SUBSISTENCEAS AN ECONOMICSYSTEMIN ALASKA:
THEORETICALAND POLICY IMPLICATIONS
by
Thomas D. Lonner
Technical
Paper Number 67
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Division of Subsistence
Anchorage, Alaska
November 3, 1980
,
-
’
ABSTRACT
..
\
c
:
.
'
The purpose
in Alaska
that
of goods,
of
Its
services,
is
and other
for
definition
in
the
nonmaterial
.
to cash is
local
explored
anh other
I
in
anthropology.
production
products.
provision
of subsistence
economic
local
marke)t ,economies,
through
resources,
findings
a system
..
.better
provide
upon research
and insecurity
land,
to
with,larger
relationship
labor,
is
subsistence
interactive
risk
paper
by drawing
indicate
often
of this
.
This
is
use
_ .
Findings
and distribution
economic
systd,
while
a imed at the minimization
of da ily
some detail,
f?o<
along
and other
with
needs.
investment
of
inputs...
.
Also
explored
is the
continued
role
and viability
of villages
in the
mod&n
.
.
world.
The relationship
sistence
patterns
Implications
tence
for
economics
is
of changing
social
and environmental
factors
-.
described.
resource
managers
as an organizing
to sub-
,
are drawn
principle.
using
the
framework
of
subsi's-
*
. .
. ..-
-
4
..*
.
. ..
s..
*-.a----.-
.
-
,
8
4 ..'
. . '.
.
Novemoer 3,
' .
.
Much of the
c
-CL-
1YtlU
difficulty
based on the
paper
of
will
lack
paper
Law derive
subsistence
further
from
a recognition
found
of Alaska's
the-definition
difficulty
suggest
economic
of
results
in the
that
the
from
a too
dictionary
uses
Subsistence
..
subsistence.
protected
by the
and appreciation
of a socially
1 1
affecting
a significant
portion
system
which
that
' we refer
material
fashion.
requiring
monetary
arena
of'man's
which
the
(Polanyi
to the
goods
By "economic"
transactions
economy as a unit
is
1971)
(Olson
services
systems,
different
forms
institutionalized.
of things
and "where'
significant
of the
State's
people
are provided
but
of
and rules'
those
also
arrangements
the
integrition
are going
.
and persons
and how quickly
Y
general
through
More generally,
in movement
:
in-
economic
in
they
situations"
want to get
1980).
In this
paper,
tionary
definitions,
and knowledge
we will
of
activities
(hunting,
the
found
"subsistence"
very
fishing,
arc
skill
regi cn * which
arc! not conducted
aim primarily
for
consumption,
for
within
to those
WC
economic
crafting,
energy
are governed
trading,
development,
a community
profit-in~ximization,
and which
die
and human ecol-
herding,
storage,
from
body of research
refers
self -contained
primarily
derived
anthropology
farming,
training,
not
international
"subsistence"
gathering,
relatively
present
large
is
in economic
Internationally
transportation,
which
that
from
subsistence
1974).
too1 -making,
suggest
but
ogy (Sruhn
and 53 on)
definition
Subsistence
arrangements
, we do not mean only
and market
and the
combination
str&tured
and specialist
livelihood
to "the
This
'W
system
assure
limited
Law is
and common parlance.
*
By "economic
there"
this
will
a repetitive
c
that
about
a definition
population.
refers
implementation
..
of co\nsensus
suggest
subsistence,
This
in the
or
which
by traditional
patterns
rather
farmer,
for
little
than
example,
in the
uses little
is‘one
who consumesPmost
non-family
a limited
by family
survival
Subsistence
less
conditions
..
cash market,
possesses
jective
market
flow
labor,
not
1971).
production
and consumption,
demanding
technology,
is
dominated
;
) .L
of production
services,
for
and whose decisionmaking
self-sufficiency
of goods,
needs.
A subsistence
..
what he produces,
sells
of
noncapital
of living,
(Wharton
total
few items
employs
standard
is a'system
is
buys
or immediate
for
both
nor
capital
and other
use and excliange.
formation
products
Its
but
(Sahlins
ob-
an end-
1971).
.
-
Production
for
of resources
use leads
In this
not-for-profit
activities
often
other
institutional
of “noneconomic
goals
basic
subsistence
prescriptions
by practical
people
to maximize
material
frayility
of a marketable
The objective,
living
under
surplus
but
an excess
when set
against
1971).
maintained
of a rcyul;lr
is
and secure
in
and stability,
not
It
only
by inteC-
separately
is
without
both
- - .-
and community
of many decisions,
conditions.
(Johnson
livestock
of order
security,
1971jT.-.
aspects
are' explained
similar
of labor
(Sahlins'
of household
patterns
and psychological
number of
nonexhausting
and traditional
as outcomes
and uncertainty
the
explanations
of.households
also
and is natural
herding,
(Dysgn-lidson
but
in
and socializini
and resultant
needs
economy,
resulting
recreation
on their
environmental
not
for
focus
alternatives,
sistence
free
domestic
scheduling,
system,
generational
attempt
time
in
economic
However,
taken,
a non-intensive
and intermittent
power and therefore
pursuit
to
their
c.
wealth
or
cash economic
For example,
and
in
sub-
based on the
production
daily
of
supply
food
!%'I).
then,
of a subs istencc
system
is
to prov ide wterial
and psyc!:olo-
gical
in the face of uncertainty
in extraand se1 f-sufficiency
..
..
\
economic systems by conserving
energy through
the reduction
of
security
regional
capital
dependency,
transportation,
not
costs
identical
product
and explain
explain
market
structures,
in
and outputs
labor,
maintenance,
the
underlay
exist
cash,
commitment
of land
investment
of lands
input,
storage,
to the
economic
a landbank
to habitat
not
.
with
hardship
land
in other
the
inputs
desire
taxation
words,
land
Lands
which
values
-.
is at risk,
-
of Native
regional
may result
in
a provisional
to subsistence.
cash,
and cer;or;lte
is ccrzclon.
proceeds.
Cash dcrivcs
frown w3gc employment,
To the dc9rce
that
- - .-I
-
and risk,
1980).
or access
the
.
system,
of resources
For example,
.
.
co examine
Where competing
and delay
contracts,
equipment
(Olson
habitat)
sufficient
'--:
transportation,
system.
economy
and so on are
subsistence
continuation
protection,
and so on.
formal
necessary
capital"
vs.
must be made.
is
to deal
"natural
transportation,
are
,..
In a modern
willingness
i.e.,
concepts
clearly
concepts
a subsistence
_.-
it
while
parallel
maximization,
accumulation,
economy,
extraction
to create
these
of
exchange,
examine
capital
-.
economies.
.
skill,
necessary
subsistence
a number
system,
product?on-for-profit,
system.
tools,
and lands
decisions
corporations
payzer,:s,
value,
of the
resources
(e.g.
difficult
since
a subsistence
habitat
the
Anzthcr
However,
distribution,
resources
provide
audience.
subsistence
to explain
include
systematically
surplus
absent
In order
inputs
to
such an economy,
generally
wild
concepts
to,an
contains
- -.
importation,
economic
technolo.$y,
investment,
t L
producers,
consumers,
diversity,
it
and energy
A subsistence
economies,
systems --labor,
These are useful
to
intensity,.material
and waste.
to capital
to capital
energy,
labor
~zgc employment
transfer
is
.
,
, :.t
.
l
November 3,
' .
-b-
1YbU
;..
intended
to underwrite
tunity
cost
committed
Similarly,
sistence.
as investment
security
program.
sistence
but
include
Thus,
of not
1976,
culture,
1977),
energy,
for
government
cases,
and oppor-
in this
daper
sysiem
, nutritional,
economy is
a highly
only
and services,
and “psychic
but
sub-
an income
replace
sub-
we shall
discuss
a-.
subsistence.
other
the
economies)
products.
-
mode of production
of
(Neale,
social
and
1971),
forms (Marks
.
..
.
that is,. nonmonetary
rather
than
rewards.
personal
.
In order
to explain
estimates
resident
higher
than
often
their
to assign
since
the
of con:ucgtion
of tctJi1
It
is doubtful
price,
price
prices
patterns
ai~d (5)
:/I.:;
(3)
place
on subsistence
produced
pays the
for
what
subsistence
include:
valuing
nultipiicity
cash cqci*ialcnts
retail
a product
of rct:il
could
A
at home considerably
measures.%
price
he buys
he sells.
risk
markets,
and subjective
for
what
However,
production.
(1)
export
products.
and consumed
based on objective
price
for
subsistence
locals
he in effect
retail
pric;ls,
for
products
wholesale
a retail
assigning
value
values
market
is correct
and receives
with
preference
must be made of
local
This
the
it
is
difficult
The problems
and uncertainty
according
prices
or should
- -.
be seen
some cases
and cultural
specialized
income"
in
through
[as with
economic,
in
may also
does not
and subsidizing
economic
goods
government
activities
Jn these
Elsewkeke
of a subsistence
the
subsistence
welfare,
it.
social
from
In Canada,
of providing
distribution
..
the
payments
subsidizes
a subsistence
time,
transfer
underwrites
multiple
the
be seen as investment
Social
to government
equipment,
..
yn wage employment-may
subsistence.
and explicitly
The outputs
(
in
directly
value
subsistence
(2)
instability
to USC (4)
instability
(Chibnik
be applied
1978).
to measure
- - ..-
8
November 3,
*
.,.*
. **t
these
-6-
1980
-
inputs
It
and outputs.
may be
.. useful
\
energy
units
assignment
to examine
of uniform
social
interaction,
costs,
risks,
is
particularly
social
I
problems
the
systems
Wille
1978).
between
the
Contrary
This
is
world,
dots
In establishing
Company had to alter
its
populations.
large
What is
true
areas,
Equally,
its
principles
units
.
a model
between
which
separate
recognizes
regularly
alternate
(Tanner
their
distinctive
economy is
trading
in order
the
the
systems
to
sets
rules
larger
operations
in Canada,
to meet the
the cash
of
either
between
of local'
the Hudson Bay
requirements
by to :21 separation
or
total
economics
assiinilation,
of
economy may be dominant
and demands are often
two distinct
in-
economy
marginJ1
in nonurban
sub-tqior~~.
The rcla:ionshi$
*
1979).
two economic
dominate
.
of analysis,
when producers
losing
while
and exchange.
(Miller-
for
operations
is
what
articulati
possible
commercial
interact
interaction
basis
always
understand
and outputs
the market
not
task.
between
needed
inputs
without
it
to
systems
and sustained
is
replacement
impossible,
of boundaries
For example , while
economies.
over
economic
it
costs,
Economies
on a seasonal
belief,
not
the
opportunity
preparation,
when attempting
particularly
two contexts
of the Western
if
how their
and interpenetrate
trapping
raised
investment,
product
a difficult,
of regular
and explains
obligations.
exchange,
production.
to popular
terface
to land
identification
and economic
comparable
..
and outputs;
however,
inputs
units
different
in cases
both
of
i
' L
and Subsistence
of Caih
when two quite
One problem
c
energy
and so on is
are special
happens
flow
product
Interpenetration
There
the
to assign
need not
but
be chJracterircd
may occupy
.
some
and
r_
.
l
middle
ground
characterized
\
As Tuck (1980) points
both.
from traditional
icularly
over
Subsistence
the
sistence
out,
economics
issue
of economic
tend
of checks;
about
the
that
balances,
older,
are
to
so different
conflict
must occur,
part-
_
development.
conservative
systems
and adaptations.
often
local,
and beneficial
economics
some value
to be 013 ;nd
and market-economies
mation
interactive,
subsistence
Western
economies
own patterns
as competitive,
result
complex,
Conflicts
with
their
between
sub-
from misperceptions
and often
and misinfor.
subsistence
econo-
unseen
mies.
.-
Conflicts
occur
for
ample cash often
to
local
rules
many reasons
provides
and energy
local
cash resources.
on external
a level
of obligation.
water
in the
'reality.
For ex-
and competition
destructive
.
costs of 'government-built
public
The operating
create
Changing
a process
village
of independence
facilities'often
markets,
day-to-day
tastes
called
a cash dependency
and techndlogy
unfilled
also
"delocalization"
create
(Pelto
by
dependency
1978).
.
,
Affiliation
with
powerlessness,
risks
IrCdS
and world
new risks
for%
in
the
VcfiiLrcs
involvement
of great
Subsistence
erosion
and cz;lcyrnent,
an3 UflSllCCQZ5fUl
is
to local
and dependency.
subsistence
economy.
CJsh inflation,
of dkw13;:ncnt
leads
not
Given
altogether
economy.
benefit
A solid
in
the
powr,
.
of
insecurity,
volatility
5
economy oftendifferent
from
base in more
of transfer-
protecting
boom-bust
of cmp:oy:rlen:
in 10~~1 CClXWrCj ~1 dcveloprscnt
the
process
is one way of
of purchasing
mldisttibution
feelings
in the market
as new opportunities
of security
to a SO:m nixed
frm
to growth
economies,
as well
and opportunities
traditional
mation
economy often
and addiction
of the Alaska
creates
the market
local
cycles
and inco!ne,
*.
*
.
.r
-o-
Novemoer 3,
.
LYOU
A cash-free
society,
desirable.
The use of iash,
of both
to
choice
from
local
..
even
and necessity,
increasing
provided
even at the
level,
dependency
particularly
demand,
regional
outside
the
is
neither
on cash,
possible
is
as resources
grow,
centers
the
nor
result
decline
and technology
in proportion
and energy
are
region.
.
t
There
is a large
This
is
indicative
of the
It
is
also
the
to the
While
in local
that
the
diet;
that
vital
cash
fats
Nutritionally,
less
subsistence
foods
were to
important
at this
point
not
is
cash which
characterizes
has become "commercialized"
in which
money is
changes,
is
sufficient
requires
jus:
a useful
condition
ptoductio:l
dn ifi:erest
tool
in
in
Western
1971).
to compare
village
for profit-rnakinq
and prices
primarily
Y
if
- - ..-
through
more rather
than
stores.
economy,
but
some terms.
"export"
does not
even tell
kinds
the
and values,
Significant
dnd dcmndcnct!
Itis
.
and "market"-
mean that
us the
"Monetization",
(Zeale
can-
&bohydrates'
primarily
in defining
activities
foods
.
and of itself,
does it
non-
and nutritional
use of subsistence
be desirable
of commercialization.
in mrbcts
economic
to be provided
might
replacement
and use of certain
provides
to be careful
nor
used (Neale
tend
appear
the
The use of money,
elements.
stores
it
production.
high
in villages.
systems;-not
payments.
to local
local
It
economic
continued
protein'and
and foodstuffs
availability
stores
is of both
by wages and transfer
likely
goods
system.
is clear
be offset
h&d
between
foodstuffs
it
interest,
of Western
of interaction
subsistence
subsistence
not
amount
the
society
of transactions
use of money in exbut
it
is
not
a
commcrcializ3tion
on markets
rather
thsrl
1971).
. ..
.
.
-,
,e
l
----
.
.?
does not occur &less
all (or nearly
all)
..
\
person or people being analyzed
are designed
Commercial
.
dependence
activities
of the
sales
and unless/until
costs
of operations
of economic
economic
dependent"
The history
routine
true
ization,
sensjtive
1;
last
provides
and outlets
This
ducts.
only
are highly
partially
is best
in
subsistence
local
store
all,
to market
.
to result
given
in
changing
of some kinds
or even the
"most
important",
prices--that
is,
are
money has been a legitimate
for
where
some time.
the
trapping
products
and the
oriented
is
that
technology
crafting
of the
capital-
of resource
commercializa;ion",
to only
and
particulirly
much like
subsistence
as "incomplete
activities
This
exchange,
diversity,
described
monetized
stop
Commercialization
shows that
nutritional
for
would
productive
1971).
century
case of the
post,
structures.
mean that
mode of exchange
trading
activities
does not
(Neale
of the
in the
productive
and price
activity
activities
"market
the
the
certain
bypro-
involving
markets.
t
.
There is no objective
measure of the relative
worth of subsistence
goods
.
and services
since they are not reduced to a generalized
med-ium of exchange.
The value
of subsistence
measures,
such as "replacement
supply
and demand system.
erally
depend
the
In additicn,
c
-.-
on individual
equality
thcrc
of
is 'jrc2t
c::ce lJ.?c':= ) dcpcfldinc;
.. ._
cost."
be reduced
Monetized
values
in
in creating
a product
perceived
over
value",
tin:2
require
ycdrs,
some
economies
or providing
in
monetized
"exchange
in exchanges
on r2SOUrCt? avZil23ility,
ICZ~ and rich
uniform
subsistence
of "use
value
to
measures
evaluations
variability
S?S, se22on of consu,mpt ion,
CJC
-
cannot
Nonmarket
amount of work expended
or the relative
si::
products
the
gen-
value",
a service,
by the principals.
v;lluo
desirability
and so on .
of subof
the
.
lruve,moer 3,
.
*
.*'.
--Labor
It
-lU-
1~0u
and Subsistence
is a popular
belief
titularly
deal
it
labor
if
tens
suffer
from
(Swetnam
was found
remains
are based on poorly
of thousands
an unacceptably
1980).
that
high
nonpaid
units
is
a form
there
underestimation
days
-.
level
par-
Thus,
In one stud-y-of
98% of labor
disguised
defined
of Alaskans.
a systematic
emplofment,"
one includes
employment
Nietschmann
for
performed
communities,
productive
areas
--in the wage economy may be too high,
\
by local
job seekers.
However, subsistence
of "disguised
amount of labor
disguised
rural
employment
a great
Alaska
that
as perceived
of significant
the
..
Unemployment
of unemployment.
is
..
\
of
rural
available
non-
are
used in
activities
(Swetnam 1980).
This
\
because-measurements
of employment
and unwarrantable
observations
r
(Swetnam
1980;
1972).
,
Subsistence
labor
is based
on a pattern,
of men, women, and children
division,
determined
by age,
.
or distribution
sex,
task,
of labor
skill,
training,
equipment,
kinship,
social
organization,
and distribution
according
to skills,
removed
.
system,
without
As noted
altering
excess
is critical
if
rJthet
fro;n
than
erip 1cyr,crlt
risks
for
labor
the
of;cn
lciscre
csnfl
chocse
tiz!.
icts
with
(Marks
1977).
from
is
Vital
ScZ?I;o:lJl
,410 must choo:c
be' coven cJsh
during
cannot .-.be
group.
scheduling
and
of wage employment
subsistence
SuSsistcrlcc
organized
skills
of the
The timing
nature
reciprocity
communally
in intermittent
seasonal
The tcmporJry
wage uneiaploynent
labor
and productivity
us2 results
is diverted
location,
and planning.
efficiency
for
season,
Subsistence
kinship,
power
time
the cn~ployce
Many p?rsons
the
production
of
time,
and so on.
interests,
earlier,
nominal
capital,
em;,loyment
of much northern
activities
and crea:cs
and subsistcncc
subsistence
seasons,
reuJrds.
unless
I
.
.
.
..C
‘*.
.
b\”
- ’
Y I;.rwc,
3,
AYOU
-II-
l
.
.
the
household
or community organization
of subsistence
..
\
investment
or if the reduction
of the subsistence
cash
(
not
reduce
subsistence
or fisherman
community
for
productivity.
to wage employment
dependent
more than
on his
However,
the
may seriously
skills,
*
t 1
labor
loss
additional
force
does
of a skilled
jeopardize
particularly
one household.
requires
hunter
a household
when he provides
or
product
.
.
Research
other
in Alaska
income
Increased
does not
income
less-demanding
ranging
area
(
If
,
and reduced
appears
time
the
to
that
increased
increase
technology.
in effort
both
resource
to engage
and part
of the
resulting
reliable,
in both
of course,
immediate
as iniestments
under-
resulting
wage
in
may
areas.
greater
.
years.
employment
and rural
result
from
in recent
in local
urban
Z-
wider
activities.
increased
and decreases
may or may not,
in-the
human effort
and
provides
in subsistence
may have
effort
useful,
technology
scarcity
wage or
or utilization.
dependence
wage income
total
increases
subsistence
that-increasing
resource
Improved
to subsistence
both
indicates
to more efficient,
availability
and devoted
possible
lead
to offset
subsistence,
is
Nowak 1975)
in decreased
to
of employment
employment
lead
result
transportation
writing
1979;
subsistence
we think
It
(Kruse
This
productivity.
..
Productivity
St is
inappropriate
either
pure
Studies
and that
nature,
c
lizi:s
able
and Efficiency
note
to asswe
chance
that
or some simple
degree
repetition
economy
iS not
dctcrxtincd
in3J01.JCS
on th2 rJnsc
subsir:zxe
the hunting
productivity
but
that
is
?roductio::
of past
not
of economic
pl3nninq
adaptive
(Tanner
1379;
by chance
While
procedures,
fro;
patterns.
by UncontroliJbls
a glood dcJ1 Of c31cul~tion.
of ;os;iblc
hdrvcst
dominated
entirely
results
there
there
SietscknJnn
forces
drc
is also
of
strict
a consider-
1972).
..
----
..-.
~.__
.--
- -
Economic
planning
requires
certain,@nan.resources
\
information
leading
to deciiionmaking
integrate
animal
behavior,
and relevent
resource
including
..
(e.g.,
the
ability
weather,
condition--weight,
to
terrain,
density,
fat
pursuit
time).
- -.
content,
nonfood
Researchers
(Jochim
variables
interact,
material
aspirations
as a season
required
.
yields,
are
. or ccmmunity
weigh
means,
location
risks
in resource
exploitation.
(e.g.,
in
resource
assessment
then,
of various
and psychological
variables
a number of econcmic
changing
by quality
and the
costs
aspirations
of technology
In addTtion,
temporary
employment
there
opportunities)
dependency.
results
from
economic
individual,
household,
a; well
As individuals
and pursue
strategies
.
possibilities
factors.
differently
on how these
techniques,
replaced
costs,
considerations
models
storage
accessibility
fluctuating
time,
elaborate
by ivailable
'1
quantity
needs
of human effort,
social,
these
have designed
(e.g.,
may result
The commitment
size,
as modified
to reduce
ogical,
1976)
progresses),
non-resource
which
aggregation
different
typify
as ecol-
and households
goals
a community's
with
e -
- -
..
different
annual
subsistence
activities.
Variability
within
formity.
For example,
ployment
systems
may result
of subsistence
may be more desired
While
ab:ent
a community
many tradition31
it
in less
earlier
possible
results
that
individual
obligations.
soci31
tixies
a lack
temporary
Similarly,
the
hJvc:-continued
relationships
inzccur-ity
economic
or permanent
social
into
of
dependency
or families
and econcmic
villages,
from
or family
by some individuals
or wes% in norttvrn
chzractcrirtd
is
also
uniwage em- r.
on secure
and cultural
than
products
others.
..
of the
p;lst
and uncertainty
the
present.
MJteriJl
may be
which
in-
security
c
in the
of reliable
sense of an uncertain'.food
..
and suffici\ent
most traditional
one's
kin
"embedded"
alternative
economies.
and one's
supply,
This
local
sources
insecurity
community
in one another
(Dalton
together
with the absence
..
of live1 ihood, characterized
resulted
in extreme
and an economy and society
dependence
on
- *'
inextricably
1971).
w
i-
Today,
this
sources
same uncertainty
and wage employment.
and subsistence
a safe
source
safeguard
material
northern
(
is
not
in conflict
the contrary
is
would
that
between
future
of both
alone
but
is
considered
high-risk,
high
stop
for
to
of
residents
elements
economies,
.
.
cash alternatives.
at northern
and modern
demands of wage and subsistence
desire
the.hesitation
opportunity
looking
traditional
subsistence
This
part,
re-
of-cash
generally
security.
in
wild
in a combination
to be maximited'in
account,
we should
the
found
resource
or wealth
profit
to embrace
suggests
(1979)
over
What appears
security
communities
as a group
Neither
of livelihood.
then,
expreked
Security
resources.,
economics,
Tanner
is
.
but
or between
try
to
understand
.
it
as a social
and economic
form
in
its
own right.
.
To satisfy
level
food and nonfood
of production
risk-minimization
an important
goal
guiding
effort
(2)
risk-minimizqtion
(5)
e~fe
trJvt'lL'd
the
of ex;)loi:atiun
effor;
(9)
or ti:ae
chdrlyus
ex;er?ti;cd
economic
expenditures,
include:
(3)
which
minimization.
of energy
dictating
rcdL:e
must be maintained,
and effort
to considerations
tion=
needs of a population,
(1)
security
(7)
difficul:y
in subzistcncc
(II)
distriSu:ion
security
involves
a consideration
The limiting
of effort
behavior
and leisure.
of caloric
reliability
(5)
of exploitation
costs
of
(10)
leading
Considera-
and other
limiting
(3)
rcdcction
r_
forms
of hunter-gatherers,
wastage,
assessment
(4)
a certain
goals
of effort
timing
to
in distance
of humtr, Jnd resource
populJtions
-.-.
-1
.
..n
.. .
-14-
November 3, 1980
l
-
.
.
(12)
f
\
need for
desirability
human aggregation
and social
contacts
..
._
\
fat content,
of certain
foods--taste,
and storage,
variety
early
spring),
in diet,
feast
of division
needs
of labor
apparent
lack
results
less
risks,
costs,
Similarly,
of
consumption
and likely
(1978)
argues
of game animals
availability
of the
as transport
distance,
is
natural
(especially
in
prestige
and (15)
maintenance
probable
that,
some instances,
that
products
in
the
(Nietschminq
variability
due to complex
game resource
storage
by changes
is
needs
. -.
Ppparent
resource
opportunity
situations
'1
.
than from a realistic
assessment
of
interest
efficiencies,
It
differential
..
ease of preparation
seasonal
desire-for
in certain
lack
Binford
affected
(14)
rarity,
and sex roles.
of effort
from
prized
(13)
in the
interactions
itself
and
the
contingencies
(especially
and weather
procurement
between
and specific
characteristics
in weather),
1972).
such
as they are
.
affects
travel
as it
s- .
..
.
c
He notes
and transport.
choices
of parts
the
parts
for
"bulk"
forms
salvaged
used the
of hunting,
arc
products
accounting
the
for
order
the'amount
and
and significance
of
and security
in preparation;
in the
and differential
diet;
preparing,
such large
is
important
gathering,
I-
secl;rit:j
of
the
desire
skills
and transporting.
and
Examples
of
such
c
are common.
circumstances,
pr2ri2::
losses,
butchering,
game animais
other
complexity
and transported;
costs;
and "gourmet"
accounting
Big
the
than
significantly
hd?nd, hunting
is/i;y
ilre
by :he suSsis:encc
packages
fowling,
Questions
ans,%erable
hunter
that
hunting,
more energy-efficient
and fishing
may bc a more high-rise
fishing_.
no:
food
excogt
abof;t
within
(Jochim
activity
prized
the
pratiucts,
econcrnic
under
and therefore
1980).
than
more
On the
low-risk,
efficicncics,
situjtion
certain
high
and
confrontcJ
or community.
..-*
.
..8
.
:
l
November 3,
.
-15-
1980
The community's
subsistence
labor
economy and population
increases
of the
and effort
the
(1971)
in relation
The objective
isfy
Sdhlins
effort;
to the
producing
to create
less
notes
rise
but
1;
We have to be careful
we.have
to consider
example,
determines
of game (or
be high,
food
food)
Nietschmann
is
of labor
1972).
to' take
the
role
products
to
sat-
Resource
the
under
of effort;
status,
for
Under conditions
form
time
would
of maximum utilization
and processing
conditions
'
necessarily
of
(Binford
1978;
of game abindance'
or in-
.
-' . - - .-
c
creased
subsistence
pursuit
time , we expect
investment
alone
with
not
accompanying
maximizing
and more selective
would
(Jochim
security,
equally
to shift
effort
decreases
in search
increasingly
utilization.
explain
to limited
Efficiency
under
and
labor
considerations
different
resource
conditions
1980).
..
Different
multiple
strateyics
native
i,
and result
resources.
reached
his
Oilt
brcddt!l
sppcics,
diet
r-dr,k:
in different
diet
simply
because
hil;hly,
outside
also
rates
(1980)
breadth,
i-, dcpendcn;
thoze
conditions
Winterhalder
an optimum
in:o
hunrcr
resource
that
of
he will
not
species
and rmt on the &sol
existing
diet
may dictate
different
utilization
of different
suggests
that,
once
incorporate
has increased
or1 the Jbsolutc
the
*
at maximum efficiency
of ef$iency
and pursuit
in transport
Conversely,
'
of consumers.
sufficient
effort.
when search
costs
of subsistence
to work
of effort.
much of subsistence
maximizing
on
majority.
.
determinants
scarcity,
not
influence
intensity
proportion
produce
to overemphasize
other
we expect
resardless
not
the
in the
to
effectivk
a considerable
that
population
a surplus,
needs of the
exercise
dbur,dJrlcc
gtc
.
In the
alter-
the hunter
a potential
has
resource
in abund;lncc.
of species
aburldJl!cc
hunting
of
short-ten,
which
the
1 ow-rJI\kjng
in which
,
. .
. .
~\UV~lliUt:rl
*-.
breadth
population
the
stable,
of
low-ranked
had not
The reader
about
fairly
note
behavior
most economic
dictate
that
material
economic
decreases,
even though
foregbing
but
the
its
hunter
might
absolute
discussion
only
notes
number
community
-.
begin
population
behavior
rationality
resource
is
also
will
cash,
and so on constitute
axiomatic
ail
that
a
solely
and Morren
predictions
as in
effort,
status,
be explained
(Dornstreich
to
variables
among time,
It
lead
in subsistence
--
of situational
study.
can never
does not
that,
needs,
of subsist&e
earlier,
subsistence
Distribution
products
among households,
an effective
subsistence
elements
reciprocities,
stibjcct
provides
is not
sharing,
nutritional
within
in terms
of
1974),
.
subsistence
skills,
production
and other
communities,
system,
based
selling,
of d spccidl
to mxizizc
a mode of economic
within
- - ...
are
bartering,
middlemen,
resc;lrch
rCi:ort
participants
minimize
materials,
much of production
similar
to those
debt,
and so on.
winter).
to spccizlizc
rcdtindJncy
and social
and so on.
loses
or surplus
gifting,
this
and dis-
regions,
on profit-maximization
of distribution
partriet~hips,
Jllov
is
distribution
and methods
---trading,
laker
be sensitive
to
.
Conversely,
if the absolute
The relationships
needs,
tribution.
fed:t;rcs
not
System
As noted
the
the
behavior.'
economic
Distribution
type
a large
elements
subsistence
food
will
prey.
food type
of hunters
kinship
critical
While
"potential"
situations,
econcmic
technology,
harvest
..
changed.
will
the
Without
the
of a highly-ranking
harvesting
density
is
fluctuation:
abundance
the
-lo-
IYOU
.
diet
c-
J,
its
creation,
in market
credit,
(This
topic
SUCh
will
be
distr-ibuticn
obtain
the
economics
obligations,
and to divide
and coq?etition,
purpose.
theira
.
.
.
, .'.
November 3,
-179
1980
.
l
.
sufficient
the
(
quantity
very
young,
and diversity
of
and provide
for
.. goods and services,
\
very old, and the luckless
and unskilled
consumers.
the
These
.\
features
are not
controlled
economy
(Dalton
1971).
While
the
purpos e of a subsistence
IL
is clear that subsistence
that
basic
it
is,
products
products
cannot
system,
either
indicate
that
only
beyond
or does not
the
exchange
is
by well-defined
not
to produce
do create
direct
or sell
to obtain
community
store,
rather
array
or government
continuous
non-profit
levels
waste
it
products,
These
products
which
of cash,into
does not
necessarily
gas,
the
this
subsistence.
clothing,
possesses
and services
fashion;
the
surcharge.
short
in
.
.
Cash is
equipment,
of
Barter
exchanges
Since
to rcgisr:Jl
product
is
costly)
barter
whcrc
not
nulri;iorlJl
subject
to
to be‘ conducted
c_
in basically
sources
it
provides
unmeasured,
lines
occurs
of
example,
tend
and timely
centers;
for
resulting
less
reliable
features
an unmonitored,
"cost"
(therefore
in rcgionJ1
special
Barter,
negotiation,
and stockpiling.
COntfi!llLEcS
it
communities.
of production,
need not be centrzlizcd
s:crc?r 4,
northern
person-to-person
transactions,
appropriate
system
of goods
and untaxed
co,%nercial
wealth
,
.
to insecure
unofficial,
for
surplus
other
than
among many--food,
social
household?onsumption.
The introduction
commercial
distribution
an appropriate
ficiency.
for
but
and so on.
significance
and little
is
activities
produce.
from wages or the
The subsistence
through
needed
barter,
one medium of exchange
services,
tO.4:;
those
are used to trade,
household
L
principles,
rules
or profit,
.
by "market"
of transportation,
of supply,
everywhere,
utilizes
diversity
transactions
village
or
and sclf-suf-
.
.
.,.’
..
.
November 3,
' .
Barter
using
-18-
1980
assists
in buffering
1
energy and skill
the
communities
required
from
external
economic changes,
By
.
a product
rather
than external
to produce
- *,
market
conditions
.
noninflationary.
buying
power)
releases
products
others,
the
labor,
In addition,
barter
those
less
goods
of barter
provision
of
products,
increases
and &vices
i,
not
of a direct
reciprocities
value
cash outlay
should
, and skills,
products
through
the
by requiring
cash for
Social
to determine
commun ity
for
.
exchanges
cannot
be overlooked.
sense
and the
of
self
building
to be
cash flow
necess ities.
that
tend
It
(or
also
be bartered.
Theseinclude,
worth,
the
value
or maintenance
among
of one‘s
of relationships
m
and obligations.
.
.
The role
and flow
sufficient
ceaied,
of cash
research.
obligation
systematically
positive
a study
purchase
etc.)
It
thaat
economic
of how those
basic
possible
of'wage
It
is
not
it
may travel
without
subject
their
but
to the
swiftly
sufficient
technology
cash may reduce
earners,
and wage employment
subsistence
can capitalize
is
and security
although
market
has been subject
to in.
cash is anonymous, readily
con-
that
explored.
and distribution
communities
has been noted
and fragmented.
comaunity
is
It
in northern
benefits.
(for
of exchange
with
What is also
whatever
of
been
communities
(rifles,.ammunition,,
subsistence
sense
has not
same rules
through
cash
this
the
needed
reason)
gasoline,
to
_
nets,
enterprise.
.
Subsistence
and the Hodcrn
-m
A CQ':;non bclicf
to the
ev?r,
st.l;c
dcC9rdifiy
Yill~gc
in Al;l;ka
is
and Cd:l;lc!a,
the
t0 a rccen:
that
subsistence
finJ1
"fron:icrs"
cstiiildte
ipa a pri21itivc
in the Idestern
(Cilibni', ,L I973),
vestige
world.
appro~i:ndteIy
pecu?i~r
l{o+
two-thirds
l ‘,.
IlV v r1rruer
3,
-*,-
LY3V
,
‘:
of the
people
in the
"developing
world"
engage in or are dependent
..
..
\
agriculture,
greatly
effecting
their
national
economies.
on subsistence
-.
Another
common belief
Western
world
ever,
rural
in Europe,
(Rei'ning
containing
26% in North
America),
and Lenkard
personal
characteristics
for
sucessful
with
renewable
those
from
constitute
the
long-term
similar
in
contacts
with
and camps
form
serves
resulting
-
as special
Viilages
to organize
relationships
subsistence
of
a relatively
as well
which
of role
shared
(20-423
of individuals.
human invention
a'commonly
How-
most *prevalent
to themselves,
a variety
in the
1000 and 3000 persons
mere collectivities
and durable'
resource
communities
base--thus,
with
hunting,
longer
conservative
than
composition,
YillzcJcs
rxlir
di;intc2rJti::g,
a finite,
into
economy,
- *. - - ...
a
and provisions
sources
are not
to persist
nonrenewable
of energy,
historically
static,
longer
resource
communities
Such persistence
and nonlocal
tend
requires
food,
to
the
..
.
and other
in terms
of organ-
or location.
hi-,:sry,
constantly
dnd rcinicgrs:ing.
Inix of kiMi;,
communities
and herding
communities.
villages
thrzur;h
local
exhaustible
farming,
mining
However,
ization,
base allows
fistiing,
use of local
resources.
histcricJ1
population.
village
places
support.
A healthy
persist
and viable
number between
of people
comaon goals,
only
Villages
of individuals
mutual
than
group
and Canada are the
,55-60% of the world population
'1
.
most of whom live
in villages
and requently
distinct
a collection
group
1980).
inhabita,nts
and stable
are a very
significant
constitute
extensive
large
Alaska
populations
hunian settlement;
in
is that
resources,
.
'fillclc;c
changing,
n\odcrnizing,
chJrzctcristics
and ccor;o;;lic
corlditigc;
ad;lpti'ncj,
arc based on the
acd Survi*iC
as
.I
..
.
-
l
-20.
November 3,
.
1980
long
self-regulating
structures.remain
..
\
in the modern world through
industrial
as basic
constructed
Villages
intact.
are newly
developments,
return
wars,
.
migration,
part
and resettlement
of cyclic
seajonal
from
relocation,
time
and the
forcfs.
tragic
or idyllic,
but
and economic
villages
is
were adapting
Increasing
outside
may intensify
It
is not
the
of
village"
and sociocultural
Thert
c
is
ri31 iz;ltion,
a viable
combination
coqx;ition
rescutce
sourtcz
of
chtrlc;c,
ch3llcjC.
they-
fact that they
.
.
forces and events.
and internal
diminish
villages
communal
but
mobility
of the
and Lenkard
ch3rlgF,
urS3niz3tion,
the
life
but
integrity
of members,
communications,
be assumed but
technology
1980).
and learning.
is the
and so on.
new and the old
and cohesiveness.
vill~3~
become
and Lenkard
sharing,
by economic
obligations,
(Reining
of residents
different.
corporate
for
be assumed
historically,
trade,
is threatening
cannot
destabilized,
changed:villages
(Reining
necessarily
of being
cannot
desires
one another;
external
complctcness,
and accounted
the
villages;it
confronted
traditions"
Z~C! COuntltss
po?l;l3tisn
that
of ccmmunities
inclusivcncrs,
reported,
sense
villages
been a
nomadism,
to be extremely
as these
about
does not
contact
technologies,
The "modern
tests
locals'
liable
s:fficient'to
of travel,
has always
outmigration,
However,
from
to changing
contacts
external
or wholeness
schools,
isolated
traditional
constantly
Movement
to new exigencies
in an immense amount
anything
are
opportunity;
or adapt
were never
have engaged
there
Villages
by external
or are abandonded
sites.
due to inmigration,
and so on.
resource
Alaska
If
history
to time,
to be either
towns
village
of traditional
The village
systematically
based on
"conditions
invcstigited,
1980).
including
popul3tion
institution3liz3tion,
ch~nr;c,
a-.
govcrczcnt
gro~it!;,
indust-
growth,
and so on.
15" I b..dI"CL J,
l
.
-Ll-
AYUU
.
i
.
l
The cumulative
their
(
effects
impacts
of forces
of goods and services,
prestige,
social
language
world-views
organization,
reference
be explored
roles,
*and ties,
use,
social
control,
organization,
values,
family
on kinsh;p,
cannot
..
religion
group
particularly
division
of labor,
and ritual,
well-being
and horizons,
here,
iden$ification,
'I
status,
-
political
practices,
personal
distribution
migration,
and stratification,
childrearing
in
economic
and social
identity,
.
and expectations.
-44
The autonomy
of the
its
village
to resist
the
mode and organization
of
ditions
of production
display
a decline
amenities,
(
However,
manner
of response
cannot
be assumed that
the
they
also
the
kinship
is
course
which
regional
of the
internal
the
rate,
to modify
con-
of the
modern
and
in their
change--it
is
predetermined
processes
and local
and type
magnitude,
of
-.
change.
The reader
of rur31
that
-
in
and
may take
villages
a sub=istencc
hold,
’
villages
settlements,
variability
history
but
use of modern
of externally-caused
of village
mediate
that
larger
ability
control
increased
into
great
from the
change
no doubt
obligations,
display
not
a way to retain
centralization
and complexity
institutions
in
There
to and management
strength
indigenous
1979).
on cash,
results
of externally-caused
production
in certain
so on.
given
process
(Tanner
reliance
village
oriented
of a subsistence-
entcrprire.
bc?l”rlrfinrl
pxc!!.!nr:r!
dei ined
exception
on the subsistence
economy is
Ilowever,
t0
13 C!W.::llln~t’/
--ties
tihish
a.--
by nul:iple
to the
SubsiztcnCp
intcrgcncrJt
in this
economy.
It
a community,
village
n.lir:t;lin
emphasis,
, the
iondl
rather
residency
SyStr.3
has been suggested
earlier
thdn
or house-
is not
---
pCcr\cJ!:liC
an individual
the
systC!n;
critical
rdt)\pr,
(Sp2rlCL?r 1353).
knoyrlcdc;cr,
on the dependence
paper,
drld exchanges,
criterion
it
--
If
is
kinst:i;l
vilIJgcs
are
villages
may,
.
in
*
;
.
:
fact,
c.
-LL-
Novemoer 3, IYOU
.
exist
within
larger
\
as communities-of-interest,
or traditional
munity
towns
absorb
based
and residency
villages,
as villages
the
These
on family,
villages-within-towns
.
exchange systems,
kinship
patterns.
(It
and cities.
use and dependency
affiliation
bution
towns
are only
villages
for
disappear
but
these
ties).
continue.
dissolving,
and grow,
$0 the degree that harvesting
'L
.
subsistence
economic system,
rather
the
for
As
and distrithan
-w
grows.
Management
com-
Similarly,
grow and become towns,
continue
ties,
may even be assumed that
a surrogate
do not
exist
subsistence
..
By controlling
community
fish
(
economies.
life
There
is
little
the
future
Given
is
little
etc.)
resemble
positive
syst~ns,
but
the
value
government
also
.
of government
agencies
need to be coordinated
ti:t
;Jka'1
cfreds on central
current
oil
revenccs
state
that
gold,
past
currently
rural
if.
controls
.
(land,
rural
-
it
for
thzn
governaent
to the
is
will
-. - .._
to energy
not
PartiJ!
encourJgin2
for
state
urbanizing
food,
trc usury
only
.
of rural
that
the
z
rural
present.
to tolerate
or requiring
could
future.
self-sufficiency
subsidies
energy,
that
are "transitioning
patterns
as likely
the
governncnt
thcr:l.
past
a conclusion
predictable
communities
the
fur),
as it
to support
have a clearly
ascribed
subsidirc
iC treasury
of Alaska
Considering
rural
is common practice
to partially
history
evidence
(whaling,
it
of rural
base,
of a variety
of the
exploitation
systems,
to
resources
economy."
will
co r*l.,,y
in the
cash/welfare
the
resource
development,
evidence
there
resource
Khiie
The actions
economy and the
into
renewable
is to persist.
Similarly,
c.
to the
and game, economic
village
the
access
such
may be less
tot21
and other
theoretically
dtpc:!?ct;cy
needs.
rcplzce
..
.
--
. ..-
.. .
November 3,
.
(through
out-of-state
state,
the
f,ood imports)
long-term
subsistence
in
-23-
1980
ability
futures,
become the
its
bases of local
subsidizes
self-sufficiency.
village
to
that
used in the
replace
the
entire
is
invested
government
transfer
payments,
and regulations
of subsistence
economies
as alternative
T$e:e
subsistence
resources
degree
plans,
guarantors
food
of government
To the
management
institutional
the
or desire
economy is doubtful.
village
all
is. no doubt
economies,
much the
that
the
state
partially
same way as it
underwrites
l -.
the
growth
of
Conversely,
it
portions
can be argued
of the
that
is
private
likely
ment to tamper
as little
as possible
the
demand it
and the
knowledge
of rural
market
economic
conditions
uncertain
.
(,
significant
purpose
future
served
uses until
(i.e.
by limiting
and unless
until
the
of the resource
It
not
found
or the
legitimate
Similarly,
the
This
past
lack
assunotions
that
indicate
the
is
years
about
rural
needs
.
development,
or adaptations
of the
a lack
of
due to limited
life.
in terms
history
economic
about
perceptions
frames
is
a need for
it.
* Given
there
,
of
refercncc
the
is little
appear
of the
health
of other
the
of Alaska
subsistence
about
unti1'
of subsistence
underlying
nature
govern-
syitems
human purposes
and aspirations
weak legislative
economy.
economic
base allows
to be unjustified
economic
there
existing
of public--debate
reveals
probably
that
and conflicting
an awareness
an examination
ten
magnitude
compelling
use is
must be noted
Law did
the
with
capital
residents).
Subsistence
subsistence.
in Alaska
subsistence
over
economics.
and unsupported
*
l
*.
.
November 3,
.
.
.
that
the
-24.
19SO
reader
examine
and historical
studies
any representative
..
\conducted
sample
hundreds
..
use and economics
on subsistence
of the
of empirical
in Alaska
.
1974;
1975;
Muller-Wille
1973;
Dumond 1977;
1970;
Nelson
1973;
Nelson,
1966;
Foote
Spencer
1959;
1968;
Chance 1966;
1969,
1961;
Nielson
Caulfield
of Alaska
1978;
many,
rural
will
reveal
resources
investment
.
cormunities,
and systems
immediate
demand,
decisions,
to the
biological)
avail
compared
be desirable
and their
tend
resource
1978;
1978;
It
is
necessary
in order
they
that
they
to
rely.
Uhl and Uhl
University
1979;
Braund
that
not one,
I
identify
of both
may result
resource
future
demand.
involve
allocation
to be based on concepts
alter
these
the
management
(social
rather
-
z
than
scarcity
surplus).
future
and
base beyond
of current
to project
but
in a greater
Current
a harvestable
and
urban
and protect
:
between
complexity
is
econcmies
This
32 sufficient
Committee
suggested
greater
There
the
dc!nllndc, (a nd possibly
Field
Bane
and many parallels
to enhance
in the future
1976;
Davis
is
Nowak
Jenness
and Travis‘T979;
paper.
to human demand for
and possible
Bishop
1979).
and nonmarket
to meet projected
issues,
ability
market
upon which
extent
al.
Federal
as a far
in this
et
in Alaska.
it
in management
1977,
1956;
1978;
and Worl
as well
can be described
both
Giddings
Anderson,
Kruse
Worl
Marshal 1 1933;
no contradictions
findings,
economies
1977;
1974;
Behnke
to protect
Alaska
Vanstone
1980;
subsistence
1966;
SpLa’rman ‘1979;
Ellanna
than
1977;
and Clark
1974;
and international
In order
Clark
Bi sta
such an examination
variability
et al.
1977;
1979;
Burns
Fejes
Yupiktak
and Behnke 1980;
Alaska
..
1975;
Josephson
1977,1979;
'
Eisler
(e.g.,
(resource
It
may
human populations
demands and expectations)
opportunity
to meet thcsc
de:n;!:lSr,.
c
Ii
subsistence
i-, to be prcvi c!cd for,
then
the
papuldtion
of wildlife
species
l
-25-
,
.-.
used for
subsistence
by its
very
tained
merely
reiuires
involved
economic
successful
by providing
nominal
cannot
wildlife
regulatory
Without
subsist
management
the
and must
should
cannot
be main-
harvest,
the
seek another
project
future
and habitat
of resources.
of
to
Subsistence,
levels.
Subsistence
opportunity.
Thus,
disturbhnces
and human conflicts,
fi
.
to harvest
opportunity,
and encourage
impediments
Questions
harvest.
continue
base to survive.
.
at adequate
..
nature,
individuals
reduce
must be maintained
demand,
reduce
unnecessary
conservation
--
.
.
Definition
.
.-
Relying
on an understanding
anthropology,
should
(
they
some basic
be noted
vary
by time
The following
compare
has often
is
Alas%~
privilege,
Cor:stitution;
rec:IJ i red Sv =tatu:c?
in
r;lther
It
fact,
neither
to
SubSistenCC
a righ;
"right"
for
in the
some other
uses.
to provisions
to t;lhe
perspectives
and
economics.
use of these
is
- -
by decisiorimakers.
voiced
privilege
refcrcncc
it
no? ubiquitbus;
The subsistence
has been argued
without
thx
a right."
and economic
However,
accordingly
subsistence
a special
cases,
economics
unifbrm
commonly
a beneficial
specific
or impeded
the
not
as just
in
from
from
are clarified.
are
several
drawn
resources.
superior,
not be tcrmin;ltcd
note
perspective
is,
questions
and must be analyzed
been characterized
econnocry
derived
economies
briefly
is a special
subsistence
use that
subsistence
pages will
common property
subsistence
definitional
and place
them to the
"Subsistence
take
that
of
.
Reilly
only
resources.
,
priorit;
rural
paper
people
that
the
resources,
a
This
use can-
in Title
a set
--
to
16 or the
of proccdl;rcs
.
. ..
.
.
November 3,
;25
1980
l
.
"Subsistence
is a welfare
system for low.income
people."
This perspective
..
\
rural
life
is impoverished
and that subsistence
is an unfortunate
assumes that
feature
of this
"let's
get
fact.
As noted
condition.
them off
replaced,
(not
reflected
a value
judgement,
appears
to be a viable
econo$ic
system.
To the
'1
.
by transfer
payments,
it
supplanted)
includes
an established
economic
extent
is
position
that
it
is
capitalized,
not
-
‘W
is based on protein
and has been only
in the
not
by government.
"Subsistence
which
is
subsistence
to the market
also
perspective,
subsistence",
earlier,
system marginal
supplemented
This
one aspect
values,
needs only."
of a complex
desires,
As noted
production
and traditions
in
earlier,
food
and distribution
addition.to
is
system
"need"
“
or
"dependency."
"Subsistence
is
is
are based on the
declining
and competition
no evidence
effort,
total
a dying
for
way of life."
growth
and declines
to support
these
productivity,
action
promotes
the continuance
of the
cusio3s,
and traditions
spcctive
subsistence
assu,:es
'the
employment,
over
Legislature
use of wild
However,
there
is
on amount of subsistence
productivity
the
economy
cash availability,
populations.
based either
that
subsistence
both
resources
time.
It
can be
supports
to serve
the
c
and
needs,
of residents.
is
limited
that
the
of the
in resource
or relative
from legislative
that
of rural
claims,
inferred
“True
Claims
to traditional
activity
rcsourc2
is relc’dcnt
methods
and the
(as defined
tools
and means."
drc more significJnt
by stztutc).
t0 COrlCC,ntZ Of ccono;nic
This
cffjcicrlcy
tll,jn
Economically,
rdthcr
pcr-
the
than
f
tile
tech-
irlJ1
.
.
l
November 3,
-270
1980
l
.
(
use.
New tools
than
a carpenter
do not
necessarily
inves;ing
in
being
a carpenter
tools
may constitute
tools
may need to be controlled,
whether
or not
or the
change
better
tools
use of the
subsistence
to build
structure.
an unacceptable
tools
activity
is
use,
any more
a structure
It
biological
the
a subsistence
the
is
also
hazard;
used are
that
new
or not
indicative
Finally,
engaged.
his
clear
whether
not
alters
of
and ironically,
'\
some of the
most efficient
subsistence
users
and traditional
primitive
(e.g.,
that
by regulation;
traditional
fish
is,
means could
traps,
efficient
subsistence
methods
caribou
drives,
technology
economies
significantly
and means available
is
(Marks
etc.)
increase
have been removed
a feature
1977).
the
to
of both
A return
modern
to some
e
harvest.
.
.
"Subsistence
This
the
is best
perspective
leaves
resources
result
Mere regulation
Given
less
than
economic
increased
total
nonlegal
system
activity."
unprotected
pressure
and seriously
the
is an individu.al,
subsistence
an elaborate
activities
division
is
into
of persons
whose ties
been custu.;lJry
and so en.
;Irc
not
as well
on resources,
damaged local
management
only,
these
task
to
and special
regulatory
on their
to rurJ1
economics,
2nd trsditionJ1
users
activity."
community
arrangements.
who live
Thf.2~2 persons
community,
a kinship-bound
of labor
to individuals
. and unreasonably
bu:
future
as a tolerated
it
as
would
resources.
for
provide
and users.
paper,
nun;bcr
the
human conflicts
is
"Subsistence
this
unregulated
themselves;
in extreme
resources
left
system
with
By defining
and confining
systems
may intrude
seriously
own in the
other
bush,
~110 live
must have their
economic
throughout
roles.
On the
of wild
As noted
who live
in ur5Jn
resources
intcrcsts
hand,
there
in urban
areas
for
protected
are a
bet
long
areas
who h,lt/e
period:,
throu(;h
factual
.
.
:.
Novemoer 3,
.
research
-28-
1980
and docunentaation
\
and permitting
..
systems.
..
c
"Subsistence
comers
is a voluntary
in
scarcely
rural
areas
system
local
residents
often
neither
perceived,
term
"lifestyle"
is
are clear
The selling
going
locals
is
local
born
not
uncommon for
economic
into
it.
to these
economic
the
picture,
it
is
The economic
roles
of
(the
of a portion
alternatives
subsistence
trapping.
.
becomes commercial."
as a medium of exchange)
(production
subsistence
As noted
is
to meet market
products
are
The use of the
as if
or recreational
use of cash
of surplus
roles
subsistence
new-
activities,
chilfhood
on and nonsubsistence
L
.
prepared
for,
nor actually
present.
"commercialization"
back to first
it
from
"monetization"
with
adopt
to beachcombing
"AS soon as cash enters
interchangeable
for
demeaning
were similar
earlier,
While
to voluntarily
a voluntary
activities
lifestyle."
ha;
not
demands).
historical
roots
contact.
.
"Subsistence
are
not
is growing
sufficient
subsistence
effort
out-of-hand
data
available
or productivity
or biological
consequences
stances
subsistence
where
ment has the
regulatory
however,
resources
for
groshh
of commercial,
It
Se
fTIdy
ncce ss;ry
to determine
from
pressure
alone
to protect
to decline
recreational,
resource
whether,
has increased
results
tools
for
and needs to have a lid
such
the
and what,
growth.
result
resource.
and subs istence
to
put on it."
fact,
if
It
from
social
localized
decline,
in:
govern-
is more common,
a combination
efforts.
There
statewide
any,
In those
in resource
due to prc ssure
:nanJgcrs
in
1
and
a - ..-
.. '.
rlovemoer
l
-2%
A, l9tlU
.
.
harvest.
c
Restrictions
harvest
allocated
on subsistence
to other
Many subsistence
issues
users
resulting
probably
may be considered
to manage effectively
than
as unavoidable
It
that
the
has been suggested
not
"uses',
subsistence
that
regulatory
into
the
language,
the
of Alaska
residents;
Where such
needs,
customs,
necessarily
stitutes
It
that
the
be established
it
mean that
the
number of subsistence
users
historical
methods-means-locations-seasons
commercial
and sports
can also
be argued
that
and biological
basis
As more pcoplc
coinpete
out.
As per unit
ncxc:52ry
that
dFJu;blti
sters
for
in
uses will
for
growth
traditional
for
Space,
productivity
of
cc0 r,c:;1ic subsistence
alloivir;l;
no way
protx:z
dn cndlcss
trJdi:ional
that
users;
rather
than
law,
and the
based
on intent
include
is
left
will
destroy
users
subsistcncc
gcdr
residents
thhir
the
recent
not
con-
use.
court
decisions
uses,
that
all
and that
the
However
e
it
social
economic
use as well.
may become squeezed
declines,
It
nu;nbcr
Jnd cus:o:nZry
are
activity
subsistence
over.
use is dcstroycd.
in
such
on subsistence
what
traditional
and traditions
documentation:
grow logarithmically,
and customary
groifth
new persons
historical
these
conclusion
of
customs,
must be restored,
get only
unlimited
entry
does not
can be placed
will
to the
that,
needs,
subsistence
no constraints
the
through
can be argued
subsistence
of failures
subsistence
lead
curtail
history
use of resources,
that
would
the
or community
and customary
has been be argued
it,
would
or traditions.,
a noncommercial
utilyzing
to protect
family,
protect
can be argued
intended
these
traditional
not
it
requirements.
consequence
to
suggestion
and should
excessive
conflict.
intended
Alternatively,
Legislature
individual,
social
Thi:
cannot
use.
more as the
Legiflature
"users."
agencies
protected
from managed but
.
does not meet statutory
the
is
of
economic
efficiency‘
thcrcfcrc
nonccmerc
iJ1
hdrvc-
USC and may,
. ..-.
November 3,
.
in fact,
destroy
A subsistence
economic,
a significant
about
as an element
we should
stocks,
which
consider
Adopting
times,
basic
determinants
and other
which
of factual
ministrative
entry
this
into
number of persons
econcmic
-makers
system
should
"jlhenever
it
maintenance
should
that
econ,2,mic dctivi
ty are,
of cocrrst,
should
not
growth
if
be reduced
levels
possible,
for
It
for
it
in
the
of
fish
use of a
part
that
decision
to assure
the
the
Management
required
Finally,
for
plans
ration,71
Efficiency
man~gcwnt
of nontraditional
traditional
of any
of AS. 16.05.251(b)
in regulation.
reasons;
ad-
to allow
--or to assure
of efficiency
disturbing
order
language
in.
may be singularly
can be argued
resources...".
growth
nor for
subsistence
basis
maintllincd
be adopted
and customarily
taking
biologicJ1
3110~ indiscriminate
as a ratiOnJle
however,
resource.
the
not
and
..
1977).
efficiency
traditional
given
species
(Marks
should
if
efficiency,
target
efficiency
uses of such
---
the threshold
and protect,
and means,
factors
on a sustainedvield
-of subsistence
assure
us.? this
upon the
output)
of traditional
traditionally
to restrict
stocks
consider
In particular,
protected
to produce
product
productivity
traditional
period
in human energy.
input/
of traditional
such efficiency
protect
is necessary
continuation
the
of
such
who are not
dependent
of fish
constrain
alone.
to sacrifice
unregulated
factors
investigation
convenience
inappropriate
methods
has produced
has developed
(energy
should
it
a significant
investment
agencies
locations,
for
terms,
a limited
efficiency
regulatory
regulations
absence
plans
for
because
products
human economic
traditional
opportunity,
large
in
In investigating*the
possible.
czn,
use,
and customary
or cultural
amount of product
We can think
the
social,
Subsistence
of time.
the
it.
use becomes traditional
nutritional,
.
-3o-
1980
use,
use.
then
-
.
.
.
.
.
h\uvtt!i\oer 3,
.
In certain
of wild
instances,
resources
restrictions
allowed
It
entry
use.
used to select
"customary
and direct
indicator
dependence"
over
, which
passage
from other
economic
is
given
the
reports
are probably
The current
by regulation,
of the
it
by the
of time,
not
not
in
such a use,
three
criteriaa
particularly
in the
some time
results,
depth
of course,.in
prQbJbly
of harvest
may not
if
necessarily
in
net
The
the
level
level
alone,
of use is
if
divorced
indicator.
reporting
reflect
Sim-
systems,
actual
an activity
conctitu:?
such
use levels.
actual
subsistence
has been eliminated
fact.
resources",
e .. - - '..
an insufficient
to establish
because
of altcrnJtivc
does
use.'
based on
probably
harvest
uniformaly
assume that,
aid
be an insufficient
nonreliability
sufficient
by region
particularly
may also
"JvJilcbility
vary
Average
has been eliminated
J~I:! fc:d:tuff;
-'
as traditional
implies
use is
levels,
by regulation.
restrictions
should
has
salmon
of
to decisionmakers,
year's
harvest
potential
regulatory
Managers
discretionary
conditions,
ilarly,
for
growth
when necessary,
and "customary"
of appropriate
or has been depressed
i
users
requiring
as "subsistence"
the
supported
thus
use
of Fisheries
netting
by statute
is
personal
.
required
of evidence.
c;lc,n
set
that
as'piotected
argument
New growth,
depth
analysis
of
This
"traditional"
historical
In tcrx
not
Board
activity
argued
the
resources
dependende."
The criteria
Finally,
canibe
amonq subsistence
participation.
use,
is
the
noncommercial
such fishing
It
that
use of these
For example,
into
purpose.
historical)
"customary
harvest.
desirable,
may determine
and hightest
hps characterized
possibly
1 anguage
age&es
..
th\e best
an unrestricted
( i.e.,
(
is
administrative
while
in
regulatory
on commercial
Cook Inlet.
for
-Jl-
AYGU
the
sufficient
avJilJbility
cause
to
.
.
c
c
November 3,
.
1980
restrict
use;
As noted
earlier,
viable
restriction
bases
is
to certain
economic
"Mainstay"
is
system
to this
--of Fact
The focus
on subsistence
more than
-
Use of
to be effective
alternatives.
focus
indexes,
characteristic.
in a subsistence
condition,
or community
is
than
with
but
nautical
dependent
resource,
a particular
whether
there
large
economic
a continuing
habituation
on community,
roots.
However,
on a subsistence
the
degree
are acceptable
if
economic
of dependency
is
and available
,
.
or small.
as an economic
ranges,
levels
decisions
evidence
on such elcrnentJry
system
kinship
often
time
depths,
comparable
leads
ties,
must be made based
matters
and historical
how many animals
*,.k::
of hua;ln
activity
SC; 'dr!dt drC the trends
(prcbztion,
in
margins
SubSiStCrlCc,
of error,
used in resource
on insufficient
as ho>/ many animals
sur,"lus;
_ a ..-
to:
economics,
standards,
to that
thr, harves:JSln
might
an individual
ofjpprticipation
term
Resource
iaydct
to be
use
s.
species
and confidence
the
than
an unfortunate
dependency,
Questions
- A research
concerns.
be considered
statutory
it,
rel event
alternatives
on biological
activities.
through
less
degree
not
family,
and,
probably
is
an unusual
an individual,
users
first
should
more a community
by the
Dependency
be based
resources"
by the
probably
may be measured
system.
should
\
"alternative
economic
"Dependency"
It
-32-
St-e actually
hGbitJt
ccrdncrci;ll
models,
science
and dcbatJblc
there
taken
chdnyc)
arc;
(by
his
whdt
all
is
Frcdztors);
been or
and s"ort
us'e
IJ *
..
.’
,
.
l
Novemaer 3,
.
-33-
1980
what
and needs by species;
harvesting
by all
significance
taking
is the
significance
..
users'compared
to total
of modern technology
more animals
vestment
of time
[in
on harvest
absolute
numbers
that
for
is,
subsistence
achievement
historical,
affecting
economic,
may not
require
system,
but
(i.e.
is
the
are people
or ratios]
or taking
not
production
"performance",
the
of the
should
legal,
logical,
data
acknowledge
system.
variable
or indicator,
It
with
if
for
the
from level
of effort,
ability,
has little
meaning
Analysis
of subsistence
obscure
sist2nce
and arguable
manage to protec t both
taking
Regulations
of excess
intcrvcnc
prirc,d
zvecics,
flOt
sociJ1
neti;orks
i/it!lin
should
take
hundreds
beyond
level',
less
in-
outlined
populations
the erltirc!
the
whcrl
thcrc
coC5tcll,!tiorl
subsistcncc
level,
this
for
econo:il:l.
for
example,
avail-
of
predation.
not the
If
merely
over
reso:irces,
some-
a subis
%
to
regulate
high-demand,
ac:jQ;itics,
To the degree
- - .-.
-
1977).
is conflict
of
.
.
subsistence
point.
not
accounting
the
decisionmakers
resource,
(Grks
within
of
using'this
reality,
to
problem
This
of one source
day-to-day
the economy and the
normally
account
and resource
index
economic
on a single
and regulatio;
productivity,
the
the
in the
overreliance
Harvest
a simple
principles
resource
reasonable
and trends
system.
with
value,
health
of variables
avoid
per unit
econcmy has social
but
possible,
entire
begins
level
factors
such as harvest
as a proxy
solely
and human considerations.
on the
the
should,
divorced
what
harvest
subsistence
exhaustive
economic
indicator
sufficiency'is
of a certain
Decisions
system.
i-
what
t
The test
the
objectives
and illegal
and energy?).
w
c
of unreported
.
harvest
objectives;
thJ:
d:ld
confl
ict
-.
mvemer
.
.
is
(
3,
lytiu
-349
' .
due to competition
from increasing.commercial
or recreational
.
\
between persons but between economic systems.
conflict
is
It
be desirable,
would
'(based
on the
iversally
ever,
not
principles
across
it
is
the
that
social
and economic
for
decisionmakers
is
systems.
lutionary
in subsistent
change
if
Regulations,
resources
will
is,
be the
issues
will
mechanisms
managers
may use un-
confronting
preceding
in
f~~U1
it
fact,
corn;lliJnce
t
in
actions
the
them.
factual
result
How-
analysis
in haphazard
irlcreascd
CCOC::.J~C considerJtion2
systems
are not
systems,
the
between
and
to basic
ramifications
loss
(Padfield
a reflection
of
to account
is minimal.
if
rat!lCr
ttidn
imoact.
and chronic
more prized
even to the
the
functions,
invalidation
of
-.
whether
regulatory
Similarly,
hJrvcst
evo-
1976).
for
the existing
rcy2lJtiofls.
'
of ecological
and economic
question
the
the
pre-
normal
constitute
.
of a job
social
of loss,
is a researchable
fail
loss
historically
part-of
but
scope of regulation,
institutions
k/here regulations
realities,
not
which
subsistence
e economic
the more central
In many instances,
that,
regulatory
may resul' b in a permanent
The broader
socioeconomic
reality
that
to the difference
lost,
greater
entire
point)
elements,
Regulatory
followed,
similar
unemployment.
the
to this
simple
>llocation
t;
.
such mechanisms,
ceded regulatory
position,
c
outlined
identify
the
outcomes.
The problem
(
to
many resource
suggested
of case-by-case
damaging
of course,
uses,
day-to-day
system.
or satisfy
basic
libcr~lizing
hdt-vest
It
subsistence
is
probable
economic
regul3tions
level
Noncclllpli;lnce,
is
may
dictated
then,
by
is
*
c
.
-35-
November 3, 1980
likely
to be due less
or incompatibility
but
would
be useful
about
human behavioral
if
systems.
rather
is destroyed
subsistence
communities,
waste
terms.
and other
and/or
deferred
Permitting,
deficits
inevitably
to simultaneously
a)
i.e.
the
social
and economic
harvest
tool,
is also
from
a harvest
disparate
However,
resource
concepts
view
product,
neither
mar'ket
and nonrenewable
and Fisher
to
reporting
selective
system
nor
resources.
to be externally
(Krutilla
subject
in relative
scarce
of a valued
continue
future
data
Western
of
value
conceived
renewable
indefinite
arises
generally
nonutilization
systems
is that
and non-Western
when a prized,
conserve
in both
accomplish
provide
is
potential.
efficently
as a regulatory
Confusion
and the
is available.
to reproductive
into
it
our commonsense assumptions
Western
Waste results
terms,
economies
Energy
noncompliance
regulations,
area of noncompliance
in both
in more absolute
loss
certain
to regulations
appear
and no replacement
particularly
for
irrelevance
Since
concerns.
examine
uncommon,
of waste
absolute
to perceived
regulations.
In northern
than
waste
responses
relatively
Concepts
disregard
systematically
of existing
than
to economic
a selective
to both
One prominent,
waste.
lawlessness
of regulations
is not universal,
consequences
to general
subsidized
1975).
noncompliance.
which
is
supposed
functions:
from which
population
status
can be extrapolated,
and
b)
monitor
compliance
with
people
are not
regulations
restricting
and limiting
resource
harvests
is obvious
harvests
that
to an agency
trying
going
to report
to reduce
harvests
out-of-season
or wrong
and make harvest
more
-36-
November 3, 1980
difficult.
It
activities
(from
permitted
(in
Subsistence
reporting
systems
of next
that
the
residents
rely
legal
report
low harvests
untary
mechanisms
work on the
part
Residents
also
in three
different
harvest
declining
regulations
(e.g.
they
will
or
not do
"coercive"
calendars
extensive
in the
growth
prevalence
walrus,
future.
This
and increased
may also
migratory
Others
Vol-
surveys)
identical
for
determining
may require
more accurate
fishery
Some
ceilings.
suggest,
calendars,
regulations
to
dependency.
and village
1) in catch
to
They argue
to hear.
of harvest
to report
can lead
(as opposed
"wants"
great
to provide
to mandatory
the drawbacks--namely,
volumes , residents
tend
object
cooperation.
management
was duplicative
that
be more prevalent
However,
from
and 3) on subsistence
is a common belief
population
than
an imposition
but
contexts:
rather
to demonstrate
as catch
and harvest
interviews,
system)
to report
do not outweigh
think
harvests
of managers
of urban
derived
what they
it
least
may accurately
some residents
(failure
opportunity)
(such
felt
people
result,
that
on coercion
to preclude
effort,
permitting
conditions,
note
systems
higher
report
may be the
in the
restrictions
reports
of more data
report
residency,
t
field
year's
perspective)
subsistence
1980).
data-gathering
residents
will
increasing
which
benefits
voluntary)
It
if
Section
loss
that
but,
the most legitimate
participation
Under ideal
(Behnke
long.
that
economic
of actual
activities.
harvests
so very
concern
a subsistence
terms
most illegal
report
is of no little
data
harvest
more
over
time.
information
2) in subsistence
permit
forms
and permitting
may, in fact,
competition
for
occur
as evidenced
waterfowl),
loss
occur
limited
by the
of permits
(Caulfield
1980).
systems
in those
areas
resources.
lack
(e.g.
or loss
of
-37-
November 3, 1980
Western
Arctic
caribou
management
institutions
It
possible
is also
by review
useful
to achieve
of those
existing
monitoring
issues
regulatory
data
the
resource
Commission).
subsistence
management
to examine
resource
mechanism
to alter
impact
can be resolved
impediments
to opportunity
Much can also
and logic.
in resource
to examine
the
possiblity
without
and provide
information
of new regulatory
of altering
the
adoption
greater
be
actions
on
expectations,
is to encourage
local
efforts,
laws
of regulations.
institutions
governing
Finally,
the
One
in resource
including
and behaviors
management and conservation.
traditional
human behavior
participation
and education
perceptions,
Another
fashion.
the
objectives
is to encourage
management through
role
of nongovernmental
economies.
is also
attempt
many current
by closely
subsistence
It
that
growth
Eskimo Whaling
by biological
accomplished
and the
(e.g
and removal
not justified
herd),
an
in a noncoercive
to play
it
a greater
would
be useful
use and conservation
of re-.
sources,
those
form,
content,
incide
with
derived
from the
and formulation
day-to-day
economic
subsistence
of agency
realities.
economic
regulations
system,
to see if
can be modified
the
to co-
-l-
Anderson,
D., R. Bane,
R. Nelson, W. Anderson,
Sheldon
1976
Kuuvanmiit:
Traditional
Subsistence
Living
In The Later Twentieth
Century.
National
Park Service
Bane, G.
1966
"Environmental
Exploitation
by the
Eskimo of Wainwright,
Alaska."
National
Park Service
Behnke, S.
1980
Subsistence
Section,
Field Trip Report.
Alaska Department
of Fish and Game
1979
Dena ‘Ina And The Land
McGill University
1977
Subsistence
Lake Clark
Cooperative
of Alaska
Binford,
1978
Nunamiut
Academic
L.
M.A. ' Thesis,
Resource Use In The Proposed
National
Park Fairbanks:
Park Studies
Unit,
University
Ethnoarcheology.
Press
New York:
Bishop,
1978
R.
Subsistence
Resource Use In The Proposed
North Addition
to Mt. McKinley
National
Park
FaIrbanks:
Cooperative
Park Studies
Unit,
University
of Alaska
Braund,
1980
S. and S. Behnke
Lower Cook Inlet
Sociocultural
Analysis
Washington,
D.C.:
of Land Management
Systems
U.S. Bureau
Bruhn, J.
1974
A Unifying
Science?"
"Human Ecology:
Human Ecology 2,2: pp. 105-125.
Burch, E. Jr.
1970
"The Eskimo Trading Partnership
in
North Alaska."
Anthropological
Papers
of the University
of Alaska
15, 1:
pp. 49-80.
Burns, A.
1977
Subsistence
Land Use In Southwestern
Alaska And The Impact Of Th Alaska
Native Claims Settlement
Act.
M.A.
Thesis,
California
State University,
Long Beach
Caulfield,
1980
c
N.
1979
R.
Field Trip Report.
Subsistence
Section,
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Subsistence
Use In And Around
Yukon-Charley
National
Rivers
Cooperative
Park Studies
Unit,
of Alaska
The Proposed
Fairbanks:
University
-2-
Chance,
1966
The Eskimo of North
mt,
Rineh'%xmn
N.
Chibnik,
1978
The Value of Subsistence
Journal
of Anthropological
561-576-
M.
New York:
Production.
Research:
Clark,
A. and D. Clark
1978
"On the Edge
in a Northern
the 1960’s.”
University
-of
Dalton,
1971
Studies
in Economic Anthropology
WashIngton,
D.C.: American
Anthropological
Association
G. (Ed)
Dornstreich,
1974
M. and G. Morren
Dyson-Hudson,
1969
R. and N.
and Aleuts
London:
"Subsistence
Herding in Uganda."
American 220, 2: pp. 76-89
Thames
Scientific
Subsistence
Activities
In The Proposed
Bearing Land Bridge National
Reserve
init,
alrban s:
University
of Alaska
D.
Ellanna,
1980
"Does New Guinea Cannibalism
Have NutriHuman Ecology 2,L: pp. 1-12
tional
Value?"
The Eskimos
and Hudson
Dumond, D.
1977
Eisler,
1978
of Today:
Cultural
Change
Athapaskan
Village
During
Anthropological
Pa ers of the
Alaska 19, 1: 65=7&--
Kodiak Native Sociocultural
Impacts
Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Bureau of
Land Management
Davis, N.
1979
(
Alaska
L.
Federal Field Committee For
Development
Planning
in Alaska
1968
Bering-Norton
Washington,
agement
Sociocultural
Systems Analysis
D.C. U.S. Bureau of Land Man-
Alaska Natives
U.S. Goverment
And The Land Washington,
Printing
Office
Fejes, C.
1966
izi+-
Foote, D.
1961
A Human Geographical
Study In Northwest
Alaska.
Atomic Energy Commission.
Giddings,
1956
Peo le --of the
J.
Noatak
New York:
Alfred
D.C
A.
"Forest
Eskimos: An Ethnographic
Sketch of
the Kobuk River People in the 1880's."
20,2 - PhilUniversit
Museum Bulletin
2TiEp-d
.
-3-
Jenness,
1970
Jochim,
1980
Dwellers
of the Tundra: Life in an Alaskan
New York:rGen-Collier
Eskimo Villa=
Press
A.
Review of Mellars,
Paul (Ed.) The Early
Postglacial
Settlement
of Northern
Europe:
An Ecological
Perspective
in Science:
1235-6, 12 September.
M.
Hunter-Gatherer
Subsistence
New York: Academic Press
i976
Johnson,
1971
Josephson,
1974
"Security
and Risk-Taking
Among Poor
A Brazilian
Case."
In Dalton,
Peasants:
(Ed.) Studies
in Economic Anthropology
American Anthropological
Washington,
D.C.:
Association
144-151
A.
"Subsistence:
A Discussion
of Relevent
Concepts and Some Observations
on Patterns
of Change in Alaska."
Proceedings
of the
Alaska Science Conference,
78-92
Kruse, J. and B..
1979
J.
"A survey of North
Institute
banks:
Research, University
Scope Residents."
Fairof Social and Economic
of Alaska
The Economics of Natural
Environments:
Studies --P
-ineTaof Commodity and
Johns HoFns
Amenity Resources Baltimoz:
University
Press
"Hunting
Behavior
Bisa in Zambia.”
and Strategies
Human Ecology
Large Mammals and A Brave
Hunters in ZamfiTem:
ington PEss
1976
Miller-Wille,
Travis
and A. Fisher
Marks, S.
1977
Marshall,
1933
G.
Alaska And The Law Of The Sea Anchorage:
Arctic
Environmental
Information
and
Data Center
K.
Kruse, J.
1979 -
Krutilla,
1975
and Settlement
-
Arctic
Robert
R.
L.
"Cost
Inuit
Polar
Village
Haas
New York:
of the Vallt
5,L: 1-36
People:
Subsistenc
University
of Wast
Harrison
Smith
and
Analysis
of Modern Hunting Among the
of the Canadian Central
Arctic."
Geography 2,2: loo-114
,
-4-
Neale,
1971
Nelson,
1973
"Monetization,
Commercialization,
Market
Orientation,
and Market Dependence."
In
Dalton,
G. (Ed) Studies
in Economic AnthroWashingtom:-%merican
Anvpo ogical
Association,
pp.25-29
R.
1969
Nelson,
1978
R.,
Nielson,
1977
K. Mantner,
Of The Northern
Forest.
Hunters
versity
Of The Northern
Ice Chicago:
of Chicago Press
8.
Chicago:
Uni-
Tracks In The Wildland:
A Portra al Of
Koyukon And Nunamiut Subsistence
eanks:
Cooperative
Park Studies
Unit,
University
Alaska
Historic
Beaufort
Sea Stud
-8
Siteentory:
Preliminary
Resource Assessment Barrow:
Borough
J.
Nietschmann,
1972
and G. Bane
Hunters
:
and Subsistence
Cultural
North Slope
"Hunting
and Fishing
Focus Among the Miskito
Indians,
Eastern Nicaragua".
Human Ecology
l&
pp. 41-66
Nowak, M.
1975
"Subsistence
Community."
Olson, D.
1980
"Capital
Gap and Rural Development"
Presentation
and Commentary to 31st Annual
Alaska Science Conference,
Anchorage,
September 17, 1980.
Padfield,
1976
A.
Pelto,
P.
1978
Polanyi,
1971
Trends
Arctic
in a Modern
28,L: 21-34
"The Snowmobile Revolution:
Social Change in the Arctic."
Ca: Cummings
K.
Eskimo
"The Expendable
Rural Community and the
Denial of Powerlessness."
Presentation
to
Symposium on Dying Communities,
Santa Fe,
New Mexico, September 13-17
"Ecology,
De-Localization
and,
Presentation
to Consequences of
Change in Circumpolar
Regions.
Boreal Instiitute
for Northern
1973
of
Social Change
Economic
Edmonton:
Studies
Technology
and
Menlo Park,
"Call Menqer's Two Meanings of 'Economic'."
In Dalton;
G. (Ed.) Studies
in Economic
Anthropology
Washington,
D.C?m
Anthropological
Association
pp. 16-24
-5.
Village
Boulder,
Sahlins,
1971
M.
The Intensity
of Domestic Production
in
Primitive
Societies:
Social
Inflections
In Studies
in
of the Chayanov slope.
Economic Anthropology.
G, Dalton,
(Ed.)
Washington,
D.C.: American Anthropological
Association
H.
Spearman,
1979
Spencer,
1959
G.
"Economic Development
and Anthropology."
In Siegel,
B. A. Beals, and S. Tyler
(Eds.)
Annual Review of Anthropology,
Vol. 4:
pp. 271-292
Land Use Values Through Time In The
Anaktuvuk
Pass Area Fairbanks:
Cooperative
Park Studies Unit,
University
of Alaska
"The North Alaska Eskimos:
A Study in
Ecology and Society."
Bureau of American
Ethnology,
Bulletin
171
R.
"Forms of Cooperation
in the
Proceedings
Barrow Eskimo."
Science Conference,
128-130
1953
Culture
of the
of the Alaska
Swetnam, 3.
1980
"Disguised
Employment and Development
Policy
in Peasant Economies."
Human
Organization
39, L: pp. 32-39
Tanner,
1979
Bringing
Home Animals London:
Institute
of Social and Economic Research, Memorial
University
of Newfoundland
A.
Tuck, B.
1980
Comments to Alaska
Uhl, W. and C. Uhl
1979
Nvatakmiit
Fairbanks:
Studies
Unit,
University
University
1978
Vanstone,
1974
Science
Conference
Cooperative
of Alaska
Park
Tagivmsinaaqmiit
Fairbanks:
Cooperative
Studies Unit,
University
of Alaska
1977
i
Society
P. C. and B. Lenkard
Schneider,
1975
(
1
y in.Contemporary
Viabilit
Co o: Westview Press
Reining,
1980
of Alaska
J.
Park
Yukon-Porcupine
Regional
Planning
Study
Fairbanks:
Agricultural
Experiment
Station
and the Institute
for Social
and Economic
Research
Athapaskan Adaptations:
Hunters and Fishermer
of the Subarctic
Forests Chicago: Aldine
,
l
Worl,
R.
"The Arctic
Subsistence
Worl, R. and R. Worl
1978
Wharton,
Beaufort
Sea Regions Sociocultural
Systems
Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Bureau of Land
Management
C. Jr.
"Risk,
Uncertainty,
and The Subsistence
Farmer: Technological
Innovation and Resistance
to Chancre in the Context of Survival"
In
Dalton,-G.
(Ed.) Studies
in Economic Anthropoly
Washington,3XZXi&ican
Anthropological
Association.
pp. 152-179
1971
Winterhalder,
1980
Yupiktak
1974
i
Bista
Slope 1979 Socioeconomic
Complex."
Unpublished
paper.
B.
.
Canadian Fur Bearer Cycles and Cree-Ojibwa
Hunting and Tapping Practices.
The American
Naturalist:
870-879 June
A Report On Subsistence
Of The Yupik Life-Style
Yuplktak
Blsta
And The Conservation
Bethel,
Alaska: