Inclusive Sustainability in Sweetgrass Populations
Indigenous Involvement in Botanical Restoration Efforts
When an ecological area
or plant species is considered threatened or in need of restoration, ecological
sciences are often the first to be consulted to determine what methods should
be implemented. Ecological studies may also provide the basis for determining
which plant species are the most valuable for the ecosystem, which will then
inform the funding towards restoration efforts. The concept of sustainability
and restoration efforts have become somewhat at odds- the rhetoric behind
restoring a natural area often focuses on removing human activity, or the
“un-natural”, from it. Conservation is frequently associated with concepts of
“protecting” the environment and rarely is there any narrative of human
integration in to restored ecological areas unless it is for tourism. Perhaps
it is no surprise, then, that most restoration efforts fail to engage the local
community or Indigenous population, as if people and their historically
sustainable cultural practices are not essential components of the ecosystem
worth considering.
In a study on cultivating Indigenous knowledge into
scientific methods, results indicated that of over 3,000 journal articles on
conservation end restoration efforts sampled, only 22% mentioned Indigenous
cultural practices or values (Wehi & Lord, 2017). The common idea seems to
be that people are not parts of an ecosystem and that any sustainable human
activity is still more harmful than simply roping off areas of land and
removing human engagement entirely. Indigenous beliefs and cultural practices have
historically been ecologically sustainable as the nature of their belief system
places human beings within the ecosystem, asserting that our health and
spiritual wellness is tied implicitly to the ongoing health of the Earth. Yet,
cultural values are infrequently included in the goals and priorities of
restoration projects, despite continuing research which indicates the
importance of sociological links in successful biodiversity management (Wehi
& Lord, 2017).
Sweetgrass, and variations of it, are culturally
significant to Indigenous tribes across the globe. As a spiritually significant
plant, sweetgrass is frequently used in ceremonial offers and practices as well
as serving practical purpose in crafting baskets, weaving, and perfumes. The
effect declining sweetgrass populations are having on Indigenous tribes who depend
on it is having devastating effects on local economies, traditions, and ways of
life in addition to the ecological value of the plant in its home range. Engaging
Indigenous traditions and methods in the restoration of sweetgrass encourages
the ecological sustainability of the plant and culturally significant
ethnobotanical practices, both of which have been threatened to extirpation by
colonial assimilation of the land.
Through an Indigenous lens, plants are not merely objects
or “material goods”. Many cultures value sweetgrass and all plant and animal
species as part of a holistic family structure which supports all components of
the land and people. This distinction in understanding the value of plant life
is essential in seeing the merit of Indigenous cultural practices in ecological
recovery. Not only scientists and tree-huggers appreciate plant ecology in
Indigenous communities because the value of plants and sweetgrass is implicit;
a plant life and population are no different than a human life and population,
in this sense. Just as we value universal health care and education, Indigenous
communities value the land and biodiversity as a system we are all part of and
benefit from together.
In
ceremonies, sweetgrass is used to honor the plant and people’s relationship to
it by involving it in rites of passage and rituals, such as smudging. Basket-weaving
with sweetgrass, too, is anthropologically and culturally significant because
it deliberately intertwines people and our history with the respect and
gratitude for the plant. The Gulah people in the southern states of America
face cultural and economic hardship as their tradition of basket weaving is threatened
by declining sweetgrass populations. Their basket weaving traditions were
brought to America through the slave trade and the Gulah have continued to
practice this artform. By passing down this tradition, the Gulah people weave
tapestries of meaning into their baskets, each with a pattern and structure
unique to their family history (Hart et al, 2004). In this way, sweetgrass is
intrinsically woven into the family structure and community of the people- it
is valuable not only as a commercial good, but as a part of the Earth which
binds people back to it and their roots.
The
concept of “plant blindness” is an attitude which disregards the importance of
plant lives and ecosystems for our communities due to the supposed superiority
of high-tech urban systems (Delsoto, 2020). Framing the value of sweetgrass, or
any plant for that matter, as something limited only to its material and
ecological value ignores the fundamental reality of the world which has
supported and shaped us as a species. Healthy and diverse ecosystems have value
outside of how we can package and sell them or rope them off and appreciate
them from afar. The common ecological view is one which privileges plants,
animals, and land as “natural” and outside from human communities, so when a
plant species such as sweetgrass is threatened it is a concern only because we value
the environment. The threat facing plants and animal species is indirect and
conceptual through this lens, which makes it a lot easier to justify the
unsustainable economies we have elected for. If we can only value plants as the
“other” which blooms and richens our landscape in the background, how can we
ever hope to meaningfully restore ecosystems to health?
Could
a greater inclusion of ceremonial practices and Indigenous cultural beliefs be
the solution to “plant blindness”? If communities could begin to see the value
of plants in this way, as significant members of a healthy community, would
people be more likely to advocate for sustainable practices going forward? There
is a tangible benefit for the health of humans and plants alike in engaging with
the traditional ways we have woven plants into our lives. People benefit from
the inclusion of a community garden; they’re more likely to feel a sense of
communion with the land and our part in it if they felt cared for and provided
for, rather than engaging with plants only through commerce and monetary
purchases. Similarly, people are more likely to advocate for restoration
projects and be actively involved in its success if they can link their own
lives and communities to the value of sweetgrass in a reciprocal sense. Just as
people will benefit from the sweet fragrance and dependability of sweetgrass in
meaningful crafting and ceremony, so too do sweetgrass populations benefit from
people picking and caring for it (Kimmerer, 2016).
Indigenous
beliefs have favored sustainability from the start, and sustainability doesn’t
come from removing humans from the ecosystem. Sustainable practices are not achieved
by removal, but by respectful modification. Indigenous communities favor an
inclusive and mindful practice of engaging with plants and animals with honor
for the gifts they can give us through medicine, food, shelter, and ceremony. Most
Indigenous cultures of North America include doctrine in their belief system
which states that the Creator and Earth have provided plants, animals, and
people to all benefit from each other. The idea is that if we don’t use plants
and animals as resources while also respecting them as part of our broader community,
they will eventually disappear, and the Earth will go barren. In addition to
providing an empowering and inclusive basis for belief and practice, studies
have shown that this rhetoric has some evidence-based truth to it. Some food
webs and ecosystems directly benefitted from human activity when it was
sustainable, such as the relationship the Blackfoot people have to bison and
sweetgrass (Kimmerer, 2016). Without people to pick sweetgrass and hunt the
buffalo, these plant and animal species quickly become over-populated, and the
ecosystem suffers.
Historically,
the greatest threat to ecosystems and Indigenous practices & cultures has
been colonialism. Colonial settlers frequently burned large swaths of land and
planted European fescue grasses which swiftly took over the native grassland
(Mikmaq Fine Arts, 2017). As a result of continued colonialization and land
ownership, sweetgrass is no longer common in its native range. Colonial
“command and control” environmental strategies purposefully disengage the
public and frame the environment as something people should own and manage, not
live with in any sort of harmony. Many conservation and restoration efforts
propose this very narrative that humans are “bad” for the environment and thus the
responsibility we have is not to renew a sustainable harmony with the
environment, but to leave these areas entirely. Our commerce with natural
resources is fundamentally broken, in this way. By treating plant & animal
communities as “others” and segregating natural spaces, people will always be
in conflict with the environment. Removing harmful human activity from an
environment is good for the healing of ecological communities which have been overexploited
but does not consider the long-term use and relationship we will have with the
land going forward. If we continue to simply rope off areas of land dedicated
only to plants and non-human animals, human developments and communities will
always be pressing up against borders and our value systems in relation to
nature will only ever go as far as tourism and ecological ideology. In addition
to this, private land ownership allows some people to own natural areas which
prohibits community engagement and furthers this idea that natural spaces are
only for privileged populations, not for the inclusive human community.
Sweetgrass populations can be difficult to
access if they are on privately owned property, which has become an issue in North
America as these grasses typically grow along coveted scenic river property.
This lack of access discourages Indigenous cultural practices and makes them
virtually impossible to maintain. Worse still, landowners growing and selling
sweetgrass has roped even this simple (yet profoundly meaningful) grass in to
the monetary economy, superimposing a singular economic value on a plant which
has never before belonged to any person. Without access to sweetgrass,
Indigenous communities cannot honor or use it which further severs their ties
to their history, spirituality, and culture. Declining sweetgrass populations
and the protection of private property which has sweetgrass growing within it
actively discourages Indigenous reconciliation. In Canada, people have the
right to worship, and yet one cannot help but wonder how quickly this same
issue would be resolved if access to churches and Christian sacred bodies and
artifacts were roped off, instead of meaningful components of Indigenous
spirituality. Hart (2004) speaks to the severe impact local land ownership over
the native range of sweetgrass is having on the local Gulah community,
stressing that “there exists a real threat that this culturally and
economically significant form of (sweetgrass) basketry may disappear if raw
materials become increasingly difficult to obtain”.
Despite
existing barriers to sweetgrass access and restoration, there is hope in
community engagement projects. As awareness for this cultural and ecological
issue has become more known, Indigenous elders have been consulted in order to
learn how sweetgrass populations were cared for in pre-colonial times, and in
areas where Indigenous heritage is still supported and practiced regularly. Some
elders suggest that collecting the seeds and distributing them by hand is an
ideal way to engage a community in restoration projects (Mikmaq Fine Arts,
2017). Indigenous knowledge, having been passed down over hundreds of years,
can be an asset in considering how we can best restore an area to health as it
once was under tribal stewardship (Daniella, 2018). The benefits of engaging
local communities, Indigenous and otherwise, in the restoration of natural
areas are profound and far-reaching. The restoration area itself is more likely
to be protected and advocated for while being engaged with directly by people
who have a real relationship to it. In addition to this, these communities will
be introduced to plant & animal conservation as advocacy to restore natural
areas to a healthy state which allows for sustainable use and respect.
Sustainable natural resources benefit the wellness of the land, people, plants
& animals, and the economy. Finally, linking Indigenous communities to the
land and native species which are significant to them allows for restoration
and biodiversity projects to operate as healing for colonial wounds.
Plant-human
relationships have historically been reciprocal, and we still have time to
restore this relationship. Studies show that sweetgrass grows faster and
populations thrive when they are being picked by humans. Merely leaving the
grass alone and “protecting it” from human use has been shown to result in
overgrown and weaker populations (Kimmerer, 2016). Daniella (2018) backs up
Kimmerer’s results with her own experiments done on plots of sweetgrass grown
with the explicit purpose to educate and be used by a local community. Field
experiments and monitored restoration sites have proven that sweetgrass thrives
when it is used by humans- sites where high numbers of people weeded the area
and picked the grass for their own use saw long-term success, and areas with
little community engagement were forgotten and suffered as a result (Daniella,
2018). Human beings are not only part of the ecosystem as resource users, but
also as component of the system which benefits several native species. Like all
things in nature, human beings belong in a complex food web and our strict
rhetoric which removes us from these systems is only setting ourselves and the
rest of nature up to fail. Whether you look at this ecologically, culturally,
historically, or spiritually- we need the Earth, and the Earth needs us. It is
our responsibility to restore this land and relationship, both of which have
suffered from widespread colonialism and “command and conquer” ideologies.
By
involving human communities in restoration efforts and encouraging people to
engage meaningfully with plants such as sweetgrass, restored natural areas will
no longer have to be “protected”. If communities can be integrated into
ecosystems with the respect and “ways of knowing” that Indigenous tribes have
practiced for generations, we will no longer need to protect natural areas- we
can live sustainably within it, like every other link in the chain. The
survival of sweetgrass means the survival of Indigenous cultures and
reconciliation efforts. Broadly speaking, a changed perspective on conservation
and ecological restoration in general can have profound effects on greater threats
human communities and natural spaces are facing today, such as climate change. With
an inclusive understanding of how ecological health effects human health,
greater advocacy toward combatting climate change may be achieved even in
politically diverse areas. A paradigm shift from isolationist conservation to
inclusive restoration projects would see sustainable hunting and harvesting be
favored and encouraged in natural spaces over factory farming, too. Though meat
consumption is a hot topic, it cannot be denied that habitat loss from large
factory farms and monoculture vegetable farms, as well as irresponsible
pesticide use, is the far greater threat to biodiversity. So too is sweetgrass
more threatened by habitat loss than people picking it. Again, we see that the
prevailing campaign to conquer the land and its living things to turn them in
to profitable structures & products leaves us with a damaged environment
and a disconnect from our cities and the land they occupy. Protecting our
national parks should not mean keeping people out but changing how people
engage with the land itself. The survival of our Earth and its natural
communities is intrinsically tied to the survival of humans; we are one and the
same.
Daniela, S. (2018). Weaving
traditional ecological knowledge into the restoration of basketry
plants.
Journal of Ecological Anthropology, 9(1). Retrieved October 26,
2021,
from
https://www.proquest.com/docview/208692591
OpenUrlRefId=info:xri/sid:wcdiscovery&accountid=12064
DelSesto, M. (2020).
People-plant interactions and the ecological self. Plants, People,
Planet, 2(3),
201–211. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10087.
Hart, Z. H., Halfacre, A.
C., & Burke, M. K. (2004). Community participation in preservation of
lowcountry
south carolina sweetgrass ( muhlenbergia filipes [m. a. curtis] j. pinson and
w. batson) basketry. Economic Botany, 58(2), 161–171. https://doi.org/10.1663/0013-
0001(2004)058[0161:CPIPOL]2.0.CO;2
Kimmerer, R. W. (2016). Braiding
Sweetgrass. Tantor Media, Inc. 157-166.
Mikmaq FineArts. (2017, Oct
17). Swi’te’- Sweet Grass. [Video].
Youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_AZzXIcvs8&t=1s
Wehi,
P. M., & Lord, J. M. (2017). Importance of including
cultural practices in ecological
restoration.
Conservation Biology, 31(5), 1109–1118. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12915
Comments
Post a Comment