Bangarang February 2014 Backgrounder1

History of the Gitga’at (And Other First Nations)

Eric Keen

Abstract

Historically, Europeans have dictated the nature of their relationship with the aboriginal peoples of North America. They first needed the First Nations for their own survival; they then needed the First Nations to fight for them; then to trade with them; then to convert and join their civilization; now they hope the First Nations will forgive them. Today First Nations in both Canada and the United States are still fighting for basic rights. The history of First Peoples on the Pacific Coast occurred largely separate from the rest of the continent, but the same themes pervaded there too. The Gitga’at First Nation, with whom and for whom the Bangarang Project is being conducted, is now faced with overcoming the challenges of the past while facing some major obstacles in the future.

Contents

First Nations History Pre-Contact Colonial Era British Era Canadian Era

Coastal First Nations Pre-Contact After-Contact

Gitga’at First Nation History Culture Today Tomorrow The Partnership

1 Bangarang Backgrounders are imperfect but rigorous reviews – written in haste, not peer-reviewed – in an effort to organize and memorize the key information for every aspect of the project. They will be updated regularly as new learnin’ is incorporated. First Nations History

Pre-Contact

Humans were established on the North American coast more than 10,000 years ago2. As the continent was populated, Canada’s First Nations settled into six geographical groups3: 1. Woodland (boreal forest in northeastern Canada) 2. Iroquoian (southernmost area, fertile land) 3. Plains (grasslands of the Prairies) 4. Plateau (from semi-desert in the south to high montane forest to north) 5. Pacific Coast (access to abundant sea life and the huge red-cedar) 6. Mackenzie and Yukon Rivers (hard environment, dark forests, muskeg).

The societies in each area shared some similarities born of the same landscape features and challenges.

Colonial Era

Norse explorers first arrived on the eastern shores in the 11th century4, but colonies were not established until the British and French explorers arrived in the 15th century. The Colonial Era lasted from then until the France’s forfeit of its colonies in 17635.

As settlers attempted to establish in North America, they forged uneasy alliances with First Nations to get assistance in finding food and entering into their traditional fur trade6. French and British colonialists moved inland via the fur trade routes7, building posts and forts as trading hubs as they went8. The French Hudson Bay Company (HBC, or “Company of Adventurers” 9) became increasingly dominant in the fur trade, and increasingly possessive of trapping lands further west10.

Fur trade was so profitable that European and First Nations began to clash, sometimes in all-out warfare. French and British fought among themselves too. These conflicts took tolls on lives and economies both in the colonies and back in Europe. The British came to realize that success in the colonies depended on stable relations with First Nations people11. In strategic response, they formed military alliance with the Iroquois who in turn set out to disrupt the (French) HBC12. The Iroquois raided HBC posts and outputs persistently until 1701, when a treaty known as the Great Peace was signed between France, First Nations and their allies.

Decades of intermarriage between traders with First Nation women created a new and distinct aboriginal group, the Metis, who merged and adopted European and First Nations customs. These people were centered at the junction of the Red and Assiniboine Rivers. 13

Despite tense but predominately stable relations with the First Nations, the British and the French still vied amongst themselves for control of the colonies. In 1760, Britain’s storming of Montreal (France’s last stronghold in the colonies) caused the French to abandon their colonial efforts. In the Treaty of Paris 1763, France ceded its colonies. This ensconced Great Britain as the administer of North American civilization and its fur trade.

2 Raincoast, year unknown. 3 AANDC 2013a. 4 AANDC 2013a. 5 AANDC 2013b. 6 AANDC 2013a. 7 AANDC 2013a. 8 AANDC 2013a. 9 AANDC 2013a. 10 AANDC 2013a. 11 AANDC 2013b. 12 AANDC 2013b. 13 AANDC 2013a.

2

British Era

After French ceded its colonies in 1764, the British thought of themselves as administers of the Canadian colonies until the 1860s14. But relations with the First Nations were still volatile. In the same year as the Treaty of Paris, Britain attempted to diffuse tensions in fur trade lands using the Royal Proclomation of 1763, which established a firm western boundary for the colonies and recognize lands to west of it as Indian Territory15. This proclamation also established an Indian Department in the British Government, a primary point of contact between First Nations and the colonies, and was the first formal public recognition First Nations rights to land and title16.

In the years following 1776, Britain had to abandon its colonies in southeast North America. The war of independence forced 30,000 British and Iroquoian (who fought on the side of the British) refugees to flee into Canadian holdings. New land was needed to accommodate this deplaced and growing population. The influx of also meant that Britain was less dependent on First Nations men for a military. However, given the risk of further conflict with the newly independent United States, alliances with First Nations remained a British priority17. So Britain concluded several land surrender treaties with First Nations that established a new agricultural colony for the dispossessed from the south. These treaties ceded First Nations lands and rights to the Crown in exchange for reserves, annuities and First Nations’ continued right to hunt and fish on unoccupied Crown Lands18.

Less than 50 years after these treaties, the European population grew to outnumber the First Nations population19. The pace of land surrender treaties increased. These FNs were relegated to small plots of land, tracts held by religious missions, or forced to squat on Crown Lands in an increasingly destitute lifestyle. 20

As the military role of First Nations men waned and the colonialist population boomed, British administrators reexamined their relationship with the First Nations. Missionary fervor and social Darwinism were sweeping Europe, an attitude that eventually spilled over into the colonies. It was the British Empire’s perceived duty to civilize (i.e., assimilate) everyone within their realm. This meant, foremost, Christianity and the abandonment of nomadic or agrarian life21.

Assimilation efforts began in the 1820’s and remained a tenet of Indian policy for the next 150 years22. “Model villages” were built in an attempt to “civilize” First Nations People. The first such experiment occurred at Coldwater-Narrows in Upper Canada, but lack of funding, organization and moral sense quickly led to its dismal failure23. Despite such initial setbacks, however, assimilation was sought even more aggressively24. A vast network of 132 residential schools was established by churches throughout Canada (Catholic, United, Anglican and Presbyterian) in partnership with the federal government. More than 150,000 aboriginal children attended these schools between 1857 and 199625. The final residential school, located in Saskatchewan, closed in 199626.

The first assimilation legislation was the Crown Lands Protection Act (1839), which defined the word Indian and proclaimed that the British government was the guardian of all Crown Lands, including those in Indian Reserves27. In 1860, the Management of Indian Lands and Property Act transferred authority for dealing with

14 AANDC 2013b. 15 AANDC 2013a. 16 AANDC 2013a. 17 AANDC 2013a. 18 AANDC 2013a. 19 AANDC 2013a. 20 AANDC 2013a. 21 AANDC 2013a. 22 AANDC 2013a. 23 AANDC 2013a. 24 AANDC. 2011. 25 AANDC 2013a. 26 AANDC 2013a. 27 AANDC 2013a.

3 Indian affairs to the colonies, thus dispensing of the Crown’s responsibility for First Nations welfare and rights28. This was soon followed by the formation of Canada as an independent state.

Canadian Era

When the Dominion of Canada was founded in 1867 (through the British North America Act), the new nation continued a centralized approach to managing Indian affairs29. Insecure in its newfound independence and threatened by its gun-slinging neighbor below the 49th parallel30, Canada was eager to establish secured and settled lands in its western territories. In 1869, after 200 years of control, the HBC sold the Rupert’s Land Charter to Canada (a move that was seen by First Nations and Metis as the unpermitted sale of their own lands)31. Meanwhile, First Nations continent-wide were facing disease, famine and poverty as the fur trade waned and the buffalo populations dwindled32. They were desperate for protection and support from the state. 33

In this insecure period from 1871 to 1921, Canada and central and eastern First Nations concluded a series of 11 treaties, the “Numbered Treaties”. In these treaties, the First Nations traded reserve lands, annuities and hunting rights for Aboriginal title. These treaties also included the provision of schools and teachers to educate (assimilate) First Nation children34. Canada concluded some of these treaties for the purposes of settlement in the south (agriculture and railways) and some for access to natural resources in the North35. Through the Numbered Treaties, Canada secured title to half of Canadian land mass.’ 36

On the whole, First Nations rejected the idea of assimilation into non-aboriginal society37. To advance this national objective, Canada’s federal government passed the Indian Act (1876), the most notorious and most- revised legislation regarding First Nations. It consolidated previous Indian regulations, gave greater authority to the federal department of Indian Affiars, and empowered the federal government to act as “guardian” of all aspects of First Nations life until they could be fully integrated into society38. At first amendments to this act honed its focus on assimilation. This Act set up automatic enfranchisement (granting of citizenship and right to vote), essentially giving First Nations no choice but to become Canadian citizens39. In the 1880s, Canadian government imposed a band council system of governance for First Nations to adopt40.

Despite the injustices of the Indian Act, 6,000 First Nations men fought in the World Wars and Korean War. Their contribution compelled Canada to reexamine their treatment of First Nations41. A parliamentary committee concluded that the Indian Act was mostly terrible and that many treaties have gone unrecognized by the federal government42.

Conditions began to improve slightly for the First Nations in the 1960s when they were granted suffrage43. A government white paper in 1969 proposed a repeal of the Indian Act and a new approach to First Nations relations. In 1973 the Canadian Surpreme Court voted in favor of First Nations on three cases regarding land claims44. This compelled the government to announce a Comprehensive Claims Policy in that same year, which aimed to settle new land agreements through a negotiated process. From 1975 to 2009, there were 22

28 AANDC 2013a. 29 AANDC 2013a. 30 AANDC 2013b. 31 AANDC 2013b. 32 AANDC 2013b. 33 AANDC 2013a. 34 AANDC 2013a. 35 AANDC 2013b. 36 AANDC 2013b. 37 AANDC 2013b. 38 AANDC 2013a. 39 AANDC 2013a. 40 AANDC 2013a. 41 AANDC 2013a. 42 AANDC 2013a. 43 AANDC 2013a. 44 AANDC 2013b.

4 comprehensive claims agreements, commonly known as “modern treaties” 45. First Nations veterans played a major role in these changes. 46

In the late 1970’s, the federal government launched an effort to reform and repatriate the nation’s Constitution. At first their proposed changes excluded any recognition of First Nations rights. Concerted lobbying by First Nations, Inuit and Metis resulted in the inclusion of two clauses that recognize existing Aboriginal and treaty rights in the revised constitution47. However, some key verbiage in these added clauses -- “Existing aboriginal and treaty rights” -- went undefined 48 . Subsequent disagreements between the provinces, Canada and aboriginal groups have resulted in no consensus of what those rights are49.

Bill C-31 (1985) amended the Indian Act by removing discriminatory provision, eliminating the links between marriage and “Status”, and giving individual bands greater control in determining their own membership. This amendment allowed 60,000 First Nations individuals to regain their lost status as “Indians”. The bill also distinguished between band membership and status, such that First Nations were given complete control over their membership lists50.

The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP) was established in 1991 to find solutions to specific issues between First Nations and the Crown51. An associated initiative, the Specific Claims Policy, established an Office of Native Claims to address claims relating to the failure to fulfill terms of previous treaties52. For the first time, First Nations were invited to become directly involved in formulating a policy that affected them; the Assembly of First Nations became directly involved in the formulation of the new Specific Claims Policy. 53 The result of this inclusion was the Specific Clams Tribunal Act of 2008, which created an independent adjudicative tribunal with the authority to make binding decisions on compensation and the validity of claims54.

In 1995 the Inherent Right to Self-Government Policy, which recognized that no single form of government is necessarily appropriate for all First Nations, was announced55. Since its introduction, there have been 17 self- government agreements56. In 1996, National Aboriginal Day (June 21st) was established57. These policies are administered by Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) 58. That same year, the final residential school closed.

In 1998, the federal government acknowledged their role in the abuse of First Nations people in the residential schools program. In 2007, the Canadian government announced a $2 billion compensation package (the “Common Experience Package”) for residential school survivors. This also created the Indian Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission. A formal apology from the Stephen Harper administration was offered in 200859.

45 AANDC 2013a. 46 AANDC 2013a. 47 AANDC 2013a. 48 AANDC 2013b. 49 AANDC 2013b. 50 AANDC 2013a. 51 AANDC 2013a. 52 AANDC 2013a. 53 AANDC 2013b. 54 AANDC 2013a. 55 AANDC 2013b. 56 AANDC 2013b. 57 AANDC 2013a. 58 AANDC 2013a. 59 AANDC 2013a.

5 Coastal First Nations

Pre-Contact

The Pacific coast was one of the six geographical areas in which humans settled in northern North America. Abundant food sources from intertidal and coastal waters allowed Pacific Coast First Nations to establish permanent settlements60, and these bounties became cultural keystones to coastal societies61. Eulachon oil played an important part in people’s diet62. The expansive coastal forests of red cedar allowed First Nations to build massive longhouses (up to 170m in length, 20m wide).63 They were excellent carpenters64 and travelled almost exclusively by dugout red-cedar canoe65. Some of these canoes could carry 40 men and two metric tons of cargo66. They were such important achievements that their construction became highly ritualized in many coast First Nations societies67.

In addition to plants, land mammals, birds and fish, Coastal Tsimshian, Haida and Nuu-chah-nulth all hunted sea lion and sea otter,68 going out in slim dugout canoes with spears. 69 The Nuu-cha-nulth also hunted whale (with a crew of 8 plus a harpooner in a canoe) 70

When weather permitted, coastal FN men went unclothed71. Coast Tsimshian women wore skirts of buckskin but other coastal FN women72 wore skirts of woven cedar bark that had been shredded to produce a soft fiber73. Neither men nor women wore footwear74. Capes of woven bark were worn in the rain, with wide-brimmed hats of women spruce roots. 75 Mountain goat fur was used in garments76, but sea otter fur trimmed the most luxurious of them77. Coastal peoples, like all First Nations, developed their own snowshoe-type system for winter travel by stretching hide across a wood frame78

In central and northern British Columbia, the 21-million acre Great Bear Rainforest79 is home to 17 First Nations peoples, in which 45 dialects are currently spoken (though many are nearing extinction): Da’naxda’dw Gitga’at Gwa’Sala-Nakwaxda’xw Haisla Haida Heiltsuk Gitxaala Gwa wa aineul Kitasoo/Xai’xais Kwiakah Kwicksutaineuk Lax Kw’Alaams Mamalilikula Metlakatla

60 AANDC 2013a. 61 Garibaldi and Turner 2004 62 AANDC 2013a. 63 AANDC 2013a. 64 AANDC 2013a. 65 AANDC 2013a. 66 AANDC 2013a. 67 AANDC 2013a. 68 AANDC 2013a. 69 AANDC 2013a. 70 AANDC 2013a. 71 AANDC 2013a. 72 AANDC 2013a. 73 AANDC 2013a. 74 AANDC 2013a. 75 AANDC 2013a. 76 AANDC 2013a. 77 AANDC 2013a. 78 AANDC 2013a. 79 Raincoast, year unknown.

6 Nuxalk Que’Qwa’Sot-Enox Tsawataineuk Wuikinuxw

After Contact

On the west coast, European contact and relations with First Nations went very differently. Fur traders, not trans-oceanic evangelical explorers, spread from the east and stumbled upon the coastal First Nations80. In 1849, the Hudson Bay Company (HBC) made efforts to found a new colony on Vancouver Island. James Douglas, the first colonial governor, signed 14 treaties with Coastal First Nations in which lump sums of money and goods and a continued right to hunt and fish were given in exchange for lands adjacent to HBC outposts. The colony of British Columbia was then created in 185981.

However, colonial surveyor and later-lieutenant governor Joseph Trutch honored none of Douglas’ treaties. He slowly retracted Douglas’ policies and did not recognize First Nation land rights. This denial continued even after BC joined the confederation of provinces in the new Dominion of Canada82. In most of British Columbia, including the central and north coast, no treaties were signed between European settlers and indigenous peoples. The inland Nisga’a First Nation’s claim in 2000 was the first modern treaty in British Columbia83. Even so, coastal First Nations have fought – and continue to fight -- for those same political and legal rights they were promised 150 years ago84.

Aboriginal people now comprise slightly more than half of the population of the Central Coast, and approximately one-third of the populations of the North Coast and Haida Gwaii. Total population: 18,000 to 20,000. Of these, 7,000-8,000 live in communities accessible only by sea. 85

Coastal First Nations are highly involved in combating the many fossil fuel trafficking projects proposed for the Great Bear Rainforest. See the “Fuel Trafficking” Backgrounder for more information.

80 AANDC 2013a. 81 AANDC 2013a. 82 AANDC 2013b. 83 AANDC 2013a. 84 Raincoast, year unknown. 85 Raincoast, year unknown.

7 Gitga’at First Nation

History

First Nations have utilized the Kitimat Fjord System and surrounds for perhaps 600 years86. The Gitga’at First Nation is a member of the Tsimshian cultural group87. The history of the hereditary chief’s lineage (sm’oygit wahmodmx) recounts a great migration from the Skeena River, several dozen kilometers north of Hartley Bay at the top of Grenville Channel88. This may be where the Gitga’at lived before they found Douglas Channel.

When they first arrived in Douglas Channel, the Gitga’at lived out their winters at their ancestral home Laxgal’tsap (Old Town) in Kitkiata Inlet on the northwest side of the Douglas Channel. Laxgal’tsap (Old Town) is the location of one of the largest collections of petroglyphs in the world. 89 Gitga’at means “people of the cane”, because the two rivers the meet at Old Town were so shallow and full of reeds that cane poles were needed to navigate the waters in Gitga’at canoes (Kyle Clifton, pers. comm.).

An intertidal petroglyph at Old Town

86 Bell, L.M. and R.J. Kallman. 1976. The Kitimat River estuary status of ~"'T ~;r environmental knowledge to 1976. Special Estuary Series No.6: 296 pp. 87 www.gitgaat.net 88 www.gitgaat.net 89 www.gitgaat.net

8

In the summer the Gitga’at used several other village and harvesting sites from Douglas to the Caamano Sound, mainly on the shores of the Gil Basin 90 . Another ancestral group, the Gitn’oogad’x, occupied sites on Aristazabal, Campania, Princess Royal and other nearby islands. 91

First contact with Europeans occurred with fur traders in the 1780’s. The first Europeans encountered by the Gitga’at people were Captain James Conett and Charles Duncan of the Prince of Wales and the Princess Royal, respectively, who arrived in Gitga’at Territory in 178792. Vancouver first surveyed the area in 1792-493. The Hudson Bay Company arrived in the 1830’s, establishing two forts near Gitga’at Territory. The Gitga’at traded with HBC, traveling by canoe to their forts94.

Gitga’at-European relations were largely economic until the arrival of missionaries William Duncan and Thomas Crosby. Duncan established a new Christian community in nearby Metlakatla in the 1870s and most but not all Gitga’at followed him there but did not abandon their use of their Territory for subsistence. 95 The Gitga’at originally spoke Sguumx (Southern Tsimshian), but adopted Sm’algyax (Coast Tsimshian, more widely used) during Duncan’s Metlakatla mission96. Sm’algyax was originally an oral language but missionaries wrote down an orthography of it when they translated the Bible for the coastal Tsimshian. 97

The Metlakatla mission lasted a decade or so, before internal conflict compelled Duncan and some followers to continue north into Alaska. Some of the Gitga’at followed, but 27 returned to their ancestral territory. Rather than returning to Laxgal’tsap, the prodigal Gitga’at established a new community at Txalgiu (“to pass by”, Ernie Hill, pers. comm.), a stopover for Gitga’at canoe traders that British surveyors had recently named Hartley Bay. Txalgiu was closer to the Inside Passage trading route and experienced milder winters98. Hartley Bay is now the only permanent settlement in Gitga’at Territory. However, Old Town, Kiel, and a network of cabins throughout the territory are still used by community members throughout the year.

A visit to the dismantled bridge at Old Town during the February 2014 Gitga’at Research Symposium.

90 www.gitgaat.net 91 www.gitgaat.net 92 People of the Gitga’at First Nation. 2006. 93 Macdonald, R.W., B.D. Bornhold, and I. Webster. 1983. The Kitimat fjord system: An introduction. Can. Tech. Rep. Hydrogr. Ocean Sci. 18, 2-13. 94 www.gitgaat.net 95 www.gitgaat.net 96 www.gitgaat.net 97 www.gitgaat.net 98 www.gitgaat.net

9 The first recorded white settler arrived in the Kitimat Area in the 1890’s99. A logging operation was at work in Kitimat from 1906-1923100 Modern industry began there in 1954, when the Alcan smelter began aluminum production in Kitimat Arm101. This development created a new major shipping route on the BC coast102 that passed right by Hartley Bay and Old Town. Kitimat grew to 13,000 by 1976103. In the mid-1970’s Kitimat was proposed as an oil port for the first time104, to which Alaskan oil would be delivered by tanker. This plan was publicly condemned by the federal government105, but the idea cropped up repeatedly for the following decades.

Society

Tsimshian societies are matrilineal; clans, affiliation, crests, names and resource gathering areas are inherited from the mother’s side of the family106. The basic social unit of organization in Tsimshian culture is the lineage, or extended family, or clan (Pte-ex)107. There are four Tsimshian clans: 108 1. Gispudwada (killer whale) 2. Laxsgiik (eagle) 3. Ganhada (raven) 4. Laxgibuu (wolf)

Within each clan, there are several house groups, or Waaps. Each Waap would live together in a cedar longhouse109. At the time of European contact, the Gitga’at at least 13 Waap (2 Gispudwada, 2 Laxsgiik, 6 Ganhada and 3 Laxgibuu110). There are no longer Laxgibuu Waaps in the Gitga’at Nation111. Each Waap has specific territories for harvesting resources, but share communal gathering places such as salmon rivers near Old Town and the seaweed harvesting camp near Kiel112. Sm’oygit Wahmodmx is the hereditary chief of the Gitga’at, whose house belongs to the Gispidwada (killer whale) clan. 113

Since time immemorial, the Gitga’at have had rich and diverse ties to the land. Salmon114, halibut, cedar and seaweed (Porphyra spp., such as red laver115) were and are mainstays of Gitga’at culture and way of life116. Cedar is rot and insect resistant and easy to carve and shape (using steam). Cedar is used to construct longhouses, canoes, storage containers, tools, totem poles and artwork117. Red laver was (and is) collected primarily in the vicinity of Kiel, Princess Royal Island.118 Coastal First Nations also used bull kelp (Nereocystis luetkeana) stipes for fishing lines and kelp floats as vessels for seal oil and other precious liquids119. Other cultural keystone species for the Gitga’at include cockles (Clinocardium nuttallii) and abalone (Haliotis kamtschatkana)120.

99 Macdonald, R.W., B.D. Bornhold, and I. Webster. 1983. The Kitimat fjord system: An introduction. Can. Tech. Rep. Hydrogr. Ocean Sci. 18, 2-13. 100 Holland, J.D.C., E.R. Christiansen, H. Gja1tema, N.J. Lemmen and G.S. Zealand. 1972. Historical review of logging activities and associated problems in the Kitimat District of th.e Central Coastal Division, Buteda1eArea 6. In Provisional environmental quality objectives for the Central Coastal Division, Northern Operations Branch, Rep. 1972-4: 1-12.x Fisheries and Marine Service, Environment Canada, Vancouver, B.C. 101 Macdonald, R.W., B.D. Bornhold, and I. Webster. 1983. The Kitimat fjord system: An introduction. Can. Tech. Rep. Hydrogr. Ocean Sci. 18, 2-13. 102 Huggett, W.S. and S.O. Wigen, 1983. Surface currents on the approaches to Kitimat. Can. Tech. Rep. Hydrogr. Ocean Sci. 18, 34-65. 103 Bell, L.M. and R.J. Kallman. 1976. The Kitimat River estuary status of ~"'Tenvironmental knowledge to 1976. Special Estuary Series No.6: 296 pp. 104 Ritimat Pipe Line Ltd. 1976. Termpo1 submission re Marine Terminal at Kitimat, B.C. Vol. I-VI. 105 Macdonald, R.W., B.D. Bornhold, and I. Webster. 1983. The Kitimat fjord system: An introduction. Can. Tech. Rep. Hydrogr. Ocean Sci. 18, 2-13. 106 www.gitgaat.net 107 AANDC 2013a. 108 www.gitgaat.net 109 www.gitgaat.net 110 www.gitgaat.net 111 www.gitgaat.net 112 www.gitgaat.net 113 www.gitgaat.net 114 Interestingly, Plateau First Nations are the other geographical group that relied on salmon. They would assemble each spring at a known fishing place to await the arrival of the first salmon. They would use dip nets and weirs in shallows to trap schools. Like the coastal First Nations, only a small percentage is eaten fresh; most is smoked and stored for winter (AADMCa). Both coastal and plateau First Nations have rituals to celebrate and give thanks for the annual salmon run114 115 Turner 2003. 116 www.gitgaat.net 117 www.gitgaat.net 118 Turner 2003. 119 Turner 1995, 1998, 2001, 2003. 120 Garibaldi and Turner 2004.

10

The people of Hartley Bay are an extraordinarily welcoming and good-natured community. They welcome guests with this traditional pre-feast message: “The cedar mat is spread, the fire is burning, and the food is ready.” (Ernie Hill, pers. comm.)

Today

The Gitga’at Territory comprises roughly 10,000 square kilometers of land and water121. Hartley Bay is now the only permanent settlement in the Gitgaa’t First Nation, with approximately 60 homes and community buildings, a fuel dock, and a government wharf122. There are no roads inside the village – homes and other buildings are linked by a network of boardwalks and trails123. There is a community center, gymnasium, and school.

Gitga’at structures elsewhere include the Kiel seaweed harvesting camp, to which the Gitga’at go in May124; a longhouse in Cornwall Inlet, whose recent construction prevented an enormous logging operation from establishing in their territory125; and cabins in Old Town (which are 100 years or more in age), Barnard Harbor, Monkey Beach, MacDonald Bay, Rennison Island (Guardian Watchmen camp) and elsewhere.

About 180 Gitga’at currently live in Hartley Bay. Another 450 live off-reserve mostly in Prince Rupert, Vancouver and Vancouver Island 126 . Hartley Bay community members are employed in commercial fishing, village administration, public works and safety, social and health services, housing, treaty negotiations, education services, salmon enhancement, forestry, tourism and ecological research127. The Hartley Bay School is within the Prince Rupert public school district, has 6 full-time teachers and a Sm’algyax instructor, and currently educates 33 students.

Large generators (soon to be replaced with a hydroelectric plant) power the entire community. Garbage collection and a dumpsite facilitate waste management. The Metlakatla ferry visits Hartley Bay from Prince Rupert twice a week (a 80 nm, 3.5 hour trip), upon which fresh vegetables, snacks and supplies are transported. The village actively harvests a diversity of delicious and bountiful food from its territory. This winter was the first time in living memory that clams were not allowed to be harvested due to high biotoxin levels (the cause of which is unknown)128.

Helen Clifton is the current matriarch of Hartley Bay, and her son Albert is the hereditary chief (sm’oygit wahmodmx). The Gitga’at Elders, who are heads of each Waap, are pillars of the community. The Hartley Bay Band Council is the administration of the Gitga’at Nation. The hereditary chief is advised by four elected councillors: Cameron Hill, Kyle Clifton, Marven Robinson, and Bruce (last name unknown)129. This council is elected to office every two years in early December130.

Tomorrow

Like all First Nations throughout history, the Gitga’at have received neglect, discrimination, and social trauma in its interactions with the federal government. Despite the issues and challenges imposed by these injustices131,

121 Clifton 2014. 122 Ban et al. 2009. 123 www.gitgaat.net 124 Clifton 2014. 125 Clifton 2014. 126 www.gitgaat.net 127 www.gitgaat.net 128 Clifton 2014. 129 www.gitgaat.net 130 www.gitgaat.net 131 One of many examples is that only 1% of the area’s $9-10 million fishery comes back to the community (Picard 2014).

11 the Gitga’at have exhibited characteristic resilience and determination to strengthen its community and its natural territory. In the last decade, the Gitga’at have organized and motivated its community around a Forward Progress Mandate: to assert Gitga’at Title and Rights, ensure conservation of its territory, and secure access to its resources (both natural and economic)132. The Gitga’at website (www.gitgaat.net, where much of the above historical and cultural information was found) reports that the nation holds three core goals for their community and their territory: 1. Build a healthy Gitga’at Community. 2. Protect and conserve lands, waters, and resources in Gitga’at Territory. 3. Build an ecologically sustainable economy for the Gitga’at community.

Despite a barrage of resource extraction proposals that might impact their territory and that have forced the Gitga’at to “play defense when they should be playing offense”133, they have become more united and driven as a community than ever. This is evident in recent publications from the Band Offic including the Gitga’at Economic Profile (March 2011)134 and the Gitga’at Economic Development Strategy (March 2011)135. The Gitga’at Guardian Watchmen program, coordinated by science director Chris Picard, is extremely active in environmental monitoring, land and marine use planning, local shellfish and salmon assessments, marine mammal surveys, and fisheries supervision136.

Compared to other coastal First Nations, the Gitga’at are actively involved in using and managing their marine territory137. But federal and provincial administrative and planning boundaries do not recognize First Nation’s territorial boundaries. This makes land use planning difficult for the Gitga’at138. But the Gitga’at are actively prioritizing ecosystem-based management, defined as “an integrated set of principles, goals, objectives and procedures that together seek to ensure the coexistence of healthy, fully functioning ecosystems and human communities.”139 They also maintain a precautionary approach: “uncertain resource management decisions will err on the side of sustaining cultural and ecological values.”140 Several conservancies were established within Gitga’at Territory in 1996, including in Union Passage, MacDonald Bay and Fin Island. The management plans for many of these conservancies are being written by the Guardian Watchmen now141. A draft land use plan was published in 2003 142 . The nation is actively involved in marine use planning as well. They are primary negotiators in the federal PNCIMA and the provincial MAPP initiatives (see Management Backgrounder), though their views are not receiving the attention they feel they should143. Despite the neglect of governments and the efforts of industry, the future is looking bright for the Gitga’at.

Partnerships

In the last decade the Gitga’at have come to build dozens of partnerships with natural and social scientists, legal experts and media professionals. Fifteen years ago, before all the pipelines and tankers had been proposed for the area, Hartley Bay was much more lowkey and isolated (J. Wray, pers. comm.). Back in 2002, whale biologists Hermann Meuter and Janie Wray received permission from Gitga’at matriarch Helen and the late Johnny Clifton to establish a whale research camp (CetaceaLab) in the Gitga’at Territory. In the years that followed, Hermann and Janie became accepted fully into the Gitga’at Nation and were inducted as members of the Raven and Killer Whale clans respectively.

Eric’s research in the Bangarang Project involves a collaborative partnership with the Gitga’at First Nation and CetaceaLab (directed by two of its members). In 2013, the Bangarang Project signed a research agreement with the Gitga’at First Nation. No aspect of Eric’s graduate research project would be possible without the support,

132 Picard 2014. 133 Picard 2014. 134 Picard 2014. 135 Picard 2014. 136 Picard 2014. 137 Ban et al. 2009 138 www.gitgaat.net 139 www.gitgaat.net 140 www.gitgaat.net 141 Clifton 2014. 142 www.gitgaat.net 143 Clifton 2014.

12 hospitality, and patience of the Gitga’at. The field work and its products will be the result of close collaborations between Eric and the Guardian Watchmen. Hopefully the partnership will result in both information and tools for imminent management issues and also the capacity for long-term, continued monitoring of the Gitga’at Territory.

“For we do not own this land so much as this land owns us. The land is part of us, and we are part of this land.” - Haisla Nation, Kitlope Declaration144

“A central tenet of First Nation’s traditional knowledge: the land and the people care for and sustain one another.” 145

“First Nations treated all objects in their environment – whether animate or inanimate – with the utmost respect. This deep respect that First Nations cultivated for every thing and every process in the natural world was reflected in songs, dances, festivals and ceremonies.” 146

“The loss of the Great Bear Rainforest could mean the loss of some of the oldest and richest cultures of the Western Hemisphere.” 147

144 Raincoast, year unknown. 145 Raincoast, year unknown. 146 AANDC 2013a. 147 Raincoast, year unknown.

13 Literature Cited

AANDC. 2011. A History of Indian and Northern Affairs in Canada. Accessed 17 February 2014. http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1314977281262/1314977321448 AANDC. 2013a. First Nations History. Accessed 17 February 2014. https://www.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/eng/1307460755710/1307460872523 AANDC. 2013b. Treay making in Canada. Accessed 17 February 2014. . https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng. https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100028574/1100100028578 Ban, N, J Alder. 2008. How wild is the ocean? Assessing the intensity of anthropogenic marine activities in British Columbia, Canada. Aquatic conservation: Marine and Frewshwater Ecosystems. Ban, NC, C Picard, and ACJ Vincent. 2008. Moving toward spatial solutions in marine conservation with indigenous communities. Ecology and Society 13(1):32. Ban, NC, CR Picard, and AJ Vincent. 2009. Comparing and integrating community-based and science-based approaches to prioritizing marine areas for protection. Conservation Biology 23(4):899-910. Clifton, Kyle. Gitga’at First Nation. Gitga’at Research Symposium, 19-22 February 2014. Hartley Bay, BC, Canada. Druehl, L. 2000. Pacific seaweeds: a guide to common seaweeds of the West Coast. Harbour Publishing. Madeira Park, BC. Garibaldi, A, and N Turner. 2004. Cultural keystone species: implications for ecological conservation and restoration. Ecology and Society 9(3):1. Gitga’at First Nation. 2009. www.gitgaat.net. Accessed 17 February 2014. Kein, CJ, A Chan, L Kircher, AJ cundiff, N Gardner, Y Hrovat, A Scholz, BE Kendall, S airame. 2008. sTriking a balance between biodiversity conservation and socioeconomic biability in the design of marine protected areas. Conservation Biology 22:691-700. Lindstrom, SC. 1993. Inter- and intrapopulation genetic variation in species of Porphyra (Rhodophyta: Bangiales) from British Columbia and adjacent waters. J. Applied Phycology 5:53-62. People of the Gtga’at First Nation. 2006. ‘Nwana’a lax Yuup: Plants of the Gitga’at People. Eds. Nancy J Turner and Judith Thompson. Cortex Consulting. Picard, Chris. Gitga’at First Nation. Gitga’at Research Symposium, 19-22 February 2014, Hartley Bay, BC, Canada. Raincoast. Year unknown. First Nations of the Great Bear Rainforest. The Nature Conservancy. Turner NJ. 2001. Coastal First Peoples and marine plants on the Norwest Coast of British Columbia. In IAMSLIC 2000: Tides of Technology. Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the International Association ofAquatic and Marine Science Libraries and Information Centers. Edited by JW Markham and AL Duda. IAMSIC, Fort Pierce, Fla. Pp. 69-76. Turner, NJ 1998. Plant technology of British Columbia First Peoples. UBC Press. Vancouver and Royal British Columbia Museum, Victoria BC. Turner, NJ. 1995. Food plants of Coastal First Peoples. Royal British Columbia Museum handbook, Victoria. UBC Press, Vancouver BC. Turner, NJ. 2003. The ethnobotany of edible seaweed (Porphyra abbottae and related speces; Rhodophyta:Bangiales) and its use by First Nations on the Pacific Coast of Canada.

14