Excerpted From Alaska Department of Fish and Game Technical Paper No. 168, December 1991.

REGIONAL HARVEST AND USE PATTERN

HISTORIC AND CONTEMPORARY SEASONAL HARVEST CYCLE

Historic Seasonal Harvest Cycle

Up until the early part of the 20th century, the Upper Tanana Athbaskans were a semi-nomadic hunting and fishing people (McKennan 1959;Guedon 1974). The high level of movement was in response to the seasonal and geographic dispersion of game and fish resources within the Upper Tanana area. People were able to work together in large groups only at specific locations during particular times of the year when resources were concentrated in abundance, such as at caribou fences during fall caribou migrations, or at fish weirs during July whitefish runs in local streams. During other times of the year, people occupied numerous scattered camps in areas near more dispersed resources. . . .

The basic historic seasonal harvest cycle of subsistence activities in the Upper Tanana region was dependent on available resources and concomitant population movements. While this seasonal round was generally applicable throughout the entire Upper Tanana area, local variation did occur, both in terms of resources and activities (Guedon 1974). In general, caribou, moose, sheep, whitefish, and waterfowl were the most important resources to the Upper Tanana Athabaskans.

Whitefish runs in area streams reached a peak in July. At this time of year, people occupied fish camps and fished intensively for the duration of the run. Comparable to the caribou sites, whitefish sites were well known and used. Historically and contemporarily, these long-established fish campsites, especially for whitefish fishing were located in close proximity to strategic fishing sites on clear water streams where a fish weir could be built. Weirs were constructed of willow branches woven around posts set into the streambed. Once constrained, the fish were caught in fish traps or by use of dipnets.

Other fish species were targeted during October and at other times of the year. According to Guedon (1974) fish were taken at unclaimed, but strategic spots, in streams and lakes. Pike fishing occurred in October and November, from creek and lake outlets, which remained clear of ice. Hooks or small nets were used for pike. Burbot, grayling, trout, and suckers were also harvested at this time. In the Ketchumstuk area where creeks were shallow, people also built dams out of gravel and "drove" whitefish and grayling toward the obstruction (Guedon 1974:33). Long nose suckers were caught and used for dog food (McKennan 1959:32l /Guedon 1974:33).

Caribou passed through the Upper Tanana region in a number of large herds on a semiannual basis passing through once in the early summer (April-June) and once in the early winter (October-December; McKennan 1959). The migratory patterns of the caribou were fairly stable and consistent and, thus, allowed for construction of simi-permanent caribou fences across major migration routes. Descriptions and photographs of the fences are contained in Murie (1935). Area residents hunted caribou by driving them along several-mile-long fences then ensnaring them with snares placed in gaps of the fence or dispatching them with bow and arrow or spears. . . .

Since caribou fences were effectively used only during caribou migrations when moist animals were taken, other means were used to hunt solitary caribou. The most common means by which this was done was by individual hunters, men, wearing snowshoes to track the animals, then dispatching them with bow and arrow (Guedon 1974:30). According to McKennan (1959) however, this later method was extremely difficult due to the superb endurance of the caribou.

McKennan (1959) emphasized the importance of caribou to the Upper Tanana . Caribou not only provided food for humans and dogs, but they also provided raw materials for clothes, shelters and boats, and sinew for construction of snowshoe netting, snare cords, and lashings (McKennan 1959:47).

Intensive moose hunting typically occurred in late summer (August-September) before the caribou drive and in the late winter (March-April). In addition, moose hunting generally occurred throughout the year, with the above-mentioned periods being times of increased emphasis (Guedon 1974:30). As a rule, moose were most commonly hunted much like single caribou--with bow and arrow and snowshoe tracking. During winter hunting, tracking was an effective means of locating moose, although often the hunter would have to follow the animal for an entire day prior to dispatching it (McKennan 1959). Another means by which moose were taken was with the use of fences and snares, although the method differed somewhat from caribou hunting. . . .

Sheep hunting was an annual activity, taking place in August or September immediately after late summer moose hunting and prior to caribou hunting. Sheep hunting was best done at this time since once animals entered into the rut, their meat was too strong tasting, and they would lost weight (Guedon 1974:31). Since sheep inhabited mountainous areas, hunting involved travel away from semi-permanent camps. Hunters had to use caution to avoid getting caught by early season. . . .

Sheep were utilized both for their meat and for their skins, which were commonly used for sleeping bags and winter clothing.

Black and brown bear hunting occurred sporadically with no set time of the year for their harvest. Generally speaking, bear hunting was considered to be a dangerous activity. Both Guedon (1974) and McKennan (1959) note that historically, hunting bears was done as much for prestige as for the meat and fur.

Small mammals that were harvested for food included hare, muskrat, squirrel, and porcupine. Harvesting smaller animals often occurred incidentally to their hunting activities, such as moose hunting, for example. Hare were taken throughout the year; the preferred time to harvest was late summer and fall. Muskrat were the focus of activity in early spring (February, March, and April). While beaver were at their fattest in fall, Guedon (1974) states that their meat was too strong tasting; and as a result, they were preferentially taken later on in February through April. Prior to this century, beaver was abundant in the Upper Tanana region and as such, they were readily harvested for their fur and meat (McKennan 1959:30). Historically, other furbearers were harvested, as well. Fur trapping occurred in conjunction with other subsistence activities. With the more important role played by the fur trade in the earlier part of this century, trapping furbearers became a primary rather than a secondary activity.

Furbearers taken solely for fur included marten, mink, wolverine, red fox, wolf, and squirrel. Lynx were taken for their fur and fat that was used in cooking. These fur animals were primarily harvested from December through February, the period when the furs were in the best condition, and travel was made easier by snowfall. Coyotes were first observed in the region in 1913 after which they were harvested (McKennan 1959).

Migratory waterfowl comprised a significant component of the diet. As in many other areas of Alaska, migratory waterfowl provided the first source of fresh meat in spring (May and June). The Upper Tanana region is a primary nesting area for many species of migratory waterfowl, and their seasonal contribution to the Upper Tanana diet was important. Migratory waterfowl arrived at a time when fall and winter caribou meat supplies were running low, and many other sources of meat were no longer or not yet available. On an annual basis, ducks and geese did not contribute a major portion of meat to the year's diet; however, they were an important resource in that they provided fresh meat at a time when starvation was common.

Ptarmigan and grouse also provided an important contribution to the Upper Tanana Athabaskan diet. Ptarmigan and grouse hunting occurred throughout the year. For the period from December through March, these birds were intensively harvested.

Berries were harvested from August to the first frost (Guedon 1974:28). Rosehips were picked in September, hedysarum roots in spring, and wild rhubarb in summer. Firewood was taken year-round, and its availability close to semipermanent settlements was reduced over time.

Contemporary Seasonal Harvest Cycle

While contemporary patterns of resource and land use have changed in many ways, they are still rooted in historic patterns. Hunting and fishing regulations have influenced contemporary seasonal harvest activities for Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tok, Tetlin, and Northway.

The seasonal round of subsistence activities by Dot Lake residents during 1983, as described by Martin (1983:34) differs from the historic pattern by indicating longer periods of fishing, particularly in fall. Also, in 1983, less time was spent harvesting hare and, in general, there were shorter periods of hunting big game primarily due to regulations. The Dot Lake pattern differs from the other community patters in showing a shorter period of muskrat and beaver trapping.

The seasonal round of subsistence activities by Tanacross residents during 1984, as described by Haynes et al. (1984:15) differs from the historic pattern in showing longer fishing periods; for example, later burbot fishing in November and December. Coyote trapping was indicated in 1984; however, squirrel hunting was not, and the periods for taking muskrat and hunting waterfowl in spring were shorter. In contrast to the other communities, several Tanacross residents still hunted porcupine during late summer in 1984.

The seasonal round of subsistence activities by Tok residents during 1983-84 as described by Halpin (1987:31) differs from the historic pattern by showing burbot fishing continuing later into fall and less ptarmigan hunting during summer. The lack of caribou hunting in 1983-84 is believed to be an anomaly since caribou were not present in the Tetlin area at that time. Caribou were harvested during fall and winter in other years when available. The Tetlin pattern differed from that of the other communities by displaying a longer and more intense harvest effort for muskrats.

The seasonal round of subsistence activities by Northway residents during 1985 as described by Case (19860:37) displayed a longer period of fishing during the fall. Northway differs from the other communities by indicating muskrat trapping activity during fall. . . .