoholism, homicides, fetal alcohol syndrome and domestic violence in the nation. Alaska Natives — many of them young men — fill the state’s jails at a rate exceeding 250 percent of their numbers in the general population. Native chil- dren are not obtaining adequate educa- tions, and Alaska Natives remain on the economic fringes of one of the rich- est states, per capita, in the union. Just as in the times when attempted assimi- lation was most blatant and pro- nounced, the validity of the Alaska Native cultural perspective continues to be ignored. Because the most serious problems Alaska Natives face are uniquely their own, the solutions will have to come from the Native community. Alaska Natives must be empowered to carry out the solutions. Dealing with unresolved transgen- erational grief borne of epidemics, reli- gious persecution, and attempts at erad- ication of their cultures will not be easy, but Alaska Natives can deal with the issues facing them. Answers will come from their inherited strength and wisdom. What the federal and state govern- ments can do is offer mutual respect and assistance. They must be willing to give control of local issues back to Alaska Natives. They must step aside in many areas so that Alaska Natives can attempt to reconstruct honorable and dignified lives for themselves. This will not be an easy task. People who have become accustomed to living without power tend to avoid the obligations that accompany it. Likewise, the external forces that take power — even with the best intentions — generally resist giving it back. In that regard, the following words from the works of Leo Tolstoy are appropri- ate to consider: “9 sit on a man's back choking him and making him cary me. Yet I assure myself and others that J am sory for him and wish to lighten his load by all possible means ~ except by getting off his back.” SS Svercigtity, is within ZOe. don't have to took anyplace We have it within 1 PAM wt ae 0 hots lok fr tee find it, use it.. va ‘Dorothy Kameroff ae Emmonak tel INTRODUCTION AND OVERARCHING PRINCIPLES laska Natives are in a period of social, cultural, economic and political transition. By its very nature, transition means change. Native people have been undergoing this change since contact with Europeans in the mid-1700s, but the most dramatic changes have occurred in quick succession during the past century. Many of the changes have been sudden and traumatic, resulting in considerable upheaval. The changes have generally not been voluntary, and the Native people have not, by and large, been able to control either the scope or pace. Consequently, Alaska Natives have been under tremendous and ever-increasing stress which permeates their lives from the physical to the spiritual, and causes contin- uing damage to their cultures and collective psyche. The end results of this constant and massive stress — the social and psychological breakdown of Native people — are the very issues that moved the Congress to empanel the Alaska Natives Commission. Alaska Natives, most of whom were economically, socially and culturally independent one hundred years ago, are now struggling to get by on the margins of a society and economy imposed on them by others. They are attempting to survive in the land of their forebears on the leavings of a dominant society and culture. To see a reversal of self-destructive tendencies among Alaska Natives, there needs to be a comprehensive approach by the federal and state governments and the Alaska Native people themselves. With all, and not just some, aspects of Alaska Native soci- ety seemingly at or near the breaking point, any piecemeal attempts at reform will fail. Reforms 19 OvERARCHING PRINCIPLES As the Commission and its task forces approached the various issue areas constituting their col- lective charge, three basic princi- ples were formed. It is within the context of these principles that the Commission has framed its discus- sions and recommendations. 1. Self-Reliance While using the rights they have resulting from the spe- cial relationship of Native Americans with the federal government and the rights they have as citizens of the United States and Alaska gen- erally, self-reliance — which includes acceptance of responsibility for individual and community actions — is the key to Alaska Natives’ future well-being in social, Cul- tural, economic, education, and physical and mental health areas. 2. Self-Determination To be effective, policies and programs affecting Alaska Natives must, to the largest extent possible, be conceived, developed and carried out by Alaska Natives. 3. Integrity of Native Cultures Policies and programs affect- ing Alaska Natives — chief among them being policies dealing with rights to subsis- tence hunting and fishing — must recognize, take advan- tage of, and maintain and enhance the traditional val- ues of Alaska Native cultures. ZO must address all of the problems and issues facing Alaska Natives and they must be concurrent. The success or failure of one initiative hinges on the success or failure of others. Such a comprehensive, multi-faceted approach in and of itself would be a positive and long needed departure from present governmental policymaking which is issue-specific and politi- cal in approach. Establishment of Natives! cultural integrity, and the true empowerment of Native individuals, families and communi- ties must become realities. In all of this, breaking Alaska Natives! social and economic dependence on others is a funda- mental part of the equation. It is time to accept that the past policy of assimilation has not worked. The federal government and the State of Alaska have repeatedly chosen to ignore this fact. But it is one clearly understood by Alaska Natives, and one that must be embraced by policymakers if the fate of Alaska Natives is to be improved. Natives must be empowered to approach the future with the certain knowledge that their world views, their traditional methods of solving problems, their ways of thinking and doing — all of which have stood the tests of time — will be given due respect and precedence. The schools, in addition to teaching the basics, must be involved in providing cultural linkages to the community and social linkages to families. Native governments must be afforded long-overdue respect and assistance in taking on the responsibilities of maintaining village harmony and social order. The affairs of the community must be conducted in a culturally and socially correct manner. Other institutions of government, from those providing social welfare and behav- ioral health programs to those offering economic development initiatives, must do so in ways that reflect the true cultural character and strengths of Alaska Natives. And they must do so with the full understanding that programs and initiatives should, ultimately and always, be at the behest and direction of Alaska Natives. ok } >) “Regaining | Sod Cock ie Integrity al & al went vast change. The Civil Rights movement came to the forefront of the nation’s political agenda, and the Basen ss country’s poorest citizens Penal relief in the form of © President Lyndon Johnson’s . . “War on Poverty.” These two initiatives, conceived and spring- __ ing forth from a world far distant both geographi- cally and culturally, would impact the lives of Alaska Natives most profoundly. ° Having ceded or otherwise lost much of the i responsibility for their children’s education, local "systems of governance {including law enforce- ‘ment), physical health and social organization to . the federal and state governments over the cane course of several decades, Alaska Natives would now give over to those same for- eign interests the responsibility for their basic livelihood. ~ Famine would become a thing of the past as Food’ Stamps and financial assis- tance programs ended hunger. The rem- nants of what was once Alaska Natives’ total dependence on the land would be severed. Because of widespread unem- ployment, a majority of Natives qualified for programs that addressed the housing and other needs of America’s poor. Families living in homes not considered "modern". received prefabricated houses. Electricity, through rural power pro- grams, lit up the villages. The dependence that began when missionaries came to bring Alaska Natives “salvation” and territorial school teachers-came to bring them the “enlight- enment” of Wester civilization was now complete. The following was stated in the federal 2(c) Report in the mid-1970s: “Natives’ needs were seen through the government’s ‘white’ eyes. The task “was basically one of defining and pro- viding what Natives needed to cope with — - the rapidly occurring changes. It is more useful than merely romantic today, to keep in mind that the Natives had a long history of self-reliance before con- tact with the white man and the western world, and that many, if not most, of the newly acquired needs were caused by ~ social and economic changes which were imposed, not sought. Invariably Native needs required resources which Natives did not have and services which they could not provide, thus producing a dependent society and a paternalistic government, the more significant charac- teristics of which persisted through the : , early 1960s.” The Alaska.Natives Commission - found that those same conditions and cir- cumstances still persist. Though the authors of the 2(c) Report foresaw poten- tial for a reversal of the dependency on the part of Natives and the paternalism of ~ government, such a reversal did not come “to pass. Many observers in the 1970s felt that the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (1971), the Indian Self- Determination and Education Assistance Act (1974), and the Indian Child Welfare Act (1978), among othérs, would begin to change the tide. Within this body of ‘1970s federal Indian and Alaska Native legislation might lie the means for Alaska Natives to begin regaining mea- sures of economic, social and governmen- tal independence. i In fact; social problems, that began to multiply and intensify inversely with Natives’ total loss of self-reliance in the 1960s, have only gotten worse. There is no end of the downward social and eco- nomic spiral in sight. Alaska Natives are still the poorest of Alaska’s citizens. Natives’ governmental authority and capa- bilities necessary to bring order and mean- ing to the social complex is as far away today as it was when Alaska became a state in 1959. — * <Lowards Self- ‘Detewmination laska Natives must begin to assume true responsibility for the responsibilities long since lost to state, federal and private agencies. As a matter of overriding policy, the federal and state governments, should, as stated previously, assist in the transfer of responsibility. However well-intended, programs designed by non-Natives and operated by : governmental and private agencies for the - “benefit”-of Alaska Natives have not worked. The evidence is in the statistics are of their families and communities, - : \ that appear throughout the various vol- umes of this report. Becatse they have not worked, they. represent a financial drain on both the federal government and the State of Alaska. There has been lit- tle, if any, return on the billions of dol- lars that governments have expended over the past 30 years on what has become, quite literally, a growth industry revolving around problems in the Native community. Many if not most of these programs really only serve to give the false impression that something is being done. The unhealthy dependence Natives have on outside decision makers and ser- ' vice providers is a double-edged sword. By their very nature social service pro- grams and law and order regimes imposed’ ‘ and controlled from without serve to dis- place the village councils, natural leaders and extended families. Rather than hav- , ing to face, acknowledge and deal with problems, the community can turn those problems over to someone else. This robs local people-of both the obligation’and the right to solve problems —.a necessary, ‘ albeit at times difficult, prerequisite for communal and familial well-being. piers L .' The -Intezzelationship of Issues he issues confronting Alaska Natives are compounded by their , interrelationship. Reversal of the cultur- ~ ‘al and social decay in which Alaska ee 24. Natives are enmeshed seems impossible without improvement in their economic condition. Individuals who believe themselves doomed to an-unending future of economic dependency are in . such psychologi- cal despair that little energy is left for under- standing and valuing their her- itage, however rich that culture may be and how- ever vital it may be to sustaining viable communities. Improvement in their economic con- dition seems unlikely without the avail- ability of an education system that works for Alaska Natives. Children, and young adults who are deprived of self-respect by a culturally alien school system and then sent into society as functional illiterates without marketable skills cannot improve their economic status. An education system that works for Alaska Natives seems out of reach so long as public health problems, family dysfunction, and alcohol and sexual abuse are prevalent. Children suffering from chronic diseases brought about by exposure to raw sewage or Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, children from families in which one or both parents are absent or abusive, and children who must live in communities where the society in which they live has failed, are ill-equipped to ‘dealing with those issues. succeed in school, even if'school is reformed to accommodate ways of learn- ing particular to their Native cultures. “The collective will required to address these problems seems impossible to attain so long as Alaska Natives live in.an atmosphere of cultural and social decay. As elders who know and can teach cultural values, and who have the self-esteem and integrity necessary to provide leadership disappear, there are. few to replace them. Younger genera- tions, seemingly condemned to lives of dependency on institutions of an alien culture, have few resources and little incentive to seek and use the tools of empowerment. Without a sense of empowerment, cultural values, and lead- ership woven through their fabric, com- munities soon founder in higher and higher seas of economic woes, public health problems, social deterioration and substance abuse. The answer, however, is not surren- der to this multitude of problems, but greater efforts to address all concurrent- ly. Progress in reversing cultural and social erosion will be rewarded by gains ‘in other areas.’ This, in turn, will bring | within reach additional progress in revi- talizing Native culture. The forward movement of an empowered Native com- munity, addressing simultaneously the many critical issues before it, will go far in promoting substantive advances in _ Che eee —_ attempts at cultural annihilation at the hands of govern- ments, many Alaska Natives seem to carry symptoms they the survivors. Not only did human beings die in great numbers from the forces ative people are e the chilitien and grandchil- dren of those who survived mass death -- ‘brought on by famine and disease. ” Descended from those who: withstood inherited and learned from their parents and grandparents — of Western civilization, but the holes left in society by mass deaths meant the loss of the rich spirituality and cultural traditions at the center of Alaska Natives’ world view. It appears that the way survivors learned to cope. was to look away from the devastation and the problems and to remain silent about their feelings. But the problems remain, persisting against the will of those who wish to forget and against the hundreds of . millions of dollars in public resources spent annually to alleviate them. ‘What is seen in village Alaska today are the tattered remains of traditional societies _ ‘ and cultures mixed in with confusing, marginally accepted Western social, governmental, educational and legal structures. Alcohol, used as medication for the soul, has served as an inexorable wedge, blunting individuals’ feelings and erasing spiritual and cultural values. Healing and mionibinis will be brought about only when Native People, their families For pe information, analyses and rec- ommendations regarding Alaska Native | social, governance and behavioral health issues, please see: ° “Table of Recommendations,” Part Ill. Q “© “The Facs Tel Te toy Patt Ill © Alaska Natives C ission, Volume Il, _ _ Report of the Social/Cultural Task Force, Part |, Section II: "Regaining : Social and Cultural Integrity’; and, Part ~ Ik “Alcohol's Carnage i in the Alaska Native Community." ® Alaska Natives Conneont Volume Il: "Report of the Governance Task Force." ® Alaska Natives Commission, Volume Il: eae of the Health Task Force." @ Alaska Natives Commission, Volume Ill: “Alaska Native Tribal Government." i a 3 and their governments assume responsibility for the total health and welfare of the villages. Among _ the first issues that must be confrontedare violence " against self and others, disregard for roles as family and tribal members, and alcohol abuse. : Current methods of dealing with Native prob- . lems-and circumstances are simply not working. The situation continues to spin out of control, and only Natives can come up with operable solutions. They must be empowered to do so. oe fe Q MEETING "Social and cultural matters ave tied in ‘and are the borids and framework which hold any. and all govetmments together.” Stanton Katchatag Unalakleet 25 UG : Pose the present condition of many Alaska Native fami= lies and communities requires that they be viewed as the children and grandchildren of those who ‘survived mass death at the hands of famine and disease, and attempts at cultural anni- hilation’ at the hands of governments and their agents. Some’ people ‘think that many Alaska Natives still carry the symptoms of what is now termed Post Traumatic Stress Disorder; syntmptoms they inherited and — -learned from their par- ents and grandparents... the “survivors.” vvv ’ One of the most danger- ous and destructive inherited symptoms is the way of coping - or not coping - with life’s prob- lems on-a personal, farnil- ial and commund level. Most 6f the survivors were. orphans of oné kind or - another.. Many were + See Page 27 >» “26 RECOMMENDATIONS MEETING BASIC SOCIAL NEEDS ‘ é 5 : - : / 1. The federal and state governments should imple-. ment policies — in the form of appropriate legislation, if needed, regulations and operating procedures — that give maximum local powers and jurisdiction to tribes and tribal courts in the areas of alcohol importation and control, community and domestic relations, and law enforcement. Ff this cannot be achieved under current federal and state statutes or because of rigid interpretations of the Alaska State Constitution, — - _ Congress should amend Public Law 83-280 to specify ‘all tribes in Alaska have concurrent criminal jurisdic- ee tion with the State of Alaska, similar to the jurisdiction / now exercised by the Metlakatla Community Council. Discussion The constant rise in alcohol-related criminality in the Native community, together with steady increases in other key indicators of social patholo- gy directly related to alcohol abuse, is clear proof that current methods of controlling alcohol’s destruction are simply not working. For over a century governments (federal, territorial and, later, the State of Alaska) haye attempted policies and regulatory schemes for controllingalcohol use and~ abuse by Alaska Natives. Everything from outright prohibition of alcohol sales to Natives, to present- day attempts at curbing alcohol importation and use under the State’s “local option laws,” shave — _ been tried. (Conn and Moras 1986). No alternative, . _or combination of alternatives, has proven even x ‘nominally effective. The situation continues to spi- ral out of control.’ A broad expansion of regulatory and judicial - authority could eventually bring a measure of peace to Native homes and villages. Lives might ulti- mately be saved, and the number of victims, most er of whom are women and children, will decrease. All too often, State Troopers arrive only after some- ‘one has been killed or a serious, alcohol-induced crime has been committed. Problems need to be addressed before they escalate to the point where significant harm has been done and the situation is beyond immediate resolution. For tribal councils and village people, expansion of powers and authorities would mean regaining inher- ent responsibility for village problem-solving in an area where grief and turmoil are the most pronounced. It would mark the beginning of the end of being whol- ly dependent on State law enforcement and judicial agencies to protect Native families and lives. ae 2. The federal government and the State of Alaska should institute a moratorium on development of new - non-Native agency programs that deal with the prob- lems of alcohol and inhalant abuse, domestic violence, - sexual assault, suicide and other social pathologies in predominantly Native areas of the state. Included in such a moratorium would be studies, seminars, confer- ences and other agency initiatives now in place or in the planning stages that have not originated from Alaska Native villages or organizations. ; : physically orphaned and -thus réared in institutions => situations that compound- ed mounting social and cultural discontinuities. Many suffered in varying degrees from the loss not- just of loved ones and oth- ' er tribal members but also the loss of the rich spiritual; -ty and cultural traditions at » the center of Alaska ‘Natives’ world view. of , : VWViwyv It appears that the way ¢ * “survivors learned to. cope: was to look away from _ ‘the devastation. and the problems and to remain silent about their feelings; as if by not having to face | ‘the situation the problems might go away. 3 . Va Ve This trait is portrayed today by many Alaska Natives. It cripples them and stands. in the way of healing and i growth. And, just like “untreated wéunds, the problems fester and ulti-- mately become disabling ‘ to individuals, families and entire; cOmmunities. 2 v Native cultures were not the only casualties of the See Page 28>> \ 27 ‘ - assault of diseases and the invasion of Western life.; Also wounded, and in some cases nearly destroyed, were the farni- ly and kinship systems that governed éveryday life. These systems includ- ed clear delineations of - relationships, responsibili- ties and rights of all the members of a family and village: grandparents and other elders, parents, - ° brothers, sisters, Uncles and aunts. 4 Vvvv Today, what is seen in vil- lage Alaska is the tat-* tered remains. of the tra- . ditional social and cultur- < : al complex overlaid with’ a jumble of confusing, ematginally, accepted Western social,” govern- mental, educational and legal structures. Se rs v ye Alaska Native communi- ties and families must begin reassuming respon- sibilities that have- been ‘lost to others. They have to fully assume the responsibility for educat- ing their children, - This” includes not onty the basics of today’s formal See Page 29 >> Discussion A moratorium on spending until such time as Alaska Natives themselves come up with proposals to replace existing programs would wipe the slate clean of ineffective programs. At the same time) it ' would afford Alaska Natives the opportunity tore 3 ; design grass-roots initiatives that take into account local knowledge, experience and expertise. Initiatives are needed that address the myriad, com- plex and interrelated problems found in the Alaska . Native community. Alaska Natives — who live ~ with those problems and their ramifications daily — are the ones most likely to devise sensible and appropriate solutions. At the same time, no effective, long-term change can happen until Alaska Natives possess the responsibil- ity for solutions and a commitment to the continued well-being:of individuals, families and communities. This will never happen unless government, in a seri- __ ous and meaningful way, loosens its grasp. ‘organizations (see Recommendation #4, below), should establish plans for beginning.a healing and recovery , process for their families and communities. Native organizations not locally based, and federal and state agencies should not initiate any new, social programs in a village. without the village taking the initial step to plan for its recovery. ¥ Discussion Existing social programs being run by the state and federal governments are not working in spite of the \ siteble outlay of funds and human resources. This recommendation is based on the premise that only the Native people can solve their own human prob- . lems. Governments cannot do it for them because , these are Native problems and it must be Natives ~ who learn to deal with them. « . In the long -run, financial savings for governments will likely be realized in ' proportion to the decrease in need for — government social _and behavioral health programs. As it is, governments spend hundreds of millions - of dollars each year on emergency health care, public safety, corrections and social services for Alaska Natives. Over time, ' Realthier communi- ties should ultimate- ly translate into sig- nificant savings to the public. “might be.- hae es education but also the teaching ‘Of thelr sons guages, their histories, © their cultures and their traditions. Only Alaska ’ Natives can do this. No one élsé-can, no matter\ how well educated ‘and well-intentioned they - \ www Village. "councils, and x Native people generally, have to reassume: respon-- sibility for the total health , and welfare of the vil-’ lage, They have, to find “the ways and the: means * TS. begin feeding and clothing their children once again, evén if it - means doing without as ~ parents and adults. This is~. @ responsibility. The-com- munity has to find ways to care for the elderly, the sick and the poor. _Leaders and ‘other responsible adults must | ‘provide recreation. and | direction for the Pol. ones and ‘activities for the~ entire comminity~ be- .? + cause these; foo, are. unmet-needs. has not been practiced — _ See Page 30>> ae -Perhaps most important, __ Natives must do that which 2 é in some cases for genera- tions — by many family and community members: the honest and truthful air- ing ef problems by family members and, if problems * are widespread, by the — entire village. vwy 3 This will be very difficult to do because the problems have multipjied over the years. Layer after layer of familial and communal trauma, grievances, mis- - understandings and resentments have been piled one upon the. other- over time. tt will be diffi- cult also because many ‘of the most sévere prob- lems are not easy to face: sexual abuse within fami- lies, domestic violence, suicide, alcohol and drug abuse, and tragic deaths. By the very nature. of : these types of problems there is much guilt and shame ‘associated with them. “Unless they are rec- ognized and dealt with effectively, though, the cycte of tragedy and despair will continue. « a 4 Bo ‘ederal and state appropriations for social programs in predominantly Native areas of thé state should bypass governmental agencies and be redirected as grants to _ Alaska Native villages and village consortia that have | developed, or are developing, projects dimed at lessening substance abuse, social pathologies, violence and crim- inality in the villages. ~ Discussion : When faced with dilemmas such as health issues, edu- cational concerns, law and order or social service _ needs, people in the villages no longer turn to them- “ selves for solutions. Instead, they call the nearest agency head or social worker, or travel to Juneau or~ Washington, Q.C., for relief. Government employees who have, at best, marginal understanding of Native people, end up as ill- equipped su surrogates groping for solutions. ‘Under this arrangement, villagers are robbed of the opportunity to discuss ‘local problems and to come up with answers best suited to their own >. circumstances and the way they view the world. © Village-based initiatives are few and far between. With the assistance of their own organizations (e.g. Native regional non-profits, regional health corpo- -rations, among others}, village councils and consor- tia of villages need’ programs that are conceived, developed and controlled at the locaLlevel. The “only criteria for funding such projects should be: 1) a- village or group of villages have, by vote of the community, admitted to having the problems they seek to address; 2)villages and/or Native organiza-° tions are able to manage programs and account for program funds; and 3) the applicant village(s) has ) agreed to participate fully in the project from the planning to implementation stages. The Situatiow o-called “welfare” programs have become a cruel irony for the Native com- \ , _ munity, tuming many Alaska Natives into 2 : . virtual economic wards of government. : ~~ Much of the blame for the current situation stems from per- sistent unemployment found throughout village Alaska, together with "Alt of es a sudden the loss of control of local resources and local decision-making processes. : f this person (an Most of the relatively few jobs available in many parts of rural Alaska are ‘extemally sige “ates eligible subsidized public service positions occupied, more often than not, by transient or perma- hoe Weel bane) bean nently resident non-Natives. The lack of opportunities for productive labor and earned income, and the loss of self-respect that comes with reliance on others for providing the basic necessities of life, are important causal factors in the epidemic of social problems afflicting Alaska Natives and their communities. 5 Values that once enabled Alaska Natives to meet their own and each others' needs through hard work and close familial and communal sharing and support systems have been severely eroded. Roles have changed and the villages have splintered into tiny fami- a very rich person and the single-parent family became . acceptable. It was during this era that the role of Native males changed, and we did not realize t... Che roles we played were not eal- ly units, dependent not on other members of the tribe, but on the government. A sense of pride and strength has been ane by a lack of self-esteem and feelings of helplessness: B -Welfare programs have, in some cases, become © ae EG : x For further information, paid ae | * recommendations regarding Alaska _ ~ Native employment, unemployment and income maintenance programs as they “affect Alaska Natives, please see: ‘ _ © “Table of Recommendations Part Ill. an added addiction. The programs have completed OY PRECR AEA \ more, as hunters, - the breakdown of healthy village and familial inter- dependence. Even worse, an unhealthy dependence ~ te re “ : gatherers.\ TOe were replaced by PAS, BIA, free housing, -, on government has led to an acquiescence about | critical decisions and a reliance on outsiders to : © “The Facts Tel The Sty," Patti , : © “Meeting Aaeed y et. solve gives ; ae energy assistance, “ a. Galore toons ened a Barriers that stand in thé way of employment | - food stamps, and - aa nee endleched opportunities for Alaska Natives must be overcome. the list could just @ Aisha Natvee Commaiesicnivolume. | At the same time, current income maintenance and go on and on." “tes ee family assistance programs mist be restructured, ‘ and Unemployment: <1 _ Eventually, the programs should be dismantled. Patrick Madros, Sr. - © Alaska Natives Commission, Volume: ‘ pee - |, Report of the Social/Cultural Task E ay. Force: "Native ah eae eed : : ‘ 1 Reliance vs. Dependéncy.” \ . eS . 2 eo . ¢ 7 : ~ Ri LL. there is to be any: lasting improvement.in the lives of Alaska Natives living in villages, the problems of unemployment and depen- defce on goverhment handouts for economic sur- vival need to be addressed and solved. The two go’ hand-in-hand. Because of the high rate of unemploy- ment — well over 50 per- : cent in most villages — many Native families quali- fy for any number of gov- ‘ernment assistance pfo- grams for which no work is required. - 3 wv Vv . ’ As discussed in.other sec- tions of this report, depen- dency has become a major contributing factor in the breakdown: of Alaska Native society. It has bro- ken thé healthy interde- pendence of families, tear- ing at the social fabric that once ‘held Native commu- nities together. It robs them - of self-esteem and feeds perceptions of poverty, inferiority, helplessness and uselessness. If compromises See Page 33 >> si RECOMMENDATIONS euetg bavane! MEETING 7 BASIC EMPLOYMENT @) OTHER , 2) HUMAN - NEEDS 1. Increased local Native employment opportunities, culturally appropriate service delivery, and local deci- ~~“ sion-making and management skills should be enhanced _ through expanded contracting of government programs and services to Native governments and other Native providers in predominantly Native areas of the state.- Discussion The slow but steady evolution towards a system of contracting government services to institutions _controlled by rural and Native people is providing employment opportunities once virtually inaccessi- ble to marty people in rural Alaska. That system, though not flawless, is also bolstering self-determi- nation efforts for Native people statewide by devel- oping the means for localized, grass-roots problem. solving and service delivery. ‘ ‘The State of Alaska should enter into cooperative service delivery agreements with Native organiza- tions and governments with clear procedures for contracting to those institutions. As a matter of policy, the State should contract with Native orga- nizations and governments where there is a proven capability to manage programs and account for pro- gram funds. impact the social and physical well-being of Native State programs and initiatives that individuals, families and tribes in village Alaska: should be the primary initial focus of what should - become universal contracting. These include, but are not limited to, the following: employment assistance, child protective services, social and = I family services, and . alcohol and mental health programs. With respect to feder- al funds and contract- ing, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the ; Indian Health Service and other’. federal agencies need to con- tinue the.process of decentralizing: ands + contracting programs eligible for inclusion under P.L. 93-638, as In_ this same light, regional- amended. . Native: -non-profit - associations and cor- should move money, authori- porations ty-and responsibility to the villages. These ase ' institutions need to work with tribal governments to review significant shifts in programs and services from the regional to the sub-regional and village level. Ultimately, the- \ - Natives’ natural sense of industriousnesg, and it takes away any ‘initiative to address and overcome the many problems they face. EMPLOYMENT The acute and chronic state of Unemployment in the villages is undermining - “the roles of village people. Alaska Natives in the work- ‘ing age population bear a greater weight of what is _ called the “burden of dependency” (the number of children and elderly that must be provided for) than. “do non-Natives. Yet many, if nof most, of these same working age* people do not have. jobs, and they have no likely prospects for jobs in the foreseeable future. ~ X THis depressing, situation is most marked - among ’ younger Native males, the’ that’ the very group Commission and others have identified as being most at-risk for déveloping behavioral health problems and displaying social pathologies. . These are the same. community members “who, in earlier times, were ‘looked to for leadérship, protection, and meeting ee See Page 34>> & a the basic survival needs ‘of , the tribe. wwyv More and more, village elders and parents. are say- ing that their sons and grandsons need jobs. They * need something to do that is productive and con- tributes to the well-being of. the village and its children. Taught as childten in feder- al and state schools that securing a.job is an impor- tant measyre .of success in life, young Natives find that there is nowhere to turn in ‘villages where jobs are vir- _ tudlly non-existent. . wvwyv Sometimes lacking the ‘ eduction or training, ta - compete for jobs in other areas of the state, and often unwilling or unable to leave their families and homes, many,Natives, par- ticularly young men, are idle for many months of the year. Depressed and dis= couraged, they turn to alcohol: and drugs to relieve the tedium and feelings of uselessness, hopelessness.and sense of failure. In time, as the sta- _, tistics show quite clearly, they become alcohol See Page 35 >> = * Discussion local employment and tribal empowerment needs ‘in the villages should be balanced with the realities of providing cost-effective, quality services throughout rural Alaska. Given the superior record Native organizations have in recruiting and hiring Natives compared _ with the federal government, the Alaska Natives Commission recommends that Native organiza- tions and governments contract all federal func- tions currently available for contracting under P.L. 93-638, as amended. 2. At a minimum, every federal agency with programs eligible for contracting under terms of P.L. 93-638, as amended, should have a Native hire requirement sim- ilar to that which is in place with the Indian Health Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs; further, all _ federal departments with job classifications located in rural Alaska should be required to maintain Native _ preference in hiring to ensure that, at a minimum, the proportion of Native employees corresponds to the i proportion of Natives in the population of the immedi- ate area. The federal government employs close to 20,000 people in Alaska. With two exceptions — the Indian Health Service (IHS) and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) — a wide disparity exists between Alaska Natives as a percentage of the state’s population (16%) and their representation in _ the federal work force (5% not including the IHS and BIA). The key factor distinguishing the IHS and the BIA from other federal departments. is a special Congressionally approved Alaska Native hiring pref- erence. Federal.agencies not under the terms of the Native hire provision — which includes most of the agencies operating in Alaska — seem unable to employ Alaska Natives in meaningful numbers. Expanding Native hire provisions to other agencies within the federal ‘system could result in substantial new job opportunities of Alaska Natives. © The Commission was unable to collect detailed fig- ures pertaining to Alaska Native hire in federal jobs ‘located in predominantly Native areas of the state. The generally low percentage of Alaska Natives in the federal work force in Alaska clearly indicates, however, thatthe ratio of federal‘ Native hires in these areas is quite low, especially considering the high percentage of Alaska Natives in the rural popu- lation.’ For instance, in the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) passed in 1980, Congress directed the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to institute Native and. local preference in a number of programs related to the Conservation System Units established by the Act. None of these has been followed even though the Conservation Units aré located in rural Alaska and most are in proximity to.predominantly Native communities. Congress should revisit ANILCA with respect to Native and-local hire provisions and establish legisla- tive directives.to the federal administration for pur- poses of enforcing the mandates of. ANILCA. Oversight that can ensure implementation of the mandates should be ongoing, and should include rep- resentation from statewide, regional and local Native organizations and corporations. : _and idleness affect the - s abusers, victims of ‘acci- dents, homicide and sui- cide. Many end™up in prison for crimes that are often committed under the influence of alcohol. vvv Not all unemployed young men become such statistics. But being a significant part of a vil- lage’s population, their mental state, drinking , ‘households, in which they live and, by. extension, the emotional. climate of the entire community. : Unable to support their- own families, much less~ - build - homes, they end up living with .parents or in-laws, adding further pressures to everyday life. - and maintain “wWwTvv Subsistence hunting and fishing, activities in which young village men still participate, no Ionger fill fhe days ‘and the months - of the calendar as they — once did. And subsis- - tence ‘does not provide the_income needed to purchase other foods. and consumer goods that.-have' become See Page 36 >> a5 nécessities in modern vil-- lages. These young men, “and many of their female counterparts, are now ‘dependants —- reliant on. their. parents who them- _ selves must often look to ‘welfare programs for _ financial support. Hence, the pleas c6ming from ‘the fathers and “mothers, grandfathers and grand- mothers: .“Get jobs for our young people.” They > know better than anyone pendence. of this social interdepen-_ else what dependency _ and joblessness are doing . to théir children and grandchitdren, It is tear- ing them apart. And it is tearing apart their fami- lies and'villages. d WELFARE DEPENDENCY Income maintenance ‘programs : — or what are commonly referred to as “welfare” programs — have completed the, breakdown of healthy vil- lage and familial interde- In the place dence is an unhealthy dependence on govern- ment to meet the basic a survival needs of tribal — and family members. This maces hand in- hand with J ‘See Page *S a =" side of Alaska. . Limits to local Native participation in capital improvement projects — including hiring and wage rules that work counter to local Native employment ' needs — must be overcome to ensure employment - ‘opportunities for village residents in public works plan- . ning, design and construction in villages. ; Discussion - L Most capital projects 43 in village Alaska are’ contracted to urban-. oe based companies, or to companies based out- As is the case with respect’ to so many aspects of - Alaska Native exis- tence, local people ~F become merely passive~ ~ recipients of the air- ports, roads, clinics ¥ and Houses construct- - ed for their benefit. The true economic-~ benefits of construc- _ tion activities go-to Ad businesses and to “workers and their fam- : \ilies in-Anchorage, _ ; , Fairbanks, Seattle and ame: other points south. we : More often than not, healthy young Native people in the village literally Watch from their front doors as others from ~ far away places earn wages on projects intended to “benefit Natives. ~ : The federal and state governments should use force accounting on all village capital projects to open opportunities for local labor and talents in the plan- _ ning, design and construction of these projects. Also, the federal and state governments should apply the federal Davis Bacon Act and the Alaska “Mini-Davis Bacon” effectively and rationally in conformity with the statutory rule of the local pre- vailing wage. The Alaska Natives Commission has, in various reports, documented the projected public works and housing needs that could lead to significant future waves of capital expenditures in rural Alaska, To the extent such expenditures are forth- coming, every effort must be made to ensure that Native ‘people are designing and constructing the homes, putting in the sewer and water systems that will service those homes, building new community, _ facilities, and repairing and maintaining those already in place. ' depending on federal and state governments to make cftucial decisions about how Natives' needs can best be met. Vvvv There is.no pride in this way of living. In: fact, a -dependent way of life intensifies the sense of helplessness and tack of > self-esteem that aretseen so often among Alaska ° Natives. In some cases, it _ appears as if welfare pro- grams have become an added addiction “and ‘that they are sympto- matic of all that is wrong’ with. life in Alaska Native villages. © woe Alaska. Native families and villages were. tradi- tionally close knit, depending on. one another for food and shelter and, when need- ed, for caring. Family and village members took care of each other;’ they looked after each other. The health of one family was of paramount importance to the others. Families hunted together, camped together, cele- brated together. They - were full together. and went hungry together. They shared each other's joys and each others sor- - See Page, 38 > rows. So, while they may have been “poor” mate= rially, they at least had each other. All too often, this is not the case now. Government anti-poverty programs have created a-new_ poverty...the poverty of the broken vil- lage family.. ~ eV Pe Families literally do not need each other now that government has stepped in to serve each member individually. The result has been a drifting apart offamilies and. iso- lation of one from anoth- er. The large circle of families, which was the ‘traditiSnal village, ‘is now a grouping of separate interests. vvv., Many. steps must be tak- en to reverse this trend. One of the most crucial steps is for family and community members to begin seeing to the’ needs of one another. At the same time the vil- lage, asa social unit, ~ needs to assume deci- sion-making capabilities and authority regarding the circumstances of its members-and families. see Page 39 >> we ts to local Native participation in rural Alaska resource production and extraction industries must be clearly identified and overcome to ensure employment opportunities for village residents, expanded economic _ benefits for rural economies, and avenues for Native involvement generally. Discussion In general, the history of resource development in Alaska resembles colonialism at its finest: i.e. eco- nomic “activity” consists largely of extracting raw resources from Alaska’s lands and waters. In far too « » many cases, local Native employment opportuni- ties in the extraction phase are marginal, as are sec- ondary or tertiary economic benefits to local economies. A noteworthy exception is the Community Development Quota (CDQ) program under which some 62 communities in western Alaska share in the royalties of the Bering Sea pollock fisheries. The positive effects resulting from the infusion of - economic and social support and assistance — . including local employment opportunities created: by the CDQs — are only now beginning to be real- ized. There are’indications that the long-term rewards will have a major impact on the-coastal Native communities in western Alaska. At the same time, the Commission sees the potential for CDQ-type approaches in other extraction indus- tries, in addition to fishing. What is of greatest importance to policymakers is the need to look more broadly at the full range of economic develop- ment opportuuities that might benefit local Native~ ‘communities in all future resource development activities taking place in rural Alaska. 5. Federal and State regulations must be changed to allow for tribal design and management of govern- ment income support and maintenance programs, most notably: Aid to Families with Dependent Children, Food-Stamps, State General Assistance, and the federal General Assistance program funded under the Bureat of Indian Affairs. Discussion What is generally viewed as a social “safety net” in contemporary American life has become more of a solid base from which many Alaska Natives now live their lives. Historically, Alaska Natives were a people capable of meeting their own and | each other's needs through close familial and com- - munal sharing and support systems, In modern times, an ever-increasing ‘number of Native vil- lages and families have become virtual economic wards of the federal and state governments. This is due mainly to the chronic unemployment situa- tion in much of village Alaska together with the loss of control of local resources and local decision- making processes.” \ OR _ While financial assistance is necessary until the. rural areas of Alaska become economically viable, there is a critical need to restore pride and self- ‘esteem to Alaska Natives and a sense of commu- nity purpose to the villages. Unless real changes are made to the current system of income, mainte- nance and financial support programs in Native communities, the overall well-being of Alaska Natives will continue to deteriorate. ¥ v Current income mainte- nance and family assis- tance programs must be restructured to meet a broader spectrum of needs of Alaskal Natives in “areas beyond the general scope of individual wel- fare. In time, the programs - should be dismantied. vvv In undertaking _ this process, policymakers should have faith in-the capabilities of Alaska Watives. If given the ‘ opportunity, they will: feed themselves and their children. They will not go unclothed. They will find a way to clothe themselves and. each other. They will not freeze to: death for lack of hous- ing. In the process they will begin to reclaim a sense of pride in who. + _ they-are and what they can-achieve. They-will rebuild a sense Of séelf- esteem and they will find purpose in life. Ye oo 6. Utilizing government transfer payment receipts, trib- al governments in Alaska should be permitted to design and implement local “workfare” programs that require productive, community development related employ- ment where aid-eligible households have at least one 4 able-bodied, employable member. Village workfare pto- ‘grams should be designed to provide adequate training, child care and other support services for participants. ’ Discussion ; San _ To the extent “welfare” programs are restructured as proposed in the foregoing discussion, the potential eo benefits to working members of households and their families are incalculable. Not only would there be a restoration of pride and self-esteem among individu- als and families, but workfare programs could be fashioned to benefit communities by providing need- ed labor for, as examples, building ahd maintenance projects, and village planning and management. ‘There are any ‘number ‘of village projects toward which workfarexfunds can be directed, many of them related to improving the overall cleanliness ‘and orderliness of communities. Others relate to increasing the ability of communities to manage and maintain village infrastructure, and improve. local government administration. The money can, also be used to augment educational and health ser- vice programs. By offering‘a viable and honorable interim solution to the need for meaningful employment in village. - Alaska, such-a move by government would comple- ment various prevention, education and village heal- ing efforts proposed in other sections of this report. The Sit«xation laska’s prisons hold an inordinate number of Alaska Natives, but the inescapable fact remains that Natives did something to bring themselves into the system. An ‘offense occurred and, more likely than not, the victim was a fellow Alaska Native: a dead cousin, a beaten wife, a sexu- ally abused child. Although it appears from data reviewed by the Commission that some mechanisms are in place to resolve disputes and even seri- ous social infractions at the village level without involving the State of Alaska judicial regime, they are not being used effectively. - Much of the problem stems from the State’s unwillingness to cede to village councils and village courts the authority to handle local cases. + / Unfortunately, there is a conviction among many State officials that any release of State authority to tribes is a threat to the State’s authority. This is unnecessary and leads away from the solution, which is the exercise of self-governance to achieve self-determination. =o a “For further information, analyses and, ~ recommendations regarding law. © enforcement and judicial needs in the” Alaska Native community, please see: _ ® “Table of Recommendations,” Part Il. © “The Facts Tell The Story," Partil. © Alaska Natives Commission, Volume I: Report of ihe Governance Task Farce." © Alaska. Natives Commission, Volume I, Report of the Social/Cultural Task Force, Part Il: "Regait fegaining Social and Gus Integrity." i © Alaska sila len Volume Ill; _ ‘Alaska Native Tribal Governance." . In many cases, the problem is a Crippling per- ception among Natives themselves that Alaska Natives are powerless. Tn far too many instances, this perception has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If there is a glaring weakness in the current sys- tem it lies in-the fact that Native villages are seldom, if ever, involved. Once a village member is arrested he or she is taken out of the village. In effect, the vil- lage is robbed of the opportunity and the obligation of facing and dealing with very real problems. | a te MEETING "It's only been in the _ last 15 ot 20 years : that white justice has come to the bush... We have _ grafted a system upon a population that previously didn't have it, and now we're wondering why it doesn't work. The fact is, it hasn't worked particularly well, if you think of a justide ‘zystem as having two primary goals. The first is the protection of the’ public.. -the ‘second is to hold people gs accountable in some meaningful way." Brant McGee > Director, Ofc. of Public Advocacy 41 ee State: of Alaska’s Department of Public Safety enforces state law everywhere in Alaska and the state ‘court systern adjudicates both civiland criminal ‘ cases, ‘ But since the 1960s that system has been buckling under the - weight of alcohol-fueled criminal cases coming out of the Alaska Native community. There have been attempts to keep - up with this ever increas- ing load: new Superior, Court judgeships have been-.created in several ‘larger‘rural communities; : ‘ more State Troopers have 5 ~ béen hired; and new pris- ‘ons have been construct- ~ 6d.~> Regardless, these “efforts ;have’' nof -stemmed, let alone ~ decreased, the number of Alaska ‘Natives in. vari -ous stages of the criminal justice system. , ~ wvv. Some argue that many of - the’ Native. people in See Page 43 > > pz > RECOMMENDATIONS <r ne MEETING ' _ BASIC LAW _y ENFORCEMENT ~ ~ A gh Aa EEA: ae ere | NEEDS st Won : 1. Alaska Native tribes should be encouraged to estab- , lish dispute resolution bodies (including tribal courts) - _and procedures that are consistent with the predomi- ; nant tradition and culture of the village, and the State. : of Alaska and the federal government should provide i training and technical assistance to further the estab- lishment and functioning of these bodies. , Discussion. : f Tribes need to be empowered to handle a broad variety of cases and infractions if a return to self- ~~ determination and self-relianee is ever to hecome a reality. Jurisdiction and authority are also prerequi- sites for solving village social problems because, as evidence clearly suggests, these problems will like- ly never be solved until Alaska Natives and their institutions of government have taken responsibili- ty for change. ‘At can be argued’ that the greatest weakness in the “system” as it currently exists is that by taking — away both authority and responsibility from Native ~ _ villages, the critical need for Alaska Natives to face : and deal with their very real social problems is only _ compounded. ~ 2. The State of Alaska should enter into formal agree- ments with each tribal council to determine which / a Ee tee For tribal governments in Alaska to have their” rights and responsibilities in this area honored, the federal and state governments have critical deci- sions to-make. The State of Alaska must recognize that tribes exist in Alaska and the federal’ govern- ment must confirm the rights and abilities pos- sessed by Alaska Native tribes (See related Recommendations on pages 73 to 78). infractions or classes of infractions will be the domain of tribal courts and which will continue to be under the authority of state government. Such agreements should specify that Village Public Safety Officers will enforce all tribal ordinances as well as state statutes. Discussion Although it appears from data reviewed by the Commission that some mechanisms are in place, to. resolve disputes at the village level without involv- ing. the state judicial system, they are not being used effectively. Probable causes of this seeming discrepancy between what could be accomplished locally and what is, in reality, being accomplished include the State of Alaska’s unwillingness to cede to village councils and village courts the authority to handle local cases. The continuing confusion and conflicts over tribal sovereignty, which embed even more deeply the State’s conviction that any release. of its authority to tribes is a threat to its authority, also stand in the way of effective local judicial control. 4 ; ‘prison do not belong there. Others argue that ‘the system is unfair and ‘unjust. and that not enough is done to help~ offenders once they have been _ incarcerated. There is certainly’a basis for each of these ‘asser- tions. But, what cannot - be denied is that Alaska Natives in question did something to bring:them- "selves into the system. An offense occurred and, — more likely than not, the - victim was a fellow Alaska Native. - So,. while it is true that the present system might provide less than a | perfect judicial process and the corrections system - might not be the best that can be -achieved for Native . offenders, thé ; offenses that are commit- ted cannat be denied. VW Ve if there-is a glaring weak- - . ness in the present system -it jes in the fact that Native villages are~sel- dom, if ever, involved. “Once a village member is arrésted ‘he or she is taken out of the village. The offender usually does not return wntil such.time as - the case ‘has been heard See Page 44 ¥> ~ “5 in some geographically removed. location. or when time has been served in a State facility. ‘Many. Alaska Natives have grown to. approve of this reality. It is easier to export a problem and send it somewhere else. vvev In light of present social : deterioration and lack of governing authority found in many villages, however, sending prob- lems away .only serves to delay the necessity of facing the conditions that feed dysfunctions and tawléssness. In that ‘respect, the current sys- —tem has. become a part of the problem. This is .trde not necessarily because people are.get- ting unfair or prejudicial treatment, but because it robs the villages of the’ opportunity - and- the obligation of facing and dealing with their very real,problems. : vwwyv The law enforcement and _ judicial systems in Alaska need to change for many reasons where the future well-being of Alaska _See Page 45 > > Alaska Native tribes and the State of Alaska need to” put their conflicts and concerns aside and begin designing and implementing local community dis- pute resolution bodies, policies and procedure. This should be accomplished without engaging in - ~ - futile arguments over tribal sovereignty or loss of e the State’s authority. . a : : 3. Native organizations, such as regional non-profit corporations, the Native American Rights Fund.and similar institutions possessing financial and technical ~ © capabilities should, in addition to pressing for resolu- . tion of tribal claims to authority and jurisdiction, examine the.existing governmental entities available to Native communities in order to identify ways to increase their effectiveness in addressing village prob- ' lems and-achieving village goals. Discussion The exercise of Native self-governance is hindered by the lack of knowledge and precedents in exercis- : ; ing authorities that currently exist. Over the course of several. generations, Alaska Natives have lost the ability to influence and shape local government to successfully respond to problems in the villages. In sheer numbers Natives constitute the over: whelming majority of citizens in communities - throughout village Alaska. It follows that they - should be able to control the election of governmen- ~ tal positions and pass and enforce ordinances con- Wag : sistent with the culture and traditions of the locale. , The reality is; instead, a crippling perception of powerlessness. In far too many instances, this per- - ception has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Natives is concerned. __ What should not be over- -, looked is that the system must change for.a very / fundamental reason: ’ vil- . ation lage involvement is need- 4. The State of Alaska should establish means by ~~ ed in the disposition of which probation and parole can be Carried out in the home village of the offender, utilizing the cultural and civil and criminal cases is that profoundly impact tribal members. The sys- tem can become a part social structure of the community to both monitor and support the individual in the spirit of rehabilitation and community healing. ( i ae : of the solution. It.can ¥ help to empower Alaska Discussion : : i ; “Natives, enabling them to: Statistics clearly show a disproportionately high fe TASS: : problems \tand percentage of Natives reincarcerated due to revoca- : “search for solutions. The tion of their probation or parole. The tilt of the practice of passing prob- State system toward urban rather than village lems to someone ola options can be seen in the failure of the correctional : ; and receding into denial” system to develop probation and parole alternatives Pane O EC OMe an reit ce : : t rt that return village offenders to villages. The results 2 ee are new problems for Native offenders who lack ~ many of the capabilities needed to meet the terms of.probation or parole in an urban setting. Village dispute resolution bodies should have the j authority to establish monitoring and assistance 2 — teams to supervise parolees and probationers in the Risa pea village. Some villagers might resist having offenders = : retumed to the village. In some of those instances there are serious misgivings about having someone > - convicted of a crime living in the village again. In "ag 2 most cases, however, resistance will be due to vil- Sod lagers' inability to confront and deal with the very : : a ‘ real family and community problems that breed Native socio-pathologies and criminality. A vil- lage-based support system would help Native offenders. It would also provide Native options for dealing forthrightly with social, mediation issues in a culturally relevant manner. - \ ; : ao a aicetint APE ome as Regional-and, where practical, village alternative : corrections programs should be established by the State of Alaska for all but thé most violent Native offenders; the programs, to be successful, must have adequate and culturally appropriate alcohol treatment components and be administered and/or overseen by ‘local Native organizations. Discussion This recommendation relates closely to the previous recommendation. Villages need to confront and deal not only with offenders, but also the situations giving rise to Native violence. This can only happen if the system is changed so that social problems, including the need for punishment and rehabilitation of Native offenders, are dealt with locally. Punishment can be - _achieved through the use, where appropriate, of alter- natives to incarceration. When incarceration is need- - ed, it can be accomplished closer to the offender's home village if adequate‘means are provided regional- ly and sub-regionally. : ei Most. crimes (estimated to be as high as 80%) for which Native people serve prison sentences are committed under the influence of alcohol. Rehabilitation of Native offenders, it follows, rests ~_ largely in the ability to bring about successful alco- hol abuse treatment. The limited substance abuse treatment programs currently available within the correctional system are fundamentally ineffective. To succeed, treatment approaches for Alaska Native offenders must be appropriate with respect to Native cultures and also in relation to the types of drinking patterns and alcohol-induced behaviors | . “Common among Alaska Natives. | ~ 1 f : The Situation eee - ooking back to the days when Native children were punished just for speaking their own Native language, it appears that education in rural Alaska has taken a big step forward. = As a matter of fact, it has. But the system still has © myriad problems. Native children today are at or near the bottom of academic achievement charts, and the indisputable fact remains that large numbers uf Native children are not meeting | the standards set by the current system. : In spite of the long history of attempted acculturation of Alaska Native peoples and tribes, Alaska Natives remain culturally different from the rest of Alaska and the United States. Besides the fact that children are being educated in what in many ways is an “alien” culture, many come from homes rife with abuse of alcohol and the attendant family violence. : All too often the school is a place of rest for a child who does not sleep well and does - not get the nurturing he or she needs at home. The school, then, is a place not for learn- ing but instead a place to temporarily escape the less than fortunate realities of home. Critical to the educational success of Alaska NE children is an integrated educa- tion, one that gives them the skills that will lead to success in life as well as the under- : standing that will continue'the community’s values. ~ : Sat oe 7] Native children need to know, understand and _ For further information, analyses and — be comfortable with who they are-as members of recommendations: Alaska ei “ ? Native education and training isaues, distinct races and cultures. The burden for ensuring please BOC. ' : “that this happens rests firmly on the shoulders of © “Table of Recommendations, "Part Il. © “The Facts Tell The Story," Part ill ~ @ Alaska Natives Commission, Volume Il: _ ‘Report of the Education Task Force.” share the responsibility together with families and _@ Alaska Natives’ ‘Commission, Volume ie ic community members. i : “Report of the Economic Task Force." ° x . Bs * Alta Naive: Commis oe : Seen mee Patt | Section I ‘Native Education A Key . - toFuture Survival! oe Ein ' roles to play in the development of children, must * Native people. But the schools, with important - “As we seatch for solu- tions, Native people must certainly exercise some introspection, but a . substantial part of the problem is derived from conditions external to the Native commenity. . Drwoposals for change must take into account the roles of teachers, of ‘school district policies and practices, the curtic- ula, and the social set- ting’ of schooling...” Dennis Demmert Juneau Pe aR RECOMMENDATIONS Lr. HemnBtiig to f ; i MEETING understand why Native ¥ / Children are at or near j sae EPEAT Giz the bottom of academic ~ ; achievement charts is a z goer ED UCATIONAL topic of concern and 2 S| INBEBDS debate for-parents, edu- : Pe - - Shad , % aes Ries E e “— cators and policymakers alike. Cértainly, some of the emerging arguments and theories have merit, _and some of the reme- | establish local control of schools by recasting advisory . ° diés.that have been tried 1. The State of Alaska should assist local residents in predominantly Native areas of the state to further z ‘ "boards as policymaking boards and by enabling, over a have improved various ~ -"_. five-year period, the Regional Education Attendance Ospects Of thegesducg” a. Area (REAA) system to delegate the authority for tional system for Alaska _ Native children. There have been many changes , : in.curricula. Multi-million Disciwsion dollar schools have’ been y _ schools to tribal governments in partnership with the Alaska Department of Education. The Native community, including parents and : Ee ete ; . i : Say pul aclly Serv bie community leaders, needs to achieve a compelling lage‘in the state. Rural school districts with Native voice in the direction of the formal education sys- tem. In village Alaska, Natives must assume true - board members have ¢ “ownership” of the schools. New forms of empow- erment in this critical area need to be appreciably different than what exists today. Natives should ° been created. But the — fact remains: Native chil. Bet? dren are still not learning. = ; . =n not be relegated to the role of just electing local wweyv. : advisory school boards. Those advisory boards that Having codam ‘ the : do exist should be policymaking boards with con- responsibility of educat- ‘ trol over hiring, curricula and educational program ing Alaska Native chil- F : , _ plans, at a minimum. : dren to missionaries and é territorial school teachers | ; i Alaska Native villages must be willing to actually See Page 49 > > take over control and direction of their schools and ass FS : ci school systems even if it means having to create the smallest and poorest school districts in the nation to achieve it. And the State must be willing to 54: ee ‘ make changes in policies and in the system to facil- jitate true local Native control. A tribal government entering into a partnership with the Alaska Department of Education as an alterna- ~ tive to participation in the REAA system should be * required to participate in the funding of the school to the same extent as similarly ‘situated Alaskan municipalities operating local school systems. Tribal governments unable to meet this financial _ obligation, if any, should be provided federal finan- cial assistance through special appropriations to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for such purposes. ; y ‘ FR 2 The State of Alaska and local school dintziets need to markedly increase the number of Native teachers and administrators to meet the particular needs of Alaska Native students through affirmative hiring, " alternative certification and other means. Discussion In most schools in ' predominantly Native communities, there remains an entirely " inadequate represen- tation of Alaska " Native school teach- ‘ers, administrators and other school “employees. Alaska’s ‘education. system needs to supply teach- ers and administrators” ag during the early part of this “century, most Native fami- lies and villages have nev- er reassumed that respon- sibility. Consequently, education is now per- ceived as being some- one else’s job. Native vil- . _ Jages and their govern-: ments remain, if not disin- terested, then certainly disengaged with respect to schools and the schoo! systems in which their. children are immersed. In order to fully. under- stand the current situa- tion, it must be under- - stood that, in spite of the . long history of attempted ‘acculturation of Alaska. Native pedples dnd tribes, Alaska Natives remain culturally different from the rest of Alaska : and the United States. In_ other.words, the ideas, methods and languages _ used to teach Native chil- dren are still alien and + therefore still difficult for: students to grasp. : vwwv Transferring information and ideas from one cul- ture to another is.com- “plex. Among Alaska * ‘See Page 50 >> Natives, the social and economic conditions of the families and villages make educational suc- cess even more difficult. Many children. come from homes ‘where there is chronic abuse. of alco- hol and the frightening . - reality of family violence. - They come oe homes © that have a near total dependence on govern- ment for economic sur- - vival. . Many of.these homes are steeped in - ‘spiritual and economic poverty. where the par- : ents and other family members are too preoc- cupied with their own problems to. pay ade- quate ‘attention tothe. child and how the is doing .. in school. Ve av. _ All too often the school is Cy place of rest for a child _ who does not sleep well “ and does not get the nur’ ’ turing she needs at home. The school; then, is a place not for learning but instead a place to . temporarily escape the less than fortunate reali- ‘ties Gf home. These chil? drén — distracted by = problems in the home: See Page 51 >> a ~ knowledgeable of, “and.” ‘transfer remains English, _ and the pictures painted "as the backdrop for learn- - nature of the work force . with respect for, Native cultures, Teachers, by and large, still come from places foreign to students and their families. The language of information ing are still from another High teacher turnover, which is directly world. related to the “import” in rural schools and results in unnecessary dis- < argument in favor of increased levels of Native teachers and administrators. '. The personnel in rural schools must be equipped to take advantage of Native ways of learning. And. they need to understand who Native children are, the social environments in which those children - live, and the culture of the family and community. "The importance of Native teachers and administra- tors as role ‘models for Alaska:Native students — many of whom have low: ‘self-esteém and fatalistic outlooks on life — is another crucial aspect that needs to be clearly recognized and appreciated by Alaska's educational system. The cultural gap between Native children and their teachers has narrowed, but the chasm that has | existed for a century is still unacceptably wide. It “continuities in instruction and learning, is another — and village-— will. not learn. Without doubt, this is one of the major rea- “sons why Alaska ‘Native children are not learning in school. The problems of village and home are robbing them. of. their. most receptive and must finally be bridged. The Alaska Legislature can do its part by resisting the political pressures that have held it immobile on this issue for far too long. inquisitive years....their childhoods. \ vwvwvv Government must bear i 3. -The Congress and the State of Alaska should help to increase social and cultural linkages between schools some of the blame and responsibility. for the inad- equacy .of the formal and the villages by creating an Alaska’Native Heritage Trust, the funds from which would be granted to : Alaska Native tribes for: 1) programs to develop parent : ga education being deliv- and village government involvement in the schools and ' Bg ae ered, ‘or not delivered, aS school systems; and, 2) use in schools and villages for - ‘ > Alaska ‘Native children. enhancing Native languages and cultures. ; : ‘ But Native villages and ; ; : families are responsible, - Discussion _. ‘ é too. While many Native Notwithstanding the relatively recent construction y - parents and extended > of modern school facilities in most Native commu- og 2 A orolty: Members migint nities throughout the state, these educational insti- ° themselves lack the for- tutions fall far short of providing adequate cultural mol Wester ecucciome grounding ta,teach the children-algebra, chem- } to families. At the same time, many family mem- P . : : ‘ istry,. grammar and the. bonds to the Native-community.and social linkages bers’ (includi its) and village leaders fail t : ers (including parents) and village leaders fail to like, they can certainly understand or fully appreciate the critical impor- : : Give active and positive tance of education to Alaska Natives’ collective _ ; support to’ their children survival as healthy peoples with strong cultural “ - and the teacher§. They foundations. Because their parents and many other ae dan look after-the nutri- village members and leaders do not always appear ‘ Honelneeds of theimenic to consider education important, Native children = dren, and they can make ~ are not pressed to perform at a level consistent with wn *% ‘sure they are getting their inherent capabilities. Parental and communi- , enough rest. In.many ty involvement is crucial to students’ education, = “s _ cases, they also have the - See Page 52>> Also critical to the educational success of Alaska é : Native children is an integrated education, one that : gives them the skills that will lead to success in life : t aes ; s aro tools and the knowledge to teach their children the Native language, his- tory and traditions. They . can help’ the children “understand who they are as members of distinct ‘cultures. Though Native societies and cultures have gone through trans- formations from: the “ancient. ones! Alaska Native people still stand ds the best conduits _ through which education » - of young Natives can be . successfully realized. Ass community members. \ as well as the understanding that will continue the ~ community's values. An integrated education will give children both Native and Western values so that they are empowered in both cultures. The skills and values are inseparable, for mastery of one cannot be obtained without mastery of the other. Native children need to know, understand and be comfortable with who they are as members of dis- tinct races and cultures. The burden for ensuring that this happens rests firmly on the shoulders of Native people. But the schools, with important roles to play in the development of children, must share the responsibility wees with families and Be agi hice, y all accounts, the state of health of Alaska Natives .is as poor as, if not worse than, any other group in the nation. As part of its two-year study, the Commission reviewed the history of Alaska Native health and | health care and studied a wide range of health problems. The findings indicate a shift in morbidity and mortality statistics with a decrease in infectious diseases and an increase in behavioral health’ problems. Further, though alcohol misuse is a symptom of much larger problems, it is the leading causal factor behind the untenable rise in behavioral health indicators from accidental deaths and maimings, to abuse towards self and others, homicides, suicides, child abuse and Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. There is no way to measure the true emotional, psychological, physical health and ~ economic toll-being taken by rampant alcohol abuse and the resultant “culture of vio- lence” found among Alaska Natives. But, if the tide is not halted and then turned, physi- ‘cal and behavioral health problems and social pathologies will continue to compromise Alaska Natives’ rebirth as a strong people capable of making healthy lifestyle choices. In order for that tide to be turned, the reasons why people drink to excess and why, , generally, Native people are not taking better care of themselves physically must be understood and addressed. Persistent low levels of self-esteem — compounded ‘by the loss of a secure spiritual, cultural and economic base — and feelings of helplessness must bet overcome. In this regard, solutions to the health problems of Alaska Natives lie not simply in health care but more generally i in empow- Bee ae] ie - erment of individuals, families ‘and villages; _ For further recommendations, informa- empowerment that will lead to Alaska Natives tion and analyses regarding Alaska i : : cn i Natives’ physical and behavioral health — becoming more involved in decisions affecting their hi pes Bee ee overall well-being. © "Table of ona Part Il. Alaska Natives must be-allowed to regain con- Se kects telithe Sa Paes | trol of their destiny. Only by establishing commu- Ciopatisteohnececs "' _ | - nity control of issues and the decision-making _ © Alaska Natives Commission, Volume ll: process can the responsibility for ensuring healthy Eee NS SOc I SUB N Le EA Cat lifestyles be regained by Native people. MEETING “The tribal-specific health plans, we think, ave a good way | to go. The people | decide and the people direct what we should be doing. Che prob- “lem is the government . doesn't always see it the same as we do, and the funding doesn't necessarily match our needs.” Robert Clark Dillingham 53 o aes, \ RECOMMENDATIONS the physical ailments... > oi at ER BEIGE found in-Native families : te 2 % _ are preventable, stem- oo 7 _ Z f BASIC PHYSICAL _ ming from Jiving in less ‘ ; - @) BEHAVIORAL. than sanitary conditions Oa ery : - é ¥ : . and a seeming ‘inability ~ HEALTH NEEDS to make wise ‘Choices. ; 2 + 3 about personal well- : a: 1% being. The infections and — RR tion ~* + aes Ae erg ele _ -diseases still prevalent in Alaska: Native villages “and “among Alaska’s =. > . Native population in gen- ae S eral arise when people ; pa Satie ish ia Baad bof en ; d -. don’t wash their hands’ =~. DE ee eS Cees SUP: and when houses are not » i Be ; ing local participation in cleaned. They arise.’ -wh@n people are not” eating well-balanced | ‘Z meals, are not getting enough rest, and when © there is an over-con- sumption of alcohol, °~ tobacco “and ~ other’ & chemicals.. Pi 1. The federal and state governments should support - and fully fund the improvement of water and sewer - facilities in rural Alaska, following the recommenda- tions of the Alaska Sanitation Task Force, and in con- _ project funding, construction, ' - { ~. and maintenance and repair. Statistically, the condition of water and sewage sys- tems in Alaska Native vil- lages is deplorable. Over 50% of the Alaska Native population resides in com-, munities that do not Have Discussion . r wwy ‘ " When the health condi- tion of Alaska Natives is compared, as it often has - been, to that of Third World countries, the com- _parison applies only to running. water and flush toilets: Although more = than $1.3 billion has been spent building water and sewer systems in rural ~— - Alaska, a very large num- See Page 55 Pe * S ber of villages still require » major work. An Indian Health Service study con- ~ ; ~ ducted in 1992 determined / Sm that 378 separate projects are needed, with a price tag of $1 billion. Furthermore, the costs of main- taining these systems, if they were in place, are expected to exceed $40 million annually. eas” Solutions imposed upon Alaska Native villages are inconsistent with the principles established by the Commission. Rather, village councils and commu- nities should be empowered and assisted in devel- oping, implementing and maintaining their own _solutions to village-specific environmental prob- lems and hazards. Funding mist be made available _ from both federal and state sources, but Native vil- Jages, in furthering self-reliance and sélf-determina- tion, must accept the responsibility for action. . the. types of infections — and diseases ftom which people suffer. On Ga per “ capita basis, the level of government expenditures - * on Alaska Native health outstrips what most peo- ple in the world receive. Yet, Alaska Natives.con- tinue to experience ail- ments in categories that - could be prevented — even by, such. simple means as appropriate use of soap and water. vvyv The. question remains: - > Why are Native individu- als and families not tak- ing better care of them- selves? : Certainly, lack of knowledge. is part of.the - answer. But a fact that aT ager WR GA ed ee Vas ee viv must be recognized and dealt with is the psycho- logical and spiritual con- dition of these individuals - and families. Simply stat- ed, many Alaska Natives + exhibit distinct signs of depression; people: psy- chologically, emotionally x and spiritually preoccu-'. pied with troubling -or unfulfilling lives. This : “anomic depression” — 2. The entire health care system for Alaska Natives va should be shifted toward health education and primary prevention, with community-based activities that inform, change attitudes and encourage healthy *lifestyles; both the federal and state governments need to provide funding to support these efforts — and the resource allocation of the Indian Health Service should -simultaneously be revised to reinforce effective primary prevention and health promotion rather than orienting its funding only toward the provision.of secondary and tertiary care. Z Ne : : g characterized by a per- Discussion -. - : 5 ceived loss of control, It is important that the sources of the drive toward . primary prevention reside within the Native com- See Page 56 >> munities themselves, reversing a long-standing gov- ae e Ri nc. ernmental tradition of designing programs and then : : “placing” them in the villages. Empowerment is ; = Es loneliness due to social disintegration and rapid cultural change, anda feeling of frustrated expectations — is further aggravated by poverty and by lack of economic opportunities aside from government anti-poverty assistance. vv Vv The Commission has come up with a ndmber: of findings regarding the health status and needs of Alaska Natives. For instance, safe water sup- plies Gnd appropriate -~ means.for human and toxic waste. disposal for Alaska Native villages are, imperatives that must not be overlooked. Greater efficiencies, in overall health delivery. have to be realized, and a focus must be put on preventa- tive health measures and health education. For the , government to expend additional mon- ey. however, on health services, including mas- sive sewer and water public works expendi- tures, without also addressing the cultural, sociat Gnd economic See Page 57 >> de key to overcoming the negative health trends among Alaska Natives, and empowerment must be the fundamental consideration in the implementa- / tion of this recommendation. ~ A wide sans of chronic health problems, including - cancer, cardio-vascular disease, diabetes, tooth and gum disease, hepatitis, and sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV and AIDS, appear to-be steadily increasing among the Alaska Native popu- lation. These same diseases and health problems also have behavioral antecedents which make them, to a large degree, preventable. But programs _ that have been developed to inform and “direct” Natives in proper health behavior have not shown “resounding effects because they have not encour- aged Alaska Natives to accept the responsibility for change. Nor have they adequately provided Natives with the tools for developing their.own — approaches to improving health-related behavior. 2 When communities have conceived, developed and implemented procedures that are based on their own self-determination efforts and steeped in their own Native culture, the results have been positive. , Instead of devising new external programs and : increasing funding to implement them, state and federal health agencies should redirect existing funds by offering grants to those Native communi- ties that have taken the responsibility to create health promotion and disease/risk prevention plans ‘that they direct from within, compatible with the cultural traditions of the village. ‘ ‘needs of Native families will only Add another lay- er of bandages to those already wrapped around Alaska Natives. - 3, The Indian Health Service should establish an inter- (ew vw nal program ensuring improved and more timely diag- nosis and screening for Alaska Natives who do acquire serious diseases or medical complications. To accom- pany this, the Congress should appropriate sufficient funding for-_patient travel — to the level authorized in : , s the Indian Health Care Improvement Act — for those ; in need of screening and treatment not available in their villages. ~ 3 : i a . Discussion : Health agencies of both the federal and state gov- ernments need to imtmediately increase the avail- ability of equipment and trained personnel through- out Alaska. In a country that prides itself on having : ¢ a one of the most technologically advanced medical : systems in the world, it is inconceivable that the \federal government would continue to offer inferior services to Alaska Natives, even if that failure is = . re eS due. to lack of funds) The myriad system failures that became apparent during the course of the Commission’s work represent problems that can Be 2 , and should be remedied. Pat When village clinics simply cannot provide the health care needed, Alaska Natives must travel, sometimes at very high expense, to a regional hub or city to receive services. The federal and state gov- ernments should provide relief to offset these ~ \ : : S expenses which are now borne by rural Natives who 2 are effectively penalized for living where they do. ~} . Funds. being spent on the diversified and ineffective data gathering in which the federal, state and munici- pal governments now engage should be refocused and coordinated to support-a single, comprehensive statewide system that will incorporate health needs assessment, health status and service evaluation infor- mation for all Alaska Natives. Discussion . i Inthe course of the Gommission’s review of health conditions among Alaska Natives, it became evi-_ dent that there are currently no statewide health _ needs assessment of health status data collection | programs on which health care system reforms can be made. A single, coordinated data system should integrate the efforts of the Alaska Area Native Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the State of Alaska, Native health cor- porations and other providers. Current funding from the fragmented non-system now in place- -* could be redirected to support the single system. Finally, an annual survey should be conducted that includes behavioral health risk assessment informa- _ tion, as well as health status and needs, to provide direction to new community-based primary preven- — tion efforts and to ensure adequate support for eval- uation of new efforts designed to improve the health of Alaska Natives. 5. Approaches to substance abuse treatment for Alaska Natives must be reconstructed to emphasize communi- ty-based, family-oriented and culturally ‘relevant strategies developed at the village level where maxi- mum discretion with respect to regulation of program strategies. To this end, federal and state appropriations for alcohol programs in predominantly Native areas: of the state, where feasible and appropriate, should — bypass governmental agencies and instead be redirect- ed as grants to Alaska Native organizations and village | councils that have developed, or are‘ developing, pro- jects aimed at lessening alcohol abuse and its resultant | ~ Native criminality and social pathologies. Discussion "The pervasiveness of alco- ; hol abuse and alcoholism — among ‘the Alaska Native population is a contributing factor in many of the health conditions reviewed by the Commission. Substance abuse is both a symptom — and a cause. It is a symp- tom of ‘the sense of power- _ lessness and frustration that many Alaska Natives feel as “a result of their culture and ~ traditional way ‘of life hav- ing been so quickly removed ce without viable alternatives being sete available that protect roles and engenders pride. It is a cause, directly or indirectly, of other diseases, uninten- tional and intentional injuries and deaths, and high- risk behaviors in general. oy: ; designs and outcomes is-fundamental to new treatment 60 The results of many years of study have repeatedly suggested that, in rhany cases, Native drinking dif- fers significantly from that of the chronic alcoholic. Regardless, the entire treatment system of the State of Alaska continues to be oriented toward the chronic non-Native alcoholic. The federal ‘govern- ment and the State of Alaska should sponsor research directed at establishing the types of drink- ing patterns of Alaska Natives for purposes of estab- lishing effective treatment programs that are Alaska Native specific. — . Additionally, the Commission, consistent with the orientation it has taken throughout this report, sees an overwhelming need for the emphasis in all sub- _ Stance abuse prevention and treatment efforts for Alaska Natives to be directed at families and entire communities. Family-centered and family-life techniques that have produced-positive results in indigenous populations need. to be examined for possible application in the Alaska Native context. Likewise, it is essential that institutional care approaches (such as half-way houses and "spirit camps") be established at the local level and signifi- cantly greater support for in-village aftercare be pro- vided by both the Indian Health Service and the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services. ‘ . he sechatiice issue is an important part of the larger historical question about the 3 Status, rights and future survival of) Alaska’s aboriginal peoples. Because of this, subsistence should not be seen as a sub-set of fish and game” management. Subsistence is not about animals, their habitats or the professional management activities of public agencies. It is about human beings. In its distribution of limited resources among competing user groups, sub- | ~ _ sistence law is social policy on a very large scale. The way in which the current conflict over fish and game allocations is resolved will do as much, if not more, to influence the’ future economic and social well-being of Alaska Natives as any other issue addressed by : the Commission. Flan 3 ' “IS ypu recognize that The’ economies of most Native villages in Alaska remain underdeveloped, artificial unemployment is 80 per- cent, then you have to _ dependencies of government where few jobs and relatively small amounts of cash exist. : : : = ' ; recognize how people sur- Without a secure protein base of wild, renewable fish and game resources, the poorest and i ; x 2 \ vive. And if people most traditional villages are doomed to economic and social deterioration. These facts’ aucevive off the.land and cannot be ignored by policymakers as they debate abstract terminologies, nor must they survive by eating natural ~ allow policy decisions to be compromised by powerful anti-subsistence constituencies. foods, natural fish and Subsistence is more than economics. In addition to supplying food and other necessities, — game in quantities it it provides people with productive labor, personal self- esteem, strong family and commu- takes to See then ~ nity relationships, and a cultural foundation that can never be replaced or t duplicated by Hote Wave fo) tecogtixe that as ah economy. 1 any other arrangement. : : And then maybe you fees, If the subsistence- based € economies and cultures of modern Alaska collapse, the pooled have to get away . resulting social dislocation and out-migration from the villages will entail an enormous from the word ‘subsis- historical cost. Aware of it or mot, all Alaskans have a vested/interest in the economic |) tence’ and just call ita. ; and social well-being of the villages. lifestyle and give rights ; er : While some argue that Congress meant to pro- to [the taking of ] that For finheriotrmations stains and | _ tecta lifestyle based on geographic rather than ethnic ah and gio, ag . recommendations regarding Alaska : f i" z E i * ‘Native Subsistence i please soe: and cultural considerations, the evidence does not - Orie Williams support that argument. Subsistence is, and always Eee. © Alaska Commission, Volume Il ‘ : . r baa e Governates Task Force : has been, an Alaska Native issue. By articulating the j * Alaska N Commission, Volume Ill: . ; ra 67 a te Asa Naver Conmesin : fit rf a on Subsistence.” i ~ ‘ » - ‘ federal government’s traditional obligation to protect indigenous citizens from the political and economic power of the non-Native majority, Title VIII of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) is a landmark of Indian law. . Alaska Natives, like all tribal peoples who fight for survival, have no desire to disap- pear. Every fact available to the Commission indicates that they will fight tenaciously to save their subsistence way of life. Having lost most of their ancestral land holdings and ~ many of their ‘inherited rights over the past two centuries, Alaska Natives have expended enormous human, financial and political resources in order to hold what ground they can on fish and game. Many Natives have willingly faced arrest and imprisonment rather than give up one of the last-remaining pillars of their aboriginal cultures. This is signifi- cant for a people who ceded untold wealth without a fight and stoically suffered a multi- tude of social and cultural losses. : The long battle over-subsistence in Alaska ‘igs unfolded in fluctuating cycles of leg- islative, regulatory and judicial activity, alternately surging and receding over the years, Today, the Native subsistence rights that Congress sought to protect in ANILCA are in greatér political jeopardy than at any time in the nation's history. They are now under ‘concerted political assault by powerful, organized interests which compete with-villages for limited public resources that governments must allocate. The current subsistence management impasse, which began. with the 1989 Alaska Supreme Court ruling in McDowell v. State of Alaska, should not be allowed to continue. |. “ RECOMMENDATIONS Xs PROTECTING ALASKA NATIVE SUBSISTENCE RIGHTS 1. Congress should repeat the following language from Sec. 4(b) of P.L. 92-203 (The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act); language that serves only to confuse~ and detract from Alaska Natives’ attempts to secure real, long-term subsistence rights: “...and including any aboriginal hunting or fishing rights that may exist...”. Discussion ANCSA’s legislative history clearly indicates the concern of Congress to protect Alaska Natives’ sub- sistence rights. Bowing to pressure from the State of Alaska, however, Congress deleted committee lan- guage that would have expressly protected those rights and substituted the present text of Sec. 4(b). - Congress also substituted the Conference Report mandating responsibility for the defense of Native * subsistence. When it became clear after passage of - ANCSA that the Secretary of the Interior and the | "State of Alaska would not adequately discharge their respective obligations as contained in the Conference Report, Congress enacted Title VII of ANILCA in an attempt to correct its flawed assumptions. _ The present language’ of Sec. 4(b) of ANCSA contin- ues to be used against Natives in every effort they ee make to assert their right to subsist from Alaska’s land and waters. Congress should cut through the ambiguity, clarifying the ongoing subsistence debate. Such action would be far preferable to the _» prevailing sophistry that often produces outcomes contradictory to the original intent of Congress. ; 2. Congress should maintain the existing rural prefer- ence in Titlé VIII of ANILCA as the minimum accept- able level of subsistence protection in federal law and should resist all pressures from private interests and the State of Alaska to diminish or eliminate the cur- ' rent preference. Discussion Despite inherent weaknesses in ANILCA's rural preference, federal law clearly remains superior to the present State system. The record of the past four years demonstrates the unwillingness of the State of Alaska to protect subsistence from the ~ demands of sport, commercial and other uses of fish and game resources. Two governors, four regular legislative sessions, two special legislative sessions and a’series of ad hoc advisory groups have sought to resolve the cur- -rent subsistence impasse. The result-is ongoing dual management. The situation has now come to a point where the only bulwark protecting Alaska Natives from the power of an adversarial state gov- , ~ ernment is federal law. % "tus of subsistence law in Alaska and the performance 3. The Congress should conduct ongoing oversight of Title VIII implementation in order to monitor the sta-' - of the state government and the federal agencies ‘involved in Title VIII implementation. “As part of this long-term analysis, Congress should draft alternative language to replace the present rural preference with more adequate protections for all Native people, including those residing in non-rural areas. - Discussion . Although it constitutes the last line of defense for Natives and must be defended from anti-subsis- - tence efforts to remove it from federal law, the rural preference is flawed in concept as well as result. It fails to protect the legitimate subsistence needs and — continued practices of thousands of Native people who, through no fault of their own, reside in areas of Alaska not defined as rural. Subsistence, being ~integral to their world view and among the strongest of remaining ties to their ancient cultures, is as much spiritual and cultural as it is, physical. The current rural preference threatens the long- \ term protection of Natives in rapidly growing, hub communities in rural Alaska. A Native preference, < irrespective of place of residence, would nullify this _ very real threat. Whether “rural” is defined by the number of people in a community, the nature of its economy, or a combination of the two, it is inevitable that some communities initially classi- fied as rural will become non-rural over time due to population growth, socio-economic change, or both. ~~ "Native villagers have little or no control over the in-migration of non-Native populations or the socio-economic changes resulting therefrom. The 7.) results-of significant non-Native population growth in rural areas are increased competition for fish and game, greater regulatory restrictions, and lowered: subsistence productivity — all without an equitable distribution of benefits of a developing cash econo- my to the Native residents. The thought that Native people in such impacted commmnities might also lose their federal subsistence protections because of events beyond their control is unaccept-" able. A Native or "Native plus" preference, substi- tuted for "rural, " would nullify this historical threat. oe ~ uring any period.of duakmanagement, Congress and the cognizant federal agencies should take all leg- islative and administrative actions necessary to maxi- mize the geographical scope of federal jurisdiction over fish and game in Alaska. At a minimum, this should include: all public lands, including all marine and nav- igable waters; all conveyed ANCSA fee lands; all select- ed, but unconveyed, State and ANCSA lands; and the _ assertion of the federal government's extraterritorial reach off public lands and waters. - a : Discussion -- Statewide, fishing accounts for almost 60 percent of total subsistence product. It is, the primary subsis- tence activity in most rural Alaskan communities. It -is inconceivable that the intent of Congress was. to leave nearly. two-thirds of rural Natives’ subsis- tence needs outside the bounds of the federal prefer- ence. But that’is the result of the federal govern- ment’s failure to include marine and navigable waters within its jurisdiction when it assumed fish and game management in 1990. Both proponents and opponents of subsistence have long agreed that fish‘and game management can best be conducted through a unified statewide system. The State’s inability to adhere to the mandates of Title VII of ANILCA virtually assures that a dual management system will exist indefinitely. As such, the federal government should expand its jurisdic- tion in order to ensure the maximum geographic scope for a coherent management system and maxi- mum protection of subsistence users. At the same time Alaska Natives’ subsistence requirements can ~ be protected to the greatest degree possible. 5. During any period of federal management in any Alaskan jurisdiction, federal agencies should fully implement existing provisions of U.S. law requiring the operation of regional subsistence advisory councils and the eptions of contracting with communities and be regional Native entities under co-management agree- , ments. It is further recommended that the State of Alaska regionalize the Boards of Fisheries and Game to enable Alaska Natives more local-control over subsis- tence resources, harvests and traditional uses. '’ Discussion : Subsistence management regimes have, to date, ignored the underlying Alaska Nativé cultural pat- terns of sharing and providing for not only oneself - but one’s corimunity.in ways that have been passed from generation to generation for millennia. Regional fish and game councils established pur- - . suant to ANILCA have, for all intents and purposes, become inactive due to lack of federal funding to support them. Likewise, while the State of Alaska spends $1.5 million annually on the operation of _ advisory committees and the Boards of Fisheriés and Game, most indications continue to be that this sys- tem — though expensive and giving the appearance of local involvement — does not honor the local cul- i tural traditions of Alaska Native people. From a strictly economic perspective, decreasing federal and state budgets coupled with diminishing access to and abundance of subsistence resources will assure even less economic well-being than that which exists in village Alaska today. _ Strategically, it behooves the federal and state governments to ‘ explore means for empowering Alaska Natives in the areas of research, and wildlife and habitat man- ; agement. This should include: 1) identification of institutional, regulatory, policy, legal and cultural barriers to Native participation in wildlife research and management; 2) identification of the major obstacles to development of co-management regimes; 3) development of co-management pro- grams with funds allocated towards development of the institutional and cultural capacity for Alaska Natives to co-manage; and 4) development of pro- grams which increase Alaska Native employment in the fields of wildlife research, and wildlife and < habitat management. 6. The Alaska Legislature should.adopt, and submit to the voters at the next statewide general election, an amendment to the Alaska Constitution allowing a statutory subsistence preference that complies with federal law and returns to the State of Alaska authority to manage fish and game in Alaska. Fhis proposed con- stitutional language should be broad enough to permit State compliance with a congressionally improved ANILCA preference (see Recommendation #3, above). A constitutional amendment should be accompanied by state legislative actions mandating local and region- al co-management agreements, effective regional advi- sory councils, and reform of the state's fish and gamé - regulatory system (see’Recommendation #5, above). “ / Discussion ’ The post-McDowell dual management arrangement under which two governments apply different sub- sistence policies t0 highly mobile fish stocks and ~ game populations according to static patterns of °. land ownership is expensive and incoherent. It ere- — ates as much ‘confusion for the professional man- agers who implement it as it does for fish and game harvesters. Alaska's people and resources deserve the consistency and reliability of a single.system of subsistence regulation. That is as true of subsis- tence users as it is of other groups — provided that the resulting single system affords adequate protec- tion of subsistence economies and cultures. _ The real problem is that, while the adoption of a state constitutional amendment and statute com- plying with ANILCA's rural preference would resolve the current legal impasse and return fish and game manageiment to the State of Alaska, it “ would not, in and of itself, adequately protect sub- sistence. In the absence of additional actions by Washington, D.C., and Juneau, such a move would merely hand subsistence back to a state govern- ment controlled by sport and commercial interests. The embittering experience of the last four years has led many Native leaders and organizations to question the wisdom of a constitutional amend- ment that does nothing more than return to the pre- McDowell status quo. This reluctance stems, in part, from the inadequacies of the rural preference itself. But, in addition, Native people are express- ing the view that putting federal lands and waters back in the control of a state government that treats _them in this way does not make sense. Their defin- ition of what is broken, and what must be fixed, appears to go well beyond dual management. . The current subsistence impasse appears to be a problem that only the legislature and Alaska's elec- torate can fix. For this to be achieved, Native organi- zational help in the legislature and Native votes at the polls are needed. The only strategy likely to enlist the entire Native community's political sup- port is one that combines a constitutional change,” congressional improvement of the rural preference, and basic reforms in the State of Alaska's manage- ment system. | ~ -* The Si ituation laska Natives’ are tribes indigenous to the United States. Full tribal recogni- tion by the federal government would not only . - legitimize its special relationship with Alaska Natives, but would — also go far in helping to define ‘the social and political. status of Alaska Natives and their communities porpmel the state. At the present time, rather than recognizing and working with Alaska Native tribal governments, the State of Alaska and, to a degree, the federal government, have attempt- ed to suppress and replace them with Western institutions and values. The social, eco-. nomic and political plight of village Alaska as we approach the dawn of a new century offers clear evidence that the’current “system” of local government — the framework for community life — is not working in rural Alaska. In a throwback to periods when. termination and assimilation were government poli- cy, the State of Alaska, in general, refuses to recognize even-the existence of Alaska Native _ tribes and opposes the empowerment of Natives’ traditional and Indian Reorganization Act zovernments. To the State, Alaska Natives area terminated people and therefore do not exist on the legal landscape. For its part, the federal government has attempted to walk a non-existent fine'line by bowing to the State’s position of non- recognition while concur- rently trying to treat Alaska Natives as it does other Native Americans. : A review of the tribal status and authority of Alaska Native communities comes with- in the mandate of the Commission for two principal reasons. Fifst, Alaska Native eligibili-— . ty for federal Indian programs is dependent upon.the tribal status of the villages. Second; * _ the tribal status and authority of these villages Kove See broadly influences relations with the federal and “The. problem is well known, and the prob- lems are all recog- nized; but the solu- tions have been out of teach of the local communities because _ of the divisive nature | of the State against the tribes...the federal: govewunent against the tribes.» Lhe tribes ave just bound to tose | fie Komaneeidiaice uted anu state governments and their residents. As long as Native ngenees eee ee eee Alaska Natives are at a legal and political disadvan-— =e political. stte- © Alaska Natives Commission, Volume Il: tage in relation to others, they can never be full.and : ‘Report of the Governance Task Force.’ Adrian LeCornu Hydaburg equal participants in achieving much- needed solu- Alaska ves 00 i isso Noune i tions to the contemporary problems facing them. FA rie Alaska Natives have seen the benefits and potential advantages of tribal governments and tribal judicial systems. They have recognized the value, and have attempted to live by the terms, of such laws as the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, the Indian Child Welfare Act, and other congressional policies intended to benefit them and their tribal governments. But their efforts are continually frustrated by the State of Alaska and its agencies in the courts and in the service delivefy arenas. Their efforts jare further frustrated by the federal government's approach where vacillation, half steps and retreats have been the rule. ‘ After several centuries of painful experience, the federal government has determined . that Native Americans are best able to govern many aspects of their own lives as evi- denced by the prevailing federal policies emerging over the past quarter-century. The application of these policies and protections, for reasons not fully clear to the Commission, has been uneven in the Alaska Native context. In fact, termination and assimilation — tragic and failed policies that, for the most part, were long ago discarded by the federal government in dealing with indigenous peoples — appear to hold on as.the de facto policies of government with respect to relations with Alaska Native people. In preceding sub-sections of this report the Commission makes a number of recom- mendations regarding issues directly relating to aspects of Alaska Native tribal gover- nance. : ‘For instance, the first recommendation made in this volume (see Recommendation #1 on page 28) proposes congréssional amendment of Public Law 83-280 extending to Native governments concurrent criminal jurisdiction with the State of Alaska. Tribal courts and other ‘dispute resolution bddies are covered under Recommendation #1 on page 44. ‘In Recommendation #2 on page 45, the Commission suggests establishment of formal agreements between tribal councils and the State of Alaska regarding jurisdiction over infractions of local law. These recommendations, together with additional recommendations in this sub-section, constitute a framework ; within which the Alaska Native tribal governance issue can be viewed not only from legal and political perspectives, but also from the perspective of true Native ‘self-determination as it affects daily life in contemporary Alaska Native villages. , ~ . RECOMMENDATIONS FOSTERING ALASKA TRIBAL GOVERNANCE ‘1. Congress should establish policies and relationships supporting tribal governments in Alaska beginning with the repeal of disclaimers added to Indian legisla- tion over the last ten years that disavow Congress’ role in promoting the federal relationship with ‘Alaska Native tribes. _Discussion s The failure of the federal government to clearly rec- ognize Alaska Native tribes facilitates assaults on fundaniental tribal interests in the state and federal courts ‘by the State of Alaska and private parties. The Secretary of the Interior partly resolved this issue by publishing an Alaska Native tribal list on October 21, 1993, clarifying that the entities listed are traditional councils or Indian Reorganization Act councils which the federal government deals with ona government to government basis. Congress, on the other hand,-has effectively removed itself from its role as a trustee of the feder- al relationship with Alaska Native tribes by includ- ing disclaimers in most recent Indian legislation. These'disclaimers state that nothing in the legisla- tion will either diminish or expand Alaska Native tribal authority nor validate or invalidate any claim of sovereign authority over lands and people. These as % ; ce! 2 _- disclaimers are inconsistent with the federal rela~, Sait tionship with Alaska Native tribes now that the : United States recognizes the tribes and any powers they still possess. ie The Secretary of the Interior should withdraw the Solicitor’s Opinion (Sol. Op. M-36,975) and clarify the federal government's position on the jurisdictional sta- , tus of Native lands in Alaska by participating in pend- ‘ing federal] court cases in support of Alaska Native trib- Bre e al claims to Indian Country. \ wee Ee : : Discussion ~ The Solicitor for the Department | of the Interior under the previous administration issued an opin- _ ion concluding that Congress expressed an intent that Native lands retained under.the terms of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act do not con- stitute Indian Country. Although the Solicitor acknowledges that restricted townsite lots and allotments remain Indian Country for federal juris- dictional purposes, it also concludes that tribes do not exercise governmental authority over practical- ; - ny pet the tribe might own or ccc. + The opinion is untenable because it supports an implicit extinguishment of tribal authority contrary | to established federal law. The federal courts have . already determined that Indian Country can exist in Alaska and, contrary to the Solicitor’s Opinion, ‘that ' ANCSA did not affect either the tribal or Indian_ Country status of Indian lands in Aliska. The Solicitor should support Alaska Native tribal 4 2 claims in federal courts that would promote, rather than diminish, the federal relationship with Alaska Natives. ‘3, Native communities should be able to freely convey ownership and control of Native lands between Native ° corporations, tribal governments, individuals and other Native Patera and they must be able to regulate . these lands where competing uses threaten tribaland = * subsistence interests regardless which Native institu- tion or individual holds title. ; 2 Discussion wes Ownership and effective control by Alaska Natives of lands on which they depend has been markedly = diminishing since statehood. ‘Native people, as evi-» denced by testimony offered to the Commission, want the option of consolidating Native land own- ership in ways that are most protective of subsis- tence land values and that expand jurisdiction over social and regulatory matters, most notably alcohol importation and use, and domestic issues. New ownership and jurisdictional patterns would be enhanced by tribaldand use plans and co-man- . \ agement agreements with federal and state land use and resource managers, and. by formal agreements with judicial and enforcement agencies. ~~ + ie Ata minimum, the Secretary of the Interior should take lands owned by tribes in Alaska into trust when requested by a tribe to the extent such lands have been transferred from an ANCSA village cor- poration pursuant to a vote of the ANCSA village \ ) 75 corporation shareholders. Some tribes in Alaska are acquiring lands from their ANCSA village corpora- tions independent of the process that led to the set- tlement of Alaska Native aboriginal claims. For this reason, there is questionable justification’ for treating tribes in Alaska any differently from those elsewhere in the United States by denying the pro- y tections of trust land status. ribal governments require a financial base which the federal and state governments should address through cooperative agreements and legislation; such as to grant federal tax credits for taxes paid to tribal governments and to provide equitable state funding to residents regardless of the form of government they — elect to represent their communities. Discussion Tribes look to reduce their dependence on federal. grant funds by generating local tax revenues. Current laws allow federal and state’taxation with- in tribal territory making it difficult for tribal com- munities to attract economic enterprises. The fed- eral government can address this situation and pro- mote its policy of self-determination by granting a tax credit for taxes paid to tribal governments. - The State of Alaska currently appropriates more. . funds to communities organized as state municipal ‘corporations than to villages governed by IRA or Traditional Councils. Persons living in unincorpo- rated communities and Native communities orga- nized under federal charters are also state citizens \ but end up receiving less state funding simply specifically, existing state agencies dedicated to developing and promoting markets for other Alaska products should assist in the expansion of reindeer markets. 19 « The federal and state governments should become more active in establishing train- ing programs related specifically to reindeer herding, animal husbandry, product preparation, business skills, marketing and other issues related to this industry. 2 O « The growing shellfish mariculture industry in many Alaska Native villages should be fully supported by federal and state government agencies through increased training and redirected economic development funding. ae q ¢ The State should reconsider its ban on fin-fish farming and establish an Alaska Native demonstration project; oversight for the program should be federal, with support and technical assistance provided by the Alaska Department of Community and Regional Affairs and the F.R.E.D. Division of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Dudicial and a Law —nfortcement Recommendations General q « The Village Public Safety Officers should: (a) receive significantly more professional training in law enforcement; (b) be given greater compensation for their work; (c) enforce local ordinances; (d) be empowered to make arrests (in addition to “citizens’ arrests”); (e) wear a dis- tinctive, standard uniform throughout the state; (f) have the option of carrying a non-lethal weapon (such as a nightstick or sap] or be armed, with appropriate training provided by the State Troopers; and, (g) be sought out as the first source of recruitment for positions in the State Troopers when vacancies occur. 4 « Village Public Safety Officers should enforce village ordinances as well as state statutes. 3 « The State of Alaska should empower local councils to: (a) pass their own ordinances; (b) enforce local ordinances; (c] apprehend those who fail to obey ordinances; and, (d) pass on 89 90 to locally established dispute resolution or judicial bodies those who are so apprehended (see later recommendations). 4 « The State of Alaska should enter into formal agreements with each village court (i.e. tribal councils or courts, or other dispute resolution body or individual established by consen- sus of the village residents) to determine which infractions or which classes of infractions will be the domain of the local jurisdiction and which will be the domain of the State. 5 « The State of Alaska should convene a task force composed of representatives of the different Alaska Native groups involved in the judicial system and all three branches of state government to devise a structure of parameters within which village (and Native community} court systems can be given due respect by the State. 6 « The State of Alaska must evaluate its entire judicial system, from the District Court to the Supreme Court, relative to its incorporation of Alaska Native law ways and ethics; it must also pursue options and alternatives to the current system, returning dispute resolution and decision making authority to Alaska Native villages and the Native communities that exist in the state’s larger municipalities. ye « Village Councils should be encouraged to establish dispute resolution bodies and pro- cedures that are consistent with the predominant tradition and culture of the village, and the state and federal governments should provide training and technical assistance to further this establishment; the Tribal Court in Minto should be looked at as an exemplary model for local dispute resolution bodies. Correctional System Issues S « The legislative and executive branches of state government need to revise perspectives regarding its correctional system and the ways in which its three purposes (punishment, rehabil- itation and protection of society) can be met; punishment can, as recommended by the Alaska Sentencing Commission, be achieved through the use of alternatives to incarceration, and incar- ceration can be accomplished closer to “home” if appropriate means are provided regionally. 9 « The state and federal governments should develop alternative punishments consistent with the ethics and culture of the village or region in which they are to be implemented; such alternatives must also be integrated with alternative forms of dispute resolution. 1 O « The Indian Health Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Alaska Department of Health and Social Services and the Department of Corrections must combine their resources and sup- port the development and maintenance of half-way houses and other transitional and support- ive living arrangements for Native offenders who can receive rehabilitative treatment at least regionally, if not in their own communities, and for incarcerated Natives who are in the process of returning home. q 7 « The Alaska Department of Corrections should increase opportunities for Native inmates to participate in substance abuse counseling and to begin that participation earlier in their stay in corrections. q = « The Alaska Department of Corrections should waive academic requirements for hiring Alaska Native counselors to enable the hiring of more Natives who have extensive life experience and a demonstrated ability to assist in the healing and spiritual strengthening that is needed for those inmates who have substance abuse and addiction problems. q 3 « The Alaska Department of Corrections should: (a) review all cases of Native individ- uals now incarcerated who are in correctional facilities merely because of a violation of proba- tion or parole and release back to their home villages any individuals who are not dangerous to themselves or others; (b) establish a means by which probation and parole can be carried out in the home village of the offender, utilizing the cultural and social structure of the community both to support and monitor the individual, in the spirit of rehabilitation and community heal- ing; (c) eliminate the requirement that Alaska Natives from rural areas who are on probation and parole must relocate to and remain in an urban area, thereby allowing them to return to their home villages; and, (d) report all the changes made and their impact on probation/parole violations and recidivism to the Alaska Judicial Council no later than July 1994. q 4 « Consistent with the recommended decentralization of the judicial and correctional systems, village dispute resolution bodies should have the authority to establish monitoring and assistance teams that will supervise a parolee or probationer in the village. 91 q 5 « An Office of Alaska Native Recruitment should be established within the Governor's Office to develop and implement procedures within other departments to ensure a more aggressive campaign of recruiting Natives into all levels of positions related to law enforcement, the judiciary and corrections. Local Sedf-“Detewmina tion “Recommendations Self-Governance Issues q « The state and federal governments and their respective agencies should give full and complete recognition to whatever governmen- tal entity that a community has chosen, whether it be a traditional council, an IRA council or a state-chartered municipality. — « Existing programs for assistance to local governments available through the state and federal governments should be reviewed and their use be monitored to determine their effectiveness in strengthening the governance skills of the community and, to the extent nec- essary, such programs should be augmented to accomplish effective self-governance. 3 « Native organizations, such as regional non-profit corporations, the Native American Rights Fund, and similar institutions which have the financial and technical capabilities to do so, should, in addition to pressing for resolution of tribal governance powers questions, examine the existing governmental entities used by Native communities in order to identify ways in which such entities can be used more effectively to achieve the goals of the communities. 92 4 « An evaluation of Bureau of Indian Affairs programs and fund utilization should be completed and, unless there is compelling evidence that would convincingly argue against it, the 103(a) grant program should be re-instated to provide stable financial support for tribal administrations in Alaska. Dt ¢ Using the training funds now incorporated into the BIA Area’s administration, a coor- dinated program of decentralized training and assistance should be offered by the Bureau at the village level to accompany the re-instatement of the 103(a] grant program; and, the Administration for Native Americans, which also has a goal of strengthening tribal govern- ments and which invests approximately $600,000 a year in pursuit of that goal in Alaska, should direct its funding into this statewide training and technical assistance effort. 6 « Alaska Native regional non-profit corporations should be directed — as a requirement of their contracting with the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service — to increase technical assistance to village tribal governments in their respective regions, and consideration should be given to establishing a matching-grant program under which regional non-profit corporations distribute portions of their administrative funds to tribal governments that become involved in the redesigned Section 103(a) and 103(b) grant programs. 7 ¢ The Alaska Native regional non-profit corporations, including health corporations, should work with member tribal governments to review significant shifts in programs and services from the regional to the village level, balancing community and tribal empowerment needs with the realities of providing cost-effective, high quality services throughout the state. 8 « Federal and state departments that provide grants and contracts to Alaska Native non- profit corporations should be directed to evaluate the programs and fund utilization of the cor- porations for the purpose of limiting administrative costs and striving to move more of the funds, functions and services to village governments. 9 « Congress should appropriate and specifically direct a minimum of $10 million annual- ly for five years for use by Alaska Native tribes in solving Alaska Native social problems in culturally appropriate ways. 93 oF Local Resource Management Issues q O ¢ The Governor and the State Legislature should reconfigure the Board of Fisheries and Board of Game to enable Alaska Natives to regain more local control over subsistence resources, harvests and traditional uses, and the federal government should augment the authority of the ANILCA (Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act) regional councils. q q « Each ANILCA regional board should have veto power over the application of hunting and fishing regulations impacting subsistence, and an oversight group, composed of represen- tatives elected by the regional boards, should review subsistence policies and regulations no less often than annually. q 2 ¢ The State of Alaska should establish a special task force — with strong representa- tion of Alaska Native communities — to study the original intent of, and present problems with, the Limited Entry program and propose ways in which the program can either be expanded to allow additional permits to be acquired or, alternatively, replaced with a program that accomplishes more effectively the program’s original objective while honoring Alaska Natives’ traditions and needs. . 2 dAucation FRecommendations q ¢ The Alaska Department of Education should continue or take action necessary to create a three-component K-12 education system of Alaska Natives that includes home community K-12 schooling that is the right of every American child, distance education delivery that effectively redresses the limitations inherent in small rural schools, regional academic and vocational schools that effectively redress the limitations of small rural schools that cannot be overcome by internal improvements and distance education delivery, and vocational schools that adapt curricula to regional and local needs. 2 ¢ The State of Alaska should establish total local control of schools by recasting adviso- ty boards as policymaking boards, and increasing Native administrators and teachers through affirmative hiring and alternative certification. 3 ¢ The State of Alaska should establish a model curricula that meet the needs of Alaska Native students by engaging Native scholars and educators in developing: model K-12 curricula differentiated on a regional basis; model post- secondary programs that will aid Native stu- dents in the transition from high school to col- lege or vocational education; and model pro- grams that will aid Native students in becoming proficient in the skills necessary to continue the subsistence tradition and economy. 4 ¢ The State of Alaska and local school districts should substantially increase efforts to recruit and train educational staff, including local Native professionals, to meet the special needs of Alaska Native students by, among other means, providing: incentives to Native college students to become teachers; incentives for Native teacher aides to become certified; alter- native certification avenues to encourage quali- fied Native professionals to enter the field of education; and incentives to Native teachers to become school administrators. ty « The Congress and the State of Alaska — in a concerted effort to make real improve- ments in the social and cultural linkages between schools and the villages — should encour- age parents and community leaders to become and stay involved with the education of Native children by, among other means: initiating a program to develop parent and village government involvement in rural school districts and using, where appropriate, culturally relevant methods and materials; and creating an Alaska Native Heritage Trust, the funds from which to be granted to Alaska Native tribes for use in schools and in the community for enhancing Natives languages and cultures. 95S 6 « The State of Alaska should commit to making measurable improvements in the per- centage of Native teachers and other employees in schools with predominantly Native stu- dent populations by ensuring that requirements for measuring teacher competency are bal- anced with local Native needs. / ¢ The State of Alaska should ensure a competent, stable work force of teachers in vil- lage schools to enhance student learning and to maintain stability in school programs by amending Sec. 14.20.150(2) of the Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) to extend years neces- sary to qualify for teacher tenure from two years (current) to five years (desirable), and insti- tuting remedies, mainly through increasing the local Native teacher work force outlined above, to decrease teacher turnover in village schools. 8 ¢ The federal government and the State of Alaska should address options for manage- ment and funding of schools in village Alaska and other funding issues by, in addition to other means: enabling, over a five-year period, the Regional Educational Attendance Area system to delegate authority for schools to tribal governments in partnership with the State Department of Education; requiring tribal governments, to the extent of their local capabilities, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs to participate in the funding of schools whose authority for management has been delegated to said tribal government on a per capita level equaling the minimum state support given schools currently operated by rural munici- palities; and providing one-time federal funding of $50 million to $100 million for upgrading and/or replacing former Bureau of Indian Affairs schools that are now being used as elementary schools. 9 « Congress should create and fund an Alaska Native Heritage Trust to be administered by the Alaska Inter-Tribal Council; the funds to be granted to Alaska Native tribes for use in schools and Native communities for enhancing Native languages and cultures. coh sical and Fada HAeatth General q « The Alaska Natives Commission endorses the recommendations made by the Alaska Sanitation Task Force which include, among others: involvement of communities in the plan- ning, design, and construction of their sanitation utilities; expansion of the remote mainte- nance worker program to ensure certified, trained operators for all sanitation systems; and awarding of direct grants only to those communities providing at least 10% of the total pro- ject costs or an equivalent amount of in-kind services. =e « Acoordinated data system should be established that integrates the efforts of the Alaska Area Native Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the State of Alaska, the Veterans Administration, other cognizant agencies and Native health corporations. 3 « Current governmental expenditures supporting the diversified data gathering that now occurs should be focused to support a comprehensive statewide health needs and status-evalu- ation survey of Alaska Natives: to include behavioral health risk assessment information and wellness indicators; and provide direction to the new health promotion and disease/risk reduction programs recommended by the Commission. 4 « The Governor and Congress should safeguard the continued funding for the Community Health Aide Program (CHAP), increasing wages over time to ensure the continuity of the pro- gram and reduce turnover among CHA’s, and providing training funds and other support. o7 5 ¢ Congress should respond favorably to the need for increased support for patient travel in Alaska and appropriate funds to meet the authorization level of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act. Child and Family Health 6 ¢ The Alaska Area Native Health Service should continue to set its objectives towards high rates of immunization in order that, by the end of the century, all Alaska Native children throughout Alaska will be age-appropriately immunized. / « Present reductions in Bureau of Indian Affairs’ funding for Indian Child Welfare Act grants and any plans for the eradication of that important program should be reversed and the Bureau should reinstate the funding to levels available for federal FY 1993 and offer even further assistance to tribes and tribal organizations in their efforts to eliminate child abuse and its consequences in the Alaska Native community. S ¢ Child abuse and neglect data should become part of a unified, comprehensive data system for Alaska Natives, and roles and responsibilities, espe- cially between the Division of Family and Youth Services, the judiciary, Indian Health Service, regional health corpo- rations and other tribal con- tractors, and federally recog- nized IRA and traditional coun- cils need to be clarified. Health Education and Preventative Health 9 ¢ The entire health care system for Alaska Natives must be re-oriented to emphasize primary prevention, and every primary prevention program must concentrate on families and communities, not on individuals. q O ¢ The Indian Health Service, through contract with the Alaska Native Health Board and in conjunction with the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, should develop a comprehensive infectious disease prevention education strategy geared directly to address Alaska Native tribes, families and children with materials developed by and for Alaska Natives and in Native languages; the effort to be made through all mediums, schools and oth- er institutions found in the villages and should clearly recognize the linkages between physi- cal health and cultural, spiritual and mental well-being. q q « Aggressive health education campaigns specific to avoiding HIV and AIDS should be initiated and a curriculum addressing the disease should be established in schools statewide; educating and raising the awareness of parents, and helping them to help their children, is an essential element of a successful anti-AIDS program. q 2 ¢ It is incumbent upon all levels of government and the entire educational system of the state to revisit the need for health education for Native children, youth, adults and elders; and the Public Health Service should augment funding and support for health education and promotion programs. q 3 ¢ The Alaska Native Health Service and the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services should aggressively pursue new approaches to increasing cancer screening and diag- nostic capabilities while at the same time offering greatly enhanced health education and risk prevention activities for Alaska Natives. q 4 ¢ The capability of the Indian Health Service should be enhanced to make effec- tive and timely diagnoses so that when Alaska Natives do seek help in response to early signs of illness they will be assured appropriate intervention and timely care to prevent more serious consequences. 99 TOO q 5 « The Suicide Prevention Program administered by the State Department of Health and Social Services should be examined as a possible model for the development of additional government-supported endeavors, upholding the goal of empowering communities to design, implement and be responsible for their own creative solutions. Substance Abuse q 6 « The Alaska Area Native Health Service, the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services, and others who provide funds for substance abuse prevention and treatment should conduct an outcome evaluation of the effectiveness of programs that they fund and, when relatively unsuccessful approaches are found, redirect the funding to fill in the gaps in the treatment system and implement new and different methods to reduce the incidence and prevalence of substance abuse. q re « The Alaska Department of Health and Social Services and the Alaska Area Native Health Service should use existing funds to support the establishment of an Alaska Native Family Development Center modeled after the successful Kakawis Centre in British Columbia, monitoring and evaluating its effectiveness over time for possible expansion. 18 ¢ Programs for early risk detection, for example the "Healthy Start" program that has proven to produce drastic reductions in child abuse, should be implemented for Alaska Natives with initial contact beginning prior to the birth of the child to also help prevent Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and Fetal Alcohol Effect. q 9 ¢ There should be an immediate establishment of federal and state policies and proce- dures that will ensure: (a) consistent gathering of needs assessment data related to the inci- dence and prevalence of substance abuse among Alaska Natives; (b) routine sharing of data between the various agencies of the federal and state governments that collect information about substance abuse; (c] the establishment of a consistent evaluation methodology that will assess the performance of programs that receive funds from the state and federal governments to fight the substance abuse problems that have become endemic in Alaska Native communi- ties; and, (d) research into the type of binge drinking common among Alaska Natives and eval- uation of treatment approaches attuned to that type of client. KEY FACTS & FINDINGS Mk * he following are selected statistical and other findings of the Alaska Natives Commission. Presented by issue area, these data are intended to acquaint the reader with key information about the many topics studied by the Commission. Volumes Il and III of the Final Report contain additional statistics and analyses by issue area. Unless otherwise noted, statistics and findings were developed by the Alaska Natives Commission based on a number of federal, state and private sources, including 1990 Census data. Social /C ultucal Zhe Alaska Native birthrate is 36.5 for each 1,000 population, therefore the demand for services such as elementary schools, Head Start programs and community health care has been increasing in the villages. LOith respect to Native children, the public education system must encompass two sets of skills and values: the first set of skills is that necessary for success in traditional Native life- ways; the second set is that necessary for success in Western society. “Zhe Native mortality rate is more than three times the national average, and a significant percentage of Natives deaths is alcohol-related. JO ZS oth the Native infant mortality rate and Fetal Alcohol Syndrome rate are more than twice the national average. <The birth rate among Alaska Native teens aged 15-19 was two and one-half times higher than their counterparts nationwide in 1988. Lhe Alaska Federation of Natives found that between 1984 and 1988 the number of Native children receiving protection services from the State of Alaska increased from 2,035 to 3,109; this means that in 1988, at least one in every eleven Native children was in need of and receiving child protection services. In 1992, the State Department of Health and Social Services received 11,509 CPS (Child Protection Services) reports of harm (i.e. physical abuse, neglect, sexual abuse and mental injury). Of these, 30 percent (or about 3,500} involved Alaska Native children. That number translates into a rate of alleged victims of 94 per 1,000 Native children, as compared to 55 per 1,000 children in Alaska’s non-Native community and 39 per 1,000 children nationwide. ZB sed on juvenile offender characteristics such as sex, race and age as reported by the State of Alaska, it can be established that in 1992 nearly one in every eight Native males between the ages of 14 and 17 had been in, or was currently in, juvenile detention during the year. In April of 1993, over 27 percent of the Alaska Native inmate population was made up of those who had sexually abused either another adult or a child; strikingly, virtually half of the Native sex crimes for which prison time is currently being served were com- mitted against children. / Many of the causes for today’s upheaval in Alaska Native communities and families can be found in their history; specifi- cally, Alaska Natives’ experiences since contact with Europeans, and in the cultural, social, political and economic climate creat- ed for them by both the federal and state governments. A the core of many problems in the Alaska Native community are unhealed psychologi- cal and spiritual wounds and unresolved grief brought on by a century-long history of deaths by epidemics and cultural and political deprivation at others’ hands; some of the more tragic consequences include the erosion of Native languages in which are couched the full cultural understanding, and the erosion of cultural values. 2 conomics “Drespite some growth in incomes and numbers of jobs in the 1980s, villages still have much smaller incomes and higher unemployment rates than the state as a whole. C Villages are precariously dependent upon public sector spending, and the cost of living in villages is exorbitant. Orne recent study indicates that many small Southwest region villages may be losing their geographic advantage due to thinning of fish and game stocks, lack of jobs and the need for goods and services available in larger population areas, such as Bethel or Anchorage... The plight of the villages will worsen in the absence of systematic efforts to reduce the problems associated with a rapidly growing population. “Final Recommendations for Action,” Calista Corporation, 1993. LOnhile 8.8 percent of Alaska’s total work force was unemployed in 1990, over one fifth of that portion of Alaska’s work force comprised of Alaska Natives was unemployed.* Jn one out of every eight villages, unemployment among Native men is in excess of 50 per- cent; in one-third of all Native villages, male unemployment — at 32 percent — is nearly quadruple the statewide average unemployment rate.* Among the roughly 16,000 Alaska Native men in the state’s civilian labor force, about 42 percent (6,645) are concentrated in the crafts, trades and service sectors. /Nearly one in three of all employed Alaska Native women works either as a secretary or * With severely limited employ- ment opportunities in most vik lages, percentages of so- called “discouraged workers,” who are not reflected in official unemployment counts, are thought to be much higher than official estimates. 103 104. clerk, and one in four works in the service sector, primarily in the food preparation and custo- dial fields. COnile all Natives, both male and female, are severely under represented in managerial and professional specialty occupations, Native women are about 60 percent more likely to be working in the management and professional fields than are Native men. LOith two exceptions — the Indian Health Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs — fed- eral agencies surveyed had a combined cumulative Alaska Native/American Indian employ- ment rate of 5.6 percent. (IHS and BIA have special congressionally approved Alaska Native/American Indian hire preference provisions.} In 1992, only 4.8 percent of the State of Alaska's executive branch work force of 13,703 indi- viduals was comprised of Alaska Natives; of particular note are the Department of Law, the Department of Natural Resources, and the Department of Fish and Game, with percentages of full-time Alaska Native employees at 3.8 percent, 2.1 percent and 1.6 percent respectively. dn estimated 21.5 percent of Alaska Native families had incomes below the officially established “poverty” line income ($12,674 for a family of four] in contrast to 6.8 percent of all Alaskan families. ‘Knowingly in some cases and unknowingly in others, many Alaska Natives have turned to government subsidies, income maintenance programs and other components of the transfer economy to make ends meet. Dustice and C ozections <Lhere is a prevalent misunderstanding or misconception on the part of many non-Natives that only by administering “Western justice” can there be justice, and this perspective is ulti- mately harmful to the pursuit of alternative dispute resolution strategies at the village level. In analyzing information from the State of Alaska, the Commission found that as of April 1993, Alaska Natives made up just over 32 percent of the state’s incarcerated population, despite the fact that Alaska Natives represent 16 percent of the overall population and only 13.5 percent of the prison-age population in the state. Adlaska Natives make up 59 percent of all persons incarcerated for violent crimes and 38 percent of those convicted of sex-related offenses. Most Native crime is alcohol-related, and a much higher percentage than average involves violence or sexual assault. LOell over half (53%) of Alaska Native inmates are incarcerated for crimes falling into categories deemed among the most violent: Assault (14% of total Native inmates}; Sexual Assault (14%); Sexual Abuse of a Minor (13%); and Murder/Manslaughter (12%). About 27 percent of all Native males between the ages of 14 and 17 were referred to the state juvenile intake sys- tem in 1992. Zhe murder rate among Alaska Natives is four times the national average. Z ata indicate that there are differences in the types of crimes for which Natives are being incarcerated: within the misdemeanants, 43 percent are Native; among sex offenders, 39 per- cent are Native; and among probation and parole revocations, 41 percent are Native. © > Data reported for 1990 showed that half of those convicted of second-degree murder were Native; For some other crimes, however, the representation of Natives was lower, among drug offenders, for example, only 8 percent were Native. Aithough plea bargaining has been banned in Alaska for 16 years, “charge bargaining” exists, and it is a possibility that the disproportionate number of Alaska Natives convicted 1O5 and incarcerated may be in part due to their more readily admitting to a lowered charge, which may in turn be related to the mediating cultural ethic of avoiding confrontation. fduca tion C hildren with alcohol-related birth defects typically have learning problems in school; figures through 1988 suggest an Alaska Native FAS rate of 5.1 per 1,000 live births cumula- tive 1981-1988, roughly two and one-half times the overall FAS rate in North America (2.2 per 1,000). Dn urban areas, about 60 percent of Alaska Natives entering high school do not graduate, while in rural areas only 12 to 15 percent do not graduate. However, the high rural graduation rate is countered by much lower than average student achievement levels. A laska Natives had American College Test (ACT] scores about 40 percent lower than those of other stu- dents in 1989, “Lhe cultural differences between students and teach- ers in Alaska’s schools are exacerbated by a lack of Native teachers and administrators: only 7 percent of the instructional staff serving the 14,000 Alaska Native students in predominately rural school districts are themselves Alaska Natives; less than 2 percent of the instructional staff serving the 9,500 Alaska Native stu- dents in non-rural schools are Alaska Natives. / Wore than 12 percent of the students in rural schools are classified as “Chapter I” pupils whose educa- tional attainment is below the level appropriate for chil- dren of their age; compared to fewer than 4 percent of the pupils in the same classification in non-rural schools. 106 «“Lxspite the seeming association between small rural schools and low performance, specialists in rural educa- tion point out that they can offer advantages such as low student-teacher ratios and opportunities for teach- ers to significantly influence the lives of their students. Fitty-three percent of all Alaska students had taken second-year algebra, compared to only 11 percent of Alaska Native students; forty-eight percent of all Alaska students had taken chemistry, compared to 8 percent of Alaska Native students. Only about 67 percent of Alaska Native students complete high school, compared to a total overall statewide completion rate of 75 percent. Jn some school districts up to 30 percent of Native children in elementary school are below grade level; in grades seven through 12, the figure jumps up to more than 40 percent. Despite this failure of the school system, some students are passed from grade to grade and finally graduated without achieving academic competency. Ohile the numbers of Native students graduating with educational degrees has increased over time, the absolute number remains small — 24 students with education degrees in the University of Alaska system in 1990. “Alaska Native Education: Issues in the Nineties,” Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska — Anchorage Aligh school graduation rates among rural students have greatly increased as a result of replacing boarding schools with small schools in the villages; achievement test scores of stu- dents in small rural high schools are, however, lower than statewide norms. “Alaska Native Education: Issues in the Nineties,” Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska — Anchorage In 1980, the percentage of the adult non-Native population that had college degrees was five 107 108 times the percentage of the adult Native population with degrees. “The AFN Report on the Status of Alaska Natives: A Call for Action” Sohysical and Fschaviozal Health “Lhe lack of adequate sanitation and water facilities in the villages has been cited as the pri- mary cause of many health problems and the rampant amount of disease found in the villages; the villages in southwestern Alaska have the highest incidences of hepatitis B and other com- municable diseases. In 1950, heart disease was the cause of death for only one of every 20 Alaska Natives; today every sixth Alaska Native dies from this cause. Alaska Natives are more vulnerable to serious injury and infectious diseases than non-Natives. Alithough more than $1.3 billion has been spent building water and sewer systems in rural Alaska, many villages have only rudimentary water and sewer utilities. For many years, Alaska Natives experienced cancer rates that were well below the rest of the nation, but that situation has clearly changed. From 1985 to 1989, the rate of diabetes for Alaska Natives rose from 15.7 to 18.2 per 1,000 population; tuberculosis is far from eradicated even though the frightening statistics from 40 to 50 years ago are no longer prevalent. Attention needs to be focused on the severe health and substance abuse problems in vil- lages and the need to create functional communities at very basic levels. <The prevalence of tobacco smoking among all Alaskan adults is 26 percent, as compared to 39 percent among Alaska Natives; some Native villages have rates as high as 60 percent among adults. Suicide “TZ he Native suicide rate has continued its upward climb in recent years, reaching nearly 69 per 100,000 population in 1989; death from suicide of an Alaska Native occurred once every 10 days, on average, during the 1980’s, and preliminary figures from 1990-1993 indicate that the Alaska Native suicide rate is continuing to climb. COnhile about one in four of non-Native suicides in Alaska are committed by 15- to 24- year-olds, virtually half in the Native community are committed by this age group. <The steep, steady rise in the Native suicide rate during the 1980s continues an upward trend that dates back to the mid-1950s; in the quarter century between 1964 and 1989, the rate of Alaska Native suicides increased 500 percent. “Dyaring the 1980s, males accounted for 86 percent of Native suicide victims; the suicide rate for the latter part of the 1980s for males aged 20 to 24 years was in excess of 30 times the national rate for all age groups combined. /Nhative suicides occur more frequently in rural Alaska; while 61 percent of Alaska Natives live in village Alaska, over two-thirds of Native suicide deaths occurred in this geo- graphic area during the 1988-89 period. Alcohol: Deaths and Disorders Jn the decade of the 1980s, 305 Alaska Natives (173 males, 132 females] were killed by alcohol and drugs. Put another way, between 1980 and 1989, once every 12 days an Alaska Native died from alcohol. In contrast, during that same time period alcohol killed 478 non- Native Alaskans (341 males, 137 females). Considering that Alaska Natives made up rough- ly 16 percent of the state’s population throughout the 1980s, the alcohol mortality rate of Natives was three and one-half times that of non-Natives (4.1/10,000 Natives, and 1.2/10,000 non-Natives). 1O9 IIO For the period 1980-89, it is estimated that the cumulative YPLL (Years of Potential Life Lost: the number of years that a person died prior to his or her 65th birthday) attributable to alcohol was 6,607 among Alaska’s non-Native population; an almost equal number of years (6,323) of potential life was lost within the Alaska Native community as a direct result of alco- hol during that same time period, despite the fact that there are five non-Natives in Alaska for every Native. <Lhe rate at which alcohol is an underlying or a contributing cause of injury death among Alaska Natives is nearly triple that among non-Natives. About one-half of fire deaths, which occur roughly twice as often, per capita, in the Native community than the non-Native community, were attributable to alcohol in 1987. Ss eventy-nine percent of all Native suicide victims have detectable levels of blood alcohol. €Z here is a clear connection between the abuse of alcohol and the commission of criminal offenses in Alaska; this alcohol connection is particularly strong in rural areas, and among “1992 Annual Report,” Alaska Sentencing Commission Alaska Natives wherever situated. DEMOGRAPHIC & GEOGRAPHIC SKETCHES OF ALASKA NATIVES SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEMOGRAPHICS early 86,000 Alaska Natives lived in Alaska in 1990.2 Census analysts estimated that another 17,000 lived outside Alaska at that time. In absolute terms, Alaska Natives in Alaska increased numerical- ly by 21,595 persons from 1980 to 1990. Eskimos (Inupiat and Yupik) increased by 30 percent, Alaskan Indians (Athabascan, Haida, Tlingit and Tsimshian) increased by 43 percent, and Aleuts increased by 24 percent. In relative terms, however, the number of Alaska Natives in Alaska declined from 16 percent to 15.6 percent of Alaska’s total population.26 General Population Chatactevistics « é he 86,000 Alaska Natives living in Alaska were present in all census areas of the state. In some census areas, particularly in northern regions of the state, Alaska Natives comprised over half the areas’ populations. Census areas with one-half or more Alaska Native populations included the Bethel Census Area (84%), Dillingham Census Area (73%), Lake and Peninsula Borough (76%), Nome Census Area (74%), North Slope Borough (73%), Northwest Arctic Borough (85%), Wade Hampton Census Area (93%), and Yukon-Koyukuk Census Area (56%). Other census areas with relatively high percentages of Alaska Native Pha * W117 II2 populations included Aleutian Islands East, Bristol Bay Borough, Prince of Wales-Outer Ketchikan, Sitka Borough, and Skagway-Yakutat-Angoon. In fact, Alaska Natives made up 20 percent or more of the population in half of Alaska’s census areas. Nearly half of Alaska Natives lived in census areas where Natives made up more than half of the population. The census areas with high percentages of Native pop- ulations shared characteristics of rapidly changing pop- ulations. These characteristics included high birth rates, high death rates, and high levels of outward migration from the census areas. Outward migration of population was also a common characteristic of census areas with predominantly Alaska Native populations. The Bethel Census Area recorded a net outward migration of 444 people (3% of the 1990 population], the Dillingham Census Area recorded a net outward migration of 101 people (2.5% of the 1990 population), the Lake and Peninsula Borough recorded a net outward migration of 118 peo- ple (7% of the 1990 population), the Northwest Arctic Borough recorded a net outward migration of 309 peo- ple (5% of the 1990 population], the Wade Hampton Census Area recorded a net outward migration of 483 people (over 8% of the 1990 population], and the Yukon-Koyukuk Census Area recorded a net outward migration of 932 people (11% of the 1990 popula- tion).27 While statistics for census areas with predominantly Alaska Native populations reflected high levels of out- ward migration between 1980 and 1990, statistics for census areas with predominantly non- Native populations reflected high levels of in-bound migration by Alaska Natives. Anchorage, for instance, with 211,000 non-Natives, grew to have the largest concentration of Alaska Natives in the state with about 15,000 Natives living there. The Matanuska-Susitna region recorded the second highest in-migration of Alaska Natives.28 Fertility and {Mortality / igh birth rates correlated with high percent- a ages of Alaska Native population in census areas in 1990. While the average birth rate throughout Alaska was 24.4 per 1,000 people, in the Bethel Census Area it was 31:1,000; Dillingham Census Area, 30:1,000; Lake and Peninsula Borough, 33:1,000; Nome Census Area, 30:1,000; Northwest Arctic Borough, 36:1,000; North Slope Borough, 32:1,000; and Wade Hampton Census Area, 37:1,000. Thus, in the most heavily Native populated cen- sus areas, the birth rate ranged from 124 percent to 155 per- cent of the statewide average birth rate. High death rates also correlated with high percentages of Alaska Native population in census areas in 1990. While the average death rate throughout Alaska was 4.1 per 1,000 people, in the Bethel Census Area it was 6:1,000; in the Dillingham Census Area, 6:1,000; in the Lake and Peninsula Borough, 7:1,000; in the Nome Census Area, 7:1,000; in the Northwest Arctic Borough, 7:1,000; in the North Slope Borough, 6:1,000 and in the Wade Hampton Census Area, 7:1,000. In the most heavily Native populated census areas, the death rate ranged from 134 percent to 175 percent of the statewide death rate. For Alaska Natives, average life expectancy in 1990 was 63.6 years versus 71.8 years for Whites in Alaska.30 13 V Comparison of Average Income/ >| Income Increase by Race SDopulation 2 1980 1990 _ PERCENT co, 7g RACE INCOME INCOME INCREASE atacteristics Whites $11,405 $19,903 74.5 Si Alaska Native popula- Asian/Pacific 8,490 13,113 54.5 tion in 1990 was signifi- Islanders cantly younger than the overall popula- Blacks 8,401 12,186 52.6 tion of the state. Forty percent of the Alaska Natives/ 5,103 9,140 79.1 total Alaska Native population was Native Americans Overall below voting age (18 or older) as com- $10,193 3 $17,610 72.8 pared to just over 30 percent of the non- SOURCE: Alaska Economic Trends, July 1992, pp. 3-4 Native population of Alaska. The medi- WW an age for Alaska Natives in 1990 was 24.0 years versus 29.5 years for White Alaskans. Twenty-nine percent of these young Alaska Natives were of school age.3! The older Alaska Native population (over 64) was only 4.8 percent of the total Native popula- tion and only slightly higher than the 4 percent of Whites in the over 64 grouping. Distribution of age in a population indicates the dependency burden that its working age (18- 64) members must carry in relation to non-working members (ages 1-17 and 65+). In Alaska in 1990 on a statewide basis, this dependency ratio was 54.6 non-working age individuals for every 100 working age individuals. For Alaska Natives in 1990, this dependency ratio was 83.3 non-working age individuals (74.6 youths and 8.7 seniors) for every 100 working age indi- viduals. This means that the dependency burden in the Native community is 53 percent higher than the dependency burden among Alaska’s overall population. Lconomic and LdAucation Characteristics Poverty and Unemployment Co Ly" a nearly 80 percent increase in their per capita income between 1980 and 1990, Alaska Natives continued to be the ethnic group in Alaska with the low- est per capita income. Alaska Natives also continued to constitute the largest group of the total Alaskan population to live in poverty. The statewide imbalance of Alaska Natives in poverty reflected bad economic conditions for them in both urban and rural areas. Predominately Native rural areas of the state continued to have over 20 percent of their population in poverty. The situation was worst where the Native population was the highest and economic opportunities were limited. Unemployment in the eight census areas where more than half the population was Native ranged from 11 per- cent to 29 percent for an average unemployment rate in those areas of 18 percent. In contrast, the unemployment rate in the 17 census areas where less than half the population was Native ranged from 2 to 16 percent for an average unemployment rate in those areas of over 8 percent. The poverty rate in the eight census areas where more than half of the population was Native ranged from 9 percent to 31 percent for an average poverty rate in those areas of 23 percent. In contrast, the poverty rate in the 17 census areas where less than half the population was Native ranged from 4 percent to 14 percent for an average poverty rate in those areas of 8 percent. A pervasive shortage of adequate housing is closely related to the intense poverty in some cen- sus areas with high Native populations. Furthermore, a majority of houses in census areas where over half the population is Native tend to be without plumbing. The reverse is true where Alaska Natives constitute a minority of the population.32 y ‘ Educational Poverty Distribution by Race Attainment in Alaska . In census areas with 50 percent PERCENT IN PERCENT IN ; . POVERTY POVERTY or more Alaska Native popula RACE 1979 1989 tion, educational attainment is Whites 6.0 45 significantly less than in cen- : = sus areas with lower percent- Asian/Pacific 6.6 6.0 . Islanders ages of Alaska Native popula- Blacks 9.2 8.8 tion. In predominantly Alaska Alaska Natives/ 25.3 21.5 Native areas, percentages of Native Americans high school graduates in the Overall 8.6 6.8 population range from 58 per- cent (Wade Hampton Census SOURCE: Alaska Economic Trends, July 1992, p. 7. Area) to 70 percent (Dillingham Census Area). 115 Percentages of college graduates in these areas range from 10 percent (Wade Hampton Census Area) to 15 percent (Dillingham Census Area). In predominantly non-Native areas, percentages of high school graduates in the population range from 66 percent (Aleutians East Census Area} to 90 percent (Anchorage Census Area). Percentages of college graduates in these areas range from 13 percent (Aleutians East Census Area] to 31 percent (Juneau Borough). Census data for Alaska Native Regional Corporations tends to W ‘ confirm the information Population Education ik. Characteristics indicated by the census at PERCENT OF PERCENT district data. HIGH OF SCHOOL COLLEGE CORPORATION GRADUATES GRADUATES Ahntna 53.4 2.5 Aleut 54.5 2.7 Arctic Slope 54.6 2.7 Bering Straits 52.7 2.2 Bristol Bay 56.7 3.8 Calista 52.2 2.7 Chugach 65.6 1.9 Cook Inlet 74.6 6.5 Doyon 63.9 4.2 Koniag 63.1 4.6 NANA 55.4 2.2 Sealaska 70.7 4.7 Average 59.9 3.4 percentage SOURCE: 1990 Census of Population and Housing - Summary Social, Economic and Housing Characteristics - Alaska, Table 17, p. 93. 1106 WHERE ALASKA NATIVES LIVE laska’s estimated 86,000 Natives live in all areas of the state from the smallest and remotest of villages to the state’s major urban centers. For pur- poses of this report three main geographic classifica- tions are used: village Alaska, maritime rural, and urban Alaska. These descriptive groupings are somewhat broad, intended only to provide a basic framework within which important economic, social and demographic vari- ables (e.g. economic development and industry, education, local self-governance, social and cultural lifestyles, and health) can be discussed and analyzed. They are not intended to be definitive with respect to policy or legal interpretations regarding substantive public policy issues, for instance the rural and urban definitions in the subsistence debate. “Cillage ~Alaska CPi Alaska consists of two main geographic/climate divisions: arctic/subarctic Cc village and maritime village. The total land area of village Alaska is 493,461 square miles, or nearly 87 percent of Alaska’s land mass. Most of Alaska’s major mountain ranges, its river systems and lowlands, its vast expanses of taiga and tundra, and virtually all of its near-endless coastline are located in village Alaska. W177 118 Village Alaska is home to just over 52,000 Alaska Natives (61% of the state’s total Alaska Native population) spread among some 200 villages. These villages range in size from just a handful of residents in the smallest of villages to sever- al thousand in regional centers such as Bethel and Kotzebue.33 Within village Alaska, Natives make up nearly two-thirds (65%) of the total population. On a statewide per capita basis, Natives are 10 times more likely to live in village Alaska than are non-Natives. Furthermore, of the 28,236 non-Natives residing in village Alaska, 6,390 live in the northern and western regional centers of Barrow, Bethel, Dillingham, Kotzebue and Nome. An additional 3,920 reside in the small Prince of Wales/Outer Ketchikan census area in southeast Alaska. This means that well over one-third (37%) of non-Natives residing in village Alaska live in just six distinct enclaves. Arctic/Subarctic Village By far the largest of the principal geographic areas studied by the Commission, arctic/subare- tic village Alaska encompasses the northern and western coastal regions and their adjacent inland areas, and most of interior Alaska. The whole of three Alaska climate zones — arctic, continental and transitional — fall within this geographic area. Arctic/subarctic village Alaska is home to just over half (43,850) of all Alaska Natives resident in the state. Arctic/subarctic village Alaska continues to be the area with the highest percentage of Alaska Native residents. In this vast area that encompasses 80 percent of Alaska, Natives make up over two-thirds (68%) of the population. North/Northwest Just under 16,000 Natives, mainly Inupiat Eskimos, reside in the north and north- west areas of arctic/subarctic village Alaska, 40 percent of whom live in the three regional centers of Barrow, Kotzebue and Nome. The balance of this area’s Alaska Natives live in 33 coastal and riverine villages from Gambell on St. Lawrence Island in the Bering Sea, to Kaktovik on Barter Island off the far northeast coast of Alaska. Southwest Some 21,415 Alaska Natives (one-fourth of all Alaska Natives resident in the state} live in the southwest area of Alaska. Predominantly Yupik Eskimos reside in this part of arctic/subarctic village Alaska in communities along the Bering Sea and Bristol Bay coasts, in the Yukon River and Kuskokwim River delta areas, the western/southern drainages of these same two rivers, and in the central and northern portions of the Alaska Peninsula. One-fifth of the Natives in this region reside in the two main cen- ters, Bethel and Dillingham, with the remaining 80 percent residing in 62 villages. Interior The remaining 6,000 Alaska Natives of arctic/subarctic village Alaska, mainly Athabascan Indians, live in interior Alaska in villages located primarily along five major river systems: the Yukon, Tanana and Koyukuk rivers, and the upper drainages of the Copper and Kuskokwim rivers. Unlike other areas within arctic/subarctic vil- lage Alaska, there are no large, predominantly Native regional centers in interior Alaska. Instead, the area is characterized by a handful of subregional hubs (e.g. Ft. Yukon, Galena) ranging in population from about 500 to 800 total residents each, with several smaller villages in close proximity. Altogether, there are 48 Native communi- ties in this area, a small portion of which are located along highway systems. Maritime Village Maritime village Alaska encompasses the climate zone of the same name, and stretches along the coastlines of southeast and southcentral Alaska (including Kodiak Island), as well as the length of the Aleutian Islands chain.34 With a much longer history of sustained encroachment by Western civilization and an earlier development of natural resource industries, especially fisheries, maritime village Alaska has a significantly smaller number of Alaska Natives as a percentage of total population than does arctic/subarctic village. Today, the 8,309 Alaska Natives residing in maritime village Alaska constitute about 51 percent of the area’s total population. Southeast Alaska’s southeastern panhandle is the traditional territory of the Tlingit, Haida and 119 IZ2O Tsimshian Indian tribes. Of the 12,831 Alaska Natives living in Southeast Alaska, 4,571 (or 36%) live in 10 coastal villages. Natives constitute 70 percent of the popu- lation of these villages (and their surrounding areas) which stretch the length of the panhandle from Yakutat in the north to Metlakatla in the south. North Gulf Coast In terms of tribal affiliation, this area of village Alaska is the most diverse. As has been the case historically, Alaska Natives living on the northern coast of the Gulf of Alaska (i.e. Prince William Sound, Cook Inlet and Kodiak) include Eskimos, Eyaks, Athabascans, Koniags and Aleuts. This area of village Alaska is home to 1,941 Alaska Natives spread between 11 villages from Tatitlek in Prince William Sound to Akhiok on the southern end of Kodiak Island.35 Alaska Natives constitute 30 percent of the area’s overall population. Aleutians Encompassing the western end of the Alaska Peninsula and the Aleutian and Pribilof Islands, the Aleutians area of maritime village Alaska has 1,797 Alaska Native resi- dents, or just over half (51%) of the area’s 3,498 total population.3° The traditional home of the Aleut people, the Alaska Native population of the region is still substan- tially Aleut. Alaska Natives resident in this portion of maritime village Alaska live in seven Aleutian villages ranging from Sand Point on the Alaska Peninsula to Atka in the west, and St. Paul and St. George on the Pribilofs. /Waritime FRuieal aritime rural Alaska includes those areas not otherwise included in village Alaska that retain general rural characteristics but where Native populations and traditional cultures no longer predominate. These areas are located throughout maritime Alaska and include mainly medium-sized municipalities and their environs where Alaska Natives generally constitute less than 15 percent of the total population.3” In most respects, the tribal affiliations of Alaska Natives living in the various regions of mar- itime rural Alaska correspond with the tribal make-up of maritime village Alaska. The major notable exceptions are the more heavily populated areas of the Kenai Peninsula where, much like urban centers, a greater mix of Alaska Native groups can be found. Southeast This portion of maritime rural Alaska includes the Wrangell-Petersburg Census Area (less the village of Kake}, the Sitka Borough and the Haines Borough. Alaska Natives, numbering 2,929, make up about 17 percent of the total population in these areas. As is the case with all of southeast Alaska, Natives living here are generally Tlingit, Haida and Tsimshian Indians. North Gulf Coast The North Gulf Coast area of maritime rural Alaska consists of several larger population groupings in the same North Gulf Coast region described in maritime village Alaska, above. Included are the Valdez-Cordova sub-census area, the Kenai-Cook Inlet sub-census area (less the villages of Port Graham and English Bay), and the Kodiak City-Kodiak Station sub-census area. Some 3,885 Alaska Natives, constituting about 7 percent of the area's total population, live in this geographic area. As is the case with Natives, generally, who live in this area, there is a great diversity of tribal affiliations. Aleuts, Yupiks and Athabascans are the pre- dominant tribes. Aleutians Some 321 Alaska Natives, or about 4 percent of the area's 8,469 residents live in the Aleutians region of maritime rural Alaska (i.e. the Aleutians West Census Area less the villages of Atka, Nikolski, St. George and St. Paul). At the time of the 1990 Census, over 90 percent of the total 727 I22 residents lived either in the military enclave on Adak Island or in the regional hub of Unalaska/Dutch Harbor. Most of the relatively few Alaska Natives residing in this area live in Unalaska/Dutch Harbor, and are of Aleut descent. Ctiban Alaska rban Alaska is made up of five distinct areas: the Municipality of Anchorage, the Fairbanks North Star Borough, the Juneau Borough, the Ketchikan Gateway Borough and the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. About 70 percent (384,320) of all Alaskans live in urban Alaska, whereas just under 32 percent (27,198) of the Alaska Native population lives there. With the exception of the Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska Natives constitute the largest single minority in each of the municipalities that make up urban Alaska.38 As noted previously in this report, between 1980 and 1990, urban Alaska experienced the highest rates of Native in-migration of all census areas in the state. As of 1990, over 19 percent of the total Alaska Native population was living in the Anchorage/Matanuska-Susitna area. WHERE IT BEGAN— THE STEPS ALONG ® @s he Alaska Natives Commission was created by Congress in 1990 at the urging c of Alaska Native groups. The idea of creating a high profile, authoritative commission emerged from the Alaska Federation of Natives’ report on the status of Alaska Natives, A Call to Action, published in January 1989. Support for creation of the Commission was solidified in the spring of 1989 when Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii}, discussed at a public hearing his findings from a trip to Alaska the year before to meet with Alaska Natives and learn about conditions in rural Alaska. “.. .we visited several Native villages and regional centers in Alaska over a five-day period. Our schedule was a full one, and the experience was one that I shall never forget,” he said. “For example, I will never for- get the standard government designed houses that have only one door — houses that are at least six feet from the ground and windows that are at least 10 or 15 feet from the ground. With no other means of exit, and with the stoves being located in the entry room, should there be a fire in one of these houses, people 123 would be trapped in the back rooms, or often forced to jump through these windows and break their bones. Children and elderly residents would almost certainly incur injuries if they were forced to escape from these windows.” Inouye also discussed educational programs, as well as high rates of incarceration among Natives. “I will not soon forget talking to a village administrator who told me she graduated as vale- dictorian of her class and when she went off to college she had to spend one year doing reme- dial work so that she could compete academically with other students. “And obviously I will always remember the prison facilities that are filled with Native pris- oners, most of them detained because of alcohol-related behavior. I will remember the high rates of recidivism and alcohol-related crimes,” he said. Lhe “Duties When Congress created the Commission, it was directed to conduct a comprehensive study of: Y The social and economic status of Alaska Natives. ‘wv The effectiveness of the policies and programs of the United States and of the State of Alaska that affect Alaska Natives. The Commission also was directed to conduct public hearings and to recommend specific actions to Congress and the State of Alaska that: ‘Y Help to assure that Alaska Natives have life opportunities comparable to other Americans, while respecting their unique traditions, cultures and special status as Alaska Natives. ‘vw Address the needs of Alaska Natives for self-determination, economic self-sufficiency, improved levels of educational achievement, improved health status and reduced inci- dence of social problems. 124. KAN OLCES Jetting Started The Commission’s first meeting was held in February 1992. Within months, staff had been hired and five task forces had been named to gather information on economics, education, governance, health and social/cultural issues. Mary Jane Fate of Fairbanks and Perry R. Eaton of Anchorage were named co-chairs of the Commission. Other Commissioners include Edgar Paul Boyko of Anchorage, Johne Binkley of Fairbanks, Father Norman Elliott of Anchorage, Beverly Masek of Willow, Martin B. Moore of Emmonak, Frank Pagano of Anchorage, John W. Schaeffer, Jr., of Kotzebue, Father James A. Sebesta of St. Mary's, Walter Soboleff of Tenakee Springs, Morris Thompson of Fairbanks and Sam Towarak of Unalakleet. Francis E. Hamilton of Ketchikan served on the Commission until her death September 27, 1992. Hearings Nine regional hearings were held by the Commission, including: Fairbanks, July 18, 1992 Bethel, August 20-21, 1992 Nome, September 21, 1992 Klawock, October 24, 1992 Barrow, February 24, 1993 Dillingham, March 2-3, 1993 Kodiak, May 22, 1993 Kotzebue, October 2, 1993 Copper Center, October 9, 1993 In addition, statewide hearings were held during the Alaska Federation of Natives Conventions October 14-17, 1992, and October 14, 1993. 125 126 Task forces held special regional hearings, and among them were: ‘vw SOCIAL/CULTURAL TASK FORCE HEARINGS June 9, 1993, in Ft. Yukon. ‘yw HEALTH TASK FORCE HEARINGS February 12-14, 1993, in Emmonak, Alakanuk and Hooper Bay. ‘vy GOVERNANCE TASK FORCE HEARINGS November 20-21, 1992, January 26, 1993, and April 14, 1993, in Anchorage; as well as criminal justice hearings March 10-11, 1993, at the Hiland Mountain/Meadow Creek Correctional Center in Eagle River and the Wildwood Correctional Center in Kenai. ‘vy EDUCATIONAL TASK FORCE HEARINGS April 14-16, 1993, in Sitka and Angoon, including a special session at Mt. Edgecumbe to gather testimony from students. GZ om pleti AG the COork In some ways the Commission’s final report is just the beginning of a new era for the Alaska Native community. When it becomes widely available, the most important step will be for Native groups, organizations and even individuals to get behind the implementation process and make sure that the recommendations of the report are carried forward. Mike Irwin, Commission Executive Director, said he has a lot of faith that people will not stop with the publication of the report but that they will work hard to make the needed changes. “The Commission’s work has been a massive undertaking,” he said. “I’m convinced that this effort will not be wasted because I know people will get behind it and push for the changes that are needed in federal and state government policies.” COMMISSION MEMBER BIOGRAPHIES he comprehensive study of the social and economic status of Alaska Natives was undertaken by 13 people, six of whom were appointed by the President of the United States and seven of whom were appointed by the Governor of Alaska. Left to Right: Rep. Don Young (ex-officio), Walter Soboleff, Frank Pagano, Beverly Masek (foreground), Mary Jane Fate (State Co- Chair), John Schaeffer, Jr., Martin Moore, Sam Towarak, Perry Eaton (Federal Co-Chair), Johne Binkley, Edgar Paul Boyko, Francis Hamilton (deceased), Morris Thompson, Sen. Frank Murkowski (ex-officio), Father James Sebesta, Father Norman Elliott. 127 128 PERRY R. EATON n a o-Chair Perry Eaton, a Koniagmuit, is president and chief executive officer of Alaska <li Village Initiatives, formerly the Community Enterprise Development Corporation. Born in Kodiak, Mr. Eaton has had a lifetime relationship with rural Alaska through his connections with commercial fishing, Native issues, finance and business. He has devoted most of his adult life to promoting rural economic development. As the president of Alaska Village Initiatives, he has successfully guided the full range of activities of this nonprofit cor- poration which is designed to strengthen Alaska’s rural economies. In addition to Mr. Eaton’s early experience on the Kodiak purse seine fishing fleet, his professional career started with Seattle First National Bank. He later worked for two other banks as well as the Alaska Native Foundation. Mr. Eaton has served on a number of national and state boards. He and his wife have two children. He said a major role as co-chair was to help ensure that the Alaska Natives Commission produced a timely, quality report - on budget. And he said it will be a “quality report” if it fair- ly represents a variety of views on creating changes that support Native peoples’ expectations. “The fundamental problem is expectations are not being met at any level,” Mr. Eaton says. “I see the task of the Commission as bridging the gap to meet those expectations. It means efficiency in government; it means realistic expectations on the part of recipients. And it means safeguarding the integrity of culture.” MARY JANE FATE “op o-Chair Mary Jane Fate, who resides in Fairbanks, was raised in traditional lin Athabascan ways in and around the village of Rampart and is a graduate of Mt. Edgecumbe High School in Sitka. A grandmother, she and her husband raised four children. She is past president and CEO of her village corporation and is a former Co-Chair of the Alaska Federation of Natives. She has been involved in Alaska Native issues since high school. She is a founding member and past president of the Fairbanks Native Association, the Tundra Times, the Institute of Alaska Native Arts and the North American Indian Women's Association. She currently serves on the University of Alaska Board of Regents and the board of the Alaska Air group. Ms. Fate recently received an honorary doctorate of law degree from the University of Alaska-Fairbanks. “T express my heartfelt thanks and gratitude to the members of the Alaska Natives Commission and members of the task forces for coming up with a report which we hope will be in the best interest and well-being of the Alaska Native people. She said people got involved in the Commission’s work, bringing out information on unmet needs as well as suggestions for changes that will make programs work for Alaska Natives in the areas of health, education, economics and social needs. Co-Chair Fate says above all else the Commission focused on the needs of people. “Tf the world can make drastic changes overnight for rights for animals, bugs and even future fashion styles, we surely must and can make great changes for our Alaska Natives,” she says. JOHNE BINKLEY Sri Binkley is currently the chief executive officer of Alaska Riverways in Co Fairbanks, and he is a riverboat captain licensed by the U.S. Coast Guard. Before moving to Fairbanks, Mr. Binkley was the owner of Northwest Navigation, a tug and barge business headquartered in Bethel. He served in the Alaska House of Representatives in 1985-86, then was elected to the Alaska State Senate where he served as co-chairman of the Senate Finance Committee for four years. He also served on a number of other committees and panels targeting the issues of high seas salmon interception, children and youth, suicide prevention and school performance. Johne Binkley was instrumental in the passage of local option alcohol laws during his tenure in the Alaska House. He and his wife have four children. One of his main concerns, he says, is that programs for Alaska Natives have turned into what amounts to an industry. “The amount of money that is spent at the federal, state and local levels in the name of programs to assist Alaska Natives is staggering,” he said. “But one of the problems that I see is that a relatively small portion of that money actually gets out to the average person living in a village in Alaska. A huge amount is eaten up in the bureaucracy.” Another concern of Mr. Binkley’s throughout the life of the Commission was that final 129 130 recommendations target key areas where substantive policy changes have the potential of doing the most good for Natives. EDGAR PAUL BOYKO > > dgar Paul Boyko, who was born in Vienna, Austria, has been involved in Alaska Native issues for many years. He is a former state special counsel for Alaska Native land claims. In addition, his work has been undertaken in many other areas and states. Since 1989, he has been a senior partner in the law firm of Boyko, Breeze & Flansburg in Anchorage. In Alaska, he served as Attorney General during 1967-68 and as Regional Chief Counsel of the Federal Bureau of Land Management (Alaska Region). Mr. Boyko and his wife raised five children, four of whom are still living. They have sev- en grandchildren. Well known for being outspoken, Mr. Boyko’s writings are widely published, including the Anchorage Daily News, the Alaska Business Magazine and other publications. He is the host of a popular radio talk show in Anchorage. Mr. Boyko says there is a standard of living — such as health care and education — that Americans expect. And he says, these, to this day, “are denied to many, many Native com- munities and many Native people.” FATHER NORMAN H.V. ELLIOT'I <7" Venerable Norman H.V. Elliott, who has been in Alaska since 1951, said the most exciting aspect of the Alaska Natives Commission is the fact that its pur- pose was not to dictate answers from the top down. “The Native people themselves — being well aware of the problems — have offered solu- tions,” he said. When Commissioner Elliott came to Alaska he was named minister-in-charge of St. Mark’s Episcopal Mission at Nenana, a church and boarding home for Native children, and St. Barnabas’ Mission, Minto. He also was priest-in-charge of St. Stephen’s Mission and Hudson Stuck Memorial Hospital at Fort Yukon from 19521-1953. From 1953 to 1958 he served as the Missioner and Archdeacon of the Yukon in charge of missions at Eagle, Circle, Chalkyitsik, Arctic Village, Venetie, Beaver and Stevens Village. After serving as rector of St. John’s Church in Ketchikan, he was rector of All Saints’ Episcopal Church in Anchorage from 1962 to 1990. He is now retired and serving as Archdeacon of Southcentral Alaska. He and his wife have three children. In the past, people seeking to solve problems facing the Native community have either simply provided funding or inappropriate solutions, such as poorly designed housing, he said. “Instead of letting the people design the houses, the government did it,” he said. Father Elliott believes the Alaska Natives Commission has taken the opposite approach, truly listening to suggestions from Alaska Natives themselves. BEVERLY MASEK Z s— Masek, an Athabascan Indian, is originally from Anvik, and she currently is an internationally known dog musher who has attempted the Iditarod Trail Sled Dog Race four times and also has raced in Europe. She is the operator and owner of Masek Racing Kennels in Willow, where she specializes in Alaska Athabascan Indian village dog development. In order to meet her mushing goals, she has had to overcome difficult odds in the past. In February 1990, all American slots were filled for a sled dog race at St. Moritz, Switzerland. Ms. Masek promptly registered to represent Czechoslovakia, her husband’s native country. She later was honored by Czechoslovakian President Havel for her efforts in the race. Ms. Masek also participated in a demonstration sled dog race as part of the opening cere- monies for the 1992 Winter Olympic Games in France. Before moving to Willow, Ms. Masek and her husband owned and operated an Anchorage restaurant, and they later managed the Chena Hot Springs resort and hotel. They have one child. “Being self-reliant and not dependent upon the state and federal governments is far beyond reach," she says. "Pride, self-esteem and confidence need to be brought back to the people throughout the state." Ms. Masek has a special interest in the education of Native youth. She fears that too many Native young people are not being prepared to meet the challenges of today’s changing world. 131 ae MARTIN B. MOORE, SR. artin B. Moore, a Yupik Eskimo from Emmonak, has been a member of the Veen of Directors for Emmonak Corporation for 19 years and currently serves as its president. Prior to his presidency of Emmonak Corp., Mr. Moore was the city manager for Emmonak. He also has served as president of Calista Corporation, the regional ANCSA cor- poration for the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta area in Southwest Alaska. Commissioner Moore served in the Alaska House of Representatives in the early 1970s and has said that he has worked to help all Alaskans, regardless of partisan politics. As an example, he pointed to the fact that he sponsored the longevity bonus for elder Alaskans. He said his top priority in the Legislature was education, but he also worked for better communications and was instrumental in the start-up of public broadcasting in Bethel. Mr. Moore has served on the Emmonak City Council, and he was mayor in 1968-69. Mr. Moore and his wife have five children and are grandparents. He says that although social issues were major topics of discussion over the course of this Commission, “I think we found that many of our solutions have to be economic ones. I encourage people to take a hard look at the many benefits that our communities may derive from a position favoring more economic development opportunities.” FRANK PAGANO rank Pagano is president of Koniag, Inc., an Alaska Native regional corporation rep- resenting about 3,400 shareholders originally from Kodiak. A Kodiak Aleut, Mr. Pagano has grown up dealing with the problems common to Alaska Natives. Like many, he was born into a poor family living at the edge of the Alaska wilder- ness. His father was a fisherman who established his family in a small village on Unga Island. Mr. Pagano left Kodiak at age 14 to attend the Bureau of Indian Affairs High School in Eklutna Village, near Anchorage. He credits the BIA with giving him, like many other young Alaska Natives, a basic education. Mr. Pagano served in the U.S. Army, and was a member of the Elite Third Airborne Ranger Company and fought in the Korean Conflict. Upon discharge from active service, he worked in Kodiak for 15 years as a utility crew- man, fisherman and policeman. He also served in the Army National Guard and the Federal Aviation Administration. He is currently retired from both the Guard and the FAA. He became president of Koniag, Inc., in 1984 and has held that position ever since. He and his wife have three children. “T believe our young people are caught between two cultures," he said. "One they can't go back to because they don't know how, and one that discriminates against them." He added, however, that young Natives who succeed can find ways to fit into the modern world while at the same time taking pride in and appreciating their heritage. He said he believes that the work of the Alaska Natives Commission can make a differ- ence by suggesting policy changes to redirect the millions of dollars currently going into pro- grams that are not working. JOHN W. SCHAEFFER, JR. ohn Schaeffer was the adjutant general for the Alaska National Guard and Merwin of the Alaska Department of Military and Veterans Affairs from _ 1986 to February 1990. He was born in 1939 in Kotzebue. After attending Mt. Edgecumbe High School in Sitka, he began his military career as a private with the First Scout Battalion, Alaska Army National Guard. He was commissioned a second lieutenant in 1958. A graduate of the Army com- mand and General Staff College, Mr. Schaeffer is airborne and special forces qualified. Mr. Schaeffer has held a number of civic and business positions. He was mayor of the Northwest Arctic Borough when it was created, served as president of the NANA Regional Corporation for 14 years and has served as a University of Alaska regent. Currently, he is a board member of the National Bank of Alaska, and recently served as chairman of the Alaska Federation of Natives. He and his wife have eight children and 22 grandchildren. Mr. Schaeffer says that Alaska Natives from throughout the state have participated in the Alaska Natives Commission’s efforts, offering their views on problems and policies affecting them. Many current programs are not working, and yet people working in them are generally trying to do a good job and can be defensive when it comes to finding solutions, he said. “That was the hard part,” he said. “We had to find a way to stand apart from the process.” 133 134 FATHER JAMES A. SEBESTA ather James Sebesta, was born in Binghamton, N.Y., and grew up in Norwich, N.Y. SF: said he always had an interest in flying and took a job at the airport in Norwich when he was 14 in order to be able to take flying lessons. Today he is an accomplished Alaskan pilot. He received his bachelor’s degree in philosophy from Fordham University in New York City in 1962 and his master’s degree in physics from the same university in 1964. He earlier had studied physics at Tufts University near Boston, before entering the priesthood in 1958. He is a member of the Society of Jesus, also known as the Jesuits. His first assignment in Alaska was to teach science and math at the Copper Valley School near Glennallen. He also taught in the Upward Bound Program at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks. Besides his work with parishioners, he was area director for the Jesuit Volunteer Corps from 1972 to 1982. He taught at St. Mary’s from 1982 to 1984. Since 1991 he has been a priest for several lower Yukon River villages. Father Sebesta said the fact that all of his work in Alaska has been in rural areas prepared him for serving on the Alaska Natives Commission. He said his main goal as a Commission member was to encourage programs to restore healthy life for Native people. Throughout his years in Alaska, he said he has seen the deteri- oration of many people’s lifestyle. “There are many problems — suicide, teen pregnancy, alcoholism, violence,” he said. “We have attempted to find the best answers.” WALTER A. SOBOLEFF wr De known for many years as a Tlingit leader, Walter Soboleff has focused his K attention on both the spiritual and the physical needs of his people. He was ordained into the Alaska Presbytery in 1940, after receiving degrees from the University of Dubuque in Dubuque, Iowa. Commissioner Soboleff was born in Killisnoo in Southeast Alaska of Tlingit-Russian-German parentage. He has four children. Throughout his long career, Mr. Soboleff has held many positions. He said he returned home after graduating from college to serve all races and learned the culture of his people, the Tlingit Indians, including the language. Mr. Soboleff has held many local, statewide and national positions, including seven terms as president of the Grand Camp of the Alaska Native Brotherhood. He served as chairman of the Alaska State Board of Education for two years and was treasurer of the Tlingit and Haida Central Council, among many others. Mr. Soboleff also is the author of several publications, including his Bachelor of Divinity thesis, “Historic Origin of the Cross.” If the Alaska Natives Commission succeeds in its efforts, Mr. Soboleff said, there will be changes in school curricula, as well as more economic development throughout rural Alaska. He said he believes the Commission met its mandate from the state and federal govern- ments to come up with solutions and that the report won’t just get shelved. MORRIS THOMPSON orris Thompson is an Athabascan born and raised in the Yukon River village of Tanana. He has had a colorful and successful career in both the public and private sectors. He served as special assistant to the Secretary of the Interior in the Nixon Administration and, at age 34, he became the youngest Commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Mr. Thompson is a former president of the Alaska Federation of Natives, founding vice president of Commonwealth North and past co-chairman of AFN. Employed by Doyon Limited since 1981, Mr. Thompson was initially hired as vice presi- dent. In October 1985, he was appointed its President and Chief Executive Officer. He and his wife have three daughters, and they make their home in Fairbanks. He said his principal focus on the Commission has been to hear from individual Alaska Natives, affording as many people as possible an opportunity to be heard. “T believe we have come up with some unique recommendations that can and will be acted on by the Legislature, the Administration and the Congress,” he said. Mr. Thompson said it’s a bit early to predict how successful the results of the Commission’s work will be, but he said he believes that the Commission focused on what can and needs to be done about problems. He is pleased that much of the testimony and ideas came from the grassroots of the Alaska Native community. 135 1306 SAM, TOWARAK ( fe wrrently serving as assistant superintendent for the Bering Strait School District, ~ Sam Towarak said much of his attention is on education. Mr. Towarak received his master’s degree in school administration from the University of Alaska-Fairbanks in May 1981. In 1972, he received his bachelor’s degree in secondary edu- cation from UAF. He was Campus President at the Chukchi Community College in Kotzebue. He has been employed by the Bering Strait School District since 1984. In 1989, he was selected as the AFN Educator of the Year which he credits to his wife Nita and their three children, Elaine, Sam Jr. and Aaron. Mr. Towarak said he has always been particularly concerned about developing programs for Native children before they even begin their formal education, including pre-natal care. There currently is too little attention on the pre-school years, he said. “Why do people look at a child in kindergarten and say we've already decided he won't be a success?” he asked. “Why can’t we eradicate that thought?” He said he also is concerned with the social problems facing villages and with economic development in rural Alaska. But he is optimistic about villages and about what Native peo- ple are capable of accomplishing. Mr. Towarak said that as a member of the Commission his goal was to work hard to make sure the final report is not put on policymakers’ desks to collect dust. “Let’s get something done. I really think we can,” he said. and Notes 1. Napoleon, Harold, "Yuuyaraq: The Way of the Human Being," Center for Cross- Cultural Studies, College of Rural Alaska, University of Alaska-Fairbanks, December 1991, p. 19. 2. Fienup-Riordan, Ann, "Cultural Change and Identity Among Alaska Natives: Retaining Control," Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska-Anchorage, April 1992, pp. 4-5. 3. Fienup-Riordan, pp. 2-11. 4. Napoleon, p.10; Fienup-Riordan, pp. 4-5. 5. Minerals Management Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Technical Paper No. 151, "Social Indicators Study of Alaskan Coastal Villages," Anchorage, Alaska, August 1992, p. 294. 6. Minerals Management Services, p. 294. 7. Fienup-Riordan, p. 4. 8. Nelson, William Edward, "Eighteenth Annual Report of American Ethnology," Washington, D.C., Government Printing Office, 1899, p. 270. 9. Minerals Management Service, pp. 79-84. 10. Fienup-Riordan, p. 5. 11. Minerals Management Service, p. 379. 12. Fienup-Riordan, p. 5. 13. Fienup-Riordan, Ann, "The Real People and the Children of Thunder: The Yup'ik Eskimo Encounter with Moravian Missionaries John and Edith Kilbuck," University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma, 1991. 14. Fienup-Riordan (1992), p. 5. 15. Ducker, James H., "Curriculum for a New Culture: Federal Schooling at Bethel and Along the Kuskokwim," Bureau of Land Management, Anchorage, Alaska, 1991. 16. Quoted in Darnell, Frank, "Alaska's Dual Federal-State School System: A History and Descriptive Analysis," Ed.D. dissertation, Wayne State University, 1970 microfilm (University Microfilms 71-396), p. 99. 17. Darnell, p. 208. 18. Rogers, George W., "The Cross-Cultural Economic Situation in the North: The Alaska Case," Paper presented at the Conference on Cross-Cultural Education in the North, Montreal, 1969, cited in Fienup-Riordan (1992), p. 8. 19. Jones, Dorothy M., "Aleuts in Transition," University of Washington Press, Seattle, IBZ 138 Washington, 1980, cited in Minerals Management Service, p. 381. 20. Minerals Management Service, p. 296. 21. Alaska Federation of Natives, "The AFN Report on the Status of Alaska Natives: A Call for Action," Anchorage, Alaska, January 1989, p. 2. 22. Fienup-Riordan (1992), p. 9. 23. Gorsuch, Lee, "2(c) Report: Federal Programs and Alaska Natives," 1976, Task I, p. 9. 24. Alaska Federation of Natives, p. 65. 25. Statistics for Alaska Natives living in Alaska include small numbers of other Native Americans living in Alaska. 26. Alaska Department of Labor, Alaska Population Overview (Juneau: Alaska Department of Labor, 1992), pp. 26-27. 27. Alaska Department of Labor, Alaska Population Overview (Juneau: Alaska Department of Labor, 1992), pp. 38-39. 28. Alaska Department of Labor, Alaska Population Overview (Juneau: Alaska Department of Labor, 1992), p. 1. 29. Alaska Department of Labor, Alaska Population Overview (Juneau: Alaska Department of Labor, 1992), p. 39. 30. Alaska Department of Labor, Alaska Population Overview (Juneau: Alaska Department of Labor, 1992) p. 39; Alaska Department of Labor, Population Projections Alaska 1990-2010 (Juneau: Alaska Department of Labor, November 1991), p. 13. 31. Alaska Department of Labor, Demographics Unit, Alaska Population Projections 1990-2010 (Juneau: Alaska Department of Labor, 1991), pp. 30-31. 32. U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of the Census, 1990 Census of Population and Housing, Summary Social, Economic, and Housing Characteristics - Alaska, 1990 CPH-5-3 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, April 1992), Table 11. 33. The Commission chose not to use arbitrary population figures in describing villages and in making “rural” and “urban” distinctions. Rather, characteristics such as Natives as a percentage of overall population, transportation links and modes, predominant cul- tural lifeways, and social and economic infrastructures were the principal bases for deter- mining these designations. 34. In outlining the broad geographic configurations for discussing Alaska Native issues and problems relative to different areas of Alaska, the principal U.S. census areas for the state were used in order to lessen confusion and for depicting certain geographic and demographic information that is only obtainable on a census area basis. For this reason, while the village of Kake in Southeast Alaska, five villages in the Prince William Sound and Kenai Peninsula areas, and the villages on Kodiak Island are included in “village Alaska” for purposes of general demographic discussions, statistical analyses on specific topics for village Alaska do not always include these villages. 35. In determining population counts for this geographic area, subcensus area figures were used. Larger, predominantly non-Native population centers were backed out of the figures, leaving numbers relative to the villages and their surrounding environs. 36. Since the high rate of military personnel and dependents in the western Aleutians — combined with the large and mainly non-Native community of Unalaska — unnecessari- ly distorts the presence of Natives in their traditional area, only individual population fig- ures for the villages of St. George, St. Paul, Atka and Nikolski were used in calculations relative to the Aleutians West Census Area. 37. Sitka Borough is the only exception with a Native population of 21 percent. Overall, Alaska Natives make up 10 percent of the population of maritime rural Alaska. 38. African Americans make up the largest minority in the Fairbanks North Star Borough, outnumbering Alaska Natives/American Indians with a population count of 5,553 versus 5,330. These figures include military personnel at Eilson Air Force Base and Fort Wainwright. 139 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The list of organizations and individuals the Alaska Natives Commission would like to thank for their assistance during the Commission's endeavor is quite lengthy. With a few exceptions, individuals are not listed because they are so numerous and because it would be easy to inadvertently leave someone out. You all know who you are, and we thank you. The Commission's work and final work products are the results of the con- tributions of many people — Alaska Native and non-Native — as well as groups and individuals. Thank all of you for what you have done in a very positive way to improve life for Alaska Natives. ALASKANS WHO TESTIFIED Our gratitude goes to the 500 people from around the state who took the time to share their insights and suggestions at our hearings, and also to the additional several hundred who submitted written testimony. HELPED WITH HEARINGS Grand Camps of the Alaska Native Brotherhood and Alaska Native Sisterhood; Bristol Bay Native Association; City of Dillingham; Kawarak, Inc.; City of Nome; Native Village of Kluti-Kaah; Ahtna, Inc.; Tanana Chiefs Conference, Inc.; Doyon Limited; Association of Village Council Presidents; Calista Corporation; Northwest Arctic Borough; North Slope Borough; City of Barrow; Alaska Federation of Natives, Inc.; Central Council Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska; Sitka Tribe of Alaska; Staff and Students of Mt. Edgecumbe High School; Kodiak Area Native Association; Emmonak Corporation; City of Emmonak; City of Hooper Bay; State of Alaska, Department of Corrections; KOTZ-FM (Kotzebue); and KYUK-FM (Bethel). IN-KIND AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT Alaska Area Office, Indian Health Service (with a special thanks to Ms. Martha Taylor for all that she did during start-up); Bureau of Indian Affairs; The Aleut Corporation; Alaska Village Initiatives; Southcentral Foundation; and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. PUBLIC MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION'S TASK FORCES Ella Anagick; Ray Barnhart; Bart Garber; Sally Kookesh; Ethel Lund; Larry Merculief; Nettie Peratrovich; Dr. Robert Rowen; Dalee Sambo; John Shively: Liz Sonnyboy; Paul Tony; Roseann Turner; and Mike Williams. REMEMBRANCE In the "Dedication" to this report we note that roughly 1,200 Alaska Natives lost their lives during the Course of our work. Among those who passed away was one of our Commission members, Mrs. Francis Hamilton of Ketchikan. Mrs. Hamilton's early contributions to our work were immeasur- able, and her spirit and wisdom imbue our final work products. 14.0 STAFF Mike Irwin, Executive Director William Hanable Debra Jessup Florence Lauridsen Harold Napoleon Robert Singyke PHOTO CREDITS Perry Eaton, unless otherwise noted DESIGN & ILLUSTRATION Debra Dubac ALASKA NANTIVVES COMMISSIO Joint Federal-State Commission on Policies and Programs Affecting Alaska Natives Anchorage, Alaska May 1994 & Printed on recycled paper