<small>Estimated time to follow this cut without detours: 20 minutes. </small>
The incorporation of Inuit Knowledge in wildlife co-management and research is mandated by the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement. Nevertheless, Inuit Knowledge in polar bear research is often selectively engaged with, rendered technical, and validated through scientific categories. This cut explores more explicitly the methodology of wayfaring as a potential transformative ethical practice of knowledge conciliation in the particular context of the community-based research of the BearWatch project. It narrates the project as a “netbag” story in which excerpts of project reports serve as a guiding cut, while reader and author correspond alongside it. Redirected by “ice-pressure ridges” and invites, such an intra-dependence performance of moving “alongside” facilitates a place-bases understanding of ethical engagement as a ‘knowing along the way’ (Ingold, 2010). Rather than rushing towards descriptive outcomes or conclusive take-aways, this cut allows us to make meaning with- both the physical, relational and the institutional landscape, and with the material dynamics of community-based fieldwork within the large-scale Genome Canada funded project; BearWatch. With the use of a knowledge-land-scape, comprised of (auto-) ethnographic materials derived from participatory observations, co-creative methods and interviews, this cut facilitates a rethinking of knowledge conciliation, beyond its usual focus on data, through an ethics of care and attention, while resisting linear, outcome-driven, and settler-centric practices.
The land invites one to move away from anthropocentric tellings - towards narrations of becoming knowledgeable in company with the seasons, snow, ice, wind, lichens, caribou and many more. Such stories leave room for us as researchers, but aren’t about us<ref>see Le Guin, U. K., & Haraway, D. J. (2019). The carrier bag theory of fiction (pp. 149-154). London: Ignota books. </ref>.
Acknowledgements
[[File:Southampton Island.jpg|thumb|Spring on Southampton Island (Photograph taken by author in 2021)]]
An explicit note of acknowledgement for this cut should go out in particular to George Konana, in Gjoa Haven, and Leonard Netser in Coral Harbour. Both men have taken me out on the land, the sea and the ice on multiple occasions between 2020-2023. They patiently took time to introduce me to the land, answer my many questions, show and explain how they found their way across the land in various ways and under multiple conditions. Most valuable, however, is how they taught me to tag along and just be present for the ride.
<small><references /></small>
=Acknowledgements=
=Introduction=
An explicit note of acknowledgement for this cut goes out in particular to George Konana, in Gjoa Haven, and Leonard Netser in Coral Harbour.
Polar bears have captured the public imagination for being charismatic and as one of the most politicized animals in the world (e.g. Strode 2017; Slocum 2004). There is little disagreement across cultures regarding polar bears as a species of importance, whether as a keystone predator, a sentinel of changing Arctic environments, a cultural icon, as a more-than-human relative, or a source of income through the guiding of sports hunts. The reconciliation of such differences within polar bear management is, on the other hand, less straightforward. Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ, the Inuit way of knowing and being in the world) considers humans and bears, for example, to co-exist in a relationship that requires harmonic balance for it to remain ongoing (see for example Keith 2005; Karetak et al. 2017), while western formulations of wildlife conservation conceptualise polar bears, on the other hand, as a species in need of management to ensure its survival. The importance of reconciling such seemingly opposite ways in which polar bears matter across cultures, has increasingly been recognized, and even formalised through Territorial Land Claims Agreements across Inuit Nunangat (the Inuit Homelands, see ITK, 2018).
Both men have taken me out on the land, the sea and the ice on multiple occasions between 2020-2023. They patiently took time to introduce me to their land and explained how they found their way in various ways and under multiple conditions.
The polar bear co-management regime in the Nunavut Settlement Area for example, is based on the Nunavut Land Claim Agreement (NLCA), which states that ‘Inuit must always take part in decisions on wildlife’ (NTI 2004), while ‘the guiding principles and concepts of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ) are to be described and made an integral part of the management of wildlife and habitat’ (Wildlife Act 2003). Despite such formalised co-management, tensions remain. Significant data-gaps, and the international pressures to fill such gaps, as well as a rapidly changing Arctic environment and the difficulties of conciliating vastly different ways of knowing and being in wildlife conservation continue to haunt in particular the management and monitoring of polar bears in Inuit Nunangat.
[[File:Leonard Netser and George Konana.jpg|thumb|Leonard Netser (left) and George Konana (right) photographed by author]]
This cut, focusses on the challenge of conciliating western sciences and IQ in community-based polar bear monitoring research. More precisely, it asks the question of what it means to practice knowledge conciliation under guidance of the principles of the ‘Ethical Space of Engagement’ (ESE), as proposed by Sturgeon Lake, Ontario, Canada First Nation elder Willie Ermine , rather than based on data-driven needs.
Thank you for teaching me the valuable lesson of just tagging along and being present for the ride.
=Becoming a Wayfarer=
<span class="next_choice">To engage and answer such a question, under guidance of the ESE, entails- as will become clear- multiple shift. A shift of positioning; from distanced observer or reader to becoming an implicated “subject” – and a practical shift from operating based on fixed principles, to a practice of ongoing negotiations and ethical encounter. This shift applies also to you as a “reader” as you will engage with this “manuscript”. Within this knowledge-land-scape you are invited to shift from a reader to becoming a wayfarer.</span>
My name is Saskia de Wildt. This cut traces my PhD research as I have conducted it with-in a large Genome Canada funded research project: "BearWatch."
Within my research I explore what it means to practice knowledge conciliation under guidance of the principles of the ‘Ethical Space of Engagement’<ref>Ermine, W. (2007). The ethical space of engagement. Indigenous Law Journal, 6(1), 193–203.</ref> and the Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC) Protocols for Equitable and Ethical Engagement (EEE<ref>Inuit Circumpolar Council (2022). Circumpolar Inuit Protocols for Equitable and Ethical Engagement.</ref>) rather than based on data-driven needs.
=Terms of engagement=
<div class="next_choice">
As you make your way through this knowledge-land-scape you might, depending on the choices you make, start feeling a shift from being a reader of my research, towards becoming a wayfarer alongside my research.</div>
To be a wayfarer, in opposition to being a traveller, is to be able to make decisions in-between and along the way. Wayfaring is not about crossing “over” from, or “across” point A to point B. It is about what happens on the way. When such a process is applied to the challenge of cross-cultural knowledge conciliation in line with the principles of the ESE, this also – as will become clear - entails a degree of shared meaning making with others. In this case, such others will include me. As such, and in line with the principles of the ESE, I want to propose some terms of engagement between us.
Firstly, it is possible to forgo this invitation to become a wayfarer. As you will enter and make your way across this knowledge-land-scape, you will have the possibility to keep following this “cut”, and read “about” my process of wayfaring the BearWatch project. Should you choose to accept (some of) my invitations (along the way), however, this should come with the understanding that such a decision entails your willingness to become an active and immersed agent in the ensuing material opening and closing opportunities for shared meaning-making within my research.
<small><references /></small>
Secondly, the knowledge-land-scape, that you are about to enter is comprised of (digitized) materials. They are ethnographic traces like voice notes, photos, drawings, edited videos, written notes, posters and presentations, as well as academic texts and workshops, resulting from the more-than-human aesthetic encounters that were part of my fieldwork. My knowledge-land-scape is explicitly not about providing “direct” access to the land or Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (nor is such a thing possible, or desirable). It adheres to Inuit-driven EEE protocol 3 , in that it respects cultural “differences”. My work does not somehow make otherwise “remote” regions legible, accessible or available for consumption. Nor does it take the liberty to “represent” IQ, or “map out” Inuit Nunangat as if it were a blank slate, or “empty” space available for inscription or re-interpretation by non-Inuit researchers like me. As such this work doesn’t work towards descriptive representations of Inuit land or Knowledge. It acts instead as an emergent topology that consists of the insights that emerged as part of my research encounters, and materializes in-between subject-object, reader-author, and land-scape.
=Knowledge Conciliation in Polar Bear Research=
As such not everything is possible within this knowledge-land-scape. The land-scape as it emerges within this web-based platform is not meant to sketch a comprehensive and complete overview of the institutional or socio-political apparatus of community-based polar bear management. It is rather bounded by the particular more-than-human encounters of my fieldwork, the apparatus of western science and polar bear co-management, available resources and the technical affordances of the software with which it was built- as well as the intra-dynamics of all these matters and my decisive cuts as a researcher.
Tensions around knowledge co-production in polar bear monitoring and co-management remain.
<span class="next_choice">As you try to figure out what this concretely means, you sport a formation of rocks. You could take a moment to orient and prepare for your upcoming journey. If you step onto this rock right next to you, you will get a better view of your surroundings. It perhaps provides possibilities to gain some deeper understanding of what such shared-meaning making and its boundaries have to do with knowledge conciliation and the ESE. Otherwise, you could just get going and learn more about how I positioned myself within the BearWatch project.</span>
Data-driven conservation, management and monitoring of polar bears in Inuit Nunangat- while necessary to address significant data gaps on population trends and a rapidly changing Arctic environment- has also proven itself a challenging environment for the conciliation of western sciences and Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ<ref>The Inuit specific cosmology of knowing and being in the world, see N. S. D. C. Nunavut Social Development Council. (1998). Report of the Nunavut Traditional Knowledge Conference, Igloolik, March 20-24,1998. Iqaluit: Nunavut Social Development Council. 35p.</ref>).
<div class="next_choice">This cut explores the methodology of "wayfaring<ref>Ingold, T. (2010). Footprints through the weather‐world: walking, breathing, knowing. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 16, S121-S139.</ref>" as an ethical practice of knowledge conciliation. </div>
<small><references /></small>
=Wayfaring as a Sensitizing Method=
=Wayfaring as a Sensitizing Method=
Use text from 1.2 word doc here
My wayfaring approach, as will become clear, does not attempt to formulate a new, alternative, or innovative means of knowledge conciliation across cultural differences, nor does it lead to conclusive take-aways about ethical knowledge conciliation.
[[File:PB skulls.jpg|thumb|Two polar bear skulls at George Konana's cabin.]]
It instead unsettles fixed ideas about “knowledge” towards a “coming to know”, and instead of “knowledge integration” it performs the idea of “worldly encounters”.
<div class="next_choice">
This cut centers the unfolding of a particular research project: ‘Bearwatch: Monitoring Impacts of Arctic Climate Change using Polar Bears, Genomics and Traditional Ecological Knowledge’.
Hereafter referred to as "Bearwatch."
'''"Keep going"''' to learn more </div>
=The BearWatch Project=
=The BearWatch Project=
The track you are currently following will cut along the unfolding developments of the Genome Canada funded research project called ‘Bearwatch: Monitoring Impacts of Arctic Climate Change using Polar Bears, Genomics and Traditional Ecological Knowledge’ – hereafter referred to as ‘Bearwatch’. Bearwatch ran between 2015 and 2023, during which it sought to meaningfully engage IQ in its development of a new non-invasive genomic polar bear monitoring toolkit. The project was a collaboration between northern communities in the Nunavut Settlement Region and the Inuvialuit Settlement Region, HTAs in Gjoa Haven and Coral Harbor, the Inuvialuit Game Council, the governments of Nunavut, Northwest Territories, and Yukon, the Canadian Rangers, and researchers and students from multiple universities across Canada and beyond.
The BearWatch project ran between 2015 and 2023, during which it sought to meaningfully engage IQ in its development of a new non-invasive genomic polar bear monitoring toolkit.
Most researchers and policymakers in the field of polar bear science more generally – and on the BearWatch project particularly – are trained in a variety of natural science disciplines of the western academic institute, or they are Inuit knowledge and rights holders. I, myself, am a white, queer, settler-guest researcher from the Netherlands with a background in the applied arts and social sciences. Approaching this research context as a non-Inuit researcher from such a different cultural and disciplinary place of beginning than most other Bearwatch team members and polar bear monitoring practitioners, has required me to negotiate and navigate my own way alongside many of the project’s activities.
<div class="next_choice">
This cut is guided by excerpts of its project reports.</div>
This particular cut allows you trace the unfolding of the BearWatch project along multiple (sometimes parallel) tracks in a manner that also allows for you to thread your own way through this knowledge-land-scape. As such, this cut is not so much about deriving at conclusive take-aways about ethical knowledge conciliation within BearWatch, as much as it about extending material opportunities for you, the reader, to become knowledgeable alongside my creative practice (auto-)ethnography with the research project.
=Transdisciplinary Threading=
=Point of Decision-making=
The paths you will navigate alongside this project, interweave and correspond with that of mine, and with those of researchers and policymakers in the field of polar bear science, with polar bears themselves, community members, ice-pressure ridges, snowdrifts, silly hats and many more...
Before you head further down this cut, you have a choice to make. Will you trace the most straightforward path across the BearWatch project, engaging just with the descriptive elements of my research? Or will you thread your own way alongside me, becoming an intra-dependent maker of meaning? The former choice will be a more disconnected, conventional experience, whereas the latter will be more of an immersed narration, that places you “within” my knowledge-land-scape.
<div class="next_choice">
But before you set on your way, notice that you have stumbled upon a "Vista".
<span class="next_choice">In this line of thought you realize it might be helpful to look up the meaning of “intra” dependency, as opposed to “interdependency”. Then you realize this entails taking off your mitts and taking your phone out of your pocket. It’s freezing, and your phone might not last long in these temperatures. If you choose to keep going instead, you will move straight to reading about the TEK workshops that were held in the community of Gjoa Haven in 2019, as to inform a feasibility study on future community-driven polar bear fecal sample collection.</span>
This '''"Vista"''' is a viewpoint. Go check it out!</div>
<span class="detour link" data-page-title="Intra-dependency" data-section-id="0" data-encounter-type="detour">[[intra-dependency|Detour: look up the meaning of "intra-dependency"]]</span>
<span class="pop-up vista link" data-page-title="The_ESE_(process)" data-section-id="0" data-encounter-type="Vista">[[The_ESE_(process)|Vista: The ESE]]</span>
=Decision-making=
You now have a choice to make.
Will you trace the most straightforward path along the reports of BearWatch project? Or will you start threading your own path as you feel your way forward in response to the company you may encounter along the way?
[[File:Invitation background.jpg|thumb]]
<div class="next_choice">If you have not yet checked out the '''"Terms of Engagement"''' of this knowledge-land-scape, you should seek them out - find them on the bottom right corner of your screen.
Otherwise,
Take a '''"Detour"''' to look up the meaning of “intra” dependency, as opposed to “interdependency” before you keep going.
Or,
'''"Keep going"''' to keep following this cut instead.</div>
<span class="detour to-cut-3 link" data-page-title="Intra-dependency" data-section-id="0" data-encounter-type="detour">[[intra-dependency|Detour: look up the meaning of "intra-dependency"]]</span>
=TEK Workshops=
=TEK Workshops=
Polar bear populations- and thus Indigenous harvesting- are, under the international agreement on the conservation of polar bears, to be managed ‘in accordance with sound conservation practices based on the best available scientific data available’ (Lentfer, 1974). The NLCA states furthermore that ‘Inuit must always take part in decisions on wildlife’ (NTI 2004), while part 1 of its wildlife act, states that ‘the guiding principles and concepts of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ) are to be described and made an integral part of the management of wildlife and habitat’ (Wildlife Act 2003).
From here, you jump straight into the BearWatch project- beginning with the TEK workshops that were held in the community of Gjoa Haven in 2019 as to inform a feasibility study on future community-driven polar bear fecal sample collection.
In response to the ‘legal authority of land claim agreements, asking that IQ/TEK be used to make management decisions’, and ‘to increase community ownership of polar bear monitoring through community-based collection and knowledge sharing’ the BearWatch project was designed to include a “Genomics and its Environmental, Economic, Ethical, Legal and Social aspects (GE3LS)” component (BearWatch research proposal, 2016 p.30-31).
The BearWatch project was designed to include a “Genomics and its Environmental, Economic, Ethical, Legal and Social aspects (GE3LS)” component
As part of this GE3Ls activity three TEK mapping workshops were co-designed with the HTA of Gjoa Haven to ‘identify TEK gaps’ and ‘fill them’. The temporal and spatial polar bear TEK that was collected, was processed and published in the MES thesis of Scott Arlidge, another student that participated in the project. It ‘provides a georeferenced knowledge base that displays information on polar bears including harvest sites, bear movement, denning sites, and hunter knowledge areas’ (Arlidge, 2022 p.13). The data as shared in this publication is presented in his thesis as i) ‘a historical record of polar bear knowledge for the community of Gjoa Haven’; and ii) ‘as a guide to areas of high polar bear activity for future targeted polar bear monitoring effort’s’ (Arlidge, 2022 p.ii).
Three TEK mapping workshops were co-designed with the HTA of Gjoa Haven, as part of the projects GE3LS strategy to ‘identify TEK gaps’ and ‘fill them’<ref>BearWatch research proposal, 2016 p.30-31</ref>.
[[File:Mapping TEK Gjoa Haven 2019.jpg|thumb|Participants discussing during BearWatch TEK workshop 2019]]
[[File:Mapping TEK Gjoa Haven 2019.jpg|thumb|Participants discussing during BearWatch TEK workshop 2019]]
<span class="next_choice">You have taken a moment to sit down and read Arlidge's thesis. As you are about to check out what Genome Canada has written on their website about GE3LS, someone brings up the existence of a nearby shipwreck: Knowledge “integration”. They suggest you go check it out to get another perspective on bringing IQ together with western sciences.
<div class="next_choice">You have taken a moment to sit down and read what Genome Canada has written on their website about GE3LS.
Then someone brings up the existence of a nearby shipwreck: "Knowledge Co-production”. They suggest you go check it out to get a deeper understanding of the im/possibilities around bringing IQ together with western sciences.
You weigh your options,
'''"Keep going"''' to move on with the project.
Or,
'''"Detour"''', to read about GE3LS.
Or,
Check out the '''"Wrecksite"''' of "Knowledge Co-production"</div>
You weigh your options, as there is also another workshop lined up for tomorrow. The Gjoa Haven HTA has urgently been trying to get the BearWatch researchers to turn their focus towards the available polar bear harvest quota. 20 people will come to talk about how a harvesting moratorium from 2001 has had reverberating impacts on them up until today.</span>
<small><references /></small>
<span class="detour link" data-page-title="GE3Ls" data-section-id="0" data-encounter-type="detour">[[GE3Ls|Detour: Read more about GE3Ls]]</span>
<span class="detour to-cut-3 link" data-page-title="GE3Ls" data-section-id="0" data-encounter-type="detour">[[GE3Ls|Detour: Read more about GE3Ls]]</span>
The M’Clintock Channel (MC) Polar Bear Management Unit (PBMU) used by hunters from Gjoa Haven, Cambridge Bay and Taloyoak (see figure 1), was in 2001 subjected to a three-year polar bear moratorium (a full suspension of hunting). In 2005, the moratorium was lifted and Gjoa Haven and Cambridge Bay signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board (NWMB) for alternating quotas of one and two tags per year, while Taloyoak did not sign the MOU at all, and therefore did not receive any tags from the MC management unit between 2001 and 2015. No other community in Nunavut or the Northwest Territories has experienced such a (near) moratorium over such an extended period of time. Despite a more recent rise in tags in 2022, these impacts continue to be felt today. Based on a desire for recognition and acknowledgement of the impact of these polar bear quota regulations, two workshops were co-organized in addition to the original <span class="detour link" data-page-title="TEK_workshops" data-section-id="0" data-encounter-type="detour">[[TEK workshops]]</span> that were planned to take place over the summer of 2019, to discuss and document <span class="detour link" data-page-title="Voices_of_Thunder" data-section-id="7" data-encounter-type="detour">[[Voices of Thunder#Voices of Thunder Testimonies|the testimonies of Gjoa Haven hunters and other community members]]</span>
The Gjoa Haven Hunters and Trappers Association (HTA) doesn't want to "keep going," however.
They have urgently been trying to get the BearWatch researchers to turn their focus towards the available polar bear harvest quota.
After two generations of hardly being able to hunt polar bears, the Gjoa Haven HTA have asked the researchers of the BearWatch project to help them seek recognition for the loss of income, loss of culture, and loss of intergenerational knowledge transfer.
[[File:Gjoa Haven's Appeal.mp3|thumb]]
=Going on the Record=
Two workshops were organized in response to community requests, to record the impacts of polar bear hunting quota reductions on the community.
One workshop was held May 15, 2019 in the evening with 10 participants and one on May 16 in the morning with 11 participants.
[[File:(color) Figure 1 Map of the MC PBMU..jpg|thumb|Map of the M’Clintock Channel Polar Bear Management Unit area (Vongraven and Peacock, 2011). Adapted with permission to include the locations of Gjoa Haven, Cambridge Bay and Taloyoak, who each hunt within this area.]]
Both workshops were audio-recorded.
[[File:Mapping TEK Gjoa Haven 2019.jpg|thumb|Participants discussing during BearWatch TEK workshop 2019]]
The BearWatch PI's and Gjoa Haven HTA-board want to use these recordings as primary materials for an academic paper.
They ask me to write it. However, I have just learnt about this project and have not yet set foot into the community.
<div class="next_choice">
'''What would you do?'''
The workshops were advertised over the radio in both English and Inuktitut (Inuit language), and interested individuals signed up through the HTA. One workshop was held May 15, 2019 in the evening with 10 participants and one on May 16 in the morning with 11 participants. These participants comprised mainly older male community members, many of whom had hunted, or still hunt polar bears. There were two female participants in each workshop. Three of the participants were between the ages of 20 and 40, with the remainder older. These two workshops focused specifically on the impacts of polar bear hunting quota reductions on the community. The workshop questions were co-designed by the BW academic researchers and HTA representatives and were asked in both English and Inuktitut to prompt discussion. The format however remained open-ended, meaning that "off-script" discussions were encouraged during the workshop, and occasionally specific members were asked to participate in answering particular questions because of their connection to the issue, as identified in previous interviews or by other community members. Two BW researchers and an interpreter would ask the pre-designed questions and prompt discussion, while a third BW researcher made notes. Both workshops were audio-recorded.
The BearWatch PI's and Gjoa Haven HTA-board want to use the recordings of these impacts workshop as primary materials for an academic paper. They ask you to write it, even though you have just joined the project and have not yet set foot into the community.
'''"Stay with the Trouble"''' to explore how the “Politics of recognition” can complicate such writing- even if it risks completely derailing you from your course.
What to do?
Or,
Although you understand that writing “about” other people’s experiences doesn’t exactly sound ethical, you have little time and need to keep going. Your first fieldwork trip to Coral Harbour is upcoming, and you need to prepare for that. Besides, the Gjoa Haven HTA wants a publication, no need to complicate things further. Alternatively you can stay with the trouble and explore in what ways the “Politics of recognition” complicates such writing practices. Maybe you have already leaned into such tensions, and all that is left now, is to organize a conference call and have a conversation with the Gjoa Haven HTA about these complexities- which will redirect you (back) to Cut 1: Voices of Thunder.
'''"Keep going"''' to not engage further with the community of Gjoa Haven for now, and prepare for your first fieldtrip to the North- to Coral Harbour.
(The Gjoa Haven HTA wants a publication, so maybe there is no need to complicate things further for the moment?)
</div>
<span class="Pop-up link" data-page-title=" Politics_of_recognition " data-encounter-type="Stay with the trouble">[[Politics of recognition|Stay with the trouble: The politics of recognition]]</span>
<span class="pop-up stay-with-the-trouble link" data-page-title=" Politics_of_Recognition " data-encounter-type="Stay with the trouble">[[Politics of Recognition|Stay with the trouble: The Politics of Recognition]]</span>
<span class="return link" data-page-title="Voices_of_Thunder" data-section-id="4" data-encounter-type="return">[[Voices of Thunder#Ongoing Conversations|(Re)turn to Cut 1 "Voices of Thunder"]]</span>
=Coral Harbour First Trip 2020=
=Coral Harbour First Trip 2020=
[[File:Coral Harbour May 2022.jpg|thumb|Photograph of Salliq (Photograph by author, May 2022)]]
Alongside funding from Genome Canada, the project PI’s also successfully applied to the Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada/ World Wildlife Fund to fund ‘traditional knowledge research and a denning survey in Coral Harbour, Nunavut’ (Schedule H, 2020, March 31. This intended study included documenting polar bear TEK in Coral Harbour, surveys of vacated dens by locals to collect a variety of samples and data, and the initiation of a collaborative effort with the high school to train students in land-based surveys.
Alongside funding from Genome Canada, the project PI’s also successfully applied to the Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada/ World Wildlife Fund to fund ‘traditional knowledge research and a denning survey in Coral Harbour, Nunavut’ (Schedule H, 2020, March 31. This intended study included documenting polar bear TEK in Coral Harbour, surveys of vacated dens by locals to collect a variety of samples and data, and the initiation of a collaborative effort with the high school to train students in land-based surveys.
=Covid-19=
<div class="next_choice">However, before you start, you hit an '''"Ice-Pressure Ridge"'''. The Covid virus has so rapidly spread, the World Health Organization declared it a pandemic on March 20, 2020.</div>
The den survey and TEK collection activities in Coral Harbour were planned for March and April, but were postponed due to COVID-19. The Hamlet of Coral Harbour requested outside visitors stay away the day before most of the BearWatch team was set to arrive in the Hamlet, and the BearWatch PI’s respected their wishes.
I had, however, travelled North a day early, and arrived in the community on exactly the day that the Covid-19 epidemic was declared pandemic. Non-resident travel bans came into effect in Nunavut and the Northwest Territories immediately, as well as physical distancing requirements within communities.
<span class="redirective link" data-page-title="Spring_Coral_Harbour" data-section-id="0" data-encounter-type="Ice-pressure_ridge">[[Spring Coral Harbour|Immediately book a flight back]]</span>
<span class="redirective ice-pressure_ridge link" data-page-title="Covid-19" data-section-id="0" data-encounter-type="ice-pressure_ridge">[[Covid-19|Ice-pressure ridge: Immediately book a flight back]]</span>
Latest revision as of 11:02, 18 July 2025
Estimated time to follow this cut without detours: 20 minutes.
The land invites one to move away from anthropocentric tellings - towards narrations of becoming knowledgeable in company with the seasons, snow, ice, wind, lichens, caribou and many more. Such stories leave room for us as researchers, but aren’t about us[1].
Spring on Southampton Island (Photograph taken by author in 2021)
↑see Le Guin, U. K., & Haraway, D. J. (2019). The carrier bag theory of fiction (pp. 149-154). London: Ignota books.
An explicit note of acknowledgement for this cut goes out in particular to George Konana, in Gjoa Haven, and Leonard Netser in Coral Harbour.
Both men have taken me out on the land, the sea and the ice on multiple occasions between 2020-2023. They patiently took time to introduce me to their land and explained how they found their way in various ways and under multiple conditions.
Leonard Netser (left) and George Konana (right) photographed by author
Thank you for teaching me the valuable lesson of just tagging along and being present for the ride.
My name is Saskia de Wildt. This cut traces my PhD research as I have conducted it with-in a large Genome Canada funded research project: "BearWatch."
Within my research I explore what it means to practice knowledge conciliation under guidance of the principles of the ‘Ethical Space of Engagement’[1] and the Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC) Protocols for Equitable and Ethical Engagement (EEE[2]) rather than based on data-driven needs.
As you make your way through this knowledge-land-scape you might, depending on the choices you make, start feeling a shift from being a reader of my research, towards becoming a wayfarer alongside my research.
↑Ermine, W. (2007). The ethical space of engagement. Indigenous Law Journal, 6(1), 193–203.
↑Inuit Circumpolar Council (2022). Circumpolar Inuit Protocols for Equitable and Ethical Engagement.
Knowledge Conciliation in Polar Bear Research[edit]
Tensions around knowledge co-production in polar bear monitoring and co-management remain.
Data-driven conservation, management and monitoring of polar bears in Inuit Nunangat- while necessary to address significant data gaps on population trends and a rapidly changing Arctic environment- has also proven itself a challenging environment for the conciliation of western sciences and Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ[1]).
This cut explores the methodology of "wayfaring[2]" as an ethical practice of knowledge conciliation.
↑The Inuit specific cosmology of knowing and being in the world, see N. S. D. C. Nunavut Social Development Council. (1998). Report of the Nunavut Traditional Knowledge Conference, Igloolik, March 20-24,1998. Iqaluit: Nunavut Social Development Council. 35p.
↑Ingold, T. (2010). Footprints through the weather‐world: walking, breathing, knowing. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 16, S121-S139.
My wayfaring approach, as will become clear, does not attempt to formulate a new, alternative, or innovative means of knowledge conciliation across cultural differences, nor does it lead to conclusive take-aways about ethical knowledge conciliation.
Two polar bear skulls at George Konana's cabin.
It instead unsettles fixed ideas about “knowledge” towards a “coming to know”, and instead of “knowledge integration” it performs the idea of “worldly encounters”.
This cut centers the unfolding of a particular research project: ‘Bearwatch: Monitoring Impacts of Arctic Climate Change using Polar Bears, Genomics and Traditional Ecological Knowledge’.
The BearWatch project ran between 2015 and 2023, during which it sought to meaningfully engage IQ in its development of a new non-invasive genomic polar bear monitoring toolkit.
This cut is guided by excerpts of its project reports.
The paths you will navigate alongside this project, interweave and correspond with that of mine, and with those of researchers and policymakers in the field of polar bear science, with polar bears themselves, community members, ice-pressure ridges, snowdrifts, silly hats and many more...
But before you set on your way, notice that you have stumbled upon a "Vista".
Will you trace the most straightforward path along the reports of BearWatch project? Or will you start threading your own path as you feel your way forward in response to the company you may encounter along the way?
If you have not yet checked out the "Terms of Engagement" of this knowledge-land-scape, you should seek them out - find them on the bottom right corner of your screen.
Otherwise,
Take a "Detour" to look up the meaning of “intra” dependency, as opposed to “interdependency” before you keep going.
From here, you jump straight into the BearWatch project- beginning with the TEK workshops that were held in the community of Gjoa Haven in 2019 as to inform a feasibility study on future community-driven polar bear fecal sample collection.
The BearWatch project was designed to include a “Genomics and its Environmental, Economic, Ethical, Legal and Social aspects (GE3LS)” component
Three TEK mapping workshops were co-designed with the HTA of Gjoa Haven, as part of the projects GE3LS strategy to ‘identify TEK gaps’ and ‘fill them’[1].
Participants discussing during BearWatch TEK workshop 2019
You have taken a moment to sit down and read what Genome Canada has written on their website about GE3LS.
Then someone brings up the existence of a nearby shipwreck: "Knowledge Co-production”. They suggest you go check it out to get a deeper understanding of the im/possibilities around bringing IQ together with western sciences.
You weigh your options,
"Keep going" to move on with the project.
Or,
"Detour", to read about GE3LS.
Or,
Check out the "Wrecksite" of "Knowledge Co-production"
The Gjoa Haven Hunters and Trappers Association (HTA) doesn't want to "keep going," however.
They have urgently been trying to get the BearWatch researchers to turn their focus towards the available polar bear harvest quota.
After two generations of hardly being able to hunt polar bears, the Gjoa Haven HTA have asked the researchers of the BearWatch project to help them seek recognition for the loss of income, loss of culture, and loss of intergenerational knowledge transfer.
Two workshops were organized in response to community requests, to record the impacts of polar bear hunting quota reductions on the community.
One workshop was held May 15, 2019 in the evening with 10 participants and one on May 16 in the morning with 11 participants.
Both workshops were audio-recorded.
The BearWatch PI's and Gjoa Haven HTA-board want to use these recordings as primary materials for an academic paper.
They ask me to write it. However, I have just learnt about this project and have not yet set foot into the community.
What would you do?
"Stay with the Trouble" to explore how the “Politics of recognition” can complicate such writing- even if it risks completely derailing you from your course.
Or,
"Keep going" to not engage further with the community of Gjoa Haven for now, and prepare for your first fieldtrip to the North- to Coral Harbour.
(The Gjoa Haven HTA wants a publication, so maybe there is no need to complicate things further for the moment?)
Photograph of Salliq (Photograph by author, May 2022)
Alongside funding from Genome Canada, the project PI’s also successfully applied to the Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada/ World Wildlife Fund to fund ‘traditional knowledge research and a denning survey in Coral Harbour, Nunavut’ (Schedule H, 2020, March 31. This intended study included documenting polar bear TEK in Coral Harbour, surveys of vacated dens by locals to collect a variety of samples and data, and the initiation of a collaborative effort with the high school to train students in land-based surveys.
However, before you start, you hit an "Ice-Pressure Ridge". The Covid virus has so rapidly spread, the World Health Organization declared it a pandemic on March 20, 2020.
