26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México.

Community Well-Being and the Anishinabeg of the Region of Northern

By Robert Robson, Ph.D Chair and Associate Professor Department of Indigenous Learning Lakehead University , Ontario

Introduction

The Community Well-Being Project is a collaborative research project that was initiated jointly by the members of the Anishinabeg community of the area of and faculty within the Department of Indigenous Learning at Lakehead University. The intention of the project was to document the land-use activities of the Anishinabeg in and around the Lake over an extended period of time and to demonstrate the connectedness of the Anishinabeg community to the land. At the same time, the project was intended to show how the health and well-being of the Anishinabeg community was directly linked to the land. Focusing on trapping territory, hunting areas and berry picking grounds as well as the location of winter lodges and summer fish camps, the project also aimed to highlight “traditional territory”. Indeed, the unstated goal of the initiative was to “reclaim” traditional territory; to prove occupancy. As the project evolved and as the community became more and more invested in the project, the Community Well-Being Project morphed into a community development project. While the land-use component remained an important part of the undertaking, land-use became a tool of community development. Working within a framework of asset based community development, the land-use activities of the Anishinabeg became the catalyst for community sustainability. In other words, the traditional routes of travel were envisioned as possible school based, canoe trip routes, the traditional berry picking locations were defined as modern day harvest locations and the family fish camps were described as possible ‘eco-tourism” sites. Central to all of this was the notion of “preserve and protect”. Recognizing that the project would not only include the voices of the Elders or the testimony of the fishers but also the record of the missionaries or the reports of the Indian Agents, researchers, many of whom were community members, began to compile the story of the Anishinabeg and the land. The story of the land, however, was a two part undertaking. The first part of the project, is focusing on the “historical’ experience while the second part is centring on the issues related to community development. The historical experience has allowed the project to map family based fishing sites or traditional hunting grounds while the community development component of the project is connecting traditional activities to sustainable community development. Framed around the notion of asset based community development, the Community Well-Being Project is attempting to build upon the strengths of the community to help sustain a healthy, vibrant community. Until recently, community development as has been applied in the Indigenous community has largely been driven by western values and a western world view. It has, for the most part been about employment opportunities, skill enhancement or training, capital investment, partnership arrangements and infrastructure development. It has also largely been co-ordinated by the two senior levels of government in Canada and while on occasion it has included private sector participants such as the Royal Bank of Canada, Calmeadow or CAPE Fund Management Inc., it is through initiatives such as the federal government’s Community Economic Development program or provincial government programs such as Ontario’s New Relationship Fund that community development has touched the Indigenous community. Beginning in the late 1980's a slow but steady reassessment of the process of community development and its application within the Indigenous community began to occur.

1/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México.

Through the work of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, the Council for the Advancement of Native Development Officers, the National Centre for Governance, the First Nation Development Institute, the Center for American Indian Economic Development the Native American Institute as well as the efforts of Indigenous scholars such as Wanda Wuttunee, Sherry Salway Black, Dean Howard Smith and David Newhouse, a new community development paradigm evolved. This new community development paradigm tended to be culturally centred, value based, people oriented and holistic in application. It was also, as is argued by Newhouse in his paper “Modern Aboriginal Economies: Capitalism With a Red Face”, founded on the seven sacred teachings1 or what are often referred to as the seven grandfathers or the seven grandfather teachings. Identified by Newhouse as kindness, honesty, sharing, strength, bravery, wisdom and humility, the seven teachings speak to the capacity for caring, the maintenance of integrity in all relationships, generosity and sharing, strength of character, 2 courage, respect for knowledge and the gift of vision and finally, humbleness. As this new community development paradigm came to be applied and particularly as it was applied by the Indigenous community, community development focused on what the First Nation Development Institute has called “Native asset-building strategies”.3 Rather than “needs” based or “deficiency oriented” development, asset-based strategies are oriented on the strength of the community.4 Recognizing that asset building in the Indigenous community has a dual purpose, “assisting tribal nations in controlling and building their assets, and assisting tribal members with individual asset-building to support their families and communities”, the First Nations Development Institute established “An Asset Building Framework” in 2004.5 Within the framework, a typology of assets was developed to help facilitate the process. Reflecting “the holistic nature of Native communities and Native economies” as well as acknowledging the fact that assets are not just financial assets “but also cultural assets and human resources”, eight broad asset categories were defined.6 From financial assets to cultural assets social capital, the framework was intended to help provide for the establishment of asset-based, sustainable development strategies.7 Eventually co-ordinated by the Native America Asset Watch Initiative, the asset-building strategy came to form the cornerstone of the new community development 8 paradigm. Asset building as it has come to be applied has focused on both the resiliency of the Indigenous community and the social capital inherent therein. Community resiliency which has been defined as “the capacity of a distinct community or cultural system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so as to retain key element of structure and identity that preserves it distinctness’ and social capital as “those features of social organization, such as trust, norms and networks that improve the efficience of society by facilitating coordinated actions” both factor large in the asset building equation. Indeed it is the trust, norms and networks of the

1 Newhouse actually refers to the teachings as “primary traditional values”. Cited as wisdom, love, bravery, honesty, humilty, truth and respect by Ojibway Elder Edward Benton-Benai in his book The Mishomis Book, Newhouse’s primary traditional values are the seven grandfather teachings. See the primary traditional values in David Newhouse, “Modern Aboriginal Economies: Capitalism With a Red Face”, The Journal of Aboriginal Economic Development, V. 1, N. 2, 2000, p. 58 and the seven grandfather teachings in Edward Benton-Benai, The Mishomis Book, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988, pp. 60 - 66. 2 David Newhouse, op. cit., p. 58. 3 Integrated Asset-Building Strategies for Reservation-Based Communities: A 27 Retrospective of First Nations Development Institute, A Report Prepared for the First Nations Development Institute, Colorado, 2007, p. 4. 4 John Kretzmann and John McKnight, Building Communities from the Inside, The Asset-Based Community Development Institute, Northwestern University, Illinois, 1993, p. 2. 5 Rebecca Adamson, Sherry Salway Black and Sarah Dewees, Asset Building in Native Communities; An Asset Building Framework, First Nations Development Institute, Colorado, 2004, p. 6. 6 Ibid., p. 7. 7 Ibid., p. 8. 8 Native American Asset Watch: Rethinking Asset-Building in Indian Country, A Report Prepared for the First Nations Development Institute, Colorado, 2009, p. 10.

2/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México.

Indigenous community that have helped the community to retain key elements of its structure and provided for community sustainability. Community sustainability, however, as is suggested by Newhouse in the paper “The Development of the Aboriginal Economy Over the Next 20 ”, must be “consistent with the cultural norms of the community” and development that takes place must “occur within the broad ethical guidelines of the community”.9 Arguing further, Sherry Salway Black maintains that community sustainability must allow “Native peoples to control and develop their assets, and through that control, build the capacity to direct their economic futures in ways that fit their cultures”.10 In other words, the new paradigm of community development not only acknowledges the culture and values of the Indigenous community it also attempts to incorporate the culture and values in the community development process. Recognizing as well the unique circumstance of each community, the new paradigm of community development builds upon the seven sacred teaching to articulate what David Groenfeldt has called a “culturally grounded development 11 path”. The culturally grounded path of community development is also a strength based path. Incorporating asset-based community development objectives, the new paradigm of community development focuses on the strengths of the community as opposed to the needs or the problems of the community and allows community members to “identify, support and mobilize existing community resources to create a vision of change”.12 Indeed, as is maintained by John Kreztmann and John McKnight in Building Communities from the Inside Out, asset-based community development begins with “what is present in the community, the capacities of its residents.....not what is absent”.13 Rather than “deficiency- oriented” community development, asset-based community development is strength oriented community development. The strengths of the Indigenous community as have been defined by the Native American Asset Watch include the financial, physical, natural, institutional, human, cultural, social and political assets. Of particular importance in the asset typology is the land and natural resources, the “skills, knowledge, education and experience of people within the community”, the customs, traditions, language and 14 the Indigenous knowledge of the community as well as the social relations and networks.

The Anishinabeg of the Lake Nipigon Region Lake Nipigon, located in approximately one hundred and seventy kilometers northwest of the present day community of Thunder Bay has been the focal point of the local Indigenous community from time immemorial. Including the Cree, the Assiniboine, the Metis and the Ojibway or the Anishinabeg, the Lake Nipigon area has provied for the well-being of Indigenous community over an extended period of time.15 At various times also known as

9 David Newhouse, “The Development of the Aboriginal Economy Over the Next 20 Years”, The Journal of Aboriginal Economic Development, V. 1, N. 1, 1999, pp. 71 - 74. 10 Rebecca Adamson et. al., op. cit., p. 4. 11 David Groenfeldt, “The Future of Indigenous Values: Cultural Relativism in the Face of Economic Development”, Futures, V. 35, 2003, p. 928. 12 Patricia Sharpe, M.L. Greaney, Peter Lee and S.W. Royce, “Assets Oriented Community Assessment”, Public Health Reports, V. 115, May/June 2000, p. 205. 13 John Kretzmann and John McKnight, op. ciy., p. 9. 14 Native American Asset Watch, op. cit., p. 56. 15 There is considerable discussion in the literature as to the occupancy of the Lake area. It is now seen as the territory of the Anishinabeg but at various times in the past it may also have been home to the Cree and the Assiniboine. For a discussion of the occupancy issue see: K.C.A. Dawson, Algonkians of Lake Nipigon, National Museum of Man, No. 48, 1976; P. Filteau, Lake Nipigon Archaeology: A Further Study, an Archaeological Report Prepared for the Ontario Heritage Foundation, Thunder Bay, 1978; Hlady, “Indian Migrations in Manitoba and the West”, Historical and Science Socitey of Manitoba, Series III, No, 17, 1964, pp. 24 - 53; E.S. Rogers, “Changing Settlement Patterns of the Cree-Ojibway of Northern Ontario”, Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, V. 19, 1963, pp. 64 - 88; W. Warren, A History of the Ojibway Nation,

3/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México.

Alimibeg, Alimigegong, Alempigon, Aminipigon, and Lake St. Ann, the Lake area is approximately 484,800 hectacres, 110 kilometers long and 60 kilometers wide.16 It is home to some forty-six species of fish. It is the southern limit of the range of woodland caribou. It forms a portion of the migration route for numerous types of birds, including geese and mergansers. Its shores are the habitat for everything from beaver to bear and the local vegetation ranges from birch to spruce to jackpine with an abundance of berries in between. It is a bountiful area in many ways and it is the bounty of the land that has provided for the well-being of the Indigenous community. The Anishinabeg of the Lake Nipigon area, like other Indigenous Peoples, have since time immemorial had a special relationship with the land. It is part and parcel of the belief structure and/or value system of the Indigenous community. Often referred to as “world view”, the belief structure and/or value system forms the foundation of the community.17 Reflecting the community’s relationship with the Creator and emphasizing a holistic perspective of the universe, the value system of the Anishinabeg is one of co-operation, sharing, patience, non-interference, modesty and respect. The community works together for the common good of the total community. The bounty of the land is willingly shared with all members of the community; the Elders are given the choicest portions of that bounty. Patience is shown in all activities as the Creator is also the provider. It is not the place of an individual community member to interfere in the activities of others. Modesty dictates that no one member of the community is above or below other members of the community, all are equal. Respect is shown to all things (living and otherwise) and the community accepts the responsibility of nurturing the land and all things of the land. Nurturing the land and all things of the land means that not only does the Anishinabeg give thanks for the bounty of the land but also that the hunting, trapping, fishing or gathering that is conducted is done so in such a way as to ensure the continuing bounty of the land, that all portions of the hunt are used and that there is no waste or misuse of the bounty of the land, that hunting or gathering territories are selectively used in an effort to allow the land the opportunity to replenish itself and that the bounty of one area is supplemented through trade by gathering the bounty of another area. In the Lake Nipigon area, all of this can be seen, for example, when the family of Granbois established their fish camp at English Bay every spring or when the family of Wawiie moved to their trapping ground every fall, or when Amatcheweskong travelled to Kamangigmag in the fall to sow wild rice.18 Whether it was fishing for white fish, trapping “rats” or cultivating wild rice, the Anishnabeg of the Lake area through their traditional land-use activities, not only provided for the well-being of their community but also for the well-being of the larger community. This, the so-called “land ethic” of the Anishinabeg community “....is deeply rooted in traditional cultural beliefs, which hold that land and forests should be viewed as a whole. This ethic embodies the concept that land and its resources must be protected out of respect for the past, present and future generations. Resource stewartship is understood to entail both a

Minneapolis: Ross and James, 1957, p. 59 and James Wright, “An Archaeological Survey Along the North Shore of ”, Anthropological Papers, National Museum of Canada, No. 3, 1963. 16 Alimibeg, Alimibegong, Alempigon and Aminipigon appear to common names that were applied by the Indigenous community to the Lake while Lake St. Ann was the term that the French used to refer to what is now called Lake Nipigon. See: Alimibeg in R. Griffith, The History of Lake Nipigon, 1972, p. 8; Alimibegong in R. Thwaites, Jesuit Relations and Other Allied Documents, V. LI, pp. 63 - 69; Alempigon in J. Carver, Travels Through the Interior Parts of , Minneapolis: Ross and Haines, 1956, p. 137; Amnipigon in L.R. Masson, Les Bourgeois de la Comgnie du Nord-Ouest, New York: Antiquarian Press, 1960, p. 239 and Lake St Ann in Company Archives (hereafter HBCA), Nipigon House Post, Post Journal, B 149/a/6, 1797 - 1798. 17 See for example a discussion of world view in A. Hallowell, “Ojibwa Ontology, Behavior and World View” in S. Diamond (ed) Culture and History, New York: Columbia University Press, 1960, D. McPherson and J. Rabb, Indian from the Inside, Thunder Bay: Centre for Northern Studies, 1993 and T.W. Overholt and J.B. Callicott, Clothed in Fur, Lanham: University Pressof American, 1982. 18 See Grandbois in HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/23, 1870 -1876, Wawiie in HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/25, 1886 - 1889 and Amatcheweskong in HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, b 149/a/24, 1876 - 1886.

4/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México. responsibility for the natural element, as well as a responsibility to ensure the well being of the 19 human inhabitants of the land.” In attempting to determine traditional-use values of the Anishinabeg as well to create a land-based, pathway for community development and in working with both the oral and written record, it is possible to identify: family connections within the community band connections within the community clan connections within the community place of residency of members of the community routes of travel of community members place names within the territory births and deaths of community members activities pursued by community members trade activities by community members. This information in turn helps to provide for a reasonable understanding of the Anishinabeg community which is clearly a family based community that is territorial as opposed to site specific. It also shows that the Anishinabeg participated in a wide range of activities that were seasonally based and balanced from one season to the next. There is also a generational component to not only the activities pursued by the Anishinabeg but also to the relationship that the Anishinabeg had with the land. Well over five hundred individuals have been identified as being part of the Anishinabeg community around the Lake in the period from 1790 - 1900.20 The majority of these individuals travelled extensively in the Lake district on what appear to be fairly well defined routes of travel. They hunted, fished, trapped, collected berries and bark, built canoes and lodges and generally enjoyed the bounty of the land as had been provided by the Creator. Several of the more prominent individuals in the Lake District appear to be individuals such as Cashian, Moniia Wininins, Nanie, Kamishon and Wenagosh. Cashian, for example, was an active hunter, trapper, and fisher around the Lake during the early 1880's. Although his lodge was apparently on one of the interior (Sturgeon Lake), he is noted as being at various points on the west side of the Lake throughout the 1820's and 1830's.21 Similarly, Moniia Wininins although identified as one of the “Gull Bay hunters”, travelled the Lake district as part of his round of activities.22 From Red Rock to Pitigong to Grassy Island, Moniia Wininins fished for speckled trout, hunted ducks and trapped “rats” throughout the region. Nanie, whose home was on the west side of the Lake at Champlain Point and who seemed to spend a good portion of his year hunting and fishing at Caribou Island, also travelled the Lake district.23 Nanie, on occasion, went as far south as Red Rock and as far north as Meeting Point and the Whitesand River. Kamishon’s territory appeared to be on the northwest side of the Lake at the “Interior of Obabika”.24 He too, however, can be tracked throughout the district as at various times he fished at both Dog and Obabica Island. Wenagosh, whose lodge was located on the east side of the Lake at Poplar Point, frequented Jackfish Island, Dog Island, Gull Bay, English Bay and Chiefs

19 “Strategic Directions - The National Forestry Strategy”, The Forestry Chronicle, V. 74, N. 3, 1988, p. 295. 20 A large part of the discussion that follows is based upon the archival records of the Hudson’s Bay Company (HBCA). A portion of the project requires that researchers cull the records of nine Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC) posts that were located around Lake Nipigon (Nipigon House, Osnaburgh House, Marten Falls, Fort William, Cat Lake, Red Rock, Michipicoten, Eagle Lake and Lac Seul). As the material is collected, researchers are attempting to take the information into the community for verification and acknowledgement, Thus far, portions of the work has been shared in the communities of Kiashke Zaaging Anishinabeek and Biinjitwaabik Zaaging Anishinabeek. 21 HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/15, December 6, 1832. 22 HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/25, May 28, 1894. 23 HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/24, March 7, 1879. 24 HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/25, June 17, 1888.

5/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México.

Bay as well as the “interior of Chiefs Bay on the west side of the Lake and Red Rock to the south of 25 the district”. Approximately twenty-five family connections can be made in the Lake district. The place of family as the foundation of the community cannot be overemphasized. Individuals are identified as living with family members, travelling with family members, hunting/fishing/trapping/collecting berries and harvesting wild rice with family members and generally, caring for and providing for family members. The most pronounced family connection that can be identified is that of male siblings. Here, for example, at various times through the course of a roughly two hundred year period, brothers can be seen together in a number of different activities and in a number of different locations. Moniia Wininins is often found travelling, hunting, fishing or trapping with his three male siblings Kakejkahbo, Iahbince and Le Petit Anglois.26 Similarly, Tesson, Cashian and Payaskeniash were three brothers who spent a great deal of their time on the land involved in family based activities.27 Father - son relations can also be described as an important part of the family of the Lake. In this regard, for example, Le Grain is often described as being in the company of his two sons, Sahmo and Macatanaquet, fishing, trapping or “encamped” together.28 Likewise, Assinab and his son Tchitichish spent a considerable amount of time together in the Lake District providing for the well-being of their family.29 Father - mother - son connections are also apparent through the activity of the Anishinabeg of the Lake Nipigon region. Wapoos, Manitoshen and Waweea, for example, are regularly described as being in the company of their wives and sons as they travelled the Lake region.30 Full families, including daughters, are also part of the family experience of the Lake. Here, for example, Sinneway or Mitewininis are often depicted as part of the mother, father, son and daughter family situation.31 Uncle - nephew/niece and cousin relations can also be seen as part of the family complexion of the Lake. Not only can individuals such as Otingonish, Chacabince or Nanie be seen on a regular basis in the company of their nephews or nieces but on numerous occasions, cousins such as Pinewinini’s son and nephew are also together on the land around the Lake.32 The final family connection that can be described is the in - law relationship which also seems to be fairly well established amongst the Anishinabeg of the Lake. Individuals such as Shegowish or Amatcheskong are often described as travelling with, or being in the company of, brother - in - laws or mother - in - laws.33 Band connections, like family connections, are clearly an important part of the traditional community of the Lake. At least eleven Bands can be identified around the Lake at any given time. Although Band size and activity appeared to vary depending upon the season and the era, in general, the people of Lake did come together in community that extended well beyond family. In this regard, Oshkinig’s Band, Agindakowenenies’ Band, Big Bear’s Band, Le Grain’s Band, Shasanash’s Band, La Veille Medalle’s Band, Le Grand Medicin’s Band, Mich Muchwa’s Band, La Guaarde’s Band, Windagab’s Band, Shigagotchish’s Band and Katchang’s Band can all be seen as 34 part of the community structure of the Lake.

25 Ibid, October 26, 1887. 26 HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/18, August 13 and 15, 1835. 27 HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/15, December 6, 1832. 28 HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/11, July 20, 1828. 29 HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/25, January 18, 1889. 30 See Wapoos in HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/24, May 29, 1880, Manitoshen in Ibid., September 17, 1880 and Waweea in Ibid., B 149/a/25, December 5, 1894. 31 See Sinneway in HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/23, November 12, 1875 or B 149/a/24, June 4, 1884 and Mitewininis in Ibid., June 10, 1879 or June 15, 1883. 32 See Otingonish in HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/25, November 7, 1890, Chacabince in Ibid., B 149/a/19, January 5, 1837, Nanie in Ibid., B 149/a/25, November 9, 1888 and Pinewinini in Ibid., B 149/a/24, August 6, 1878. 33 See Shegowish in HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/18, August 15, 1835 and Amaatacheskong in Ibid., B 149/a/24, August 6, 1878. 34 See Oshkinig’s Band in HBCA, Nipigons House, Post Journal, B 149/a/24, September 12, 1879, Agindakowenenies’ Band in Ibid., B 149/a/25, October 18, 1893, Big Bear’s Band in Ibid., B 149/a/19, June

6/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México.

Community of the Lake is also represented by the clan or totemic system of the Anishinabeg. While there appears to have been five original clans (Keegonse, fish; Mooshokaosi, crane; Mang, loon; Mako, bear; and, Monsone or Waub - ish - ash - e, marten) over time there may have been as many as twenty-one clans or clan like communities located in the Lake region.35 Nonetheless, it is possible to determine that Metweash and his family, whose territory seemed to stretch west from the Lake to Sturgeon Lake, were part of the Deer clan and that the Crane clan’s territory was northwest of the Lake in the vincity of Lake Joseph or that members of the Pelican 36 clan primarily hunted in the territory directly west of the Lake in close proximity to . Place of residency in the Lake district can be determined on the basis of lodge location, trapping grounds, fishing grounds and hunting grounds. In general and, as already suggested, residency was territorial as opposed to site specific. The Anishinabeg of the Lake region lived on the land and while they did erect shelters, sweat lodges and drying racks, their home was the land or territory upon which they pursued their seasonal round of activities. When Netawasang erected his family lodge at Snake Point or when Maradgiwabandang’s family went to their trapping grounds at Ombibika or Nimaakiwens’ family were at their fishing grounds on Jackfish Island or Ogitchitabinen’s family went to their hunting grounds in the interior of Wabanosh, they were all 37 taking up residency; living in their community. Routes of travel by the Anishinabeg in the Lake Nipigon region are telling examples of not only the knowledge base of the community but also their special relationship with the land. Individuals travelled extensively in the region and their routes of travel can best be described as lake travel and interior travel. Lake travel was (and still is) of paramount importance to the Anishininabeg. Community members travelled from one location on the Lake to another for the purpose of fishing, wild rice harvesting, trading, visiting and in order to gain access to the interior. Aganigisigweb, for example, regularly travelled across the Lake to Poplar Lodge to trade.38 Magwetan travelled the Lake to get to his trapping grounds at Wabinosh Bay.39 Wenagosh and his family travelled from the west side of the Lake to get to their “fishing station” and Anamiebinons went back and forth from the mainland to “his home” on Caribou Island.40 In similar fashion, the Anishinabeg travelled regularly from the Lake towards the interior. Michi Muckwa, for example, travelled on a regular basis south from the Lake to visit with family at Fort William.41 Legarde travelled as far east as Michipicoten to trade.42 Minsakigabaw travelled from the Lake to get to his hunting grounds at the interior of Obabika (Ombabika) on the northeast side of the Lake.43 Gishickoke travelled west to get to his lodge at Mille Lac.44 Nanie travelled south to get to Red

11, 1838, Le Grain’s Band in Ibid., B 149/a/10, June 10, 1828, Shasanash’s Band in Ibid., B 149/a/22/ February 3, 1872, La Veille Medalles’ Band in Ibid., B 149/a/18, July 19, 1835, Le Grand Medicin’s Band in Ibid., September 3, 1835, Mich Muckwa’s Band in Ibid., B 149/a/19, January 4, 1837, La Guarde’s Band in Ibid., B 149/a/18, May 13, 1836, Windagab’s Band in Ibid., B 149/a/24, may 25, 1886, Shigagotchish’s Band in Ibid., B 149/a/23, December 11, 1873 and Katchang’s Band in Ibid., B 149/a/25, February 27, 1888. 35 See the discussion of the clan or teotemic system in both C. Bishop, The Northern Ojibwa and the Fur Trade, Toronto: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1951, pp. 266 - 289 and William Warren, The History of the Ojibway People, Minneapolis: Minnesota Historical Society, 1984, pp. 41 - 53. 36 See the discussion of the Deer, Crane and Pelican clans in Bishop, op. cit., pp. 269 - 272. 37 See Natawasang in HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/23, February 6, 1871, Maradgiwabandang in Ibid., March 29, 1874, Nimaakiwen in Ibid., B 149/a/24, February 28, 1885 and Ogitachitabinen in Ibid., B 149/a/23, January 20, 1874.

38 HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/24, April 17, 1877. 39 Ibid., b 149/A/25, December 17, 1891. 40 See Wenagosh in Ibid., B 149/a/24, October 20, 1885 and Anamiebinons, April 8, 1883. 41 Ibid., B 149/a/11, June 23, 1828. 42 Ibid., B 149/a/21, August 1, 838. 43 Ibid., B 149/a/25, May 21, 1887. 44 Ibid., B 149/a/11, January 27, 1829.

7/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México.

Rock.45 Otakwi travelled from the Lake to Mud Lake where he and his family “made rice” and 46 Payashkenuash travelled from the Lake up the Gull River to hunt deer. While the Lake is now known as Lake Nipigon and points around the Lake are now recognized as Jackfish Island or Meeting Point, Anishinabeg places names provide an important connection between the people of the Lake and the land itself. It speaks to occupancy, knowledge of the land and in many ways it helps to underscore the special relationship that the Anishinabeg had (have) with the land. Place names such as Pitobigong, Abamad (Lake), or Itawi Mamawi Sagi all acknowledge the place of the Anishinabeg on the land and further, help to paint a picture of the way the Anishinabeg have, since time immemorial interacted with the Lake and the land around the Lake. The language of the Anishinabeg is an insightful language that when it comes to place names, tends to capture a sense of place as opposed to simply designating a physical space. Anishinabeg place names in fact speak to the story or the life of the place. In this regard, for example, the Anishinabeg name Negondinong has a much deeper meaning to the Anishinabeg than the present name, Meeting Point or, Nejoshkwananbika means much more to the Anishinabeg than simply Flat Rock Point. The demography of the Anishinabeg community is very difficult to track.47 Whether in consideration of population size, gender, age structure or birth and death rates, it is almost impossible to speak with any accuracy as to the composition of the Anishinabeg community. It is, however, possible to gain some insight into the community and the well- being of the community through documented birth and deaths. While this information too is limited, when for example, the record shows an increase in births it could suggest that the relative well-being of the community was such that it provided for either new family formation or increased family size. Similarly, if the record shows a relatively large number of deaths in the community, it could suggest that the relative well-being of the community had declined.48 In the mid-1870's through to the 1880's, for example, because of recorded births such as that of Grandbois eldest daughter or Wenagosh’s wife, it may be possible to suggest increasing family size and/or new family formation is evidence of a flourishing community.49 In the late 1820's through to the ealry 1830's, however, because of the recorded deaths of Kakejukahbo, Iahbince or Henemoiwetang as well as the reported fact that “many other families about the Lake” were “very sick” it may also be possible to 50 suggest that the community was not as prosperous at that time. The Anishinabeg of the Lake Nipigon area were primarily a trapping, hunting, fishing people. Working within what appeared to be fairly well defined family territories, the Anishinabeg followed a seasonal round of activities which allowed the community to not only sustain itself but also to sustain the land. The trapping pursued in the late fall or early spring lead into duck or goose hunting in April and May which lead into a fishing season which was followed by harvesting time and then a hunting period. The beaver or the muskrat taken from the traps combined with the duck, the white fish, the blueberries and the caribou to provide for the needs of the Anishinabeg. At the same time, the cyclic nature of the seasonal round, the respectful nature of the activity, the

45 Ibid., B 149/a/24, September 11, 1884. 46 See Otakwi in Ibid., B 149/a/24, September 4, 1877 and Payashkenuash in B 149/a/20, July 12, 1838. 47 Population estimates vary considerably. A conservative estimate of the total population of the Anishinabeg community made by Charles Bishop sets it at approximately 4,500 while a more liberal estimate made by Alexander Morris sets it at approximately 14,000. See Charles Bishop, The Northern Ojibwa, op. cit., p. 7 and Alexander Morse, The Treaties of Canada with the Indians of Manitoba and the North-west Territories, Toronto: Belfords, Clarke and Co., 1880, p. 55. 48 There are numerous variables involved in the discussion of community well-being. Births and deaths are presented here as part of the discussion but it is important to acknowledge the fact that well-being can be affected by everything from age structure to natural occerences. 49 See the birth of Wenagosh’s “female child” in HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/24, January 8, 1886 and Grandbois’ grandchild in Ibid., B 149/a/22, May 1, 1876. 50 See the death of Kakejukahbo in HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journals, B 149/a/18, August 13, 1835, Iahbince in Ibid., July 22, 1836 and Henemoiwetange in Ibid., B 149/a/20, August 18, 1837 as well as the sickness “about the Lake” in Ibid., B 149/a/10, June 26, 1827.

8/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México. territorial basis of the hunting or fishing activity and the nurturing perspective of the Anishinabeg community, also provided for the sustainability of the land base. When, for example, Pouce Coupe caught sturgeon, Moniia Wininins caught white fish, Negotche trapped martens, Assikissic trapped muskrate, Shigosopi hunted caribou, Galaffe hunted bear, Wenagosh hunted loons, Otakwi harvested wild rice or, Pekotchab went “berry hunting”, they were not only meeting the needs of their community but they were doing so in such a way as to maintain an overall harmony with their universe.51 Very much a part of the Anishinabeg world view, this in turn, provided for the well-being of the Anishinabeg as well as for all things of the Lake region. The Anihinabeg of the Lake Nipigon region, like other Indigenous Peoples, have a had a long established tradition of trade. Individuals traded with individuals, family members traded with family members and communities traded with communities. Trade was not only one way to supplement available resources, it was also a means of cementing friendships and ensuring the general well-being of the overall community. In general and while items of trade varied considerably over an extended period of time, the trade included skins (furs), meat, fish, vegetation, cedar bark, canoes and snowshoes. The skins (furs) traded in terms of volume of trade were muskrat, beaver, marten, mink, otter, cat, bear (black and brown), fisher, fox (red and silver) and wolverine. Meat traded, again in terms of volume of trade, included deer, bear, caribou, moose, rabbit and fowl (ducks and geese). Fish traded were primarily white fish, sturgeon and trout. Vegetation traded included berries and wild rice.52

Community Development and the Anishinabeg of the Lake Nipigon Region With the arrival of the European community into the Lake Nipigon area as occurred in the post - seventeenth century era, the Anishinabeg were forced to contend with a newly introduced land ethic; a land ethic was homo-centric and primarily concerned with the control and exploitation of the land.53 As a result and over an extended period of time, the traditional land-use activities of the Anishinabeg slowly came to be displaced. While the Anishinabeg would maintain their special relationship with the land, the opportunity to continue to practice their land based activities would slowly diminish. Largely in response to the demands of the church, the fur trade companies, Euro- government and eventually, industrial capitalism, the Anishinabeg were forced to adjust to a Euro- Canadian centred land-use agenda. What this in turn meant was that the territorially based sense of community slowly gave way to a settlement centred community, that community levels of production were displaced by the demands of an external market place, that hunting, fishing and trapping and even berry collecting or wild rice harvesting slowly became regulated by Euro-Canadian law and perhaps most importantly, that the long

51 See Pouce Coupe in HBCA, Nipigon House, Post Journal, B 149/a/11, July 2, 1828, Moniia Wininins in Ibid., B 149/a/25, ocotber 31, 1887, Negotche in Ibid., November 23, 1896, Assikissic in Ibid., B 149/a/18, August 6, 1835, Shigosopi in Ibid., B 149/a/24, June 24, 1883, Galaffe in Ibid., B 149/a/19, June 5, 1836, Wenagosh in Ibid., B 149/a/24, May 2, 1881, Amatcheweshkang in Ibid., Speptember 13, 1882 and Pekotchab in Ibid., September 7, 1880. 52 The Hudson’s Bay Account Books offer a tremendously detailed overview of the trading activities of the Anishinabeg in and around the Lake Nipigon area. The list of trade items is based upon information found in the Account Books under the heading of debt and credit. See, for example, HBCA, Nipigon House, Account Books, B 149/d/1, 1824 -1825. 53 There is considerable uncertainty as to when the first European visited the Lake Nipigon region. It is suggested in the literature that Etienne Brule may have visited hte lake Superior area and possible the Lake Nipigon region as early as 1622. It is also suggested that Pierre Radisson and Medard Chouart des Groseillers may have visited the Lake in 1654. Father Allouez, a Jesuit missionary, who reported visiting the Lake on June 3, 1667 may well have been the firs European to do so. See, Brule in K.C.A. Dawson, Original People and Euro-Canadian in Northwestern Ontaio, Thunder Bay, Centre for Northern Studies, 2004, p. 31, Radisson and Groseillers in A.T. Adams, The Exploration of Pierre Esprit Radisson, Minneapolis; Ross and Haines, 1961, pp. 112 - 160 and Father Allouex in R. Thwaites, The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents, V LI, pp. 63 - 69.

9/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México. established relationship that the Anishinabeg had with the land itself came under attack as the Euro-Canadian community attempted to assert it world view and further, its land-use priorities. Euro-Canadian land-use priorities would come to be applied through the religious missions, the fur trade posts, the creation of reserve communities, rail and road construction, forestry and mining development, hunting, trapping and fishing regulations, the development of a commercial fisher, various hydro-electric power projects and program delivered housing and community infra-structure. In establishing the Euro- Canadian land ethic in the Lake Nipigon region, the Euro-Canadian community would also challenge the world view of the Anishinabeg. Whether through the Robinson - Superior Treaty which was signed in 1850 and was interpreted to mean that the “Chiefs and Principal Men do freely, fully and voluntarily surrender, cede, grant and convey unto Her Majesty, Her heirs and successors forever, all right, title and interest in the whole of the territory.....save and except the reservations set forth”, or the residential school program where the children were taught the “Evils of Indian Isolation” at schools such as Cecilia Jeffrey or St. John’s or through the Indian Act where a large portion of the first such Act provided for the “Management and Sale of Timber” and clearly gave authority over the management of on-reserve timber land to the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, Euro-Canadian society was not only setting their own land management agenda but in the process they were also attempting to alter the time honoured relationship that the Indigenous community had established with the land.54 It was in fact, part and parcel of a larger Euro-Canadian agenda which was intended to provide for the assimilation of the Indigenous community into “mainstream” society. This was clearly articulated by one - time Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, Duncan Campbell Scott in the often quoted passage wherein he maintained that “Our object is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politics, and there is no Indian 55 problem”. The Euro-Canadian land ethic and the various ways that came to be applied in the Lake Nipigon region would eventually see the Anishinbeg relocated on to reserve land. In all, six reserve communities would be created, Biinjitwaabik Zaaging Anishinabeek (Rocky Bay First Nation), Kiashke Zaaging Anishinabeek (), Animbiigoo Zaaiigan Anishinabeek (Lake Nipigon Ojibway), Bingwi Neyaashi Anishinabeek (Sand Point First Nation), and Red Rock First Nation. Kiashke Anishinabeek Zaaging Anihsinabeek (KAZA) would be located on the west side of the Lake, Whitesand First Nation and Bingwi Neyaashi Anishinabeek (BNA) on the north side of the Lake, Biinjiitewaabik Zaaging Anishinabeek (BZA) and Animbiigoo Zaaiigan Anishinabeek (AZA) on the east side of the Lake and Red Rock First Nation on the south side of the Lake. Recent demographic information as has been compiled by Indigenous and Northern Affairs, Canada, shows that KAZA has a registered population of 1134 and an on-reserve population of 326, Whitesand First Nation has a registered population of 1140 and an on-reserve population of 340, BNA has a registered population of 258 and on- reserve population of 69, BZA has a registered population of 678 and an on-reserve population of 327, AZA has a registered population of 491 and an on-reserve population of 3 and Red Rock First Nation has a registered population of 1,837 and an on-reserve population of 285.56 The six reserve communities form the basis of the contemporary, Anishinabeg community of the Lake Nipigon region. Although four of the six communities, Kiashke Zaaiiging Anishinabeek, Animbiigoo Zaaigan Anishinabeek, Biinjitwaabik

54 Lake Nipigon is part of the Robinson - Superior Treaty area and the reference to the “Chiefs and Principal Men” is taken directly from the Treaty itself which can be found in Canada, Indian Treaties and Surrenders from 1860 - 1890, V. 1, N. 60, Ottawa: Queen’s Printer, 1891, pp. 147 - 148. The reference to the residential schools can be found in the “Program of Study” in Canada, 60 Vic., 1897, Sessional Papers, N. 14, pp. 396 -399 which outlines as part of the curriculum to be taught in the residential schools, the “Evils of Indian Isolation”. The Indian Act regularly speaks to the relationship that the Indigenous community had with the land. For the “Management and Sale of Timber” reference see, Canada, Statutes, Vic. 39, 1876, Chap. 18, Sec. 45 -47, pp. 57 - 61. 55 As cited, for example, in Canada, Standing Committee on Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Issue No. 58, September 30, 1982, p. 58.5. 56 Although of questionable accuracy, see the demographic information at Indigenous and Northern Affairs, Canada, “First Nation Profiles”.

10/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México.

Zaaging Anishinabeek and Bingwi Neyaashi Anishinabeek are members of the , the six communities have all attempted to independently address the community development issue. Traditional land-use has been a focus of both the Kiashke Zaaiiging Anishinabeek and the Biinjitwaabik Zaaging Anishinabeek community development initiative. Both communities have acknowledged the importance of the land and the ways of the land and have directly connected the land and the ways of the land to community development. As a result, the lodge location of Wenagosh, the ricing grounds of Otakwi, Magwetan’s trapping grounds, Minsakigabaw’s hunting grounds and Kamishon’s fishing area have all become part of the community development equation but so too has economic diversification and community building. This is particularly true of the activity of Biinitwaabik Zaaging Anishinabeek who has recently defined a ten point community development plan. Focusing on project oversight, site verification, site preservation and protection, contaminant testing, infrastructure development, community building, economic diversification, regional economic development, interpretive programming and curriculum development and delivery BZA has clearly articulated a culturally grounded development path. Project oversight which is an important part of any community development initiative is rooted in the community. Although the Band Manager has assumed the leadership of the BZA community development project, an advisory committee, composed of six community members will provide direction and oversight. The advisory committee is scheduled to meet once a month and its mandate is to provide project direction as well as project feedback. Important here as well in the discussion of project oversight is community engagement. Community engagement is both BZA based as well as Lake based. Regular community forums are scheduled to take place within the community with community input sought as the project moves forward. Lake based community engagement is taking place through the creation of a “regional committee” wherein representative of the of seven Indigenous communities that have a connection to the Lake, Biinjitwaabik Zaaging Anishinabeek, Kiashke Zaaging Anishinabeek, Animbiigoo Zaaiigan Anishinabeek, Bingwi Neyaashi Anishinabeek, Whitesand First Nation, Red Rock First Nation and Fort William First Nation will all be invited to participate in the community development initiative. The regional committee is a tremendously important part of the initiative as it acknowledges the fact that reserve community is a creation of Euro-Canadian authority and that the community of the Lake is much more than a reserve community. Outside support is also part of the project oversight thus far BZA has received a commitment from the university community, government department’s and/or agencies and other Indigenous communities that have expertise or knowledge that will assist in the community development process. Site verification involves the verification of both “traditional” land-use sites as well as more contemporary land-use sites. Working with Elders, considerable work has already taken place within BZA identifying and verifying fishing, hunting, trapping and harvesting areas and many of these areas have already been mapped using geographic information system (GIS) technology. Family based, resource use areas, are very much a part of the story of the Lake and that story speaks to multi-generation, resource use areas. As well, site identification and verification also includes fur trade posts, missionary establishments and industrial use areas such as logging camps, mine sites and other areas of Euro-Canadian activity. Grid mapping has helped to organize site verification and the Band Manager has begun the task of cataloguing and digitizing the map collection. A large part of the of the initiative is site preservation and protection. This process began with grid-mapping of each identified site. Each site is being numbered, logged and photographed before preservation work commences. Once the site is documented, community members will be organized and trained in artifact retrieval, recording, classification and preservation. Work , for example, has already started in this regard and well over fifty pictograph sites have been identified and recorded. In consultation with Chief and Council, decisions are being made as to how best preserve and protect the pictograph sites. An underlying issue here is whether or not the community should attempt to “reclaim” the pictograph image with contemporary dyes or allow the image to follow its’ natural path. Also part of the discussion is “site planning” and whether or not identified sites should remain in their natural state or be “developed’ as part of the interpretative program. The fine line between preservation and protection is very much a part of

11/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México. the debate and is captured well in what Jeff Corntassel and Cheryl Bryce have called “Indigenous resurgence” which is “centered on reclaiming, restoring and regenerating homeland relationships”.57 Regardless of the path the community decides to follow, site preservation and protection includes site interpretation. The “story” of the site will be documented and told, both in written and oral form. Important here is the knowledge of the site that is carried by community knowledge keepers and the sharing of that knowledge. The need for contaminant testing has grown out of the industrial land-use activities that have been introduced to the Lake area by the Euro-Canadian community. Forestry, mining and hydro-electric power generation has all had an impact on the health and well-being of Lake Nipigon. It has also had an impact on the health and well-being of the Anishinabeg community of the Lake. Contaminants such as persistent organic pollutants, radon and heavy metals are now very much a part of the Lake Nipigon story. The presence of such contaminants have dramatically effected the way of life and the way of being of all inhabitants of the Lake area. In specific locations around the Lake, fish can’t be eaten, large game is diseased, water cannot be used for day-to-day activities and there are now concerns about contaminants leaching into the watertable. By necessity, the BZA community development plan includes a contaminant testing component. Working within well defined programs such as Health Canada’s Environmental Public Health Program in First Nation Communities, the First Nation Environmental Contaminants Program, BZA has begun to test the Lake area for contaminants. Approximately 15% of the territory has already been tested. This includes, fish testing, animal testing, soil testing and vegetation testing. A timeline of continued testing has been defined and it is anticipated that over the course of the next four or five years much of Lake and its environs will have been tested for contaminants. This is a particularly important part of the project as it speaks to resource use as well as possible remediation and/or site reclamation and possible litigation. Infrastructure will be a big part of the project as the project moves forward and while the Administrative Office of Biinjitwaabik Zaaging Anishinaabeek currently provides infrastructure support for the project, it is a temporary arrangement. Infrastructure development within the community will eventually include a field office, an interpretative centre, a museum, a residence/accommodation centre and waterfront facilities such as docks, fish cleaning stations, boat launches, etc. Other infrastructure endeavours will include campsite development such as tent platforms, fire pits and outdoor privies. Infrastructure development will be staged over several years but the most immediate need is the field office and interpretative centre, The field office will provide a centralized base of activities while the interpretative centre will be the information/collection centre for the project. While community building has been very much a part of the project from its inception, it will become increasingly more important as the project moves forward. Community engagement will take place through project oversight but efforts need to be made to ensure that community engagement takes place throughout the duration of the project. This will be facilitated by the project team and it will include everything from the hosting of community information sessions to actively involving community members in the work of the project. Community information sessions will allow for the sharing of information as well as site visitations by community members. Information sessions will include community presentations as well as regional workshops. Community members will also be encouraged to assist in the development, operation and maintenance of the community development plan. Young people, for example, will be employed in the cutting of trails and the clearing of bush. Elders will be asked to share their knowledge and experience and these conversations will be recorded and will incorporated into the story of the community. Fishers will be asked to develop the fish sites and to prepare “fishing schedules”. The women of the community will ve invited to pursue craft production and to develop teaching modules for craft instruction.

57 Jeff Corntassel and Cheryl Bryce, “Practicing Sustainable Self-Determination: Indigenous Approaches to Cultural Restoration and Revitalization”, Brown Journal of World Affairs, V. XVIII, Issue II, Summer 2012, p. 153.

12/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México.

Potentially a very important part of the initiative, the economic diversification component essentially speaks to long term, wide ranging, economic development. What it means is having community members move from fishing to small engine repair, from food preparation to bakery production, from infrastructure development to carpentry training. Again, working within an asset based community development model, community members will be asked to identify community strengths and once these strengths are identified, to help the project team to develop these strengths as the engines of economic diversification. While some work has already been done at the regional level with either Nokiiwin Tribal Council or individual communities such as Red Rock First Nation, the potential for regional economic development, particularly coming out of the community development initiative, suggests that community planning include regional planning as well. To this end, the seven Indigenous communities of Kiashke Zaaging Anishinabeek, Animbiigoo Zaagiigan Anishinabeek, Bingwi Neyaashi Anishinabeek, Red Rock First Nation, White Sand First Nation and Fort William First Nation will be invited to participate in the regional economic development plan process. The first step towards the development of a regional economic development is identifying regional economic priorities. BZA has already begun to identify regional economic priorities and its priorities range from fish management to eco-tourism. In as much as the goal is regional economic development, it is imperative that the seven communities come together to plot regionally centred priorities. The eventual goal is not only setting priorities but to create a Regional Economic Committee to oversee regional economic development. Important to this is also the inclusion of the local municipality, the Municipality of Greenstone. Some discussion has already taken place with the municipality and Greenstone has centred much of its economic development strategy on First Nations partnerships. Interpretive programming is clearly an important of the community development plan. It builds upon work that has already been done in terms of site verification and site preservation/protection and is directly linked to community building, economic diversification and regional economic development. Working with land-use maps, the knowledge of the land, collected artifacts, the stories of the Elders and the audio-visual material generated by the project, the interpretative program will tell the story of the Lake. While a portion of all of this will be developed and delivered in the interpretative centre another portion will be land-based. In other words, the maps, the artifacts, the stories and the audio-visual material will be shared in such a way to provide for a well-rounded understanding of the experience of the Anishinabeg of the Lake. Land-based interpretative progamming will include the trails, the fish camps, the canoe routes and the berry picking grounds and will offer an experiential learning opportunity. Interpretative program development will be determined by the scope and the richness of the material collected. It will, however, include the audio-visual accounts of the Elders, the stories of the fish, the GIS maps of generational land-use, photos of the land, Lake samples and even fur trade records. Land- based interpretative programming will likely include route maps and trail markers, photo displays, interpretative plaques and vegetation signage. The land-based program will also involve site development which could include gathering areas, fire pits and perhaps even storage areas. Curriculum development will take many forms and will include both classroom and non- classroom curriculum. Curriculum development will initially be done in conjunction with the activity of the staff and teachers at the Spirit Bay School at Biinjitiwabik Zaaging Anishinabeek. Directed at students in grades kindergarten to eight, the curriculum will slowly be introduced as a class specific undertaking but eventually the curriculum will be integrated across the curriculum. Curriculum will also be developed with the Nipigon-Red Rock High School staff and teachers and delivered as part or the schools regular course delivery. Efforts too will be made to work with faculty and staff of both Lakehead University and Confederation College to introduce the BZA curriculum into both post- secondary institutions. Initially, BZA curriculum will be rooted in history/cultural studies with the course material reflecting the experience of the Anishinabeg community of the Lake Nipigon region. Eventually though, the curriculum will also speak to the life cycle of the sturgeon, the ranging patterns of the caribou and the impact of climate change. Workshop curriculum will also be part of the community development plan, wherein a series of workshops will be developed that deal with topics like traditional land-use mapping or environmental degradation. These workshops will be delivered in the community at local

13/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México. gatherings but they will also be used to help inform residents of northern Ontario of the experience of the community of the Lake Nipigon region.

Conclusion Community development and the Anishinabeg community of the Lake Nipigon region is a community well-being project. It begins with the values and belief structure of the Anishinibeg community, it focuses on the special relationship that the Anishinabeg community has with the land, it speaks to the Anishinabeg “land-ethic”, it documents time honoured patterns of land-use and land-use activities, it introduces the Euro-Canadian community and the influence that the Euro-Canadian community has had on Anishinabeg land-use activities, it works within a culturally grounded development path of asset based community development and it focuses on the specific community development interests of the Anishinabeg community. While all of this is integral to both community well-being and the process of community development, at the end of the day, community development and the Anishinabeg community is the story of the land and the connection that the Anishinabeg community has with the land. It is, however, also the story of self- determination. The world view of Indigenous Peoples is a way of being. It is what the Anishinabeg call “mino bimaadiziwin” or living well. It is co-operation, sharing, patience, non-interference, modesty, respect and above all else harmony with oneself and the world around you. The seven grandfather teachings as articulated by Elder Eddie Benton-Benai, wisdom, love, bravery, honesty, humility, truth and respect, speak to this way of being and this way of being is reflected in the ways of the community.58 The so-called new paradigm of community development as is now defined by the Indigenous community and which is being more and more readily applied in the Indigenous community is, mino bimmaadiziwin. The special relationship that the Anishinibeg community has with the land, or what is often referred to the “land ethic” is an ethic that “embodies the concept that land and its resources must be protected out of respect for the past, present and future generations.”59 Generations of humankind but animal kind and other world beings as well. It is a spiritual connection that ensures balance and harmony in the universe. Protect and preserve is very much a part of the community development story. The time-honoured patterns of land-use that frame the community development initiative are territorially based land-uses that have a regional focal point. They are family/generationally rooted in the experience of the community. They are seasonally based and balanced from one season to the next and they are informed by the land and the knowledge that the Anishinabeg community has of the land. When the Euro-Canadian community arrived in the Lake Nipigon region they brought bring with them their world view and a land ethic that was/is homo-centric and primarily concerned with the control and exploitation of the land. As a result, the land-based activities of Anishinabeg slowly came to be displaced by the more aggressive land-use ethic of the Euro-Canadian community. Eventually giving rise to the resettlement of the Anishiniabeg into six, Lake based reserve communities, the Anishinabeg community was forced to adapt to the ways of the “other”. In reclaiming their rightful place on the land, community development is also an expression of self- determination. Self-determination is represented in the community development process by what the First Nation Development Institute has described as “Native asset building strategies”.60 These strategies are reflective of the new community development paradigm which is culturally centred, value based, people oriented and holistic in application. Most importantly, it is a culturally grounded development path that is focused on the strengths of the community. In the case of the Anishinabeg community of the Lake Nipigon region, self-determination has allowed the

58 Edward Benton-Benai, op. cit., pp. 60 - 66. 59 “Strategic Directions”, op. cit., p. 295. 60 Integrated Asset-Building Stategies for Reservation-Based Communities, op. cit., p. 4.

14/15

26 y 27 de abril, Ciudad de México. community to focus the initiative on project oversight, site verification, site preservation and protection, contaminant testing, infrastructure development, community building, economic diversification, regional economic development, interpretive programming and curriculum development. From project oversight to curriculum development and delivery, the community development initiative of Biinjitwaabik Zaaging Anishinabeek is a culturally grounded attempted on the part of the community to reclaim its’ place on the land and to sustain the health and well- being of the community over an extended period of time. It includes everything from the protection of traditional land-use sites to youth employment opportunities. It was initiated with a view to the past and an eye to the future. Remembering and honouring generations gone by and planning for generations to come, BZA community development, is self-defined and self-directed.

15/15