Significant Meanings and the Oil Factor at Unalakleet

The meaning of the river to the residents of Unalakleet cannot be validated simply from heating a few similar comments and observing similar behavior among different people. Other kinds of comments made in different contexts can help to validate or invalidate the impressions obtained from conversations during net-clearing trips. For example, one shy, inarticulate man about thirty years of age, who had never considered speaking at a public meeting or acting as a spokesman for the village, sought out a competent and admired uncle to express his concerns about developments that might affect the river—from oil and gas exploration to commercial fishing by outsiders and from commercialized sportfishing to kayaking, again by outsiders. The man was emboldened to talk by a few drinks of alcohol, but he was lucid.

To this man, the river meant the comfort of place and space. It provided nourishment—real and spiritual—and represented freedom to conduct an Eskimo way of life. He recognized that the river was threatened, as were the freedoms that the river represented, and he said that he would rather take lives, or have his own life taken, than see the river overrun or destroyed.

The elder counseled the younger man that violence would not be the solution but would only generate more problems. But he, too, recognized the vulnerable and powerless position of local natives, and though he did not counsel violence, he felt that force, alone, might be the only way in which the river could be kept intact as Unalakleet space.

The chance hearing of this discussion caused the research team to inquire of or to inquire about all the other men in the village who fell into the twenty-five to forty years of age category to learn how they felt about the river. The vocal, articulate leaders were not queried, only those who were neither vocal nor leaders were polled. Without exception, forty men expressed or were heard to express sentiments similar to those articulated by the concerned younger man to his wise uncle. This is not a commodity view of nature, where a village and its resources are salable at the fight price. It is a native view of space and place; it is a home, a place in which livelihoods are obtained and that they are willing to defend.

At a public hearing in Unalakleet in October 1981 prior to an oil and gas lease sale for Norton Sound run by the Minerals Management Service's OCS office, at subsequent hearings conducted by the state for onshore oil leases, and at public relations meetings conducted by representatives of oil companies, the Unalakleet residents expressed their strong opposition to oil and gas leasing. Person after person explained the importance to them of the resources that might be affected by oil-related operations. Moreover, they raised cogent questions about consequences to oil rigs from the movements of ice.

But they felt that they were completely disregarded, perhaps rebuffed with contempt (see Appendix B). The utter frustration that they demonstrated when speaking about these meetings left indelible impressions on us. Their worries about their environment and the clarity with which they stated their concerns cannot be understood as sham or as political positioning by people seeking to enhance their financial positions. And although village leaders requested training for jobs and the allocation of jobs to village residents in oil-related tasks, they did so after arguing eloquently against developments that may threaten their livelihoods and damage their space. Contra-

dictory statements have, therefore, been placed on the public record, but with some interpretation of the texts, the contradictions can be resolved.

One step in the reasoning was omitted from the texts. This missing step was supplied by the elder who counseled his nephew that violence would only make the situation worse, while suspecting that nothing short of violence will stop developments from occurring. It is the sense of the inevitable that causes the articulate leaders to protect what they can. As one man who opposes large-scale industrial developments said, "What chance does a $2 million fishing operation have against a $2 billion oil operation, especially when the guys who make the decisions have all the bucks—oil bucks?" He said this during a discussion of an impending state oil lease sale, since canceled, which had so frightened Unalakleet residents that it dominated much of the public discussions which were focused on different topics, such as commercial fishing.