Point Lay Case Study MMS 89-0093
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
● OCS Study Point Lay Case Study MMS 89-0093 Social and Economic Studies /1 U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Region OCS Study MMS 89-0093 Technical Report No. 139 Contract No. 14-12-0001-30364 Point Lay Case Study Submitted to: U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service Alaska OCS Region Anchorage, Alaska IMPACT ASSESSMENT, INC. NOVEMBER 17, 1989 Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Region, Leasing and Environment Office in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its eontent or use thereof. Alaska OCS Environmental Studies Program Point Lay Case Stndy Impact Assessmen~ Inc. La Jolla, California. Prepared by Michael Galginaitis, Michael A. Downs, and James W. VanStone, with contributions by Sverre Pedersen, Yvonne Yarber, Lawrence Kaplan, Mari Rodin, and Stanley Walens and much assistance from too many people to mention by name in Point Lay, Point Hope, and Barrow. John S. Petterson served as principal investigator and project manager. November 198S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In any research involving as much fieldwork as this one, by more than one fieldworker, in more than one community, there are far too many people who deserve thanks and mention than it is ever possible to formally recognize. We are taking the opportunity here to single out some of those individuals who were especially helpful, but have no doubt inadvertently left out some who should have been included. We apologize in advance, and can only claim the press of events for any oversight of this nature. In Point Lay, Galginaitis would first like to thank Paul (Polo) Tazruk for his hospitality in sharing his house when Galginaitis first arrived in Point Lay. Housing is limited in Point Lay and this not only eased Galginaitis into the community but aided the research immeasurably. We also wish to thank Polo for his aid in other matters and his willingness to talk with Yvonne Yarber for the oral history portion of the research. Lastly, we wish to express our personal gratitude to Polo and the other members of his household - Jim Jim, Thomas, Gertie, and for a time Blackie. Living in Point Lay in your household was truly memorable. We also wish to thank the other Elders in Point Lay, all of whom assisted the research in one way or another. Dorcas and Warren Neakok, Kate Peterson, and Leo Attungowruk all provided interesting and essential information. Most of the other adults of Point Lay also contributed to the study in too many ways to enumerate. Only a few can be mentioned here. Amos Agnasagga, although often swamped with other responsibilities, was very generous with his time and helped solve problems that the researcher blundered into. Lisa Von Ziegesar was also a major contributor to the study, both as an informant and as a friend. Ben and Alice Neakok, Ruth and Danny Pikok, and Jack and Bertha Henry all provided comforting support by welcoming Galginaitis into their homes as pseudo-kinsman (Polo is the father of the three women). Allen and Martha Upicksoun, now in Oklahoma, welcomed Galginaitis at nearly any time and although not enthused about the sponsorship of the research were willing to accept him as a fellow human being and a friend. Susie Neakok saved Galginaitis a trip to Barrow by administering medical care and was always willing to talk for a bit in the store. Allen and Susie Attungowruk were willing to entertain Galginaitis for hours, discussing Native issues or life in general, and without these visits his understanding of Point Lay would be much less. Angela and Terry Harding also welcomed Galginaitis to visit whenever he wanted and shared much of their knowledge of the village with him. Andy Fields, the school principal, and Sandy, his wife, were very patient with the research, even when Galginaitis had difficulty at first in explaining what its purpose was. Tim Whip, Steve Culbertson, and Steve Bohorski were all more than helpful, and made the time in Point Lay even more pleasant. John Cartwright and Louise and Brad Olsen helped Galginaitis understand construction projects in Point Lay (and on the North Slope in general). It is impossible to mention all those who made our work in Point Lay truly unforgettable, and who we hope to see again many times in the future. In Point Hope, the John and Molly Oktollik and Rex and Ramona Rock families accepted Downs as family, for which he will be forever grateful. They were also exceptionally friendly and helpful to Galginaitis. Ernie and Evie Frankson, along with Dinah Frankson, were good friends. Dorcas and Elijah Rock also held open house for the researchers. Edie Turner, herself a guest in Point Hope, was very cooperative in sharing information and discussing mutual topics of interest. We also wish to thank Mayor David Stone and the President of Tigara Corporation Sayers Tuzroyluke, who were both extremely helpful in their official capacities as well as more informally. It is impossible to thank by name all of the many friends we have made in Point Hope, but their contribution to this report is beyond measure and can never be fully acknowledged. We hope this report repays them for the care and understanding that they displayed to us. There are also several people in Barrow we should thank. Betsy and Tom Chivers are due a major thanks for lodging the researchers on such short notice. Their family provides a nice change from sterile hotel rooms as well. Will Nebesky and Rick Sampson of the NSB Planning Department were cooperative far beyond our reasonable expectations. Karla Kolash, since resigned from that department, was also most helpful. Tim Holmes shared some insights on Barrow and Wainwright gained from the preliminary findings of the Barrow and Wainwright subsistence studies, and he and Meg made Galginaitis feel welcome as a social visitor as well. TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface . Xxvlll. .“” Introduction . ..1 “Traditional n Inupiat Social Organization . 1 Transitional Era: Contact-1880 . ...6 Time Line: Point Lay, Alaska . ...6 Time Line: Point Hope, Alaska . 9 Population inthe Transitional Era . 17 Households inthe Transitional Era . 20 Economy and Trade Network in the Transitional Era . 22 Social Institutions in the Transitional Era . 26 Kinship inthe Transitional Era . 26 The Umialik, Marriage, and the Expansion of Kin Ties inthe Transitional Era . ...28 Institutionalized Partnerships, the Qalgi, and Social Cohesion in the Transitional Era . 30 Latter Transitional Era: 1880-1927 . 33 Sociocultural Change in the Latter Transitional Era . 33 Schools inthe Latter Transitional Era . 37 Economy in the Latter Transitional Era . 38 Consolidation and Dispersal: 1927- 1958 . 39 The Dew Line Era: 1958-1971 . ...39 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Point Hope and the Transition to the Contemporary Era: 1955-Present . ..40 The Point Hope School in the Transition to the Contemporary Era . 44 Community Activities in the Transitionto the Contemporary Era . 45 Contact with the Outside World in the Transition to the Contemporary Era . ...46 The Episcopal Church in the Transition to the Contemporary Era . ...47 Role of’ Elders in the Transition to the Contemporary Era . 47 Land Use in the Transition to the Contemporary Era . 48 Employment in the Transition to the Contemporary Era . 48 Changes in Whaling in the Transition to the Contemporary Era . 49 Cultural Awareness in the Transition to the Contemporary Era . 50 The Contemporary Era: 1971-Present . 51 General Population -- Point Layand Point Hope . 51 General Population Description of Contemporary Point Lay . 51 Marriage and Migration in Point Lay . 69 Community Migration Sequence . 82 Discussion . ...85 Point Lay Households . ...86 Household Information: The Census of July 1984 . 89 Introduction . ...89 Inupiat “Complex” Households . 94 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Non-Inupiat Households . 96 Household Information: The Census of September 1987.... 96 Introduction . ...96 Inupiat Households . ...96 Non-Inupiat Households . 102 Household Information: The Census of December 1987 . 102 Introduction . 102 Inupiat Households . 102 Non-Inupiat Households . 107 Household Information: The Census of June 1988 . 107 Introduction . 107 Inupiat Households . 107 Non-Inupiat Households . 112 Discussion . 112 Community Housing and Settlement Pattern . 115 General Population Description of Contemporary Point Hope . 116 Point Hope Households . 125 Klnshipin Point Lay . 133 Introduction . 133 . 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS Preliminary Remarks . ...133 Key Households . ...144 Demographic Processes . 145 Summary ofthe Chart . 146 Kinship in Action: Politics and Ideology in Point Lay . 147 Kinship in Action: “WeAreO neFamily” . ...147 Kinship in Action: Economic Opportunities . 149 Kinship in Action: General Sharing and Redistribution Networks . 150 Kinship in Action: The Organization of the Beluga Hunt . 150 Kinship in Point Hope . ...151 Point Hope Household Network A . 151 Point Hope Household Network B . 154 Point Hope Household Network C . 157 Adoption and Residence in Point Hope Networks Band C . 159 Other Household Networks in Point Hope . 160 Kinship Networks in Point Lay and Point Hope . 160 Ideology of Kinship . ...160 Behavioral Kinship . ...162 iv -. TABLE OF CONTENTS Kinship Links Between Point Lay and Point Hope . ...166 Social Organization . ...167 Volunteerism and Formal Institutions in Point Lay . ...167 Emergency Services: Search and Rescue, and the Fire Department . 168 Search and Rescue in Operation, 1987 . 170 Point Lay Native IRA Council . 171 Governance and Community Attitudes . 171 Cully Corporation History.