August 16, 1991, Lubicon mail-out on Carter book

Enclosed for your information is a review of a book entitled
"Lost Harvests:  Prairie Indian Reserve Farmers and Government
Policy."  The book is particularly interesting in light of
current Canadian Government efforts to "dismantle" the Lubicon
society.

The book quotes Canadian Government policy from 1885 as intended
"to dismantle the tribal system and promote individualism", "to
erode further the Indians' land base" by segmenting tracts and
denying native farmers access to necessary farm machinery", and
to apply "considerable political pressure to coerce land
surrenders".

As William Faulkner said, "the past is not dead, it is not even
past."

re-printed without permission from "The Edmonton Journal",
Sunday, July 21, 1991

         NATIVE FARMERS ENTRAPPED WITHIN FALSE MYTHOLOGY

Daniel Ray
Edmonton

LOST HARVESTS:  PRAIRIE INDIAN RESERVE FARMERS AND GOVERNMENT
POLICY, by Sarah Carter, McGill-Queen's University Press, 323
pp., $34.95

There is a certain mythology that has grown to be commonly
accepted among Canadians in regard to native peoples and
government policies towards them.

A pervasive element in this mythology is the belief that native
culture and religious beliefs are at the core of their lack of
success in modern economic pursuits.  To put it bluntly, many
Canadians are convinced that natives are indolent and backwards. 
It is believed that native refusal to abandon hunting and
trapping, and other vestiges of a nomadic lifestyle, point
towards an unwillingness and inability to adapt to the exigencies
of a modern economy.

When it comes to government native policies, it is generally
accepted that governments have been excessively generous in
supporting this indolence and backwardness at the taxpayer's
expense.  Natives are widely perceived as the ultimate "welfare
bums" -- those who feel they deserve a free ride on the backs of
the rest of us.

Sarah Carter's examination of the historical record in LOST
HARVESTS suggests a different scenario altogether, at least as it
applies to prairie reserve agriculture.  In her book, Sarah
Carter scrutinizes the post-treaty era in terms of native
agricultural development.  She warns in the introduction that,
"Those who stress that the fundamental problem was that Indians
were culturally or temperamentally resistant to becoming farmers
have ignored or downplayed economic, legal, social and climactic
factors."

Carter's research shows that from early on in the process, the
Plains Indians recognized a need to turn to an agricultural base
in order to feed themselves in the future.  Not only did they
display a strong willingness to learn and desire to succeed as
farmers, but also, they showed an admirable perseverance and
patience in the face of misguided and paternalistic government
policies that served only to subvert their best efforts.

Despite persistent protests by native leaders and spokesmen,
things began on the wrong foot and continued apace.  Adequate
implements and stock were not made available to reserve farmers
despite government promises.  Indians were consistently denied
the right to sell what surplus they could grow, and hence were
unable to enhance their operations by their own hands.

Government policy from 1885 on was primarily intended "to
dismantle the tribal system and promote individualism."  This was
to be accomplished through "increased supervision, control, and
restriction of the activities and movements of the Indians." 
Policies such as the allotment of land in severalty and peasant
farming were designed "to erode further the Indians' land base"
by segmenting tracts and denying native farmers access to the
labor saving machinery essential to prairie dryland farming.  The
restrictive permit and pass systems governing Indian movement
effectively denied them access to the market economy.  Finally,
as white settlers worked their way west, considerable political
pressure was applied to coerce land surrenders.

Sarah Carter's LOST HARVESTS takes a long, hard look at Canada's
policies and native responses over the past century as they apply
to western agricultural development.  Her book succeeds in
dispelling the myths of indolence and cultural inferiority that
pervade attitudes towards the failures of native farmers.  It is
a history of which we cannot be proud, but it is a history that
needs to be read and acknowledged.

(Daniel Ray is an Edmonton freelance reviewer.)