Inclusive Sustainability in Sweetgrass Populations

 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. 



References

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