SINIXT TRADITIONAL TERRITORY A Review of Ethnographic and Historical Sources Ministry of Attorney General Legal Services Branch NATRIL Research Revised to October 23, 2023 CONFIDENTIAL This report may contain unpublished archaeology information from RAAD, permit and non-permit archaeology reports, or other records of the Archaeology Branch. Information from these sources must not be shared or distributed without the permission of the Archaeology Branch. The purpose of this research is to inform the Crown of such historical, ethnohistorical, and archaeological data as are readily available and potentially useful to a preliminary assessment of a claim. This research is not intended to be an exhaustive or conclusive examination of all evidence relating to a claim. Page |2 Sinixt Summary The focus of this research is limited to the period between direct European presence in the Arrow Lakes area in 1811 through the assertion of British sovereignty (1846), and up to the establishment of Indian Reserves at the end of the nineteenth century. For the purposes of this report the rough scope of the geographic region includes the drainage area of the Arrow Lakes and Columbia River between Kinbasket Lake to the north and the international boundary to the south. The first recorded encounter between Europeans and the sn̓ʕayckstx (Sinixt), or Lakes people, took place in 1821 on the Arrow Lakes. In 1811, fur trader David Thompson travelled north along the length of the Arrow Lakes where he met the Indigenous populations present there; he did not leave any record that he identified these groups by name. In 1821, fur trader Alexander Ross met an Indigenous man around Upper Arrow Lake identifying himself as the chief of the “Sinatcheggs” (Sinixt). The Indigenous people that Hudson’s Bay Company Governor George Simpson met on his trip to the area in 1824-1825 also identified themselves as “Sinachicks – Lakes [Arrow] of Main River [Columbia River].” The Sinixt speak Nsǝlxcin (pronounced “in-sill-cheen”), an Interior Salish language spoken by the populations who traditionally inhabited the Okanagan and Columbia River drainages. In English, “the people’s speech,” Nsǝlxcin was historically known as “Okanogan” and later as “OkanaganColville.” The conflating of tribal identity with language in some historical sources has presented a challenge in correctly identifying the group about whom the source is writing. Ethnographic sources clearly and consistently describe the Arrow Lakes area as Lakes, or Sinixt, traditional territory. Lakes traditional territory is described throughout the ethnographic and historic record as encompassing the Arrow Lakes and Columbia River from around Revelstoke (and even as far north as Big Bend on the Columbia River), south to Kettle Falls, below the US border; and from roughly Kettle River Valley on the western boundary, to the Kootenay Valley on the eastern boundary. Slocan and Trout lakes are also consistently, but not without exception, included within descriptions of Sinixt traditional territory. Historically, both Secwépemc (Shuswap) and Ktunaxa (Kutenai or Kootenay) 1 were at times present, at least in the boundary areas, to access fishing, engage in trade, and raid Lakes villages for women. The ethnographic record references the Ktunaxa attempt to dispossess the Lakes of their salmon fishery at the mouth of Slocan River. This is the location of a significant conflict between the Lakes and Ktunaxa 1 When speaking in historical context, the report will sometimes use historic and ethnographic spellings of respective Indigenous populations. CONFIDENTIAL 2 Page |3 Sinixt in which the Lakes successfully defended the fishery resulting in the Ktunaxa retreat to the south end of Kootenay Lake. The Secwépemc (Shuswap) travelled from their territory east along the Eagle River to the Columbia River valley to fish and trade at Revelstoke. Some of the ethnography describes the boundary with the Okanagan at and around what is now Grand Forks, extending almost directly northward. Others include all the entire Kettle River Valley with the western boundary located west of Rocky Creek. Working with Lakes consultants, early ethnographers documented Lakes territory and villages as was described to them by Lakes people. Ethnographer James Teit recorded the location of twenty Lakes villages in British Columbia located on the Upper and Lower Arrow lakes, Slocan Lake, Trout Lake and the Lower Kootenay and Slocan rivers. Shortly after Teit’s publication, ethnographer Verne Ray located and mapped the presence of thirty Lakes villages north of the border and ten in Washington State. Anthropologist William Elmendorf also worked with Lakes consultants, documenting in great detail information regarding Lakes territory, culture, and people. Fishing took place along the Arrow Lakes and the Columbia River. Significant fishing areas include (but are not limited to): at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia River; on the Columbia River at Revelstoke; at Beaton Arm and on the Slocan River. Hunting grounds were located in neighbouring hills and valleys. Major hunting camps were located at Revelstoke, various spots along Lower Arrow Lake and the Narrows. Historical surveys also identified foot trail networks that traversed and connected the north Okanagan region to the Arrow Lakes, the Salmon Arm area to the upper Columbia and lesser used access overland and north from the Pend d’Oreille River valley. Early survey maps of the area identify three trails specifically as Indian passes. At least one hundred and fourteen archaeological sites have been identified within the Arrow Lakes area, many of which are settlement sites with extensive pit house presence constructed in a style typical of Sinixt construction methods. Gold Commissioner William George Cox set aside a temporary reserve at kp’ítl’els, located at the mouth of Kootenay River, in1861, yet no official reserve was ever established there. The Christian family – a Lakes family living at this location – was ultimately displaced by the establishment of a settlement of Doukhobors who began arriving in the area in the early 1900s. Late, in October 1902, Indian Reserve Commissioner A.W. Vowell, at the request of the local Indian Agent Galbraith, allotted a reserve opposite Burton for twenty-two “Indians now residing at Arrow Lake.” The Arrow Lake Indian Reserve near Burton reverted to the Province of British Columbia in 1956. CONFIDENTIAL 3 Page |4 Sinixt In 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Desautel recognized that the rights of the Sinixt continued with the Lakes Tribe of the Colville Confederated Tribes and that, as a successor group, members of the Lakes Tribe hold the right to exercise Aboriginal rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. In the Reasons for Judgement, J. Rowe summarized: “At trial, the year 1811 was accepted as the date of first contact between the Sinixt and Europeans. At this time, the Sinixt were engaged in a seasonal round of hunting, fishing, and gathering, travelling largely by canoe in their ancestral territory. This territory ran as far south as an island just above Kettle Falls, in what is now Washington State, and as far north as the Big Bend of the Columbia River, north of Revelstoke in what is now British Columbia” (Paragraph 4, Reasons for Judgement, Rowe J. in R v. Desautel, 2021 SCC17). CONFIDENTIAL 4 Page |5 Sinixt Contents SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................................................. 5 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE ......................................................................................................................... 7 2.0 SINIXT TRADITIONAL TERRITORY .................................................................................................................. 8 2.1 3.0 SOURCES ............................................................................................................................................................9 CULTURAL CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................... 10 3.1 SOCIAL AND POLITICAL ORGANIZATION ...................................................................................................................15 3.2 LAND AND RESOURCE USE: ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES AND SEASONAL ROUND ...................................................................18 3.2.1 Traditional dwellings............................................................................................................................23 4.0 SINIXT TRADITIONAL TERRITORY AS DOCUMENTED IN HISTORICAL AND ETHNOGRAPHIC SOURCES ......... 25 4.1 DESCRIPTION OF LAKES TERRITORY – ETHNOGRAPHIC AND HISTORIC MAPPING ..............................................................25 1811 – David Thompson .....................................................................................................................................26 1795, 1814, 1818 – Aaron Arrowsmith ..............................................................................................................27 1821 – Alexander Ross .......................................................................................................................................29 1838 – Samuel Parker ........................................................................................................................................31 1842-1848 Pierre Jean De Smet ....................................................................................................................33 1859 – John Arrowsmith ....................................................................................................................................37 1884, 1892 – George Dawson and W.F. Tolmie .................................................................................................37 1928 – Franz Boas ..............................................................................................................................................41 1909-1930 – James Teit......................................................................................................................................42 1909 – Teit’s Arrow Lakes Boundary Revision ....................................................................................................50 1936 – Verne Ray ...............................................................................................................................................56 1956 – British Columbia Native Indians Distribution of Ethnic Groups – 1850 ..................................................58 1979, 1985, 1989 – Bouchard and Kennedy .......................................................................................................59 4.2 BOUNDARY AREAS AND COMPARATIVE MAPPING.....................................................................................................63 5.0 SINIXT VILLAGE AND CAMP SITES ............................................................................................................... 71 5.1 5.2 6.0 WINTER/MAIN VILLAGES – LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ...........................................................................................71 SMALL VILLAGES/CAMP SITES AND PLACE NAMES ....................................................................................................88 HISTORY OF SINIXT TERRITORY ................................................................................................................... 91 6.1 TRAIL NETWORKS – TRADE, TRAVEL, AND TERRITORY .................................................................................................91 6.2 INTER-GROUP RELATIONS IN THE ARROW LAKES REGION ..........................................................................................101 6.2.1 Intermarriage .....................................................................................................................................101 6.2.2 Relations with Secwépemc.................................................................................................................102 6.2.3 Sinatcheggs (Sinixt)/Kootenais (Ktunaxa) – Early Relationship .........................................................104 6.2.4 Conflict with Ktunaxa – Slocan fishery ...............................................................................................106 6.2.5 Conflict with Ktunaxa – Beaton Arm fishery ......................................................................................106 6.2.6 Conflict with Ktunaxa – Halcyon Hot Springs .....................................................................................108 6.3 ETHNOGRAPHIC AND HISTORIC DOCUMENTATION OF THE ARROW LAKES REGION..........................................................109 7.0 POST-CONTACT HISTORY AND RESERVE CREATION .................................................................................. 120 7.1 7.2 7.3 POPULATION HISTORY AND THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY ....................................................................................120 KP’ÍTL’ELS AND THE COLONIAL RESERVE AT BRILLIANT ..............................................................................................124 ARROW LAKES INDIAN RESERVE 1902 – THE OATSCOTT RESERVE, BURTON ................................................................131 CONFIDENTIAL 5 Page |6 Sinixt 8.0 ARCHAEOLOGY ......................................................................................................................................... 136 8.1 EARLY 1960S ARCHAEOLOGY – PRE-FLOODING OF ARROW LAKES RESERVOIR ..............................................................136 8.2 LATE 1960S AND 70S ARCHAEOLOGY – POST-FLOODING OF ARROW LAKES RESERVOIR.................................................138 8.2.1 Turnbull 1977 .....................................................................................................................................139 8.2.2 Mohs and Turnbull 1977 ....................................................................................................................139 9.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................. 156 APPENDIX 1 – GAZETTEER OF SITES, PLACE NAMES, AND VILLAGES IN THE VICINITY OF THE ARROW LAKES UPDATE ............................................................................................................................................................. 170 APPENDIX 2 – MAPS .......................................................................................................................................... 184 ASSERTED TRADITIONAL TERRITORIES ............................................................................................................................184 HISTORICAL AND ETHNOGRAPHIC MAPS .........................................................................................................................185 APPENDIX 3 – OTHER MAPPING ........................................................................................................................ 226 1993/1994 – Maracle, Armstong, Derrickson, Youn-Ing ..................................................................................226 APPENDIX 4 – FIRST NATIONS WITH OVERLAPPING INTERESTS IN THE ARROW LAKES REGION ......................... 230 A) B) C) D) E) F) G) H) I) Splatsin ...................................................................................................................................................230 Neskonlith Indian Band...........................................................................................................................231 Adams Lake Indian Band ........................................................................................................................233 Little Shuswap Lake Band (Skw’lax) ........................................................................................................234 Shuswap Indian Band (Kenpesq’t) ..........................................................................................................235 Ktunaxa Nation .......................................................................................................................................236 Westbank First Nation ............................................................................................................................237 Osoyoos Indian Band ..............................................................................................................................238 Okanagan Indian Band ...........................................................................................................................239 CONFIDENTIAL 6 Page |7 Sinixt 1.0 Introduction and Scope The purpose of this report is to provide a summary review of historical and ethnographic information relating to the traditional territory of the Sinixt people. The bulk of this information relates to Sinixt people themselves, but also includes information regarding the presence of other people who, throughout the historical period, accessed Sinixt territory, such as neighbouring Indigenous groups, government officials, and settlers, to name just a few. The focus of this research is on the time period of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, namely around the time of direct European contact with the Sinatcheggs (Sinixt), or Lakes people, in 1811 through the assertion of British sovereignty (1846), and up to the establishment of Indian Reserves at the end of the nineteenth century. In 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Desautel recognized that the rights of the Sinixt continued with the Lakes Tribe and that, as a successor group, members of the Lakes Tribe held the right to exercise Aboriginal rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. In paragraph 4 of the Reasons for Judgement, Rowe J. stated the following: Mr. Desautel [who was charged for hunting an elk in British Columbia] is a member of the Lakes Tribe of the Colville Confederated Tribes based in the State of Washington in the United States, a successor group of the Sinixt people. At trial, the year 1811 was accepted as the date of first contact between the Sinixt and Europeans. At this time, the Sinixt were engaged in a seasonal round of hunting, fishing, and gathering, travelling largely by canoe in their ancestral territory. This territory ran as far south as an island just above Kettle Falls, in what is now Washington State, and as far north as the Big Bend of the Columbia River, north of Revelstoke in what is now British Columbia. The place where Mr. Desautel shot the elk in October 2010 was within the ancestral territory of the Sinixt. 2 This report may consider more recently reported evidence, insofar as it offers insight with respect to earlier practices, but it is not the purpose of this report to document twentieth-century or modern land use or assess potential impacts. The research summarized here is based on a review of as many relevant sources as could be obtained at the time of writing. As such, this is considered a living document and is subject to further updates. The report was researched and written by Melissa Worth, Senior Research Officer with the Indigenous Legal Relations Research Unit, Ministry of Attorney General. After meeting with Sinixt members in Nelson in January 2023 changes were made to the original, previously released report. In response to Sinixt feedback, input, and collaboration, changes in layout and wording were made, and additional sources were reviewed and incorporated. 2 Paragraph 4, Reasons for Judgement, Rowe J. in R v. Desautel, 2021 SCC17 CONFIDENTIAL 7 Page |8 Sinixt A note regarding orthography and viewing maps: The spelling of Indigenous names varies throughout the report in reflection of the source and era from which the information came. In some cases this terminology is outdated and obsolete. No offense is intended in the use of outdated terminology. Maps are best viewed on a screen so that they can be expanded in size in order to view detail without losing quality of image. Therefore, it is best to review this report in its digital format. Where map excerpts are provided in the text of the report, for the purposes of context, complete, or near-complete maps, are provided in Appendix 1 Maps. 2.0 Sinixt Traditional Territory The geographic scope of this report includes the drainage area of the Arrow Lakes and Columbia River between Kinbasket Lake to the north and the International boundary to the south including geographical locations to the east and west such as Slocan Lake and Slocan River, the Kootenay watershed, and the Kettle River watershed. This area roughly replicates that of the boundary shown on the following map of Sinixt traditional territory (Figure 1) published by Lawney L. Reyes in 2002. In 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Desautel recognized that the rights of the Sinixt continued in Canada with the Lakes Tribe and that, as a successor group, members of the Lakes Tribe hold the right to exercise Aboriginal rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Lakes Tribe is one of twelve member tribes3 of the Colville Tribes located in Washington State. 3 Figure 1 – Map A: Map of Asserted Sin Aikst [Sinixt] territory – Reyes 2002 The remaining eleven members are: Chelan, Chief Joseph Band of Nez Perce, Colville [Skoylepi], Entiat, Methow, Moses-Columbia, Nespelem, Okanogan, Palus, San Poil, and Wenatchi (colvilletribes.com – accessed 2022). CONFIDENTIAL 8 Page |9 Sinixt 2.1 Sources A complete list of sources cited throughout this report can be found in References Section 9.0. Indigenous observations – direct ancestral knowledge from the people themselves – gleaned in early ethnographies are given weight and are regarded as highly valuable. Therefore, information provided by Lakes people closer to, or at, the time of contact with Europeans directly to explorers, surveyors, Indian Agents, Hudson’s Bay Company employees, historians, anthropologist, and ethnographers such as James Teit, Verne Ray, and William Elmendorf, is information held in high regard. Biographical information of both ethnographers and their Indigenous consultants, where available, is provided in the body of this report as information is introduced and discussed. This review of ethnographic and historic records focuses upon several published and archival documents. It is important to keep in mind that the available historical and ethnographic documents present an imperfect record of Indigenous culture in the 18th and 19th centuries. It is both incomplete and at times, some sources can be confusing or unreliable. The documentation of certain areas, nations, and cultures is uneven in detail and quality. The creation of these records was generally incidental to other enterprises, such as geographical exploration, the fur trade, mining, missionary activities, or government administration. Such historical reporters were not trained in ethnographic research. Although this has its advantages as well. In some instances, people like James Teit recorded a significant amount of useful information. The work of early professional ethnographers is subject to certain limitations, depending on where the ethnographers went, with whom they consulted, and the amount of in-depth local research they conducted. Furthermore, detailed field notes were often broadly generalized in published works. And in this case, review of original fieldnotes can provide a rich context and detail sometimes omitted from publications. Ethnographic observations might also be subject to cultural biases and assumptions, theoretical approaches and topical preferences of anthropologists, and other professional pre-occupations of traders and missionaries. While this body of evidence is significant and substantial, it should be approached with an awareness of its limitations. Much of the ethnographic literature is based upon oral history information recorded by ethnographers at earlier times. Among most Indigenous communities today, additional oral history known to Elders may remain unrecorded or unpublished. This information could contribute significantly to an understanding of these societies in earlier historical times. However, insofar as this information is not readily available, it is outside of the scope of this report. Some modern ethnographic interviews have been conducted by Bouchard and Kennedy, whose reports have been referenced here. However, the actual transcripts and notes of these interviews were not available to us, and we have had to rely only upon the final report for information. CONFIDENTIAL 9 P a g e | 10 Sinixt 3.0 Cultural Context The Arrow Lakes area is located within the Plateau Culture Area (Figure 2) (Ray 1939:2). The Lakes people inhabited the Arrow Lakes region when Europeans first visited the area in 1811 (Ross 1821; Ray 1939). Ethnographic sources describe the Arrow Lakes area as “Lakes” traditional territory and with all village sites in the Arrow Lakes area attributed to the Lakes people. There is evidence of both Secwépemc and Ktunaxa presence in this area–mostly for the purposes of accessing the seasonal fisheries–the details of which are discussed in the following sections. The Lakes and Ktunaxa had also engaged in warfare around fishing in the Arrow Lakes region. One ethnographer (Turney-High 1941) working with the provided information states that Ktunaxa traditional territory extends west to include the lower end of Lower Arrow Lake, however, this inclusion is not repeated by any other ethnographers and Turney-High himself doubted the westward extent of Ktunaxa territory. Secwépemc territory is described as encompassing the upper Columbia River up to and including Revelstoke. Details are provided in the following sections. Figure 2 – Map 1: Linguistic stocks in the Plateau. Horizontal hatching: Sahaptin; diagonal hatching: Salish; vertical hatching: Athabascan; cross hatching: Kutenai. – Ray 1939:2 The Lakes (Sinixt) are described in the ethnographic record as a Nsǝlxcin-speaking people whose traditional territory in British Columbia encompasses the Arrow Lakes, and sections of the Columbia and Kootenay rivers. Ethnographer James Teit included the Lakes people among the population he had come to know as the “tribes” of the “Okanagon” linguistic group, today known as Nsǝlxcin-speaking people (1930:198). During a ten year period, Teit worked with Indigenous consultants who identified the Arrow Lakes area as part of Lakes traditional territory. Anthropologist Franz Boas, prefaced The CONFIDENTIAL 10 P a g e | 11 Sinixt Salishan Tribes of the Western Plateaus – the publication in which Teit’s ethnography on the Nsǝlxcin-speaking peoples appeared – by writing: The material here was collected by Mr. James A. Teit in 1904, 1908, and 1909 while he was travelling over British Columbia and the States of Washington and Montana for the purpose of determining the distribution of Salishan dialects and the general movement of tribes so far as these could be ascertained by tradition…Mr. Teit’s statements of opinion must be taken as those of his informants, not his own, unless expressly qualified (Boas in Teit 1930:19 [emphasis added]). First, in 1900, James Teit travelled to visit the western and northern people of Fraser River where he gathered the information from which he compiled his 1909 ethnography of the people he knew as the Shuswap, today the Secwépemc. For the purposes of his publication, he visited all Secwépemc bands except “the isolated ones of Upper North Thompson River at Jasper House, the Kinbaskets on Columbia River, and the Arrow Lake band” due to the considerable expense of the expedition (1909:447). Later, in 1909, after visiting the people living at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers, James Teit clarified his understanding of the territory encompassing the Arrow Lakes and he altered his original findings of Secwépemc composition and territory, specifically with regards to the Arrow Lakes (this is discussed in detail later in this report). Teit gathered his data from two Lakes consultants, Mary Christian and her mother Antoinette, who were living at that time at the mouth of Kootenay River (Teit 1909). Teit visited the area in order to map the distribution of Salishan dialects and learn about the movements of Indigenous groups (Teit 1930:25). Ultimately, Teit published an ethnography on the Nsǝlxcinspeaking tribes (1930) in which he included the Lakes people of the Arrow Lakes whose territory he described to encompass the Arrow Lakes and area. In 1985, Randy Bouchard and Dorothy Kennedy compiled a Lakes Indian Ethnography and History that was “meant to be utilized in the interpretation of the Vallican archaeological site at the confluence of the Slocan and Little Slocan Rivers” (1985:i). Bouchard and Kennedy relied on archival documents, government records, anthropological and ethnographic notes, and their own fieldwork among “people of Lakes Indian ancestry who live on or near the Colville Reservation” (1985:ii). Bouchard and Kennedy compiled an extensive list and description of place names in the Arrow Lakes region. Ethnographically, the Northern Okanagan, Lakes (Sinixt), and Sxwei’7lhp (Skoyelpi/Colville) 4 (in the United States) are part of an Interior Salish group which includes a southern component in Washington State (Teit 1914:284; Kennedy and Bouchard 1998:238). Kennedy and Bouchard write that “for convenience” this grouping “may be termed Okanagan-Colville” (1998:238), an outdated term for Nsǝlxcin, the language they hold in In early historical documents and ethnographies Sxwei’7lhp (Skoyelpi) people were called “Colville” in reference to the place at which they wintered and from where they came. 4 CONFIDENTIAL 11 P a g e | 12 Sinixt common. Northern Okanagan villages were located on the Okanagan Lake and the Okanagan River drainage. The Lakes (Sinixt) traditional territory centred on the Arrow and Slocan lakes and on the Columbia River from north of Revelstoke to Northport, or sná’kǝwi’ltǝn, Washington to the south (Figure 3) (Teit 1914:284; Kennedy and Bouchard 1998:238; Nancy Wynecoop in Elmendorf 1935). Figure 3 – Map 2: Northern Okanagan, Lakes and Colville territory, late 19th and 20th centuries – Bouchard and Kennedy 1998 The Northern Okanagan, Lakes and Colville groups each speak a different dialect of their common language Nsǝlxcin, also written in some sources as nsilxcin, Nselxcin (“people’s speech”) (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998:238; see also Turnbull 1977:1, 16). Similarly, Teit reported that the tribes of this language group collectively referred to themselves as Nis’lixtcEn, or Nse’lixtcEn, meaning “Salish-speaking” (Teit 1930:198). 5 Teit explained that both the Lakes and the Okanagan tribes “extend into the United States, and both speak the Okinagan [Nsǝlxcin] language” (1914:284). The geologist and surveyor George Dawson also observed that this is a “linguistically allied people” and “might appropriately be designated simply the Salish” (1892:5). According to Teit, dialectical differences were revealed where “[t]he variation in pronunciation and vocabulary is sufficient to identify the division to which the speaker belongs. The chief difference between the Colville [Sxwei’7lhp] and Lake [Sinixt] consists of the slower utterance of the latter” (Teit Teit explained that this name is derived from “Sa’lix, Se’lix, Si’lix, “Salish or Flathead tribes;” and –tcin, -tcEn, “language”” (1930:198). 5 CONFIDENTIAL 12 P a g e | 13 Sinixt 1930:203). Lakes consultant Nancy Wynecoop explained that “the Colville (sxoie’lp) and Lakes dialects are very closely similar” (Elmendorf 1936, Notebook 4). Nancy Wynecoop of Wellpinit, Washington was ethnographer William Elmendorf’s primary Lakes consultant during his ethnographic work in the 1930s. She spoke the Lakes dialect of Nsǝlxcin and Npoqínišcn (Spokane) (Elmendorf 1936, Notebook 4). At the time of the interviews with Elmendorf in 1935, Wynecoop was approximately 70 (born c. 1865) (Elmendorf 1936, Notebook 4). Anthropologist Franz Boas’ map “Showing Distribution of Salish Dialects, And of Languages Spoken in Adjoining Territory, Before 1800” (Figure 4) 6 indicated with the letter “c” that the Okanagan, Lake, Sanpoil and Colville as speaking the same Salish dialect but their separate and distinct territories within the language group is shown by a fine dotted line. Figure 4 – Map 3: Distribution of Salish Dialects, and of Languages Spoken in the Adjoining Territory, Before 1800, Based on Information Collected by James A. Teit, Franz Boas, and Leo J. Frachtenberg [Detail] – Boas 1928 In his ethnography of the Okanagon (1930) Teit explained that the Okanagan people who lived at the head of Okanagan Lake, used the term Sӓltī’qut, “Lake people” (1930:203, fn. 9) to differentiate themselves from other Nsǝlxcin-speaking groups, that is, those Okanagan people who spoke the same language and lived to the south on the Okanagan and Similkameen rivers (Teit 1930:203-204). Lakes consultant Nancy Wynecoop informed anthropologist William Elmendorf in 1935, that her people were called sina’itsktx (Sinixt) or Lakes, meaning “people at 6 Boas’ map is based on information collected by James A. Teit, Franz Boas, and Leo J. Frachtenberg. CONFIDENTIAL 13 P a g e | 14 Sinixt headwaters” 7. The Arrow Lakes area is consistently identified in the ethnographic and historic record as that of sngaytskstx or “Sinixt”. The historical and ethnographic record consistently characterizes the sngaytskstx (Sinixt of the Arrow Lakes) as a separate and distinct geopolitical entity that holds a language in common with the Okanagan and Skoyelpi (Colville) people. In comparing the Sxwei’7lhp (Skoyelpi) and Sinixt, James Teit wrote that: The Colville [Sxwei’7lhp] are named from the Colville River and Fort Colville, places in their territory; but formerly they were generally called “Chaudiere” or “Les chaudieres” by the fur-traders. They were also known by translations of this term, such as “Kettle Indians,” “Pot Indians,” “[illegible] Indians,” and “Cauldrons.” The origin of the names is not clear; but evidently it has some connection with Kettle Falls and Kettle River, places in their territory. They were also sometimes called “Shuelpee,” [Sxwei’7lhp] which is simply a corruption of their own name. The Lake were often called “Sinijixtee” and “Sinatcheggs,” which are corruptions of their own name. The name of the “Lake” was applied to the tribe because of their habitat on the lakes to the north; viz. Arrow Lakes, Kootenay Lake, Slocan Lake, in British Columbia” (Teit 1930 manuscript:1-2). Anthropologist Verne Ray in 1936 published a description of Native Villages and Groupings of the Columbia Basin. According to Ray, the information gathered for the purpose of publication had been received primarily from knowledge-keepers who “were selected so that the information was furnished from direct experience or from knowledge gained from parents or others of the same generation” (Ray 1936:99). Among Ray’s principal consultants was James Bernard, a Lakes man who, in 1931, “was perhaps eighty years old, the best informed and oldest surviving member of his group… From early in the present century until his death in 1934 he was chief of the few surviving members of the Lakes” (1963:99). 8 Other knowledge-keeper consultants included individuals from Kalispel, Coeur d’Alene, Spokane, Sanpoil, Nespelem, Colville [Skpoelpi] and other groups in the United States (1936:99). Ray explained that the information he provided represented “aboriginal conditions as they existed around 1850” (1936:101) and stressed that “this date be emphasized with regard to the data here presented for the territorial distribution may have been very different a hundred years earlier, due to native movements uninfluenced by direct contact with whites” (1936:101). In identifying the Lakes people, Ray preferred to use the plural form “Lakes” as he was referring to those who live around Upper and Lower Arrow lakes 7 According to Wynecoop, and other Lakes people with whom he consulted, the Lakes “originally settled around Revelstoke” and that “over 100 yr. ago [ca. 1830s] the Lakes retreated down from around Revelstoke” (Elmendorf 1919-1936). Elmendorf was also informed that nk’mapeleks, located on Beaton Arm, was the “earliest settlement” of the Lakes (Wynecoop in Elmendorf 1936). This is discussed further in Section 5.1 below. 8 James Bernard, therefore, was born around 1851, roughly shortly after the Oregon Treaty was signed in 1846 and the US/Canada border was established. CONFIDENTIAL 14 P a g e | 15 Sinixt as well as Slocan and other lakes (Ray 1936:120). 9 Teit used the singular form, Lake (Teit 1930). Teit writes that the Lakes referred to themselves as: Snai’tcEkst, Snrai’tcEkstEx, Snāi’.tcEkstEx (1930:198). 10 Other names include Senijextee (Teit 1914:284), Sinatcheggs (Ross 1955:171-172; Teit 1930:198) and the Lakes name sna’itck stku, to refer to the group as a whole (Ray 1936:120). Dawson called this group S-na-a-chikst (1892:5). Sn?aykstx means “Dolly Varden char people” (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998:251; 1985:6). Anthropologist Leslie Spier reported that “Sinajextee” translates to lake trout (Spier 1936:7). The Sinixt were also referred to as the Columbia Lake Indians in some early historical sources (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998:251; Kittson 1826; Moberly 1865). 3.1 Social and Political Organization Unique geographical and environmental factors strongly influenced the political organization of the Lakes people which differed from other Columbia Basin groups. According to Verne Ray, “definite indications of true tribal organization are absent” among the Columbia Basin groups, in general: “…political affiliation of any kind between one and another village of many of the social and geographical units…was entirely lacking. In other words, the political unit was the village itself, and political entity of greater embrace being wholly unknown” [emphasis in original] (Ray 1936b:112). He went on to add, however, that “[t]his condition of village autonomy did not obtain in all parts of the Columbia Basin in 1850 or subsequently. Indeed it would be difficult in the light of present knowledge to circumscribe the area where such organization was to be found at the time of white advent” (Ray 1936b:112). The Lakes, unlike other Columbia Basin groups, he wrote, exhibited quite a different type of political unity. A marked feeling of solidarity seems to have grown out of the uniqueness of their habitat. They occupy a series of lakes and rivers over which they travel in circuits, making for a maximum of social intercourse and demanding considerable cooperation. Moreover, they are effectively shut off from adjacent groups on the west and north by high mountain ranges. A habitat of such nature is obviously inimical to Plains culture; and in fact the Lakes have accepted almost nothing from that area (Ray 1936b:115). The shape and nature of the environment provides natural boundaries to Lakes territory. Ray produced a map showing the extent of the Lakes traditional territory and the location of Lakes villages based on the information that was provided to him by Lakes consultants with whom he According to Ray, the “southern lobe of Lakes territory” located in Washington State, “is the least definitely established” and is based upon a single Lakes village located at Addy, Washington (Ray 1936:121). 10 The suffix -Ex denotes “people” (Teit 1930:198). 9 CONFIDENTIAL 15 P a g e | 16 Sinixt worked (Figure 5) (both territory and village locations are discussed in detail in Section 5.0 below). Figure 5 – Map 4: Lakes territory and villages – Ray 1936 Ray described the Lakes territory as “a series of interconnecting lakes and rivers over which they [Lakes people] travelled in circuits, making for a maximum of social intercourse and demanding considerable cooperation” (1936:115). The Lakes people were isolated from their neighbours to the north and west by mountain ranges. Ray suggested that this geographical isolation helped to solidify group cohesion (Ray 1936: 115). He noted that the Lakes had a chief, as did other Plateau groups, but that the Lakes chief exercised more control than other chiefs (Ray 1936:12). Teit found that Nsǝlxcin-speaking tribes had “one recognized head chief of all the tribes, except possibly the Lake” (1930:263) suggesting that the Lakes were autonomously governed by their own chief or chiefs. Teit in his fieldnotes remarked that “I found no trace of divisions among the Lakes. They were divided in small bands each having a chief and a main headquarters. (Like the bands of the Shus & Thomp.)” (Teit 1910-1913:1). Although the Lakes were “canoe people” (Nancy Wynecoop in Elmendorf 1935; Teit 1930:263) “some families were nomadic” (Teit 1930:263), that is they followed a seasonal round of hunting, CONFIDENTIAL 16 P a g e | 17 Sinixt fishing, and gathering11Lakes bands population “averaged less [sic] people than those of the other tribes” (1930:263). After Nsǝlxcin-speaking territories were split by the international boundary in 1846, “there were two head chiefs of the tribe – one on each side of the line” (Teit 1930:263). One of Teit’s Okanagan consultants provided Teit with a list of leading chiefs of several tribes “about [the year] 1850” (1930:270). The “leading chief of the Lake” is listed as Kirkwa’ or KEsawī’lEx, “‘becoming bad,’ at Fort Shepherd” on the Columbia River near Waneta (Teit 1930:270). From the 1840s to the 1870s, Lakes Chief Gregoire or Gregory is mentioned in various historical records. This is most likely the same chief, Kirkwa’. Citing Elmendorf (1935-1936) and Ray (1975, 2:147), Kennedy and Bouchard state that the Lakes held councils that “were comprised of a selected group” of “subchiefs, each appointed by their local group and... as a group chosen by the chief himself, who met with him every evening during the winter” (1998:248). 12 “Among the Lakes there was no social stratification” (Ray 1939:25). Social equality was emphasised although a dichotomy existed between the sexes. Chief and council was responsible for social authority. Chieftainship was loosely hereditary (Ray 1939, Elmendorf 1935-36) and according to Elmendorf’s Lakes consultants “[t]he Lakes Indians recognized 2 categories of chieftainship. There was a main chief who presided over all the Lakes people at any one time and a group of subchiefs who headed the various local groups” (Elmendorf 1935-36:I:76). There was a head chief over all the Lakes people known as ilimixwǝm and several sub chiefs known as sxi’I’it (also called suxuk’tpa’axa’m’ or “thinkers”) who were responsible for local groups. Together these men formed the council (Elmendorf 1935-36:I:76-78). “Council was held in the winter months in the chief’s lodge and functioned as the organizational body for tribal activities, a judiciary body for wrongdoers, and the sanctimonious authority for marital affairs (ibid)” (Mohs 1982:66). Ray provided a summary of the function of the tribal assembly and the council. He wrote: In the anthropological sense, “nomadic” refers to moving about the territory in order to access seasonally available resources, rather than living permanently at one location. Teit appears to be saying that the villages were permanently occupied by people throughout the year (that is, the villages were not abandoned by the entire population at once), while some families went out to pursue the seasonal round. 12 The following is list of Lakes chiefs as recorded in historical sources shown in brackets: 1) Quilischeenshue 1829 (Work) 2) Plitchouegge 1838 (Blanchet & Demers) 3) Gregoire Kessouilih (also referred to as Gugoin or Gregory) 1839 (Demers), 1840 (De Smet), 1861 (Cox), 1871 (Galbraith), 1865-6 (Moberly) 4) Qui-qui-lasket or Quil-Quil Louis 1861 (Cox), 1856 (Owen) 5) Melchoir 1858 (Michalore, Mikichlore or Mocklain), 1861 (Owen, Cox) 6) Cypien 1870 (Winnas) 7) Baptiste Skil-loom 1870 (Winnas) 8) Jaques 1870 (Winnas) 9) Edward 1874 (Simms), 1890 (MacDonald) 10) Oraphan 1874 (Simms), 193? (Morton) 11) Ask-a-weelish (?) 1847 (Kane) 11 CONFIDENTIAL 17 P a g e | 18 Sinixt Reference has been made to the tribal assembly and its functioning. It was quite an informal mechanism but it provided all adult members of the tribe an equal voice in all consequential affairs of the political group. Discussions were carried on at great length and decisions were made, by acclamation, only when the question under discussion had been thoroughly examined. The frequency with which the assembly met was determined wholly by the business that needed to be transacted and when tribal affairs were running smoothly there were long periods without any meetings. The membership of the assembly was automatically determined by the adult membership of the tribe. The council, on the other hand, was largely an instrumentality of the chieftainship and its size and membership was determined by him. It was a small group of men, sometimes including women, moderately stable in membership, with the sole function of advising the chief. Before this body, he brought all routine and non-critical matters when he wanted to test the alignment of public opinion, or simply to get advice from others whose judgement he respected (Ray 1975 [2016]:155-156). The historical record reflects Ray’s findings of Lakes group cohesion under the advice of a single chief. In 1821 fur trader Alexander Ross reported an encounter with the chief of the Sinatcheggs (Ross 1955:171-172). From the 1840s to the 1870s, Chief Gregoire or Gregory is mentioned in various historical records including Father De Smet’s journal of his stay at a camp on Upper Arrow Lake (Chittenden and Richardson 1906:548). Surveyor Walter Moberly travelled in the Upper Columbia region and along Illecillewaet River in 1865. His observations are recorded in his fieldnotes (notebooks 2&3, 1865) and in the Government publication of Columbia River Explorations (1866). Moberly’s colleague, James Turnbull, drafted a map showing the routes explored by Turnbull, Moberly and Green (Turnbull 1865-1866). In 1865 whilst camping at Revelstoke, Moberly made repeated references to Chief Gregoire (1865:16). Chief Gregoire reportedly was left in charge of Fort Shepherd once the Hudson’s Bay Company abandoned it in 1869. He remained at Fort Shepherd until at least 1871 (Turnbull, E. 1959:46; see also Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:123-124). It is most likely that Gregoire is the same Lakes chief that Teit (1930:270) identified as Kirkwa’ and who was located at Fort Shepherd around 1850. 3.2 Land and Resource Use: Economic Activities and Seasonal Round Typical of other Plateau groups, Lakes economic activities focused on fishing, hunting, and gathering plant foods. However, Kennedy and Bouchard write that the Lakes differed from the Sxwei’7lhp (Skoyelpi) and Northern Okanagan in that “[t]he Lakes were far more mobile, were canoe oriented rather than horse or foot oriented, and placed a greater emphasis on hunting than [on] fishing or plant gathering” (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998:241). CONFIDENTIAL 18 P a g e | 19 Sinixt The Arrow Lakes area provided ample hunting of caribou, goat, and bear. Teit reported that the Lakes tribe hunted these animals as well as deer, which “were not so plentiful as in the territories of the other tribes” (Teit 1930:242). In discussing the Nsǝlxcin-speaking populations in general, the seasonal round, as Teit described, included hunting by individuals and parties that continued throughout the year “almost incessantly”: …most bands had four great hunts every year: A spring hunt for deer and sheep, which usually was not very far afield and comparatively short in duration; a late fall hunt for deer, sheep, elk, and bear, the parties sometimes going far away and remaining out for about two months; a midwinter hunt for deer, and a late winter hunt for sheep. During the spring and late fall hunts the women busied themselves digging roots; and during the summer and early fall, when individual hunting only was carried on, they attended to the gathering and curing of berries and roots. Skins were dressed more or less all the year round, but probably chiefly in the wintertime. In the winter sheep hunt mostly ewes were killed and the rams were let go. The latter were hunted on their summering grounds when fat by small parties in the late summer and early fall, either by still hunting (the chief object being to catch them in their lairs on hot days), or with dogs (Teit 1930:243). Teit wrote that the “Lake Indians...fished a great deal” (1930:246). During the salmon run, the main encampment of the Lakes was at Hayes Island at the Kettle Falls (in Washington State) where they shared the salmon harvest with the Sxwei’7lhp (Skoyelpi/Colville) people (Bouchard and Kennedy 1975:5). Important fisheries were also located at Cascade on the lower Kettle River and near Slocan Pool on the lower Kootenay River. Salmon were also fished on the Arrow Lakes (Teit 1930). Teit admitted to having not received details on fishing tools and methods but reported that floats and sinkers were used by the Okanagan and Lake people and that two sinkers “were found on Arrow Lake: one was made of a flat, elongated waterworn beach stone, 12 centimeters long, 7 centimeters at the widest part, and 2.5 centimeters thick. This hole had been drilled from both sides, and a worked groove extended from the perforation on each side to the small end of the stone” (Teit 1930:246). Archaeologist Christopher Turnbull stated that “[f]ishing was most important, and was described [in historic records] many times, especially salmon fishing at Kettle Falls, where many travellers passed” (1977:120). In 1826, Hudson’s Bay Company employee William Kittson observed the use of weirs on Kootenay River and a barrier for fishing on the Slocan River (Kittson 1826:3). Whilst surveying the lower Kootenay river Kittson noted that “[a]bout two miles below the portage [South Slocan and Bonnington Falls] is the discharge of a small rapid where the Columbia Lake Indians [Lakes] make a barrier for salmon” (Kittson 1826:4). CONFIDENTIAL 19 P a g e | 20 Sinixt Alexander Ross mentioned the presence of a stone fishing weir at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia River (1855:164-165). The Lakes used a conical basketry trap to catch small fish. Ethnographer William Elmendorf (1935-36:II:22a) described this style of trap in his field notes and stated that “all the small streams in L.[akes] country had one in them.” Teit stated that of all the Okanagan tribes, “[t]he Lake used canoes most extensively” (1930:247). He emphasized that the territorial environment of each of the Nsǝlxcin-speaking tribes informed their hunting and fishing activities. The Arrow Lakes was reportedly an environment that influenced the canoeing, hunting, and fishing preferences of the Lakes people: “The importance of sheep hunting among the Similkameen and Okanagon, antelope hunting among the Sanpoil, caribou and goat hunting among the Lake, like the difference in fishing and the use of canoes, were caused by the different types of environment by the tribes” (Teit 1930:247; see also Turnbull 1977). The annual economic cycle was broken into four seasons: summer fishing (early or mid-June to August or September); fall hunting (September to November); sedentary winters (November to January); and spring hunting (February). Late summer is berry harvest time (Turnbull 1977:127). Major salmon fishing locations are as follows: Slocan River (Kittson 1826:3) mouth of the Kootenay River (Turnbull 1866:77) the Columbia at Revelstoke (Moberly 1865:17) Columbia at Kettle Falls (Heron and Kittson 1831:8b, 15) • • • • A noted fishing site was also located at the mouth of Incomappleux River at Beaton Arm (Ray 1936:126). Hunting grounds were located “in the hills and tributary valleys” (Turnbull 1977:128; see also Moberly 1865:18). Turnbull (1977:128) explained that during the fall hunt, parties dispersed and camped in groupings of one or two lodges at: • • • Revelstoke (Moberly 1865:17) Lower Arrow Lake (Turnbull 1866:27) the Narrows (Moberly 1865:17) Cascade Canyon and Falls area, south of Christina Lake, is know by Sxwei’7lhp (Skoyelpi) people as K’lhsaxem, “end of fish going up”, which refers to furthest extent of salmon north on the Kettle River (Freisinger 1979a:30). It was reported to archaeologist Michael Freisinger during his CONFIDENTIAL 20 P a g e | 21 Sinixt archaeological investigations of the Boundary area in the late 1970s by Skoyelpi consultants Martin Louie 13 and Albert Louie that “sockeye salmon spawned below Cascade Falls 14 because they could not ascend the falls, hence the name K’lhsaxem, “end of fish going up”' (Freisinger 1979a:29). and that a trail came to the south side of the falls: “The U – shaped basket net called the Ts’eli’7 and the harpoon were used here when Martin Louie fished here. There were twenty-five camps all sharing in the proceeds from the Ts’eli7. There was a salmon fishing organizer at the camp. The salmon fishing organizer helped distribute the salmon caught making sure everyone got a fair share” (Bouchard, and Kennedy, Pers. Com. with Freisinger, 1975). 15 Mary Marchand, a Lakes consultant, stated that they regularly portaged around Cascade Falls and travelled up the Kettle as far as they could go. 16 This information corresponds with village and camp sites identified by Teit (1930) and Ray (1936). See Section 5.0 below for details regarding village and camp sites. Lakes villages shared common hunting, berrying and root digging grounds (Ray 1936:117). Turnbull (1977:207-211) produced tables in which he listed the plants collected in Lakes traditional territory. His tables are reproduced in part here: Roots Collected in Lake Territory (Teit 1930) Common Name Remarks Common camas South of Castlegar (Taylor 1966:97) Bitter root [location not given] (Lyons 1965:134) Nodding onion Common throughout the area (Taylor 1966:96) Miner’s lettuce [location not given] (Lyons 1965) Yellow bell South of Castlegar (Taylor 1966:51-53) Columbia lily or tiger lily Common in wetter areas, throughout (Taylor 1966:53-56) Spring sunflowers Drier southern (Lyons 1965:142) Martin Louie is identified as Colville Okanagan (Sxweyi7lhp) [Skoyelpi] in this publication (Friesinger 1979a:29, 30). 14 Friesinger added: “Historical documentation has not been located as of yet to verify this. According to the International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission sockeye salmon fry require a lake for rearing during the first year or two of life. Since no lake is available below Cascade Canyon, sockeye spawning in this area would not be self-sustaining. It seems unlikely that fry produced from spawning in this area could find their way to Christina Lake (Philip Gilhousen, Project Biologist Pers. Commission)” (1979a:29). 15 A myth concerning the origin of salmon and the formation of Cascade Canyon is told by Martin Louie and is reproduced in Bouchard and Kennedy 1975. 16 This information was shared with BC by Sinixt in 2023 citing: Interview with Mary Marchand, April 21, 1986, with Joanne Signor. Manuscript in possession of the Colville Confederated Tribes. 13 CONFIDENTIAL 21 P a g e | 22 Sinixt Common Name Remarks Mariposa lily South of Castlegar (Taylor 1966:12, 96) Yellow avalanche lily or snow lily Common at higher elevations (Taylor 1966:42, 98) Silver weed In saline meadows and marshes (Lyons 1965:140) Ballheard water leaf In drier area (Lyons 1965:161) Berries Collected in Lake Territory (Teit 1930:238-239) Common Name Remarks Western choke cherry Below Lower Arrow and Kootenay Lake (Lyons 1965:46) Blueberry Alpine range (Lyons 1965:69) Bunchberry [location not given] (Lyons 1965:109) Black raspberry Up to 2000’ west of Selkirk Mountains (Lyons 1965:90) Thimbleberry Interior wet zones (Lyons 1965:87) Arctic raspberry Northern areas (Lyons 1965:129) Swamp gooseberry Mountain slopes (Lyons 1965:100) Hudson Bay currant [location not given] (Lyons 1965:98) Red-flower currant [location not given] (Lyons 1965:99) Sticky currant [location not given] (Lyons 1965:99) Scooplallie Open mountain slopes (Lyons 1965:84) Strawberry Dry interior (probably south of Castlegar) (Lyons 1965:114) Black mountain huckleberry 4000’ and above (Lyons 1965:88) Canada blueberry Abundant to north (Lyons 1965:58) Tall mahonia Valley floors to timberline (Lyons 1965:61) Seeds Collected in Lake Territory (Teit 1930:239) Common Name Remarks Hazelnut Common to 4000’ in the Revelstoke area (Lyons 1965:79) Western ponderosa pine Above Castlegar (Lyons 1965:18) Spring sunflower Southern drier areas (Lyons 1965:19) Lodgepole pine Common [location not given] (Lyons 1965:19) Cow parsnip Common [location not given] (Lyons 1965:122) CONFIDENTIAL 22 P a g e | 23 Sinixt 3.2.1 Traditional dwellings According to the knowledge-keepers with whom Teit consulted, Lake people used underground lodges – “earth lodges” or “earth-covered lodges” – “to a considerable extent…long ago” (Teit 1930:226; see also Ray 1936:135). Teit described the earth lodges as being “quite small”, large enough to house “one or two families”, with the entrance “through the top” (1930:226). According to Ray “[t]he Lakes pit lodges differ considerably from those of the Shuswap and their neighbors” (1936:135). Ray explained that the roofs of Lakes’ pit houses were distinct in that they were constructed with a roof of radiating poles: “a type of construction dominant to the south” (Ray 1936:133). Lakes’ pit houses did not contain central posts: “The roof is sufficiently steep so that the radiating poles maintain their positions after being anchored in the ground and tied to the hatchway frame. The foundation poles are spaced about four feet at the base. These are crossed by horizontal purlins or hoops, both inside and out. Then sub rafters are placed and covering material added” (Ray 1936:133). Figure 6 – Map 5: Earth lodges. Vertical hatching: circular, with rafters; horizontal hatching: circular, roof of radiating poles; diagonal hatching: circular, flat roof; broken hatching: circular, radiating poles with purlins (Ray 1936:133). Ray illustrated the distribution of earth lodges in the Plateau Culture area. In Figure 6, he illustrates with diagonal hatching that pit houses in Lakes territory were of circular construction with a roof of radiating poles (1936:133). Through his work with the Lakes people Ray came to understand that: In British Columbia the earth lodge continued in use until late in the last [19th] century. On the American side, in contrast, it was going out of existence before the whites entered the scene. The consistent native comment is that the earth lodge was the ‘old type’ CONFIDENTIAL 23 P a g e | 24 Sinixt of dwelling, at one time the exclusive winter habitat. Gradually, over a long period, it is explained, the earth lodge was supplanted by the mat covered dwelling, so the latter was in virtually exclusive use in the late nineteenth century…. The winter mat lodge [in contrast] is designed as a stationary structure, but can be moved, and is characteristically re-erected each year. The earth lodge requires maintenance of residence in the same spot each winter if it is to be utilized (Ray 1936:136-137). Teit also found that the use of subterranean houses was a former practice and no longer used at the time he visited the area. When he was in the area in the 1920s, Teit was informed that “none of the oldest Lake people now living ever used [pit houses]; but they have been described by their parents, some of whom lived in them” (1930:226). After living four days with Lakes people at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers, Teit wrote the following: I also found out that the Lakes formerly used kekule-houses with entrance from top by a ladder. They say the same in every way as the Shuswap K.h. but generally small to accommodate only one or sometimes two families. They went out of use a long time ago the women who told me this had never seen one, only the sites of them but the mother of one & grandmother of the other had lived in them when young. 17 Conical lodges were constructed with tule mats or bark and poles in both summer and winter months. Teit reported that the Lakes had used a double lean-to lodge made with poles and mats or brush throughout the year and that “this type of lodge went out of use among them a long time ago, but that formerly it was in use for the accommodation of strangers, visitors, and when communities camped together temporarily, as at fishing and other resorts in the fair season” (Teit 1930:228). Whilst hunting or trapping in the mountains, members of hunting parties constructed brush houses and shelters (Teit 1930:228). Hudson’s Bay Company employee John Work in 1829 described the dwellings situated along the upper Columbia River during the summer months as “…nothing more than posts set up in the form of an oblong with a flat roof covered with coarse grass or roots, generally open at both sides and ends, or if closed so many aperatures [sic] are left that the wind passes through without much interruption” (Work 1829:35). In the winter …they disperse themselves into small parties, these being seldom more than a half dozen lodges together, often only one or two. Their winter dwellings are constructed with poles covered with mats of bull rushes, joined together longitudinally, and left open at the top. They much resemble the roof of a barn set upon the ground, and generally situated on the 17 Teit, James. Salish ethnographic materials, 1898-1910. Boas Collection, F. 61 (BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00239). CONFIDENTIAL 24 P a g e | 25 Sinixt bank of a river…. Usually two or more families reside in the same lodge, each of which has its own fire…. The size of the lodge is proportional to the number of inhabitants (Work 1829:35). Discussion of archaeological investigations of pit houses is provided in further detail in Section 8.0 below. 4.0 Sinixt Traditional Territory as Documented in Historical and Ethnographic Sources Lakes traditional territory is described throughout the ethnographic and historic record as encompassing the Arrow Lakes and Columbia River from around the Big Bend at Kinbasket Lake to south of the US border, from Kettle River Valley to the Kootenay Valley. Below is a summary of some of the main sources of information regarding Lakes territory which include mapping, historic and ethnographic written territorial descriptions, compilations of village and resourceharvesting sites, trail networks, and relations with neighbouring groups. Anthropologist and archaeologist Gordon Mohs succinctly summarized the geographical characteristics that make up Sinixt traditional territory when he wrote that “[t]he traditional territory of the Lakes people consisted largely of a series of narrow, interconnected lake and river valleys bordered by steep mountain ranges. This terrain offered them protection and relative isolation from neighbouring groups to the north, west and east while, at the same time, providing them with diversity of food resources” (Mohs 1982:47). This habitat was instrumental in shaping Lakes culture (Ray 1936). 4.1 Description of Lakes Territory – Ethnographic and Historic mapping The following is a summary of historical and ethnographic maps that show the Arrow Lakes area and/or explicitly delineate Sinixt/Lakes traditional territory. Lakes territory is well-documented through mapping. Sinixt core territory centres on the Arrow Lakes. The following mapping summary is by no means exhaustive and is subject to further revision and additions. The maps are entered chronologically. Maps of particular interest are: • 1821 – Alexander Ross’ map is significant for identifying the Sinatcheggs (Sinixt) situated on the Arrow Lakes at that time • 1956 – British Columbia Native Distribution of Ethnic Groups compiled in 1956 by the BC Provincial Museum is a summary map showing the extent of Lakes traditional territory at 1850 as delineated by the most reliable and thorough ethnographic sources such as Verne Ray (1936), James Teit (1909-1930), and William Elmendorf (1935). CONFIDENTIAL 25 P a g e | 26 Sinixt • 1936 – Verne Ray’s Lakes Territory and Villages provides an illustration of Lakes territory as described to him by Lakes consultants. This map also shows the location of Lakes villages on Arrow Lakes, Slocan Lake, and Kootenay River. 1811 – David Thompson In 1811, fur trader David Thompson travelled north along the length of the Arrow Lakes. There Thompson encountered Indigenous populations along the Arrow Lakes as indicated by arrows sketched on his map 18 (Figure 7), shown below. Thompson does not appear to have identified this population by name (Belyea 1994:287-290) but we know from other sources that these would have been the Sinixt people. Figure 7 – Map 6: Map of the North-West Territory of the Province of Canada from Actual survey during the years 1792-1812 [Detail] – Thompson 1897 Hudson’s Bay Company Governor George Simpson wrote that the Indigenous people he met during his trip of 1824-1825 were called “Sinachicks – Lakes [Arrow] of Main River [Columbia River]” (Simpson 1931:169). Simpson appears to have been one of the first non-Indigenous people to identify the Sinixt by their own name (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:6). Although it may be that the Indigenous population living at Arrow Lakes was first identified by Alexander Ross in 1821 (Figure 10 below). The historic record provides some description of the Lakes people during the period of contact with European explorers and fur traders. The Lakes people became referred to as such because of the Arrow Lakes (Turnbull 1977:112). The people were known as “the Natives about the Lakes” or “the Columbia Lake Indians” (Kittison 1826:14; Dease 1827:1). By 1829, the name “Lake” was established as the term used to describe the population living at Arrow Lakes (Work 1829:4). This is my reading of the significance of the arrow markings and it could be a mistaken one. I have yet to read any other explanation for the use of arrows on this map although I have heard casually that Thompson was indicating the direction of river currents. 18 CONFIDENTIAL 26 P a g e | 27 Sinixt 1795, 1814, 1818 – Aaron Arrowsmith In 1795, Cartographer Aaron Arrowsmith produced A Map Exhibiting all New Discoveries in the Interior Parts of North America (Figure 8). Figure 8 – Map 7: A Map Exhibiting all New Discoveries in the Interior Parts of North America [detail], with additions to 1814 – Arrowsmith On this 1814 edition, Arrowsmith showed the Arrow Lakes as a single lake called “Chatth-noonick or Ear bobs L.” Located to what looks like the west of the Arrow Lakes, or perhaps to the south, Arrowsmith indicated “Ear bobs” [Pend d’Oreilles or Kalispel Tribe] across the “Wah na a CONFIDENTIAL 27 P a g e | 28 Sinixt cha” [Wenatchi] 19 River. 20 In 1818, Arrowsmith shows further additions and changes to his map (Figure 9). Figure 9 – Map 8: A Map Exhibiting all New Discoveries in the Interior Parts of North America [detail] – Arrowsmith 1818 “Ear bobs” Lake is either replaced with, or redrawn as, two lakes (clearly identifiable as the Arrow Lakes) but is not identified by name. To the immediate east of the middle of the Arrow Lakes is written “Kootanie Ind.” 21 and to the west “Otchenankane [Okanagan] Lake” is shown. To the immediate south of the Arrow Lakes, and to the east of the Columbia River, is the label “Sayalpee “Ear bobs” probably refers to the Pend d’Oreilles or Kalispel tribe in Washington and Montana. Pend d’Oreilles comes from the French “hang from ears”. The “Wah na a cha” River is most likely the Wenatchi River. 20 Belyea suggests that Arrowsmith “may have obtained this information not from [David] Thompson but from Joseph Howse, whose map of the upper Columbia, drawn in 1812, is now lost – it may have been discarded after its information was engraved on a published map” (1998:296). 21 Between the upper Columbia River and the Rocky Mountains, Arrowsmith identified the “Kootanac Ind.” which appears to be a separate population from the “Kootanie Ind.” to the immediate east of Arrow Lakes. 19 CONFIDENTIAL 28 P a g e | 29 Sinixt [Sxwei’7lhp/Skoyelpi] Ind.” “McGillivrays R.” is a previously-used name from Kootenay River and “Flat bow Lake” was what is now “Kootenay Lake”. 1821 – Alexander Ross Of considerable interest is fur trader Alexander Ross’ encounter on Upper Arrow Lake in 1821 with an Indigenous man identifying himself as the chief of the Sinatcheggs (also spelled sn̓ʕayckstx, sngaytskstx, and Sinixt)22 and the “son of a Kootenay chief” who had been forced, by warfare with the Blackfoot, to leave Ktunaxa country and settle at Arrow Lakes around 1790 (see Section 5.6 below for further discussion of this encounter). On his 1821 map, (Figure 10) Ross indicated “Sin Natch Eggs” across the Arrow Lakes at the point where the two lakes meet and adjacent to what Arrowsmith (1818) identified as “Kootanie Ind.” Ross also showed the location of the “Sin natch eggs Nation” and the village site, marked by three squares located on the “First Lake” (Lower Arrow Lake), south of what is now called Caribou Creek and opposite of present-day Burton. Today spelled sn̓ ʕayckstx. In their ethnography of the Lakes people, Bouchard and Kennedy recorded the spelling sngaytskstx (1985:96). 22 CONFIDENTIAL 29 P a g e | 30 Sinixt Figure 10 – Map 9: The Map of Columbia [Detail, notations added] – Alexander Ross, 1821 Ross provided the first written ethnographic description of this group after encountering the Sinatchegg (Sinixt) chief on Upper Arrow Lake. The chief informed Ross that his father was a “Kootanais chief” who was forced by the Blackfoot westward to the Arrow Lakes around 1790. Ross provided the details of the encounter with the Sinixt chief at the lower end of Upper Arrow Lake in his journal as follows: CONFIDENTIAL 30 P a g e | 31 Sinixt [The chief] gave us much information respecting the country, beaver and other animals, roads and distances; also some account of himself and the Indians of the place. ‘My father,’ said he, ‘was a Kootanais chief; but, in consequence of wars with the Blackfeet, who often visited his lands, he and a part of his people emigrated to this country about thirty years ago [around 1790]. I am now chief of that band, and head of all the Indians here. We number about two hundred, and call ourselves Sinatcheggs [Sinixt], the name of the country; and here we have lived ever since. I have been across the land on the west, as far as the Sawthlelum-takut, or Kanagan [Okanagan] Lake, which lies due west from this, and can be travelled on foot in six days. I and several people have likewise been to the She-whaps [Shuswap Lakes], which lies in a northwest direction from this’…. Here the old man concluded his remarks, and told us that his people were then living about two miles up the river [Nakusp], 23 where they were employed in hunting wild animals and catching fish; that his stumbling upon us was the effect of mere chance, he being at the time in pursuit of a wounded moose deer; but, on seeing the whites, he abandoned the pursuit, and came into our camp. We gave the sachem [chief] of the Sinatcheggs an axe, a knife, and some tobacco, and he took his departure highly gratified with his reception (Ross 1855:171-172) [emphasis added]. It is important to note that the ancestral identity of the man who emigrated to Sinixt territory, who happened to be a Ktunaxa chief, is inconsequential as group affiliation is tied to land and territory. Those people who emigrated to Sinixt territory became Sinixt upon joining the community and living in the territory. 1838 – Samuel Parker American missionary, Samuel Parker who wintered at Fort Vancouver on the Columbia River in 1835-36, described the Indigenous people living in Idaho and Montana in his Journal of an Based on mapping and description of villages (see Section 4.2 below), the chief may have been referring to the village of Nakusp, which was also was the location of a well-established fishery (Teit 1930:209). 23 CONFIDENTIAL 31 P a g e | 32 Sinixt exploring tour beyond the Rocky Mountains…in the years 1835, '36, and '37. Included in the publication is a map of Oregon Territory (Figure 11). The Arrow Lakes are shown on the map. Figure 11 – Map 10: Map of Oregon Territory [detail] from Journal of an exploring tour beyond the Rocky Mountains…in the years 1835, '36, and '37 – Parker 1838 Although not indicated by name on the map, Parker described in his journal the Lakes people located on the Arrow Lakes, as well neighbouring territories: The Cootanies [Ktunaxa] inhabit a section of country to the north of the Ponderas along M’Gillivray’s [Kootenay] river, and are represented as an uncommonly interesting people. They speak a language distinct from all the tribes about them…. I could not ascertain their numbers, but probably they are not over a thousand…. North of the Cootanies are the Carriers…. South of these are the Lake Indians, so named from their place of residence, CONFIDENTIAL 32 P a g e | 33 Sinixt which is about the Arrow Lakes. They are about five hundred in number…. At the south, and about Colvile, are the Kettle Falls Indians [Sxwei’7lhp/Skoyelpi]. Their number is five hundred and sixty…. At the west and North-west, next in order, are the Okanagans, numbering one thousand and fifty (Parker 1840:178-179) [emphasis added]. 1842-1848 Pierre Jean De Smet Father Pierre Jean De Smet was a Jesuit priest who travelled to North America to missionize Indigenous populations. He spent several years establishing missions on the Columbia River. De Smet produced a map of the Northern Rocky Mountains and Plateau based on his time spent from 1842-1848 with the Indigenous people living in the region then called by Europeans “Oregon Territory” (Figure 12). His detailed, albeit difficult to read, map locates the Catholic mission “St. Peter’s Station” of the “Gens des Lacs de la Cola” (Lakes People of the Columbia) on the west side of Upper Arow Lake, thus identifying the Lakes people living on Arrow Lakes at 1842. De Smet visited 20 families of “Lakes Indians” (Thwaites 1906:II:270). 24 Figure 12 – Map 11: [1842-1848] [Map of Northern Rocky Mountains and Plateau]. Jesuit Missouri Province Archives, St. Louis, Missouri. De Smetiana Collection, MJA IX C8 – 13. [Detail] The map reads south to north with west being at the top of the map. De Smet drew in the natural boundary between the Okanagan Valley and the Columbia River Valley and labelled it: “The Modeste Demers baptized the Lakes’ chief Gregoire Kessouilih in 1839 (Demers 1939). In 1878 Father Norbert Blanchet spent 18 days at “the House of the Lakes” and baptized “17 children” (Bagley 1932:25). In his journal entry for February 28, 1878 Demers wrote: “stopped at the House of the Lakes, and Forts Colville, O’Kanagan, and Walla Walla, at each of which immense crowds of Indians assembled…” (Bagley 1932:23). According to Laura Stovel (2020), “House of the Lakes” was at Arrowhead. Arrowhead was also the location of Lakes village Kospi’tsa (Buffalo robe), an important salmon-fishing and root digging centre (Teit 1930:209). 24 CONFIDENTIAL 33 P a g e | 34 Sinixt Mountains that separate the Skoyelpi [Sxwei’7lhp] of the Kettle [Falls] from the Okanagans” – the Okanagan people are situated to the west in Okanagan Valley (not shown in detail). In 1846, De Smet’s map of the “Oregon Territory” (Figure 13) was published. This map shows St. Peter’s Station on Arrow Lakes (marked), Fort Colville (marked), and several geographical placenames. Figure 13 – Map 12: Oregon Territory, 1846 [Detail] – Thwaites 1904 In the text accompanying the map, De Smet wrote that he “gave the name of St. Paul to the Shuyelphi [Sxwei’7lhp/Skoyelpi] [De Smet also referred to this nation as the Chaudière 25 Indians] nation, and placed under the care of St. Peter the [Lakes] tribe inhabiting the shores of the great 25 Chaudière means “kettle” in French. CONFIDENTIAL 34 P a g e | 35 Sinixt Columbia lakes…. My presence among the Indians did not interrupt their fine and abundant fishery” (Thwaites 1904:108). De Smet continued in his description of the Lakes’ fishery. He wrote: An enormous basket was fastened to a projecting rock, and the finest fish of the Columbia, as if by fascination, cast themselves by dozens into the snare. Seven or eight times during the day, these baskets were examined, and each time were found to contain about 250 salmon. The Indians, meanwhile, were seen on every projecting rock, piercing the fish with the greatest dexterity. They who know not this territory may accuse me of exaggeration, when I affirm, that it would be easy to count the pebbles so profusely scattered on the shores, as to sum up the number of different kinds of fish, which in this western river furnished for man’s support…. One may form some idea of the quantity of salmon and other fish, by remarking, that at the time they ascend the rivers, all the tribes inhabiting the shores, choose a favorable location, and not only do they find abundant nutriment during the season, but, if diligent, they dry, and also pulverize and mix with oil a sufficient quantity for the rest of the year. Incalculable shoals of salmon ascend to the river’s source, and there die in shallow water. Great quantities of trout and carp follow them, and regale themselves on the spawn deposited by the salmon in holes and still water. The following spring the young salmon descend towards the sea…. Six different species are found in the Columbia River” (De Smet in Thwaites 1904:109-110). De Smet produced a further map c. 1846 showing the Pays des Porteurs (Figure 14) on which he shows the settlement of the Gens des Lacs (Lakes People) on Lacs de la Colombie (Columbia Lakes, now known as the Arrow Lakes). To the west he shows the location of the Okanagan people on Okanagan Lake and to the east the “Country of the Kootenays” is located. CONFIDENTIAL 35 P a g e | 36 Sinixt Figure 14 – Map 13: [c.1846] Pays des Porteurs [Country of the Carriers]. Washington State University Libraries, Pullman, Washington. Manuscripts, Archives, and Special Collections. Pierre Jean de Smet Papers, Cage 537, Neg. No. 99-145. [Detail] CONFIDENTIAL 36 P a g e | 37 Sinixt 1859 – John Arrowsmith In 1859 cartographer John Arrowsmith, nephew of cartographer Aaron Arrowsmith, produced a map on which is labelled “Sin Natch Eggs Ind.” (also spelled sn̓ʕayckstx, sngaytskstx, and Sinixt)26 across the middle Arrow Lakes region (Figure 15) in approximately the same area as did Ross on his map of 1821. Arrowsmith further identifies Caribou Creek as “Sinnatcheggs R.”. Sin Natch Eggs Ind. Figure 15 – Map 14: The Provinces of British Columbia & Vancouver Island with the Portions of the United States & Hudson’s Bay Territories [Detail], Complied from Original Documents by John Arrowsmith, 1859 1884, 1892 – George Dawson and W.F. Tolmie George Dawson undertook several geological reconnaissance trips in the southern interior of British Columbia during 1877, 1888, 1889 and 1890. Although Dawson’s work was of a geological nature and not focused on ethnological investigation, he wrote that his “almost consistent Today also spelled sn̓ ʕayckstx. In their ethnography of the Lakes people, Bouchard and Kennedy recorded the spelling sngaytskstx (1985:96). 26 CONFIDENTIAL 37 P a g e | 38 Sinixt association with [the Indigenous population] naturally afforded numerous opportunities of acquiring information respecting them, and the circumstances were such as to favour especially the accumulation of local notes and the identification of places” (1892:3). This work culminated in the publication of Notes on the Shuswap People of British Columbia (1892) in which Dawson briefly described the S-na-a-chikst (Sinixt), the population living on and around the Arrow Lakes (1892:6). The information regarding the Sinixt people was provided to Dawson by former Hudson’s Bay Company employee and Indian Agent Joseph William McKay. In the publication Dawson wrote that he “never met with these [the Sinixt] people, and the facts above notes, together with the rendering of the name, are derived from [Indian Agent] Mr. McKay” (Dawson 1892:5). During the winter of 1875-76, George Dawson and scientist and fur trader William Fraser Tolmie, collected a vocabulary of Indigenous languages which they published in Comparative Vocabularies of the Indian Tribes of British Columbia (1884). Included in this publication is their Map Shewing the Distribution of the Indian Tribes of British Columbia (Figure 16). The map illustrates through green colour shading that the Arrow Lakes is included among the Salishspeaking populations. The boundary between the Ktunaxa-speakers and the Salish-speakers roughly follows the Selkirk mountain range. The western boundary of the “Akoklako or Lower Kootanie” intersects the eastern boundary of the “Okanagan” (referring to Nsǝlxcin-speaking territories) near the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers and erroneously includes the confluence of those rivers within the bounds of Kootenay-speaking territory. Dawson later corrected this error on his 1892 map (see below). To the northeast, Trout Lake is included within the shaded boundary of the area labelled “Okanagan” (Nsǝlxcin-speaking territories). Kennedy and Bouchard (1985) likewise interpret the eastern boundary of the area shaded and labelled as “Okanagan” as that of the Lakes division (see comparison map Figure 29, Map 25). CONFIDENTIAL 38 P a g e | 39 Sinixt Figure 16 – Map 15: Map Shewing the Distribution of the Indian Tribes of British Columbia [Detail] – Tolmie and Dawson 1884 It is not surprising that Dawson erred, at first, in his depiction of boundaries at, at least, the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers given that, as stated above, Dawson had not visited the area, nor had he met with the people living there. He corrected this error in his subsequent 1892 map (Figure 17 below) after having visited the area himself. Although Dawson showed “Okanagan” territory centered at Okanagan Lake and “Kootanie” territory centred on Kootenay Lake, he did not specifically delineate Lakes (Sinixt) territory on this 1884 map (Figure 16); but by 1892 he corrected this omission by including an illustrated rendition of Sinixt territory. In his 1892 publication, Dawson explained that “[o]n the earlier [1884] map… no attempt was made to show the precise lines of division” (1892:4); however, on his 1892 map (Figure 17) Dawson labelled the territory encompassing the Arrow Lakes “S-NA-A- CONFIDENTIAL 39 P a g e | 40 Sinixt CHIKST (Sinixt) SALISH PROPER”, this time including the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers. This 1892 map was prepared after having visited the area. Figure 17 – Map 16: Map Shewing the Limits of the Shuswap People, with the Principal Subdivisions – Dawson 1892 Lakes country, writes Dawson, “thus forms a wedge between that of the Oo-ka-na-knae [Okanagan] and Kootenuha [Ktunaxa]” (1892:5). A dotted line is used to indicate the northern boundary with the Shuswap, located at what is the present-day city of Revelstoke, suggesting some permeability at this boundary (Dawson 1892). Dawson also clarified that “[t]he country occupied by them [Sinixt] is included in that of the Oo-ka-na-kane [Okanagan]” (1892:4). Curiously, Trout and Slocan lakes are not included within Sinixt boundaries in this 1892 version, CONFIDENTIAL 40 P a g e | 41 Sinixt whereas Trout Lake was shown within Sinixt boundary on his 1884 map. Furthermore, in his 1892 version, Dawson included the mouth of the Kootenay River within Sinixt territory. Dawson’s 1892 map is more consistent with other historic maps with the exception in his exclusion of Trout and Slocan lakes from Sinixt territorial boundary. Dawson’s mapping was accompanied by a written description of Sinixt territory. He wrote that the S-na-a-chikst “claim the fishing and hunting grounds along the western leg of the Columbia River, including the Arrow Lakes and the lower part of the Kootenai River from its mouth to the first fall [presumably Bonnington Falls] 27, which was a noted fishing place” (1892:5). Dawson added that “[t]hey now [late 19th century], however, migrate to the north of the international boundary only in the summer season, their centre and winter quarters being in Montana” (Dawson 1892:5). 1928 – Franz Boas Anthropologist Franz Boas’ map “Showing Distribution of Salish Dialects, And of Languages Spoken in Adjoining Territory, Before 1800” is based on information collected by James A. Teit, Franz Boas, and Leo J. Frachtenberg and shows the territory of the “Lake” (Figure 18) encompassing the Arrow Lakes, Kootenay River and the Columbia River south into what is now the Unites States. Lakes territory is shown as making up a portion of the larger Nsǝlxcin language group. Upon first publishing this map in 1927, Boas and anthropologist and linguist Herman Karl Haeberlin explained: The map shows the distribution of tribes as obtained from the earliest reliable information collected among old Indians, and it represents, on the whole, the period of the second half of the 18th Century. It should be noted that the boundary lines are not absolutely definite, although they probably represent very nearly the actual distribution of the tribes (1927:117). Sinixt read Dawson to be describing “the ‘first fall’ here was most likely Slocan Falls, not Bonnington Falls. Slocan Falls is just upstream of Slocan Pool and downstream of Bonnington. It is the first time that salmon met a significant barrier on the Kootenay River. Ocean salmon and steelhead trout converged in great numbers in the extensive pool below these falls, beside an equally extensive Sinixt village that extended north to present-day Crescent Valley and (as recent archaeological discoveries on private land near the mouth of the Slocan River confirm), west toward Castlegar” (Sinixt “EH Critique May 2023”). This would place Dawson’s description of Sinixt western boundary slightly further west of Bonington Falls. 27 CONFIDENTIAL 41 P a g e | 42 Sinixt Figure 18 – Map 3: Distribution of Salish Dialects, and of Languages Spoken in the Adjoining Territory, Before 1800, Based on Information Collected by James A. Teit, Franz Boas, and Leo J. Frachtenberg [Detail] – Boas 1928 The map indicates with the letter “c” that the Okanagan, Lake, Sanpoil and Colville as speaking the same Salish dialect and their separate and distinct territories within the language group is shown by light dotted line. 1909-1930 – James Teit In 1909, after visiting the people present at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers, James Teit clarified his understanding of the territory encompassing the Arrow Lakes. Teit gathered information from two Lakes consultants, Mary Christian and her mother Antoinette, who were living at that time at the mouth of Kootenay River (Teit 1909). Teit visited the area for the purposes of mapping the distribution of Salishan dialects and to learn about the movements of Indigenous groups (Teit 1930:25). CONFIDENTIAL 42 P a g e | 43 Sinixt In 1930 Teit published an ethnography of the Nsǝlxcin-speaking tribes 28 in which he included the Lakes people whose territory he described to encompass the Arrow Lakes and area. According to Teit, the Lakes people were referred to as such because of “their habitat on the lakes to the north, viz, Arrow Lakes, Kootenai Lake, and Slocan Lake, in British Columbia” (1930:198). In his publication Indian Tribes of the Interior, Teit described Lakes territory as follows: The Senijextee [Sinixt] or Lake tribe is found along the Columbia river and near the Arrow Lakes from Revelstoke south; along the Slocan River and Lake; along the Kootenay River below the Lake; near the west arm of Kootenay Lake and in part of the Kettle River valley…. The Okinagan live along Okanagan Lake and River, from the head southwards, in parts of the Kettle and Similkameen valleys, and in a portion of the upper Nicola valley near Douglas Lake. Both of these tribes extend into the United States, and both speak the Okinagan language [Nsǝlxcin], while the other three tribes [Ntlakyapamuk, Shuswap, Lillooet] speak closely allied but separate languages (1914:284; emphasis added). In his fieldnotes, Teit provided further detail regarding Lakes boundaries as follows: Boundaries: Lakes all country along both banks Columbia from around Marcus & Newport up to beyond Revelstoke including Rossland & Trail on west. Kootenay River up to Lake around Nelson or a little above although not much used at least lately. All Slocan River & Slocan & Trout Lakes. 29 The Lake people, according to Teit, “seem to have been a long time in their present habitat” (1930:214); he added that “[i]t is possible… that they may have been a northern offshoot of the Colville, whom they regard as their nearest of kin” (1930:214-215). In his fieldnotes Teit recorded more clearly: “Senijextee [Sinixt] – Marcus close to the borders of the Colville. They [Sinixt] consider themselves an offshoot or branch of the latter [Colville/Skoyelpi]” (1910-1913:18). Archaeological evidence gleaned from investigations prior to the flooding of the Columbia River support this statement (Harrison 1969:62). 30 Some of Teit’s consultants “even say that they [Lakes and Skoyelpi] were originally one people whose home was at Marcus” located near Kettle Falls on the Columbia River in Washington State (Teit 1930:215; see also Dawson 1892:5; Work "The Okanagon", pp. 198-294 in The Salishan Tribes of the Western Plateaus, Franz Boas (ed.), 45th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for 1927-1928, (Washington, 1930), 23-396. 29 Teit (n.d.) Fieldnotes on Thompson and neighboring Salishan languages [circa 1904-1913]. American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia. Boas Collection 372.1, Roll 48, S 1b.7 (BCA MS 1425, Microfilm A-262). 30 Archaeological evidence supports Teit’s finding that the Lakes are possibly “a northern offshoot of the Colville” (Teit 1930:214-215). “Pictographs at Deer Park (DiQ1-3) include many elements duplicated on Bonaparte Creek [sic] in Washington on Colville territory. Joined circles, the stemmed cog wheel, the centipede, and sunbursts are nearly identical with their counterparts in DiQl-3” (Harrison 1961:62). 28 CONFIDENTIAL 43 P a g e | 44 Sinixt 1830:2; Ray 1936:114). Both Teit (1930) and Ray (1936) reported that the village located near Marcus was the largest of the Lakes settlements (see also Heron and Kittson 1831:8b-9). The Nsǝlxcin tribes “were surrounded by other tribes of the [I]nterior Salish, except on that part of the eastern confines of the Lake tribe where they bordered on the Lower Kutenai” (Teit 1930:203). According to Teit’s consultants, “[t]he Lake division claim that their eastern boundary was at a point on the [Kootenay] lake some seven or eight miles east of Nelson” 31 (Teit 1930:210211). Teit described the Shuswap as “a canoe people” like the Lake and that the former “occupied a country very similar in climate and natural features, contiguous to the Lake tribe and just north of them” (1936:203). The population identified by Teit as “the Okanagan division” of the Nsǝlxcinspeaking tribes32 lived in villages on Okanagan Lake but also hunted to the east of Okanagan Lake where their traditional territory bordered with that of the Lake tribe: “They crossed the Gold Range to near the Arrow Lakes, claiming the country as far east as the head of Caribou [Whatshan] Lake and the middle of Fire Valley [near Inonoaklin Creek], where they met the Lake tribe” (Teit 1930:213; see also Hill-Tout 1978:131). As shown in the maps that follow, Teit consistently maps the boundary between the Okanagan division and the Lakes division at around Grand Forks 33 following the Granby River north to just east of what is now Granby Provincial Park where the boundary meets the Secwépemc southern boundary, which continues north along the Gold Range, up to Revelstoke (see Figure 19 below). By this description the boundary would be located approximately in the area of Willow Point. Teit referred to this population as “the Okanagan division of the Okanagan tribes” (1930). 33 In his fieldnotes Teit wrote: “Okanagons all along on N of them [Spokans]. Okanagons occupied Upper Kettle River coming down to about Grand Forks or Christina Lake” (Teit 1907-1910:Salish Tribal Names and Distributions). 31 32 CONFIDENTIAL 44 P a g e | 45 Sinixt Figure 19 – Map 17: Map (3) showing northern boundaries of the Kalispels, & territories of the Lakes & the Kootenays, and positions of other Interior Tribes [detail]– Teit American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c (Teit 1910-1913) Teit’s “Map (3) showing northern boundaries of the Kalispels, & territories of the Lakes & the Kootenays, and positions of other Interior Tribes” (Figure 19): On close examination of shading and outlining, Teit shows Kootenay Lake as ascribed to both Kootenay [Ktunaxa] territory and Lakes territory, as an area of overlap. In his other mapping, Kootenay Lake is not included within Lakes territory. In addition to delineating Lakes territory, this map shows a portion of Kalispel hunting territory, marked with “(3)”, extending north of the Canadian/US border to just south of Nelson. According to the following story, from 1855-1858, this area was Kalispel headquarters. Teit wrote: CONFIDENTIAL 45 P a g e | 46 Sinixt “That marked (3) was anciently only hunting country of the Kalispel, and possibly at one time belonged altogether to the Lakes. After the war against the Whites in Eastern Washington (1855 to 1858) a large body of Kalispels made their headquarters in this district north of the international line and remained there for several years. Even during the progress of the war a number of them were located there. Some time over 100 years ago or earlier [c. 1810?] a large body of lower Kootenay moved against the Lakes, and tried to with the intention of dispossessing them of their salmon fisheries at the mouth of Slocan River and in fact to take drive them of occupying the Kootenay River down to the mouth. This resulted in a war in which the Kootenay were finally driven back to Kootenay Lake…“. 34 And… The Kalispel These people are unique in so far as their country extends into four states viz BC, Wash, Idaho & Montana. I have defined their boundaries in Maps (1), (2), (3) & (4) (green colors) They appear were in [illegible] As the Lakes, Coeur d’Alenes & Pend d’Oreille all agree with the Kalispels on these boundaries they are probably correct. Their main habitat was along Clark’s Fork or Pend d’Oreille River from Plains in Montana to the BC line. South of Nelson they formed a wedge between the Lakes & Kootenays and occupied the salmon fisheries on the upper part of Salmon [Salmo] River BC. They occupied all the Priest Lake & Pend d’Oreille Lakes regions in Idaho. The Chewala & upper part of Colville villages in in Wash. & Horse Plains &c. in Montana. In early days they were allies with the spokanes in their wars, and also fought a great deal with the Kootenay. They are divided into at least three bands (or divisions). 35 He also noted in his fieldnotes: Notes to Map (3) (Interior) (Br. Columbia) (showing country claimed by the Lake tribe,) and all of it occupied by them until very recently. The southern and eastern western boundaries of the Kootenay are those considered their the ancient boundaries by from Lake, and, Kalispel, and Pend’ d’oreille informants who claim them to be the ancient ones. Their eastern boundaries are marked for recent years but were probably different at one time. (see Map. (1) and notes to same.)….(Teit 1910-1913; corrections Teit’s). 36 Teit’s “Map No. (2) showing approximate positions and boundaries of tribes circa 1840-50 (or before any of the tribes went on reserves)” (Figure 20), provided below, shows the southwestern boundary encompassing the Kettle River valley, but not without some outstanding questions, as I have tried to capture Teit’s notes as true to the original as possible. Therefore I have included in the typescript all of Teit’s strikesthrough as they appeared in his notes. Teit, James. Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest. Originals held by American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia, 1910-1913:16(7). 35 Teit, James A. Salish tribal names and distributions. BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3, 1907-1910. 36 Teit, James. Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest. Originals held by American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia, 1910-1913:15(6). 34 CONFIDENTIAL 46 P a g e | 47 Sinixt Teit went on to state. He wrote: “…some more investigation is required for the Kettle River Country, my information regarding it being entirely from the Lakes”. 37 Bouchard and Kennedy (1985), concluded that this southwestern expansion happened only after 1880 (see below for further detail). Figure 20 – Map 18: Map No. (2) showing approximate positions and boundaries of tribes circa 1840-50 (or before any of the tribes went on reserves) [detail] – Teit American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c (Teit 1910-1913) 37 Teit, James. Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest. Originals held by American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia, 1910-1913:17(8). CONFIDENTIAL 47 P a g e | 48 Sinixt Figure 21 – Map 19: Map. No. 1. Western States [detail, additions mine] – Teit, American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c (Teit 1910-1913) Teit provided the following legend for his map shown above (Figure 21)[emphasis added]: (13) Traditional early headquarters of the Shuswap from whence they are supposed to have spread. (14) Also a very old headquarters of the Shuswap. (15) Early headquarters of the Okanagon from whence they spread according to some. 38 (16) [Early headquarters of the Okanagon] from when they spread north according to others. (17) [Early headquarters] of the Lake from whence they spread. [Marcus, Washington] Teit further added: “Tradition points to the earliest headquarters of the Okanagon having been on Okanagon River, that of the Colville on the Columbia around the mouth of Colville, and Kettle Rivers…” (p. 20(11)) and that “The Okanagon appear to have spread from a center on Okanagon River chiefly North Westwards” p. 52 (18). Teit, James. Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest. Originals held by American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia, 19101913. 38 CONFIDENTIAL 48 P a g e | 49 Sinixt (18) Other important old headquarters of Lake bands. [Teit lists several here: Marcus, Waneta, Castlegar, Slocan, and Nakusp] (19) Early and late main seat of the Colville [Skoyelpi] (23) [Old headquarters] of Lower Kalispel. Figure 22 – Map 20: Map (3) showing present or late and also former distributions of northern tribes [detail] – Teit, American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c (Teit 1910-1913) Regarding the sources for his mapping, Teit noted that the “Information on the tribes included in Map (3) and their boundaries was obtained entirely from Indians sources for all the tribes…” (Figure 22). 39 It is interesting, and not insignificant, to compare this map (Figure 22) – which depicts territorial boundary information received from all Indigenous groups with whom Teit worked, as Teit stated here – with his map (Figure 20), drawn from Lakes information only, as also stated. Despite this and the fact that one map depicts territorial boundaries as they existed at 1840-50 (Figure 20) and the other showing boundaries around 1910, that is, postTeit, James. Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest. Originals held by American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia, 1910-1913:68(44). 39 CONFIDENTIAL 49 P a g e | 50 Sinixt establishment of the Colville Reservation (Figure 22), the two maps are nearly identical in their depiction of Lakes boundaries. 1909 – Teit’s Arrow Lakes Boundary Revision In Teit’s 1909 ethnography on the Secwépemc he listed, in error, “a detached band … on Lower Arrow Lake” (1909:451) as the “Arrow Lake band” 40 – marked ‘G’ on his map below (Figure 23) – as part of the “Shuswap Lake division” of the Shuswap, today the Secwépemc. The Arrow Lakes was encompassed erroneously within this larger delineation of Secwépemc territory. Teit Although Teit listed a “Principal Village or Headquarters” for other bands, he did not provide one for the “Arrow Lakes band” (1909:462). 40 CONFIDENTIAL 50 P a g e | 51 Sinixt realized his error and took care to both explain the reasons for having made this mistake and later to make the appropriate correction. Figure 23 – Map 21: Map Showing the Shuswap Territory (Teit 1909) Teit began his erroneous analysis by explaining that the Sxstê’llnEmux41 (“people of Sxstê’lln”) comprise the Indians on the Upper South Thompson, Shuswap Lake, and Spallumcheen River. They hunt south along Salmon River, north on Adams Lake to the Columbia above Revelstoke, and east around Mabel and Sugar Lakes to Upper Arrow Lake. Sometimes they hunted even beyond the latter in the mountains east of Lardeau and Nakusp. It seems the Arrow Lakes were more or less disputed ground, a band of Okanagon [Nsǝlxcin] in Washington claiming 41 Also known as the Shuswap Lake Division. CONFIDENTIAL 51 P a g e | 52 Sinixt them almost to as far north as Revelstoke. On the whole, however, they seem to have been more frequently occupied and utilized by the Shuswap. I shall call these people the Shuswap Lake division. Belonging originally to this division, or at least having greatest affinity to it, is the small band of Shuswap located on Lower Arrow Lake, where they have a reserve, and hunt the country as far north as Revelstoke, and as far south as the junction of Kootenay River with the Columbia. They may be called the Arrow Lake band (Teit 1909:455 – emphasis added). Before his corrected findings were published in 1930, Teit further wrote: Since 1902 this band [the Arrow Lake band] has had a reserve on the west side of Lower Arrow Lake, where they make their headquarters. 42 Formerly; they roamed along Columbia River between Revelstoke and the American boundary-line, hunting and fishing; and they do even now in some measure. These people are mixed with Kootenai to some extent. Formerly, it seems, they were closely related to the Spallumcheen band (1909:462). In his fieldnotes on Salish Tribal Names, Teit reported the following regarding mapping–“The parts of the map filled with colors, show approximately the territories in Eastern Washington etc. occupied until recently by people speaking the various Salish dialects”–Lake traditional territory: Lake. Shows the southern boundary of this dialect given by the San Poil. They occupied both sides of the Columbia from between Northport & the mouth of the Pend d’Oreille River more than half up Lower Arrow Lake where they came in contact with the Shuswap. Both tribes fished in Lower Arrow Lake. The Shuswaps had their main camp at the head of Lower Arrow Lake, and the Lakes had their main camp at the junction of Kootenai River with the Columbia. They occupied the Kootenai River at least as far up as the [Bonnington] Falls, and appear to have come in contact with the Flatbows of Kootenai Lake about this place. Next summer I will be able to ascertain their former exact eastern boundaries. The Lakes are so called by the whites on account of their former habitat having been mainly on Lower Arrow Lake. Their dialect is said to be almost identical with the Colville [Skoyelpi] but I will find out about this next year (Teit 1907-1910; emphasis added). 43 As Teit writes, he was unclear about the details of the territory and looked forward to his visit to the area to ascertain details from people living in the area. The map accompanying his fieldnotes (Figure 24) illustrated his lack of information and his uncertainty about the territory to the south, near the Kootenay River, as is shown by the placement of a question mark – “?” – at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers. This would be where the Oatscott reserve at Burton for the Arrow Lakes Band would have been located. See Section 7.3 below for details. 43 Teit, James A. Salish tribal names and distributions. BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3, 1907-1910. 42 CONFIDENTIAL 52 P a g e | 53 Sinixt Figure 24 – Map 22: Map showing as near as possible Location of the Shuswap Tribe and Divisions, with approximate Boundaries of neighboring Tribes [detail]. American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c (Teit 1910-1913) During his visit to the Kootenay River and area, Teit wrote Franz Boas on May 20, 1909. In addition to reporting that he had observed an “old Indian graveyard” at Waneta, Teit informed Boas that he spent four days with the people who were living at the Kootenay River mouth and that these people were Lakes people: I left home I came straight through Nelson, left my baggage there and went out to hunt up the small band of Indians who were reported to live right at the mouth of Kootenay River. I found them without much trouble and I took up my abode with them, staying with them four days & nights. I questioned them on all the most important matters I could think of & wrote down a vocabulary of 900 words of their language. It agrees with what the Indians of the Sans Poil etc told me last year viz that it is a dialect very closely related to the Colville CONFIDENTIAL 53 P a g e | 54 Sinixt [Skoyelpi]. These Indians are Lakes [Sinixt] as I stated to you last year…. They are nice people, and treated me fine. All the old men of this band are dead so I got all my information from two women. 44 They were glad to see a white man who took an interest in them, and who could talk the Thompson [Nlakaʼpamux] Language, 45 and understand some of their own…. I also found out that the Lakes formerly used kekule-houses with entrance from top by a ladder. They say the same in every way as the Shuswap K.h. but generally small to accommodate only one or sometimes two families. They went out of use a long time ago the women who told me this had never seen one, only the sites of them but the mother of one & grandmother of the other had lived in them when young (Teit 1898-1910; emphasis added). 46 After having visited the area, Teit corrected his conclusions about the territory encompassing the Arrow Lakes in his unpublished “Notes on the Boundaries of Indian Tribes” (1909): The territory claimed by the [Lakes] tribe is marked red on maps (4)(3) [Figure 19, Map 17]. Most of it is in B.C. and extends N to a little beyond Lat. 51. This makes an alteration in the southern boundaries of the Shuswap [Secwépemc] as given by me in my paper on the Shuswap. The northern boundaries of the Lake as here given are undoubtedly about correct, and this is partly borne out by later information obtained from the Shuswap. The latter had several trails leading to the Arrow Lakes and Columbia between Revelstoke & Killarney, and parties of them used to visited and fished with the Lakes every year on the Columbia at two or three points. There was a great deal of intercourse and intermarriage between the Northern Lakes and the Shuswap, and there appears to have been no wars between them. The country around Revelstoke was almost held in common between them.... I had no chance yet of interviewing Colville [Skoyelpi] and Okanagon in the matter. The Lakes [Sinixt] were formerly very numerous & had many winter camps scattered along the Columbia Marcus being the most southern, and Revelstoke the most northern. They also had villages on the Lower Kootenay River, Slocan River, Slocan Lake, and Trout Lake. The only tribe they had wars with was the Kootenay who at one time tried to take possession of the salmon fisheries on Lower Kootenay River. The Shuswap assisted the Lakes latterly in this war, and afterwards used to attack the Lower Kootenay on their own accord. I found no trace of divisions among the Lakes. They were divided in small bands each having a chief and a main headquarters. (Like the bands of the Shus & Thomp.) [strikethroughs are Teit’s, emphasis added] (Teit 1910-1913:1). Shortly after publication of his 1909 map [Figure 23, Map 21], Teit officially retracted his conclusions regarding boundaries (Teit 1910-1913). In a letter addressed to C.F. Newcombe on April 1st, 1910, Teit explained that he had erred in his description of the Secwépemc southern boundary and proceeded to clarify the extent of the Lakes boundary. He wrote: 44 James Teit gathered his data from two consultants, Mary Christian and her mother Antoinette, who were living at that time at the mouth of Kootenay River (Teit 1909). 45 James Teit was married to a Nlakaʼpamux [Thompson] woman and spoke the language fluently. 46 Teit, James. Salish ethnographic materials, 1898-1910. Boas Collection, F. 61 (BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00239). CONFIDENTIAL 54 P a g e | 55 Sinixt The Shuswap boundaries are all correct excepting part to the south but this is my mistake not yours. You have the boundaries as I give them in the map attached to my paper on the Shuswap but last year I ascertained for certain the boundaries near Arrow Lakes are wrong, I went through this region last year and made sure of this point. The country from the mouth of the Kettle River following up the Columbia & taking in the Lower and upper Arrow Lake north to or slightly beyond Revelstoke was occupied by the Lakes or Lake Indians a tribe very closely related to the Chaudiere [Kettle] or Colville [Skoyelpi] Indians and speaking a dialect very close to the Okanagon [Nsǝlxcin]. These people occupied Trout Lake, Slocan Lake & River and the Kootenay River up to a point on the Lake about Nelson or slightly east of same. I gave all the tribal boundaries in this region pretty well defined now 47 (Teit 1910; emphasis added). Further, in his “Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest” (1910-1913), Teit corrected his initial conclusion regarding the inclusion of the Arrow Lakes within Secwépemc territory 48 and instead wrote that the “Lake tribe occupied from very early times49 all the [Arrow Lakes] country in British Columbia” (1910-1913:7). Teit writes: In my paper on the Shuswap (see map annexed to same [Figure 23, Map 21) I allowed the Shuswap the territory along Arrow Lakes almost down to Robson. I had not then been in that district, and was mislead by some statements of the Shuswaps of Shuswap Lake region, which appeared to be corroborated by White testimony, to the effect that the Arrow Lake country was former Shuswap territory, partly occupied in more recent years by Colville [Skoyelpi] Indians chiefly for hunting and trapping purposes. This is not correct. The Lake tribe [Sinixt] occupied from very early times all the country in British Columbia as outlined on the accompanying map [Figure 22, Map 20], and I have been unable so far to collect any evidence that any part of this territory was ever occupied by other tribes. Further inquiry among the Shuswap confirms this. The only part seemingly in doubt is the extreme north, the old Revelstoke band having been much mixed with Shuswap, and members of the latter tribe were in the habit of repairing there annually in varying numbers for fishing purposes. One or two other bands on Lower Arrow Lake also intermarried with Shuswap, and small parties of the latter visited them frequently, fished with them, and sometimes without them. The Lakes [Sinixt] being of the same language as the Colville [Skoyelpi] Indians, and the southern portion of the tribe being much intermarried with the latter, they were allowed rights on the Colville Reservation which most of them took advantage of. Over 100 however, (remnants of the more northern bands) remained on their old grounds in B.C. government officials took the position that the Shuswaps alone had rights in that district, the Lakes being American Indians from the Colville Reservation, and interlopers in B.C. This was extremely wrong there being no more reason to deny the rights of these people in B.C. than Okanagon and Kootenay, which tribes also inhabit both sides of the line. Later their rights have been partly recognized by setting aside a small reservation for them near Burton, but Teit to Newcombe April 1, 1910, Newcombe Family Correspondence. BCA MS 1077, Series A. Volume 5, Folder 143, Teit, James Alexander. 48 Archaeologist Turnbull appears to not be aware of Teit’s correction of original delineation of Shuswap territory and suggests that Teit’s finding of Shuswap territory including the Arrow Lakes is a reflection of Lake withdrawal from the Arrow Lakes after 1870, the year in which the Colville Reservation was established (Turnbull 1977:119). 49 Teit does not provide dates for “very early times”. 47 CONFIDENTIAL 55 P a g e | 56 Sinixt the Canadian Indian Department classes them as Shuswaps which is quite misleading [strikethroughs in original, emphasis added] (Teit 1910-1913:7-8). Teit further clarified in his notes “Salish Tribal Names and Distributions” (1910-1913) that the population for which an Indian Reserve was set aside in 1902 called the Arrow Lakes band was primarily Lakes people and was closely related to the population living at the mouth of the Kootenay River at Castlegar, 50 another Lakes group. Teit explained: [t]he Kootenay mouth people 51 say emphatically that the Arrow Lake band are their own kin and speak the exact same language as themselves. 52 They have intermarried from time to time with Shuswap and in a less degree with Kootenay. At the present time [1909] the Arrow Lake band is made up of some 24 who may be called Lakes and one Shuswap (from Spallumcheen) and one Kootenay (from Kootenay Lake) both women married there making about 26 altogether. They were all mentioned by name to me & some are cousins & other relations to the Kootenay mouth band (the latter number about 11 – 10 Lakes & 1 Thompson)’….” (Teit 1910-1913). 1936 – Verne Ray Beginning in 1928, Anthropologist Verne Ray undertook substantial ethnographic fieldwork among the Lakes and other Nsǝlxcin-speaking people. Ray’s information was obtained directly from Indigenous consultants. Ray’s principal consultants were Kalispel, Coeur d’Alene, Spokane, Sanpoil, Nespelem, Skoyelpi (Colville), 53 and Lakes. Ray’s Lakes consultant was James Bernard. Bernard was around 80 years old in 1931.54 Ray wrote that Bernard was “…the best informed and oldest surviving member of his group…. From early in the present century until his death in 1934 he was chief of the few surviving members of the Lakes” (1936b:99). Teit (1930) identified this location as (No. 9) QEpi’tłes and Ray (1906) as (No. 14) kupi’tłks. See Table 1 below for more information. 51 These would be people living in the area of what is now Castlegar. Teit lists these people as a “Lake” population in his 1930 ethnography. 52 The common language of which Teit mentions here presumably is Nsǝlxcin (see Teit 1930). 53 Ray referred to the Skoyelpi people as Colville. 54 James Bernard, therefore, was born around 1851, roughly shortly after the Oregon Treaty was signed in 1846 and the US/Canada border was established. 50 CONFIDENTIAL 56 P a g e | 57 Sinixt Figure 25 – Map 4: Lakes Territory and Villages – Ray 1936:114 Ray produced a map (Figure 25) showing the extent of the Lakes traditional territory and the location of Lakes villages. He explained that the villages identified “were birth-places or residences of informants themselves or were visited by them during youth”(1936b:99). Based on the collected data, Ray aimed to provide a picture that referred “…strictly to aboriginal conditions as they existed around 1850” (19636b:101). Over the course of his fieldwork, Ray became increasingly skeptical of Teit’s conclusions (1936b:101). Their disagreement over territorial boundaries can be seen where Ray shows Lakes territory to the west to encompass the entire Kettle River and drainage, and to the east butting up to the western shores of Kootenay Lake. In this illustration, Ray attempted to convey “indefiniteness of boundary” by breaking up the continuous outline. Ray explained that “during the gathering of this material every group in the Basin was visited and the maps were first drawn in the presence of informants as information was given, bit by bit, including village locations as well as lines of boundary” (1936b:117). CONFIDENTIAL 57 P a g e | 58 Sinixt Accompanying the map is a corresponding catalogue of villages and camps which includes information pertaining to resource procurement sites. The village sites are discussed in detail in Section 5.0 below. Ray’s map holds considerable importance to and use by the Colville Confederated Tribes: This same territorial map of Lakes territory by Ray (1936b) is relied on by the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation based in Nespelem, Washington, although the Colville Tribes also cite ethnographer James Teit's (1910-1913; 1930b) delineation of Lakes territory, which is less expansive than Ray's. The Business Council of the Colville Tribes advises that the area around the Columbia River/Kootenay River confluence is part of the homeland of the Lakes (sngaytskstx or Sinixt) Tribe which is one of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, and that it is only the Business Council of the Colville Tribes that represents the Lakes Tribe's interests - including issues pertaining to Aboriginal title and rights - on both sides of the U.S./Canada border (Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation 1998a; 1998b; 1998c) (Bouchard and Kennedy 2000[2005]:18). 1956 – British Columbia Native Indians Distribution of Ethnic Groups – 1850 The following map (Figure 26) was compiled and published by the British Columbia Provincial Government in 1956 as part of the British Columbia Atlas of Resources project. The map shows the names, distributions, and relationships of Indigenous territories and language groups “at a time just before intensive European settlement, that is, about 1850” (BC Atlas of Resources, BC Natural Resources Conference, 1956:25). CONFIDENTIAL 58 P a g e | 59 Sinixt Figure 26 – Map 23: British Columbia, Native Indians Distribution of Ethnic Groups – 1850 [Detail] (Provincial Museum, Department of Education, Victoria, 1959) This map shows “Lakes” as a Nsǝlxcin-speaking, Interior Salish group (shown as “Okanagon” and “Salish” on the map), whose traditional territory includes the upper Columbia River drainage, from roughly Kettle River to the west and Kootenay Lake and Duncan River to the east, from Big Bend to the north to south of the US border in Washington State. 1979, 1985, 1989 – Bouchard and Kennedy In the 1970s, Bouchard and Kennedy worked with the people living on or near the Colville Reservation in Washington State. Their Lakes consultants were Mary Marchand, Charlie Quintasket, and Julie Quintasket (Bouchard and Kennedy 1979). CONFIDENTIAL 59 P a g e | 60 Sinixt According to their Lakes consultants, the territory of the Lakes “can be delineated by the area in which they wintered and foraged for food, although the latter activity was conducted occasionally beyond their homeland and in the company of neighbouring groups” (1985:6). Kennedy and Bouchard described nineteenth century Lakes territory as extending “from as far north as the vicinity of Revelstoke to as far south as Northport on the Columbia River” (Figure 27 below) (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998:239; Bouchard and Kennedy 1985). The territory also extended along the lower Kettle River upriver to Cascade. The western boundary was in the vicinity of Midway and immediately west of Christina Lake (Bouchard and Kennedy 1979:15-16). The northern boundary is drawn on the north side of Downie Creek. The map below accompanied their 1985 ethnography of the Lakes people. CONFIDENTIAL 60 P a g e | 61 Sinixt Figure 27 – Map 24: Lakes Indian Territory circa 1800 – Bouchard and Kennedy 1985 This map, a version of which was later published in the Handbook of North American Indians (1998) (Figure 28), shows a territorial expansion post-1880 to the south and west, to include Christina Lake. However, looking back at Teit’s work, and in particular at his map of Lakes territory at 1840-50 (Figure 20 above), Christina Lake was included within Lakes territory at that time, at least as early as 1840, and was not, according to Teit’s consultants, the result of any later CONFIDENTIAL 61 P a g e | 62 Sinixt territorial expansion. In their 1985 Lakes ethnography, Bouchard and Kennedy explained their reasoning behind showing an extension southwestward of Lakes’ territorial boundary post-1880. Despite Teit’s (and Ray’s) early evidence and that of early Lakes consultants’ territorial information, Bouchard and Kennedy explained their reasoning and concluded the following: Both Ray (1936:114) and most of our contemporary Lakes informants (Bouchard and Kennedy 1984:51) have included the entire Kettle River Valley as part of traditional Lakes territory, but we have not found any historical documentation to support this claim. As we have noted elsewhere (Bouchard and Kennedy 1984: 47) it appears these Kettle River people were originally sxweyi7lhp [Skoyelpi/Colville], but by the late 1800s most of the lower Kettle River area was occupied by Lakes [Sinixt] people. Similarly, there is no substantiation in the historical records that the temporary camps identified by Teit (1930:209-210) at Christina Lake and by Ray (1936:114,128) near Curlew Lake [Washington State] were originally part of Lakes territory, nor is there substantiation that, as Chalfant (U.S., Indian Claims Commission Docket 181:228) stated, traditional Lakes hunting grounds extended to Curlew. Because Lakes Indians by the 1870s-1880s were living along the Columbia River between the Little Dalles (in Washington State) and Kettle Falls, and in the Kelly Hill region between the lower Kettle River and the Columbia, and along the lower Kettle River from its mouth up to the international border (with possible seasonal utilization of Christina Lake north of the border), we have included these additional areas in our map of Lakes territory but have delineated them with a dotted line, as they reflect a pattern of use for the period after about 1880 (1985:27-28). Despite their question around the southwest boundary, Bouchard and Kennedy’s Handbook (1998) map is useful in that it shows the location of Lakes villages present on the Arrow Lakes as well as the territories of the other Nsǝlxcin groups. These village sites are discussed in further detail in Section 5.0. CONFIDENTIAL 62 P a g e | 63 Sinixt Figure 28 – Map 2: Northern Okanagan, Lakes and Colville territory, late 19th and 20th centuries – Bouchard and Kennedy 1998 4.2 Boundary Areas and Comparative Mapping Lakes territory was naturally defined by its geography. Lakes villages were located on waterways (Ray 1936:117; Kennedy and Bouchard 1998:239) “resulting in [territorial] boundaries [between Columbia Basin groups] being most definite at points where streams or rivers crossed. The greater the distance from population centers, the more vague the lines of demarcation. Thus, far back in hunting territory or far out in desert root digging grounds, boundaries sometimes completely faded out” (Ray 1936:117). CONFIDENTIAL 63 P a g e | 64 Sinixt In addition to their 1985 map showing Lakes territorial boundary as they understood it, Bouchard and Kennedy produced another map (Figure 29) in 1985 comparing the estimated boundaries of Lakes traditional territory as outlined by early ethnographic sources such as: George Dawson (1884) (Figure 16), further outlined by Dawson in 1892 (Figure 17); Teit’s revised boundary in 1909 (Figure 19); Franz Boas 1928 (Figure 18) (showing the eastern boundary only); and Verne Ray in 1936 (Figure 25). 1985 Figure 29 – Map 25: Estimated Boundaries of the Lakes Traditional Territory – Bouchard and Kennedy Bouchard and Kennedy’s Lakes boundary (Figure 27) resembles that of Teit’s but allows for a post-1880 movement further south and to the west, placing the south-western boundary at Grand Forks and turns north to meet Downie Creek at its northmost boundary. Based on their own extensive review of historical and ethnographic sources, and on information provided to them by sxweyi7lhp (Skoyelpi/Colville) consultants, Bouchard and Kennedy understood that Lakes territory centred on the Columbia River Valley region north of what is now Castlegar prior CONFIDENTIAL 64 P a g e | 65 Sinixt to about 1850 at which time their southern boundary began a gradual southward extension “in to an area that had been previously utilized by, but probably not permanently inhabited by, both the Colville [Skoyelpi] and the Lakes [Sinixt]” (Bouchard and Kennedy 1979:52-53). Archaeologist Christopher Turnbull also produced a map comparison (Figure 30) of Dawson and Tolmie’s 1884/85 map (Figure 16); Teit’s self-admittedly erroneous map (Figure 23) – discussed further below; Ray (1936) (Figure 25); and Ktunaxa ethnographer, Turney-High’s map (1941) (Map 27), also showing boundaries which Turney-High himself questioned – also discussed further below. Figure 30 – Map 26: Distribution of native peoples in southeastern British Columbia according to various authors – Turnbull 1977:197 Turney-High, an anthropologist who worked with the Ktunaxa during the 1930s, is the only ethnographer who showed Ktunaxa (Kutenai) territory encompassing the Arrow Lakes although he himself doubted the accuracy of the extent of the westernmost boundary (Turney-High 1941:24). With reservation as to the western boundary, as discussed in the following paragraph, Turney-High described the western extent of Ktunaxa territory as follows: CONFIDENTIAL 65 P a g e | 66 Sinixt …On the southwest the boundary lay along the present Colville Indian Reserves, crossing the panhandle of Idaho and extending a short way into Washington. The extreme southern edge of the ovoid was said at Tobacco Plains to rest on the site of Coeur d’Alene, Idaho. This is denied at Bonner’s Ferry, where it is said that the Kutenai could not go further south than Sandpoint, Idaho, without expecting to fight the Pend d’Oreille. Since this is the [current c.1940] range of the Bonner’s Ferry Kutenai, their word should be accepted. The westward face of the range, they claim, extended to the western shore of Arrow Lake. The main line of the Canadian Pacific Railroad at Revelstoke makes an effective boundary. From there the range swung in a blunt point back to the region of Donald (Turney-High 1941:23-24). Turney-High concluded, however, that the territorial description given to him did not reflect his definitive view of the Ktunaxa’s south-western boundary but that it reflected the information provided to him by the majority of the Ktunaxa elders he interviewed: The only serious difference between the map printed herein and the previous ones lies to the southwest and west. I myself feel serious doubt about the claims for so much territory to the southwest, but since informants were insistent, the map was drawn to their direction. In any event it is an unsettled point and perhaps one of no great importance (Turney-High 1941:24 – emphasis added). 55 Turney-High acknowledged that there is a distinct discrepancy between other territorial maps of the area (Dawson and Tolmie 1884, Figure 16; Ray 1936, Figure 25; Teit 1909,Figure 23) and his map (Map 27) illustrating The Kutenai Range of territory (Turney-High 1941:24). Turney-High explained that “[i]nformants in the past claimed the country clear to and including Arrow Lake as Kutenai land, while Ray and others map the [Ktunaxa] range as westward to Kootenay Lake only, assigning the land west to Arrow Lake and beyond to the Lakes people” (Turney-High 1941:24).56 Turney-High further reported that his Ktunaxa informants recounted “a well-known story about the southern tip of Arrow Lake formerly being inhabited by the descendants of two Kutenai brothers and s’milkamin wives at a relatively recent date” 57(Turney-High 1941:24). Turney-High Local writer Olga Johnson, in 1960 reiterates Turney-High’s initial conclusions about Ktunaxa inclusion of the Arrow Lakes, however, her conclusions are derived from his data (Bouchard and Kennedy 2000:146). 56 Turnbull states that “[d]elineation of the eastern boundary with the Kutenai is vague” (1977:118). Turnbull speculates that the falls on the Slocan River “would form a natural dividing line” between the Kootenay and the Lake (1977:118). 57 “In earlier days [no time frame is provided] the region as far west along the Kootenai River as present Nelson, B.C. was considered by the Kutenai as their own territory. It is probable that the portion of the Lake beyond present Proctor, B.C., where they fished for ling and charr, was infrequently occupied by the Kutenai, most of their activities being confined to the country to the south. The Kutenai claim that they met the Lakes Indians at modern Balfour, B.C.” (Schaeffer 1935-1969, Box 6, f. 56). Schaeffer mentioned in his notes the existence of an extinct mixed Similkameen group living in the same area: “There was another band called Gałi’sa [or Kałisa] who lived west of 55 CONFIDENTIAL 66 P a g e | 67 Sinixt did not provide any further information about dates here but given that Turney-High was writing in the late 1930s, one could assume he was referring to these few Ktunaxa/Similkameen descendants possibly inhabiting “the southern tip of Arrow Lake” around that time [early twentieth century], this being “a relatively recent date.” This would have been some time after the Lakes people began living on the Colville Reservation in Washington State. Turney-High requestioned consultants at Bonner’s Ferry, Creston, Tobacco Plains and Flathead Lake regarding their western boundary and all but one informant claimed Arrow Lake and its shores but stated that there were no Ktunaxa villages on the lake. This is consistent with all ethnography in that all ethnographically recorded village sites on the Arrow Lakes are Lakes villages (see Ray 1936). Some consultants at Bonner’s Ferry told Turney-High that the Ktunaxa could travel as far west as Arrow Lakes, for the purpose of fishing, without meeting resistance, while other consultants told him that they would have to fight the Arrow Lakes people if they went west of Kootenay Lake (Turney-High 1941:25). Anthropologist Claude Schaeffer, who also worked extensively with Ktunaxa consultants through the mid twentieth century, was informed that “Kutenai territory ended at lower end of Arrow Lake (mitsqaqas’ territory)” (See Section 7.2) (Schaeffer 1935-1969, Box 1, f. 10). Regarding the western extent of Ktunaxa territory, Turney-High summarized the following: In 1940 every competent and available informant at Bonner’s Ferry, Creston, Tobacco Plains, and Flathead Lake was re-questioned regarding the westward extent of the Kutenai range. With but one exception they all claimed Arrow Lake and its shores, although admitting that there were no Kutenai villages there. They said that the lake was one of their important sources of fish, that their fathers regularly visited it by canoe, and that they expected to find no enemy or rival there or on the way there. Chief David of Bonner’s Ferry alone admitted that the Kutenai could not proceed westward of Kootenay Lake without fighting. While the majority [Ktunaxa] opinion is the one represented on the map [Map 27] in this work, it must be considered a moot point, perhaps unsolvable at this date (Turney-High 1974:24-25). The ethnographic consensus, however, is that Ktunaxa territory did not extend as far west as to encompass the Arrow Lakes (Turney-High 1941:24). No other ethnographic mapping shows Ktunaxa traditional territory encompassing the Arrow Lakes. During his research, anthropologist Allan Smith reviewed Turney-High’s monograph and provided the following comment: “…his data, or at least his interpretation of them, sometimes convey the impression of being improbable or even unqualifiedly erroneous” (Smith 1984:5). According to Smith, the contradictory information regarding the western Kutenai boundary is quite “possibly the result of an early post-contact movement of Kutenai into previous Lakes territory [that is, that is, after Nelson, B.C., near Castlegar, B.C. These have all died. These are nearly all half-breed Similkameen Indians” (Schaeffer 1935-1969, Box 4, f. 52). CONFIDENTIAL 67 P a g e | 68 Sinixt the establishment of HBC Fort Colvile in 1825; the boundary in 1846 and the US reservation in 1872], one that by the mid-1800s carried Kutenai in small numbers even to Arrow Lakes. Provisionally, then, I bring the Kutenai boundary down the watershed along the west side of Kootenay Lake, which was unarguably traditional Kutenai hunting and fishing territory” (Smith 1984:25). Apart from Turney-High (1941), and Teit’s early, and subsequently corrected, error in assigning the Arrow Lakes to the Shuswap, the Arrow Lakes area is consistently associated with the group identified as the “Sin Natch Eggs” and other variant spellings of Sinixt. Based on his analysis of the ethnography and ethnographic mapping, archaeologist Christopher Turnbull described Lakes territory as situated “[t]o the north of the Colville along the Columbia River and the Arrow Lakes” (1977:16). Turnbull stated however, that “[d]elineation of the eastern boundary with the Kutenai is vague” (1977:118) 58 and that “Lake withdrawal from the area sometime after 1870” complicated the early mapping of Dawson and Tolmie 1884, and of Teit 1905. This probably also accounts for the confusion among local historians and government officials around Lakes identity and territory in the early 20th century. Bouchard and Kennedy pointed out that there is in fact greater agreement concerning the Lakes' eastern boundary than their northern one. According to Bouchard and Kennedy’s analysis of the mapping and ethnography, they wrote: Trout Lake clearly was within Lakes territory. This is confirmed independently both by Ray (1936:114,126) and by Teit (1909a i1930:210). Edgar Dewdney in June, 1865, noted that both Lakes and Kutenai Indians were camped along the Lardeau River "two days travel" up this river from where it enters the north end of Kootenay Lake (Dewdney: 1865). Both [surveyor and mapmaker James] Turnbull (Moberly 1866:30) and [HBC employee James] Bissett (1868) described the Indian trail they followed from the northeast arm of Upper Arrow Lake through to Trout Lake 59—Turnbull was accompanied by Lakes Indians to a point on the Lardeau southeast from Trout Lake. Teit (1909a ) wrote that the Kutenai "went north as far as little ways up Lardeau River not half way to Trout Lake". Yet we have found no indication that any other group besides the Lakes utilized Trout Lake (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:23). In his journal, Northwest Company employee Ross Cox recorded his travels along the Columbia River in 1817. Travelling north along the Columbia River, Cox wrote of passing the Flat-head [Pend Oreille River] and camping near McGillivray’s [Kootenay River]. Cox described the Kootenay River and appears to equate this river with his understanding of Ktunaxa territory. Cox wrote: “Encamped late, near M’Gillivray’s [Kootenay] River, a fine bold stream, which takes its rise in the Rocky Mountains, and running in nearly a north-east direction, through the Cootonais [Ktunaxa] lands, here joins the Columbia” (Cox 1957:274). 59 In 1868, HBC trade James Bisset noted information regarding trails in the Trout Lake Lardeau area that was provided to him by his Lakes guides. He wrote: “My Indians describe the route from NE Arm of the Upper Arrow Lake as follows: A good Indian trail from Arrow Lake to Trout Lake – no mountains – snow disappears there same date in spring as at Colville – good grass for horses – the distance is travelled by them in one day. Trout Lake they traverse by canoe; and excepting at the highest stage of water, they descend the small river [the Lardeau] which flows therefrom into the north end of Kootenay Lake” (Bissett 1868). 58 CONFIDENTIAL 68 P a g e | 69 Sinixt The Boundary area around Grand Forks is located in the region of Sinixt western territorial boundary and was described by archaeologist Michael Freisinger, who undertook an archaeological survey investigation of this region in the late 1970s, as an “area of ethnographic variance” (1979a). The Kettle River drainage area “was occupied and utilized by three linguistically related groups: Sxwei’7lhp (Colville Okanagan), Sngaytskstx (Lakes Okanagan), and the Snxwiya7lhp (Kettle River Indians)60 (Bouchard and Kennedy, 1979). All three groups claimed the territory from the mouth of Kettle River near Kettle Falls to the headwaters of the Kettle River near Beaverdell and the Christian Valley” (Freisinger 1979a:12). According to Bouchard and Kennedy (1979) the term Nxwiya7lhpi’tkw is used to refer to the entire area of the Kettle River; the term Snxwiya7hlpi’tkwx refers to the Kettle River people. There is some discrepancy regarding the ethnographically delineated territorial boundaries in this area. Teit (1910-1913, 1930) shows Lakes (Sngaytskstx/Sinixt) territory encompassing the Kettle River Valley up to Cascade Canyon [south of Christina Lake] and the Okanagan from Okanagan Valley occupying the Upper Kettle River Valley (see Teit maps above). In his notes (1910-1913) Teit acknowledged a group of people present along the Kettle River. He stated that: “more investigation is required for the Kettle River country, my information regarding it is being entirely from the Lakes.” Lakes consultant Mary Marchand, in a 1986 interview with Joanne Signor, stated that they regularly portaged around Cascade Falls and travelled up the Kettle as far as they could go.61 Cascade Canyon and Falls area, south of Christina Lake, is know by Sxwei’7lhp (Skoyelpi) people as K’lhsaxem, “end of fish going up”, which refers to furthest extent of salmon north on the Kettle River (Freisinger 1979a:30). Sxwei’7lhp (Skoyelpi) consultant Martin Louie informed archaeologist Michael Freisinger during his archaeological investigations of the Boundary area in the late 1970s that the sockeye spawned below Cascade Falls in July and that a trail came to the south side of the falls: “The U – shaped basket net called the Ts’eli’7 and the harpoon were used here when Martin Louie fished here. There were twenty-five camps all sharing in the proceeds from the Ts’eli7. There was a salmon fishing organizer at the camp. The salmon fishing organizer helped distribute the salmon caught making sure everyone got a fair share” (Bouchard, and Kennedy, Pers. Com. with Freisinger, 1975). 62 Also referred to as Chaudière (meaning kettle) in historical documents. This information was shared with BC by Sinixt in 2023 citing: Interview with Mary Marchand, April 21, 1986, with Joanne Signor. Manuscript in possession of the Colville Confederated Tribes. 62 A myth concerning the origin of salmon and the formation of Cascade Canyon was told by Martin Louie and is reproduced in Bouchard and Kennedy 1975. 60 61 CONFIDENTIAL 69 P a g e | 70 Sinixt Ethnographer James Mooney (1896), on the other hand, attributes the entire Kettle River Valley to the Sxwei’7lhp (Skoyelpi/Colville). This group is “known to have occupied the Kettle River in the mid-1800’s. Their numbers were most likely greatly reduced between the years 1846-1854 when small pox, measles, and influenza struck the area” (Freisinger 1979a:13). Catholic Missionary Father Alexander Diomedi spent time missionizing small Indigenous groups in the area around Fort Colville. One of these was a small unidentified group living in the Kettle River Valley near Rock Creek, B.C. (1878). Ray (1936), on the other hand, stated in his ethnography that the Lakes occupied the entire Kettle River Valley. He wrote that “[t]he dividing line between the Lakes Indians and the Colville Indians was very precisely drawn at the point where it crossed the Columbia River. Kettle Falls proper was in the territory of the Colville, but the large island to the north and the adjacent rapids belonged to the Lakes" (Ray (1947) 2016:145). Significantly, United States Army Officer, Major Lugenbeel in 1859 predicted that “when the boundary between the United States and British Columbia shall be ascertained, I think these [Lakes] Indians will be found to be on the north of the line”, an opinion that “recognized not only the linguistic similarities between the Lakes and Colville, but also the cultural differences, primarily those features determined by a lake as opposed to riverine environment. The Lakes [Sinixt] were said to be trappers and hunters, travelling about in small groups, whereas the Colville [Skoyelpi] were thought of as a more cohesive group centered about the Kettle Falls fishery” (Bouchard and Kennedy 1979:52). Archaeologist Michael Freisinger provided a geographic explanation for the cultural variance observed in the area. He wrote: The area upstream from Cascade Canyon according to James Teit’s (1910-1913) Map of Ethnographic Areas is a “boundary” between the Lakes [Sinixt] Okanagan and the Okanagan [from Okanagan Valley]. There is a distinct change environmentally on the area west of Cascade Canyon in comparison to the area below the canyon and at Christina Lake. This environmental variation might have an effect on cultural boundaries or preferences. This locality is located where an aboriginal/historical trail (DgQn 26) comes up from Kettle Falls/Fort Colville area and continues along the Kettle River to Rock Creek over the Anarchist Summit to Osoyoos Lake/Fort Okanagan, connecting numerous archaeological sites. (1979:38). Based on this ethnographic and historical evidence and on his own archaeological investigations, Freisinger concluded that “[i]t appears reasonable to say all three groups utilized and occupied the Kettle River Valley” (1979a:12). CONFIDENTIAL 70 P a g e | 71 Sinixt 5.0 5.1 Sinixt Village and Camp Sites Winter/Main Villages – location and description Anthropologist William Elmendorf conducted ethnographic fieldwork with the Spokane and Lakes people in 1935 and 1936. His main Lakes consultant was Nancy Wynecoop. According to Wynecoop, and other Lakes people with whom he consulted, the Lakes “originally settled around Revelstoke” and that “over 100 yr. ago [ca. 1830s] the Lakes retreated down from around Revelstoke” (Elmendorf 1919-1936). Elmendorf was also informed that nk’mapeleks, located on Beaton Arm, was the “earliest settlement” of the Lakes (Wynecoop in Elmendorf 1936). Early Lakes information coincides with early historic mapping of Lakes territory as discussed in Section 4.1 above (see Ross 1821, De Smet 1846, etc.). Bouchard and Kennedy were informed that “the heart of the Lakes homeland was considerably south both from Revelstoke and from Beaton” (1985:82). Perhaps this apparent contradiction reflects the time and place in which they undertook their fieldwork at Colville in the 1970s, approximately 100 years after the Lakes people began living on the Colville Reservation, or, more likely, a recognition of early ethnographic evidence suggesting that Lakes people were a Skoyelpi “offshoot” (Teit 1930:214-215). In any case, Bouchard and Kennedy report that early historical documents show that prior to 1850 the Lakes people were centred in the Columbia Valley region, north of what is now Castlegar (Bouchard and Kennedy 1979). This is also supported by the archaeological record which locates most winter settlements in the same region (Mohs 1982:53 – See Section 8.0 for a discussion of the archaeology). Winter villages are known to have had populations of between 50-200 individuals while summer foraging camps were comprised of small, scattered family groups (Teit 130:211, Ray 1936:124, Elmendorf 1935-36:II:56). In 1909 ethnographer James Teit received information regarding Lakes settlements from two consultants, Mary Christian and her mother Antoinette, who were living at that time at the mouth of Kootenay River (Teit 1909). Teit visited the area to map the distribution of Salishan dialects and learn about the movements of Indigenous groups (Teit 1930:25). His consultants did not know of any band divisions among the Lake tribe. He concluded that it was uncertain that any divisions existed. He did, however, obtain “what is probably a full list of the old villages and main camps of this [Lakes] tribe within British Columbia” (Teit 1930:208). In a letter written in 1909, Teit reported to Boas the following regarding Lakes’ villages and northern boundary: I took down a list of the Lakes in B.C., that is to say regular wintering places. These number 19, 12 of them between Waneta & Revelstoke along the Columbia & Arrow Lakes and 7 in the Slocan district (Slocan River & Trout Lakes). There were two villages on the Kootenay River; one at the mouth & one at the mouth of the Slocan River. They had no permanent camps above the Falls of the Kootenay viz Bonnington but they claimed the country for hunting & fishing purposes to about 6 miles E. of Nelson on Kootenay Lake. They also had no CONFIDENTIAL 71 P a g e | 72 Sinixt permanent camps north of Revelstoke although they claimed the right to hunt & trap a few miles north of Revelstoke, but the country from a little north of Revelstoke (about 15 miles N and beyond) was considered Shuswap … To the south the Lakes [claimed] the Columbia to about Marcus where they say the Colville began. 63 In his 1930 ethnography, Teit itemized twenty Lakes villages in British Columbia which were located on the Upper and Lower Arrow lakes, Slocan Lake, Trout Lake and the Kootenay and Slocan rivers. Teit’s listing of Lakes villages from “north to south along Columbia River and Arrow Lakes” (1930:208, 209-210) is provided in Table 1 below. Beginning in 1928, Anthropologist Verne Ray undertook substantial fieldwork among the Lakes and other Nselxcin-speaking people. All of Ray’s information was gathered directly from Indigenous consultants. Ray’s principal consultants were Kalispel, Coeur d’Alene, Spokane, Sanpoil, Nespelem, Skoyelpi, and Lakes people. Ray explained that “during the gathering of this material every group in the Basin was visited and the maps were first drawn in the presence of informants as information was given, bit by bit, including village locations as well as lines of boundary” (1936:117). Ray’s Lakes consultant was James Bernard who was around 80 years old in 1931.64 Ray writes that Bernard was “…the best informed and oldest surviving member of his group…. From early in the present century until his death in 1934 he was chief of the few surviving members of the Lakes” (1936b:99). Ray produced a map (Figure 31) showing the extent of the Lakes traditional territory and the location of Lakes villages. Letter from Teit May 20, 1909: BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3 (Salish Tribal Names and Distributions, American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia); (see also Teit 1914). 64 James Bernard, therefore, was born around 1851, roughly shortly after the Oregon Treaty was signed in 1846 and the US/Canada border was established. 63 CONFIDENTIAL 72 P a g e | 73 Sinixt Figure 31 – Map 4: Lakes territory and villages – Ray 1936 In this illustration, Ray attempted to convey “indefiniteness of boundary” by breaking up the continuous outline (1936:117). Accompanying the map is a corresponding catalogue of villages and camps which includes information pertaining to resource procurement sites. Ray clarified that in his cataloguing of villages “no attempt has been made to procure exhaustive lists of temporary camp sites” (Ray 1936:120). The largest of the Lakes winter villages, according to Ray, was kixki’us (Figure 31, No. 2) (“open place in a cottonwood grove”) located in Washington state “about one mile below Marcus” on the Columbia River. 65 Ray indicated the existence of thirty villages north of the Canada/US border and ten in Washington State. His catalogue is reproduced in Table 1 below. Ray cross-referenced Teit’s (1930) listing of villages where they correspond. 65 Teit listed what appears to be the same village but provided a different name: NstEltsElē’tuk (1930:210). CONFIDENTIAL 73 P a g e | 74 Sinixt Bouchard and Kennedy (1989) indicated the location of Lakes villages on their Handbook map (Figure 32), 12 of which were located in Canada on the Arrow Lakes, Trout Lake, Slocan lake and River, and the Kootenay River. Figure 32 – Map 2: Northern Okanagan, Lakes and Colville territory, late 19th and 20th centuries – Bouchard and Kennedy 1998 The following table provides a summary comparison of the village information provided by Teit (1930), Ray (1936), and Kennedy and Bouchard (1989): CONFIDENTIAL 74 P a g e | 75 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Teit (1930) Ray (1936) (Map 4) (No. 11) Nkoli’la (No. 11) nquli’la’ 66 Description Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) This village, located on the Columbia (No. 40) nkwlίla? river about a mile above the present “burned area” village of Waneta, numbered four or five families throughout the year. The berry fields and salmon grounds of Northport [also Little Dalles in Washington] were conveniently near at hand (Ray 1936:125). Close to Waneta, on the east side of Columbia River, just above the mouth of the Pend d’Oreilles River. Many people are said to have lived here formerly, and there are some very old burial grounds near by (Teit 1930:209). Teit further noted that “[i]t seems that there was an old village near the site of old Fort Shepherd, on the west side of the Columbia, a little north of the international line, and old burials are reported near here” (Teit 1930:210). Teit added that “[s]ome informants [consultants], however, had no knowledge of a village having been here” (Teit 1930:210). TceaulExxi’xtsa (now Trail) 67 (No. 12) tcωlxi∙’t’sȧ This camp was located on the west side of the Columbia river at the site of the present town of Trail. Hunters used the site for a few days at a time as a base for deer hunting (Ray 1936:125). In cross-referencing Teit’s list of Lakes villages, Ray did not cross-reference Teit’s No. 11 with his own No. 11, although it appears that they are speaking about the same village. 67 This place name was not provided in Teit’s listing of villages but mentioned in a later list of important temporary camp sites (1930:210). This list is provided below. 66 CONFIDENTIAL 75 P a g e | 76 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Teit (1930) Ray (1936) (Map 4) (No. 10) SnskEkEle’um (No. 13) snskəkəle’um Description Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) At a creek on the west side of the Columbia river close to Trail (Ray 1936:125). At a creek in the west side of Columbia River, close to Trail. This was a center for gathering service berries (Teit 1930:209). CONFIDENTIAL 76 P a g e | 77 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Teit (1930) Ray (1936) (Map 4) (No. 9) QEpi’tłes (No. 14) kupi’tłks “rubbing the chest” 68 Description Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) This was a settlement at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers, used as a temporary base for root digging. Travelers coming or going from the Kootenay or upper Columbia river valleys usually camped here for a week or two, visiting and gambling with friends and using the sweat houses. To a limited extent it also served as a hunting base (Ray 1936:125). (No. 39) kpίλəls James Douglas, travelling up the Columbia River in 1835, “found a camp of Indians belonging to the Little Chiefs band” located at “McGillivrays or Coutonais River” (1835:9). Bouchard and Kennedy concluded that this was a Lakes band (1985:113). At the mouth of Kootenai River, just above the junction with the Columbia. A great many people lived here formerly, most of them on the north bank of the Kootenai, 69 within sight of the Columbia. Some old and modern burial grounds may be seen in the neighbourhood (Teit 1930:209). In a 1909 letter to Franz Boas, Teit confirmed that the population living here are Lakes people who speak a dialect similar to that of the Skoyelpi: “It agrees with what the Indians of the Sans Poil etc told me last year, viz that it [the language of a small band of Indians at the mouth of Kootenay River] is a dialect very closely related to the Colville [Skoyelpi]. These Indians are Lakes as I stated to you last year” (Teit Letter May 20, 1909). 70 In cross-referencing Teit’s list of Lakes villages, Ray did not cross-reference Teit’s No. 9 with his own No. 14, although it appears that they are speaking about the same village which may have been located on both the north and south banks of the Kootenay River. Ray clearly located this village on the south bank of the river (Map 4), yet Teit mentions that most of the population lived on the north bank (1930:209) which implies that some people lived on the south bank as well. 69 Alexander Ross observed in 1821 at this same location, “the remains of a deserted Indian camp” (Ross 1855:164165). By this statement, this village encompassed both the north and south banks of the Kootenay River. 68 CONFIDENTIAL 77 P a g e | 78 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Teit (1930) Ray (1936) (Map 4) (No. SntEkEli’t.ku 18) (No. 15) ntikuli’tku “much river food” 71 Description Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) This encampment was on the north side of the Kootenay river about a mile above the mouth of the Slocan (slo’kȧn) river [near or at Bonnington Falls]. Trout pools were numerous in the river at this point making it a popular fishing center. Women used the site as a base for berry picking while men found it convenient for hunting bear. Parties usually stayed here a week or two, most often during April just before the river began to rise. Later they moved to the north for caribou hunting, some travelling Slocan river route, some choosing the Kootenay river (Ray 1936:125-126). Near the junction of Slocan and Kootenai Rivers. This was a noted salmon-fishing place. Salmon ran up the Slocan River, but could not ascend the Kootenai because of the great Bonnington Falls. Salmon were formerly plentiful throughout the Slocan district, and many people lived at all the villages (Teit 1930:210). 70 BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3 [Salish Tribal Names and Distributions, American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia]. 71 In cross-referencing Teit’s list of Lakes villages, Ray did not cross-reference Teit’s No. 18 with his own No. 15, although it appears that they are speaking about the same village. CONFIDENTIAL 78 P a g e | 79 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Teit (1930) Description Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) Ray (1936) (Map 4) (No. 16) nxa∙xa’tsən “cave in the rocks” This camp was the Kootenay river, opposite Nelson, at the edge of the caribou hunting area. Line fishing for trout was also profitable here (Ray 1936:126). William Kittson in 1826 noted a cave above the Slocan River, at the commencement of the lower Kootenay: “here is a rock with a cave to it where the natives (Kutenai) make on their return from war on the Kettle Fall Indians [Lakes] sacrifices to a Spirit as they say residing there” (Kittson 1826). Possibly associated with archaeological site: DjQi 1 (Map 36a) pit-house; camp or village Opposite the town of Nelson two or more pit-houses present Kaia’mElEp (now Nelson) 72 (No. 17) k’iyȧ’mlupu (Kutenai word?) A settlement at the site of the present town of Nelson (Ray 1936:126). (No. 18) yakskukəni’’ “Where many kukeni’’ [a small red fish] are found” Located about six or seven miles above Nelson on the Kootenay river. Root gathering, bear and caribou hunting and trout fishing were all profitable (Ray 1936:126). (No. 19) ktca’ukuł “spliced trousers” This encampment was near the present town of Balfour (?) on Kootenay Lake. It was used as a temporary base during May and June. This place name was not provided in Teit’s listing of villages but mentioned in a later list of important temporary camp sites (1930:210). This list is provided below. 72 CONFIDENTIAL 79 P a g e | 80 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Teit (1930) Description Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) Ray (1936) (Map 4) (No. 20) na∙xspoȧ’lk’en “rocky bank made by spoȧ’lk’en [mythological character]” CONFIDENTIAL On the west shore of upper Kootenay lake, exact location uncertain. Temporary camp (Ray 1936:126). 80 P a g e | 81 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Description Teit (1930) Ray (1936) (Map 4) (No. 19) Kali’so (No. 21) sia’uks qa∙li’su “where the water flows outward” probably referring to the drainage of Trout lake into Kootenay lake. 73 Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) This was a caribou hunting and fishing camp located at the lower end of Trout lake at the site of the present town of Gerrard. Drying racks for fish were erected here and travellers sometimes remained for several weeks (Ray 1936:126). In 1868, HBC trade James Bisset noted information regarding trails in the Trout Lake Lardeau area that was provided to him by his Lakes guides. He wrote: “My Indians describe the route from NE Arm of the Upper Arrow On Trout Lake. Its waters drain into the Lake as follows: A good Indian trail north end of Kootenai Lake (Teit from Arrow Lake to Trout Lake – no 1930:210). mountains – snow disappears there same date in spring as at Colville – good grass for horses – the distance is travelled by them in one day. Trout Lake they traverse by canoe; and excepting at the highest stage of water, they descend the small river [the Lardeau] which flows therefrom into the north end of Kootenay Lake” (Bissett 1868). Bouchard And Kennedy conclude that the Lakes utilized “at least half of the Lardeau River area” and that they have not seen any “documentation of the Kutenai utilization of Trout Lake itself” (1985:88). (No. sinpətł’me∙’p 22) This encampment at the upper end of (No. 32) snpəλmίp Trout lake was at the site of the present Trout Lake City. From here a portage usually was made to the end of Upper Arrow lake (Ray 1936:126). In cross-referencing Teit’s list of Lakes villages, Ray did not cross-reference Teit’s No. 1 with his own No. 21, although it appears that they are referencing the same village. 73 CONFIDENTIAL 81 P a g e | 82 Sinixt (No. 2) NkEma’pElEks “base or bottom end,” with reference to the end of the lake 74 (No. 23) nk’umȧ’puluks “end of the water” 75 This important camp was situated at the (No. 30) nkmápələqs uppermost end of Upper Arrow lake [on “head end of lake” Beaton Arm] near the site of the [former] town Comaplix. It was a popular meeting place and a productive fishing, hunting, and berrying center. The camp was most populous in May and June (Ray 1936:126). At the head of the bight in Upper Arrow Lake, above Arrowhead, near the mouth of Fish [Incomappleux] River. Called “Comaplix” by the whites. Said to have had a large population. It was a specially important center for fishing, berrying (especially huckleberries), and root digging (Teit 1930:209). Lakes consultant, Nancy Wynecoop informed Elmendorf that the Lakes “originally settled around Revelstoke.” Elmendorf was told that nk’mapeleks was the “earliest settlement” of the Lakes people (Elmendorf 1935-1936). Associated with archaeological site EeQk-1: 76 “According to local traditions, a fishing camp was established near the mouth of the Incomaplix [Incomappleux] River at the present townsite of Beaton, on the North East Arm. Examination of the area suggested that the townsite itself would be a logical camping ground, however no collections exist in the town, no physical features occur, and no informant could point out a specific location” (Harrison 1961:42). (No. 1) SkExi’kEntEn (No. 24) skəxi’kəntən CONFIDENTIAL Settlement opposite Revelstoke (Ray 1936:126). On the creek opposite the present town of Revelstoke. This place is said to have 82 (No. 29) skxikntn Bouchard and Kennedy write that this name is associated with P a g e | 83 Sinixt Local historian Kate Johnson writes of a village at which the “Okinaken” [Lakes], “Indians of the Okanagan country” camped at Shelter Bay. She was told that the name of this place was “head of the lake”; however, the location description provided by Johnson matches Ray’s listed village (No. 25) kospi’tsa “Buffalo robe”. Johnson writes: “The Indians of the Okanagan country [Lakes] came... to Shelter Bay, next to Bannock Point about three miles south of Arrowhead. It seems certain that at that time prior to the arrival of Hudson’s Bay Company fur traders there were no camps of Indians at what is now Arrowhead, but the condition of native remains exhumed at their old burial ground there in 1907 would indicate that they had used the place for a long time. They had no definite name for that place but just referred to it as the ‘head of the lake’” (Johnson 1964:7-8). Archaeological site EeQl 2 is a burial site located at Arrowhead (see Section 8.2.2 below). As stated throughout this report, Kate Johnson’s work is not entirely reliable and should be read with caution. Johnson mentions the presence of “a group of figures and signs... drawn in red ochre on rocks near Cape Horn” (Johnson 1964:8). These pictographs were associated with a pithouse site (EcQl-1) identified in 1961. The pithouse was identified as having Lakes-style structure and the pictographs were “suspected to be of Shuswap origin” (Harrison 1961:64). Records of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development in the early 1900s sometimes refer to the Secwépemc as “Indians of the Okanagan Country”. Also in the ethnohistory “Okanagan Country” refers to what I have to come understand to be a description of the Kettle Valley/Christina Lake area, that is, part of Lakes traditional territory. I have not confirmed this and have identified this as something that requires further research. By this time, the early 1900s, the Lakes people had relocated south of the border to the Colville Reservation. 75 In cross-referencing Teit’s list of Lakes villages, Ray did not cross-reference Teit’s No. 2 with his own No. 23, although it appears that they are referencing the same village. 76 Mohs reported in 1977 after investigating that “EeQk 1 [Site type: “general activity”, observed in 1977] Site has been totally destroyed with inundation. The site is in a very active zone: at the confluence of the Incomappleux River and Upper Arrow Lake. Downcutting due to river alterations, wave action and silt redeposition have left nothing of the site” (1977:72). 74 CONFIDENTIAL 83 P a g e | 84 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Teit (1930) Description Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) Ray (1936) (Map 4) been the headquarters of a rather large band, which was reinforced at certain seasons by people from lower down the Columbia. It was noted as a trading, trapping, hunting, berrying, and salmon-fishing center (Teit 1930:209). Revelstoke/Illecillewaet River/Tonkawatla River (1985:77). area “Mary Marchand and Julia Quintasket stated that they had heard the Okanagan-Colville [Nsǝlxcin] terms skxikn and skxikntn and were of the opinion that either of these place names may have been applied to Revelstoke” (Bouchard and Kennedy 2000[2005]:70). It is also where Fleming (1883) encountered a group of “Fort Colville Indians” camping. (No. 3) Kospi’tsa “buffalo robe” (No. 25) kospi’tsa “Buffalo robe” 77 At the site of the present town of (No. 31) qwəspίca? Arrowhead (Ray 1936:127). “buffalo robe” At the upper end of Arrow Lakes, where the town of Arrowhead now is. This also was a salmon-fishing place, and a noted center for digging roots of Lilium columbianum 78 (Teit 1930:209). Local historian Kate Johnson writes of a village at which the “Okinaken” [Lakes], “Indians of the Okanagan country”, camped at Shelter Bay. She was told that the name of this place was “head of the lake”; however, the location description provided by Johnson matches Ray’s listed village(No. 25) kospi’tsa “Buffalo robe”. Johnson writes: “The Indians of the Okanagan country came... to Shelter Bay, next to Bannock Point about three miles south of Arrowhead. It seems certain that at that time prior to the arrival of Hudson’s Bay Company fur traders there were no camps of Indians at what is now Arrowhead, but the condition of native remains exhumed at their old burial ground there in 1907 would indicate that they had used the place for a long time. They had no definite name for that place but just referred to it as the ‘head of the lake.’ As recently as 1908 there were indications of a fairly large campsite on the flat higher level above the sandy shore. Evidently it had been cleared although new growth was showing in places. There were also rotting poles lying around of a size that might have served as supports for shelters for ponies in spring and late autumn. None of the native people ever stayed in this Upper Lake area during winter time but moved back to the dryer Okanagan valley and boundary country [Grand Forks and area]” (Johnson 1964:7-8). Archaeological site EeQl 2 is a burial site located at Arrowhead (see Section 8.2.2 below). Johnson mentions the 77 CONFIDENTIAL 84 P a g e | 85 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Description Teit (1930) Ray (1936) (Map 4) Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) (No. 4) Ku’sxEna’ks (No. 26) ku’sxəna’ks On Upper Arrow Lake, now called (No. 33) kwusxənáqs Kooskanax (Ray 1936:127). “point of land sticking out; long point” Now called Kooskanax. On Upper Arrow Lake, a little above Nakusp (Teit 1930:209). (No. 5) Neqo’sp “having buffalo” 79 (No. 27) neqo’sp80 “Having buffalo” Now called Nakusp (Ray 1936:27). (No. 34) nkwusp “come together” Now Nakusp, near the lower end of Upper Arrow Lake, on the east side. A noted fishing place for salmon and lake trout (Teit 1930:209). 81 (No. 6) Tci’ukEn (No. 28) tci’uken A little below Nakusp (Ray 1936:127). A little below Nakusp; a center for hunting. Some fine caribou grounds were near this place (Teit 1930:209). presence of “a group of figures and signs... drawn in red ochre on rocks near Cape Horn” (Johnson 1964:8). These pictographs were associated with a pithouse site (EcQl-1) identified in 1961. The pithouse was identified as having Lakes-style structure and the pictographs were “suspected to be of Shuswap origin” (Harrison 1961:64). See footnote 74 for further comment. 78 Tiger or Columbia Lily. 79 Teit comments that although the name references buffalo, “[t]here is no tradition of buffaloes occurring here” (1930:209). 80 Johnson provides another translation for Nakusp provided by Chief Louie: “Indians come down lake in canoes, storm very bad, canoes nearly lost at Kuskanax Creek, but on entering big bay at the point... Neqo’sp – ‘safe’” (1964:9). 81 Ross met a Lakes man in 1821 who was camped in the vicinity of Nakusp. Ross wrote: “Here the old [Lakes] man concluded his remarks, and told us that his people were then living about two miles up the river [Nakusp], where they were employed in hunting wild animals and catching fish” (Ross 1855:II:171-172). CONFIDENTIAL 85 P a g e | 86 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Description Teit (1930) Ray (1936) (Map 4) (No. 7) Snexai’tskEtsEm (No. snexai’tsətsəm Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) 29) Near the upper end of Lower Arrow Bouchard and Kennedy remark that lake, opposite Burton City (Ray this area is now called Belleview 1936:127). (1985:93). Near the lower end of Upper Arrow Lake, opposite Burton City. This was a great berrying center, especially for huckleberries (Teit 1930:209). (No. 8) Xaiē’kEn (No. 30) xaie’kən At a creek [Caribou Creek?] below Location at which Ross met the Burton City (Ray 1936:127). Sinixt in 1821? At a creek below Burton City. A center for the catching of land-locked salmon or little red fish (Teit 1930:209). (No. 31) məmatsi’ntin “log leaning outside a cave” A village on Lower Arrow lake, exact location uncertain. It was a center for hunting mountain goat in March and April (Ray 1936:127). (No. 32) plu’me’ This was a temporary camp on the east side of Lower Arrow lake near the site of the present Deer Park. It marked the lower end of the hunting and fishing territory (Ray 1936:127). (No. 33) sm∙a’ip’ “large log leaning against a tree” A temporary camping place at the foot of Lower Arrow lake (Ray 1936:127). (No. 34) [unnamed] A settlement at the site of the present town of Castlegar, near the fork of the Kootenay river and Lower Arrow lake, was important for both spear and line fishing. There was a rapids here, which aided the fisherman (Ray 1936:127). CONFIDENTIAL 86 P a g e | 87 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Teit (1930) Description Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) Ray (1936) (Map 4) (No. 17) SkEtu’kElôx (No. 35) sketu’kəlôx On lower Slocan River (Ray 1936:127). 82 On Slocan River, below No. 16 (Teit 1930:210). In the vicinity of Vallican. (No. Nkweio’xłEn 16) (No. 36) nkweio’xtəx On Slocan River above no. 35 (Ray (No. 38) nkweio’xEn (?) 83 1936:127). On Slocan River, below No. 15 (Teit 1930:210). (No. 15) Kā’ntcā’k (No. 37) ka∙ntca∙’k On Slocan River below the lake (Ray 1936:127). On Slocan River below the lake (Teit 1930:210). (No. 14) Sihwīl’lEx (No. 38) sihwi∙’ləx On the lower part of Slocan Lake (Ray (No. 37) sixwίlx (?) 1936:127). “Mrs. P. Cooper of the town of On the lower part of Slocan Lake (Teit Slocan was told by her father, who 1930:210). came into the Slocan Lake area in 1892-1893, that a village of 60-70 ‘Colville’ Indians lived at the mouth of Springer Creek, at the southeast end of Slocan Lake, but they left in 1896 (Cooper n.d.; personal communication: 1985). Undoubtedly these were Lakes Indians” (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:99 – emphasis added). Ray assigned two locations to No. 35, sketu’kəlôx, both of which are found on the Slocan river: one below the confluence with Little Slocan River; the other above the confluence (Map 4). 82 Kennedy and Bouchard (1998:240) (Map 2) locate this village on the west bank of the Slocan River, whereas Ray (1936) (Map 4) and Teit (1930) both place it on the east side. 83 CONFIDENTIAL 87 P a g e | 88 Sinixt Table 1 Village or Camp Name Description Teit (1930) Ray (1936) (Map 4) (No. 13) TakElExaitcEkst “trout ascend”? [from ai’tcEkst, a variety of large trout, probably lake trout] (No. 39) takələxaitcəkst “trout ascend” (No. 12) SnkEmi’p “base, root, or bottom,” with reference to the head of the lake (No. 40) snkəmi’p At upper end of Slocan lake (Ray (No. 35) snkmίp “base, root, or 1936:127). “end of lake” bottom” At upper end of Slocan Lake (Teit 1930:210). (No. NEmī’mEltEm Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) (Map 2) On Slocan lake, below no. 40 (Ray (No. 36) tqel?áytckst (?) 1936:127). “trout ascend” On Slocan Lake, below No. 12 (Teit 1930:210). 20) (No. nəmi∙’məltəm 41) On Caribou [Whatshan] 84 lake, to the west of the narrows between the Arrow lakes (Ray 1936:127). On Caribou Lake, to the west of the narrows between the Arrow Lakes. The country around here was famous as a caribou-hunting ground (Teit 1930:210). 5.2 Small Villages/Camp Sites and Place Names Teit added that in addition to his listing of Lakes villages, “there were a number of smaller villages or camps, all more or less permanent” (1930:210). He further noted that “[i]t seems that there was an old village near the site of old Fort Shepherd, on the west side of the Columbia, a little north of the international line, and old burials are reported near here” (Teit 1930:210). Teit added that “[s]ome informants, however, had no knowledge of a village having been here” (Teit 1930:210). According to Teit, the Lake “also had important temporary camps within British Columbia” (Teit 1930:210). Teit listed four such locations west of the Columbia River as follows: 84 In 1865 Turnbull recorded in his journal that “the Indians call this the What’shaan River” (1965:27). CONFIDENTIAL 88 P a g e | 89 Sinixt west of the Columbia River 1) Christina Lake Michael Freisinger conducted an archaeological investigation of the area and, like Teit, found that “[t]he predominate settlement pattern in the area strongly suggests temporary seasonal occupation (campsites) along the Kettle River, and Christina Lake. There is only evidence at Christina Lake of a minor permanent settlement (DgQn 23)” (1979:53). 2) Keluwi’sst (now Rossland) – According to Bouchard and Kennedy, the area around Rossland, including specifically Red Mountain (kmarkn) “was an important huckleberry-picking place in recent times” (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:123, 2000[2005]:141). Bouchard and Kennedy’s Lakes consultant Julia Quintasket “recalled that in the early 1900s, the ‘Kelly Hill and Northport Indians (that is, Lakes people living along the Columbia just north from Kettle Falls, and near the B.C. border respectively) used to go regularly to kmarkn [Red Mountain] to pick huckleberries” (2000[2005]:141). 3) TceaulExxi’xtsa (now Trail) on Kootenai Lake The use of Beaver Creek (which enters the east side of Columbia, downriver from Trail) and Beaver Valley by Lakes people has been documented by early local historians such as Clara Graham who documented that Beaver Creek was used for hunting by Senijextee (Sinixt) (Graham 1963:242-243). 4) Kaia’mElEp (now Nelson) Teit recorded that Lakes eastern territorial boundary was located “seven or eight miles east of Nelson” and that “sometimes [the Lake] had a berrying camp here” (Teit 1930:211). Teit noted six freshwater fishing camps (listed in table below), most of which were situated on the Arrow Lakes, and to a lesser extent, on the lower Kootenay and Slocan Rivers (Teit 1930:209211). During the salmon run, the main encampment of the Lakes was at Hayes Island at the Kettle Falls (in Washington State) where they shared the salmon harvest with the Skoyelpi people (Bouchard and Kennedy 1975:5). Important fisheries were also located at Cascade on the lower Kettle River and near Slocan Pool on the lower Kootenay River. Salmon were also fished on the Arrow Lakes (Teit 1930). In his ethnography of the Nsǝlxcin-speaking people, Teit produced a list of “place names from the Lake division” (1930:211). Dorothy Kennedy and Randy Bouchard also collected a list of place CONFIDENTIAL 89 P a g e | 90 Sinixt names from their Lakes consultants (1985). A summary of these place names located north of the International Boundary is as follows: Location Place Name Comments Arrow Lakes Ti’kut (“lake” or “large lake”) (Teit 1930:211). Columbia River below the Arrow Lakes Ntoxē’utke (“straight or smooth water”) (Teit 1930:211). Kootenai River below Kootenai Lake Nta’lltExi’tke (“ta’lltex or te’lltex water,” “water of the stallt people [?]”) (Teit 1930:211). “…said to be so named because the water came from the Lower Kutenai country.” Also known as McGillivray’s River by early traders. Bonnington Falls and neighbouring parts of Kootenai River Ntsa’kuławi’lxu (“portage or carrying place for canoes”) (Teit 1930:211). “The Lake portaged canoes at this place, the river being unnavigable.” Slocan River and Slocan Lake district Słoke’n (Teit 1930:211). Big Bend/Boat Encampment/Athabasca Portage K’ilsenqatsēā’luqten “gr___ place” Big Bend (Boas/Teit 1900). Snaai’tckstq “Big Bend of Columbia” (Boas/Teit 1900). Place of many groundhogs (Boas 1900). Bouchard and Kennedy suggest that Boas’ consultant was “indicating to him that the Lakes or Sngaytskstx travelled as far north as this area of the Columbia” (1985:76). This is substantiated by the fact that early Hudson’s Bay Company employees indicated that Boat Encampment (the Athabasca Portage) was the “upper limit” of the Kettle Falls/Lake Indians (McLeod 1822; Dease 1827; Work 1830). This was also reported in local Kamloops newspaper in 1825: “from time immemorial” the Colville [Lakes] Indians considered Columbia River from Kettle Falls to Big Bend their rightful reserve” (Atkins 1925). Dalles des Morts and Little Dalles areas CONFIDENTIAL Skōkuntlquē’tl (Boas/Teit 1900 in Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:76) “working place (when fish have to work hard to go up rapids)” 90 The exact location was not recorded. P a g e | 91 Sinixt Location Place Name Comments Halcyon Hot Springs No name provided (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:89) “The springs were known among the Indians as the ‘great Medicine Waters.’ Indians from the State of Washington arrived by scores in canoes, pitched their tents, dug deep excavations near the hot springs where the crippled members of the tribe sojourned for months, while others in active health caught salmon. For possession of the springs the Kootenay and Colville [those living at Colville Reservation] tribes engaged in a long and bloody war…. Ed Picard… in 1887, found the hot springs quite by accident…. The springs were not staked until two years later by Robert Sanderson who bargained with the Indians for their rights” (Johnson 1964:173). 85 “Great Medicine Waters” 6.0 6.1 History of Sinixt Territory Trail networks – trade, travel, and territory Ray explained that the environment – heavily forested, mountainous, located within the Selkirk Range (Teit 1930:198) – in conjunction with the shape of the territory in which the Lakes people lived, influenced their reliance on travel by canoe (Ray 1936:110, 121; see also Teit 1930:203): “With but a single portage it was possible to make circuits of hundreds of miles by canoe” (1936:120-121). Ray wrote: “Their territory, extending far into the Canadian Rockies, consisted largely of long mountain ranges enclosing narrow valleys with precipitous sides. Navigable rivers and lakes lay within each of these interconnected valleys making canoe transportation highly feasible but any other type of travel scarcely possible. Horses of course were never accepted” (1936:110). Although horses were introduced early in the eighteenth century, unlike other Okanagan tribes the “Lake people, except for a few in the south, never adopted horses, as their country was unsuited to them. The Lake tribe had no chance to become a horse people as long as they occupied their own territories. The few horses they employed were procured from the Colville” (1930:249). Bark (mostly from white-pine) “sturgeon-nose” canoes were used by the Lakes people as “the Lake had an abundance of good bark in their country” (Teit 1930:248). The Colville (Skoyelpi), 85 Local historian Kate Johnson created a small body of popular work regarding the history of the Arrow Lakes and area. Although her research and conclusions are not consistent and her identification of Indigenous populations can be confusing, her work has been commented on here to examine sources of confusion in the historical record. Perhaps some pieces of truth can be mined from questioning this work. However, caution is required when consulting her work. CONFIDENTIAL 91 P a g e | 92 Sinixt according to Teit’s consultants, “procured most of their canoes from” Lakes people (Teit 1930:248, 254). During excavation on Kettle River in the 1970s, archaeologist Michael Freisinger learned from Skoyelpi/Sinixt consultant, Albert Louie, that the remains of a dugout canoe identified from the Kettle River “is a similar shape [and wood type] to the canoes formerly constructed by the Colvilles [Skoyelpi]” (Albert Louie in Freisinger 1978-27:71). 86 Pole and tule rafts were also used, most often on small mountain lakes, “by the Okanagon and all the surrounding tribes” (Teit 1930:248). 87 Snowshoes “were used by all the tribes” but “Lake snowshoes appear to have been slightly shorter than most.... In this way they were better adapted to climbing steep mountains” (Teit 1930:249). According to Teit, the Secwépemc populations who reached the Columbia came from Spallumcheen River, Shuswap Lake, and the Upper North Thompson. He commented that “[t]he contact here between Lake and Shuswap was between the poorest bands of both tribes” and that the distances between these groups were long and “through rough country, which would hamper any extensive trade development in this direction” (Teit 1930:251). According to Teit, trade from Kettle Falls moved north “following the Columbia to Arrow Lakes and Revelstoke, where the Shuswap were met” (Teit 1930:251; see also Teit 1909:536 and Ignace 2008:183). Teit learned that two main routes provided the way by which the Secwépemc “came into touch with the Lake”; one of which was “by way of the Fire Valley [Inonoaklin Creek] and Caribou [Whatshan] 88 Lake to the upper end of Lower Arrow Lake” and the other “farther north to the “There is little ethnographic information on dugouts of the Lake or Colville-Okanagan. Durham (1960) and Ray (1932) give brief descriptions of middle Columbia River dugouts of which neither fit the design or shape of the Kettle River canoe (see figure 13). The middle Columbia River dugouts were thicker and generally constructed more crudely” (Freisinger 1978:71). 87 Various local historians wrote about the Indigenous populations present in the Arrow Lakes area. Often these sources are problematic and misinformed. One such example is that of local historian Kate Johnson who reported that “[d]ugout canoes were also made at Galena Bay by both the Kitanaqa [Ktunaxa] and Okinaken [Okanagan] tribes. The local white pine wood, for which the district has always been notable, was used for this purpose” (Johnson 1964:171). It must be stated here that it seems that Johnson, and some other local historians of the time, may have been confused about the identities of the Indigenous population in the area. Johnson, in this case, assumed the identity of the Indigenous populations to which she referred. It is likely that by “Okinaken”, she was referring to Nsǝlxcin-speaking people. Furthermore, (1964:169) Johnson admitted that she presumed the identity of the population to which she referred was Kitanaqa (Ktunaxa) but was not certain. Johnson also did not provide a time frame for this activity. Bouchard and Kennedy wrote that Johnson “obviously did not have a clear idea of just who were the Indian people in the Arrow Lakes were” and added that over the course of their own research in the area “we see no evidence that Okanagan Indians or Kutenai [Ktunaxa] Indians ever utilized the Arrow Lakes fisheries, but there are numerous references to conflicts between the Lakes and the Kutenai [Ktunaxa]” (1985:83). These conflicts were regarding fisheries and raids on Sinixt populations. See Section 6.2 on Inter-group relations in the Arrow Lakes region. 88 In 1865 Turnbull noted in his journal that “the Indians call this the What’shaan River” (1865:27). 86 CONFIDENTIAL 92 P a g e | 93 Sinixt Columbia River at Revelstoke” (1930:251). Teit illustrated these routes by red line on the following map showing trade routes and trading places (Figure 33). Figure 33 – Map 28: Map (4). Showing approximately some of the chief trade routes and trading places &c of the Plateau tribes. – Teit, American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c (Teit 1910-1913) Teit provided a legend to this map in his Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest, as follows: CONFIDENTIAL 93 P a g e | 94 Sinixt AA 34 Near Kettle Falls, Colville traded here with Sans Poil, Lake, Upper and Lower Spokane, Kalispel, and sometimes Okanagon and others. B 35. At the mouth of Slocan River, Lake traded here with Lower Kutenai. C 36, 37. Trading points of Lake with Shuswap [shown to be located at Revelstoke and upper end of Lower Arrow Lakes, at the terminating point of the trade-route trails with the Arrow Lakes]. 89 Teit further indicated on the map the early homes and headquarters of the following groups: 4. [Oroville] [Traditional early home of the] Okanagon [from whence they spread]. 7. [Marcus] [Traditional early home of the] Lakes [from whence they spread]. 8. [Colville] [Traditional early home of the] Colville [from whence they spread]. 13. [Chewela] [Approx. old headquarters of the] Lower Kalispel. 16. [Tonasket] An old headquarters of the Upper Kalispel. 90 In his notes, Teit concluded that village sites may have been strategically chosen for reasons such as proximity to significant trade routes, or migration and territorial expansion of Salish populations. He noted: It is noticeable that although the territories of the Okanagon and Lake extended a long ways to the north and the territories of other tribes in like manner to the south etc. yet the traditional and known old headquarters of all or nearly all the Salish tribes of the Okanagon and Flathead groups are directly on or in proximity to the great main trade route connecting from the Plains of the Upper Missouri with the route leading north and south along the Columbia River and the Cascade Mountains. These headquarters may have been chosen because of trade or other conditions or they may show the an old line of migration or expansion of the Salish people [corrections Teit’s]. 91 Historical maps also provide a source of information regarding travel routes between Indigenous territories. In 1827 Archibald McDonald, HBC factor at Thompson’s River Post in Kamloops, showed a trail on his sketch map, (Figure 34) below, that ran between “She Whaps” (Secwépemc) territory and eastward to the Columbia River along what is most likely Eagle Creek and labeled it “Communication with Columbia”. Teit, James. Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest. Originals held by American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia, 1910-1913, p. 71 (46). 90 Teit, James. Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest. Originals held by American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia, 1910-1913, p. 73 (48). 91 Teit, James. Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest. Originals held by American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia, 1910-1913, 74 (94). 89 CONFIDENTIAL 94 P a g e | 95 Sinixt Communication with Columbia Figure 34 – Map 29: McDonald, Archibald. [A Sketch of the Thompson River District.] [Detail] (Microfiche of map in the BCA CM/A354, Victoria), 1827. Surveyor and mapmaker James Turnbull 92 documented in detail these same routes in 1865 during a surveying expedition. Walter Moberly, the Surveyor General of British Columbia and Dominion Government Engineer-in-Charge of Exploratory Surveys of the Rocky Mountain district visited the area in the early- to mid-1860’s. In his report of the Columbia River exploration, the then Assistant Surveyor General Moberly wrote that Surveyors Ashdown Green and James Turnbull joined Moberly on his expedition during which the three men surveyed the Columbia-Kootenay region. This exploratory expedition resulted in Turnbull’s illustration Plan of the Columbia River District (1865-1866) (Map 30) on which he outlined several trails traversing and connecting the Okanagan, Columbia and Kootenay river valleys. Within the Arrow Lakes region, there are three trails, shown by red dashed line, that are specifically marked “Indian Pass” (Figure 35): 92 Surveyor Walter Moberly travelled in the Upper Columbia region and along Illecillewaet River in 1865. His observations are recorded in his fieldnotes (notebooks 2&3, 1865) and in the Government publication of Columbia River Explorations (1866). Moberly’s colleague, James Turnbull, drafted a map showing the routes explored by Turnbull, Moberly and Green (Turnbull 1865-1866). CONFIDENTIAL 95 P a g e | 96 Sinixt Figure 35 – Map 30: Plan of the Columbia R. District: Shewing the Routes Explored by Messrs Moberly, Green & Turnbull [in 1865] [detail]. – Turnbull 1866 1) An “Indian Pass” is shown to connect Arrow Lake on the western shore opposite what is today called Halcyon Hot Springs with Shuswap River. The trail follows a river identified as Naghtuous River (Fosthall River), continues through a pass in the mountains to the west and joins with the “Spillemeechene” (now Shuswap) River north of Cherry Creek. The trail continues north (along the Spillemeechene) and south along the Shuswap River and cuts across to join up with a network of trails that access the Okanagan Lake (Figure 35 above). Johnson wrote that the “Indians of the Okanagan country came by way of the Fosthall and Pingston valleys up along the lake shore areas to Shelter Bay, next to Bannock Point about three miles south of Arrowhead” on Upper Arrow Lake (Johnson 1964:7-8). This route description coincides with that drawn by Turnbull in 1865 as shown above in Figure 35. According to Johnson’s research, 93 the main routes to Galena Bay prior to 1865 were “via the road from the Pingston Creek trail, then past Shelter Bay to what is now known 93 Local historian Kate Johnson, created a small body of popular work regarding the history of the Arrow Lakes and area. Although her research and conclusions are not always consistent and her identification of Indigenous populations is not entirely accurate, her work has been commented on here to point out the inaccuracies and perhaps some pieces of truth can be mined from this work, however confusing it tends to be. A strong caution needs to be exercised when reading her work. CONFIDENTIAL 96 P a g e | 97 Sinixt as Sidmouth, then on the west bank to the Columbia River to Revelstoke, and on to the Rogers Pass country” (1964:182). 2) Two “Indian Passes” (Figure 35 above) are identified as following Mosquito Creek from the south end of Upper Arrow Lake west before splitting into a northern and a southern pass which eventually join again at Cherry Creek and onto Shuswap River. In 1865, Turnbull writes he has “marked all the different routes by which the Columbia can be gained via the east and south branches of Cherry Creek” and that he “camped at the junction of south branch pass with the Columbia; the Indians call this the What’shaan River” (1965:27). Whatshan River empties into the Columbia River at what is today identified as the Needles of Lower Arrow Lake. In the report of his reconnaissance of Eagle Creek, Turnbull noted the presence of a “plainly marked” and “old Indian hunting trail” (1869:24). This trail is faintly identified in yellow on the map, shown below (Figure 36), and follows Eagle Creek to Three Valley Lake, to Skoukoncleu River [empties into Upper Arrow Lake at Big Eddy] and continuing along Illecillewaet River. Walter Moberly explored this region in 1865 and 1866. He described an “Indian trail” which went from the head of Seymour Arm on Shuswap Lake, up the Seymour River to Ratchford Creek, and crossing the Monashee Mountains through Pettipiece Pass to Seymour Creek, then down the same creek to where it meets the Columbia about 4 km (2.5 miles) downriver from Downie Creek (Moberly 1866:15). This trail is also identified on the map in Figure 36 below. CONFIDENTIAL 97 P a g e | 98 Sinixt Figure 36 –Map 30: Plan of the Columbia R. District: Shewing the Routes Explored by Messrs Moberly, Green & Turnbull [in 1865] [detail, labels in red added]. – Turnbull 1866 Turnbull further identified four other passes in the vicinity of the Arrow Lakes which are shown variously as: “Low Pass”, of which there are two – one connecting Kuskeonx River to the south end of Trout Lake – and the other connecting Galena Bay to a point north of Staubert Lake, a route that follows what is now the Balfour-Kaslo-Galena Bay Highway; “Pass to the Columbia River” connecting Mable Lake with a point on the Columbia just south of Revelstoke (Figure 37 below) (this corresponds to Teit’s trade route connecting Revelstoke with Shuswap Figure 33 above) and “Very Low Valley said to be a good pass to the Columbia River” (Figure 38) connecting Okanagan Lake, via Mission Creek with Lower Arrow Lake, at what is now Renata 94 (Turnbull 1865-1866) (Figures 37 and 38). 94 Several pit-house sites are found at Renata. See Section 5.5 Archaeology CONFIDENTIAL 98 P a g e | 99 Sinixt Figure 37 – Map 30: Plan of the Columbia R. District: Shewing the Routes Explored by Messrs Moberly, Green & Turnbull [in 1865] [detail]. – Turnbull 1866 Figure 38 – Map 30: Plan of the Columbia R. District: Shewing the Routes Explored by Messrs Moberly, Green & Turnbull [in 1865] [detail]. – Turnbull 1866 CONFIDENTIAL 99 P a g e | 100 Sinixt In 1868, HBC trade James Bisset noted information regarding trails in the Trout Lake/Lardeau area that was provided to him by his Lakes guides. He wrote: My Indians describe the route from NE Arm of the Upper Arrow Lake as follows: A good Indian trail from Arrow Lake to Trout Lake – no mountains – snow disappears there same date in spring as at Colville – good grass for horses – the distance is travelled by them in one day. Trout Lake they traverse by canoe; and excepting at the highest stage of water, they descend the small river [the Lardeau] which flows there from into the north end of Kootenay Lake” (Bissett 1868). A trail meeting this description is also shown on Turnbull’s (Figure 37) above, marked “Low Pass”. In 1890, geographer George Dawson submitted for publication in the Annual Report of the Geological Survey of Canada a detailed report of the geography of the West Kootanie District including that of the Arrow Lakes in which he mentioned that there was “a pass used by Indians from the vicinity of Slocan Lake to the West Arm of Kootanie Lake” (1890:21B). He describes another pass from Nakusp to Slocan Lake: “Another stream of comparatively small size, flowing in a mile and a half south of the last, is know as the Na-kusp. It [the trail] comes from a low and rather wide valley which is reported to be used by the Indians as a pass to Slocan Lake” (1890:11B). This is likely the route along which today’s Highway 6 was built between the north end of Slocan Lake and Nakusp. During his archaeological reconnaissance of the area around Grand Forks, archaeologist Michael Freisinger documented the location “where an aboriginal/historical trail (DgQn 26) comes up from Kettle Falls/Fort Colville area and continues along the Kettle River to Rock Creek over the Anarchist Summit to Osoyoos Lake/Fort Okanagan, connecting numerous archaeological sites” (Freisinger 1979:38). During the course of his research Freisinger interviewed residents of Christina Lake. He reported that “[a]ccording to early white residents at Christina Lake the ‘Indians’ use to travel down from the Arrow Lakes to Christina Lake and down to Kettle Falls. (1979:51-52). Freisinger summarized that the archaeologically designated trail (DgQn 26) is presumed to be a well travelled route through the Kettle River drainage area to and from Kettle Falls on the Columbia River and the Okanagan Valley (east-west) route. The Christina Lake area was a well travelled route via Arrow Lake to and from Kettle Falls (northsouth route). The latter is evident from a Colville Okanagan legend referring to an overland trail from Arrow Lakes to Kettle Falls (Legend of Nnilu’s) 95 and from a local resident of Christina Lake (Wiebe, personal communication) (1979:57). “There is a Colville Okanagan story of Nnilus told by Martin Louie about an overland route from Arrow Lakes to Kettle Falls (on file British Columbia Indian Language Project)” (Freisinger 1979:51-52). 95 CONFIDENTIAL 100 P a g e | 101 Sinixt 6.2 Inter-group relations in the Arrow Lakes region Generally, the relationship with neighbouring groups was peaceful and conflict was generally avoided; however, conflict occurred periodically with Secwépemc and Ktunaxa primarily over the salmon fisheries on the lower Kootenay River but also over the abduction of Lakes women during raids on Lakes settlements. Social, economic and political intercourse was greatest with the Skoyelpi people to whom the Lakes were most closely related (Ray 1939:36; Elmendorf 1935-36, Teit 1930). 6.2.1 Intermarriage According to Teit, the Lakes people interacted most often with the Colville people “and intermarried mostly with them” (1930:215). Lakes consultant Nancy Wynecoop informed Elmendorf “the Lakes intermarried with the Colville to a slight extent, but the tendency was quite strong among the Lakes toward tribal endogamy. 96 The Colville quite often sought for wives among the Lakes” (Elmendorf 1936, Notebook 4). The Lakes also “had a considerable amount of intercourse with the Shuswap and some with the Lower Kutenai” (Teit 1930:215; Teit 1909:469). Teit added that there was “much less intermarriage with Shuswap and still less with the Lower Kutenai, the Okanagon, and hardly any with the other tribes” (Teit 1930:215). Kennedy and Bouchard provided the same information but with different phrasing. They wrote: “The Lakes intermarried mostly with the Colville but came into contact and negotiated a few marriages with the Shuswap, Kootenai, and Northern Okanagan” (1998:239). In his early 1909 ethnography of the Secwépemc, Teit commented that “[t]he Arrow Lake band intermarried a great deal with the Kootenai, and formerly sometimes with the Okanagon [Nsǝlxcin-speakers] of the Columbia. At the present day they [the Arrow Lake band, that is, the entity formed and administered by the Federal Government] are said to be nearly half Kootenai in blood” (Teit 1909:469). Lakes consultant Nancy Wynecoop characterized these “intermarriages” differently when she informed Elmendorf that the Ktunaxa and Secwépemc raided the Lakes people for women. She informed Elmendorf that: “The Lakes seemed to seek wives from other tribes only among the sxoie’lp [Skoyelpi] and sntsa’ǝli’xi.97 Their relations with the Kutenai and Shuswap (sixwa۰) were entirely hostile. These tribes raided the Lakes for women” (Elmendorf 1936, Notebook 4; see also Teit 1930). She went on to add that “The Kutenai and the siwxa۰pmx [Secwépemc] were standing enemies of the Lakes and could be killed (anytime, without blame)” (Elmendorf 1936, Notebook 4); “The Shuswap (sixwa۰’pmx) and Endogamy refers to the practice of marrying within one’s own social or culture group. In this case Elmendorf stated that the Lakes had a preference for marrying within the Lakes community. 97 It has yet to be determined who these people are. It is possibly an Upper Similkameen people but this is not confirmed and further research is required. 96 CONFIDENTIAL 101 P a g e | 102 Sinixt Kutenai (sti۰’ltx) raided the Lakes to obtain women slaves. The Lakes men would not marry Shuswap or Kutenai women.” Wynecoop added, however that the Lakes and the Skoyelpi shared a close relationship. She informed Elmendorf that “[t]he Colvilles (sxoie’lp) [Skoyelpi] were friends of the Lakes, and the Lakes would not protect a man who had killed one of them” (Elmendorf 1936, Notebook 4). 6.2.2 Relations with Secwépemc Teit reported in his later (1930) ethnography, published after having visited the area, that the Secwépemc came to meet the Lake at the upper end of Lower Arrow Lake and further north on the Columbia River at Revelstoke where [s]ome [Secwépemc] people often traversed the river and the lakes between these two points, fishing and hunting with the Lake tribe. Occasionally some of their parties tarried several months on these visits, especially some of those who came by way of Fire Valley. Those who came to Revelstoke fished with the Lake tribe there. Some of them returned the way they came, after the fishing season was over; and others ascended the Columbia for hunting and trapping. Some of the latter met other Shuswap parties who reached the Columbia farther up, by way of Canoe River, 98 and they frequently wintered at points on the Columbia 99 (Teit 1930:251). In a letter dated 1909, and contradictory to Nancy Wynecoop’s information provided to Elmendorf in the 1930s as described above, Teit described a harmonious relationship between the Secwépemc and the Lake people, as described to him by Lakes women Mary Christian and her mother Antoinette who were living at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers at the time: …the country from a little north of Revelstoke (about 15 miles N and beyond) was considered Shuswap. The latter tribe was always on good terms with the Lakes and after hunted & fished with them. They very seldom wintered on any part of the Lakes or River [illegible]. Numbers of them came across the mountains to Revelstoke where sometimes in the fall there were as many Shuswap as Lakes. At the end of the fishing and berrying these people went up the Columbia on trapping & hunting expeditions or returns to Shuswap Lake. The other place where the Shuswaps reached the Lakes was by the Fire Valley trail to Lower Arrow Lake. They sometimes stayed most of the fall hunting caribou & fishing. [Shuswap] people came from Spallumcheen & generally returned home for the winter. To the south the Lakes the Columbia to about Marcus where they say the Colville began. 100 Canoe River is located just south of Valemount near the north end of Kinbasket Lake. Teit does not specify at which points on the Columbia they wintered. 100 Letter from Teit May 20, 1909: BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3 (Salish Tribal Names and Distributions, American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia); (see also Teit 1914). 98 99 CONFIDENTIAL 102 P a g e | 103 Sinixt In his fieldnotes, Teit further noted an amiable relationship between the Secwépemc and Lakes people, where the Secwépemc visited Lakes territory and married Lakes people: …The latter [Secwépemc] had several trails leading to the Arrow Lakes and Columbia between Revelstoke & Killarney, and parties of them used to visited and fished with the Lakes every year on the Columbia at two or three points. There was a great deal of intercourse and intermarriage between the Northern Lakes and the Shuswap, and there appears to have been no wars between them. The country around Revelstoke was almost held in common between them.... [strikethroughs are Teit’s, emphasis added] (Teit 1910-1913:1). According to Teit, the Secwépemc populations who reached the Columbia came from Spallumcheen River, Shuswap Lake, and the Upper North Thompson. He commented that “[t]he contact here between Lake and Shuswap was between the poorest bands of both tribes” and that the distances between these groups were long and “through rough country, which would hamper any extensive trade development in this direction” (Teit 1930:251). Nancy Wynecoop stated that “The Lakes did not trade with the Shuswap, they were afraid of them. It was easier to contend with the Kutenai, as these were less organized” (in Elmendorf 1936, Notebook 4). Nancy Wynecoop’s information regarding the relationship with the Secwépemc and that which was given to Teit by his Lakes consultants (as is seen above in the section on intermarriage) differs in that Teit’s consultants characterized a peaceful relationship between the two groups who intermarried and came together seasonally to fish and hunt, whereas Wynecoop informed Elmendorf that the relationship was one of conflict and fear. Although Teit reported good relations between the Lakes and Shuswap, there are some historical references regarding wars between the Secwépemc and their neighbours, including conflict between the Lakes and Secwépemc. Teit informed Boas in a 1909 letter that “[t]he Lakes say the Shuswaps were great fighters formerly and their war parties sometimes passed through the Lake country to attack the Kootenays of Kootenay Lake. They had no wars with any other tribes” (1909). Teit’s Lakes consultants reported that they did not engage in warfare with the Secwépemc or “with any other tribe except the Kutenai” (1930:258). Bouchard and Kennedy pointed out, however, that Teit (1910-1913) noted in his unpublished notes that “there had been a dispute between the Lakes and the Shuswap concerning ‘hunting rights’ in the vicinity of Revelstoke” (1985:133a), although they were unable to verify this information in government records. Furthermore, whilst camping at Upper Arrow Lake in 1865, colonial surveyor James Turnbull was informed of conflict between the Lakes and Secwépemc, the reasons for which were not mentioned.101 On August 17, 1865 Turnbull recorded the following in his journal whilst camping “about 5 miles up the Lower Arrow Lake”, on the east side: Perhaps this is the dispute to which Bouchard and Kennedy referred, however, this too was unverifiable during the course of the research and writing of this report. 101 CONFIDENTIAL 103 P a g e | 104 Sinixt The whole of the Okanagan [Nsǝlxcin-speaking Lakes] Indians insisted on returning 102 [“on account of it being salmon fishing time”] 103; I told them I could not pay them (not having any money with me) until they brought me up river as far as where Mr. Moberly was station; this they refused and went away without pay in a very angry manner. Before going, they had a conversation with a Columbia Indian 104 who arrived in camp, which did a great deal of harm in my opinion. During the day I had a conversation with Gregoire, the [Lakes] chief, whom I asked to assist me, but I could see quite a marked change in behavior – a sort of coolness on his part, owing, no doubt, to my not having paid the Indians – made a great many excuses about his Indians [Lakes] being afraid to go up river on account of the Shuswap Indians with whom they were then at war; he, however, promised to do his best and left (Turnbull 1865:28; emphasis added). According to Sinixt-Skoyelpi consultant, Martin Louie 105 a battle occurred at a place called Nk’mmtsin, located at the confluence of the Kettle and Granby rivers (currently known as Grand Forks). This is also the location of burial site identified in the archaeological record as DgQo-2 (Freisinger 1979a:38). Martin Louie informed anthropologists Bouchard and Kennedy that “Kts’ats’ukw’a killed the Shuswaps in a battle” at this place (Freisinger 1978-27:38). 6.2.3 Sinatcheggs (Sinixt)/Kootenais (Ktunaxa) – Early Relationship The nature of the Ktunaxa/Lake relationship appears to have been a long and complicated one. On his journey through the Arrow Lakes in 1821, Hudson’s Bay Company employee Alexander Ross encountered an Indigenous man at the lower end of Upper Arrow Lake who declared he was chief of this country. He demonstrated his intimate knowledge of the surrounding country and informed Ross that his father was Ktunaxa: ‘My father,’ said he, ‘was a Kootanais chief; but, in consequence of wars with the Blackfeet, who often visited his lands, he and a part of his people emigrated to this country about thirty years ago [around 1790]. I am now chief of that band, and head of all the Indians here. We From context given earlier in the Journal, these Nselxcin-speaking people would be returning back south to the Salmon fisheries, possibly Kettle Falls. 103 Turnbull provided this information in in the entry for August 14, 1865. 104 In the 1860s the Indigenous populations living at what were known as the “Columbia Lakes”, that is Columbia Lake and Windermere Lake, were referred to as the “Columbia Indians”. More specifically, this was the population of Secwépemc people living in the area Windermere and Columbia lakes. See for example, Ball, H.M. Colonial Correspondence. BCA, GR 1372.11.101a, 1869 Oct.- Dec. Notes on Ball’s (Stipendary Magistrate/Gold Commissioner) time among Kootenay and Columbia Indians, including hunting and settlement locations. Today this population is the Kenpesq’t or Shuswap Band. 105 At the time of publication in 1978, archaeologist Michael Freisinger was given the term Colville Okanagan to identify Martin Louie (1979a:32) 102 CONFIDENTIAL 104 P a g e | 105 Sinixt number about two hundred, and call ourselves Sinatcheggs, the name of the country; and here we have lived ever since’ (Ross 1955:171-172). 106 The Ktunaxa ancestry of this chief is a moot point given he joined the Sinixt community and became a member of this group after emigrating to their country. It is clear from this statement that the identity of these people is tied to the land and territory known as Sinatcheggs or Sinixt.107 According to Bouchard and Kennedy, the Lower Ktunaxa obtained salmon from friendly neighbouring territories, including from Sinixt territory; however, salmon was not a significant part of Lower Ktunaxa diet given they had little direct access to it (2000:295). Further to this, anthropologist David Chance wrote that a few of the lower Kutenai did move seasonally to the salmon fisheries on the lower river [Kootenay River] between the lake and the Columbia, and also to Kettle Falls, at any rate after the Hudson’s Bay Company established itself there [1825]. 108 But to fish and trade for salmon, the lower Kutenai had to be in harmonious relations with the Arrow Lakes [Sinixt] and Kettle Falls or Colville Salish [Skoyelpi], which they not always were (Chance 1981:1). According to Teit’s consultants, trade and good relations existed between the Ktunaxa and the Lakes tribe “[i]n early times” 109 (Teit 1930:253). Parties of Lower Ktunaxa frequently came to the mouth of the Slocan River, and occasionally to the mouth of the Kootenai [river], to buy salmon. They left their canoes above Bonnington Falls; and after living a couple of weeks with the Lake tribe visited the Kutenai on Kootenai Lake, occasionally going as far as Creston, where they engaged with them in games and did a little trading 110 (Teit 1930:253). In return for salmon, the Lower Ktunaxa “sometimes traded painted bags, parflêches111 and deerskinned robes to the Lake” (Teit 1930:253). Apparently trade between the Ktunaxa and the Lakes decreased with the introduction of the horse (Teit 1930:253). Teit provided a description of the Tunaxe: “This tribe was also obliterated by the Blackfeet. Their traditional territory is marked [on Teit’s field map] with horizontal strokes. Their exact southern and eastern boundaries are not quite certain. They had their head quarters on the Sun and Dearborn Rivers and all their grounds were east of the main Rocky Mountain Range. They extended down the Missouri to a little below Great Falls. The Seton River was considered to be the boundary line between the Blackfeet & Salish tribes.” Although it is neither certain nor confirmed that the Tunaxe and the Kootenais referred to above are the same population, the possible connection is noteworthy. 107 This migration event is reported to have roughly occurred about the same time as, or within a few years of, the war between the Kutenai and the Lake over the Slocan fishery as described by Teit above. 108 Fort Colville, located near Kettle Falls, was established in 1825. 109 Teit does not provide a specific date or dates for this activity. 110 Bouchard and Kennedy pointed out that Teit “did not indicate if they actually participated in the salmon fishery here” (1985:116). 111 Raw-hide bag. 106 CONFIDENTIAL 105 P a g e | 106 Sinixt 6.2.4 Conflict with Ktunaxa – Slocan fishery According to Teit the Lakes “had some small fights and one great war” with the Ktunaxa (1930:258) over the same fishing site on the Slocan River at which the Ktunaxa and Lakes came together to trade. In his “Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest”, Teit remarked that at some point before the turn of the nineteenth century, the Lakes engaged in warfare with the Kuntaxa in defense of their fisheries on Slocan River. He wrote: “[s]ometime over 100 years ago (c. 1810)112 a large body of Lower Kootenay moved against the Lakes, with intention of dispossessing them of their salmon fisheries at the mouth of Slocan River, and of occupying the Kootenay River down to the mouth. This resulted in a war in which the Kootenay were finally driven back to Kootenay Lake” [strike-through Teit’s] (1910-1913:7). Teit provided further details of the war in his 1930 ethnography: A number of fights occurred, with advantage sometimes to one side, sometimes to the other. At last the Lake held a council, and said, ‘We better kill all the Kutenai, and then there will be no more trouble.’ At this time the Lake tribe was very numerous, and men came from all parts of the tribe. A large expedition went up to Kootenai Lake and attacked the Lower Kutenai of Creston. They killed a great many people, and after that the Kutenai ceased to attack them. In some expeditions Shuswap helped the Lake against the Kutenai. The Lake say that sometimes independent war parties of Shuswap appeared in the Lake country on their way to attack the Kutenai. The Lake tribe sometimes gave them assistance in crossing the Columbia. It seems that there has been no war between the Lake and the Kutenai since about the beginning of the last century [circa 1800] (Teit 1930:258). William Kittson in 1826 noted a cave above the Slocan River, at the commencement of the lower Kootenay River: “here is a rock with a cave to it where the natives (Kutenai) make on their return from war on the Kettle Fall Indians [Lakes] sacrifices to a Spirit as they say residing there” (Kittson 1826). 6.2.5 Conflict with Ktunaxa – Beaton Arm fishery In addition to the conflict over the Slocan fishery, it was reported that a dispute arose between the Lakes and Ktunaxa over the Lakes’ fishery at Beaton Arm around 1800. 113 Local historian Kate Johnson created a small body of popular work regarding the history of the Arrow Lakes and area in the 1960s. However, caution is required when reading her work as her identification of Indigenous populations is confusing at best and requires further analysis and comparison against the historic record. In her publication on Nakusp and Arrow Lakes, she wrote 112 113 This would put the date of this war some time at or before 1810. It is noteworthy that two conflicts over two apparently separate fisheries occurred at about the same time. CONFIDENTIAL 106 P a g e | 107 Sinixt of the Ktunaxa coming to the Arrow Lakes to fish in birch bark canoes 114 “up to a certain period prior to the advent of fur traders” (Johnson 1964:7). 115 According to Johnson the Ktunaxa camped at “what is now Beaton on the north-east arm” of Upper Arrow Lake (Johnson 1964:7). It is known that Lakes villages were located in this area. Teit (1930), Ray (1936), and Kennedy and Bouchard (1998) reported the presence of the Lakes village NkEma’pElEks (No. 2, Teit 1936) at or near the north end of Beaton Arm, also the location of a noted fishing site. The conflict that reportedly took place at this location transpired between the group of Ktunaxa people camping in the area and the Lakes people who inhabited the village NkEma’pElEks identified above. It is important to note that Johnson added confusion to the story of this conflict by referring to the Lakes people as “Okinaken”. It is probable that by referring to “Okinaken”, she was referring to people of the Nsǝlxcin language group, and specifically to the Lakes people. She wrote that “the Okinaken Indians from what is now the Okanagan country [Lakes] 116 were jealous of these more numerous invaders of what they considered their private hunting and fishing grounds” (Johnson 1964:7). She wrote that “[r]esident families of this tribe [Lakes] made their homes on the shore lands of Lower Arrow Lake and wintered there, so often in the autumn there was war between the two tribes [Ktunaxa and Lakes]” (Johnson 1964:7). According to Johnson, the Ktunaxa and Lakes tribe eventually “decided that it would be better to make a truce and each tribe keep to distinct areas. The Kitonaqa then kept to the Kootenay Lake and River and the Northern Idaho country, and the Colvilles [Skoyelpi], of which the Okinakens [Lakes] were a branch, retained the fishing rights of the Arrow Lakes” (1964:7). According to Johnson, the truce was marked by the presence of arrows at Lower Arrow Lake resulting in the subsequent naming of “Arrow” Lakes by early fur traders: “The cliff painting and the flights of arrows shot over the cliffs of the Arrow Lakes on arrival of the first fur traders and missionaries were a sign of the truce of the Kitonaqa [Ktunaxa] and Okinaken [Lakes] about one hundred and fifty years ago (c. 1800)” 117 (Johnson 1964:9). This is discussed further below. Some of Johnson’s confusion around the correct naming of the Lakes tribe may stem from Ktunaxa ethnographer Turney-High’s difficulty in eliciting information from his Ktunaxa consultants regarding the Lakes people. Johnson relied heavily on Turney-High’s ethnographic work. Turney-High reported that his Ktunaxa consultants did not recognize Lakes people as such but referred to this population as “Colville” (being those living at Colville Reservation) and Skoyelpi and Lakes dugout canoes were typically made from ponderosa pine or cottonwood (Freisinger 1978, Sinixt communication 2022). Sturgeon-nosed canoes are made from white pine bark (Sinixt communication 2023). 115 The first fur trader to arrive in the area was David Thompson in 1811. 116 It is not clear what she means by “what is now Okanagan country but presumably, given the context, Johnson is referring to the Lakes and Skoyelpi territory south of the International boundary or possibly the boundary area of Kettle Falls/Christina Lake/Grand Forks area. See footnote 74 for further comment. 117 For example see: May 29, 1846: P.J. De Smet Washington State University Special Collections, Cage 537, Pierre Jean De Smet Papers, Box 1, f. 20. 114 CONFIDENTIAL 107 P a g e | 108 Sinixt “Okanagan” (being those of the Nsǝlxcin language group). Assuming Johnson relied on Ktunaxa consultants (directly or through Turney-High’s work) for her information, this would explain her identification of the Indigenous people living at Arrow Lakes as “Okinaken”. Turney-High was understandably confused regarding Lakes people given his work was exclusively with the Ktunaxa people. He wrote: [i]t is not entirely clear whom [Ray] and his authorities mean by ‘Lakes’ Indians. The Kutenai informants [consultants] have never heard of them by this name. Neither have the Canadian and United States Indian agents questioned. Neither have the priests at St. Eugene Mission. At best, then, the term ‘Lakes’ is a dubious one from the Kutenai standpoint. In trying to make a possible identification of the ‘Lakes’ people, informants [consultants] used Kutenaian terms meaning Colville and Okanagan (Turney-High 1974:24). Commenting on Turney-High’s statement, archaeologist Christopher Turnbull attempted to make sense of his confusion by suggesting that “[t]he Kutenai may be lumping the Lake and Colville people together” (1977:118). 118 It seems that information regarding the Lakes and/or people who resided at the Colville Reservation given to Turney-High in the later 1930s (and thus to Johnson) by Ktunaxa consultants was confused or misunderstood. 119 6.2.6 Conflict with Ktunaxa – Halcyon Hot Springs Johnson also wrote about a war between the Ktunaxa and “Colville tribes” – presumably she was referring to people from Colville Reservation, specifically the Lakes– over the hot springs today known as the Halcyon Hot Springs, the details of which were provided by early settlers: The springs were known among the Indians as the ‘great Medicine Waters.’ Indians from the State of Washington arrived by scores in canoes, pitched their tents, dug deep excavations near the hot springs where the crippled members of the tribe sojourned for months, while others in active health caught salmon. For possession of the springs the Kootenay and Colville tribes engaged in a long and bloody war…. Ed Picard… in 1887, found the hot springs quite by accident…. The springs were not staked until two years later by Robert Sanderson who bargained with the Indians for their rights (Johnson 1964:173). A date for the conflict over the hot springs was not provided. Turnbull points out that Tuney-High (1941:25) “records the Upper Kutenai name for the Colville [Skoyelpi] as ‘tsafnunek’, which is very similar to the name ‘Tsefenō’nikl’ that Teit records as Upper Kutenaian for Lake (1930:198)” (Turnbull 1977:119). 119 These excerpts from Turney-High and Johnson are included here to point out the further confusion that has arisen from Turney-High’s comments regarding Lakes people and territory, and to emphasize the importance of ethnographic and historic sources that demonstrate a direct and prolonged working relationships with Lakes people themselves such as James Teit, William Elmendorf, and Verne Ray. 118 CONFIDENTIAL 108 P a g e | 109 Sinixt 6.3 Ethnographic and Historic documentation of the Arrow Lakes region A significant number of personal journals of 19th and 20th century explorers, fur traders, priests, surveyors and Indian Agents, as well as fieldnotes, maps, and published ethnographic works, describe the Lakes people and their presence at and around the Arrow Lakes. In 1846, Jesuit priest Pierre-Jean De Smet, after having visited the Arrow Lakes area, wrote that the Arrow Lakes were named as such due to the presence of a number of arrows lodged in a rock at the lower end of Lower Arrow Lake. De Smet explained: The second lake is about six to eight miles distance from the first, it is less large, but about the same length. There we passed under a perpendicular rock, the crevices of which are filled with arrows. The Indians, as they ascend or descend the lake by canoe, have the custom of letting fly an arrow into the crevices of the rock. The origin and the cause of this custom is unknown to me. It is from this that the first voyageurs called these lakes the Arrow Lakes. 120 In 1821, Hudson’s Bay Company employee Alexander Ross, perhaps one of the “voyageurs” of which De Smet speaks, wrote that the arrows belong to a warring “distant tribe”: At a point on the west side a number of figures of men and animals have been rudely portrayed on the naked rocks with red ochre; and into a large cavity, at a considerable height above high-water mark, a number of arrows have been shot, which remain as a menace left by some distant tribe who had passed there on a warlike expedition. The natives understand these signs, and can tell, on examining the arrows, to which tribe they belong (Ross 1825). 121 Cartographer John Arrowsmith indicates the location of Arrow Rock on his 1859 (Figure 39) at or in the vicinity of Deer Park. May 29, 1846: P.J. De Smet Washington State University Special Collections, Cage 537, Pierre Jean De Smet Papers, Box 1, f. 20. 121 Local historian Kate Johnson offered the following remarks regarding this war between the Ktunaxa and the Lakes: “The cliff painting and the flights of arrows shot over the cliffs of the Arrow Lakes on arrival of the first fur traders and missionaries were a sign of the truce of the Kitonaqa [Ktunaxa] and Okinaken [Lakes] about one hundred and fifty years ago (c. 1800)” (Johnson 1964:9). 120 CONFIDENTIAL 109 P a g e | 110 Sinixt Figure 39 – Map 14: The Provinces of British Columbia & Vancouver Island with the Portions of the United States & Hudson’s Bay Territories [Detail], Complied from Original Documents by John Arrowsmith, 1859 Hudson’s Bay Company Fur trader A.C. Anderson also identified Arrow Rock on his 1867 map (Figure 43). Figure 40 – Map 31: A Portion of the Colony of British Columbia from various sources, including original notes from personal explorations... 183[?] and 1851 [detail] – Anderson 1867 This is also the approximate location at which Ray identified a temporary camping site – (No. 32) plu’me’. A number of archaeological and pit house sites have also been identified in this area (Turnbull 1977). CONFIDENTIAL 110 P a g e | 111 Sinixt Archaeologist Christopher Turnbull (1977:194) compiled a list – “Records and sightings of Lake people 1811-1865” – itemizing a number of sources which reference the Lakes people. The table below is based on Turnbull’s own table. Additional information has been added through the course of research. 122 In documenting the historical references to Indigenous presence at the Arrow Lakes, it becomes apparent that the Lakes are those to whom references are made most frequently, the earliest reference made in 1824 by George Simpson, Governor of the Hudson’s Bay Company. There are few references to Ktunaxa presence at the Arrow Lakes as well as references to “Indians” in general, the identity of whom is not always specified. Date Area and Nature Reference 1824-5 Simpson G. Columbia River, Boat Encampment to Kettle Falls “Sinachicks – Lakes [Arrow] of Main River [Columbia River]” (Simpson 1931:169). 1825 Ross, A. Columbia River, Boat Encampment to Kettle Falls At their camp on the lower end of Upper Arrow Lake, Ross met an Indigenous man who “gave us much information respecting the country, beaver and other animals, roads and distances; also some account of himself and the Indians of the place. ‘My father,’ said he, ‘was a Kootanais chief; but, in consequence of wars with the Blackfeet, who often visited his lands, he and a part of his people emigrated to this country about thirty years ago [around 1790]. I am now chief of that band, and head of all the Indians here. We number about two hundred, and call ourselves Sinatcheggs [Sinixt], the name of the country; and here we have lived ever since. I have been across the land on the west, as far as the Sawthlelum-takut, or Kanagan [Okanagan] Lake, which lies due west from this, and can be travelled on foot in six days. I and several people have likewise been to the Shewhaps [Shuswap], which lies in a northwest direction from this….Here the old man concluded his remarks, and told us that his people were then living about two miles up the river [Nakusp], where they were employed in hunting wild animals and catching fish; that his stumbling upon us was the effect of mere chance, he being at the time in pursuit of a wounded moose deer; but, on seeing the whites, he abandoned the pursuit, and came into our camp. We gave the sachem [chief] of the Sinatcheggs an axe, a knife, and some tobacco, and he took his departure highly gratified with his reception.” (Ross 1855:171-172; emphasis added). 122 Only the portion of Turnbull’s table that mentions the Arrow Lakes region is reproduced. CONFIDENTIAL 111 P a g e | 112 Sinixt Date Area and Nature Reference 1826 Kittson, W. Lower Kootenay River “About two miles below the portage [South Slocan and Bonnington Falls] 123 is the discharge of a small rapid river where the Columbia Lake [Lakes] Indians make a barrier for salmon” (Kittson 1826:4). (HBCA, Fort Colville, letter to John Dease, September 5, 1826) 1827 Ermatinger, E. Columbia River, Boat Encampment to Kettle Falls March 20, 1827: At the Lower Arrow Lake, writes Ermatinger, “[a]n Indian comes to our camp with a few fish (Suckers and Tidubee) and a small piece of cabris which we exchange for a piece of dried meat” (Ermatinger and White 1912:76). March 21: At Upper Arrow Lake, Ermatinger “[p]asses several camps of Indians in course of the day and traded 7 pairs of [snowshoes]” (Ermatinger and White 1912:77). October 13, 1827: Paddling through the Upper, then Lower Arrow Lakes, Ermatinger comments that his party “saw Indians” (Ermatinger and White 1912:110). Ermatinger clearly observed Indigenous populations living on the Arrow Lakes, however, he did not identify these people by name or nation. 1827 Dease, W. Columbia District Report, Hudson’s Bay Company This report cited by Turnbull 124 was reviewed but no reference to the Arrow Lakes was confirmed. This may have been due to the illegibility of the document. 1827 Douglas, D. Columbia River, Boat Encampment to Kettle Falls Douglas, David. Journal Kept by David Douglas during his Travels in North America 1823-27. Royal Horticulture Society, London, 1914. Near Deer Park on Lower Arrow Lake: “Purchased of them a little dried reindeer – meat and a little black bear, of which we have just made a comfortable supper. They seem to live comfortably, many skins of Black-tailed, Rein, and Red deer being in their possession. I purchased a little wool of Mouton Blanche (mountain goat?) as a specimen of the quality of wool; gave seven balls and the same number of charges of powder for it” (Douglas 1914:251). Archaeologist Christopher Turnbull stated that the “river is undoubtedly the Slocan” (1977:118). Turnbull speculated that the falls located here “would form a natural dividing line between two peoples”, the Lake and Kootenay (Turnbull 1977:118). 124 Colville Fort (Columbia River) Report, 1827. Reports on Districts. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives, Ottawa, 1827. 123 CONFIDENTIAL 112 P a g e | 113 Sinixt Date Area and Nature Reference 1829 Work, J. Columbia District Report, Hudson’s Bay Company “Lake Indians – Sinnetchts” “The Lake, Kettle falls, Sinapoilish, Spokan, Pend [illegible], and Flathead Indians speak all the same language [Nsǝlxcin]” (Work 1829). 1830 Work, J. Columbia District Report, Hudson’s Bay Company “The Lake Indians inhabited the Columbia from or above the Athabasca portage [vicinity of Canoe River north of Revelstoke] to the White goat river [Pend d’Oreille or possibly Sheep Creek] or little Dalles [near Northport, Washington] not far above Kettle Falls, and the small streams that fall into it” (Work 1830). 1830-1 Heron, C. & Kittson, W. Fort Colville Post Journal, Hudson’s Bay Company August 18, 1830: “Got the Lake Indians who have as usual passed most of the summer at the [Kettle] Falls, to get out to their lands so as to commence their beaver hunts at an earlier period than they were accustomed to do, having usually remained here doing nothing til late in the season.” January 31, 1831: “The little Lake Chief and his followers set out for the Lakes to hunt.” (Heron and Kittson 1830-1) Simpson, G. 1841 Columbia River, Boat Encampment to Kettle Falls Simpson, George. Journals of 1841. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives, Ottawa, 1841. 1846 Kane, P. Columbia River, Boat Encampment to Kettle Falls Kane, Paul. Wanderings of an Artist Among the Indians of North America. M.G. Hurtig. Edmonton, 1968. Observed the Lakes between the Little Dalles, just north of Revelstoke, and the Dalles des Morts. CONFIDENTIAL 113 P a g e | 114 Sinixt Date Area and Nature Reference 1846 De Smet, P. Columbia River, Boat Encampment to Kettle Falls ... In the course of the day, we skipped through the area called the little dalles and camped at the entrance of the first lake [Lower Arrow Lake]. The lake with its waters, transparent like crystal, presented a ravishing spectacle at the moment when the rising sun shot forth its first rays on the rocky and icy summits of its mountains. It is from four to five miles wide by twenty-five to thirty long....The two highest peaks are called the St. Pierre and the St. Paul. Twenty or so Indian families from the St. Pierre station could be found camped on the shores of the lake. I submitted myself with pleasure to their pressing invitation. It was the meeting of a father with his children after ten months of absence and danger. Dare I say, the joy was great and sincere on both sides. The greatest portion of their tribe had been evan-gelized at the Chaudiere [Kettle] falls, in the course of last summer; these here had been absent on that occasion... Gregoire, that is the name of the Big Chief, had the pleasure in 1836 to receive the baptism from the hands of Reverend Blanchet, now Archbishop, upon his entrance into Oregon... The tribe of the Lakes is part of the Schuyelpi [Skoyelpi] 125 nation. As soon as we would have more means at our disposal, we will come to their aid with tools of labour and seeds and roots, that promise to succeed in their country and that will be a great help for this poor people, denied everything. 126 (Chittenden and Richardson 1905; emphasis added) 1859 Palliser, J. Blakiston, T. Hector, J. Columbia and Kootenay Rivers (Palliser, John. The Journals, Detailed Reports, and Observations relative to the Exploration of... British North America... 1857-60. Parliamentary Blue Book. London, 1863). 1865 Moberly, W. Arrow Lakes Moberly 1866 The details of this source are provided below. 1865 Turnbull Arrow Lakes Turnbull 1866 The details of this source are provided below. Engineer and Surveyor, Walter Moberly undertook an exploration of the Columbia River in the mid-nineteenth century. His journal and that of James Turnbull, are published in Columbia River Outsiders often called the Skoyelpi (Colville), Scheulpi or Chualpay; the French traders called them Les Chaudières ("the kettles"). 126 May 29, 1846: P.J. De Smet Washington State University Special Collections, Cage 537, Pierre Jean De Smet Papers, Box 1, f. 20. 125 CONFIDENTIAL 114 P a g e | 115 Sinixt Exploration, 1865-6, Instructions, Reports, & Journals relating to the Government Exploration of the Country Lying between the Shuswap and Okanagan Lakes and the Rocky Mountains. The following journal excerpts detail Turnbull’s and Moberly’s observations and experience in the Arrow Lakes region: From Turnbull (1865): • July 24th 1865: Turnbull, camping near Long Lake (to the east of Okanagan Lake), hired “Indians to accompany me as far as the Columbia” (1865:25). On August 17th, whilst at Lower Arrow Lake, wrote that “the whole of the Okanagan Indians [from Okanagan Valley] insisted on returning” (1865:28). Turnbull does not comment on why his Okanagan guides, at this point in the journey, insisted on returning to Okanagan Lake, however, it is possible that they knew they were entering neighbouring territory. • August 6th 1865: Turnbull recorded in his journal that he had “marked all the different routes by which the Columbia can be gained via the east and south branches of Cherry Creek” and that he “camped at the junction of south branch pass with the Columbia; the Indians call this the What’shaan River” (Map 30) (1965:27). Whatshan River empties into the Columbia River at what is today identified as the Needles of Lower Arrow Lake. • August 9th 1865: Still at the camp at the mouth of the Whatshan River, Turnbull wrote that “several Indians came to camp, tried to engage them and collect all the information I could respecting the Selkirk Range, as well as the Gold Range; found out that all the Indians including the Chief of the [Lakes] tribe (Gregoire), were either at the mouth of the Kootenay River [Castlegar area] or Fort Shepherd [Waneta]” (Turnbull 1865:27). Turnbull decided to proceed to Fort Shepherd where he hired an Indian to take him back up to Lower Arrow Lake. • August 14th 1865: Whilst camping on the east side of Lower Arrow Lake “about 3 miles up” (possibly around Robson), Turnbull recorded in his journal that “on account of its being salmon fishing time I could not persuade any Indians to accompany me; the chief Gregoire promised to do his best and bring me Indians in a few days on his way up river” (1865:28). • August 17th 1865: Turnbull wrote that he was unable to pay the “Okanagan Indians” who accompanied him to the Lower Arrow Lake until they met up with Moberly. Before leaving CONFIDENTIAL 115 P a g e | 116 Sinixt in a very angry manner… they [the Nsǝlxcin-speaking Lakes] had a conversation with a Columbia Indian 127 who arrived in camp, which did a great deal of harm in my opinion. During the day I had a conversation with Gregoire, the chief, whom I asked to assist me, but I could see quite a marked change in behavior – a sort of coolness on his part, owing, no doubt, to my not having paid the Indians – made a great many excuses about his Indians being afraid to go up river on account of the Shuswap Indians with whom they were then at war; he, however, promised to do his best and left (1865:28). • Turnbull left camp without the aid of Indians and reached the “upper end of Lower Arrow Lake” in the morning of August 20th 1865. They camped here “in hopes of the appearance of Gregoire and his hunting party, part of whom made their appearance at about 5p.m. I arranged with them to bring us up to the foot of the Upper Lake…” (1865:28). • August 22nd 1865: Turnbull camped at small creek, “known by the Indians as Kushenox River [Kuskanax Creek]”, emptying into the east side of Upper Arrow Lake (1865:18). Figure 41 – Map30: Plan of the Columbia R. District: Shewing the Routes Explored by Messrs Moberly, Green & Turnbull [in 1865] [Detail], 1866 • August 23rd 1865: “[Lakes Chief] Gregoire and his Indians arrived, on their way up to the head of Upper Arrow Lake. I arranged with 4 of them to bring me to the head of the lake…” (1865:28). After reaching the head of the lake (most likely somewhere near or at Galena), “the Indians refused to go further” [on account of war with the Secwépemc] (1865:28). • August 27th 1865: Turnbull lost a canoe with supplies after having set off without Indians and paddling for two hours. He sent word to “the Indians below of what had happened, and desire them to come up.” The following day, “3 canoes came up to our camp; the 127 In the 1860s the Indigenous populations living at what were known as the “Columbia Lakes”, that is Columbia Lake and Windermere Lake, were referred to as the “Columbia Indians”. More specifically, this was the population of Secwépemc people living in the area Windermere and Columbia lakes. See for example, Ball, H.M. Colonial Correspondence. BCA, GR 1372.11.101a, 1869 Oct.- Dec. Notes on Ball’s (Stipendary Magistrate/Gold Commissioner) time among Kootenay and Columbia Indians, including hunting and settlement locations. Today this population is the Kenpesq’t or Shuswap Band. CONFIDENTIAL 116 P a g e | 117 Sinixt [Lakes] Indians informed us that Gregoire, their chief, would be up during the day, and would bargain with me; that in the meantime they would convey is 3 miles further up…. During the afternoon Gregoire made his appearance, and persuaded 4 Indians to undertake to bring us up at a most exorbitant price…” (1865:28). • August 31, 1865: Surveyor Walter Moberly camped at the Eddy (across from Revelstoke) 128 for the night. In his journal he writes that in the evening, “the old [Lakes] Indian Chief ‘Gregoire’ paid me a long visit” (Moberly 1865:17). On September 1st, Moberly camped on a small Island “about 8 miles above Eddy. Gregoire and 3 Indians camped with us” (Moberly 1965, notebook 2). • Turnbull hired “a number of Indians” to accompany him on his exploration of the Ill-comopalux River area. Upon reaching Lake de Truite (Trout Lake), Turnbull set up camp about eight miles below the lake “on account of the Indians refusing to proceed further. They endeavoured to cover their refusal on the plea of having shewn me the summit dividing the two Columbias, telling me that was their agreement and they would go no further” (1865:30). From Moberly (1865): • September 11, 1865: “...completed arrangements to go below to Ille-cille-waut Creek.... Two Columbia Indians129 came to engage for trip to eastward of Columbia River” (Moberly 1865:17). • September 15, 1865: “Left Layton’s camp in morning, with Turnbull and Perry, 3 Shuswap and 2 Columbia River [Lakes] Indians; the Shuswap Indians that were to have gone with Turnbull, refused to go at the last moment” (1865:17). It is clear from Moberly’s October 3rd entry that there were “3 Shuswap Indians” among his party on the Ille-cille-waut Creek journey. Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:76. In the 1860s the Indigenous populations living at what were known as the “Columbia Lakes”, that is Columbia Lake and Windermere Lake, were referred to as the “Columbia Indians”. More specifically, this was the population of Secwépemc people living in the area Windermere and Columbia lakes. See for example, Ball, H.M. Colonial Correspondence. BCA, GR 1372.11.101a, 1869 Oct.- Dec. Notes on Ball’s (Stipendary Magistrate/Gold Commissioner) time among Kootenay and Columbia Indians, including hunting and settlement locations. Today this population is the Kenpesq’t or Shuswap Band. 128 129 CONFIDENTIAL 117 P a g e | 118 Sinixt 130 131 • Travelling east on the Ille-cille-waut Creek, Moberly comments that “Victor (an Indian travelling with us who knows it [the river])” 130 provides advice on the direction of the route (1865:19). • September 29, 1865: “Started on return journey at 7:30 a.m., we had hardly left the camp, when a fine caribou, about 4 years old came trotting over the prairie to us, when a shot from Victor’s gun brought him down, he weighed about 4 or 500 lbs., and had a splendid pair of antlers. It was with great difficulty I got the Indians away, as he was very fat; however, after getting his skin and some of the sinews and fat, I got them off and made about 12 miles...” (Moberly 1865:19) • October 4th, 1865: Moberly travelled to the “island above ‘Little Dalles’ [just north of Revelstoke] (the same place where I camped before with [Lakes Chief] Gregoire & Columbia R. Indians) where we camped” (Moberly 1865:19). The identity of the “Columbia R. Indians” to which Moberly refers can appear confusing. The sources identify Gregoire was the chief of the “Lakes” (Emile de Girardin [graphic material], Library and Archives Canada (R4976-7-6-E); (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:75). Gregoire, being the Chief of the Lakes people, it is most likely that those Moberly refers to as the Columbia River Indians, by whom Gregoire is accompanied, are the same population identified ethnographically as the “Lakes” people. However, in his published narrative of his travels, Moberly also speaks of hiring “Charley, a Columbia-river Shuswap” for guidance (1885:79). Furthermore, possibly adding to confusion, in a December 28, 1869 letter to the Colonial Secretary, Stipendiary Magistrate H.M. Ball sent his notes on his “time among Kootenay and Columbia Indians, including hunting and settlement locations”. He provided the following comments on this population: “The Columbia Indians differ in feature and habits from those on the Kootenai, resembling the Shuswap Tribe, and their Lodges are scattered along the Banks of that River, from its headwaters [Columbia Lake] to the 49th parallel during the Salmon Season, large quantities of which fish are speared and caught in hand nets and stored for their winter supply” (Ball, H. M. Colonial Correspondence. BCA, GR-1372.11.101a, 1869 Oct.- Dec.). On closer scrutiny, it appears that there are two different populations being discussed. The Lakes were almost certainly those referred to as “Columbia River Indians” in Moberly and Turnbull and that the population referred to as the “Columbia Indians” probably was the population of Secwépemc people 131 who were living at the Columbia River headwaters at the time of Ball’s correspondence. In his published narrative of this journey, Moberly identifies Victor as a “Columbia-river Indian” (1885:45). Today this population is the Kenpesq’t or Shuswap Band. CONFIDENTIAL 118 P a g e | 119 Sinixt From Moberly (1866): • June 21, 1866: “Remained at Kirby’s Landing [most likely located at Kirbyville Creek north of Revelstoke] and discharged Columbia River Indians [Lakes]. Arranged for Turnbull to leave next day for Seymour, to locate line for road through Eagle River Pass” (1866:14). From Turnbull (1866): • Turnbull also kept a journal of his expedition of Moberly’s route in which he records on June 20th that once he reached Kirby’s Landing, he hired “one Indian (Narcisse)” and a white man “to accompany me through the pass [Eagle Creek Pass – (Figure 42)] to the south arm of Shuswap Lake. Turnbull “also got two of Mr. Moberly’s [Lakes] Indians (Papoon and Cultus Jim 132)” (Moberly 1866:20). Figure 42 – Map 30: Plan of the Columbia R. District: Shewing the Routes Explored by Messrs Moberly, Green & Turnbull [in 1865] [Detail], 1866 In 1883 Sanford Fleming surveyed the railway route along the Eagle River valley and encountered a hunting party of “Fort Colville Indians” who had been camping at the mouth of the Tonkawatla River for about a month. Fleming’s party was guided to the west as far as Three Valley Lake. Fleming wrote: We discovered that the Fort Colville Indians encamped near us were well acquainted with the country for some distance back of the Columbia. It had been their hunting ground; accordingly we engaged one of their party, old [Lakes Chief] Baptiste, as a guide, to take us on our way [through Eagle Pass] by the least difficult route. The Indian knew the route well as far as Three Valley Lake. 133 The path we pass along is the one taken by the Indians for carrying caribou and game over the mountains. The various wild berries we saw on the route Cultus Jim was a Sinixt (Bouchard and Kennedy 2005a). At the time of writing, the identity of Narcisse and Papoon was not determined. 133 This would be a boundary area with the Secwépemc. 132 CONFIDENTIAL 119 P a g e | 120 Sinixt were unusually large…. There was an abundance of huckleberries and blackberries.... [at Three Valley Lake]. Baptiste tells us that much game abounds, and that from the lake large fish are taken, as we infer, salmon (Fleming 1884:297, 299, 303). Fleming noted that to the west of Three Valley Lake the Shuswap were “on their own ground” (Fleming 1884:304) thus indicating that the Shuswap/Lakes boundary lay at Three Valley Lake. 7.0 Post-Contact History and Reserve Creation 7.1 Population History and the International Boundary It appears that an estimate of Lakes population was first provided to Europeans when Alexander Ross when met a group of Lakes people in 1821. The Lakes chief informed Ross that his people numbered 200 (Ross 1855:171). The Lakes population suffered significant loss by smallpox epidemics, the first of which occurred around 1780. Teit reported that the Lakes population was “decimated” around 1800 by smallpox “but spared the Okanagon” until 1832 when “all the tribes were decimated by epidemic” (1930:212). 134 According to anthropologist James Mooney, the smallpox epidemics were severe and resulted in a mortality rate of up to fifty percent in some areas (Mooney 1928:13). It has also been estimated that the Lakes population was reduced by 80-90 per cent in the epidemic of 1782 alone (Goodale et al. 2022:27). This rapid change in population led to “enormous social disruption and changes” (Turnbull 1977:112). Population estimates provided by Hudson’s Bay Company records show a slow recovery of Sinixt population in the early to late 1800s. In 1825, following the establishment of Fort Colville, there was a “slow but steady migration and settlement of Lakes Indians south of the international border” (Mohs 1982:44). The international boundary established in 1846 divided the populations of the Okanagan and Lake tribes “in about halves” (Teit 1930:203). The Lakes community at Fort Colville “remained until the withdrawal of the Hudson’s Bay Company in 1870 and the establishment of the Colville Reservation” (1977:116). “By the time the Colville Indian Reservation was established in Washington State in 1872 135, very few Lakes Indians remained in Canada” (Mohs 1982:44). Kennedy and Bouchard regard this movement southward to Kettle Falls as a territorial expansion (1998:239) (see Map 2). Although the Lakes were among 134 The observation that the Lakes population was impacted by smallpox 32 years before that of the Okanagan, points to the significant geographic and social distance between these two groups. 135 The original Coville Reservation extended as far north at the International boundary. Twenty years after the establishment of the reserve, the northern half was removed. CONFIDENTIAL 120 P a g e | 121 Sinixt the Indigenous populations assigned to the Colville Reservation, “some of the Lakes people continued to travel throughout the Arrow Lakes on a seasonal basis” (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998:251). Ethnographers agree that Sinixt annual activities centred on the Arrow Lakes and that, as historian Andrea Geiger summarizes: a gradual southward migration into areas previously utilized but not permanently occupied occurred during the nineteenth century following the establishment of Fort Covile and Fort Shepherd by the Hudson’s Bay Company…. There is also evidence, however, that migratory patterns persisted among Sinixt who wintered near Fort Colvile but continued to travel up the Columbia River into the Arrow Lakes region to utilize the plant and animal resources of that area on an annual basis (Geiger 2010:123). CONFIDENTIAL 121 P a g e | 122 Sinixt Figure 43 – Map 32: The agreement in 1846 to fix the international border at the forty-ninth parallel divided Sinixt territories between the United States and Britain – Geiger 2010:125 Geiger further summarized that by the end of the nineteenth century, the arrival of nonIndigenous people into Lakes territory “had brought to a head the issue of resolving Native land claims on both sides of the border. On the U.S side, the Arrow Lakes were included among those permitted to reside on the Colville Reservation, established in northeastern Washington by executive order in April 1872, less than one year after British Columbia joined the dominion of Canada” (Figure 43)(2010:124). CONFIDENTIAL 122 P a g e | 123 Sinixt By 1914, the settlement of Lakes people south of the border was more or less established; however one Lakes family, that of Alexander Christie, continued to winter at the confluence of the Kootenay River with the Columbia, on a site that had been posted as an Indian reserve in 1861. This would be the reserve that was proposed near Brilliant (see Section 7.2 for details). Teit (1930; site No. 9) and Ray (1936; site No. 14) identified villages at or near this site, namely kp’ítl’els (see Section 5.0 for a full listing of village sites). Due to ongoing government pressure and settlement of Europeans, this site was abandoned in 1920 (Kennedy and Bouchard 1985, 1998:251; Cox 1861; Teit 1912). The following table provides a summary of census data of the Lakes people recorded by ethnographers and government officials starting from about 1780. 136 Date Prior to 1780 Total in Canada 1780 Unknown 500 2000 1825 About 200 1827 1829 34 men 138 1845 167 1840s 500 1860 1866+ 1866 Total in USA 800 Lakes Indian Chief to Alexander Ross (Ross 1855:171) John Dease (1827) John Work (1829) [34 men, 38 women, 25 boys, 41 girls] Warre and Vavasour 1845:151 [50 men, 43 women, 28 boys, 46 girls] DeSmet, 1860 (Chittenden and Richardson 1905:II:1005) (Parker 1840:178-179) Verne Ray (US Claims Commission, Petitioners’ Exhibit No. 530, c.1956) Allard (1926) Around Fort Shepherd Captain Charles Wilson (1866:292). Information from a Lakes Chief. Wilson (1866:292) stated that they live "on the lakes and upper portion of the Columbia River." Winans (1870) [54 men, 66 women, 67 boys, 42 girls] 137 Winans (1871:710) c.200 About 200-300 150 1870 229 1871 230 Sources and Comments Verne Ray (US Claims Commission, Petitioners’ Exhibit No. 530, c. 1956) Mooney 1928:15 Teit 1930:211 This table is based on Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:74, with additions. “It is important to note that Winan’s 1870 report appears to be the first known historical document locating the Lakes Indians south of Northport on the Columbia River. For the previous sixty years, the reports of traders, missionaries and government agents located the Lakes people primarily in the Arrow Lakes region” (Bouchard and Kennedy 1979:52). 136 137 CONFIDENTIAL 123 P a g e | 124 Sinixt 1875 1876 1881 21 “Colville” 242 55 men 333 1882 325 on 30 farms 1885 1886 1890 1891 295 300 303 348 (includes 45 not otherwise enumerated) 340 1893 1895 1897 1899 1902 25 1902 1903 1905 22 26 1905 1906 1907 1909 1909 1912 1917 1924 11 26 21 18 10 1929 1939 1959 3 4 257 7.2 284 285 311 305 79 men 240 268 BIA Annual Report 1875:118 G.W. Harvey (Harvey 1876) Canada Census, 1881; BIA Annual Report 1881:286 Chapman 1882 (along the Columbia from Northport to Kettle Falls) BIA Annual Report 1885, p. 350 BIA Annual Report 1886 BIA Annual Report 1890:216 Lake Indians of Colville Agency, Washington (US Indian Census Rolls, 1891) Lake Indians of Colville Agency, Washington (US Indian Census Rolls) BIA Annual Report 1895 BIA Annual Report US Census Records 1899 Rossland Miner 1902 “along the Columbia north of the border” Arrow Lake Band (Vowell 1902b) Arrow Lake band (DIA Annual Report 1903) Lake Indians of Colville Agency, Washington (US Indian Census Rolls) US Senate Documents 1906:6 John Webster (1906) BIA Annual Report for 1907 At Kootenay River mouth (Teit 1909a) Arrow Lake band (DIA Annual Report 1909a) Arrow Lake band (DIA Annual Report 1912) Arrow Lake band (DIA Annual Report 1917) Arrow Lake band (DIA Annual Report 1924, in Raichman 1947) Arrow Lake band (DIA Annual Report 1929) Arrow Lake band (DIA Annual Report 1939) “Lakes” Bloodworth (1959:54-57) kp’ítl’els and the Colonial Reserve at Brilliant James Douglas, travelling up the Columbia River in 1835, “found a camp of Indians belonging to the Little Chiefs band” located at “McGillivrays or Coutonais River” (1835:9). Bouchard and Kennedy concluded that this was a Lakes band (1985:113); In May 1846, Father P.J. De Smet mentioned that he had “already marked out a site for the construction of a church” at the confluence of the Columbia River and the “McGilvray or Flatbow [Kootenay] River” (Chittenden and Richardson 1905:II:549); and in 1861, W.G. Cox, Gold Commissioner for the Colonial CONFIDENTIAL 124 P a g e | 125 Sinixt government, spent time at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers in an effort to quell tension between gold miners and Lakes and Ktunaxa populations. Cox ascended the Columbia River “in search of the Lake and Kootenais Indians” (Cox 1861). It had been reported that Lakes Indians had kept miners from ascending the Columbia River in July 1861, just weeks before Cox’s visit (Stanley 1970:164). In October of 1861, Cox reported his reluctance to camp on the Columbia near Kootenay River for fear of encountering Ktunaxa people further up the Kootenay River: “I, being anxious to encamp there in case the miners might follow me up the River & accidentally fall in with the Kootanais Indians who are reported to be hostile to the miners.” 138 Cox also noted the presence of a fishing site “during the proper season” –at what is now known as Shields– “where Moberly Creek/Shields Creek empties into the former lowermost end of Lower Arrow Lake on its south side” (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:113). On October 5th, Cox was visited at his camp at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers by a couple “from the Kootenais tribes” with whom he made arrangements “to proceed tomorrow in search for the Kootenai Chiefs” (1861). Later on the 5th, “two more Indians arrived… they are from the Lakes” (1861). And on the 7th, Cox met with Lakes chiefs “Mikichlore” and “Qui-qui-las-ket” who informed him that “the [Lakes] Chief Gregoire is hunting deer & beaver and at too great a distance to be reached for, but that they were chiefs also – and were glad to see me” (1861). Cox delivered the following address to the miners regarding relations with the Lakes and Ktunaxa people: I have come here on my own [illegible] to assist you in exploring this country. The Lake and Kootanais Indians although weak in numerical strength are not to be trifled with – Nine Indians with bows & arrows repulsed eleven whites at the Pend O’Reille affair when the Latter was around with rifles…. Be cautious how you conduct yourselves. For independent of their numbers they can at any time command large reinforcements from the Shuswap Okanagan and other neighboring tribes. You cannot, in case of trouble with the Indians, expect any assistance from the Government until an officer is appointed to look after the Indians’ interests & safety…”. Clearly the Lakes people were prepared to defend their territory from the miners and Lakes neighbours were disposed to help, were it required. One of the Ktunaxa chiefs, Francois, requested of Cox to set aside a temporary reserve at the mouth of Kootenay River where it meets the Columbia River (also the site of Lakes village kp’ítl’els [See Table 1: No. 9 Ray, No. 14 Teit] and the area now known as Brilliant) (Harris 2002:334). In the 1861 report of his visit to the area, Cox wrote: 138 Letter and report to James J. Young, October 19, 1861. BCA, GR-1372, Colonial Correspondence File F/376/24. CONFIDENTIAL 125 P a g e | 126 Sinixt This morning [Ktunaxa Chief] Francois requested of me to Secure for his tribe a small flat piece of land – the north point at mouth of the Kootanai River – I did so by placing notices on it and also along the banks of the Columbia River in the immediate neighborhood of same, warning all persons not to trespass [sic] or encamp thereon it being an Indian Reserve until instructions to the contrary from the Government – bid farewell to the Indians and left (1861). It is Bouchard and Kennedy’s opinion that the Ktunaxa made this request of Cox for a reserve not because they had traditionally used or camped at this place – Bouchard and Kennedy state that they had found no evidence of Ktunaxa presence here – but because “[the Ktunaxa] wanted to take advantage of this site’s strategic location” (1985:114). 139 This was the location of the Lakes villages kp’ítl’els 140 and of a well-documented gravesite (Mary Marchand in Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:120; Nelson Daily News 1911; Castlegar Historical Review 1952). In 1865, surveyor Edgar Dewdney reported to the Colonial Secretary that “The point of land at the junction of the Kootenais with the Columbia… is a favorite place of resort with the Indians, and at times, especially in the winter, a number of families remain there” (Dewdney 1865). It is clear from the context of his letter that he is referring to Lakes people. He wrote, for example, that he desired to travel onward to Kootenay Lake but found his journey delayed and he remained at the Kootenay River mouth because of the lack of willingness of Indian guides to take him beyond their own territory: “I find the exploration takes me much longer than I anticipated, owing principally to the unwillingness of Indians to travel beyond their own section of country and I am consequently delayed at this point” (Dewdney 1865). The Lakes people, therefore, were unwilling to travel beyond their own territorial limits. Dewdney further informed the Colonial Secretary that he reserved this land at the mouth of the Kootenay River as a town site. It is unknown if Dewdney was aware that this land had previously been posted by Cox as an Indian Reserve. This reserve site was situated at the approximate location of the Lakes village site Anthropologist Claude Schaefer recorded from his Ktunaxa consultants that this was the approximate location of mythical Ktunaxa hunting territory located above Brilliant: “Wolverine’s territory (amákes) in myth located along [blank] river above Brilliant at falls while Chickadee’s [mítsqaqas] territory lay at lower end of Arrow Lake. Coyote brought salmon up the Columbia through the Arrow Lakes (Chickadee’s territory) and on to the source of the Columbia but did not pass through Wolverine’s territory” (1947). Dr. Claude E. Schaeffer Fonds, 1955, NA-1996-1, Series 1: Kootenay, M-1100-7. 140 Anthropologist Claude Schaeffer noted that this was also the approximate location a former Lower Ktunaxa group with a village at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers: “There was another [Lower Kutenai] band called Gałi’sa [or Kałisa] who lived west of Nelson, B.C., near Castlegar, B.C. These have all died. These are nearly all half-breed Similkameen Indians” (Schaeffer 1935-1969, Box 4, f. 52). Bouchard and Kennedy wrote that Gatisa “appears to be a Kutenai [Ktunaxa] pronunciation of the Okanagan-Colville [Nsǝlxcin] term gaytskst, meaning ‘bull trout’ [formerly Dolly Varden char], from which the Lakes people’s own name for themselves, sngaytskstx, is derived (2000[2005]:108). 139 CONFIDENTIAL 126 P a g e | 127 Sinixt identified by Teit as (No. 9) QEpi’tłes (1930); Ray as (No. 14) kupi’tłks, “rubbing the chest” 141 (Map 4); and Kennedy and Bouchard as (No. 39) kpίλəls (1998) (Map 2). After the imposition of the International Boundary and the pressures of subsequent European settlement, Lakes people gradually began to spend more time south of the US border travelling seasonally to their territory north of the border (Dawson 1892:6; Mohs 1982). The Lakes began staying more permanently at Kettle Falls where they “remained until the withdrawal of the Hudson’s Bay Company in 1870 and the establishment of the Colville Reservation” (1977:116). According to Teit, the Lakes people living north of the border “...owing to nonrecognition of their rights by the Canadian Government and to recent pressure of white settlement... have followed the example of other members of their band... and have gone to the United States, where they have been granted land on the Colville Reservation” (1930:212). With the establishment of the Colville Reservation in Washington State in 1870, many people from the Plateau area were assigned by the US government to this reservation. Still, some Lakes people remained north of the International Boundary even after the establishment of the Colville Reservation. Some anthropological sources postulate that a vacuum was created in the Arrow Lakes area when the Lakes people moved to the Colville Reservation whereby neighbouring groups began entering Lakes territory to access resources. It has also been speculated that this phenomenon caused government officials (and “local historians” such as Johnson) to confuse Lakes identity and/or Lakes territory for “a mixture of Okanagans [Nsǝlxcin speakers], Shuswap, and Kutenai (Teit 1909:450)” (Turnbull 1977:116). Contemporary Department of Indian Affairs Reports on the population living at the Arrow Lake Reserve have revealed the confusion generated at this time due to the disruption to Lakes territory. For example, the following is written in the Department of Indian Affairs records about the population living at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers: “These Indians are Shuswaps [Secwépemc] and have lived and hunted for years along the Columbia. They formerly made Fort Shepherd their camping-ground. They speak the Shuswap and Okanagan languages” (DIAND 1904:253); in 1908 the population is identified as Secwépemc who “came from the Okanagan [Shuswap] country several years ago, and have since then lived on the Columbia river and Arrow lake” (DIAND 1908:238); and in 1910, those living at the Arrow Lakes reservation were identified as Secwépemc “who married into a Kootenay family that settled on the Arrow lakes” (DIAND 1910:229). Bouchard and Kennedy opined that “most observers of these Lakes Indians did not know what their ethnic affiliations were” (1985:140). In cross-referencing Teit’s list of Lakes villages, Ray did not cross-reference Teit’s No. 9 with his own No. 14, although it appears that they are speaking about the same village which may have been located on both the north and south banks of the Kootenay River. Ray clearly locates this village on the south bank of the river (Map 4) yet Teit mentions that most of the population lived on the north bank (1930:209) which implies that some lived on the south bank as well. 141 CONFIDENTIAL 127 P a g e | 128 Sinixt In 1897, in his Reminiscences G.M. Sproat noted that the village located at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers was a Lakes village even though the Lakes population, at that time, were largely located south of the border on the Colville Reservation at the time of his publication. 142 Despite the movement of neighbouring Indigenous groups into Lakes territory, it is clear by the historical record that Lakes presence in Canada persisted here at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers specifically, and in the Arrow Lakes area in general. In 1902, Indian Agent Galbraith wrote to Vowell of Lakes man, Baptist Christian “squatting on a piece of land on the west side of the Columbia River at a place now known as Castlegar (Galbraith 1902d). He further writes that “Joseph [a Lakes man]… is on land purchased some years ago by Mr. G.M. Sproat at the mouth of the Kootenay River, East side of the Columbia and north of the Kootenay” (1902d). Historical evidence indicates that Indigenous families lived on the south side of the Kootenay River mouth and along the east side of the Columbia River south to Ootischenia at the time of arrival of the Doukhobor people in the early 1900s (DeFoe 1964; Popoff 1985; Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:118). Archaeological evidence indicates precontact Indigenous presence in this same area (see Section 8.0). Teit noted that “a great many people [formerly] lived” at kp’ítl’els, “most of them on the north bank of the Kootenai” (1930:209). He also mentioned that old and modern burial grounds are seen in the area. This is confirmed in the archaeological record. Although Teit does not specifically state that people also lived on the south bank, his description in the quote above suggests as that they may have since “most of them [were] on the north bank” (emphasis mine). The Lakes consultants with whom Ray worked provided the following information on kp’ítl’els: … [kp’ítl’els is] a settlement at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers, used as a temporary base for root digging. Travellers coming or going from the Kootenay or upper Columbia river valleys usually camped here for a week or two, visiting and gambling with friends and using the sweat houses. To a limited extent it also served as a hunting base (Ray 1936:125). In 1910, the matter of establishing a permanent reserve at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers was revived with a letter from Reverend John McDougall to the Deputy Superintendent General of Indian Affairs requesting that the area marked “reserve” located on the north bank of the Kootenay River near its confluence with the Columbia River be secured for the Indians who had “occupied this part from time immemorial” (McDougall 1910). During his 142 Sproat, G.M. 1897, “Reminiscences of G.M. Sproat.” In Thomas C. Collins Papers, BCA, G/N32/C69. CONFIDENTIAL 128 P a g e | 129 Sinixt visit of the “23 souls” of the Arrow Lakes Band, McDougall made a record that “9 of the above [population] are living on the North side of the Kootanie River near its mouth on Block 9 – “Reserve” of the Provincial Govt. These 9 ask for 10 acres or more at this Point – Their Homes and Graveyards and continued residence have been on this land for generations” (George and John McDougal Family Fonds 1909). Later in 1910, Indian Agent Galbraith addressed the matter by writing: The little band of Indians, with [Lakes] Chief Baptiste Christian, number about ten souls, and they have told me, that they and their forefathers have occupied the ground for years, and have made it their headquarters, as a fishing, hunting and camping place. They have two or three dwellings, a couple of little gardens, three graveyards, out East and West of their houses... I have inquired from time to time, as to why this land was made a reserve, but no one was able to throw any light on the subject... The Indians’ Claim to a portion of the reserve, is just, if occupancy for years is considered (Galbraith 1910a). In his statement to the Royal Commission in October of 1914, Indian Agent Galbraith further addressed the matter of the reserve located near Brilliant. He wrote: Then I took up the question of the three or four families who had squatted at the mouth of the Kootenay River, and I found that over thirty-five years ago [c. 1879], Mr. Hayes [sic] at Osoyoos had taken up that land, but there was a piece of land across the river…and I tried to get from Haynes estate ten acres for them, as it was a favourite fishing grounds of theirs and they had their graveyard there. 143 This land was eventually purchased by a group of Doukhobors and Galbraith was unable to secure it for the Indigenous population living on the then Doukhobor-owned land. On this matter Bouchard and Kennedy provided the following comment: “As we have stated, we are puzzled that neither the Federal nor the Provincial officials made any reference to that fact that W.G. Cox had reserved land at the mouth of the Kootenay, on the north side, as an Indian Reserve in 1861 (Cox 1861), or that Edgar Dewdney, only four years after Cox, had reserved this same area as a town site (Dewdney 1865)” (1985:140). Galbraith continued with his 1914 testimony as follows: …In the meantime Baptiste, who is the head of the [Lakes] band, could see that there was no chance for getting any of the land, so he and his wife, who was a Colville [Skoyelpi] woman, went to Marcus, just south of the line, where they were given one hundred and sixty acres of land, horses, agriculture implements and other farming tools. I have, however, never taken him off the rolls of the Agency as he claimed that he held this American property for his wife “Examination of Agent R.L.T. Galbraith, at the Board Room, Victoria, October 25th, 1914,” Royal Commission on Indian Affairs for the Province of British Columbia. BCA. Department of Indian Affairs records (RG10, Volume 4047, file 356200-1). 143 CONFIDENTIAL 129 P a g e | 130 Sinixt as a Colville [Skoyelpi] woman, and he says that he is a King George man, and that some day he will come back again. 144 Baptiste’s brother, Alexander Christian, gave the following testimony to the Royal Commission on Indian Affairs in 1914: I am one of the few survivors of the band of the Lake (S-nai-tcekstet) [Sinixt] tribe living at the mouth of the Kootenay River. The Lower Kootenay River has been occupied by my people from time immemorial. I have heard that our Indian Agent Galbraith has said that I not always at the mouth of Kootenay River, and that I have come there lately from parts unknown. I wish to state that I was born there, and have made that place my head quarters during my entire life. Also my ancestors have belonged to there as far back as I can trace. Both my parents were born there and three of my grand parents. We have been asking for many years that a reserve be laid off for us at our old home [at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia 145]. For about sixteen years either my father Christian, my brother Baptiste or I have been speaking to our Agent about this. We have also had the matter brought before the Indian Department and were promised a reserve but nothing has resulted. However until last year we have been unmolested in our occupation and use of old home. Then the Doukabours sought our land, and we learned that they had bought it from a white man or white people who claimed ownership of it… I know of four graveyards close to our houses, and there are older burials I cannot point out. I know that Indians burying their dead there often came on the bones of other dead they had not known. The grave yards I know had sticks and crosses erected at the graves and rings of stone around the outside. In one of these cemetaries [sic] are buried my two children, my brother, my sister Mary and my first Cousin. This grave yard has not been plowed up yet. On another grave yard are buried Frank’s wife and some old men and women. The Doukabours have plowed this graveyard… We had a number of houses at the mouth of the Kootenay at one time when more people lived there, but flood and fire destroyed some of them. At present there are two large and two small houses… (One of them) was built by Louis the son of old Isaac. Louis died and Isaac shifted to Bossburg Washington. When he left I bought the house paying him a good horse, a good riding saddle and a boat. The horse he afterwards traded with the Chief James Bernard at Bossburg for two gentle pack horses…”. 146 Despite Alexander Christian’s submission in 1914, a reserve was never created at the junction of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers under the Royal Commission. Still, Lakes presence in the area continued even after the events of the 1914 Commission and the Doukhobor land purchase. Early settler Joseph Killough (Killough/Bell 1983) noted that just a few Indians lived here by about 1920 and that “they moved south and joined up with the Colville “Examination of Agent R.L.T. Galbraith, at the Board Room, Victoria, October 25th, 1914,” Royal Commission on Indian Affairs for the Province of British Columbia. BCA. Department of Indian Affairs records (RG10, Volume 4047, file 356200-1). 145 This is Bouchard and Kennedy’s comment (1985:137). 146 Royal Commission on Indian Affairs for the Province of British Columbia. BCA. Department of Indian Affairs records (RG10, Volume 4047, file 356200-1). 144 CONFIDENTIAL 130 P a g e | 131 Sinixt [Skoyelpi] Band” (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:117). Killough also mentioned that Indians used to winter on Zuckerberg Island, although it appears he neither identified the time frame nor the group who wintered at this location (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:117). Archaeological remains found on Zuckerberg Island (DhQj 22), however, “could represent… a large pit house village” or “winter village” (Baker 1981:30). Bouchard and Kennedy reported that their contemporary Lakes consultants in the 1970s knew of the village kp’ítl’els located at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers “but few details about its traditional utilization were known” (1985:119). Bouchard and Kennedy wrote: Our Lakes consultants knew that formerly this was an important place to the Lakes Indians, and they recalled that Baptiste Christian, who they remember also by his Indian name, pa7pa7tságskn, lived here at different time, as did his brother, Alec, known by his Indians name, pkekeláwna7, and their sister, Marianne [referred to by Teit (1909a) as “Mary”], and their mother, antuní [an “Indianized” pronunciation of “Antoinette,” which is the name Teit (1909a) referred to her by] 147 (MM; JQ). MM recalled that the “Louie family” also used to live at kp’ítl’els or “somewhere around kp’ítl’els.” From other information that MM provided, it is clear she was referring to Louis Joseph, who was very well known around Burton. Both MM and JQ referred to a man who lived “somewhere around kp’ítl’els, who they recalled only by his Indian name, skalaswá. From other information provided by MM, it is clear this was Frank Joseph, the brother of Louis Joseph. As well, MM recalled there was a woman named “Ann” who had been married to one of these two brothers, but, she noted, he died and her two sons died and she moved to Vernon and married a man named Parker – clearly this was Annie Joseph. MM also recalled being told that there was a graveyard at kp’ítl’els and that her mother had gone to the funeral of Baptiste and Alec’s sister, Marianne, here. And MM remembers that, when she was a young girl, she got to know antuní (Antoinette, the mother of Marianne, Baptiste, and Alec) when antuní used to visit her parents. MM points out that Joe Paul, a Lakes Indian, and his son, Gregory Paul, used to live “somewhere around the Arrow Lakes” (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:120). As is evident above, kp’ítl’els, and the what is now known as Castlegar area, was a significant Lakes settlement and fishing station that became an area of interest for settlers, neighbouring Indigenous groups, the Royal Commission, and a population of Doukhobors. Despite decades of conflicting interests, Lakes presence in the northernmost part of their territory persisted, at least occasionally and seasonally. 7.3 Arrow Lakes Indian Reserve 1902 – the Oatscott Reserve, Burton In 1901 Indian Agent Galbraith requested of the then Indian Superintendent A.W. Vowell that a reserve be set aside for the “a little Band of Indians at Arrow Lakes.” Galbraith wrote: 147 Lakes women Marianne (Mary) and Antoinette were Teit’s consultants (1930). CONFIDENTIAL 131 P a g e | 132 Sinixt On the 23rd I visited a little Band of Indians at the Arrow Lakes, on the Columbia River, for the first time. They claim to have lived there, for many years. I found three Lower Kootenays, with their families amongst them. The others say they are Okanagans [Nsǝlxcin-speaking people] and Shuswaps. They have their homes near Burton City, a little mining town. They appear to make a good living hunting, trapping and fishing. They also work on the steamers that ply on the Columbia River. They are squatted on public Crown Lands, and have neat little gardens around their homes. They are anxious that a portion of the land should be reserved for them and their families. 148 In October 1902, Indian Reserve Commissioner A.W. Vowell, in response to Galbraith’s request, allotted opposite Burton a reserve for twenty-two “Indians now residing at Arrow Lake…six families who have hitherto lived independently at Revelstoke, Trail, Lower Kootenay and the Arrow Lakes, no land having been assigned to them.” 149 Attached to Galbraith’s 1902 request is a sketch map (Figure 44) “showing the land now occupied by the Arrow Lake Indians who asked it be set apart as a Reservation.” Marked on the sketch map is “Baptiste’s House” located just north of Christie Creek at what is now known as Oatscott as is the land identified as “requested for Arrow Lakes Indians for Reservation”. Baptiste, 12 years later in 1914 as discussed above (Section 7.2), was then present at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers and at that time requested a reserve a that location. DIAND, Minutes of Decision & Correspondence, Volume 15, p. 57. Letter from A.W. Vowell, Indian Reserve Commissioner to The Deputy Commissioner of Lands and Works, October 25, 1902, and “Minute of Decision. Arrow Lake Indians,” October 10, 1902. Ministry of Crown Lands, Minutes of Decision Files; Box 6, F. 7791. 148 149 CONFIDENTIAL 132 P a g e | 133 Sinixt Figure 44 – Map 33: “A rough sketch showing the land now occupied by the Arrow Lakes Indians: We ask that it be set apart as a Reservation.” Galbraith to Vowell, April 30, 1904: BCA, GR 1751: RG 10, Vol. 3748, F. 29858-2 (BCA Reel B0304). The reserve at Burton was 255 acres and, Vowell noted, “[f]ully one half of the reserve consists of precipitous granite bluffs; near the shore of the lake however sufficient good land can be obtained to meet all the requirements of the Indians.” The sketch of the reserve shows that approximately one tenth of the reserve’s land would be underwater at high tide.150 The Minute of Decision of October 10, 1902 reads in part: “A reserve of two hundred and fifty five (255) acres, situated in West Kootenay district, on the western shore of the Lower arrow Lake, about five miles below Burton” 151 (Figure 34) accompanies the Minute. Letter from A.W. Vowell, Indian Reserve Commissioner to The Deputy Commissioner of Lands and Works, October 25, 1902, and “Minute of Decision. Arrow Lake Indians,” October 10, 1902. Ministry of Crown Lands, Minutes of Decision Files; Box 6, F. 7791. 151 DIAND. Minutes of Decision, Volume 15, #3. 150 CONFIDENTIAL 133 P a g e | 134 Sinixt Figure 45 – Map 34: Sketch Plan of Arrow Lake Indians Reserve DIAND, Minutes of Decision, Correspondence and Sketches, Volume 15 In 1903, Indian Commissioner of the Kootenay District commented on the reserve set aside on Upper Arrow Lake at Oatscott near Burton 152 which, in archaeologist Turnbull’s words, “added much confusion to the question of Lake identity” (1977:115-116). Galbraith reported: These Indians are Shuswaps or Kootenays, 153 who have lived and hunted for years along the Columbia River. They speak the Shuswap language and a few speak English very well…. The Indians follow hunting, trapping, and fishing and one or two work on the steamers plying on the rivers. The women make moccasins and gloves for which they find a ready sale, and during summer they pick and dispose of the wild berries in the towns of Nakusp, Revelstoke, Trail, and Castlegar (Department of Indian Affairs 1903:290). Teit (1930) and Ray (1936) were informed of the presence of a fishing village at this location: (No. 8) Xaiē’kEn (No. 30) xaie’kən, respectively. 153 Not only were the Indian Commissioners confused by Lakes identity, but also were many local historians, like Kate Johnson. Her works should be read with caution. Johnson also stated that Ktunaxa people populated the Burton Reserve. She wrote: “The Indians of Burton Reserve were, so far as is known, the Kutenai of Kitunaha (meaning Kootenay)” (Johnson 1964:196, emphasis added). Johnson also implied that this is the population known as the Arrow Lake Indians. 152 CONFIDENTIAL 134 P a g e | 135 Sinixt Archaeologist Peter Harrison 154 offers a simple explanation for the ongoing confusion around Lakes identity. He pointed out that by this time, late 1903, the people of the settlement near Castlegar had departed to live more permanently in the United States and the population living at the settlement at Burton came to represent the “Arrow Lake Band”, regardless of ethnic identity. He wrote: “These people, then, were a combination of Shuswap and Colville (Okanagan), neither indigenous to the area” (1961:5). It was this entity, the “Arrow Lake Band” that was declared “extinct” in 1956 after the last listed member died. The Department of Indian Affairs in 1904 further mentioned that the population at this reserve spoke “the Okanagan language [Nsǝlxcin]” in addition to “the Shuswap language [Secwepemctsín]” (1904:290; McLean 1901). It is Bouchard and Kennedy’s opinion that Galbraith was confused. They wrote: “Of course, the language was Okanagan-Colville [Nsǝlxcin], specifically the Lakes dialect, and not Shuswap [Secwepemctsín], although at least one Shuswap [Secwépemc] was living at this time with these Lakes people” (1985:136). In his unpublished notes, Teit commented that the “Canadian Indian Department” classed the Indians living near Burton “as Shuswap which is quite misleading” (1910-1913). In his statement to the Royal Commission in October of 1914, Indian Agent Galbraith stated, with respect to the Arrow Lake reserve, that [n]one of my predecessors, or even the higher officials, knew, when the reserves were allotted, that there were any Indians in that locality with claims for land. In the early days, many of the Colville Indians [Lakes people who had been living on the north half of Colville Reservation] had been in the habit of ascending the Columbia river to hunt and fish. In 1871 I found a small band of Indians under Gregory, a [Lakes] Chief, in this [northern] section. I went over there on an electioneering tour, but found afterwards that they had drifted south of the line, and I heard no more of them. I spoke to Mr. Phillips, who was then Agent, but he knew nothing about them, and the fact of their being on the Columbia river did not crop up until Mr. Bullock-Webster, of the Provincial Police, notified me, as Agent, of the finding of the body of an old Indian on the railway track near Castlegar [May 1901 155]; and, upon making investigation, I found a small band of [Lakes 156] Indians camped on the Kootenay river near West Robson. There were in this band the families of Baptiste Christian, Alex Christie and one other. Near Burton [23rd May 1901 157] I found two or three Indian houses, and a small Band under an Indian by the name of Joseph – he having originally come from the Shuswap country…. I also found that these Indians had married women of the Colville Nation [Lakes], and that, Old Joseph having died some years before, his son was acting as Chief. 158 Harrison undertook the first archaeological survey of the Arrow Lakes in 1961 and is discussed in Section 8.1. (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:134). 156 Teit (1909), identify this group as a band of Lakes people. 157 (McLean 1901; Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:135). 158 “Examination of Agent R.L.T. Galbraith, at the Board Room, Victoria, October 25th, 1914,” Royal Commission on Indian Affairs for the Province of British Columbia. BCA. Department of Indian Affairs records (RG10, Volume 4047, file 356200-1). 154 155 CONFIDENTIAL 135 P a g e | 136 Sinixt According to the Lake consultants with whom Teit worked, the population at the Oatscott reserve – the Arrow Lake Band – and the population at the confluence of the Columbia and Kootenay rivers appear to be related and consisted mostly of Lakes people: The Kootenay mouth [the Christian family living near present-day Castlegar] people say emphatically that the Arrow Lake band are their own kin and speak the exact same language as themselves. They have intermarried from time to time with Shuswap and in a less degree with Kootenay. At the present time [1909] the Arrow Lake band is made up of some 24 who may be called Lakes and one Shuswap (from Spallumcheen) and one Kootenay (from Kootenay Lake)[,] both women married there making about 26 altogether. They were all mentioned by name to me & some are cousins & other relations to the Kootenay mouth band (the latter number about 11 – 10 Lakes & 1 Thompson)’… (Teit 1909). 159 In 1937 Cranbrook Indian Agent, Andrew Irwin, notified Ottawa that a Lakes woman, Annie Joseph, was the “last surviving adult member of the Arrow Lake Reserve” (Irwin 1937). Annie Joseph had been living at the Okanagan IR 1 at this time (Coleman, March 22, 1937 in Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:156). Annie Joseph passed away in 1953, and being the last person registered on the Indian Affairs records, the Indian Act administrative entity known as the “Arrow Lake Band” was declared “extinct” by the Canadian Federal Government in 1956. The Arrow Lake Reserve at Oatscott reverted to the Province of British Columbia at that time in 1956. 160 8.0 Archaeology This section contains a brief and limited review of archaeological work undertaken in the 1960s and 70s in which several sites were identified including village sites and pit houses that correspond with Lakes village sites identified in the ethnographic record. Archaeological evidence can be used to corroborate specific sites or general land use patterns described in ethnographic and historical sources. A detailed and comprehensive archaeological overview is beyond the scope of this report; however, Table 2 below provides a summary of the sites identified during the course of early archaeological investigations with cross-referencing to corresponding ethnographic information where applicable. 8.1 Early 1960s archaeology – pre-flooding of Arrow Lakes Reservoir In 1961, archaeological research in the Arrow Lakes was initiated by an archaeological survey of the High Arrow Reservoir (1961-5) by archaeologist Peter D. Harrison. Harrison undertook Letter from Teit May 20, 1909: BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3 (Salish Tribal Names and Distributions, American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia). 160 OIC PC 1956/3, January 5, 1956: NAC, RG 2, Vol. 2189, F. 422H 159 CONFIDENTIAL 136 P a g e | 137 Sinixt archaeological investigations covering the area of the reservoir pool which would extend from the proposed dam site, six miles west of Castlegar, to the city of Revelstoke, an area located behind the then-proposed High Arrow Dam and before subsequent flooding took place (Harrison 1961:3). Harrison recorded 77 sites including: 24 pithouse, 30 non-pithouse, 11 burial, 4 pictograph, 4 sweathouse and 4 historic sites. Most sites (49) were located on the Lower Arrow Lake with 10 in the Narrows and 18 on the Upper Arrow Lake (Harrison 1961). Harrison’s work provided him with insight as to some of the apparently conflicting reports of the identity of the people present on the Arrow Lakes in some of the earlier historical sources (this is covered in some detail in the above sections). Based on the evidence from the archaeological survey, Harrison concluded: Reviewing the results of this survey in conjunction with the earlier, apparently conflicting, works on the area, one becomes aware of the distinct possibility that all of these may be correct, although each ascribes different tribal affiliations to the Indians of the Arrow Lakes. The error lies in assuming that all the inhabitants maintained the same affiliations at all times. The tribal mixing [intermarriage] indicated by previous reports has been borne out by the survey. There are indications that more than one if not all of the surrounding tribes made migrations of sufficient length of time to require wintering in the area. All of them evidently visited the lakes on brief visits (Harrison 1961:61). Given the disruption of territory imposed by the international boundary and the increasing pressure to settle at the Colville Reservation, “brief visits” to Lakes northern territory by neighbouring Indigenous groups may have been made more frequently in the early 20th century. 161 Harrison selected a few sites “to display varied ethnic origin, which their excavation should establish or disprove” (Harrison 1961:64). It should be reiterated that archaeological evidence should be read in conjunction with the ethnological record for the same reason. A brief summary of Harrison’s selection of archaeological sites follows. Evidence at archaeological site DiQl-3, according to Harrison, supported Teit’s finding that the Lakes are possibly “a northern offshoot of the Colville” (Harrison 1961:62; Teit 1930:214-215).162 DiQl-3 is a site located near Deer Park that contains pictographs that “include many elements duplicated on Bonaparte Creek [sic] in Washington on Colville territory. Joined circles, the stemmed cog wheel, the centipede, and sunbursts are nearly identical with their counterparts in DiQl-3.” (Harrison 1961:62). This site is possibly associated with a temporary camping site identified in Ray 1936 – No. 32: plu’me’ (Map 4). This provides a strong argument for confusion around Lakes identity by local historians and government officials in the early 20th century. 162 As Lakes knowledge-keeper Wynecoop stated, the Colville and Lakes were very closely related (Elmendorf 1936, Notebook 4). 161 CONFIDENTIAL 137 P a g e | 138 Sinixt Other pictographs link historic Shuswap presence to the Upper Arrow Lake. Harrison described pictograph site EbQl-2 as follows: “As far as the Shuswap are concerned, we have already seen that they were represented at Burton [Oatscott Reservation – see Section 7.3 above for details] in 1904, and in addition to this is further pictograph evidence. Site EbQl-2 on the Upper Lake includes a stick figure with extended arms, and at the end of each extremity is grasped a stylized fish. The same motif occurs unmistakably at Mara Lake in Shuswap territory, between the Upper Lake and the Shuswap Lakes. (Gjessing, 1952:72).” Despite slight archaeological evidence connecting the presence of Okanagan people from Okanagan Valley at the Arrow Lakes, the evidence is “slim” (Harrison 1961:63). Harrison explained the archaeological details as follows: Evidence for the presence of the Okanagan from Okanagan Valley is slim. The most direct route of entry to the Lakes is via the Inanoklin Valley over the Monashee pass. The one sample of an incipient nipple-top hand maul occurs at DkQm-2 in Edgewood at the mouth of this route. Its possible connection with the Okanagan is found in Caldwell’s report of his survey in the Okanagan…(Harrison 1961:63). Reading the ethnography, in which there is an absence of any record of Okanagan people from Okanagan Valley present at the Arrow Lakes, it is to be expected that evidence in the archaeological record would be scant. Here again, we find the archaeological record confirming the ethnographic one, or vice versa. Archaeological site EcQ1-1 is the most northerly occurrence of pit house ruins on the Arrow Lakes, and is associated with pictographs again thought to be of Shuswap origin. Harrison states that the “comparative information on the method of lodge construction would be significant, particularly in view of Ray’s identification of a unique ‘Lakes’ type of structure” (Ray, 1939:135). (Harrison 1961:64) 8.2 Late 1960s and 70s archaeology – post-flooding of Arrow Lakes Reservoir In 1967 the Arrow Lakes Reservoir was flooded therefore drastically changing the archaeological landscape. Between 1966 and 1969, archaeologist Christopher Turnbull conducted salvage excavations and in addition to excavation, Turnbull recorded 43 new archaeological sites within the region, the majority of which were located along the Kootenay and Slocan rivers. In 1972 further excavations were conducted by archaeologist Diana French at a stratified campsite (DiQi 1) on the lower Kootenay River (Mohs 1982:74). In 1977 Gordon Mohs provided an CONFIDENTIAL 138 P a g e | 139 Sinixt archaeological survey study of post inundation of the Arrow Lakes and in 1982 an archaeological investigation of the Vallican Site (DiQi-1) in the Slocan Valley. 8.2.1 Turnbull 1977 In 1977 Christopher Turnbull published his dissertation “Archaeology and Ethnography in the Arrow Lakes, Southeastern British Columbia,” the purpose of which was to “[outline] the cultural sequence and [assess] the external relationships of the Arrow Lake area” (1977:1). Turnbull commented at the time of publication in 1977 that the “prehistory of the Arrow Lake has only been scratched” and that gaps in the cultural sequence existed. He added that the archaeological heritage of the area is compromised by the dams on the rivers (1977:vi). Turnbull examined early records of the Lake people – those whose territory encompassed the Arrow Lakes and at the time of contact – in order to describe the Arrow Lakes region at historic times (1977:1, 14). The first substantial evidence of early occupation dates after 1300 BC (1977:1). During the course of Turnbull’s investigation, a total of 120 sites were organized into six categories including pit house, non-pithouse, burial, pictograph, sweat lodge and historic. Turnbull focused his study on pit houses, non-pit houses sites (most of which were probably small campsites) and burials (1977:24-25). During the course of his work, Christopher Turnbull erroneously stated that “the historical records do not mention the use of pit houses in this country” (1977:133). Turnbull went on to suggest that “[s]ince the historic records are substantiated by the archaeological research, a possible explanation of the confusion is that Teit and Ray were actually interviewing Okanagans or Shuswap, who both use pit houses to historic times, and who moved into the area after the Lake had withdrawn to the Colville Reservation” in 1870 (Turnbull 1977:133). Turnbull added further confusion by arguing that “virtually all pit houses tested in [his archaeological study of the Arrow Lakes] reveal cultural affiliation with an earlier phase in the prehistory of the Arrow Lakes. The theory that the Lake ever used pit houses is unsupportable from the evidence accumulated. In fact, the suggestion from the data is that pit houses may have gone out of style at least a thousand years before the historic period” (1977:133-134). Mohs later corrected Turnbull’s conclusions following subsequent archaeological investigations. Mohs wrote: “Recent data from the excavations at Vallican emphatically contradicts this theory. Almost all of the housepit depressions excavated are associated with late prehistoric components (750-1800 A.D.) although several are associated with earlier components…. [p. 90] Consequently, it is the author’s opinion that the dates Turnbull obtained were the product of a sampling bias” (Mohs 1982:89). 8.2.2 Mohs and Turnbull 1977 A post-inundation assessment of archaeological sites within the Arrow Lakes pondage resulted in 37 new sites recorded (Mohs 1977). It was noted that “of a total of 152 sites recorded on the CONFIDENTIAL 139 P a g e | 140 Sinixt Arrow Lakes only 12 (8%) remained more or less intact and above the high water level; 140 (92%) had been destroyed beyond salvage” (Mohs 1982:75; Mohs 1977:47). Several survey projects have been conducted in the region since 1977 including a pictograph survey of Slocan Lake later published in an article by Joy Bell entitled “The Pictographs of Slocan Lake” (1979) (Mohs 1982:76). Pit house sites have been of particular interest in the Arrow Lakes region since at least the 1980s. Mohs summarized the outer limits of pit house sites which also roughly corresponds with Lakes territorial boundaries: “Pit house sites are generally found in the valley bottoms along the margins of the major watershed area and are isolated to a geographical region extending about 180 km. (north/south) by 60 km. (east/west). The most easterly are found on the Kootenay River near Taghum although half a dozen square 3 meter depressions have been reported in the Rosemont area at Nelson (French 1973:21). The most northerly appear on the Upper Arrow Lake above Nakusp (Harrison 1961) while the most southerly are found along the Columbia River near Kettle Falls (Chance 1967, 1970, 1972, 1976) (Mohs 1982:80). The vast majority of pit house depressions surveyed by the 1980s “measure between 5 and 10 meters in diameter [3 meter minimum is required for it to be habitable]”. Regarding pit house shape, the majority (398 or 89.9%) are circular-ovoid, the predominant shape “utilized by all groups in the western half of the American Plateau including the Lakes, Sanpoil, Sothern Okanagan, Wenatchi, Columbia, Kittitas, Yakima, Klikitat, Tenino, Wishram and Klamath”(Mohs 1982:82). This style was also accompanied by a conical roof and radiating poles, “although the Lakes pit house differed somewhat in that it lacked central support post” (Ray 1939:135). These groups were also known to have utilized square pit houses (Mohs 1982:82). Rectilinear pit house depressions numbered 45 or 10.2 % of those identified at the time of Mohs’ archaeological survey, and were recorded at 13 sites in the Arrow Lakes region. Mohs observed that “[t]here is no ethnographic reference to the utilization of rectilinear pit house dwellings by the Lakes people” (Mohs 1982:82). 163 Mohs added that “[r]ectilinear housepit depressions have been recorded throughout the Shuswap area, bordering the Lakes territory to the northwest. A total of 650 rectilinear housepit depressions have been noted at over 100 sites in the South Thompson/Shuswap area (Mohs 1980, 1981). These features are belived to date between about 750-1800 A.D. and are associated with the ‘Kamloops Phase’ (Mohs 1980, 1981).” (Mohs 1982:84). To clarify, “[s]ome of the rectilinear depressions recorded in the [Arrow] lakes area are undoubtedly the remains of excavated winter mat lodge dwellings…, but not all. Many exceed a meter in depth and about half are square in design, traits not characteristic of the traditional winter mat lodge” (Mohs 1984:84). 163 CONFIDENTIAL 140 P a g e | 141 Sinixt Mohs conclude that the historical and archaeological record agree that the centre of Lakes territory prior to 1850 centred on the Arrow Lakes with the majority of winter settlements being located in this region. Mohs wrote: …early historical documents indicate that prior to about 1850 the Lakes people were primarily centered in the Columbia valley region north of Castlegar (Bouchard and Kennedy 1979). This is also supported by the archaeological record which locates the majority of winter settlements in the same region. Winter villages are known to have had populations of between 50-200 individuals while summer foraging camps were comprised of small, scattered family groups (Teit 130:211, Ray 1936:124, Elmendorf 1935-36:II:56).(Mohs 1982:53). CONFIDENTIAL 141 P a g e | 142 Sinixt In order to locate archaeological sites within the ethnographic context, Christopher Turnbull reproduced Verne Ray’s 1936 map of Lakes villages (Map 30, Figure 46) marking the location of villages and campsites that were identified archaeologically. Figure 46 – Map 35: Map of Lake territory, villages (v), and campsites (based on Ray 1936:114) – (Turnbull 1977:196) Turnbull explained that “[t]he pit house sites have a distinct distribution in the Arrow Lakes. The pit house sites are found only along the immediate river or lake shores, only as far north as the middle of Upper Arrow Lakes and as far east along the Kootenay River as the [Bonnington] falls below Nelson” (Turnbull 1977:108, 136). According to Turnbull’s archaeological findings, the last CONFIDENTIAL 142 P a g e | 143 Sinixt archaeological development ends “with the historic inhabitants of the Arrow Lakes – the Lake people” (Turnbull 1977:109). Below is a summary of Turnbull’s findings: Table 2 Site Type Approximate Location Comment Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 DgQj 1 (Map 36a) camp or village left bank of the Columbia River above Trail DgQj 3 (Map 36a) camp or village at the confluence of the Columbia and Kootenay rivers at Trail No. 12: tcωlxi∙’t’sȧ (Ray 1936) (Map 4) DhQj 1 (Map 36a) camp or village; burial near or at Brilliant on the Columbia River No. 14: kupi’tłks (Ray 1936) (Map 4) No. 9: QEpi’tłes (Teit 1930) DhQj2 (Map 36a) burial on an island 165 in the Kootenay River above the confluence with the Columbia River DhQj 3 (Map 36a) camp or village At Castlegar DhQj 4 camp or village not shown on Turnbull’s DhQk 1 (Map 36a) camp or village on the north side of Kootenay River above the confluence with the Columbia River DiQi 1 Bridge Site (Map 36a) camp or village “…on the Kootenay River above the Slocan Junction site” (1977:33). “…on the upstream end of a small island at the set of rapids” (1977:33). DiQi 2 (Map 36a) pit-house on the north side of Kootenay River just east of the Slocan junction between Sproule Creek and Grohman Creek two or more pit-houses present No. 34: unnamed (Ray 1936) (Map 4) No. 9: QEpi’tłes (Teit 1930) Where an ethnographically identified village site corresponds with an archaeological site, it will be noted and cross-referenced here. See Section 5.0 for information regarding ethnographically identified villages. 165 Turnbull does not provide a name for this island; however, Bouchard and Kennedy report that Zuckerburg Island located “opposite the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia” showed signs of winter use (1985:117). 164 CONFIDENTIAL 143 P a g e | 144 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location DiQi 3 (Map 36a) camp or village on the south bank of the Kootenay River DiQi 4 (Map 36a) camp or village on the north side of Kootenay River just east of the Slocan junction between Sproule Creek and Grohman Creek DiQi 5 (Map 36a) camp or village on the north side of Kootenay River just east of the Slocan junction between Sproule Creek and Grohman Creek DiQi 6 (Map 36a) camp or village on the north side of Kootenay River just east of the Slocan junction between Sproule Creek and Grohman Creek DiQi 7 (Map 36a) camp or village on the north side of Kootenay River just east of the Slocan junction between Sproule Creek and Grohman Creek DiQi 8 (Map 36a) camp or village on the north side of Kootenay River just east of the Slocan junction DiQj 1 (Map 36a) pit-house Located at or near the present-day town of Castlegar. ten or more pit houses present DiQj 2 (Map 36a) pit-house; camp or village At the confluence of Slocan and Kootenay rivers ten or more pit houses present DiQj 3 (Map 36a) burial On an island at the confluence of Slocan and Kootenay rivers DiQj 4 (Map 36a) camp or village On the north bank of Kootenay River east of the Slocan River confluence CONFIDENTIAL 144 Comment Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 P a g e | 145 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location Comment Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 DiQj 5 Slocan Junction Site (Map 36a) pit-house; camp or village “located on the lower terraces in the Kootenay River Valley at the entrance of the Slocan River” (1977:26). Site is “composed of three distinct area: a main cluster of 14 houses; a small cluster of three houses; and a stratified campsite” (1977:27). No. 18: SntEkEli’t.ku (Teit 1930) No. 15: ntikuli’tku “much river food” (Ray 1936) (Map 4) DiQj 6 (Map 36a) site type not provided; artifact location On the north bank of Kootenay River east of the confluence with Slocan River DiQj 7 (Map 36a) artifact location Slocan River north of confluence with Kootenay River DiQj 8 (Map 36a) camp or village On north bank of Kootenay river just north of confluence with Slocan River DiQj 9 (Map 36a) camp or village On east bank of Slocan River north of the confluence with Kootenay River DiQk 1 (Map 36a) pit-house On the north bank of Lower Arrow Lake DiQk2 (Map 36a) site type not provided On the north bank of Lower Arrow Lake DiQk 3 (Map 36a) pit-house On the north bank of Lower Arrow Lake DiQk 4 (Map 36a) pit-house On the north bank of Lower Arrow Lake DiQk 5 (Map 36a) camp or village On the north bank of Lower Arrow Lake DiQk 6 (Map 36a) camp or village On the north bank of Lower Arrow Lake DiQl 1 (Map 36a) pit-house On the north bank of Lower Arrow Lake DiQl 2 (Map 36a) pit-house; camp or village On the north bank of Lower Arrow Lake CONFIDENTIAL 145 Three or more pit houses present No. 33: sm∙a’ip’ “large log leaning against a tree” (Ray 1936) (Map 4) twenty pit-houses possibly present P a g e | 146 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location Comment DiQl 3 (Map 36a) pictograph On the north bank of Lower Arrow Lake just above DiQl 6 “Pictographs at Deer Park (DiQ1-3) include many elements duplicated on Bonaparte Creek [sic] in Washington on Colville territory. Joined circles, the stemmed cog wheel, the centipede, and sunbursts are nearly identical with their counterparts in DiQl-3” suggesting that the Lakes are possibly an offshoot of the Skoyelpi (Harrison 1961:62; Teit 1930) DiQl 4 (Map 36a) camp or village On the south bank of Lower Arrow Lake DiQl 5 (Map 36a) camp or village On the south bank of Lower Arrow Lake DiQl 6 Grey Wolf Site (Map 36a) pit-house “Located at the base of Grey Wolf Bluff, on the north side of Lower Arrow Lake” (1977:31). “…this site had four house depressions” (1977:31). DiQl 7 (Map 36a) camp or village On the north bank of Lower Arrow Lake one pit-house present DiQl 8 (Map 36a) camp or village On the north bank of Lower Arrow Lake DiQm 1 Cayuse Creek Site (Map 36a) pit-house “located at the southern end of Lower Arrow Lake near Deer park” (1977:29). DiQm 2 (Map 36a) camp or village On Lower Arrow Lake near Deer Park DiQm 3 (Map 36a) pit-house On Lower Arrow Lake near Deer Park four pit-houses present DiQm 4 Deer Park Site (Map 36a) pit-house “Deer Park is on the eastern shore of Lower Arrow Lake” (1977:30). “The site, composed of twentytwo house depressions, is spread along the lake front in two areas” (1977:30). CONFIDENTIAL 146 Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 “House depressions lie on the east side of a small bay.... In 1967, only eleven houses remained” (1977:29). No. 32: plu’me’ (Ray 1936) (Map 4) P a g e | 147 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location DiQm 5 (Map 36a) burial; camp or village On eastern shore of Lower Arrow Lake near Deer Park DiQm 6 (Map 36a) camp or village On eastern shore of Lower Arrow Lake near Deer Park DiQm 7 (Map 36a) pit-house On western shore of Lower Arrow Lake three pit-houses possibly present DiQm 8 (Map 36a) pit-house On western shore of Lower Arrow Lake at Renata Creek one pit-house present DiQm 9 (Map 36a) pit-house On western shore of Lower Arrow Lake at Renata Creek number of pit-houses unknown DiQm 10 (Map 36a) pit-house; camp or village On eastern shore of Lower Arrow Lake north of Deer Park number of pit-houses unknown DiQm 11 (Map 36a) camp or village On eastern shore of Lower Arrow Lake north of Deer Park DiQm 12 (Map 36a) camp or village On Lower Arrow Lake near Deer Park DiQm 13 Renata Warf Site (Map 36a) camp or village On Lower Arrow Lake at Renata (1977:32). DiQm 14 (Map 36a) pit-house Lower Arrow Lake immediately above DiQm 1 single house site (1977:32). DiQm 15 (Map 36a) pit-house On Lower Arrow Lake near Deer Park two or more pit-houses DiQm 16 (Map 36a) artifact On the west side if Lower Arrow Lake opposite Deer Park DiQm 17 (Map 36a) pit-house On Lower Arrow Lake above Deer Park one pit-house DiQm 18 (Map 36a) pit-house Lower Arrow Lake single house site (1977:32). DiQm 19 (Map 36a) pit-house On the west side of Lower Arrow Lake below Renata two pit-houses CONFIDENTIAL 147 Comment Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 P a g e | 148 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location Comment Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 DiQm 20 (Map 36a) camp or village On Lower Arrow Lake at or near Deer Park DjQi 1 (Map 36a) pit-house; camp or village Opposite the town of Nelson two or more pit-houses present No. 16: nxa∙xa’tsən “cave in the rocks” (Ray 1936) (Map 4) DjQj 1 Miros Site (Map 36a) pit-house “…on the Kootenay River above the Slocan Junction site” (1977:33). 166 two or more pit-houses present DjQj 2 (Map 36a) camp or village On Slocan River above the junction with Little Slocan River DjQj 3 (Map 36a) camp or village On Slocan River above the junction with Little Slocan River “It can be effectively argued that a single site is a weak basis on which to define a regional sequence. However, as the local sequence suggests that DjQj 1 has been continuously reoccupied by aboriginal cultures over the past 3000 years and that major changes are evident in the cultural sequence represented, the site deserves a unique definition of its cultural phase occupations. The 3 phase scheme outlined for Vallican is, therefore, an initial attempt at the site and is designed to provide a basis for further work in the Slocan Valley. Further research might possibly reveal that a variation of this scheme is applicable to the lakes region as a whole” Mohs 1982:93). Turnbull provides this location in the text of his report (1977); however, his Map 36b shows DjQj 1, 2, and 3 located on the Slocan River above the junction with Little Slocan River. 166 CONFIDENTIAL 148 P a g e | 149 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location Comment DjQm 1 (Map 36a) pit-house west side of Arrow Lake at Twobit Creek six pit-houses present DjQm 2 (Map 36a) pit-house west side of Arrow Lake at a creek north of Twobit Creek two pit-houses present DjQm 3 (Map 36a) pit-house west side of Arrow Lake at Hutchinson Creek one pit-house present DjQm 4 artifact not shown on Turnbull’s map DkQi 1 (Map 36a) pit-house On Slocan River below Slocan Lake seven pit-houses present DkQi 2 (Map 36a) pit-house On Slocan River below Slocan Lake five pit-houses present DkQi 3 (Map 36a) pit-house On Slocan River below Slocan Lake five pit-houses present DkQi 4 (Map 36a) pit-house On Slocan River below Slocan Lake five pit-houses present DkQm 1 (Map 36a) pit-house On the west side of Arrow Lake between Whatshan and Inonoaklin rivers two or more pit-houses present DkQm2 Junebug Point Site (Map 36a) pit-house “Junebug Point is to the north of Edgewood” (1977:32). “The site, lying on the southern side of the point, consisted of three pit houses” (1977:32). DkQm 3 (Map 36b) camp or village On the west side of Arrow Lake between Whatshan and Inonoaklin rivers three or more pit-houses present DkQm 4 (Map 36b) pit-house On the west side of Arrow Lake between Whatshan and Inonoaklin rivers four pit-houses present DkQm 5 Inonoaklin Site (Map 36b) pit-house “Located on the west shore of Lower Arrow Lake near Edgewood” (1977:31). “…the site contained four house depressions. Three were in a cluster parallel to the lake, while a fourth lay to the south along Eagle Creek” (1977:31). CONFIDENTIAL 149 Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 No. 37: ka∙ntca∙’k (Ray 1936) (Map 4) No. 15: Kā’ntcā’k (Teit 1930) P a g e | 150 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location Comment DkQm 6 (Map 36b) pit-house On the east side of Lower Arrow Lake north of Van Houten Creek two or more pit-houses present DkQm 7 (Map 36b) camp or village On the east side of Lower Arrow Lake opposite Edgewood DkQm 8 (Map 36b) camp or village On the east side of Lower Arrow Lake opposite Edgewood DkQm 9 (Map 36b) pit-house On the east side of Lower Arrow Lake opposite near or at Applegrove DlQi 1 (Map 36b) pictograph west side of Slocan Lake DlQl 1 (Map 36b) sweat lodge east side of Lower Arrow Lake at or near Burton No. 8: Xaiē’kEn (Teit 1930) No. 30: xaie’kən (Ray 1936) (Map 4) DlQl 2 (Map 36b) sweat lodge east side of Lower Arrow Lake at or near Burton No. 8: Xaiē’kEn (Teit 1930) No. 30: xaie’kən (Ray 1936) (Map 4) DlQm 1 (Map 36b) pictograph; camp or village east side Lower Arrow Lake between Burton and Fauquier DlQm 2 (Map 36b) camp or village west side Lower Arrow Lake opposite Fauquier DlQm 3 (Map 36b) camp or village east side Lower Arrow Lake below Fauquier DlQm 4 (Map 36b) camp or village west side Lower Arrow Lake opposite Fauquier DlQm 5 (Map 36b) sweat lodge west side Lower Arrow Lake at Whatshan River DlQm 6 (Map 36b) burial west side Lower Arrow Lake opposite Fauquier DlQm 7 (Map 36b) camp or village west side Lower Arrow Lake opposite Fauquier CONFIDENTIAL 150 Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 one pit-house present two pit-houses present P a g e | 151 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location DlQm 8 (Map 36b) camp or village west side Lower Arrow Lake opposite Fauquier DlQm 9 (Map 36b) camp or village west side Lower Arrow Lake north of Needles DlQm 10 (Map 36b) burial west side Lower Arrow Lake north of Needles DlQm 11 (Map 36b) camp or village west side Lower Arrow Lake north of Needles DlQm 12 (Map 36b) camp or village west side Lower Arrow Lake south of Needles EaQk 1 (Map 36b) pit-house east side Upper Arrow Lake at or near McDonald Creek EaQk 2 (Map 36b) camp or village east side Upper Arrow Lake at or near McDonald Creek EaQk 3 (Map 36b) camp or village west side Upper Arrow Lake at or near McDonald Creek Park EaQl 1 (Map 36b) camp or village east side of Lower Arrow Lake at or near East Arrow Park EaQl 2 (Map 36b) camp or village east side of Lower Arrow Lake at or near East Arrow Park EaQl 3 (Map 36b) camp or village west side of Lower Arrow Lake south of Mosquito Creek EaQl 4 (Map 36b) pit-house east side of Lower Arrow Lake at or near East Arrow Park five pit-houses present EaQl 5 (Map 36b) pit-house east side of Lower Arrow Lake at or near East Arrow Park two or more pit-houses present EaQl 6 (Map 36b) burial east side of Lower Arrow Lake at or near East Arrow Park CONFIDENTIAL 151 Comment Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 five pit-houses present No. 28: tci’uken (Ray 1936) (Map 4) No. 6: Tci’ukEn (Teit 1930) P a g e | 152 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location EaQl 7 (Map 36b) camp or village on an island in Lower Arrow Lake between East Arrow Park and Landing EaQl 8 (Map 36b) camp or village; burial east side of Lower Arrow Lake opposite Mosquito Creek EbQk 1 (Map 36c) burial on Upper Arrow Lake at Nakusp EbQk2 (Map 36c) sweat lodge on Upper Arrow Lake just north of Nakusp Creek EbQk 3 (Map 36c) camp or village east side of Upper Arrow Lake at Kuskanax Creek EbQl 1 (Map 36c) pit-house “…on Upper Arrow Lake above Nakusp” (1977:32). EbQl 2 (Map 36c) pictograph on east side of Upper Arrow Lake at or near Cape Horn Creek EcQl 1 (Map 36c) pit-house on the east side of Upper Arrow Lake near Cape Horn Creek EcQl 2 (Map 36c) pictograph CONFIDENTIAL on the east side of Upper Arrow Lake near Cape Horn Creek 152 Comment Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 “…a cluster of six houses” (1977:32). No. 26: ku’sxəna’ks (Ray 1936) (Map 4) No. 4: Ku’sxEna’ks (Teit 1930) two pit-houses present “EcQl-1 is the most northerly occurrence of pit house ruins on the lakes, and is associated with pictographs suspected to be of Shuswap origin. The surface yield indicates that a high artifact return should not be expected, but comparative information on the method of lodge construction would be significant, particularly in view of Ray’s identification of a unique ‘Lakes’ type of structure (Ray, 1939:135)” (Harrison 1961:64). P a g e | 153 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location EdQl 1 (Map 36d) camp or village on Upper Arrow Lake at Galena Bay EeQk 1 (Map 36d) camp or village at Beaton on Beaton Arm Comment Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 “According to local traditions, a fishing camp was established near the mouth of the Incomaplix [Incomappleux] River at the present townsite of Beaton, on the North East Arm. Examination of the area suggested that the townsite itself would be a logical camping ground, however no collections exist in the town, no physical features occur, and no informant could point out a specific location” (Harrison 1961:42). NkEma’pElEks “base or bottom end,” with reference to the end of the lake 167 (Teit 1930, No. 2) nk’umȧ’puluks “end of the water” (Ray 1936, No. 23) nkmápələqs “head end of lake” (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998, No. 30) Elmendorf was also informed that nk’mapeleks, located on Beaton Arm, was the “earliest settlement” of the Lakes (Wynecoop in Elmendorf 1936). Local historian Kate Johnson writes of a village at which the “Okinaken” [Lakes], “Indians of the Okanagan country” camped at Shelter Bay. She was told that the name of this place was “head of the lake”; however, the location description provided by Johnson matches Ray’s listed village (No. 25) kospi’tsa “Buffalo robe”. Johnson writes: “The Indians of the Okanagan country came... to Shelter Bay, next to Bannock Point about three miles south of Arrowhead. It seems certain that at that time prior to the arrival of Hudson’s Bay Company fur traders there were no camps of Indians at what is now Arrowhead, but the condition of native remains exhumed at their old burial ground there in 1907 would indicate that they had used the place for a long time. They had no definite name for that place but just referred to it as the ‘head of the lake’” (Johnson 1964:7-8). Johnson’s work needs to be taken with caution given her consistently confusing narratives and Indigenous identities. Archaeological site EeQl 2 is a burial site located at Arrowhead (see Section 8.2.2). Johnson mentions the presence of “a group of figures and signs... drawn in red ochre on rocks near Cape Horn” (Johnson 1964:8). These pictographs were associated with a pithouse site (EcQl-1) identified in 1961. The pithouse was identified as having Lakes-style structure and the pictographs were “suspected to be of Shuswap origin” (Harrison 1961:64). Records of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development in the early 1900s refer to the Shuswap [Secwépemc] at “Indians of the Okanagan Country”. It is clear that by this time, the early 1900s, the Lakes people had moved south to the Colville Reservation. See footnote 69 for further information. 167 CONFIDENTIAL 153 P a g e | 154 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location Comment EeQl 1 (Map 36d) burial; camp or village at the head of Galena Bay Local historian Kate Johnson reported the presence of a fishing camp located at or near EeQl 1: “Each year native Indians came from remote areas to near the mouth of Hill Creek at the end of Thumb Bay which is the extreme north end of Galena Bay…. They came with their families in several canoes arriving about the middle of August and stayed until the middle of October. They caught Kokanee or red fish, also trout and larger fish, and did some hunting. They smoked the fish in cedar bark huts and carried them away to their winter quarters. They also picked and dried Saskatoon berried taken from the shore areas. About 1890 they came as usual, but a settler named Sam Hill had built a shack on their camping ground…. The [Lake] Chief, Cultus Jim, claimed that he had a prior right to ownership…. [A conflict ensued and Hill] and [Hill] shot the chief through the heart” (1964:182). EeQl 2 (Map 36d) burial at Arrowhead on Beaton Arm of Upper Arrow Lake EeQl 3 (Map 36d) camp or village at Arrowhead on Beaton Arm of Upper Arrow Lake EeQl 4 (Map 36d) burial at Arrowhead on Beaton Arm of Upper Arrow Lake EeQl 5 (Map 36d) camp or village Upper Arrow Lake near Shelter Bay CONFIDENTIAL 154 Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 No. 3: Kospi’tsa “buffalo robe” (Teit 1930) P a g e | 155 Sinixt Site Type Approximate Location EeQl 6 (Map 36d) camp or village west side of Upper Arrow Lake above Beaton Arm EfQn 1 burial; camp or village west side of Columbia River opposite Revelstoke EfQn 2 (Map 36d) camp or village west side of Upper Arrow Lake below Revelstoke CONFIDENTIAL 155 Comment Corresponding ethnographically identified village Site 164 No. 24: skəxi’kəntən (Ray 1936) (Map 4) No. 1: SkExi’kEntEn (Teit 1930) P a g e | 156 Sinixt 9.0 References Anderson, A.C. 1867 A Portion of the Colony of British Columbia from various sources, including original notes from personal explorations... 183[?] and 1851 (BCA, CM F9, Map 3 Locker I). Arrowsmith, Aaron 1795 A Map Exhibiting all the New Discoveries in the Interior Parts of North America. 1795. Additions 1814. National Archives of Canada (Ottawa) NMC 48909 [detail]. Arrowsmith, Aaron 1818 A Map Exhibiting all the New Discoveries in the Interior Parts of North America. 1795. Additions 1818. William L. Clements (Ann Arbor) I-l-2 [detail]. Arrowsmith, John 1859 The Provinces of British Columbia & Vancouver Island with Portions of the United States & Hudson’s Bay Territories. London, 1859. Atkins, B. R. 1925 “Plain Sam Hill,” The Tranqullian, Kamloops, June 1925. Copy in the Earle Dickey files, Revelstoke Museum and Archives, Revelstoke BC. Bagley, Clarence B. 1932 Early Catholic Mission in Old Oregon, Volume One, Containing Historical Sketches of the Catholic Church in Oregon during the First Forty Years 1838-1878 – Blanchet… Lowman & Hanford Company: Seattle Washington, 1932 Ball, H. M. 1869 Bell, Joy 1979 Colonial Correspondence, 1869 Oct.-Dec. BCA, GR-1372.11.101a The Pictographs of Slocan Lake. Crara 77, ed. Doris Lundy, Heritage Record No. 8, pp. 2328, Victoria B.C. Bissett, James 1868 Diary, 1868. BCA MS-2056, James Bisset Fonds, 1854-1914, Diaries, Letters, and Notes. Boas, Franz 1890 CONFIDENTIAL First General Report on the Indians of British Columbia. Pp. 801-893 in, 59th Annual Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science for 1889. [Includes, Linguistic Map of British Columbia] London (Reprinted in Northwest Anthropological Research Notes, Vol. 8(1-2): Fall/Spring 1974). 156 P a g e | 157 Sinixt Boas, Franz (Teit, James) 1900 The Thompson Indians of British Columbia (PDF). Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History. The Jesup North Pacific Expedition. Vol. II, Pt. IV. New York, American Museum of Natural History. Boas, Franz 1927 Boas, Franz 1928 “Sound Shifts in Salishan Dialects,” Pp. 117-136 in, International Journal of American Linguistics, Vol. 4, No. 2/4 (Jan., 1927). University of Chicago Press. “Map Showing Distribution of Salish Dialects, And of Languages Spoken in Adjoining Territory, Before 1800…” Bureau of American Ethnology, 41st Annual Report 1919-1924. Washington D.C., 1928. Bouchard, Randy and Dorothy Kennedy 1979 Ethnography of the Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake Area. British Columbia Indian Language Project. 1985 Lakes Indian Ethnography and History, BC Heritage Conservation Branch: Victoria. 2000[2005] First Nations Ethnography and Ethnohistory in British Columbia’s Lower Kootenay/Columbia Hydropower Region. Prepared for the Columbia Power Corporation, Castlegar. Victoria: British Columbia Indian Language Project. British Columbia 1866 Department of Lands and Works. Columbia River Exploration, 1866: Reports and Journals Relating to the Government Exploration of the Country Lying Between the Shuswap and Okanagan Lakes and The Rocky Mountains. Victoria: Government Printing Office. 1914 Royal Commission on Indian Affairs for the Province of British Columbia. Transcripts of Evidence. Kootenay Agency, 1914. BCA, MS-1056. 1956 “Native Indians: Distribution of Ethnic Groups – 1850,” p. 25 In British Columbia Atlas of Resources, Natural Resources Conference, 1956. Brunton, Bill B. 1998 “Kootenai”. Pp. 223-237 in Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 12: Plateau, William C. Sturtevant, ed. Washington: Smithsonian Institute, 1998. Belyea, Barbara, ed. 1998 Columbia Journals, David Thompson. McGill-Queen’s University Press: Montreal, 1998. Canada 1887 CONFIDENTIAL Department of Indian Affairs. Volume 20, Minutes of Decision & Sketches – P. O’Reilly, A.W. Vowell – “Decisions IRC Book No. 2” May 1887 to October 1908. 157 P a g e | 158 Sinixt 1898 Department of Indian Affairs. Volume 15, Minutes of Decision, Correspondence & Sketches. January 1898 to May 1902. F. 298588, Vol 9 [pp. 1-168]. 1903 Department of Indian Affairs. Dominion of Canada Annual Report of the Department of Indian Affairs for the Year Ended June 30, 1903. Ottawa, 1903. 1904 Department of Indian Affairs. Dominion of Canada Annual Report of the Department of Indian Affairs for the Year Ended June 30, 1904. Ottawa, 1904. 1910 Department of Indian Affairs. Annual Reports for the Years 1904, 1908, 1910. Ottawa. 1910 Department of Indian Affairs. “Kamloops Agency – General correspondence regarding futile attempts to buy lands at the mouth of the Kootenay River from the Doukhobor sect in order to set up a new reserve. 1910-1913,” RG 10, vol. 4047, file 356200-1. Chance, David 1973 “Influence of the Hudson’s Bay Company on the Native Cultures of the Colville District”, Northwest Anthropological Research Notes Memoir No. 2. Chance, David. 1981 The Kootenay Fur Trade and Its Establishments, 1795 – 1871, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle. Seattle District Library: Seattle, 1981. Chittenden, Hiram and Richardson, Alfred Talbot 1905 Life, Letters and Travels of Father Pierre-Jean de Smet, 1801-1873, New York: Harper & Rowe. Coues, Elliott, ed. 1897 New Light on the Early History of the Greater Northwest: The Manuscript Journals and Alexander Henry and David Thompson, 1799-1812, New York: Harper, 1897. Coues, Elliott 1897 Cox, Ross 1957 “Map of the North-West Territory of the Province of Canada from Actual survey during the years 1792-1812”, Traced by Francis P. Harper in 1896, under the direction of Dr. Elliott Coues. In, The Manuscript Journals of Alexander Henry and of David Thompson. Vol. II, edited by Elliott Coues. Published by Ross and Haines, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota. The Columbia River. (edited and with an Introduction by Edgar I. Stewart and Jane R. Stewart.) Norman, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press, 1957. Cox, William George 1861 Letter and report to James J. Young, 19 October 1861. BCA, GR-1372, Colonial Correspondence, F. 736/24. CONFIDENTIAL 158 P a g e | 159 Sinixt Dawson, George and W.F. Tolmie 1884 “Comparative Vocabularies of the Indian Tribes of British Columbia with a map illustrating distribution,” Geological and Natural History Survey of Canada, Dawson Brothers: Montreal. Dawson, George M. 1989 The Journals of George M. Dawson: British Columbia, 1875-1878 Volume II, 1877-1878. Douglas Cole and Bradley Lockner, eds. Vancouver: UBC Press. Dawson, George M. 1890 Report on a Portion of the West Kootenai District, British Columbia, 1889. Geological and Natural History Survey of Canada, Annual Report 1888-1889:4:5B-27B. Montreal: William Forst Brown & Co., 1890. Dawson, George M. 1892 “Notes on the Shuswap People of British Columbia”, Proceedings and Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada for the Year 1891, series 1, vol. 9, 1892. Dease, W. 1827 Colville Fort (Columbia River) Report, 1827. Reports on Districts. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives, Ottawa. Demers, Modeste 1939 Relation of a missionary tour made by Rev. Demers among the various Indians. Manuscript contained in folder 11, Box 1, Blanchet Papers, Catholic Archdiocese Archives, Portland. De Pfyffer, Robert L. 1987 “Found – Cox’s Map of 1862” in Fifty-First Report of the Okanagan Historical Society, 1987, pp. 88, 90-1. De Smet, Father Pierre Jean [1842-1848] [Map of Northern Rocky Mountains and Plateau]. Jesuit Missouri Province Archives, St. Louis, Missouri. De Smetiana Collection, MJA IX C8 – 13.Available Online. (Published in 1993 at pp. 118-119 in, Sacred Encounters: Father De Smet and the Indians of the Rocky Mountain West, by Jacqueline Peterson with Laura Peers. Norman, Oklahoma and London: The De Smet Project, Washington State University, in association with the University of Oklahoma Press). 1846 Carte du Territoire de l’Oregon [Map of Oregon Territory]. Jesuit Missouri Province Archives, St. Louis, Missouri. De Smetiana Collection, MJA IX C8 – 16. Available online. [c.1846] Pays des Porteurs [Country of the Carriers]. Washington State University Libraries, Pullman, Washington. Manuscripts, Archives, and Special Collections. Pierre Jean de CONFIDENTIAL 159 P a g e | 160 Sinixt Smet Papers, Cage 537, Neg. No. 99-145. Available Online. (Published in 1988 at p. xiv in, Looking at the Land of Promise: Pioneer Images of the Pacific Northwest, by William H. Goetzmann. Pullman, Washington: Washington State University Press). 1846 Pierre Jean De Smet Papers, Box 1, f. 20. Washington State University Special Collections, Cage 537. Dewdney, Edgar 1865 Letter to the Colonial Secretary, 2 June 1865. BCA, GR-1372 Colonial Correspondence, File F46l/9. Diomedi, Alexander 1878 Sketches of Indian Life in the Pacific Northwest, Ye Galeon Press: Fairfiled, Washington. Elmendorf, William W. 1935 [Lakes and Spokane ethnographic and linguistic fieldnotes.] (Manuscripts in Elmendorf’s possession), 1935-1936. Ermatinger, C.O., and White, J. 1912 Edward Ermatinger’s York Factory Express Journal, being a record of journeys made between Fort Vancouver and Hudson’s Bay in the Year 1827-1828. Royal Society of Canada, Ottawa. Fleming, Sanford 1884 England and Canada: A Summer Tour Between Old and New Westminster. Dawson Brothers Publishers, Montreal, 1884. Freisinger, Michael A. 1978a Phase I. Report of the Boundary Archaeological Survey September 25, 1978 – June 1, 1979, Permit No. 1978-27. Report submitted to the Heritage Conservation Branch, Victoria. 1978-0027A 1979b Phase I. Supplement Report of the Boundary Archaeological Survey, July 1 - September 21, 1979. Report submitted to the Heritage Conservation Branch, Victoria. 1978-0027B French, Diane. E. 1973 “Nelson Archaeological Project: Results of the Investigations of a Stratified Campsite, DiQi I, Near Taghum, B.C.,” Feb. 1973. 1973-0016 Galbraith, R.L.T. 1902 Letter to A.W. Vowell, 2 April 30, 1902. DIAND (RG 10, Volume 3748, File 29858-2). 1910 CONFIDENTIAL Letter to A.W. Vowell, 25 January 1910. BCA, RG 10, Vol. 4047, File 356,200-1. 160 P a g e | 161 Sinixt 1914 Examination of Kootenay Indian Agent R.L.T. Galbraith, at the Board Room, Victoria, October 28th, 1914. Extract from Stenographer Report, Royal Commission on Indian Affairs for the Province of British Columbia. NAC, RG 10, Vol. 4047, File 356,200-1, 1914. Geiger, Andrea. 2010 “Crossed by the Border: The U.S.-Canada Border and Canada’s ‘Extinction’ of the Arrow Lakes Band, 1890-1956,” Western Legal History 23, no. 2 (2010). Gjessing, Gutorm 1952 Petroglyphs and Pictographs in British Columbia. Indian Tribes of Aboriginal America, Ed. Sol Tax. Chicago, University ofChicago Press. Goodale, Nathan and Alissa Nauman, Cole Harris, Lori Barkley. 2022 Sinixt in the Slocan: The Last 3,000 Years. Chameleon Fire Editions: New Denver, BC. Graham, Clara 1963 This Was the Kootenay. Vancouver: Evergreen Press. 1971 Hale, Horatio 1891 Harris, Cole 2002 Kootenay Mosaic. Vancouver: Evergreen Press. Remarks on the Ethnology of British Columbia: Introductory to the Second General Report of Dr. Franz Boas on the Indians of that Province. In Report of the Sixtieth Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science., eds. E. B. Tylor, W. Bloxam, Sir Daniel Wilson, G. M. Dawson, General Sir H. Lefroy and R. G. Haliburton, Pp. 553-562. London: British Association for the Advancement of Science, 1891. Making Native Space: Colonialism, Resistance, and Reserves in British Columbia. UBC Press: Vancouver. Harrison, Peter D. 1961 “Report of the Archaeological Survey of the High Arrow Reservoir,” September 1961, 1961-5 Hart, Richard E. 2020 “Maps Showing Sinixt Territory, 1811-46”, Cartographia 55:4, pp. 219-240. Heron, C.J., and W. Kittson 1831 C.J. Heron’s Journal of Occurrences at Fort Colville, Cont’d by W. Kittson. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives. Ottawa. Hill-Tout, Charles 1978 “Report on the Ethnology of the Okanaken [Okanagan] of British Columbia, an Interior Division of the Salish Stock,” Pp. 131-159 in Ralph Maud (ed.) The Salish People, The Local CONFIDENTIAL 161 P a g e | 162 Sinixt Contribution of Charles Hill-Tout Volume I: The Thompson and the Okanagan. Talon Books: Vancouver, 1978. Holloway, Marguerite 1997 “The Paradoxical Legacy of Franz Boas,” Natural History, Vol. 106, No. 10 (Nov), pp. 8689. Ignace, Marianne Boelscher 1998 “Shuswap”. Pp. 203-219 in Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 12: Plateau, William C. Sturtevant, ed. Washington: Smithsonian Institute. Ignace, Marrianne and Ron Ignace 2004 “The Secwepemc: Traditional Resource Use and Land Rights,” in Native Peoples: The Canadian Experience, Third Edition edited by R. Bruce Morrison and C. Roderick Wilson, Don Mills: Oxford Press, 2004. Irwin, Andrew 1937 Letter to the Secretary of Department of Indian Affairs, Ottawa. NAC, RG 10, Vol. 10241, F. 982/20-7-7. Johnson, Kate 1951 Pioneer Days of Nakusp and the Arrow Lakes. Reprinted from 1951 publication to commemorate Nakusp’s Diamond Jubilee, 1892-1952. Kane, Paul 1974 Wanderings of an Artist among the Indians of North America... Hurtig Publisher: Edmonton, Alberta. Kennedy, Dorothy and Randy Bouchard 1998 “Northern Okanagan, Lakes and Colville”. Pp. 238-252 in Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 12: Plateau, William C. Sturtevant, ed. Washington: Smithsonian Institute. Killough, Joseph F. 1983 Joseph Killough interview [Bell, 1983], BCA AAAB5780, sound recording 1983-11-04, West Kootenay Cultural Society, period covered 1890-1920. Kittson, William 1826 Letter to Mr. John Warren Dease, Fort Colville, dated 5 September 1826. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives, D.4/120, Correspondence Book Inwards, 1826/1827. Lyons, C.P. 1965 CONFIDENTIAL Trees, Shrubs, and Flowers to know in British Columbia. J.M. Dent and Sons: Vancouver. 162 P a g e | 163 Sinixt Lungenbeel, Pinkney 1859 P. Lungenbeel to E.R. Geary, Superintendent of Indian Affairs, 15 July 1859. Papers of the Washington Superintendency. Federal Archives and Records Center, Seattle. M5 #20. Maud, Ralph (ed). 1978 The Salish People, The Local Contribution of Charles Hill-Tout Volume I: The Thompson and the Okanagan. Talon Books: Vancouver. McDougall, John 1909 M-729-78, British Columbia Volume 1 [ca. 1909 - ca. 1910], Series 2-f, Miscellaneous Records, John C. McDougall – 1858-1928 and n.d., George and John McDougall Family Fonds, Glenbow Archives. McDougall, Rev. John 1910 Letter to the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, Ottawa, 8th January 1910. BCA, RG 10. BCA, RG 10, Vol. 4047, File 356-200-1. McLean, J.D. 1901 Letter to Vowell, 3 July 1901. BCA, RG 10, vol. 3748, f. 29858-2. McLeod, John. 1822-1823 Spokane House Report. H.B.C. Archives, Winnipeg. B.208/e/1 Mithun, Marianne 1996 “The Description of the Native Languages of North America: Boas and After,” Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 17, Languages. Washington, D. C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1996, pp. 43 and 59. Mohs, Gordon 1977 Post Inundation: Archaeological Survey Studies of the Arrow Lakes, 1977-11, Arrow Lakes Reservoir Region Post Inundation Studies of the Archaeological Resource, December 1977 1982 Archaeological Investigations at the Vallican Site (DiQj 1), Slocan Valley, 1981-16, Southeastern B.C., 1982 1982 “Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Columbia/Lakes Region of Southeastern British Columbia and Northeastern Washington,” December 1982 Moberly, Walter 1865 Royal Engineers Collection Tray 1, Vol. 2, Book 3, 1865 by Moberly. Maps and Plans Vault, Surveyor General Branch. Ministry of Crown Lands, Victoria. 1869 CONFIDENTIAL Moberly’s Journal in Columbia River Exploration, 1865-6, Instructions, Reports, & Journals relating to the Government Exploration of the Country Lying between the Shuswap and 163 P a g e | 164 Sinixt Okanagan Lakes and the Rocky Mountains, Victoria: Government Printing Office, 1865 (1869). 1869 Journal of the second year’s work and Exploration in the Country between the 49° and 58° Parallels of N. Latitude and the 115° and 120° Meridians of W. Longitude in Columbia River Exploration, Reports and Journals relating to the Government Exploration for the Country lying between the Shuswap and Okanagan Lakes and the Rocky Mountains, Victoria: Government Printing Office, 1866 (1869). 1885 The Rocks and Rivers of British Columbia, London: Blacklock & Co. Mooney, James 1896 The Ghost-dance religion and the Sioux outbreak of 1890. US Bureau of American Ethnology, 1892-3 Annual Report, 2 vols., 1896. 1928 Aboriginal Population of America. Smithsonian Institution Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 80, no. 7. Washington. Osoyoos Indian Band 2011 Osoyoos Indian Band Forest & Range Agreement, Forest & Renage Consultation Revenue Sharing Agreement (FCRSA) between the Osoyoos Indian Band and British Columbia, 2011. Parker, Samuel. 1838 Journal of an exploring tour beyond the Rocky Mountains, : under the direction of the A.B.C.F.M. performed in the years 1835, '36, and '37; : containing a description of the geography, geology, climate, and productions; and the number, manners, and customs of the natives. : With a map of Oregon Territory. Ithaca, N.Y.: Published by the author. Mack, Andrus, & Woodruff, printers. Pearkes, Eileen Delehanty 2002 The Geography of Memory - Recovering Stories of a Landscape's First People. Nelson: Kootenay House Press. Pryce, Paula 1999 Ray, Verne F. 1936 ‘Keeping the Lakes Way’: Reburial and the Re-creation of a Moral World among and Invisible People.” (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999). “Native Villages and Groupings of the Columbia Basin.” The Pacific Northwest Quarterly 27:99-152, 1936. 1932 The Sanpoil and the Nespelem: Salish Peoples of Northeastern Washington. University of Washington Publications in Anthropology, Vol. 5. 1933 Sanpoil Folk Tales. Journal of American Folk-Lore 46:129-187. CONFIDENTIAL 164 P a g e | 165 Sinixt 1936a The Kolaskin Cult: A Prophet Movement of 1870 in Northeastern Washington. American Anthropologist, n.s. 38(1):67-75. 1936b Native Villages and Groupings of the Columbia Basin. The Pacific Northwest Quarterly 27:99-152. 1937 The Bluejay Character in the Plateau Spirit Dance. American Anthropologist. N.s. 4(1):593601. 1939 Cultural Relations in the Plateau of Northwestern America. Publications of the Frederick Webb Hodge Anniversary Publication Fund, Vol. 3. Los Angeles: Southwestern Museum. 1942 Culture Element Distribution: XXII Plateau. Anthropological Records 8:99-262. 1954 [Testimony of Verne F. Ray, October 1954]. The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation et al. v. The United States of America. National Archives of the United States, Seattle Branch. RG 75, [U.S.] Indian Claims Commission, Docket 181. 1975 Final Report: Colville Interpretive Theme. Volume Two. Prepared for the Colville Confederated Tribes, Nespelem, Washington, January 1975. 1975 Aboriginal Economy and Polity of the Lakes (Senijextee) Indians. Pp. 127-149 in, Final Report: Colville Interpretive Theme. Volume Two. Prepared for the Colville Confederated Tribes, Nespelem, Washington, January 1975. [Republished in Journal of Northwest Anthropology, Vol. 50, No. 2, Fall 2016] 1975 Chief Joseph Dam Visitors Facilities. Cultural Report. (Reporte prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Seattle, Wash.). Reyes, Lawney L. 2002 White Grizzly Bear’s Legacy: Learning to be Indian. University of Washington Press: Seattle and London. Ross, Alexander 1821 [Columbia District Map]. Drawn by Alexander Ross, September 1821. With notes added by Ross, August 1st, 1849. British Library, Department of Manuscripts. Add. Mss. No. 31, 358B. London. 1855 The Fur Hunters of the Far West: A Narrative of Adventures in the Oregon and Rocky Mountains, In Two Volumes. Smith, Elder and Company: London. Volume II, 1855. Schaeffer, Claude E. 1955 Dr. Claude E. Schaeffer Fonds, Glenbow Archives, NA-1996-1, Series one, Kootenay. CONFIDENTIAL 165 P a g e | 166 Sinixt Simpson, George 1931 Fur Trade and Empire: George Simpson’s Journal. Edited by Frederick Merk. The Belknap Press of Harvard University: Cambridge. Smith, Harlan I. c. 1929 Canadian Museum of Civilization, Smith Harlan I., Coll. Box 15 F. 7 “Archaeological Sites Kootenay area” (ca. 1929). Somerset Mackie, Richard 2000 Trading Beyond the Mountains: The British Fur Trade on the Pacific 1793-1843. UBC Press: Vancouver. Spier, Leslie 1937 Tribal Distribution in Washington. General Series in Anthropology, No. 3. Menasha. Taylor, T.M.C. 1966 “The Lily Family (Liliaceae) of British Columbia,” British Columbia Provincial Museum, Handbook No. 25. Victoria. Teit, James A. 1907 Salish tribal names and distributions. BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3, 1907-1910. 1907 “Hunting Grounds and Territories of Interior Indian Tribes,” in Salish Tribal Names and Distributions, 1907-1910, American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia; BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3, n.d. 1907 Boundaries of Ind. Tribes in Montana, Idaho, Eastern Washington & B.C. according to information gathered from Salish tribes, 1909 in BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3 (Salish Tribal Names and Distributions, American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia), 1907-1910. 1907 Notes to Map showing approximate territories in Eastern Washington of people speaking various Salish dialects from Salish Tribal Names and Distributions. BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3 (Salish Tribal Names and Distributions, American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia), 1907-1910. 1909 Extract from letter concerning the correction of a mistake made re Shuswap Boundaries on Arrow Lakes 1909 in Salish Tribal Names and Distributions, American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia: BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3, 1907-1910. 1909 “The Shuswap”, in Franz Boas ed., The Jesup North Pacific Expedition, Volume II, Ethnology and Archaeology of Southern British Columbia and Washington, New York: G.E. Stechert, 1909. CONFIDENTIAL 166 P a g e | 167 Sinixt 1909 Lakes Ethnographic Fieldnotes and letters to Franz Boas, May 20 1909 and July 17, 1909. Salish ethnographic materials. Originals held by American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia (microfilm copy in BCA, A0239, A0262), 1909a. 1910 Teit to Newcombe April 1, 1910, Newcombe Family Correspondence. BCA MS 1077, Series A. Volume 5, Folder 143, Teit, James Alexander. 1910 Notes to Maps of the Pacific Northwest. Originals held by American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia, 1910-1913; BCA, MS 1425 Boas Collection, microfilm reel A0239. 1914 “Indian Tribes of the Interior,” pp. 283-310 in Canada and its Provinces, A History of the Canadian People and their Institutions by One Hundred Associates. Adam Shortt and Arthur G. Doughty, eds. Volume XXI, Glasgow, Brook & Company: Toronto, 1914. 1928 “The Middle Columbia Salish,” edited by Franz Boas, University of Washington Publication in Anthropology, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 83-128. 1930 "The Okanagon", pp. 198-294 in The Salishan Tribes of the Western Plateaus, Franz Boas (ed.), 45th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for 1927-1928, (Washington, 1930), 23-396. 1930 The Salishan Tribes of the Western Plateaus. Franz Boas, ed. Pp. 23-396 in 45th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for 1927-1928. Washington (Reprinted, Seattle: Shorey Book Store, 1973). 1930 [Manuscript] No. 1717 [Teit, James A. (Frans Boas, Ed.)] [The Salish Tribes of the Western Plateaus. 45th Ann. Rept. B.A.E., 1927-28, pub. 1930. The Okinagan; The Flathead Group p. 431-437, typed carbon copy.] (n.d.) Fieldnotes on Thompson and neighboring Salishan languages [circa 1904-1913]. American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia. Boas Collection 372.1, Roll 48, S 1b.7 (BCA MS 1425, Microfilm A-262). Thompson, David 1998 Columbia Journals, ed. Barbara Belyea (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1998), Pp. 287-290. Thwaites, Reuben Gold (ed.) 1904 “Part II of Farnham’s Travels in the Great Western Prairies etc., October 21-December 4, 1939; and De Smet’s Oregon Missions and Travels over the Rocky Mountains, 18451846.”, In, Early Western Travels, 1748-1846: A Series of Annotated Reprints of some of the best and rarest contemporary volumes of travel, descriptive of the Aborigines and Social and Economic Conditions in the Middle and Far West, during the Period of Early American Settlement, Volume VXXIX. Twaites, Reuben Gold (editor), Ohio: The Arthur H. Clark Company, 1904. CONFIDENTIAL 167 P a g e | 168 Sinixt Turnbull, James 1866 Letter and Journals. Columbia River Exploration: 1865-6 Instructions, Reports, and Journals relating to the Government Exploration of the Country lying between Shuswap and Okanagan Lakes and the Rocky Mountains. Government of British Columbia. New Westminster. Turnbull, James 1866 Plan of the Columbia River District Shewing the Routes explored by Messr. Moberly, Green & Turnbull, 1865-1866. In, British Columbia. Columbia River Exploration, 1865-6. Instructions, Reports, & Journals [and accompanying map] Relating to the Government Exploration of the Country Lying Between the Shuswap and Okanagan Lakes and the Rocky Mountains. Published [in 1866] at the Government Printing Office in Victoria. (A copy of this same map also exists in the Land Title and Survey Authority of British Columbia, Victoria. Surveyor General Division, 8 Tray 2 Miscellaneous). Turnbull, Elsie 1959 Old Fort Shepherd. The Beaver, Autumn Outfit 290, pp. 42-47. Winnipeg, 1959. Turnbull, Christopher 1977 Archaeology and Ethnohistory in the Arrow Lakes, Southeastern British Columbia. National Museum of Man Mercury Series, Archaeological Survey of Canada, Paper No. 65. Ottawa: National Museums of Canada, 1977. Nancy J. Turner, Randy Bouchard, Dorothy Kennedy 1980 “Ethnobotany of the Okanagan-Colville Indians of British Columbia and Washington,” British Columbia Provincial Museum no. 21 Occasional Paper Series, 1980 Turney-High, Harry H. 1974 Ethnography of the Kutenai. Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association 56. Menasha, Wisconsin: 1941. (Reprinted, New York: Kraus Reprints, 1974). Walker, Deward E. Jr. (ed). 1998 Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 12: Plateau. Washington: Smithsonian Institute, 1998. Work, John 1823 Journal (July 18th – October 28th, 1823), York Factory to Spokane House. Transcript, BCA A/B/40/W89.1A Work, John 1829 Fort Colville Report 1829. Reports on Districts. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives, Ottawa. Work, John 1830 “Some Information Relative to Colvile District, April 1830”. HBC Archives, B.45/e/3/1-14 CONFIDENTIAL 168 P a g e | 169 Sinixt Colvile Fort (Columbia River) Report 1830. Reports on Districts. Hudson’s Bay Company Archives. Wynecoop Clark, Nettie, and Nancy Perkins Wynecoop. 1985 In the Stream: An Indian Story, Spokane Washington. CONFIDENTIAL 169 P a g e | 170 Sinixt Appendix 1 – Gazetteer of Sites, Place Names, and Villages in the vicinity of the Arrow Lakes This table is a catalogue of settlement sites, resource harvesting areas and other historically identified locations of Indigenous land use, organized by geographic areas for quick reference. To ensure a complete reference and discussion of sites, territory, and resource harvesting areas, please refer to the body of the report. Place Location Comment Arrow Lakes • • The Narrows CONFIDENTIAL The Arrow Lakes area provided ample hunting of caribou, goat and bear. Teit reports that the Lake tribe hunted these animals as well as deer which “were not so plentiful as in the territories of the other tribes” (Teit 1930:242). Teit writes that the “Lake Indians...fished a great deal” (1930:246). He admits having not received details on fishing tools and methods, but he does write that floats and sinkers were used by the Okanagon and Lake people and that two sinkers “were found on Arrow Lake: one was made of a flat, elongated waterworn beach stone, 12 centimeters long, 7 centimeters at the widest part, and 2.5 centimeters thick. This hole had been drilled from both sides, and a worked groove extended from the perforation on each side to the small end of the stone” (Teit 1930:246). Lower Arrow Lake • Turnbull (1977:128) goes on to explain that during the fall hunt, parties dispersed and camped in groupings of one or two lodges at Revelstoke (Moberly 1865:17), Lower Arrow Lake (Turnbull 1866:27) and the Narrows (Moberly 1865:17). Arrow Lakes • Turnbull (1977:128) goes on to explain that during the fall hunt, parties dispersed and camped in groupings of one or two lodges at Revelstoke (Moberly 1865:17), Lower Arrow Lake (Turnbull 1866:27) and the Narrows (Moberly 1865:17). Kootenay River • In 1826, Kittson observed the use of weirs on Kootenay River and a barrier for fishing on the Slocan River (Kittson 1826:3). • Major fishing location: “perhaps the mouth of the Kootenay River” (Turnbull 1866:77) 170 P a g e | 171 Sinixt Place Location Comment Slocan River • In 1826, Kittson observed the use of weirs on Kootenay River and a barrier for fishing on the Slocan River (Kittson 1826:3). • Listed as a major fishing location: Slocan River (Kittson 1826:3). • Parties of Lower Kutenai “frequently came to the mouth of the Slocan River, and occasionally to the mouth of the Kootenai, to buy salmon. They left their canoes above Bonnington Falls; and after living a couple of weeks with the Lake tribe visited the Kutenai on Kootenai Lake, occasionally going as far as Creston, where they engaged with them in games and did a little trading” 168 (Teit 1930:253). • According to Teit the Lake “had some small fights and one great war” with the Kutenai (1930:258) over the same fishing site on the Slocan River at which the Kutenai and Lake came together to trade. The Eddy This is reported to be located “across from Revelstoke.” Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:76. • On August 31, 1865, surveyor Walter Moberly camped at the Eddy for the night. In his journal he writes that in the evening, “the old Indian Chief ‘Gregoire’ paid me a visit” (Moberly 1865, notebook 2). 169 Island upriver from The Little Dalles The Little Dalles is located approximately 5 kilometres upriver from Revelstoke (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:75) and is marked on Turnbull’s plan of the Columbia River (1865-1866). • On September 1st, Moberly camped on a small Island “about 8 miles above Eddy. Gregoire and 3 indians camped with us” (Moberly 1965, notebook 2). On October 4th, Moberly again travelled to the “island above “Little Dalles” (the same place where I camped before with Gregoire & Columbia R. Indians [Lakes])” (Moberly 1865; notebook 3). Kootenay and Columbia Rivers At the confluence of these two rivers. • Alexander Ross mentioned the presence of a stone fishing weir at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia River (1855:164165). Bouchard and Kennedy report that Zuckerburg Island located “opposite the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia” showed signs of winter use (1985:117). • Columbia River At Revelstoke • Major fishing location (Moberly 1865:17). Bouchard and Kennedy point out that Teit “did not indicate if they actually participated in the salmon fishery here” (1985:116). 169 The sources report that Gregoire was the chief of the “Lakes” Indians of Colville (Emile de Girardin [graphic material], Library and Archives Canada (R4976-7-6-E); Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:75). 168 CONFIDENTIAL 171 P a g e | 172 Sinixt Place Location Comment Revelstoke • Turnbull (1977:128) goes on to explain that during the fall hunt, parties dispersed and camped in groupings of one or two lodges at Revelstoke (Moberly 1865:17), Lower Arrow Lake (Turnbull 1866:27) and the Narrows (Moberly 1865:17). • Teit writes that the Shuswap came to meet the Lake at the upper end of Lower Arrow Lake and further north on the Columbia River at Revelstoke where “[s]ome [Shuswap] people often traversed the river and the lakes between these two points, fishing and hunting with the Lake tribe. Occasionally some of their parties tarried several months on these visits, especially some of those who came by way of Fire Valley. Those who came to Revelstoke fished with the Lake tribe there. Some of them returned the way they came, after the fishing season was over; and others ascended the Columbia for hunting and trapping. Some of the latter met other Shuswap parties who reached the Columbia farther up, by way of Canoe River, 170 and they frequently wintered at points on the Columbia” 171 (Teit 1930:251). South of Castlegar • Camas, yellow bell, mariposa lily gathering (Taylor 1966). Above Castlegar • Gathering western ponderosa pine seeds (Lyons 1965:18) Below Lower Arrow and Kootenay Lake • Western choke cherry gathering (Lyons 1965:46). • Hudson’s Bay Company employee John Work provides a description of housing he observed in 1829 situated along the upper Columbia River during the summer months: “…nothing more than posts set up in the form of an oblong with a flat roof covered with coarse grass or roots, generally open at both sides and ends, or if closed so many aperatures [sic] are left that the wind passes through without much interruption” (Work 1829:35). Upper Columbia River 170 171 Canoe River is located just south of Valemount near the north end of Kinbasket Lake. Teit did not specify the points at which they wintered on the Columbia. CONFIDENTIAL 172 P a g e | 173 Sinixt Place Location Comment Beaton Arm Upper Arrow Lake • In addition to the conflict over the Slocan fishery, it appears that dispute arose over the fishery at Beaton Arm around 1800. 172 Local historian Kate Johnson, in her publication on Nakusp and Arrow Lakes, writes of the Kootenays 173 coming to the Arrow Lakes to fish in birch bark canoes “up to a certain period prior to the advent of fur traders” (Johnson 1964:7). 174 Johnson reports that the Kootenays camped at “what is now Beaton on the north-east arm” of Upper Arrow Lake (Johnson 1964:7). Halcyon Hot Springs Upper Arrow Lake • Johnson also writes about a war between the Kootenay [Ktunaxa] and “Colville” [meaning those who were living at Colville Reservation, likely Lakes] tribes over the hot springs today known as the Halcyon Hot Springs. She writes: “The springs were known among the Indians as the “great Medicine Waters.” Indians from the State of Washington arrived by scores in canoes, pitched their tents, dug deep excavations near the hot springs where the crippled members of the tribe sojourned for months, while others in active health caught salmon. For possession of the springs the Kootenay and Colville [see above] tribes engaged in a long and bloody war…. Ed Picard… in 1887, found the hot springs quite by accident…. The springs were not staked until two years later by Robert Sanderson who bargained with the Indians for their rights” (Johnson 1964:173). Nkoli’la (Teit 1930, No. 11) nquli’la’ 175 (Ray 1936, No. 11) nkwlίla? “burned area” (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998, No. 40) Waneta, Columbia River • This village, located on the Columbia river about a mile above the present village of Waneta, numbered four or five families throughout the year. The berry fields and salmon grounds of Northport [also Little Dalles in Washington] were conveniently near at hand (Ray 1936:125). • Close to Waneta, on the east side of Columbia River, just above the mouth of the Pend d’Oreilles River. Many people are said to have lived here formerly, and there are some very old burial grounds near by (Teit 1930:209). It is noteworthy that two conflicts over two apparently separate fisheries occurred at about the same time. Later in her publication she writes that Beaton was known to be an important camping area of the “native people”, “presumably the Kitanaqas of the south Kootenay country” (emphasis added), although she admitted that she was not sure of their identity (1964:169). 174 The first fur trader to arrive in the area was David Thompson in 1811. 175 In cross-referencing Teit’s list of Lakes villages, Ray did not cross-reference Teit’s No. 11 with his own No. 11, although it appears that they are speaking about the same village. 172 173 CONFIDENTIAL 173 P a g e | 174 Sinixt Place Location Comment TceaulExxi’xtsa (now Trail) 176 (Teit 1930) tcωlxi∙’t’sȧ (Ray 1936, No. 12) Trail • This camp was located on the west side of the Columbia river at the site of the present town of Trail. Hunters used the site for a few days at a time as a base for deer hunting (Ray 1936:125). SnskEkEle’um (Teit 1930, No. 10) snskəkəle’um (Ray 1936, No. 13) At a creek near Trail • At a creek on the west side of the Columbia river close to Trail (Ray 1936:125). • At a creek in the west side of Columbia River, close to Trail. This was a center for gathering service berries (Teit 1930:209). QEpi’tłes (Teit 1930, No. 9) kupi’tłks “rubbing the chest” 177 (Ray 1936, No. 14) kpίλəls (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998, No, 39) At the confluence of Kootenay and Columbia rivers • This was a settlement at the confluence of the Kootenay and Columbia rivers, used as a temporary base for root digging. Travelers coming or going from the Kootenay or upper Columbia river valleys usually camped here for a week or two, visiting and gambling with friends and using the sweat houses. To a limited extent it also served as a hunting base (Ray 1936:125). • At the mouth of Kootenai River, just above the junction with the Columbia. A great many people lived here formerly, most of them on the north bank of the Kootenai, 178 within sight of the Columbia. Some old and modern burial grounds may be seen in the neighbourhood (Teit 1930:209). 179 This place name was not provided in Teit’s listing of villages but mentioned in a later list of important temporary camp sites (1930:210). This list is provided in Section 5.2 177 In cross-referencing Teit’s list of Lakes villages, Ray did not cross-reference Teit’s No. 9 with his own No. 14, although it appears that they are speaking about the same village which may have been located on both the north and south banks of the Kootenay River. Ray clearly locates this village on the south bank of the river (Map 4), yet Teit mentions that most of the population lived on the north bank (1930:209) which implies that some lived on the south bank as well. 178 Alexander Ross observed in 1821 at this same location, “the remains of a deserted Indian camp” (Ross 1855:164165). By this statement, it would appear that this village encompassed both the north and south banks of the Kootenay River. 179 In a 1909 letter to Franz Boas, Teit confirms that the population living here are Lakes people who speak a dialect similar to that of the Colville: “It [the language of a small band of Indians at the mouth of Kootenay River] agrees with what the Indians of the Sans Poil etc told me last year, viz that it is a dialect very closely related to the Colville. These Indians are Lakes as I stated to you last year” (Teit Letter May 20, 1909: BCA, MS 1425, Reel A00246, Boas Collection 372. Roll 15, S.3 [Salish Tribal Names and Distributions, American Philosophical Society Library, Philadelphia]). 176 CONFIDENTIAL 174 P a g e | 175 Sinixt Place Location SntEkEli’t.ku (Teit 1930, No. 18) ntikuli’tku “much river food” 180 (Ray 1936, No. 15) Near the junction of the Slocan and Kootenay rivers nxa∙xa’tsən “cave in the rocks” (Ray 1936, No. 16) Comment Opposite Nelson • This encampment was on the north side of the Kootenay river about a mile above the mouth of the Slocan (slo’kȧn) river [near or at Bonnington Falls]. Trout pools were numerous in the river at this point making it a popular fishing center. Women used the site as a base for berry picking while men found it convenient for hunting bear. Parties usually stayed here a week or two, most often during April just before the river began to rise. Later they moved to the north for caribou hunting, some travelling Slocan river route, some choosing the Kootenay river (Ray 1936:125-126). • Near the junction of Slocan and Kootenai Rivers. This was a noted salmon-fishing place. Salmon ran up the Slocan River, but could not ascend the Kootenai because of the great Bonnington Falls. Salmon were formerly plentiful throughout the Slocan district, and many people lived at all the villages (Teit 1930:210). • This camp was the Kootenay river, opposite Nelson, at the edge of the caribou hunting area. Line fishing for trout was also profitable here (Ray 1936:126). DjQi 1, (Map 36a), pit-house; camp or village. Opposite the town of Nelson. Two or more pit-houses present • Kaia’mElEp (now Nelson) 181 (Teit 1930) k’iyȧ’mlupu (Kutenai word?) (Ray 1936, No. 17) Nelson • A settlement at the site of the present town of Nelson (Ray 1936:126). yakskukəni’ “Where many kukeni’ [a small red fish] are found” (Ray 1936, No. 18) Six or seven miles above Nelson • Located about six or seven miles above Nelson on the Kootenay river. Root gathering, bear and caribou hunting and trout fishing were all profitable (Ray 1936:126). ktca’ukuł “spliced trousers” (Ray 1936, No. 19) near Balfour • This encampment was near the present town of Balfour (?) on Kootenay Lake. It was used as a temporary base during May and June. In cross-referencing Teit’s list of Lakes villages, Ray did not cross-reference Teit’s No. 18 with his own No. 15, although it appears that they are speaking about the same village. 181 This place name was not provided in Teit’s listing of villages but mentioned in a later list of important temporary camp sites (1930:210). This list is provided in Section 5.2. 180 CONFIDENTIAL 175 P a g e | 176 Sinixt Place Location Comment na∙xspoȧ’lk’en “rocky bank made by spoȧ’lk’en [mythological character]” (Ray 1936, No. 20) west shore of Upper Kootenay lake • On the west shore of upper Kootenay lake, exact location uncertain. Temporary camp (Ray 1936:126). Kali’so (Teit 1930, No. 19) sia’uks qa∙li’su “where the water flows outward” probably referring to the drainage of Trout lake into Kootenay lake 182 (Ray 1936, No. 21) On Trout Lake at the town of Gerrard • This was a caribou hunting and fishing camp located at the lower end of Trout lake at the site of the present town of Gerrard. Drying racks for fish were erected here and travellers sometimes remained for several weeks (Ray 1936:126). • On Trout Lake. Its waters drain into the north end of Kootenai Lake (Teit 1930:210). sinpətł’me∙’p (Ray 1936, No. 22) snpəλmίp (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998, No. 32) On Trout Lake at Trout Lake City • This encampment at the upper end of Trout lake was at the site of the present Trout Lake City. From here a portage usually was made to the end of Upper Arrow lake (Ray 1936:126). In cross-referencing Teit’s list of Lakes villages, Ray did not cross-reference Teit’s No. 1 with his own No. 21, although it appears that they are referencing the same village. 182 CONFIDENTIAL 176 P a g e | 177 Sinixt Place Location Comment NkEma’pElEks “base or bottom end,” with reference to the end of the lake 183 (Teit 1930, No. 2) nk’umȧ’puluks “end of the water” 184 (Ray 1936, No. 23) nkmápələqs “head end of lake” (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998, No. 30) Upper Arrow Lake on Beaton Arm at the site of the former town of Comaplix • This important camp was situated at the uppermost end of Upper Arrow lake [on Beaton Arm] near the site of the [former] town Comaplix. It was a popular meeting place and a productive fishing, hunting, and berrying center. The camp was most populous in May and June (Ray 1936:126). • At the head of the bight in Upper Arrow Lake, above Arrowhead, near the mouth of Fish [Incomappleux] River. Called “Comaplix” by the whites. Said to have had a large population. It was a specially important center for fishing, berrying (especially huckleberries), and root digging (Teit 1930:209). • Lakes consultant, Nancy Wynecoop informed Elmendorf that the Lakes “originally settled around Revelstoke.” Elmendorf was told that nk’mapeleks was the “earliest settlement” of the Lakes people (Elmendorf 1935-1936). • Associated with archaeological site EeQk-1: “According to local traditions, a fishing camp was established near the mouth of the Incomaplix [Incomappleux] River at the present townsite of Beaton, on the North East Arm. Examination of the area suggested that the townsite itself would be a logical camping ground, however no collections exist in the town, no physical features occur, and no informant could point out a specific location” (Harrison 1961:42). Local historian Kate Johnson wrote of a village at which the “Indians of the Okanagan country” camped at Shelter Bay. She was told that the name of this place was “head of the lake”; the location description provided by Johnson matches Ray’s (No. 25) kospi’tsa “Buffalo robe”. Johnson writes: “The Indians of the Okanagan country came... to Shelter Bay, next to Bannock Point about three miles south of Arrowhead. It seems certain that at that time prior to the arrival of Hudson’s Bay Company fur traders there were no camps of Indians at what is now Arrowhead, but the condition of native remains exhumed at their old burial ground there in 1907 would indicate that they had used the place for a long time. They had no definite name for that place but just referred to it as the ‘head of the lake’” (Johnson 1964:7-8). Johnson’s work needs to be taken with extreme caution given her consistently confusing narratives and Indigenous identities. Archaeological site EeQl 2 is a burial site located at Arrowhead (see Section 8.2.2). Johnson mentions the presence of “a group of figures and signs... drawn in red ochre on rocks near Cape Horn” (Johnson 1964:8). These pictographs were associated with a pithouse site (EcQl-1) identified in 1961. The pithouse was identified as having Lakes-style structure and the pictographs were “suspected to be of Shuswap origin” (Harrison 1961:64). Records of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development in the early 1900s refer to the Shuswap at “Indians of the Okanagan Country”. It is clear that by this time, the early 1900s, the Lakes people had moved south to the Colville Reservation. 184 In cross-referencing Teit’s list of Lakes villages, Ray did not cross-reference Teit’s No. 2 with his own No. 23, although it appears that they are referencing the same village. 183 CONFIDENTIAL 177 P a g e | 178 Sinixt Place Location Comment SkExi’kEntEn (Teit 1930, No. 1) skəxi’kəntən (Ray 1936, No. 24) skxikntn (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998, No. 29) opposite Revelstoke • Settlement opposite Revelstoke (Ray 1936:126). • On the creek opposite the present town of Revelstoke. This place is said to have been the headquarters of a rather large band, which was reinforced at certain seasons by people from lower down the Columbia. It was noted as a trading, trapping, hunting, berrying, and salmon-fishing center (Teit 1930:209). 185 • Also noted as original settlement (Elmendorf 1935-36). Kospi’tsa “buffalo robe” (Teit 1930, No. 3) kospi’tsa “Buffalo robe” 186 (Ray 1936, No. 25) qwəspίca? “buffalo robe” (Kennedy and Bouchard 1998, No. 31) Upper Arrow Lakes at the town of Arrowhead • At the site of the present town of Arrowhead (Ray 1936:127). • At the upper end of Arrow Lakes, where the town of Arrowhead now is. This also was a salmon-fishing place, and a noted center for digging roots of Lilium columbianum 187 (Teit 1930:209). According to the knowledge keepers with whom Elmendorf consulted (1935-1936), the Lakes “originally settled around Revelstoke” and that “over 100 yr. ago [ca. 1920s] the Lakes retreated down from around Revelstoke” (in Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:79). Elmendorf was also informed, however, that nk’mapeleks was the “earliest settlement” of the Lakes (1935-1936 in Bouchard and Kennedy 1985:82). According to Bouchard and Kennedy “the heart of the Lakes homeland was considerably south both from Revelstoke and from Beaton” (1985:82). 186 Local historian Kate Johnson wrote of a village at which the “Indians of the Okanagan country” camped at Shelter Bay. She was told that the name of this place was “head of the lake”; the location description provided by Johnson matches Ray’s (No. 25) kospi’tsa “Buffalo robe”. Johnson writes: “The Indians of the Okanagan country came... to Shelter Bay, next to Bannock Point about three miles south of Arrowhead. It seems certain that at that time prior to the arrival of Hudson’s Bay Company fur traders there were no camps of Indians at what is now Arrowhead, but the condition of native remains exhumed at their old burial ground there in 1907 would indicate that they had used the place for a long time. They had no definite name for that place but just referred to it as the ‘head of the lake’” (Johnson 1964:7-8). Archaeological site EeQl 2 is a burial site located at Arrowhead (see Section 8.2.2 below). Johnson mentions the presence of “a group of figures and signs... drawn in red ochre on rocks near Cape Horn” (Johnson 1964:8). These pictographs were associated with a pithouse site (EcQl-1) identified in 1961. The pithouse was identified as having Lakes-style structure and the pictographs were “suspected to be of Shuswap origin” (Harrison 1961:64). Records of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development in the early 1900s refer to the Shuswap at “Indians of the Okanagan Country”. It is clear that by this time, the early 1900s, the Lakes people had moved south to the Colville Reservation. 187 Tiger or Columbia Lily. 185 CONFIDENTIAL 178 P a g e | 179 Sinixt Place Location Ku’sxEna’ks (Teit 1930, No. 4) ku’sxəna’ks (Ray 1936, No. 26) kwusxənáqs “point of land sticking out; long point” (Kennedy 1998, No. 33) Upper Arrow Lake, at Kooskanax above Nakusp Neqo’sp “having buffalo” 188 (Teit 1930, No. 5) neqo’sp 189 Nakusp, Upper Arrow Lake Comment “Having buffalo” (Ray 1936, No. 27) nkwusp “come together” (Bouchard and Kennedy 1998, No. 34) Tci’ukEn (Teit 1930, No. 6) tci’uken (Ray 1936, No. 28) • On Upper Arrow Lake, now called Kooskanax (Ray 1936:127). • Now called Kooskanax. On Upper Arrow Lake, a little above Nakusp (Teit 1930:209). • Now called Nakusp (Ray 1936:27). • Now Nakusp, near the lower end of Upper Arrow Lake, on the east side. A noted fishing place for salmon and lake trout (Teit 1930:209). “Long time residents of the area in the early 1960s identified Nakusp as an important Native traditional site, recalling that a sweat bath site and graveyard were still visible in the early 20th century. [Archaeologist] Peter Harrison indicated that several local residents told him that ‘a burial ground ha existed under the present location of the Beau Vista Motel in Nakusp.’ Bert Herridge indicated that around 1910-1915 he had seen an aboriginal ‘sweat bath site’ at the mouth of Nakusp Creek. This was verified by Mr. H.L. Miller of Nakusp, who pointed out this sweat house site was actually on the north bank of the mouth of Nakusp Creek. Mrs. Leary of Nakusp stated that ‘Indians camped at Nakusp’ (Harrison 1961b). Archaeological evidence of an indigenous use of the Nakusp area was also observed. In 1965, William Mosely of Nakusp indicated that ‘up to a few years ago’ it used to be possible to ‘pick up Indian arrowheads at any time’ in the vicinity of the ‘recreation ground’ at Nakusp (Mosely 1965)” (Bouchard and Kennedy 2000[2005]:85). • Upper Arrow Lake, below Nakusp • A little below Nakusp (Ray 1936:127). • A little below Nakusp; a center for hunting. Some fine caribou grounds were near this place (Teit 1930:209). Teit commented that although the name references buffalo, “[t]here is no tradition of buffaloes occurring here” (1930:209). 189 Johnson provided another translation for Nakusp that was given to her by Chief Louie: “Indians come down lake in canoes, storm very bad, canoes nearly lost at Kuskanax Creek, but on entering big bay at the point... Neqo’sp – ‘safe’” (1964:9). 188 CONFIDENTIAL 179 P a g e | 180 Sinixt Place Location Comment Snexai’tskEtsEm (Teit 1930, No. 7) snexai’tsətsəm (Ray 1936, No. 29) Lower Arrow Lake, opposite Burton Xaiē’kEn (Teit 1930, No. 8) xaie’kən (Ray 1936, No. 30) Lower Arrow Lake, below Burton məmatsi’ntin “log leaning outside a cave” (Ray 1936, No. 31) • Near the upper end of Lower Arrow lake, opposite Burton City (Ray 1936:127). 190 • Near the lower end of Upper Arrow Lake, opposite Burton City. This was a great berrying center, especially for huckleberries (Teit 1930:209). • At a creek [Caribou Creek?] below Burton City (Ray 1936:127). • At a creek below Burton City. A center for the catching of landlocked salmon or little red fish (Teit 1930:209). Lower Arrow Lake • A village on Lower Arrow lake, exact location uncertain. It was a center for hunting mountain goat in March and April (Ray 1936:127). plu’me’ (Ray 1936, No. 32) Lower Arrow Lake, near Deer Park • This was a temporary camp on the east side of Lower Arrow lake near the site of the present Deer Park. It marked the lower end of the hunting and fishing territory (Ray 1936:127). sm∙a’ip’ “large log leaning against a tree” (Ray 1936, No. 33) foot of Lower Arrow Lake • A temporary camping place at the foot of Lower Arrow lake (Ray 1936:127). [unnamed] Ray 1936, No. 34) Castlegar, at the fork of the Kootenay River and Lower Arrow Lake • A settlement at the site of the present town of Castlegar, near the fork of the Kootenay river and Lower Arrow lake, was important for both spear and line fishing. There was a rapids here, which aided the fisherman (Ray 1936:127). SkEtu’kElôx (Teit 1930, No. 17) sketu’kəlôx (Ray 1936, No. 35) Slocan River (in the vicinity of Vallican) • On lower Slocan river (Ray 1936:127). 191 • On Slocan River, below No. 16 (Teit 1930:210). Bouchard and Kennedy noted that this area is now called Belleview (1985:93). Ray assigned two locations to No. 35, sketu’kəlôx, both of which are found on the Slocan river: one below the confluence with Little Slocan River; the other above the confluence (Map 4). 190 191 CONFIDENTIAL 180 P a g e | 181 Sinixt Place Location Nkweio’xłEn (Teit 1930, No. 16) nkweio’xtəx (Ray 1936, No. 36) nkweio’xEn (?) 192 (Bouchard and Kennedy 1998, No. 38) Slocan River Kā’ntcā’k (Teit 1930, No. 15) ka∙ntca∙’k (Ray 1936, No. 37) Slocan River Sihwīl’lEx (Teit 1930, No. 14) sihwi∙’ləx (Ray 1936, No. 38) sixwίlx (?) (Bochard and Kennedy 1998, No. 37) Slocan Lake TakElExaitcEkst “trout ascend”? [from ai’tcEkst, a variety of large trout, probably lake trout] (Teit 1930, No. 13) takələxaitcəkst “trout ascend” (Ray 1936, No. 39) tqel?áytckst (?) “trout ascend” (Bouchard and Kennedy 1998, No. 36) Slocan Lake Comment • On Slocan river above no. 35 (Ray 1936:127). • On Slocan River, below No. 15 (Teit 1930:210). • On Slocan river below the lake (Ray 1936:127). • On Slocan River below the lake (Teit 1930:210). • On the lower part of Slocan lake (Ray 1936:127). • On the lower part of Slocan Lake (Teit 1930:210). • On Slocan lake, below no. 40 (Ray 1936:127). • On Slocan Lake, below No. 12 (Teit 1930:210). Kennedy and Bouchard (1998:240) (Map 2) located this village on the west bank of the Slocan River, whereas both Ray (1936) (Map 4) and Teit (1930) place it on the east side. 192 CONFIDENTIAL 181 P a g e | 182 Sinixt Place Location Comment SnkEmi’p “base, root, or bottom,” with reference to the head of the lake (Teit 1930, No. 12) snkəmi’p “base, root, or bottom” (Ray 1936, No. 40) snkmίp “end of lake” (Bouchard and Kennedy 1998, No. 35) Slocan Lake • At upper end of Slocan lake (Ray 1936:127). • At upper end of Slocan Lake (Teit 1930:210). NEmī’mEltEm (Teit 1930, No. 20) nəmi∙’məltəm (Ray 1936, No. 41) Whatshan [Caribou] Lake • On Caribou [Whatshan] 193 lake, to the west of the narrows between the Arrow lakes (Ray 1936:127). • On Caribou Lake, to the west of the narrows between the Arrow Lakes. The country around here was famous as a caribouhunting ground (Teit 1930:210). Brilliant • Gold Commissioner William George Cox set aside a temporary reserve at the mouth of Kootenay River and the confluence with the Columbia River (the area now known as Brilliant) in October 1861 (Harris 2002:334) at the request of Kootenay Indians. opposite Burton • In October 1902, Indian Reserve Commissioner A.W. Vowell, at the request of the local Indian Agent Galbraith, allotted at Burton a reserve for 22 “Indians now residing at Arrow Lake…six families who have hitherto lived independently at Revelstoke, Trail, Lower Kootenay and the Arrow Lakes, no land having been assigned to them.” 194 Christina Lake • In his fieldnotes Teit wrote: “Okanagons all along on N of them [Spokans]. Okanagons occupied Upper Kettle River coming down to about Grand Forks or Christina Lake” (Teit 19071910:Salish Tribal Names and Distributions). Location of Lakes temporary camp (Teit 1930). • In 1865 Turnbull noted in his journal that “the Indians call this the What’shaan River” (1965:27). Letter from A.W. Vowell, Indian Reserve Commissioner to The Deputy Commissioner of Lands and Works, October 25, 1902, and “Minute of Decision. Arrow Lake Indians,” October 10, 1902. Ministry of Crown Lands, Minutes of Decision Files; Box 6, F. 7791. 193 194 CONFIDENTIAL 182 P a g e | 183 Sinixt Place Location Comment Nk’mmtsin Grand Forks According to Sinixt/Skoyelpi knowledge-keeper, Martin Louie 195 a battle occurred at a place called Nk’mmtsin, located at the confluence of the Kettle and Granby rivers (currently known as Grand Forks). Martin Louie informed anthropologists Bouchard and Kennedy that “Kts’ats’ukw’a killed the Shuswaps in a battle” at this place (Freisinger 197827:38). • 195 At the time of publication in 1978, Freisinger used the term Colville Okanagan to identify Martin Louie. CONFIDENTIAL 183 P a g e | 184 Sinixt Appendix 2 – Maps Asserted Traditional Territories Map A: CONFIDENTIAL Map of Sin Aikst [Sinixt] asserted territory – Reyes 2002 184 P a g e | 185 Sinixt Historical and Ethnographic Maps Map 1: CONFIDENTIAL Linguistic stocks in the Plateau. Horizontal hatching: Sahaptin; diagonal hatching: Salish; vertical hatching: Athabascan; cross hatching: Kutenai. – Ray 1939 185 P a g e | 186 Sinixt Map 2: CONFIDENTIAL Northern Okanagan, Lakes and Colville territory, late 19th and 20th centuries – Bouchard and Kennedy 1998 186 P a g e | 187 Sinixt Map 3: CONFIDENTIAL Distribution of Salish Dialects, and of Languages Spoken in the Adjoining Territory, Before 1800, Based on Information Collected by James A. Teit, Franz Boas, and Leo J. Frachtenberg – Boas 1928 187 P a g e | 188 Sinixt Map 4: CONFIDENTIAL Lakes Territory and Villages – Ray 1936:114 188 P a g e | 189 Sinixt Map 5: CONFIDENTIAL Earth lodges. Vertical hatching: circular, with rafters; horizontal hatching: circular, roof of radiating poles; diagonal hatching: circular, flat roof; broken hatching: circular, radiating poles with purlins – Ray 1936 189 P a g e | 190 Sinixt Map 6: CONFIDENTIAL Map of the North-West Territory of the Province of Canada from Actual survey during the years 1792-1812, Thompson, 1897 190 P a g e | 191 Sinixt Map 7: CONFIDENTIAL A Map Exhibiting all the New Discoveries in the Interior Parts of North America. 1795 Additons to 1814 [Detail] – Arrowsmith 191 P a g e | 192 Sinixt Map 8: CONFIDENTIAL A Map Exhibiting all New Discoveries in the Interior Parts of North America [detail] – Arrowsmith 1818 192 P a g e | 193 Sinixt Map 9: CONFIDENTIAL The Map of Columbia [Detail] – Alexander Ross, 1821 193 P a g e | 194 Sinixt Map 10: CONFIDENTIAL Map of Oregon Territory, 1838 – Samuel Parker 194 P a g e | 195 Sinixt Map 11: CONFIDENTIAL [1842-1848] [Map of Northern Rocky Mountains and Plateau]. Jesuit Missouri Province Archives, St. Louis, Missouri. De Smetiana Collection, MJA IX C8 – 13. 195 P a g e | 196 Sinixt Map 12: CONFIDENTIAL Oregon Territory, 1846 – Thwaites 1904 196 P a g e | 197 Sinixt Map 13: CONFIDENTIAL [c.1846] Pays des Porteurs [Country of the Carriers]. Washington State University Libraries, Pullman, Washington. Manuscripts, Archives, and Special Collections. Pierre Jean de Smet Papers, Cage 537, Neg. No. 99-145. 197 P a g e | 198 Sinixt Map 14: CONFIDENTIAL The Provinces of British Columbia & Vancouver Island with the Portions of the United States & Hudson’s Bay Territories [Detail], Complied from Original Documents by John Arrowsmith, 1859 198 P a g e | 199 Sinixt Map 15: CONFIDENTIAL Map Shewing the Distribution of the Indian Tribes of British Columbia [Detail] – Tolmie and Dawson 1884 199 P a g e | 200 Sinixt Map 16: CONFIDENTIAL Map Shewing the Limits of the Shuswap People, with the Principal Subdivisions – Dawson 1892 200 P a g e | 201 Sinixt Map 17: Map (3) showing northern boundaries of the Kalispels, & territories of the Lakes & the Kootenays, and positions of other Interior Tribes [detail] – Teit 1910-1913 (Teit 1910-1913, American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c) CONFIDENTIAL 201 P a g e | 202 Sinixt Map 18: Map No. (2) showing approximate positions and boundaries of tribes circa 184050 (or before any of the tribes went on reserves) [detail] – Teit 1910-1913 (Teit 1910-1913, American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c) CONFIDENTIAL 202 P a g e | 203 Sinixt Map 19: Map. No. 1. Western States [detail] – Teit, 1910-1913 (Teit 1910-1913, American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c) CONFIDENTIAL 203 P a g e | 204 Sinixt Map 20: Map (3) showing present or late and also former distributions of northern tribes [detail]. – Teit 1910-1913 (Teit 1910-1913, American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c) CONFIDENTIAL 204 P a g e | 205 Sinixt Map 21: CONFIDENTIAL Map Showing the Shuswap Territory (Teit 1909) 205 P a g e | 206 Sinixt Map 22: Map showing as near as possible Location of the Shuswap Tribe and Divisions, with approximate Boundaries of neighboring Tribes [detail] – Teit 1910-1913 (American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c - Teit 1910-1913) CONFIDENTIAL 206 P a g e | 207 Sinixt Map 23: CONFIDENTIAL British Columbia, Native Indians Distribution of Ethnic Groups – 1850 - Provincial Museum 1959 207 P a g e | 208 Sinixt Map 24: CONFIDENTIAL Lakes Indian Territory circa 1800 – Bouchard and Kennedy 1985 208 P a g e | 209 Sinixt Map 25: CONFIDENTIAL Estimated Boundaries of the Lakes Traditional Territory (Bouchard and Kennedy 1985) 209 P a g e | 210 Sinixt Map 26: CONFIDENTIAL Distribution of native peoples in southeastern British Columbia according to various authors – Turnbull 1977 210 P a g e | 211 Sinixt Map 27: CONFIDENTIAL The Kutenai Range – Turney-High 1941 211 P a g e | 212 Sinixt Map 28: Map (4). Showing approximately some of the chief trade routes and trading places &c of the Plateau tribes – Teit, 1910-1930 American Philosophical Society, Islandora Repository, Graphics Collection, Mss.497.3.B63c (Teit 1910-1913) CONFIDENTIAL 212 P a g e | 213 Sinixt Map 29: CONFIDENTIAL McDonald, Archibald. [A Sketch of the Thompson River District.] (Microfiche of map in the BCA CM/A354, Victoria), 1827 213 P a g e | 214 Sinixt Map 30: CONFIDENTIAL Plan of the Columbia R. District: Shewing the Routes Explored by Messrs Moberly, Green & Turnbull [in 1865]. - 1866 214 P a g e | 215 Sinixt Map 31: CONFIDENTIAL A Portion of the Colony of British Columbia from various sources, including original notes from personal explorations... 183[?] and 1851. 1867 [detail] – Anderson 1867 215 P a g e | 216 Sinixt Map 32: CONFIDENTIAL The agreement in 1846 to fix the international border…(Bill Nelson in Geiger 2010) 216 P a g e | 217 Sinixt Map 33: Sketch Showing Land Requested for Arrow Lake Reserve Galbraith to Vowell, April 30, 1904: BCA, GR 1751: RG 10, Vol. 3748, F. 29858-2 (BCA Reel B0304). CONFIDENTIAL 217 P a g e | 218 Sinixt Map 34: Sketch Plan of Arrow Lake Indians Reserve DIAND, Minutes of Decision, Correspondence and Sketches, Volume 15 CONFIDENTIAL 218 P a g e | 219 Sinixt Map 35: CONFIDENTIAL Map of Lake territory, villages (v), and campsites (based on Ray 1936:114) – Turnbull 1977 219 P a g e | 220 Sinixt Map 36a: Archaeological Sites in the Arrow Lakes Region (Turnbull 1977) CONFIDENTIAL 220 P a g e | 221 Sinixt Map 36b: Archaeological Sites in the Arrow Lakes Region (Turnbull 1977) CONFIDENTIAL 221 P a g e | 222 Sinixt Map 36c: Archaeological Sites in the Arrow Lakes Region (Turnbull 1977) CONFIDENTIAL 222 P a g e | 223 Sinixt Map 36d: Archaeological Sites in the Arrow Lakes Region (Turnbull 1977) CONFIDENTIAL 223 P a g e | 224 Sinixt Map 37: CONFIDENTIAL Original Okanagan Territory (Approximate Boundary) – Armstrong et al. 1994 224 P a g e | 225 Sinixt Map 38: CONFIDENTIAL Map Showing Northern Districts in Canada – Armstrong et al. 1994 225 P a g e | 226 Sinixt Appendix 3 – other mapping 1993/1994 – Maracle, Armstong, Derrickson, Youn-Ing Lee Maracle, Jeanette Armstrong, Delphine Derrickson, and Greg Youn-Ing compiled the publication (1993/1994) We Get our Living like Milk from the Land on behalf of the Okanagan Tribal Council (now ONA) in which the sylix (Nsǝlxcin)-speaking traditional territory is described as follows: “The sylix speaking people’s lands lie on both sides of the Okanagan River, east to the Selkirk range, west to the Cascades summit, south into Washington bounded by the Columbia river and Lake Chelan and north up to Salmon River” (1993/94:4). Maracle et al. describe the sylix territory as having had eight organized districts, all of whom speak sylix and who share the same customs and stories. They state that “They are one Nation and are now commonly called the Okanagan” (1993/94:4). It is important to state that upon reviewing the ethnohistory, and the information provided by knowledge-keepers in the ethnohistory, it is clear that there is a group of people who are linked by language – sylix/Nsǝlxcin – but that within that language group are a number of distinct geopolitical units whose identity and membership is tied to the land and territory in which they live. This does not come through in Maracle’s et al. publication. An attempt below is made to point out the errors in the publication that can generate subsequent misunderstandings of the Sinixt people and territory. Maracle et al. lists seven (not eight, as originally stated in the publication) districts. According to Maracle et al. these are (Figure 47 below): Southern Okanagan or sƏnq’aɁítkw Northern Okanagan or suknaqínx San Poil or sƏnpʕwilx Colville/Kettle or sƏnxwyaɁɬpítkw Arrow Lakes or sɁalt’ík’wƏt Slocan or sƏnʕíckstx Similkameen/Methow or smƏlqmíx CONFIDENTIAL 226 P a g e | 227 Sinixt Figure 47 – Map 37: “Original Okanagan Territory (Approximate Boundary)” – Armstrong et al. 1994 Maracle et al describe each district’s territory as follows: The Northern Okanagan, suknaqínx, occupy the lands in the Okanagan Valley north of Oroville and include Douglas Lake area. The sƏnxwyaɁɬpítkw, Kettle, occupy the Kettle Valley to the Great Kettle Falls. The sɁalt’ík’wƏt, Arrow Lakes, occupy the Arrow Lakes down to Kettle Falls. The sƏnʕíckstx, Slocan, occupy the Slocan down to Chewelah. The smƏlqmíx occupy the Similkameen Valley from Princeton to the couth bordered by the Methow. The San Poil, sƏnpʕwilx, occupying the San Poil River to where it meets with the Columbia river. The Southern Okanagan, sƏnq’aɁítkw, occupy the lands surrounding the Okanagan River to where it meets with the Columbia (Maracle et al. 1993/94:5-6). Within British Columbia, Armstrong et al. recognized three regional groups as illustrated on the following (Figure 48): CONFIDENTIAL 227 P a g e | 228 Sinixt Figure 48 – Map 38: Map Showing Northern Districts in Canada – Armstrong et al. 1994 Three of the eight “districts” are shown to be located in Canada. Anthropologist Dorothy Kennedy pointed out that “the illustrated boundaries identified by Maracle et al. are inconsistent with other data; moreover, some of the Indigenous and/or English names have been applied incorrectly” (2015:74). Furthermore, the term sɁalt’ík’wƏt has been applied incorrectly as becomes apparent after deep review of the ethnohistory. In his ethnography of the Okanagon (1930) Teit explained that those who lived at the head of Okanagan Lake, used the term Sӓltī’qut, “Lake people” (1930:203, fn. 9, emphasis added) to differentiate themselves from other Okanagan (Sylix/Nsǝlxcin)-speaking groups, that is, those who spoke the same language and lived to the south on the Okanagan and Similkameen rivers (Teit 1930:203-204). Armstrong et al. incorrectly used the term sɁalt’ík’wƏt (Teit’s Sӓltī’qut – head of Okanagan Lake people) to identify the Arrow Lake region, an area consistently identified in the ethnographic and historic record as sngaytskstx or Sinixt. Kennedy (2015:74) pointed out that Armstrong et al. “have conflated this Indigenous name sɁalt’ík’wƏt (Teit’s Sӓltī’qut)…with the widely-accepted English name ‘Lakes’” which is applied to the sngaytskstx (Sinixt) people of the Arrow Lake region and incorrectly assigned it to the Arrow Lakes region. Kennedy and linguist, Randy Bouchard, undertook fieldwork in the region in 1986 and recorded the term s7alt’íkw’tx (Teit’s Sӓltī’qut and CONFIDENTIAL 228 P a g e | 229 Sinixt Armstrong’s et al. sɁalt’ík’wƏt) 196 which was used to identify “the Okanagans of the Nicola Valley” and not the Sinixt of Arrow Lakes. As Kennedy explained, the s7alt’íkw’tx (sɁalt’ík’wƏt) – the Northern Okanagan people of Okanagan Lake (and the Nicola Valley) – and the sngaytskstx (Sinixt) of the Arrow Lakes “are separate and distinct regional groups” (2015:74). The historical and ethnographic record consistently characterizes the Sinixt people of Arrow Lakes as separate and distinct. Their name has also been consistently recorded in the history and ethnography as sngaytskstx (Sinixt) (and by various other spellings of the same name) and not as sɁalt’ík’wƏt, as stated and illustrated in Maracle et al. “Indian History and Knowledge of the Aspen Grove to Peachland Corridor of the Coquihalla Highway” 1986 in Kennedy 2015:74. 196 CONFIDENTIAL 229 P a g e | 230 Sinixt Appendix 4 – First Nations with overlapping interests in the Arrow Lakes region The following Indigenous groups assert territorial boundaries that include at least a portion of Sinixt traditional territory. This section is included to inform governments, Indigenous and nonIndigenous alike, about Indigenous interests in Sinixt traditional territory. A) Splatsin The Splatsin are a Secwepemc Nation community and holds Indian Reserve lands near the city of Enderby and the Shuswap River: Salmon River Reserve 1, Enderby Reserve 2, and Sicamous Reserve 3. The Splatsin are the southernmost tribe of the Secwepemc Nation and assert their traditional territory stretches from the BC/Alberta border near the Yellowhead Pass to the plateau west of the Fraser River, southeast to the Arrow Lakes and to the upper reaches of the Columbia River. The Splatsin is one of nine member bands of the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council. 197 They are also one of three Secwepemc nations that comprise the Sexqeltkemc te Secwepemc Division (People of the Lakes Division). 198 As illustrated on Map B, Splatsin asserted traditional territory encompasses the Arrow Lakes.199 Shuswap Nation Tribal Council member bands include: Adams Lake; T’kemlups te Secwepemc (formerly Kamloops Indian Band); Shuswap; Neskonlith; Skeetchestn; Splatsin; St’uxwtéws (Bonaparte Indian Band); Whispering Pines/Clinton; and Simpcw (https://shuswapnation.org/about/bands/). 198 The Sexqeltkemc or Lakes Division is made up of four Secwepemc bands in the Shuswap Lakes area: Adams Lake/Sexqeltin/Hust’alen Indian Band; Little Shuswap Lake/Skwlax Indian Band; Neskonlith/Sk’emtsin Indian Band; and Splatsin/Spallumcheen First Nation (Secwepemc Shuswap First Nation Portal Websites (firstnationsseeker.ca)). 199 Land – Splatsin (splatsin.ca) 197 CONFIDENTIAL 230 P a g e | 231 Sinixt Map B: Splatsin Asserted Traditional Territory 200 B) Neskonlith Indian Band The Neskonlith Indian Band is a Secwepemc Nation community and holds Indian Reserve lands located in the Chase area on the South Thompson River and near Salmon Arm. The Neskonlith Indian Band is one of nine member bands of the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council. 201 They also are one of three Secwepemc nations that comprise the Sexqeltkemc (People of the Lakes Division).202 According to mapping included in the Forest and Range Consultation and Revenue Sharing Agreement (FCRSA) between the Neskonlith Indian Band and British Columbia 2019, Map C 200 Land – Splatsin (splatsin.ca) Shuswap Nation Tribal Council member bands include: Adams Lake; T’kemlups te Secwepemc (formerly Kamloops Indian Band); Shuswap; Neskonlith; Skeetchestn; Splatsin; St’uxwtéws (Bonaparte Indian Band); Whispering Pines/Clinton; and Simpcw (http://www.shuswapnation.org/index.html). 202 The Sexqeltkemc or Lakes Division is made up of four Secwepemc bands in the Shuswap Lakes area: Adams Lake/Sexqeltin/Hust’alen Indian Band; Little Shuswap Lake/Skwlax Indian Band; Neskonlith/Sk’emtsin Indian Band; and Splatsin/Spallumcheen First Nation (Secwepemc Shuswap First Nation Portal Websites (firstnationsseeker.ca)). 201 CONFIDENTIAL 231 P a g e | 232 Sinixt (Figure 3) illustrates Neskonlith asserted traditional territory, the boundaries of which include the upper Columbia River basin.203 Map C: Neskonlith Asserted Traditional Territory 204 203 204 http://www.shuswapnation.org/bands/member-bands/neskonlith.html. neskonlith_fcrsa_renewal_agreement_signed.pdf (gov.bc.ca), 2019 CONFIDENTIAL 232 P a g e | 233 Sinixt C) Adams Lake Indian Band The Adams Lake Indian Band is a member of the Secwepemc Nation and is one of nine member bands of the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council.205 They also are one of three Secwepemc nations that comprise the Sexqeltkemc (People of the Lakes Division). 206 The main Adams Lake Indian Band community is located on the Thompson River near Chase on Sahkaltkum IR 4.207 In total, there are seven Adams Lake Indian Band reserves located on Adams Lake, South Thompson River and Salmon Arm. Attached mapping to the Secwepemc Government to Government Letter of Commitment [Qwelminte] on Reconciliation 2019 (Map D) illustrates Secwepemc asserted traditional territory (the Adams Lake Band being a member community), the boundary of which includes the upper Columbia River basin. 208 205 Shuswap Nation Tribal Council member bands include: Adams Lake; T’kemlups te Secwepemc (formerly Kamloops Indian Band); Shuswap; Neskonlith; Skeetchestn; Splatsin; St’uxwtéws (Bonaparte Indian Band); Whispering Pines/Clinton; and Simpcw (http://www.shuswapnation.org/index.html; http://www.shuswapnation.org/bands/member-bands/adamslake.html). 206 The Sexqeltkemc or Lakes Division is made up of four Secwepemc bands in the Shuswap Lakes area: Adams Lake/Sexqeltin/Hust’alen Indian Band; Little Shuswap Lake/Skwlax Indian Band; Neskonlith/Sk’emtsin Indian Band; and Splatsin/Spallumcheen First Nation (Secwepemc Shuswap First Nation Portal Websites (firstnationsseeker.ca)). 207 Bands - Shuswap Nation Tribal Council (SNTC) 208 Adams Lake Indian Band - Province of British Columbia (gov.bc.ca) CONFIDENTIAL 233 P a g e | 234 Sinixt Map D: Qwelminte Secwepemc Territory 209 D) Little Shuswap Lake Band (Skw’lax) The Little Shuswap Lake Band is a Secwepemc band, the main community of which is located near Chase. 210 Little Shuswap Indian Band has five reserves. Their territory is contained with the larger asserted Secwepmec territory as shown above in Map D. 209 210 secwepemc_g2g_loc_with_iea__signed.pdf (gov.bc.ca) http://www.gov.bc.ca/arr/firstnation/little_shuswap/default.html. CONFIDENTIAL 234 P a g e | 235 Sinixt E) Shuswap Indian Band (Kenpesq’t) The Shuswap Indian Band is a member of the Secwepemc Nation and is one of nine member bands of the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council. 211 Appended to the Shuswap Band Interim Agreement on Forest & Range Opportunities 2006 is a map showing the asserted territory of the Shuswap Indian Band (Map E). The entire Upper Columbia River basin is captured within its boundary. Map E: Shuswap Indian Band Asserted Territory 212 Shuswap Nation Tribal Council member bands include: Adams Lake; T’kemlups te Secwepemc (formerly Kamloops Indian Band); Shuswap; Neskonlith; Skeetchestn; Splatsin; St’uxwtéws (Bonaparte Indian Band); Whispering Pines/Clinton; and Simpcw (http://www.shuswapnation.org/index.html; Bands - Shuswap Nation Tribal Council (SNTC)). 212 Shuswap Band Interim Agreement on Forest & Range Opportunities, 2006 shuswap_fcrsa_consultation_and_revenue_sharing_agreement_fn_executed_decembe_5_2018.pdf (gov.bc.ca) 211 CONFIDENTIAL 235 P a g e | 236 Sinixt F) Ktunaxa Nation Six bands comprise the Ktunaxa Nation, 213 four of which are located within British Columbia and two in the United States.214 The Ktunaxa illustrate their asserted traditional territory in Map F and encompasses the entire Upper Columbia River basin. Map F: Ktunaxa Nation BC Treaty Area and Asserted Traditional Territory 215 Ktunaxa Nation member bands are: ʔakisq̓ nuk First Nation (Columbia Lake Band), Yaq̓ it ʔa·knuqⱡiʾit (Tobacco Plains Indian Band), ʔaq̓ am (St. Mary’s), and Yaqan Nuʔkiy (Lower Kootenay Band) (Ktunaxa Communities : Ktunaxa Nation). Two additional communities, the Kootanie Tribe of Idaho and the Ksanka Band, are located in the United States. Shuswap Indian Band shares St. Mary’s 1A IR with the Columbia Lake Band, St. Mary’s Band, Tobacco Plains Band and the Lower Kootenay Band. 214 http://www.ktunaxa.org/who/index.html 215 Traditional_Territory_Av2_02.png (1275×1650) (ktunaxa.org) 213 CONFIDENTIAL 236 P a g e | 237 Sinixt G) Westbank First Nation The Westbank First Nation is located on the west shore of Okanagan Lake, across from presentday Kelowna. Westbank First Nation’s most populated reserve lands are Tsinstikeptum IRs 9 and 10 near West Kelowna. Their three remaining reserves are located on the east side of the lake near Kelowna. 216 Westbank First Nation is one of seven member groups of the Okanagan Nation (Syilx). 217 Map G illustrates Westbank FN asserted territory which delineates both a Harvesting Area and a Governance Boundary. Both areas encompass the Upper Columbia River basin. The Westbank First Nation is currently engaged in the British Columbia treaty process. 218 http://www.syilx.org/who-we-are/organization-information/ona-member-bands/#wfn; About Westbank First Nation - Westbank First Nation (wfn.ca) 217 According to sylix.org, there are seven member communities: Lower Similkameen Indian Band; Okanagan Indian Band; Osoyoos Indian Band; Penticton Indian Band; Westbank First Nation; Upper Nicola Indian Band; Colville Confederated Tribes (http://www.syilx.org/who-we-are/organization-information/ona-member-bands/). 218 Westbank First Nation | BC Treaty Commission 216 CONFIDENTIAL 237 P a g e | 238 Sinixt Map G: Westbank First Nation Asserted Territory 219 H) Osoyoos Indian Band The Osoyoos Indian Band has reserve lands located in the southern part of the Okanagan Valley between Oliver and Osoyoos. 220 Osoyoos Indian Band is one of seven member groups of the Okanagan Nation (Syilx). 221 The Okanagan Nation Alliance produced Map H of their asserted traditional territory which includes that of the Osoyoos Indian Band. The Upper Columbia River basin is captured within this territorial boundary. 219 wfn_title_and_rights_maps_8.5x11.pdf (wfn.ca) Member Communities – Okanagan Nation Alliance (syilx.org) 221 According to sylix.org, there are seven member communities: Lower Similkameen Indian Band; Okanagan Indian Band; Osoyoos Indian Band; Penticton Indian Band; Westbank First Nation; Upper Nicola Indian Band; Colville Confederated Tribes (http://www.syilx.org/who-we-are/organization-information/ona-member-bands/). 220 CONFIDENTIAL 238 P a g e | 239 Sinixt Map H: Asserted Okanagan Nation Territory [Detail] 222 I) Okanagan Indian Band The Okanagan Indian Band’s main community is located on Okanagan IR 1 north of Vernon. The OKIB have six reserves located between Armstrong and Winfield and at Westside of Okanagan Lake: 223 Okanagan Indian Reserve #1; Swan Lake Indian Reserve #4; Harris Indian Reserve #3; Priest Valley Indian Reserve #6; Duck Lake Indian Reserve #7; and Otter Lake IR #2. 224 Okanagan Indian Band is one of eight member groups of the Okanagan Nation (Syilx). 225 The Okanagan Nation Alliance produced Map H, above, of their asserted traditional territory which includes that of the Okanagan Indian Band. The Upper Columbia River basin is captured within this territorial boundary. 222 Declaration & Territory.cdr (syilx.org) Member Communities – Okanagan Nation Alliance (syilx.org) 224 Lands & Economic Development Department (okib.ca) 225 According to sylix.org, there are seven member communities: Lower Similkameen Indian Band; Okanagan Indian Band; Osoyoos Indian Band; Penticton Indian Band; Westbank First Nation; Upper Nicola Indian Band; Colville Confederated Tribes (http://www.syilx.org/who-we-are/organization-information/ona-member-bands/). 223 CONFIDENTIAL 239