The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAPA1604('I) ~ SUBSISTENCE LAND USE LO ' 1.0 in . ~ g UPPER YUKON-PORCUPINE COMMUNITIES, ALASKA LO LO ,..... ('I) ('I) Dinjii ·Nats' a a Nan Kak Adagwaandaii Richard A . Caulfield Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Subsistence Fairbanks, Alaska Technical Paper Number 16 June 1983 _, Cover photo: Removing a gillnet from under the ice near Chalkyitsik, Fall 1982. All photographs by the author unless otherwise noted. i i SUBSISTENCE LAND USE IN UPPER YUKON-PORCUPINE COMMUNITIES, AlASKA ABSTRACT This report documents the extent of 1 and used for the harvest of wi 1 d resources by residents of the Upper Yukon-Porcupine communities of Arctic Village, Birch Creek, Chalkyitsik, Fort Yukon, and Venetie. Land use maps depict areas used over the lifetimes of residents currently living in those communities. A brief overvi ~w of historic and prehistoric 1 and use patterns is included to provide a context for understanding contemporary use. A summary of use patterns of wild resources for the region, as well as the annual round of resource harvest activities for each /community, is presented. Finally, factors which influence land and resource use patterns in the region and concerns of 1 ocal residents about wi 1 d resources are discussed. The data for this report were gathered between 1980 and 1982 using formal and informal interviews and participant-observation. Land use by non-community based households, an important element in regional land use patterns, was not included in this report due to funding and time limitations. The data presented in this report demonstrate that the residents of the study communities have used, and continue to use, extensive areas of the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region for the harvest of wild resources. Use of land for this purpose is an integral component of a mixed, subsistence-based socioeconomic system in the region. Much of the documented land use occurs within newly- created federal conservation areas, including the Yukon Flats and Arctic Nation- al Wildlife refuges. Research has determined that relatively distinct and well-defined areas of contemporary 1 and use exist for each study community. These areas of use fall within those described previously for traditional Gwich'in Athabaskan bands, providing evidence of continuity between past and present 1 and use patterns. Residents occasionally travel beyond their community's area of use when 1 arge seasonal resource migrations of salmon or caribou are available. Respondents from Fort Yukon, furthermore, report use of areas which overlap those of certain other nearby communities, perhaps reflecting expanding pressure of a regional popul ati o~ center upon 1 oca 1 resources or continuing sod ocul tural ties to outlying communities··. · Other factors which were determined to influence the nature and extent of community land use included resource dynamics, economic factors, social organization, and cultural traditions. Both distribution and exchange patterns and elements of customary law were found to influence contemporary 1 and and resource use. Sharing and exchange networks were documented both within and between communities in the region and to a lesser degree beyond the region. Arctic Village and Fort Yukon, in particular, were found to be major sources of caribou and salmon, respectively, for the region as alwhole. Elements of customary law were identified pertaining to the use uf land, harvest strategies, procurement methods, use of harvested resources, and conservation of resources and habitat. The report's conclusion suggests that resource managers examine the applicability and utility of custom- ary law in addressing contemporary resource conservation issues. ABSTRACT IN GWICH'IN ATHABA~KAN Dinjii Nats'aa Nan Kak Adagwaandaii Jii t'ee nijin gwa'an Vashr~ii K'QQ~ Deenduu, Jalgiitsik, Gwichyaa Zhee, Viniht~ii jidii gii'ii nijin gwa'an nagaazhrii, luk keegii'in, khy~h 9aadlii ts'a' nijin gwa'an jak g~~htsii geegwaandak. Aiits'a' chan geegwaandak khaii, shin, shreenyaa, khaiits'a' nin nilehts'i' t'iichy'aa, luk, gwanzhih t'ag~~chy'aa. Aiits'a' chan nan deegw~htl'oo gwich'in n~ii eenjit vaghaii gweedhaa nilii ts'a' jaghaii giit'~~hchy'aa. Jii khaiinkQQ aii chan nats'aa jii gwich'in n~ii nats'aa t'eedagaa'in gwi~ gwiheendal. Oil haa gwitr'it t'agwah'in n~ii, gas, oil haa duulee vadzaih iheendal ginyaa. Laraa kantii n~ii chan Deenduu chyy giveh'an iiheezyy ginyaa. Ch'izhii chan geegwaraandak, oonduk gwats'an naazhrii n~ii chan duulee tr'ikhit gwandaii l~ii gahaahkhwaa. Dinjii ch'atth~ii agwaa'ee n~ii duulee gwintl'oo gavaa nigwihee'aa. Law k'eejit ahtsii n~ii duulee dinjii eenjit ch'ijuk gwahahtsyaa. Nan gwik'it teedanahotl'oo t'agw~~hchy'aa jii nan kan ' ' t'eedaraa'in £enjit. Jii nan gwik'it teedanahotl'oo tr'ahtsii d~i' tr'ookit kwaiik'it khatihgijii n~ii akoodarahnyaa aiitl'ee t'ee JUU gaandaii n~ii aragookwat ts'a' geegwitr'it t'agwah'in. Zhehk'aa datthak kwaiik'it gwizhit ts'a' giriheekhyaa gwik'ee gwarandaii g~a Gwichyaa Zhee aii akwaa. Gwichyaa Zhee aii t gwintsii geh'an ts'a' juu nan gwintl'oo t·~~hchy'aa n~ii zhrih ts'a' girinhe'. Jii nan gwik'it teedanahotl'oo aii t'ee kwaiik'it gwatsal gwa'an t'oonchy'aa. Dzaa gwa'an t'ee dinjii n~ii naraazhrii ginyaa, luk keegii'in, ch'ag~~htsii, ts'a' khy~h gaadlii gogwandaii gwizhit. Ch'izhii chan van, han, ddhah vakak gwigweech'in. Gwich'in oozhri' chan. t'ee deegw~htsii kwaiik'it d jii nan haandaii geegwaan~ak. Duulee dinjii nan t'iij.iiJ.hchy'aa datthak t'irinlik kwaa dQhlii· At'oohju' hee jii gwitr' gakaagwar<:J.<:J.h'q.ii gwandaa gwitr'it gwarahaht- syaa goo' Jii t'ee nijin dii-government t'eedaraa'iri geenj k 1 eedeegwaadhat ji' nats'aa jii nan t'eegwahaahchy'aa akQQ deegw(J.hts dinj ii nan t' iiJ.iiJ.hchy' aa gaag,iheendaii aii ts' a' deegwiiJ.htsii ii eenj gogwanlii gaagiheendaii. Akoodi- gwinyaa chan kwaiik gwich'in niiJ.ii nan k'eeriiJ.~htii gwits'oonya' luk, ch'atth~ii kwaii ts'a' nan chan. ch'atthiiJ.ii k'iiJ.~htii n~ii dinjii zhuh k'eegogohthat jidii ch'adai' gwik' geedaa. Arctic Village gwich'in vadzaih eenjit rule gahtsii gwik 1 it dinj n~ii nilii zhyaa angahahtsyaa kwaa ts'a' nats'aa ninghit diiJ.i 1 khy~h tee gwik'eegaahlii gwik' Jii jyahts'a' t'ee nihlaa gwitr'it t'aragwahah'yaa nin akQQ nan haa eenjit. CONTENTS LIST OF MAPS ......... ~ ................................................ . v LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................... vi LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS ....................................................... vii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................ ix NOTE ON THE USE OF GWICH 1 IN ATHABASKAN xi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 0 0 II 0 0 0 e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 e 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 0 0 ••••• xi i i PHOTO ESSAY CHAPTER 1. CHAPTER 2. CHAPTER 3. CHAPTER 4. ............................................................... THE STUDY .................................................... Introduction Purpose .................................................. •••••••••• It ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Research Objectives Background Literature The Study Communities ........................................ ........................................ ........................................ ............................... -............... . Methodology Data Analysis ............................................. THE LAND AND THE PEOPLE: A REGIONAL OVERVIEW Environmental Setting Historical Overview of Socioeconomic Overview ........................................ Regional Land Use ..................... ....................................... RESOURCE USE SUMMARY FOR UPPER YUKON-PORCUPINE COMMUNITIES ............................... The Na~ure of Resource Use .................................... ........................................................ Moose Caribou Dall Sheep ••••••••••••••• IJ •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••• 0 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Bear ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0 ••••••••••••••••• ..................................................... Wildfowl Small Mammals ................................................ Fish Furbe'arers •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0 •••••••••••••••••••• Fuel a~d Structural Materials ................................ Vegetation • • • • • • • • e • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ARCTIC VILLAGE LAND AND RESOURCE USE Environmental Setting •• 0 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Land Use Patterns Over Time The Contemporary Community .................................. ................................... Annual Cycle··~·············································· Land Use Summary •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0 •••••••••••••••• iii XV 1 1 3 4 5 5 7 12 15 15 22 45 51 51 51 63 68 69 70 72 74 77 82 84 87 87 87 94 97 101 CHAPTER 5. CHAPTER 6. CHAPTER 7. CHAPTER 8. CHAPTER 9. CHAPTER 10. CONTENTS (Continued) BIRCH CREEK LAND AND RESOURCE USE ............................ Environmental Setting •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Land Use Patterns Over Time •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• The Contemporary Community ................................... Annual Cycle •••.•..•.•••..•••••.•••.•••••••••.••.•••••••••••• Land Use Summary ............................................. CHALKYITSIK LAND AND RESOURCE USE .......... ··-· ............... . Environmental Setting ••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Land Use Patterns Over Time •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• The Contemporary Community ................................... Annual Cycle ................................................ . Land Use Summary ............................................. FORT YUKON LAND AND RESOURCE USE .......... ~ ........... • ....... . . ~ Environmental Setting ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.• Land Use Patterns Over Time •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• The Contemporary Community ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Annual Cycle •.••..•.•••••.••.••..•..•••••••••••••••••••.••••• Land Use Summary ............................................. VENETIE LAND AND RESOURCE USE ................................ Environmental Setting •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Land Use Patterns Over Time ••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. The Contemporary Community ................................... Annual Cycle •.•.••...•••...•.•.••.•••••.•••.••..••••••••.•••• Land Use Summary •••••••••• 0 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• REGIONAL LAND USE SUMMARY Discussion •.•. ······································~········ Regional Summary r~ap ......................................... SOME FACTORS INFLUENCING LAND AND RESOURCE USE Influence of Resource Dynamics ............................... Economic Factors ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Social Interaction with the Land ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Cultural Interaction with the Land ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Sharing and Exchange of Resources:~ •••••••••••••••••••••••••• Customary Law .••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Local Concerns About Land and Resource Use ••••••••••••••••••• The Need for Further Research ................................ REFERENCES CITED ••••••••••••••• & •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ·• • iv 111 111 111 114 118 121 127 127 127 132 133 137 145 145 145 149 153 157 169 169 170 173 177 180 187 187 188 193 194 195 198 200 203 205 210 217 219 MAP 1 MAP 2 ~AP 3 MAP 4 MAP 5 MAP 6 MAP 7 r~AP 8 MAP 9A MAP 9B MAP 9C MAP 10 MAP llA MAP liB MAP 11C MAPS The Upper Yukon-Porcupine Region •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. 2 Traditional Gwich'in Band Distribution ••••••••••••••.••••••••••• 24 General Location of Historic and Cemetery Sites Identified Under ANCSA, Section 14(h)(1) •••••••••••••••••••••••• 27 Gwich'in Caribou Fence Locations in Northeastern Alaska and Northern Yukon •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 29 The Fort Yukon Trapping Area in 1949 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 40 General Location of Native Allotment Applications 43 Land Status in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine Region, 1982 ••••••••••••••o••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 44 Territory of the Chandalar Gwich'in, 1920s •.•••••••••••••••••••• 91 Arctic Village Land Use Arctic Village Land Use Arctic Village Land Use ......................................... ......................................... 102 104 106 General Location of Arctic Village Place Names •••••••••••••••••• 109 Birch Creek Land Use Birch Creek Land Use Birch Creek Land Use ............................................ ............................................. 122 123 124 r~AP 12 ,.Genera 1 Location of Birch Creek P 1 ace Names • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 126 . • !· MAP 13A MAP 13B MAP 13C MAP 14 MAP 15A MAP 15B MAP 15C MAP 16 Chalkyitsik Land Use Chalkyitsik Land Use Chalkyitsik Land Use ............................................ ............................................ ............................................ 138 139 140 General bocation of Chalkyitsik Place Names •••••••.••••••••••••• 143 Fort YukoM Land Use Fort Yukon Land Use Fort Yukon Land Use ••••••••••••• 0 •••••••••••••••• 0 •••••••••••••• • o o • o • o o o o • o e o • • • • o • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 158 160 162 General Location of Fort Yukon Place Names •••••••••••••••••••••• 167 v PLATE 1 PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE 5 PLATE 6 PLATE 7 PLATE 8 PLATE 9 PLATE 10 PLATE 11 PLATE 12 PLATE 13 PLATE 14 PLATE 15 PLATE 16 PLATE 17 PLATE 18 PLATE 19 PLATE 20 PLATE 21 PLATE 22 PHOTOGRAPHS Yukon Flats in Spring, with Yukon River in Foreground ••••••••• 15 A Winter's Fur Harvest, Circa 1920s ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 36 Loading Skin Boats on the Porcupine River, Circa 1920s •••••••• 37 Arctic Village El~er Spotting Caribou •.•••••••••••••••••••••••• 86 Hitching Up a Dog Team in Arctic Village ••••••••••••••••••••••• 86 Packing Caribou Near Old John Lake •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 96 Birch Creek Village in Winter ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 115 Muskrat Pelts Drying at Beaver Creek Camp ••••••••••••••••••••• 115 Birch Creek Elder David James ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 116 View of Chalkyitsik from Marten Hill •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 128 Chalkyitsik Elder Reverend David Salmon Displaying Traditional Arrow Points ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 128 Street Scene in Fort Yukon •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 150 Chum Salmon Drying Along the Yukon River •••••••••••••••••••••• 150 Fort Yukon Woman with Trapped Muskrat ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 151 Community Store in Venetie ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 174 Aerial View of Venetie ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 174 1 Community Resource Experts in Venetie ••••••••••••••••••••••••• 175 . y. Oil Exploration Helicopter in Venetie •••••••••••••••••••••••••• 214 Fort Yukon and Kaktovik Residents Assist with a Caribou Census •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 214 Log Home Construction Project in Venetie ••••••••••••••.••••••• 216 Charte~d Float Plane Used to Reach Spring Camp on ~Beaver Creek •••.••.••.•••••.•••.•.•••••••••••••••••••• 216 Child on Snowmachine in Venetie ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 218 vii TABLE 1 TABLE 2 TABLE 3 TABLE 4 TABLE 5 TABLE 6 TABLE 7 TABLE 8 TABLE 9 TABLES Percentage of Households Providing Mapped Data, by Community ...•.....•.......•......•.......••.... 8 Resource Categories Used in Map Biographies .................... 9 Climatic Data for Fort Yukon and Arc t i c Vi 11 age , A 1 a.s k a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 17 Population Census for the Upper Yukon-Porcupine Region, 1950-1980 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 45 Population Size and Composition of Upper Yukon-Porcupine Communities, 1980 Common, Gwich'in, and Scientific Names For Major Wild Resources Used in the ........................ 47 Upper Yukon-Porcupine Region ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 52 Selected Gwich'in Names for Moose (Alces alces) and Caribou (Rangifer tarandus) .................. 56 Historic Estimates of Moose Harvest by Upper Yukon-Porcupine Communities, 1942-1982 ................... 61 Comparative Five-Year Chum Salmon Harvests for Fort Yukon, Alaska, 1961-1980 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 76 ix If'' I NOTE ON THE USE OF GWICH 1 IN ATHABASKAN The reader will note that many words and phrases written in the Gwich•in Athabaskan language have been included in this report. The term 11 Gwich 1 in 11 was used instead of its frequ~ntly-used equivalent form, 11 Kutchin,11 in keeping with the practice of using the modern form of spelling developed by the Alaska Native Language Center (J. McGary, personal communication). A decision was made to include Gwi ch • in translations on the title page and in the abstract because the majority of those who 1 i ve in the study communities are Gwi ch • in speakers. Other Gwich 1 in words and phrases are found in the text which provide the non-Gwich•in speaker with the equivalent name for resources o.r places commonly known in the region. It is important to note, however, that use of these terms only portrays a very limited amount of the environmental knowledge reflected in the native language of the region. Gwich 1jn translations in the report were largely the work of Katherine Peter, formerly of the A 1 ask a Native Language Center at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks. Mrs. Peter used the modern version of the Gwich•in orthography developed by Richard Mueller and the Alaska Native Language ~ '· Center. Tone markin~s for Gwich 1 in phrases were not included because of limi- tations on kime and funding. ;...:: .'r xi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author gratefully acknowledges the cooperation and assistance of the people of Arctic Village, Birch Creek, Chalkyitsik, Fort Yukon, and Venetie, who made this research possible. Especially in the smaller communities, mem- bers of almost every family .contributed in some respect to this report and treated the researchers with utmost kindness and hospitality. Resource experts hired in each community contributed greatly to data gathering efforts and made the work both stimulating and enjoyable. These persons included: Rev. Trimble Gilbert and Lincoln Tritt in Arctic Village; Eddie James and Susan Baalam in Birch Creek; William Salmon, Jr. and Minnie Salmon in Chalkyitsik; Titus Peter and Clarence Alexander in Fort Yukon; and Caroline Tritt, Maggie Roberts, and Dan Frank in Venetie. Walter Peter made important contributions to the research, and his assis- tance and friendship are greatly appreciated. Harry Fields ably gathered information about land status in Fairbanks and assisted with pulling the entire report together. Katherine Peter provided most of the Gwi ch • in Athabaskan translations, and taught me a great deal about her language and culture. Dr. Jim Kari and Jane McGary of the Alaska Native Language Center helped with ~ '· ideas and technical!' questions regarding the use of Gwich'in in the text. Debbie Mi 11 er generously contributed place name data she had collected in Arctic Village. Maps and graphics for the report were expertly prepared by the staff at the Arctic Environ~ental Information and Data Center in Anchorage, including ~ Diane Crowne, Mary Aho, and Ray Norman. The report was reproduced by Print- more Corporation in Anchorage. Elizabeth Andrews, Terry Haynes, Dr. Robert Wolfe, Zarro Bradley, Dr. Linda Ellanna, and Dr. William Schneider reviewed various stages of seemingly- endless drafts and made important editorial suggestions. Kathy Morack, Joe xiii Subsistence Land Use in Upper Yukon-Porcupine Communities, Alaska Dinjii Nats'aa Nan Kak Adagwandaii PHOTO ESSAY XV xvi xvii PHOTOGRAPHS: Page xv, Venetie elder tanning a moosehide. Pages xvi through xviii (clockwise from upper left): Page xvi, preparing caribou meat for packing back to Arctic Vi 11 age; setting a gi 11 net under the ice on the Black River near Chalkyitsik; Venetie man wearing a caribou- hide parka; making a rabbit snare near Chalkyitsik. Page xvii, white- fish and pike caught in a gillnet near Arctic Village; Venetie woman cutting salmon at a fishcamp on the Yukon River; skinning out a muskrat at a spring camp on Beaver Creek; checking a gillnet using a "rat" canoe near Arctic Village. Page xviii, spring muskrat camp near Fort Yukon; preparing a garden in Chalky1tsik; hunting caribou by snowmachine near Arctic Village. xviii INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1 THE STUDY This report documents the use of land for the harvest of wild resources by residents currently living in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine communities of Arctic Village, Birch Creek, Chalkyitsik, Fort Yukon, and Venetie during their life- times (Map 1). It also presents a brief overview of historic and prehistoric data designed to provide a context for understanding contemporary land and re- source use. The intent of the report is to document the extent of land use by employing a methodology similar to that developed in Canada for the documenta- tion of Inuit land use and occupancy (Freeman 1976). Patterns of resource utilization and the ecological, socioeconomic, and cultural factors which influence community-based land use are also discussed. Use of wild resources in the region has been found to be an integral part of a subsistence-based socioeconomic system (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978). Subsistence-based economies are 11 mi xed 11 economies with both cash and subsistence sectors, and are based upon a domestic mode of production with a stable and complex seasonal round of harvest activities (Wolfe and ~ r. Ellanna 1983:258). Wild resources are also an integral component of complex and dynamic sociocultural systems. Sharing, gi ft-gi vi ng, trade, and barter bind fami 1 i es within both communities and the region. The social organization of villages, ~~ fishcamps, and hunti~g parties are linked to this relationship between people and the natural environment. The world view of many of the region's residents has been molded and shaped by centuries of living closely with the natural world. Land use data in this report describe community-based use patterns. Not included in this report are use patterns of households located outside of the 1 five study communities. Because these households oft~n make significant local- ized use of resources, a complete description of land use for the entire region will require documentation of these uses as well. PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to document the nature and extent of land use for the harvest of wild resources through time in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region. Patterns of resource utilization and ecological trends that have influenced land use over time are also summarized, and ecological, socioeco- nomic, and cultural variables which may affect contemporary land and resource use are identified and analyzed. The information developed in this study is directed to at least four audiences: 1} village and tribal councils and local residents; 2} regional non- profit and profit-making Native corporations; 3} state and federal government agencies such as the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and 4} the community of scholars who have documented land and resource use in other areas of the North. Understanding the nature of land and resource use over time is an essential precursor to planning and management for the conservation of natural resources in the re~ion. IssLes relating to resource conservation include: management of fi.sh and wi 1 dl ife resources such as the Porcupine Caribou Herd and Yukon Flats moose populations; continued utilization of the Yukon Flats and Arctic National Wildlife Refuges and adjacent areas for subsistence purposes; and habitat degredatio~, due to industrial and/or agricultural development. The research was designed to complement documentation of land use already completed in the Canadian North (Freeman 1976; Brice-Bennett 1977; Brody 1982}, and on Alaska•s North Slope (Pedersen 1979}. A primary objective of the project was to encourage substantive involvement of local community resource experts in documentatio·n of land and resource data. 3 BACKGROUND LITERATURE Systematic documentation of 1 and and resource use over time is 1 acki ng for the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region as a whole, although the literature does pro vi de insight into pre historic, historic, and contemporary use patterns. Several bib 1 i ographi es incorporating references pertaining to this use have have been compiled for the .region (Poppe 1971; Andrews 1977; Krauss and McGary 1980; McMillan 1981; Andersen 1983). Major ethnographic sources useful for this research included Murray (1910), Osgood (1936), Hadleigh-West (1963), and McKennan (1965). Important references pertaining to use in the latter half of the twentieth century include Shimkin (1951, 1955), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1964), Nelson (1973), Schneider (1976), and the Institute of Social and Economic Research (1978). Archival research at the University of Alaska library in Fairbanks produced information on land use from a number of sources including Tritt (n.d.), White (n.d.), McDonald (n.d.), Murie (n.d.), and the Alaska Game Commission (n.d.). The Alaska. Native Language Center 1 i brary at the University of A 1 ask a, Fairbanks was a source of transcribed oral literature and research notes from residents of the study communities. Key oral literature resources utilized in this study include Peter (1979, 1981) and Herbert (1982). THE STUDY COMMUNITIES The study communities of Arctic Village, Birch Creek, Chalkyitsik, Fort Yukon, and Venetie are located in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region of Alaska (Map 1). This re~i:on includes the vast Yukon Flats and surrounding uplands, 9 and the eastern portions of the Brooks Range south of the continental divide. The confluence of the Yukon and the Porcupine rivers 1 i es near the center of this region. Other communities 1 ocated in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region, or considered by residents to have socioeconomic and cultural ties to the region, are Beaver, Central, Circle, Stevens Village, and, to a lesser degree, 5 Fort Yukon is the largest community in the .region and its primary administrative, economic, and transportation center. It had a population of 661 persons in 1980 and is situated near the confluence of the Yukon and Porcu- pine Rivers in the heart of the Yukon Flats (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1980). It is located at 66° 34'N, 145° 16'W, about 145 miles northeast of Fairbanks. Fort Yukon's location on the. Yukon River traditionally made it an important transportation center as well as a focus for fishing, principally for salmon. It, too, is surrounded by an extensive network of lakes, rivers, and sloughs which provides habitat for resources such as moose, salmon, whitefish, bear, and muskrat. The community of Venetie is situated on the Chandal ar River and has a population of 132 persons in 1980 (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1980). It is located about 45 miles northwest of Fort Yukon at 67° 01'N, 146° 25'W. To the north the terrain rises to the foothills of the eastern Brooks Range. Nearby Venetie Lake is an important source of waterfowl and was historically an excellent place for fishing. Venetie•s location on the northern fringe of the Yukon Flats allows harvest of resources from both "flats" and upland areas. METHODOLOGY f i, Since the goals of the study involved descriptive community-based re- search, three primary methodologies were used to collect data: (1) systematic land use mapping, (2) formal and informal interviews, and (3) participarl~ observation of resource harvest activities. Virtually all data were gathered while the researcher was in residence in the study communities during the period between October 1980 and March 1982. Land Use Mapping. In order to systematically map land use, interviews were conducted with the heads of households in each community using a method 7 Data were collected from both male and female heads. of households. Because most heads of households were male, however, some under representation of uses by women may have occurred. Individual map biographies were developed on mylar overlays using U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 series base maps. Colored pencils were used to delineate areal boundaries of.use for each resource category. Table 2 presents the list of resource categories used in the map biographies. Interviews were tape recorded and generally lasted from one to three hours. Respondents were paid by the hour for their time, and each overlay was coded using a number rather than the individual's name to ensure confidentiality. Completed map TABLE 2 RESOURCE CATEGORIES USED IN MAP BIOGRAPHIES Category 1. Bear 2. Caribou 3. Fuel and Structural Materials 4. Fish 5. Furbearer Hunting 6. Furbearer Trapping 7. Moose " . 8. Sheep 9. Sma 11 ~1amma 1 s 10. Vegetation 11. Wi 1 dfowl 9 Major Resources Included black bear, grizzly bear caribou white spruce, black spruce, birch salmon, whitefish, pike, grayling, burbot, sucker, arctic char, lake trout, sheefish muskrat, wolf marten, lynx, beaver, wolf, wolverine, mink, fox, land otter moose Dall sheep hare, ground squirrel, red squirrel, weasel, porcupine, marmot berries, birch bark, roots geese, ducks, crane, grouse, ptarmigan, eggs biographies for each of the study communities were then superimposed to create a composite map for each resource category. The use of 11 informant reca11 11 for data collection has been both accepted and used extensively in human ecological research (Arima 1976). Data recorded through the use of this technique have been found to be generally reliable and the method represents one of the few means of recording knowledge about the past in prel iterate societies. An effort was made, h9wever, to corroborate !i<' data obtained in interviews with other informants and "the literature. For example, use of the Sheenjek River by Arctic Village residents over an extended period of time was corroborated in at least three independent literature sour- ces. In other cases, direct observation of hunting, fishing, or trapping activities allowed first-hand verification. Of over 40 formal mAp interviews completed, only one case was found where adequate corroboration could not be obtained. That case was thus excluded from the summary data. Interviews were conducted only with individuals whose pri~ary residence was in one of the study communities. Land use by non-community-based households was not included. For this reason, and because a 100 percent sample was not achieved, the data presented on the maps included here should be considered only a minimal representation of actual land use in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service personnel have been involved in docu- menting traplines used by many of these remote households (M. G. Sheldon: personal communication, November 1981). Areas outside of the region used by community residents were not recorded. For example, caribou hunting areas of a Venetie man who had hunted near Kotzebue during his residence there were not documented. All residents of the study comm.unities were considered eligible respondents. While all of the communities are predominately Gwich'in Athabas- kan ethnic or cultural affiliation were not determinants in selecting infor- mants. Both Native and non-Native informants were interviewed. 10 The second component of the mapping effort,involyed interviews with know- 1 edgeab 1 e informants in each community to document Gwi ch • in Athabaskan names for physical and cultural features on the landscape. Names for such physical features as lakes, rivers, and trails important in the local subsistence econ- omy and cultural features such as the location of cabins, the site of historic and supernatural events, and . contemporary resource use sites were recorded. Documentation of Native-named places has proven to be a valuable index of the depth and extent of environmental knowledge which persists in modern communities (Ritter 1976). Further, it demonstrates types of land use which may not other- wise emerge in interviews. Village councils were asked to identify the most knowledgeable persons for place name interviews. The interview usually involved from three to eight hours using 1:250,000 scale maps (and 1:63,600 scale when available) on which the named locations were marked. Place names were recorded both on tape and in writing. Transcribers from the community 1 iterate in both Gwich'in Athabaskan and English were hired and the tapes were translated by Katherin~ Peter (formerly of the Alaska Native Language Center). A separate and more detailed document presents this corpus of place names for the region ( Caulfield and Peter 1983). This represents only a first step toward syst- matic collection of place names, as additional work will be needed to fully ~ y\ compile, cross-check~ and annotate names for the region. Interviews. Formal and informal interviews about resource use over time were conducted with knowledgeable individuals in each community. Those selected for interviews were generally elders identified for the researchers by the village council. ~Interviews focused on the annual cycle of resource harvest ; activities, procurement ~ethods, distribution and sharing, and the use of wild resources. Considerable data were also obtained pertaining to the socioeconomic and cultural significance of wild resources to residents in the study communi- ties. Further, they helped to identify individual and community perceptions of resource and 'land management issues potentially affecting future use. In 11 portrayed on map biographies will remain confidential to protect individual respondents. Interview and field data were compiled and organized by study community. A determination was made in the initial research design to present primary data at the community level, while providing an overview of resource use and his- toric land use data for the region as a whole. 13 lA11\t' I t.K l. THE LAND AND THE PEOPLE: A REGIONAL OVERVIEW ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Community 1 and use in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region occurs primarily within the Eastern Brooks Range, Porcupine Plateau, and Yukon Flats physio- graphic provinces as described by Wahrhaftig (1965). The expansive Yukon Flats are comprised of nearly flat to gently rolling floodplains made up of river-sorted gravels and wind-borne silt. This vast undulating area, which to the inexperienced eye has no geographic relief whatsoever, actually rises gently from an elevation of approximately 300 feet in the west to 600 feet in the east. The area below the 600-foot contour contains over 10,000 square miles of thaw lakes, braided streams, and marshy flats (King, White, Spencer, Lensi nk 1970:6). PLATE 1 Yukon Flats in Spring, with Yukon River in Foreground. 15 ,,, "I ''I ,,, TABLE 3 CLIMATIC DATA FOR FORT YUKON AND ARCTIC VILLAGE, ALASKA FORT YUKON: Elevation: 443 1 Temperatures: Summer 34° to 72°F Winter -29° to 18°F Extremes -75° to 100°F Precipitation: 7", including 45" of snow Average Wind: 6.4 knots, calm 14% ARCTIC VILLAGE: Elevation: 2,020' Temperatures: Summer 32° to 67°F Winter -49° to 10°F Extremes -68° to 80°F Precipitation: 10", including 58" of snow Average Wind: No data Source: Selkregg 1975 The Upper Yukon-Porcupine region is bisected by the Arctic Circle, where daylight is nearly continuous from mid-May until early August. Fort Yukon has about 700 hours more sunlight and "civil twilight" each year than does Washington D.C. (King, et al. 1970:7). During the long days of summer, time is cast lo_ose from the constraints of "night" and "day" as most people know them. Human and non-human animals alike are more active during the cooler nights with their abundant twilight than during the hot insect-ridden days. Much of the preci pi tati on which falls at this time of year is generated by -:. often vi ol~ent thunde~r and 1 i ghtni ng storms which cause dramatic variation in the water level of tributaries to the Yukon River. Fires caused by lightning are common, often enveloping much of the Yukon Flats in smoke. The forest fires contribute to the dynamics of the environment by recycling important nutrients and crea~ing new habitat. ; As fall approaches, the nights lengthen and, lacking snow cover to reflect available light, the region experiences its darkest periods. Later, with a snow cover on the ground, moonlight and the aurora borealis can provide enough light for many activities such as trapping, snowmachine driving, and dog mushing to continue into night hours. 17 sp.). A variety of shrubs, grasses, sedges, mosses, an~ iichens create a gener- ally productive and complete ground cover. Aquatic vegetation thrives during summer in the warm waters of lakes, particularly those in the Yukon Flats. When traveling through the region, the mosaic of micro-environments encountered is striking. Climax communities dominated ~Y white spruce, birch, and balsam poplar are generally found along well-drained hi 11 sides or river- banks. Away from the rivers and in poorly-drained areas black spruce are often found interspersed with bog and muskeg vegetative communities. Along river bars, shrub thickets of willow and alder predominate creating excellent habitat for moose, snowshoe hare, and other species. Moist tundra communities contain sedge tussocks, herbs such as fireweed, and a variety of 1 ow-growing shrubs and grasses. Summer travel through such areas is usually arduous. In higher elevations, particularly in the Brooks Range, alpine tundra provides habitat for caribou, Dall sheep, ground squirrels, and grizzly bear. Lichens, forbs, grasses, and shrubs are often found here clinging t() barren, rocky, windswept slopes. Residents of the Upper Yukon- Porcupine region have traditionally utilized certain species of this local flora, including berries, roots, and other materials. Fire plays a major role in shaping the ecological character of the region ~ :. c y by disrupting climax-'communities and releasing nutrients necessary for regrowth. Low humidity and precipitation in summer allow lightning-caused fires to burn extensive areas, although in recent decades aggressive fire control efforts have modified historic burn patterns. Fire can also impact human communities through the occasi~ral destruction of homes, cabins, and good trapping country. j The role of fire in creating productive wildlife habitat, however, is becoming increasingly understood by land and resource managers. Permanent ground ice, or permafrost, has a significant effect upon vegeta- ti on. The Upper Yukon-Porcupine region is characterized by continuous perma- frost, which influences drainage, soil formation, plant growth, and landforming 19 free of snow where food can be readily obtai ned. C9ntemporary and historic use of sheep is well documented for residents of Arctic Village (Hadleigh-West 1963; McKennan 1965; Warbel ow et al. 1975). Historic use of sheep has been reported by residents of Venetie, Chalkyitsik, and Birch Creek as well. Black bear (Ursus americanus) are ubiquitous in boreal forest zones, generally feeding upon berries.and roots. They are rarely found in alpine tundra regions. Black bear are uti 1 i zed for both human and dog food. Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) are principally found in upland areas characterized by alpine or moist tundra. They are rarely utilized for food, but are shot if found disrupting camps and caches. A variety of small mammals are .a source of food and other resources for residents of the region, i ncl udi ng the snowshoe hare (Lepus ameri canus), Arctic ground squirrel (Spermophilus undulatus), porcupin~ (Erethizon dorsatum), lynx (Felis canadensis), marten (Martes american a), beaver (Castor canaden- sis), and muskrat (Ondatra zibethi cus). Other small mammals include marmot (Marmota caJigata), red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus), wolf (Canis lupus), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), wol~erine (Gulo gulo), mink (Mustela vison), ermine (Mustela erminea) and least weasel (Mustela rixosa). Fur species such as marten, beaver, lynx, muskrat, mink, otter, wolverine, and wolf contribute 1 :. to the subsistence erconomy of the region, while moles, shrews, and mice play an important role in natural systems. Ducks and geese are an important source of food because they often repre- sent the first fresh meat in spring when subsistence resources are tradition- ally in short supply. Grouse and ptarmigan are also important food species. ~ . Among the Gwich'in of Old Crow, Irving (1958) recorded Native names for 99 spe- cies of birds, many of which were utilized for human consumption. Other bird species are known to community residents by their behavioral patterns or be- cause of cultural significance. 21 a large continuous area in the interior of Alaska and western Canada and also includes southern Alberta, the Pacific coast, and the American southwest (Krauss and Golla 1981:67). At the time of contact with Euroamericans, the Gwich'in were distributed throughout the area of the far north generally described by Osgood as 11 the region around the great bend of the Yukon River, eastward into the valley of . the Mackenzie, north to the littoral of the Arctic Ocean held by the Eskimos, and south to roughly 65 degrees north 11 (1936a:14). At least nine and perhaps ten abori gina 1 Gwi ch' in bands have been reported (r1ap 2}, each band centered in the drainage of a major river and exhi biting di a 1 ect differences from neighboring bands (Slobodin 1981:514-515). English names for these bands are as follows: Yukon Flats Gwich'in, Birch Creek Gwich'in, Chandalar Gwich'in, Dihai Gwich'in, Black River Gwich'in, Crow Flats Gwich'in, Upper Porcupine River Gwich'in, Peel River Gwich'in, and Arctic Red River Gwich'in. Krech (1978) suggests that a distinction should be made between the band on the Lower Mackenzie and those to the east. Five of these regional bands were centered in what is now the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region of A 1 ask a. Andrews (1977:103) described this traditional distribution in Alaska as .. extending roughly from the middle fork of the Koyukuk and the drainage of the Chandalar River, east to the drainages of the Sheenjek and Coleen rivers, the environs of the 1 ower Porcupine and Black rivers as we 11 as the entire Yukon Flats region .. (1977:103). The historic Gwich'in land use area in Alaska, she notes, approximated 36,800 square miles. Neighboring aboriginal groups included the Inupi at Eskimo to :the north and northwest, Koyukon Athabaskans to the west, ; Tanana and Han to the south, and the Hare to the east ( Sl obodi n 1981:515). The Dihaii Gwich'in (Dihai Kutchin) occupied an area north of the Yukon Flats and west of the Chandalar River. This area may have extended as far west as the Noatak and Kobuk Rivers during the early nineteenth century (Hall 1969; Slobodin 1981:515). The Dihaii were reported to have migrated east 23 after having troubled relations with Inupiat neighbors to the north and west. Remnants of this band were said to have been largely assimilated into the Yukon Flats and Chandalar bands by the end of the nineteenth century (Slobodin 1981:515). One of the last remaining Dihaii speakers, Johnny Frank, died in 1977 at the age of 98 (Mischler 1981:89). The territory of the Neets•aii Gwich 1 in (Chandalar Kutchin), according to McKennan (1965:16), "centered in the drainage of the East Fork of the Chandalar River [and] also included the headwaters, at least, of the Sheenjek River to the east, together with the intervening valley of the~smaller Christian River ... Andrews (1977:109) reports their territory also included the Coleen River. The Gwi chyaa Gwi ch • in (Yukon Flats Kutchi n) inhabited the area along the Yukon River near its confluence with the Porcupine, extending upriver to in- elude Sam Creek and the present site of Circle, and downriver-to include the area around the mouth of the Chandalar River (Andrews 1977:105; Slobodin 1981:515). Semi -permanent fishing and hunting camps existed in this area, although some band members traveled to Fort Yukon during the mid-nineteenth century after its founding as a trading center. The Deendu Gwich 1 in (Birch Creek Kutchin) were reported to have inhabited the area south of the Yukon River to the northern foothi 11 s of the White and t. Crazy Mountains, and· perhaps west to include the vicinity south and west of the present vi 11 age of Beaver (Andrews 1977:106). Although Osgood ( 1936:14-15) reports that "within twenty-five years of their first discovery, the Birch Creek Kutchin were annihilated by an epidemic of scarlet fever, .. reports from local elders reve~l, that the presence of another aboriginal band in the area ~ may have caused some confusion about the fate of this Birch Creek band. These reports are discussed further in Chapter 5. People living along the Porcupine and Black rivers within Alaska were known as the or•aanjik Gwich 1 in (Tranjik Kutchin) or 11 Black River people 11 {Nelson 1973:15-16; Slobodin 1981:515). Settlements of this band during the 25 point fragments, bifacially flaked knives, end scrapers, side scrapers, notched pebble axes, gravers, and lithic debitage. Fire-cracked rocks associated with the site were likely used as boiling stones during a late pre.historic or early historic occupation. While accurate dating of the material found at Twelve- Mile Bluff was not completed, it resembles Tuktu material excavated near Anaktuvuk Pass dated at 4500 B.C. (Andrews 1977:116). Hadleigh-West (1965) also documented three prehistoric· and historic fishcamps n~ar Fort Yukon but no archeological material was found. A recent archeological find at Marten Hill near Chalkyitsik included side- notched projectile points dating from approximately 4000 B.C. to 2000 B.C., and microblades perhaps indicating a date of as early as 10,000 B.C. (Mobley 1982:26). The site is of interest because of its anti~uity and because the material inventory indicates that ancient inhabitants were trading and com- municating with people living at great distances. Hall and McKennan (1973) located 42 prehistoric sites at Old John Lake near Arctic Village during their survey at its northern and eastern perimeters. Artifacts included end scrapers, bifaces, burins, microblades, campus-type cores, core tablets, side-notched projectile points and bases, and a denticu- 1 ate slate fragment. Side-notched points similar to those found at 01 d John Lake have been dated at 4500 B.C. at Anaktuvuk Pass and during the first millenium A.D. at Healy Lake (Andrews 1977:118). The survey also recorded a variety of historic cabins, tent frames, and caches. Between 1971 and 1973, the remains of 46 Gwich'in caribou fences were located in northwestern Alaska and northern Yukon Territory as part of a base- line resource assessment undertaken in conjunction with the proposed Arctic Gas Natural Gas Pipeline project (Warbelow et !!_. 1975). Map 4 shows the location of these fences in Alaska and Canada •. Use of caribou fences by Gwich'in residents of the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region has been documented by Richardson (1900), Murie (1935), Hadleigh-West (1963), and McKennan (1965). While the 28 use of these fences in Alaska was said to have terminated around the turn of the century (Hadl ei gh-West 1963:131}, fence 1 ocati ons pro vi de a glimpse into the prehistoric and historic land use patterns of Gwich'in inhabitants of the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region. Historic use of caribou fences by the Birch Creek Gwich'in also has been documented during this research. Data are pre- sented in Chapter 5 along with resource data for the community of Birch Creek. ; An archeological survey was conducted by Dixon and Plaskett (1980} along t the upper reaches of the Porcupine River within Alaska between 1978 and 1980. Sixty-seven sites were documented containing a variety of flakes, microblade segments, burins, projectile points, and other lithic artifacts. Their cul- tural affiliation and dates of origin, however, have not_yet been determined. -~ While the archeological record for aboriginal inhabitants of the region may be limited, the Gwich'in have an extensive oral tradition which illuminates the 11 times of long ago ... Legends featuring Ko'ehdan and Vasaagihdzak are compelling in contemporary Gwich'in cosmology just as are biblical stories in Judea-Christian traditions. These oral traditions include tales of powerful shamans, legendary giants, and great events set against the backdrop of natural features and landmarks known to the Gwich'in of today. For example, John Fredson recorded this story of creation in 1923. A long time ago, they say, there was no land. Just one man was sitting on a raft, floating around. There was no land anywhere. There was only water and sky. A muskrat was traveling around with the man. When they had been floating around on the raft for a long time, they got tired of it. The man said, so they say, 11 With just the amount of earth that's under one's fingernails, I will make enough land to walk around on... Then the muskrat replied to the man, 11 Even though I live in the water, I still have never seen the bot- tom. I wonder how it would be if I went down farther? .... Try it,11 the man said. The muskrat beat the water with his narrow tail and was down a long time. After some time, he popped up. 11 I went lower than I usually go, but I got scared, and I hurried back up ... After just a little while, saying 11 I'll try again, .. back in the water he went. After a longer time than he had spent before, again he came up nose first. 11 I think I saw earth, 30 \ I but just then I got out of breath, and I came back up quick- ly." After resting, he said, "I 1 11 go down there again." After taking a great breath he dived into the water like a splashing rock. Now indeed he spent a long time down. Just as the man was thinking, "Surely he won•t ever come out a- gain," the muskrat regained the surface with great diffi- culty. He was out of breath and out of strength, and he fell over on the raft. After a little bit he sat up, saying "Here!" and handed the man a little bit of earth. And in- deed they say this earth we now live on was made by medicine from the bit of eartb. (Peter 1973) Aboriginal land use in the region was centered around the harvest of large mammals, fish, and small game. While regional bands were generally centered within a river drainage, harvest areas varied widely (Slobodin 1981:514-515). Productive hunting areas for moose, caribou, or other mammals were well known to the Gwich 1 in. If moose or caribou were killed, hunters and their families would establish a camp near the kill site until the meat was either dried or consumed. The locations of fishcamps near sloughs, creeks, or lakes known for abundant and relatively predictable fish populations were more stahl e. Harvest of large mammals, principally moose and caribou, varied depending upon the season and the terrain. Moose were taken with bow and arrow and through the use of fences containing snares (Nelson 1973:109). Caribou, like- wise, were taken with spears and with bow and arrow after being ensnared in caribou fences (Hadleigh-West 1963; McKennan 1965; Warbelow et ~-1975). . ·. Small mammals ~-including hares, beaver, muskrat, tree squirrels, ground squirrels and porcupine --were usually taken by deadfalls or snares. Ducks and geese were harvested with the use both of blunt arrows and an arrow having a tapered bone point (locally called a "water arrow"). Fish were taken using weirs, gill nets, ?~ooks, spears, gaffs, and dip nets (Slobodin 1981:515-516). Gwich 1 in resource use, however, remained subject to cycles of abundance and scarcity. McKennan ( 1964: 27) reports that "although predictable fish runs all owed the Yukon Flats Kutchi n to enjoy a certain stability unknown to peoples almost completely dependent on hunting, periods of starvation were known to all the Kutchin and, indeed, to most Athabaskans." 31 Trading relationships and conflict with neighboring groups grew in signifi- cance for the Gwich'in during the late precontact period (Slobodin 1981:528), affecting traditional land use patterns. The Neets'ajj Gwich'in, for example, traveled to the Arctic Coast to trade with the Inupiat. Sheep, caribou, fish, and small game were harvested along travel routes traversing the Brooks Range. Conflict between the Dihaii Gwich'in and the Nunamiut Inupiat, on the other hand, 1 ed to the abandonment by the Di hai i of subsistence use areas in the central Brooks Range (Burch 1979:133). Reports of explorers, missionaries, and traders provide a valuable record of traditional 1 and use during the early contact period. The first recorded contact between the Gwi ch • in and Euroameri cans occurred in July 1789 when • .'i Alexander Mackenzie's party encountered several fam1l1es fishing' along what later became known as the Mackenzie River (Osgood 1935:17). In 1844 John Bell of the Hudson's Bay Company initiated exploration of the Upper Yukon- ·Porcupine region in a journey from the Company's Peel River post down the Porcupine River to its confluence with the Yukon (Osgood 1935:17). While returning from the Yukon, Bell met three western Gwich'in Indians who lived on the Yukon: According to their accounts the count~y is rich in beaver, martens, bears, and moose deer, and the River abounds with salmon, the latter part of the summer being the season they are most plentiful, when they dry enough for winter con- sumption. (~ Karamanski 1980:305) Bell's informants reported that no traders were in the area but that manufactured goods determined to be of Russian origin --had been obtained from traders lower on the Yukon River (Karamanski 1980:305). In 1847 Alexander Hunter Murray 1 eft Fort McPherson and descended the . Porcupine River to establish Fort Yukon on behalf of the Hudson's Bay Company (Wilson 1947:39). The establishment of the Hudson's Bay Company post at Fort Yukon signalled the beginning of continuous Euroamerican presence in the Upper 32 .I ! Yukon-Porcupine region. Describing the subsistence activities of the Gwich'in at Fort Yukon, Murray wrote: They spend the summer principally in fishing, and make a supply of dried trout and white fish for winter. The small rivers and narrow parts of lakes are barred with stakes, and large willow baskets placed to entrap the fish, some- times immense hauls are made ••• In fall and winter they live on rabbits and moose, the moose are generally snared, very few of the Indians can kill them in any other way, but the animals are so plentiful that they are frequently shot ••• Towards spring most of them repair to the Carribeaux lands to make a supply of dried meat, but more particularly to procure skins for clothing, etc •••• (Murray 1910:89) Ethnographic reports of subsequent traders, explorers and missionaries to the region include those of Kirby (1865}, Hardisty (1867}, Kennicott (1869}, Whymper (1869), Jones (1872}, Schwatka (1900}, Raymond, (1900), Richardson (1900), and Sims (In Wesbrook 1969}. While largely lacking detailed data pertaining to land use, these references provide ethnographic portraits of the Gwich'in during this early postcontact era. The journals of the Archdeacon Robert McDonald, author of the first Gwich'in grthography and pioneer Anglican missionary, provide an extraordinary account of the extent of tradition a 1 1 and use in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region during his residence in Fort Yukon between 1862 and 1871 (McDonald n.d.}. McDonald reached Fort Yukon in September 1862 and, over the next 10 years, ·;~ '· traveled 'extensively by dog team and boat to visit the Black River, Birch Creek, Crow Flats, and Chandalar Gwich'in, as well as Indians trading downriver at the confluence of the Yukon and the Tanana rivers. Starvation and death resulting from fluctuating resource avail abi 1 i ty and disease are recurrent themes in McDonala~s journal entries. The Gwich'in of the region were struck ; by major epidemics in the 1860s and 1870s, causing substantial declines in population (Krech 1978:97; Slobodin 1981:529). The Hudson's Bay Company post itself was not immune to food shortages; McDonald's journal describes a five- day period one spring in which there was nothing to eat but undressed skins (Peake 1975:58}. 33 and beaver, resulting in shifts from harvest patterns· focused on food animals to one involving not only a nutritional component but also trade for imported goods. Mrs. Belle Herbert, an elderly woman of Chalkyitsik who died in 1982, is believed to have been born sometime between 1855 and 1877. She recounted the changes in harvest strategies which she witnessed during her lifetime: In those days people·didn't spend much time visiting. They didn't visit much, they just hunted, that's all. We didn't hunt for furs, either. What would we hunt them for anyway? We didn't know about buying things. Finally, during my lifetime, we started hunting for furs, I think. Before then they used to do that upriver, and someone bought the furs, and they bought babiche, they bought caribou skins and caribou skins with the hair on, and also dried meat and the grease they made. Those are the things the trader bought and then they sold it. (Herbert 1982:199-200) The gold stampedes in the late 1800s and early 1900s brought an influx of people into the traditional country of the Gwich'in. The number of steamboats on the Yukon River increased from 3 in 1892 to 35 in 1901. In 1901 alone, 25,000 tons of freig~t, primarily bound for the gold fields of the Klondike, were shipped from St. Michael (Shimkin 1951:5). Later, many disheartened veterans of the gold diggings sought 1 i vel i hoods as trappers, storekeepers, and mail carriers, often marrying into Native communities and learning fishing and hunting skills~from the Gwich'in. Vacant trapline areas may have been available to these i~dividuals due to the decimation of the Gwich'in by disease (Shimkin 1951:5). While continuing a primary focus on hunting, fishing, and trapping, the Gwich'in and newcomers to the area found seasonal employment by cutting wood for the steamboats, building boats or freighting supplies (Shimkin 1951:5-6). At about this time the Episcopal Church, led by the Archdeacon 35 ' PLATE 2 A Winter's Fur Harvest, Circa 1920s (R. Carroll, Sr. collection). Hudson Stuck, established a hospital in Fort Yukon, and missions and schools in several settlements. During the 1920s family groups frequently spent winters on remote traplines and summers in larger settlements (Graburn and Strong 1973:19). A typical pattern in Fort Yukon was for entire families to load a year's supplies into a scow in 1 ate summer and push off for their trapping grounds, not to be seen again until after breakup the following spring. Evelyn Shore describes her family's preparations for traveling up the Black River for a winter of trapping: We never went out of Fort Yukon without a load on. The scow always held the grub supply for the winter, canned goods packed around the engine, flour and cornmeal on the floor in front of it--twelve hundred pounds of the one and five hundred of the other. Our thousand pounds of sugar went with the paper cartons and things easily damaged on top of the eight cases of gasoline, right behind the en- gine, with the dogs' fish on top of it all. The power boat carried twenty-eight cases of gasoline with twelve do~ 36 riding on top of them and the cans we needed for feeding and watering the dogs scattered in every available space. (Shore 1954:60-61) In remote trapline camps traditional hunting and fishing activities meshed easily with harvest of fur resources. When fur prices were low, local resource harvests remained a nutriti-onal and cultural mainstay for most families. The collapse of the world fur market in 1914 and again in later years emphasized the precariousness of a cash economy based upon the exploitation of fur. Osgood (1936a:170) observed during the 1930s that hunting and fishing remained the primary sources of obtaining food for the Gwich'in at that time. The harvest of wild resources continued to be the basis for ideological and belief systems as well. The population of Fort Yukon grew moderately during this period, from 500-550 in 1920 to 600-650 in 1940. Schools were fully PLATE 3 Loading Skin Boats on the Porcupine River, Circa 1920's (R. Carroll, Sr. collection). 37 ---J operating in Fort Yukon and were open intermittently in Chalkyitsik and Venetie. By 1939, Fort Yukon had a lodging and gambling establishment, a combined motion picture house and dance hall, three general stores, and one frame sawmill, a small boatyard, a primary school and Episcopal Mission, and a hospital (Shimkin 1951:6}. Under the leadership of John Fredson, a college-educated Gwich'in man who was a protege of the Archdeacon Hudson Stuck, the people of Venetie, Arctic Village, Christian Village and 11 Kachick 11 (K'aatsik}, a small settlement near the mouth of the Chandal ar River, received approval for the creation of the 1,480,000-acre 11 Chandalar Native Reserve 11 on May 20, 1943 (Lonner and Beard 1982:101}. This action was based upon a 1936 amendment to the Indian Reorgani- 'i I' zation Act (IRA) of 1934 allowing for the creation· of Indian reservations within Alaska on public lands which were 11 actually occupied .. by Indians or Eskimos. The federal government's action represented the first formal recogni- tion of lands actually occupied and used by a band of the Gwic~'in in Alaska. While the communities voted to accept the new reservation in 1944, disagreement immediately arouse over boundaries of land 11 actually occupied ... Petitions were made in later years to the Department of Interior seeking to enlarge the reserve to encompass 1 ands reportedly used for hunting and fishing north of Arctic Village and west of Venetie (Lonner and Beard 1982:103}. Shimkin described the economic and demographic characteristics of the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region during the 1940s, noting that for Fort Yukon in 1949, trapping, hunting, and fishing 11 supported nearly 70% of the population wholly or to a predominant degree 11 (Shimkin 1955:228). Direct governmental relief, the second major source of income, proved significant to a quarter of the population. Other sources of income included self-employment in occupa- tions such as store owner or carpenter, wage and salary earners, gardening or handicrafts. A steady decline of available game (particularly caribou), improved trade through the reduction of isolation (principally due to the 38 airplane), and a sharp increase in financial and medical aid were cited by Shimki n as the most important factors of change in the area • s economy during the decade of the 1940s. Even as the availability of wage employment and new technology changed, especially in Fort Yukon, adaptive strategies of families continued to revolve around resource harvest activities. Shimkin•s description of the seasonal round of production activities in 1949 reflects the primacy of those activities, coupled with involvement in the fur trade: The occupational cycle embraces movement from, say, Fort Yukon to a satellite camp such as Birch Creek Village, in mid-August or early September. During the fall, the trap- per hunts moose or wild fowl, catches whitefish, chops wood, clears his trapline trails and repairs his line cabins. His womanfolk, if any, prepare and preserve food, dress hides and prepare clothing ••• and help care for the dogs. From November through February comes the season for intensive trapping, especially for marten, mink, fox and, later, beaver. Over this period the trapper makes the cir- cuit of his traplines a half dozen times or more, each cir- cuit being a three to ten-day trip in intense cold and darkness, sometimes without shelter other than a tent, and often on an empty stomach. If he can afford it, he flies to Fort Yukon for Christmas and the New Year potlatches. In March and April comes the muskrat season, a time of some- what more social activity and better eating. By late May, be has picked up his traps and returned to Fort Yukon for summer loafing, broken by some salmon fishing with the help of a fish wheel, or possibly by gardening or wage work. (1955: 232-233) Sixty-three traplines were documented by Shimkin in 1948-49 in the .. Fort Yukon Trapping Area 11 ~ which incorporates much of the Yukon Flats region includ- ing the drainages of the Porcupine, Black, Christian, Sheenjek, Coleen, and Chandalar rivers and Birch Creek (Map 5). The total number of traplines in the 11 Fort Yukon Trapping Area .. in 1948-1949 was estimated at 80. Approximately 35 percent of the "entire area was either unclaimed for trapping or inactive _,. .. (Shimkin 1955:228-229). A household required a trapline of 20 to 100 miles in length or 60 to 200 square miles, according to Shimkin, and needed access to whitefish, moose, and muskrat harvest areas as well. Individual or group 11 titles 11 to traplines were recognized by both Native and non-Native trappers 39 although they were not officially recognized by .territorial authorities. Boundaries for hunting areas also existed, although they were apparently not documented (Shimkin 1955:228). Serious declines in certain game populations were reported in the Yukon Flats region between 1938 and 1948 (Shimkin 1951:33). Caribou, which during the 1930s had been easily accessible in the Yukon Flats and upriver above Circle, declined precipitously by the 1940s. Moose populations, however, were reported to be steady in spite of 11 heavy 11 harvest of all food animals. Shimkin's survey indicated an annual harvest of 165 moose and 42 caribou in the Yukon Flats region during the twelve months from July 1948 to June 1949 (Shimkin 1951:34). A major flood in the Yukon Flats in 1949 impacted land and resource utili- zation patterns. Effects of the flood included the alteration of residence patterns, an influx of government social programs, and a change in established social patterns i ncl udi ng the gathering of people from throughout the region in Fort Y:ukon during early summer (Solomon n.d.). Statehood and the con- solidation of Bureau of Indian Affairs and territorial schools in Fort Yukon in the late 1950s accelerated the decline of seasonal extended family camps as increased pressure was placed upon children to attend school. -~ ? .. In the 1960s, ·proposed construction of the Rampart Dam on the middle Yukon River created political controversy as it was a perceived threat to tra- ditional social, economic, and cultural activities in the region (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1964). Proposals for this hydroelectric project generated an outcry of concJr;n about the effects of flooding upori both habitat essential • 'j to fish and wildlife resources and local communities dependent upon those resources. The project, however, was never constructed. By the early 1970s, many of the region's residents had applied for Native allotments of up to 160 acres under provisions of the 1906 Native Allotment Act (U.S. Congress 1906). Application for a Native allotment required proof 41 that the site had been utilized in the past. Generally these sites included fishcamps, hunting camps, or trapline cabins. Map 6 shows the general location of allotment applications filed by residents of the five study communities. Applications were not allowed for the Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government lands (the former Venetie Indian Reservation), because those lands had previous- ly been withdrawn. The Arctic National Wildlife Range was created in '.the early 1960s, and included areas of the eastern Brooks Range utilized by Arctic Village residents. It was the first of several "national interest" 1 and withdrawals undertaken over the next two decades. Continued access to lands used for resource harvest- i ng within the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region was a major concern expressed by ~ f residents during deliberations on ANCSA and the Alaska N'ational Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) of 1980. Arctic Village and Venetie chose not to participate in the regional corporation structure established under ANCSA, but instead took title to lands which formerly comprised their :reservation. The enactment of ANCSA and ANILCA created a new context for subsistence land use in the region. Map 7 depicts land status in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region as of 1982. Together, ANCSA and ANILCA created a complex patchwork of land classifications --Native village or regional corporation lands, other private lands, state lands, and federal conservation areas. Specific provisions were included in ANILCA to protect the opportunity for continued resource harvest activities on the newly-created Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge, additions to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and on other federal lands within Alaska (Kelso 1982:1). This historical overview for the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region has briefly described certain factors which have molded and shaped land and resource use over time. Understanding the historical dimensions of land and resource use provides a context for analyzing the role of land use in the mixed, subsistence- based socioeconomic system of today. 42 8;tS ~ map ad ap t ~d fr om Alaska I:I,OC(),OC() Base Map Series C> Copyright, Arctio.: En\'ironmental l n formation and Data Center, U n iv~rsity of Alaska 1982. 0 ,45 6 0 Miles ~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!iiiiiiiiiiiiiil!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!~iiiiiiiiiiiiiil 15 30 Map 6: General Location of Native Allotment Applications (As Of 7/1182) Strong population trends are difficult to discern for the region as a whole. The region's population appears to have remained relatively stable or shown only small increases from 1960 to 1980, reflecting balances between natural in- creases, deaths, and in-and out-migration (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978:2:2). Population for the five study communities in 1980 was ' 994, while population for the entire Yukon Flats census subarea (which also includes Beaver, Circle, and Central) was 1,207 (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1980). Population figures for certain communities, however, have increased markedly during this period. For example, Fort Yukon's population grew from 446 in 1950 to 619 in 1980. Similarly, Chalkyitsik's population grew from 27 in 1960 to 100 in 1980. How much these increases can be attributed to improved census data collection or consolidation of smaller ohtlying camps into larger communities is not known. A 1 ask a Natives comprised more than 80 percent of those residents in the Yukon Flats census subarea communities in 1980. Migration from the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region to urban areas such as Fairbanks or to work locations on the North Slope appears to be on the increase, although workforce mobi 1 i ty remains much 1 ower than among the non-Native popul a- tion in Alaska (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978:3:4). Emigration appears to be offset by a sizeable return migration from more populated areas to the smaller communities (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978:2:2). ; r1any residents who responded to a 1977 ISER survey {34 percent) sought work on pipeline-related projects outside the region between 1974 and 1977, for example, but later returned to their home communities {Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978:4:5). During the course of this research, some residents periodi- cally left the village for to take nonlocal jobs, working long enough to obtain \'lage income to make purchases such as boats or snowmachines, or to generate enough cash to .. get by .. for the remainder of the year. A recent evaluation of age and sex composition for nine communities in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region indicates both a declining birth rate. since 1960 46 and a propensity for smaller families. Household size for Natives in the region dropped from 5.1 to 1960 to 3.8 in 1977, and the average number of persons in Native families dropped from 6.1 to 4.5 during the same period (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978:2:7). Population size and household composi- tion data for the five study communities in 1980 are presented in Table 5. Recent research has cons·i derably expanded our understanding of soci oeco- nomic systems in Alaska (Wolfe and Ellanna 1983). Such systems provide material and soci a 1 support for a community or region a 1 population through a set of Community Arctic Village Birch Creekc Cha 1 kyi tsi k Fort Yukon Venetie $ Source: u.s. TABLE 5 POPULATION SIZE AND COMPOSITION OF UPPER YUKON-PORCUPINE COMMUNITIES, 1980 Population Number of Mean House- Size Households hold Size 111 33 3.17 32 13 2.46 100 29 3.45 619 187 3.31 132 36 3.67 ?, Bureau of the Census, 1980 Percent Alaska Native 88.3 96.9 96.0 71.1 97.7 interrelated elements, including identifiable socially-constituted groups, modes of production, an~ an economic resource base (Wolfe and Ellanna 1983:234-235). The subsistence-based socioeconomic system, described by Wolfe and Ellanna, contrasts with other systems by focusing directly on food extraction. According to their research, a subsistence-based system is in part characterized by: 1) a 11 mi xed economy 11 with mutually supportive 11 market 11 and 11 Subsi stence 11 sectors; 2) a 11 domestic mode of production .. where extended kinship-based production units 47 has, in fact, been found to increase in households ~ith cash incomes. Even with a greater degree of involvement in market sectors of the economy, residents in 1976 estimated that local resource harvests provided half or more of all household food in the region. University of Alaska researchers concluded that: subsistence activity in the Yukon-Porcupine region cle~rly remains an important component in the lives of its resl- dents. While the amount of time spent on subsistence is not as great, on the average, as the amount of time spent on wage employment, the products of subsistence pursuits are perceived to provide half or more of the food consumed in most Native households of the region ••• The quality of subsistence measured in terms of diversity of take and equipment employed, may be actually enhanced by wage em- ployment opportunities while the quantity of subsistence, measured either in terms of time or proportion of food pro- vided becomes less critical. The future viability of sub- sistence, then, may primarily concern the continued avail- ability of diverse subsistence resources, rather than the presence of new employment opportunities. (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1980:5:9-10) Per capita income for the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region showed an increase during the period between 1960 and 1976, from $1,660 per capita in 1960 to $3,385 in 1976 (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978:7:2). This figure is considerably lower than comparable statewide figures, which in 1976 was $8,047 per capita. The lack of a major economic base in the region other than that• based upof1 local resource harvest activities, lack of education or job skills, poor health, and family responsibilities were found to be factors affecting involvement in the wage economy (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978:7:2). The cost of _Jiving in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region is one of the highest in Alaska .. ; In 1980 the cost of feeding a family of four with elementary school-aged children at home in Fort Yukon with purchased foods was estimated at $151.74 per week, 215 percent of the same figure for an average family in the United States as a whole (University of Alaska, Cooperative Extension Service 1981). Costs in outlying communities such as Arctic Village or 49 Chalkyitsik are considerably higher due to additional transportation costs and smaller markets (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978:7:7). Transfer payments from federal and state sources are an important component of the Upper Yukon-Porcupine economy. In 1979 the total federal and state per capita transfer payments contributed 13 percent of the per capita income of the Upper Yukon census division, in which the study communities are located (Goldsmith and Rowe 1982:12). Federal payments included social security, veterans benefits, Medicare, General Assistance, food stamps, and Aid to Fami- lies with Dependent Children (AFDC). Recent reductions in funding for federal transfer programs, such as General Assistance and AFDC, probably will decrease per capita and household incomes in the region. \\ Other elements common to subsistence-based socioeconomic systems have been i denti fi ed in the region, and have been summarized elsewhere in this report. These include: the existence of a "domestic mode of production" (Chapter 3); a complex community-based seasonal round of production activities :(Chapters 4 - 8); networks of sharing, distribution, and exchange (Chapter 10); traditional systems of land use and occupancy (Chapter 10); and a system of beliefs, know- ledge, and values associated with resource uses passed on between generations (Chapter 10). Such findings suggest that the economy of the Upper Yukon- Porcupine region is centered around a mixed, subsistence-based socioeconomic system which has been described for other regions in rural Alaska (Wolfe and Ell anna 1983). 50 CHAPTER 3 RESOURCE USE SUMMARY FOR UPPER YUKON-PORCUPINE COMMUNITIES THE NATURE OF RESOURCE USE Wild renewable resources.play an important role in the complex and dynamic subsistence-based economy of the region. Because patterns of resource utiliza- tion in the five study communities have many similarities --including dis- tribution of species, timing of utilization, methods and technology employed, harvest levels, types of use, and the relative significance of harvest -- general patterns are summarized for all communities in this chapter. Community maps depicting lands used for harvesting specific resources are presented in chapters 4 through 8. Major ecological factors influencing land and resource use for the region as a whole are summarized in Chapter 10. The English, scientific, and Gwich'in Athabaskan names for major wild resources used in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region are presented in Table 6 (t4orrow 1980; Chapman and Fel dhamer 1982; Nelson 1983). Gwi ch' in names were compiled from community resour:e experts and translated by Mrs. Katherine Peter. Names for many other species of plants and animals not listed here are ' part of the Gwich 1 in vocabulary as well, indicative of highly-developed store of environmental knowledge (Irving 1958). MOOSE (Alces alces) Moose repres~nts the most desired and sought-after 1 arge mammal for all Upper Yukon-Porcupine communities except in Arctic Village, where caribou are a more significant resource. Nelson's observations pertaining to the significance of moose to the residents of Chalkyitsik holds true, with the above exception, for all of the communities studied: 51 Camrron Narre Birds cont'd willow ptarmigan rock ptarmigan sandhill crane whistling swan shoveler oldsquaw harlequin surf scoter Fish northern pike arctic grayling chum sal.rron king sa.J..rron coho sal.rron lake trout broad whitefish humpback whitefish round whitefish least cisco arctic char longnose sucker bur bot sheefish Vegetation white spruce <, black spruce paper birch birch bark balsam poplar willow (sp.) alder (sp.) bog blueberry bog cranberry,, highbush cranberry alpine bearber:i:y nagoonberry crowberry dogwood "Indian potato" wild rhubarb not known juniper (sp.) rosehips (wild rose) TABLE 6 Continued G.vich 1 in Narre daagQQ daaky 1 aa jyah daazhr~ii dehdrik aah~~lak kiiteegwilik deetree 1 aa iltin shriijaa hii (shii) luk choo needlii neerah'jik chiishoo neeghan khal4-i-1 ch 1 ootsik luk dohohtr'i' deets 1 at chehluk shryah ts 1 iivii aat 1 oo k 1 ii t'aa k'aii k'oh jak natl 1 at trahkyaa dandaih nakal deenich'uh dzindee· trih ts'iiguu dee'ii'ahshii deenich' uh t 1 an nitsih 53 ·Scientific Name Lagopus lagopus Lagopus mutus Grus canadensis Olor columbianus Anas clypeata Clangula hyernalis Histrionicus histrionicus Melanitta perspicillata Esox lucius Thymallus arcticus Oncorhynchus keta Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Oncorhynchus kisutch Sal velinus namaycush Coregonus nasus Coregonus pidschian Prosopium cylindraceum Coregonus sardinella Salvelinus alpinus catostanus catostomus Iota lota Stenodus leucichthys Picea glauca Picea :rrariana Betula papyrifera Populus balsamifera Salix (sp.) Alnus (sp.) Vaccinum uliginosum Vaccinium vitis Viburnum edule Arctostaphylos alpina Rubus arcticus Ehlpetrum nigrum Comus stolonifera Hedysarum alpinum Polygonum alaskanum Boschniakia rossica Juniperus (sp.) Rosa acicularis Ccmron Name Vegetation cont'd labrador tea sphagnum rross sedge anerrone wild chives TABLE 6 Continued Gwich' in Name ledii masket (?) not knON.n not known not known not knON.n Scientific Name Iedum palustre Sphagnum (sp.) carex (sp.) Anemone patens Allium schoenoprasum It is impossible to say just how vital a role moose played in the traditional Kutchin economy, but there is little question about its importance to people today. The Chalk- yitsik Kutchin consider moose the game in their country. They always want to have moose meat on hand, and if they run out they think and talk about how they will• get more •. 1 Meat• is almost synonomous with moose. Whereas other ani- mals may be considered delicacies or treats, moose is prob- ably the one meat they could least think of doing without •. During some years the volume of other foods, such as fish, may exceed the volume of moose, but the people still seem to consider it the most important. (Nelson 1973:85) Moose are found throughout the Yukon Flats and surrounding uplands. According to Arctic Village residents, moose have become much more abundant in the foothi 11 s and valleys of the Brooks Range over the past 30 to 40 years. Residents report that moose leave the Yukon Flats in the fall after the first snow and by November are largely in the hills on the periphery of the Flats. In late winter or early spring they return to feed along rivers and on islands where willows are abundant. Reports of elders who have hunted moose in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region suggest that resource populations today are somewhat higher in the northern and eastern portion of the region--near the Porcupine, Chandalar and Black rivers --than in the south towards Birch Creek or west near Beaver and Stevens Village. Moose populations near Venetie, Chalkyitsik, Arctic Village, and perhaps Fort Yukon, are reported by these longterm observers as being somewhat higher today than 20 or 30 years ago. 54 The Gwich 1 in have an elaborate body of knowledge_ relating to moose hunt- ing, butchering, distribution, and preparation (Nelson 1973:84-112). The variety of Gwich 1 in terms used to describe moose (Table 7) is a reflection of this extensive knowledge. Today moose are harvested principally during the fall (usually September), but also in the winter and in early spring. Bull moose are most sought after during. the 1 ast three weeks of September prior to the rut when they have the most fat. At this time they are moving a great deal, and are more easily attracted for hunting. Hunters are conscious of moose 11 sign 11 throughout the summer, however, mindful that this information may be useful at a later date. Fall hunting is nearly always conducted by riverboat, and moose are gen- erally killed within one half-mile to a mile of a river. Typically, three or four hunters, usually relatives, travel together. Moose are located using a vari- ety of visual, auditory, and tracking techniques. Bulls are often attracted . through the use of a moose scapula scraped upon brush. Nelson (1973: 94) quotes an older Gwi ch • in hunter as saying 11 When I hear a moose rake his horns, that • s my moose. No way to miss it if I got a moose bone [scapula] with me. 11 Moose hunters traveling by riverboat often use their knowledge of moose behavior and the land to their advantage. Some hunters consistently use small ~ hills or bluffs as game lookouts to scan nearby flats or lakes. Camps are estab- 1 i shed on or near these 1 ookouts. In sever a 1 1 oca ti ons on the Black and Chandalar rivers, small wooden towers 10 to 15 feet in height have been con- structed to spot moose or caribou. Other hunters know of mineral licks, burned areas, or parti cul'a.r microhabitats such as wi 11 ow bars where moose often can be found. Almost half of the year• s moose harvest in 1969-70 for Chalkyitsik was taken during the fall season, an estimate which appears to hold true today for other Upper Yukon-Porcupine communities (Nelson 1973:86). Winter and spring hunting is generally conducted during November and from February through March, although moose occasionally are taken at any time meat 55 II I; TABLE 7 SELECI'ED GWICH' IN NAMES FOR MOOSE (Alces alces) AND CARIBOU (Rangifer tarandus) M:x:>se (all) large bull medium bull smaller bull smaller bull young bull yearling CON oaw without calf young CON calf newborn calf two cows together Caribou (all) bull caribou smaller bull smaller bull smaller bull bull in fall (prior to rut) bull in fall (during and after rut) young caribou oaw caribou nursing cow with calf pregnant CCM barren oow cow without calf in winter yearling calf newrorn calf dinjik ch'izhir dijii jyaagoo dachan ch' ik jaa'alkbf>k ~-i-i ch' its'~ zhii dizhuu dizhuu vidi tsik kwaa khadeetsik ditsik daatsQQ dizhuu nihlaa niilzhii vadzaih vadzaih choo dazhoo khaii k' ee' ilik dazhootsoo kh~in ts'an ch'atsun vak'oo ch' iin t'rat vadzaih tsal ch' iyaht'ok tseegwildii vi tseerohchii (or) tr' ii jii vadzaih njaa khad~~tsan ch'igii is in short supply. Moose tracks are more easily followed in snow, and freshly broken willows are a good sign that moose are in the area. Winter and spring hunting usually involves the use of a snowmachi ne and is often undertaken in conjunction with trapping. Some trappers make it a practice to hunt moose only after the first snow, when meat can be frozen and when traplines and cabins can be reached by snowmachi ne or dog team. Cow moose are considered 56 more desirable than bulls during winter and spring because of their high fat content. Bulls taken during these times are usually lean and tough. Moose meat obtained in both fall and winter is usually eaten fresh or frozen for later use. In spring and occasionally at other times of the year the meat is cut into thin strips and dried. The recent introduction of freezers into many communities has expanded the practice of preserving meat by indoor freezing. Field observations by this researcher indicate that moose taken in Upper Yukon-Porcupine communities during 1980 and 1981 were generally thoroughly utilized. Internal organs including the heart, kidneys, and intestines are considered delicacies and are generally reserved for older people or guests. The Gwich'in have at least four different names for parts of the intestine which are boiled and eaten. The ribs, brisket, and backstraps are highly favored and are shared with relatives, especially older people. The moose head is '\ perhaps the greatest delicacy. It is occasionally roasted whole over an ~pen fire but more commonly boiled for moosehead soup. Portions of the head, including the lips, eyelids, tongue, and nose, are combined with macaroni and vegetables to prepare this dish, which is relished at potlatches and other community gatherings. Moose hides are an important source of leather for making clothing, foot- wear, and handicrafts. Hi des of bulls are preferred for toboggan sides and footwear bottoms because of their thickness. Cow hides are generally thinner and more pliable, and are used for sewing and handicrafts. Tanning of moose 1 hides has declined during recent years because of the availability of substi- tute materials. Tanning is still done, however, by some women. For example, one woman in Venetie tanned six hides in 1980, all of which were used for clothing or footwear. Other uses of moose include the shaping of bone from the 1 ower 1 eg for scraping skins and the use of the scapula as an attractor in hunting. Sinew from moose is still used today as thread for sewing. 57 Ill 1;: Sharing of a moose, while reportedly not as extensive as in aboriginal times, still occurs within nuclear and extended-family groups according to informants. Figure 1 shows the distribution of a moose taken in 1981 by two residents of Fort Yukon, which included sharing with relatives in Fort Yukon, Venetie, Fairbanks, and Anchorage. In this example, two hunting partners who were brothers harvested a bull moose near Fort Yukon. Each partner kept one-third of the moose and gave the remaining third to their elderly parents who also live in Fort Yukon. One of the partners shared~portions of the moose with his wife's mother and sister. Meat was also shared with a distant relative described as that hunter's 11 godfather .. , an elderly person in Fort Yukon with no close relatives, an unrelated friend in Fairbanks, and with Fort Yukon residents participating in potlatches at Christmas, ''New Year's and Spring Carnival. The other partner shared meat with distant relatives described as 11 godparents 11 , a distant relative living in Fairbanks, and with other community members at a Fort Yukon potlatch. Meat was also " given to the mother's sister's family living in Anchorage. The parents of the hunters distributed meat to the families of the hunter's father's brother, the mother's sister, and the mother's sister's son. A moosemeat dish was also contributed to a Fort Yukon potlatch. Sharing by residents of smaller communities in the region. is reported to be more extensive than in Fort Yukon. Nelson (1973:111) reported for Chalkyitsik that 11 each moose ••• brought into the village is eventually distri- buted among a number of households, and the hunter is probably lucky if he saves half of his take for himself... In 1981 portions of a moose taken by an Arctic Vi 11 age resident were distributed to .virtually every household in the community. The hunter was left with only one hind-quarter. The cultural significance of moose is symbolized by a 11 first moose .. potlatch held in Venetie in 1982. A 19-year-old man reportedly shot his first moose, which was distributed to the entire village to assure 11 good luck 11 in 58 future hunting. The moose was carefully butchered and cleaned. Entrails were cleaned and were stuffed into a 11 bag 11 made from the moose • s 1 arge stomach for storage. They were later removed, cut into small pieces, and boiled along with the meat. Over a two-day period the entire vi 11 age was invited to the home of the young hunter•s father who later reported that the entire moose had been given away. The hunter himself reported keeping none of the moose. Food served at the potlatch included moosehead soup, boiled.moose meat and intes- tines, mesentary fat, fresh bread, pilot biscuits witlt butter, and canned fruit cocktail. Literature sources provide an incomplete record of historical moose harvests in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region (Table 8). For example, between November 1931 and October 1932 a territorial game watden stationed in Fort Yukon reported 11 a very healthy condition in the number of moose 11 in the Yukon Flats (Alaska Game Commission 1932:72). An estimated 45 moose were harvested in 1942 along the Yukon River between Stevens Village and Fort Yukon, and 30 were taken that year between Circle and the Canadian border (Alaska Game C9m- mission 1942:6). Shimkin (1955:222), writing of the Yukon Flats trapping area which included most trappers from Fort Yukon, Birch Creek, Chalkyitsik, and Venetie (Map 5), reported that 11 moose were overwhelmingly the most important game in 1948-49, providing some 80,000 pounds or about 50% of all meat and fish consumption by weight. 11 In a separate report he documented harvest of 165 moose in the same area between July 1948 and June 1949 (Shimkin 1951:34). Rausch (1953:139) reported for Arctic Village that 11 not more than 3 or 4 moose are killed each year... Caribou, he noted, were more commonly used for subsistence purposes in that community. In 1964 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimated that approximately 320 moose were taken annually by local residents in the proposed Rampart Dam impoundment area, with at least 40 additional moose taken by sport hunters 60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I Harvest Period Jan. -Dec. I 1942 I I I July 1948 -I June 1949 I I I 1952 -1953 I I I 1964 I I I I I 1969 -1970 I I I 1970 I I I I 1973 I I I I I I I 1976 I I I I -; I , I June 1981 -I May 1982 I I I I I TABLE 8 HISTORIC ESTIMATES OF MOOSE HARVEST BY UPPER YUKON-PORCUPINE COMMUNITIES 1942-1982 Estimated Communities Included Harvest Beaver, Fort Yukon, 45 Stevens Village--[?] Birch Creek, Chalkyitsik, 165 Fort Yukon, Venetie Arctic Village 3-4 Beaver, Chalkyitsik, 320 Circle, Rampart, Stevens Village, Venetie Chalkyitsik 36-40 11 Yukon Flats .. 360 Arctic Village, Beaver, 481a Birch Creek, Canyon i Village, Central, Chalkyitsik, Fort Yukon, Stevens Village, Venetie Arctic Village, Beaver, 300-500 Birch Creek, Chalkyitsik, Circle, Fort Yukon, Stevens, Village, Venetie Arctic Village, Beaver, 200-250 Birch Creek, Chalkyitsik, Circle, Fort Yukon, Stevens Village Source Alaska Game Commission 1942 Shimkin 1955 Rausch 1953 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1964 Nelson 1973 King et al. 1970-- U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Alaska Planning Group, 1974e Institute of Social and Economic Re- search 1978 Division of Subsistence, Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game a Estimate reported to be 11 Subject to gross error 11 (U.S. Department of the Interior, Alaska Planning Group 1974e) 61 r n verification. It should be noted that while these. figures are believed to be reasonably accurate, they are estimates only. CARIBOU (Rangifer tarandus) Caribou (vadzaih) harvested by Upper Yukon-Porcupine communities are prin- cipally from the Porcupine Herd, although Central Arctic and Fortymile Herd ( animals may also be occasionally taken. Gwich'in names for different types of caribou are listed in Table 7. The Porcupine Herd consists of about 110,000 animals (Whitten and Cameron 1980:ii). The annual migration typically includes a northward,movement from the winter range in spring to the calving ground on the Arctic coastal plain ' of northeastern Alaska and Yukon Territory. In mid-to late summer a southerly dispersion generally occurs toward the herd's winter range in the boreal forest of the Chandalar region of Alaska and in the Yukon Territory of Canada. Archdeacon Robert McDonald, a resident of Fort Yukon in the 1860s, docu- mented the ,historic use of caribou in the region. Hudson's Bay Company men from Fort Yukon, he noted, obtained caribou from a "meat trading post in the Gens du Large (Chandalar Gwich'in) country" UkDonald n.d.:21 December 1862). During a journey to visit with the Chandalar Gwich'in in 1863 he described the " use of a caribou fence: Accomeanied the indians to the deer barriere [caribou- fenceJ to hunt deer. About 20 brought to the barriere, but nearly all broke through. I shot one and another was killed by Francois Boucher. (McDonald n.d.:24 March 1863) In 1868 McDonald r:eported that the "majority of the Fort Yukon indians went ; off, some to the Netsi Kutchin to procure deer robes for winter clothing, others tOward Black River" (n.d.:19 October 1868). In November of 1868 he noted that Black River Gwich'in were hunting caribou (McDonald n.d.:18 November 1868) • 63 The consistent pattern of use of caribou by residents of the region is documented by Tritt (n.d.), Osgood (1936a), Carroll (1957), White (n.d.) and others. Michael Mason, an Englishman who lived in the Fort Yukon area in the early 1920s, described a trip with a Fort Yukon hunter up the Yukon River to the vicinity of Woodchopper Creek above Circle in fall of 1920 to obtain meat for Fort Yukon. 11 All day long, 11 Mason reported, "up and down the river as far as the eye could reach, the water was full of bobbing' horns, white, shaggy necks, and dark gray backs, the bank was a seething mass of running beasts, coming across on their way south 11 (1924:72). Historically, residents from as far away as Beaver traveled up the Yukon to the vicinity of Charley Creek [Kandik River] to obtain caribou meat (Schneider 1976:11). Caribou were ~\ particularly accessible to Fort Yukon hunters in the 1930s: Alaska Game Commission reports noted an ever increasingly number of caribou wintering near Fort Yukon and both on and around the Yukon Flats. Regular migrations took place across the Yukon River between Forth [sic] Yukon and Wood- chopper late each fall, but these apparently stopped about 1935. (Skoog 1968:260) During 1935 and 1936, caribou were reported north of Fort Yukon, Beaver, and Stevens Village (Alaska Game Commission 1936:84). Fort Yukon residents regularly traveled up the Yukon above Circle to harvest caribou at this time, although during 1936 and 1937 game warden McMullen reported that 11 the natives who went from [Fort Yukon] last fall to Circle returned with very few caribou .. (Alaska Game Commission 1937:107). During 1938 and 1939, Fort Yukon residents reportedly took 150 caribou near that community (Alaska Game Commission 1939:36). According to Shimkin (1955:223), caribou had become a 11 rarity 11 in the Yukon Flats by 1948-49. However, in October 1957 Fort Yukon residents . reportedly harvested 300 animals on the Porcupine River (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1964:69). During the last two decades caribou principally have been available in the region to hunters near Arctic Village and Venetie, and to a lesser extent 64 to Fort Yukon and Chalkyitsik hunters on the Porcupjne River. Furthermore, hunters from Circle and Birch Creek have infrequently harvested caribou from scattered bands. Birch Creek residents report their last significant harvest of caribou near the village was in 1939 or 1940. Trappers, however, have occasionally harvested animals in the White Mountains since that time. A movement of the Porcupine Herd across the Yukon River in a broad front from Eagle to the Steese Highway occurred during the winter of 1981 and 1982. During that winter caribou were harvested by Circle, Eagle, Fort Yukon, and Chalkyitsik residents, as well as remote households in between. Caribou harvests in the region today take place principally in the fall, winter, and spring. In Arctic Village caribou are usually first seen in mid- August migrating south from the coastal plain along wind-swept alpine ridges. Animals are taken at that time from hunting camps along timberline, from camps near fishing sites, and along rivers using boats. Harvested caribou are some- times cached near hunting camps for up to several days while hunters obtain additional ,meat or begin transporting their harvest back to the community. Venetie residents sometimes travel up the Chandalar River by boat in August and September to hunt caribou. In August 1981 a Venetie hunter shot two cari- bou on such an upriver journey near Big Rock Mountain even before caribou had ~} been available in Arctic Village. In recent years Fort Yukon residents have harvested caribou along the Porcupine River near Canyon Village, usually in early September. In 1980, seven hunting parties made the 1 ong journey up the Porcupine by riverboat where they took befween 50 and 75 animals. Nelson (1973:113) reported Chalky- itsik people also harvest fall caribou on occasion along the Porcupine River. Transportation to fall hunting areas usually involves travel by boat, on foot, and occasionally by aircraft. Bull caribou are selected in fall because of their high fat content and the prime condition of their hides. Young caribou 65 are occasionally taken in August as their thinner hi de is desired for use in making parkas. Caribou often remain available to Arctic Village and Venetie residents through the winter and spring. Between October and February, hunters usually select cows for harvest because they are fatter and better tasting than are bulls. After that time, either bulls or cows may be taken. Snowmachines are commonly used in harvest activities during this time of year. It is not uncommon for residents of other communities traveling to Arctic Village to hunt caribou with relatives, especially in spring. Caribou meat is generally stored by freezing or drying, and is usually prepared by boiling. Occasionally it is also baked or fried. Dried meat con- tinues to be a highly desired food i tern today. Caribou heads, considered a great delicacy, are either boiled, baked, or occasionally roasted over a fire. Intestines, which are prized for their fat, are cleaned, boiled, and eaten. Portions of the ''stomach" are sometimes used as a container for holding mesen- tary fat for human consumption or for collecting blood to be used in soups or as dog food. Furthermore, hides of caribou are tanned and used for cloth- ing, handicrafts, sleeping pads, or as bedding material in dog houses. Leg- skins are tanned for use in winter footwear. Caribou bones are sometimes cracked and boiled for marrow. In times of food shortage, hooves have been boiled to make a broth. Several elderly women in Arctic Village still keep the hooves of all caribou harvested by their families for this use. Caribou are of major cultural significance to the Gwich'in people of the region. According to Slobodin: In mythic time, the Kutchin [Gwich'in] and the caribou lived in peaceful intimacy, although ~he people were even then hunters of other animals. When the people became dif- ferentiated, it was agreed that they would now hunt cari- bou. However, a vestige of the old relationship was to remain. Every caribou has a bit of the human heart ••• in him, and every human has a bit of caribou heart. Hence humans will always have partial knowledge of what caribou are thinking and feeling, but equally, caribou will have 66 the same knowledge of humans. This is why c~ribou hunting is at times very easy, at other times very difficult. All hunted creatures are to be respected, but none, except the bear, more so than the caribou. (1981:526) The importance of this cultural relationship is expressed through the oral traditions of the contemporary Gwich'in. According to Hadleigh-West who worked in Arctic Village: . A great-grandfather of one informant was a shaman whose principal medicine animal was the caribou. He had a song with which he called the caribou in. It was sung only in times of severe distress when everyone was discouraged, and the people were threatened with starvation. The informant's grandmother who raised her said that she witnessed this performance. The medicine man was called upon to sing his song which he did. The next morning all the hunters went out with the shaman leading. He would reach down with his hand and bring up a live caribou. He would let that one go and it would disappear. That was done several times. Soon the men came to a group of caribou and started shooting and the threat of famine was over. (1963:196) The failure of caribou to migrate near Arctic Village in 1979 prompted one resi- dent to comment that 11 we're really sick when there's no caribou." At a community gathering held shortly thereafter the researcher was informed that the meal was "not a real potlatch" because moose was served instead of caribou. Elements of customary 1 aw regarding hunting behavior, care of meat, and distribution and exchange of caribou persist in several communities in the region and are dis- cussed in .Chapter 10. Between July 1981 and June 1982, caribou from the Porcupine Herd were har- vested in Alaska by residents of Arctic Village, Kaktovik, Venetie, Fort Yukon, Chalkyitsik, Circle, and Eagle, and by several remote households within the range of the herd~ Arctic Village residents reported harvesting 300 to 400 animals during this time. Estimates of harvest provided by knowledgeable residents in other communities during this period included: Venetie, 50 to 75; Fort Yukon, 15 to 20; Chalkyitsik, 60 to 70; Eagle, 200 to 300; and Kaktovik, 43. The total Alaskan harvest for the period, therefore, was probably less than 1,000 animals. 67 DALL SHEEP (Ovis dalli) Dall sheep (divii) are common in the eastern Brooks Range and are also reported by community residents to be found in the northern extension of the Ogilvie Mountains between the Yukon and Porcupine rivers and in the White Mountains near Beaver Creek. The communities of Arctic Village, Venetie, Chalkyitsik, and Birch Creek have all historically harvested sheep, according to local informants, but s/ in recent decades sheep have been taken almost solely by Arctic Village resi- dents in the Brooks Range. A "lo~gstanding" tradition of sheep hunting exists for Arctic Village (Jakimchuk 1974; Tritt n.d.; Peter 1981). Annual harvest for that community in recent years has probably averaged less than 10 animals. Traditionally sheep were taken using bow and arrow and~ occasi ona.lly, snares. Sheep meat is stored by drying or by freezing, and is prepared as dry meat, by boiling, or by baking. Sheep are generally taken near Arctic Village in early fall, ( 1 ate August or early September) or in early winter (November). Residents usually hunt sheep on foot from hunting camps or through the use of snowmachines. Occasion- ally chartered aircraft are used to reach sheep hunting areas. In early winter sheep are said to be easy to hunt, as they often move down off high rocky slopes into valleys. Sheep hunting requires considerable expenditures of time and energy to obtain a relatively small quantity of meat. In November 1981, for example, two hunters on snowmachines traveled over 100 miles from Arctic Village to obtain one sheep. Hunters returning with sheep meat, however, are afforded considerable prestige because the meat is said to be highly-desire- able "Native food," particularly for the eld~rs in the community. In Arctic Village, furthermore, an effort is made to have sheep meat available for the Christmas potlatch. The continued availability of sheep, according to one Arctic Village resident, provides a sense of security much like "having money in the bank." 68 While large numbers of sheep are not taken, local residents take satisfaction in knowing that a relatively stable and accessible resource is nearby should the need arise. In a culture where 11 hungry times 11 are still fresh in the memory of elders, this knowledge is said to be of considerable significance. BEAR (Ursus americanus/Ursus arctos) Black bears (shoh zhraii) are utilized by all Upper Yukon-Porcupine communities except Arctic Village, where they are rarely found. Bears are common in the Yukon Flats and are a frequent sight along riverbanks and near fishcamps. Generally, the Gwich'in do not consider them dangerous, except perhaps in the spring (Nelson 1973:124). Hunting of black bear takes place primarily in the spring and fall. In late April and early May, bears emerge from their dens and are easily hunted because they are 1 ess shy of humans than 1 ater in the fall. The meat at this time is desirable because bears still retain some of their winter fat. Spring is a parti c,ul a rly 11 1 ean 11 time of year for human food, and bear meat can often be an important food source unti 1 waterfowl arrive. Often bears are spotted along rivers after breakup near muskrat and fishing camps. At one such camp on Beaver Creek in spring of 1980, five bears, including two cubs, were encountered by Fort Yukon residents and two adult bears were killed. Both were shot in or near the camp and the meat was used for human and dog food. In fall, usually September, black bear meat is fat and desirable. Often bears are killed in conjunction with moose hunting along rivers. Furthermore, den hunting, described by Nelson ( 1973:118-122), is still occasionally under- taken today. Bear meat is generally frozen or used fresh. It is usually boiled or fried, but in either case it must be fat to be considered suitable for human consumption. Hides are sometimes sold or are used for insulation around doors (Nelson 1973:127). 69 II ' !· Grizzly bears ( shi h tthoo) are rarely used for food but are profoundly respected by people in Upper Yukon-Porcupine communities. They are quite common in upland areas, particularly near Arctic Village, but may be found nearly anywhere in the region. Grizzlies that are killed are usually .. nuisance bears" which have disturbed caches or have come too close to camps or settle- ments. One grizzly was reportedly killed on a ridge near Arctic Village in fall of 1980 after it broke into a caribou meat cache. At a caribou hunting I camp near 01 d John Lake during the same period, hunters demonstrated great concern about the presence of a grizzly which had disturbed another meat cache. The reported presence of a winter bear --one which failed to den up --near Arctic Village in November of 1981 was also a source of great concern in the community. Winter bears are believed by community 'residents to be quite dangerous. Hunters set out on sno\'mlachines to kill the bear but were unable to find it. WILDFOWL Migratory waterfowl, grouse, and ptarmigan are highly valued food sources in all communities of the region. Ducks and geese are particularly abundant on the vast Yukon Flats, where a myriad of lakes, ponds, and rivers provide habitat for birds from all four major North American flyways (U.S. Department of the Interior, Alaska Planning Group 1974e:59). Waterfowl usually are present in the Yukon Flats between 1 ate Apri 1 and early October. In spring they have traditionally been one of the first sources of fresh meat available after the long winter. The first sought-after species to arrive, according to local informants, is ~sually the Canada goose (khaih), followed generally by pintail (ch'iriinjaa), American widgeon (chalvii), green- winged teal (chi'idzinh), scaup (taiinchoo), and common goldeneye (chiik- jj_). Later arrivals, usually appearing abo1,1t the first of June, are white-winged scoter ( njaa), white-fronted goose ( deechy • ah), and old squaw 70 (aah9~1ak). White-winged seaters (locally called 11 blaGk ducks 11 ) are probably the most sought-after duck in spring because of their fat content and because their predictable behavior makes them easy targets. Other important resources include the mallard (neet'ak choo), bufflehead (t7'aandii), and snow goose ( gwi geh). Waterfowl hunting methods ~nd preferences described by Nelson (1973:73-80) remain typical of those used today by all communities in the Yukon Flats. River hunting with boats is common particularly in spring just after breakup. Other methods of harvest include hunting on lakes using 11 rat canoes .. made of spruce and canvas, hunting on land as waterfowl fly by, and hunting from blinds on or near 1 arger water bodies such as Venetie Lake, Ohti g Lake, or other smaller 1 akes. Spring waterfowl hunting is often an activity undertaken by small groups of young men in the community. During spring of 1981 the lives of young men in Venetie seemed to be dominated by a pattern of hunting through the dusky twilight of 11 ni ght 11 and sleeping by day. Freshly-ki 11 ed ducks were brought home and cleaned in the early morning, and all over the village bubbling pots of duck soup were being consumed. Ducks are frozen or dried to keep them for later use. In the past, duck eggs were collected for food, but this prac- tice is reported to be · rarely done today. A Fort Yukon resident reported that the last time he harvested duck eggs was in the mid-1950s. Ruffed, spruce, and sharp-tailed grouse are all harvested in the region, usually on an opportunistic basis using .22 rifles or shotguns. Ptarmigan are also taken, particularly in the foothills and valleys of the Brooks Range and other upland areas. Hunting ptarmigan is an important component of the Arctic Village annual cycle, especially in spring before the arrival of waterfowl. Whi 1 e the actua 1 vo 1 ume of meat provided today by wi 1 dfowl may not be great, its role in providing fresh meat during lean periods and providing 71 ~: diversity in the diet should not be overlooked. As Ne 1 son points out for aboriginal residents of the region: ... birds were one animal they always had a fair chance of finding. Thus, their role in the economy might have been much more important than is evident at first glance, be- cause they could be a a crucial resource for getting the people through lean periods. (1973:83) SMALL MAMMALS Snowshoe hares (geh) are an extremely important and yet often overlooked resource found throughout the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region. Subject to marked population cycles, they epitomize the variability inherent in the boreal forest environment (Nelson 1973:131). Earlier observers noted the significance of hares for food in this environment: At times and in places the moose and the caribou, to say nothing of the black and the brown bear or the mountain- sheep, are plentiful ••• But at other times and places no big game will be found at all ••• and it is often just when a man is dependent on the country that the big game fails him~ But, with an exception [during low cycles] ••• the rabbit never fails. (Stuck 1917:333) Hares remain an important source of food both for humans and for dogs, par- ticularly when large game such as moose and caribou are not available. They ar·e hunted or snared, and, rarely, trapped. Hunting usually takes p·lace in lat.e August and September when their coloration and the. absence of leaves make them more visible. 11 Rabbit drives, .. during which one hunter walks through willow stands to drive hares toward another hunter, are often conducted at this time. On the Black River above Chalkyitsik two people obtained many 11 rabbits 11 in this manner during the fall of 1981 by shooting them with .22 rifles as they walked through a willow thicket. Arctic Village residents return each fall to specific willow bars up the Chandalar River where 11 rabbit drives 11 are known to be productive. Hunting is also undertaken in late March and early April when the snowshoe hares are out sunning themselves (Nelson 1973:133). 72 ·. i !, I l.: VEGETATION The principal species of vegetation used by local residents include bog blueberry (jak), lowbush cranberry (nau•at), highbush cranberry (trahkyaa), rosehips (nitsjh), bearberry (dandaih), crowberry (deenich'uh), nagoonberry (naka1), wild rhubarb (ts 1 iignu), 11 Indian potato 11 (trih), and labrador tea (ledii masket). Not all species are uniformly distributed through the region, however. For example, blueberries are more commonly found in upland areas near Arctic Village and Venetie. Wild rhubarb is abundant along the banks of streams and sloughs in the Yukon Flats. Lowbush cranberries and rosehips can Native medicinal practices, little known to those outside local communi- ties, require certain plant materials. Spruce pitch, for example, is used on cuts, infection, and sores (Nelson 1973:37). Boschniaki·a rossica, known to the Gwich 1 in as dee 1 ii 1 ahshii, is used in making a medicinal steam bath. Leaves of another unidentified plant, called deenich 1 uh t•an, are boiled to make a juice which, when consumed, eases coughing. Also used for medicine is powdery rock called try•ah ky•uu, locally re- ferred to as the 11 legend rock.11 Hadleigh-Hest (1963:86) suggests that this may be an arsenophyrite. Chalkyitsik residents report that, near their community, this rock is found only at certain places along the Porcupine River by those said to have a 11 Special power.11 The rock is scraped to obtain a fine brownish- tan powder. Thongs of tanned skins are then soaked in a solution made by mixing the powder with water and wrapped aroung joints to cure arthritis and rheumatism. The powder is also used to make a medicinal tea. Some local residents are reluctant to discuss the healing powers of 11 Indian medici ne 11 for fear of ri di cul e or cri ti ci sm from those who practice Western medicine. During the course of this research, the use of t1y•ah ky•uu was 84 I I I L PLATE 4 Arctic Village Elder Spotting Caribou. ~· PLATE 5 Hitching Up a Dog Team in Arctic Village. feet or more. The view around is grand. I take my stay among the Netsi Kutchin for a month or so. (n~d.:24 March 1863) In a later journal entry, events which took place when the Neets'~11 Gwich'in traveled on a trading expedition to the Arctic coast were documented: Francois Boucher and a party of indians returned from the seacoast. They saw one lodge of Eskimo, occupied by two men, two women, and two boys. They learnt from them that a ship was wrecked near the shore last autumn, but that the whole of the crew were saved, that they were rescued by an- other ship which wintered, as the Eskimo believe, about forty miles distant from their lodge--they had an arduous journey. The weather was cold, and without a fire the camps were wretched. (n.d.:11 April 1863) The journals of the Reverend Albert Tritt (n.d.), a Neets'~11 Gwich'in man born near the Sheenjek River in 188Q, provide a glimpse into the early contact history of his people. Tritt's journals describe travels of Arctic Village people to Rampart House, Old Crow, the Arctic coast, the Coleen River, and Fort Yukon during the late 1880s and the 1890s. Families were also living on the Sheenjek River (11 Salmon River 11 ) at that time. The first rifles used by the Neets'~11 Gwich'in, · according to Tritt, were obtained around 1889 through trading with the Inupiat to the north. After that time families which may have previously dispersed to caribou fences in the fall and winter apparently remained together because only a few rifles were available. Hadleigh-West reports that the first permanent residence was built at Arctic Village by Chief Christian in about 1908 (1963:223). Trading relationships with the Inupiat to the north continued into the twentieth century (McKennan 1965:25). In 1909, Tritt reported that: everybody' stayed over at 01 d John Lake and [had] a big feast. There were lots of people. Chief Christian made a potlatch. I made potlatch on Christmas, all Eskimo people was there that time. Old John was a layreader and I'm a fiddleman. (Tritt n.d.) Edington's vivid account of the journey of Deputy Marshal Hansen to the contact the Neets'~11 Gwich'in in 1910 reports that Inupiat were trading with the Indians, probably at Old John Lake (Edington 1930). Tritt reported visiting a 89 the creeks they set fishnets. All the time they scanned the territory with fieldglasses for caribou. {Peter 1981: 42-44) A significant political event which would later influence land use patterns was the creation in 1943 of the 1.48-million-acre Chandalar Native Reserve, which included lands between Arctic Village, Christian Village, "Kachick" (K 1 aatsik), and Venetie (Lonn.er and Beard 1982:101). Largely through the efforts of John Fredson, a Native leader originally from Venetie, the reservation was established under provisions of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 (amended in 1936). Although residents voted to accept the Reserve in 1944, they petitioned the Department of the Interior in 1950 and again in 1957 to include lands to the north and west of the reservat'ion. These lands were reportedly used for hunting, fishing, and trapping but had been 1 eft out of the original Reserve (Lonner and Beard 1982:101). Continued traditional use of the Sheenjek River valley in the 1950s was indicated by naturalist Olaus Murie•s encounter there in 1956 with two Arctic Village resjdents. Murie was there to assess the area•s potential for a wildlife refuge (Murie n.d. ). Trappers from Arctic Village have continued to use the Sheenjek River periodically up to the present time. Hadleigh-West (1963:268) noted, however, that by the 1960s the Neets 1 ~ll Gwich 1 in seldom traveled as far as the Coleen River. Environmental studies related to the proposed Alaskan Arctic Gas Pipeline project, conducted during the early 1970s, resulted in a brief description of land use by Arctic Village residents, which included "longstanding" use of Flatrock, Cane, and Red Sheep creek drainages for sheep hunting, and the use of both the Chandalar and Sheenjek drainages for trapping and hunting (Jakimchuk 1974:39). Also during this time, Warbelow et ~· (1975) documented the location of caribou fences and related structures. By the early 1970s the use of dog teams for the harvest of resources had 1 argely been supplanted by the use of snowmachi nes. The speed and range of 93 ., ' the snowmachine allowed resource users to travel great distances in much less time, albeit with some risk of becoming stranded by mechanical breakdown. The decline of dog teams also resulted in a reduction in the use of fish and caribou for dog food. At the same time, the need for cash increased, to allow purchase of a machine, gasoline, oil, and spare parts. However, in the late 1970s the number of dogs appeared to be once again on the increase, primarily for use in racing but also for checking traplines. In February 1981 there were approximately 60 working dogs in Arctic Village, and at least one musher flew to Fort Yukon to spend several weeks fishing for dog salmon to feed his team. The enactment of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in 1971 affected the 1 and status of the Chandal ar Native Reserve by revoking Native reservations, extinguishing claims based upon aboriginal title relating to use and occupancy including hunting and fishing rights, and providing an option under which villages within existing Native reserves could obtain title to those lands (Lonnner and Beard 1982:102-3). Arctic Village joined Venetie in selecting the Reserve lands and jointly transferred their lands to the "Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government" in 1979 (Abeita 1980). In 1981 the tribal government again claimed an additional 3.4 million acres north and west of the former reservation lands based upon the previous 1950 and 1957 petitions to the Department of the Interior (Lonner and Beard 1982:102-3). THE CONTEMPORARY COMMUNITY In 1980, Arctic Village had a population of approximately 111 people (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1980). Facilities .located in the village include the following: an elementary and high school serving about 40 students operated by the Yukon Flats School District; a village-owned store; a Public Health Service clinic; a post office; a laundry and shower facility (presently inoper- able); a generator building; a community-operated lodge; a National Guard 94 armory; a community hall; the village council office; an Episcopal church; and a mission house. The community•s 5,200-foot gravel airstrip has recently under- gone major improvements. A gravel road connects the community with the airstrip and also extends east to the base of a nearby ridge. Water is currently carried from the Chandalar River. A system which provided lake water for domestic use froze in 1979 and remains inoperable. Solid waste is disposed of at a nearby dump, while sewage is collected in honey buckets and privies. An el ectrifi cation project begun in 1980 has expanded service to most households in the community at an initial monthly cost of :50 dollars each. Telephone service consists of a single Alascom phone in the council office, although plans are underway to expand this to individual homes. The Public Health Service clinic has a radiophone for emergency medical calls. Television was introduced in the community in 1981 and nearly all households now have a television set. Full and part-time employment opportunities are limited, but include: a postmaster;-school and village maintenance workers; a health aide, a store manager and assistant; three bilingual teaching aides; a council office manager; a school cook; and a National Guard armory caretaker. In 1981 seven men received income for National Guard training undertaken during the year. Other residents have received income as seasonal workers on construction projects, wildlife surveys, firefighting crews, or homemaking projects. In 1980 and 1981 up to six residents were working from July to September operating bulldozers, graders, or scrapers on the airport improvements project. -, Unemployment insurance payments, social security benefits, and state welfare payments for Arctic Village residents totalled $34,540 in 1979 (Louis Berger and Associates 1982:2:37-39). Some households received foodstamps, which contributed to household buying power. Certain individuals also sold firewood at $35 a toboggan-load (about one-eighth cord), while others made 95 PLATE 6 Packing Caribou Near Old John Lake. 96 income through the sale of beadwork and handicrafts •. Income derived from the sale of fur obtained through trapping is important for many households. The cost of living in Arctic Village is substantially higher than Anchorage, Fairbanks, or Fort Yukon. One recent study found prices of food items to be 72 percent higher than those in Anchorage (Lonner and Beard 1982:141}. Gasoline cost $4.00 per gallon, and 100· pounds of propane cost $110 in the fall of 1981. In August 1981 a pound of ground beef, when available, cost four dollars. A large box of pilot crackers cost $3.35; 10 pounds of Pillsbury All-Purpose Flour cost $6.50; and 25 pounds of Purina Dog Chow cost $21.30. Only a few residents buy commercial food products directly from Anchorage, Fairbanks, or Fort Yukon; air freight from Fairbanks is 50 cents per pound. The logistics of importing food, furthermore, severely limit the availability of fresh pro- duce. Barges are unable to reach the community because of shallow water. Shipping delays often mean that the store wi 11 have only a few canned and dry goods available. Arctic Village is served by two air carriers, providing service five days per week from Fort Yukon. Generally Cessna 206 and 207 aircraft are used, al- though larger aircraft are chartered to transport fuel and building materials. Oneway airfare from Arctic Village to Fairbanks costs about $100. ANNUAL CYCLE The seasonal cycle of resource harvest activities for Arctic Village from 1970 through 1982 is summarized below (Figure 2}. Data presented in this summary are based both upon interviews with resource experts and observations by the researcher. It should be emphasized, however, that only the major activities are included in this summary and that other activities, such as hauling water or gathering firewood, may require considerable amounts of time over the entire year. Furthermore, considerable variation can occur 97 restricts travel, usually in late September. Moose are harvested using boats on the Chandalar and Junjik rivers. Sheep are sometimes taken, in recent years by traveling to hunting areas by means of chartered aircraft. Ground squirrels are hunted and trapped --often by women and elderly persons --on alpine ridges surrounding the community. Waterfowl are occasionally harvested before ice develops on lakes and streams. In addition, .. rabbit drives .. are sometimes undertaken to flush out hares from willow bars along rivers where they can be harvested for human food. Firewood and berries are gathered. By late September freeze-up usually has begun, and travel becomes restric- ted until solid ice and a sufficient snow cover allow travel by snowmachine. Winter. Once travel by snowmachine becomes possible, usually by mid- October, resource harvest activities expand once again. Caribou hunting resumes through the use of smowmachines. Caribou hunting continues through the winter depending upon local need and availability. Generally, caribou are no longer available to Arctic Village residents after mid-to late April. Gillnets are placed under the ice on the Chandalar River, on Old John Lake, and on other nearby lakes for grayling, pike, whitefish, burbot, and lake trout. Residents also 11 jig 11 for grayling through holes in the ice on the Chandalar River, and use set hooks for pike, burbot, and lake trout. Fishing under the ice usually continues until December, after which the ice becomes too thick for efficient harvesting. Fishing with a hook-and-line for grayling is pursued once again in late winter, usually April and early May. Sheep hunting takes place by snowmachine in early winter, especially near Ottertail Creek. Sheep meat is kept frozen or dried, and is usually saved for the elderly and for community potlatches. In November, trappers begin to make sets for marten, fox, wolf, wolverine, and beaver. Some trappers travel 1 ong distances by snowmachi ne and occasionally by chartered airplane with their supplies and equipment to distant trapping areas. In recent years trappers have run lines as far as Alexander's Village, 100 I Christian Village, and the Sheenjek River. Trappers_ continue checking their lines until about the end of March. Trapping, snaring, or hunting of small game and fowl such as hares, porcupine, and ptarmigan provide variety to the local diet throughout the winter. Firewood gathering and water hauling also require constant attention in winter. Late winter activities include spring caribou and occasional moose hunting, muskrat, beaver, and ground squirrel trapping and ptarmigan hunting. House logs are often sledded to the community for use in summer construction projects. LAND USE SUMMARY Maps 9A through 9C depict community-based land use during the lifetime of residents in Arctic Village. Factors which appear to have shaped recent land use patterns include the shift to a permanent settlement having a school and a post office, the availability of limited wage employment opportunities and government transfer payments, changes in resource distribution, the use of new / technology such as high-powered rifles, outboard motors, and snowmachines, changing demographic patterns, and resource competition. While these and other factors may have influenced recent use patterns, the total area utilized has remained largely consistent with those of the past. Caribou hunting areas utilized today fall largely within the drainage of the East Fork of the Chandalar River, including the Junjik river and smaller tribu- tary creeks, and the Christian River drainage. Two men traveled by snow- machine, for exampl~, up the Junjik River and over a divide into the drainages of Cane and Red Sheep creeks in 1981 in search of both caribou and sheep. In late summer of 1981 an Arctic Village family camped at the confluence of Red Sheep Creek and the East Fork to harvest both caribou and sheep. Trappers from Arctic Village who have traveled to Christian Village and the Sheenjek River by snowmachine in recent years have also harvested caribou. Arctic 101 L Village residents have hunted caribou as far to the east as the Coleen River during their lifetimes. In recent decades, however, this use has declined. Hunting for moose using a boat usually occurs along the East Fork and the Junjik rivers. Hunters sometimes stop at several wooden towers located along their banks to scan the surrounding area for both moose and caribou. Moose are sometimes taken using a snowmachine in winter, either in the vicinity of the community or in upland areas to the east. The area around Christian Village is also known to be good for moose hunting. Sheep hunting in fall principally takes place near the headwaters of the East Fork and on the Sheenjek River. In November and December sheep are usually harvested on tributaries of the East Fork, including Ottertail and Smoke creeks. Historically, sheep hunting also occurred during summer months in conjunction with the harvest of wolves taken under the bounty program. r~ajor fishing areas include the East Fork and its tributaries, Old John Lake, the Sheenjek and Christian rivers, and lakes near the community. Grayling are generally caught in rivers, while lake trout and an unusual land-locked population of arctic char are virtually always caught in specific lakes. Grayling are valued as a source of fresh food while residents are hunting in summer and fall. Hunters at one camp near Old John Lake in 1981, for example, regularly fished at a particularly productive net site to obtain whitefish, lake trout, and pike. In early winter, nets are placed under the ice in this same spot, and on the East Fork. Set hooks are also placed in the ice in these locations for pike and burbot. Waterfowl hunting, which sometimes occurs in conjunction with fishing, occurs principally on lakes and rivers in the East Fork valley and on Old John Lake. Principal trapping areas used by Arctic Village residents include the East Fork valley above Brown Grass Lake, the Christian River extending to Christian Village and to near Alexander's Village, and the Sheenjek River north from Vundik Lake. The most productive trapping areas are said to be in the more heavily 108 PLATE 7 Birch Creek V~llage in Winter. PLATE 8 Muskrat Pelts Drying at Beaver Creek Camp. 115 PLATE 9 Birch Creek Elder David James. 116 hauling water, community gatherings, and visiting occupy considerable amounts of time in winter. Grouse, ptarmigan, and hares are harvested when available. LAND USE SUMMARY Community-based 1 and use over the 1 i fetime of Birch Creek residents is presented in maps llA throug~ llC. Land use by Birch Creek residents is focused upon extensive lake, river and slough systems. Canoe portages, including those between Birch and Beaver creeks, between Birch Creek and the Yukon River, and between many smaller 1 akes and creeks are essential to this pattern of use. Detailed knowledge of geographical features in nearly flat terrain becomes essential for successful harvest of resources. In upland areas, trail systems known to local residents are used for trapping and hunting. Most rnoose and black bear hunting by Birch Creek residents takes place on Birch Creek from the upper and lower mouths on the Yukon River upstream to the Steese Highway bridge, along the Yukon River between White Eye and Fort Yukon, and on Beaver Creek. Salmon fishing occurs principally at the lower mouth of Birch Creek on the Yukon River. Fishing for whitefish, grayling, sheefish, and pike occurs at specific net sites along Birch Creek at its tributaries and in lakes surrounding the community. Grayling fishing with a hook-and-line often occurs in conjunction with hunting, and extends the length of Birch Creek to where it is crossed by the Steese Highway bridge. Muskrat and waterfowl hunting occur principally on the myriad of lakes, rivers, and sloughs surrounding Birch Creek village and extending downriver to the Yukon. The larger lakes south of Birch Creek village are particularly productive waterfowl hunting areas. Furbearer trapping takes place along established trails to the south of the village into the foothills of the White Mountains near the headwaters of Preacher Creek, along the upper and lower mouths of Birch Creek, and to the west along Beaver Creek. Gathering of firewood, 121 berries, and house logs usually takes place at specifi~ sites near the community and upriver along Birch Creek. Fifty-two Native-named places have been documented for the community of Birch Creek {Caulfield and Peter [in press]) {Map 12). Named places include resource use sites, geographic travel routes including trails and key portages, and cultural and historic si·tes. Distribution of named places extends from the Yukon River south to the White t~ountai ns, and west to Beaver Creek. The drainages of Birch and Beaver creeks south of the Yukon River contain the greatest concentrations of names. 125 Map 12: General L . Miles ocatwn of B. Irch Creek Pl ace Names 0 15 30 45 60 CHAPTER 6 CHALKYITSIK LAND AND RESOURCE USE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Chalkyitsik (Jalgiitsik) is located at 66° 30 1 N latitude, 143° 43•w longitude on the Black River,·at the eastern fringe of the vast Yukon Flats. Fort Yukon lies about 50 miles to the west. The Gwich 1 in name for the community means 11 fish hooking place 11 ; Chalkyitsik has traditionally been an important fishing site. The Black River, focus of much of the resource harvest activities of Chalkyitsik residents, originates in the rugged uplands which surround the Yukon Flats to the east and south. Just upriver from the community the river begins to change character and blend into the maze of sloughs, lakes, and creeks which make up the Flats. Several large lakes, including Ohtig and Tiinkdhul, are situated not far from the Black River and are used for hunting, fishing and trapping. To the north of the community, the Porcupine River flows in a southwesterly direction from Canada to its confluence with the Yukon River near Fort Yukon. In winter a trail is broken from the village to the Porcupine River, providing access to important hunting, fishing, and trapping areas. LAND USE PATTERNS OVER TIME The people of Chalkyitsik describe themselves as or•aanjik Gwich 1 in, or 11 people living along cache-river [Salmon Fork of the Black River]... Only i one or two families are said to be 11 real 11 or•aanjik Gwich 1 in, however, in the sense of having originated from the Black River itself. Ancestors of other village residents are said to have come from the Yukon Flats, Chandal ar, and Upper Porcupine bands (Nelson 1973:17). Archeological excavations near Old Crow and along the Porcupine River demonstrate great antiquity in the use and occupancy of the region near 127 PLATE 10 View of Chalkyitsik from Marten Hill. PLATE 11 Chalkyitsik Elder Reverend David Salmon Displaying Traditional Arrow Points. 128 i I , I Chalkyitsik (Morlan 1975; Dixon and Plaskett 1980).. Recent archeological finds on Marten Hill, adjacent to the village of Chalkyitsik, possibly date to as early as 10,000 B.C. (Mobley 1982:26). Elders among the Dr'aanjik Gwich'in remember a highly mobile way of life, living at the headwaters of the Black River from autumn until spring and then floating downri'(er to fish in summer (Nelson 1973:17; Peter 1979; Herbert 1982). Moose, caribou, and sheep were harvested during winter in this mountain- ous country while prodigious populations of fish, especially whitefish, on the Black River provided a relatively stable source of food. Chalkyitsik elders report that nearby Ohtig Lake was used extensively for waterfowl harvesting during aboriginal times. Early explorers in the region, including Hardisty (1867) and Cadzow (1925), provide only brief reference to the Dr'aanjik Gwich'in. Cadzow's account, cited in Nelson (1973:16), notes that: along the headwaters of the Black River, are found the Tranjik-Kutchin, the "Cache River People," who take their name from the number of caches or stages built along the stream on which they live •••• The Tranjik-Kutchin are famed as snarers of moose, building pounds similar to those used by the Vuntit-Kutchin for capturing caribou. Archdeacon McDonald reported encountering Black River people in Fort Yukon and on the Porcupine River in 1863 (McDonald n.d.:2 July 1863). He again met them on subsequent journeys to the Black River and on the Porcupine River in 1865, 1866, and 1868. He encountered 67 people in one Black River camp in 1868. During McDonald's residence at Rampart House after 1871, he regularly encoun- tered Black River people trading there (McDonald n.d.:5 May 1871). Old Rampart was utilized by Black River band members for trading and social activities, according to Andrews (1977:292). The seasonal round of Black River pepl e during the 1 atter part of the nineteenth century was described by one elder as follows: We \'lent up the Black River together. Way up to the head of it ••• for we were going to stay there for the winter •••• 129 Chalkyitsik was a traditional seasonal fishing .camp which, by the late 1930s, had four cabins (Nelson 1973:17}. In about 1940 a boat loaded with materials to build a school at Salmon Village had to unload at Chalkyitisk due to low water. Several Salmon Village families moved to Chalkyitsik and, in 1941, built the school there (Nelson 1973:17). Some families continued to live much of the year at trap~ing or fishing camps on the Porcupine and Black rivers at such places as Shuman House, 11 0ld Village .. , Ddhahtee, Canyon Village, Burnt Paw, .. John Steven's place 11 , Salmon Village, and Grayling Fork •. From 1961 to about 1967 several Dr'aanjik Gwich'in families lived at Canyon Village on the Porcupine River, although most moved back to either Fort Yukon or Chalkyitsik by the end of the decade (Peter 1979:99-100). By the time Nelson worked in the area in 1969-70 most of the Black River people had moved from outlying camps to Chalkyitsik (Nelson 1973:19). At that time there were 26 houses, a store, two churches, and a community hall in the village (Nelson 1973:19). Chalkyitsik proved to be located in an environment with relatively abundant populations of fish and waterfowl. According to Nelson (1973:18): the main reason for the aboriginal settlement [at Chalkyit- sik] was the presence of an abundant source of whitefish, which run down the nearby creek during the fall. The vil- lage is also on a sharp and very deep bend in the Black River, which the people say is about the best fish-netting spot along its entire course. Waterfowl hunting is excel- lent at Chalkyitsik because it is situated amid an ideal combination of lakes and other features of the landscape, which creates exceptionally good conditions for shooting ducks and geese during their spring and fall migrations. For example, studies conducted in Chalkyitsik in 1960 revealed a harvest of about 3,000 salmon and 4,000 whitefish and sheefish by Chalkyitsik residents (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1964:37). Most of the salmon caught in that year were chums, which were dried for dog food. The whitefish and sheefish were primarily for human consumption. In addition to fish and waterfowl, moose and caribou were also accessible to Chalkyitsik residents along both the Black and Porcupine rivers. 131 THE CONTEMPORARY COMMUNITY In 1980 Chalkyitsik was reported to have a population of 100 people (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1980). In that year the Chalkyitsik school, operated by the Yukon Flats School District, had 26 students and two teachers for elementary and secondary levels. The school has electric power provided by two generators. Health care is provided by a local health aide in a small clinic building. A single Alascom telephone is located in the village council office, although efforts are under way to provide each home with telephone service. A satellite radio is available for medical emergencies. About 31 houses, not all in use, exist in Chalkyitsik; virtually all are heated with wood. Only the vi 11 age counci 1 office and the school are heated with oil. Water is hauled year round from the B1 ack River. Most homes use privies, although the school and several other buildings are connected to a sewage lagoon. At least four households rely on private electrical generators, although efforts are under way to provide electricity to all households. Satel- lite television programming is available in the community. At the present time, most homes use Coleman lanterns for lig~t and propane for cooking. Facilities in the community include a store owned by the village corpora- tion, a post office, three churches (Episcopal, Assembly of God, and Baptist), an elementary and secondary school, and the village council office. The com- munity has a 2,500 foot runway and is served by two air services. Barge service from Fort Yukon is 1 imi ted by water 1 evel s, but usually one or two trips are made each summer. Full-time wage employment opportunities in the community include a post- master, store manager, council office clerk, and health aide. Full-time posi- tions during the school year include two teachers, a maintenance person, a cook, and two bilingual instructors. Summer firefighting and construction jobs provide seasonal income. The construction of equipment, such as snowshoes, 132 I ... I I 'I I. :I : i .! I . l I' I ., 1 I i I .: I ) . I' •j . . ·i I' I sleds, or boats, and clothing or beadwork, provides important income for certain households. The sale of firewood, at $100 dollars a cord, pro vi des income for a few families during winter months. Alaska state welfare payments, unemployment compensation, and social security payments made to Chalkyitsik residents in 1979 totalled $39,139 dollars (Louis Berger and Associates 1982:2:37-39}. Furbearer trapping has reportedly increased in recent years, providing cash income to a number of households. According to local residents, a resurgence of interest in trapping is due in part to high fur prices and a lack of alternative employment opportunities. In 1981, two Chalkyitsik trappers commented that the scarcity of fi refighting and construction jobs, coupled with a recent decline in government transfer payments, were reasons for their expanded trapping activity. The use of dogs by Chalkyitsik residents for trapping appears to have remained stable since Nelson's (1973} work in 1969-70. He noted that four men in Chalkyitsik depended entirely on dogs for transportation, while four others used them in conjunction with a snowmachine (Nelson 1973:176}. In 1981-82 four men used dog transportation almost exclusively, while five others used them less frequently in conjunction with snowmachines. ANNUAL CYCLE The annual cycle of resource harvest activities for Chalkyitsik from 1970 to 1982 is summarized below (Figure 4}. As in previous chapters, annual cycle data were compiled from interviews with resource experts in the community and from observations by the researcher. Only major activities are included in the summary, however, and considerable yearly variations can occur. Spring. Breakup of rivers in the area around Chalkyitsik usually occurs in mid-to late April, similar to patterns elsewhere in the Yukon Flats. 133 are occasionally harvested during winter months. In late winter, usually April, grayling are caught through the ice using hook-and-line. LAND USE SUMMARY Land use data compiled from Chalkyitsik residents are depicted in Maps 13A through 13C. These maps ~how continued use of the 19th century territory of the Dr'aanjik Gwich'in, including the Black and Little Black river drainages, the Porcupine River to the Canadian border, and the lower Coleen River. The Black and Porcupine rivers are particularly important to Chalkyitsik residents, both for the resources which they provide and as transportation routes to other harvest areas. Chalkyitsik moose hunting activity generally occurs on the Black and Salmon Fork rivers, on the Porcupine River, and in grassy, meadow-like areas to the south of the community. On the Black River, hunters travel by boat, generally from the vicinity of 11 Englishshoe Bar 11 upstream to above Kiivinjik Creek on the Salmon Fork. Moose are also taken by Chalkyitsik trappers at outlying camps on the Black, Little Black, and Porcupine rivers. Caribou are occasionally harvested by Chal!<yitsik hunters, especially in fall and spring, when the opportunity arises and meat supplies are low. Nelson {1973: 113) reported that Chalkyitsik hunters sometimes obtained caribou on the Porcupine River, in other areas of the herd's winter range, or in trade with people on the Chandalar River. During the course of this research, Chalkyitsik residents harvested caribou on the Porcupine River and near the headwaters of the Salmon and Grayling forks of the Black River in both fall and winter. Furthermore, In the spring of 1982 caribou migrated immediately adjacent to the community of Chalkyitsik --an infrequent occurence --where they were harvested by local hunters. 137 Dall sheep, according to local reports, were hjstorically harvested by Dr'aanjik Gwich'in hunters in mountains at the head of the Salmon Fork of the Black River. Hunters traveled upstream to the head of navigation in small canoes, and then proceeded overland to sheep hunting areas. However, none of the residents interviewed in Chalkyitsik during this research had ever hunted sheep in this area. Trappers from Chalkyitsik travel considerable distances on the Black, Little Black, Salmon Fork, Porcupine and Coleen rivers in search of fur. For example, in the fall of 1981 two trappers traveled over 150 miles by boat from Chalkyitsik to reach their winter camp. After a winter of trapping by dog team, they returned to Chalkyitsik the following March using dogs. Other trappers have seasonal camps at places such as Shuman House and "Old Village" on the Porcupine River, on both the Grayling and Sa 1 mon forks of the Black River, and on the lower sections of the Black and Little Black rivers. Muskrat and waterfowl harvest activities occur principally in spring and early summer. They are centered in the extensive lake, creek, and slough systems found from the area just north of the Porcupine River south to the vicinity of the Little Black and Grass rivers. Ohtig Lake is a particularly productive hunting area for waterfowl. Marten Hill near Chalkyitsik is known to be good for hunting waterfowl as birds fly low over the terrain. The Black River and its tributaries are the most productive sources of fish for residents of Chalkyitsik. Salmon, whitefish, burbot, and pike are caught with gillnets in the main river. Grayling are also taken, both in nets and with hook-and-line, especially in conjunction with other resource harvest activities such as moose hunting. A small creek entering the Black River just upstream from Chalkyitsik is a particularly prolific source of whitefish and pike in the spring and fall. Pike and whitefish are also taken in larger 1 akes near the community. 141 Map 14: General Location of Chalkyitsik Place Names BasC' map adaptC'd from Alaska l:I,OCX>,OCX> Base Map Ser ies () Cop)'right, Arctic En\'ironmc-ntallnfo rm atio n and Data Cente r, University of A1aska 1982. CHAPTER 7 FORT YUKON LAND AND RESOURCE USE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Fort Yukon, largest of the communities in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region, is situated at 66° 34'N lat1tude, 145° 18'W longitude in the heart of the Yukon Flats. Fort Yukon's Gwich'in name, Gwichyaa Zhee, means 11 house in the flats. 11 Located near the confluence of the Yukon and Porcupine rivers, the community has historically served as a gathering place for the Gwich'in and neighboring peoples. In more recent times, it has served as an important trading, supply, transportation, and administrative center. Fort Yukon's central location in the Yukon Flats has fostered expansive land and resource use patterns. It is surrounded by a vast lake-covered flood- plain containing bottomland spruce-poplar and lowland spruce-hardwood forests, as well as lowbrush bog and muskeg communities. The Yukon Flats provide habitat for abundant aquatic species such as muskrat, beaver, whitefish, and waterfowl. The Yukon and Porcupine rivers serve as vital transportation corridors which provide access to upland areas which are used for harvesting moose, caribou and other species. Fisheries resources in the Yukon and Porcupine rivers and their tributaries provide a major source of food for Fort Yukon and, because of the interrelationship of all Upper Yukon-Porcupine communities, other com- munities as well. LAND USE PATTERNS OVER TIME Fort Yukon area residents are known as the Gwichyaa Gwich'in, or 11 dwellers on the flats 11 (Slobodin 1981:532). The aboriginal territory of the Gwichyaa Gwich'in included the Yukon Flats south of the lower reaches of the Chandalar and Sheenjek rivers and extending up the Yukon River to the vicinity of Circle (Andrews 1977:105). Prior to the arrival of the Hudson's Bay Company, members 145 I I ' 1 l land use. Whymper (1869:177-178) encountered members of several different bands at Fort Yukon in 1867 and reported finding 11 i ndi ans camped everywhere by the banks 11 of the Yukon fishing for salmon. In 1869, Raymond (1900:28) reported meeting the renowned Gwich•in chief Shahnyaati' in the lower ramparts of the Yukon nearly 200 miles below Fort Yukon. As Fort Yukon grew, people were drawn to the settlement by the opportuni- ties for trade. By 1873 the Alaska Commercial Company began operating a steamer on the Yukon River and established a store at Fort Yukon (Shimkin 1951:4). Disease also became widespread, reducing the region's Native popula- tion (Shimkin 1951:4). Gold strikes, first on Birch Creek and the Fortymile River, and then in 1897 in the Klondike region, brought new people and goods to the area. The expanded availability of goods changed the economic patterns and material cul- ture of the region's inhabitants. Many Gwichyaa Gwich'in found seasonal wage employment in cutting wood for steamboats, hauling freight, or working as stevedores (Shimkin 1951:5). Family-centered trapping, in which extended families became associated with particular areas, was the predominant pattern between 1900 and 1930 (Schneider 1976: 214). Trappers would spend the winter with their extended family at distant camps and then return to Fort Yukon to fish or to work for wages in summer. ·Thus, land use patterns were modified with changing social patterns. According to McKennan (1970:314-315), 11 more and more, the Native's economic life came to center around the individualistic activities of the nuclear family, rather than the earlier collective activities of the large band •••• 11 Seasonal camps comprised of one or more families, such as Alexander's Village, Twentytwo Mile Village, Old Rampart, 11 Boxcar,11 and 11 Sixteeninile,11 continued to play impor- tant roles in hunting, fishing, and trapping patterns in the early twentieth century (Andrews 1977:303-304). The influx of non-Native persons to the region, who often became integrated into the area's trapping and subsistence 147 151 community center. Sewage is disposed of in privies, while solid waste is con- solidated at the city dump. The Yukon Flats School District operates both elementary and secondary education facilities in Fort Yukon. The University of Alaska offers courses through the Cross-Cultural Education Development program (X-CEO) and a branch of its Rural Education Center. Health care is provided by the Public Health Service clinic; the nearest hospital facility is located in Fairbanks. Fort Yukon has a 5,000-foot gravel runway maintajned by the State of Alaska. Two commercial airlines provide service to Fairbanks .and to outlying 11 bush 11 communities. Charter service is available for landing on floats, wheels, or ski is. Barge service is provided by Yutana Barge Lines of Nenana and the Yukon Navigation Company during the summer months. The economy of Fort Yukon is a blend of both cash and subsistence com- ponents. A survey conducted in 1978 by the University of Alaska found that wage employment opportunities tended to be more prevalent in Fort Yukon than in other communities in the region (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978:5:3). Preferences for subsistence activities over wage employment re- portedly were less strong in Fort Yukon than in other communities in the region (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978:5:6). While Fort Yukon Native residents reported spending less time in resource harvest activities each year than did residents of other communities, the diversity of their subsistence take was reported to be greater (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978:5:6). This research determined that the quality of 11 Subsistence pur- suits, 11 measured in terms of the diversity of resources taken and equipment uti 1 i zed, may actually have been enhanced by the~e wage employment opportuni- ties even as the quantity of resources harvested declined (Institute of Social and Economic Research 1978: 5-9). Possible explanations for this may include use of better technology for resource harvesting made possible by income from wage employment or the fact that a diversity of resources are available to 152 ~,: j l residents due to Fort Yukon's central location in the region. Fort Yukon is a transportation center in the region, allowing residents ready access to major river corridors and air taxi services. Fort Yukon had a higher proportion of professional-technical, managerial- administrative, and sales-clerical employment opportunities than did the re- mainder of the region, according to the survey by the Institute of Social and Economic Research (1978:6:4). As a result, employment for some residents tends to be less seasonal in nature, and earnings are higher. The complementary interaction of the market and subsistence components of the mixed economy, however, are reflected in the fact that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1976 estimated that at 1 east 50 percent of the meat and fish consumed in Fort Yukon were derived from local resources (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1976:6). Interviews with Fort Yukon residents suggest an expansion of resource harvest efforts si,nce the early 1970s. Noncommercial harvests of salmon, for example, have generally increased in Fort Yukon during the 1970s (Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Commercial Fisheries 1980:89-91) (Table 6). Interview data gathered in Fort Yukon suggest that the number of persons engaged in trapping as well as the amount of trapping effort may also have increased during this period. ANNUAL CYCLE The annual cycle of resource harvest activities for Fort Yukon from 1970 to 1982 is summarized below (Figure 5). Data presented in this summary were compiled from interviews with local resource experts and from observations by the researcher. The annual cycle summary includes only major harvest activities and may vary from year to year. Spring. Breakup usually begins in mid-April in the Yukon Flats area, and migratory waterfowl appear soon after that time. Ducks and geese are avidly sought by Fort Yukon residents because they offer the first fresh meat of spring. 153 I I I I I I Residents living in spring tent camps harvest waterfowl on small lakes and streams. Others living in Fort Yukon at this time of year seek waterfowl along rivers and lakes close to the community. Muskrat hunting is also an important spring activity. Some hunters establish muskrat camps on isolated lakes in late winter before breakup begins. They then 11 spring out 11 at these camps, remaining there during breakup to trap and then hunt muskrat and waterfowl. Black bear are also occasionally taken near these camps or, after the rivers become free of ice, along the banks of watercourses. Fishnets are placed in small creeks and sloughs near the Yukon and Porcupine rivers to catch whitefish, sucker, and pike. By June waterfowl and musk rat hunting decline and the focus of activity centers around preparation for salmon fishing. Boats, outboard motors, and nets are pulled out of storage and repaired for use during the brief summer months. Some residents cut house logs along the Yukon and Porcupine rivers upstream from Fort Yukon and raft them down to the community during high water for later use. Summer. Many Fort Yukon residents travel on the Yukon or Porcupien rivers to establish fishcamps before the arrival of king salmon around the first of July. Others remain in Fort Yukon but make daily trips to check their nets. King salmon are caught using gillnets and occasionally fishwheels. Fishing families are busy checking nets and wheels, cutting and processing fish, making king salmon 11 Strips,11 and tending smokehouses. Daily activities often include the repair of equipment such as outboard motors and fishnets, and gathering firewood for smokehouses and cooking fires. Small game or fowl are sometimes harvested if available, and considerable time is spent visiting friends and relatives in nearby camps. These patterns of fishing activity continue after the first week of August when chum salmon usually arrive in the Fort Yukon area. Chum salmon are more commonly caught in fishwheels, and are split and dried on racks made of local 155 winter. Other species are usually sought unti 1 mi d-:March. Snare 1 i nes for hares are checked regularly both by trappers and by Fort Yukon residents. Grouse or ptarmigan are occasionally harvested when encountered. Fishing under the ice for whitefish, pike, and suckers sometimes is undertaken just after freezeup. Fish are kept frozen for both human and dog consumption. Firewood gathering and water hauling remain regular chores for most households throughout the winter. Moose are sometimes harvested during winter, usually in November or again during February and t4arch. Often trappers in remote areas wait until early winter to harvest moose so that meat can be kept frozen. Spring moose are occasionally taken to provide meat for the summer months. In late winter, trappers turn their attention to beaver snaring and trapping and then to muskrat trapping. Grayling are caught through holes in the ice using hook-and-line as late as early April. LAND USE SUMMARY Areas of land use utilized by selected Fort Yukon households are depicted in t,1aps 15A through 15C. Because of the large size of the community and time constraints, only six percent of all households in Fort Yukon were interviewed to obtain mapped land use data (see Methodology, Chapter 1). Households selected were those reported by 1 ocal residents to be most active in their use of 1 and for resource harvest purposes. Because of these limitations, land use data presented here should be considered only a minimal representation of actual land use. For example, the use of Alexander•s Village, a seasonal camp north of Fort Yukon, has been documented in the literature for both historic and contemporary periods (Andrews 1977:303). However, because of the limitations stated above this use is not reflected on the maps. Similarly, use of caribou hunting area upriver of Circle by Fort Yukon residents, also documented in the literature (Mason 1924; Alaska Game Commission n.d.), is not included. 157 I i I . I ! Fort Yukon to Beaver Creek in winter of 1981-82, remai~ing there through break- up to hunt muskrats and waterfowl. In June 1982 he floated down Beaver Creek to the community of Beaver and 11 hitched 11 an aircraft charter back to Fort Yukon. Fort Yukon also serves as a supply center for households living full- time near distant traplines throughout the region, including those on the Coleen, Sheenjek, Porcupine, !,:handalar, and Black rivers and on Birch Creek. Because this research was community-based data from these remote households were not included on the maps. The Porcupine River is utilized by Fort Yukon residents for moose, bear, waterfowl, and caribou hunting. It is also used for fishing, gathering house- logs and firewood, and berry picking. The Porcupine also serves as a transpor- tation route for travel to Chalkyitsik, Old Crow, and to upland resource use areas. Clear water, expansive gravel bars, and a relatively good channel, make it a desirable setting for outdoor activities in summer including as picking berries or teaching a youngster how to operate a boat. Land use maps compiled from Fort Yukon households are of particular in- terest because they reflect the diversity and mobility of the community•s residents. Many people in Fort Yukon today have kinship ties to outlying communities and occasionally utilize these areas for hunting and fishing. For example, members of one Fort Yukon household who grew up in Birch Creek often return to this area for fall moose hunting and for trapping. Another extended family which grew up in a winter camp 100 miles from Fort Yukon travel long distances with a riverboat or by chartered aircraft to trap, hunt, and fish in the area used by their family for several generations. Thus, improved technology enables many families to continue use of an area while at the same time retaining a home base in the larger community. New equipment is purchased and maintained with cash received from wage employment and trapping. Fort Yukon•s location near the confluence of the Yukon and Porcupine rivers, and the availability of 165 CHAPTER 8 VENETIE LAND AND RESOURCE USE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The village of Venetie (Viinihtaii) is situated at 67° 01'N latitude, 146° 25'\v longitude on the nort.h side of the Chandalar River. Venetie is approxi- mately 45 air miles northwest of Fort Yukon and about the same distance by river from the mouth of the Chandalar River. Its name means "trail comes down between two hills," describing its location at the intersection of a game trail with the Chandalar River (Caulfield and Peter [in press]). Venetie's location on the Yukon Flats near the foothi 11 s of the Brooks Range pro vi des access to resources found in the extensive lake, river, and slough systems of the Flats themselves, and resources of the upland region such as caribou. Not surprising- ly, Venetie residents take advantage of this diversity, utilizing land south toward the Yukon River and north into the Brooks Range. Upriver from the community, the East and Middle forks of the Chandalar River extend north into the treeless alpine tundra regions of the Brooks Range. To the east the Christi an River flows circuitously from the uplands between the Sheenjek and Chandalar rivers to its confluence with the Yukon below Fort Yukon. The vast Yukon Flats extend to the west of the community, toward a cluster of small 1 akes known as van 1 ~i j and to the Hadweenzi c and Hodzana rivers. The Chandalar River flows southeasterly past Venetie toward its con- fluence with the Yukon River. Like residents in other communities of the region, the people of Venetie utilize the Yukon both as a transportation route and as a source of fish, especially salmon. Large lakes --including Venetie, Ackerman, and Vunittsieh --play an important role in resource harvests. Although declining water levels have apparently thwarted the historic harvest of whitefish from Venetie Lake, it is utilized today for hunting, particularly for waterfowl. Ackerman Lake is a source of lake trout, whitefish, and pike 169 Chandalar River natives number about SO in all: A small settlement, of which the nucleus is a couple-of cabins, is found in the flats about 7 miles above the mouth of the river. Most of the natives, however, live beyond the flats, in the mountainous part of the country. Their principal village is on East Fork, remote from the in- fluence of the Yukon travel and traffic. (Schrader 1900: 457) These settlements likely were utilized on a seasonal basis, consistent with a pattern exhibited by other bands in the region. For example, Schrader (1900:457) noted that these people spent: a few months during the coldest part of the winter ••• in log cabins or winter tents, and the remainder of the year in roaming about, wherever game or fish may furnish food. He also noted the use of travel routes along Lake and Grave creeks and along the Swift and Middle forks as having been 11 used only by the natives in their hunting and fishing trips 11 (Schrader 1900:454}. The Swift River trail was reportedly used by 11 Chandal ar River natives 11 to travel to Fort Hamlin on the Yukon River near present-day. Stevens Village to trade (Schrader 1900:454). The assistance provided Schrader by local residents in making the portage from the Chandal ar to the Koyukuk River suggests that they were familiar with the area (Schrader 1900:449}. Archdeacon Hudson Stuck, traveling by dog team from Fort Yukon in 1905, visited Venetie and found a 11 settlement of half a dozen cabins and twenty-five or thirty souls .. (Stuck 1914a:27). He also reported the outbreak of a diptheria epidemic in the community. The gold rush to the Chandalar country in 1906-07 expanded contact between Venetie residents and the outside world. Caro, a mining camp upriver from Venetie, quickly exploded into a town of nearly 40 cabins, a recording office, a post office, roadhouses, a store, and a saloon (Andrews 1977:279}. Another store, located near the head of navigation for small supply boats on the Chandalar River, was built near the mouth of the East Fork. Native people from the area, including Robert John and his family, visited and traded at these settlements (Schneider 1976:369). However, by 1910 171 the Chandalar gold rush.'was largely 11 played out 11 and Caro was almost completely abandoned (Schneider 1976:369). A later visit by Stuck to Robert John's camp at Tsuk'99 in 1917 provides a portrait of the relative ~bundance of specific resource sites: In a short time [we] were in Robert John's comfortable two- roomed cabin ••.. A couple more families were housed within a stone's throw, so that the place was quite a settlement. There was a good fishing stream nearby, firewood was handy, potato and turnip patches had been cultivated, and it was in a good region for moose and not far from the threshold of the caribou country .••• (Stuck 1920:12) In February of 1928 wildlife agent Sam 0. White visited Venetie by dog team, reporting that he 11 gave [a] talk to natives on laws as they want to know ••.• Say first game warden ever [to] visit them. Population 50 11 (White n.d.:8 February 1928). Geologist J.B. Mertie (1929:96) also reported visiting the community, noting that the Chandalar River was navigable in motor boats as far as the village. During his visit to Venetie in 1933, anthropologist Robert McKennan found that the terri tory uti 1 i zed included the fishing sites referenced above plus hunting and trapping areas in the northern portion of the Yukon Flats and in the southern edges of the Brooks Range (McKennan 1965: 19-20). At that time, Venetie had a population of 63 people. DtJring the late 1930s and early 1940s efforts of local residents led to the creation in of the 1.48-million-acre Chandalar Native Reserve (Lonner and Beard 1982:101). At abollt the same time a school was opened in Venetie, and families which previously had lived in outlying camps moved to the village so that their children could attend school. Eventually an airstrip, post office, and a store were built, and the population continued to grow. Shimkin's map of the Fort Yukon trapping ~rea (Map 5) shows the extent of trapping activity near Venetie in 1948-49 (Shimkin 1955:230). Included are traplines extending north up the East Fork, west along the main Chandalar river, and south toward the Hadweenzic River. Venetie families continued to live much of the year in the community during the 1950s and 1960s but traveled 172 I I i ·'l i I to seasonal camps for fishing, hunting, or trapping •. A notable exception to this pattern was Johnny Frank who, with his wife Sarah, continued to live on the East Fork at 11 Gold Camp 11 until his death in 1977 (Mischler 1981:89). The advent of the snowmachi ne in the 1960s all owed trappers and hunters to travel great distances in less time, enabling them to continue utilizing areas which had been occupied. seasonally. The corresponding decline in the use of dog teams reduced demand for 1 arge quantities of fish for dog food. The number of dogs in Venetie increased again in the late 1970s, primarily for use in racing. Correspondingly, fishing for dog food has increased, according to informants, although not to previous levels. The airplane was also adopted as an occasional means of transport to areas previously occupied seasonally. Ackerman Lake, for example, was tradi- tionally used as a seasonal hunting camp for moose, caribou, and sheep by Venetie residents. Today, a few residents travel there by aircraft in summer, but more commonly use snowmachines in winter. Similarly, Venetie residents sometimes fly on scheduled aircraft to Arctic Vi 11 age to hunt caribou with relatives. In the early 1980s a Venetie resident obtained a pilot•s license and began flying from the community. THE CONTEMPORARY COMMUNITY Venetie had a population of 132 people in 1980 (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1980). The community has over 48 homes, many of which are new 30-by-40 foot log structures built under a Bureau of Indian Affairs housing program. All houses are heated with wood and have electricity. The new log structures also have running water and indoor plumbing with individual septic tanks and drain- fields. The village has an elementary school currently operated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and a high school operated by the Yukon Flats School Dist- rict. In 1981-82 the elementary school had 43 students with 2 teachers; the 173 PLATE 15 Community Store in Venetie. PLATE 16 Aerial View of Venetie. 174 !· I I r I i I I high school had 12 students and two full-time teachers. Other faci 1 i ties in Venetie include two stores, an Episcopal church, the village council office, a generator building, a community hall, and a post office. The village has a 4,000-foot gravel runway capable of handling Hercules C-130 aircraft. Two air services pro vi de scheduled flights to and from Fort Yukon five days a week. Wage employment opportunities in Venetie are limited and often seasonal in nature. Fi refighting and construction jobs continue to be a major source of wage income. Construction of the new log homes employed a number of Venetie residents on a seasonal basis during the summers of 1979 through 1981. Oi 1 exploration employment in the spring and summer of 1981 involved between 8 and 10 people. Full-time wage employment opportunities include two bilingual teaching aides, a school maintenance worker, a health aide, a school cook, a postmaster, and a store manager. Part-time employment included seasonal con- struction worker, council office manager, National Guard, and Youth Conservation Corps worker. Handicrafts and beadwork provide important sources of income for some families. Alaska state welfare payments, unemployment compensation, and social security benefits paid to Venetie residents totalled $40,384 in 1979 (Louis Berger and Associates 1982:2-37,38,39). In March 1981 gasoline in Venetie cost $3.20 per gallon. Electricity was billed at a flat rate of $30 per month for each home. Firewood cost $90 per cord de 1 i vered to one • s home. In 1981 an Oklahoma-based oil company undertook petroleum exploration activities on lands owned by the Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government. Seismic exploration began in the spring of 1~81 and continued through the summer. Two helicopters and a camp of over 40 persons were based in Venetie during that period. The tribal government reportedly placed constraints on the nature of the exploration activities, including requirements that heli- copters rather than tracked vehicles be used and that seismic 1 i nes avoid 176 l critical habitat for wildlife and fish (P. Williams, personal communication, March 1981). The results of exploration activities had not been made public as of winter 1982. ANNUAL CYCLE The annual cycle of resource harvest activities for Venetie from 1970 to 1982 is summarized below (Figure 6). Annual cycle data were compiled from interviews with resource experts and from observations by the researcher. Only major activities are included, however, and variation can occur in the annual cycle from year to year. Spring. The hunting of waterfowl usually begins in early May as open water appears on streams and on the margins of lakes. Venetie residents in spring muskrat camps harvest both muskrat and waterfowl until early June. Waterfowl hunters remaining in Venetie utilize Venetie Lake and sites along the Chandalar River for harvest activities. Once ice has left rivers and small streams, gillnets are placed in the water to harvest whitefish, pike, and suckers. Ground squirrels are trapped or hunted in upland areas near the community. Black bear are also taken occasion- ally when encountered along rivers or near the community. Some Venetie families prepare to make the journey down to the mouth of the Chandalar River by boat to fishcamps along the Yukon River, where salmon will be harvested. Summer. Some Venetie families move to the Yukon River to fish for king and chum salmon by mid-June. Before the arrival of king salmon in early July, fishcamp OFCupants are busy preparing boats, outboard motors, nets, and camps for fishing~ Those remaining in Venetie continue to fish for whitefish, pike, grayling, suckers, and burbot in the Chandalar River and in adjacent lakes and and creeks throughout the summer. Fishing on the Yukon River for king salmon occurs mostly in July, and chum salmon harvests usually occur during August and early September. Chum salmon are also caught with nets on the Chandalar River 177 near Venetie, beginning in mid-August. Chums are sp]it, dried, and used for dog food. Other summer activities include growing gardens, gathering berries and rosehips, fishing for grayling, and hauling in logs for use in construction of new homes and community buildings. Seasonal wage employment in firefighting, oil and gas exploration ac~ivities, or construction is also undertaken. In late summer, usually August, caribou may be enountered along the Chandal ar River's East Fork. Hunters occasionally harvest caribou along the river while traveling in boats. Fall. Moose hunting and fishing for salmon and whitefish are major fall activities. Hunters often travel along the Chandalar River using riverboats in search of moose, camping at specific places known for concentrations of game. ~~oose meat is either eaten fresh or dried or frozen for use during winter. Caribou may occasionally be harvested in fall as well. Chum salmon fishing continues on the Chandal ar River near Venetie unti 1 freezeup in early October. Salmon are dried or frozen for use principally as dog food. Gillnets are also placed at the mouths of particular small streams to obtain whitefish in the fall. Hunting near the community in fall often yields hares, ground squirrels, grouse, and black bears. Cranberries are gathered for use in winter, and fireweed is collected for home heating. Winter. Trapping activities begin in earnest in November. Prior to that, trappers are busy preparing equipment and cabins for use during the winter season. The primary species sought by Venetie trappers are marten, mink, beaver, lynx, fox, wolf, and muskrat. Snare lines are also set around the outskirts of Venetie to obtain hares throughout the long winter. Grayling are caught through the ice using hook-and-line in early winter. In November and early December moose may occasionally be harvested by hunters on snowmachines. In some years caribou are available to Venetie hunters 179 Map 1 7 A: VENETIE LAND USE Moose Sheep 11//111 Wildfowl Fuel/Structural materials 20 Miles ==~==~~~==~~ 5 10 0 Base map adapted from: Alaska 1 :1,000,000 Base Map Series @ Copyright, Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center, University of Alaska. 1982. Map 1 7C: VENETIE LAND USE Bear Caribou Furbearer hunting 20 Miles ~~==~~====~~ 5 0 10 Base map adapted from: Alaska 1,1,000,000 Base Map Series @ Copyright, Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center, University of Alaska. 1982. a summary of reported community-based land use during the lifetimes residents. Because the data are compiled from a sample of households for a ...,__ __ L _,./'---llnO!tl!d period of time, and because subsistence land use is dynan:tic, this map may only depict minimal limits of actual land use by community residents over time. See ' '-f-"7d..---t-:::::"==ro;,:;l;;o~gy" section for further explication. Base map adapted from: Alaska 1:1,000,000 Base r Series (§) Copyright, Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center, University of Alaska, 1982. CHAPTER 9 REGIONAL LAND USE SUMMARY A regional summary of 1 and use areas reportedly uti 1 i zed by residents of the five Upper Yukon-Porcupine commmunities is depicted on Map 19. Review of this summary map coupled with analysis of historic data presented above, provides a portrait of land use over time in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region. Limita- tions presented in Chapter 1 regarding the methodology of data call ecti on require that caution be exercised in the use of this map, since it likely underrepresents areas actually used in the region. Several observations about the nature and extent of land use in the region can be drawn from the summary map. First, it is evident that residents of the five study communities have made, and continue to make, extensive use of the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region for the harvest of wild resources. Wild resources in the region are known to be widely dispersed or only seasonally abundant. Land use patterns reflect this fact and, consequently, extensive areas are utilized to obtain necessary resources. Certain resources, especially fish and caribou, require more intensive site-specific land use within the larger area of use. Data pertaining to the distributions of Native-named places known to community residents also mirror reported areas of use quite closely, providing evidence that traditional knowledge of these areas persists. A second observation is that areas mapped by residents of the study communi- ties largely fall within those areas utilized by 19th century Gwich 1 in bands at the time of their first contact with Euroameri cans (Map 2). These bands were traditionally centered in the drainages of major rivers (Slobodin 1981: 514-515). Contemporary land use data suggest that this pattern has continued to the present day. For example, land use by Arctic Village and Venetie resi- dents incorporates much of the Chandalar River drainage wit~ the exception of the North and West forks. Use by residents of the communities of Chalkyitsik 187 and Birch Creek is generally centered in the Black River·and Birch Creek drain- ages respectively. Documentation of Native-named places for each community provides evidence of this fidelity with respect to land use areas (Caulfield and Peter [in press]). Thus, while residence patterns in these areas may have changed over time, from seasonally-mobile use to community-based sedenti sm, the general areas utilized appear consistent with those used in the past. A third observation derived from the data is that relatively little overlap occurs in the areas used, with the possible exception of Fort Yukon. For exam- ple, Arctic Village residents report the use of the East Fork of the Chandalar River extending downriver as far as Big Rock Mountain and Brown Grass Lake. South of this general area, Venetie residents engage in hunting, fishing, trapping, and gathering activities. Similarly, the Black River above the vicinity of 11 Englishshoe Bar 11 is generally used by Chalkyitsik residents. Downriver from that vicinity, Fort Yukon residents are the primary users. Local residents articulate their awareness of these generalized use areas. Chalkyitsik •s area, for example, is loosely referred to as 11 the Black River country ... Similarly, Arctic Village's area of use is often referred to as 11 the Chandal ar country. 11 One Fort Yukon resident whose outboard motor broke down on the Yukon River while moose hunting in the fall had to resort to floating downriver to the village of Beaver, which is located outside of Fort Yukon's area of use. He reported that those who met him on the bank in Beaver gave him a cool reception unti 1 he made it clear that he was not hunting in their use area but that his boat had simply broken down. At 1 east two variations in this general pattern of use may exist. The first involves areas in the region which have abundant seasonal concentrations of migratory resources, especially salmon and caribou. Some residents from the communities of Arctic Village, Birch Creek, Chalkyitsik, and Venetie currently travel to seasonal fish camps along the Yukon River to harvest king and chum salmon. Arctic Village and Birch Creek residents only have access to 189 I ' who was born in Birch Creek village and who trapped in earlier years near that community. The sons of this man have continued to utilize both traplines and muskrat hunting areas previously used by their father, but from their residence in Fort Yukon. While the younger household members must travel greater distances to their traplines and camps, they can do so in part because of the availability of more sophisticated technol~gy in the form of snowmachines and, occasionally, by means of an air taxi charter. Seasonal involvement in wage employment available in Fort Yukon by members of this household makes possible the use of this technology, and the continued use of traditional areas. The snowmachine and other forms of modern technology may be a key factor in the persistence of tradi ti anal use areas, therefore, despite the concentration of population in settlements like Fort Yukon. Similarly, the use of the upper Black River by several Fort Yukon residents reflects the activities of one extended family which previously had lived there throughout the year. In this case, some family members are involved in wage employment at Fort Yukon whi 1 e others from the immediate and extended family travel up the Porcupine and Black rivers each fall to spend the winter trapping, hunting, and fishing. Involvement of certain family members in wage employment provides an economic buffer for occasional times when trapping does not provide adequate cash income for the family. A second possible factor affecting Fort Yukon use areas may be that expanded hunting, fishing and trapping pressure, or a declining local resource base, is forcing Fort Yukon residents to travel further for certain wild resources. In particular, moose are not abundant near Fort Yukon, and some residents have reported that they must travel greater distances in recent years to successfully /." harvest them. Factors which may be involved in expanding pressure on the resource include a growth in local population, changing harvest technology, or 191 CHAPTER 10 SOME FACTORS INFLUENCING LAND AND RESOURCE USE Planning and management of lands and resources in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region requires an appreciation for the breadth and complexity of economic, social, and cultural factors which shape their use. The nature of these factors influences how people in the region interact with their environment. Most of those living in the study communities are Gwich'in Athabaskans, whose culture has been shaped by intimate interaction with the 1 and and its resources for generations. Other residents, generally of Euroamerican origin, have moved to the region and have become socialized into the traditional round of trapping, hunting, or fishing activities. For many of these residents as well, a strong relationship with the land and wild resources has developed through years spent in local communities, on remote traplines, or in fishcamps. Recent statutory actions generated from outside the region --including the creation of new federal conservation areas under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (AN1LCA) and new land ownership patterns created through the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) --are changing the way land is perceived both within and outside the region. Until very recently, use of the land was limited only by indigenous laws and practices. New laws have now brought concepts of private ownership, trespass, use permits, and licenses which reflect a different social, political and jural land systems. Traditional perceptions and relationships to land persist side by side with these introduced concepts. For example, the use of traplines, muskrat hunting areas, and fi shcamps continue to be controlled through custom and traditions, whi 1 e the harvest and use of wild resources are often influenced by elements of customary law. The purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of several of these factors and to briefly present perceptions and concerns of 1 ocal resi- dents regarding critical land and resource issues. 193 their availability to Fort Yukon or Chalkyitsik hunters. Ice formation on the river in the fall sometimes forces hunters in boats to return home empty-handed prior to the caribou crossing. Changes in habitat due to natural succession, fire, the effects of other species, and other factors can shape land use patterns. The increase of moose near Arctic Village noted above may be due to the increased availability of browse along river valleys in the Brooks Range. Some residents in the region believe that the Porcupine Caribou Herd may not be migrating through the Yukon Flats to the extent they have in the past, in part due to increasingly dense vegetation. For example, Venetie residents believe that the area south and west of their community has become 11 too brushy .. for large numbers of caribou. Many hunters report that declining water levels in the multitude of lakes and ponds in the Yukon Flats are responsible for reduced muskrat populations. Near Venetie and Arctic Village residents report that productive whitefish streams have become increasingly choked with vegetation which restrict fishs migrations. In addition, fire can create new habitat beneficial to certain food resources such as moose, but in the short term may negatively affect trapping areas and destroy camps, caches, and cabins. Manipulation of the local environment to enhance resource availability is not unknown. In the past, Chalkyitsik residents have removed new beaver dams blocking migrations of whitefish in nearby streams. Birch Creek and Arctic Village residents have placed mud on top of lake ice during break-up to enhance melting and attract waterfowl. ECONOMIC FACTORS Economic factors shaping 1 and and resource use often receive the most attention because they generally are the most easily understood, especially from the viewpoint of an .. outsider .. to the region. Today food from the land figures significantly in the diet of most households in the region. Recent 195 ;; l ' constraints, limited involvement in to the wage econom~, and minimal alternative resources requires that access be maintained even to areas and resources not utilized for some time. The land and its resources provide security, much like 11 money in the bank .. , when other alternatives are not available. It is in this sense, for example, that Arctic Village residents speak of the importance of sheep to their livelihood~ While perhaps less than 10 sheep are currently taken in a year, Dall sheep are considered a vital component of an array of resources which may at any time become unobtainable. The use of traplines is responsive to several economic and ecological factors. When fur prices are high, furbearer populations are abundant, or other economic opportunities are not available, trapping activity increases. For example, on the Black River above Chalkyitsik no trappers spent the entire season at outlying camps when Dr. Richard Nelson lived in that community in 1969 and 1970 (R. Nelson, personal communication, May 1982). However, in 1981-82 at 1 east 12 persons in 6 households wintered in the area. Many of these trappers used traplines which, although left dormant for a period of time, had been used by their families for several generations. Rising fur prices and the 1 ack of alternative employment opportunities were reportedly the principal reasons for the expanded effort. For example, a lynx pelt brought only $20 to $30 in 1971, while in 1982 a comparable pelt was sold for $400 or more. The majority of these trappers uti 1 i zed dog teams as their primary mode of transportation on the trapline in 1981-82. The relative security found in some communities today is unprecedented. Many older people, who have seen freedom from hunger emerge within their life- times, remain convinced that this period will not last. They are convinced that things will change once again, either in their lifetime or in that of their children. In response to this concern, older women in Arctic Village continue to stockpile the hooves and bones of caribou, which can be boiled to make soup in times of hardship. Elders in the study communities express the 197 \ resource use patterns. Men more often engage in hunting large game, trapping, and checking nets. Women more often are involved in the processing of wild foods, hunting or snaring small game, preparing clothing, gathering berries or other vegetation, and handling routine child-rearing functions. Younger people often haul water, gather firewood, and hunt for older persons. Social interactions with the land can be expressed at the personal, extended family, or community level. At the personal level a child growing up in Gwich'in culture quickly develops a relationship to 11 place 11 --a community, a particular fishcamp, or a certain bank of willows where one first snares a 11 rabbit 11 • These settings often become intimately familiar, just as a child growing up in an urban area may come to know in some detail the local neighborhood. Often a parent or a relative plays a significant role in providing the child with the knowledge and tools necessary for living in that environment. For example, the son of an Arctic Village man had already been provided with a canoe, two rifles, a shotgun, and an abundance of ammunition by the time that he was only two years old. In 1981 the parents of a young man in Venetie, who had just obtained his first moose, sponsored a community potlatch to help ensure future success in hunting. Interaction with the land can provide an individual and community sense of psychological well-being. Even after extended time away from the region, while serving in the military, working in Fairbanks, or going away to school, familiar areas such as fishcamps or traplines can be essential touchstones in the life of an individual. In times of stress or anxiety, returning to these familiar places can offer respite from the pressures of a demanding world. Within the extended family and the community as a whole, the land serves as a focus for social activity --be it at fishcamp on the Yukon River, at a sheep hunting camp near the headwaters of the East Fork of the Chandalar River, or trapping with a partner in a cabin at the upper reaches of the Black River. By traveling with other community members a person expands his or her environmental 199 ' I \ j Traditions of the Gwich 1 in people provide insight into this link between culture and land use. Recent publications such as the life story of the late Belle Herbert entitled Shaandaa: In My Lifetime (Herbert 1982), or Neets 1 - 9ii Gwiindaii: Living in the Chandalar Country by Katherine Peter (Peter 1982) pro vi de evidence of these traditions. Maps of Gwi ch 1 in place names pro vi de documentation of the extent .of environmental knowledge and traditional 1 and use, and names which accompany physical features of the landscape often relate to cultural events in the history of local residents. Historical and cultural sites provide further evidence of the depth of cultural interaction with the land. Campsites, cabins, caches, or harvest sites may appear abandoned but often are components of contemporary use patterns. The isolated gravesite found by Murie may have been the only physical evidence of the lives of generations of people who hunted, fished, raised families, and died in that area. Many sites documented by Andrews (1977) showed evidence of continuity through prehistoric, historic, and contemporary use. The hamel and of the Gwi ch 1 in has been a setting for supernatural events which are known to many today but, because of a strong sense of cultural privacy, are rarely discussed with 11 0utsiders... Campsites of the legendary Vasagihdzak, for example, the only survivor of an ancient flood who traveled down the Porcupine and Yukon rivers, are known along those rivers today (Andrews 1977: 295). Deacon Rock, a pillar jutting up in the middle of the Porcupine River, was the site of a skirmish between the Gwich 1 in and an ancient enemy. According to elders in Chalkyitsik, a shaman among the Gwich 1 in swept his people into the air and set them down on the rock, out of reach of the arrows of their enemy. Additionally, Ohtig and Tiikdhul lakes near Chalkyitsik are believed by the Gwich 1 in to have been formed by the footprints of a legendary giant. The reluctance of the Gwi ch' in to openly express these beliefs to strangers stems in part from criticism and ridicule leveled at them by early explorers and missionaries. 201 SHARING AND EXCHANGE OF RESOURCES The sharing and exchange of locally derived resources has been documented at the community, regional, and interregional levels since the first Euro- americans explored the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region. In 1864, Archdeacon Robert tkDonald noted that caribou obtained from the 11 Chandalar people .. was the only resource available .during a food shortage at Fort Yukon (McDonald n.d.:1 April 1864). He noted that Fort Yukon inhabitants obtained moose meat from outlying camps in the Yukon Flats and received fish from Birch Creek residents. McDonald also described trading journeys of Native residents beyond the region, to both the Arctic coast and down the Yukon River to its confluence with the Tanana River. Sharing and exchange of 1 oca lly-deri ved products continues in the region today. Certain communities, especially Arctic Village and Fort Yukon, serve as regional providers of localized resources. When caribou are available near Arctic Village, meat is shared not only with relatives in Venetie where kinship ties appear especially strong, but also with all other communities in the region. Small amounts of caribou meat may also be sent to the elderly confined in the hospital in Fairbanks or to university students living away from home. Residents of other communities with relatives in Arctic Village occasionally travel to that community and hunt caribou when they are available. A resident of another community may pay for the gas, oil, and ammunition used by an Arctic Village relative to hunt caribou and then pay the costs of shipping the meat. Fort Yukon residents commonly share salmon, particularly king salmon, with residents of Arctic Village and, to a lesser extent, of other communities. Fort Yukon•s location on the Yukon River makes it relatively easy for residents to obtain enough salmon to share with relatives in other communities. Moose meat is also occasionally shared between relatives in each of the communities in the region, especially when local moose populations are in short supply. Lumber made from birch obtained near Venetie or Fort Yukon is sometimes shipped 203 r I ! law to contemporary issues reportedly required seismic crews to utilize heli- copters rather than tracked vehicles. In summary, customary law continues to influence local use of land and resources in the region. Self-limiting principles appear to be guidelines for appropriate behavior, enforced through social pressure by community and tribal councils, and by local resict.ents themselves. Occasionally, violations are also reported to state or federal wildlife enforcement personnel. Social pressures against the improper use or care of meat have, in the past, been a contributing factor in cases in which individuals have actually had to move away from a community. Violations of customary law do occur, according to local residents. Soon after the Arctic Village caribou rules were instituted, a Venetie resident visiting relatives in Arctic Village took more than his two allotted caribou. Arctic Vi 11 age council members reportedly contacted him and asked to count the number of caribou which had been taken. The hunter was then informed of the limit but allowed to keep the meat. However, members of the village council drove snowmachines to the kill sites to ensure that no meat was left behind and that the area had been covered over. They were also present when the meat was loaded into an airplane to see that it was properly packaged. In the Canadian North, similar traditional management mechanisms and the 1 and tenure system upon v1hi ch they depend were found to be fragi 1 e (Berkes 1981:172). Disruption in that system occurred when: 1) sociopolitical control was lost over resources leading to open-access common property conditions (such as through the introduction of roads); 2) rapid technological change took place; 3) commercialization of a resource occurred; and 4) when there was pressure from rapid human population growth. However, historic and contem- porary evidence from Canada suggests that such perturbations are not necessar- ily permanent (Berkes 1981:172). 209 other people in the lower 48 ... The word 11 SUbsistence 11 doesn't mean anything to the legislative people down there. We depend on the caribou, and they think it • s a joke . ., Concern About Habitat Protection. While the region as a whole has experi- enced relatively few direct impacts from large-scale industrial development, community leaders have begun to express concern about certain potential projects which could affect local resources. The protection of the calving ground of the Porcupine Caribou Herd has been identified by regional leaders as a matter of utmost concern. According to these leaders, congressionally-mandated oil exploration on the calving grounds in Alaska have added immediacy to the need for enhanced habitat protection. The Reverend Trimble Gil bert, speaking for Arctic Village, noted: Caribou is the most important thing to Arctic Village. If we don't have any caribou, I don't know how we're going to live. In the calving ground, we don't want any development ••• ! want to see the Porcupine caribou protected for future generations. (Tanana Chiefs Con- ference 1980:2-3) In order to advocate for conservation of the herd and to ensure user participa- tion in its management, Athabaskan and Inupiat residents of Alaska and Canada created in 1982 their own .,International Porcupine Caribou Commission., com- prised of users of the herd. A primary purpose of the commission, according to local leaders, is to advocate for an international agreement between the Unit- ed States and Canada for the conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd. Recent studies have only begun to assess the environmental and sociocul- tural impacts of Arctic Slope oil and gas exploration on the Porcupine Herd and those who utilize it. A report by the Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (1982) identifies potential effects of Arctic Slope exploration activities upon cultural values, social and political organization, and the economy, facilities, and services of Arctic Village and Kaktovik. Oil and gas 212 exploration on private lands in the region could have environmental, economic, and sociocultural effects upon local communities and resources as well. Birch Creek village residents and the Yukon Flats Fish and Game Advisory Committee, furthermore, have repeatedly expressed concern about the decline of water quality in Birch Creek due to mining activities upstream. Local resi- dents believe that increased turbidity in the creek poses a threat to fish and wildlife resources, continued subsistence uses, and the community water supply. Concern About Resource Competition. The actions of non-local hunters and recreationists are viewed with concern by some local residents. For example, in August 1982 expanded hunting and guiding activity near Arctic Village reported- ly caused residents there to request that air taxi operators not use the com- munity airstrip for transporting non-local hunters and recreationists. Additionally, an increase in moose hunting on Birch Creek near the Steese Highway bridge was cited by Birch Creek residents as a major reason for a decline in local moose populations. One Birch Creek resident reported encoun- tering seven riverboats carrying non-1 oca 1 hunters between the bridge and the mouth of Preacher Creek during moose season in 1981. The Alaska Board of Game took action in 1983 to institute a limited registration permit hunt for moose in the area near Birch Creek, Beaver, and Stevens Village in Game Management Unit 250. The action also included a restriction on the use of aircraft in hunting moose. General objections also seem to be raised about "trophy" hunting and the practices of certain guides and non-local hunters. Some local residents believe that non-local hunters are reducing game populations and that noise from increased aircraft and boat activity drives game away from hunting areas. Recreational users are sometimes accused of breaking into trapping cabins and removing the contents, stealing fish from nets and wheels, or otherwise disrupting ongoing subsistence activities. Particularly sensitive areas for 213 PLATE 18 Oil Exploration Helicopter in Venetie. PLATE 19 Fort Yukon and Kaktovik Residents Assist with a Caribou Census. 214 potential conflict include the Yukon and Porcupine rivers, Birch and Beaver creeks, and the Chandalar River near Arctic Village and Venetie. Assuming that growth in recreational use continues, resource management policies may need to address ways of minimizing conflicts betwen legitimate recreational uses and local activities. An issue of increasing concern in the region involves the allocation of salmon in the Yukon and Porcupine rivers and their tributaries between commercial and subsistence uses. Conflicts over the allocation of salmon appear to be increasing, and residents of the region have expressed the belief that subsis- tence needs be met before commercial harvest guidelines are changed. Concern About Access to Local Resources. Residents from all the study communities harvest resources on lands within both the Yukon Flats and Arctic National Wildlife Refuges, with the exception of Birch Creek, which uses lands in the Yukon Flats refuge only. The legislative intent of Congress in creating these refuges included as a basic purpose 11 the opportunity for continued subsistence uses by local residents,. subject to provisions for the conservation of fish and wildlife populations and their habitats (U.S. Congress 1980). Still, there remains a concern among many of the region's residents that regulations imposed to manage these refuges could further restrict local uses. As one Arctic Village man noted: People are now to a place where they are afraid to go out and live their native way of life, because of game wardens, because of regulations, they are afraid to go out and live like we're supposed to ••• we wish for the older people, while they're still living to eat in their traditional lifestyle, and if we can fix it up today, so that they can continue to live in the way that they're accustomed to, without being afraid of outside prosecution or outside pressure (cited in Lonner and Beard 1982:158) The land use maps developed for this report document the fact that extensive areas of these wildlife refuges are currently utilized for customary and tradit- ional harvests of local resources. Use patterns have evolved over time in 215 PLATE 20 Log Home Construction Project in Venetie. PLATE 21 Chartered Float Plane Used to Reach Spring Camp on Beaver Creek. 216 response to many factors, including resource availability, economic impera- tives, and social and cultural factors. Patterns of use extend beyond bound- aries of lands recently designated for ownership by village or regional Native corporations, or by tribal governments. Mapped data presented in this report illustrate the minimal extent of these uses, and can be used te assess the potential effects of new state and federal policies and regulations ~pon access to lands and resources currently used. State land disposals in important local use areas such as Old John and Ackerman lakes, on the Middle Fork and the main segment of the Chandalar River, on the Sheenjek and Koness rivers, or in the upper Black River drainage, could significantly affect local harvest activities. THE NEED FOR FURTHER RESEARCH The focus of this report has been 1 imi ted to describing community-based land and resource use over time. Because of limitations in the research design, and because these uses are dynamic, additional research will be needed to provide data necessary for management of resources in the region. Therefore, this research should be considered only a baseline effort. Additional research addressing the role of natural resource use in local economies is necessary. Detailed evaluations of the economic, social, nutri- tional, and cultural significance of natural resouces in each community should be conducted and regularly updated. Further documentation of specific resource use areas and sites should be undertaken, especially in areas where the effects of industrial development and other land use changes can be anticipated. Documentation of variations in future land use should also be carried out. Baseline documentation of 1 and use can be extended to other communities in northeastern Alaska, including Circle, Beaver and Stevens Village in the Yukon Flats. Documentation of both land and resource use by non-community households should also be undertaken. 217 PLATE 22 Child on Snowmachine in Venetie This report has briefly described the nature of resource sharing, barter, and exchange in the region. Further research on this subject should provide a better understanding of the interrelationships which exist within and between communities in the region. Identification of harvest task groups and kinship ties between communities would be important to this effort. Customary law has been determined to play a role in shaping patterns of land and resource use in the region. Additional research regarding the nature and significance of this body of law may provide avenues for locally acceptable resource conservation measures. Such research might encourage local residents and resource managers alike to think about the applicability and utility of cus- tomary law in a contemporary setting. Fostering the application of customary law to contemporary land and resource issues may help bridge barriers hindering progress toward conservation of natural resources in the Upper Yukon-Porcupine region. 218 Arima, E. Y. 1976 An Assessment of the Reliability of Informant Recall. In Inuit Land Use and Occupancy Project. Volume Two. Ottawa: Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. Armstrong, Robert H. 1980 A Guide to the Birds of Alaska. Anchorage: Alaska Northwest Publishing Company. Bane, G. R. 1977 Place Name Research: A Key to Understanding Land Use. Paper presented at the Fourth Annual Alaska Anthropological Association Conference, April 8-9. Fairbanks: University of Alaska. Beaver, C. M. 1955 Fort Yukon Trader: Three Years in an Alaskan Wilderness. New York: Exposition Press. Berkes, F. 1981 The Role of Self-regulation in Living Resources Management in the North. In M.M.R. Freeman, ed., pp. 166-178. Proceedings: First InternatTOnal Symposium on Renewable Resources and the Economy of the North. Ottawa: Association of Canadian Universities. Brice-Bennett, C. ed. 1977 Our Footprints Are Everywhere. Nain, Labrador: Labrador Inuit Association. Brody, H. 1982 Maps and Dreams. New York: Pantheon Books. Burch, E. J. Jr. 1979 Indians and Eskimos in North Alaska, 1816-1977: A Study in Changing Ethnic Relations. Arctic Anthropology 16(2):123-151. Burke, C. H. 1961 Doctor Hap. New York: Coward McCann. Cadzow, D. A. 1925 Habitat of Loucheux Bands. In Indian Notes. New York: Museum of the American Indian. Cairnes, D. D. 1914 The Yukon-Alaska Rivers. Ottawa: 67. Campbell, J. International Boundary Between Porcupine and Yukon Memoir of the Geological Survey of Canada, Number 1962 An Anthropologist Looks at the Arctic.National Wildlife Refuge. ~Proceedings of the Twelfth -Alaskan Science Conference, College. 1962 Cultural Succession at Anaktuvuk Pass, Arctic Alaska. Arctic Institute of North America Technical Paper Number 11. Montreal. 220 I :! \ Fitzgerald, G. 1944 Reconnaissance of the Porcupine Valley, Alaska. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin Number 933-D. Washington, D.C. Freeman, M. M. R. 1976 Inuit Land Use and Occupancy Study. 3 volumes. Ottawa: Depart- ment of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. 1981 Proceedings: First International Symposium on Renewable Resources and the Economy of the North. Ottawa: Association of Canadian Universities and Canada Man and the Biosphere Program. Gagnon, Paul L. 1959 Report on Village of Arctic Village. Juneau: Alaska Rural Develop- ment Board. Ms. 1959 Report on Village of Venetie. Juneau: Alaska Rural Development Board. Ms. Gasbarro, Anthony F. 1977 Opportunities for the Subsistence Use of Forest Resources in Interior Alaska. In The Subsistence Lifestyle in Alaska Now and in the Future. FaTrbanks: Proceedings of the School of Agri cul- tural and Land Resources Management, University of Alaska. Goldsmith, S. and J. P. Rowe 1982 Federal Revenues and Spending in Alaska. Alaska Review of Social and Economic Conditions XIX(2). Graburn, Nelson H. and B. Stephen Strong 1973 Circumpolar Peoples: An Anthropological Perspective. Pacific Palisades, CA.: Goodyear Publishing Company. Gubser, N. J. 1965 The Nunamiut Eskimos, Hunters of Caribou. New Haven: Yale Uni- versity Press. Hadleigh-West, F. 1959 On the Distri~ution and Territories of the Western Kutchin Tribes. In Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska, Vol. F, No. T. 1963 The Netsi Kutchin: An Essay in Human Ecology. Ph.D. dissertation. Anthropology Department. Louisiana State University. 1965 Archaeological Survey and Excavations in the Proposed Rampart Dam Impoundment, 1963-1964. Contract Numbers 14-10-0434-948 and 14-10- 0434-1546 between the University of Alaska and the National Park Service. Manuscript in Rasmussen Librpry, University of Alaska. Hall, Edwin S. Jr. 1969 Speculations on the Late Prehistory of the Kutchin Athapaskans. ~ Ethnohistory 16(4):317-333. 1975 Kutchin Athapaskan-Nunamiut Eskimo Conflict. In Alaska Journal 4:248-252. 222 II ·~ I I ! , I Kelsall, J.P. and J. Bisdee 1980 The Porcupine Caribou Herd and Its Range: An Annotated Cross Referenced Bibliography. Ottawa: Canadian Wildlife Service. Kelso, D.O. 1982 Subsistence Use of Fish and Game Resources in Alaska: Considera- tions in Formulating Effective Management Policies. Prepared for the 47th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Confer- ence, Special Session on Alaska. March 31. Portland, Oregon. Kennicott, Robert . 1869 Biography of Robert Kennicott and Extracts From His Journal. Chicago Academy of Sciences Transactions, Vol. 1. Chicago. Kindle, E. M. 1908 Geologic Reconnaissance of the Porcupine Valley, Alaska. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, Volume 19. Washington, D.C.: Geological Society of America. King, James G., Sam 0. White, David L. Spencer, and Calvin J. Lensink 1970 Alaska•s Yukon Flats--An Arctic Oasis. Juneau: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. Ms. Kirby, w. w. 1865 A Journey to the Youcan, Russian America. In Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution of 1864. Washington. Krauss, Michael E. and Mary Jane McGary 1980 Alaska Native Languages: A Bibliographical Catalogue. Part One: Indian Languages. Alaska Native Language Center Research Papers Number 3. Fairbanks: University of Alaska. Krauss, Michael and Victor K. Golla 1981 Northern Athapaskan Languages. In Handbook of North American In- dians, Volume 6: The Subarctic.--Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution. Krech, Shepherd III 1978 On the Aboriginal Population of the Kutchin. Arctic Anthropology 15(1):89-104. 1980 Northern Athapaskan Ethnology: An Annotated Bibliography of Pub- lished Materials, 1970-1979. In Arctic Anthropology 17(2): 68- 105. Leopold, A. S., and F. Fraser Darling 1953 Wildlife in Alaska. New York: Ronald Press Company. Leopold, A. S. . 1966 Effects of the Rampart Dam on Wildlife Resources. In Rampart Dam and the Economic Development of Alaska, Vol. 2.--Alaska Devel- opment Project Report No. 4. Ann Arbor, MI.: School of Natural Resources, University of Michigan. Linklater, A. n.d. Archibald Linklater Collection. Fairbanks: University of Alaska Archives. 224 Mischler, C. W. 1981 Gwich'in Athapaskan Music and Ethno-history. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Texas, Austin. Mob 1 ey, Charles 1982 Archeological Investigations at the Marten Hill Gravel Source and the Chalkyitsik Slough Gravel Source, Chalkyitsik, Alaska. Report prepared by Alaskarctic for State of Alaska, Department of Trans- portation and Public Facilities. Fairbanks. ~1orlan, R. 1973 The Later Prehistory of the Middle Porcupine Drainage, Northern Yukon Territory. Archaeological Survey of Canada, Number 11. Ottawa: National Museum of Man, National Museums of Canada. 1975 Kutchin Prehistory as Seen From the t~iddle Porcupine Drainage, Northern Yukon Territory. In Proceedings of the Northern Athapaskan Conference, 1971. Vol. 2. -ottawa: Canadian Ethnology Service Paper Number 27. Morrow, James E. 1980 The Freshwater Fishes of Alaska. Anchorage: Alaska Northwest Pub- lishing Company. Murie, Olaus J. 1935 Alaska-Yukon Caribou. North American Fauna 54. Washington, D.C. n.d. Olaus J. Murie Collection. Fairbanks: University of Alaska Archives. Murray, A. H. 1910 Journal of the Yukon 1847-48. Puhlications of the Canadian Ar- chives, Vol. 4:1-125. Nelson, R. K. 1973 Hunters of the Northern Forest. Chicago: Aldine. 1977 Forest Resources in the Culture and Economy of Native Americans. In Symposium on North American Forest Lands at Latitudes North of 00°: Proceedings. Fairbanks: Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Alaska. 1979 Cultural Values of the Land. In Native Livelihood and Dependence: A Study of Land Use Values Through Time. Fairbanks: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Petroleum Reserve 105(c) Land Use Study. 1983 r~ake Prayers to the Raven: A Koyukon view of the Boreal Forest. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Olson, S.T. 1957 Management Studies of Alaska Caribou:-Movements, Distribution, and Numbers. Jobs 2-B and 2-C. In Alaska Wildlife Investigations, Caribou Movement Studies. Juneau: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Osgood, C. 1934 Kutchin Tribal Distribution and Synonymy. American Anthropologist, N.S. 36(2):168-179. 226 Renewable Resources Consulting Services, Ltd. 1976 Recreation, Aesthetics, and Use of the Arctic National Wildlife Range and Adjacent Areas, Northeastern Alaska. Preliminary Report. Ms. Richardson, W. P. 1900 Relief of the Destitute in the Gold Fields, 1897. In Compilation of Narratives of Exploration in Alaska. Washington:--D.C.: Senate Committee on Military Affairs. pp. 504-510. Ritter, J. T. 1976 Kutchin Place Names: Evidence of Aboriginal Land Use. In Dene Rights: Supporting Research and Documents, Volume 3. Y~owknife: Indian Brotherhood of the Northwest Territories. Ross, Johnny n.d. Account of the annual cycle of Black River Gwich 1 in. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center. Ms. Schneider, W. 1976 Beaver, Alaska: The Story of a Multi-Ethnic Community. Ph.D. dissertation. Anthropology Department, Bryn Mawr College. Schrader, F.C. 1900 A Preliminary Report on a Reconnaissance Along the Chandalar and Koyukuk Rivers, Alaska in 1895. In Twenty-first Annual Report of the U.S. Geological Survey. WashTngton. pp. 441-486. Schwatka, F. 1900 Report of a Military Reconnaissance Made in 1883. In Compilation of Narratives of Explorations in Alaska. Washingto~ D.C.: Senate Committee on Military Affairs. pp. 323-362. Scott, F. 1951 Wildlife in the Economy of Alaska Natives. In Transactions of the 16th North American Wildlife Conference.--pp. 508-523. Selkregg, L. 1975 Alaska Regional Profiles: Yukon Region. Anchorage: Arctic Environ- mental Information and Data Center, University of Alaska. Shimkin, D.B. 1951 Fort Yukon, Alaska: An Essay in Human Ecology. Juneau: Alaska Development Board. Ms. 1955 The Economy of a Trapping Center: The Case of Fort Yukon, Alaska. ~Economic Development and Culture Change, 3(3):219-240. Shore, Evelyn Berglund 1954 Born on Snowshoes. Boston: Houghton·Mifflin Company. Skoog, R. o. 1968 Ecology of the Caribou in Alaska. Ph.D. dissertation. Zoology Department. University of California, Berkeley. 228 . I . l