Climatic Change

, Volume 124, Issue 1–2, pp 385–398 | Cite as

Climate change and Yakama Nation tribal well-being

  • J. M. MontagEmail author
  • K. Swan
  • K. Jenni
  • T. Nieman
  • J. Hatten
  • M. Mesa
  • D. Graves
  • F. Voss
  • M. Mastin
  • J. Hardiman
  • A. Maule


The Yakima River Basin (Basin) in south-central Washington is a prime example of a place where competing water uses, coupled with over-allocation of water resources, have presented water managers with the challenge of meeting current demand, anticipating future demand, and preparing for potential impacts of climate change. We took a decision analysis approach that gathered diverse stakeholders to discuss their concerns pertaining to climate change effects on the Basin and future goals that were collectively important. One main focus was centered on how climate change may influence future salmon populations. Salmon have played a prominent role in the cultures of Basin communities, especially for tribal communities that have social, cultural, spiritual, subsistence, and economic ties to them. Stakeholders identified the need for a better understanding on how the cultural, spiritual, subsistence, and economic aspects of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation could be affected by changes in salmon populations. In an attempt to understand the complexities of these potential effects, this paper proposes a conceptual model which 1) identifies cultural values and components and the interactions between those components that could influence tribal well-being, and 2) shows how federal natural resource managers could incorporate intangible tribal cultural components into decision-making processes by understanding important components of tribal well-being. Future work includes defining the parameterization of the cultural components in order for the conceptual model to be incorporated with biophysical resource models for scenario simulations.


Traditional Ecological Knowledge Tribal Community Natural Resource Base Tribal Member Columbia River Basin 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We thank the workshop participants, Lynne Koontz, and Jennifer Thorvaldson for their input and support. Also see Supplemental Materials 1 for those who provided input and guidance in developing the conceptual model. Funding was provided by U.S. Geological Survey, Science Applications and Decision Support Program. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement of the U.S. Government.

Supplementary material

10584_2013_1001_MOESM1_ESM.docx (14 kb)
Supplemental Materials 1 (DOCX 14 kb)


  1. Alcamo J, Bennett EM (2003) Ecosystem and human well-being: a framework for assessment. Island Press, Washington, ISBN: 1559634022Google Scholar
  2. Cone J (1995) A common fate: endangered salmon and the people of the Northwest. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, ISBN 0-87071-391-4Google Scholar
  3. Crane TA (2010) Of models and meanings: cultural resilience in social–ecological systems. Ecol Soc 15:19. Google Scholar
  4. CRITFC (1995) The Columbia River Anadromous Fish Restoration Plan of the Nez Perce, Umatilla, Warm Springs, and Yakama Tribes, Volume 1. Columbia River Basin Inter-Tribal Fisheries Commission. Accessed 15 January 2012
  5. Diener E (2009) Subjective well-being. In: Diener E (ed) The science of well-being: the collected works of Ed Diener: social indicators research series 37. Springer, New York, pp 11–58. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-2350-6_1 Google Scholar
  6. Donoghue EM, Thompson SA, Bliss JC (2010) Tribal-federal collaboration in resource management. J Ecol Anthropol 14:22–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fischer M (2006) Cultural agents: a community of minds. In: Gleizes M-P, Ricci A (eds) Engineering societies in the agents world VI: lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin, pp 259–274. doi: 10.1007/11759683_16 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Geertz C (2000) The interpretation of cultures: selected essays. Basic Books, New York, ISBN: 0465097197Google Scholar
  9. Geisler CC, Green R, Usner D, West PC (eds) (1982) Indian SIA: the social impact assessment of rapid resource development on native peoples. University of Michigan, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  10. Gondolf EW, Wells SR (1986) Empowered native community, modified SIA: the case of Hydaburg, Alaska. Environ Impact Assess Rev 6:373–383. doi: 10.1016/0195-9255(86)90030-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gunnier M (2008) The history and contemporary role of the Lyle Falls dip net fishery in Yakama economy and culture. Thesis. Central Washington UniversityGoogle Scholar
  12. Hardiman JM, Mesa MG (2013) The effects of increased stream temperatures on juvenile steelhead growth in the Yakima River Basin based on projected climate change scenarios. Clim Chang (this issue)Google Scholar
  13. Hatten JR, Batt TR, Connolly PJ, Maule AG (2013) Modeling effects of climate change on Yakima River salmonid habitats. Clim Chang (this issue)Google Scholar
  14. Helliwell JF, Putnum RD (2004) The social context of well-being. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 359:1435–1446. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2004.1522 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Henson EC (2008) The state of the Native nations: conditions under US policies of self-determination: the Harvard Project on American Indian Economic Development. Oxford University Press, New York, ISBN: 9780195301250Google Scholar
  16. Howitt R (2001) Rethinking resource management: justice, sustainability and indigenous peoples. Routledge, New York, ISBN: 978-0415123334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hunn ES (1990) Nci’i-Wana. “The Big River”: mid-Columbia Indians and their land. University of Washington Press, Seattle, ISBN: 0295968516Google Scholar
  18. Jenni K, Graves D, Hardiman J, Hatten J, Mastin M, Mesa M, Montag JM, Nieman T, Voss F, Maule A (2013) Identifying stakeholder-relevant climate change impacts: a case study in the Yakima River Basin, Washington, USA. Clim Chang (this issue)Google Scholar
  19. Jobes PC (1986) Assessing impacts on reservations: a failure of social impact research. Environ Impact Assess Rev 6:385–394. doi: 10.1016/0195-9255(86)90031-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kimmerer R (2002) Weaving traditional ecological knowledge into biological education: a call to action. Bioscience 52:432–438. doi: 10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0432:WTEKIB]2.0.CO CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. King TF (1998) How the archeologists stole culture: a gap in American environmental impact assessment practice and how to fill it. Environ Impact Assess Rev 18:117–133. doi: 10.1016/S0195-9255(97)00064-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. King TF (2000) What should be the “cultural resources” element of EIA? Environ Impact Assess Rev 20:5–30. doi: 10.1016/S0195-9255(99)00003-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lal P, Alavalapati JRR, Mercer ED (2011) Socio-economic impacts of climate change on rural United States. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 16:819–844. doi: 10.1007/s11027-011-9295-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lockie S (2001) SIA in review: setting the agenda for impact assessment in the 21st century. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 19:277–287. doi: 10.3152/147154601781766952 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. MacKendrick K (2009) Climate change adaptation planning for cultural and natural resource resilience: a look at planning for climate change in two Native Nations in the Pacific Northwest U.S. Thesis, University of Oregon. Accessed 5 August 2011
  26. Miles RL, Greer L, Kraatz D, Kinnear S (2008) Measuring community well-being: a central Queensland case study. Australas J Reg Stud 4:73–93, Accessed 5 August 2011Google Scholar
  27. MVEIRB (Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board) (2007) Socio-economic impact assessment guidelines, 2nd edn. MVEIRB, Yellowknife, Canada. Accessed 15 January 2012
  28. NRC (National Research Council) (1996) Upstream: salmon and society in the Pacific Northwest. National Academy Press, Washington, ISBN: 0309053250Google Scholar
  29. OECD (2011) Compendium of OECD well-being indicators. OECD.,3746,en_2649_201185_47916764_1_1_1_1,00.html. Accessed 5 August 2011
  30. O’Faircheallaigh C (1999) Making social impact assessment count: a negotiation-based approach for indigenous peoples. Soc Nat Resour 12:63–80. doi: 10.1080/089419299279894 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. O’Faircheallaigh C (2009) Effectiveness in social impact assessment: Aboriginal peoples and resource development in Australia. Impact Assess Proj Apprais 27:95–110. doi: 10.3152/146155109X438715 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Parker PL, King TF (1998) Guidelines for evaluating and documenting traditional cultural properties. National Register Bulletin 38. US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  33. Pierotti R (2010) Sustainability of natural populations: lessons from indigenous knowledge. Hum Dimens Wildl 15:274–284. doi: 10.1080/10871201003720439 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ross H (1989) Community social impact assessment: a cumulative study in the Turkey Creek area, western Australia. East Kimberly Working Paper No. 27. ISBN 0 86740 355 1Google Scholar
  35. Ruckelshaus MH, Levin P, Johnson JB, Kareiva PM (2002) The Pacific salmon wars: what science brings to the challenge of recovering species. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 33:665–706. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.33.010802.150504 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Scerri A, James P (2010) Accounting for sustainability: combining qualitative and quantitative research in developing ‘indicators’ of sustainability. Int J Soc Res Methodol 13:41–53. doi: 10.1080/13645570902864145 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schuster HH (1975) Yakima Indian traditionalism: a study in continuity and change. Dissertation, University of WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  38. Soto-Estrada E, Aguirre-Saldivar R, Noor Islam S (2005) Cultural integrity as a criterion of SEA. In: Schmidt M, João E, Albrecht E (eds) Implementing strategic environmental assessment. Springer, Berlin, pp 409–420. doi: 10.1007/3-540-27134-1_28 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Taylor J (2006) Indigenous peoples and indicators of well-being: an Australian perspective on UNPFII Global Frameworks. Meeting on indigenous peoples and indicators of well-being March 22–23, 2006. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Accessed 5 August 2011
  40. Tsosie R (2007) Indigenous people and environmental justice: the impact of climate change. Univ Colo Law Rev 78:1625–16789Google Scholar
  41. Turner NJ, Boelscher Ignace M, Ignace R (2000) Ecological knowledge and wisdom of Aboriginal peoples in British Columbia. Ecol Appl 10:1275–1287. doi: 10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1275:TEKAWO]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization) (2003) Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage, MISC/2003/CLT/CH/14, UNESCO. Accessed 15 January 2012
  43. Wilkinson C (2005) Blood struggle: the rise of modern Indian nations. W.W. Norton & Company, New York, ISBN-10: 0393051498Google Scholar
  44. YESAB (Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board) (2006) Guide to socio-economic effects assessments. YESAB. Accessed 5 August 2011

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht (outside the USA) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. M. Montag
    • 1
    • 7
    Email author
  • K. Swan
    • 1
  • K. Jenni
    • 2
  • T. Nieman
    • 3
  • J. Hatten
    • 4
  • M. Mesa
    • 4
  • D. Graves
    • 5
  • F. Voss
    • 6
  • M. Mastin
    • 6
  • J. Hardiman
    • 4
  • A. Maule
    • 4
  1. 1.U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science CenterFort CollinsUSA
  2. 2.Insight Decisions, LLCDenverUSA
  3. 3.Decision Applications, Inc.Saint HelenaUSA
  4. 4.U.S. Geological Survey, Western Fisheries Research Center, Columbia River Research LaboratoryCookUSA
  5. 5.Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish CommissionPortlandUSA
  6. 6.U.S. Geological Survey, Washington Water Science CenterTacomaUSA
  7. 7.Bureau of Land ManagementCheyenneUSA

Personalised recommendations