When the River of Life Gets Dammed: Colonization and Indigenous Survival

Early European contact with indigenous populations in the Americas, Africa, and elsewhere throughout history has often resulted in the destruction or drastic reduction of not only their populations, but also their natural resources. The religious and cultural beliefs of conservationism practiced by the indigenous populations in the pre-contact era was at odds with the European model of resource consumption that was brought by colonization. Native Americans were faced with the European ideal of taming the wilderness, and by extension, the “savages” who lived there. Indigenous populations were devastated by disease, relocation, and loss of resources, as they were threatened by deforestation, mining, and violence. The Nambiquara and Yanomami in Brazil have faced their fair share of the violence and devastation brought on by ideal of progress. However, indigenous peoples across the world have, in the modern age, become involved in lawmaking and activism, in an attempt to reclaim control over the management of their traditional lands. Native Americans in the United States and Canada are protesting and litigating against environmentally threatening pipelines, while the Yanomami are advocating for demarcation of their lands as well as for healthcare and education. The road to self-advocacy however, has been littered with struggles, beginning in the age of contact.

Prior to the arrival of European explorers, indigenous peoples around the world survived off of the lands, and often engaged in conservation practices that were grounded in reverence and respect for the natural resources that provided them with everything that they needed to survive. In North American, the indigenous peoples practiced controlled forest burns, limited harvests, and often cycled through seasonal hunting, fishing, and gathering grounds in order to allow the resources to recover. The native peoples viewed themselves as part of nature, and thus a respect for the natural world was required in order to be provided with the resources they needed for survival.[1] This reciprocal approach of the indigenous population was starkly at odds with the beliefs brought by European settlers in the 16th century. The Europeans had come in search of resources to replace those that they had over-exploited at home,[2] and they saw the vast forests as vacant and unused, not realizing that they were used seasonally by native populations.[3] They sought to transform the landscape to resemble what they knew at home, and cleared forests for timber, as well as creating tracts of land for agricultural uses and settlements.[4] Europeans’ views of nature were rooted in their Christian beliefs—natural resources were provided to them by God, and the native populations were wild and savage, and it was their responsibility to tame and civilize them.[5]

Similarly, when the Spanish arrived in Central America, they encountered a resource-rich indigenous population who they believed to be savages, and as such could not be entrusted to manage the resources on which they relied.[6] Wherever the European settlers went, indigenous populations were exposed to diseases to which they had no immunities. Populations were devastated by smallpox, measles, influenza, and more.[7] In central Mexico, the population was reduced from about 25.2 million in 1518 to 6.3 million in 1545, and continued to decline.[8] In addition to resources, the colonized lands could also provide indigenous labor and luxury goods, such as spices, gold, and textiles.[9] The resources encountered by the European explorers were quickly exploited.

In India, the Europeans discovered and harvested Teak, which they valued for shipbuilding due to its resistance to shipworms.[10] Across the world in North America, the Atlantic coast reported its first documented fisheries collapse in the 1700’s,[11] due to overfishing. As European settlers continued to clear and exploit the resources on the east coast of North America, they began vying for land and resources against the indigenous populations. As violence ensued, the new American government took action against the Indian problem—the Indian Removal Act of 1830 was intended to force most eastern tribes further west, in order to open their lands to settlement.[12] A reservation system followed soon after, and the Dawes Act of 1887 further reduced tribal land holdings.[13] The removal of Native Americans from their ancestral lands was tantamount to an almost complete loss of resources. Many tribes lost access to or were moved far away from their traditional hunting, fishing, and gathering grounds and were expected to pivot to an agricultural subsistence system that aligned with European ideals.

As European settlement of indigenous lands continued, marked changes in subsistence patterns became more evident; according to a study conducted by Bradley, Moore, Burton, and White, “intensification of activities such as hunting, fishing, and foraging, along with destruction of subsistence systems, were reported during the 19th century, while agricultural intensification and expansion were reported during the 20th century”.[14] This is evident in the elimination of Buffalo, an important food supply of Great Plains tribes, to make way for settler’s farms and cattle, followed by the 20th century dams that decimated the salmon populations that were so important to Pacific Northwest tribes.[15] The completion of the Grand Coulee Dam on the Columbia River, for example, ended thousands of years of salmon fishing for the tribes in the area and upstream, as it lacked a simple fish ladder, permanently blocking fish migration.[16] In addition to providing electricity, the dam provides irrigation to agriculture up to a hundred miles away. The river, however, had been the centerpiece of tribal life in the basin for thousands of years, providing food and transportation for trade. The river was central to survival and industry for the Native Americans, but was transformed to suit the needs of the newer, non-native population.

The needs of new settlers have been forced on indigenous populations all over the world; in South America, the Nambiquara of Mato Grosso were also devastated by the settlement and development of their traditional lands.[17] First contacted around the turn of the 20th century, the Nambiquara’s traditional way of life was immediately interrupted by the arrival of technology, as Candido Mariano de Silva Rondon attempted to place a telegraph line through their territory in 1907.[18] As development continued, the government sought to build a highway and encourage settlement in their territory, and in 1968 the National Indian Foundation (known as FUNAI) attempted to demarcate their territory, and relocate the Nambiquara to a reserve that consisted of only 20% of their territory, so that the rest of it would be available for settlement and industry.[19]

Today, FUNAI works to uphold legal and constitutional rights for indigenous peoples.[20] In the 1970’s and 1980’s, however, its policies and actions were more often in the interest of government and industry.[21] The Yanomami of Brazil and Venezuela have been uniquely threatened by these interests in the 20th century. Despite being one of the largest isolated tribes in the world with an estimated population of 32,000 people, sustained contact did not occur until the mid-20th century.[22] Like the Nambiquara, the Yanomami were directly threatened by the construction of the Transamazon Highway in the early 1970’s, and the relocation from their territory.[23] Although the highway was never completed, the construction and development resulted in deforestation and environmental degradation; in all, “between 1978 and 2000, approximately 65 million hectares of Amazonian forest were lost”.[24] Furthermore, when valuable mineral deposits were discovered within Yanomami territory in the 1970’s, the lands were opened to outsiders by the government. Throughout the 1980’s the area was flooded with up to 45,000 goldminers.[25] By 1983, the government had passed Decree 88.988, which officially opened Yanomami land to both state and private mining companies, effectively supporting the presence of the invading miners.[26] In addition to violence between the Yanomami and the miners, garimpeiros (prospectors) brought tuberculosis, measles, and influenza, to which the Yanomami had no immunities.[27] In 1991, in response to the violence and devastation suffered by the Yanomami, Brazilian president Fernando Collor de Mello established a demarcation of 8 million hectares of Yanomami land, which “resulted in the expulsion of thousands of miners”.[28] Within two years, estimates of illegal garimpeiros working in Yanomami territory reached 11,000.[29] While violent clashes between the Yanomami and the garimpeiros were common, the Haximu massacre of 1993 was particularly horrifying. A group of garimpeiros crossed the Brazilian border into Venezuela sometime between June and July of 1993, and launched multiple attacks on the Haximu group of the Yanomami, killing 16 men, women, and children.[30] The perpetrators were tried in the Brazilian criminal justice system, and five of the seven defendants were convicted of their crimes.[31] Violence, however, is not the only danger created by illegal mining, as they threaten the environment around the mining sites. The gold amalgamation methods used by the illegal miners threaten water sources and aquatic life with pollution and mercury bioaccumulation.[32] Additionally, the presence of the garimpeiros causes a spike in malaria rates among the Yanomami, and the mining techniques often result in the creation of standing water, which provides an ideal breeding ground for mosquitos.[33]

In order to protect themselves, the Yanomami have formed their own self-advocacy groups: in 2004 the Yanomami of Brazil formed Hutukara, and Horonami was formed by the Venezuelan Yanomami in 2011. Hutukara projects include healthcare, education, and border protection projects.[34] Indigenous groups around the world have taken similar action to protect their lands, and their rights. In 2000, the Saramaka people of Suriname filed a petition with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to block logging on their traditional lands. The commission referred the case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and a 2007 ruling found that the government of Suriname had violated the survival rights of the Saramaka, and ordered the government to modify logging concessions to ensure the survival of the Saramaka.[35] Similarly, in 2018, several tribes have filed lawsuits in the United States to prevent the construction of the coal pipeline called Line 3, planned to run through their ancestral lands in Minnesota.[36] All around the world, indigenous peoples are standing up for rights that were taken from their long before many of them were even born. Often times, they are fighting for rights that they have never had the opportunity to know. However, despite the new age of indigenous activism, indigenous peoples are still facing a long, uphill battle.

However, despite the violence, disease, and loss of ancestral lands and resources that indigenous peoples have faced throughout the centuries, indigenous peoples have adapted and begun fighting for their rights. After facing relocation, and loss of the lands that once provided them with everything they needed to survive, Native Americans are fighting back against projects that once again threaten their ancestral lands and sacred places. The indigenous peoples of Brazil and Venezuela are working with non-profit groups in order to appeal to the government for their land, healthcare, and education rights. In Suriname, the Trio and Wayana tribes are working to preserve the forests that their people have called home for centuries. All had to endure unspeakable horrors before coming into their own voices, to advocate for their own rights. In order to move forward, we must look at the past, and what brought us to where we are, as well as what caused indigenous people to need to fight for their basic rights in the first place. 

References

Block, Ben. "Suriname Tribe Protects Land, Ensures Rights." Suriname Tribe Protects Land, Ensures Rights | Worldwatch Institute. Accessed November 03, 2018. http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6100.

Bradley, Candice, Carmella C. Moore, Michael L. Burton, and Douglas R. White. "A Cross-Cultural Historical Analysis of Subsistence Change." American Anthropologist, New Series, 92, no. 2 (1990): 447-57. http://ntserver1.wsulibs.wsu.edu:2135/stable/680155.

Hoge, Warren. “Brazil’s Indians Have Seen Too Much Progress.” New York Times. (New York, NY), Feb 15, 1981.

Kopp, Peter A. and Ryan Powell. Oxford Encyclopedia of American Cultural and Intellectual History, 1st ed., s.v. "Nature and Environmentalism." Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Accessed September 3, 2018. http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199764358.001.0001/acref-9780199764358-e-472.

Marchand, Michael E., Kristiina A. Vogt, Asep S. Suntana, Rodney Cawston, John C. Gordon, Mia Siscawati, Daniel J. Vogt, John D. Tovey, Ragnhildur Sigurdardottir, and Patricia A. Roads. The River of Life: Sustainable Practices of Native Americans and Indigenous Peoples. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014. Accessed September 29, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central.

McKibben, Bill. "Anti-pipeline Activists are Fighting to Stop Line 3. Will They Succeed?" Guardian (London), Jun. 27, 2018. Accessed September 3, 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/commentisfree/2018/jun/27/anti-pipeline-activists-fighting-to-stop-line-3

Nichols, Roger L. Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern World, 1st ed., s.v. "Native Americans." Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Accessed September 3, 2018. http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195176322.001.0001/acref-9780195176322-e-1088.

Plummer, Jasmine. “The Yanomami: Illegal Mining, Law, and Indigenous Rights in the Brazilian Amazon.” The Georgetown International Environmental Law Review 27, no. 479 (2015): 479-496. Accessed September 29, 2018. https://ntserver1.wsulibs.wsu.edu:4107/api/document?collection=analytical-materials&id=urn:contentItem:5GBH-HF90-00CV-913H-00000-00&context=1516831.

Robins, Nicholas A. Mercury, Mining, and Empire: The Human and Ecological Cost of Colonial Silver Mining in the Andes. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2011. Accessed September 29, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central.

"Yanomami in Venezuela Demand Land Rights." Survival International. Accessed November 03, 2018. https://www.survivalinternational.org/news/11234.

"Yanomami." Survival International. Accessed November 03, 2018. https://www.survivalinternational.org/tribes/yanomami.

[1] Peter A. Kopp and Ryan Powell, “Nature and Environmentalism,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of American Cultural and Intellectual History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013)

[2] Michael E. Marchand, et al, The River of Life: Sustainable Practices of Native Americans and Indigenous Peoples (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014), 5.

[3] Marchand, The River of Life, 28.

[4] Marchand, The River of Life, 28.

[5] Kopp and Powell, “Nature and Environmentalism”

[6] Marchand, The River of Life, 4.

[7] Marchand, The River of Life, 4.

[8] Marchand, The River of Life, 4.

[9] Marchand, The River of Life, 6.

[10] Marchand, The River of Life, 28.

[11] Marchand, The River of Life, 7.

[12] Roger L. Nichols, “Native Americans,” in Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008)

[13] Nichols, “Native Americans”

[14] Candice Bradley, et al, "A Cross-Cultural Historical Analysis of Subsistence Change," American Anthropologist 92, no. 2 (1990): 452.

[15] Marchand, The River of Life, 50.

[16] Marchand, The River of Life, 53.

[17] Warren Hoge, “Brazil’s Indians Have Seen Too Much Progress,” New York Times (New York, NY), Feb 15, 1981.

[18] Hoge, “Brazil’s Indians”

[19] Hoge, “Brazil’s Indians”

[20] Jasmine Plummer, “The Yanomami: Illegal Mining, Law, and Indigenous Rights in the Brazilian Amazon,” The Georgetown International Environmental Law Review 27, no. 479 (2015): 481.

[21] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 481.

[22] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 480.

[23] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 481.

[24] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 482.

[25] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 483.

[26] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 483.

[27] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 483.

[28] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 483.

[29] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 484.

[30] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 484.

[31] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 484.

[32] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 487.

[33] Plummer, “Yanomami”, 487.

[34] Survival International, "Yanomami," https://www.survivalinternational.org/tribes/yanomami.

[35] Ben Block, “Suriname Tribe Protects Land, Ensures Rights,” Suriname Tribe Protects Land, Ensures Rights | Worldwatch Institute, http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6100.

[36] Bill McKibben, “Anti-pipeline Activists are Fighting to Stop Line 3. Will They Succeed?” Guardian (London), Jun. 27, 2018.