She was a Native person exploring Modernism, that temporal and aesthetic other. But she was also Indigenous to the terrain of Modernism itself.¹

Philip Deloria

In 1969, Maclean’s magazine named Dakota elder Martha Tawiyaka as one of the “Canadians You Should Know” with the caption declaring her “The Indian Grandma Moses of Rug Making.”² She was described as the “spiritual head” of an artist co-operative on Standing Buffalo First Nation, and Lorna Ferguson as the “white woman” who conceived the idea. Like most media describing the Standing Buffalo rugs, the author emphasized the significance of Dakota oral histories and traditional designs but described rug-making as novel.

While the specific latch-hooked technique used by the Sioux Handcraft Co-operative to produce its Ta-hah-sheena rugs was introduced in 1967, Indigenous women in the Qu’Appelle Valley had been making rugs for decades. The majority were braided and hooked rugs. Preceded by buffalo robes, painted hides, Hudson’s Bay blankets, and finger “woven” rabbit skin blankets, Indigenous women’s use of cloth increased as they moved into settlements and onto reserves. These shifts were partially in response to the collapse of the buffalo herds and loss of political and economic power following the 1885 resistance and the signing of the treaties. During these difficult times, marketing rugs, quilts, baskets, and moccasins were important aspects of the annual economic cycle for both First Nations and Métis women.³ Women’s needles kept people alive. The products of sewing, accompanied by fish and berries, were often sold door-to-door. Rug-making was a family enterprise, and marketing could be highly competitive.

The critical feature in the longevity of hooked and braided rug-making is their essential frugality, recycling used clothing and other textiles into lengths of material. Frugality was at the heart of the weaving and sewing included in “Industrial teaching” for girls. The 1892 Annual Report of the Department of Indian Affairs provides descriptions of programs in Residential and Day Schools. The inspector visiting the Okanese school declared the girls “expert at carding wool,” while other students knitted with yarn they had just spun. A “cloth hearth-rug” was among items on display.⁴ The Qu’Appelle Industrial School had fully equipped sewing rooms, including spinning wheels and knitting machines. In the guise of education, girls played fundamental roles in the school economy. They sewed and mended all student clothing and made “door mats and hearth rugs” from clothing too worn for use.⁵ The full life of every garment went through their hands.

In 1933, an array of artistic textiles from fifteen Prairie Residential and Day Schools was displayed at the Regina Fair. The reporter asked, “Where do they get their ideas?” and enthused, “Indian girls in the schools are talented seamtresses . . . they have a fine knowledge of colour combinations and are very quick to master new stitches in the various branches of sewing.” Included in the display were “woven and hooked mats.” Some of these talented children became the adult women of the Standing Buffalo co-operative. All the members, except possibly the eldest, had been taken to residential school. In the repeated narrative of “loss of culture,” this was the unspoken reason why girls, recently returned from school, needed support to reconnect with their own aesthetic traditions.

Government Policy and Indigenous Women’s Art

Until 1951, Indigenous people living under the jurisdiction of the Indian Act were highly regulated and controlled. They could not travel without a pass from the Indian Agent, and important religious ceremonies were outlawed. It was illegal to gather, to dress in traditional garments, to dance, sing, or hire a lawyer. Indian Agents on each reserve had the power of Justices of the Peace. On the Prairies, “the dancing set” were viewed as a threat to assimilationist aims to destroy First Nations’ cultures. The creation of regalia and ceremonial items—the very heart of artistic expression—was suppressed.

In 1951, a new edition of the Indian Act quietly removed most of the sections that outlawed ceremony and dance. Ironically, having spent eighty years actively repressing Indigenous creativity, federal government rhetoric in the 1960s bemoaned the loss of traditional knowledge and the resulting decline in cultural arts. The Department of Indian Affairs established its Cultural Affairs Section in 1965.⁶ The new section’s focus was developing special exhibitions and projects related to First Nations arts and culture, with an eye on the upcoming centennial. At the same time, Saskatchewan’s Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) government embarked on a program of co-operative development in Northern Saskatchewan.⁷ Following the CCF template, the Northern Handicraft Co-operative Centre at La Ronge was established in 1960 as an alternative to the trading post system.⁸ The Saskatchewan Arts Board worked with the Department of Co-operatives to provide advice and support. In 1962, these efforts resulted in the inclusion of northern artists in a Canadian Handicraft Guild Exhibition in Italy.⁹

Anne Ratt’s rabbit fur rugs (cat. 44 & 45) were created in this context. They may have been a “test product” marketed through the Northern Handicraft Centre at La Ronge. The small rug format was designed to appeal to tourists or a southern market, but the technique and skills were ancient northern Cree. Blankets and parkas were finger “woven” from lengths of rabbit fur cut from individual skins and dried into fur-covered cord. Rubbing and working the cord broke down the fibres in the skin, leaving a pliable length of fur. With a crooked index finger serving as a hook, women looped the fur into garments or blankets in a technique similar to crochet. The garments were lightweight and warm, with the open structure allowing heat and moisture to escape. Using the same technique, Anne Ratt “wove” alternating fur colours to create patterns. The average consumer may not have fully appreciated the process behind the soft little rugs, which may account for the small number produced.

The Sioux Handcraft Co-operative at Standing Buffalo was organized after Saskatchewan transitioned from a CCF to a Liberal government, and during a time of significant reorganization in the federal Department of Indian Affairs. Each level of government viewed Indigenous creativity as an untapped natural resource that if properly managed could address economic hardships. Having committed to Inuit co-operatives, the federal government embraced “Eskimo Art” and promoted it to collectors. They were tentatively moving towards the idea of First Nations men as professional artists. However, in the bureaucratic vision of Indigenous arts, women would remain firmly tethered to craft production for a low-end tourist market. The Ta-hah-sheena rug-making project hovered between categories.

Ta-hah-sheena: the Sioux Handcraft Co-operative

The origin story of the Standing Buffalo co-operative comes from the intersection of two women’s lives. Martha Tawiyaka was Sisseton Dakota, a descendant of Chief Standing Buffalo, a midwife and medicine woman, with deep knowledge of plant medicines. She abandoned her medicines when she became an Evangelical Christian, but whether practicing or not, the depth of her Dakota knowledge was profound.¹⁰

Lorna Bell Ferguson lived on Standing Buffalo for a short time as the wife of John Ferguson, a teacher who ran adult education programs from 1965 to 1967. The family’s move to Standing Buffalo from Fort Vermilion, Alberta, in September 1965, was motivated by his acceptance into the University of Saskatchewan (Regina Campus) and an opportunity to teach an adult-education class at Standing Buffalo, part of a nationwide pilot project. The job came with a teacherage, ideal for a father with a growing family. In 1966, the Standing Buffalo adult education program was recognized as the only successful pilot site in the country.¹¹ Ferguson subsequently established a community advisory committee and began organizing a range of training opportunities, but the following year his position was cut.¹² The family moved to Regina in 1969 where Lorna established and ran the first daycare for the university.¹³

In media reports and promotional literature, “Mrs. Ferguson” is credited with “conceiving and initiating” the Standing Buffalo project. It is sometimes suggested that she traveled to conduct extensive artistic research, but with three small children and the family’s chronically precarious finances, that is unlikely.¹⁴ However, she established a firm friendship with Martha Tawiyaka and became a student of Dakota visual traditions. She acted as the co-operative’s spokesperson and served as “advisor and marketing consultant” from 1967 to 1968.

The initial two-week latch-hooked rug-making course coincided with John Ferguson’s expanded training program. How Lorna Ferguson acquired the skills to teach and happened upon rug and tapestry production as a viable project remains a puzzle. Classes were offered at the teacherage at the cost of five dollars per participant, with the option of deducting the cost from the sale of rugs.¹⁵ Dividing the twenty participants into morning and afternoon groups, Ferguson taught ten women at a time using a “kitchen table” pedagogy she was to replicate in her later literacy work.¹⁶ Members joined the co-operative for a two-dollar fee, materials were provided, and further supplies were issued upon submission of a completed rug. The latch-hooked rug-making technique was labour intensive, with the Saskatoon StarPhoenix reporting “each square foot contains 1,600 hand-crafted knots which require three or more hours to complete.”¹⁷ The project was consistently referred to as “a profit-sharing industry,” but based on a “per square foot” model for both remuneration and sale, artists earned a dollar an hour, slightly below the Saskatchewan minimum wage—and only if the rug sold.¹⁸

Ferguson was adept at obtaining media coverage for the fledgling group. The initial press release was carried across the country with the headline “Sioux to Make Rugs,” more accurately as “Sioux Co-Op Launched” in The Indian Record. Considering it was only a few years after restrictions on First Nations’ movement were lifted, racism and social discomfort were significant realities. Ferguson’s role as spokesperson and her strategy of focusing on the elderly advisors were effective. She reached out to prominent women, who at the time were western Canada’s most effective arts advocates.¹⁹ With a supportive and influential network, Ferguson organized displays and exhibitions in public venues, including government buildings, art galleries, Saskatchewan House in London, and the Musée de l’Homme in Paris.

Tióšpaye, Visual Grammar, and Female Abstraction

Although the Sioux Handcraft Co-operative was based on a Western co-operative model, the key role of elders was critical to its success. The five “design consultants” provided aesthetic and cultural support for younger artists. Martha Tawiyaka (cat. 54) is most frequently mentioned, but Jessie Goodwill (cat. 17), Mary Lasuisse (b. 1890), Lucy Yuzicapi (b. 1891), and Marina Goodfeather (b. 1901) were all important contributors. The original grant proposed modest remuneration for their involvement. The advisors were active in the design process and made rugs themselves.

Perusing the list of co-operative members, kinship was clearly a factor. The importance of the kunsi or grandmother is obvious. It might be an overreading, but the co-operative appears to have overlapped with the Dakota tióšpaye—the complex network of extended families centred on women. Artists were often sisters, aunties, cousins, and sisters-in-law. These relationships would enhance the elder-advisors’ capacity and comfort in transferring knowledge to younger members.

From the outset, Dakota/Lakota narrative was prioritized. Rugs were valued at “three dollars per square foot for ordinary designs and five dollars per square foot for story-telling designs.”²⁰ While Lorna Ferguson appears to have been a keen and respectful learner, public representation of Ta-hah-sheena “story-telling” was somewhat romantic and simplistic.

The people of Standing Buffalo are descendants of several major bands of the Sisseton Dakota and Teton Lakota who moved north in the 1860s.²¹ Dakota and Lakota imagery is based on a system of basic shapes. According to Lakota designer Sadie Red Wing, “all Lakota visual grammar originates in the line, the triangle, and the square.”²² Each basic shape in the vocabulary is a recognizable unit, but like letters of the alphabet, meaning is only created when shapes are combined. A single motif may have one literal meaning, but deeper meanings are formed by groupings, composition, and context. Meanings were often passed down through families and could vary significantly. “Feather” shapes (if grouped) could be a Whirlwind, Feathered Headdress, or Breath of Life.²³ The triangle, often representing the tipi, is much more than a shelter. A tipi could represent a home, a portal, or a unit in a camp circle (cat. 24). Different arrangements of triangles could represent mountains and hills.

A motif could be a mnemonic device for an entire story. One of Martha Tawiyaka’s stories was represented by a stylized fish skeleton. A Whirlwind motif could represent the natural phenomenon or the character in a world-ordering, foundational story. Stars, including the morning and evening stars central to Dakota and Lakota cosmology, occur frequently in Ta-hah-sheena rugs. Stars were celestial beings, guides for those on earth, and their movements mirrored annual cycles.²⁴ The shape commonly identified as the “hourglass,” clearly neither a Dakota nor Lakota term, is one of great significance. The kapemni represents cones—cosmic tipis—sky and earth worlds touching and aligning, with the bottom triangle representing the earth and the top the sky, with energy exchanged at the apex.²⁵

Interpretation rested at the intersection of the viewer’s knowledge, the maker’s imagination, and the function of the object. Despite extensive study, most art historians are cautious about interpreting Dakota/Lakota art, because of its variations and the role of individual expression. Artists (in general) are reticent to explain due to protocols or the danger of appropriation or misuse. Within the artist collective itself, imagery was open and accessible. Photographs of the Standing Buffalo workspace show reference drawings tacked to the wall. Christian conversion and distance from their southern homeland may have tempered meaning, but James Howard, who spent time with Martha Tawiyaka and others during this period, commented that the northern “Sioux” had maintained knowledge lost among their southern kin. However, despite the potential depth of knowledge embedded in imagery, emphasis on literal readings of symbolic meaning suggests a repetitive rigidity and ignores key factors in female aesthetic practice: creativity and abstraction.

Women and men had separate, but balanced, roles in all aspects of life, including the aesthetic. Men painted sequential narratives in arrangements of pictographic images. Women worked with colour and a bold geometric language. The ta-hah-sheena, the ornamented robes from which the co-operative’s rugs took their name, is a perfect example of that dichotomy. Men’s robes were covered with pictographic narratives of significant events in their lives, while women’s were geometric. They could be painted, quilled, or beaded. Designs could be gendered: some for men, others for women.²⁶ Designs were born in dreams and the imagination, invented, and modified to suit the purpose of the object. Within a specific geometric vocabulary, women exercised unlimited creativity. This was only restricted if there was a specific function that required particular imagery or colours, and even then, there was room for subtle variations.

Descriptions in the Ta-hah-sheena inventory frequently reference parfleche bags and other rawhide containers. Painting on rawhide was a female practice, and it was a space of excellence and innovation.²⁷ Of the hundreds of surviving painted parfleche containers, no two are the same. In the same way, by 1969, the co-operative produced 182 unique designs, working with the same visual grammar. As Kiowa artist Terri Greeves so aptly commented, “women were busy abstracting the world.”²⁸

Making and Marketing

When the co-operative was invited to the prestigious New York Gift Show in 1968, the Regina Leader-Post covered their departure, featuring a photograph of a smiling co-operative member Joan Ryder wearing beaded moccasins as she boarded a plane with Lorna Ferguson.²⁹ The article informed readers that the co-operative had grown from twelve to forty-eight members, who ranged in age from eighteen to ninety-two. The forthcoming National Film Board documentary, Standing Buffalo, was also mentioned.

In its first year of operation, the co-operative produced eighty-five rugs and tapestries.³⁰ The second year was buoyed by the New York Gift show, the release of the NFB documentary, and inclusion in an exhibition of Canadian craft that toured Europe, Japan, and Australia. Despite this promise, ta-hah-sheena rugs were never fully embraced by the Department of Indian Affairs’ arts and crafts program. The 1967–1970 Annual Reports of the Department of Indian Affairs do not mention the Standing Buffalo co-operative, although the federal government purchased the rugs that toured with the Canadian craft exhibition (currently housed in the Indigenous Art Centre collection in Gatineau). The Indian News reported the “most productive display to date has been at the Lippel Art Gallery in Montréal. The display was promoted by Miss Alanis Obomsawin of the Abenaki Indian tribe near Montréal.”³¹

The co-operative’s aspirations for acceptance in the art market, or at least by discerning interior decorators, was never fully embraced. Despite a grant from the “vocational and special training division” of the Department of Indian Affairs, its sporadic funding was largely through the provincial Department of Co-operatives and the Saskatchewan Arts Board.³² In 1968, when a promised Department of Indian Affairs loan was denied, Lorna Ferguson revealed the co-operative’s fragile finances: “It really is a shoe-string operation with no adequate capital . . . We have never been able to maintain continuous production.”³³ By late 1969, Ferguson’s marriage ended, and she returned to Fort Vermilion with her children. The co-operative carried on, with the Saskatchewan Arts Board assisting in promotion and marketing, but the number of active artists declined.

Despite this, Ta-hah-sheena artists’ most significant accomplishments occurred during the final years. In 1968, Seneca artist and curator Tom Hill was appointed director of the Cultural Affairs Section of the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. Women had not been included in The Indians of Canada pavilion at Montréal’s Expo 67, but Hill proposed works by two women for Expo 70 at Osaka, Japan: a tea set by Mohawk Potter Elda Smith and a tapestry by Bernice Bear. The works were destined for the Discovery Room of the Canadian Pavilion.

Their selection was based on “the status they have achieved in the Canadian art world and for their ability to best portray native Canadian art.”³⁴ Bernice Bear’s composition and colour palette were described as “a classic example of the Canadian Indian’s feel for symmetry and colour.” Bear’s untitled rug can be identified in the Indigenous Art Centre’s collection through a media photograph and a rather indifferent description in a Ta-hah-sheena inventory: “designs without meaning (except the flint arrowheads) purely decorative.”³⁵ For Hill, however, Bear, then twenty-two years old, working in pure colour and abstraction, represented the new generation of Indigenous artists.

Two large latch-hooked tapestries were commissioned by the University of Saskatchewan (Regina Campus) in 1970 where they are installed in public spaces. Three selected designs submitted by Marge (Marjorie) Yuzicappi (cat. 60), Martha Tawiyaka, and Bernice Runns were chosen, and execution was a collaborative effort, with co-operative members (often family) working together. The geometric patterns are both subtle and dynamic, serving the ancient purpose of beautifying a shared communal space.

In 1972, Lorraine Yuzicappi, president of the co-operative, informed a patron that Marge Yuzicappi had a rug that was almost finished, but “Margaret Ryder and her girls are the only ones interested in making large rugs at the present time.”³⁶ The labour-intensive process, low remuneration, and cost of materials that had been chronic challenges, combined with movement and life changes among key members, led to Ta-hah-sheena’s quiet demise.

But its impacts continue. Standing Buffalo, for its small size, is one of the most artistically vibrant First Nations in Western Canada. Women shifted to beadwork and star blankets, art forms with deep meaning and immediate relevance to their families and community. Rather than trying to accommodate the shifting interests of an outside market, their focus turned inward.

A new textile artist emerged in the 1970s. Florence Ryder, a child during the co-operative’s lifetime, learned rug-making from her mother, Elizabeth Ryder. A prolific artist, Ryder returned to the affordable hooked rug, a much more sustainable medium. Influenced by Ta-hah-sheena’s aesthetic (cat. 48 & 49), her work has been widely collected. She had a solo exhibition Florence Ryder: Hooked Rugs in 1989 at the Dunlop Art Gallery in Regina and was included in the gallery’s contemporary group exhibitions Indian Summer, 1990 and Here and Now, 1999.

It is important to see the structures that limited Indigenous women artists of this time to truly appreciate the importance of their work. With only six years of tentative inclusion in the Canadian body politic, the women of Standing Buffalo organized decades before the inclusion of Indigenous artists into arts funding streams. The co-operative structure, the sole source of available funding, emphasized profit distribution and job creation. It reflected prevalent government attitudes to view Indigenous art solely through an economic lens. It was a wildly inappropriate vehicle for an artist collective seeking inclusion as fine craft. Ta-hah-sheena’s labour-intensive, inter-generational creative process was a refusal to take the proffered niche as manufacturers or suppliers for a low-end tourist market. This was a bold, brave venture as witnessed by the enduring visual power of their work.

Notes

1. 1 Philip Deloria, Becoming Mary Sully: Toward an American Indian Abstract (Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press, 2019), 21. Author’s note: This essay began with a directed study of Ta-hah-sheena rugs in the SK Arts Permanent Collection with University of Regina Media, Art, and Performance (MAP) graduate students Larissa Ketchimonia and Bailey Monsebroten that led to our quest to identify the locations of surviving rugs.
2. 2 “Canadians You Should Know,” MacLean’s Magazine, October 1, 1969, 97.
3. 3 See Samuel Buffalo Interview 1, IH-115, August 30, 1977; Joe Moran Interview, IH-SD.104, August 22, 1983, Saskatchewan Archives Board. Transcripts available on oUR Space, University of Regina Archives and Special Collection, https://ourspace.uregina.ca/.
4. 4 Annual Report of the Department of Indian Affairs for the Year 1892 (Ottawa: Government Services, 1893), 244.
5. 5 Annual Report, 177, 178.
6. 6 For a discussion of the Cultural Section, see Barry Ace, “Reactive Intermediates: Aboriginal Art, Politics, and Resonance of the 1960s and 1970s, in 7: Professional Indian Artists, Inc., ed. Michelle LaVallee (Regina: MacKenzie Art Gallery, 2014), 200–204.
7. 7 See David M. Quiring, CCF Colonialism in Northern Saskatchewan: Battling Parish Priests, Bootleggers, and Fur Sharks (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2004).
8. 8 “Indian Handicraft Sold at Cooperative Centre,” Leader-Post (Regina), June 18, 1960, 15.
9. 9 “European Markets for Indian Crafts,” Leader-Post (Regina), February 2, 1962, 7.
10. 10 Martha Tawiyaka told James Howard she buried her medicines, and put aside her practice in James Howard, The Canadian Sioux (Lincoln NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1984), 48.
11. 11 “12 Indians Receive Diplomas as Education Course Finishes,” Leader-Post (Regina), March 5, 1966, 1.
12. 12 Ferguson announced his job loss at a United Church Conference in Regina. “Indian Worker Losing Position: Job being abolished,” Leader-Post (Regina), June 1, 1967.
13. 13 “Day Care Centre Seeks Quarters,” Leader-Post (Regina), November 6, 1969, 4.
14. 14 Two of their sons became authors, describing their mother’s courage throughout their family misadventures in Ian Ferguson, Village of the Small Houses: A Memoir of Sorts (Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 2003) and Will Ferguson, Beauty Tips from Moose Jaw (Toronto: Knopf Canada, 2010).
15. 15 Dear – from Lorna Ferguson (unsigned), Sioux Handicraft Industry, Fort Qu’Appelle SK, July 26, 1967, Ta-hah-sheena research file, folder 23, Dunlop Art Gallery archives.
16. 16 Lorna Bell was referred to as “The Grandmother of Literacy” and credited with launching Alberta’s literacy movement. See Deborah Morgan, Opening Doors: Thoughts and Experiences of Community Literacy Workers in Alberta (Camrose: Augustana University College and Alberta Association of Adult Literacy, 1992), 99.
17. 17 “Tapestries Feature Sioux Designs,” StarPhoenix (Saskatoon), March 28, 1968, 6.
18. 18 A grant application described the cost per square foot as $6, and the sale price calculated at $9 per square foot.
19. 19 See Ann Whitelaw, “Professional/Volunteer: Women at the Edmonton Art Gallery, 1923–70,” in Rethinking Professionalism: Women and Art in Canada, ed. Kristina Huneault and Janice Anderson (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2012), 357–90.
20. 20 Lorna Ferguson, Submission re Teepee Mat Makers (Proposal for Cottage Industry Rugmaking Project), n.d., Ta-hah-sheena research file, folder 15, Dunlop Art Gallery archives.
21. 21 Martha Tawiyaka was one of James H. Howard’s important sources of information during his fieldwork in the 1970s. James H. Howard, The Canadian Sioux (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1984).
22. 22 Sadie Red Wing, “Learning the Traditional Lakota Visual Language Through Shape Play” (master’s thesis, North Carolina State University, 2016), 31.
23. 23 Carrie Lyford, Quill and Beadwork of the Western Sioux, reprint of 1940 original (Boulder, CO: Johnson Publishing Co., 1979), 74 & 77.
24. 24 Sinte Gleska College, Lakota Star Knowledge: Studies in Lakota Stellar Theology (Rosebud, SK: Sinte Gleska College Publishing, 1990).
25. 25 Julie A. Rice-Rollins, “The Cartographic Heritage of the Lakota Sioux,” Cartographic Perspectives 48 (Spring 2004), 43.
26. 26 Rice-Rollins, “Cartographic Heritage,” 78.
27. 27 American Meredith, “Parfleches: How Native Women Pushed the Envelope of Abstraction,” First American Art Magazine 26 (Spring 2020): 34–39.
28. 28 Teri Greeves, “Women Were Busy Abstracting the World,” in Hearts of Our People: Native Women Artists, ed. Jill Ahlberg Yohe and Teri Greeves (Minneapolis, MN: Minneapolis Institute of Art in association with the University of Washington Press, 2019), 101.
29. 29 “Rugs shown in New York,” Leader-Post (Regina), August 20, 1968, 10.
30. 30 “Handcraft group meets: Bylaws approved,” Leader-Post (Regina), January 16, 1968, 10.
31. 31 “Tah-hah-sheena,” Indian News 12, no. 1 (April 1969), 6.
32. 32 The article reported sales worth two million dollars, but that must be an error.
33. 33 “Native co-op’s hopes dashed by refusal,” Leader-Post (Regina), Sept 6, 1968, 11.
34. 34 “Canadian Indian Art Forms at Expo ‘70”, The Indian News 12, no. 8 (November 1969), 7.
35. 35 Rug no. 68031C, Bernice Bear, Inventories and lists of rugs, Ta-hah-sheena research file, folder 35,  Dunlop Art Gallery archives.
36. 36 Mrs. Lorraine Yuzicappi to Mrs. Collins, Fort Qu’Appelle SK, 16 May 1972, Ta-hah-sheena research file, folder 30, Dunlop Art Gallery archives.