Constructing Cultures then and now: A Centenary Conference Celebrating Franz Boas and the Jesup North Pacific Expedition,1897-1997,

American Museum of Natural History, New York, 13-17 November,1997

Indigenous Cultures and Sustainable Resource Management on Kamchatka

Erich Kasten

Introduction: The historical approach to the issue

"People, animals, land" and their complex interdependencies were the predominant theme for Franz Boas at the beginning of his academic career (Boas 1883). While his work on Baffin Island (Boas 1964: 11) was still characterized by what was later called a "qualified environmental determinism" (Smith 1984: 65ff.), he later distanced himself from his earlier approach. His growing reluctance to draw generalizing conclusions on interrelationships between people, animals and the land did not mean, however, that he left those questions out of his later work for the program of the Jesup Expedition and on the Pacific Northwest Coast (see for example: Boas 1909, 1921, 1934). But it was Boas' early work on the Inuit, which marks for Ludger Müller-Wille (1994) the beginning of an "Arctic Anthropology", and which, under the later theoretical paradigm of cultural ecology, was further elaborated for the Russian Arctic by Igor Krupnik (1993).

Unfortunately, the central and southern parts of Kamchatka, the traditional home territory of the Itelmen people, were not as comprehensively covered by the Jesup expedition as were other areas. Therefore, we have a less complete ethnography of this people from that time than do for most other indigenous populations of the North Pacific Rim. Waldemar Jochelson, who contributed to the Jesup expedition with his volume on Koryak culture, participated later in the Riabushinskii Expedition (1909-1911), which brought him to the more southern and central parts of Kamchatka. His ethnographical notes from that journey remained fragmentary and in manuscript form (Jochelson n.d.) and cannot be compared, for this purpose, with most of his other well-edited published materials.

Important historical information on former resource use by indigenous populations can be found in the monographs of a number of natural scientists travelling in and investigating Kamchatka since the early 18th century. With their all-encompassing view of nature and the cultures of the people ­ before the humanities and natural sciences had separated themselves ­ some of these researchers had already addressed most of the issues which are relevant here, such as did Georg Wilhelm Steller (1774), and later Kittlitz (1858), Erman (1833-48), Kegel (1992), Karl von Ditmar (1890) and others.

A reassessment of that rich material should further current interest in sustainable resource management in that area. For the Karl von Ditmar material, this is to be realized by means of a "re-study" of his findings by following and documenting his route some 150 years later. A first expedition of this kind was made in summer 1997 by E. Dulchenko (Kamchatka Institute of Ecology and Nature Management, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatski) and E. Kasten. Assessments have been made of endogenous and anthropogenic change in particular environments and the use of resources by local populations since that time. By placing von Ditmar's historical information into the present context, traditional knowledge which was lost in the more recent past might again be used for possible cultural revitalization.

Thus, some of the principal aims of this work will be to maintain or bring back the specific relationships between people, animals, and the land which have provided for the survival of indigenous populations in harsh northern environments ­ and to translate or integrate their traditional local knowledge into new strategies of sustainable resource management. This is intended to counteract the increasing loss of cultural and biological diversity, which not only puts at risk the continued existence of natural ecosystems, but even restricts adaptive means by which humans interact with them successfully. These concerns must have felt less urgent at the time of the Jesup expedition one hundred years ago; they became obvious only more recently. Today, they are shared not only within the scientific community, but have been increasingly acknowledged by the general public and are now being addressed by various UNESCO programs. Some of these programs will have particular relevance for future developments on Kamchatka, after considerable parts of the peninsula were included by the UNESCO World Heritage Committee on its list at its meeting in Mexico City on December 5th, 1996.

UNESCO programs as a conceptual framework for sustainable development on Kamchatka

Nature reserves, which had already been established in Soviet times to protect the unique natural heritage and bio-diversity of Kamchatka, will in the future also allow certain forms of sustainable development according to World Heritage and MAB-guidelines. Since last year, five of these areas in the central and southern parts of Kamchatka have been included on the World Heritage list under the title "Volcanoes of Kamchatka". (Two protected areas on the west coast had been previously admitted to the List of Wetlands of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention.) Of course, conservation and sustainable resource management regimes should not be restricted to these protected areas alone, although their legal status make them core zones to which other adjacent territories could orientate or attach themselves.

Presumably, the relevant UNESCO programs mentioned above need not be explained here in detail, although some of the more recent trends should be briefly mentioned. For the Man-and-the Biosphere-Program it may be noted that, since it was first announced in 1976, there has been some shift to the increased consideration of the needs for local development. This was outlined in the "Strategy of Sevilla" (UNESCO 1995), after the program had been criticized by some for being too restrictive in that respect. With regard to the specific concerns of local communities about sustainable development, various conventions of the UNCED Conference in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 suggest increased local participation in the decision making process and the implementation of sustainable resource management practices, whereby local traditional knowledge is applied when seen as useful.

For the World Heritage Program, the former emphasis on preserving unique natural sites seems to be shifting to include not just cultural monumental sites of special significance for world history but also valuable "living" traditions of indigenous peoples, which are at risk of disappearing in the wake of globalization. While seeking to maintain the links between indigenous cultures and their sustainable interaction with their natural environments ­ a recurrent theme in anthropology since Franz Boas' early work on Baffin Island ­ the more recent World Heritage concepts increasingly meet our aims for future research on Kamchatka. Therefore, relevant UNESCO programs can provide both an adequate conceptual framework and a common ground to be shared by most of the partners involved in the political decision-making process for future developments on Kamchatka. Earlier research on these issues has shown, however, that Kamchatka has special cultural and ecological features. Applying general concepts in too much haste ­ and without proper research and careful adaptation to the specific conditions and given potentials of the peninsula ­ is, therefore, a questionable approach.

For this reason, an international group of scientists from various disciplines and different countries has been established, in conjunction with local or native experts and representatives of the respective local communities. The goal is to develop adequate programs for sustainable resource management with regard to the special features of given ecosystems and socio-cultural traditions, as well as to the more immediate needs of the local people to make their living. A team of members from the Free University (FU) Berlin and the Kamchatka Institute of Ecology and Nature Management (Kamchatski Institut Ekologi i prirodopolzovaniia, DVO RAN) in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatski ­ together with experts from Itelmen communities ­ has for the past three years already conducted research on these (and other) issues on the west coast of Kamchatka. Experiences will be presented here for discussion and as an outline for future activities in this regard.

Seeking economic alternatives in sustainable development

On a more short-term or immediate basis, there is a need to be able to deal with acute crisis situations involving the improvement of living conditions in remote areas of traditional inhabitation by indigenous peoples on Kamchatka. This is to counteract depopulation, or the so-called "brain-drain" of the most talented and energetic people from those territories, where they are needed to assist in the rebuilding of their home communities. Even minor projects or other forms of assistance show local populations that they have not been forgotten in the often confusing currents of these new times. This may give them hope and help stabilize them psychologically.

For this end, a project has been prepared in conjunction with a local investor and a German technology company to address the dramatically felt energy shortage, which not only frustrates many people but limits any serious planning of reliable future economic development. On the west coast of Kamchatka, an appropriate alternative to the still widely used (and largely ineffective) diesel-generators would be to make use of wind energy. In the central parts of the peninsula, the land's geothermal potential could be exploited through advanced technology. Besides being ecologically compatible and more cost-effective, the use of wind energy would also allow a decentralized power supply for more remote settlements. This would enable and encourage local populations to enter utilization of their traditional territories, from which they were earlier removed, and which have been left without infrastructure ever since.

To nurture indigenous cultures and enhance their role in sustainable resource management, it is of particular importance to strengthen the traditional economies by modernizing them and making them competitive under market conditions. At the same time, though, it is important to maintain a distinctive mixed, subsistence-based "Native economy" (Usher 1993: 108 f.) because of its well-known socio-cultural impacts. With regard to the west coast of Kamchatka, a comprehensive development plan should focus on small-scale fish-processing plants, so-called mini-zavods, to secure or create employment even in remote villages. Examples of how quality products such as smoked salmon can be obtained and successfully marketed have been demonstrated by First Nations enterprises on the American Northwest coast.

In some cases ­ for example through well thought-out and properly organized eco- and ethno-tourism ­ traditional economies can be extended and transformed. Additional income can be generated and new kinds of employment created for indigenous populations, which can reinforce their traditional ways and cultural self-esteem in various ways. First initiatives of this kind are in the process of being elaborated and tested for various Itelmen communities on the west coast of Kamchatka. These tours will be directed towards a special and limited kind of tourist who is interested in the particular ecological and cultural features of the area, and who seeks adequate information from local guides and through brochures. An Itelmen economist, who participated as a trainee in our earlier project on renewable resources, is now working out (together with local investors) the economic potential of such tourism and the feasibility of necessary investments in some basic infrastructure.

The specific cultural component of these tours is not just the stimulus for maintaining and enhancing traditional knowledge and skills. It also provides means for supporting indigenous arts and crafts. Revenues from a first group of tourists travelling to Kovran this year are to be transferred to the local school museum. This will support children's crafts classes there, and in future plans, provide grants to talented artists to perfect their skills and to carry on or revitalize the specific art traditions of their people. Another example is special event-oriented tourism, such as dog-sledge tours. These are to be organized in an ecologically compatible way and can help indigenous traditions to survive while carried on in a modern context. Such tours will not only provide additional employment to local people. They will also contribute to preserving and to transmitting ­ in this particular case ­ the knowledge of training and handling dog-teams and the particular craft of building sledges for future generations. They may even help revive techniques or ancient sledge forms which were once unique to the Itelmen (Kasten 1996a: 28). Thus, well-organized ethno- and eco- tourism could have positive impacts on community development, although there must also be a critical look at their well-known risks and sometimes detrimental effects.

Another, although often very problematic, type of tourism ­ sport hunting and fishing ­ should be taken into consideration here, as it could benefit local populations. In particular in Kamchatka, the disastrous effects of hunting tourism, especially for bears, would be noticed if carried out without community control, in a more or less poaching manner. On the other hand, there is considerable supplementary income potential for local hunters and trappers in having foreign guests pay a fee to kill game, while locals keeping the meat for themselves. Precise estimates by A. Valentsev (1996: 74) show that the optimal annual catch of 2030 sable for a given territory would provide US $152.250 in revenues (at 1995 prices). This could be increased up to US $386.250 if the 39 bears allowed to be hunted each year are brought under the auspices of the local community controlled hunting tourism. Such additional income would help local hunters and trappers to carry on their traditional ways, which would encourage them to stay in the area.

Besides reorganizing of traditional economies to be more efficient and competitive in a sustainable way, using other renewable resources, which have not been part of the indigenous economy on a large scale before, can have a beneficial impact. An example could be the extremely profitable crab-fishing industry of Ust-Khairyuzovo on the west coast of Kamchatka, if properly monitored, whose products are exported as far as Korea, Japan and the USA. This could mean not only additional jobs on a long-term basis, but also the reinvestment of profits in essential infrastructure, such as in modernized power plants based on wind energy. Even more important is the fact that such a profitable industry can help to forestall recent plans for off-shore oil drilling in the area, as the latter could jeopardize or completely wipe out the crab industry overnight in case of an accident (Dulchenko, forthcoming). The further strengthening of a carefully monitored fishing industry, because of its economic importance (Sharakhmatova 1996) and ­ unlike the oil industry ­ because of its more steady employment opportunities for local populations, could be put forward as a strong argument to political decision-makers, along with the legitimate concerns of conservationists.

From this point of view, even in the central parts of Kamchatka, one should seek similar profitable and sustainable economic alternatives to environmentally hazardous kinds of resource development such as gold-mining or extensive logging. Therefore the intended gold-mining for certain parts of the Bystrinski Rayon would, in the long run, not be most efficiently prevented by environmentalists' protests alone. Although these are useful and necessary when immediate action is required, viable economic alternatives ­ such as a stabilized reindeer-herding industry for the Even people and the use of the rich cultural and natural potential of that area for well-organized ethno- and eco- tourism ­ would be an even more convincing argument. It would likely gain support from both decision-makers and local populations in this debate.

Need for co-operation in decision-making and the management of the resources

As usual, there are various and divergent interests involved which make it necessary to seek appropriate forms of co-operation to find the right solutions or compromises. In this debate, although global responsibilities are involved, the term co-management might be seen as provocative by any person or group that perceives the resources of a given territory as exclusively its own. This has made co-management in Western countries a politically loaded concept. It can be vehemently rejected, at times, by indigenous leaders in political rhetoric, in the same way that it has been not infrequently abused by non-indigenous developers. In practice, however, it can hardly be denied. Competence and outside expertise are welcomed by most indigenous populations as valuable assets in the search for optimal and realistic solutions to managing their natural resources and in rebuilding their communities.

One task is to coordinate the often divergent perceptions and interests of ecologists with those of local or indigenous populations as natural allies in maintaining bio-diversity and traditional ways of sustainable resource management. However, there is often mistrust or misunderstanding on both sides. This is sometimes justified, but it may simply be used as a tool in the political bargaining process. In fact, many ecologists tend to be primarily concerned with conservation, while sharing less the perceived need of local populations who have to make a living from the renewable resources of a given area. These attitudes can be particularly prevalent in Russia, where a critical dialogue between scientists and indigenous people seems not to have been carried out in the past in as open and well-articulated a way as in the Western Arctic over the last three decades (Kasten 1996b). On the other hand, sometimes indigenous activists and people with no direct link to the given territory can hinder reasonable solutions and frustrate others. They sometimes mobilize the well-known rhetoric of the "noble savage", when their individual interests should take a backseat to conservationists' concerns for overriding, global needs.

What complicates the situation even more is that there can also be divergent attitudes towards sustainable resource management among the same indigenous or local populations. This could happen, for example, if reindeer herding families are won over by the prospect of selling more reindeer meat to inhabitants in a flourishing gold-mining industry in the Bystrinski Raion of central Kamchatka. Meanwhile, members of the Even or other local populations, living farther downstream and dependent primarily on fishing, have every reason to be worried about these same developments.

To enable or strengthen future collaboration between scientists and local groups, special efforts have to be taken to provide full information to all partners involved, and to allow them to take part in the planning and decision process. An example of this might be the origins of the initiative for the already-mentioned project on the economic potential of renewable resources on the west coast of Kamchatka. It began with a motion at the conference of Tkhsanom, which is the political organization of the Itelmen people, in Kovran in 1993. Accordingly, the research program was first drafted with local experts and scientists. Then funding was applied for under the INTAS program of the European Union. Members of the indigenous population participated in the project and, in one case, were trained for future jobs in community development. Eventually, the results of the research were openly discussed at a 1996 conference in Kovran, the main settlement of the Itelmen people, in the presence of representatives of the various Itelmen communities. Some of their views are presented in articles in the concise anthology (Bednadskaya 1996, Zaporotski 1996). The intention is to apply a similar procedure to future research. It will start with clearly defined community needs in sustainable resource management and then be integrated into relevant international programs (usually reflecting more general, global interests) and not the other way round. But as there will always be divergent interests on this, careful mediation and understanding on both sides will be required.

It should be noted here that even anthropologists can often, understandably enough, focus exclusively on their specific interests. They tend to maintain stronger associations with those local or indigenous groups from which the most or best data can be expected for the more prevalent subjects of anthropological research. Consequently, there is the risk of being trapped - consciously or unconsciously - in the role of being an advocate or lobbyist for one faction only, while failing ­ partially or entirely ­ to see and understand the legitimate interests of the community as a whole.

Another major obstacle to sustainable development on Kamchatka could be a growing community division along ethnic grounds. The local population is better off if it speaks with one voice in view of conflicting situations towards outside interests. Without going deeper into the debate on the current shaping of new legislation in Russia on indigenous peoples ­ as these issues are discussed in other papers here ­ I would like to address a few of the concerns that came to mind during our work in Kamchatka.

Privileged access to the land for indigenous groups means discrimination against other local populations. These may be people who have lived in an area for generations together with indigenous groups. They may have established similar links to the land by jointly managing the same resources and have identified themselves with the territory in the same way. This is in contrast to other, temporary residents, who are less likely to be interested in sustainable land use patterns. There is fear among non-indigenous long-term residents that ethnic tensions might build up to serious conflicts. Thus legislation which does not take a well-balanced position on this could become a "Trojan horse". It may work in the end not only against local communities by dividing them, but, as a result, actually jeopardize long-term indigenous interests, despite any initial individual benefits.

On the other hand, often a long-established multi-ethnic community set-up produces specific and unique forms of local culture. This is particularly obvious, in the music and dances of these communities, which express the local identities of people with different ethnic backgrounds and are based on different cultures. Through specific new configurations of various cultural elements and impacts, such communities are about to develop unique profiles of their own towards the outside world. Unifying symbols and ways of feasting ­ aimed at restoring or enforcing community networks ­ are, as in the case of the revitalized feast Alkhalalalay, clearly overriding ethnic lines. Thus, perceptions of clearcut ethnicities no longer work. They would entail an even more static view of culture, denying its dynamic and most creative potential stemming from evolving new forms of multi-ethnic local cultures. These forms represent, we believe, the more real associations and common sentiments of people, which are to be reflected and supported by relevant legislation. Acknowledging and enhancing the dynamic of such evolving new complex cultural diversities, based not only on ethnicity but even on locality, could provide better chances for the survival of endangered indigenous traditions than simply treating them as "icons of the past". Consequently ­ to follow to our theme ­ the local knowledge and legitimate interests of non-indigenous populations are also important. If they identify themselves with the waters and the land, and with the continued use of its renewable resources for future generations, they should not be discriminated against, but integrated into the process of sustainable development.

In our opinion, long-term residence and identification with local interests ­ as opposed to the often quite arbitrary ethnic affiliation alone ­ should be the criteria defining the group of people whose interests are to be acknowledged and supported, in the first place. This does not mean, however, ignoring or discrediting the proliferation of necessary sub-identities on the local level or within the communities. These tend to follow ethnic or family lines, or former places of residence, as has always been the case and can still be witnessed today for the Itelmen settlements on the west coast (Kasten, forthcoming I). Ethnic affiliations or symbols of ethnicity are usually mobilized, along with otherwise defined networks, in the natural process of internal politics. Here it seems important, however, that the power balance between the factions be kept somewhat flexible, instead of establishing indisputable preferential status through legislation on ethnic grounds, which may create unnecessary deep-rooted anger and bitterness. What should be promoted, instead, is an understanding of a more realistic concept of multi-cultural identities as a basis for developing specific local community profiles. These might be labelled, for political reasons and for differentiation from mainstream culture, as indigenous ­ although their actual multi-ethnic origins should not be forgotten.

Contents of co-management and joint research

One of the principal aims of co-management should be the integration of different kinds of knowledge in the definition and application of the most appropriate means of sustainable development of a given area. This will be the traditional environmental knowledge (TEK) of indigenous or other local populations as well as modern scientific knowledge. On this topic, an assessment of the state of ethno-botanical knowledge among the Itelmen people on the west coast of Kamchatka was done by Olga Chernyagina during the European-Russian project mentioned above. Unfortunately, the outcome of that study gave a discouraging picture (Chernyagina, forthcoming). Most of the relevant knowledge on the traditional use of plants seems to have been lost, apparently in many cases only recently, whereas it had still been mentioned at length by most of the scientists travelling in Kamchatka in the 18th and 19th centuries. The question is how such TEK can be revitalized from early sources. Local populations desire such a revival, and it will be part of future project work. Here, the goal among other things, is to transform this valuable source material into a more organized form accessible again to local populations for their own purposes. As mentioned before, TEK might also gain new prestige in connection with eco-tourism, a further encouragement to its revival.

In another project, which deals with the collection of Itelmen texts and is being carried out in collaboration with one of the Native experts on the Itelmen language, Klavdiya Nikolaevna Khaloimova, narratives and oral documentation on traditional resource use are one of the most prominent themes. Therefore, some of the language-related material on earlier resource use, which is close to being lost with the last Itelmen elders who are still in full command of these traditions, is being recorded for possible future revival.

Important in this regard has been the mapping out of former traditional territories and the recording of toponyms. This valuable knowledge still exists only among a handful of elders who remember places and place names from their youth, when these territories were still traditionally used, until the resettlements of the 50s and 60s. In one case, for the ancient settlement of Upper Kovran, most of this knowledge was lost forever with the unexpected death of one of the last key informants (Vladimir Pritchin) two years ago, before it was recorded.

With regard to Kamchatka, the integration of western and Russian research traditions and experiences has been effected through joint project work. Worth mentioning here are the Russian-Japanese-American project on the re-introduction of the Aleutian goose (kazarka) to Kamchatka, the Russian-American project on the monitoring of sea mammals, and the European-Russian project on the economic potential of renewable resources on the west coast of Kamchatka. Similar American-Russian joint research has been conducted by scholars from Columbia University in New York, with whom the Institute of Ethnology of the Free University has entered into a close collaboration under the existing partnership agreement between the two universities.

Transmitting local knowledge through education programs

Besides the more urgent and immediate measures to be taken, as mentioned above, there is the long-term need for more directed efforts to transmit traditional and modern environmental and cultural knowledge to future generations through specific education and training programs. In times of far-reaching socio-economic transformations ­ and, not infrequently, cultural confusions which many people in Russia have to go through ­ it is extremely important to give youths appropriate orientation and guidance for the future. They will soon be the caretakers of these programs on sustainable development.

Clearly, school education can only teach some of the skills, whereas necessary fundamental values have to be transmitted through the family, first of all. But the school curriculum can take up and focus on special programs aimed at maintaining traditional cultural and environmental knowledge in combination with modern science to secure or enable future sustainable resource use of the given area. To this end, we have been asked by the Itelmen organization Tkhsanom to conceptualize and to produce new teaching materials (Kasten, forthcoming II).

A team was put together for this, consisting apart from myself of an ethnolinguist from Berlin, Itelmen teachers and Native language experts, as well as an Itelmen artist. Starting with a primary focus on Itelmen language maintenance, the content and aim of these teaching materials widened during the process of recurrent re-evaluation and feed-back from the various Itelmen communities, which have been consulted regularly on preliminary drafts of the material. In contrast to earlier standardized primers on Itelmen language, we attempted to emphasize the local context and familiar situations in which the language has been used. This way, environmental knowledge and traditional resource use can be favourably presented together with Itelmen language materials. An example are the maps with toponyms for each of the former Itelmen settlements as mentioned above, as well as certain tools and methods in fishing, and traditional ways of using edible plants and preparing them according to traditional recipes (Khaloimova et al. 1996). A first school book of this kind was introduced into the general curriculum this Fall, not only in so-called national schools in the Itelmen territory, but also in other parts in Kamchatka Oblast. Beyond strengthening the particular ethnic cultural heritage of the Itelmen people, it also addresses other local populations, namely those who have (or about to) become identified with the land and its cultural past.

The other question to be dealt with is how these teaching materials and programs are accepted by the students, and in particular, when they will be extended and adapted to the more advanced classes. There is the risk that they are not appealing enough to youth, if they are associated with a image of backwardness. This is possible in view of the lures of modern lifestyles as portrayed through the media and American soap operas, which are present in almost every Itelmen household. Therefore, an international image, which often is associated with progress, should be given to the teaching of traditional cultural and environmental knowledge in combination with modern science, where possible. An example for this is the poster series on the "Natural and Cultural Heritage of Kamchatka", which is produced in co-operation with the main German organization on nature preservation (NABU), and whose texts are, besides Russian and English, presented in the four main indigenous languages of Kamchatka.

Beyond this, significant prestige could be given to the new teaching materials by using modern technology in presenting them. With this in mind, we are producing a CD-ROM with the title "Itelmen Language and Culture" (Dürr/Kasten 1997) on the basis of the school text. It includes spoken texts in different dialect varieties for the students to listen to for training speech competence. Its structure encourages a more game-like approach to themes in which local environment and traditional resource use play a prominent role. (The current generation is getting increasingly used to video games, which are already in remote Itelmen communities.) The same CD-ROM is also produced in English-Itelmen for non-Russian speaking scholars. All these efforts are only first steps in a specific ­ and hopefully correct ­ direction. The first results, of course, need further time to be evaluated.

In closing, I would like to recall some of the methods and approaches of Franz Boas, which seem to become even more relevant today. First, there is the pronounced multi-disciplinary approach for which his name is so well known. This has been, and will be, furthered through our team-work between local educators, anthropologists, ethnolinguists, and Russian natural scientists from different disciplines. Second, today's more frequent collaboration with Native experts, in contrast or in addition to previous adherence to "participant observation", reminds one of the similar methodological turns Franz Boas took after his time with the Inuit of Baffin Island. Obviously, that early approach was revised by him in the search for a fuller understanding of Native thought by giving more authority to ­ presumably ­ Native experts during his later work on the Pacific Northwest Coast (Kasten 1992). Although far from solving all methodological problems, this approach has since become a key element in the anthropology of the North, and should continue to play such a role in our future work in Kamchatka.

References

Bednadskaya, Ulyana (1996): Rodovaya obshchina &laqno;Biliukai»; in: E. Kasten and E. Dulchenko (red.), Resursy traditsionnogo prirodopolzovaniya narodov Severa i Dalnego Vostoka Rossi. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatski. (pp. 23-24).

Boas, Franz (1883): Über die ehemalige Verbreitung der Eskimos im arktisch-amerikanischen Archipel; in: Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Erdkunde zu Berlin 18: 118-136.

­ (1964): The Central Eskimo. Reprint from: Sixth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology 1884-85, 1888: 399-669.

­ (1909): The Kwakiutl of Vancouver Island. Publications of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition 5, part 2: 301-522. Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History 8(2). New York.

­ (1921): Ethnology of the Kwakiutl. In 2 parts. 35th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for the years 1913-1914, pp 43-1481. Washington.

­ (1934): Geographical Names of the Kwakiutl Indians. Columbia University Contributions to Anthropology, 20. New York.

Chernyagina, Olga (forthcoming): Der gegenwärtige Zustand des ethnobotanischen Wissens der Itelmenen Kamtschatkas; in: "Ungeduld und Verzweiflung". Tagungsberichte zur internationalen Konferenz "Georg Wilhelm Steller (1709-1746) und die Erforschung von Sibirien und Alaska". In der Reihe: Quellen zur Geschichte Sibiriens und Alaskas aus russischen Archiven. Hg. Franckesche Stiftungen zu Halle und Archiv der Russischen Akademie der Wissenschaften in St. Petersburg. Gotha.

Ditmar, Karl von (1890): Reisen und Aufenthalt in Kamtschatka 1851-1855. Beiträge zur Kenntnis des Russischen Reiches, 3. Folge, Band 7. St. Petersburg.

Dürr, Michael and Erich Kasten (forthcoming): Itelmen Language and Culture. Multimedia CD-ROM. München/Newcastle.

Dulchenko, Elena (forthcoming): Gemeinsame russisch-deutsche ökologische Forschungen an der Westküste Kamtschtakas (1995-1996); in: "Ungeduld und Verzweiflung". Tagungsberichte zur internationalen Konferenz "Georg Wilhelm Steller (1709-1746) und die Erforschung von Sibirien und Alaska". In der Reihe: Quellen zur Geschichte Sibiriens und Alaskas aus russischen Archiven. Hg. Franckesche Stiftungen zu Halle und Archiv der Russischen Akademie der Wissenschaften in St. Petersburg. Gotha.

Erman, Adolph ( 1833-48): Reise um die Erde durch Nordasien und die beiden Oceane. Berlin.

Jochelson, Waldemar (n.d.): Waldemar Jochelson Papers, Box 6. New York Public Library.

Kasten, Erich (1992): Masken, Mythen und Indianer: Franz Boas' Ethnographie und Museumsmethode; in: M. Dürr, E. Kasten, E. Renner (Hg.), Franz Boas. Ethnologe, Anthropologe und Sprachwissenschaftler. Ein Wegbereiter der modernen Wissenschaft vom Menschen. Berlin. (pp. 79-102).

­ (1996a): Lachsfang und Bärentanz: Die Itelmenen 250 Jahre nach ihrer Beschreibung durch Georg Wilhelm Steller. Begleitbuch zu der Ausstellung "Steller und die Itelmenen" in den Franckeschen Stiftungen zu Halle. Bonn.

­ (1996b): Voprosy okhrany prirody i interesy korennych narodov Severa; in: E. Kasten and E. Dulchenko (red.), Resursy traditsionnogo prirodopolzovaniya narodov Severa i Dalnego Vostoka Rossi. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatski. (pp. 7-14).

­ (forthcoming I): Ethnizität bei den Itelmenen: Politische und kulturelle Hintergründe und Entwicklungen; in: "Ungeduld und Verzweiflung". Tagungsberichte zur internationalen Konferenz "Georg Wilhelm Steller (1709-1746) und die Erforschung von Sibirien und Alaska". In der Reihe: Quellen zur Geschichte Sibiriens und Alaskas aus russischen Archiven. Hg. Franckesche Stiftungen zu Halle und Archiv der Russischen Akademie der Wissenschaften in St. Petersburg. Gotha.

­ (forthcoming II): Probleme und Wege des Spracherhalts bei Völkern Kamtschatkas; in: C. Hasselblatt und P. Jääsalmi-Krüger (Hg.), Europa et Sibiria, Festschrift für Wolfgang Veenker. Hamburg.

Kasten, Erich and Elena Dul'chenko (eds.,1996): Resursy traditsionnogo prirodopol'zovaniia narodov Severa i Dal'nego Vostoka Rossii. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskii.

Kegel, Johann Karl Ehrenfried (1992): Forschungsreise nach Kamtschatka. Reisen und Erlebnisse des Johann Karl Ehrenfried Kegel von 1841 bis 1847. Erstveröffentlichung eines verschollenen Manuskriptes des Johann Karl Ehrenfried Kegel. W. F. Gülden (Hg.). Köln.

Khaloimova, Klavdiya; Michael Dürr; Erich Kasten; Sergei Longinov (1996): Istoriko-etnograficheskoye uchebnoye posobiye po itelmenskomu yazyku. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatski.

Kittlitz, Friedrich Heinrich von (1858): Denkwürdigkeiten einer Reise nach dem russischen Amerika, nach Mikronesien und durch Kamtschatka. Gotha.

Krupnik, Igor (1993): Arctic Adaptations. Native Whalers and Reindeer Herders of Northern Eurasia. Hanover and London.

Müller-Wille, Ludger (1994): Franz Boas und seine Forschungen bei den Inuit: Beginn einer arktischen Ethnologie; in: V. Rodekamp (Hg.), Franz Boas 1858-1942: Ein amerikanischer Anthropologe aus Minden. Bielefeld. (pp. 25-38).

Sharakhmatova, Viktoriya (1996): Perspektivy razvitiya natsionalnych predpriyati korennych narodov Severa i vozmozhnosti vykhoda na vneshni rynok: Itelmeny zapadnoi Kamchatki; in: E. Kasten and E. Dulchenko (red.), Resursy traditsionnogo prirodopolzovaniya narodov Severa i Dal'nego Vostoka Rossi. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatski. (pp. 97-100).

Smith, Eric A. (1984): Approaches to Inuit Socioecology; in: Études Inuit Studies (8)1: 65-87.

Steller, Georg Wilhelm (1774): Beschreibung von dem Lande Kamtschatka. Frankfurt/Leipzig. Neudruck 1996, Hg. von E. Kasten und M. Dürr, mit einem Nachwort von E. Kasten. (also available on CD-ROM). Bonn.

UNESCO (1995): International Co-ordinating Council of the Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme. Thirteenth Session, 20. April 1995. Item 7 of the Provisional Agenda: Report of the International Conference on Biosphere Reserves. Paris.

Usher, Peter J. (1993): Northern Development, Impact Assessment and Social Change; in: N. Dyck and J. P. Waldram (eds.), Anthropology, Public Policy and Native Peoples in Canada. Buffalo, New York. (pp. 98-119).

Valentsev, Aleksandr (1996): Nazemnye mlekopitaiushchiye na territori obshchiny &laqno;Tkhsanom» i ratsionalnoe ispolzovaniye ikh resursov; in: E. Kasten and E. Dulchenko (red.), Resursy traditsionnogo prirodopolzovaniya narodov Severa i Dalnego Vostoka Rossi. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatski. (pp. 69-78).

Zaporotski, Oleg (1996): O traditsionnych promyslakh, o sovremennom sostoiani natsionalnykh predpriyati i obshchin assotsiatsi itelmenov &laqno;Tkhsanom»; in: E. Kasten and E. Dulchenko (red.), Resursy traditsionnogo prirodopolzovaniya narodov Severa i Dalnego Vostoka Rossi. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatski. (pp. 15-21).