Thought the number of households in their community that met their harvest needs were: Between 26-50% Survey Results 2017

Transcription

1 People who filled out this survey: Participated in harvest activities: More than the average household About the same as other households Less than other households Not sure Ranked these 10 factors as having the strongest impact (negative and positive) on healthy harvest practices. 40% 35% 20% 5% Spent this many hours harvesting in a typical week: Less than 20 hours Between hours Over 40 hours 29% 24% 35% Not sure 12% Felt in the last 10 years the overall health of harvest had: Improved 25% Stayed the same 26% Declined 49% 1. Fuel (gasoline) costs 86% 2. Commercial food costs 80% 3. Changes in game population size 77% 4. Changes in fish population size 76% 5. Current length or timing of fishing or 74% hunting seasons 6. Current harvest limits 73% 7. Access to equipment (boats, ATVs, nets, 73% snowmachines, etc.) 8. Energy (heating/electricity) costs 73% 9. Erosion of river banks and trails hindering 70% hunting, fishing, trapping 10. Extended family coming together for 69% social functions and ceremonies Estimated the time spent on fishing activities over the last 10 years: Increased 26% 26% Did not changed Thought the number of households in their community that met their harvest needs were: 20% 46% 27% Between 0-25% Decreased 41% Not active 7% Between 26-50% Health of Harvest Survey Results 2017 Estimated the time spent on hunting activities over the last 10 years: Increased 32% 38% Did not change Between 51-75% 7% Between % Decreased 26% Not active 4% Estimated that compared to 10 year ago they: Shared more harvested food: Shared the same harvested food: 21% 7-9 months 29% 32% Shared less harvested food: Agreed that fuel/energy costs were making harvest activities challenging. Agreed that climate change was making harvest activities challenging. 39% 80% Agreed that regulations were making harvest activities challenging. 75% months 7% 34% Estimated their salmon harvest lasted 38% 4-6 months 61% 0-3 months 28% months 14% Estimated their moose harvest lasted 67% Said they were satisfied with the health of their households harvest practices. Are You? 0-3 months 18% 40% For full survey results visit Tanana Chiefs Conference Hunting & Fishing Task Force page This survey was developed in partnership between TCC and UAF Commnity Partnerships for Self-Reliance. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant No Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF. December months 4-6 months

2 Survey Results The Health of Traditional Harvest Practices in Interior Alaska Communities 2017 Survey Goals The University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) Community Partnership for Self-Reliance in collaboration with the Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) Natural & Cultural Resource Department conducted the Survey of the Health of Traditional Harvest Practices in Interior Alaska between March and May, 2017 to better understand the factors affecting traditional harvest practices in the Interior. This research was funded by the National Science Foundation and approved by UAF s Institutional Review Board (# ). Definition of the Health of Traditional Harvest Practices The health of traditional harvest practices includes the harvesting and sharing of fish, game, and other resources and the ceremonies which accompany these practices which provide for the social, cultural, spiritual, and economic wellbeing and survival of our people and communities Key Findings Survey respondents were asked to rate the relative impact of 43 factors on the health of traditional harvest practices. Of all the rated factors, fuel (gasoline) costs were reported as having the strongest impact on the health of a households traditional harvest practices. Other factors reported as having a strong impact included commercial food costs, the price of energy (heating/electricity) costs, and changes in fish and game population size. When asked whether respondents felt harvest had improved or declined, (49%) indicated that they felt that harvest had declined or significantly declined over the past 10 years while (25%) indicated harvest had improved or significantly improved. When asked if respondents were satisfied with harvest, surprisingly (61%) indicated that they were satisfied or very satisfied compared to (26%) that indicated they were unsatisfied or very unsatisfied. Participating in hunting has remained about the same over the last 10 years, with about an equal number of respondents indicating either an increase or decrease in the amount of time spent hunting. Slightly more respondents indicated that their household has spent less time fishing during the last 10 years. A few more households reported a decrease (39%) in the amount of traditional foods they share compared to (29%) that reported an increase. (46%) of respondents felt that on average over the last 10 years between 25%-50% of households in their community met their harvest needs while only (7%) of respondents felt that the majority of households in their community met their harvest needs.

3 Survey Response This survey was distributed at Tanana Chiefs Conference 2017 Convention, posted on TCC social media outlets, and was mailed to all tribal councils within the TCC Region. These survey results include responses from 433 individuals including 117 responses from individuals residing in Fairbanks whom often hunt, fish, or gather near rural communities in the TCC region. There was at least one response from 33 of the 42 communities in the TCC region. Surveys were anonymous. Results are considered representative of the TCC region. The number of responses within individual communities were often insufficient to be considered representative of that community. Survey Use We hope that these survey results can be used in decisions that support sustainable traditional harvest practices among communities in the Tanana Chiefs Conference region. This information will be shared in multiple ways including this publication, in proposals that support tradition harvest practices, and in scholarly journals. Number of survey respondents by community of residence There was 12 surveys completed by people that live outside of the Tanana Chiefs Conference region but hunt or fish in the region. These communities include Anchorage, Bethel, Copper Center, Juneau, Kenai, Little Eagle, Palmer, Unalakleet, and Wasilla.

4 1. Around which community to you hunt, fish, or gather? Responses that identified only one community. Fort Yukon 21 Ruby 20 Koyukuk 18 Minto 18 Fairbanks 16 Arctic Village 15 Stevens Village 15 Nulato 13 Tetlin 13 Huslia 12 Venetie 12 Chalkytsik 11 Galena 11 Beaver 10 Holy Cross 10 Kaltag 10 Allakaket 9 Anvik 9 Northway 9 Tanana 9 Circle 8 Grayling 8 Nenana 8 McGrath 6 Rampart 6 Shageluk 6 Hughes 3 Eagle 2 Healy Lake 2 Manley Hot Springs 2 Tok 2 Birch Creek 1 Dot Lake 1 Tanacross 1 Some respondenants identified several communities around which they hunt, fish or gather. Totals exceed number of respondants. Fairbanks 14 Fort Yukon 12 Minto (Old Minto & 11 Minto Flats) Chalkytsik 9 Nenana 8 Nulato 8 Beaver 7 Holy Cross 7 Galena 6 Tanana 5 Kaltag 4 Huslia 3 Shageluk 3 Venetie 3 Allakaket 2 Arctic Village 2 Birch Creek 2 Circle 2 Grayling 2 Manley Hot Springs 2 McGrath 2 Rampart 2 Tanacross 2 Tok 2 Anvik 1 Canyon Village 1 Eagle 1 Takotna 1 Tetlin 1 Some respondenants identified several communities around which they hunt, fish or gather. Totals exceed number of respondants. Yukon River 7 Chitina/Copper 5 River Koyukuk River 5 Kenai 3 Tanana River 3 Mentasta 2 Black River 2 Porcupine River 2 Delta 2 Glennallen 2 Interior 2 Bethel 1 Draanjik River 1 Tazlina 1 Koyuk River 1 GASH 1 Holikachuk 1 Kaiyuh Flats 1 KBC 1 Anchorage 1 Little Eagle 1 Georgetown 1 Norton Sound 1 RAPKLS 1 Salmon Village 1 Slana 1 Mansfield 1 Unigal 1 Unit 21 D 1 Unit 21 E 1 Chandalar 1 Yukon Flats 1 YK 1

5 2. How satisfied or unsatisfied are you with the overal health of your household s traditional harvest practices over the last 10 years? 3. What would be the impact on your household if the following resources were 50% less available than they have typically been over the last 10 years?

6 4. To what extent do you feel the overall health of your household s traditional harvest practices has improved or declined over the last 10 years? 5. During a typical week over the last 10 years, what is your best estimate of the number of hours your household spent participating in traditional harvest practices?

7 6. Do you feel your household participates in traditional harvest activities more or less than the average household in your community? 7. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Climate hange has challenged my household s ability to conduct traditional harvest practices.

8 8. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Fuel (gasoline) and/or energy (heating fuel, electricity) costs have challenged my household s ability to conduct traditional harvest practices. 9. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Hunting and fishing regulations have challenged my household s ability to conduct traditional harvest practices.

9 10. During a typical year over the last 10 years in your community, what is your best estimate of the percentage of households that have met their traditional harvest needs? 11. Over the last 10 years, to what extent has your household s sharing of traditional foods increased or decreased?

10 12. During a typical year over the last 10 years, how long does it take your household to eat all of your MOOSE and SALMON harvest? 13. To what extent has the amount of time that your household spends participating in hunting and fishing activities (camp, harvest, processing) increased or decreased over the last 10 years?

11 14. What impact do the following factors have on the health of your household s traditional harvest practices? (1 = No impact, 2 = Minor impact, 3 = Moderate impact, 4 = Strong impact, X =Not sure). Economics No Impact Minor impact Moderate impact Strong impact Not sure Fuel (gasoline) costs 2% 5% 17% 69% 7% 414 Commercial food costs 6% 7% 20% 60% 7% 414 Energy (heating/electricity) costs 9% 9% 19% 54% 9% 408 Employment opportunities 12% 13% 19% 49% 7% 414 Airline travel costs to and from community 18% 11% 14% 48% 9% 410 Access to equipment (boats, ATVs, nets, 10% 11% 28% 45% 6% 416 snowmachines, etc...) Household income 10% 15% 22% 44% 9% 405 Having time from job to hunt, fish, trap, or 12% 14% 24% 43% 7% 408 gather Firefighting jobs 22% 11% 16% 39% 13% 414 Opportunities to sell fur and other wild 20% 16% 19% 28% 17% 405 products Financial subsidies (example: food stamps) 26% 12% 20% 25% 16% 408 Total Environment No Impact Minor impact Moderate impact Strong impact Not sure Changes in fish population size 5% 10% 17% 59% 8% 409 Changes in game population size 7% 8% 23% 54% 7% 409 Erosion of river banks and trails hindering 8% 12% 25% 45% 9% 409 hunting, fishing, and trapping Dangerous ice conditions (rivers, lakes) 9% 14% 24% 43% 10% 408 Timing of freeze up and break up conditions 10% % 43% 8% 413 River or lake water levels hindering hunting, 9% 13% 27% 40% 11% 408 fishing, trapping Landscape/river changes hindering access 9% 14% 28% 39% 9% 410 to traditional areas Extreme weather conditions 10% 17% 28% 39% 7% 405 Wildfire activity changing plant and animal 12% 17% 24% 35% 12% 397 habitat Wildfire activity hindering travel for hunting, fishing, trapping 13% 18% 23% 24% 12% 409 Total

12 Hunting & Fishing Regulations No Impact Minor Moderate Strong Not sure Total impact impact impact Non-local hunting and fishing competition 12% 9% 20% 47% 12% 407 Current length or timing of fishing or 7% 14% 29% 45% 4% 414 hunting seasons Current harvest limits 9% 12% 31% 42% 6% 413 Differences between State & Federal 8% 13% 26% 39% 14% 414 regulations Local participation on fish and game 14% 15% 30% 26% 15% 412 committees, councils, and boards Land ownership around your community 21% 17% 25% 25% 12% 407 Health & Culture No Impct Minor Moderate Strong Not sure Total impact impact impact Elders being well taken care of 12% 11% 22% 46% 9% 404 Extended family coming together for 12% 11% 26% 43% 8% 406 social functions and ceremonies Interactions between Elders and 13% 14% 26% 39% 8% 406 young people Participation by kids in hunting and 12% 16% 25% 38% 9% 409 fishing Mental wellbeing of community 11% 16% 27% 35% 11% 408 Physical activity of community 12% 14% 32% 32% 10% 409 Sharing between communities (food, 14% 16% 31% 30% 9% 414 information) Communicating through social media 20% 15% 24% 28% 13% 403 (example: Facebook) Use of traditional clothing and tools 18% 18% 27% 26% 10% 407 Education & Knowledge No Impact Minor Moderate Strong Not sure Total impact impact impact Children being taught traditional 11% 12% 21% 48% 8% 409 practices and values Learning and speaking traditional 17% 10% 18% 45% 10% 408 language Knowledge of the land and animals 14% 10% 29% 38% 9% 408 Percentage of people in my household 22% 15% 22% 32% 9% 407 with high school diploma Opportunities for technical training 19% 15% 25% 30% 11% 403 Percentage of people in my household with a college degree 31% 14% 19% 23% 13% 407

13 For more information or questions about survey please contact: TCC Contact Orville Huntington TCC Wildlife & Parks Phone: (907) ext UAF Contact Todd Brinkman Assistant Professor Dept. Biology & Wildlife Phone: (907) This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. UAF is an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer and educational institution. October 2017