The Pluralism Project at Harvard University

“Manoomin,” or wild rice, lies at the heart of how the Ojibway perceive themselves as a people and in relation to their Creator. While many traditional Ojibway stories reveal their intimate relationship with the food they consume, it was wild rice that was given specifically to the Ojibwe and guided their ancestral migration (LaDuke and Carlson 2003 1). There are numerous stories of the origin of manoomin but all focus on Nanaboozhoo, a cultural hero, and themes of hunger and satiation (Vennum 61).

The great migration of the Anishinaabeg, as the Ojibwe call themselves began when ancestors were told by prophets that if they did not move westward, they would be destroyed. They were told their destination was “the place where the food grows on water.” This land became their homeland. As Andrew Favorite, White Earth Anishinaabe and Tribal Historian said, “We are here because of the wild rice. We are living a prophecy fulfilled.”

Although wild rice is today spread by humans, Ojibwe believe it was originally seeded only by supernaturals (Vennum 65). Many Ojibway believe that wild rice was created for their people while other foods were given to the whites by their gods. They believe that wild rice has historically followed them wherever they go and will continue to do so if they maintain a proper relationship with their Creator and surroundings (Vennum 73).

The farming of wild rice traditionally was an activity that not only reaffirmed the Ojibway’s connection to their Creator, but also familial ties and social ties within entire communities. As rice ripened in the fall, Ojibway families broke from larger villages and moved to the shores of rivers and lakes (Vennum 158). Wild rice camps were composed of two to five families living in temporary wigwams (Vennum 160). The entire extended family was needed to work during the rice harvest (Vennum 166). Families often returned to the same sites year after year establishing long-term bonds with specific families and groups (Vennum162). Rice farming therefore had strong social implications.

Wild rice is also central in traditional ceremonies and life cycle events. It is used as an offering and a variety of traditions are performed to celebrate and ensure its presence in the future. Celebrations during harvest time and before the first crop are very important (Vennum 70). Wild rice is a central component of funerals, memorial feasts, and is left at grave sites (Vennum 75). It is believed that the spirits of the dead should be fed with wild rice during and after their journey to the afterlife (Vennum 76).

Many Ojibwe today request time off from work to harvest rice in the fall. Some sell a portion of their harvest, while many keep it as a food source (Vennum 298). Ojibway living in Minneapolis, St. Paul, Milwaukee, Chicago, and Winnepeg move in with relatives or set up camp to harvest, yet this represents a remnant of a more consistent migration. The decline of rice camps is upsetting to many Ojibwe because it historically helped strengthen community ties and communication between generations (Vennum 156).

For many years, European contact brought no major changes to Ojibway traditional wild rice practices. They traded only surplus rice with settlers and missionaries who came to rely on it to survive the winter months (Vennum 134). Between 1837 and 1883, large areas of Minnesota and Wisconsin were ceded to the United States. Anishinaabeg were careful to protect access to ceded lands in treaties (Meyer 37). In 1867, the Ojibwe ceded lands from a previous treaty agreement and the White Earth Reservation was established Northern Minnesota which brought several bands of Anishinaabeg groups together (Meyer 43).

Although rice fields were communally owned by the Ojibwe, the 1867 treaty mandated land allotment (Meyer 42 and Vennum 265). Federal legislation such as the 1887 Dawes Act which allotted plots of land to individuals forced the Ojibwe to navigate an agriculture system that ran counter to their understanding of land use (Vennum 268). The establishment of less migratory agricultural systems, individual land ownership, and maximum production of resources were seen as important components of assimilation.

The process of land allotment represents perhaps the first major clash between the Anishanaabeg and Western scientist. Researchers, including Dr. Albert Jenks from the University of Minnesota performed blood analysis and analysis of individuals’ physical characteristics. He claimed such methods could determine whether individuals were “full-blood” or “mixed-blood” and who deserved to receive land (LaDuke 2004).

Another clash between the Anishanaabeg and Western notions of science began in the 1890s when whites began farming wild rice for themselves. Whites’ view of Ojibwe farming practices as underproductive became a major justification for the take over of land and markets. In reality, the Ojibwe understood that any rice that was not harvested one year would re-seed and provide rice for the following year. Moreover, that the crop returned year after year signaled to the Ojibwe that they were in harmony with their Creator, the ultimate provider of wild rice (Vennum 217).

Mechanization of wild rice practices within Ojibwe communities was gradual with individuals making their own choices about whether to adopt certain tools based on their understanding of the sacredness of wild rice (Vennum 218). However, this did contribute to the a decline in wild rice camps as processing could be finished at home or individuals could specialized in specific areas of the process (Vennum 220).

Increasingly, new land practices threatened the sanctity of wild rice. Ojibwe were perhaps most frustrated with non-Indian premature harvesting which limited re-seeding and often damaged rice plants. In 1939, the Minnesota State Legislator tried to address this problem by passing Chapter 231, which acknowledged Native treaty rights but effectively mandated state take over of Ojibwe traditional regulation of ricing. White commissioners replaced traditional rice chiefs and the Ojibwe resented having to travel long distances to purchase expensive harvesting licenses (Vennum 271).

Paddy rice production began in the 1960s and continues today (Vennum 239). Many Ojibwe regard paddy rice as a white creation that is sacrilegious and a desecration of their religious beliefs (Vennum 297 and 217). By the early 1980s, cultivated, paddy grown wild rice had outstripped wild rice. Due to competition for land and environmental factors such as pollution and water levels, many Ojibwe found it increasingly difficult to fulfill their subsistence needs on the White Earth Reservation and began to work for agriculture or lumber companies part time or leave the reservation altogether (Meyer 222-223). Currently the wild rice market is not only out of the hands of the Ojibwe and other native groups, but is largely controlled by a handful of corporations (LaDuke and Carlson 2003 8).

Efforts at the University of Minnesota to transform wild rice into a cultivated crop began in the 1940s. Research has continued to the present day with a focus on domestication, disease resistance, insects, paddy rice development, and general improvement of the crop. Researchers at the University claim to have “created” several strains of wild rice through cross fertilization. Some strains have male sterility which prevents reseeding, thereby creating higher yields and the need to continually purchase seeds. Other strains select for traits that help in mechanical harvesting of wild rice (LaDuke and Carlson 2003 12).

Research done by the University of Minnesota has helped fuel the industrialization of the paddy-grown wild rice industry and has facilitated the shift of dominance in the wild rice market from Minnesota where it is the State Grain to California (LaDuke). Research has also made it possible for large companies like Uncle Ben’s and Green Giant to use mass produced, paddy-grown wild rice in their products. Today, wild rice is a $20million industry dominated by a handful of paddy rice companies (LaDuke and Carlson 2003 6).

Controversial research involves both wild rice breeding and genetics research. For example, Raymie Porter cross pollinates plants to select for certain preexisting traits. Such research has helped make rice less prone to wind, disease, and insects or has resulted in rice seeds that do not fall off the plant as easily as wild rice. Seeds resulting from such research have been sold to and used by paddy rice farmers (Robertson).

Additional research at the University of Minnesota involves the mapping of the wild rice genome, a project that was completed by Ron Phillips and colleagues in 2003 (LaDuke and Carlson 2003 8). The Ojibway have campaigned to halt this research and other genetics research on wild rice. The University refuses citing their commitment to academic freedom. However, researchers also argue that no faculty members are pursuing research to produce genetically modified wild rice. The University also claims that there is not enough money in the wild rice business to motivate such research in the near future. Researchers explain that if genetically modified rice was produced in the future, the approval process to actually use the rice would be long and complicated (Noll).

In 2000, Ojibway representatives from the White Earth Land Recovery Project (WELRP) began meeting with administrators at the University of Minnesota. WELRP is a grassroots organization that works to promote sound land stewardship and restore Ojibwe lands.

While the economic affect of research and industry has depleted the seasonal income of many Ojibwe rice farmers, the threat to the sanctity of wild rice is of more concern. Particularly worrisome and controversial are wild rice strains possessing male fertility. While the Ojibwe pray for the return of wild rice each year and see the plants’ return as a sign from the Creator, genetic manipulation is working to ensure the opposite. The Ojibwe worry that contamination of their wild rice with strains modified for male sterility could affect the yearly return, and therefore sacredness, of their wild rice (LaDuke and Carlson 2003 12).

Some Ojibwe oppose not only genetic research but also cross-pollination research which focuses on producing “better” varieties of wild rice. They feel that wild rice was given by their Creator and any attempt to change this gift is sacrilegious. Researchers argue that cross-bred rice has the same genes as traditionally used rice, but that certain naturally occurring traits are simply emphasized (Gunderson and Julin). The Ojibwe worry that contamination of their wild rice could occur through wind or birds that disperse rice from different waterways (Noll). Raymie Porter of the University of Minnesota argues that cultivated rice would not survive if mixed with wild rice (Gunderson and Julin).

The Ojibwe point to cases in which natural breeding between a wild and a genetically modified crop have resulted in the transfer of genetically engineered traits to uncultivated organisms. Many Ojibwe worry that genetics research on wild rice could lead to “trans genetics” or the insertion of wild rice genetic material into white rice varieties. Australian researchers at Southern Cross University have already performed such research and are attempting to patent their research methods. This patent is being challenged by the Ojibwe as well as environmental and food safety organizations (LaDuke and Carlson 2003 9).

The Manoomin Ogitchidaag Coalition is a group of representatives from most of the Anishinaabeg bands in Minnesota. In September 2003, the organization drew up a list of demands to the University of Minnesota. The group called for a moratorium on genetic research of wild rice at the University. They called for a ban on the granting or selling of intellectual property rights related to wild rice. Additionally, they proposed that the University institute a cultural consultation program to assess the ethics of their research. Finally, the group called for the University to pursue research on behalf of the Anishinaabeg equal to the research they have done to benefit the cultivated rice industry (LaDuke).

Access to wild rice is protected by the 1837 treaty between the Ojibwe and the U.S.Government. Many Ojibwe assert that irreversible genetic contamination to wild rice would restrict their access to this resource and therefore violate their treaty rights. In 1998, Minnesota Chippewa Tribe President Norman Deschampe expressed this view in a letter to the University of Minnesota in the following way:

“...We are of the opinion that the wild rice rights assured by treaty accrue not only to individual grains of rice, but to the very essence of the resource. We were not promised just any wild rice, that promise could be kept by delivering sacks of grain to our members each year. We were promised the rice that grew in the waters of our people, and all the value that rice holds...” (LaDuke and Carlson 2003 12)

In other words, the Ojibwe argue that their treaty rights guarantee them access to not simply an economic commodity or subsistence food, but rather to the wild rice their ancestors have valued for hundreds of years (LaDuke and Carlson 2003 12). Joe LaGarde, a leader in White Earth’s efforts to protect wild rice, explains that if the Ojibwe were to end up in court, they would undoubtedly assert their treaty rights (LaGarde).

The Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism (IPCB) stresses the importance of native groups providing a check on the activities of genetic researchers. IPCB suggests that native communities institute tribal codes or ordinances, such as the Indigenous Research Protection Act to regulate research within their jurisdiction and provide a model tribal resolution (Indigenous People). The Ojibwe agree with such an approach and White Earth was the first reservation to ban the introduction or growth of genetically-modified wild rice seeds on their land (Robertson). IPCB also suggests tribes declare their land as “patent-free zones” (Indigenous People).

This organization and others emphasize the training of community members, especially tribal leadership, in the science and legal issues involved. Community members should be trained to provide review, oversight, and recommendations to specific research proposals and funding for such training should be providing by outside interests who have a stake in the matter. Community leaders should organize workshops to educate community members about the issues as well as workshops to educate local landowners about genetic contamination. IPCB also urges native communities to make their voices heard on a larger scale by urging state and federal governmental bodies to protect life from patenting and support other relevant initiatives (Indigenous People).

On the state level, the Ojibwe have protested the labeling of cultivated, paddy grown rice as “wild rice” and the use of Ojibwe or other native images in company advertising and packaging. In 1988, several Ojibwe filed Wabizii v. Busch Agricultural Resources which claimed that Busch Agricultural Resources was engaged in false and misleading advertising of its product “Onamia Wild Rice.” The packaging of the company’s California grown paddy rice depicted two Indians in a canoe picking wild rice. Additionally, because the crop was transported to and packaged in Minnesota, the company advertised it as a Minnesota product. The case was settled out of court but may have contributed to the passing of Minnesota Statute 30.49 which forced Minnesota paddy rice farmers to label their products as “paddy rice.” The Ojibwe continue to resent companies that have driven consumer tastes and beliefs of what wild rice is, beliefs that are often false (LaDuke and Carlson 2003 5).

In March 2006, the Minnesota State Legislature passed a law mandating a two year moratorium on genetically engineered wild rice in the entire state of Minnesota. During this time, the Department of Natural Resources is to consult with the Seven Sovereign Ojibwe Tribes of Minnesota and assess the “agronomic, economic, cultural, and environmental impact of releasing genetically engineered wild rice in the state” (State). While this legislation does not affect any current or future genetics research at the University of Minnesota, it does prevent any planting of genetically modified wild rice in test plots (Noll).

The United States Patent Office will grant patents to researchers who have identified specific genetic sequences in plants, animals, and humans. Once a sequence is patented, it can be mass produced and sold on the commercial market. Entire plants can also be patented, providing companies with seed monopolies (Indigenous People).

Ken Foster and Zan Hua Zahn of NORCAL Wild Rice, a California company, have successfully patented a strain of wild rice that uses male sterility to enhance commercial production and seed sales (U.S. Patent number 5955.648). Many Ojibwe resent the entire notion of patenting life, especially sacred life, and see such practices as disrespectful. To them, a patent should provide monetary benefit to the inventor of a tool, machine, or process. The patenting of genetic sequences or entire organisms, on the other hand, designates companies as the “discoverers” of a living organism. Patents allow for ownership of a living organism and allow companies patent control of its use. To the Ojibwe, NORCAL and other companies are patenting seeds that were not given to them by the Creator (LaDuke and Carlson 2003 10 and 11).

In 2003, WELRP partnered with the International Slow Food Movement which seeks to educate consumers about the benefits of supporting locally grown foods. This organization views wild rice as a national treasure and the preservation of it should be something of concern to all Minnesotans. Ojibwe leaders also speak in courses at the University of Minnesota and bring students on wild ricing trips (LeGarde).

Today, Ojibwe on the White Earth Reservation are working to strengthen their connection to wild rice by organizing rice camps for youth in the summer time. There are many educational programs and workshops that teach traditional art and cultural practices including ricing practices and traditions (LaGarde).

University of Minnesota has argued that wild rice research is for the public good, a notion that is consistent with their origin as a land-grant institution (LaDuke and Carlson 2002). However, the Ojibwe and their supporters point out that the Ojibwe are not benefiting and that their views about wild rice are being ignored. They ask if the University does not consider them part of the “public.” They also remain highly skeptical of the motivations underlying the University’s research arguing that millions of Minnesota tax dollars have funded a wild rice market in California while causing its own residents economic hardship. Additionally, Ojibwe point to the numerous ties between University of Minnesota researchers and major money-making corporations.

The questions being asked related to wild rice, some claim, are inherently racist because they assume that the Western understanding of the issue is the only rational one. The conviction that plants can and should be manipulated is not a neutral scientific precept, but a culturally constructed idea. Additionally, some consider the patenting of wild rice varieties as a colonial act with many parallels to the colonization of the Ojibwe and other native peoples. From the Ojibwe perspective, the research community is claiming ownership of living things that first of all cannot be owned and second of all were never given to them (Doerfler).

The range of strategies being employed by the Ojibwe to protect the sanctity of wild rice reflects the creative and untraditional approaches that many Native groups must use to protect their religious and cultural freedoms. In an age of biotechnology, these approaches are sure to strengthen and expand as native groups must search for innovative legal strategies that can provide a check on this very new and growing field.