MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379931113 · doi:10.1353/nai.2014.a843655

Imaginary Lines: Transcending the St. Croix Legacy in the Northeast Borderlands

2014· article· en· W4379931113 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rachel Bryant

Bibliographic record

VenueNative American and Indigenous Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe ImaginaryTreatyLawSupreme courtCorporationLicenseIndigenousGovernment (linguistics)FishingPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

NAIS 1:1 SPRING 2014 Imaginary Lines 49 RACHEL BRYANT Imaginary Lines Transcending the St. Croix Legacy in the Northeast Borderlands Beware of the language, the use of the language of industry, the language of corporations, the language of Government, and the language of conquest. —HUGH AKAGI, “PAY ATTENTION: ADVICE OF AN ELDER” IN 1993, Nova Scotia authorities arrested a Mi’kmaw man named Donald Marshall and charged him with three violations of the Canadian Fisheries Act: “the selling of eels without a license, fishing without a license, and fishing during the close season with illegal nets.”1 The defense insisted that Marshall ’s actions were lawful under the authority of a 1760 treaty between Aboriginal nations and the Crown, and in 1999, the Supreme Court of Canada acknowledged that the federal fishing regulations failed to make sufficient accommodation for those treaty rights; Marshall was cleared of all charges. Shortly after this decision, Canadian federal officials found themselves in the uncomfortable position of having to answer to the Passamaquoddy peoples of Point Pleasant, Maine, as to whether or not they were entitled to the same commercial rights in the waterways of eastern Canada. At this juncture , confusion and frustration among non-Native fisheries workers in the Atlantic Provinces was fueled by a misguided and inflammatory Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) article out of Fredericton that opened, “The court ruling that gave First Nations people the right to fish year-round without a license doesn’t extend to non–First Nations people [in Canada]—but it might apply to Americans.”2 With public indignation on the rise, the director -general of Resource Management for the Fisheries Department issued a statement to declare that, as American citizens, the Passamaquoddy would be necessarily excluded from benefits granted by the ruling; in response, Ernie Altvater, then chief of the Point Pleasant Passamaquoddy, was quoted as saying, “We’ve been fishing and hunting on both sides of the imaginary line for a long time and will continue to do so.”3 Ironically, as the Canadian historian William Wicken has noted, those initial 1760 treaty negotiations on which the Canadian Supreme Court’s decision was based “did not directly involve the Mi’kmaq” but instead “included delegates from the Maliseet and from the Passamaquoddy,” the latter of whom moved freely throughout the Rachel Bryant NAIS 1:1 SPRING 2014 50 northeast until they were pushed into Maine by Loyalist settlers and by the subsequent sealing of the Canada–U.S. border after the American Revolutionary War.4 To complicate matters further, a sizable Passamaquoddy population remains in the vicinity of what is now St. Andrews, New Brunswick, but because the Passamaquoddy have been denied federal status in Canada, they too have been refused all rights granted by the Court’s decision. For all intents and purposes, the Passamaquoddy are treated as extraneous to contemporary Canadian Aboriginal rights negotiations, for they have been neatly categorized as a U.S. tribe. As a settler-state, Canada certainly stands on contested ground even as its elected officials continue to use their borders, both cognitive and cartographic , to deny Indigenous nations access to their lawful and traditional lifeways. Since the Marshall ruling, a small number of historical and anthropological scholars have grappled with the question of whether the Passamaquoddy abandoned their British treaty rights by “settling” in the United States—a phrasing and historical interpretation that does much to obscure the shameful violence that first sparked the eighteenth-century Passamaquoddy migration. Indeed, one Passamaquoddy woman, Rose Cunha, in an interview with the Mi’kmaw scholar Bonita Lawrence, speaks of the gradual process through which her ancestors were dispossessed of their homelands by Loyalist settlers. As she explains, In the United States, I’m a member of the Passamaquoddy Tribe of Maine. But here in Canada, where our people come from, I’m non-status. Our people once lived in what is now New Brunswick and welcomed the Loyalists. But then they drove us off our territory to a little island in the middle of Passamaquoddy Bay. But even that was, I guess, still a little too close for the Loyalists. So my people were driven to the other side of the...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.426
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0290.010
Scholarly communication0.0120.004
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNative American and Indigenous StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207