(OBJETIVO) Documentación para trámites y servicios elaborada.

Most of the communities affected by the EVOS have small populations of persons who live in relatively close physical proximity and have multiple types of social bonds with one another. The mayor or Tribal

Council member may also be the owner of a local business, an immediate neighbor, and a member of the same church congregation of any given resident. These types of multiple ties between community members are a characteristic style of social bonds in small communities (cf. Hatch 1979; Fischer 1982). These contrast to relationships among individuals who live in larger communities where ties tend to be more single interest: a neighbor is often only a neighbor, a mayor is only a mayor. This is not to say that multiple social ties do not exist, but the tendency in larger communities is for more single interest than multiple social ties (Fischer 1982). For smaller communities, multiple social ties result in demands to manage face-to-face relationships so that there is a certain harmony or equilibrium in day-to-day interactions. When there are tensions between individuals or groups, for whatever reasons, this

complicates interpersonal relationships in a way that does not exist in where relationships are primarily single interest. For example, Robbins (1993:78ff) describes Valdez as a community in which there are tensions and divisions just as there are in Cordova, Kodiak, or any of the other spill impacted

communities. Tensions and divisions have a kind of ‘dynamic equilibrium’ that people manage because of the needs to maintain face-to-face interactions or alternatively there is some insularity that segregates individuals or groups.

This structure of multiple social ties and the dynamic equilibrium of social relationships in small communities was directly affected by the EVOS. Individuals who might otherwise have made compromises to maintain face-to-face relationships argued and broke off their acquaintances (Endter-Wada, et al. 1993; IAI 1990d; Picou and Gill 1997). In communities where there was some existing insularity among residents, the event brought individuals into contact who often did not interact because of economic or occupational reasons (Endter-Wada, et al. 1993: 78ff). In other instances it resulted in a characterization of neighbors in ways that made future relationships impossible. For example, in almost every community there was an attribution of ‘greed’ to other community members from their response to the spill. This attribution complicated previous social bonds with those persons (cf. IAI 1990d; Russell et al. 1996; Endter-Wada, et al. 1993; Picou and Gill 1997). That is, it was more difficult to maintain a relationships with individuals whose moral character was called into question by their actions in response to the spill (cf. Russell et al. 1996).

This structural character of multiple social ties with other individuals in small communities is a characteristic of communities in the spill-affected region. It contributes to the character of small-town cohesiveness and neighbors helping neighbors that could be predicted as a characteristic of almost every community in the region. The EVOS resulted in multiple stressors on these ties, in some instances straining them and in others breaking them. A consequence was damage to community cohesiveness and an overall increase in the level of community disruption and stress as a result of the influence of the event on community social bonds. In some instances this may have contributed to the stress experienced by individuals as much as did the circumstances of the actual oil spill (cf. Palinkas et al. 1993; Russell 1992). 5.3.2 Effects of the Oil Spill and Cleanup Changed Patterns of Social Interaction

Some communities experienced changes in social interactions and other aspects of social organization as a result of the oil spill and cleanup. This was especially the case in Valdez as well as Kodiak and

Cordova, although the reasons for Valdez are different than for the other communities. In Valdez, the oil spill exacerbated some existing social tensions among oil spill industry employees and other segments of the community (Rodin et al. 1997; Robbins 1993; IAI 1990c). This changed some patterns of interaction and association. To some extent, this same type of dynamic no doubt occurred in most spill-affected communities, i.e., conflicts and disruptions of community life affected the preexisting tensions and issues within the region. The processes in Cordova and Kodiak exemplify the processes within communities with more homogenous social groupings and specifically those where commercial fishing is a dominant activity.

Within communities where commercial fishing was dominant both economically and socially, usual patterns of social interaction changed. Prior to the spill, among commercial fishermen in communities such as Kodiak, Cordova, Old Harbor, and to some extent Seward and Homer there were expectations and established patterns of doing business and interacting. The competitive commercial fishing culture within such communities was an arena in which individuals knew what to do and how to compete. The best commercial fishermen, the highliners, had positions of status within these communities because of their accomplishments. The crew members, net builders, supply and repair shops, and other components of social structure in these fishing dominated communities had expectations and understandings about their place in relationship to other social categories. This structure of status relationships and social

expectations was a basis for organizing a major component of social life and interaction in such communities.

The privatized cleanup disrupted the usual rules and expectations. Some fishermen who were not

necessarily highliners or even among the most productive fishermen could buy new boats and equipment. Individuals who previously earned modest or meager incomes as fishermen made substantial sums of money as cleanup workers and improved their capital equipment and capabilities to compete as fishermen. For example, in Cordova a fisherman who previously had a small boat and modest success bought a larger boat with refrigerated sea water capabilities. Others fishermen judged this as a

development that was unlikely to occur without an unusual event such as the cleanup. The result was that other fishermen believed they were now at a competitive disadvantage with someone who previously was not judged as a strong competitor in the Cordova fishing fleet (Russell 1990). Competing for cleanup work was also different than fishing. Indeed, the in-fighting and perceived rules for getting cleanup work were at odds with normal expectations. Expectations changed. Patterns of interaction changed. The usual social hierarchies and statuses changed. In the Kodiak region, Endter-Wada observed:

The oil spill disrupted the existing patterns of interaction among fishermen. As one interviewee put it, there was suddenly a “new game, new rules, and new players” . . . Instead of the normal competitive fishing game, people had to complete in a new realm where they did not understand the rules. The common occupational status that many residents shared as fishermen, which cut across the divisions based on gear and size, was not longer a binding community force in the context of the oil spill and cleanup

(Endter-Wada, Hofmeister, et al. 1992: 838).

This indicates the more general process that occurred in commercial fishing communities: the usual expectations and patterns of association and interaction were disrupted by how the cleanup was

organized and implemented. Commercial fishing communities, because of their culture and more or less homogenous social organization, were especially vulnerable to this type of social disruption.

5.4 FAMILY AND KINSHIP