Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Cultural conflict in decision making in the Northwest Territories Feeney, Margaret Mary 1977

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1977_A8 F44.pdf [ 6.2MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094215.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094215-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094215-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094215-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094215-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094215-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094215-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094215-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094215.ris

Full Text

CULTURAL CONFLICT IN DECISION MAKING IN THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES MARGARET MARY FEENEY B.A., Bryn Mawr College, 1973 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (School of Community and Regional Planning) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October, 1977 by MASTER OF ARTS i n Margaret Mary Feeney, 1977 In presenting th i s thes is in p a r t i a l fu l f i lment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the Un ivers i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L ibrary sha l l make it f ree l y ava i lab le for reference and study. I fur ther agree that permission for extensive copying of th is thes is for scho lar l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h is representat ives . It is understood that copying or pub l i ca t ion o f th is thes is f o r f i n a n c i a l gain sha l l not be allowed without my wr i t ten permission. School Xng$SEB8BK% of Community and Regional Planning The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date Ootober 5, 1977 i ABSTRACT This thesis examines a significant problem in planning for a multicultural society: the existence of cross-cultural communication barriers which can hinder effective planning. The hypothesis is that communication problems that arise in cross-cultural planning efforts in the North-west Territories go beyond substantive issues and are deeply-rooted in fundamental differences between White and Native attitudes about decision making processes. In land use planning, communication problems are even further exacerbated by conflicting White and Native attitudes toward land. Anthropological concepts are used to provide insights into the dynamics of cross-cultural interactions. The work of anthropologists and other social scientists, in addition to the author's field experience, is used to synthesize descriptions of "traditional" (i.e. roughly around the turn of the century) and emerging White and Native patterns of decision making. Comparison shows that traditional pat-terns are fundamentally different, but that emerging patterns-are beginning to converge in significant ways. The author recommends emphasizing the areas where White and Native decision making patterns are beginning to overlap in establishing models of decision making to meet the needs of the new multicultural Northwest Territories society. Some of the problems that have resulted from imposing decision making models based on White values on new northern communities in the 1950's and 1960's are explored. In addition, two sets of minutes are examined to show that communication problems among northern Natives and White government and industry representatives are exacerbated by fundamental differences in cultural values. The implications of this thesis for contemporary decision making issues confronting Northwest Territories residents are explored. Recommendations are made for further testing the hypothesis and for monitoring the effectiveness of cross-cultural communication in northern decision making. i i i Table of Contents Page ABSTRACT i LIST OF TABLES V ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v i PREFACE v i i CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Purpose 1 1.2 Methodology 2 1.3 An Anthropological Perspective 4 1.4 Cross-cultural Communication 7 1.5 People i n Planning 9 CHAPTER 2. TRADITIONAL CULTURAL CONTEXTS 13 2.1 White Culture 14 2.1.1 White So c i a l Structure 14 2.1.2 White P o l i t i c a l Organization 15 2.1.3 White Economy and Technology 16 2.1.4 White Worldview 17 2.2 Dene and Inuit Culture 19 2.2.1 Native S o c i a l Structure 20 2.2.2 Native P o l i t i c a l Organization 21 2.2.3 Native Economy and Technology 22 2.2.4 Native Worldview 23 2.3 Comparison 2 3 2.4 . Emerging Trends 2 7 2.5 Two Views on Land 31 CHAPTER 3. DECISION MAKING IN NEW NORTHERN COMMUNITIES IN THE 1950's AND 1960's 39 3.1 Culture Contact and Culture Change 39 3.2 The Introduction of Committees and Councils 43 3.3 Cul t u r a l C o n f l i c t 49 3.3.1 Fragmentation vs. Holism 49 3.3.2 Representative vs. Participatory Decision Making 52 iv Page 3.3.3 Adversary vs. Consensual Behaviour 55 3.4 Conclusion 59 CHAPTER 4. NORTHERN DECISION MAKING IN THE 1970'S 63 4.1 The Trend Toward "Ad Hocracy" 63 4.2 Native Response 6 8 4.3 Case Studies 70 4.3.1 Cominco at Wrigley 72 4.3.2 Polar Gas at Spence Bay 80 4.4 Conclusions 89 CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 9 3 5.1 Guidelines for Effective Cross-Cultural Communication 9 3 5.2 Guidelines for Effective Decision Making in the Northwest Territories 9 7 BIBLIOGRAPHY 105 APPENDIX I: WRIGLEY, N.W.T. • 110 APPENDIX II: POLAR GAS MEETING - SPENCE BAY, N.W.T. 121 V LIST OF TABLES Page I. Comparison of Traditional Cultural Contexts of Whites and Natives 25 II. Comparison of Decision Making Patterns in White and Native Cultures 26 III. Traditional White and Native Attitudes Toward Land 33 vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the many northern residents -Whites, Dene, Inuit, and Metis - who have expressed an interest in this work and encouraged me to complete it. Similar encouragement from my friends, house-mates, and colleagues was also appreciated. I owe thanks not only to my two thesis advisors, Nancy Cooley and William Rees, but also to Andrew Thompson, R.G. Williamson, and Ray Creery for steering me to valuable sources of information and for commenting on drafts. This thesis would not have been possible without the financial support generously provided by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, and the Arctic and Alpine Research Committee at U.B.C. vii PREFACE While I was earning my undergraduate degree in Anthro-pology I had the privilege of working for several summers in the Northwest Territories. After graduation I returned to the Northwest Territories to work for two years in the civil service. During those two years I found that the "anthropo-logical perspective" I had developed helped me to perceive some barriers to cross-cultural communication that my colleagues seemed to miss. I also had many opportunities to witness the communication breakdowns that resulted from the failure on the part of both Whites and Natives to perceive such barriers. Northern Whites and Natives often "talk past" each other. Many interactions end on a note of mutual frustration, and substantive issues are left unresolved. This thesis is an attempt to apply insights gained through Anthropology to Planning in a multicultural setting. It is hoped that these insights will help planners view northern communication problems in a new light so that new solutions might be tested. 1. CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1-1 Purpose The purpose of this thesis is to test the hypothesis that many efforts to involve Northwest Territories residents in land use planning are ineffective as a result of cross-cultural communication barriers. That is, communication problems go beyond substantive issues and are deeply rooted in incompatible cultural values. The central premise explored in this thesis is that northern Whites and Natives have different expectations about the role of the individual in decision making. This premise is explored by examining the traditional and emerging patterns of decision making of the major cultural groups involved in the Northwest Territories and then investigating how these patterns are expressed in relation to a particular kind of decision making, land use planning. However, in order to understand communication issues in land use planning in the North, a further complicating factor must also be considered - the dramatically different way in which northern Whites and Natives view the land, and the role land plays in each culture. These differences in cultural patterns and expectations are explored in an attempt to help clarify the cross-cultural communication barriers that can hinder effective decision 2. making i n general, and land use planning i n p a r t i c u l a r , i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . 1.2 . Methodology There are many methodological constraints on a thesis of t h i s nature. Relatively l i t t l e has been written on communic-ation problems among Whites and Natives i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , or on the values that shape communication and decision making processes within each northern culture group. Even though the l i t e r a t u r e on these issues sometimes seemed disappointingly "thin" I have had to r e l y on i t subs t a n t i a l l y i n the i n i t i a l chapters. These chapters describe the c u l t u r a l contexts of Whites and Natives, with p a r t i c u l a r reference to the t r a d i t i o n a l and emerging decision making patterns of each group. The problems experienced i n t r y i n g to e s t a b l i s h White decision making models i n new northern communities i n the 1950's and 1960's are also described. Sources include the work of anthropologists and other s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s , community development workers, c i v i l servants, and consultants to Government and Native organizations. In Chapter 4, I use a case study to advance my hypothesis. Two sets of minutes from meetings recently held between Whites and Natives i n Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s /communities are analyzed and show that communication problems are exacerbated by differences i n expectations about decision making and i n 3. attitudes toward land. F i n a l l y , I suggest ways i n which my hypothesis might be tested i n the f i e l d . Throughout the thesis I have r e l i e d to some extent on my own t r a i n i n g and experience i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . My f i r s t exposure to the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s was i n 1970, when I took part i n a summer course i n Anthropology taught at the A r c t i c Research and Training Centre i n Rankin I n l e t . The following two summers I was employed by the Government of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s and t r a v e l l e d extensively throughout the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s as I took part i n a variety of research and administrative projects. In 1973 I became a permanent resident i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . I was employed f i r s t by the Government of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s and then by the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s Housing Corporation i n research and program management positions. Since becoming a f u l l time graduate student i n September 1975 I have had the opportunity of returning three times to the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s for research purposes, for periods ranging from one week to one month. In addition, I have r e l i e d on my undergraduate t r a i n i n g i n Anthropology for a conceptual framework. Anthropology provides a perspective which I have found useful i n attempting to sort out the complex and i n t e r r e l a t e d issues involved i n cros s - c u l t u r a l communication i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . The key to what I refer to as the "anthropological perspective" 4. i s t h i s : the e x p l i c i t recognition of c u l t u r a l conditioning as a s i g n i f i c a n t factor i n land use planning i n the Canadian North. Some relevant concepts from Anthropology are i n t r o -duced i n the following section. 1.3 An Anthropological Perspective From the study of cultures, anthropologists conclude that there i s no universal cognitive pattern. Culture i s one of the forces which shapes the way d i f f e r e n t i n d i v i d u a l s perceive or experience the same " r e a l i t y " . Culture selects the range of behaviour i t s members consider to be appropriate i n various s i t u a t i o n s . Because most c u l t u r a l conditioning occurs on subconscious l e v e l s , i t i s very d i f f i c u l t for members of a p a r t i c u l a r culture to be aware of i t . In cros s - c u l t u r a l encounters, however, individuals are often faced with behaviour they do not expect, or behaviour that they consider to be inappropriate; or they may simply f a i l to experience the behaviour they have been conditioned to expect. This often results i n ali e n a t i o n and misunderstand-ings (Foster 1973, 138; Hall 1969, 181). "Ultimately, what makes sense (or not) i s irrevocably c u l t u r a l l y determined and depends heavily on the context i n which the evaluation i s made" (Hall 1976, 188). Whites and Natives are each c u l t u r a l l y conditioned to expect a p a r t i c u l a r pattern of decision making behaviour. The type of decision making each group has 5. evolved i s appropriate i n i t s own c u l t u r a l context; that i s , i t serves the perceived needs of the members of a p a r t i c u l a r r culture. I t may not be appropriate, however, when trans-ferred to another c u l t u r a l context i n which peoples' perceived needs are d i f f e r e n t . Members of every culture are ethnocentric to some degree. They assume that t h e i r own patterns are the u n i v e r s a l l y correct ones, the "natural" ones. As a r e s u l t , what frequently occurs i n c r o s s - c u l t u r a l settings i s that each group continues to act on i t s own t r a d i t i o n s , and may even attempt to force others to conform to them as well. Our conviction of superiority and our believe that we have knowledge of truth makes us anxious to 'share* t h i s s u p e r i o r i t y with other peoples whom we believe to be less fortunate. I t sometimes comes as a surprise to us to discover that the members of other cultures believe that b a s i c a l l y t h e i r way of doing things i s natural and best. (Foster 1969, 86). Lessons about c u l t u r a l r e l a t i v i t y and c u l t u r a l conditioning have become p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t for Whites to learn because of the recent rapid spread of White technology to many parts of the world. This has had the e f f e c t of buffering Whites from the traumatic but illuminating experience of being immersed i n completely d i f f e r e n t cultures. Whites can t r a v e l to almost any part of the world and avoid, i f they wish, the d i f f i c u l t i e s and challenges of confronting very d i f f e r e n t cultural, forms (Hall 1976, 48-50). 6. The psychological consequences of t h i s spread of white culture have been out of a l l proportion to the m a t e r i a l i s t i c . This world-wide c u l t u r a l d i f f u s i o n has protected us as man had never been protected before from having to take seriously the c i v i l i z a t i o n s of other peoples; i t has given our culture a massive u n i v e r s a l i t y that we have long ceased to account for h i s t o r i c a l l y , and which we read o f f rather as necessary and i n e v i t a b l e . (Benedict 1934, 6). We i n the West are convinced that we have a corner on r e a l i t y ... and that other r e a l i t i e s are simply superstitions or d i s t o r t i o n s brought about by i n f e r i o r or less developed systems of thought. (Hall 1976, 180-181). Thus the wide acceptance of one part of White culture -technology - has also reinforced White ethnocentrism. In many h i s t o r i c a l incidents of culture contact between Whites and indigenous peoples i n North /America, Whites have been determined to transfer not only technology, but also i n s t i t u t i o n s and behaviour. Intense pressure for culture change, usually coinciding with epidemics and resource depletion, has resulted often i n the i n t e r n a l collapse of indigenous cultures. ... the l a s t two centuries have shown only too often that there are l i m i t s to the rate of c u l t u r a l change, and that beyond a certain point the pressure of a l i e n culture results i n the i n t e r n a l collapse of the native l i f e without assimilation of the new. The change i s a l l i n the d i r e c t i o n suited to the more powerful culture which thus suffers less derangement even when i n a l i e n t e r r i t o r i e s ; while the p l a s t i c i t y of the victim i s strained to the breaking point. (Forde 1963, 472). 7 . Some a s p e c t s o f c u l t u r e a re much more r e s i s t a n t t o change than o t h e r s . C u l t u r e i s s e l e c t i v e i n i t s changes. I n a c u l t u r e c o n t a c t s i t u a t i o n , one c u l t u r e adopts from the o t h e r o n l y c e r t a i n f e a t u r e s t h a t can be accommodated i n t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l f a b r i c w i t h o u t t o o much s t r e s s . M a t e r i a l c u l t u r e o f t e n changes more r e a d i l y t h a n n o n - m a t e r i a l a s p e c t s - t h e v a l u e s , s o c i a l b e h a v i o u r , and i n s t i t u t i o n s t h a t form t h e c o r e o f a c u l t u r e . I n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , f o r example, N a t i v e p e o p l e have adopted many o f t h e m a t e r i a l a s p e c t s o f White c u l t u r e , such as h o u s i n g , c l o t h i n g , r a d i o s , e t c . One cannot assume, however, t h a t n o n - m a t e r i a l a s p e c t s o f N a t i v e c u l t u r e s have changed e q u a l l y d r a m a t i c a l l y , and t h a t N a t i v e v a l u e s a re now t h e same as White v a l u e s . I t i s the p e r s i s -t e n t , u n d e r l y i n g d i f f e r e n c e s i n v a l u e o r i e n t a t i o n s t h a t can a c t as b a r r i e r s t o communication - p a r t i c u l a r l y when th e y a re n o t e x p l i c i t l y r e c o g n i z e d . 1.4 C r o s s - c u l t u r a l Communication I d e a l l y , P l a n n i n g i s a p r o c e s s o f d e c i s i o n making by whi c h a s o c i e t y as a whole d e c i d e s on the a l l o c a t i o n and use o f i t s r e s o u r c e s i n a manner t h a t conforms w i t h s o c i a l g o a l s and v a l u e s . E f f e c t i v e communication i s fundamental t o e f f e c t i v e p l a n n i n g , s i n c e s o c i a l g o a l s and v a l u e s can o n l y become apparent i f i n d i v i d u a l s can convey i d e a s and a c h i e v e a c e r t a i n l e v e l o f mutual u n d e r s t a n d i n g . Communicating 3. effectively is a challenge even within the framework of a single culture. In a multicultural society, communication difficulties are compounded because of differences in language, experience, and cognitive frameworks. If cross-cultural communication is to take place successfully, a number of basic conditions must be met: a) language problems, including the use of professional or technical jargon, must be overcome; b) sufficient time must be allowed for translation, not only of words but also of concepts; c) true dialogue must be established, with an opportunity for participants to request clarification or respond to each other's statements; d) discussion must proceed according to a process understood and agreed upon (implicitly or explicitly) by all participants; e) the issues under discussion must be thoroughly explored verbally so that misunderstandings resulting from cognitive differences can be identified and resolved. To evaluate the effectiveness of cross-cultural communi-cation over a period of time or over a series of interactions, it should be possible to monitor certain "indicators". These will be suggested in Section 4. 9. 1.5 People in Planning Obviously, planning in any society involves people - but the extent and form of "involvement" can vary considerably according to the values and the cultural institutions that have been evolved by the people concerned. Before contact with Whites, the Dene and Inuit lived in small, homogeneous camp groups. In this situation, the "society" for which the planning was done might be defined as a single camp group composed of one or two extended families. The "involvement" of individuals in planning took the form of participatory decision making. Everyone in the camp group took part in making decisions that affected the group as a whole. The involvement of people in planning in White society takes a very different form. In a large, complex, industrial society it is not practical to have every individual involved in actually making every decision concerning the allocation and use of the society's resources. Instead, certain indivi-duals make decisions on behalf of others. It also becomes difficult to have every resource use decision satisfy every individual's wishes. Nonetheless, in a democratic society there is an attempt to have planning conform to the goals and values of the majority. This implies a responsibility to understand and consider the goals and values of all interest groups that compose the society. In the past, the involvement of Whites in planning has sometimes been limited to voting for 10. decision makers and organizing pressure groups to present views to these elected decision makers. More recently, Whites have been concerned with expanding the mechanisms for " c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n " i n decision making i n general, and i n planning i n p a r t i c u l a r . Public information programs, formal public hearings, informal public meetings, consultation sessions, public i n q u i r i e s , special task forces, and advisory committees have a l l become part of the o v e r a l l process of involving people i n planning. It should be obvious that t h i s White concept of " c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n " i s quite d i f f e r e n t from Native "participatory decision making". This difference complicates communication problems, since individuals from d i f f e r e n t cultures enter the planning process with d i f f e r e n t sets of assumptions and expectations as to what t h e i r role i n t h i s form of decision making should be. In addition, d i f f e r i n g White and Native attitudes toward land further complicate communications problems i n land use planning. These attitudes w i l l be explored i n Chapter 2. U n t i l t h i s century, planning i n what i s now the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s usually involved only the members of a single culture group so that c r o s s - c u l t u r a l communication problems were not an issue. In recent decades, however, a multi-c u l t u r a l society has begun to emerge i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . Northern planning issues now a f f e c t many 11. individuals from several c u l t u r a l backgrounds. For the purposes of t h i s thesis, four major c u l t u r a l groups are recognized i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s : DENE - refers to Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s residents of Chippewyan, Yellowknife, Hare, Nahanni, Satudene, and Loucheux ancestry who i d e n t i f y themselves as Dene, regardless of status under the Indian Act; INUIT - refers to the people whose ancestors t r a d i t i o n a l l y occupied t e r r i t o r i e s along the A r c t i c coasts and above the tree l i n e (sometimes referred to by others as "Eskimos"); WHITES - refers primarily to Caucasian Anglophone Canadians, although many of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s extend more generally to North Americans of European descent who are part of the i n d u s t r i a l , c a p i t a l i s t economy; METIS - refers to persons of mixed White and Dene parentage and who consider themselves to be d i s t i n c t and separate from both Dene and Whites (some persons of mixed White and Dene parentage consider themselves to be Dene). In addition, the term "Native" i s used i n th i s thesis to refer to c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s shared by both Dene and Inuit.' The following pages focus primarily on the contrasts between White and Native c u l t u r a l conditioning. While Metis are recognized by the author as a d i s t i n c t culture group, t h e i r emergence as such i s a r e l a t i v e l y recent phenomenon. Information on Metis culture and attitudes toward decision making was found to be too "thin" to include them i n the c u l t u r a l comparisons that follow. CHAPTER 2. TRADITIONAL CULTURAL CONTEXTS The purpose of this chapter is first to compare White and Native decision making patterns in the context of the cultures in which they evolved, and then to determine where these decision making patterns potentially conflict or over-lap. Whites, Metis, Dene, and Inuit approach decision making with different values, attitudes, and expectations. In this chapter, some of these differences are explored from an anthro pological perspective. White and Native traditional cultures are described under the broad headings of "social structure," "political organization," "economy and technology," and "world view". A wide variety of sources were used to synthesize these descriptions. Obviously, this attempt to highlight aspects of culture and decision making patterns involves a great deal of simpli-fication and generalization. It is recognized that within any one culture group a variety of viewpoints exists. Furthermore it is recognized that the processes of acculturation and modernization tend to increase the range of individual attitudes and expectations. Nonetheless, for the purposes of this thesis, it is felt that certain broad, underlying and persistent themes can be drawn out with validity for comparison. 14. 2.1 White Culture The following description of "traditional" White culture refers to some of the basic characteristics that have predom-inated since the time of contact with Dene and Inuit in the Northwest Territories, particularly in the latter part of the nineteenth century and throughout the twentieth century. The reader should bear in mind that these are generalizations, simplifications, and certainly do not apply to all Whites or to all situations. (Some of the views described under "Economy and Technology," in particular, have been strongly challenged in recent years and are beginning to change.) 2.1.1 White Social Structure White society is large and complex, with formal organ-izational structures at national, regional, and local levels. In addition, Whites join together to form a wide variety of voluntary organizations and informal committees. The White population is highly heterogeneous, with individuals repre-senting a variety of ethnic origins, religious beliefs, lifestyles, and occupations. The White population is linked by high-techology transportation and communication systems. Schools, mass media, religion, and the family are important socialization agents. While the nuclear family is important, individual mobility and independence are also encouraged. The individual, as well as the family, makes important decisions 15. about lifestyle and occupation. In the stratified White society, division of labour is complex, with a high degree of skill specialization. Individuals are believed to have equal opportunity to achieve high social status and material goods. Many organizations in both the public and private sectors are organized hierarchically. The individual in a hierarchy is expected to take orders from above, and give orders to subordinates (Ogmundson 1976, 169-171; Bienvenue 1976; Leiss 1974, 183; Hunter 1976, 132; Foster 1973, 116, 127). 2.1.2 White Political Organization In White culture, active participation in political activities is not widely practised. Political authority is legally achieved through the election system (Foster 1973, 172) . The public leaves important decisions in the hands of the elected and appointed officials and their administrative and technical assistants who are believed to "know best" by virtue of their training, experience, and access to information. Senior officials attempt to balance the desires of interest groups in the society, and to have their decisions reflect the national interest, or be in the best interest of the society as a whole (Deutsch 1970, 39-40). Government is viewed as neutral, independent, and responsible to citizens* wishes as expressed through the democratic process of voting. In addition, citizen groups can organize and pressure their elected representatives to ensure that t h e i r interests are known and considered (Dosman 1975, 10). Decisions are formally recorded as p o l i c y or law, and are enforced by p o l i c e and courts for the public good. In the past century, formal government structures have become more elaborate and more bureaucratized, and the public service that aids elected decision makers has grown tremendously (Santos 1976, 476; Ogmundson 1976, 173-181; Dosman 1975, 68-69; Foster 1969, 101). 2.1.3 White Economy and Technology Whites have an i n d u s t r i a l c a p i t a l i s t economy, i n which goods are d i s t r i b u t e d through a modified free market mechanism. It i s generally believed that consumers control what i s produced by deciding what to buy (Ogmundson 1976, 177). Goods, c a p i t a l , and people are permitted to move f r e e l y within national boundaries (Usher n.d., 4). Whites believe economic growth to be a precondition for s o c i a l harmony, since continued growth means high employment and a r i s i n g standard of l i v i n g . Growth i n any part of the economy i s viewed as good for the society as a whole (Heilbroner 1976, 10; Foster 1969, 97; Rogers 1975, 108). White individualism expresses i t s e l f i n the economy as the p r i n c i p l e of free enterprise. Each business attempts to maximize i t s p r o f i t s , and generally ignores the external costs of i t s a c t i v i t i e s , which society as a whole i s expected to pay. Whites view the land - including everything on and under i t as the primary resource. Complex, cap i t a l - i n t e n s i v e technology i s u t i l i z e d for the purpose of ex p l o i t i n g land resources f u l l y and rapidly (Rogers 1975, 108). Land rights are required to extract minerals from the land and to trans-port them over the land. Whites view land use and land ownership as two separate concepts. Land can be p r i v a t e l y owned by individuals, who can transfer rights of land use or ownership to others, usually i n exchange for cash. Land may be expropriated from private owners for compensation i f i t i s to be used for a project judged to be i n the public i n t e r e s t (Ogmundson 1976; Naegele 1964, 507). Whites tend to view most problems as b a s i c a l l y economic or technological, and f e e l they can be solved by applying s u f f i c i e n t cash or improved technol-ogy (Foster 1969, 7; Lotz 1971, 131). 2.1.4 White Worldview White worldview derives primarily from Judaeo-Christian-H e l l e n i s t i c t r a d i t i o n s which were modified through the Renaissance, Reformation, and the Industrial Revolution i n Europe (Hoebel 1966, 498). Time i s perceived to be l i n e a r , segmented, and non-repetitive. Because of t h i s , Whites place a great emphasis on scheduling and promptness (White 1967, 346 Ha l l 1976, 14; 1959, 19). Segmentation or fragmentation pervades White culture and manifests i t s e l f i n many ways. 18. For example, work and leis u r e are considered to be d i s t i n c t and separate a c t i v i t i e s (Lotz 1971, 133; Whyte and Holmberg 1973, 447). The White approach to s c i e n t i f i c inquiry i s often to break down the subject under study into component parts (Leach 196 8, 77). Education i s broken down into i s o l a t e d f i e l d s of knowledge. Social services are delivered i n a fragmented way. For example, a c h i l d care worker can only address the problem of a parent neglecting a c h i l d , and cannot deal with contributing causes such as poor n u t r i t i o n or unemployment (Castellano 1971, 355). Whites are " r a t i o n a l " vs. mystic. They see the universe as operating by physical laws which can be understood through s c i e n t i f i c i nvestigation. They believe that human beings are capable of manipulating these natural laws, and possibly even improving on them. P r a c t i c a l s k i l l s are highly regarded (Hoebel 1966, 499) . Whites are achievement oriented. Hard work i s considered to be good i n i t s e l f , and idleness inherently bad (Gallagher 1973, 476; Foster 1969, 97). Social status and wealth are important symbols of in d i v i d u a l achievement. Progress i s believed to be the r e s u l t of the application of human e f f o r t , science, technology, and the i n d u s t r i a l produc-t i o n system (Hoebel 1966, 499; Usher n.d., 3). Innovation and change are accepted as the norm (Foster 1973, 5). Part of the Judeo-Christian legacy i s the creation myth. This holds that man i s created i n the image of God, and therefore transcends the rest of the natural world. The earth and animals are believed to have been created for human benefit and utilization. The domination or mastery of Nature is seen as a challenge to human ingenuity (Foster 1973, 85; Leiss 1974; Murphy 1967, 5-7; Foster 1969, 97). Christianity "not only established a dualism of man and nature but also insisted that it is God's will that Man exploit nature for his proper ends" (White 1967, 347). Many Whites no longer consciously hold these beliefs, but their approach to natural resource development may still be influenced by them. Whites view society as a collection of individuals, all of whom are equal. Because of their belief in equal oppor-tunity, Whites emphasize that "anyone who works hard can make it" (Ogmundson 1976, 176). Individualism and competition are encouraged, and the gain of any individual or group is interpreted as a gain for the society as a whole, rather than as a loss to someone else. 2.2 Dene and Inuit Culture The original intention was to describe Dene and Inuit cultures separately. In doing so, however, it quickly became apparent that the two cultures show striking similarities in the basic cultural features described in this section. To avoid being overly repetitive, therefore, traditional Dene and Inuit cultures are described together here. The 20. d e s c r i p t i o n s are s y n t h e s i z e d mainly from the work of anthro-p o l o g i s t s , and r e f e r to the N a t i v e c u l t u r e s around the time when i n t e n s i v e c o n t a c t w i t h Whites^began - roughly the l a t e n i n e t e e n t h century. Metis are not i n c l u d e d i n t h i s d e s c r i p t i o n , s i n c e t h e i r emergence as a d i s t i n c t c u l t u r a l group i s a more r e c e n t phenomenon. 2.2.1 Native S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e T r a d i t i o n a l l y , i n Dene and I n u i t y s o c i e t y the extended f a m i l y was the b a s i c u n i t of s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n . F a m i l i e s would v o l u n t a r i l y j o i n t o gether to form s m a l l hunting bands. Bands s h a r i n g the same d i a l e c t and u s i n g the same broad t e r r i -t o r y composed loose " t r i b e s , " although a l l members of one t r i b e would r a r e l y gather t o g e t h e r . Dene and I n u i t commonly l i v e d i n s m a l l , homogeneous, nomadic, r e l a t i v e l y i s o l a t e d bands, u s u a l l y composed o f two or t h r e e r e l a t e d f a m i l i e s . Band s i z e and composition v a r i e d over time a c c o r d i n g to food a v a i l a b i l i t y , hunting techniques employed, and the d e s i r e s of members. Wi t h i n the band, there was very l i t t l e emphasis on s t a t u s and rank, and very l i t t l e s o c i a l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , although o l d s u c c e s s f u l hunters and shamans were h e l d i n h i g h regard. There was no s p e c i a l i z a t i o n of labour, o t h e r than d i v i s i o n by sex. Dene and I n u i t t r a d i t i o n a l l y had no w r i t t e n language. Information, i n c l u d i n g knowledge of h i s t o r i a l events, was passed on by word of mouth. The f a m i l y and band were strong s o c i a l i z a t i o n agents (Driver 1969, 288-90, 331-336, 450; Spencer, Jennings, et a l 1965, 155-161; Smith 1971, 209; Cooper and Penard 1973, 78-79; Chance 1966, 62; Willmott 1968, 150-152; Damas 1969; 1973; B a l i k c i 1964, 77). 2.2.2 Native P o l i t i c a l Organization Dene and Inuit had minimal large-scale p o l i t i c a l organiz-ation. The small, nomadic, kinship-based bands were s e l f -governing, and there were no clear l i n e s of authority beyond these. Within the family, the eldest male usually made decisions a f f e c t i n g family location and movements. When several families joined together to form a larger camp group, the most capable hunter would organize group hunting a c t i v i t i e s . These informal headmen remained headmen only as long as they continued to a r t i c u l a t e group w i l l and to display superior s k i l l and judgement i n hunting. In essence everyone was involved i n decision making. Decisions were reached only a f t e r free exchange of information and opinions among band members. Deliberation would continue u n t i l consensus was reached. Decisions were respected by group members voluntar-i l y , and anyone who did not wish to go along with the decisions was free to separate from the group. Decisions were not formally recorded, and no formal i n s t i t u t i o n s operated to enforce them. Nonconformists, however, would be subject to group pressure through mockery, gossip, r i d i c u l e , ostracism, or - i n extreme cases of nonconformity that were seen as a threat to the well-being of the group - murder (Smith 1971, 209; Cooper and Penard 1973, 78-79; Fumoleau 1973, 217; Vallee 1968a, 109; Driver 1969, 288-289; B a l i k c i 1970, 109, 116; 1973, 373-378; Chance 1966, 65; Hughes 1966, 255). 2.2.3 Native Economy and Technology The main staple for many Dene and Inuit was caribou, which was hunted with bow and arrow or spear. Other land and sea animals, as well as birds and f i s h , were important to the native economy. Because of uncertainties i n game cycles and weather, and the nature of the r e l a t i v e l y simple and labour-intensive technology, periods of starvation or p r i v a t i o n were frequent. The Dene and Inuit considered food to be the most valuable resource provided by the land. A l l band members had equal access to food resources, which could not be monopolized by anyone. Rights of land use or ownership never belonged to in d i v i d u a l s . Food caches were considered to be private property, but could be used by anyone i n need. Tools and weapons were p r i v a t e l y owned, but were widely shared. Material wealth was not accumulated. Food was d i s t r i b u t e d through the practice of sharing. Within broad t e r r i t o r i e s , band members were free to roam over the land and to use any of i t s resources to feed themselves (Helm 1965, 381-382; Spencer, Jennings, et a l 1965, 124, 156-159; Rogers 1975, 95; Fumoleau 1976, 18; Weyer 1932, 188; Driver 1969, 273; B a l i k c i 1973, 378; Paine 1973, 309; Willmott 1968, 154). 2.2.4 Native Worldview Dene and Inuit t r a d i t i o n a l l y perceived themselves to be an i n t e g r a l part of nature, and at the mercy of whimsical and powerful natural and supernatural laws. Dene and Inuit attemp-ted to understand these laws and to co-operate with them. Some attempts were,made, p a r t i c u l a r l y by shamans, to mediate with supernatural forces to a t t r a c t more game to a p a r t i c u l a r area, but there was no b e l i e f that these forces could be controlled or manipulated by human beings. The souls of people and animals were believed to reincarnate. Animals were treated with great respect so that they would allow themselves to be taken, and so that they would reincarnate i n the same area to be hunted again. Hunters were therefore careful to observe taboos to avoid offending animals (Spencer, Jennings, et a l . , 1965, 157; Rogers 1975, 95; Savoie 1970, 86; Driver 1969; 289, 450; Chance 1966, 71; Williamson 1974, 22-23; Paine 1973, 310-311). 2.3 Comparison A comparison of the White and Native c u l t u r a l contexts reveals many stark contrasts, some of which are obviously related to differences i n population s i z e . T r a d i t i o n a l Native technology and the harsh northern environment prohibited large concentrations of population. White methods of exploiting land permitted much larger concentrations of population and demanded more complex organizational and institutional structures. Perhaps the most striking and pervasive contrast between White and Native cultures is fragmentation vs. holism. Whites tend to separate, segment, specialize, compartmentalize, etc., constantly. Natives, on the other hand, have a holistic cognitive pattern. A Native person would not separate activi-ties into categories, such as work vs. leisure, or classify activities such as religious vs. recreational. The separate discussions of political, social, and economic features in this chapter would make little sense to a traditional Native person, who would undoubtedly regard this as a particularly "White" approach. Some of the more striking differences between White and Native cultures are summarized in Table 1 . White and Native decision making processes were compatible with the institutions of the culture in which they evolved, but, as might be expected, were fundamentally different from each other. Major characteristics of traditional Native and White decision making are contrasted in Table 2 . Culture and experience conditioned White, Dene, and Inuit to expect the patterns of decision making outlined in Table 2 . Such cultural conditioning is often subconscious, Table I: Comparison of Traditional Cultural Contexts of Whites and Natives White large population, highly concentrated in some areas heterogeneous population hierarchical society formal social control mechanisms complex information recording, storage, and transfer systems high skill specialization capital-intensive technology growth-oriented economy individual accumulation of material goods private ownership of property, includ-ing land attempt to control natural forces individualism fragmentation Native small, dispersed, nomadic population homogeneous population unstratified society informal social control mechanisms oral history; information transferred by word of mouth division of labour by sex only labour-intensive technology subsistence economy very little accumulation of material goods sharing; no concept of land ownership attempt to cooperate with natural forces collective spirit holism Table II: Comparison of Decision Making Patterns in White and Native Cultures White REPRESENTATIVE: Leader balances differing views, makes compromises, decides on behalf of group formally elected leader restricted access to decision makers (through actual distance or hier^* archies) little direct consultation with citizens, although they may take the initiative to organize a pressure group centralized restricted access to information (often it is "confidential" or written in professional jargon laymen cannot understand complex information storage and transfer systems split between legislative and execu-tive functions decisions formally recorded adversary model majority rule Native PARTICIPATORY: Group deliberates until consensus is reached; leader articulates group will tacitly acknowledged headman individuals have direct access to headman constant direct consultation with band members decentralized freedom of information oral history; information spread by word of mouth group makes decisions; group executes them decisions not recorded consensual model consensus i.e. members of a culture automatically expect the type of behaviour they are accustomed to, and regard it as the natural or correct way to do things. Being confronted with other types of behaviour - as happens in cross-cultural situations -can be confusing and exasperating. It is my hypothesis that differences in White and Native expectations about how decision making should occur have been a major source of friction, misunderstandings, and communication breakdowns in attempts to make decisions within the context of a newly-defined "multicultural" society which encompasses them all. This idea will be explored in the following chapters. 2.4 Emerging Trends It is easy to imagine that cultural values as strikingly different as those outlined above might exacerbate cross-cultural communication problems when members of these cultures attempt to take part in joint decision making processes. This is particularly true when the individuals involved are not aware of their fundamental value differ-ences . Table 2, page 26, summarizes traditional White and Native values surrounding decision making. It would not be appropriate, however, to assess current planning efforts in the Northwest Territories in light of the values listed in Table 2. Both White and Native cultures have undergone 28. s i g n i f i c a n t change i n t h i s century, r e s u l t i n g i n new values toward d e c i s i o n making. In the past decade, the White " c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n " movement, and the formation of l a r g e - s c a l e Native p o l i t i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s , have r e f l e c t e d some of these changing values. A strong emerging trend i n White s o c i e t y i s to favour changes i n t r a d i t i o n a l d e c i s i o n making patterns to i n c l u d e the f o l l o w i n g : a) a more h o l i s t i c approach to planning and problem s o l v i n g ; use of the "systems" approach f o r i n s i g h t s i n t o the i n t e r r e l a t e d n e s s of i s s u e s ; b) greater d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of d e c i s i o n making a u t h o r i t y ; c) b e t t e r r e f l e c t i o n of m i n o r i t y views i n d e c i s i o n making; d) a l a r g e r r o l e f o r c i t i z e n s to pl a y d i r e c t l y i n the d e c i s i o n making process; e) more freedom of information; f) e x p l i c i t statement of s o c i a l goals and premises on which d e c i s i o n s are based; g) greater emphasis on the importance of the process by which d e c i s i o n s are made, as w e l l as the d e c i s i o n s themselves. (See, f o r example, recent attempts by White planners to define parameters f o r e f f e c t i v e " p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n " i n planning: Friedmann 1973, Clague 1971, O'Riordan 1971, Lash 1976, St. Pierre 1977, Canadian A r c t i c Resources Committee 1977.) Emerging trends i n Native decision making include the following: a) use of formal decision making mechanisms and structures, such as voting, elections, assemblies, minute-taking; b) use of representatives, which reduces the role of individuals i n decision making to a certain extent; c) use of mass media for dissemination of information; d) use of specialized "resource people"; e) formation of special committees or groups to look at s p e c i f i c issues or p a r t i c u l a r aspects of complex problems; f) e x p l i c i t statement of s o c i a l goals and premises on which decisions are based. The t r a d i t i o n a l White and Native decision making patterns outlined i n Table 2 are c l e a r l y and consistently contradictory. However, from the emerging trends described above, i t would appear that White and Native decision making patterns are becoming much more s i m i l a r . Many of the d i f f e r -ences between contemporary White and Native expectations of decision making are now more a matter of degree. White and Native ideals are approaching each other, but from opposite ends of the spectrum. While Natives now r e l y to some extent on representatives and resource people, they do not do so 30. anywhere near to the extent that Whites do. Furthermore, Natives expect such individuals to be not only accountable, but also readily accessible - a hopeless ideal to pursue in the complex bureaucratic structures of urban White society. While decentralization, a holistic approach, and maximal participation by individuals in decision making are now ideals held by both Natives and Whites, Native standards of accept-ability in each of these areas are higher than those of Whites. But beyond these relatively minor differences in decision making patterns there still lies a very significant difference concerning the role of the individual in decision making. The individual enters the decision making process with very different attitudes and behaviour, depending on whether the model if adversary (as in the White representa-tive system) or consensual (as in the Native participatory system). In representative decision making, often "the squeaking wheel gets the grease". Thus, individuals are encouraged to take on adversary roles, aggressively asserting and even exagerating their views in an attempt to tip the scales in favour of their own cause or against someone else's. In participatory decision making, individuals work coopera-tively to achieve consensus, voluntarily compromising in the interest of the entire group. In representative decision making opinions are often polarized, and the final decision is then left up to an arbitrator who is considered to be 31. objective. In participatory decision making, the individuals themselves "stay with" an issue until it is finally resolved to everyone's satisfaction. The assertive behaviour of Whites who try to promote their own narrow interests sharply contrasts with the tradi-tional, non-assertive style of Dene and Inuit. This fundamental difference continues to frustrate attempts by Whites and Natives to communicate effectively within the framework of a single decision making system. 2.5 Two Views on Land White and Natives view land quite differently, and have very different approaches to utilizing the resources it provides. This compounds cross-cultural communication difficulties in land use planning. Since the Industrial Revolution, many Whites' view of land is that it is a commodity to be exploited for immediate economic gain. In White society, land ownership and usage rights are privately held. Natives, on the other hand, had no concept of land ownership, and no concept of private rights over resource use. Land, certainly among those groups who existed by hunting, was merely a fact of life. It existed. It was the resources provided by the land, rather than the land itself, that were of importance. But the resources were not to be controlled by the will of any one individual or group of individuals. They were to be used for 32. the benefit and enjoyment of all. No man had a right to deprive another of those resources needed to sustain himself and his family. (Rogers 1975, 95). The Indian did not see himself as owner of land, nor as empowered to bestow ownership on another. He considered that the land and its animals, the water and its fishes, were for his use. He would never refuse to share them, compelled by conviction to do so. Nor did he consider that the act of sharing deprived him of his own right to freely use the land as he had previously done. This attitude was rooted in experience and culture. (Fumoleau 1973, 307). Dene and Inuit viewed themselves as an integral part of the natural system, in which animals, land, and people are inseparably linked in an ongoing process of mutual nurturing and sustenance. These fundamental differences between White and Native attitudes toward land are summarized in Table 3. For a long time, Whites viewed most of what is now the Northwest Territories as a "wasteland" containing few exploitable resources. Between 1900 and 1920 missionaries and Indian Agents pleaded with Ottawa to extend Treaty benefits to Natives living north of Great Slave Lake who were suffering as a result of epidemics. The Government resisted these pressures "on the grounds that no profitable use could be made of the land" (Fumoleau 1973, 106). Table II-I: Traditional White and Native Attitudes Toward Land White Man is separate from and superior to Nature, one element of which is land Land is a commodity Man exploits land for his benefit Private ownership of land Resources may only be utilized by the owner, or by individuals acquiring usage rights from the owner Man exploits land for his benefit Short time horizon regarding land use Native Man is an integral part of Nature along with land and animals "Land is life" Land nurtures man No concept of land ownership Resources used by anyone as needed Man takes from land only what is needed for subsistence Long time horizon regarding land use 34. White attitudes toward northern land changed suddenly when o i l was discovered at Norman Wells, N.W.T., i n 1920. Preparations began immediately for Treaty 11, which was to be signed by Dene l i v i n g north of the lands which the Whites regarded as having been ceded when Dene signed Treaty 8, i n 1899 (Fumoleau 1973, 106, 153). The Treaties underscore the difference between White and Native attitudes toward land. The Whites regarded land as a transferable commodity, whose ownership and usage rights could change hands through the signing of a document and an exchange of money. Natives, on the other hand, had no concept of land ownership or t r a n s f e r a b i l i t y . I t i s obvious, then, that t h e i r understanding of what was being negotiated at Treaty time was quite d i f f e r e n t from the Whites' understanding. Whites thought of the Treaties as legal transactions by which the Dene ceded a l l land rights; Dene thought of the Treaties as expressions of goodwill and friendship. The Dene customarily shared resources among themselves and they were w i l l i n g to share with Whites as well . But the Dene had no way of knowing about the customary White approach to resource use, and the disastrous e f f e c t s t h i s would have on t h e i r own way of l i f e . The behaviour of White trappers who poured into the North to seek t h e i r fortunes was an unpleasant surprise to the Dene, and a threat to t h e i r s u r v i v a l as well. 35. Every slough, o f f the Slave River had a white trapper. They would come i n and just clean out the slough of muskrats. They would leave nothing for seed. They would k i l l every beaver i n every lodge they found. Then they would get the h e l l out of the country. The Indians weren't l i k e that; they weren't getting r i c h , they were l i v i n g o f f the land and knew that they had to be a l i t t l e b i t c a r e f u l ... (James B a l s i l l i e i n Fumoleau 1973, 240). These differences i n c u l t u r a l values and orientation were either ignored or not perceived at Treaty time. Whites and Dene both took part i n the same inter a c t i o n , but with very d i f f e r e n t understandings about i t s basis and meaning. This constitutes a b a r r i e r to communication. I t i s not surprising that problems have arisen between Whites and Dene because of the ambiguities surrounding the signing of the Treaties. The battle as to what the Treaties r e a l l y mean i s now being fought i n the courts. Meanwhile, the misunderstanding has caused considerable animosity between Whites and Natives i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . Many Dene f e e l they were cheated and l i e d to by Whites; many Whites f e e l that the Dene are try i n g to go back on an agreement which, from the White point of view, was made f a i r l y and should be l e g a l and binding. Since 1970, pressure from some Whites for rapid, . large-scale development of non-renewable resources i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s has i n t e n s i f i e d to an unprecedented degree. The controversy over the proposed Mackenzie Valley pipeline once again embroiled Whites and Natives in land use planning issues. Many of the statements made by both groups indicate that traditional attitudes toward land have persisted. While these attitudes may not be universal, they are still predominant. The following statements by Dene before the Berger Inquiry indicate that they still regard the land as essential to their life, and that they reject the White view of land: Chief Hyacinthe Kochan: "This is our land, where we live. We make our living by hunting, trapping and fishing. For everything, we depend on the land" (in Native Press, 3/9/76, p. 9). Isadore Kochan: "This land is not for us to make money out of. We think too much of our country to get it disturbed by a pipeline ... This land fed us all that time. It's just like a mother to us. That's how serious we think about the land around here. This land means more to us than money ..." (Native  Press, 3/9/76, p. 9). Frank T'Seleie: "Deep in the glass and concrete of your world you are stealing my soul, my spirit. By scheming to torture my land you are torturing me. By plotting to invade my land you are invading me. If you ever dig a trench through my land, you are cutting through me ... You are coming to destroy a people that have a history of thirty thousand years. Why? For twenty years of gas? Are you really that insane?" '(in The Canadian Forum, 11/76, p. 16). For Native people, land connotes livelihood, home, nurtur-ing, life. The activities of many northern Whites show that for them land connotes an "economic base," profit, and employment opportunities. Whites and Natives in the Northwest Territories are now faced with the prospect of settling Native land claims. Land claims, in fact, can be seen as a defensive move on the part of Native people. Whites have seemed incapable of understanding the Native view of land, so now Natives are attempting to use the legal tools of the White system to achieve protection of their land and their way of life. There is a danger that in land claims settlement negotiations errors of the past will be repeated, and cross-cultural communication barriers will remain. Many Whites assume that "land claims" is an argument about who owns title over a piece of real estate. For many Natives, the meaning of "land claims" is much more profound. The motto of the Dene land claims movement is "our land is our life". For them, land claims connotes the very survival of their culture and their way of life. Their idea of settlement of land claims includes consideration of new economic, social, and political institutions that will ensure their place in Canadian society and allow them to set up a viable renewable-resource management system. There is high potential for communication breakdowns, however, since many Whites are thinking of land claims settlement in terms of the historical pattern, which involves cash compensation for extinguishment of land rights, so that non-renewable resource development can proceed without further delay. 38 The minutes examined in Chapter 4 show some of.the way in which conflicting White and Native attitudes toward land exacerbate communication problems in efforts at land use planning in the Northwest Territories today. CHAPTER 3: DECISION MAKING IN NEW NORTHERN COMMUNITIES IN THE 1950's AND 1960's In t h i s chapter, the decision making processes imposed on northern settlements around the middle of t h i s century are examined i n l i g h t of pot e n t i a l c r o s s - c u l t u r a l communi-cation b a r r i e r s , which are exacerbated by the c o n f l i c t i n g White and Native values described i n the previous chapter. I t i s also important, however, to view these decision making processes against the background of the culture change that was occurring at the time they were introduced. 3.1 Culture Contact and Culture Change In general, Native cultures have undergone greater change than White culture because of the nature of culture contact i n the N.W.T. and subsequent events. Because of the remoteness and severity of t h e i r habitat, Dene and Inuit were i n i t i a l l y spared the i n t e n s i t y of acculturation pressure experienced by indigenous peoples i n southern parts of Canada. Throughout the nineteenth century some Whites took part i n short-term exploitation of the North's renewable resources, primarily furs. For the most part, however, southern Canadian Whites regarded the North as a barren wasteland - u n t i l the late nineteenth century, when gold was discovered i n the Yukon. Subsequent discoveries 40. of gold, o i l , and other mineral resources i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s resulted i n a rapid i n f l u x of Whites, p a r t i c u -l a r l y into the areas t r a d i t i o n a l l y occupied by the Dene. But even u n t i l the middle of the twentieth century, the tendency was for Whites to seek t h e i r fortunes i n the North, through rapid and intensive resource exploitation, and then to r e t i r e to more comfortable climates. I t i s only i n the past two decades that the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s ' White population has shown a s i g n i f i c a n t increase i n s t a b i l i t y -esp e c i a l l y i n the larger m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . With a larger and more permanent White presence, acculturation pressures experienced by Dene and Inuit are more intense than they have ever been i n the past. Changes came r e l a t i v e l y quickly to the Native cultures from the mid-nineteenth century onward. The introduction of r i f l e s and metal traps i n the nineteenth century changed the relationship between Native peoples and the land i n s i g n i f i c a n t ways. Trapping became as important as,: i f not more important than, hunting. In addition, Dene and Inuit became consumers of imported goods which could be acquired by trading at the numerous posts established i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the 1920's. For the f i r s t time the Native economy became linked with outside forces, since the value of pelts was determined by the dr a s t i c fluctuations of the world fur market. These economic changes went hand i n hand with s i g n i f i -cant changes i n Native s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l structure. The i n i t i a l l y higher game yi e l d s made possible by new technol-ogy reduced the importance of sharing and cooperative hunti] techniques. As a r e s u l t of t h i s , and of the long series of epidemics that accompanied contact with Whites, camp groups were reduced i n size and number. The rate of change i n Native cultures continued to accelerate throughout the twentieth century, and increased dramatically from the 1950's onward. In the 1950's most Dene and Inuit moved to permanent settlements, because of game depletion and because of the a t t r a c t i v e services that were provided i n settlements by the government. Permanent settlement meant larger and more heterogeneous gatherings than the Dene and Inuit had ever experienced. I t meant continued exposure to White culture, i n s t i t u t i o n s , and technology - and also to diseases against which Dene and Inuit had no immunity. The mid-century was a time of serious c u l t u r a l disruption for Dene and Inuit. Many Native victims of tuberculosis were evacuated to southern sanatoriums, where they spent years away from t h e i r families and t r a d i t i o n a l life-ways. Children were taken to hostel schools for at least ten months of the year, where they were t o t a l l y immersed i n White culture, as well. Lessons were taught i n the English language only, and were based on the same curriculum that was designed for urban White children. White C h r i s t i a n missionaries discouraged the use of t r a d i t i o n a l names and the continuation of t r a d i -t i o n a l r e l i g i o u s practices. In some areas the option of continuing the t r a d i t i o n a l way of l i f e was rapidly eroded. High concentrations of population made i t impossible to support communities from the land i n the t r a d i t i o n a l manner, and children raised i n the White education system quickly l o s t t r a d i t i o n a l s k i l l s . These changes resulted i n anxiety and uncertainty about c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t y and self-image. U n t i l quite recently, many Dene and Inuit f e l t powerless against these forces of change. Attitudes of ambivalence, uncertainty, and even some resignation to the changes introduced by Whites prevailed throughout the 1 9 5 0 ' s and 1 9 6 0 ' s . The Dene and Inuit had no t r a d i t i o n of s o c i a l or p o l i t i c a l organization on a large scale, and no previous experience l i v i n g i n groups larger than the extended family hunting band. There i s evidence that i n the f i r s t decades of permanent settlement, Native decision making continued to follow t r a d i t i o n a l camp patterns. Headmen would speak only for the members of t h e i r extended family or former camp group, and l i t t l e i n i t i a t i v e seems to have been taken by Natives themselves to restructure s o c i a l organization on a community scale (see, for example, 43. Williamson 1976, 365; B a l i k c i 1968). This i s understand-able i n l i g h t of the dramatic and tumultuous changes the Native cultures were undergoing at that time. In comparison, the impact of culture contact on White culture and society was n e g l i g i b l e . Contact with Dene and Inuit may have brought s i g n i f i c a n t changes to the l i v e s of i n d i v i d u a l Whites who ventured north, but i t had very l i t t l e e f f e c t on the general course of White culture toward further urbanization and i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n . 3.2 The Introduction of Committees and Councils I t was Whites - primarily transient government agents -who took the i n i t i a t i v e to organize decision making i n new northern communities i n the 1950's and 1960's. The absence of the forms with which they were f a m i l i a r may have led them to believe that Inuit, Dene and Metis had no decision making i n s t i t u t i o n s . From mid-century onward government administrators attempted to e s t a b l i s h White models of organization i n new northern communities. Under the Indian Act, Band Councils were established i n Indian communities a l l across Canada. These councils were responsible primarily for administration of reserve lands. Since no reserves were ever established i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , many of the Band Council duties outlined under the Act were i r r e l e v a n t . Nonetheless, e l e c t i o n of Band Councils i n Dene communities was encouraged. In the 1950's i t became Department of Northern A f f a i r s p o l i c y to set up Eskimo Advisory Councils i n eastern and central A r c t i c communities (Williamson 1974, 150). As the name suggests, these councils were merely advisory, and met at the behest of government representa-tives i n the community to discuss l o c a l administrative concerns. In the mid-1960's the Carrothers Commission evaluated government i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . The commission concluded that the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s was not ready to move toward p r o v i n c i a l status, for a number of reasons. One was that the t e r r i t o r i a l council's work was unusually d i f f i c u l t because of the weakness or absence of municipal i n s t i t u t i o n s i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . Another was that the rate of p a r t i c i p a t i o n by Native people i n l o c a l government was very low. Spurred by the Carrothers Commission Report, the Government of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s i n i t i a t e d a new l o c a l government development scheme i n the late 1960's. Under the new program, a community would move through various stages of development - from settlement to hamlet to v i l l a g e to town. At each stage the community's elected council would become less advisory i n nature, and would handle certain defined authorities and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . In Inuit communities, the Eskimo advisory councils opened their membership to non-Inuit and were eventually developed into municipal councils. Band Councils, however, were not considered appropriate to the new local government program, because they represented only registered Indians. Band Councils did not represent Whites and Metis, who formed a significant part of the population in Mackenzie Valley communities. The Band Councils were not dismantled, but a second set of councils was introduced in Mackenzie Valley communities. Dene were confused by these new councils which seemed to undermine the authority of those previously established by Whites. One civil servant responsible for promoting the new local government scheme explained how municipal councils were rationalized: At first we were told that in Indian communities the Chief represented the community. In the first place, we argued, the Chiefs were not usually traditional. They were chosen origin-ally by the Department of Indian Affairs as a representative for certain purposes of the federal government, ranging from the signing of treaties to greeting V.I.P.'s. Secondly, the Chiefs were apparently no longer representatives of the Indian community judging by the number of delegations opposing the Chief's policies. Finally, chiefs were in no way representative of the non-Indian residents of the communities. (in Bean, n.d., 14). For these reasons the new councils may have seemed necessary to Whites; to the Dene they seemed not'only incompatible with traditional decision making patterns but also redundant considering that one set of community decision making bodies had already been established by Whites. Cross-memberships in Band Councils and municipal councils occurred quite frequently. Nonetheless, the two types of councils operated independently and were never really integrated into a unified community decision making system. Dene, for the most part, have continued to view Band Councils as the bodies most representative of their views. In eastern and central Arctic communities, settle-ment councils were generally accepted by both Whites and Inuit as the primary representative bodies at the community level. In addition to Band Councils and settlement or municipal councils, a wide variety of committees was^: established in northern communities throughout the 1950's and 1960's in an attempt to increase the involvement of local people in decision making. Housing administrators set up local housing associations; health officials set up local health committees; educators set up local education advisory boards; game officers set up local hunters' and trappers' associations; social development workers set up welfare committees and alcohol committees. In addition, churches, cooperatives, and other non-government agencies 47. established t h e i r own advisory groups i n northern commun-i t i e s . The r e s u l t of t h i s a c t i v i t y i s that settlements which several decades ago had no community-scale decision making structures now have r e l a t i v e l y complex networks of councils and committees. There were designed, however, to conform to the White i d e a l of "p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n " decision making, rather than the Native i d e a l of "participatory" decision making. Spence Bay i s an example of a small northern community where a network of advisory bodies has recently been established. The community's evolution followed the t y p i c a l pattern of northern settlement. A Hudson's Bay Company trading post was f i r s t established i n the Spence Bay area (on the Boothia Peninsula) i n 194 8. Other White agencies followed - the R.C.M.P. i n 1949, a Roman Catholic Mission i n 1950, and an Anglican Mission i n 1955. In 1958 a government school was b u i l t , and i n 1962 a government nursing s t a t i o n . From then on, construction of government housing and f a c i l i t i e s continued ste a d i l y , and the Inuit began to be attracted from t h e i r hunting camps to s e t t l e permanently around the clus t e r of White agencies. The Spence Bay people have had less than two decades of experience with community-scale s o c i a l organization, and less than one decade of involvement i n meetings and commit-tee work. The f i r s t settlement council was elected i n 48. November 1970. In the winter of 1975-76, the community, with a population of around 400 (approximately half of which i s under f i f t e e n years of age) had a t o t a l of one hundred committee seats. With cross-representation, these seats were occupied by forty-eight i n d i v i d u a l s , or about one-third of the adult population over twenty years of age (Williamson 1976, 376). The one hundred positions are on sixteen representative bodies with varying degrees of a c t i v i t y : Settlement council Hunters' and trappers' association Education advisory board Recreation committee Manpower committee Youth committee Welfare committee Anglican vestry Housing Association Co-operative board of directors Health advisory committee Inuit T a p i r i s s a t of Canada committee Alcohol education committee Fire Brigade R.C. church committee A slate of committees such as this gives the appearance of considerable l o c a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n decision making. However, Williamson (1976, 413) suggests that Spence Bay i s following a pattern that t y p i c a l l y occurs i n northern communities: high i n i t i a l i n t e r e s t i n these new forms of organization, followed by apathy, f r u s t r a t i o n , or r e j e c t i o n of them. This thesis argues that part of the reason for disinterest in or frustration with northern decision making models is conflicting cultural expectations about the decision making process. The decision making processes introduced in the 1950's and 1960's fulfilled traditional White decision making expectations, but frustrated tradi-tional Native expectations. 3.3 Cultural Conflict The decision making models introduced in the Northwest Territories in the 1950's and 1960's were developed by Whites to meet decision making needs as Whites perceived them. These models are characterized by a) fragmentation vs. holism; b) representative vs. participatory decision making; c) adversary vs. consensual style of deliberation. Each of these aspects will be discussed in greater detail below. 3.3.1 Fragmentation vs. Holism In the system introduced by Whites, committees each have a specialized function, and work to improve a particul aspect of community life. The areas of responsibility defined are often not those of greatest interest to Native peoples. Each deals with isolated symptoms of community 50. problems (e.g., welfare committee, housing association, health advisory committee, alcohol education committee, recreation committee, e t c . ) . Furthermore, they divide the community into age sets (e.g., Spence Bay Old Folks Committee, youth committee) and i n t e r e s t groups (R.C. church, Anglican vestry). While t h i s type of s o c i a l organ-i z a t i o n may seem appropriate to Whites l i v i n g i n large urban centres, i t may not seem so i n an i s o l a t e d northern community whose several hundred Native residents are t i g h t l y bound by kinship and marriage t i e s . Another way i n which the system introduced by Whites i s "fragmented" i s i n the delineation of j u r i s d i c t i o n s . The design of l o c a l government i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s r e f l e c t s White c u l t u r a l p r i o r i t i e s , and involves the areas of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y that would most concern an emerging, tax-based municipality i n a southern province. The area of r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the council i s based on the assumption of an evolving tax base suited to a culture which has an ethic of private property and ownership. The council, i n e f f e c t , becomes the forum for working out the interests a r i s i n g out of the ownership of private property. The range of r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s delegated to the council - roads, a i r s t r i p s , street l i g h t s , water, sewage, and garbage are prime topics of community discussion only i n a private-propertied, tax-based culture. (Bean n.d. , 17) . Land - as mentioned i n Section 2.5 - i s a central concern i n Dene and Inuit cultures, yet th i s i s one area over which community decision making bodies have least control. Authority for land use decisions rests with the federal government. The one l o c a l body that i s given some power over land resource issues i s the hunters' and trappers' association. While th i s association generates considerable l o c a l i n t e r e s t , i t s powers are quite l i m i t e d . I t acts as an advisory body for l o c a l f i s h and w i l d l i f e o f f i c e r s . The only r e a l "power" the hunters' and trappers' associations have - and t h i s i s not taken l i g h t l y - i s the a l l o c a t i o n of polar bear tags to hunters i n the community. The polar bear hunting quota i s established for each Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s community by government agents each year, and the l o c a l hunters' and trappers' association then decides who w i l l be permitted to k i l l the bears, and when. Neither the hunters' and trappers' associations nor any other community-level body has j u r i s d i c t i o n over wider issues of land use and resource management. Of the numerous l o c a l , advisory representative bodies established by White agents, i t i s the settlement council that Whites relate-to "as the body which o f f i c i a l l y repre-sents the w i l l of the community as a whole" because of the universal voting for i t s members (Williamson 1976, 404). The settlement council " i s expected to speak for the community on matters of broad p o l i c y , statements of p r i n c i p l e , and with reference to p o l i t i c a l and c u l t u r a l concerns" (Williamson 1976, 405). I t i s usually the settlement council - and not, for example, the hunters' and trappers' association - that i s approached for "consultation" on resource development questions. Yet while the settlement council i s expected to be the voice of the people on e s s e n t i a l l y a l l matters, i t s powers are limited to community housekeeping matters, such as sewage and waste disposal, water delivery, and approval of subdivision of land. In i t s attempts to encourage responsible l o c a l government, and greater i n t e r e s t and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Native communities, the Government has decentralized decision making authority to some extent, but often i n areas that are not of primary concern to the Dene and Inuit. This i s not to say that Native northerners do not want control over the delivery of housing and municipal services. Of course they do. These issues are important to community l i f e . But there are other matters which, based both on c u l t u r a l t r a d i t i o n s and current p r a c t i c a l i t i e s , are also of great importance to them, but over which they have no control. 3.3.2 Representative vs. Participatory Decision Making Since mid-century, authority over many aspects of l i f e perceived to be most important by Dene and Inuit - including management of the land and i t s resources - has been removed from the small groups of people accustomed to making such decisions in a participatory manner and has been transferred to specialized decision makers. These decision makers are often neither accountable nor accessible. Almost always they are from another culture, i.e. they are White, and quite often they do not even reside in the Northwest Territories. v. To the Dene and Inuit, the Whites who are now respon-sible for northern planning seem very remote. One Inuk described his sense of distance from White decision makers: The first man, living here, tells something to the second, who tells the third, who passes it on to the fourth. But each of them can change what they say, and the man at the end of the line will not hear what the first man said. But that man at the end will decide what the others should do just the same, because he is the real boss. And he lives in the south, far away. He will think he knows what is best, so the man who lives here in the north, close to the Eskimo people, will be doing what a man who lives far away in the south would do. (in Brody 1975, 146). This pattern is incomprehensible to Native people, who are used to making decisions for themselves by consensus, and whose spokesmen have always been readily accessible. In the smaller, predominantly Native communities in the Northwest Territories, Native people sometimes accommo-date to these cultural differences in decision making by carrying on the tradition of consensual decision making beneath the veneer of the new, representative forms. For example, Williamson observes that i n Spence Bay, "experienced chairmen allow the discussion to develop, i n the Eskimo style of sharing thought and understanding u n t i l a f u l l consensus i s sensed. Indeed the p e r i o d i c a l c a l l s for votes during meetings are e s s e n t i a l l y a b r i e f and almost perfunc-tory r i t u a l process of recognition of consensus already reached" (1976, 397). Discussion on issues i s led by one or two primary speakers aided by comments and questions from others. Then a series of speakers echo what has already been said before the formal vote on a motion takes place (Williamson 1976, 397). Bean describes a s i m i l a r pattern i n Coppermine S e t t l e -ment Council deliberations. Issues are talked out u n t i l consensus i s reached, making formal motions redundant. At one time the Coppermine council altered the system of recording and numbering formal motions. They wanted to express t h e i r unanimity i n the minutes by writing " i t i s agreed that ..." followed by the decision that had been worked out by the group. While l o c a l administrators often support and encourage t h i s type of accommodation, bureau-crats more removed from the front of c u l t u r a l interactions are often less sensitive to c u l t u r a l differences, and more i n s i s t e n t that "correct" procedures be followed. Word came back from the Regional Office that motions must be recorded. There must be a mover and a seconder, a vote and a recorded motion number. Such a process seemed illogical in a decision-making process where no one or two people were responsible for the idea. (Bean n.d., 17). Such attempts to accommodate participatory decision making within representative forms are common, but they do not promise to be a satisfactory long-term solution. They seem most effective in the smaller, more isolated communities, where there is an overwhelming Native majority. However, as Whites become more predominant, as in the larger munici-palities in the Northwest Territories, they inevitably seem to take a dominant role in municipal affairs. When this occurs there is more emphasis on "correct" procedure, more business is conducted in the English language, and the adversary style of debate becomes predominant. 3.3.3 Adversary vs. Consensual Behaviour The procedural guidelines which northern decision making bodies were expected to follow also reflected the priorities of a complex urban industrialized society where decisions are often made quickly by representatives, without consulting every person concerned. Procedures are geared to ensure that each group has a fair opportunity to present its position; but then such groups are expected to withdraw and leave the final decision to an objective arbitrator. This obviously conflicts with the traditional Dene and Inuit decision making pattern, i n which everyone informally takes part i n deliberation u n t i l consensus i s achieved. The f i r s t council secretary t r a i n i n g manual c l e a r l y prescribes the actions a municipal council was expected to take to contend with members of the public who might try to "usurp" the council's decision making authority (which, i n the Native context, would r i g h t f u l l y be t h e i r s ) : 8.1 When members of the community or other  v i s i t o r s attend council meetings. Although the public has a ri g h t to attend council meetings, the public has no special r i g h t to take part i n council discussions but the council, through the chairman, may, i f i t wishes, ask or i n v i t e any member of the public or special v i s i t o r to j o i n the discussion. The Chairman must make sure that the v i s i t o r ' s remarks are to the point and as b r i e f as possible. When the discussion has ended and before the vote i s taken, the chairman should thank the v i s i t o r who then withdraws from the proceedings to the back of the room away from the council table. If any member of the public interrupts or disturbs a council meeting i n any way, he may be asked to leave and i f he w i l l not do so, the assistance of a police o f f i c e r may be obtained i n removing the offender. In the event of a great deal of disturbance, after repeated c a l l s for order by the Chairman, the Chairman should adjourn the meeting stating his reasons for doing so and naming the date, time and place of the next meeting. (in Bean, n.d., 15). This excerpt could be from the manual drawn up for any large southern White municipality, where representatives make decisions for the public good, and where formal i n s t i t u t i o n s (e.g. police) are established to execute those decisions. In a small, i s o l a t e d northern community occupied primarily by related Dene or Inuit, these rules make l i t t l e sense. Moreover, they may actually foster counterproductive divisiveness. In order not to create a f a l s e impression, i t must be pointed out that the above quote i s taken from a manual that i s no longer i n use. Council meetings are no longer expected to be conducted i n the formal manner described. Nonetheless, the quote i l l u s t r a t e s very well the i n s e n s i t i -v i t y to c u l t u r a l differences which has been a b a r r i e r to communication i n northern decision making i n the past few decades. Some northern researchers have begun to note that the difference between White and Native de l i b e r a t i v e behaviour i s a s i g n i f i c a n t factor i n Native withdrawal from decision making at the municipal l e v e l i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s today. In a study recently commissioned by the Government of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s to ascertain why Inuit p a r t i c i -pation i n municipal a f f a i r s had waned i n Frobisher Bay, incompatibility of deli b e r a t i v e s t y l e s was reported to be a contributing factor: "Southerners" have been trained to adopt an adversary, debate-orientation to business items that are presented to Council for decision. After a short period of preliminary discussion, a member of the Council grasps the issues with sufficient clarity to propose a motion. The discussion of the motion normally takes on a comparatively aggressive, debating style. Then, after the Chairman deems the motion to have been sufficiently discussed (regardless of consensus) the question is called and a 51% majority vote will render the decision. This is the normal, "southern" way of deciding issues. The Inuit way of group decision making has been described to me (and to my observations and experience corroborates this) as drastically different from this adversary model. In an Inuit forum or council when faced with a decision, an idea will be advanced in a tentative, open-ended fashion. This idea will then be discussed at length, examined and amended. The nature of the discussion is highly consensual and strongly opposing views are rarely evidenced. After considerable discussion and when no significant new factors are added, the decision is considered to have been made. This format of decision making is often more time consuming than the "southern" format described above; it does, however, usually reflect a 100% consensus as opposed to a 51% majority. That these two approaches cannot peacably co-exist within the same forum is self-evident. Invariably those with the more aggressive approach wind up playing the dominant role in any discussion. Those with the consensus approach will tend to withdraw into polite silence. When they do speak, they will deliver a relatively quiet-spoken, open-minded opinion which the debate-oriented people will be unlikely to respond to. Their suggestions thus are often spoken into a vacuum, valid though they may be. (Dyck n.d., 16). To overcome this problem, Dyck (n.d.) recommends that a separate Inuit Advisory Council be established as an adjunct to the regular council. In this way, Inuit would be able to discuss issues i n the manner with which they were fam i l i a r and comfortable, and then report t h e i r conclusions to the regular council. Some Native organizations i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s have also recently considered the use of separate decision making processes or i n s t i t u t i o n s for the various culture groups i n the North. For example, the Dene have indicated i n t h e i r "land claims" proposal that they would l i k e to develop separate p o l i t i c a l i n s t i t u t i o n s for the members of the i r culture group within Confederation. While t h i s approach may seem to be the easiest short-term solution, i t may turn out to be quite short-sighted. I t avoids cross-c u l t u r a l communication problems, rather than solving them. 3.4 Conclusion In the context of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s society that was emerging i n the 1950's and 1960's, neither White nor Native t r a d i t i o n a l decision making patterns would have been e n t i r e l y appropriate. The l i f e s t y l e i n i s o l a t e d northern settlements was something new for both Whites and Natives, and adjustments i n the t r a d i t i o n a l decision making patterns of both groups would be necessary to meet the new decision making needs that arose. Instead of developing decision making i n s t i t u t i o n s and processes appropriate to the rapidly changing northern 60. society, however, White administrators imposed decision making models used i n southern Canada on new northern communities. I t was Whites who delineated the concerns that l o c a l bodies would address themselves to - and receive funding for. In addition, authority over some of the aspects of northern development that were most important to Native people was retained by the remote Government i n Ottawa. Communication was i n e f f e c t i v e because Whites and Natives did not recognize and resolve the differences i n the i r approaches to decision making. Cultural disruption and inexperience at cro s s - c u l t u r a l i n t e r a c t i o n may have made i t impossible for Native northerners to comprehend, l e t alone a r t i c u l a t e , the ways i n which the newly-introduced decision making processes frustrated t h e i r most basic expectations. The ethnocentricity or " c u l t u r a l blinkers" of the White i n i t i a t o r s may have made i t d i f f i c u l t for them to see that the decision making models they were i n t r o -ducing were guaranteed to frustrate northern Natives. I t i s not surprising that problems have been encoun-tered i n attempting to make these decision making models operable i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . While northern committees and councils resemble t h e i r southern counterparts i n form, they often do not resemble them i n performance. For example, throughout the 1950's and 1960's, the new advisory committees met largely at the request of White administrators; Native members rarely i n i t i a t e d a c t i v i t i e s themselves (Honigmann 1965, 103; Bean n.d.; Williamson 197 4, 150-152). The committee system has had l i t t l e relevance for Natives, who had no part i n designing i t , and no exper-i e n t i a l basis for understanding i t . An inherent danger i n the new decision making system i s that i t can be e a s i l y manipulated, because the Native people using i t have only a s u p e r f i c i a l f a m i l i a r i t y with i t . As a f i e l d administrator of government programs, I have had the personal experience of receiving a telephone c a l l urging me to c a l l a spe c i a l meeting with a l o c a l advisory body and to "use my influence" to persuade i t s members to endorse an idea developed by White bureaucrats i n a head o f f i c e thousands of miles away. There are a number of reasons why the l e v e l of Native involvement i n community decision making processes i s bound to be lower than White administrators might hope: a) For many Native people, English i s a second language, at best. This makes i t very d i f f i c u l t to comprehend complex correspondence that comes from regional o f f i c e s and the c a p i t a l concerning municipal a f f a i r s . b) Native people continue to depend on White advisors to inter p r e t complex procedural rules with which they are unfamiliar. c) Many of the matters that most concern Native people -such as land use, the education system, alcohol laws -remain outside the j u r i s d i c t i o n of community councils. d) At best, individuals are given an opportunity for "pa r t i c i p a t i o n i n " decision making, as opposed to "participatory decision making" which Native people are accustomed to, and i n which they have r e a l decision making authority. e) The Whites' aggressive, adversary s t y l e of debate seems to contradict t h e i r stated intentions of attempting to cooperate i n decision making. Assertive behaviour, to Natives, seems not only d i s t a s t e f u l , but also counter-productive to finding solutions acceptable to a l l . These barri e r s to e f f e c t i v e communication are often not recognized. Whites continue to be b a f f l e d by the common signs of apathy or f r u s t r a t i o n among Natives toward current opportunities for p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n municipal a f f a i r s . Natives continue to have t h e i r hopes of cooperative decision making (raised by statements .of intent from Whites) destroyed when they see the kinds of "p a r t i c i p a t i o n " the Whites have i n mind. "Pa r t i c i p a t i o n " i s quite d i f f e r e n t from the participatory decision making process Natives expect to engage i n . Whites' consistent f a i l u r e to actually s i t down with Natives and reach f i n a l decisions, by consensus, makes t h e i r promises of greater involvement for Natives seem h y p o c r i t i c a l . CHAPTER 4. NORTHERN DECISION MAKING IN THE 1970's In t h i s chapter, two recent ad hoc attempts by government and industry o f f i c i a l s to involve northern Native communities i n land use planning are analyzed. Both instances reveal that communication problems are exacerbated by c o n f l i c t i n g c u l t u r a l values about the role of the i n d i v i d u a l i n decision making and about land. Once again, i t seems appropriate to set the stage for the two case studies by f i r s t describing the h i s t o r i c a l events and culture change trends that provide the context for them. 4.1 The Trend Toward "Ad Hocracy" Edgar Dosman's book, The National Interest (1975), describes how the Canadian North became the prize of i n t e r -national power plays i n the late 1960's. Senior o f f i c i a l s i n Ottawa viewed northern development issues i n the wider contexts Qf national energy policy and b i l a t e r a l trade # r e l a t i o n s . An atmosphere of " c r i s i s " prevailed as Canada's sovereignty over A r c t i c areas was challenged. Information on northern planning issues became co n f i d e n t i a l " i n the national i n t e r e s t " . At a time when a variety of " c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n " programs were being experimented with i n many areas of Canada, decisions about northern development were being made by government and industry representatives behind closed doors i n Ottawa. By retreating to t h i s conservative s t y l e of decision making, White administrators i n Ottawa removed the process even further from Native ideals. Natives expect that every person affected by a decision w i l l actually take part i n making i t . In the late 1960's, northern residents were not given an opportunity to take part i n northern development decisions that would d i r e c t l y a f f e c t t h e i r l i v e s . S t i l l worse, they were often not even informed of them. In the 1970's environmentalists began to be alarmed by i m p l i c i t suggestions that Canada might be prepared to b u i l d a northern gas pipeline on short notice, i f Alaskan proposals f e l l through. They began to p u b l i c i z e Canada's state of unpreparedness - the lack of knowledge about environmental, s o c i a l , and economic consequences of such a major project. Public awareness of and i n t e r e s t i n northern development issues continued to grow as a r e s u l t of the work of environmentalists and Natives' rights proponents. The process by which northern development decisions were being made outraged l i b e r a l Whites, whose ideals regarding the decision making process had been altered by the " c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n " movement, and by a growing awareness that there were s o c i a l and environmental costs to be considered as well as economic costs. Whites both within and outside the T e r r i t o r i e s began i n s i s t i n g that northern residents be allowed to "participate" d i r e c t l y i n decisions related to northern resource use. Native northerners were seen to have a special i n t e r e s t i n northern development a c t i v i t y because (1) they made th e i r permanent home i n the North, (2) t h e i r "land claims" were unsettled, and (3) the d i r e c t i o n of northern development could have a very profound impact on t h e i r way of l i f e . Bowing to t h i s public pressure i n the 1970's, government and industry have shown more willingness to involve northern residents i n resource development decisions. The unquestioned assumption, however, was that involvement would take the forms of White " p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n " decision making, rather than Native "participatory" decision making. Thus the problem that government and industry representatives thought they faced was to choose from the array of White p a r t i c i -pation mechanisms those that would be most appropriate for Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s residents, and p a r t i c u l a r l y for Native northerners. It was evident that some of the forums, such as formal public hearings, used i n southern Canada would not be as appropriate i n the North. Often these opportunities assume the presence of well-informed, organized, and a r t i c u -late i n t e r e s t groups. Natives had l i t t l e experience with such formal settings and procedures, and they were poorly informed about northern development proposals. Furthermore, the Native cultures, with th e i r consensual approach to decision making, placed more emphasis on l i s t e n i n g well than on speaking well, and they discouraged assertive behaviour. As a r e s u l t , Natives did not stand a chance at a r t i c u l a t i n g t h e i r views i n the same way that White i n t e r e s t groups backed by abundant experience and resources could. In addition, Natives found repulsive the situations i n which White factions and int e r e s t groups aggressively competed with each other for the decision makers' sympathies. Such situations were incompatible with the consensual behaviour they expected to experience i n decision making. I t was also evident to industry and government represent-atives that many community councils were not i n the best position to represent the unique and little-understood Native i n t e r e s t i n northern development issues. Native involvement i n these bodies, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n larger munici-p a l i t i e s , was often low. Furthermore, some of the emerging Native organizations discredited such l o c a l bodies, claiming they represented mainly the interests of development-oriented Whites i n the communities. At the same time, government and industry o f f i c i a l s were reluctant to accept these new organizations as the "Voice of the Native People". They questioned the representativeness of young Native spokesmen, who were often not elected. They also questioned the presence of White advisors i n Native organizations, and suspected that statements from these organizations might represent White views more than Native views. Furthermore, the uneven pace of culture change has l e f t quite a mosaic of attitudes and desires among northern residents, making i t impossible to achieve f u l l consensus within any one culture group, as had been possible within small t r a d i t i o n a l hunting bands. Evidence of the range of Native views on northern develop-ment issues was used to d i s c r e d i t claims that Native organizations t r u l y represented the northern Native population. Because of these uncertainties, government and industry o f f i c i a l s began to take a series of ad hoc measures to involve Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s residents, p a r t i c u l a r l y Natives, i n northern land use planning. The Government launched a great number of special research projects and " s o c i a l impact" studies, i n addition to funding Native organizations to conduct t h e i r own information programs and organizational a c t i v i t i e s . Other ad hoc measures to improve Native input into decision making ranged from f l y - i n consultation meetings with community groups, to development "freezes" i n certain areas, to the launching of the much-public i z e d Berger Inquiry into the poten t i a l construction of a Mackenzie Valley p i p e l i n e . 6 8 . The companies which had a stake i n northern development decisions also got into the act by sponsoring a wide variety of public information and consultation programs i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . These programs helped the companies' public relations - i f not i n the communities where they were conducted, then at lea s t i n southern Canada, where some Whites had been quite c r i t i c a l of industry's lack of s e n s i t i v i t y to the impacts of t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s on Native l i f e s t y l e s . The information and consultation programs could also help to avoid delays i n the granting of exploration and development permits. Some companies even went so far as to esta b l i s h l o c a l or regional advisory committees (e.g. the Beaufort Sea Advisory Committee sponsored by Dome Petroleum), adding to the already complex network of advisory bodies i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . 4.2 Native Response Government and industry e f f o r t s to involve northerners, and p a r t i c u l a r l y Native northerners, i n resource development decisions, were often undertaken with the best of intensions. Many of the programs were regarded by Whites as not only ingeniously innovative, but also as quite l i b e r a l . They could not understand why the programs seemed only to aggravate northern Natives more. This caused a "backlash" of attitudes among some White residents of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s who f e l t that government and industry were bending over backwards to e l i c i t the views of Native people. The Natives' apparent ingratitude, and t h e i r growing demands for more decision making power, seemed quite u n j u s t i f i e d to many Whites. New programs aimed at giving Natives better opportunities to "participate" i n northern development decisions often only served to make them more aware that t h e i r most funda-mental expectations about decision making were being v i o l a t e d . I t seemed intolerable to Natives that Whites had taken upon ° themselves the authority to make major decisions about the use of Native land - the very l i f e b l o o d of the Native cultures. In response to t h i s threat, Native p o l i t i c a l organizations began to emerge rapidly at the t e r r i t o r i a l l e v e l i n the early 1970's. Other factors also contributed to the large-scale p o l i t i c a l organization of Dene and Inuit, including the following: (1) the emergence of young, uni v e r s i t y -educated, f l u e n t l y b i l i n g u a l Native leaders who are more aware of how the White "system" operates, (2) community development a c t i v i t i e s i n i t i a t e d by Whites and Natives, (3) the a v a i l a b i l i t y of funding and other resources from the Canadian Government, industry and private organizations, and (4) the example set by Native organizations i n Alaska and other parts of the world organizing to protect t h e i r i n t e r e s t s . 70. In the past few years, many Natives have displayed anger, f r u s t r a t i o n , and impatience with White models of decision making. They perceive t h e i r land and t h e i r culture as threatened, and White decision making models as inadequate tools for coping with the sudden intense pressure from astute southern i n d u s t r i a l i s t s for rapid non-renewable resource development i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . To many Natives, White-initiated " p a r t i c i p a t i o n " and consulta-t i o n e f f o r t s seem an i n s u l t and a waste of time. They see no point i n c a l l i n g a meeting unless there i s a decision to be made, and no point involving people i n deliberation unless they are expected to work out a decision by consensus. The inevitable r e s u l t of the differences between White and Native expectations about the role of individuals i n decision making, compounded by differences i n attitudes toward land, i s communication breakdowns i n current attempts to involve northern residents i n land use planning. 4.3 Case Studies This thesis argues that many of the communication breakdowns that occur i n northern land use planning r e s u l t i n part from c o n f l i c t i n g c u l t u r a l expectations about'the decision making process i n general, as well as c o n f l i c t i n g attitudes toward land. To test t h i s , i t would have been id e a l to observe a series of meetings between Whites and Natives on land use planning matters, to witness the kinds of communication breakdowns that occur, and the apparent reasons for them. It was not possible to do such fieldwork for this thesis. While minutes of meetings are a poor substitute for direct observation, they can provide some insights. The minutes included as Appendices I and II are from recent meetings initiated by government or industry officials and held in Native communities in the N.W.T. These two sets of minutes are not necessarily representative case studies. Wrigley and Spence Bay are both small, isolated, relatively homogeneous communities, in terms of . dialect, kin groups, and history. Thus they are not typical of all Northwest Territories communities, since many are larger, more heterogeneous, and perhaps less oriented toward traditional cultural patterns. These minutes were chosen for use here because (1) they are readily accessible, both appearing in other published reports; (2) they seem unusually detailed, incorporating notes on group dynamics and communication processes as well as summarizing the major points of discussion; (3) they represent a quite common form of "ad hocracy" in the Northwest Territories - the "fly-in" consultation session; and (4) they highlight cultural differences because the White and Native participants in these meetings are relatively "conservative" in relation to the cultural patterns outlined i n Chapter 2. Their interactions show more c l e a r l y how communication problems are exacerbated by ongoing c o n f l i c t s between these two c u l t u r a l patterns, even though i n the context of the wider northern society such c o n f l i c t s may now be less exaggerated, more subtle, and complicated by other factors, as well. Both sets of minutes dramatically i l l u s t r a t e that land use planning i s a v o l a t i l e issue i n northern communities. Both Dene and Inuit are keenly concerned about northern land use decisions and the process by which they are made. At both meetings, communication problems a r i s e . The purpose here i s to see whether or not these problems are exacerbated by differences i n c u l t u r a l values. As i n Chapter 3, differences between White and Native expectations about decision making w i l l be described i n terms of the following c o n f l i c t i n g patterns: fragmentation vs. holism, representa-tive vs. pa r t i c i p a t o r y decision making, and adversary vs. consensual behaviour. Comments on c o n f l i c t i n g attitudes toward land w i l l be made throughout the text wherever appropriate. 4.3.1 Cominco at Wrigley On March 27 a regular meeting of the settlement council was held at Wrigley, N.W.T. The agenda included a variety of items for discussion, including an application by Cominco to the federal government for a land use permit to carry out mineral exploration work near the community. Discussions reached an impasse, and a special meeting was arranged for March 28 to resume discussions a f t e r settlement c o u n c i l l o r s would have a chance to consult with the Band Council, community residents, and the Indian Brotherhood. The minutes indicate that a number of c o n f l i c t s arose which can be at l e a s t p a r t i a l l y attributed to differences between White and Dene expectations about the decision making process. 4.3.1.1 Fragmentation vs. Holism The Whites present at the meeting "fragment" what they perceive to be the issue i n many ways. They separate the concepts of land use and land ownership; they i n s i s t that t h i s p a r t i c u l a r exploration project should be looked at i n i s o l a t i o n from a l l others; and they are frustrated by the Dene's i n a b i l i t y to separate and define s p e c i f i c parts of t h e i r proposal that cause concern. The Dene do not seem able to fragment the problem i n t h i s way. They are concerned about the general problem of Whites usurping control over major decisions that a f f e c t t h e i r land and t h e i r l i v e s . They are not convinced that the p a r t i c u l a r project under discussion can be viewed i n i s o l a t i o n from others, even though the Cominco representative continues to i n s i s t that his project has nothing to do with land claims, and w i l l have no e f f e c t on them ("This i s something d i f f e r e n t . " ) . During the meeting the Cominco representative t r i e s to dissect the problem and have the Dene discuss i t s parts. For example, he asked them, "Is employment one problem?", and "Are any problems with t r a p l i n e s , cabins, etc.?" But the Dene do not respond, other than to say, "There i s always a problem." That i s , the general problem i s the presence of Whites on Dene land. The solution to a problem of such dimensions requires much more than the adjustment of one or two features of a p a r t i c u l a r project proposal. 4.3.1.2 Representative vs. Participatory Decision Making Early i n the meetings, one c o u n c i l l o r questions the whole point of the meetings, since Cominco had already moved some of t h e i r equipment across the r i v e r . He senses that the meetings are a sham, and that they have very l i t t l e to do with the actual decision as to whether or not Cominco w i l l be granted the permit. The representative from the Depart-ment of Indian A f f a i r s and Northern Development (D.I.A.N.D.) explains that the company had started moving t h e i r equipment, but were halted because D.I.A.N.D. had decided that the companies should not get permission to do exploration work u n t i l discussions had taken place with l o c a l people to inform them of the proposed project and p o t e n t i a l employment prospects. I t i s not clear what decision making authority the community people would actually have; the s t i p u l a t i o n seems to be just that "discussions" take place. A l e t t e r from the Northwest Lands and Forests Service i s c i t e d which states, "... we w i l l not issue the permit before a l l comments are received, and problems i f any resolved". But when the problems i d e n t i f i e d by the Dene are the broad problems of recognition of t h e i r rights to control the"land and t h e i r l i v e s ( i . e . participatory decision making i n land use planning) the Whites indicate that the a b i l i t y to change the conditions surrounding such issues i s beyond t h e i r power: Right now Government has set rules for us to follow; i f the people are displeased with the rules then the people must talk to the Government. For now Cominco w i l l go by the rules. It becomes clear that the people of Wrigley can only suggest minor conditions that might be attached to a land use permit, but that D.I.A.N.D.'s po l i c y of promoting northern develop-ment cannot be challenged at t h i s meeting. The chiefs must f i r s t convince the Government in Ottawa of the resolution [supporting a development freeze]. The Government s t i l l has a p o l i c y of northern development. We must s t i l l work within present laws! T i l l t h i s occurs I have no authority even i f I wanted, to shut things down. This also applies with regard to Settlement Council and Band Council. We are faced with l i v i n g within present laws v and make the best of i t . So we have laws that control the use of land. The Council Chairman never seems to grasp the idea that the actual authority to grant the permit l i e s outside 76. the community. Towards the end of the second meeting he declares, "They were never given permission to go across [the river] - so they don't go across and that is itl" The D.I.A.N.D. officer replies that he will convey the council's opinion to his superiors, "but I can make no guarantees as to the outcome of the permit requested by Cominco." 4.3.1.3 Adversary vs. Consensual Behaviour Other misunderstandings in these meetings arise out of the difference between the adversary and consensual approaches to decision making.. The Dene constantly strive to achieve true dialogue and a flow of information among those concerned. One councillor admits, "Right now I don't understand the problem and we should know more before we decide." The councillors first review the available inform-ation, calling for a summary of. the last meeting, and a report on the land claims conference that had just taken place at Fort Rae. They then invite a lawyer hired by the Indian Brotherhood of the Northwest Territories to attend the discussions and act as a resource person. They feel it is well worth postponing the meeting a day to canvas community views, to find out the Band Council's position (someone points out during the meeting that "the chief is sleeping and he should be here listening"), and to wait for the Brotherhood lawyer. The Whites in attendance are 77. quite disappointed over t h i s delay. For them, "consultation" represents only one phase of the decision making process. They would prefer to have the council present t h e i r position succinctly so they would be able to f l y o f f and continue with other phases of the decision process. The Cominco representative had a prepared statement which he expected to present to council, and he i s frustrated when the council does not give him an immediate opportunity to do so. Consensus i s time-consuming. When discussion turns to the disappearance of moose from the area where Whites are working, the Cominco represent-ative says, "I understand the problem but don't know what to do about i t . " The Chairman responds, "If you don't know what to do then we are finished with you." He runs out of patience with the Whites' d i s i n t e r e s t i n engaging i n r e a l dialogue and t h e i r seeming lack of commitment to finding solutions. Dene are accustomed to discussing problems and reaching decisions among those affected. Discussing problems without deciding on solutions seems nonsensical to them. Whites, on the other hand, often carry on discussions over several s i t t i n g s , and reach a decision only af t e r the issue has been discussed with a cross-section of affected parties . To the Dene, th i s approach can seem l i k e an unwillingness on the part of Whites to f i n d solutions. The Whites appear to "hear" what the Dene are try i n g to say, but 78. they do not make what the Dene think are the obvious decisions that would flow from t h i s understanding. They do not r e a l i z e that i n White culture, authority to make f i n a l decisions i s held by individuals who do not attend a l l consultation sessions. 4.3.1.4 Emerging Trends, Accommodating the New System The minutes i l l u s t r a t e some of the recent changes i n Dene decision making patterns. For example, there are several references by Dene council members to procedural matters and protocol. They seem to be concerned that the meeting be run i n the proper manner. I t i s c e r t a i n l y a more formal decision making forum than would have occurred t r a d i t i o n a l l y . During the meetings, Dene point out that i t i s not possible for one c o u n c i l l o r to c a l l a meeting without the consent of others; that speakers from the audience must be formally recognized by council and i n v i t e d to the Table to speak (unless they want to wait u n t i l the general discussion period); and that i t i s important and necessary to record what i s said at meetings such as these. The Dene s t i l l seek consensus, but t h i s meeting shows that they are aware that consensus now involves many more people than just the members of the l o c a l Band. The settlement councillors express concern about being i n agree-ment not only among themselves, but also with other Dene councils. The councillors do seek unanimity among them-selves; they also state a desire to reach a decision that w i l l not contradict the Band Council i n the community. They go further and say, "We shouldn't go ahead of the Brotherhood; we should wait and see what they say." They do not want to go against an agreement that had just been reached among chiefs attending the Fort Rae conference. There i s talk during the meetings about the need for Dene to use confrontation t a c t i c s to force the Government to pay attention to t h e i r wishes. Such t a c t i c s were not used t r a d i t i o n a l l y when authority rested within the group. Whites point out during the meetings that the rules have changed for them, as well. In the past companies did not even inform communities of t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s . The Dene agree that i t i s an improvement that the companies at least t e l l them what i s going on now, but t h i s i s not enough. The type of consultation that occurs seems only to raise fal s e expectations about the role of the Dene council i n decision making. The D.I.A.N.D. o f f i c e r advises the Dene not to get upset i f companies make a few mistakes, such as moving equipment across the r i v e r too soon. After a l l , he explains, the rules are something new to them. They never had to follow such rules before. He remarks that, "Rules have c e r t a i n l y changes for everyone i n the North." 80. 4.3.2 Polar Gas at Spence Bay On A p r i l 25, 1976, a public meeting was convened by the Polar Gas Community Relations O f f i c e r (C.R.O.) in the Adult Education Centre at Spence Bay, N.W.T. The Spence Bay Settlement Council had suggested that the meeting be held under the auspices of the Polar Gas C.R.O., rather than the council. The purpose of the meeting, as stated by the Polar Gas representative, was to discuss summer work opportunities with Polar Gas for people i n the community. 4.3.2.1 Fragmentation vs. Holism Like the Dene, the Inuit of Spence Bay continuously draw discussion off the s p e c i f i c project that concerns the White v i s i t o r s and onto broader issues of land use and decision making. Also l i k e the Dene, the Inuit cannot look at t h i s one company (Polar Gas) or t h i s one project (a summer d r i l l i n g program) i n i s o l a t i o n from other events that are changing t h e i r l i v e s and t h e i r land as a r e s u l t of White incursions, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the past few years. As S a d l i r i n a points out, I t i s much more than simply a question of the game. It should again be made clear to you that i t i s our land which you are taking away. We want to keep the f e e l i n g that i t i s our land. The community re l a t i o n s o f f i c e r defends Polar Gas and i t s projects. When the Inuit express anger over the use of 8 1 . explosives on Prince of Wales Island the previous summer, the community relations officer insists, "It was someone else. If you work for Polar Gas and get involved, people will see what Polar Gas is really all about and then they will know. It was the oil companies." Yet when probed about a disturbing line of flagged stakes that had been placed across the river, the man admits that he does not know whether they were placed by Polar Gas or not, or why they were placed. Responses from the Inuit audience indi-cate that they do not isolate these incidents or companies. Who is doing it is not the point: Tulurialik: "There is really no difference. They're all the same." Qauqyuaq: "People were very angered about this blasting - and it's really all the same interests, even if the names of the outfits are apparently different." Kiahinak: "... I have learned, by the habits learned in watching the animals, something about whites - and I know that the Polar Gas people are no different from any other whites, even if they pretend to be. We know enough of white people altogether, and now we are sad." The ways in which White society is fragmented are reflected at the meeting, as well, but are not understood by the Inuit. For example, the Inuit are furious with the Whites for what they perceive to be the Whites' disregard for the Inuit knowledge of the land and animals. Whites insist on coming north to conduct their own studies, 82. disturbing the animals, instead of l i s t e n i n g to what the Inuit have to say. The Polar Gas representative t r i e s to explain the importance of such studies: "This work has to be done so that i t can a l l be written down, so as to help those people who are doing future planning." In White society, there i s a high degree of s k i l l s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . Some people do studies, and others plan, using information retrieved from complex data systems. To the Inuit, i t i s incomprehensible that any step i n the planning process -which i s supposed to benefit the land - should damage the land. I t seems that Whites j u s t i f y studies that disturb the land i n the name of helping. As Kiahinak angrily t e l l s the community re l a t i o n s o f f i c e r , "You depend j u s t on written words. But we depend on t h i s land." In White culture each company looks out for i t s own i n t e r e s t s , t r i e s to s e l l i t s own products. The Inuit at Spence Bay keep i n s i s t i n g that Polar Gas must study a l t e r -native methods of transporting gas from the A r c t i c Islands, and suggest that much less environmental damage might r e s u l t i f they were to transport i t by plane. But Polar Gas i s a pipeline promoter, and i t i s not too interested i n probing alternatives i n d e t a i l . 4.3.2.2 Representative vs. Participatory Decision Making The Polar Gas representatives have no authority to make 83. big decisions about the pace and form of northern develop-ment. In response to c r i t i c i s m s about Whites' destructive behaviour i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , the o f f i c e r r e p l i e s , "I don't know what to say. Change w i l l come whatever you say. We'll have to make out the best way we can." Like the Cominco representatives at Wrigley, the Polar Gas representatives can make few promises to the Inuit of Spence Bay. During the meeting a man gets up and indicates on the map an area where he feels d r i l l i n g must not take place, because i t i s a very important caribou migration area. The representative r e p l i e s , "We cannot promise that t h i s work w i l l not be done. We cannot stop the study being done." In another instance, people i n the audience say that Inuit workers do not l i k e to be l e f t alone on the job when Whites go o f f by themselves to do other work. This makes them think the Whites are tryi n g to hide t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s . The community relations o f f i c e r says, "If i t i s important to the Inuit people that they should not be l e f t by themselves, then Polar Gas w i l l try to make that possible." Yet when the Inuit point out that they just said i t i s important to them, and press him for a commitment, the Polar Gas representative s t i l l does not make any promises. In spite of the Polar Gas representative's assurances that he w i l l do his best to see that Polar Gas considers the Inuits' concerns, and that every project minimizes 8 4 . damages, the Inuit remain unconvinced: N i v i a t s i a : "What has been said does not give us any reassurance about the game and about the Inuit people's land. There i s nothing to say they w i l l not come to some harm. We are very a f r a i d , and we have asked you not to come here and disturb the animals and the land, but you are just going ahead anyway." The Inuit are frustrated that Whites ask for t h e i r advice, and then do not follow i t . This meeting, l i k e the Wrigley one, makes i t apparent that the Whites regard the l o c a l people as merely one of many i n t e r e s t groups. They admit that the project they are proposing w i l l damage the caribou to some extent and that th i s w i l l hurt the people, but they continually promise to attempt to minimize damages. One man's angry outcry reveals his f r u s t r a t i o n with the way Whites are approaching northern development decisions: What would you do i f the Inuit went south and attacked your land? You wouldn't l e t them do i t l But you f e e l free to come north to the Inuit land and destroy our land ... In the south you have your leaders and you have heard many times from our leaders. But your leaders don't come here and talk to us, and i t i s about time they did. The Inuit s t i l l expect t h e i r leaders to be both accountable and read i l y accessible. Inuit participants are prepared and able to reach consensus decisions on the spot. I t must seem i n s u l t i n g to them that the White decision makers authorized to seal agreements are not even present at discussions such as these. 8 5 . 4.3.2.3 Adversary vs. Consensual Behaviour Like the Dene, the Inuit engage in deliberation not simply to exchange views, but to solve problems. This is not the case with the Whites who called the meeting in Spence Bay. At the opening of the meeting, a Polar Gas spokesman explains that this meeting is about the summer work program, and that "no one would be expected to make any decision tonight about working for Polar Gas." This is to be an information-giving session only. Polar Gas is to describe the jobs that will be available in the summer. Later in the meeting the Whites undermine their own stated purpose, by admitting that they themselves did not understand much about the jobs and about the summer drilling program, and suggest that "it is better for the people to work for Polar Gas and so find out for themselves. Inuit people who are trusted could go to work for Polar Gas and can then tell the rest of the people what it is like, and they will be more readily believed than listening to representatives from Polar Gas." This calls into question the reason the Whites called the meeting in the first place. Although one Polar Gas representative makes an eloquent call for cooperation, it is clear that the Whites have no intention of joining with community residents to find mutually satisfactory solutions. It is time for everybody to get together, and everybody in Spence Bay and all the Polar Gas 86. people must talk to each other and all work together. This plea is contradicted many times. For example: Polar Gas is trying to be as sympathetic as possible to Council requests ... But Polar Gas won't always be able to go along with the Council ... and We will listen to you and sometimes we will agree with you, and sometimes we will disagree and We may not always agree, but we're ready, to . exchange views. Whites are accustomed to debating, and to defending firm positions. This contrasts with the Inuit custom of developing a dialogue, and of entering discussions with an open mind, ready to be flexible and to work out a solution to the satisfaction of all. At the Spence Bay meeting the people have a difficult time even getting any information, let alone establishing a dialogue. At one point, a representative states that he will have to respond to a question from the audience in writing. At another point, in response to a simple, direct question about the summer program the representative responds that Polar Gas has a committee set up to tell the Inuit Tapirissat of Canada what they will be doing. This is as much as to say that such details are not the business of people in the community. These information gaps evoke the fury of the audience. They feel they are 8 7 . being manipulated and lied to. 4.3.2.4 Emerging Trends These minutes show that the Inuit are aware of changing leadership and organizational requirements. References are made to the need to train young Inuit for leadership roles. References are also made to the Inuit Tapirissat of Canada a an organization that is capable of representing the views of Inuit, but that organization needs to be given much more information about northern land use planning. The minutes also indicate that Inuit are becoming aware of the need to alter their attitudes toward land, in defense against the activities of Whites. As Qauqyauq points out: In the past people didn't need to think much about the ownership of their land. They knew it was theirs. Now, these events are forcing them to find out where they stand. ... The Inuit are claiming their own land and learning more about Polar Gas. Polar Gas should be aware that the people are not fools, and are coming together to make it clear what the white man should understand about the Inuit people's land. In addition, the Inuit sense the power of the pipeline proponents, and their own powerlessness in northern land use planning. They know there is limited time to achieve an understanding of what is happening to their land and thei 1 i ve s. Qauqyuaq: "If we don't get these things worked upon now, and things are more hurried, later it may be too late to get it right. It's better to sort out our problems in a serious way now, during 88. t h i s four or f i v e years before the gas people s t a r t construction ..." The minutes also indicate some of the ways i n which the approach to northern land use planning has changed for Whites. The Polar Gas representatives are concerned about keeping communication channels open between the Inuit and the company. They promise to answer information requests, and even o f f e r to f l y Inuit from Spence Bay to other communities to learn more about pipeline construction. Their words also indicate that Polar Gas i s concerned about the p o t e n t i a l s o c i a l and environmental impacts of a pipeline project. In the past Whites considered these impacts to be much less important than economic impacts. Another s t r i k i n g feature about th i s meeting i s the way that fury i s vented by the Spence Bay people. This kind of behaviour i s i n contrast to t r a d i t i o n a l Inuit i d e a l s . Ordinarily deliberation among the Inuit takes place i n a cheerful, non-aggressive fashion. Williamson (1976) reports that community meetings i n Spence Bay are normally amiable. S p i r i t s are high, and participants are humorous, cooperative, and cheerful. The meeting with the Polar Gas representatives was extraordinary i n i t s display of f r u s t r a t i o n and h o s t i l i t y . Examples are numerous: They're not t e l l i n g everything. We are s t i l l getting promises to f i n d out these things which you should already know, but we are s t i l l not getting many r e a l and detailed f a c t s . 8 9 . He never seems to have heard about anything he does not want to hear. He's meaningless and insults us. Foolish answer ... he thinks we are fools. This level of anger shows how strongly the Inuit feel about their land, and the attitudes and behaviour of Whites toward it. Qaqutiniq: "We want very much to keep our land. We are frightened and worried and upset and are being driven to an early grave worrying about the destruction of our;land and our lives." At the end of the meeting, Ashevak half-apologizes for the tone of the meeting, and expresses resignation to the fact that these land use matters will require some unpleasant confrontations: This has been a serious meeting. You may not have found it pleasant, but then not all meetings can be pleasant. It is often the case. As you would say, 'that's how it is'. 4 . 4 Conclusion The information on historical events contained in this chapter indicates that in spite of increasing "ad hoc" measures to involve N.W.T. residents in land use planning, there is increasing agitation among Native northerners about the land use planning process. Many northern Natives express frustration with "official" representative bodies, such as municipal councils and the territorial council. The Dene 90. have gone so far as to state that they do not recognize, the Government of the Northwest Territories as a legitimate government, and that they will not deal with any of its representatives until after land claims are settled. The two case studies indicate that conflicting cultural values regarding the role of the individual in decision making and conflicting attitudes toward land are major causes of communication failures between Natives and Whites. Whites and Dene, and Whites and Inuit, "talk past" each other because they have very different underlying assump-tions on these issues. Ad hoc efforts to involve northern Natives in decision making may be inspired by good intentions, but, as these case studies clearly illustrate, their outcome may be quite different from what is hoped for. The meetings held in Wrigley and Spence Bay were intended to assuage community concerns about resource development activities planned for their areas. Neither meeting accomplished this. In both cases, the community residents were left with intensified feelings of distrust, cynicism, anger and hostility. The opportunity to "participate" in land use planning falls far short of Native expectations for "participatory" planning. Furthermore, since Whites and Natives perceive the problems differently, the meetings cause more confusion, instead of clarifying issues as they were intended to do. In section 1.4 a number of conditions are l i s t e d which must be met i f cro s s - c u l t u r a l communication i s to take place successfully. B r i e f l y , these c r i t e r i a concern (1) overcoming language problems (including technical jargon), (2) allowing s u f f i c i e n t time for t r a n s l a t i o n of concepts as well as words, (3) developing a true dialogue, (4) conducting discussions according to a process understood by a l l involved, and (5) thoroughly exploring issues verbally, i n order to i d e n t i f y misunderstandings r e s u l t i n g from cogni-t i v e differences. In both meetings examined, basic language problems were overcome by using interpreters. S u f f i c i e n t time seems to be allowed for t h i s , although at Wrigley, White v i s i t o r s seemed to be quite upset that a second unscheduled meeting was deemed necessary by the Dene. While a "true dialogue" seems to be established between Whites and Natives at the meetings, the dialogue i s seriously r e s t r i c t e d because the White representatives have very l i m i t e d authority. Both the Dene and the Inuit express considerable f r u s t r a t i o n about the i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y of the Whites who actually have authority to make decisions. They f e e l i t i s a waste of time to hold deliberations i f no decision can be made on the spot. From the Native point of view, the dialogue must be established among individuals who can actually make decisions. I t i s the fourth and f i f t h conditions l i s t e d that are met l e a s t successfully i n the two meetings examined. There seems to be no r e a l i z a t i o n oh the part of Whites or Natives about the ways i n which t h e i r expectations about the decision making process d i f f e r , and there i s no serious discussion about how these differences might be accommo-dated within a single decision making process. S i m i l a r l y , a great deal of f r u s t r a t i o n i s caused by the c o n f l i c t i n g , incompatible White and Native attitudes toward land, but t h i s issue i s never confronted d i r e c t l y . Cognitive differences cause misunderstandings and impasses, but no one seems able to overcome these c r o s s - c u l t u r a l communica-ti o n b a r r i e r s . Suggestions as to how they might be overcome w i l l be explored i n Chapter 5. CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS Chapters 3 and 4 contain evidence to support my hypothesis that communication problems i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s are exacerbated by c o n f l i c t i n g White and Native c u l t u r a l values concerning the decision making process and land. Since e f f e c t i v e communication i s fundamental to e f f e c t i v e planning, i t i s of paramount importance that northern residents from d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l backgrounds learn to overcome communication barr i e r s that r e s u l t from differences i n c u l t u r a l conditioning. The two case studies indicate that c r o s s - c u l t u r a l communication problems hinder attempts by Whites and Natives to j o i n t l y plan land use a c t i v i t i e s which are r e l a t i v e l y minor i n comparison to many of the complex issues which currently confront northerners, such as "land claims" and major questions on the d i r e c t i o n and pace of northern "development". 5.1 Guidelines for E f f e c t i v e Cross-Cultural Communication The immediate challenge to people engaged i n northern land use planning i s to work on overcoming the serious cross-c u l t u r a l communication problems that currently hinder decision making i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . Attempts at cr o s s - c u l t u r a l decision making should f i r s t s t r i v e to meet the conditions outlined i n section 1.4. i n addition, progress i n overcoming c r o s s - c u l t u r a l communication b a r r i e r s can be checked by monitoring certain "indicators" while observing a series of cr o s s - c u l t u r a l meetings. Communication i s becoming more e f f e c t i v e as the participants i n the decision making process: - express less confusion as to the purpose of the meeting - express less confusion about procedure - express less h o s t i l i t y , d i s t r u s t , suspicion of motives, etc., toward the meeting i n i t i a t o r s - spend less time discussing procedural matters, and more time on substantive matters - maintain a high i n t e r e s t l e v e l i n p a r t i c i p a t i o n - do not f e e l that important information i s being withheld from them - express less confusion about meeting resolutions - express less confusion about the outcome or follow-up of the meeting - f e e l that t h e i r views have been r e a l l y l i s t e n e d to - f e e l that t h e i r views have been understood - f e e l that t h e i r views have been f a i r l y r e f l e c t e d i n the f i n a l decisions or resolutions taken at the meeting. I n i t i a l l y , meetings that are conducted i n cognizance of value differences w i l l i n e v i t a b l y devote a considerable amount of time to procedural matters. As people grow more fam i l i a r and comfortable with new forms of decision making which accommodate c u l t u r a l differences, less time w i l l have to be spent on c l a r i f y i n g ambiguities and d i f f e r e n t assumptions about "process". Consequently, more time can be spent on reaching decisions on substantive issues. Meetings which attempt to involve members of various culture groups i n decision making i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s w i l l i nevitably be time-consuming a) because of the need to translate words and concepts so that a l l can understand them; b) because a great deal of dialogue i s necessary to ensure that the assumptions of participants are the same, and that cognitive gaps are i d e n t i f i e d and bridged; c) because many meetings would best be conducted using the consensual approach, which i s often more d i f f i c u l t , time consuming (especially for Whites); however, there i s a much stronger commitment to execute decisions that are sought cooperatively and supported unanimously; d) because the history of frustrated c r o s s - c u l t u r a l interactions has created a considerable amount of apathy, cynicism and confusion among northerners which can make them less than o p t i m i s t i c about engaging i n further attempts at joining decision making. In many cases, cros s - c u l t u r a l communications problems can be ameliorated by the use of certain kinds of procedure. For example, a meeting that includes the following procedures i s more l i k e l y to achieve successful communication because i t e x p l i c i t l y checks many of the po t e n t i a l obstacles: - e x p l i c i t discussion of: the purpose of meeting, the objectives of the meeting, the way i n which the meeting w i l l be conducted, and time constraints ( i f any) - e x p l i c i t reference to a pol i c y framework or s o c i a l goals and the way decisions under discussion relate to these - e x p l i c i t resolution of "process" items before moving on to substantive issues - review of objectives of the meeting to see whether they have been accomplished - review of follow-up procedures or the expected outcome of the meeting - d i r e c t questioning of participants as to whether they are s a t i s f i e d that they have had a f a i r hearing and that t h e i r views have been liste n e d to - clear statement of decisions or recommendations r e s u l t i n g from t h i s meeting - d i r e c t questioning of participants as to whether they understand these decisions and recommendations, and whether they f e e l that they are a f a i r r e f l e c t i o n of the views of a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s . 9 7 . 5.2 Guidelines for Effective Decision Making in the Northwest Territories In light of the trends in decision making patterns emerging in the Northwest Territories it is clear that there are some aspects of decision making on which Whites and Natives now have a greater possibility of finding agreement than they ever have in the past. Obviously, decision making processes designed to serve the Northwest Territories population should build on these. Thus, northern decision making processes should strive to attain: 1. Greater involvement of individuals in decision making. For Natives, however, greater "involvement" must be in the form of participatory decision making, not' more advisory opportunities, or more consultation or information programs. Northern Whites may appreciate more opportunities to exchange opinions without expect-ing decision making authority. Natives, however, may want to engage in deliberation only when there is clearly a decision to be made on that occasion. 2. A more holistic approach to decision making. Native people have a naturally holistic cognitive pattern. Their orientation is to the land, and they tend to see other decisions in terms of their effects on land and lifestyle. 98. Whites, who have a more "fragmented" cognitive pattern, may have greater need for formal integrative structures such as special task forces, j o i n t committees, or i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y planning teams to undertake complex problem-solving a c t i v i t i e s using a "systems" approach. More freedom of information Communication problems w i l l p e r s i s t i f some p a r t i c i -pants f e e l that information i s being withheld from them. Complete freedom of information i s necessary for decision making to take place i n an atmosphere of trust and cooperation. This recommendation w i l l be implemented more e a s i l y i f decentralization occurs. E x p l i c i t statement of s o c i a l goals and premises on which  decisions are based That i s , there must be an e x p l i c i t p o l i c y framework for northern planning to guide decisions a f f e c t i n g northern land and people. Northern people should be encouraged to continually challenge and debate the fundamental assumptions underlying the p o l i c y framework, which should be f l e x i b l e i n recognition of the fact that northern society i s i n t r a n s i t i o n and needs are constantly changing. 9 9 . 5. A c c e s s i b i l i t y of decision makers For Whites, t h i s can be achieved through decentral-i z a t i o n and for Natives through a greater use of p a r t i -cipatory decision making. Where i t i s necessary to use Native representatives, e.g. i n regional decision making, these representatives must remain responsive to community requests for t h e i r appearance to discuss issues of concern. Substantial funding would be required to meet transportation and communication needs, since northern communities are so dispersed. 6. Greater decentralization of decision making authority For Natives, however, the decision making authority decentralized must relate to land use planning. More authority over municipal infrastructure or housing regulations w i l l not s u f f i c e . I t must be recognized that decisions of d i f f e r e n t magnitude a f f e c t d i f f e r e n t individuals and groups, as well as d i f f e r e n t units of land. For example, the decision to bu i l d or not to b u i l d a community a i r s t r i p should be made by the people l i v i n g i n the community, while a decision to b u i l d or not to b u i l d a road or a railway l i n k i n g a number of communities might best be made at the regional l e v e l . S i m i l a r l y , i t i s clear that even people l i v i n g outside the 1 0 0 . Northwest Territories have some interest in questions, such as the construction of a northern gas pipeline, which touch on national energy policy and other national concerns. The key to decentralization is to ensure that all of the people affected by a certain decision are represented in the process by which it is made. It is quite possible to maintain participatory decision making at the local level, especially in smaller communities where there is still a Native majority. In these communities, experiments should be undertaken to make participatory decision making a reality. In some northern communities, committee networks built on southern models are unnecessarily divisive, or threaten to stretch local leadership resources too thin. In these communities the networks of committees and councils could be streamlined (and perhaps even abolished altogether in the very small communities). Various committees might be amalgamated, or might act as council sub-committees for better coordination and a more holistic approach to problem solving. In other communities a "task force" approach might be tested, so that members of different committees could meet to jointly solve complex communi ty problems. Use of a more holistic approach to decision making at the local level would undoubtedly lead to a similar approach at the regional and territorial levels. This would be 101. advantageous, since one of the major problems perceived-by government workers has been the lack of communication among l i n e departments. The manifestations of t h i s lack of communication can be p a r t i c u l a r l y serious (as well as very v i s i b l e and very aggravating) i n northern communities. For example, in Rankin Inlet a huge school equipped with the most modern f a c i l i t i e s was recently b u i l t . The irony i s that, because of poor municipal services and poor n u t r i t i o n factors, the community has one of the highest infant mortality rates i n a l l of Canada. A broader approach to budgetting for community services would undoubtedly have led to decisions to place the highest p r i o r i t y on improving community l i v i n g conditions to ensure that children l i v e to reach school age. Decision making at the regional and t e r r i t o r i a l l e v e l s may not be "participatory" i n the sense that every i n d i v i d u a l i n the region or i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s affected by decisions can take part i n making them. Nonetheless, as Native organizations have shown, decision making at these le v e l s can s t i l l s a t i s f y constituents' expectations provided that certain conditions are met. That i s , representatives must be accessible, communication channels must be kept open, information must flow f r e e l y i n both d i r e c t i o n s . Decision making bodies at regional and t e r r i t o r i a l levels can also agree to work with the, consensual 102. approach to decision making i n the i r deliberations, even though at the higher lev e l s there may have to be provision made for resorting to majority vote i f consensus cannot be achieved within a certain period of time. The federal and t e r r i t o r i a l governments should e x p l i c i t l y recognize c u l t u r a l conditioning as a s i g n i f i c a n t factor i n northern decision making by ensuring that any c i v i l servant whose work concerns c r o s s - c u l t u r a l decision making i s "sensitized" to the c u l t u r a l differences among Whites, Dene, Inuit, and Metis. Native organizations should also ensure that t h e i r workers are s i m i l a r l y made aware of the nature of c r o s s - c u l t u r a l value c o n f l i c t s . This knowledge would help c l a r i f y complex communication problems, and help northern people overcome the barrie r s to cr o s s - c u l t u r a l communication more quickly. If i t i s necessary f o r government of industry represent-atives to "consult" northerners, t h i s should be done at the highest l e v e l s , by individuals who actually have the authority to make major decisions and commitments. The minutes examined i n Chapter 4 indicate that a great deal of f r u s t r a t i o n among Native northerners occurs as a r e s u l t of t h e i r assumption that decision making w i l l be " p a r t i c i -patory" . Many misunderstandings arise because the Whites i n i t i a t i n g or attending various types of consultation, information, or advisory meetings are unable to make firm 103. commitments to the Native people, who are prepared to reach decisions. To many Natives, t h i s seems to indicate that Whites are unwilling to seek sensible solutions to problems, or that they have u l t e r i o r motives for such meetings. These misunderstandings could be avoided i f the White o f f i c i a l s who have decision making authority meet with Natives d i r e c t l y , instead of sending middle-men to represent them, or to "sound out" a community on t h e i r behalf. Implementing t h i s recommendation w i l l be easier as decision making authority i s decentralized, so that i t w i l l not be necessary for the president of a company or a cabinet minister to meet with community or regional councils The implications of t h i s thesis are serious for the resolution of major issues now confronting northern r e s i -dents. The implications are p a r t i c u l a r l y important regardin the complex issue of "land claims" settlement. Land claims i s an issue of utmost importance since i t s resolution w i l l have a tremendous impact on the l i v e s of northerners and on the relat i o n s h i p of northern Natives to the res t of Canadian society for years to come. "Land claims" bring to focus White and Native value c o n f l i c t s on many l e v e l s : questions of land ownership, p r i o r i t i e s for land use, perception of "resources," the nature of decision making i n s t i t u t i o n s , and the r e l a t i o n -ships between land and l i f e s t y l e . In the past, t r e a t i e s and 104. land claims settlement have been approached by Whites as straightforward problems of extinguishing "aboriginal rights" which have never been clearly defined, but which have been assumed to include title to land in exchange for compensation in the form of cash, supplies, and a small allotment of land. Treaties 8 and 11, made in 1900 and 1921 with the Dene in the Mackenzie Valley, were made in the absence of effective cross-cultural communication. The result is that these Whites and Dene are now battling in Canadian courts in an attempt to sort out what the Treaties actually mean. This complicated activity has created racial tension as Whites accuse. Dene of trying to back out of agreements they made fairly, while Dene accuse Whites of having cheated and lied to them about the intent of the Treaties. It is clear that a new approach to land claims settle-ment is necessary if such misunderstandings, and resultant hostilities, are to be avoided. The framework for resol-ving land claims issues should be experimental and flexible, and most of all, it should be cognizant of the conflicting White and Native value conflicts that can exacerbate commun-ication problems. The framework designed for negotiation of land claims should include a built-in system for monitoring the effectiveness of cross-cultural communica-tion, based on criteria outlined in this thesis. 105. BIBLIOGRAPHY B a l i k c i , Asen. Development of Basic Socio-Economic Units In Two Eskimo Communities. National Museum of Canada, B u l l e t i n 202, 1964. . "The N e t s i l i k Eskimos: Adaptive Processes," in Man the Hunter. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co., 1968,, pp. 78-82. . The N e t s i l i k Eskimo. Garden City, N.Y.: The Natural History Press, 1970. . " C o n f l i c t and Society," i n Thomas Weaver (ed)., To See Ourselves. Glenview, I l l i n o i s : Scott, Foresman and Co., 1973, pp. 370-378. Bean, Wilf. "Colonial P o l i t i c a l I n s t i t u t i o n s i n the Communities of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s " . Band Development Programme, Indian Brotherhood of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , March 19 76. Benedict, Ruth. Patterns of Culture. Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n Co., 1934. Bienvenue, Rita M. "Intergroup Relations: E t h n i c i t y i n Canada," i n Ramu and Johnson (eds), Intro to Canadian  Sociology: S o c i o l o g i c a l Analysis. Toronto: MacMillan Co., 1976, pp. 212-251. Brody, Hugh. The People's Land: Eskimo and Whites i n the  Eastern A r c t i c . Penguin Books Ltd., 1975. Canada, Dept. of Indian A f f a i r s and National Resources. Report of the Advisory Commission on the Development of Government i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s (The Carrothers Commission Report). Ottawa, 1966. Canadian A r c t i c Resources Committee. Proceedings of Conference on Canadian A r c t i c Resources, 1977. Castellano, Marlene. "Out of Paternalism and into Partnership: An Exploration of Alternatives i n Social Service to Native People," i n James A. Draper (ed), C i t i z e n  P a r t i c i p a t i o n : Canada. Toronto: New Press, 19 71, pp. 351-361. Chance, Norman A. The Eskimo of North Alaska. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1966. 106. Clague, Michael. "Citizen Participation in the Legislative Process," in James A. Draper (ed), Citizen Participation: Canada. Toronto: New Press, 1971. Cooper, Rev. John, and Rev. J.M. Penard. "Land Ownership and Chieftancy Among the Chippewagan and Caribou-eaters," in Bruce Cox (ed), Cultural Ecology. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Ltd., 1973, pp. 76-80. Damas, David. "Characteristics of Central Eskimo Band Structure," Contributions to Anthropology: Band  Societies. National Museum of Canada, Bulletin 228, 1969*,:'pp.- 116-141. Deutsch, John J. "The Public Service in a Changing Society," In W.E. Mann (ed), Social and Cultural Change in Canada, Vol. 2. Copp Clark Publ. Co., 1970, pp. 39-46. Dosman, Edgar J. The National Interest: Politics of Northern Development, 1968-1975. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Ltd., 1975. Driver, Harold E. Indians of North Americay "Chicago:-University of Chicago Press, 1964, 2nd edition. Dyck, Bertram. "Inuit Involvement in the Municipal Govern-ment of Frobisher Bay". A paper prepared for the Government of the Northwest Territories. March 31, 1977. Forth, T.G., et al. Mackenzie Valley Development: Some Implications for Planners. Ottawa: Dept. of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, 1974. Foster, George M. Applied Anthropology. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1969. . Traditional Societies and Technological Change. , New York: Harper and Row, 197 3, 2nd edition. Forde, C. Daryll. Habitat, Economy and Society. New York: E.P. Dutton and Co. Inc., 196 3. Friedmann, John. Retracking America. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1973. Fumoleau, Rene. As Long as this Land Shall Last, A History  of Treaty 8 and Treaty 11, 1870-1939. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1973. I 107. Fumoleau, Rene. "The Treatise: A History of Exp l o i t a t i o n , " The Canadian Forum, LVI:666 (Nov. 1976): 17-20. Gallagher, Art J r . "On Changing the System," i n Thomas Weaver (ed), To See Ourselves. Glenview, I l l i n o i s : Scott, Foresman and Co., 1973, pp. 475-478. Goodenough, Ward H. "In t e r c u l t u r a l Expertise i n Public Policy," i n Peggy Reeves Sanday (ed), Anthropology and  the Public Interest. New York: Academic Press, 1976. H a l l , Edward T. The S i l e n t Language. Greenwich, Conn.: Fawcett, 1959. . The Hidden Dimension. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1969. Beyond Culture. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 19 76. Heilbroner, Robert L. "The False Promise of Growth," The  New York Review of Books, March 3, 1977, pp. 10-12. Helm, June. "Organization of the A r c t i c Drainage Dene," Ethnology, N.S.:4 (1965): 361-385. Hoebel, E. Adamson (ed). Anthropology. New York: McGraw-H i l l Book Co., 1966, 3rd e d i t i o n . Honigmann, John J. Eskimo Townsmen. Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Anthropology, University of Ottawa, 1965. Hughes, Charles Campbell. "From Contest to Council: Social Control Among the St. Lawrence Island Eskimos," In Swartz, Turner and Tuden (eds), Pol. Anthro. Chicago: Aldine Pubi: Co., 1966, pp. 255-264. Hunter, A l f r e d A. "Class and Status i n Canada," i n Ramu and Johnson, Introduction to Canadian S o c i o l o g i c a l  Analysis. Toronto: Macmillan Co., 1976, pp. 111-154. Lash, Harry. Planning i n a Human Way. Ottawa: Ministry of State for Urban A f f a i r s , 1976. Lesch, Edmund. A Runaway World? New York: Oxford University Press, 1968. Leiss, William. The Domination of Nature. Boston: Beacon Press, 1974. 108. Lotz, Jim and Pat. " P i l o t Not Commander," Anthropologica  N.S., XIII:1 & 2 (1971), Special issue. Murphy, E a r l Finbar. Governing Nature. Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1967. Naegcle, Kaspar D. "Canadian Society: Further Reflections," in Blishen, Jones, Naegcle and Porter (eds), Canadian  Society: S o c i o l o g i c a l Perspectives. Toronto: Macmillan, 1964, pp. 497-522. Ogmundson, Rick. "The Sociology of Power and P o l i t i c s : An Introduction to the Canadian Polic y , " i n Ramu and Johnson, Introduction to Canadian Society: S o c i o l o g i c a l  Analysis. Toronto: Macmillan Co., 1976, pp. 157-211. O'Riordan, T. Perspectives on Resource Management. London: Pion Ltd., 1971. Paine, Robert. "Animals as C a p i t a l : Comparisons Among Northern Nomadic Herders and Hunters," i n Bruce Cox (ed), C u l t u r a l Ecology. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Ltd., 1973, pp. 301-314. Rogers, E.S. "The Indian and the European: Two Views of the Land," i n Louis D. Levine (ed), Man i n Nature. Toronto: Royal Ontario Museum, 1975, pp. 90-110. Santos, C.R. "Bureaucracy i n Canada," i n Ramu and Johnson Canadian Society: S o c i o l o g i c a l Analysis. Toronto: Macmillan Co., 1976, pp. 438-477. Savoie, Donat (ed). The Amerindians of the Canadian North- west in the 19th Century, as Seen by Emile P e t i t o t , Vol. I I , The Loucheun Indians. Ottawa: Northern Science Research Group, D.I.A.N.D., June 1970. Smith, Derek G. "Implications of Pluralism for Social Change Programs i n a Canadian A r c t i c Community," i n Jim and Pat Lotz (eds), P i l o t Not Commander, Anthropologica N.S., Vol. XIII:l-2 (1971): 192-214. Spencer, Robert F. and Jesse D. Jennings, et a l . The Native  Americans. New York: Harper and Row, 1965. St. Pie r r e , Paul. "Public P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an Inter-agency Committee: The Ai r p o r t Planning Committee i n Vancouver." Vancouver: U.B.C, M.A. Thesis i n Planning. 109. Usher, Peter J. "Canadian Northern Development Policy: Its Implications to the People and Land of the NorthV. Paper presented at the Conference on Northern Change, Anchorage, Alaska, Nov. 18, 1976. Vallee, Frank G. "Differentiation Among the Eskimos in some Canadian Arctic Settlements," in Valentine and Vallee (eds), Eskimo of the Canadian Arctic. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart Ltd., 1968a, pp. 109-126. Weyer, Edward Moffat. The Eskimos: Their Environment and  Folkways. Yale University Press, 1932. White, Lynn Jr. "The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis," in Paul Shepard and Daniel McKinley (eds), The Subversive Science: Towards an Ecology of Man. Boston:- Houghton Mifflin Co., 1967, pp. 341-351. Whyte, William F. and Allan R. Holmberg. "Human Problems of U.S. Enterprise in Latin America," in Thomas Weaver (ed), To See Ourselves. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Co., 1973, pp. 442-450. Williamson, Robert G. Eskimo Underground: Socio-cultural  Change in the Canadian Central Arctic. Uppsala: Institutionen f5r allman och jamffirdnde etnografi vid Uppsala Universitet, Occassional Papers II, 1974. . The Boothia Peninsula People: Social Organization in Spence Bay, N.W.T. Institute for National Studies, University of Saskatchewan, 1976. Willmott, W.E. "The Flexibility of Eskimo Social Organization," in Valentine and Vallee (eds), Eskimo of the Canadian  Arctic. Toronto: McClelland and Steward Ltd., 1968, pp. 149-159. News of the North, 6/4/77; 9/2/77; 2/2/77. Native Press, 17/9/76; 3/9/76. The Canadian Forum, Nov. 1976. source: Forth et a l , 1974 110. APPENDIX I WRIGLEY, N.W.T. Regular Meeting of the Settlement Council Held March 27, 1973 i n the Council O f f i c e Agenda: 1. Introduction 2. F i n a n c i a l report 3. Correspondence 4. Business a r i s i n g from minutes 5. New business Present: Chairman Arthur Hardisty Councillor Edward Nayally Councillor F e l i x Tale Councillor Paul Moses Councillor Gabriel Hardsity Absent: Councillor David Horesay (no excuse) 1. Introduction: The chairman c a l l s the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. The minutes of the l a s t meeting are accepted by council. Motion 17-73 CARRIED. 2. Fin a n c i a l Report: Per Capita Grant " $ 838.36 Water and Sanitation 3,597.93 Fi r e Protection 734.00 Road and A i r s t r i p 1,2 64.92 TOTAL $6,435.21 L.I.P. Grant $6,740.00 Recreation Grant .... 1,832.11 TOTAL $8,572.51 3. Correspondence: a. Re: Building i n Wrigley - Letter F i l e 22-124-204 The Secretary reads a l e t t e r from Mr. R. Fielden, Project Manager, D.P.W., which states that the department w i l l construct the new well house out of logs, as i s 111. desired by the community; and also the construction w i l l be done by the people of Wrigley. b. Re: Proposed V i s i t by Social Development O f f i c e r The Secretary explains that Mr. P h i l Dickman, the newly appointed S o c i a l Development O f f i c e r for the Simpson area would l i k e to spend two or possibly three nights i n Wrigley i n about 2 or 3 weeks time; and would l i k e to overnight i n a l o c a l person's house. Chairman Hardisty indicates that Mr. Dickman i s welcome to stay at his house ( i f he cuts wood for the f i r e - laughter). Secretary i s to correspond with Mr. Dickman and inform him of the i n v i t a t i o n . 3. Business A r i s i n g from Last Meeting: a. Re: Settlement Secretary Trainee The chairman explains that at the l a s t council meeting Mr. H. Hardisty was i n v i t e d to s i t with council and discuss t h i s job. Mr. Hardisty i s asked whether or not he wants t h i s job. He t e l l s council that he received a l e t t e r from Mr. R. Creery, Regional Director, Fort Smith Region, i n d i c a t i n g that Henry should strongly consider t h i s challenging new career. Mr. Hardisty indicates that he would l i k e to have the job. The chairman says that Council i s pleased with the work done by Archie Horesay and Richard Moses l a t e l y d e l i v e r i n g water and asks the people in the audience to speak up i f they have any comments and not to "talk behind t h e i r backs". No comments. The chairman asks Henry Hardisty to s t a r t work A p r i l 1, 1973 i f the Government approves the council recommendations. Mr. Hardisty indicates that he has to go into the bush and pick up his traps and traplines and would l i k e to s t a r t a few weeks l a t e r . Councillor Moses suggests that Henry be allowed a two week extension and that he begin his t r a i n i n g A p r i l 16/73. A l l agree. Motion 18-73 CARRIED. b. Re: Land Use Permit/Cominco The chairman remind council that at l a s t week's meeting councillors decided to delay recommending the granting of the permit u n t i l t h i s meeting and that a Cominco representative was i n v i t e d to s i t with council and discuss the s i t u a t i o n . Councillor Hardisty wants to know what council said at the l a s t meeting. Councillor Nayally thinks i t a good idea to talk about i t again with Gabe. Councillor Tale says they have already moved across 112. the r i v e r - not much I can say. Mr. Ryznor, the Cominco representative, i n t e r j e c t s from the audience that he could explain now. Councillor Nayally wants council to talk to Gabe about the l a s t meeting and to f i n d out more about the Rae Conference. Mr. Angus Moses, one of the Band Councillors i n the audience, says that af t e r Councillor Hardisty l e f t Rae Conference that the chiefs had decided on a land freeze. Mr. Jim Antoine, Co-op Development Department of Industry and Development, Yellowknife (in the audience) indicates that the Indian people shouldn't l e t any company come around and do exactly what they want. He suggests that the Settlement Council wait for a decision from Band Council and t h e i r l e g a l advisors before they go any farther. Chariman Hardisty asks counci l l o r s what they think. There i s discussion i n Slavey for about f i v e minutes. The councillors agree with what Mr. Antoine says. Mr. Antoine (audience) asks when the next meeting so that the Brotherhood can attend. Councillor Hardisty indicates that i t i s a good idea that the Brotherhood lawyer be at a meeting such as t h i s while we are t a l k i n g because he knows much more about these things and can help us to make a decision. A l l counci l l o r s react a f f i r m a t i v e l y to what Councillor Hardisty says. Mr. Angus Moses (audience) - Band Council w i l l discuss t h i s with the Brotherhood tomorrow; because t h i s land belongs to the Indian people and no one else. Mr. B. Gauthier, f i e l d representative, Department of Northwest Lands and Forests, Fort Simpson area (audience) "Thought that we were tal k i n g to the Band Council tonight". He then goes on to ask the secretary for the contents of the l e t t e r from Mr. Lynn dated March 7/7 3. The secretary reads Mr. Lynn's l e t t e r . This l e t t e r was a form l e t t e r from the department in d i c a t i n g Cominco's program and wants E. MacArthur, Settlement Manager, to discuss same with Council. The l e t t e r states, "... we w i l l not issue the permit before a l l comments are received, and problems i f any are resolved". The secretary then informs Mr. Gauthier that the Settlement Council has a moral r i g h t to recommend on any matters d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y influenc-ing the l i f e of the people of Wrigley, and further the secretary has no connections with the Band Council other than the fact that two of i t s members are on Settlement Council. Councillor Hardisty i s informed that Mr. G. Sutton, Brotherhood lawyer can be present for a meeting with the people tomorrow. Councillor Tale thinks t h i s i s a good idea. Secretary explains that one c o u n c i l l o r alone cannot adjourn a meeting. 113. Councillor Hardisty explains that what he understood at the Rae Conference was that the Band Council and chief are responsible for the land around the settlement and that settlement council i s responsible for the land i n the settlement and employment outside of i t . Mr. Ryznor leaves his seat i n the audience on his own i n i t i a t i v e and s i t s at the council table and says "Maybe I can help solve a few problems i f you l e t me speak". The chairman informs Mr. Ryznor, through his secretary, that he would have time to speak l a t e r but that he was not asked to s i t with council at t h i s time. Mr. Ryznor returns to his former seat. Mr. Angus Moses (audience) - We should have a meeting about the land use permit tomorrow not tonight. Councillor Nayally informs Council that there i s a l o t he doesn't know about t h i s land business. The people don't know what i s going on - they should ask Mr. Ryznor to attend another meeting a f t e r they have talked every-thing over. Mr. Angus Moses (audience) - Conference i n Fort Rae discussed land claims - Chief Arrowmaker said freeze a l l Treaty lands. The chairman asks Mr. Ryznor to s i t with council. Councillor Hardisty - things should be done r i g h t . We shouldn't go ahead of the Brotherhood; we should wait and see what they say. Mr. Ryznor - Maybe the people would l i k e to hear what I have to say tonight before tomorrow's meeting - "I don't know i f I ' l l attend one tomorrow afternoon." Councillor Hardisty - The chief i s sleeping and he should be here and l i s t e n i n g . Mr. Ryznor - Won't a f f e c t t r e a t i e s and land r i g h t s , what we are doing. This i s something d i f f e r e n t . You people asked me to come here tonight. Government people i n Yellowsknife asked me to come here and talk to you and f i n d out what the problems are. Mr. B. Gauthier (audience) - That's also one of the reasons why I'm here. Councillor Hardisty - Right now I don't understand the problem and we should know before we decide. Mr. Ryznor begins to say something but Councillor Hardisty i n t e r -rupts - People want to talk about th i s tomorrow. Mr. Ryznor asks why they don't want to talk about i t tonight. The chairman puts his f i s t on the table and says that's i t for tonight - we meet with people tomorrow. Councillor Hardisty moves that the meeting f i n i s h now. A l l agree. Mr. Ryznor while leaving the council table says that 114. he i s disappointed i n council. Chairman Hardisty adjourns the meeting at 8:30 p.m. O r i g i n a l signed by: Arthur Hardisty Chairman, Wrigley Settlement Council E. MacArthur Secretary, Wrigley Settlement Council Manager 115. WRIGLEY, N.W.T. Non-scheduled Meeting of the Settlement Council Held March 28, 1973 i n Council Agenda: 1. Land Use Permit - Cominco Mines Present: Chairman Arthur Hardisty Councillor Edward Nayally Councillor F e l i x Tale Councillor Paul Moses Councillor Gabriel Hardisty Councillor David Horesay In Attendance: Mr. B i l l Armstrong, D.I.A.N.D., Yellowknife Mrs. G. Sutton, Brotherhood lawyer, Yellowknife Mr. G. Ryznor, Project Geologist, Cominco Mr. J. Antoine, Co-op Div. Dept. of Ind. & Development, Fort Simpson Mr. B. Gauthier, Northwest Lands and Forests Service, Fort Simpson The chairman c a l l s the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The minutes of l a s t night's meeting are accepted by council. Motion 19-73 CARRIED. 1. Land Use Permit The chairman explains the s i t u a t i o n concerning Cominco Mines wanting to obtain a Land Use Permit i n order to move equipment onto t h e i r proposed summer exploration s i t e . Councillor Moses agrees that t h i s i s the purpose of the meeting. The chairman asks Mr. Ryznor to s i t with council. The chairman asks why Mr. Ryznor moved equipment across without consulting council f i r s t . Mr. Ryznor discussed t h i s with E. MacArthur a few weeks ago and then I made application to the Gov't i n Yellowknife for a permit. As for equipment moving - we only moved a few things across and then the Gov't halted the operation. Therefore we thought we'd see what you had to say I Chairman - This i s our land' Mr. Ryznor - If t h i s i s i n regard to treaty r i g h t s , i t ' s not my argument. This i s between the Indian people and the government. 116. The secretary explains - about three weeks ago Mr. Ryznor phoned from Vancouver and the chairman happened to be i n the o f f i c e at that time. Mr. Ryznor wanted to know i f his company could use Wrigley Ice Bridge. Secretary explained - the bridge was only b u i l t by the people, you must ask Imperial O i l for clearance to use the bridge. At that time Mr. Ryznor indicated that he might use the winter road instead of helicopter to minimize expenses. When informed of a 10-15 man crew to be hired, Secretary asked i f there would be any employment (consultation with chairman) for the people of Wrigley. Mr. Ryznor then indicated that the job was highly technical; therefore not much chance. Secretary discussed on-the-job t r a i n i n g (plenty of time to prepare). Mr. Ryznor again indicated that there was not much chance. Chairman and secretary decided, aft e r Mr. Ryznor's c a l l , to place the matter before the next Council session (Tuesday, March 20/73). Mr. Ryznor then asks i f employment i s one problem. Councillor Hardisty - Jobs should be given for the people to learn on-the-job. I f not then no money for the people. Mr. Ryznor - Cominco works just i n the summer - only a short period of time - most of the work i s done by people with at least f i v e years of t r a i n i n g . We have some jobs that don't require much tr a i n i n g but only for a short period of time. Type of jobs - only 12 people i n the entire camp - maybe two hired from here perhaps I We have work now being done by Dallas Construction to move s t u f f into the s i t e for Cominco. Perhaps you could ask them to hire someone to help - only for one or two days to move i n equipment - then we must clean up road work for two more maybe - i n our type of work l o t s of tr a i n i n g to f i n d something big - i f found then l o t s of work. The chairman comments - only two or three people working. Councillor Nayally - i f they f i n d minerals, t h i s land belongs to the Indians. Therefore the land must be claimed by us -then they can work on i t i f they l i k e . Mr. Ryznor - Right now Gov't has set rules for us to follow; i f the people are displeased with rules then the people must talk to the Gov't. For now Cominco w i l l go by the rules. Mr. Angus Moses (audience attempts to speak). The Chairman - can't talk from the audience - must ask council l o r s i f you want to speak from back - then you should s i t where Mr. Ryznor i s s i t t i n g at the council table. Secretary - The council does not want to cut people o f f . It does not want to offend people who are not used to these meetings. At important meetings must record things said. We i n v i t e people to speak - then l a t e r , everyone w i l l be given a chance to comment. Councillor Hardisty - Not fi n i s h e d with Mr. Ryznor - then everyone w i l l be given a chance to speak. 117. Mr. Ryznor asks the chairman i f there are any problems with t r a p l i n e s , cabins, etc. Chairman indicates problem across r i v e r every spring at clearings moose are k i l l e d i n June. Mr. Ryznor - "I didn't see any moose a l l l a s t summer." Chairman - Because you're l i v i n g there - no moose. Mr. Ryznor - At the Commonwealth Building s i t e there are many moose. How many do you k i l l each summer? Chairman - In a good year maybe s i x or seven. Mr. Ryznor - "Did any people from here go there l a s t year?" Chairman - Knew you were there, so no point i n going over. Mr. Ryznor - I understand the problem but don't know what you can do about i t . Chairman - If you don't know what to do then we are fini s h e d with you. Councillor Hardisty - The company has already been on the land over there so problem i s the moose have moved on. White people don't understand how the Indian hunts i n the summer. Mr. Ryznor - Are there any other problems about us being over there? Chairman - There i s always a problem! Mr. Ryznor - What kind? Chairman - Thanks Mr. Ryznor and then asks Mr. Armstrong i f he has any words to say. Mr. Armstrong - The l a s t time I was here we talked about another company and spoke of land use and rules of Gov't for people working i n the area. In view of the past discussions of same, maybe a good idea i f I explain these regulations again. These regulations control the use people make of the land. Today, i n the area along the r i v e r , near Wrigley, there are lots of people interested i n the land: 1) Indian People - t r a d i t i o n a l use of hunting 2) Companies who want to look for resources 3) D.P.W. - highway building. These regulations are designed so any one group of people can make use of land and won't s p o i l i t for others who want to use i t . A l l know that i n the past, companies and even the Gov't have come to Wrigley to look for resources etc. and only concern was t h e i r use of the land and not what use i s to be made by any one, for any purpose (highway, exploration, government) they must get a permit for use! Before any permit to be issued, the applicant i s required (D.P.W.) to l e t the l o c a l people know what they're about. In the permit stipulat i o n s i f there i s a problem with w i l d l i f e , some condition must be inserted to make a less harmful e f f e c t on w i l d l i f e . 118. This whole system of regulations only deals with the use of land. The Indian people and Gov't are t a l k i n g about land ownership. This question hasn't been s e t t l e d yet. A l l Indians and Eskimos i n N.W.T. are interested i n land r i g h t s ; not only i n Wrigley'. In future you w i l l be negotiating the problem not with me but with the government i n Ottawa (Prime Mi n i s t e r ) . Problem w i l l not be s e t t l e d today; not next week; maybe not next year. In the meantime, t h i s problem i s s t i l l obvious - land use. This i s where I hope to be of some help (land., use). I hope th i s information would be of use with looking at the problem we have tonight. Councillor Hardisty - Right now, i n problem Gov't and Indians saying t h i s i s our land - This won'ts be s e t t l e d for 3-5 years and we don't want anyone to use the land t i l l i t i s s e t t l e d . Mr. Armstrong - Well u n t i l settlement comes we should l e t companies use the land under controlled conditions and as long as policy i s such ^ there w i l l be a certain amount of develop-ment; i t i s good for the gov't people and the companies to work together to develop as best for a l l ! As long as some work i s going on; best for a l l concerned to s i t down and get t h i s done i n the best manner possible. Chairman - This i s the best way of c o n t r o l l i n g the land t i l l settlement. Mr. Armstrong - During the past winter we have seen where th i s has happened i n Wrigley for the f i r s t time - companies are coming i n to explain work to people! Councillor Hardisty - We used to have companies around the area who didn't inform us about what they were doing. Mr. Armstrong - Now they are, but they can't go ahead and get land permit t i l l discussion takes place with the people. (Re: employment prospects and outline of program), f the company makes a mistake i . e . with moving things across r i v e r before they should - remember that these are new rules to them also. They never had rules to abide by before. The companies also understand now while they do t h e i r work that they are watched by inspectors l i k e Mr. B. Gauthier. If they do break the rules set down i n the permit they can be stopped. Rules have c e r t a i n l y changed for everyone i n the north. Councillor Hardisty asks for a 15 minut break. A l l agree. Chairman adjourns meeting for rest at 8:00 p.m. Chairman c a l l s the meeting back to order at 8:20 p.m. He asks Mr. Armstrong to return to the table and answers few more questions. Councillor Hardisty - Company wants to cross - but the Indian people say they don't want them there. The only reason i s because of the meeting at Fort Rae, so they want no confusion with the other chiefs i n other communities. 119. Mr. Armstrong - From what I understand a resolution was passed at Rae conference to put a freeze on a l l Northern development. Is that correct? Councillor Horesay - At the meeting at Rae - Must l e t a l l other chiefs know before l e t the companies work. Mr. Armstrong - The chiefs must f i r s t convince the gov't i n Ottawa of the resolution. The gov't s t i l l has a p o l i c y of northern resource development. We must s t i l l work within present laws! T i l l t h i s occurs I have no authority even i f I wanted, to shut things down. This also applies with regard to Settlement Council and Band Council. We are faced with l i v i n g within present laws and make the best of i t . So we have alws that control the use of land. I f Cominco goes ahead, i t i s my r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and that of Council to safe-guard the use of land so no spoilage for others. Chairman - They were never given permission to go across -so they don't go across and that i s i t ! Mr. Armstrong - This i s the process of consulting with council and when t h i s system was set up - f i r s t the recommend-ations of same and i f Council doesn't want work to go ahead, i t i s a good idea to pinpoint reasons why not. Comment by Councillor Nayally i n Slavey. Councillor Hardisty - Explains Councillor's feelings -only concerned with land settlement; not only with t h i s community but others. Want communities to wait t i l l land i s se t t l e d . Mr. Armstrong - Does th i s apply to companies throughout N.W.T.? Councillor Hardisty - Only reason - Because of the meeting i n Rae - didn't want to open up land use for company without consulting other c h i e f s . So don't want to break an agreement already made. Mr. Armstrong - I think I understand the pos i t i o n of Council - I can convey t h i s reasoning and position taken at Rae to Ottawa but I can make no guarantees as to the outcome of permit requested by Cominco. Chairman - Thanks Mr. Armstrong for taking time to speak to Council. Delegation Chairman asks Mr. J. Antoine to inte r p r e t for Mr. G. Sutton. Also, Mr. A. Moses (Wrigley Band Councillor) joins council table. Mr. Sutton - I f I could just talk about a few things Mr. Armstrong mentioned; he said there was dispute with the gov't and Indian people about the land ownership question. He said the problem sometime i n the future would be solved when the Gov't and the Indian people get together. There i s no question i n the minds of the Indian People about who owns 120. the land. The Indian has said for a long time, "This i s our land". At Rae the people asked themselves, " I f nothing happens" by saying t h i s , nothing i s accomplished. The chiefs and counci l l o r s decided that the gov't i s not going to s e t t l e theland question. So, i t ' s time for the people to do some-thing. So one decision was made - Let's take action to protect our land before the settlement takes e f f e c t , because by the time the settlement comes - l o t s of land w i l l be taken up by other people. Some places, l i k e Hay River, have a r e a l problem because the Indian people are pushed aside and have no place to go any more. Indians thought i t about time to force the gov't to get serious about the land question!! Decision at Rae -Together, the people would take steps to protect land and to show the Government that they were serious about the s e t t l e -ment. Mr. Sutton asks i f there are any questions Council has for him to answer, there are no questions. Chairman - We wait t i l l land question i s s e t t l e d . Thanks Mr. Sutton. Asks i f there are any questions from the f l o o r -now say what you have to say or I ' l l close i n 10-15 minutes. Mr. Andrew Root - Land i s Ours; l o t s of s t u f f i n the land, that i s why so many o i l companies and mining companies are i n the area and no money goes to the people except as labourers on t h e i r own land. No further questions or comments. Chairman asks what Council has decided to do. A l l c o u n c i l l o r s are i n unanimous agreement that the people of Wrigley, as represented by t h e i r Settlement Council i s going to abide by the stand taken at the Rae conference, that i s : no companies w i l l be recommended for the issuance of a land use permit by the people of Wrigley independently of the other Indian peoples i n the N.W.T. u n t i l the land question has been decided. A l l agree. Motion 20-73 CARRIED. Chairman adjourns meeting at 9:05 p.m. O r i g i n a l signed by: Arthur Hardisty Chairman, Wrigley Settlement Council E. MacArthur Secretary Manager Wrigley Settlement Council source: Williamson 1976 121. APPENDIX II POLAR GAS MEETING - SPENCE BAY, N.W.T. Date: A p r i l 25th 1976 Location: Adult Education Centre Convened by the Polar Gas Community Relations O f f i c e r No l o c a l chairman (The Polar Gas representatives asked James Eetoolook to c a l l the meeting, but he declined to have any formal r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for i t , though a s s i s t i n g with s e t t i n g up the necessary arrange-ments . There was no chairman and the meeting was e s s e n t i a l l y subject to the i n i t i a t i v e s of the interpreter employed by Polar Gas. Eetoolook had declined to serve i n that capacity.) The meeting began at 8:15 p.m. with 26 adults present; at 8:28 p.m. two more individuals came into the meeting, and two minutes l a t e r two men entered who were v i s i t o r s from P e l l y Bay. U n t i l 9:10 p.m. there was a steady accretion of people coming into the meeting, u n t i l there was a t o t a l of 36. Following t h i s time some people"'began to leave, p r i n c i p a l l y younger in d i v i d u a l s . I t was noted that i n the entire meeting, there was only one Spence Bay person present who was under the age of 30. The Polar Gas Community Relations O f f i c e r opened the meeting, addressing a l l of his remarks sotto voce to the interpreter, who then interpreted as she saw f i t . At no time did the CRO address the people d i r e c t l y , but whispered to the interpreter. The Summer Works Program Co-ordinator followed his example. Throughout the evening there were many apparently private, very low-voiced colloquies between the three people at the table (Polar Gas C.R.O., Summer Program Co-ordinator, and the i n t e r p r e t e r ) . Through the interpreter, the Polar Gas C.R.O. said that the meeting was to be about work opportunities for Spence Bay people who would be employed with Polar Gas i n t h e i r summer program. He said i t would be l i k e the work done by David "Igupta" and Max Kamimaalik during a previous season. The interpreter made i t clear that Polar Gas was here t h i s evening e s s e n t i a l l y to talk about t h e i r summer work program, and that no one would be expected to make any decision tonight about working for Polar Gas. The actual 122. h i r i n g would take place i n June, the interpreter said. Tonight, she said, they would simply talk about what jobs would be available. . Polar Gas S.W.P.C: (through the interpreter) There would be caribou studies t h i s summer, outdoor jobs working from camps. Two Inuit men would be required for t h i s to work with two quablunat. Qauqyuaq: What would the arrangements be for th i s job? Who would be the white people, and how long would the, job be? Following interpretation and through the interpreter, the Polar Gas S.W.P.C.: two people would be needed to help with the b i r d studies to take place i n the Rasmussen Basin, and also south of Baker Lake. This would be a two-week job, roughly from.July 15th to July 30th. Ashevak: What would t h i s study of the caribou actually e n t a i l ? What actually would the people be doing, how would they be doing i t , and what would be the expected outcome of the work? C.R.O. (through the i n t e r p r e t e r ) : We want to know where the caribou feed, and they would do thi s by following the caribour and c o l l e c t i n g t h e i r droppings. This w i l l be ground work, not airborne. Ashevak: This i s not what the people have f i r s t been to l d . E a r l i e r they have been t o l d that the job was going to be to count the caribour and to tag them. C.R.O.: There i s no counting and no tagging to be done th i s year. T u l u r i a l i k : .Does Polar Gas r e a l l y pretend to suggest in public that the Eskimo do not know enough about the caribou and the birds? This i s Eskimo country and the people have always l i v e d here and they know the animals and the birds very well. The white people have only just come here and are i n s u l t i n g to suggest that they know more than we do about the game. S.W.P.C.: This work has to be done so that i t can a l l be written down, so as to help those people who are doing future planning. Polar Gas want the Inuit to contribute to the program i t s e l f . T u l u r i a l i k : I am confused about what had been said concerning the work of Kamimaalik. 123. S.W.P.C.: Two people would be needed to help study s o i l layers around the l i n e of the pipeline by d r i l l i n g for core samples. The work would e n t a i l long hours and s h i f t work. The work would begin around July 1st and end around August 1st. Ashevak: (Went to a small map which i s part of the Adult Education wall material already i n place, and indicated an area on the northwest quadrant of the Boothia Peninsula.) There should be no core d r i l l i n g done i n that area as i t i s i n the heartland of the caribou migrations. C.R.O.: I would have to respond to that statement i n writing. I f Polar Gas does d r i l l , undoubtedly the people w i l l be angry. But i f i t i s not done Polar Gas w i l l not have enough information to go ahead and make the pipeline as safe as possible. Polar Gas i s tr y i n g to be as sympathetic as possible to Council requests. For example, they agreed with Council not to do a f i s h study on the N a t s i l i k River. But Polar Gas won't always be able to go along with the Council. Ashevak: There are some places where i t would be a l l r i g h t for Polar Gas to go ahead and work, and there i s no reason they should not go there. There are other places where they could do great harm. Why, then, should they not go where there i s no harm to be done? E l i s i p i (protesting): The map on the wall i s far too small, and the people couldn't see what you were actually talking about. And the area on the map i t s e l f i s also too small and should not be exploited. C.R.O.: There would be work i n that area only for a few days, perhaps as many as ten, but no more. I know that i t w i l l disturb the caribou, but we w i l l do our best to minimize the disturbance. E l i s i p i (loudly): I don't believe themI They're not t e l l i n g everything. Don't believe theml T u l u r i a l i k : We don't mind what's being done i n some areas, but we object very strongly to some of the areas where they want to work even for a few days of work. The caribour may be s t i l l scared away, for months or even years, and then the people w i l l go hungry. Qaqqutinirq: Polar Gas haven't started to b u i l d the pipeline yet, and they have been t o l d repeatedly that they are not wanted i n t h i s region. So, why can you not go o f f somewhere else? 124. C.R.O. (through the i n t e r p r e t e r ) : The pipeline i s going t h i s way and that i s how i t ' s going to be. It's going down the Boothia Peninsula and so that i s where the core samples have to be taken. T u l u r i a l i k : We are a l l very a f r i a d of a l l of t h i s . C.R.O.: We cannot promise that t h i s work w i l l not be done. We cannot stop the study being done. Ashevak (speaking loudly) : We just do not believe it'. Interpreter (replying without tr a n s l a t i n g but speaking d i r e c t l y ) : Well that's what they are saying. You just have to take i t . Qauqyuaq: How many d r i l l s i t e s w i l l there be, and how far down w i l l they go? C.R.O.: They w i l l be between 20 and 23 feet i n depth. Qauqyuaq: Now the figures are changing again! Last year you talked about making holes of only three or four feet. Now already i t ' s going much deeper! C.R.O.: Yes but the pipe i t s e l f w i l l only go into the ground about three feet. What we want to know i s what the ground i s l i k e below that l e v e l . U d l a t i t a : You s t i l l didn't answer the question about how far i t w i l l be between d r i l l s i t e s . C.R.O.: I don't know. Maybe I could f i n d out. Maybe miles. Qauqyuaq: You should know. And you must f i n d out how many holes there w i l l be and how far apart they w i l l be. And then t e l l us. C.R.O.: I w i l l f i n d out immediately and write the Council with t h i s information r i g h t away. Qauqyuaq: Well keep i n mind that they should not be too close. C.R.O.: I think they w i l l be about every ten miles. Ashevak: He s t i l l hasn't given us much of an explanation. He didn't t e l l us very much. I'd l i k e to know more about what i t ' s l i k e underneath where the pipe w i l l be. 125. U d l a t i t a (addressing Ashevak): It seems l i k e a good idea to know i f the ground below the pipe i s going to sink or r i s e up. Qauqyuaq: We are s t i l l getting promises to f i n d out these things which you should already know, but we are s t i l l not getting many r e a l and detailed f a c t s . Ashevak: How are you going to move the people around doing t h i s work. By airplane? C.R.O.: We have set up a committee to t e l l I.T.C. what we are going to do. We have John Amarualik and Ian Creery and (someone whose name no one could hear), along with three men from Polar Gas. They are looking into the problems of transportation by plane and ship. Ashevak (to the people): See! He didn't answer my question again. Etunga: We t o l d you that the people do not want the pi p e l i n e . We have also asked i f the gas cannot be transported by plane. We have heard nothing more. C.R.O.: We have acted on that request that was made here l a s t f a l l , to investigate the use of airplanes. Qauqyuaq: How far w i l l the noise of the d r i l l i n g r i g , travel? C.R.O.: I t w i l l be l i k e a skidoo or a power plant. Ashevak (to the people): Foolish answer! A skidoo i s small and a power plant can be enormous. He thinks we are foo l s . Qauqyuaq: Skidoos can be heard three to f i v e miles away. Some can be heard much more. I t depends on the size of the engine and the d i r e c t i o n of the wind. What (the Polar Gas man) said doesn't mean anything. (Speaking to the people): He's meaningless and i n s u l t s us. U t i q i : You must be aware that these areas where you want to go are where the food for the people i s . You want to drive the food away from the people. C.R.O.: We w i l l l i s t e n to you and sometimes we w i l l agree with you, and sometimes we w i l l disagree. Polar Gas wants to get the people out working on the land with them so they w i l l get first-hand experience of what Polar Gas i s about. Qauqyuaq: How big i s the d r i l l i n g rig? C.R.0.: It's small. I t can be l i f t e d by helicopter. Ashevak: What i s "small"? And moreover there are a l l sizes of helicopters. Qauqyauq: In the past people didn't need to think much about the ownership of t h e i r land. They knew i t was t h e i r s . Now, these events are forcing them to f i n d out where they stand. S.W.P.C.: I t r i e d to fi n d out from the Polar Gas people about these jobs, and about the engineering of the d r i l l i n g , but I myself could not understand them. I t i s therefore better for the people to work for Polar Gas, and so fi n d out for themselves. Inuit people who are trusted could go to work for Polar Gas and can then t e l l the res t of the people what i t i s l i k e , and they w i l l be more re a d i l y believed than l i s t e n i n g to representatives from Polar Gas. Qauqyuaq: The Inuit are claiming t h e i r own land and learning more about Polar Gas. Polar Gas should be aware that the people are not fools, and are coming together to make i t clear what the white man should understand about the Inuit people's land. S.W.P.C. (speaking to the i n t e r p r e t e r ) : At Baker Lake I have explained that some of the people from Spence Bay w i l l come down there. They would learn about the p i p e l i n e . Sadlarina: How many people altogether w i l l be working on the Polar Gas jobs th i s summer? How many Inuit people w i l l there be and how many white people altogether? S.W.P.C. (with a nervous laugh): I don't know. C.R.O.: There w i l l be two white men and two Eskimo on the caribour study. Sadlarina (aside): That's not answering my question. Nahaulaituq: Sometimes on these jobs the white people take Eskimos so far and then they go o f f and leave the Inuit on t h e i r own, and go and do something somewhere else. This i s because they don't want the Inuit to see what they are r e a l l y doing. That's not the way to convince the Inuit people that they are sincere. 127. S.W.P.C.: I t w i l l be part of my job to t e l l the Polar Gas people about the way the Inuit people see i t and about the problems of the Inuit people, as well as to speak for Polar Gas. I want the people here to f e e l free to speak and to come to me and t e l l me about any of th e i r problems. Nahaulaituq: We s t i l l haven't heard an answer about leaving the Inuit helpers on th e i r own. Why have they done that? Is that going to happen again? S.W.P.C.: I hope not. I t r e a l l y i s up to the people in charge of the job; and also up to the Inuit working on the job not to be shy. Whites must also co-operate with the Inuit. I t i s time for everybody to get together, and every-body i n Spence Bay and a l l the Polar Gas people must talk to each other and a l l work together. C.R.O.: I f i t i s important to the Inuit people that they should not be l e f t by themselves, then Polar Gas w i l l try to make that possible. Nahaulaituq: I just t o l d you i t i s important'. We fe e l very strongly about i t . Now, i s that a promise, r i g h t now, or i s i t just words? Ashevak (aside): See I He didn't answer. S.W.P.C.: In order to improve understanding and to help co-operation, I would l i k e to have people come to Baker Lake and to have the. s c i e n t i s t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y the b i r d s c i e n t i s t s who are going to be there, to s i t down with the Inuit people and explain what they are doing and what i s the meaning of thei r findings. Again, i t i s important for everyone to try and understand each other and to work together. Qauqyuaq: We the Inuit people are not happy because there are so many people coming here from the South and doing things without giving the Inuit people any sense of control or involvement i n what i s happening here i n thei r own land. People f e e l that whites are p a t e r n a l i s t i c and treat the Inuit l i k e children. Moreover I.T.C. i s r e a l l y not getting enough information, s u f f i c i e n t that they i n turn can help the Inuit i n the North get r e a l l y involved. C.R.O.: Polar Gas i s trying to co-operate and has taken note of the recommendations that came out of the meeting at Tuktoyaktuk. 128. Qauqyuaq: Although t h i s i s Inuit country, the Inuit have no say at a l l i n what i s going on i n Polar Gas and the work they do. They are not properly consulted nor given f u l l information. S.W.P.C.; The notes for the caribour study w i l l be i n both languages. People w i l l be t o l d what to write down, and i t w i l l , sort of, go that way. Qauqyuaq: For over two years I have been learning a great deal through I.T.C., and I know now that people can become more involved i n a f f a i r s and achieve more control of what i s going on i f there i s constant consultation and sharing of information. S.W.P.C.: I hope that the Spence Bay people w i l l allow themselves to get involved i n the work and*they w i l l learn about Polar Gas that way. Qauqyuaq: I t would be better i f the study crews were equal i n organization and pay. We should get equal pay and get equal say i n the conduct of the study. C.R.O.: I agree that people, both Inuit and white on the job, should get the same pay and have equal say i n the job. But whites have more experience, they know more, so they get more money and have more to say. Ashevak (aside): He doesn't agree. He's contradicting himself again. Qauqyuaq: People should be t o l d beforehand what the work i s , so that they can get a good idea of what they are getting themselves into. S.W.P.C.: Before the people are hired they w i l l be given a paper which w i l l give the job description and the pay scale. Qauqyuaq: There i s a great deal of instrumentation and equipment used for surveying land and other kinds of study. W i l l the Inuit be taught how to use a l l these instruments, or w i l l they just be used as labourers to carry them? C.R.O.: Maybe they can learn something about i t when they are i n Baker Lake, i f (the S.W.P.C. named) can fi n d someone who i s w i l l i n g to teach the Eskimo. . N i v i a t s i a : What has been said does not give us an reassurance about the game and about the Inuit people's land. 129. There i s nothing to say they w i l l not come to some harm. We are very a f r a i d , and we have asked you not to come here and disturb the animals and the land, but you are just going ahead anyway. C.R.O.: We w i l l t r y to minimize the damage. Sa d l i r i n a : I t i s much more than simply a question of the game. I t should again be made clear to you that i t i s our land which you are taking away. We want to keep the fe e l i n g that i t i s our land. The people know the i r land well and they know a l l the animals and they know how they behave, and they know where they are and they know whether there i s enough or not enough. The whites are not doing th i s research for the sake of the Inuit. They l i e i f they t e l l us i t i s for us. There was a meeting i n Spence Bay t h i s f a l l . I have heard that Polar Gas are saying that the Spence Bay people and the Baker Lake people and the Resolute Bay people and the Gjoa Haven people, and the P e l l y Bay people a l l agreed to the pipe-l i n e . (Angrily) : That i s a great l i e I I t was exactly the other way around, and everybody knows i t . Now we have heard that they have written i t out even i n Eskimo that we a l l agreed to the pi p e l i n e . Everybody knows i t was excatly the other way around, and that everybody i n the meeting voted against the pip e l i n e . So Polar Gas t o l d a t e r r i b l e l i e . I t was just the other way round. S.W.P.C.: That i s the second time we have heard t h i s . We w i l l have to check into t h i s . C.R.O.: Perhaps there was a mistake i n the tr a n s l a t i o n . It wasn't intended that way. I w i l l check on that when I get back to Toronto. S.W.P.C.: Is that t r a n s l a t i o n now here i n Spence Bay? Sadlarina: I think my son s t i l l has that paper. C.R.O.: We w i l l have to check i t out. Aqqaq: I t i s i n the paper which i s supposed to t e l l about what everyone said i n the meeting i n November here when the people from Resolute Bay and Baker Lake and Gjoa Haven and P e l l y Bay came here. T u l u r i a l i k : We heard these reports before. And Kamimaalik has t o l d us about what he saw on Price of Wales Island, where quite a l o t of white people were ;active doing exploration work using explosives. 130. C.R.O.: There wasn't any explosion. T u l u r i a l i k : That man doesn't know what he's talking about or he i s c a l l i n g me a l i a r ! I don't l i k e him for either reason. I w i l l not describe to you i n d e t a i l the process of blas t i n g with dynamite. ( T u l u r i a l i k then described the whole process of blasting.) I know what I'm ta l k i n g about. C.R.O.: I t was someone else. If you work for Polar Gas and get involved people w i l l see what Polar Gas i s r e a l l y a l l about and then they w i l l know. I t was the o i l companies. T u l u r i a l i k : There i s r e a l l y no difference. They're a l l the same. And th i s summer work i s very d i f f e r e n t from work building a pipel i n e , I'm sure. Qauqyuaq: People were very angered about t h i s b l a s t i n g - and i t ' s r e a l l y a l l the same int e r e s t s , even i f the names of the o u t f i t s are apparently d i f f e r e n t . Polar Gas should r e a l i z e that the Inuit know much more than the white people do about the game in the country. Do the whites need to do t h i s work? The whites don't know anything about the hunting grounds. And now Polar Gas are saying that the Inuit are not as qual-i f i e d as the white people to do f i e l d work concerning the game. This i s simply not true. Indeed the Inuit know a great deal more than the whites about t h e i r country and t h e i r game and they are better q u a l i f i e d . S.W.P.C.: I t i s a matter of administration. A l l of our work i s done by contract. White people have to have contracts with each other so that people get what they expect at the end of the job. They can l o s t i f they do not meet the terms of the contract. Spence Bay people are sure of getting paid anyway every two weeks. Qauqyuaq: He hasn't answeredl I am very much involved i n a l l of t h i s , and I am not uninformed. But there are l o t s of people here who don't understand about contracts and administration. I am asking questions not just for my own information, because i n some cases I have some idea of what the answer i s , or what i t should be, but I am asking the questions on behalf of people I know have not had the same chance to learn things as I have. Qaquitiniq (speaking very strongly indeed): I want to know i f we r e a l l y w i l l be able to preserve our N a t s i l i k River and go on using i t for f i s h i n g , or w i l l the pipeline come and take i t a l l away from us? We have used that r i v e r for a very long time and now they are threatening to take i t away from us. Is there r e a l l y no other area where you can 131. b u i l d the pipeline? Have you r e a l l y looked everywhere else? How w i l l the pipeline be of any benefit to the Inuit people? Is i t r e a l l y for the benefit of the Inuit people? Or i s i t , to be honest, r e a l l y for the benefit of the whites? C.R.O.: Some more gas has been found at a time when the other sources have been running short. I t i s being used by the people a l l across Canada. Qaqutiniq; I want to know i f the white people have run out of other places to get gas from and i s that now why they have to come and get gas from the North? S.W.P.C.: No, but the gas i s beginning to run short elsewhere. Qaqutiniq: We want very much to keep our land. We are frightened and worried and upset and are being driven to an early grave worrying about the destruction of our land and our l i v e s . C.R.O.: I appreciate her feelings. Qaqutiniq (loudly and f o r c e f u l l y ) : The whites have no ri g h t to destroy the land which Is not th e i r ' s to misuse. This i s Inuit land and should not be damaged or destroyed by the white people not belonging here. I t i s not r i g h t and the Inuit should not be disturbed i n t h i s way. (Angrily): I t i s not f a i r , the Inuit people do not go south to the white man's land and hurt them and t h e i r land, so why do they f e e l free to come north and hurt our people? Kiahinak (strongly): I was not born yesterday. I am an old man and I know thi s land. Always I have been watching the animals and I.learned t h e i r ways. And so too I have learned, by the habits learned i n watching the animals, something about the whites - and I know that the Polar Gas people are no d i f f e r e n t from any other whites, even i f they pretend to be. We know enough of white people altogether, and now we are sad. (There ensues a whispered conversation for several minutes between C.R.O., S.W.P.C. and Interpreter. C.R.O. shrugs.) C.R.O.: I don't know what to say. Change w i l l come whatever you say. We'll have to make out the best way we can. Kiahinak (angrily): What would you do i f the Inuit went south and attacked your land? You wouldn't l e t them do i t ! 132. But you feel free to come north to the Inuit land and destroy our land. You depend just on written words. But we depend on this land. In the South you have your leaders and now you have heard many times from our leaders. But your leaders don't come here and talk to us, and it is about time they did. Takulik: What will happen when the pipeline comes to the lakes and the rivers? Will the pipeline go around the lakes or will it go through them. S.W.P.C. (laughingly): The pipeline cannot go around them all. They are now surveying for the best crossing points. Takulik: I don't believe that it can be done without the risk of the pipeline breaking. We know about construction work damaging the fish population. It happened when they built the airstrip at Pelly Bay. C.R.O.: We never heard about it. Takulik: There are an awful lot of things you don't seem to have heard about. But you better not doubt me. (Turning to the people): He never seems to have heard about anything he does not want to hear. Kiahinak and Qauqyuaq (talking together) tell of something near Kiahinak's camp that they saw last year, when a crew of white people seemed to have come by the Natsilik River and left a line of stakes and wire crossing the river and disap-pearing in a straight line. C.R.O.: I know nothing about this. Qauqyuaq: Was it anything to do with the caribou .survey? Kiahinak: There is also other activity, there are markers near a river by the Shepherd's Bay DEW Line site. The same thing as that across the Natsilik River. Why? C.R.O.: We will have to find out if Polar Gas did it, and if so why. Kiahinak: They had flags, orange flags, attached to stakes. Etunga: I think that if the pipeline is going to be built it's better to do the research now than just rush into it without having information. If they did that they would do even more damage. C.R.O.: I agree. 133. Ashevak: . When the pipeline i s no longer used what w i l l they do with i t ? I ask thi s because when the idea of a plane to carry gas out of the North came up, i t was appealing for other reasons, such as when the gas i s a l l used up there w i l l be nothing l e f t behind to s p o i l the land. C.R.O.: It may be f i f t y years or a hundred years before the gas i s a l l used up. I t would cost too much to take the pipeline away again and the job of taking i t away would cause even more problems. Ashevak: But the gas people may f i n d t h e i r gas i n many d i f f e r e n t places i n the North, and then have to b u i l d more and more pipelines a l l over the country - whereas i f they had big airplanes they would simply have to b u i l d an a i r s t r i p near where the gas i s coming out. Airplane transport i s much more f l e x i b l e . C.R.O.: A l l the d i f f e r e n t means of taking the gas w i l l each have t h e i r own problems. At t h i s point Polar Gas i s having discussions with I.T.C. about looking into a l l of these problems. Qauqyuaq: You said i t would cost too much to take out a d e r e l i c t p i p e l i n e . Explain further. C.R.O. and S.W.P.C. (answering at the same time): Cost i s only one factor, but the disturbance of taking out the pipeline would be just as great as putting one i n . T u l u r i a l i k : Even though there has never been a pipeline here, that doesn't mean we don't know anything about such things, and we do cer t a i n l y know our own land, and we know that the pip e l i n e w i l l not be a success. I t could be disastrous. C.R.O.: I t may be not as bad as you think. Interpreter (speaking to T u l u r i a l i k and not tr a n s l a t i n g for C.R.O.): They don't have to say that a l l over again, they have already r e p l i e d to that question once. Ootookee: I would l i k e to know more about how they have gone about t h i s pipeline work i n other parts of Canada and the world. Have they been allowed to go ahead and damage the ri v e r s and damage the country the way they are going to here? E l i s a p i (very f o r c e f u l l y ) : You Polar Gas people must not dam up the r i v e r s . You did not make t h i s land. And i t i s not yours to destroy and change. 134. Anaija: You already know that the pipeline i s going to make many problems for us. But you don't change. We know that o i l can be carr i e d by ship and by plane, and so can gas. C.R.O. (showing i r r i t a t i o n obviously): Well, you'd better go and talk to I.T.C. and see what they come up with in t h e i r report about alternative methods. Again, i t i s a good thing to have good surveys done before anything else. And we want the Inuit people to p a r t i c i p a t e . Ashevak: This has been a serious meeting. You may not have found i t pleasant, but then not a l l meetings can be pleasant. I t i s often the case. As you would say, "that's how i t i s . " Aqqaq: Kamimaalik has reported about f i g h t i n g i n the research crews and the men even getting t h e i r clothes ripped. That must not be allowed to happen again. C.R.O. (jokingly f l i p ) : Maybe Max l i k e s f i g h t i n g . Qauqyuaq: I s t i l l want to know about what goes on with th i s idea of burying the pi p e l i n e . Are you proposing to put the l i n e r i g h t under the r i v e r s or across the bed of the r i v e r s , and w i l l there be proper surveys of the r i v e r crossings? Interpreter (brusquely): That question's been asked. C.R.O.: There w i l l not be much r i v e r survey work done th i s year. Qauqyuaq: We s t i l l want to know, have they thought of tunneling the pipe below the r i v e r s and under the lakes instead of on the floor? C.R.O.: The pipe w i l l be sunk into the bottom of the r i v e r s . Qauqyuaq: The Land Claims of the Inuit people must be given top p r i o r i t y . The Land Claims must be s e t t l e d before there i s any thought of construction of the p i p e l i n e . C.R.O.: I t may be fi v e years before the pipeline i s begun. Land Claims should be s e t t l e d long before that. Qauqyuaq: I t would be better i f the Inuit were f u l l y involved i n a l l aspects of the survey work, because they need to know, and some cannot return to l i v i n g the old way. I t i s better to do good survey work and provide learning opportunities 135. for a l l , and also to use thi s survey work to create leader-ship amongst the Inuit people. This i s what we are doing in I.T.C. I f we don't get these things worked upon now, and things are more hurried, l a t e r i t may be too late to get i t ri g h t . I t ' s better to sort out our problems i n a serious way now, during t h i s four or fi v e years before the gas people s t a r t construction. C.R.O.: We want the Inuit people to learn everything. Qauqyuaq: We s t i l l need to f i n d people who we can tru s t , to work with them to f i n d solutions for a l l of these d i f f e r -ences, because then we might even f i n d something worthwhile yet about the pipel i n e . T i r t a q : I want to know i f people working with the survey crews w i l l a l l be young, or i s there going to be room for older people? C.R.O.: That's up to the Spence Bay people. T i r t a q : I t would be better i f at lea s t one of the members of each crew were an older man, working with a younger man or men. The young men can help i n some ways, but the older men can also do a l o t to i n s t r u c t about the land and the game. S.W.P.C.: I t would be good i f one of them could speak English. T i r t a q : Why i s i t that the Inuit people are always expected to go along with the whites? The white boses would do well to l i s t e n to the advice of the Inuit and go along with them sometimes. Itunga: You should work with the councils when you come to the settlements, and keep them f u l l y informed. Why do you have nothing to do with the councils? S.W.P.C.: Actually the Spence Bay Council suggested that I hold my own meeting. Qingattuq: I t should be clear to you that we are not going to agree to everything tonight. S.W.P.C.: I w i l l want to go on sharing information with the people. I t i s also not only my job to t e l l the people about working positions, but to hire people too. Ti r t a q : I know well some of the country on Prince of Wales Island and Somerset Island and i n Fort Ross area. These 136. are areas that some of the young people don't know at a l l , and i f you are going to be working i n some of these areas, you should have older people working with you on your crews. Some of the young people don't know t h i s country at a l l . C.R.O.: (S.W.P.C. named) w i l l be back in three weeks. Ti r t a q : I wish to thank you for coming here and t a l k i n g . A l l too often the people come up here from the South and do things without ever talking with the people. C.R.O.: We don't always agree, but we are prepared occasionally to have exchanges of views. (Since there was no chairman there was some d i f f i c u l t y about bringing the meeting to an end, u n t i l Qauqyuaq simply said that he f e l t everyone had heard enough for one night; at which point there was a general exodus.) 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

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"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094215/manifest

Comment

Related Items