Wildlife Management in Nunavik: Structures, Operations, and Perceptions Following the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement
Among the functions of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (JBNQA) was the establishment of a series of mechanisms to enable its Indigenous signatories to continue their subsistence practices. Central to these mechanisms were commitments to create a co-management regime for the area’s wildli...
Published in: | ARCTIC |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
The Arctic Institute of North America
2019
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/view/68287 |
id |
ftunivcalgaryojs:oai:journalhosting.ucalgary.ca:article/68287 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
ftunivcalgaryojs:oai:journalhosting.ucalgary.ca:article/68287 2023-05-15T14:19:24+02:00 Wildlife Management in Nunavik: Structures, Operations, and Perceptions Following the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement Gombay, Nicole 2019-06-17 application/pdf https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/view/68287 eng eng The Arctic Institute of North America https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/view/68287/53157 https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/view/68287 Copyright (c) 2019 ARCTIC ARCTIC; Vol. 72 No. 2 (2019): June: 103-214; 181-196 1923-1245 0004-0843 Inuit Indigenous James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement Nunavik wildlife management land claims subsistence co-management Autochtone Convention de la Baie-James et du Nord québécois gestion de la faune revendications territoriales subsistance cogestion info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion research-article 2019 ftunivcalgaryojs 2022-03-22T21:24:27Z Among the functions of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (JBNQA) was the establishment of a series of mechanisms to enable its Indigenous signatories to continue their subsistence practices. Central to these mechanisms were commitments to create a co-management regime for the area’s wildlife. In 1995, 20 years after the Agreement was signed, Lorraine Brooke published an analysis of Inuit experiences of the regime. This article extends her study, presenting the present structures of wildlife management in Nunavik, particularly as of the mid-2000s. It explores the extent to which the federal and provincial government commitments laid out in the JBNQA have been fulfilled and assesses the contemporary relevance of Brooke’s conclusions. Based on interviews with Inuit and non-Inuit stakeholders, including bureaucrats and individual hunters and fishers, the paper outlines the diverse perspectives of those who administer and who are subject to the enforcement of Nunavik’s wildlife management regime. It concludes that many of the findings from Brooke’s analysis persist. The region continues to be subject to complex bureaucratic and administrative structures that routinely make power sharing between Inuit and non-Inuit government agencies problematic. Parmi les modalités de la Convention de la Baie-James et du Nord québécois (CBJNQ), notons l’établissement d’une série de mécanismes permettant à ses signataires autochtones de continuer à exploiter les ressources à des fins de subsistance. Une série d’engagements visant à créer un régime de cogestion de la faune de la région était à la base même de ces mécanismes. En 1995, 20 ans après la signature de la convention, Lorraine Brooke a publié une analyse au sujet des expériences des Inuits par rapport à ce régime. Cet article se veut le prolongement de son étude et présente les structures actuelles de gestion de la faune du Nunavik, plus particulièrement depuis le milieu des années 2000. L’article explore la mesure dans laquelle les engagements du gouvernement fédéral et du gouvernement provincial énoncés dans la CBJNQ ont été respectés, et évalue la pertinence contemporaine des conclusions de Lorraine Brooke. En se fondant sur des entrevues réalisées auprès d’intervenants inuits et non inuits, y compris des bureaucrates ainsi que des chasseurs et des pêcheurs particuliers, l’article fait état des diverses perspectives de ceux qui administrent le régime et de ceux qui sont assujettis à l’application du régime de gestion de la faune du Nunavik. Il conclut que grand nombre des constatations découlant de l’analyse de Lorraine Brooke sont encore valables. La région continue de faire l’objet de structures bureaucratiques et administratives complexes qui rendent problématique le partage du pouvoir usuel entre les organismes gouvernementaux inuits et non inuits. Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic inuit inuits James Bay Nunavik University of Calgary Journal Hosting Baie James ENVELOPE(-80.500,-80.500,53.500,53.500) Nunavik ARCTIC 72 2 181 196 |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
University of Calgary Journal Hosting |
op_collection_id |
ftunivcalgaryojs |
language |
English |
topic |
Inuit Indigenous James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement Nunavik wildlife management land claims subsistence co-management Autochtone Convention de la Baie-James et du Nord québécois gestion de la faune revendications territoriales subsistance cogestion |
spellingShingle |
Inuit Indigenous James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement Nunavik wildlife management land claims subsistence co-management Autochtone Convention de la Baie-James et du Nord québécois gestion de la faune revendications territoriales subsistance cogestion Gombay, Nicole Wildlife Management in Nunavik: Structures, Operations, and Perceptions Following the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement |
topic_facet |
Inuit Indigenous James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement Nunavik wildlife management land claims subsistence co-management Autochtone Convention de la Baie-James et du Nord québécois gestion de la faune revendications territoriales subsistance cogestion |
description |
Among the functions of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (JBNQA) was the establishment of a series of mechanisms to enable its Indigenous signatories to continue their subsistence practices. Central to these mechanisms were commitments to create a co-management regime for the area’s wildlife. In 1995, 20 years after the Agreement was signed, Lorraine Brooke published an analysis of Inuit experiences of the regime. This article extends her study, presenting the present structures of wildlife management in Nunavik, particularly as of the mid-2000s. It explores the extent to which the federal and provincial government commitments laid out in the JBNQA have been fulfilled and assesses the contemporary relevance of Brooke’s conclusions. Based on interviews with Inuit and non-Inuit stakeholders, including bureaucrats and individual hunters and fishers, the paper outlines the diverse perspectives of those who administer and who are subject to the enforcement of Nunavik’s wildlife management regime. It concludes that many of the findings from Brooke’s analysis persist. The region continues to be subject to complex bureaucratic and administrative structures that routinely make power sharing between Inuit and non-Inuit government agencies problematic. Parmi les modalités de la Convention de la Baie-James et du Nord québécois (CBJNQ), notons l’établissement d’une série de mécanismes permettant à ses signataires autochtones de continuer à exploiter les ressources à des fins de subsistance. Une série d’engagements visant à créer un régime de cogestion de la faune de la région était à la base même de ces mécanismes. En 1995, 20 ans après la signature de la convention, Lorraine Brooke a publié une analyse au sujet des expériences des Inuits par rapport à ce régime. Cet article se veut le prolongement de son étude et présente les structures actuelles de gestion de la faune du Nunavik, plus particulièrement depuis le milieu des années 2000. L’article explore la mesure dans laquelle les engagements du gouvernement fédéral et du gouvernement provincial énoncés dans la CBJNQ ont été respectés, et évalue la pertinence contemporaine des conclusions de Lorraine Brooke. En se fondant sur des entrevues réalisées auprès d’intervenants inuits et non inuits, y compris des bureaucrates ainsi que des chasseurs et des pêcheurs particuliers, l’article fait état des diverses perspectives de ceux qui administrent le régime et de ceux qui sont assujettis à l’application du régime de gestion de la faune du Nunavik. Il conclut que grand nombre des constatations découlant de l’analyse de Lorraine Brooke sont encore valables. La région continue de faire l’objet de structures bureaucratiques et administratives complexes qui rendent problématique le partage du pouvoir usuel entre les organismes gouvernementaux inuits et non inuits. |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Gombay, Nicole |
author_facet |
Gombay, Nicole |
author_sort |
Gombay, Nicole |
title |
Wildlife Management in Nunavik: Structures, Operations, and Perceptions Following the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement |
title_short |
Wildlife Management in Nunavik: Structures, Operations, and Perceptions Following the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement |
title_full |
Wildlife Management in Nunavik: Structures, Operations, and Perceptions Following the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement |
title_fullStr |
Wildlife Management in Nunavik: Structures, Operations, and Perceptions Following the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement |
title_full_unstemmed |
Wildlife Management in Nunavik: Structures, Operations, and Perceptions Following the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement |
title_sort |
wildlife management in nunavik: structures, operations, and perceptions following the james bay and northern quebec agreement |
publisher |
The Arctic Institute of North America |
publishDate |
2019 |
url |
https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/view/68287 |
long_lat |
ENVELOPE(-80.500,-80.500,53.500,53.500) |
geographic |
Baie James Nunavik |
geographic_facet |
Baie James Nunavik |
genre |
Arctic inuit inuits James Bay Nunavik |
genre_facet |
Arctic inuit inuits James Bay Nunavik |
op_source |
ARCTIC; Vol. 72 No. 2 (2019): June: 103-214; 181-196 1923-1245 0004-0843 |
op_relation |
https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/view/68287/53157 https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/view/68287 |
op_rights |
Copyright (c) 2019 ARCTIC |
container_title |
ARCTIC |
container_volume |
72 |
container_issue |
2 |
container_start_page |
181 |
op_container_end_page |
196 |
_version_ |
1766291232227590144 |