Arctic Borderlands Ecological Knowledge Co-op

For more information on this discussion paper or on the Borderlands Co-op, contact Joan Eamer, (867) 667-3949

Gary Kofinas posed questions to the group

What do these mean to us, and how can we learn to respect each other more? How can we get more sense of how they're the same and different, and how they can come together to make us all stronger? How do we learn? What methods do we use to learn about the world?

One kind of knowledge isn't better than another. Why we have knowledge is to survive. It's what we do to sustain ourselves.

Randall Tetlichi talked about knowledge

The indigenous way is to use what we have, the natural resources. The environment, we're given it to look after. It's our responsibility to look after it.

When the white people first came here, the native people said "how" and the white people said "why". I spent 90% of my time growing up with my grandparents. They taught me about a lot of stuff. I notice in the traditional world, it's all based on how am I'm going to do this. They never asked why. People at my age level are the last ones to say how. Traditional knowledge is passed on through generations. Experiences from elders that they're passing down to me and to other people. You never hear them say "why?" Didn't ask why I use snowshoes to get a moose, it's by knowledge that was passed down. Traditional knowledge is using the knowledge that we have.

Science is always asking why. Traditional knowledge is all connected with the universe. Science wants to know why it works.

A good thing today is that people have to come together. We have to know why and how. We have to double understand. Growing up I just had to understand my way. Now it's a total different world. I have to train my mind to remember, but I also have to train my mind to understand science. Now I have to double understand and pass the knowledge on. The young people have to double understand, use that knowledge-- how, and why.

Not too long ago Mike would say, "my way's the best". Charlie would say, "my way is right, your way is bad". In the past there was a lot of judgement. The old people tell me, let's work with the white people and work together to move forward.

Discussion

Common to all knowledge is how we believe the world works based on what we see. Often we wonder if our explanations are right. As part of that, we have to look at what we want. Underneath are the things that we assume but don't talk about. Language contains a lot of unspoken assumptions. "How" makes sense if the world is changing at a slow rate. When it is faster, "why" is more important. Or maybe "why" is used because people wanted to change the world.

When I think about science, there are many tribes. Anthropologists are very different from physicists or biologists. Methods are different among scientists just as with native users.

Barney Smith talked about his view of how science works

Talking about caribou migration, the way science looks at that is to break it into pieces. If you can understand the smaller pieces, you should be able to understand the whole picture. Part of that may mean to look in the spring and then in the fall, breaking into separate little puzzles, then you can put that together and look at the big picture. You need to understand variation, like if the snow is deep, do they do something different? You try to see patterns, understand the whole and make predictions about how things would change.

There are rules about what you can say about how things will change. A scientist may not be able to make a guess, because of rules about how we make statements of truth. When someone makes an overall statement of truth, a scientist may ask lots of questions, and may seem rude. These are the same kinds of questions scientists ask each other. There are rules for telling about truth, rules for how you do it, breaking things in parts, how to see how things work.

Discussion

Are there elders in science? Yes, very much. And some people who are very good at writing, and can have a lot of influence. Many old scientists have such a broad knowledge and experience, their judgment is very respected. They can look back over many years and many situations. Younger scientists are concerned about proving themselves, not very confident about what they know and what they don't. What the older scientists say is known and believed and passed down--if those stories aren't right, it takes a long time for them to be overturned.

There is a rule in science that you can't prove anything, you can only test it. It can only be disproved. If one study shows that one theory doesn't work, then the old thinking won't be accepted any more. If there's more belief in it, it will be accepted, but we, as scientists, are not allowed to say it's right for sure.

Before land claims, scientists didn't pay attention to us because we were uneducated and didn't have anything in writing. After land claims, when the scientists came in we could say that we have something to say about scientists working. I've had people come in and tell me after a week of being here. A guy gave a report about whales, and I had to tell him that half of what he said I disagreed with; I've been watching whales for 30 years.

A rule in native traditional knowledge is that I never question anyone older than me. So traditional knowledge is passed down. Today we need to create a new rule. To move forward into the future we need to build a new set of rules to survive.

In science, we have a tradition of doubting everything. We need rules on how to resolve that.

It's easy to say we are using different types of knowledge without any real meaning to it.

If I'm talking to a co-management group, I can't write more than 2 pages. Shrinking it down like that feels very disrespectful for me, it's difficult.

We have to drop judgement. Have to look at what's effective, and get rid of what's bad or good--they'll disappear and we can move forward. That's the way I see it.

As indigenous people we have knowledge, it was already here when westerners came. Why can't scientists pick up the ball from the elders so they can really understand native knowledge? Traditional knowledge is really more like science to me.

Scientists can't do that because it doesn't follow their rules. They're not allowed to do that. Now since land claims, the rules are changing. In co-management boards, they are seeing the value of it and working out a system of how to include it in the other rules. To be a scientist and also listen to elders, they didn't think about how to fit that into the rules.

[As a native researcher] when I did my research, I already knew the rules because it was in my own community, so it was easy for me in my language to explain the questions.

This is also about money, power, and boundaries around knowledge so other people can't get in. It's about knowledge and trust. Science of the whole, the big system as a whole. Science reduces. As Randall pointed out, to use what's effective is the best way to do things.

How do you classify scientists? By their education? Elders are classified as scientists in our terms. In the past we used to have meetings with the scientists. They didn't give a hoot about our knowledge. The Dene nation put together scientists and elders retreats. By the third or fourth time, they realized that the elders knew as much as they did. We need more of that.

We [native people] have different ways. Randall has the privilege of being raised up at home. I was raised in a residential school until 15 years old. Where did we have a chance to learn our traditional knowledge?

If I said to the scientists, it's like this, I know it's a fairy tale to them. When they landed a man on the moon, an elder said, they're not the first ones! We've got a guy up there right now. The elders have a lot of knowledge about weather. They know all that. If I said, Black Mountain is putting on its coat, meaning dirty weather is coming up, you wouldn't believe me. But it's going to happen.

In place of all this computer and indicators and all that stuff, we use medicine and shamanism, that's how we manage it.

[From observations at large Arctic science meetings] in the last 10 years there has been a shift, talking more about people instead of just weather or other science. This is a positive note.

I have to engage myself both in what science and elders are saying. I have to engage in both. What about scientists? They have to also. That's one of the new rules. One of the new rules needs to be, if you don't engage, you don't get the money.

To be continued...