article
A Chippewa Case: resource control and self-determination
Cultural survival quarterly • 11 (2) • Published In 1987 • Pages: 39-42
By: Handrick, Philip.
AbstractBrief abstract written by HRAF anthropologists who have done the subject indexing for the document
This is a short article discussing contradictions in the 1972 Indian Self-Determination Act, which resulted in the wholesale slaughter of the wall-eye breeding population in Chiquamegon Bay, Wisconsin. Wall-eye are a staple of the local Bad River Band of Chippewa. The Indian Self-Determination Act gave Indians responsibilities to regulate local resources and in 1974 the Bad River Band established a fish hatchery for wall-eye. However, the right to protect this resource within the reservation on non-Indian property or outside the reservation were circumvented by state ordinances limiting native landrights. Frustrated by the band administration's inability to protect the wall-eye, some band members decided to get all the wall-eye they could, resulting in the destruction of half the breeding population in 1982. Since then, rulings have favored the Bad River Band's control of resources both on and off the reservation.
- SubjectsDocument-level OCM identifiers given by the anthropology subject indexers at HRAF
- Fishing
- Marine industries
- Real property
- External relations
- Public welfare
- Legal norms
- Property offenses
- cultureCulture name from the Outline of World Cultures (OWC)
- Ojibwa
- HRAF PubDateThe date HRAF published the document
- 2000
- RegionThe area the document pertains to
- North America
- Sub RegionThe more specific area the document pertains to, which is located within the Region
- Arctic and Subarctic
- Document TypeMay include journal articles, essays, collections of essays, monographs, or chapters/parts of monographs
- article
- Evaluation
- Creator TypeThe type of person writing the document, e.g. Ethnographer, Missionary, Archaeologist, Folklorist, Linguist, Indigenous Person, and so on.
- Ethnographer
- Document Rating A ranking done by HRAF anthropologists based on the strength of the source material on a scale of 1 to 5, as follows: 1 - poor; 2 - fair; 3 - good, useful data, but not uniformly excellent; 4 - excellent secondary data; 5 - excellent primary data.
- 4: Excellent Secondary Data
- 5: Excellent Primary Data
- AnalystThe HRAF anthropologist who subject indexed the document and prepared other materials for the eHRAF culture/tradition collection
- Ian Skoggard ; 1998
- Field DateThe date the researcher conducted the fieldwork or archival research that produced the document
- 1982-1987
- Coverage DateThe date or dates that the information in the document pertains to
- 1974-1987
- Coverage PlaceLocation of the research culture or tradition (often a smaller unit such as a band, community, or archaeological site)
- Twentieth Century Ojibwa, Chequamegon Bay, Wisconsin, United States
- NotesAdditional notes
- Philip Handrick
- LCCNLibrary of Congress Control Number
- 8964755
- LCSHLibrary of Congress Subject Headings
- Ojibwa Indians