Objective: Define environmental science, and compare environmental science with ecology.
Environmental science from a native perspective is cultivated observations, testing observations to see if hypotheses are correct, and then building healthy practices based on confirmation of that knowledge. This activity is known as being in relationship, and to be in a good relationship with the environment ensured not only surviving but thriving. This knowledge is then held within a lineage that is dedicated to growing the body of knowledge and teaching it to future generations through a process of intergenerational transference of knowledge. There are specific people dedicated to holding the stories of how to understand environment and relationships. These stories are told in a specific way – even inflections in voice were learned to keep the integrity of the story through eons. Traditional environmental knowledge oversees all relationships and includes human beings as part of the environment. Indigenous people have long helped cultivate and evolve species. Native groups practice population management and stewardship so that species will survive in abundance for subsequent generations. For instance, the Tlingit hunted fur-bearing animals such as sea otters and beavers with the understanding of the animals breeding and consumption habits, purposeful hunting helped manage those populations. If they aren’t mindful of how much the population is increasing, then certain animals will destroy the environment. In balance, the Tlingit were also mindful of not overharvesting. Alaska Natives and American Indians have rigid rules about which animals in a group to take in order to keep the population the healthiest, generally the biggest and lead animals are left to bread and lead, which continually improved the quality and renewal of plant, fish, bird, or animal populations. Leaving the leaders ensured that the animals would migrate in the same patterns as before, allowing hunters to anticipate and track their routes for successful hunting in the future. (DeWitt)
Objective: List the five major fields of study that contribute to environmental science.
Anthropology is a field of study that contributes to environmental science. Anthropology is cross-cultural, finding similarities and differences in many cultures and studies “the interactions of the biological, cultural, geographical, and historical aspects of humankind” (Arms). It considers both the insider perspective of the culture and outsider objective perspective of the anthropologist. Subjective understanding with empirical knowledge makes the science stronger. The methods of anthropological work include field work, participation, and considering insider and outsider perspectives. Anthropology seeks to understand and communicate indigenous perspectives, both past and present.
Anthropology often takes an evolutionary approach, considering both the biological and cultural evolution of humans. It also considers ecology, how species interact. As anthropology considers human interactions with the environment, often through the lens of a native perspective, it adds an extra layer to environmental science. The common Westernized view of the environment often classifies the environment simply as resources, adding an indigenous perspective to environmental education should alter that view. Indigenous science is a connection within Anthropology between landscapes, non-humans, and humans (Johnson 14-15). Anthropology and Indigenous knowledge overlap in the form of observation systems (Johnson 17). Indigenous knowledge is not solely rooted in spirituality; there is clear scientific knowledge as well.
Objective: Describe the major environmental effects of hunter-gatherers, the agricultural revolution, and the Industrial Revolution.
Our ancestors were hunter-gatherers for 99% of our evolution. The vast majority of human history had a very different relationship with the environment than we do today. Fortunately, there are some peoples who still live similarly to our ancestors. Indigenous wisdom can help us understand different views of environmental science and give us a better understanding of how our ancestors treated the environment. Hunter-gatherers are more in touch with the environment; they have cultural ties to the environment: for the hunter-gatherers, there is no separation between human and nature, there is no “external world of nature that has to be grasped” (Ingold 40-42). Since hunter-gatherers are more in tune with nature, hunting is done for subsistence and not for sport. As humans transferred out of a hunter-gatherer existence, domination and sport became the reason for hunting (Ingold 69). Indigenous people were able to use hunting as a management system, keeping the natural balance of prey vs. predator in check (Mulder 113). A natural “stewardship of their lands that maintained an ideal balance” was established in indigenous science (Cajete 170).
Hunter-gatherers learned how they affected the environment through their actions, which allowed them to improve their behaviors based on cultivated knowledge and experiences, allowing hunter-gatherers to be dynamic, changing and adapting to the environment. They lived in balance with nature and tended the wild: hunter-gatherers improved the return of plants, animals, etc. There would often be an overabundance of foods and medicines in the tended areas. Hunter-gatherers follow natural cycles, seasons, and live in harmony while ever improving the environment. If environmental systems collapsed, they would have to accept experiences, adapting and sometimes even migrate. The Tlingit would be considered to have semi-nomadic migration patterns. They would have houses in the winter in a village and go to fish camps in the summer. Many other Alaska Natives like the Inuit and Athabascans practiced seasonal rounds. Other migrations patterns included nomadic and settled. Nomadic groups would stay in a location based on the season and what was available, continuously following a food source. Other tribes were more settled and would have underground permafrost cellars to keep whale and other harvested foods in. The human pattern of movement was based on the type of foods and environment that they were specialized in. Alaska Natives did practice some agriculture pre-contact. They would cultivate crops like potatoes and tobacco. Growing crops with high caloric yield was a good safety net for populations, but having populations rely completely on agriculture can be very risky and wasn’t sustainable in most regions. (DeWitt)
Alaska Natives have been assimilated into the industrialized sector through colonization, incorporation, and consumerism. These processes have caused great harm and significant loss to the American Indian and Alaska Native people. As the industrial revolution took off, production of food and goods became mechanized, increasing abundance that allowed the population of America to surge – increasing through an influx of immigrant workers mainly from Europe. This has taken a heavy toll on the environment through unchecked exponential growth, which is unsustainable, causing the environment to become out of balance, also known as climate change. Currently, in the Post-Industrial Era, Alaska Natives and American Indians are in a cultural renaissance. They are reviving traditional practices while fighting to change persisting oppressive institutional policies. There are regulations still in place that criminalize traditional ways of life. Indigenous people have strict rules about when, how, and what to hunt, these traditionally based protocols don’t always correlate with government regulations. (DeWitt)
Objective: Describe “The Tragedy of the Commons”
A shift has occurred in the view of common resources. In human past, people would take only what they needed. Today we have “the tragedy of the commons.” If people don’t understand the natural highs and lows of populations and the proper human response to those changes, humans could risk threatening the whole species. Indigenous community knowledge is hard won knowledge as they have come to learn this. People have long interacted with the environment and harsh conditions and have been tested. Mulder and Coppolillo explain that “[f]undamental to the tragedy of the commons is a social dilemma. Social dilemmas occur whenever an individual’s decision to maximize short-term self-interest leads to a situation in which all other participants in that person’s community are left worse off than feasible alternatives” (Mulder 131). In many indigenous communities, there isn’t a problem of people maximizing their short-term self-interests, as this is against their traditional practices.
Meda is critical of using an explanation like a “tragedy of the commons.” This idea separating people from each other and from the land. Owning land is a fictitious system and traditionally, no one owned resources. Resources are instead viewed as relatives and interdependent relationships built for survival. The appropriate concept, instead of ownership, would be guardianship or stewardship. Indigenous groups had areas of land and water that they would inherit the duty of protecting and cultivating. Rather than a “tragedy of the commons,” there is a natural law to understand need and dependence on the environment to sustain human life. In a culture with traditional indigenous values, there is no worry about a “tragedy of the commons.” They understand the dynamic system of relatedness between species and the importance of biodiversity. Rather than extracting resources from the environment, they cultivate all different kinds of species to work together in the environment. (DeWitt)
Objective: Explain the law of supply and demand
An indigenous perspective on supply and demand is that people today don’t understand the actual value or costs of what is utilized. Many people don’t consider the interconnectedness of the environment and how taking one thing affects many others. A Western view is to simply take from the environment when there is a demand for it. However, we may not see immediate consequences, overuse of an area will eventually crash the supply and ruin the natural regulation also known as natural law. (DeWitt)
A more appropriate way to think of this would be that Creator and Mother Earth provide for us. Our relatives: the plants, animals, minerals, and others look after us as well. When we are cultivating an area we observe cycles, meaning that eating habits, textiles, and trade items fluctuate depending on what is in abundance. Also, in a reciprocal concept, if we stop utilizing a certain item then its population diminishes or goes away, usually due to lack of protection and cultivation. A third aspect of indigenous supply and demand, is that if something is overharvested and or wasted then nature views that as providing too much and reduces what is available. Traditionally being wasteful is strongly discouraged, because it could mean that resource will become scarce in the future. While wasting is viewed as an inconsequential act to a modern person, it indicates that there are behaviors within the population that signify laziness and/or disrespect that would bring about the outcomes of an ecosystem crash. (DeWitt)
Objective: List the three differences between developed and developing countries
From an indigenous perspective, not all wealthy, prosperous, “developed” countries are heading in the right direction. Many developed countries have poor education about the environment they are living in, high levels of waste, and have large carbon footprints. They are consumerism based with their success tethered to exponential growth on a planet with limited resources. This is a recipe for failure. Developing countries still remember how to live Pre-Industrial Era and many of them are skipping directly to the technological era. In both developed and developing countries, a system of renewable energy and conscious resource usage is required to justly transition through the rapidly changing climate cycles. (DeWitt)
Objective: Explain what sustainability is, and describe why it is a goal of environmental science.
Sustainability is the concept of renewing what is used and keeping things at consistent levels. While sustainability is an admirable goal, we can learn from indigenous groups about the consistent cultivation of natural systems. With the understanding that the environment is constantly changing, it is important to work and live in harmony with natural cycles of expansion and contraction in abundance. Indigenous wisdom seeks to constantly learn and improve upon the environment and its yield: seeking long-term improvement rather than false short term benefits. One way is to pay attention to the health of the heard, following long-held knowledge like not killing the lead animal of a herd, which is the leader and remembers the migration routes, or not pulling the roots of a plant if the roots aren’t being utilized. Indigenous peoples harvest responsibly so that there will still be more to harvest later. (DeWitt)
Objective: Distinguish between renewable and nonrenewable resources.
Some resources can only be used once then they are gone, while other items can replenish themselves. Non-renewable resources are often coal, oil, metals, and minerals. Renewables are usually insect, plant, fish, bird, animal, or organism based. However, if not protected and cultivated appropriately and in balance, renewable resources can also become depleted or extinct. Renewables in energy production usually refer to sun, wind, geothermal, tidal, and other replenishing based actions. Water, air, food, and medicines usually are viewed as being renewable, but can be compromised or unusable due to pollution based on non-renewable resource extraction, transport, processing, and utilization. (DeWitt)
Ecological systems cannot sustain the current human population with extractive resources. Nonrenewable resources have a greater cost than what is passed on to the consumer at the time of purchase, especially because it is subsidized by governmental systems and disproportionately burdens those with lower socioeconomic status. We are also borrowing from and placing undue burden on future generations. Indigenous wisdom views oil as Mother Earth’s blood, it acts as a lubricant in crunch zones between the tectonic plates. Once it is extracted, we can’t get it back. Currently this is being demonstrated by the increased earthquake activity in areas that Fracking has been conducted in places that aren’t known for having earthquakes. (DeWitt)
Indigenous food gathering practices have become overly regulated and monetized. Governmental agencies and industry now value commercial or sports hunting and fishing income, relegating indigenous use as “subsistence” with the least support or say in the governance over the animals and fisheries. Without the capacity to tend or follow the animals in a traditional way, it has become expensive and complex to engage in subsistence harvesting. The competing systems of indigenous and cash economy with aide of regulations and policy create a false comparison, making ease of access to cheap goods the more viable option. However, many of the available western food sources and goods that are available aren’t sustainable or renewable. Especially in rural Alaska, were milk shipped up from the continental United States may be $11.00 a gallon. While the traditional foods like salmon, which is available in the stream located by the village, when canned with the bone-in is a better source of Vitamin D, calcium, and rich in healthy high quality fatty acids. Salmon would be the renewable resource as long as it is not overfished by commercial or sports fisherman. (DeWitt)
Sam says that everything natives used in the past were primarily renewable resources. All the plants and animals they ate were maintained by not over-harvesting. When he was younger he remembers fishing along a river where they would create a fence across the river to catch lots of fish. The fence was dismantled after they got fish and any extra was distributed to others in the village, who didn’t have dogs to get to the river, or couldn’t walk well. They made sure everyone got their share of fish and none was wasted. Many of the resources were seasonal, because of migration patterns. Certain species will come through an area at certain times. Eels would be fished in the fall migratory run and moose would be hunted when they are in the best condition. Sam remembers hunting migrating geese, when the whole sky seemed to be filled with birds. The flyaway has changed now and there aren’t as many birds now, probably due to climate changes. (Demientieff)
Objective: Classify environmental problems into three major categories.
Meda says that the three problems that our environment currently faces are human population, climate change, and pollution. These are directly related to a lack of respect and not observing natural law. The root cause is the human population viewing themselves as above the ecosystem and not part of the ecosystem. In indigenous cultures, there are historical accounts handed down in oral traditions from ancient times. Many of these stories recount geological events such as Ice Ages and mini Ice Ages coming and going. This process is viewed as a cycle in nature that requires adaptation in human behavior to transition through it well. However, humans have made the capacity to transition through the changing climate events harder than in past times due to: the denial of climate change happening, excessive pollution, and over population. The second two issues could be addressed through collaborative efforts if the first issue of climate change denial is mitigated. (DeWitt)
Sam agrees with this and explains that a subsistence lifestyle is misunderstood. A subsistence lifestyle is not just the physical process of fishing, hunting, or trapping for food. A subsistence lifestyle is also the whole of living and life, in understanding that everything has a spirit. Their whole lives revolve around what the environment supplies. They help renew the environment and then the environment helps them. This way of life is also about teaching the younger generation how to hunt and treat animals with respect. The animals allow themselves to be hunted and they thank them for being there for them. This is why you don’t say you are going out hunting. That would be bragging and the animals can sense that. The native way of life is to take care of the earth. Once a population starts to deplete, they would move on to a new area until the old area has time to regenerate. Not allowing this time for regeneration and respect for the environment creates environmental problems. If you take care of the land, it takes care of you. (Demientieff)
In Alaska, they are seeing effects on rivers, trees, and the boreal forests as a whole. The earth is suffering. It is drying up. People have been taught to watch for signs in nature. One sign that the environment is changing and not doing well is when strange animals come into an area or the country. Southern animals are starting to move north, because the climate is warming. The reason why a lot of people don’t know these things is because they don’t ask. If you ask you’d probably learn something. (Demientieff)