83
Arctic Yearbook 2015
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
transfer autonomy and authority to new structures of governance—suggests the creation of new
and/or the solidification of existing (but abstract) boundaries: while Indigenous traditional lands
and territories are bounded conceptually, the modern land claim process institutionalized these
boundaries within western legal and political traditions. This paper does not cover all the
possible ways and forms that local mobilization engages in processes of regionalization, and
there may be opportunities to better tease out ‘traditional’ regionalism from processes that
occur under ‘indigenous regionalism / self-governance’.
The Inuit Circumpolar Council, the Aleut International Association, the Arctic Athabaskan
Council, the Gwich’in Council International, the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples
of the North, and the Saami Council.
Alaska has 229 federally recognized tribes.
To date, only the Deline community self-government agreement has been finalized, though
the other communities within the boundaries of the regional land claim are currently in
negotiations.
In their paper, Alcantara & Wilson define intra-jurisdictional relations as the “relationships
between separate governance bodies within a single jurisdictional unit” (45). Thus, these
relationships operate in a clear geographical and regional location.
A 13th corporation was also created for Alaska Natives no longer residing in the state. As such,
it is not a “regional corporation” as its endowment did not include a geographical unit within
the state of Alaska.
By May 17, 1967 the following claims (Native Protests) had been made to the Department of
the Interior: (1) Mentasta; (2) Gulkana; (3) Copper Centre; (4) Yakataga; (5) Lake Aleknagik;
(6) Stevens Village; (7) Birch Creek; (8) Minto; (9) Nenana; (10) Tanacross; (11) Prince William
Sound; (12) Anvik; (13) Northway; (14) Chilkoot; (15) Cantwell; (16) St. George Island; (17)
Eklutna; (1
H