Migratory Bird Harvest in Northwestern
Alaska: A Zooarchaeological Analysis
of Ipiutak and Thule Occupations from
the Deering Archaeological District
Madonna L. Moss And Peter M. Bowers
Abstract. Until 2003, it was illegal to hunt migratory birds in Alaska during the spring and summer. Even though many Alaska Natives have a long history of hunting migratory birds, use of
these resources is not well documented. Here we present our preliminary analyses of the bird
remains recovered from the Deering Archaeological District (49-KTZ-169), located in Deering,
Northwest Alaska. Relatively large bird assemblages from two sites (KTZ-299 and 300) provide
information on the use of birds during both Ipiutak and Thule occupations dating between about
1250 and 850 years ago. We find strong evidence that the Ipiutak and Thule people inhabiting the
sites relied heavily on migratory birds, including ducks, geese, and murres. Zooarchaeological
analyses demonstrate that Alaska Natives and their ancestors have been using migratory birds in
this region during the spring and summer for more than a dozen centuries.
The Regulation of Migratory
Bird Hunting
Between 1916 and 2003, the hunting of migratory
birds during the spring and summer by Alaska Natives was illegal, even though bird hunting and egg
collecting are traditional subsistence activities that
had been practiced continuously for centuries. The
1916 Migratory Bird Treaty with Canada was the
first of several international treaties aimed at curbing the massive decline of bird populations due
to commercial hunting in the late nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries. The Act did not prohibit
bird hunting in the fall, an activity in which both
Native and non-Native hunters participated. While
the intent of this and other treaties was to protect
migratory birds and allow for variable levels of fall
sports hunting, these treaties ignored the customary use of birds by indigenous northern peoples
during the spring and summer.
The 1956 Fish and Wildlife Act designated
the Department of the Interior as the key agency
for managing migratory birds in the United States.
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act Protocol Amendment of 1995 aimed to redress what can be viewed
as long-term discrimination against Alaska Natives.
The amendment “provides for customary and traditional use of migratory birds and their eggs for subsistence use by indigenous inhabitants of Alaska,”
but states that “it is not the intent of the Amendment to cause significant increases in the take of
Madonna L. Moss, Department of Anthropology
University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, 97403-1218
Peter M. Bowers, Northern Land Use Research, Inc.
P.O. Box 83990, Fairbanks, Alaska, 99708
ARCTIC ANTHROPOLOGY, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 37–50, 2007 ISSN 0066-6939
© 2007 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
W4336.indb 37
4/20/07 10:15:36 AM
38
Arctic Anthropology 44:1
Figure 1. Deering Archaeological District.
species of migratory birds relative to their continental population sizes” (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 2003:1). The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
(USFW) and the Alaska Department of Fish & Game
(ADF&G) surveyed subsistence harvests, and in
2000, the Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management
Council was established with representatives from
USFW and ADF&G in addition to Native organizations. In 2003, the Council issued its first annual
harvest regulations for the spring and summer of
2003. Since then, the regulations have appeared
annually, identifying species open and closed for
harvest and specifying exactly when birds can be
hunted and eggs collected (e.g., Department of the
Interior 2006).
The purpose of this paper is to help document the use of migratory birds by the indigenous
people of Northwest Alaska. Investigations of archaeological sites in the Deering Archaeological
District (KTZ-169; see Fig. 1) in 1999 by Northern
Land Use Research, Inc. (NLUR) provided a relatively large sample of bird bones from two different occupations separated in time by some 350
to 400 years. The species composition of the bird
sample from the Ipiutak house (KTZ-299) differs
from that recovered from a Western Thule house
(KTZ-300) located nearby. These in turn differ in
interesting ways from the species reportedly harvested in recent years by Iñupiat people of Deering
(Ipnatchiaq), yet the data show that the indigenous
people of Northwest Arctic have been harvesting
migratory birds during the spring and summer for
at least 1250 years. In documenting the history of
W4336.indb 38
migratory bird use, we provide longitudinal support for the Iñupiat’s and other Alaska Natives’
rights to harvest birds. As the Northwest Arctic
Borough (2005) recently re-asserted, subsistence
use of the borough’s coastal lands and waters is
the highest land use and economic priority of borough residents.
The Pittagmiut Nation on
The North Coast of the
Seward Peninsula
Ernest S. Burch, Jr., (1998:285) has written that
the Pittagmiut are the “least known of all the historic Iñupiaq nations of Northwest Alaska.” Their
territory was centered around Goodhope Bay on
the north side of the Seward Peninsula along the
southern shoreline of Kotzebue Sound. Based on
the territories of their neighbors, the Pittagmiut
region extended from Cape Espenberg in the northwest to Motherwood Point in the east, to the headwaters of Kugruk and Goodhope rivers in the interior, encompassing the Imuruk Lava Plateau
(Burch 1998:288–289).
Most of Pittagmiut territory is covered in
moist tundra, with some wet tundra on the Espenberg Peninsula (Burch 1998:292–293). Permafrost is discontinuous across the area. Tundra vegetation is composed of cottongrass, sedge, mosses,
and lichens. Willows, alder, and birch shrubs grow
along rivers and streams or in well-drained areas.
Some spruce trees are known from the upper trib-
4/20/07 10:15:36 AM
Moss and Bowers: Migratory Bird Harvest in Northwestern Alaska
utaries of the Kugruk River, and cottonwood grow
along the Inmachuk and Goodhope rivers. The
spruce tree line occurs about 75 km to the east of
Deering (Hulten 1968; Matthews 1974). The area’s
weather is similar to that of Kotzebue, with long
cold winters and cool summers, with temperatures
ranging from 47.6 ⬚ F (8.7 ⬚C) in July to -6.1 ⬚ F (-21.2 ⬚C)
in February (Burch 1998:292). Freshwater freezeup occurs in October and break-up takes place between May 13 and June 11 (Burch 1998:292). In
general, Kotzebue Sound is ice-free from early to
mid-June until mid-October.
Marine mammals were and continue to be
major resources; especially abundant in the area
are ringed seals, bearded seals, and spotted seals.
Beluga were taken by net, driving, and harpooning off Cape Deceit (Lucier and VanStone 1995:16).
Caribou are undoubtedly the most important terrestrial mammal, but furbearers, bears, and hares
were also significant. In the latter half of the twentieth century, moose, beaver, and muskox moved
or were moved into the area after periods of absence or near-absence (Burch 1998:293). Fish of local economic importance include chum and pink
salmon, char, grayling, ling cod, herring, northern pike, smelt, whitefish, blackfish, saffron cod,
arctic cod, and flounder (Burch 1998:294; Sobelman 1984). Burch (1998:295) identifies four groups
of birds of primary importance to the traditional
economy of the Pittagmiut: 1) seabirds that nest at
Cape Deceit and other rocky headlands, 2) waterfowl that concentrate in the wet tundra of the Espenberg Peninsula, 3) ptarmigan in terrestrial environments, and 4) other species such as sandhill
crane and snowy owl.
The earliest account of the Pittagmiut dates
from von Kotzebue’s 1816 journey into the sound
that was given his name. In August of that year,
Kotzebue observed eight umiat traveling from Cape
Deceit (that cape also known as Kippalu; Outwater
Cox 2005:16) to Goodhope Bay, each with 12 men
indicating a minimum of 96 men (Burch 1998:296).
Burch (1998:295–297) estimated that in the early
nineteenth century, a minimum of 400 people, and
possibly as many as 472, comprised the Pittagmiut
nation. Later contacts by F. W. Beechey in 1826
and Hobson in 1853–54 resulted in some minimal
information about the Pittagmiut and their landscape (Burch 1998:287, 294). Hobson observed relatively few people at the three settlements he visited in February, 1854, but this was a time of year
when the Pittagmiut were probably out hunting
seals at Cape Espenberg or caribou in the interior
(Burch 1998:302). Even though the Seward Peninsula caribou herd is known to have declined between 1855 and 1870, there is no evidence that,
coincident with this, the Pittagmiut migrated en
masse to some other region (Burch 1998:303). Yet,
by the 1880s, very few people were living in the
W4336.indb 39
39
Goodhope district (Burch 1998:304). This led
Burch (1998:287) to conclude that the “Pittagmiut
nation ceased to exist as an independent entity
some time before 1880.” Outwater Cox (2005:18)
notes that at least a few families continued to live
in the Cape Deceit-Inmachuk River area. Larsen
(1958:580; 2001:11) states that only one family living in Deering in 1950 had lived there before 1900.
It seems likely that the introduction of new diseases had some, as yet undocumented, impact on
the Pittagmiut.
After this time the region was occupied by
Iñupiat moving in from surrounding districts. By
1910, only one of the Iñupiat living in the Goodhope district was Pittagmiut; 70% were from the
Kuzitrin River district to the south, 13% from the
Kobuk River, and smaller proportions were from
the Selawik and Kuskokwim river areas and elsewhere (Burch 1998:304). In 1910, the three other
surviving Pittagmiut lived in Shungnak and Kotzebue. In 1914, most Deering residents were relocated to the new Bureau of Education funded community of Noorvik on the Kobuk River (Ducker
1996) because mining-related sedimentation had
decimated Inmachuk River fish runs. Nevertheless,
the Alaska Natives living in the district today are
Iñupiat and are closely affiliated with the Pittagmiut and their ancestors. Ethnographic sources
include works by Charles Lucier, Helge Larsen,
Dorothy Jean Ray, David Eisler, William Sheppard,
and Sandra Sobelman, all of which contributed
to Burch’s 1998 synthesis. Larsen’s (2001) posthumous report on his 1950 excavation at Deering
contains some ethnographic information (see also
Larsen 1958) and Georgette’s (2000) report of subsistence use of birds in the Northwest Arctic region are recent valuable additions to the literature.
Archaeological Investigations at the
Deering Archaeological District
The Native Village of Deering is a predominately
Iñupiat Eskimo community with a population of
about 130, located within historic Pittagmiut territory. Deering’s economy is a mix of cash and subsistence activities, with active reindeer herding in
the recent past. Regionally, it is part of the Northwest Arctic Borough, NANA Regional Corporation,
and Maniilaq Regional Health Corporation (Alaska
Department of Community Advocacy 2004). The
present day village was re-established in 1901 as a
support town for gold mining in the interior of the
Seward Peninsula, particularly the gold mining
community of Utica, located some 20 miles (32 km)
up the Inmachuk River from the historic village of
Ipnatchiaq (KTZ-003).
Deering (Ipnatchiaq) is located at the mouth
of the Inmachuk River, a northeasterly flowing river
4/20/07 10:15:36 AM
40
which empties into Kotzebue Sound. It is built
upon a gravel and sand spit that has been aggrading for over 2000 years. The 2 km long spit has a
maximum height of 4.3 m asl and has formed by
eastward longshore sediment flow derived from
bluff erosion replenished periodically by storm
surges. The spit forms a barrier that tends to impound sediments from the northward flowing Inmachuk River and its tributary, Smith Creek. Surficial sediments comprise a series of gravel and
sand beds, capped in places by sand dunes (Mason, Hopkins, and Plug 1997; Reanier, Sheehan,
and Jensen 1998). The area was not glaciated during Wisconsinan glaciation, although outwash and
loess may have provided a source for some sediments later reworked to form the Deering spit.
Archaeological research since 1949 has identified at least three prehistoric cultures present
along the spit and on the adjacent headland at
Cape Deceit: Ipiutak, Western Thule, and late prehistoric Iñupiat (e.g., Bowers 2006; Bowers et al.
1999; Dixon 1994; Harritt 1994; Larsen 2001; Powers et al. 1982; Ray 1964; Reanier, Sheehan, and
Jensen 1998). Much attention has been focused
on the impressive remains associated with the ca.
A.D. 600 –900 Ipiutak culture, for example, the results of Larsen’s 1950 excavations of a large qargi
[ceremonial or community house] at KTZ-023 (Larsen 2001). A number of Ipiutak burials were excavated in 1997 (Reanier, Sheehan, and Jensen 1998),
including Ipiutak Burial 4 which contained a spectacular composite ivory mask similar to two found
at Point Hope (cf. Larsen and Rainey 1948).
Deering has a historic gold-rush component
at the eastern end of the spit (KTZ-170), protohistoric and historic settlements at Cape Deceit (Kipalut; KTZ-020, KTZ-025) and sites along the Inmachuk River (KTZ-003, KTZ-024, KTZ-026; Ray
1964; Powers et al. 1982; Burch 1998). More than
80 cultural resource features are known within the
Deering Archaeological District (KTZ-169, encompassing the entire modern village), including human burials, buried houses, and cache pits.
The archaeological excavations from which
the bird bone samples derived resulted from trenching for a new vacuum sewer system installed by
Village Safe Water (Bowers 2006; Bowers et al.
1999). This work was undertaken by Bering Strait
Foundation in 1997, Ukpeagvik Iñupiat Corporation (UIC) in 1998 (Reanier, Sheehan, and Jensen 1998), and Northern Land Use Research, Inc.,
(NLUR) in 1999 (Bowers 2006; Bowers et al. 1999).
NLUR employed standard archaeological field
methods (Bowers et al. 1999). Survey data and artifact provenience data were collected using a
Leica™ TCR 307 total station. Excavations proceeded in 1 m x 1 m blocks and all material was
sifted through 1/4 inch mesh screen. Faunal remains, lithic debitage and screen finds were re-
W4336.indb 40
Arctic Anthropology 44:1
corded by 0.5 m x 0.5 m horizontal block and vertical stratigraphic units. Both cultural and natural
stratigraphic units were recorded.
Within the large Deering Archaeological District (KTZ-169; Figure 1), the 1999 NLUR archaeological investigations focused on two sites: KTZ-299
and KTZ 300. KTZ-299 was a buried Ipiutak house
and adjacent cache pit under what is now the new
Post Office building. The Ipiutak features excavated
by NLUR at KTZ-299 yielded about 1,750 artifacts
and more than 6,000 animal bones (Bowers et al.
1999). The remains of a Western Thule settlement
are located about 200 m west of KTZ-299. Each of
two Western Thule houses in this area has been assigned its own site number, even though the houses
are located just 2 m apart. The 1999 NLUR excavations of Western Thule House 1 (KTZ-300) recovered approximately 1,375 artifacts and more than
45,500 faunal remains. The 1998 UIC excavations
of about half of Western Thule House 2 (KTZ-301)
recovered more than 1200 artifacts and an unknown quantity of faunal remains. Seven Ipiutak
burials (KTZ-302), comprising at least 20 individuals, were excavated in 1997 by James Simon, then
employed by Bering Strait Foundation (Reanier,
Sheehan, and Jensen 1998). The overall size and
extent of both the Ipiutak and Western Thule settlements at Deering is still unknown. Since 1999,
NLUR has conducted other archaeological surveys
and construction monitoring (e.g., Bowers 2002).
NLUR is currently studying the extensive collections from the 1997, 1998, and 1999 investigations
and a final report is scheduled to appear in 2007
(Bowers 2006).
Ipiutak House (Ktz-299)
The Ipiutak house excavated in 1999 was roughly
rectangular in shape, with straight 3.7– 4.75 m
long sides and rounded corners. A short entrance
was found in the southern corner and the original wood floor may be indicated by wood chips.
No post holes or sod block remnants were located.
A hearth occurs near the center of the house, and
a cache pit was located outside the house (Bowers
et al. 1999). Artifacts recovered from the Ipiutak
house and features include: incised bone and antler arrow points, chert side- and endblades, chert
discoidal scrapers, worked ivory and wood, flake
knives, bone awls, worked bird bone, bird-bone
needles and tubes, chert projectile points, wound
plugs, incised decorated bones, leister prongs,
carved tooth/seal effigies, antler hooked objects,
toggling harpoons with intact sideblades, and an
engraving tool with a carved seal head and iron
tip (Bowers 2006; Bowers et al. 1999:7).
Pertinent radiocarbon dates are presented in
Table 1 (see Bowers 2006 for a complete list). Charcoal from the central hearth was radiocarbon dated
4/20/07 10:15:37 AM
41
Moss and Bowers: Migratory Bird Harvest in Northwestern Alaska
Table 1. Radiocarbon Ages from Deering Archaeological Sites, 49-KTZ-299, 300, and 301.
Measured Conventional
14
14
C Age
C Age
(B.P.)
(B.P.)
C / 12C
Ratio
(o/oo)
Estimated
Calendar Age
Range (A.D.;
2 sigma)
13
Site
Lab #
Beta-
299
138562
1250+40
1230+40
-26.3
685– 890
299
138564
1640+80
1620+80
-26.1
245– 615
300
138565
940+40
920+40
-26.2
1020 –1210
300
138568
910+40
870+40
-27.2
1040 –1255
300
138566
1080+80
1080+80
-25.1
775–1055,
1085–1150
300
138567
1220+40
1190+40
-26.8
720 –745,
760 –965
301
189091
820+40
790+40
-26.6
1220 –1270
Material & Context
charcoal from central hearth in
Ipiutak house
charcoal from Ipiutak cache pit
adjacent to Ipiutak house
charcoal from bottom of entrance
tunnel in Western Thule House 1
charcoal beneath main room
floorboards of Western Thule
House 1
charcoal from kitchen antechamber, Western Thule House 1;
sea mammal oil-soaked layer
charcoal from kitchen antechamber, Western Thule House 1;
sea mammal oil-soaked layer
wood from subfloor cache wall of
Western Thule House 2
Calibrated age ranges were estimated using the INTCAL curve (Stuiver et al. 1998); samples Beta-138566 and Beta138567 yielded multiple intercepts.
to 1230 ⫾ 40 B.P. (calibrated A.D. 685– 890; Beta138562). A nearby cache pit dates to 1620 ⫾ 80
B.P. (calibrated A.D. 245– 615; Beta-138564). The
date of the hearth is statistically identical to that
of Ipiutak Burial 4 (1280 ⫾ 40 B.P. [Beta-113142];
Reanier, Sheehan, and Jensen 1998) and a series
of dates from the Ipiutak qargi excavated in 1950
(Larsen 2001). The cache pit date is older than expected, but may reflect the “old wood problem”
(Schiffer 1986) if the dated wood derived from
driftwood.
Western Thule Houses
Western Thule House 1 (KTZ-300) was partially
excavated in 1998 by UIC with additional excavations by NLUR the following year. The semisubterranean house is roughly square (2.7 m ⫻
2.3 m) with a main room, 6.4 m long entrance tunnel, and a side room presumably functioning as a
kitchen. The house was constructed of driftwood,
whalebone, and sod. Most of the cultural material
was recovered from midden fill. Well-preserved
faunal remains were found lying directly on basal
floorboards and in midden fill directly above the
floor. All of the Western Thule avian remains described here derived from this feature. A partial
list of artifacts from House 1 includes: pottery,
antler harpoon heads, arrow points, ivory float
nozzles, antler awls, ivory pins, ground slate ulus,
W4336.indb 41
knotted baleen, ivory puffin pendants, wooden and
ivory pottery paddles, antler brow bands with incised lines, incised ivory objects, ivory seal plugs,
chert scrapers, antler fishing jigs, scapula knives,
fish net gauges, notched stone sinkers, stitched
bark fragments, tanged arrow points made of antler, baleen bowls with wooden bases, part of a
wooden bowl or shovel, ivory harpoon heads, bodkins, ivory needles, wooden baskets, and ivory
picks with lashing grooves (Bowers 2006; Bowers
et al. 1999:7– 8).
Four radiocarbon dates were obtained from
House 1 samples collected in 1999. Charcoal found
beneath the main room floorboards dated to 870 ⫾
40 B.P. (calibrated A.D. 1040 –1255; Beta-138568).
Charcoal from the base of the House 1 entrance tunnel dates to 920 ⫾ 40 B.P. (calibrated A.D. 1020 –
1210; Beta-138565). Two samples from the House
1 kitchen antechamber may have been contaminated by ancient sea mammal oil; these are thus
less reliable age indicators (Bowers 2006; see discussion of sea mammal bone dates in Morrison
1989:52–53). A single tree ring date of A.D. 1203
was obtained from analysis of structural wood
from House 1 timbers. This wood had a growth
span of 163 years between A.D. 1040 and 1203 and
was probably obtained as driftwood (Val Barber,
personal communication 2003).
Western Thule House 2 (KTZ-301), consisting of a main room measuring 3.7 m ⫻ 3.2 m, was
4/20/07 10:15:37 AM
42
partially excavated in 1998 by UIC. The length of
the entrance tunnel and presence/absence of a side
room are unknown due to the limited test excavation. House 2 was also constructed of driftwood,
whalebone, and sod, with well-preserved organic
remains located on floorboards and in midden fill
directly above the floor. A radiocarbon sample of
wood from a subfloor cache wall was dated to 790
⫾ 40 BP by NLUR (calibrated A.D. 1220 –1270;
Beta-189091); this is the only date so far associated
with Western Thule House 2 (Bowers 2006).
In this paper, we present the results of just one
aspect of the Deering project: what study of the bird
bones recovered from KTZ-299 and KTZ-300 might
mean for the people of Deering and the Northwest
Arctic region today. Ultimately the results of this
study will be considered within the larger context of the other faunal remains and occupational
evidence recovered from the Ipiutak and Western
Thule occupations in the Deering Archaeological
District.
Zooarchaeological Methods
In 2002, Principal Investigator Peter Bowers contacted Madonna Moss to determine her interest
in analyzing the bird bones from KTZ-299 and
300. We acknowledged that while the North Pacific Comparative Collection of Reference Faunal
Specimens in the Department of Anthropology,
University of Oregon, was not ideal, it was probably adequate (see http://uoregon.edu/⬃mmoss/
Zooarchaeology-at-Oregon/. Moss identified the
archaeological bird bones using specimens in the
comparative collection, but also with reference to
Cohen and Serjeantson (1996), Gilbert, Martin,
and Savage (1985), Oates, Boyd, and Ramaekers
(2003), and Olson (1996a, 1996b). Based on the
number of duck bones in the assemblage, Moss secured additional comparative material on loan from
the Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture
at the University of Washington (Clangula hyemalis, Polysticta stelleri, Somateria fischeri, S. mollissima, S. spectabilis, Aythya valisineria, A. marila,
A. affinis, and Oxyura jamaicensis). Cultural modifications and non-cultural damage were noted.
Specimens were quantified by count (NISP) and
weight (g). Observations were recorded on Excel
spreadsheets (on file with both authors) and on
tags bagged with the specimens. The KTZ-299 and
300 bird remains still reside at the University of
Oregon, but will be curated, along with the rest of
the Deering collections, according to the wishes of
the Native Village of Deering.
A total of 1540 specimens, weighing 672.67
grams were analyzed. Of these, 57% of the total
NISP and 83% of the total weight were identified
to the family, subfamily, tribe, genus, or species.
Approximately 60% of the bird bones were re-
W4336.indb 42
Arctic Anthropology 44:1
covered from the Ipiutak deposits (KTZ-299) and
about 40% from the Western Thule deposits (KTZ300). The taxonomic categories include six species, 11 genera, a set of two tribes, one subfamily,
and two families. The taxonomic identifications
are summarized in Table 2.
Major Bird Taxa in the ktz-299
and ktz-300 Assemblages
In this section we integrate data on habitat, behavior, seasonal availability, and ethnographic use
for each of the major bird taxa identified in the
two Deering assemblages. Here we consider four
taxonomic categories, 1) the combined Aythyini/
Mergini tribes of ducks, 2) geese, 3) murres, and
4) ptarmigan. Each of these make up at least 4%
by NISP or weight of either the Ipiutak or Thule
samples. The percentages reported below are a
proportion of the taxon in question relative to the
total identified to family, subfamily, tribe, genus,
or species levels, i.e., “identified.” In other words,
these proportions do not include those remains
that were unidentified to skeletal element and to
family, subfamily, tribe, genus, or species. Biological data on key taxa derive from Armstrong (2002),
Elphick, Dunning, and Sibley (2001), and Stokes
and Stokes (1996), and the major ethnographic
sources are Burch (1985, 1998) and Georgette
(2000). The relative frequencies of major taxa in
the two samples will be analyzed in a subsequent
section.
Aythyini/Mergini
This category includes two of the four tribes of
ducks. At least 20 species representing these two
tribes occur in western Alaska. Members of these
tribes identified to genus or species in the KTZ-299
and 300 assemblages include scaup (Aythya), longtailed duck (Clangula hyemalis), scoter (Melanitta),
merganser (Mergus), Steller’s eider (Polysticta stelleri), and king eider (Somateria spectabilis). Taken
together this group combines to represent 11% of
the NISP and 7% of the weight in the Ipiutak sample and 83% of the NISP and 79% of the weight in
the Thule sample.
Although each species in the Aythyini/Mergini group has its own pattern of behavior and migration, these ducks generally migrate to Northwest Alaska during break-up. Some of the most
common species in this tribe nest on islands (A.
marila, M. serrator, S. mollissima), while others
nest on saltwater mainland shores (S. mollissima,
M. serrator); others nest near ponds and lakes in
lowland tundra (S. spectabilis, S. fischeri, M. nigra);
and yet others nest some distance away from water
(M. perspicillata). Some time after breeding, these
ducks disperse into areas that provide food and
4/20/07 10:15:37 AM
43
Moss and Bowers: Migratory Bird Harvest in Northwestern Alaska
Table 2. Bird Remains from 49-KTZ-299 and 49-KTZ-300, Deering, Alaska
Scientific Name
Ipiutak
KTZ-299
Common Name
NISP
Gavia spp.
Phalacrocorax spp.
Branta spp. (cf.)
Anatinae
Aythyini/Mergini
Aythya spp.
Clangula hyemalis
Melanitta spp.
Mergus spp.
Polysticta stelleri
Somateria
spectabilis (cf.)
Lagopus spp.
Larus spp.
Rissa tridactyla (cf.)
Stercorarius spp.
Alcidae
Cepphus columba
Lunda spp.
Synthliboramphus
antiquus
Uria spp.
Strigidae
Unidentified bird
Total
loon
cormorant
goose
ducks
diving ducks/
sea ducks
scaup
long-tailed duck
scoter
merganser
Steller eider
king eider
ptarmigan
gull
black-legged
kittiwake
jaeger
alcid
pigeon guillemot
puffin
ancient murrelet
murre
owl
2
51
2
42
92.96
0.88
20.65
1.72
7
5
2
2.58
1.83
0.52
7
2.16
7
2.98
282
1
511
921
168.98
0.19
95.66
394.36
Total
NISP
weight (g)
NISP
weight (g)
2
10
1
368
7.27
8.15
0.30
143.01
2
2
61
3
410
3.25
7.27
101.11
1.18
163.66
7
2
7
3
1
3
22.30
6.90
17.85
2.00
2.00
11.10
7
2
9
3
1
3
22.30
6.90
19.57
2.00
2.00
11.10
18
1
5
9.25
0.70
2.10
25
6
7
11.83
2.53
2.62
1
12
2
5
1
0.27
2.00
1.00
3.30
0.40
1
19
2
12
1
0.27
4.16
1.00
6.28
0.40
21
19.75
149
619
18.66
278.31
303
1
660
1540
188.73
0.19
114.32
672.67
3.25
2
protection from predators, because they are flightless when they molt. Most of these ducks migrate
by October, although eiders might remain in the region as late as November or December if the ocean
has ice-free areas (Georgette 2000:16). Almost all
members of this group winter in coastal waters
from the Aleutian Islands south, although the winter range of S. mollissima extends to the south side
of the Seward Peninsula. S. fischeri spend winter
in the pack ice of the Bering Sea.
Georgette indicates that ducks are most accessible to hunters during the spring. Ducks and geese
(see below) first appear in leads and cracks in the
sea ice (Burch 1985:96), and people hunt eiders
and other waterfowl while seal hunting (Georgette
2000:17). As the ice breaks up, the birds come
closer to the beach and Burch (1985:97) explains
that people station themselves at specific locations
along the birds’ flight paths. Burch (1985:97) and
Georgette (2000:8) agree that spring is the main
goose and duck hunting season. Later, the birds
nest, and Georgette (2000:17) states that eiders are
“the only bird shot off the nest” because, in the
W4336.indb 43
weight (g)
Thule
KTZ-300
words of a Kotzebue hunter, “you get a nestful of
eggs and also a very fat duck.” Georgette (2000:17)
indicates that Melanitta and Clangula remain in
good condition (fat) into late spring. She states that
some Iñupiat hunted ducks that were molting in
the summer during the 1990s and that this practice
was more common in the past. Local people found
molting ducks easy to pluck, yielding fat, tender
meat (Georgette 2000:18).
Branta spp.
The University of Oregon comparative collection
has three different subspecies of Branta canadensis, but no other geese. Therefore, geese identified
as cf. Branta spp. may be B. canadensis or B. bernicla, but they may also represent the remains of
Anser albifrons, Chen caerulescens, or C. canagica, other goose species common in the project
area and of cultural importance. Geese represent
12% of the NISP and 31% of the weight in the Ipiutak sample and 2% of the NISP and 3% of the
weight in the Thule sample.
4/20/07 10:15:38 AM
44
Arctic Anthropology 44:1
Each species of goose differs in seasonal behavior and migration. The most likely subspecies of
Canada goose in the project area are cackling goose
(B. c. minima) and Taverner’s (B. c. taverneri). They
breed on the tundra coastal wetlands and winter in
Washington, Oregon, and California. Brant (B. bernicla) nests on low grassy tundra just above high
tide or on islands and it winters on coastal waters
south of Alaska. The white-fronted goose (Anser albifrons) nests on tundra and winters on saltwater
grass flats or inland fields far south of Alaska. The
snow goose (Chen caerulescens) passes through the
project area in the spring on its way to more northerly breeding areas. The emperor goose (C. canagica) nests on wet tundra near the coast and on islands, and winters on saltwater beaches to the south
of the project area.
Georgette (2000:11) reports that Iñupiat preferred white-fronted geese because they are among
the earliest birds to arrive in the Northwest Arctic
in late April or early May. Her respondents said
that white-fronted geese were always “fat enough
to make a good pot of soup” and that they were
amongst the easiest birds to hunt in the spring.
They were traditionally snared, but in the fall they
were difficult to capture. Although not as desirable as the white-fronted goose, Canada geese were
routinely hunted, and they are also early arrivals.
Georgette (2000:12) found that they were easily
hunted in the spring, but also during the molting
period, when kayakers herded them into shallow
areas of lakes and then killed them by hand. Molting geese are still taken during the summer, usually with shotguns. Emperor geese nest along the
coast west of Deering near the Goodhope River and
stay in the area until October (Georgette 2000:13).
Brant are the last geese to arrive. They come in late
May or early June when the ice is melting; Georgette
(2000:14) found that this made it difficult for Deering residents to hunt this species, even though they
enjoy the brant’s soft meat and yellow fat.
Uria spp.
Both U. aalge and U. lomvia are common seabirds
in western Alaska, but the University of Oregon
collections lack the thick-billed murre. The two
species vary in size, so bone measurements may
have permitted identifications to species. Nevertheless, the two species behave similarly. Murres
nest on the ledges and tops of steep coastal headlands and islands in large colonies. They winter
at sea, south of the project area. Murres represent
69% of the NISP and 57% of the weight in the Ipiutak sample and 4% of the NISP and 8% of the
weight in the Thule sample.
Cape Deceit (Kippalu) is one of three main
concentrations of seabirds in the Northwest Arctic
region (Georgette 2000:19). It is a steep rocky bluff
W4336.indb 44
located only 2 km from Deering. Burch (1998:295)
noted that Cape Deceit was the most important seabird colony within the territory of the Pittagmiut
nation. An estimated 20 or more pairs of murres
can nest per square yard in such habitats (Elphick,
Dunning, and Sibley 2001:312). Murres, known locally as “crowbills,” arrive in the project area early
in the spring when leads open in the sea ice and
the birds are sometimes taken during this time.
Georgette (2000:19) indicates that they were more
commonly eaten in the past than they are today,
“especially when other fresh meat was scarce.” Today, murre eggs are still collected in July and are
preferred over puffin eggs, which are more difficult
to gather. Local residents collect murre eggs using
ropes secured by stakes at the top of the islands
or headlands where the birds gather. They generally suspend the ropes over water and are accompanied by boats in case the climbers fall (Georgette
2000:102; Outwater Cox 2005:196 –199). One of
Georgette’s (2000:103) respondents explained that
a person cannot climb to collect eggs when it is
raining, because it becomes too slippery and dangerous. Apparently Cape Deceit has become quite
hazardous in recent years because, in a respondent’s
words, “the rock has become too soft” (Georgette
2000:111). Twentieth century murre egging parties
are known to obtain adult birds while out gathering eggs (Burch 1985:100).
Lagopus spp.
Ptarmigan are one of the few birds available to
Deering area residents during the winter. Burch
(1998:295) writes that although they disperse in
nesting pairs during the summer, “[i]n winter they
are found in flocks in shrub thickets almost everywhere.” Ptarmigan make up 2% of the NISP and
1% of the weight in the Ipiutak sample and 4%
of both the NISP and weight in the Thule sample.
Georgette (2000:20) agrees with biologists that the
willow ptarmigan (L. lagopus), is the most common ptarmigan in the Northwest Arctic. She has
written that “[p]tarmigan are considered good to
eat, although they are not hunted as much now
as in the past” (Georgette 2000:20). The Iñupiat
used snares and nets, mostly during freeze-up and
break-up, to hunt ptarmigan which were “critically important” during March (Burch 1985:96).
Differences between the Ipiutak and Thule Samples
As shown in Table 3 and Figure 2, the relative
abundance of the four major taxonomic categories
differs between the Ipiutak and Thule samples.
The most abundant in the Ipiutak sample is Uria
spp., the murres, comprising 69% of the NISP and
57% of the weight. In contrast, the Thule sample
is dominated by the sea ducks (Aythyini/Mergini)
that comprise 83% of the NISP and 79% of the
4/20/07 10:15:38 AM
45
Moss and Bowers: Migratory Bird Harvest in Northwestern Alaska
Table 3. Major Bird Taxa from Ipiutak (49-KTZ-299) and Thule (49-KTZ-300) Samples from Deering, Alaska.
Scientific Name
Ipiutak
KTZ-299
Common Name
Aythyini/Mergini
Branta spp. (cf.)
Lagopus spp.
Uria spp.
Other identified
Total identified
Thule
KTZ-300
NISP
%
weight
%
NISP
%
weight
%
44
51
7
282
26
410
11
12
2
69
6
22.37
92.96
2.58
168.98
11.81
298.70
7
31
1
57
4
391
10
18
21
30
470
83
2
4
4
6
205.16
8.15
9.25
19.75
17.34
259.65
79
3
4
8
7
diving & sea ducks
geese
ptarmigan
murres
Bird Remains from Ipiutak and Thule Samples (NISP) and Number of Birds taken in 1997
other
murres
1997
ptarmigan
geese
ducks
other
murres
Thule
ptarmigan
geese
ducks
other
murres
Ipiutak
ptarmigan
geese
ducks
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
NISP for Ipiutak, Thule, counts for 1997
Figure 2.
weight. The Ipiutak sample has significantly more
geese (12% of the NISP, 31% of the weight) than
the Thule sample (2% of the NISP and 3% of the
weight). The Thule sample has a slightly higher
percentage of ptarmigan (4% of NISP and weight)
than the Ipiutak sample (2% of the NISP and 1%
of weight).
A number of factors could account for these
differences. The Ipiutak and Western Thule sites
in Deering are separated by as much as 350 to 400
years, but the faunal samples probably represent
short “slices in time” of a number of seasons rather
W4336.indb 45
than an amalgam of material deposited over centuries. While the Western Thule house has a long
entrance tunnel and kitchen suggesting it was a
“winter house,” the Ipiutak house, with its minimal entranceway, appears to be a more ephemeral
structure. The other fauna in the Ipiutak sample
show a focus on caribou and pinnipeds. Murres
and geese could be acquired when they arrive in
the spring, but they are most vulnerable to humans
when the murres are nesting and the geese molting in July. The season of Ipiutak bird acquisition
appears to be spring to early summer, and this may
4/20/07 10:15:38 AM
46
provide evidence of the seasonality of the Ipiutak
house occupation.
Western Thule House 1 appears to be a classic winter house, with the faunal remains probably representing multiple seasons of acquisition.
Pinnipeds and caribou are represented, but the
bones of arctic hare (Lepus arcticus) are particularly numerous (Becky Saleeby, personal communication 2006). Although Arctic hare were probably not a primary food, at times when caribou and
seals were scarce, they may have been important.
Nunavut elders describe how hares aggregate in
groups in the winter when they are easy to shoot
(Canadian Museum of Nature 2006). Ptarmigan are
often taken in March, and the high percentage of
sea ducks suggests hunting in the spring during
break-up when these birds arrive. We suggest that
the Thule people lived in this house during winter
through early spring.
One possibility we considered was that climate change might have caused a decline in murre
abundance sometime during the Thule occupation.
Mason and Gerlach (1995) have argued that the
Thule culture developed during a time of cool, deteriorating climate and increased storminess. They
have inferred frequent and intense storms at Cape
Espenberg ca. A.D. 1400, A.D. 1550 –1600, and
A.D. 1700 –1850 (Mason and Gerlach 1995:109).
Yet these events evidently postdated the early Western Thule occupation at KTZ-300 by a few centuries. Both the Ipiutak and earliest Western Thule
occupations appear to have occurred during times
of warmer climate, surface stability and soil formation, when the relative lack of storms made the
Deering spit habitable. The hiatus between occupations co-occurs with a period of instability, when
the spit could not support human occupation
(Owen Mason, personal communication 2006).
Whether or not excessive storminess during this
hiatus could have caused a decline in local murre
populations during the subsequent Western Thule
occupation at KTZ-300 should be re-assessed when
more geomorphological, chronological, and biological data are available.
A brief report of the faunal analysis conducted
on the materials excavated in 1950 at the Ipiutak qargi is now available (Larsen 2001:78–79). Lumping
together the remains from two occupation floors,
the most common taxa identified were: ringed seal
(330), caribou (120), bearded seal (80), thick-billed
murre (68), and geese (46) of a total 686 bones. Interestingly, murre and geese are the most abundant
birds, as they are in the NLUR 1999 Ipiutak sample. Larsen indicated that the murres were taken at
Cape Deceit during the summer (although he does
not specify a month), and suggested that the geese
were captured in July when molting on the flats
just inland from the house area. These results are
consistent with those from KTZ-299. Based on var-
W4336.indb 46
Arctic Anthropology 44:1
ious lines of evidence, it seems most likely that
the differences between the composition of the Ipiutak and Thule assemblages indicate a different
seasonal emphasis, with the Ipiutak occupying
KTZ-299 primarily in the summer and the Thule
occupying KTZ-300 in the winter and spring. We
do not claim that Ipiutak occupation of the Deering spit was limited to summer, only that so far,
we have no evidence of winter occupation of this
Ipiutak house, KTZ-299. Mason (2006:113) has argued that the presence of ceremonial/community
houses at Ipiutak sites suggests winter occupation
and clearly, such a house was excavated by Larsen
(2001) at Deering. At present, our data cannot resolve this issue.
Comparisons between Ipiutak,
Thule, and Contemporary Iñupiat
Uses of Migratory Birds
In this section, we compare the taxonomic abundances of the archaeological samples to the number of birds reportedly taken by Deering hunters
in 1997 (Georgette 2000:58–59). Of course, hunting birds with firearms is different from use of
the tools found archaeologically, such as bow and
arrow, snares, nets, gull hooks, or bolas. The duck
category used by Georgette includes all ducks,
whereas the archaeological samples represent
Aythyini/Mergini more specifically. We acknowledge that the NISPs for the archaeological samples
are not the same as the number of birds as reported
for the 1997 harvest. Georgette’s bird counts are
conceptually closer to MNIs (minimum number
of individuals), but Grayson (1984:63) has shown
that the information on relative abundance that resides in MNIs also resides in NISPs. For our purposes here, these figures are comparable. Considering geese, relatively more geese were taken in 1997
than in either the Ipiutak or Thule samples. The
same is true for ptarmigan, many of which were
taken in 1997, but relatively few occur in either
archaeological sample. For ducks, relatively more
ducks are represented among the Thule sample
than taken in 1997 or among the Ipiutak sample.
Perhaps more striking is that in the Ipiutak
sample, murres are relatively abundant, whereas
they are scarce in both the Thule sample and in
the 1997 survey. Yet the contemporary subsistence
importance of murres is significant, not as measured by the number of birds taken, but by the
numbers of eggs collected. Deering residents reported taking 746 murre eggs in 1997 (Georgette
2000:61). The rest of their egg harvest was contributed by gulls (739 eggs) and ducks (7 eggs). No
eggshells were found in the archaeological deposits, so we have no data on pre-contact egg collection. The conditions under which eggshells might
4/20/07 10:15:38 AM
47
Moss and Bowers: Migratory Bird Harvest in Northwestern Alaska
survive cooking, discard, and post-depositional
processes are presently unknown. The importance
of murres is probably underestimated in the archaeological samples because of the absence of
eggshells.
Ptarmigan seem to be of greater contemporary importance than their numbers suggest for the
pre-contact era. One explanation for this may be
that the people of Deering live in the village yearround. The residents of the Ipiutak house (KTZ299) do not appear to have spent the winter there,
and while the Western Thule house (KTZ-300) was
occupied during winter, it was probably not occupied year-round.
Since ducks and geese have been legal to
hunt in the fall for many years, and because ptarmigan are legal to hunt in the winter, the numbers reported for these taxa by both Deering residents and residents of the Northwest Arctic region
may be more accurate than the numbers reported
for seabirds and other taxa. Other species that may
also be “taboo” for residents to report include
swans, cranes, and owls. Because these latter birds
were not well-represented in the archaeological
samples, we have not focused on them. Nevertheless, it seems possible that data collected on certain types of birds harvested prior to 2003 might
be less reliable due to legal sanctions against migratory bird hunting, especially those species taken
during spring and summer. Even though it was illegal to hunt ducks and geese in the spring and summer during the years of her study, Georgette makes
clear that this was the season during which waterfowl were preferred because they were fat and hunting conditions were favorable:
In general, subsistence hunters favor spring waterfowl because the birds are fat at this time and
because fresh meat has typically not been available
for quite some time. The long, mild days of spring
are ideal for waterfowl hunting and the sight and
sound of birds after their long winter absence is
exhilarating. Additionally, ecological conditions
in spring tend to concentrate birds over short periods of time in predictable locations, making for
efficient harvest. In the fall, birds tend to be more
dispersed throughout much of the region and migrate south gradually over several weeks. At this
time of the year, local residents are primarily occupied with other harvest activities such as caribou
hunting, seal hunting, and berry picking. However, there are key areas, particularly on coastal
flats and river deltas where birds congregate prior
to the fall migration, enabling nearby communities
to participate in an efficient fall harvest if desired.
(Georgette 2000:8)
Low lying marshes similar to the coastal flats described above occur in the vicinity of Deering. We
expect that use of firearms has made fall hunting
of ducks and geese more efficient now than it was
W4336.indb 47
during pre-contact times. Given these considerations, we believe that the archaeological data
on waterfowl and other migratory birds from
KTZ-299 and KTZ-300 demonstrate bird harvest during spring and summer during Ipiutak
and Thule times. This is consistent with the use
of birds across the larger region during the twentieth century continuing to the present (e.g., Nelson 1969:152–162; Wakabayashi 2006). Even with
the threat of avian influenza, migratory waterfowl
are still considered staples of Iñupiat diet (Wakabayashi 2006).
Conclusions
Spring and summer harvest of migratory birds
in Alaska was illegal prior to 2003. Yet Iñupiat,
Yup’ik, Aleut, Tlingit, and other Alaska Natives
have been taking birds and collecting their eggs
for many years (e.g., Hunn et al. 2003). Our study
of the bird remains from KTZ-299 and KTZ-300
provides archaeological evidence that the people
of what was to become the Native Village of Deering relied upon birds during the spring and summer seasons for 1200 or more years. While the
relative frequencies of the various taxa in the Ipiutak and Thule samples differ, both samples contain substantial evidence of the use of migratory
birds. We have used both ethnographic and biological data to argue that the predominance of murres
in the Ipiutak sample indicates acquisition in July,
and that the high proportion of diving and sea
ducks in the Thule sample shows acquisition during spring break-up. Taken together, we find clear
evidence of long-term use of migratory birds during spring and summer.
For a number of years, biologists and anthropologists working in Alaska have recognized the
legal dilemma faced by Alaska Natives. Wolfe,
Paige, and Scott wrote (1990:4), “to continue their
traditional hunting practices, they [northern peoples] must break federal and state laws.” In his
1985 report, Burch (1985:94) admitted that his records on bird use from the 1960s were inadequate,
at least partly to protect the interests of the community in which he worked. At the time, Burch
(1985:95) felt that trying to collect data on the bird
harvest would jeopardize his ability to stay in the
village of Kivalina, so he instructed his assistants
not to collect any information on subsistence hunting of birds. Burch describes the 1961 “duck-in”
at Barrow in which “most of the hunters in the village each shot one duck and brought it to a meeting at which they challenged the game warden
to arrest them.” Such acts of defiance and resistance occurred across the state, and for a number
of years, the Migratory Waterfowl Treaty simply
was not enforced. Obviously, the criminalization
of spring and summer harvest of migratory birds
4/20/07 10:15:39 AM
48
made collecting reliable information on bird harvests by anthropologists or agency employees
difficult.
Given this sociopolitical situation, the archaeological data documenting pre-contact use
of birds becomes even more valuable for what we
can learn about migratory birds and their long
term use by the Iñupiat and other Alaska Natives.
We know that modern environments are historical phenomena, and that the biology and behavior of migratory birds has evolved in a context in
which the Iñupiat and their ancestors hunted birds
for more than a thousand years. We hope that the
zooarchaeological analyses presented here will be
of use to the people of Deering, the Iñupiat of the
Northwest Arctic region, other Alaska Natives, and
to the Alaska Department of Fish & Game, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management Council as they work together to continue to allow for sustainable harvests
of migratory birds during the spring and summer
seasons.
Acknowledgments. Excavations at Deering were
funded by a contract between the City of Deering and Northern Land Use Research, Inc., with
funding provided under the requirements of the
National Historic Preservation Act by the ADEC
Village Safe Water Program. We thank the City of
Deering and Native Village of Deering for their
assistance with all phases of the Deering Archaeological Program. In particular, we acknowledge the
important contributions by the late James Moto, Jr.,
Emerson Moto, Gilbert Barr, Calvin Moto, Brenda
Karmen, Roberta Moto, Bonita Barr, Suzie Barr,
Stephanie Barr, K evin Moto, Jim Moto, Brian Weinart (all of Deering); Catherine Williams (NLUR Lab
Supervisor), Robin Mills (NLUR Field Supervisor, now with BLM), and Owen Mason (Geoarch
Alaska). Both authors extend our sincere thanks
to the staff of NLUR who worked diligently in the
field and laboratory to recover and process the
samples that are the subject of this study. We are
especially grateful to Catherine Williams who also
prepared the site map. Radiocarbon samples were
dated by Beta Analytic, Inc. and dendrochronological analysis was performed by Dr. Val Barber
of the University of Alaska Institute of Arctic Biology. We are indebted to Robert C. Faucett, Collections Manager, Ornithology, and Professor Sievert
Rohwer, Curator of Birds, the Burke Museum of
Natural History and Culture, for loaning Moss
comparative specimens to supplement those at the
University of Oregon. We gratefully acknowledge
Shayna Rohwer, graduate student at the University
of Oregon, who suggested the loan, and then transported the birds safely back to Seattle herself. This
paper benefited greatly from the contributions of
three anonymous reviews as well as sage advice
W4336.indb 48
Arctic Anthropology 44:1
from Susan Kaplan. Finally, we thank Stacy Ericson for her diligence and skill.
REFERENCES
Alaska Department of Community Advocacy
2004
Community Database Online. Deering Community Overview. http://www.commerce.state.ak
.us/dca/commdb/CF_BLOCK.cfm. Accessed
December 21, 2005.
Armstrong, Robert H.
2002
Guide to the Birds of Alaska. Anchorage: Alaska
Northwest Books.
Bowers, Peter M.
2002
Emergency Excavation of Human Remains in
Deering. Letter report to the Native Village of
Deering. July, 2002. Fairbanks: Northern Land
Use Research, Inc.
2006
Update on the Deering Archaeological Program.
Alaska Anthropological Association Newsletter
32(1):13–20.
Bowers, Peter M., Catherine M. Williams, Owen K. Mason,
and Robin O. Mills
1999
Preliminary Report on the 1999 Deering Village
Safe Water Archaeological Program. Report prepared for Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation Village Safe Water Office, the City
of Deering, and the Deering IRA Council. Fairbanks: Northern Land Use Research, Inc.
Burch, Ernest S., Jr.
1985
Subsistence Production in Kivalina, Alaska: a
Twenty Year Perspective. Alaska Department of
Fish and Game Technical Paper, 128. Juneau:
Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
1998
The Iñupiaq Eskimo Nations of Northwest
Alaska. Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press.
Canadian Museum of Nature
2006
Ukaliq: The Arctic Hare. Canadian Museum of
Nature electronic document http://www.nature
.ca/ukaliq/index_e.cfm, accessed October 13,
2006.
Cohen, Alan and Dale Serjeantson
1996
A Manual for the Identification of Bird Bones
from Archaeological Sites. London: Archetype
Publications.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
2006
Migratory Bird Subsistence Harvest in Alaska;
Harvest Regulations for Migratory Birds in
Alaska during the 2006 Season; Final Rule.
Federal Register 71(39):10404 –10410.
Dixon, R. Greg
1994
An Archaeological Reconnaissance of Lands
to be Affected by the Proposed Construction of
a Sewer Line and Treatment Plant in Deering,
Alaska. Report prepared for Alaska Department
of Environmental Conservation Village Safe
4/20/07 10:15:39 AM
Moss and Bowers: Migratory Bird Harvest in Northwestern Alaska
Water Office, the City of Deering, and the Deering IRA Council. On file Anchorage Office of
History and Archaeology.
Ducker, James H.
1996
Out of Harm’s Way: Relocating Northwest Alaska
Eskimos, 1907–1917. American Indian Culture
and Research Journal 20(1):43–71.
Lucier, Charles V. and James W. VanStone
1995
Traditional Beluga Drives of the Iñupiat of Kotzebue Sound, Alaska. Fieldiana Anthropology,
New Series, 25. Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History.
Elphick, Chris, John B. Dunning, Jr., and David Allen
Sibley (editors)
2001
The Sibley Guide to Bird Life & Behavior. New
York: National Audubon Society and Alfred A.
Knopf.
Mason, Owen K.
2006
Ipiutak Remains Mysterious: A Focal Place
Still Out of Focus. In Dynamics of Northern
Societies: Proceedings of the SILA/NABO Conference on Arctic and North Atlantic Archaeology. Jette Arneborg and Bjarne Gronnow, eds.
Pp. 103–119. Copenhagen: National Museum
of Denmark.
Georgette, Susan
2000
Subsistence Use of Birds in the Northwest Arctic Region, Alaska. Alaska Department of Fish
and Game Technical Paper, 260. Juneau: Alaska
Department of Fish and Game.
Mason, Owen K. and S. Craig Gerlach
1995
Chukchi Hot Spots, Paleo-Polynyas, and Caribou Crashes: Climatic and Ecological Dimensions of North Alaska Prehistory. Arctic Anthropology 32(1):101–130.
Gilbert, B. Miles, Larry D. Martin, and Howard G.
Savage
1985
Avian Osteology. Laramie: Modern Printing
Company.
Mason, Owen K., David M. Hopkins, and Lawrence Plug
1997
Chronology and Paleoclimate of Storm Induced
Erosion and Episodic Dune Growth Across Cape
Espenberg Spit, Alaska, USA. Journal of Coastal
Research 13:770 –797.
Grayson, Donald K.
1984
Quantitative Zooarchaeology: Topics in the
Analysis of Archaeological Faunas. Orlando:
Academic Press.
Harritt, R. K.
1994
Eskimo Prehistory on the Seward Peninsula.
National Park Service Resources Report NPS/
ARORCR /CRR-93/21. Anchorage: U. S. Department of the Interior.
Hulten, E.
1968
The Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories.
Palo Alo: Stanford University Press.
Hunn, Eugene S., Darryll Johnson, Priscilla Russell, and
Thomas F. Thornton
2003
Huna Tlingit Traditional Environmental Knowledge, Conservation, and the Management of
a “Wilderness” Park. Current Anthropology
44(4):79–103.
Larsen, Helge
1958
Material Culture of the Nunamiut and Its Relation to Other Forms of Eskimo Culture in
Northern Alaska. In Proceedings of the 32 nd
International Congress of Americanists 1956.
Pp. 574 –582, Copenhagen.
2001
Deering—A Men’s House from Seward Peninsula, Alaska. Martin Appelt, ed. Publications
of the National Museum Ethnographical Series,
vol. 19. Copenhagen: The National Museum of
Denmark.
Larsen, Helge and Froelich Rainey
1948
Ipiutak and the Arctic Whale Hunting Culture.
Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, 42, New York: American Museum of Natural History.
W4336.indb 49
49
Matthews, J.V., Jr.
1974
Quaternary Environments at Cape Deceit, Seward
Peninsula, Alaska: Evolution of a Tundra Ecosystem. Geological Society of America Bulletin
(85):1353–1384.
Morrison, David
1989
Radiocarbon Dating the Thule Culture. Arctic
Anthropology 26(2):48–77.
Nelson, Richard K.
1969
Hunters of the Northern Ice. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
Northwest Arctic Borough
2005
Northwest Arctic Borough Coastal Management
Plan. Electronic document, http://www.nwabor
.org/planning/4.05%20Coastal%20Mgt/Chapter
%201%20Introduction.htm, accessed October 12, 2006.
Oates, David W., Ed D. Boyd, and Jennifer S. Ramaekers
2003
Identification of Waterfowl Breastbones and
Avian Osteology (Sterna) of North American
Anseriformes. Virginia Museum of Natural History Special Publication, 10. Lincoln: Virginia
Museum of Natural History.
Olson, Stanley J.
1996a North American Birds: Skulls and Mandibles.
Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology
and Ethnology 56(4).
1996b North American Birds: Postcranial Skeletons.
Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology
and Ethnology 56(5).
Outwater Cox, Loretta
2005
The Storyteller’s Club: The Picture Writing
Women of the Arctic. Anchorage: Alaska Northwest Books.
4/20/07 10:15:39 AM
50
Powers, W. Roger, Jo Anne Adams, Alicia Godfrey,
James A. Ketz, David C. Plaskett, and G. Richard Scott
1982
The Chukchi—Imuruk Report: Archeological Investigations in the Bering Land Bridge National
Preserve, Seward Peninsula, Alaska, 1974 and
1975. Anthropology and Historic Preservation
Cooperative Part Studies Unit, University of
Alaska Occasional Paper, 31. Fairbanks: Anthropology and Historic Preservation Cooperative
Part Studies Unit, University of Alaska.
Ray, Dorothy Jean
1964
Nineteenth Century Settlement and Subsistence
Patterns in Bering Strait. Arctic Anthropology
2(2):61–94.
Reanier, Richard E., Glenn W. Sheehan, and Anne M.
Jensen
1998
Report of 1997 Field Discoveries City of Deering
Village Safe Water Cultural Resources Project.
Report prepared for City of Deering and Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation,
Village Safe Water Program. On file Fairbanks:
Northern Land Use Research, Inc.
Schiffer, Michael B.
1986
Radiocarbon Dating and the “Old Wood” Problem: The Case of the Hohokam Chronology.
Journal of Archaeological Science 13:13–30.
Sobelman. Sandra
1984
Background Paper on Subsistence Salmon Fishing, Inmachuk River, Deering. Alaska Depart-
W4336.indb 50
Arctic Anthropology 44:1
ment of Fish and Game, Division of Subsistence,
Technical Paper, 110. Fairbanks: Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
Stokes, Donald and Lillian Stokes
1996
Field Guide to Birds, Western Region. Boston:
Little, Brown, and Company.
Stuiver, M., P. J. Reimer, E. Bard, J. W. Beck, G. S. Burr,
K. A. Hughen, B. Kromer, F. G. McCormac, J. v. d. Plicht,
and M. Spurk
1998
INTCAL98 Radiocarbon Age Calibration,
24,000 – 0 cal BP. Radiocarbon 40:1041–1083.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
2003
Alaska Subsistence Migratory Bird Harvest
Surveys. http://alaska.fws.gov/ambcc/ambcc/
Harvest/subharvweb.pdf, accessed January 7,
2005.
Wakabayashi, Daisuke
2006
Bird Flu Fear Doesn’t Deter Alaska’s Hunters.
Planet Ark World Environmental News, June 13,
2006. http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory
.cfm/newsid/36754/newsDate/13-Jun-2006/
story.htm, accessed, October 19, 2006.
Wolfe, Robert J., Amy W. Paige, and Cheryl L. Scott
1990
The Subsistence Harvest of Migratory Birds in
Alaska. Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Technical Paper, 197. Juneau: Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
4/20/07 10:15:39 AM