1. Introduction and Terms of Reference I was invited by Chief Allan Adam of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation to work on its behalf as it prepared for the hearings for Shell’s proposed Jackpine Mine Expansion and new Pierre River Mine (letter 18 Nov. 2010). Sean Nixon, with Woodward & Company LLP, then provided me with terms of reference to follow in writing an expert report (e-mail letter 21 Dec. 2010): 1. Provide an ethnographic description of the people who now form Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, including an analysis of how traditional band structures differ from those created by virtue of the Indian Act . 2. Describe how ACFN passed on their culture and cultural practices to future generations (e.g., what were their oral history traditions?). 3. Provide a description of ACFN traditional territory or traditional lands, including: a. whether there was a pre-contact (and/or pre-Treaty) concept of ACFN territory, b. the extent to which ACFN moved around within their territory (including: the amount of space required to carry out their traditional activities; the need to be respectful of others’ rights; and the depletion of resources), c. “axes” of ACFN territory (if this concept is relevant to ACFN), d. whether there was any amalgamation of groups (e.g., was there any overlap between local groups and bands through marriage and family connections?), e. whether there was any effect of the formation of a separate First Nation at Fort MacKay on ACFN membership and on its relation to the “southern territories” (i.e., the southern portions of ACFN traditional territory or traditional lands)? 4. Describe the circumstances around ACFN presence in Wood Buffalo National Park in the 20 th Century, and whether the Park should be considered when defining the scope of ACFN traditional territory/lands (historically and now). If ACFN members were excluded from the Park for some period of time, how has this affected ACFN’s conception of its territory/lands and the exercise of ACFN rights within that area? 5. What was the impact of the W.A.C. Bennett dam on ACFN and on the exercise of ACFN rights? 2 6. Why were Poplar Point and Point Brûlé established where they are? Why are they the size they are? Were there any primary values and resources that led to ACFN choosing or receiving reserves at Poplar Point and Point Brûlé? If so, what were those values and resources? Is there historic evidence regarding the values or resources that were important to the way of life of ACFN members in the area near those reserves? Were these areas historically/culturally important for ACFN in other ways? a. Was access to fishing locations a value that led to the establishment/site selection of any of ACFN’s other reserves? 7. When were traplines established in the “southern territories”? Were there conflicts of issues around the formation of these traplines? How did ACFN manage trapping, subsistence, and other resources in the area at the time of Treaty, prior to establishment of traplines? How did these management systems change or persist after traplnes were established? How did the formation and regulation of registered traplines affect ACFN traditional practices? 8. Describe ACFN population growth and movements from the early 20 th Century to the present. Have the “southern territories” around Poplar Point, Point Brûlé, and areas to the south become more or less important over time? Why? 9. What role did woodland caribou play in the ACFN way of life/economy at the time of Treaty, when Wood Buffalo National Park was established, and after the 1950s (following changes in barren land caribou migration)? 10. What role did bison play in the ACFN way of life/economy at the time of Treaty, when Wood Buffalo National Park was established, and after? 11. What role did moose play in the ACFN way of life/economy at the time of Treaty, when Wood Buffalo National Park was established, and after? 12. What role did fish caught from Lake Athabasca, the Athabasca River, and waters connected to the Athabasca River have on the ACFN way of life and economy at the time of Treaty, and after? 13. What role did migratory birds have in the ACFN way of life/economy at the time of Treaty, and after? 3 Summary Responses 1. Provide an ethnographic description of the people who now form Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, including an analysis of how traditional band structures differ from those created by virtue of the Indian Act . The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation is the contemporary outgrowth of both Chipewyan and Cree people and the former Chipewyan and Cree Bands of the Fort Chipewyan region. 1 It is a legal “Indian Band” that was created under the framework of the Indian Act in 1899, when Chipewyans and Crees at Fort Chipewyan negotiated their entry into Treaty No. 8, or, in the eyes of the treaty commissioners, took separate adhesions to the treaty that was first signed at Lesser Slave Lake. If the population had been smaller, there might have been only one Chipewyan-Cree Band, as there was at Fort McMurray. The size of the Chipewyan and Cree populations were sufficiently large that the commissioners created two separate bands, each with its own chief and two headmen, following a government formula. In the past, such Indian bands were administrative units for the convenience of the Department of Indian Affairs. They had no correspondence to the on-the-ground reality of the local bands in which Aboriginal people lived on the land. Today, thanks to living with these legal band structures for over a century, the Indian Bands - now known as First Nations - have acquired meaning and significance to their members, and as units of governance they enjoy a reality that did not exist at the time of treaty and that continues to strengthen with time. This report focuses on the local band structure that was the everyday social reality in 1When I capitalize “Band,” it is a reference to the legal entity created by the Government of Canada under the framework of the Indian Act . Some Europeans also appear in the ancestry of both First Nations; see below. 4 northeast Alberta for both Chipewyans and Crees, both in the pre-contact past and in the years when they became involved as trappers in the fur trade. Local bands were small, autonomous, co-residential units of production and consumption. They had individual leaders. Neither Chipewyans nor Crees had a single overarching “chief.” Members of the local bands were related to one another by a complex network of kinship ties. Local bands often came together in summer or winter, producing temporary larger groupings, sometimes called a “regional band,” but the regional bands were not bounded formally, nor did they exhibit any special social organization at that time. Movement and membership was fluid between regional bands as well as between local bands. 2. Describe how ACFN passed on their culture and cultural practices to future generations (e.g., what were their oral history traditions?). When Athabasca Chipewyan members lived in local bands on the land, passing on their knowledge and culture was a seamless process. Children learned from watching and listening to their parents, grandparents, and other relatives, and from taking part in all the activities that occurred. While such transmission is no longer possible on a full-time basis, it is still very important to Athabasca Chipewyan members to pass on their knowledge, culture, and values to their children and grandchildren. While there are some initiatives in the schools, that approach is not considered an adequate solution. The most appropriate place for Chipewyan children to learn cultural values today is still “on the land,” also phrased as “in the bush,” just as it was in the past, traveling and spending time with their relatives. Moreover, there are some aspects of culture and values, which Athabasca 5 Chipewyans call “place-based cultural knowledge,” that can only be learned on the land, not in a town or in a classroom (ACFN 2010:27). Nor is any part of the northern landscape suitable; it needs to be those areas that constitute the lands to which people were connected in the past and to which they enjoy on-going connections in the present – their “traditional lands.” 2 Even today, traditional lands are highly important locations for learning spiritual values and having spiritual experiences, and they are the only places where they can learn those aspects of Chipewyan history that are encoded in geography, in the features of the landscape, and that are passed along in the oral traditions shared while people are on the land together. An understanding of their history as Chipewyan people is a critical element in shaping Chipewyan identity. By spending time in the bush, children can thereby learn not only practical skills, but also their Chipewyan identity and a wide range of traditional Chipewyan values that are still considered to be crucial not only for today but also for their future as Chipewyans. 3. Provide a description of ACFN traditional territory or traditional lands, including: a. whether there was a pre-contact (and/or pre-Treaty) concept of ACFN territory, b. the extent to which ACFN moved around within their territory (including: 2These relationships are rarely obvious to outsiders or casual observers, but they are real nevertheless. Many of them are encoded in place names, which are used as part of the process of talking about locations that are meaningful for various reasons. The importance of place names to Athapaskan-speaking peoples has been demonstrated in studies from the Northwest Territories and the Yukon to the Southwest United States.