Course:IGS585/OK2022WT2/Reflect6
- For your reflection on another class member's reflection, start by typing your name and using the 'Sub-heading 1' style from the pulldown menu.
Contents
- 1 Reflections on the conversation with Maria Correia
Reflections on the conversation with Maria Correia
Ilyas Kanybek
Perhaps the most valuable lesson I learnt from this lecture was that Syilx water strategy should become the foundation of our sustainability approach. In my understanding I think it could be and should be an essential step towards our reconciliation. We as a community have a chance of re-incorporating traditional indigenous practices back into the work, practices that have been there for centuries. Our adaptive management should be cooperative, should incorporate multi-stage learning and cross-cultural collaboration. This is, according to Maria Correia is particularly relevant and applicable to salmon restoration. In salmon restoration it is particularly important in salmon restoration for indigenous people to take a leadership role which also means applying new model of governance and interaction with the nature.
Another very important topic that Maria Corrreia touched upon was the complexity of salmon restoration initiatives. I think it is essential to acknowledge this idea and act accordingly. Our initiatives were to address this complexity and not simplify what is often what leads to very unsuccessful results. This presentation and the ideas presented I think should be seen and understood in relation to other lectures we had, this links of the arguments we heard makes up the comprehensive picture.
Leandra Vanbaelinghem
It took me some time to understand the importance of Maria Correia's research to sustainability and resilience. Maria was not exactly part of the discussion or decision-making component of the watershed salmon project but focused instead on how to enable collaborations on sustainability to be successful is critical to understand. Facilitating sustainability collaborations will allow us to move forward more efficiently and effectively to meet sustainability and resiliency goals. Maria explained that many projects that took place before reconciliation with indigenous people were pushed in Canada, as during the watershed salmon project started, there were a lot of trust issues between western societal groups like the government and the indigenous people because of colonization. This aspect got me thinking of what other trust issues could occur within such collaborations, which could harm sustainability advancements. Because such collaborations involve people from different disciplines, epistemic cultures, and approaches to collaborating, I would not be surprised if trust issues arise from having different backgrounds and ideas of how we know what we know. For instance, this could be in the form of not trusting a particular field or a group of people with a different wished outcome than their own and protecting one's interest. In the end, I would hope that people's involvement in such collaborations to make a positive change would mean people are willing to put this skepticism aside and, as Maria said, learn from each other instead. I also wonder how the long timeframe of such projects (12 years, 25 years and even 7 generations based on indigenous peoples' temporal view) could affect such collaborative projects. In general, in the corporate world, high turnover rates are viewed as negative and detrimental to an organization's path and goals. I would like to know if such sustainable projects could shift or get re-oriented based on such turnover or flow of people. Maria did mention that the watershed salmon project made an explicit decision to keep the group small to allow space for learning, flexibility and decision-making, but I wonder about other projects with larger collaborating groups.
Something that resonated with me was the idea of addressing sustainability issues because we care about them. Maria explained that scientists and other western societal groups approach sustainability and resiliency with an economic mindset. She said these individuals did not particularly think of the salmon populations and did not realize how much indigenous people cared about the salmon. Maria said that the salmon issue would not have been addressed without the indigenous people. This connects to one of the main points from Dr. Dulic's presentation that people need to care about the environment to want to make sustainable choices. This is especially important because our crisis is caused by our own activities, hence we should at least care about our actions and the Anthropocene mark we are leaving behind, as Dr. Parrot mentioned.
Em Isaak
Hey Leandra, thank you for your reflection! There has definitely been many trust issues between the Canadian government and Indigenous communities due to the historical and ongoing violence of colonialism. Indigenous communities are the earliest stewards of sustainability so it makes sense to listen to them and uplift their voices when it comes to environmental sustainability. I really appreciate how you mention Maria's point about we address these issues because we care. I think it can just be difficult to help other folks understand and care.
Annie Furman
Maria Correia’s presentation on intercultural collaboration was a valuable addition to Dr. Dulic’s presentation on Waterways earlier this term. Additionally, I was very interested in the Mill Creek Flood Mitigation proposal that she initially spoke to, which would have directly impacted water flow and system interactions in Brandt’s Creek through a diversion of floodwaters, but the project was stalled due to Covid-19. Her discussion of both of these project highlights the importance and complexity of cross-cultural collaboration, which I think is also necessary to any successful Brandt’s Creek planning.
In her discussion of the sockeye salmon restoration project in the Okanagan, Maria Correia also touched on the spatial and temporal complexity of salmon, which presents challenges when collaborating between the syilx nation, settler colonial governments, and other institutions that claim jurisdiction over various aspects of waterways. While there are no salmon currently in Brandt’s Creek (and maybe never have been, given it’s historical seasonal nature), this is also a spatially and temporally complex system, and we should be conscious of differences in syilx planning timeframes and the sorts of timeframes frequently imposed by government funding grants.
I think learning more about syilx narratives pertaining to Brandt’s Creek and syilx needs, priorities, and desires on creek and watershed management is a key aspect of this project that we have thus far been missing, and I’m very much looking forward to visiting the Sncewips Heritage Museum, where I hope we can learn more.
Daisy Pullman
Hi Annie, thank you for your reflection! I agree that it was great to learn more about the intercultural collaboration that underpinned the project, and it has significant relevance for how we approach our Brandt's Creek project given it lies on unceded Syilx land. I also appreciate your emphasis on the spatial and temporal complexity of the sockeye as highlighted by Maria Correia, and the idea of different cultural notions of time. While there may be no salmon in Brandt's Creek, I think the broader restoration and conservation ideas this case study raises will help us develop our proposals, particularly the emphasis on Syilx-led environmental projects.
Gabrielle Heschuk
Maria Correia's presentation was completely different to the previous one from Dr. Schreier as Maria's presentation involved a specific project that she worked on and provided a different perspective on problem solving. Maria focused on the idea of brining indigenous knowledge into projects and the importance of this. Linked with previous presentations given from the guest lecturers, Maria drew on traditional ecological knowledge and how the waterways project used this to really advance their research and ultimately led to the projects success.
Maria provided great context as to how bringing in indigenous knowledge is important and valuable in projects. For the Brnadt's creek project Maria emphasized how bringing in indigenous knowledge and ways of knowing could help advance our projects and provide a different way of thinking about solutions. For out particular project and looking at the ecology of the creek, it may be useful to research about what the natural ecology of Brandt's creek used to look like and find out the cultural and perhaps medicinal importance of these species and plants. This is just one way in which our project could attempt to include more traditional ecological knowledge systems.
The way that these two presentations linked from Maria and Dr. Schreier was their contribution and willingness to link their projects and their research to Brnadt's creek. They both provided valuable and important ways in which river naturalization is extremely important but from two different perspectives which I really enjoyed. In a way the two presenters although using different knowledge systems, agreed with the other way of thinking. The value of ensuring rivers are naturalized and how modification causes many problems was a major idea in both presentations.
Shaiyan Siddique
Hi Gaby! You have made a great observation that both professor Schreier's and Maria's presentations are connected by the underlying concept that we should not mess with the natural flow of waterbodies. I also agree with your observation that utilizing indigenous knowledge to get an idea of how the creek used to behave prior to development should provide us valuable insight regarding the restoration of the creek. This reminds me of professor Dulic's presentation where the interactive videos were shown of how Kelowna used to be prior to the arrival of settlers.
Daisy Pullman
There are not many good news stories these days when it comes to environmental and conservation issues (and Professor Schreier’s presentation definitely reminded us of this) therefore, Maria Correia’s presentation on the Okanagan Sockeye Salmon restoration was a refreshing reminder that positive change is possible. In the 1990s the population of returning salmon fell as low as 10,000, but through an intensive Syilx-led process of restoration (including implementing crossings through dams, and releasing fry) the returning population hit nearly 700,000 in 2022.
I appreciated Correia’s focus on the collaborative processes that underpinned this restoration project. I think often the focus is on the scientific methods used (which is of course valuable), but the importance of institutional and individual cooperation cannot be understated. So many well-designed, well-intentioned environmental projects never get off the ground due to the most mundane bureaucratic reasons. Respectful, effective collaboration and cooperation are essential to the success of any project, and this is an exemplary study of multiple bodies and institutions cooperating for a greater purpose. It is made even more remarkable given the context of colonial oppression: I can only imagine how challenging it was for the Syilx project partners to work with the very same institutions that have long worked against their interests. Given these legacies of mistrust, the success and endurance of the collaboration is remarkable.
My thesis research focuses on differences across the US/Canada border within the Okanagan bioregion. One aspect I will be considering is environmental policy and governance, and the Okanagan Sockeye restoration is an interesting example of cross-border (or even bioregional) collaboration. While it might seem obvious that animals do not recognise human borders, conservation research and policy continue to focus largely on the national scale. This is totally counterproductive when it comes to migratory species like the sockeye, which moves through the Columbia River in the US to get to the Pacific, so it's great to see a successful example of international collaborative conservation, and I intend to investigate this topic further for my own research.
Annie Furman
Hi Daisy, I completely agree that it was very refreshing (and encouraging) to see an example of a successful restoration project. Also, I think your statement that “respectful, effective collaboration and cooperation are essential to the success of any project” is absolutely true and something that’s essential to keep in mind for our work with Brandt’s Creek (and, more generally, for any project we’re working on). You also raise an excellent point about the need for cross-border/cross-bioregional collaboration, and while it may be easy to think of Brandt’s Creek as a smaller, relatively far from the US border ecosystem, it certainly has the potential to be a habitat for animals crossing international borders. Perhaps not salmon, but certainly some migratory bird populations.
Sofia Bahmutsky
Maria Correia, a PhD candidate in the Interdisciplinary Graduate Program - Sustainability theme supervised by Dr. Aleksandra Dulic spoke to our class about her PhD research. She had taken the IGS 585 course a few years ago and reflected on her place in the class then and currently as a presenter. Maria's lecture had many similarities to Dr. Dulic's, especially regarding the waterways project. Maria spoke about the salmon decline in the 1990’s and then their eventual return due to intense collaboration and Syilx-led environmental projects. Much of the presentation spoke to the issues surrounding the barriers to successful sustainable community and indigenous led projects brought upon by bureaucratic procedures. For me it is quite humbling to know that indigenous people have any will and energy left to collaborate with anyone on such projects, considering the entire reason the collaboration is becoming necessary is colonial activity degraded their environment in the first place. I find it inspiring that indigenous people want to find solutions, and I have hope that lasting change can be brought upon by successful projects.
The theme of bureaucracy and difficulty of enacting meaningful change in a certain environmental issue or industry is prevalent in my research area. In Canadian agriculture, I find that indigenous knowledge is completely unrepresented. In my experience working on a research farm in Alberta and in the agriculture sector for the past few years I have not witnessed any influence or attempt to bring in Indigenous knowledge or collaboration. If these types of collaborative projects exist then they may not be very public, but I feel that it is simply a lack of representation generally.
The salmon represent an extremely important aspect to the Syilx people as one of the four food chiefs, the return of the salmon being a high priority in the Okanagan region for the Syilx people. This point resonates with me to a previous lecture where we spoke about how it is imperative for people to have a personal and emotional connection to a place (or a living being) in order to care about it and protect it. I believe that the same must be true for the Brandt’s Creek in the context of the IGS 585 course project. Maria’s lecture had me contemplating that even if many people may care a great deal, there are often much larger and obstructive bureaucratic “blocks” when it comes to sustainability.
Thomas Letcher-Nicholls
Thank you so much, Sofia! I found this super thoughtful and helpful. I have learnt so much about the agriculture sector from you in class. It is really discouraging to hear Indigenous voices are not represented or even really considered in agriculture – I wonder what the agricultural sector would look like if it took Indigenous voices seriously.
I have gotten the sense that it must be very frustrating to look at agriculture and all the barriers there to enacting sustainable practices. This seems to get to your point about the tension between caring for and wanting to make a difference for a place, but also having bureaucratic blocks to doing that. In relation to policy and sustainability, I really hope that we can find ways to make a difference, even in small ways.
Shaiyan Siddique
Maria Correia presented on the Mill Creek flood mitigation project, and the salmon reintroduction project guided by the Canadian Okanagan Basin Technical Working Group (COBTWG). It was very interesting to learn how the fish population was restocked through this program using adaptive co-management strategies such as the real-time Fish Water Management Tool. Maria’s involvement was not with the technical aspects of the program (such as the water quality parameters or working with the fish species), but rather the aspect of community engagement. I feel that creating an effective connection with the stakeholders, particularly the indigenous communities, would be the most important aspect of such a project due to the high sentimental value of salmon to the Syilx people. It was also interesting to know about the traditional timescale of 7 generations used by the indigenous communities, as it provides insight on how things used to be managed in this land before the arrival of the settlers.
One of the aspects discussed by Maria that strongly resonated with me was the trust issues between the settlers and the indigenous communities. Maria explained that due to the history of colonialism, discrimination and injustice, it is very difficult for the indigenous communities to trust, feel accepted and be involved in any collaboration with settlers. Due to these past trauma, it is understandable that the indigenous communities will be sceptical about the honesty and genuineness of such efforts. In fact, this lack of trust and the feeling of insincerity is also very much prevalent in the sphere of international development today. I remember bringing up during professor Parrott’s discussions the point of how development aid to poorer countries by wealthier nations are often attached with conditions that end up benefiting the donors more. This can be compared with the experiences of the indigenous communities, as most of these wealthy donor countries obtained their immense wealth in the first place by colonialism, looting and essentially sucking the blood out of the former colonies like a parasite. It is laughable to now hear and see many of these colonizers on their high horse, showing off their generosity, humanitarianism and civility in the name of foreign/developmental aid.
In this context, I was very happy to hear Maria explain that at least for the fish reintroduction project, power has been transferred to the indigenous communities not only on paper or for the sake of formality, but in actuality. Maria informed us that the funds for the project are channeled and distributed through the Okanagan National Alliance (ONA), providing them a sense of honest empowerment, control and inclusion in the project. Maria also explained that this has also contributed to the immense success of the project, as western scientists would have judged the sockeye salmon only on its economic value and not with the same importance and attachment as the indigenous communities. Creation of empathy and a sense of care and attachment will also be vital for the success of our Brandt’s creek project.
Gabrielle Heschuk
Shaiyan thank you for this reflection, I really resonated with your opinion on how Maria's presentation made you reflect on the settlers and indigenous communities relationship. In my reflection I also spoke about how Maria did a good job at explaining to us and emphasizing the importance of indigenous knowledge. It was interesting what you mentioned about the traditional timescale of 7 generations concept as this was something I didn't pick up during her presentation.
Hoda Pourpirali
The main point from Maria Correia's lecture was the significance of community involvement, particularly the involvement of indigenous peoples, in projects. He discussed a project centered around salmon and highlighted the benefits of working in conjunction with local communities. He emphasized that in many projects, only the economic and physical aspects are taken into account and important factors like the cultural significance of salmon to local residents are neglected. The lecture emphasized the importance of intercultural cooperation and its positive impact, as seen in the successful return of salmon populations. This is a crucial aspect that should be considered in our group's investigation of Brandt's Creek.
The speaker emphasized the crucial importance of building trust with indigenous communities, who have a history of distrust towards project planners and officials due to past mistreatment and abuses. As a result, these communities may be less inclined to participate in collaboration efforts.
This lecture brought to mind a previous project that I had worked on, a revitalization project for a urban decay area that was done in collaboration with the local residents. The results of this collaboration were truly remarkable, with the dilapidated area being rapidly rebuilt and former residents returning to the neighborhood.
This lecture has also inspired the me to incorporate the perspectives and contributions of the public in my thesis research, especially because I want to assess the impacts of one of the important urban projects on the people daily life.
Thomas Letcher-Nicholls
I found Maria Correia’s presentation insightful and incredibly meaningful in thinking about how collaboration and – most importantly – the amplification of Indigenous voices can lead to success in sustainability and resilience. And, as Daisy’s reflection says, it was also really great and hopeful to hear a story of success in the amazing return of the Okanagan Sockeye Salmon. I had also found Professor Hans Schreier’s presentation hopeful and energising in thinking about action that can make a difference!
As others have noted in their reflections, it was really moving and heartening to hear about Indigenous groups leading the way in these projects despite the history of trauma, marginalisation, and silence that comes with colonisation. I am thinking about how in Australia, we are soon to have a referendum on an Indigenous voice to parliament, which would be an Indigenous body that would be able to contribute to political discussion; but while many First Nations people are in favour, some prominent Indigenous people are worried that this voice would still be overlooked and disregarded.
Maria explained that without the input of the First Nations groups, the Sockeye Salmon would have been completely overlooked as they do not hold as much economic value as other species. As Leandra says, it is really important to think about how different values (social, political, cultural) and ways of seeing the world come together in projects such as these. Maria explained that the Sockeye Salmon project was kept consciously small and that many differences had to be put on hold to achieve the outcomes they did. For our project, I think one of the biggest challenges will be working out how to be as inclusive and considerate as possible; I am thinking of the Indigenous custodians of the land, local residents and businesses, and the community living by the creek.
One of the things we have been thinking about in IGS Sustainability in the last semesters has been the practicalities and daily work of doing interdisciplinary work – and so I am grateful for Maria’s in depth look at the collaborative process for the Sockeye Salmon project. What I took away is that very simply, this work takes time and is often worked out as one goes along, through discussion and cooperation. I am wondering how our project can hold space for the hard work that goes into sustainability and resilience; how it can be underpinned by care for this place; and whether we can anticipate any challenges that will arise.
Sofia Bahmutsky
Thank you for your enlightening reflection Tom. I strongly agree with your point about the Indigenous body in parliament being supported by many, but also seen with skepticism by prominent figures. I too would think that if the voice hadn't been heard or respected for so many decades, why would parliament respect it now? It reminds me of things like greenwashing, or other political "action" with an ulterior motive and tokenism of sorts.
I think your comment about keeping the IGS 585 Brandt's Creek project scope small while being inclusive and considerate of many parties is very appropriate, and definitely a challenging aspect to the project which requires thoughtful and deliberate planning.
Em Isaak
I enjoyed Maria’s presentation because it is always interesting to hear what current IGS UBCO students are doing and Maria’s project in general sounds super interesting. That being said, I had a difficult time getting more into her presentation because we had previously heard about the Waterways project from Dr. Dulic. One point that Maria made that I feel like sometimes is forgotten when thinking about environmental sustainability is that the “borders” that exist, are social, colonial constructs. Animals, water, weather and the environment do not have borders and that is something to keep in mind.
One aspect that I can really appreciate about Maria’s presentation was when she spoke about the idea of thinking about the next 7 generations. Through many Indigenous worldviews, the idea of thinking of the future with regards to the next 7 generations is used as a way to think sustainably in the present. I think our class should employ this thinking as a way to conceptualize Brandt’s Creek. I feel like Western policies and projects regarding sustainability do not take into account very far into the future and because of that projects often get stuck. In the context of our project, I think it is very important to think about the future generations that might will be using Brandt’s Creek. The implementation of this thinking is not only more sustainable, but it takes into account how fast-growing Kelowna is.
Leandra Vanbaelinghem
I appreciate that Em pointed out the constructed idea of "borders" from us humans and how every other living being and nature do not have such concepts. Remembering that our actions are not confined by "borders" and affect all of us is crucial to sustainability. Additionally, it is valuable to keep this in mind when approaching a sustainability issue from a system's perspective, as system boundaries have to be defined, and for simplicity, geographical boundaries are commonly delimited by countries. These made-up boundaries, enclosing specific laws, norms, and practices, should not restrict our sustainability attention and action. The Waterways project is an excellent example of such cooperation in a system that crosses boundaries. I think Em's point about the implementation of long-scale time frames is essential. Most long western projects are around 20 years, which is not close to 7 generations. This could be because work turnover in our society makes the workplace more individualistic and temporary. However, arriving at true sustainability and resiliency requires much longer concepts of time, which all fields could benefit from incorporating, even if this adds complexity.
Kevin Auster
Maria Correia presented about the restoration of Okanagan sockeye salmon. Learning about the salmon restoration project is excellent because it helps me better internalize participatory community-based research (PCBR) concepts. PCBR is a social research technique built on collaboration between researchers and researchers. Learning about the Okanagan sockeye salmon restoration project helped me reflect on what I learned last term about PCBR and how this restoration project resembled the application of PCBR concepts. I appreciate what I learned here because I can relate it to my understanding of PCBR concepts, which helps solidify my awareness of practical ways to apply PCBR techniques.
Ilyas Kanybek
I agree with Kevin that learning about salmon particularly in the Okanagan valley was quite interesting. I should also agree that I was quite surprised to learn about the participatory community based research concept. I think it is interesting how social research is evolving to have new ways of conducting research. I think it is very relevant to many social scientists and students like us to learn more about this concept.