Occupying the Land - Digital Library Of The Commons

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ask permission to use the traps from those who built them. Gunther (1927:199) reportedthat Clallam salmon traps were owned by "the chief of the village, who tends it at night,leaving it during the day-time for his poor relatives who have not traps of their own."Deer-nets and deer-pits were likewise owned property. Their operation was directed bythe owner, but sites where they were situated were not necessarily owned. As notedpreviously, aerial duck-nets were owned by families, as were the poles used to erect them,but the sites where they were erected were used by several tribes in common (Suttles1951:72). Suttles (1990:459), however, suggests that such sites were formerlyindividually owned.These ownership traditions were closely intertwined with seasonal rounds, themovements of people over the harvest season from one site to another where they hadcustomary or culturally recognized rights. Jenness (1934-1935: 70) reported, "Wintervillage sites were situated within an area where people obtained large portions of theirfood and materials, and which they identified using names in their own language. Agroup’s territory is commonly identified by applying the suffix /-ulh/ meaning ’of orbelonging to’... One’s territory is also the landscape imbued with oral tradition...Ownership was expressed individually as the right to use resources in a multitude ofareas, and was independent of proprietary feelings for one's tribal territory.”The East Saanich [Tsawout], the Songish [Legwungen] and those near Chemainusfollowed practically the same routine as the West Saanich; they all left their main villagesin the middle of summer and netted sockeye and humpbacked salmon on the mainland,off the mouth of the Fraser River, as reported by Jenness (1934-1935:18). Also, "If theweather was warm, many of the [Saanich] people left the village and camped near theircamas grounds on San Juan Island, using for shelter either a few boards taken from theirhouse, or rush huts (Jenness 1934-1935: 7). The Suneymexw (“Solachwan”) people of theNanaimo area, according to Jenness (1934-1935: 9), occupied their village until aboutApril, “when they joined the others in moving out to False Narrows and Gabriola Islandto fish for cod, grilse and other species, to hunt seals and seal-lions and to gather clamsand camas; for every family had its own bed of camas on Gabriola Island.”The Cowichan Halkomelem, according to Jenness (1934-1935: 8), had no fishing rightson the mainland, but only over the waters immediately adjacent to their shore and aroundMayne and Saltspring Islands. Jenness added that at Point Roberts, on the Mainland southof Tsawwassen, where Saanich families went to fish, each family dried its fish, year afteryear, in the same spot, and they left their stone net-sinkers at this location to be used thefollowing year. There was a careful distribution of fish with a special counting system(Jenness 1934-1935: 18). Actually, there are other reports that the Cowichan did haverights to harvest sites on the Mainland. Arvid Charlie (pers. comm., 1999) stated that thepeople from Cowichan not only had property and resource harvesting sites on the GulfIslands, but that they owned an island near Port Moody along the Fraser River, and wentthere specifically to harvest cat-tails. It seems unlikely that they would not have taken thisopportunity to fish as well.In any case, as noted by Kennedy (1993), Jenness (1934-1935), Suttles (1990) and others,there was such an extensive network of affinal ties from inter-village and inter-nationmarriages among the Central Coast Salish, that most people had relations on whom they10
could count for resource harvesting privileges throughout the region. Arvid Charlie (pers.comm. to NT 1999) noted that he personally has relations with the Snuneymexw(Nanaimo), Musqueam, Chemainus (all Halkomelem), Tsawout, Tsartlip, andLekwungen, as well as with American communities like the Lummi and Semiahmoo (allStraits). Furthermore, he said, one of his relatives, a Semiamhoo woman, routinely cameto the village at Cowichan Bay, and stayed in a part of the settlement known as “LittleSemiamhoo” because that was owned and occupied by the people from that village.Nuu-Chah-Nulth “HaHuulhi” Example:More Rigorous Proprietorship of Large Areas Through Hereditary Chiefs withCommunity Consultation and Assignment of Specific Rights Within to Sub-Chiefs andOthersIn Nuu-Chah-Nulth traditions, the Chiefs’ proprietary rights to territory and resources areknown as hahuulhi. There are comparable systems among the neighbouringKwakwaka’wakw and more northerly coastal groups. Hahuulhi ...is described byHereditary Chief of Ahousaht Earl Maquinna George (pers. comm. to NT, May 10,1996).Hahuulhi ...is a word equivalent to, if not a stronger word, than sovereignty. Theword is used by hereditary chiefs of the Nuu-Chah-Nulth for aboriginal right,ownership, and territory. It's a chieftainship's role to hold that hahuulhi as a sacredright. Now today they call it aboriginal right. And ...besides salmon streams thatwere owned by hereditary owners. They had specific areas. They couldn't gobeyond their own realm of boundary lines because there were other tribes on eachside of the nation or territory because there were known places that marked offterritorial area. There is a fine line between two nations. On each side of theAhousaht Nation was ...on the south side, the Tla-o-qui-aht Nation, south side toMeares Island, and Bedwell Sound and up into the mountains beyond StrathconaPark on Vancouver Island. On the other side, the northwest side, the borderbetween the Hesquiaht Nation, Hesquiaht Point and in behind Cannon [Konni]Lake. And going into the Talbot Range, Median Lake. Big area and a big territory.[At Potlatches]... They didn't give ownership [away] but they did give certain rightsto hereditary chiefs. Sometimes the right to catch fish, but not to own the creek.And they talked about it at the potlatch because big name hereditary chiefs wererespected. And they talked about how the system would work. That they would beallowed to fish in the territory that had a good seasonal salmon run.... There werespecial people that looked after the creek, not the chief. They had people thatworked to do the cultural work of the stream.As described by Earl Maquinna George, sub-chiefs and others could gain the rights andpermission to use a chief's lands and resources, but would always pay tribute in the formof a portion of the harvest or some other contributions. Rivers, fishing areas, huntingareas, berry patches and root-harvesting “gardens” were all considered property of theChief although their care might be designated to a representative or subject to advicefrom others in the chief’s family or village.11
Page 2 and 3: settlement. Notably, the template f
Page 4 and 5: Indigenous Group(Language Family);R
Page 6 and 7: Sekani, Dakelh or Carrier,Tsilhqot
Page 8 and 9: families," and the use by others re
Page 12 and 13: ... in the case of a salmon stream,
Page 14 and 15: As well as gardens, patches and sta
Page 16 and 17: Charles Newcombe (1902: Haida - Ksa
Page 18 and 19: • Succession:: Territories and si
Page 20 and 21: The burgeoning field of traditional
Page 22 and 23: longest time", which became the fou
Page 24 and 25: Barnett, Homer G. 1955. The Coast S
Page 26 and 27: Hamori-Torok, Charles. 1990. Haisla
Page 28 and 29: Richardson, Allan. 1976. The Contro
Page 30: email to Nives Dolsak and Elinor Os

Occupying the Land - Digital Library Of The Commons

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?