Posted on

Katie John (Athabaskan) – Atlantic Salmon Farming

Biographical Timeline | Leadership Qualities | Atlantic Salmon | References

Katie John in Batzulnetas, with fish wheel in background.

Katie John grew up learning how to live off the land, also known as subsistence living, specifically fishing. Many tribes in the Pacific Northwest also grew up this way. When one grows up in a certain ecosystem with certain animals, any change can throw off the entire system. Atlantic salmon are being farmed in the Pacific Northwest and due to human error, these fish break free sometimes. This leads to many issues such as the disease and parasites that the salmon contract. Katie John would be against Atlantic salmon farming in the Pacific Northwest because it interferes with the natural balance of the eco system. This effects those that survive off of the salmon like she did growing up. Natives that are still fishing for substance will not eat the disease ridden Atlantic salmon in their waters, for obvious reasons. Katie John already fought for the right to fish on her land, she would not be okay with the fish being tainted.

A salmon with sea lice.

A great concern that came upon the impact the Atlantic salmon issue brought upon was the impact it Native Pacific salmon. These Atlantic salmons are invasive species which then lead to the problems of them being competitors whether it be of finding food or even eating the other species. Not only does this negatively affect other species in the same ecosystem, but it also economically affects the people there too. Although other corporation might see this event as a great thing due to the increase of production and selling they could do off it, Katie John knew this would hurt her people. Not being able to use their sources because they have been interfered with lead to the decrease of what they could use to benefit themselves. Along with this, she would be against any idea of not trying to fix this problem, even if that meant taking action herself.

The way of life of Kate John’s people was one of subsistence . You took what the land gave, you did not take more than you could use, and you worked to replenish it when you were done. Katie once said, “Our land , air and water have always been good to us.” The land and animals took care of you, and you took care of them. For many tribes, this lifestyle was common, but it has been interrupted by colonialism–often by commercial and capitalistic ventures. These ventures have been shown to deplete and damage the land, and are often not sustainable. Katie John believed that the western world did not know how to take care of the land, and she knew that it was up to her and her people to fight for it. The case of Atlantic Salmon farming is a clear parallel to her fight in Alaska, and she would strongly support and advocate with tribal rights to those lands and lifeways.

Posted on

Katie John (Athabaskan)- Biographical Timeline

Biographical Timeline | Leadership Qualities | Atlantic Salmon | References

Posted on

Katie John (Athabaskan) – Leadership Qualities

Biographical Timeline | Leadership Qualities | Atlantic Salmon | References

Strong-Willed

Katie John with Staff

Strong-Willed is great word to use to describe Katie John. She was raised in an environment that many would not be able to withstand. Substance living is arguably one of the best ways for both personal health and the health of the planet. However, substance living requires strong people because it is not easy.

She learned English as a teenager. Learning a new language past the age of ten is proven to be far more difficult than when a child. She was married young and raised so many children. She then helped create a written alphabet for the language that she was raised with. Part of her being strong-willed is the will to keep her language alive, while so many factors of western culture is trying to erase it.

To credit her will once again, she started a court case to have Alaska state permit substance fishing. She was determined and fought for this for the remainder of her life. A huge part of her culture and the way she was raised is substance living. Once again Western culture tries and eliminate an indigenous culture, Katie John saw it as her duty to keep her language and way of living still going.

Frank

John did not mince words, beat around the bush, or play games. Throughout her life, she spoke plainly and directly about the issues she fought for and against. It did not matter who you were, what your status was, or what you thought of her, Katie John just told you what she thought. This was apparent in her leadership in Mentasta Village, where she once told her own son and other tribal members that they had to leave the village for a certain amount of time, and could not come back until they changed their ways.

Katie John watches as Governor Tony Knowles struggles to hold on to a salmon.

Further, when she went to the Supreme Court to fight for substance rights, she did not change the frank way in which she talked, and in fact, seemed to utilize it as a way to break through the formal barriers of the court. After the court case had been determined in favor of her and the tribe, then Governor Tony Knowles could have appealed on behalf of the state of Alaska, and she simply invited him to their fish camp, which was illegal at the time. They spent the day together, and she spoke in her frank manner about the importance of fish to her people and their way of life. However, this is not to say she spoke with humor, or without intelligence, and when the Governor accidentally let a fish fall back into the river, she asked if he had granted it a “gubernatorial pardon.”

Determined

Katie John receiving an honorary doctorate from the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.

Being that Katie John was well known for obtaining rights for her people, it is clear to see that this job was not easy. Challenges she faced, especially that of being a Native woman, come to show how determined she was when standing up for what she believed in. Katie John knew well what things to take in consideration that would potentially be both positive or negative, but did not let that stop her from reaching her goals.

Katie received many rejections over the period of years in which she fought for her and her peoples rights, that including the one towards the Alaska Board State of Fisheries. This movement that began in 1985 by Katie herself, continues up to this day, even after her passing. This comes to show that although what she fought for was what she believed to be their rights, she was determined to do this not only for the period of time in which she lived, but for the future of her people. Despite many obstacles Katie faced while trying to obtain their rights, she did it all with love and honor and did not stop fighting up until her last days, making her a very respected Native American woman.

Posted on

Billy Frank Jr. – Fishing Rights in Alaska

Biographical Timeline | Leadership Qualities | Fishing Rights in Alaska | References

In October 2012, fishing on the Kuskokwim River in Southwest Alaska was closed due to low amounts of king salmon during a salmon run. Native fishermen who depend on salmon, decided to ignore the closure because they believed their rights surpassed the state’s decision to close the river. Alaska State Troopers were notified of the defiant act and descended upon the river, apprehended dozens of nets, and more than 1,000 pounds of fish. The state pressed charges against sixty-one fishermen. This event sparred a rally, not the first rally for fishing rights, and certainly not the last. Alaskans gathered together to demand indigenous fishing and hunting rights be restored. These rights were eliminated under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act in 1971 and since then, Alaska natives often find themselves in a losing battle of rules, regulations, and jurisdiction. In 1980, congress attempted to fix this by enacting the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). In theory, ANILCA was meant to help Alaska Natives by allowing subsistence hunting. However, ANILCA also allowed any rural resident to engage in subsistence hunting if they could prove residency in Alaska for one year.  Subsistence fishing and hunting has been a continuing concern for Alaska’s Natives with no end in sight.

Diagram of who harvests fish and game in Alaska (Alaska Department of Fish and Game).

In 1971, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act attempted to resolve land claims of Alaska’s Natives.  This act gave the legal title of forty-four million acres of land to Alaska’s Natives if it was considered unappropriated and unreserved. Alaska’s Natives were also awarded a $962.5 million settlement. The Settlement Act allowed the development of regional, and smaller village corporations in which all Natives were eligible to be shareholders. These corporations were under Alaska state law and there were no restrictions on using or selling the land. In the continental United States, almost all Native lands are owned by the federal government and cannot be used without the consent of the United States. Because of this difference between Alaska and the continental United States, the Alaska’s Natives’ land is not considered Indian Country and the Natives do not have governmental powers over them. Aboriginal hunting and fishing rights were exterminated despite that subsistence hunting takes less than one percent of the resources. Alaska Natives are required to comply with state laws everywhere in the state. These laws interfere with Alaska Natives’ traditional ways of life and began a lengthy battle for Natives rights.

Some success was meant to come in 1980 when the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act was enacted. The ANILCA is a piece of federal legislation providing protection to millions of acres of land in Alaska. Under this act the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act was implemented more specifically. The ANILCA specifies the designation of wilderness and subsistence management. Since ANILCA, Alaska Natives have practiced subsistence fishing just as they have for hundreds of years. However, Alaska Natives face the frustrating reality that their rights have been restricted. State and federal management of fish and game conflict at times and Alaska Natives become the victim of a diverging government.

Were Billy Frank, Jr. alive today, he would have stood with Alaska Natives in preserving their right to continue subsistence hunting and fishing without regulations from the government. Billy Frank, Jr. was a passionate, and resilient leader. He cared deeply for the preservation of his home, traditions, and people. If Billy Frank, Jr. would have been present in October 2012, it can be speculated that he would continue subsistence fishing despite facing charges from the state government. This assumption comes from the dozens of time Billy Frank, Jr. was arrested for fishing when the government had placed regulations that he did not believe were fair or just. Billy Frank, Jr. believed he had a right to live off the land as his ancestors had for hundreds of years. He trusted that being consistent and resilient would serve his purpose and bring attention to the overlooked travesty of indigenous peoples’ rights.

As an inspirational leader, Billy Frank, Jr. would have done more than just participated in fishing. At his core, he was an activist. He spent his entire life fighting for the rights of indigenous people and held many influential positions including chairman of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission.  Billy Frank, Jr. was defiant, but he was not brash. His actions had thoughtful and strategic purpose. He would have taken time to completely understand the situation and then determined practical solutions. As a reasonable man, Billy Frank, Jr. would have actively sought influential people in government to help his cause. This assumption comes from the video clip, below. In this clip, he speaks about “going together” to the government. It was not fair to let the united states congress, or state legislature dictate the rights of indigenous people without the opinions of indigenous people. Billy Frank, Jr. had a deep understanding that solutions are created from fair representation and compromise between parties and he would have continuously fought for the Alaska Natives’ right to fish.