‘But who were you in it?’

Wildtending, sometimes called ‘the Hoop’, was in 2014–2017 a loose movement of mostly white non-Indigenous aspiring nomads in the US northwest that appropriated Indigenous ecological practices to denounce civilisation and enact alternative ways of being human. Those who practised wildtending were specifically committed to gathering and propagating plant foods across the Columbia Plateau and Great Basin regions in the US northwest. Wildtending was a counter-cultural group that strived to distance itself from cis-hetero-patriarchal and ecocidal social norms. They were also a settler network that benefited from – and did not materially disrupt – extant anti-Indigenous relations of power and property. This article traces notions of human and non-human in wildtending narratives, engaging Indigenous studies critiques of anthropology’s ontological turn as well as Black studies analyses of how discourses of ‘Man’ reproduce white supremacy. The conflicting ontological claims enclosed in diverse wildtending narratives, which reflected ambivalent stances toward the environing structures of US settler empire, provide an opportunity to re-examine the ways that ontology is theorised across the social sciences. Wildtending’s utopic-dystopic narratives attest to the deeply felt desire of ‘hoopsters’ to re-form the human, and to the great capacity for imagination and hope that exists within communities wishing to re-create their socio-ecological lives. The contradictions among ‘hoopster’ narratives show that ontology is not only socially received but is something we make and do together, albeit under power-laden conditions. At the same time, the limited scope of wildtending’s critiques of colonial ‘Man’ suggest that achieving wildtending goals – healing the land, becoming better humans – also requires anti-colonial action, the return of lands to Indigenous nations, and the transformation of social and political-legal conditions throughout the US west.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Hunter Gatherer Research
Published
2025-09-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3828/hgr.2026.3
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Australian History and Society
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.20
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

‘But who were you in it?’

Bruno Seraphin
1 citations
Hunter Gatherer Research
Australian History and Society
4.20
article

‘But who were you in it?’

Bruno Seraphin
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Wildtending, sometimes called ‘the Hoop’, was in 2014–2017 a loose movement of mostly white non-Indigenous aspiring nomads in the US northwest that appropriated Indigenous ecological practices to denounce civilisation and enact alternative ways of being human. Those who practised wildtending were specifically committed to gathering and propagating plant foods across the Columbia Plateau and Great Basin regions in the US northwest. Wildtending was a counter-cultural group that strived to distance itself from cis-hetero-patriarchal and ecocidal social norms. They were also a settler network that benefited from – and did not materially disrupt – extant anti-Indigenous relations of power and property. This article traces notions of human and non-human in wildtending narratives, engaging Indigenous studies critiques of anthropology’s ontological turn as well as Black studies analyses of how discourses of ‘Man’ reproduce white supremacy. The conflicting ontological claims enclosed in diverse wildtending narratives, which reflected ambivalent stances toward the environing structures of US settler empire, provide an opportunity to re-examine the ways that ontology is theorised across the social sciences. Wildtending’s utopic-dystopic narratives attest to the deeply felt desire of ‘hoopsters’ to re-form the human, and to the great capacity for imagination and hope that exists within communities wishing to re-create their socio-ecological lives. The contradictions among ‘hoopster’ narratives show that ontology is not only socially received but is something we make and do together, albeit under power-laden conditions. At the same time, the limited scope of wildtending’s critiques of colonial ‘Man’ suggest that achieving wildtending goals – healing the land, becoming better humans – also requires anti-colonial action, the return of lands to Indigenous nations, and the transformation of social and political-legal conditions throughout the US west.

Hunter Gatherer ResearchVol. 12(1)
University of Connecticut (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Australian History and Society
4.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.