Graduate Studies, College of (Okanagan)
DSpace
UBCO
Good Water, Dallas
Master of Arts - MA
University of British Columbia
The Okanagan Syilx people reside on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border. The study of Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution practices underpinning social and governance structures is the focus of this research. The purpose is to examine gaps in contemporary management of salmon resources. I argue that historical Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution was reinforced by a complexity of multifaceted social and governance mechanics that provided equity and land sustainability for community, vital to contemporary Syilx management access and distribution. My research questions ask, first: what are the social and governance structures that underpinned and supported Syilx historical resource management and distribution? second: what were the changes that impacted Syilx historic access activities and how did they evolve into modern day governance reservation politics that resulted in governance law and historic tenets now missing? and third, how can understanding both historical and contemporary Syilx distribution methods facilitate and improve contemporary management of Syilx salmon distribution practices? The literature reviewed includes historical, ethnographic, ethnohistorical archival sources as well as contemporary research. A mixed-methods approach incorporates the literature search which focused on the first two research questions. The Enowkinwixw Process, a traditional Syilx analysis procedure, was used as an Indigenous research method to address historical social and governance structures and activities to inform present day management practices. I apply an Okanagan Syilx Nested System (parts-to-whole) analysis lens and the Enowkinwixw Four Oppositional Dynamics (of a living system) to examine and privilege historical salmon distribution practices acknowledging earlier social and governance structure. Research findings confirmed that the Okanagan Syilx historical practice of salmon distribution to external neighbouring tribes and internally in the band communities, although different from each other, were focused on equitable procedures and sustainability. Findings related to Syilx contemporary salmon distribution, although intended to be fair, were not and require re-visiting and re-organizing by the Syilx people. Research concludes that historical Syilx salmon distribution was reinforced by ceremonial protocols for community and inter-nation sharing to ensure health and wellbeing for the land and the people. Research also concludes that historical practices will strengthen and inform contemporary social cohesion and sustainable governance mechanics.
OKANAGAN SYILX HISTORICAL AND CONTEMPORARY SALMON DISTRIBUTION: UNDERPINNING SOCIAL AND GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES by Dallas Good Water B.A., Simon Fraser University, 2007 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE COLLEGE OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Interdisciplinary Studies) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Okanagan) April 2018 © Dallas Good Water, 2018 ii The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the College of Graduate Studies for acceptance, a thesis/dissertation entitled: Okanagan Syilx Historical and Contemporary Salmon Distribution: Underpinning Social and Governance Structures Submitted by _Dallas Good Water_________ in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Arts Dr. Jeannette Armstrong, Irving K. Barber School of Arts and Sciences____________________ Supervisor Dr. Diana French, Emerita, Irving K. Barber School of Arts and Sciences___________________ Supervisory Committee Member Dr. Michael Evans, Irving K. Barber School of Arts and Sciences_________________________ Supervisory Committee Member Dr. Rachelle Hole, Faculty of Health and Social Development____________________________ University Examiner iii Abstract The Okanagan Syilx people reside on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border. The study of Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution practices underpinning social and governance structures is the focus of this research. The purpose is to examine gaps in contemporary management of salmon resources. I argue that historical Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution was reinforced by a complexity of multifaceted social and governance mechanics that provided equity and land sustainability for community, vital to contemporary Syilx management access and distribution. My research questions ask, first: what are the social and governance structures that underpinned and supported Syilx historical resource management and distribution? second: what were the changes that impacted Syilx historic access activities and how did they evolve into modern day governance reservation politics that resulted in governance law and historic tenets now missing? and third, how can understanding both historical and contemporary Syilx distribution methods facilitate and improve contemporary management of Syilx salmon distribution practices? The literature reviewed includes historical, ethnographic, ethnohistorical archival sources as well as contemporary research. A mixed-methods approach incorporates the literature search which focused on the first two research questions. The Enowkinwixw Process, a traditional Syilx analysis procedure, was used as an Indigenous research method to address historical social and governance structures and activities to inform present day management practices. I apply an Okanagan Syilx Nested System (parts-to-whole) analysis lens and the Enowkinwixw Four iv Oppositional Dynamics (of a living system) to examine and privilege historical salmon distribution practices acknowledging earlier social and governance structure. Research findings confirmed that the Okanagan Syilx historical practice of salmon distribution to external neighbouring tribes and internally in the band communities, although different from each other, were focused on equitable procedures and sustainability. Findings related to Syilx contemporary salmon distribution, although intended to be fair, were not and require re-visiting and re-organizing by the Syilx people. Research concludes that historical Syilx salmon distribution was reinforced by ceremonial protocols for community and inter-nation sharing to ensure health and wellbeing for the land and the people. Research also concludes that historical practices will strengthen and inform contemporary social cohesion and sustainable governance mechanics. v Lay Summary The goal of thesis is to present research relevant to the Okanagan Syilx people in regard to their contemporary governance and in the management of salmon. My main question asked how Syilx governance and management was done traditionally with a particular focus on sharing and distribution methods; I also, asked more specific questions about underpinning social and governance practices to determine how those methods changed, and how they are being done in the present. I used Enowkinwixw, an Okanagan Syilx method, to examine historical information. In the gathering and examination of information I privileged Okanagan Syilx voice over other historical information collected by non-Okanagan Syilx. I found through research that historical distribution methods were equitable and sustainable while contemporary practices although intended to be were not. My overall goal was to help determine how the historical research may inform the present practices. vi Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... iii Lay Summary .................................................................................................................................v Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................... vi List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... ix Glossary .......................................................................................................................................... x Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... xi Dedication .................................................................................................................................... xii Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................1 1.1 Okanagan Syilx historical context ..................................................................................... 3 1.2 Theoretical framework: Situating self as Syilx researcher ................................................ 5 1.3 Literature reviewed: Primary, secondary and oral literature ............................................. 8 1.4 Research approach: How to answer the research questions? ............................................. 9 Chapter 2: Okanagan Syilx Historical Context ........................................................................12 2.1 Okanagan Syilx: Okanagan and Okanogan ..................................................................... 12 2.2 Okanagan Syilx: Territory ............................................................................................... 13 2.3 Language family .............................................................................................................. 14 2.4 Historical and Contemporary governance structure/political organization ..................... 15 2.5 Captikwl in the present .................................................................................................... 16 2.6 Relevant contemporary and historical events .................................................................. 16 2.7 Contributors to salmon decline ........................................................................................ 19 2.8 Salmon revitalization ....................................................................................................... 20 vii Chapter 3: Literature Review .....................................................................................................24 3.1 Captikwl ........................................................................................................................... 24 3.1.1 Captikwl: Four oppositional dynamics ..................................................................... 26 3.1.2 Okanagan Syilx nested system: Parts to whole ......................................................... 27 3.2 Primary sources ................................................................................................................ 28 3.3 Secondary sources ............................................................................................................ 34 Chapter 4: Methodology ..............................................................................................................39 4.1 Enowkinwixw Process as a research framework ............................................................. 42 4.2 Enowkinwixw as inquiry tool .......................................................................................... 44 4.3 Four oppositional dynamics: As research method ........................................................... 45 4.4 Enowkinwixw: Four oppositional dynamics as research guide ....................................... 46 4.5 Okanagan Syilx nested system: Parts to whole ................................................................ 47 4.6 Four oppositional dynamics: Research methodology ...................................................... 48 Chapter 5: Findings and Analysis: Okanagan Syilx Salmon Distribution .............................51 5.1 Research findings: Tradition ............................................................................................ 52 5.2 Research findings: Interdependence ................................................................................ 54 5.2.1 Community cooperation: Okanagan Syilx headmen ............................................... 56 5.2.2 Harvest practices ....................................................................................................... 59 5.2.3 Family related interactions ........................................................................................ 60 5.2.4 Collaborative protocols with other tribes .................................................................. 61 5.2.5 Salmon distribution protocols ................................................................................... 63 5.3 Research findings: Change .............................................................................................. 65 5.3.1 Laws .......................................................................................................................... 66 viii 5.4 Action: Captikwl teachings: Informing/Working with western science .......................... 68 Chapter 6: Analysis and Conclusions ........................................................................................72 6.1 Research question 1: Analysis ......................................................................................... 73 6.2 Research question 2: Analysis ......................................................................................... 74 6.3 Research question 3: Analysis ......................................................................................... 76 6.4 Summary conclusions ...................................................................................................... 79 References .....................................................................................................................................81 Appendices ....................................................................................................................................88 Appendix A American Okanogan and Colville Chiefs and Headmen Letter 1925 .................. 88 Appendix B Laurier Memorial 1910 ....................................................................................... 101 ix List of Figures Figure 1. Okanagan Nation Alliance, view of the Okanagan Nation territory map ..................... 24 Figure 2. Okanagan Syilx governance diagram ............................................................................ 39 Figure 3. Visual representation of research metholdology ........................................................... 50 x Glossary Captikwl/cepcaptikwl: Okanagan Syilx oral history that contain reminders to the Okanagan Syilx about how to live in the world. Captikwl is singular and cepcaptikwl is plural. Enowkinwixw: is the process the four Chiefs engaged when an issues needs to be addressed. Also, it is used in the present. Nsyilxcen: the Okanagan Syilx name for the language. Okanagan Syilx: within this research the name is meant to include both the Okanagan people, north of the 49th parallel and the Okanogan people, south of the 49th parallel. xi Acknowledgements I am very thankful for the support provided by my academic supervisor, Dr. Jeannette Armstrong and committee members, Dr. Diana French and Dr. Mike Evans and the guidance and encouragement they provided throughout the research and writing process through to thesis completion. In particular, Dr. Armstrong’s research focus and personal Okanagan Syilx knowledge fueled my confidence in this thesis research. . xii Dedication Limlimt kwu kwukstxw to my husband, my grandfather, my parents, my children and grandchildren (including future ones). Their inspiring presence and patience has supported me in my academic pursuit. limlmt kwu kwukstxw to the Okanagan Nation, the Okanagan Indian Band, the En’owkin Centre and the Okanagan Syilx people for allowing access to the Okanagan Nation and Okanagan Indian Band library holdings that greatly informed my research. As well my conversations with Okanagan Syilx people whose words informed my understanding of my research. 1 Chapter 1: Introduction A 1925 letter, written by Chiefs and Headmen of the Colville and Okanogan Tribes to the American President, stated “…our great fishery at the Kettle Falls where when we were young, all the tribes gathered and we gave fish to all who came; even to the tribes east of the mountains” (Raufer, 1966, p. 432) (see Appendix A for full transcription). The recent return of Okanagan sockeye salmon brought with it the revitalization the allotment and distribution of salmon practices of the Okanagan Syilx communities (Okanagan Nation Alliance, Fishing for Okanagan Sockeye Salmon). Presently, the salmon distribution methods provide equal quantities to each of the seven Okanagan Syilx communities that make up the Okanagan Nation Alliance (ONA). The sharing method of distributing salmon seems to be a standard based on funding determinants. As well, current physical access by individuals to harvest fish for themselves is different than historic access allowed and is acknowledged but is not a research focus. Rather, this research is focused on studying the underlying historical tenets that governed and directed access to salmon through fishing, and distribution to understand the transition of these practices to modern day epistemologies and distribution methods. Research questions focuses on specific historic salmon distribution and access practices related to individuals, families, communities and other Indigenous tribes and nations to understand the changes that took place. The impacts resulted in the way modern day government policy and reservation politics evolved, and in the governance laws and historic tenets now missing in modern Syilx governance for access to salmon through distribution practices. The research methodology includes historiographical research to document and understand specific historic salmon distribution practices through a literature search of primary, secondary, 2 and oral accounts maintained by the Okanagan Nation, community and extended families. The research methodology includes an examination tool utilizing a whole system view. The Okanagan Syilx Nested System: parts to whole analysis and the Four Oppositional Dynamics commonly known as the Enowkinwixw Inquiry Tool by (Armstrong 2012, pp. 174-181), while Cohen (2010, pp. 41, 114-121) refers to his as Sqilxwlcawt and A Quadrant Model of Society. However, both Armstrong and Cohen’s research methodologies examined their information through a four-part segmentation of a whole systems lens. The approach to research examined Syilx salmon distribution literature for social constructs, underlying ethics, and equitable management to inform contemporary contexts. The research theorizes that historic Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution was reinforced and supported by a complexity of multifaceted social and governance mechanics. My research questions ask, first: what are the social and governance structures that underpinned and supported Syilx historical resource management and distribution? second: what were the changes that impacted Syilx historic access activities and how did they evolve into modern day governance reservation politics that resulted in governance law and historic tenets now missing? and third, how can understanding both historical and contemporary Syilx distribution methods facilitate and improve contemporary management of Syilx salmon distribution practices? The findings of the research are focused upon identifying mechanisms for equitable distribution practice in the context of modern governance related to individuals, families, reservation communities, the Okanagan Nation on both sides of the international boundary, as well as other bordering Indigenous nations and non-Indigenous agencies and interests. Writing Okanagan Syilx history in this research entailed privileging the Okanagan Syilx point of view organized through a lens that prioritized the dreams, aspirations, and goals of the 3 Okanagan Syilx Nation. The Okanagan Syilx research goal in this inquiry is to assist in revitalizing the successful historic tenets that governed and directed salmon fishing and salmon distribution as an equitable process. The study acknowledges the need for an appropriate research ethic and goal relevant to Indigenous communities. Champagne and Goldberg (2005) say, “Native communities are trying to build nations that preserve culture and sacred knowledge. Research should have some meaningful end or value for the Native community and should not jeopardize these pursuits” (p. 56). The thesis endeavors to conduct research in a manner resulting in findings valid and practical to the Okanagan Syilx. Thesis research findings are focused on identifying the Okanagan Syilx historic salmon fishing, access and distribution practices. The findings are situated to establish that the changes in salmon distribution practices from historic to the present are due to the colonizing government’s laws that replaced Syilx governance, altered access to salmon and altered distribution practices and resulted in an outwardly inequitable distribution and access practice. The result is to understand that current salmon distribution practices and access differs from historic practice. The process of identifying and acknowledging the difference is the purpose of this study. 1.1 Okanagan Syilx historical context Privileging the Syilx Okanagan view required further information to understand the Okanagan Syilx thought which is driving the impetus of this research. Historic distribution and allotment of salmon harvested at Kettle Falls, Okanagan Falls and other Okanagan Nation fisheries were analyzed and synthesized to inform present-day Okanagan Syilx applications, including community salmon allotments as a method of distribution. 4 The name “Okanagan Syilx” is used throughout to encompass the Indigenous people of the traditional territory of one language group living on both sides of the 49th parallel or the Canada-United States border. Okanagan Syilx captikwl or oral history written in English, and other written accounts, informs and guides the historiographical analysis research for the purpose of understanding the principles underlying salmon distribution. Two captikwl How Coyote Broke the Salmon Dam (Mourning Dove & Long Thresa, 2007) and How Food was Given (Okanagan Tribal Council, 2012) are important to this research. Although there are different versions, all situate the relationship between the Okanagan Syilx and the Animal People as an interdependent relationship. The interdependent relationship between the Okanagan Syilx and the Animal People is implicit within the captikwl, wherein the captikwl serves as a reminder of the symbiotic nature of the relationship and instructs on their separate responsibilities. The research is based on theory following Armstrong (2012) and Cohen (2010) that captikwl has a purpose to the Okanagan Syilx in the present, and in fact, has been and is fundamental to Okanagan Syilx continuation and adaptation of the relationship to the Animal people into the present time. The identification and use of historical salmon episteme to inform contemporary salmon distribution practice underscores the relevance of the Okanagan Syilx worldview and history from an Okanagan Syilx perspective (Armstrong 2012). Theory follows then that the nation building of the Okanagan Syilx founded upon the Okanagan Syilx worldview as identified by historical documents and captikwl is Indigeneity. The thesis theoretical approach situates that Okanagan Syilx knowledge and ethics contained within captikwl is dynamic and known to Okanagan Syilx in the present. Okanagan Syilx culture has never been stagnant and has evolved with captikwl foundational tenets as the anchor. The Okanagan Syilx knowledge and captikwl teachings are integral in the present day for Okanagan Syilx 5 Indigeneity. The recent return of Okanagan salmon to the Okanagan water system and the salmon’s distribution informed by historical practices is Indigeneity. Utilizing historical salmon distribution practices exemplifies the importance of Okanagan Syilx epistemology and knowledge in the present for both the Okanagan Syilx people and their living environment. 1.2 Theoretical framework: Situating self as Syilx researcher In the process to determine how to approach the research questions in order for study’s findings to be relevant to the Okanagan Syilx, the theoretical framework is based in my experience as an Okanagan Syilx community researcher. The following excerpt discusses the purpose of Indigenous studies, albeit the author uses the term Native American Studies,1 Cook-Lynn states: A major reason for the development of Native American Studies as a disciplinary work was to defend indigenous nationhood in America. This approach has been seen as an immediate departure from the anthropological, ethnological approach that has focused from the outside on cultural materialism and “the other” and the so-called scientific method. (1997, p. 11) Cook-Lynn’s strong words are analogous with Indigenous peoples’ need to write their own history that speaks to the theory framework for this research. Cook-Lynn’s words resonate in regard to the Okanagan Syilx because a primary research goals of this work is for the research to be relevant and practical to the Okanagan Syilx nationhood. By which I mean, the research process informs revitalization of historical practices to reinforce and strengthen the Okanagan Syilx. During both my academic studies and in other professional works I have utilized the historical field notes on the Syilx Okanagan and resultant research publications for their useful information concerning the Okanagan Syilx. The chasm that I have found between early written 1 Native American is the term used in the Unites States to refer to its Indigenous peoples 6 field research and contemporary written works on the Syilx Okanagan has been the focus of a search throughout my professional career. The examination that began in my earlier work experience as Cultural Researcher and Researcher and Archaeological Projects Coordinator at the Okanagan Nation and the Okanagan Indian Band before graduate study and now is central to this research. Understanding what is missing is a part of my own adaption process as Syilx Okanagan and how I understand the captikwl teachings and the knowledge imparted by the Okanagan Syilx communities within which I have worked. Cook-Lynn’s words serve to focus my thoughts. Cook-Lynn (1997) grounds Native American Studies scholars of the 1990’s as focused upon articulating: “…what it means in academic terms to possess an American Indian tribal future grounded in indigenousness and sovereignty” (p. 16)? However, to counter balance Cook-Lynn’s focus on Indigenousness and sovereignty Graham Smith’s (2000) point of view regarding responsibility of Indigenous researchers provides guidance. He states that Indigenous academics have accountability to the academy and to community (p. 213). Therefore, the research approach balances inquiry to focus on both my academic and my community responsibility albeit privileging the Okanagan Syilx voice to answer the foundational research question: What was Okanagan Syilx historic salmon distribution? My professional experience as earlier stated entailed collection of information and research including interviews conducted with Okanagan Syilx communities, the majority with my home community. As an Okanagan Syilx community researcher, I exercised a personal Syilx Okanagan research ethic. A rigid requirement is that my community and nation are not jeopardized in any way; this requires a transfer of research power from the research to those who provide communal information as individuals of extended family, community, and nation in my previous role as a community researcher. Transfer of research power means that the community itself should 7 articulate their “meaningful end or value” and requirements for participating in the research. As well, a transfer of research power occurs when there is recognition that the knowledge gathered is valued in its own right for its primary purpose. The transfer of research power is further explained by Kovach’s discussion of cultural sustainability. She says, Cultural sustainability is integral to Indigenous research frameworks, adding a dimension to Indigenous research that requires a particular type of attention. Serving community in this becomes the individual Indigenous researcher’s responsibility, whereas sustaining, Western culture through research is a highly institutionalized, supported project. (2009, p. 164) The importance of knowledge gathered being respected in its own right is the understanding that Indigenous knowledge is culture and sacred. Transfer of research power needs to work with, and be tempered by understanding that “…Native communities should be regarded as more than a population of individuals, since the communities have collective goals, shared culture, and group history” (Champagne & Goldberg, 2005, p. 56). The shared goals, culture, and history spoken of by Champagne and Goldberg are directly relative to the discussion of ontology by Howitt and Suchet-Pearson (2006). They state: If the metaphors of reconciliation and coexistence are to offer a basis for building equitable, just and sustainable relations in remote and rural communities around Australia, consideration of how indigenous and Western ontologies differ, and what might be involved in co-constructing new relations on the ground and of working in the context of ontological pluralism, is imperative. (p. 331) However seeming unrelated and jarring the transition from speaking about research power and understanding held by a group of people with shared goals, culture and history seems when situated in tandem with questions of Indigenous ontology from my Syilx view, they are directly related. A sense of unease is a good place to situate oneself and serve as a reminder to pay attention to the source of discomfort. The discomfort stems from questioning the status quo through this research framework and the acknowledgement of research power. 8 1.3 Literature reviewed: Primary, secondary and oral literature The primary, secondary and oral literature sources that informs this research included anthropological, ethnographical, published book, archival interviews in document, audio and microfiche format from private and public institutions. As this research is privileging the Okanagan Syilx sources, the literature reviewed was chosen because of their Okanagan Syilx voice focused and relativity to addressing the salmon distribution research questions. The oral literature sources included captikwl in English written format, written explanations of captikwl purpose and audio recordings of interviews with Okanagan Syilx language speakers or Nsilxcen speakers, wherein they share and explain captikwl in English. Also, the oral literature sources provide captikwl contextual information such as, explaining the relationship between the Okanagan Syilx and the Animal people, the purpose Okanagan Syilx captikwl serves geographic location of salmon as placed by Coyote and the time setting of the captikwl within Okanagan Syilx chronology. Furthermore, primary sources utilized for this research are comprised of older and more recent Okanagan Syilx inquiries research that discusses topics such as, Kettle Falls’ First Salmon Ceremony, Salmon Chief role, game and salmon distribution at large and small fisheries, preparation for fishing and hunting, visiting neighboring nations at Kettle Falls fishery camping and salmon sharing and Okanagan Syilx governance structure. Moreover, secondary sources utilized also focus their research on the Okanagan Syilx or related peoples and their inclusion is to clarify and expound primary and oral literature sources. Secondary sources encompass Plateau people resource sharing including Kettle Falls and Okanagan River fisheries. 9 1.4 Research approach: How to answer the research questions? The research approach was organized to answer the research question from an Okanagan Syilx perspective according to standard academic perimeters. The research methodology selected for research required a mixed methods qualitative approach, which included a historiographical analysis for Okanagan Syilx fishery distribution practices from a whole system view. The historiographical analysis was informed by four aspects or themes making up a whole system view of being Syilx Okanagan called enowkinwixw from captikwl, as put forward by Armstrong (2012) and Cohen (2010). The Enowkinwixw Inquiry Tool utilized Four Oppositional Dynamics with the Okanagan Syilx view of a nested system as parts to whole analysis method to inform the research questions and was previously utilized by Armstrong (2012) and Cohen (2010) for different purposes. The Okanagan Syilx Nested System is a model representing the Okanagan Syilx social construct of smaller components nested within wider related fields of: individual, family, community and tmixw place (the Animals place). The tmixw in English are “‘all of creation’ or as the ‘spirit animals’ or simply as ‘everything in nature” (Armstrong, 2012, p. 148). Cohen’s translation of tmixw is “Spirits of the land/ecology refers to all the beings and things in the ecology with spirit (2010, p. xv). The four aspects are best summarized as Four Oppositional Dynamics, which are also described in Syilx community as representative of: traditions/old people, interdependence/mother, innovations/youth and actions/father. The two representative ways to think of the aspects are essentially the same and interchangeable when viewed as a human dynamic, however, each is useful depending on the purpose. The purpose of representation through familial relationship is significant to the illustration of Okanagan Syilx family structure, its historic interactions, and historic education; however, it is not a focus of the research. The research method entailed viewing the written historical accounts from three lenses 10 in terms of: tradition, interdependence, and change while the fourth lens, action served as a way to view salmon distribution literature related to the historic and contemporary salmon distribution. The literature accounts, both historic and contemporary, were examined to identify relevancy to Syilx salmon traditions, Syilx interdependence principles, and Syilx change factors. In this research, the traditions lens is comprised of values that include spirituality expressed through ceremony, songs, and feasts. The interdependence lens is comprised of governance expressed in food practices like community cooperative, family interactions, and protocols with other tribes. The interdependence lens is comprised of new beliefs and practices, education, laws, and boundaries including reservations. For the actions lens information examined pertinent to the four lenses were further viewed through their relationships in the Enowkinwixw: Four parts nested view of individual, family, community, and tmixw place (Armstrong, 2012, pp. 174). The Enowkinwixw: Four parts nested view is central to this research and will be referred to as Okanagan Syilx Nested System: parts to whole. Research findings regarding salmon distribution practice historically are discussed in chapter five while contemporary salmon distribution is discussed in chapter six. The four lenses of the Four Oppositional Dynamics worked with the Okanagan Syilx Nested System to address the three research questions. Viewing the literature with the four lenses including the fourth historic and contemporary actions of individuals, family, community and nation or tmixw place (the Okanagan Syilx Nested System) resulted in information relevant to the first research question about the social and governance structures that underpinned historic and contemporary salmon distribution. Also, the lenses and nested system addressed the second research question regarding changes that impacted Syilx historic access and activities that evolved into modern day governance policy and reservation politics and result in governance law 11 historic tenets that are now missing. Moreover, the methods spoke to the third research question regarding, understanding both historical and contemporary Okanagan Syilx distribution methods facilitate and improve contemporary management of Syilx salmon distribution practice. Each of the three research questions study the difference between historic and contemporary salmon distribution practice as derivative of social change. The practical application of this research to the Okanagan Syilx has the ability to inform salmon management since the research privileged the Okanagan Syilx. Previous research did not solely focus upon Okanagan Syilx historic salmon distribution as such, research focused on historic salmon distribution will fill a research gap, which is directed by and intertwined with Okanagan Syilx captikwl (oral history) both as a research methodology and as a lens. The Okanagan Syilx conducting research premised on captikwl understands that Okanagan culture or more correctly knowledge and thought is dynamic and premised on captikwl and therefore recognizes that captikwl is relevant and important in the present. A real world example of Okanagan Syilx Indigeneity is the return of Okanagan Salmon to the Okanagan River. The research shows that historic salmon practices were directed by the teachings of the Four Food Chiefs and How Coyote Broke the Salmon Dam cepcaptikwl. The thesis is organized with Chapter 2 providing pertinent background historical information and current information about the Okanagan Syilx salmon revitalization and distribution practice. Chapter 3 focuses upon the literature informing the research. Chapter 4 explains or outlines the research methodology. While, Chapter five identifies research findings and their analysis including past salmon distribution methods and its underpinning structures. The data analysis and conclusions addressing the research questions are discussed in Chapter 6. 12 Chapter 2: Okanagan Syilx Historical Context The purpose of Chapter two is to provide a snapshot of the Okanagan Syilx. It contains an overview of the historical and present day governance of the Okanagan Syilx and their interactions with the governments of British Columbia and Canada in regard to land and water. Also presented is an overview related to the Okanagan Syilx historical traditions, their use of captikwl, the governance related to interdependence, and relevant changes as a result of colonization in the present. The research privileges the Okanagan Syilx point of view. The discussion covers the historical timespan from contact with Europeans through to the present day. 2.1 Okanagan Syilx: Okanagan and Okanogan The name Okanagan Syilx is used in this paper refers to the Indigenous peoples who reside in the watershed of the Okanagan Valley and the Columbia River ways. It includes people on both sides of the 49th parallel or the Canada-United States border, living in Okanagan territory (variously spelled Okanogan or Okanagon). Presently, the Okanagan Syilx north of the 49th parallel are identified in publications as the Okanagan, which is an Anglicized spelling of their name (Hudson 1990; Armstrong, Derickson, Maracle and Young-Ing, 1993/94); the Okanagan Nation Alliance (constituted by communities located north of the 49th parallel) use this name for themselves. The Okanagan Nation Alliance is the tribal organization representing the seven Nsyilxcen (Okanagan) speaking bands in Canada. Among the Confederated Tribes of the Colville (located south of the 49th parallel) the term Okanogan is used to identify Okanagan Syilx as one of their twelve member tribes. The name Okanogan is also utilized by Anastasio (1955) and by Lerman (1954) within their research. In the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation member tribes besides the Okanogan tribal group speak dialects of the same 13 Nsyilxcen or Okanagan language (this is explained more completely by the following Okanagan language section). For the purposes of this study, Okanagan Syilx is used to encapsulate peoples despite the Canada and United States border, when the people are one and the same. The respective names Okanagan and Okanogan will be used when corresponding to source written records, and as needed to differentiate the Okanagan Syilx peoples relative to their geography north or south of the 49th parallel. 2.2 Okanagan Syilx: Territory As this research is focused on salmon distribution, an outline of the Okanagan Syilx territory is helpful. Ethnographic and historical sources exist and include written descriptions of the Okanagan Syilx territory including, Boas and Teit (1985, p. 167), and Spier (1938, p. 3), as well as fur trade era maps that depict the territory geographically by Samuel Black (1835), A.C. Anderson (1867), David Thompson (1814) and Archibald McDonald (1827). However, the various accounts contain disparate geographical descriptions of territory, and the maps created are general in their representation, with few landforms depicted. Interestingly, a recent map by Bouchard and Kennedy in their report, First Nations’ Ethnography and Ethnohistory in British Columbia’s Lower Kootenay/Columbia Hydropower Region (2000), are actually six separate maps designed to fit together depicting the various tribes’ place names. Two Okanagan Syilx sources will be relied on for an overview of the Okanagan Syilx territory. The Okanagan Syilx territory boundaries most closely align with the captikwl stories of coyote bringing the salmon to the people (see Figure 1. below). The Okanagan Syilx stories about the placement of salmon shared by Mourning Dove, Tommy Gregoire, Martin Louie, and Joe Abel are held in a variety of Okanagan Syilx communities. These cepcaptikwl originate in, and are geographically situated within the Columbia River and Fraser River watersheds. The 14 first source is an early documented acknowledgement of separate territories in the Interior Plateau. The Memorial to Sir Wilfrid Laurier was written by a consortium of Interior of British Columbia Chiefs including the Okanagan Syilx, Secwepemc (Shuswap), and the Nlaka’pamux (Coteau or Thompson), to the Premier of Canada in 1910 (see Appendix B for full transcription). It is important to acknowledge that this is a grouping of international neighboring Nations; as they are separate tribes of the larger Interior Salish language grouping, their languages are not mutually intelligible. As the Chiefs said: “They found the people of each tribe supreme in their own territory, and having tribal boundaries known and recognized by all” (Armstrong et al., 1993/94, p. 109). The second source is a contemporary description of Okanagan Syilx territory provided for the Okanagan Nation Alliance for a case regarding the Waneta Dam: Northern extent of Okanagan territory, or isca?la?laqsc, is near Revelstoke, the eastern boundary is near Kootenay Lake, the southern boundary extends to the vicinity of Wilbur, Washington, and the western boundary extends to the west of the Nicola Valley. In Canada, the neighboring nations to the Okanagan Nation are the Nlaka’pamux Nation to the west, the Secwepemc Nation to the North and the Ktunaxa Nation to the east. (ONA written evidence, November 2009, p. 5) Considering the preceding summary of Okanagan Syilx territory, in tandem with the Interior Chiefs’ acknowledgement of separate territories, identifies a possibility for further research regarding Okanagan Syilx territory in historical records and captikwl. 2.3 Language family There are eight organized districts within the Okanagan Syilx territory. The eight districts are the Southern Okanagan, Northern Okanagan, San Poil, Colville/Kettle, Arrow Lakes, Slocan and Similkameen/Methow (Armstrong, 1993/94, p. 4). Each district speaks the Okanagan Syilx language and “have the same customs and stories. They are one Nation and are now commonly called the Okanagan” (Armstrong, 1993/94, p. 4). Mattina and Jack explain the relationship 15 between the eight Okanagan Syilx districts languages and dialects “They all spoke Okanagan with small dialectical differences. These were not much more marked than the differences between Canadian and Midwestern U.S. English” (1990, p. 146). 2.4 Historical and Contemporary governance structure/political organization The Colville publication Coyote and the Colville (Yanan and Andrist, 1995) describes pre-reservation Okanagan Syilx governance and political structure: Each of these bands had its own chief, its areas where it lived, set up winter villages, and where it fished, hunted and gathered roots and berries. Many of these areas overlapped. The bands often met at special places for councils, celebrations and trade. (p. 9) This essential description of early Okanagan Syilx governance existed as a seemingly simple lifestyle yet it was a purposeful social and governance structure that served the purposes and requirements of the Okanagan Syilx. Governance in the present for the Okanagan Syilx is legally directed by the respective federal governments and their bureaucratic arms. In Canada, the bureaucratic arm is the Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada and in the United States, the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The Okanagan Nation Alliance (ONA) is the tribal council governing body of the Okanagan Syilx in Canada. Prior to their name change in 1997 the ONA was known as the Okanagan Tribal Council. The eight member bands of the Okanagan Nation Alliance are: the Okanagan Indian Band (reserve land allotted in 1877 and 1888); the Upper Nicola Band (reserve land allotted in 1878 and 1879); the Lower Similkameen Indian Band (reserve land allotted in 1878); the Upper Similkameen Indian Band (reserve land allotted in 1878, 1888 and 1893); the, Penticton Indian Band (reserve land allotted in 1877 and 1894); the Osoyoos Indian Band (reserve land allotted in 1877, 1893); and the Westbank First Nation created in 1963, upon separation from the Okanagan Indian Band. The Confederated Tribes of the Colville 16 Reservation was created in 1872 and became an official member of the ONA in 2010. 2.5 Captikwl in the present In present times captikwl provides an understanding that Okanagan Syilx oral history is relevant to the people for today’s problems and are also used as a source of traditional governance practice. The Enowkin Centre is an Okanagan Syilx based cultural and learning resource centre. It aids organizations by facilitating traditional format discussions requiring community feedback and guidance to inform their operations or every day work through their Enowkinwixw Process. The contemporary Enowkinwixw Process evolved from the Four Food captikwl. As an example, I have participated in the process twice. In the first instance, the Okanagan Nation Alliance desired feedback from the community about child welfare issues; and in the second instance, the Enowkinwixw Process was employed to build a consensus between the Okanagan Syilx communities as a whole regarding revenue sharing. 2.6 Relevant contemporary and historical events The focus of this section is the return of sockeye salmon to the Okanagan River after an almost 100-year absence. The last 100 years has been a tumultuous century for the salmon that spawn on the river (Okanagan Nation Alliance, 2017), for the Okanagan River itself, and for the people that rely on the salmon as food. The return of the Okanagan sockeye is chronicled from an Okanagan Syilx lens rather than from the scientific data point of view. The former is not meant to diminish science, especially since science conducted by the Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department (ONAFD) played an important and integral role in the resurgence of Okanagan sockeye. Rather, the role of science in the process has overshadowed the importance of the Okanagan Syilx people’s actions concerning the salmon’s return which is also due to the “spiritual relationship and dietary importance” (ONA newsletter 2003, p. 3) of salmon to the 17 Okanagan Syilx. The Okanagan Syilx’s1 actions relating to the return of the Okanagan salmon is the focus of this section and relies on articles, brochures, newsletters, reports, alongside published primary research, Okanagan Syilx oral history and captikwl to frame and articulate the history of the return of the Okanagan sockeye salmon. As well, this section’s research is provided underpinning the Okanagan Syilx contemporary embodiment of traditions and interdependence regarding salmon distribution. This discussion correlates and theorizes a contemporary historical relationship between the Okanagan salmon and Okanagan Syilx people. This correlation begins with two Okanagan Syilx oral histories or cepcaptikwl relevant to this discussion and is followed by a highlight of events as snapshots of time regarding the salmon and the people. To inform the readers’ understanding of the Okanagan Syilx history and point of view, pertinent background information includes the geographical perimeters of the Okanagan River and its headwaters. The Okanagan River is a transboundary waterway with headwaters in the vicinity of Armstrong, British Columbia, Canada and merges with the Columbia River at Brewster, Washington State, United States of America (Rae, 2005, p. 1). The name Okanagan, north of the 49th parallel is spelled Okanagan and south of the 49th parallel the name is spelled Okanogan (Rae, 2005, p. 1, Brown, 1995, p. 60). The Okanagan/Okanogan Syilx peoples interface with two separate countries and their respective governments. The two governments, Canada and the United States have different laws that work symbiotically with the laws of their respective Provinces and States and it is this combination of laws that circumscribe and affect Okanagan/Okanogan Syilx governance in the present 1 Although focused primarily on the Okanagan Syilx people, not to the exclusion of the Okanogan Syilx. 18 summarized below. In the present day, the governance of the Okanagan Syilx in Canada and the Okanogan Syilx in the United States is different from earlier times. In the United States, the Okanogan (Syilx) are part of the twelve tribes that form the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (CCT). The CCT was created in 1872. In Canada, the Okanagan Syilx are now seven Bands or communities legally created in the late 1800’s through Canada’s 1876 Indian Act and formed an early incarnation of the Okanagan Nation Alliance (ONA) in 1980’s. The ONA, the CCT and the seven Okanagan Syilx Indian Bands have various departments that oversee specific services to their community members. Both ONA and CCT fishery departments were instrumental in the Okanagan salmon return. Their fishery departments employed scientists that worked on salmon restoration in the whole of Okanagan territory. Also, both fishery departments employed community members and worked collaboratively with them in the salmon restoration program. The population declines of Okanagan salmon in Okanagan Lake had transitioned to no passage of salmon after the 1914 implementation of a dam at the lake’s outlet (Okanagan Nation Alliance, 2017). The operation of this dam prevented salmon from entering Okanagan Lake from the Okanagan River. Overall, the Okanagan sockeye population had also diminished throughout the Okanagan River system for a myriad of reasons including: habitat loss, lack of migratory access, diminished water flows, poor water quality, increased predation and competition, and climate change as outlined in brochures widely available through ONA on the Okanagan Salmon Restoration website. Even before the construction of the dam in 1914, major developments had started to take place in Okanagan Valley through agricultural settlement and the creation of towns to serve their needs. “The settlements arose next to water, mostly Okanagan Lake. Vernon, Kelowna, and 19 Penticton were all founded in 1892” (Rae, 2005, p. 5). The new towns close proximity to Okanagan Lake resulted in salmon habitat loss. Different and new resource management practices arose as well. “Between 1894 when the first fish were stocked in the Okanagan, and 1990 when stocking of the main valley lakes stopped, more than 46 million fish were released in Okanagan lakes” (Rae, 2005, p. 26). The stocking of preferred fish into the Okanagan lakes increased the predation and competition that affected Okanagan sockeye fry populations. In addition, sockeye salmon migrations in the Canadian Upper Columbia ended in the building of dams on the Columbia River after which the Okanogan River was the only remaining river accessible to spawning salmon. International salmon management on the Columbia River has affected fish populations in the Okanagan Basin. When the Grand Coulee Dam was built on the Columbia River in 1939, fish passage into the Canadian portion of the upper Columbia was eliminated. Thus, the Okanagan Basin remained as the only Canadian basin accessible to sea-run fish species. (Rae, 2005, p. ii) In fact, the remaining Okanagan sockeye salmon travel “past 9 hydroelectric dams in the Columbia River before reaching the spawning grounds near Oliver, BC,” and “are the last remaining viable population of salmon that returns to Canada via the Columbia River” (ONA, Salmon Reintroduction Backgrounder, n.d., p. 6). 2.7 Contributors to salmon decline The following excerpts are from a 2005 Okanagan Basin Water Board (Rae) report that outlines the precarious health of salmon in the Okanagan Lake and its tributaries to form an encompassing picture of salmon revitalization. The report states that the Okanagan River salmon population was at its lowest in the 1990’s. In regard to water use in the Okanagan, Approximately 80% of all surface water licensed in the Okanagan comes from streams; the rest comes from main valley lakes. Ground water is not licensed, so no data are 20 available from ground water use. Over 90% of streams are now at, or beyond, their maximum capacity for water withdrawals. (Rae, 2005, p. 13) Furthermore, fish ladders were built on Skaha Lake and Okanagan Lake outlet dams but were not used (Rae, 2005, p. 25). These two pieces of information mean that water management and fish passage were not priorities at the time of the report. As well, the report identifies a lack of knowledge regarding resident fish species. For instance, the report attributes some fish species identified, as resident fish does not have sound support facts and as such is anecdotal information. The Okanagan Basin resident fish of focus with Rae’s report includes sturgeon (p. 26), and sockeye salmon, Chinook and steelhead that according to Traditional Ecological Knowledge migrated to the upper Okanagan Basin (Rae, 2005, p. 26). In discussing historic fish passage and Traditional Ecological Knowledge, Rae says, A dam at the outlet of Skaha Lake at Okanagan Falls also prevents fish passage, but the original waterfall and cascades may have prevents upstream fish passage historically. Traditional Ecological Knowledge indicates, however, that fish were able to swim upstream over the cascades. (Rae, 2005, p. 29) These fish and water management details explain the decline of fish populations in the Okanagan. Fish population decline, including sockeye salmon, compelled the Okanagan Syilx to begin a strong program of Okanagan salmon restoration. 2.8 Salmon revitalization The following is an overview of the Okanagan sockeye salmon restoration works undertaken by actions of the Okanagan Syilx toward the long-term goal of the Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department to return Okanagan sockeye salmon to Okanagan Lake. At present up to the research and writing of this thesis, sockeye salmon are released into Shingle Creek outlet; the outlet enters the Penticton River channel, which flows from Okanagan Lake into Skaha Lake. Skaha Lake’s outlet is the Okanagan River south to Osoyoos Lake. 21 Many steps were taken for the Okanagan salmon to be released at the mouth of Shingle Creek. The Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission’s research and technical negotiated works culminated in the development of a proposal to identify the hazards of sockeye re-introduction into Skaha Lake, prior to their re-introduction into Okanagan Lake and to recommend re-introduction options (ONA newsletter, 2003 summer edition, p. 3). The ONA newsletter identified the Fisheries Department’s study as having four main components: Disease Risk Assessment, Exotic Specifies Assessment, Habitat Assessment, and Sockeye Salmon Lifecycle Model (p. 3). This three year study completed in 2003 “…was funded by Bonneville Power Administration through the Colville Confederated Tribes and carried out with the help and advice of the federal and provincial disease control specialists and fishery managers” (p. 3). The Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department stated that their salmon revitalization program had six steps (ONA, 2017). They identify the six steps as cooperation between partners from both Canada and the United States, participation in water management for fish health, the reintroduction of sockeye fry into Skaha Lake, the construction of a fish passage over McIntyre Dam, habitat restoration, and participation in a salmon feast where prayers of thanks for the fish could be given. The salmon revitalization is a culmination of the Okanagan Nation’s research and technical negotiations for their goal. Clearly situating the return of the salmon to that section of the river, the ONA newsletter recently reported that the 2015-Okanagan Salmon Feast celebrated the renaming of the Okanagan Falls Provincial Park to sx̌ʷex̌ʷnitkʷ Provincial Park. sx̌ʷx̌ʷnitkʷ translates to “little falls” which is in relation to Kettle Falls whose Okanagan Syilx name sx̌ʷnitkʷ means “big falls” (ONA, 2015). Another earlier source had asserted that “Historically, the Okanagan people fished throughout the Okanagan Basin. A key fishing site was in the Okanagan River at Okanagan 22 Falls where, sockeye, chinook and steelhead were captured” (Rae, 2005, p. 8). The renaming states the reassertion of the Syilx responsibility to the salmon seen in the return of the salmon to the falls and beyond. The process that the Fisheries Department’s followed in their community and in their technical actions contributed to an important overall consensus of the importance of Okanagan salmon. While the purpose of this chapter was to provide an overview of information to assist in understanding of the historical position of the Okanagan Syilx in the present, the simple snapshot of the Okanagan Syilx historical perspective from earlier times to the present is also a way to say as the Okanagan Syilx we have our own point of view about history. 23 24 Chapter 3: Literature Review The written accounts that inform this ethnohistorical research extend from anthropological and ethnographical documents to more recent written works, including archived interviews previously conducted with Okanagan Syilx who shared their experience about salmon distribution. In addition, further historical written documents include letters signed by the Okanagan in 1910 and by the Okanogan in 1925, in which the Chiefs and Headmen stated their particular perspectives of the status quo, and the history of their relationship between the Okanagan Syilx and settlers. Trigger, in his article Ethnohistory and Archaeology (1978) discusses ethnohistory’s relationship with the fields of history and anthropology. He argues that ethnohistory should be called history, and should incorporate archaeological research findings or prehistory within its written works. A parallel yet separate avenue of thought is the recognition that the Okanagan Syilx viewpoint of the historical or ethnohistorical past is not only valid, but is needed. 3.1 Captikwl Okanagan Syilx captikwl or cepcaptikwl (plural) are the oral histories that at present are in use in both oral and written forms. Two written Okanagan Syilx captikwl of central importance to this discussion are How Coyote Broke the Salmon Dam (Mourning Dove and Long Thresa, 2007) and How Food was Given provided by Armstrong (2012) and Cohen (2010). The former captikwl outlines the physical places where salmon were brought to the Okanagan Syilx, and the latter relates how the Okanagan Syilx receiving governance related to the foods they were gifted with. The following two definitions of Okanagan Syilx captikwl explain and outline its task and purpose. The first definition is concise, “Captikwl/CepCaptikwl [is] [t]he Okanagan 25 traditional story system which expresses cumulative knowledge, the living record of what it means to be Sqilxw/Okanagan” (Cohen, 2010, p. xiv). The second is a more descriptive explanation, Captikʷɬ are an essential part of the Syilx social matrix which formed as an Indigenous response to the land and resulted in the meaning and concept contained in words like tmxʷulaxʷ which is essential to understanding the tmixw as the life-force and who appear as animal characters of the stories. The land/nature images of Nsyilxcen built into the speaker of pre-Columbian Nsyilxcen and the stories which permeated that persons being were highly developed to influence social pattern and behavior as they were transferred from speaker to speaker in each generation. (Armstrong, 2012, pp. 88-89) Both explanations convey the significance of captikwl to the Okanagan Syilx as it serves as a reminder to the people about how to live. Historical captikwl range from shortened condensed versions for example, like in Syilx (2008) to more extended versions documented in the Colville Confederated Tribes (2007) publication. In Syilx abbreviated cepcaptikwl including versions of Coyote Bringing Salmon (Marchand, p. 36) and two accounts of How Food was Given. One is attributed to Marchand (p. 30) and the second condensed version of How Food was Given is provided by Cohen, he also shares an explanation about captikwl (Cohen, pp. 13-16). The two captikwl also have different names in other versions. For instance Cohen and Armstrong’s dissertations each contain a lengthier version of the Four Food Chief captikwl. Cohen refers to it as How Food was Given and Armstrong calls the captikwl both How Foods were Given and the Four Chiefs Story (Cohen, 2010, p. 115, Armstrong, 2012, p. 358). Both dissertations are excellent sources of encompassing information regarding the Four Food Chiefs/How Food was Given captikwl and teachings. 26 3.1.1 Captikwl: Four oppositional dynamics The literature search includes information related to the origin of the Enowkinwixw Process and significance to the methodological process employed in this thesis. As well, the importance and relevancy of captikwl in the present is demonstrated through the modern applications employed by the Okanagan Syilx. The Four Food Chief captikwl is the foundation of the Enowkinwixw Process (Cohen 2010, p. 114, Armstrong (2012, p. 175), and forms the Syilx enquiry method (Armstrong, 2012, p. 172) as the Four Oppositional Dynamics utilized in this research. The main themes of this research are based on the Enowkinwixw Process which is discussed in Syilx (2008) a booklet published by the Vernon Public Art Gallery to complement the latest artistic works of artist Barbara Marchand. In the booklet Cohen outlines the four characteristic of Enowkinwixw. Although, the publication discusses its four attributes it is unlike descriptions in present use. Another source outlining Enowkinwixw’s four characteristics are Armstrong (2012), Cohen (2010) and the Enowkinwixw: A Syilx (Okanagan) Protocol of Respect (En’owkin Centre, n.d.). The En’owkin Centre initially developed and led contemporary facilitation of the Enowkinwixw Process, and its facilitator guide clarifies each of the four aspect’s characteristics most widely used in the present and as used in this thesis. Cohen’s dissertation (2010) outlines the evolution of enowkinwixw attributes as represented through their animal forms and the related characteristics of bear, siya, bitterroot and salmon. Cohen connects the Four Food Chiefs “quadrants” or attributes with his spiders web Sqilxwlcawt model (p. 115) as a teaching model for both his dissertation and the workshops he facilitates addressing social issues. Thus, he pairs “bear/youth, berry/mothers, root/elders, and salmon/fathers” (p. 115). In his dissertation Cohen readily acknowledges his awareness of Armstrong’s (2012) other configuration of enowkinwixw as an enquiry method. 27 Armstrong’s (2012) utilization of enowkinwixw incorporates a different configuration of animals as the related attributes than Cohen (2010). She pairs bear/enduring stability, bitterroot/inter-reliant connection, sia/persistent change and salmon/independent action and calls the system Enowkinwixw oppositional dynamics model (p. 181). Furthermore, Armstrong states that contemporary enowkinwixw applications include its use as a “traditional law instrument” and in “conflict resolution” and in earlier times, the process would be seen as “informal because the required underlying procedural principles would have been overtly in practice and present as a philosophy internally within each individual” (p. 188). Correspondingly, the Enowkin Centre’s enowkinwixw process facilitator’s guide utilizes the same animal and plant format as Armstrong (2012). 3.1.2 Okanagan Syilx nested system: Parts to whole Cohen‘s and Armstrong’s inquiries both utilize enowkinwixw however, Cohen utilizes terms spiders web as a sqilxwlcawt model (2010, p. 115) and Armstrong terms enowkinwixw: four parts nested view (2012, p. 174). Their models share similarities despite their differing names. The differing names reflect their respective research focus while the similarities reflect their Okanagan Syilx foundation of whole system thought. The foundation for these two systems shares similarities as displayed by a Diagram Showing the Structure of the Governance System (Armstrong et al., 1993/94, p. 8) (see Figure 2. below). The diagram depicting Okanagan Syilx governance shows nine levels of authority. The nine levels are individual, household heads, heads of extended family, village chiefs, resource protectors, trade-commerce/ village-chiefs, tribal chiefs and High Chief. On the other hand Cohen’s Sqilxwlcawt model adaptation contains five levels of interaction through the People-to-be, the extended family, the community, the Nation, the World (p. 41). 28 Moreover, Armstrong describes her enowkinwixw in a four parts nested view as “various levels of human social organization” (2012, p. 174). The four parts are identified as individual, family, community, and tmixw place. The first three parts of the nested view are readily understandable by their name; yet, tmixw place is more complex. Tmixw place refers to the larger ecosystem in which community, extended family, and ultimately individuals enact social imperatives (p. 175). She says, “The construct manifests, as a nested system, a view that emphasizes the place-based character of Syilx interaction with the ecosystem, as unbroken generations of extended families making up villages transferring an ethic of regenerative land-use” (p. 175). Both Armstrong’s enowkinwixw: four parts nested view (2012, p. 174) and Cohen’s spiders web sqilxwlcawt model (2010, p. 115) are founded on the framework of enowkinwixw as a whole system analysis tool to address their respective research interests. Their utilization and understanding of Okanagan Syilx social construct is imperative to my own research as an aide to understanding through an Okanagan Syilx lens. In this research Armstrong’s enowkinwixw: four parts nested view is a framework used to address the research questions and is referred to as an Okanagan Syilx Nested System: parts to whole. 3.2 Primary sources Primary research documents were acquired from several archives from both Canada and the United States in various forms including digital audio, microfiche, transcribed interviews, and photocopied hand written letters. Primary information from Okanagan Syilx people utilized in this research, as much as possible, were from interviews held in other collections or published in books and from other private sector funded research reports. Although these three main 29 information sources do not solely concentrate upon salmon distribution, they were reviewed for their focus on the Okanagan Syilx. One main source that informed this research is a published book in which author Mourning Dove shares her salmon distribution experience at the Kettle Falls fishery as related kin to its Salmon Chief. Although she wrote the manuscript in the early 1900’s, Mourning Dove: a Salishan Autobiography was not published until 1990 (Miller). Among other topics relevant to this research she also discusses ideal prerequisites for a chief, the four divisions of the Okanagan Syilx groups as well as noting that the “interior tribes were held together by bonds of marriage, trade, visiting, and common interests” (Miller, 1990, p. 146). She goes on to explain their common interests included “enemy tribes” (p. 147) and the relevance to resource areas such as Kettle Falls, and the distribution of food. Moreover, she describes the process not only for the sharing and distributing of salmon from the fishery but most importantly the reasoning behind it. Another primary source is a report prepared for the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation developed from interviews conducted by Bouchard and Kennedy (1975). Their report was mainly based upon information from one male source who directly experienced and participated in the Kettle Falls salmon fishery and was also a kin relative of the past Salmon Chief. Bouchard and Kennedy’s report Utilization of Fish by the Colville Okanagan Indian People (1975) was informed by a great grandson of the “Salmon Chief Knkannaxwa” (p. i). In the same source, his sister provided descriptions of the process of cutting, processing and smoking of salmon for the report. She was also one of the cultural experts that provided information to the Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission report as noted below (Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission). In this report, Kennedy provided the text and diagrams while Bouchard worked with Okanagan Syilx language speakers to ensure the proper use of Nsyilxcen 30 names and correct spelling. Bouchard and Kennedy researched in the Okanagan Syilx for years prior to the development of this report, as part of the British Columbia Indian Language Project, a registered society in partnership with Okanagan Syilx people, who freely shared their knowledge and collaborated to develop a written orthography of the language, Nsyilxcen. In this report, numerous fish species are named by their English name, scientific name and in Nsyilxcen as well as to provide Nsyilxcen place names situated near the Kettle Falls. In addition, the Salmon Chief’s role, the salmon distribution practice and Kettle Falls’ fishery restrictions and taboos as well as the First Salmon Ceremony are explained. The report also discusses visiting tribes and their respective camp locations and protocols while visiting at the Kettle Falls during fishery operations. Another primary source informing this research is the Okanagan Nation Alliance’s Aboriginal Fisheries Information Within the Okanagan Basin (2000) report. It incorporates the work of community researchers who had conducted 25 interviews in total with people from each Okanagan Syilx community north of the 49th parallel. Each interview focused on community practices concerning access to fishing locations and the seasonal round of food sources. A woman with knowledge informing this report had also shared information in Bouchard and Kennedy’s report as noted above. In this report she provided information about Kettle Falls, the Salmon Chief, the salmon feast, the salmon ceremony and the sizes of the salmon and descriptions of the fish traps. Her valuable perspective is unique as a relative of the Salmon Chief, and as one who lived at the Kettle Falls community itself and participated in the fishery. Further information of relevance to thesis research was provided by another informant in this ONA fishery source about lake-fishery distribution practices utilized by his community. He also 31 shared information about the practices and rules that he experienced at the fishing stations. These three primary sources inform the Okanagan lens. The Okanagan lens is supplemented by Captain Wilson (1866), Armstrong et al. (1993/94) and Anastasio (1955), Lerman (1954), Spier (1938), Orchard and Brent (1956-1961). Wilson (1866) provides information regarding salmon distribution from his position as a Kettle Falls fishery visitor. Captain Wilson worked on the North American Boundary Commission for England, specifically on the British Columbia-U.S. border. Moreover, in this publication he wrote about the fisheries on the Okanogan River and Columbia River. Wilson identifies the specific tribes that attended the Kettle Falls Fishery and also provides the names of tribes that obtained salmon from the Columbia and Spokane Rivers (p. 297). A more recent source We Get our Living Like Milk From the Land (Armstrong et al., 1993/94) discusses the process of salmon distribution at the Kettle Falls salmon fishery. The multi-authored work is an important recent publication containing much information about the Okanagan Syilx. The authors provide information concerning the Kettle Falls Salmon Chief’s lineage, the Okanagan Syilx governance structure, and the roles of the village chiefs, the headmen, the resource protectors and the high chiefs (p. 8). The diagram informs an understanding of the Okanagan Syilx governance structure through the identification of its respective positions and their tasks and responsibilities. This publication also highlights the Okanagan Syilx governance structure as an essential component of the historical salmon distribution management. Additionally it provides information regarding the legal creation of the Okanagan Syilx reserves and a verbatim copy of the Laurier Memorial (1910). Okanagan Syilx trade, travel, leadership, defense, and intermarriage practices, each of which are internal 32 and external components of social and governance structures related to the salmon distribution practices. Other primary source interviews reviewed for this research include digitized audio recordings by Donald Watkins and Wendy Wickwire both curated by the American Philosophical Society. Donald Watkins interviewed Okanagan Syilx in the years 1961, 1966, and 1971 with a focus on Nsyilxcen. His interviews included recordings of Christian prayers and hymns in the Okanagan language and the Chinook trade language. They provide context in regard to fish species and their Nsyilxcen Okanagan Syilx names. Important to this research, one Okanagan Syilx person outlines teachings regarding food and water. The explanation of food teachings includes separate mention of the Four Food Chiefs as singular food entities as well as the importance of water to people and the land. Watkins’ interviews include numerous captikwl from several Okanagan Syilx. Okanagan Syilx discourse aided in my comprehension of Okanagan Syilx captikwl. Further aiding my captikwl understanding is the discussion within the interviews on the use of French and English languages in Nsyilxcen communications and naming conventions. Also housed at the American Philosophical Society are the Wendy Wickwire interviews with Harry Robinson. Their collaboration together resulted in three book publications. The works especially relevant to this research are Robinson’s audio recorded explanations of the sweathouse, the captikwl or cepcaptikwl and about Old Coyote. His sharing of captikwl with explanations recorded in audio format aided in my understanding the captikwl teaching, as to their purpose and their time settings in Okanagan Syilx chronology. Robinson’s captikwl works explaining Okanagan Syilx chronology informed this research through an understanding of the Okanagan Syilx stages of learning contained in Armstrong et al., (1993/94). 33 Further primary sources that provided information regarding historical social change are Orchard’s interviews and Brent’s letters. Both of these sources reflect the pioneer and early settlement time period. The Province of British Columbia Archives maintains the CBC interviews conducted by Imbert Orchard throughout British Columbia. Orchard carried out 950 interviews in the 1960’s focused on immigration and settlement of British Columbia prior to World War 1; ten interviews were initially identified as possibly relevant to this research. Ultimately four were pertinent as they offered information about the social changes that occurred between the past and present Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution methods. Two of the interviews are also available in transcribed form from the University of Regina, oURspace website. Three of the four Orchard interviews reviewed were with people that resided on Okanagan Syilx reserves. Information included accounts of Okanagan and Secwepemc (Shuswap) battles, more modern day intermarriage examples adolescent training for boys and girls, impressions of land health in the 20th century, and information regarding recent interaction between the Okanagan Syilx and the Secwepemc. Maria Brent’s 1956-1961 letters to Ella Clarke regarding Okanagan legends are archived at the University of Washington Archives Special Collections section. Brent letters reviewed did not solely contain Okanagan legend information, but also documentation regarding historical leadership of the Okanagan Syilx. Brent’s letters contained her great-great grandfather, Chief Pelka-mu-lox’s speech to the first white people he saw in Montana, and her genealogical relationship to the hereditary Okanagan Syilx leadership. It also describes customs regarding the sweathouse, regard for food sources, a captikwl about Shuswap Falls/Spillamcheem Rapids previously published in the Okanagan Historical Society (1948), and her father’s history both as a settler in the Okanagan Valley and later in Canada’s military. 34 Norman Lerman’s Okanogan (1954) field notes recorded on microfiche at the University of Washington Special Collections are a comprehensive Okanagan Syilx resource. They contain information about Okanagan Syilx fish distribution. The time setting during which the interviews were conducted is important since it allowed for the documentation of practices between the historical and early distribution practices and present distribution methods. Important information was provided about fishing headmen and hunting headmen distribution practices. It also included information about the sweathouse, Okanagan and neighbor relations including both Secwepemc and Blackfoot, the use of stone structures as defense and captikwl. D.A. Ross’ (1957) Okanagan Syilx interviews included information concerning both responsibilities and the tasks of historic fishing headmen and hunting headmen. 3.3 Secondary sources While Okanagan Syilx share their knowledge and experience with researchers informed primary sources, secondary sources employed include Okanagan Syilx publications and a synthesis of earlier investigations by various researchers. Angelo Anastasio’s (1955) dissertation research focused on Plateau culture. His research synthesized many ethnographic and historical works to describe Plateau culture. He identifies the different peoples and social structures that comprised the Plateau intergroup dynamics. He also lists other primary sources containing data relevant to historic salmon distribution at Kettle Falls. Anastasio’s investigations aides the understanding of the Okanagan Syilx social structures through their task groupings to explain Plateau food sharing and distribution practices from major sources. The Okanagan Nation Alliance publications written for their communities and reports written to inform their projects are stored in their research holdings and informed my research 35 concerning contemporary salmon fisheries in the Columbia Basin. Their useful publications include e-news letters, brochures, fishery related reports, and information packets informing their communities and others about the Okanagan Nation Alliance fisheries department projects and works related to salmon restoration. Both Okanagan and Okanogan Syilx fishery departments, respectively the ONAFD (Okanagan Nation Alliance Fishery Department) and the CTFW (Colville Tribes Fish and Wildlife Department) produced scientific information regarding Okanagan salmon restoration. The Okanagan Syilx written newsletters, articles (magazine and others) constitute accurate lay reports distributed to their communities and are based on Okanagan salmon studies regarding their Okanagan salmon restoration works. Information from the CCT included a CTFW newsletter published quarterly since 2011 and which is available on their website, as well as several fish and salmon reports commissioned by the CCT. Additionally, The Sinkaietk or Southern Okanagon (1938) edited by Spier contains information about Okanagan Syilx headmen and the first salmon ceremony (Post, p. 15). Further information of interest include time of year to fish, the building of weirs, the physical and spiritual preparation to fish and hunt, the storing of salmon, and the quantities needed of salmon and deer as winter food. The publication explains the use and construction of fish “traps” (p. 11) and weirs (p. 12) and the various fishing tools used for harvesting salmon, including: spears, weirs and traps, small dip nets and large nets (p. 12). An informative secondary resource is the Report Prepared for the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reserve by Lynn De Danaan” (2002). In the report, De Danaan writes briefly about the Kettle Falls Fishery and mainly focuses upon fisheries located along the Okanogan River. The report lists early visitors in the descriptions of Okanagan Syilx fisheries by David Thompson (1816), Paul Kane (winter 1846/summer 1847), Captain Wilson (1866), James Teit (1930), 36 Norman Lerman (1954), and William Elmendorf (1935). Archival records from the fur trade posts and publications by fur trade workers were also reviewed by Danaan for salmon distribution practices at the Kettle Falls fishery and other Okanagan Syilx fishery. David Thompson (1916) spent two weeks at the Kettle Falls fishery in 1811. His journals and notebooks are housed at the Province of Ontario Archives. Belyea (2007) published his field notes, which was examined for Okanagan Syilx fishery information; it contains information regarding the welcoming of guests and sharing of food. In their article, titled They Made Themselves our Guests (2005) Thomson and Ignace discuss the fur trade eras and the relationships and tensions between the Salish and fur traders and the later settlers as written in early journals and utilized the Laurier Memorial 1910 to illustrate a Salish Peoples point of view (albeit, as signatories of the letter, they identified themselves as separate tribes: Secwepemc, Okanagan Syilx and Nlakapmx). The authors chosen use of Salish as the grouping of those people in their article was a way to convey the similarities of the grouping of different language speakers of one language family. Through their use of fur trade journals the authors indicated that the Salmon Chief would not allow fur traders free access to the Kettle Falls fishery and that fur trader access to the fish was through trade alone. Another recent source important to address Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution research is Armstrong and Sam’s (2013) paper, Indigenous Water Governance and Resistance: a Syilx Perspective in which they discuss the difference in meaning between Canadian law and Okanagan Syilx law. Their discussion regarding the different meaning of law echoes the sentiment expressed by the Okanagan Syilx Chiefs as signatories to the Laurier Memorial (1910) and the Okanogan and Colville Chiefs and Headmen in their letter to the American President (1925). As discussed at the beginning of this section, two documents central to this research 37 were written or signed by Okanagan/Okanogan Chiefs. The first is The Memorial to Sir Wilfrid Laurier 1910 (Armstrong 1993/94, p. 109) signed by Okanagan Chiefs and second the American Okanogan Chiefs and headman’s 1925 letter to American President Coolidge (Raufer, 1966, p. 428) in which the respective Okanagan (north of the 49th parallel) and Okanogan (south of the 49th parallel) outline their point of view. Okanagan Syilx law is discussed in both letters. The two letters and the point of view guide my research and the understanding of Okanagan Syilx historic salmon distribution methods and its meaning and relevancy in the present. While the following visited and witnessed the Kettle Falls fishery and their subsequent writings may have contained some chronological information of relevance to this research they were too general in scope. These included: Simpson, Ogden, Cox (1832), Franchere, Missionaries 1830-1840’s (such as De Smet), Wilkes (1841), Stevens (1853) railroad surveys (1855) vol. 12, Reports of Commissioner of Indian Affairs (early 1850’s) and Ray (1932), (1939). 38 Figure 2. Armstrong et al. (1993/94) We Get our Living Like Milk From the Land. p. 8 39 Chapter 4: Methodology The privileging of the Okanagan Syilx in this research necessitated the utilization of Okanagan Syilx research tools and a whole system theory to answer the research questions in a manner relevant and useful to the Okanagan Syilx. The principal thesis question asks: What was Okanagan Syilx historic salmon distribution? The three research questions significant to the approach utilize Okanagan Syilx theory as an analytical tool, and therefore ultimately have the potential as a guide to forward an Okanagan Syilx research agenda. As well, the research provides example of an Okanagan Syilx ethical approach since it addresses questions and issues relevant from the Okanagan Syilx point of view. Furthermore, the research methodologies’ efficacy is directed at studying salmon distribution practices while answering the research questions regarding the dynamic between historic and contemporary Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution methods as supporting structures in their internal and external societal governance system. Approaching a research question relevant to the Okanagan Syilx requires a research framework and methodology with the ability to generate knowledge usable and relevant to the Okanagan Syilx. Smith (2008) in her seminal Indigenous research book deduces that two differences in purpose contrast Indigenous research from mainstream research. The first difference Smith argues is the importance of research for a society’s good as a facet of social responsibility; and second she considers the purpose of an Indigenous research agenda in contrast to scientific method research programs. “The elements that are different can be found in key words such as healing, decolonization, spiritual, recovery” as in an Indigenous research agenda (p. 117). In contrast, Smith asserts that scientific method research programs are biased and political in scope. 40 Kovach (2009) provides an excellent discussion regarding research purpose, situating its intrinsic default to “inherently center Western epistemology, thus manufacturing and reproducing Western epistemology as a normative standard within research” (p. 41). She furthers the notion that Western research frameworks can be modified and “adapted as structural forms that are helpful to the Indigenous researcher for allowing the entrance of visual, symbolic, and metaphorical representations of a research design that mitigates the linearity of words alone” (p. 41). Kovach’s thoughts make space for Indigenous research frameworks and methodologies that prioritize Indigenous epistemology’s visual, symbolic, and metaphorical representations. Her acknowledgement of the underlying Indigenous worldview modifications can be made to research frameworks and methodologies to best suit the research question. In other words, an Indigenous research framework will guide an Indigenous research methodology through parameters that support the research purpose. The approach to the research is historiographical in the selection of materials relevant to the topic. The analysis of materials is informed by a traditional Okanagan Syilx methodology, utilizing four aspects or analysis themes of Four Oppositional Dynamics. The Four Oppositional Dynamics situate four alignments that serve to organize materials in a living system by selectively examining polarized factors between tradition and change and between interdependence and independent action (see Figure 3 below). The research approach entailed analyzing written accounts in the literature selected relative to groupings under Traditions, Interdependence, and Innovations to correlate these three aspects relative to the thesis questions. The fourth theme, Action was utilized to deconstruct the materials organized into the first three themes to produce research findings reflecting differences between past and present practice. 41 For a research methodology to be pertinent to the needs of the Okanagan Syilx in academic use, modifications to a traditional enquiry method of the Okanagan Syilx were required to address the research questions. The talking circle and or focus group and the medicine wheel are two widely used research methods that share some parallel with what is commonly known as the Enowkinwixw Process by the Okanagan Syilx and is also called the Enowkinwixw Inquiry Tool or the Four Oppositional Dynamics as discussed in 4.1 and 4.2 below. The only parallel between the talking circle or focus group as well as the well-known medicine wheel and the Okanagan Syilx Enowkinwixw Process and Four Oppositional Dynamics is that they serve as an Indigenous research frameworks reflecting relational fields in a whole system through which to view the study topic. An important difference between the talking circle as well as the medicine wheel and enowkinwixw as an active process is a decision-making tool based in critical analysis founded inOkanagan Syilx captikwl. The Indigenous methodology in this research is directed by an underlying Indigenous theory and epistemology of the Syilx Okanagan that guided the research. Bridging the distance from conceptualizing an Indigenous research framework and methodology to creating an Okanagan Syilx research framework and methodology is an important aspect of this Okanagan Syilx approach. An Okanagan Syilx research framework and methodology as a process highlights the importance of studying the Okanagan Chiefs and Okanogan headmen’s letters of roughly a hundred years ago as relevant to the Okanagan Syilx in determining how practices of today have or have not changed. The motivating impetus for the Okanagan Chiefs in 1910 and Okanogan Chiefs and headmen in 1925 for drafting their respective letters to the Premier of Canada and the American President was to articulate their point of view. Their thoughts had to be written in a manner understandable to people that spoke 42 a different language from theirs and had a different corresponding worldview and epistemology. Unfortunately, the fundamental differences between the two peoples outlined in the letters have not been bridged in the intervening years since 1910 and 1925 when the letters were written. The Okanagan Syilx Chiefs and headmen’s objectives in writing the letters was for their point of view to be understood. Their goal is also my goal. Following Kovach’s ideas about Indigenous epistemologies’ this methodology makes space for the use of visual, symbolic, and metaphorical representations. 4.1 Enowkinwixw Process as a research framework Captikwl or cepcaptikwl serve as reminders to the Okanagan Syilx concerning how to live in the world. Armstrong (2012) explains it this way “captikwl conveys the Syilx people’s inextricable connection to the natural world and is fundamental to the dissemination of the Syilx environmental ethic” (p. 106). The captikwl are also understood in this way “The first law is to understand and to live in balance with the natural world. This first law has been put into the meanings in the cepcaptikwl” (Armstrong et al., 1993/94, p. 3). Two Okanagan Syilx cepcaptikwl central to this research are, How Coyote Broke the Salmon Dam (Dove, M., & Thresa, L 2007, p. 95) and How Food was Given (Okanagan Tribal Council, 2012, p. 9). These stories outline how the Okanagan Syilx came to have salmon and what is required for the people to have a consistent supply of salmon for food. The Four Food Chiefs storyline contains a procedure engaged as discussion that demonstrates a methodology by which to address the needs of the People-To-Be and is a guide for the Enowkinwixw Process in use by the Okanagan Syilx today. Inherent in the story is a step-by-step mechanics and procedure for decision-making for sustainability. In this summarized version of the captikwl, the four chiefs discussed how to feed the People-To-Be. The three 43 younger chiefs looked to Chief Bear for guidance. His solution was to offer himself and his people as food for the People-To-Be. The younger chiefs concurred and agreed with Chief Bear’s solution and also offered themselves and their people as food. The problem was how Chief Bear’s life and theirs would be renewed after being taken as food. Chief Bear did not immediately revive after offering himself. The people sang their songs of renewal but Chief Bear did not revive, until fly, known as a disturber, sang his song of honor and grief over Chief Bear not reviving and the song revived Chief Bear. As such, the four chiefs determined that the People-To-Be need to give thanks and honor each life offered to them and would always sing the Plant and Animal People’s renewal. Captikwl are told in the present as in earlier times and continue to serve as a reminder to the people to use the process that correlates and organizes information based in the Okanagan Syilx worldview and epistemology. The function of captikwl to the Okanagan Syilx are inherent cues in the Enowkinwixw Process. The Enowkinwixw Process when engaged as a facilitated discussion is a consensus driven decision-making framework whereby participants voice their thoughts and opinions about an issue to identify and collaboratively bring together their individual ideas toward achieving an agreed upon consensus for action. On the surface there is similarity between the Enowkinwixw Process and the sharing circle, talking circle or focus group research methods. However, a key difference for the utilization of the Enowkinwixw Process is that it is an Okanagan Syilx epistemology which, ensures and clarifies a collaborative transition in societal change dynamics. It is unique as an Okanagan Syilx methodology. Lavallee (2007) discusses her use of Indigenous knowledge guiding her research framework this way: “It is important to allow Indigenous knowledge to guide and shape the research framework. When we take traditional teachings and imbue them with theory from an Indigenous perspective, it becomes Indigenous theory and scholarship” (p. 44 132). Lavallee’s ideas guided the decision to engage the Enowkinwixw Process. Specifically, contemporary Okanagan Syilx adapted the captikwl dialogue process for discussions relevant to Okanagan Syilx needs of today. In the present, the Enowkinwixw Process is utilized by the Okanagan Syilx to engage community members as well as with non-Syilx in subject-based discussions to inform the development of policy toward appropriate actions. The Four Oppositional Dynamics form a progression in the undertaking of the Enowkinwixw Process, based on the dynamics of decision-making. For example, the Okanagan Nation Alliance and Okanagan Syilx communities have facilitated Enowkinwixw discussions for issues in health, governance, and education. The utilization and success of the Enowkinwixw Process to the Okanagan Syilx propelled its tailoring to become a tool using the Four Oppositional Dynamics in different forms by Okanagan Syilx scholars Armstrong (2012), Cohen (2010), Chenoweth (2017). 4.2 Enowkinwixw as inquiry tool Enowkinwixw situated as a research methodology has an identifiable method by which to answer and explain questions significant to the Okanagan Syilx. Armstrong’s use of the Enowkinwixw Oppositional Dynamics model (Armstrong, 2012, p. 181) and the Enowkinwixw Four Parts Nested View (Armstrong, 2012, p. 174) and Cohen’s Sqilxwlcawt Web of Learning (Cohen, 2010, p. 246) in their doctoral dissertations to frame and answer their research questions from an Okanagan Syilx point of view was accomplished within accepted academic research methods. For instance, Armstrong’s (2012) dissertation research methodology utilization of Enowkinwixw’s “Elder Voice, Youth Voice, Mother Voice, and Father Voice” is based on the respective “dynamic of oppositional interactions present in community which can be called on as a positive force of community sustainability rather than cast as being in competitive opposition” 45 (p. 190). In other words, the composite of Okanagan Syilx community is comprised of the four voices centered on a whole-system view of sustainability rather than opposition. In the same way, Cohen (2010) in his Enowkinwixw use of the four aspects illustrating Okanagan Syilx family structure, says: “The collective responsibility [to children, as the People-To-Be] is balanced by interdependent and cooperative relationships between 1) youth, 2) mothers, 3) elders, and 4) fathers” (p. 42). 4.3 Four oppositional dynamics: As research method The Four Oppositional Dynamics as a lens for contemporary study in this research is used to view the questions: what did the Okanagan Syilx do, pertaining to salmon distribution, in historical documents? How does the Okanagan Syilx distribute salmon in the present? What is missing from Okanagan Syilx protocols today? Information found in historical documents about salmon distribution practices in the 1800’s were juxtaposed with present day salmon distribution methods. The use of the Four Oppositional Dynamics also allowed room to account for the changes between earlier times’ and present day Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution. Most important, the process of research itself simultaneously illuminated Okanagan Syilx knowledge. The methodology employed for this research was a historiographical analysis informed by the aspects or themes of the Four Oppositional Dynamics process through the lenses of Traditions, Interdependence, Innovations and Actions configured to suit the purposes of this research. The transition from the Enowkinwixw Process to the specific Four Oppositional Dynamics features was required to address the parameters outlined in the research questions. The method entailed analyzing the data as they relate to Traditions, Interdependence, and Innovations. The fourth lens, Action, served to situate the data findings associated with either the past or the present practices. 46 The similarity between the Enowkinwixw Inquiry Tool and another Indigenous research method, the medicine wheel is that the two research tools use four quadrants and both recognize the importance of relationship as central to Indigenous epistemology. Clarkson, Morrissette, and Regallet (1992) state: “The medicine wheel in many contemporary Aboriginal societies continues to serve as a metaphor for this concept of balance among the political, social, economic and spiritual aspects of life” (as cited in Jeannotte, 2017, p. 203). “There are a variety of medicine wheels used by different tribes for different purposes” (Dapice, 2006, p. 251). However, it is important to point out that the medicine wheel’s four quadrants are different from the Enowkinwixw Inquiry Tool. Enowkinwixw is a way to view a whole system field through four lenses, including Tradition, Interdependence, Change, and Action. The four lenses are a way to construct oppositional dynamics for clarity. The Four Oppositional Dynamic fields are grounded in Okanagan Syilx captikwl and therefore, supersede any similarities between the two tools. The use of Enowkinwixw Process to inform the four quadrants transformed the medicine wheel quadrants from an Indigenous research method to an Okanagan Syilx research method. The Enowkinwixw Process requires participants to verbally state a non-adversarial action towards achieved consensus. So, in that way the actualizing of captikwl use of the teachings in the present is a way forward for the Okanagan Syilx to move in alignment with sustainability teachings. 4.4 Enowkinwixw: Four oppositional dynamics as research guide The Enowkinwixw four aspects as sets of characteristics guided the placement of information contained in the historical documents and are re-interpreted from the way they are used in the process of a facilitated dialogue. The following are descriptors of the Enowkinwixw four aspects as used within the Four Oppositional Dynamics to serve the research themes. 47 The central element of Tradition is situated as a theme or lens in understanding the importance of remembering those not-yet-born in decision-making by ensuring that the Okanagan Syilx future is guided by captikwl teachings. Tradition’s place in the oppositional dynamics model and in this research is organized in relation to the Okanagan Syilx teachings and their practical applications including spirituality expressed through ceremony, songs, and feasts. The principle characteristic of Interdependence is its distinctive focus on the health and needs of the individual as an aspect of good relationships that ensure community health. In this research, Interdependence is concerned with governance, community cooperative harvest practices, family regulated interactions, and collaborative protocols with other tribes. The core feature of Innovation as a focus, is the reality of new ideas create change and a need for adaption based in prior knowledge to inform adjustments required to accommodate new ways. However, in this research the Innovation aspect situates and examines change factors from introduced new beliefs, western education, colonial laws, and politically created boundaries including reservations in both historical and contemporary contexts. The distinguishing attribute of Action is concerned with accomplishing and implementing what is identified as needed for the individual, family, and community. For this research the Action aspect is used to situate past and present actions of the individual, family, and community related directly to salmon distribution. 4.5 Okanagan Syilx nested system: Parts to whole The Okanagan Syilx Nested System as a parts to whole view situates the individual, family, community, and tmixw place (the Okanagan Syilx land) in four nested circles. The individual is placed at the center with family, community, and tmixw place in separate circles, expanding outward from the individual. The Okanagan Syilx Nested System situates the Okanagan Syilx 48 social structure as a whole system in which all individuals form families and all families form community and all at each level interacts with tmixw place 4.6 Four oppositional dynamics: Research methodology The Okanagan Syilx Nested System served as the lens by which to answer the first two research questions. For example, to ask how the Okanagan Syilx individuals, families, and communities interacted at fishing stations at tmixw places the Okanagan Syilx Nested System worked to inform through the Four Oppositional Dynamics to illuminate the internal and external social and governance structures underpinning resource management and salmon distribution. The diagram Figure 3 is a visual representation of the Enowkinwixw Inquiry Tool as utilized in this thesis. The illustration is a way to visualize and imagine how the Four Oppositional Dynamics and the Okanagan Syilx nested view is a way to situate the dynamic of people interacting as a synergy powered by songs of thanks, by teachings of the Four Food Chiefs, by the physical presence of the tmixw place, and by the story laws of Coyote and kwulncutn (creator) as the actions of the people. 49 Figure 3. Visual representation of research methodology. Author adaption of Okanagan Syilx Nested System and Enowkinwixw: Inquiry Tool. As shown in the visual representation and discussed earlier the Enowkinwixw oppositional model’s aspects of tradition, interdependence, change and action are situated in relation individual, family, community and tmixw place together inform the research questions. Documents are viewed for tradition practices employed by Okanagan Syilx individuals, families, and communities, in tmixw locations. Documents are studied in regard to salmon distribution practices for information relevant to Okanagan Syilx traditions of spirituality, songs, ceremony, teachings, captikwl and feasts as practiced by Okanagan Syilx or that identify the tmixw place in both historic and contemporary times. A focus on historic Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution activities and practices in documents illuminate information relevant to the Okanagan Syilx. Inherent within Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution methods is a view of their governance structures. In this research Interdependence is situated to view the supporting social structures which underpin the Okanagan Syilx Nested System. The supporting social structures • Community • Tmixw place • Family • Individiual Tradi8on Interdependence Change Ac8on 50 are governance, community cooperatives, harvest practices, family regulated interactions, and collaborative protocols with other tribes or nations. The Four Oppositional Dynamics model aspect of Change in this research organizes changes from an Okanagan Syilx lens and acknowledges the legitimacy of their point of view as an alternative to the building of Canada as a narrative. An Okanagan Syilx view as an alternative to Canadian history is imperative to understanding social constructs founded on captikwl principles as a contemporary analysis of what is necessary for the present. Action in the Four Oppositional Dynamics functions as a way to focus the two points of time as historical and present practices. Utilizing two disparate time qualifiers allowed for resultant findings to be contrasted to each another and therefore to be discernible as results in the conclusions. Findings dated from the historical time point and present-day salmon distribution findings can be expanded upon to inform present-day Okanagan Syilx practice. In that way the Four Oppositional Dynamics are situated to produce conclusions that are relevant and useful to the Okanagan Syilx. 51 Chapter 5: Findings and Analysis: Okanagan Syilx Salmon Distribution In this chapter I outline the results of the research. In order to present the findings in a way that is relevant to the Okanagan Syilx I use the Four Oppositional Dynamics to create different lenses (relative to each) for the analysis, and further nest that analysis in Okanagan conceptions of place or tmixw place (which highlights a nested view of place, engaging the individual, family, community in place (the Okanagan Syilx Nested System). In this way my approach reflects the Syilx research process of enowkinwixw. Two documents written by Okanagan/Okanogan Chiefs, The Memorial to Sir Wilfrid Laurier 1910 (Armstrong et al., 1993/94, p. 109) delivered by Interior Chiefs, (including Okanagan Syilx) and American Okanogan and Colville Chiefs and Headmen’s 1925 letter (Raufer, 1966, p. 428) in which the respective Okanagan (north of the 49th parallel) and Okanogan (south of the 49th parallel) outline their respective points of view are relevant here. Close examination of the two letters using an Okanagan Syilx lens (guided by the Enowkinwixw Process and the Four Oppositional Dynamics) focused on their chosen wording demonstrates the continuity of the Syilx approach. The Okanagan Syilx Chiefs and Headmen’s words describe the social change experienced with the ending of the fur trade and the beginning of the settlement era. By the time ethnographies and early written works about the Syilx were produced social change had already occurred for the Okanagan Syilx and, therefore, observations or information regarding traditions “should not be thought of as “traditional” in the sense of representing a culture untouched by western contact” (De Dannan, 2002, p. 17). While her observation is true, it should not be overstated, as there is an ongoing continuity to Syilx culture and tradition. However my insistence of the importance of an Okanagan Syilx lens is not to romanticize Okanagan Syilx 52 historical culture, rather to insist on the continuing importance of teachings within Okanagan Syilx captikwl, in part by continuing to articulate them. The excerpts from their respective letters, the Okanagan Syilx leaders state their governance structures and laws are interdependent with their food, and therefore the continued renewal of the Okanagan Syilx and the plants and animals, demonstrate that they are directed by Okanagan Syilx laws as with captiwkl. They further that the bounty of the land was made for the people as a system of renewal. For example, in the Chief and Headmen’s Letter they state: The Indians were created here in this country, truly and honestly, and that was the time our rivers started to run. Then God put fish in the rivers, and he put deer and elk in the mountains and buffalo upon the plains, and roots and berries in the field, and God made laws through which there came the increase of fish and game. When the Creator gave us Indians life, we awakened and as soon as we saw the fish and the game we knew that they were made for us. (Raufer, 1966, p. 428) Their words explaining their relationship with the Plants and Animals as food and required renewal actions are also explained by the Four Food Chiefs captikwl. Another source, affirms their sentiment by saying that before fur traders came to the Okanagan Valley the Okanagan Syilx did not practice agriculture rather food came from hunting, fishing, roots and berries (Lerman, 1954, p. 199) Following are the research findings, organized in accordance to the enowkinwixw Four Oppositional Dynamics as informed by Okanagan Syilx Nested System and focused upon Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution. 5.1 Research findings: Tradition The following research findings are organized through the lens of Traditions. Under Traditions the findings are related to spirituality in ceremony, songs, and feasts conducted by individuals, family, community, at tmixw place. 53 In the Tradition aspect, individual preparation for good luck in fishing entailed spiritual and body purification as preparation: “Abstention from intercourse before hunting and fishing was considered desirable. The purity thus acquired as to be intensified by the taking of numerous sweat baths” (Mandelbaum, 1938, pp. 119). Sweat baths are a spiritual place to “wish” for good things, and has the ability to yield the good wishes (Wickwire and Robinson, 1980-1981). Okanagan Syilx people, sexual abstinence and sweat baths are both a physical and a spiritual purification preparatory action for individuals, to activate hunting and fishing success and continue into the contemporary. The Kettle Falls’ first-salmon ceremony and feast was an actualized and embodied spiritual practice that is founded on and affirms Okanagan Syilx governance. The Salmon Chief conducted the first salmon ceremony and did not allow fishing to begin until this ceremony was fulfilled (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1975, p. 10); the Salmon Chief was a member of the village or community at Kettle Falls, which is within the larger Okanagan Syilx territory. The large and important salmon fishery at Kettle Falls is considered a tmixw place, and the Salmon Chief of that tmixw place was integral to Okanagan Syilx governance. A descriptive source pertaining the Kettle Falls fishery, mentions the “guardian spirit” of the Salmon Chief as aiding the first salmon ceremony process (p. 9). A guardian spirit is acquired by an individual as a spiritual process, although in some cases family members’ aided one in the acquisition of a guardian spirit “concerned with fishing” (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1975, p. 9). The first salmon ceremony is most fully explained in the report, Utilization of fish by the Colville Okanagan Indian people (1975). The Salmon Chief directed the salmon ceremony with the first male and female king or Chinook salmon in the fish trap. A fish trap was placed above the falls at Nlhelhewikn (spearing on back) to catch the first salmon (p. 10). “It was the Salmon 54 Chief’s “guardian spirit” that caused these two fish to enter the trap” (p. 10). Young men past childhood aided in the repair and construction of the fish trap. Young women “cleaned the stone “kettles” in which the fish were boiled for the “first salmon ceremony”, called snxexe7iwlm or “special feast” (p. 10). The young women prepared the fish to be stone-boiled in the stone kettles. Then, the Salmon Chief “offered” the cooked salmon to the “great Chief” (p. 10). The cooked salmon was then divided into two, with one portion for women and one portion for men to provide the people present a “taste” of the first salmon. The village or community leaders partook first as they were seated around the Salmon Chief, and next were the people seated beyond (p. 10). Simultaneously to the salmon tasting, the Salmon Chief reminded the people that Coyote brought salmon up the Columbia River. Next, the Salmon Chief, asked the “salmon powers” for an “abundant run of salmon” while the salmon bones and remains were returned to the water. The person sharing the information was very clear that, the Salmon Chief was a “mediator” between the “salmon powers” and the people at the fishery and that offense to the Salmon Chief is “offense” to the fish and “place the salmon harvest in jeopardy” (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1975, p. 41). The Salmon Chief’s tasks were to maintain a peaceful existence between the different groups of people, and to regulate use of the limited fishing stations and to govern the Kettle Falls Fishery (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1975, p. 9). 5.2 Research findings: Interdependence Interdependence is a lens focused on governance, community cooperation, family related interactions, harvest practices and collaborative protocols. The Okanagan Syilx social constructs related to salmon distribution aides in understanding historic Okanagan Syilx governance that underpinned salmon distribution. 55 A recent Okanagan Syilx publication statement that historic salmon distribution was determined by the “high salmon chief at Kettle Falls” (Armstrong et al., 1993/94, pp. 11) builds upon the Salmon Chief role in the Tradition and tmixw place discussion. The high salmon chief Knkannaxwa (died 1896) determined how many fish were caught at the fishing station and salmon distribution (Armstrong et al., 1993/94, p. 11). Armstrong et al., also diagram the Okanagan Syilx Structure of the Governance System which illustrates the interrelationships from the Individual to the High Chief (p. 8) (See Figure 2.). Although the Salmon Chief is not explicitly depicted on the Okanagan Syilx governance system diagram, his position within the resource protection and trade-commerce position can be understood through this diagram. The Kettle Falls Salmon Chief position affirmed the Colville and larger Okanagan Syilx governance in the territory. “It was clearly understood, however, that the Colville Okanagan people had “control” of this fishery, before the Europeans came to this world” (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1975, p. 9). In addition, the Kettle Falls fishery is an example of a tmixw place in that it served as a place for the larger Okanagan Syilx to meet for food gathering and social activities. Groups gathered for fish at Kettle Falls included the neighboring groups of Okanagan Syilx (Miller, 1990, p. 100), (Anastasio, 1955, p. 43). The Kettle Falls fishery is a place for the neighboring nations or tribes to meet with the Okanagan Syilx/Colville and other neighboring tribes or nations (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1975, p. 9, Miller, 1990, p. 100, Anastasio, 1955, p. 44). The high salmon chief’s duty of salmon distribution at this place to all peoples gathered at the Kettle Falls is representative of a tmixw place that includes large fish camps, like the Kettle Falls camp. Consistent with the attributes of a tmixw place, is the Kettle Falls fishery’s immense size and importance was shown by the visitation and usage by neighboring nations or tribes. In other 56 words, the visitation by neighboring tribes or nations elevated the tmixw place in terms of governance tasks, as it was an international meeting location. 5.2.1 Community cooperation: Okanagan Syilx headmen The community cooperation focus related to salmon distribution is the process whereby the community formed as parts of the larger tribe or nation worked together for food acquisition, and then through distribution or sharing practices. Sources with information about community cooperation also discuss headmen for both fishing and hunting, however this discussion will focus upon fishing headman. Sources containing information about Okanagan Syilx headmen for fishing include Post (1938, p. 12), Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission (2000, p. 331), Bouchard and Kennedy (1975, pp. 35, 45), D.A. Ross (1957, p. 18) and the governance diagram showing natural resource headman by Armstrong et al., (1993/94, p. 8). The headman’s task was to manage and guide a larger group of people obtaining food together. Headman did not need a special “powers” for this role (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1975, p. 35). However, Post (1938) noted that upon arrival of families to help build the weir, the head man would mark a stick while he sang his power song, and placed it on the ground, to signify the beginning (p. 12) “The others also sing if they have power songs” (p. 12). Post also outlines the process of headmen or headwomen announcing and planning to build a fishing weir: The first step in the building of the weir is the announcement by a man (occasionally a woman) that he will build one at such a time and place. This announcement usually occurred at the winter dance. The news spread by word of mouth, in former times also by the speakers of the chief, whose permission had to be obtained by this “head man.” The two would talk over the plans in some detail, with the help of older men. (Post, 1938, p. 12) In that way the building of a weir was beyond a family endeavor or a group of families, and extended to a community, or to the nation as a tribal endeavor. The governance diagram 57 showing this relationship between the resource and headmen and villages or communities, and extended families is demonstrated in the publication, our Living Like Milk from the Land (Armstrong et al., 1993/94, p. 8). In the Okanagan Syilx governance diagram Trade & Commerce and Village-Chiefs are listed together, yet are identified as separate and are shown as above Resource Protection (identifying those who are resource protectors) and shows that these three social and governance components are also a point of convergence between the Village Chiefs and the Heads of Extended Families. The report Utilization of Fish by the Colville Okanagan Indian People mentioned the head fishermen involved tasks, however, with the name salmon-fishing organizer, twice within their report. The salmon-fishing organizer directed during the fishing season, the actual physical locations and utilized the labor of men, women and children, as shown in the following excerpt: A salmon-fishing organizer told people when to construct the river-weirs, and where to place it. As it required the assistance of many people, men, women and children, helped to build this [river] weir. Weirs were used to catch fish in areas…where the water is swift and shallow, and runs over a gravel-bed. (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1975, p. 45) The report gave further information about the salmon-fishing organizer, and outlined the fishing trap building this way “Construction of this [conical] trap required the assistance of many people. A man knowledgeable in trap construction, but possessing no special “powers” became the “salmon fishing organizer” and instructed the people in the building of the p’nip” (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1975, p. 35). The fishing methods utilized the conical trap, river weir and rock weir (p. 35). The cited information clarifies a key difference in the task differentiation between fishing headmen or salmon fishing organizer and the Salmon Chief. Another key difference between the fishing headmen or salmon fishing organizer and the Salmon Chief is their mode of 58 telling the people at fish camp that there is to be distribution. The salmon fishing organizer walked through camp informing people, while the Salmon Chief, hollered his readiness (p. 49). In the Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission (2000) report, an elder reported that a large group of people fishing simultaneously would place their caught fish in a pool of water, this would keep the fish fresh and would enable equal distribution between the people present. He explains, “Everybody stood around the head fisherman, if there was a lot of fish he would just start to give a bucketful to everyone around him, he knew how many children each family had so he fed them accordingly” (Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission, 2000, p. 331). Shown in this extract, the head fisherman ensured that the fish caught were placed in the pool for equitable sharing and would ensure that the fish stayed fresh. Another source discussing head fisherman, also identified a head hunter, and stated that every community had one of each as both roles were important as, half protein food sources came from meat hunted and half from fish (Ross, 1957, p. 18). Another cultural expert says, that each tribe had both a head huntsman and fisherman and fish “are divided equally among all, even though a person may not have fished. Fish division [was done] by [the] head fisherman (1954, p. 10). Further clarity about salmon headman distribution is again likened to hunting distribution. In groups hunts: The chief divides the deer in equal parts for all the people out hunting. Fishing is the same. Fish from [the] traps [is] divided by [the] headman among all [of] the families in the group. If one family is bigger then it gets more [fish]. (Lerman, 1954, pp. 58-59) Task similarities between headmen for fishing and headmen for hunting are linked to their knowledge and respective to the tasks as social and governance positions. Food distribution as a communal cooperative activity of fishing and hunting was mentioned by the respective works of Post (1938), Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission (2000), Bouchard and Kennedy (1975), D.A. Ross (1957), Lerman (1954) and the governance diagram showing natural resource 59 headman in Armstrong et al., (1993/94, p. 8). Despite the variances in hunting and fishing headmen responsibilities, there was a need to differentiate between the position of Salmon Chief and community fishing headmen roles. 5.2.2 Harvest practices The following summarizes personal fishing knowledge and witnessed accounts of fishing apparatus use to inform a general outline of harvest practices at Okanagan Syilx fishing stations or camps. Fishing methods and tools were determined for the geography of the fishing station and by water levels as shown in the following excerpt: Salmon were caught by various methods, depending on the season and the status of the fisherman. In the shallows they used spears, standing on the rocks or wading (no platforms were known); in certain favored positions weirs and traps were built; at waterfalls small dip nets were operated by hand. Large nets may have been used at the falls near Oroville. (Post, 1938, p. 12) The information outlined the knowledge gained from direct experiential fishing with the tools and methods at hand. An eyewitness account by an employee during England and the United States boundary work wrote about fishing tools and made an interesting distinction between the Okanogan River and the Columbia River. Captain Wilson wrote that stone work fish runs, weirs, hook and line, and baskets traps were used to catch fish. His writing mentions both the “Okinagan River” and the Columbia River. Captain Wilson reported that on the “Okinagan River” a willow weir was used to catch salmon, and on the Columbia River at Kettle Falls a “wicker basket” (trap) was used to catch salmon (1866, p. 297). As explained above by Spier, geography and water levels determined appropriate fishery methods for success. This was re-affirmed by Bouchard and Kennedy who mention that the lowering of water levels at the first falls at Kettle Falls fishing camp caused the first falls’ cessation, and as a result the trap was 60 moved to another part of the Kettle Falls and the location became ideal for harpooning salmon (1975, p. 41). 5.2.3 Family related interactions Information sources regarding family related interactions at Okanagan Syilx fisheries were situated as female and males tasks. The tasks assigned to men and to women as noted by Wilson (1866) correlate with and the following excerpt by Mourning Dove (Miller, 1990), in which she relays her remembrance of family related interactions during the Columbia River fishing season explained as husband and wife tasks. The summer was spent alternating between berry picking in the hills and taking salmon in the rivers. When the salmon ran in the Columbia and its tributaries, a family divided up for different tasks. The husband speared, netted, and trapped the fish while the wife was busy cutting them up in thin slices and curing them on drying racks in the sun. (pp. 65-66) Similar to Mourning Dove’s memories of Kettle Falls, activities were noted by Captain Wilson (1866) in earlier times. He is a useful source inasmuch as he verified that after the fish were caught, dispatched, and distributed the women cut and processed the fish (p. 298). Further, information regarding male and females tasks while community fishing is outlined in the Okanagan Nation Alliance fisheries report (2000). The Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission (2000, p. 331) contains interview transcripts of an elder who is clear regarding the catching and processing of fish related to male and female tasks. The elder explains that the male’s task was the catching of the fish, its cutting and processing was a female task. He emphatically stated that the male did not touch the fish after he caught it (p. 331). 61 5.2.4 Collaborative protocols with other tribes Collaborative protocols with other tribes or nations refers to the Colville people’s established relationships that allowed neighboring nations or tribes to share in the salmon from Kettle Falls and to identify the process by which salmon was distributed or shared with them. Four sources offer tribal or nation names of groups that visited and received salmon from the Kettle Falls fishery to illustrate the collaborative protocols with other tribes. One source named visiting tribes or nations as Kalispel, Spokane, Coeur d’Alene, Flathead, Okanogan, Sanpoil, Squant, and Wenatchi (Miller, 1990, p. 100). Anastasio, called the tribes or nations that attended the Kettle Falls fishery, the Colville task grouping, which included: Colville, Spokane, Coeur d’Alene, Kalispel, Sanpoil, Nespelem, Sinkaietk, Methow, Chelan, Okanogan and Lakes (1955, p. 43). He maintained that the Colville were the “focal group” through their “being in charge” of the fishery and as “sedentary traders”. He further explains that the Colville maintained a trade role in “intergroup relations (p. 43). Also, Anastasio (1955) maintained that the most important relations between Plateau people were those in adjacent proximity and were linked by “intermarriage, co–utilization of resource and settlement sites, cooperation in various tasks, alliances for war, and intergroup ceremonies” (p. 42). In addition, Anastasio provided an example that members of the task grouping had an interest in the settlement of disputes in intergroup relations. “Douglass reports that a Sinkaietk chief who had offered to act as a guide for him could not leave Kettle Falls until a dispute between the Kutenai and the Lakes had been settled” (Anastasio, 1955, p. 44). Anastasio’s findings point to the underlying governance structures that Okanagan Syilx historic salmon distribution required and utilized. His highlighting that the Colville Task Grouping directed the fishing and trading at the Kettle Falls fishery underlines that Nation-to-Nation dispute resolution 62 or International governance occurred at the fishery. Anastasio’s works explain the Colville Task Grouping at the Kettle Falls fishery and explains salmon distribution in a manner that focuses on the Western Salish peoples, which includes the Kettle Falls fishery. Although he rarely differentiates the Northern Okanagan in the Colville Task Grouping, they are mentioned. The third source specifically mentions the Spokane tribe and more generally “several other groups,” however, it is stated clearly that “Colville Okanagan had “control” of this fishery” (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1975, p. 9). The collaborative protocols included the acceptance of the “control” of Kettle Falls fishery and the concept of “being in charge” of the Kettle Falls fishery can be better understood from the following explanation about neighboring nations or tribes through the Okanagan Syilx and the Secwepemc (Shuswap). “Okanogans and Shuswap could go into each other’s territories but if [an] Okanogan [was] in Shuswap territory he was under jurisdiction of Shuswap chief and vice versa” (Lerman, 1954, p. 30). This information concerned with visiting neighboring tribes involving the protocol of being under the hosting nation or tribal jurisdiction is affirmed by Mourning Dove. The protocol is described by Mourning Dove in regard to the camping places of visiting tribes, the sharing of fish, and the host communities’ governance at Kettle Falls’ fishery. Tribes generally camped in specific areas, and Colville hospitality saw to it that no visitor ever left without a full load of dried salmon. The Colville camped on both sides of the falls to oversee the fishing. The east side encampment included the Kalispel, Spokan, Coeur d’Alene, and Flathead, while on the west side were the Okanogan, Sanpoil, Squant, and Wenatchi. (Miller, 1990, p. 100) Mourning Dove’s information about camping places of visiting nations or tribes clearly demonstrates s that a collaborative protocol existed at the fishery. One centered on Colville Okanagan hospitality, whereby visitors left the fishery with salmon. The Colville Okanagan 63 governance responsibility as Kettle Falls’ fishery hosts was maintained and ensured through their occupation of the site and their camp’s proximity to both the river and their guests. 5.2.5 Salmon distribution protocols Three sources explain the Kettle Falls process of distribution of food and a further source correlates the salmon distribution and sharing practices with hunting distribution and sharing practices. The following account describes the Kettle Falls Salmon Chief’s salmon distribution to families present: One blow on the head from their practiced hands settles the account of each fish, which is then thrown out on the rocks and carried to the general heap, from which they are portioned out to the different families every evening by a man known as the ‘salmon chief,’ when the squaws take them in hand for splitting and drying. (Captain Wilson, 1866, p. 298) Wilson’s account is informative about the practical aspects Kettle Falls salmon procurement, processing, and distribution. Another source, from a first hand experience at Kettle Falls’ fish station, outlines salmon distribution and the underlying values related to salmon distribution sharing. Mourning Dove says: Periodically, the salmon that had been caught were gathered into a big heap under the shade of the cliffs. There a man called the divider or Salmon Tyee took charge of giving the fish to all the campers according to the size of the family in each lodge. It was equally divided among all, both workers and visitors, regardless of how much labor they had put in, every day at noon and dusk. Everyone got an equal share so that the fish would not think humans were being stingy or selfish and so refuse to return. The divider that I remember best was named See-pas. (Miller, 1990, p. 101) Mourning Dove’s description situates the Salmon Chief’s salmon distribution method as based upon the fish knowing the people were not being selfish or stingy with food fish. Her statement regarding an equal share for visitors and their people despite the amount of work is indicative of a form of social and governance serving both internal and external components and is reflective of an Okanagan Syilx tmixw place protocol. The internal and external components of 64 governance centered on the Salmon Chief, and a major fishery in a process including neighboring nations or tribes and the salmon distribution sharing are elements of a tmixw place. The following source reiterates Mourning Dove’s information regarding salmon distribution to the people and provided further description this way: “Although it is believed that there were special “rights” (see section 6c. p. 37) governing the use of the traps at the Kettle Falls fishery, the proceeds were distributed equally among the people who traditionally came there” (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1975, p. 11). “At the Kettle Falls fishery, the traps were emptied at least three times a day” (p. 50). Furthermore, the report provides in-depth information of the actual salmon distribution process in that the Salmon Chief directs his helper in the process of sharing (p. 50). A line would form with each person representing their family; each person would receive a fish until the stone holding pen was emptied (p. 50). Later in the day, at the next fish trap distribution, people would reoccupy their position in the line as from the earlier distribution, and the helper would commence distribution from its earlier ending (p. 50). A member of the community and one who had experienced and actively engaged in the Kettle Falls fishery shared the source of information regarding salmon distribution process. As well, the report, Utilization of fish by the Colville Okanagan Indian People clarified that there was difference between “salmon fishing organizer” distribution of salmon and the Salmon Chief’s distribution of salmon In two sources that further describe Okanagan Syilx food distribution practices, one echoes the Salmon Chief’s salmon distribution method and one deviates from it. The first source shares information about animal food sharing within a community. It is stated by an Okanagan Syilx chief who shared, that all “animals” killed were divided equally between community households (Ross, 1957, p. 18). Furthermore, the Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission (2000) report and 65 Lerman (1954) both outline fish distribution by a head fisherman to numerous families. They agree that, head fisherman would distribute fish according to how many children the family had to feed and would distribute appropriately (p. 331). The variance between the two distribution methods is seemingly disparate, however, the people receiving the food is the key factor. For example at Kettle Falls the Salmon Chief ensured an equal share was distributed between the people, the visitors and the workers alike and the head fisherman distributed fish between community families according to the number of children requiring food. The underlying agreement between the two distribution methods is the sharing of food to feed families and the apportioning process stems from the difference between a community fishery and a tmixw place fishery. Information from earlier quoted sources (Post, 1938) mention different fisherman “status” that at the lowering of Kettle Falls’ water levels there was created a harpooning fishing location, however, this is beyond the scope of this research but required acknowledgement. The salmon distribution differences between the Salmon Chief and Headmen point to the strict protocols of distribution and sharing of salmon being based in astute awareness of who is receiving the food. 5.3 Research findings: Change The aspect of Change is concerned with new beliefs or introduced new practices including education, laws, created boundaries, and reservations and their impacts on the individual, family, community and tmixw place as each relates to salmon distribution. In the present, examination of the Okanagan Syilx Change in regard to the research included the school system; the development of Canadian and American governance systems; the implementation of the Canada-U.S. border; the creation of the reserve system and the Indian Act. 66 Mary Balf (1978), in her synopsis of Interior Salish or Plateau history ponders the change brought by missionaries and the disruptions caused by the gold rush. Balf theorizes that fifty more years of the fur trade and corresponding good relationships between Syilx and fur trade society could have produced a “happy Indian-white society” (p. 6). However, she continues, “with the formation Colony of British Columbia in 1858 brought an end to the HBC trade monopoly, and the loose form of government practiced by them and the Indian tribes was replaced, in effect by English law” (p. 8). This is a sentiment first expressed by the Okanagan/Okanogan Chiefs in their letters, 5.3.1 Laws One view of Okanagan Syilx laws is framed as the fishing station conventions that have been discussed above. These conventions regulate social conduct and are socially agreed upon and accepted. The Okanagan Syilx view for salmon distribution apparent through the literature research identified several conventions that were generally agreed upon. People were not allowed to fish until after the Salmon Chief conducted the first salmon ceremony and he also identified people to aide him in the ceremony. These practices were accepted convention. In addition, he determined the salmon distribution process and his helper proceeded as directed. Mourning Dove added further information about conventions from her direct experience at the fishery, as a female. Any female water related task like, gathering water, washing clothes, bathing or sweat lodge would scare the fish and they would never return (Miller, 1990, pp. 104-105). For this reason, “water for human use could only be taken below the falls” and was only gathered in the “early morning or in the evening, since women stayed well away from the fisherman during the day” (Miller, 1990, p. 104). She also says, “Many were the strict regulations governing my people during the fishing season” (p. 104). It was strictly against the 67 rules during fishing season for anyone to take water from above the falls or otherwise pollute the area (p. 104). The men’s sweat lodge was above the falls (p. 105) and the “Women’s sweat lodge were about a half mile below the falls and were used after spearing for the day had stopped. As well, fish innards were disposed by burying in the ground to ensure their scent did not reach the fish and to ensure their distance from dogs and menstruating women (p. 104). Furthermore, women also did not touch fishing instruments: “None of this fishing gear was ever touched or made by women, because they were classed as unclean mortals by the men” (Miller, 1990, p. 101). As well, no fishing was allowed on Sundays “by orders of Chief Kinkanawah of the Colvile” so many people went to church (p. 105) and in the afternoon the men went to council in the Chief’s lodge (p. 107) and the women and children swam below the falls, looked for tanning rocks, visited or played games (Miller, 1990, p. 105) Another informed source spoke about Okanagan Syilx laws and conventions about the attendance of women at a community fishery. He maintains that women at any age, by law were not allowed on the fishing locations, whether at dams or on a creek, and they needed to camp below the fishery. He also clarified that older women, past menopause could fish (Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission, 2000, p. 331). Another law mentioned as an example related to other fishing practice was the prohibition of making a fire on ice (Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission, 2000 p. 332). Also, he outlined expected conduct and explains that with numerous people ice fishing, once the fishing hole was made in the ice, no talking, unneeded walking or “anything” occurs between fishing people because “those fish are quite wild” (p. 332). These statements could be construed as solely practical knowledge regarding fish behavior and thus what was required to attain them 68 as food, however, in light of the overall research findings related to wider reasons for traditional custom, there is obviously further explanation. 5.4 Action: Captikwl teachings: Informing/Working with western science Knowledge of captikwl aided in understanding the Okanagan Syilx relationship with the Okanagan River salmon. Okanagan Syilx oral histories served as reminders to the people of teachings regarding how to live in their world. For instance, the cepcaptikwl How Coyote Broke the Salmon Dam (Mourning Dove & Long Thresa, 2007, p. 95) published by the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (CCT) and How Food was Given (Okanagan Tribal Council, 2012, p. 9) both contain teachings regarding how plants and animals gave themselves willingly as food to the people. In trade for their sacrifice, people give thanks to the food and adhere to food harvesting protocols and laws of “restricted use of resources through supervision by certain band groups or families” (Vedan, 2002, p. 7). Okanagan Syilx people from most communities shared their personal and family knowledge through interviews with ONA fisheries staff to inform their salmon restoration work. In 1997 low salmon numbers available for food, drove the Okanagan Syilx to establish the Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission (ONFC). The ONFC, in the following year wrote the report Okanagan Nation Fisheries Losses. In 1999, the Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission hired Ernst to research and write, Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission Dam Research and in 2000, Aboriginal Fisheries Information within the Okanagan Basin. The Aboriginal Fisheries report is a 360 page final report consisting of qualitative interviews conducted with Okanagan Syilx people from each of the seven communities. The information from the interviews informed the development of a seasonal round calendar of Indigenous knowledge of fisheries including locations, healthiness, and native fish varieties. Thereafter, the Okanagan Nation 69 Fisheries Commission with Vedan wrote an article outlining the importance of aboriginal knowledge to western science. In their article, Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission and Vedan, titled Traditional Okanagan Environmental Knowledge and Fisheries Management (2002) articulate the “…value of combining aboriginal traditional knowledge with western science” (p. abstract). The ONFC’s recognition of captikwl responsibilities in the present is shown through the following excerpt “Today, fisheries management is now attempting to incorporate traditional knowledge because of the demand for environmental sustainability and to include the people who are affected by and use these resources” (Vedan, 2002, p. 3). In the early decade of 2000’s the Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission changed their name to the Okanagan Nation Alliance Fisheries Department (ONAFD). The name change identified the beginning of the development of an Okanagan Syilx scientific program utilizing Indigenous knowledge for salmon restoration. In writing about past education methods, Mourning Dove gives two examples of Okanagan Syilx teachings. Her explanations intertwine the role of the individual guardian spirit in combination with training by an elder possessing in-depth knowledge of tribal teachings. Mourning Dove explains, “While the power and the guidance for a career came from a spirit, it was the elders, learned in these tribal traditions, who provided the fine points of usage and established the social context for approved practice” (Miller, 1990, p. 37). She further explained teaching and the role of the whole Okanagan Syilx family to the individual as a role of educating young people for what is needed to live and added that: “The orphan has no education, schooling, or advice to become a great person” (Miller, 1990, p. 37). Education and teaching as explained by Mourning Dove outlined understanding the interdependence of spirituality as guidance the importance of tribal teachings in captikwl as preparation for healthy adulthood. 70 In conclusion, the research findings regarding Okanagan Syilx historical salmon distribution show two different methods of apportioning salmon. The two methods are clearly founded on an accepted relationship between the people and salmon. The relationship outlined by the two captikwl guides the process through which the Okanagan Syilx obtained salmon to eat. The Okanagan Syilx people’s embodied principles demonstrated in salmon ceremony, and in feasts and other expression of spirituality represented by Traditions and shown through salmon distribution and sharing in earlier times as conveyed through the various ethnohistorical literature reviewed continues into the present. The aspect of Interdependence in the expressions of governance, community cooperatives, harvest practices, family regulated interactions and collaborative protocols with other tribes were displayed in the internal and external societal and governance activities that supported Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution practices. The aspect of Innovation in the experiences of Change to new beliefs, introduced and new practices, education, laws, created boundaries including borders and reservations in relation to the present were a part of colonization. Rather than discussing colonization, the research aims to be oriented toward understanding the process through Okanagan Syilx Action. Action’s past and present has thus far focused mainly on the past. The Actions of the present focuses on the return of salmon and reviews the process of development that hindered salmon’s continual healthy return. The following excerpt, by Mourning Dove is an excellent closure and accurately represents the purpose of this research: The fate and well being of the future depended on how people treated the fish. In return, the fish indicated what kind of seasons we could expect. Before the bad winter of 1892-93, people knew to expect hardship because the salmon runs were plentiful and the fish had a thick skin. Nonetheless, we very much enjoyed boiling and eating those red, fat, juicy king salmon. The old people liked to drink the soup made from boiling the fish. (Miller, 1990, p. 101) 71 Her message is relevant in the present, as a guide for the Okanagan Syilx to remember our relationship with salmon as outlined within captikwl. 72 Chapter 6: Analysis and Conclusions The approach to utilize a mixed method research framework to answer research questions was organized to bring conclusion to research findings relevant to the Okanagan Syilx. The theorizing of a Syilx Okanagan historical context was situated to support the assertion of an Indigenous research framework with the recognition and understanding that there exists a multitude of Indigenous epistemologies in the world. For this research, situating the Okanagan Syilx history as a chronology from the past to the present framed through an enquiry lens within the captikwl was required to provide a more accurate context for the purpose of the thesis. The acknowledgement of the Okanagan Syilx temporal sequence provided a way to bring to light the profound and on-going relationship between the Okanagan Syilx people and the environment. A mixed-method research approach that allowed for the incorporation of Okanagan Syilx thought as an imperative to guide and to develop the research findings toward conclusion was integral for an analysis relevant and useable to the Okanagan Syilx people. The adaption and tailoring of a medicine-wheel research method found in Okanagan Syilx thinking focused the research questions and examined a subject of specific and sole interest to the Okanagan Syilx. Identifying an Okanagan Syilx alternative to a Canadian view of history was a core intent toward building an understanding of the social constructs that originate in captikwl and have implications for serving Okanagan Syilx purposes in the present. The research findings identified historical Okanagan Syilx internal and external societal as well as governance structures and activities that underpinned salmon distribution and resource management in the past. The research framework included a literature search and the use of the Enowkinwixw Process, which was modified to allow two distinct research lenses. The Okanagan Syilx Nested 73 System and the Four Oppositional Dynamics lenses were engaged as a way to assert that captikwl continues to be significant for the Okanagan Syilx. The Okanagan Syilx Nested System’s practical application as a methodological approach applied a lens of relational fields moving outward from the individual to family and community in the tmixw place. The features of the Four Oppositional Dynamics were used to explore themes related to traditions, relationships, innovations, and actions in both historical and contemporary information. The resonance between the two methodological approaches were appropriate as a way to organize the research findings through three of the themes including Traditions, Relationships and Innovations. Examination of documents through an Okanagan Syilx lens for information regarding salmon distribution for findings assisted in theorizing the Okanagan Syilx societal and governance systems and their mechanics. The Action theme was engaged as a lens concerned with identifying what was historically deemed necessary to meet the needs of individual, the family, and community. The process was focused on research findings that would have relevance in the present and would inform the Okanagan Syilx on the importance of a salmon distribution authority that could strengthen governance assertions into the future. 6.1 Research question 1: Analysis Research question one asked: what are the social and governance structures that underpinned and supported Syilx historical resource management and distribution? The research findings support the following analysis and conclusions. Okanagan social and governance structures that underpinned and supported historic resource management and distribution were components that are comprised of a process of authority displayed in the idea of an Okanagan Syilx Nested System and a governance structure 74 as explained by Armstrong et al. (1993/94, p. 8). The Okanagan Syilx Nested System is a visual representation of the Okanagan Syilx social structure with identifiable components of the social system displayed as individual, family, community, and tmixw place. The governance structure, which extended from the individual, family, and community through to the High Chief, underpinned and supported the resource management and distribution of salmon. The recognition of the Salmon Chief’s authority at tmixw places like the Kettle Falls fishing station and the headman’s authority at smaller fishing stations confirmed the structure as an aspect of governance. Community leaders’ roles and formal seating protocols at the Kettle Falls First salmon ceremony supported the Salmon Chief ‘s role, as did the custom of community headman or headwomen announcing their plans to build a fishing weir during the public winter dance. Importantly, the men’s Sunday meetings documented at Kettle Falls as a dispute resolution discussion indicated that governance indeed occurred, albeit there are no specific mention of topic or the process used. The two Okanagan Syilx visual schematic indicating the social and governance structures are confirmed as the foundational structures for historical resource management and distribution. As well, that the two structures shared components of Enowkinwixw provided affirmation of the findings of levels of governance authority for salmon distribution for community as well as for intertribal purposes. 6.2 Research question 2: Analysis Research question number two asked: what were the changes that impacted Syilx historic access and activities and how did they evolve into modern day governance policy and reservation politics and result in governance law and historic tenets that are now missing? The research findings support the following analysis and conclusions. 75 Okanagan Syilx historic salmon distribution and resource management from its internal and external components and aspects of social and governance activities in salmon distribution practices were examined through intersections between the foundational structures of the Okanagan Syilx Nested System as a social construct and the traditional governance structure. The two structures’ individual aspects and the interactions contained therein provided a way to view the internal and external Okanagan Syilx social and governance mechanics. The Okanagan Syilx historical aspects of social and governance activities in salmon distribution practices required examination of salmon distribution to discern the internal social and governance structural workings. The findings illuminated that the distribution protocols of the Salmon Chief through the salmon ceremony and the headman and headwomen salmon-sharing practices through community cooperatives are governance tools insuring an equitable and peaceful access to the salmon resource. As well, findings showed that the same structures that served internally also had external functions. External societal and governance structures included the authority of the Salmon Chief through the tmixw place distribution protocols with other tribes and confirmed knowledge of tribal tenets related to the existence of an external governance procedure. Findings also confirmed a different internal configuration embodied by a host community in larger fisheries with a Salmon Chief and that of a headman or headwomen in the community cooperatives of smaller fisheries in distribution methods. Findings also confirmed equitable salmon distribution and sharing did occur in both through protocols situated as the governance structure. As shown in the literature, despite their different salmon distribution methods, the Salmon Chief and headman operated within accepted governance conventions. The Salmon Chief’s distribution was an absolute accurate equal amount to everyone present. No information was found regarding a process whereby local people fished for themselves after the first salmon 76 ceremony took place. At smaller fisheries the distribution by headmen had two variances, one was an equal division among all people present and in the second the distribution amounts to people was based on family size. The latter practice can be understood to display that the headman knew the size of families and based their apportionment accordingly. The variance underscoring the difference between the Salmon Chief’s and the headmen salmon distribution methods is that although both were premised on generosity of food, a political governance benefit is inferred with the strict equality to neighboring tribal visitors and in community fisheries an internal stability as a desired advantage is insured by distribution based on the knowledge of family size and hence their food needs. A shared aspect common to all levels of the Okanagan Syilx structures is the individual in their central role of governance. Research findings showed that Okanagan Syilx individuals participated in sweat baths, sexual abstinence, used power songs, and sought the guidance of spirit power as a normalized practice in all food harvesting. Individuals form families and families form communities that participate together in the governance of food acquisition. As families they lived together and gathered food together, and observed internal laws related to gender roles, family roles, and community roles in fishing tasks. Furthermore, the social structures’ and interactions, as shown in the Okanagan Syilx Nested System and in the governance structure, echoes and affirms the relevance and the strength of the Enowkinwixw Process as a governance tool originating in captikwl. 6.3 Research question 3: Analysis Research question number three asked: how can understanding both historical and contemporary Syilx distribution methods facilitate and improve contemporary management of Syilx salmon distribution practice? Research findings support the following analysis and conclusions. 77 Understanding historical salmon distribution methods has practical applications in the present can inform other Okanagan Syilx interests. The primary practical application in the present is governance related to the distribution of Okanagan salmon since it’s return to the Okanagan River. The salmon have returned after almost a hundred years of being obstructed from returning to their original spawning places. Present distribution practices of the returned Okanagan River salmon is that they are shared or divided based on an equal division between each band of the Okanagan Nation Alliance, excluding the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Nation since they harvest salmon prior to their reaching the Canada-U.S. border. As a result of the disproportionate populations among the Okanagan Syilx communities it is inequitable that communities with disparate populations are receiving an equal number of salmon to feed their populations. The findings confirm that historical salmon distribution methods can better inform present day management practice in salmon distribution for equity between communities and sustainability. Knowledge of historical salmon distribution as a foundation for salmon and land sustainability would strengthen and inform contemporary social cohesion and sustainable governance mechanics. Further, practical applications of historic Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution knowledge could inform revenue sharing and the sharing of resource management responsibilities as reinterpreted from confirmed practices of Chiefs and headmen in the research examined. Recently the Okanagan Nation Alliance staff, directed by the Chiefs Executive Council, developed a revenue sharing model. The revenue sharing model put forward has been ratified by all but one Okanagan Syilx community at this writing. The major stumbling block to developing a unanimously agreed upon model was an equitable revenue sharing model reflecting population differences. The salmon distribution research can inform the development of better revenue 78 sharing models premised on Okanagan Syilx captikwl tenets founded on the principle recognizing the needs of individuals and families. Salmon distribution can inform all resource management practices in that it is Okanagan Syilx knowledge from captikwl informing resident peoples’ interactions with the land in the responsibility to maintain a healthy Okanagan Syilx landscape. The wealth of the Okanagan landscape is foremost to be preserved as confirmed in the findings as an essential spiritual relationship between the Okanagan Syilx and the land. Research findings support that historical salmon distribution was supported by a spiritual relationship including the ceremonial protocols for band or community and inter-nation sharing, which helped to ensure health and wellbeing for the land and the people. The research approach to the research question was guided by the intent of understanding and articulating the Okanagan Syilx point of view. Understanding and articulating the Okanagan Syilx point of view also included examining their relationships with other Interior Salish tribes and nations prior to colonization. Their governance relationships important for the land and the future is central as confirmed in the two letters written by Okanagan Chiefs and Headmen. The two letters by the Okanagan Syilx leadership in 1910 and 1925 form a precise perspective as does the Laurier Memorial as representative of the larger Interior Salish grouping of tribes including Okanagan Chiefs and the Okanogan and Colville Chiefs and headmen. As well, the intent of the research was not a survey of information but to source information for the purpose of answering the research questions to inform present governance of the Syilx Okanagan fisheries. 79 6.4 Summary conclusions A deliberate decision was made to frame the research through an Okanagan Syilx perspective of a living culture rather than as a process of Okanagan Syilx decolonization. However, the same objectives are realized in the process. Framing the research from an Okanagan Syilx perspective does not allow colonization as an idea to enter the research beyond acknowledgement. Colonization as a process is real and continuous and was acknowledged in its effects of change factors as a part of theorizing a historical context for the research so that it did not taint the research analysis in process. In the examination of the research questions and the findings related to each, the researcher decided to separate the change theme from the findings related to governance structures and aspects of salmon distribution practices in the past and present in the thesis research. Manageability of the findings and delving into or writing about colonization was not required. Finally, a recognized limitation of this research project is the inability to gather all sources regarding historic Okanagan Syilx salmon distribution information. As well, the intent of the research was not a survey of information but to source information for the purpose of answering the research questions to inform present governance of the Syilx Okanagan fisheries. The research goal of identifying salmon distribution as a process of internal development of the Okanagan Syilx is a recognition of the relevance and importance of the Okanagan Syilx worldview through an understanding of history from their perspective. While, contemporary Okanagan nation building is a process of decolonization it is inherently founded upon the revitalization of an Okanagan worldview within captikwl. The findings demonstrate that Okanagan Syilx culture has never been stagnant and has evolved with foundational tenets from captikwl as its anchor. Therefore, we can conclude that the captikwl are as integral in the present day as a guiding force for both Okanagan Syilx decolonization and Indigeneity as they were in 80 the past. The decolonization discourse and the movement informed by Indigeneity is a global narrative, as a way to resist, shed and eradicate the colonization experience. The relevance and importance of decolonization and re-indigenization as a process of reclaiming of Indigeneity by the Okanagan Syilx people is inherently central to this research conclusion. 81 References Anastasio, A. (1955). Intergroup. relations in the southern plateau. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Chicago, Chicago, IL. Armstrong, J. (2012). Constructing Indigeneity: Syilx Okanagan oraliture and tmixwcentrism (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Katalog Der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek. (d-nb.info/1027188737/34) Armstrong, J., Derickson, D., Maracle, L., & Young-Ing, G. (Eds.). (1993/94). We get our living like milk from the land. Penticton, BC: Theytus. Armstrong, J., & Sam, M. (2013). Indigenous water governance and resistance: A Syilx perspective. In J. Wagner (Ed.), The social life of water (pp. 239-253). New York, NY: Berghahn Books. Balf, M. (1978). The dispossessed: Interior Indians in the 1800s. Kamloops, BC: Kamloops Museum. Belyea, B. (Ed.). (2007). David Thompson: Columbia journals. Montreal, QC: McGill- Queen’s University Press. Boas, F., & Teit, J. A. (1985). Coeur. d'Alene, Flathead and Okanogan Indians. Fairfield, WA: Ye Galleon Press. Bouchard, R., &. Kennedy, D. (1975). Utilization of Fish by the Colville Okanagan Indian People. Okanagan Nation Alliance Library, Westbank, BC. Bouchard, R., &. Kennedy, D. (2000). First Nations’ Ethnography and Ethnohistory in British Columbia’s Lower Kootenay/ Columbia Hydropower Region. Okanagan Indian Band Library, Vernon, BC. 82 Brent, M. (1948). The legend of Shuswap Falls. Okanagan Historical Society, 12, pp. 16-17. Retrieved from https://open.library.ubc.ca/search?q=*&collection=ohs Brent, M. H. (1956-1961). Letters from Marie Houghton Brent of Republic Washington to Miss Clark (Box 1/9). Ella Elizabeth Clark Papers (Cage 146). Manuscripts, Archives, and Special Collections, Washington State University Libraries, Pullman, WA. Brown, A. K. (1995) Mourning Dove's the house of little men. Canadian Literature, 144, 49-60. Retrieved from https://canlit.ca/full-issue/?issue=144 Champagne, D., & Goldberg, C. (2005). Changing the subject: Individual versus collective research interests in Indian country research. Wicazo Sa Review, 20(1), 49-69. Chenoweth, J. A. (2017). Finding qwamqwemt: restorying post-secondary education for Aboriginal people (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/24/items/1.0348709 Cockrall-King, J. (2012, October, 12). Return of the Okanagan Sockeye. Okanagan Life. Retrieved from https://okanaganlife.com/return-of-the-sockeye/ Cohen, B. (2008). Coyote, Fox and Spider expressions of Okanagan artist, Barb Marchand. In L. Culen & C. Redding (Eds.), Syilx: Barb Marchand, (pp. 12-18). Vernon, BC: Vernon Public Art Gallery. Cohen, W. A. (2010). School failed Coyote, so Fox made a new school: Indigenous Okanagan knowledge transforms educational pedagogy (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/24/items/1.0071499 Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation. (2018). Facts [website]. Retrieved from https://www.cct-hsy.com/facts/ Cook-Lynn, E. (1997). Who stole Native American studies? Wicazo Sa Review, 12(1), 9-28. 83 Dapice, A. N. (2006). The Medicine Wheel. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 17(3), 251- 260. DOI: 10.1177/1043659606288383 De Danaan, L. (2002). Report prepared for the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation. Retrieved from https://collections.lib.utah.edu/details?id=1150442 Dove, M., & Thresa, L. (2007). How Coyote broke the salmon dam. In J. Ferguson, & M. George (Eds.), Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation: Upper Columbia River book of legends (pp. 95-100). Oakesdale, WA: Arts & Crafts Bookbindery & Publishing. Enowkin Centre. (n.d.). Enowkinwixw: A Syilx (Okanagan) Protocol of Respect Enowkin Centre, Penticton, BC. Howitt, R., & Suchet-Pearson, S. (2006). Rethinking the building blocks: Ontological pluralism and the idea of 'management'. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 88(3), 323-335. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0459.2006.00225.x Hudson, D. (1990). The Okanagan Indians of British Columbia. In J. Webber & En’owkin Centre (Eds.), Okanagan sources (pp. 54-89). Penticton, BC: Theytus Books. Jeannotte, M. S. (2017). Caretakers of the earth: integrating Canadian Aboriginal perspectives on culture and sustainability into local plans. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 23, 199-213. doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2017.1280784 Kovach, M. (2009). Indigenous methodologies: Characteristics, conversations, and contexts. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press. Lavallee, L. F. (2007). Physical activity and healing through the medicine wheel. Pimatisiwin a Journal of Aboriginal and Indigenous Community Health, 5(1), 127-153. Retrieved from http://www.pimatisiwin.com/online/ Lerman, N. H. (1954). Okanogan (Salish) ethnology (negatives) (Container 142). Melville 84 Jacobs Papers, 1918- 1978 (Ascension 1693-001), University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections, Seattle, WA. Mandelbaum, M. (1938). The individual life cycle. In L. Spier (Ed.), The Sinkaietk or Southern Okanagon of Washington. Menasha, WI: George Banta Publishing Company. Marchand, B. (2008). Barbara Marchand Syilx artwork. In L. Culen & C. Redding (Eds.), Syilx: Barb Marchand, (pp. 19-37). Vernon, BC: Vernon Public Art Gallery. Mattina, A., & Jack, C. (1990). Okanagan communication and language. In J. Webber & En’owkin Centre (Eds.), Okanagan sources, (pp. 143-65). Penticton, BC: Theytus Books. Miller, J. (Ed.). (1990). Mourning Dove: a Salishan autobiography. Lincoln, NE: U of Nebraska Press. Okanagan Nation Alliance. (n.d.) Okanagan Sockeye reintroduction backgrounder. [8 pp. handout]. Copy in possession of author. Okanagan Nation Alliance. (2003, Summer). ONA newsletter 2003 [digital copy]. Okanagan Nation Alliance Library, Westbank, BC. Okanagan Nation Alliance. (2004, Summer). ONA summer e-news 2004 [digital copy]. Okanagan Nation Alliance Library, Westbank, BC. Okanagan Nation Alliance. (2009). Okanagan Nation Alliance Written Evidence of for the BC Hydro-Acquisition from Teck Metals Ltd. of an Undivided One-third interest in its Waneta Dam and Associated Assets Project No. 3698565. Retrieved from http://www.bcuc.com/proceedings-orders-decisions/ Okanagan Nation Alliance. (2012). Fishing Okanagan sockeye salmon [Brochure]. Copy in possession of author. 85 Okanagan Nation Alliance. (2015). Three day Okanagan Nation salmon feast celebrates sacredness of the river at traditional fishing camp sxwewnitkw [community poster]. Retrieved from https://www.syilx.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Media- Advisory-Salmon-Feast.pdf Okanagan Nation Alliance. (2017). About us [website]. Retrieved from https://www.syilx.org/about-us/ Okanagan Nation Alliance. (2017). Our journey bringing the salmon home [website]. Retrieved from https://www.syilx.org/fisheries/okanagan-sockeye/ Okanagan Nation Alliance. (2017). Territory [website]. Retrieved from https://www.syilx.org/about-us/syilx-nation/territory/ Okanagan Nation Fisheries Commission. (2000). Aboriginal fisheries information within the Okanagan Basin. Okanagan Nation Alliance Library, Westbank, BC. Okanagan Tribal Council. (2012). Kou-Skelowh kwu sqilxw: We are the people a trilogy of Okanagan legends. Penticton, BC: Theytus Books. Orchard, I. (1961-1972). CBC interviews. Imbert Orchard Fonds (PR-0374). Royal BC Museum, Victoria, BC. Post, R. H. (1938). The subsistence quest. In L. Spier (Ed.), The Sinkaietk or Southern Okanagon of Washington (pp. 11-34). Menasha, WI: George Banta Publishing Company. Rae, R. (2005). The State of Fish and Fish Habitat in the Okanagan and Similkameen Basins. Retrieved from http://www.obwb.ca/fileadmin/docs/state_of_fish_habitat_obwb.pdf Raufer, S. M. I. (1966). Black robes and Indians on the last frontier, a story of heroism. Milwaukee, WI: Bruce Publishing Company. Ross, D. A. (1957). Interviews with Okanagan people. Enowkin Centre Library, Penticton, 86 BC. Smith, G. H. (2000). Protecting and respecting Indigenous knowledge. In M. Battiste (Ed.), Reclaiming Indigenous voice and vision (pp. 209-224). Vancouver, BC: UBC Press. Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: research and Indigenous peoples. New York; NY: Zed Books. Spier, L. (Ed.). (1938). The Sinkaietk or Southern Okanagon. Menasha, WI: George Banta Publishing Company. Thomson, D. & Ignace, M. (2005). They made themselves our guests: power relationships in the Interior Plateau region of the Cordillera in the fur trade era. BC Studies: The British Columbian Quarterly, 146, 3-35. Trigger, B. G. (1978). Ethnohistory and archaeology. Ontario Archaeology, 30, 17-24. Vedan, A. (2002). Traditional Okanagan environmental knowledge and fisheries management. Retrieved from https://www.hydroreform.org/sites/default/files/Colville%20Tribe%20Comments.pdf Watkins, D. (1961, 1966, 1971). Okanagan Salish stories and songs (MSS.Rec.101). American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, PA. Wickwire, W. (1980-1981). Okanagan stories (Mss.Rec.116). American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, PA. Wilson, C. E. (1866). Report on the Indian tribes inhabiting the country in the vicinity of the 49th parallel of north latitude. Transactions of the Ethnological Society of London, 4, 275-332. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/3014295?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents Yanan, E., & Andrist, J. E. (Eds.). (1995). Coyote and the Colville. Coulee Dam, WA: 87 Colville Confederated Tribes Museum and Gift Shop. 88 Appendices Appendix A American Okanogan and Colville Chiefs and Headmen Letter 1925 Chiefs of the Colville and Okanogan Tribes quoted in H.R. 3855. “Claims of the Colville and Okanogan Indian Tribes of Washington against the United States,” House of Representatives, Sixty-ninth Congress, First Session, 3-12. This letter was written by chiefs and headmen of various tribes at a council meeting at Spokane, Washington on October 31, 1925. (Raufer, 1996, pp. 428-436) TO OUR GREAT WHITE FATHER THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES We, the older Indians and Chiefs of the Colville and Okanogan tribes of Indians of the State of Washington, open our hearts to you, our great White Father at Washington. We tell you about our body, about our lands; we speak for all our people, the men, the women, the children, and the children that are not yet born. This is what our fathers considered; this is what we consider, this is what we want you to consider. We will tell you how we regard the white man according to our view of things. We will speak the truth; we will speak plain so that you can understand us. Those that speak the truth are not afraid to speak plain; those who speak the truth do not need to speak with a forked tongue. We speak the truth. You do not understand the Indians, and poke fun at them every day. They always seem to have something to say about the Indians and don’t understand them—even at the odor of the Indians you turn up your nose. We smell of the clean wood fire, of the woods. Now, 89 we do not like the smell of the white people. We don’t like the ways of the white people, but we have said nothing of that. We will tell you about this Indian Country. This was our country. God created this Indian Country, and it was like he spread out a big blanket, and he put the Indians on it. The Indians were created here in this country, truly and honestly, and that was the time our rivers started to run. Then God put fish in the rivers, and he put deer and elk in the mountains and buffalo upon the plains, and roots and berries in the field, and God made laws through which there came the increase of fish and game. When the Creator gave us Indians life, we awakened and as soon as we saw the fish and the game we knew that they were made for us. For the men God gave the deer, the elk and the buffalo to hunt for food and hides; for the women God made the roots and the berries for them to gather, and the Indians grew and multiplied as a people, and gave their thanks to the Creator. When we were created we were given our ground to live on, and from that time these were our rights. This is all true. Our mothers gathered berries; our fathers fished and killed game. These words are our and they are true. It matters not how long we live, we cannot change these thoughts. This land was ours, and our strength and our blood is from the fish and the game, the roots and the berries. These are the essence of our life. We were not brought here from a foreign country; we did not come here. We were put here by the Creator. The Creator did not plan the Indian to plow up the fields or to live as White Man. We had no cattle, no hogs, no grain—just berries and roots, and fish and game. We never thought we would be troubled by these things. Whenever the season opened we raised our hearts in thanks to the Creator for his bounty that his food was given us. 90 When we came into the world, we came from a woman, our Mother. She, before we were born, saved rabbit skins for us, and when we came into the world she placed us in skin. That was our dress. She fed and cared for us. This country was like our Mother. Here our fathers were born. Here we were born. It provided us with food and cared for us. This country was like our Mother; we did not want to leave it. We never saw a better country. We are satisfied. It was Indian country long before the White Man came. We were poor Indians, but we were content to stay here in our country. Here were good roots; the camas, the couse, the bitter-root. Here many salmon came; came in the spring and again came when the grass was dry. Here the game, the deer and the birds multiplied. Here the good sun shone brightly, and the trails led to our friends the Flatheads and the Nez Perces, and across the Mountains to the buffalo grounds. This country God gave to our fathers. Our game food God placed upon this land for our fathers to eat. God provided here for our fathers, the Indians, their food in season; the game, the berries, the roots and the fish. God Gave to the Indians here all they needed; God gave us here all we desired, all we needed. Therefore, we believe that we the Indians were favored of God; and according to this understanding, and our views of things we regard the White Man as thus beneath us, in creation and in standing before God. We thought of our Maker and prayed hard. In the morning our fathers had their prayers and asked God to give them pure water from heaven that the grass might grow. They asked for pure water so that nothing unclean would be in them; also that they would be provided with plenty to eat. Our Fathers taught us to pray that way. Our fathers taught us to be kind to little children, to be kind to one another, to be friends upon our lands and to have strong hearts. Their words were true and like to the light. We are telling you the truth. Now you will understand: that is 91 something you didn’t understand before. We will tell you of our fathers. Our fathers were great in the days gone by, and their past will last forever and ever. Our fathers did not have books. Our fathers did not need books. The Indian did not write down his words on paper, or in a book, and then place his words on a shelf to be covered with dust, forgotten and unknown to his children. The Indian wrote his words, his promises in his memory; in his children’s memory, and in the memory of his children’s children, our fathers lived here in happiness. They had hearts that were strong; they regarded them the same as a mountain. Our fathers taught us never to kill things foolishly, but to take for use only, to kill only for food. Our fathers allowed the white man to come as our fathers were good and kind to everyone. Our Maker, the Great God, told us when everything was full grown and had full growth; when the birds’ eggs had hatched, and the birds grown; when the deer and the buffalo had calves on strong legs; calves that ate the grass, then we should kill the game. Our fathers’ roads were straight no matter where they went; their roads were always open never closed; and their words were true. The White Man has brought a change in this, our country. Since our fathers’ time even the rocks and trees that our fathers were accustomed to have disappeared. You have killed off or destroyed all that we used for food. Our game food God placed here upon this land for us to eat—you have killed off, have killed it off foolishly; the Indian game food that they lived on; the buffalo you have killed for hides; the deer and the game birds you have killed off by poison or wantonly hunted and killed for pleasure. You have done this without asking us, and you have taken away our country by force, against our will; you see how you have done with us and we have just watched you do away with our things. You have done away with our beautiful land that long ago we roamed over, free as a bird. All these things you have done; all these things you 92 have taken away; all the things that were beautiful to the Indians. We calmly looked on. We had not been here a little while; we had always been here. When the world was made, God gave everyone a country. God did not forget the Indian. God gave the Indians this country. He placed the great waters of the ocean between us, to separate the lands he gave to the Indians from the lands he gave the White Men. You came and you took our lands. One part came from the cold side of heaven (the Canadians) and said, this is all my land down to this line; another party came from the warm side of heaven (Americans) and said this is all my land up to this line. They did us, the Indians, a great wrong. When the President and the Queen of England made their line dividing the Indian Country they did not consult us. You came after us; you should have consulted us. Before white people came we lived here in peace and were content. We heard that wonderful persons were to come among us. We were pleased; we thought you would help us. When you came we found you were only men like ourselves. Your skin is white but your blood was red like our own. We found that the white men did not come to help the Indians, but to take from the Indian his country. As soon as you white people came and put your feet in our country we began to be miserable. Your children got their eyes on the ground and they coveted it. When they saw this country of ours they liked it. They did not care for the poor Indian. They wanted our country and they put their feet in our very tracks. When you came we welcomed you. You did not ask for what is ours. You took what was ours. You fenced our trails; you took our gardens; you took away our homes by force; you plowed up our fathers’ graves; you killed our game. Had it not been for our fathers; had it not been for the teachings of our fathers, of our priests, had it not been that our hearts were big, the white people would not have been so plentiful here for the Indians have strong hearts like the mountain. Now you white people have 93 grown up on our country, and are rich in everything. Our fathers told us to be good, to do right; did you do right to the Indians? You have taken all that we had; what have you given us? Our fathers taught us water was the only thing we should drink; water was the only thing we had to drink. Your fire water the Indians did not make. The Indians did not have fire water. Your fire water makes men into beasts. You knew that your fire water even kills you, yet you gave it to the Indian, you white people. You made Indians into beasts with fire water; you killed Indians with fire water. No Indian ever made fire water. You had bad diseases and sicknesses that God had not given to or meant for the Indians, his children. You inflicted us with them; you killed us with them. You white people stole and debauched our women, our wives, our sisters, our daughters, and when you were done with them you sent them back to our teepees with their half white children for us to support; we from whom you had taken everything. You wanted our land; you took it from us. You have killed our game; you have destroyed our fisheries; our great fishery at the Kettle Falls where when we were young, all the tribes gathered and we gave fish to all who came; even to the tribes east of the mountains. You have plowed up our camas and couse grounds and our berry fields. You have trampled over the graves of our fathers. We have sat broken hearted because of what you did; we have sat with empty bellies, and watched you while our children cried. Watched you and your children enjoy that which you took from us. That which you took from us and have not paid us for. We are men. Men with different skins than yours, different thoughts than yours; but we are men. We did not fight you. We are men with strong hearts, hearts like mountains. We were told it was wrong to fight. We watched you. You put your laws upon us. Your laws say that we men are children, and that we cannot manage the little you left to us. By your laws you say that we are but children; that we have no 94 minds, that we cannot do as we wish with what is ours—that little that you have not taken yet from us. That we cannot ask you to pay us for what you owe us, unless we, your children, first ask and get consent from your great council of Congress. After many years, many long years, your council of Congress this Spring voted us Indian consent. Your Council of Congress said that we Indians could ask you in your Court of Claims to pay us what is right for you to pay for that you took from us. We are now told that you, the President, have said that we should have asked you to pay us in that Court before; that our claims are too old—that we have waited too long. We have waited long; we have waited very long. We cannot ask you to pay, only when your Council of Congress says we may. When did Congress say we could ask? Our fathers told us to pay our debts; to pay all our debts. Our fathers did not tell us we need not pay the old debts, our fathers told us if they could not pay their debts then, we their children must pay them, or our children’s children, else we and our children, and our fathers are disgraced. We are broken hearted because we are treated like children. We wait to know about our claims; we have waited very long. We ask you to now treat us as men; to deal with us as men. Do so now. Make glad our hearts; make whole the broken promises of Stevens. About this land it all belonged to the Indians. You were more numerous than we; as numerous as are all the ants in all the ant hills. You were stronger than we. You put your feet in all our tracks. You crowded us out. You took our land away. We were sorry. Our hearts were heavy. They are yet heavy. We never started to offend the whites, but they have continually done wrong toward us. We never gave to you, we never sold our lands to you; we have never agreed on a treaty. We have never given you any writing for these lands. We were willing to be big hearted towards you; we would have selected the best of our lands and reserved our homes 95 and graves of our fathers, and we would have been liberal with you, so that the poor white men who had no lands and were hungry for Indian lands might settle on what was left of our lands. We so often told your commissioners. You took our lands from us. Without our consent, wholly without consulting us, General Grant, the President, selected some of our lands; not our homes, not our best lands, not where our fathers were buried, but some of the poor lands, mostly rocks and mountains. We did not select those lands. We were not consulted. We did not consent to goon those lands. We had other lands, good lands. We then lived on those lands. We cultivated them. Our fathers were buried on those lands. There we wanted to live. But the white man wanted those same lands, wanted them because they were good lands, the best lands. The white men did not want the rocks and the mountains where the President said we should have a reservation. The white men crowded us out. They threatened us. They seized our lands and improvements; they threatened us. The Indian Agents you sent to us told us we had to move from our homes to that Reservation that the President had selected. You sent us your soldiers among us. We did not fight you. Our priests taught us it was wrong to steal; that it was wrong to fight. We did not fight. We obeyed you. We left our homes. We left the graves of our fathers. We left with heavy hearts and we went on those poor rocky lands that you left to us as a Reservation; the poor lands that the White Men did not want. We went unwillingly. You had told us that our lands and rights would not be taken from us without our consent. We believed you. We trusted you. You said you were our friend and protector. Our lands were taken from us without our consent. The great chief, Governor Isaac I. Stevens, who first came among us and who held councils with us said that he was our friend; that whatever was done about our lands would be done by talking and agreeing, both sides being satisfied. He said that 96 our rights were our rights; that we would not be deprived of them, and that our lands should not be taken away from us without our consent. We spoke with one tongue. He spoke for you. We, the poor ignorant Indians believed him. He went away to the great war you had, long, long ago. We are told he was killed in battle. Had he lived we believe he would have kept his words unbroken. His words are broken words. The Indian Agents, the Commissioners, and other big men that you sent to us for many years after that handed you the broken words of Stevens. They told you that you had no right to our lands; told you that our lands had not been given to you, told you that no agreement had been made between us, told you that you had not bought our lands, that you had not paid for them, told you that our Indian title to our lands was not wiped out. When these Agents, these Commissioners, these Big Men spoke thus to us and to you, you had other agents surveying our lands, you were inviting white men to settle upon them; you were giving them away to the railroads, to the State, to the Schools and Colleges, to whoever wanted them until now all the Indian lands, that you made free lands are gone. All our lands you have given away, and you did not own them; you did not buy them from us; you have not paid us for them. We never gave you what you took. These lands were taken away from us by you—our friend, our protector, our guardian. These lands were not taken from us in war, we never fought you, we were always your friend. What you took was ours, so claimed by us, so recognized by our neighbors, so recognized by you; you have never paid us for what you took. On this land of ours your children have built great towns; over it they have run railroads; from the belly of the earth they have dug our silver, gold, lead and copper. They have cut down and used the great forests that grew on our hills, they have built great dams across our salmon 97 streams and harnessed the lightning to do their work. They have made farms and orchards out of our root fields and our hunting grounds. Your people have multiplied and grown rich on our lands; these lands that you our friend, took from us without our consent; these lands that you have never paid us for. You are our guardian. You govern us by your laws. We cannot employ attorneys without your consent. We cannot act without your consent. By your laws we cannot urge a claim against you without your consent; we cannot ask you for justice in your own courts, unless you first make a law granting us that right. The first time you spoke to us Indians about our lands was in the day of our fathers, when we were children or infants in our Mothers arms, you were yet talking to us about our lands and our rights when we were young men. We have talked ever since. Our hair is now gray and we are becoming old, some of us are now very old, and we will see but few winters. We are old and we have not long to wait here. We would like to have this matter settled before we meet our fathers; before we meet Governor Isaac I. Stevens. We do not want to tell them that Stevens’ promises, that our promises are yet broken; that the Indian lands were taken for the whites without the consent of the Indians; that the whites have multiplied and grown rich on the Indians land; and that the poor Indians from whom they were taken without consent, without agreement, without treaty, have never been settled with or paid for the lands taken from them. After many years we secured your consent to employ a lawyer, familiar with your customs, to present our claim. The sub chief in the two great councils of Congress made a law that our claims should, with your consent, be submitted to and heard by your Court of Claims. This proposed law was 98 designated as H.R. 9160. It was submitted to you, you did NOT approve it, and unless you approve the law, the poor Indian cannot go into your courts; cannot secure justice. We are told that you, the President have said that our claims are too old. Who made them old? Who delayed the settlement? We are your children; we are your wards; we can do nothing without your consent. We have been—we are now helpless unless you act. We cannot bring suit against you in your courts. If settlement with us has been delayed, it has been due to your own fault. It is not the fault of the poor, ignorant, helpless Indian. Will you take advantage of your own fault? Will you say, I delayed a long time settling with my children; now because I delayed so long I will not settle with them at all? An Indian does not so pay his debt. If he cannot pay it his children pay it. We cannot believe that you, the President, meant to take advantage of the poor Indian, and refuse to pay him because of you own delay. We have also been told that you have said that our claim is too large. We have never put any price on our lands, or on the rights you took away from us without our consent. All we have asked, all we now ask is that the matter be settled; that you permit your Court of Claims to decide whatever it is just for you to pay us. Are you not willing to pay that; are you not willing to pay whatever you justly owe; whether it is big or little? We are told that you are the head of the wealthiest nation in the whole world; that the United States is a benevolent nation, that has given hundreds of thousands of dollars—great sums that the poor Indian cannot comprehend, to the poor people across the ocean in the countries where the great world war was fought, and where our own sons fought, bled and died fighting shoulder to shoulder with your own sons. Whatever your courts may decide and fix upon as the amount justly due us, for the lands and rights taken from us will be as but a leaf from the great tree of your wealth; it will be but as a 99 small twig from the branch that you broke off and gave away. Is not the Heart that gives away big enough to move you to pay the just debt, be it little or big, that you owe to us poor Indians? An Indian pays his debts before he gives a potlatch. We have studied our situation. We have watched you. We are wise with the wisdom of our fathers. We know that the Indian as an Indian must cease. We see that the day of the Indian has passed; the Sun set on the old Indian life when you killed our game, destroyed our fisheries, and took away our lands. We now know that the Indians if they continue to exist must become White Men in their manner of living. We have some of us read your history. We learn that it has taken two thousand years to change the Helvatians of France; the Germanians and the Goths, and the Britons and the Picts of England, into you white people of today. We know that the Indian cannot be wholly changed into White Men in a generation or in a short time. We know that the mind and way of thinking has to be changed and we know that the bodies of the Indians have to be changed. We who lived by fishing and the chase must learn to work as White Men and our muscles and the bones of our bodies must change. Our bellies must accept and be content with strange foods; our skins must grow accustomed to our wearing the White Men’s clothes and our lungs that only knew the clean free air must become accustomed to the air of closed houses. While we change into White Men we must suffer in body and in spirit. We must fight in our bodies all your diseases which we as Indian never knew, and for which our Indian medicines are not good. Our women must learn to have children and to keep them well under new and changed conditions so that they grow into strong men and women. We see you White Men work and gather money and property together for your children. We have children. We love these children. We think of our children’s children who will be 100 White Men and Women like yourselves—but with red skins—less red than ours. What was ours, what our fathers left to us you have taken. Taken without our consent, for that we want pay. This is our right. This is our need. We want this that we make care for ourselves and our children while the Indian changes into a White Man. That we may care for and make provision for our children, just as you White Men do. This is our right. Now about our Claims. We want them settled now while we yet live. When they are settled we can continue changing into White Men and they will be forgotten. Now these claims are in our minds. We keep thinking about them. Why do you not settle this matter, why do you not let your Court of Claims decide what is justly due us? It is not because of lack of time for the life time of man has passed since we first began to talk about our lands. It is not because you do not know of our claims and of their right and justness, for commencing with Governor Stevens, your own Commissioners and Agents have often told us of our rights, and have often written them out in the records of your doings that you keep in your great office at Washington. Why do you not settle this matter? We are very old. The lands, the rights you took were OURS. We have never agreed that you should have them. They were valuable, valuable to us and more valuable to you. You took them. You have never settled with us for them. We want nothing but what is just, nothing but what your own Court of Claims may freely say is ours. What are you going to do? We have spoken. That is all. 101 Appendix B Laurier Memorial 1910 MEMORIAL To Sir Wilfred Laurier, Premier of the Dominion of Canada From the Chiefs of the Shuswap, Okanagan and Couteau Tribes of British Columbia Presented at Kamloops, B.C. August 25, 1910 Dear Sir and Father, We take this opportunity of your visiting Kamloops to speak a few words to you. We welcome you here, and we are glad we have met you in our country. We want you to be interested in us, and to understand more fully the conditions under which we live. We expect much of you as the head of this great Canadian nation, and feel confident that you will see that we receive fair and honourable treatment. Our confidence in you has increased since we have noted of late the attitude of your government towards the Indian rights movement of this country and we hope that with your help our wrongs may at last be righted. We speak to you the more freely because you are a member of the white race with whom we first became acquainted, and which we call in our tongue “real whites.” One hundred years next year they came amongst us here at Kamloops and erected a trading post. After the other whites came to this country in 1858 we differentiated them from the first whites as their manners were so much different, and we applied the term ”real whites” to the latter (viz., the fur- traders of the Northwest and Hudson Bay companies!) as the great majority of the companies employees were French speaking, the term latterly became applied by us as a designation for the whole French race. The “real whites” we found were good people. We could depend on their word, and we trusted and respected them. They did not interfere with us nor 102 attempt to break up our tribal organizations, laws, and customs. They did not try to force their conceptions of things on us to our harm. Nor did they stop us from catching fish, hunting, etc. They never tried to steal or appropriate our country, nor take our food and life from us. They acknowledged our ownership of the country, and treated our chiefs as men. They were the first to find us in this country. We never asked them to come here, but nevertheless we treated them kindly and hospitably and helped them all we could. They had made themselves (as it were) our guests. We treated them as such, and then waited to see what they would do. As we found they did us no harm our friendship with them became lasting. Because of this we have a warm heart to the French at the present day. We expect good from Canada. When they first came among us there were only Indians here. They found the people of each tribe supreme in their own territory, and having tribal boundaries known and recognized by all. The country of each tribe was just the same as a very large farm or ranch (belonging to all the people of the tribe) from which they gathered their food. On it they had game which they hunted for food and clothing, etc.; fish which they got in plenty for food; grass and vegetation on which their horses grazed and the game lived, and much of which furnished materials for manufactures, etc.; stone which furnished pipes, utensils, and tools, etc.; trees which furnished firewood, materials for houses and utensils; plants, roots, seeds, nuts and berries which grew abundantly and were gathered in their season just the same as the crops on a ranch, and used for food; minerals, shells, etc., which were used for ornament and for paints, etc.; water which was free to all. Thus fire, water, food, clothing and all the necessaries of life were obtained in abundance from the lands of each tribe, and all the people had equal rights of access to everything they required. You will see the ranch of each tribe was the same as its life, and without it the people could not have lived. Just 52 years ago the other whites came to this country. They found us just the same as the first 103 or “real whites” had found us, only we had larger bands of horses, had some cattle, and in many places we cultivated the land. They found us happy, healthy, strong and numerous. Each tribe was still living in its own “house” or in other words on its own “ranch.” No one interfered with our rights, nor disputed our possession of our own “houses” and “ranches,” viz., our homes and lives. We were friendly and helped these whites also, for had we not learned the first whites had done us no harm? Only when some of them killed us we revenged on them. Then we thought there are some bad ones among them, but surely on the whole they must be good. Besides they are the queen’s people. And we had already heard the great things about the queen from the “real whites.” We expected her subjects would do us no harm, but rather improve us by giving us knowledge, and enabling us to do some of the wonderful things they could do. At first they looked only for gold. We knew the latter was our property, but as we did not use it much nor need it to live by we did not object to their searching for it. They told us, “Your country is rich and you will be made wealthy by our coming. We wish just to pass over your lands in quest of gold.” Soon they saw the country was good, and some of them made up their minds, to settle in it. They commenced to take up pieces of land here and there. They told us they wanted only the use of these pieces of land for a few years, and then would hand them back to us in an improved condition; meanwhile they would give us some of the products they raised for the loan of our land. Thus they commenced to enter our “houses,” or live on our “ranches.” With us when a person enters our house he becomes our guest, and we must treat him hospitably as long as he shows no hostile intentions. At the same time we expect him to return to us equal treatment for what he receives. Some of our Chiefs said, “These people wish to be partners with us in our country. We must, therefore, be the same as brothers to them, and live as one family. We will share equally in everything--half and half--in land, water and timber, etc. What is ours will be 104 theirs, and what is theirs will be ours. We will help each other to be great and good.” The whites made a government in Victoria--perhaps the queen made it. We have heard it stated both ways. Their chiefs dwelt there. At this time they did not deny the Indian tribes owned the whole country and everything in it. They told us we did. We Indians were hopeful. We trusted the whites and waited patiently for their chiefs to declare their intentions toward us and our lands. We knew what had been done in the neighboring states, and we remembered what we had heard about the queen being so good to the Indians and that her laws carried out by her chiefs were always just and better than the American laws. Presently chiefs (government officials, etc.) commenced to visit us, and had talks with some of our chiefs. They told us to have no fear, and queen’s laws would prevail in this country, and everything would be well for the Indians here. They said a very large reservation would be staked off for us (southern interior tribes) and the tribal lands outside of this reservation the government would buy from us for white settlement. They let us think this would be done soon, and meanwhile until this reserve was set apart, and our lands settled for, they assure us we would have perfect freedom of traveling and camping and the same liberties as from time immemorial to hunt, fish, graze and gather our food supplies where we desired; also that all trails, land, water, timber, etc., would be as free of access to us as formerly. Our chiefs were agreeable to these propositions, so we waited for these treaties to be made, and everything settled. We had never known white chiefs to break their word so we trusted. In the meanwhile white settlement progressed. Our chiefs held us in check. They said, “Do nothing against the whites. Something we did not understand retards them from keeping their promise. They will do the square thing by us in the end.” What have we received for our good faith, friendliness and patience? Gradually as the whites of this country became more and more powerful, and we less and less powerful, they little by little 105 changed their policy towards us, and commenced to put restrictions on us. Their government or chiefs have taken every advantage of our friendliness, weakness and ignorance to impose on us in every way. They treat us as subjects without any agreement to that effect, and force their laws on us without our consent, and irrespective of whether they are good for us or not. They say they have authority over us. They have broken down our old laws and customs (no matter how good) by which we regulated ourselves. They laugh at our chiefs and brush them aside. Minor affairs amongst ourselves, which do not affect them in the least, and which we can easily settle better than they can, they drag into our courts. They enforce their own laws one way for the rich white man, one way for the poor white, and yet another for the Indian. They have knocked down (the same as) the posts of all the Indian tribes. They say there are no lines, except what they make. They have taken possession of all the Indian country and claim it as their own. Just the same as taking the “house” or “ranch” and, therefore, the life of every Indian tribe into their possession. They have never consulted us in any of these matters, nor made any agreement, nor signed any papers with us. They have stolen our lands and everything on them and continue to use same for their own purposes. They treat us as less than children, and allow us no say in anything. They say the Indians know nothing, and own nothing, yet their power and wealth has come from our belongings. The queen’s law which we believe guaranteed us our rights, the B.C. Government has trampled underfoot. This is how our guests have treated us--the brothers we received hospitably in our house. After a time when they saw that our patience might be exhausted and that we might cause trouble if we thought all the land was to be occupied by whites they set aside many small reservations for us here and there over the country. This was their proposal not ours, and we never accepted these reservations as settlement for anything, nor did we sign any papers or make any treaties about same. They thought we would 106 be satisfied with this, but we never have been satisfied and never will be until we get our rights. We thought the setting apart of these reservations was the commencement of some scheme they had evolved for our benefit, and that they would now continue until they had more than fulfilled their promises but although we have waited long we have been disappointed. We have always felt the injustice done us, but we did not know how to obtain redress. We knew it was useless to go to war. What would we do? Even your government at Ottawa, into whose charge we had been handed by the B.C. Government, gave us no enlightenment. We had no powerful friends. The Indian agents and Indian office at Victoria appeared to neglect us. Some offers of help in the way of agricultural implements, schools, medical attendance, aid to the aged, etc., from the Indian department were at first refused by many of our chiefs or were never petitioned for, because for a time we thought the Ottawa and Victoria governments were the same as one, and these things would be charged against us and rated as payment for our land, etc. Thus we got along the best way we could and asked for nothing. For a time we did not feel the stealing of our lands, etc. very heavily. As the country was sparsely settled we still had considerable liberty in the way of hunting, fishing, grazing, etc., over by far the most of it. However, owing to increased settlement, etc. in late years this has become changed, and we are being more and more restricted to our reservations which in most places are unfit or inadequate to maintain us. Except we can get fair play we can see we will go to the wall, and most of us be reduced to beggary or to continuous wage slavery. We have also learned lately that the British Columbia government claims absolute ownership of our reservations, which means that we are practically landless. We only have a loan of those reserves in life rent, or at the option of the B.C. Government. Thus we find ourselves without any real home in this our own country. In a petition signed by fourteen of our chiefs and sent to your Indian department, July 1908, we pointed out the disabilities under 107 which we labour owing to the inadequacy of most of our reservations, some having hardly any good land, others, no irrigation water, etc.; our limitations re pasture lands for stock owing to fencing of so-called government lands by whites; the severe restrictions put on us lately by the government re hunting and fishing; the depletion of salmon by over fishing of the whites, and other matters affecting us. In many places we are debarred from camping, travelling, gathering roots and obtaining wood and water as heretofore. Our people are fined and imprisoned for breaking the game and fish laws and using the same game and fish which we were told would always be ours for food. Gradually we are becoming regarded as trespassers over a large portion of this our country. Our old people say, “How are we to live. If the government takes our food from us they must give us other food in its place.” Conditions of living have been thrust on us which we did not expect, and which we consider in great measure unnecessary and injurious. We have no grudge against the white race as a whole nor against the settlers, but we want to have an equal chance with them of making a living. We welcome them to this country. It is not in most cases their fault. They have taken up and improved and paid for their lands in good faith. It is their government which is to blame by heaping up injustice on us. But it is also their duty to see their government does right by us, and gives us a square deal. We condemn the whole policy of the B.C. Government towards the Indian tribes of this country as utterly unjust, shameful and blundering in every way. We denounce same as being the main cause of the unsatisfactory condition of Indian affairs in this country and of animosity and friction with the whites. So long as what we consider justice is withheld from us, so long will dissatisfaction and unrest exist among us, and we will continue to struggle to better ourselves. For the accomplishment of this end we and other Indian tribes of this country are now uniting and we ask the help of yourself and government in this fight for our rights. We believe it is not the desire nor policy of your 108 government that these conditions should exist. We demand that our land question be settled, and ask that treaties be made between the government and each of our tribes, in the same manner as accomplished with the Indian tribes of the other provinces of Canada, and in the neighbouring parts of the United States. We desire that every matter of importance to each tribe be a subject of treaty, so we may have a definite understanding with the government on all questions of moment between us and them. In a declaration made last month, and signed by twenty-four of our chiefs (a copy of which has been sent to your Indian department) we have stated our position on these matters. Now we sincerely hope you will carefully consider everything we have herewith brought before you and that you will recognize the disadvantages we labour under, and the darkness of the outlook for us if these questions are not speedily settled. Hoping you have had a pleasant sojourn in this country, and wishing you a good journey home, we remain Yours very sincerely, The Chiefs of the Shuswap, Okanagan and Couteau or Thompson tribes. - Per their secretary, J.A. Teit.
Thesis/Dissertation
eng
Interdisciplinary Studies
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Graduate
Okanagan Syilx historical and contemporary salmon distribution : underpinning social and governance structures
Text