UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Resource allocation and control on the Lummi Indian reservation : a century of conflict and change in… Boxberger, Daniel L. 1986

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1987_A1 B69.pdf [ 16.52MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0097069.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0097069-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0097069-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0097069-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0097069-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0097069-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0097069-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0097069-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0097069.ris

Full Text

RESOURCE ALLOCATION AND  CONTROL ON THE LUMMI INDIAN  A CENTURY OF CONFLICT AND  RESERVATION  CHANGE IN THE SALMON FISHERY  DANIEL L. BOXBERGER B.A., The E v e r g r e e n S t a t e C o l l e g e , 1973 M.A., W e s t e r n W a s h i n g t o n U n i v e r s i t y , 1977  A THESIS SUBMITTED  IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF  THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY  in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department o f  We  accept  this  Anthropology/Sociology)  thesis  to the r e q u i r e d  as  conforming  standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September  1986  Cc)Daniel L. Boxberger,  1986  In  presenting  this thesis in partial fulfilment  of the  requirements for an advanced  degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department  or  by  his  or  her  representatives.  It is  understood  that  copying or  publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Department of  Anthropology/Sociology  The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date  DE-6(3/81)  25 November 1986  Supervisor:  Dr.  J.E  Michael  Kew  abstract RESOURCE ALLOCATION AND CONTROL ON THE LUMMI INDIAN RESERVATION: A CENTURY OF CONFLICT AND CHANGE IN THE SALMON FISHERY This  study  focuses  Washington State, in  and  past  excluded one  from  hundred  situation  of  resources. timber,  and  f i s h e r s of  Northwest  i n d u s t r y over  commercial The  fishing  approach  dependency productive  fish. —  ideal  Indian  the  years.  and  Lummi  have been  c o n t r o l of  minerals, an  the  t h e manner i n w h i c h t h e y  internal  The  presents  on  to  is  to  point  own  for  —  or  included  taken  examine  resources  that Indians  starting  be  the  in  this  access  land,  water,  have a c c e s s  understanding  to  to,  Indian  underdevelopment. Prior  to  and  immediately  after  confined  to a r e s e r v a t i o n , they  were  fishery  that  for  potential  to  penetration North  Puget  met  develop of  Sound  the  need  1900s, fishing  for  of  efforts  by  resulted  a  time  engaged  into  the  commercial  utilized  other  labor. the in  Concomitantly,  State the  ethnicities  of  Lummi  had  the  endeavor.  The  fishery  the  circumvented  throughout to  but  of  i n c r e a s e i n the  rapidly  Washington being  and  labor, an  were  traditional  salmon  Lummi and  Lummi  in a  subsistence  extractive technologies of  the  viable commercial  initially  labor  Indian  needs  into  capital  d e v e l o p m e n t o f new availability  their  the  the  curtail  confined  V  to  early Indian  a  small  reservation the  fishery  1940s,  total,  when L u m m i  t h e need  were once  Lummi  the post-war  Sympathetic guaranteed  going  into  needed  i n the late  significant the present  t h e Lummi  the economic y i e l d  Lummi  examines  with  of the f i s h e r y  a  ethnohistorical  i n the  and e a r l y  opportunity  salmon  i s causing  1970s  f o r the  fishery  economic  i s not  base.  The  the m a j o r i t y  t o be s i p h o n e d  dependency  and e t h n o g r a p h i c  approach  political  on t h e U n i t e d  of  1960s  a viable  By  study  dependency shows  dominant  from  fishery.  by t h e p r o c e s s o r s , t h e  fishing Lummi  underdevelopment.  the  and t h e Lummi  o f f t o non-  interests.  Utilizing  this  almost  saw new d e v e l o p m e n t s  manner i n w h i c h t h e f i s h e r y h a s d e v e l o p e d of  was  In  squeezed o u t o f the i n d u s t r y .  commercially  to provide  became a c u t e ,  era again  court cases  Nevertheless,  the f i s h e r y  the commercial salmon  i n d u s t r y , a n d , no l o n g e r again  commercial potential.  from  suddenly  incorporated  were once  Lummi.  exclusion  for fishers  again  Nevertheless, salmon  of i n s i g n i f i c a n t  chronic  a valuable  how  focusing  t h e Lummi  natural  resource.  iii  this  understanding  primarily States  community  s o c i e t y and became underdevelopment,  to  data,  Lummi  on e c o n o m i c  Federal was  study  and  Government,  incorporated  a dependent  community  despite access  t o and  into  suffering utilization  RESOURCE ALLOCATION AND CONTROL ON THE LUMMI INDIAN RESERVATION A CENTURY OF CONFLICT AND CHANGE IN THE SALMON FISHERY TABLE OF Chapter  I  CONTENTS  Introduction S t a t e m e n t o f the P r o b l e m T h e o r e t i c a l Background M e t h o d s and O b j e c t i v e s Sources of Data  Chapter  II  The  Pre-Reservation  1 4 23 27  Lummi  Introduction P r i o r to Contact Resource Procurement O r g a n i z a t i o n o f Labor E t h n o h i s t o r i c a l Sketch 1792-1854 The T r e a t y E r a 1855-1859 Post-Reservation and A l l o t m e n t 1860-1884 Summary Chapter  III  The Lummi and the D e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e C o m m e r c i a l Salmon F i s h e r y 1885-1900 Introduction The T e c h n o l o g i c a l Growth o f C a r l i s l e P a c k i n g Company Summary  Chapter  IV  31 32 36 46 54 62 72 79  The  Era  the  Salmon  o f C o m m e r c i a l Salmon F i s h i n g  81 Fishery..88 107 114  1901-1935  Introduction 116 T e c h n o l o g i c a l Growth i n the Salmon I n d u s t r y . . . . 1 1 9 I n d i a n L a b o r i n t h e Salmon I n d u s t r y 140 S t a t e and F e d e r a l A c t i v i t y and the Lummi 146 Lummi F i s h i n g 1901-1935 166 Summary 172 Chapter V  The  Indian  New  Deal  1936-1950  Introduction S t a t e and F e d e r a l A c t i v i t y and t h e Lummi T e c h n o l o g i c a l Change i n the Salmon F i s h e r y The R e - E n t r y o f Lummi i n t o t h e C o m m e r c i a l Fishery Summary  iv  175 177 191 201 212  Chapter VI  From T e r m i n a t i o n  to  Self-Determination  1951-1973  Introduction... S t a t e and F e d e r a l A c t i v i t y and t h e Lummi T e c h n o l o g i c a l Change i n t h e Salmon F i s h e r y The D e c l i n e o f Lummi P u r s e S e i n e F i s h i n g  215 216 231 245  Summary  257  Chapter V I I  The B o l d t D e c i s i o n and Beyond  Chapter V I I I  Introduction U n i t e d S t a t e s y_^ S t a t e o f W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e and F e d e r a l A c t i v i t y and t h e Lummi The P o s t - B o l d t Growth o f t h e Lummi F i s h e r y Summary Conclusions  259 260 263 279 309 311  References C i t e d  318  v  1974-1985  TABLES  Table  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29  S e a s o n a l A v a i l a b i l i t y and U t i l i z a t i o n o f Salmon 41 S t r a i t s S a l i s h Reef Net L o c a t i o n s 46 W h i t e and I n d i a n P o p u l a t i o n s o f Whatcom C o u n t y , W a s h i n g t o n , 1860-1910 69 C o m m e r c i a l Salmon C a n n e r y P r o d u c t i o n on P u g e t Sound, 1877-1900 84 T r a p s O p e r a t e d i n P u g e t Sound, 1893-1900 92 P u g e t Sound P u r s e S e i n e L i c e n s e s , 1897-1900 95 S e a s o n a l A v a i l a b i l i t y o f Salmon i n t h e Nooksack R i v e r 106 C a r l i s l e P a c k i n g Company A n n u a l P a c k , 1896-1928 I l l P u g e t Sound P u r s e S e i n e L i c e n s e s , 1901-1935... 125 P u g e t Sound T r o l l i n g L i c e n s e s , 1917-1935 126 P u g e t Sound G i l l N e t L i c e n s e s , 1901-1935 129 P u g e t Sound R e e f N e t L i c e n s e s , 1915-1935 133 P u g e t Sound T r a p L i c e n s e s , 1901-1935 134 P u g e t Sound Salmon P a c k , 1901-1935 139 C a n n e r y L a b o r , by E t h n i c i t y , i n t h e P u g e t Sound F i s h i n g I n d u s t r y , 1902-1935 144 P u g e t Sound C o m m e r c i a l Salmon F i s h i n g L i c e n s e s , 1935-1950 194 P r o p o r t i o n a l C a t c h o f e a c h Salmon S p e c i e s by User Group, i n P e r c e n t a g e s f o r Four Year P e r i o d s , 1936-1951 195 P u g e t Sound C o m m e r c i a l Salmon P a c k , 1936-1950.198 P u g e t Sound C o m m e r c i a l Salmon C a n n e r i e s , 1936-1950 200 Numbers o f F i s h T a k e n by Lummi i n Nooksack R i v e r and B e l l i n g h a m Bay, 1935-1950 202 P u g e t Sound C o m m e r c i a l Salmon F i s h i n g L i c e n s e s , 1951-1974 232 Salmon and S t e e l h e a d S p o r t C a t c h , 1939-1974... 239 P u g e t Sound Salmon C a n n e r i e s , 1951-1974 241 P u g e t Sound Salmon P a c k , 1951-1974 242 C a t c h e s o f Salmon on P u g e t Sound, 1951-1974... 248 Numbers o f F i s h T a k e n by Lummi, B e l l i n g h a m Bay and Nooksack R i v e r , 1951-1974..250 A C o m p a r i s o n o f A v e r a g e Y i e l d and E x p e n s e s o f the Lummi F i s h i n g F l e e t , 1981 t o 1984 291 A v e r a g e E a r n i n g s o f Lummi Salmon F i s h e r s , 1981 t o 1984 •. 298 Lummi A d m i n i s t r a t i v e O r g a n i z a t i o n and A f f i l i a t i o n with Fishing Interests 305  vi  MAPS AND  FIGURES  Maps Map  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Areas o f P r i n c i p l e Resource C o - U t i l i z a t i o n 53 W e s t e r n W a s h i n g t o n , c a . 1855 71 Lummi R e s e r v a t i o n , c a . 1873 74 N o r t h P u g e t Sound T r a p S i t e s , 1913 136 Lummi I n d i a n R e s e r v a t i o n and V i c i n i t y , c a . 1930 150 G i l l N e t D r i f t s , Mouth o f t h e N o o k s a c k R i v e r . . . 1 7 0 Western Washington Commercial F i s h i n g A r e a s , 1935 178 L a n d O w n e r s h i p on t h e Lummi R e s e r v a t i o n , 1971..224 P u g e t Sound Salmon Management A r e a s , 1950 226 Western Washington T r e a t y T r i b e s 284  Figures Figure  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  I l l u s t r a t i o n o f a Salmon T r a p 93 Salmon T r a p s a t P o i n t R o b e r t s , 1895 ; 99 Salmon T r a p s a t V i l l a g e P o i n t , 1895.. 109 Lummi and n o n - I n d i a n P u r s e S e i n e V e s s e l s , c a . 1949 205 P u g e t Sound Salmon C a t c h , 1913-1974 244 Lummi O p e r a t e d P u r s e S e i n e V e s s e l s , 1945-1985..247 Lummi Salmon C a t c h , 1935-1974 251 Lummi P o p u l a t i o n , 1780-1980 253 Lummi Salmon C a t c h , 1974-1985 281 C o m p a r i s o n o f Lummi F i s h i n g V e s s e l s , 1980s 287 Growth o f Lummi Salmon F i s h i n g F l e e t , 1974-1985 289 I n d i a n and n o n - I n d i a n S h a r e o f t h e T o t a l Salmon C a t c h , 1974-1984 293 Lummi and non-Lummi S h a r e o f t h e I n d i a n C a t c h , 1974-1984 294  vii  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I  was  f o r t u n a t e i n making  e l d e r s who in  the  commercial  Dorothy in  rest  treasured  fishery.  work  friend;  Leo  College. of  this  who  These  nature  should  not  Washington;  was  one  individuals the  reef  note  Alvin  Charlene  Casimir  into  insight cleared  o f my are  I owe  a debt  Sr.; Dutch  instructors sorely  are  visiting  e x c e l l e n c e and  at  missed.  dispensed  and  anonymous.  and  Jeannette  Boxberger;  up  the  Buck  Willie  and  intricacies  many o f my Cooper;  are  ' A u n t i e J a c k i e ' Tom;  h i s home; C l i f f o r d into  They  Evergreen Often  with  of  Casimir;  the  in a  as  "too Lummi  Jim  Wilson;  G e o r g e Adams; J e w e l l James;  first  Armour  Jo  Wilson;  took and  Teen T a l l y ;  me  Jimmy  fishing  I r e n e James;  W e s l e y Bob;  Adams; Sam  Lizzie  Greene,  Margaret  Greene;  Florence  James;  Henry M a r t i n ;  Willie  Olson; Jones;  Polly Gordon  Washington,  R i v e r ; Dean  S c o t t ; Ray  Ken  Johnnie;  M i k e and  Dean  whose  fishery  Cagey; V e r n o n Lane; G.I.  Jr.;  welcomed  Indian commercial  i n the Nooksack Charlie  Martha  and  first  Dick  Juanita Jefferson;  Wilson;  and  that  Casimir,  who  Kelly;  c o n f u s i o n s ; Joe B i l l ;  Dave and  Sollie  Alvin  Washington, Lila  Joe  a  Kinley;  o f g r a t i t u d e t o many  L a r r y K i n l e y , L u m m i T r i b a l C h a i r m a n s i n c e 1978;  who  participation  were A l o y s i u s and  n e t t e r par  Hillaire,  informants  remain  Isadore  Scholtz;  and  their  Lummi  c o n t r i b u t e d d i r e c t l y t o t h i s w o r k a n d I am o f t h e b e l i e f  they  me  d a y s and  particular  S e n i o r ; Ben  numerous t o m e n t i o n " b u t who  Of  home; Herman O l s o n ,  Mary H i l l a i r e ,  State  of the e a r l y  of several  C h a r l e s , w i t h whom I s p e n t many d e l i g h t f u l h o u r s  the  and  spoke f r e e l y  the a c q u a i n t a n c e  Martin;  Bill  Cagey;  Ralph  and  Rosalie Eugene  Scott; Earl DeCoteau;  Johnson; Priest;  Vivian  a n d Wayne  John  and B.J. Greene;  Plaster;  Ron F i n k b o n n e r ;  apologize.  Gary  Ballew.  Wilson;  I am  to this  following  people  former  study.  sure  Merle  I have  and  Tribal  Fisheries  faculty  final member  faculty,  unfailing  o f the Department  staff,  confidence  I would  informants the gill  netter Jerry  Association;  and P a t r i c k  Johnson  contributed  to the completion  I am a l s o d e e p l y David  F. A b e r l e the years.  present,  to extend  Of s p e c i a l Stevenson,  Murray,  who  my g r a t i t u d e t o  of this  note  for their  are Professor  Eileen  each,  I was a  at Western  o f the department  and s u p p o r t .  and C o l l e e n  of Anthropology  like  and s t u d e n t s  Donaldson,  Smith,  in their  Laurie  own  way,  thesis.  i n d e b t e d t o P r o f e s s o r s J.E. M i c h a e l Kew and  for their  helpful  In a d d i t i o n other  deserve  the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s  s u g g e s t i o n s a n d warm members o f my  recognition,  Guppy and B l a n c a M u r a t o r i o . for  and I  College of Fisheries;  Biologist;  H e r b e r t C. T a y l o r , P r o f e s s o r J o a n  and  some  d r a f t s o f t h i s t h e s i s were w r i t t e n w h i l e  Washington U n i v e r s i t y .  over  Larry  Gary Davis o f the Washington S t a t e Department o f F i s h e r i e s . The  the  Vern  members have c o n t r i b u t e d  Anderson, Chairman o f the Washington Reef N e t t e r s P a u l Hage, Lummi  Sr.;  missed  consulted: Richard Poole,  P r e s i d e n t o f t h e Lummi  Ballew;  Jefferson;  I n a d d i t i o n t o my Lummi  were a l s o  Bill  A r t Humphreys,  Dozens o f o t h e r Lummi t r i b a l  indirectly  and  Jones;  that  ix  especially  Of c o u r s e follow  support  committee,  past  Professors  Neil  I assume  and t h e e r r o r s  responsibility that  remain.  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Statement o f the I n 1974 Boldt  United  handed  down  guaranteeing of  Problem States Federal D i s t r i c t  a d e c i s i o n defining Indian  treaty  Indians-*- 50  salmon. T h i s r e v e r s e d  had  come t o e x c l u d e  from  the  Federal the  most  part  treaties  Lummi and  based  Indian  fishing  the  of p o l i c y  of  mutually  treaties  other  George  rights  allowable and  Western  Indian  and  harvest  practice treaty  that  tribes  Washington.  State  the  at  a l l "usual  upon  some p a r t  s i g n a t o r s t o use  r e s e r v a t i o n s and  fishing  agreed  reserved  "exclusive right"  of the  reservation  of  nineteen  fishery  on  Washington  w e r e an  boundaries  a century  salmon  f o r the  Western  percent  Judge  Most  i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s have a r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h  government  environment In  the  commercial  Indian tribes  Court  treaties. of  the  for their  resources  the For  natural  sustenance.  reserved  to a l l r e s o u r c e s  in  the  within  the  an " i n common" r i g h t t o o f f and  accustomed  grounds  and  stations". This  study  will  focus  N o r t h w e s t W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e and included  i n and  over  the  past  this  case  of  communities  excluded  one  i n the  Lummi  Indian  fishers  t h e manner i n w h i c h t h e y  years.  dependency,  United  the  States,  The  approach  similar will  be  to  be  examine  salmon  taken  t o t h a t o f most to  of  have been  from the c o m m e r c i a l h a r v e s t of  hundred  internal  on  the  to  Indian access  1. D e s p i t e t h e a b h o r r e n c e some p e o p l e v o i c e o v e r t h e use o f t h e t e r m " I n d i a n " as o p p o s e d t o " N a t i v e " o r " N a t i v e A m e r i c a n " , I n d i a n w i l l be u s e d t h r o u g h o u t t h i s w o r k . I n f i f t e e n y e a r s o f w o r k i n g w i t h t h e Lummi and o t h e r P u g e t Sound g r o u p s I h a v e y e t to e n c o u n t e r a n y o n e who o b j e c t s t o b e i n g r e f e r r e d t o a s an I n d i a n a n d , i n f a c t , t h a t i s t h e t e r m c o m m o n l y u s e d by t h e N a t i v e p e o p l e o f P u g e t Sound t o r e f e r t o t h e m s e l v e s . 1  to  resources.  water,  The c o n t r o l o f p r o d u c t i v e r e s o u r c e s , i . e . , l a n d ,  timber,  rights  minerals,  to, represents  and  fish  a starting  that  point  Indians  own  or  f o r understanding  have  Indian  underdevelopment. This which  study  operates  economic colony", for  will  c o n c e n t r a t e on a l o c a l p o p u l a t i o n , b u t one  w i t h i n the context of e x t r a l o c a l  systems.  The Lummi  one w h i c h  i s dependent  political  of control  below,  Lummi  have  commercial Boldt  system  o f i t s own  i t i s important  historical  on t h e U n i t e d  been  b u t has r e m a i n e d resources.  Over  Lummi a c c e s s t o s a l m o n .  powerful  fishing  demonstrates  sufficiency this  study  within  mean  Prior  clear  from  an  years the  regularity.  from  the  The 1974  i fnot i n a l l of The Lummi  case  valuable resource  does  well-being  group.  With  the f o l l o w i n g  nor economic  these  points  self-  i n mind,  q u e s t i o n s , each  falling  p e r i o d o f time.  t o and i m m e d i a t e l y  engaged  case  excluded  i s instructive.  economic  examine  a particular  1.  case  f o r the t r i b a l will  into  B e c a u s e t h e Lummi a r e t h e most  that access to a commercially  necessarily  be made  one h u n d r e d  i n Western Washington,  t h e Lummi  government  one o f a l o n g s e r i e s o f c i r c u m s t a n c e s  affecting  not  t h e Lummi  h a r v e s t of, s a l m o n w i t h s t a r t l i n g  America,  "internal  incorporated  As w i l l  the past  and  underdeveloped f o r  i n c l u d e d and s u b s e q u e n t l y  tribe  a s an States  h a s been  t o examine  perspective.  D e c i s i o n i s merely  North  be t r e a t e d  e x i s t e n c e and one w h i c h  the dominant economic lack  will  political  after  in a traditional  treaty  Lummi  were  their  s u b s i s t e n c e n e e d s and had t h e p o t e n t i a l  2  fishery  n e g o t i a t i o n s the  that  adequately  to develop  met  into a  lucrative and  economic  endeavor.  What  was  the t r a d i t i o n a l  political  e c o n o m i c o r g a n i z a t i o n and how d i d i t manage t h e r e s o u r c e ? 2.  The e a r l y  reservation fishery  despite  attempts  become  agriculturalists.  enough  for their  market. period  by t h e F e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t  sustenance  t h e Lummi  3.  The g r o w t h  fishery  i n the e a r l y  from  their  use o f t h e i r  twentieth  self-sufficient,  during  the depression  of  to  become more d e p e n d e n t  to  participate  observation tribes  producing  natural  their  tended  resources? from being 6.  What  The Lummi  than  introduce  What  t o happen?  the Indian  present-day (1972:11) made  people level,  were  more  prior  t o and  subsequently.  What  t h a t caused  United  t h e Lummi able  States  Indian  the f o l l o w i n g  general  "Unlike  a n d do n o t p r o v i d e  political  fishery  Lummi  fishery?  are tribes  self-directing  salmon  to displace  this  this  resources?  o f the commercial  a p p l i e s w e l l t o t h e Lummi:  Why  during  on t h e F e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t and l e s s  resources,  members".  producing  a surplus for  relationships  a r e n o t a n d c a n n o t be s e l f - d i r e c t i n g ,  control their  not only  at a survival  Deal"  discussing  which  t o f o r c e t h e Lummi t o  were  to allow  t h e 1930s  i n the salmon  Jorgensen  i n t o t h e 1890s  l o c a t i o n s and methods.  that  albeit  f a c t o r s d i d t h e " I n d i a n New  reservations,  century  fishing  suggests  nearly  In  and s o c i a l  f a c t o r s combined  Evidence  5.  b u t were  and d e v e l o p m e n t  traditional  socio-political 4.  T h e Lummi  What s t a t e p o l i c i e s affected  continued  unable  and e c o n o m i c  individuals,  do n o t a n d c a n n o t sustenance  to control factors  keep  for a l l  their  own  t h e Lummi  and s e l f - s u s t a i n i n g ? has a p p a r e n t l y  3  been g e n e r a t i n g  several  million poor.  dollars Who  each year  1974 — y e t t h e p e o p l e a r e s t i l l  since  i s the f i s h e r y benefiting  happening  t o the economic  surplus  i f n o t t h e Lummi?  being  What i s  g e n e r a t e d by t h e I n d i a n  commercial fishery?  Theoretical This factors Puget  study w i l l  inherent  Sound"  Although in  Background  1  c o n c e n t r a t e on t h e p o l i t i c a l  i n the h i s t o r y  and t h e r e s u l t a n t  economic  change  the c o m m e r c i a l salmon  fishing  with  f i s h e r y growth change.  teqhnology intended  varying  policy,  investigate  t h e Lummi  industry.  The  we  effects  on t h e Lummi  patterns  i n t e c h n o l o g y h a s been an  a point  user group  this  growth  i n concert  of departure to within  the salmon  i n the u t i l i z a t i o n  r e s o u r c e and t h e c o n c o m i t a n t changes  Indians.  i n technology,  By d o c u m e n t i n g  can provide  economic  industry of  to increase harvest,  as a s p e c i f i c  varying  fishing  may o c c u r w i t h o u t change  important element o f economic in  o f the salmon  and  of the  i n t h e s o c i e t y c a n be s e e n  a s t h e d i r e c t r e s u l t o f t h e d o m i n a t i o n o f t h e L u m m i by t h e l a r g e r society.  Besides p o l i t i c a l  society brings appear and  i t s own t e c h n o l o g y .  as a n e u t r a l  priorities  and e c o n o m i c  of  factor.  activities  the dominant  Modern t e c h n o l o g y does n o t  I t tends to support the i n t e r e s t s  the system  that  introduces  i t (Bossen  1975:599) . Within  the context o f the l a r g e r  society  t h e Lummi have  been  2. The t e r m "Puget Sound" a s u s e d t h r o u g h o u t t h i s s t u d y r e f e r s t o more t h a n P u g e t Sound p r o p e r . As d e f i n e d by t h e W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t o f F i s h e r i e s , "Puget Sound" i n c l u d e s P u g e t Sound, t h e S t r a i t o f J u a n de F u c a , G e o r g i a S t r a i t , a l l t h e t i d e w a t e r s o f P u g e t Sound and a l l o t h e r t i d e w a t e r s e m p t y i n g i n t o P u g e t Sound ( W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t o f F i s h e r i e s 1947:7).  variously  included  industry.  i n and  excluded  I t i s the focus  of  this  from  the salmon  study  fishing  to understand  the  v a r i o u s f a c t o r s a t work o v e r t h e p a s t one h u n d r e d y e a r s t h a t have a f f e c t e d Lummi u s e and c o n t r o l o f t h e s a l m o n Within are  the context  several variables that w i l l  h i s t o r i c a l periods. of  of p o l i t i c a l  the salmon  industry;  United  t o c o n t r o l and u s e  t e c h n o l o g i c a l change  approaches utilized  o f Lummi  that  have  theory.  the s i t u a t i o n  and J o r g e n s e n dependency  States  and e c o n o m i c  dependency  approach provides  of  States  United  factors. helped  Indian  branches o f the  approach  States  to the  dependency tribes  have  I am o f t h e o p i n i o n  that  are best  Indian  considered theme  Indians  as p a r t o f  was f i r s t  by A b e r l e  applied  (1969; 1983)  Underdevelopment  i sa result  and l a c k o f o p p o r t u n i t y  f o r Indians  c a n be  political  approach  at United  American  and t h e p o v e r t y  the  economy; and  In the past,  The u n d e r d e v e l o p m e n t  of North  salmon  especially  the market  dependency  ethnohistory.  looked  i n the  governments.  (1971; 1972; 1978).  the United  economic  a  of underdevelopment  dependency  in  take  into  t h e o r i e s o f underdevelopment.  theories  of  will  economy,  to the v a r i o u s  S t a t e s and W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e  understanding  to  fishery  o f t h e Lummi  study  there  T h e s e a r e : Lummi a c c e s s  the r e g i o n a l p o l i t i c a l  This  change  w i t h i n each o f s i x  resource;  relationship  and e c o n o m i c  be d e a l t w i t h  i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f the salmon the  resource.  directly  dependence  attributed  on t h e l a r g e r  an u n d e r s t a n d i n g  to  their  society.  The  o f underdevelopment  r e s e r v a t i o n s because of p o l i t i c a l  and  A b e r l e p o i n t e d o u t how t h e u n d e r d e v e l o p m e n t  to understand  the s i t u a t i o n  5  o f the Navajo.  Economically speaking, the Navajo constitute an underdeveloped group. T h e y a r e an u n d e r d e v e l o p e d , internal U.S. c o l o n y . T h e y show t h e m a r k s o f i t . T h e i r p o v e r t y and their u nd e red uc a t io n are not causes of their underdevelopment but r e s u l t s of i t . The u n d e r d e v e l o p m e n t r e s u l t s from t h e i r r e l a t i o n s w i t h the l a r g e r s o c i e t y , which l i m i t the e c o n o m i c o p t i o n s open t o them, d r a i n o f f t h e i r r e s o u r c e s , and f a i l t o p r o v i d e them w i t h t h e e d u c a t i o n , t h e t e c h n o l o g i c a l b a s e , and t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f o r m s n e c e s s a r y f o r s a t i s f a c t o r y development ( A b e r l e 1969:228). Jorgensen Indians the  has  w i t h i n the context  larger  society.  anthropological primarily  studies  consisted  acculturation for  Western  all  Indian  which  also placed  will  Jorgensen  of  of  those  European  situation  the  capitalist  has  of  change  to  relates The  Indians  how  how  States  the  have  level  assumption  the  dominant  misguided  i s a r e s u l t of  of  hypothesized i s that  a developmental  into  of  previous  groups  norms  underlying  t o be  United  Indian  the  somewhere a l o n g  approach  out  show to  of  economic change  among  i n t e g r a t e them  of Native  and  pointed  attempts  are  believes this  the  He  groups  eventually  situation  of p o l i t i c a l  society.  societies  the  and  path  society.  in his  view  incorporation into  economy.  Underdevelopment, i n my view, has been caused by the d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e w h i t e - c o n t r o l l e d n a t i o n a l economy and t h e p o l i t i c a l , e c o n o m i c and s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s o f I n d i a n s a r e n o t i m p r o v i n g b e c a u s e t h e A m e r i c a n I n d i a n i s , and has b e e n f o r o v e r one h u n d r e d y e a r s , f u l l y i n t e g r a t e d i n t o t h e n a t i o n a l p o l i t i c a l economy ( J o r g e n s e n 1971:68). Jorgensen  uses  the  by A n d r e Gunder F r a n k the  dominant  explaining areas  that  t h a t do  metropolises, economic  society  metropolis/satellite  (1967) t o d e s c r i b e t h e and  satellites  not on  power.  United  States  are  labor  concentrate the The  other  the  political  h a n d , do  satellites  Indian and  and  formulated  relationship  economic  resources  between  reservations,  resources  concentrate  provide 6  concept  of  rural  power,  the  political  and  and  labor  but  do  not  share  economic  proportionately  surplus  to continue  generated  in  the  i s used  economic development,  by  economic those  benefits.  i n the  The  metropolises,  u s u a l l y t o the d e t r i m e n t  of  the  satellites. American  Indians  relationship besides  than  being  any  have other  economically  contradictions  of  a  (1972:10) subjugation, to and  Jorgensen and  disadvantaged economy,  refers  and  to  such  due  to  Indian local,  this  as  from  States  groups  inherent have  S t a t e , and  "domestic  this  because  the  relationships  i n the  F e d e r a l disagreements over and  more  also  Federal  domination"  as  military  often contradictory Federal p o l i c i e s  a d m i n i s t r a t i v e changes  resources,  suffered  i n the U n i t e d  d o m i n a t i o n by  includes  varying  group  capitalist  been s u b j e c t t o p o l i t i c a l governments.  perhaps  general  Bureau o f  Indian  c o n t r o l of  Affairs,  due  State  reservation land  discrimination  (both  and  social  and  political). More  r e c e n t l y , White  historical the  understanding  Pawnee,  understand  the why  populations contact.  Indian  "with  the  groups  who  some  security"  Only  brought over  t h a t we  l o o k i n g at the then  subsistence  control  and  White p o i n t s out  situation.  system  of three United  Choctaw,  o f d e p e n d e n c y by  Indian  (1983) a p p l i e d d e p e n d e n c y  can  we  resources,  Navajo.  previously were will  unable  only  understand their  7  attempted  supported to  do  understand  the  in  "a  poverty  by  to  so  after  the  cause each  collapse  population  an  their  development of how  to  tribes,  i n t e g r a t i o n i n t o the  dependence, sustained  Indian  White  historical  e c o n o m i e s and  increasing  States  theory  of  world  without payments  controlled  by t h e l a r g e r  Application rests an has  given  the  Lummi  Indian  1983:xix).  approach  i n t h e Lummi  underdevelopment  of p o l i t i c a l  through  i s related to  was  achieved  which  The r e s t r i c t i o n o f by d i r e c t  political  t h e n e g o t i a t i o n o f a t r e a t y , and has l e d t o  domination of their  lives  by e x t e r n a l f o r c e s .  Subsequent  F e d e r a l p o l i c i e s caused the breakdown o f the t r a d i t i o n a l social  and  creation tribal  economic  o f new  remain  injections of Federal  over  time  tended (part  valuable  Federal  government,  Indian  Affairs,  assimilate State manner  that  branches fostered  that  particularly  from  o f government,  under  often The  forms o f  despite  massive  access  The  interaction 8  industry  against The  local United  by t h e B u r e a u o f designed  to  The g o v e r n m e n t o f t h e resource  treaty  with of  i n such a  were  interaction  in conflict  that  the owners o f c a p i t a l  or "periphery").  Federal  to a '  demonstrate  p o l i c i e s , and a c t i o n s  participation.  confusion.  will  has managed t h e s a l m o n fishing  by t h e  colony".  and worked  society.  Lummi  economic p r a c t i c e s .  as e x e m p l i f i e d  i n t o American  Indians  study  favored  or "center")  has i n s t i t u t e d  Indians  o f new  new  i n t e r v e n t i o n i n the f i s h i n g  policies  of Washington  excluded  This  (part of the s a t e l l i t e  States  filled  institutions,  underdeveloped  resource.  of the metropolis  producers  was  f u n d s and d e s p i t e g u a r a n t e e d  and S t a t e  to i n s t i t u t e  tribal  void  had become an " i n t e r n a l  t h e Lummi  commercially  This  and t h e a d o p t i o n  t h e Lummi  Today  systems.  dependent  organization,  In e f f e c t ,  case  and e c o n o m i c d o m i n a t i o n  t o a s t r u c t u r e o f dependency.  to a reservation  dominance, further  that  process  rise  (White  o f the dependency  on t h e p r e m i s e  historical  society"  of  gradually these  one a n o t h e r ,  State  and  two has  Federal  government Indian,  has a l s o  fostered disagreement  use o f n a t u r a l  of  with modernization  development  dependency  followed  here  offers  after  (Anders  Dependency branches,  those  (e.g., T a y l o r exchange" which  production  theory which  guide  countries.  Third  World  economies  as " d u a l  have  failed  Veltmeyer variations  focus  or is  Both  the exchange  theory  arose  The m o d e r n i z a t i o n (and c e r t a i n  model  approach  by an i n j e c t i o n  ideological  safe basis  o f c o n d i t i o n s from to say that o f most  this  United  i n some  9  and t h e  developed  segments o f  are a  world. great  As many  that the s o l u t i o n to  which  inhibit  the developed approach  States  approach  visualized  the developing  out, there  societies  main  i n t h e 1960s a s  the underdeveloped  but a l l suggest  two  of the problems o f  segments  up" w i t h  points  o f the t r a d i t i o n a l  probably  programs  production"  problems of underdevelopment l i e i n the r e s t r u c t u r i n g elements  f o r the  on t h e " s t r u c t u r e o f  common e x p l a n a t i o n s  to "catch  into  I t i s t h e "exchange"  study.  economies",  (1980:199) on t h i s  which  i n dependency  o f the then  separated  on t h e " s t r u c t u r e o f  1967).  this  World  which  focus  Frank  Third  nations)  an e x p l a n a t i o n  on N a t i v e A m e r i c a n  c a n be b r o a d l y  1979) a n d t h o s e  approaches  a critique  l i m i t a t i o n s , the  1980:695).  (e.g.,  will  theory  s u b j u g a t i o n and c o n t i n u i n g  i n t o t h e modern e r a when e x p e n d i t u r e s risen  While each  and u n d e r d e v e l o p m e n t h a s i t s own  approach  and o t h e r  to e x p l a i n the problems  and d e v e l o p m e n t .  persistence of Indian poverty  has  Lummi,  resources.  T h e r e a r e many t h e o r i e s t h a t a t t e m p t associated  over  Indian  of those  development regions.  has  been  policy.  It the The  dependency certain  view  areas  attacked  capitalism  incorporated capitalism areas The  that  would  production eventually into  be  Marxist  incorporate  systems,  process  of growth  view  also  The t r a d i t i o n a l  and i n i t i a t i o n  separate  rather,  of capitalism  of  these  came  Dependency  towards  major  contribution  clarification underdevelopment  of  of  the  are part  modes  nations  system"  t h e two m a i n  production,  theory that  production  suggest  formations  i s t h e mode o f p r o d u c t i o n .  only  through  examination under  t h a t the proper  an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f the h i s t o r y  the c a p i t a l i s t  look  focus  stages  i n the  which  1980:200). has  A  been  the  development  and  Both  theory,  o f study  I t i s , says  take  place  system. e x c h a n g e and  of Third  World  Taylor  (1979),  of production  formations  mode o f p r o d u c t i o n ,  10  point  at the s t r u c t u r e of  o f modes  of s o c i a l  production  of a structure  branches o f dependency that  would  mode o f p r o d u c t i o n .  o f t h e same p r o c e s s .  the approaches  which  of  are not part of  (Veltmeyer  recognition  the  modes  however,  i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e g r o w t h o f c a p i t a l i s m as a w o r l d Of  areas  of  different  dependency  by  suggested  new  process  the c a p i t a l i s t  capitalist  have  attack  view  theorists,  represent  to  areas.  pre-capitalist  and u n d e r d e v e l o p e d  the world  they  under  Marxist  pre-capitalist  nor do t h e y  failed  penetration into Third  incorporates  down  out that  have  because  are, rather, part of the periphery  defines  they  of a developmental  system.  that developed  because  and t h e c a p i t a l i s t  the break  the c a p t a l i s t  "They  but,  by p o i n t i n g  the underdevelopment o f those  theorists.  as t h e g r o w t h  result  out  has caused  traditional  dependency  position  are not underdeveloped  incorporate  World  this  which  t h a t we w i l l  and t h e  have  come  begin to  understand how  how  a capitalist  modes.  against other explaining  A common  explanations  the i n t e r n a l  factors  involved  and  class  i n keeping  criticism  that  i s t h a t they  this  approach  do n o t go f a r enough i n  and, e s p e c i a l l y ,  structure  levies  which  also  segments o f a s o c i e t y  that  bears  they  on t h e  underdeveloped  dependent. By  concentrating  e x c l u s i v e l y on  however, c e r t a i n a s p e c t s dependent nature ignored. direct role  Since  of  various  productive adequately  agencies  addressed  i n the United o f the United i s an  that  purposes o f t h i s study Lummi  are f u l l y  are guaranteed  structure.  This  Lummi,  a  as  fully study  distinct  cannot  be  o f modes o f on t h e  s o c i e t y (see S i n c l a i r  1984),  to c l a r i f y  the debate.  as a working  into  the c l a s s  is directed political  For the  assumption  segment,  i n the dominant  at understanding and  that  s t r u c t u r e o f the  a s an u n d e r d e v l o p e d  incorporated  11  in  debate  Northwest Washington region, granted nevertheless  consideration  f i t into the c l a s s s t r u c t u r e .  i t i s taken  incorporated  government the  The c o n t r o l o f and a c c e s s t o  in capitalist  i s not the g o a l o f t h i s study  States  i s considerable  a s t o how f i s h e r f o l k  o f the  a r e under t h e  a t the a r t i c u l a t i o n  In a d d i t i o n , there  particularly  production,  S t a t e s w o u l d be  States  essential  Indians  by l o o k i n g  of fishers  of  i n the United  causes o f dependency.  production. position  tribes  tribes  domination  resources  t h e mode  o f i m p o r t a n c e t o an u n d e r s t a n d i n g  of Indian  Indian  political  determining  but  came t o e x i s t and  t h e p r e v i o u s l y dominant non-  d e p e n d e n c y and e x p l o i t a t i o n  ignore  the  of production  i t h a s come t o be d o m i n a n t o v e r  capitalist  It  mode  social  class  why t h e  entity,  are  underdeveloped base  and d e p e n d e n t ,  and d e s p i t e  recently  resource.  Conceivably  Lummi  the basis  with  not.  acquired  Indian  process  people  capitalist For that  into  the purposes of t h i s  study,  the view  or  developed  system  nations,  p e r i p h e r i e s or underdeveloped just  as  applicable  Underdeveloped developed.  regions  The  extraction,  to  are  principal  by t h e c e n t e r ,  such cause  but the s i t u a t i o n  exacerbated  by t h e f a c t  dependent Marshall tribes,  nations".  t o the Cherokee although  they  on t h e U n i t e d  political  existence. Indian  territory  and  assistance. retained developed  term,  that  needs. Indian  i n the i n the  perspective  developed other  nations.  regions  i s the  surplus created Indians  are  i n the  i s further  r e s e r v a t i o n s are "domestic a p p l i e d by C h i e f J u s t i c e  Federal  In t h i s  resources  and  that  Indian  some d e g r e e o f s o v e r e i g n t y , a r e  States  have  over  followed  of underdevelopment  first  Government  r e l a t i o n s h i p with given  or  This  rights  12  Federal of  their  for recognition to  resources,  relationship,  resources  for their  the  up t h e m a j o r i t y  i n exchange  Some " r e s o u r c e s ,  such  this  i n 1831, r e f e r s t o t h e f a c t  tribes  for their  because  for native  exercise  dependent  government  within  that Indian  This  be  development  Further,  o f the economic  periphery,  will  underdevelopment  nations. regions  domination  conflict.  produces and  o f an  of t r a d i t i o n a l  coming  capitalist  the  but i t has  i s the r e s u l t  and e c o n o m i c the r e s u l t  to that  provide  self-sufficiency situation  resource  access  could  modes o f p r o d u c t i o n  the world  centers  not merely  treaty-assured  resource  f o r economic  of p o l i t i c a l  and  a  guaranteed  the salmon  I t i s my p o s i t i o n t h a t t h i s  historical  is  despite  are rarely  and were  however, developed  has by  Indians  f o r Indians.  natural  resources  capitalist to  lack  system  since  politically, restricted  and as s u c h  Indians  Indian  tribes  Indians  have  been,  changes  self-sufficiency,  system.  I n d i a n t r i b e s have found  capital,  markets,  or o p p o r t u n i t y  to development through  and r a r e l y ,  and s t i l l  policy  have  the t r i b a l  interests.  resources  cannot  the massive c a p i t a l  advances,  displaced  restricted  Indian  the  resources  were  1  present  access to  without  access  t h e y own.  resources  Thus  reservation  developed  In the Puget  such Sound  o u t l a y s , and s u b s e q u e n t t e c h n o l o g i c a l  the  access  Indian  to create  under  and, t h e r e f o r e ,  u n i t , as a whole, b e n e f i t s .  although  the tendency has  themselves without  are these  In  further  Generally,  their  due  are, dominated  the use o f the r e s o u r c e s  i f ever,  of the  generated.  a r e d e p e n d e n t upon e x t e r n a l a g e n t s t o d e v e l o p  resources  fishery  surplus  and p r o b a b l y  and o t h e r  underdeveloped  has v a r i e d w i d e l y ,  economic  that  remain  resources.  not u t i l i z e d  fish,  influence  t o be e x p l o i t e d by o u t s i d e  g e n e r a l l y have  Indians  the  i n Indian  use o f I n d i a n  to resources  f o r resources  under  to the economic  periodic  Indian access  land, water, timber,  are u t i l i z e d  of access  addition,  been  Indian  small  operations  to the resource.  developed  but  and  increasingly  Thereby  t h e Lummi  the t r i b a l  tribe  became  underdeveloped. This  approach  provides  an e x p l a n a t i o n  r e a l i t i e s o f Lummi d o m i n a t i o n the  destruction of their  institutions, economy,  their  and t h e i r  by t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s  traditional  e x c l u s i o n from exploitation  f o r the h i s t o r i c a l  social  participation  by o u t s i d e r s .  13  government,  and  economic  i n the dominant  In  taking  a dependency  underdevelopment  we w i l l  factors  that  a t work  Specifically, economy  of  fishing  t h e Lummi  a r e under  the Northwest  never  provided  The  Lummi  the United  Federal  f o r t h e Lummi  not,  trust  in this  economic worked,  endeavor. both  The two  which  capitalist for  economy  when t h e i r  but  longer  (1978:50), use  labor  a situation no  their  t h e Lummi were  Lummi  utilization  resources.  type  o f study f o r  and a r e s e r v a t i o n  incorporated  into the  t o p r o v i d e raw m a t e r i a l s  Once t h e Lummi were i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o t h e  there  was no t u r n i n g b a c k ,  and r e s o u r c e s  were  where  they  able  to participate.  t h e Lummi own  an  factors  to i n h i b i t  the f u l l  community  system as commodity p r o d u c e r s  the processors.  dominant  in  through  focus  as  and e c o n o m i c  for this  As a f i s h e r f o l k  trust  fishing  Lummi p r e s e n t  community.  has a  encouraged  and s e p a r a t e l y ,  i s a fishing  relationship  government has  the f i s h e r y  Lummi  growth.  The F e d e r a l  natural resources, especially  reasons.  the  Lummi l a b o r a n d r e s o u r c e s  political  an i d e a l  especially  government  e c o n o m i c g r o w t h and s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y their  region,  their  relationship,  i n combination  o f dependency.  through  tribe.  Therefore,  and p o l i t i c a l  an avenue f o r e c o n o m i c  politically  States  Lummi  the i n f l u e n c e o f the dominant  with  responsibility  of  i n a state  Washington  t h e Lummi  are dominated  to understanding  the economic  s e c t o r , which o f t e n u t i l i z e d  but  with  examine both  keep  t h e Lummi  approach  burgeoning  fishing  resources,  nor c o n t r o l  that  needed,  were  they  were d e p e n d e n t on t h e d o m i n a n t  never  resources,  no l o n g e r  f o r i t meant  had a c c e s s  the s k i l l s  industry, over  To  their 14  to the c a p i t a l  needed  adequate own  paraphrase  Jorgensen needed t o  to participate  counsel  economy  i n the  t o use the f i s h e r y  resources.  As a t r i b e t h e  Lummi  are  subject  characteristic tribes  the  over  local  control these  internal  extends  f a r beyond  tribal  of Indian  there  g o v e r n m e n t and  States,  i s a myriad  Indian  government  Affairs.  the Congress of the United  of government  colonialism  The c o n t r o l t h e F e d e r a l  o f the Bureau  rests with  of  a l l Federally-recognized  States.  Indians  office  levels  aspects  of v i r t u a l l y  i n the United  exercises  to  Ultimately but between  of agencies  o f f i c e s , a l l o f w h i c h e x e r c i s e some c o n t r o l o v e r  and  the l i v e s of the  Lummi. The  government  existence,  intervenes  but i t s a c t i v i t i e s  exploitation  domination  agencies,  State-* and l o c a l  court  systems  which  agencies Indians  have  into  process.  working  a role  utilized  the dominant  At  over  instituting  policies  interests  in  the e x c l u s i o n o f Indian  i n shaping  Various  the past  Federal  and F e d e r a l  t h e manner i n  resource.  Federal  time  a c t i o n s and p o l i c i e s  one h u n d r e d  years  to a i d i n  the F e d e r a l  government  was  the l o c a l  government  was  and r e g u l a t i o n s  capitalist  and S t a t e  i n the  u n s u c c e s s f u l l y , t o "mainstream"  t h e Lummi,  of  i tplays  communities.  the salmon  society.  t h e same  to mainstream  Indian  o f modern-day  noticeable i nthe  and i n t h e r o l e  governments,  have worked, l a r g e l y  have been i n s t i t u t e d this  of Native  have a l l p l a y e d  t h e Lummi  aspect  are especially  of natural resources  continued  i n every  i n the Puget  that Sound  worked  t o the b e n e f i t  fishery  and r e s u l t e d  fishers.  3. T h r o u g h o u t t h e r e m a i n d e r o f t h i s work " s t a t e " w i t h a l o w e r c a s e " s " w i l l r e f e r t o a s y s t e m o f i n s t i t u t i o n s and " S t a t e " w i t h a c a p i t a l "S" w i l l r e f e r s p e c i f i c a l l y t o t h e S t a t e o f W a s h i n g t o n . I n o r d e r t o r e m a i n c o n s i s t e n t , " F e d e r a l " , when r e f e r r i n g t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s F e d e r a l Government, w i l l a l s o be c a p i t a l i z e d .  15  The force, The  s t a t e , as a system o f i n s t i t u t i o n s ,  branches o f which  relationship  complex. and  branches, that  nations", Federal Indian They  have  Indian  their  tribes  each  with  exercise  tribes  primary  agency  —  position although  They  the  are just  and t h e i r  exercises  nature  of this  a  they  o f them.  they  as " q u a s i -  Indian  Affairs. system.  do e x e r c i s e although  do  implementation  States,  that  each  Control  w h i c h h a s e x c l u s i v e power o v e r  of  control,  development that  concern  Barsh  the Bureau o f Indian and t h e S t a t e s  and  Affairs,  form  a  triad  I t i s the  and d i r e c t s  are not a part of t h i s of the three  they  such as  u s e and  resources.  controls  some  (e.g., t a x a t i o n ) .  r e s e r v a t i o n Indians.  The t r i b e s lobby  of  of resource  use o f n a t u r a l  interaction  may  exist  few o f t h e m a t t e r s  c o n t r o l over  reality.  independent  and  systems o f  i n the Federal  that States  (1980) have d i s c u s s e d how  which  although  complex  are not States,  problems  Congress of the United  political  extremely  t h a t many o f t h e p r o b l e m s s t e m ,  concerning  These  tribes  Henderson  position  of jurisdiction,  problems  Indian  is  another.  legislative,  States  the Bureau  a r e i n an u n u s u a l  this  programs.  one  o f p o l i t i c a l power comes t h r o u g h a  some o f t h e same p o w e r s  problems  with  i n the United  source  sovereignty.  i s from  the s t a t e  executive,  o f those  are not f o r e i g n nations, of  with  with  the s t a t e c o n s i s t s of n a t i o n a l , State,  and each  government  degree  in conflict  shape d e c i s i o n s and a c t i o n s .  Although  the  context,  r e g i o n a l governments,  control  and  t h e Lummi  In t h i s  judicial  It  are often  i sa multi-faceted  Indian  t r i a d and  they  have  no p o w e r  ultimately rests  with  Congress  tribes.  16  "But t h e p r i c e  of control  is high: (Barsh  formal  poverty,  has  transfer  government  The  Indians  The  o f State States  prefer  not, of course,  just  benefit control.  limited  Looking  of Indian  by  Northeast, owns l e s s percent  States  5 percent  of the land  the Census  1985:196).  g o v e r n m e n t owns 29.1 p e r c e n t such areas forests,  but Federal  special  fishery  as m i l i t a r y  resources  In  land  and  resources.  especially  geographical  i n the f i r s t  is a  The v a s t States.  regions  the F e d e r a l  and  dichotomy  i n the Western  —  the  government  three  b u t 60  (United States  Bureau  Washington  State  the  Federal  o f the land i n the State o u t r i g h t ,  c o n t r o l extends here,  1980:223).  and  r e s e r v a t i o n s , n a t i o n a l parks,  importance  action are  Indian  land  land  o f the land i n the Western region  be  are examples of  Federal/State  are also  M i d w e s t , S o u t h , and West — than  As w i l l  responsibility for  to Indian  as f o u r  i s to  are r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  moving  This  i n which  complications  i n the Western States.  reservations  a t the United  isolation,  and H e n d e r s o n  use and c o n t r o l o f F e d e r a l l y - o w n e d  majority  the  of,c o n g r e s s i o n a l  to minimize  issue, particularly  the Federal  to the States.  however,  Indians"  One m a n n e r  these  (Barsh  action,  out of Federal  sensitive  of  with  "parameters  and c a n d i r e c t l y  resources  of  groups.  by  and t e r m i n a t i o n  and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y "  parameters  revenue.  The  has d e a l t  below, a l l o t m e n t  process.  supremacy  is  i s complicated  some o f t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  demonstrated  The  f o r Indians  The r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  and r e s i s t a n c e o f t r i b a l  Federal  this  f o r services to t r i b a l  and H e n d e r s o n 1980:223).  government  the  responsibility  over  even  Indian  further,  and n a t i o n a l f o r example,  r e s e r v a t i o n s and  over  t h a t a r e n o t bound t o t h e l a n d .  There are twenty-six  Indian 17  r e s e r v a t i o n s i n Washington  State  and  they  (3.2  represent  million  7.6  acres  reservations,  percent  of  42  especially  the  million  total  acreage  acres).  State Indian  and,  utilization,  in addition, treaty  retain Federally-assured o f f - r e s e r v a t i o n  rights  certain  time  they  the  Furthermore  i n terms of resource  the mouths o f r i v e r s ,  resources  of  i n Western Washington, are l o c a t e d i n  areas of extreme importance example  of  were  using  at  the  for  Indians  to p o r t i o n s  the  treaties  of  were  negotiated. Between  the  responsibility  and  c o n t r o l of  of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y circumstances impact  on  Federal  and  change.  Indian  use  and  State  resources  are  governments shared  c o n t r o l changes through These changes  of  in policy  lawmakers.  complicated  the  The  the  time may  the  as  i n f l u e n c e of  Bureau of Indian A f f a i r s  Bureau  degree  specific  have a  decided  r e s o u r c e s even though t h a t impact  have been a c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f the by  but  both  may  not  This situation of  Indian  is  Affairs.  i s answerable to Congress, not  the  States. C o n g r e s s can a f f o r d t o respond f a v o r a b l y to agency [Bureau of Indian A f f a i r s ] requests. C e r t a i n other aspects of I n d i a n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a r e , however, p a r t i c u l a r l y o b n o x i o u s to the s t a t e s . Reservations reduce tax bases already weakened by federal t a x a t i o n , and c r e a t e demands f o r uncompensated s e r v i c e s . T h e y t i e up r e s o u r c e s t h a t c o u l d energize s t a t e economic growth. Indian programs are therefore particularly v u l n e r a b l e t o a t t a c k s by state government. P o l i c y s e e s a w s b e t w e e n p l e a s i n g t h e b u r e a u and n o t d i s p l e a s i n g t h e s t a t e s ( B a r s h and H e n d e r s o n 1980:224). The without which  are  i n a no-win  situation.  the Bureau of Indian A f f a i r s is plausible  dislike lives  tribes  the  but  not  i n t e r f e r e n c e of  they put  up  with  they  They  would cease  necessarily true.  the Bureau o f  believe to  exist,  Although  Indian A f f a i r s  in  i t because the p e r c e i v e d a l t e r n a t i v e s 18  that  they their seem  so much w o r s e .  The Bureau o f I n d i a n A f f a i r s ,  depends upon t r i b a l  Indians  were t o become t o t a l l y w o u l d be no r e a s o n even  though  long  as  the  self-sufficient  bureaucracy,  itself.  I f Indians  and s e l f - r e g u l a t i n g ,  f o r the Bureau o f Indian A f f a i r s  tribal  Bureau of Indian  to perpetuate  as a  self-sufficiency  Affairs,  Bureau  of  Indian  to exist.  i s the u l t i m a t e  that goal  will  never  Affairs  there  goal  So  o f the  be a t t a i n e d a s  is directing  i t s  fulfillment. The and  manner  interact  i n which  with  these  Indian  courts  generally  Federal  government  agencies  generally interpret o f State  governmental  reservations  Federal  benefit  three  uphold  i s complex  the t r u s t  has f o r I n d i a n s .  citizens.  and e n a c t  bodies and  affect  confusing.  responsibility  State  courts  and  the  State  r e g u l a t o r y measures t o the  The c o n t r o l o f p r o d u c t i v e  resources,  a s p e r c e i v e d by F e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t , t h e I n d i a n s , a n d t h e B u r e a u of  Indian  of  the State.  faced one  Affairs,  Therein  i n attempting  hundred  years.  group, l i k e  i s often lies  i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n with much o f t h e p r o b l e m  to u t i l i z e  A politically  T h i s was e v i d e n t  incorporated  into  even  now  that  been  resolved. Although early  reservation  the dominant  lands  were  their  economy  t h e Lummi have b e e n i t was  resource  over  dependent  resources  to their  i n contact  not u n t i l  allotted  19  and i t r e m a i n s  of treaty fishing  after  with  i n severalty, that  first  evident  r i g h t s has  whites  1884,  have  the past  f r o m t h e t i m e t h e Lummi were  the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n  1800s,  t h e Lummi  and e c o n o m i c a l l y  t h e Lummi, c a n n o t u t i l i z e  own b e n e f i t .  the  the salmon  the perception  when  since the  t h e Lummi  became f u l l y to  this  market  integrated into  time  t h e Lummi  participated  economy and e n t e r e d  government,  b u t i t was  commercialized subsistence salmon  that  the dominant economic system.  into  treaties  not u n t i l  t h e Lummi  economy.  i n some a c t i v i t i e s  abandoned  act  the f i s h e r y  as commodity  fishing and  technology  was  and  non-Indians  readily  adapted  runs  made t h e  As f i s h i n g  technology  advanced  also  through  their  regulation.  lives,  Thus,  t h e Lummi  Through the e a r l y but d e c r e a s i n g  access  reservation  and a t t e m p t s  Washington,  traditionally  fished  Federal control  continued  Any f i s h i n g  non-Indians,  and  the  by t h e Lummi,  20  over  g r o u p by 1900.  to fish  carried  access  was b e c o m i n g t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t of  was  by t h e c a n n e r i e s and  salmon,  o u t was on t h e  were made, by t h e Lummi,  among  s e r v i c e s no  r e g u l a t o r y m e a s u r e s hampered  r e s e r v a t i o n i n h a b i t a n t had e q u a l  fishery State  increasing  and i n c r e a s i n g  Meanwhile,  their  more  access to the resource  1900s t h e Lummi  of the resource.  resource.  attracted  were a d e p e n d e n t , d o m i n a t e d  utilization  every  found  intervention  with  endeavors,  locations  I n some c a s e s , t h e i r  State  well-developed  value of the salmon resource  direct  of the  and f i s h i n g  l o n g e r needed.  by  A  to commercial  t o t h e i n d u s t r y , t h e Lummi  restricted  traditional  t h e Lummi were i n a p o s i t i o n t o  a d e s i r a b l e labor force.  the increasing  became  t h e Lummi.  f o r the canneries.  knowledge o f the f i s h  Lummi  their  States  a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and l e g i s l a t i v e  developed,  producers  fishery  the development  c o n t r o l o f the U n i t e d S t a t e s government over As  of the  the United  the salmon  Coinciding with  i n d u s t r y was i n c r e a s i n g  with  Prior  North  t o ensure  to this  shrinking  the commercial single  that  salmon  i n d u s t r y i nthe  Puget  Sound  area,  became t h e most p r o d u c t i v e i n  the  State. Technological  gap  change  and i n n o v a t i o n  b e t w e e n t h e Lummi and n o n - I n d i a n  continued  fishers,  t o widen the  and r e - e n t r y t o t h e  c o m m e r c i a l s a l m o n f i s h e r y by t h e Lummi became more d i f f i c u l t . a  result  t h e Lummi  subjugation,  unable  means o f m a k i n g During Faced  with  Lummi  but because  of fish  were unable,  with  t o remain  to change  they  of  poverty  and  and w i t h o u t  any o t h e r  was s u d d e n l y  reversed.  living.  War I I t h i s  shortages  state  to fish commercially  a decent  World  in a  situation  producers  the processors  be r e i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t h e s a l m o n  place,  war,  persisted  As  were p r o v i d e d  the dramatic  competitive.  fishery. with  urged  that  A change  took  outmoded  gear  they  t e c h n o l o g i c a l change a f t e r the  Technological  the face o f the salmon  fishery,  innovation  continued  and a s t h e s a l m o n  began t o show n o t i c e a b l e d e p l e t i o n , I n d i a n  fishing  was once  runs again  curtailed. During government Bureau  t h e 1930s and 1940s brought  of Indian  periods,  Lummi  technological  t h e Lummi  Affairs control  Bureau control  and  note  was  Indians  effectively As  use o f  and e c o n o m i c change  Affairs  t h e Lummi  t o move  t o urban  under  resources  i n the salmon  tribal Federal  historical  was  shaped  by  i n d u s t r y and t h e  t o t h e S t a t e and F e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t s .  brought  in policy  ever-increasing  and i n c r e a s i n g dependency.  the "Relocation  of a  i n previous  t h e 1950s t h e c o n t i n u i n g c h a n g e s  of Indian over  more  control.  r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f t h e Lummi Through  the establishment  Program",  areas  where  21  which they  urged  could  find  o f the  government Of  special  reservation jobs.  This  program  was  entered  i n t o by a s i g n i f i c a n t  coincided  with  the  early  1950s.  the  r e s e r v a t i o n i n t h e 1960s,  increasing as  a  the r a p i d  d e c l i n e o f Lummi  With the g r a d u a l  for  economic  to u t i l i z e  by p e r i o d i c  wage l a b o r and  transfer  confronted Eventually  the  over  access  salmon  a court suit  the Indians  resource.  over  of  sustained remained  When  the  court  o f salmon,  t h e Lummi  by  developing  the  processors.  their  uneven.  Fully  "poverty  level",  percent  the f i s h i n g  individuals,  of  that this  tribes,  among t h e m  the  of Washington,  and  into  a  were e n t i t l e d  t o 50  percent  once  Lummi  again  but t h i s  22  themselves by  development  fishers  rapidly has  been  r e m a i n below  of the resource  the  i s harvested  In the ten year  period  and c o n t r o l o f t h e  w i t h i n t h e hands o f a few  use c a p i t a l - i n t e n s i v e i s both  found  responded  r i g h t s d e c i s i o n the access  control  resource.  treaty  o f the p o p u l a t i o n .  who  salmon  tribes  that  has become c o n c e n t r a t e d  those  the  Indian  determined  t h e Lummi  f o r a l a r g e share  a s m a l l percentage  resource  The  commercial f l e e t ,  90  State  a c c e s s , c o n t r o l , and management o f  the h a r v e s t  suggests  Partly  and t h e S t a t e expanded  Washington  salmon  avenues  i n t e r v e n e d on t h e I n d i a n s ' b e h a l f .  of Western  after  with  resource  t h e Lummi  a g a i n s t the S t a t e  fishers  needed  to  Western Washington  Federal/State controversy  by  payments,  State  The c o n t r o v e r s y b e t w e e n  of  failed.  s e v e r a l Washington  thirteen  entered  Indian  faced  Other  1960s,  the U n i t e d S t a t e s government  the  were  and p o v e r t y - s t r i c k e n .  the l a t e  Lummi,  opportunity i n  the salmon  development.  were a t t e m p t e d , b u t l a r g e l y  In  for i t  r e t u r n o f many r e l o c a t e e s t o  development  dependent  fishing  t h e Lummi a g a i n  n e e d s , y e t were u n a b l e  basis  number o f Lummi,  political  gear.  This  study  and e c o n o m i c and  has  resulted  i n a s e g m e n t o f t h e Lummi  political the  p o s t i o n to e x e r c i s e c o n t r o l over  salmon The  approach  dependency  the t r i b a l  their  share of  resource.  summarized.  into  population utilizing  t o be f o l l o w e d i n t h i s s t u d y c a n be v e r y s i m p l y  The p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n i s the d i r e c t  the dominant  result  society  The  Lummi  were u s e d  but  their  community  and s e p a r a t e  when needed a s c o m m o d i t y  remained This  u n d e r d e v e l o p m e n t and  o f t h e i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f t h e Lummi  as a d i s t i n c t  as l a b o r  underdevelopment.  o f Lummi  a peripheral  situation  segment. producers,  one s u f f e r i n g  i s exacerbated  from  by t h e  r e l a t i o n s h i p t h e Lummi h a v e w i t h t h e F e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t .  This  study  time  will  examine  the process  of this  as an a i d t o u n d e r s t a n d i n g how t h i s factors  a r e a t work t h a t p e r m i t  development  situation  through  came a b o u t  and what  i t to continue.  M e t h o d s and O b j e c t i v e s Eric  Wolf  (1982) h a s s u g g e s t e d  the p r e s e n t world  u n l e s s we t r a c e  that  we  shall  the growth o f the world  economy and t h e c o u r s e o f c a p i t a l i s t d e v e l o p m e n t . theory  of  informed,  that  a n d we  theory o f that change  growth must  unfolding  the l i v e s  writing  of  in local  t h i s approach  " e t h n o h i s t o r y " , which  to understand  to relate  development  o f people  In a n t h r o p o l o g y of  and d e v e l o p m e n t be a b l e  until  not understand  that  We must have a is  both  to processes that  23  and  a f f e c t and  areas. may be i n c l u d e d  recently  explorers  historically  t h e h i s t o r y and  i n the f i e l d  has p r i m a r i l y  aspects o f p r e - c o n t a c t Indian groups early  market  government  been  used  through the  agents.  The  ethnohistorical ethnographic modern-day  data.  In  do  order  the p o l i t i c a l  and  much  to  reservation Indians  understand their  approach> can  more  than  understand in  the  economic  the  United  factors  supplement  situation  States  we  t h a t have  of  must shaped  societies. Anthropology and h i s t o r y a r e b r o u g h t t o g e t h e r i n t h e field of ethnohistory. H i s t o r i c a l e t h n o l o g y , as i t i s s o m e t i m e s c a l l e d , combines a c u l t u r a l a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l t h e o r e t i c a l framework w i t h h i s t o r i o g r a p h i c r e s e a r c h procedures f o r the s t u d y o f c u l t u r e and c u l t u r e p r o c e s s ( S p o r e s 1 9 8 0 : 5 7 5 ) . We  Change  assume does  that societies  not  necessarily  d i s s o l u t i o n of a s o c i a l less  "real"  Fenton  has  than  may  change  reduce  system.  have  identity  A modern I n d i a n  the p r e - c o n t a c t s o c i e t y  pointed  and  continuity. nor  lead  society  i t descended  is  from.  to no As  out:  There i s a romantic f a l l a c y t h a t Indian c u l t u r e s changed l i t t l e b e f o r e the coming of the w h i t e s . Until recently i t was s h a r e d e q u a l l y by h i s t o r i a n s and a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s . Many o f us have been g u i l t y o f s e e k i n g a c u l t u r a l s t a b i l i t y b a s e d o n a p r e - C o l u m b i a n c u l t u r e t h a t was m o r e o r l e s s s t a t i c (Fenton 1978:924). Change, whether brought other  n a t i v e groups,  societies  less  models of  culture  about  recent  or Europeans,  worthy may  about  of be  our  internally,  by  i n f l u e n c e of  d o e s n o t make N a t i v e  study.  Overconcern  with  c o u n t e r p r o d u c t i v e , a s Adams  "acculturation"  Indian  s t u d i e s of Northwest Coast  static  observed societies  which: ... t e n d t o be d i s a p p o i n t i n g b e c a u s e t h e y s o o f t e n p r e s e n t t h e I n d i a n s i n a " d e c u l t u r a t e d " p r e s e n t w i t h no s e n s e f o r t h e s t r u c t u r e s o f i n t e r a c t i o n w h i c h c a n be o b s e r v e d i n a n y s o c i e t y , not simply those with a b o r i g i n a l t r a i t s (Adams 1981:382). The to  present  study,  overcome  such  adopting bias  an  and  ethnohistorical present  24  the  approach,  Lummi  attempts  society  as  a  continuum people  —  a constantly  who  changing,  are d i s t i n c t  today  purposes o f t h i s  study  best  Hickerson.  defined  by  constantly  as t h e y  the goals  were  adapting  group o f  i n 1790.  For the  of e t h n o h i s t o r i c a l research  were  E t h n o h i s t o r i a n s ... a p p l y t h e m e t h o d s o f h i s t o r i o g r a p h y t o the c u l t u r e s i n which they a r e i n t e r e s t e d i n l i g h t o f t h e i r g e n e r a l a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l e x p e r i e n c e ; t o gauge change t h a t h a s t a k e n p l a c e i n them and t o comprehend t h e h i s t o r i c a l f a c t s i n v o l v e d i n and d e t e r m i n i n g change ( H i c k e r s o n 1 9 7 0 : 7 ) . The periods  data  discussed  Reservation Lummi  t o be p r e s e n t e d  Lummi"  society  i n a s many examines  The s h a r i n g  for  their  exploitation  discussion  o f the impact  Both the p e r i o d included  study  chapters.  what  as i t r e l a t e s  resource.  are  in this  we  fall  neatly  Chapter  know  I I , "The P r e -  o f the p r o t o - h i s t o r i c  to the u t i l i z a t i o n  of productive will  be  resources  outlined  o f Europeans  into s i x  and  o f the salmon  and t h e methods followed  i n the e a r l y  s e c t i o n , because  i t i s concluded  until  the reservation  Chapter  I I I , "The  lands  were  allotted  years  that the  r e s e r v a t i o n s y s t e m was n o t a d o m i n a n t f a c t o r i n t h e l i f e Lummi  a  historic era.  o f t h e t r e a t i e s and t h e e a r l y r e s e r v a t i o n  in this  by  of the  i n severalty i n  1884.  Commercial salmon  industry  this period economy Certain  Salmon  Fishery",  o f Puget  as p r i m a r y aspects  t h e Lummi  particular  and  Sound.  producers  of the state  the mechanisms from  of the  the development  o f t h e Lummi  i n the salmon  involved  Carlisle  of the  Of p a r t i c u l a r i m p o r t a n c e  fishing  i n the subsequent  industry. Packing  industry. i n order exclusion  The h i s t o r y  Company,  during  i n t o the market  r e l a t i o n s h i p are discussed  the f i s h i n g  processor,  the Development  examines  was t h e i n c o r p o r a t i o n  to understand of  Lummi  o f one  i s discussed  in  order  t o understand  processing  s e c t o r and t h e Lummi.  Chapter discusses  t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n one s e g m e n t o f t h e  I V , "The E r a o f C o m m e r c i a l  the penetration  Salmon  Fishing",  o f m o n o p o l y c a p i t a l i s m and t h e g r o w t h  of t e c h n o l o g i c a l s o p h i s t i c a t i o n i n the salmon i n d u s t r y .  The  of  and t h e  the state,  Washington  as e x p r e s s e d  State  through  the court  system  role  D e p a r t m e n t o f F i s h e r i e s , was t o squeeze t h e  Lummi o u t o f t h e c o m m e r c i a l a s p e c t s  o f t h e f i s h e r y j u s t a s i t was  becoming e c o n o m i c a l l y  The Lummi w e r e  destitute to  during  this  lucrative. period  an o n - r e s e r v a t i o n ,  a s t h e Lummi  fishers  p r i m a r i l y subsistence  subsistence Chapter  such  as l o g g i n g  and f a r m  labor  were  confined  fishery  and were  form.  Seasonal  u n a b l e t o f i n d a d e q u a t e wage l a b o r i n any o t h e r occupations  economically  supplemented the  activities. V, "The I n d i a n New  Deal",  examines the increased  domination o f the F e d e r a l government over Indian r e s e r v a t i o n s . The  most  Indian and  Federal  Reorganization  constitutions.  during an  important  a c t i o n was t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n  A c t , which This  established tribal  period  continued  past  w h i c h t i m e t h e Lummi f i s h e r y e x p e r i e n c e d  i n c r e a s e d need f o r f i s h e r s .  of the  governments  World  War I I ,  a revival  The f i r s t Lummi p u r s e s e i n e  due t o fleet  developed d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d , coming t o employ a l a r g e p o r t i o n o f t h e Lummi m a l e l a b o r and  fishing  technology  were once a g a i n Chapter discuss  force.  As F e d e r a l p o l i c y s h i f t e d once  went i n t o a n o t h e r g r o w t h s p u r t ,  squeezed o u t o f the salmon  V I , "From T e r m i n a t i o n  t h e "pendulum" o f F e d e r a l  26  again  t h e Lummi  fishery.  to Self-Determination",  will  I n d i a n p o l i c y and t h e r e s u l t a n t  effects  on t h e a b i l i t y  fishery.  o f t h e Lummi  The r o l e o f t h e c o u r t s  participate  i n the salmon  t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the salmon  i n d e f i n i n g t h e Lummi r i g h t t o  fishery  will  be c o n t r a s t e d  e f f o r t s o f the State of Washington to block Federal  Government  the on  impact o f the c o u r t  S t a t e s y_;_ S t a t e  The g r o w t h o f t h e Lummi  will  be d e t a i l e d , a s w i l l  face  i n t h e near  future.  over-capacity  fishery.  D e c i s i o n and Beyond", w i l l  case United  t h e Lummi c o m m u n i t y .  of  i n t e r v e n t i o n by t h e  i n t h e management o f t h e s a l m o n  C h a p t e r V I I , "The B o l d t  fishing  examined,  as  fleet  will  The r e a s o n s f o r t h e g r o w t h be  look a t  o f Washington  the dilemmas the f i s h e r y  w i l l  with the  likely  to the point  w i l l  possible  the  information  alternatives. Chapter presented  VIII, and  perspective  the c o n c l u s i o n s ,  discuss  used  the  will  review  relevance  and p o s s i b l e  of  the  theoretical  i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e Lummi  case  study.  Sources o f Data The  data  this  study  i s based  sources:  ethnographic,  archival,  The  ethnographic  data  although place were other  come  i n proper  the Saanich  British  were p r i m a r i l y f r o m  Klallam  (Gunther  (Collins  1974);  comparative  data  a r e a l context.  (Jenness  Columbia  Coast  1927);  from  n.d.); Salish  and t h e Twana  main  27  (1951)  g r o u p s were used t o  The s u p p l e m e n t a r y  (Barnett (Duff  (Elmendorf  (1969;  Suttles  t h e Songhees,  the Stalo  by J o r g e n s e n  three  and f i e l d w o r k .  s u p p l e m e n t a r y d a t a on n e i g h b o r i n g  t h e Lummi from  upon  Saanich,  and  1938; 1955); t h e  1952); 1960).  1980) were  data  used.  the  Skagit  In a d d i t i o n  The  archival  Washington System;  State  data  come  Archives;  and t h e P r o v i n c i a l  from  three  the United Archives  main  States  sources;  Federal  of B r i t i s h  the  Archive  Columbia.  The  P r o v i n c i a l A r c h i v e s o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a were p r i m a r i l y used t o provide they  information  on t h e f u r t r a d e  house the m a n u s c r i p t s  foreign  power  Indian A f f a i r s , t h e Lummi  and p u b l i s h e d  i n the Northwest  Hudson's Bay Company.  during  The r e c o r d s  especially  Center  records  that pertain s p e c i f i c a l l y  and as  placed  Archives  that  Point  some m a t e r i a l s  in Seattle.  rather  than  Federal Archives  were  the B r i t i s h  o f the Bureau o f  office  under  which  Many o f t h e F e d e r a l  t o t h e Lummi were d u p l i c a t e d i n t h e e a r l y 1970s, and  accessed  the F e d e r a l  a t t h e Lummi  Archives.  and R e c o r d s C e n t e r  some o f t h e m a t e r i a l s  time,  a t t h e F e d e r a l A r c h i v e s and  i n t h e Lummi T r i b a l A r c h i v e s  a result  works o f the dominant  the E v e r e t t area  Records  1827 t o 1860, a s  and a c c o u n t s  a r e subsumed, a r e housed a t Sand  era, circa  Tribal  Fortunately,  the  i n S e a t t l e has c a t a l o g s o f  a v a i l a b l e i n the N a t i o n a l  Archives.  Some  d a t a , e s p e c i a l l y o n t h e I n d i a n New D e a l , w e r e o b t a i n e d  from the  National  D.C. b u t  Archives  and R e c o r d s  t h i s was a c c o m p l i s h e d fishing  through the m a i l .  i n Washington, Historical  and t h e e a r l y c o m m e r c i a l s a l m o n f i s h e r y  published  reports  Fisheries.  These  of the United reports  Records D e p o s i t o r y , in  Service  Wilson  d a t a on Lummi  were f o u n d  i n the  States  Bureau  of  Commercial  were o b t a i n e d  f o r me  by t h e F e d e r a l  L i b r a r y , Western Washington U n i v e r s i t y  Bellingham. The  Washington  State Archives  accounts  and r e c o r d s  o f the development  28  i n Olympia  were  useful for  of the commercial  salmon  fishery  of Puget  statistics, pertaining State of on  Sound.  the l e g i s l a t i v e t o the f i s h e r y  and t h e I n d i a n  fisheries,  the  University  Service Indian  Archives  reports  other  and  documents  North  was o b t a i n e d  The N o r t h w e s t  i n Bellingham Puget  from  of Washington,  also provided  Sound  fish  the Northwest  the National  i n Olympia,  branch data  traps.  In  Collection at  Marine  Fisheries  the Northwest  and t h e h o l d i n g s  of  individuals. fieldwork  i f there  member  of  Residence  undertaken  i s a usual  t h e Lummi  continuous  seven  since  years  obtained intense  much  was n o t o f t h e u s u a l that  non-Indian  with  can  become.  two i n t e r r u p t i o n s , h a s  been  i n the employ  one y e a r  College  I am a s much a  as t r i b a l  o f the  historian  o f F i s h e r i e s (now  Lummi  b o t h a s an i n s t r u c t o r and an a d m i n i s t r a t o r .  the course  excursion.  pieces of information were  a  I have  of eight years,  utilized  of everyday Field  been i n the h a b i t o f keeping  conducted,  as  reservation, 1971.  study  I suppose  of the information  during field  kind.  a t t h e Lummi  Community C o l l e g e ) Therefore  for this  community  on t h e Lummi  Lummi T r i b e a t o t a l and  were r e v i e w e d .  F i s h e r i e s Commission  The  been  and v a r i o u s  i n S e a t t l e , t h e Whatcom C o u n t y C o u r t h o u s e ,  private  kind,  fisheries  and t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n W a s h i n g t o n  especially  material  State  records,  tribes,  the Washington State  addition  The  life  a j o u r n a l which  My  study  was  and n o t d u r i n g  any  n o t e s were never  t h a t were o f u s e h e r e ,  informal.  in this  Lummi  kept.  I have  i n c l u d e s b i t s and  but i n t e r v i e w s ,  friends  when  and a f f i n e s a r e *  obviously  uncomfortable  and  i n most  cases  out  of place.  being  note-taking  A course  interviewed or tape  I taught 29  i n a formal  recording  would  a t t h e Lummi C o l l e g e  situation, have  been  for five  years  entitled  many  "Indian  of the issues  Indian  New  Deal,  Determination, classroom  The  lives,  Lummi  Lummi this  and T r i b a l  with  Relocation  and t h e f i s h i n g  me  on t h e i r  especially  Indian  tribe,  views  and  rights  (ranging  i n i t s progress.  Indian In  i n age f r o m  these  o n o f my  affected  members  have  fishery.  body  intention  of the  to  taken  Self-  18 t o 60)  policies  the governing  conduct  an  members i n g e n e r a l were aware o f t h i s  and  o p i n i o n s on o c c a s i o n .  their  Lummi g e t t o g e t h e r salmon that  fishing.  the conversation  Consequently  were o f u s e t o my  to others  that I cannot  active  I n a d d i t i o n , members o f t h e Lummi  C o m m i s s i o n and t r i b a l volunteered  invariably  I was p r i v y  understanding  Whenever  the  informal  and t h e p o s t - B o l d t  Council,  and s e v e r a l c o u n c i l  especially  controversy.  o f how  early  study,  Termination,  relocation  Business  Government" b r o u g h t o u t  in this  students  was i n f o r m e d  research,  interest  dealt  d i s c u s s i o n s my  enlightened their  Policy  Fish study  two o r more  steers  towards  t o many d i s c u s s i o n s  t h e Lummi  fishery  and a l s o  use i n c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f the p r i v a c y o f  i n d i v i d u a l s who o f f e r e d t h e i r  comments i n t r u s t .  30  CHAPTER I I THE  PRE-RESERVATION LUMMI  Introduction Before political  concentrating  elements  that  t h i s chapter  contact  and p o s t - c o n t a c t  will  family  fishing.  i n these  had of  I t was  resources  was v e s t e d  resources  an o v e r v i e w of  s t a t u s was  be made  that the  of  economically  in certain  reef  types o f  netting  and  weir  that ownership o f  Although  the procurement that  individual  to the resource  the stewardship  on b e h a l f  of productive  enhanced.  Washington  i n the context area.  to v a r i o u s elements o f white self-sufficient.  were  will  resource  t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e p r o t o - h i s t o r i c Lummi w i l l be  the Western  lands  to the  to  o f an i n d i v i d u a l ,  Through  o f t h e Lummi  establishment  pertains  of fishing  t o manage a c c e s s  k i n group.  Following  i.e.,  evident.  i n the c o n t r o l  individual  that  consisted  two t y p e s  up  and  what we know o f t h e p r e -  cooperated  fishing,  economic  t h e Lummi  The c a s e  that  was most  the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y a larger  society  society  units  salmon  site  draw t o g e t h e r  Lummi  labor-intensive  productive  affected  and d i s p e n s a t i o n .  pre-reservation independent  the introduced  have  present,  procurement  on  This  Although  society,  continued  into  of the r e s e r v a t i o n .  allotted  i n 1884  o f the e a r l y  they  Lummi  were  remained  the f i r s t Not u n t i l  d i d t h e Lummi  development introduced  s e p a r a t e and  years  after  the  the r e s e r v a t i o n begin  to  undergo  i  dramatic point  change  and a d j u s t m e n t  the c o n t r o l  government through The  exercised  to the dominant over  t h e Lummi  the Bureau o f I n d i a n A f f a i r s  Bureau o f Indian A f f a i r s  society. by was  the  this  Federal  strengthened.  i n t r o d u c e d a new e c o n o m i c 31  At  system,  farming,  and  exercise  increasingly  and  new  activities  Prior  to  'elalang, of  the  to  resided  in  Islands  and  various  by  and  began  everyday  to  life  mouth  of  ratified  few  the  were  actually  establishment  so of  and  area,  the  Although  in certain own  same the  types  of  stores  "Lummi"))  of  Elliott members  the  Lummi  1954:98).  the  travelling These  seasonally  families, were a  to  were houses  houses.  In  this  usually  economically house  procurement  might  activities  separately  G e n e r a l l y , w i t h i n the v i l l a g e ,  Juan  villages  within  cooked  Lummi  San  independent  similar  resource  Point  the  after  r e s e r v a t i o n , the  individual  and  to  River  to  throughout  families  moved  Later,  move  s t r u c t u r e but  32  swelax,  Treaty  economically  and  leqamas,  Nooksack  sites.  a set of  adjacent  word  to  of  and  i n 1859.  the  k i n s h i p to other, to  the  (Suttles  villages  procurement  shared  their  the  urged  did  mainland  (e.g.  the  i t was  bands  descendants  (s'emas) w e r e  and  politically  who  1951a:494).  the  Samish  1855  bonds o f  kept  and  by  Archipelago  comes  signed  adjacent  independent. cooperate  which  Lummi  "house" r e f e r s  related,  Juan  villages  semi-permanent  of  San  the  resource  composed  they  at  Nooksack  Prior  study  the  i s populated  of  R e s e r v a t i o n , but  united  religion,  c o n t r o l s over  today  the  (from  Semiahmoo  Reservation  the  of  Lummi  xwlolamas  22 J a n u a r y  of  and  Lummi.  Several  representatives on  the  inhabitants of  mainland.  Lummi  restrictive  Lummi c o m m u n i t y  former  parts  of  of education  Contact  The the  concepts  (Suttles  several households  formed  a  community  appropriately testimony ct.cl.  ten  i n 1927  530,  nineteen  termed  604  a  The  which  "household  (1934))  at  the  totaling  "compartments"  what was  sorts,  Barnett  cluster."  h e a r i n g s (Duwamish,  "clusters",  t r e a t y was  of  time  According  of  the  treaty  family  of  units)  each.  t o become t h e Lummi  Lummi  a r e one  of several  the language  conventional. Semiahmoo, who  as  groups  resided  speaking a Coast  in  the  area  Harbour,  Victoria  the S t r a i t  the K l a l l a m ,  dialectal  language It these  and  Salish  1951a:6),  has  become  includes  resided  who  east  the  sides of  t h e Songhees, Bay,  Bay), D i s c o v e r y  who  Esquimalt  Island  resided  along  f r o m Hoko R i v e r  and  i n the  the area  the south shore of  to Port Discovery,  on t h e s o u t h e r n San J u a n  I s l a n d ; and  I s l a n d s , Samish  With  and the Bay,  the e x c e p t i o n of  d i f f e r e n c e s a l l o f t h e s e g r o u p s s p o k e t h e same  ( J o r g e n s e n 1969:18; is difficult  local  Salish  t i m e s a t B e e c h e r Bay on V a n c o u v e r  resided  on  to the speakers term  (Parry  t h e Sooke,  who  that  Islands;  and t h e n o r t h e r n p a r t o f F i d a l g o I s l a n d . minor  the  Bay, D r a y t o n H a r b o r , B i r c h  Victoria  Oak  Island;  o f J u a n de F u c a  in h i s t o r i c a l who  around  and  on t h e w e s t  nearby G u l f  Harbour,  s h o r e o f San J u a n  o f Sooke I n l e t ;  and  resided  referred  Straits  i n the Boundary  t h e S a a n i c h , who  resided  has  Salish",  B e s i d e s t h e Lummi,  the S a a n i c h P e n i n s u l a  Samish,  Suttles  "Straits  to  Reservation.  (1890:563).  west  eight When  Lkungen  by B o a s  79  were  r a t i f i e d , o n l y t h r e e o f t h e s e houses were l o c a t e d  later  area;  States  from  l a k ' o n g e n a n g by i t s s p e a k e r s ( S u t t l e s  Bay  Lummi  there  language c a l l e d  of  to  e t a l . v^ U n i t e d  t w e n t y - s i x houses  (individual  (1955:21)  Thompson  t o s a y w i t h any  named g r o u p s  1979:695). degree  were autonomous 33  of c e r t a i n t y  tribes  o r bands.  that There  was a g r e a t d e a l o f i n t e r m a r r i a g e a n d i n t e r a c t i o n these than  named u n i t s with  (see S u t t l e s  neighboring  groups  1963; E l m e n d o r f  speaking  among a l l o f  1971),  different  languages.  c o n c e p t o f " t r i b e s " o r " b a n d s " among t h e C o a s t S a l i s h that  gained  usage  reservations,  after  the  groups  in a legal  sense  some  were much l e s s  modern  more u s e f u l  63). E l m e n d o r f speaking  c o h e s i v e than  times  tribe  the concept o f "speech  term to  h a s come groups  t h e named  T h i s has l e d  the language  t o use than the s o - c a l l e d  has used  "tribe"  they a r e today. that  The  restricted  In p r e - t r e a t y  r e s e a r c h e r s to suggest unit  isa  i n the d e a l i n g s Indian  have w i t h t h e F e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t . groups  were  and i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s t h e t e r m  to have meaning  more so  group  is a  (Kew 1 9 8 1 : 6 2 -  community"  when  o f t h e Twana and S k o k o m i s h .  The c h i e f bonds b e t w e e n t h e v a r i o u s v i l l a g e s w i t h i n t h e speech community w e r e a common l a n g u a g e not spoken e l s e w h e r e , common c u s t o m s , a common, s i n g l e d r a i n a g e - a r e a t e r r i t o r y , and a common e t h n i c and l i n g u i s t i c name ... O t h e r u n i f y i n g f a c t o r s were l a c k i n g . T h e r e was no p o l i t i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e s p e e c h c o m m u n i t y , n o r any t r a d i t i o n a l p a t t e r n s o f u n i f i e d a c t i o n among i t s c o n s t i t u e n t v i l l a g e c o m m u n i t i e s ( E l m e n d o r f 1960:255). For  the purposes  will  be r e f e r r i n g  with  t h e Lummi  that  study,  when we  speak  Reservation.  Although  the S t r a i t s  a s one u n i t ,  we  find  i t has j u s t  Salish  that  very  early  on a  between v a r i o u s S t r a i t s S a l i s h groups,  Klallam,  t h e S a a n i c h , and l a t e r ,  she  an i n d i v i d u a l was r e s i d i n g  identification  would  identify  a t the time,  c o u l d , and o f t e n  t h e Lummi.  34  should  with  be  distinction  e s p e c i a l l y the likely  w i t h w h i c h he o r  b u t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s did, exist  suggested  I t i s most  w i t h the group  we  associated  been  speakers  was made  that  o f "Lummi"  t o t h o s e p e o p l e who w e r e l a t t e r l y  traditionally  considered  of this  a l l e g i a n c e and  any o f t h e l o c a l  named  Straits  Salish  groups.  Henceforth  Lummi a s t h e f o c a l g r o u p o f t h i s mind  that  "tribe"  prior  resource  is a  diachronic  procurement.  reader  around  Boas  resource study  1930s  Boas's  the s o c i a l  organization  sociologist,  Bernhard  that  and  J.  ( S t e r n 1934).  Barnett's  article  his later  of Southeast  Stern,  Coast  doctoral Salish, Songish,  Salish  of B r i t i s h  dissertation principally Saanich,  dealt  with.  looks  and i n t h e  published  Island  brief  manuscript  o f Canada  on t h e  in Victoria. (Barnett  with  Last,  work  that  the  (1951a)  of the S t r a i t s  and Semiahmoo, a l t h o u g h  S a m i s h , a n d t o some e x t e n t ,  with  Suttles's  life  1938)  the S t r a i t s  i n conjunction  Columbia.  35  a  anthropologist  Columbia  1955) d e a l  I t i s Suttles's  myths.  i s available for research  a t the economic  t h e Lummi  Island  several  The C a n a d i a n  Salish  (Barnett  Vancouver  Hill-Tout's  Vancouver  records  of B r i t i s h  on t h e C o a s t  monograph  followed.  an as y e t u n p u b l i s h e d  Archives  i n and  o r g a n i z a t i o n and  work on t h e K l a l l a m ,  i n t h e 1930s, a copy o f w h i c h  the P r o v i n c i a l  the S t r a i t s  b u t was n o t a s u s e f u l f o r  o f Southeast  a short  with  social  on  overview the  account of the groups  discusses  of the Indians  Diamond J e n n e s s p r o d u c e d  also  Lummi  concentrating  ethnographic  t o some e x t e n t  monograph on t h e Lummi  Saanich  work  (1927) p u b l i s h e d a  Salish  to the  and s e p a r a b l e  primarily  a s were many o f t h e w o r k s  account  Gunther  other  study  For a complete  utilization  describes  and  identifiable  (1890) g i v e s a b r i e f  Victoria.  (1907)  refer  b u t i t m u s t be b o r n e i n  i s r e f e r r e d t o s e v e r a l works t h a t d e a l  Salish.  at  will  d i d not e x i s t .  This  this  t o 1855 a n  study  we  t h e Sooke,  the Klallam, are was  found  most  useful, in  a s he d e a l t  with  so f a r as i t c o u l d  The  focus  of  the  ethnohistorical The  be r e c o n s t r u c t e d  of Suttles's people  the t r a d i t i o n a l S t r a i t s  work  whom point  from  dispensing fishery.  this  that  economy the  have  study  w i l l  immediately  make  and p o l i t y  reservation,  allotment  Resource  t o do  of productive It will  with  resources the case  confinement  of reservation  house  of  houses  an  follows  will  cover  at the time o f  only  initial  of access  t o and  -- p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e salmon that  the impact  prior  of  Western  to the establishment o f  o f t h e Lummi  thereon,  and t h e  lands.  i n which  individual's  immediate  he o r s h e r e s i d e d .  d i d not always  basic  unit  i n the a c q u i s i t i o n ,  food.  Individual  families  kept t h e i r p r o v i s i o n s 1951a:494).  Efforts  types o f salmon  Straits  some d e t a i l  The n u c l e a r  at  family  would  especially  their  as  much  own  food  was t h e  s e p a r a t e l y and  labor,  f o r example,  s e e work c r e w s r e c r u i t e d from  kinship  (e.g. s e e S u t t l e s  resource  p r e p a r a t i o n , and c o n s u m p t i o n o f  prepared  requiring  Salish  especially  in efforts  was t o  t h e members  i n t h e i r own s t o r a g e c o n t a i n e r s  fishing,  k i n group,  allegiance  Nevertheless,  cooperate  procurement, p a r t i c u l a r l y f i s h i n g .  1971),  from  life  Procurement  the  The  examine  the c o n t r o l  was n e g l i g i b l e  A Straits Salish  extended  i n f o r m a n t s ' memories.  was on t h e t r a d i t i o n a l e c o n o m i c  those aspects o f S t r a i t s S a l i s h c u l t u r e , that  culture  o f view.  discussion  contact,  Salish  within  system  36  to  certain from the  t h e house.  has been  1960; J o r g e n s e n  i t relates  (Suttles  the  dealt  with i n  1969; E l m e n d o r f  procurement  and  dispensation as  of  resources.  bilateral  with  Relationships generational  great-great-great could  recount  relationships extensive  be  (six ascending  this  has  extended and  six  collateral  for  different  local  kin  were  an  cousins  were  parent's  of  Large,  the  twelve  or  great-  individuals  and  mother.  especially be  ego's  to  the  regardless  of  All  terms f o r Aunt  mother's  as  four  allegiance  and  Often  not  from  relationships.  child's generation  "nephew"  I t was  time.  terms.  and  These  individual  primary  at the  mother's  refered  an  kin  sibling  father  also  person's  siblings,  from  that  who  Recognizable  grandparents  extensive  other  and  uncle  siblings  but  i n d i v i d u a l s of  the  and  father's  "aunt" could  whether  and be  first  "uncle".  referred  they  were  to the  siblings.  multi-family  houses The  predominated,  o f t e n oversaw c e r t a i n s u b s i s t e n c e  composition  and  residence  h o u s e s w e r e u s u a l l y h e a d e d by  more l a b o r - i n t e n s i v e t y p e s o f The  as  villages.  living  father's  t e n d e d t o be p a t r i l o c a l . who  was  for  i n d i v i d u a l s of or  a  same  would  "niece"  children  the  generation,  Similarly  the  derived  have  but  were e q u a t e d w i t h  from  cousins,  man,  to  groups,  reflects  were c l e a r l y  distinct  as  individual  named  Terminology  terms  far  uncommon.  r e l a t i o n s h i p s meant  t o t h e g r o u p w h e r e he o r s h e  cousins  as  beyond a common g r e a t g r a n d p a r e n t were r a r e .  uncommon  first  predominating.  i n common) a l t h o u g h  extensively  characterized  descending,  w o u l d have r e l a t i o n s i n d o z e n s o f d i f f e r e n t  was  been  emphasis  laterally  grandparent  kin  k i n system  generational  could  steps  The  o f h o u s e s was  37  salmon not  one  activities, especially fishing.  p e r m a n e n t , and  a component  family  might  change  1951a:494).  The  fragmentary,  i t sallegiance  data  on  but i t appears  who  wife)  might  inhabit  that several nuclear  by b o n d s o f k i n s h i p ( e i t h e r his  f o r convenience  through  w o u l d come t o g e t h e r  a  a house.  cousins  and t h e i r  1955:242; and C o l l i n s quite for  independent  most  1949:155).  such  important  in order o f importance, fishing  b r o t h e r s , or  1951a:273;  Barnett  Houses w i t h i n a c l u s t e r although  reef net fishing  they  might  were  cooperate  forms o f f i s h i n g  gathering  p l a n t foods, waterfowl  (i.e.,  site  forms o f salmon  fishing  other  species),  h u n t i n g , s e a mammal h u n t i n g , and  S a l m o n were by f a r t h e most  t o t h e Lummi p e o p l e .  were,  f o rsalmon, weir  gathering, other  other  source  through  means o f s u b s i s t e n c e t o t h e Lummi  f o rsalmon, s h e l l f i s h  mammal h u n t i n g .  joined  as defense.  fishing,  land  (Suttles  o f one a n o t h e r ,  v a r i o u s purposes, The  families  or  are  The h o u s e s seemed  m o s t o f t e n t o be c o m p o s e d o f a n o w n e r a n d h i s s o n s , male  house  families  t h e house owner  t o form  (Suttles  important  food  H e w e s (1973:136) h a s e s t i m a t e d t h e  a n n u a l p e r c a p i t a i n t a k e o f s a l m o n , f o r t h e Lummi, a t s i x h u n d r e d pounds,  one o f t h e h i g h e s t  Evidence  presented  fishing  economy  between  free-access  that  were h e l d  below  resources  i n trust  was g u a r a n t e e d  as  h i s (and h i s wife's) everyone,  this  t e r r i t o r y occupied  g r o u p was t h e p r i m a r y  show  Salish  that  and c e r t a i n  fora larger  access  to fishing  kinship  networks  included v i r t u a l l y  interaction locations k i n group.  locations  as  extended.  far For  the entirety of  speakers.  i n terms o f r e s o u r c e 38  area.  the p r e - c a p i t a l i s t  procurement  by t h e S t r a i t s S a l i s h  unit  culture  was a c o m p l e x  by i n d i v i d u a l s  individual  the  will  o f the S t r a i t s  An  practically  i n the Northwest Coast  The k i n  procurement.  Among  anadromous  trout  were  least  t w e l v e methods  cycle  consistently  of the fish  availability available  of  others.  genus Salmo steelhead  include  times  The  o f the year  Salmonidae  Among  species  and a t  were-  different  two g e n e r a ,  Salmo  t o the native  than and  people  the various species ofthe  i s an anadromous  (S. g a i r d n e r i i ) .  at  and t h e  some s p e c i e s w e r e m o r e d e s i r a b l e  Coast.  s p e c i e s commonly  The g e n u s  Oncorhynchus  t o t h e Lummi a r e a :  0. t s c h a w y t s c h a  Common names i n c l u d e : blackmouth,  kisutch  utilizing  employed  different  s p e c i e s o f salmon n a t i v e  0.  and one o f  T o some e x t e n t , t h e l i f e  s p e c i e s o f importance  Pacific there  by t h e L u m m i ,  the method  the resource.  In the f a m i l y  the North  s p e c i e s o f salmon  exploited  determined  In a d d i t i o n ,  Oncorhynchus,  five  ( B e r i n g e r 1982).  at different  locations.  of  fish  known a s  includes  king,  tyee,  five  spring,  and c h i n o o k ;  Common names i n c l u d e : c o h o and s i l v e r ;  0. g o r b u s c h e  Common names i n c l u d e : p i n k , humpback, and humpies;  0.  keta  Common names i n c l u d e : chum and d o g ;  0. n e r k a  Common  names  include:  r e d , b l u e b a c k and  sockeye; There and  fall  distinct primary  a r e two r a c e s o r runs o f c h i n o o k  runs, both  native  differences one b e i n g  t o t h e Lummi  between  the time  these  o f year  spawn and hence become more r e a d i l y Spring late  chinooks enter fresh  summer o r e a r l y  September  or October  fall.  water Fall  salmon,  area.  two r a c e s they  enter  available  spring  There  water  the to  t o human p r e d a t i o n .  i n March o r A p r i l  and spawn i n  chinooks enter fresh  and spawn i 39n f a l l  a r e some  o f salmon, fresh  runs  and e a r l y  winter.  water i n Chinook  are  the  l a r g e s t of  the  Lummi a r e a  the  of  20  salmon s p e c i e s , with  t o 30  Coho s a l m o n e n t e r  (9 t o  f r e s h water  spawn i n l a t e  fall  then  averaging  chinook  pounds  or  14  average weights  kilograms).  from September  early winter. between  Coho a r e  8  and  in  10  t o November  somewhat  pounds  and  smaller  (3.5  to  4.5  kilograms). Humpback in  the  fresh  Lummi water  Humpback  are  the  other  spend  little  days.  The  pounds  tributary  the  are  are  time  reef  and  spawn  due  enabled  to the the  enter  of  (2 t o 2.5  during  the  annual  as  fall.  early  as  kilograms),  more  spread  out  fresh  water  as  late  chum  rivers  fed  those  lakes.  the  i n December.  usually salmon  by  lakes  than  i s between  the  early  Chum  spawning  and  Whereas t h e  sockeye l i k e l y  highly developed  that pass through  in early  6 pounds  generally  salmon p r o t e i n to  Lummi  enter  as  salmon  within  30  10  and  12  spawn  in  kilograms).  Nevertheless, of  They  fishers  i n f r e s h water,  streams of  percentage  years  salmonids.  evident  weight  etc.).  net  Entering  still  1983,  September to  i n odd-numbered  usually other  s a l m o n have r e s i d e n t r u n s w i t h i n the Lummi a r e a  not.  is  runs  t o 5.5  Sockeye  1981,  b e t w e e n 5 and  average  (4.5  and  species.  they  spawn o n l y  accessible  smallest of  salmon  to  1979,  August  also  salmon  September,  return (e.g.  Averaging  Chum  of  area  during  are  July. they  salmon  to the  the  San  Juan  migration.  the  contributed  species  sockeye  the  Fraser  Islands  of  reef  River  and  netting  runs of  Georgia  This that  sockeye  Strait  S o c k e y e become a c c e s s i b l e as  40  do  highest  p r e - r e s e r v a t i o n Lummi.  technology  e x p l o i t the  four  area early  as  June,  although The  and  subsequent  the p r i n c i p a l  runs  continue  fishing  well  takes place  into  September,  i n July  and August.  a v e r a g e w e i g h t o f sockeye i s between 5 and 7 pounds  (2 t o 3  kilograms).  Table  1.  Fishing  Seasonal a v a i l a b i l i t y  Method  and u t i l i z a t i o n  o f salmon.  J a n F e b Mar Apr May J u n J u l Aug Sep O c t Nov Dec  Trolling Traps Gaffs,  Harpoons,  D i p Nets  Weirs Gill  Nets  Seines Trawls Reef N e t s Maximum A v a i l a b i l i t y Species Chinook Coho Humpback Chum Sockeye Steelhead  41  by S p e c i e s  Steelhead the w i n t e r salmon  runs  begin  i n e a r l y December  m o n t h s w e l l i n t o t h e summer  there  a r e two  runs  and c o n t i n u e  through  months. As w i t h  chinook  of steelhead  i n t h e Lummi  winter  r u n f r o m December t h r o u g h M a r c h and a summer  March  into  beginning  August.  Towards  o f t h e summer  salmon,  steelhead  believed  a small  do n o t a l w a y s d i e a f t e r number  run from  t h e end o f t h e w i n t e r  r u n t h e two r u n s b l e n d  area,  late  r u n and t h e  together.  spawning,  s u r v i v e t o spawn a g a i n .  a  Unlike and i t i s  I n t h e Lummi  a r e a , t h e a v e r a g e w e i g h t o f s t e e l h e a d i s b e t w e e n 10 a n d 12 p o u n d s (4.5  t o 5.5  kilograms).  According other  Straits  technologies be  the only  For  to data Salish  known group  presented speakers  down  aboriginal  eight (For a  methods s e e  study  (1982) t h e Lummi and  a l l the salmon  Coast  known t o u t i l i z e  into  sophistication.  utilized  t o the Northwest  the purposes of t h i s  broken  by B e r i n g e r  peoples  and appear t o  a l l of these  technologies.  the f i s h i n g  types  increasing  complete  fishing  m e t h o d s u s e d w i l l be i n complexity  description of  S u t t l e s 1951a; S t e w a r t  the  and  various  1977; and B e r i n g e r  1982.) Simple were  instruments,  generally  spawning shallow  used  locations.  such as harpoons, g a f f s ,  i n the f a l l These  w a t e r o r when u s e d  Chinook,  coho,  when  devices  the f i s h  were  i n conjunction  and chum s a l m o n  most with  were most o f t e n  and d i p - n e t s  were  near t h e  successful in a t r a p or  taken  with  weir. these  tools. Trolling and  coho  pursued  was a c c o m p l i s h e d  could  during  be  taken  in salt  in this  any t i m e o f y e a r , 42  w a t e r , and o n l y  manner.  Trolling  b u t t o t h e Lummi  chinook could  be  i t was u s u a l l y  a spring Salish and  and  summer  activity  often  trolled  lines  there are  even  canoe p a d d l e s . Traps although  not  commonly  used  both  bait  most  and  traveling of  lures  trolling  in conjunction with  s t e e l h e a d . Other traps,  or  use  a  t o Lummi  weir  prior  N o o k s a c k R i v e r and resided least  there.  four  times  1951a:33-36;  their  story  (Curtis  and  Riley  of  Weirs  were a  not  to  the  movement has  1955:133-140).  Nickomekl perhaps  River,  Rivers,  among  and,  as  a t Dakota Creek  The  large  weir  the  family,  although "everyone"  fishing  i t (Suttles  most h e a v i l y water  and  reef  netting  by  Nooksack  who  build  of  the  formerly  been p u b l i s h e d a t  p l a c e s the  The  nearly  43  on  Suttles date  of  the  two  sites  Campbell  on and  evidence,  communication).  River  was  owned  in building  weirs  when t h e m a j o r  was  to  mouth  archaeological  participated  1951a:149).  i n the f a l l  tidal  i n at l e a s t h a l f a dozen  Semiahmoo  suggested  the  for  1730.  (Grabert, p e r s o n a l  on  as  1934:115-120;  Curtis  w e r e known t o h a v e been b u i l t  Nooksack  Most  f o r salmon.  p l a c e s : a t the mouth o f the S a m i s h R i v e r , p o s s i b l y the  weir.  such  o f the Sk'alexan  Stern  to  usually,  t h e y d i d n o t know how  1913:25-30;  t h e movement a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y  attached  i n some a r e a s , w e r e  at l e a s t  migration  this  to place,  t r a p s were u s e d  w h i c h were used  the d i s p l a c e m e n t  The  fall,  Straits  trolling.  types of traps,  tradition  to  place  in  used  i n the  The  lines  were u s e d  n o t common among t h e S t r a i t s S a l i s h , According  from  made o f b a s k e t r y and  i n s m a l l streams  waterfall  1951a:135).  often  always,  s a l m o n and  t r a p s and  while  descriptions  Both  were  (Suttles  entered  although  one  i t and  were p r o b a b l y  r u n s had  finished,  by  in  used fresh  evidence  suggests  that at least  throughout  the Nooksack R i v e r  the season  Seines  were  obstructions,  i n some y e a r s  used  usually  i n areas  streams.  Seines  surrounding  them.  mouths  of  the Nooksack  Drayton  Harbor  the  fall  prior  nets  was  free  of  t h e mouths o f  captured  fish  by  Seines  around  into  were l i k e l y  used i n  the mouths o f  streams  the f i s h  i n t h e mesh,  most o f t e n a l o n g  emptying  grounds.  captured  the f i s h  streams  sized  by  surrounding  which  was  made i n  s p e c i e s o f salmon.  the shore  o r near  stream  w a t e r w o u l d make them more e f f e c t i v e .  c o h o , and humpback and were u s e d  them,  Gill mouths  Gill  nets  primarily  i n the  employing  a bag-  and summer.  Trawls type  that  used  1951a:150).  or around  the  areas.  s i z e s f o r the d i f f e r e n t  took chinook, spring  and  t o the spawning  nets . entangled  where t h e c l o u d y  flats  congregated  s e i n e s , which  were u s e d  have been  the water  nets  River  were s e i n i n g  to ascending  specific  large  may  The mouth o f t h e S a m i s h R i v e r and p r o b a b l y t h e  as t h e f i s h  Unlike gill  were  (Suttles  where  i n the t i d a l  weir  were  used  directly  n e t t o w e d b e t w e e n two  i n the streams,  canoes.  whenever s u f f i c i e n t  numbers o f f i s h  were  used  most  commonly  Trawls  could  were r u n n i n g  i n the s p r i n g  be  utilized  upstream, but  for steelhead  (Suttles  1951a:145). By f a r t h e most i m p o r t a n t was  reef netting,  techniques  the  employed  lead,  method o f t h e Lummi  one o f t h e most h i g h l y e v o l v e d  stationary, being net,  salmon f i s h i n g  in a pre-contact  s e t anew e a c h y e a r .  which  was  anchored  44  fishery.  and Reef  specialized nets  were  They c o n s i s t e d o f a l o n g to  the  sea bottom  at the  forward end.  end and t i e d  A smaller  swimming  b e t w e e n t h e bows o f two c a n o e s a t t h e back  n e t was s t r u n g  along  b e t w e e n t h e two c a n o e s .  the sea bottom,  followed  the lead  The  fish,  n e t up ( a s i f  swimming o v e r an u n d e r w a t e r  r e e f ) and i n t o t h e s m a l l e r  n e t , where  they  would  the canoes.  involved  great  deal  men  could  gear  be h a u l e d of labor,  as w e l l  be e m p l o y e d  were g e n e r a l l y  Evidence fish  aboard  from  could  s e t i n June  amount o f f i s h  i n a reef  ( S u t t l e s 1951a:160).  and f i s h e d  1800s s u g g e s t s  netting  a  Upwards o f s i x t o t w e l v e  on a s i n g l e g e a r  the l a t e  be t a k e n  as s k i l l .  Reef  that  net gear.  through  The  September.  an enormous amount o f It is likely  t a k e n was l i m i t e d o n l y  by t h e a b i l i t y  were  the sockeye  that the  to process  it. Reef through they  nets  the, L u m m i  spawn.  would  designed  area  In years  be  taken  locations  were  to fish  on t h e i r when  i n u s e by  nets.  to the signing  sets  a t some l o c a t i o n s .  along  Roberts.  Only  net. having  the mainland the  The Lummi several  Straits  net  Salish  up t o a d o z e n  o f f Southeast  scattered Vancouver  s o u t h o f B o u n d a r y Bay, and a t P o i n t Salish  speakers  c o n t r o l l e d t h e most s i t e s sites  reef  Straits  The l o c a t i o n s were Islands,  where  they, too,  twenty  with  migrate  River  running  and o t h e r  of the treaty,  t h r o u g h o u t t h e S a n J u a n and G u l f Island,  were  Possibly  t h e Lummi  groups p r i o r o f gear  way t o t h e F r a s e r  humpbacks  i n the reef  that  (sets o f gear).  45  utilized  by f a r , some  the  reef  locations  Table  2.  Straits  Salish  reef  net l o c a t i o n s .  Reef Net L o c a t i o n s  Utilized  Otter Point O'Brien Point B e e c h e y Head B e e c h e r Bay San J u a n I s l a n d Stuart Island John's I s l a n d Pender I s l a n d South Pender A c t i v e Pass Charles Island Lopez I s l a n d Shaw I s l a n d Orcas I s l a n d Waldron I s l a n d Lummi I s l a n d Cherry Point Birch Point Point Roberts  Sooke Sooke B e e c h e r Bay K l a l l a m B e e c h e r Bay K l a l l a m , S o o k e . S o n g h e e s , K l a l l a m , S a a n i c h , Lummi, S a a n i c h , Lummi. Saanich Saanich Saanich Saanich Saanich S a m i s h , Lummi, K l a l l a m . Klallam Lummi Lummi Lummi, Semiahmoo. Semiahmoo, Lummi. Semiahmoo S a a n i c h , Lummi, Semiahmoo  Stern  SOURCES: 87.  It reef  i s highly  net sites  settlement boundary  As  took  place  among  1955:86-  more c o - u t i l i z a t i o n  these  groups  prior  o f the  to  their  o f the i n t e r n a t i o n a l  later.  the  k i n group  i n terms o f u t i l i z i n g fishing  organization traditional  much  Barnett  o f Labor  mentioned  weir  that  L o c a l Named G r o u p s  1951a:192-212;  and t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t  than occurred  cooperation  Suttles  probable  on r e s e r v e s  Organization  and  1934:126;  By The F o l l o w i n g  both  and were Straits  Salish  a great  f a r t h e most fishing.  46  the p r i n c i p a l  salmon resources.  required by  was  deal  Reef  of  netting  of labor  productive  The s i t e s  unit  and  methods o f  were owned and  controlled Suttles  by  individuals  on  behalf  (1951a:149) b e l i e v e s t h a t  of  a  although  the  w e i r m i g h t be i n t h e c o n t r o l o f a k i n g r o u p , to take  fish  from  it.  Also,  larger  f o r the  kin  group.  ownership  everyone  of  a  had a r i g h t  Saanich:  A w e i r b e l o n g e d t o t h e f i v e o r s i x men who b u i l t i t , e a c h o f whom c o m m o n l y s e t a g a i n s t i t t h r e e o r f o u r t r a p s . I t was u n d e r s t o o d , h o w e v e r , t h a t o t h e r men i n t h e same c o m m u n i t y m i g h t s e t t h e i r own t r a p s a t t h e w e i r as soon as t h e o w n e r s had s a t i s f i e d t h e i r needs ( J e n n e s s n . d . : 2 5 ) . Whether S u t t l e s and J e n n e s s clear.  Suttles  community their  c o u l d use  needs.  resources  without the  to  the  referring  the weir  Further  taken  reasonable  of  c o u l d be  by  data  that  on  anyone  including  would  w a l k w a y s and  often  maintenance  hamper was  f o r the  winter rights or  The  as  observation  traveled  the  having  while  traps. use  of  by  (Suttles  satisfied  I t would weir,  of  seem  at  least  c o n t r i b u t e d some Some  weirs  entire  river  S i n c e d e b r i s and  drift  a c r o s s an  the  weirs,  they were i n use. sites  i n the  distribution  is lacking.  stretching  winter v i l l a g e  and  constant  Often  although  1951a:149-150).  t h e o w n e r s when t h e y  weirs  primarily  through  the  Perhaps  use  were t h r o u g h  fishing  weir.  description  by  actual  without  efficient  well  u s i n g the  only  o w n e r s had  use  i s not  that others  r u n s o f s a l m o n t h e y m i g h t be u s e d  were g r a n t e d  were n o t  Lummi,  fall  months  the  could  several  necessary  were c o n s t r u c t e d near used  fact  m a t e r i a l s towards the c o n s t r u c t i o n .  were v e r y c o m p l e x u n d e r t a k i n g s , and  the  weirs  owner's p e r m i s s i o n ,  l a b o r and  to the  only after  t h e Lummi  doubt  a r e s a y i n g t h e same t h i n g  Theodore through  we  have  Winthrop.  the a r e a  47  of  a Lummi  Winthrop,  i n August o f  weir  i s from  an  accompanied  by  1853.  Our c o u r s e was i n l a n d , up a g o o d - s i z e d r i v e r , thickly shrouded with almost t r o p i c a l v e g e t a t i o n . P r e s e n t l y we came t o an I n d i a n s a l m o n w e i r , a h i g h f r a m e w o r k o f p o l e s reaching a c r o s s t h e s t r e a m , and s e r v i n g a l s o as a l i g h t foot-bridge. At i n t e r v a l s , w i c k e r - w o r k s h i e l d s are suspended i n the w a t e r , and j u s t a g a i n s t t h e m , b a s k e t s l i k e a l o b s t e r p o t ; t h e s a l m o n , r u s h i n g up s t r e a m , i s met by t h e s h i e l d , and t u r n i n g , f a l l s i n t o the pot. The f i s h e r y b e l o n g e d t o one o f my men, and a s we c a m e , an I n d i a n was j u s t t a k i n g a n o b l e salmon out (Winthrop 1913:265). Winthrop a l s o noted the  same For  month the  which  was  more  fish.  Lummi  the  operating  fishing  more  set  of  the  these  a reef and  reef  net  the  gear.  If  an  skills  or  was  1951a:487). certain  The  portion  The  reef  m e m b e r s and owner year,  Islands  to  reef  netting  sites  too  implied  amongst  his  the  of  the  more  than  required in  owned  had  knowledge setting  access  requiring a great the  fish  equitable  manner.  were  t o be  was  and  obliged  site them, It  to  house-mates  of and  a  is  select  (Suttles  receiving  Anchors deal  of  divided  made anew e a c h y e a r , t h e sections also  among  enough f i s h  48  the  of  had  effort.  I t appears that  t h e c r e w members had  to  owner's b e h a l f .  owner  kinsmen  wives making  together.  operation  merely  i n f i r m to e x e r c i s e the  an  a  catch.  gear  their  much  considered  involved  o l d or  times  was  It also  a c t on  contributed  crew p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a n t i c i p a t i o n o f  net  joined  Juan  likely  i n d i v i d u a l who  in pre-contact from  and  ritualism  likely  members  San  secondary  net  gear.  i n d i v i d u a l s could  crew  i n the  Ownership  then other that  was  important  inherited right.  technology  lacked  weir  Ownership  l o c a t i o n to  netting  (1913:27-28).  considered  individual, a  Lummi r e e f  the  to  be  While the  net, set the  crew  which anew  gear  members  needs before  the each  was  owner w o u l d a s s u r e  for their  crew  he  in  in  an  that kept  any  for himself.  sufficient of  fish,  the crew  the  crew  fish,  way  this  the  important  could  with  be  food  fish"  enhanced  distribution  some  to note  had  anyway.  that  t h e manner  w i t h the  by  there We  Suttles  been  possible  enough  is  not  It is  taken care of radically  i t m i g h t seem t h a t t h e number o f S t r a i t s S a l i s h  people  net f i s h e r y  the evidence  suggests  was that  limited, most,  the  estimates  net  fishery.  Population  from seven hundred  1947:135).  Given  the  when  examined  i f not a l l ,  i n and a c q u i r e d  locations  to  fishery.  S t r a i t s S a l i s h people p a r t i c i p a t e d  (Kroeber  fish  t h a t t h e owner  differs  i n which shares are d i s t r i b u t e d  from the reef  range  i s made o f  modern  more c l o s e l y ,  Lummi  for a  i n the  commercial salmon  reef  1968  scenario  this  of  wealth  perhaps i t never o c c u r r e d .  see l a t e r ,  a  of  mention  the needs o f t h e crew were shall  became  the accumulation  No not  own  1951a:545).  net s i t e  would presume  This  their  the a c q u i s i t i o n (see  families  "The w i v e s o f  (Suttles reef  phenomenon).  happened  members had  had been d r y i n g  for trade,  social  b e c a u s e , a s we  benefiting  time  owner's  i n the l i t e r a t u r e ;  While  t h e owner's,  i n the p r e s e r v a t i o n .  the needs o f the crew.  encountered  from  and  have  take  first,  status  of this  might  would  dry  eventual  discussion  satisfy  until  when t h e crew  arrangement, ownership of a  food, for  what  who  helped  i n which  goods  that  t h e r e m a i n d e r was  members,  this  surplus  states  members a s s i s t i n g  now  Through  Sut.tles  resources from  f o r the  pre-contact  ( G i b b s 1854:42) t o e i g h t minimum  of  o f the  thirty  hundred  reef  net  k n o w n t o h a v e b e e n u s e d by t h e L u m m i , i t w o u l d a p p e a r  t h a t t h e e n t i r e a v a i l a b l e l a b o r f o r c e w o u l d be n e e d e d i n o r d e r t o have a minimum  o f s i x crew  members on e a c h g e a r . 49  Assuming  that  the  available  quarter half  labor force  o f the population  o f the males  f o r r e e f n e t gear  o p e r a t i o n was o n e -  ( o n e - h a l f t h e p o p u l a t i o n i s male, one-  are o f working  age), suggests  strongly  that  r e e f n e t t i n g was a v a i l a b l e t o a l l o f t h e L u m m i . According capable Kerr  to data  o f t a k i n g over  1917:60),  were s a i d  from  the l a t e  a thousand  and t h e g e a r  1800s  fish  a t Lopez  r e e f n e t s were  p e r day (Rathbun Island  easily  1900:314;  and P o i n t  Roberts  t o be c a p a b l e o f t a k i n g an enormous q u a n t i t y o f f i s h .  There i s a s m a l l but p r o d u c t i v e r e e f i n s i d e o f Iceberg P o i n t a t t h e s o u t h e r n end o f L o p e z I s l a n d , on w h i c h a few n e t s a r e u s e d , a n d w h e r e d a i l y c a t c h e s o f 3,000 t o 4,000 s a l m o n a r e sometimes made (Rathbun 1 9 0 0 : 3 1 5 ) . When f i s h a r e r u n n i n g i n good numbers t e n t o f i f t e e n I n d i a n s f o r m a c r e w f o r ' a r e e f n e t , a n d a h a u l c a n be made e v e r y m i n u t e o r two i f n e c e s s a r y . Some o f t h e I n d i a n s a r e v e r y e x p e r t a t t h i s k i n d o f f i s h i n g , a n d h a v e t a k e n a s many a s 2,000 s a l m o n i n a d a y . In such cases the clutchmen [ " k l o o t c h m e n " o r women] come o u t w i t h c a n o e s a n d b o a t t h e f i s h ashore so t h a t t h e o p e r a t i o n s o f those engaged i n f i s h i n g w i l l n o t be i n t e r r u p t e d ( C o l l i n s 1 8 9 2 : 2 6 0 ) . No d a t a  exist  to suggest  process  f o u r thousand  months  and must  Hewes's Lummi site  estimate  i s correct, have  then  days  when  that  the S t r a i t s  variables subject  so many  must,  salmon Salish  i t would  rapidly  take to  i n t h e summer  w i t h i n a day o r two a t most. I f  enough  consumption  fish  weight  would  X 4,000 f i s h  be t a k e n ,  were n o t l a c k i n g  50  with  f o r the Island  individuals  (5  / 600 p o u n d s p e r  t h a t t h e r e w e r e many  but i t c e r t a i n l y for fish.  be c o n s i d e r e d .  fluctuations,  rates  a t the Lopez  f o r 33.3  I t i s not l i k e l y  of course,  to quadrennial  spoils  o f annual  sockeye  p e r s o n p e r annum = 33.3).  labor  one day o f f i s h i n g  provided  pounds low average  much  Salmon  be p r o c e s s e d  (1973:136)  would  fish.  how  shows  Many o t h e r -  Sockeye  an e x t r e m e l y  runs good  are year  followed  by  subsequent  lean,years.  One y e a r o u t o f f o u r w i l l h a v e a h e a v y r u n w h i l e t h e n e x t w i l l be s h a r p l y r e d u c e d and t h e r e m a i n i n g two, smaller still. The same o r d e r o f h i g h , m o d e r a t e and low y e a r s w i l l be r e p e a t e d , and t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n peak and low y e a r s may be i n a r a t i o a s g r e a t a s s e v e r a l t h o u s a n d t o one (Kew 1976:3-4). Since  a l l o f our  a time  when u n r e g u l a t e d  already  had  difficult been  profound  to  say  most  of  filleting  unlikely since  techniques  be  1976:2).  Therefore  it.  employed,  by  salmon  amount  i n an  could  exists  runs,  concerning to  size  say  that  this the  the  harvested i s capable  e i g h t hour  approach  i t i s impossible  run  fish  cutter  i t is have  the  of  had  would  i t appears  A modern f i s h  processors  knowledge  the  from  degradation  human p r e d a t i o n  affected  concerning  thousand  pre-contact  l i t t l e  to  to process  one  s i z e s date  environmental  pre-contact  enough  factor  the a b i l i t y  and  salmon run  e f f e c t s on t h e a n a d r o m o u s f i s h  ( c f . Kew  significant  concerning  fishing  whether  significant  fluctuations  was  estimates  day.  It is  number,  but  pre-contact  with  any  degree  of  access  to  certainty. Since fish  t h e crew members' f a m i l i e s  after  would  go  to  standing owner's  they  had  the  site  (Suttles  k i n and they  wealth.  Besides,  sites  were  owner  were  and  1960:30).  not  they  fishing  be  also  i t was than  would  time others.  rise  51  by  put  away,  any  to enhance  benefit  from  his  a  site-  h i s enhanced  crew  of  members  Some r e e f  Hence, o v e r  in status.  social  acquisition  beneficiary to cease.  surplus-  his  association,  assist  were o b l i g e d as  until  families  used  Since,  h e s i t a n t to  more p r o d u c t i v e  years c e r t a i n  numbers  house-mates would  status,  to c o n t i n u e  sufficient  were c u t o f f f r o m  a period  net of  Map of cut  number  1 displays  the S t r a i t s S a l i s h . lines  So-called  convenience  important  It i s evident that  demarcating  groups.  the most  "territory" tribal  neccessitated  between  the  Straits  Salish  by  the speech  one  another,  southwest, groups of  appeared  community. e.g.  to  Access  include  Although  the  d i d not  winter  villages  B e l l i n g h a m Bay  the  notably to f i s h .  areas are  the  or  Salish  a  modern  political  actions  t o r e s o u r c e s among  entire  named u n i t s  interact  i n contiguous areas c e r t a i n l y most  and  clear-  Straits more  t h e Semiahmoo i n t h e n o r t h and  probably  groups,  the are  legislative  than they are a p r e - c o n t a c t r e a l i t y .  locations  t h e r e w e r e no  territories  by  resource  utilized  farthest  t h e Sooke  share  d i d , and  area  from i n the  resources,  the  there i s evidence  Klallam, ranging  far  F o r e x a m p l e , t h e San J u a n  from  their  I s l a n d s and  mentioned:  T h e m o s t p o w e r f u l and w a r l i k e o f a l l t h e S a l i s h t r i b e s o n t h e c o a s t o f W a s h i n g t o n were t h e C l a l l a m , a g r o u p c o m p r i s i n g a b o u t a d o z e n p o p u l o u s v i l l a g e s on t h e s o u t h e r n s h o r e o f t h e S t r a i t o f J u a n de F u c a f r o m P o r t D i s c o v e r y on. t h e e a s t t o H o k o c r e e k o n t h e w e s t , a s w e l l a s some s e t t l e m e n t s o n t h e upper w e s t c o a s t o f Whidbey i s l a n d and t h e s o u t h e r n s h o r e s o f San J u a n and O r c a s i s l a n d s ( C u r t i s 1 9 1 3 : 1 9 ) . A f e w y e a r s b e f o r e 1850 a g r o u p o f K l a l l a m f r o m C l a l l a m B a y , who a l w a y s w e n t t o L u m m i t e r r i t o r y t o f i s h , s e t t l e d n e a r Marietta [ a d j a c e n t t o t h e Lummi R e s e r v a t i o n ] (Gunther 1927:179). The  area  near  Bellingham) settled  there.  utilized Salish, and  was  but  of  town  also The  of  Sehome  inhabited  evidence  by  (later Klallam  suggests  by a l l m e m b e r s o f t h e s p e e c h access to p a r t i c u l a r l y  strictly  types  the  controlled  fishing  that  by  that  whites  The  into first  r e s o u r c e s were  productive sites  require  52  when  community of the  k i n groups.  d i d not  incorporated  was  sites  significant  co-  Straits  regulated  of  simpler  investment  of  Map 1. Areas of p r i n c i p a l resource SOURCES: B a r n e t t ( 1 9 5 5 : 2 4 ) ; S u t t l e s  53  co-utilization. (1951a:7-45).  labor fish  were  considered  out o f a stream  place  to  place,  operation  free-access or t r o l l  but  of a weir  areas.  Anyone c o u l d  f o r salmon  to p a r t i c i p a t e  or the p i e c i n g  while  gaff  traveling  from  i n the c o n s t r u c t i o n  together  a  and use o f a  and reef  n e t a n i n d i v i d u a l h a d t o be a member o f t h e e x t e n d e d k i n g r o u p o r an  affine.  granted  Interests  and e x e r c i s e d  certain  resources  subsistence. only  part  Prestige, the  Subsistence,  over  itself.  a share  The  resources  of the  century.  access  to  a  o f an  inherited  utilizing means  of was  privilege.  and s t a t u s were a l l p a r t o f  as w e l l .  The  k i n group  exercised  means o f p r o d u c t i o n  e x e r c i s e d c o n t r o l over that p a r t i c i p a t i n g  the  and  resource  members  were  Salish  with  1792-1854  date  encounters from  of  the l a s t  Straits  years  of the  T h e d i s c o v e r y o f t h e S t r a i t o f J u a n de F u c a  subsequent  were  harvest.  recorded  European e x p l o r e r s  resources  o f paramount importance,  to the important  Sketch  first  than  identity,  to a large extent,  Ethnohistorical  the  more  The k i n g r o u p a s s u r e d  allocated  important  the k i n group, because  exercise  social  access  most  although  of the o v e r a l l ritualism,  therefore,  through  involved  use o f salmon  control  i n the  e x p l o r a t i o n by S p a n i s h  and B r i t i s h  eighteenth (1787) a n d  venturers  give  us some g l i m p s e s i n t o t h e l i v e s o f t h e s e p e o p l e d u r i n g t h e e r a o f the  first  Puget  Sound  lucrative during  contacts. and  the Gulf  f u r trade  the l a t e  The n a t i v e p e o p l e o f t h e i n l a n d w a t e r s o f of Georgia  i n progress  eighteenth  and  along early 54  were  sheltered  from  the Northwest P a c i f i c nineteenth  centuries.  the Coast The  earliest Spanish The it  recorded explorers  British was  Eliza  Captain  "discovered"  waters  of  insignificant  area  that  of of  Both area, Of  the Spanish  but the contacts  t h e San Juan  expedition,  Since  by t h e i n 1792.  i n 1792, and  from  and e x c h a n g e d  fur-bearing  t h e two  information  they  animals  found  i n the  on  only  inland  1792 were few.  and t h e B r i t i s h with  were  and V a l d e z  the e x p l o r e r s  Georgia.  waters, the e x p l o r a t i o n s a f t e r  area  was a l s o i n t h e a r e a  one a n o t h e r  the Gulf numbers  i n t h e Lummi  i n 1791, and G a l i a n o  Vancouver  i n t h e Lummi  countries the  explorations  native  archipelago,  took  peoples  Pantoja,  n o t i c e o f t h e Lummi were  remarkably  a member  few.  of the E l i z a  remarked:  Between F i d a l g o a n d L o p e z de A r o t h e s e i s a great archipelago o f i s l a n d s w h i c h was named " S a n J u a n " ... N e i t h e r on t h e i s l a n d s nor on t h e a d j a c e n t c o a s t s were any s e t t l e m e n t s s e e n , b u t i n t h e S e n o de P a d i l l a [ P a d i l l a B a y n e a r A n a c o r t e s ] some I n d i a n s a f t e r s h e l l f i s h w e r e s e e n i n the s h a l l o w s (Wagner 1933:187-188). I n J u l y o f 1791 P a n t o j a  d i d notice natives  w h i c h he t o o k t o be a n i s l a n d Indians  were  ( I s l a de Z e p e d a ) .  at Point  Roberts,  Most l i k e l y the  reef netting.  A t t h e I s l a de Z e p e d a t h e s e i s an i n c r e d i b l e q u a n t i t y o f r i c h s a l m o n and numerous I n d i a n s , much m o r e d o c i l e a n d t r a c t a b l e than those a t the entrance [to the S t r a i t o f Juan de F u c a ] . They speak an e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t l a n g u a g e and i n s p i t e o f the f a c t that they d i d not understand i t they e x p l a i n e d w i t h e n t i r e c l e a r n e s s t h a t t h e r e had been v e s s e l s w i t h i n t h e c a n a l much l a r g e r t h a n t h e s c h o o n e r (Wagner 1933: 186-187). Vancouver island made  recognized  and renamed  no m e n t i o n  1798:298-300),  that  i t Point  of natives  although  the " I s l a  Roberts.  de Z e p e d a " was n o t a n  At Point  nor o f a n a t i v e  he was t h e r e  55  just  Roberts  village  one y e a r  Vancouver (Vancouver  after  Pantoja.  Curiously, that  Menzies,  Vancouver  Roberts, himself  but  a  mentioned  a review  d i d not  member  of  a  Vancouver's  large  expedition,  deserted  o f Vancouver's j o u r n a l  village  finds  that  records  at  Point  Vancouver  record i t .  When t h e y l e f t t h e S h i p on t h e M o r n i n g o f t h e 1 2 t h t h e y f i r s t e x p l o r e d a l a r g e s h o a l w a t e r B a y t i l l t h e y came t o a c o n s p i c u o u s White B l u f f of a moderate h e i g h t f o r m i n g the w e s t e r n p o i n t o f i t & w h i c h a f t e r w a r d s o b t a i n e d t h e Name o f Cape R o b e r t s . Here they l a n d e d to d i n e near a l a r g e d e s e r t e d V i l l a g e c a p a b l e of c o n t a i n i n g at l e a s t 4 or 500 I n h a b i t a n t s , t h o i t was now i n p e r f e c t r u i n s — n o t h i n g b u t the s k e l e t o n s of the houses remaind, t h e s e however were s u f f i c i e n t t o shew t h e i r g e n e r a l f o r m s t r u c t u r e & p o s i t i o n . E a c h h o u s e a p p e a r d d i s t i n c t & c a p a c i o u s o f t h e f o r m o f an o b l o n g s q u a r e , & t h e y were a r r a n g d i n t h r e e s e p a r a t e rows o f c o n s i d e r a b l e l e n g t h ; t h e Beams c o n s i s t e d o f huge l o n g p i e c e s o f T i m b e r p l a c e d i n N o t c h e s on t h e t o p o f s u p p o r t e r s 14 f e e t f r o m t h e g r o u n d , b u t by w h a t m e c h a n i c a l p o w e r t h e N a t i v e s had r a i s d t h e s e b u l k y beams t o t h a t h e i g h t t h e y c o u l d n o t conjecture. T h r e e s u p p o r t e r s s t o o d a t e a c h end f o r t h e l o n g i t u d i n a l beams, & an e q u a l number were a r r a n g e d on e a c h s i d e f o r t h e s u p p o r t o f s m a l l e r c r o s s beams i n each house ( M e n z i e s 1923:60). These  d i s c r e p a n c i e s are  difficult  be t h a t i n J u n e , when V a n c o u v e r was in  the  Whether in the  islands  or  fishing  was  t h e Lummi a r e a fact  although  that there  up-river, the  where  reason  there  were  appeared  to  they  Indians have  would  lack  to say.  few  for.  I t could  i n the a r e a , the I n d i a n s were  f o r the  is difficult  to account  of  not  be  natives  noticed. elsewhere  V a n c o u v e r commented to  be  seen  p r e v i o u s l y been  on  anywhere, a  denser  population. It may be somewhat p r e m a t u r e to c o n c l u d e that this d e l i g h t f u l c o u n t r y has a l w a y s been t h u s t h i n l y i n h a b i t e d ; on the c o n t r a r y , t h e r e a r e r e a s o n s to b e l i e v e i t has been infinitely more populous...Not many y e a r s s i n c e , e a c h o f t h e s e v a c a n t p l a c e s might have been a l l o t t e d to the h a b i t a t i o n s of d i f f e r e n t s o c i e t i e s . . . I n our different e x c u r s i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y those i n the neighbourhood of Port D i s c o v e r y , t h e s c u l l , l i m b s , r i b s , a n d b a c k b o n e s , o r some o t h e r v e s t i g e s o f t h e human body, were f o u n d i n many p l a c e s promiscuously scattered about the beach, in great n u m b e r s . . . t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s do n o t a m o u n t t o a d i r e c t 56  p r o o f o f t h e e x t e n s i v e p o p u l a t i o n t h e y i n d i c a t e , y e t , when c o m b i n e d w i t h o t h e r a p p e a r a n c e s , t h e y w a r r a n t e d an o p i n i o n , t h a t a t no v e r y r e m o t e p e r i o d t h i s c o u n t r y h a d b e e n f a r m o r e p o p u l o u s t h a n a t p r e s e n t (Meany 1 9 5 7 : 1 2 3 - 1 2 4 ) . The years at  next European contacts  later.  After  acquiring  with  t h e Lummi came  the American  A s t o r i a , a t t h e mouth o f t h e C o l u m b i a  Fort  Vancouver  eighty  miles  further  F u r Company  River,  up t h a t  Hudson's Bay Company s e t o u t t o e x p a n d t h e i r northward. F o r t Langley, Lummi,  was,founded  Vancouver location area  i n the v i c i n i t y ,  contained  Spit,  o f 1824.  stream, the operations  the c l o s e s t to the on  Southeast  that decided  t r a v e l e d through  t h e Lummi  although  sizeable villages  Little  Work  mention  camped near  i n the mid-1800s  likely  an " o l d I n d i a n have o n l y  been o c c u p i e d  J u l y and A u g u s t .  the F r a s e r  River  village"  at Point  during  Roberts,  i s made  locations (Semiahmoo  11 a n d 12 D e c e m b e r ; a n d B i r c h B a y 20 D e c e m b e r ) .  record  on t h e  J o h n Work, a H u d s o n ' s B a y C o m p a n y  kept a j o u r n a l o f that e x p e d i t i o n .  natives  that  in  to e s t a b l i s h Fort Langley  same  Victoria,  The e x p e d i t i o n  holdings  and e s t a b l i s h i n g  trading  River,  i n 1827, and F o r t  i n 1843.  i n the winter  clerk, of  Island,  on t h e F r a s e r  thirty-two  Work d i d  but i t would  the reef net f i s h i n g  season  O f t h e H a l k o m e l e m p e o p l e Work e n c o u n t e r e d on  he n o t i c e d :  A p a i r o f o l d b l a n k e t s and an o l d k n i v e [ s i c ] were t h e o n l y E u r o p e a n a r t i c l e s o b s e r v e d among t h e s e p e o p l e , t h e y seemed t o h a v e no a r m s , t h e i r c l o t h i n g was b l a n k e t s o f t h e i r own m a n u f a c t u r e ( E l l i o t t 1912:223). Work crossed not  d i d encounter  over  mention  "Coweechin" near  from Vancouver's  Island"  any i n h a b i t a n t s o r s i g n s  How Work knew where t h e I n d i a n s It  is difficult  to avoid  B i r c h Bay who  (Elliott  1912:224),  of villages  came f r o m  "had j u s t  i n the area.  i s n o t made  clear.  s p e c u l a t i n g on t h e a p p a r e n t 57  but d i d  lack of  native  people during  estimates eight  place  hundred  contact. already  By  he  the  first  encountered  so  as  disease, years.  increased  in  the  the  remain  Smallpox  only passing  of  seven hundred  Europeans  diseases.  the  prior area  Suttles  the  bore  noted the  reducing  every  people  the  had  1700s/early  1800s,  seem  T h i s p r a c t i c e o f r a i d i n g may  when  by  any  early explorers. strange  Large  of F o r t Langley  numbers o f  i n the  vessels  Skagit  e a r l y years  m e n t i o n s o f Lummi, f o r  and  years  contract  probably  by  natives  twenty  number o f  which  to  smallpox  population  e p i d e m i c s were the Kwakiutl),  of  to  (1954:42)  t h a t many  scars  non-immune  establishment  j o u r n a l s , but  first  Population  Semiahmoo)  tends to recur  i t keeps  late  hid  few.  and  Vancouver  Sound  were e n c o u n t e r e d  the  the  results.  (probably  firearms.  Even a f t e r Lummi  with  Salish  Samish  introduced  Puget  Indians  natives  Straits  by  therefore  during  introduced  of  generation  Coupled  "Northern"  few  in  new  and  exploration.  s m a l l p o x e p i d e m i c s t r u c k t h e Lummi a r e a  1798:254). a  the  arrival  devastating  (Vancouver or  (including  the  with  early period of  t h e number o f Lummi a t a r o u n d  been d e c i m a t e d  estimates 1782  this  for  the many  raids to  by  have  because  of  s u g g e s t why  so  Perhaps were  sighted.  mentions of  Klallam  at F o r t Langley  the  are  the  noted  there  are  example:  S a s h i a i n f o r m s us t h a t he h e a r d a r e p o r t i n t h e H o l u m m a C o u n t r y t h a t Mr. M c K e n z i e and h i s l i t t l e p a r t y o f f o u r men w e r e m u r d e r e d by t h e T l a l a m s s o m e w h e r e i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f • Whidbey I s l a n d ( M c M i l l a n , 13 F e b r u a r y 1828.) McMillan  was  Company  men  European  e x p l o r a t i o n of  Fort  by  referring Klallam  to the  (see the  Dye  murder o f 1907).  Nooksack  Langley. 58  River  s e v e r a l Hudson's C e r t a i n l y the also  originated  Bay  first from  Mr A n n a c e w i t h f o u r men and t h e Q u a i t l i n e C h i e f g o t t o t h e Osaak or Whullummy r i v e r t h e i r 1 s t day f r o m Canoe e a r l y w h i c h p r o v e d l a r g e r t h a n he e x p e c t e d ; b u t f o u n d n o t h i n g t h e r e but abandoned Lodges - the v e r y p l a c e where t i s s a i d the S c h a c h a d s l a t e l y k i l l e d 4 o f them, f o r g i v i n g their B e a v e r t o t h e Q u a i t l i n e s (McDonald 5 F e b r u a r y 1 8 3 0 ) . Numerous p a s s a g e s Indians  at P o i n t Roberts  referred would  t o as c a m p i n g  have been  1952:25-26). fort,  from but  and  fishing  as  Some S a a n i c h  fishing  journals  (Saanich).  The  i n t h e B o u n d a r y Bay for reef  seemed  and  Langley  "Sanch"  villages  c o n s t r u c t e d a weir  Hudson's Bay  the F o r t  netting  Sanch area  are  which  (see a l s o  t o have w i n t e r e d  established  mention  Duff  over  near  the  trade r e l a t i o n s  with  the  Company.  A l i t t l e Red D e e r ' s m e a t was p u r c h a s e d t o d a y f r o m S a n c h I n d i a n s who h a v e t h e i r l o d g e s n o t f a r f r o m t h i s up t h e l i t t l e Portage River (McMillan 6 October 1827). T h e r e a r e a few o f t h e S a n c h t r i b e encamped n o t f a r f r o m us, u p o n t h e L i t t l e P o r t a g e R i v e r , w h e r e t h e y t a k e S a l m o n by b a r r i n g up t h e R i v e r . T h e y k i l l a few B e a v e r a l s o w i t h wooden t r a p s ( M c M i l l a n 12 O c t o b e r 1827). It  i s not  during  the e a r l y  further Birch  unlikely  that  Saanich  as  from  " S a a n i t c h " on Vancouver  Island  times  tribe  whom P o i n t R o b e r t s  name  from  one  Semiahmoo", n o t  (Suttles  of  their  from  inhabiting  to themselves  (1856) i d e n t i f i e s  historic to  people  1800s r e f e r r e d  evidence Gibbs Bay  the  his  1856  fished  1951a:202).  map.  1  Roberts  as " S a a n i c h " .  the people It  near  i s known  that  well  into  F u r t h e r , t h e Semiahmooo,  leaders during  ascribed, the  of t h e i r  mid own.  As  residing  at P o i n t Roberts  i s generally  an a p p e l l a t i o n  Point  derive 1800s,  The  the  their  "Chief  references  1. S u t t l e s s t a t e s t h a t t h e p e o p l e a t B i r c h B a y may h a v e b e e n S o n g h e e s (1951a) o r a t l e a s t S o n g h e e s f r o m C a d b o r o B a y came t o B i r c h Bay t o d i g c l a m s (1951a:19). T h e r e i s p r o b a b l y no c o n f l i c t between these v a r y i n g r e p o r t s , i t j u s t f u r t h e r supports the c o n t e n t i o n t h a t t h e p r o d u c t i v e r e s o u r c e s o f t h e a r e a were s h a r e d by many l o c a l l y - n a m e d C o a s t S a l i s h g r o u p s .  59  to Sanch at F o r t Langley  suggest  extent  fur trade,  with  i n the  the  developing  Hudson's Bay  that they p a r t i c i p a t e d but  i t i s evident  Company d i d n o t  dominate  t o some  that  their  trade  economic  activity. F a m i l i e s f r o m t h e S a n c h v i l l a g e a t P o i n t R o b e r t s have been p a s s i n g i n c o n t i n u e d s u c c e s s i o n d u r i n g t h e day a l l bound f o r t h e S a l m o n F i s h e r y ( M c M i l l a n 25 A u g u s t 1827). A f e w I n d i a n s a b o u t - one o f Roberts Village t r a d e d 20 f o l l o w e r s a l s o b r o u g h t us one a n d 10 o r 12 o f t h e v e r y l a r g e g r e a t abundance i n the l i t t l e 1828).  them - t h e C h i e f f r o m P o i n t B e a v e r S k i n s - he a n d his hundred of the S m a l l Salmon o n e s - t h e y now t a k e t h e m i n r i v e r s ( M c D o n a l d 21 O c t o b e r  C h i c h e , n o o k s / t h e C h i e f of P o i n t R o b e r t s / h i s young men a g a i n b r o u g h t us two h u n d r e d w h i c h w i l l make 4 C a s k s o f good S a l t e d Salmon (McDonald 22 O c t o b e r 1 8 2 8 ) . By an I n d i a n j u s t a r r i v e d f r o m t h e m o u t h o f t h e r i v e r t h e a s s e m b l a g e o f n a t i v e s i n t h a t q u a r t e r i s immense - On P o i n t R o b e r t s a l o n e he S a y s t h a t no l e s s t h a n 200 C a n o e s l a n d e d t h e o t h e r d a y ( M c D o n a l d 20 A u g u s t 1829). The posts  too,  t r a d e was too  Lummi must have v i s i t e d but  limited.  lucrative,  Fort Victoria Fraser  i t is clear  River  and  The  i n 1843,  began  Company t r a d i n g  that their.participation  lower  around  t h e Hudson's Bay  the  the  Fraser River same  fur  time  trade  as  i n the  f u r t r a d e was the  i n the  never  establishment  area  of  the  fur  of  Lower  to d e c l i n e .  I r e g r e t to say t h a t F o r t L a n g l e y i s l o w e r i n g f a s t i n the scale of importance; I t s f u r r e t u r n s a r e t r i f l i n g t o an e x t r e m e ( Y a l e 17 December 1 8 4 5 ) . The r e t u r n s o f F o r t L a n g l e y a r e t h i s y e a r v e r y p o o r , s h e w i n g a d e c l i n e i n v a l u e o f a b o u t L700. as compared w i t h last y e a r , w h i c h i s s u p p o s e d t o a r e i s e e n t i r e l y f r o m want o f e x e r t i o n on t h e p a r t o f t h e N a t i v e s (Ogden and Douglas 19 M a r c h 1 8 4 6 ) . Suttles  (1954:39)  ( r o u g h l y 1827-1841) was  suggests  one  that  the  fur  i n which n a t i v e people  60  trade  period  were needed  by  the  traders  t h a t they  culture rather  evidence  corroborate were l e s s closer  from this  than  food.  "The a d d i t i o n s  of  the f u r traders  a s s e r t i o n a n d t o make i t c l e a r  to the t r a d i n g  the t r a d e r s than  Straits  tends  to  t h a t t h e Lummi  were t h e g r o u p s  living  posts.  the establishment  other  i n s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n or r e l i g i o n . "  the journals  i n contact with  With and  f o r f u r s and t o p r o v i d e  [ t h e f u r t r a d e r s ] made t o n a t i v e c u l t u r e were m a i n l y i n  material The  t o hunt  Salish  i n the l e s s  of Fort Victoria  likely  spent  there  than  familiar  area  Fraser  R i v e r . The f o l l o w i n g q u o t a t i o n  much  i n 1843, t h e Lummi more t i m e  of Fort  trading  Langley  discussing Native  on t h e  Americans  i n g e n e r a l seems t o a p p l y t o t h e Lummi i n p a r t i c u l a r . As l o n g a s t h e n a t i v e A m e r i c a n s were a b l e t o d i r e c t m o s t o f the s o c i a l l a b o r a v a i l a b l e through k i n - o r d e r e d r e l a t i o n s t o the task o f guaranteeing their subsistence, the goods o b t a i n e d by p a r t - t i m e f u r h u n t i n g s u p p l e m e n t e d r a t h e r t h a n r e p l a c e d t h e i r own means o f p r o d u c t i o n (Wolf 1 9 8 2 : 1 9 3 ) . From  the h i s t o r i c a l data  participated half  t o any g r e a t  of the nineteenth  them a t t h e n e x t 1849 the  nearest  i t d o e s n o t a p p e a r t h a t t h e Lummi  extent  century.  i n the f u r trade There  i s only  of the f i r s t  one m e n t i o n o f  p o s t , F o r t N i s q u a l l y , and t h a t n o t u n t i l  when W.F. T o l m i e n o t e s t h a t a " p a r t y o f L u m m i e s a r r i v e d down beach"  (1920:61).  The p u r p o s e  of the v i s i t  i s n o t made  clear. There either, place  i s no m e n t i o n o f L u m m i  but since F o r t V i c t o r i a  f o r Indians  Alaska, notice.  i n the F o r t V i c t o r i a  very  rapidly  a r e numerous n a t i v e a c c o u n t s  V i c t o r i a during  gathering  a l l t h e way f r o m S o u t h P u g e t Sound t o S o u t h e a s t  i t i s not s u p r i s i n g that a p a r t i c u l a r There  became a  records  group would  escape  o f Lummi t r a v e l i n g t o  the-1800s f o r t r a d e and v i s i t i n g ,  and s i n c e t h e  Victoria Salish at  area  social  Victoria  most  t r a d e on  frequented  assigned the  Yet,  there as  t h e L u m m i was the  normal  range of  the  expected  t h a t the  trading post  by t h e L u m m i .  to Bellingham  Indians  1856).  came u n d e r  w i t h i n the  n e t w o r k , i t i s t o be  of  (Fitzhugh  well  w o u l d be  I n d i a n Agent that  was  Bay  had  of  example,  in July  to V i c t o r i a  out,  negligible.  domination  reported  gone  pointed  For  the  I t was  the U n i t e d  on  impact not  until  found  no  such  explorers. was  the  through  dearth  I n 1853,  largest  (Trowbridge  of  the  Lummi  native  territory  inhabitants  Trowbridge noted  Indian  1942:398),  "visit" the  the  fur  Lummi  that  of  factor. i n the  as  he  and  impact  did  mid-1800s the  early  t h a t near B e l l i n g h a m  encampment  and  1856  States government  t h e W e s t e r n economy began t o become a s i g n i f i c a n t travelers  the  of  a  of  were f o r c e d t o accommodate -the m a r k e t economy t h a t t h e  The  Straits  had  ever  Bay seen  also that:  T h e t r i b e c a l l e d Lummys i s t h e l a r g e s t - an I n d i a n t o l d me t h a t t h e y have f o r t y c h i e f s ("Laket t a t i l u m h y a s Tyees") (Trowbridge 1942:399).  The  Treaty Era As  and of  provided  Great  by  Britain,  the the  t h e Semiahmoo, and  States. that  the  I t was area  settlement mouth The  1855-1859  of  of  not  of  area  1846  between the  K l a l l a m , became t h e  long  after  the B e l l i n g h a m Creek  Whatcom  of  i n h a b i t e d by  began t o a t t r a c t  Whatcom  mouth  treaty  the  later  at  Creek  was  the  had  Samish,  early  begun,  first  of  Creek a  part  United  this  As  Squalicum site  States  t e r r i t o r y o f the  settlers.  area  and  62  Lummi,  United  confirmation of  white Bay  the  treaty as  and  sizeable  at  1852 the  Sehome. Lummi  village. of it  The f a l l s  a saw m i l l , for.  496),  there  made  i t an i d e a l  w h i c h was what t h e f i r s t  Under  the Oregon  any a d u l t U n i t e d  Land  States  site  settlers  Donation  citizen  f o r the l o c a t i o n proposed  A c t o f 1850  could  stake  t o use  (9 S t a t .  a claim  o f 320  a c r e s , a n d i t was p o s s i b l e f o r a man a n d w i f e t o c l a i m 640 a c r e s . What  i s now  Territory  the State  from  of Washington  1846 t o 1 8 5 3 .  305).  Congress  T h e same  passed  an I n d i a n  negotiate  treaties  Territory  had t o t i t l e  concept theory, could land  Treaty  and l i q u i d a t e  was  cleared,  any c l a i m  twenty-five  a l l taking Issac  Washington governor, leader  timber  I. Stevens  land  1968:47),  i n 1853.  of Indian  Superintendent  of Indian A f f a i r s ,  took  this  task  arrived  and w a s t e d  title  to the  to the  filed  t o the census on P u g e t  in  to land  title  had been  on  there  Sound by  lands. o f the newly  In a d d i t i o n  formed  to h i s post  o f the T e r r i t o r i a l Railroad  to acquire  title  little  time  as  army,  Survey,  I t was S t e v e n s ' s  i n Washington T e r r i t o r y 63  o f Oregon  held  duty,  and as  to the land  on b e h a l f o f t h e F e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t .  seriously  Stevens  Affairs.  funds t o  at least  before  governor  Pacific  Superintendent  the Indians  before  claims  from unclaimed  the Northern  States  i n operation  was a p p o i n t e d  Territory  from  the Indians  Even  S t e v e n s was a l s o m a j o r - g e n e r a l of  authorized  and a c c o r d i n g  sawmills  Donation Act,  and t h e r e f o r e ,  settlers.  nineteen  Bay (Edson  were a l r e a d y  Land  t o t h e l a n d . The U n i t e d  to white  o f the Oregon  t h e s e p a r a t i o n (10  A c t , which  o w n e r s h i p h a d t o be e x t i n g u i s h e d  be g r a n t e d  duties.  after  as t h e Oregon  of a b o r i g i n a l ownership  Bellingham  1855,  year  part  T h e O r e g o n L a n d D o n a t i o n A c t was  made a p p l i c a b l e t o W a s h i n g t o n T e r r i t o r y Stat.  was  Stevens  i n executing h i s i n November  of  1853.  By  December  treaty commission negotiations. treaties  were  in  who  One  1855  1854/1855 Western which  had  December and  treaty  failed  later  signed  Territory  (Stevens  with  of  Indians  "Treaty In  most  One  of  was  the  year of  of  Samish,  and  Western  Some o f the  the  Quinaielt"  native  with  groups  of  December/January  initially  Treaty  four  S t e v e n s met  of  the  the  With  fact,  treaty  1854/1855  in negotiations.  one  appointed  the d e t a i l s of the  signed  within  Lummi,  h i s newly  January  with  treaties  the  with  and  the  1900:478).  Washington  met  1979:112).  treaties  included  had  worked out  (Boxberger  negotiated  Washington  he  negotiated  refused  J u l y of  and  and  During  Washington. groups  o f 1854  of  successful  Point  eighteen  Elliott,  other  named  groups. Although Indian  groups  Washington United  negotiated  States  liberal  with  1859,  the  in  ratification The  1857  of  Treaty  outlining  the  (Stevens  the  "exclusive  of  and  as was  Point by  (Stevens  Elliott which  1979:123-128).  by  the  1900:449).  the  the  Approval  was  been  too  Stevens h i m s e l f  had  the  Territory  in gaining  contains  fifteen  s i g n a t o r i e s agreed  Article  Article  64  Western  of  eventual  1940:403).  2 described  Indians;  the  by  t h a t S t e v e n s had  instrumental  treaty; Article  use"  became e f f e c t i v e . being  the  for r a t i f i c a t i o n  r e p r e s e n t a t i v e from  treaties  policies  Boxberger  c e d e d by  the  they  r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of  Government,  to wait  the f e e l i n g  Indians  by  States  had  before  e l e c t e d to Congress  Washington  signed  United  still  Senate  until  (see  the  treaties  refused  been  and  and  1  described  the  3 set  lands aside  articles to the  abide lands  reserved  for  a reservation  for  a school;  the  reservation  Article  of  that  annuities;  and  Article  from  7 gave  the c i t i z e n s  alcohol  from  promised  8 forbade  n o t t o commit  of the United  the reservations;  12 p r o h i b i t e d  the dominions  trade  States;  Article  a t Vancouver  of the United  an a g e n c y ,  agency;  Article  10 e x c l u d e d  11 a b o l i s h e d Island  States";  school,  and A r t i c l e  15 s t a t e s  Article  that  slavery;  or elsewhere "out  and m e d i c a l  become o b l i g a t o r y on t h e s i g n a t o r s and  t h e use  any d e p r e d a t i o n s  13 s e t a s i d e  f u n d s t o e s t a b l i s h a g r i c u l t u r e on t h e r e s e r v a t i o n s ;  general  the  the r e s e r v a t i o n s or  to individuals; A r t i c l e  the Indians  established  gathering  f o r the payment o f i n d i v i d u a l d e b t s ; A r t i c l e 9  against  of  of the treaty;  shellfishing,  t h e r i g h t t o remove I n d i a n s  the a n n u i t i e s  Article  t h e t r i b e s were t o move o n t o  fishing,  6 outlined  the reservations  stated  that  one y e a r o f r a t i f i c a t i o n  hunting,  Article  President  4 stated  within  5 reserved  rights;  allot  Article  Article  14  facilities  at the  the t r e a t y  was t o  when r a t i f i e d  by t h e P r e s i d e n t  of the Point  Elliott  the Senate. Even  special  prior  Indian  to r a t i f i c a t i o n  Agents  W a s h i n g t o n where assigned  Bay.  sufficient  during  abundance  introduced  to c e r t a i n areas The f i r s t  was E.C. F i t z h u g h reported  this period,  owing  traditional  that  foods  Indian  t h e Lummi  adaptations with  were  the market  were  fisheries  (Fitzhugh  insignificant economy.  Agent  i n J u l y o f 1856 a t  t h e Lummi  to their  i n Western  1856;  and c e r t a i n i t e m s o f E u r o p e a n m a n u f a c t u r e  but these  connecting  area  Fitzhugh  of other  Potato farming  assigned  Indians concentrated.  t o t h e Lummi  Bellingham  adopted,  were  Treaty,  selfand an 1857).  had been  i n terms of  Potatoes  had been  by t h e H u d s o n ' s B a y C o m p a n y a t F o r t L a n g l e y a s e a r l y 65  a s 1827  a n d h a d s p r e a d t h r o u g h t h e C o a s t S a l i s h a r e a w i t h i n a few  years  ( S u t t l e s 1951b).  P o t a t o e s seemed t o have r e p l a c e d n a t i v e  plant  foods with  o r no  t h e Lummi. gathering camas,  little  White  (1980:32-33) has  practices  bracken  agriculture instruction  adjustment  of  the  Coast  fern,  and  the  potato  that  i n i t s c a r e and  as a s u b s i s t e n c e c r o p and  n e c e s s a r y on t h e p a r t  suggested Salish  nettles) was  that  (especially had  so  adopted  planting".  the  s o l d v e r y few  traditional i n regard  approached  "without  The  Lummi  of  any  raised  to the w h i t e s  to  true direct  potatoes (Fitzhugh  1856). One  item  of  consternation selling  of  selling area  liquor  as  native  I n d i a n Agent  while  t h e H u d s o n ' s Bay  they  they  found find  technology  and  had  were  As  that a  that  been  quickly  turned to l i q u o r  Bay  of  was  the  was  began  one  item  Less  etc., merely  s a t u r a t e d the  area  but  or,  he  more  were s e l l i n g Fort  frequently often,  liquor  replaced market  so  items  of  white  i n order to continue t h e i r  trade  i n the  attempt  reported soldiers  to the  Indians.  was  they  the  that  Bellingham  the  p e r i s h a b l e goods  time  trade,  the  in  f o r which  the  spent  by  trading  ( s e e W h i t e 1983:318 f o r a c o m p a r a b l e c a s e ) . was  the  territory.  operations agent's  some  explicit policies against  n a t i v e market. pots,  cause  suppressed  i n charge  Americans  liquor  did  at Bellingham  Company had  b l a n k e t s , guns,  traders often  traffic  to Indians.  consistently  such  introduction  Liquor  Company  however,  could  f o r the  liquor.  Hudson's Bay In f a c t ,  white  that  liquor  stationed  established  66  to suppress  just  boats at Fort  Much o f  the  liquor  were  i n the  Bellingham  e a s t o f the mouth o f  the  Nooksack  protect  River  i n 1856.  the s e t t l e r s  "Northern  and  Indians"  identified  as  "Hyders"  Fitzhugh  the  soldiers  were no l e s s  the  introduction of liquor  lived, the  the  local  (probably  Tsimshian).  attributed  The p u r p o s e  often  an e v i l traffic  boundary  marauding  although  variably  (Tlingit),  t o Governor  than  Stevens  the northern  i n t h e Lummi  area  A  brief  T h e f o r t , h o w e v e r , was s h o r t Island  controversy  o f 1859, b u t t h e l i q u o r  traffic  o f the next  River  that  people  o f 100,000  Washington T e r r i t o r y passing  through  settlement  o f Whatcom.  hundred  Bay  suddenly  and  a newspaper. It  from  attitude  estimated  Columbia 1968:74),  and most  s t a y i n g on i n t h e s m a l l  a population of less  the settlement  t h a t many o f t h e g o l d (Jeffcott  1949:58),  o u t and p r o s p e c t o r s propectors  that  encountered.  the gold  on  than  Bellingham  became a c i t y , s p o r t i n g s a l o o n s , b r o t h e l s , h o t e l s ,  appears  California  from  was  I t has been  to B r i t i s h  Bay and many  Expanding  from  to increase,  occurrence  o f 1858 (Edson  t o n e a r l y t e n thousand,  California  to p l a y  came  during  o f Americans.  i n 1858.  i n t h e summer  Bellingham  one  influx  influential  rush o f t h e upper F r a s e r  that  largely  r e - s t a t i o n e d t o San J u a n  b u t no d o u b t  upwards  was  being  as a r e s u l t  and  r a i d e r s , and  white traders d i d not d e c l i n e , rather i t continued primarily  was t o  from  "Stikines"  complained  to the m i l i t a r y post.  the s o l d i e r s  Indians  Kwakiutl  (Haida),  of the f o r t  were  apparently  the Indians  seekers  where  came t o t h e a r e a  the gold  restless brought  was  f o r new with  them  of Washington T e r r i t o r y  I n 1858 F i t z h u g h  reported  67  beginning  finds. a  The  frontier  had n o t y e t  some a n x i e t y among t h e  Indians  i n the area.  transients passing the  Indians  were coming  According  through  to the gold  t h e y met a l o n g i n t o the area  fields  some  had b e e n  informing  and w e r e g o i n g (which  indeed  they had done, see  L a t e r t h a t year Agent F i t z h u g h  The  canoes t o the whites  prospectors  upper F r a s e r  t o make t h e t r i p  used B e l l i n g h a m  River gold  whites  t o wipe out the Indians  reported that the  Lummi w e r e " d e s t i t u t e o f t h e means o f f i s h i n g " , h a v i n g their  of the  t h e way t h a t g r e a t h o r d e s o f  as t h e y had done i n C a l i f o r n i a N o r t o n 1979).  to Fitzhugh  sold a l l  to the Fraser  River.  Bay as a s t a r t i n g p o i n t f o r t h e  fields,  either  t a k i n g passage  to Fort  Hope by w a t e r , t r a v e l i n g o v e r l a n d , o r more c o m m o n l y , m a k i n g way up t h e N o o k s a c k R i v e r by c a n o e , t h e n c e o v e r l a n d and  the Fraser  that  gold  the Indians  Fitzhugh  reported  prospectors  were  fields  would  paying  t h a t t h e Lummi  before  too long. entire  the s e t t l e m e n t s towns, they  part  with  gold  was  to Chilliwack  I t i s d i f f i c u l t to imagine a l l of  that the temptation  likely  The  beyond.  their  canoes,  too great.  lasted  less  but  of the large p r i c e s the Regardless,  i ti s  w o u l d h a v e been a b l e t o a c q u i r e new  rush  their  than  s i x months.  canoes  Although  o f Whatcom and Sehome h a d t e m p o r a r i l y g r o w n  into  shrank a g a i n t o a s m a l l e r s i z e n e a r l y as r a p i d l y as  t h e y had grown.  By t h e c e n s u s o f 1860 t h e t o t a l  white  population  o f Whatcom C o u n t y was 3 5 2 , 108 o f whom w e r e s o l d i e r s a t San J u a n Island  and  States/Great  governmental  personnel  surveying  the  United  B r i t a i n b o u n d a r y a t Camp Semiahmoo (near p r e s e n t d a y  Blaine).  68  Table 3. W h i t e and W a s h i n g t o n , 1860-1910. Year  Indian  1860  Indian  populations  of  Whatcom  County,  White 352  600  Includes what i s now Whatcom, San J u a n and p a r t s o f I s l a n d and Skagit Counties. ti  1870  600  1880  275  3,137  1890  269  18,192  I n c l u d e s a l l I n d i a n s o f Whatcom C o u n t y , n o t j u s t Lummi.  1900  519  22,512  II  II  1910  658  48,464  II  II  534  SOURCES : United States t h r o u g h 1910.  The the  Lummi  earliest The  final  element  during  this  I n c l u d e s p a r t o f what S k a g i t County.  Census  with  was  i n the v i c i n i t y  especially  at Fort  through  of  Vancouver,  1910; ARCIA  was  and Demers m i s s i o n i z e d t h e Hudson's  Bay  Cowlitz  S t a t i o n as e a r l y as 1839, and t h e m i s s i o n out from  believes  that  in  this  the f i r s t  centralized priest  1 8 4 1 , when he v i s i t e d  mentioned as v i s i t i n g  A mission  visits  t r i b e s i n the t e r r i t o r y .  location.  the S t r a i t s  Whidbey  the p r i e s t  69  Island.  a t Whidbey  The 1840s.  among t h e  Company  and made o c c a s i o n a l  1860  society to  i n the e a r l y  various  radiated  i s now  t h e work o f m i s s i o n a r i e s .  missionaries  Catholic P r i e s t s Blanchet  natives  1860  i n the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f white  period  known c o n t a c t  II  posts, to the  was e s t a b l i s h e d a t expeditions  Suttles  people  (1954:40)  saw was Demers  Although Klallam are Island  i n the f a l l o f  1841,  there  i s no e v i d e n c e  However, Demers passed Langley.  that  through  Of t h e I n d i a n s  t h e Lummi  t h e Lummi  he met a l o n g  also visited  area  en r o u t e  t h e way, he  there. to Fort  said,  A l m o s t a l l knew how t o make t h e s i g n o f t h e c r o s s a n d s i n g some c a n t i c l e s ... T h o s e n a t i o n s s c a t t e r e d i n v a s t a r e a s had c o m m u n i c a t e d m u t u a l l y among t h e m s e l v e s what t h e y had l e a r n e d (Landerholm 1956:104). The  Straits  Christianity, several  Tsamishes"  the  Bolduc came  invariably  (Georgia  states that  impressed  attracted mass.  Strait)  to attend  people  from  1850s o r e a r l y  fully  1860s.  adopting  The p r i e s t s  crowds o f from  a r e known t o have the p r i e s t s , Klalams,  services at Fort Victoria contact  with  Indians  1,200 " K a w i t s h i n s ,  Yet, the lack of constant  Straits  late  be  a l l t h e way t o t h e C o w l i t z M i s s i o n t o v i s i t  Father  1843.  to  t o be b a p t i s e d a n d a t t e n d  t h e Bay o f S t . G e o r g e "  traveled and  appeared  since the p r i e s t s  hundred  "beyond  people  with  i n March o f  the p r i e s t s  Christianity reported  and  kept  u n t i l the  that  ... t h e n a t i v e s o f P u g e t Sound show q u i t e a z e a l f o r p r a y e r ; y e t they h a r d l y u n d e r s t a n d t h e meaning o f t h e word. I f i t h a d o n l y b e e n a m a t t e r o f k n o w i n g some p r a y e r s , o f s i n g i n g c a n t i c l e s t o be a C h r i s t i a n , t h e r e w o u l d n o t h a v e b e e n o n e n o t d e s i r i n g t o be one ( L a n d e r h o l m 1 9 5 6 : 1 9 8 ) . In long and  support  of this  as t h e p r i e s t s devout.  would  view  the agent F i t z h u g h  were among  When t h e p r i e s t s  t h e Lummi departed  reported  the Indians  however,  t h a t as  were  their  pious  influence  wane. As t h e C a t h o l i c P r i e s t s h a v e b e e n h e r e f o r a b o u t 2 w e e k s , t h e r e h a s been a g r e a t i m p r o v e m e n t i n my I n d i a n s . I c a n n o t s a y how l o n g i t w i l l l a s t , a f t e r t h e y make t h e i r d e p a r t u r e ( F i t z h u g h 1856). Father  Eugene  Casimir  A g e n c y i n 1857, and a f t e r served  as sub-agent  Chirouse  was  ratification  i n charge  assigned  o f the t r e a t i e s  of the T u l a l i p , 70  t o the T u l a l i p i n 1859,  S w i n o m i s h , and  F t Vancouver  Map  2.  Western Washington, c i r c a 71  1855.  Columbia| River  Lummi  Reservations.  Lummi  periodically  Father  Chirouse  and i n 1861 had a  reservation.  In the p r i e s t ' s  Davy C r o c k e t t ,  was a p p o i n t e d  After  the Oregon  Northwest and  region  latterly  settlers.  the  Land  absence  to hold  the Puget  The U n i t e d  the United from  the  Indians  reserved  t h a t was s e c u r e d .  access  resources by  to  (e.g.,  felt  i n Oregon,  i t was  essential  timber,  treaty  were  resources  Through  the n a t i v e people.  essential  as  land,  minerals)  and A l l o t m e n t  1860-1884  However,  In the case  tribes,  just  removed  to the l i v e l i h o o d o f  use.  secured  o f the  l a r g e numbers o f  of the  i t was t h e f i s h e r y  N e v e r t h e l e s s , a s we s h a l l  resources  those  by t r e a t y , they  that  see, even t h e Lummi  d i d the  were  other  not p r o t e c t e d  treaty.  Post-Reservation  Ratification Lummi  Much spent  of the Point  Reservation  resident  farmer  became  was  of the e f f o r t i n urging  reservation. at  Valley  S t a t e s government  for their  Point E l l i o t t  though t h e f i s h e r i e s lost  on t h e  o f l a n d o w n e r s h i p be a c c o m p l i s h e d .  r e s o u r c e s t h a t were c o n s i d e r e d  resource  built  settlement  attracted  S t a t e s government  the  and o t h e r  services at  t h e " c h i e f " o f t h e Lummi,  Act white  region,  o w n e r s h i p o f l a n d and r e s o u r c e s  Lummi,  church  The W i l l a m e t t e  Sound  negotiation of treaties  were  prayer  services.  Donation  accelerated.  that c l a r i f i c a t i o n  held  the time  Elliott  Treaty  the permanent  assigned  to teach  them  There  were  to settle  two Lummi  of r a t i f i c a t i o n ,  that the  home o f t h e L u m m i .  o f the farmer-in-charge t h e Lummi  meant  "civilized during  and  villages  stay  A  pursuits".  t h e 1860s within  was the  on r e s e r v a t i o n l a n d  one a t G o o s e b e r r y P o i n t and one a t 72  the  Portage.  Sometime d u r i n g  a new c h a n n e l after  on t h e e a s t  t h a t a new v i l l a g e  Point  (Suttles  relocating  formed  was e s t a b l i s h e d a t i t s m o u t h n e a r probably  the o f f - r e s e r v a t i o n  was  River  s i d e o f t h e r e s e r v a t i o n , and s h o r t l y  1954:58-59),  from  reservation  t h e 1850s t h e N o o k s a c k  composed  villages.  of  Fish  people  By t r e a t y , t h e  t o be t h e " I s l a n d o f C h a - c h o o - s e n "  which  f o r m e d by t h e two mouths o f t h e N o o k s a c k R i v e r , one e m p t y i n g Georgia  Strait  and one i n t o  Bellingham  Bay.  Later,  into  i n 1873, t h e  n o r t h e r n b o u n d a r y was r e - e s t a b l i s h e d t o c o n f o r m more c l o s e l y the t o w n s h i p l i n e s At CC.  (ARCIA  t h e new v i l l a g e  Finkbonner,  Chirouse reports  built  Chirouse  near  Fish  Point, the farmer-in-charge,  established h i s residence, the C a t h o l i c  Speaking  with  1882:293).  Church.  o f the Indian Agents  rapidly.  was  According  t h e Lummi  o f t h e Lummi  and t h e r e  took  Reservation  Father  to the  annual  to farming  quite  i n 1871,  Father  reported:  This r e s e r v a t i o n comprises a f i n e body o f l a n d , and t h e I n d i a n s a r e c o n t e n t e d and i n d u s t r i o u s , r a i s i n g e v e r y t h i n g t h e y n e e d ... T h i s r e s e r v a t i o n s h o u l d b e g i v e n t o t h e I n d i a n s i n s e v e r a l t y as they a r e e n t i r e l y c a p a b l e o f managing a l i t t l e f a r m f o r t h e m s e l v e s , and a l l a r e a n x i o u s and e a g e r t o h a v e t h e i r l a n d s s u r v e y e d i n t o s m a l l f a r m s , t h a t e a c h may know what b e l o n g s t o h i m (ARCIA 1871:273). The as  1870s were a t i m e  a substitute  Nevertheless, farmers. no  their  tide  had  done b e f o r e .  traditional  method o f f a r m i n g were p l a n t e d  activity,  the  their  f o r many  The c r o p s  fishing  when t h e Lummi  were a d o p t i n g  subsistence  differed  and t e n d e d  from  left  In f a c t ,  to f i s h  fishing  sustenance. 73  or gather continued  activities. that o f white  as l o n g as t h e r e  b u t as soon as t h e salmon  was l o w , t h e y  farming  was  were r u n n i n g or  shellfish  as they  t o p r o v i d e most o f  74  The  development  Washington w i l l it  is  be  important  of  the  discussed to  note  commercial  more here  fully  fishery  i n the  that  next  salmon  i n the Northwest.  some t h e y  and  utilize  the  rather  abundant  a nuisance,  fish  various  f o r purposes other  Western  chapter,  were  importance to the e a r l y s e t t l e r s were  of  of  but  little  In f a c t ,  to  ways were t r i e d  to  than  food.  As l a t e as 1890 many f a r m e r s o f Whatcom C o u n t y p i t c h f o r k e d t h e l o r d l y s a l m o n o u t o f t h e s t r e a m s d u r i n g t h e s p r i n g and summer s p a w n i n g s e a s o n , and u s e d them by t h e w a g o n l o a d s as fertilizer f o r the soil, o r as feed f o r hogs (Roth 1926:661). Until  preservation  commercial  value  methods  to the  were  improved  non-Indians.  salmon  C e r t a i n l y the  had  native  t r a d e d an o c c a s i o n a l f i s h t o t h e w h i t e s t o a c q u i r e o t h e r items  of  white  manufacture,  but  this  form  of  c e r t a i n l y n o t an a s p e c t o f a m a r k e t e c o n o m y . motive  nor  The  was  there  Indian  a  Agent  relationship reports  from  of  to  T h e r e was  the  people  foods  interaction  "producer"  1856  little  and  no  was  profit  "consumer".  1880s a r e  replete  w i t h n o t i c e o f t h e f a c t t h a t a g r e a t d e a l o f t h e Lummi's t i m e spent  in fishing  was  no  small  and  1 8 8 0 s he was  reservation Lummi  to  in  continue  become  farmers and  reservation  for fishing  I n d i a n Agent.  was  s e v e r a l t y as  farming. backed  they  At  by  would  the  a  This  Throughout the  1870s  eventually  l a n d t o i n d i v i d u a l s was process.  75  time,  belief  become "good c i t i z e n s " .  civilizational  further  this  the  inducement  to  the  the  of  the  that  abandon And  was  activities.  u r g i n g the Bureau of I n d i a n A f f a i r s to a l l o t  land  States  the  in preparing  annoyance t o the  United  lifestyles  or  or  the  policy  i f Indians their  would  traditional  allotment  s e e n as a n e c e s s a r y  of  the  step in  It  is fairly  Reservation economy. time,  obvious  Although  potato  became  agent  farming  had been  i n charge o f t h e i r  to pursuade  These  the farmer-in-charge  was i n s t r u m e n t a l i n t h e a d o p t i o n  the farmer  able  that  them  important  to pursue  lives  of farming  i n the  p r a c t i c e d f o r a long  on t h e r e s e r v a t i o n was  other  supplements  o f t h e Lummi  forms  of  to subsistence  agriculture. as t h e I n d i a n  observed. The a s s i s t a n t f a r m e r o f t h i s t r e a t y h a s f o r a number o f y e a r s b e e n i n c h a r g e o f t h e Lummi R e s e r v a t i o n , a n d t h e i r m o r a l and p h y s i c a l i m p r o v e m e n t , and s u p e r i o r i t y o v e r t h e p o o r I n d i a n s o f t h e S w i n o m i s h and P o r t M a d i s o n , where t h e r e i s no g o v e r n m e n t e m p l o y e [ s i c ] , are very apparent (ARCIA 1873:299). 1  The in  Lummi  Reservation  1884, t h r e e y e a r s  Act  of  1887  (24 S t a t .  r e s t r i c t i o n s over greater  prior  control  Allotments  was  eventually allotted  t o the General L., 3 3 8 ) .  Allotment  the o f f - r e s e r v a t i o n  over  their  lives  o f 80 a c r e s  Oregon  States  Land  t o take  Donation  by t h e I n d i a n  a c r e s f o r a man a n d w i f e . by  the Bureau  p o p u l a t i o n grew, in  1927 t h a t  other  of  was a l l o t t e d  many  as w e l l ,  individuals  never  reservations u n a l l o t t e d land  (Washburn 1975:30). reservation  than  they  76  a d u l t male, and  citizens  of the United  for single over  and  men  was h e l d  received  reverted  Lummis  o r 640  in trust  eventually,  although  T h i s was n o t t h e c a s e  was s m a l l e r  Agents.  In comparison,  The l a n d l e f t Affairs,  further  160 a c r e s .  o f 320 a c r e s  Indian  meant  w e r e made t o e v e r y  Act allowed  out claims  A c t , o r Dawes  movements o f t h e Lummi and  m a l e h e a d s o f h o u s e h o l d s were a l l o t t e d the  Allotment  in severalty  as t h e testified  allotments.  to the p u b l i c  On  domain  a t Lummi, a l t h o u g h t h e  had been l e d t o b e l i e v e .  ... t h e b e g i n n i n g p o i n t was down h e r e a t w h a t i s known a s T r e a t y Rock [ e a s t bank o f t h e mouth o f t h e N o o k s a c k R i v e r ] , t h e n d u e n o r t h , t h e n way up b y a c e r t a i n c o r n e r way up n e a r B a l l a r d ' s Lake [ B a r r e t t ' s L a k e ? ] and t h e n due w e s t t o Bay Station [ C h e r r y P o i n t ] ... He s a i d he s e e n t h e [ s u r v e y ] posts ... a t B a y S t a t i o n ( T e s t i m o n y o f L o u i s M i k e f o r D u w a m i s h e t a l . v . U n i t e d S t a t e s 79 C t . C I . 5 3 0 , 604 (1934)). The area be the  the r e s e r v a t i o n a c t u a l l y  restricted  could  be s o l d .  Elliott  1874:80),  Treaty  but these  Reservation  t o move  Area plans  were  party  Nooksack.  In a c t u a l i t y  States/Canadian  Samish  Island u n t i l after  traditional 1880s under way b a c k 375  by t h e  Reservation  (ARCIA  border  by t h e 1860s; when  some  of  they  Lummi  homelands,  the Nooksack  where  they  Point),  the Samish  moved  and t h e  were l i v i n g (Roblin  of the  stayed  t o Guemes  moved their  to  Island  the  Lummi  took o u t l a n d c l a i m s  ( S u t t l e s 1954:56).  i nthe  found  77  their  A s many a s  B a y " (on S a n J u a n  o f f t h e r e s e r v a t i o n when a s u r v e y 1919).  on  way b a c k t o t h e i r  Homestead A c t ; and some Lummi  t o the San Juan I s l a n d s  i n 1919  of the Klallam,  t o t h e Lummi and S w i n o m i s h  b u t most e v e n t u a l l y found  Indians  conducted  The  most o f t h e Semiahmoo moved n o r t h  t h e 1870s,  the Indian  No  Lummi, i n c l u d i n g "San J u a n " and " M i t c h e l l  Island)  allotments.  covered  materialized.  of Point  the turn o f the century  Reservations); Reservation,  a l l Indians  (with the exception  to the Treaty  United  (then  never  and t h e l a n d  received  t h e Lummi  l a n d was t o  was t o b e c o m e t h e home o f t h e S t r a i t s S a l i s h o n t h e  American side o f the border who  to  twice the  that the s t a t u s o f  to fee patent,  n o t a l l Lummi  hoped  over  The a l l o t t e d  years, but after  changed  Of c o u r s e ,  agent-in-charge  Point  be  have e n c o m p a s s e d  included.  for twenty-five  allotments  could The  above d e s c r i p t i o n w o u l d  was  Although reservation the  many  and  and  British  Columbia as  Little impact  of  work has  into  becoming  the  way  away they  and,  from  had  the  before,  Many  Lummi  i n a d d i t i o n , Indians  came  to  Lummi  and  from  received  1927:179).  been done i n the N o r t h w e s t c o n c e r n i n g  reservation  allotments  Clearly,  g r o u p s and  drift  t o a l a r g e number.  some K l a l l a m  (Gunther  to  much  allotments  and  well  organization. tribal  living  were a t t r a c t i v e  were g r a n t e d  allotments  preferred  make t h e i r  allotments  stayed  people  the  extended  overt  on  traditional  purpose  households,  and  was  coerce  social  to break the  the  up  the  individuals  farmers.  The e f f e c t o f t h e a l l o t m e n t s y s t e m , s o f a r a s t i t l e t o a s e p a r a t e t r a c t o f l a n d g o e s , i s most b e n e f i c i a l , and i n c i t e s t h e I n d i a n t o g r e a t e r i n d u s t r y , g i v e s him more i n d i v i d u a l i n d e p e n d e n c e , and t e n d s g r e a t l y t o w e a k e n t h e tribal r e l a t i o n (ARCIA 1 8 8 2 : 5 0 4 ) . Nationally early  as  1870  the push f o r a l l o t m e n t of I n d i a n  (Otis  1973:4), but  w h e t h e r C o n g r e s s had Indian  treaties  problem  the  (Washburn  a l l included  authority  to  allot  a  the  unclear  f o r many  as  years  a u t h o r i t y to change the p r o v i s i o n s i n 1975:35).  i n Western Washington,  Stevens,  i t was  l a n d s began  This  s i n c e the  was  treaties,  provision - giving  reservation  not  lands  the (e.g.  a  as  serious  written  President see  by the  Boxberger  1979:126). The when  allotment  i t could  be  prior  to  fully  penetrated  The  white  United  of  the  said  contact. their  States  r e s e r v a t i o n marked  that The lives,  the  Lummi  were  Western economic although  government  certain  exercised  78  a  the  end  living  of as  system aspects certain  the  time  they  had  had  not  yet  of  it  had.  amount  of  control  over  increasing waves  of  t h e Lummi,  national  most  until  during  i n Indian  dramatically  n a t i v e people.  influential  and,  interest  legislation  government over  b u t i t was  t h e 1880s  affairs  increased  The G e n e r a l  and c o n t i n u a l the c o n t r o l of  Allotment  and t h e most c o e r c i v e o f t h e s e  A c t was t h e  legislative  s u b s e q u e n t d e v e l o p m e n t s , had t h e most p r o f o u n d  I t was a f t e r  allotments  that  acts  impact.  were made t h a t t h e r e s e r v a t i o n became t h e  d o m i n a n t f a c t o r i n t h e l i f e o f t h e Lummi.  Summary This  chapter  has c o n c e n t r a t e d  on  the t r a d i t i o n a l  t r a n s i t i o n a l L u m m i s o c i e t y up t o t h e t i m e became  the dominant  demonstrated outside the  that prior  River  gold  agriculturalists, primary  extensive direct  rush,  and c o n t r o l t h e i r o f the dominant  without  completely  The  I t has  subjected  from  pressure  t h e s e a and  So l o n g own  subsistence  society could  reordering  folk  the t r a d i t i o n a l  their  economic  The t r e a t y  the  former  restricted  small  their  an  able to certain economy  structure  relationships.  t h e Lummi w e r e d e s t i n e d f o r d e p e n d e n c e . to a  deriving  were  r a t i f i c a t i o n of the Treaty of p o i n t E l l i o t t  Lummi  t o become  activities,  penetrate  efforts,  maintaining  as t h e Lummi  been  to various  missionizing  p e r s i s t e d as a f i s h e r  fishery.  on k i n - o r d e r e d  lives.  and g o v e r n m e n t a l  subsistence  aspects  based  in their  as t h e f u r t r a d e ,  t h e Lummi  salmon  that the r e s e r v a t i o n  t o 1884, a l t h o u g h  i n f l u e n c e s such  Fraser  their  factor  and  portion  access  of their  to productive  79  meant  that  restricted  territory, i t  resources,  and i t  restricted dominant the  opportunity  economic  United  f o r t h e Lummi t o c o m p e t e  system.  States  The r a p i d  government,  influx  area  to settlement.  This  move, i n e f f e c t ,  u n d e r d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e Lummi  o f immigrants caused  to negotiate  native people of Western Washington State  as a t r i b e .  80  i n the growing  treaties  i n order  with  the  t o open t h e  s e t the stage  f o r the  CHAPTER I I I THE LUMMI AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL SALMON FISHERY 1885-1900 Introduction The of  account which  salmon  fishing  capitalization Using  technology  o f the salmon  Carlisle  demonstrated  follows w i l l  Packing  that  this  primarily  that  fishing  Company  took p l a c e  the  Sound.  the p o t e n t i a l  skilled  industry  They  as p r o c e s s o r s ;  most  abundant  salmon  were  runs  —  fishing  the  The d e v e l o p m e n t  need  replaced part  f o r Lummi  o f the Bureau  the salmon  they  to harvest  River  few  of Indian  industry.  sockeye. pushed  obviated  of Chinese  labor  The i n s i s t e n c e  on t h e  that  t h e Lummi  pursue  were  almost  impact of these f a c t o r s  totally  excluded  a s t h e y had been  from  was  commercial  incorporated  only a  before.  Although commercial  Affairs  The c o m b i n e d  by 1900, a s q u i c k l y  years  technologies  and t h e i n f l u x  were  a l s o worked t o s e p a r a t e them f r o m p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n  t h e Lummi  fishing  fishers  extractive  most o f t h e I n d i a n c a n n e r y l a b o r .  agriculture  that  o f new  place  the resource  located  the Fraser  ideal  took  f o r market;  ideally  be  i n c l u s i o n and  N e v e r t h e l e s s , a s t h e i n d u s t r y d e v e l o p e d , t h e Lummi w e r e aside.  Sound.  i t will  exploiting  a surplus  and t h e y  o f Puget  rapid  The Lummi w e r e i n an  were a l r e a d y  to produce  to the  to the i n i t i a l  when t h e c o m m e r c i a l i z a t i o n o f s a l m o n  i n North Puget with  rise  as an e x a m p l e ,  s u b s e q u e n t e x c l u s i o n o f t h e Lummi. situation  gave  cover those aspects  there  salmon  was n o t u n t i l  were  fishery  several  attempts  i n the Northwest  at establishing  prior  t o t h e 1880s, i t  t h e c a n n i n g p r o c e s s was d e v e l o p e d and r e f i n e d  81  a  that  commercial the to  1830s  operations  became e c o n o m i c a l l y  feasible.  Bay  Langley  t h e Hudson's  introduce  salted  Company  salmon  into  at Fort  was  than d e s i r a b l e . i n Hawaii,  members  of  salmon  and o t h e r  some e x t e n t ,  the  Hawaiian  fishery,  well  and  In  were t a k i n g The  was  terms  for their  commercial  the  own  that  Company  and  Co.  States.  In  infancy.  The  two 1. the  the  1860s  first  thousand  year  cases  1  in  1832  subsidiary  Northwest  Coast Salted  to maintain  local  of  a commercial  d i d not  demand,  fish  Since  i t s attempts  salmon  i n North  and,  travel  attempts  Puget  taken,  Sound  at  were  these  the f i s h  at  early Indians  subsistence.  the  first  the  l e d to  the  i n the  Lummi  canning  salmon,  I t was  salmon  of operation of  a  salmon  1940:148).  i n comparison with  operations  s e t up  but  of the Hawaiian d i e t  salted  C a l i f o r n i a on t h e S a c r a m e n t o R i v e r . Hume,  that  opened  curtailed  numbers  eventually  salmon  for salt  ( T i t c o m b 1972:22, 86).  salteries  insignificant  events  part  insufficient  of  attempted  market,  popular  and H a c k e r  Because  commercial  e n d e a v o r s were  (Craig  Bay  so  to market  insufficient  the f i s h e r y .  establishing  a n d Co.,  integral  was  market  Company  r e m a i n s so t o d a y  Hudson's  there  doomed.  products  trade  the  developing  Simpson  became an  became  Bay  as  t e c h n i q u e s made t h e p r o d u c t  reliable  i t soon  Hudson's  Pelly  salmon q u i c k l y to  where  the  corporation,  The o n l y  early  had  the i n t e r n a t i o n a l  l o n g v o y a g e s and p o o r p r e s e r v a t i o n less  As  establishment area  there that  cannery  industry  was  i n Sacramento and  lack  began  of  of in  Hapgood,  i n the  United  still  in i t s  produced  only  technological  I n t h e s a l m o n i n d u s t r y a " c a s e " , a s a u n i t o f measurement, i s e q u i v a l e n t o f f o r t y - e i g h t one pound c a n s . 82  sophistication half  of this  company  pack  first  found  degradation enough  and f a u l t y  size.  Columbia  pack.  that  In subsequent  from  hydraulic  River  (Smith  salmon  the l o s s years and  1979:15),  operation  where  i n what  fledgling  environmental there  to allow  i n 1866, W i l l i a m  of at least  this  mining,  i n the Sacramento River  Consequently,  commercial  caused  due t o o v e r f i s h i n g  resulting  salmon  equipment  were n o t  an i n c r e a s e i n  Hume  moved  he c r e a t e d i s now  to the  the  first  the State  of  Washington. Before years  later,  owned  l o n g Hume was f o l l o w e d salmon c a n n e r i e s  by J a c k s o n ,  Everett)  i n 1877.  Semiahmoo  (San J u a n I s l a n d ) in  be t a k e n  their  bright red flesh  species  the late  nineteenth  regulatory  canneries  Roberts  limitations  salmon,  t h e number  although  were  this  more  built at Harbor  a n d Lummi  Island  1938:697).  i t was f o u n d  that  i n t h e form meant  of canneries  industry  an u n l i m i t e d  o f sockeye  salmon.  Lack  use o f the sockeye taken i n t r a p s and  than  other  dramatically  was a l s o d u e , i n p a r t ,  83  the salmon  price i n  virtually  unbridled  marketable  sockeye  desirable  salmon brought a higher  found  The  Because o f  soon became t h e most  who d e v e l o p e d  (near  Friday  and K e l e z  B e c a u s e s o c k e y e c o u l d be r e a d i l y  sockeye  were  i n 1893,  i n 1895,  until  century  resources  because  1895,  sockeye  The e n t r e p r e n e u r s  at Muckilteo  by t h e u s e o f t r a p s .  as red-meated  of natural  fisheries.  start  i n abundance  t o can,  market.  supply of  Point  Bellingham  was o f f t o a s l o w  could  in  area  1896 ( R a t h b u n 1 9 0 0 : 3 2 0 ; R o u n s e f e l l  industry  the  and Company,  I n t h e Lummi  i n 1894,  Eleven  a p p e a r e d on P u g e t Sound, t h e f i r s t ,  Meyers,  ( B l a i n e ) i n 1891,  by d o z e n s o f o t h e r s .  species of  increased  after  to the increase i n  technological Whatcom  County  in  State  the  Fairhaven  sophistication contained of  eleven  Washington,  (Wilcox  i n the canning  industry.  of the l a r g e s t s i x near  salmon  Blaine  Production  1542 13495 9500 11200 24364 22350  5538 2954 47852 41781 65143 72979 312048 252000 499646 229800  on P u g e t  Chum Humpback 500  5000 238 1300  240 1000 382 86 1200  five  by S p e c i e s  Y e a r C a n n e r i e s C h i n o o k S o c k e y e Coho 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 2 1 2 2 3 3 7 11 12 18 19 19  canneries near  1902:522).  T a b l e 4. C o m m e r c i a l s a l m o n c a n n e r y p r o d u c t i o n 1877 t o 1900, i n c a s e s o f 48 one pound c a n s .  1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900  and  I n 1899  7480 3000 5869 7206 11812 22418 50865 82640 91900 98600 111387 128200  SOURCE: PFY 1918:62, 65.  84  1145 4000 3903 16180 11380 22152 38785 26550 23310 38400 31481 89100  2809 5647 17530 9049 23633 57268 252733  Sound,  Total  Average per Cannery  5500 238 1300 5100 8500 7900 1500 5500 12000 17000 22000 21975 11674 8000 20529 26426 89774 95400 179968 195664 494026 400200 919611 469450  5500 238 1300 5100 8500 7900 1500 5500 12000 17000 22000 5934 5837 8000 10265 13213 29925 31800 25710 17788 41168 22234 48401 24708  As  Table  increased  4  faster  that  i s , average  last  decade o f  development  of  Rounsefell Lummi  for  cash  it  The  was  1938:705).  of  began  to  workers. or  migrant  mean a s h i f t  of  the  Lummi t o t h e  Lummi  farm  as  entire  occasional  "Whatcom  Fisheries  and  1890:14).  dramatically.  market  In  1891  the c a n n e r i e s  and  Within there "80  were  Chinese  85  labor  was  i n the  next 108 and  as  wage 1880s,  until  coal  and  period,  few  force did  not  linked  to the  partners.  Indians  this  engaged  Indians"  in  working  the  1890s, The In  industry  Department  years  in the  fishing  State  as  but  t o change a l l t h a t . entire  the  miners,  gathering,  not  (Washington the  Although  the  system p r i o r  producers  were e m p l o y e d  vicinity"  the  fishing  fishers  throughout and  1890s,  began  S p e c i a l i z e d labor  commercial f i s h e r y  o n l y t w e n t y men  as  into  society.  subordinate  the  worked  fishing  individuals  the  Lummi economy as  laborers  1900:294;  1860s t o  both  the  the  and  labor  of  obtained  industry  the  rapid  and  (Rathbun  from  the  fishers  during  the  had  to the  rapidly,  livelihood  in  years  as  ( S u t t l e s 1954:77).  Indian  networks of the  development of  for  fishing  rise  —  methods.  operations  fishers  Very  to supplement t r a d i t i o n a l a few  of  Lummi  Some  of  1890  the  employ  integration  but  of  canning  salmon  canneries  due  skills  of  to  formative  requisite  subsistence  aspect  i n the  Indian  tended  and  commercial  from  of  T h i s was  fishing  become a d o m i n a n t p a r t o f  lumberjacks, order  Kelez  w e l l as  an  d i d not  cannery  fish  became p a r t  as  canneries  earliest  their  and  the  number  production  necessary  had  production  i n the  century.  industry of was  annual  increase  nineteenth  they  processors.  the  the  as  the  the  annual cannery  labor  industry,  majority  than  i n the  Indian  labor  indicates,  of  changed fishing for  the  canneries 1893  (Washington S t a t e  there  industry,  were  420 e m p l o y e e s  120 o f whom w e r e  to the United shows  States  115 I n d i a n s  Whatcom  Department o f F i s h e r i e s i n t h e Whatcom  Indians  were  i n the canneries  (Wilcox  men  were  women's t r i b e This  working  as p r i m a r y  t h e 1890s meant t h a t  for  reported  producers  away f r o m t h e c o n t r o l o f t h e I n d i a n  that  A visitor  1893  were to a  I n d i a n women and  laborers,  (Herring  t h e Lummi were  a n d 15 o f whom  1895:258).  as cannery  was n o t s p e c i f i e d  new r o l e  fishing  The r e p o r t  and F i s h e r i e s  fishers  P o i n t R o b e r t s c a n n e r y i n t h e 1890s Chinese  In  i n t h e 1892 c o m m e r c i a l f i s h e r y o f  C o u n t y , 100 o f whom  employed  County  (Roth 1929:662).  Commissioner o f F i s h  employed  1892:14).  although the  1913:171). i n the market  drifting agent.  further  system o f  and f u r t h e r  The h i g h hopes o f t h e  g o v e r n m e n t a g e n t f o r t h e Lummi t h r o u g h t h e 1880s was s h a t t e r e d a s they  abandoned  1890s.  farming  As e a r l y  i n favor  of commercial fishing  a s 1891 t h e I n d i a n  agent r e m o r s e f u l l y  i n the  reported:  One o f t h e l a r g e s t a n d n a t u r a l l y m o s t f e r t i l e o f t h e f i v e r e s e r v a t i o n s i s t h e Lummi, b u t , b e i n g more r e m o t e and l e s s a c c e s s i b l e f r o m t h e a g e n c y t h a n a r e t h e o t h e r s , t h e same d i s c i p l i n e c a n n o t e a s i l y be m a i n t a i n e d w i t h t h e s e I n d i a n s ... T h e y a r e m o r e i n d e p e n d e n t a n d show l e s s i n c l i n a t i o n t o c u l t i v a t e t h e i r l a n d t h a n do t h e I n d i a n s o f m o s t o f t h e reserves, t h o u g h n o t a f e w o f t h e y o u n g e r men h a v e i n d u s t r i o u s l y c u l t i v a t e d t h e i r s e v e r a l h o l d i n g s and have c o m f o r t a b l e f a r m homes. F o r t h e most p a r t , h o w e v e r , t h e y engage i n f i s h i n g , s e a l i n g , and l o g g i n g (ARCIA 1 8 9 1 : 4 5 9 ) . While fisherfolk  i t may would  in  a developing  is  not  suprising  agriculture. forgotten,  n o t be  be a t t r a c t e d industry that  like  they  migrant  that  by t h e o p p o r t u n i t y  a  traditional  to participate  the c o m m e r c i a l salmon  would  By t h e mid-1890s  although  predictable  choose c o m m e r c i a l f i s h i n g  farming  labor 86  fishery, i t over  seems t o have been a l l b u t  was s u p p l e m e n t i n g  the fishing.  The I n d i a n s , as a r u l e , a r e n o t s y s t e m a t i c f a r m e r s . Farming i s w i t h them t h e i n c i d e n t and n o t t h e b u s i n e s s o f e v e r y d a y l i f e ... A l a r g e m a j o r i t y s p e n d m o s t o f t h e i r t i m e i n t h e i r c a n o e s , f i s h i n g , e s p e c i a l l y d u r i n g t h e s a l m o n s e a s o n ... I n the e a r l y f a l l , w i t h few e x c e p t i o n s , a l l , l i t t l e and b i g , y o u n g a n d o l d , go t o t h e hop f i e l d s , w h e r e t h e y m e e t o l d f r i e n d s f r o m a l l o v e r t h e sound and e a s t o f t h e m o u n t a i n s (ARCIA 1 8 9 5 : 3 1 9 ) . According late  to B a l l a r d  August  sockeye  and  fishing  Perhaps longer  September. season  because  possible,  population  (1950:85),  and  was  to  market  the  the e f f o r t s  market not  economy.  interfere  Indian in  goods,  2  entered  and  early  eager  Subsistence agriculture  with commercial  after  Hop  fishing  the f a c t  picking,  the  fishing  was  Puget  in  Sound  August. activities  growth  or j u s t because were  season  the North  traditional  rapid  t h e Lummi  of f i s h i n g . into  of  picking  of  of the I n d i a n agent  agent d i d anguish over  favor  the  hop  peak  in July  Lummi t o t h e r e s e r v a t i o n , and  The  many o f  due  the  the  were  non-Indian  to r e s t r i c t  of a desire  the  the  for cash  to p a r t i c i p a t e on  no  in  the  reservation  did  activities  although  the  t h a t f a r m i n g was n e g l e c t e d  an e a r l y  season  fall  was  activity,  over.  What  was this  s u g g e s t s i s t h a t t h e Lummi were p u r s u i n g a number o f  alternatives  to  They  their  traditional  alternatives great  which  e x t e n t , and  means  of  subsistence.  were s e a s o n a l , which  which  a l l o w e d them  d i d not o v e r l a p  chose to  t o work f o r c a s h as w e l l  any as  subsistence. Thus,  in a relatively  enmeshed i n the market  short period  e c o n o m y and  of time  t h e Lummi  began to e x p l o i t  the  became salmon  2. The I n d i a n agent attempted to r e s t r i c t off-reservation m o v e m e n t f o r g a t h e r i n g and o t h e r t r a d i t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s . The a g e n t , however, e n c o u r a g e d t h e Lummi t o l e a v e f o r hop p i c k i n g and c a n n e r y work. A p p a r e n t l y w o r k i n g f o r a wage was c o n s i d e r e d t h e more a c c e p t a b l e way o f making a l i v i n g . 87  resources  f o r cash  as  well  as  subsistence.  This  degree  i n t e g r a t i o n d i d not l a s t  l o n g , h o w e v e r , a n d a s we s h a l l  intensification  capitalization  the  Lummi  on  industry. look  and r a p i d  the p e r i p h e r y rather  To u n d e r s t a n d  why  this  a t the growth o f the salmon  period  when  a large  number  o f the f i s h e r y  than  see the  soon  at the center  happened  industry  of  left  of the  i t i s necessary to  from  of technological  1890 t o 1 9 0 0 , a i n n o v a t i o n s took  place.  The  T e c h n o l o g i c a l Growth o f t h e Salmon The  methods  Northwest those  i n the e a r l y  previously  Salmon  had been  America  long  discovered gear  adopted  fished  i n other  fishers  the f i s h e r i e s  of  of the  transplants  world.  and N o r t h e a s t  North  the Northwest  were  Hence, most o f t h e e a r l y  were  of the  w e r e t h e same a s  fisheries  i n N o r t h e r n Europe  by E u r o p e a n s . Sound  the commercial  years of the industry  developed  before  i n Puget  by  Fishery  from  commercial  these  established  fisher ies. Although  the salmon f i s h i n g  similar  t o Indian gear.  be  i n the Puget  used  their  basic  Traditional It  Indian  i s apparent  used  large  we As  were  f o r both find with  gear  that  was t r a n s p l a n t e d ,  most o f t h e gear  Sound s a l m o n f i s h e r y ,  technology,  introduction be  In f a c t ,  gear  resembled  was  described  t h e I n d i a n gear  so s i m i l a r sets.  parallel  and t h e gear  down t o  Indian  i n the preceding  t h e same E n g l i s h  There  t h a t came t o  when b r o k e n  traditional  i t was  of  gear.  section. European  names have come t o  a r e a few d i f f e r e n c e s  b u t by a n d  developments.  the I n d i a n gear  the e a r l y 88  white  gear  was  primarily  labor  intensive,  but,  as  we  r a p i d l y became m e c h a n i z e d . innovations created  by  i n world-wide individuals  shall  see,  the  white  In f a c t ,  many o f t h e  commercial  fishing  working  i n the  gear  very  technological  technology  Northwest  Coast  were  salmon  fishery. The  first  salmonids entangles varies  gear  was  t o be  the g i l l  the  fish  n e t s were f i s h e d  both  rowed  from  mouths.  nets  then hauled  method  was  Gill  s e e i n g the  (Smith  latter  early  as  Sound as a b o u t  primarily  the  1873  twenty  mesh  non-Indian  b o a t s t h a t c o u l d be and  allowed  Sometimes g i l l  tied  employed  o f the  earliest  s e t out  being  net  to the  i n or  shore  near  to  nets or  the  to  river  and  Fraser  (Rounsefell  gill As  During  fished  time,  feet  Rivers,  and  net  Kelez  boats  f i r s t on  appearing  at  1938:701).  i n use  i n North  i n l e n g t h , m a n n e d by t w o ,  they nets  was  the  1890s  the  gear  was  were  primarily not  mentioned  used  to  used  near  owned  any  great  above, most  89  sockeye  or  Puget  by  extent  one the  Because,  i n the  taken  the  sometimes  by i n d i v i d u a l s o n a s h a r e b a s i s . were  the  Rathbun  U s u a l l y one o r t w o w o u l d w o r k t h e o a r s w h i l e  net.  c a n n e r i e s and  sockeye.  size  of  net.  1979:27) as  three, persons.  mouths,  were  i n by h a n d .  location,  (1900:307) d e s c r i b e s t h e g i l l  that  The  the g i l l  n e t s s e e m t o h a v e b e e n u s e d by n o n - I n d i a n s  Columbia  at  fish.  taking  G i l l n e t s a r e m o s t e f f e c t i v e a t n i g h t when t h e f i s h h a v e  difficulty  worked  i n the  The  s m a l l double-ended  The  were s e t i n a s t a t i o n a r y This  non-Indians  As d e s c r i b e d e a r l i e r ,  species of  sailed.  for a time,  poles.  by  i n t h e mesh o f t h e n e t .  gill  drift  net.  a c c o r d i n g t o the  and  used  to  river take  in North  Puget  Sound  accessible  were bound in  the  f o r the  open  Fraser  water.  In  River  1899,  and  of  therefore  the  322  l i c e n s e s i s s u e d i n W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e , 81 w e r e f o r u s e P u g e t Sound  (Bellingham  (Rounsefell  and  take  coho  value, were  Kelez  and  Bay,  1938:712-713).  chinook,  were not  B o u n d a r y Bay,  which,  nearly  as  gill  net  boats  Some w e r e e q u i p p e d (PFY  1919:59), and  not  increase  the  more  i n use  most  their  were motor  fishing  methods,  Certainly  the  most i m p o r t a n t  salmon f i s h e r y  was  came  to  be  known  the  other  commercial  migrations  especially they  Lummi a r e a  passed the  Fraser-bound  crossed  the  The Great  Lakes.  Roberts the  had  fish  be  as  t r a p s were sockeye  of  area  and  most  long  lead  one  lead and  i n t o a t r a p or  one-quarter  90  this  did  long  i n the  as  were  commercial  "pound n e t " o r trap.  the  The  salmon  the  Fraser  of  miles  where they  did than  worked  the  annual  known  important  trap  Traps  during  along  as i t  fishery  canning.  succession  pound  1890s  below,  routes.  In  because  there  before  they  concentrated  entered  (one  late  As  discussed  because  especially  were  1890s.  but  extent.  fish  except  the  the  importance.  the  sockeye, through  1914,  innovation  Sound,  the  t r a p s were c o p i e s o f the pound n e t s A  a  to  minor  innovation  Canadian border  first  during  by  great  economic v i a b i l i t y  technological  salmon,  little  i n t r o d u c t i o n of the  i n Puget  more t o change t h e  turn  area  i n N o r t h P u g e t Sound  powered  t o any  remained of  the  of  m o t o r power as e a r l y as  efficiency  effective  the  with  very  net  the  i n the N o r t h  Samish River)  certainly  after  changed  gill  on  net  sockeye. The  any  gill  They were used p r i m a r i l y t o  while  sought  and  only  River. i n use  traps  i n the  at  Point  i n length)  would  would  be  brailed  out  a s n e e d e d , o r , i n many c a s e s ,  Collins  (1892b:258)  caught  more  traps  traps  i n 1900  $1.00 of  The  were  invested  piles  galvanized piling  and  floating  1.  1890  traps  Point  around  Roberts  ten  other  trap  traps  between  Lummi  discussed whites number year  with  crib,  the  turn  were n o t  of  were  the  fishing  or  constructed  of  typical  of  the  as  of  the  during in  the  the  the traps  first  trap  century  Juan I s l a n d s found  of  locations  the  common.  (also  i n Puget  Sound  l i c e n s i n g ) to  see  By  and  91  first  River  Cobb  1895  was  1921:81).  there  area  along  and  Point  traps  were  the were  alone  and  Table  A  the  mainland  Roberts  (Rathbun  constructed  1980:51) and,  Figures  steadily  1900.  The  Columbia  Roberts  Bay  (Boxberger  Indians  some  ( i n c l u d i n g Lummi I s l a n d ) .  i n Samish  majority  is  i n comparison with  1890s.  Point  every  twine  (Rathbun 1900:301;  Lummi R e s e r v a t i o n  The  A  devices  constructed  cotton  was  the  running  for  were p r i m a r i l y e x p e r i m e n t a l .  i n 1880  in  were  b e l o w , became a p o i n t o f s e r i o u s c o n t e n t i o n  and of  San  fish  full.  Roberts  pots  l e a d s were  1900:297).  these  locations  i n the  1900:298-300). near  net  or  the  $2.50 p r o f i t  s u c h e a r l y a t t e m p t s were i n s i g n i f i c a n t  thirty-three  area  trap,  Point  low-maintenance  strung  After  expansion of trap f i s h i n g  few  The  i n Western Washington north  at  Hence  average of  bottom,  The  at  d a y s when t h e  (Rathbun  in Figure  to  known t r a p  But  mesh.  traps  efficient,  an  t r a p s appeared, but  Prior  placed  the  the  t r a p became too  handled.  1977:12).  netting  illustrated  the  turning  into  wire  of  be  were v e r y  (Barsh  driven  that  than could  were c l o s e d p a r t  heavily. that  fish  reports  when t h e  2 and  increased  as  or  will  be  between  3). from  5 shows t h i s  on  The 1893  the  total (the  increase.  T a b l e 5. o f dummy  Traps operated traps).  i n Puget  numbers  Number o f T r a p s  1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900  13 19 21 26 71 45 112 163  i n Table  merely  to hold  barrier  to Indian  As  indicated  traps fished areas  5 exclude  a location  (exclusive  1938:717.  "dummy  traps",  but nonetheless  which  would  were s e t  have  been a  fishing. by t h e a v a i l a b l e  evidence,  the majority o f the  i n P u g e t Sound were i n t h e Lummi  traditional  fishing  ( R a t h b u n 1900:295-296; Cobb 1911:78; R o u n s e f e l l and K e l e z  1938:718-719) locations. fishing  Indian  More  and i n d i r e c t than  any o t h e r  u s e l e s s and, because  operated  conflict  with  they  (1921:78) s t a t e s appeared operation  fishing Indian  most o f t h e t r a p s were owned and labor,  t h e need f o r  was o b v i a t e d .  t h e 1890s  where  Lummi  method t h e t r a p s r e n d e r e d  by t h e c a n n e r i e s and r e q u i r e d l i t t l e  fishermen  In point  1893 t o 1900  Year  SOURCE: R o u n s e f e l l and K e l e z  The  Sound,  purse were  that  seines  were  an e f f e c t i v e  the f i r s t  i n 1898, b u t t h e r e i n Puget Sound  not y e t developed method  of fishing.  gasoline-powered were  a few p u r s e  i n t h e 1890s t h a t  92  to  purse seine  seine  the  Cobb boat  boats i n  must have had motor  Maximum 2500 Feel  F i g u r e 1. Illustration f r o m C o l l i n s 1892b) .  of  a Puget  93  Sound  salmon  trap  (adapted  power  as  well  (probably  appearance of  purse  gives  of  a date  devices  derive their  seines  1886.  were drag  steam).  It  is likely  or beach s e i n e s , not  innovation  (Yugoslavs)  in  the  century.  introduced, Indian  fishing  1909,  (Cobb  Islands,  latter  after  to  in  1894  change  to  power  and  purse  development  (Rounsefell  purse  seines  seines",  which  had  (Collins  not  to  These by  seine  the at  how an  i n Puget  "Slavonians" and  purse  effective  early  seine  was  hindrance  to  hand  power  to by  worked  PFY  1900  1892a:254; 1892b:40).  Juan  nets  to  San  by  at  a  and  1919:59-60). were o f t e n  of  a l l  post-1900  tow  "scow boats  approximately  two  were p u l l e d by  hand  pull  the  purse  These e a r l y purse s e i n e  94  Friday  complete  1907  was  Juan  "received  A  steam-powered  fathoms which winches  o f San  the  1896".  1938:728;  prior  in  least  a cannery  in  to  end  at  (1938:727),  completed  moved a b o u t  twenty-five  southern  Kelez  change  Kelez  vessels  f o r sockeye,  fishing  and  was  utilized  employed  seining and  the  operated,  the s t r i n g s  nineteenth  Anacortes  the  and  be  as w i t h  l o c a t i o n of  seines  that  The  some  i t was  Purse  three  suggest  fathoms  when o r  is  1900.  from  indications  human power.  of  Rounsefell  impetus  Harbor  although  which  the  "Salmon Banks" o f f the  according  hundred  true purse seines,  that purse  of  and  early  were most f r e q u e n t l y u s e d  1911:26).  considerable  or  that  Scandinavians  part  Regardless  until  at the  Island  b r o u g h t by  fishers these  d r a w n i n t o a bag,  i t i s clear that  Purse seines by  however,  It is generally believed  an  twentieth  to Chinese  name f r o m t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h t h e n e t  a purse.  Sound was  (1911:26) a t t r i b u t e s t h e  i n P u g e t Sound  the bottom of the net being of  Cobb  line  vessels  were d e s c r i b e d the  as  "clumsy"  and  so were n o t f i s h e d  too f a r from  canneries.  Table  6.  Puget  Sound p u r s e  seine licenses,  Year  As  was  true  commercially Little from  with  1938:728.  seine,  significant  until  power  i n the a c t u a l t o motor  fishing  power  1900  trolling  white  trollers  Sound  was  of  minor  among c o m m e r c i a l  i n the e a r l y  1890s,  boats gear  d i d not  became  itself  but  practiced  but the change  more  commercially  fishing  trollers.  by I n d i a n  importance.  become  commonplace.  c h i n o o k a r e t a k e n by  primarily  being  trolling  made t h e g e a r  G e n e r a l l y o n l y c o h o and  include t r o l l i n g Puget  Kelez  purse  human power  Until  of  1900.  47 40 72 57  the  changed  viable.  and  to  Number o f L i c e n s e s  1897 1898 1899 1900 SOURCE: R o u n s e f e l l  1897  fishers,  Collins  did  methods employed  not in  stated,  The I n d i a n s e m p l o y t r o l l i n g h o o k s and s p e a r s i n t h e Sound and s m a l l s t r e a m s t r i b u t a r y t h e r e t o , and p a r t i e s f i s h i n g f o r p l e a s u r e a l s o use s p o o n h o o k s and t r o l l i n g l i n e s (Collins 1892a:254). This  i s one  of the  the  salmon f i s h e r y  the  sport  and K e l e z  fishery.  first  that w i l l Of  mentions later  95  find  o f an  become o f m a j o r  the c o m m e r c i a l  (1938:751) s t a t e t h a t "we  we  may  troll  fishery  assume t h a t  aspect of  importance, Rounsefell the  fishery  was o f l i t t l e boats  importance  increased thereafter Generally  for  because  about  1910, and t h a t t h e number o f  t o a maximum  i n 1919".  Indian fishers only t r o l l e d  considerable  Trolling  numbers  of fish  i n t e r m i t t e n t l y , not  to preserve  or  to  sell.  was n o t a s p r o d u c t i v e a s o t h e r m e t h o d s o f f i s h i n g b u t , i t was a method  of year, the  until  fish  could  be o b t a i n e d  e s p e c i a l l y d u r i n g t h e w i n t e r months,  o c c a s i o n a l food  t h e San J u a n (Rathbun  whereby  fish.  Rathbun  notes  any  time  i t was e m p l o y e d f o r  Indians  trolling  I s l a n d s i n November, December, J a n u a r y ,  among  and F e b r u a r y  1900:281).  Certainly significant  none o f t h e m e t h o d s  mentioned  thus  f a r were as  t o t h e L u m m i a s was t h e r e e f n e t f i s h e r y .  What t h e  t r a p s were t o t h e w h i t e f i s h e r s , t h e r e e f n e t s were t o t h e I n d i a n fishers.  I t i s the c o n f l i c t  characterizes  between these  the development  two g e a r  o f the commercial  P u g e t Sound and, d u r i n g t h e 1890s,  the r a p i d  types  fishery  that  of North  d e m i s e o f t h e Lummi  fishery. During most  the l a t t e r  important  Reef n e t t i n g intercept  p a r t o f the n i n e t e e n t h century  economic  activity  o f t h e Lummi  r e p r e s e n t s a unique  the annual  runs  was  reef  method o f f i s h i n g  o f sockeye  during  their  by f a r  the  netting.  designed to  migratory  pass  t h r o u g h N o r t h P u g e t S o u n d a n d t h e G u l f o f G e o r g i a o n t h e i r way t o the  Fraser  generally are and  River pass  watershed,  through  no c o m m e r c i a l l y the reef  designed  where  t h e Lummi  significant  net represents  to intercept  they  area runs  a  i n July  The s o c k e y e and A u g u s t .  o f sockeye  highly  an o t h e r w i s e  96  spawn.  i n Puget  specialized  runs There Sound,  technique  unavailable resource.  In  addition of  to  sockeye,  humpback and The  and  most  Point  other  reef  nets  occasional  important  Village  several  the  the  reef  (Lummi  sites  also  salmon of net  the be  Reservation  Island).  throughout  San  Juans,  (Boxberger  especially  f i s h e d by  Straits  San  the  border  (Boxberger  the  cannery at F r i d a y  n e t t e r s o f f the S o n g h e e s or notes  Saanich  that  Indians  on  and  Whatcom  the  1895  (The  the  San  Island  As  fish  the  the  reef  fish net  Point  traps  reef catch  nets at  At  The  w e r e made on  sockeye  the  sites  continued  were  to  Indian  reef  must have  been  located  fish  (1898:596)  purchased  from  there  Blade  operated  of  that  Wilcox  Weekly  in  states  from  who  there.  their  increased of  the  of  nine  in  23  the 1895,  October  reef  to nearby  and  the  only  Roberts  a  and  to  nets  at  processors  reef  this  small  size  Point,  i n f r o n t of  nets  quite  during  (Figure clearly.  Point.  s  Lummi  Charts  3),  was  cannery  the  useless.  proportion  Village  97  Village  Point  and  remain productive  directly  Village  illustrate  taking  nets  R o b e r t s and  rendering 2)  in importance  reef  were c o n s t r u c t e d  i n 1895,  Point  although  (1900:320)  cannery  fishers  both Point  (Figure  were  Lummi  traps  grounds,  Roberts  newspaper  Islands,  Island,  Juan Island  the  utilized  from the C a n a d i a n s i d e  salmon  by  Roberts  1895:4).  ability  traps  of  species.  Some r e e f n e t  Juan  came t o f i s h  were s e l l i n g  Blade  1890s,  owned  and  Weekly  jeopardized.  the  County  Juan  Rathbun  o f San  Island  that  San  coming over  pounds  Juan  mentioned  Lummi  who  419,960  on  numbers  also  allotments  Harbor obtained  s o u t h end  other  Lummi  1980:52).  1979:112).  significant  were a t P o i n t  The  the  those  Salish  the  locations  t h e s e were l a r g e l y abandoned a f t e r Lummi  take  of  depicting  In  of  the  At  Point  1895  the  commercial Roberts  5,116,272 t o t a l pounds o f s a l m o n  were  taken.  N e a r l y a l l t h e c a t c h i s made by p o u n d n e t s , t h e e x c e p t i o n b e i n g 184,239 p o u n d s b y I n d i a n r e e f n e t s a n d 46,971 p o u n d s by g i l l n e t s . On t h e r e e f s o f L u m m i I s l a n d 350,805 p o u n d s a d d i t i o n a l w e r e t a k e n by r e e f n e t s , t h e u s e o f w h i c h i s confined to Indians. The I n d i a n s a l s o t a k e q u i t e a l a r g e amount w h i c h they p r e p a r e f o r t h e i r winter food supply (Wilcox 1898:592). R a t h b u n s t a t e s t h a t i n 1894 and 1895, when s a l m o n were purchased per  fish  from the commercial the Indians  (Rathbun  1900:321).  The  usurpation  go  uncontested  Commissioner evidenced  were  fishers  being  paid  for ten to f i f t e e n only  o f the r e e f net f i s h e r y  by t h e Lummi, of Indian  who a s e a r l y  Affairs  by t h e f o l l o w i n g  five  to e i g h t  being cents cents  by t h e t r a p s d i d n o t  a s 1894 p e t i t i o n e d t h e  to intervene  on t h e i r  behalf,  as  letter.  L i v i n g a s we d o o n t h e s h o r e s o f P u g e t S o u n d o u r p r i n c i p a l means o f s u b s i s t e n c e , e s p e c i a l l y d u r i n g c e r t a i n s e a s o n s o f t h e y e a r , i s f i s h i n g o u r b e s t g r o u n d s s i t u a t e d near t h e r e e f of P o i n t Roberts o f t h i s s t a t e . S e v e r a l y e a r s ago w h i t e men began t o e n c r o a c h on o u r g r o u n d . We w e r e w i l l i n g t o h a v e them s h a r e w i t h us t h e r i g h t t o f i s h b u t n o t s a t i s f i e d w i t h e q u a l r i g h t s t h e y have y e a r l y made a d d i t i o n a l o b s t r u c t i o n s t o p r e v e n t o u r c a t c h i n g f i s h , by s e t t i n g t r a p s , and p l a c i n g p i l i n g around the grounds. T h e y have d r i v e n us f r o m o u r o l d c a m p i n g g r o u n d o n t h e b e a c h a n d h a v e s o t r e a t e d u s t h a t we f e e l we m u s t now a p p e a l t o y o u f o r a s s i s t a n c e . In our t r e a t y w i t h t h e g o v e r n m e n t we were g i v e n t h e f i r s t r i g h t t o h u n t a n d f i s h o n o u r o l d g r o u n d s a n d we know t o o w e l l t h a t the good government t h a t has so f a r p r o t e c t e d our r i g h t s w i l l riot p e r m i t us t o be t r o d d e n upon s i m p l y b e c a u s e we a r e Indians. We t h e I n d i a n s o f t h i s r e s e r v a t i o n do t h e r e f o r e e a r n e s t l y p r a y t h a t y o u w i l l c a l l u p o n t h e U.S. D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y o f S e a t t l e t o p r o s e c u t e t h o s e who a r e r o b b i n g u s o f o u r l a w f u l r i g h t s (Lummi T r i b a l A r c h i v e s 1894). Nothing next  year  Bellingham Lummi  was d o n e b y t h e B u r e a u o f I n d i a n A f f a i r s , t h e Lummi  sought  a t t o r n e y s J.A. K e r r  and p r e s s u r e d  the Bureau  legal  counsel  a n d W.B. M c C o r d of Indian  98  on  and t h e  their  own.  represented the  Affairs  to request the  SALMON TRAP LOCATIONS AT POINT ROBERTS, 1895  F i g u r e 2. Salmon Rathbun 1900) .  traps  at Point  99  Roberts,  1895  (adapted  from  Attorney  General  did.  The U n i t e d  (C.C.  Wash.,  Judge did  ruled  retained  privileges,  such  Hanford  (1897))  was  heard  equal  fishing  as permanent,  reasoned  that  were  still  abundant  Packers  Association,  t o f o r c e the cannery  fish  CH.  locations.  to take  Hanford.  3  fishing Further,  Assocation  traps  salmon  because  Lastly,  he h e l d  to the Alaska  Packers  i n the water.  were s e l l i n g  Association  not s p e c i a l  protected  runs  Packers  eventually  of Point E l l i o t t the  rights,  the Alaska  they  by J u d g e  t h a t under t h e T r e a t y  t h a t b e c a u s e t h e Lummi  o u t would  be d o i n g  the Indians  disservice. In  of  t o c o u r t , which  n o t i n f r i n g e on t h e Lummis' a b i l i t y  there  a  the case  S t a t e s , e t a l . v ^ The A l a s k a  7 9 F 152  Judge Hanford Indians  t o take  1897 t h e Lummi  Indian A f f a i r s  again  i n appealing  sought  the a s s i s t a n c e o f the Bureau  the case.  We t h e I n d i a n s o f t h e Lummi R e s e r v a t i o n i n Whatcom C o u n t y , s t a t e o f W a s h i n g t o n , s e e i n g t h a t o u r r i g h t s under t h e T r e a t y of 1855 b e t w e e n t h e U.S. a n d t h e I n d i a n s are being t h r e a t e n e d by o u r w h i t e n e i g h b o r s , have come t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f a d d r e s s i n g t h e D e p a r t m e n t i n t h i s m a t t e r a s we l o o k t o t h e g o v e r n m e n t o f t h e U.S. t o p r o t e c t u s i n o u r r i g h t s under t h a t T r e a t y . I n t h e f i r s t p l a c e we w i s h t o m e n t i o n t h a t about two y e a r s ago t h e A l a s k a Packers A s s o c i a t i o n , a f i s h c a n n i n g Co., o p e r a t i n g i n P o i n t R o b e r t s , Wash, h a v e b e e n i n t e r f e r i n g i n many d i f f e r e n t ways t o p r e v e n t t h e I n d i a n s t o f i s h on t h e P o i n t R o b e r t s r e e f , w h i c h f r o m t i m e i m m e m o r i a l , had been o c c u p i e d by o u r a n c e s t o r s and o u r s e l v e s f o r f i s h i n g purposes. By t h e a d v i s e o f some o f o u r W h i t e f r i e n d s we w e r e i n d u c e d t o f i g h t f o r o u r r i g h t s i n t h e S t a t e c o u r t s , a s , t h e y s a i d , by t h e T r e a t y we h a d . b e e n guaranteed t h e r i g h t s o f t a k i n g f i s h i n common w i t h t h e c i t i z e n s of the State. T h e c a s e was b e g u n i n New W h a t c o m ,  3. J u d g e C H . H a n f o r d was a p p a r e n t l y i n v o l v e d i n t h e f i s h i n g i n d u s t r y o f Whatcom C o u n t y b u t p e r h a p s n o t t o a p o i n t t h a t c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d a c o n f l i c t o f i n t e r e s t i n t h e A l a s k a P a c k e r s c a s e . T h e P a c i f i c F i s h e r m a n o f J a n u a r y 1905 r e p o r t e d t h a t " J u d g e C H . Hanford has i n v e n t e d a can crimper and c a p p e r f o r use i n a B e l l i n g h a m cannery" ( P a c i f i c Fisherman 1905).  100  Wash., and f i n a l l y d e c i d e d a g a i n s t us by F e d e r a l J u d g e H a n f o r d , o f S e a t t l e , Wash. I n t h e s e c o n d p l a c e we w i s h t o m e n t i o n a n o t h e r c a s e , t h a t i s the' c a s e o f V i l l a g e P o i n t on L u m m i I s l a n d , Wash. The C h i c a g o F i s h Co., r e p r e s e n t e d by one J o s e p h A l s o p i s a l s o t r y i n g t o p r e v e n t us t o t a k e f i s h on t h a t r e e f by d r i v i n g p i l e s b o t h i n f r o n t a n d b a c k o f u s , t h u s d e p r i v i n g us o f any c h a n c e o f c a t c h i n g f i s h and e v e n o f e r e c t i n g t e m p o r a r y h o u s e s t o s h e l t e r us w h i l e f i s h i n g . So we now f i n d o u r s e l v e s e x c l u d e d f r o m e a r n i n g an h o n e s t l i v i n g for o u r s e l v e s and our families. We would t h e r e f o r e r e q u e s t t h e D e p a r t m e n t t o p r o t e c t us i n o u r r i g h t s by, a t o n c e s e n d i n g an I n s p e c t o r t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e f a c t s i n t h e c a s e , and a p p l y a s p e e d y and e f f e c t u a l r e m e d y and your p e t i t i o n e r s w i l l e v e r p r a y . (Lummi T r i b a l A r c h i v e s 1 8 9 7 ) . An United  appeal  was  made i n t h e c a s e ,  S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t .  General,  upon  drop the  case,  review, and  However, t h e U n i t e d  advised  on  22  May  the Bureau  1899  a m o t i o n t o the Supreme C o u r t granted  (ARCIA  As  a  Point  result  were m a r g i n a l the  the  A  determination  and  Lummi  few  in  the  of  Roth  resort  continued  Alaska  Packers  r e e f net  grounds  to  small-scale  adjacent  to operate,  traps continued  to  but  the these  to grow, the p r e s s u r e  adjacent Bay  1926:663).  Fish The  to  As  early  a s 1894  r e s e r v a t i o n lands,  Company traps  at  even  Sandy  most  Point  encroached  on  l a n d s o f t h e r e s e r v a t i o n , as t h e I n d i a n A g e n t B u c h a n a n for  was  fishing.  been c o n s t r u c t e d  1900:300;  to  submitted  appeal, which  the  River  had  Bellingham  of  and  Nooksack  reef nets  t o Lummi  number  Island  s a l m o n s t o c k s became more i n t e n s e .  the  the  Attorney  Affairs  General  t o abandon t h e i r  the  by  Indian  Attorney  to d i s m i s s  t h e Lummi had  fishing  reservation.  As  of  Roberts  subsistence  the  of  States  the  1899:140).  A s s o c i a t i o n case, at  which u l t i m a t e l y reached  1900.  101  on  traps notably  (Rathbun the  tide  reported  C o n s i d e r a b l e d i f f i c u l t y h a s b e e n o c c a s i o n e d by a c t s o f t r e s p a s s upon t h e p a r t o f t h e t r a p - m e n . B o t h t r a p s and men have trespassed upon the tide lands abutting the r e s e r v a t i o n s of t h i s agency. I n some i n s t a n c e s t h e t r e s p a s s e s w e r e c o m m i t t e d u p o n t h e u p l a n d s a s w e l l (ARCIA 1901:391). Traps near in  were  constructed at  the Portage.  Puget  the  I n 1899,  Sound,  82  1884,  the  the  Lummi  mouth o f  of the  were  in  112  use  the Nooksack R i v e r  total  and  traps in operation  i n Whatcom  County  (Wilcox  1902:523) . Until utilized  by  equitably a little thrive  was  surplus  participants,  continued  the  market.  the  capital,  rapidly  fishery.  a fishery  the Chicago-based  Puget Sound  locations  were b e i n g  $90,000  important  (Wilcox aspect  common  removing  producers  the  i n an  and  came  form  of  control (Paris  attempt  i n d u s t r y (Barsh sold  efficient  i n 1899  of  common those  control  capitalist ventures,  the  finished  1977:246).  American  1977:13).  For  Fisheries,  to monopolize  at p r i c e s  a  fishing  to  processing  processor, P a c i f i c  i n 1899  trap fishing  the f i s h e r y  most  thereby  example,  more  i s to c o n t r o l  primary  million  thereby  The  from  $1  the  and  dominated  product  over  As  Indian  o f the r e s o u r c e began t o become e v i d e n t ,  to  the  needs  i n d u s t r y , as  to  for  subsistence  canneries,  An  Indian fishery  capable of producing  nature  to  owners g a r n e r i n g  was  very  years  site  distributed  and  such  $35,000  The  the  was  was  needed to p r o v i d e f i s h  into  trap  with  resource  resource  canning  penetration  spent  the  salmon  the  to  as  that  the  of  access  access  assured  formative  beyond  property  devices,  the  i n which  more f o r t h e m s e l v e s .  i n the  labor  with  among  manner  the  Individual ranging  from  1902:523). of  the  102  salmon  fishery  is  that  as  a  common p r o p e r t y resource  i s undefined  procured.  Unlike  agricultural "owns"  resource^  land,  other  development o f gear  the  end o f t h e l i n e " , no  property Sound,  access  resource,  selects  maximize  spent  fishing  fishery salmon  traps.  the  case  property the  c a n be a s s u r e d In  a  farmers  profits  by  fishery  timber  or  Consequently  no g e a r  A  effort  Puget  i n order to over-use  (Berkes  1985).  i n t h e f o r m o f more In the case  owners  than the  might  take  a  (e.g., i n  i n the case  i n the case  time  o f the salmon  was more e f f e c t i v e  fertilizing,  is  1968:1244-1245).  t o over-use  or timber-land  with  common  of North  to r e i n v e s t i n the resource by  no one  leaves those " a t  fishery  of a  of the common  i s no i n c e n t i v e t o r e i n v e s t s u r p l u s i n 1968:23) b e c a u s e no o n e  of harvesting a particular there  is  rights,  The r e s u l t i n g  gear.  replanting) ,  (Crutchfield  resource  access.  of fishing  susceptible  Sound  resource, there  resource  restricted  o f t h e commons" ( H a r d i n  Puget  owner  first  i n the  the r e s e r v a t i o n f i s h e r s ,  the resource.  of the farmer,  timber-land  like  i n property  g e n e r a l l y takes place  Where  of their  resources  as t h e salmon  o r more e f f e c t i v e  o f North  portion  case  severely  are e s p e c i a l l y  Intensification  said  i t i s harvested.  for intensification  known a s t h e " t r a g e d y Fisheries  until  as  to get at the f i s h  such  b e n e f i t s from  time  are invested  i n this  or  such  natural  resource  the  either  until  which  the salmon  i t i s one i n w h i c h o w n e r s h i p  a r e no g u a r a n t e e s  entrepreneur  p o r t i o n of the catch.  that  investment  i n the  4. M a r c h a k h a s c o r r e c t l y n o t e d t h a t t h e t e r m "common p r o p e r t y r e s o u r c e " i s " i n h e r e n t l y c o n t r a d i c t o r y s i n c e p r o p e r t y by d e f i n i t i o n c o n n o t e s s p e c i f i c o w n e r s h i p r i g h t s " , and r e s t r i c t e d licensing removes the r e s o u r c e f r o m a n y commons o r p u b l i c o w n e r s h i p (Marchak 1984:4). Yet, i ti s clear that rights i n a fishery r e s o u r c e a r e n o t t h e same a s r i g h t s to stationary resources. 103  resource be  will  invested  higher  be  returned.  in  the  bigger So  and  were b e t t e r  for  concerns. a  fish  to  because the  maximum  hatcheries  production. faster or  traps  The  boats, better  i n the  tends  to  means  to  more trap  efficient  locations.  1890s, t h a t  f i s h e r y , a t t e n t i o n was  escapement  were b u i l t  i t was  generated  for  turned  F i s h e r i e s b i o l o g i s t s began t o p o i n t  guaranteed  Salmon h a t c h e r i e s 1896  of  and  f i r s t t i m e i n the h i s t o r y of the  need  surplus  more e f f e c t i v e t r a p s ,  e f f e c t i v e were t h e  biological  any  instruments  productivity  nets,  Thus,  i n the  recognized  potential.  in operation  for  i n the  Puget  that By  reproductive  the  Sound  fish  1900  area  were  as  the  early  as  exploited  five  N o r t h P u g e t Sound a r e a  to  purposes.  were b e i n g  there  out  the  salmon  alone  (Cobb  1911:168) . The  intervention  of  the  s t a t e , here  whole of a system of government state  system, the  further  of  Indian  State  intervention  which  l i m i t s f i s h i n g to  fishing treaty protect  rights  the  allocating  enforcement  complex  judiciary, led  access  types state  to  to  licensing, capital  to r e c o g n i z e  treaty  exclusively  the  the  resource.  (generally  regulations,  favoring  the  forms:  escapement  of  usually  and  several  c e r t a i n gear  r e s o u r c e , but  ostensibly  for to  users of c a p i t a l  gear.  Beginning salmon  salmon  from  r e f u s a l of the  not  f i s h e r s ; and  intensive  the  and  fishers  in f i s h i n g takes  gear types);  the  i n s t i t u t i o n s w h i c h make up  l e g i s l a t i v e , executive,  exclusion  intensive  r e f e r r i n g to  i n 1890  fishery  and  prohibition  other of  by  the  State  of  establishing fisheries  nets  in  any  Washington a State  (Austin stream  104  began  agency 1972).  was  one  to In of  to  regulate  oversee  the  1897  the  the  first  regulations  t o be  enforced.  were s p e c i f i c a l l y State  of  exempt  Washington  reservation.  enforced  increased,  indignation  about  fishing  from State  Gradually  regulations  Indians  did  Indian  to  Report  of  the  fishing  on  s a l m o n s t r e a m s was  Indian with  w h i c h he  had  to  1890s,  of  State  Fish  from  and  the  such  the off of  Public  State  of  Reservations  laws.  Commissioner one  numbers  activities.  grew,  Indians  fishing  the  r e g u l a t i o n s on I n d i a n  explicit  reservations  Indians  enforcement  despite the  exemption  the  fishing  W a s h i n g t o n began to e n f o r c e  the  regulations, although  r e g u l a t i o n s on  through as  on  According  for  1899/1900,  o f the major  problems  contend.  The g e n e r a l f i s h e r i e s l a w p a s s e d by t h e l a s t l e g i s l a t u r e p r o v i d e s t h a t a n y I n d i a n r e s i d i n g i n t h i s s t a t e may take s a l m o n o r o t h e r f i s h by a n y m e a n s a n d a t a n y t i m e f o r t h e u s e o f h i m s e l f and h i s f a m i l y ... t h e I n d i a n s h a v e t a k e n t h i s c l a u s e t o mean t h a t t h e y h a v e a r i g h t t o do a s t h e y p l e a s e w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e t a k i n g o f s a l m o n , and h a v e b u i l t t r a p s e n t i r e l y a c r o s s t h e r i v e r s on w h i c h a r e l o c a t e d some o f o u r h a t c h e r i e s ... T h i s p r o v i s i o n , i n s t e a d o f b e i n g a b e n e f i t t o t h e I n d i a n s , has r e s u l t e d i n a l o s s t o them, as on a c c o u n t o f t h e i r a t t e m p t i n g t o f i s h i n a m a n n e r a n d a t t i m e s when t h e l a w p r o h i b i t e d t h e s a m e , t h e y h a v e b e e n p u t t o c o n s i d e r a b l e e x p e n s e and have f a i l e d t o g e t as many f i s h as t h e y have under o t h e r c i r c u m s t a n c e s . T h i s c l a u s e i n the l a w s h o u l d be r e p e a l e d . I t has been t h e p o l i c y o f t h i s d e p a r t m e n t t o be v e r y l e n i e n t w i t h t h e s e p e o p l e , a n d no t r o u b l e w o u l d e v e r have a r i s e n w i t h them had t h e y n o t been ill-advised as to their rights under this statute ( W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t o f F i s h e r i e s 1899/1900:21-22). The  m e t h o d o f e s t i m a t i n g e s c a p e m e n t n e e d s and  unrefined insure  science  a spawning  i n the  1890s.  escapement  was  i t p a s t t h e c o m m e r c i a l t r a p s and Lummi,  cut  Nooksack  off  River  overfishing  and  from to  their  meet  the  to p r o t e c t those  easiest fish  way  to  needs  sockeye, for  turned  salmon,  r e g u l a t o r y measures t h i s 105  an to  t h a t made  i n t o the s t r e a m s or r i v e r s .  access  their  intensified  Generally  r u n s i z e s was  but  to  The the  due  to  resource  too  was b e c o m i n g The  less accessible.  Nooksack R i v e r  of steelhead. supports spring  run of chinook  7.  salmon  r u n s o f s a l m o n and two r u n s  Seasonal  species,  salmon.  time the various  Specie Fall  five  T h e r e a r e no r u n s o f s o c k e y e  a l l the other  approximate  Table  supports  i n the r i v e r  including a  The f o l l o w i n g  table  runs a r e i n the Nooksack  availability  o f salmon  but i t  fall  and  shows t h e River.  i n the Nooksack  River.  J a n F e b Mar Apr May J u n J u l Aug Sep O c t Nov Dec  Chinook  Spring  Chinook  Coho Humpbacks  (odd-numbered y e a r s  only)  Chum Winter  Steelhead  Summer S t e e l h e a d  Until  after  adequate  fish  Nooksack  River  the  sockeye  the turn of the century  to secure runs  were  fishery,  reservation  fishery,  subsistence  and  Nooksack R i v e r  their  t h e Lummi  subsistence  nowhere  near  needs.  were s t i l l  some  fishery  for sale.  able  Wilcox  a resource  restricted  to catch notes  as  to their  enough f i s h f o r that  a t t r a c t e d non-Indian commercial 106  to  C e r t a i n l y the  as v a l u a b l e  b u t t h e Lummi, a l t h o u g h  had a c c e s s  even the operations  i n c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h t h e Lummi. The w a t e r s o f t h e N o o k s a c k R i v e r , w h i c h have t h e i r r i s e and o u t l e t i n t h e c o u n t y , added 1,997,180 pounds a d d i t i o n a l [ t o the commercial f i s h e r y ] . C o m m e r c i a l f i s h i n g on t h i s s t r e a m i s o f l a t e o r i g i n and w o r t h y o f n o t i c e . P r i o r t o 1893 what little fishing was c a r r i e d o n i n t h e N o o k s a c k was by r a n c h e r s and I n d i a n s f o r home c o n s u m p t i o n , b u t t h e w a t e r s o f t h e r i v e r a r e y e a r l y more and more f i s h e d f o r s a l m o n t h a t a r e d i s p o s e d o f t o t h e c a n n e r i e s o f P u g e t Sound and t h e w h o l e s a l e f i s h - d e a l e r s o f S e a t t l e , New Whatcom, o r F a i r h a v e n (Wilcox 1892:594). Although found on  wage  Lummi  c u t o f f from  labor  i n the canneries,  Island.  Company),  fishing  Lummi  from  Company  1911  1897 t o 1934, e m p l o y e d  the Northwest Coast labor  during  1978:87)  those (later  Packing  a few Lummi  i n operation Beach  Packing Packing  workers.  Elsewhere  on  I n d i a n women p r o v i d e d a g r e a t d e a l o f c a n n e r y  the late  1800s  b u t i n t h e Lummi  work  Lummi  Company a t V i l l a g e  and e a r l y  area  1900s  diligently  (e.g.,  the abundant C h i n e s e  was o f t e n p r e f e r r e d b e c a u s e t h e y p r o v i d e d t h e i r would  a few  t o 1946, N o o k s a c k  C o m p a n y , 1915 t o 1 9 2 8 , a n d C a r l i s l e Point,  sockeye  especially  Bay P a c k i n g  in operation  for  f o r long  hours  see Knight labor  force  own o v e r s e e r s and  a t low pay  (Rathbun  1900:320) . A  short history  Company, w i l l  Carlisle  o f one o f t h e s e  illustrate  Packing  some o f t h e s e  canneries, C a r l i s l e points.  Company  S a l m o n t r a p s a t Lummi  Island  were f i r s t  known w i t h  t o have been s e t a t L e g o e Bay i n 1895, a l t h o u g h been s m a l l t r a p s t h e r e e a r l i e r . Roberts, of  t h e Lummi  the traps,  Packing  Just  Indians immediately  w h i c h were i n c o n f l i c t 107  as they  certainty  t h e r e may  have  had done a t P o i n t  p r o t e s t e d the c o n s t r u c t i o n with  the t r a d i t i o n a l  reef  net  grounds  obtaining it  was  1895  (see  a  Figure  temporary  they  The  Lummi  injunction against  s h o r t - l i v e d , and  season  3).  although  were o p e r a t i n g  the  at  were  the  traps  full  successful  traps  i n 1895,  missed  capacity  in  in  part  but  of  the  1896.  On t h e w e s t s i d e o f L u m m i I s l a n d , s o u t h o f V i l l a g e P o i n t , three trap-net sites, equal distances apart, had been o c c u p i e d up t o t h e c l o s e o f 1895, the f a r t h e s t being about 1 1/4 m i l e s f r o m t h e p o i n t , t h e n e a r e s t w i t h i n o n e - f o u r t h mile. T h e y l e a d o f f f r o m t h e s h o r e f r o m 637 t o 725 f e e t i n t o d e p t h s o f 6 1/2 t o 8 f a t h o m s . One was b u i l t u p o n f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e i n 1895 b u t t h e o t h e r s a r e o f o l d e r d a t e . One o f the l a t t e r , the f a r t h e s t from the p o i n t , has been abandoned. The r e m a i n i n g two, h o w e v e r , a r e s a i d t o be f a v o r a b l y p l a c e d , b u t w h i l e b o t h w e r e p u t t o u s e i n 1895, an i n j u n c t i o n o b t a i n e d a g a i n s t them by t h e I n d i a n s prevented t h e i r employment d u r i n g most o f t h e s e a s o n . T h i s was due t o t h e i r l o c a t i o n i n s i d e o f and a d j a c e n t t o one o f t h e f a v o r i t e r e e f - n e t f i s h i n g - g r o u n d s , which the I n d i a n s c l a i m e d was b e i n g i n j u r e d by t h e i r p r o x i m i t y . H e r e a l s o , i n 1897, a marked i n c r e a s e was shown i n t h e e x t e n t o f t r a p - n e t f i s h i n g (Rathbun 1900: 299-300). When t h e  success  Incorporation 12  May  year  1896,  fish  were f i l e d with  a cannery  three  was  hour.  operation Carlisle  established  in  years. was  of As  small,  the  foreign  Company,  Victoria,  for a l l canneries but  Articles  of  Company  on  Island Packing  $100,000, and  at V i l l a g e  by  Point  J u l y of  that  c o n s i s t i n g of  c a p a c i t y to process  one  hundred  year  the  cannery  ownership  hands Ltd.  with The  British  Britain.  $125,000, c a r r i e d  became e v i d e n t ,  Lummi  base of  following  i n v e s t o r s were i n G r e a t capital  f o r the  having  into  Packing  traps  constructed  The  went  these  a capital  b u i l d i n g s and per  of  on  The the  of t h i s  gradually C a r l i s l e  108  a  of  change  manager's  Columbia  but  of  name  to  office  was  a l l of  the  foreign investors, with business  f o r the  e a r l y e r a , the  increased  a  next  five  annual  pack  i t s output.  1  F i g u r e 3. Salmon Rathbun 1900) .  traps  at V i l l a g e  109  Point,  1895  (adapted  from  It  became  business,  and  difficult i n 1902  owners  f o r the  Alaska  Packers  million filed  for  the  Carlisle  f o r e i g n owners  Packing  Company  p u r c h a s e p r i c e o f $100,000. Association  i n 1909  (PFY  i n January of  had  1909:23).  1902  an  f o r the  was  By  purpose  continue s o l d to  the local  comparison,  the  capital  of  $7.5  of I n c o r p o r a t i o n  were  operating  Articles  to  of:  ... f i s h i n g i n t h e S t a t e o f W a s h i n g t o n , and o t h e r w a t e r s , f o r s a l m o n and o t h e r f o o d f i s h e s , and t o c a p t u r e s u c h f i s h w i t h p o u n d n e t s , t r a p s , w e i r s , s e i n e s , and o t h e r fishing a p p l i a n c e s ; t o s e l l and d i s p o s e o f t h e f i s h so c a u g h t ... t o a c q u i r e , h o l d , s e l l , and t r a n s f e r l i c e n s e s f o r s u c h f i s h i n g a p p l i a n c e s ; t o a c q u i r e , e s t a b l i s h , h o l d , s e l l , l e a s e , and l e t f i s h i n g l o c a t i o n s ... t o a c q u i r e , b u i l d o r l e a s e , c h a r t e r , and o p e r a t e s h i p s , s t e a m e r s , and o t h e r w a t e r c r a f t ... d e a l i n r e a l e s t a t e ... t o a c q u i r e , b u i l d , own, lease, and l e t canneries ... a n d o t h e r w i s e manufacture fish products from the f i s h taken i n the S t a t e of W a s h i n g t o n ( C a r l i s l e P a c k i n g Company 1 9 0 2 ) . The  Whatcom, W a s h i n g t o n  F e b r u a r y 1902 traps and  (1902:6).  Whitehorn.  established  These  in  i n 1904)  Sehome,  ownership of  town  800),  and of who  of  mainland  Whatcom  were  b e t w e e n Sandy P o i n t  and  (Whatcom,  ran  the  passed  company  110  to  until  into  was  Whatcom,  the By  Frank the  Company  New  moved t o S e a t t l e i n 1912. had  operating Bay  incorporated  Carlisle  5  I s l a n d at Legoe  head o f f i c e o f C a r l i s l e P a c k i n g  the  the  Lummi  The  Bellingham  out  w e r e on  along  and  shares  traps  and  Fairhaven  principal  Weekly Blade of  s t a t e s t h a t C a r l i s l e c a n n e r y owned s i x  Point Migley,  Point  n e w s p a p e r , The  city this  Wright  1930s.  of  time (798  T a b l e 8. C a r l i s l e P a c k i n g Company a n n u a l c a s e s o f 48 one pound c a n s .  pack,  1896 t o 1928, i n  Production  Year  cases (approx.) 10,000 28,000 cases " 9,000 cases 45,000 cases " 11,200 cases " 50,425 cases 12,265 cases 14,950 cases (did not operate) 23,618 cases, (did not operate) 30,325 cases (did not operate) 37,000 cases (no i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e ) cases 79 ,658 cases 26 ,539 134 ,935 cases cases 37 ,831 cases 36 ,274 cases 8,071 cases 82 ,779 cases 2 ,826 cases 61 ,635 (did not operate) 51,282 cases (did not operate) 45,503 cases (did not operate) 34,180 cases (did not operate) (did not operate) (did not operate)  1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928  SOURCES: F o r 1896 t o 1 9 0 0 , p e r s o n a l p a p e r s o f M. P e g g y f o r 1901 t o 1928, PFY (1903 t h r o u g h 1 9 2 9 ) .  111  Aiston;  As  will  be  explained  i n the  i n d u s t r y o f t h e West C o a s t impetus  from  World  t h i s p e r i o d and the  Kvichak  the  mouth  Company Packing to  of  By  Company was  after  received  canneries, on  in  the  increase  Y u k o n R i v e r , and  at  (Carlisle  seasons,  i t s stock  Company  c a p a c i t y • through  salmon,  the  traps  canneries  always  operated,  in Bellingham.  the  effects  sold  o f f the A l a s k a  (PFY  1928:62) b u t  traps to P a c i f i c September $80,000  of  With  the o u t l a w i n g discussed  and  By  1928,  from  $80,000  operated  1920s.  catch  for  was  the  holdings  and  c l o s e d the V i l l a g e  continued  to  fish  to  other  cannery  I n 1928  from  the  humpback  sold  salmon market.  at a  Although  " o f f " years  however,  sell  Carlisle  1918).  early  the  the  value  of a f a l l i n g  1930  the  loss  stock  Packing  proceedings the  on  Packing  Carlisle  Point  the  was  Cannery  Puget  Sound  A m e r i c a n F i s h Company c a n n e r y o p e r a t i o n s .  (Carlisle  bankruptcy  the  operate  considerable  on  s h o w n on t h e c a n n e r y p a c k c h a r t , C a r l i s l e high  salmon  a l l in Alaska,  Cordova  s e v e r a l good  Packing  the  expanded d r a m a t i c a l l y d u r i n g  Bay,  River  able to  (Carlisle  not  was  Company  reduced  1930),  from  and  $1,000,000  four  years  to  later  began. and  o f t h e t r a p s by t h e S t a t e o f W a s h i n g t o n i n 1934  (to  i n the  Packing  operation  of  the c a n n e r i e s ,  the  following chapter), Company  traps  capital  of  value  In  economy  Carlisle  only  Bristol  1918,  did  the  Carlisle  Copper  cannery  be  I.  near  the  1925).  relatively  feeling  of North America  opened t h r e e o t h e r  River  $1,000,000 As  War  following chapter,  was  made  holdings  of  to  remain  illegal, the  i t became solvent,  Wright  company.  112  depressed  impossible and  could  not  since  for the  liquidate  Having  appropriated  Lummi d u r i n g fishery,  the r i s e  Carlisle  capital-intensive fishing  some o f t h e b e s t  fishing  o f t h e N o r t h P u g e t Sound  Packing fishery  commercial  Company,  i n combination  operations,  effectively  on any l a r g e s c a l e .  Even  increasing  much  was a s t a t e d canneries Company  policy  we  Lummis  1925).  either  labor  was  as l a b o r , b u t  white or Chinese thinned  i n t h e e a r l y 1900s and d u r i n g of C a r l i s l e  endeavor  Packing  t o use o n l y  Despite  this  other  C e r t a i n l y some i n d i v i d u a l  of the Chinese  automation  with  Indian  l a b o r was f a r l e s s n u m e r o u s t h a n  labor.  salmon  ended  were i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o t h e c o m m e r c i a l o p e r a t i o n s Lummi  s i t e s of the  white  Company  labor"  statement,  out  t h e 1920s i t that  " i n our  (Carlisle  many  Packing  elderly  Lummi  r e m e m b e r F r a n k W r i g h t a s a k i n d man who w o u l d p u r c h a s e f i s h them  when  parents  they  some  strengthens  were work  i n need i f they  the point  individuals,  was  o f cash,  that  were  the force  with  o f t h e Lummi  desperate.  the economic a t work  c a n n e r y owners and o p e r a t o r s expropriation  or give  was j u s t  capitalized  large  companies  further  But t h i s  only  itself,  not  t h e Lummi.  The  but the  one o f d o z e n s o f s m a l l c o m p a n i e s  the f i s h i n g themselves  centralized.  t h e 1930s,  were  their  t o salmon has nothing  N o r t h P u g e t Sound a r e a , a l l o f w h i c h u s u r p e d  by  or  may h a v e b e e n k i n d p e o p l e , access  from  t o do  personalities. Carlisle  and  them  system  against  with  after  industry only  treaty fishing  t h e heyday  113  operations  chapter  of commercial  p e r i p h e r a l to the commercial  sites  t o be i n c o r p o r a t e d  as t h e c o m m e r c i a l  In the subsequent  i nthe  fishery,  we  will  fishing,  into  became  see t h a t t h e Lummi  p r i m a r i l y engaged i n  subsistence  fishing  supplemented  by  wage  labor  in  seasonal  occupations.  Summary The  period  fishery, factors  of the development  of the commercial  1884 t o 1 9 0 0 , was o n e i n w h i c h p o l i t i c a l combined  to exclude  Indian  fishers  from  the c o m m e r c i a l development o f the r e s o u r c e . capital,  under  concentrate desirable  pressure  from  on a g r i c u l t u r a l  the Bureau  endeavors,  of the a v a i l a b l e labor  the  usurpation of their  locations  t h e Lummi  commercial supposedly them  interests. looked  in this  activities  worked  sophistication impossible,  to  The  At  t h e same  i n the f i s h i n g  f o r Lummi  were  the e x c l u s i o n o f Indian labor.  intensive  gear  fisher found  time,  that  to acquire. t h e Lummi  of  was  to contest  Affairs,  d i d nothing of State  from  to  own  commercial  fishing  technological  i tdifficult,  and c a n n e r i e s were  114  small  i f not Cannery  of production were  employing  utilizing  capital-  o f any r e s e r v a t i o n  years of the nineteenth  to a  support Federal  instruments  t h e means  which  and  increasing  operators  The c l o s i n g  restricted  t h e Lummi  to remain competitive.  beyond  least  to confront the  Indian  i n d u s t r y made  fishers  Independent  the  to  treaty-protected, fishing  t h e Lummi  fishers  Affairs  In attempting  interests,  investing in their  non-Indian  of Indian  The c o m b i n a t i o n  to exclude  Without access to  were p o w e r l e s s  Bureau  their  conflict.  opportunity.  operations  after  they  participation in  f o r the canneries,  traditional,  found  and e c o n o m i c  and c o n s i d e r e d  were f o r c e d i n t o a s t a t e o f d e p e n d e n c y .  salmon  part  of their  century former  territory resource  and  with  access  formerly available  to  just  t o them.  115  a  fraction  of  the  salmon  CHAPTER IV THE ERA OF COMMERCIAL SALMON FISHING 1901-1935 Introduction The  period  from roughly  the t u r n o f the c e n t u r y  mid-1930s was a t i m e d u r i n g  u n t i l the  w h i c h t h e Lummi came t o be a l m o s t  totally  excluded  from p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the c o m m e r c i a l  salmon  fishing  industry.  In t h i s chapter we w i l l document t h i s  process  through  an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f the f o l l o w i n g :  the t e c h n o l o g i c a l  growth o f the salmon f i s h e r y ; the p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f Lummi salmon  fishing  instituting further  of  industry resulted  Rarely, the  further  p o l i c i e s which  innovations  developed  i n the increased impossible  o f the s t a t e i n tended  fishing.  the t e c h n o l o g i c a l  were  virtually  and t h e a c t i v i t y  l e g i s l a t i o n and f o r m u l a t i n g  to l i m i t Indian  Many  it  industry;  i n the  during  fishing  period.  This  c a p i t a l i z a t i o n o f the i n d u s t r y ,  making  for reservation  this  i n the  Indians  to p a r t i c i p a t e .  i f e v e r , d i d Lummi have t h e c a p i t a l n e c e s s a r y t o e n t e r  f i s h e r y on a c o m p e t i t i v e  financing, vessels,  such were  as  lending  n o t open  basis,  and o t h e r  institutions  to  them.  By  or  avenues of  cannery-backed  documenting  this  t e c h n o l o g i c a l growth we w i l l demonstrate how the Lummi came to be restricted The  t o an o n - r e s e r v a t i o n  fishery.  c o n t r a c t i o n o f t h e Lummi f i s h e r y t o a s m a l l p o r t i o n o f  i t s f o r m e r m a g n i t u d e was i n s t r u m e n t a l s o c i e t y t h a t began t o activities.  i n c r e a t i n g a dependent  r e l y on e x t e r n a l a g e n c i e s t o d i r e c t i t s  Unable to compete i n the commercial f i s h e r y ,  l a b o r found t h a t i t was no l o n g e r  116  needed i n c a n n e r i e s  Indian  as p e o p l e  of  other  ethnicities  subsisted  by  t o work as  migrant  and  local  for  most p a r t  farm  period  was  to  limited  in  several  basis.  At  becoming labor,  to  the  time  same  groups  (white,  readily  available.  The this  period  With  more  available,  the  easiest  rivers,  maximum fishery, ability  had  to  State  place rivers, the  the of  Washington  to  the  late  1800s.  Lummi  although  there  of  the  take  but were  fishing  they  suffered  Lummi were  rebuffed  forced  was  area to  consistently  f i s h e r y had sustain refused  117  salmon  fewer  more  during stocks.  fish  being  into a p o s i t i o n of  legislative fishing  was  a critical  allow  an  actions. in Being  and  open w a t e r  themselves. to  ethnic  industry  highly visible, i n the  skilled  other  areas of migration.  taken  was  becoming  the  and  eliminate  terminal  was  on  through various  industry  of  fishing  fishery  f i s h e r y was  runs  labor  its toll  or  competitive  more h i g h l y  which  was  a  fishing  with  salmon  the  limit  yield  the  requiring  Washington  the  terminal salmon  Valley  some employment,  f i s h e r y on  Japanese),  to  of  Indian  sustainable  i n the  even  commercial  compete  growth began  the  thereby  salmon f i s h i n g  s t r e a m s and the  the  fishers entering  curtailing The  also  had  to f i s h ,  and  Lummi  the F r a s e r  i n which  t o 1935  re-enter  Chinese,  continued  one  waters,  mechanized,  Indians  was  century  attempts  and  they  Many  officials.  t u r n o f the  more  as  They c o n t i n u e d  reservation  from State the  W a s h i n g t o n or  laborers,  this  destitute.  From  readily available.  a g r i c u l t u r e also provided  economically  harassment  more  t r a v e l i n g to Eastern  Logging the  became  when  the in the  commercial  e f f e c t on The  State  the of  escapement  specifically  f o r an I n d i a n  fishers  should  groups.  Several  first  quarter  publicly  of State  During sites,  expected  were trap  sophisticated  into  that  sites  seines  direct  into  Washington  passing  fixed  i n the State.  regulatory  defending infringing The fishing Bureau  a conflict  take  Initiative  on t h e r i g h t s  combined  f o r over  By  1917  $100,000,  with  time,  the mobile  culminated  years. most  fishers  with  More  notably entering  traps.  This  the State of  77 i n 1934 e l i m i n a t i n g t h e u s e o f  Although  Initiative  exempted  demanded  action against  i t sp o s i t i o n  fishing in  investments.  the s t a t i o n a r y  which  user' g r o u p s  the State  l o c a t i o n s , p r i m a r i l y the  i n two o r t h r e e  with  with  action specifically  restrictions, officials  selling  nets,  competition  user  during the  period  a l l Indians  a l s o appeared a t t h i s  and g i l l  developed  gear  fishing  o f the investment  technology  the other  on o r o f f r e s e r v a t i o n .  valuable  were  with  the t r e a t y  a r r e s t s occured  i twould a r r e s t  becoming  that  and e a r l y i n t h i s  law, whether  recovery  purse  century,  along  Lummi  t h i s period the best  individual  the  of this  claiming  f o r the f i s h  fishing-related  announced  defiance  trap  compete  fishery,  77 and p r i o r  Indian  that  from  the State  the t r i b e s .  by c l a i m i n g  gear  The S t a t e  that  State fishing  fisheries obliged,  the Indians  were  of the State.  result of State  and l o c a l  regulation,  decreased  o p p o r t u n i t i e s , and an u n w i l l i n g n e s s on t h e p a r t o f t h e of Indian  Affairs  to support  any v i a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e s ,  was  a marked i n c r e a s e i n Lummi e c o n o m i c u n d e r d e v e l o p m e n t , m a k i n g 1901 t o 1935 one o f t h e most d e s t i t u t e p e r i o d s  118  i n Lummi  history.  Technological  Growth  Around  the  industries,  such  were  turn as  cases  Despite  out  or  the  form  of  Pacific  twenty-two Alaska  the  This  industry.  the  century  many  United  coal,  copper,  sugar,  meat,  conglomerates  Act,  bankruptcy trend  American  to  Fisheries in  cannery  control  1983:2).  Canneries  involved  i n the  cannery  in  the  at  over  Alaska  Packers  world,  at  Fairhaven, During  total  force  of  Del  the  The the  most  Columbia  sockeye  pack,  i n the  Monte  and  Pacific  and even  Coast  fishing  productive  near B l a i n e  into Bellingham  canneries  Point the  part  in  in  salmon  this  day  fishery  the  century,  (Greenberg Roberts  the the  were  salmon Pacific  1890s 80  the  percent  s i z e a b l e p o r t i o n of  to  to  1893,  form  largest of  the  joined  to  average of  In  in  grounds of  the  1899,  State  eleven  of  the  the  i t remains as  a  Lummi were  of  Washington  the  " l a r g e s t salmon  i n the S t a t e " were l o c a t e d i n Whatcom C o u n t y six  independent  t u r n of the  and  form,  evident  late part of  a  to  a  subsidiary  Corporation.  traditional  River.  pack  i n some  began  forces  and  f o r an  numerous or  canneries  was  the  of  salmon  the  merger,  and o i l ,  Similarly,  joined  (Blaine)  Packers A s s o c i a t i o n accounted  strong  also  dozen  Alaska  Sound  was  by  three  Semiahmoo  Alaska  1890,  smaller,  1895.  operators  A m e r i c a n F i s h e r i e s merger.  the  of  example, s e v e r a l s m a l l  Packers A s s o c i a t i o n , which,  grown  Puget  on  States  through  large monopolies  business  For  small  Fishery  Sherman A n t i - T r u s t A c t  forcing  entrepreneurs. fishing  of  into giant  in defiance  buying  Salmon  iron,  incorporated  mergers.  had  i n the  and  five  at Fairhaven  i n 1904).  I n 1901 119  north  (Wilcox  (Fairhaven  t w e l v e of the  was  certainly of  the  canneries 1902:522),  incorporated  nineteen  Puget  Sound c a n n e r i e s accounted (Roth  for  relied  the  e a r l y years  upon  with  women  Indian  Indians  the  the  other  found  because  the  most  This  machine,  which  fish  i n a ten  hour  cans,  canneries. used  The  i n the in  eliminated  the  cannery.  Other  Puget  reduction While decrease  of  Indian  and  those  Sound  industry  labor.  twelve  salmon  pushed  so  pack  This  fill  replaced  Pacific  1903. need  for  the  two  use  of  to  a l s o continued  i n the  to  canneries  was  for  120  and  manual  de-fin  enough  in  the  by E. A. S m i t h and  was  cutters  cannery  in  immediately i n the  can-filling  machines  (later  average  machines, replaced  by  c r i m p e d ) , a l s o added to a  i n the  canneries.  cannery operations the  canneries.  labor  twenty as  Chink"  cases of f o r t y - e i g h t  Indian  capitalization  make  "Iron  i n the  machine  t o be  needed  increased  became the  the  this  such  only  opportunities and  the  can-soldering  innovations  and  force,  F i s h e r i e s Company  of  fifteen  workers  thousand  American  labor  fitted  fished  traps  labor  called  invented  innovations, and  demand  i n the  eviscerate,  much  The  the  the  innovation  behead,  to  as  canneries  aside.  many C h i n e s e  could  the  where men  entered  Machine, brazenly  unskilled  the  However,  groups  c a n s " , w h i c h had  intensification salmon  and  fishing  important  day  machines,  "sanitary  of  total  " I r o n C h i n k " was  Fairhaven  washing  the  catch.  themselves  i t replaced  pound  of  ethnic  Smith Butchering  first  the  t r a d i t i o n a l d i v i s i o n of labor,  and  Perhaps  one  of  fishers  processed  prominent  the  two-thirds  i n Whatcom C o u n t y ,  1926:666). In  well  were l o c a t e d  i t more  and  labor in  the  continued force,  to the  procurement  more d i f f i c u l t  for  Indian  fishers  fishery  the c a p i t a l  needed  to enter the  on a c o m p e t i t i v e b a s i s .  The seine  to accumulate  m o s t n o t a b l e g r o w t h o f m e c h a n i z a t i o n was i n t h e p u r s e  fishery.  I n 1930 C o b b  (1930:480)  remarked  that  purse  s e i n e s had u n d e r g o n e more m o d i f i c a t i o n and r e f i n e m e n t t h a n any other  gear  type.  In the l a t e  1800s p u r s e  seine boats  required  a  c r e w o f n i n e men t o h a u l t h e n e t by h a n d a n d t o man t h e o a r s , b u t the of  addition this  o f motor  gear  undeniably  type.  power By  attributable  dramatically  changed  1919 t h e g r o w t h to technological  the e f f i c i e n c y  of purse  seining  was  change.  In no b r a n c h o f t h e f i s h e r i e s h a s t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e g a s e n g i n e made m o r e n o t i c e a b l e c h a n g e s t h a n i n p u r s e seining. When s a i l s w e r e t h e m o t i v e p o w e r b r o a d , flat, s c o w - l i k e b o a t s w e r e u s e d , a n d t h e s e w e r e p r o p e l l e d by e i t h e r o a r s o r s a i l s , o r by b o t h . I n 1903 t h e f i r s t g a s o l i n e - p o w e r e d s e i n e b o a t a p p e a r e d on t h e s a l m o n f i s h i n g g r o u n d s o f Puget Sound. T h e v e s s e l was named t h e P i o n e e r a n d s h e was e q u i p p e d w i t h a 5 h.p. S t a n d a r d e n g i n e . The f i r s t s e a s o n she e a s i l y d e m o n s t r a t e d her v a s t s u p e r i o r i t y o v e r t h e o t h e r p u r s e s e i n e r s i n t h e q u i c k n e s s w i t h w h i c h she c o u l d r e a c h a s c h o o l o f f i s h a f t e r i t was s i g h t e d a n d i n surrounding i t with her seine. The n e x t y e a r t h e r e were a few m o r e b u i l t o r s o e q u i p p e d , a n d t h e number h a s s t e a d i l y i n c r e a s e d u n t i l a t p r e s e n t t h e r e a r e a b o u t one t h o u s a n d o p e r a t i n g i n P u g e t Sound, A l a s k a , and B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a (PFY 1919:59-60). C a p t a i n J a m e s W. T a r t e s t a t e d one  oar-powered  (PFY  1912:50).  small, in  purse The  first  a v e r a g i n g about  number  38 f e e t  i n 1906 t h e r e was o n l y  i n o p e r a t i o n i n Puget  seine  i n length.  boats  were  As t h e b o a t s  and more p o w e r f u l .  i n l e n g t h b e t w e e n 45 and 75 f e e t ,  45 t o 110 h o r s e p o w e r  feet  left  powered  t h e y became l a r g e r  s e i n e b o a t s ranged by  s e i n e boat  that  e n g i n e s , and used  Sound  typically increased  By 1920 p u r s e were p o w e r e d  n e t s u p w a r d s o f 1800  long. In  addition to propulsion,  m e c h a n i c a l power was a l s o  121  adapted  to  hauling  the  h a n d , i t was and  a long,  tackle  enabled  as  table boat  and  switch  that  Sound  could  Those  who  the  to  the  seiners  built.  seiner,  said he  be  built  the  equipped  with  one  1911  a  of  first  and  longer  improvements, net  materials,  and  a  seine-  side  dominate  1920s  as  s e i n i n g he first  the a  of  the  the  Puget  and  1930s  commercial  famous  foot  the  instruments of production.  seiner.  old  gear  and  leased  entering  and  expanding  i t out with  to  In  built  other  the  engine  122  purse foot  to  and,  Petrich  that  time,  (PFY  1927:125-126).  the  developmental reinvesting  v e s s e l owners kept fishers.  f i s h e r y were  assistance  scow  vessel  1916  up  c a p a b i l i t e s by  Many new  powered  seine  f i s h e r y during  their  to  in a fifty-two  purse  vessel  Slav  seining  m o v e d on  motor  reinvested  seine  increase  acquire  the  J.J. P e t r i c h ,  the  sixty-five  period  to  to  live-aboard  were i n t h e  Unable  deeper  enterprise  a n i n e t y - f i v e horsepower  to  1920s,  either  fishers in  Petrich  l a r g e s t purse  able  over  block  the  messages),  came  beach  Some i n d i v i d u a l s who were  use  by  in  e a r l y 1900s, s t a r t e d beach  From  the  power w i n c h ,  improved  net  example,  had  In  to  the  successful  For  i n 1905  obtained  Lummi.  and  hauled  1920s.  i n 1897.  and  be  adopted  received  seiners  i n Puget Sound i n the  a cannery  to  With further  developed t h e i r  developed.  1912,  carry  work  purse  became  seining  in  to  had  The  rollers,  merely  turn  were i n d i v i d u a l s who  for  nets  to d i e s e l engines,  f i s h e r y during  seiner  power  boats  initially  astern,  fishery  seine  laborious process.  seine  (which  or  the  t o make m o r e s e t s i n a d a y . the  radios  When  set-ups,  purse  n e t s , and such  nets.  from  These not  canneries  or  their  means  open  in  of  to  the  banks  and  denied  a t e r m i n a l area  found  entry  increasingly The  into  the  remote  enhanced  m o b i l i t y of  By  further  i n t o the  the  fish  reduce  in  the  fishing  significantly a c t i o n by  proximity  noticeably  of  of  the  purse  Puget  seines  i n t h e o p e n w a t e r and  terminal the  areas,  numbers  the  State  of  of  Lummi  Sound  worked  causing  directly  the  reaching  use  conflict  between  operators  continued  twentieth  century.  operators  became  succeeded  the  the  The by  the  voters  traps  by  for their  cannery  result  the  of  late  the  an  pressure State  of  sites.  workers  traps,  of purse  sports  source  began  to  first  seines  until  by  to  fish,  invest  the  in purse  again  a p p e a r e d on  123  trap the  seine  1930s  and  anti-trap  exerted  took  the  was  issue  depended  to  upon  more f a r - s i g h t e d o f seine  c a n n e r y - o w n e d v e s s e l , common among t h e 1800s,  the  their  many c a n n e r i e s  of  the  purse  groups they  seine seine  o n e - t h i r d of  force  user  not  out,  and  (1977:15)  fishers  two  Since  seiners  to  fishing  trap  Barsh points  Barsh  Washington  principal  the  lobbying  these  initiative.  owners  to  influential the  purse  through  According  in recruiting  position. resisted  t o grow  the  and  began  trap  i n f r o n t of the  As  their  following  prohibited  many o f t h e  Greater  trap catch.  then  purse seines  fish  but  armed c o n f l i c t .  diminished  the  to  A t r a p o p e r a t i n g a l o n e i s more e f f i c i e n t t h a n a p u r s e o p e r a t i n g alone, but a t r a p o p e r a t i n g behind a purse i s l e s s e f f i c i e n t (Barsh 1977:14). The  an  moving f u r t h e r  Washington  s t a t i o n a r y gear,  r e c a l l purse seines s e t t i n g infrequently  fishery  S t r a i t s o f J u a n de F u c a and  towards the  Legislative  commercial  the  possibility.  advantage. out  f i s h e r y o f commercial magnitude,  P u g e t Sound.  gear.  gill  net  Generally  As  a  boats a  cannery vessel was  would  f o r the  finance  a  duration of  In  "Slavonians"  (Yugoslavs)  seining  was  fishing  the  known  fisher  or  lease  to  elders  and  worked  as  accurate  crew  on  participating  the  Slav  i n the  drag  seines  reservation  for  more s e i n e r s method o f  (see  and  schooners  by Map  smelt. use  as  seine  the  Europe  is  the  actual  were  5) d u r i n g  seine  the  the  1910s  Odd-numbered  124  the  profits  1917/1919:10-11). and  a few to  Lummi acquire  number  of  1901  1935,  to  fishery,  salmon.  were  and  bait.  salmon.  the  Lummi but  exclusive Some  " s e i n i n g g r o u n d s " on  fish  humpback  net  for  These  purse  fish  few.  used  at  of  Fish  seiners"  would  difficult  operations  also  "alien  fishers,  It  to  dominant  State  with  Fisheries  i n the  Lummi  t h a t the  to  Slavonian  were  l i c e n s e d , as  taking  of  provoked  because they  return  t h a t they  which  were used  herring  fishery  9 shows t h e g r o w t h  seines,  i n 1917  concerning  i n d i c a t i o n s suggest  i t  Sea  adaptable  became so  of  Purse  i n the A d r i a t i c easily  the  number  operators.  Slavonians  vessels.  purse  was  that  Department  information  Table  The  then  remember  seine  1969:355)  Darwin to remark  State  significant  been used  fishery  e x t i n c t i o n and  (Washington Lummi  seine  a  w h i c h had  be p r o h i b i t e d f r o m t h e  salmon  Sound  i n P u g e t Sound.  a  With e i t h e r arrangement, i t  became p u r s e  (Lyons  purse  should  of  a  a season.  Puget  a technique  Commissioner  all  North  generations  salmon in  to  s t i p u l a t e d t h a t the l e a s e r would s e l l a l l of the c a t c h to  financier.  for  vessel  seines  sold  1920s to to  years  are  the  fish  drag the for  local  halibut  tended  to  most  have  effective  Table  9.  Puget  Sound p u r s e s e i n e Licenses  Year 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918  Sound  conspicuous. of  purse  Just  with  addition  o f motor  trolling trollers  trolling  trolling,  method,  some  was  trolling  selling  were  Puget  no  the  less  viability  made g i l l  Trollers  primarily from  netting  fish fish  to  Indian  t h e number the  market  grounds  an  row-boats,  increased  from the f i s h i n g  125  the N o r t h  enhanced also  Reports.  practical.  f o r the f r e s h  more a p p e a l i n g .  Annual  groups  greatly  significantly  Although  t o and  mobile  t o 1900,  non-Indians  fished primarily  p r o d u c t was  258 172 252 123 133 93 154 136 179 168 212 197 251 203 241 228 215  to dominate  of engines  more  prior  power  vessels.  b o a t s made t r i p s  power  the a d d i t i o n  and  came  other  as motor  seining,  Whereas  seiners  1935.  Licenses  1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935  fishery,  more p r o f i t a b l e  to  S t a t e Department o f F i s h e r i e s ,  the purse  salmon  1901  Year  67 78 87 72 91 78 64 69 95 127 137 169 252 288 362 275 420 204  SOURCE: W a s h i n g t o n  While  licenses,  and  the of  canneries, motorized  faster  and  the  seek c o h o and c h i n o o k , as  the  other  powered  do  trollers  addition feet,  species  readily  could  only  o f motor power  were a b l e each  line,  fisher.  After  1918  to p u l l  the  to t r o l l  h o o k s on  used  not  and  from  use  one  boats, two  a hook. or  still  two only  to s i x l i n e s  The  gurdies,  lines,  adding  a Puget  early,  lines.  with  Sound  f u r t h e r to the  one  human-  With  twenty to  a l l o f t h i s g e a r c o u l d be  power  i n the  take  the  thirty  to  three  t e n d e d by  invention, trolling  one were gear  efficiency. It  is difficult  to estimate  i n Puget Sound p r i o r  t o 1917  Rounsefell  state:  and  Kelez  t h e number o f t r o l l e r s  b e c a u s e no  l i c e n s e s were  operating required.  We may assume t h a t the troll f i s h e r y was of l i t t l e i m p o r t a n c e p r i o r t o a b o u t 1910, and t h a t t h e number o f b o a t s i n c r e a s e d t h e r e a f t e r t o a maximum i n 1919 ( R o u n s e f e l l and Kelez 1938:751).  Table  10.  P u g e t Sound Year 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926  trolling licenses,  Licenses 782 982 1,032 611 415 165 221 374 438 684  1917 t o Year  Licenses  1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935  820 672 656 784 599 259 220 478 438  SOURCE: W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t o f F i s h e r i e s ,  126  1935.  Annual  Reports.  T h e s e numbers do actual  trollers,  were n o t  the  Strait  o f Juan  to  with  fishers. and  Puget  and  laws  numbers o f b o a t s Sound  line  Flattery that  fishing  operate  could  t o 1935,  certain  only  take  in  proper. the S t a t e  areas  (Austin  in  Puget  1972:12-16).  a r e a s were meant t o p r o t e c t t h e s a l m o n  trollers  and  Cape  s a f e t o assume  n e t f i s h e r s and a p p e a s e t h e g r o w i n g However,  line"  the  restricted  hook  t h e t o t a l number o f  o f f s h o r e from  p r o g r e s s i n g through  increasingly  Most o f these l i m i t e d commercial  and  and  reflect  I t appears  indicate  de F u c a  fishing  fishing  licensed.  10  i n 1907  Washington  Sound  boats  t o be  i n Table  Beginning of  since  required  t h e numbers  not n e c e s s a r i l y  number o f  advantage  i n areas closed  from  of  sport  these  to other  "hook  commercial  gear. In  1928,  when  the  Trolling  V e s s e l s Owner's A s s o c i a t i o n  chartered, i n the S t a t e of Washington, 2,000  trollers  fishery  were  operating  (PFY 1 9 2 9 : 1 5 7 ) a n d  672  i t was  estimated  i n the N o r t h  Pacific  that  Coast  o f t h e s e were l i c e n s e d  was over  salmon  for  Puget  Sound. With about  1902  t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e a d d i t i o n o f motor power, and  becoming  underwent  few  century.  Motor  power  c o u l d cover  ground  to f i s h i n g was  their  Since g i l l Pacific  and  i n c r e a s e d the allowed  ground.  speed  where t h e f i s h i n g  North  total  by  changes d u r i n g the e a r l y  netter  boats  almost  was  gill  y e a r s of the  range  that  a  net  of  the  mobility,  attraction  both  useful  boats  twentieth given  f o r q u i c k e r movement f r o m  Much  and  1914,  beginning  gill  fishing  of g i l l  in getting  net to  most p r o d u c t i v e .  n e t s w e r e one o f t h e f i r s t g e a r t y p e s u s e d  commercial  salmon  fishery,  127  i t i s not  i n the  suprising  to  see t h a t from portion gill  the e a r l i e s t date o f record keeping  o f the salmon f l e e t  net boats  1913,  increased during  decreased  increased The  netters.  t h e 1910s,  dramatically during  The numbers o f  reaching  t h e 1920s  a peak i n  and t h e n  again  i n t h e 1930s. e x p l a n a t i o n f o r the drop  reduction staked  were g i l l  a significant  i n t h e number  i n or near  i n t h e 1920s  of " s e tnets",  a river.  Some  gill  s e t nets  i s the dramatic nets  which  were m e r e l y  were  used t o  hold a t r a p l o c a t i o n because the c o s t f o ra s e t net l i c e n s e considerably  lower  than  and K e l e z 1938:713).  the c o s t  for a trap license  Some o f t h e m o r e p r o f i t a b l e  was  (Rounsefell  s e t net areas  were a t t h e mouths o f t h e S k a g i t , S a m i s h , and Nooksack R i v e r s and in  Boundary Bay.  in  fresh  water  S i n c e s e t n e t s w e r e no l o n g e r a l l o w e d  after  t o t a l number o f g i l l drift  net licenses  1921, t h e r e a s o n nets  gill  remained fishers  nets  a potent  were  a decrease,  force  on t h e u p s w i n g  although  gear)  a decline to  method  o f salmon  (Crutchfield initiative  and a p o p u l a r fishing  t o reach  group  since.  G i l l net  erupted  between the  movement was begun t o d i s a l l o w  except  gill  nets  and t r o l l e d  1969:139-140).  the b a l l o t  f e e l i n g s o f the e r a .  128  and have  i n t h e 1920s and 1930s.  controversy  and P o n t e c o r v o  failed  the p o l i t i c a l  political  i n 1924 a g e a r  user groups,  by t h e 1930s  i n the i n d u s t r y ever  were an o u t s p o k e n  example,  various any  by m o t o r - p o w e r e d  i s noted. The  For  i n the  A l o o k a t t h e number o f  i n open w a t e r  d o e s n o t show a s p r e c i p i t o u s 1922  f o r the decrease  i s apparent.  (operated  to fish  Although  i t nonetheless  lines this  speaks f o r  Table  11.  P u g e t Sound  Year  Drift  1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935  414 353 334 438 348 310 329 362 366 403 459 377 427 544 512 449 537 417 540 364 346 119 136 181 391 361 397 353 368 398 319 254 302 318 325  gill  net l i c e n s e s ,  1901  to  Set  Total  369 361 470 540 574 618 755 836 686 666 813 829 807 458 559 541 658 646 686 439 318 37 14 10 17 11 18 22 23 20 19 8 9 12  783 714 804 978 922 928 1,084 1,198 1,052 1,069 1,272 1,206 1,234 1,002 1,071 990 1,195 1,063 1,226 803 664 156 150 191 408 372 415 375 391 418 338 262 311 330 325  —  SOURCE: W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t o f F i s h e r i e s ,  129  1935.  Annual Reports.  Although River  catch, g i l l  taking  only  (Rounsefell in  the bulk  nets  were  of the B r i t i s h  less  important  a few o f t h e s o c k e y e and K e l e z  the Nooksack  reservation, in  taking  1938:713).  River  gill  F o r t h e Lummi  n e t s were a l s o  p e r pound  Although  i n 1933) t h a t  d r i e d , or canned f o r winter fishery 1915.  gill  In order  feet)  to f i s h  Therefore  nets  feet)  were  limited  fishery fishing  adjacent  to the  form  o f gear  used  were s o l d , t h e  fairly  was  smoked,  In the commercial  as t o depth  meshes)  gear  from  Sound,  however,  o f the catch  the r i v e r ,  merely  Puget  Sound  some f i s h  u s e (FARC 1 9 3 3 ) .  the Indian  t h e c o m m e r i c a l gear gill  most  (one h u n d r e d  Fraser  w e r e s o l o w (e.g., o n e t o t w o  were n o t l i m i t e d  and s h a l l o w  Lummi. \  nets  waters  the p r i n c i p a l  prices paid to the Indian fishers cents  i n North  i n the Puget  and s h a l l o w  the subsistence fishery.  Columbia  or length  small  nets  until  (one h u n d r e d  were  used  by t h e  was c o n s i d e r a b l y s m a l l e r  practical  t o s i x hundred  necessity.  fathoms  than  Commercial  (eighteen  hundred  i n l e n g t h a f t e r 1915. Almost  totally  River,  t h e Lummi  though  t h e most  operators. especially  A  dependent  were  reluctant  productive few  Lummi  a t Lummi  upon  gill  netting  to give  sites  Island.  up r e e f  had been  continued  i n the Nooksack netting  taken  over  to operate  Speaking  by t r a p  reef  of reef  even  nets,  nets, Cobb  (1911:32) r e p o r t e d : In 1909 b u t f i v e w e r e u s e d a n d t h e s e w e r e o p e r a t e d o f f t h e s h o r e s o f S a n J u a n , H e n r y , S t u a r t , and Lummi I s l a n d , and i n the v i c i n i t y o f P o i n t R o b e r t s . It the  i s not clear  five  locations  i f Cobb i s r e f e r r i n g listed  with  130  any  to five  number  of  s e t s o f gear or nets  at  each  l o c a t i o n . One in  1917  and  year.  eleven  1921:85),  i n operation  were  that  and  any one  i n 1930  The  reserves  San  who  were  Juan,  those  Henry,  "San  I n 1919,  away f r o m  Juan  Juan Islands Juan as  the  guaranteed fishery  Indian  At  Islands  control treaty  San  that  reef  at net  issued  g e a r was  number  not  fished in  l e a s t one  of  fishing  Juan  nets  were  by  San  Indian  retained  (San J u a n  fish  Juan  men  living  r i g h t s , were a b l e  H.T.  by  the  on t h e  San  nets l i c e n s e d for  who  who  hired  San  Juan  who  were  not  also  were  not  to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the  not open to the r e s e r v a t i o n  131  as  i n the  Indians",  licensed  Indians, and  living  ( R o b l i n 1919),  traps  whites  agent,  Island)  made o f I n d i a n s  c h i l d r e n were l i v i n g  Juan  Island Some o f  Archipelago  and most o f t h e r e e f  i n a m a n n e r t h a t was  Island  the I s l a n d s .  o f t h e s e "San  were owned  the  Point  Washington  a dozen  the  and  from Vancouver  Many o f t h e I n d i a n  Clearly  Island  " M i t c h e l l Bay"  women, and  reef netted  crew.  Stuart  across  i n Western  men,  of Washington.  Indians  no  Washington  Lummi  when an e n u m e r a t i o n was  Indian  Islands.  at  and  i n the  owned a t l e a s t h a l f  San  that  the exact  had n e v e r l e f t  Juan" or  reservations  many a s 150  under  remained  i d e n t i t y as  Indians.  the  of  Since  Bay  none a r e u s e d  stated  State  to determine  o r by I n d i a n s who  people  State  Cobb  the  o p e r a t e d by S t r a i t s S a l i s h c o m i n g  Cayou,  i n Legoe  r e e f n e t s t h a t w o u l d h a v e b e e n u s e d by f i s h e r s f r o m  Reservation  Roberts.  San  nets  Island  year.  Lummi  their  five  "practically  (although  i t is difficult  The o n l y  the  r e e f n e t t i n g a t Lummi  reef net l i c e n s e s that year).  licensed,  the  there  Cobb r e p o r t e d  (Cobb  were  remembered  r e c a l l e d that  I n 1921  present" gear  Lummi e l d e r  Lummi.  Racial  d i s c r i m i n a t i o n on  lending  institutions,  explain  the  reservation people  small  commercial beginning.  salmon  rights,  several  factors.  i n P u g e t Sound. 1904, a n d t h e n (Carrothers spread was  First, Traps they  1937:22).  Indian's  not diminished  canneries  i n the  Washington  on  a  the were  other  excluded  In Alaska,  and s t a y e d  i n the  basis who  from  had  treaty-  was  much more  that  in British  Columbia  endeavor The until  t h a t t h e Lummi were b e i n g a t t h e same t i m e  although  i t was  directed  t h a t the f i s h e r y  State of Washington d i d not begin  1915, and, as t h e numbers  licenses  until  o f J u a n de F u c a numerous,  i n Puget  Second, the l e g i s l a t e d p o l i c i e s o f the Bureau o f Indian were s u c h  and  prevalent  o p p o r t u n i t y f o r other gear  to the extent  the  the p o l i t i c a l  to the S t r a i t traps,  Non-  contradiction involves  the t r a p f i s h e r y  were n o t a l l o w e d  by  fully  native  hand,  well  the  as  competitive  were l i m i t e d  and  fishery.  as  entered  This apparent  o u t so f a r t h a t f i s h i n g  the  a r e a l i t y , does not  and A l a s k a ,  on  e c o n o m i c f o r c e s a t work.  of  probably of  fishery  Lummi,  fishing  part  i n Western  Columbia  The  protected  while  number  Indians  in British  the  into was  other  were types  Sound. Affairs  areas  of  developing. reef  nets  i n d i c a t e , t h e r e were never  many  taken out.  132  to license  Table  12.  P u g e t Sound  r e e f net  licenses,  1915  to  1935.  Year  Licenses  Year  Licenses  1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925  13 13 13 13 14 10 13 8 9 9 10  1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935  10 12 12 14 11 11 9 11 11 20  SOURCE: W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t o f F i s h e r i e s ,  The 1915,  d e c l i n e of the r e e f net  when  stationary reef  nets  Lummi. but  the  traps  locations.  were The  had  properly.  A  few  San  Juan I s l a n d s , f i s h e d  but  these  after  the As  fish  through  simply  traps  the  faded  traps doubled  never  t r a p s were  the growth o f  continued nets  individuals  with  the  but  of  complete  a l l of  short-lived, by  white  d i d not  both  fishers,  know  how  and  reef netted  learned  t o any  the  and  not  by  1900s  set  and  by  best  early to  at Point Roberts  Indians  the  though,  r e e f n e t t i n g i n the  t r a p f i s h e r y , which third  of  the  out of e x i s t e n c e .  after  fairly  Reports.  the  i n the  techniques,  great extent  until  abolished.  first  i n number  fluctuated  was  they  whites,  was  control  1935  attempted  none were s u c c e s s f u l , as  gear  in  decline  were r e v i v e d a f t e r  Some w h i t e s  fishery  Annual  three  reaching  times. a peak  133  began  twentieth  i n the century,  B e t w e e n 1895 After  1901  i n 1913.  1890s,  and  reef  1900  t h e number The  the of  fluctuation  b e t w e e n e v e n and odd numbered y e a r s runs, of  which  only  appear  i n odd-numbered  t h e "dummy t r a p s " w o u l d  T a b l e 13. P u g e t Sound dummy t r a p s ) .  1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912  evidenced  Sound  and t h e S t r a i t  traditional  Lummi  twenty year  $20,000  (Barsh  canneries  from  during  As a r e s u l t  these  fishing  period.  117 91 100 88 130 111 98 48 98 92  Annual  (1938:718),  of the traps  de F u c a  were  I f the average value  t h e t r a p s was $9,000  average  price  the trap  fishing  l o c a t i o n s , had a v a l u e  134  annual  (based  located  i n Puget in  traps  the over  o f t h e t r a p s was income  for  the  on a v e r a g e c a t c h and  fishery,  o f over  Reports.  during the  fished  a r e a , an a v e r a g e o f s i x t y  1977:13) a n d t h e a v e r a g e  received),  Licenses  1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934  and K e l e z  o f Juan  runs.  Year  Department o f F i s h e r i e s ,  60 p e r c e n t  some  1901 t o 1934, ( e x c l u s i v e o f  168 116 148 110 153 109 114 79 96 63 96 71  by R o u n s e f e l l  1915 t o 1934 f u l l y  years.  Licenses  1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 19 22 1923 1924  period  the  Year  149 142 106 79 138 96 98 80 152 93 111 110  SOURCE: W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e  As  be f i s h e d  trap licenses,  Licenses  Year  i s due t o t h e humpback s a l m o n  utilizing  $1 m i l l i o n  Lummi  and c o u l d  generate even  an a v e r a g e  more.  annual  According  income of over  to  testimony  trap at.Village  of  $500,000, or  Lummis  c l a i m s case,  one  In the e a r l y  1930s the t h r e e t r a p s o p e r a t e d  Company a t Legoe Bay at  $240,000  that  the  average due  traps  the  their  sockeye.  traps  were  beginning  The  t o 1934,  Roberts  were making d a i l y  Since  and  one  July  fish  Puget  29  recorded,  Columbia  season,  there  R o u n s e f e l l and  many f i s h  caught  thrown  away  stories  from  by  than  Kelez  the  were  their  was  traps.  Many  e l d e r s of barge  million before  during  one  of  cases  of  at  Point (Lyons  680,000  strike  (1938:775) s t a t e  canned.  150  Kelez  half  demand  t r a p s t h a t year  the  undoubtedly  t o 7,000 f i s h  fully  more  than  Traps  caught  were on  much  likely  the p e r i o d  ( R o u n s e f e l l and  fishers  i t is  1,105,096  c a t c h e s o f 1,500  August  valued  demonstrated.  over  I n 1901,  t r a p a t B o u n d a r y Bay  t o be  is  been  during  Sound  Packing  runs.  already  t o 31 J u l y , o n l y t h r e e weeks b u t  sockeye  fish.  has  land  f o r $75,000.  valuable  traps captured  ever  from  and  the B r i t i s h  8 July the  packed  So  This high value sockeye  1927  by C a r l i s l e  more  phenomenal.  runs  were  10  River  I was  sockeye  sold  1934).  were  efficent  sockeye  between  area  amount o f t r a p - c a u g h t  largest  1969:226),  Company  traps.  to Fraser  d u r i n g W o r l d War  the  Lummi  o f a l l P u g e t Sound  That  and  Packing  i n the  been  P o i n t M i g l e y were e s t i m a t e d  (Carlisle  t o the a c c e s s  From  and  P o i n t had  in a  perhaps  sockeye  1938:775).  t h a t year  o f t h e peak f o r Puget  remember  of  Sound  t h a t t h e r e were  t h a t more s o c k e y e Lummi  from  so  were  hearing  loads of salmon being  taken  o u t i n t h e S t r a i t s o f G e o r g i a t o be dumped b e c a u s e o f t h e g l u t i n the  canneries.  Over  twenty-five  135  million  sockeye  were  caught  by  Map 4. N o r t h P u g e t S o u n d t r a p s i t e s , 1913. (Washington State Department o f F i s h e r i e s , m i c r o f i l m i n Washington S t a t e A r c h i v e s . ) 136  all  gear  the  trap  1913.  i n 1901, catch  a catch  only  1901,  using  of  I t must  be  noted  so  River  to  be  b i g year  so  not  that  River to  nearly  so  during  a  sockeye  run  Fraser  River  thousands of past  the  the  runs  on  fish  1969:291-292).  were  reached  were  1913,  to  other  traps  but  that  of  species  of  of  an  and  even  in  1913  had  the  improved spring  Canadian of  when  of  Pacific  the  Fraser  unsurmountable  barrier  probably  though  million  H e l l ' s Gate.  to  Columbia  Canyon  r u n was  unable  t o the  In  the  1913  water o f  catching  canneries  wasted.  2.4  were  Again  i n the  packed  high  equal  shipped  the  created  record,  during  i n August  of  construction  The  the  1969:274).  capacity  canneries  barrier  1901  being  H e l l ' s Gate  sockeye  after  e x c e s s was  r o c k s l i d e which  ever  was  then  r e t u r n i n g salmon.  catch of  i n abundance.  1909  many  the  gear,  that  (Lyons  b l a s t i n g at  caused  the  the  by  and  came t h e  however,  Railway,  was  processed  another  1913,  packed  next b i g year  many s o c k e y e t h a t  less  though,  s a l m o n were a l s o b e i n g The  exceeded  A  the  Puget  Sound  cases, few  the  of  made i t  the  peak  debris  Immense n u m b e r s o f f i s h d i e d w i t h o u t  and  tens  fish  e a r l y J u l y , but  negotiate  largest  of  (Lyons  spawning,  l i t t e r i n g t h e b a n k s and b a r s o f t h e F r a s e r R i v e r b e t w e e n Y a l e  and  Agassiz.  The  river  the  damage t o  the  run  in a shortage fourth year, the  exceeded  million operators  of  was  c l e a r e d by  complete  of sockeye.  that of  pack  was  the  any  from  four years  but  still,  the  shortage  being  o f f years.  especially  the  f o l l o w i n g year, later  pack of sockeye  some o f  species,  offset  recovered  The  pack,  t h a t of  other  cases,  1913  and  the  and  the  would  i n 1917  The  was  onebig  increase  exceeding  P u g e t Sound  H e l l ' s Gate d i s a s t e r w i t h  137  result  a quadrennial  humpback, so  but  in 1.1  trap  a minimum  of  damage. On  3 August  1914  Germany  invaded Belgium,  day G r e a t B r i t a i n d e c l a r e d war joined the  the  war  cannery  effort. ships  on Germany.  Consequently  were  from  m a t e r i a l s were d i f f i c u l t  t o a c q u i r e , and  male l a b o r f o r c e  i n the  Because from  of  these  W o r l d War  around  time  canning, war  I.  Western  production this  factors The  the  cry of " f i s h  Washington,  were u t i l i z e d , the  After primarily  to  pace  the due  canneries 35  from  The 1894. back never  war  win  f o r the  of  e s p e c i a l l y chum and canning  the  salmon war  in  salmon  to the drop  canning the  1969:302).  Sound b e n e f i t e d  the  war"  export  was  heard  stepped  up  market.  At  operated 1914  remained  i n 1920  through  pack  war  fell  rapid,  market. i n 1913  years, (PFY  the  even  From  the  after  1921:68).  as c o m p a r e d  with  a 55  slump, million  t o an a v e r a g e  export  precipitously  market  The  31,  fell  number  too  as  41,  only  32,  of  45,  of 11 32  1919.  f o r Puget  Sound  i n 1920  however,  c a p a c i t y , although  exceed  During  1917.  export  1920  industry recovered  to pre-war again  in  in operation  total  The  pounds  the  humpback.  industry experienced  i n the  pounds d u r i n g  million  canneries  and  Puget  canneries  ( a t 48 p o u n d s p e r c a s e ) e x p o r t e d  million 39  (Lyons  of  other species, p r e v i o u s l y considered undesirable for  the U n i t e d S t a t e s e n t e r e d the  129  many  a large p o r t i o n of  of  the  immediately  production,  will  and  following  Columbia  services  fisheries  considerably, primarily  years  pounds  armed  the  Canadians  in British  withdrawn  enlisted  and  twenty-five.  138  and  was by  t h e number  the  the  lowest  late  since  1920s  of canneries  was  would  T a b l e 14. cases). Year  Puget  Chinook  1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 SOURCE: PFY  30, 049 14, 500 14,,441 1,,804 8,,139 1, 814 95, 210 13, 019 10, 064 21, 823 20 ,252 1, 234 26, 044 28 ,466 37, 030 57,,543 63 ,366 68 ,542 25 ,846 25 ,567 20,,615 15 ,777 19,,968 29 ,061 27 ,859 41, 716 23 ,153 33,,720 29 ,378 28 ,066 23 ,694 20 ,869 14,,089 9 ,243  Sound  salmon  pack,  Coho  Sockeye 1 ,105, 096 339, 556 167, 211 123, 419 847, 122 182, 241 93, 122 170, 951 1 ,097, 904 248, 014 127 ,761 184, 680 1 ,673, 099 335, 230 64, 584 84, 637 411, 538 50, 723 64, 346 62, 654 102, 967 48, 566 47, 402 69, 369 112, 023 44, 673 97, 594 60, 081 111, 898 352, 194 83, 728 78, 319 125, 738 340, 787 51, 714  85 103 118 79 94 119 128 143 162 256 149 61 151 180 155 114 235 210 24 89 111 122 87 173 123 135 89 101 122 76 60 44 69 70  (1921: 46; 1940 :69) •  139  817 450 127 335 497 472 922 133 755 124 727 019 893 783 832 276 860 883 502 412 771 000 879 215 469 802 923 635 691 025 740 568 080 514  1901 t o 1935  Chum  (by 48 p o u n d  Humpback  Total  275,494 1 ,380 ,590 581, 059 93 ,492 12,,001 181,236 478, 498 291, 488 49 ,456 70,992 1 ,018,,641 41 ,057-430,,602 149 ,218 698, 080 433,423 50 ,249 6,075 448, 765 47 ,607 370,993 1 ,632, 949 53 ,688 108 567, 883 146 ,942 104 ,321 1,046,992 1 ,557 ,021 700 416, 125 60 ,760 791,886 2 ,583, 463 56 ,225 892 792, 860 278 ,801 583,649 1 ,269, 206 411 ,724 1,887 707, 278 427 ,878 216 ,285 1,124,884 1 , 921,554 624 ,198 6,605 267 ,538 1 ,295 ,626 ,541 421,215 525 520 ,849 4,669 166, 48 404,713 653 ,490 30 ,831 2,225 248,,729 65 ,552 475,849 758,,138 97 ,081 5,945 134 ,360 317, 649 553,904 43 ,345 911, 670 2,107 310, 425 112 ,204 578,923 892, 244 38 ,129 5,597 325 ,376 146 ,356 727,621 1 ,131, 844 156 ,683 3,712 572, 606 64 ,234 705,580 948 ,881 55 ,189 310 ,911 1,677 146 ,151 543,340 771, 776 37 ,039 3,296 500,,093 72 ,841 369,620 516, 727 15 ,636  Indian  Labor  i n the  Although fishery, the  by  Puget  Sound  commercial Indians the  Tulalip  Industry the  formative  I n d i a n l a b o r had  become o f  fishing  most n o t a b l y fishing  by  in  industry. C h i n e s e and  political  a  i n the  fishing  d e s c r i p t i o n of  agency w r i t t e n  and  the  by  the  salmon  significance labor  of  in  other  excluded  from  economic c o n s t r a i n t s , the  Indians  i n 1913,  minor  of  J a p a n e s e , and  only  industry during the  years  Replaced  o f P u g e t Sound came t o r e p r e s e n t  labor In  important  1901  ethnicities,  Salmon  the  under  agent  a minute p o r t i o n of years the  1901  to  charge  1935.  of  the  reported:  The I n d i a n s o f t h e T u l a l i p a g e n c y a r e , l a r g e l y , lumbermen o r f i s h e r f o l k , t o l i m i t e d e x t e n t and on a s m a l l s c a l e ... T h e y l i v e c h i e f l y upon s u c h b o u n t y as t h e s e a and t h e sound b r i n g t o them - s a l m o n , b o t h f r e s h and d r i e d and s o m e t i m e s s a l t e d ; f l o u n d e r s and o t h e r f i s h ; c r a b s , c l a m s , m u s s e l s , e t c . , a s w e l l as t h e b e r r i e s w h i c h t h e y o b t a i n f r o m t h e w o o d s and w h i c h a r e p o t e n t i a l s o u r c e s o f f o o d w h e t h e r i n t h e r e c e n t or in dried condition. T h e y have n e v e r been t r a i n e d t o l i v i n g upon the land for the purpose of c u 11 i v a t i.ng i t , consequently t h e y do n o t do s o y e t t o a n y m a r k e t e x t e n t . They have n o t i n t h e p a s t been a c c u s t o m e d t o d e p e n d i n g upon Mother E a r t h f o r s u b s i s t e n c e , f o r i n p r i m i t i v e days the adjacent waters rendered them s e l f - s u p p o r t i n g . That c o n d i t i o n , h o w e v e r , d o e s n o t e x i s t t o s u c h an e x t e n t t o d a y h a v i n g been d i m i n i s h e d by t h e c o m m e r c i a l e x p l o i t a t i o n by t h e w h i t e man's f i s h t r a p s ... T h e r e f o r e i t i s t h e r u l e t h a t t h e o l d e r I n d i a n s d e v o t e t h e i r t i m e c h i e f l y t o f i s h i n g and t h e y o u n g e r o n e s , i f t h e y work, t o v a r i o u s d u t i e s i n and a r o u n d t h e numerous l o g g i n g camps, f i s h c a n n e r i e s , and hop fields. T h e s e means a r e d i s a p p e a r i n g ( e x c e p t employment i n c i d e n t t o t h e f i s h e r i e s and t h i s i s o n l y b r i e f and o c c a s i o n a l ) and t h e u l t i m a t e d e p e n d e n c e m u s t be u p o n t h e a l l o t m e n t ( B u c h a n a n 1913:3-4). I n 1915  in a special  Washington Chinese  the  the salmon canning  S t a t e Bureau of Labor  workers formed the bulk  developing Bureau  r e p o r t on  of  found  that  of the  Labor  Chinese  1915:3).  Exclusion  Anti-Chinese Act  of 140  in previous  l a b o r , but  for Japanese labor to predominate  industry,  the  1882,  years  trend  (Washington  legislation,  for  prohibited  the  was  State  example further  immigration, turn  and  anti-Chinese activism  of the c e n t u r y reduced  Since  Chinese  available  immigration  either  States  illegally.  never  disallowed  smuggling  had  come  into  or  restricted, and  o p e r a t i o n s i n t h e San  smuggled  illegal,  earlier  i n Canada,  States/Canadian border labor  the a v a i l a b i l i t y was  Although  i n Puget  thus  Juan  the had  Sound  of Chinese workers  Chinese  were  the U n i t e d  immigration  there developed  i n W h a t c o m County..  Juan  along the U n i t e d  Much o f t h e C h i n e s e  s t a y e d and  worked  close  system.  Chinese  labor  the c a n n e r i e s would contractor  would  contracts  contracts case  workers.  employ,  number  feed,  this  from  f o r between  and  and  each  The  contract  cannery  were i l l e g a l  much.  However,  availability  Alaska  Sullivan  of Chinese  labor  the season  the  workers,  The  freeing  the  Examples  Packers  between  of  some o f  Association showing  probably  52  and  d i d not  and  fee.  are  fourteen  50,000 c a s e s o f s a l m o n  managers  early  contract  an a g r e e d - u p o n  (1983:17),  employing  immigrants as  pay  a  with a cannery f o r  of cases during  and  20,000 and  under  contract  responsibility.  the  i n DeMuth and  workers  to  supplied  pay t h e c o n t r a c t o r  o p e r a t o r s from  reproduced  per  was  Chinese-owned a g e n c i e s would  the p a c k i n g of a c e r t a i n  these  to  Island.  Typically  cannery  was  several  t h e b o r d e r a r e a s , f o r e x a m p l e , a t S e m i a h m o o , Lummi I s l a n d , San  the  labor.  who  entered  I s l a n d s and  the U n i t e d S t a t e s  around  a t $0.45  132  Chinese  know  i f the  o r n o t , nor d i d i t seem t o m a t t e r  as  1905  was  c a u s i n g some d e g r e e  the cannery o p e r a t o r s .  141  the  reduction of  in  the  dismay  Cannerymen a r e l o o k i n g ahead w i t h n o t a g r e a t d e a l o f r e l i s h t o t h e t i m e when t h e y w i l l have t o e m p l o y l a r g e l y J a p a n e s e l a b o r and a g o o d l y number o f w h i t e s , i n d i a n s and w o r k e r s o f d i f f e r e n t n a t i o n a l i t i e s ( P a c i f i c Fisherman 1905:8). As 1910s  Japanese similar  J a p a n e s e by  labor  types  local  began  of  about  this  whites.  In  was  Chinese  were  1915  labor  directed  in Blaine  and  t i m e the Washington S t a t e other  in  the  towards  i n other  a rash of anti-Japanese  moved t o e x c l u d e J a p a n e s e and fishing  replace  prejudice  around Puget Sound t h e r e Also  to  the  towns  agitation.  Department o f F i s h e r i e s  non-white m i n o r i t i e s from  the  industry.  E v e r y c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f p u b l i c w e l f a r e p r o m p t e d an e f f e c t i v e e n f o r c e m e n t of the a l i e n law, as t h e s u r e s t means o f p r e s e r v i n g our g r e a t f i s h i n g i n d u s t r y t o our own p e o p l e , o r t o t h o s e who, by o u r l a w s , may become c i t i z e n s o f this country (Washington State Department of Fisheries 1913/1915:33). In of  1915  Labor  the  1915:9)  categories. w h i t e , who and  filled  during  Chinese  the  labor  Japanese  needed  for  of  there  any  were  Second, there season,  p r e d o m i n a t e d , but labor  days during  in faster Labor  Indian  the  labor  labor  female.  would  into  three  engineers,  machinists,  clerks,  was  contract  roughly by  the  from  season, be  there  to  was  group  This  last  as  group  Indian  The  mostly i s the  labor  was  less  than  or  Japanese  142  trend  extra  processed.  in  November.  fish State white  one  in  used  in  labor  (Washington S t a t e  was  labor  u s u a l l y when t h e  this  as  May  mid-1910s the  Third,  fall,  labor, brought  near r e s e r v a t i o n s , even though I n d i a n Chinese  general mostly  some c a n n e r i e s desirable  Bureau  employees,  than they could  characterized  (Washington State  year-round  to predominate.  r e s i d e n t s , b o t h m a l e and which  cannery  the p o s i t i o n s of  fishing  a few  were coming Bureau  divided  First,  supervisors.  only  for  State Bureau of Labor  was  Bureau  of  Labor  1915:10).  The Packing for  Alaska  Packers  Company  on  A s s o c i a t i o n a t S e m i a h m o o and  Lummi  the c o n t r a c t l a b o r .  bunk h o u s e " w h e r e t h e much  kept  to  I s l a n d both Older  Lummi p e o p l e  Chinese  themselves.  used as  was  The  latter only  them  from  and  supervision.  employed  during  the  busy  semi-permanent  e m p l o y e e s were v e r y  f o u r Lummi  families  part  cannery  few.  lived  the  the  year-round  and  labor that  season,  1910s on  although and  most  of  the  p a r t s of the year that buy  they  had  the  doing  no  to d i g clams to s e l l A few  and  and  elder  during  the  winter  out  was  a detailed  conducted  i n 1910.  employed.  Obviously  Indian  women.  reports  of  the  Sound  canneries  total,  but  example  also  i n 1915  census of  It indicated the  State Fish was  not  earned white  to  d i d not  Commissioner, only  a  very  workers  averaged  143  much  data Indian  than  to  in  the  labor  other per  the  States was  work f o r annual  i n Puget  percentage  $363  but  time.  L u m m i woman  provide  small  considerably less  months  i n the U n i t e d  statistical  men  remembers  Some o f  at that  t h a t o n l y one  canneries  According  Indians  The  t o Lummi I s l a n d  to r e e f net.  women w o u l d g e t p a r t - t i m e work i n t h e c a n n e r y There  1920s  caretaking  One  August  was  these  early  work.  Lummi remember g o i n g  months of J u l y  of  Lummi I s l a n d , where  maintenance  t h e r e w o u l d be  necessities.  during  year  the  sometimes  the male heads o f the f a m i l i e s worked f o r the cannery. worked  pretty  responsibilities  employees,  During  "Chinese  to p r e f e r  Indian  of  quarters  the  ate,  seemed the  board,  and  remember  canneries  payroll,  fishers  separate  laborers lived,  c o n t r a c t l a b o r because i t f r e e d providing  provided  Carlisle  of  workers. year,  the For  while  T a b l e 15. C a n n e r y l a b o r , by f i s h i n g i n d u s t r y , 1902 t o 1935.  ethnicity,  White  Chinese/Japanese  Year  Numbers  Numbers  1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934  1,990 1,500 1,500 1,200 1,500 1,500 1,400 1,950 1,750 1,872 1,321 3,899 1,872 2,124 1,496 1,887 1,494 1,524 673 1,330 724 1,411 751 1,663 1,153 1,960 1,115 2,382 1,927 1,538 798 2,009 2,668  1,725 1,250 1,100 1,700 2,300 1,700 1,450 2,065 1,500 1,430 791 2,267 1,028 1,352 594 2,124 755 901 135 416 106 268 150 482 216 448 208 508 232 262 133  i n the Puget  Indians Numbers  254* 291*  Sound  75 75 50 40 50 40 41 55 40 250 24 125 182 108 70 262 161 " 234 172 108 73 109 17 169 22 50 80 55 25 7 5  Percent of T o t a l 2 2.7 1.9 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.2 7 1.1 2 6 3 3.2 • 6 6.7 8.8 17.5 5.9 8 6.1 1.9 7.3 1.6 2 6 1.9 1.1 <1 <1  Washington State Department of F i s h e r i e s , Annual SOURCES: R e p o r t s ; W a s h i n g t o n S t a t e B u r e a u o f L a b o r (1915). Those y e a r s marked w i t h an a s t e r i s k (*) i n d i c a t e t h a t C h i n e s e , J a p a n e s e , and I n d i a n l a b o r were c o m b i n e d i n t h e t a b u l a t i o n .  144  Chinese  and J a p a n e s e w o r k e r s averaged  is probably that  not that the Indian  Indians  worked  shorter  f o r c e from By  canneries  operated  during  humpback  runs  Carlisle  cannery ceased  its  Bellingham. partially  after  Lummi the  total  benefited  3.9 p e r c e n t .  Company  Ute,  when t h e  the Beach  sold  A m e r i c a n F i s h e r i e s Company i n source  o f wage l a b o r  was  only  and by 1928 had d i s a p p e a r e d  Packing  Company  continued  1946, no Lummi r e c a l l  labor labor  i n the f i s h i n g  working  to  there  force,  i n d u s t r y was o n l y a s m a l l p a r t o f  and o f t h e s e In f a c t ,  only  part  cannery  as f i s h e r s  jobs  were  was n o t n e e d e d .  i s the r e l a t i o n s h i p spheres,  communities,  which  makes  not a v a i l a b l e  and u t i l i z e  natural resources  tribal  society  a  There  145  as a  industry.  and  Indian  A p h e n o m e n o n common t o  between  i t impossible  whole.  individuals  i n the f i s h i n g  and  f o r Indian  i n order are a  f o rthe  t h e e c o n o m i c and  Government,  control  as  few  (1972:11) d e s c r i b e d  that develops  the Federal  a  t h e r e s e r v a t i o n community  r e s e r v a t i o n s , as J o r g e n s e n  political  only,  War I .  the most  Indian  marginal  o p e r a t i o n s a l t o g e t h e r and i n s t e a d  t o Lummi w o r k e r s ,  t o any e x t e n t .  experience  and o t h e r  I n t h e 1928 s e a s o n t h e  whole never b e n e f i t e d from p a r t i c i p a t i o n For  cannery  profitable.  on Lummi I s l a n d u n t i l  World  The  years  So, by t h e 1920s t h i s  Although  workers.  odd-numbered  t o the P a c i f i c  available  entirely. operate  fish  other  i n t h e t o t a l Puget Sound  Packing  made c a n n i n g  trap-caught  than  1901 t o 1935 was o n l y  1920 t h e C a r l i s l e  $83. I t  l a b o r was p a i d s o much l e s s b u t  periods  average p r o p o r t i o n of Indians labor  $274 a n d I n d i a n s  the  Indian  groups  to  to b e n e f i t the  few  examples  of  individual stories. in  the  The  As  jobs  1920s and  I n d i a n s had  early The  success  1900s.  Indian  fish  found  The  and  i n the  1930s,  fishers  the t r a p s ,  stories  but  no  fishing  i t was  primarily  Asian labor  were u n a b l e  competitively in  community  whites  more  who  to the  was  desirable  filled  r e p l a c e d by  salmon  fishery  to a c q u i r e the c a p i t a l  the  success  them.  r e p l a c e d by A s i a n l a b o r i n t h e  in turn  access  of  i n d u s t r y became  themselves  found  examples  increasingly  whites.  usurped  by  necessary  to  capital  intensive  fishery.  State  and The  Federal Activity General Allotment  reservation year  on  c o u l d be  those sold  to  the  Lummi  (Dawes) A c t o f 1887  land i n severalty,  moratorium  holdings  and  i t also provided  allotments, after  not o n l y  divided  for a twenty-five  which  individual  land  non-Indians.  As e a r l y as 1891, t h e l o c a l p r e s s a d v o c a t e d t h a t Lummi l a n d s be s o l d t o l o c a l w h i t e s ... t h e B e l l i n g h a m B a y Express noted, " i f adopted, ( t h i s p l a n ) w o u l d w r o n g no o n e , but w o u l d a s s i s t t h e I n d i a n s now l i v i n g and add v e r y m a t e r i a l l y t o t h e w e a l t h o f o u r c o u n t y by g e t t i n g u n d e r c u l t i v a t i o n some o f t h e s p l e n d i d l a n d w h i c h i s now p r i m e v a l f o r e s t and d o i n g nobody any g o o d " ( D e l o r i a 1 9 7 8 : 1 1 4 ) . Twenty y e a r s l a t e r , twenty-five Bellingham  year  Herald  roughly coinciding  moratorium  on  the  sale  w i t h t h e end o f of  allotments,  the the  reported.  Few p e o p l e r e a l i z e t h a t at l a s t the g r e a t f i g h t f o r the o p e n i n g o f t h e Lummi R e s e r v a t i o n has been v i r t u a l l y won, and t h a t f r o m now on i t i s o n l y a m a t t e r o f t i m e u n t i l a h u g e a r e a o f t i d e l a n d s f l a t s w i l l be a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e B e l l i n g h a m B a y f a c t o r y s i t e s a n d f r o m 12,000 t o 13,000 a c r e s o f t h e f i n e s t a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d opened f o r d e v e l o p m e n t . I t i s more than probable that at l e a s t f a i r l y big c i t i e s w i l l be e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h e c o u r s e o f t i m e a t Lummi Bay and B i r c h Bay, w h i c h i s f a i r l y w e l l s e t t l e d , and t h a t d i r e c t a c c e s s w i l l be g i v e n t o t h e p e o p l e o f M o u n t a i n V i e w i n t o t h e c i t y 146  of Bellingham. In a d d i t i o n to a l l t h i s a quick route w i l l probably be e s t a b l i s h e d t o L u m m i I s l a n d a n d t h e w h o l e f e r t i l e s e c t i o n o p e n e d by r a i l r o a d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . T h e t i d e l a n d s a t M a r i e t t a c o m p r i s e f r o m 15 t o 20 s q u a r e m i l e s and a r e o f s u c h a n a t u r e t h a t t h e y may be e a s i l y r e c l a i m e d . T h e s e b e i n g added t o B e l l i n g h a m ' s r e s o u r c e s , w i l l g i v e t h i s , c i t y f a c t o r y and i n d u s t r i a l p o s s i b i l i t i e s s u c h a s a r e t o be f o u n d i n o r n e a r no o t h e r t o w n o n t h e w h o l e e n t i r e P a c i f i c Coast ( I n D e l o r i a 1978:113-114). The the  first  Tulalip  thereafter passed  even  Agency some  into  The  began  prime  non-Indian  Lummi  through  Sells,  sale of a l l o t t e d  waterfront  Reservation  lands  had t o c r o s s  grounds. fertile  delta  River.  This  Bureau  of  thereafter In of  area land  near  setting  much o f i t p a s s e d  cases  S t a t e s v. S t o t t s , 810).  Since  Reservation  access  to fishing  on t h e Lummi  Affairs  and  hands.  contested  and  the r e s e r v a t i o n i n 1931  t h e 1930s i t h a s been c o n c e d e d  with  non-Indian  landowners 147  shortly  1  right  (United  precedent(United  S t a t e s v . B o y n t o n , 49 F 2d that the t i d e l a n d s o f  t h e r e s e r v a t i o n a r e i n common o w n e r s h i p o f t h e L u m m i , conflicts  States  t h e Lummis  i n f a v o r o f t h e Lummi  49 F 2d 619; U n i t e d  i s the  by t h e U n i t e d  non-Indian  were d e c i d e d  that  shellfishing  Reservation  1930s,  surrounding  of  t h a t t h e Lummi  and  trap fishers  Cato  mouth o f t h e Nooksack  and r e c l a i m e d  into  lands  The l a n d s  beach f r o n t p r o p e r t y  v. Romaine, e t a l . , 255 F. 253). T w i c e tideland  shortly  the a l i e n a t i o n  1978:14).  i n t h e 1920s  use o f the t i d e l a n d s  States  of Indian  t h e o l d (west)  was d i k e d  1919 n o n - I n d i a n  on t h e Lummi  advocated  (Jorgensen  farmland  Reclamation  and  t h e s a l e o f much o f t h e i r  openly  to gain  The b e s t  land  of Commissioner  were a l i e n a t e d were p r i m a r i l y often  t h e r e s e r v a t i o n s under  hands.  managed t o r e s i s t  the term  from  i n 1915 (ARCIA 1 9 1 5 : 1 8 4 ) ,  1916 t o 1 9 2 0 , who  Indian  lands  recur  although  periodically.  In  terms o f n a t i o n a l p o l i c y ,  under  a case  fishing  U.S.  involving  3 7 1 ) , i t was  assured  fishing  private  property  Therefore  The  determined  rights  access  not only  to other  f o r two  their  Second,  reservation be  possessing  and g a t h e r i n g  t h e Lummi R e s e r v a t i o n First  non-Indian  fish  of Washington traps  Indian traps  Affairs were  then  along herring  upheld  (FARC 1 9 3 3 ) .  profitable  the east  halibut  shore  herring,  fishery.  o f t h e Lummi  Other f i s h  the h a l i b u t  fishers  traps,  an i m p o r t a n t  The s h a l l o w  Reservation  low w a t e r  areas  t o use as b a i t .  bait in  water  are  fish  areas  important fishers  barrels of herring the b a i t  fishery  s e v e r a l non-Indians constructed  traps i n  to intercept  t h e Lummi s e i n i n g g r o u n d s .  As  traps  and t h e B u r e a u o f  s p a w n i n g g r o u n d s and i n t h e 1910s and 1920s Lummi  became more p r o f i t a b l e , the  shallow-  use r i g h t s o f  In a d d i t i o n to salmon  to capture  this  i f i t could and  the t i d e l a n d  d e s p i t e p r o t e s t by t h e Lummi  constructed  waterfront  supported  to operate  w o u l d b e a c h s e i n e i n t h e s p r i n g months t o s e l l to  were a p o i n t  on t i d e l a n d s a b u t t i n g t h e  to continue  The Romaine c a s e  to fish  across  locations.  of a l l the  t h e Lummi b u t o n l y d e a l t w i t h an i s o l a t e d c a s e . continued  treaty-  ownership of the t i d e l a n d s i n front of  would, be a l l o w e d  areas.  198  t i d e l a n d s as w e l l .  s h o w n t h a t t h e L u m m i h a d no c l a i m t o t h e t i d a l  water  the  Winans,  u s e r e s e r v a t i o n t i d e l a n d s b u t have  p r o p e r t i e s , and t h e S t a t e  claim.  decision i n  to obtain access  fishing  reasons.  p r o p e r t y owners c l a i m e d  States  Indians  m u s t be a l l o w e d  t i d e l a n d s surrounding  contention  (United  that  to t r a d i t i o n a l  t h e Lummi  guaranteed  of  Yakima  a 1905 Supreme C o u r t  the h e r r i n g before  they  reached  T h i s was c o n t e s t e d by t h e Lummi,  148  who,  receiving  no  particular nearly  help  case,  twenty  from hired  years  of  finally  resolved with  were no  longer allowed  tidelands  (Nugent  f i s h e r y had was  the  Bureau  attorneys  g r o u n d s was  to  Indian  Affairs  represent  n e g o t i a t i o n s and  t o s e t or o p e r a t e  1979:34).  By  the  arguments  the h a l i b u t  this  Through  the  issue  and  t r a p s on  1920s t h e  in  them.  an o u t o f c o u r t s e t t l e m e n t ,  become d e f u n c t and  d e p e n d e n t on  of  was  non-Indians  the r e s e r v a t i o n  Puget  Sound  halibut  s i n c e t h e Lummi h e r r i n g  fishery  f i s h e r y , c o n t e n t i o n over  the h e r r i n g  a moot p o i n t .  The h a l i b u t f i s h e r y d u r i n g t h e s e y e a r s was l a r g e l y a p r o c e s s o f d e p l e t i n g the P u g e t Sound banks. I n 1892 h a l i b u t b a n k s e x t e n d e d f r o m C a p e F l a t t e r y t h r o u g h t h e S t r a i t s o f J u a n de F u c a t o t h e s o u t h end o f W h i d b e y I s l a n d i n t h e s o u n d . As l a t e a s 1905 a c o n s i d e r a b l e q u a n t i t y o f l a r g e h a l i b u t was landed at Bellingham from nearby waters. By 1910 practically a l l of the b a n k s i n t h e sound had been d i s c o v e r e d and f i s h e d o u t (Spencer and P o l l a r d 1937:86). Fishing  on  or  near  agreement over The  area  of  the  r e s e r v a t i o n f o r salmon c o n t i n u e d , but  t r a p s d i d not  Bellingham  s t o p e n c r o a c h m e n t by  Bay  near  r e s e r v a t i o n became known as t h e Indian  salmon  fishers  shallow  the  " G l o r y H o l e " b e c a u s e so many  non-  fortunes there  waters  (see Map  5).  I n d i a n s d i d n o t become c i t i z e n s o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s 1924  (43  person a  to  provided War  Prior  t o become a c i t i z e n  white  land  S t a t . 253).  I.  man fee  by  patent  and  until  i t was  status  the  was  conditions. arbitrarily  only  marriage  voluntarily paying  General Allotment  Citizenship those  by  (25 S t a t . 392),  i n the  under  t o 1924  was  deemed  Few  Lummi in  149  important  1924.  f o r an Indian  on  the  service enough  obtained  until Indian  woman  transferring  taxes  actually  way  o f an  A c t ) , o r by  not  granted  gear.  of  made t h e i r  the  mobile  the  to  allotted land  (as  in World to  pursue  citizenship  Map  5.  Lummi I n d i a n R e s e r v a t i o n  and  150  vicinity,  circa  1930.  The  question  may  seem an odd  the  problem  issue. the  of  could  both  to  not  order  residence  for  insisted  then  commercially State  a  were  the  citizens  fishers  commercially. if  were  would have to a b i d e  license  like  yet  other  until the a  of  1909  State  of  1924  they  State  Fish  license  in  g e n e r a l l y conceded  going by  heated  license  of the  obtain  I t was  Indians  a  fishing  citizenship  fishery granted  S e s s i o n a l Laws  license,  Indian  was  became  commercial  not  State  that  they  a State  a  i s s u e i n t h e Lummi  before c i t i z e n s h i p  w i t h i n and  Indians  officials  acquire  fishing  obtaining  able to f i s h  reservation  an  Washington  for  qualify  t o be  State  the  Since  Commissioner  and  Indians  requirements  Washington.  as  c o n s i d e r a t i o n , but  According  included  by  of c i t i z e n s h i p  to  State  citizens  of  fish  off-  regulations  the  State.  P r a c t i c a l l y e v e r y I n d i a n h a s an a l l o t m e n t o f l a n d , and a home o f h i s own. T h i s i s v e r y much m o r e t h a n i s p o s s e s s e d by t h e a v e r a g e w h i t e f i s h e r m a n o f t h i s s t a t e . I t w o u l d seem u n f a i r , t h e r e f o r e , t o t a x t h e w h i t e p e r s o n f o r a l i c e n s e and n o t r e q u i r e one o f t h e I n d i a n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y w h e r e t h e I n d i a n e n g a g e s i n c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h t h e w h i t e man (Washington S t a t e Department o f F i s h e r i e s 1916/17:42). Although  State  requirement, fisheries personal  specifically  t h i s was  from  1913  vendetta  Prior the  law  t o 1921  t o 1921,  against  L. H. D a r w i n , who  Indian  salmon f i s h i n g  Fisheries  Code o f  1915  and  was  of  to have  a  the  laws passed  by  be  or  changed  ( L a s e t e r , e t a l . 1973:60).  been s i g n e d  conservation  151  license  i n charge  seemed  r e g u l a t e d by  sessions  affirmed  the  fishing.  t h e f i r s t F i s h e r i e s Code had limitations  from  r e g u l a t i o n s c o u l d not  amended b e t w e e n l e g i s l a t i v e  commercial  Indians  i g n o r e d by t h e C o m m i s s i o n e r  S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e , and  I n 1915  exempted  i n t o law  measures  right  and  outlined.  of Treaty  Indians  the The to  fish  on-reservation  to three any  hundred  stream  feet  being  Commissioner, interpreted curtail  these  fished  fishing.  access  to the salmon  regulation  reservation, fishing  sports  various  who  were  Code  until  after  required  though  affirmed  the season  to purchase  exempted  Indians  were  the right  During  the years  fishers,  Bureau was  with  the Washington of Indian  The  a State gear  license  from  State  not enfranchised  of Indians  as  States.  The  to fish  on-  of Indian  rights,  without  out o f season.  l e g a l and p o l i t i c a l State  Department  40  percent  i n North Puget  Sound  a license,  fishing i n  From t h e s e  a r r e s t s an  maneuvers on t h e p a r t o f F i s h e r i e s and t h e  Affairs.  Superintendent  Dr. C h a r l e s  Indian  closed.  1915 a n d 1916 o v e r  for fishing  waters, or f i s h i n g  The  o f t e n had no  a b o v e i t s m o u t h i n 1915 ( s e e Map 5) a t t h e b e h e s t o f  argument developed  Bureau  though  b u t Commissioner D a r w i n c l o s e d t h e Nooksack R i v e r t o  were o f Lummi  both  when t h e  the open-water  Indian  o f t h e a r r e s t s made by f i s h e r i e s o f f i c i a l s  of  Fish  groups,  fishing  to a reservation fishery,  runs  were  and even  gear  l o o s e l y and began e x e r t i n g e f f o r t t o  law s p e c i f i c a l l y  fishers.  closed  State  user  o f t h e S t a t e o f W a s h i n g t o n and t h e U n i t e d  Fisheries  net  The  established to coincide with  Indians State  citizens  1972:4).  from  Indians  restricted  had been  although  Indian  s e a s o n was c l o s e d w e r e o f t e n a r r e s t e d , e v e n  fishers,  fishery.  (Austin  pressure  clauses  Indian  seasons  but r e s t r i c t e d  i n m a r i n e w a t e r s and o n e - t h i r d t h e w i d t h o f  under  Indian  commercial  for subsistence  o f the Western  Affairs M.  at Tulalip  Buchanan,  especially  Washington  during  unusual  treaty 152  fishing  this  i n being rights.  Agency  o f the  particular  time  a champion  of  Seemingly out  of p l a c e i n the Bureau o f Indian A f f a i r s  when t h e e f f o r t  direct  endeavors,  Indians  advocated  towards  more p r a c t i c a l  In  an e m o t i o n a l  speech  in  1915 and l a t e r  agricultural  pursuits, especially  given  published  Buchanan  commercial  t o the Washington  was t o  fishing.  State Legislature  in a regional historical  journal,  B u c h a n a n made t h e f o l l o w i n g p l e a . W h a t , t h e n , g e n t l e m e n , a r e we a s k i n g a n d why a r e we a s k i n g it? ... I t o n l y r e m a i n s t o s t a t e t h a t w h i c h we most e a r n e s t l y b e s e e c h o f t h e l a w g i v e r s o f o u r S t a t e , f o r we w i s h t o b e , a s we h a v e a l w a y s b e e n , l a w a b i d i n g a n d l a w respecting w i t h a l l due r e s p e c t and l o y a l t y t o d u l y c o n s t i t u t e d a u t h o r i t y and p r o p e r l y e n a c t e d l a w . We a s k y o u t o make i t p o s s i b l e f o r t h e I n d i a n t o l i v e , to live l a w f u l l y , t o l i v e l a w f u l l y on t h e f o o d and f o o d sources w h i c h he k n o w s a n d w h i c h a r e a t h i s d i s p o s a l , t o make i t p o s s i b l e t h e r e b y f o r h i m t o l i v e a t p e a c e and i n good w i l l w i t h h i s w h i t e n e i g h b o r and a n c i e n t f r i e n d . T h i s we a s k , t h i s we b e s e e c h o f y o u , t o r e w r i t e i n t o t h e l a w s o f o u r State, to confirm again to the Indian the exemption p r i v i l e g e s c o n f e r r e d upon us by t h e f i r s t A c t i n t h i s S t a t e r e l a t i v e t o I n d i a n f i s h i n g (Buchanan 1 9 1 5 : 1 1 7 ) . Regardless Bureau State  o f how  of Indian on b e h a l f  decisions  made  Unable having  Affairs  felt,  as an a d m i n i s t r a t o r  he was o f t e n p o w e r l e s s  of Indian  fishers  and o f t e n  confidence  t h e Lummi  sought  from  the Bureau  i n the l o c a l legal  United  counsel  Commissioner  injunction  against  o f 1897.  fishers.  denied,  the developments  f o l l o w i n g d i d much  this  own, much a s  Darwin  a r r e s t s o f Lummi  on I n d i a n  Attorney  The Lummi  further  position  Although  A f f a i r s and  States  on t h e i r  sought  From  to bureaucratic  of Indian  case  State's  to c o n f r o n t the  tied  they had i n t h e A l a s k a P a c k e r s an  i n the  by h i s . s u p e r i o r s .  to obtain help  little  General,  Buchanan  to  counsel prevent  the i n j u n c t i o n to formulate  was the  fishing.  a c t i o n a heated  argument erupted  153  between  Darwin  and  Buchanan,  a l l documented  1979:20-21), w i t h cautioned people  weakened  arrests.  your  continued,  The S t a t e  stipulations.  own  mentality." with  contended  Without  financially  That  the State  Department law  unable  court  system  upholding  that  overruled  State  i s understandable,  a State  Court  fishing  case,  Indians  d i d not abide  arrested  t h e Lummi  i n Federal  Court.  a c t i o n s by t h e S t a t e F i s h e r i e s so i n o p p o s i t i o n t o S t a t e  would  lower  (Buchanan  i f he c o n t i n u e d  impossible  Supreme C o u r t  likely  especially position  by v i r t u e o f In other imprisoning  gear,  the Indians  to continue  without  The a t t o r n e y s  be r e v e r s e d  fishing.  a State  the Treaty  which upheld the  i f i t were h e a r d  with  154  this  Court,  i t s d e c i s i o n on  was n u l l  v i r t u e o f the A c t making Washington a S t a t e .  that  i n Federal  based  t h e Lummi  Alexis,  license to  f o r A l e x i s thought  Supreme C o u r t  them  and/or  (89 Wash. 492 ( 1 9 1 6 ) ) ,  since the State that  have  1915:114).  fining  Lummi  that i f  a r r e s t e d , a L u m m i by t h e name o f J o h n  court decision. would  again  to confiscate their  hisconviction for fishing  State  and o v e r  a  as s a y i n g  r e g u l a t i o n s he w o u l d  power  i t financially  One o f t h o s e  dismissed  was q u o t e d  t o c o u r t over  and c o n t i n u i n g  soon f i n d  appealed  Darwin  use o f p l e n a r y  t h e Lummi  a t one p o i n t  by S t a t e  words D a r w i n knew t h a t  the  o f the Bureau o f  General,  the cases  but doing  Judge  the enraged  and b r o u g h t  arbitrary  .case  upheld  laws  i s suprising. When  the  The a r r e s t s by  the a i d or support  to appeal  inferior  the State courts  Indian A f f a i r s or the O f f i c e o f the Attorney were  (see Nugent  t h a t y o u r l o n g a s s o c i a t i o n among a m e n t a l l y  had  treaty  material  D a r w i n a t one p o i n t w r i t i n g t o Buchanan, " I was  Fisheries officials the  in archival  Since  and v o i d by the Federal  Courts  had  Court's  upheld  position  I n d i a n T r e a t i e s many t i m e s was  weak.  however, the U n i t e d rei., by  Kennedy  Seneca  the  case  S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t  v^ Becker  Indians  Before  (241  U.S.  must c o n f o r m  556)  t o New  State  further.  to  seasons  fish  While  his  jurisdiction  must  the o n - r e s e r v a t i o n  fishing  development  of purse  seining, continued  fishery.  emigrated Coast,  Yugoslavia,  and  were  various  Croatia.  Lummi, b o t h Lummi  A c t u a l l y from  from  amiable also  the  Slav  by  upset  of the the  must  obtain  State  fishing  particular  before  One  (Deloria  1977:138-139; Nugent  of  fishers  Slav they  i n c i d e n t has  waged,  to dominate the  over  the  Adriatic  the  encroachment  Sea  reached  Dalmation  1979:26-32) b u t  with The  reservation  reservation  been d e s c r i b e d  in  Sound  grounds. on  the  Puget  interaction  fishing  the  with  i n North Puget  a great deal of  the  grounds.  being  in conjunction  area  in contention over  was  including Austria,  T h e y had and  before  the  places  waters, i n t e r c e p t i n g f i s h  here.  Because  to pursue  they  abide  battle  mentioned  i s now  fishing  1979:33).  fishers,  what  them n o t  that  "Slavonian"  Sound  law.  ex.  S h o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r Buchanan informed  o f f - r e s e r v a t i o n and  (Nugent  York,  York  A l e x i s case  licenses  r u l e d i n New  State  appealed,  t r e a t y Indian  t h e Lummi's a t t o r n e y a d v i s e d  under  c o u l d be  that  this ruling  reservations  b e f o r e , the  twice  bears  fishing before  repeating  1  In  April  of  1916  a  purse  seine  boat  belonging  to  a  Slav  1. C o n t r a r y t o w h a t D e l o r i a w r o t e (1977:139) t h e i n c i d e n t d i d n o t c a u s e an i n t e r n a t i o n a l s c e n e . The A u s t r i a n f i s h e r s were l o c a l i m m i g r a n t s who f i s h e d c o m m e r c i a l l y under l i c e n s e f r o m t h e S t a t e o f W a s h i n g t o n , n o t A u s t r i a n n a t i o n a l s on a s p o r t f i s h i n g t r i p as D e l o r i a a s s e r t s . 155  fisher  was  Lummi. gear,  seining  A group  and p l a c e d  Superintendent t h e Lummi at  for herring  o f Lummi t h e crew  Buchanan  Reservation  t h e same  time  Slav  promised return  a t the urging  the  fishers  were  i n May  boat,  arresting  fourteen  this  incident  placed  embarrassed jurisdiction  the d i s p u t e d  Washington State This  Darwin  him, Darwin decided over  Attorney  issue brought  tribes  terms  being  apprehended After  in a  no l o n g e r waters  on t h e  t h e Lummi only  would  f i s h e d on  t o do s o (Nugent  another  light  "Austrian"  treatment and  to attempt  unless  while  t h e Lummi and  the media  bad  on  license.  t h a t they them  Darwin  fishers  with  i fonly  fishing  to  advised  of  publicly  to exercise t o do so by  General.  t o the f o r e the " e x c l u s i v e use" c l a u s e o f  the T r e a t y o f P o i n t E l l i o t t . signatory  Lummi  had a d v i s e d  fishers.  by t h e  According  were  a State  again  t h e Lummi  arrest.  o f Commissioner  on f r i e n d l y  i n the area  claimed  fishermen"  d i d not possess  net, the Slavs' c l a i m  Again  under  arresting  r e s e r v a t i o n because Darwin  1979:29).  the  was  waters  the v e s s e l , c o n f i s c a t e d the  and s k i p p e r  Darwin  not to f i s h  their  boarded  the "Austrian  r e s e r v a t i o n because they The  within  reserved  Under A r t i c l e  2 of the Treaty the  e x c l u s i v e use o f the area  w i t h i n the  bounds o f t h e r e s e r v a t i o n . A l l t r a c t s s h a l l be s e t a p a r t , a n d s o f a r a s n e c e s s a r y s u r v e y e d and marked o u t f o r t h e i