A three-pronged approach that leans on Indigenous knowledge for northern fish monitoring and conservation

Freshwater fisheries monitoring in northern ecosystems using Indigenous ecological knowledge, genomics, and life history: Insights for community decision-making

Natural resources in northern regions are often data-limited because they are difficult and expensive to access. Indigenous ecological knowledge (IEK) can provide information similar to, different from, or complementary to Western scientific data (WSD). We evaluated the general hypothesis that congruence in outcomes of IEK and WSD for population monitoring parameters is determined by temporal and spatial scale of the knowledge type. Parameters included population structure, degree of philopatry, morphological variation (and conservation status for one species), and genomics was a key Western scientific method. We evaluated this hypothesis in three subsistence and recreational fisheries (walleye, lake trout, and northern pike) in Mistassini Lake, Quebec, Canada. Concordance of outcomes was varied. IEK provided richer information on the biology, distribution, and morphological variation observable with the eyes. However, IEK cannot “see” into the genome, and WSD identified population structure and history more precisely than IEK. Both knowledge types could “see” change in populations, and the nature of what was seen both converged and was complementary. Determining when IEK and WSD are complementary or reach common conclusions may allow Indigenous communities to use both together, or one knowledge type over another when either is more desired, appropriate, or time- or cost-efficient to adopt.

Indigenizing the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation

Although a diversity of approaches to wildlife management persists in Canada and the United States of America, the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation (NAM) is a prevailing model for state, provincial, and federal agencies. The success of the NAM is both celebrated and refuted amongst scholars, with most arguing that a more holistic approach is needed. Colonial rhetoric permeates each of the NAM’s constituent tenets—yet, beyond these cultural and historical problems are the NAM’s underlying conservation values. In many ways, these values share common ground with various Indigenous worldviews. For example, the idea of safeguarding wildlife for future generations, utilizing best available knowledge to solve problems, prioritizing collaboration between nations, and democratizing the process of conserving wildlife all overlap in the many ways that the NAM and common models of Indigenous-led conservation are operationalized. Working to identify shared visions and address necessary amendments of the NAM will advance reconciliation, both in the interest of nature and society. Here, we identify the gaps and linkages between the NAM and Indigenous-led conservation efforts across Canada. We impart a revised NAM—the Indigenizing North American Model of Wildlife Conservation (I-NAM)—that interweaves various Indigenous worldviews and conservation practice from across Canada. We emphasize that the I-NAM should be a continuous learning process that seeks to update and coexist with the NAM, but not replace Indigenous-led conservation.