Principle – Society accepts responsibility for sustainability.

Criterion- Recognition and respect for Aboriginal roles in sustainable forest management (Aboriginal Rights, Treaty Rights and aboriginal values).

Indicator – Extent to which forest management planning takes into account the protection of unique or significant Aboriginal social, cultural or spiritual sites.

Box B: Definition:

This indicator is designed to assess two components: i) the extent to which Aboriginal values -- be they tangible elements such as cultural features, cultural landscapes, spiritual sites, traditional use sites or intangible elements such as respect of elders, Aboriginal resource management practices etc. -- are known; and ii) the extent to which these values, including traditional ecological knowledge, are respected and incorporated into forest management activities.

Box D: Applicability to Different Landowners:

This is applicable to all landowners for whom aboriginal rights or treaty rights overlap their jurisdictions (in the U.S. federal landowners are obligated only other landowners may voluntarily participate in order to achieve sustainability) . Consequently, some landowners in particular jurisdictions may not be affected by this indicator.

Box E: Overlap:

CIFOR – BAG: 2.2 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.2.4 2.2.2 2.2.3 1.1.3 2.3.1

2.2 2.2.4 2.1.3

CCFM: 6.1.1 6.2.1. 6.2.4

Notes: While Aboriginal territory, reserves or treaty lands may not cover all forest management units, few areas in forested North American have not been occupied, at least seasonally, by Aboriginal people. Consequently, this indicator should be generally applicable across all scales.

Notes: This indicator is descriptive of the current conditions associated with Aboriginal peoples. Some trend data may be available from some organization such as the Canadian Forestry Service or the National Aboriginal Forestry Association. The presence of trend data would enable this indicator to be used in a somewhat more predictive fashion.

Box I: Underlying Concepts:

Aboriginal peoples are recognized to be distinct from other forest actors in recognition of their sovereign rights. A suite of indicators that addresses sustainability issues with respect to Aboriginal peoples is a recognition that these peoples are "Not Just Another Stakeholder" (National Aboriginal Forestry Association, 1995). However, CIFOR-BAG criteria and indicators 2.1, 2.2, 2.1.2, 2.1.3, and 2.2.4 measure similar concepts for ‘forest actors’ in general.

In North America, many Aboriginal people are traditionally forest-based or forest dwelling people. For these peoples, forests provided a means to sustain life through hunting, trapping or gathering activities. In the Pacific Northwest for example, the Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicata) is considered the tree of life. Red Cedar provided material for long house construction, canoes, clothing, rope and fishing gear among other things. While some Red Cedar were harvested in their entirety for long houses or construction, bark and plank harvesting was conducted for thousands of years from living trees. Culturally modified trees (CMT’s) are an enduring feature of this vital relationship. Specific features such as CMTs, blazes, pictographs, petroglyphs, are point specific cultural features of Aboriginal origin but entire landscapes also have Aboriginal value as ‘cultural landscapes’. The concept of a cultural landscape recognizes the inherent cultural value of an area including traditional harvesting areas and spiritual areas. A cultural landscape is an inherent expression of the interrelationship of Aboriginal people with the forest environment and the lack of separation in many First Nations languages between the concepts of cultural and ecological resources. Since point specific features are often included in archaeological data bases and protected by archaeological legislation, the definition of aboriginal values by examination only of point specific features has a tendency to result in the definition of Aboriginal cultures as ‘historic’ and not active and thriving cultures.

CIFOR-BAG notes that this indicator is based on a number of assumptions. The first is that it is believed that forest actors often have natural resource management systems that are (or have been) viable, and that as such, they can make valuable contributions to ‘modern’ management (Clay, 1988; Colfer and Wadley, 1996). The second assumption is that pro-active attempts to integrate indigenous systems with more conventional models, where the two stakeholder groups may otherwise compete, may also lead to better overall management, as well as being less disruptive to forest actors and their existing systems and may be helpful in minimizing conflicts (Colfer, Prabhu and Wollenberg, 1995). TEK is not typically organized in a standard, western-scientific or resource management framework and as such has often been ignored or devalued. This indicator is based upon the assumption that information from multiple sources is valuable and valued and that some mechanism needs to exist to incorporate this information into forest management.

Box J: Relevance to Sustainable/Unsustainable Management :

In Canada, more than 80% of Aboriginal communities lie in the productive forest zones of Canada. Similarly, in the US and Mexico, many aboriginal groups are forest peoples. Aboriginal use of forest land – be it subsistence or commercial fishing, hunting, trapping or gathering – affects forest management and thus, forest management planning. Where Aboriginal peoples have rights for traditional, ceremonial, subsistence, or commercial harvest of timber, the relevance to sustainable forest management is also clear. As sustaining human well being is one important aspect of sustainability, respecting aboriginal and treaty rights is an important first level in assessing sustainability.

Examining the extent to which Aboriginal values are a) known and b) respected an incorporated in forest management is a useful assessment of Aboriginal well-being. Without knowledge of Aboriginal values, forest managers can not respect these values. Subsequently if Aboriginal values are not respected and incorporated into forest management the ability of forest-based Aboriginal cultures to sustain their cultural connections with the land are threatened.

Box K: Measurement Methods:

Measurement methods that can be used to assess this indicator include:

1. A quantitative or qualitative study of the extent to which Aboriginal peoples feel that their values are respected and incorporated in forest management activities;
2. an assessment of inventories, traditional use studies, archaeological inventories and oral history studies to examine the extent of their coverage of the forest management unit; and/or
3. an examination of procedures used by forest land managers to both incorporate Aboriginal values in land management decision making and to minimize negative impacts on these values;
4. content analysis for Forest Management Plans for incorporation and consideration of Aboriginal values.

This indicator is designed to assess two components: i) the extent to which Aboriginal values, be they tangible elements such as cultural features, cultural landscapes, spiritual sites, traditional use sites or intangible elements such as respect of elders, Aboriginal resource management practices etc., are known and ii) the extent to which these values are respected and incorporated in forest management activities.

Box L: Data Required:

In Canada, the Canadian Forestry Service has collected data for past years regarding some Aboriginal forestry activities including on-reserve forestry activities (CCFM, 1997). Since the creation of the National Aboriginal Forestry Association, founded in 1991, a number of studies on Aboriginal participation in forestry activities and surveys of participation in business and economic opportunities have been collected (NAFA).

In many jurisdictions, archaeological site inventories note specific Aboriginal archaeological features. In the U.S., the Antiquities Act provides protection for recognized archaeological features. In Canada, legislation varies from province to province but most have some sort of legislation such as the BC Heritage Conservation Act which protects inventories Archaeological sites, the Ontario Timber Management Guidelines for the Protection of Cultural Heritage Resources or the Yukon and Northwest Territories land claims agreement documents.

Many Aboriginal communities or Nations are conducting or have completed traditional use studies or land-use studies to map social, cultural and spiritual sites (see for example the BC Traditional-Use Study (TUS) program). In Alberta for example, Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries (Al-Pac), worked with Aboriginal communities to map their traditional areas and incorporate this information into the company’s forest management plan.

TUS studies are especially prevalent in areas undergoing land-claims negotiations or Treaty renegotiations. Much of this information is confidential until it has been utilized in these negotiations process and confidentiality and privacy of these data sources is a significant concern. The Aboriginal Mapping Network, a WWW platform provides one mechanism for connecting to Aboriginal groups using mapping and GIS information to inventory and evaluate Aboriginal values.

Box M: Data Used for the North American Test:

Data sources used include:

• Hanes, R.C. 1995 (DRAFT). American Indian Interest in the Northern Intermontane of Western North America. Social Assessment Report for the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project. ICEBEMP.
• Interview with BNF Archaeologist Will Reed
• Boise National Forest 1990 Land and Resource Management Plan

Box N: Example Results:

Inventories, Traditional Use Studies, Archaeological Inventories and Oral History Studies

While traditional use studies, oral history studies or other inventories have not been conducted for the BNF, archaeological inventories are a part of existing requirements. A number of aboriginal archaeological features have been identified for the BNF including isolated artifacts, lithic scatters, rock art and seasonal camps (Wilson, 1985). The BNF EIS documents indicates that while over 600 cultural resource projects have been completed they have examined only approximately 4.3% of the Forest. No map was available during the test period, however, this information can be obtained from the BNF archaeologist.

In a discussion of occupation and use of the northern intermontane region, Hanes’ discusses the importance of place that is "embedded in Indian culture as reflected in the languages which serve a ‘symbolic link’ to the land". Place names, "relay traditional knowledge of land and resources referring either to plants and animals which characterize a location, the actions of people at a location, the spiritual role of the location, or some other important attribute of the site" (Hanes, 1975). The subsistence range, exclusive use areas, trust lands, cultural landscapes and cultural sites are all scales at which these cultural values are expressed. While Hanes’ provides an overview of the cultural values at the northern intermontane region scale this information is not specific to our study area.

Aboriginal Calendar and Traditional Knowledge

One form of representing aboriginal knowledge and culture within a contemporary context is through a calendar format. While no similar resource was readily available for the study area, a seasonal calendar was available in Hanes (1995) for the Columbia Plateau area. This seasonal calendar denotes culturally important plants and animals by season of harvest and availability. The calendar blends the two Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal cultures together through the use of the seasonal cycles imposed on the Gregorian (contemporary) calendar.

The Plateau Seasonal Round

(Source: Hunn, 1991.)

Procedures to Incorporate Aboriginal Values

Within the U.S. context, consultation with aboriginal people but not defined. The Forest Service’s American Indian/Alaska Native Policy Statement (FSM 1563) summarizes the relationship between the Forest Service and Tribal governments and directs the organization to:

• "Implement Forest Service programs and activities honoring Indian treaty rights and fulfill legally mandated trust responsibilities to the extent that they are determined applicable to National Forest System lands; and
• Administer programs and activities to address and be sensitive to traditional native religious beliefs and practices" (USDA-FS, 1997).

This second policy statement specifically directs the FS to identify and acknowledge cultural needs in Forest Service activities and consider those values as an important part of management on the national forests. To date, incorporation of Aboriginal values into forest management activities in the Boise National Forest has been minimal although specific issues around aboriginal graves and spiritual sites have been noted in the current scoping document.

For archaeological resources, the Boise National Forest Final EIS notes that final approval for forest projects generally requires a cultural resource inventory survey to ensure the conservation of archaeological resources. The Final EIS notes that given the proportion of Forest land un-inventoried, the Forest "will continue to meet the requirements of historic preservation laws, but only minimally" (USDA-FS, 1990).

Box O: Assessing the Practicality:

Traditional use studies, archaeological surveys and other formal assessments of Aboriginal values can be costly and time consuming activities unless that information is already available as a result of land claim or treaty negotiations or is a requirement of the legislation the forest manager operates under. If such data is available, an assessment of the extent to which forest manager policies or plans respect and incorporate this information can be assessed relatively cost effectively and in a repeated fashion.

Aboriginal liaison officers or similar positions (e.g., heritage archaeologists) at some Forest Management units can serve as a useful conduit for information for this indicator and can assist in tracking and repeated measure of this indicator. Original qualitative or quantitative surveys of the extent to which Aboriginal values are incorporated in forest management planning would be relatively expensive unless combined with other indicator measurement and would undoubtedly require specific institutional arrangements with Aboriginal Tribal governments.

Box P: Assessing the Information Value:

The definition of this indicator requires the examination of the original data (e.g., Aboriginal feature maps) as well as an assessment of the extent to which this information is included in forest management. If only the presence of the original data is assessed the information value is relatively low but it can be improved if the examination of the incorporation of the data into forest planning is included.

Box Q: Overall assessment:

Accepted.

The strengths of this indicator are that it provides a measure both of the existence of information about Aboriginal values and the extent to which this information is included in forest management planning activities. The strength of this indicator can be enhanced if data collection for this variable is combined with data collection for CIFOR-BAG indicators 2.1.1 through 2.2.3. These indicators are written in a more stepwise fashion and allow evaluation of each component related to respecting and valuing stakeholder input. The weaknesses of this indicator is that there will be a tendency, because of the ease of data collection, for forest managers to assess the degree to which they have knowledge of, and incorporate, values associated with Aboriginal features, particularly historic features and to exclude examination of broader Aboriginal values.

Box R: Did you rewrite or revise to a new indicator. If so what?

No

Box S: References:

Most of these references come from an excellent WWW site: www.conbio.rice.edu/nae/ball.htn/

• Becker, Rolan R. and Thomas S. Corse. 1997. The Flathead Indian Reservation: Resetting the Clock with Uneven-Aged Management. Journal of Forestry 98(11):29-32.
• [Uneven-aged management has been used on the Flathead Indian Reservation in northwestern Montana to generate income and meet the cultural and spiritual needs of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. A long-term case study has led to tentative conclusions about residual basal area, size distribution, and Q-slope goals on appropriate habitat types. Uneven-aged prescriptions are compatible with ecosystem management and simulate the effects of frequent, low-intensity fires and return the forest to pre-European-settlement conditions.]
• Bombay, Harry. 1993. Many Things to Many People: Aboriginal Forestry in Canada is Looking Toward Balanced Solutions. Cultural Survival Quarterly 17(1): 15.
• Canadian Council of Forest Ministers. 1997. Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management in Canada. Technical Report 1997. Canadian Forest Service, Ottawa, ON.
• Clay, J.W. 1988. Indigenous Peoples and Tropical Forests. Cultural Survival, Inc. Cambridge, Mass.
• Colfer, C.J.P., and R. Wadley. 1996. Assessing "Participation" in Forest Management: Workable Methods and Unworkable Assumptions. Working Paper No. 12, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.
• Colfer, C.J.P., R. Prabhu, and E. Wollenberg. 1995. Principles, Criteria and Indicators: Applying Ockham’s Razor to the People-Forestry Link. Working Paper No. 8, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.
• Davis, Shelton H. 1993. Self-Determination and Resources: Forestry is at the Forefront of Initiatives to Revitalize Reservation Economies in the United States. Cultural Survival Quarterly 17(1): 24.
• Diemer, J.A., and R.C. Alvarez. 1995. Sustainable Communities Sustainable Forestry: A Participatory Model. Journal of Forestry. Nov. pp. 10-14.
• Dillsaver, Joe D. 1977. Natural Resources: Federal Control over Indian Timber. American Indian Law Review 5: 415-422.
• Einbender, LeGrand and D.B. Wood. 1991. Social Forestry in the Navajo Nation. Journal of Forestry 89(1): 12-18. [Now LeGrand Einbender-Velez.]
• Faiman-Silva, Sandra L. 1988. Tribal Land to Private Land: A Century of Oklahoma Choctaw Timberland Alienation from the 1880s to the 1980s. Journal of Forest History 32(4): 191-204.
• Fox, Franklin G. Jr. 1977. Bureau of Indian Affairs' Timber Sales Policies: Economic Impacts on the Flathead Indian Reservation. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington.
• Gordon, John et al. 1993. An Assessment of Indian Forests and Forest Management in the United States. Indian Forest Management Assessment Team. Portland: Intertribal Timber Council.
• Hanes, R.C. 1995 (DRAFT). American Indian Interest in the Northern Intermontane of Western North America. Social Assessment Report for the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project. ICEBEMP.
• Hosmer, Brian C. 1991. Creating Indian Entrepreneurs: Menominees, Neopit Mills, and Timber Exploitation, 1890-1915. American Indian Culture and Research Journal 15(1): 1-28.
• [The building of a sawmill at Neopit, Wisconsin by the U.S. government and its impact on the Menominee. - Reviewer Unknown]
• Hunn, E.S. 1991. The plateau. In: C.M. Buan, R. Lewis. The First Oregonians. Oregon Council for the Humanities: Portland
• Huntsinger, Lynn. 1995. A Forest for the Trees: Forest Management and the Yurok Environment, 1850 to 1994. American Indian Culture and Research Journal 19(4): 155.
• Kosek, Jon. 1993. Ethics, Economics, and Ecosystems: Can British Columbia's Indigenous People Blend the Economic Potential of Forest Resources with Traditional Philosophies? Cultural Survival Quarterly 17(1): 19.
• Koyiyumptewa, B.K. 1993. Spiritual Values of the Pinon-Juniper Woodland: A Hopi Perspective. In USFS General Technical Report RM-236, pp. 19-20.
• Mathias-Mundy, Evelyn and Olivia Muchena et al. 1992. Indigenous Technical Knowledge of Private Tree Management: A Bibliographic Report. Ames: Iowa State University.
• McConnell, L. 1995. National Forest Land Use Planning: The Legal Requirements and Cultural Needs of American Indians. In Managing Forests to Meet People's Needs: Proceedings of the 1994 Society of American Foresters/Canadian Institute of Forestry Convention, Anchorage, AK, Sept. 18-22. Bethesda: Society of American Foresters, pp. 351-356.
• McCorquodale, Scott M. and Rosemary H. Leach et al. 1997. The Yakama Indian Reservation: Integrating Native American Values into Commercial Forestry. Journal of Forestry 98(11):15-18.
• [Designed to retain ecological and cultural features important to the tribe, forest management on the Yakama Indian Reservation, Washington State, emphasizes traditional resource values but is also highly profitable. Land-use management areas are identified as reserves, resource-emphasis stands, or commerical logging areas; site-specific measures are also employed. The Yakama recognize that stand health and profit maximization are sometimes compromised by measures designed to conserve other values, but conservation of such fundamental resources as water, wildlife, and fish warrants special consideration.]
• Miller, Ronald K. 1997. Southwest Woodlands: Cultural Uses of the "Forgotten Forest." Journal of Forestry 98(11):24-28.
• [For centuries, Native Americans of the Southwest have used woodland resources for a wide variety of practical and ceremonial uses. Current strategies focus on integrated management guided by tribal culture and priorities. Woodland areas are being managed for the production of fuelwood, posts and poles, pi-on nuts, and other traditional commodities. Nonconsumptive uses of the woodland are equally important and include ceremonial uses and areas set aside for wildlife habitat, recreation, and scenic beauty.]
• Miller, Ronald K. and S.K. Albert. 1993. Zuni Cultural Relationship to Pinon-Juniper Woodlands. In USFS General Technical Report RM-236, pp. 74-78.
• Moss, Madonna L. 1986. Native American Religious Use in the Pacific Northwest: A Case Study from the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest. Northwest Anthropological Research Notes 20(2): 191-201.
• Motanic, D.A. 1990. Bureau of Indian Affairs' Policies, Field Implementation and Issues Affecting Its Forestry Program on the Frontier, which Includes Cooperating Organizations. In Forestry on the Frontier: Proceedings of the 1989 Society of American Foresters National Convention. Bethseda: Society of American Foresters, pp. 304-307. [Describes how the federal government relates to tribal government and how this relationship affects outside organizations.]
• Nafziger, Rich. 1976. A Violation of Trust? Federal Management of Indian Timber Lands. Indian Historian 9(3): 15-23.
• National Aboriginal Forestry Association. 875 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON (613) 233-5563
• Nathan, Holly. 1993. Aboriginal Forestry: The Role of the First Nations. In Touch Wood: BC Forests at the Crossroads. Ken Drushka and Bob Nixon et al, eds. Madeira Park: Harbour Publishing, pp. 137-170. [Discusses the participation of BC First Nations in the timber industry and government resource management programs.]
• Pavel, D. Michael and Gerald B. Miller et al. 1993. Too Long, Too Silent: The Threat to Cedar and the Sacred Ways of the Skokomish. American Indian Culture and Research Journal 17(3): 53-80.
• Pecore, Marshall and Larry Nesper. 1993. "The Trees will Last Forever": The Integrity of the Forest Signifies the Health of the Menominee People. Cultural Survival Quarterly 17(1): 28.
• Pinkerton, Evelyn W. 1983. Forest Management and Haida Land Claims. BC Studies 57: 69-85.
• Pomeroy, Kenneth B. and J.G. Yoho.. 1964. North Carolina Lands: Ownership, Use and Management of Forest and Related Lands. Washington, DC: American Forestry Association.
• Tonantzin Land Institute. 1988. Havasupai, Forest Service at Loggerheads over Canyon Mine. Tribal Peoples Survival, Summer: 2.
• USDA-FS. 1990. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Boise National Forest Plan. USDA-FS. Boise National Forest.
• Watson, Edith L. 1945. Giving the Forest Back to the Indians. American Forests 51: 590.
• Wilson, M. A., 1985. Boise National Forest Cultural Resource Overview. USDA-FS. Boise National Forest.