Lower Chehalis elder Henry Cultee obtained his own long life from sharing it with the river his people named themselves for. Hum-m-m-ptulips, that river was, its name humming along on the tongue the way its rifles hummed along, so that it cleaned itself out in three days after a rain.
His elders had taught him to dive deeply in the river when its water was “alive”, when it was at its most powerful– and the greatest challenge to humans.
Cultee told me of a cousin who simply wet his hair to give the appearance of diving. His elders might be fooled, but the river knew who really dived there. His cousin passed to the other side many decades ago while Cultee lived on in concert with the land.
He was in his mid-eighties when I first met him and still living in season in his “fishing shack” on the Humptulips, tending and mending heavy nets on his own. He was ninety-nine when I last went to see him. Then he had given up the heavy labor at his ancestral place on the Humptulips. He was living with his son Richard on the Skokomish Reservation, where the only medication he took was an occasional aspirin-and where he and Richard had taken in two small boys.
“Here we are, bachelors with children”, Henry Cultee quipped.
“Wherever you found a river”, Cultee once told me, “There you found Indians”.
The fluidity of the river mapped the flow of the land, rather than the frozen north or south of paper maps-and certainly-rather than fence lines, which Cultee complained stopped the flow of natural life
To the Northwest’s river people the treaty promise of the US government: “as long as the rivers shall run” was no fleeting thing-even if Territorial Governor Isaac Stevens wrote to his superiors, that as soon as the US gained more strength in this area, they would no longer have to honor the treaties they were making.
Indian peoples themselves soon learned that to the US government, treaties held “as long as the rivers shall run–or thirty days, whichever comes first”.
Richard Cultee’s Skokomish people had another joke: “We knew the whites had arrived when we woke up one morning and the river was moved.”
It was no joke that Tacoma Power stopped up the entire north fork of the Skokomish River with a massive dam at Cushman to generate electricity.
That whole section of the river didn’t run at all any longer. Neither did the salmon, whose care was outlined in traditional Skokomish tales, which instructed the people to allow the salmon to release their eggs so as to perpetuate and strengthen the runs.
There wasn’t any advice in those old stories about how to help the salmon up a dry river bed.
But the Skokomish fought the dam that blockaded their river. And just this year they achieved a settlement with the Tacoma utility that it would release enough water from its turbines to allow the river to flow again.
There won’t automatically be salmon back on that water. The water flow comes all at once, in a steady blast from the turbines rather than in an ebb and flow. But the Skokomish have visions for changing that too.
And someday they may be able to follow the injunctions in their ancient tale for caring for the salmon on their river again. They have dreams about that: and like the Chehalis who earned their long lives on the land in conjunction with the rivers, they plan on persisting.
So do the Takelma, represented by Takelma elder, Agnes Baker Pilgrim, who will conduct the second annual ceremony “honoring the water”-blessing the Willamette River-this coming Sunday, April 26 at the EWEB Plaza in Eugene, Oregon. Grandma Aggie has international stature as chair of the International; Council of the Thirteen Indigenous Grandmothers. But she has local status with the salmon.
On her website Grandma Aggie conceives of her role as a “voice for the voiceless”-for all those things, that is, whom we have neglected because they may not speak in a human voice-or if they do, may speak only the language of the privileged. In this sense she works to actualize a “democracy of all life” as East Indian environmental activist Vandana Shiva has put it.
This phrase is an apt term to describe the “commons”- that natural life upon our own depends, no matter what our status in human society.
We are only now beginning to see what happens when we ignore the natural sources of our lives.
This is a lesson we would not have to learn the hard way if we had traditions of honoring the rivers in the way of the Takelma or Chehalis or Skokomish.
We might learn from the river instead.
There is nothing that can teach us more about the democracy of nature than a river.
And nothing that can teach us more about reciprocity and balance: since what we put into the river ultimately comes back to us.
This is one tragic lesson in the current state of the Ganges River, sacred to millions, but one of the top ten most polluted rivers in the world whose flow is also threatened by global warming. Hindu econfeminist Lina Gupta has analyzed how the idea of transcendence without reciprocity has led to the pollution of this river. There is a belief that the river is a goddess who can cleanse anything-and thus anything can be dumped into her with impunity.
It is the understanding of reciprocity and balance, Gupta writes, that is most dangerously missing from this perspective.
Conceiving of the river as transcendent in this way implies that she never has to be cared for herself. Gupta argues that this attitude contradicts true Hindu belief about Dharmic (duty) responsibility for one’s actions. Gupta also ties this into the notion of dominance in the industrial world that denigrates the sources of nurturance that it designates as feminine-like the Mother Ganga.
Thus those who say they revere the river as transcendent can actually use this as an excuse to pollute it.
Global warming is currently affecting the glacier that feeds this river-and as its source dries up; millions downriver are affected by drought. And the e.coli and heavy metal content from industrial pollution is directly affecting those who use this river as the source of their drinking water.
From a short-sighted human perspective, it might look like we can dump anything into our rivers and have it simply carried away.
But in fact, the river teaches reciprocity: how what we dump there ultimately comes back to us. It teaches karma, that is, in Hindu terms.
It also teaches another revered Hindu idea, according to Gupta: the idea that all is one. In its flow it negates the modern industrial divisions between spirit and nature, humanity and the natural world. When we pollute the rivers, we pollute our own bodies.
Meanwhile, back in Oregon, Grandma Aggie specifically requested that a sign be made for her blessing of the river that reads, “The river is not a garbage dump”.
Coming back to the question that began this essay– how do we love a river?
By caring for it, as have the Skokomish with the long court battle to free its water and as does the Chehalis River Council today.
By knowing it-following the example of the Corvallis Environmental Center’s mapping of the water quality in the Willamette River in conjunction with the Institute for Water and Watersheds at Oregon State. University.
By fighting its being bottled up in plastic and sent elsewhere, as are the Winnemem people currently defending their sacred McCloud River in Northern California.
By learning from rivers everywhere what they have to teach us about fostering the length of our lives on the land.
Filed under: Contrasting worldviews, Ecofeminism, Environmental ethics, Environmental psychology, Folklore and Oral Tradition, Indigenous, Northwest History and Culture, Our Earth and Ourselves, Thirteen indigenous grandmothers, environmental philosophy | Tagged: Agnes Baker Pilgrim, Chehalis, environmental philosophy, Environmental psychology, McCloud River, rivers, Skokomish, sustainability, Willamette River, worldviews








How to love a river. This concept hits close to home for me as I have spent five seasons working on the Colorado River. The river is 47 degrees at Lee’s Ferry as it comes from the cold deeps of Lake Powell through the Glen Canyon Dam. The Colorado, once muddy, red, and warm, was the native habitat for species such as the humpback chub and the razorback sucker. Now, the Colorado River is the perfect habitat for trout—cold, clear, and dam controlled. The gates of the dam were closed in ‘63– just one of the Bureau of Reclamation’s many water projects created to “reclaim” wilderness areas for human use. It’s hard to fathom, while you’re floating silently down the Colorado River, that every drop of water is already spoken for by someone downstream. While we’re on the river, it is everything to us: transportation, drinking water, bath water, and a swimming pool when it’s a hundred degrees in the shade. I can’t imagine, though, diving deep into the strong currents of the river as Henry Cultee did, without a life jacket. So how do I love the river? By greeting it each morning with gratitude and the utmost respect. By sharing it with others, so that they may come to value the river and its protection as I do.
Hi Christine, thanks for your perspective on an important river to the survival of the entire West coast. I appreciate your touching personal point in response to this question. Lovely stance that if we indeed all shared, would make a profound difference in our world!
This particular writing is especially sad to me. My heart aches for the river; I regress to each fish from our seas and am thankful for the bountiful resource beef or organic beef provides. Imagine if we didn’t have our organic, domesticated animals to feed our exponentially exploding population. And despite what some may say, cattle, pigs and the like are intelligent and provide humankind with great amounts of food. Treated with dignity, they are a respected and thankful source of food.
My heart understands what the river does for me and my neighbor, but I am uncomfortable with it. I use kerosene sometimes but I don’t know where that comes from. I am sorry for our rivers and glad that Aunt Ag is blessing them since they are in such sorry state.
You state: We might learn from the river instead. Indeed, this is true, hopefully. The river cannot be held for too long and it is life giving. This is like us so how can we not learn from the river unless we are deaf?
I send my daughter to find something in the kitchen or outside and when she return saying she can’t find it, I say Open Your Eyes! That is what I say to myself today. If we can’t or don’t respect water, then how can we say that we love our children?
This was a good read; thank you.
Tina
Hi Tina, thanks for sharing a simple and profound perspective here. I like your last statement especially–there is so much for us to open our eyes to for the sake of our children. And so many ways, I think, that this can potentially expand our sense of presence in the world and thus the fullness of each of our lives.
Your Aunt Ag has the courage of this vision–and the vision to be able to share her inspiration with others. I am blessed to have met her.
And if my essay wasn’t clear, the Eugene Grandmothers are extending an open invitation to anyone who wants to come and participate in the second annual honoring of the Willamette River on April 26. (Your comment just gave me a chance to throw that in!).
Are you kidding me? Of all things on this earth, rivers are at the core of my heart! I simply LOVE rivers and all they represent. My FAVORITE time of relaxation is lying next to a river and listening to the force, the power, the endlessness. It just keeps going and going and going. For this reason, the river represents life for me. It flows and flows and it cannot be stopped UNLESS we choose to stop it.
“Wherever you found a river”, Cultee once told me, “There you found Indians”.
The fluidity of the river mapped the flow of the land, rather than the frozen north or south of paper maps-and certainly-rather than fence lines, which Cultee complained stopped the flow of natural life”.
It was very sad to read about the salmon being “STOPPED” because a blockage had occurred disrupting their natural passage in the river.
In my eyes, the rivers were formed for specific important reasons in the reciprocirty of life. When man attempts to change this, nature is disrupted and it affects MORE than the immediate vision of vision.
I loved the quote from The Top Ten Polluted Rivers in the World: “What makes a river so restful to people is that it doesn’t have any doubt – it is sure to get where it is going, and it doesn’t want to go anywhere else”.
What if we had this same committed attitude toward life and OUR WORLD?
Paul
Thanks for your comment and sharing your love of rivers here, Paul. I very much like what you found on this link about the top ten polluted rivers–and your conclusion about what we might learn from this in terms of our own sense of direction– and, I think, our own fit with the land.
Gupta makes the additional point that the fact that the Ganges is so accepting ,makes her vulnerable to careless human behavior.
Professor Holden,
Even after the reading, I do not understand this response vs. other rivers???
Gupta makes the additional point that the fact that the Ganges is so accepting ,makes her vulnerable to careless human behavior
Why would the Ganges be any different than any other river when it comes to human involvement? What makes it unique to any river?
I know you are very busy and active……..probably the most active the Professor I have at this stage, but, I want to learn more. Can you help me more with this comment and reference?
I do not want to take up too much of your time, and, this reply is no hurry………….so, somewhere during the week is O.K.
Thanks so much,
Paul
Hi Paul, thanks for your comment. I am perfectly happy to clarify. I didn’t mean to imply that the Ganges was unique: just the opposite. All rivers are accepting and thus vulnerable in this particular way, since we can throw anything into them. What Gupta wanted to do (and I wanted to do, in citing here) was to understand the denigration of the Ganges in the seemingly paradoxical context in which it is both considered so holy and so mistreated…does that help or do you have something else you would like to clarify?
The short-sightedness of humans evidenced in this article is disheartening. Just this morning I read another article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090420/ap_on_re_us/pharmawater_factories) that discussed the ways in which corporations have been dumping into our water supply for decades. As you mentioned, in the end our short-sightedness will always come back to haunt us. I wish that people would stop to think about the consequences of their actions. Creature comforts like electricity and bottled water offer convenience and comfort, but their effect on the environment is often the last thing people think about. I wish more people thought like Henry Cultee and Grandma Aggie – then there would be greater respect for the environment.
Hi Allison, thanks for your comment. It is sad indeed that those very rivers that might teach us the reciprocity of natural processes should be treated as something that can simply take the waste we produce away without our having to change our ways.
At some point, we need to nudge our economic system into a place that rewards those who actually care for our environment rather than ravage it as in your link above.
The elders who model ancient and profound ethics give each of us something to emulate– as Christine notes in her care and gratitude toward the Colorado River in the first comment to this essay.
Here is another issue, among the 271 million pounds of drugs released legally into the waterways by pharmaceutical industries are oral contraceptives. In Puerto Rico, where twenty six per cent of the economy is controlled by the pharmaceutical industry–and many of the pills containing female hormones are released into the water supply, there is an epidemic of premature thelarche (the breast development that usually happens with puberty) among girls aged six months to eight years!
Growing up in an area surrounded by rivers I appreciate and respect them. They contain an unmeasurable about of power. Every year it seems like someone drowns because they assume the calm running water will be easy to swim.
I found it interesting what you wrote about the Skokomish River. In the papers there would be tidbits about the controversy with the Tacoma utility, but I never knew they blocked the flow to such a major degree. Every winter on the news the Skokomish is the first area to flood and they always show the pictures of the fish swimming across the road. It must have turned into a swampy area without a good direct water flow.
It is too bad to see all the pollution that runs in our waters and enters our rivers through various means. I can understand that Gupta sees this as hurting ourselves in the process. The idea of what we do to the planet we are doing to ourselves.
Sometimes the saying of , “we know not what we do” applies to many of these stories, but it is used as an excuse to not care about what we do and not take responsibility for our actions.
Hi Ann. The Cushman dam blocked the important North Fork of the Skokomish, not the whole river. Thanks for the comment that allows me to clarify.
As you imply, what Gupta says of the mistreatment of the Ganges is something that applies to the mistreatment of rivers everywhere.
Not knowing what we do is something the result of denial: I find it interesting that the very rivers that taught lessons of interconnection and reciprocity to some brought no consciousness of this to others.
I like Tina’s remark in this respect (the one she uses with her child): “trying opening your eyes”
I just have a couple of questions concerning heavy metals. What makes a metal a heavy metal?
In my bird class I was exploring the bat fatalities (and songbirds, hawks etc…) from wind turbines. In this conversation concerning unintended consequences a classmate shared with me that we might consider using old naval ships to construct the turbines. I had suggested we might use old vehicles, recycle them and create jobs. Are these ships leaching heavy metals into the ocean? I understand that soil is the great filter, so does soil filter heavy metals? If so, do the molecules or compounds in these metals attach to water molecules in the soil adding back to the hydrological cycle?
Hi Tina. I am not a chemist, so someone out can give more detailed better info, but my understanding is that a metal is called “heavy” because of its large atomic weight–which makes it very stable and not susceptible to breaking down into anything else unless there is something like a very hot fire involved– in which case some heavy metals only melt rather than break down.
Though they don’t break down, they leach everywhere…so unless the lead from lead paint, for instance, is actually taken out of soil, it remains there. Fertile soil with lots of humus makes food plants likely to take this lead up. But in general, it is not a good idea to eat foods grown on soils with heavy metal contamination. Because heavy metals have such chemical density, they cannot easily be metabolized by our bodies. However, you can give children suffering lead poison “chelates” like pectin that spur the body to get rid of the lead.
Some of the worst offenders proliferated into the environment through modern industrial processes are mercury, lead, arsenic, cadmium, and aluminum, all of which have been implicated in endocrine disruption and nervous system disorders in every species tested.
All told, I think putting any heavy metals– or things made from them– into the ocean is a bad idea.
The best thing to do with these metals is to recapture and reuse these in the industrial processes that use them.
And here are some basics in terms of our health visa vie heavy metals:
1. Never cook any acid food (like tomato sauce) in an aluminum pan, as the aluminum will leach into the food. Canada outlawed a particular type of aluminum (not cast aluminum, which is more stable) cookware several years ago because of the implication of aluminum in Alzheimer’s. Brains of patients with this disease have concentrations of aluminum at their tangled synapses: we don’t know if this is environmentally caused, but I would say discretion is a good idea here. In like fashion, I wouldn’t think drinking soda (which has its own corrosive properties) from aluminum cans is such a great idea either.
2. Check out the mercury content of fish (salmon is one of the cleanest of all fish- -wild salmon, that is, farmed salmon is something else again because of what the salmon are fed) before you ingest very much of it.
3. Recycle fluorescent bulbs at special collection stations so that the mercury in them can be recycled (and kept out of landfills).
4. Coal burning is one of the primary causes of mercury in the environment: one more reason (as if global warming is not enough) not to build more coal burning plants–and to phase out the ones we have.
5. Older treated wood (before this formula became illegal perhaps five years ago) was injected with arsenic. Play structures with this kind of treated wood have had to be pulled out of parks and schools everywhere because of the health hazards to children. You should always use gloves in handling old treated wood– and I wouldn’t feel great about eating food grown in raised beds made of the stuff.
5. Batteries (and especially car batteries) made with cadmium should always be handled with care and recycled.
When I get the time, I will gather this and similar info into a basic safety sheet to put somewhere as a page on this site.
Thanks for your comment, Tina.
Oh, let me clarify. He stated that old fleets were sunk into the ocean. I wonder what the motivation for this is.
Unfortunately, Tina, I think that the motivation for this is just getting rid of them.
It is so sad the way people feel about nature and all it’s wonderful gifts. I never quite understood how people could see something so beautiful such as a river or especially the ocean and just dump trash there. For me I have always wanted to preserve what is beautiful so that I and others may enjoy it again on a different occasion. I think of these places as special treasures that the divine has given us to enjoy and look after, so it would hurt me to do something that could potentially harm it. It’s so nice to see people who are dedicated to protecting these sacred treasures. If only everyone could see our natural world this way.
Thanks for your comment and your personal care for these treasures of the natural world, Kelli. It seems that some pollute these out of genuine acts of greed and others out of carelessness– by buying goods of corporations who dump pharmaceuticals into watercourses, for instance. Thus the issue is both personal (our individual choices) and systemic–linked to our economic and cultural processes. To care for our rivers and oceans, we must be aware on both levels.
I find it so sad that people still don’t understand the implications of the water cycle fully and continue to dump various toxins into water supplies thinking that they will just be washed away. I seem to remember being taught about the whole cycle way back in basic science classes, and having that concept repeated, that rivers flow into oceans, oceans become clouds, clouds become rain/snow, and on and on. In nations like in India where they are taught a more transcendent view of the rivers purpose, it seems more inevitable that they might miss the implications of their actions, but here in the US, we are taught from a young age to know better… yet it really hasn’t sunk it.
Thanks for your thoughtful response, Erin. The water cycle is also linked to local water tables, so that what we dump enters our groundwater as well.
Gupta’s point is that it is actually the violation of Hindu beliefs– and greed and carelessness– that has led to the pollution of the Ganges. We may not have a transcendent notion of nature itself in the Western world, but we do have an otherworldly interpretation of heaven in Christianity, which can lead to the same dynamic in closing our eyes to the natural consequences of our actions.
These issues are important to consider.
Dr. Holden,
Thanks for the clarification. This makes much more sense to me now.
Paul
Surely, we do not have to travel to India to know that people polluted rivers willingly. Also all of the most so-called “civilised” countries in the western world hold records of polluting river, because for decades it seemed to be the most convenient and beneficial method to get rid of all types of waste. Again the ideology of capitalism did not leave space for company policies that put waste disposal and recycling on their agenda. Nonetheless, many governments realized the importance of preserving rivers and enacted laws which aimed to persecute those who treat rivers as a garbage dump. Where wisdom and reason lack, strict laws have to be implemented whose adherence is to be regulated and observed by government agencies. If we could live without greed for one day and obligate ourselves to moral principles, a lot of tax payer money could be saved and our society would profit as a whole.
Your point is certainly one to ponder, Nick. We don’t have to travel to India to understand this — what is it, do you think, about the modern western worldview that makes us believe that we can dump in the rivers with impunity?
That’s wonderful that the Skokomish were able to stop that dam and restore some flow to the river and all its inhabitants! I read recently that the Colorado River doesn’t even reach the ocean anymore and the life that depended on that water is suffering. I also just heard on NPR that bottle water sales declined for the first time ever this month. With our freshwater sources only accounting for less than 2% of the planets water, it seems we would be putting more effort into ensuring their survival (hence our survival!).
The story of the Ganges River reminds me of when I was visiting the island of Kauai, Hawaii, and while there I spent part of a day at the island’s Hindu Monestary. I met someone who gave me a tour of the new temple they were building and I spoke with some of the builders too. These guys had beautiful, huge 20+ft long and 3ft wide hand-carved, stone pillars that they had shipped all the way from India to Hawaii for their temple. I was in awe of their beauty and the skill that went into making them but I was even more shocked at the idea of shipping that much weight across the world for a building.
I asked the foreman how he felt about it and he said that since they were being used to build a place of worship,a holy place, the karmic affects of it were positive. I asked him how many people he thought the temple could have fed with the money and resources that were spent getting the pillars there. He said the temple would nurture their souls and that was more important. There are so many ways that we can justify the harm that we are doing to the planet.
Thoughtful post, Dazzia. I think we need to be careful in judging others, since there are so many more destructive ways to harm our earth than shipping (even very heavy) pillars. There is human air travel, which is both destructive of the ozone layer and contributes large amounts of carbon to our atmosphere. I’m not sure if the pillars were flown there, but coming by ship, they may have done less damage than a few average tourists flying over to visit. I don’t want to get into a hierarchy of destructive acts. The point I am getting at is that our critical stance can, I think, more effectively be leveled at ourselves rather than others–and as the world’s most egregious users of resources, our own changes can make a big impact.
That said, I also think it is true that the idea of “transcendence”, when it becomes a license and an excuse not to be responsible for the here and now, has caused some real problems. Indeed, in speaking about the dangers of thinking we can throw something “away”, the concept of another world can be the ultimate “away” as an excuse for not dealing responsibly with creation. On balance, I have also seen those who have an other-worldly orientation exhibit a stance of humility and care for others that leads them to work for both social and environmental justice. These issues are not black and white– they call for critical assessment.
Thanks for your comment!
At first, it is the idea of human domination over the natural world. Nature is to be ruled by humanity and its sole purpose is to serve humankind. Secondly, as mentioned in prior posts financial benefits are given preference over the protection of nature. I would like to compare our situation to Plato’s “Allegory of the cave”. Clearly, the world we consider as real and especially the way we see it is a complete illusion. Therefore, most of us fail ton understand that environmental protection is not an obstacle to economic growth, but it might even stimulate economic growth and in the long run, we harm the economy by disrespecting nature. Behind us lies the witness stand of two presidential terms in office, where environmental matters were constantly undermined and the destruction of our planet was sold to us as an economic stimulus package.
Well said, Nick. Thanks for the perspective in this comment. I think it is especially problematic (and the data doesn’t bear it out) when environmental degradation is, as you have said “sold to us as an economic stimulus package”. In fact, a study posted on the “good jobs first” website perhaps three years ago indicated that those communities with the best jobs for workers were also those with the strictest environmental regulation.
And of course, the ultimate failure of economic stimulus is the failure of the natural systems that support our lives.
Living in the Northwest, we are lucky to be exposed to the beautiful outdoors every day, even if we do not give it a second thought. It is sad how we take this for granted. Somehow we do not connect our surroundings into our daily lives, and we fail to consider the effects of man on the earth. We separate humans from nature, forgetting that what we put into the land comes back to us. I think our society is beginning to realize this, and a sentence from this passage that expresses this, “We are only now beginning to see what happens when we ignore the natural sources of our lives” sums this up very well. I hope that we can keep moving in this direction, for the sake of our people, all living creatures, and the land that we share.
Reading about the problems with the Ganges Rive makes us realize that this is not a problem we are just facing in Oregon and Washington, but people everywhere have had harmful affects on the environment. I hope our efforts to become more “green” and care more about the earth are successful, universal and can continue to encompass people worldwide.
I hope so, too, Erin. A thoughtful as well as caring post. Each of our choices can move this in the direction we need to go.
I have thought about this issue before. It really disturbs me that people are, in my opinion, close minded about their surrounding environment. I understand that it is a part of their religious beliefs that the river is devine, but it still doesn’t make sense to me that people can still ignore what is right in front of them. I personally don’t directly follow any specific religion, but to me rivers are sacred, especially those in the northwest. I found this great series of articles about steelhead fishing in the northwest, particularly Washington.
http://www.patagonia.com/usa/patagonia.go?assetid=32069
The articles talk of ledgedary fly fishing on the skykomish river among others and the people that first began fly fishing there. I also found another article about river pollution in patagonia. When you look at the photo and relize that its actually water and not flowing lava, it made me nauseous. It toxic spill is linked to a wealthy family that owns the mine. The article states that the workers actually tried to not notify the authorities.
Hi Chris, thanks for the links and the comments. The Skykomish River is on Puget Sound rather than the Olympic Penninsula. Beautiful area all around. It is certainly tragic when one wealthy family pollutes a natural treasure that so many rely upon.
here is the site for the patagonia incident.
http://patagonia-under-siege.blogspot.com/2007_10_01_archive.html
Thanks, Chris. It certainly is time that we started treating all our rivers with the respect they deserve.
The part where you discuss the hindu belief of Dharma and the treatment of the Ganges is such an interesting contrast. I’d always known that the Ganges was both seen as sacred and totally poluted, and I have always been confused as to why: if it’s so sacred, then why do you always see camera shots of people washing clothes and dumping stuff into it. Well, now I get it. How funny that they treat thier cleansing goddess with such disregard and they think it’s okay. If only that “cleansing river” thing actually worked! We’d never have a town dump, just a black hole that took all of our garbage.
Also interesting is that the white race has shown the native people the worst part of our selfishness to get something for nothing. As long as it benefits us, we don’t care WHO is downstream. It reminds me of someone who blows thier leaves onto thier neighbor’s lawn without even noticing, because they only think of thier OWN yard’s cleanliness. The leaves are out of sight out of mind. I feel like the human race does this a lot when it comes to environmental issues. The garbage is taken to the dump: out of sight, out of mind…. but it’s still there. Where is our own sense of Dharma?
Well written essay!
If only there were such an “away”, Josh! Or an infinite source of resources. For some time colonizing peoples have subscribed to the worldview in which both the away and the supply were in other people’s countries– and they had a right to dump and to lift these respectively. Perhaps we will finally notice that natural systems are independent and limited and deal with the consequences of our own actions. Our very survival depends on it.
Interesting example in the leaves. We don’t tend to notice where what we don’t want goes– as along as it is away from us. But hey, if it were only leaves that someone blew over to my yard, I wouldn’t mind. I go scouting neighborhood leaves in the fall, since they are such great mulch.
Thanks for your thoughtful comments.
I really liked the phrase used in your article: “democracy of all life” . This elevates all life to a place of respect and gives it a voice.
I wanted to share something that happened to me a while back having to do with rivers. I went to a place on the Santiam River here in Oregon where I heard there was good fishing. It turned out to be a lovely place with several bends in the river and plenty of trees and scenery all around. But while I was there with other people I started noticing all sorts of cigarette butts, food wrappers, etc. So I decided to do a clean up and I felt glad to do my part in cleaning it up. A few weeks later I returned and was shocked to see things litered much worse as if I had not done any clean up previously. Then while wading in the water to cool off I stumbled on a car tire in the river. Now I was really bummed. I still cannot imagine how anyone went to all the effort to drag a big old tire to the river, and what could have been possibly the purpose in the person’s mind who had done this??? This was very disheartening.
I think of the future and how people must surely someday think back on our current times as very barbaric and crude to not care better for our environment and especially rivers. How long is it going to take, I wonder, for people to get smart and learn to love our beautiful rivers.
Jim Jarrad
Thanks for sharing this, Jim. I hope you don’t feel that you caring for this area on the Santiam was unimportant– obviously there is much to do to change many mindsets. Can you imagine how those who came immediately after you felt when they came to the area you had just cleaned? And maybe– if you feel as did the indigenous people quoted here– the river itself felt?
This article makes you want to go visit the Indian elders who clearly hold much wisdom about life. The dams which have changed so much in the lives of Indians and have changed the land and rivers so much that it is very startling. I appreciate learning how it was before these dams were around so that we can understand better their impact. It is great to hear that some of these are being removed. Our management of water supplies, and generating hydroelectric power are coming into better perspective in the 21 century. I hope to hear of continued better understanding of these issues and more compassion for rivers and all life.
Thanks! Jim Jarrad
Hello again, Jim. I appreciate the follow up comment. I do feel immensely personally blessed to have worked with such wonderful elders.
And anyone who is near Eugene is welcome to come to the Willamette River Blessing ceremony and experience some of the inspiration and energy of Grandma Aggie firsthand. And if you can’t get here, I will try to make time (after a May 1 article deadline) to post a write up of that ceremony here afterwards.
Happy Earth Day!
After reading this article I thought back to my house that sits over the river close to Island park in Eugene. When I was younger I would go out swimming in the rapids and enjoy the natural playground that it was. Yet over the short time Ive had with the river the place has mistreated and abused by the public. I know on several occasions when I have visited Ive ended up taking something out of the river, In one occasion, diving down and pulling out what was left of a bike. I dont understand why so many believe their trash will disappear if they leave it there. I only hope one day we can help heal the damage we have done to river, its the least we can do for all that we receive from it.
Thanks for your comment, Kevin–and most of all, thanks for your energy in helping clean the river and right the actions of those who abuse it. We can all hope for healing in this respect. Perhaps some who dump their trash here don’t think about it even going away– maybe they don’t think at all. It is a curious thing how some have the impulse to defile something beautiful– perhaps they don’t want to understand either their responsibility or their place in the natural world that such beauty might call them to. I have sometimes pondered this with respect to those who seem to attack natural beauty with such a vengeance– it is almost as if they feel threatened by it.
After reading this article as well the”Top Ten most *Polluted Rivers in the World”, I would like to say that as humans who need water to survive, without rivers, life will cease to exist. The idea of “democracy for all life” in my perspective is that when the rivers quit running, so do we. The accountability lies with each person. When I lived in Europe, I remember the Rhine River and how beautiful it was. All these rivers, no matter what continent we live on, are awesome! The only solution to the rivers as well as the environment is listening to the elders who knows the land as well as working together. And because it applies, I would like to add a quote from (the Bible)Proverbs 15:31 that I just looked at today, “He whose ear listens to the life-giving reproof; will dwell among the wise.”
Thanks for the comment, Tina. Great point about our need for rivers– these “top ten” polluted rivers effect millions of people. Rivers are awesome indeed-and just as we learn from elder cultures and elder human individuals, I think we can learn from the rivers which are, after all, our elders on this land as well, since they have been here longer than humans have.
This article emphasizes the healthy dependence and admiration the Indians had for the river and it’s resources. I found the statement about “treaties being held as long as the rivers ran” very disturbing. Shortly after, the government dammed the river and the natural resources the people depended on so much. Growing up, the people told tales of how to care for the salmon by allowing them to release their eggs to strenthen the runs. Years of teaching about environmental respect were destroyed by the government’s actions and the Indians were left with no river to care for. Luckily, the Indians anger was heard and they achieved a settlement with the Tacoma utility to allow the river to flow again. While this is a step in the right direction, the damage has already been done and the salmon population had to suffer. If we continue to disrespect our natural resources like the previous example, we will be left with an irreversible world going in a downward spiral.
Hi Jason, thanks for your comment– thoughtful summary of historical events here. Time, as you indicate, to care for our world that gifts us with our lives to avoid an “irreversible downward spiral”.
Reading this essay reminded me of my childhood. I practically grew up on the Chattahoochee River in Georgia and have nothing but fond memories of walking to the river every day in the summer with my friends where we would swim, lie on the rocks and just enjoy the sounds and smells of nature. We are lucky here in ATL because the majority of our river banks are protected Nature Reserves so they haven’t suffered from development as many other rivers do. However, we do get our drinking water and hydro power from several dams that run along the river and daily water releases from the main Buford Dam have caused water levels to rise above most of the rocks I used to lay on during the summer. I can’t help but be grateful though because I know it’s not as bad as it could be.
Despite my support for clean energy solutions, I am at a loss on where to stand on issues such as dams, wind turbines, solar power, etc… I took a class last semester on Salmon Management and being from the southeast, was quite surprised over the level of controversy in the west over the use of hydro-electric dams, their detriment to the environment and the extreme negative affects they have on the yearly salmon runs. It seems that this sort of controversy plagues every type of alternative “clean” energy we have. People today are so concerned about cleaning up the environment and getting away from the use of fossil fuels, etc… yet every time I turn around, there is another activist group fighting those same clean technologies because of how they affect the environment. Wind turbines kill the birds, dams kill the salmon runs and riparian habitats, solar power takes up too much space and “rapes” the desert, etc…
To be able to love a river and harness it’s power and energy; I think the answer lies in moderation. This seems to be quite a challenge for humans. For us, it’s usually all or nothing which is how rivers get 4, 5, 12 + dams built on them and completely destroy the riparian habitats. Our rivers are renewable but only if we take care of them and not just take from them.
BTW- I was surprised to see a picture of the exact place I spent my days on the “Hooch” as a kid on Wikipedia’s web page. If anyone is interested Google the Chattahoochee and click on Wikipedia’s link. The picture in Norcross is “my” part of the river.
Hi Allyson, thanks sharing your river! The example in ATL shows how economic, aesthetic, and environmental wins are interconnected.
As to getting off our carbon excesses (and global warming), the one thing that no one should object to is reducing our usage. Large percentages of our energy are also lost in transporting it over long distances–and their transmission lines take up enormous amounts of space and are eyesores for sure. One place solar has been successfully used without harming any landscape is on rooftops: Germany (whose climate is as cloudy as ours in the Northwest) has just gone through an all out program to install urban solar. So has Sacramento: in such urban climates, harvesting solar is done with “reverse metering” which allows the homes generating electricity to sell it back to the local utilities when they generate excess. Better for the utility and the homeowner and the climate, since locally generated electricity doesn’t suffer the power line transmission issue.
As for the other technologies, you are right about the all or nothing approach: such technology CAN be placed with respect for natural habitat– as in low head hydro with fish ladders and protected riparian habitat. Wind turbines are now situated away from known bird flyways (duh!) and the arms are being designed differently in an attempt to allow birds to fly by them more safely (and not to perch on them when they are not running so they aren’t in harms way when they start up again), and solar technology is shrinking the size of the technology and its silicon usage.
Stanford University recently rated technologies according to their environmental friendliness, efficiency, and economic practicality and found coal, nuclear and biofuels on the list of the worst– and wind turbines at the top of the other list. But nothing is perfect, as you indicate–and we need to reduce consumption and transportation costs, as well as the general environmental footprint of whatever energy we use.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment.
This article really touches me. I have been living in the Northwest for me entire life. I’ve had homes in various places in both Washington and Oregon, all near wonderful bodies of water. A river, as stated in the article, does have life. It is a horrible thing just to pick it up and move it to fit your own needs. I have great respect for the natural existence and cycles of the river and its organisms. I am saddened that men moving rivers and redirecting water ways happens all too often. I understand a society attempting to move forward in industrialization, but there needs to be greater care for the environment involved. The earth is like a puzzle that has been laid out in such a way that is meant to stay, not for man to pick up a random piece and move it somewhere else where it doesn’t fit. Native people depended so much on the rivers we have moved or changed. Animals were lost in this transition as well. It is a sad occurrence for all of existence.
Thanks for your caring personal comment, Allie. I like the analogy of the earth’s being like a puzzle in which all the pieces need to fit– all the elements of ecosystems have grown up in concert with one another for millions of years, and it seems we both need to preserve and honor this “fit”.
Good balance on the idea that we need to take greater care for the environment as we move forward– perhaps that part and parcel of the definition of any real advancement– that such care is involved.
I am having a very difficult time understanding this essay. It’s very understandably that we fight for the things we love like in the case of the Skokomish Tribe vs. the Tacoma utility. However, I worry that a person’s love and subsequent selfishness for something like a river sacrifices others wellbeing. What I don’t understand is who this essay is attempting to make the villain. Is it the Tacoma utility or just industrialization in general?
I don’t know why I have such a hard time identifying hydroelectric power generation as an evil doer attempting to do in the Native American’s way of life. Maybe, it’s because that electricity can go to schools, hospitals, streetlights, or to other things to make OUR community better. It can go to businesses where PEOPLE work so they can earn a little income to raise a family. The water from that dam can be regulated for irrigation for farmers so they can grow food for PEOPLE. It seems to me that to say that the wellbeing of the community as a whole is worth sacrificing so that a much MUCH smaller group of people can watch their property values increase by having riverfront real estate is a very selfish act. Of course here I am talking in extremes but the validity of the opposition’s argument must be analyzed in a cost-benefit manner.
Hello Matt, thanks for sharing your thoughts here. Perhaps your difficulty in understanding this essay is thinking that there IS a villain meant to be portrayed here. I am happy you couldn’t find one– since I did not mean to point one out–unless you want to call a particular way of thinking the villain.
Nor do I think the issue here is gauging the needs of some against others, whether they be other people or other species. In fact, the agreement reached between the utility and Skokomish allowed for power generation AND return of the river flow– there is an essential balance here. In that all parts of natural systems are related, the careless use of technology (such as stopping up this river entirely) had repercussions not just for non-human species but for humans– in its effects on the water table, for instance.
Few would argue that power generation does some good things: it also does some bad things (allow industries that use the majority of the water to pollute) and some wasteful things. The point is not whether power generation is per se good or bad– I think that few of us would want to do without electricity. Instead I want to raise the issue of the careless habit of mind that has led to polluting of rivers around the world. As water supplies decrease with increasing population, we cannot afford such carelessness– this is certainly not good for people.
I have indicated in a few other responses to comments here that there are different kinds of dams: I am not implying all are bad.
I also think it is not useful to think of the Skokomish as a small tribe winning legal rights over the larger society. I for one want to thank them for what they have done for a river that so many depend upon. This is true of indigenous environmental struggles everywhere: see this article here for an outline of such struggles:
http://holdenma.wordpress.com/culture-and-environment/indigenous-peoples/.
For instance, if not for the persistent legal struggle of a group of tribes in the Southwest, the Colorado River might be dried up in its natural course rather continuing to serve the large populations it does (though it still being drawn down year by year).
Another type of deficient thinking that river pollution illustrates is short term rather than long term assessment. I wonder what you think of the Jain concept of theft as applied to the environment–that if we carelessly take too much for this generation, we are robbing the next.
I want to thank you for sharing your personal responses to this essay, as it allows dialogue to take place concerning important issues!
This is a very moving essay, and i believe that we should all treat the river the same as the Skokomish people. They more than just loved the river, it was a part of thier lives. It is upseting to see that we took this away from them, what they loved and cherished so much. We seem to be so blind by what we do to the environment and water or what we put in it. I wish i was able to see what it was like as described in the beginning, i am sure it was a gorgeous river. I also wish i new why it was ever taken away in the first place?. i know they built a dam but what for?, where the water was going must not have been to important to us at the time we thought of course. And will probably prove to be a mistake.
Thanks for this comment,Christian. The dam was to create electricity for City of Tacoma: the new legal agreement allow them to continue to do this while also releasing enough water to allow the river to flow again. That is the good news. The bad news is the ways that humans continue to treat rivers all over the world.
I thought this was a very sad and interesting article. Just as the name says, we as a society need to take lessons on how to love a river. It hits close to home. In my job as a planner in natural resource conservation, I sometimes see landowners who want to change a river or stream to fit their wants. We explain to them they cannot do that and try to give them advice on how to work with nature rather than fight it. Fortunately with permits they are not allowed to change the flow course. I just never understand why people want to fit mother nature to their wants instead of working with her. Rivers are so life giving and beautiful. If it were not for life giving streams and rivers, early settlers and native american people could not have survived than harsh conditions of the wilderness. I do not understand why now people do not want to take special take them, they are just as important now as they were then. Hopefully we can continue to clean up our river system along with preserving the natural rivers and streams we have left on earth.
Thank you, great article,
Troy Jonas
Thanks for your thoughtful and caring comment, Troy. It is heartening to me that your work in natural resource conservation entails explaining how to work with the rivers instead of trying to bend them to human will. I do think that this is an inherent aspect of the Western worldview– the attempt to make nature adapt to us instead of vice versa. Rivers, as you point out, are both aesthetic treasures and the basis of our survival. What more could you ask of something to elicit our love for it?
Excellent article. I find it absolutely amazing that this problem is pretty much worldwide. How have we, as civilized people, gone so long without caring about what happens to our rivers? I guess a lot of can be attributed to what we dump in the river is then someone else’s problem down stream. I work with a group here in NC that works to clean and protect the Eno River. This group is numerous, they have festivals and community event to help support conservation efforts for the river. Even with all this support the Eno River is still being dumped in and polluted. How is that possible? I hope we find a solution to this problem soon, for all rivers.
Thanks for sharing the information about the river you are caring for in NC, Timothy. You have hit the nail on the head with the point about “somebody else’s problem downstream”. We obviously need to change this attitude: I think you must certainly be having an effect, even if it is discouraging to see others still dumping and polluting. We really need to get across the ideas that rivers are the basis of our lives.
I suppose we can blame this horrible problem on the motion of the river. As rivers flow away from us our ancestors must have thought “it’s moving away from us so there is no harm in throwing our garbage, our toxic waste, or whatever we want to disappear into it. It moves away not towards us, so this is OK.” Almost 20 years ago I had a friend who asked me to help her research Reynolds Aluminum where her grandfather’s property was. Everyone in her family all died of cancer; her grandfather, mother, aunt, brother and she was the last surviving one. This was on the Ohio River dividing Indiana from Kentucky. It’s something I wished I would have taken her up on. It seems we have always dumped into waterways thinking it’s NIMBY. As with anyone you love the answer IS to take care of it. You wouldn’t put anything harmful into the body of a loved one-why would you treat a river any other way?
Hi Pam, thanks for your thoughts. It is ironic that the very vitality of a river is that which causes some to pollute it. However, this view of “away” hasn’t swayed some with different worldviews from the modern western one to pollute.It sounds like your friend’s family lived in an area of “cancer cluster”– especially toxic areas throughout country whose toxins, as you indicate with the reference to NIMBY, eventually get into bodies of all humans. I like your analogy of taking care of a river’s body the same way we would take care of our own.
“How to Love a River” brings up the interesting point about how Hindus treat their rivers. I wonder if it is their mentality, or just the fact that there are too many people and not enough arrangements for disposal of waste, or gathering water. There does seem to be some sort of disconnect going on there with the overly “transcendent” idea. It is wonderful to hear about dams being removed and life slowly coming back to a river. Maybe caring and perseverance CAN overcome man’s powerful rampage against life. Those who persevere are very patient, indeed.
Thoughtful question, Lesley. Gupta argues that it is a failure to fully appreciate the tenets of Hinduism that has led to polluting the Ganges: those who truly understand all is one would understand they are polluting all (including themselves) rather than expecting the Ganges to carry away their wastes. As for population, it is my understanding that industrial pollution is the main issue these days; however, it is also true that more and more people doing the wrong thing adds up. But one person doing the wrong thing can have quite an effect–as in the case of the salmon trap cited in Charles Wilkinson’s excellent history of water usage in the West. That trap destroyed an entire salmon run, since the salmon backed up in the pioneer trap could neither escape–nor be released by its owner once he recognized what was going on. Fortunately, good can also be multiplied, witness those few of the many, many today pointed out in the essay “how can you not plant a rose in wartime here”.
In the Northwest and particularly here in Corvallis, the rivers hold much in their depths. The fish and waterfowl who live within them need to have a clean river. Over time it has been discovered that fertilizers and municipal waste, as well as industrial waste have polluted many rivers in this area. I would not feel comfortable swimming in the Willamette. Is there an organization monmitoring this river? It would be nice to see results in a local media form. This especially during the summer swimming season. How bad is our river?
Thanks for your question Ross. And to think the Willamette was once clean enough to drink as well as swim in. The Corvallis Environmental in conjunction with your university came out with a map of point source pollutions throughout the Willamette River basin; they may also keep abreast of fluctuating summer water quality. Give them a call and check it out.
I really enjoyed Henry Cultees comment about the rivers marking the land instead of paper lines on a map. It does make a lot more sense and is realistic in terms because then property lines would move with the natural course of the river instead of humans trying to force the river to stay in one place.
That is one thing that is different between the east and west portions of our country. Property lines in the east tend to be curvy and fluid following the natural boundaries of the land and water courses. Land divisions in the west are based upon square grids, paper lines on a map. I always thought that didn’t make as much sense.
Hi Julie, I hadn’t known that about eastern property lines. Thanks for sharing this bit of info and perspective. Carolyn Merchant, in her history of ecological changes with the coming of pilgrims in New England mentions that much of early farmland was the result of beaver meadows (which created the fertility desired by these farmers), so those curvy lines make even more sense in that context.
Dr. Holden,
I have just spent the last hour reading over your essays and I have only touched the surface. After each phrase I found I needed to stop and process the words. Powerful.
I teach history and human geography at Rochester High School. One of my goals this summer was to set up a blog for my classes that would combine current events and our traditional course-related concepts to our local area, making it more “place-based.” In searching for some primary source material on the decline of strawberry fields in our area and the dangers of a monoculture, I came across your blog.
WOW. The Chehalis elders, Berry, Merchant (I listen to her podcasts when I walk,) rivers, environmental ethics, Thelma Pederson…I was in heaven!
Are you from this area? I couldn’t find a separate contact for you, so I apologize for writing on this thread.
To make this on topic, though, I just finished re-reading Cadillac Desert and the chapter on the Columbia River. Last month my TAH grant group went to the Elwah River dam to learn more about all they are doing to prepare for the dams removals there. Fascinating.
Thank you,
Jan Watson, Rochester High School
Hi Jan, thank you for your touching feedback– and your obvious care for our shared earth. I have been so very lucky to have worked with such elders as I have quoted here throughout the Northwest. I currently teach at Oregon State University and live in Eugene (there is a contact in the “about” page here). My family is from Olympia and I still do spend some time in that area (you do mean Rochester, WA–yes?) I am so glad you are doing this work with your students!
Please feel free to share (and of course, link) what you wish according to the requests I set out in the about page.
Thank you again for your warm words. Our circle of care is often much larger than we might assume. I take heart in that!
P.S. I would love to see the blog you have set up for your students–is up yet? Care to share the link?
I think that the way that many people view the dumping and polluting of rivers (that we can dump anything into our rivers and it will simply be carried away-out of sight and out of mind) is closely related to how people view throwing out their garbage in municipal waste streams. Not many people stop to ponder the final resting place of our shiny black garbage bags and their contents when we place them at the edge of the sidewalk. Yet, the various chemicals and toxins that we throw out with our garbage end up in landfills, and those same toxins will end up in our groundwater through the process of leaching, eventually polluting our streams, rivers and lakes as well. So even if do not deliberately pollute rivers but physically dumping straight into them we end up essentially doing the same thing when we are not carefull about what we are throwing into the garbage can. These two streams, the literal one and the munical waste stream both can serve to teach us valuable lessons about balance and reciprocity in nature. What we put out there returns to us, no matter how much we wish to turn a blind eye to the fact of the matter.
Great reminder about the municipal waste “stream” as a river of garbage that eventually effects our waterways, Samantha. This is of course why changing our consumer habits– ceasing to buy things that cannot be thrown away and/or made with toxic materials is so important.
This article has got me thinking. You drive down a highway, and see those signs that say “Adopted by ” . And by adopting the highway this organization or community is showing care for this particular stretch of road. How did we get things so backwards? The site (http://www.adoptahighway.com/faqs.html) even talks about not having to clean your stretch as the sponsorship pays for that. And I quote “This partnership extends our hospitality beyond the rockers on our front porch.” We have a partnership with the roads. . . Depressing.
Not that I’m suggesting people adopt a river in this manner, it’s just that our care for the environment around us is so misplaced. And while I like smooth roads, I’d much rather have clean water and diverse ecosystems.
Very pointed contrast here, Joe. A partnership with asphalt over which co2 emitting engines travel. What better metaphor for our age. Let’s hope we develop both different modes of transport and a larger sense of partnership with the world around us soon. I’m with you in that I am not critiquing those who chose to spend volunteer energy cleaning up roads on behalf of those who travel through their neighborhoods, but….
Since I love going out to the rivers, I often go to many rivers whenever I have time, and wherever I am.
There are beutiful rivers in Japan, too, but unfortunately some similar problems with those that mentioned in this articles have been occurred there, too; such as pollution by companies and the garbage dump. The number of the signs of “This river is not a garbage dump.” are often seen at many location in Japan, too, and I think it is increasing.
Also, it is a little different story, but another big problem is invasive fish species. Probably the most famous and big problems about invasive species are “Blackbass” and “Bluegill”. These species had brought into many different locations and keep increasing its population with destroying the original balance of ecosystem. Many studies showed these species were brought into these water by sport-fishing people and/or “fish lovers” who like to keep foreign fish species.
I agree with the quote; when we pollute the river, we pollute our own bodies.
Polluting the river, the environment around it, and destroying ecosystem of it will return to human sooner or later in my country. (or it’s already started…)
I think I would like to suggest to my local people that it is important to think about global warming and other environmental issues such as air pollution of the world and whole Japan, of course, but they should turn eyes on to local more (like corvallis and/or studies by OSU) , to improve all these problems…
Thanks for sharing this information from the perspective of Japan, Miki. I am glad to know that “this river is not a garbage dump” signs are appearing there as well. An important response concerning local actions and values. I think we must always begin where we are. And though problems on a global level seem so overwhelming, the collection of all those local actions make up something very hopeful–they also assert strong communities, which strengthen our quality of life as well.
What vast knowledge of the river Cultee and his people must hold. They lived for generations around the river and were able to sustain their way of life using nature as it was intended. They thought of the river as being alive so I cannot even begin to imagine how tragic it must have been to see part of their heritage simply disappear almost over night…all in the name of progress. I am optimistic that people are beginning to see that all of our actions towards nature are “coming back to us” and I am hopeful moving forward we will learn from our mistakes and our failed attempts to control our natural resources.
I also wanted to express my admiration of Cultee and his son for taking in the boys. The idea of nurturing others is so important to me and the fact that these men took on the role of caregiver and nurturer is especially moving.
Thanks for you comment, Anedra. The term progress is certainly ironic under these conditions. Learning from our mistakes is a step toward real progress. And I agree that nurturing others is something for which these men should be respected.
I am so impressed by the Skokomish’s ability to get Tacoma Power to run water back through the North fork of the Skokomish river. It goes to show the power that we can have as a group of people joining together to fight a cause. This is a unique article for me because my dad was just talking about the salmon not being as prosperous as they once were. We were going to go on a salmon fishing trip down the Elk River, but my dad said the salmon don’t run like they once did in the location he wanted to go. This brings this story close to home for me. The changes that we make to the world effect everyone and everything living in it.
The many decades of destruction we have caused are starting to show and effect our health and our environment. It is only going to continue to get worse if we don’t start to change and make small differences in what we do.
Thanks for your support of the salmon– and point about the difference all of us can make when we join with one another. Certain salmon runs in the Northwest were already declining before the turn of the nineteenth century– misuse of such resources can show up very quickly and take a good deal of time to remedy. That is why, as you note, it is so important to change the actions that destroy such a wondrous natural resource.
I think that these are great examples of reciprocity. Honoring and caring for the rivers, and I especially like the signage “not a garbage dump” So many times, it is the mentality of out of sight– out of mind. But as the water cylcle exists, all we put into our rivers, will come back to us or our children. We all live down river in this respect.
It is sad how so many things are done to nature for the sake of convenience, want and greed. We need to stop doing that. Think about the rest of the eco system in which we co-exist.
Culte and his son show a great quality of nurturing to care for those 2 boys. I think this is probably shows theri respect for nature, others and themselves.
Thank you for your response, Erin. We truly do all live downriver and in an interdependent world– so that those who nurture others do this for all of us.
Sometimes I try and think of this planet as an enlarged version of human bodies. We have rivers that run through our own bodies, and when we are not concerned about the pollution we put in them, blockages are often formed which kill us. Our bodies are one complete unit, and what we do to one part can always affect the others. Anyone who has ever had cancer understands this. Lung cancer, breast cancer, or any other won’t necessarily be contained in that one area. It often spreads and sometimes takes over. Then the entire planet of the body is doomed.
When we put clean, purified water into our bodies, along with healthy food sources, our bodies run well and sustain us. Just as we are made up mostly of water and cannot survive long without it, so the earth is, too. It is the one thing scientists look for on other planets to determine the potential of life there. If our rivers become so dirty that our planet’s immune system can no longer fight off the disease of pollution, the cancer that has already formed will likely take over the entire body of the planet. At this point, I believe our prognosis is poor. But I have hope that, with enough action, we can reverse this disease not by killing it with more poisons but rather by feeding it with the abundance of health the planet already manufactures.
Hi Staci. I very much like the vision you share here of healing the planet based on honoring its own resilience. Your idea about water in the body of persons and of the earth is very much like what Siletz Takelma elder “Grandma” Aggie Pilgrim Baker (chair of the Thirteen Indigenous Grandmothers) said about water in a gathering of the Willamette Grandmother’s Circle at which she spoke last night!
Living in Oregon you become so accustomed to being surrounded by rivers and being able to take full advantage of everything they have to offer. My parents actually live 2 houses from the Willamette River on the street they live on, and having the river so near us was a great blessing. You don’t realize how special the river becomes to you, until you see people “abusing” the river. People all the time would abuse the river, by polluting it, kids who sneak down to the river in the middle of the night, have parties and drink, with that taking place it would cause a great deal of pollution. What was once a “sacred” place is now filled with trash? It is very sad. But, if everyone would just do their part to protect and preserve our environment, especially our rivers then we would have very few problems when it comes to the pollution of our natural habitats. A river is a precious thing and should be preserved. A side note to this is that when my grandparents would come to visit from Mexico, the first place my grandpa would go would be down to the river near my parents’ house. He would go sit down by the river and listen to the water. He would also collect rocks with my 5 year old son, as a special thing for the two of them to do. He was just in “awe” over the rivers here, because in the village he lives in, in Mexico they don’t have precious rivers.
Thanks for this reminder about the preciousness of our rivers, Jose. Just because we are so blessed with rivers in this area, that is no reason to abuse them. Let’s hope we all learn this lesson.
I believe we love a river basically by realizing, every action towards the river, good or bad, will eventually come back to affect us. If we fail to respect the river and its inhabitants, in the grand scheme we are only disrespecting ourselves; because rivers play such an important role in supporting our life. I remember when I used to live in Sacramento and floating the American River was a great way to avoid the summer swelter. Floating the river, you could see so many kids sinking their beer cans and littering everywhere; it would irritate me so bad. I feel the rivers, the trees and the many other aspects of nature; humans take their existence for granted and fail to give the appropriate appreciation. When we do this we are only affecting ourselves and should realize our actions before it is too late.
Thanks for the reminder about the ways our actions toward rivers come back to us, Matt. Your gratefulness to the river for what it gave you–and what rivers give all of us everywhere is something we need to return to if we hope to honor the water that we as well as rivers are made of.
The population density near the Ganges River is very high. So many people that live there have not been taught anything about pollution and they have no idea what a poisoned river will do. A friend of mine spent time in Bangledesh years ago and was showing me photos of the streets. There was litter every where and it looked filthy. She said that they let the streets get dirty like that because every year it floods and the trash goes out to the river! It is just their philosophy of street cleaning over there. They don’t know any better! In America we have to clean up after a flood but in Bangledesh they are cleaned from the flood! I don’t know if this practice still goes on nor do I know if the flood waters receded to the Ganges but it seemed amazing to me that this went on.
Thanks for your comment, Kelley. I would rather look at this situation as a parallel lesson for us in that we can idealize something in such a way that our actions ultimately destroy it.
We have laden our own rivers with pollution as well– there is mercury in Dorena Reservoir as a result of old gold mining activity and parts of the Willamette River near the industrial section of Portland were so toxic they triggered superfund criteria for clean up funds. And though we might hide our own garbage in landfills, so much plastic has blown from our landfills into the ocean that there is now a floating plastic island in the ocean the size of Texas.
I think self-reflection serves us better than critiques of others. I am sorry if my essay has led to the latter. Have you any ideas about self-reflection that might come from the ideas presented here– that might allow us to change our actions or become wiser in them?
Native americans depended very heavily on the river they lived to for pelts, food, and spirituality. With all of todays medicines and diets that are supposed to make us live longer and healthier, maybe what we all need is a dive into a clear cool river to wash us of our sins and sickness.
I can’t think of anything more healing than diving into a river when the water is “alive”– clean in this way. Thanks for your comment, Mitch.
I was looking at only the obvious pollution such as deliberate trash on the streets for the natural flood waters to clean up. Our culture is sneaky with our pollution. Industrial pollution is far more toxic than trash in rivers. The common person does not observe where industry leaks poison into the streams. And I’m sure our culture produces more waste that does not dissolve back into natural systems since we consume massive amounts of stuff. Our culture does pollute lots more especially when one considers the pollution caused in other parts of the world on behalf of making products for us to consume (sneaky). And I may be think that having a few plastic bags floating from our landfills at a constant rate is not as obvious as the plastic that the flood waters that take away all at once. You really can’t fool Mother Nature. Pollution is pollution no mater how it gets there and what ever form it takes. Just hiding pollution will cause problems down the road. Eventually it will come back to haunt us and we need to find a way to rid the earth of toxins so they can never resurface again. I am unsure if this is possible though short of exporting containers of waste past our atmosphere into orbit. We need to stop combining chemicals that produce toxins. Most chemicals would be considered benign but when they are combined in a certain way with other chemicals they become toxins. I wonder if there are ways to uncombine these deadly combinations? We need to promote the precautionary principle or pollution will overtake our universe.
Thanks for clarifying this focus on pollution of rivers, Kelley. The only thing I would add is that I’m no sure most chemicals are benign– I think it depends on the class of chemicals we are talking about. Most pesticides, for instance, are engineered to be poisons and thus definitely not benign.
You certainly have a point that we need to take into account combinations of chemicals and not just single ones in assessing their toxicity.
And I like your point that pollution being pollution (whether we see it or not?) I appreciate your thoughtfulness response to my queries.
I was raised in the Portland area and remember well when the Willamette River was being polluted with industrial waste diverted directly into the river from pipes hanging out of the riverbanks. Although environmental laws now prohibit that practice, it’s clear that industry has found a way to by pass those laws to some extent. PCB concentration in some areas of the river are high and, according to the Willamette Riverkeeper, the Willamette “currently violates temperature, bacteria and mercury standards”. One would think that, since the Willamette is the focus of so many different aspects of our lives here in the valley such as transportation and recreation, all would make extra effort to keep it clean and healthy. It only makes sense to protect the health of this resource as we would that of a family member.
Thank you for this reminder to those of us in the Willamette Valley that we need to protect and care for this river that is so central to our lives here, Susan. The Riverkeepers are a great group that one can support in doing this.
For me it is crazy to think of what rivers represent and what they were compared to what they have become. Growing up in southern California, let’s just say there are not many rivers. I have two very distinct and different memories about rivers from how and where I was raised. The first is of the Colorado River in Arizona. We would go to the river with my parents when I was young and all I remember is pollution, boats, and drunks. This river could not be farther from the way it deserved to be. My second memory about rivers is the Rogue in southern Oregon. Though it is far from pure, this river is a happy place because I was still able to experience its “wildness.” The Rogue, to me, represents the balance and reciprocity that is described in this essay. For my admiration, respect, and gratitude, the Rogue gave me its beauty and adventure.
Thanks for your comment, Bree–and the comparison of these two rivers. The beleaguered Colorado River is so much drawn on for irrigation it dries up before it even ends its former course. This was once true of the Umatilla, but in cooperation with local groups, the Intertribal Fishing Commission has it running again–and reports are that what was once a trashed out river bed is now a source of care and pride in Pendleton. Things can change if we commit ourselves to this.
This essay really touched me. I feel terrible that more people aren’t able to tell their stories to others so that their history could be spread throughout the world. Salmon is important for this tribe to live on and so was the river, when the white people took both away, they could no longer survive. It is really sad that we hear a lot of stories that have similar story lines, most of them include white people taking away from native people.
“How do we love a river?” Just as it said in the article: By caring for it, knowing it, fighting for it, and learning from it. However, how can we convince others to do these things when not all others are aware of the significance of rivers? When not all are open to the facts that by dumping trash into the river, it won’t merely carry it away to where it will never be seen or heard from ever again? We must learn to respect the rivers and treat them as though we are to drink directly from them, for ultimately it may indeed end up in your water glass.
To know that you are poisoning yourself by polluting rivers, might be the only way people will alter their careless ways when it comes to disposing their trash in a place they eventually learn will not carry it away, but rather carry it right back around to them. To know that you are affecting your own well-being is sadly the only way for most people to finally desire some change in their self-destructive actions. If only they could look beyond their own well-being and desire change not only for themselves, but for the animals with which we share the rivers. The creatures which we never seem to acknowledge when we look at a river some ignorantly see as a trash deposit.
We must look at rivers as not merely a resource on which our health and lives depend, but as something much more: They are the homes of several different species, and still they are much more than that. They are part of this world and play a role just as every species and forest and mountain-range and ocean do. Every natural thing the earth has bared renders its own significance and plays a necessary role on this planet. A fact it seems most have disregarded.
How do we even BEGIN to love a river? We must regard it for what it is; the significance its existence truly bares in our lives, in the lives of other animals who drink from it, feed from it, and even live in it; and ultimately the significance it bares in and of itself. We must regard a river as though it is truly living; as though it has a heart and soul. And THEN maybe we can begin to love a river.
Thanks for your comment, Cherisse. As for drinking from the river– it is sad to think that these Northwestern rivers had water that was drinkable prior to their being polluted over the last hundred and fifty years. You have an important point about interdependence of living systems and the river’s being alive.
As for looking beyond our own well-being, as you mention– perhaps if we just truly looked at our own well being, we would notice how precious these sources of water are, as Jose indicates in his discussion of the rarity of rivers in the area of Mexico his family is from. Seeing the interdependence of our world, that is, might tell us that it is in our own well being to protect these rivers.
Water shortages are current emerging throughout the globe. Our water supply is something we cannot afford to squander, not the least reason for this is the fact that our own bodies are mostly water.
Time to truly honor ourselves and the living rivers that we absolutely need to sustain us.