Oral histories as a baseline of landscape restoration – Co-management and watershed knowledge in Jukajoki River
TERO MUSTONEN
Mustonen, Tero (2013). Oral histories as a baseline of landscape restoration – Co-management and watershed knowledge in Jukajoki River. Fennia 191: 2, pp. 76–91. ISSN 1798-5617.
This article explores local oral histories and selected communal written texts and their role in the severely damaged watershed of Jukajoki [and adjacent lake Jukajärvi watershed] located in Kontiolahti and Joensuu municipalities, North Karelia, Finland. All in all 35 narratives were collected between 2010 and 2012. Four narratives have been presented in this paper as an example of the materials. Empirical materials have been analysed by using a framework of both integrated ecosystem management and co-management. Three readings of the river Juka- joki and the adjacent watershed emerged from the materials – Sámi times, Savo- Karelian times and times of damages, or the industrial age of the river. Local knowledge, including optic histories, provided information about pre-industrial fisheries, fish ecology and behaviour and bird habitats. Lastly, special oral histo- ries of keepers of the local tradition provided narratives which are consistent with inquiries from other parts of Finland, non-Euclidian readings of time and space and hint at what the Indigenous scholars have proposed as an intimate interconnection between nature and human societies extending beyond notions of social-ecological systems. Empirical oral histories also conceptualize collab- orative governance with a formal role of local ecological knowledge as a future management option for the Jukajoki watershed. Watershed restoration and as- sociated baseline information benefits greatly from the oral histories recorded with people who still remember pre-industrial and pre-war ecosystems and their qualities.
Keywords: North Karelia, Jukajoki, co-management, oral history, optic history
Tero Mustonen, The Department of Geographical and Historical Studies, Univer- sity of Eastern Finland, P. O. Box 111, 80101 Joensuu, Finland, E-mail: tero@ snowchange.org
Introduction They have failed to restore the ecosystem health, nor they have been able to detect the fish deaths This paper investigates severely damaged water- that occurred and were identified by the local shed of Jukajoki [and adjacent lake Jukajärvi wa- subsistence fishermen both in 2010 and 2011. tershed] located in Kontiolahti and Joensuu mu- The key question explored in this paper is related nicipalities, North Karelia, Finland. They are a to the need of an improved management of wa- part of the larger Pielisjoki river watershed. Juka- tersheds in the case of an industrial discharge. joki river has received national attention in 2010 More specifically, I explore, what are the possi- and 2011 due to fish deaths caused by discharges bilities that Finnish local knowledge embedded of highly acidic waters from the peat production in oral histories can provide as a source of infor- site Linnunsuo owned by the Finnish state-owned mation both on current events and as a baseline energy company VAPO. Both regional state agen- material for restoration actions? Secondly, in light cies and the company have tried to control and of international scholarship, what are the needs limit the ecosystem damages using science-based and advantages for a collaborative management methods, knowledge production and monitoring. of Jukajoki?
URN:NBN:fi:tsv-oa7637 DOI: 10.11143/7637 FENNIA 191: 2 (2013) Oral histories as a baseline of landscape restoration 77 Theoretical framework knowledge (Helander 1999; Lehtinen 2011; Mustonen 2012b). Hence it refers also to the Finn- This paper explores models and differing geo- ish local communities and to their subsistence ac- graphical discourses of time and space in the con- tivities (Luotonen 2006; Mustonen 2009). Here text of watershed restoration and recovery from subsistence means fisheries, hunting, gathering peat production and other watershed damage, and other such uses of renewable resources from a such as ditch drainage (Tanskanen 2000). Theoreti- watershed that is not done for professional or cally emphasis will be on introducing unorthodox monetary gain, rather for complementary and cul- methods (Berkes 1999; Berkes 2012) and knowl- tural purposes. edge production regimes (see on the need of a In the context of discontinued traditions of East- grounded approach Ingold 2000, 2004; Martinez ern Finland and North Karelia, a more proper term 2011; Mustonen 2012a) in the context of address- than traditional knowledge is local ecological ing damages of peat production. I am arguing that knowledge (Luotonen 2006) – here referring to by using integrated ecosystem management, and those individuals that are living and habiting sites more specifically processes leading to ecosystem- of change and who have capacities for ecosystem based fisheries management (EBFM) with a strong observations and interpretations. However this lo- local knowledge focus possibly more successful cal ecological knowledge in North Karelia is not conservation and restoration results can be limited to a set of technical observations of birds, achieved than single-focus site-specific actions in fish, landscapes, mires and so on. Individuals and restoration1. This builds on the ideas and ap- families who have habited local communities in proaches developed by Berkes (1999; Carlsson & Karelia from pre-industrial times and are still in- Berkes 2005; Berkes 2012; Berkes & Ross 2013). volved in subsistence activities, such as berry- The village landscape of Selkie is the product of picking, fisheries, hunting, mushroom gathering interaction of humans and nature and has been and other practices continue to possess deeper designated as a national landscape by the Govern- readings and discourses of this place. Luotonen ment of Finland in 2000. First records of inhabit- (2006: 204−222) provides a groundbreaking read- ants are from 1500s, but pre-historic Sámi popula- ing of a coastal Finnish local knowledge and the tion utilized the area prior to this time (Selkien multi-dimensionality of Selkämeri region as a lived kyläyhdistys 2004: 112, see on the toponymic Sámi landscape3 (Ingold 2000, 2004). place names of Eastern Finland in Aikio 2007, There is a difference between documented 2012). Geomorphologically the soil is filled with knowledge and oral histories. It can be summa- phyllites extending to the lake Pyhäselkä in the rized by saying that living oral histories (Burch west. In these phyllites there are large concentra- 1991; Macdonald 2000; Eicken 2010; Mustonen tions of iron that affects the colour of the minerals. 2012a) as opposed to documented local knowl- These phyllites indicate that the soil has been af- edge are communal exercises– the people them- fected by lack of oxygen on a former seabed selves provide the oral matrix and transfer of roughly 2000 million years ago. Sulphur and iron knowledge that is needed to understand the wider play dominant part in the Jukajoki soil phyllites spectrum of multi-faceted and multi-dimensional and are the root cause for the high presence of iron lived knowledge. in the discharge waters from the peat production Such an act leads to an authentic representation sites (Nykänen 1971; Pekkarinen 1979; Kesola of local community epistemologies as opposed to 1998; Lehtinen et al. 1998). West of Jukajoki val- anecdotes, which often have been taken out of ley there are sand dunes of moraine as a result of context in the documented local ecological knowl- the last Ice Age. The glaciers flowed lastly in north- edge materials. Macdonald (2000) provides a con- west-southeast direction, which is the predomi- vincing case of a long-running community based nant positioning of water bodies within the terri- oral history archive and its contextual advantages tory of Selkie village (Lyytikäinen 1982; Kesola from the community of Igloolik, Nunavut, Canada. 1998). Oral histories by the communities themselves are In Finland the role and use of local knowledge currently largely missing from the assessments of is emerging (Mustonen 2009; Mustonen 2012a) as ecosystem change and their meanings (Burch a field of practice, and it is connected to the de- 1991; Mustonen 2012a). Toponymic and place- bates regarding the Arctic (Stammler 2005; Wat- name knowledge as a social-ecological source of son & Huntington 2008) and indigenous Sámi information is central to this local knowledge ma- 78 Tero Mustonen FENNIA 191: 2 (2013) trix (Mustonen 2009). For the case here, the exam- of Jukajoki over a two-year period from autumn ple provided by Macdonald (2000) is appropriate 2010 to November 2012. The age group included – the uses of the watersheds by the local popula- people from their 30s to their 80s. The interviews tions in rural Finland are to a large extent invisible were conceptualized around themes related to the in decision-making and analysis. affected watershed and human histories around it, According to Martinez (2011) such oral histories but allowing the interviewees to steer the conver- provide important knowledge of what has changed sations in the preferred direction. One-to-one in- and how in the context of ecological restoration. terviews were paralleled with mid-size group ses- Oral histories are always the product of human sions of about 5−12 people (hunters, fishermen) agency, with their flaws, faults and other possibili- and larger-scale communal events with over 40 ties for misinformation, either intentional or unin- people (4 sessions). The oral history collection is a tentional. However, as Burch (1991) and Macdon- part of a larger, multi-year scientific study and res- ald (2000) remind us, potential for a more wide toration efforts of the watershed. Four selected understanding of social-ecological systems (Berkes documented narratives of oral histories will be & Ross 2013) is possible, if the oral histories are used in this article to support case-relevant obser- done with the people, as opposed to treating the vations and community views. locals as informants or passive targets of scholarly They have been chosen as a sample because action. Long-term residence in the community they provide narratives of traditional fisheries, eco- from which the oral histories emerge also grounds logical change and past baselines, connections them into a reflective process over several years. with the landscape through myriad ways and last- Currently the human uses of the watershed of ly, opinions that are supportive of a collaborative Jukajoki are to a large extent uncoordinated – they management as a solution to the contemporary are simultaneous and layered4, some zoning on crises. Subsistence fishermen and their oral histo- regional scale directs the process, but specifics, ries were instrumental in identifying the problems both from the community and ecosystem perspec- caused by the peat production in the first case. To tives are missing5. This contributes negatively to summarize, these four interviews that were chosen the social-ecological systems (Berkes & Ross 2013) as themes of the research come visible both in the in the area. A possible solution to this can be found articulation of oral history and the individuals be- from the recent scholarship on joint stewardship of ing able to illustrate the watershed condition and natural resources. While recognizing the fault- impacts well, in a historical-traditional continuum. lines and emerging practices of models of collabo- Gender balance was proportionate with a slight rative management of natural resources (Howitt emphasis on male respondents. Interviews were 2001; Carlsson & Berkes 2005; Berkes 2012), es- documented using digital recorders, transcribed in pecially land use and fisheries will be introduced Finnish, returned to the interviewed person for a from theoretical viewpoint and compared with the review and then stored at the Snowchange Oral situation on the ground. More specifically the pa- History Archive, which is a community-based per argues that the linear science-based readings node of oral histories from the boreal and Arctic of time and space connected with established subsistence communities of Eurasia. The paper is means of watershed restoration do not address the driven by auto-ethnographical research as the au- local context adequately. Rather the local knowl- thor is the head of the community of Selkie. This edge embedded in the residents of the watershed, village together with Alavi, the second settlement if properly and respectfully investigated, can pro- in the watershed, leads the post-peat production duce non-Euclidean time-spaces (Massey 2005, restoration work in the watershed. 2009) which will widen the scope, means and The position of a researcher as both an actor and substance of watershed and ecosystem restoration an analyser of events has its pros and cons. An in- efforts. Massey (2009) makes the case for a new sider view provides better access to the events and understanding of open, unbounded place, such as materials but also produces biases and “blindness” quantum animisms6. Bridging tools can be found to issues at hand. The author is aware of these from the co-management regimes (Carlsson & problems and has tried to identify them through Berkes 2005) that take both kinds of time-space this inquiry and avoid pitfalls created by such a processes into account. process. In terms of methodology and fieldwork thirty- Berkes (2012) while exploring marine fisheries five oral histories were collected in the watershed calls for a widespread reform of natural resource FENNIA 191: 2 (2013) Oral histories as a baseline of landscape restoration 79 management in the context of rapid ecosystem within the last 60 years (Tanskanen 2000) provides change. He (2012: 466) argues that ecosystem- possibilities of baseline information to be gathered based management (EBM) approach involves and from those who lived and used the little-disturbed includes a holistic view of managing resources in watersheds prior to their alterations. the context of their environment (see also Howitt Berkes (2012: 470) argues that the system 2001; Pretty 2011). It contains a consideration of change, whether in terms of climate or ecosys- habitat issues and system resilience. By identifying tems, requires us to address management in a gaps in case studies around the world (mostly in whole new context of principles. The transforma- oceanic ecosystems), Berkes (2012: 466−468) em- tion from management into governance has to in- phasizes that ecosystem-based fisheries manage- clude a set of tools to be successful. He identifies ment (EBFM) based solely on fisheries biological amongst some co-management or sharing of re- science captures only one slice of the EBM pie. source use power, in some cases also adaptive co- A broad ecosystem-based approach that in- management, which would mean an on going, cludes social as well as ecological considerations self-organised, dynamic process. Social learning, has been identified as a “social-ecological system” inclusive management and integrative science (Berkes 2012: 466−468; Berkes & Ross 2013), have been established decades ago as valid ap- which manifests as a complex adaptive system that proaches to the emerging new natural conditions, includes social (human) and ecological (biophysi- but interestingly enough Berkes suggests clumsy cal) subsystems in a two-way feedback relation- solutions, more specifically defined as “explorato- ship (see also Mustonen 2012a). In short a social- ry solutions that include inputs from a broad range ecological system perspective is a major departure of stakeholders along the fishing chain and require from the conventional view in rural Finland. In the information-sharing, knowledge synthesis and context of Finnish resource governance, new ap- trust-building” (2012: 470). These unexpected, proaches are urgently needed as the previous “fuzzy” solutions may provide new avenues for models of using natural and raw materials have ecosystem stewardship, which Berkes identifies as proved to be socially and ecologically unsustain- being a “strategy to respond to and shape social- able (for example on hydroelectric power, see ecological systems under conditions of uncertain- Mustonen et al. 2010; Mustonen 2012b). Of ty and change to sustain the supply and opportuni- course equity and power problems associated ties for use of ecosystem services to support hu- with natural resources production have a global man well-being” (2012: 470). reach too (Howitt 2001; Pretty 2011). In the context of Jukajoki watershed, both the In the Finnish (non-Sámi) context it is well special natural conditions (acidic soils, phyllites) known that the business as usual, for the most part, combined with severe ecosystem damages result- has wrecked the natural habitats and left the local ing from drainage of wetlands, peat production, communities, some of which also embrace large- ditches, clear cuts, extractive soil enterprises, hu- scale natural resources production, without a man-altered water bodies and infrastructure con- voice. Local environmental knowledge as a key struction over a period of a relatively short time source of additional and non-Euclidean knowl- (50 years) produce a context where extraordinary edge regarding ecosystem change can be identi- and new mechanisms of ecosystem restoration are fied as a remedy for this context. Integrated eco- needed. system management, with a strong emphasis on Established, institutionalized land management fisheries7 and realized through a possible co-man- and uses cannot provide sufficient answers any agement regime (Carlsson & Berkes 2005) may more. In this article the role of fisheries plays a prove to be a crucial new step in the emerging crucial role as the fish have been an indicator of field of ecosystem restoration (Martinez 2011). It ecosystem degradation in 2010−2011, and a can combine the oral histories of the affected peo- source of local knowledge for the people in the ple (Mustonen 2012a) as a valid source of pre-use surrounding communities. Ecosystem-based fish- ecosystem characteristics8. Oral histories of living eries management is therefore both needed and people are relevant, because as opposed to archi- may provide new ground for restorative work in val materials, they are a part of the agency in the the watershed. Berkes (2012: 473) argues that watershed – actors with an active role and interest EBFM is revolutionary because it would involve in restoration processes. The overwhelming size dealing with multiple disciplines, scales and ob- and speed of mire-marshland territory extraction jectives simultaneously. Addressing EBFM would 80 Tero Mustonen FENNIA 191: 2 (2013) offer the possibilities to expand management into (for example Mustonen et al. 2010) the co-manage- a notion of governance that includes cooperative, ment regime is a new concept. Only recently some multilevel approaches involving partnerships, so- initiatives have begun to emerge, for example in the cial learning and knowledge co-production. case of the Sámi people and the Hammastunturi wil- So if local knowledge is an important source of derness area in Lapland. However while consulta- management in the case of Jukajoki watershed and tion and participation have been guaranteed in the it receives a full expression through the various environmental impact assessments and hearings re- oral histories from the communities, where does garding various scales of resource exploitation in Fin- this lead us in terms of governing the river? The land, no meaningful power sharing or local contex- answer lies potentially in the role of collaborative tualisation has taken place (Luotonen 2006; management of resources which has been defined Mustonen 2012a, 2012b). for example as follows: Carlsson and Berkes (2005: 66−67) identify the type of agency with which arrangements are made to • Co-management is a situation in which two be usually agency with jurisdiction over an area (usu- or more social actors negotiate, define and ally a state agency) and local communities. Commu- guarantee amongst themselves a fair sharing nities are rarely “coherent and homogenous units” of the management functions, entitlements and responsibilities of a given territory, area (ibid.). They are constantly changing and they are or set of natural resources. multidimensional, cross-scale social-political units. • Co-management of common-pool resources, In terms of investigations of time-space, they may such as fisheries and forests, are depicted as contain and produce non-Euclidean narratives of a some kind of power-sharing arrangements place (Massey 2005, 2009; Luotonen 2006; between the State and a community of re- Mustonen 2009; Ettlinger 2011). source users. • Collaborative management, co-management, Carlsson and Berkes (2005: 66−67) interpret co- is defined as the sharing of power and re- management as a continuum from the simple ex- sponsibility between the government and lo- change of information to formal partnership. It sup- cal resource users. poses that parties have agreed on an arrangement, • Co-management is a situation in which two but the actual arrangement often evolves. They or more social actors negotiate, define and (2005: 67−68) emphasize that it is a dynamic and guarantee amongst themselves a fair sharing of the management functions, entitlements iterative system, a process which is constantly re-ad- and responsibilities of a given territory, area justed because ecosystems and how they respond to or a set of natural resources. resource exploitation may be highly unpredictable. • It is an association of co-management with According to them “Command-and-control kind of natural resources management: co-manage- resource management is a poor fit for ecological un- ment as a partnership between public and certainty…Nature is seldom linear.”(2005: 67, 68) private actors. Co-management is not a fixed Hence “the evolution of co-management networks is state but a process that takes place along a continuum. (Adapted from Carlsson & Berkes the substantial result of ongoing processes of prob- 2005: 65−66, see also Berkes & Ross 2013) lem-solving.” (2005: 74). Lastly, according to Pinker- ton (1989 in Carlsson & Berkes 2005: 71), there are From this set of definitions we can say that co- an identifiable number of tasks for a well-functioning management is therefore an approach to govern- co-management, which should include: ance. It is a form of governance that, if properly de- signed, addresses the concerns identified by Ettlinger 1. Data gathering (2011) and Foucault (2005) with the notions of gov- 2. Logistical decisions: who harvests and where ernance, governmentality and (ab)uses9 of power. 3. Allocation decisions 4. Protection of resource from environmental Carlsson and Berkes (2005: 65) identify that “com- damage munities” and “the State” have many faces. Most im- 5. Enforcement of regulations portantly, they feel these actors need to concentrate 6. Enhancement of long-term planning on the function, not on the formal structure of a sys- 7. More inclusive decision-making tem. Optimistically Carlsson and Berkes (2005: 66) see management as a right to regulate internal use In addition I propose also new steps and patterns and transform the resource by making im- methods in ecosystem and watershed-based provements. In the Finnish context of state domi- restoration work. In the context of Jukajoki it is nance and abuse of power in resource management hard to establish a baseline view of the former FENNIA 191: 2 (2013) Oral histories as a baseline of landscape restoration 81 healthy ecosystem and of the human interaction Four rivers across time and in time – as we do have only limited written materials from Results from the oral history work the region from 1930s onwards. On the other hand we have plenty of texts regarding Finnish tradition and regional history from 1500s on- The 35 collected oral histories over 2010−2012 wards (locally see Selkien kyläyhdistys 2004; for identify a large corpus of observations, themes, North Karelia, see Mustonen 2009). A successful traditions, counter-narratives and opinions regard- combination of both written and oral histories ing the Jukajoki and Jukajärvi watersheds. For the combined with the innovative, “clumsy” ap- purposes of this article only small segments of the proaches suggested by Berkes (2012) may pro- cultural texts from the villages of Selkie and Alavi vide new avenues of improving this social-eco- have been chosen from the corpus10. More pre- logical system of Jukajoki. As Martinez (2011) cisely the oral histories here consist mainly of four proposes we need alternative baseline assess- narrative texts11. Integrated ecosystem view has ments in the context of determining the scope, been applied, which means all human uses as well extent and aims of ecosystem restoration work. as natural processes of a watershed have been sur- Firstly, old photographs of the area, and in some veyed. Both written communal texts (Selkien ky- cases old maps, may prove to be crucial in deter- läyhdistys 2004) as well as oral histories have been mining the situation of low or no disturbance on employed. Toponymic and place-name knowl- the river (ibid.). edge of the chosen people is used to demonstrate Secondly, a method which is applied in this the quality and scale of local knowledge contents, paper, the role of documented oral histories as a but a full portrayal of this theme awaits future pub- (re)source of landscape restoration should not be lication. underestimated (Martinez 2011). Ecological res- The oral history materials which have been toration in the context of severe damage such as collected during the fieldwork as well as the in Jukajoki and Jukajärvi watersheds demands a communal written texts and histories related to range of innovative, extraordinary and uncon- Selkie (Palomäki 1960; Selkien kyläyhdistys ventional methods (Berkes 2012) in addition to 2004) portray three “rivers” across time with a more mundane technical solutions. Oral histo- fourth reading as an emerging, non-Euclidean ries can help us determine what has changed. time-spaces (Mustonen 2009) of the river. In short They act as a crucial source of complimentary, they are “Jukajoki in Sámi times” [from Time Im- and in some cases, primary vehicles of trying to memorial to the closure of pre-history in linear determine the extent of change. Oral histories time, roughly 1500s], “Jukajoki as a Savo-Kare- can also provide investigations into why certain lian River” [From 1500s of first written records change happens, and what can be done to ad- through dispelling of Karelians in 1640s to 1940s], dress change. Lastly they may, if we are open to “Jukajoki as a Damaged River” [From 1940s to radical and differing geographical time-space 2010s], and lastly, partially sitting outside these discourses (Massey 2005; Mustonen 2009, readings, “Jukajoki as a Dream River” [Communal 2012a), provide unique non-Euclidean views on Oral History from 1930s through to future, with a place (Ingold 2000, 2004; Sheridan & Long- prophetic and Non-Euclidean time-space quali- boat 2006; Massey 2009). ties]. Most importantly, in the context of this paper, the role of these lived oral histories provides evi- Jukajoki in Sámi times dence and targets for watershed restoration work as limited written records hinder a baseline as- We can characterise the Jukajoki watershed in sessment. Oral history can also provide a quali- Sámi times as having a very low human impact tative and rooted aim of a restoration work (Mar- (Selkien kyläyhdistys 2004). The siidas12 (Aikio tinez 2011), meaning that it identifies the most 1992; Helander 1999; Mustonen & Mustonen important factors that need to be aimed at during 2011; Aikio 2012) of those Sámi Nations13 that such a process. Therefore the oral histories, if used and occupied the watershed as a part of their they get expressed in culturally-appropriate hunting and fishing seasonal cycles are reflected ways, may be avenues of social change in a con- in the regional place-name knowledge, such as in text where local voices otherwise are dismissed toponyms as “Eno” [a big river/rapids] (Aikio 2007; in natural resources and land use debates. Vesajoki & Pihlatie 2011; Aikio 2012) along the 82 Tero Mustonen FENNIA 191: 2 (2013)
Pielisjoki watershed adjacent to Jukajoki. Most As our focus is on the wetland uses of the area of likely these communities were connected with the Jukajoki, the oral histories of an 80-year-old male lake Pielisjärvi siida communities (Mustonen & describe the mires in the following: Mustonen 2011). By 1500s, Sámi people living in these communities were either driven further “The mires were far wetter before. It caused the north, assimilated to the arriving Karelians or dis- lake great damages when the ditches were made appeared for other reasons from the watershed and mires drained to the lake – these waters went straight into the lake. It caused great damages. (Selkien kyläyhdistys 2004; Aikio 2012). This man- They used to be cloudberry mires, and we of ifestation of the Jukajoki watershed social-ecologi- course went there constantly.”14 (Snowchange cal system can be characterized as having low hu- Alavi Oral History Archive 171012) man impact and fairly natural ecosystem health in this understanding of the landscape. Jukajärvi lake and Jukajoki were sources of lake iron in the late 19th Century, more precisely the Jukajoki as a Savo-Karelian river activity started in 1860−62. This iron oxide was produced into iron in the region. It is mostly lo- First written records locate the village of Selkie on cated in 1−3 m depth. All ore was taken by hand. maps around 1500s when the habitants belonged On Jukajoki River a small smelter produced chunks to Karelian culture (for summary of settlement his- of iron from the natural ore. Its capacity was for tories see Selkien kyläyhdistys 2004; Saloheimo approximately 1020 kg of ore in 24 hours. Iron 2010). The river was harvested for lake-bound At- was mostly used to make everyday items for the lantic salmon and other fishes and the meadows small farms in the region. In 1862 in total 42500 along the shores of the river were most likely im- kg of iron was produced but already in 1865 the portant source of natural hay. Information about amounts went down to 3400 kg. This enterprise the land use and occupancy of these people re- was discontinued in 1865 (Selkien kyläyhdistys main vague, even though we do know some de- 2004: 21). tails of specific houses thanks to taxation sources. Fisheries have been and continue to be a crucial In mid-1600s the Karelians were driven out, or subsistence activity in the watershed. In earlier according to some materials, left willingly, to other times they provided food security for the commu- parts of Russian Empire [namely to Tver region] nities and even today remain a source of cultural before the advancement of Savo-Karelian peoples and subsistence harvest. The land-locked Atlantic from the West who belonged into the Lutheran re- salmon came up the Jukajoki River in 1930s, pro- ligion attached to the Swedish Crown (Saloheimo viding to be a key indicator of a healthy river 2010). This expansion was driven by slash-and- (Snowchange Selkie Oral History Tape 300810; burn agriculture called kaski, which required Vesajoki & Pihlatie 2011). Hydroelectric power roughly one hectare of land per year per family for stations and subsequent ecological damage has this style of farming. Fishing, gathering and hunt- discontinued these habitats (Vesajoki & Pihlatie ing economies remained strong alongside foods 2011). acquired through farming. Small mills existed Oral histories from an 80-year-old man on lake along the river Jukajoki (Selkien kyläyhdistys Jukajärvi provide a view to the fisheries in 1930s 2004). Meadowlands along the rivers were used and 1940s: according to family territorial use – this system had characteristics of seasonal transhumance even “I have memories being 10-years old fishing with though the village was the primary place of habita- my grandfather, the father of my father…He used tion (Snowchange Selkie Oral History Tape to walk to the lake with a walking stick and I was the rower. My cousin was there and my little sister 300810). Liisa, always were together…We made the nets Characteristics of local ecological knowledge of ourselves. The spawning times of bream [lat. these peoples were rooted in the tradition of the abramis brama] was our main fishery prior to mid- area. The key person in the community to possess summer and at the time of midsummer the big otherworldly and cosmological information was breams came to spawn close to the shore and the tietäjä, “he who knows” (Mustonen 2009). then we got them. Two-three kilogram fish. Our neighbour made so-called ancient fish traps from “Power of nature flowed through him” has been strips of pinewood. Spawning times of the fish one oral history by which such people were de- were known well, smaller bream spawned prior to scribed in the North Karelian communities (ibid.). midsummer and on midsummer the big breams FENNIA 191: 2 (2013) Oral histories as a baseline of landscape restoration 83
started to spawn…When we got the big breams more water was drowned out from the lake than our boat bottom was covered with them, we never was planned…We went to see it and wondered… had to go to fish and return empty-handed, I do It caused negative changes as the shoreline we not recall we ever came back empty-handed.” used to have was real good and it was wrecked… (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 171012) At first it was ok, but then water plants and mud arrived to the shores and you could not swim The Savo-Karelian times along the river started there…Fish disappeared completely after the to display impacts from the human uses, but both draining. I do not know if they went to river Piel- oral histories and written texts (Palomäki 1960) in- isjoki or where…Slowly they started to make a dicate that this level of disturbance remained fairly comeback and new stocks were brought also from small lakes from Heinävaara, mostly perch and low or took place in the context of subsistence roach which was caught by the local fishermen farming, fisheries and small-scale harvest of tim- with a fish trap and brought here…” th ber. Iron harvest towards the end of 19 century (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 171012) represents one of the first larger-scale harvests of natural resources from the watershed. But things Breams15 which were introduced to the lake af- were about to change towards the end of 1930s ter the 1959 draining have started to reproduce and 1940s with the WW2 looming on the horizon. rapidly, as is evident in the observations made by In terms of socio-ecological system there was a one subsistence fisherman, 58-year-old from Alavi: great shift in late 1940s when families arrived from the ceded Karelia after the Continuation War and “Those that are still trying to catch bream have were re-settled along the Jukajoki river (Palomäki noticed it has become really small. When the lake 1960). They cleared new fields and farm sites from lost its fish it was a great mistake then to reintro- duce bream there in those numbers as the lake is the forests in the watershed. Then in 1959 the local so eutrophic that it is an ideal environment for the farmers with state agencies supporting them de- bream.” cided to lower the water levels on lake Jukajärvi (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 220612) for the third time. The purpose of the act was to receive new farmlands from the emerging lake Place names and toponymic knowledge along bottom. This was partially successful. However the the watersheds was still mostly in its oral form. process had great consequences for the whole wa- They reflected the Savo-Karelian land use and sea- tershed below Jukajärvi. Also impacts to the fish- sonal rounds, where hunting, gathering and fisher- ery in the lake and river were tremendous. It is ies formed crucial subsistence activities. They clearly a key marker in the past 100 years in the were recorded on Finnish maps by the state car- ecosystem. Subsistence fishermen resisted this tographers in the 20th century. These toponyms draining of lakes as is evident from one oral history provide crucial indicators of ecosystem health by a male, 80 years old: when combined with the oral histories. As an ex- ample of such a process two place names are dis- “A piece of paper was circulated in the village cussed here. “Hirviniemi” means “Moose Cape”, where you had to sign your agreement, indicating an area through which the moose crossed the lake that you approve of the draining of the lake. I re- Jukajärvi on their way to their winter pastures – a call my father and a certain Vartiainen…they did not sign the paper even though they went through cycle that had been in place most likely since whole village all the way to Pyhäselkä to collect post-glacial times. Information about this toponym signatures…There was a need for farmland then. is provided in the narrative of a subsistence fisher- That was the primary reason and it caused bene- man, 58-year-old from Alavi: fits to a certain family, they could now make a new road that they could use. They had to travel “Hirviniemi…when I moved here there used to be through the forests prior to the road. Those that a lot of moose here on the move as there was very signed the letter approved of it. My father and Var- little human habitation on the opposite shore. The tiainen did not protest further but they refused to lake used to have a real strong bottom here and it sign this letter, as they were suspecting that there could hold the weight of a moose. In summertime would be no more fish in the lake as a result. The large herds crossed here too. I could see them people from the villages of Heinävaara, Särkivaara when they came and ate and then they went over and Alavi approved it and then they made needed to the Särkivaara area. They fed themselves here, changes to the river Jukajoki, digging the river up large herds. But then when human habitation in- and so forth… and then the waters started to creased on the cape the natural crossing point was move, it was wintertime. Ice was left on air as abandoned. Now they have to go around the lake, 84 Tero Mustonen FENNIA 191: 2 (2013)
and cross the road to Ilomantsi, which means a lot down the river (Snowchange Selkie Oral History of car crashes on the road. There is a tremendous Archive 220710). Observation was made three km amount of moose tracks here and territories where downstream from the VAPO production site. On there is food, food for them and peace. These are th good wintering grounds for them. Around mire 18 July 2010 far more dead fish were seen and a Valkeasuo they had an aerial surveys for herds large flock of seagulls flying back and forth along and they could spot 200 moose at once on these the river, eating the dead fish. The acidic discharg- wintering areas. And towards Riuttavaara it is a es from the production site killed all the fish in the good area for calving too.” river downstream from the VAPO site both in 2010 (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 220612) and 2011. These damages bypassed the monitor- ing regimes of the company and the state environ- Further north as a part of this hunting-gathering mental authorities. The local knowledge of the subsistence economy the toponym “Linnunsuo” fishermen still made relevant observations, 50 [Marsh of the Bird] had been allocated to a marsh- years into the large-scale alteration of landscapes land, which is situated along the Jukajoki River and watershed by humans. and adjacent watershed. This toponym is based on Case samples of the oral histories from this pe- the central role of capercaillie (lat. Tetrao urogal- riod illustrate the scope and quality of knowledge lus) and black grouse (lat. Lyrurus tetrix) in the sub- today. How do the people living in the contempo- sistence hunting complex16 (Berkes 2009) for the rary times conceptualize this watershed and how villages of the region. A famous ethnographer R.E. are skills learned? Answers can be sought from an Nirvi who worked in the villages in early 20th Cen- oral history of a 58-year-old fisherman: tury documented that in the local dialect the marsh was called “Linnonsuo” (Nirvi 1974: 977). The “We fished for burbot a lot, also with fish traps marshland was a crucial moose hunting and berry- actively. We tried those old spots harvested by the picking area too (Snowchange Selkie Oral History old people, we asked where they had been fish- ing.” Archive 2010−2012). Nirvi also confirms the lo- (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 220612) cals considered this place to be a crucial berry- picking area (Nirvi 1974: 977). This area was This excerpt from the oral history account is wrecked by the peat production started in 1970s relevant for a number of reasons. The Finnish and 1980s (Vesajoki & Pihlatie 2011; VAPO 2012). communities and peoples have often been iden- We can establish that the end of the period for Ju- tified as having lost their traditions through the kajoki as a Savo-Karelian River took place around modernisation process in our country (Mustonen 1930s. 2009). Here something remains. First off, the people are still targeting a non-game species, Jukajoki as a damaged river the burbot using fish traps. Secondly they are harvesting spots passed on from the “old peo- Due to the massive changes in society ushered in ple” and they have actively sought these spots by the war and subsequent state-sponsored indus- and sources of oral knowledge themselves. As trial land use projects from 1940s to 1990s (Tans- long as the subsistence activities, such as fishing kanen 2000), the Jukajoki also was impacted by persist, so do remnants of the larger body of lo- these developments. Most of the mires were cal knowledge. drained, amount of discharge from ditches for for- Building on this surviving body of knowledge, estry altered water quality and peat production emerging observations of ecosystem health can changed whole water regimes on Linnunsuo mire. be gathered. For example a 58-year-old fisher- Additional impacts came from the hydroelectric man shares his observations about the lake Juka- stations that were constructed along the river Piel- järvi. The lake suffers from the discharge of or- isjoki (Vesajoki & Pihlatie 2011). As a result, the ganic matter from several dozen forestry ditches: time when it was still possible to fish Atlantic salm- on and trout along the river came to an end. “In the deep spots and on the edge of the deep In the 2000s the state-owned energy company people have tried to fish and have noticed that VAPO produced peat in the former mire of Lin- there seems to be a lack of oxygen in the winter, th not even pike perch persists there. In the sum- nunsuo. On 17 July 2010 a local subsistence fish- mertime the nets become so slimy that I do not erman living in Tiittala [a part of village of Selkie], really have an interest to fish there anymore.” along Jukajoki observed four dead fish floating (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 220612) FENNIA 191: 2 (2013) Oral histories as a baseline of landscape restoration 85
Another excerpt by him addressed the dis- In this narrative fisherman has identified the re- charges from the drained mires and their impact stocking as a source of subsistence fishery. He on lake Jukajärvi, portraying the baseline infor- continued the winter net fishing and made obser- mation that Martinez (2011) supports too: vations of the deep part of the lake, more specifi- cally about a phenomenon of emerging goo from “I am wondering as I used to set nets here on my the deep. It had impacted pikeperch caught in the shore, perhaps ten years ago, I was using nets nets. Regarding other species, observations of which were at least two meters tall. Now there is birds can be seen in the following narrative by a not even that much water there, perhaps one me- ter twenty centimetres.” male, 58 years old: (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 220612) “I went to the shore where the pier is and duck The same fisherman, known for his skills in the had ducklings there, eight of them. Swans, usually community of Alavi, commented on bream in his two pairs. There was a crane and a swan nests close to each other here in the bay of Iso Rapalah- narrative: ti. But some autumns ago swans stopped here on the bay and I am not lying, they must have been in “Then it is a time when the bays are sloshing their thousands...the bay was all white. Last Au- when big bream fish come to spawn, they are tumn this was not the case however.” midsummer bream, it comes around both sides (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 220612) of midsummer. The water temperature affects it and also air needs to be still and hot, over 25 °C. When the air is still you can see their fins. There Some of the fishermen along the watershed is not a lot of bream and when nets become dirty have observed events and phenomena that they so easily we do not fish them so much.” cannot explain easily, as is the case in a narrative (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 220612) told by a fisherman in his 60s:
This narrative is relevant for a number of rea- “I went to fish towards Kissapuro creek and it was sons. Again, traditional calendar built around a still morning. To my big surprise I heard kind of bream spawning times and harvests seems to splashing, water splashes, and I was thinking it must be breams spawning. Then I rowed closer have been passed on from the people who mas- and I noticed that a bay covered with weeds and tered it in the 1930s (see Snowchange Alavi grasses produced these great bubbles of air.” Oral History Archive 171012) despite the mod- (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 130912) ernization process. Secondly the knowledge contains information about seasonal marker In this oral history fisherman is visiting an area (midsummer), water temperature (over 25 °C, in he knows well. Sounds are heard and he positions Finnish helle) and wind (it needs to be still). them to the seasonal event for the bream spawn- Lastly optic history17 is used to confirm that the ing. To his surprise this is not the case, as it is un- big bream fish enter the bays (“you can see their explainable bubbles emerging from the lake bot- fins”). tom to the surface. The polluted waters contrast During the times of damaged watershed an- with the memories from the deep knowledge of a other human impact was restocking. A male cleaner watershed. fisherman in his 60s observed that: The surviving local knowledge systems act as a pool of self-reflection too. An 80-year-old fisher- “Until 2008 or 2009 and when pikeperch start- man, who also worked as a farmer from the 1940s ed to flourish in the lake due to restocking, we to 2010s, says regarding the draining of mires and used to fish with winter nets in the deep parts creation of ditches that: of the lake…Across the deep part. Then we started to wonder as the nets were three meters tall and in the lower part, perhaps for a half a “I believe some kind of a matter has flowed from meter or a meter, a brown rust colour emerged. the forests, and I have to confess that I have played We could not wash it off with anything. Usually a part in it too myself…as the waters have flowed we checked nets once a week and if there was through my fields and we have used fertilizers to a pikeperch on the lower part of the net and it make them fertile. These fertilizers are accumulat- had gone into the bottom mud its gills and ing and start to grow hay on the lakeshores, and mouth were filled with this rust goo.” then waves bring these substances to the shores… it was not there when I was a child…It used to be (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 130912) clear sandy beaches, now there is soft and muddy 86 Tero Mustonen FENNIA 191: 2 (2013)
materials in meters at the bottom, in my shore I was remembering Jukajoki and all those experi- over four meters deep, they say those researchers ences that came to my mind, and then I saw this who have made drilling samples there.” dream the other night, and in this dream we were (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 171012) walking along the river…It was on the meadow [next to the river], to the right at the bridge, to- This part has focused on surviving elements of wards river Pielisjoki. I do not remember who was local knowledge in the context of Jukajoki as a with me. Perhaps my father or someone else. The damaged river and watershed from 1930s to meadow had turned into humus, turned upside 2010s. Subsistence fishermen continue to make down, it was no longer a meadow. And this river observations that have relevance for the whole Jukajoki was as narrow as it is today for a stretch of one kilometre. But [the river] was filled up with river and lake. They also observe throughout their soil or with some kind of mud which had dried up fishing areas anomalies like the lack of oxygen, there. All of a sudden the river widened up into its presence of iron, and unexplainable chemical pro- former width and there was a sandy bottom– cesses in the form of bubbles. Lastly those in the though no water at all. And in such form it flowed community who lived through the state-sponsored to the river Pielisjoki. I remember also in the alteration campaigns of ecosystems, especially dream that I became so glad when I saw that there mire drainages, reflect on the damages and posi- was sand and that the river is wide again; I gave a shout in the dream, that there is sand here! And tion themselves as a part of the problem, admitting thus it ended. that mistakes were made. (Snowchange Selkie Oral History Archive 300810)
Jukajoki as a dream river While the more specific meanings of this event will remain within the community, what is note- Three readings of rivers embedded in the local knowl- worthy is that as this oral history demonstrates the edge have been identified and categorized according people and the river have very sensitive and inti- to the amount of human impacts the watershed has mate connections that can manifest as dreams. The received. Lastly, an element of the local ecological old woman sees the different stages of life of the knowledge that contains multiple “time-spaces” is ex- river from the salmon stream, through the damages plored. of today into things that are perhaps yet to come, a During the oral history documentation work some sandy, wide, healthy river. Such power stories of of the older ladies (in their 70s to 80s) in the villages intimate connections that local people may have were interviewed. These women from the lake and demonstrated that their knowledge is not only a riverside spoke openly about what has been called set of observations. Instead it can be read as a with various terms, including “sacred”, “hidden” or wide-ranging “cosmovision” where past, present “mystical” elements that local knowledge may have. and possible futures create non-Euclidean (Et- For example the role of dreams as an information tool tlinger 2011) renderings of time-spaces that need to know about things to come is central to this pro- to be assessed carefully and within their cultural cess. Sheridan and Longboat (2006) as representa- matrixes. tives of Indigenous societies have ventured the fur- thest in academic literature and made the claim that instead of forming “socio-ecological systems”, those Conclusions - Integrated ecosystem humans with rooted connections with their home ar- management in heavily damaged eas belong to those places – meaning there are con- nections that exist beyond the Euclidean (Ettlinger post-industrial watersheds in Finland 2011) readings of time and space. through co-management Such elements are present in one oral history we recorded in late summer 2010 when the damages Lastly the questions of management of the water- were most pronounced. This older woman from the shed were explored in the corpus of the 35 oral village of Selkie is known in the region for her knowl- histories collected between 2010 and 2012. Local edge of the local tradition. She fished for salmon as a people of Alavi and Selkie have witnessed, as is young girl with her father in 1930s. Through 1930s to evident, the events, which have happened, they 1950s she was able to meet and listen to the oral have been involved in some of them through knowledge from one of the last publicly known ti- workforce (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Ar- etäjä, a spiritual person of Selkie, who lived in Pal- chive 171012) or instigators of change (ibid.) as is ovaara. She told me18: the case with lowering the waterlevels of lake Ju- FENNIA 191: 2 (2013) Oral histories as a baseline of landscape restoration 87 kajärvi. They have also witnessed impacts from to repair this lake, because those that have caused imposed industrial uses of land as is the case of all of this remain active in the watershed and so- fish deaths as a result of peat production. How do ciety has received funds through their activities, such as through forestry…A joint responsibility they then think of “integrated ecosystem manage- should be clear in the sense that the impacts are ment” in heavily damaged areas in their own taken care of too, all of what they have caused. It terms? is almost the same, we can compare this to the In those oral histories that are presented here, large sawmill sites in North Karelia or former gas answers range from a set of technical-land use de- stations…in those locations the environment was cisions into governance. The former is present in totally ruined due to the company and what they did, so in fact it is the society that has to pay for the narrative of a male, 58 years, from Alavi: these impacts. We can make a direct comparison to here, this environment has been heavily used “In my view it would be most important to tackle and we can see the impacts here, I cannot believe the existing ditches that have been done back in the local people would have the financial resourc- the old days, the forest and mire draining, they es to correct these results by themselves.” should be the target of the first set of actions. (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 130912) There should be proper dam structures and less- ening of water flow to the extent that that organic matter, the solid matter in the flow, would stay in In this oral history there are several key con- the pools of the dams…Regarding the field zones, cepts that link almost precisely to the definitions of there should be protective zones that are manda- a co-management regime proposed by Carlsson tory today, the pressure coming from the water- and Berkes (2005). Firstly the person identifies the shed to the lakes should be fixed, and then we could start to consider the water levels, dredging need of the villages to be in close proximity to and cutting hay, and fishing for ´coarse fish’, if each other. Secondly he drafts an organ that would there was a need, and that is about all there is to be a joint representative body in a future arrange- it…” ment for cooperative management. However he (Snowchange Alavi Oral History Archive 220612) has no experiences from such events so he is not yet quite sure what does it mean but at least it In this view the local man positioned the role of should collect “information and observations”, re- surrounding watershed as a primary target of re- ferring to both science and local knowledge of storative actions prior to actions on the lake and oral histories. Lastly the person identifies responsi- river itself. Instalment of dams to control the or- bilities, saying that the local people cannot possess ganic and solid matters flowing from the ditches resources for the damages caused by the industrial and the proper zones to the fields could control activities. the damages according to him. Dredging and oth- Carlsson and Berkes (2005) identified the co- er management options on the lake would only management of a given territory as a power-shar- come later. ing arrangement. Berkes (2012) while discussing In another narrative a male subsistence fisher- fisheries called for “fuzzy” and “clumsy” solutions man in his 60s linked governance (Ettlinger 2011) on the basis that ecosystem change, including im- to the responsibility that both society and the local pacts of climate change (Arctic Council 2005), re- communities have: quire us to think outside the box. The local oral histories collected from the local people in the “Around the lake there are several villages and empirical materials link autonomously similar joint management would presuppose good and needs for the Jukajoki watershed and go on to clear cooperation between these communities… identify how it should be organised and providing perhaps if there was a joint cooperative body to which representatives of different villages would mandates for local knowledge observations to be be chosen to…I do not know what such govern- included in the valid sources of decisions regard- ance would mean to us if it became…but at least ing this area. They reposition a village as an actor it would mean that this [cooperative body] would regarding its lands, manifesting traditional govern- collect information and observations about the ance through possible co-management arrange- lake and would see a range of uses and values for ments. Importantly enough such proposals emerge the lake…A joint land ownership…what would be the economic building blocks for such a thing from the oral histories of people living in ecosys- or to a governance…It is a process we ought to tems, or socio-ecological systems that have been consider and think about. But all in all the future affected by a full range of modern and industrial of the lake depends on funds from society at large activities, causing severe damages. It means that 88 Tero Mustonen FENNIA 191: 2 (2013) the communal arrangements and knowledge re- tions of social-ecological systems (Berkes & Ross garding the watershed has lasted through the vari- 2013). ous stages of this process and are re-emerging, Empirical oral histories also conceptualized col- again strengthening the argument for non-Euclidi- laborative management with a formal role of local an readings of time-space if viewed from the grass- ecological knowledge as a future management op- roots subsistence level. tion for the Jukajoki watershed. Watershed restora- tion and baseline information it needs benefits greatly from the oral histories recorded with peo- Discussion ple who still remember pre-industrial and pre-war ecosystems and their qualities, as suggested by The purpose of the paper was to explore (mis-) Martinez (2011). The current times with multiple, management in the context of severe ecosystem layered interests for the area of the watershed need damage on the river Jukajärvi and adjacent water- to be coordinated better to avoid further damages, shed. More specifically, questions emerged on and collaborative management could be devel- what are the possibilities that Finnish local knowl- oped to achieve that goal. edge embedded in oral histories can provide as a Berkes (1999, 2012) highlights local or tradi- source of information both on current events and tional knowledge as being a crucial basis for such as a baseline material for restoration actions? Sec- systems of collaborative management and inclu- ondly, in the light of international scholarship, sion of a larger knowledge base in fisheries. Many what are the needs and advantages for a collabora- of the examples he draws on such as Sub-Arctic tive management of Jukajoki? Canada (ibid. 1999), marine fisheries and tropical This article has explored local oral histories and regions discuss mostly indigenous populations selected communal written texts and their role in which position their knowledges in a marked dif- the severely damaged watershed of Jukajoki [and ference with the mainstream or state expert knowl- adjacent lake Jukajärvi watershed] located in Kon- edge. Often also the land base and uses of these tiolahti and Joensuu municipalities, North Karelia, communities differ from the mainstream society. Finland. All in all 35 narratives were collected In the case of Eastern Finland, exportability is- 2010−2012. Four narratives have been presented sue emerges while applying the frameworks of in this paper as an example of the materials. Em- Berkes (1999) and colleagues (Carlsson & Berkes pirical materials have been analysed using the 2012). The ownership of land, composition and framework of both integrated ecosystem manage- role of kylä -communities in rural Finland and the ment and co-management proposed by Carlsson invisibility of subsistence and even commercial and Berkes (2005) and Berkes (2012). Three read- fisheries (Mustonen 2009) practices in relationship ings of the river Jukajoki and the adjacent water- to the state decision making provide an exciting, shed emerged from the materials – Sámi times, emerging inquiry filled with tensions, expectations Savo-Karelian times and times of damages, or the and possibilities20. For the future, next steps of in- industrial age on the river. vestigating the role and scales of local knowledge In the case of Jukajoki, the local knowledge in Jukajoki point to a need of a land use and oc- played a crucial role in detecting fish death, and as cupancy mapping, as this could be a potential tool the oral and optic histories were documented be- to bring forwards the “unseen” realities from tween 2010−2012 many additional observations ground up. While maps are always limited, two-to- on health of watershed were discovered. It pro- three dimensional representations of a much wid- vided information about pre-industrial fisheries, er multi-dimensional reality, they are a tool that fish ecology and behaviour and bird habitats. The administrators and companies understand. oral histories contain non-Euclidean, or specific Lastly the use of oral histories may (Macdonald categories and ways of discussing the area and 2000) provide us with radically new and relevant species. Such cultural texts range from spawning readings of nature and human societies, which al- times of bream fish as an indicator of lake use into low more sustainable societies to emerge. For East- intimate, mystical connections in dreams regard- ern Finland, this potential should be explored in a ing the river. These are, as indigenous scholars systematic manner for a wide range of communi- have proposed (Sheridan & Longboat 2006) as an ties engaged in subsistence uses of land. As a resi- intimate interconnection between nature and root- dent of the Jukajoki watershed, the oral history and ed human societies possibly extending beyond no- ecological restoration work along the river and FENNIA 191: 2 (2013) Oral histories as a baseline of landscape restoration 89 lake has been a tremendous journey into a land- asymmetrical and without checks and balances. The scape pulsating with lived (Ingold 2000) stories, local communities in rural Finland have very little human experiences and our living tradition, so of- possibilities to contribute to uses of power within village territories (kylä), as there is no legal context ten pronounced dead. for it. Villages are only represented through third sector associations. 10 The full oral history corpus regarding Jukajärvi and Jukajoki watersheds is located at the Snow- NOTES change oral history archive, www.snowchange.org 1 Majority of watershed and post-peat production as well as the affected individuals. All in all the cor- restorative actions in Finland rest on natural scienc- pus contains over 1,000 pages of documented oral es-based options. See e.g. Pellikka (2001). histories from July 2010 to December 2012. Cultur- 2 This document, a village book, contains both sum- al texts here include oral histories, diary entries from maries of scientific studies of the natural conditions the villages, written lay texts and other narratives, which emerge in the local context and community. in Selkie, as well as stories, reflections, poems and 11 songs written by the villagers. The latter group repre- They have been qualitatively chosen based on the sent ”communal texts” – materials authored by the information related to past fisheries and tradition, residents in the village. relationship with landscape and watershed and last- 3 This statement emphasizes the need to experience, ly, thoughts for the better management of the eco- with various senses, the places of dwelling and oc- system. This choice reflects the role Martinez (2011) cupancy as opposed to seeing them as linear time- puts on those oral histories, which are relevant for a spaces. comprehensive ecosystem assessment, leading to 4 To name a few overlapping processes, a copper restoration. These texts are not exhaustive, others could have been chosen. and gold mine exploration licence has been pro- 12 vided on an area that contains protected areas, fish- Siidas were and to certain extent still are the Sámi eries, forestry zones, a village habitation of indigenous tribal communities prior to large-scale Heinävaara, hunting territories, a railroad and so on. colonial influences. They had specific territories, Furthermore, all industrial uses of the land are built and governance bodies, such as the Eastern Sámi sobbar village council. on rather Euclidean notions of time-space. 13 5 Priority, in the form of publicity, public support Aikio (1992) makes the case of multiple Sami ”na- and infrastructure is given often to large-scale natu- tions” in this part of Finland – however, no historical ral resources extraction land uses over other activi- records exist to confirm or deny this claim. If com- ties in North Karelia. pared with other existing, specific Sami peoples, it 6 Here the non-euclidean space refers to multiple, seems clear that ”nations” could exists side-by-side culturally-grounded understandings of places in within a fairly small territorial base, see more for space, which are not bound (Massey 2009). They Eastern Sámi siidas in Mustonen and Mustonen (2011). may manifest in and through dream experiences, al- 14 tered states of consciousness, long-term experiences The oral histories are available as transscripts and and audio tapes from the author in Finnish. with a river through fisheries and so on. Most impor- 15 tantly, they put the emphasis on the groundedness The Finnish local fisheries are organised as of the human experience of space (Ingold 2004). I osakaskunta – local fisheries bodies consisting of lo- am arguing that the local oral histories focusing on cal people who can decide issues related to permits relationships with watersheds from on-going village and stocking, for the most part. They have very lim- ited powers. life in Eastern Finland is to a large extent unex- 16 plored, exciting representation of a time-space that Knowledge-practice-belief complex as defined by needs to be further investigated. It contains continu- Berkes (1999). However the questions of belief as- ums of tradition in the middle of lost traditions of pect of the knowledge apparatus require further re- Finnish society, such as the role of dreams in con- search in the Eastern Finnish communities and await future research. nection with a landscape. 17 7 Both commercial and subsistence in the case of Optic histories are an exciting and emerging field Jukajoki. of engagement with subsistence and other fisher- 8 Other innovative materials can include old maps, men on their observations of ecosystem change. aerial and other photographs, written historical nar- Mustonen and Feodoroff (2013) provide a number ratives, catch records or diary entries. In Finland the of definitions and uses of the term – it refers to visu- ecological restoration plans tend to lead towards ally observed events narrated using oral history, but natural sciences with oral histories dismissed as also to digital photos taken by practitioners them- ”anecdotes” or supplementary data (see Mustonen selves on their terms of change that they position as et al. 2010). meaningful. Ingold (2004) hints at this direction 9 Use and/or abuse of power depends on the point with the emphasis on felt and grounded experiences as a source of information. of view. Those in power, when using it, may produce 18 results in the targets of power, if this relationship is I have reviewed the use of this sequence of her 90 Tero Mustonen FENNIA 191: 2 (2013) oral history in detail with her for public use several Written Sources times and she has approved it, saying that it is im- portant these issues are discussed too. Aikio S 1992. Olbmot Ovdal Min – Samiid Historja 19 Peat production, forestry and gravel companies. 1700-logu radjai. Ohcejohka, Girjegiisa. 20 In Finland the role and scales of local knowledge Aikio A 2007. The study of Saami substrate toponyms embedded for example in fish harvest data is mostly in Finland. In Pitkänen R & Saarikivi J (eds). The located in the Sámi areas. Differences between lo- borrowing of place-names in the Uralic languag- cal and indigenous knowledges in Finland have es. Onomastica Uralica 4, 159−197. Debrecen, been discussed in Mustonen and Feodoroff (2013). Helsinki. In short, the Sámi knowledge contains elements of Aikio A 2012. An essay on Saami ethnolinguistic pre- surviving ways of cosmologies and interactions with history. In Grünthal R & Kallio P (eds). A linguistic nature that have for the most part been broken in the map of prehistoric Northern Europe. Suomalais- Finnish communities as communal exercises. To ugrilainen seura, Helsinki. what extent such knowledge and practices can be Arctic Council 2005. Arctic Climate Impact Assess- revived, see more the Conclusions section in ment.
Lehtinen A 2011. From relations to dissociations in Palomäki M 1960. Post-war pioneering in Finland spatial thinking: Sámi ‘geographs’ and the prom- with a special reference to the role of the settle- ise of concenctric geographies. Fennia 189: 2, ment areas. In Smeds H (ed). Three Faces of Fin- 14–30. land – Guidebooks Prepared for the Three Finnish Lehtinen M, Nurmi P & Rämö T 1998. Suomen kalli- Excursions at the XIX International Geographical operä – 3000 vuosimiljoonaa. Suomen geologin- Congress. Fennia 84, 43-68. Finnish Geographical en seura, Jyväskylä. Society, Helsinki. Luotonen E 2006. Vapaa-ajan kalastajan Oura. In Pekkarinen L 1979. The Karelian formations and their Häyrynen M, Luotonen E, Mustalampi E & Bruk E depositional basement in the Kiihtelysvaara-Värt- 2006. Tuntematon saaristo – Selkämeren saariston silä area, East Finland. Geological Survey of Fin- eletty maisema, 204-222. Otava, Helsinki. land, Bulletin 331. Lyytikäinen A 1982. Pohjois-Karjalan harjumaiseman Pellikka P 2001. Suopohjat kierrätykseen – mitä teh- kehitys sekä nykyisen tilan ja maankäytön yleispi- dä vanhoilla turvetuotantoalueilla? Suo 52: 2, irteet. Valtakunnallinen harjututkimus, raportti 22, 75−77. Joensuu. Pinkerton E 1989. Cooperative management of local Macdonald J 2000. The arctic sky – Inuit astronomy, fisheries, new directions for improvement, man- starlore and legend. Royal Ontario Museum, To- agement and community development. UBC ronto. Press, Vancouver. Massey D 2005. For space. Sage, London. Pretty J 2011. Interdisciplinary progress in approach- Massey D 2009. The possibilities of a politics of place es to address social-ecological and ecocultural beyond place? A conversation with Doreen Mas- systems. Environmental Conservation 38: 2, 127– sey. Scottish Geographical Journal 125: 3−4, 139.http://dx.doi.org/10.1017%2 401−420.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080% FS0376892910000937. 2F14702540903364443. Saloheimo V 2010. Selkien vuodinjako 1774. In Mustonen T 2009. Karhun väen ajast-aikojen avartu- Mustonen T (ed). Selkien perinteestä ja luonnosta, va avara. University of Joensuu Press, Joensuu. 11-16. Selkien kyläyhdistys, Selkie. Mustonen T, Mustonen K, Aikio A & Aikio P 2010. Selkien kyläyhdistys 2004. Selkie – kulttuurikylä. Jy- Drowning reindeer, drowning homes – Indigenous väskylä. Sámi and hydroelectricity in Sompio, Finland. Sheridan J & Longboat RD 2006. The Haudenosaunee Snowchange Cooperative, Kontiolahti. imagination and the ecology of the sacred. Space Mustonen T & Mustonen K 2011. Eastern Sámi Atlas. and Culture 9: 4, 365–381. Snowchange Cooperative, Kontiolahti. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177%2F1206331206292503. Mustonen T 2012a. Rebirth of indigenous Arctic na- Stammler F 2005. Reindeer nomads meet the market: tions and polar resource management: critical Culture, property and globalisation at the ‘End of perspectives from Siberia and Sámi areas of Fin- the Land’. LIT Verlag, Berlin. land. Biodiversity 14: 1, 19-27, http://dx.doi.org/1 Tanskanen M 2000. Näkyvän takana – Tutkimus 0.1080/14888386.2012.725652, 2012. metsäojitetun suomaiseman kulttuurisuudesta. Mustonen T 2012b. Kohti saamelaistutkimuksen uut- Joensuun yliopisto, Joensuu. ta tulkintakehystä. In Lehtola V-P, Piela U & Snell- VAPO 2012. Peat production on sulfide soil. Case man H. Saamenmaa – Kulttuuritieteellisiä näkökul- Linnunsuo in Eastern Finland. In Geological Sur- mia, 254-264. SKS, Helsinki. vey of Finland. 7th International acid sulfate soil Mustonen T & Feodoroff P 2013. Ponoi and Neiden conference. Towards harmony between land use collaborative management plan. Snowchange Co- and the environment. Proceedings Volume. Vaasa. operative, Kontiolahti. Vesajoki H & Pihlatie M 2011. Pielisjoki – Elämän Nirvi R 1974. Kiihtelysvaaran murteen sanakirja IV. virta, Stream of Life. Hyvinkää. Joensuu: Karjalaisen kulttuurin edistamissäätiö. Watson A & Huntington H 2008. They’re here – I can Nykänen O 1971. Suomen geologinen kartta 1: feel them: The epistemic spaces of indigenous and 100000, lehti 4241 Kiihtelysvaara. Geologian tut- Western knowledges. Social & Cultural Geogra- kimuslaitos. phy 9: 3, 257–281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080% 2F14649360801990488.