UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The costs of power sharing : community involvement in Canadian porcupine caribou co-management Kofinas, Gary Peter 1998

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-ubc_1998-34567X.pdf [ 25.88MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0088701.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0088701-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0088701-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0088701-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0088701-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0088701-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0088701-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

THE COSTS OF POWER SHARING: COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN CANADIAN PORCUPINE CARIBOU CO-MANAGEMENT by Gary Peter Kofinas B. A., The University of North Carolina Greensboro (1975) M.S.T., Antioch/New England Graduate School (1978) A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Interdisciplinary Studies in Resource Management Science) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA July, 1998 © Gary P. Kofinas, 1998 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Department of &s«cU*\ti S b j c j i ^ C(^terJ^cif\^af^ SW>*^ ReSCWtC DE-6 (2/88) Abstract Co-management arrangements are commonly framed with the theoretical assumption that community management systems function with a minimum of transaction costs and government-community power sharing lowers overall costs of management. Commonly overlooked both practically and theoretically are costs to communities. This dissertation investigates the involvement of three northern indigenous communities in a wildlife co-management arrangement to delineate community costs of power sharing. The subject of the study is the internationally migratory Porcupine Caribou Herd, Canada's three primary Porcupine Caribou user communities (Old Crow, YT, Aklavik, NT, and Fort McPherson, NT), and the resource regime established by the Canadian Porcupine Caribou Management Agreement and The Agreement between the Governments of Canada and the United States for the Conservation of Porcupine Caribou. Using multiple sources of evidence and drawing on the ethnographic method, the study documents emergent communication linkages between co-management boards and communities, analyzes locals' perceptions of caribou management information and scientific research activities, identifies patterns of interaction between researchers and hunters, and illustrates the constraints of choice available to hunters of the Canadian ' Porcupine Caribou co-management system. Presented is an account of the "1993 Caribou Crisis," a critical co-management incident in which hunters confront caribou researchers and face the dilemma of violating cultural traditions in order to stop proposed hydrocarbon development. Fundamentally, the study examines the consequence of interfacing authority systems and power dynamics of a formal co-management arrangement. The study also points to the limitations of rational choice perspectives when conducting institutional analysis, and the need to consider group identity, perspectives on uncertainty, and styles of learning when delineating transaction costs. From a more applied perspective, delineating anticipated and incurred community transaction costs of power sharing brings attention to the impediments to local involvement, how community members invest their energies in a co-management process, and who and by what method they bear the costs of shared decision making. Porcupine Caribou user communities make sacrifices when seeking to exercise authority in shared decision-making. The transaction costs of co-management associated with community involvement come at the price of time commitments and imposed schedules, restructuring of former traditions of leadership, and engaging with government agencies in bureaucratic processes. Internalizing authority in caribou management means that community members and leaders must decipher new information, interact with a host of players, engage in lobbying, and become involved in conflicts which are at times turbulent and controversial, as well as divisive to community. In some cases, the costs of power sharing are perceived to violate customary and traditional institutions regarding human-human, and human- caribou relations and in turn, undermine the well-being of the caribou resource and the relationships of those who depend on it. Table of Contents ABSTRACTS ii TABLE OF CONTENTS iv TABLE OF FIGURES vii TABLE OF TABLES ix ACRONYMS APPEARING IN THE DISSERTATION xi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xiii DEDICATION xiv 1. A RESEARCHER'S W E L C O M E TO CO-MANAGEMENT 1 1.1 ETHNOGRAPHIC SKETCH #1: "AFFIRMING" THE STUDY 1 1.2 REFLECTIONS ON THE DECISION TO "AFFIRM THE STUDY" 7 1.3 BRIEF OBJECTIVES STATEMENT 8 1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE DISSERTATION 9 2. T H E STUDY. 12 2.1 CO-MANAGEMENT AND THE NEW CANADIAN NORTH 12 2.2 A NEW SET OF QUESTIONS 15 2.3 THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVE OF THIS STUDY 17 2.4 RATIONALE FOR DELINEATING TRANSACTION COSTS 21 2.5 CO-MANAGEMENT AS POWER CONFLICT AND POWER SHARING 24 2.6 BEYOND CO-MANAGEMENT AS SOLUTION .26 2.7 KEY CONSTRUCTS AND ASSUMPTIONS 40 2.8 FRAMEWORK AND METHOD OF ANALYSIS 44 2.9 CHALLENGES OF AND REFLECTIONS ON THE RESEARCH PROCESS 49 2.10 SOURCES OF EVIDENCE , METHODS OF DATA ANALYSIS, FEEDBACK SESSIONS.. 52 3. A CONTEXT FOR NORTHERN WILDLIFE CO-MANAGEMENT . 59 3.1 ACCOUNTING FOR CONTEXT AND ITS IMPORTANCE 59 3.2 AN OVERVIEW OF CONDITIONS 61 3.3 RESOURCE ECOLOGY OF THE CARIBOU COMMONS 67 3.4 ARCHEOLOGICAL LINKS WITH THE PAST COMMUNITIES 77 3.5 VUTZUI TTHULH (THE CARIBOU CORRAL) 80 3.6 RESOURCE ABUNDANCE AND HUMAN PREDATOR CONTROL : 83 3.7 JURISDICTIONAL COMPLEXITY OF THE "ARCTIC BORDERLANDS" .88 3.8 PORCUPINE CARIBOU AGREEMENTS AND PROVISIONS FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 92 3.9 ASYMMETRICAL REGIMES AND IMPLICATIONS 100 3.10 OVERVIEW OF PCH MANAGEMENT ISSUES... 102 3.11 THE THREE STUDY COMMUNITIES; OLD CROW, FORT MCPHERSON, AKLAVIK 108 3.12 CONCLUSION 119 4. MANAGEMENT RELATIONS: COMMUNITY AND CARIBOU 120 4.1 INTRODUCTION 120 4.2 PERSPECTIVES ON "LOCAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS" 122 4.3 AN ACCOUNT OF LOCAL SYSTEMS OF PORCUPINE CARIBOU MANAGEMENT 130 4.4 CONCLUSION 171 5. LINKING COMMUNITIES WITH THEIR CO-MANAGEMENT BOARDS 174 5.1 VOICES FROM THE "BLACK HOLE" 174 5.2 CHAPTER OVERVIEW 175 5.3 THEORETICAL CONSIDERATION FOR COMMUNICATION, POWER, AND POWER-SHARING; THE CHALLENGES OF DEMOCRACY ; 178 5.4 N O N - N A T I V E PERSPECTIVES O N R E P R E S E N T A T I O N ; T H E I R ASSUMPTIONS, E X P E R I E N C E A N D A D J U S T E D E X P E C T A T I O N S 195 5.5 T H E C H A L L E N G E S F A C I N G C O M M U N I T Y R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S 204 5.6 T O W A R D S A N I M P R O V E D C O M M U N I C A T I O N S Y S T E M ; C O M M U N I T Y - G E N E R A T E D EFFORTS A T R E P R E S E N T A T I V E A C C O U N T A B I L I T Y 214 5.7 L O C A L PERCEPTIONS OF C O - M A N A G E M E N T L I N K A G E S 218 5.8 ISSUES OF RESPONSIBILITY 246 5.9 T H E E M E R G I N G C O M M U N I C A T I O N S N E T W O R K 251 5.10 S U M M A R Y OF FINDINGS 254 6. COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVES ON CARIBOU MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES, INFORMATION, AND CO-MANAGEMENT BODIES , 257 6.1 C H A P T E R O V E R V I E W 257 6.2 T H E N E E D TO C O N D U C T STUDIES OF C A R I B O U 259 6.3 R E L I A B L E I N F O R M A T I O N SOURCES 267 6.4 L O C A L S ' PERSPECTIVES O N T H E U S E OF C A R I B O U C O L L A R S FOR C A R I B O U STUDIES , 271 6.5 L O C A L S ' PERCEPTIONS OF A C C U R A C Y OF C A R I B O U C E N S U S A N D H A R V E S T D A T A 276 6.6 P E R C E I V E D A C C U R A C Y OF H A R V E S T D A T A 280 6.7 P E R C E I V E D N E E D TO C O N T R O L T H E C A R I B O U R E S E A R C H A G E N D A 281 6.8 P E R C E I V E D N E E D F O R Q U O T A 282 6.9 L O C A L S ' E X P E C T A T I O N S T H A T C O M M U N I T Y H U N T E R S W I L L C O M P L Y WITH A H U N T I N G Q U O T A 284 6.10 P E R C E I V E D N E E D T O L O B B Y A G A I N S T D E V E L O P M E N T 285 6.11 L O C A L PERCEPTIONS OF C O M M U N I T Y I N F L U E N C E AS PROVIDED B Y T H E P C M B A N D T R U S T I N T H E S Y S T E M 289 6.12 S U M M A R Y OF FINDINGS 292 7. HUNTERS AND RESEARCHERS AT THE CO-MANAGEMENT INTERFACE 295 7.1 P O T E N T I A L S A N D C H A L L E N G E S OF C O - M A N A G I N G C A R I B O U R E S E A R C H ; T H E O R E T I C A L CONSIDERATIONS 297 7.2 E T H N O G R A P H I C S K E T C H #3: T H E 1993 C A R I B O U CRISIS 303 7.3 C O N C L U S I O N 323 8. DECONSTRUCTING THE CRISIS 323 8.1 I N T R O D U C T I O N 323 8.2 W O R K I N G WITHIN F O R M A L L Y S T A T E D A G R E E M E N T S 325 8.3 O V E R C O M I N G MISTRUST OF SCIENCE A N D R E S E A R C H E R S , EXPRESSIONS OF MISTRUST 334 8.4 T R A N S F O R M I N G T H E C U L T U R E OF W I L D L I F E M A N A G E M E N T A G E N C I E S 338 8.5 A C C E S S I N G A G E N C Y BIOLOGISTS A N D THEIR I N F O R M A T I O N 359 8.6 I N F L U E N C I N G T H E W O R K OF T H E C O - M A N A G E M E N T B O A R D 365 8.7 M A N A G I N G T H E B O A R D AS A S O C I A L U N I T 380 8.8 B R O A D E N I N G T H E SCOPE OF T H E A R R A N G E M E N T 384 8.9 I N T E R N A L I Z I N G T H E DUTIES OF R E G I O N A L A U T H O R I T Y 386 8.10 S U M M A R Y OF FINDINGS 388 9. CONCLUSION 392 9.1 O V E R V I E W ^ 292 9.2 THESIS A R G U E D 392 9.3 A M P L I F I E D COSTS 394 9.4 D E L I N E A T E D COSTS 395 9.5 C O M M U N I T Y D I L E M M A S 397 9.6 T H E U T I L I T Y OF D E L I N E A T I N G C O M M U N I T Y COSTS; IMPLICATIONS TO T H E O R Y B U I L D I N G 398 9.7 IMPLICATIONS TO T H E P R A C T I C E OF C O - M A N A G E M E N T 399 9.8 A F I N A L W O R D 402 10. BIBLIOGRAPHY 404 11. APPENDICES 430 11.1 RESEARCH LICENSE 430 11.2 PORCUPINE CARIBOU MANAGEMENT USERS' INTERVIEW 431 11.3 AGENCIES INVOLVED IN DIFFERENT FUNCTIONS OF-MANAGEMENT 4451 11.4 COMMUNITY PROFILES; LEVELS OF EDUCATION AND DEMOGRAPHICS 447 11.5 TRANSCRIBED ELDERS' STORIES .448 11.6 EXAMPLES FROM THE PCMB'S "MANAGEMENT PLAN" 459 11.7 ANTECEDENTS TO THE 1993 CRISIS 463 11.8 PCMB RESOLUTIONS OF THE CRISIS 465 11.9 CODED PCMB TRANSACTIONS OF THE BODY CONDITION STUDIES FROM BOARD MINUTES AND OBSERVATIONS .469 11.10 CARIBOU MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP/FOCUS GROUP 470 11.11 ELDERS' INTERVIEW SCHEDULE 471 Table of Figures FIGURE 2.1 MAP OF THE PORCUPINE CARIBOU HERD RANGE, USER COMMUNITIES, AND MAIN JURISDICTIONS 18 FIGURE 2.2 AGENCY TRANSACTION COSTS IN CO-MANAGEMENT 34 FIGURE 2.3 HURDLES IN THE CO-MANAGEMENT COMMUNICATION PROCESS WITH COMMUNITIES,.... 46 FIGURE 2.4 PARTS OF THE STUDY..... .•; .......48 FIGURE 3.1 CIRCUMPOLAR DISTRIBUTION OF CARIBOU : 68 FIGURE 3.2 SATELLITE RADIO COLLARED CARIBOU MAP (SPRING) 70 FIGURE 3.3 SATELLITE RADIO COLLARED CARIBOU MAP (SUMMER) ..70 FIGURE 3.4 FIGURE 3.3 SATELLITE RADIO COLLARED CARIBOU MAP (FALL) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 FIGURE 3.5 FIGURE 3.3 SATELLITE RADIO COLLARED CARIBOU MAP (WINTER) 71 FIGURE 3.6 P C H CALVING GROUNDS. 73 FIGURE 3.7 VUTZUITTHULH OF THE P C H RANGE 81 FIGURE 3.8 P C H POPULATION AS REPORTED BY RESEARCHERS' CENSUSES................. 84 FIGURE 3.9 PCH REPORTED HARVEST BY COMMUNITY AND ANNUAL VARIATION IN TAKE. . . . . . . . . . .86 FIGURE 3.10 PORCUPINE CARIBOU HERD POPULATION SIZE COMPARED TO TWO OTHER LARGE HERDS \. 88 FIGURE 3.11 MAP OF LAND MANAGEMENT REGIMES. ,'. 91 FIGURE 3.12 STRUCTURAL FEATURES OF THE PCH INTERNATIONAL ARRANGEMENT... 94 FIGURE 3.13 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF THE CANADIAN CO-MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENT..; : 99 FIGURE 3.14 CONSUMPTION FREQUENCY OF TRADITIONAL FOODS IN OLD CROW AND FORT MCPHERSON, ADAPTED FROM WEIN AND FREEMAN TRADITIONAL FOOD USE STUDIES : ; ;'. . . . . . 115 FIGURE 3.15 PER CAPITA TAKE BY COMMUNITY BASED ON REPORTED HARVEST TOTALS 116 FIGURE 3.16 OLD CROW SEASONAL AND ANNUAL RHYTHMS OF CARIBOU HUNTING,. 118 FIGURE 3.17 AKLAVIK SEASONAL AND ANNUAL RHYTHMS OF CARIBOU HUNTING.... 118 FIGURE 3.18 FORT MCPHERSON SEASONAL AND ANNUAL RHYTHMS OF CARIBOU HUNTING.. ..118 FIGURE 4.1 FREQUENCY OF SHARING CARIBOU WITH OTHER HOUSEHOLDS 144 FIGURE 4.2 LUCKY HUNTERS OF FORT MCPHERSON 144 FIGURE 4.3 NUMBER OF HUNTERS WHO SHARE CARIBOU WITH PEOPLE IN OTHER COMMUNITIES...;.... ...... 1 145 FIGURE 4.4 NUMBER OF WEEKS LOCALS SPEND ON THE LAND EACH YEAR 157 FIGURE 4.5 TYPICAL CARIBOU HUNTING TRIPS...: 157 FIGURE 5.1 COMPONENTS OF CO-MANAGEMENT LINKAGES, AS ASSUMED IN THEORY 177 FIGURE 5.2 MEDIA RICHNESS 185 FIGURE 5.3 NUMBER OF LOCALS WHO HAVE HEARD OF THE P C M B 219 FIGURE 5.4 LOCALS' KNOWLEDGE OF WHO SERVES AS THEIR PCMB REPRESENTATIVE220 FIGURE 5.5 LOCALS' KNOWLEDGE OF INTERNATIONAL PORCUPINE CARIBOU BOARD. 221 FIGURE 5.6 SOURCES AND FREQUENCY; WAYS LOCALS HEAR ABOUT CARIBOU MANAGEMENT ISSUES 225 FIGURE 5.7 BEST METHOD FOR HEAR FROM THE PEOPLE 249 FIGURE 5.8 LOCALS' VIEW ON WHOSE RESPONSIBLITY IT IS TO SOLICIT COMMUITY CONCNERS ON CARIBOU-RELATED ISSUES 249 FIGURE 5.9 WHAT LOCALS SEE AS THE PREFERRED ROLE OF ELDERS IN CARIBOU MANAGEMENT ; . , 249 FIGURE 6.1 LOCALS' PERCEIVED NEED TO CONDUCT CARIBOU STUDIES. 262 FIGURE 6.2 LOCALS' WILLINGNESS TO LOBBY AGAINST DEVELOPMENT 288 FIGURE 7.1 CARIBOU CRISIS AERIAL TRANSECT MAP 305 FIGURE 8.1 FREQUENCY LOCALS HEAR AND LEARN ABOUT THE CONDITION, HEALTH AND GENERAL STATUS OF THE PORCUPINE CARIBOU HERD 360 Table of Tables TABLE 2.1 CONSEQUENCES OF CO-MANAGEMENT 27 TABLE 2.2 COMMUNITY AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO INSTITUTION TYPES WITH EXAMPLES... 42 TABLE 2.3 ACTIVTY AND PROBLEM AREAS SERVING AS THE BASIS OF THE ANALYSIS 45 TABLE 3.1 DIMENSIONS OF CO-MANAGEMENT CONTEXT 60 TABLE 3.2 NATIVE COMMUNITIES AND DIFFERING FORMAL POSITIONS ON ANWR OIL DEVELOPMENT 65 TABLE 3.3 RELATIVE HABITAT VALUES OF PORCUPINE CARIBOU HERD 75 TABLE 3.4 PRE AND EARLY-CONTACT PORCUPINE CARIBOU HUNTING PATTERNS 79 TABLE 3.5 OVERVIEW OF KEY PCMA TERMS FOR COMMUNITY 100 TABLE 3.6 COMPARISONS OF THE STUDY COMMUNITIES... 113 TABLE 3.7 AKLAVIK WILD FOOD PREFERENCES 116 TABLE 3.8 HOUSEHOLD (HH) NEEDS OF CARIBOU, HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION, AND PERCENTAGE OF MEAT CONSUMPTION THAT IS CARIBOU AS REPORTED BY INTERVIEWED LOCALS 117 TABLE 4.1 HOUSEHOLD DATA ON NEEDS AND SHARING 145 TABLE 4.2 INTER-COMMUNITY SHARING 146 TABLE 4.3 GWICHTN NAMES FOR CARIBOU 159 TABLE 4.4 AREAS OF LOCAL KNOWLEDGE - TOPICS OF DISCUSSION - 160 TABLE 4.5 OBSERVATIONS, THEORIES, AND VALUES AND PREFERENCES 162 TABLE 4.6 HUNTERS' INDICATORS OF QUALITY CARIBOU - BODY CONDITION AND OVERALL HEALTH 166 TABLE 4.7 LOCAL KNOWLEDGE OF CARIBOU TASTE 167 TABLE 5.1 COMPARING STYLES OF COMMUNICATION 183 TABLE 5.2 BASIC MATRIX WITH QUESTIONS GUIDING PCMB MANAGEMENT PLAN PROCESS 190 TABLE 5.3 INTERNATIONAL PORCUPINE CARIBOU BOARD MEETINGS 193 TABLE 5.4 LISTING OF AKLAVIK USER REPRESENTATIVE'S ROLES IN ADDITION TO PCMB MEMBERSHIP 205 TABLE 5.5 CHARACTERISTICS OF PROSPECTIVE LEADERS MENTIONED BY LOCALS: 217 TABLE 5.6 PATTERNS OF "DON'T KNOW" RESPONSES 223 TABLE 5.7 "MAIN" WAYS PEOPLE SAY THEY HEAR ABOUT CARIBOU MANAGEMENT 224 TABLE 5.8 NUMBER OF MONTHS BETWEEN REGULAR PCMB MEETINGS HELD IN EACH COMMUNITY 238 TABLE 5.9 THE BEST WAY TO GET LOCALS INFORMATION ON CARIBOU MANAGEMENT ISSUES, AS IDENTIFIED BY LOCALS 245 TABLE 5.10 LOCAL PERCEPTIONS OF WHO SPEAKS FOR COMMUNITY 251 TABLE 5.11 WHERE PEOPLE GO WITH A PCH CARIBOU MANAGEMENT CONCERN 253 TABLE 6.1 TOPIC QUESTIONS AND INDICATORS WHICH ARE PRESENTED IN THIS CHAPTER. 259 TABLE 6.2 TYPES OF AGENCY AND UNIVERSITY PCH CARIBOU MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES. 260 TABLE 6.3 LOCALS' PERCEPTIONS OF BEST INFORMATION SOURCES AND WAYS OF KNOWING CARIBOU 268 TABLE 6.4 LOCALS' PERCEIVED RELIABILITY OF LOCAL, NON-LOCAL, AND INTERFACE INFORMATION SOURCES 269 TABLE 6.5 PERCEIVED RELIABILITY OF LOCAL AND NON-LOCAL ORGS. AS INFORMATION SOURCES 269 TABLE 6.6 LOCALS' PERSPECTIVES ON THE USE OF CARIBOU COLLARS 270 TABLE 6.7 LOCALS' PERCEPTION OF THE ACCURACY OF PORCUPINE CARIBOU HERD CENSUS 277 TABLE 6.8 LOCALS' PERCEPTIONS OF THE ACCURACY OF NUMBERS COLLECTED IN HARVEST QUESTIONNAIRES .282 TABLE 6.9 LOCALS' PERCEIVED NEED FOR HUNTING QUOTA IF NUMBERS DROPPED BELOW 70,000 PORCUPINE CARIBOU 283 TABLE 6.10 LOCALS' PERCEIVED NEED TO LOBBY AGAINST OIL DEVELOPMENT IN THE r CALVING GROUNDS OF THE PORCUPINE HERD 287 TABLE 6.11 WHO LOCALS SAY CONTROLS THE PCMB ACTIVITIES 290 f TABLE 6.12 HOW DOES LOCALS' TRUST OF THE PCMB COMPARE WITH THE CANADIAN FEDERAL AND TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS 291 TABLE 6.13 LOCALS' TRUST OF UNITED STATES CARIBOU MANAGEMENT TO PROTECT THE PORCUPINE HERD 292 TABLE 8.1 OPTIONS FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN CARIBOU RESEARCH PROCESS. ... 333 TABLE 8.2 EXAMPLES OF COMMUNITY COSTS IN THE 1993 CRISIS 366 TABLE 8.3 ASSERTIONS OF LOCAL KNOWLEDGE IN CO-MANAGEMENT BOARD-LEVEL TRANSACTIONS 367 TABLE 8.4 ROLES ASSUMED BY ACTORS IN CO-MANAGEMENT OF CARIBOU RESEARCH 368 TABLE 8.5 OBSERVED AND DOCUMENTED HUNTER-RESEARCHER TRANSACTION TYPES AS ILLUSTRATED IN THE CARIBOU CRISIS 375 x A c r o n y m s appear ing in the d isser ta t ion BQCMB Beverly Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Board CAH Central arctic Caribou herd CYI Council of Yukon Indians GFN Gwich'in First Nation GRRB Gwich'in Renewable Resource Board HTC Hunter and Trapper Committee IACPC Agreement Between the Governments of Canada and the United States for the Conservation of Porcupine Caribou IFA Inuvialuit Final Agreement IGC Inuvialuit Game Council IPCB International Porcupine Caribou Board MOU Memorandum of Understanding NOGAP Northern Oil and Gas Assessment Project PCH Porcupine Caribou Herd PCMA Porcupine Caribou Management Agreement PCMB Porcupine Caribou Management Board PCTC Porcupine Caribou Technical Committee RCMP Royal Canadian Mounted Police RRC Renewable Resources Council US United States of America VGFN Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation WMAC(NS) Wildlife Management Advisor Council (North Slope) YTG-RR Yukon Territorial Government Department of Renewable Resources xi Acknowledgments First and foremost, I acknowledge the support provided by the people of Aklavik, Fort McPherson, and Old Crow. Without their gracious hospitality, willingness to let me be a part of their lives, and caring energies to educate me in the subtle nuances of northern native life, this work would not have been possible. Of special mention are the many community members who took the time to share their stories, take me on the land, and show me something of the warm and magical ways of caribou people. Other locals also made important contributions. Local PCMB members and alternate members of past and present, Donald Aviugana, Johnny Abel, Billy Archie, Carl Charlie, Johnny Charlie, Sr., Frank Edwards, Billy Germaine, William Greenland, Percy Henry, Roy Moses, Gladys Netro, Stan Njootli, Charlie Snowshoe, Joe Tetlichi, and Randall Tetlichi served as community hosts and helped to interpret local co-management perspectives. Field workers Mary Blake, Steven Charlie, Taig Connell, Freddy Kendi, Abe Stewart, Jr., and Florence Thomas were hardworking and persistent in administering the lengthy and, at times, intrusive questionnaire. Renee Arey, Bertha Francis, Jane Montgomery, Roy Moses, and Richard Papik gave of their skills as translators when working with elders and transcribing taped interviews. I am especially appreciative of Roy Moses and Johnny Charlie, Sr. who reviewed the chapter on caribou-community relations and provided input on my use of Tugugh Gwitchin. As well, the staff and leadership of local and regional organizations of the Inuvialuit, Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation, and the Gwich'in of NWT were most kind to open their doors, provide advice, and give support. Government representatives to the PCMB, agency biologists, wildlife managers, and wildlife officers were also exceptionally supportive. Albert Peter and Doug Urquhart of the PCMB, Don Russell of the Canadian Wildlife Service-Yukon Region, Brian Pelchat of Yukon's Renewable Resources-Regional Management Department, Roger Binne and John Nagy of the GNWT-Renewable Resources-lnuvik Region, Brad Griffith of the US Biological Survey in Fairbanks, Sverre Pederson of Alaskan Department of Fish and Game-Division of Subsistence in Fairbanks and others allowed access to files, made copy machines available, and set aside time for my many questions. While maintaining my nomadic, student researcher life style, I was also fortunate to be hosted by the Connell, Nagy, Pelchat, Urquhart, and Russell households, where I regularly found home-cooked meals and warm friendship. A special thank you is extended to Doug Urquhart, who offered perceptive and helpful editorial comments on several draft chapters. Guiding my process of academic inquiry was my UBC academic committee — Professors Evelyn Pinkerton, Alan Chambers, Peter Nemetz, and Les Lavkulich and ex officio committee member Professor Jack Kruse. Each made a unique and complementary contribution to my studies at UBC and to the dissertation project. In his or her own way, each pushed me to achieve a higher standard of excellence, stimulated my thinking to make new discoveries, and maintained a belief in my abilities in spite of my own doubts. The committee's good collaboration and interdisciplinary approach reflects these people's talents as gifted scholars and skilled educators. That we successfully managed to transcend the professional boundaries and develop good friendships speaks to their commitment to the ideals of community. Of special mention is department head Dr. Les Lavkulich, his administrative xii assistant Nancy Dick, and the staff at UBC's Institute for Resources and Environment who addressed the bureaucratic complications. There are many others who offered guidance, advice, and support at the various phases of the research. At the risk of forgetting some, I mention Ann Welch Acheson, Sheglah and Collin Bearstro, Fikret Berkes, Taylor Brelsford, Steve Braund, Richard Caulfield, Norman Chance, Bob Childers, Julie Cruikshank, Phyllis Fast, Glenna Frost, Henry Huntington, Larry Moore, John Weiner, David Klein, Art Martell, Gail Osherenko, Richard Slobodin, and Bill Simeone, and John Stager. Funding for the project was made possible with a grant from the U.S. Man and the Biosphere Reserve Program/US Department of State (Grant # 1753-200118 and # 1753-300112) and a National Science Foundation Dissertation Improvement Grant (Award # 93108