(MintPress) – “The tribes’ treaty rights, the basis of their economy, culture and way of life are at stake,” said Mike Grayum, executive director of Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, speaking about dwindling salmon populations along the coastline of the Pacific northwest.
Grayum’s organization, which represents 20 treaty tribes including the Hoh, Upper Skagit, Puyallup, Tulalip, Nooksack and Nisqually are saying that their treaty rights with the U.S. government are being violated, as the salmon populations dry up due to factors such as development, logging, loss of wetlands and flood plains, overfishing, pollution, bulkheads along shorelines and increased human activity, according to a recent report in the Seattle Times.
In an interview with MintPress, Grayum said the tribes’ “whole existence – their economy, their food, their culture, all depend on these natural resources, especially the salmon.”
Fearing that salmon, of high cultural importance to the indigenous tribes of the Pacific Northwest, will dry up, the tribes are threatening to take legal action if the U.S. government does not step up and help them replenish the salmon population along the northwest Coast and Puget Sound.
Significance of the salmon
Historically, the salmon have been of great importance to the tribes of that area, and the American government acknowledged this over 150 years ago. The tribes in the areas ceded land rights to the government in exchange for rights to continue to fish the salmon and other wildlife. “When treaties were signed in the 1850s between the U.S. government and tribes of the Northwest and Plateau, the right to continue taking salmon was written in. The U.S. wanted to save money by having native people feed themselves, while the native people did not want to turn into crop farmers or stoop laborers,” Dr. Jay Miller, native North American tribal expert, writes.
Salmon and other marine life are also part and parcel of the religious and ritualistic life of various tribes in the area. “What stands out clearly from native sources is how much people identified with these underwater beings. Epics told what it was like to be a salmon, where they came from, what they did and how they live among themselves, looking at home very much like humans,” Miller says.
In addition to holding a specific cultural significance, the salmon are also valuable to the tribes as sustenance and for commercial economic reasons. However, over time, the fish populations have increasingly declined.
A recent report from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that “throughout the Pacific Northwest (northern California, Oregon, Idaho, Washington and the Columbia Basin portion of British Columbia), many wild salmon stocks have declined and some have disappeared. Substantial efforts have been made to restore some runs of wild salmon, but few have shown much success.”
“We ceded all this land to the United States for a contract to protect our salmon, our way of life, our culture. We’re gatherers and we’re harvesters. And they forgot about us,” Billy Frank Jr., chairman of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission and a member of the Nisqually Tribe, told the Times.
But violations of the treaty rights have been going on since 1854, Grayum says. “They ceded their land in exchange for certain rights, and this is the most important right from their perspective.”
A dwindling population and efforts to revive the Eco-system
Populations of salmon and other marine life have been trailing off for years, largely due to human activity. “American settlement and sprawling construction have destroyed or polluted salmon habitats, killing these fish and extinguishing whole runs. The development of canned salmon made fishing profitable for the world market, but massive overfishing with devices such as fish wheels led to dwindling supplies that soon brought natives and other commercial fishers into court. Judges upheld the treaty right, allowing natives back into the fishery, but ignorance and bitterness still lurk,” Miller says.
The EPA report does not paint a rosy outlook for the future of the salmon, explaining, “Even with definitive scientific knowledge, which will never be complete or certain, restoring most wild salmon runs in the Pacific Northwest to historic levels will be arduous and will entail substantial economic costs and social disruption required. Ultimate success cannot be assured. Given the appreciable costs and social dislocation, coupled with the dubious probability of success, candid public dialog is warranted to decide whether restoration of wild salmon is an appropriate, much less feasible, public policy objective.”
Tribal leaders and activists see a lack of political will to make improvements in habitat for the fish, despite the acknowledgement from the government that problems continue.
The Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, in a 2009 statement to the White House Council on Environmental Quality, wrote, “The treaty tribes of western Washington have been natural resource stewards for our lands and waters since time immemorial. Sustainability has been the key component of our management philosophy. Preserving our fish and wildlife resources, as well as access to them, is essential to our economic, cultural, and spiritual well being. This importance has always been understood by our people and is why our hunting and fishing rights are secured under treaty with the United States. The breadth and scope of current tribal involvement in all aspects of natural resource issues underscores how essential it remains to tribal life today.”
The Commission also pointed out that the inclusion of tribal perspectives in the governments’ development of ocean and coastal policy is both “appropriate and necessary to fulfill the federal government’s treaty trust responsibilities.”
The group also recommended that a national ocean policy include the following elements: a monitoring element to measure and track change in the eco-system, a plan for assessing the amount of wildlife in the area and a research body to address issues of climate change, ocean acidification and spatial planning.
“Climate change and ocean acidification are real problems that will require substantive action across all levels of government. Effects are being felt now by the tribes not only through our natural resources, but daily life within our communities as well,” the letter concludes.
“We appreciate the Obama Administration’s acknowledgement that tribal nations are sovereigns, self-governing political entities and should be engaged in a government-to-government manner. We view this conversation as a natural progression of that acknowledgment. It is our desire to work with the task force to develop ocean and coastal policies that both protect our shared natural resources and enhance the government-to-government relationship between the tribes and federal government.”
Response (or lack thereof) from the government
In July 2010, President Obama signed an Executive Order which established the National Policy for the Stewardship of the Ocean, Our Coasts, and the Great Lakes, which sets forth a vision for America “that ensures our ocean, coasts and Great Lakes are healthy and resilient, safe and productive, and understood and treasured so as to promote the well-being, prosperity, and security of present and future generations. To achieve this vision the National Ocean Policy establishes a comprehensive, collaborative, regionally based planning process—coastal and marine spatial planning (CMSP),” documents from the workshop in Washington, D.C. where leaders met to outline how to implement the plan read.
While the first day of the workshop was open to the public, the remainder of the conference aimed at coordinating efforts between federal, state and tribal stakeholders, which the government said was integral to “develop an approach tailored to the unique needs of each region.”
Today, however the tribes say little progress has been made.
“A lot of people are talking about the importance of salmon,” Grayum said, “but little is being accomplished.”
After the White House Council on Environmental Quality, responding to pressure from the tribes, directed regional leaders of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to hatch a plan to address concerns, the governmental agencies vowed to make better use of existing regulatory authorities and incentive programs to protect and restore salmon habitat, and they announced plans to establish a forum between tribes and federal agencies.
The tribes are currently discussing how to respond and are pondering taking legal action if their concerns are not properly addressed.
Grayum says that litigation is “not the preferred course of action, but if that’s the only option left they would not shy away from that.”
“It’s a long road and we understand that, but there’s more we think needs to be done,” Grayum said, adding, “We need to stop the destruction.”