FAMILY OR BUREAUCRATIC TRAPLINES?: THE REGISTERED TRAPLINE SYSTEM AS A TOOL OF COLONIALISM IN KASHECHEWAN

by

KIETHEN SUTHERLAND

B.A., Nipissing University, 2017

A THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE PARTIAL FUFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

in

SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES

NIPISSING UNIVERSITY

February 2020

Ó KIETHEN SUTHERLAND, 2020

Abstract

This project examines the histories and afterlives of the Registered Trapline System established by the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) in the James Bay Region as a colonial project of the state. The Illilo1 of James Bay have been living in the territory since time immemorial, moving freely among and in relationship to the animals. The land has provided them with enough wildlife to help sustain themselves. The Illilowuk (Crees) shared the land alongside others. Life began to change for the Illilo with the arrival of Europeans to the territory in the late 1600’s. The arrival of settlers brought new technologies to the region. Fur Trade relations also changed traditional trade relationships. In the late 1940s and the early 1950s, the Ontario government established bureaucratic traplines throughout Ontario, which were a particular expression of the settler state and relationships between Ililo and non-Ililo on the coast of James Bay. This project will examine these traplines on the James Bay Coast with a particular focus on the community of Kashechewan First Nation, exploring the impact of registered traplines on the Illilu way of life. My thesis asks the following questions: How were these traplines created? How did the Illilowuk react to the changes with regards to land ownership/possession? This research is important for understanding settler-state relationships with the Illilowuk of James Bay. It examines the policies that Ontario Government imposed on the Illilowuk without regards for rights guaranteed by Treaty No. 9. In this thesis, I will argue that the Omushkegowuk experienced various forms of state control over their harvesting rights. The state-controlled access to lands and animals in ways that undermined the rights that are guaranteed with the signing of Treaty No. 9 that my ancestors signed. With this research I worked with Elders and community members who still carry this knowledge and live and work in relationships with the land and the animals. I also integrated my knowledge of hunting and trapping in the region, as well as my own relationship to the territory. Elders are still very vocal about these changes and reflect on how these traplines changed their way of life. To this day, the trapline system continues to be used.

1 Illilo is the Cree term for the people, there will be some instances where I will be using Illilowuk which is the plural for Illilo.

i Table of Contents

Abstract ...... i Table of Contents ...... ii List of Figures ...... iii Acknowledgements ...... iv Chapter One: Introduction...... 1 Chapter Two: Protecting the North’s Valuable Resources: The Hudson Bay Company, Ontario and Local Illilowuk Knowledge Keepers...... 11 Introduction ...... 11 Weskatch Illilo Matisonah and Relationships to the Land...... 13 Indigenous Knowledge and the Emergence of Scientific Wildlife Management ...... 15 Hudson Bay Company Conservation ...... 20 Beaver Preserves ...... 23 Reintroducing Wildlife in the Omushkegowuk Territory ...... 28 Conclusion ...... 31 Chapter Three: Wanaykunaskiya - The Registered Trapline System ...... 34 Introduction ...... 35 Traplines Elsewhere and the Past ...... 36 Traditional Land Use ...... 38 Elders Stories on Traditional Land-use ...... 42 Ontario Provincial Traplines...... 46 Treaty Rights and the Trapline System...... 50 Conclusion ...... 58 Chapter Four: Decolonizing and Reanimating the Land through Photography ...... 60 Introduction ...... 60 Working with Photography ...... 61 John Macfie Photography ...... 65 Ni Minapiskaykanah (My Photos) ...... 73 Conclusion ...... 82 Chapter Five: Conclusion ...... 85 Reference ...... 89

ii

List of Figures

Figure 1-1: Spring Hunt 2017...... 1 Figure 2-1: Map of Beaver Preserves and information on Beaver Conservation. From the Waskaganish Cree Nation Website. https://www.waskaganish.ca/beaver-reserves/ ...... 26 Figure 3-1: Picture of My Father and Me...... 34 Figure 3-2: Traplines of Kashechewan and Fort Albany ...... 41 Figure 3-3: Map of Indian Treaties in Ontario...... 51 Figure 4-1: Cam Surrie (in peaked cap), trapline management supervisor for the Department of Lands and Forest, consulting a map with Big Trout Lake trappers. Photo from John Macfie...... 67 Figure 4-2: Earl Stone of the Department of Lands and Forest, meeting with trappers at Poplar Hill. Photo from John Macfie...... 68 Figure 4- 3: A Moose Factory trapper dragging home two beavers. His snowshoes, moccasins, mitts, and canvas gun case are native-made. Photo from of John Macfie...... 69 Figure 4-5: Mr. Echum of Moose Factory pelting a beaver. The bone tool he is wielding with a chopping motion will separate skin from flesh without risk of cutting it...... 71 Figure 4-4: A Moose Factory Women fleshing a stretched beaver-skin...... 71 Figure 4-6: No Man's Point Spring Hunt Camp ...... 74 Figure 4-7: Godwit Hunting on the North Mouth of the Albany River ...... 74 Figure 4-9: Snow goose hunting along the Cheegunuk River ...... 78 Figure 4-8: Returning from a snow goose hunt and dropping off my harvest to my Grandmother...... 78 Figure 4-10: Me with an otter my friends and I trapped on the Nechichishi River...... 80 Figure 4-11: Pit stop south of Kinoshe Siipii (Pike River)...... 80

iii

Acknowledgements

First, I am extremely thankful for my supervisors Dr. Kirsten Greer and Dr. Katrina Srigley for their incredible support and guidance. They have worked with me to strengthen my writing skills. They have read and offered feedback on many drafts to help shape the thesis to what it is now. I also would like to thank the Office of Indigenous Initiatives and my peers for providing support in my six years at Nipissing University. I also would like to extend my thank you to the community of Kashechewan as they all have encouraged me to pursue my dreams.

I would also like to offer a special thanks to my parents Michael and Lucy Sutherland for continuing to support me through my education journey, they have seen me at my lowest in life and continued to push me to reach my potential. I am forever grateful for that. We did this together.

iv

Dedicated to My late grandfather, and to all my ancestors…

v

Chapter One: Introduction

Figure 1-1: Spring Goose Hunt 2017. Photo from the author's personal collection.

1 ᐧᐊᒋ ᑭᑎ ᓭᑕᕐᓚᓐ ᑎᓯᓂᑫᓱᓐ᙮ ᐃᑯᒣᑲ ᑭᔐᒉᐧᐁᓐ ᑐᒋᓐ ᐃᑯᑌᒥᑲ ᑲᑭᐯᒪᒍᔦᓐ᙮ ᐃᓂᐱᒃ

ᐃᓇ ᐸᑲᓐ ᐃᐱᑌᑫᓚᓄᒃ ᑲᑭᑐᑕᓐ ᐊᓐᑎ᙮ ᔕᑯᒡ ᐃᐱᐳᒃ ᐅᐱᐳᓐᐅᒥᔅᑲᓐ ᐃᑐᑯᓐ ᒧᓱᓇ ᐃᓕᑯ

ᑯᔾᑌᒧᒃ ᐱᓕᔅ ᐊᑎ ᐊᑐᓪᐯᔅᑲᑐᒃ ᑭᐧᐁᑌᓄᒃ ᑎᑫ᙮ ᒥᑐᓀ ᑭᔅᑌᓐᑕᑯᓐ ᐁᐧᐃᑭᓇᓄᒃ ᐅᑐ ᒣᓭᐧᐁ

ᐃᓀᑲᓇᒃ ᑫᔅᑫᓕᒣᑐᒃ ᐃᑯᒣᑲ ᒣᓗᑐᑌᑐᒃ᙮

ᐧᐃᐸᒡ ᐯᑯ ᓄᒋᒥᒃ ᑭᑕᓯᔭᓐ᙮ ᓴᓐᒃᐅ ᐱᑯ ᐅᒋ ᑲᑕᐳᓀᓯᔭᓐ ᐅᒋ᙮ ᐁᓯᑯᒃ ᒣᓀ ᑫᒍᓕᑯᑕ

ᐊᓐᑌ ᒣᓀ˙ᓀ˙ᓂᒃ ᑎᑫ ᓯᑯᓀᓭᓇᓐ᙮ ᑕᑐ ᐃᓯᑯᒃ ᒪᓇ ᑌᑐᑕᓇᓐ ᓄᑕᔾ ᐃᑯᒪᑲ ᓀᑫᔾ ᒪᓇ ᓂᐧᐃᒍᑯᐧᐅᒃ

ᓂᑯᑯᒻ ᐁᑯᒪᑲ ᓂᒧᓱᒻ ᐊᐸᓐ ᒪᓇ ᐃᔑᑦ ᐃᑎᑌᐸᓇ᙮ ᒣᓭᐧᐁᐯᑯ ᑲᔾᑕᓯᔦᒃ ᑌᑐᑕᑕᓐ᙮

ᐁᑯᓐᑕ ᒪᑲ ᑲᑭᓯᑭᔅᑭᓄᒪᓯᔦᓐ ᑕᓂ ᑐᒋᑲᑌᒃ ᓄᒉᒣᒃ ᐃᑕᓭᐧᐅᓄᒃ᙮ ᐁᔦ˙ ᐁᓴ ᐁᒣᓗᑐᒉᒃ

ᐁᑕᓴᐧᐅᓇᓄᒃ᙮ ᒣᓴᐤᐁ ᓀᔅᑕ ᐤᑫᔦᔅ ᐁᒣᓇᒉᑕᓄᒃ ᐊᔅᑫ ᓀᐱ ᐤᐃᔭᔑᓴᒃ ᐯᓓᓱᒃ ᒋᒣᓇᒐᑲᓄᑎᒃ᙮

ᑌᐸᒋᒧᓇ ᒪᑲ ᑌᑫ ᐅᒉ ᐅᒉᐸᓓᑭ ᐅᐅ ᑭᔅᑫᓄ˙ᒪᑯᓇ᙮ ᑲᑭᐯᒉᓄᐧᐊ ᐁᓭᑦ ᑭᓯᑫᔅᑫᓐᑌᓐ ᐊᓀᒪ᙮ ᐱᓭᓭᒃ

ᑭᐧᐃᑎᒪᑯᓐ ᐁᑲ ᒉᒣᑕ˙ᑭᐧᐊᓐ ᐧᐃᔭᔑᓴᒃ ᑭᒥᒉᔭᓐ ᐯᑯ ᓂᐸᑕᔭᓐ ᐯᓭᓭᒃ ᑭᑌᑯᓐ᙮ ᐁᑯᒪ ᒪᑲ

ᑲᑭᐯᒋᑐᑕᒪᓐ ᐧᐁᔅᑲᒡ ᐯᑯ ᐅᒉ ᐯᓭᓭᒃ ᓄᒉᒣᒃ ᑭᑕᓭᔪᓐ᙮

ᑲᑭᐯᒉ ᐅᔅᑫᓂᑯᔭᓐ ᒪᑲ ᑭᑌᒪᒪᒧᑌᓀᓐᑌᓐ ᑫᑲ˙ᓇ᙮ ᑫᑯᒉ ᐯᔭᑫᒃ ᐁᑕᑯᒃ ᒪᓇ ᓀᑌᑌᓐ᙮

ᐧᐁᔅᑲᒃ ᒪᓇ ᐁᑌᐸᒉᒧᓇᓄᒃ ᓇᓇᑯ ᑌᑫ ᒪᓇ ᑭᑕᓄᓐ ᐃᓇᑐ˙ ᐯᒪᒍᓇᓄᒃ᙮ ᐧᐃᔭᓯᓴ ᑲᔑᑕᓐᑌ ᒪᓇ

ᐁᑐᑌᓪᐧᐊᒃ᙮ ᑲᐧᐃᑫ ᒥᒋᔐᑎᒃ᙮ ᑫᑲ ᒪᑲ ᑭᑎᐸᒉᒧᓇᓄᓐ ᐊᒥᔅᒃ ᐅᑭᒪ˙ ᑲᑭᑐᑕᒃ᙮

ᐁᑯᑕ ᒪᑲ ᐅᒉ ᐸᓓᒃ ᐅᒪ ᑲᒪᓭᓀᑫᔭᓐ ᐁᓂᑐ˙ ᑭᔅᑭᓐᑕᒪᓐ ᑫᑯᓐᒋ ᑲᑭ ᐧᐊᐧᐁᓕᓴᑕᓄᑭ ᐊᓄ

ᐧᐊᓇᑲᓐ ᐊᔅᑭᔭ᙮ ᑕᓂᑲᑐᒋᑲᑌᒃ ᐁᓀᑲᓇᒃ ᑲᔭᒥᔭᑲ ᓄᑎᒃ ᐳᒥᓭ ᑲᔭᔅᑕ ᓄᑭ ᐅᐅ ᐧᐊᓀᑲᓐ ᐊᔅᑭᔭ᙮

ᐁᑯᒪ ᐅᒉ ᒉᒪᓭᓇᒪᓐ ᐅᒪ ᒪᓭᓀᑲᓐ

2 I grew up in a remote northern community, Kashechewan First Nation. Kashechewan is a fly-in reserve and is only accessible by airplane or by boat in the summer. In the winter months the community is connected with other communities along the coast by a coastal winter road, stretching from Attawapiskat in the north to Moose Factory in the south. It connects every community in between. I was lucky to grow up in a community like Kashechewan because everyone knew one another. The community is really close.

At a young age, I began to spend a lot of time on the land. From the age of nine months, I have gone to our family’s spring hunt camp Minownown (No Man’s Point). I go there with my father and mother along with my grandparents. My extended family goes there too.

This is where I learned the teachings about living out on the land and develop a relationship with the land. There were a lot of teachings that I have received while living out on the land. All these teachings centred around showing respect to the land and the animals we harvest. At a young age, I was taught to only kill things that I would eat so that nothing would go to waste. My Elders still remind me of this teaching when I leave for a hunt. These teachings have been passed down through generations, through stories, and this is how I received my understanding of taking care of the land.

While being out on the land and spending time at the camp I began to wonder why we always stayed in the same area. I remembered the stories my grandmother told me when I was younger. She mentioned the Illilowuk2 always went to where they could find food. If there was food they would stay there. If there was no animals to be found they would move somewhere else.

This is when I started to hear about traplines in the area and how the Ontario Ministry of Natural

Resources (Fish and Wildlife Branch) set up traplines in the north. I wondered how these traplines

2 Illilo is the Cree word meaning “the people”. There will also be times where I will use Illilowuk which is plural for the people.

3 came to be, and who decided where the borders would be drawn and who was consulted? These

questions led me to write this project. I wanted to understand the histories of colonial conservation

practices in the Omushkegowuk region, and the impact it has had on the Illilowuk, specifically the

people of Kashechewan.3

Research on the histories of these trapline systems has been sparse. Bryan Cummins has

some discussion about traplines in his monograph Only God Can Own The Land. Cummins’ work

considers how the Registered Trapline System impacted Illilo views of land use and ownership.

Work from other scholars has also touched on trapline systems in other parts of Canada.4 Glen

Iceton and David Vogt both wrote about the trapline system as a system of state control for land

tenure within provincial boundaries in places such as British Columbia.5 Looking into the histories of trapline systems, especially from Indigenous perspectives, are extremely important, considering they are not taken into account when conducting Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA). The international mining company De Beers, for example, did not consider traditional territories of the

Illilowuk from Attawapiskat when scoping an EIA for its mining operations in the region. Instead they used the provincial Trapline System from the government for this process, illustrating the deliberate disregard for the Illilo way of life, and their relationship to the land.6 Using archival

research and interviews with Elders from various communities along the James Bay Coast, this

thesis will contribute to a better understanding of the impact of the trapline system on the Illilo and

how this system fractured Illilo relationships to the land and animals.

3 This is the English translation to what was written in Cree syllabics. 4 Bryan Cummins, “Only God Can Own the Land”: The Attawapiskat Cree (Toronto: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004). 5 David Vogt, “Indians on White Lines: Bureaucracy, Race, and Power on Northern British Columbian Traplines 1925-1950,” Journal of the Canadian Historical Association vol. 26 no. 1 (2015): 165; Glen Iceton, “Defining Space: How History Shaped and Informed Notions of Kaska Land Use and Occupancy,”(PhD diss., University of Saskachewan, 2019). 205. https://harvest.usask.ca>bitstream>handle>ICETON-DISSERTATION-2019 6 Leonard J.S. Tsuji, Daniel D. McCarthy, Graham S. Whitelaw and Jessica McEachren, “Getting Back to the basics: The Victor Diamond Mind Environmental Assessment Scoping Process and The Issue of Family-Based Traditional Lands Versus Registered Traplines,” Impact Accessment and Project Appraisal 29, no. 1. (2011): 42.

4 Combining Indigenous methodologies with archival work, my thesis will contribute to this body of literature by examining the history of wildlife conservation in the Omushkegowuk territory

(West Coast of James Bay), focusing on three areas: Hudson Bay Company (HBC) conservation efforts and the restocking of animals; the implementation of the Registered Trapline System; and, interactions between Omuskegowuk peoples and the land and state officials, as documented in photography. My principal questions are: What impact did the conservation laws have on the

Illilowuk? How did the Omushkegowuk Illilo deal with and/or adapt to these changes? What changed for the Omushkegowuk Illilo because of these laws?

In answering these questions, I will consult a variety of sources that cover the conservation history on James Bay but also in other areas as well. These primary sources provide a window on the trapline systems, HBC conservation programs, and the restocking of furbearing animals in the

Omushkegowuk territory. For instance, archival material from the Archives of Ontario details conservation programs in the Omushkegowuk Territory including the establishment of traplines, restocking of animals, and how the Ontario Government managed to impose their laws on the

Omushkegowuk Illilo. For the project I have also interviewed Elders from my hometown,

Kashechewan. Their stories are important for this research because they show how the Illilo were impacted by these laws. With these stories there is a better understanding of Illilo views of these impacts and importantly, the degree to which there are strong continuities in Illilo relationships with the land, and the animals who also call it home.

I will argue that the Omushkegowuk experienced various forms of state control over their harvesting rights. The controlled access to lands and animals they experienced undermined the rights that are guaranteed with the signing of Treaty No. 9 that my ancestors signed. However, this thesis will also examine ways the Illilowuk have resisted and been able to adapt to these changes.

5 Chapter Two will investigate other conservation laws and polices other than the Registered

Trapline System from the Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC) and the Ontario government. It will focus on the history the HBC had with conservation and funding research for conservation and how this paved the way for the Ontario Government to start funding research for wildlife conservation, illustrating the emergence of scientific research and it relationships to Indigenous knowledge. This chapter will then highlight the establishment of beaver preserves by the HBC that were funded by the provincial government and the Ontario government’s efforts to restock furbearing animal populations in the north. What impacts did this conservations effort have on the

Illilo? What role did science play in developing conservation policies?

Chapter Three will examine the Registered Trapline System that was introduced in Ontario in 1940. It will determine the effects this system had on Illilowuk harvesting of animals. The questions that I ask in this chapter are: How was the Registered Trapline created? Were the Illilo consulted? What impacts did the Registered Trapline System have on the Illilowuk? How did this system fracture and change their relationships to the land? This chapter will analyze what Elders from the community of Kashechewan have said and what the archival material says about the system. It will also look into secondary literature on Illilo land use.

Chapter Four will analyze photographs taken by MNR officials during their trips to

Northern Ontario. These photographs will be used to consider what the photographer imagined and the narrative they wanted to construct with their photographs. Were these photographs used in the creation of conservation policies in the area? Also, in this section I use my own photographs of my time on the land. These photographs will be used to show acts of resistance to state policies, the ongoing relationships that the Illilowuk have with the land and the animals, and contribute to a different understanding of the hunting and trapping lifestyles of the Illilowuk.

6 Together these chapters show that there is a long history of colonialism and bureaucratic

control of Indigenous lands in the Omushkegowuk Territory. It shows how these policies and laws

impacted and fractured Illilo relationships with the land and animals. This thesis will also show

how the Illilo after many years have continued to be resilient and adapt to these changes.

Indigenous Methodologies and Working with Story

Indigenous Research methodologies provide a rich and valuable way to examine Indigenous

worldviews and land-use practices, which might not otherwise be captured by western

epistemologies and ontologies. The most influential method in conducting historical research using

Indigenous methodologies is listening to and learning from oral histories. For countless generations, Indigenous peoples have used oral histories as a means of passing down knowledge from one generation to the next. These oral histories are often passed down by Elders7 or

knowledge keepers (of all ages) who have experienced an event or those who carry stories that

have been passed down to them. The most common stories are told on an everyday basis. These

stories are often everyday teachings and life experiences, and are similar to the stories that my

grandmother tells me whenever I am with her.

There are numerous scholars who conduct Indigenous research. Relationships and relationship building are common themes in their research.8 Building relationships is an important

cornerstone in Indigenous Research. As it is mentioned in Shawn Wilson’s book Research is

Ceremony, relationships are much more than relationships between two people, they are the

7 An Elder is someone who provides teachings and share life experiences with you. Generally, an Elder to me is someone I can go to for guidance and can provide knowledge on things I have questions for. 8 Margaret Kovach, Indigenous Methodologies: Characteristics, Conversations, and Contexts (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2009); Lianne C. Leddy, “Dibaajimowinan as method: Environmental History, Indigenous Scholarship, and Balancing Sources,” in Methodological Challenges in Nature-Culture and Environmental History Research, ed. Jocelyn Thorpe, Stephanie Rutherford, and Anders L. Sandberg (New York: Routhledge, 2017). Linda Tuhiwai Smith, Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (Zed Books: New York, 2012); Shawn Wilson, Research is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods (Black Point N.S: Fernwood Publications, 2008).

7 relationships that we have all around us, including the land, the animals, and our ancestors.9

Growing up in Kashechewan First Nation I have developed relationships and trust with Elders in the community. This happened in a few ways. Since I was young, I have been surrounded by

Elders. When visiting my grandmother’s house, another Elder would often be present. They would often exchange laughter and stories. Elders will often tell me stories about the land because I spend a lot of time out on the land. In these conversations we equally share stories with one another about our times out on the land. This has helped build the reciprocal relationships that I have with the

Elders in my community and made space for the story sharing that is at the center of this project.

I learned through these relationships for my project. I worked with Elders and knowledge keepers of the community of Kashechewan First Nation. As I have mentioned the Elders in the community are rich in knowledge. I also worked with the leadership (Chief and Council) of

Kashechewan First Nation. After writing a request to community leadership I received permission to interview Elders in the community. I hoped to interview six or ten Elders, but only four were available. These Elders were nonetheless able to provide me with invaluable knowledge. Over the

Christmas holidays of 2018, I contacted Elders in my community to ask if they were willing to share stories of their experiences with traditional land use and the changes they faced with the implementation of the Registered Trapline System. These interviews took place in the comfort of their own homes. The interviews were audio recorded, and I only asked one question for them:

“niiwi kiiskenten kehkon kiiskiintahmun waanaykun ashkiya ehko mahgah danehtehtunmun ooho waanaykun ashkiya?”10 I asked them one question because this gave them the freedom to talk about what was important to them when discussing the trapline system.

9 Shawn Wilson, Research is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods (Black Point N.S: Fernwood Publications, 2008): 80. 10 English Translation: “I would like to know what you know about the trapline and would like to know what you think about them?”

8 The information the Elders provided is rich in knowledge. Although, it may seem as though they did not answer the question directly at first, I allowed them to continue to tell me their story.

The oral histories that they provided proved to be valuable for my research. When going through and transcribing the interviews, I started to understand why they told me these stories. Their stories described the relationships that they had with the land. This is when I figured out that this project was about a lot more than the history of the traplines. It was more about the relationship the

Illilowuk have with the land. It was also about my relationship to the land. I am forever thankful for those stories that were shared with me. This experience was really empowering for me as it made me realize the importance of the relationship the Illilowuk have with the land.

These interviews were done in the Illilimowin (Cree). Both the Elders and myself speak

Illilimowin as our first language. While there were no language barriers between myself and the

Elders, when doing the translations there were some dialect differences, particularly as it related to how words were said. Nonetheless, even with this dialect difference it was still fairly easy to translate. Sometimes I called my grandmother for some reassurance. After the interview process,

I transcribed all of the interviews into Roman Orthography and then English. I went this route because it made it easier to translate the language from Roman Orthography to English. The interviews will be stored at the Ojibwe and Cree Culture Centre in Timmins Ontario.

Archival Work

Archival research was also essential in the completion of this thesis, I worked with archival material from the Archives of Ontario (AO). Over the course of my project I made two visits to the AO. During these visits I examined material from John Macfie, who was a trapline manager for the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) in the Fish and Wildlife Branch (FWB). Some other material I looked at were files from the FWB, particularly fur management files. However, there

9 were some limitations to what I was able to find there with regards to traplines in the North. From what I have heard from conversation is that the files for the Patricia District (Far Northern Ontario) were stored in their Cochrane Office but were destroyed in a fire. This limited the files available to me for my research. Nonetheless, the AO had various files that were tremendously helpful in this research. These files focus on traplines and detailed the other ways the provincial government implemented conservation efforts. These materials have also helped with my other chapters in this project.

In this thesis, I bring archival and interview material together, allowing me to consider different perspectives, experiences, and worldviews. For example, as we will see throughout the thesis, interviews of Elders helped me understand how new laws impacted their way of life. The stories also deepened my understanding of the nature of the changes to hunting and trapping resulting from conservations measures from the perspective of Illilo Elders from the community of Kashechewan land based relationships. While the archival material helped me understand the how the laws themselves came to be. Most of the archival material I used in this thesis are internal correspondence between MNR employees. This correspondence illustrates how MNR officials enforced these laws, how they viewed Indigenous trapping and hunting, and undermined the rights of Indigenous trappers to access fur bearing animals for subsistence.

10 Chapter Two: Protecting the North’s Valuable Resources: The Hudson Bay Company, Ontario and Local Illilowuk Knowledge Keepers.

Introduction

The James Bay region and its people experienced great change with the arrival of the

English in 1611 in the so-called “New World.” European treatment of subarctic animals as

commodities for a growing multi-national company centered on the imperial metropole of London,

England. Throughout the 1600’s, there were numerous explorations of the James Bay region from

Europe. By 1670, the English fur trading company, now known as the Hudson Bay Company

(HBC), were sending men to the mouth of the Moose River to trade directly with the Illilowuk.11

In 1674, the HBC established their first trading post on the Moose River and by 1675 they had

expanded north and built another trading post on the Albany River. As a result, by 1679 the HBC

were well established along the western coast of James Bay.12 The presence of early HBC

explorers, including Henry Hudson (ca.1565-1611), whom many believe to be buried on the land,

and the changes that resulted from their presence continue to reverberate in Illilowuk stories.

Sharing the land is a custom for Illilowuk. It is without a doubt that this custom made it

possible for the HBC to set up shop along the coast. The Omushkego Illilo worldview then (as

now) prioritized reciprocity, and, as such, if they agreed to share things with visitors the

understanding within this system was that visitors would share things with them.13 Consequently,

the Illilo assisted the HBC officials in several different ways. One of them was the relationship the

Illilo had with the lands surrounding the James Bay. This relationship meant the Illilo understood

the natural cycles of the lands, including the changing of the seasons and the migration of animals.

11 Victor P. Lytwyn, Mushkekowuck Athinuwick: Original People of the Great Swampy Land (Winnnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 2002), 126. 12 Ibid, 127. 13 John Long et al., “Sharing the Land at Moose Factory in 1763.” Ontario History 109, no. 2 (Fall 2017): 80-81. doi: https://doi.org/10.7202/1041286ar

11 They knew when the waterfowl would fly into the territory as it was an important food source for the people. After the major rivers broke up, leaves and grass started to grow, they knew that berry harvesting season was coming. This moment in the year was also important for the Illilo as it meant that they started their summer activities, meeting up with many other families at summer locations.

The HBC established posts on these summer locations to take advantage of the number of Illilo gathered in the area, and to learn about the movement of fur-bearing animals, familial trade networks, and the changing ice coverage for the seasonal flow of ships and furs to and from

England to James Bay from the seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries.

Furs were a valuable commodity for the HBC in the Omushkegowuk Territory. The Illilo provided these furs to the HBC in return for tools that were, at least initially, foreign to them such as steel pots and pans, as well as steel traps. The exact nature of the beginnings of the trade in these goods is unclear because trade networks with other Indigenous groups, such as the Nbisiing

Nishnaabeg on whose territory I now live, were well-established and it is quite possible that the

Illilowuk were already trading for some of these trade commodities before the arrival of the HBC in the Omushkegowuk region.14

Early years of prosperity gave way to the decline in fur returns for the HBC in the later 19th century. The population of furbearing animals were on the decline because of overharvesting. This was not only a problem for the HBC, it was also a problem for the Illilo as these animals were their primary food source. This decline in beaver was a result of shifts in trade culture, from take what you need to take as much as you can, which was coupled with the disruption of Illio relationships with and stewardship of the land.

14 Lytwyn, 115.

12 In response to declining returns, the HBC and the Ontario Government implemented

conservation laws in the Omushkegowuk Territory. In the next chapter, I examine the Registered

Trapline System and how that impacted Illilo harvesting activities. In this chapter, I focus on other

conservation measures implemented by both the HBC and the Provincial Government and their

impacts. For example, the HBC relentlessly tried to save their economy by setting up beaver

reserves and focusing their attention on other furbearing animals. The Government of Ontario

responded between the 1950s – 80s by reintroducing furbearing animals in Northern Ontario. This

chapter will also investigate the complications between Indigenous Knowledge and Western

Science.

Weskatch Illilo Matisonah and Relationships to the Land

Before getting into the history of the HBC and their conservation efforts, it is important to

outline the traditional practices of the Illilowuk. There has been a great deal of scholarship that

examines how the Illilowuk structured land use before the arrival of the Hudson Bay Company. In

a study done on traditional land-use practice by Cummins in his monograph Only God Can Own

the Land: The Attawapiskat Cree there are two different schools of thought with regards to Illilo

ownership to the land. For his part, anthropologist John Cooper suggests that there was a sense of

ownership to the wildlife where the Illilo occupied land. However, Cooper explains, if someone

was to pass through an occupied family hunting territory they were able to harvest berries, fish and

hunt for food. This was allowed when passing through a family territory. However, what was not

allowed was to trap fur-bearing animals in a territory that was occupied by a family.15

In reflecting on this discussion, it is important to consider the practices that are still in use

today, which I do here by drawing on my own experiences and knowledge. Today, fishing and

15 Bryan Cummins, Only God Can Own the Land: The Attawapiskat Cree (Toronto: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004), 19.

13 berry harvesting are open for common use to everyone and, in my experience, one can go fishing

anywhere along the coast and up the Albany River. This is the case even if you might be fishing

in someone’s “trapline” (to use today’s term). Similarly, hunting for food throughout the

Omushkegowuk territory is also open for common use. In the fall and winter months people will

hunt wherever they are able to find food. In the fall, hunting is primarily focused on waterfowl and

this happens along the coast on the mudflats. These mudflats are located north of the Albany River

and you will often see many other hunters there. In the winter months, hunting grouse anywhere

is also open to common use. There are also some instances where Illilo trappers will trap anywhere

they find beaver or fur bearing animals. However, this typically happens in close proximity to the

community, as there is an ongoing recognition of community-land relationships.

Growing up on the territory it is very evident that the Illilowuk have a special connection

to the land. Not only does the land provide the necessary “gifts” for survival, it also provides a

safe space for those who may need it for therapeutic reasons. It is also a place for language. I say

this because whenever I am out on the land it gives me an opportunity to hear/learn words I may

have never learned before. For example, whenever my family and I are at the spring hunting camp

we will listen to the bush radio16 during all times of the day. When conversations are happening

on these radios they are always in Cree. Sometimes they will use words that I have never heard

before. Also, when being out on the land with my father he will use words that I would never hear

in the home. Some words include explanations of different ways to paddle a boat. While others

may be to name different species of trees and animals found on the land. The land provides

teachings in different ways. Listening to some of the stories from Elders, the animals and

geographical features of the land become teachings in the language. This is done to ensure I

16 Bush Radio is a common name for a high frequency radio. Commonly used during the spring goose hunt and also the fall moose hunting season.

14 understand how everything works in relationship and balance in the environment and to maintain

my connection to the land.

Growing up on the land has also helped me develop a relationship with the land and the

animals. This allowed me to understand the natural cycles of the lands and its seasonal changes.

This also allowed me to understand animal behaviours in the region. At a young age, I learned how

to respect the animals that I harvest, including how to properly harvest and clean animals in a

respectful manner. One example of this is to not let anything go to waste while cleaning animals,

including learning how to properly dispose of parts of the animal I will not use. This also came

with teachings about not over harvesting. I should only kill what I will eat and use.

Storytelling is an important part of passing down knowledge for the Illilowuk living in the

Omushkegowuk region. Through these stories knowledge is passed down through many

generations. When I was growing up, these stories were always centered around the land and

animals. When listening to these stories Elders and friends will always start with a place and time.

Having growing up in the territory you know the place they are talking about and you can place

yourself in the position that they are in the story. These stories might be good and funny memories

shared over food and fire. These stories also have teachings in them, particularly the older stories

that are connected to the historical experiences of the Illilowuk.17

Indigenous Knowledge and the Emergence of Scientific Wildlife Management

17 Louis Bird et al., Telling Our Stories Omushkego Legends and Histories from Hudson Bay (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2015); Louis Bird, Spirit Lives in the Mind: Omushkego Stories, Lives, and Dreams (Montréal: McGill-Queens University Press, 2014); Jill Doerfler, Centering Anishinaabeg Studies Understanding the World through Stories (East Lansing, MI: Univ. of Manitoba Press, 2013); Lee Maracle, Memory Serves: Oratories (Edmonton, AB: NeWest Press, 2015).

15 The production of scientific knowledge, as both empirical information and as a source of

authority, has been closely intertwined with the histories of colonialism.18 After the 1940’s, during

the era of ‘high modernism’ and a privileging of colonial technology, science, and rationality,

Indigenous knowledge and practices were rejected, and viewed as subjective and “hearsay.” Post-

war governments’ policies used these ideas to intervene in northern hunting cultures. Games acts

and game reserves provide a prime example. As a result, conservation became a tool of

colonialism. Science justified control over Indigenous hunting and where possible the

incorporation of Indigenous peoples into an agrarian economy.19

In the post-war era, scientists flooded the north in unprecedented numbers. The federal government was responsible for this, providing initiatives for northern research. Many of the scientists were trained in universities in southern Canada. The way that they framed their research was also only suitable for the south, meaning the scientists lacked understanding of the north.20

During this time several biologists denied the existence of Indigenous knowledge and methods of

environmental research management. They held the view that the chief cause of wildlife depletion

was Indigenous peoples themselves. As a result, throughout the 1960s and 70s wildlife scientist

argued that Indigenous peoples had little capacity for conservation.21

In her book States of Nature, historian Tina Loo examines the emergence of scientific

research and heightened professionalism in game management in post-war Canada. In 1947, the

government of Canada created the Dominion Wildlife Service (which was then later renamed

Canadian Wildlife Service or CWS). This organization was created to manage wildlife in the

18 Stephen Bocking, “Indigenous Knowledge and The History of Science, Race, and Colonial Authority in Northern Canada,” in Rethinking the Great White North: Race, Nature, and the Historical Geographies of Whiteness in Canada, ed. Andrew Baldwin, Laura Cameron, and Andrey Kobayashi (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2011), 40. 19 Ibid, 41. 20 Ibid, 45-46. 21 Ibid, 47.

16 Northwest Territories and National Parks in Canada. The CWS relied heavily on scientific research so that this research could be applied to management policies.22 The biologists working for the

CWS were mandated to carry out investigations relating to numbers, food, shelter, migrations, reproduction, diseases, parasites, predators, competitors, and uses of the animals being managed.23

The provinces in Canada followed suit by hiring biologists to work for their game management programs. The growth in the need for biologists working for both the federal and provincial governments also resulted in Canadian universities starting to offer wildlife management programs at their institutions. Faculty at these schools also did contract work for both levels of government.24 However, the professionalization of wildlife service was not limited to biologists it also extended to warden services.25 The Ontario Government instituted and reframed a program for its wardens that centered on ranger schools designed to indoctrinate them into the principles of wildlife management by offering courses based on methods, technology, surveying and animal inventory.26

As my work demonstrates, local knowledge about conservation and balance has been an essential resource for the Illilowuk living in the Omushkegowuk. This knowledge is gained through relationships with the land. Through many generations this knowledge has been passed down. Further to this, the natural cycle of the Mushkegowuk Territory and the behaviours of different animals’ species are understood through these experiences. This was very evident in the stories Elders from the community have shared with me. The stories that they shared centered around their relationships with the land. In one interview with Clifford Wesley, he focused on his

22 Tina Loo, States of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006), 123. 23 Ibid, 123-124. 24 Ibid, 124. 25 Ibid. 26 Ibid, 125.

17 experiences with the spring goose hunt. During his talk he mentioned that he was not hunting at

the trapline that he was registered to. Instead he chose to hunt at Minownown (No Mans Point).

He did this because he knew that there was no one hunting there at the time.27 Knowing this he

knew that he was able to cycle the territories and allow his original trapline to replenish its

resources.28

In anthropologist Paul Nadasdy’s book Hunters and Bureaucrats, he writes about his

experiences with the Kluane people of Yukon. His book focuses on the traditional knowledge of

the Kluane people and looks at how this shaped relations between the Kluane people and the state.

What really stood out in this book is looking at experience as knowledge. There is a general

emphasis on experiences as a means to gaining knowledge for the Kluane people. For the Kluane

people, being out on the land is the only way to learn things about the land. One cannot learn about

the land by reading a book. Learning about the behaviours of animals also requires you to be out

in the bush, hunting and observing the animals.29

I can relate to what Nadasdy says about Kluane hunters in the book. When learning how to do things while out in the land I had to observe what my father was doing from a young age.

Learning what to do does not stop once you reach the age where you are old enough to go out by yourself. You continue to observe the environment around you which includes observing the migration patterns of Canada geese, ducks and any other migratory birds. Animal behaviours are also learned from observing the animals for years. One example of this is understanding the population cycles of snowshoe hares in the Omushkegowuk region. There was an abundance of

27 Minownown is where my family hunts and traps. When he decided to hunt there because he knew that the area was vacant. (My grandfather was doing work in Kapuskasing at the time working on the construction of the dam if I remember correctly). 28 Wesley, interview. 29 Paul Nadasdy, Hunters and Bureaucrats: Power, Knowledge and Aboriginal-State Relations in the Southwest Yukon (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2003), 97.

18 snowshoe hares on the territory when I was young. One spring, when I was young, my grandmother

told me that this abundance meant that there would also be an increase in the numbers of fox in

the area. The following winter there were a lot of fox and thereafter the number of snowshoe hares

diminished. Knowing this gave me a deep understanding of population cycles of animals in the

territory, but also an understanding of predator and prey numbers that guided my hunting choices.

This is true for Illilo and Nishinaabeg hunters across northern Ontario. Over time hunters have

experienced the land in the many different climatic and seasonal conditions and observed animal

habitats and behaviour in each condition.30 Familiarity with the land is obtained through spending

long periods of time out on the land. Knowledge is gained through a way of life rather than reading

collections of facts in books.31

Wildlife management scientists did not work with local Indigenous knowledge to establish

their policies.32 A lot of Indigenous people see the practice of scientific research by these researchers as disrespectful, particularly their treatment of wildlife in life and death. They feel as though the scientists obtain knowledge from the animals by force, including the use of radio transmitters that reinforce the belief that animals are ‘objects of study’.33 As Nadasdy’s work

shows, the Kluane people also believe that scientific research is inappropriate and inaccurate. They

get knowledge from being out in the bush. Biologists acquire their knowledge from secondary

sources such as books.34

Looking at archival material and the correspondence between officials in the MNR there

is evidence that the MNR did not listen to what the Illilowuk had to say about their conservation

30 Ibid, 98. 31 Ibid. 32 Bocking. 47. 33 Nadasdy, 110. 34 Ibid.

19 policies. For example, when leadership from the communities of Fort Albany and Attawapiskat

complained about the dates of the open beaver season, explaining that they did not work in the

north because of the different climate in the James Bay region. They were ignored. They noted

that beaver at the start of the MNR beaver season are still too small to trap. Furthermore, winter

months were difficult for trapping beaver because of the thickness of the ice, at more than three

feet. Even at the end of the beaver open season in March, the ice was still too thick to trap beaver.35

The MNR knew that the dates did not fit the environmental conditions of the James Bay Coast.

They also understood that beavers in this area had a shorter growing season then the beavers in the

south. This again goes back to what Stephen Bocking said about southern scientist working in the

north. Their training and understanding of nature come from experiences in the south, therefore

they have little knowledge of what happens in the north.36 The Illilowuk understood their

environment, but were ultimately shut out because the government and scientists rejected

Indigenous knowledge when developing their policies.

Hudson Bay Company Conservation

Starting in the 1820s, the HBC developed and implemented their own conservation

policies. In this section, I focus on the work the HBC did to revitalize a fragile fur market between

1820 and 1850 because of the plummeting numbers of fur-bearing animals in the region. By 1820,

the fur market was not doing well. The amount of fur returns was declining year by year as the fur-

bearing animals were rapidly depleted throughout many areas in North America. This was cause

for panic for the company. This forced the HBC to find ways to revitalize the fur market for the

35 Correspondence from Chief James Wesley to A. Gordon, August 26, 1959, Box RG-1-427, File G 22-3-2, Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 36 Bocking, 45-46.

20 future of their company. The end result was an interesting collection of conservation methods,

which the HBC implemented.

The earliest record of conservation from the HBC was when George Simpson (1792-

1860)37 assumed control of the Canadian operations in 1821. The fur market had taken a hit from

overharvesting in various areas. In a report in 1822 to the Governor and Committee in London he

wrote: “The country is without doubt, in many parts exhausted in valuable furs, yet not to such a

low ebb as has been generally supposed and by extending the trade in some parts and nursing

others our prospects are by no means unfavorable.”38 Since the beaver have been the staple of the

trade, Simpson focused his effort on bringing them back.39

One of the main areas of focus for Simpson’s conservation program was to reduce a few trapping operations in overhunted areas, while at the same time the company encouraged other trading post to extend the trade into new areas.40 The HBC also started to shift the locations of

several trade posts in accordance with fur returns. They hoped this would cut company costs and

motivate Indigenous trappers and hunters to move to areas where beaver was plentiful.41

The HBC also tried to change the focus of the market away from the beaver. In doing so

they studied the fluctuation of fur-bearing animal populations.42 In an effort to take advantage of

their studies the HBC started to encourage Indigenous trappers to focus on trapping muskrat in an

effort to recoup the beaver populations. Fortunately, in the hunting season of 1823/24 the muskrat

37 Sir George Simpson was Governor of the Hudson Bay Company in 1820, then also took charge when the HBC and The Northwest Company merged in 1821. 38 Arthur Ray, “Some Conservation Schemes of the Hudson Bay Company 1821-50: An Examination of the Problems of Resource Management in the Fur Trade,” Journal of Historical Geography 1, no. 1 (1975): 51. 39 Ibid, 51. 40 Ibid, 51. 41 Ibid, 51. 42 Ibid, 52.

21 market was strong in Eastern Canada and the United States.43 This helped to convince trappers to

focus on trapping muskrat and relieve the pressure on beaver populations.

Steel traps also started to be an issue not only for the HBC, as they contributed to the

decline of beaver populations. In 1822, Simpson wrote “The use of Beaver Traps should have been

prohibited long ago, they are the scourge of the Country and none will, in the future, be given out

except for new Districts exposed to opposition and frontier establishments.”44 It is without a doubt that the steel traps have been an issue in regards to trapping. I have not had any experience with any other methods to trap, but I know that the steel trapping method is easier to use. In an interview

I conducted with Clifford Wesley, he mentioned other ways of trapping beaver in early winter. In his story he did not mention steel traps as a means to trap beaver. Instead he told me that he and his father would use snare wire45 to get beavers.46 In his story it was evident that it was harder to

use this method of beaver trapping. He described how important it was to use a stick thick enough

so that the beaver could not chew it off. In his experiences this had happened to him.

In the 1920s, British zoologist, Charles Elton (1900-1991), who graduated from Oxford

University with a MA in Zoology, developed an interest in studying wildlife population cycles.

His interest in this area lead to the HBC interest in his service to study population cycles of fur-

bearing animals. As a result, the HBC then sponsored his work. He did some work on the

economics of the fur trading market stating that understanding population cycles would be

important for the fur trade. Afterwards, in 1925, the HBC granted Elton access to their archival

43 Ibid, 53-54. 44 Ibid, 55. 45 Using snare wire other than steel traps was another common method to kill beaver in the past. In Clifford Wesley’s description of how this was done he mentioned that you would need to break a hole in the ice and get a long and thick stick so that the beaver does not eat it. After this is done you place the snare wire on the stick and make sure that it is on there good. The size of the hole on the wire needs to be at least the diameter of an orange. This is best done when this is the place that the beaver will go next, or near its winter storage of food. 46 Welsey interview.

22 material nearly six years before they allowed public access. The HBC from time to time referred

to Elton as their “biological consultant” or their “fur consultant”.47 This not only helped the HBC

understand the population cycles of fur bearing but also had economic motivations. Effectively

predicting the number of furs the company would receive that year was important for the HBC.48

It was also important with regards to conservation as well, as they would develop their

conservation policies based on these studies.

Beaver Preserves

Since these early years, beaver populations declined and nearly became extinct in the

twentieth century. The Illilowuk had their own conservation schemes that I will discuss in the

Registered Trapline chapter while discussing traditional land use. The main conservation strategy was leaving a breeding pair at the lodge when trapping. However, growing pressures from competition from other Illilowuk trappers and white trappers moving north changed these traditional conservation measures.49

In 1836, the HBC intensified their conservation efforts in order to save the beaver. A beaver

sanctuary was established in Charlton Island at the suggestion of Robert Miles who was the chief

trader at the time.50 However, this would have not been made possible without the advice of a local

chief in the area who had advised Miles that the Charlton Island was suitable for the preserve. “The

island itself is about six or seven miles long and about four or five broad. It is filled with trees and

ponds.”51 The HBC sent fourteen pairs of beaver to Charlton Island. They also ordered hunters to

47 Loo, 100. 48 Ibid. 49 Ibid, 104. 50 Ibid, 96. 51 Harvey A Feit, “Myths of the Ecological Whiteman: Histories Science and Rights in North American-Native American Relations,” in Native Americans and the Environment: Perspectives on the Ecological Indian. ed. Michael E. Harkin and David Rich Lewis (London: University of Nebraska Press. 2007), 73.

23 get rid of natural predators in the area including lynx and otters. The HBC forbid the Eouyou52

from trapping and hunting in the region.53 By 1845, the HBC estimated that there were now forty

beaver lodges in Charlton Island. When the Eouyou hunters went to go count the number of beaver

lodges on the island they counted sixty lodges. By 1851, the beaver were so numerous that the

HBC ordered that 5000 beaver be killed in the preserve.54 This little experiment for the HBC

worked, but it would not be seen again in the area until a century later.

Despite these successes, the Illilowuk people continued to struggle beyond the boundary

of the sanctuary with the declining number of beavers in the area. In 1931, an HBC fur commission

stated that a number of people had died from starvation in Great Whale River.55 The importance of beaver is evident here as it was also mentioned earlier in this chapter by Omushkegowuk Elders.

I remember growing up in the territory hearing a story from my grandmother. She recalls canoeing up a river with her father and they happened to see a beaver. The family did not have food, they ended up shooting it so that they could eat, even though beaver was closed for killing at the time.56

She mentioned that they had to look to other animals such as weasel, mink and skunks which are

not normally in the diets of the Illilowuk to make ends meet for food. There have been numerous

times when she shared stories with me of hardships she faced growing up in the territory because

of a lack of food sources available for them. This highlights how the declining number of resources,

and the controlled access to them, had an impact on their lives. She then told me that my

grandfather used to work for the MNR when he was a teenager. His job with the MNR was to

transport pairs of beaver to various locations and to give these pairs to families in that area to

52 Eastern James Bay Cree translation for the people. 53 Loo, 96. 54 Ibid. 55 Ibid, 103. 56 Bernadette Sutherland, Interview with Kiethen Sutherland, Kashechewan First Nation, January 10, 2019.

24 release in their trapping territory.57 Another example of this is a story told to me by Rebecca Friday.

She told me that back in the day there were set quotas on beaver, but when someone happened to

reach the limit they still continued to kill beaver and give those furs to those who did not reach

their quotas. Sometimes they also just kept the fur and used the fur for something else such as

blankets for babies.58 This example shows some of the consequences of the severing of

relationships to the land but also ongoing resistance to the control of fur-bearing animals such as

beaver.

Beaver was an important food source, the struggle from the Illilowuk can be traced to the

control of access to not only beaver but also other fur bearing animals. As I will mention in the

trapline chapter, there were open and closed seasons for beaver in the Omushkegowuk Region.

This is evident in the correspondence sent from the leaderships to MNR when they requested that

the beaver season be extended into late spring. Listening to Elders stories, they discussed the

restocking of beaver in the Omushkegowuk region by the MNR and that they prohibited from

killing these animals in the region.59 Again the restocking of fur bearing animals in the area came

with policies that prohibited local Illilowuk from killing wildlife that were important for them. In

fact, access to beaver restricted the access of Illilowuk to one of their important food sources.

Aware of the success of the beaver preserve on Charlton Island, preserves were introduced

again in the 20th century in the James Bay Region. HBC factor James Watt (1893-1962) who was

based in Rupert House (now Waskaganish, Quebec) saw the struggle the Eeyou faced first hand

with regards to the declining number of beavers. For James Watt this meant that the HBC had to

57 Story shared with me from my grandmother in April 2018. 58 Rebecca Friday, Interview with Kiethen Sutherland, Kashechewan First Nation January 11, 2019. 59 Correspondence to Hugh Conn from Jack Grew, 29 October 1959. Box B396531, File G23-9, Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

25 do something. One of his ideas was to restore the Cree notion of ‘private property’60, which he

believed was key to conservation. He later proposed to the Eeyou to stake out lakes and creeks and

have them registered to the HBC. They did this, while not being allowed to trap any beaver. After

allowing the beaver populations to grow, Watts’ idea was that the Indigenous peoples would have

exclusive rights to them.61 Watt believed that having long term hunting rights to the territory would

ensure that the hunter would know the land well and would help find beaver lodges in the winter.

According to anthropologist Tobey Morentz, the knowledge of the Eeyou62 helped James Watt formulate a plan to restore the beaver that was more respectful of the Eeyou relationship to land.

This system was used to uphold the right of hunting for the Eeyou in their respective hunting

Figure 2-1: Map of Beaver Preserves and information on Beaver Conservation. From the Waskaganish Cree Nation Website. https://www.waskaganish.ca/beaver-reserves/

Figure 2 - 2 : Picture of My Father and IFigure 3-3: Map of Beaver Preserves and 60info Privatermation property on is inBeaver quotations Conservation. here because the From Illilwok the or Waskaganish Eeyou believe that Cree no one Nation owns the Website. land, which meanshttps://www.waskaganish.ca/beaver that it is not actually private land. -reserves/ 61 Loo, 105. 62 I use Eeyou hear because of the geographical context of the text. This was taking place in the Quebec coast of James Bay. The Cree term for the people there is Eeyou. Figure 2-4: Picture of My Father and I

26 Figure 2-5: Traplines of Kashechewan and Fort AlbanyFigure 2-6: Picture of My Father and IFigure 3-7: Map of Beaver Preserves and information on Beaver Conservation. From the Waskaganish Cree Nation Website. https://www.waskaganish.ca/beaver-reserves/ territory and Watt believed that this would do a lot more to help restore the beaver populations

then having closed seasons.63

In 1929, James Watt took the initiative to start purchasing beaver. He gave credit to those

who agreed to not trap the beaver where they were found. For example, 60 dollars was given to a

couple for not killing a beaver when they reported it. Seeing that this seemed to be working among

the Cree, James Watt asked for help from the HBC, but the HBC refused to help financially in his

initiative. From this point on James Watt decided to get help from the Quebec Government. Maud

Watt, James Watt’s wife, who was also involved by meeting and presenting James Watts’ ideas to

the Quebec Government, insisted on going to Quebec City to meet with the Deputy Minister of

Colonization L.A Richard. Maud Watt’s determination to go see the deputy minister helped with

the scheme, but so did the fact that she was French Canadian. From that point onward, the

provincial government agreed to help with the program. On 17 March, 1932 Richard announced

that his government agreed to support the beaver sanctuary of 17,000 square miles between the

Rupert and Eastmain Rivers and into the interior as far as Nemeskau post for a period of 15 years.

However, the provincial government would not assume the cost to run the sanctuary and would

require a ten-dollar annual fee for the lease. Still, the HBC did not budge and support Watt in his

efforts. In 1933, the HBC decided to take over the lease through the Department of Colonization.64

Anthropologist Harvey Feit in “Re-organizing Co-management as Co-governance: Visions

and Histories of Conservation at James Bay”, shows that the Cree people on the eastern coast of

James Bay were in support of the beaver conservation program introduced to them by Watt. In

fact, when Watt expanded the beaver reserves, the Cree from Waswanipi already had this type of

63 Morantz, The White Man’s Gonna Getcha: The Colonial Challenge to the Cree in Quebec (Montreal-Kingston: McGill-Queens University Press, 2002),. 159. 64 Ibid, 160.

27 system in place for their band.65 What is interesting here is Watt mentions that the only way for success of the conservation of beaver in the long run was to return authority over the land to the

Eeyou and recognize the rights the Eeyou had to the territory. Watt supported this idea and thought that it would be essential for the continued conservation of beaver after restocking of beaver is complete.66

The success of this beaver preserve was enough to inspire the provincial governments of

Ontario and Quebec to take the beaver conservation program elsewhere. In the James Bay region alone, they opened five other beaver preserves: Charlton Island (1934), Akamiski (1935),

Attawapiskat (1936), Kapisko (1940) and Fort George (1940) (See Figure 3-1). All of these beaver preserves were managed by a combination of local knowledge, paternalism, and the emerging principles of scientific game management.67

Reintroducing Wildlife in the Omushkegowuk Territory

The depletion of furbearing animals in the Omushkegowuk Territory saw the implementation of animal reintroduction programs from the Government of Ontario. Earlier in this chapter, I explained that the HBC pioneered this initiative with the establishment of beaver reserves and the purchasing of live beaver for the sole purposes of restocking a valuable commodity for the HBC and the Illilowuk. However, it was not only beaver that the government help restock in the area. They also helped restock other fur bearing animals into the area.

While Elders from the community were sharing their experiences with me about the

Registered Trapline System they also talked about the reintroduction of fur bearing animals into the Omushkegowuk Territory. One example of this comes from the story told by Clifford Wesley

65 Harvey Feit, “Re-cognizing Co-Management as Co-governance: Visions and Histories of Conservation at James Bay,” Anthropologica 47, no. 2 (2005): 275. 66 Ibid, 276. 67 Loo, 108.

28 who is a prominent hunter and spent a lot of time out on the land. He told me “back then when I

was trapping there were no beaver or martens. The marten showed up just recently in this area.”68

Rebecca Friday also told me that there had never been marten in the area when she was growing

up. She remembers one time at Ghost River she saw the MNR bring in boxes of martens to the

area and releasing them in great numbers. She also mentioned they did this with beavers in the

area.69 When I asked other Elders about this, they only knew of the beaver being reintroduced in

the area. Wesley was not sure if the marten were reintroduced or not. This shows us how little

knowledge there was on the reintroduction of marten in the territory even though Wesley, Friday

and others spent a lot of time out on the land. Looking at archival material there is some evidence

from correspondence regarding the restocking of fur-bearing animals in the Omushkegowuk

region. In a letter addressed to Hugh Conn, MNR officials mentioned releasing live marten and

fisher into the area by the Ontario government.

You know that the government has released some live fisher and live marten in parts of your country for the past four or five years. You and your people know that this was done in order that in a few more years you would have more fur to trap. Now it would be foolish to trap these fisher and marten as soon as they are released and before they have had a chance to increase, so there will be a closed season on them for a few years until they become more plentiful.70

Illilo trappers were asked not to trap any of the fur-bearing animals that were reintroduced into the

Omushkegowuk Territory.

Beaver was also another important animal the provincial government reintroduced into the area. In the 1950’s, these beavers were usually relocated from Southern Ontario to Northern

Ontario. The Ministry removed what they called ‘nuisance beaver’ along highways in Ontario. The

Ministry also helped provide funding for the live trapping of beaver along highways to help ease

68 Clifford Wesley, Interviewed by Kiethen Sutherland, Kashechewan First Nation, January 12, 2019. 69 Friday Interview. 70 Correspondence to Hugh Conn from Jack Grew, 29 October 1959. Box B396531, File G23-9, Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

29 the destruction of property along these highways. This provided Indigenous trappers with

employment. When discussing the idea R. Boultbee said: “As, we never had experience along the

line previously, we should like to have your advice as to what you consider the best way to pay

trappers for taking these nuisance beaver – of course, we would employ Indians71 only.”72

Indigenous people were employed for this job as they understood the methods of trapping. They

also knew the territory and are able to find areas where the beavers were most likely to survive.

Illilo men were hired by the government to carry out the program in the Omushkegowuk

Region. In a story shared with me by Rebecca Friday she mentioned that my grandfather worked

for the MNR and helped them with the distribution of beavers to families at their trapping grounds.

In this story she describes how the beavers were brought in as well. She told me that they were

brought in by wooden cages and each family would get a male and female beaver to put in their

trapping territories.73 Elder Mary-Rose Hughie also mentioned the restocking of beaver in the

Omushkegowuk Territory. In her story she mentions families getting a pair of beavers to let go at

their trapping grounds once they go there.74 Rebecca Friday also remembers the beaver being

flown in by planes into Ghost River (Ghost Island near the mouth of Ghost River). The beavers

were released in great numbers into the area in this way.75The use of local Illilowuk reveals that the Ministry Intrusted them with transporting these beavers to families or taking them to the their traplines. They knew where other families were in the vast region. The Illilowuk also knew where

71 What they meant here is they hired trappers from southern Ontario to live trap beaver near these highways and then the MNR transported these beavers to northern Ontario where Illilo men transported these beavers to different families. 72 Correspondence to Jack L. Grew from R. Boultbee, 28 July, 1950. Box RG-1-427, File G 22-3-2, Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 73 Friday interview. 74 Mary-Rose Hughie, Interview with Kiethen Sutherland, Kashechewan First Nation, January 14, 2019. 75 Friday interview.

30 it was suitable to release beaver. Though their skills/knowledge were often ignored, in this case

Illilo knowledge helped with the restocking of beavers into the Omushkegowuk region.

Conclusion

The Registered Trapline System was not the only conservation policy that had an impact on the lives of the Illilowuk of the Omushkegowuk Territory. These conservation policies came as a result of shifts in trapping culture in the Omushkegowuk Territory and the declining numbers of fur-bearing animals in the territory. Although this chapter focuses on these areas, it also looks into the interaction of local Indigenous knowledge and western science in developing these policies.

This chapter also showed the importance of understanding Indigenous people’s relationships to the land and animals. However, this discussion extends beyond this chapter and into other chapters as well. It is through these relationships that knowledge of the land is passed down through many generations. I used myself as an example as a recipient of this knowledge and how I applied this knowledge to this research and while being out on the land.

Furthermore, this chapter examined the emergence of zoological research as a profession, and how this research was applied to conservation policies. During this rise in scientific research, the existence of Indigenous environmental knowledge was often not seen as legitimate by state officials and their employees. The provinces then began to professionalize these scientific practices. For example, the Ontario Government instituted and reframed a program for its wardens that centered on ranger school, designed to indoctrinate them into the principles of wildlife management with courses based on methods, technology, surveying and animal inventory.

Much like the Kluane People, the Illilo find it disrespectful The way that Western scientists conduct research on the animals. In our worldview, animals should not be treated as objects of study. Rather building relationships with these animals is the best way to learn the behaviour of

31 them and make decisions about how best to ensure their populations remain stable or recover from natural cycles. This approach would take away the need to force foreign object onto the animals such as radio transmitters. The only way to truly understand their behaviour is to observe these animals and spend time on the land.

Growing up I have been told many times that I must respect the relationships I have as a hunter with the animals. I have always been told that whenever you kill an animal it is because it knows that you are in need and it gave its life up for you. This is also evident for the Waswanipi

Cree in Harvey Feit’s chapter in an edited work. Elders mentioned the relationships that they have with moose. This shows the complex relationships between animals and humans and shows that this practice of respectful and life-supporting relationships still continues.76

The HBC have also developed their own conservation policies as a way to revitalize the fur market. In their efforts they reduced trapping operations in areas they felt wildlife were exhausted. They have also moved some of their trapping post into areas they felt were not being heavily trapped. Another focus was to move away from trapping beaver to trapping other fur- bearing animals like muskrat. They also funded Elton Charles’s research to understand the fluctuations of fur-bearing animal populations.

Lastly, I discussed the restocking of fur-bearing animals in the territory. This included the establishment of beaver preserves in the territory. Fur-bearing animals such as marten and fisher were also reintroduced into the territory. The HBC experimented with this program in 1836, almost a century before we see it again in the early twentieth century. In 1929, the provinces were involved in establishing these beaver preserves as they helped fund the programs. Eventually beaver were

76 Harvey Feit, “James Bay Crees’ Life Projects and Politics: Histories of Place, Animal Partners and Enduring Relationships,” in In The Way of Development: Indigenous Peoples, Life Porjects and Globalization, ed. Mario Blaser, Harvey Feit, and Glenn McRae (New York: Zed Books, 2004), 107

32 restocked throughout the territory where families would receive a pair of beavers to release at their trapping territory.

Throughout all of these conservation policies, it is important to remember that access to these animals were prohibited for stretches of time. Illilowuk were not allowed to trap or hunt beaver for some time including other fur-bearing animals such as marten and fisher. After a few years, the Ministry began to allow for the trapping of beaver, but through open and closed seasons, but these seasons were not well suited to the climate in the north. As a result, there was a controlled access to the animals that are valuable to the Illilowuk to survive and, as my grandmother’s story makes clear, resulted in periods of hunger.

33 Chapter Three: Wanaykunaskiya - The Registered Trapline System

Figure 3-1: Picture of My Father and I. Photo from the author’s personal collection.

Figure 2-28: Traplines of Kashechewan and Fort AlbanyFigure 2-29: Picture of My Father and I

Figure 2-30: Traplines of Kashechewan and Fort Albany 34

Figure 2-31: Map of Indian Treaties in Ontario.Figure 2-32: Traplines of Kashechewan and Fort AlbanyFigure Introduction

I was no older then twelve years of age. I remember getting up one winter morning to go

on a trapping trip with my father. The sun was just about to rise and as we got ourselves ready the

first light of the new day dawned upon us. The horizon lit up like a buck stove with too much wood

in it. As the sun broke the horizon, the ground looked as though it had glinting diamonds on it. The

soft roar of a snowmobile could be heard from inside our home as we were having our last cup of

hot tea before we left for our trip out to the trapline. It was cold that morning. Looking outside it

looked as though it was foggy but, it was not fog it was the chimney smoke from neighbouring

houses failing to rise due to the extreme cold weather. As we made our way out of the community

on our snowmobiles, you could see others getting ready to leave for their trapping and hunting

trips as well. As we made our way toward the coastal winter road, which is a route we always take,

we saw more hunters and trappers. Along the winter road we crossed many creeks and rivers. The

spruce and tamaracks stood tall listening to the speaking heavens. Along the way we saw wildlife

we would typically see during this time of year, the fox looking for food, the sharp-tailed grouse

feeding on tamarack buds. The beautiful scenery of the muskeg is always breath-taking no matter

how many times you have seen it.

As the sun got higher in the sky, I could feel its warmth touching my face, though the

temperature did not get any warmer that day. Throughout the day, you could sense the crisp cold

air every time you breathed in it was as though you were smoking a menthol cigarette. Then it hit

me, my grandfather, and my ancestors before him, used to walk this area. At this moment, I felt

proud knowing that my ancestors walked these very trails as I did. Throughout the day, we checked our traps, some traps had marten in them, the others did not. We came into a heavily forested area. It looked as though there was no way the snowmobile would be able to drive in

35 there. As we got closer, it became more evident that there was a skidoo trail. Once we passed through the treeline from the coast, you could smell the spruce fill the air. The snow was covered in fallen spruce needles. As we made our way along the trail my dad pointed to an old trapping set up. He told me that this was my grandfather’s trap setup. It is so pristine it looks as though it has not been touched since the last time my grandfather trapped the area.

I was fortunate enough to have many experiences like this growing up. The relationship I have built with the land shapes my understanding of the world. This has also sparked interest in me throughout my educational journey. It was this love for the outdoors that made me seek out answers to the questions I had growing up. Why is it that when it comes to trapping we come back to the same area every year to trap? Why can we hunt and fish anywhere? Why do we have registered traplines in the territory when the Cree have not believed in the concept of land ownership? This chapter addresses these questions.

Traplines Elsewhere and in the Past

The trapline system put into place by various provinces in Canada are wildlife management programs. Traplines are units of crown land that vary in sizes. To give an example from Ontario, traplines vary in size from 5 square kilometres to the biggest, which is 900 square kilometres. The average size of a trapline is 109 square kilometres. There are about 2800 traplines in Ontario, and

36 percent of these traplines are trapped by treaty “Indians”.77

There were traplines implemented in other areas of Ontario, as well as in British Columbia and Manitoba before the Registered Trapline System was established in the Omushkegowuk

Region. There were game laws before the establishment of traplines in Ontario, but these game laws were not working in favour of Ontario because it was hard to police the large areas of

77 Report on the Registered Trapline System by Milan Novak, RG-1-427 file 171. Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. I am using the word Indian when I am quoting from the archival material.

36 Northern Ontario. Game laws focused more on regulating hunting, trapping and fishing activities, including establishing open and closed seasons for various game animals. While on the other hand, as I will mention later in this chapter, the registered traplines established a more bureaucratic land use tenure system on crown land in Ontario.

In Ontario there was internal pressure on the Ontario government to better manage their natural resources. In 1928, two Indigenous men were charged for killing and trapping beaver during the closed season. However, treaty rights were used as a counter argument to the charges against the two men. The two men won their court case because the right to hunt was promised in the Robinson-Superior Treaty of 1850. The Ontario Government, however, decided to appeal the decision and eventually won their appeal because the accused trappers were trapping outside of their treaty boundaries.78 Shortly after the case was heard in the courts, the Ontario government developed a trapline system for the province. This new approach came from the recommendations of the Black Committee (1931). The “official” trapline system grew from the committee’s conclusion that existing laws on trapping fur-bearing animals were not working. After this the government then decided to divide the province into various sections. Within each section, trappers applied for trapping licenses for specific pieces of land for one hunting season at a time.79

Northern Ontario (Robinson-Huron Superior Treaty Area) was divided up into three sections: East, Central, and North. According to historian David Caverley, Indian Affairs tried to work with this system on the understanding that Nishinaabeg trappers would receive preferential treatment so that they could retain their familial trapping grounds. However, the system worked to strengthen provincial control in regards to land tenure at the expense of Nishinaabeg treaty rights.

78 David Calverley, Who Controls the Hunt?: First Nations, Treaty Rights, and Wildlife Conservation in Ontario, 1783-1939 (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2018), 88. 79 Ibid, 88-89.

37 Nishinaabeg trappers were required to re-apply for trapping licenses on an annual basis and there

was never a guarantee that the trapper would be able to keep the same trapping grounds when re-

applying for a trapping license.80 The government in British Columbia (BC) also developed their

own traplines system that would also see state control on land tenure within provincial

boundaries.81 The BC government faced a lot barriers in their creation of these traplines. Seasonal migration represented one barrier. This included the Kaska people.82 Indigenous people living in

BC were registered to the majority of the traplines in BC, but as time progressed hunting pressure

and competition for land and an increasing number of white trappers have caused the BC

government to regulate traplines.83 More significantly the traplines registry became another

example of state regulation that began to alter Indigenous forms of land organization. As I will

discuss, this also happened in Omuskegowuk or Treaty 9 territory.

Traditional Land Use

Before getting into the Registered Trapline System I believe it is important to look into

Illilo traditional land use. There has been a lot of debate between anthropologists on the topic of

land use. There are two different views in these discussions. The first is that family hunting

territories are not Indigenous as the idea of territory did not emerge until the pressures of

colonization forced it to develop. The second view is that there was already a developed sense of

territoriality amongst the Illilowuk.

80 Ibid, 104-105 81 David Vogt, “Indians on White Lines: Bureaucracy, Race, and Power on Northern British Columbian Traplines 1925-1950,” Journal of the Canadian Historical Association vol. 26 no. 1 (2015): 165; Glen Iceton, “Defining Space: How History Shaped and Informed Notions of Kaska Land Use and Occupancy,”(PhD diss., University of Saskachewan, 2019). 205. https://harvest.usask.ca>bitstream>handle>ICETON-DISSERTATION-2019 82 Ibid, 209. 83 David Vogt, 168.

38 Perhaps one of the earliest works on the topic came from anthropologist Frank Speck.

Speck was an American anthropologist who conducted ethnographic research on the social

organization of Algonkian people, which included the Cree people. In his paper he argues that

Indigenous people in eastern and northern North America did indeed have claims to lands, and that

these claims existed within family groups. He defined these hunting groups as a kinship group

composed of folks united by blood or marriage, having the right to hunt, trap and fish in a certain

inherited district bounded by some rivers and, lakes or other natural landmarks.84

Another anthropologist that took part in the historiographical debate is John Cooper.

Cooper made arguments similar to Speck, but took a different methodological approach on the

traditional hunting system. In his article “Is the Algonquian Family Hunting Grounds System Pre-

Columbian?” he examined evidence for and against the aboriginality of the family hunting ground

that exists today (early twentieth century).85 The way he described aboriginality in relation to land

was based on influences of colonial structures on Algonkian hunting systems. He made the same

argument as Speck, that family hunting grounds remain customarily within the family. In this

paper, Cooper suggested that among the bands there was no public authority or superiority to

alienate a member of a band from his land against his will.86

In re-examining John Cooper’s field notes, the anthropologist Regina Flannery identified

references to the land use of Cree people in the Omushkegowuk region. When Cooper was

interviewing a hunter from the Albany post, he indicated that hunting groups generally used the

hunting territory their fathers occupied, or in some cases the hunting grounds their grandfathers

84 Frank Speck, “The Family Hunting Bands as the Basis of Algonkian Social Organization,” American Anthropologist, New Series, vol. 17, no. 2 (1915): 290. 85 John Cooper, “Is The Algonquian Family Hunting Ground System Pre-Columbian?,” American Anthropologist vol. 41 no. 1. (1939): 66. 86 Ibid, 67.

39 used. There was also mention of movement of great distances between the Illilowuk in this article.

For example, the same Elder mentioned he used to hunt historically at Kinoshe Siipii (Pike River),

and then centered his hunting 150 mile up the Kapiskau River, while his siblings continued to hunt

at their old hunting ground.87 The information shared with John Cooper from the Elder shows that

there is movement of Illilowuk between hunting grounds for some families and communities in

relationship to the land.

Seasonal cycles of the land have been an important part of Cree people’s lives, which

formed the basis of the work of anthropologist, Colin Scott. According to Scott, the Cree’s hunting

territory was organized into hunting patterns associated with three principal land-based production

processes, which included hunting and trapping in the winter, the goose hunt in the spring and fall,

and fishing in the summer.88 As a result, many Cree people frequently used more than one territory, from season to season and year to year. This decision was made by the hunting boss/okimaw (or the family head) based on the amount of animals available in territory.89 Scott paid particular

attention to the goose hunt, where the Cree people of James Bay focused most of their attention in

the spring and fall seasons in coastal hunting camps. According to Scott, there was much more

flexibility among this season between families. Families that hunted and trapped inland, moved to

the coast during this time of the year. This made the camps bigger and required the coordination

of all hunting males in the camp. Therefore, the larger hunting territory was subdivided to help

accommodate the large number of hunters in the area.90

87 Regina Flannery and Elizabeth Chambers, “John M. Cooper’s Investigation of James Bay Family Hunting Grounds,” Antropologica vol 28, no. 1/2. (1986): 112-113. 88 Colin Scott, “Hunting Territories, Hunting Bosses and Communal Production among Coastal James Bay Cree,” Antropologica vol 28, no. 1/2. (1986): 165. 89 Ibid, 166. 90 Ibid, 167.

40 In a study done by Fikret Berkes, who worked with people from the Cree nation of

Chisasibi, he addressed the question of the family hunting territories in that community.91 In his conversation with hunters from Chisasibi, they all mentioned that there were two types of hunting territories, which were goose and beaver hunting territories. Families usually returned to the same territory year after year; however, the Cree people did not believe that land could not be individual property. It cannot be sold or bought. Land belonged to God who put the animals here. It is also important to note that wildlife is not considered to belong to individuals and families.92 Ownership

Figure 3-2: Traplines of Kashechewan and Fort Albany

91 Fikret Berkes, “CommonFigure Property 2-52: ResourcesandMap of Indian Hunting Treaties Territories,” in Ontario.Figure Anthropologica vol 2 -28, no. 1/2 (1986): 147. 53: Traplines of Kashechewan and Fort Albany 92 Ibid, 150.

Figure 2-54: Map of Indian Treaties in Ontario.Figure 2- 55: Traplines of Kashechewan and Fort Albany 41

Figure 2-56: Map of Indian Treaties in Ontario.Figure 2- 57: Traplines of Kashechewan and Fort Albany to the Cree is keeping law and order in that area. This prevents abuse of wildlife on the land. One

good example is the head of a hunting territory sets the rules with regards to hunting in the territory

and makes sure that everyone is getting a fair share within the territory.93 The study here shows us

that there were cycles of land-use for the Cree people in Chisasibi. They also did not believe that

they owned land but instead they were stewards for the land that they lived on.

There have also been studies done on the people of Attawapiskat. In Cummin’s study the

Illilowuk also stated that no one owns the land. However, there is a sense of having rights to a

piece of land based on the amount of time spent there or experience that they have on the land.

One man from Attawapiskat, for example, stated that he spent his entire life in the bush; he trapped

on the lands his father used to trap. He then concluded by saying that nobody is using the land

now, so anybody can use it, no one owns it.94

The anthropologists in this debate have based their arguments and their conclusions on the

material that was available to them at the time. However, looking at what I heard growing up in

the community, and from the Elders I have interviewed, there is a general consensus that no one

had any ownership to the land and its resources. The land and wildlife are shared among the people.

Elders Stories on Traditional Land-use

Elders that I have interviewed talked about land-use practices in the past. In these

interviews they mentioned all the things previous scholars have been saying with regards to

traditional land use. The late Elder Clifford Wesley mentioned that he belonged to a ‘separate

hunting area’ trapline number MO11895. He also mentioned that he used to spend his time goose

93 Ibid, 151. 94 Bryan Cummins, “Only God Can Own the Land”: The Attawapiskat Cree (Toronto: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004), 50-51. 95 Traplines codes are given based on their districts. For example, the Moosonee District 118 is abbreviated to MO118.

42 hunting on the Lawapiskaw River which is within the territorial lines of trapline MO117 (See

Figure 3-2).96 Later he told me this story.

I was hunting geese on the Lawapiskaw River. One morning while hunting on the Lawapiskaw River I was not getting any geese while I was hunting there. Then I heard geese over at Minownown Creek. So, I went to go check it out. Currently, I was still using dogs to get around. As I got to the creek I look over to see so many geese. I went back the next day and made a hunting blind. Before the afternoon I decided that was enough for today when I killed forty geese. I thought to myself that my dogs will struggle to pull the sled if I got anymore. As I headed back to camp the dogs did struggle to pull a load of forty geese, I had to help them pull.

The story told by Clifford Wesley reiterates what scholars have said about the topic in regards to traditional land-use. Even though he was registered in trapline MO118 he was still hunting in another territory that he was not registered in. When it came to hunting for food it was alright for someone to go into another person’s trapline to hunt for food. To this day this is still done in the

Omushkegowuk Region. Another Elder named Mary Rose Hughie also shared that people in the past would hunt in another person’s territory. She recalled hearing stories of people taking animals from other people’s traps. This was accepted because they would leave the fur behind or would sometimes take the whole animal and leave a note for the trapper stating that they took the animal because they were hungry.97

The Registered Trapline system was not also widely accepted by Omushkego Illilo trappers in the region. When the Ministry began to implement trapping restrictions on the Omushkegowuk

Illilo they began to assign specific trapping areas to individual families. This then turned into a bureaucratic process of applying for licenses, registering and having to follow quotas, which was foreign to the Omushkegowuk Illilo who had developed their own system of land use over

96 Elder Clifford Wesley, interview with Kiethen Sutherland, Kashechewan First Nation, January 12, 2019. 97 Elder Mary-Rose Hughie, Interview with Kiethen Sutherland, Kashechewan First Nation, January 21, 2019.

43 generations.98 According to Leonard Tsuji et al., written records from the Hudson Bay Company reveal the free movement of Illilowuk between the river basins during the fur trading period. In addition, there was movement of Illilowuk from Attawapiskat to the communities of Fort Albany and Moosonee documented by Honigmann.99 The movement of Illilo between communities is not what was in dispute. What was in dispute was the questions of Registered Traplines, a government construct being implemented on the coast.

Illilo Elders have been very vocal about the impacts that the Registered Trapline System had on their way of life. To quote Elder Marius Spence, quoted by Tsuji et al.,:

Now I will tell you what went wrong with our traditional life… A time came when our life, culture and customs were curtailed. We were now controlled, our land was divided. The piece of paper that marked our lands looked like a checkerboard. Everybody was given a piece of land where he can trap…A lot of people did not like the checkerboard trapping…the trouble started when the whiteman began regulating.100

This quote from Spence again reiterates the Registered Trapline System was another piece of

legislation that hindered and controlled Indigenous hunting and trapping by dividing up the lands

and registering plots of lands to individuals. This was to further the governments bureaucratic

control of Indigenous people.101 The Illilo had to conform to these new regulations. Even with

having rights guaranteed by treaties such as hunting, trapping and fishing, they were heavily

regulated by the province. These laws influenced their well-being by regulating their harvesting

rights. This prevented the Illilowuk by having enough animals to feed their families.

The impact of the Registered Trapline System caused conflict and aggression among the

Illilowuk. This again illustrates how the system changed the perception of land ownership among

98 Leonard J.S. Tsuji, Daniel D. McCarthy, Graham S. Whitelaw and Jessica McEachren, “Getting Back to the basics: The Victor Diamond Mind Environmental Assessment Scoping Process and The Issue of Family-Based Traditional Lands Versus Registered Traplines,” Impact Accessment and Project Appraisal 29, no. 1. (2011): 43. 99 Ibid. 100 Ibid, 42. 101 Bryan Cummins, 42.

44 the Illilowuk. This is what Bryan Cummins found when he did his fieldwork in Attawapiskat in

the 1990s. He quotes one of the Elders, “A lot of people were protective about their land, not letting

others use it, but I was not.”102 Another quote from the book says, “It was my father’s land, but

now I own it because I have the permit (#2332). I allow my sons and sons-in-law to trap because

they have no land of their own.”103 So, according to Cummins, there are two perspectives outlined

here with regards to land ownership after the Registered Trapline System had been implemented.

The quotes that I used before shows those who believe that they had ownership to the land.

Moreover, there were those who did not believe that anyone owns any piece of land. These

individuals could not care less when it came to others hunting in territories that they were stewards

for. To quote from Cummins book “Anybody can hunt and trap on my land. A long time ago

anybody could trap on my father’s land but then the government set up the grid and things

changed.”104 This practice was also present in the stories of the Elders I interviewed in

Kashechewan. For example, Elder Clifford Wesley stated that he was registered in trapline number

MO118 but did most of his goose hunting and harvesting in trapline MO117, which shows greater flexibility in land use than the Registered Trapline suggests.105

For the Omushkegowuk Illilowuk sharing was a way of life. This was a way of seeing and

acting in the world that was reciprocal. It involved the land and animals, the spirit world, the

ancestors and the people they accepted as visitors.106 Everything was shared for the Illilo. The land,

water and its wildlife were all commonly shared.107 The stories I heard growing up from Elders in

the community all tell stories of their hardships in the past. Elders have mentioned that everyone

102 Ibid, 42. 103 Ibid. 104 Ibid, 43. 105 Wesley Interview. 106 John S. Long et al., eds., “Sharing the Land at Moose Factory in 1763,” Ontario History 109, no. 1. (2017): 80. 107 Ibid.

45 tried to help each other whenever they could. This is evident in the stories two Elders shared with

me, especially when Mary-Rose Hughie mentioned that the Illilo would sometimes take an animal

from a trap when they were going through hard times and would leave a note saying that they took

the animal.

Ontario Provincial Traplines

The Registered Trapline System was put in place by the government of Ontario during the

late 1940s and early 1950s. This came after a series of closed seasons to manage fur bearers of the

province. By 1939, beaver and otter populations were sufficiently recovered to allow for two short

open seasons in the area south of the CNR main line and north and west of the French and Mattawa

rivers and Lake Nipissing. During these open seasons all trappers were required to apply for

trapping licenses and were permitted a maximum of ten beavers, while “Indian” trappers in the

north of the CNR did not require licenses to trap beaver.108

Through the late 1940s there were numerous complaints coming from “Indian” trappers

from the Patricia District, which is located in Northern Ontario (Treaty No. 9) about other trappers

encroaching into their trapping territories. A meeting was held on March 22, 1947, Hugh Conn109

explained to Jake Grew110 the system of traplines they had developed for the Moose Factory area and they believed that this would be suitable throughout northern Ontario. They proposed that the traplines be registered using the “Indian Trapping Grounds” rather than the township boundaries system they were using in the south. This involved registering a watershed in one family’s name.111

108 Lisa Hansen, Indian Trapping Territories and the Development of the Registered Trapline System in Ontario, Ontario Native Affairs. Historical Report. Native Affairs Directorate: Toronto. 25 109 Hugh Conn was a Fur Supervisor for the Indian Affairs Branch. 110 Jack Grew was a representative for the Fish and Wildlife Division of the Ontario Department of Lands, Forest and Mines. 111 Hanson, 29.

46 On August 3, 1950 an order was passed by the Ontario government, extending the Registered

Traplines System into the Patricia District in Kenora into the northern part of the Cochrane District.

The Registered Trapline System created conflicts for the Omushkegowuk People. First, the

new system was foreign to them. They were forced to hunt, trap and fish within assigned territories.

It was as though the Omushkegowuk People were given ownership to the land that they were

assigned to, and this was already problematic because, as previously mentioned, the Illilo did not

believe that they had ownership of the land. I am not saying that the Illilo did not have title to land,

they obviously did. It is the fact that boundaries were added to ashki-masinaykanah112 that

fractured the relationships that the Illilo had with the land. The disarticulation of lands into

territories also fractured relationships between different families by having land registered to

particular families, which prevented them from roaming in the Omushkegowuk Territory and

seeing other families.

This was also the case for the Indigenous people in the Yukon. Just like the Omushkego

Illilo the Yukon people also had nomadic lifestyles, and constantly moved from one territory to

another. There was no such thing as ownership to lands, but there was a sense of having rights to

an important fishing area if they frequented it.113 The marking of territories seem to be an area

conflict for the Indigenous people in the Yukon. When they were asked by colonial governments

to draw out ‘traditional’ boundaries for their communities there was a lot of overlap between the

communities. Between the Kluane and White River communities they agreed to share the

112 Cree word for maps. 113 Paul Nadasdy, “Boundaries Among Kin: Sovereignty, the Modern Treaty Process, and the Rise of Ethno- Territorial Nationalism among Yukon First Nations,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 54, no. 3. (2012): 507

47 overlapped areas with each other. They refused to draw a line to resolve the overlap between the

two territories.114

It is known that cultures change throughout history. It is difficult to pinpoint exactly how

land use patterns were before the arrival of European influences. However, according to Bryan

Cummins there seems to have been two different views on land ownership for the Illilo. When

Cummins was in conversation with Elders in Attawapiskat this is what he established: there are

those who did not believe anyone owned the land and that anyone could hunt and harvest where

ever they pleased, then there are those who believed that there is ownership to the land, because it

was passed down to them from their fathers and the MNR gave them the piece of land to hunt

on.115 This diversity is completely understandable within the Illilowuk worldview, this does not

mean there is no title to the land, instead it shows that there were relationships to territories and

retained territories were stewarded by certain families.

Irrespective of their understanding, Omushkegowuk people did not believe that they owned

the land in a capitalist sense of property ownership, rather there was still a sense of entitlement to

the land that they occupied and a belief that they had a duty to enforce traditional laws in the area.

Long term relationships with land helps prevent any overuse of the animals on the land. One good

example of this is that each hunting territory has a leader for the said territory.116 When a family

is familiar with a territory for generations it is easier for them to recognize the natural cycles within

the territory, including the animal population cycles. They also understand how much wildlife

there are within the territory and can plan accordingly.

114 Ibid, 516. 115 Hanson, 42-43. 116 Fikret Berkes, “Common Property Resourcesand Hunting Territories,” Anthropologica, 28, no. 1/2. (1986): 150- 151.

48 The lands within the Omushkegowuk Region are an important part of Illilo life. The land

provides wildlife as food and clothing to help the Illilowuk survive. According to Elder Mary-

Rose Hughie from Kashechewan, the Illilo were given plots of land from the Amisk Okimaw.117

They were told that this was where they would trap. In our interview, she explained that there were

changes that she witnessed when the traplines were implemented. She told me back then that

people helped each other during hard times. It was as though the traplines did not exist when the

Cree helped each other after they were implemented. She mentions that when someone was having

a hard time getting food and they happened to be passing by someone’s trap they would take the

animal that was in that trap. They would then leave a note near the trap saying that they had a hard

time getting food so they took the animal out of the trap. Then she reiterated that this was common

practice and that people understood that the person who took the animal out of the trap may have

needed it more than they did.118 I share this story again because I believe it is important to

understand this Illilo custom and how this practice continued even with the trapline system

imposed on the Illilo. Unfortunately, the trapline system still made this practice difficult to sustain.

I grew up seeing this from the community, harvesters from the community of Fort Albany

also practiced these teachings. The Albany River is a major roadway that both communities travel

on. During the moose hunts when a group of hunters has a successful hunt they share it with other

hunters who may have not been successful or are just starting their hunt. If they meet enroute, they generally give the hunters some meat to enjoy on their travels. This is also the case for waterfowl hunting. When a hunter has a very successful hunt, it is a custom to feed Elders in the community or to give to those who are not able to hunt (I go into more detail on this in the Chapter 4)

117 Amisk Okimaw is a term used by the Cree for the MNR. The world translates into beaver boss in English. 118 Hughie Interview.

49 The Registered Trapline system hindered and controlled Indigenous harvesting. As a result, this also impacted the distribution of food among the communities by preventing Illilo from sharing food because of the limits that were imposed on them. With the open and closed seasons enforced by the government, getting access to wildlife was difficult which then resulted in hardships and starvation, and the Illilo were forced to rely on other sources for food.

Treaty Rights and the Trapline System

On 3 August 1905 in Albany Post an agreement was made to share the land between the

Crown (Along with the Federal and Provincial Government of Ontario) and the Illilowuk gathered at Albany Post. The treaty that was signed that day is called Treaty No. 9. Treaty No. 9 guaranteed the right to hunt, fish and trap within the treaty boundaries (see Figure 3-3).119 The rights guaranteed by Treaty No. 9 made it difficult for the province to impose conservation laws in the north. Provincial law does not have jurisdiction over rights guaranteed by Treaty No. 9. Under treaty agreements, only laws passed by the federal government have an impact on Indigenous people. This became problematic for the provincial government, as they planned to impose strict laws of bureaucratic control on Illilowuk lands or harvesting.

The government of Ontario has infringed upon the land, hunting and trapping rights of the

Illilowuk and the following documents from the archives show this. A letter sent to G.A.

McCormack was a case of an Indigenous native trapper charged under the Game and Fish Act. In this case the provincial government lucked out on this matter because no defense was offered from the accused, and he was absent on the court date, so the trapper was issued a conviction and a fine.120 The government of Ontario knew that this court case was on their side because of the

119 John S. Long, Treaty No. 9: Making the Agreement to Share the Land in Far Northern Ontario in 1905 (Montreal and Kingston: McGill -Queens University Press, 2010), 357. 120 Correspondence from L.H Eckel to G.A. McCormack, 27 March 1979, RG-1-427 file 178. Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

50 absence of the accused. They also knew that they were extremely lucky because they understood that if the accused had appeared, and used the defense of having treaty rights to trap, the court

Figure 3-3: Map of Indian Treaties in Ontario. Photo Courtesy from the Archives of Ontario. would have sided with the accused. The government of Ontario tried to figure out what to do legally when it came to aboriginal treaty rights. The same letter states:

…I would recommend that future matters of this kind continue to be dealt with on an ad hoc basis until some agreement or decision can be obtained either through tripartite negotiations or possible future amendment of the Indian Act. I agree with your opinion that there is little opportunity at this time to legislate against Indian “right” and I do not think it would be in anyone’s best interest to have this matter brought to the attention of the Attorney General for subsequent review by the uniformity of the commissioners.121

121 Ibid.

51 These traplines were enforced on the Illilo illegally. The government of Ontario knew that the provincial laws did not apply to ‘Indian’ trappers. More correspondence between the Ministry’s office shows that they did in fact know that they were undermining the rights of Indigenous people to access their homelands for subsistence. In an earlier letter sent to D. B. McGregor it states in

1979:

The trapping regulations made under Provincial Legislations do not apply to Treaty Indians. As the law now stands only Federal Legislation, or regulations made under Federal Legislation, apply to Treaty Indians. …for what it is worth I am of the opinion that the longer we play ostrich and ignore the problem the better it will be for the Administration of the Resource.122

Nonetheless, the provincial government was still willing to deny Illilo access to the land. In fact, they sold that right to access the land. They did this by selling trapping licenses to Illilo trappers whom they then assigned to a registered trapline. The Illilo had exclusive rights to trap in the said trapline and no where else. According to the Elder Clifford Wesley, trapping licenses were issued to trappers at five dollars each. Illilo trappers at first were willing to pay for the licensing fees to trap in the trapline. However, for whatever reason people stopped paying for the licensing fees.123 Illilo trappers refused to pay these license fees. This shows their refusal to comply with these colonial laws that were enforced upon them. The government knew that they could not enforce these laws because provincial laws did not have jurisdiction over Indigenous peoples.

To this day trappers are required to pay for a trapping license in order to trap furbearing animals. I myself and other people I know do not own trapping licenses and still trap fur-bearing animals. The only limitation this has is that we cannot sell or ship the furs to auction. This requires a trapping license in order to do so. Although most people without these licenses will still sell these furs on their own to people who make use of these furs for clothing.

122 Correspondence from E. C. Burton to D.B. McGregor. 5 February 1979, RG-1-427 file 178. Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 123 Wesley, interview.

52 The Illilo have shown throughout history that they are resistant to colonial imposition. They know that they have rights to the lands that they depend on for subsistence. This becames an issue in a further case in 23 July 1979, that further illustrates the legal issues that the MNR faced in regards to their traplines being a barrier for the Illilo rights to hunt fish and trap. This case is interesting because this was the first time the defendant claimed that he had treaty rights as his defense. In correspondence dated 13 July 1979 addressed to J.K Reynolds, Deputy Minister for the MNR, there is mention of an “Indian trapping infraction.” This was a charge against Simon

Cheechoo, a Treaty Indian, for violating section 57 of the Game and Fish Act. The office was informed that the legal counsel representing Mr. Cheechoo will be defending his trapping rights guaranteed under Treaty No. 9.124 This of course was a cause for concern for the MNR. They knew that the court would side with the defendant and rule against them.

There were also discussions going on within the Ministry about some options that they had in regards to charges laid against Treaty “Indians.” In the aforementioned letter Eckel suggested three options for them to proceed with the case. The first one was to withdraw the charge. The second was to negotiate with the defense attorneys, and last, they could proceed with the charge.125

Withdrawing from the charge would relieve the situation over treaty rights. This move however would be viewed as a sign of weakness by “Treaty Indians” and would further illustrate the province’s inability to be able to impose restrictions on harvesting. Negotiating with the defence attorney would still have the same pros and cons as a withdrawal of the charge. Lastly, the

Ministry’s final option was to go ahead and proceed with the charge. The province knew that the court would likely side with Mr. Cheechoo if his defense was based on treaty rights. However, the

124 Correspondence from L.H Eckel to J.K Reynolds, 13 July, 1979, RG 1-427 file 178. Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 125 Ibid.

53 Ministry concluded that the case would bring positive effect by bringing the insistence of Treaty

Rights to the attention of the courts in a way that would ultimately disadvantage the Treaty Indian

trapper. Ministry officials believed that this would help with their position because the Illilowuk

had agreed to the Registered Trapline System and believed that the majority are still in favour of

the trapline. This decision seems to have split the Ministry between two positions. It appears the

majority of bureaucrats within the Ministry preferred to withdraw the charge due to the fact that

the court would not side with their regulations.126 This shows that the Ministry did not have the

legal position to implement the Registered Trapline System.

The Registered Trapline System challenged the ways in which subsistence harvesting was

conducted. In Illolimowen the acts of hunting and trapping are different words and reflect upon

the relationships between actions. This does not, however, mean that they are two different things.

Both activities are important to the Illilowuk as they are a way for them to provide for their

families. This was another area of discussion within the Ministry. The Ministry did not want to

define hunting and trapping as having the same meaning. It could also be possible that this was an

area of discussion because Treaty No. 3 gives rights to hunting and fishing only, while Treaty No.

9 gives rights to hunting, trapping and fishing.127 The Ministry jumped on the inconsistencies when

drafting their policy on Registered Traplines. In a letter sent to the regional manager in the Kenora

district from D.B McGregor it states “Treaty 9 clearly provides hunting, trapping & fishing rights.

Treaty #3 only provides hunting and fishing rights. Our proposed policy states that where the treaty

is silent on a right, that there is no right.”128 This policy forces those living within Treaty No. 3 to follow the regulations of the province because Treaty No. 3 did not give signatories and their

126 Ibid. 127 Treaty No. 3 is located in the Kenora District near the Ontario/Manitoba Border. 128 Letter from D.B McGregor to Regional Director of Kenora, 4 June 1979, RG 1-427 file 178. Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

54 descendants the right to trap. This makes it difficult for the people under Treaty No. 3 to access

the land for subsistence.

Treaty No. 9 was a different story for the Ministry, as it guaranteed the right to trap. As the

Ministry’s policy already states that hunting was not trapping, the right to trap from Treaty No. 9

created a problem for the Ministry because it gave the Illilowuk the right to trap. The province at

this point, after knowing that they would have trouble with Treaty No. 9, knew that they would

have to negotiate with the ‘Indian’ people and with the Federal government on the matter. The

Ministry wanted to go this route, but also knew it would take the longest. The Ministry thought

that if the ‘Indians’ knew they had legal control in the matter they would not negotiate with the

province to regulate trapping.129 While negotiation was an option for the Ministry, they ultimately wanted to pursue the case on Simon Cheechoo through the court for a definite legal position. This would give the Ministry an advantage for settling the issue. However, it was important that they were sure of their position in the court and would have the support of the Ministry and the prosecuting attorney.

The Ministry continued to undermine the rights of Indigenous trappers while trying to implement their Registered Trapline System. For example, in that same letter to Reynolds, one of the options was to keep running the bluff on “the Indians” where their policy states that hunting was not the same as trapping by ignoring the differentiation between hunting and trapping established in the Treaty. They were still willing to ignore the problem.

There have been some limitations to the research using archival material on this matter. As

I already noted, a lot of the material for the James Bay region burned when the Cochrane office burned down. This has caused some gaps in the documentary needed on the making of the policies

129 Ibid.

55 on the Registered Trapline System. Nonetheless, we know the province was successful because

the Registered Trapline System is still in place in Ontario.

Open and Closed Seasons: Control of Harvesting Activities

With the implementation of the trapline system in the Omushkegowuk Region came closed

seasons on beaver, which is an important food source for the Illilowuk. The trapline system limited

access to food sources for the Illilowuk who typically harvested beaver at this time in the region.

This included hunting, trapping and fishing for their food, but in sustainable ways based on Ililo

understandings of the natural cycles of land and animals. Once the trapline was established, my

grandmother shared the hardships occurred for families trying to get food to feed themselves. One

time she explained that she and her father were paddling up a creek and came across a beaver

swimming on the creek. During this time, the killing of beaver was forbidden because of the low

numbers of their population. Nonetheless, my great grandfather decided to shoot the beaver

because they needed some food to eat. After that they ate the beaver and used the fur for their own

use without having to sell it. While they were not charged, they could have been and my

grandfather knew there were risks.130

Chief and Councils’ in the Omushkegowuk Region voiced their concerns on the closed

seasons of beaver in 1959. Two letters written by community leaders from Fort Albany and

Attawapiskat were sent to the MNR requesting that they extend the beaver season. In James

Wesley’s letter, who was the Chief of Fort Albany, it states,…“Up here where we are trapping in

James Bay, Ontario [sic] North Ontario, here is a long winter started [sic] to freeze October 20, for six month is fall [sic] of [sic] winter where [sic] very cold. In the month of March is [sic] thick as

130 Bernadette Sutherland interview, with Kiethen Sutherland, Kashchewan First Nation, January 10, 2019.

56 this [sic] three feet where beaver are staying where they are…”131. The letter makes clear that there

were closed seasons on beaver that did not work for the Illilowuk. Further to this, the letter also

indicates there was no consultation with local trappers on the matter. There are no signs that any

local traditional knowledge was used. The leadership voiced their concerns to the Ministry,

knowing that this was not feasible for the north.

The same can be found in a letter written by trappers from Attawapiskat. In this letter they

mentioned the early start to the beaver season, which they say started on the 15th of October. The

trappers of Attawapiskat believe that this was still too early for them to trap beaver because the

beaver were still too young and small during this time of year. They explain that the beavers are

just right in the spring time after the closed season. Another reason for this was the low number of

other animals such as mink and otter.132 The two letters asked for an extension of the beaver

trapping season because they knew the value of the furs from beaver are better in the late spring.

They also understood and argued that the climate was different compared to the south where these laws may have been made. The winters in the north were colder than the winters in the south.

Ultimately these requests to extend the open season were denied by the Ministry. The explanation given was that it was more economical to leave it as is then to look out for the welfare of the people from the communities of Attawapiskat and Fort Albany. In a letter addressed to both

James Wesley and Xavier Tookate, Chiefs of the respective communities the Ministry responds:

We did not reply to you at the time when we received your letter because the trapping regulations were then under consideration and has not yet been passed. The regulations have now been passed and as was expected the closing date for trapping beaver this year will be March 31st 1960. The reason for this change in the regulation is that for several years past too many trappers in Ontario have left their beaver trapping until the spring open water so that a

131 Correspondence from Chief James Wesley to A. Gordon, August 26, 1959, RG1-427 file G23-9, Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 132 Correspondence from Xavier Tookate, Joseph Iahtail, John Shisheesh, Xavier Paulmartin and their people to A.G Gagnon. 21 July 1959, RG1-427 file G23-9, Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

57 great many poor springy pelts have been put on the market with the result that the price paid for Ontario beaver have been steadily dropping.133

The Ministry was reluctant to change the closing of the season after being advised by local Illilo trappers that the best time to trap beaver was in the spring. The Illilo trappers in this instance had the traditional local knowledge that the Ministry did not have. The late reply to the letters indicates that they knew about these requests and did not take the time to consider these changes for the

Illilo when they requested them.

One thing that I have seen today is how resistant Illilowuk are to the Registered Trapline

System. Today Illilowuk along the Mushkegowuk region hunt freely anywhere they want. They hunt and fish wherever they pleased even in other people’s traplines. This is most likely the case in summer and fall. During the summer, fishing is the main activity for the Illilowuk and this happens up along the Albany River. During the fall waterfowl hunting happens in the months of

August and September. During this activity hunting occurs along the coastline, which usually means hunting on someone else’s ‘trapline’. This is the case for fall and winter moose hunting as well. When one goes up along the Albany River (see Figure 1) there are many traplines that they cross.

Conclusion

To conclude, the Registered Trapline System has proven to be problematic for the

Omushkegowuk Illilowuk. First, it complicated traditional land-use practices, includes how the people viewed and used the land. The Illilowuk had no sense of having private land ownership.

The Illilo believed that there was a diversity of ways to look at land, not necessarily as landowners, but more about having relationships to a particular territory. The Illilo shared and helped one

133 Correspondence from A.G Gagnon to James Wesley and Xavier Tookate. 29 October 1959, Box RG, RG1-427 file G23-9. Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

58 another. They knew to help each other when someone was in need. However, the implementation of these traplines hindered this relationship by forcing Illilowuk into a single territory.

Second, the trapline system infringed on the treaty rights of the Illilowuk. Throughout the chapter, I have established how the MNR have consistently tried to undermine the rights the

Illilowuk. The MNR knew that provincial legislation did not apply to “treaty Indians”, but continued to enforce their laws onto the Illilowuk. This included laying charges against the

Illilowuk even though the MNR knew they did not have a strong case because of treaty rights.

Some Illilowuk understood that they had a legal advantage in these cases.

Ultimately, though, the MNR was successful in implementing the traplines in the

Omushkegowuk territory. They imposed open and closed season on fur bearing animals. The most important one was beaver, as it was an important food source for the Illilowuk. Community leadership from Fort Albany and Attawapiskat voiced their concerns saying that the dates proposed did not work for the north, but nobody listened. This just furthers the governments control on First

Nations hunting by implementing control on how Illilowuk harvested in the territory.

Nonetheless, the Illilowuk have proven to be resistant to the changes that were brought to them. With the strict game laws brought to them by the Ontario Government, the Illilowuk continued to harvest throughout the territory. As is evident in my introduction with the story, the

Illilowuk continue to hunt, trap and fish throughout the Omushkegowuk territory. Hunters to this day still hold the same values that were carried by our Elders. As I will show in Chapter 4, they continue to share meat with others when they have successful hunts. This is what makes a community and the community have proven to be resilient by continuing these practices.

59 Chapter Four: Decolonizing and Reanimating the Land through Photography

Introduction

“All photographs represent moments in time, but at their best they are also able to inspire something tangible – an emotion an empathetic response, occasionally a realization. Then one recognizes that there are stories within the image. Often these stories are lost, but something can be gleaned and the photograph can go further.” – Paul Seesequasis, Blanket Toss Under Midnight Sun.

This chapter will critically examine some of the photographs that John Macfie, a non-

Indigenous government worker, took during his time with the Minister of Natural

Resources(MNR) on Mushkegowuk territory from 1950-1960. Macfie (1925-2018) was from the

Parry Sound area, worked with his father in the timber industry, and became inspired to find a job outdoors in the winter of 1949 while cutting logs with his father. Following his father’s advice, he earned a position with the Ontario Department of Land and Forests, and then moved into the department’s Fish and Wildlife Branch to become a trapline management officer. In 1950, he arrived in Sioux Lookout to take up the duties, which included issuing trapping licenses, compiling records, and writing reports. He worked as what he called “field man,” which involved spending time in the bush to resolve trapline disputes, monitor beaver lodge counts turned in by trappers, and to monitor wildlife abundance and habitat.134 During this time, Macfie photographed and documented the landscapes, animals, and people in the north.

The aim of this chapter is to consider three different questions: first, what do these photos show about the colonial history of conservation in the Omushkegowuk region? Second, do these photos show Indigenous resistance to change in their territory? If so, in what ways? In answering these questions, I will argue that, as scholar Celeste Pedri Spade has found, these images taken by

134 John Macfie, Hudson bay Watershed: a Photographic Memoir of the Ojibway, Cree and Oji-Cree, (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1991), Kindle Edition, Introduction 7.

60 a non-Indigenous man highlight Illilowuk resistance. People are still using traditional tools and

continue to be out on the land despite being told that they cannot hunt or kill in ways they would

traditionally do so. As I have highlighted elsewhere in this thesis, Omushkegowuk Illilowuk have

special relationships with their environment. These photographs extend this discussion. I end this

chapter by re-inserting my own presence on my traditional lands by showing photographs of my

own.

Working with Photography

This chapter builds on the work of Indigenous scholars Paul Seesequasis and Celste Pedri-

Spade on Indigenous and decolonized photography. Both Seesequasis and Pedri-Spade consider

photography as a way to strengthen Indigenous identity, history and language. Pedri-Spades’ work

highlights how photographs of our ancestors provides knowledge of what they were doing in the

past, as well as acts of resistance to colonialism in their daily lives.135 In Seesequasis’ project, The

Indigenous Archival Photo Project, he began to post photos of family and community online

through social media. This generated discussion from family and community members beyond his

territory. When people saw pictures of their parents, aunties, uncles or grandparents, they were

inspired to share oral narratives.136 This work has culminated in a book tilted Blanket Toss Under

Midnight Sun which includes photographs by Macfie and images from the Hudson Bay Water

Shed including an image of my uncle from Eastmain, Quebec.

There has been some research on the role of photography in the colonization of Indigenous

peoples. However, there have been a growing number of efforts to flip the lens on Indigenous

photography. These photos are used by Indigenous peoples and communities to achieve different

135 Celeste Pedri-Spade, “Waasaabikizo: Our Pictures are Good Medicine,” Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society 5 no. 1 (2016): 58. 136 Paul Seesequasis, Turning the Lens: Indigenous Archival Photo Project, June 21, 2018. https://shekonneechie.ca/2018/06/21/turning-the-lens/

61 goals linked to confronting and countering the ongoing legacies of colonial violence with the aim

of moving towards decolonized practices. Through photography, Indigenous peoples address

many of the issues entrenched in colonialism including land, identity, family relationships and

culture.137 Celste Pedri-Spade oversaw her own project after coming across a photograph of her

grandmother, which inspired her to collect other photographs of the Anishinaabe people. Through

this project she was able to look at images of her ancestors from the area, and to start to think about

how her ancestors created these images because they wanted to show something meaningful to

their family members in the future.138 What is useful in this work is how the author used

photographs of Indigenous people in the past in ways that could help strengthen Indigenous

identity, histories and language in the present.

While there is not much literature on conservation photography, there is a growing body

of scholarship focussed on the connection between photography and colonialism and the colonial

encounter. In James Ryan’s Picturing Empire historical photography offers compelling views of

Britain’s imperial past. In his book, he emphasizes that photos are prone to human perception,

meaning that photos will often need titles, captions and texts. These photos are framed and

produced within specific cultural and historical circumstances.139 Within the context of

conservation, Ryan argues that photography replaced hunting as “photo hunting,” which became

popular on African safaris in the late 19th and 20th centuries. As a result, European attitudes towards wild animals changed. A shift from indulgent slaughter to “enlightened” conservation occurred, highlighting the emergence of colonial ideas of “civilized” approaches to nature. During this period, we see colonial perceptions on hunting change as a result of this shift. Within this

137 Celeste Pedri-Spade, Waasaabikizo. 47. 138 Ibid, 55. 139 James Ryan, Picturing Empire: Photography & the Visualization of the British Empire (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1997), 11-12.

62 transition, Indigenous hunters in Africa became “poachers.”140 I draw from this framework as I consider the process of colonial conservation in the Omushkegowuk territory. Macfie’s photos demonstrate the ongoing process and struggles the Illilowuk faced with colonial authorities in northern Ontario.

It is also without a doubt that photography is very influential in shaping public perceptions on social issues. This can be evident in previous works in this literature review. However, photography has had an influence on how issues related to the natural environment are shaped.

The relationship between conservation and photography has a long history. In 1864, American

Carleton Watkins used his landscape photographs of Yosemite to influence the United States

Government to enact a bill to create its first nationally legislated nature preserve to be manage through the State of California. Then five years later, photography also influenced the creation of

Yellowstone National Park.141

In his thesis titled “Conservation Photography” Carlton Ward Jr. looks back into the history of conservation photography in the United States. In his thesis he says that photography has empowered conservation since the beginning of environmental movements in America.142

Throughout his thesis he finds examples from all over the world where photography influenced government policies on conservation. One of the examples he uses in his thesis is a photographer from China named Xi Zhinong. Zhinong became a leader in the Chinese environmental movement.

When he discovered that a logging company was illegally cutting down woods in a habitat of endangered monkeys he went on a media campaign to expose them. This resulted in the creation of a non-governmental environmental protection agency. His photographs also influenced support

140 Ibid, 19. 141 Carlton Ward Jr, “Conservation Photography,” (MSc Thesis, University of Florida 2008.) 17. http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/UFE0021860/ward_r.pdf 142 Ibid.

63 from media outlets and students around the country.143 There are many more examples used in his

thesis that show the same influential work from photographers around the world, but most

importantly the history of photography and how photography played a role in conservation.

The next area of literature is the theme of photography and the colonial encounter. In

Elizabeth Edward’s article “Negotiating Spaces: Some Photographic Incidents in the Western

Pacific, 1883-84,” she argues that it is the spatial elements of photographs that give a theatre of

action and give shape to cultural performances within them.144 Space is essential. Space and place

become more than just settings for an action. They are culturally and socially constructed in

dynamic practices. They also offer rich contexts of analysis of the photographic incident and the

relationships represented in the ongoing encounter in support of or to challenge the colonial

agenda.145 Many (if not all) of John Macfie’s photographs are images of colonial encounters

between Illilowuk trappers and officials from the MNR. Examining the colonial space that the two

parties are in or considering the context within and beyond the photograph, helps me build my

understanding of the story of conservation in the Omushkegowuk region.

Similarly, Joan M. Schwartz and James Ryan’s “Introduction Photography” focus on

photography as a powerful tool to engage with the world around us through the lens of geography.

Through photographs, we remember, we imagine, and we picture place.146 According to these authors, photographs were entangled in empiricism, meaning they were embedded in 19th-century practices of collecting classifying, and controlling facts. Photographs and photography are

143 Ibid, 22. 144 Elizabeth Edwards, “Negotiating Spaces: Some Photographic Incidents in the Western Pacific, 1883-84,” in Picturing Place: Photogrpahy and the Geographical Imagination, ed. Joan M. Schwartz and James Ryan (New York: I.G Tauris, 2003), 262. 145 Ibid, 263. 146 Joan M. Schwartz and James R. Ryan, “Introduction Photography and the Geographical Imagination,” in Picturing Place: Photography and the Geographical Imagination, ed. Joan M. Schwartz and James Ryan (New York: I.G Tauris, 2003), 2.

64 therefore linked to histories of colonialism. This made the world more visually and conceptually

accessible.147 This work is important when looking at photos of the past. Especially these photos

taken by an official from the MNR. I wonder, what did my ancestors make of these photographic

moments? Instead of showing my ancestors only as victims of colonization, I want to consider them as actors in the stories being shared through these photographs and, as I argue, part of the decolonization process.

John Macfie Photography

John Macfie first landed the job as the department’s Fish and Wildlife Branch (FWB) trapline management officer in a remote part of Northern Ontario in 1950. Just a little over a year later, the government of Canada responsible for Indigenous Affairs (then Indian and Northern

Affairs) and the government of Ontario, which regulated hunting and trapping in the province, entered into an agreement to work together to safeguard the wild fur of the North.148 When John

Macfie got into the position most of the groundwork was already laid by Hugh Conn of the

Indian Affairs Branch. Three years earlier, Hugh Conn had already travelled to all of the northern settlements to meet with Indigenous trappers in the region. Macfie, like other civil service workers, had spent a lot of time behind a desk issuing trapping licenses, compiling records, and writing reports. He also did some field work when it required him to do so. For example, he worked on settling trapline boundary disputes, and audited beaver lodges for the

FWB.149 It was during this time that Macfie took photographs of the landscape, animals and the

people.

147 Ibid. 148 John Macfie, Hudson Bay Watershed, 7. 149 Ibid, 8.

65 The aim of this chapter is to examine photography. I will look into the methodological

approach of other scholars who have utilized photography in their studies and apply these

approaches in my own analysis. Jennifer Tucker’s article, “Entwined Practices: Engagements with

Photography in History Inquiry,” looks into photography as another source for historical analysis.

In this article she advocates that photography should be used in relation to the complexities of any

other historical use of any document. What is clear in this context is that photographs are neither

more nor less transparent than other documentary sources. Many of the same questions must be

asked about photographs as of any other type of historical sources: who took the photo? Who is

the photograph for? To whom was it circulated and what was its impact?150 In most of her article

she quotes other historians on how to use photography in the discipline of history.

Elizabeth Edwards has done a lot of work on the uses of photography for analysis. In her

article “Objects of Affect: Photography Beyond the Image”, she starts off with a question other

authors have used when looking at photography: “What do material things make possible?”.151

Throughout her article she uses this central question when examining ways to look at photography.

She notes that historical photos are defined by their reproducibility and potential repurposing, and

are objects of active biographies in a constant state of flux. There are many uses of photography.

They become reframed, replaced, rearranged. They are prints, becomes negatives, postcards,

family treasures, private photos go to archives and photographs of scientific production are

reclaimed as cultural heritage.152 She also explore two interconnected elements of material

practices of photography. The first one is the idea of placing. This is to look at how the photo is

150 Jennifer Tucker, “Entwined Practices: Engagements with Photography in History Inquiry,” History and Theory, Theme Issue 48. (2009): 5. 151 Elizabeth Edwards, “Objects of Affect: Photography Beyond the Image,” The Annual Review of Anthropology 41 (2012): 222. 152 Ibid, 225.

66 used and what relationships it has with the space around it. The second is to consider the material condition of the photographs themselves. This is what she describes, the remediation and repurposing of photographic images.153

However, there are some limitations to the photographs taken by John Macfie. For example, I could not find any context to the photographs when visiting the archives and consulting his diary during his time working for FWB. The only bit of information I could find was from his photographic memoir book. Therefore, I frame this section by looking into what these photos show in regards to conservation history in the Omushkegowuk region. I will also look at these photos as acts of resistance to colonial laws in the Omushkegowuk region. At the time that these photos were taken, Omushkegowuk culture had changed drastically, including the tools, clothes and food that they were using. However, these photos also show how the culture of the Indigenous people living in the north adapted to these changes. Technologies may have changed, but the traditions, including teachings about land and animals and uses of tools remain the same. This is an important

challenge, as Phillip Deloria, Mary Jane

Logan McCallum, and other Indigenous

scholars have noted, to narratives that

reify Indigenous peoples in the past.154

I now want to turn my attention to some

of the photographs used by John Macfie

Figure 4-1: Cam Surrie (in peaked cap), trapline in the fur trade section of his management supervisor for the Department of Lands and Forest, consulting a map with Big photographic memoir book. There is a Trout Lake trappers. Photo Courtesy of John Macfie.

153 Ibid, 226. 154 Philip Joseph, Deloria, Playing Indain (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2007); Mary Jane McCallum, Indigenous Women, Work, and History, 1940-1980 (Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 2014).

67 series of photographs showing the negotiations of and consultations for trapline maps. This is an

important moment for land use management for the Omushkegowuk People. Figure 4-1 is a photo

of Cam Surrie with trappers from Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation (Big Trout Lake).

Meetings with Indigenous trappers were put in place by the Department of Lands and Forest

(DLF). The DLF consulted with

Indigenous trappers to determine on

how to split lands up into Registered

Traplines.

Place is an important concept

when examining photography.

Looking at this photograph it is most

likely that this meeting between the

trapline manager and trappers of Big

Figure 4-2: Earl Stone of the Department of Lands Trout Lake is happening in a Hudson and Forest, meeting with trappers at Poplar Hill. Photo courtesy of John Macfie. Bay Company store. The HBC stores

were an important place for many Indigenous Peoples living in remote areas. Most people would

think of these stores as a place of importance for Indigenous peoples who rely heavily on these

stores. I like to think otherwise. Indigenous trappers have always provided for the fur trade

economy and these stores needed Indigenous trappers to keep their stores going. This brings us

back to the place where this photograph was taken. Why was this photo taken exactly inside these

stores? It is possible that John Macfie, the person who took the photograph, wanted to show us

how important this place was for colonial interests. When looking at the photos that John Macfie

took of meeting spaces, many seem to be taken inside HBC buildings. Throughout the HBC’s

68 history, their spaces have been an important place for transactions to occur. This can be seen with the treaty negotiations in the Omushkegowuk region. The HBC acted as translators for these interactions.155 This is where all annual treaty payments were made and was also a meeting place for FWB as seen in these photos.

These spatial sites (Figure 4-1)

show us the ongoing encounters

between Indigenous and colonial

worlds. The photograph shows us this

space as a place for negotiations and

consultations, something Indigenous

people have been doing in colonial

spaces for many years. In this picture

it shows exactly this encounter in

which Cam Surrie met with the

trappers from Big Trout Lake. Figure 4- 3: A Moose Factory trapper dragging home two beavers. His snowshoes, moccasins, mitts, However, there is no indication of what and canvas gun case are native-made. Photo courtesy of John Macfie. this meeting was about. In this meeting they could be discussing trapline boundaries, or whether the trappers have seen beaver lodges.

Although there is no clear indication of what this meeting is about it still shows us the encounters between Indigenous and colonial worlds.

Moving on to Poplar Hill (Figure 4-2) we can see the same setting as the picture from

Figure 4-1. It still shows the ongoing encounter between Indigenous and colonial worlds. What is

155 David Calverley, “The Impact of the Hudson’s Bay Company on the Creation of Treaty Number Nine,” Ontario History, Volume XCVIII, no. 1. (2006): 43.

69 interesting in this picture is that there is a smaller number of Indigenous trappers at this meeting.

This could mean that the population of Indigenous trappers in Popular Hill is smaller compared to

other reserves or settlements or that those present did not want to be photographed, or, still further,

that people were not notified and were absent from the meeting.

Notice the interaction in the photograph. There are not a lot of trappers speaking to the

representative from the Department of Lands and Forest. Looking at the photograph, a majority of

Indigenous trappers are sitting in the background. It could be possible that the way that this meeting

was structured was to have trappers come up one at a time to discuss issues or ask any questions of the representative from the Department of Lands and Forest. It could also mean that the trappers were not interested in these meetings, as many of them had voiced their displeasure of the trapline system. For example, in John Macfie’s diary he mentions that his guides had voiced their disagreement with having to buy a trapping license. This came out after John Macfie told the guides that they would not be getting paid for their services.156 As noted in other chapters, Elders

have voiced their displeasures with the trapline system and resisted these changes.

Although the first two photographs from the Macfie photos may be interpreted as

Indigenous trappers adapting to white settler society, there are also other photographs that show

the strength in the Illilowuk culture. What these photographs also show is the act of resistance

shown from the Illilowuk to continue to practice their culture. These resistances of our ancestors

continue to the present day. This can be seen in a later section when I share my photographs of my

experiences out on the land.

In Celeste Padri-Spade’s scholarship she explains that photos of our ancestors show acts

of resistance. These photos show the continued struggle of our ancestors to retain and practice their

156 John Macfie Dairy, 23 January 1952. B2667706, Box C 330-18-1 file 04. Archives of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

70 way of life.157 In a country that has been systematically trying to destroy the culture of the

Indigenous populations, the Illilowuk still practiced these cultures. In Figure 4-3 it shows a trapper

from Moose Factory dragging home two beavers from his hunting trip. That this occurred during

the open beaver season meant that the province allowed the killing of beaver during this time. The duration of the open seasons spans from the late fall right up into early spring in May. This picture also shows us the relationships the Illilowuk had with the land and the animals. For example,

Figure 4-4: A Moose Factory Women Figure 4-5: Mr. Echum of Moose fleshing a stretched beaver-skin. Photo Factory pelting a beaver. The bone courtesy of John Macfie tool he is wielding with a chopping motion will separate skin from flesh animal hides are required to make the snowshoes that without risk of cutting it. Photo courtesy of John Macfie. he is wearing. This requires the knowledge of making and preparing the hide to make it suitable for use on snowshoes. The gloves that the trapper is wearing also requires hide from animals in the region. The hide itself can come from moose or caribou. The fur trimming usually consists of beaver fur. It is also important to consider that the trapper in the photo could be also be a guide for John Macfie. It is evident that the man in the photograph has knowledge of the local area and is applying or is purchasing clothing from people aware of traditional methods of clothing production.

157 Padri-Spade, 58.

71 The reason why I chose this photograph was because of the importance of the beaver as a food source for the Illilowuk. There are stories of people shooting and killing beavers during the closed season. My grandmother told me a story where she recalls her father shooting a beaver during the closed season because they were hungry.158 Although this photo may have been taken during the beaver season imposed by the MNR, it still shows the Illilowuk resistance to the laws highlighted by my grandmother’s story. The photograph shows the viewer that even with strict conservation laws that were imposed on the Illilowuk, they still found ways to adapt and work around these laws. They continued to harvest beaver for its many uses during the open season

(when the MNR “allowed” beaver to be trapped) and found ways to manage without one of their main food sources during the majority of the year. Something else to note about this photo is the use of handmade material as the photo caption suggests. Even with the introduction of colonial clothing and tools, the majority of Illilowuk still used their traditional clothing and tools (as seen in the photo: moccasins, mittens, and snowshoes). Today the clothing in the photographs are still overwhelmingly used by hunters and trappers in the community.

Earlier in this section I mentioned that the Illilowuk in the region have been able to adapt to changes brought to them by colonial factors. The photos in Figures 4-4 and 4-5 show that even though the Illilowuk were able to adapt to some of these changes, they have also chosen to keep some of the old tools that they have been using for many years. In Figure 4-5 you can see a man using a tool made from an animal bone to skin a beaver. This tool prevents the fur from being cut or damaged. In Figure 4-4 we cannot see what tool the woman is using to flesh a stretched beaver skin. However, the equipment used to stretch the beaver pelt is made from a tree branch and some

158 Bernadette Sutherland Interview.

72 sinew or hide laces. This also has been practiced for a long time and is still the preferred method today.

These are some of the examples that we see in these photos on how the Illilowuk have been able to adapt to change. In Figures 4-1 and 4-2 they show ‘consultations’ between the Ministry of

Natural Resources and other Indigenous trappers. Even with tough conservation laws the Illilowuk were able to adapt to these changes and make things work. They were still able to continue trapping like they had before but have worked around the seasons designated for beaver. In Figures 4-3, 4-

4 and 4-5 we see that even with these changes the Illilowuk have been able to continue using older tools and equipment. Most old tools shown in the photos are still used today.

Ni Minapiskaykanah (My Photos)

In this next section, I reinsert my own personal photographs out on the land into my work to illustrate the special relationships that the Illilowuk have with the land. I also demonstrate that many of these traditions are still practiced today and that not much has changed since the time of contact. Tools and technology may have changed throughout the years in the Omushkegowuk territory, but the teachings and the culture remain the same.

Before getting into the photographs I would like to talk about the relationship that I have with the land and what that relationship means to me. I grew up being out on the land. At a young age my parents or grandparents always took me out on the land whenever they could. Every spring my parents and I would spend some time at our spring hunt camp. I usually stayed longer with my grandparents when my parents returned to our community for work.

My time out on the land continues to provide teachings. These teachings come from the people that are with me when I am out on the land, as well as the land itself. For example, growing up and learning how to hunt with my father, he often told me not to kill anything that I would not

73 eat. This lesson was also shared when he told me not to overkill and only kill enough to provide

for my family. Travelling to our destinations resulted in teachings, as well. When we travel along

the coast my grandparents and father would tell me the different names of places along the coast.

The names were always shared with a story about why the place was called what it is. I was also

taught to respect the land and keep it clean. This is something that I have learned through many

years being out on the land. Whenever I went camping with family as a child we would always

clean up after ourselves when we were done with the camp. I was also involved in this practice by

having my grandparents tell me to help them with cleaning up the campsite.

Stories about the relationships between humans and animals all came from my

grandmother. These stories always seem to be shared at the end of the day, after a long day of

hunting. She would always explain how important the geese are to the people. In these stories she

often talks about her experiences with hunting geese and how it is important to respect the harvest

of geese and not to disrespect the bird. She also tells stories about other animals and birds as well

and how they are important to the natural cycle of the Mushkegowuk Region. She also shares

Figure 4-6: No Man's Point Spring Hunt Camp. Photo from the author’s personal collection. Figure 4-7: Godwit Hunting on the North Mouth of the Albany River. photo from the author’s personal collection.

74 athelokanah (legends) with me. These stories tell us how things come to be and why things are the way they are.

I have also discovered what being out on the land and having this relationship means to me. Being out on the land is therapeutic to me. It is a place where I can find myself once again after going through a rough patch in my life. It does not necessarily mean just being out to hunt or trap, but just to be out there and sit under a tree and have some tea. The land is also a place to share stories and laugh together with family and friends. It is a place to relax and escape from your troubles. So, I hope that these photos that I will be sharing will show these attributes.

The Minownown (No Man’s Point) spring hunting camp as shown in Figure 4-6 is where

I spent all of my springs growing up. This place has a very special place in my heart. A lot of memories were made for me at this camp. This is the camp where my family stays for the spring harvest of geese. Although it is mainly used for the spring hunt, it is also a spot where the family gathers for picnics. This camp is also used as a rest stop for the communities which sits right along the coast of James Bay.

This photo of Minownown (No Man’s Point) shows my relationships to the land. The land that my ancestors have harvested through generations. The description of the seasonal uses of the camp also highlights the type of relationships I have with the camp. The spring goose hunt is when the hunt camp is very busy. The whole family will take up all the hunting cabins seen in the picture.

Then in the summer and fall there is not as much going on at the camp, but there are times when the family will go spend a few days or even weeks (depending on the winds and conditions of the bay) at the camp. However, tents will be pitched up at the end of the point near the coast (not seen in the photo). During the summer and fall the family will set up their gill nets for harvesting whitefish along the coast line. Another activity during this time of year is harvesting berries.

75 During the winter it provides a stop during our trapping trips. There is not a whole lot of activity

during this time of year, but in the late winter preparation begins once again for the spring goose

hunt to show the circular nature of this cycle.

Every time I see this photo, or see photos similar to this, it always brings me back to all the

times I have spent out on the hunt. This links me directly to the knowledge that has been passed

down to me. Almost all of the teachings I received have been at this hunting camp. This was where

I always spent “me” time when I was away from the community. When I explain the seasonal uses of this camp, it is important to mention the importance of travel. In the spring and winter snow mobiles are used to get to the camp. The route that is taken is the seasonal winter road up to No

Man’s Creek; however, in the early winter and late spring the preferred route is to drive along the coastline. This is because of the uncertainty of the muskeg or creek freezing solid. In the summer and fall, boats are used to get the camp. This is the time of year when travel is unpredictable. The

Bay can be unpredictable, even the slightest north wind can cause the waves to be too high for boats. One must also really know to recognize the coastline in order to get to the camp. If someone did not know how to read the coastline they could easily get lost out on the Bay.

The spring hunt camp that my family has been going to for many years is not the only place where we go to harvest. Figures 4-7 and 4-8 show that we harvest anywhere that we can find food.

This photo was taken in August of 2015. During this time of the year it is Hudsonian godwit hunting season. A Hudsonian godwit is a shore bird that frequents the coast in early fall. The coast north of the Albany River is the feeding grounds for the godwit. When the tide starts to come in people will leave the mouth of the major rivers and go to smaller creeks and rivers along the coast.

They do this by trying to beat the tide in those areas. Once the tide starts getting high enough the

76 godwits leave their feeding grounds to go to a dryer pond somewhere inland. They come in numbers over your boats and this is when the Illilowuk will shoot them.

For many years the Illilowuk have known the behaviour of godwits. They knew exactly when the godwits arrive to feed before they migrate south. This knowledge has been passed down through generations. Illilowuk along the coast still go hunting today because of this knowledge.

This is learned at a young age when parents take their children hunting. This was the same for me and after some time I understood that godwit season started when my dad takes me out to the Bay to hunt them. Not only does this show the continued relationships the Illilowuk have with the land and the animals, but I also argue it shows resilience. Through many years of colonialism and efforts to destroy Illilowuk culture in the Mushkegowuk region my family and community still carry their teachings and culture. Many Illilowuk today, especially the young ones, continue to harvest through these teachings.

Later in the month of August or in September is when the coast sees the return of waterfowl.

During the fall months the Illilowuk focus on hunting snow geese and ducks. Figure 4-9 was taken during one of my snow goose hunts. What this picture reminds me of is the teaching I have heard from my dad and grandmother. This photo was taken in midday. The skies are clear and the wind was coming from the west, Which is why I only have a picture of my boots as I got nothing that day. Typically, in order to go snow goose hunting it is best to go when it is an overcast and it is a lot cooler. The best is when the wind is coming from the north. Snow geese are more active in weather like this.

77 Figure 4-8: Returning from a Figure 4-9: Snow goose hunting along the Cheegunuk snow goose hunt and dropping off River. Photo from the author’s personal collection. my harvest to my Grandmother. Photo from the author’s personal collection. Teaching, culture and resistance are what comes to mind when looking at these images I have taken during my time out on the land. Not only do they show the relationships that I have with the land, but also are reminders of the teachings I have received while out on the land. Figure 4-9 for example is a great one. The skies are clear and it

was very warm that day. The only time that snow geese were active was in the early morning and

when the hightide came in. Once the tide has receded the snow geese go back out to the coast to

feed on the mudflats. Another thing that these photos show are the continued practices of

harvesting.

In Figure 4-8, I returned from a snow goose hunt that I took before coming back to North

Bay to start my studies in my master’s program. I spent the summer and early fall season harvesting

for my grandmother. In the summer it is spent fishing. However, as I have mentioned before, in

78 the early fall season Illilowuk harvest godwits and snow geese. Snow geese this early in the season are not usually fat. So, the Illilowuk shoot adult snow geese which will be fatter than the ones that hatched over the summer. I do not have a photograph of this but my grandmother took ten of the birds and showed me how to prepare them when they are not as fat as they are supposed to be.

This cut is called Piimishikanuk.159 They are normally prepared like this earlier in the hunting season.

I would also like to get into one of the oldest practices in Illilowuk culture. This is feeding your Elders or people in need. I have mentioned that I had been harvesting for my grandmother while I was on my summer break. This meat may be for my grandmother, but it can also end up distributed widely throughout the community or to other communities. My grandmother will sometimes have her friends over and when they are over they will take something out of the freezer to eat, which is usually wild game that has been gifted to her. Sometimes her friends will call her to ask if she has any extra wild meat to give away. It can also end up with other family members in other communities along the coast. My grandmother has a lot of family in the community of

Attawapiskat and sometimes the wild meat will end up with family in Attawapiskat.

Growing up in the community sharing meat with Elders is an important teaching I grew up with. It is common practice in the community. Sometimes when an Elder gets word that someone is heading out on a hunt the Elder will ask the person to get some meat from an animal that is not commonly hunted. For example, sometimes an Elder will want a crane, so the hunter will try their best to get a crane that day. Cranes are not commonly hunted today so it would not cross the minds of hunters to shoot them. I also had a similar experience during the spring hunt. I had mentioned to my grandmother that the crane had arrived in the north and that I had seen two flying by my

159 Piimishikanuk translates into a cut made in a curve. This cut is used when smoking birds that are not fat enough for a regular cut. This minimizes the risk accidently cutting through the meat.

79 blind. She then told me to shoot at least one crane whenever I get the chance again because she

wanted to smoke it.

I now focus on some photographs I took during my winter activities. In the winter months

the Illilowuk will trap for furbearing animals. Trapping is one of the many activities I do whenever

I am home during the winter months. However, right now me and my family focus on trapping

Figure 4-10: Me with an otter my friends and I trapped on the Figure 4-11: Pitstop south of Kinoshe Siipii (Pike Nechichishi River. Photo from the River) Photo from the author’s personal author’s personal collection. collection.

martens. So, the trapline number assigned to us by the MNR is Trapline MO117. Trapline MO117

starts on the south banks of the Lawabiskow River up to Kakakishikamikok (Cockerpenny Point)

and it goes as far as sixty kilometres inland to No Mans Creek.

However, we generally do not trap on our assigned traplines. Figure 4-10 shows me on

another trapline that was assigned to my friend’s family. This photo was taken on the Nechichishi

River which is about 30 km north of No Man’s Point. In it I am holding an otter that we trapped

80 on one of our trips. This was taken after we had snow dried160 the fur on the otter. This is done to prevent the fur from freezing in the harsh cold temperatures in the winter and damaging the fur.

I chose to show this photograph because I was not within the trapline that was assigned to my family by the MNR. I was at a friend’s trapline where I was invited to join them in their endeavours. This shows the resistance of the Illilowuk against colonial traplines where we are supposed to trap within the boundaries given to us by colonial institutions. Instead of conforming to these ideals we continue to practice a long tradition of inviting other people to our hunts and trapping if there were not having any luck at theirs. What will also happen is when someone loses a family member from death, they will at times refuse to go to where they would traditionally hunt and trap. The memories of those times make it hard for the hunter to continue to hunt at these areas. Sometimes a friend will be invited to harvest in their assigned trapline or the person will ask if they can join them on their harvest. Eventually once they have gone through their grieving process they will return to the original area. What will also happen is that someone might be going hunting alone and would like to invite a friend and their family for the harvest or visa versa. It is a practice that the Illilowuk still continue to do. This is also done in the spring where a family will invite another family to join them in a goose hunt.

There is also a lot of travel done to get to your trapline in the winter. In Figure 4-11 this was one of the rests stops we took when we traveled to our trapline. This picture was taken on the south shore of Kinosheo River (Pike River). The reason why I wanted to include this photo is to provide another example of the relationship I have with the land in the Omushkegowuk region.

This area is not within the boundaries of the trapline assigned to us by MNR. We still must drive

160 Snow drying fur is a common practice after trapping beaver, otter or muskrat when bringing it out of the water. The fur is wet and with the frigid temperatures in the winter the cold can damage the wet fur if it is not dried. So, to snow dry fur is to brush the fur in snow repeatedly until is dries. This prevents damage to the fur.

81 through the area to get to ours. This results in learning the landscapes of the Omushkegowuk region. Each place has its unique characteristics. For example, that tree along the skidoo trails shows us that we are halfway to Minownown. This is where we would normally stop to have a cup of tea and to see how everyone is fairing in the trip. This is also a spot where we will make plans on how to check our traps once we get to Minownown, and if we are moose hunting in the winter, we will also talk about how everyone will be positioned when moose hunting.

What also happens at this rest stop is it provides a social space. On some days we will encounter other trappers heading to their traplines or Illilowuk hunting grouse in the area. The family that traps in that area will also come over to socialize with other trappers. While the trappers and hunters gather they will tell stories of what happened in their travels or they will mention what animals they had seen. They will laugh and share a cup of tea if anyone did not have any tea.

Conclusion

The Omushkegowuk land is an important part of the lives for the Illilowuk. It provides them with the wildlife and food they needed for survival. This provides a unique connection between the animals the land and the Illilowuk. The relationships that were built are built on the respect for the natural cycles of the Mushkegowuk region. The photos that I have chosen for this chapter show this unique relationship the Illilowuk have with the land.

Photos from Figure 4-1 and 4-2 shows the encounters between settler and Indigenous societies. In the 1950s, the province was interested in protecting “its” natural resources for the province. To safeguard the wildlife in the north the provincial government believed it had to establish conservation laws. This came in the form of establishing traplines in Ontario’s far north.

The two photos show meetings between trapline managers and trappers. The Illilowuk were still able to adapt to these new laws. It is important to understand the spaces where these meetings

82 occurred, as most of these meetings happened in HBC buildings. This was a place to gather for many of the Illilowuk. The HBC also provided translation services161 so this made the buildings an ideal place for meetings, but as I have suggested it was also a space that relied on Illilowuk hunters and on Illilowuk land for prosperity. While the first two photos may have shown

Indigenous trappers adapting to colonial rules, it is important also to remember that the Illilowuk had their own way of conservation before colonial laws were set. So, this was new to them but they eventually agreed to follow these laws. The Illilowuk were able to adapt to these changes while also keeping the culture and practices alive. Figure 4-3, 4-4 and 4-5 shows the continued practices from the Illilowuk.

Looking at these photos there are also some connections between the photos that John

Macfie has taken and the ones that I have taken. When looking at these photos it is important to look at the continuity in hunting and trapping. Today, I still receive the teachings the come from being out on the land. I have learned how to prepare and show respect to the animals that I have harvested. The ability of our ancestors to adapt to these changes after being forced to follow provincial game laws has made it possible for Illilowuk today to continue to harvest.

The same tools were used for skinning and fleshing beavers and other fur bearing animals.

They still have the respect for the animals that they have harvested. After the animal has been harvested they are cared for and every part of the animal is used as food, tools, or clothing. Figures

4-4 and 4-5 shows two people preparing hide. This is still an important process for the Illilowuk today. It is still as important as it was during the time when Macfie took those photos. If you look at Figures 4-3 and 4-10 we are both wearing mitts made from hide. The process of preparing hide

161 Calverley, 43.

83 and fur trimmings continues in these two photos. Snowshoes and moccasins are also still important today for trappers.

Finally, in the chapter I used my own photography to showcase the continued relationships that the Illilowuk have with the land and the animals. I tried to focus these photographs on each season but I did not have anything for the summer months. The summer months are focused on harvesting fish. A big part of my life is the spring goose camp that we have at Minownown. I have a special relationship to this place. It is basically a second home to me and my family. Unlike my grandparents and parents I do not spend most of the year at this camp.

These photos are not only memories connected to me, they also provide teachings and offer a piece of history. For example, the Illilowuk still harvest whatever they can at any given time. To this day I still do whatever I can to provide for my family whenever I am home for a short period of time at home during my breaks. These photos also show my continued practice to carry on these traditions such as the teachings I have learned on when it is a good time to hunt. Also, another big part of my life is to provide for my family and community. The wild meat I have harvested gets dispersed throughout the community and will sometimes end up in other communities along the coast.

Building relationships with the land is something that we have learned while out harvesting. There is also relationship building done with other families. We will also run into other families of hunters and trappers while they are out on the land. Sometimes these places provided a social space where hunters and trappers can share stories of their adventure and about the animals they have seen. They will share tea and exchange laughs and take photographs of their adventures/time together.

84 Chapter Five: Conclusion

The original intent of this thesis is to argue that the Omushkegowuk people have experienced various attempts by colonial companies and governments to control their land and resources. The controlled access to lands and its wildlife undermined the rights that were guaranteed with the signing of Treaty No. 9. In Tsuji’s article “Getting Back to the Basics” when quoting an Elder interview conducted by Cummins “The MNR interfered by asking people to [obtain] licenses…the

MNR system is to inflexible, to impractical. The area was too small, therefore, it restricted people into a land of insufficient resources.”162 While arguing this I have also shown that the Illilowuk have been resistant and able to adapt to these changes. I demonstrate this argument in three overlapping chapters, which highlight the impacts of colonial conservation programs in the

Omushgekowuk Territory and how these programs impacted the way of life of the Omushkego

Illilo.

Chapter 2 examines the role the HBC played in the conservation of the animals in the territory, as well as the relationships between western science and Indigenous knowledge. Then finally it considers the history of reintroducing furbearing animals in the territory. Again, like all other chapters in the thesis I discuss the relationships the Illilowuk have with the land. It is important to understand these relationships to better our understanding of the impact of these laws had on the Illilo. The emergence of scientific research is also important to consider when examining these policies. Western science often denied the existence of traditional knowledge in the post-war period. This led to Indigenous people having no say in the drafting of these policies.

162 Leonard J.S. Tsuji, Daniel D. McCarthy, Graham S. Whitelaw and Jessica McEachren. “Getting Back to the basics: The Victor Diamond Mind Environmental Assessment Scoping Process and The Issue of Family-Based Traditional Lands Versus Registered Traplines,” Impact Accessment and Project Appraisal 29, no. 1. (2011): 42.

85 Indigenous people were also not fond of the idea of scientific research. They viewed scientific research methods as disrespectful to the animals as they are only being used as objects of study.

I also go on to discuss the ways that the HBC developed their own conservation policies in the mid 1800s. This was an attempt to revitalize the fur market as the declining numbers of fur bearing animals were impacting their business. They did this by limiting their trapping operations in areas that were overharvested. They also banned the use of steel traps in certain areas. The HBC also pioneered the idea of creating beaver preserves. The HBC used this idea twice. Once in the mid 1800s and then again in the mid-twentieth century. In the mid-twentieth century, the provincial government helped with the cost of running these beaver preserves while they were being run by the HBC. The establishment of these beaver preserves again restricted access to an important food source for the Illilowuk.

With the help of the Illilowuk the MNR reintroduced fur bearing animals into the region again. There are archival materials that show where the Ministry mentions relocated beavers from the south and shipping them up north. With this program they employed local trappers to help with the distribution of beavers. My grandmother has told me stories that my grandfather was one of the people employed to take live beaver to different families in the area. An Elder also told me that this is what they remember seeing growing up, and that it was not only beaver they did this with but also with marten. This program, of course, required the participation of the Illilo to not hunt and trap these animals for some years, which limited their access to an important food source.

In Chapter 3 I examined the history of the Registered Trapline System in the

Omushkegowuk territory. I first looked into Illilo land-based relationships/use by using both secondary literature and stories from Elders that were shared with me. According to the secondary literature, there were two sides to the debate regarding Indigenous land use. There were those who

86 argued that hunting territories were indeed an Indigenous concept and that rights to land have been

here before the arrival of colonial influence. Then there are those who say that this is indeed the

case, however, the Cree used more than one territory depending on the seasons. They have also

said that the Cree did not believe that they owned that land except that they are there to enforce

Cree laws of land use. Elders from my community concur with the latter perspective. For example,

in a story told to me by Clifford Wesley he mentioned that he went goose hunting in a trapline that

was not registered to him in the spring, but for trapping he stayed within his trapline boundaries.

The Illilowuk also knew to share the land and help each other as this was what Mary-Rose Hughie

experienced growing up.

On August 3, 1950 an order was passed to implement traplines in Northern Ontario

(Patricia District). This trapline system created conflict for the Illilowuk as the system was foreign

to them. Mary-Rose Hughie remembers hearing how the Omushkegowuk Illilo were given plots

of land for them to trap on. This expedited the change in how land was seen by the Illilowuk as

some began to take in the ideas of land ownership. These traplines have also undermined the treaty

rights of the Omushkego Illilo. When challenged in court for violating treaty rights the provincial

government immediately “played ostrich” to ignore the problem. Therefore, the traplines limited

the access to wildlife and land for the Illilowuk.

Lastly, in Chapter 4, I analyze the photography of John Macfie (1925-2018). In this chapter, I show that photography reveals the unique connections between land, animals and the

Illilowuk. In the first few photographs I show the interaction between colonial and Indigenous worlds. These places were meeting places between the Ministry and Indigenous trappers. Other photos from Macfie shows how the Illilowuk adapted and resisted these changes. In photographs taken by Macfie it shows the Illilo still continuing to practice their traditions. This then allowed

87 me to transition into my own photography. My photography shows us that I continue to practice these traditions. I still go enjoy my time out on the land. I too have this relationship that my ancestors had. These photos show that this relationship with the land is not just a memory, but it also shows teachings and a piece of history.

Over all of the chapters I have argued that Omushkego Illilowuk experienced various forms of state control over their harvesting rights. The controlled access to lands and its wildlife, undermine the rights that are guaranteed with under Treaty No. 9, which my ancestors signed.

Control of access have fractured Illilo relationships to the land and its animals but the strength and resistance of the Omushkego Illilo shows us that this did not last long. It shows us the strength of the Illilo culture as they were able to adapt to changes. This strength is showcased most importantly with the photos I have taken as it shows that relationship to the land is still there to this day. Many harvesters in the community of Kashechewan continue to follow Illilo customs, and they continue to harvest freely within the Omushkego Territory.

88 Reference

Archival Material

Fish and Wildlife Branch Trapline Management Office Field Notes, RG 1-616, Archives of Ontario, Toronto Ontario, Canada.

Fur Management Policy Files, RG 1-442, Archives of Ontario, Toronto Ontario, Canada.

John Macfie Diaries, C 330-18-1, B2667706, Archives of Ontario, Toronto Ontario, Canada.

Wildlife Branch Fur Management Files, RG 1-427, Archives of Ontario, Toronto Ontario, Canada.

Interviews

Friday, Rebecca. Interview by Kiethen Sutherland. Personal Interview. Kashechewan First Nation, January 11, 2019.

Hughie, Mary-rose. Interview by Kiethen Sutherland. Personal Interview. Kashechewan First Nation, January 14, 2019.

Sutherland, Bernadette. Interview by Kiethen Sutherland. Personal Interview. Kashechewan First Nation, January 10, 2019.

Wesley, Clifford. Interview by Kiethen Sutherland. Personal Interview. Kashechewan First Nation, January 12, 2019.

Secondary Sources

Anker, Peter. Imperial Ecology: Environmental Order in the British Empire, 1895-1945. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2008.

Berkes, Fikret “Common Property Resources and Hunting Territories,” Anthropologica vol 28, no. 1/2 (1986): 145-162.

Bocking, Stephen. “Indigenous Knowledge and The History of Science, Race, and Colonial Authority in Northern Canada,” in Rethinking the Great White North: Race Nature and the Historical Geographies of Whiteness in Canada, Edited by Andrew Baldwin, Laura Cameron, and Audrey Kobayashi, 39-61. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2011.

Calverley, David. “The Impact of the Hudson’s Bay Company on the Creation of Treaty Number Nine,” Ontario History. Volume XCVIII, no. 1. (2006): 30-51.

89 Calverley, David. Who Controls the Hunt?: First Nations, Treaty Rights, and Wildlife Conservation in Ontario, 1783-1939. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2018.

Cooper, John. “Is The Algonquian Family Hunting Ground System Pre-Columbian?,” American Anthropologist vol. 41 no. 1. (1939): 66-90.

Cummins, B. D. "Only God Can Own the Land": The Attawapiskat Cree. Toronto: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2008

Deloria, Philip Joseph. Playing Indian. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press, 2007.

Doerfler, J., Stark, H. K., & Sinclair, N. J. Centering Anishinaabeg studies: Understanding the World Through Stories. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 2013.

Edwards, Elizabeth. “Negotiating Spaces: Some Photographic Incidents in the Western Pacific, 1883-84,” in Picturing Place: Photogrpahy and the Geographical Imagination, ed. Joan M. Schwartz and James Ryan, New York: I.G Tauris, 2003.

Feit, Harvey A. “Myths of the Ecological Whiteman: Histories Science and Rights in North American-Native American Relations,” in Native Americans and the Environment: Perspectives on the Ecological Indian. Edited by Michael E. Harkin and David Rich Lewis. 52-92. London: University of Nebraska Press, 2007.

Feit, Harvey. “James Bay Crees’ Life Projects and Politics: Histories of Place, Animal Partners and Enduring Relationships,” in In The Way of Development: Indigenous Peoples, Life Porjects and Globalization. Edited by Mario Blaser, Harvey Feit, and Glenn McRae. 92- 110. New York: Zed Books, 2004.

Feit, Harvey. “Re-cognizing Co-Management as Co-governance: Visions and Histories of Conservation at James Bay,” Anthropologica 47, no. 2 (2005): 267-288.

Flannery Regina, and M. Elizabeth Chambers. “John M. Cooper’s Investigation of James Bay Family Hunting Grounds, 1927-1934” Anthropologica 28. no. 1/2 (1986). 108-144.

Iceton, Glen. “Defining Space: How History Shaped and Informed Notions of Kaska Land Use and Occupancy,” PhD Dissertation, University of Saskatchewan, 2019. https://harvest.usask.ca>bitstream>handle>ICETON-DISSERTATION-2019

Hansen, Lise. Indian Trapping Territories and the Development of the Registered Trapline System in Ontario. Historical Report. Ontario Native Affairs Directorate: Toronto, ON.

Kovach, M. Indigenous Methodologies: Characteristics, Conversations and Contexts. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2010.

90 Leddy, Lianne C. “Dibaajimowinan as Method: Environmental History, Indigenous Scholarship, and Balancing Sources.” In Methodological Challenges in Nature-Culture and Environmental History Research, edited by Jocelyn Thorpe, Stephanie Rutherford, and Anders L. Sandberg, New York: Routledge, 2017. 93-104.

Long, John S. Richard J. Preston, Katrina Srigley. Lorraine Sutherland. “Sharing the Land at Moose Factory in 1763.” Ontario History 109, no. 1. (2017): 72-96.

Loo, Tina, States of Nature: Conserving Canada’s Wildlife in the Twentieth Century. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2006

Lytwyn, Victor. P. Muskekowuck Athinuwick: Original People of the Great Swampy Land. Winnipeg, Man.: University of Manitoba Press, 2002.

Macfie, John. Hudson Bay Watershed: a Photographic Memoir of the Ojibway, Cree and Oji- Cree. Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1991, Kindle Edition.

Maracle, Lee. Memory Serves: Oratories. Edmonton, AB: NeWest Press, 2015

McCallum, Mary Jane. Indigenous Women, Work, and History, 1940-1980. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 2014.

Morantz, Tobey. The White Man’s Gonna Getcha: The Colonial Challenge to the Cree in Quebec. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2002.

Morantz, Toby “Foreword: Remember the Algonquian Family Hunting Territory Debate.” Antropologica, vol. 60, no. 1 (2018): 10-20

Nadasdy, Paul. “Boundaries Among Kin: Sovereignty, the Modern Treaty Process, and the Rise of Ethno-Territorial Nationalism among Yukon First Nations” in Comparative Studies in Society and History 54, no. 3. (2012): 499-532.

Nadasdy, Paul. Hunters and Bureaucrats: Power, Knowledge and Aboriginal-State Relations in the Southwest Yukon. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2003.

Pedri-Spade, Celeste. “Waasaabikizo: Our Pictures are Good Medicine,” Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society 5 no. 1 (2016): 45-70.

Pitawanakwat, Brock. “Anishinaabeg Studies: Creative, Critical, Ethical and Reflexive.” in Centering Anishinaabeg Studies: Understanding the World Through Stories, edited by Jill Doerfler, Niiganwewidam James Sinclair, and Heidi Kiiwetinepinesiik Stark, Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 2013. 163-178.

Ray, Arthur. “Some Conservation Schemes of the Hudson Bay Company 1821-50,” Journal of Historical Geography 1, no. 1 (1975): 49-68.

91 Ray, Arthur. J. Indians in the Fur Trade. Toronto:University of Toronto Press, 2005.

Ryan, J. R. Picturing Empire: Photography and the Visualization of the British Empire. London: University of Chicago Press, 1997.

Schwartz, J. M., & Ryan, J. R. Picturing Place: Photography and the Geographical Imagination. London: I. B. Tauris, 1997.

Scott, Colin “Hunting Territories, Hunting Bosses and Communal Production among Coastal James Bay Cree,” Antropologica vol 28, no. 1/2. (1986): 163-173

Scott, Colin. “Hunting Territories, Hunting Bosses and Communal Production in Coastal James Bay Cree Hunting.” Antropologica 22 (1986): 1-21.

Seesequasis, Paul. “Turning the Lens: Indigenous Archival Photo Project.” Shekon Neechie, June 21, 2018. https://shekonneechie.ca/2018/06/21/turning-the-lens/.

Seesequasis, Paul. Blanket Toss Under Midnight Sun: Portraits of Everyday Life in Eight Indigenous Communities. Toronto:Alfred A. Knopf, 2019.

Smith, L. T. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. London: Zed, 2012.

Speck, Frank and Loren C. Eisley. “The Significance of Hunting Territory Systems of the Algonkian in Social Theory.” American Antropologist 42 (1), (1939): 269-280.

Speck, Frank. “Family Hunting Territories of Lake St. John Montagnais and Neighbouring Bands.” Antropos 22. (1927): 387-403.

Speck, Frank. “The Family Hunting Bands as the Basis of Algonkian Social Organization.” American Anthropologist, New Series, vol. 17, no. 2 (1915): 289-305.

Tsuji, Leonard J.S. Daniel D. McCarthy, Graham S. Whitelaw and Jessica McEechren. “Getting Back to Basics: The Victor Diamond Mine Environmental Assessment Scoping Proce and The Issue of Family-Based Traditional Land Versus Registered Traplines.” Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 29. no. 1 (2011):37-47.

Tucker, Jennifer. “Entwined Practices: Engagements with Photography in History Inquiry,” History and Theory, Theme Issue 48. (2009): 1-8.

Vogt, David. ‘“Indians on White Lines”: Bureaucracy, Race, and Power on Northern British Columbian Traplines 1925-1950,” Canadian Historical Society 26, no. 1 (2015): 163- 190.

Ward Jr. Carlton. “Conservation Photography,” Masters of Science Thesis, University of Florida 2008 http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/UFE0021860/ward_r.pdf

92

Wilson, S. Research is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods. Black Point, N.S.: Fernwood Pub, 2008.

93