UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Toward aboriginal land management: the experience of the Kyuquot first nation Robertson, Linda G. 1994

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_1994-0235.pdf [ 4.32MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0087342.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0087342-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0087342-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0087342-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0087342-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0087342-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0087342-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

TOWARD ABORIGINAL LAND MANAGEMENT:THE EXPERIENCE OF THE KYUQUOT FIRST NATIONbyLINDA G. ROBERTSONB.E.S., University of Waterloo, 1988A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OFTHE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OFMASTER OF ARTSinTHE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES(Resource Management and Environmental Studies)We accept this thesis as conformingto the required standardTHE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIAApril 18, 1994© Linda G. Robertson, 1994In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanceddegree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make itfreely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensivecopying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of mydepartment or by his or her representatives. ft is understood that copying orpublication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my writtenpermission.___________________________Department of JjQU -The University of British ColumbiaVancouver, CanadaDate [C, (.fDE-6 (2/88)11ABSTRACTAs part of a broader development process aimed at achieving greater self-reliance, many rural,resource-based aboriginal communities in B.C. are searching for means of developing acommunity-based, culturally appropriate alternative to the way local forest resources arecurrently being managed. The term “aboriginal land management” (ALM) is used in thisthesis, to represent this ideal toward which community development efforts can be directed.The purpose of the thesis is to analyze the nature and outcomes of the on-going process usedby one B.C. aboriginal community to gain more control over the management of local forestresources as a means for achieving greater self-reliance. A case study of the Kyuquot NativeTribe’s (KNT) experience provides insight into what aboriginal communities stand to gain orlose, and the battles they might expect to face in their efforts to bring about ALM. Theliterature indicates that a major challenge for aboriginal communities attempting to advanceALM is the need to access the skills, expertise and opportunities that exist outside thecommunity while, at the same time maintaining and rebuilding the community’s own culturaltraditions and autonomy. The case study focuses particular attention on how the KNT hasdealt with this challenge.The broad range of strategies and initiatives used by the KNT to overcome an array of internaland external obstacles to ALM are documented and analyzed. All have required some level ofinteraction and learning between the KNT and outside people, institutions and organizations.The history of the development process is analyzed in terms of how opportunities andconstraints evolved in response to individual strategies and groups of initiatives.While cooperative alliances with outsiders are shown to have been instrumental in advancingthe KNT through stages toward ALM, they have posed certain risks to community self-111reliance. The thesis specifically identifies the risks and benefits involved in the KNT’s jointforestry management initiatives with two of the major forest companies operating in KyuquotTerritory.It is concluded that, although obstacles to ALM continue to mount and the future for the KNTis still very uncertain, the development process so far has increased the community’s capacityfor self-reliance through ALM. The Kyuquot experience provides lessons on how benefits canbe derived from cooperative alliances with outsiders and suggests how risks can be minimizedby:-strengthening the linkages between internal development strategies (e.g., socialdevelopment programs) and external development strategies (e.g., protests and publicity);and,-linking community economic, social and cultural development initiatives.In creating such linkages, a strong base of community commitment to, and involvement inALM initiatives can be created to help ensure that community interests and values areprotected in ALM initiatives involving outsiders.The case study highlights the value and the limits of what joint forestry management withindustry can achieve in terms of advancing ALM. While joint management is not an end initself, it provides a valuable opportunity for creating and exploring new channels throughwhich learning can take place between “insiders” and “outsiders” to advance ALM.ivTABLE OF CONTENTSAbstract iiTable of Contents ivlist of Tables ..... vii1.1st of jg5••••• viii. ix1.0 Introduction 11.1 Purpose and Objectives 11.2 Rationale 31.3 Structure of Thesis 92.0 Approach to Research . .. .112.1 The Case Study Approach 112.2 Data Collection 132.3 Conceptual Framework for Analysis 183.0 Aboriginal Land Management: Challenges and Opportunities 233.1 Aboriginal Land Management 233.1.1 Definition and Characteristics 233.1.2 Goals 253.2 The Challenge 263.2.1 Combining Insider and Outsider Knowledge 273.2.2 Combining Traditional and Scientific Knowledge 293.2.3 Social Learning 313.2.4 Cultural Development 333.3 Legal and Political Opportunities in the B.C. Context 353.3.1 Legal and Political Developments 353.3.2 Forest Management in B.C 403.4 Summary 44V4.0 Introduction to the Case Study: People and Forestry in Kyuquot...... 464.1 The Community of Kyuquot 464.1.1 Introduction 464.1.2 The Kyuquot Native Tribe 534.1.3 Other Players and Their Interests 574.2 Kyuquot Tribal Territory 594.2.1 GeneralLanduse 614.2.2 Ministry of Forests 624.2.3 Forest Companies 624.2.4 Other Government Agencies 654.2.5 Forest Policy 655.0 History of Community Actions and Initiatives ..... 765.1 Introduction 765.2 Conceptual Framework 775.3 Recognition of Crisis 805.4 Staged linitiatives 835.4.1 Stage One: Crisis Response 875.4.2 Stage Two: Seizing Opportunities 925.4.3 Stage Three: Joint Management with Industry 1075.4.4 Stage Four: Treaty Negotiations 1165.5 Process Trends 1195.5.1 Patterns and Observations 1195.5.2 Roleof Learning 1236.0 ‘[‘lie Challenge of Joint 14anagemnent ... .... ..... 1266.1 Introduction 1266.2 Risks and Benefits of Joint Management 1276.2.1 Benefits 1276.2.2 Risks 1316.2.3 Summary 1366.3 Linkages Between Initiatives 1366.3.1 Linking Social, Cultural and Economic Development 1376.3.2 Role of the Internal Planning Process 1406.3.3 Linking Internal and External Initiatives 1426.3.4 Summary 144vi7.0 Conclusions..•1•••••••••.............. 1467.1 Summary.1467.1.1 Overview of the Process for Advancing ALM 1477.1.2 Lessons to be Learned from the Kyuquot Experience 1507.2 Conclusion 1528.0 References 1568.1 General References 1568.2 Unpublished References 1608.3 Interview References 1628.3.1 Kyuquot Interviews 1628.3.2 Miscellaneous Interviews 163Appendix 1: Field Work Summary 165Appendix 2: Chronology of Major Events 166viiLIST OF TABLESTable 1: Forest Licence Holders with Charted Areas in KyuquotTribal Territory 63Table 2: Planned Annual Harvest and Tenure Commitments for 1992-96in Kyuquot Tribal Territory 66Table 3: Total Areas Logged in Kyuquot Tribal Territory 68Table 4: History of Community Action 85Table 5: Risks and Benefits fo Joint Management 136vii’LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1: A Systems View of Community Development 20Figure 2: Hierarchy of Goals 26Figure 3: Comparison of Annual Volume Logged with DirectForest Industry Jobs in British Columbia (1961-1989) 41Figure 4: Kyuquot Location 47Figure 5: Kyuquot Sound 48Figure 6: Kyuquot Tribal Territory 60Figure 7: Forest Licence Operating Areas in Kyuquot Tribal Territory 64Figure 8: KNT Development Process 78Figure 9: Time Chart of Kyuquot Actions and Initiatives 86Figure 10: Levels of Social Learning in the KNT Development Process 122ixACKNOWLEDGEMENTSI would like to extend my thanks to all those who made this work possible and helped mealong the way. It is these people who have made the whole experience worthwhile. First Iwould like to thank Julian Griggs who opened the door that pointed me toward Kyuquot andled to my acceptance there. I am particularly thankful for his enthusiasm and interest in theresearch which I have found to be contagious.My sincere thanks go out to Ron Frank and Richard Leo for agreeing to take me on and withwhose support, openness and generousity I could not have done without. Thanks to Tom Paterfor the time he took to provide thoughtful and insightful comments and advice on the issuesclose to his heart. To everyone else in Kyuquot who I interviewed and shared homes, meals,rides, and conversation with--thank you. You have given me fond memories for which thisthesis cannot begin to repay.Thanks to each of my advisors at the University of British Columbia, Peter Boothroyd,Maureen Reed, Al Chambers, and Les Lavkulich. Each made valuable suggestions andoffered perspectives which have helped to broaden my thinking and shape the development ofthe thesis.Finally, I offer my thanks to all those in Resource Management and Environmental Studieswho gave me their friendship, support and a lot of good times along the way. Last of all,thanks to Chris whose unwavering optimism, support and encouragement carried me through itall!11.0 INTRODUCTION1.1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVESFor thousands of years, aboriginal’ people across North America enjoyed access to anabundance of resources and lived in self-reliant, autonomous communities. Today, these samecommunities are struggling to regain the self-reliance and pride in their culture that have beeneroded by a long history of colonialism. Regaining access to and control over land and localresources has been and continues to be a central part of the aboriginal struggle for self-reliance. In British Columbia, where forestry is the major base of the provincial economy, thestruggle for self-reliance often involves attempts by First Nation communities to gain morecontrol over local forest management.2This thesis involves a case study of one such community’s ongoing efforts to achieve greaterself-reliance. The purpose is to analyze the nature and outcomes of the process used by a B.C.aboriginal community to gain more control over the management of local forest resources as ameans for achieving greater self-reliance.The phrase “aboriginal land management” (“ALM”), is used throughout the thesis to refer to acommunity-based, culturally appropriate alternative to the way land and natural resources arecurrently being managed. It represents an ideal by which community self-reliance may beattained.The thesis is comprised of both a literature review and a case study. The literature reviewestablishes the contextual setting and describes theoretical concepts and issues which areapplied to the analysis of the case. A case study of the Kyuquot Native Tribe’s (KNT) effortsThe terms “aboriginal” and “Native” are used mterchangeably throughout the thesis to refer to personsof aboriginal ancestry. The term “First Nation” is used in a political context to reflect the view that aboriginalpeople in B.C. are members of sovereign nations with an inherent right to self-determination.2 See British Columbia Task Force on Native Forestry, Native Forestry in British Columbia: A NewApproach. (Victoria: Queens Printer, November, 1991),33.2to advance ALM, is then analyzed in light of the theories and context set out in the literature.The case study focuses particular attention on describing and analyzing how the KNT hasattempted to balance the need to access the skills, expertise and opportunities that exist outsidethe community, with the need to enhance and maintain the community’s cultural autonomy andcapacity for self-reliance.The approach to advancing ALM taken by the KNT has involved numerous strategies andinitiatives which have included working with forest companies in the joint planning andmanagement of local forestry operations. The case study describes and analyzes thesestrategies and initiatives in terms of how they worked to utilize opportunities, overcomeobstacles and keep the overall process directed toward satisfying community developmentgoals.The objectives of the case study, designed to gain insight into the nature and outcomes of theprocess for advancing ALM are:1) to identify the goals that underlie the KNT’s efforts to gain more control over local forestrymanagement;2) to examine the context out of which community efforts to advance ALM have arisen;3) to identify and describe the strategies and initiatives the KNT has employed to advanceALM;4) to analyze how opportunities and constraints have evolved in response to these strategiesand initiatives;5) to identify the risks, benefits and challenges the KNT has encountered by working withforest companies in joint management arrangements; and,6) to analyze how the overall process used by the KNT to advance ALM has worked tominimize the risks and maximize the benefits associated with joint management.3General conclusions with respect to the nature of the process used for advancing ALM, aredrawn from the case. More specific lessons are identified from the Kyuquot experience whichmay be useful for other communities with similar goals and aspirations.1.2 RATIONALEAn ambitious experiment is underway in British Columbia which will have significantimplications for the way land and natural resources will be managed in the future. Currently,the provincial government is wrestling with how to regulate and control the use andmanagement of increasingly scarce natural resources for increasingly large numbers ofinterests. Previous approaches to land use planning and resource management have proven tobe inadequate for accommodating the wide range of values that society now demands.Compounding this is a problem, referred to by the B.C. Commission on Resources andEnvironment, as a “dysfunction in public policy decision making.”3 In its 1992-93 report, theCommission saw this dysfunction expressing itself in,a widespread public cynicism about government effectiveness and fairness and aresulting dissatisfaction with the actions and decisions of government.4The Commission stated further that,The dysfunction arising from this increasing alienation must be addressed throughprocesses which provide the opportunity for meaningful participation in governmentdecisions by those most directly affected by them.5B.C. Commission on Resources and Environment, 1992-93 Annual Report to the Le2islativeAssembly (Victoria: Queens Printer for British Columbia, June 1993), 10.Ibid.4The Commission’s report goes on to stress that there are many attributes of traditionalaboriginal culture that can be instructive to general society in its attempts to improve currentapproaches to resource management and public policy decision making. It encourages generalsociety to “develop a greater understanding and respect for traditional aboriginal practices,”and to encourage, “the restoration of traditional values among Aboriginal people.”6There is a rich body of literature7which argues that more community-based, holistic, andparticipatory approaches to resource management and decision-making, would benefit societyby creating “more efficient, equitable and appropriate management.”8 Much has also beenwritten on the value of traditional aboriginal cultures and ways of viewing the world which caninform the development of such new management regimes.9This revaluing of traditional cultures and the search for new approaches to resourcemanagement is occurring on a smaller scale within many aboriginal communities throughoutBritish Columbia. In their efforts to rebuild self-reliance within their communities many FirstNations in B.C. are attempting to gain more control over local resource management anddevelop their own systems of aboriginal land management (ALM), founded in a renewed senseof pride in cultural traditions. In doing so, they are embarking on a new and uncharted course6 Jb 12.See, for example, F. Berkes, Common Property Resources: Ecology and Community-BasedSustainable Development (London: Belhaven Press, 1989); H. Hammond, Seeing the Forest Among the Trees--The Case for Wholistic Forest Use (Vancouver: Polestar Press, 1991); M. McGonigle, “DevelopingSustamability: A Native/Environmentalist Prescription for Third-Level Government” BC Studies 84 (Winter1989-90):65-99; E. Pinkerton, ed., Co-Operative Manaaement of Local Fisheries: New Directions for ImprovedManagement and Community Development (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1989); and K.Sale, Dwellers in the Land: The Bioregional Vision (San Fransisco: Sierra Club Books, 1985).E. Pinkerton, “Introduction: Attaining Better Fisheries Management Through Co-ManagementProspects, Problems and Propositions,” in Co-Operative Management of Local Fisheries, 5.In addition to Berkes, McGonigle and Pinkerton, see, L. Clarkson, et.al. Our Responsibility to theSeventh Generation: Indigenous Peoples and Sustainable Development (Winnipeg: International Institute forSustainable Development, 1992); and M. Kew and J. Griggs, “Native Indians of the Fraser Basin: Towards aModel of Sustainable Resource Use,” in Perspectives on Sustainable Development in Water Management, ed.A.H.J. Dorcey (Vancouver: Westwater Research Center, 1991), 17-47.5which could have significant consequences for themselves, for other British Columbians andfor the way resources are managed in the province.If it is assumed that, a) there is a need to find new, community-based approaches to resourcemanagement and decision-making, and b) that such new approaches should be based in a valuesystem and way of viewing the world which draws from traditional aboriginal culture, thensurely what happens in aboriginal communities as they attempt to advance ALM can beinstructive to the rest of society as it searches for solutions to pervasive resource managementproblems.A Possible Route?The growing literature on cooperative resource management involving aboriginal communitiesacross Canada, reflects the increased frequency with which cooperative relationships betweenlocal communities and government resource management agencies and/or industry are beingused as a means for advancing ALM. Since the B.C. government’s formal recognition of theexistence of aboriginal rights in the summer of 1990,10 and its agreement to negotiate treatieswith B.C. First Nations the following October,11 there has been a proliferation of jointmanagement or “co-management” arrangements between aboriginal communities, andgovernment agencies and/or industry in B.C. These arrangements involve the sharing ofpower and responsibilities to manage a given resource. The degree to which powers andresponsibilities are shared in such arrangements varies dramatically.The co-management literature12demonstrates that, while these types of arrangements representpromising opportunities for advancing ALM, they also present substantial risks for the10 British Columbia Claims Task Force, The Report of the British Columbia Claims Task Force(Victoria: Queens Printer, June 28, 1991), 15.Ibid.12 See M. Morrell, “The Struggle to Integrate Traditional Indian Systems and State Management in theSalmon Fisheries of the Skeena River, British Columbia,” in Co-Operative Management of Local Fisheries, 231-6community participants. Particularly when the power to make and implement managementdecisions is not equally shared, the threat of co-optation into the prevailing managementsystem has been a common concern. 13 This has been identified in the community developmentliterature14as a major paradox faced by aboriginal communities in any community-initiated,socio-economic development initiatives aimed at achieving self-reliance. On the one handaboriginal people must access the skills, knowledge and opportunities for development thatexist outside the community, while on the other they must protect and enhance their culturalidentity and autonomy.The types of co-management arrangements that are emerging, particularly in forestmanagement in B.C., are often informal arrangements set up to address specific local resourcemanagement problems. Unlike fisheries co-management which involves a governmentresource management agency (Department of Fisheries and Oceans), joiiit managementinitiatives in forestry often involve the private sector. Such arrangements are rarely based onlegal documents, and they often have little supporting expertise or funding.15 While there maybe community benefits to be gained from participating in such arrangements, there will alsoundoubtedly be risks of co-optation involved.Although fisheries co-management experiences in B.C., have been well documented,16themore informal joint forestry management arrangements between First Nations and forest248; and P. Usher, “Contemporary Aboriginal Lands, Resources, and Environment Regimes--Origins, Problemsand Prosects,” A background paper prepared for the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, June 1993.See in particular, 3. Kearney, “Co-Management or Co-Optation?: The Ambiguities of Lobster FisheryManagement in Southwest Nova Scotia,” in Co-Operative Management of Local Fisheries, 85-102; and P. Usher,“Contemporary Aboriginal Lands, Resources, and Environment Regimes - Origins, Problems and Prospects,”Background paper prepared for the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, June 1993.14 See Chapter 3 for a more detailed review of this literature.1 See, British Columbia, Task Force on Native Forestry, Native Forestry in British Columbia: A NewApproach (Victoria: Queens Printer, November, 1991); and Intertribal Forestry Association of British Columbia,Strategic Study of the Potential for Increased Native Participation in the Forest Sector, February 1992.See, for example, M. Morrell; M. Richardson and B. Green; and J. MacLeod articles inOperative Management of Local Fisheries; and R. Paisley, M. Healey and T., McDaniels, “Analysis of Strategiesfor Co-operative Fisheries Management between Government and Native Indians,” (Vancouver: Westwater7companies have not been. In particular, little research has been done to analyze the role ofsuch informal joint forestry management arrangements as part of an aboriginal community’sbroader development efforts aimed at advancing ALM and self-reliance. Since sucharrangements appear to be growing in number, there is a need for more study on what FirstNations have to gain or lose, and the challenges they may face by participating in sucharrangements. The case study of the Kyuquot Native Tribe’s experience in joint managementwill shed light on this particular route to ALM and will contribute to a better understanding ofthe risks and benefits involved when joint forestry management is used to advance ALM.Given that ALM is community-based, there can be no one path, or series of steps that acommunity can follow to develop and implement a system of ALM--it will evolve differentlyfor each community according to its own unique circumstances. Furthermore, as long asALM remains an ideal, or a vision to work toward, rather than asking how, it is moreinstructive to ask what happens when a community tries to gain more control over localresource management and advance ALM. The processes a community goes through and thestrategies it chooses to develop ALM will have outcomes which the community may or maynot have intended or wished for.Although there can be no recipe for getting to ALM, communities can learn from each other’sexperiences in trying.17 Case studies of diverse experiences of different communitiesattempting to bring about ALM under different circumstances through the employment ofdifferent means can be used to identify lessons from which others can learn.Research Center, 1992); and E. Pinkerton, D., Moore, and F. Fortier, “A Model for First Nation Leadership iiiMulti-Party Stewardship ofWatersheds and Their Fisheries,” Draft report to the Royal Commission onAborigina,Peoples October 25, 1993.1 The importance of learning from the experiences of other First Nation communities was a majortheme that emerged from the Conference “Action Agenda for Self Government,” First Nations House of Learning(UBC), Vancouver, B.C., November 7-10, 1993, [conference proceedings in progress].8This thesis, through an analysis of the outcomes of one community’s attempts to advanceALM, will identify lessons which will contribute to a better understanding of the initiatives,strategies and overall processes through which ALM can be developed.The Kyuguot CaseA number of factors make Kyuquot and the experience of the Kyuquot Native Tribe (KNT) aparticularly rich and appropriate case of a community’s struggle to gain more control overlocal resource management. First, the aboriginal community in Kyuquot shares features incommon with other aboriginal communities in British Columbia. It is small, isolated,resource-based, and, typical of many rural First Nation communities, it shares many of thesame facilities (ie., store, post office, school, hospital) with non-Native residents. Also likemany aboriginal communities throughout B.C., indeed throughout Canada, the KNT hasbecome dependent on government transfer payments and is plagued with a litany of socialproblems that stem from a long history of colonization and paternalistic government policies.’8The Kyuquot case is particularly significant because there is a five-year history of concertedcommunity action to gain more control over local forest management which can bedocumented and analyzed. The community began to actively mobilize in 1988 in response towhat it perceived as a crisis in the way local forests were being managed. Since then, theKNT has been struggling to develop a community-based, culturally appropriate alternative tothe present forest management regime. It has undertaken several bold and innovativeinitiatives which have included working with cooperatively with both government and industryas part of its on-going efforts to achieve greater self-reliance through the development ofALM. Its experiences over the past five years may contain useful lessons for othercommunities just now beginning to experiment with different approaches to advancing ALM.18 See, Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Discussion Paper I: Framing the Issues (Ottawa:Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1992).9Finally, a previous case study of Kyuquot has provided a foundation on which the presentthesis has built. 19 Grigg’ s study demonstrated that a solution to a conflict in the clam fisheryin Kyuquot might be achieved through cooperative management which combines principlesadapted from the traditional resource use system of the Kyuquot people with scientificmanagement system of the state. The present study has built on this work by examining theopportunities and constraints, trials and tribulations faced by the KNT in its on-going attemptsto find a similar solution to forestry conflicts within its Tribal Territory.1.3 STRUCTURE OF THESISThe remainder of this thesis is comprised of six chapters. Chapter 2 outlines the approachtaken to the research and the methodology used. In addition to a brief review of theadvantages and pitfalls of this type of case study research, it discusses how information wascollected and analyzed. Finally, it outlines the conceptual framework applied to the analysisof the case.Before delving directly into the case study, Chapter 3 reviews the theories relevant to theanalysis and identifies the broad-level goals, challenges and opportunities involved inaboriginal community efforts to advance ALM. The chapter begins by elaborating on theconcept of aboriginal land management (ALM), and identifying its underlying goals. It thenturns to the theoretical literature to identify; 1) a major problem confronting aboriginalcommunities in their attempts to advance ALM, and 2) the theories that have been advanced tosuggest how it may be overcome. Finally, the chapter describes the legal and political contextin which B.C. First Nations find themselves and identifies specifically the opportunities thatare emerging for greater First Nation involvement in forestry management in the province.19j• Griggs, “Developing Cooperative Management Systems for Common Property Resources:Resolving Cross-Cultural Conflict in a West Coast Fishery” (Masters thesis, University of British Columbia,1990).10The chapter speaks to the first two case study objectives by identifying the goals underlyingALM and by providing a contextual setting from which to view the case.Chapter 4 addresses the same two objectives, but with specific reference to case. It beginswith a description of Kyuquot--the people and the place. It identifies the different levels ofcommunity that exist in Kyuquot before focussing specifically on the KNT and identifying itsgoals and interests. The second half of the chapter describes the Tribal Territory of theKyuquot people, the forest management regime currently in place, and the conflict surroundingit. This provides the context for the examination of the community development processwhich follows.The history and analysis of community action to advance ALM forms the bulk of the thesisand is described in Chapter 5. The chapter is concerned with the third and fourth case studyobjectives to identify the strategies and initiatives employed to advance ALM and to show howopportunities and constraints have evolved in response. Community initiatives are described interms of the obstacles they overcame and the new opportunities they created. The chapter isstructured to show how the initiatives have evolved through four stages ending, most recently,with treaty negotiations.Chapter 6 addresses the last two case study objectives. First, it identifies the risks and benefitsassociated with the KNT’s initiatives involving joint forestry management with industry.Second, it examines the overall development process and the linkages between variousinitiatives to show how attempts have been made to minimize risks and keep developmentefforts directed toward community goals.Chapter 7 concludes with a summary of the lessons to be learned from the Kyuquot experienceand a discussion of the implications the study may have for communities elsewhere.112.0 APPROACH TO RESEARCHThis chapter provides the rationale for adopting a case study approach to research and outlinesthe methods used to collect and analyze information. The discussion also identifies thelimitations and potential for bias associated with this type of research approach andmethodology. Finally, the chapter outlines the conceptual framework which has been appliedto the analysis of the case.2.1 THE CASE STUDY APPROACHThe need to document and analyze the experiences of B.C. aboriginal communities attemptingto gain more control over the management of local resources has been established in theprevious chapter. The use of a case study allows for the full richness of the relationships thatcreate the community processes and their outcomes to be incorporated into the analysis. AsYin states,the distinctive need for case studies arises out of the desire to understand complexsocial phenomenon. . . the case study allows an investigation to retain the holistic andmeaningful characteristics of real-life events. .According to this view, the case study approach taken in this thesis is appropriate given thecomplexity of the issues and processes being addressed. Another view, put forward byCropper, suggests that what really distinguishes a case study approach from other researchstrategies, is its ability to make use of a variety of sources of information, from which themesare drawn and connections made so as to create a structure of evidence.2 By using multiplesources of evidence reflecting a variety of points of view, a broad range of issues pertinent tothe case can be addressed, and facts can be corroborated among the different sources.3R. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Newbury Park: Sage Publications, 1989), 14.S. Cropper, “Theory and Strategy in the Study of Planning Processes--the Uses of the Case Study,”Environment and Planning B 9 (1982): 345.Yin, 97; Cropper, 345.12Case study research is the primary approach used for analyzing community developmentprocesses.4 By describing, the events, the players involved and the factors contributing to theprocess over time, case studies provide insight into what worked, what did not, and why.Through a detailed narrative of what actually happened, case studies provide insight into whatis possible under certain conditions. Their value lies in offering readers “surrogateexperience” from which they can take lessons and apply to similar situations they mayexperience elsewhere.5Potential for Researcher BiasThe qualitative nature of case studies leaves them susceptible to the personal biases of theresearcher. They tend to rely more on the intuition of the researcher than do more quantitativemethods of analysis and the potential for researcher bias is high. Furthermore, the lessonslearned from one case are not always transferable to other situations. Care must be taken indocumenting case studies to provide the requisite level of detail regarding the circumstancessurrounding the case. This allows readers to gain insights into what is possible under similarcircumstances experienced elsewhere.The case study presented in this thesis is subject to particular biases stemming from my role asa non-aboriginal outsider documenting and analyzing the development process occuring withinan aboriginal community. The information I have gathered during fieldwork has been filteredthrough my own cultural values and perceptions. The perspective taken has been that of anoutsider looking in. The reader should keep this in mind and recognize that an aboriginalperson’s interpretation of the process may be different than what is presented here. Byproviding details of the methods used for collecting and analyzing information, I haveattempted to clarify where the potential for personal biases exist.I. Masser, ‘The Analysis of Planning Processes: Some Methodological Considerations,” Environmentand Planning B 9 (1982): 8.Ibid.13As an outsider researcher, I must also acknowledge certain ethical considerations which mayhave contributed to a personal bias. The case study contained in these pages brings theexperience of the Kyuquot people into the public domain where it will be subject to publicscrutiny. For this reason, I have felt ethically bound to conduct my research in a way thatwould provide at least some benefit to the community. This may also have led me to beparticularly sensitive and sympathetic to the community’s point of view. Such a bias towardthe community may have been compounded by the attachment and commoradery I developedwith some of the community members with whom I worked over the course of my fieldstudies. Such researcher biases cannot be eliminated. I have attempted, however, to make mybiases explicit, to remain aware of them throughout all the phases of the research, and toclearly distinguish between my personal views and those expressed by others.The methodology adopted has helped to minimize the effect of these biases. Multiple sourcesof evidence have been used in an effort to reflect an accurate account according to a widerange of viewpoints--not just those of the researcher or one particular player or group ofplayers. The techniques used for gathering information are described below. Limitations arediscussed along with the measures taken to mitigate the potential for bias.2.2 DATA COLLECTIONData collection was guided by five broad research questions corresponding to the case studyobjectives listed in the introduction.1) What goals underlie the KNT’s efforts to gain more control over local forestrymanagement?2) What strategies and initiatives has the KNT employed to advance its goals?3) How have opportunities and constraints evolved in response to these strategies andinitiatives?144) What are the risks, benefits and challenges the KNT has encountered by working with forestcompanies in joint management arrangements?5) How has the overall process used by the KNT to advance its goals worked to minimize therisks and maximize the benefits associated with joint management?Information was collected in the field over the course of one year (July 1992-June 1993)during six separate field trips to Kyuquot, amounting to a total of 25 days spent there. Asummary of the purpose and length of each of these trips is contained in Appendix I. Fourprinciple means were used to gather information to address these questions; 1) consultationswith key informants, 2) document analysis, 3) direct observation, and 4) semi-structuredinterviews.Early in the research process, a close working relationship was established with both the KNTChief Councillor and KNT Forestry Advisor. Both acted as key informants with whom I wasable to regularly consult throughout the course of the research. A third informant provided asomewhat different perspective which helped to ensure a balanced account of events. As anon-Native resident of Kyuquot and the director of a local community-based environmentalgroup, this informant provided valuable comments and insights, throughout the course of theresearch.Consultations with, and support from key informants were vital, for providing direct insights,explanations and interpretations of events. They also directed me toward and, in many cases,made available, other relevant sources of information. They provided access to relevantsources of documentation which included correspondences between the KNT, governmentagencies and forest companies, minutes of meetings between the KNT and forest companies,and internal band administrative and planning documents. This documentation wassupplemented by government reports and newspaper clippings. Document analysis was15particularly useful for constructing a detailed chronology of events and for cross-checkinginformation obtained through other sources, including the informants themselves.Key informants also provided access to Band Council meetings, community workshops andmeetings between the Band Council and forest company representatives. This enabled directobservation of actual events as they unfolded, providing new insights and an opportunity, onceagain, to corroborate findings from other sources. Without the support of key informants, thisopportunity would not have been available and the depth of the case study would have beenlimited.There are drawbacks to using key informants in case studies of this type. Reliance on one ortwo key people who have a vested interests in the research can lead to capture. That is, it canlead to a situation where the informant directs the research and feeds biased information to theresearcher. There has certainly been a potential for that to happen in this case. Both the ChiefCouncillor and Forestry Advisor have a vested interest in seeing the community developmentprocess portrayed in a positive light. The third informant, knowledgeable of, but largely anoutsider to the KNT’ s development process, helped to provide a balanced perspective. Inparticular, his detailed review of an early draft of the case study helped to clarify contentiousissues and challenge some assumptions that had been made.This potential for capture has been mitigated further by using multiple sources of informationobtained both with and without the help of key informants. Interviews with communitymembers and other outside players has been a particularly important source of information inthis respect. They helped to ensure that the study represented a broad and balancedperspective.16In addition to the on-going consultations with the three key informants, interviews wereconducted with people representing a wide range of viewpoints. The perspectives sought outin the interviews included those of thirteen Native and nine non-Native Kyuquot residents, twoMinistry of Forests officials directly involved in the community’s development process andthree forest company executives involved in the joint forest management initiatives with theKNT.The community members interviewed included a wide range people including elders, youth,men, and women, some of whom worked in forestry or fisheries and others who did not.While some of the Kyuquot participants were selected on the basis of a recommendation of theChief Councillor, others were suggested by other participants and still others came forwardvoluntarily. Such interviews took place in Kyuquot, either in the band office, in people’shomes or outside on the docks where people were working. The purpose of the interviewswith community members was to gain a general understanding of the changes that hadoccurred in the community as a result of its efforts to gain more control over the local forestmanagement. The interviews also served the purpose of of corroborating findings from othersources.The Kyuquot interviews were semi-structured and informal. Attempts were made to take notesin an unobtrusive fashion. Some sketchy, handwritten notes were taken during the interviewsand were supplemented immediately once an interview was completed. Due to the diversity ofparticipants and the experiences they carried with them, interviews varied considerably induration, the emphasis they took, and the range of issues discussed. Although pre-formulatedquestions were brought into the interviews, they were found to be too structured andinappropriate for soliciting the in depth, unguarded type of answers being sought. A revisedinterview strategy used the questions only as a guide and a free-flowing conversation wasallowed to develop. Such interviews varied in length from 10 minutes to one hour.17This interview strategy provided insights into the process that had not been anticipated andwhich would likely not have been discovered if a more rigid structure for interviews had beenadhered to. The style of interview also helped to limit the effect the my personal biases thatmay have been reflected in the pre-formed list of questions. A drawback to this type ofinformal interview is the loss of some measure of objectivity since it becomes more difficult tocompare the individual responses.Time and availability constraints made it impossible to interview all the people that would havebeen desirable. The interviews did, however, serve their purpose in providing a very generalsense of the resident’s perceptions of the changes that have occurred in Kyuquot as a result ofcommunity initiatives. They also served the important function of enlightening myself to thelevel of complexity inherent in community development processes.Interviews with forest company executives were used to obtain their perspectives andassessments of the particular joint forest management initiative in which the respondent wasinvolved. These were formal, semi-structured, tape-recorded interviews conducted in theVancouver offices of the respondents and lasting from 1 to 1 1/2 hours. These interviewswere particularly useful for gaining an understanding of the events leading up to each of thetwo joint management initiatives examined in the case study. They were also used to crosscheck information received from other sources.Interviews with Ministry of Forests officials were more structured and took place over thephone. These interviews were conducted to clarify certain points and to obtain the Ministry’sperspective on specific contentious issues between the KNT and the Ministry.Analyzing the information gathered was an iterative process. Different conceptual frameworkswere continually applied in an effort to discover where the information from various sources18converged. The framework finally adopted is outlined below. It helped to provide the processunderstanding needed to construct a cohesive narrative of the Kyuquot experience. Oncecomplete, the narrative was reviewed by key informants, their written and verbal commentswere received and revisions were made. The case study review and acceptance by keyinformants from both the Native and non-Native community in Kyuquot, lends credit to thedata collection and analysis processes.Throughout the research process I have strived to reduce the potential for bias in order toproduce a fair and balanced view of the Kyuquot experience. I am confident that the range ofviewpoints obtained, the use of a number of different data gathering techniques and my effortsto cross-cheek information have achieved this.2.3 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSISAnalyzing the data obtained through the various sources in an attempt to gain a processunderstanding of the KNT’s development efforts has been a complex task. The application ofsystems theory to the analysis and understanding of community development processes is awidely used and accepted approach. The so-called “systems approach” ,6 is particularly usefulfor understanding the linkages that exist within a community and between a community and thebroader environment in which it is situated. This thesis uses the conceptual scheme articulatedby Roberts7where communities are viewed as open, goal-seeking systems in which inputs andoutputs of knowledge and resources work to alter components of the system. For the purposeof understanding community development processes using a systems approach, Roberts defines‘community’ as, “a collection of people who have become aware of some problem or somebroad goal, who have gone through a process of learning about themselves and about their6 For a detailed explanation of the systems approach as a method of inquiry see, J.P. van Gigch,Applied General Systems Theory (New York: Harper and Row, 1977).H. Roberts, Community Development: Learning and Action (Toronto: University of Toronto Press,1979).19environment, and have formulated a group objective.”8 In the present case study, the KyuquotNative Tribe (KNT) fits within this definition of community and is the central focus of thestudy.Roberts shows how the application of systems theory to community development directsattention to the internal nature and dynamics of the community as well as to the connectionswith the rest of society within which it exists. Internally, systems thinking helps to focus theanalysis on relationships between community members. Rather than viewing communitymembers as component parts which can be added together to form an aggregate community,Roberts’ conceptualization sees a community as a whole in which its members are arrangedand organized in relationships. These relationships are constantly changing--the system is in aconstant state of flux--moving the system toward a goal. Externally, Roberts’ systemsconceptualization focuses attention on the interrelations that exist between discretecommunities which form part of a greater whole. A community is viewed as a sub-system of alarger system. This conceptualization leads to the understanding that change in one part of thesystem will yield changes in other parts. As Roberts describes,Changes in one community of people in a larger social system will bring about changesin other communities, because it will be drawing different inputs from some of thoseother communities and it will be producing different outputs which will impinge onthem.9Another important aspect of systems theory Roberts applies to community development iscybernetics--the information flow and communications within and between systems. Theconcept of feedback is central to the cybernetic systems model. Feedback comes from bothwithin the system (community) and from outside. Both types of feedback are required to keepthe system functioning and directed toward its goal. Internally, members of the communityrequire channels for expressing their feelings and frustrations, otherwise, as Roberts describes,8 Ibid., 45.Thid.,51.20“there will be silent frustrations, people will move away and the community willbreakdown.“ Feedback from outside the system can take any number of forms. It may, forexample, take the form of new government regulations or directives, a withdraw of fundingfor certain community programs, or complaints from neighbouring communities. Feedbackmay also come from the natural environment in the form of pollution or declines in availableresources. Whatever form feedback from other systems may take, Roberts stresses that it willhave an effect on the community. Figure 1 represents a systems view of a communitydevelopment process which has been applied to the analysis of the case.FIGURE 1: A Systems View of Community DevelopmentCRISISGOALSA systems approach to analyzing community development processes leads to a focus on therelationships and communication flows between those within the community (system) andthose outside it. The literature relating to social learning, (reviewed in the next chapter), hasparticular relevance in this respect. It provides a theory as to how such relationships between“insiders” and “outsiders” should evolve if the community is to overcome obstacles andadvance toward its goals. The thesis analyzes the KNT’s development process using a systemsapproach and uses theories of social learning to identify patterns of outcomes.1021This broad conceptual framework has been applied to the analysis of the KNTs experience asfollows. The analysis begins by situating the KNT within a larger social system andidentifying the linkages that exist between it and other communities (systems). This providesthe broad base for understanding the internal opportunities and constraints which input to thecommunity development process. The analysis proceeds by identifying and describing theforest policies and practices (external inputs) as they have been applied in Kyuquot. Thisprovides an introduction to the case study and is contained in Chapter 4.Chapter 5 is an attempt to document the history of the development process in which the KNThas been engaged. The chapter describes and analyzes the separate strategies and initiativesused by the KNT to advance its goals. It proceeds along two lines of inquiry. The first isconcerned with tracing the opportunities and constraints as they evolved is response to each ofthe strategies or initiatives employed. The second focuses on the changing relationshipsbetween community insiders and outsiders throughout the process. The conceptual modelshown in Figure 1 has been used as a guide for describing the individual strategies andinitiatives. The examination of evolving internal and external opportunities and constraints is,in systems terms, an analysis of inputs, outputs and information flows both within the KNTand between the KNT and other outside systems with which it is connected. Chapter 5expands this conceptual model to reflect the evolution of the KNT’s development processthrough stages progressing toward ALM. With each stage of initiative, a new class ofopportunities and constraints are encountered. This evolutionary view of the history of theprocess, and the emphasis on changing relationships and communication flows betweeninsiders and outsiders, provides the basis for understanding the process from a social learningperspective.A second stage of analysis is contained in Chapter 6. This chapter is an attempt to achievesynthesis and an understanding of how community goals were or were not advanced as a result22of all the actions and initiatives combined. This second stage of analysis examines howcommunity initiatives aimed externally have affected the community internally and howinternal initiatives have affected the external environment. The focus moves from anexposition of how the process developed over time (Chapter 5), to an examination of the ongoing interrelationships and complementarity that exists between different types of initiativesand players in the process.It should be emphasized that what has been described represents a loose conceptual model usedto guide the analysis. It is not a rigid framework for structuring a classifying evidence. Carehas been taken to ensure that the analysis retains “the holistic and meaningful characteristics ofreal-life events...”11 This has allowed for overall patterns of outcomes to be identified andcompared to those which are predicted on the basis of social learning theory. Meaningfulconclusions have then been drawn about the nature of the KNT’s development process and itsoutcomes.Before proceeding to the actual analysis of the case, a broad context for the case study mustestablished. The following chapter reviews the literature to identify the theories relevant to thecase study. It goes on to outline the broad challenges and opportunities faced by aboriginalcommunities in B.C. attempting gain more control over local forestry management anddevelop greater self-reliance.Yin, 14.233.0 ABORIGINAL LAND MANAGEMENT: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIESThis chapter establishes the broad context from which to view the case. After further definingthe concept of aboriginal land management (ALM) and its underlying objectives, the chapteridentifies, through a literature review, the fundamental challenge faced by aboriginalcommunities attempting to advance ALM and points to the theories advanced for dealing withit. The chapter goes on to outline the narrower context of the legal and political opportunitiesthat exist for advancing ALM in B.C.3.1 ABORIGINAL LAND MANAGEMENT3.1.1 Definition and CharacteristicsAboriginal communities throughout Canada are remarkably consistent in directing theirdevelopment efforts toward achieving greater community self-reliance. That is, they arestriving to satisfy more of their own needs through the use of their own resources. Suchefforts are firmly rooted in cultural values and are almost always accompanied by a culturalresurgence. This point came through loud and clear in the hearings of the Royal Commissionon Aboriginal Peoples,Aboriginal people in the hearings consistently voiced the hope and the expectation thata re-valuing of their cultures can provide the basis for designing institutions andservices that will revitalize their communities, as well as provide the foundation for anew or renewed relationship with other Canadians.1For many resource-based communities, aboriginal land management (ALM), is often chosen asa goal toward which a range of community development initiatives can be directed to achievegreater self-reliance.2 Aboriginal land management (ALM), as it is being used in this thesis,1 Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Discussion Paper 1: Framing the Issues, October 1992, 3.2 This was strikingly apparent in the workshops and panel discussions at the conference, “ActionAgenda for Self Government,” First Nations House of Learning (UBC), Vancouver, B.C., November 7-10, 1993,[conference proceedings in process]. Workshops centered on the community-based initiatives of individual FirstNations. See also the fisheries and forestry initiatives of various First Nations described in F. Cassidy and N.Dale, After Native Claims?: The Implications of Comprehensive Claims Settlements for Natural Resources inBritish Columbia (Lantzville, B.C./Halifax, N.S.: Oolichan Books/Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1988).24refers to a community-based system of resource management which is guided by a renewedsense of cultural values and traditions.ALM finds its basis in the inseparability of aboriginal culture from the land. Much of whathas been written from the perspective of First Nations emphasizes the sense of responsibilitythat arises from the practical and spiritual connection aboriginal people have with the land.Many write of the belief that as First peoples they were put on the earth with “a sacredobligation to protect the land and use its resources wisely.”3 Aboriginal rights, wheninterpreted through an aboriginal world view has often been equated with aboriginalresponsibility. As Lyon explains,We are the aboriginal people and we have the right to look after all life on this earth.We share land in common, not only among ourselves but with the animals andeverything that lives in our land. It is our responsibility. Each generation must fulfillits responsibility under the law of the Creator. . . Aboriginal rights means aboriginalresponsibility, and we were put here to fulfill that responsibility.4ALM represents a means for expressing these aboriginal rights and responsibilities, and forachieving greater community self-reliance. Like the term community self-reliance, ALMrepresents an ideal to strive toward. In its ideal form it is a system where communitiesthemselves control the planning and management of land and resources within their tribalterritories. It is a system driven by a deeply held sense of responsiblility and respect towardthe land and its resources. It is based on a holistic understanding of the natural world wheretimber, for example cannot be separated from the wider ecosystem.Fred Plain, “A Treatise on the Rights of Aboriginal Peoples of the Continent of North America,” inThe Ouest for Justice: Aboriginal People and Aboriginal Rights, ed. M. Boldt and J.A. Long (Toronto:University of Toronto Press, 1985),34. See also L. Clarkson et. al, Our Responsibility to the SeventhGeneration. (Winnipeg, International Institute for Sustainable Development, 1992), 4; and 0. Lyons, “TraditionalNative Philosophies Relating to Aboriginal Rights” in The Quest for Justice, ed. M. Boldt and J.A. Long(Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985), 19-20.Lyons, 19-20.25Cultural development is an essential part of the community development process directedtoward advancing ALM. As with any social institution, a resource management system isgrounded in the values and beliefs of those who design them. Resource management systemsare based fundamentally on the beliefs people have about their relationship to the land--theirland ethic. Any community attempting to develop its own system of land management mustalso be able to articulate what it, as a community, “believes” about its relationship to the land.Although myths and romantic ideals of the relationship between aboriginal people and the landabound, the truth is that in B.C. today, the value systems people ascribe to are not so easilydemarcated along racial or ethnic lines. A major prerequisite for developing any community-based system of land management is a common community vision informed by the values andbeliefs of community members. Cultural development, thus has a vital role to play inadvancing ALM. The evolution of cultural traditions, which blend the contemporary withhistorical accompanies many aboriginal community development efforts. This evolution is alsokey to the development of ALM and will be discussed in more detail later in the chapter.3.1.2 GoalsFor the purposes of this thesis, ALM represents an intermediary goal toward which communitydevelopment initiatives can be directed in order to facilitate the higher goal of community self-reliance. Both are lofty goals. The goal of community self-reliance is all-encompassing,reaching into the economic, political, cultural and environmental spheres of community life.Efforts to advance ALM as a means for community self-reliance, must be equallycomprehensive and include a range of community development initiatives. The objectives thatunderlie efforts to advance ALM include the promotion of economic self-reliance, promotionof self-government, restoration and maintenance of ecological integrity and strengtheningcultural autonomy. While these objectives are each a means to self-reliance themselves, theyalso tend to be mutually reinforcing and, together they can guide the ALM developmentprocess to ensure that it serves the overarching goal of community self-reliance. Figure 226represents how ALM provides a focal point toward which diverse community objectives can bedirected to achieve community self-reliance.FIGURE 2: Hierarchy of GoalsCommunity Self-RelianceAboriginal Land ManagementI I I Ieconomic self- self- ecological culturalreliance government integrity autonomyFinally, it should be stressed again that ALM as it has been discussed here, is representative ofan ideal toward which an increasing number of aboriginal communities in B.C. are directingtheir development efforts. It is also important to recognize that there is no one path or seriesof steps that a community can follow to develop and implement a system of ALM. Theprocess will be different for every community as will the outcomes. Nevertheless, somebroad-level challenges and opportunities aboriginal communities are likely to face in theirefforts to advance ALM can be identified.3.2 THE CHALLENGEA review of the community development planning literature reveals the existence of a commondilemma faced by any community working to effect change and gain greater self-reliance.This dilemma, as the growing case study literature on aboriginal land management regimesshows, is particularly pronounced for aboriginal communities.5 It manifests itself in theSee an upcoming volume of case studies prepared for the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples,edited by Peter Usher (in progress).27dichotomic differences between the kind of knowledge that exists within a community and thatwhich exists outside it. The challenge arises out of the need to access the knowledge, skillsand opportunities that exist outside the community while, at the same time, protecting andenhancing the community’s own cultural traditions and identity. This is the point on which anumber of authors have converged although they have followed different lines of emphasis asdescribed below.3.2.1 Combining Insider and Outsider KnowledgeCommunity development planners, among them Roberts,6Friedmann,7and Lockhart,8distinguish between the knowledge and/or information that exists inside a community, withthat which exists outside or external to a community. Each contend that communitydevelopment requires the use and synthesis of both types of knowledge and information.Lockhart uses the terms “insider” and “outsider” knowledge to distinguish between theknowledge people in a community have of internal relationships, ways of communicating andvarious functionings; and the knowledge of external opportunity structures (i.e., the economic,legal and political institutions and processes external to the community from which manyopportunities arise). Friedmann makes a similar distinction when he speaks of “personalknowledge” which is based on experiences, and “processed knowledge” which is theoreticaland based on models of reality.Roberts presents a model of a community or group which is made up of an internal and anexternal system. The internal system constitutes the “sentiments, activities and interactionsthat fulfill the personal needs of people within the group,” thus serving a “social-emotional or6 H. Roberts, Community Development: Learning and Action (Toronto: University of Toronto Press,1979).J. Friedmann, Retracking America: A Theory of Transactive Planning (New York:Anchor/1oubleday, 1973).A. Lockhart, “The Insider-Outsider Dialectic in Native Socio-Economic Development: A Case Studyin Process Understanding,” Canadian Journal of Native Studies 2:1 (1982): 159-68.28maintenance function.” The external system, by contrast, is defined by the “sentiments,activities and interactions that enable a group to survive in its environment.” This is thegroup’s “task function.” As Roberts states,There is an unavoidable relationship between what happens in the internal system of thegroup and what happens in the external system as affected by the environment.9A number of handbooks and guides for community development practitioners1°point to theneed for a systematic understanding, not only of the internal strengths and weaknesses of thecommunity, but of the opportunities and constraints operating externally. A community,according to Lockhart, requires outsider knowledge to enable it to make full use of theopportunities for development available. Accordingly, gaining more community control overlocal resource management, for example, would require knowledge of bureaucratic structuresand procedures, technical knowledge of current resource management systems and knowledgeof resource policies and legislation. This then must be used in combination with localknowledge of how the community works and what its development capabilities are, ifdevelopment efforts are to be successful. Friedmann argues that as the complexity of asituation increases, so does the need to combine these two types of knowledge in order todevelop new understandings of opportunities for action and change.It is this requirement to relate insider/personal to outsider/processed knowledge, “using each tocorrect and supplement the other,”11 that Lockhart identifies as a major challenge, particularlyfor aboriginal communities. He explains,Roberts, 35.10 See for example, M. Lewis and F. Green, Strategic Planning for the CED Practitioner (Vancouver:Westcoast Development Group, 1992).‘1Friedmann, 106.29since these outside structures are overwhelmingly predicated upon values andassumptions that are profoundly alien and hence threatening to those found inside nativecommunities, many of the problems associated with the new wave of native self-initiated development may be understood in terms of the difficulty of fmding ways andmeans of combining these inside and outside knowledge components so as to affirmrather than negate native cultural identity. 123.2.2 Combining Traditional and Scientific KnowledgeThe “difficulty” expressed by Lockhart has also been felt explicitly in Native attempts toadvance ALM. Many have argued that in a world of imperfect knowledge, local or“traditional ecological knowledge” may be just as valuable as the “scientific knowledge” ofstate resource management regimes for informing resource management decisions. 13Increasingly, First Nations entering into power sharing (co-management) agreements with stateresource management agencies are looking for answers to the question of how traditionalknowledge can be used alongside scientific knowledge.’4 There appears to be an emergingconsensus amongst co-management analysts that attempts should be made to set up ALMregimes that allow for “collaboration” between the two types on knowledge rather than“integration.”5Peter Usher,16 for example, in his review of the problems and prospects for aboriginal landand resource management regimes, questions the ability of co-management arrangements toembrace “traditional knowledge” on an equal footing with scientific knowledge,12Lockhart, 161.13 See for example, J.Inglis, ed. Traditional Ecological Knowledge: Concepts and Cases (Ottawa:International Program on Traditional Ecological Knowledge, Canadian Museum of Nature and InternationalDevelopment Research Center, 1993).14 See the case studies contained in a forthcoming volume edited by Peter Usher for the RoyalCommission on Aboriginal People, 1994.15 Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Co-management workshop, Meeting minutes,Novembei1993.1 P. Usher, “Contemporary Aboriginal Lands, Resources, and Environment Regimes--Origins,Problems and Prospects,” A background paper prepared for the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, June1993.30how does “traditional knowledge” get incorporated into co-management, whendespite nominal commitments, both the structures and the idiom [of the co-managementboards] require English-speaking participants, and use non-aboriginal concepts andparadigms to operationalize the management system?’7To illustrate, Usher points to the term “wildlife.” The simple fact that many of the northernco-management regimes he refers to have “wildlife” sections shows, according to Usher, thecultural bias of the regime. The term, he contends, has no direct equivalent in aboriginallanguages. Far from being an “objective description” Usher argues it is a “cultural statementof the relation of people and animals (and habitat) in an agricultural, settler heritage.”8 Thishe says demonstrates,the power of the dominant system, through language alone, to subtly but inexorablyforce the Native organizations into negotiating on non-Native grounds, not simply innon-Native jargon but in a non-Native paradigm and knowledge system, that extendsnot simply to wildlife, but to the whole basis of the use and management of naturalresources.19A related theme within the co-management literature is the risk that aboriginal communitieswill be co-opted into the mainstream system.20 Co-management is obviously not the self-management to which First Nations aspire. Usher raises the question of who benefits from comanagement, and which party receives a greater advantage. He warns that co-management hasbeen in many cases as much of a government as an aboriginal initiative and, “perhaps even ameans to contain or co-opt the claims process.”21The question remains, how can the two types of knowledge (i.e., insider/outsider andtraditional/scientific) be related to each other on equal terms so that one doesn’t overwhelmIbid., 74.l8j 73.20 See in particular J. Kearney, “Co-Management or Co-Optation?: The Ambiguities of Lobster FisheryManagement in Southwest Nova Scotia,” in Co-Operative Management of Local Fisheries: New Directions forImproved Management and Community Development, ed. E. Pinkerton (Vancouver: University of BritishColumbia Press, 1989), 85-102.21 Thid.31and replace the other. The answer, according to Friedmann, Lockhart, and others is through aprocess of continual learning on the parts of both those who possess insider knowledge andthose outside “experts” involved in the community development/resource management process,whether they are community planners, government administrators, industry representatives orresource managers.3.2.3 Social LearningIn his discussion of development in aboriginal communities in Canada, Elias points out that asthe development initiatives of aboriginal communities become “increasingly ambitious” theyare met with “increasingly powerful constraints.”22 The power, complexity and sheer numberof obstacles faced by aboriginal communities attempting to gain more control over localresource management, requires a full mobilization of both internal and externalunderstandings.The concept of social learning offers a means for dealing with such complex problems thatrequire equally complex solutions. It has been described as, “a normative idea of learning as acollective experience.”23 Both Lockhart and Friedmann contend that planning anddevelopment processes which allow for “mutual learning” by both insiders and outsiders canwork to bring about new understandings of the problem and lead to new, innovative solutions.What Lockhart terms an “insider-outsider dialectic” is a process of relating insider to outsiderknowledge on equal footing, “in the belief that deep insights leading to new possibilities willeventually emerge in the context of growing trust and mutual appreciation.”24 The“transactive” style of planning articulated by Friedmann involves just such a dialectic. It iswhat Friedmann terms a process of “mutual learning.”22 p• Elias, Development in Aboriginal Communities (North York: Captus Press Inc., 1991), 225.N. Dale, “Getting to Co-Management: Social Learning in the Redesign of Fisheries Management,” inCo-Operative Management of Local Fisheries, 51.Lockhart, 167.32In mutual learning, planner and client each learn from the other--the planner from theclient’s personal knowledge, the client from the planner’s technical expertise. In thisprocess, the knowledge of both undergoes a major change. A common image of thesituation evolves through dialogue; a new understanding of the possibilities for changeis discovered.25In addition to the process of mutual learning, social learning involves a process of, what hasbeen termed, “evolutionary experimentation.” The theory, originally conceived by Dunn,26 isthat human evolution is an experimental process of learning involving observation,experimentation, evaluation and redirection of effort. There is no exogenous experimenter asin physical science. The process of experimentation is an act of social system self-analysis andself-transformation. It is “a purposive, self-actuating, but not fully deterministic process.”27Friedmann brings the two ideas (mutual learning and evolutionary experimentation) togetherwhen he says that history can be viewed as a process of social learning “in which oldknowledge yields to new as it emerges from the interplay of theory and practice.”28A process of social learning is implicit in the power sharing arrangements First Nations areentering into with outside people and institutions as a means for exercising more control overtheir lives and land. The process occurs at different levels--in relationships between individualcommunity members, between the community and its consultants, between community andgovernment and/or industry participants in joint management arrangements, and between FirstNation and federal and provincial government negotiators in the treaty-making process. Theprocess of evolutionary experimentation can be understood from the level of a particularcommunity, up to the level of global society.25Fñm 185.26 E. Dunn, Economic and Social Development: A Process of Social Learnin2 (Baltimore: JohnsHopkins Press, 1971).27 Ibid., 241.28 Friedmann, 230.333.2.4 Cultural DevelopmentWhile the creation on an “insider-outsider dialectic” and a process for mutual learning mayhelp communities to advance toward ALM, it is no small undertaking. Even before the issueof co-optation arises is the issue of whether “traditional knowledge” still exists within a givencommunity. Many aboriginal communities have been stripped of their traditions, and withtheir collapse have been a host of social pathologies29--pathologi which Elias describes as,“indicators of serious damage to the core of aboriginal culture.”30 The question for aboriginalpeople determined to keep their cultural traditions vital is not merely one of how to relate theirtraditional knowledge to outside experts, but how to revive such knowledge within their owncommunities. This does not mean stepping back in time and returning to the past but ratherbringing the salient features of their cultures into the present and into the vision for the future.“Tradition”, viewed from this perspective of cultural development, is seen as evolving andprogressive. Elias points out that in many instances, “what appears to be an abandonment oftradition is, in fact, adaptive change continuous with tradition.”31 The need for a discoursebetween insider and outsider knowledge thus poses another challenge for the development ofALM.Cultural development has already been identified as a major component of aboriginal efforts todevelop ALM. A good base for understanding the evolving nature of contemporary aboriginalculture is provided in Elias’ description of three approaches to cultural development currentlybeing used by aboriginal people.32 These three approaches, each addressing a differentdimension of the same problem, are outlined below. The first is aimed at revitalizing culturaltraditions. This approach directs attention to a re-examination of local traditions in view ofhow they might be usefully applied to contemporary aboriginal life. The second approach is29 See Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Discussion Paper 1: Framing the Issues (Ottawa:Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1992.30 Elias, 138.31 Ibid 35.32j 137-139.34aimed at adopting “innovations” that compliment selected traditional practices. Attention hereis directed at examining the skills and knowledge available from non-aboriginal sources thatwill help serve aboriginal goals for economic self-reliance and self-government. Theobjective, according to Elias, is to begin, “merging innovation and tradition in newconstructions that serve aboriginal people in the realities of the Canadian context.”33 The finalapproach to cultural development described by Elias is to heal the wounds left when culturaltraditions have collapsed. This approach involves directing new and revitalized traditionstoward efforts to heal the social ills that have crippled so many aboriginal communities. It ispredicated on the belief that social pathologies such as substance abuse, spousal abuse, familybreakdown, violence, suicide, and dependency are direct consequences of the long history ofthe relationship between aboriginal people and Canadian society.Of course, as Elias notes, most cultural development initiatives will address all threedimensions of the problem at once. The important point, emphasized by Elias, is that it is upto aboriginal people themselves to decide what their limits are. The challenge belongs to themalone, “to balance the need for adaptation to the Canadian environment with the need forpreservation of aboriginal standards.”34 They must decide the means through which to“combine innovation with tradition” to overcome the obstacles to their economic, political andcultural development goals.The nature of the opportunities that aboriginal communities face will naturally inform suchdecisions. The following section outlines the broad legal and political opportunity structurethat exists for First Nations in B.C. to gain more control over local forest management. Thisprovides further context for the analysis of the KNT’s experience.Thid.35.353.3 LEGAL AND POLITICAL OPPORTUNITIES IN THE B.C. CONTEXTAboriginal people in B.C. live within a very different political and legal context from otherBritish Columbians. Recent legal and political developments have created the circumstanceswhere resource-based aboriginal communities in B.C. are well situated to take the lead indeveloping and implementing their own systems of community-based resource management.The legal and political developments that have created these circumstances are outlined below.3.3.1 Legal and Political DeveloDmentsAboriginal people describe their rights to be self-governing and their rights to the land as beingrooted in their history as First peoples. From an aboriginal perspective, these rights werenever surrendered and will always exist.35 The courts and the Canadian and BritishColumbian governments however, have only recently begun to recognize these rights. Inparticular, at the request of the federal government and the provinces, the British Parliamentpassed the Constitution Act in 1982. Section 35(1) of the states that, “existing aboriginaland treaty rights of the aboriginal people of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.” Thelegal definition of what exactly constitutes an “existing aboriginal right” has been left for thecourts to decide. Nevertheless, this limited form of recognition has served to provideopportunities through which First Nations can exercise control over the management of localland and resources.The legal concept of aboriginal rights arose out of the Royal Proclamation of 1763.36 TheProclamation recognized that Indian Nations continued to hold rights to their lands exceptwhere they voluntarily ceded their lands to the British Crown. With the exception of parts ofsouthern Vancouver Island, and the north-eastern section of the province, no treaties of cessionF. Plain, A Treatise on the Rights of Aboriginal Peoples of the Continent of North America, inThe Ouest for Justice: Aboriginal People and Aboriginal Rights, ed. M. Boldt and J. Long (Toronto: Universityof Toronto Press, 1985), 40.36 The Royal Proclamation of October 7. 1763, R.S.C., 1985, App. II, No. 1.36have been signed by First Nations in British Columbia. This has given rise to what is oftenreferred to as the Land Question in British Columbia.Judicial recognition that aboriginal rights still exist as part of the modem law of Canada, hasbeen slow in coming. In 1973, the Nish’ga of north-western British Columbia brought theircase before the Supreme Court of Canada in Calder v. A.G. of British Columbia.37 TheNish’ga had never signed a treaty and claimed that their aboriginal title to the land had,therefore, never been surrendered or extinguished. The Court split equally on the issue ofwhether the aboriginal rights of the Nish’ga were extinguished by virtue of the policies andlaws enacted by the colonial government. It was argued that laws providing for land grants,mineral claims, and forest licences implied the extinguishment of aboriginal title to, and rightsover, the land. The decision left many unanswered questions concerning the legal nature ofaboriginal rights and whether they have been extinguished even where no treaties have beensigned.The question was picked up again by the Gitksan and Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs in theirlegal struggle to have their rights of ownership and jurisdiction over their territories recognizedby British Columbia.38 After hearing almost four years of evidence for in the trial court,Chief Justice McEachem largely dismissed the evidence presented by the Gitksan andWet’suwet’en. The Court of Appeal however, was convinced by the evidence presented thatthe plaintiffs continued to hold an “aboriginal interest” in their territory. The five judgesunanimously agreed that, contrary to the decision of McEachem, the aboriginal interest, orrights of the Gitksan and Wet’ suwet’en in their territory had never been extinguished. TheCalder v. A.G. of British Columbia (1973), 344 D.L.R. (3d) 145 (S.C.C.).38 See both Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (1991), 79 D.L.R. (4th) 185 (B.C.S.C.).; andDelgamuukw v. British Columbia (1993), 5 W.W.R. 97 (B.C.C.A).37Court found furthermore, that these rights are protected under s. 35 of the Constitution Act,l982.While Delgamuukw dealt with the broader rights of aboriginal title and self-government, othercases brought before the courts deal with more specific rights. L v. Sparrow40,is one of themost far reaching of these. The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Sparrow went a longway to interpret what s. 35(1) means and to define the nature and scope of aboriginal fishingrights. The judgement stated that s. 35(1) must be dealt with “generously and liberally” toprotect aboriginal rights. The phrase “existing rights” the court interpreted as those rightswhich existed at the time of Constitutional enactment in 1982. It stressed that the definition ofwhat constitutes an existing right must be interpreted flexibly to permit the evolution ofaboriginal rights over time. The judgement established that an aboriginal right cannot beextinguished just because it has been regulated.Having thus interpreted s. 35(1), the court found that the right of aboriginal people to fish forfood and ceremonial purposes is an “existing right” protected under the Constitution. Theeffect of this, the court determined, is that the Indian food fishery takes priority over that ofother user groups including the commercial and sports fisheries. If an aboriginal person orgroup can prove to the court that a regulation has infringed upon their aboriginal right, thenthe onus is on the Crown to prove that the limitation is justified. The judgement in Sparrow,laid out a number of tests to be used to demonstrate whether a regulation is justifiable. Inaddition to demonstrating that the regulation is justifiable for conservation purposes, theCrown must show that the aboriginal group affected has been consulted with respect to theSection 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 states that, “existing aboriginal and treaty rights of theaboriginal people of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.” The legal definition of what exactly constitutesan “existing aboriginal right” has been left for the courts to decide.R. v. Sparrow (1990), 70 D.L.R. (4th) 385 (S.C.C.).38conservation measures being implemented. In his analysis of the case, Usher41 points out thatthe tests challenge the current approach to resource management and recognize the right ofaboriginal people to participate in the conservation and management of the resource. AsUsher puts it the Crown must “show not only that a particular regulation has the objective ofconservation, but that it is the most efficacious and acceptable from the aboriginalperspective.”42Decisions like Sparrow and Delgamuukw, in addition to giving legal force and meaning toaboriginal rights, have helped to define the legal obligation that the Crown has towardaboriginal people. An earlier case43 had established that the Crown must maintain a fiduciary,or trust-like relationship with aboriginal people and must act on behalf of their best interests.McEachern’s decision in Delgamuukw, stated that the Crown has a fiduciary obligation topermit, and not arbitrarily limit aboriginal use of vacant or unoccupied Crown land.”A Thisobligation requires the provincial government to consult with First Nations where a land usedecision may infringe upon aboriginal use of unoccupied Crown land. The judicial andconstitutional recognition of aboriginal rights, coupled with the legally enforceable fiduciaryobligation the Crown owes toward First Nations have been identified as major forces indriving the B.C. government to take steps to settle the Land Question.45Historically the position of the B.C. government has been to deny the existence of aboriginalrights in the province. Shortly before being voted out of office in 1991, the governmentfinally reversed its position. The new government then gave force to the statement byformally recognizing the inherent rights of aboriginal people to aboriginal title and self41 P. Usher, “Some Implications of the Sparrow Judgement for Resource Conservation andManagement,” Alternatives 18:2 (1991): 20-21.21.Guerin v. The Oueen (1984) 13 D.L.R. (4th) 321 (S.C.C.).Delgamuukw v.British Columbia, 216.F. Cassidy, “Concluding Comments,” in Reaching Just Settlements, ed. F. Cassidy (Lanzville:Oolichan Books, 1991), 86.39government.46 In 1993, First Nations, Canada, and British Columbia agreed to establish theB.C Treaty Commission to facilitate the process of treaty negotiations in the province. TheCommission was established on the recommendation of the tripartite B.C. Claims Task Force.Among the Task Force’s major recommendations was that,First Nations, Canada, and British Columbia establish a new relationship based onmutual trust, respect and understanding--through political negotiations.47It elaborated that,recognition and respect for First Nations as self-determining and distinct nations withtheir own spiritual values, histories, languages, territories, political institutions andways of life must be the hallmark of this new relationship.”48In the fall of 1993 the Commission began accepting “Statements of Intent” from First Nationsready to begin negotiating a treaty.In recognition that the negotiation of treaties will take some time, the province has made acommitment itself to negotiate “interim measure agreements.” This is to ensure that aboriginalinterests with regards to land and resources, are not undermined before or during the treatynegotiation process.49 The commitment of the province has been made clear,In the period leading up to the negotiation of treaties, the province is undertakingenhanced consultation to identify aboriginal rights and to negotiate mutually agreeablearrangements to ensure those rights are not infringed by resource managementactivities. These arrangements are frequently expressed through memoranda ofunderstanding that formalize new relationships between government agencies and FirstNations in areas such as planning and resource management, resource use and localeconomic benefits.5°Legal and political developments regarding aboriginal rights in B.C. are an important part ofthe context out of which contemporary First Nations community development initiatives areBritish Columbia Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs, Annual Report--1991/1992, March, 1992, 4.British Columbia Claims Task Force, Report of the British Columbia Claims Task Force, June 28,1991, 19.48d 16.The recommendation for the negotiation of interim measure agreements is made in the Task Forcereport, Thid., 65.British Columbia, B.C. Forest Practices Code Discussion Paper, November, 1993, 23-24.40emerging. The legal and political recognition of aboriginal rights is particularly significant foraboriginal communities directing their development efforts toward ALM. Having gained alegal basis for participating more fully in the management of local resources, First Nations arefinding new opportunities through which to exercise more control over local resourcemanagement. Changes in the forest management policies and regimes in B.C., are alsocreating new opportunities for ALM, as will be discussed below.3.3.2 Forest Management in B.C.Having served the province well as an engine for economic growth, the old growth forests onwhich the forest industry in B.C. has traditionally relied are now dwindling. While the annuallevel of harvest has increased over the past decade, so has the pressure to create moreprotected areas and change current harvesting practices to accommodate other forest values.In 1991, after consulting with the public, the B.C. Forest Resources Commission made veryclear that there had been a major shift in the values that British Columbians attach to theprovincial forests.51 The Commission reported a growing public concern for non-timber forestvalues such as recreation, wildlife, water quality, and biodiversity. This was accompanied bywhat the Commission characterized as, “a great deal of concern that the provincial forests arebeing overcut--that the present level of harvest is not sustainable in the long run.”52 Figure 3demonstrates how the total annual cut for the province has continued to increase. It alsodemonstrates that while the level of cut has been increasing, the number of direct forestindustry jobs has been steadily decreasing.The reason for the decline in forest industry employment the Forest Resources Commissionattributes, in part, to the concentration of control over the resource in the hands of a few large,51 Forest Resources Commission, The Future of Our Forests (Victoria: Forest Resources Commission,1991), 8.52 Forest Resources Commission, 80.HGURE3:CubiC Meters900000008000000070000000600000005000000040000000300000002000000010000000Comparison of Annual Volume Logged with DirectForest Industry Jobs in British Columbia (19614989)1.801.601.401.201.000.800.600.400.200.0041Jobs/i 000 Cubic Meters2.00019 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 1919 196162636465666768697071727374757677787980818283848586878889[after R. Travers, “Comparative Data Charts,” Forest Planning Canada 7:3 (1991):37.]42integrated forest companies.53 Public concerns stem from the fact that most of the availabletimber supply is tied up in long-term tenures held primarily by companies producing low valuecommodity products (pulp and paper), and employing fewer and fewer people in theirmanufacture.54 New entrants to the industry, with innovative ideas for producing value-addedwood products, and possibly creating more jobs, have been denied access to wood.55Another long standing issue in B.C. forestry concerns forest harvesting practices. B.C.environmental groups have directed much of their lobby efforts toward publicizing thedestructive impacts of such practices. In developing a new “Forest Practices Code,” theprovincial government has explicitly recognized the causes and nature of these impacts. Forexample, the government’s 1993 discussion paper on the new “Code” stated,Huge clearcuts, poorly constructed logging roads, and poorly planned harvesting inwatersheds have at times led to soil erosion, fish and wildlife habitat destruction, andloss of forest and rangeland biodiversity.56Fuelled by these types of concerns, there has been a growing lobby to decentralize control overforest management in British Columbia. This movement has been led by people andorganizations like Slocan Valley residents57,Herb Hammond58,the Tin Wis Coalition59 andthe Village of Hazelton.6° All have put forward proposals that would give communities moreauthority over the management of local forests. All contend that local people can better andmore responsibly manage local forests for social, economic and environmental well-being,Tn 1991 69% of harvesting rights in B.C. were controlled by the 10 largest forest manufacturingcompaniej (Forest Resources Commission, 37)S. Peel, “The Future of Our Forest,” Forest Planning Canada, 7:6 (1991): 5.Forest Resources Commission, 37.Forest Practices Code Discussion Paper, 1.Slocan Valley Community Forest Management Project: Final Report, (1975).8 H. Hammond, “Community Control of Forests,” Forest Planning Canada, 6:6 (1990):43-46; and H.Hammond, Seeing the Forest Among the Trees: The Case for Wholistic Forest Use (Vancouver: Polestar Press,1991).Tin Wis Coalition, “Community Control, Developing Sustainability, Social Solidarity” (Vancouver:Tin Wis oalition, 1991).0 Village of Hazelton, Framework for Watershed Management (Hazelton, B.C.: The Corporation of theVillage of Hazelton, 1991).43than can corporate or state managers making decisions from afar. Their arguments hinge mostfundamentally on the idea of “attachment to place” and the premise that the self-interest ofthose living within forest-based communities will dictate a more responsible approach to theneeds of both the community and the environment.The increased attention being focussed on community-based solutions is also being reflected ingovernment initiatives. The provincial Commission on Resources and Environment (CORE),for example, has been mandated to develop, implement and monitor both regional planningand community-based, participatory processes to consider land use and related resource andenvironmental management issues. CORE is also mandated by its legislation to specificallyensure aboriginal interests are taken into account. CORE has adopted a “shared decision-making” approach to land use planning and management where representatives of thoseinterests most directly affected by land use decisions sit down to negotiate solutions.Various other government initiatives form, what the province is calling, “a new comprehensiveland use and resource management strategy.”6’ These initiatives include, in addition toCORE:-the Protected Areas Strategy (PAS) which will identify unique parks and wilderness areasand decide on which should receive “protected area” status;-a Timber Supply Review to update timber inventory information so as to make betterinformed allocation decisions; and,-the B.C. Treaty Commission (described previously), to negotiate interim agreements aimedat protecting aboriginal rights and interests in the land.Consultation with First Nations is to form a major component of this new “comprehensive landuse strategy.” This is described in a discussion paper on a new Forest Practices Code for B.C.61 Forest Practices Code Discussion Paper (Victoria: Queens Printer, November, 1993): 1.44In the period leading up to the negotiation of treaties, the province is undertakingenhanced consultation to identify aboriginal rights and to negotiate mutually agreeablearrangements to ensure those rights are not infringed by resource managementactivities. These arrangements are frequently expressed through memoranda ofunderstanding that formalize new relationships between government agencies and FirstNations in areas such as planning and resource management, resource use and localeconomic benefits.62A search then, is underway in B.C. for new solutions to the centralized, sectoral andbureaucratic way in which resources have been managed. This, coupled with the formalrecognition by the provincial government of aboriginal rights, are creating new windows ofopportunity for the development of ALM in B.C.3.4 SUMfvIARYThis chapter has provided a contextual setting for the case study and contrasted the challengefor developing ALM with the opportunities that are emerging in the B.C. context. The majorchallenge faced by aboriginal communities in developing ALM has been identified as the needrebuild and maintain local culture and tradition while, at the same time, combining it with theknowledge that exists outside the community. The literature indicates that processes whichallow for mutual learning can best overcome the threat of co-optation which aboriginalcommunities face in their efforts to advance ALM.The second half of the chapter described the favourable political climate that exists in B.C. forthe advancement of ALM. There is widespread recognition in the province that pastapproaches to resource management and land use decision making have not been working.The search for new solutions, coupled with the province’s legal obligation toward aboriginalpeople, are creating new opportunities through which aboriginal communities can combine“innovation with tradition” in pursuit of their development goals. It may well be that the23-24.45lessons being learned in the development efforts of aboriginal communities in B.C. have muchto offer broader society in its attempts to foster better land and resource management.The context and theory set out in this chapter provide the point of departure for the case study.The case study which follows analyzes how the problem of finding means of combining and/orcollaborating insider and outsider knowledge has manifested itself within a particular B.C.Native community’s attempts to advance ALM. It focuses identifying and describing themeans through which the community has dealt with this fundamental challenge and analyzesthe results of its on-going efforts to advance ALM. The following chapter introduces the case-the people, the place and the issues involved.464.0 INTRODUCTION TO THE CASE STUDY: PEOPLE AM) FORESTRY INKYUOUOTThis chapter addresses the first two case study objectives listed in Chapter 1. It identifies thegoals underlying the KNT ‘s efforts to gain more control over local forestry management; andit examines the context out of which community efforts to advance ALM have arisen. Thechapter is divided into two main sections. The first introduces the people and the communitywhich is the focus of the case study. The second section describes the the local land base andforest management regime. Together the two sections establish the context for the case study.4.1 THE COMMUNITY OF KYUQUOTThe community of Kyuquot is part of a larger social system with linkages to a number of othergroups and communities. An attempt has been made to situate Kyuquot within this largercontext and to identify the different levels of “community” as it exists in Kyuquot. First, abrief introduction to Kyuquot and the history of its settlement is provided.4.1.1 IntroductionKyuquot is a remote, fishing village located within the northern temperate rainforest, inKyuquot Sound on the north west coast of Vancouver Island (see Figure 4). It has a mixedaboriginal and non-aboriginal population scattered among the numerous islands that break upthe coast line (see Figure 5). Approximately 150 Kyuquot band members live either on theHoupsitas reserve, or just offshore on Aktis Island which was the traditional Kyuquot villagesite. Across a small cove from Houpsitas is Walters Island where a non-Native population ofapproximately 85 is centered. Located here is a fish plant, a government wharf, a restaurant,general store and post office. A public school for grades 1-10 is located on the Houpsitas sideof the cove.47FIGURE 4: Kyuquot Location[after J.R. Griggs, “Developing Cooperative Management Systems for Common PropertyResources: Resolving Conflict in a West Coast Fishery,” (University of British Columbia:Masters Thesis, 1990), 114.]48FIGURE 5: Kyuquot Sound[after S. Kenyon, The Kyuguot Way: A Study of a West Coast (Nootkan) Community,(National Museum of Man, Mercury Series. Ottawa: Canadian Ethnology Service, PaperNo., 61, 1980).]49The population in Kyuquot swells in the summer months with commercial fishers and an ever-increasing number of visitors and recreationalists, which include pleasure boaters, kayakersand sports fishers. Kyuquot is a very different place in the winter, however, when thefishboats are gone and the rain and fog typical of the northern temperate rainforest roll in.High winds and winter storms can prevent anyone from coming or going for several days at atime.The remote location of Kyuquot, far removed from any urban centre, is accentuated by itsinaccessibility. The nearest urban centre is Campbell River on the east coast of VancouverIsland. It can be accessed from Kyuquot via boat to Fair Harbour then by a treacherous lengthof winding road that eventually connects to the Island Highway which leads to CampbellRiver. In total, the trip takes about 5-6 hours when the roads are free of snow and ice.Alternatively, there are scheduled daily flights by float plane to Gold River, which is a twohour drive away from Campbell River. Supplies are brought to Kyuquot by freighter fromGold River once a week.Approximately one-third of Kyuquot band members live off-reserve, mostly in Campbell Riverwhere they form a tight-knit community among themselves. The author’s observations andinquiries indicated that, for the most part, their ties with family members and friends still inKyuquot remain strong. Many Kyuquot families spend their winters in places like CampbellRiver, Tahsis or Victoria, where there are employment opportunities and where their olderchildren can complete the last two years of high school. Other families, who have memberssuffering from chronic health problems (especially the elderly), are forced to live off-reserveto receive medical attention. Often families living off-reserve will return to Kyuquot eachsummer for the fishing season.50Brief HistoryKyuquot people maintain their ancestors lived here from time immemorial. Undoubtedly thelong history of contact between Kyuquot people and Europeans has had a dramatic impact onthe lifestyles of Kyuquot people. Still, the written accounts of this history emphasize that theirstrong connection to, and reliance on, the land and sea has remained a fundamental part ofKyuquot culture and lifestyle.1According to the available documentation, the present-day Kyuquot Native Tribe, (KNT) wasoriginally composed of four separate tribes made up of fourteen extended family groups thatlived in village sites located at the mouth of the major rivers and inlets throughout KyuquotSound.2 People moved seasonally to different hunting and fishing camps throughout theSound to make optimal use of the range of resources available. The local groups would cometogether in the summer months and live on Aktis Island for offshore fishing and pelagicmammal hunting. The Checkleset people, who lived in Checkleset Bay to the north ofKyuquot Sound, amalgamated with the Kyuquot Native Tribe much later in Kyuquot’s history.Kenyon describes how early contact with the European newcomers during the late 1700’s waslimited and centered around trade, particularly in sea otter pelts. The primary effect of thisearly contact was, according to Kenyon, an increased year-round importance of the village atAktis.3 By 1800, the sea otter trade had declined, and while Kyuquot people continued to huntand trap for the fur trade, Kenyon maintains it was not until the middle part of that century1 See for example, S. Kenyon, The Kyuguot Way: A Study of a West Coast (Nootkan) Community,National Museum of Man, Mercury Series (Ottawa: Canadian Ethnology Service, Paper No., 61, 1980); and 3.Griggs, “Developing Cooperative Management Systems for Common Property Resources: Resolving Cross-Cultural Conflict in a West Coast Fishery,” UBC Planning Papers, Canadian Planning Issues #29, (Vancouver:School of Community and Regional Planning, 1991), 69-79.2 The traditional political groupings and systems of resource use and management have been documentedto varying degrees by, P.Drucker, The Northern and Central Nootkan Tribes, Bureau of American Ethnology,Bulletin 144 (Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1951), 222-225; Griggs, 71-74; and Kenyon, 34-37.Kenyon, 39.51that Kyuquot people became more involved in a commercial economy and their lifestylesunderwent significant changes.4The first major trade commodity to have an impact on Kyuquot after the sea otter, was“dogfish” oil which was used by early loggers to grease skids. The seasonal rotations thatKyuquot people followed now centered on fishing dogfish in the summer and trapping for fursin the winter. Sealing was the other major activity and source of high income for manyKyuquot families during the latter half of the 19th century. After the demand for dogfish oilended in 1890, and the sealing industry was put to an end by the Pelagic Treaty signed in1912, new commercial developments arose which attracted Kyuquot people, who soon becamefully integrated into the cash economy.Canneries which opened in various locations around Vancouver Island supplied periodic workfor men in fishing and women in processing. Local work was available at a Japanese ownedand operated saltery near Kyuquot, in Chamiss Bay, which shipped salt herring and chumsalmon to China until trade difficulties between Japan and China forced its closure in the1930’s. A whaling station operating on Cachalot Inlet from 1908-1926 also employed localKyuquot men.Commercial fishing has since become the major economic enterprise of Kyuquot people. Withthe establishment in 1930 of the first cooperative fisheamp on Walters Island, the effect of thecommercial fishing industry on Kyuquot lifestyle has been far reaching. According toKenyon’s account,Ibid.52“Until this time, all commercial enterprises had been at a distance and people returnedto their traditional village when they had worked sufficiently. With the fishcamplocated in the harbour of Walters Cove, however, a whole range of new experienceswere introduced. A White community, small at first, but increasing year by yearbegan to settle in the new Cove.”5During the 1950’s, the Checleset people moved from their traditional villages north ofKyuquot, to the more commercialized settlements in Kyuquot. The Checleset Tribe thenformally amalgamated with the Kyuquot Band for administration purposes set out in the IndianAct.By 1974, most Kyuquot people had moved from Aktis to Houpsitas, which became the majornative settlement in Kyuquot, just across the cove from the non-native community on WaltersIsland. Since then, interactions between people in the two settlements have increased, and in anumber of ways they operate as one community. Conversations and observations with bothKyuquot native and non-native residents, during the course of the research, along withKenyon’s account of native/non-native relations in Kyuquot, point to a generally cooperativerelationship. Children attend school together, everyone uses the same post office and store,fishers work side-by-side on their fish boats, and many residents share the same concerns overthe logging practices in Kyuquot Sound and other local issues. Nevertheless, Kyuquot bandmembers are governed by different sets of laws, enforced by different sets of authorities thanare other Kyuquot residents. The relationship between aboriginal and non-aboriginal residentsof Kyuquot appears to be a dynamic one which is constantly changing. What exactlyconstitutes the “community” in Kyuquot requires some elaboration.5 ThJ.,5353Definition of CommunityThis case study is, in part, a case study of a community development process. The definitionof “community” being adopted for these purposes is one used by Roberts. A community,according Roberts, “exists when a group of people perceives common needs and problems,acquires a sense of identity, and has a common set of objectives.”6 In recounting the efforts ofthe Kyuquot Native Tribe (KNT), to gain more control over local forest management, it hasbecome clear that at certain times, for particular purposes, both Native and non-Native groupsin Kyuquot have acted as one community. At these times, discussed in the next chapter, theefforts of the KNT simply cannot be separated from those of the non-Native residents ofKyuquot. Over time, however, the sense of identity and aspirations of aboriginal people inKyuquot have grown separate from those of the rest of the population in Kyuquot. The KNTbegan to follow a path quite distinctly its own.Throughout the thesis the term “community”, unless stated otherwise, refers to the entireresident population of Kyuquot--both Native and non-Native. Although the entire populationof Kyuquot often acts as one community, the aboriginal people in Kyuquot form a communityamong themselves. The thesis refers to the aboriginal community in Kyuquot as either theKNT or the “Band.” While the study is concerned with the development efforts of the KNT inparticular, it recognizes that these efforts have at times been part of a larger community effort.4.1.2 The Kvuauot Native TribeToday the Kyuquot Native Tribe (KNT), has approximately 360 members with 150-175 livingon reserve depending on the time of year. Members living off-reserve, primarily in CampbellRiver, for the most part retain strong ties to Kyuquot and being a member of the KNT is an6 H. Roberts, Community Development: Learning and Action (Toronto: University of Toronto Press,1979):27.54important source of identity.7 Many, including the Kyuquot Hereditary Chief, felt compelledto leave Kyuquot due to lack of employment opportunity and a serious lack of housing andhealth care. As more housing is now becoming available in Houpsitas, many band membersare contemplating “moving back home.”The KNT Band Council, with its powers conferred on it by the federal Indian Act, is the onlyformal local government authority in Kyuquot. The KNT Council’s jurisdiction does notextend to the non-Native community in Kyuquot. While the KNT has chosen to select itsChief and Council through an electoral process, the hereditary system remains strong withinthe KNT. The traditional rites of chieftainship, expressed in the Kyuquot concept of “HaHoulthe,” remain a fundamental part of Kyuquot culture. The Ha-Houlthe, from a Kyuquotperspective, is the source of aboriginal title. Each of the 14 local group territories in KyuquotSound have associated songs, dances, masks and ceremonies which, along with rights andresponsibilities to use and manage the land, water and resources within the territory, form theHa-houlthe which have been passed down through generations along family lines. Todayeveryone in the KNT is well aware of who the hereditary chiefs are and which families “own”(have stewardship responsibilities toward) which river systems within the Tribal Territory.Development GoalsThrough its development initiatives, the KNT has expressed its desire to retain more of theeconomic benefits of forestry within its Tribal Territory. More importantly, however, itwishes to retain these benefits in perpetuity--the KNT is interested in long-term communitystability, not the type of short-term economic gains that appear to have been the driving forcebehind forestry operations in the Kyuquot Territory to date. While the KNT is by no meansagainst logging, it wants to see forestry practiced differently within its Territory. It wouldSee Kenyon, 130, where she describes the “band solidarity” that exists among Kyuquot people livingboth on and off-reserve. The sense of solidarity was confirmed by the author’s interviews and observations.55promote logging which would allow economic benefits flow to the community in perpetuity,allow traditional livelihoods (fishing, hunting) to be protected, and allow people to have morecontrol over their lives and express their collective aboriginal responsibility toward the land.Like most aboriginal communities, the KNT wants to be more self-reliant and break out of thedependency trap in which it finds itself. In looking to aboriginal land management (ALM) asa means for achieving self-reliance, the KNT has a number of underlying objectives whichlargely correspond to the ALM objectives identified in Chapter 3.These goals are implicit in the development initiatives of the KNT described in Chapter V.They have also been made explicit in a number of statements the KNT has made, to the press,in correspondences with government and forest company officials, in Band CouncilResolutions and in internal community planning documents. Some of these statements arelisted below. An attempt has been made to group the statements under the headings ofeconomic self-reliance, self-government, ecological integrity and cultural autonomy, tocorrespond to the ALM objectives in Chapter 3. This has been somewhat arbitrary. Thestatements themselves reveal, the interrelatedness and inseparability of these objectives. ForKyuquot people, the maintenance of ecological integrity within their Territory flows naturallyout of their goals to strengthen cultural autonomy. For a culture so intimately tied to the land,protecting one necessarily means protecting the other. ALM is a means for exercising HaHoulthe, and the exercise of Ha-Houlthe speaks to all four objectives at once.56Economic Self-Reliance“We must have Band management responsibility for resources and gain economic benefitsfrom their use.”8“The Kyuquot Native Tribe desires community economic and social stability.”9Self-Governmentj’he Kyuquot Native Tribe desires increased self-government in the Kyuquot Tribal Territory“We have the right and the responsibility to protect our Territory from anything which mayharm it, and therefore limit us from thriving.”1’“We have the right and responsibility of Self-Government and to plan and administer programsfor our own People, and the resources of our Traditional Tetory.”12Ecological Integrity/Cultural Autonomy“It is our responsibility to our children and their children to come to ensure the integrity of ourland and sea resources for ourselves and our descendants.”13“The future of our community, ourselves, and our descendants depends to a large extent on theland, sea, ski, forest, fish, wildlife and other natural resources within the KyuquotTeto.”1“The Kyuquot Native Tribe desires... to express our Stewardship Responsibility over theKyuquot Tribal Territory. . . to ensure proper resource management and rebuilding of resourcesin the Kyuquot Tribal Territory.15we require these watersheds to protect our traditional way of life and. . .in order toaccomplish this objective these watersheds must be managed as a whole and not in a piecemealbasis.”16“There must be respect for all living things, forest management must be on a watershed basisand managed according to the type of ecosystem of each area of that watershed with full8 Kyuquot Native Tribe, “Our Lands, Our Resources, Our Government,” Discussion paper, October1992, 3.Kyuquot Native Tribe, Band Council Resolution, January 5, 1993.10 Ibid.Kyuquot Native Tribe, “Our Lands...,” 1.l213 Kyuquot Native Tribe, “Position of the KNT Regarding Forest Resource Development in the KyuquotTribal Territory,” May 3, 1991.Kyuquot Native Tribe, “Our Lands...,” 1.Kyuquot Native Tribe, Band Council Resolution, February 15, 1993.16 R. Leo, Letter to Minister of Forests, Dec.2, 1991.57respect given to the other animals, plants, river and delta systems which rely on the forest tokeep the system whole.”17“Respect for all living things is fundamental. We are all one. Each of us is dependent on theother.”18“The Kyuquot people are now committed to be involved in the natural resource managementand planning from the very beginning of the process. We are bringing our traditional values tothe current forestry and fisheries management practices. Our traditional valus say: ‘theforest, the rivers, the sea and air are all one, each dependent on the other.”14.1.3 Other Players and Their InterestsThe relations between the KNT with other interests and organizations have often influenced theoutcomes of the KNT’s development efforts. Some of these organizations are introducedbriefly here.Kyuguot Economic and Environmental Protection SocietyThe Kyuquot Economic and Environmental Protection Society, known as “KEEPS,” is acommunity environmental group (with both Native and non-Native members), formed inresponse to the proliferation of clearcuts that became visible from the village of Kyuquot in the1980’s. KEEPS has been very active in working with other larger environmental groups topublicize the poor logging practices in Kyuquot, and in lobbying for better, moreenvironmentally sound forest practices and land use decision malcing.KEEPS has lost some of its earlier momentum as the KNT has itself become more active inthese areas. While KEEPS no longer has the strong basis within the community which it oncehad20, it still plays an important role in connecting Kyuquot forestry and land use issues to thewider public. For example, it most recently sponsored, along with the KNT, a study which17 Kyuquot Native Tribe, “Kyuquot Traditional Tribal Territory Resource Management in ForestrySector.”18 Ibid.19 Kyuquot Native Tribe, “Regarding resource extraction in the Kyuquot Tribal Territory,” Pressrelease,9tober 5, 1991.According to KEEPS director Tom Pater fewer and fewer people come to meetings and communityinterest in the activities of KEEPS has dropped significantly. Tom Pater, interview by author, Kyuquot, B.C.,June 1, 1993.58showed the serious effects that proposed logging in the Tahsish-Kwois watershed would haveon the stability and channel morphology of the rivers.21Nuu-Chah-Nulth Tribal CouncilThe KNT is the northern most tribe within the Nuu-Chah-Nulth Tribal Council (NTC). TheNTC has 14 member Tribes with territories spanning over most of the west coast of VancouverIsland. The NTC states its primary objective as being “to provide advisory services tomember Tribes to enable the establishment of self government within our TraditionalTerritories extending from Brooks Peninsula (north of Kyuquot to Sheringham Point (south ofPort Renfrew).”22The NTC provides an effective lobbying function for the KNT, lobbying at high levels forchanges in government policies and legislation as they relate to aboriginal people. Under thefederal government’s Comprehensive Claims Policy of 1980, the NTC filed a declaration andclaim to the Traditional Territories of its member tribes spanning over most of the west coastof the Island. The political clout carried by the NTC makes it an important vehicle throughwhich the KNT can apply for and receive funding for its various development initiatives.The NTC has been very encouraging and supportive of initiatives being taken by the KNT andoften hold the KNT up as an example to other tribes within their membership which arestruggling with similar community and resource development issues.21 R. Kellerhals, “Effects of the Proposed Tahsish-Kwois Forest Management Plan on the Stability andChannel Morphology of Kwois Creek and the Lower Tahsish River,” Report prepared for Kyuquot Economic andEnviromnta1 Protection Society (KEEPS) and the Kyuquot Band, 1993.Nuu-Chah-Nulth Tribal Council, “Nuu-Chah-Nulth Land Question: Land Sea and Resources,” August1991.59Comox-Strathcona Regional District23Kyuquot is located within the Comox-Strathcona Regional District which encompasses 451,113hectares on the northwest coast of Vancouver Island.24 The Regional District has directorsrepresenting each of the three major villages within the area, and one representing “Area G”which includes Kyuquot and the entire area outside the three villages. A long-time non-Nativeresident of Kyuquot, and founding member of KEEPS recently retired as the director for AreaG. Another non-Native resident and director of KEEPS has taken over the seat on theRegional District. The Regional District has little direct influence over life in Kyuquot.However, since there is no formal local government body in Kyuquot outside the KyuquotBand (which has no jurisdiction outside the reserve), the directorship has been viewed by boththe past and present directors, as a means for accessing information and attending meetings togive Kyuquot residents at least some representation in government.264.2 KYUQUOT TRIBAL TERRITORYThe Kyuquot Tribal Territory includes the combined areas traditionally used by both theKyuquot and Cheeleset Tribes. It encompasses almost 150,000 hectares spanning from CapeCook on the Brooks Peninsula, down to Rugged Point at the bottom of Kyuquot Sound (Figure6). The Territory extends out to sea to the edge of the continental shelf and inland to theheight-of-land of the Vancouver Island Mountain Range. It encloses 8-10 major watershedsdraining into the numerous coastal inlets which carve up the rugged coastline. Most of thesteep, mountainous terrain is covered with rich, dense old growth forests. While logging hasgone on in the Territory since the 1940’s, there are still five major watersheds which retainhigh wilderness values.2723 Information for this section has been drawn from personal communications with Sam Kayra, and TomPater (past and present directors of “Area G” of the Comox-Strathcona Regional District).24WSLAC 9.25 These are Zeballos, Tahsis and Gold River.26 Sam Kayra, Interview by author, Kyuquot, B.C., June 4, 1993; and Tom PaLer, Interview by author,Kyuquot,B.C., June 1, 1993.L7 Briitsh Columbia, “Towards a Protected Areas Strategy” (Victoria: Queens Printer, 1992).[afterKyuquotNativeTribeResourceMaps,SoforConsultants,1990]614.2.1 General LanduseOver 99% of the land within the Territory is Provincial Forest Land with only 560 hectaresfalling under private ownership or Indian Reserve status. An additional 518 hectares isdesignated as Provincial Park (Rugged Point) and there are three Ecological Reserves withinthe Territory which have been set aside to protect unique and endangered ecosystems. Theremaining productive forest land base within the Territory has been allocated, under variousforms of tenure, to seven of the major forest companies with operations in B.C. Whilelogging has been the dominant land use in the Territory for the past 50 years, fish habitat,wildlife, biodiversity, recreation, wilderness, tourism and cultural heritage have becomeincreasingly important resource values within the Territory.28The long history of logging in the Territory (and indeed throughout the west coast) which hasproceeded with little regard for these non-timber forest values, has created a high level ofcontroversy and conflict and has brought into question the efficacy of the policies and tenuresystems under which forest management takes place in Kyuquot. Various provincial land useplanning exercises focussing on Vancouver Island in the early 1990’s caused logging to betemporarily deferred in a number of the watersheds within the Kyuquot Tribal Territory.29In 1992, the various planning processes were rolled together under the province’s new“Protected Areas Strategy.”3°Under this strategy the Tahsish-Kwois, Power-Battle andNasparti watersheds (refer to Figure 6) have been designated as “study areas” and logging hasbeen deferred in these areas while long-term land use planning for the whole of Vancouver28 WSLAC, p.1029 Two year deferrals were granted under the provincial Cabinet’s Old Growth Project in September1990. Eighteen month deferrals were then granted in January 1992 to allow the newly established Commission onResources and Environment to carry out its regional land use planning process on the Island. British Columbia,Ministry of Forests and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, “Interim Timber Harvesting StrategyAnnounced, (press release), January 21, 1992. Other land use planning processes affecting Kyuquot Territoryhave included, Parks Plan 90 (Ministry of Parks), Wilderness for the ‘90’s (Ministry of Forests). WSLAC, 28.30 British Columbia, “Towards a Protected Areas Strategy,” Map-brochure, May 1992.62Island is underway.31 In the meantime, forest policies and practices are coming under heavyscrutiny as it is becoming widely recognized that a new approach to forest management isneeded to accommodate the diverse number of interests that have a stake in forestrymanagement today.4.2.2 Ministry of ForestsKyuquot Territory lies within the Campbell River Forest District. The Ministry of Forestsdistrict office in Campbell River holds the primary responsibility for forest management withinthe Kyuquot Territory. The district administers the terms of various harvesting agreements,and carries out field activities in protection, silviculture, and recreation management andapproves the five-year management and working plans submitted by licensees. The regionaloffice in Vancouver, is charged with supervising these operations while the MOF’s centralbranches in Victoria provide the policy and procedural guidelines which the district officesmust abide by.4.2.3 Forest CompaniesThere are currently seven major forest companies with Forest Licences giving them rights toharvest timber in the Kyuquot Tribal Territory. The companies, and the major areas whereeach has been operating are listed in Table 1 below. These “chart areas” are not fixed andcompanies trade them among each other. Interfor, for example, has taken over HecateLogging’s chart area in the Ououkinish River drainage, and Hecate has moved its operationssouth into an area outside the Kyuquot Territory previously charted by Interfor. Figure 7 is amap showing Forest Licence operating areas as they are currently distributed among thecompanies.31 The Commission on Resources and Environment (CORE) is expected to submit its land userecommendations for Vancouver Island by the end of January, 1994.63TABLE 1: Forest Licence Holders with Charted Areas inKyuquot Tribal TerritoryFOREST COMPANY MAJOR CHART AREAInternational Forest Products Chamiss Bay-Malksope(Interfor) Cachalot-NarrowgutWestern Forest Products Power-BattleHecate Logging Ououkinish R.MacMillan Bloedel Tahsish-KwoisFletcher Challenge Artlish R.Canadian Pacific Forest Products Kaouk R.Canadian Forest Products Upper Tahsish R.Each of these companies face different issues with respect to their operations within theKyuquot Territory. The case study focuses on Interfor and Western Forest Products (WFP),as these are the companies with which the KNT has attempted to work cooperatively. Theinterests of each of these two companies are discussed in the following chapter. Both describethemselves as family owned, B.C. companies, with long-term view of themselves in the forestindustry in B.C.3232 Tom Lundgren, Assistant Chief Forester, International Forest Products Ltd, Interview by author,Vancouver, B.C., April 26, 1993; and Bill Dumont, Chief Forester, Western Forest Products Ltd., Interview byauthor, Vancouver, B.C., May 4, 1993.64FIGURE 7: Forest Licence Operating Areas inthe Kyuquot Tribal Territory[adapted from Ministry of Forests, Campbell River Forest District Map of Licence OperatingAreas for the Kyuquot Timber Supply Block as of February, 1994].654.2.4 Other Government AgenciesNumerous other government ministries and agencies are involved in the management ofresources in Kyuquot Tribal Territory. While each has specific management responsibilitiesfor specific resources, they also have the opportunity, through a referral process, to influencewhat goes into the management and working plans and pre-harvest silviculture prescriptionsprepared by forest companies.Referral agencies include, various branches of the B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands andParks--in particular the Fish and Wildlife Branch which is responsible for the management andprotection of wildlife and freshwater fisheries resources; the federal Department of Fisheriesand Oceans with responsibility for saltwater fisheries, the B.C. Ministries of Tourism, andEnergy, Mines and Petroleum Resources.4.2.5 Forest PolicyForest policy as it has evolved in B.C. has had a dramatic impact on the practice and pace oflogging within the Kyuquot Tribal Territory. The following outlines some of the effects ofB.C. forest policy as it has been applied in Kyuquot Tribal Territory.TenureThere are three types of tenure arrangements in the Kyuquot Territory which give forestcompanies the right to harvest timber. As already discussed, each of the seven major forestcompanies operating in the Territory holds a Forest Licence which gives it the right to harvesta certain volume within a designated “chart” area. Such licences have a term of 15 years andare replaceable every five years. Once an area has been harvested and regenerated accordingto the specifications of the Minister of Forests, the licensee charts a new area within the TSA.Forest Licences are the major form of tenure in the Kyuquot Territory and harvesting underthese licences accounts for almost 90% of the planned annual harvest for 1992-1996 within66Kyuquot Territory (See Table 2). Licensees are required to prepare Management and WorkingPlans every five years which are submitted to the MOF and reviewed by the public and othergovernment agencies before they are finally approved by the MOF. Annual plans include 5-Year Plan updates, and site-specific Pre-Harvest Silviculture Prescriptions’ PHSP’ sdetail the harvesting methods to be used, potential problems with regenerating the site, renewalstandards to be achieved and other resource values of concern. These too are reviewed by thepublic and referral agencies prior to approval by the Forest District office in Campbell River.TABLE 2: Planned Annual Harvest and Tenure Commitments for1992-96 in Kyuguot Tribal TerritoryTenure Kyuquot Tribal Territory PlannedAnnual Harvest for 1992-96 (m3)Forest Licences* 717,733Timber Sale Licences* 80,000Timber Licences 250,000**(after Kyuquot Model Forest Proposal, 1991)*The volumes allocated under forest licences and timber salelicences in Kyuquot Territory account for 48% of the AAC forthe Strathcona TSA.**Thjs volume is not included in the AAC for the TSA.Rights to harvest relatively small volumes of timber are allocated under Timber Sale Licenceswhich are generally awarded through a public competition process to Small Business operatorsin the Territory. These are short term licences and management responsibilities are usuallyassumed by the MOF. There are a total of 8 Timber Sale Licences currently active in theKyuquot Tribal Territory.33Finally, a significant volume of wood is removed from the Kyuquot Territory under theauthority of Timber Licences. These are an old form of area-based tenure which are nowbeing phased out. These tenures grant the licencee the right to harvest everything within theRory Annet, Resource Officer-Planning, Ministry of Forests, Campbell River Forest District,Personal Communication, February, 3, 1994.67designated area at any time up to the tenure expiry date. After expiry, the land reverts back tothe Crown. Harvesting that occurs on Timber Licences is not included as part of the AAC forthe TSA and the rate of harvest within these tenures has not, traditionally, been regulated bythe MOF. A 1991 amendment to the Forest Act34 now permits Timber Licence expiry datesto be extended to enable the MOF to regulate the annual harvest on these tenures.The volume-based forest licences which make up the vast majority of tenure in KyuquotTerritory, have been widely criticised35 for the lack of incentive they provide for licensees topractice intensive silviculture.36 Although the “evergreen” nature (constant renewability) ofForest Licences practically guarantees licensees the right to continue to harvest a certainvolume, the area over which the cut can be applied always changes. Once a company harvestsan area, there is no guarantee that it will return to harvest the next rotation--it simply charts anew area in which to harvest its quota. Companies with volume-based licences, therefore,lack the security necessary for long term investment in one area. There is no incentive to doanything beyond the minimum MOF requirements for restocking.The form of tenure in Kyuquot creates other concerns from the community’s perspective. Theevergreen licences make it almost impossible for new entrants to the industry to obtainharvesting rights. With all the available AAC already allocated among existing tenure holdersthe possibility for establishing area-based tenures for community forests and aboriginal forestryis very slim. As it stands, the major logging companies operating in the Kyuquot Territorybring their workers in from communities on the east coast of the Island--harvest the old growthin Kyuquot Territory and remove it for processing to their mills located outside Kyuquot. ThisSection 25.1 of the Forest Act contains this amendment which was put in force on March 12, 1991.See, Forest Resources Commission, 42.36 Intensive siliviculture involves techniques such as thinning, brushing, weeding and fertilization aimedat improving yields on forest stands.68situation has left the community of Kyuquot to bear the costs of local timber harvesting, whilethe benefits flow elsewhere.Rate and Concentration of HarvestLogging began in Kyuquot Tribal Territory in the 1940’s when several of the more accessiblevalleys were harvested to provide building materials for the war effort. For the next 20 yearslogging on the Island remained concentrated on the east coast where there was still enough oldgrowth forests to support the mills located there and on the mainland coast. As theseaccessible old growth stands were logged out, the B.C. Ministry of Forests (MOF) begangranting established forest companies secure tenures within the Kyuquot Territory to harvestthe old growth they needed for their mills and established markets.37 By the 1980’s thevolume being logged annually within the Kyuquot Territory had increased from less than900,000 cubic metres in the 1940’s and 50’s, to more than 6,000,000 m3 (see Table 3below).38TABLE 3: Total Areas Logged in Kyuquot Tribal TerritoryTotal Areas Logged*and Approximate Volume and ValueArea Volume ValueDecade (ha) (cu. m) (1990 $)1940’s 1,238 879,615 $189.11 7.2251950’s 1,233 876,061 $188,353,1151960’s 6.548 4.653,963 $1,000,602,0451970s 3,835 2,725,918 $586,072,370I 980s 8,703 6,185,737 $1 ,329.933,455Total 21555 15,321,294 $3,294,078,210Excludlng Tn. Fai’m Uc.nc. arias[after Kyuquot Native Tribe Resource Maps, SoforConsultants, 1990]The level of cut has been set to theoretically achieve a sustained yield over an area much largerthan the Kyuquot Tribal Territory. Forest companies, therefore, object to the use of the termKyuquot Native Tribe, “Model Forest Proposal,” February 28, 1992, 13.Kyuquot Native Tribe Resource Maps, Sofor Consultants Ltd., 1990.69“overcufting,” often used in the media and by Kyuquot residents when referring to landswithin Kyuquot Territory.39 What is indisputable is that the level of cut deemed by the MOFto be sustainable over a large area is being concentrated in the Kyuquot Territory where thereare still relatively large stands of old growth.40 The issue of whether or not overcutting isoccurring, is an issue of scale.The sustained yield policy objective of the Ministry of Forests is implemented through amechanism called the Allowable Annual Cut (AAC) which controls the volume of timberharvested annually within a given management unit. Such management units take the form ofeither Tree Farm Licences (TFL’s), where management responsibilities fall to the licencee, orTimber Supply Areas (TSA’s), where the MOF retains the responsibility for management.The MOF calculates the AAC for the entire TSA then distributes the volume to be cut amongthe forest companies which are licensed to harvest a certain quota within broadly designated“chart areas” throughout the TSA.The AAC is determined on the basis of numerous social and economic considerations and onforest growth and yield analyses. A complex computer modelling procedure which considers avariety of different land use scenarios and harvesting levels is used as an aid in determining theAAC. Central to the determination of the AAC is accurate forest inventory information. Thisis contained in a technical “yield analysis” prepared for each TSA. As the Forest ResourcesCommission describes,A yield analysis in simple terms, looks at the size of the accessible and operableforested land and calculates the volume of wood that can be grown on the land based ona particular management regime. Currently, this volume is based on the len1gth of timeit takes for a stand to reach and maintain its maximum annual growth rate.4Bill Dumont, Chief Forester, Western Forest Products, Interview by author, Vancouver, B.C., May4, 1993.38-42.41 British Columbia, Forest Resources Commission, The Future of Our Forests, (Victoria: QueensPrinter, April 1991),81.70The basic formula for determining the sustained yield has remained essentially unchanged since1945 when sustained yield forestry became government policy.42 The volume of maturetimber is divided by the age at which the future sustained yield forest reaches its maximumannual growth rate (rotation age). To this the mean annual growth of the immature treeswithin the unit is added to obtain a figure which represents the level of harvest that cantheoretically be sustained in perpetuity within the management unit:Timber Stock (mature) + Mean Annual Increment AACRotation AgeThe calculation is subject to serious criticisms which can be summarized as follows:43-It is based on inaccurate and often outdated forest inventory data;-The maximum volume rotation does not take into account the ecological effects of talcing outa succession of harvests at such short rotations, nor does it take into account differingeconomic values between species, stand ages, and quality of wood; and-The size and dimensions of the logs that are cut and brought to market constantly change asdetermined by the market. The utilization standards which go into the calculation of thevolume of harvestable (mature) timber do not adequately reflect what occurs in practice.Kyuquot Tribal Territory falls within the Strathcona Timber Supply Area (TSA) administeredby the District MOF office in Campbell River. The Strathcona TSA is divided into threetimber supply blocks. The Kyuquot Timber Supply Block (KSB) lies to the west of theVancouver Island Mountain Range. It is rich in old growth forests, and encompasses theKyuquot Tribal Territory. The other two supply blocks in the TSA are on the east coast whererelatively little old growth remains and where little of the second growth is ready to beharvested.42 G. MeG. Sloan, (Commissioner), Report of the Commissioner Relating to the Forest Resources ofBritish Columbia, (Victoria: King’s Printer, 1945).See Forest Resource Commission, 80-83; and K., Drushka, Stumped: The Forest Industry inTransition (Vancouver: Douglas and McIntyre, 1985).71Once the AAC is determined for the TSA, it is distributed among the tenure holders who canapply it in designated areas within the TSA. In practice, because most of the major companieswith harvesting rights in the TSA hold some form of tenure within the KSB, a disproportionateamount of the cut has been, and continues to be, concentrated within the Kyuquot SupplyBlock. For example the KSB contains 61.48% of the total net productive forest land base ofthe Strathcona TSA, yet 71% of the volume harvested within the TSA from 1985 to 1990,came out of the KSB. Similarly, the Kyuquot Tribal Territory makes up only 30% of thetotal land base of the TSA, yet 48% of the AAC has been concentrated there.45The result has been a concentration of cutting in the Kyuquot area, at levels thatenvironmentalists and Kyuquot residents deem unsustainable. There is a great deal of concernwithin the community of Kyuquot over the impacts that the rate of cut within watersheds ishaving on the river systems in Kyuquot Sound. To address the issue, many, including KEEPSand the KNT, have argued that the KSB should constitute a separate management unit with itsown yield analysis and resulting AAC. In 1991 the Western Strathcona Local AdvisoryCouncil (WSLAC)”6recommended that, “a sustainable level of timber harvesting should beachieved within the Kyuquot Timber Supply Block (vs. the Strathcona TSA).”47 Although itdid not refer specifically to the Kyuquot Timber Supply Block, the Forest ResourcesCommission has also argued for the use of smaller management units throughout the provincestating,The Forest Resources Commission believes that determining AACs on the smallersupply block levels. . . will produce a far more accurate picture of feasible harvest supplyfrom the forest.. 48WSLAC,.41.Model Forest Proposal,. 846 WSLAC was a multi-stakeholder group of government agency, industry and communityrepresentatives set up by the MOF to develop a strategy for the sustainable development of resources in theWestern Strathcona Area, which includes the Kyuquot Supply Block. The WSLAC initiative is discussed ingreater detail in Chapter 5.WSLAC, 42.Forest Resources Commission, 83.72The pressure to revamp the process for determining the AAC for the Strathcona TSA hascontinued to increase. In November 1992, a consultant group under the direction of a forestcompany with operations in the Kyuquot Territory and the Kyuquot Native Tribe, completed aseparate yield analysis for the KSB. Using the most conservative assumptions, the reportshowed cutting levels to be at least 40% higher than what could be sustained using the MOF’ sown methods for calculating sustained yield.49 This, coupled with the temporary withdraw ofthe Tahsish-Kwois and Nasparti-Power-Battle watersheds from the timber supply under theprovince’s Protected Area Strategy, led the District MOF to reduce the AAC in the TSA. InJanuary 1993 the Campbell River District Manager announced an 11 % reduction in the AACover the Strathcona TSA and an 18% reduction specifically in the Kyuquot Supply Block. Themethod by which such reductions were determined remains a mystery and the arbitrary natureby which the AAC has been determined in the TSA is coming under increasing fire from allquarters, including industry.50Forest PracticesForestry as practiced in Kyuquot Sound, mostly during the 1970’s and 80’s, has beenportrayed by the media and environmentalists as among the most environmentally destructivefound anywhere.51 The area around the Sound has been described in the media as a “forestryembarrassment,” a “mess,” and an “international black eye.”52 Both MOF officials and forestcompany executives have been quoted in the media as admitting that “mistakes were made” inKyuquot, that logging has made a “mess” of the area and even that, “there’s been someT.M. Thomson and Associates, “Timber Supply Analysis of Strathcona TSA for Kyuquot TSB,Sayward TSB and Loughborough TSB,” Report prepared for International Forest Products Ltd., and the KyuquotNative Tribe, July 1992.50 Industry lobbied hard against the reductions. The major licencees in the TSA volunteered to take atemporary cut reduction and work out a plan among themselves to deal with the reduced timber supply. BillDumont, interview by author, Vancouver, B.C., May 4, 1993.51 See for example, National Geographic, September, 1990; and Sierra Club of Western Canada,“Kyuquoound: The Vanishing Rainforest,” (videotape), 1990.R. Watts and L. Leyne, “Industry trying to fix Kyuquot ‘mess’,” Victoria Times-Colonist, February1, 1990, Al; and R. Watts, “World to see B.C.’s embarassment,” Victoria Times-Colonist, January 31, 1990,Al.73overcutting.”53 Huge, progressive clearcuts scar steep mountainsides running down to the seathroughout much of the Sound. The heavy rains, typical of the west coast, pelt down on theclearcut mountainsides, subjecting them to massive erosion and landslides.The siltation of rivers and streams as a result of forest harvesting has become a major concernwith respect to the damage caused to salmon habitat.54 A 1992 audit prepared for theMinistries of Forests and Environment, Lands and Parks, showed that forest companies onVancouver Island were in poor compliance with the province’s logging guidleines to protectsalmon stocks.55 The audit found that 34 of the 53 streams surveyed “were affected to somedegree” by non-compliance with coastal fisheries-forestry guidelines. Among those streamsthat received the most damage from logging activity were three salmon streams withinInterfor’s licence area in Kyuquot Sound.56 Another hydrological study,57 commissioned byKEEPS and the KNT, concluded that MacMillan Bloedel’s logging plans for the TahsishKwois drainage “would almost certainly increase the frequency of debris torrents and slides,which, in turn, would augment the supply of sediment.. .into Kwois Creek and into the lowerTahsish.”58 Increased sediments, the report warned, tends to degrade downstream salmonspawning habitats.B. Kieran, “‘Logging mistakes made’,” Vancouver Province, February 2, 1990, 21; and J.Kavanagh, “Clear-cuts incense Kyuquot,” Vancouver Sun, June 10, 1989, A5.See, for example, the numerous papers documenting the cumulative effects of forest harvesting on asmall, relatively stable coastal watershed contained in T.Chamberlin, ed., Proceedings of the Workshop:Applying 15 Years of Carnation Creek Results. (Nanaimo, B.C.: Carnation Creek Steering Committee, PacificBiological Station, 1987).D. Tripp, A. Nixon and R. Dunlop, Application and Effectiveness of the Coastal Fisheries-ForestryGuidelines in Selected Cutbiocks on Vancouver Island (Nanaimo: Tripp Biological Consultants, April 1992).The release of the report received much newspaper coverage. See “Penalties Possible for RiverDamage,” Vancouver Sun, July 31, 1992, D8; “Damage Audit Destroys Industry Claims to Turning New Leaf,”Vancouver Sun, August, 11, 1992, D2; and “Stream Course Found Paved with Gravel,” Vancouver Sun, August11, 1992D2.R. Kellerhals, “Effects of the Proposed Tahsish-Kwois Forest Mangement Plan on the Stability andChannel Morphology of Kwois Creek and the Lower Tahsish River,” Report prepared for Kyuquot Economic andEnvironmental Protection Society (KEEPS) and the Kyuquot Band, 1993.5874With an economy centered on fisheries, and increasingly on tourism and wilderness recreation,Kyuquot residents strongly object to logging policies and practices that ignore their needs as acommunity. The visual impact of logging in the Sound is extreme and serious concerns havebeen raised over the effect on a community like Kyuquot where both residents and tourists areattracted by the scenic landscape. For example, the Chicago-based, Outdoor Magazine createda stir among residents and Vancouver newspapers by reporting, in 1989,Vancouver Island used to be the preeminent sea-kayaking area in North America. Buton the Island’s northwest side, logging clearcuts straight to the waters edge havedestroyed the shoreline around Kyuquot Sound.59Forestry practices in Kyuquot have changed significantly in recent years. Landscapemanagement plans are now prepared by logging companies to minimize the aesthetic impact ofclearcuts viewed from offshore. More sensitive harvesting techniques are being used to avoiddamage to water quality in streams and fish habitat. Restorative measures are being taken onsteep, unstable slopes to prevent future landslides. Clearcuts are getting smaller, road buildingtechniques are being improved and some forest companies are even showing interest indeveloping economically viable alternatives to clearcutting. Recognition of the need for moresite-specific forest management techniques and the value of local involvement in forestplanning and management is now beginning to be reflected in the approach to planning beingtaken by at least two of the forest companies operating in Kyuquot Sound.60Many people living in Kyuquot have developed an acute sensitivity to what they believe to beunjust and unsustainable provincial forest policies and practices. There has been a long historyof community action in Kyuquot aimed at changing the way local forests are managed. Thischapter has been an attempt to provide the reader with some insight into the context out ofwhich community actions have arisen. The next chapter documents the strategies andOutdoor Magazine, May 1989, quoted in Vancouver Sun, June 10, 1989, AS; and Victoria Times-Colonist, June 11, 1989, M20.The efforts of Interfor and WFP in this repsect are discussed in much greater detail in Chapter 5.75initiatives taken by the community as a whole and by the KNT in particular to gain morecontrol over local forest management.765.0 HISTORY OF COMMUNITY ACTIONS AND INITIATIVES5.1 INTRODUCTIONThis chapter addresses the third and fourth case study objectives. It identifies and describesthe strategies and initiatives the Kyuquot Native Tribe (KNT) has employed to advanceaboriginal land management (ALM) and analyzes how opportunities and constraints haveevolved in response.The chapter documents the KNT’s actions and initiatives as they evolved to deal with a crisisoccurring on two fronts; one on the land, where poor forestry practices had resulted in alandscape dominated by large clearcuts and landslides; and the other in the community, wherealcoholism and related social ills had come to dominate the socio-cultural landscape. Thedescription of the many and varied community strategies and initiatives, and the analysis of theopportunities and constraints from which they arose, illustrates the constantly evolving processthe KNT has been, and still is, engaged in.The history of this process has been constructed by tracing the evolution of opportunities andconstraints through four stages of community initiatives. The KNT’s actions and initiativesaimed at advancing ALM have, therefore, been described as component parts of anevolutionary process of learning and experimentation moving the KNT closer to its ideal ofALM.The chapter begins by describing the conceptual framework used to analyze the history of theKNT’s development process. The recognition of a crisis within the community is the startingpoint for the analysis. The crisis that occurred in Kyuquot is discussed in terms of thecommunity’s understanding of it and decision to act. The community initiatives that emergedto deal with this crisis are then described. Opportunities and constraints are traced througheach initiative following the conceputal framework outlined below. Initiatives are described77separately, but are grouped into one of four stages as shown in Table 4. The chapterconcludes by identifying certain patterns of outcomes that have emerged from this particularconceptualization of the development process.5.2 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKA systems view of the community development process, shown in Figure 1 at the end ofChapter 2, provides the overall conceptual scheme used in the analysis of the case. Thedescriptions of the individual strategies and initiatives, and the evolution of opportunities andconstraints in response, have been guided by this model. Figure 8, below, is an elaboration ofFigure 1 which provides a conceptualization of the history of the KNT’s development process.The history of the KNT’s actions and initiatives to advance ALM is viewed as an evolutionaryprocess of social learning. In this conceptualization, internal and external opportunities andconstraints form the context out of which community initiatives emerge. They act as inputs tothe process. The KNT’s actions and initiatives, both individually and collectively, create aprocess which produces outputs which feedback into the system creating new sets ofopportunities and constraints. It is during this feedback that the learning takes place whichenables the KNT to continue to employ new initiatives to advance toward its goals. With eachnew set of opportunities and constraints, a new stage of initiatives emerges and the cyclerepeats itself--progressively moving the KNT toward its ideal of ALM.This conceptualization of the process demonstrates how, for the KNT, the route to ALM hasbeen a long process of peeling back layers of obstacles and building up layers of newinitiatives. Each time one layer of obstacles has been overcome through one group ofinitiatives, a new set of more entrenched obstacles have been revealed requiring new,78F[GURE8:CRISISThe KNT Development Process++opportunities /EstraintsALM??-Protest/Publicity-Community SocialDevelopmentLearning-Environmental Alliance-Community Forestry-WSLAC-Legal Strategies-Community PlanningLearningSTAGEONESTAGETWOSTAGETHREESTAGE FOUR_KEYI I larger social systemtEl community(E) community actioninputs / outputsfeedback\rI79bolder initiatives. In this view of the process, each successive stage of initiatives reachesdeeper into the mainstream institutions and ways of doing things in an attempt to change them.The learning that takes place, in the form of feedback, enables the KNT to overcomeincreasingly entrenched obstacles and advance through stages toward ALM. Feedback occursas a result of the outputs of both individual initiatives, and stages of initiatives.Individual community actions and initiatives have been grouped into stages to reflect differentclasses of associated opportunities and constraints. The first initiatives (Stage One) were directresponses to the crisis as perceived by the community. Together, these initiatives created anew set of circumstances which presented new opportunities for the KNT to become moreactively involved in local land use planning and decision making. A flurry of new communityinitiatives emerged in Stage Two to take advantage of the full range of opportunities that hadbeen created. These initiatives occurred in Kyuquot simultaneously, some dealing withexternal constraints to ALM, others dealing with obstacles to ALM harboured within thecommunity itself. All required some level of interaction between the KNT and outside people,institutions and/or organizations.The circumstances which led to the KNT’s work with the forest companies were created bothby earlier stages of initiatives and by external forces. Its efforts to work with industry tojointly manage the resources in particular watersheds moved the KNT one step deeper into themainstream resource management system. As it became apparent that their vision for ALMcould not be realized through these joint management initiatives, the KNT moved on to thelatest stage of initiative. In October, 1993, the KNT took formal steps to begin a process oftreaty negotiations with the federal and provincial governments. This turn of events constitutesthe fourth and most recent stage in the KNT’s efforts to bring about ALM.80The development process in Kyuquot began after there was community recognition of a crisis.The following section describes the crisis that occurred in Kyuquot, and the community’srecognition and understanding of it. This is then followed by an analysis of the particularstrategies and initiatives used to advance the KNT through stages toward ALM.5.3 RECOGNITION OF CRISISThe whole community of Kyuquot, both Native and non-Native, was profoundly affected bythe stepped up rate of harvest during the 1980’s and the proliferation of clearcuts andlandslides. By May 1989, after bouts of heavy rain, there were 18 slides on a singlemountainside, St. Pauls Dome, located 2-3 miles behind the village of Kyuquot.1 Ininterviews, many residents recalled the shock and disbelief they felt at witnessing thedestruction of their picturesque landscape. But for the Native people of Kyuquot the crisis wasnot just in the forest or in the forest management regime. Individually and collectively, as acommunity and as a culture they had reached a crisis point.The fact that the landscape of their ancestral homeland had been so quickly and dramaticallyaltered was bound to have a profound effect on the aboriginal people who had lived in theSound all their lives and whose ties to the land ran deep. For a people whose livelihood andculture revolves around fishing, the threat that logging posed to the clam beaches and salmonproducing rivers and estuaries struck an vital nerve. If logging was killing the fish, as oneresident reflected, it was also killing their community and their culture. From this point ofview, the crisis on the land can be interpreted as the catalyst which shook people out of theirdespondency and allowed them to see more clearly the social pathologies that had beensmouldering in the community. In order to take action to deal with the crisis on the land,people understood that they would first have to deal with the dysfunctionality of the“Kyuquot Residents Dismayed with Overcutting of Forests,” Ha-Shilth-Sa, August 29, 1989, 8.81community. In this way, the social and environmental problems in Kyuquot became intricatelylinked.Through the 1980’s, the social health of the Native community in Kyuquot had reached itslowest ebb since disease epidemics of the late nineteenth century. 2 It was the survivors of theepidemics, of residential schools and of assimilationist government policies who now turned todrugs and alcohol. Abuse of alcohol and drugs, and abuse of one another became a fact of lifein Kyuquot. The bonds between people that create a community had all but disappeared.Several residents interviewed spoke of these “dark times.” People, they said, kept tothemselves, they did not discuss their problems or their pain, they did not interfere in eachothers lives. It seems that this general social malaise, born out over a century of Kyuquotcontact with Europeans, had swept through the community every bit as powerfully as thedisease epidemics had a century before.Experience had provided the KNT Council lessons on how iii to solve community socialproblems. According to the Chief Councillor and several KNT staff, the heavy-handedapproach Council took to dealing with alcohol and drug abuse in the mid- 1980’s hadbackfired. The imposition of laws on the community, the banning alcohol from the reserveand having the RCMP physically escort violators off reserve only increased the anger andbitterness within the community and did little to prevent substance abuse. It became clear tothe Chief Councillor that the best role for Council would be to provide support andencouragement for the healing process that would have to begin from within the community.This approach carried over into the political activities of Council as well.2 Kyuquot population was reduced from well over 1000 at the time of contact to 119 by1920. Nuu-Chah-Nulth Tribal Council, Brochure.82Previously the Council’s energies had gone into attending land claims meetings at the TribalCouncil level. After being re-elected to office in 1989, the KNT Chief Councillor returned tothe NTC land claims meetings to find little had changed in four years. Although memberbands continued to put the land and sea question as a top priority, there were few if any bandlevel initiatives. Out of frustration with this process and the sense of urgency that prevailed inKyuquot, the Council broke away from the NTC meetings and committed itself to acommunity-based process for development.3From the KNT’s perspective, the ecological crisis on the land and the social crisis in thecommunity both stemmed from the same cause--their subjugation by mainstream culture andthe loss of control over their lives. The solution, as the KNT and Council came to see it, layin reviving their traditions and regaining control over their lives. Reclaiming their TribalTerritory and the stewardship responsibilities that went with it was an integral part of thecommunity healing process on which the KNT was about to embark.The perceived need to somehow revive their own local and traditional knowledge and combineit with the mainstream scientific knowledge led to the KNT’s work in both fisheries andforestry management. Community involvement in fisheries management began four yearsbefore many inroads were made in forestry management for at least three reasons. The first,according to the KNT Chief Councillor, was the fact that fisheries management was controlledby the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) which had staff working at the locallevel and was actively promoting “co-management” projects where local people would betrained to collect inventory and survey data. Forestry management, on the other hand was,throughout the 1980’s, under the provincial jurisdiction of a government which refused torecognize aboriginal rights and which had a strong corporate (as opposed to community) bias.This account is based on conversations with Richard Leo, KNT Chief Councillor, May 26, 1993.83A second factor which led to community initiatives in fisheries ahead of forestry, was theavailability of an NTC fisheries advisor whose expertise and sensitivity to community needswas put to immediate use. The KNT Fisheries Management Crew was established as early as1986 and it was their data collection efforts and the lobbying of the KNT that led to the closureof the clam fishery in the Sound in 1989 for conservation reasons.4 Finally, the centrality offishing to Kyuquot culture and economy is an obvious factor prompting the KNT to take morecontrol over fisheries management. It is equally important as a motivating factor in thecommunity’s attempts to stop the logging practices that posed a threat to the local fisheries.Community initiatives in forestry, then were not far behind those of fisheries. Prompted bythe escalation of logging activity and landslides, Native and non-Native residents of Kyuquotpulled together. In 1988, they began talcing active measures to have their concerns over localforest policies and practices addressed.5.4 STAGED INITIATIVESCommunity actions and initiatives have been grouped into stages to reflect the evolution of theprocess used by the KNT to advance ALM as shown in Table 4 below.The community actions and initiatives described below come from many different directions,are aimed at many different ends and arise out of complex sets of circumstances. Some arereactive responses to external forces while others are proactive initiatives aimed at building oncommunity strengths and overcoming internal obstacles to change. Each of these initiativesare described in terms of the circumstances (opportunities and constraints) which led to theirFor more detailed information on the clam fishery in Kyuquot Sound and the role of the KNT in theconflict see 3. Griggs, “Developing Cooperative Management Systems for Common Property Resources:Resolving Cross-Cultural Conflict in a West coast Fishery” (Masters thesis, University of British Columbia,1991), 50-68.84emergence, the obstacles they were able to overcome, and the new obstacles that theyrevealed.Particular attention is directed to examining the interplay between the KNT and other outsideplayers within each of the various community development initiatives. Incidents arehighlighted where internal and external knowledge and understandings were combined as ameans of advancing community goals. This focus on insider-outsider relationships provides abasis for understanding how such relationships have helped or hindered the KNT’sadvancement toward ALM.An attempt has been made to discuss the initiatives more or less in the order in which theywere explored by the KNT. This however, has proven somewhat arbitrary since there is asignificant amount of overlap. Some pursuits are ongoing, others started, stopped and pickedup again later on, and many initiatives were pursued simultaneously with others, to strategiceffect. Despite these complications, the evolution of the process as a whole can best beunderstood by describing the initiatives in the order in which they occurred. Figure 9 plotseach of the initiatives together on a time line, showing where the overlaps lie and when eachinitiative began and ended. A chronology of events also appears in Appendix 2.85TABLE 4: History of Community ActionStage One: Crisis Response-Protest and Publicity-Community Social DevelopmentStage Two: Seizing Opportunities-Environmental Alliance-Community Forestry Initiatives-Western Strathcona Advisory Council-Legal Strategies-Community Development PlanningStage Three: Joint Management with Forest CompaniesStage Four: Treaty NegotiationsFIGURE9:TimeChartofKyuquotActionsandInitiatives(June1988toDecember1993)198819891990199119921993STAGEIProtest/PublicitySocialDevelopmentSTAGE2EnvironmentalAllianceCommunityForestryWSLAGLegalCommunity_PlanningSTAGE3JointManagementSTAGE4Treaty_NegotiationIntermittentInitiative00875.4.1 Stage One: Crisis ResponseTwo sets of initiatives emerged in response to the two-pronged crisis outlined above. Thefirst, involved both Native and non-Native residents of Kyuquot acting as one community witha goal to end poor logging practices in Kyuquot Sound. These lobbying, protest, and publicityinitiatives set the development process for the KNT in motion and had profound implicationsfor the way events were to transpire. The second set of initiatives belonged to the KNTCouncil and marked the beginning of the new role Council was to take within the KNT.Protest and Publicity5The first initiative that brought the concerns of the community of Kyuquot to the outside, camein the summer of 1988 as a result of the efforts of two non-Native Kyuquot residents who feltmoved to take action. The two women, having had no success in their repeated phone callsand visits to the MOF Campbell River District Office, rented a video camera and filmed theclearcut mountainsides, landslides and debris-choked rivers. They took the video to the MOFDistrict Office in Campbell River where they showed it to the District Manager who reportedlyasked that they not show it to anyone else. Undaunted, the pair continued on a tourVancouver Island which ended at an “Annual Wilderness Gathering” at Strathcona ParkLodge. Their video attracted the attention of the media and a number of high profile B.C.environmentalists who were at the Wilderness Gathering. The video thus served to bring theissue of the poor logging practices occurring in B.C’s coastal old growth forests into publicview. In August of the same year, the two women formed the Kyuquot Environmental andEconomic Protection Society (KEEPS).KEEPS grew to include both Native and non-Native Kyuquot residents concerned with themanner and pace of logging in Kyuquot Sound. In June 1989 a group of Kyuquot residentsInformation for this section was drawn largely from personal communications with Tom Pater,Director of KEEPS and Gail Muir, one of KEEPS original founders.88travelled to Campbell River and held a three-day picket outside the Campbell River ForestDistrict office to protest, what residents were calling, “devastating logging practices.”6 Theirprotest attracted much support. As one Kyuquot resident protester recalled,The support was shown not only from the residents of Kyuquot, but, from people wholive in Campbell River and from places where the people haven’t even been toKyuquot, but have seen the publicity shown from various media.7News of the poor forest practices in Kyuquot and the upcoming protest by residents quickly hitthe major newspapers in both Victoria and Vancouver. Both the Victoria Times-Colonist8andthe Vancouver Sun9, quoted Campbell River Forest District Manager Don Sluggett, as saying,with respect to logging in Kyuquot Sound, “There’s been some overcutting, we never plannedto cut as much as we did up there.” And, “We maybe allowed too much logging in the area.”A Times-Colonist editorial, in reference to what it called the “pathetic explanations” of theDistrict Manager, bemoaned the state of forest management and policy making in BritishColumbia,When watchdogs of the public interest can offer no better defence than this, BritishColumbians have reason to be worried.10Adding to the controversy in Kyuquot was the news, carried in Vancouver Sun and Times-Colonist articles, that a major U.S. outdoor magazine was advising tourists away fromKyuquot because of the visually offensive clearcuts. The same editorial quoted above linkedthe issue of the effect of logging on tourism in Kyuquot to the larger provincial level. Despitewhat is going on in the west coast rainforests, it said, “.. .the Tourism Ministry continues tospend millions of dollars cynically promoting the myth of ‘Supernatural British Columbia.”11J. Kavanagh, “Clear-cuts Incense Kyuquot,” Vancouver Sun, June 10, 1989, A5.Natalie Jack, “A Kyuquot Resident on Logging,” Ha-Shilth-Sa, July 20, 1989, 6.“U.S. magazine pans Kyuquot clearcut logging,” Times-Colonist, June 11, 1989, M20.3. Kavanagh, “Clear-cuts incense Kyuquot,” Vancouver Sun, June 10, 1989, AS.10 “How to kill the goose that lays a golden egg,” (editorial) Times-Colonist, June 15, 1989, A4.Ibid.89The District Manager’s initial response to the protest by Kyuquot residents, the resulting mediacoverage and the ongoing lobbying efforts of KEEPS, came in the summer of 1989. Theresponse took the form of three small logging deferrals of Interfor’s operations scheduled tobegin in Clinninick Cove (a valued shelter and anchorage for local fishers), and a promise fora long-term (20-year) resource management plan for the area. By October 1989, at thesuggestion of the District Manager’2,the Forest Minister, announced plans to establish a localadvisory council to resolve the “resource-use conflict” in the Kyuquot Sound area.13Through their actions, Kyuquot residents managed to take a forestry issue of local concern andmake it one of provincial concern. The protest and publicity also opened the floodgates to thesurge of international attention that would be focussed on Kyuquot over the next four years andbring the issue into the international spotlight.’4 In doing so, these protests and the resultingpublicity, served to effectively challenge the MOF indifference to community concerns overforestry. Once the obstacle of corporate-governmental indifference was overcome and theMOF and logging companies were made accountable for poor logging practices in KyuquotSound, a new set of issues and obstacles presented themselves.Logging plans were being approved, and logging was imminent in several of the remainingunlogged watersheds in Kyuquot Sound. Logging was set to begin in the Tahsish-Kwois, awatershed especially significant to the KNT, not only for its outstanding fisheries values butbecause it has always been the Tribe’s hereditary chief’s river. A new tack was needed tokeep logging out of the Tahsish. The community protests and publicity paved the way for astrengthening of the cooperative alliance already developing between the KNT and12 Don Sluggett, Campbell River Forest District Manager, Jiiterview by author, (telephone), January 21,1994.13 B. Parfitt, “Local advisory council to deal with Kyuquot,” Vancouver Sun, October 14, 1990, BIl.14 This is discussed in greater detail under Stage Two.90environmental groups. This new strategy formed part of the second stage of communityaction.While both Native and non-Native residents worked together effectively in the interest ofcommon goals during this early initiative, they still formed two distinct groups with twodifferent conceptions of the cause of the problem. Many of the Kyuquot non-Nativesinterviewed, for example, saw the crisis to be a result of a flawed democratic process andwoefully inadequate provincial forest policies. As one such resident reflected, it was aproblem of Kyuquot being “out of sight, out of mind.”15 The solution, then, was to raise theirvoices loud enough to be heard by the powers that be in Campbell River and Victoria. Theyhad to publicize the issue to the point where it became politicized beyond the local level. Oncethey had the ear of government, they would voice their concerns and demand action. Fromthe perspective of the KNT, the crisis on the land was equated with colonization and the lossof tribal control over the land base. The KNT’s conception of the problem, therefore,required community action on another front as well. Its efforts to promote community socialdevelopment are discussed below.Community Social Development16The crisis in the community, and the community’s recognition of it, provided the motivationthat was needed to begin efforts to heal the community. Kyuquot people recognized that theycould do little to end the destructive logging practices and gain control over their lands andlives as long as they were dependent on alcohol and drugs. Hiring a Drug and Alcohol (D&A)Worker, who was himself Native and a recovered alcoholic, represented the KNT’s first stepin changing its role within the community from the dictating authoritarian one it had played inSam Kayra, KEEPS Founder, Interview by author, Kyuquot, B.C., June 4, 1993.Information for this section was drawn from personal communications with Richard Leo, KNT ChiefCouncillor, May 26, 1993, and from Edwin James, KNT Drug and Alcohol Worker, Interview by author,Kyuquot, B.C., June 3, 1993.91the past, to one of facilitation, providing support and encouragement for band memberswanting and needing to turn their lives around.For the past four years the D&A Worker has been living in Kyuquot providing counselling,establishing support groups and directing those that come to him to one of three Native-oriented alcohol and drug treatment centers on Vancouver Island. The approach to treatmentis based in aboriginal philosophies and spirituality and is focussed on rebuilding a strong andenduring sense of cultural identity and pride. Upon completion of a six week treatmentprogram, several members of the support group in Kyuquot travel to attend the sending offceremonies and then host a welcoming home dinner for band members returning fromtreatment. By the summer of 1993, 29 people in Kyuquot had been through treatment, fourwere currently in treatment and there was a very active adult support group composed of 50band members who met regularly in smaller groups. Today, close to 80% of community issober--a major accomplishment in a community where over half of its population was drinkingand using or selling drugs only four years ago according to the KNT Chief Councillor andDrug and Alcohol Worker.The community-based orientation of the KNT’s approach to the drug and alcohol problem intheir community appears to have served to bring people together socially. In their innerstruggles, individuals have been supported by the collective strength of the community.Everyone interviewed in Kyuquot cited sobriety and community cohesiveness among the majorchanges that have happened in Kyuquot in the last five years. People are opening up, seekinghelp, and finding that people have pulled together to provide support for each other.The sense of pride in their culture is readily apparent and continues to grow in Kyuquot.Traditional dancing and singing practices are held regularly and those attended by the authorhad a large turnout (25-30) of both young and old. The Kyuquot language still flourishes and92Elders hold a respected position within the community. Community meetings and gatheringsattended by the author often began with prayers recited by respected elders and werefrequently interspersed with speeches by Elders spoken in their own language.While overcoming widespread alcohol and drug abuse in the community has been a courageousundertaking, it is only the tip of a much larger iceberg of obstacles that stand in the way ofcommunity health and well-being. Once substance abuse was brought under control, otherforms of dependency surfaced which would prove even more difficult to overcome. To breakfree of their dependency on government social assistance, for example, new economicopportunities needed to be created and traditional economic pursuits, such as fishing andhunting, had to be protected from the logging that threatened them. Although early efforts todeal with substance abuse revealed the existence of more ingrained dependencies, such effortsalso helped to establish a sense of community and created new opportunities to develop thecommunity capacity for self-reliance and ALM. The commencement of a broader basedcommunity planning process and community economic development initiatives emerged as aresult in Stage Two.5.4.2 Stage Two: Seizing OpportunitiesThis next stage of actions and initiatives evolved out of the successes of the previous one. Inaddition to revealing new obstacles, the initiatives in Stage One created new opportunities forALM. The five different actions and initiatives that evolved to take advantage of these newopportunities have involved two types of strategies. Inward looking strategies have requiredthe KNT to turn in on itself to identify and build on community strengths and overcomeinternal obstacles to ALM. Outward looking strategies have made use of opportunities thatexisted outside the KNT and have been aimed at pushing aside external obstacles to ALM.Both types of strategies have demanded that the KNT interact with outside institutions andorganizations.93Environmental AllianceThe KEEPS video shown at the Strathcona Park Wilderness Gathering in 1988, drew theattention of several prominent B.C. environmentalists and sparked an interest in Kyuquot. Forenvironmentalists, the logging in Kyuquot Sound was a clear and vivid example of some of themost destructive logging practices in B.C. The landscape around Kyuquot was a showcase forthese practices, located on the some of last remaining old growth temperate rainforests in theworld. The interest of environmental groups in Kyuquot led eventually to a NationalGeographic article on forestry in B.C. which featured Kyuquot. The article, appearing the theSeptember 1990 issue of the magazine, put Kyuquot in an international spotlight by decryingB.C. logging practices with a picture of Mt. Paxton, a mountain scalped from peak to sea.17Alliances between the KNT and environmentalists began developing from there. Publicitycampaigns are what environmental groups in B.C. have become known for, and publicity, theKNT decided, was what it needed. The KNT was able to increase its political leverage byworking with environmentalists to bring the issue of logging in Kyuquot into the provincialand international arenas. When the KNT now petitioned the MOF, they had the backing of ahuge following of environmentalists and public sympathizers.It soon became clear that the KNT and environmental groups had more than photoopportunities and publicity to offer each other. The Tahsish-Kwois watershed was, and still is,a priority area for protection, both among environmentalists and the KNT. The question ofwhether logging should be allowed to go ahead in the lower Tahsish had been hotly debatedsince 1981 when the provincial government established a Task Force to examine the costs andbenefits of logging. The Tahsish-Kwois Follow-Up Committee, formed by the MOF in 1989,17 Rowe Fmdley, editor of National Geographic was cited as saying with respect to Kyuquot “...that hehad never seen so many bad logging practices in one place at one time. ‘ Times Colonist, Wednesday, January 31,1990, p. Al.94was established to deal with the question ofi to log it, while environmentalists, the KNTand KEEPS steadfastly refused to agree to logging in the area.B.C. environmental groups aligned themselves with the KNT, not only because it lent moreweight to their cause, but because they saw a potential legal avenue through which to keeplogging out of the Tahsish.18 It was with the research and financial support of the Sierra Cluband the Western Canada Wilderness Committee that the KNT retained a lawyer and beganpreparations for a case, based on aboriginal rights, to get an injunction to keep logging out ofthe Tahsish-Kwois.A small isolated native community suffering from the effects of some of the worst loggingpractices in the world makes for a potent story, and it attracted the attention of environmentalgroups internationally. In December 1991, Greenpeace International and the Women’sEnvironmental Network (based in Britain), invited and paid for the KNT Chief Councillor anda respected Kyuquot elder to travel to Britain to discuss the forest management practices inKyuquot Tribal Territory. At the time, European and B.C. environmental groups wereorganizing a European boycott of B.C. timber products. While the KNT issued a press releasestating that it did not support the boycott and that it was not against timber harvesting per se,19the perception back in B.C., at least among the forest company executives, was of a strongnative-environmental alliance involving the KNT’s Chief Councillor.20 The trip heightenedthe animosity between the Chief Councillor and the MOF District Manager, but it also raisedthe Chief Councillor’s personal political clout, allowing him to bypass the MOF District officeand meet directly with the Ministers of Forests and Aboriginal Affairs to seek support forsome of the KNT’s own forestry initiatives.18 Personal knowledge of the author as an employee of the Sierra Club of Western Canada (1989-90).19 Kyuquot Native Tribe, “Kyuquot Native Tribe not supporting boycott of Canadian timber,” (pressrelease), December 4, 1991.20 B. Dumont, Chief Forester, Western Forest Products, Interview by author, Vancouver, B.C., May 4,1993.95The contacts that developed between the KNT and environmental groups both in B.C. andabroad, led to another important initiative that will be touched upon briefly here and discussedin greater detail under Stage Three. Greenpeace International and the Sierra Club of WesternCanada had sponsored a European forester to travel to B.C. to explore opportunities fordeveloping alternatives to the clearcutting practices occurring on the west coast. He was soonled to Kyuquot and began working with the KNT to develop a proposal for a pilot project totest alternative harvesting practices in Kyuquot Territory. This initiative would gathermomentum later in conjunction with events that were to unfold in Stage Three.Despite all this, the close contacts between the KNT and environmental groups began todecrease after the media attention on Kyuquot reached its height in the Summer and Fall of1990. The situation in the Tahsish-Kwois became less urgent when, by January 1991, the firstin a string of deferrals was issued to delay logging in the Tahsish in order for a variety ofprovincial land use planning processes to take place. The KNT had also begun to pursue anumber of different initiatives which included working “cooperatively” with some of the forestcompanies. The development interests of the KNT began coming into sharper focus againstthe preservation interests of the B.C. environmental community. While there is still commonground, it is now tempered with a mild degree of mistrust, and parties on both sides act morecautiously when working together.2’Western Strathcona Local Advisory Council (WSLAC)22In October 1989, prompted largely by the community initiated protests and publicity overlogging in Kyuquot Sound, the Minister of Forests, acting on the recommendation of the21 This impression is based on personal communications with Richard Leo, KNT Chief Councillor, TomPater, Director of KEEPS, and Sharon Chow, Conservation Coordinator, Sierra Club of Western Canada.Information for this section has been drawn from personal communications with Richard Leo, KNTChief Councillor; Ron Frank, KNT Forestry Advisor; Tom Pater, Director of KEEPS; and from Don Sluggett,Campbell River Forest District Manager, Interview by author, (telephone), January 21, 1994.96Campbell River Forest District office, announced the establishment of the Western StrathconaLocal Advisory Council (WSLAC) to address the land use conflict in the area. WSLAC wasdirected by the MOF to develop a sustainable development strategy for the Kyuquot TimberSupply Block and an adjoining Tree Farm Licence and to report to the MOF regional managerin Vancouver. The Council was set up as a roundtable with 22 members representing the fullrange of stakeholders with an interest in the natural resources of the area. Both the KNT andKEEPS had representatives sitting on WSLAC. WSLAC represented an opportunity for theKNT to explore a new forum for voicing their concerns over logging in their ancestral lands.Six months after it was established, however, the KNT withdrew from WSLAC. Theirwithdrawal hinged on concern that as WSLAC talked and debated on how resources should bedeveloped in the future, business as usual was occurring on the ground. Logging of theirTribal Territory continued at the same rates and using the same clearcutting practices that thecommunity maintained was threatening their way of life. KNT representatives felt that theirparticipation on WSLAC ran counter to community goals for ALM. They did not wish toparticipate in a process where they represented just one of 27 different stakeholders, alongsidea host of forest companies and government agencies. In addition, WSLAC was using up theprecious time and energy needed to work within the community to develop the self-management capacity needed for ALM. Based on these concerns, the KNT withdrew, butstated that it supported KEEPS in its efforts on behalf of the community of Kyuquot.23While the timing of WSLAC seemed appropriate for the MOF and most of the otherstakeholders, it came at the wrong time for the KNT, which was just in the beginning stages ofa community development process. The rigid and formalized structure of the multistakeholder process did not provide the flexibility necessary to develop creative means for23 Reasons for the KNT’s withdraw from WSLAC are contained in, Kyuquot Native Tribe, Letter toWSLAC. May 23, 1990.97cross-cultural communications that was needed for the KNT to participate effectively. TheWSLAC process was alien to KNT representatives. Because it had been imposed from above,it was difficult for KNT representatives to see how their participation would help to resolve theimmediate and desperate situation the community faced--economically, socially and culturally.No planning process coming from the top down could solve such problems for the community.Rather, top-down processes were what led to much of the Tribe’s problems in the first place.While the KNT recognized the need to work with outsiders, the WSLAC process threatenedonly to overwhelm and co-opt the needs and aspirations of the Native community in Kyuquot.The KNT’s participation and subsequent withdrawal from WSLAC compounded the alreadyexisting tension between the tribe and the District MOF. Similar tensions erupted between theKNT and KEEPS over a decision regarding Interfor’s development plan for the CachalotNarrowgut Chart Area. Both KEEPS and the KNT wanted logging operations kept out of theCachalot Creek watershed which had been nominated by KEEPS as a candidate for protectionunder the province’s Old Growth Project. Logging had already been approved for the ChartArea, and Interfor’s development plan included two cutblocks in the Cachalot drainage. At therequest of the Old Growth Project, a sub-committee on which KEEPS was represented, hadbeen struck within WSLAC to reach consensus on how harvesting operations would proceed inthe Cachalot-Narrowgut Chart Area. By the fall of 1990 it was agreed that Interfor’sdevelopment plan would be amended so that,No timber harvesting will take place in the Cachalot Creek watershed before there hasbeen visually effective greenup of those areas which have been logged in thesurrounding seaward area..., and,Timber harvesting in Narrowgut as set forth in the Plan will proceed commencing withblock 102 in 1991.2424 Western Strathcona Local Advisory Council Cachalot Subcommittee, “Cachalot Creek Consensus,”October 16, 1990.98The deferral of logging in the Cachalot, was not reached without a compromise on the part ofKEEPS. Interfor maintained that the only feasible means for getting the timber out of theNarrowgut was to construct a log dump at the end of Cachalot Inlet and build an access roadthrough the Cachalot drainage.The consensus agreement signed by KEEPS allowed for the construction of a dryland sort,booming grounds and a mainline road within the Cachalot drainage, as well as a bridge acrossCachalot Creek. Because the KNT had withdrawn from WSLAC it was not party to theagreement and objected to it strongly, advising KEEPS representatives not to sign on. It wasfelt that a mainline logging road through the Cachalot Creek watershed was too formidable acompromise.Despite the KNT’s withdrawal early in the process, the results of WSLAC’s work would havesignificant implications for the Tribe and for its future dealings with outsiders. The fact thatthe KNT had not been party to the agreement that was reached regarding an importantwatershed within their Tribal Territory, gave the KNT leverage with which to initiate its ownnegotiations with the forest companies operating in the area.The community initiative which is of interest here, is the KNT’s decision to withdraw fromWSLAC. On the one hand withdrawal from WSLAC meant having to accept the compromiseon the Cachalot agreed to by KEEPS. On the other hand, the decision created newopportunities for the KNT to become involved in forestry planning on its own terms, and in aforum more appropriate for the achievement of its goals. Initiatives that evolved to takeadvantage of these opportunities came in Stage Three. In the meantime, however, the KNTCouncil busied itself with creating a strong community base and mandate that could guide itsfuture dealings with outsiders.99Legal StrategiesPreparations began in 1989 for a case to get an injunction to keep logging out of the TahsishKwois based on the KNT’s aboriginal rights to the area. As mentioned, the KNT alliance withenvironmentalists helped to put the Tahsish near the top of the government’s list of areasworthy of permanent protection. The logging deferrals that have since been imposed onlogging in the Tahsish, to buy the province time to complete various land use planningprocesses on Vancouver Island, have precluded the need to file for an injunction. The threatof a long and protracted legal fight if logging is allowed to proceed in the Tahsish, no doubthas helped to create the situation which now appears to favour some sort of permanentprotection for the Tahsish.Other legal strategies have been employed to try to prevent logging in the CachalotNarrowgut. Early in 1992 members of the KNT cut down, for local use, six spruce treeswithin Interfor’s licence area. Had Interfor decided to sue, the KNT planned to fight the caseon the basis of an aboriginal right to harvest and sell trees and seek a ruling similar to therecent Sparrow25judgment which dealt with fishing. Interfor has not pressed the issue,wanting no part in setting such a precedent.26 The main obstacle for the KNT in pursuing thislegal tack, has been that there is nowhere to sell the logs that it cuts since the log market inB.C. is controlled by the large integrated forest companies.While the KNT has not yet been involved in any actual litigation with respect to forestry, closecontact is maintained between the KNT and their lawyer who are poised and waiting for thefirst opportunity to exert more control over logging in their territory through legal means.Litigation is a route that the forest companies wish to avoid at all costs, according to thecompany representatives interviewed. The threat of long, drawn out court battles has providedR. v. Sparrow (1990), 70 D.L.R. (4th) 385 (S.C.C.).T. Lundgren, Chief Forester, Interfor, Interview by author, Vancouver, B.C., April 26, 1993.100incentive for the forest companies to attempt to accommodate the KNT’s concerns moresincerely.Community Forestry Initiatives27From the KNT’s perspective, the need to hire an outsider well-versed in B.C forest policy andwell connected in the forest industry was clear due to the complexity of the forestry issues andpolicies bearing on Kyuquot. People in Kyuquot had always lived their lives day by day anddid not feel the need to concern themselves with the affairs of the provincial government. Bythe time it became apparent that their survival as a community depended on their beingconcerned with those affairs, the issues were too big and the stakes were too high to deal withwithout outsider help. By hiring a Forestry Advisor in 1989, the Council hoped both toincrease the effectiveness of its lobby efforts and to create local, culturally appropriateemployment in forestry. The objective was to provide an on-going, basic level of economicactivity to sustain community development efforts.With the help of their Advisor, the KNT was able to secure funding from Canada Employmentand Immigration to begin a silvicultural job training program. By winter 1990, the 6-memberKNT Forestry Crew had successfully completed three silviculture contracts for the MOF whichinvolved brushing and spacing on second growth plantations within Kyuquot Territory and hadanother crew of six working on treeplanting contracts for Interfor. Six more band membersreceived silviculture training in the spring of 1991 and three of those already working on thesilviculture crew began training in field surveying, traversing, ecosystem identification andsilvicultural assessment. 2827 Information for this section has been drawn from personal communications with Ron Frank, KNTForestry Advisor, and from Scott Dunn, Campbell River Forest District Silviculturalist, Interview by author(tele1phone), February 9, 1994.2 Kyuquot Native Tribe, “Long Term Silviculture Strategy,” April 1991.101Due to the lobby efforts of the KNT, together with KEEPS and other environmental groups,the companies have been forced by the MOF to go back and rehabilitate areas where pastlogging practices have threatened slope stability and clogged salmon streams with debris. TheKNT has used this as an opportunity to create two new KNT forestry crews which are workingon contracts with both the MOF and Interfor to grass seed steep, unstable slopes that havebeen clearcut and clean logging debris out of streams that have been clogged.All this new economic activity in Kyuquot has transformed the KNT from a community whereover 75% of the population was unemployed throughout most of the year and dependent ongovernment transfer payments,29 to one where people are supporting themselves and theirfamilies without having to leave their homes or Tribal Territory.30 Nevertheless, the KNT’scommunity forestry initiatives have not been without problems. It has been a major challengefor the KNT to generate a stable supply of work to justify the expense of training andinvestments in equipment. The low level of funding the Province allocates to silviculture hasbeen, and continues to be, a major obstacle to the KNT s efforts to provide even a basic levelof security for its workers.31Related problems, which are detailed in a stream of letters and entreaties from the KNT to theMOF,32 stem from an overtaxed District staff who, according to the KNT Forestry Advisor,gives KNT forestry crews a relatively low priority. The letters from the KNT to the Ministerof Forests complain of common delays of up to five weeks between silviculture contracts withthe MOF while the KNT waits for District staff to do layouts and get new projects in place and29 C. Smith, KNT Social Worker, Interview by author, Kyuquot, B.C., May 31, 1993.30 The number of those employed in silviculture varies each year and every season, with the length andnumber of contracts secured.31 Richard Leo, Letter to Claude Richmond, Minister of Forests, November 30, 1990; Richard Leo,Letter to Don Sluggett, Campbell River Forest District Manager, April 7, 1991; Richard Leo, Letter to DanMiller, Minister of Forests, January 29, 1992; Richard Leo, Letter to Dan Miller, Minister of Forests, May 29,1992; Richard Leo, Letter to Dan Miller, Minister of Forests, January 25, 1993.32 Ibid.102running on the ground. Although the KNT has workers trained to do such layouts andsilviculture assessments, both the KNT Chief Councillor and Forestry Advisor say theirattempts to negotiate means for cooperatively managing second growth stands in KyuquotTerritory with the District MOF staff have been continually stalled.From the perspective of the District MOF,33 the source of delays between contracts liessquarely within the community. Both the District Manager and District Silviculturalist cite theinability of the KNT forestry crews to meet contract commitments as the primary cause ofdelays. Even the KNT Forestry Advisor conceeds that a low level of motivation on the part ofKNT workers has, in the past, delayed contract completion. The major cause, however, of thetenuous relationship between the KNT and the District MOF office, according to the DistrictSilviculturalist, relates to communication and the channels through which information isrelayed from the community, to the Forestry Advisor, and finally to the District office. Theseinformation flows deserve some discussion here since they reveal some of the internalobstacles the KNT has been faced with in its attempts to gain more control over local forestrymanagement.The remote location of Kyuquot and the difficulty in travelling there makes the channelling ofaccurate information from Kyuquot to the MOF District office in Campbell River particularlyimportant to maintaining smooth operations and working relationships. According to theDistrict Siliviculturalist, communication channels have often broken down and inaccurateinformation (e.g., regarding whether a contract has been completed) has often been conveyed.The KNT Forestry Advisor acts as a liason between the KNT forestry crew and the DistrictMOF. Because he is not based in Kyuquot, the Forestry Advisor relies on informationsupplied to him from band members. A band member’s perception of whether a contract hasThe following discussion is based on information derived from telephone interviews by the authorwith Don Sluggett, Campbell River Forest District Manager, January 21, 1994; and Scott Dunn, Campbell RiverForest District Silviculturalist, February 9, 1994.103been completed, however, may be extremely different from the opinion of either the ForestryAdvisor or the District Silviculturalist. Band members, according to the DistrictSilviculturalist, often have said what they think MOF staff want to hear, even if that has meantmisrepresenting the actual situation. Such motivational and communication problems are,from the District MOF perspective, the major cause of the slow progress being made in thecooperative management of second growth stands in the Kyuquot Territory. They are seen asinternal community problems to be dealt with by the Band. Progress in cooperativemanagement is not likely to proceed until the forestry crew is able to demonstrate, to thesatisfaction of the District MOF office, its ability to meet contract commitments.At the same time, the District MOF has a strong economic interest in seeing the KNT forestrycrew develop their own capable silvicultural contracting business. It is, in fact, pushing hardfor the KNT to move in this direction and fill the need for a local silvicultural contractor onthe west coast of the Island. Currently, it is far more expensive for the MOF to tend to secondgrowth on the west coast of the Island, than on the east coast where there are plenty of localcontractors. The District MOF is attempting to downsize the direct award contracts which arecurrently supplying the KNT forestry crews with sporatic work, and pressuring the KNT to bidand compete openly for silviculture contracts. Ultimately, the KNT would also like to seeband members take over and start their own, independent contracting company, but workershave little real incentive (or business skills) to break out of the direct award arrangementcurrently in place. Although both the District MOF and the KNT want essentially the samething, they appear to be working at cross purposes in attempting to get there. While theDistrict office is pushing to downsize the direct award program, the KNT, has been strugglinghard (preparing funding applications and lobbying all levels of government) to keep theforestry crew working and motivated.104Problems the KNT has encountered in developing cooperative management of second growthstands in the Kyuquot stem from both internal and external sources. Externally, the progresstoward cooperative management of second growth stands have been stalled by an overtaxedbureaucracy, and lack of funding for siliviculture. Internal problems are related to a lack ofworker motivation and business skills, and to the little experience people in Kyuquot have hadin working with outsiders. The need for effective cross-cultural communication presents amajor challenge for both the KNT and the District MOF. The breakdown of communicationchannels is a problem both parties need to work to resolve if there is to be further progresstoward cooperative management of second growth stands.In summary, the KNT forestry initiatives can be said to have been successful in increasinglocal employment, decreasing dependency on social assistance, and bringing more of thebenefits of local logging operations into the community. It is taking much longer than wasoriginally expected, however, to make silviculture the basis for providing long termcommunity stability and economic self-sufficiency for the KNT.Community Development Planning34With the community’s recognition of the crisis they were faced with, and with the Council’snew commitment to community-based development, the stage was set for a communitydevelopment planning initiative in Kyuquot. The Council knew that any efforts they made ateconomic or social development would fail if they were not guided by the communitymembers themselves.Beginning in 1989, the Council and the Forestry Advisor started meeting with Kyuquot eldersto map out and reaffirm the boundaries of the traditional tribal territory. From the veryInformation for this section was drawn from personal communications with Richard Leo, KNT ChiefCouncillor, and Ron Frank, KNT Forestry Advisor and from personal interviews with Kyuquot residents.105beginning, it was clear that the KNT recognized the need to use both insider and outsiderknowledge and to find means for combining them so that development goals could be met.The mapping exercise, in which boundaries were drawn on a map, based on the memories andexperiences of elders, was the first step toward making the implicit knowledge of insiders(elders), explicit in a way that could be communicated to everyone.The planning process extended over a period of three years and was centered arounddeveloping a cohesive community vision of what people wanted for the future in Kyuquot.The KNT’s Forestry Advisor played a central role in this process, interviewing band members,preparing discussion papers, facilitating community workshops, and compiling information.While still an outsider (and recognized as such by the community), the consultant was broughtcloser to the people in the community and to their needs and values. The process created ameans through which there could be open communication between the consultant andcommunity members.The process of identifying the needs, goals and aspirations of the community involved one-on-one interviews, questionnaires, a videotaped mapping exercise with elders, “kitchen table” orfamily meetings, women’s discussion groups, and community workshops. Interviews wereconducted both in Kyuquot and in Campbell River where almost one-third of KNT memberslive. In this manner, everyone in the community was given an opportunity to express his orher views and was made to feel that they were important. The consultant learned theaspirations of the people first hand and KNT members learned that they had a stake in theplanning process and a say about their future.The process culminated in a draft summary document35of the tribe’s needs and aspirationswith respect to everything from resource management, to education, to the justice system. TheKyuquot Native Tribe, “Our Land, Our Resources, Our Government,” October, 1992.106document was presented and discussed at a two-day community workshop held in November1992 along with an “Interim Resource Management Strategy” prepared by the KNT and theirfisheries and forestry advisors.The process worked toward rebuilding the pride that over the years had been eroded orstripped away from the community. The title of the KNT document, “Our Land, OurResources, Our Government,” is itself an indication of the success of the planning exercise asan empowering process. According to the Chief Councillor, “four years ago no one cared--now people are becoming more a part of the work Council is doing”36 The process helped tofocus the community into thinking not just in terms of what their rights were, but in terms oftheir aboriginal responsibilities.The process helped the Council also to further redefine its role in the community. Rather thandictate, Council began to provide leadership within the community through the support andencouragement it provided to its members. Education became a key function of the Council.According to the Chief Councillor, the Council is determined to develop ALM by getting asmany people as possible interested and involved in fisheries and forestry within the TribalTerritory. Rather than holding countless band meetings, the KNT Council counts on this typeof direct involvement to keep people informed of the work it is doing. The Nuu-Chah-NulthTribal Council strongly supports this approach and holds Kyuquot out as an example to otherband councils in their membership.The planning process also helped to create a common understanding, or community vision ofthe direction in which development should be geared. This collective vision has helped tokeep development efforts on track. The production and circulation of maps showing KyuquotTribal Territory has also made it clear to industry and government where the KNT’s goals lie.36 Richard Leo, KNT Chief Councillor, Interview by author, Kyuquot, B.C., May 26, 1993.107A negative aspect to the process has been the reaction of some non-Native residents inKyuquot. Many were shocked by the size and expanse of the area that lay within KNT TribalTerritory. Some non-Native members of KEEPS who had been working hard to fight loggingin the Sound preferred to see the land protected through provincial land use designations thansee it come under KNT management with no guarantees that it would be protected fromlogging. Non-Native residents had been largely alienated from the KNT planning process.Tension increased with the release of the KNT document “Our Lands, Our Resources, OurGovernment,” which contained a statement that the resources and jobs in the Tribal Territorywould be for the benefit of KNT members first and of non-Native Kyuquot residents second.In interviews, several non-Native residents mentioned this document specifically as an exampleof the extent to which they had been shut out of the KNT’s plans for the future. It appears thatthe surfacing tensions are an inevitable result of the shifting power base in the community.5.4.3 Stage Three: Joint Management with IndustryAs land use conflicts throughout the province, and particularly on Vancouver Island continuedto escalate into the 1990’s, and as more and more non-timber demands were being placed onthe forests, logging companies began to recognize a need to at least talk to the communities inthe areas where they operate. For logging companies on the west coast, where so much of theland base is tied up in land use planning exercises and where future access to a wood supply isextremely tenuous and uncertain, establishing alliances with local First Nations provides someextra security. The companies which find themselves in the tightest squeeze, in terms ofaccess to a wood supply, tend to be those which are courting such relationships.These factors have certainly come into play in facilitating the new relationship that hasdeveloped between the KNT and both International Forest Products (Interfor) and WesternForest Products (WFP)--two of the forest companies holding tenure in Kyuquot TribalTerritory. It has been the KNT’s own initiatives, however, detailed under Stages One and108Two above, that compelled the KNT to develop and explore a new relationship with the forestcompanies. The development of a working relationship with the forest companies representeda new stage of community initiative--one which employed a completely new tactic to getaround the obstacles that surfaced in Stage Two. The willingness of the companies to “talk”created a window of opportunity through which the KNT could push to become directly andmeaningfully involved from the very beginning of the planning process for proposed loggingdevelopments within their Territory. It provided a potential alternative to multi-stakeholderplanning processes, such as WSLAC, which did not address community goals for culturalautonomy and self-government. Working closer with the forest companies had the potentialalso for opening new funding opportunities and new silvicultural contracts which could lessenthe KNT’s reliance on an over-taxed MOF District office. By focusing on work with theforest companies, the KNT could avoid some of the tensions that Stage Two initiatives createdbetween the KNT and MOF District office. It was these considerations which helped to shapethe relationships that developed between the KNT and both Interfor and WFP. The two,somewhat different relationships that evolved, are described below.Interfor37By 1991 in Kyuquot Sound, no company stood more to gain by making important Native alliesthan Interfor. The bad publicity the company got from the KNT-Environmental lobby over itsoperations in Kyuquot, the mobilization of the Kyuquot people around the land claim issue andthe increasingly obvious determination of the KNT to gain more control over forestmanagement in their Territory all put pressure on Interfor to consult with the KNT. With alarge portion of its wood supply under tenure within the Kyuquot Supply Block, and with ascarred public image in desperate need of repair, the company had nothing to lose and much togain by talking to the KNT.The analysis in this section is based on a combination of sources including Interfor-KNT meetingminutes, correspondence between Interfor and the KNT, interviews by the author and field notes taken during theauthor’s attendance at meetings between Interfor and the KNT. All are referenced in the bibliography.109For the KNT the major impetus which led it to begin working with Interfor was the “CachalotConsensus” that came out of WSLAC. The consensus agreement meant that the two cutbiocksscheduled to be logged in the Cachalot Creek watershed were eliminated from Interfor’s 5-yearplan. Logging would not be allowed to proceed in the Cachalot cutbiocks until such time asthere was “visually effective greenup” on surrounding seaward slopes already harvested. Thisagreement and the concession to allow road construction through the Cachalot Creek watershedwas opposed by the KNT Chief Councillor. He advised the representatives of the communityof Kyuquot and KEEPS who sat on the Cachalot sub-committee of WSLAC, not to sign theagreement. The agreement was disappointing from the KNT’s perspective, because it did notaddress the issue of the rate-of-cut and did not, in the Chief Councillor’s view, provideadequate safeguards to ensure logging would be kept permanently out of the Cachalot.38Nevertheless, the consensus among the members of the sub-committee was reached. Havingnot been party to the agreement, the KNT demanded that Interfor deal with its concernsdirectly, outside the confines of WSLAC.By May 1991 Interfor and the KNT, represented by the Chief Councillor and the KNTForestry Advisor, had agreed to work together in developing a 5-year management plan for theCachalot-Narrowgut.39 Interfor and the KNT each prepared separate statements of theirobjectives in preparing a joint plan. Their main objectives, stated respectively, were asfollows,38 Tom Pater, the KEEPS representative party to the agreement, has emphasized, in personalcommurncations with the author, that the rate-of-cut issue was not open for negotiation by the Cachalot SubCommittee. He maintains that the deferral of logging in the Cachalot cutbiocks (coupled with the KNTs workwith Interfor) delayed logging in the Cachalot-Narrowgut Chart Area by two years. He also emphasized that noagreement was made to allow logging in the Cachalot. He is confident that the logging deferral in the Cachalotdrainage ill be indefinitely extended.As a licensee, Interfor was legally bound to prepare such a plan for the MOF.110Interfor wishes, over the long term, to be able to continue to economically harvesttimber in the Traditional Territory of the Kyuquot Native Tribe,The Kyuquot Native Tribe wishes to be able to continue to prosper in our TraditionalTerritory, and to care for the ecosystem and resources in the Territory.40By the summer of 1991 both parties signed a joint letter of understanding in which therespective objectives were accepted as, “the basis for working towards cooperativemanagement of the resources in the Kyuquot Supply Block and the Kyuquot TribalTerritory.”41 Several meetings were held in Kyuquot attended by Interfor representatives andKNT councillors, advisors and members of the fisheries and forestry crews. The KNT’s mainthrusts throughout the negotiations were:1) to see logging practices changed--they rejected the use of progressive clearcuts in theirTerritory and wanted to work cooperatively to develop alternative harvesting practices,using the Narrowgut as a “model” of watershed management;2) to see the rate of cut reduced to levels that could be sustained on a watershed basis. As afirst step toward this they wanted Interfor to help pressure the MOF to include in its YieldAnalysis of the Strathcona TSA, a separate analysis for the Kyuquot Supply Block portionof the TSA. This would provide the information necessary to determine the rate at whichthe west coast portion of the TSA was being overcut and would provide the policyrationale for reducing the AAC in the Supply Block to more sustainable levels;3) to ensure that they received more of the benefits from logging in terms of training andemployment; and,4) to ensure protection of fish habitat.The working relationship did not last long before an impasse was reached. By June 1992 thecompany and the KNT split over a 5-year development plan Interfor presented at a communitymeeting in Kyuquot. The community (Native and non-Native) was united in its rejection ofthe plan which was perceived as Interfor’s plan and not the “joint plan” the KNT and Interforhad supposedly been working on together. In a strongly worded letter to Interfor’s Chief40 “Letter of Understanding for Development of Cooperative Management for the Kyuquot TribalTerritory” August 8, 1991.41 Ibid.111Forester, the Chief Councillor expressed the KNT’s displeasure at Interfor’s “talk and log”tactics,Although we have had some joint meetings it is obvious to us that we are still beingdictated to, and that the agenda has been previously set. . .Joint-management is cooperation, not we co-operate and you operate. This is not acceptable.42Despite what may have seemed a futile attempt at cooperative management, the meetingsbetween the KNT and Interfor did set the stage for a better more equal power sharingrelationship to develop. After the ill-fated June, 1992 meeting, the company made strongefforts to demonstrate its good faith and commitment to joint management with the KNT.These efforts included:-working with the KNT to prepare joint applications for funding from government to supportthe KNT in the joint management planning process;-working with the KNT Forestry Advisor and others in developing a proposal for a pilotproject to test the feasibility of alternative harvesting systems on the west coast;-increasing contact and opening communication lines with KNT members through an increasednumber of joint on-site inspections and monitoring of all developments in the CachalotNarrowgut;-planning to spread operations over more areas so that the impact of harvesting on any onearea is reduced; and,-completing a yield analysis for the Kyuquot Supply Block.It was the completion of the Yield Analysis in November 1992 that led the KNT to reconsiderInterfor’s commitment to joint-management. The day before the KNT’s 2-day land claim andresource management community workshop, Interfor representatives travelled to Kyuquot topresent the results of the Yield Analysis that they had commissioned on behalf of themselvesand the KNT. The report, which calculated sustainable yield using the same procedure usedby the MOF, but calculating it for the Supply Block as opposed to the entire TSA, found that42 Kyuquot Native Tribe, Letter to International Forest Products. June 16, 1992112the level of harvest in the Kyuquot Supply Block was 40% higher than what was sustainable.43The weight of the results of the analysis were made even more powerful by the fact that the40% figure was considered conservative in the extreme in that it made no allowances forrestraints on cut levels due to wilderness retention, landscape management demands, soilstability zones or streamside management zones.The KNT felt that this new information could go a long way toward forcing the MOF toreduce the AAC in the Supply Block. The completion of this report was interpreted by theKNT as a measure of good faith on the part of Interfor. It led the KNT to finally withdraw itsobjections to the commencement of harvesting in the Cachalot-Narrowgut in accordance withInterfor’s 5-year plan. While the KNT only agreed to logging proposed in the first two yearscontained in the 5-year development plan, Interfor was legally bound to send the entire 5-yearplan to the MOF for approval.45Beyond this, there has been limited progress toward meeting the KNT’s demands. At the mostbasic level, Interfor has shown no commitment to meet the KNT’s demands for a sustainablelevel of harvest by watershed. Although the KNT Forestry Advisor, concedes that the loggingpractices being used in the Cachalot-Narrowgut are better than anything Interfor has donebefore, they are still not exemplary in his view, and certainly do not the “model” of alternativeharvesting practices which the KNT had been pushing for. In fact, negotiations between theKNT and Interfor concerning an alternative harvesting pilot project in the CachalotNarrowgut, have come to a grinding halt. Interfor now plans to experiment with “landscapelogging” to reduce the visual impact of clearcutting in two cut blocks not even within theCachalot-Narrowgut chart area. Despite these disappointments, the KNT’s attempts to workT.M. Thomson Associates, “Timber Supply Analysis of Stratcona TSA, For Kyuquot TSB, SaywardTSB, Loughborough TSB,” (TMT File #289 1), Prepared for International Forest Products and the KyuquotNative Tbe, July 1992.KEEPS, Letter to John Cuthbert, Chief Forester, Ministry of Forests. October, 14, 1992.Kyuquot Native Tribe-Interfor, Meeting Minutes. November 3-4, 1992113more cooperatively with Interfor, allowed it to advance its goals beyond where was possiblethrough their alliance with environmentalists alone.Western Forest Products (WFP)KNT efforts to develop joint management have not been limited to one company. Similarefforts have been made with WFP, a company facing much different circumstances in terms ofits access to wood supply within Kyuquot Tribal Territory. The company’s charted tenure inthe Power and Battle River watersheds is also a “study area” under the provincial ProtectedArea Strategy. Logging in the area has been deferred until a decision is made its status,which, at that time, was not expected until 1995. With the announcement of this deferral in1992, the company suddenly had no access to a wood supply in the Kyuquot Supply Block. Itsincentive to create an alliance with the KNT increased accordingly. As the Chief Forester ofthe company, explained,• . . we realized that we may never get into the Power-Battle--it may never come out ofPAS. In view of the aspirations of the band we would never have an oortunity tooperate in Power-Battle without some sort of agreement with the KNT.WFP gave the KNT Chief Councillor a tour of their North Island operations to demonstratethe care taken and the fisheries enhancement work in which the company had been involved.The Chief Councillor was suitably impressed and meetings began in the fall of 1992 to discussthe process for developing a long-term joint management plan for the Power-Battle drainages.The major difference between the negotiations with Interfor and those with WFP is that WFPis interested in working on a long-term (20-year) plan while Interfor is struggling to get KNTapproval for what amounts to a 5-year plan of operations. The different approaches appear tobe due more to the tenure situations of the respective companies than to any real difference inGovernment of B.C., Towards and Protected Areas Strategy for B.C., (map brochure), 1992Bill Dumont, Chief Forester, WFP, Interview by author, Vancouver, B.C., May 4, 1993.114management style. Like negotiations with Interfor, the major stumbling block for WFP is theKNT’s demand for the annual rate of cut in the Power-Battle to be at a level that could besustained in perpetuity. Also like negotiations with Interfor, there has been no success ingetting the provincial government either to participate or to formally endorse these jointmanagement initiatives--a situation which is proving to be a major obstacle to any furtherprogress.The other ongoing obstacle which continued to plague the KNT was the lack of funding toenable it to participate in a long-term planning process. The KNT’s Forestry Advisor, beganmeeting with both WFP and Interfor to prepare an application for “Joint Stewardship” fundingthrough a program administered by the B.C. Ministries of Forests and Aboriginal Affairs.After several joint meetings, and backroom lobbying by Interfor, the KNT was told that theirapplication needed the endorsement of the Campbell River Forest District office. The DistrictManager has refused to provide the endorsement--stating that the MOF is not the appropriatevehicle for funding the KNT’ s involvement in forest operations, (although he conceded that itmay be in the future).48Although no real substantive outcomes were to result from the few meetings the KNT had withWFP, the commitment of the KNT and WFP to work together on a joint plan has hadramifications for the community of Kyuquot. Some residents of Kyuquot, both Native andnon-Native, felt anxious over the mood of cooperation between the WFP and the KNT.Members of KEEPS had worked hard for the protection of the Power-Battle, but thedeveloping alliance between the KNT and WFP left them no room to manoeuvre in their lobbyefforts. As one member of KEEPS said, “we can’t fight WFP and the Band too.”49According to the Chief Counciflor, the KNT’s interests lay somewhere inbetween KEEPS48 Don Sluggett, Campbell River Forest District Manager, Interview by author, (telephone), January 21,1994.Sam Kayra, Interview by author, Kyuquot, B.C., June 4, 1993.115determination to keep all logging out of the Power-Battle and WFP’s resolve to have access towood throughout the entire area. The Chief Councillor sought a solution that would bring theeconomic benefits of logging to his community without compromising the pristine lake, riverand tributaries within the watersheds which were essential for a healthy fishery.50The Power-Battle issue has come to serve as a catalyst forcing latent tensions to surface in thecommunity. Economic development interests are coming into conflict with preservationinterests within the community of Kyuquot. Non-Native members of KEEPS feel they arebeing left out of the process, and feel shunned by the KNT which is making no effort tocommunicate. The lack of communication between KEEPS and the KNT has resulted in themarginalization of KEEPS--both as a unifying force within the community of Kyuquot and asan effective lobby group on behalf of the community as a whole.Tensions have been increased further by government policies, such as B.C. ‘s AboriginalFishing Strategy, which have served to draw a clear distinction between the rights of Nativeand non-Natives people in Kyuquot. While a distinction in the treatment of Native and non-Native people has always been present in government policy, it has historically been non-Native people who have benefitted. This is changing with the recognition of aboriginal rights.Under the Aboriginal Fishing Strategy, for example, Native people in Kyuquot are entitled toa greater share of the resource than are their non-Native neighbours who also rely on fishingfor their livelihood. In a similar vein, funding available only to Indian bands, has recentlyallowed for the construction of new houses, and public works improvements on the reserve.All of this signals a shifting of the balance of power in Kyuquot and the tensions that arebound to result may have a bearing on the outcome of the KNT’s efforts to bring about ALM.50 Richard Leo, KNT Chief Councillor, Interview by author, Kyuquot, B.C., June 3, 1993.116As tensions within the community as whole grew, so was the magnitude of the obstacles to theKNT’s joint planning efforts with WFP. The KNT’s joint management planning with WFPdid not advance far before it became clear to both parties that the MOF had to be included inthe process. Attempts by the KNT and WFP to involve bureaucrats from both the District andRegional offices of the MOF were met with little success. The District office was faced with adilemma in that it was required to follow the policy and directives coming from politicians inVictoria. WFP’s Chief Forester explained,We’re having trouble getting the Forest Service to endorse or condone what we’redoing. They say they’re too busy to participate in the planning process... .We’re doingthings here that are ahead of policy. Nothing annoys the bureaucracy more than whenyou do that.51The pressure to continue harvesting timber out of Kyuquot Tribal Territory at rates that farexceeded sustainable levels was, and continues to be, extreme. The forest policies andlegislation in B.C. allow, and in many ways require, this overharvesting to continue. TheKNT came to recognize that the companies had neither the authority nor the incentive toreduce the rate of harvest in Kyuquot Territory to levels that could be sustained over the longterm. Forest policies, legislation and regulations--the entire management regime--acted againstthe KNT and the achievement of its goals for ALM. As the formidability of these barrierscame to light, the limitations of continuing to work with the companies in the absence ofgovernment representatives was brought into focus. This awareness led the KNT into its mostrecent stage of initiatives.5.4.4 Stage Four: Treaty NegotiationsFrustrated by the apparent unwillingness of the District MOF office to cooperate in thedevelopment of joint forestry management in Kyuquot Territory, the KNT has begun to lookbeyond the forest companies and the MOF to focus its attention on the federal government and51 Bill Dumont, WFP Chief Forester, Interview by author, Vancouver, B.C., May 4, 1993.117treaty negotiations. In October 1993, the KNT was among the first to formally submit a“statement of intent” to begin treaty negotiations. This initiative represents the first stage inthe six-stage process being used in B.C. for the negotiation of treaties.52 The KNT plans touse the treaty negotiation process as a vehicle for obtaining “interim measures agreements” thatwould protect the lands and resources within its Territory from further developments (loggingor otherwise) while treaty negotiations are taking place.53 As part of their strategy to ensurethat treaty negotiations proceed, the KNT is planning to make a formal declaration ofsovereignty. Signs are being made to mark the boundaries of the Kyuquot Territory and asystem of visas and passports is being designed through which the KNT will control whocomes in and out of the Territory.The decision to initiate treaty negotiations, has had consequences for the KNT’s otherinitiatives. Joint planning initiatives with WFP and Interfor, for instance, have been set asidewhile the KNT focuses energy on treaty talks. With the exception of the collapsed alternativeharvesting initiative, the curtailment of these joint planning initiatives have not adverselyaffected the KNT’s relationships with either WFP or Interfor. Interfor, for example, continuesto keep KNT workers employed in stream cleaning and grass seeding. While its energy hasbeen diverted from long-term planning negotiations with industry, the KNT continues to bevigilant in communicating their concerns and grievances over specific logging operations to thecompanies involved. Most recently, (January 1994), the KNT met with Fletcher-Challenge(now named Timber West Ltd.) company officials to express community concerns overdamage to salmon habitat, and continued access to wildlife in the Artlish watershed where thecompany has operations.5452 See, British Columbia Claims Task Force, The Report of the British Columbia Claims Task Force,June, 1991.Kyuquot First Nation, “Kyuquot Nation first to file papers with B.C. Treaty Commission,” Newsrelease, (tober, 1993.Ron Frank, Personal communication, January 15, 1994.118With respect to the KNT’s cooperative forestry initiatives with the Campbell River ForestDistrict office, it appears that the KNT’s commitment to treaty negotiations is having somepositive effect. It prompted the District office to arrange a meeting with KNT representativesto discuss the KNT’s expectations with respect to cooperative forestry in Kyuquot Territory.As a minimum requirement, the KNT representatives told the District office staff they wanted18 band members assured of full-time employment in silviculture within the Territory.Although no commitment has been made to meet this demand, the KNT Forestry Advisor stillconsidered the meeting to be a good one and one that could mark the beginning of animproved relationship between the KNT and the MOF District office.The MOF’s District Silviculturalist shares this sentiment. In an interview, he explained thatsome of the communication and motivational problems that have hampered relations betweenthe MOF and the KNT in the past, are now being dealt with.56 Lines of communicationbetween the KNT, the Forestry Advisor and the MOF, for example, have now been clearly setout so that there is greater accountability. In addition, a new KNT forestry crew chief, who ishighly motivated and well respected in the community, has helped to increase the level ofmotivation among forestry crew members. There appears to be room for cautious optimismthat relations will be less strained in the future.While treaty negotiations provide a new and valuable opportunity for the KNT to pursue itsgoals for ALM, the negotiations are also bound to open up a whole new set of obstacles andconstraints to ALM which the KNT will have to face. This stage marks a major turning pointin the KNT’s development process. It is a point to which many First Nations in B.C. aretrying to get to and ready their communities for. The overall process by which the variousIbid.56 Scott Dunn, Campbell River Forest District Silviculturalist, Interview by author, (telephone),February 9, 1994.119initiatives worked together to bring the KNT to this newest stage is analyzed in the nextchapter.5.5 PROCESS TRENDSIn retracing the history of events and initiatives that have moved the KNT along a path towardALM, several broad observations can be made and patterns can be identified. Framing theKNT’s development process as one of staged initiatives has uncovered patterns which, in turn,reveal the pivotal role of social learning in the advancement of ALM. These patterns areidentified and discussed below, followed by a discussion of the importance of learning to theprocess.5.5.1 Patterns and ObservationsThe process began with community recognition of a crisis and a perceived a need to act. Oncethe community itself (both Native and non-Native) became aware of the problem, actions weretaken to raise the level of awareness outside the community. A strong, bottom-up communityinitiative (protests at MOF offices) served to raise tensions between the bureaucratic-corporateinterests of the forestry management regime, and the socio-economic interests of thecommunity to a level where new forums for community involvement in forestry could evolve.The protests, and the tensions created by them, acted as a catalyst for the development of newinitiatives and alliances.From there, the process continued to evolve through stages where community members havecooperated with eachother, and with outsiders, in order to find solutions for getting aroundincreasingly complex obstacles. The cooperative alliances which developed between the KNTand other outside interests (e.g., KEEPS, environmental groups, government and forestcompanies), have been important in moving the KNT along the road to ALM. They have120provided the means for combining internal and external understandings in order to gain newinsights into problems and develop strategies for overcoming them.The description of the history of the process shows how these alliances continually shift asobstacles are overcome, as new tensions are raised and as new opportunities are revealed.Cooperative relationships with outsiders have developed as a result of converging anddiverging interests and strategies between players. The strategies of the KNT and two forestcompanies, for example, converged in the joint management initiatives in Stage Three. Theyhave diverged again with the KNT’s initiation of the treaty negotiation process. Similarly, theinterests of the KNT, KEEPS and other environmental groups converged in Stage One andTwo out of a common perceived need to raise the level of public awareness of the poorlogging practices in Kyuquot. These alliances, developed in these early stages of the process,have become less significant in the later stages as the KNT encountered new obstacles andopportunities for advancing ALM.Another pattern can be identified which relates, not so much to the relationships betweenplayers, as to the relationships between strategies and initiatives. The KNT has propelled itselfalong a path toward ALM by employing a broad range of strategies working both internallyand externally to overcome obstacles to ALM. Some have been used to improve thecommunity’s capacity for self-management, while others have been aimed at creating anexternal environment in which ALM can develop. Stages One and Two employed separateinitiatives for dealing with either internal or external opportunities and constraints. Strategiesaimed specifically at overcoming internal obstacles to ALM have included social developmentprograms, a community planning process and the early phases of the community forestryinitiative. In many ways, these strategies or initiatives have depended on other initiatives usedto overcome external constraints to ALM. Strategies directed toward external obstacles have121included protests and publicity, lobbying all levels of government, and negotiations withgovernment and industry.The later phases of the KNTs community forestry initiatives with the MOF, and its work withindustry to develop joint forestry management plans, represent a strengthening of the linksbetween internal and external development strategies. These more comprehensive ALMinitiatives emerged from the knowledge and experience gained from learning and working witheach other and with outsiders in Stage Two. From a social learning point of view, it follows,that as insider and outsider understandings merge, the links between internal and externaldevelopment strategies strengthen. The nature and importance of these linkages are examinedin detail in the next chapter. Although it appears that the linkages between internal andexternal development strategies become stonger with each stage of initiatives, it is still tooearly to determine the extent to which treaty negotiations in Stage Four will continue thistrend.Finally, this conceptualization of the KNT’s development process shows that learning hasoccurred at different levels simultaneously throughout the process. With each successivestage, a new level of opportunities for learning between KNT and outside people andorganizations have been added. Figure 10 illustrates these different levels as they emerged ateach stage of the development process. The learning that occurred during Stage One, forexample, was primarily between individual community members. By Stage Two of theprocess, interactions and learning centered around the KNT Council and Forestry Advisor.They acted at the interface between the KNT and external people and organizations.Internally, learning occurred between the Council and individual Band members. IndividualBand members had few interactions with outsiders such as environmental groups, lawyers,MOF officials and forest company representatives at this stage. The KNT Council andForestry Advisor represented the rest of the community in these external interactions.122HGURE 10: Levels of Social Learning in the KNTDevelopment ProcessKNT Council4??Forest ManagementRegimeBroader Society123By Stage Three’s joint management initiatives, a new level of interaction and opportunity forsocial learning emerged. Although Council still acted at the interface between the forestcompanies and the community, individual Band members now had opportunities to interactdirectly with company foresters and executives. Meanwhile learning continued at all levelssimultaneously--from the level of the individual, up to the level of the community and theforest companies. Stage Four represents the next highest level. Treaty negotiations present anopportunity for learning to occur between the community and the whole of Canadian society,as represented by the federal and provincial governments. Whether learning will be able tocontinue at all other levels at the same time is for the future to tell.5.5.2 Role of LearningThe description of the progression of the KNT actions and initiatives through stages illustratesthe long and difficult road to ALM that the KNT has travelled for at least the past four years.It has been a long road with many obstacles around which the KNT has had to either chipthrough or swerve and find new routes around--always with a mind toward the main road onwhich it wished to travel. With each stage of roadblocks passed, new and bigger ones haveappeared requiring the KNT to work with outsiders to overcome them. The learning that hasresulted has enabled the KNT to continue to advance through stages toward ALM.This conceptualization of the process as evolving through stages reaching deeper into themainstream highlights the role and importance of social learning. The new knowledge, skillsand experience the KNT acquired through its interactions with outsiders have been used togenerate new solutions for overcoming obstacles and move the process along through new setsof opportunities and constraints. Constraints encountered in one stage of the process haveoften been transformed into opportunities through a process of learning. For example, thedestructive logging practices originally percieved as a serious threat to the cultural andeconomic survival of the community, became an opportunity for advancing ALM. Learning124between individuals within the community and later between community members and theForestry Advisor, transformed the threat that logging posed to local fisheries, into anopportunity for creating local jobs in silviculture, diversifying the local economy, andprotecting the local fisheries.Another example of a constraint becoming an opportunity involves the multi-stakeholderprocess (WSLAC) initiated by the MOF to address community concerns over forestmanagement. The KNT soon found the WSLAC process to to be an inappropriate forum foraddressing its concerns and considered it a constraint to the advancement of ALM. Once theKNT’s withdrew from the process, WSLAC became an opportunity which could be used topressure the MOF and the companies to work with the KNT directly. The KNT, the forestcompanies and the MOF all learned from the failure of WSLAC to accommodate the KNT.More appropriate forums for KNT involvement in forest management then emerged in theform of community forestry initiatives with the MOF and joint management with the forestcompanies.There are limitations to this conceptualization of the history of the KNT’s developmentprocess. Grouping the initiatives into stages has been somewhat arbitrary. The stagesprovided a convenient means for structuring the analysis to focus on the role of social learningin the development process. In reality, many of the stages and initiatives occurredsimultaneously. Opportunities and constraints constantly evolved in response to individualinitiatives, but also in response to the combined initiatives both within and across stages. It isimportant to recognize that opportunities and constraints are not fixed at each “stage” of theprocess but are in a constant state of flux.This analysis has been useful in demonstrating the importance of developing cooperativealliances with outsiders and working simultaneously within and without the community to125advance ALM. Missing from this analysis is an examination of the linkages across stages andbetween initiatives. Also absent is an examination of the threats that the KNT’s approach toadvancing ALM entails. Chapter 6 addresses these omissions. It identifies the potential risksand benefits of the process and shows how the linkages between initiatives have worked tominimize risks.1266.0 THE CHALLENGE OF JOINT MANAGEMENT6.1 INTRODUCTIONThroughout the community’s development efforts, the KNT Council and Forestry Advisorhave acted at the interface between those within the community1(insiders), and thoseindividuals, organizations and agencies affecting the community from without (outsiders).2The challenge for the KNT has been to find ways and means for recognizing and making useof outside opportunities to help combat the problems faced by the community, while at thesame time maintaining and strengthening social traditions and cultural identity. As attested toin the literature, this is the central challenge aboriginal communities face in their developmentefforts. It stems from the fact that outside opportunity structures for community developmentare rooted in mainstream cultural norms which are in many ways antithetical to aboriginalcultures and aspirations.3The previous chapter showed that the long history of the KNT’s development efforts have ledthe community deeper and deeper into the mainstream in search of opportunities for ALM.Because the KNT has no legislative authority over who logs where, when, and how withintheir Tribal Territory, negotiating joint management agreements with forest tenure-holdingcompanies has provided a valuable means for the KNT to advance its goals towards ALM.While such an approach may have been necessary to bring about change, there have beenserious associated risks.This chapter addresses the fifth and sixth case study objectives. It identifies some of thepotential risks and benefits associated with the KNT’s joint management initiatives, andThe term “community” here refers to the aboriginal community in Kyuquot.At different stages in the KNT’s development process, and for some intents and purposes, non-Nativeresidents in Kyuquot can be considered “insiders,” while in other circumstances they are “outsiders” to thecommunity.A. Lockhart, “The Insider-Outsider Dialectic in Native Socio-Economic Development: A Case Studyin Process Understanding,” Canadian Journal of Native Studies 2:1(1982): 159-68.127analyzes the means through which the KNT has worked to reduce the potential risks. Thechapter considers how joint planning initiatives have been linked to other community initiativesand how they have worked together to reduce the potential risks. Attention is refocussed froma description of separate initiatives evolving through stages, (as in Chapter 5) to an analysis ofthe linkages between initiatives. This analysis thus provides different perspective into theoverall process the KNT has used to advance ALM. The chapter considers joint managementin context with all the other various forms of initiatives and strategies that have preceeded andoccurred alongside joint management.6.2 RISKS AND BENEFITS OF JOINT MANAGEMENT6.2.1 BenefitsThe KNT has benefitted in many respects from its work with the forest companies to jointlymanage forestry operations within Kyuquot Tribal Territory. Aside from the obvious benefitof increasing opportunities for community involvement in forestry planning and decisionmaking, outcomes of the KNT’ s efforts in joint management have included training andemployment opportunities, the development of skills for community self-management, moreecologically sound forestry practices and a strengthened lobby for policy reforms. Jointmanagement has served the double function of creating pressure for change both internally andexternally. It has provided an avenue for greater community control over local forestmanagement while at the same time developing the interest, competence, and confidence ofcommunity members to take on greater management responsibilities.Training and EmploymentTraining and employment for Band members have been direct results of both the jointmanagement and community forestry initiatives. The KNT-environmentalist alliance andlobby efforts have also contributed to local employment opportunities by insisting that thedamage caused by past logging practices be remedied. As already noted in the discussion of128community forestry initiatives, Interfor contracted two KNT crews to clean streams of loggingdebris and to grass seed steep unstable slopes were clearcut and in danger of sliding.The increased number of jobs in forestry have increased community income and providedKyuquot people with a viable alternative to welfare. More than that, the four KNT forestrycrews now working on contracts have provided opportunities for those so inclined, to gainsupervisory and leadership skills and experience. In time, the KNT Council expects thatworkers will gain the confidence and skills necessary to start their own silviculture company,and bid for their own contracts independently.The creation of local forestry jobs has also diversified the economic base of the community.The branching out of forestry crews into a number of different activities which have included,planting, spacing, brushing, girdling, stream cleaning, and grass seeding have also helped tocreate diversification within the silvicultural skills base of the community. This has enabledthe KNT to take maximum advantage of local opportunities in silviculture as they arise. It hasalso precluded the need for Band members to look outside the Tribal Territory for work. Intime, both the MOF and the forest companies could become just as reliant on a competent,cost-effective local workforce as the KNT is on them to supply work. The KNT has theadvantage that there is more than one company operating in its Territory. The KNT’scontracts currently come from the MOF, Interfor, Fletcher Challenge, and Canadian PacificForest Products.Training and employment in silviculture serves all four community goals. By increasingincome and diversifying the community economic base, economic self-reliance is promoted.Self-management is encouraged by the KNT Council in the “hands-off” approach it takes tooverseeing the work of the forestry crews. The workers are left responsible for themselvesand are expected to make their own decisions. The organizational and leadership skills that129have developed as a result, have increased the ability of the KNT to provide for its ownmanagement of resources. The very nature of the work itself is aimed at restoring ecologicalintegrity of the land and contributes to more sustainable forestry. Finally, because the jobs areadministered by the KNT Council, which has remained sensitive to the needs of Kyuquotworkers, cultural autonomy has been protected.Self-Management SkillsJoint management with forest companies served to increase the number and type ofopportunities for local people and forest company representatives and employees to interact.Rather than the mainstream standard of meeting around a table, looking at maps, and talking inabstract forestry jargon, more and more interaction began taking place on the ground, one-on-one. Whether it has been through one-on-one communications in the field during siteinspections, around-the-table negotiations in the band office, community meetings in therecreation hail, or even baseball games between the KNT and the nearby Interfor loggingcamp, such opportunities for exchange allowed a measure of mutual respect to grow betweenforest company foresters and executives and Kyuquot people.Community involvement in joint management has been greatly facilitated by creating a broadvariety of different means for interacting and communicating between cultures. Althoughthese were not truly equal power sharing relationships, joint management initiatives providedopportunities to explore different communication channels and enhance cross-culturalcommunication skills on both sides.Joint management initiatives provided opportunities for people in the community to gain theskills and experience that will be needed for ALM to become a reality. Leadership,negotiation, and communication skills developed through joint management will provide someof the skills base necessary to facilitate ALM. The KNT’s work with Interfor and WFP130provided the KNT Council, staff, and members of the fisheries and forestry crews with abetter understanding of external forest planning and management structures as well asexperience in dealing with outside experts and corporate interests. As the community’s skillsand confidence in working with outsiders increases, so will its ability to effectively protectcommunity interests, and it will become better equipped to identify where opportunities lie forshifting more control to the community.Ecologically Sound Forestry PracticesJoint management helped to facilitate the development of new, more ecologically soundforestry practices in Kyuquot Tribal Territory. The protection of fisheries, and by extensionthe protection of the economic and cultural base of the community, has been a high priorityand a major benefit to have come out of the ALM development process. The KNT fisheriescrew played a particularly important role in joint management efforts with Interfor. Theconcerns they expressed over maintenance of water quality and stream habitat for the chumsalmon fishery in the Cachalot-Narrowgut Chart Area have forced Interfor to introduce moresensitive road construction and harvesting techniques.4 The inventories and ongoing field datacollection of the KNT fisheries crew will ensure that logging and road building activities areintensively monitored for their effect on fish returns, water quality and stream habitat. If aproblem develops, it will be discovered quickly by the local fisheries crew so that mitigativemeasures can be taken immediately.The KNT’s ALM initiatives are getting more people in the community out on the land--tendingthe second growth, monitoring logging operations and collecting field data. Members of theKNT’s fisheries and forestry crews are acquiring a knowledge of the land which is informedby both the scientific management perspective of fisheries officers and company foresters, andby their own local knowledge informed by day-to-day, season-to-season experience. This mayKNT-Interfor Meeting Minutes, Kyuquot, B.C., April 1, 1993.131be contributing to an emergence of a new understanding of how resources should be used andthe land cared for which could form the basis for a new aboriginal land management regime inKyuquot.Strengthened Lobby EffortsInterfor’s determination to demonstrate its good faith in participating in joint management withthe KNT led to its commitment to have a Yield Analysis completed for the Kyuquot TimberSupply Block. This report, showing a 40% rate of overcut in the Supply Block, has helped tostrengthen the KNT’s lobby efforts to have the MOF lower the level of cut. The KNT nowhas hard numbers on which to base its arguments for reducing cut levels and the arbitrarynature in which the MOF determines the Allowable Annual Cut (AAC) has been exposed.By teaming up with industry, the KNT was able to increase the pressure on the MOF toparticipate in negotiations to develop a new, more community-oriented, ecologically-soundmanagement regime for Kyuquot Tribal Territory. Whether this increased pressure will beenough still remains to be seen.6.2.2 RIsksThe risks associated with the KNT’s joint management initiatives are similar to those thatoccur whenever outsiders are involved in a community’s development efforts. They are therisks that accompany any attempt to “change the system from within”--there is always thedanger that through the process of getting to know the system one may become part of it andeither develop a vested interest in maintaining the status quo, or simply become overwhelmedand absorbed into it. The risks outlined below are potential outcomes of joint managementwhich could pose a threat to the KNT’s goals for self-reliance.132Erosion of Informal EconomyWhile the increase in wage employment resulting from the KNTs developing relationshipswith the forest companies has benefitted the community, it also poses certain risks. Peopledrawn into the wage economy have less time to spend on traditional pursuits which form thebasis for a subsistence economy. People working 9-5, 5 days a week no longer have time tosmoke and can fish, go hunting and fishing, collect herring roe and berries, or to make breadand preserves--activities which contributed to community self-reliance and formed the basis fora strong informal economic sector in Kyuquot. As the wage economy gains prominence inKyuquot, the community risks undermining the informal sector and the important role it couldplay in achieving self-reliance.Such a statement must be tempered however, by remembering that it was in part the decline inavailability of local resources for subsistence needs that led, the KNT to begin to look formeans for gaining more control over the management of local resources in the first place. TheKNT has, either consciously, or unconsciously made certain tradeoffs. Presumablyindividuals, in deciding to take a job rather than rely on welfare, and the KNT as a whole, inagreeing to manage forestry jointly with the forest companies, believe that the increased self-esteem and opportunity to do something to prevent local resource depletion by outsiders isworth the tradeoff against the potential risk to the informal sector. Silviculture contractsthrough the forest companies are a welcome alternative to government handouts, alcohol abuseand the hand-to-mouth sort of existence that used to prevail in Kyuquot.The increased number of jobs in Kyuquot has increased the influx of cash into the localeconomy but it is unclear, on the surface, how much this has actually benefited thecommunity. Certainly more people now can afford to travel to Campbell River more often forshopping. This has meant that more staples as well as luxury items are being brought in fromoutside Kyuquot and very little of the cash flow is recirculated back into the community.133Also, with more cash at their disposal, more people are choosing to pay for food and serviceswhich they would have otherwise have provided for themselves.There is a risk that the increased community income will result in a chain of consequences thatwill, in the end, reduce community self-reliance. Steady jobs and wages could reduce the timeand inclination people might otherwise direct toward fishing or food preparation; this mayresult in a loss of traditional skills and greater reliance on cash to buy goods and servicescoming from outside Kyuquot; this, in turn, could increase dependence on the jobs supplied bythe forest companies. As long as most of the jobs in Kyuquot are generated through contractswith the forest companies, there is the danger that, rather than becoming more self-reliant, theKNT will merely shift its dependency from government to the forest companies whosecorporate agendas are even less concerned with community needs.Tension Within the Community as a WholeAs has been already touched on in the previous chapter, the advancement of the KNT throughvarious stages of initiatives, each investing more power in the KNT to affect change, hasbrought out tensions within the community of Kyuquot as a whole. A split betweendevelopment and preservation interests has surfaced and raised tension levels between residentsin Kyuquot. Non-Native residents, have been largely left out of the KNT’s work with Interforand WFP, and the KNT has no plans to begin working more cooperatively with non-NativeKyuquot residents.5 All this acts to increase the competition between local interests. Thiscould easily lead to the best interests of the community as a whole being compromised as theyface off against the formidable external corporate-bureaucratic pressures to maintain the statusquo.Richard Leo, KNT Chief Councillor, Interview by author, Kyuquot, B.C., June 2, 1993.134Reliance on Outside ExpertsThe current management regime within which the KNT must work, is highly complex andtechnical, based on complicated projections, statistics and formulas which are, for the mostpart, unintelligible to anyone who is not a professional forester, statistician or economist. TheKNT must rely to a large extend on the technical competence of the advisors and consultants itemploys. In relying so heavily on outside “experts”, the KNT runs the risk of furtherentrenching its dependency on outsiders and reducing the potential for community self-reliance. There is the danger that outsiders will act in their own self-interest and that theinterests of the community will be ignored and compromised beyond acceptable limits.Co-Optation Into Mainstream Resource ManagementJoint management has been used by the KNT as a means for developing resource managementprinciples, policies and practices which reflect cultural values and serve community needs andinterests. The companies, on the other hand, see joint management with the KNT as a meansfor helping to ensure that they can continue to turn a profit by logging within KyuquotTerritory regardless of the outcomes of treaty negotiations.The companies have a major advantage over the KNT in that the management regime currentlyin place, and within which joint management efforts must operate, favours corporate interestsabove those of local communities or First Nations. Only the provincial government has thepower to change the current management regime. As long as there are no governmentrepresentatives at the table, joint management plans will have to be developed to satisfy therequirements of the current regime. This severely limits the ability of joint management, as itcurrently exists in Kyuquot, to serve the interests of the community. Given the currentmanagement regime, the economic interests of the companies take precedence over those ofthe KNT.135Both companies participating in joint management initiatives with the KNT have steadfastlyrefused to accommodate the KNT’s basic demands for sustainable forestry (i.e., an annual cutthat can be sustained in perpetuity) based on smaller management units (e.g., watersheds). Itis the MOF, not the companies, which has the power to implement a sustainable cut.Continued efforts to work with these forest companies in the planning and management offorestry in Kyuquot Territory, therefore, poses the risk that the KNT will become co-optedinto the mainstream, centralized, scientific management regime, run by bureaucrats andforestry “experts” for short-term economic interests. The KNT may very well find that itsdecision makers have agreed to a “joint” logging plan which makes only a few minor, buthighly aggrandized concessions to community interests--lots of fanfare but little of substancefor the community.Cultural AssimilationGiven the highly complex and technical nature of the current management regime, and theneed to use outside experts, the importance and value of local knowledge and culturaltraditions could easily get lost in the process of trying to “change the system from within.”Cultural values and attitudes toward the land may get set aside in the interest of local economicdevelopment which happens in the absence of community social or cultural development. Thecultural ethics of sharing and cooperation which direct and fuel the informal economy inKyuquot risk being supplanted by the competitive individualism inherent in the wage laboureconomy being ushered in through the KNT’s work with the forest companies. There is a riskthat a preoccupation with job security will overshadow the respect for the land and for oneanother that appears so central to Kyuquot culture.1366.2.3 SummaryThe benefits of joint management (or more accurately the whole of the KNT’s ALMdevelopment process), have not been easily won and have been accompanied by a number ofserious risks. The risks and benefits associated with the KNT’s development efforts to date aresummarized in Table 5 below.TABLE 5: Risks and Benefits of Joint ManagementBenefits Risks-training and employment -erosion of informal economy-self-management skills -tension within community-improved forestry practices -reliance on outside experts-strengthened lobby efforts -co-optation-cultural assimilation6.3 LINKAGES BETWEEN INITIATIVESSo long as the KNT has to work with outsiders to advance ALM, the risks discussed abovewill be present. The KNT’ s process for developing ALM has, nonetheless, worked tominimize the risks to self-reliance by maintaining both a holistic and strongly community-based approach to development. An understanding of how the KNT has progressed along theroad to ALM, cannot be complete without an appreciation of how various communityinitiatives--aimed both internally and externally, have been linked to one another. The broad,comprehensive nature of the KNT’s development goals have necessitated an equallycomprehensive approach to satisfying them. Individual initiatives, by themselves, do little toadvance broad community goals, but held together by a web of various linkages, they act as awhole integrated process. The linkages provide the momentum to move the KNT along a pathto ALM.137In Chapter 5, the process was described as a series of separate initiatives proceeding throughstages. This chapter is an attempt to look deeper into the process to gain an understanding ofits inner workings. Attention has been redirected toward the interrelationships betweencomponent parts of a larger whole, and on feedback loops and information flows between andwithin different initatives. Kyuquot people also think in terms of interrelationships, althoughthey do not do so in a detached, disinterested kind of way. They live the linkages. Their livesare centered around them. They do not speak of development in terms of separate social,economic and cultural initiatives--these distinctions, as I discovered through interviews andobservations, are relatively meaningless to them. They live at the interface between them.Missing from a systems approach to understanding is the heart and the spirit of Kyuquotpeople which drives the entire process and keeps it from falling apart into a chaotic mess ofdisconnected initiatives leading nowhere. This spirit can be thought of as the energy whichboth drives and flows through the development process.6.3.1 Linking Social. Cultural and Economic DevelopmentThe KNT’s comprehensive approach to community development has gone a long way toprovide the checks and balances necessary to minimize the risks described above. Thedevelopment of employment opportunities, for example, have been fully integrated with socialdevelopment efforts and have been consistent with cultural values. While there may bedifferent initiatives focussed on different aspects of community life, achieving self-reliancethrough ALM is the unifying theme through which the diverse initiatives are connected.The linkage of community social, economic and cultural development efforts is most evident inthe hiring and employment policy used by the KNT Council. Ahead of production andefficiency comes the personal well-being of the employee. The Council maintains anextremely flexible attitude and has no fixed or strict policy on number of sick days per year,138number of hours worked, or level of production. This flexibility, the KNT Chief Coundillormaintains, is needed to allow people to structure their lifestyles to deal with stress. Jobsprovided by the Council are meant to aid in the social healing process in which the communityis engaged. Economic development resulting from the increased employment is, in a sense, aspinoff effect.Efforts to create jobs have not been done in isolation from cultural considerations. Deciding tocreate a silvicultural workforce in Kyuquot not only made good economic sense, but it wasentirely consistent with the cultural values being revived, in part, through the drug and alcoholtreatment program. The jobs provided people with an opportunity to exercise their aboriginalresponsibilities as caretakers of the land. The opportunity to exercise that responsibility hasthen been taken one step further by involving fisheries and forestry crews directly in the jointmanagement activities with Interfor. Through their involvement in joint management, workersare being given an opportunity to affect resource management decisions in the early stages ofdevelopment planning and monitor developments as they occur on the ground.By linking cultural pride to sobriety and by linking both to the development of employmentopportunities and dealings with the forest companies, the KNT has worked to ensure thatcultural pride and autonomy are reinforced at every level and that cultural values are thedriving force behind all ALM initiatives. The KNT’s holistic approach has helped to ensurethat community economic development includes both social and cultural development so thatthe interests of the community are always kept in clear view. In this way, the risk that somecommunity interests or goals become overwhelmed by the pursuit of any particular goal(eg. job creation) is minimized.The threat that new jobs in forestry poses to the informal economy has been minimized by thetraditional wisdom reflected in the policy the Council has toward to its employees. The139employment offered through the KNT to its members has been intended to complimenttraditional lifestyles rather than replace them. The Chief Councillor has emphasized that workin forestry is not intended in any way to take over from fishing, it is a supplement. Forestryworkers are free to quit their jobs in the summer to fish then return to work on forestry crewsin the fall. The silviculture jobs and the flexible manner in which they are administered helpto diversify the economic base of the community and make it less dependent on any one typeof activity.The threat to the traditional skills base and cultural autonomy of the community has beenreduced by ensuring that economic development has not been isolated from the socio-culturallife of the community. The success of community social development efforts in dealing withsubstance abuse and building pride in culture has helped to rekindle people’s interest intraditional skills, and because more people are now sober, more now have the inclination touse these skills and to teach others. Women elders are teaching others to basket weave, andhave produced beautiful work which they are selling in the local store. Cleaning, smoking andcanning fish are skills that continue to be passed from generation to generation. The Kyuquotlanguage is being taught in the Kyuquot school. Traditional Kyuquot songs and dances thathave been passed down through the generations are being relearned through the teaching of theelders.While it is true that 9-5 work takes time away from such pursuits, what is more important isthat it provides a culturally appropriate alternative to welfare, which many people in Kyuquotbelieve was destroying their community.6 The jobs help instill self-respect not only byallowing workers to provide for themselves and their families, but by providing a means forworkers to reconnect with the land that is so much a part of their identity as Kyuquot people.6 The concern over the effect of welfare on their culture and community was frequently expressed byparticipants during a 2-day community workshop attended by the author in November 1992, in Kyuquot.1406.3.2 Role of the Internal P1annin ProcessThe KNT’ s emphasis on linkages and interrelationships have not been lost in its attempts todeal with outsiders who are more likely to view life in Kyuquot as a complex of separateeconomic, social, political, and cultural activities. The internal community planning processhas played a critical role in creating a strong sense of community direction and cohesive visionof the future which has been applied to the KNT’s work with outsiders.LessonsCertain lessons were learned through the community planning process which have since beenapplied to the KNT’s work with outsiders. The first lesson, identified as such by the ChiefCouncillor, was that “Kyuquot people never say “I”, they say “we.”7 With this lesson theKNT Council has maintained a commitment to ensure a strong community base of support andinvolvement in local land management. The second lesson was that, “you can’t force anyoneto do anything, you have to respect people’s opinions.” This wisdom has been reflected in theCouncil’s commitment to educate and encourage people to help themselves. The KNT Councilhas interpreted its role to be to one of providing the opportunities for people to helpthemselves, both individually and as a community. The KNT’s community forestry and jointmanagement initiatives are part of the on-going attempts to keep as many people as possibleinterested and directly involved in local land management.Another important result of the planning process was the widespread recognition within thecommunity that working more closely with outsiders was inevitable if their goals were to beachieved. The process itself, which was facilitated largely by an outsider (the ForestryAdvisor), provided an indication of how the KNT could work with outsiders at minimal risk.Just as the Forestry Advisor was being plugged into the needs and aspirations of thecommunity through the planning process, so any KNT dealings with outsiders would have toRichard Leo, KNT Chief Councillor, Interview by author, Kyuquot, B.C., May 26, 1993.141be intimately linked to, and guided by the interests of insiders to the community. By ensuringstrong links between community interests and dealings with outsiders, the KNT has been ableto work with outsiders to further its development goals, at minimal risk to its cultural integrityand achievement of its goals.OutcomesThe planning process had important outcomes in terms of ensuring that community goals andinterests would be respected in its inevitable dealings with outside interests. First the centralinvolvement of the forestry advisor in the process ensured that he would have somewhat of aninsider’s understanding that could be applied to his dealings with outside interests.Second, the process created a strong sense of commitment within the community to worktoward self-reliance through ALM. The process acted to translate the concern people had overthe crises occurring in Kyuquot into a formula for action. The process helped spark acollective interest and enthusiasm among KNT members to work toward ALM as a means forimproving their lives by giving them greater self-reliance. The broad-based commitment tolocal land management has helped to ensure that involvement in community initiatives aimed atALM are equally broad-based.Finally, the strong sense of community direction and sense of cultural identity that coalescedduring the planning process helped to create a set of principles for Kyuquot Aboriginal LandManagement that have been continually referred to in the KNT’s correspondence andnegotiations with government and industry.These three outcomes have all helped to strengthen the solidarity within the community behinda clear set of community goals. This unanimity has allowed the KNT to boldly work withoutsiders knowing with a strong intuitive sense where exactly community interests lie.1426.3.3 Linkin! Internal and External InitiativesLinkage of Cultural Values to External Economic OpportunitiesMuch of what has been discussed with respect to the linkages between economic, social andcultural development can be reiterated here. The culturally sensitive and flexible employmentpolicies of the KNT Council have helped to carry the social and cultural values of thecommunity into its participation in the wage economy. As a result the traditional, informaleconomy has not been usurped and the cultural values of workers (stewardship responsibilities)have not been unduly compromised through their work in forestry. It is a clear example of theability of Kyuquot people to adapt to change by combining innovation with tradition--allowingthem to move with the times while still retaining a strong connection to their past.8Linkage of Outside Consultant to CommunityMuch of the work required to open up external opportunities for ALM has been left to theForestry Advisor hired by Council. The Council chose a disenchanted B.C. forester who wasalready well-connected in the forest industry, and who had first-hand experience of how boththe industry and the government worked. The forester provided the KNT with the necessaryexpertise to deal with the more technical and scientific side of the KNT’s efforts to gain morecontrol over local land management. The use of an outside expert reduced the risk of localpeople becoming absorbed into the complexity of the current management regime, which runscounter in so many ways to Kyuquot cultural beliefs and ways of knowing. Insiders have beenlargely spared the indignity of having to set aside their cultural norms and values in order toeffect change on the outside.8 This ability of Kyuquot people to successfully adopt innovations in their lifestyles while at the sametime retaining certain traditions and values is the central theme in S. Kenyon, The Kvuguot Way: A Study of aWest Coast (Nootkan Community. National Museum of Man Mercury Series, Paper No. 61, (Ottawa: CanadianEthnology Service, 1980).143The Forestry Advisor’s intimate involvement in the community planning process has helpedhim to communicate, respect and understand insider views and aspirations. Thisunderstanding, together with the guiding principles derived from the community planningprocess, has been applied to the Advisor’s work with the “powers that be” to ensurecommunity interests are upheld. Not only that, but the Advisor is continually challenged tolearn to “think like an Indian.” The Advisor’s development of an insider’s understanding is,therefore, never completed and the community has worked to ensure that his learning is ongoing.Linkage of Community to Initiatives Involving OutsidersIn attempting to minimize the risks involved in working and dealing with outsiders, the KNThas sought means to translate directly into its work with outsiders, the strong sense ofcommunity direction and cultural identity developed during previous and on-going ALMdevelopment initiatives. The KNT’s commitment to maintaining a strong community base inits development efforts has meant that joint management with the forest companies has servedas a testing ground of potential avenues for community involvement. As a safeguard againstco-optation into the agendas of forest companies, the KNT has attempted to involve as manypeople as possible and create as many opportunities for involvement as possible, within theframework of its joint management initiatives.The KNT recognized that for people to become involved, they had to be comfortable with theprocess. The KNT used the joint planning process with Interfor to explore new channels forcross-cultural communication. The planning process was kept flexible in order to allow for theaccommodation of differences in communication styles and the development of culturallyappropriate means for community involvement.144The more people with some means of participating in and keeping abreast of joint managementinitiatives, the better insurance that community goals would not be sacrificed in the attempt tofind common ground with the forest companies. This broad community involvement, coupledwith a strong community sense of direction, provided the essential feedback loop for ensuringthat work with outsiders was kept on track, and that risks to community self-reliance wasminimized. Broad-based community involvement which fed directly back into the collectiveaspirations that were expressed in the community planning process, provided a system ofchecks and balances to ensure the KNTs development efforts were kept in line withcommunity needs and aspirations.6.3.4 SummaryThe KNT has minimized the risks associated with joint management through three principalmeans:1) linking community economic, social and cultural development initiatives to ensure thatcultural pride and autonomy are continually reinforced and that cultural values act asthe guideposts to ALM involving outsiders;2) using a community visioning process to create a strong, unified sense of communitydirection and broad base of commitment to self-reliant community developmentcentered around ALM;3) using joint management as an opportunity for creating and exploring new channels forcross-cultural communication and community involvement in ALM initiatives.These three safeguards have worked to encourage, and create opportunities for thedevelopment of a broad-base of community involvement in both internal and external ALMinitiatives. The creation of such a participatory, community-based development process hasbeen central to the achievement of the goals underlying the KNT’s ALM development efforts.That being the case, it should not be surprising that the manner through which the KNT has145worked to minimize the risks of joint management, has also served to ensure greatercommunity benefits. The self-management capacity of the community, in particular, has beengreatly augmented by broad community participation in planning and management activities.Such a participatory approach has helped to ensure that the developing skills base is spreadthroughout the community, and that not only the skills, but the process of developing them,are directed toward facilitating ALM.Finally, the creation of a cohesive community, whose members are widely involved in, andcommitted to the advancement of ALM, helped to keep the KNT’s joint managementinitiatives in perspective. Joint management has been considered a means to an end--anecessary stepping stone on the long road to ALM and community self-reliance.1467.0 CONCLUSIONS7.1 SUI’v111ARYThis thesis has analyzed the nature and outcomes of the process used by a B.C. aboriginalcommunity to gain more control over the management of local forest resources as a means forachieving greater self-reliance. A case study of the Kyuquot Native Tribe’s (KNT)experience, has provided insight into the means through which aboriginal land management(ALM) can be advanced.Aboriginal land management has been the term used in this thesis to refer to a community-based system of resource management which is guided by a renewed sense of cultural valuesand traditions. It represents an ideal toward which the KNT has been directing itsdevelopment efforts aimed at self-reliance.The lesser goals or objectives that underlie community efforts to gain more control over localland management have been identified to include:- promotion of community economic development;- promotion of self-government;- restoration and maintenance of ecological integrity; and,- strengthening cultural autonomy.A literature review revealed a paradox confronting aboriginal communities in their efforts togain greater self-reliance through ALM. The need to work cooperatively with outside expertsand interest groups to access the skills, knowledge and opportunities for ALM that existoutside the community clashes with the need to strengthen cultural autonomy and develop aninternal capacity for self-reliance. In working with outsiders (resource managers) within themainstream resource management system, aboriginal communities run the risk of being coopted into the current management regime and compromising community goals. The literature147indicates that such a paradox can best be dealt with through the creation of processes whereinsiders (community members) and outsiders (state or corporate resource planners andmanagers) relate to each other on equal footing and learn from one another. The challenge liesin developing the means through which such mutual learning can take place so that insidersand outsiders can collaborate in ways that “affirm rather than negate cultural identity.”1The case study of the Kyuquot Native Tribe’s (KNT) experience has focused particularattention on how the KNT has dealt with this challenge. The analysis of the KNT’sdevelopment process included the the actions and initiatives leading up to, and continuingalongside the KNT’s work with two forest companies to jointly manage local forestryoperations.7.1.1 Overview of the Process for Advancing ALMThe history of the KNT’s development process has been conceptualized as a series of stagedinitiatives. Each time one layer of obstacles was overcome through one group of initiatives, anew set of more entrenched obstacles were revealed, requiring new, bolder initiatives thatreached ever deeper into mainstream institutions. This conceptualization, and the focus of theanalysis on the evolution of insider-outsider relationships through the process, have been usefulin highlighting the importance and role of social learning in advancing the KNT toward ALM.This view of the process revealed several patterns which reflect social learning. They aresummarized as follows:- The process was catalyzed by a strong, bottom-up community action in response to aperceived crisis. The bottom-up action served to raise tensions between the interests of1 A. Lockhart, “The Insider-Outsider Dialectic in Native Socio-Economic Development: A Case Studyin Process Understanding,” Canadian Journal of Native Studies 2:1(1982): 161.148the forest management regime and the interests of the community to a level where newforums for community involvement in forestry could evolve;- Cooperative alliances with people and organizations from outside the communityconstantly shifted as as obstacles were overcome, as new tensions were raised and as newopportunities were revealed. Alliances changed in response to the converging anddiverging interests and strategies between players;- The process has involved a broad range of strategies which have worked simultaneouslyto deal with internal and external opportunities and constraints. With each stage of newinitiatives, the links between internal and external strategies strengthened;- Learning between insiders and outsiders has occurred simultaneously at different levelsthroughout the course of the process. With each successive stage, a higher level oflearning has been added. From learning that occurred between individual communitymembers, the process has progressed to include learning between the community and thelocal forest management regime, and finally to learning between the community and thewhole of Canadian society (as represented by the federal and provincial governments intreaty negotiations).The descriptions in Chapter 5, of the individual strategies and initiatives used to advanceALM, showed that with each stage of the process, the KNT acquired new knowledge, skillsand experience with which to face new, and bigger challenges. Constraints encountered at onestage, often became opportunities in the next as new understandings developed. By buildingon the knowledge and understandings lying latent within the community and combining thatwith selected outsider knowledge and understandings, the KNT has advanced closer toward toALM.149This process has not, however been without risks. The analysis uncovered a number ofpotential risks and benefits faced by KNT in its efforts to increase community self-reliancethrough joint forestry management with industry. Benefits, in terms of advancing communityself-reliance, included:- training and employment opportunities for band members;- increased self-management capacity;- more environmentally sound forest practices;- greater community involvement in forestry planning and decision-making; and,- strengthened sense of community and pride in culture.The risks that the KNT’s joint management initiatives posed to community self-reliance wereidentified as follows:- erosion of informal economy;- fractions within the community as a whole;- reliance on outside experts;- co-optation into mainstream resource management; and,- cultural assimilation.The thesis has shown that the whole of the KNT’s development process, up to and includingthe joint management initiatives, served to encourage the benefits and minimize the risks of cooptation. The examination of how this was achieved revealed a number of important lessonswhich could serve as useful guides to other communities working to advance ALM.7.1.2 Lessons to be Learned from the Kvuuuot ExperienceGiven the time and energy consuming nature of the process used to bring about ALM, perhapsthe most obvious general lesson to draw from the Kyuquot experience is the requirement for ahigh level of community commitment to, and involvement in the process. When this150commitment and involvement is carried into work with outsiders, a feedback loop is created toensure that community interests are protected. The KNT worked to reinforce this loop bystrengthening the links between insiders and outsiders and between internal and externaldevelopment strategies through a series of progressions. The more specific means throughwhich these links were developed are outlined below. They are stated as lessons from whichothers may learn.1. Creating linkages between community economic, social and cultural developmentinitiatives allows cultural pride and autonomy to be continually reinforced andencourages cultural values to be carried into ALM initiatives involving outsiders.Some examples of the means through which the KNT created such linkages include:- involving the same outside consultant in both the community planning process andjoint management initiatives with forest companies;- rebuilding a sense of pride in culture and reviving traditional values as a means fortreating social pathologies (e.g. aicholism) caused, in part, by the devaluation ofculture; and- creating employment opportunities which compliment traditional values being revivedin cultural and social development initiatives.2. A community visioning process, undertaken in the early stages of the process foradvancing ALM, can facilitate the expression of the collective asprirations of thecommunity and help to create a strong, unified sense of direction which can guide theconnnumty in its work with outsiders.The KNT used such a visioning process to develop a number of guiding principles whichwere applied to the KNT’s work with the forest companies. The process also helped toalleviate despondency within the community. The development of a collective vision for151the future motivated community members to take an active part in the development ofALM.3. Processes for aboriginal community involvement in resource management decision-making must remain flexible to allow for the accomodation of cultural differences incommunication styles and the emergence of new forums for interaction in whichmutual learning can take place.For instance, the analysis of the KNT’s experience with the Western Strathcona LocalAdvisory Council (WSLAC), demonstrated that:- Native community representation in multi-stakeholder roundtables may not be anappropriate means for advancing ALM goals; and- for Native communities in the process of reviving their cultural identity, such arigidly structured decision-making process designed by non-Natives for non-Nativesmay not be an appropriate forum for expression of aboriginal concerns and values.4. Joint forestry management initiatives with industry, while not ends in themselves,can provide opportunities for creating and exploring new channels for cross-culturalcommunication and community participation in resource management.The KNT’s joint management initiatives with industry gave community members practiceand experience in dealing with outsiders in a number of different forums, ranging fromon-the-ground site inspections to around-the-table negotiations.While the joint management initiatives did not achieve any real changes in the forestmanagement regime (although forest practices are definitely improved in terms of theirvisual impact and effect on salmon stream habitat) they have served to prepare thecommunity for the next stage in the process involving treaty negotiations.1527.2 CONCLUSIONIn conclusion, the outcomes of the KNT’s efforts to gain more control over local forestmanagement, have served to advance ALM and promote greater community self-reliance.Based on this conclusion, generalizations about the nature of the process used by the KNT toadvance ALM can be made which may prove useful for other communities with similar goals.The case study shows that the risks to community self-reliance which are inherent in workingcooperatively with outsiders to advance ALM, are not insurmountable. The risks can beminimized and self-reliance can be advanced when work with outsiders is accompanied bycommunity-based efforts to build a strong sense of community commitment to the process.The KNT’s experience offers lessons on how community commitment to, and involvement inthe process, can be achieved by linking community social, cultural and economic developmentefforts aimed at advancing ALM. By continually strengthening the linkages between internallyand externally-based development strategies, the risks of co-optation can be diminished andALM advanced.More specific conclusions can be made with respect to joint forestry management. TheKyuquot experience demonstrates the limits of what joint forestry management with industrycan achieve in terms of advancing ALM. Based on the KNT’s experience, it can be concludedthat joint forestry management with a forest company, in the absence of governmentrepresentation, has a very limited ability to affect change in the forest policy and managementregime (i.e., rate of cut issues, tenure arrangements, alternative harvesting systems).Furthermore, such joint management initiatives can contribute to community self-reliance onlyinsofar as community development efforts are successful in encouraging broad communitycommitment to, and involvement in, the initiative.153Aboriginal land management remains a distant and elusive goal for Kyuquot people.Nevertheless, community efforts to bring about ALM have moved them closer and theirexperience to date contains lessons which can be applied to their future efforts to advanceALM. If, indeed, past experience is any guide, the challenge of having to access outsideopportunities for ALM, while at the same time maintaining a strong community base andprotecting cultural autonomy is only likely to increase for the KNT in the future (i.e., duringtreaty negotiations). The KNT ‘s joint management initiatives with the forest companies, haveserved a vital function in developing the organizational capacity of the community andproviding the community with the experience in how to protect community autonomy whileworking with outsiders. In this sense, joint management initiatives may have been a necessarystage in the KNT’s development process leading up to treaty negotiations. The challenge forthe future will be how to maintain community commitment to ALM during treaty negotiationsand how to meaningfully involve community members in the process.The KNT’s experience to date in advancing ALM takes on even greater significance as itmoves into treaty negotiations. Through the negotiation of interim argreements for the jointmanagement of fisheries and forests, the KNT has the opportunity to move another step closertoward its ideal of ALM. Opportunities exist, within the context of these negotiations, tostrengthen even further internal-external linkages and feedback loops to the community. Forexample, traditional social institutions, such as Ha-Houlthe, the Kyuquot system of socialorganization, can become strengthened as avenues are developed for integrating them into localresource management decision making. Still, the treaty negotiation process is likely to unearthnew tensions within the community, some of which have already begun to surface withinKyuquot. As with the KNT’s previous stages of ALM initiatives, these tensions betweeninterests can act as a catalyst for the development of new forums for cooperation. This inturn, can allow the social learning to take place which may be necessary for dealing with154increasingly complex decision malcing problems. As internal tensions are discovered, andmeasures taken to deal with them, the self-management capacity of the community can bestrengthened further. In this way the treaty negotiation process, has the potential to create newlevels of cooperation within the community, enabling it to more effectively deal with outsidersto advance ALM and achieve greater self-reliance.This latest stage in KNT’s process for advancing ALM, will provide for a rich case study initself. The internal and external strategies and initiatives that accompany treaty negotiationswill undoubtedly be influenced by the KNT’s experience described in these pages. Will theKNT learn from its experience so far? What lessons from working with the forest companies,will the KNT bring into its negotiations with the federal and provincial governments? Whatnew lessons will it learn? What new obstacles and opportunities for ALM will emerge? Whatnew threats will the community face? How will relationships change between Band membersand between Native and non-Native residents? And finally, what effect will all this have onthe way resources are managed? These are all important questions of increasing concern asFirst Nations throughout the province begin entering treaty negotiations. Being one of the firstin B.C. to initiate negotiations, the experience of the Kyuquot First Nation will continue tooffer valuable lessons from which other communities can learn.It is becoming increasingly clear that cooperation in management decision making within andbetween all levels of social organization--from the family, the neighbourhood and the village,up to the region, the state and the global community--will be necessary for the effectivemanagement of land and resources in today’s very complex world. This study has endeavoredto provide a basis for understanding what has happened to date in one community. It is hopedthat this will aid in the understanding of what is to come, as the Kyuquot First Nation, along155with many other First Nations throughout B.C., embark on a new development path whichwill have profound consequences for local communities and for the way resources are managedin the province.1568.0 REFERENCES8.1 GENERAL REFERENCESBerkes, F., Common Property Resources: Ecology and Community-Based SustainableDevelopment. London: Beihaven Press, 1989.Boothroyd, P. “Linking Economic and Social Community Development.” Paper presented to31st Annual Meeting of Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Portland,Oregon, Oct 4-7, 1989.British Columbia. Towards a Protected Area Strategy for B.C. Map bochure. Victoria:Queens Printer, May 1992.British Columbia. B.C. Forest Practices Code Discussion Paper. Victoria: Queens Printer,November 1993.British Columbia Commission on Resources and Environment. Report on a Land Use Strategyfor B.C. August, 1992.________1992-93 Annual Report to the Legislative Assembly. Victoria: Queens Printer forBritish Columbia, June 1993.British Columbia Forest Resources Commission. The Future of Our Forests. Victoria:Queens Printer, April 1991.British Columbia Claims Task Force. Report of the British Columbia Claims Task Force. June28, 1991.British Columbia Task Force on Native Forestry. Native Forestry in British Columbia: A NewApproach. Victoria: Queens Printer, November, 1991.British Columbia Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs. Annual Report--1991/1992, March, 1992.Cassidy, F. “Concluding Comments. “ In Reaching Just Settlements, ed. F. Cassidy, 86-88.Lanzville: Oolichan Books, 1991.Cassidy, F. and N. Dale. After Native Claims?: The Implications of Comprehensive ClaimsSettlements for Natural Resources in British Columbia. Lantzville, B.C./Halifax, N.S.:Oolichan Books/Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1988.Chamberlin, T., ed. Proceedings of the Workshop: Applying 15 Years of Carnation CreekResults. Nanaimo, B.C.: Carnation Creek Steering Commitee, Pacific BiologicalStation, 1987.Clarkson, L., V. Morrissette, and G. Regallet. Our Responsibility to the Seventh Generation:Indigenous Peoples and Sustainable Development. Winnipeg: International Institute forSustainable Development, 1992.Cropper, S. “Theory and Strategy in the Study of Planning Processes: The Uses of the CaseStudy.” Environment and Planning B 9 (1982):341-57.157Dale, N. “Getting to Co-Management: Social Learning in the Redesign of FisheriesManagement.” In Co-Operative Management of Local Fisheries: New Directions forImproved Management and Community Development. Vancouver: University ofBritish Columbia Press, 1989, 49-72.Drucker, P. The Northern and Central Nootkan Tribes. Bureau of American Ethnology,Bulletin 144. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1951.Drushka, K. Stumped: The Forest Industry in Transition. Vancouver: Douglas and McIntyre,1985.Dunn, E. Economic and Social Development: A Process of Social Learning. Baltimore: JohnsHopkiis Press, 1971.Dunster, J. “Concepts Underlying a Community Forest.” Forest Planning Canada 5:6 (1989).Elias, P. Development of Aboriginal People’s Communities. North York: Captus Press Inc.,1991.Frideres, J.S. Native Peoples in Canada: Contemporary Conflicts. (Scarborough: PrenticeHall, 1988). [Chapter 11]Friedmann, J. Retracking America. Emmaus, Penn.: Rodale Press, 1973.Griggs, J. Developing Cooperative Management Systems for Common Property Resources:Resolving Conflict in a West Coast Fishery. UBC Planning Papers, Canadian PlanningIssues #29. Vancouver: School of Community and Regional Planning, University ofBritish Columbia, 1991.Hall Pinder, L. The Carriers of No: After the Land Claims Trial. Vancouver: Lazara Press,1991.Hammond, H. Seeing the Forest Among the Trees: The Case for Wholistic Forest Use.Vancouver: Polestar Press, 1991.Inglis, J., ed. Traditional Ecological Knowledge: Concepts and Cases. Ottawa: InternationalProgram on Traditional Ecological Knowledge, Canadian Museum of Nature andInternational Development Research Center, 1993.Intertribal Forestry Association of British Columbia. Strategic Study of the Potential forIncreased Native Participation in the Forest Sector. February 1992.Kearney, J.F. “Co-Management or Co-Optation: The Ambiguities of Lobster FisheryManagement in Southwest Nova Scotia.” In Cooperative Management of LocalFisheries, ed. E.Pinkerton, 85-102.Kellerhals, R. “Effects of the Proposed Tahsish-Kwois Forest Management Plan on theStability and Channel Morphology of Kwois Creek and the Lower Tahsish River.”Report prepared for KEEPS and the Kyuquot Band, 1993.Kenyon, S. The Kyuguot Way: A Study of a West Coast (Nootkan) Community. NationalMuseum of Man, Mercury Series. Ottawa: Canadian Ethnology Service, Paper No.,61, 1980.158Kew, M. and J. Griggs. “Native Indians of the Fraser Basin: Towards a Model of SustainableResource Use.” In Perspectives on Sustainable Development in Water Management, ed.A. Dorcey, 17-47. Vancouver: Westwater Research Center, UBC, 1991.Lewis, M. and F. Green. Strategic Planning for the CED Practitioner. Vancouver: WestcoastDevelopment Group, 1992.Lockhart, A. “The Insider-Outsider Dialectic in Native Socio-Economic Development: A CaseStudy in Process Understanding.” Canadian Journal of Native Studies 2:1(1982): 159-68.Lyons, 0. “Traditional Native Philosophies Relating to Aboriginal Rights.” In The Ouest forJustice: Aboriginal People and Aboriginal Rights, ed. M. Boldt and J. Long. Toronto:University of Toronto Press, 1985.Masser, I. “The Analysis of Planning Processes: Some Methodological Considerations.”Environment and Planning B 9 (1982): 5-14.McGonigle, M. “Developing Sustainability: A Native/Environmentalist Prescription for ThirdLevel Government.” BC Studies 84 (Winter 1989-90): 65-99.Paisley, R., M. Healy and T. McDaniels. “Analysis of Strategies for Co-operative FisheriesManagement between Government and Native Indians.” Vancouver: WestwaterResearch Center, 1992.Pecarski, R. “Comprehensive Community Planning Within B.C. Indian Communities: A CaseStudy.” Masters thesis, University of British Columbia, 1987.Peel, S. “The Future of Our Forest.” Forest Planning Canada 7:6 (1991): 5.Pinkerton, E., ed., Co-Operative Management of Local Fisheries: New Directions forImproved Management and Community Development. Vancouver: University ofBritish Columbia Press, 1989.Pinkerton, E., D. Moore, and F. Fortier, “A Model for First Nation Leadership in MultiParty Stewardship of Watersheds and Their Fisheries.” Draft report to the RoyalCommission on Aboriginal Peoples, October 25, 1993.Plain, F. “A Treatise on the Rights of Aboriginal Peoples of the Continent of North America.”In The Ouest for Justice: Aboriginal People and Aboriginal Rights, ed. M. Boldt and J.Long. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985.Ponting, J., ed. Arduous Journey: Canadian Indians and Decolonization. Toronto: McClellandand Stewart, 1986.Roberts, H. Community Development: Learning and Action. Toronto: University of TorontoPress, 1979.Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. Discussion Paper 1: Framing the Issues. Ottawa:Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, October, 1992.________Exploring the Options: Overview of the Third Round, November, 1993.159Sale, K., Dwellers in the Land: The Bioregional Vision. San Fransisco: Sierra Club Books,1985.Taylor, D. and J. Wilson. “Environmental Health--Democratic Health: Examination ofProposals for Decentralization of Forest Management in British Columbia.” ForestPlanning Canada 9:2 (1993):34-45.T. M. Thomson Associates. “Timber Supply Analysis of Strathcona TSA for Kyuquot TSB,Sayward TSB, and Loughborough TSB.” Report prepared for International ForestProducts and Kyuquot Native Tribe, July 1992.Tin Wis Coalition. “Community Control, Developing Sustainability, Social Solidarity.”Vancouver: Tin Wis Coalition, 1991.Tin Wis Forestry Working Group. “Draft Model Legislation, Forest Stewardship Act.”Vancouver: Tin Wis Coalition, 1991.Tripp, D., A. Nixon, and R. Dunlop. Application and Effectiveness of the Coastal Fisheries-Forestry Guidelines in Selected Cutbiocks on Vancouver Island. Nanaimo: D. TrippBiological Consultants, April 1992.Truck Loggers Association. “The State of the Resource” Brief to the Forest ResourcesCommission of B.C. Reprinted in Forest Planning Canada 7:2 (1991): 16-23.Usher, P. “Some Implications of the Sparrow Judgement for Resource Conservation andManagement.” Alternatives 18:2 (1991): 20-21.________“Contemporary Aboriginal Lands, Resources and Environment Regimes--Origins,Problems and Prospects.” Background paper prepared for the Royal Commission onAboriginal Peoples, June 1993(ed.). Volume of case studies prepared for Canada Royal Commission on AboriginalPeople (in progress).van Gigch, J.P. Applied General Systems Theory. New York: Harper and Row, 1977.Village of Hazelton. Framework for Watershed Stewardship. Hazelton: The Corporation of theVaillage of Hazelton, 1991.Westcoast Development Group. The Development Wheel: A Workbook to Guide CommunityAnalysis and Development Planning. Port Alberni: Westcoast Development Group,1990.Western Strathcona Local Advisory Council. A Sustainable Development Strategy for theWestern Strathcona Area of Vancouver Island. April, 1991.Wismer, S.and D. Pell. “Community-Based Economic Development and Community Self-Reliance.” In Rethinking Community Development in a Changing Society, ed. H.Campfens, ??. Guelph: Community Development Society, 1983.Yin, R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Newbury Park: Sage Publications,1608.2 UNPUBLISHED REFERENCESRonald Frank. Letter to Chief and Council, Kyuquot Native Tribe, January 15, 1992.Ingram, Ken. Letter to Richard Leo and Band Councillors, Kyuquot Native Tribe, February26, 1991.Kayra, Sandra. Letter to George Mulder, Area Engineer, International Forest Products, June8, 1992.Kuiper, B. “Nuu-Chah-Nulth Forestry Program: A Case Study of Community-Based Planningand Implementation.” Paper for Canada Department of Indian and Northern Affairs,B.C. Region, October, 1985.Kyuquot First Nation. “Kyuquot Nation First to File Papers with B.C. Treaty Commission.”Press release, October 1993.Kyuquot Native Tribe. “Land Claims Interview Summary To Date.” October, 1991.________“Land Claims Update.” November 25, 1990.“Kyuquot Band Council Land Claims Settlement Within Our Traditional Territory.”Discussion paper, March 1991.“Long Term Silviculture Strategy.” April 1991.“Position of the Kyuquot Native Tribe Regarding Forest Resource Development inthe Kyuquot Tribal Territory.” May 3, 1991.“Statement of Objectives: Integrated Environmental and Resource ManagementNarrowgut/Cachalot Watersheds.” August 7, 1991.“Response from Kyuquot Native Tribe regarding resource extraction in the KyuquotTribal Territory.” Press release, October 17, 1991.“Kyuquot Native Tribe not supporting boycott of Canadian timber.” Press release,December 4, 1991.“Kyuquot Traditional Tribal Territory Resource Management in Forestry Sector.”Draft discussion paper, 1992.“Our Resources, Our Lands, Our Government.” Discussion paper, October 1992.“Kyuquot First Nation Interim Resource Management Strategy.” Third draft fordiscussion, October 1992.“Model Forest Proposal.” February 28, 1992.Band Council Resolution. January, 5, 1993.Band Council Resolution. February 15, 1993.“Declaration of Kyuquot First Nation Jurisdiction.” (draft), February 17, 1993.161Kyuquot Native Tribe and Doman Industries. “Report: Power River Drainage TimberBlowdown and Natural Resources.” July 4, 1991.Kyuquot Native Tribe and International Forest Products. Meeting Minutes. May 30, 1991.________“Letter of Understanding for the Development of Cooperative Management for theKyuquot Tribal Territory,” August 8, 1991.Meeting Minutes. October 10, 1991.•Meeting Minutes. May 30, 1991.Meeting Minutes. May 4, 1992.Meeting Minutes. November 3, 1992.Meeting Minutes. November 4, 1992.Meeting Minutes. April 1, 1993.Kyuquot Native Tribe and Western Forest Products. Meeting Minutes. February 5, 1991.Meeting Minutes. November 26, 1992.Meeting Minutes. January 28, 1993.Leo, Richard. Letter to Western Strathcona Advisory Council, May 23, 1990.Letter to Claude Richmond, Minister of Forests, November, 1990.Letter to MacMillan and Bloedel, April 6, 1991.___Letter to Tom Lundgren, International Forest Products, May 21, 1991.Letter to Dan Miller, Minister of Forests, December 2, 1991._Letter to Andrew Petter, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, December 10, 1991.Letter to Dan Miller, Minister of Forests, December 17, 1991.Letter to Cohn Gableman, Attorney General for British Columbia, January 29,1992.Letter to Dan Miller, Minister of Forests, January 29, 1992.Letter to Gail Ksonzya, Manager, Intergovernmental Relations, Department ofIndian and Northern Affairs, February 25, 1992.Letter to Jacqui Morgan, Director, Natural Resource Management, Ministry ofAboriginal Affairs, April 8, 1992.Letter to Dan Miller, Minister of Forests, May 29, 1992.Letter to Don Sluggett, Manager, Campbell River Forest District, June 10, 1992.162________•Letter to Tom Lundgren, International Forest Products, June 16, 1992.Letter to Tom Siddon, Minister of Indian Affairs, January 20, 1993.Letter to Don Sluggett, Manager, Campbell River Forest District, January 15,1993.Letter to Dan Miller, Minister of Forests, January 25, 1993.Lundgren, Tom. Letter to Kyuquot Native Tribe Council, January 20, 1992.Letter to Richard Leo, June 22, 1992.Nuu-Chah-Nulth Tribal Council. “Land Question: Land, Sea and Resources,” (brochure).August 1991.Pater, Tom. Letter to Charlie Cornfield, Resource Officer, Campbell River Forest District,May 15, 1992.Letter to John Cuthbert, Chief Forester, Ministry of Forests, October 14, 1992.Letter to Don Sluggett, Manager, Campbell River Forest District, January 12,1993.Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. Co-management Workshop, Meeting Minutes.November 5-6, 1993.Scott, David. Letter to Richard Leo, February 27, 1992.Sluggett, Donald. Letter to Western Strathcona Local Advisory Council, April 17, 1991.Sofor Consultants Ltd., Kyuquot Native Tribe Resource Maps, 1990.Woodward, Jack. Letter to Ron Frank, November 16, 1990.8.3 INTERVIEW REFERENCES8.3.1 Kvuuuot InterviewsChiddley, Rick. Small business logger. Interview by author, June 4, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Frank, Ron. KNT Forestry Advisor. Interviews by author, October 5, 1992, (telephone);January 20, 1993, Courtenay, B.C.; January 29, 1993, (telephone); February 18, 1993Kyuquot, B.C.; April 1, 1993 Kyuquot, B.C.; January 15, 1994 (telephone).Hanson, Hilda. KNT Councillor. Interview by author, May 31, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Jack, Anita. KNT Receptionist. Interview by author, May 31, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Jack, Leroy. Band member. Interview by author, May 27, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.163James, Edwin. KNT Drug and Alcohol Worker. Interview by author, June 3, 1993, Kyuquot,B.C.John, Dennis. KNT Councillor. Interview by author, May 31, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Jules, Chris. Band member. Interview by author, May 26, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Jules, Vema. Band member. Interview by author, June 1, 1993 Kyuquot, B.C.Kayra, Sam. KEEPS founder. Interview by author, June 4, 1993 Kyuquot, B.C.Leo, Cecelia. Band member. Interview by author, May 27, 1993 Kyuquot, B.C.Leo, Richard. KNT Chief Councillor. Interviews by author, January 21, May 26 and June 2,1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Muir, Gail. KEEPS founder. Interviews by author, January 21, 1993; and May 27-28, 1993,Kyuquot, B.C.Norberg, Carsten. Kyuquot resident. Interview by author, June 2, 1993 Kyuquot, B.C.Norberg, Lynne. Kyuquot resident. Interview by author, June 2, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Osenenko, Joanne. Kyuquot resident. Interview by author, June 1, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Osenenko, Rick. Kyuquot resident. Interview by author, June 2, 1993 Kyuquot, B.C.Oscar, Agnes. KNT Bookeeper. Interview by author, May 31, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Pater, Tom. KEEPS Director. Interview by author, January, 21, 1993; June 1, 1993,Kyuquot, B.C.Short, Danny. Band member. Interview by author, May 27, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Smith, Carol. KNT Social Worker. Interview by author, May 31, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Smith, Theresa. KNT Councillor. Interview by author, May 26, 1993 and June 3, 1993,Kyuquot, B.C.Vincent, Al. Band member. Interview by author, May 27, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.8.3.2 Miscellaneous interviewsAnnett, Rory. Resource Planner, Ministry of Forests, Campbell River Forest District.Interview by author, February 3, 1994, (telephone).Dumont, Bill. Chief Forester, Western Forest Products. Interview by author, May 4, 1993,Vancouver, B.C.Dunn, Scott. District Silviculturalist, Ministry of Forests, Campbell River Forest District.Interview by author, February 7, 1994, (telephone).164Lewis, Mike. Community planner, Westcoast Development Group. Interview by author,March 22, 1993, (telephone).Lundgren, Tom. Chief Forester, International Forest Products. Interview by author, April26, 1993, Vancouver, B.C.Muldar, George. Area Engineer, International Forest Products. Interview by author, May 25,1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Slugget, Donald. District Manager, Ministry of Forests, Campbell River Forest District.Interview by author, January 21, 1994, (telephone).Weber, Yup. Scientific Director, Environmentally Sustainable Forestry International.Interview by author, May 25, 1993, Kyuquot, B.C.Wong, Rupert. West Coast Expeditions. Interview by author, July 1992, Kyuquot, B.C..165APPENDIX 1: FIELD WORK SUMMARYField work was conducted between July 1992 and June 1993 as summarized below:Kyuquot,July 15-24, 1992Scouting/Orientation-toured major watershed (Tahsish-Kwois)-obtained documents-informal interviews (Chief Councillor, KEEPSdirector, local tourist operator, and communitymembers)Kyuquot, Nov 4-5, 1992Kyuquot Traditional Territory Resource Management Workshop-attended community workshop-formally introduced to communityCourtenay and Kyuquot, Jan 20-21, 1993Document Retrieval-obtained documents at Forestry Advisor’s office-met with Chief Councillor in KyuquotCourtenay and Kyuquot, Feb 15-18, 1993Document Retrieval! Meeting with CORE-obtained documents at Forestry Advisor’s office-attended community meeting with CORE in Kyuquot-informal interviews with community members andCORE representativesKyuquot, April 1, 1993Meeting with International Forest Products-attended Cachalot-Narrowgut joint planningmeeting between KNT and InterforKyuquot, May 25-June 4, 1993Kyuquot Interviews-visited Interfor’s Chamiss Bay logging camp-toured Interfor’s Cachalot Creek operations-interviewed Kyuquot residents166APPENDIX 2: CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR EVENTS1988spring -Kyuquot residents film clearcuts and landslidessummer -video shown at Strathcona ParkAug -KEEPS formed1989-Forestry Advisor hired-Drug and alcohol worker hiredJune -Kyuquot protest at MOF-CROct -WSLAC formed-Lawyer retained to prevent logging in TahsishNov -Big landslide on St. Pauls Dome clogs estuary1990Winter -KNT forestry crew trainingMay -KNT withdraws from WESLACMay -WFP holds public meeting in Kyuquot-review of information gathered on Power-BattledrainagesJune -Sierra Club video-- “Kyuquot Sound - The VanishingRainforests”Sept -National Geographic articleSept 17 -Old Growth Project announces two-year deferralof logging in two Kyuquot watershedsOct -WSLAC Cachalot Consensus signedNov -KNT gets first silviculture contract from MOFNov -Territorial Resource Maps completed and presentedto community1991Feb -First meeting with Western Forest Products (WFP)re: cooperative management in Power/BattleMarch -KNT Land Claims discussion paper circulated-Interviews conducted and discussion groups formedApril -WSLAC Report released167May -KNT agrees to work with Interfor in developingjoint plan for Cachalot-NarrowgutDec -Chief Councillor and elder sponsored byenvironmental groups to go on speaking tour inEurope1992Jan CORE established-logging in Tahsish-Kwois deferred for 18 monthsJune -Cooperative planning with Interfor breaks down--impasse reachedNov -Resource Management Community Workshop-Interfor/KNT Yield Analysis for Kyuquot TSBreleased-KNT acquieces to Interfor’s 5-year plan forCachalot-Narrowgut1993Jan -MOF-CR announces 11 % reduction in AAC forStrathcona TSA to account for PAS study areasunder deferralOct -KNT files “statement of intent” to commencetreaty negotiations with B.C. Treaty Commission


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items