land
Article
Alaska Native Allotments at Risk: Technological Strategies
for Monitoring Erosion and Informing Solutions in
Southwest Alaska
Jonathan S. Lim 1, * , Sean Gleason 2 , Hannah Strehlau 3 , Lynn Church 4 , Carl Nicolai, Jr. 5 , Willard Church 6
and Warren Jones 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
*
Citation: Lim, J.S.; Gleason, S.;
Strehlau, H.; Church, L.; Nicolai, C.,
Jr.; Church, W.; Jones, W. Alaska
Native Allotments at Risk:
Technological Strategies for
Monitoring Erosion and Informing
School of Archaeology, University of Oxford, 1 South Parks Rd., Oxford OX1 3TG, UK
Hampden Sydney College, Hampden Sydney, VA 23943, USA
Zentrum für Baltische und Skandinavische Archäologie, 24837 Schleswig, Germany
Nalaquq, Quinhagak, AK 99655, USA
Qanirtuuq Inc., Quinhagak, AK 99655, USA
Independent Researcher, Quinhagak, AK 99655, USA
Correspondence: jonathan.lim@arch.ox.ac.uk
Abstract: After the United States’ purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1867, Alaska Native lands have
existed in a legal state of aboriginal title, whereby the land rights of its traditional occupants could
be extinguished by Congress at any time. With the passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement
Act (ANCSA) in 1971, however, Alaska Native individuals were given the opportunity to select and
secure a title to ancestral lands as federally administered ANCSA 14(c) allotments. Today, though,
these allotments are threatened by climate-change-driven erosion. In response, our article provides
an erosion monitoring tool to quantify the damage caused by coastal and riverine erosion. Using the
Yup’ik (pl. Yupiit) community of Quinhagak as a case study, we employ high-precision measurement
devices and archival spatial datasets to demonstrate the immense scale of the loss of cultural lands in
this region. From 1976 to 2022, an average of 30.87 m of coastline were lost according to 9 ANCSA
14(c) case studies within Quinhagak’s Traditional Land Use Area. In response, we present a free
erosion monitoring tool and urge tribal entities in Alaska to replicate our methods for recording
and quantifying erosion on their shareholders’ ANCSA 14(c) properties. Doing so will foster urgent
dialogue between Alaskan Native communities and lawmakers to determine what measures are
needed to protect Alaska Native land rights in the face of new environmental challenges.
Solutions in Southwest Alaska. Land
2023, 12, 248.
https://doi.org/10.3390/
land12010248
Keywords: unpiloted aerial vehicles (UAVs); remote sensing; Alaska high altitude photography
(AHAP); satellites; erosion; climate justice; indigenous data sovereignty; archaeology; Alaskan Native;
Yup’ik
Academic Editor: Javier
Martínez-López
Received: 16 December 2022
Revised: 7 January 2023
Accepted: 11 January 2023
Published: 13 January 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
1. Introduction
1.1. Overview
The signing of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) by President Richard
M. Nixon on December 18, 1971 marked a pivotal moment in the history of Indigenous land
rights in the United States. With its passage, ANCSA provided over 17,000 land parcels
(i.e., ANCSA 14(c) allotments) to individual Alaskan Natives who could demonstrate claims
to the land “under traditional use and occupancy.” Today, however, many of these ANCSA
14(c) allotments are under threat from climate-change-driven erosion. In response, our
article provides an erosion monitoring tool for ANCSA 14(c) allotment owners and village
corporations to quantify the damage caused by coastal and riverine erosion. Using the
Yup’ik (pl. Yupiit) community of Quinhagak as a case study, we employ high-precision
measurement devices and archival spatial datasets to demonstrate the immense scale of
the loss of cultural lands in this region. In conclusion, we call for tribal entities in Alaska to
Land 2023, 12, 248. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010248
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/land
Land 2023, 12, 248
2 of 19
replicate our methods for recording and quantifying erosion on their shareholders’ ANCSA
14(c) properties. Our goal is to foster urgent dialogue between Alaskan Native communities
and lawmakers to determine what measures are needed to protect Alaska Native land
rights in the face of new environmental challenges.
1.2. A Recent History of Southwestern Alaska: Reclaiming Ancestral Lands, One Acre at a Time
The windswept islands and coasts of southwestern Alaska have been occupied by
Indigenous cultures for millennia (Figure 1) [1]. According to most recent estimates, the
first peoples to cross into modern-day Alaska arrived via the Beringia land mass circa
14,000 Before Present (BP) [2]. Since then, successive generations have developed the
innovative technologies and ecological knowledge necessary to subsist and survive in
this harsh climate [1,3,4]. In turn, the oral histories and archaeological records of these
Alaskan Native communities—including the Unangan of the Aleutian Archipelago, the
Sugpiaq of the Alaskan Peninsula and Kodiak Archipelago, and the Yup’ik (pl. Yupiit)
of the Yukon–Kuskokwim Delta—all testify to the cultural importance and knowledge
embedded within Indigenous subsistence sites, ancestral villages, and place names [5–8].
For these reasons, the relationships among place, people, and nonhuman species are central
to all Alaskan Native cultures and cosmologies.
Figure 1. Southwest Alaska is home to many Alaska Native groups who must now contend with the
devastating effects of climate change on their homes and heritage.
Unfortunately, for these groups, the past two centuries have been marked by colonial
violence and intergenerational trauma. The arrival of Western powers during the 19th and
20th centuries—beginning with the first contact between Alaskan Natives and Russian
Land 2023, 12, 248
3 of 19
soldiers, traders, and missionaries—created calamitous societal upheavals in the form of
displacement, violence, forced conversion, uncompensated labor, and disease [9–11]. For
instance, “The Great Sickness” epidemic of 1900 killed between 25–50% of Indigenous
communities in Western Alaska [12]. In addition, with the purchase of Alaska from
Russia in 1867, the United States government introduced genocidal policies of systematic
repression through the forced enrollment of Alaska Native youth to boarding schools run
by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and missionaries. As a result, entire villages were forced to
relocate to new settlements containing boarding schools, where locals were prevented from
participating in subsistence activities, culture practices, and ceremonies [13].
Despite this legacy of colonialism, Alaska Natives have achieved meaningful victories
since the start of the 20th century to regain control of ancestral lands. As a new territory
of the United States at the turn of the 20th century, Alaska Native lands existed in a
legal state of ‘aboriginal title’ that granted ownership to traditional occupants by virtue
of their peoples’ continuous use from ‘time immemorial’ [14]. However, these rights
could be extinguished by Congress at any time without compensation, putting these
groups on a precarious legal footing. With the passage of the Alaska Native Allotment
Act of 1906, however, Alaska Native individuals were given the opportunity to select
and secure a title to 160 acres of land as federally administered allotments. Frustratingly,
very few applications were actually processed and conveyed under this program in the
following decades: the initiative was poorly advertised, and labyrinthine bureaucratic
practices placed insurmountable obstacles in the path for Alaska Natives to obtain their
allotments [15]. However, after years of lobbying by Alaska Native groups, especially the
Alaska Native Brotherhood, and other allied parties, US Congress passed the monumental
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in 1971 [15]. ANCSA extinguished all
aboriginal titles in Alaska in exchange for USD 962.5 million and 44 million acres that
were held in ‘fee simple’ titles by 12 newly formed Alaska Native corporations whose
shareholders included all tribal members born before 1971. In addition, ANCSA and
its subsequent amendments finalized the conveyance of more than 14,000 ANCSA 14(c)
allotments to individual shareholders by the end of 1992.
In some ways, this granting of ANCSA 14(c) allotments to Alaskan Native shareholders
was more generous and less culturally damaging than comparable measures in other parts
of the country, such as the Dawes Act of 1887—a heavy-handed division of territory where
Native Great Plains families were forced into a farming-based lifestyle by randomly allotted
parcels that were not arable, nor compatible with traditional subsistence lifestyles [16].
Nevertheless, the ANCSA 14(c) allotments process was not without issues or restrictions:
First, it is also no longer possible for Alaska Natives to be allocated such properties unless
through inheritance, potentially disenfranchising future generations from the opportunity
to hold ancestral land [17]. Second, the ANCSA 14(c) claim validity does not include
land use that commenced after 18 December 1971, which restricts the inclusion of new,
contemporary subsistence camps. In addition, individual allotments must meet a strict
criteria of use as of 1971 that excludes any property or land use aside from an individual’s
primary place or residence, business, subsistence camp, or nonprofit location. Finally,
ANCSA 14(c) individual allotments are ‘restricted’ (as opposed to ‘fee simple’) properties,
meaning they cannot be sold without an arduous and expensive process of federal approval.
Such stipulations—alongside the fervent support of ANCSA by the oil and gas industry
since it empowered tribal corporations to sell land for development—has led to criticism
that the legislation has been largely inadequate for redressing the territorial injustices
and intergenerational trauma of the colonial experience [15]. Nevertheless, Alaska Native
individual allotments are highly treasured assets since they serve as symbolic and legal
affirmations of their owners’ ancestral connection to the land. Allotments may also be
used to generate income from permits, leases, or purchases to third parties. Finally, many
ANCSA 14(c) allotments include subsistence camps that have been in use for generations
and, therefore, contain priceless material heritage in the form of archaeological remains
and ancestral graves.
Land 2023, 12, 248
4 of 19
1.3. Permafrost Loss and Erosion in an Era of Change
Since ANCSA 14(c) allotments were granted as one-time, permanent conveyances,
individuals are unable to select new allotments if their parcel can no longer serve as a
primary residence, business location, or subsistence camp. Thus, recent years have seen
the rise of another existential threat to Alaskan Native lands in the form of climate change:
over the course of the 21st century, rising annual temperatures have dissipated offshore sea
ice and melted the permafrost in soil, making its coastal regions particularly susceptible
to erosion [18]. In turn, Alaskan Native communities have unfortunately become some of
the first climate change refugees: a 2021 erosion forecast report by the State of Alaska’s
Department of Natural Resources concluded that of the 48 Yukon–Kuskokwim communities
assessed, 33 are forecast to lose infrastructure and cultural sites due to erosion before the
2070s [19]. As a result, many villages have already made evacuation plans: The Yup’ik
community of Newtok, for example, has recently relocated to the new village of Metarvik
14 km further inland [20]. In addition, Napakiak, a community on the Kuskokwim River,
has lost approximately 80 m of its riverbank from 2016–2022 while a cursory inspection
of cadastral records and modern satellite imagery shows that many nearby ANCSA 14(c)
allotments are now reduced in size due to erosion [21,22]. In response to these threats,
Napakiak tribal leadership has identified a safe location nearby to evacuate to at a projected
cost of USD 100 million, of which only 10% of the funds have been secured [23].
1.4. Study Area Profile: Quinhagak, Alaska
Villages such as Napakiak and Newtok are not the only Alaskan Native communities
who must contend with the consequences of a rapidly changing world [24–26]. One such
village is Quinhagak, a coastal community of around 774 Yupiit (sing. Yup’ik) located along
the Bering Sea coastline roughly 40 km south of the mouth of the Kuskokwim River. The
village is nestled between two major salmon rivers [27]—the Qanirtuuq (var. Kanektok
River) on whose mouth the village is situated, and the Agalig (var. Arolik River) 8 km
to the south (Figure 2). Pursuant to ANCSA, the village corporation Qanirtuuq Inc (QCorp) has been allocated approximately 58,000 hectares of land, which enclose 86 private
allotments consisting of 2597.7 hectares prior to erosion. In light of the community’s favored
subsistence resources, namely salmon, berries, and sea mammals, it is unsurprising that
the majority of these allotments are on or at the mouths of the two major rivers and along
the coast where these resources abound. However, the Traditional Land Use Area (TLUA)
extends far beyond Q-Corp’s land claims as demonstrated by the presence of ANCSA
14(c) allotments outside the corporation’s boundaries. Quinhagak is also located near the
archaeological site of Nunalleq (GDN-248), a 17th century ‘winter village’ composed of
semisubterranean structures with walls made of sod blocks (known colloquially in Alaska
as ‘sod houses’). Sod houses were used widely in Yupik communities until the mid-20th
century, and some families, such as those of late Quinhagak Elder Sam Carter, lived in
them until the mid-1970’s (John Smith pers comm.). Prior to the Western colonial era,
the Yupiit lived a semisedentary lifestyle, moving throughout the year with skin tents to
establish seasonal camps [11]. During the colder months, the Yupiit would reconvene in
winter villages for shelter, and occasionally remote subsistence sites also contained isolated
sod structures. For these reasons, sod houses and ancestral winter villages constitute
two important features that were often claimed as “traditional use and occupancy” under
ANCSA 14(c) conveyance.
The excavation of Nunalleq, which has recovered almost 100,000 artifacts and ecofacts,
is the most significant archaeological investigation of a precontact Yup’ik community [7].
Today the collection is housed locally in a purpose-built museum and cultural center,
allowing the community to learn valuable lessons about their ancestors. For all the outstanding body of research carried out on the Nunalleq site though, relatively little has been
performed to research the wider cultural landscape of the community: limited surveys
were conducted in 2021 and 2022 to document nearby subsistence sites as an extension
of 220 Yup’ik place names recorded in 1999 by former Qanirtuuq land manager Joseph
Land 2023, 12, 248
5 of 19
Pleasant [28,29]. For both surveys, qualitative data were collected during in situ interviews
with Elders as well as community meetings. Site locations were recorded using a handheld GPS, and a preliminary database was published for community use in July of 2022.
Notably, the majority of these sites are located on or near ANCSA 14(c) allotments and
contain important, intergenerational cultural knowledge about the landscape [30]. For
example, place names such as Neqlin Kuiga (trans. “Fish processing lake.”) are a record of
important locations to obtain resources needed for survival. In other cases, place names in
the Yup’ik language of Yugtun may help communicate how to best traverse the landscape.
For instance, the Agalig river, which is nearly impossible to navigate for most of the year
due to low water levels, has bends of the river named to warn travelers on the waterway
(e.g., Angyarrairyaraq, “the place where boats can barely get through”). As such, the cultural
significance of these place names (and their corresponding ANCSA 14(c) allotments) cannot
be overstated, as they represent a tangible link to the past for many Yupiit in the Y-K Delta.
Like many villages in the Y-K Delta, Quinhagak has lost vast swathes of corporation land,
infrastructure, ANCSA 14(c) allotments, and cultural sites to erosion—a situation that is
expected to worsen in the coming years [31]. Moreover, in order to qualify for government
grants to mitigate this damage, Yup’ik coastal villages must pay external consultants to
quantify and map the impact of recent erosion events. The costs associated with these
environmental reports and surveys can be high, as evidenced by a recent 2018 erosion
study commissioned in Quinhagak to estimate erosion damages caused by the Qanirtuuq
river to the old airport runway near the Yup’ik placename Meqsarturyaraq (trans. “place
where one gets freshwater”). This report—which included bathymetric and lidar surveys,
hydrological data, and visible spectrum satellite imagery—provided the village of Quinhagak with potential river reroute plans alongside flood plains for 50, 75, and 100 flood
events [32]. In total, the report cost Q-Corp USD 267,000, and the village was not provided
digital copies of the underlying datasets.
Figure 2. Quinhagak is a traditional Yup’ik village of around 700 people on the Bering Sea (see inset
aerial photo). Exact sample area locations are not shown to protect archaeological site locations.
Land 2023, 12, 248
6 of 19
In response, our article proposes a new approach to quantifying erosion damage to
ANCSA 14(c) allotments. Using the Traditional Land Use Area (TLUA) of Quinhagak
as a case study, we use highly accurate and high-resolution geospatial datasets derived
from archival satellite imagery and Unpiloted Aerial Vehicles (UAVs, a.k.a. “drones”)
surveys to demonstrate the extent to which coastal erosion has damaged nearby ANCSA
14(c) allotments. To do so, we introduce a novel Python script for use in geographic
information systems (GIS) software to automate the interpretation of aerial imagery so
that other communities requiring urgent documentation of erosion damage can conduct
similar analyses.
2. Methodology
2.1. Surveying in Wetland Tundra
Conventional land surveys in the Y-K Delta are challenging due to the frequency
of waterways and patches of marshy terrain. Furthermore, access to many sites is only
possible by boat due to the absence of land transport infrastructure in rural Alaska [33]. In
response, researchers working in this region increasingly rely on aerial imagery derived
from satellites or UAVs [28,29]. UAV platforms are well suited for surveying since they can
record large areas of terrain remotely at a higher resolution than satellite imagery provided
that the aircraft remains within the pilot’s line of sight in accordance with current US Federal
Aviation Authority (FAA) laws. Moreover, photogrammetric methods have advanced to
the degree that precise spatial measurements may be made from aerial photographs of
an area, thereby reducing the necessity for obtaining measurements by hand in difficult
terrain and environmental conditions [34].
2.2. Collecting and Processing Aerial Imagery of Erosion
Four regions within Quinhagak’s TLUA were selected for survey and analysis (Table 1).
Each region was located along an important waterway for Yup’ik subsistence and contained
at least two significant erosion events on or near ANCSA 14(c) allotments. Finally, specific
areas within each region were selected for UAV-based imaging in consultation with Q-Corp
with feedback from local Yupiit during community meetings and interview sessions that
occurred from 2019–2022.
Table 1. Regions measured using UAV surveys in 2022 and archival satellite imagery.
Region Name
Erosion Areas Measured
Uyak
2
Agalig Mouth
2
Bessie Creek
2
Old airport
3
Cultural Significance
An important creek used for subsistence. Contains significant archaeological
remains and traditional Yup’ik placenames.
A major salmon river used for subsistence. Contains significant
archaeological remains and traditional Yup’ik placenames at its mouth.
A creek branching off on the Agalig. Possible archaeological sites near the
confluence. Site of a proposed gravel pit, making it important for future
village infrastructure.
Many ANCSA 14(c) allotments, one of which is inhabited throughout the
year. Important village infrastructure that is eroding.
From July until August 2022, a precision landscape measurement of each region was
completed using an DJI M300 RTK UAV outfitted with a DJI P1 35 mm full-frame 48 MP
RGB optical sensor. The M300 has real-time kinematic (RTK) capabilities, allowing it to
receive coordinate information from a stationary base station to improve image spatial
accuracy [35]. The horizontal and vertical spatial accuracy of this UAV when combined
with the DJI D-RTK2 base station configuration was advertised as 1 cm–2 cm according to
the DJI user manual. However, from our own independent measurements of control points
from each region with an Emlid RS+ GNSS unit, the D-RTK2’s accuracy appears closer to
~10 cm and ~5 cm.
Automated flights for data collection were planned and implemented using the DJI’s
proprietary Pilot 2 software and smart controller. The UAV was programmed to fly cross
Land 2023, 12, 248
7 of 19
grid patterns, capturing imagery at automated intervals to achieve an 80% forward and
70% side overlap to ensure the ease of constructing georeferenced orthomosaics. Flights
were performed at an altitude of less than 400 feet to ensure a ground sampling distance
(GSD) of <4 cm. Before each flight, a DJI D-RTK2 High Precision GNSS Mobile Station
was allowed to self-calibrate for over two hours to improve the spatial accuracy of the
final image.
2.3. Software and Archival Data Sources
Archival Very High Resolution (VHR) satellite imagery was utilized alongside current
UAV imagery to measure the comparative levels of erosion at specific ANCSA 14(c) allotments over time. The primary VHR dataset included declassified 1976 military intelligence
photographs (Keyhole satellite system) with a <1 m GSD. This imagery was then georeferenced using extant geological features alongside pre-georeferenced DigitalGlobe (WV02)
imagery (dated 9 May 2015). Finally, authoritative Native allotment and corporation property boundaries hosted by Callista Corporation were utilized to determine the location of
specific ANCSA 14(c) allotments [36,37].
ArcGIS Pro 3.0.2 was used to view and manipulate the imagery and to take precise
spatial measurements. This is a powerful and versatile GIS software package that all Alaska
Native groups have access to under an agreement with the US Bureau of Indian affairs.
The workflows and scripts described in this article may thus be easily replicated in other
communities if they have a computer available to run the software. In addition, Agisoft
Metashape Professional 1.8.2 was used to create georeferenced orthomosaics from the
UAV imagery.
2.4. Community Engagement: Interviews and Meetings
Community meetings were held at the project’s onset to determine the spatial extents
and regions for inquiry. From 2018–2022, 20 GIS-based interviews were also conducted
about individual ANCSA 14(c) allotments within Quinhagak’s TLUA. During these interviews, individuals had the opportunity to review GIS layers, composite orthomosaics,
and UAV footage of specific subsistence sites under threat from erosion. UAV footage for
these interviews was compiled in Davinci Resolve 17.2.0., and Adobe audition was used
to edit .wav files of recorded interviews. Finally, researchers held ad hoc meetings with
community leadership during this time period to present preliminary findings and gather
additional feedback.
Ethnographic interviewing was also conducted during on-site visits to each of the
four proposed regions. During interviews, Yup’ik familiar with each site were asked
nondirective and directive questions about a location’s importance, usage, and history.
Relevant GIS coordinates were logged with a Garmin handheld GPS and an Emlid DGNSS
RS+ base station/rover unit. Interviews were recorded using a Zoom Fn2 Lavalier microphone (32 bit, .wav) and a BMPCC 6 K camera (6144 × 3456 pixels, .braw). Video captured
from UAV flights using a DJI Mavic Mini 2 (3840 × 2160 pixels, .mp4) were also collected
to provide a bird’s eye view of erosion for interviewees. At the request of Q-Corp, select
portions of recorded interviews were published as ESRI Story Maps to highlight the erosion
damage at particular subsistence sites (e.g., link).
2.5. Measuring Erosion
A custom ArcPy geoprocessing script—the Waterway Erosion Tool (WET)—was written in ArcGIS Pro to automate the measurement of erosion change between two images of
the same area. The script utilizes user-defined inputs in order to produce a table showing
minimum, maximum, mean, and median change for a specified area with erosion damage. It is available for download here (https://github.com/Nalaquq/WET) [Accessed
5 January 2023]. As an open-access tool, this script will allow communities to measure
erosion in their wider cultural landscape, not just the limited places covered in the recent
Land 2023, 12, 248
8 of 19
2021 State of Alaska erosion survey. The process for its implementation is summarized in
Figure 3 below:
Figure 3. The open-access tool used in this study to measure erosion was developed by the authors
for use in ESRI ArcGIS Pro, which every Alaska Native community has access to via the BIA.
Land 2023, 12, 248
9 of 19
3. Results
3.1. Erosion
At each of the nine selected sample areas, each chosen for their cultural significance,
large amounts of land have been lost since 1976 (Table 2).
Table 2. A list of sample areas measured across four regions near Quinhagak.
Sample
Area
Region
Native Allotment ID
Sampling
Lines
Min.
Length
Max
Length
Mean
Median
Erosion
Period
Lot 11, USS 9532
Lot 4, USS 9532
15
64
1.87
7.42
6.9
109.81
3.89
70.07
3.62
72.11
Since 1976
Since 1976
Lot 2, USS 9568
28
1.27
22.58
12.35
13.40
Since 1976
Lot 1, USS 9680
60
0.33
25.87
11.77
7.03
Since 1976
Lot 4, USS 9688
21
0.37
29.56
13.00
9.90
Since 1976
Lot 1, USS 9688
26
3.47
28.51
13.39
21.75
Since 1976
7
8
Uyak
Uyak
Agalig
Mouth
Agalig
Mouth
Bessie
Creek
Bessie
Creek
Old Airport
Old Airport
223
10
0.89
64.00
296.20
75.45
55.26
67.28
21.33
66.14
Since 1976
Since 1976
9
Old Airport
Lot 5, USS 9672
Lot 1, USS 9672
None, village
infrastructure
51
6.01
61.87
30.48
25.30
Since 2015
1
2
3
4
5
6
3.2. Uyak Creek
Uyak Creek is a narrow waterway north of Quinhagak. Near its mouth is the archaeological winter village site of Uyakmiut (trans. “People of Uyak”), a collection of at
least four precontact sod houses dated to Cal AD 1450 to 1640 within a Native allotment
(Figure 4). Non-Yup’ik researchers were initially perplexed at the choice of location since it
is unusual for a winter village to be sited on a waterway that has no immediate access to
the salmon runs [38]. However, ethnographic data collected in 2021 during interviews with
former Quinhagak mayor Willard Church indicated that this creek is indeed frequented by
anadromous fish species such as salmon and smelt. The bank adjacent to the structures
at the site (Sample area 1) has been eroding for decades, with a mean of 3.89 m (median
3.62 m) of erosion since 1976. Church recalls how, as a child, his brother would obtain
artifacts from the erosion face, including ornate wooden masks and stone bowls. Finally,
as noted in ethnographic interviews with local hunters (n = 3), Uyakmiut has been long
utilized for subsistence hunting since it is an optimal place to intercept birds on their annual
migration routes.
Near Uyakmiut, at the mouth of Uyak creek, is a partially eroded narrow spit known
as Legenret, which is located on an ANCSA 14(c) Native allotment (Sample area 2). As
noted during on-site interviews in 2021, Legenret has long been an important place to hunt
ducks and gather edible greens, wood, and grass for weaving baskets. However, it has also
suffered some of the worst erosion in Quinhagak’s TLUA with a mean land loss of 70 m
(median 72.11 m) since 1976. As a result, the former peninsula became an island in 2019.
Due to this topographic shift, local Yup’ik have raised concern that further erosion will
increase the volume of water flowing into the creek at high tide, something that may, in the
future, increase the rate of erosion at nearby allotments including the nearby Uyakmiut site.
Land 2023, 12, 248
10 of 19
Figure 4. Erosion at Uyak Creek. Aerial orthomosaics by authors (2022), basemap by ESRI.
3.3. Agalig Mouth
The Agalig (Arolik River) is the most important subsistence waterway in the Quinhagak area. It is extremely difficult to navigate, as it is dangerously shallow. As such, there
is a high concentration of archaeological sites and Native allotments near the mouth of
the river where less navigation is required. Furthermore, salmon are funneled into this
area as there are fewer tributaries, making it a very good area for fishing [38]. Sample area
3 represents what may be an undocumented cluster of three small sod houses on a ANCSA
14(c) allotment on the south bank of the river, which has lost a mean of 12.35 m (median
13.40 m) of land since 1976 (Figure 5). Artifacts have been recently recovered from this
erosion edge, including an intricate wooden spoon and bow.
The abandoned village near Sample area 4 was known as Agaligamiut. In the late
19th century, it was a larger settlement than Quinhagak, according to the US census.
However, by 1910, it was totally abandoned. There are no obvious surface indications
of structures, but structures appear on an old USGS map from 1954. Furthermore, UAV
surveys conducted in 2022 were able to clearly delineate these structures using elevation
and multispectral data. A mean of 11.77 m (median 7.03 m) of land has eroded since 1976,
almost encroaching on the structures.
Land 2023, 12, 248
11 of 19
Figure 5. Erosion at the mouth of the Agalig. Aerial orthomosaic by authors (2022).
3.4. Bessie Creek
Bessie Creek is a tributary of the Agalig (Figure 6). There are many traditional place
names in this area, indicating that this is an important place to obtain salmon, small mammals, berries, and waterfowl. In 2019, the authors carried out test pits at Sample area 5: it
was suspected to be an undocumented cultural site due to its elevated position and the presence of fireweed—an indicator of past human activity in this particular environment [29].
No structures were immediately evident, but test pits revealed the presence of a dense layer
of faunal remains just below the topsoil, along with 20th century waste including candy
wrappers. This suggests there was a historic hunting camp in the area. There is a high
amount of erosion threatening this site, with a mean of 13 m (median 9.9 m) lost since 1976.
Land 2023, 12, 248
12 of 19
Figure 6. Erosion at the confluence of Bessie Creek and the Agalig. Aerial orthomosaic by authors
(2022), basemap by ESRI.
The ANCSA 14(c) allotment around Sample area 6 is of particular interest, as many
people have expressed that there might have been a winter village there (Church pers.
Comm). This area is also important for the future development of Quinhagak. It is known
to have very firm ground due to extensive gravel deposits. However, a high degree of
erosion has occurred at this site with a mean change of 13.9 m (median 21.75 m) lost
since 1976.
3.5. Old Airport
Quinhagak’s abandoned old airport is where some of the worst erosion is taking
place (Figure 7). Although there are no recorded archaeological features in the vicinity, it
is culturally important. The area is an important subsistence region traditionally known
as Meqsarturyaraq (trans. ‘place where we get fresh water’). The ANCSA 14(c) allotment
at Sample area 7, an important subsistence place near modern fishing camps, has seen a
staggering loss of land at almost 300 m in places, with a mean loss of 55.26 m (median
22.33 m). On a similar vein, the allotment at Sample area 8 is permanently occupied
throughout the year by members of the Cleveland family. However, it has also lost a lot of
land since 1976, a mean value of 67.28 m (median 66.14 m). The most alarming damage
of all is taking place just south of this allotment, on the runway of the abandoned airport.
Until recently, it was used as a gravel road to access fishing areas and gravel harvesting
Land 2023, 12, 248
13 of 19
pits to the east [39]. In the last 7 years alone, since 2015, this area has seen a mean loss of
30.48 m (median 25.30 m).
Figure 7. Erosion at Quinhagak’s old airport. Aerial orthomosaic by authors (2022), basemap by ESRI.
4. Discussion: The Economic and Cultural Significance of Native Allotments
“ . . . most villages began as winter settlements for a nomadic population whose members
consumed goods and services that were locally produced in a subsistence hunting, fishing,
and gathering economy. Today most villages continue to be well sited for participation in
the subsistence economy, but they are not locations at which human beings would reside
if they wished to participate in the wage economy that produces the goods and services
that village residents, and particularly young Natives, now want to consume.” (Mitchell
2001, 535) [40]
Debate exists as to whether ANCSA 14(c) allotments are compatible with the traditional Yup’ik subsistence lifestyles. After all, as evidenced by ethnographic accounts from
Nelson Island, there was no concept of private property in precontact Yup’ik society, and it
was common for multiple families to subsist together without consideration of boundaries
or territorial restrictions [41]. However, the world that contemporary Yupiit occupy is
drastically different from that of their ancestors. Today, Alaska Natives must navigate
a wage-based economy, and many feel that ANCSA 14(c) allotments provide a bulwark
against uncertain times, especially in the context of the United States’ history of forced
relocation of Native peoples.
Land 2023, 12, 248
14 of 19
To an extent, ANCSA 14(c) allotments provide financial security as some owners
use their land as a source of income by renting land to outside companies: for instance,
although there was a well-documented, historical animosity between local Yup’ik and
guided sport fishing companies, sport fishing is now tolerated on the Qanirtuuq river,
despite the disruptions it causes to daily community life [31]. As a result, some allotment
owners allow recreational fishing camps to be situated on their properties for a fee. In
addition, Native allotments are ‘restricted’ property, meaning any change to its status
(e.g., transferring, mortgaging, or selling) is subject to the approval of the US Bureau of
Indian Affairs (BIA). As imperfect as this arrangement is, the ‘restricted’ status provides
allotment owners with a degree of legal certainty that their land is protected, since ANCSA
14(c) allotments are “inalienable and nontaxable”, meaning that the land cannot be taken
from the owner by force and is not subject to local or state property tax [42].
Yet, the importance of ANCSA 14(c) allotments is not solely restricted to monetary
considerations: as multigenerational use areas, Native allotments are very likely to contain
the material remains of ancestral Yupiit in the form of archaeological remains. Moreover, all
ANCSA 14(c) allotments are culturally significant places, since they were selected according
to the importance to its owner and their family as a “traditional use and occupancy.” As
Q-Corp land manager Carl Nicolai Jr. noted in a 2022 interview, “Native allotments were
chosen where people grew up, and places that are good for subsisting.” In this sense,
ANCSA 14(c) allotments hold intrinsic cultural value as places that are central to a family’s
history or important subsistence locations. Indeed, the majority of ANCSA 14(c) allotments
within Quinhagak’s TLUA are still regularly used by their owners for hunting, fishing,
gathering, and camping. Besides serving as resource collection hubs, subsistence camps
are places where families and friends can spend quality time with one another, away from
the hectic setting of their home village—in other words, an opportunity to reinforce and
establish social ties [30].
The profound sense of persistent cultural continuity, where every traditional place
is imbued with societal memory and lessons for survival, is very much present in Quinhagak as it is in other Yup’ik communities in the Y-K Delta. [41,43]. The spiritual toll of
allotment loss must, therefore, also be considered: traditional Yup’ik belief subscribes to
the notion of Ellam Yua, a sentient universe that reacts and changes based on the actions of
its inhabitants [44]. This belief is still prevalent throughout the Y-K Delta: for instance, the
Yup’ik residents of Hooper Bay equate the degradation of treasured archaeological sites
(most notably, the grave of a renowned shaman) with their people ‘losing their way’ in
the modern world [43]. On Nelson Island, Elders contend that the lack of prey animals is
a direct consequence of ill feeling and squabbling over land, triggered by the imposition
of the ANCSA 14(c) allotment system [41]. However, as a community that has had longer
exposure to missionary influence, the concept of Ellam Yua is not commonly discussed in
explicit terms in Quinhagak [30]. However, traditional beliefs still endure in the cultural
consciousness of the community. As longtime Nunalleq project collaborator Michael Smith
says in the short film Children of the Dig, “We are seeing what the Elders were saying:
When people change, the weather will too” [45]. Thus, as if the financial and symbolic
consequences of Native allotment loss were not enough, the loss of Native allotments risks
compounding social anxiety, derived from almost two centuries of generational trauma
and the notion that Yup’ik society is on the wrong path.
5. Conclusion: New Solutions for a Changing World
Historically, Yupiit chose ANCSA 14(c) allotments that included place names near
coastlines and in-land waterways. Yet, although these allotments constitute important
cultural locations for subsistence and daily travel, they are, nonetheless, vulnerable to
increased erosion due to climate change. In response, the US government has finally
begun to take action with federal programs designed to mitigate climate change and rectify
historical injustices: on 20 January 2021, the Biden–Harris administration issued Executive
Order 13985, empowering Federal agencies to address systemic barriers to opportunity
Land 2023, 12, 248
15 of 19
facing historically underserved communities. Similarly, the US Department of the Interior
(DOI) has adopted a Climate Adaptation and Resilience Plan, which seeks to champion
climate justice to groups that are disproportionately affected by climate change, including
Native Alaskan peoples. These goals are admirable, and it is in the spirit of these initiatives
that we call for urgent measures to address the issue of Native allotment loss.
When the Alaska Native Allotment Act of 1906 was first conceived, the impending climate consequences of a rapidly industrializing world were impossible to predict. However,
by the time ANCSA was enacted, there was sufficient evidence that climate change would
disproportionately impact arctic communities, and that fossil fuels were a contributing factor [46,47]. Yet ANCSA was passed in large part due to support from oil and gas industries
since it facilitated the purchase and leasing of oil-rich territories [15]. As a result, Alaskan
Natives have been forced to pay the price for a catastrophe perpetrated by colonial powers.
As demonstrated through our analysis of satellite and UAV imagery, ANCSA 14(c)
allotments within Quinhagak’s TLUA have suffered increased rates of erosion since 1976.
Such displacements, when coupled with the loss of traditional cultural and ecological
knowledge, have had a significant impact on the health and safety of Alaskan Native
communities. For instance, since ANCSA 14(c) allotments were selected relative to Yugtun
place names, they often include important traditional knowledge and landmarks meant
to help Yupiit navigate the tundra. Warren Jones’ Native allotment on the Qanirtuuq, for
example, was passed down to him from his late father and contains a single, prominent
sod structure of indeterminate age that has been used as a landmark and shelter for Yupiit
traveling upriver to the mountains over many generations. If, as Yup’ik Elder Paul Charles
of Nelson Island notes, “[Yugtun] place names were like street signs”, then the roadmaps
needed to safely traverse the Y-K Delta are currently under threat [48]. Not surprisingly,
this loss of intergenerational knowledge when coupled with the unpredictable freeze/thaw
cycles have resulted in a notable increase in Search and Rescue (SAR) missions throughout
the arctic [49].
Despite these challenges, Alaska Natives have displayed remarkable resilience in
the face of colonial structures. Grassroots-level programs and Native-owned heritage
organizations such as the Alaska Native Heritage Center and the Nunalleq Museum have
worked tirelessly to record Elder teachings and to communicate traditional knowledge to
new generations [7,50,51]. Moreover, the transition from subsistence to cash economies
created undue hardships that have shaped traditional Alaskan Native communities to
this day [52]. The economic cost of importing consumables necessary for survival to rural
Alaskan communities with no road access—such as fuel and ammunition—is considerable
and causes significant hardship [44]. In turn, the majority of Yup’ik families in the Y-K
Delta still rely on subsistence activities to offset the high cost of food, building supplies,
and heating fuel. Here, the erosion of ANCSA 14(c) allotments has a two-fold impact
on the health, safety, and economic vitality of Yup’ik coastal villages. First, the loss of
intergenerational Yugtun placenames means that families must work harder to gather the
requisite supplies to subsist. Second, coastal and riverine erosion have made it more difficult
for commercial barge vessels to bring necessary supplies into villages. In Quinhagak, for
instance, riverine erosion along the Qanirtuuq river has forced barges to navigate shallower
shipping channels at the risk of running aground (Figure 8).
The impact of ANCSA 14(c) allotment erosion has significant material, if not always
visible, impacts on Alaskan Native communities. Thus, given the cultural and financial
significance of these properties, we call for urgent dialogue and swift action between Alaska
Native communities and lawmakers to compensate Native allotment owners for the loss of
their lands. Ideally, this should take the form of allowing them to redefine the boundaries
of their allotments, taking the effects of erosion into account. Perhaps these definitions may
be informed through datasets generated by communities utilizing the methodology we
have outlined in this article. The use of UAV data is crucial, as UAVs can produce higher
quality data than satellite imagery. Furthermore, from a data sovereignty standpoint, there
are no restrictions placed on the use of UAV imagery, allowing communities to publish and
Land 2023, 12, 248
16 of 19
monetize the data as they see fit. Regular surveys of areas at high risk of erosion, conducted
at quarterly intervals throughout the year, will go a long way towards building a robust
model for predicting how the landscape will change in the future. Other measures should
also be used in conjunction with this, such as more funding for archaeological intervention
and rescue excavations where erosion poses an immediate threat to material culture.
Figure 8. A UAV still image of a grounded barge at the mouth of the Qanirtuuq river in fall of 2022.
Image courtesy of Bryan Jones, Quinhagak AK.
In these uncertain times, it is difficult to foresee the perfect solution for the myriad
of challenges facing communities such as Quinhagak in Southwest Alaska. However, one
thing is for certain: inaction is likely to lead to more damage to the culture and way of life
of the Native inhabitants of Southwest Alaska. Only swift dialogue and decisive action can
have a hope of forestalling the coming crisis.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.S.L., S.G. and W.J.; methodology, J.S.L.; software, J.S.L.
and S.G.; validation, J.S.L.; formal analysis, J.S.L. and S.G.; investigation, J.S.L., S.G., H.S., W.J,
W.C., L.C. and C.N.J.; resources, J.S.L., S.G., W.J., W.C. and L.C.; data curation, J.S.L. and C.N.J.;
writing—original draft preparation, J.S.L. and S.G.; writing—review and editing, J.S.L., S.G. and H.S.;
visualization, J.S.L.; supervision, S.G., W.J. and L.C.; project administration, J.S.L., S.G., W.J. and L.C.;
funding acquisition, J.S.L., S.G., L.C. and W.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: The research of J.S.L. is supported by grants from the Royal Anthropological Institute/Sutasoma Trust and The Oxford Research Centre in the Humanities. The research of S.G. was
supported by grants from Hampden-Sydney College, and the Virginia Foundation for Independent
Colleges (VFIC).
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author. The data are not publicly available as it is the property of Qanirtuuq Inc. and
Nalaquq LLC., containing sensitive heritage information belonging to the Alaska Native community
of Quinhagak.
Land 2023, 12, 248
17 of 19
Acknowledgments: As always, we are grateful to the community of Quinhagak and Qanirtuuq Inc.
for their continued friendship and support, and for allowing us to carry out this research on their
lands. We are indebted to the support and encouragement of Linda McDowell, without whom this
work would not have been possible. Thanks also to the field support provided by staff and volunteers
of the University of Aberdeen’s Quinhagak Archaeological Project. We would also like to thank two
anonymous reviewers, whose feedback greatly improved the quality of this work. A special thanks to
the staff of University of Arkansas’ Center for Advanced Spatial Technologies for providing training
and arranging travel for J.L. for the purpose of completing this research.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
Friesen, T.M.; Mason, O.K. Introduction: Archaeology of the North American Arctic. In The Oxford Handbook of the Prehistoric
Arctic; Friesen, T.M., Mason, O.K., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 7–21.
Becerra-Valdivia, L.; Higham, T. The Timing and Effect of the Earliest Human Arrivals in North America. Nature 2020, 584, 93–97.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
Dumond, D.E. Norton Hunters and Fisherfolk. In The Oxford Handbook of the Prehistoric Arctic; Friesen, T.M., Mason, O.K., Eds.;
Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 230–241.
Mason, O.K.; Friesen, T.M. Out of the Cold: Archaeology on the Arctic Rim of North America; The SAA Press: Washington, DC,
USA, 2018.
McCartney, A.P.; Veltre, D.W. Aleutian Island Prehistory: Living in Insular Extremes. World Archaeol. 1999, 30, 503–515. [CrossRef]
Steffian, A.; Leist, M.; Haakanson, S.; Saltonstall, P. Kal’unek/From Karluk: Kodiak Alutiiq History and the Archaeology of the Karluk
One Village Site; Illustrated edition; University of Alaska Press: Fairbanks, AK, USA, 2015; ISBN 978-1-60223-244-0.
Knecht, R.; Jones, W. “The Old Village”: Yup’ik Precontact Archaeology and Community-Based Research at the Nunalleq Site,
Quinhagak, Alaska. Études Inuit Stud. 2019, 43, 25–52. [CrossRef]
Linares Matás, G.J.; Lim, J.S. “This Is the Way”: Knowledge Networks and Toolkit Specialization in the Circumpolar Coastal
Landscapes of Western Alaska and Tierra Del Fuego. J. Isl. Coast. Archaeol. 2021, 1–29. [CrossRef]
Reedy-Maschner, K.L.; Maschner, H.D.G. Marauding Middlemen: Western Expansion and Violent Conflict in the Subarctic.
Ethnohistory 1999, 46, 703–743.
Knecht, R.; Haakanson, S.; Dickson, S. Awa’uq: Discovery and Excavation of an 18th Century Alutiiq Refuge Rock in the Kodiak
Archipelago. Publ. Natl. Mus. Den. Ethnogr. Ser. 2002, 20, 89–119.
Fienup-Riordan, A. Yuungnaqpiallerput/The Way We Genuinely Live; University of Washington Press: Seattle, WA, USA, 2007; ISBN
978-0-295-98669-2.
Wolfe, R.J. Alaska’s Great Sickness, 1900: An Epidemic of Measles and Influenza in a Virgin Soil Population. Proc. Am. Philos. Soc.
1982, 126, 91–121.
Frink, L. A Tale of Three Villages: Indigenous-Colonial Interactions in Southwestern Alaska, 1740–1950; University of Arizona Press:
Tucson, AZ, USA, 2016; ISBN 978-0-8165-3109-7.
Erickson, R. Aboriginal Land Rights in the United States and Canada. NDL Rev. 1984, 60, 107–140.
Metcalfe, P. A Dangerous Idea: The Alaska Native Brotherhood and the Struggle for Indigenous Rights; Illustrated edition; University of
Alaska Press: Fairbanks, AK, USA, 2014; ISBN 978-1-60223-239-6.
Merjian, A.H. An Unbroken Chain of Injustice: The Dawes Act, Native American Trusts, and Cobell v. Salazar. Gonzaga Law Rev.
2010, 46, 609.
Skinner, R.E. Alaska Native Policy in the Twentieth Century: The Free Market Goes to School, 1st ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2019;
ISBN 978-1-138-96644-4.
Jorgenson, M.T.; Frost, G.V.; Dissing, D. Drivers of Landscape Changes in Coastal Ecosystems on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta,
Alaska. Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 1280. [CrossRef]
Buzzard, R.M.; Turner, M.M.; Miller, K.Y.; Antrobus, D.C.; Overbeck, J.R. Erosion Exposure Assessment of Infrastructure in Alaska
Coastal Communities; Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys Report of Investigation: Anchorage, AK, USA, 2021;
p. 29.
Ristroph, E.B. Navigating Climate Change Adaptation Assistance for Communities: A Case Study of Newtok Village, Alaska. J.
Environ. Stud. Sci. 2021, 11, 329–340. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Calista Calista Region ANCSA Lands—Overview. Available online: https://calistacorp.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=
5271bd1ac6bb4f7482ff7b08c3874c73 (accessed on 1 December 2022).
ESRI Living Atlas of the World|ArcGIS. Available online: https://livingatlas.arcgis.com/en/home/ (accessed on 1 December 2022).
Kim, G. ‘River Is Getting Close.’ Erosion Is Threatening Napakiak’s School. Available online: https://www.ktoo.org/2021/12/02
/river-is-getting-close-erosion-is-threatening-napakiaks-school/ (accessed on 26 November 2022).
Terenzi, J.; Jorgenson, M.T.; Ely, C.R.; Giguère, N. Storm-Surge Flooding on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska. Arctic 2014,
67, 360–374. [CrossRef]
Land 2023, 12, 248
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
18 of 19
Brubaker, M.; Berner, J.; Chavan, R.; Warren, J. Climate Change and Health Effects in Northwest Alaska. Glob. Health Action 2011,
4, 8445. [CrossRef]
Brinkman, T.J.; Hansen, W.D.; Chapin, F.S.; Kofinas, G.; BurnSilver, S.; Rupp, T.S. Arctic Communities Perceive Climate Impacts
on Access as a Critical Challenge to Availability of Subsistence Resources. Clim. Change 2016, 139, 413–427. [CrossRef]
Masson-MacLean, E.; Houmard, C.; Knecht, R.; Sidéra, I.; Dobney, K.; Britton, K. Pre-Contact Adaptations to the Little Ice Age in
Southwest Alaska: New Evidence from the Nunalleq Site. Quat. Int. 2020, 549, 130–141. [CrossRef]
Lim, J.S.; Gleason, S.; Jones, W.; Church, W. Nuna Nalluyuituq (The Land Remembers): Remembering Landscapes and Refining
Methodologies through Community-Based Remote Sensing in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Southwest Alaska. Archaeol. Prospect.
2021, 28, 339–355. [CrossRef]
Lim, J.S.; Gleason, S.; Williams, M.; Linares Matás, G.J.; Marsden, D.; Jones, W. UAV-Based Remote Sensing for Managing Alaskan
Native Heritage Landscapes in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 728. [CrossRef]
Rearden, A.; Fienup-Riordan, A. Erinaput Unguvaniartut: So Our Voices Will Live: Quinhagak History and Oral Traditions; Alaska
Native Language Center: Fairbanks, AK, USA, 2013; ISBN 978-0-615-86633-8.
Britton, K.; Hillerdal, C. Archaeologies of Climate Change: Perceptions and Prospects. Études Inuit Stud. 2019, 43, 265–287.
[CrossRef]
CRW Engineering, INC. Kanektok River Reroute: Conceptual Design Report; Qanirtuuq, Inc: Quinhagak, AK, USA, 2020; p. 150.
Hanson, D.K. Cultural Resource Management in Alaska. Alsk. J. Anthropol. 2007, 5, 1–16.
Magnani, M.; Douglass, M.; Schroder, W.; Reeves, J.; Braun, D.R. The Digital Revolution to Come: Photogrammetry in Archaeological Practice. Am. Antiq. 2020, 85, 737–760. [CrossRef]
Štroner, M.; Urban, R.; Seidl, J.; Reindl, T.; Brouček, J. Photogrammetry Using UAV-Mounted GNSS RTK: Georeferencing
Strategies without GCPs. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 1336. [CrossRef]
Jackson, D. Calista Region ANCSA Lands. 2022. Available online: https://calistacorp.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=52
71bd1ac6bb4f7482ff7b08c3874c73&sublayer=6 (accessed on 5 January 2023).
Alaska Native Allotment GIS Layer. 2022. Available online: https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/BLM-EGIS::alaska-nativeallotment-3/explore?location=-0.000000%2C0.000000%2C2.17 (accessed on 5 January 2023).
Lim, J.S.; Linares Matás, G.J. Using Open Spatial Data to Investigate the Importance of Salmon Streams in the Indigenous Cultural
Landscapes of Southwest Alaska. In Innovative Approaches to Archaeology; Prezioso, E., Giobbe, M., Eds.; BAR International Series;
BAR Publishing: Oxford, UK, 2022; pp. 95–109. ISBN 978-1-4073-5991-5.
Gleason, S.; Lim, J.S.; Marsden, D.; Pleasant, J.; Church, W.; Jones, W. Yuuyaraq Today, Yuuyaraq Tomorrow: Modeling Coastal
Changes to Yup’Ik Traditional Land Use Areas (TLUAs). J. Maps 2022, 1–10. [CrossRef]
Mitchell, D.C. Take My Land, Take My Life: The Story of Congress’s Historic Settlement of Alaska Native Land Claims, 1960–1971;
Illustrated edition; University of Chicago Press: Fairbanks, AK, USA, 2001; ISBN 978-1-889963-24-2.
Qaluyaarmiuni Nunamtenek Qanemciput/Our Nelson Island Stories: Meanings of Place on the Bering Sea Coast; Illustrated edition;
Fienup-Riordan, A. (Ed.) University of Washington Press: Bethel, AK, USA, 2011; ISBN 978-0-295-99135-1.
Bureau of Indian Affairs Real Estate Services|Indian Affairs. Available online: https://www.bia.gov/regional-offices/alaska/
real-estate-services (accessed on 1 December 2022).
Cusack-McVeigh, H. Stories Find You, Places Know: Yup’ik Narratives of A Sentient World; University of Utah Press: Salt Lake City,
UT, USA, 2017; ISBN 978-1-60781-583-9.
Fienup-Riordan, A. Boundaries and Passages: Rule and Ritual in Yup’ik Eskimo Oral Tradition; University of Oklahoma Press: Norman,
OK, USA, 1995; ISBN 978-0-8061-2646-3.
Children of the Dig; 2018. Anchorage, Alaska. This is a short film by Joshua Branstetter. Available online: https://www.imdb.
com/title/tt8874324/ (accessed on 5 January 2023).
Robinson, E.; Robbins, R.C. Sources, Abundance, and Fate of Gaseous Atmospheric Pollutants. Final Report and Supplement.
In Final. Rep. Suppl.; 1968; pp. 1–76. Available online: http://chr.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Exhibit-3I-SourcesAbundance-and-Fate-of-Gaseous-Atmospheric-Pollutants-Supplement.pdf (accessed on 5 January 2023).
Oldfield, J.D. Mikhail Budyko’s (1920–2001) Contributions to Global Climate Science: From Heat Balances to Climate Change and
Global Ecology. WIREs Clim. Change 2016, 7, 682–692. [CrossRef]
Rearden, A.; Fienup-Riordan, A.; Calista Elders Council. Qaluyaarmiuni Nunamtenek Qanemciput = Our Nelson Island Stories:
Meanings of Place on the Bering Sea Coast; Calista Elders Council in association with University of Washington Press: Bethel, AK,
USA, 2011; ISBN 978-0-295-80475-0.
Clark, D.G.; Ford, J.D.; Berrang-Ford, L.; Pearce, T.; Kowal, S.; Gough, W.A. The Role of Environmental Factors in Search and
Rescue Incidents in Nunavut, Canada. Public Health 2016, 137, 44–49. [CrossRef]
Wexler, L. Looking across Three Generations of Alaska Natives to Explore How Culture Fosters Indigenous Resilience. Transcult.
Psychiatry 2014, 51, 73–92. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Land 2023, 12, 248
51.
52.
19 of 19
Fickel, L.H. Teachers, Tundra, and Talking Circles: Learning History and Culture in an Alaska Native Village. Theory Res. Soc.
Educ. 2005, 33, 476–507. [CrossRef]
Smith, J.; Gleason, S. Knowledge Is like Food: Qanruyutet on Change and Subsistence from John Smith. Text & Performance.
Quarterly. 2021, 41, 37–60.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.