Science, Irving K. Barber Faculty of (Okanagan)
Biology, Department of (Okanagan)
DSpace
UBCO
Pilat, Hannah
Master of Science - MSc
University of British Columbia
Colonialism and a changing climate have threatened culturally significant food plants and the well-being of those who rely on them. An example is skʷenkʷínem (western spring beauty, Claytonia lanceolata Pursh), which is significant for Secwépemc People of Skeetchestn Indian Band. Skeetchestn is located in the Deadman Valley, in the interior of what we now call British Columbia. skʷenkʷínem once comprised a large portion of Secwépemc diet, but is no longer feasible to harvest as a meaningful food source. We used a Two-Eyed Seeing approach to species distribution modelling, beginning with semi-structured interviews with three Skeetchestn community members. The interviews produced five major themes: nourishment, colonization, interconnectedness, kinship, and places, with an emphasis on the importance of the Skeetchestn community skʷenkʷínem patch. Using a set of predictors informed by the Knowledge from the interviews, and several bioclimatic variables, we used an ensemble modeling approach to predict suitable habitat for skʷenkʷínem over its known geographic extent. We predict a decrease in suitable habitat from the present to 2081-2100 across skʷenkʷínem full geographic extent and an increase within Skeetchestn Territory. These predictions use Skeetchestn’s existing Knowledge of skʷenkʷínem in our predictive models to support Skeetchestn’s goals of food sovereignty. We also discuss the existing field of species distribution modelling regarding culturally significant species, and how geographical tools can support Indigenous communities’ decision-making and sovereignty assertion. Our study is an example of reproducible species distribution modelling done in partnership with an Indigenous community, balancing the need for open science and ethical and equitable research.
A Two-Eyed Seeing approach to predicting the distribution of skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata), a culturally significant plant by Hannah Pilat B.Sc., The University of Calgary, 2021 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE in THE COLLEGE OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Biology) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Okanagan) June 2024 © Hannah Pilat, 2024 ii The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the College of Graduate Studies for acceptance, a thesis/dissertation entitled: A Two-Eyed Seeing approach to predicting the distribution of skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata), a culturally significant plant submitted by Hannah Pilat in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Biology Examining Committee: Dr. Jason Pither, Irving K. Barber Faculty of Science, Biology Co-supervisor Dr. David Ensing, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Co-supervisor Dr. Fiona McDonald, Irving K. Barber Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Community, Culture and Global Studies Supervisory Committee Member Dr. Adam Ford, Irving K. Barber Faculty of Science, Biology Supervisory Committee Member Dr. Jon Corbett, Irving K. Barber Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Community, Culture and Global Studies University Examiner iii Abstract Colonialism and a changing climate have threatened culturally significant food plants and the well-being of those who rely on them. An example is skwenkwínem (western spring beauty, Claytonia lanceolata Pursh), which is significant for Secwépemc People of Skeetchestn Indian Band. Skeetchestn is located in the Deadman Valley, in the interior of what we now call British Columbia. Skwenkwínem once comprised a large portion of Secwépemc diet, but is no longer feasible to harvest as a meaningful food source. We used a Two-Eyed Seeing approach to species distribution modelling, beginning with semi-structured interviews with three Skeetchestn community members. The interviews produced five major themes: nourishment, colonization, interconnectedness, kinship, and places, with an emphasis on the importance of the Skeetchestn community skwenkwínem patch. Using a set of predictors informed by the Knowledge from the interviews, and several bioclimatic variables, we used an ensemble modeling approach to predict suitable habitat for skwenkwínem over its known geographic extent. We predict a decrease in suitable habitat from the present to 2081-2100 across skwenkwínem’s full geographic extent and an increase within Skeetchestn Territory. These predictions use Skeetchestn’s existing Knowledge of skwenkwínem in our predictive models to support Skeetchestn’s goals of food sovereignty. We also discuss the existing field of species distribution modelling regarding culturally significant species, and how geographical tools can support Indigenous communities’ decision-making and sovereignty assertion. Our study is an example of reproducible species distribution modelling done in partnership with an Indigenous community, balancing the need for open science and ethical and equitable research. iv Lay Summary Culturally significant plants have been tended to by Indigenous Peoples since time immemorial. However, climate change and land-use changes, such as the introduction of livestock, have ruined habitat for many of these plants. Skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata Pursh) is a culturally significant food plant for Secwépemc of Skeetchestn Indian Band. Skeetchestn’s skwenkwínem patches are declining in quality, and they cannot use skwenkwínem as a meaningful food source. This study investigates where ideal growing conditions for skwenkwínem may exist now and in the future, under predicted climate change. We interviewed three Skeetchestn community members to better understand their Land and their skwenkwínem patches. We used this information to produce maps with places where skwenkwínem might grow best today, and in 2081-2100 if no climate change mitigation policies are implemented. These maps can be used by the Skeetchestn community to help conserve their skwenkwínem patches for generations to come. v Preface We are co-producing the Knowledge resulting from this project together, with our research partners and interview participants acknowledged as co-researchers and given authorship in publications using their data, as recommended by Nêhiyaw and Saulteaux scholar Margaret Kovach (Kovach 2021). Co-authorship affirms that the Knowledge was co-created (Brant-Castellano 2004, Barber and Jackson 2015, Bird-Naytowhow 2017, Wong et al. 2020, Kovach 2021). This project would not exist without Skeetchestn Traditional Ecological Knowledge and the ongoing use of this Knowledge. This study was approved by the University of British Columbia (UBC’s) Behavioural Research Ethics Board, study #H22-03472, and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s (AAFC’s) Human Research Ethics Committee, study # 2023-F-004. We affirm that the Skeetchestn community and the Secwépemc Nation have intellectual property Rights to their Oral Traditions, Oral Histories, and their Knowledge. Our co-researchers maintain ownership over their Knowledge presented in this thesis and contained within the verbatim transcripts. Place names are not included, to protect the Skeetchestn community and their food sources from further harm. Through this thesis, there are discussions of dispossession, land-use changes, climate change, and residential schools, which may be distressing to readers. Please reach out to the resources below if you are struggling in any way with the content: IRSSS Toll-Free Line: 1-800-721-0066 24 hr National Crisis Line: 1-866-925-4419 vi Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... iii Lay Summary ............................................................................................................................... iv Preface .............................................................................................................................................v Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................... vi List of Tables ..................................................................................................................................x List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xi A note on language and formatting ........................................................................................... xii Glossary ...................................................................................................................................... xiii Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................xv Dedication ................................................................................................................................... xvi Chapter 1: Introduction – Setting the Table ...............................................................................1 1.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Positionality .................................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Research objectives ......................................................................................................... 5 1.3.1 Research questions .................................................................................................. 6 1.4 Methods and methodology .............................................................................................. 7 1.4.1 Ethical considerations and care ............................................................................... 8 1.4.2 Semi-structured interviews ..................................................................................... 9 1.4.3 Qualitative data collection .................................................................................... 10 1.4.4 Co-researcher selection ......................................................................................... 11 1.5 Quantitative analysis ..................................................................................................... 11 1.6 Structure of the thesis.................................................................................................... 13 1.7 Background ................................................................................................................... 13 1.7.1 Skeetchestn Territory ............................................................................................ 14 1.7.2 Colonial ideologies ............................................................................................... 14 1.7.3 Geography and colonialism .................................................................................. 16 1.7.4 Conservation vs stewardship................................................................................. 18 1.7.5 Biology of skwenkwínem ........................................................................................ 19 vii 1.7.5.1 Cultural use ....................................................................................................... 22 1.7.5.2 Potential influences of climate change on skwenkwínem ................................... 23 1.7.6 Species distribution models .................................................................................. 24 Chapter 2: Qualitative Knowledge – a first course of sustenance and place-based Knowledge ....................................................................................................................................26 2.1 Overview ....................................................................................................................... 26 2.2 Theme 1: Nourishment ................................................................................................. 28 2.2.1 Dietary nutrition .................................................................................................... 29 2.2.2 Preparation ............................................................................................................ 30 2.2.3 Difficulties harvesting ........................................................................................... 31 2.3 Theme 2: Colonization .................................................................................................. 34 2.3.1 Displacement......................................................................................................... 34 2.3.2 Cattle ..................................................................................................................... 36 2.3.3 Roads and transportation....................................................................................... 38 2.3.4 Logging ................................................................................................................. 41 2.3.5 Fire suppression .................................................................................................... 45 2.3.6 Disruption in stewardship ..................................................................................... 47 2.4 Theme 3: Interconnectedness ........................................................................................ 49 2.4.1 Stewardship - yecwmenúl’ecwem ......................................................................... 49 2.4.2 Ecological indicators ............................................................................................. 54 2.4.3 Seasonal round ...................................................................................................... 58 2.5 Theme 4: Kinship .......................................................................................................... 61 2.5.1 Matriarchs ............................................................................................................. 62 2.5.2 Blood memory ...................................................................................................... 63 2.5.3 Access privileges .................................................................................................. 65 2.6 Theme 5: Places ............................................................................................................ 66 2.6.1 The community patch ........................................................................................... 67 2.6.2 Preferred habitat .................................................................................................... 69 2.6.3 Sovereignty ........................................................................................................... 71 2.7 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 73 viii Chapter 3: Predicting the distribution of skwenkwínem using tidysdm - the second dinner course ............................................................................................................................................75 3.1 Overview ....................................................................................................................... 75 3.2 Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 75 3.3 Research questions ........................................................................................................ 76 3.4 Study areas .................................................................................................................... 76 3.5 Methods......................................................................................................................... 78 3.5.1 Occurrence data .................................................................................................... 79 3.5.2 Predictor data ........................................................................................................ 81 3.5.2.1 Predictor selection ............................................................................................. 82 3.5.2.2 Contribution of predictor variables ................................................................... 84 3.5.3 Model evaluation and selection ............................................................................ 85 3.5.4 Ensemble approach ............................................................................................... 86 3.5.5 Classification of suitable or unsuitable habitat ..................................................... 86 3.6 Results ........................................................................................................................... 87 3.6.1 Model performance ............................................................................................... 87 3.6.2 Predictor contributions .......................................................................................... 89 3.6.3 Predicted area ........................................................................................................ 93 3.7 Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 98 3.7.1 Model performance ............................................................................................... 98 3.7.2 Predictor contributions .......................................................................................... 98 3.7.3 Predicted area ...................................................................................................... 104 3.7.4 Limitations .......................................................................................................... 106 3.8 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 107 Chapter 4: A synthesis of mixed-methods - Bringing spaces and places together over dessert..........................................................................................................................................108 4.1 Overview ..................................................................................................................... 108 4.2 Places and spaces ........................................................................................................ 108 4.3 Species distribution model review .............................................................................. 110 4.3.1 Studies acknowledging cultural significance ...................................................... 110 4.3.2 Studies using Indigenous Knowledge to inform their approach and models...... 112 ix 4.4 Spatial tools as mechanisms to communicate Indigenous Knowledge ....................... 116 4.5 Rights-based geography .............................................................................................. 119 4.6 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 121 Chapter 5: Concluding our visit over a cup of tea ..................................................................122 5.1 Management recommendations .................................................................................. 123 5.2 Reflections – finishing our cups ................................................................................. 124 References ...................................................................................................................................126 Appendices ..................................................................................................................................146 Appendix A - Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act articles ......................... 146 Appendix B - Truth and Reconciliation Commission Calls to Action articles ....................... 148 Appendix C - Tobacco Protocol ............................................................................................. 150 Appendix D - Semi-structured interview questions ................................................................ 151 Appendix E - ODMAP protocol ............................................................................................. 152 Appendix F - Pseudoabsence sampling .................................................................................. 158 x List of Tables Table 3.1. Predictor variables used in Informed species distribution model. ............................... 84 Table 3.2. Species distribution model performance for Informed and Bioclim models. .............. 88 Table 3.3. Absolute and percent area predicted as suitable for skwenkwínem ............................... 94 xi List of Figures Figure 1.1. Skwenkwínem plant in bloom ....................................................................................... 21 Figure 2.1. Resulting themes from inductive analysis .................................................................. 28 Figure 2.2. Skwenkwínem corms ..................................................................................................... 33 Figure 2.3. Decommissioned road through Skeetchestn community skwenkwínem patch............. 39 Figure 2.4. Slash pile on top of Skeetchestn’s community skwenkwínem patch ............................ 42 Figure 2.5. Skwenkwínem and associated indicator plants ............................................................. 56 Figure 2.6. Skeetchestn community skwenkwínem patch ............................................................... 68 Figure 3.1. Species distribution model study extent in North America ........................................ 77 Figure 3.2. Species distribution model methods workflow .......................................................... 79 Figure 3.3. Species distribution ensemble model performance. ................................................... 88 Figure 3.4. Informed species distribution model predictor importance ........................................ 90 Figure 3.5. Marginal response curve, soil temperature seasonality .............................................. 90 Figure 3.6. Marginal response curve, elevation ............................................................................ 91 Figure 3.7. Bioclim species distribution model predictor importance .......................................... 91 Figure 3.8. Marginal response curve, precipitation of the wettest month ..................................... 92 Figure 3.9. Marginal response curve, precipitation seasonality, coefficient of variation ............. 92 Figure 3.10. Continuous habitat suitability present and future predictions for skwenkwínem ....... 95 Figure 3.11. Area of agreement predictions for skwenkwínem Informed and Bioclim models ...... 97 Figure 5.1. Skwenkwínem emerging from the slash pile ............................................................... 125 xii A note on language and formatting Our writing promotes the use of Secwepemctsín names first, followed by English and Latin, as recommended by Wong et al. (2020). Following Indigenous Style by Opaskwayak Cree scholar Gregory Younging, words relating to Indigenous identities and nationality are capitalized, such as Rights and Protocols (Younging 2018). Indigenous words are italicized to distinguish them from the English text. Whenever reasonable, collective terms are used rather than individual. An alternative spelling of Skeetchestn, “Skítsesten” exists, but the community uses the former spelling, which is used in this thesis (Ignace and Ignace 2017:18). The present tense is used when discussing Secwépemc presence on the Land to affirm that Secwépemc continue to occupy their Territory. The quotes from our co-researchers from the semi-structured interviews are written in Arial font and italicized to distinguish them from the surrounding text. This formatting choice is inspired by Daliso Mwanza and Hanna Paul’s master’s theses (Mwanza 2022, Paul 2022). xiii Glossary Pronunciations are available at: https://www.firstvoices.com/secwepemc Tmicw: Lands, waters, and all living creatures (Ignace and Ignace 2017, SNRC 2022). Secwépemcúl´ecw: the traditional Territory and homelands of Secwépemc (Ignace and Ignace 2017). Secwépemc: “the spread-out people” who have occupied Secwépemcul’ecw since time immemorial (Ignace and Ignace 2016:25, Ignace and Ignace 2017:16). Yecwmínmen: traditional caretakers of Secwépemcúl´ecw (Peacock et al. 2016). “[Y]ecwmínmen have a responsibility to protect their tmicw from harm for future generations, and to maintain a tradition of reciprocal and relational accountability among all who rely on the lands, waters, and air of Secwépemcúl´ecw.” (SNRC 2022). Secwepemctsín: the (endangered) language spoken by Secwépemc People, including Skeetchestn. The Skeetchestn community speaks the western dialect of Secwepemctsín (Ignace and Ignace 2017). Indigenous Title: “the Indigenous Right to collective ownership and jurisdiction over land and resources.” (Younging 2018:145). Self-determination: “the right of peoples to choose freely how they would be governed.” (Younging 2018:150). Indigenous sovereignty: “As distinct Nations, sovereignty refers to the inherent and constitutional rights of First Nations, Inuit and Métis to self-determination, self-government, cultural and spiritual practices, language, social and legal systems, political structures, and inherent relationships with lands, waters and all upon them” (Chung-Tiam-Food 2022:90). xiv Guest: a person whose cultural and linguistic homeland is somewhere other than where they are currently located (Smith 2011). Corm: “A fleshy, thickened underground stem at the base of a plant, usually more or less spherical, resembling a bulb, but solid rather than layered.” (Turner 1997). “Corm” and “potato” are used interchangeably in this thesis. Geophyte: “plants whose nutritious organs are below the ground.” (Ames 2005:88). skwenkwínem: western spring beauty, Claytonia lanceolata t´sts’elq: arrowleaf balsamroot, Balsamorhiza sagittata scwicw: yellow glacier lily, Erythronium grandiflorum qwléwe: nodding onion, Allium cernuum qéq’me: chocolate lily, Fritillaria affinis qweq’wíle: large-fruited desert parsley, Lomatium macrocarpum llwk’qpin: bitterroot, Lewisia rediviva sxúsem: soapberry, Shepherdia canadensis secwsqéqxe7ten: trapper’s tea, Ledum glandulosum textsin’: peppery tiger lily, Lilium columbianum xv Acknowledgements I cannot thank the Skeetchestn community enough for providing me with this research opportunity and a home during field season. I am humbled by their generosity. A huge thank you to our co-researchers: Lizzy, for sharing your stories and your Knowledge with the utmost patience; Sam, for your humour and your keen insights; Gabe, for the enriching conversations; Darvy, for showing me your Territory and sharing your stories. Thank you to Shaun, Meghan, Chereen, Liam R., Liliana, Katrina, Hailey, Carley, Cam, Michelle, Liam J., Olivia, Brontë, and Fabio for your hard work. For everyone in the BLERF lab, I could not have made it through this without you. Thank you to Valerie for your expertise and for sharing your field snacks. Thank you, Carroll for your kindness, and Don for always welcoming me home. Kukwstsétsemc. Jason, thank you for always dreaming big and for pushing the institutional bounds with me. I admire your dedication to Indigenous data sovereignty, and I look forward to seeing where we go next. Dave, thank you for keeping me grounded and for our many miles traversed through Skeetchestn Territory. And thank you for falling back when we were traipsing through the bush and I expressed my fear of cougars. It was not unnoticed. Fiona, thank you for accidentally (?) making me an anthropologist and for all the time you spent training me to be one. Adam, thank you for always centering me within the community and for your thought-provoking insights. A huge thank you to my family who have supported me through this journey. Thank you to: the National Science and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) for funding this research through their Indigenous Scholars’ Initiative; Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) for the funding through their Research Affiliate Program; the University of British Columbia’s Indigenous Strategic Initiatives Fund for funding our field work and community engagement. xvi Dedication This work is dedicated to the children who did not come home, those who did, and those to come. May you forever be able to harvest potatoes up in your mountains. 1 Chapter 1: Introduction – Setting the Table 1.1 Overview Our Elders also remind us that, after more than a century of colonial western science-based, capitalist profit-oriented exploitation of our Secwépemc homeland, it is in a state of q̓wempúlecw: the land, in its holistic dimension of landscape, ecology and all its living beings, has become barren due to human activity, impoverishing our wellbeing and existence. (Ronald and Marianne Ignace in Dickson-Hoyle et al. 2022:4). Settler colonialism has led to Land-use changes that threaten indigenous plant populations and the Knowledge of those plants. Such imposed Land-uses include urbanization, recreational use, the introduction of invasive species, fire suppression, commercial logging, damming, and cattle grazing (Turner et al. 2000, Moore 2001, Turner and Turner 2008) Land-use changes from tending to exploiting, coupled with anthropogenic climate change, continue to cause declines in the abundance and quality of many plant species that are culturally important food sources for Indigenous Peoples (Garibaldi and Turner 2004). Extractive and exploitative practices and the settler-colonial policies that support them have disrupted access to, and Knowledge of, culturally important food plants, leading to a reduction in their cultivation and harvest. Skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata; Montiaceae, western spring beauty, mountain potato) is a food plant that is culturally significant to Secwépemc People and is declining in quality and abundance (Turner 2014, Lizzy Ignace, personal communication February 2022). Skwenkwínem is a geophyte that produces corms, which are harvested and consumed by Indigenous Peoples across what is now known as North America. Skwenkwínem corms were once a significant portion of the Secwépemc diet (Turner 1997, 2014, Ignace et al. 2016). However, soil compaction from cattle grazing is limiting high quality habitat for skwenkwínem, constraining the size of corms produced by the plant (Turner 1997, 2014, Secwépemc Elder Mary Thomas in Turner et al. 2000). A reduction in Indigenous care-taking practices has been 2 identified as a cause for the reduction in the abundance and the quality of skwenkwínem corms and a decline in skwenkwínem patch productivity (Turner 2014, Elder Mary Thomas in Ignace et al. 2016). Ongoing changes in climate compound the challenges presented by a reduction in caretaking practices. Skwenkwínem emerges immediately following snowmelt, making it particularly sensitive to snowpack and the timing of snowmelt (Gezon et al. 2016). The timing of snowmelt is advancing due to climate change, placing skwenkwínem individuals at risk of frost damage (Dunne et al. 2003, Gezon et al. 2016). To understand how the spatial distribution of skwenkwínem may shift with changes in local climate, and where suitable habitat exists, we created an ensemble species distribution model (SDM) for skwenkwínem. SDMs are correlative models that relate occurrence data to environmental predictor variables, such as air and soil temperature and moisture, elevation, and light availability, to predict suitable habitat (Elith and Leathwick 2009, Yates et al. 2018). Ensemble models combine several SDMs, each running different algorithms to predict habitat suitability or probability of occurrence (Araújo and New 2007, Dormann et al. 2018, Hao et al. 2019). Our ensemble model is based on skwenkwínem occurrence records in Skeetchestn Territory and British Columbia, and environmental predictor variables from publicly available databases. The skwenkwínem SDM predicts suitable habitat under future climate change scenarios to inform the selection of ideal locations for conservation efforts for skwenkwínem in Skeetchestn Territory. The major output of this work is the SDM of skwenkwínem in Skeetchestn Territory and subsequent maps to consider distributional shifts over time with introduced pressures on skwenkwínem. As part of this research, we gathered Secwépemc Knowledge, through semi-structured, one-on-one interviews, to develop a socio-ecological perspective on skwenkwínem 3 and its habitat, and used western scientific tools to illustrate suitable habitat for skwenkwínem. The intent is for these tools and collected stories to be used in the revitalization of skwenkwínem in Skeetchestn Territory to improve Skeetchestn’s access to skwenkwínem as a food source. In February 2022, I was invited to join the Revitalizing Skwenkwínem project, co-developed and co-delivered by Skeetchestn Natural Resources Corporation (SNRC) and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s Summerland Research and Development Centre (AAFC). This was a one-year pilot project aimed at securing skwenkwínem for Skeetchestn Indian Band. This project has since grown into a three-year, multi-species project titled Revitalizing Skeetchestn Agro-Ecology, to which the skwenkwínem project remains integral. In the springs of 2022, 2023, and 2024, I spent a total of 6 months living on Skeetchestn reserve and conducting field work. We monitored the phenology of select skwenkwínem plants at our study sites, collected climate data from climate stations at three of the sites, surveyed the plant communities present, and conducted harvest trials with control, hand tool, and shovel treatments. We counted flower and leaf density in our harvested quadrats, as well as the number of corms harvested, with diameter measurements for the corms harvested from those quadrats. Cattle exclusion fencing was installed to investigate skwenkwínem’s success with and without cattle grazing. These studies will investigate the anthropogenic and biotic influences on skwenkwínem and what might be causing the decline in its abundance and quality in Skeetchestn Territory. During our field seasons, I helped SNRC with bird, mule deer, bighorn sheep, beaver, and rattlesnake surveys and collected occurrence data for skwenkwínem through our travels. I spent a substantial amount of time with community members and was shown around Skeetchestn Territory. I have been invited to return to harvest more food plants, hunt in the fall, 4 and have been promised salmon. The core objective of the Revitalizing Skwenkwínem project was to create good relations between SNRC, AAFC, and UBC, and by living on reserve during field season and maintaining regular contact with community members, I believe we have started building the relationship on a good foundation. 1.2 Positionality Through my maternal grandmother, I am Nīhithaw (Woodland Cree), and from my maternal grandfather I have Quebecois/French ancestry. Through my paternal grandmother, I have Michif ancestry, and through my paternal grandfather, I have Ukrainian ancestry. I am named after my Nīhithaw and Michif great grandmothers and I consider this a great honour and responsibility. Although I am an Indigenous person myself, I was not raised in my home community or with my Nīhithaw or Michif Values. I was raised and educated within western institutions, rather than out on the Land. I am doing this place-based research with Skeetchestn due to my interest in Land-based learning that blossomed when I read Braiding Sweetgrass by Dr. Robin Wall-Kimmerer (Kimmerer 2013). The idea of building and maintaining reciprocal relationships by tending to the plants and learning from the plants as teachers was so different from what I had learned in a university setting. Learning place-based knowledge within context is my favourite way to learn and this is why I am conducting this research with the Skeetchestn community. A motivating factor in this research project is connection to community. Although I am a guest within Skeetchestn Territory, I have been warmly welcomed and have slowly built trust with the community members I have worked with. I arrived in Skeetchestn barely sure of how to distinguish a Ponderosa pine from a Douglas fir, meaning I arrived with the utmost humility. As a university researcher, I recognize that there are certain power imbalances that come into play; 5 my access to academia puts me in an advantageous position. I acknowledged to Skeetchestn community members I will be receiving a degree from this research, and I have a research affiliate position with the federal government, which is motivating me to produce tangible research outputs for the community’s benefit, so the benefits run both ways. An important event that brought me to this research was when my great uncle (gruncle) Wilfred Burton told me the Meewasin Northeast Swale, a biodiverse wetland region on the outskirts of Saskatoon, was slated for the development of a freeway. The Métis Nation of Saskatchewan tried to prove their citizens used this Land historically and continue to do so today, but were unable to prove this from the western perspective of cultural use. My drive for this research project bloomed when I made the connection between the Meewasin Northeast Swale, and when Gabe Jules told me researching out on the Land is exercising their sovereignty over Skeetchestn Territory. This is where the heart of this research lies; in playing a very small part in advancing Skeetchestn’s Right to self-determination and food sovereignty. 1.3 Research objectives The goal of this research is to establish an equitable research relationship with the Skeetchestn community by contributing to their goal of food sovereignty. As an Indigenous researcher studying with Skeetchestn, I feel a tremendous sense of responsibility to do right by the community. It is essential to conduct the research in support of Skeetchestn’s Right to self-determination, as outlined in the British Columbia Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA; 2019), and following the First Nations Information Governance Centre’s Principles of Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession (OCAP). Using statistical single species distribution models; the outputs from this study are: 6 1. A contemporary distribution map for skwenkwínem over its geographic extent and created from realized species distribution models using predictors informed by Skeetchestn Knowledge and bioclimatic variables. 2. A projected distribution map for skwenkwínem based on climate change predictions, created from a potential species distribution model. This SDM will identify suitable habitat for skwenkwínem and may be used to inform targeted revitalization efforts of skwenkwínem. This research is in line with Articles 3, 4, 5, 11, 13, 20, 24, 25, 26, 29, 31, and 32 of DRIPA (Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act 2019, Appendix A). This research responds to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s Calls to Action: 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, and 52 (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada 2015, Appendix B). 1.3.1 Research questions For this project there are two central research questions: 1. How has settler colonialism, including resource extraction activities, agriculture, and urbanization, changed the landscape of Skeetchestn Territory over time? a. How have these changes impacted the habitat available to skwenkwínem in Skeetchestn Territory? 2. What is the predicted distribution of suitable habitat for skwenkwínem presently and in 2081-2100? a. What is the effect of projected climate change scenarios on the available habitat for skwenkwínem in our study extent and Skeetchestn Territory? 7 The first research question will be addressed in Chapter 2, and the second research question will be addressed in Chapter 3. 1.4 Methods and methodology Since the relationship between Skeetchestn, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and the University of British Columbia, Okanagan, is in its early stages of development, this research is focused on process-based inquiry rather than outcome-based inquiry (Smith 2011, deLeeuw et al. 2012). The process of building an ethical and equitable relationship with the Skeetchestn community is emphasized over the production of research publications, as in outcome-based inquiry. This research is grounded in Skeetchestn’s concerns and objectives, but the research questions were developed by myself and my co-supervisors, based on consultation with SNRC and our knowledge of Skeetchestn’s research interests. This thesis is the result of a mixed-methods approach that weaves together the use of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) and western mapping methods. TEK is imperative to gaining a more holistic understanding of ecological processes. TEK and western scientific tools are used to illustrate suitable habitat, which will go back to the community for their use. This follows the Two-Eyed Seeing approach adopted by Skeetchestn Natural Resources and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in their planning of the overarching Revitalizing Skwenkwínem and Revitalizing Skeetchestn Agro-Ecology projects. The Two-Eyed Seeing approach is a Mi’kmaw concept shared by Albert and Murdena Marshall (Bartlett et al. 2012). Two-Eyed Seeing is the process of using two different knowledge systems to reach a common goal (Bartlett et al. 2012). Using western mapping tools to communicate Secwépemc Knowledge is our way of Two-Eyed Seeing to gain a better understanding of skwenkwínem. A 8 greater understanding of these culturally significant ecosystems will inform how we can secure skwenkwínem, and the habitats in which it grows, for future generations. 1.4.1 Ethical considerations and care This is a minimal risk study, as determined by the University of British Columbia’s Behavioural Research Ethics Board (BREB), study #H22-03472, and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC), study # 2023-F-004. We obtained collective consent through review by Skeetchestn’s Chief and Council, and each co-researcher provided individual consent. Tobacco is a sacred medicine, and offering tobacco when asking someone to share their Knowledge with you is Protocol for establishing a relationship (Castellano 2004). The exchange of tobacco for someone’s Knowledge is exchanging a gift for a gift, but does not commodify the Knowledge (Castellano 2004, Lavallée 2009). It has been suggested that the exchange of tobacco should replace the written consent forms required by university research ethics boards (Lavallée 2009). From my own experience, I support this Protocol when used in the correct contexts. For instance, co-researcher Gabe Jules said by accepting the tobacco and going to the interview, he was consenting to his Knowledge being shared (personal communication, June 2023). Although it is a common practice to give interview participants a pseudonym or code name, we named our co-researchers to attribute their Knowledge to them. Opaskwayak Cree scholar Shawn Wilson argues it is unethical to not name Indigenous research partners, despite the preference of university research ethics boards to keep participants anonymous (Wilson 2008). The Knowledge and the sharer of the Knowledge are tied together; we need to name the carriers of the Knowledge to avoid erasure of the co-researchers’ identities and histories (Wilson 9 2008, Svalastog and Eriksson 2010). The co-researchers will be listed as co-authors in related publications, affirming the Knowledge from this project was co-created. Acknowledging those interviewed as co-researchers reframes the interview process from extracting data from participants to co-creating Knowledge together (Loppie 2007, Kovach 2021). We transcribed the interviews verbatim and sent them to the community co-researchers for review, to ensure ongoing consent in the research process. The interview transcripts are stored on my personal encrypted computer, backed up to OneDrive, whose servers are in Canada, and stored in the Open Science Framework, with Skeetchestn Natural Resources Corporation (SNRC) having access to the transcripts. In the future, relevant SNRC employees, including the co-researchers, will steward the transcripts so Skeetchestn holds their Knowledge, following the Principles of OCAP. Co-researchers reviewed the transcripts prior to qualitative analysis, and later reviewed the thesis. Both rounds of review provided the co-researchers the space to withdraw their participation in the study if they did not agree with how their Knowledge was being used. The review process maintained both ongoing informed consent and relational accountability between me and the co-researchers. 1.4.2 Semi-structured interviews For this thesis, three semi-structured interviews (n = 3) were conducted in the spring of 2023 within the Skeetchestn community. In preparation for the 2023 field season, I grew tobacco from seeds I was gifted and processed the leaves (Appendix C). This tobacco was offered to Elders and community members I met at a language gathering, and to the co-researchers in medicine pouches I stitched together, with a small white flower (like skwenkwínem) beaded on the front 10 (Appendix C). The co-researchers received the interview questions prior to the interview to review and reflect on the questions (Appendix D). Prior to beginning the formal interview process, I offered the co-researchers the tobacco, along with a small envelope of tobacco seeds, a thank you card, and a non-incentive honourarium. I read the informed consent forms out loud to each participant prior to starting the recorded interview. Two of the interview co-researchers provided written consent, and the third provided oral consent to participate in the interview process. Once the interview commenced, I asked a set list of questions (Appendix D), each grounded in the present, and asked additional questions as they came up in conversation. Each interview lasted approximately 1.5 hours. 1.4.3 Qualitative data collection Semi-structured one-on-one interviews (n = 3) are the main qualitative research instrument for this study. We collected the interview data through audio-recorded, semi-structured one-on-one interviews with three Skeetchestn community members, to facilitate the oral transmission of Knowledge (Bird-Naytowhow et al. 2017). We conducted the interviews in English, as Skeetchestn is a small community of fewer than 600 people, with very few translators of Secwepemctsín to English. The goal was to use participatory GIS in these interviews to gather information on where skwenkwínem is located in Skeetchestn Territory, but the co-researchers preferred to share their stories orally. The Knowledge gathered informed my sampling efforts for the field season but did not result in a map with point locations from the co-researchers. We pivoted to using publicly accessible occurrence records for the thesis, with Skeetchestn-specific data to be used at a later date, and not published. 11 1.4.4 Co-researcher selection Our research partners at Skeetchestn Natural Resources Corporation, who have extensive community contacts, recommended the interview participants, hereafter referred to as co-researchers. The co-researchers are Skeetchestn community members who were selected for their Knowledge on skwenkwínem. We selected co-researchers from different representative age groups to gain a wider perspective on the Oral Histories and traditional and contemporary harvesting practices, and the current observations and concerns with the health of skwenkwínem patches within Skeetchestn Territory. All co-researchers were 18 years of age or older at the time of interviewing and we had an existing working relationship prior to being invited to the interview process. I had known Sam and Lizzy for a year before interviewing, from the Revitalizing Skwenkwínem project, and had known Gabe for a few months through participating in wildlife surveys with SNRC. It was the intent to interview Elders for this thesis work, but the limited timeframe and competing timelines of ethics review prevented the necessary engagement to set up a talking circle with the Elders. Darvy Hewitt preferred not to participate in a semi-structured, audio-recorded interview, but he shared lots of Knowledge throughout my time in Skeetchestn Territory, mostly shared out on the Land. Darvy provided consent to write about his Knowledge with a handshake and an offering of tobacco. Regarding age, Darvy is in his 50s, Gabe in his 40s, Sam in her 30s, and Lizzy in her 20s. 1.5 Quantitative analysis The quantitative portion of this study is based on species distribution modelling, through an ensemble approach, to identify suitable habitat for skwenkwínem now and in future scenarios. We 12 used the tidysdm R package (Leonardi et al. 2024) as the framework for the species distribution model. We conducted an ensemble species distribution model, first with occurrence data for Ranunculus glaberrimus (sagebrush buttercup) from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF.org 2024), obtained using the rgbif (Chamberlain et al. 2024) R package (R Core Team 2023). We used Ranunculus glaberrimus as an independent test species to build our model workflow, to avoid interaction with the skwenkwínem data prior to analysis. Ranunculus glaberrimus is a species that often co-occurs with skwenkwínem, but has no known cultural significance, and was therefore chosen as an independent dataset to test our SDM workflow. We trained the models using R. glaberrimus data and completed a pre-registration (available at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/RM9S2) based on the ODMAP protocol, provided in Appendix E (Zurell et al. 2020). A pre-registration outlines analytical decisions made for transparency and reproducibility, prior to analyzing the primary data. A pre-registration and reporting modelling choices through the ODMAP protocol are important steps to ensuring the reproducibility of SDM studies (Zurell et al. 2020). Many SDM studies fail to report their analytical decisions in sufficient detail to reproduce; in this study, we provide a pre-registration, ODMAP protocol, and relevant code for reproducibility. Upon completion of the pre-registration with R. glaberrimus, we inputted the skwenkwínem occurrence data from GBIF into the tidysdm pipeline. We used climatic, edaphic, and topographic predictor data in both realized and potential models, with future climate predictions coming from the WorldClim dataset based on the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) climate model HadGEM3-GC31-LL (Eyring et al. 2016, Roberts 2017, Met Office Hadley Centre 2024). We created a contemporary prediction of suitable habitat for skwenkwínem using predictor variables informed by the Knowledge collected in the interviews 13 with Skeetchestn community members. The outputs from these models are species-environment curves, depicting the relationship between the species and the chosen predictor variables, and continuous habitat suitability maps. 1.6 Structure of the thesis Since the overall objective is to contribute to Skeetchestn’s efforts for food sovereignty, the metaphor of visiting over a meal will guide us through this thesis. This metaphor is inspired by Hanna Paul’s MA thesis, which brings readers on a journey from picking saskatoon berries to baking and eating a saskatoon berry pie (Paul 2023). This first chapter is the literature review, which can be considered setting the table. Here, we set the context for the research on skwenkwínem by introducing Skeetchestn, grounding us in their Lands or tmicw, and provide an overview of colonization in these places. In Chapter Two, we present a first course that brings to the forefront the qualitative Knowledge that is central to framing the context for the places explored in Chapter Three. In the Chapter Three is the second course, which is the quantitative SDM portion of this work, and my specific contribution to the Revitalizing Skwenkwínem project. Chapter Four is a synthesis of the qualitative and quantitative work to bring together places and spaces, and is our dessert. Lastly, the Conclusion chapter closes our visit with a cup of tea together. 1.7 Background The background research serves as a place-setting for this thesis; I welcome guests to the table to learn about Skeetchestn and the context surrounding their drive to protect skwenkwínem. 14 1.7.1 Skeetchestn Territory The Secwépemc Nation is an Interior Salish Nation, occupying the approximately 180 000 km2 between the Rocky Mountains, upper Fraser River, and the Arrow Lakes in what we now call British Columbia (Matthew and McKinnon 2018). Skeetchestn Indian Band is one of 17 distinct bands within Secwépemc Nation (Matthew and McKinnon, K. 2018, Tk̓emlúps te Secwépemc 2023). “Skeetchestn” means “the meeting place” in Secwépemctsín (Moore 2001:2). Skeetchestn Territory encompasses the Deadman Watershed, in the arid Thompson-Okanagan Plateau (Moore 2001, Skeetchestn Indian Band 2013). These Lands consist of rolling mountains, from the grasslands around Kamloops Lake to the dense subalpine fir forests topping the mountains. The Thompson River runs through these Lands out of Kamloops Lake, with many tributaries that feed into it. This Territory has been occupied since time immemorial and continues to be occupied by Secwépemc of Skeetchestn (Skeetchestn Indian Band 2013). 1.7.2 Colonial ideologies It is imperative to start by affirming that First Nations have inherent authority over our Lands, due to inhabiting them since time immemorial (Adams et al. 2014, Assembly of First Nations 2018). Skeetchestn exercises sovereignty over their entire traditional Territory, though the “crown” still asserts authority over Skeetchestn Territory (Skeetchestn Indian Band 2013). The Doctrine of Discovery, created in the 1400s by popes of the Roman Catholic Church to proselytize Christianity, justified the colonization and dispossession of Indigenous Lands and Peoples by Christians, who saw themselves as superior to all non-Christian peoples (Assembly of First Nations 2018, Rata 2020, Tomchuk 2023). The word “discovery” 15 erroneously implies that Indigenous Peoples did not exist as complex social beings capable of occupying territory (Younging 2018). The ideology of European superiority justified the violent indoctrination of Indigenous Peoples into Christianity through various means, perhaps most notably, the Indian Residential School System. The Doctrine of Discovery is the foundation for subsequent colonial policies and practices, including the Indian Act, reserve system, Sixties Scoop, and the Indian Residential School System (Tomchuk 2023). In March of 2023, the Vatican rescinded the Doctrine of Discovery, although they failed to take responsibility for their role in the colonization of Indigenous Peoples (Tomchuk 2023). The doctrine of terra nullius is the ethnocentric concept of seeing unfamiliar Lands as “no-man’s land” or “empty land” whose potential for resource exploitation is wasted (Deloria 1969, Borrows 1997, Cardinal 1999, McMillan and Yellowhorn 2004, McDonald 2005:269, Castleden et al. 2012). Europeans used terra nullius to justify the colonization and dispossession of Indigenous Lands from Indigenous Peoples and to deny our claims to our territories (Deur and Turner 2005, Smith 2011, Assembly of First Nations 2018). The Europeans compared their large permanent settlements and intensive agriculture to Indigenous lifestyles, which were incorrectly perceived as nomadic, passive hunter-gatherer societies (Harley 1989, Brealey 1995, McMillan and Yellowhorn 2004, Ames 2005, Darby 2005, Deur and Turner 2005, McDonald 2005, Smith 2005, Louis 2007, Castleden et al. 2012). Early colonizers and anthropologists in what we now call British Columbia were fascinated by First Nations’ intensive salmon harvests and assumed that salmon comprised an overwhelming majority of First Nations’ diets (Deur and Turner 2005). These early colonizers failed to recognize First Nations’ tending of indigenous plants as sophisticated agro-ecosystems, likely because they were unfamiliar with the indigenous plants encountered (Deur and Turner 2005). 16 By denying First Nations Peoples as sophisticated agriculturalists, the colonizers justified their views of terra nullius to support their desire to colonize and exploit the Land. It is hypothesized that up to 50% of Interior Salish Peoples’ diet consisted of root plant starches, demonstrating the colonial assumptions of salmon-dominant diets were misconstrued and damaging to the holistic picture of First Nations food sovereignty (Hunn et al. 1998, Ignace et al. 2016). These ignorant views of wasted Land and space persist today to undermine Indigenous Title to our Lands. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 formally recognized Aboriginal Land Title and Rights, requiring negotiation to take place for colonizers to inhabit Indigenous Lands, and recognizing that terra nullius was not an applicable concept in Canada due to our inherent Aboriginal Rights to our Lands (Turner et al. 2005, Assembly of First Nations 2018, Younging 2018, Irwin, Robert 2018, Skeetchestn Indian Band n.d.). When the First Nations reserves in British Columbia were planned, the McKenna-McBride Royal Commission failed to recognize First Nations cultivated plant species as culturally significant (Deur and Turner 2005, Turner et al. 2005). Salmon harvesting sites were largely protected, although restricted, but First Nations were dispossessed of their plant resource sites (Deur and Turner 2005, Popken et al. 2023). 1.7.3 Geography and colonialism Geography is a product of colonialism and was a tool that facilitated conquest, so it is important to situate the discipline of geography as a tool of colonization in this thesis (Castleden et al. 2012). The perception of terra nullius by British colonizers with maps in hand, allowed the British to justify the uprooting, displacement, and dispossession of Indigenous Peoples from our 17 ancestral Lands (Deloria 1969, Borrows 1997, Cardinal 1999, McMillan and Yellowhorn 2004, Castleden et al. 2012). Positivism is the western belief that the natural world can be examined and is understood through measuring it; colonizers viewed space as translatable to static representations of lines, which are compartmentalized and measurable (Smith 2011). Representing space on paper allowed for cartographers to chart their biased views of how the Land was used, or rather, how they thought the Land was not being used (Brealey 1995, Smith 2011). By erasing Indigenous Peoples from our Lands through maps, cartographers were conduits for the colonization and exploitation of our Lands (Brealey 1995, Smith 2011). Our places were renamed, and Indigenous children taught the colonized names rather than their original names through the Indian Residential School System. Reserve plots were planned for us to live on, regardless of the potential of those Lands to provide for us. In the words of Secwépemc Chiefs, “… we are being more and more restricted to our reservations which in most places are unfit or inadequate to maintain us” (Chiefs of the Shuswap, Okanagan, and Couteau Tribes 1910:6). Although static representations of spaces and places through maps have been used for the colonization of Indigenous Lands, they are also useful tools for exercising sovereignty over Indigenous Lands. The paradox of GIS as both empowering and oppressive is not lost here. By mapping out cultural use areas, there is a tangible visualization of the use of Indigenous Lands by Indigenous Peoples. Skeetchestn Natural Resources Corporation has several employees working within GIS systems to visualize their research and the cultural use of their tmicw. The maps produced in this study will be used by Skeetchestn as they see fit, to reposition the use of geographic tools to be used in exercising sovereignty. 18 1.7.4 Conservation vs stewardship The following section briefly outlines important points on the differences between western concepts of conservation and Indigenous concepts of stewardship, discussed further in chapter 2. On the topic of conservation from the traditional western perspective, Forester Clyde Leavitt of the Commission of Conservation said: The fundamental idea of conservation is to secure the fullest possible utilization of all natural resources, avoiding all unnecessary waste, and so using those resources which are the result of growth that the supply will continue, adequate for the future needs of the people, instead of becoming exhausted. (Leavitt 1915, as cited in Parminter 1981:18) Conservation is a doctrine of colonial governments, who have historically exploited natural resources, and Indigenous Peoples have rarely benefitted from colonial natural resource management activities (Adams et al. 2014). Fortress conservation is the typical mode of conservation; establishing protected areas and keeping humans away from nature (Adams et al. 2014, Tauli-Corpuz et al. 2020). Human disturbance of ecosystems has a negative connotation and has therefore been heavily regulated, resulting in disruptions to the ecosystems that have co-evolved with humans (Loewen et al. 2016). In many cases, removing humans from socioecological systems has done more damage than good, infringing upon human Rights and contributing to the biodiversity crisis (Tauli-Corpuz et al. 2020). In contrast, Indigenous concepts of kincentric ecology are holistic and reciprocal. As explained by Rarámuri scholar Enrique Salmón, “[w]e are all related to, and play a role in, the complexity of life” (Salmón 2000:1328). Kincentric ecology is relationship-based: [O]ther lifeforms both plant and animal – and even non-living entities such as the sun, mountains, waters and winds, are regarded as having human traits, and as being, in fact, our relatives: generous relatives who give of themselves so that humans may live. (Turner and Clifton 2009:181) 19 Kincentric concepts position humans among Creation and as reliant on other beings, rather than in superior positions. The nurturing of ecosystems by humans is considered upholding our relationship to those ecosystems and fulfilling our role in Creation. Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) of the Land and our Kin is developed over millennia of lived experiences on the Land and is deeply entrenched in Indigenous Values and places (Kirkness and Barnhardt 1991, Adams et al. 2014). TEK is defined as: ‘‘a cumulative body of knowledge, practice and belief, evolving by adaptive processes and handed down through generations by cultural transmission’’ (Berkes 2008, as cited in Turner and Clifton 2009:181). As a Values-based system, TEK includes instructions for how to maintain a relationship with the plants and animals that give themselves to us, grounded in spiritual beliefs and transcending ecological co-existence. Weaving together western conservation and Indigenous stewardship practices is beneficial to conserving our Kin and is part of our responsibility to Creation. With each generation of scientists, the baseline knowledge on ecosystems shifts, but Indigenous place-based Knowledge can preserve baseline data through the intergenerational transmission of Knowledge (Paul-Burke et al. 2020). Weaving Indigenous place-based Knowledge and western scientific tools provides a more holistic understanding of our environment, through the process of Two-Eyed Seeing (Bartlett et al. 2012). 1.7.5 Biology of skwenkwínem Skwenkwínem is the Secwepemctsín name for western spring beauty (Claytonia lanceolata), a culturally significant food plant for Secwépemc People and many other First Nations in western North America (Fig 1.1). Skwenkwínem is an early-flowering, corm-bearing geophyte, and a 20 spring ephemeral (Stewart and Wiens 1971, Gezon et al. 2016). Ephemerals are plants whose aboveground parts exist for a short period of time before senescing, and geophytes are plants that bear subterraneous nutrient storage organs (Stewart and Wiens 1971, Dunne et al. 2003, Ames 2005, Niklas 2008, Gezon et al. 2016). Skwenkwínem produces subterranean corms (Fig. 1.1), which store carbohydrates and allow shoots to grow rapidly once favourable conditions are met when the snow melts in the spring (Niklas 2008, Yoshie 2011). Vegetative and sexual development occur underground, making skwenkwínem one of the first plants to flower following spring snowmelt (Halleck and Wiens 1966, Stewart and Wiens 1971, Douglas and Taylor 1972). The underground corm and senescence of aboveground parts facilitate skwenkwínem’s survival through the dry summer season and disturbances such as fire (Sosa and Loera 2017, Pausas et al. 2018, Howard et al. 2019). Skwenkwínem seeds are myrmecochorous, meaning they are dispersed by ants, typically Formica canadensis (Hymenoptera:Formicidae; Turnbull et al. 1983). Myrmecochorous seeds contain nutritive tissue, called an eliasome, which the ants are attracted to and subsequently consume (Ortiz et al. 2021). Myrmecochorous seeds reduce intraspecific competition due to dispersal of the seeds away from the parent plant and support survival through disturbances by deposition in ant colonies (Turnbull et al. 1983, Ortiz et al. 2021). Ant colonies are nutrient-rich structures and often occur in moist soils in open, sunny spots, which are ideal places for seed germination (Turnbull et al. 1983, Ortiz et al. 2021). 21 Figure 1.1. Left: Skwenkwínem (western spring beauty, Claytonia lanceolata) plant in bloom. Right: Skwenkwínem plant showing above- and below-ground parts. © Hannah Pilat, 2022 Skwenkwínem occurs from the Rocky Mountains to the west coast of North America and grows at elevations of sea level to 3600 m in well-drained soils (Davis 1966, Stewart and Wiens 1971, Douglas and Taylor 1972, Miller and Chambers 2006, Tribble et al. 2021). Secwépemc have influenced the geographic distribution of skwenkwínem through intentional dispersal by scattering the corms during harvest time (Lepofsky and Lertzman 2008, Turner 2014, Turner et al. 2021). Cultivators improved the conditions of cultivated plots or moved propagules to increase accessibility to skwenkwínem, thus increasing its ecological distribution (Deur and Turner 2005, Lepofsky and Lertzman 2008). Skwenkwínem is hypothesized to be sensitive to growing degree days, so shoots emerge from the soil when the plant is less likely to be negatively impacted by freezing, frost, and drought (Chuine 2010, Theobald et al. 2017). Sufficient snowpack insulates skwenkwínem’s vegetative and reproductive organs at or just above 0 ºC during winter, leaving them dormant 22 and viable for the growing season (Miller and Chambers 2006, Briceño et al. 2015). Prior to snowmelt, air temperatures are much cooler than the soil, so the phenology of skwenkwínem is an adaptation that protects the plant from adverse weather conditions (Briceño et al. 2015). Douglas and Taylor (1972) found that following snowmelt, skwenkwínem tended to flower within 3 days, fruit within 10 days, and disperse seeds and senesce around 30 days. These reproductive events are synchronous with the activity of pollinators and seed dispersers. Skwenkwínem plants are pollinated primarily by sweat bees (Lassioglossum spp.), which emerge early in the spring, as well as Hylaeus spp. and Ceratina spp. (Douglas and Taylor 1972, Gezon et al. 2016). If skwenkwínem plants bloom later in the season, they tend to be pollinated by bumblebees and flies, which are less effective pollinators (Gezon et al. 2016). 1.7.5.1 Cultural use Indigenous Peoples have cultivated food and medicinal plants since time immemorial. Although harvested at high intensities, traditional stewardship practices enhanced root plant populations by improving growing conditions and avoiding resource overexploitation (Deur and Turner 2005, Turner 2020). Growing conditions are improved through propagation, transplanting, dispersal through trade, aerating the soil, pruning, prescriptive burning, and selective cultivation and harvesting (Anderson and Rowney 1999, Turner and Peacock 2005, Karalius and Alpert 2010, McCune et al. 2013, Turner 2014, Vanderplank et al. 2014, Cook-Patton et al. 2014, Comberti et al. 2015, Trant et al. 2016, Armstrong et al. 2018, Turner 2020, Armstrong et al. 2021). Secwépemc cultivation practices create microhabitats that support distinct species assemblages, which is important for the conservation of biodiversity in conifer-dominated landscapes (Anderson and Rowney 1999, McCune et al. 2013, Turner 2014, 2020, 23 Armstrong et al. 2021). A reduction in Indigenous care-taking practices has caused a decline in the use and abundance of traditional food plants, with negative socioecological consequences, discussed in Chapter 2 (Elder Mary Thomas in Ignace et al. 2016). 1.7.5.2 Potential influences of climate change on skwenkwínem Early flowering species are particularly sensitive to environmental cues and flowering plants at high elevations are subject to low temperatures and short growing seasons (Dunne et al. 2003, Lambert et al. 2010, Theobald et al. 2017, Jerome et al. 2021). The phenology of plants is directly affected by abiotic conditions, such as snowpack, which are advancing in time due to climate warming effects, particularly at high elevations (Dunne et al. 2003, Forrest et al. 2010, Briceño et al. 2015, Gezon et al. 2016). Reduced snowpack can result in advanced snowmelt where skwenkwínem emerges too soon and is killed by frost (Forrest et al. 2010, Gezon et al. 2016, Pardee et al. 2018). Frost causes ice crystals to form in the plant’s aboveground tissues, causing mortality or detrimental damage to reproductive organs (Briceño et al. 2015, Pardee et al. 2018). Early flowering species at high elevations are subjected to particularly strong climate change effects, putting skwenkwínem at risk of habitat unsuitability (Dunne et al. 2003, Lambert et al. 2010, Meng et al. 2018, Jerome et al. 2021). Climate-induced shifts in plant species distributions are based on the plant’s seed dispersal, germination, and seedling establishment capabilities (Briceño et al. 2015). High elevation environments are limiting in both space and growing conditions (Lambert et al. 2010). Spring arrives later at higher elevations, the growing season is shorter, and slope and aspect influence the growing conditions through light availability and temperature (de Keyzer et al. 2017). Montane conditions are already limiting to the distribution of skwenkwínem in 24 space, and changing climate conditions are likely to affect skwenkwínem’s habitat suitability (Briceño et al. 2015). Since skwenkwínem’s phenology is tightly tied to climate cues, understanding the effects of climate change in their habitat is important for predicting where skwenkwínem can survive in the future. 1.7.6 Species distribution models Species distribution models (SDMs) are correlative statistical frameworks that fit a species’ occurrence data to environmental predictor variables to describe species’ relationships to their environment (Guisan and Zimmermann 2000, Elith et al. 2006, Elith and Leathwick 2009, Yates et al. 2018, Wilkinson et al. 2019, Araújo et al. 2019, König et al. 2021). The aim of SDMs is to understand the conditions in which a species grows and use those conditions to estimate the similarity between occupied sites and unknown sites to predict the species’ geographic distribution (Yates et al. 2018, Hijmans and Elith 2023). SDMs use statistical relationships to estimate a species’ realized niche, which is then used to predict the suitability of habitat for that species in both space and time (Elith and Leathwick 2009, Thuiller et al. 2009, Essl et al. 2024). SDMs are the most widely employed frameworks for predicting the impacts of climate change on biodiversity, because they generate occurrence probabilities, habitat suitability indicators, and response curves for the species-environment relationship (Guisan et al. 2013, Ehrlén and Morris 2015, Ferrier 2016, Liu et al. 2019, Zurell et al. 2020). There are two general types of SDMs: realized and potential. Realized species distribution models predict a species’ actual distribution in the present, while potential species distribution models predict a species’ spatial distribution for a particular time, such as in the future (Rocchini et al. 2011). Model transfer, as defined by Elith and Leathwick (2009), 25 produces a prediction of the species’ distribution to a new geographic environment, in the present. Model projection, extrapolation, or forecasting is when a species distribution is predicted in new environmental conditions, such as those under climate change scenarios, which may occur in the same location (Elith and Leathwick 2009). SDMs occur with single models, joint models, stacked models, or in ensembles. Ensemble species distribution models average multiple algorithms for correlating occurrence to environmental predictor variables, which results in better model performance than models that rely on single algorithms (Liu et al. 2019). The multiple algorithms create associations between occurrence points and predictors, which are transferred to create predictions of species’ distributions (Araújo and New 2007). The increased predictive performance of ensemble models is especially beneficial when occurrence records are limited (Liu et al. 2019). The modelling of culturally significant species’ distributions is not rare in the SDM literature. However, few studies acknowledge the cultural significance of their focal organisms, or the Territories in which those studies were conducted. A handful of studies, discussed in Chapter 4, acknowledge the cultural significance of their focal organisms and serve as examples for this work. This study aims to contribute to the limited literature surrounding Indigenous participation in species distribution model studies. Producing maps and model outputs with community participation can facilitate ethical Indigenous research and better-informed conservation efforts. Using Skeetchestn’s Knowledge to inform our species distribution model fits well within the framework of Two-Eyed Seeing. We begin the analytical section of this thesis with Skeetchestn’s point of view in Chapter Two, our first dinner course. 26 Chapter 2: Qualitative Knowledge – a first course of sustenance and place-based Knowledge 2.1 Overview In this chapter, I present a first dinner course, discussing Skeetchestn Territory from the perspective of Skeetchestn community members themselves, which frames the context for the places examined in this study. Skeetchestn community members shared their Knowledge through semi-structured interviews and provided context for the importance of culturally significant food plants, and the anthropogenic pressures existing in Skeetchestn Territory. What emerges from a mixed-methods approach to this research is an emphasis on the importance of the social-ecological systems surrounding skwenkwínem, and how habitats within Secwepemcúl’ecw and the stewardship of them have been altered due to colonization. We used inductive thematic analysis to code the interview transcripts according to the themes emerging from the data, rather than pre-existing hypotheses and ideas used to sort the themes, as in deductive thematic analysis (Chapman et al. 2015). The inductive process involves developing your own perspective, and although I am not Secwépemc myself, I do bring an Indigenous perspective and one formed through prior experience working with Skeetchestn (Kirkness and Barnhardt 1991). My perspective shaped the way I understood the co-researchers’ Knowledge and lived realities, thus Indigenizing the analytical process (Loppie 2007). The qualitative process itself is subjective and the results are not intended to be reproducible. We analyzed the data using Grounded Theory to centre the co-researchers’ perspectives in the process of creating themes from the codes produced (Chapman et al. 2015, Heydarian 2016). Grounded Theory is an appropriate theory for analyzing the interview data, as it ensures the 27 findings are relevant to the co-researchers and allows the co-researchers’ perspectives to remain at the forefront of the analysis, as well as allowing for a collective story to emerge from the data (Loppie 2007, Lavallée 2009, Chapman et al. 2015). I reviewed the interview transcripts several times and manually coded for overarching themes twice. We selected relevant quotes and organized them by theme. We confirmed the themes emerging from the data with our co-researchers to ensure ongoing engagement and trustworthiness of the themes (Lincoln and Guba 2000). We sent the thesis and summaries of each chapter to the co-researchers for review, as part of member-checking (Loppie 2007). Continuous engagement with the co-researchers reinforces their role and ensures accuracy of the analysis from their data (Wilson 2008). Five major themes emerged from the qualitative data collected: nourishment, colonization, places, interconnectedness, and kinship (Fig. 2.1). These themes are not mutually exclusive of each other, with the theme of interconnectedness difficult to parse out from the other four themes. Each co-researcher had more emphasis on a different theme; Lizzy’s interview focused on kinship, Sam’s interview focused on places, and Gabe’s interview focused on interconnectedness and colonization. An underlying, implicit theme common to each interview is the goal of food sovereignty and self-determination. Although we did not code food sovereignty and self-determination as themes, they are important to consider when analyzing the interview data, as these frame the community’s motivations behind the research. The discussion of the co-researchers’ insights is supported by evidence from the literature, with scholars from the Secwépemc and other Indigenous Nations prioritized to minimize western affirmations. 28 Figure 2.1. Resulting themes from inductive analysis: nourishment, kinship, places, colonization, and interconnectedness. 2.2 Theme 1: Nourishment Lizzy: [I]t’s a traditional food plant that we’ve [umm] gone and harvested my whole life[.] Lizzy spoke extensively about her family’s outings to harvest skwenkwínem, which were spent sharing stories out on the Land, while acquiring a small amount of a once abundant traditional food source. It seems appropriate to start the discussion of the qualitative data with the theme of food. This theme is titled “nourishment” because food, as a major component of culture, is much more than a means of physical sustenance. The Protocol at Skeetchestn’s events is always to share food. The sharing of food provides opportunities to connect, as evidenced by Lizzy’s discussion of growing up harvesting food with her family, more of which will be explored in the kinship section. 29 2.2.1 Dietary nutrition Gabe: [Skwenkwínem] was definitely a very early [umm] staple food that you could – that you could rely on every year to get all that rejuvenation from all the energy lost through the winter time. And [umm] I still – I still feel that, like after winter, how much energy I lose from the fall time through the winter time. Even though we got lots of food available now in the grocery stores and stuff, that - that early spring food and those early spring medicines really help rejuvenate the body and bring it back into balance. That’s what Granny would always teach me, was [umm] trying to – trying to get that balance back into your body because you’re always burning energy no matter what you do. And early spring time is one of the most vital times to be able to get that energy. And when you pick those foods early in the spring like that, that’s – that’s when you get that energy back because all the life is coming back into those plants. Skwenkwínem, as a root plant, is a reliable and predictable early spring food source (Turner and Peacock 2005, Turner and Clifton 2009). Although salmon and berries are important dietary staples, their interannual fluctuations in yield make them a less predictable source of food than root plants (Turner 2014, Ignace et al. 2017). Skwenkwínem grows at varying elevation levels, providing an early spring source of nutrition at lower elevations, where the snow melts first, and a later spring source of food at higher elevations (Turner 2014, Ignace et al. 2017). Skwenkwínem growing at low elevations are harvested not long after the medicinal root plant llek’wpin (bitterroot, Lewisia rediviva; Darvy Hewitt, personal communication April 2022). The Latin word rediviva indicates “revival,” emphasizing the importance of llek’wpin as an early spring medicine. llek’wpin is harvested by digging the root with a sharp implement, similarly to skwenkwínem harvesting, and is increasingly rare due to Land-use changes (Turner 1997, Bonneau 2013, Darvy Hewitt, personal communication 2022). Skwenkwínem provides essential nutrients in early spring not only for humans, but also grizzly bears, pocket gophers, voles, marmots, and pikas (Turner 1997, Mattson 2004). Skwenkwínem is also an important early spring food source for its pollinators and seed dispersers 30 (Gezon et al. 2016, Ortiz et al. 2021). The pollinators rely on an early source of nectar after the flowers bloom, and the seeds contain nutritive tissue, called an eliasome, which is consumed by the ants who disperse the seeds (Ortiz et al. 2021). If these animals lose access to their early food source, this may have a cascading effect on other plant species who rely on their pollination and dispersal services (Dunne et al. 2003, Forrest et al. 2010, Morton and Rafferty 2017). 2.2.2 Preparation When asked about how skwenkwínem corms are prepared, Lizzy said: Yeah, like, depending if you- if you get them fresh or if you dry them, yeah we did pit-cooking. Not like super often and potatoes were just like a teeny tiny side of that, based on their size. It was more just to like try them, not really to like, eat them. It was more like, there was quite a bit of like, balsamroot in them [pit ovens], and there was a lot of [umm] like, meat in them [pit ovens] as well, but potato were just like a teeny tiny side based on their size and that’s kind of like, how I’ve known them in my lifetime, unfortunately. But it was mostly like the bigger, hardier plants. Definitely balsamroot and just like, any meat we put and cooked in it. Yeah. Despite the immense effort required to harvest enough skwenkwínem corms for a meal, Skeetchestn community members keep the Knowledge of preparing skwenkwínem alive by doing community harvest events each year, and by hosting pit cooks. The effort to keep the Knowledge alive is worthwhile; as Sam said, they taste really good. Sam said she prepares skwenkwínem potatoes like garden potatoes. Skeetchestn Elder Emily Bara, interviewed by Nancy Bonneau in 2012, said she boiled skwenkwínem potatoes soon after harvesting them, and knew others who prepared them over coals (Bara 2012). With the effort it takes to build a pit oven and the time it takes to pit cook the potatoes, it is possible the boiling method has become popular due to the decreased yield from Skeetchestn’s skwenkwínem patches. 31 According to Elder Mary Thomas, the skwenkwínem corms were strung up and dried, and then later pit-cooked prior to eating (Ignace et al. 2016). Cooking the corms in pit ovens breaks down inulin, an indigestible sugar, to extract more nutrients and get sweeter-tasting corms (Ames 2005, Ignace et al. 2016). It is also said the corms are sweeter once the plant has gone to seed and the carbohydrates from the aboveground parts move back into the belowground parts (Turner 2014). Therefore, the preferred timing of harvest coincides with the ideal time to remove the corms, to avoid negatively impacting the next generation of skwenkwínem (Turner 2014). There is archaeological evidence of pit ovens dating back to around 2400 years ago, coinciding with a warmer climate, more bountiful resources, and an increase in population of the Secwépemc People (Rousseau and Ignace 2017). 2.2.3 Difficulties harvesting Sam: They’re really hard to pick. It’s just - it’s a lot of work now. But, like, I’ve been told it wasn’t as much work and I’ve been told stories of the hundreds of pounds families would gather to survive on and store. And you look at what we have now, and I couldn’t - I couldn’t do it. Skwenkwínem was once a significant portion of the Secwépemc diet, with families each harvesting between 50 and 120 kg of skwenkwínem corms per year (Turner 1997, 2014, Fulkerson and Tushingham 2021). Root plants contributed a significant amount of carbohydrates, vitamins, and fibre to the Secwépemc diet (Hunn et al. 1998, Turner et al. 2000, Kuhnlein and Turner 2020). Today, the Skeetchestn community is unable to harvest large quantities of skwenkwínem corms, rendering it a small fraction of their contemporary diet. Gabe said, I know because we haven’t been utilizing it as much as we used to in the past, that the potatoes are actually getting smaller. Elder Mary Thomas agreed skwenkwínem are declining in abundance, due to a lack of caretaking practices and use (Ignace et al. 2016). Sam 32 described how her brother and nephews take all afternoon to fill up ¼ of a small takeout container with skwenkwínem corms. Ts’ilpinek, a Skeetchestn Elder interviewed by Nancy Bonneau in 2012, spent hours harvesting only to gather about 1 cup of skwenkwínem potatoes (Ts’ilpinek 2012). Ts’ilpinek recalls their grandparents used to harvest much more compared to the 2012 harvest (Ts’ilpinek 2012). Today, the effort required to harvest enough skwenkwínem to subsist on is incomprehensible (Fig. 2.2). When asked about the size of skwenkwínem corms, Lizzy said: [umm] I don’t really remember the size to be honest. I know we didn’t eat them too often because of their size. Like, in my lifetime, they’ve never been like, that big, but I feel like they’re just like, particularly small now. Like, I don’t, they’re just tiny now. Like we would still, once a year, be able to like, harvest enough and still like, do a pit cook every year with them[…] It’s not a species that you can live off of and, like, eat by any means. Like, you would have to pick hundreds of them to have a decent meal. [umm] And with how difficult it is to harvest them, that’s just not something that’s, that’s like, productive. Right, so it’s essentially unfortunately just, like, a hobby, essentially, and just to keep the knowledge alive to pick them and how to harvest them. It’s not actually a food that provides any good food, which is really unfortunate because my dad told me stories where they would pick potatoes and they’d be half the size of my palm [gestures with palm]. Like, you know those like, the baby potatoes you buy in the store, you just, you only need half a dozen of those and you’ve got a meal, you’re good. Whereas now, like, they’re like the size of your pinky finger[nail][gestures with hand to show pinky fingernail], and if you’re lucky you can find one the size of the edge of your thumb[nail]. [umm] So… that is pretty unfortunate[.] 33 Figure 2.2. Photographs of skwenkwínem corms. Left: corm in palm of hand. Right: Corm measured using calipers. © Hannah Pilat, 2022 In just a few generations, Secwépemc People have gone from harvesting hundreds of pounds of skwenkwínem corms, to harvesting what they can to keep the Knowledge alive rather than for subsistence. As Lizzy said, unfortunately because of the size, like in my lifetime, we wouldn’t really harvest for food because they are so dainty. When asked about who would have harvested hundreds of pounds of skwenkwínem, Sam said the current living Elders of the Skeetchestn community have stories about harvesting large quantities of potatoes when they were children. This points to the importance of interviewing the Elders, who have Knowledge to which the younger generation can only refer. However, the younger generations have keen insights on the anthropogenic pressures they face in their Territory, which is explored next. 34 2.3 Theme 2: Colonization For this theme, we begin with the history of the Skeetchestn community being forcibly moved to their reserve, as told by co-researcher Lizzy Ignace. A discussion of colonial Land-use changes follows, including cattle ranching, roads, logging, fire suppression, and a disruption in Secwépemc stewardship. 2.3.1 Displacement Lizzy: So Skeetchestn, the reserve hasn’t always been where it is now. [umm] We used to be located along [Kamloops Lake], kind of mostly where Savona is now. [umm] And where the, where the bridge is, like you know we have all those pit housing- pit houses there, so that’s where our village used to be. We still utilized [umm] this Skeetchestn, like, valley here, we know that because there’s still a bunch of old pit homes there […] There’s just a bunch of them along the creek, so we know that we always used the valley, but the main village was in Savona, which is just a little bit closer to the [community potato patch]. And then, [umm] unfortunately, after the smallpox epidemic, we went from like, a hundred family names to just over the ten we have now, like the Ignace, Jules, Denault, XYZ. So, [umm], then [Kúkpi7, Chief] Archie for the time, moved us into the valley because of that, unfortunately […] And then that’s where our- our reserve plot was based, so we had to stay there. Since time immemorial, Secwépemc People lived semi-sedentary lifestyles, living in in-ground pit houses in the winter and moving around Secwepemcúl’ecw from the spring to the fall (Rousseau and Ignace 2017). Between 4500 and 2400 years ago, the climate was cool and wet, so Secwépemc lived in valley bottoms, where resources were more available (Rousseau and Ignace 2017). Around 2400 years ago, the climate became warmer and drier, increasing the availability of resources from the Land, allowing human populations and their village sizes to increase (Rousseau and Ignace 2017). With more mouths to feed and a warmer climate, Secwépemc moved up the mountains and intensified their production of root crops, as evidenced by the impressions of pit ovens (Rousseau and Ignace 2017). 35 For Secwépemc People, the arrival of fur traders in the early 1800s was the first encounter with Europeans, which Secwépemc said were peaceful relations (Chiefs of the Shuswap, Okanagan, and Couteau Tribes 1910, Ignace et al. 2017). In 1858, however, miners following the Fraser River Gold Rush arrived in Secwepemcúl’ecw, bringing with them cattle, invasive plants, and smallpox, decimating both the Land and Secwépemc People within a few decades (Chiefs of the Shuswap, Okanagan, and Couteau Tribes 1910, McLean 1982, Ignace et al. 2017, Skeetchestn Indian Band n.d.). It is estimated that two-thirds of the Secwépemc population was killed due to the smallpox epidemic of 1862-1863, and another one-third of their population killed by the Spanish Flu in the early 1900s (Ignace et al. 2017). In 1868, the surviving Skeetchestn community members were relocated from Sk’emqín (the outflow of Kamloops Lake into the Thompson River) to the Deadman Valley, where their village is located today (Ignace et al. 2017, Skeetchestn Indian Band n.d.). The Skeetchestn Indian Band reserve was established in 1877 and reduced in size in 1916 by the McKenna-McBride Commission (Deur and Turner 2005, Skeetchestn Indian Band n.d.). Lizzy spoke about three major Land-use changes she believes to be the cause of the reduction in size and abundance of skwenkwínem corms: [I]t’s essentially come down to [umm] just like a heinous trifecta of causes. [umm] When it comes to logging, and it comes to [umm] recreation, and it comes to cattle, essentially. So, [umm] the logging either opens up the areas [umm] where they get too much sunlight, or not enough sunlight, or just the vehicles are destructing it or they’re ruining the ground. Like, we had a slash pile laid on one of ours [skwenkwínem patches], unfortunately. [umm] And then we have recreational use, which is just [umm] driving all over our potato patches or compacting the soil even more than it’s already compacted. [umm] Or we have cattle, which is, I think, the biggest destructor currently, now of our potatoes, [umm] which is adding more compaction. 36 2.3.2 Cattle Cattle ranching took over many areas in British Columbia once used to cultivate root plants (Turner et al. 2013). Heavy cattle compact the soil and intense cattle grazing selects for grazing tolerant species, primarily introduced grasses, which generate a thick turf layer, making it difficult for harvesters to find root plants (Elder Mary Thomas in Turner et al. 2000). The community skwenkwínem patches are located on “crown” Land, which is tenured by cattle ranchers who graze their cattle over the sites annually, and twice annually over the main skwenkwínem patch (Darrell Peters, personal communication May 2023). These cattle are only legally allowed to graze over each area once annually, but ranchers failing to check their fences or keep their herd in the right places allows the cattle to move over the skwenkwínem patches in both the spring and fall, as these are central locations in their annual range (Darrell Peters, personal communication April 2024). Perry Ranch, an historic cattle ranch west of the Skeetchestn community, was established in 1857, as displayed on their sign. Cattle have therefore been in Skeetchestn Territory for at least 166 years. It is believed cattle brought with them diseases that elk (Cervus elaphus) had no immunity to, therefore extirpating elk populations in Secwepemcúl’ecw, removing access to yet another food source (Ignace et al. 2017). Land used for ranging cattle was overgrazed by the year 1900, with cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) entering the area in 1915 (McLean 1982). Cheatgrass is a low quality, invasive grass that is not grazed or browsed on, and can serve as a fine fire fuel, exacerbating wildfires where it grows (Shaun Freeman, personal communication June 2022). Range and grassland management are part of the broader study being conducted collaboratively by SNRC and AAFC and will not be discussed in detail here. 37 When asked about the state of Skeetchestn’s skwenkwínem patches, Gabe said: [umm] I would - I would have to say a lot of it is compaction, like we have a lot of rangeland up there. And as you know, the cows and horses they like those open areas for grazing and stuff, so a lot of compaction from [umm] animals [umm] compacting the land. And [umm] almost underutilization. I know people do go up there and it’s been getting more - [umm] more used, like the use of the potatoes are starting to be revitalized more and more. I know that it was ongoing but only a certain few people would go up and harvest. [umm] So, between the compaction of the animals for grazing year-round, like through the summertime [umm] right into late fall, that’s one of the big things. [umm] Not digging enough or over-utilizing the same patches[.] Also speaking about the state of their community patches, Lizzy said: That ground is so solid, like it’s so difficult to dig in it now. And the potatoes just, they can’t get into the ground more than a couple centimeters. Like, you only just have to lift up the grass, like humus layer and then they’re there. They’re not even in the soil really. And if they can’t really reach the soil, like, are they really getting the nutrients they need, and the room to grow? So cattle in my opinion is the biggest factor. Elder Mary Thomas echoed Lizzy’s concerns: Everything is deteriorating. The surface of the soil where we used to gather our food, there’s about 4-6 inches of thick, thick sod and all introduced [weeds and grasses]. And on top of that the cattle walk on it, and it’s packing it to the point where there’s very little air goes into the ground, very little rain, and it’s choking out all the natural foods, and it’s going deeper and deeper, and the deeper they go the smaller they’re getting. (Thomas et al. 2016:347) Ron and Marianne Ignace of Skeetchestn Indian Band (and Lizzy’s parents) fenced cattle and horses out of their ranch and conducted periodic burning trials to see if the previously present populations of qweq̓wile (Lomatium macrocarpum, large-fruited desert parsley) and tsewéw̓ye (Fritillaria pudica, yellowbells) would return to their ranch (Dickson-Hoyle et al. 2022). The Ignaces found that excluding cattle and horse grazing from their food crops allowed for the populations to recover on their ranch in under a decade (Dickson-Hoyle et al. 2022). After a season of not burning the recovering patch in 2018, and an invasion of cattle in 2019, the tsewéw̓ye population declined (Dickson-Hoyle et al. 2022). These results demonstrate that 38 fire suppression and the introduction of cattle have had negative consequences on Skeetchestn’s food sources, although this study was not specific to skwenkwínem. However, the broader SNRC/AAFC project is studying the effects of cattle exclusion on the size and abundance of skwenkwínem corms, with fences installed at the community patch in 2023. 2.3.3 Roads and transportation Construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) in British Columbia began in the early 1880s and was completed by 1885 (Parminter 1981). Both the Canadian Pacific and Canadian National railways run through Skeetchestn Territory, bordering Kamloops Lake and the Thompson River on opposite sides (Darvy Hewitt, personal communication in April 2023). Additionally, the Trans-Canada Highway (Highway 1) bisects Skeetchestn Territory; the construction of the Trans-Canada Highway resulted in Skeetchestn community members being fenced out of their traditional resource production and hunting areas (Elders Hilda and Elsie Jules in Ignace et al. 2016). These rail lines and the highway create dangerous obstacles for humans and animals to cross to access the lake and river and are a major cause of animal mortality (Moore 2001). The construction of the CN railway through the Fraser Canyon caused a slide in 1913 that blocked the Fraser River, effectively destroying the salmon populations depended on by Nations along the Fraser and Thompson Rivers (Ignace et al. 2017). The community skwenkwínem patch has a decommissioned forestry service road through the middle and a new access road perpendicular to the existing road (Fig. 2.3). This new road was built to access trees burned in the Sparks Lake fire of 2021 for salvage logging. These roads compact the soil further and reduce the available habitat for skwenkwínem (Moore 2001, Thomas et al. 2016). Skeetchestn community members believe the building of roads in their Territory is 39 excessive and ecologically damaging (Moore 2001). As of 2001, there were 1772 km of roads in the Deadman Watershed, which is only a portion of Skeetchestn’s Territory (Moore 2001). Many of the existing roads in Secwepemcúl’ecw were once used to access resource areas and to meet neighbours for trade (Thomas et al. 2016, Ignace and Favrholdt 2017). These roads have been overtaken and built for settlement, logging, recreation, and mining exploration, severely disrupting hydrology and animal behaviour in the Deadman Watershed, and reducing suitable habitat for cultivated species, like skwenkwínem (Moore 2001, Thomas et al. 2016). Figure 2.3. Photograph depicting decommissioned forestry service road through Skeetchestn community skwenkwínem patch, with skwenkwínem growing on either side of the road (white blooms). © Hannah Pilat, 2023 40 In addition to the ecological consequences of excessive roads, there are social consequences of roads and using vehicles as transportation. Since skwenkwínem emerges immediately following snowmelt, accessing the potato patches in the early spring is vital to the harvest. Sam said, because it’s such a short growth span, as soon as the roads open up, we miss them, I guess. Or you could miss them, because most people travel by vehicle, not on foot, so. Sam spoke about riding up to the potato patches on horseback, and in early conversations with Darvy Hewitt, he said his family would hike up to the sites, with his Granny on horseback (personal communication May 2022). Many of the roads in Skeetchestn Territory do not get cleared over the winter, unless they are determined to be priority roads leading to forestry cutblocks or houses (Darvy Hewitt, personal communication April 2023). We could not access one of our study sites in the early spring of 2023 due to a road covered in snow. By the time we got through to the site, the skwenkwínem plants were in full bloom, blanketing the hillside. Compared to the previous year, we were able to access that site prior to the skwenkwínem plants blooming. In the winter of 2022 to 2023, it is estimated there was 200% more snow in the Deadman Valley than previous years, which is why the roads took so long to clear up (Darvy Hewitt, personal communication April 2023). Additionally, the snow melting in the mountains with fewer trees holding the water back has caused roads to flood and wash out. These roads are then inaccessible to vehicles and require costly repairs. The change in method of transportation from on foot or horseback to vehicles has contributed to the increasing inaccessibility of skwenkwínem to the Skeetchestn community, especially with the unpredictable effects of climate change and interannual variations in snowpack. 41 2.3.4 Logging The community patch spoken about during all three interviews is not only heavily grazed, but also affected by logging and the creation of a fire break when the Sparks Lake fire was burning in 2021 (Lizzy Ignace, personal communication April 2022). Sam: You’ve seen the state of the community patch [redacted] so that’s going to be… a process to get it back. Maybe, maybe it won’t, I don’t know. I’m excited to see it this year and what comes through the woody debris. Without consulting Skeetchestn, the BC Wildfire Service pushed a slash pile on top of their most frequented community skwenkwínem patch (Lizzy Ignace, personal communication April 2022; Fig. 2.4). In the following two growing seasons, the skid trails where the machinery drove over the patch appeared to have fewer skwenkwínem blooms compared to the surrounding patch, and soil loosened by the buckets still had skwenkwínem blooms. The slash pile is still sitting on the skwenkwínem patch as of spring 2024. Seeing the state of this important community patch was devastating to the Elders who attended our spring 2022 harvest at that site. In previous conversations, Lizzy said if the BC Wildfire Service had asked where to place the slash pile, Skeetchestn would have advised the pile be located on the other side of the forestry service road, metres from where it currently sits (Lizzy Ignace, personal communication April 2022). 42 Figure 2.4. Photograph depicting slash pile on top of Skeetchestn’s community skwenkwínem patch. © Hannah Pilat, 2023 The compounded effects of logging and wildfires in Skeetchestn Territory have removed an unprecedented volume of trees in the Deadman Watershed, which reduces soil stability and water retention in the watershed (Skeetchestn Natural Resources Corporation 2022). Gabe: So I’d have to say water is a big thing, not only to the skwenkwínem but everything above it also. Because without that water retention, without [umm] the thermal cover up top, you’re losing a lot of that water. And [umm] that’s what keeps a lot of the lower elevation stuff into the grasslands [umm] healthier throughout the years, [umm] a higher water table. When speaking about the loss of trees due to the recent wildfires in Skeetchestn Territory, Sam said, there’s nothing holding it, so the water is flowing so much faster. Like I’m still – I’m still worried about flooding in the valley. The effects of severe wildfires last beyond the active fire season. I have witnessed the fear and destruction that comes with the spring freshet, more intense now that there are fewer trees holding the melting snow back, and burnt, hydrophobic soil that is unable to absorb the water (Skeetchestn Natural Resources Corporation 2022). 43 Increased water flow puts personal property in danger, and may have effects on the plants trying to recover from these fires. On how this may affect skwenkwínem, Sam said, […] I wonder if that faster [water] flow is going to wick out the nutrients in the soil more… I don’t know, so much- so many things are going to change. Are these plants going to adapt to it? Although we may not know the effects of increased water flow on skwenkwínem, the salmon of the Deadman Valley are increasingly under threat. Gabe explained: [T]he temperature of the main Deadman Creek here is vital to those salmon that are coming out of the ocean and the eggs and, and you know, the logging brings down not only the [umm] hotter temperatures – or it creates hotter temperatures up higher that feed the creeks down here. It also allows a lot of the fine silts, clays, and other [umm] organic material to come down and it blankets some of those [umm] spawning channels. So your late rains in the fall time will bring a lot of that material down, when that material shouldn’t be flowing, not until the spring freshet when it brings down a lot of that material. But by then, you know, those eggs are starting to, you know, hatch and get into the water and stuff, where that flow of water in the fall time, because it’s not as aggressive as the spring freshet it – it allows a lot of that material and suspension to fall out early, and it blankets a lot of those spawning grounds, which suffocates those eggs, because those eggs need that turning water to oxygenate them. Gabe referred to salmon as a staple food several times in the interview, noting the loss of forest due to logging and wildfires, in combination with climate change, are threatening Skeetchestn’s salmon populations. Irrigation from the Thompson River for agriculture in Secwepemcúl’ecw has lowered water levels to the point that salmon spawning grounds are lost (Thomas et al. 2016). In the Memorial to Sir Wilfred Laurier, a letter written to the then Prime Minister of Canada, Secwépemc Chiefs state early colonizers overfished their salmon resources, and greatly restricted their fishing Rights: In many places we are debarred from camping, traveling, gathering roots and obtaining wood and water as heretofore. Our people are fined and imprisoned for breaking the game and fish laws and using the same game and fish which we were told would always be ours for food. (Chiefs of the Shuswap, Okanagan, and Couteau Tribes 1910) 44 So, when salmon were abundant, Secwépemc People were restricted in their harvesting of those salmon, and now that their Rights to fishing are recognized in Canadian Law, fish populations have become scarce (Ignace et al. 2017). Salmon exhibit quadrennial dominance, where every 4 years there is a dominant salmon run, with far fewer salmon running in the following years (Ignace et al. 2017). With this interannual fluctuation in salmon populations, predictable and reliable root crops that are easily stored, such as skwenkwínem, are essential for overwintering (Deur and Turner 2005, Rousseau and Ignace 2017). Skeetchestn has a salmon hatchery within their community to revitalize their salmon populations, and SNRC has a large fishing boat they use on Kamloops Lake to catch salmon for their community (Darvy Hewitt, personal communication May 2022). In terms of continued resource exploitation in Skeetchestn Territory, Gabe said: [umm] I know they’re getting into logging down here too, so I know that’s going to be another impact. I’m hoping that it doesn’t, you know, they don’t have landings and skid trails going right through those smaller patches, and really I hope that we can start using fire again as a – as a tool [umm] to revitalize some of those areas[…] And logging really, like, I could 100% say that logging is what caused a lot of the burns that get so intense around here[…] Why I say logging has [umm] really allowed for these [umm] fires to – to rage the way they have is because of the thermal cover that has been removed and [umm] subsequently all the vegetation, shrubbery, especially the grasses underneath, dry out really really fast, especially when you don’t have that thermal cover of the trees to shade. And then the water, what I talked about a little while earlier, as soon as any rain hits that hot hot ground, it evaporates out. So you get a rain that comes through and then the clouds move on, the sun comes out. Now that open ground from that logging- because there’s nothing there to retain that water, it just evaporates off. Logging practices have clearly created conditions that favour intense wildfires. Although skwenkwínem tends to grow in clearings (later discussed in the Places section), the creation of logging cutblocks does not create ideal growing conditions for skwenkwínem, due to the compaction of the soil. Current logging practices involve replanting favoured tree species, killing unfavoured tree species with herbicide, and using insecticides to control insect pest 45 populations (Thomas et al. 2016). Removing trees removes habitat for nesting birds, and the use of herbicide has reduced insect populations, and subsequently bird populations, leading to an overall loss in pollination services (Thomas et al. 2016). Overall, logging is a major force in negatively altering landscapes and ecological communities. 2.3.5 Fire suppression Gabe: So that I can definitely say because we haven’t been using fires in like, almost 200 years, [umm] we - we kept those areas open by utilizing fire. And as the - the trees have been moving farther and farther down into the valleys, they’ve been kind of choking out those open areas that you’ve seen where the potatoes like to grow, and it’s usually in those open [umm] fields and stuff where the potatoes grow. And I know underutilization of the fire to open those areas up is one of the issues that – that is- been reducing the areas of the potato patches. British Columbia was the first Canadian province to enact fire suppression policies, through the Bush Fire Act of 1874, which fined or imprisoned people whose fires burned “out of control”, both on private and “crown” Land (Parminter 1981, Lepofsky et al. 2005, McDonald 2005, Ignace 2016). The motivation behind the Bush Fire Act (1874) was to maximize the volume of timber harvested, for economic benefits (Parminter 1981). The Bush Fire Act and subsequent related policies have criminalized cultural burning by First Nations, a process vital to maintaining habitat heterogeneity, increasing the productivity of culturally important plants, and reducing the fuel load in forests (Wright and Heinselman 1973, as cited in Parminter 1991). Conifer encroachment is threatening plant species growing in meadows, causing the contraction of those species’ ecological ranges (Lepofsky and Lertzman 2008, Haugo et al. 2011). Sam believes the skwenkwínem patches are becoming inaccessible from conifer encroachment: I feel like the timbers encroached a lot on our potato patches, which has made them harder to find, made them smaller. Elder Mary Thomas believed meadows will 46 be overtaken by brush if cultural burning is not reintroduced to reset the meadows to an earlier successional stage (Turner et al. 2000). Traditionally, skwenkwínem patches are burned at low intensities every 5 to 6 years to maintain meadow habitats (Lepofsky and Lertzman 2008, Turner 2014, Ignace et al. 2016, Dickson-Hoyle et al. 2022). The burning of skwenkwínem meadows thins out competitive plants, allowing skwenkwínem corms to grow larger the following growing season (Turner 2014, Ignace et al. 2016). Burned skwenkwínem patches have a higher soil pH, improving the conditions for nitrogen-fixing bacteria, increasing the nutrient availability of the soil, and consequently increasing the productivity of the patch (Turner et al. 2000, Turner and Peacock 2005, Ignace et al. 2016). The responsible use of fire, informed by cultural Protocols, creates suitable habitat for skwenkwínem and resilient plant communities (Eisenberg et al. 2019). However, intense wildfires can burn the organic layer skwenkwínem grows in, leaving behind hydrophobic, mineral soils that can only support the growth of early successional species (Skeetchestn Natural Resources Corporation 2022). Intense fires may also destroy the seed and bud bank for geophyte species like skwenkwínem (Ignace et al. 2016, Skeetchestn Natural Resources Corporation 2022). I have seen firsthand the devastating effects of the severe wildfires that ravaged Skeetchestn Territory in 2021. Between the years of 2017 and 2021, an estimated 65% of Skeetchestn’s traditional Territory, their tmicw, has burned (Lizzy Ignace, personal communication April 2022). In reference to the 2017 and 2021 wildfires, Gabe said, after the fire there’s not a whole lot of our Territory left, really. 47 2.3.6 Disruption in stewardship The topics discussed above all point to one common denominator; Skeetchestn’s stewardship of their tmicw has been undermined since contact with Europeans, causing the cumulative effects of colonization to result in food insecurity. Each of the co-researchers suggested getting people back out on the Land to dig the potatoes to revitalize them as a food source. Sam believes skwenkwínem patches are still abundant in their Territory, but need care: I think they’re way more abundant in our Territory than we think it is. Or at least recently, the amount of patches I’ve been coming across amazes me, like... But we just aren’t using it. So, I don’t - like I find the patch but I don’t dig them up often. When asked what sort of care their skwenkwínem patches need, Sam replied, ‘cause I think we haven’t done any kind of cultural burns in forever, so I think cultural burns [umm] with loosening the soil. Lizzy agreed management of the sites is needed: [W]e don’t have the amount of people going up there and digging them every year to get that soil turnover, regardless. So… that would be a big one, we just don’t have that traditional management happening up there that we would have used to have to take care of the species as well, which is unfortunate in its own. Of all the colonial interferences, the Indian Residential School System directly caused the most drastic decline in the use of plant and animal resources by Secwépemc People (Ignace 2016, Ignace et al. 2017). Children forced into residential schools were subjected to mandatory agricultural training, where they worked in fields to grow European crop species and varieties for their own food and for sale (McDonald 2005). Children were missing from their communities to learn about place names, food names, how to prepare their foods, and cultural Protocols such as giving back to the Land in the spirit of reciprocity (Turner et al. 2000, Turner and Turner 2008). 48 As for economic impacts, the Indian Act (1927, s. 40) prohibited Indigenous Peoples from selling, trading, and bartering produce outside of their reserve communities (Hinge 1985). The shift to a wage economy further alienated the Secwépemc People from their resource management practices and increased their reliance on purchased, imported foods (Bonneau 2013, Ignace et al. 2017). Gabe shared that work and life often got in the way of him harvesting from the Land, and 2023 was the first year since his Granny passed in 2014 that he harvested skwenkwínem, although he fishes and hunts for game every year. SNRC is reframing Skeetchestn’s participation in the economy, by paying their employees to harvest their resources, including skwenkwínem and sxúsem, with the community (Darvy Hewitt, personal communication July 2023). Sam explained the importance of the work with SNRC: [umm][SNRC] helped me get that connection to the plants. So I think, when we first started that was one of our summer jobs was we would go out with the community and harvest Indian potatoes, every spring. Although Skeetchestn’s stewardship of their tmicw has been disrupted, the community is reclaiming their traditional stewardship practices and exercising their sovereignty through the work of SNRC, which includes cultural heritage preservation, archaeology, terrestrial ecology, fisheries, and forestry. SNRC advocates for the wellbeing of their tmicw, through consultations with interest groups such as range tenure holders and forestry companies. When asked about how to revitalize their skwenkwínem patches, Sam said, we need more education around it I guess, proof that it’s not just a pretty little flower. Lizzy agreed: [I]n the spring and even early summers you see people parked up there in their RVs and just camping, even though they’re not supposed to. Like, we kick out dozens of people every year who are- who are camping. And there are some places they’re allowed to camp up there, [umm] and we’re not always- we can’t technically kick them out, we can just let them know because we’re not conservation officers and they’re not on band land. But if they choose not to listen 49 to us, they don’t have to, but we call it in to conservation. But unfortunately, they’re just so, so busy that it doesn’t always happen. The above quote from Lizzy underscores the contention of stewardship and respect for Skeetchestn’s jurisdiction over their tmicw. People are allowed to use the Land and resources in destructive ways, and Skeetchestn can only attempt to educate those using their tmicw. We close the discussion of this theme with some hopeful words from Gabe which brings us to the next theme, interconnectedness: [umm] The underutilization [of skwenkwínem] is now turning around, we’re seeing that, now that there’s more acceptance of our knowledge, [umm] a lot of our Elders that went through residential school, they weren’t really willing to share a lot of that knowledge for the longest time and now they’re seeing that more of the younger people are a lot more interested and it’s not, [umm] I guess, seen as a shameful thing, not the way they were taught through residential school[…] [T]he Elders are starting to see that there’s a lot more interest, [umm] they - they’re starting to learn that what they were taught in residential school, and to be ashamed of who they were is starting to fade away, and they’re starting to realize that the younger people are really wanting to learn and revitalize this knowledge because, you know, it does speak [umm] a lot to who we were - who we are. See, even that intergenerational stuff, who we were. No, it’s who we are as a people and how much we benefit the Land as much as the Land benefits us. 2.4 Theme 3: Interconnectedness It is difficult to disentangle interconnectedness from the other four themes emerging from the interviews. Here, we will discuss Skeetchestn’s concepts of stewardship, Knowledge about ecological indicators, their seasonal round pattern, and their connection to their tmicw. 2.4.1 Stewardship - yecwmenúl’ecwem Gabe: [W]e benefit the potato by digging and making the ground softer so it can grow bigger and be healthier and it benefits us by providing – providing us with nutrients. So, that’s how I can draw the line and say there’s a symbiotic relation between us and the potato and [umm] how we benefit each other out on the Land. 50 Ron and Marianne Ignace note that the cultivation of plants by humans is a mutualism; we are gaining nutritional benefits from plants and nurturing these plants to increase their wellbeing and productivity (Loewen et al. 2016, Ignace et al. 2017). In western science, the concepts of mutualisms and symbioses are not often applied to humans, who have historically been excluded from nature. Indigenous Worldviews, on the other hand, see us as part of Creation, which means we have a responsibility to respect and care for all that has been given to us (Jules 2012, Ts’ilpinek 2012, Ignace et al. 2017). Elder Mary Thomas said, “I was taught that we were connected to Mother Nature, we were not superior. We are a part of Mother Nature. If we destroy Mother Nature, we are destroying ourselves…” (Thomas et al. 2016:359). Framing our relationship to our plant and animal resources as a mutualism places a responsibility on us to provide a benefit, rather than exclusively receiving benefits. The idea of mutualism is grounded in relationships and benefit sharing, as opposed to coexistence which is not explicitly defined by a relationship. The nuances between these western concepts are important to consider when weaving together western science and Indigenous Worldviews. The Ignaces explain the Secwépemc have a concept called kecmentsút: animals and plants give themselves to us out of pity, because we cannot provide for ourselves (Ignace et al. 2016, 2017). The Secwepemctsín word for “thank you” is kukwsts´tsemc, which translates most closely to “you saved me”, illustrating the importance of the plants and animals who give themselves to us (Ignace et al. 2016:417). Gabe emphasized the importance of plant foods for Skeetchestn, the community really [umm] depends on a lot of the things out on the Land and [skwenkwínem] is one of the many things that we depend on. His emphasis on the word depend is in line with the concept of kecmentsút. In return for the plants and animals providing for us, we are responsible for humbling ourselves and respecting them, otherwise they will 51 choose not to provide for us (Ignace et al. 2016, 2017). Respect demands avoiding overindulgence and not wasting the animals and plants who gave themselves to us by using every part of them (Ignace et al. 2016). Sam said, we know this plant is important to us, but… we just kind of protect it I guess. The term yecwmenúlecwem best translates to “stewardship”, with human stewards called yecwmínmen in Secwepemctsín (Ignace et al. 2016, 2017). Yecwmínmen tend to the plant resources in their area and report their conditions to their Kúkpi7 (Chief); the Kúkpi7 decides if the resources can be harvested by the community, based on the expertise of the yecwmínmen (Ignace et al. 2016, 2017). This is a system of checks and balances; the knowledgeable yecwmínmen communicate the condition of their resources, and the Kúkpi7 decides to harvest there or to let the patches lie fallow (Peacock et al. 2016, Ignace et al. 2017). This system protects the plant resources by preventing their over-use and stimulating new areas, ensuring a rotation of productive food crops. When asked about the care Skeetchestn’s skwenkwínem patches need, Gabe replied, [o]ther than revitalizing and utilizing them more, teaching that knowledge. [umm] Especially that knowledge on how to dig [umm] and maintain those patches without over-use. Gabe’s teachings from his Granny include rotating where you harvest skwenkwínem: [Y]ou don’t pick in the same areas because you want that abundance to come back for, you know, the next cycle when you come back there. And a lot of the times you’ll see the cycles within First Nations, usually, revolve on – on 4 years, just like the seasons, you got the 4 seasons. And a lot of the other things that you see with First Nations will be in 4s. So that’s part of that knowledge and [umm] making sure you don’t overpick or overstimulate one area. When asked about cultural burning of Skeetchestn’s skwenkwínem patches, Lizzy said: Yeah, I was talking to my parents about that and so they were like, ‘Yeah, they could have burned’, like, if it needed it and there was a lot of downy layers and the grass was getting too, too [umm] crazy and outgrowing the potatoes and 52 anything, but it wouldn’t have been the main management strategy, from- from what I’ve asked my family. Lizzy explained that digging the potatoes and loosening up the soil was the most important management strategy for increasing the productivity of their skwenkwínem patches, with fire used semi-regularly to remove competing plants. Based on the information communicated by the yecwmínmen, the Kúkpi7 decided when their patches required burning (Ignace et al. 2017). Cultural burns were usually ordered every 5 to 6 years for late March or early April, when there is still snow present to prevent fires from becoming out of control (Ignace et al. 2016, 2017). Gabe is knowledgeable on using burns cyclically to improve plant productivity: [W]e know once you burn, things come back really nicely. And you always want to do a spring burn because the spring burn allowed for the next year to have a better growth cycle. So even though you’d burn in the [umm] springtime and you’d see the green growth coming back throughout the summer, you didn’t really utilize that area. The next year would be a really good growth season because then it would have an early start, opposed to a later start. Burning and tilling of the soil cycles nutrients, increases the soil’s pH and nitrogen-fixing bacteria population, improves conditions for seed germination, and prevents conifer encroachment (Turner et al. 2000, Turner and Peacock 2005, Turner 2014, Loewen et al. 2016). By improving the growing conditions of plant resources, plant yield and therefore the nutrients available to humans increases. Gabe said, I know I was always taught that when you dig them, it helps the next year. [umm] You’ll be able to get [umm] bigger potatoes out of it[.] The corms are selectively harvested once at a median stage of maturity and size, with the smaller corms left in the patch or scattered around to maintain a continuous crop and expand the size of the patch (Turner 2014). There is a possibility of directional selection causing a prevalence of larger root plants, since the largest roots were replanted to keep seed- 53 producing plants in the population, and smaller corms removed from the reproducing population (Lepofsky and Lertzman 2008). Traditionally, a digging stick called a pétsẻ was used to dig the corms out of the ground, and was made from saskatoon or black hawthorn branches, or mule deer antlers (Turner 2014, Peacock et al. 2016). These tools aided in the selective harvest by grabbing onto larger corms and leaving smaller corms in the ground (Turner 2014, Ignace et al. 2016). Sam said a lot of people use shovels now, which tend to cut the corms in half. Although garden potatoes can reproduce vegetatively, skwenkwínem corms do not currently grow large enough to produce buds that will reproduce if separated (Lizzy Ignace, personal communication February 2022). The methods of harvesting are being studied in the Revitalizing Skwenkwínem project and will not be discussed further here. However, it is important to note perceived technological advances are not always improvements. Traditional harvesting methods are mechanisms of positive feedback, as illustrated in the example of scwicw (yellow glacier lily, Erythronium grandiflorum) management. Scwicw is a culturally significant root plant commonly co-occurring with skwenkwínem in Secwepemcúl’ecw and is harvested and prepared similarly. Tending scwicw increases its productivity, the same as skwenkwínem (Loewen et al. 2016). Loewen et al. (2016:266) wrote, “Indigenous use and management strategies, then, may have led to a co-evolutionary situation in which disturbance led to positive feedback in both the quantity and quality of yellow glacier bulbs”, suggesting the relationship between Secwépemc and their plant resources is co-evolutionary, and beyond co-existence. The improvement of plant resource sites also benefits the wider ecological web, improving forage for ungulates such as deer, elk, and moose, as well 54 as marmots and grizzly bears (Elder Mary Thomas in Turner et al. 2000, Deur and Turner 2005, Turner and Peacock 2005, Turner 2014, 2020, Peacock et al. 2016). Today, the role of yecwmínmen is filled by SNRC employees, who have eyes on their Territory throughout the year. During our three field seasons, we communicated with Don Ignace the condition of the patches, and he would decide to arrange for a community potato harvest at the sites. In the first year, we harvested where the slash pile was placed, and in the second year we decided to harvest up the road from that spot. Gabe said we followed Protocol by moving to a new area, which would help that area improve for future years. Although out of the scope of this thesis and the wider Revitalizing Skwenkwínem project, it will be interesting to see cultural burns reintroduced to Skeetchestn’s resource sites, which is an important part of Skeetchestn’s stewardship of their tmicw. 2.4.2 Ecological indicators All three interviews involved rich discussions of the ecological indicators within Skeetchestn Territory, both temporal and visual. The timing of plant harvest at higher elevations is indicated by the emergence of lower elevation plant species, closer to the Skeetchestn village. Both Sam and Gabe mentioned johnny jump-ups, which Sam called yellowbells (tsewéw̓ye, Fritillaria pudica) and Gabe called sagebrush buttercup (Ranunculus glaberrimus; Fig. 2.5). Sam: When I was little, yellowbells, the Johnny jump-ups, the ones that lean over, I know those - when those start popping out is when I start looking for the Indian potato patches[…] ‘Cause they seem to be buddies, in some way. Like the Johnny jump-ups will fringe the potato patch, almost. Gabe: [umm] But identification, it was following the early flowers, Granny would always talk about. And I never went and looked at [umm] what those plants were, where the flowers were, I’m pretty sure they’re the buttercup, but she always called them little johnny jump-ups and they were little yellow flowers like buttercup. And she said when you see those, it’s almost time to start going up 55 [the mountain], and back then they were on horse or foot so she said it was almost time to go up to start looking for the potato plants. And that’s how she taught us to look for was [umm] the open areas, look for the little white flowers and… you should be able to dig up the potatoes if you find those plants. So there was indicators down lower[.] In the case of both tsewéw̓ye and sagebrush buttercup, their emergence at lower elevations indicates temporal availability of skwenkwínem at their harvesting sites, as well as location. Skwenkwínem and sagebrush buttercup co-occur at nearly every potato patch we found, with tsewéw̓ye occurring at each of our main study sites. The Knowledge of the temporal availability of food plants at higher elevations based on plants closer to the village saves harvesters from travelling up to the sites too early to harvest the potatoes, ultimately optimizing their harvesting efforts. The ability to locate patches by the visual cues of the bright yellow sagebrush buttercup blooms helps with identifying where a potato patch might exist. My experience was the sagebrush buttercup bloomed slightly before the skwenkwínem plants if both existed at that same location, so we could make note that the buttercups are out at a particular spot and to look out for the white blooms of the skwenkwínem plants. Although the buttercups are not a consumable plant (Sam Draney, personal communication April 2022), Lizzy spoke extensively of t´sts’elq (arrowleaf balsamroot, Balsamorhiza sagittata) which is a culturally significant food plant (Fig. 2.5): So it was always a springtime plant, kind of in our area, it kind of goes the very first plant you harvest in spring is balsamroot… [umm] that’s the very first one you harvest for food. Like, you- you gotta get it right away, while it’s bloomed. If you wait until after, it gets [umm] too hard and you can’t cook and it’s- it essentially just becomes useless. So it kind of always went balsamroot [umm] was always first and then skwenkwínem was second, in the order of like, when you harvest your plants for the season. 56 Figure 2.5. Top: Photograph of the Skeetchestn community patch with skwenkwínem and tsewéw̓ye (Fritillaria pudica) flowers in bloom. Bottom left: Photograph of t´sts’elq, or arrowleaf balsamroot (Balsamorhiza sagittata) plants in a forest opening. Bottom right: Photograph of skwenkwínem and sagebrush buttercup (Ranunculus glaberrimus). © Hannah Pilat, 2023 57 During the interview, Sam realized the skwenkwínem are ready at higher elevations around the same time the community harvests trout: [O]nce you see the flowers, that’s when you go to harvest… because once the flowers are gone it’s kind of like the whole plant dies back. I guess that times out the same time as our trout harvest also, but I’ve never tied the two together […] But the trout are tied to the frogs. When the frogs start croaking in the community, the trout are running up at [redacted]. But I’ve never tied the three together yet – like not[…] ‘Cause there’s like little wetlands behind the community so as soon as they start croaking, everyone’s like ‘oh it’s time to go fish!’ It’s like a Facebook status. One person hears a frog and it’s like ‘fishing time!’ [laughs]. A similar relationship to the above example of paired indicator species is the meadowlark is known to sing when qweq’wile (large-fruited desert parsley, Lomatium macrocarpum) is ready for harvest (Ignace et al. 2017). Sam mentioned around this same time, it gets warmer at night, indicating the coming of spring. Another example is the ripening of sxúsem (soapberry, Shepherdia canadensis) signalling the start of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) migration up the Fraser River (Turner, Ignace, and Loewen forthcoming, as cited in Turner 2014). Sam referred to these phenological indicator species as friends and indicator species. Likewise, Peacock et al. (2016) referred to co-occurring plant species as companion plants, inferring a relationship beyond spatial co-existence. The relationships between indicator species are talked about amongst the community and shared to the children when learning how to harvest their food plants. Gabe spoke about his Granny teaching him to identify the skwenkwínem plants by their white blooms, we needed [umm] to learn what the plant looked like when it was fully formed so that we didn’t [umm] go and pick other plants and dig where we weren’t supposed to be digging because it wouldn’t be potatoes. Gabe was also taught to identify skwenkwínem by their leaves, which look similar to sagebrush buttercup leaves: 58 [umm] I guess the one, it was - I think it’s the buttercup that grows next to the skwenkwínem and they almost have similar leaves when they’re smaller but the veins on the backside are a lot different. And [umm] so yeah, when I first started picking them, that’s – that’s what I was, that’s how I was taught was to recognize the flowers, to pay attention to the leaves, and mostly the flowers. Sagebrush buttercup and meadow death camas (Zigadenus venenosus) were common at our study sites, both of which are toxic (Sam Draney, personal communication April 2022). Differentiating between the different plants at harvesting areas is a matter of life and death, and passing on this Knowledge to future generations is vital to their survival if they are to use these plant resources. 2.4.3 Seasonal round Several sources have documented the Secwépemc seasonal round, so I will not go into detail here (Turner 2014 Chapter 8, Ignace et al. 2016 Chapter 2, Ignace et al. 2017 Chapter 5, Wale 2022). However, there was much discussion during the interviews about skwenkwínem signifying spring: Gabe: The one thing I could add with the importance of [skwenkwínem] is that it really signified when, like the spring has started. And because it’s so low [in elevation], it’s not the lowest one [umm] what we start with but because it’s low, it kind of signifies [umm] your season going up the mountain. So when the skwenkwínem, the potato, comes out, it – it kind of signifies that the growing season’s starting and it’ll, and you can follow it up the mountains as – as you go further up the mountains you’re getting different foods and they’re coming up at different times. So [umm] timeframe, [umm] getting a good sense of when the season’s starting, that really [umm] plays a big role with the early growth of the potatoes. They tell you when things are really starting. [umm] There’s a few others down lower like the cactus and even [umm] the saskatoon, those kind of things down lower, they’ll – they’ll start and it’ll signify when those foods are going to start a little, up the hill a little further. But because potato’s such a early grower, that is one of the things that – that signifies to you that the season has already started and you need to be preparing and following those foods up the mountain. 59 As an early emerging flower, skwenkwínem plays an important role in signalling when the growing season has started, and when to prepare for the busy harvest season. The exact timing of plant emergence following snowmelt is variable, especially so with increasing unpredictability from climate change effects. Therefore, following dates on a calendar is not a foolproof system of predicting the timing of the growing season. However, intergenerational Knowledge on the timing of plant phenology within Secwepemcúl’ecw is relative to the timing of the first plants to emerge. This is an ingrained system of ecological Knowledge that will lend to the Secwépemc adapting to changes in phenology with climate change. When asked if the seasonal round had changed in her lifetime, Lizzy spoke about the interannual variability in snowmelt timing: [I]t’s still like these plants are going to grow in spring, and these plants are going to grow in summer, and these plants are going to grow in fall. [umm] And it changes year to year, some years you’re going to have a really early spring, some years you’re going to have a really late spring. [umm] You just kind of wait for those changes. Like, thankfully arrowleaf balsamroot, like, it grows on hillsides everywhere, like you see it on every drive you’re at, you see it on the hillsides. That one’s a really good indicator [umm] that spring is here, it’s started. That’s like a good, like a very good indicator species for ‘spring has sprung’. So, like, on really dry drought years, like, maybe it’ll start earlier… when there isn’t such a good winter and maybe it starts later, but they all seem to follow the same trend. Skeetchestn’s Elders and Knowledge Keepers have observed reduced winter snowpack in the Deadman Valley in recent years (Dickson-Hoyle et al. 2022). A reduction in winter snowpack reduces insulation for underground corms and seeds in the soil, which puts skwenkwínem at risk of freezing over winter, which can be fatal. An earlier snowmelt results in earlier increases in soil moisture, which is hypothesized to be the cue for skwenkwínem to flower (Jerome et al. 2021). Another consequence of early snowmelt is water limitation for plants, which can reduce the amount of aboveground biomass and the number of flowers produced by shortening the plant’s green period (Dunne et al. 2003, Yoshie 2011, Pardee et al. 2018). Smaller and fewer flowers result in decreased pollinator visitation rates (Pardee et al. 60 2018). A negative impact to reproductive success can be detrimental for high elevation plants, such as skwenkwínem, who are resource-limited and put more effort into reproduction to occupy more of their niche (Meng et al. 2018). Understanding and accepting interannual variability in the phenology of food plants is an inherently relational and adaptive system. It is said a deep understanding of our Kin is the reason for our survival and adaptability to interannual variations in resource availability (Turner and Clifton 2009). Lizzy referred to this system of ecological Knowledge as a timeline: yeah, it’s like a timeline of like, plant knowledge and that’s normally how it goes, that’s how you, in the traditional knowledge would time your picking of that [plant]. Understanding the phenological timeline can optimize harvesting efforts by moving up to plant resource production sites at the correct time for harvesting (Turner 2014). Gabe spoke about the importance of harvesting every year to remain familiar with their food plants: I knew as a kid what mountain for the berries that we’d go to and there’d be an abundance. And now you see a lot of people and they drive around and they go mountain to mountain to mountain until they find an abundance. And before, I know Granny taught me how to be able to follow the seasons and to know which mountains to go to, so that was knowledge that was there. And… just because of life and work and stuff like that, some - some years you don’t get to really fully enjoy [umm] getting out and actually testing your knowledge on, like, knowing which mountain is going to be productive. However, anthropogenic changes to plant phenological timing may occur at unprecedented rates. Plants differ in their plasticity and will likely react and adapt differently to climate change (Briceño et al. 2015, Meng et al. 2017, Pardee et al. 2018, Jerome et al. 2021, Love and Mazer 2021). These differential adaptations are predicted to cause changes in community composition (Forrest et al. 2010, Pardee et al. 2018). Changes in phenological overlap can result in what is called the “phenological reassembly” of communities, which can result in a loss in species richness and invasion by alien species (Theobald et al. 2017). Invasive 61 species that flower earlier than native plants can exhaust available resources, following the vacant niche hypothesis and priority effects (Elton 1958, Sale 1977, Morellato et al. 2016). Invasive species that flower earlier use up pollinator resources, which may cause pollen limitation and reduced reproductive success in native species, who may be outcompeted (Morellato et al. 2016). The phenological timing of flowering can also affect outcrossing species, including skwenkwínem, by limiting the selection of and access to mates (Stewart and Wiens 1971, Mistretta and Liston 1992, Lambert et al. 2010, Thomson 2010, Gezon et al. 2016). A continued and evolving understanding of plants’ phenological timing is essential to the adaptation of the seasonal round with climate change. In the spring of 2022, skwenkwínem were emerging from the ground in the middle of April, but in 2023 they did not emerge until around two weeks later. The 2023 community harvest was planned relatively last minute because the growing season was exceptionally short (Sam Draney, personal communication May 2023). Due to the unexpectedly short growing season, many community members missed out on harvesting skwenkwínem in 2023. Keeping the Knowledge of ecological indicator species alive is imperative to the cultural survival of Secwépemc People. This timeline of plant knowledge, as Lizzy called it, is context-specific, variable, and grounded in a deep understanding of those species. This timeline and the seasonal round need to remain adaptable and well-understood if Secwépemc are to continue harvesting their plant resources. 2.5 Theme 4: Kinship Kinship and togetherness were common topics among the interviews, with Lizzy emphasizing her fond memories of harvesting skwenkwínem with her family: [umm] personally, to me, [umm] the importance is like the family time with it. Like we used to go, not every spring, 62 I think we would say, every, like, 2 to 3 years we would head up there. In general, harvesting plant resources was an important annual event shared between k’wséltkten (relatives; Ignace et al. 2017). The Secwépemc seasonal round brings families up the mountains to plant resource sites, where they harvest roots and berries. Families within a community meet at central root processing sites to dry and pit-cook their roots, which was often done by women and children (Ignace et al. 2017). A traditional root-processing site for Skeetchestn is k’écse7ten (Back Valley; Ignace et al. 2016). Men moved on to further hunting sites to harvest meat and would meet back up with their families to dry their food (Ignace et al. 2016). Children started harvesting plants as soon as they could walk, learning the plant names and harvesting Protocols from their Elders (Ignace et al. 2016). Adults would dig trenches in the dirt, and children were tasked with finding skwenkwínem potatoes (Ignace et al. 2016). 2.5.1 Matriarchs In both Sam and Gabe’s interview, they mentioned their grandmothers (kyé7e) as key parts of their upbringing. Sam was homeschooled growing up and spent lots of time with her kyé7e, and Gabe learned how to track the seasonal round and harvest food plants from his Granny, Hilda Jules. Similarly, Darvy spoke about harvesting with his Granny Maggie, who is also Gabe’s great grandmother. Gabe said when his Granny passed away in 2014, a lot of important Knowledge was lost. Gabe said, my Granny always talked about [umm] her mom, Granny Maggie always taking them up to a couple of different places, and while he carries on much of this Knowledge, he expressed regret for not paying better attention to her teachings. Darvy’s mother was the youngest of Granny Maggie’s children and did not participate much in food production, since she was responsible for the tasks at home (Darvy Hewitt, personal 63 communication April 2023). However, Darvy still carries the Knowledge Granny Maggie taught him when he was a child and is now passing that on to the next generation. Similarly, Elder Mary Thomas recalled her grandmother sorting through the basket of potatoes she picked as a child and taking out the smallest corms to be re-planted (Peacock et al. 2016). Women were responsible for food plant cultivation and harvesting, and therefore played a significant role in providing both food and Knowledge for their families (Ignace et al. 2017). 2.5.2 Blood memory A Secwépemc demonstration of their connection to Creation and the Land is the practice of burying umbilical cords, so people are never separated from the Land (Ignace et al. 2017). Sam mentioned blood memory, which is the concept of passing down spiritual Knowledge between generations, through the blood (G. Atone and V. Harper in Lavallée 2009). Nehíthaw writer and lawyer Harold R. Johnson explains blood memory and his connection to his homeland: My Indigenous ancestors, the ones I identify with most strongly, lived upon this land. When they died their bodies were placed upon scaffolds, wrapped tightly in buffalo robes. The birds ate at them, the scaffolds rotted and fell down, the worms took pieces of my ancestors down into the earth. My ancestors’ atoms are in the land. The plants reached down with their roots and took up those atoms and brought them back up to the surface. Deer, rabbits, and moose ate those plants, and my ancestors’ atoms are in those animals. My ancestors’ atoms are in the berries and mushrooms and medicines I gather. When I eat those berries and the meat of the animals, my ancestors’ atoms are in me. When I die, I will be buried, and I will go back to the earth, the worms will eat me and spread my atoms, and the cycle will repeat itself (Johnson 2022:60). Living within your Indigenous homelands, harvesting the plants and animals who also get their sustenance from these Lands, is carrying on blood memory and contributing to the interconnected ecological and spiritual web. Johnson (2022) later explains that we belong to the Land and are an important functional part of the Land. We see our Kin in the Land, hence the term “all my relations”. 64 Sam explains the responsibility to care for skwenkwínem lives on: we don’t use it [skwenkwínem] as much as we used to but there’s still that, kind of like a blood memory. We know this plant is important to us, but… we just kind of protect it I guess. Because her ancestors cared for skwenkwínem, she intuitively knows to care for it as well, through intergenerational memory, or blood memory. The phenomenon of blood memory applies to other culturally significant plants, with Sam explaining that mariposa lily (Calochortus macrocarpus) was important, although she did not know what it was used for. Ignace et al. (2017) list mariposa lily as a root food plant, but no further detail is given. Lizzy spoke of blood memory as manifested in her father’s Knowledge: It was just always known that [umm] in spring, [umm] that that’s when you [umm] harvested your potatoes[…] [umm] It was just, it was just known knowledge, like when you go up [to harvest]. My dad would be like ‘oh, it’s a nice day. It’s gotten warmer, it’s not cold anymore, the ground’s not frozen, we’re ready to go’. Lizzy later said, he like, always knew instinctively that it was ready, indicating blood memory can inform the timing of plant resource harvest. Lizzy’s father, Ron Ignace, was raised by his great grandmother, Sulyen, who taught him the language and how to care for their tmicw (Ignace et al. 2017). Ron has passed on this Knowledge to his children, who now have children of their own. This is at least 6 generations from this lineage who have learned the Laws of the Land and have a deep ecological Knowledge of the habitats in their Territory. In combination with blood memory, the direct intergenerational transmission of Knowledge creates an impressive toolkit of ecological understanding, spanning hundreds to thousands of years. Lizzy saying the timing of skwenkwínem’s life cycle was always known indicates these plants have been culturally significant since time immemorial. 65 2.5.3 Access privileges The Secwépemc kinship system is tied to resource access; traditionally, all speakers of Secwepemctsín have access to the resources growing within Secwepemcúl’ecw. Individual families were responsible for caring for their local resources, but those resources were shared amongst Secwépemc People (Ignace et al. 2017). The concept of helping one another by sharing resources between families is called knucwentwécw in Secwepemctsín (Ignace et al. 2016, Peacock et al. 2016). Social and spiritual sanctions encourage generosity; if someone is unwilling to share, the plants and animals will not present themselves to that person and they will have a poor harvest (Ignace et al. 2016, 2017). Balancing the Protocols of stewardship and generosity prevented the over-use of resources while ensuring all Secwépemc People, generally, had enough to survive. Access to resources is granted through marriage or adoption into the Secwépemc Nation, to support Secwépemc children and create and maintain bonds between other Nations (Ignace et al. 2017). Sexlítemc (guests) are also provided for in the spirit of generosity, based on similar beliefs to animals giving themselves to humans out of pity (Ignace et al. 2016). Since sexlítemc in Secwepemcúl’ecw are away from their homelands, they are unfamiliar with the environment and therefore pitiful. Their Secwépemc hosts are responsible for providing for them, and the guests must reciprocate the favour (Ignace et al. 2016). As a guest myself, I was provided with a place to live and food on several occasions, and I am reciprocating these favours by conducting ethical research. Darvy said, as an Elder in training, he feels the responsibility to share his Knowledge and the resources their tmicw provides (Darvy Hewitt, personal communication May 2022). 66 Harvesting food plants is a social activity that facilitates place-based learning and visiting, strengthening the bonds between people and people and the Land. Lizzy spoke about sharing stories on the Land growing up: it was more to harvest as like a family activity on like a weekend or something to go up and like my dad would tell stories about locations. Sam and Gabe both spoke about learning on the Land with their grandmothers, cousins, and uncles. Passing on Knowledge to the next generations at the places the Knowledge originates from is important for cultural heritage and the preservation of Skeetchestn’s specific histories. Next, we will discuss these places in which Skeetchestn community members have gone to harvest skwenkwínem since time immemorial. 2.6 Theme 5: Places The objective of this section is to provide context for the places in which Secwépemc nurture their culturally significant plants, and places were a major theme emerging from the interviews, particularly from Sam’s interview. Although much was discussed about these places, a lot of this information will remain confidential. We have redacted specific place names to safeguard Skeetchestn’s culturally significant places from potential harm. These places hold stories, memories, connections, opportunities to learn, and they are where Secwépemc Values and Secwepemctsín originate. These places are fundamental to Secwépemc identity: “[w]hat made and makes us a people is the collective memory and wisdom of living in our homeland, knowing and using its landforms and resources, and talking about these activities in our language, Secwepemctsín” (Ignace et al. 2016:27). 67 2.6.1 The community patch Secwépemc Elders believe the best resource harvesting sites are those used for thousands of years (Peacock et al. 2016). The most talked about skwenkwínem patch within the Skeetchestn community has been used since time immemorial (Fig. 2.6). In reference to this patch, Lizzy said, it’s just always been there and likewise, Sam said, everyone I always knew goes to that [community patch] and that’s just a huge patch all through the fringe of that. The huge patch Sam is referring to is the large, connected meadow spanning from the site where the slash pile wrecked part of the patch, up to where a new logging road crossed over part of the patch. This meadow is approximately 1.2 by 0.7 kilometres in size and surrounded by interior Douglas fir trees (Pseudotsuga menziesii). In the spring of 2023, I asked several Elders and community members if they knew the Secwepemctsín place name of this community patch, and no one was sure. However, everyone knew which patch I was referring to, because of the extensive use of this patch. Gabe said, [the community patch] is pretty well known by the entire community, and Lizzy said, [the community patch] was just the known garden location. So, it’s just been a very old, traditional location. Lizzy also mentioned this patch is the most accessible to the community; this is where the school and other community members have harvested skwenkwínem in the springs of 2022 and 2023. Sam said this is the place her kyé7e would take her to harvest as a kid, we all kind of got raised on that spot. 68 Figure 2.6. Photograph of the Skeetchestn community skwenkwínem patch, a meadow nestled in the opening of an interior Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) forest. © Hannah Pilat, 2023 Lizzy’s use of the word garden is important for the argument of intensive plant resource production by Secwépemc People. The erroneous assumption that Indigenous Peoples were passive plant gatherers is disproven by the concept of gardening, or nurturing plant resources. The Secwepemctsín word k’wén’llqem translates to “trying out plants”, which Elder Mary Thomas interpreted as gardening (Peacock et al. 2016). A word to describe gardening in Secwepemctsín is historical evidence of resource production by Secwépemc People, and therefore use of these resource production sites. 69 2.6.2 Preferred habitat Overall, the co-researchers focused on their known community patches when talking about skwenkwínem’s preferred habitat. Lizzy said, like, I wouldn’t go out and just be like ‘oh I’ve heard it grows at 1000 m elevation, let’s look here’. Like, [umm] I only know about my traditional locations, highlighting the importance of maintaining Skeetchestn’s known community patches for a reliable crop. Sam and Gabe both said they know skwenkwínem to grow in forest openings, from large meadows to small clearings: Sam: I’ve found plots that are the size of this table [a four person table], it just happens to be a break in the canopy. Gabe: Any – any kind of void or open area I’m pretty sure you probably could find them in there. During our travels in Skeetchestn Territory, we encountered what we guess is a garden, which was a small patch, roughly 10 by 10 metres, containing skwenkwínem and several other food plants and very few weed plants. This patch is located close to the community patch, and it is possible it was tended to as a garden. Many of the patches found off the side of the road were as small as a table, like Sam said, and only a few patches as large as a football field. [Y]ou never see the potato patch run into the middle of a really big meadow. It kind of stays on that cooler edge. Those little meadows it might blanket right across, like up at [the community patch], but that’s also cooler up there. Since it is believed skwenkwínem emerges from the ground following an increase in soil moisture, cooler habitats keep the soil moist enough for the stems to emerge (Jerome et al. 2021). Sam said, they need that little bit of shade it seems like, which would help with soil moisture retention. Sam said she tends to find skwenkwínem at the edge of interior Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) forests, or in rocky places, often where she does not expect them to be growing. Skwenkwínem is well known to grow in moist meadows and at the edges of forests, and 70 will grow from mid- to high-elevations (Ignace et al. 2016). Skeetchestn, at the western edge of Secwepemcúl’ecw, is dry and so does not generally support the growth of skwenkwínem at lower elevations, whereas Secwépemc communities to the east have wetter conditions, supporting skwenkwínem at various elevations (Ignace et al. 2016). The encroachment of conifers is a well-known issue in reducing habitat for skwenkwínem. This, in turn, reduces forage for browsing ungulates and fills in clearings ideal for hunting game. The compounding effects of fire suppression have increased the forest cover, and forestry practices also favour conifers with little to no consideration for food species requiring open meadow habitats (Thomas et al. 2016). Lizzy said she knows skwenkwínem to be a very site-specific species, needing certain conditions to grow, which make it difficult to transplant: I don’t think like, if it had perfect conditions, it wouldn’t just start growing there. It would have had to already been there[…] [I]t is a very site-specific species. [umm] It does need, like, XYZ, ABC, 123, it needs all of those factors. [umm] And it’s quite hard to cultivate in new locations if it doesn’t have those factors. Again, Lizzy highlights the importance of conserving and revitalizing Skeetchestn’s existing community patches. Lizzy said Syilx People have experimented with transplanting skwenkwínem to increase their food plants’ accessibility: I know they’ve tried in like, the Okanagan and whatever to like, try and like, transplant it and whatnot. That’s not anything, I don’t think we’ve tried here. It’s just there’s always been like, those are our traditional areas and… like, sometimes we see it outside of those areas, but quite close by. Elder Mary Thomas transplanted skwenkwínem corms to her garden to increase her accessibility to the plants (Turner 2014, Peacock et al. 2016). Propagules, such as corms, are easy to transport and are more likely to succeed than sowing seeds in new places (Turner et al. 2021). Transplanting propagules of culturally significant plants has extended their community patches, 71 increased the geographic range of their preferred plants, and contributed to increased landscape heterogeneity in many parts of British Columbia, with lasting effects (Turner and Loewen 1998, Deur 1999, Turner 2014, Peacock et al. 2016, Fisher et al. 2019, Armstrong et al. 2021). 2.6.3 Sovereignty Secwépemc reserve Land is a meagre 1% of Secwepemcúl’ecw (Ignace et al. 2017). Gabe said the Skeetchestn reserve is not even a fraction of our Territory. No legal Land surveys took place for four decades after the arrival of settlers, allowing settlers to pre-empt Land for themselves, while Secwépemc were legally unable to obtain fee simple title or purchase private property (Ignace et al. 2017). Sam said there are no skwenkwínem patches within Skeetchestn reserve Land, and the existing patches are on unceded “crown” Land, where cattle range freely. Sam said, I find the cows love where the potatoes go. Or they love where our potatoes go. Gabe echoed Sam’s concern about cows, we have a lot of rangeland up there. And as you know, the cows and horses they like those open areas for grazing and stuff, so a lot of compaction from [umm] animals [umm] compacting the Land. Sam mentioned finding skwenkwínem far from roads, in fenced private properties, and at mine sites, all of which are inaccessible to the Skeetchestn community. Speaking on accessibility, Gabe said: But I mean, even back then, like that’s – that’s why we moved around was, you know, we were never stationary. And on a reserve, that was a new thing so we had to make do with that and, you know, up until I think it was the 40s and 50s, somewhere in there, and you weren’t allowed to leave the reserve. You had to literally go to the Indian agent and ask for a pass to leave the reserve. So, not only were Skeetchestn community members fenced out of their resource production sites, they were also fenced in on their reserve Land, which is not suitable for cultivating montane 72 species such as skwenkwínem, since the reserve is in the dry Deadman Valley bottom. The Pass System severed the connections between communities, restricting Secwépemc resource access laws through marriage. However, the resource access laws were taken advantage of by settlers in many instances, who married Secwépemc women to gain access to their resources and would then sell the Land to other settlers for a profit (Ignace et al. 2017). The Pass System prevented First Nations from accessing the places they used to hunt, grow food, and visit with each other, alienating them from the Land and their livelihoods further. Although never passed as a law, the Pass System was enforced through existing oppressive laws since at least 1882 until the 1940s (Nestor 2018). With the colonial government undermining Secwépemc sovereignty over Secwepemcúl’ecw in every way imaginable, the landscape has changed drastically. Ron Ignace summed up the effects, many of which were spoken about in the interviews: Clear-cut logging and open cattle range, along with a recent pine-beetle infestation in much of the interior has altered our landscape, and the health of our environment. In addition, urban sprawl, industrial development, and most recently large mining projects are continuing to impede our ability to have quiet enjoyment of Secwepemcúl ̓ecw as our right to the undisturbed use of the land we never ceded. (Ignace et al. 2016:xv) The Right to quiet enjoyment of Secwépemc homelands has been violated by the pre-emption of culturally significant places for settlement and resource extraction. Important cultural events, such as étsxem (spirit guardian questing) must occur where the person can be isolated from others for months, to learn how to live off the Land (Teit 1909, Ignace 1999, 2008, Peacock et al. 2016, Ignace et al. 2017). Similarly, sq’ilye (sweat lodges) are built in isolated places along creeks (Ignace et al. 2017). Based on what I have seen of Skeetchestn Territory, it would be nearly impossible to find a place isolated from others to conduct these important ceremonies. 73 The severe wildfires of 2017 and 2021 have further reduced the places Skeetchestn community members can gather to share teachings, conduct ceremonies, and produce foods. As Gabe said, after the fire there’s not a whole lot of our Territory left, really. Although the Land is still technically there, much of it is considered gone, or ruined. Many resource production areas in Secwepemcúl’ecw were named after the resources bountiful there, such as Pellskwenkwínem, which translates to “has skwenkwínem”, although skwenkwínem no longer grows there (Ignace et al. 2016, 2017). Trails used to access resource production sites have either turned into roads or grown over, which renders them unrecognizable (Ignace and Favrholdt 2017). Secwepemctsín place names tend to be visually informative and relational to help with navigating between places, but if the places become unidentifiable, the place names are no longer informative (Ignace et al. 2017). Many place names have been replaced by settler names, which are not informative and can have traumatic histories associated with them. The erasure of Secwepemcstín place names is the erasure of the history and ecological Knowledge of these places. 2.7 Conclusion The assertion of sovereignty over Secwepemcúl’ecw comes with the revitalization and continuation of cultural practices, including language, stewardship, and resource access laws. The livelihood of Skeetchestn and the broader Secwépemc Nation depends on the health of and access to these places of cultural significance. 74 To close this chapter, we end with the words of the Skeetchestn Elders Group*, who created a statement on their Land and health (Ignace et al. 2016:425-426). “Yeri7 re tmicw-kt re skectéls te xqweltén-kt. Our land gave us our language. E ta7es es westém re tmicw-kt me7 llegwentém re xqweltén-kt. If we don’t have our land, we will lose our language. E xilmet yeri7 me7 re sqwenqwentwilc-kt. If we let that happen, we will become poor. Me7 k ̓ wiyusem-kt, we7 kénmes k stem, ta7ews k sllépentem. We will suffer, whatever happens, let’s not forget that. Re tmicw te skukwstéls es tuwitentels. We thank the land for raising and sustaining us.” * The Skeetchestn Elders’ Group consisted of: Christine Simon, Amy Slater, Daniel Calhoun, Leona Calhoun, Garlene Dodson, Cecilia Peters, Doris Gage, Julie Antoine, Hilda Jules, and James Peters 75 Chapter 3: Predicting the distribution of skwenkwínem using tidysdm - the second course 3.1 Overview The following chapter is a geospatial analysis of the distribution of skwenkwínem – our second dinner course. In this chapter, we explore the distribution of skwenkwínem in the present and under future climate change scenarios, using a species distribution model from the R package tidysdm (Leonardi et al. 2024). We use an ensemble approach to model skwenkwínem with climate predictors and Informed predictors, from Skeetchestn Knowledge gathered in Chapter 2. We produced continuous habitat suitability maps and binary occurrence maps, depicting suitable and unsuitable habitat, for both models. We then calculated suitable area for skwenkwínem, using the binary habitat suitability maps, now and in the future. 3.2 Objectives Our primary objective in this chapter is to demonstrate the use of a Two-Eyed Seeing framework for species distribution modelling. Our secondary objective is to provide a reproducible example of a species distribution model that is focused on a culturally significant plant species. Our outputs are continuous habitat suitability indices and binary suitable habitat maps for: 1. The occupied niche of skwenkwínem, from the West Coast of North America to the Great Continental Divide, as evidenced in Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) occurrence records. 2. Skeetchestn Traditional Territory. We produced these continuous habitat suitability and binary suitable habitat maps through: 1. Realized species distribution model for skwenkwínem over its entire known range in the present time, with both Informed predictors and climate-related predictors as input into 76 separate models. The Informed predictors were selected based on the interviews in Chapter 2, and the literature review of skwenkwínem. They consist of soil temperature and pH, elevation, landcover, and anthropogenic biomes. The climate-related predictors are a set of 19 bioclimatic variables with temperature and precipitation values from 1970-2000, all sourced from the WorldClim website (https://www.worldclim.org/data/index.html). 2. Potential species distribution model for skwenkwínem over its entire range in the future, under predicted climate change scenarios, with WorldClim predictors from 2081-2100. Following the predictions over skwenkwínem’s entire range, we cropped the extent to Skeetchestn Traditional Territory to produce maps for Skeetchestn’s use. These maps of Skeetchestn are not publicly available, to protect skwenkwínem from potential harm. These maps can inform future conservation and revitalization efforts within Skeetchestn Territory by mapping suitable habitat now, and where we can expect suitable habitat to exist with our changing climate. Our strategy allows for publishable results while supporting Skeetchestn’s Right to data sovereignty. 3.3 Research questions a. What is the predicted distribution of suitable habitat for skwenkwínem presently and in 2081-2100? b. What is the effect of projected climate change scenarios on the available habitat for skwenkwínem in our study extent and Skeetchestn Territory? 3.4 Study areas We constructed all SDMs using a study extent that encompasses the current, known distribution of skwenkwínem, which is approximately 4 023 545 km2 (Fig. 3.1). We chose this 77 extent based on the recommendation to capture the full fundamental niche of the species, which means encompassing all known occurrence records and their full span of associated environmental conditions (Elith and Leathwick 2009, Thuiller et al. 2009, Gogol-Prokurat 2011, Essl et al. 2024). To accommodate potential shifts in distribution with climate, our full study extent also includes a buffer beyond the extent of occurrence records: 15º buffer to the north and 2º buffer to the east. Question “a” is addressed using this full study extent. For question “b”, we cropped the model results to Skeetchestn Territory, which is approximately 7190 km2. Figure 3.1. Boundary of our study extent (green polygon) with occurrence points, within the context of North America. Map projection used is the North America Albers Equal Area conic projection. 78 3.5 Methods Our overall workflow generated species distribution models using the same occurrence records with WorldClim data (referred to as the “Bioclim model”; Fig. 3.2), and data informed from the interviews in Chapter 2 as predictors (referred to as the “Informed model”; Fig. 3.2). Both the Bioclim and Informed predictor datasets are formatted as rasters. We transferred the Bioclim model to make a future habitat suitability prediction from 2081-2100 under CMIP6 climate change scenario SSP 5-8.5, referred to as the Bioclim future prediction (Fig. 3.2). Both models use publicly available data and the same model settings. Choices made during the modelling process are included in detail in the ODMAP Protocol (Appendix E). Analysis was completed in R version 4.3.2. (R Core Team 2023) using tidysdm version 0.9.3 (Leonardi et al. 2024). Data were prepared for analysis using the terra (Hijmans 2023) and sf (Pebesma et al. 2023) packages, and plots were created using tidyterra (Hernangómez et al. 2024), a package of helper functions to plot terra objects using ggplot2 (Wickham et al. 2024). A detailed list of packages and versions used is included in the ODMAP Protocol (Appendix E). 79 Figure 3.2. Flowchart showing skwenkwínem SDM workflow with both Informed and Bioclim models. 3.5.1 Occurrence data We downloaded occurrence records from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF.org 2024) through the rgbif R package (Chamberlain et al. 2024). We selected records from human observation and preserved specimens, with coordinates available, and filtered out erroneous records with 0,0 as the coordinates, which are common geospatial issues with GBIF occurrences. We included preserved specimens to have as many occurrences as possible to best represent the species’ realized niche, past and present (Smith et al. 2023). Using more occurrence records results in a more complex model, which tends to produce better predictions of suitable 80 habitat (Liu et al. 2019, Brun et al. 2020). We selected records between 1940 and 2024 to restrict our dataset to more contemporary records. Occurrences collected through human observation are typically spatially autocorrelated, due to being samples of convenience (Fletcher Jr. et al. 2019, Baker et al. 2022, Leonardi et al. 2023). In other words, occurrences near each other tend to have similar conditions. Models based on spatially-biased observations may reflect sampling effort, rather than the actual fundamental niche of the species (Merow et al. 2013, Doyle-Yamaguchi 2021, Barber et al. 2022). Subsampling of the occurrence dataset through spatial thinning of the records reduces spatial bias in human observations (Baker et al. 2022, Barber et al. 2022). We began with 3541 occurrences, with an outlying record in Alaska that was eliminated from our analysis. We thinned the remaining occurrences in a two-step process, following the tidysdm steps. The first thinning step limited occurrences to one per cell of the raster with predictor layers used in the model (2564 occurrences). The second thinning step constrained occurrences to a minimum intervening distance of 15 km, which retained 859 occurrences. As confirmed absences are not publicly available for most species, we developed presence-only SDMs and generated pseudoabsences to use as background points in the models. Presence-only models have reduced statistical power, due to the sampling bias introduced with presence records (Elith et al. 2006, Fletcher Jr. et al. 2019, Smith et al. 2023). Pseudoabsences are used in place of confirmed absences to provide background data for the models to discriminate from presence records (Stewart et al. 2022, Valavi et al. 2022). We generated 8590 pseudoabsences over our study extent to adequately sample the background conditions for a good representation of the environmental conditions available in the region (Barbet-Massin et al. 2012, Rousseau and Betts 2022). We sampled 10 times the number of presences so reproduction 81 with differing numbers of occurrences will maintain the same relative proportion of occurrences versus pseudoabsences. We generated pseudoabsences through radius-restricted background sampling, which has been shown to improve predictions made by the model Maximum Entropy (MaxEnt; Phillips et al. 2009, Anderson and Raza 2010, Barve et al. 2011, Acevedo et al. 2012, Barber et al. 2022). Using the radius-restricted sampling method introduces similar spatial biases as the occurrence data have from opportunistic community science collection. The effect of sampling bias in our occurrence data is therefore reduced by introducing the same bias in our pseudoabsence sampling approach (Phillips et al. 2009, Barber et al. 2022). Pseudoabsence samples were taken from a buffer around occurrence points, and sampled randomly within those buffers, without replacement. The circular buffer (a “disc”) is within a minimum of 50 km and maximum of 75 km around occurrences, through the dist_disc argument. During the Ranunculus training phase, we found pseudoabsence sampling discs close to the occurrences (minimum distance 5 – 20 km away) to result in poor discrimination of presences from pseudoabsences, and therefore poor model performance (Appendix F). We chose sampling discs 50 - 75 km from presences, as this resulted in improved model performance, while not exceeding our computational limits. 3.5.2 Predictor data The 19 bioclimatic variables from WorldClim were used in the Bioclim model, which is a standard procedure for many SDM studies. The WorldClim data provides annual, quarterly, minimum, and maximum temperature and precipitation measurements for the present-day, as well as future predictions created through the CMIP6 models (Eyring et al. 2016). The CMIP6 models account for greenhouse gas emissions scenarios combined with scenarios of varying 82 degrees of climate warming reduction policies implemented. We selected the SSP 5-8.5 HadGEM3-GC31-LL model for our analysis (Eyring et al. 2016, Roberts 2017, Met Office Hadley Centre 2024). For our current distribution predictions, we used the 19 bioclimatic variables from 1971 – 2000. The future projections used the worst-case Shared Socioeconomic Pathways model (SSP 5-8.5) from CMIP6 for the years 2081-2100, the most advanced temporal predictions, to illustrate the most pessimistic future climate change scenario. We used 30 arcsecond resolution data for both present and future predictions, the highest resolution available from WorldClim. The Bioclim predictors are available at 30 arcsecond resolution (1 km by 1 km at the equator) and referenced using the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS1984). We transformed the Informed rasters to WGS1984, cropped to our study extent, and resampled to all have matching resolutions of 30 arcseconds to allow for direct comparison between the Informed and Bioclim present models. We resampled the numeric rasters using bilinear interpolation, and categorical rasters using the nearest neighbour method. We prepared the predictor rasters from both datasets for modelling using the terra and sf packages, which interface well with tidysdm. We removed NA values from the rasters prior to input into the model. 3.5.2.1 Predictor selection Predictors are typically selected for their ecological and statistical relevance in predicting species’ distributions (Guisan and Zimmermann 2000, Adde et al. 2023). We used two sets of predictor variables for our two models to assess model performance between climate-only variables (Bioclim model), and variables tailored to our study system (Informed model). Our selection of variables for the Informed model is a combination of variables informed through the 83 interviews in Chapter 2 and through the literature review (Table 3.1). We selected datasets with the highest resolution available for our models, to better represent the high climatic heterogeneity of our study area (Essl et al. 2024). For each model, we selected a subset of predictors that were uncorrelated by removing variables with Pearson’s R > 0.8. The process of selecting expert-chosen predictors and filtering out highly correlated predictors is an appropriate approach to balance the need for biologically significant predictors that are not correlated (Adde et al. 2023). Plant species distributions are not solely governed by climatic conditions; soil characteristics are also determinants of plant distributions in space and are important for determining habitat suitability, especially on a continental scale (Ni and Vellend 2022). We included soil temperature and pH as predictors, 0-5 cm below the surface for each, which is a relevant depth for skwenkwínem, whose corms are known to grow at shallow depths. Similarly, landcover, through habitat fragmentation and anthropogenic pressures, is an important driver of plant species’ distributions (Chauvier et al. 2021). Through the interviews in Chapter 2, we learned skwenkwínem is commonly found in forest openings, ranging from large meadows to small pockets where the forest canopy opens, making landcover an important predictor to include in our model. To add a layer of human influence, we included a predictor layer of anthropogenic biomes. Anthropogenic biomes are ecosystem types with significant influence by humans, such as urban areas, settlements, cropland, and rangeland (Ellis and Ramankutty 2008). Including the human influence on ecosystems is relevant for our study, as rangeland is believed to be a large influence on skwenkwínem health, and potentially its distribution in space (Elder Mary Thomas in Turner et al. 2000, Ignace et al. 2016, Thomas et al. 2016). Highly correlated Informed predictors (Pearson’s R > 0.8) were removed prior to analysis. 84 Table 3.1. Predictor variables used in the Informed species distribution model for skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata). Variables were chosen based on the interviews in Chapter 2 and the literature review in Chapter 1. * indicates uncorrelated variables included in model input. Variable Name Description/Justification Source Anthropogenic Biomes* Anthropogenic biomes account for ecological biomes that have been greatly influenced by humans. Examples include urban areas, rural settlements, rangeland, different types of cropland, etc., which are thought to be limiting suitable habitat for skwenkwínem, as shown in Chapter 2. Ellis and Ramankutty 2008 Elevation* Skwenkwínem is known to grow between sea level and 3600 m in elevation (Stewart and Wiens 1971), but is localized to montane habitats in Skeetchestn Territory. Commission for Environmental Cooperation 2023 Landcover* Skwenkwínem is known to grow in meadows of Douglas fir forests. Landcover is therefore important to include as a predictor, to classify areas as meadows. Commission for Environmental Cooperation 2020 Soil pH, 0-5 cm Soil pH in H2O X 10, 0-5 cm below the surface. Soil pH was found to be an important predictor for plants growing in meadows in the Swiss Alps (Buri et al 2020) and for influencing alpine plant community composition (Vonlathen et al. 2006). International Soil Reference and Information Centre (ISRIC) 2022 Soil temperature seasonality (ºC), 0-5 cm* SBIO4 - temperature seasonality (standard deviation X 100), 0-5 cm below the surface. Temperature seasonality is the variability in soil temperature. This is important to consider for skwenkwínem, which requires soil to remain above 0 ºC over winter (Miller and Chambers 2006, Briceño et al. 2015). van den Hoogen et al. 2021 3.5.2.2 Contribution of predictor variables We determined the contribution of variables visually by marginal response curves, which depict the contribution of one variable at a time by setting the other variables to their mean. For a quantitative comparison, we compared variable importance. Variables with high importance (mean dropout loss closer to 1) have the greatest influence on the model’s predictive performance when they are independently removed from the model (Naimi and Araújo 2016, 85 Zurell 2020). Variables with low importance (mean dropout loss closer to 0) have little influence on the model’s predictive performance when removed (Naimi and Araújo 2016, Zurell 2020). 3.5.3 Model evaluation and selection Evaluating SDMs involves testing the model’s ability to discriminate presences from pseudoabsences with two independent datasets, in a process called cross-validation (Elith et al. 2006, Thuiller et al. 2009, Barbet-Massin et al. 2012, Yates et al. 2018, Hao et al. 2019). The model runs using 80% of the data, referred to as the training dataset, and is evaluated for its ability to predict presences within the other 20% of the data, referred to as the validation dataset. These data can be partitioned in different ways; for example, data from one time period can be used to train the model, while data from a different time period can be used for validating the model’s predictive ability (Roberts et al. 2017, Stillman et al. 2023). A more common approach is to use data from one area for training the models, with data from a separate area used to validate the models (Roberts et al. 2017, Benner et al. 2019). The latter approach is referred to as spatial cross-validation, which we chose as our method, as it reduces the effects of spatial autocorrelation (Roberts et al. 2017). We used k = 5 cross-validation folds, where the data are partitioned into 5 groups and assigned to the spatial grid (blocks). One of these 5 groups (20% of the data) is withheld from model training and reserved for model evaluation (Naimi and Araújo 2016, Roberts et al. 2017, Soley-Guardia et al. 2024) The tidysdm package allows for the use of multiple model algorithms: we selected Maximum Entropy (MaxEnt) and random forest (rf) for their ability to use categorical predictors and for their high predictive capabilities as species distribution models (Valavi et al. 2022). We initially also used a generalized linear model (GLM) and a generalized boosted model (GBM), 86 but neither could properly handle the many categories in each of the categorical predictors in the Informed model. We assessed model predictive performance using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), which assesses a model’s ability to discriminate between presences and absences (Valavi et al. 2022). Models performing at 0.5 AUC discriminate presences and absences no better than random, and 1.0 AUC is considered perfect discrimination (Skroblin et al. 2021, Valavi et al. 2022). An AUC below 0.7 is considered poor, between 0.7 and 0.8 considered acceptable, between 0.8 and 0.9 considered excellent, and 0.9 or greater considered outstanding performance (Elith et al. 2006, Gogol-Prokurat 2011, Ensing et al. 2013). 3.5.4 Ensemble approach We used an ensemble approach to account for uncertainties in the individual algorithms used to classify habitat suitability (Araújo and New 2007, Hao et al. 2019, Araújo et al. 2019, Thuiller et al. 2019). Ensemble models average the individual predictions made from single species distribution models using individual algorithms for combined predictions (Thuiller et al. 2009, Hao et al. 2019, Liu et al. 2019). MaxEnt and random forest were each run with 10 combinations of tuned hyperparameters, with the best performing combinations selected for inclusion in the ensemble by tidysdm. With the tidysdm pipeline, only the best performing models in the ensemble (AUC > 0.8) are retained and contribute to the predictions. The resultant AUC values in the ensemble are the mean AUC values for each model. 3.5.5 Classification of suitable or unsuitable habitat We produced continuous habitat suitability indices, ranging from 0 (unsuitable) to 1.0 (perfectly suitable), and binary predictions of suitable or unsuitable habitat. The binary predictions result 87 from selecting a threshold in which cells are classified as suitable (above the threshold) or unsuitable habitat (below the threshold). We used the optimized true skill statistic (maxTSS) as the threshold for suitable vs unsuitable habitat. Liu et al. (2013) recommend thresholding with the optimized sum of sensitivity and specificity (maxSSS), which they equate to maxTSS, for presence-only models. We classified the raster cells of the binary predictions as “suitable”, “unsuitable”, and “overlap”. The overlap consists of cells classified as suitable by both models in each prediction. To calculate the area of suitable habitat, we projected our habitat suitability rasters to the North America Albers Equal Area conic projection (ESRI:102008), tallied the number of cells in each class, then multiplied the number of cells by the individual cell area. 3.6 Results 3.6.1 Model performance MaxEnt and random forest produced excellent model performances for both the Bioclim and Informed models. The Bioclim model produced outstanding model performances with both MaxEnt and random forest algorithms (AUC > 0.9; Table 3.2., Fig. 3.3). MaxEnt and random forest in the Informed model produced excellent predictive performance (AUC > 0.8), although with a lower AUC than the Bioclim model (Table 3.2, Fig. 3.3). Both MaxEnt and random forest in the Bioclim and Informed models performed above our threshold for inclusion in the predictions (AUC > 0.8; Table 3.2, Fig. 3.3). 88 Table 3.2. Species distribution model performance (Area Under Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve, AUC) for Informed and Bioclim models of skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata) in western North America. Values are mean AUC for each model, with standard error of the mean, after combining into an ensemble. AUC and SEM values are rounded to 2 and 3 decimal places, respectively. Higher AUC values indicate higher predictive performance. Algorithm Informed model (mean AUC ± SEM) Bioclim model (mean AUC ± SEM) MaxEnt 0.88 ± 0.012 0.91± 0.017 random forest (rf) 0.87 ± 0.014 0.92 ± 0.011 Figure 3.3. Species distribution ensemble model performance for the Informed and Bioclim species distribution models for skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata) in the present time. MaxEnt, and random forest (rf) were run with 10 combinations of hyperparameters, and their area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values combined into an ensemble. Performance values for each algorithm are mean AUC and error bars extend to one standard error of the mean. The horizontal dashed line at Mean AUC = 0.8 is the predictive performance cutoff for models to be included in the habitat suitability predictions. 89 3.6.2 Predictor contributions The two most influential predictors in the Informed model are soil temperature seasonality (0-5 cm below the surface) and elevation, which did not differ greatly in importance (Fig. 3.4). Relative habitat suitability for skwenkwínem generally decreases with increasing soil temperature seasonality 0-5 cm below the surface, with maximum habitat suitability at around a 6.5ºC standard deviation in soil temperature (Fig. 3.5). Relative habitat suitability for skwenkwínem generally increases with increasing elevation, with the highest relative habitat suitability around 2000 m (Fig. 3.6). The two most influential predictors for the Bioclim model are precipitation of the wettest month (Bio13; Fig. 3.7) and precipitation seasonality (measured as the coefficient of variation for precipitation, Bio 15; Fig. 3.7). Relative habitat suitability for skwenkwínem increases with increasing precipitation of the wettest month, up to 150 mm (Fig. 3.8) and decreases with increasing precipitation seasonality (Fig. 3.9). 90 Figure 3.4. Predictor importance for the Informed species distribution model of skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata) in western North America. The variable importance is mean dropout loss (one minus AUC loss after permutations) for the model predictor variables, with higher values indicating more influential variables on the model performance and predicting habitat suitability. Elevation is in metres, and soil temperature is soil temperature seasonality (standard deviation). Figure 3.5. Marginal response curve, based on the Informed model of present conditions, between soil temperature seasonality (standard deviation), 0-5 cm below the surface (ºC) and predicted habitat suitability. Relative habitat suitability for skwenkwínem ranges from 0 = unsuitable to 1 = most suitable. Shaded area represents values within Skeetchestn Territory. 91 Figure 3.6. Marginal response curve, based on the Informed model of present conditions, between elevation (m) and predicted habitat suitability. Skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata) habitat suitability is predicted to increase with increasing elevation, up to 2000 m. Relative habitat suitability for skwenkwínem ranges from 0 = unsuitable to 1 = most suitable. Shaded area represents values within Skeetchestn Territory. Figure 3.7. Predictor importance for the Bioclim species distribution model of skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata) in western North America. The variable importance is mean dropout loss (one minus AUC loss after permutations) for the model predictor variables, with higher values indicating more influential variables on the model performance, and on predicting habitat suitability. Predictors include, in order from least to most important: annual mean diurnal range (ºC), isothermality (%), mean temperature of the driest quarter (ºC), precipitation of the warmest quarter (mm), annual temperature range (ºC), mean temperature of the wettest quarter (ºC), precipitation seasonality (%), and precipitation of the wettest month (mm). 92 Figure 3.8. Marginal response curve, based on the Bioclim model of present conditions, indicating skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata) habitat suitability is predicted to increase with precipitation of the wettest month (mm, Bio13). Relative habitat suitability for skwenkwínem ranges from 0 = unsuitable to 1 = most suitable. X values are precipitation of the wettest month, in millimetres, from WorldClim contemporary data (1970-2000). Values from Skeetchestn Territory are shown with the dark shaded area for the Bioclim present dataset, and the light shaded area for the Bioclim future dataset. Figure 3.9. Marginal response curve, based on the Bioclim model, between bio15 (precipitation seasonality, coefficient of variation) and predicted habitat suitability. Relative habitat suitability for skwenkwínem is predicted to decrease with increasing precipitation seasonality (%). Relative habitat suitability for skwenkwínem ranges from 0 = unsuitable to 1 = most suitable. X values are precipitation seasonality (%) from WorldClim contemporary data (1970-2000). Values from Skeetchestn Territory are shown with the dark shaded area for the Bioclim present dataset, and the light shaded area for the Bioclim future dataset. 93 3.6.3 Predicted area Overall, our Informed and Bioclim models predict similar distributions in suitable habitat for skwenkwínem (Fig. 3.10). For the present time, the Informed model predicts more suitable area than the Bioclim present model over our full study extent and within Skeetchestn Territory (Table 3.3). However, the Bioclim present prediction shows more highly suitable habitat than the Informed prediction (Fig. 3.10). The Bioclim future predictions estimate less suitable habitat for skwenkwínem over the full study extent and more suitable habitat within Skeetchestn Territory, compared to the Bioclim present prediction (Table 3.3, Fig. 3.10). Over the full study extent, the Informed (33.72%), Bioclim present (29.91%), and Bioclim future (29.30%) predictions classify about 1/3 of the study extent as suitable habitat for skwenkwínem (Table 3.3). The Informed (78.11%) and Bioclim present (71.08%) and Bioclim future (74.72%) predictions classify a majority of Skeetchestn Territory to be suitable habitat for skwenkwínem (Table 3.3). There is a reduction in suitable habitat between the Bioclim present and future predictions, for the full study extent (-0.60%) and an increase in suitable habitat within Skeetchestn Territory (2.11%). Relative to the predicted suitable area, we predict a loss of suitable habitat from present to future for the full study extent (-15.77%) and Skeetchestn Territory (-5.60%). 94 Table 3.3. Absolute area (km2) and percent area (%), relative to the study area and Skeetchestn Territory, predicted as suitable for skwenkwínem by the Informed model (present time), and Bioclim model (present and future predictions). The Bioclim present model uses predictor data from 1970-2000, and the future Bioclim prediction uses predictor data from 2081-2100, Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenario 5-8.5. The Change from Bioclim Present to Bioclim Future shows an overall loss of suitable habitat with SSP scenario 5-8.5. Our total study area is 4 023 545 km2 and Skeetchestn Territory is 7190 km2. Values are rounded to 2 decimal places. Prediction Total Study Area Skeetchestn Territory Absolute Area (km2) Percent Area (%) Absolute Area (km2) Percent Area (%) Informed Present 1 356 862.00 33.72 5615.75 78.11 Bioclim Present 1 203 225.00 29.91 5110.55 71.08 Bioclim Future 1 178 985.00 29.30 5372.14 74.72 Change from Bioclim Present to Bioclim Future -24 240.16 -0.60 151.73 2.11 95 Figure 3.10. Continuous habitat suitability present and future predictions for skwenkwínem in western North America based on the Informed and Bioclim ensemble species distribution models. The index is relative habitat suitability, ranging from 0 to 1. Predictions are mean average predictions based on their respective ensemble model. The left and middle panels show habitat suitability predictions for the present, and the right panel shows predictions for 2080-2100 under SSP 5-8.5. The projection used is the North America Albers equal area conic projection. 96 The area of agreement is the area where two compared models both predict suitable habitat to exist. The area of agreement in suitable habitat between the Informed and Bioclim present-day predictions represents 22.43% of the full study extent and 58.29% of Skeetchestn Territory (Fig. 3.11). The area of agreement between the Bioclim present and future predictions represents 24.21% of the full study extent (Fig. 3.11) and 60.21% of Skeetchestn Territory. A majority of the total suitable habitat predicted by both the Informed and Bioclim predictions (55.36%) and Bioclim present and future predictions (69.19%) is in agreement over the full study extent. Within Skeetchestn Territory, the overlap between the Informed and Bioclim present predictions represents 64.50% of the predicted suitable habitat, and the overlap between the Bioclim present and future predictions represents 70.36% of the predicted suitable habitat. 97 Figure 3.11. Area of agreement predictions for skwenkwínem based on the Informed and Bioclim models. Predictions are mean average predictions based on their respective ensemble model, which were thresholded to binary suitable/unsuitable predictions. The left panel shows habitat suitability predictions for the present time, while the right panel shows future predictions. “Bioclim present” is the area predicted to be suitable by the Bioclim model for the present time, and “Informed present” is the area predicted to be suitable by the Informed model for the present time. “Informed & Bioclim” indicates the area predicted to be suitable by both the Informed and Bioclim models. “Bioclim future” is the area predicted to be suitable in 2081-2100 under SSP 5-8.5, and “Bioclim present & future” is the area predicted to be suitable by both Bioclim present and future predictions. Map projection used is the North America Albers equal area conic projection. 98 3.7 Discussion 3.7.1 Model performance The performances of the Informed and Bioclim models indicate each effectively discriminated between presence and pseudoabsence points during the model cross-validation (Table 3.2, Fig. 3.3). The Informed and Bioclim ensemble models display negligible differences in model performance with the MaxEnt algorithm, and the Bioclim model has improved performance over the Informed model with random forest (Table 3.2, Fig. 3.3). Therefore, our chosen set of predictors in the Informed model with MaxEnt can explain the relative suitability of habitat for skwenkwínem with the same predictive power as the bioclimatic variables, and nearly the same predictive power with random forest (Table 3.2, Fig. 3.3). Our threshold for the inclusion of models in the predictions was set to AUC = 0.8, which means both the MaxEnt and random forest models were used in creating the predictions. 3.7.2 Predictor contributions Mean dropout loss represents the effect of iteratively removing a predictor from the model on the model performance. For the Informed and Bioclim models, the maximum mean dropout losses are under 0.25 and 0.15, respectively (Figs. 3.3 & 3.6). Since mean dropout loss represents 1 – AUC loss after permutations, values of predictor importance can be from 0 to 1, with 0 being unimportant and 1 being highly important influencers on model performance (Naimi and Araújo 2016, Zurell 2020). Our maximum mean dropout loss (variable importance) values are closer to 0 than 1, indicating none of the predictors have particularly strong independent influences on the model performance. Several of the SDM studies discussed in Chapter 4 failed to mention the 99 contributions of their predictors to their models; the studies that did mention predictor contributions showed a maximum predictor contribution of 43% (Benner et al. 2019) and 58% (Campbell et al. 2022). A study on the distribution of 2616 vascular plants in the European Alps had relative contributions of 58.5% for climate, 20.1% for soil, and 21.4% for landcover (Chauvier et al. 2021). Variable contributions around 20% are consistent with our results, with soil temperature seasonality and elevation falling between 0.15 and 0.30 (Fig. 3.4) although precipitation of the wettest month and precipitation seasonality fall between 0.075 and 0.150 (Fig. 3.7). Another study had similarly low mean relative predictor contributions of 0.471, 0.0762, and 0.0662 for their top three contributing predictors, two of which were soil variables (Ni and Vellend 2022). However, much like this study, their model performance values are high, with AUC > 0.9 for all three models (Ni and Vellend 2022). For the Informed model, soil temperature seasonality (ºC, 0-5 cm below surface) and elevation (m) are the two most influential predictors on the model’s performance (Fig. 3.4), and therefore in classifying suitable habitat for skwenkwínem. Within a smaller extent, such as Skeetchestn Territory, elevation is a main driver of species distributions (Pearson and Dawson 2003). For example, from Kamloops Lake to the surrounding mountains, the habitat changes from dry, big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) habitat to dense subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) forest in less than 12 km, as the crow flies. These different zones support different ecological communities and have varying degrees of human impact (Chauvier et al. 2021). Over a larger geographic extent, skwenkwínem is widespread and can be considered a relatively generalist plant species, occupying habitat over a large range in elevation (Fig. 3.6). The marginal response plot for elevation indicates the ideal elevation for skwenkwínem, over the full study extent, is approximately 2000 m (Fig. 3.6). There is a peak in relative habitat suitability at 2000 m, and the 100 existing literature states skwenkwínem is known to grow at elevations ranging from sea level to 3600 m (Davis 1966, Stewart and Wiens 1971, Douglas and Taylor 1972). Our study sites and nearby skwenkwínem patches within Skeetchestn Territory are at approximately 1000 m in elevation, which is consistent with our results (Fig. 3.6). Within Skeetchestn Territory, elevation ranges from approximately 300-1900m, encompassing the most highly suitable elevations according to our results (Fig. 3.6). However, the effect of elevation is indirect, with latitude important to consider along with elevation, and climate being the direct driver of habitat suitability (Austin 2002, Chauvier et al. 2021). Climate variability is inversely related to elevation, with low variability in climate at higher elevations, due to less surface area (Chauvier et al. 2021). Ultimately, climate influences landcover, which in turn influences soil properties, with differing magnitudes of effect at differing elevations (Chauvier et al. 2021). Elevation and climate influence human activity, with human activity concentrated at lower elevations (Nogués-Bravo et al. 2008). As discussed in Chapter 2, the Skeetchestn skwenkwínem patches are in montane habitats, at mid elevations, with easy access by humans and therefore human disturbances, both positive and negative. Variation in soil temperature as a determinant of habitat suitability is expected for skwenkwínem, a geophyte species. Skwenkwínem corms are known to grow at shallow depths and require soil temperatures to stay at or above 0ºC year-round, so their corms do not freeze (Miller and Chambers 2006, Briceño et al. 2015). Our results show high relative habitat suitability at a 6.5 ºC standard deviation in soil temperature, with a decline in relative habitat suitability above a 7.0 ºC standard deviation in soil temperature (Fig. 3.5). The higher the standard deviation, the greater the annual variability in soil temperature (O’Donnell and Ignizio 2012). Upon inspection of the soil temperature seasonality raster, high variability in soil temperature occurs in areas such 101 as high elevation deserts where temperatures fluctuate between extreme highs and lows, which are generally predicted to be unsuitable for skwenkwínem (Fig. 3.5). The highest habitat suitability is predicted at moderate variability in soil temperature (Fig. 3.5), where snowpack insulates the soil over winter, but soils do not reach temperatures as high as in deserts, for example. Skeetchestn Territory encompasses the conditions in which soil temperatures are highly suitable for skwenkwínem (Fig. 3.5). However, soil temperature seasonality is interpolated from air temperature data, which itself is interpolated from numerous weather stations (Karger et al. 2017, van den Hoogen et al. 2021). Therefore, we must be careful when inferring habitat suitability from soil temperature datasets with high uncertainty. Incorporating snowpack or snow persistence predictors into our model could better inform us of soil temperatures over winter, leading to better predictions of habitat suitability for skwenkwínem. The most influential predictors for the Bioclim model are precipitation of the wettest month (bio13) and precipitation seasonality/coefficient of variation (bio15; Figs. 3.7 – 3.9). There is an increase in habitat suitability with increasing precipitation of the wettest month, up to 150 mm where a plateau is reached (Fig. 3.8). Sufficient precipitation as snow, and therefore spring soil moisture, are important determinants of habitat suitability for skwenkwínem, which is hypothesized to be adapted to emergence following an increase in soil moisture (Jerome et al. 2021). As a geophyte, skwenkwínem requires sufficient snowpack to insulate its corms over the winter, otherwise the reproductive organs freeze and the individual dies (Miller and Chambers 2006, Briceño et al. 2015). Skwenkwínem likely requires the wettest months to occur over winter, so sufficient precipitation as snow accumulates and their corms are insulated over winter. Precipitation during the months following senescence are not likely to be strong determining factors in skwenkwínem habitat suitability, as the corms have entered dormancy prior to the hot 102 summer months. The use of snow persistence (day of year of average snowmelt) in SDMs has been shown to improve predictions for cold-adapted species in Fennoscandia (Rissanen et al. 2021). Within the arctic and boreal systems under study, snow persistence is argued as a driver of plant distributions (Rissanen et al. 2021). Although our study system is in lower and warmer latitudes, the phenology of skwenkwínem is dependent on the timing of snowmelt, making snow persistence a determining factor in its habitat suitability. We recommend the use of snow persistence as a predictor in future studies, to better characterize suitable habitat for skwenkwínem. For precipitation seasonality, highly suitable habitat is associated with low variation in precipitation, with a sharp decrease in habitat suitability with higher variability (Fig. 3.9). The inverse relationship between precipitation seasonality and habitat suitability is an unexpected finding, as skwenkwínem is thought to be adapted to annual fluctuations in precipitation. However, it is possible many of the skwenkwínem occurrences are in areas with similar amounts of precipitation as rain and precipitation as snow, leading to lower variability in annual precipitation but not necessarily less snowpack. Another possible explanation is some populations of locally-adapted cytotypes may be suited to habitat with less annual variability. For example, in the Cascade Mountains, snow release occurred throughout June, July, and August, with morphologically taller varieties of Claytonia associated with earlier snowmelt, and shorter varieties of Claytonia associated with later snowmelt (Douglas and Taylor 1972). The authors suggest belowground plant development occurred in the same way whether there was 2 cm or 2 m of snow over winter (Douglas and Taylor 1972). These findings show annual variability in precipitation might not be as important as initially thought for determining suitable habitat, with the possibility of many different cytotypes adapted to many different conditions over the large extent in which skwenkwínem exists. 103 Landcover is the least influential predictor in our Informed model (Fig. 3.4). Based on the Knowledge of skwenkwínem within Skeetchestn Territory, skwenkwínem is associated with Douglas fir (Pseudostuga menziesii) forest openings, so we expected landcover to be a strong predictor of suitable habitat. However, landcover is a less influential predictor than climate for the distribution of 2616 plants in the European Alps (Chauvier et al. 2021). The influence of landcover is tied with soil properties and climate, with the individual effects of landcover alone difficult to unentangle (Chauvier et al. 2021). The landcover raster used in our analysis has a spatial resolution of 30 m, which was then upscaled to 30 arcsecond (1 X 1 km at the equator) resolution to match our other predictors. However, the forest openings in Skeetchestn Territory are often less than 10 m2, so the resolution of this dataset does not adequately capture this habitat type. We recommend using higher resolution landcover data to investigate if the forest openings in which skwenkwínem grows will be captured in the model predictions, and to improve model performance and predictive accuracy (Chauvier et al. 2022). Anthropogenic biomes are the second least influential predictor in the Informed model (Fig. 3.4). Coupled with landcover, anthropogenic biomes characterize habitat fragmentation and human influence on ecosystems (Ellis and Ramankutty 2008, Chauvier et al. 2021), which are prevalent in our study system. The anthropogenic biomes dataset was available at a coarser resolution (5 arcminute) and was downscaled to 30 arcsecond resolution. We recommend using higher resolution Land-use data to better capture the small-scale Land-uses within our study extent. However, it is important to consider, in Skeetchestn Territory, skwenkwínem tends to be found in meadows where cattle graze, as evidenced in Chapter 2. This is the disadvantage of using correlative species distribution models; although the species may exist in a certain area, the species may be declining in quality, and an SDM will not capture this relationship. 104 3.7.3 Predicted area The areas predicted to be suitable by the Informed and Bioclim present models and Bioclim present and future predictions comprise approximately 30% of our total study area (Table 3.3, Figs. 3.10 – 3.11). This is a considerable portion of the large extent under study. Out of the total suitable area predicted within our full study extent, the Informed and Bioclim present and Bioclim present and future predictions have a majority overlap (Fig. 3.11). Conservation efforts should target skwenkwínem patches within the area of agreement from the Bioclim present and future predictions, as habitat contained within the overlap is likely to be highly suitable for skwenkwínem now and for decades to come. In the context of Skeetchestn Territory, the Informed and Bioclim present predictions had approximately 60% of their predicted suitable area in agreement, while the Bioclim present and future predictions had around 70% overlap in suitable area. The large area in overlap between the Bioclim present and future predictions indicates consistency between the predictions, and stability between the current predicted suitable habitat in Skeetchestn between the present and years 2081-2100 under SSP 5-8.5. We predict 2% of Skeetchestn Territory not classified as suitable in the Bioclim present prediction to become suitable in the future, while 6% of the habitat classified as suitable in the Bioclim present prediction is predicted to become unsuitable in the future. An increase in suitable habitat over the Territory indicates new areas of Skeetchestn Territory are predicted to become suitable, while some of the currently suitable habitat is predicted to become unsuitable. Although there is a reduction in absolute area predicted to be suitable over the full study extent, much of the suitable habitat is predicted to remain suitable in the future, which is an ideal scenario (Figs. 3.10 - 3.11). Visually, the northernmost suitable habitat in the Bioclim present 105 prediction is not considered suitable in the future (Figs. 3.10 – 3.11). We also see that habitat classified as highly suitable changes slightly in the future (Fig. 3.10). A common trend for species distribution shifts with climate change is poleward shifts, so our findings that the northern habitats may become unsuitable are unexpected (Parmesan and Yohe 2003, Parmesan 2006, Dyderski et al. 2018, Chakraborty et al. 2021). However, a study investigating the effect of soil predictors on plant species distribution models found the inclusion of soil predictors, rather than climate predictors alone, predicted smaller magnitudes of latitudinal shifts in distribution with climate change (Ni and Vellend 2022). Our future prediction shows a retraction in distribution from the northern portion of our study area with climate predictors alone, indicating that the distribution of skwenkwínem may retract to the central portion of our study area. Including future soil variables in a model transfer may further support this finding if both high latitude soils and climate are not suitable for skwenkwínem. Within Skeetchestn Territory, the Informed and Bioclim present predictions show a majority of the Territory to be suitable (Table 3.3). The Bioclim future prediction shows a decrease in suitable habitat for the full study extent and an increase within Skeetchestn Territory (Table 3.3). Although concerning, the overall decrease in suitable habitat in the future could be attributed to an overprediction of suitable habitat. Upon inspection of the continuous habitat suitability prediction from the Informed and Bioclim models, cropped to Skeetchestn Territory, much of the drier parts of the Territory are classified as suitable. However, our interviews from Chapter 2 and experience within the Territory lead us to believe these areas are incorrectly classified as suitable. The Informed and Bioclim models may have overestimated suitable habitat for skwenkwínem. A higher threshold for determining suitable and unsuitable habitat could result 106 in a more conservative estimate of suitable habitat, which may more accurately reflect the actual suitable habitat available. Although there is predicted to be an increase in suitable habitat in Skeetchestn Territory in the future, no areas in Skeetchestn Territory show particularly high habitat suitability for skwenkwínem. Based on Chapter 2, skwenkwínem is influenced by anthropogenic and edaphic factors, and not climate predictors alone. Comparing the Informed present prediction to a future prediction with the same predictor variables could give better insight to how projected anthropogenic effects (such as Land-use changes) may impact suitable habitat for skwenkwínem. Although the climate may become more favourable based on temperature and precipitation, the impacts of snow persistence with climate change were not tested in this analysis. Since snowmelt timing is thought to be a limiting factor in skwenkwínem’s success, we strongly recommend including snow persistence as a predictor in future analyses. We also recommend using Territory-specific occurrence records to better characterize suitable habitat in Skeetchestn Territory. We emphasize our prediction represents one possible scenario, and skwenkwínem may respond to climate change and anthropogenic factors in unexpected ways. 3.7.4 Limitations The use of presence-only data with pseudoabsence points means we cannot infer probability of presence, we can only estimate relative habitat suitability (Lee-Yaw et al. 2022, Soley-Guardia et al. 2024). We also cannot infer the causation of the distribution of skwenkwínem, since SDMs are correlative (Guisan and Zimmermann 2000, Austin 2002). What we can infer are relationships between environmental predictors and skwenkwínem habitat to estimate which conditions are suitable. Although this study predicts potential habitat suitability for skwenkwínem into the future, 107 we could only do so with bioclimatic variables from WorldClim, as the variables used in our Informed model are not available for the future. This means our future projection did not consider anthropogenic influences, soil conditions, or snow persistence, which are thought to be limiting to the distribution of geophytes like skwenkwínem in space (Chauvier et al. 2021, Ni and Vellend 2022). Interpreting the future predictions of suitable habitat for skwenkwínem needs to be approached with caution, as anthropogenic influences will change between now and 2081-2100. 3.8 Conclusion Our Informed and Bioclim models have high predictive performance, and similar predictions of relative habitat suitability in space over the full extent of our study area. Within Skeetchestn Territory, these predictions are different in terms of area predicted to be suitable, with more area in agreement than over the full study extent. Our future predictions show a decrease in suitable habitat from the present to 2081-2100, under the most pessimistic climate change scenario, over the full study extent, but an increase within Skeetchestn Territory. Although an overall decrease in suitable habitat could be attributed to an overprediction, the increase in suitable habitat in Skeetchestn Territory is unexpected. Territory-specific data will likely result in a different future prediction, which could give better insight into the future suitable habitat available to skwenkwínem. 108 Chapter 4: A synthesis of mixed-methods - Bringing spaces and places together over dessert 4.1 Overview While Chapter 2 focuses on the Knowledge of and places in which skwenkwínem grows within Skeetchestn Territory, Chapter 3 focuses on the spatial aspect of where skwenkwínem grows over its entire known distribution. Without Chapter 2, we would lack the context of the importance of skwenkwínem and the places it grows. This chapter discusses the concepts of place and space, and how these can be brought together with a Two-Eyed Seeing framework for a more holistic perspective on skwenkwínem’s ecology. We also discuss the field of species distribution modelling as it stands, with respect to the inclusion (or lack thereof) of Indigenous Knowledge in modelling approaches, and how this thesis serves as an example of modelling with Indigenous Knowledge. This chapter brings together the place-based and space-based analytical chapters, our main dinner courses, through the metaphor of sharing dessert. 4.2 Places and spaces The concept of “place” is a connection to culture, history, and experiences (Trusler and Johnson 2008), as opposed to the concept of “space” which is founded on measurable entities (Johnson and Hunn et al. 2008, as cited in Trusler and Johnson 2008). Places and their key species and features are well-known within Indigenous communities, serving as the foundation of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK; Turner et al. 2000, Trusler and Johnson 2008). Cultural resource areas are places where people gather to tend to their resources, harvest, visit, and share, thus merging social and ecological systems (Cuerrier et al. 2015). These locations are termed “cultural keystone places” for their important contribution to the identities of the Peoples who 109 use them (Garibaldi and Turner 2004, Cuerrier et al. 2015, Artelle et al. 2019). “A CKP [cultural keystone place] can be seen as the heart and roots of a peoples’ territory” (Cuerrier et al. 2015). Cultural keystone places do not exist in isolation from one another. The entire landscape is interconnected; “Landscapes […] are understood as journeys along paths or trails within a region, a linkage of specific known places” (Trusler and Johnson 2008, p. 565). Skeetchestn Elder Christine Simon described the Deadman Valley as “arms that stretch out to us when we come home into our valley from travels” (Ignace et al. 2016, p. 56). The cultural significance of places requires them to be considered as much more than physical geographic features of the landscape. We cannot reduce the journeys between places or the feeling of coming home to a measurable entity, which is what distinguishes “place” from “space”. In Chapter 2, it is emphasized that the community skwenkwínem patch is a culturally important place. Sam, Lizzy, Gabe, and Darvy each have memories of spending time with their families at the skwenkwínem patch, learning from their grandmothers and parents how best to care for the plants. This community patch provides food for not only the Skeetchestn community, but also the wider ecological community. The skwenkwínem patch is a place for sustenance, Knowledge transmission, and ultimately, cultural persistence. We suggest the Skeetchestn community skwenkwínem patch qualifies as a cultural keystone place, based on the results of Chapter 2 and our own experiences with the community at the patch. Without the interviews and analysis from Chapter 2, it would not be obvious how much the skwenkwínem patch means to the Skeetchestn community, and we would lack critical information on the conditions in which Skeetchestn knows their skwenkwínem plants to grow. Chapter 3 investigates the spatial aspect of our study, by modelling the spatial distribution of skwenkwínem in the present and future. The species distribution model (SDM) 110 literature is vast, but severely lacking in studies that partner with Indigenous communities to inform their modelling approach and predictor variables (but see Doyle-Yamaguchi 2021, Skroblin et al. 2021, Campbell et al. 2022, Mucioki et al. 2022). Below, we discuss the existing SDM literature with culturally significant focal species, and SDM studies that involve Indigenous communities. 4.3 Species distribution model review Through Scopus, we reviewed search results for “species distribution model*” with “Indigenous” or “Aboriginal” in both the title and keywords, which returned 5 results, 4 of which were relevant to culturally significant species. A search for “species distribution model*” returned 97 018 results, and this does not include the aliases under which SDM can be found, such as “ecological niche model” or “habitat suitability model”. This was not a systematic review, as that is out of the scope of this study. We discuss the articles found through this search, with a focus on studies investigating culturally significant plant species’ distributions. Two main themes emerged from this review: SDM studies acknowledging the cultural significance of their focal species, with no Indigenous partnerships, and studies including Indigenous Knowledge in their modelling and knowledge-making process. 4.3.1 Studies acknowledging cultural significance Our search returned a study that used the MaxEnt SDM and the 19 bioclimatic variables to model the distribution of many different taxa in the Guiana Shield, South America (McPherson 2014). However, their study only mentioned Indigenous Peoples as those managing the Lands within their study area, with no partnership or braiding of knowledge systems (McPherson 111 2014). Similarly, a study modelled the distribution of taro (Colocasia esculenta), a culturally important cultivated species in Hawai’i, using the 19 bioclimatic variables from WorldClim and MaxEnt (Kodis et al. 2018). They ran two models: one with environmental variables only and one with anthropogenic variables, the latter of which performed better than the environmental-only model (Kodis et al. 2018). Although anthropogenic features were included as model predictors, the study did not involve Indigenous partners. However, by including all cultivated taro plots, their model included an effectively complete set of occurrences covering the realized niche of taro (Kodis et al. 2018). They recommend future studies include participatory mapping, although they do not explicitly mention Indigenous Peoples. A 2019 study modelled the distribution of black huckleberry (Vaccinium membranaceum) based on Landsat imagery of the shrubs’ bright red leaves in the fall, coupled with field surveys (Shores et al. 2019). The authors mention the cultural significance of black huckleberry to Indigenous Peoples, but do not incorporate Indigenous Knowledge or partnerships into their study. Another study based in the Athabasca region of Alberta modelled the distribution and abundance of velvet-leaf blueberry (Vaccinium myrtilloides), a culturally significant plant species for several Indigenous Peoples (Nielsen et al. 2020). However, they did not partner with the local Indigenous communities, and recommend doing so to better understand the cultural value of the blueberry patches under study. While the above studies are important for the modelling of culturally significant species distributions, they are not done in partnership with Indigenous communities. Acknowledging the cultural significance of a focal species is an important first step, but true partnership and Knowledge-making (i.e. by selecting model predictors based on Indigenous Knowledge) is needed to produce locally relevant results. 112 4.3.2 Studies using Indigenous Knowledge to inform their approach and models While there is a concerning lack of SDM studies informed by Indigenous Knowledge, the few existing examples cover a broad range of culturally significant species, including important medicinal, technological, and food species. For instance, a study modelled the distribution of 3 medicinal plant species, cux’sawi’ (Piper tuerckeimii), tziri’tok’ (Piper amalago), and ch’un (Costus laevis), used by Q’eqchi Maya People, using environmental and geologic features (Pesek et al. 2009). This study incorporated traditional healers’ Knowledge into their model through slope, aspect, and ecosystem type present in their medicinal plant habitats (Pesek et al. 2009). Muskrat root (Acorus americanus: Raf), is a culturally significant medicinal plant for the Houlton Band of Maliseet People (Baumflek et al. 2015). The authors interviewed Maliseet plant harvesters, who further referred them to Mi’kmaq harvesters (Baumflek et al. 2015). This study used a layer of sociocultural suitability to include distance from community and distance from roads, to include the accessibility of sites as a metric in the model (Baumflek et al. 2015). Their model identified the most suitable habitat for muskrat root so the community could plant their nursery-raised plants in those locations, which the Houlton Band already owned (Baumflek et al. 2015). This study is an excellent example of community engagement resulting in a well-informed model, with locally relevant results, and they explicitly mention co-ownership of the data with the Houlton Band. A study from 2022 used herbarium records for four plant species that are culturally significant to the Indigenous Peoples of the Klamath River Basin: tanoak (Notholithocarpus densiflorus), evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), bear grass (Xerophyllum tenax), and iris (Iris spp.) (Mucioki et al. 2022). This study was co-developed with co-principal investigators from the Klamath Department of Natural Resources, 113 with interviews and focus groups with Tribal members providing Indigenous Knowledge of the species (Mucioki et al. 2022). The occurrence records were used as input into MaxEnt, along with climatic, landcover, and wildfire predictor variables (Mucioki et al. 2022). The authors concluded the models can inform larger patterns, but Indigenous Knowledge contextualizes the more regional, place-based ecological processes that occur. (Mucioki et al. 2022). SDMs informed by Indigenous Knowledge have also modelled technologically important species. For instance, Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) trees are used as teepee poles by Mescalero Apache People for their women’s coming of age ceremonies (Mockta et al. 2018). The models and interviews with tribal members were used to predict the availability of these trees in the future, under different climate change scenarios (Mockta et al. 2018). The authors found the Douglas fir are not predicted to exist in the sites where they are currently accessed by Mescalero Apache, under the mildest climate change scenario (Mockta et al. 2018). Similarly, monumental western redcedar trees (Thuja plicata), are used by Heiltsuk People for totem poles, dugout canoes, and housing materials (Benner et al. 2019). This study used a two-pronged approach, the first with archaeological records, and the second with field surveys conducted by Heiltsuk community members, to model the distribution of the plant with MaxEnt (Benner et al. 2019). The studies discussed above used SDMs to estimate the availability of technologically important trees, for the benefit of their respective communities. Finally, and as done in this thesis, SDMs informed by Indigenous Knowledge model culturally significant food species, including animals and plants. For example, a 2019 study modelled the distribution of mankarr (greater bilby, Macrotis lagotis), a culturally significant animal to the Martu People of Western Australia (Skroblin et al. 2021). The authors interviewed Knowledge Keepers and drew known occurrences on a map, which were then 114 digitized and used as occurrence data in MaxEnt (Skroblin et al. 2021). A study with similar methods focused on the distribution of pine mushroom (Tricholoma murrilianum), a culturally and economically significant fungus for the Líl’wat Nation, within Líl’wat Territory (Doyle-Yamaguchi 2021). The distribution of pine mushroom was modelled with MaxEnt using digitized map locations from interviews with Knowledge Keepers, and separately using occurrence data collected in the field, informed by Líl’wat Knowledge (Doyle-Yamaguchi 2021). Another example is a study where interviews conducted with Indigenous Protected Area Rangers informed SDMs of wan'kurra, (Northern Brown Bandicoot, Isoodon macrourus) and marrŋu/rupu (Common Brushtail Possum, Trichosurus vulpecula) in Northern Australia (Campbell et al. 2022). The Knowledge Keepers drew suitable habitat on maps, which were then digitized and used as occurrence points in MaxEnt (Campbell et al. 2022). Their predictor variables were also informed by the interviews (Campbell et al. 2022). These studies are instructive models for SDMs as tools to communicate Indigenous Knowledges visually, and for preserving baseline Knowledge and habitat suitability estimates for future monitoring. Several of the studies summarized above exist because of community-defined needs for their research (Baumflek et al. 2015, Doyle-Yamaguchi 2021, Campbell et al. 2022, Mucioki et al. 2022). These studies use interviews with Knowledge Keepers to inform species distribution models, but the other studies mentioned fall short of incorporating Indigenous Knowledge in meaningful ways. Notably, Baumflek et al. (2015) used a health sovereignty approach to species distribution modelling and included accessibility metrics to better predict habitat suitable both ecologically and culturally. Our study would be improved by including accessibility metrics for predicted skwenkwínem habitat to ensure potential patches could realistically be used by the Skeetchestn community. 115 Although the above studies contribute to the socio-ecological SDM literature, none of them provide publicly accessible code for reproduction, or detailed enough methods to reproduce the study. Many of the essential decisions and components of SDMs are not explicitly reported, resulting in an inability to repeat their methods. Few of the discussed studies make their data publicly accessible, although the locations of culturally significant species should arguably be safeguarded from public access. Several of the above studies publish Indigenous Traditional Territory boundaries with point locations or habitat suitability indices. Our study provides a baseline estimate and future prediction of suitable habitat for skwenkwínem over its known distribution, so Indigenous communities other than Skeetchestn may also find our results useful for revitalizing their skwenkwínem patches. Publishing the maps illustrating the broader distribution of skwenkwínem keeps the Skeetchestn-specific maps in the hands of Skeetchestn. The SDM process can be repeated with Territory-specific occurrence data, as the predictor data are from public repositories, and we recommend using higher resolution data for finer-grain predictions that could be more relevant to individual communities (McBride et al. 2017). Few of the studies discussed above mention data sovereignty, except for Doyle-Yamaguchi (2021), who mention OCAP as guiding their community engagement, and Baumflek et al. (2015), who explicitly outline data management through an Indigenist paradigm. We emphasize here the importance of research projects supporting Indigenous data sovereignty, so Indigenous communities can choose how their data are used. We recommend all future studies involving Indigenous communities and data include a statement outlining how Indigenous data sovereignty has been addressed. Supporting Indigenous data sovereignty is an essential component of ethical research (Carroll et al. 2021, Jennings et al. 2023). 116 4.4 Spatial tools as geovisualizations to communicate Indigenous Knowledge Geography as a visual tool can document human and other-than-human relationships and communicate place-based Knowledge (Jessen et al. 2022). Maps can therefore serve as a means of better understanding the spatial extent (“geovisualization”) of TEK and cultural use (McBride et al. 2017). Maps of cultural use areas can serve as baselines for monitoring ecological change and informing adaptive management, which is especially useful in the face of rapid climate change (McBride et al. 2017). However, maps cannot perfectly communicate or substitute for stories and TEK shared on the Land. The Knowledge and social-ecological relationships formed through experiential learning and intergenerational transmission cannot be represented by points, lines, and polygons (Huck et al. 2014, McBride et al. 2017). Participatory GIS and geographic tools that record Oral Stories at point locations are becoming increasingly available, which is a starting point for braiding geography and Indigenous Knowledge systems (Huck et al. 2014, Baumflek et al. 2015, McBride et al. 2017). Similarly, statistical models cannot model the complex socio-ecological relationships developed since time immemorial. Climate models fall short of the foresight Indigenous communities use when making management decisions. For example, many Indigenous communities base their decision-making processes on the seven generations principle; decision-makers must consider seven generations ahead before making decisions on Land-use (Clarkson et al. 1992). The seven generations principle serves to ensure decisions made today are with the future generations in mind. Climate models, such as the CMIP6 models, are revolutionary by envisioning a future under different climate policies and greenhouse gas emission scenarios. However, they fall far short of the futures envisioned seven generations ahead of today, only 117 reaching to the year 2100. This discrepancy in foresight highlights the difference between Indigenous and western conservation worldviews. The seven generations principle can serve as a valuable framework for improving future climate models with far-term predictions that are relevant to Indigenous Peoples and their decision-making processes. Indigenous Peoples are particularly vulnerable to climate change, due to their deep symbiotic relationship with the Land (Daigle et al. 2019, Hille 2022). In my three field seasons in Skeetchestn, we experienced a cold spring (2022), a wet spring, following unprecedented snowpack in the Deadman Valley (2023), and a drought year (2024). In the spring of 2023, many community members missed the opportunity to harvest skwenkwínem, due to not expecting the plants to senesce so early (Lizzy Ignace, personal communication April 2024). The holistic and cumulative effects of climate change have affected the socio-ecological relationships between the People of Skeetchestn and their tmicw at an unprecedented rate. It is for this reason we chose to model the distribution of skwenkwínem under the worst-case CMIP6 climate scenario, from 2081-2100. This timeframe is the furthest in the future available, so our future predictions can best inform the Skeetchestn community about potential shifts in suitable habitat for skwenkwínem. Species distribution models are largely unable to capture the effects of humans on species’ distributions (Mucioki et al. 2022). For example, transplanting of seeds or propagules to more accessible sites is a common practice among Indigenous communities, but may not be captured by SDMs that classify those habitats as unsuitable based on publicly available occurrence records (Turner 2014, Mucioki et al. 2022). It is also difficult to include resource quality as a metric of SDMs, which is ultimately the most important aspect of studies that focus on culturally significant species (Doyle-Yamaguchi 2021, Mucioki et al. 2022). However, modelling with informed objectives and inputs from Indigenous communities can produce more 118 locally-relevant predictions, by including occurrence points that would not be found by western scientists alone, and providing context to the growing conditions under study (Bélisle et al. 2018, Skroblin et al. 2021, Mucioki et al. 2022). Our study takes the Knowledge of suitable habitat gathered in Chapter 2 and selects predictor variables that align with these insights. However, we do not reduce our co-researchers’ Knowledge to mere existing datasets. Chapter 2 stands alone and contains its own analysis and discussion. Chapter 3 complements the Knowledge gathered in Chapter 2 by visualizing the distribution of skwenkwínem, using a western scientific tool, the SDM. The result of a properly co-developed and co-produced SDM is a more holistic and relevant understanding of the socio-ecological relationships between Indigenous Peoples and their culturally significant resources (Baumflek et al. 2015, Doyle-Yamaguchi 2021, Skroblin et al. 2021, Campbell et al. 2022, Mucioki et al. 2022). Species distribution models are founded on statistical correlations, and much of the existing predictor data is modelled and interpolated. Therefore, SDM results must be interpreted with care. When sharing their Knowledge, many Nehiyaw Elders will say “this is what I believe to be true” (Kovach 2021:225). This phrase highlights their lived experiences, which are not necessarily shared by everyone else. We can relate the results of our SDM to the phrase “this is what I believe to be true” because a model with different input data and analytical decisions will produce different results. Each model represents a prediction of a possible reality that may never be realized. Therefore, it is important to interpret the results of SDMs with as much ecological context as possible when making management decisions. This is where Skeetchestn’s lived experiences and intergenerational Knowledge of skwenkwínem can inform correlative predictions. Our model produced landscape-level predictions, based on the known realized niche of skwenkwínem. We encountered computation limits when using predictors at 30 arcsecond 119 resolution. These 30 arcsecond projections are visually informative on a large scale, but cannot capture the small skwenkwínem patches known to exist in Skeetchestn Territory. However, using lower resolution data means we can produce publishable habitat suitability indices without compromising specific resource locations. We also found in Chapter 2 the community skwenkwínem patch is a place of high cultural importance. Previously unknown suitable skwenkwínem patches from a realized SDM may not matter as much to the community as conserving their known patches of cultural importance. However, the predictions are there for Skeetchestn to use if they want to revitalize skwenkwínem habitat based on our predictions. The future predictions are also useful by telling us if the areas of high cultural importance where skwenkwínem is known to grow today are predicted to become unsuitable in the future. These results can inform a targeted approach to skwenkwínem patch conservation, to account for the larger climatic changes beyond the control of the community. 4.5 Rights-based geography Although geography has been misused to facilitate the colonization of Indigenous Lands and exploitation of natural resources, geographic tools can support Indigenous communities’ sovereignty. Doyle-Yamaguchi (2021:9) referred to this concept as “mapping as resistance”, where using maps to prove use of the Land is considered an act of resistance to British Columbia’s claim to jurisdiction over their Territory. The doctrine of terra nullius was founded on the belief Indigenous Peoples were not using the Land, so mapping the use of the Land is foiling the idea of terra nullius, and the very foundation of colonial occupation of our Lands. Canadian courts require evidence of exclusive use and occupation of the Land and its resources in order to recognize Aboriginal Title to the Land in question (Turner et al. 2021). The 120 precedent set in the landmark Delgamuukw v. British Columbia court case is Oral Histories are admissible as court evidence of occupation of Lands (Delgamuukw v. British Columbia 1997, Beaudoin 2017). Similarly, the Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia court case set the precedent that place names and Creation Stories are evidence of historical occupation of the Land by the Tsilhqot’in Nation (Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia 2007, Robbins and Bendle 2020). One of the Tsilhqot’in Creation Stories cited in the court proceedings explains how skwenkwínem (sunt’iny in the Tsilhqot’in language) came to grow in various places in their Territory (Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia 2007, Robbins and Bendle 2020). Therefore, the documentation of Oral Histories in Chapter 2 adds to the evidence of continued use of the Land by the Skeetchestn community, and additional visits with Elders will contribute to the already extensive documentation of Skeetchestn’s historical use of the Land (Ignace et al. 2017). One of the first conversations I had with Gabe Jules revolved around the Delgamuukw Case, and Skeetchestn’s Title to their Land. He told me Skeetchestn’s studies of the plants, animals, waters, and features of the Land are demonstrating continued occupation of their Territory. The heart of this research lies in supporting Skeetchestn in their efforts to continually occupy their tmicw and use their plant resources for generations to come. Working with Gabe, Darvy, Sam, and Lizzy out on the Land provided conversations I would not have received in an office. “Researchers cannot rely on interviews alone; they need to experience being out on the land in all of its facets under the guidance of knowledge keepers” (Michell et al. 2021:30). Exercising caretakership and the tending of plants and animals is an essential component of Title assertion (Ignace et al. 2016). It is imperative to contribute to the advancement of Indigenous sovereignty when conducting research with Indigenous communities - otherwise, the research is not equitable or ethical. 121 4.6 Conclusion In this chapter, we discussed bringing together the qualitative and quantitative analyses from Chapters 2 and 3. In Chapter 2, we gathered Knowledge of skwenkwínem in the context of Skeetchestn Territory, and in Chapter 3, we selected predictors based on the Knowledge collected through the interviews. In Chapter 3, we produced maps of suitable habitat for skwenkwínem, thus providing an application of Two-Eyed Seeing through oral transmission and geographic tools. While bringing together the concepts of places and spaces through a Two-Eyed Seeing approach is a useful framework, there are still gaps to be filled. The balance of using high resolution data and having computational limits is important when conducting SDM studies for Indigenous communities who have localized interests. A deep understanding of the broader ecological system, such as that provided by TEK, is critical to making informed predictor selections for SDMs. Being out on the Land in which you are studying, interacting with your focal species, and learning about the broader ecosystem is integral to producing ecologically and culturally relevant research. Going beyond the desk and connecting with community members out on the Land is an essential component of relationship-building, and therefore ethical research. 122 Chapter 5: Concluding our visit over a cup of tea This final chapter finishes our visit with a cup of tea, as is the cultural norm for many Indigenous Peoples. It is only fitting to conclude our metaphor of visiting over a meal with a cup of tea, followed by digesting the research experience through reflection. In Chapter 1, I “set the table” by introducing myself, the research project, our objectives, and presented a literature review surrounding Skeetchestn Territory and skwenkwínem. Through this literature review, we explored the published knowledge of skwenkwínem, which is limited to a handful of journal articles, and entries in broader ethnobotanical publications. We introduced the potential challenges climate change brings to the success of skwenkwínem, and how species distribution modelling tools can provide insight for future habitat suitability. For our first dinner course in Chapter 2, we sought to understand how settler colonialism has changed the landscape of Skeetchestn Territory, and how these changes have impacted skwenkwínem habitat. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with Sam, Lizzy, and Gabe in the spring of 2023. We identified five main themes: nourishment, colonization, interconnectedness, kinship, and places. A rich discussion of memories harvesting skwenkwínem with family members followed, along with accounts of the challenges faced by skwenkwínem and the wider ecological community. We found the cumulative impacts of colonization, including those from cattle grazing, fire suppression, resource extraction, and dispossession, are creating barriers for the Skeetchestn community to access skwenkwínem. We identified the community skwenkwínem patch as a place of cultural significance, where intergenerational Knowledge transmission, visiting, sharing, and harvesting take place. The community is actively revitalizing their caretaking practices and renewing their symbiotic relationships with their tmicw. 123 Chapter 3, our second dinner course, focused on species distribution models identifying suitable habitat for skwenkwínem to grow in, now and under projected climate change scenarios. Our models exhibit high predictive performance and considerable overlap over our full study extent, but less overlap within Skeetchestn Territory. We predict suitable habitat for skwenkwínem will decrease between now and the worst-case future climate change scenario over our full study extent, and we predict an increase within Skeetchestn Territory. The maps produced from this chapter encompass the entire known distribution of skwenkwínem, as well as Skeetchestn Territory, although the maps of Skeetchestn will not be published publicly here. Over dessert, Chapter 4 brought together Chapters 2 and 3 to discuss the application of a Two-Eyed Seeing approach to species distribution modelling with culturally significant species. Although there are shortcomings to using correlative statistical models, the maps serve as visualizations of cultural use and baseline estimates of habitat suitability for future monitoring efforts, with the potential to support Skeetchestn in exercising sovereignty over their tmicw. The documentation of Skeetchestn’s ecological Knowledge in Chapter 2 serves as important context for Chapter 3 and stands alone as an important outcome of this study. Chapters 2 and 3 are based on two complementary Knowledge systems that come together, through Two-Eyed Seeing. 5.1 Management recommendations Chapter 2 made it abundantly clear the Skeetchestn community understands their skwenkwínem patches and wider ecological community in a way we can never hope to glean from a species distribution model. The Skeetchestn community values their long-used skwenkwínem patches, which are places of high socioecological importance. We are working to revitalize their community patches by experimenting with cattle exclusion, which may improve the quality of 124 the corms growing there. Although our predictions from Chapter 3 show suitable habitat for skwenkwínem may be increased in Skeetchestn Territory with climate change, we are not sure how skwenkwínem will respond to the dynamic impacts of climate change. We recommend revitalization efforts concentrate on skwenkwínem patches of cultural importance, with annual rotations of harvesting efforts and traditional burning, as recommended by Gabe in Chapter 2. 5.2 Reflections – finishing our cups Our overall goal was to build a good research relationship with Skeetchestn, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and the University of British Columbia. I lived within the Skeetchestn community for three skwenkwínem growing seasons. We are also working with SNRC on using the Open Science Framework to manage their research partnerships, so they can exercise OCAP over their data. I highly recommend continued visits with the Skeetchestn community, especially with Elders, to gain an even more holistic understanding of skwenkwínem’s socioecological importance. Initially, I planned to interview Skeetchestn Elders, but as an outsider I did not assume I had access to them without putting in the good work. Sadly, over the course of this research, the Skeetchestn community had several Elders become ancestors. Gabe expressed to me he wished he paid better attention to his Granny’s teachings before she passed, so we cannot take for granted the Knowledge Elders hold while they are with us. Personally, I gained so much experience from this research project. Learning from Skeetchestn community members, out on the Land, was an invaluable experience I would not have received anywhere else. Working with the Skeetchestn community showed me we are resurging and taking back our cultural practices, overcoming shame, and sharing our Knowledge. Sam’s Knowledge of indicator species filled me with excitement for future research 125 opportunities. Lizzy asked her parents about skwenkwínem and answered the interview questions with her daughter on her lap in a demonstration of intergenerational Knowledge transmission. Gabe challenged me to think about the collective benefit of the community in everything we do. Darvy firmly believes their tmicw and Knowledge of it is meant to be shared. We close with reflecting on what skwenkwínem represents. Skwenkwínem weathers the winter underground and emerges in the spring when conditions are favourable. Similarly, the Skeetchestn community has endured many challenges from colonization, but their Knowledge and traditional practices have survived these challenges. Skwenkwínem and the Skeetchestn community have been resilient through unfavourable times and are resurging and reclaiming their spaces. The revitalization of relationships with their tmicw is key to the cultural survival of the Skeetchestn community: it’s who we are as a people and how much we benefit the Land as much as the Land benefits us (Gabe Jules, June 8th, 2023). Figure 5.1. Skwenkwínem emerging from the slash pile laid on Skeetchestn’s community patch. © Hannah Pilat, 2023 126 References Acevedo, P., A. Jiménez-Valverde, J. M. Lobo, and R. Real. 2012. Delimiting the geographical background in species distribution modelling. Journal of Biogeography 39(8):1383–1390. Adams, M. S., J. Carpenter, J. A. Housty, D. Neasloss, P. C. Paquet, C. Service, J. Walkus, and C. T. Darimont. 2014. Toward increased engagement between academic and indigenous community partners in ecological research. Ecology and Society 19(3). Adde, A., P.-L. Rey, F. Fopp, B. Petitpierre, A. K. Schweiger, O. Broennimann, A. Lehmann, N. E. Zimmermann, F. Altermatt, L. Pellissier, and A. Guisan. 2023. Too many candidates: Embedded covariate selection procedure for species distribution modelling with the covsel R package. Ecological Informatics 75:102080. Ames, K. M. 2005. Intensification of food production on the Northwest Coast and elsewhere. Pages 67–100 in D. Turner, Nancy J. Douglas E., editor. Keeping it living: Traditions of plant use and cultivation on the Northwest Coast of North America. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, USA. Anderson, M. K., and D. L. Rowney. 1999. The Edible Plant Dichelostemma capitatum: Its Vegetative Reproduction Response to Different Indigenous Harvesting Regimes in California. Restoration Ecology 7(3):231–240. Anderson, R. P., and A. Raza. 2010. The effect of the extent of the study region on GIS models of species geographic distributions and estimates of niche evolution: preliminary tests with montane rodents (genus Nephelomys) in Venezuela. Journal of Biogeography 37(7):1378–1393. Araújo, M. B., R. P. Anderson, A. Márcia Barbosa, C. M. Beale, C. F. Dormann, R. Early, R. A. Garcia, A. Guisan, L. Maiorano, B. Naimi, R. B. O’Hara, N. E. Zimmermann, and C. Rahbek. 2019. Standards for distribution models in biodiversity assessments. Science Advances 5(1):1-10. Araújo, M. B., and M. New. 2007. Ensemble forecasting of species distributions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 22(1):42–47. Armstrong, C. G., W. M. Dixon, and N. J. Turner. 2018. Management and Traditional Production of Beaked Hazelnut (k’áp’xw-az’, Corylus cornuta; Betulaceae) in British Columbia. Human Ecology 46(4):547–559. Armstrong, C. G., J. Miller, A. McAlvay, P. M. Ritchie, and D. Lepofsky. 2021. Historical Indigenous Land-Use Explains Plant Functional Trait Diversity. Ecology and Society 26(2). Artelle, K. A., M. Zurba, J. Bhattacharyya, D. E. Chan, K. Brown, J. Housty, and F. Moola. 2019. Supporting resurgent Indigenous-led governance: A nascent mechanism for just and effective conservation. Biological Conservation 240:108284. 127 Assembly of First Nations. 2018. Dismantling the Doctrine of Discovery. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.afn.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/18-01-22-Dismantling-the-Doctrine-of-Discovery-EN.pdf. Austin, M. P. 2002. Spatial prediction of species distribution: an interface between ecological theory and statistical modelling. Ecological Modelling 157(2):101–118. Baker, D. J., I. M. D. Maclean, M. Goodall, and K. J. Gaston. 2022. Correlations between spatial sampling biases and environmental niches affect species distribution models. Global Ecology and Biogeography 31(6):1038–1050. Bara, E. 2012, May 24. Emily Bara interview by Nancy Jules Bonneau. Barber, R. A., S. G. Ball, R. K. A. Morris, and F. Gilbert. 2022. Target-group backgrounds prove effective at correcting sampling bias in Maxent models. Diversity and Distributions 28(1):128–141. Barbet-Massin, M., F. Jiguet, C. H. Albert, and W. Thuiller. 2012. Selecting pseudo-absences for species distribution models: how, where and how many? Methods in Ecology and Evolution 3(2):327–338. Bartlett, C., M. Marshall, and A. Marshall. 2012. Two-Eyed Seeing and other lessons learned within a co-learning journey of bringing together indigenous and mainstream knowledges and ways of knowing. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences 2(4):331–340. Barve, N., V. Barve, A. Jiménez-Valverde, A. Lira-Noriega, S. P. Maher, A. T. Peterson, J. Soberón, and F. Villalobos. 2011. The crucial role of the accessible area in ecological niche modeling and species distribution modeling. Ecological Modelling 222(11):1810–1819. Baumflek, M., S. DeGloria, and K.-A. Kassam. 2015. Habitat modeling for health sovereignty: Increasing indigenous access to medicinal plants in northern Maine, USA. Applied Geography 56:83–94. Beaudoin, G. A. 2017, August 18. Delgamuukw Case. Bélisle, A. C., H. Asselin, P. LeBlanc, and S. Gauthier. 2018. Local knowledge in ecological modeling. Ecology and Society 23(2). Benner, J., A. Knudby, J. Nielsen, M. Krawchuk, and K. Lertzman. 2019. Combining data from field surveys and archaeological records to predict the distribution of culturally important trees. Diversity and Distributions 25(9):1375–1387. Bird-Naytowhow, K., A. R. Hatala, T. Pearl, A. Judge, and E. Sjoblom. 2017. Ceremonies of Relationship: Engaging Urban Indigenous Youth in Community-Based Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 16(1):1-14. Bonneau, N. 2013. Shuswap and Okanagan First Nation Root Food Protocols. 128 Borrows, J. 1997. Frozen Rights in Canada: Constitutional Interpretation and the Trickster. American Indian Law Review 22(1):37–64. Brealey, K. G. 1995. Mapping Them ‘Out’: Euro-Canadian Cartography and the Appropriation of the Nuxalk and Ts’ilhqot‘in First Nations’ Territories, 1793–1916. Canadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes 39(2):140–156. Briceño, V. F., G. L. Hoyle, and A. B. Nicotra. 2015. Seeds at risk: How will a changing alpine climate affect regeneration from seeds in alpine areas? Alpine Botany 125(2):59–68. Brun, P., W. Thuiller, Y. Chauvier, L. Pellissier, R. O. Wüest, Z. Wang, and N. E. Zimmermann. 2020. Model complexity affects species distribution projections under climate change. Journal of Biogeography 47(1):130–142. Buri, A., S. Grand, E. Yashiro, T. Adatte, J. E. Spangenberg, E. Pinto-Figueroa, E. Verrecchia, and A. Guisan. 2020. What are the most crucial soil variables for predicting the distribution of mountain plant species? A comprehensive study in the Swiss Alps. Journal of Biogeography 47(5):1143–1153. Campbell, B. L., R. V. Gallagher, and E. J. Ens. 2022. Expanding the biocultural benefits of species distribution modelling with Indigenous collaborators: Case study from northern Australia. Biological Conservation 274:109656. Cardinal, H. 1999. The unjust society. 2nd edition. Douglas & McIntyre, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Carroll, S. R., E. Herczog, M. Hudson, K. Russell, and S. Stall. 2021. Operationalizing the CARE and FAIR Principles for Indigenous data futures. Scientific Data 8(1):108. Castellano, M. B. 2004. Ethics of Aboriginal Research. Journal of Aboriginal Health 1(1):98–114. Castleden, H., V. S. Morgan, and C. Lamb. 2012. “I spent the first year drinking tea”: Exploring Canadian university researchers’ perspectives on community-based participatory research involving Indigenous peoples. Canadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes 56(2):160–179. Chakraborty, D., N. Móricz, E. Rasztovits, L. Dobor, and S. Schueler. 2021. Provisioning forest and conservation science with high-resolution maps of potential distribution of major European tree species under climate change. Annals of Forest Science 78(2):26. Chamberlain, S., V. Barve, D. Mcglinn, D. Oldoni, P. Desmet, L. Geffert, and K. Ram. 2024. rgbif: Interface to the Global Biodiversity Information Facility API_. R. Chapman, A. L., M. Hadfield, and C. J. Chapman. 2015. Qualitative research in healthcare: An introduction to grounded theory using thematic analysis. Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. 129 Chauvier, Y., W. Thuiller, P. Brun, S. Lavergne, P. Descombes, D. N. Karger, J. Renaud, and N. E. Zimmermann. 2021. Influence of climate, soil, and land cover on plant species distribution in the European Alps. Ecological Monographs 91(2):e01433. Chauvier, Y., P. Descombes, M. Guéguen, L. Boulangeat, W. Thuiller, and N. E. Zimmermann. 2022. Resolution in species distribution models shapes spatial patterns of plant multifaceted diversity. Ecography 2022(10):e05973. Chevalier, M., A. Zarzo-Arias, J. Guélat, R. G. Mateo, and A. Guisan. 2022. Accounting for niche truncation to improve spatial and temporal predictions of species distributions. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 10. Chiefs of the Shuswap, Okanagan, and Couteau Tribes. 1910. Memorial to Sir Wilfred Laurier. Chuine, I. 2010. Why does phenology drive species distribution? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 365(1555):3149–3160. Chung-Tiam-Food, T. 2022, February 16. Understanding Indigenous Sovereignty & Rights. Evergreen Resource Hub. Clarkson, L., V. Morrissette, and G. Régallet. 1992. Our Responsibility to The Seventh Generation. International Institute for Sustainable Development. Comberti, C., T. F. Thornton, V. Wyllie de Echeverria, and T. Patterson. 2015. Ecosystem services or services to ecosystems? Valuing cultivation and reciprocal relationships between humans and ecosystems. Global Environmental Change 34:247–262. Commission for Environmental Cooperation. 2020. 2010 Land Cover of North America at 30 Meters. North America Land Change Monitoring System, Canada Centre for Remote Sensing (CCRS), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO), Comisión Nacional Forestal (CONAFOR), Instituto Nacional de Estadistica y Geographica (Inegi). Commission for Environmental Cooperation. 2023. North America Elevation 250m Resolution. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Resources Observation & Science (EROS) Center, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, USA. Cook-Patton, S. C., D. Weller, T. C. Rick, and J. D. Parker. 2014. Ancient experiments: forest biodiversity and soil nutrients enhanced by Native American middens. Landscape Ecology 29(6):979–987. Cuerrier, A., N. J. Turner, T. C. Gomes, A. Garibaldi, and A. Downing. 2015. Cultural Keystone Places: Conservation and Restoration in Cultural Landscapes. Journal of Ethnobiology 35(3):427–448. Daigle, J. J., M. Natalie, D. J. Ranco, and M. R. Emery. 2019. Traditional Lifeways and Storytelling: Tools for Adaptation and Resilience to Ecosystem Change. Human Ecology 47(5):777–784. 130 Darby, M. 2005. The intensification of wapato (Sagittaria latifolia) by the Chinookan People of the Lower Columbia River. Pages 194–217 in N. J. Turner and D. E. Deur, editors. Keeping it Living: Traditions of plant use and cultivation on the Northwest Coast of North America. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, USA. Davis, R. J. 1966. The North American Perennial Species of Claytonia. Brittonia 18(4):285–303. deLeeuw, S., E. S. Cameron, and M. L. Greenwood. 2012. Participatory and community-based research, Indigenous geographies, and the spaces of friendship: A critical engagement. Canadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes 56(2):180–194. Deloria, V. Jr. 1969. Custer died for your sins. The MacMillan Company, New York, New York, USA. Deur, D. E. 1999. Salmon, Sedentism and Cultivation: Toward an Environmental Prehistory of the Northwest Coast. Pages 129–155 in D. Goble and P. Hirt, editors. Northwest Lands and Peoples: An Environmental history Anthology. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, USA. Deur, D. E., and N. J. Turner. 2005. Introduction: Reassessing Indigenous resource management, reassessing the history of an idea. Pages 3–34 Keeping it living: Traditions of plant use and cultuvation on the Northwest Coast of North America. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, USA. Dickson-Hoyle, S., R. E. Ignace, M. B. Ignace, S. M. Hagerman, L. D. Daniels, and K. Copes-Gerbitz. 2022. Walking on two legs: a pathway of Indigenous restoration and reconciliation in fire-adapted landscapes. Restoration Ecology 30(4):e13566. Dormann, C. F., J. M. Calabrese, G. Guillera-Arroita, E. Matechou, V. Bahn, K. Bartoń, C. M. Beale, S. Ciuti, J. Elith, K. Gerstner, J. Guelat, P. Keil, J. J. Lahoz-Monfort, L. J. Pollock, B. Reineking, D. R. Roberts, B. Schröder, W. Thuiller, D. I. Warton, B. A. Wintle, S. N. Wood, R. O. Wüest, and F. Hartig. 2018. Model averaging in ecology: a review of Bayesian, information-theoretic, and tactical approaches for predictive inference. Ecological Monographs 88(4):485–504. Douglas, G. W., and R. J. Taylor. 1972. The biosystematics, chemotaxonomy, and ecology of Claytonia lanceolata in western Washington. Canadian Journal of Botany 50(11):2177–2187. Doyle-Yamaguchi, E. 2021. A PREDICTIVE MODELING AND ECOCULTURAL STUDY OF PINE MUSHROOMS (TRICHOLOMA MURRILLIANUM) WITH THE LÍL̓ WAT NATION IN BRITISH COLUMBIA, CANADA. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Vancouver, BC, Canada. DRIPA. 2019. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act. 131 Dunne, J. A., J. Harte, and K. J. Taylor. 2003. Subalpine Meadow Flowering Phenology Responses to Climate Change: Integrating Experimental and Gradient Methods. Ecological Monographs 73(1):69–86. Dyderski, M. K., S. Paź, L. E. Frelich, and A. M. Jagodziński. 2018. How much does climate change threaten European forest tree species distributions? Global Change Biology 24(3):1150–1163. Ehrlén, J., and W. F. Morris. 2015. Predicting changes in the distribution and abundance of species under environmental change. Ecology Letters 18(3):303–314. Eisenberg, C., C. L. Anderson, A. Collingwood, R. Sissons, C. J. Dunn, G. W. Meigs, D. E. Hibbs, S. Murphy, S. D. Kuiper, J. SpearChief-Morris, L. Little Bear, B. Johnston, and C. B. Edson. 2019. Out of the Ashes: Ecological Resilience to Extreme Wildfire, Prescribed Burns, and Indigenous Burning in Ecosystems. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 7. Elith, J., C. H. Graham, R. P. Anderson, M. Dudík, S. Ferrier, A. Guisan, R. J. Hijmans, F. Huettmann, J. R. Leathwick, A. Lehmann, J. Li, L. G. Lohmann, B. A. Loiselle, G. Manion, C. Moritz, M. Nakamura, Y. Nakazawa, J. McC. M. Overton, A. Townsend Peterson, S. J. Phillips, K. Richardson, R. Scachetti-Pereira, R. E. Schapire, J. Soberón, S. Williams, M. S. Wisz, and N. E. Zimmermann. 2006. Novel methods improve prediction of species’ distributions from occurrence data. Ecography 29(2):129–151. Elith, J., and J. R. Leathwick. 2009. Species Distribution Models: Ecological Explanation and Prediction Across Space and Time. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 40:677–697. Ellis, E. C., and N. Ramankutty. 2008. Putting people in the map: anthropogenic biomes of the world. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6(8):439–447. Elton, C. C. 1958. The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants. Chapman and Hall, London, England. Ensing, D. J., C. E. Moffat, and J. Pither. 2013. Taxonomic identification errors generate misleading ecological niche model predictions of an invasive hawkweed. Botany 91(3):137–147. Essl, F., A. García-Rodríguez, B. Lenzner, J. M. Alexander, C. Capinha, P. Gaüzère, A. Guisan, I. Kühn, J. Lenoir, D. M. Richardson, S. B. Rumpf, J.-C. Svenning, W. Thuiller, D. Zurell, and S. Dullinger. 2024. Potential sources of time lags in calibrating species distribution models. Journal of Biogeography 51(1):89–102. Eyring, V., S. Bony, G. A. Meehl, C. A. Senior, B. Stevens, R. J. Stouffer, and K. E. Taylor. 2016. Overview of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) experimental design and organization. Geoscientific Model Development 9(5):1937–1958. 132 Ferrier, S. 2016. IPBES - the methodological assessment report on scenarios and models of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, Germany. Fisher, J. A., N. Shackelford, M. D. Hocking, A. J. Trant, and B. M. Starzomski. 2019. Indigenous peoples’ habitation history drives present-day forest biodiversity in British Columbia’s coastal temperate rainforest. People and Nature 1(1):103–114. Fletcher Jr., R. J., T. J. Hefley, E. P. Robertson, B. Zuckerberg, R. A. McCleery, and R. M. Dorazio. 2019. A practical guide for combining data to model species distributions. Ecology 100(6):e02710. Forrest, J., D. W. Inouye, and J. D. Thomson. 2010. Flowering phenology in subalpine meadows: Does climate variation influence community co-flowering patterns? Ecology 91(2):431–440. Fulkerson, T. J., and S. Tushingham. 2021. Geophyte field processing, storage, and women’s decision-making in hunter-gatherer societies: An archaeological case study from western North America. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 62:101299. Garibaldi, A., and N. Turner. 2004. Cultural Keystone Species: Implications for Ecological Conservation and Restoration. Ecology and Society 9(3). GBIF.org. 2024, January 21. GBIF Occurrence Download. Global Biodiversity Information Facility. Gezon, Z. J., D. W. Inouye, and R. E. Irwin. 2016. Phenological change in a spring ephemeral: implications for pollination and plant reproduction. Global Change Biology 22(5):1779–1793. Gogol-Prokurat, M. 2011. Predicting habitat suitability for rare plants at local spatial scales using a species distribution model. Ecological Applications 21(1):33–47. Graves, R. A., S. M. Pearson, and M. G. Turner. 2017. Landscape dynamics of floral resources affect the supply of a biodiversity-dependent cultural ecosystem service. Landscape Ecology 32(2):415–428. Guisan, A., R. Tingley, J. B. Baumgartner, I. Naujokaitis-Lewis, P. R. Sutcliffe, A. I. T. Tulloch, T. J. Regan, L. Brotons, E. McDonald-Madden, C. Mantyka-Pringle, T. G. Martin, J. R. Rhodes, R. Maggini, S. A. Setterfield, J. Elith, M. W. Schwartz, B. A. Wintle, O. Broennimann, M. Austin, S. Ferrier, M. R. Kearney, H. P. Possingham, and Y. M. Buckley. 2013. Predicting species distributions for conservation decisions. Ecology Letters 16(12):1424–1435. Guisan, A., and N. E. Zimmermann. 2000. Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecological Modelling 135(2):147–186. 133 Halleck, D. K., and D. Wiens. 1966. Taxonomic Status of Claytonia rosea and C. lanceolata (Portulacaceae). Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 53(2):205–212. Hao, T., J. Elith, G. Guillera-Arroita, and J. J. Lahoz-Monfort. 2019. A review of evidence about use and performance of species distribution modelling ensembles like BIOMOD. Diversity and Distributions 25(5):839–852. Harley, J. 1989. Deconstructing the map. Cartographica 26(2):1–20. Haugo, R. D., C. B. Halpern, and J. D. Bakker. 2011. Landscape context and long-term tree influences shape the dynamics of forest-meadow ecotones in mountain ecosystems. Ecosphere 2(8):1-24. Hernangómez, D., D. D. (for ggspatial code), and ggplot2 authors (for contour code). 2024, January 19. tidyterra: “tidyverse” Methods and “ggplot2” Helpers for “terra” Objects. Heydarian, N. M. 2016. Developing Theory With the Grounded-Theory Approach and Thematic Analysis. APS Observer 29. Hijmans, R. J. 2023. terra: Spatial Data Analysis. R. Hijmans, R. J., S. E. Cameron, J. L. Parra, P. G. Jones, and A. Jarvis. 2005. Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology 25(15):1965–1978. Hijmans, R. J., and J. Elith. 2023. Species Distribution Models. https://rspatial.org/raster/sdm/raster_SDM.pdf. Hille, S. 2022. Planning for the Next Seven Generations: Centering Indigenous Perspectives in Climate Planning in the Eastern United States. Georgetown University, Washington, D.C., USA. Hinge, G. 1985. Consolidation of Indian Legistlation Volume II: Indian Acts and Amendments, 1868-1975. Pages 257–258. Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. Howard, C. C., R. A. Folk, J. M. Beaulieu, and N. Cellinese. 2019. The monocotyledonous underground: global climatic and phylogenetic patterns of geophyte diversity. American Journal of Botany 106(6):850–863. Huck, J. J., J. D. Whyatt, and P. Coulton. 2014. Spraycan: A PPGIS for capturing imprecise notions of place. Applied Geography 55:229–237. Hunn, E. S., N. J. Turner, and D. H. French. 1998. Ethnobiology and subsistence. Pages 525–545 in D. E. Walker, editor. Handbook of North American Indians. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., USA. 134 Ignace, M. B. 1999. Guardian spirit questing in the nineties: A mother’s thoughts. Pages 184–188 in P. J. Murphy, G. P. Nicholas, and M. Ignace, editors. Coyote U: Stories and teachings from the Secwepemc Education Institute. Theytus, Penticton, BC, Canada. Ignace, M. B., and K. Favrholdt. 2017. Le Q’7éses re Scwescwesét.s-kucw ell re S7eykemín’ems-kucw: Trade, travel, and transportation. Pages 220–223 in M. B. Ignace and R. E. Ignace, editors. Secwépemc People, land, and laws: Yerí7 re Stsq’ey’s-kucw. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal;Kingston;London;Chicago. Ignace, M., R. E. Ignace, and B. Leonard. 2017. Secwépemc People, Land, and Laws: Yerí7 Re Stsq’ey’s-Kucw. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal, CANADA. Ignace, M., N. J. Turner, and S. L. Peacock, editors. 2016. Secwepemc people and plants: research papers in Shuswap ethnobotany. Society of Ethnobiology, Tacoma, WA. Ignace, R. E. 2016. Preface. Pages xiii–xvi in M. B. Ignace, N. J. Turner, and S. L. Peacock, editors. Secwepemc people and plants: research papers in Shuswap ethnobotany. Society of Ethnobiology, Tacoma, WA, USA. Ignace, R. E. (Stsmel’ecqen). 2008. Our oral histories are our iron posts: Secwépemc stories and historical consciousness. Ph.D., Simon Fraser University (Canada), Canada -- British Columbia, CA. International Soil Reference and Information Centre (ISRIC). 2022. SoilGrids250m 2.0 - Soil pH in H2O aggregated 1000m. Irwin, Robert. 2018, September 25. Aboriginal Title. The Canadian Encyclopedia. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/aboriginal-title Jennings, L., T. Anderson, A. Martinez, R. Sterling, D. D. Chavez, I. Garba, M. Hudson, N. A. Garrison, and S. R. Carroll. 2023. Applying the ‘CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance’ to ecology and biodiversity research | Nature Ecology & Evolution. Nature Ecology & Evolution. Jerome, D. K., W. K. Petry, K. A. Mooney, and A. M. Iler. 2021. Snow melt timing acts independently and in conjunction with temperature accumulation to drive subalpine plant phenology. Global Change Biology 27(20):5054–5069. Jessen, T. D., N. C. Ban, N. X. Claxton, and C. T. Darimont. 2022. Contributions of Indigenous Knowledge to ecological and evolutionary understanding. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 20(2):93–101. Johnson, H. R. 2022. The power of story: On truth, the trickster, and new fictions for a new era. Windsor, ON, Canada. Jules, M. 2012, April 13. Interview by Nancy Jules Bonneau. 135 Karalius, T., and P. Alpert. 2010. High abundance of introduced plants on ancient Native American middens. Biological Invasions 12(5):1125–1132. Karger, D. N., O. Conrad, J. Böhner, T. Kawohl, H. Kreft, R. W. Soria-Auza, N. E. Zimmermann, H. P. Linder, and M. Kessler. 2017. Climatologies at high resolution for the earth’s land surface areas. Scientific Data 4(1):170122. de Keyzer, C. W., N. E. Rafferty, D. W. Inouye, and J. D. Thomson. 2017. Confounding effects of spatial variation on shifts in phenology. Global Change Biology 23(5):1783–1791. Kimmerer, R. W. 2013. Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants. Milkweed Editions, Minneapolis, MN, USA. Kirkness, V. J., and R. Barnhardt. 1991. FIRST NATIONS AND HIGHER EDUCATION: The Four R’s — Respect, Relevance, Reciprocity, Responsibility. Journal of American Indian Education 30(3):1–15. Kodis, M., P. Galante, E. J. Sterling, and M. E. Blair. 2018. Ecological niche modeling for a cultivated plant species: a case study on taro (Colocasia esculenta) in Hawaii. Ecological Applications 28(4):967–977. König, C., R. O. Wüest, C. H. Graham, D. N. Karger, T. Sattler, N. E. Zimmermann, and D. Zurell. 2021. Scale dependency of joint species distribution models challenges interpretation of biotic interactions. Journal of Biogeography 48(7):1541–1551. Kovach, M. 2021. Indigenous methodologies: Characteristics, conversations, and contexts. University of Toronto Press, Toronto;Buffalo;London. Kuhnlein, H., and N. J. Turner. 2020. Traditional Plant Foods of Canadian Indigenous Peoples: Nutrition, Botany and Use. Routledge, London. Lambert, A. M., A. J. Miller-Rushing, and D. W. Inouye. 2010. Changes in snowmelt date and summer precipitation affect the flowering phenology of Erythronium grandiflorum (glacier lily; Liliaceae). American Journal of Botany 97(9):1431–1437. Lavallée, L. F. 2009. Practical Application of an Indigenous Research Framework and Two Qualitative Indigenous Research Methods: Sharing Circles and Anishnaabe Symbol-Based Reflection. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 8(1):21–40. Lee-Yaw, J. A., J. L. McCune, S. Pironon, and S. N. Sheth. 2022. Species distribution models rarely predict the biology of real populations. Ecography 2022(6):e05877. Leonardi, M., M. Colucci, and A. Manica. 2023. tidysdm: leveraging the flexibility of tidymodels for Species Distribution Modelling in R. bioRxiv. Leonardi, M., M. Colucci, and A. Manica. 2024. tidysdm: Species Distribution Models with Tidymodels. R. 136 Lepofsky, D., K. Hallett, R. Lertzman, A. Mathewes, A. McHalsie, and K. Washbrook. 2005. Documenting precontact plant management on the Northwest Coast: An example of prescribed burning in the Central and Upper Fraser Valley, British Columbia. Pages 218–239 in N. J. Turner and D. E. Deur, editors. Keeping it living: Traditions of plant use and cultivation on the Northwest Coast of North America. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, USA. Lepofsky, D., and K. Lertzman. 2008. Documenting ancient plant management in the northwest of North America. Botany 86(2):129–145. Lincoln, Y. S., and E. G. Guba. 2000. Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. Pages 163–188 in N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, editors. Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, California, USA. Liu, C., G. Newell, and M. White. 2019. The effect of sample size on the accuracy of species distribution models: considering both presences and pseudo-absences or background sites. Ecography 42(3):535–548. Loewen, D. C., N. J. Turner, and M. Thomas. 2016. Yellow Glacier Lily (Erythronium grandiflorum): An important root vegetable for the Secwepemc and Neighbouring Peoples of the Northwest Interior Plateau. Pages 219–278 in M. B. Ignace, N. J. Turner, and S. L. Peacock, editors. Secwepemc People and Plants: Research Papers in Shuswap Ethnobotany. Contributions in Ethnobiology, Tacoma, WA, USA. Loppie, C. 2007. Learning From the Grandmothers: Incorporating Indigenous Principles Into Qualitative Research. Qualitative Health Research 17(2):276–284. Louis, R. P. 2007. Can You Hear us Now? Voices from the Margin: Using Indigenous Methodologies in Geographic Research. Geographical Research 45(2):130–139. Love, N. L. R., and S. J. Mazer. 2021. Region-specific phenological sensitivities and rates of climate warming generate divergent temporal shifts in flowering date across a species’ range. American Journal of Botany 108(10):1873–1888. Matthew, S. K., and McKinnon, K. 2018. “Walking in Two Worlds: Aboriginal Peoples in the Small City” in “Small Cities, Big Issues” on AU Press—Digital Publications. Page Chapter 7 in C. Walmsley and T. Kading, editors. Small cities, big issues: reconcieving community in a neoliberal era. AU Press- Digital Publications, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Mattson, D. J. 2004. Exploitation of Pocket Gophers and Their Food Caches by Grizzly Bears. Journal of Mammalogy 85(4):731–742. McBride, B. B., F. Sanchez-Trigueros, S. J. Carver, A. E. Watson, L. M. Stumpff, R. Matt, and W. T. Borrie. 2017. Participatory Geographic Information Systems as an Organizational Platform for the Integration of Traditional and Scientific Knowledge in Contemporary Fire and Fuels Management. Journal of Forestry 115(1):43–50. 137 McCune, J. L., M. G. Pellatt, and M. Vellend. 2013. Multidisciplinary synthesis of long-term human–ecosystem interactions: A perspective from the Garry oak ecosystem of British Columbia. Biological Conservation 166:293–300. McDonald, J. 2005. Cultivating in the Northwest: Early accounts of Tsmishian Horticulture. Pages 240–273 in N. J. Turner and D. E. Deur, editors. Keeping it living: Traditions of plant use and cultivation on the Nortwest Coast of North America. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, USA. McLean, A. 1982. History of the cattle industry in British Columbia. Rangelands 4(3):130–134. McMillan, A., and E. Yellowhorn. 2004. First Peoples in Canada. Douglas & McIntyre, Vancouver, BC, Canada. McPherson, T. Y. 2014. Landscape scale species distribution modeling across the Guiana Shield to inform conservation decision making in Guyana. Biodiversity and Conservation 23(8):1931–1948. Meng, F. D., L. L. Jiang, Z. H. Zhang, S. J. Cui, J. C. Duan, S. P. Wang, C. Y. Luo, Q. Wang, Y. Zhou, X. E. Li, L. R. Zhang, B. W. Li, T. Dorji, Y. N. Li, and M. Y. Du. 2017. Changes in flowering functional group affect responses of community phenological sequences to temperature change. Ecology 98(3):734–740. Meng, F., J. Suonan, Z. Zhang, S. Wang, J. Duan, Q. Wang, B. Li, C. Luo, L. Jiang, L. Zhang, P. Liu, W. Renzeng, W. Lv, Z. Wang, D. Tsechoe, and M. Du. 2018. Nonlinear responses of temperature sensitivities of community phenophases to warming and cooling events are mirroring plant functional diversity. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 253–254:31–37. Menzel, A., T. H. Sparks, N. Estrella, E. Koch, A. Aasa, R. Ahas, K. Alm-Kübler, P. Bissolli, O. Braslavská, A. Briede, F. M. Chmielewski, Z. Crepinsek, Y. Curnel, Å. Dahl, C. Defila, A. Donnelly, Y. Filella, K. Jatczak, F. Måge, A. Mestre, Ø. Nordli, J. Peñuelas, P. Pirinen, V. Remišová, H. Scheifinger, M. Striz, A. Susnik, A. J. H. Van Vliet, F.-E. Wielgolaski, S. Zach, and A. Zust. 2006. European phenological response to climate change matches the warming pattern. Global Change Biology 12(10):1969–1976. Merow, C., M. J. Smith, and J. A. Silander. 2013. A practical guide to MaxEnt for modeling species’ distributions: what it does, and why inputs and settings matter. Ecography 36(10):1058–1069. Met Office Hadley Centre. 2024. WCRP CMIP6: Met Office Hadley Centre (MOHC) HadGEM3-GC31-LL model output for the “hist-sol” experiment. NERC EDS Centre for Environmental Data Analysis. Michell, H., B. Hardlotte, and R. McLeod. 2021. Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) of the Woodlands Cree and Denesuline Peoples of northern Saskatchewan, Canada: The land as teacher and healer. Journal of Indigenous Wellbeing 6(1):26–36. 138 Miller, J. M., and K. L. Chambers. 2006. Systematics of Claytonia (Portulacaceae). Systematic Botany Monographs 78:1–236. Mistretta, O., and A. Liston. 1992. Genetic Diversity, Gene Flow, and Relictualism in Claytonia lanceolata Var. Peirsonii, a Rare Montane Perennial from Southern California. The Southwestern Naturalist 37(3):223–230. Mockta, T. K., P. Z. Fulé, A. Sánchez Meador, T. Padilla, and Y.-S. Kim. 2018. Sustainability of culturally important teepee poles on Mescalero Apache Tribal Lands: Characteristics and climate change effects. Forest Ecology and Management 430:250–258. Moore, D. 2001. Through the eyes of Sk’lep: A vision of ecosystem stewardship in the Deadman Watershed. Skeetchestn Indian Band. Morellato, L. P. C., B. Alberton, S. T. Alvarado, B. Borges, E. Buisson, M. G. G. Camargo, L. F. Cancian, D. W. Carstensen, D. F. E. Escobar, P. T. P. Leite, I. Mendoza, N. M. W. B. Rocha, N. C. Soares, T. S. F. Silva, V. G. Staggemeier, A. S. Streher, B. C. Vargas, and C. A. Peres. 2016. Linking plant phenology to conservation biology. Biological Conservation 195:60–72. Morton, E. M., and N. E. Rafferty. 2017. Plant–pollinator interactions under climate change: The use of spatial and temporal transplants. Applications in Plant Sciences 5(6):1600133. Mucioki, M., J. Sowerwine, D. Sarna-Wojcicki, K. McCovey, and S. D. Bourque. 2022. Understanding the conservation challenges and needs of culturally significant plant species through Indigenous Knowledge and species distribution models. Journal for Nature Conservation 70:126285. Naimi, B., and M. B. Araújo. 2016. sdm: a reproducible and extensible R platform for species distribution modelling. Ecography 39(4):368–375. Nestor, R. 2018, July 16. Pass System in Canada. The Canadian Encyclopedia. Accessed October 9, 2023. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/pass-system-in-canada Ni, M., and M. Vellend. 2022. Soil effects on plant distributions and potential migration in Eastern North America. preprint, In Review. Nielsen, S. E., J. M. Dennett, and C. W. Bater. 2020. Predicting Occurrence, Abundance, and Fruiting of a Cultural Keystone Species to Inform Landscape Values and Priority Sites for Habitat Enhancements. Forests 11(7):783. Niklas, K. J. 2008. Life Forms, Plants. Pages 2160–2167 in S. E. Jørgensen and B. D. Fath, editors. Encyclopedia of Ecology. Academic Press, Oxford. Nogués-Bravo, D., M. B. Araújo, T. Romdal, and C. Rahbek. 2008. Scale effects and human impact on the elevational species richness gradients. Nature 453(7192):216–9. 139 O’Donnell, M. S., and D. A. Ignizio. 2012. Bioclimatic Predictors for Supporting Ecological Applications in the Conterminous United States. Page 10. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia, USA. Ortiz, D. P., L. Elizalde, and G. I. Pirk. 2021. Role of ants as dispersers of native and exotic seeds in an understudied dryland. Ecological Entomology 46(3):626–636. Pardee, G. L., D. W. Inouye, and R. E. Irwin. 2018. Direct and indirect effects of episodic frost on plant growth and reproduction in subalpine wildflowers. Global Change Biology 24(2):848–857. Parmesan, C. 2006. Ecological and Evolutionary Responses to Recent Climate Change. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 37(1):637–669. Parmesan, C., and G. Yohe. 2003. A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature 421(6918):37–42. Parminter, J. 1981. PROTECTION AS CONSERVATION: SAFEGUARDING BRITISH COLUMBIA’S FORESTS FROM FIRE, 1874 - 192. Pages 1–29. British Columbia Ministry of Forests. Parminter, J. 1991, May 29. A review of fire ecology, fire history and prescribed burning in southern British Columbia. Symposium, Kelowna, BC, Canada. Paul, H. M. 2023. Sharing Métis women’s stories about moon time and colonial body shame through visiting and berry picking in Buttertown, Alberta. Master’s Thesis, University of British Columbia, Okanagan, Kelowna, BC, Canada. Paul-Burke, K., T. O’Brien, J. Burke, and C. Bluett. 2020. Mapping Māori knowledge from the past to inform marine management futures. New Zealand Science Review 76(1–2):32–41. Pausas, J. G., B. B. Lamont, S. Paula, B. Appezzato-da-Glória, and A. Fidelis. 2018. Unearthing belowground bud banks in fire-prone ecosystems. New Phytologist 217(4):1435–1448. Peacock, S. L., M. B. Ignace, and N. J. Turner. 2016. Re Secwépemc Re Syecwmenúl’ecwems: Secwepemc stewardship of land and resources. Pages 167–206 in M. B. Ignace, N. J. Turner, and S. L. Peacock, editors. Secwepemc People and plants: research papers in Shuswap ethnobotany. Society of Ethnobiology, Tacoma, WA, USA. Pearson, R. G., and T. P. Dawson. 2003. Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimate envelope models useful? Global Ecology and Biogeography 12(5):361–371. Pebesma, E., R. Bivand, E. Racine, M. Sumner, I. Cook, T. Keitt, R. Lovelace, H. Wickham, J. Ooms, K. Müller, T. L. Pedersen, D. Baston, and D. Dunnington. 2023, December 18. sf: Simple Features for R. 140 Pesek, T., M. Abramiuk, D. Garagic, N. Fini, J. Meerman, and V. Cal. 2009. Sustaining Plants and People: Traditional Q’eqchi’ Maya Botanical Knowledge and Interactive Spatial Modeling in Prioritizing Conservation of Medicinal Plants for Culturally Relative Holistic Health Promotion. EcoHealth 6(1):79–90. Phillips, S. J., M. Dudík, J. Elith, C. H. Graham, A. Lehmann, J. Leathwick, and S. Ferrier. 2009. Sample selection bias and presence-only distribution models: implications for background and pseudo-absence data. Ecological Applications 19(1):181–197. Popken, L. R., P. J. Griffin, C. Coté, and E. Angel. 2023. Indigenous food sovereignty through resurgent self-governance: centering Nuu-chah-nulth principles in sea otter management in Canada. Ecology and Society 28(2). R Core Team. 2023. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Rata, A. 2020. Dismantling Cook’s legacy: Science, migration, and colonialism in Aotearoa. New Zealand Science Review 76(1–2):54–58. Rissanen, T., P. Niittynen, J. Soininen, and M. Luoto. 2021. Snow information is required in subcontinental scale predictions of mountain plant distributions. Global Ecology and Biogeography 30(7):1502–1513. Robbins, D. M., and M. Bendle. 2020. Tsilhqot’in Nation Aboriginal Title: Ethoecological and Ethnobotanical Evidence and the Roles and Obligations of the Expert Witness. Pages 313–328 Plants, people, and places: the roles of ethnobotany and ethnoecology in Indigenous peoples’ land rights in Canada and beyond. McGill-Queen’s University Press, London;Kingston;Chicago;Montreal; Roberts, D. R., V. Bahn, S. Ciuti, M. S. Boyce, J. Elith, G. Guillera-Arroita, S. Hauenstein, J. J. Lahoz-Monfort, B. Schröder, W. Thuiller, D. I. Warton, B. A. Wintle, F. Hartig, and C. F. Dormann. 2017. Cross-validation strategies for data with temporal, spatial, hierarchical, or phylogenetic structure. Ecography 40(8):913–929. Roberts, M. 2017. MOHC HadGEM3-GC31-LL model output prepared for CMIP6 HighResMIP. Earth System Grid Federation. Rocchini, D., J. Hortal, S. Lengyel, J. M. Lobo, A. Jiménez-Valverde, C. Ricotta, G. Bacaro, and A. Chiarucci. 2011. Accounting for uncertainty when mapping species distributions: The need for maps of ignorance. Progress in Physical Geography 35(2):211–226. Root, T. L., J. T. Price, K. R. Hall, S. H. Schneider, C. Rosenzweig, and J. A. Pounds. 2003. Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants. Nature 421(6918):57–60. Rousseau, J. S., and M. G. Betts. 2022. Factors influencing transferability in species distribution models. Ecography 2022(7):e06060. 141 Rousseau, M. K., and M. B. Ignace. 2017. Re Tsúwet.s le Q’7es te Stet’ex7éms-kucw:What archaology tells us about the initial peopling of Secwepemcúl’ecw. Pages 73–120 in M. B. Ignace and R. E. Ignace, editors. Secwépemc People, land, and laws: Yerí7 re Stsq’ey’s-kucw. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal;Kingston;London;Chicago. Sale, P. F. 1977. Maintenance of High Diversity in Coral Reef Fish Communities. The American Naturalist 111(978):337–359. Salmón, E. 2000. Kincentric Ecology: Indigenous Perceptions of the Human-Nature Relationship. Ecological Applications 10(5):1327–1332. Shores, C. R., N. Mikle, and T. A. Graves. 2019. Mapping a keystone shrub species, huckleberry (Vaccinium membranaceum), using seasonal colour change in the Rocky Mountains. International Journal of Remote Sensing 40(15):5695–5715. Skeetchestn Indian Band. 2013. Skeetchestn land and resource management plan Deadman Watershed. Skeetchestn Indian Band. n.d. About: Our history - key milestones. https://skeetchestn.ca/about/. Skeetchestn Natural Resources Corporation. 2022, March 15. Skeetchestn Fire Salvage Harvest Guidelines. Skroblin, A., T. Carboon, G. Bidu, N. Chapman, M. Miller, K. Taylor, W. Taylor, E. T. Game, and B. A. Wintle. 2021. Including indigenous knowledge in species distribution modeling for increased ecological insights. Conservation Biology 35(2):587–597. Smith, A. B., S. J. Murphy, D. Henderson, and K. D. Erickson. 2023. Including imprecisely georeferenced specimens improves accuracy of species distribution models and estimates of niche breadth. Global Ecology and Biogeography 32(3):342–355. Smith, B. D. 2005. Low-level food production and the Northwest Coast. Pages 37–66 Keeping it living: Traditions of plant use and cultivation on the Northwest Coast of North America. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, USA. Smith, L. T. 2011. Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. 2nd edition. Bloomsbury Publishing, New York, New York, USA. Soley-Guardia, M., D. F. Alvarado-Serrano, and R. P. Anderson. 2024. Top ten hazards to avoid when modeling species distributions: a didactic guide of assumptions, problems, and recommendations. Ecography 2024(4):e06852. Sosa, V., and I. Loera. 2017. Influence of current climate, historical climate stability and topography on species richness and endemism in Mesoamerican geophyte plants. PeerJ 5:e3932. Stewart, D., and D. Wiens. 1971. Chromosome Races in Claytonia lanceolata (Portulacaceae). American Journal of Botany 58(1):41–47. 142 Stewart, S. B., M. Fedrigo, S. Kasel, S. H. Roxburgh, K. Choden, K. Tenzin, K. Allen, and C. R. Nitschke. 2022. Predicting plant species distributions using climate-based model ensembles with corresponding measures of congruence and uncertainty. Diversity and Distributions 28(5):1105–1122. Stillman, A. N., R. L. Wilkerson, D. R. Kaschube, R. B. Siegel, S. C. Sawyer, and M. W. Tingley. 2023. Incorporating pyrodiversity into wildlife habitat assessments for rapid post-fire management: A woodpecker case study. Ecological Applications 33(4):e2853. Svalastog, A.L., and S. Eriksson. 2010. You Can Use My Name; You Don’t Have to Steal My Story – a Critique of Anonymity in Indigenous Studies. Developing World Bioethics 10(2):104–110. Tauli-Corpuz, V., J. Alcorn, A. Molnar, C. Healy, and E. Barrow. 2020. Cornered by PAs: Adopting rights-based approaches to enable cost-effective conservation and climate action. World Development 130:104923. Teit, J. A. 1909. The Shuswap. AMS Press, New York, New York, USA. Theobald, E. J., I. Breckheimer, and J. HilleRisLambers. 2017. Climate drives phenological reassembly of a mountain wildflower meadow community. Ecology 98(11):2799–2812. Thomas, M., N. J. Turner, and A. Garibaldi. 2016. “Everything is Deteriorating”: Environmental and Cultural Loss in Secwpemc Territory. Pages 345–378 in M. B. Ignace, N. J. Turner, and S. L. Peacock, editors. Secwepemc People and Plants: Research Papers in Shuswap Ethnobotany. Contributions in Ethnobiology, Tacoma, WA, USA. Thomson, J. D. 2010. Flowering phenology, fruiting success and progressive deterioration of pollination in an early-flowering geophyte. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 365(1555):3187–3199. Thuiller, W., M. Guéguen, J. Renaud, D. N. Karger, and N. E. Zimmermann. 2019. Uncertainty in ensembles of global biodiversity scenarios. Nature Communications 10:1446. Thuiller, W., B. Lafourcade, R. Engler, and M. B. Araújo. 2009. BIOMOD – A Platform for Ensemble Forecasting of Species Distributions. Ecography 32(3):369–373. Tk̓emlúps te Secwépemc. 2023. History - Tk̓emlúps te Secwépemc. https://tkemlups.ca/profile/history/. Tomchuk, T. 2023. The Doctrine of Discovery. Accessed August 16, 2023. https://humanrights.ca/story/doctrine-discovery Tomimatsu, H., S. R. Kephart, and M. Vellend. 2009. Phylogeography of Camassia quamash in western North America: postglacial colonization and transport by indigenous peoples. Molecular Ecology 18(18):3918–3928. 143 Trant, A. J., W. Nijland, K. M. Hoffman, D. L. Mathews, D. McLaren, T. A. Nelson, and B. M. Starzomski. 2016. Intertidal resource use over millennia enhances forest productivity. Nature Communications 7(1):12491. Tribble, C. M., J. Martínez-Gómez, C. C. Howard, J. Males, V. Sosa, E. B. Sessa, N. Cellinese, and C. D. Specht. 2021. Get the shovel: morphological and evolutionary complexities of belowground organs in geophytes. American Journal of Botany 108(3):372–387. Trusler, S., and L. M. Johnson. 2008. “Berry Patch” As a Kind of Place--the Ethnoecology of Black Huckleberry in Northwestern Canada. Human Ecology 36(4):553–568. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. 2015. Calls to Action. Ts’ilpinek. 2012, May 24. Interview by Nancy Jules Bonneau. Turnbull, C. L., A. J. Beattie, and F. M. Hanzawa. 1983. Seed Dispersal by Ants in the Rocky Mountains. The Southwestern Naturalist 28(3):289–293. Turner, N. J. 1997. Food Plants of Interior First Peoples. Royal British Columbia Museum, Victoria, BC, Canada. Turner, N. J. 2014. Ancient pathways, ancestral knowledge: Ethnobotany and ecological wisdom of Indigenous Peoples of Northwestern North America. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal;Kingston;London;Ithaca. Turner, N. J. 2020. Plants, people, and places: the roles of ethnobotany and ethnoecology in Indigenous peoples’ land rights in Canada and beyond. McGill-Queen’s University Press, London;Kingston;Chicago;Montreal; Turner, N. J., and H. Clifton. 2009. “It’s so different today”: Climate change and indigenous lifeways in British Columbia, Canada. Global Environmental Change 19(2):180–190. Turner, N. J., C. Geralda Armstrong, and D. Lepofsky. 2021. Adopting a Root: Documenting Ecological and Cultural Signatures of Plant Translocations in Northwestern North America. American Anthropologist 123(4):879–897. Turner, N. J., M. B. Ignace, and R. Ignace. 2000. Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Wisdom of Aboriginal Peoples in British Columbia. Ecological Applications 10(5):1275–1287. Turner, N. J., D. Lepofsky, and D. Deur. 2013. Plant Management Systems of British Columbia’s First Peoples. BC Studies: The British Columbian Quarterly(179):107–133. Turner, N. J., and D. C. Loewen. 1998. The Original “Free Trade”: Exchange of Botanical Products and Associated Plant Knowledge in Northwestern North America. Anthropologica 40(1):49–70. Turner, N. J., and S. L. Peacock. 2005. Solving the perennial paradox: Ethnobotanical evidence for plant resource management on the Northwest Coast. Pages 101–150 in N. J. Turner 144 and D. E. Deur, editors. Keeping it living: Traditions of plant use and cultivation on the Northwest Coast of North America. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, USA. Turner, N. J., R. Smith, and J. T. Jones. 2005. “A Fine Line Between Two Nations”: Ownership Patterns for Plant Resources among Northwest Coast Indigenous Peoples. Pages 151–180 in D. E. Deur and N. J. Turner, editors. Keeping it Living: Traditions of Plant Use and Cultivation on the Northwest Coast of North America. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, USA. Turner, N. J., and K. L. Turner. 2008. “Where our women used to get the food”: cumulative effects and loss of ethnobotanical knowledge and practice; case study from coastal British Columbia. Botany 86(2):103–115. Valavi, R., G. Guillera-Arroita, J. J. Lahoz-Monfort, and J. Elith. 2022. Predictive performance of presence-only species distribution models: a benchmark study with reproducible code. Ecological Monographs 92(1):e01486. van den Hoogen, J., J. J. Lembrechts, SoilTemp, I. Nijs, and J. Lenoir. 2021. Global Soil Bioclimatic variables at 30 arc second resolution (Version 1). Zenodo. Vanderplank, S. E., S. Mata, and E. Ezcurra. 2014. Biodiversity and Archeological Conservation Connected: Aragonite Shell Middens Increase Plant Diversity. BioScience 64(3):202–209. Vonlanthen, C. M., A. Bühler, H. Veit, P. M. Kammer, and W. Eugster. 2006. Alpine Plant Communities: A Statistical Assessment of Their Relation to Microclimatological, Pedological, Geomorphological, and Other Factors. Physical Geography 27(2):137–154. Wale, J. D. 2022, June. Climate Rez-ilience: Building Transformative Climate Resilience in Indigenous Communities. University of British Columbia, Okanagan, Kelowna, BC, Canada. Wickham, H., W. Chang, L. Henry, T. L. Pedersen, K. Takahashi, C. Wilke, K. Woo, H. Yutani, D. Dunnington, T. van den Brand, Posit, and PBC. 2024, February 23. ggplot2: Create Elegant Data Visualisations Using the Grammar of Graphics. Wilkinson, D. P., N. Golding, G. Guillera-Arroita, R. Tingley, and M. A. McCarthy. 2019. A comparison of joint species distribution models for presence–absence data. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 10(2):198–211. Wilson, S. 2008. Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Fernwood Publishing, Halifax, Nova Scotia; Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. Yates, K. L., P. J. Bouchet, M. J. Caley, K. Mengersen, C. F. Randin, S. Parnell, A. H. Fielding, A. J. Bamford, S. Ban, A. M. Barbosa, C. F. Dormann, J. Elith, C. B. Embling, G. N. Ervin, R. Fisher, S. Gould, R. F. Graf, E. J. Gregr, P. N. Halpin, R. K. Heikkinen, S. Heinänen, A. R. Jones, P. K. Krishnakumar, V. Lauria, H. Lozano-Montes, L. Mannocci, 145 C. Mellin, M. B. Mesgaran, E. Moreno-Amat, S. Mormede, E. Novaczek, S. Oppel, G. Ortuño Crespo, A. T. Peterson, G. Rapacciuolo, J. J. Roberts, R. E. Ross, K. L. Scales, D. Schoeman, P. Snelgrove, G. Sundblad, W. Thuiller, L. G. Torres, H. Verbruggen, L. Wang, S. Wenger, M. J. Whittingham, Y. Zharikov, D. Zurell, and A. M. M. Sequeira. 2018. Outstanding Challenges in the Transferability of Ecological Models. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 33(10):790–802. Yoshie, F. 2011. Effects of growth temperature and chilling duration on leaf phenology of Fauria crista-galli subsp. japonica, an alpine snowbed geophyte. Journal of Plant Research 124(3):371–7. Younging, G. 2018. Elements of Indigenous style: A guide for wriitng by and about Indigenous Peoples. Brush Education Inc., Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Zurell, D. 2020, November. Intoduction to species distribution modelling (SDM) in R. github.io. https://damariszurell.github.io/SDM-Intro/#References. Zurell, D., J. Franklin, C. König, P. J. Bouchet, C. F. Dormann, J. Elith, G. Fandos, X. Feng, G. Guillera-Arroita, A. Guisan, J. J. Lahoz-Monfort, P. J. Leitão, D. S. Park, A. T. Peterson, G. Rapacciuolo, D. R. Schmatz, B. Schröder, J. M. Serra-Diaz, W. Thuiller, K. L. Yates, N. E. Zimmermann, and C. Merow. 2020. A standard protocol for reporting species distribution models. Ecography 43(9):1261–1277. 146 Appendices Appendix A - Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act articles Relevant Articles from the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA 2019), which can be found here: https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/19044 - Articles 3-5 for data sovereignty and self-determination: o Article 3: “Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.” o Article 4: “Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.” o Article 5: “Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social, and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State.” - Articles 11, 13, 20, and 24 for the right to subsistence and cultural survival: o Article 11: ▪ “1. Indigenous peoples have the right to practise and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs. This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature.” o Article 13: “Indigenous peoples have the right to revitalize, use, develop and transmit to future generations their histories, languages, oral traditions, philosophies, writing systems and literatures, and to designate and retain their own names for communities, places, and persons.” o Article 20: ▪ “1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and develop their political, economic and social systems or institutions, to be secure in the enjoyment of their own means of subsistence and development, and to engage freely in all their traditional and other economic activities.” o Article 24: ▪ “1. Indigenous peoples have the right to their traditional medicines and to maintain their health practices, including the conservation of their vital medicinal plants, animals and minerals. Indigenous individuals also have the right to access, without any discrimination, to all social and health services.” - Articles 25, 26, 29, 31, 32 for the right to their lands and cultural heritage o Article 25: “Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned or otherwise occupied 147 and used lands, territories, waters and coastal seas and other resources and to uphold their responsibilities to future generations in this regard.” o Article 26: ▪ “1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.” ▪ “2. Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.” o Article 29: ▪ “1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive capacity of their lands or territories and resources. States shall establish and implement assistance programmes for indigenous peoples for such conservation and protection, without discrimination.” o Article 31: ▪ “1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts. They also have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions.” o Article 32: “Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for the development or use of their lands or territories and other resources.” 148 Appendix B - Truth and Reconciliation Commission Calls to Action articles Relevant Articles from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s 94 Calls to Action, which can be found here: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/british-columbians-our-governments/indigenous-people/aboriginal-peoples-documents/calls_to_action_english2.pdf 43. We call upon federal, provincial, territorial, and municipal governments to fully adopt and implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as the framework for reconciliation. 44. We call upon the Government of Canada to develop a national action plan, strategies, and other concrete measures to achieve the goals of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. 45. We call upon the Government of Canada, on behalf of all Canadians, to jointly develop with Aboriginal peoples a Royal Proclamation of Reconciliation to be issued by the Crown. The proclamation would build on the Royal Proclamation of 1763 and the Treaty of Niagara of 1764, and reaffirm the nation-to-nation relationship between Aboriginal peoples and the Crown. The proclamation would include, but not be limited to, the following commitments: i. Repudiate concepts used to justify European sovereignty over Indigenous lands and peoples such as the Doctrine of Discovery and terra nullius. ii. Adopt and implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as the framework for reconciliation. iii. Renew or establish Treaty relationships based on principles of mutual recognition, mutual respect, and shared responsibility for maintaining those relationships into the future. iv. Reconcile Aboriginal and Crown constitutional and legal orders to ensure that Aboriginal peoples are full partners in Confederation, including the recognition and integration of Indigenous laws and legal traditions in negotiation and implementation processes involving Treaties, land claims, and other constructive agreements. 46. We call upon the parties to the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement to develop and sign a Covenant of Reconciliation that would identify principles for working collaboratively to advance reconciliation in Canadian society, and that would include, but not be limited to: i. Reaffirmation of the parties’ commitment to reconciliation. ii. Repudiation of concepts used to justify European sovereignty over Indigenous lands and peoples, such as the Doctrine of Discovery and terra nullius, and the reformation of laws, governance structures, and policies within their respective institutions that continue to rely on such concepts. iii. Full adoption and implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as the framework for reconciliation. iv. Support for the renewal or establishment of Treaty relationships based on principles of mutual recognition, mutual respect, and shared responsibility for maintaining those relationships into the future. v. Enabling those excluded from the Settlement Agreement to sign onto the Covenant of Reconciliation. vi. Enabling additional parties to sign onto the Covenant of Reconciliation. 149 47. We call upon federal, provincial, territorial, and municipal governments to repudiate concepts used to justify European sovereignty over Indigenous peoples and lands, such as the Doctrine of Discovery and terra nullius, and to reform those laws, government policies, and litigation strategies that continue to rely on such concepts. 52. We call upon the Government of Canada, provincial and territorial governments, and the courts to adopt the following legal principles: i. Aboriginal title claims are accepted once the Aboriginal claimant has established occupation over a particular territory at a particular point in time. ii. Once Aboriginal title has been established, the burden of proving any limitation on any rights arising from the existence of that title shifts to the party asserting such a limitation. 150 Appendix C - Tobacco Protocol In the summer of 2021, I was working at Elk Island National Park, at the time the 215 children’s graves at the T’kemlúps Residential School were recovered in 2021, I was working at Elk Island National Park. As National Park employees, we were required to wear our uniforms, and could not wear orange shirts to show our support. However, we could wear small pins on our shirts, so I started wearing my orange shirt pin. My coworkers asked about it, and I said I could try and make pins for them to wear on their uniform. So far, I have made 53 orange shirt pins for coworkers, colleagues, friends, family, and our co-researchers so they can wear an orange shirt any time they want. I did not charge money for these, but instead gifted them to those who showed interest. I tried to teach them the Protocol surrounding gifting, which is that a gift is usually given back in return, often tobacco. Some colleagues made me scrunchies or bracelets in return, and another gifted me a jar of tobacco seeds. I started growing these seeds in January 2022, knowing I would use the tobacco in my research journey. I dried the leaves on paper towels on my front porch in August of 2022. I was told by a friend tobacco leaves are best harvested prior to seeds setting, so I left the stems growing in the pots once the leaves were removed. This allowed the seed pods to produce, which I dried on the stem and kept in a jar. Once the leaves were dried, I crunched them up and kept the tobacco in a glass container. In the spring of 2023, I used scraps of cloth for tobacco ties to gift to Skeetchestn community members. I brought these ties to the language gathering I was invited to, where I told the community members in attendance about our research. I also found a medicine pouch making kit at His Bead Store, a Métis-owned bead and supply store in Saskatoon, of which I ordered several to place the tobacco in to gift to the interviewed co-researchers. These pouches are made of hide and have a small white flower beaded on the front. At the beginning of the interviews, I presented the tobacco pouch and a small envelope of tobacco seeds to the co-researchers, so they could grow their own medicine if they wanted. The entire journey of the tobacco from gift to gift was a 2 year process. However, growing and tending to these medicines grounded my research. I applied for ethics review through both UBC and AAFC, but growing the tobacco, making the cloth ties, and stitching the pouches was my way of ethical Protocol and finding my place within the research. Left: moose hide tobacco pouch. Right: Jar of tobacco seeds, tobacco ties, loose tobacco, and envelope with tobacco seeds. 151 Appendix D - Semi-structured interview questions ONE-ON-ONE SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW SCRIPT and QUESTIONS for: “Predicting the distribution of the culturally significant food plant, skwenkwínem (western spring beauty, Claytonia lanceolata), in Skeetchestn territory” Informed Consent Procedure: Read consent forms, make space for questions or concerns. An estimated 5-10 minutes at the start of each interview. Verbal confirmation that sound recording equipment is turned on: Once recording is turned on, identify the date, location, time, and the participants active in the interview. Confirm on the recording that informed consent has been received. Overview of Purpose of Interview: ● Connecting with community members ● Gathering and documenting knowledge on skwenkwínem for future generations ● Getting spatial information so we can determine the distribution of skwenkwínem in the past, in the present, and in the future under different climate change scenarios ● Documenting why we are protecting skwenkwínem and how best to protect them Questions for Interview: 1 to 3 hours in length 1. Can you tell me a bit about yourself? 2. What do you know about skwenkwínem? 3. Can you tell me more about the importance of skwenkwínem to you? 4. What can you share about the importance of skwenkwínem to Skeetchestn? 5. Can you tell me about the life cycle of skwenkwínem? a. What can you tell me about harvesting skwenkwínem? b. How do you find skwenkwínem? c. What places you would harvest skwenkwínem? 6. What can you tell me about the current state of skwenkwínem patches? 7. What have you witnessed as some factors in changing skwenkwínem patches? 8. What sort of care do you think skwenkwínem patches need? Closing Remarks Thank you for your time. On your informed consent document, you have the contact information should you have any follow up thoughts, feedback, or questions. As a reminder you are also welcome to withdraw from this study at any point, as long as you withdraw before September 1st, 2023. Your insights are greatly appreciated. Kukwstsétsemc! 152 Appendix E - ODMAP protocol A Two-Eyed Seeing approach to predicting the distribution of skwenkwínem (Claytonia lanceolata:Pursh), a culturally significant plant – ODMAP Protocol – Hannah Pilat, David Ensing, Jason Pither 2024-03-08 Contact: hannahepilat@gmail.com Study link: https://osf.io/m4u8q/?view_only=b574aa670c4a4c48ae65e6aca8dc53c3 Model objective Model objective: Forecast and transfer Target output: Continuous habitat suitability index, binary suitable vs. unsuitable habitat Focal Taxon Focal Taxon: Claytonia lanceolata: Pursh, Montiaceae Location Location: Western North America Scale of Analysis Spatial extent: -137.0667, -103.0333, 31.90833, 58.1 (xmin, xmax, ymin, ymax) Spatial resolution: 30 arcseconds (1 km at the equator) Temporal extent: Informed Predictors: between 2008 and 2023. WorldClim present data: 1970-2000. WorldClim future data: 2081-2100. Temporal resolution: Monthly, annually Boundary: natural Biodiversity data Observation type: citizen science Response data type: presence-only Predictors Predictor types: climatic, edaphic, habitat, topographic, anthropogenic Hypotheses 153 Hypotheses: N/A Assumptions Model assumptions: - Species are at equilibrium with their environment. - Both species and environmental data have been sampled perfectly. - We have incorporated all major factors determining species range limits. Algorithms Modelling techniques: maxent, random forest Model complexity: Each of the models selected are known to perform well on presence-only datasets Model averaging: Ensemble modelling through mean averaging model predictions Workflow Model workflow: First, we built our model and did a test run with Ranunculus glaberrimus records through the tidysdm R package pipeline. R. glaberrimus is a commonly co-occurring species with skwenkwínem with similar spring ephemeral phenology, but has no known cultural significance. After completing a pre-registration, we then input skwenkwínem occurrences into our workflow. Our model workflow follows 2 stages: the first is to run our model with skwenkwínem occurrences and a set of informed predictor variables (Informed Model). These predictors were selected for their perceived biological importance by Skeetchestn community members and the literature. We then input skwenkwínem occurrences into a model with the 19 bioclimatic variables from WorldClim (Bioclim Model). Occurrences are first thinned, then pseudoabsences are generated. We filter out predictor layers that are highly correlated. Predictors with Pearson’s correlation coefficient > 0.8 are removed from the analysis. We join the occurrences (presences and pseudoabsences) to our uncorrelated predictor data, which is then used as input in our model. We partitioned the data into 80% training and 20% testing sets, and validated our model using 5-fold cross-validation, for 10 runs (10 combinations of hyperparameters) per model. We evaluated model performance based on AUC. Models were then averaged and combined into an ensemble. The best performing models in the ensemble (AUC > 0.8) were then used to project our predictions to the present (for both the Informed and Bioclim Models), and future (for the Bioclim Model). We did not have future predictions with our Informed Predictors, so we were unable to project to the future in this model. We then thresholded our predictions to binary suitable/unsuitable predictions, using the optimized true skill statistic (tss_max) as our threshold. Cells classified as suitable were filtered out and the area in km^2 was calculated so we could quantify change in suitable habitat between predictions. Software Software: We used R version 4.3.2. for our analysis. Packages used include: DALEX 2.4.3, dplyr 1.1.4, ggplot2 3.4.4, overlapping 2.1, parsnip 1.1.1, ranger 0.16.0, recipes 1.0.8, rgbif 3.7.8, sf 1.0-14, terra 1.7-55, tidymodels 1.1.1, tidysdm 0.9.3, tidyterra 0.5.0, tidyverse 2.0.0, tune 1.1.2, workflows 1.1.3, workflowsets 1.0.1, xgboost 1.7.5.1, yardstick 1.2.0 154 Code availability: https://osf.io/32r7n/?view_only=b489ff5240b243b5b3f2b5b4745e40a7 Data availability: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hPVURwmgKhZEn61KctXL_-iWm8HbwldDUz_OrZFjo04/edit?usp=sharing Data Biodiversity data Taxon names: Claytonia lanceolata: Pursh Taxonomic reference system: GBIF Taxon Key: 3084746, Kingdom: Plantae, Phylum: Tracheophyta, Class: Magnoliopsida, Order: Caryophyllales, Family: Montiaceae, Genus: Claytonia, Species: Claytonia lanceolata, Ecological level: individuals Data sources: GBIF.org (06 March 2024) GBIF Occurrence Download https://doi.org/10.15468/dl.tyzyux Sampling design Sample size: 3541 observations Clipping: Canada, USA Scaling: All predictor layers converted to SpatRasters with CRS = WGS84, 30 arcsec resolution, 3143 rows, 4083 columns, and cropped and masked to our study extent. Occurrence records are first thinned to 1 per cell in our background raster, then constrained to be a minimum of 15 km from other occurrences. Cleaning: We filtered out occurrences with geospatial issues, required observations to have coordinates, and selected observations made between 1940 and 2024. The midpoint of this timeframe is 1982, which is close to the midpoint of our present-day WorldClim data (1985). We observed an outlier in Alaska, which would have expanded our study area greatly. To avoid introducing extra unsuitable habitat into our model, we chose to crop out this outlier. Our spatial extent covers every other observation, to best capture the realized niche of skwenkwínem. Absence data: 10 times the number of presences were sampled for pseudoabsences, to adequately sample the background environment. Background data: We used a target group sampling approach to generating pseudoabsences. Pseudoabsences were generated randomly within discs surrounding our presences. We sampled pseudoabsences from a minimum of 50 km and maximum of 75 km from presences, to introduce the same type of sampling bias as the presence points (thus reducing the effect of sampling bias from presences). Errors and biases: Detection probability is low, as the records are largely from citizen science and herbarium specimens, rather than a structured sampling effort. Misidentification potential exists, due to the citizen science nature of the records. Geo-referencing errors are controlled for by filtering out records with geospatial issues as determined by GBIF. Data partitioning Training data: Data were partitioned into spatial blocks based on 80% training and 20% testing sets (withheld from model fitting) Validation data: Models were validated through 5-fold cross-validation of the training and testing sets. Models were run 10 times (10 combinations of hyperparameters), and mean averaged when combined into the ensemble. 155 Predictor variables Predictor variables: Informed Model: Anthropogenic biomes, Elevation, Landcover, Soil pH 0-5 cm below surface, , Soil temperature 0-5 cm below surface, Bioclim Model: 19 bioclimatic variables: BIO1 = Annual Mean Temperature, BIO2 = Mean Diurnal Range (Mean of monthly (max temp - min temp)), BIO3 = Isothermality (BIO2/BIO7) (×100), BIO4 = Temperature Seasonality (standard deviation ×100), BIO5 = Max Temperature of Warmest Month, BIO6 = Min Temperature of Coldest Month, BIO7 = Temperature Annual Range (BIO5-BIO6), BIO8 = Mean Temperature of Wettest Quarter, BIO9 = Mean Temperature of Driest Quarter, BIO10 = Mean Temperature of Warmest Quarter, BIO11 = Mean Temperature of Coldest Quarter, BIO12 = Annual Precipitation, BIO13 = Precipitation of Wettest Month, BIO14 = Precipitation of Driest Month, BIO15 = Precipitation Seasonality (Coefficient of Variation), BIO16 = Precipitation of Wettest Quarter, BIO17 = Precipitation of Driest Quarter, BIO18 = Precipitation of Warmest Quarter, BIO19 = Precipitation of Coldest Quarter Data sources: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hPVURwmgKhZEn61KctXL_-iWm8HbwldDUz_OrZFjo04/edit?usp=sharing Data processing: Our goal was to have all predictor layers with the same CRS, resolution, dimensions, and extent - Shapefiles were vectorized and subsequently rasterized. - Rasters were projected to WGS84 (if needed). - Rasters were then resampled to 30 arcsec resolution (if needed). - Rasters were then cropped to our study extent. - Rasters were then masked to our boundary polygon, so values outside of the polygon were set to NA. - Landcover was a large file that required aggregating to a lower resolution prior to reprojecting, resampling, cropping, and masking. Transfer data Data sources: Present Data: https://www.worldclim.org/data/worldclim21.html Future Data: https://www.worldclim.org/data/cmip6/cmip6_clim30s.html#google_vignette WorldClim 2.1 Spatial extent: -180, 180, -90, 90 (xmin, xmax, ymin, ymax) Spatial resolution: 30 arcsecond Temporal extent: Present: 1970-2000, Future: 2081-2100 Temporal resolution: Monthly Models and scenarios: Future: HadGEM3-GC31-LL model, SSP 5-8.5 (worst-case, no climate policy implemented) Data processing: Data were cropped to our study extent, and all other predictors were processed to match the existing specifications of these WorldClim datasets. Model Variable pre-selection Variable pre-selection: Informed Model predictors were selected for their perceived biological importance to skwenkwínem, through semi-structured qualitative interviews with Skeetchestn 156 community members, and from the literature review. Justification of Informed Predictor Selection: - Anthropogenic biomes account for ecological biomes that have been greatly influenced by humans. Examples include urban areas, rural settlements, rangeland, different types of cropland, etc. Many of these anthropogenic biomes are thought to be limiting suitable habitat for skwenkwínem, especially rangeland. Each of the 3 co-researchers mentioned cattle grazing as reducing the quality of skwenkwínem habitat. - Elevation: Skwenkwínem is known to grow between sea level and 3600 m in elevation, but is very localized to montane habitats in Skeetchestn territory (based on our interviews). Elevation is therefore likely an important determinant of the distribution of skwenkwínem. The inclusion of elevation also accounts for aspect. Sam believes shade is important for skwenkwínem habitat, as she has not observed skwenkwínem growing in giant meadows, but has observed skwenkwínem growing in small forest openings. - Landcover: Skwenkwínem is known by the Skeetchestn community to grow in meadows of Douglas fir forests. Landcover is therefore important to include as a predictor, to classify areas as forested meadows. - Soil pH in H2O X 10, 0-5 cm below the surface. Soil pH was found to be an important predictor for plants growing in meadows in the Swiss Alps (Buri 2020). Soil pH was also found to be an important factor in influencing alpine plant community composition (Vonlathen et al. 2006). - Soil temperature 0-5 cm below surface: SBIO4 - temperature seasonality (standard deviation X 100), 0-5 cm below the surface. Temperature seasonality represents the variability in temperature. This is important to consider for skwenkwínem, which requires soil to remain above 0 ºC over winter. Otherwise, the corm can freeze and the generation of reproductive and aboveground parts may not occur. Skwenkwínem corms are known to grow at shallow depths, so 0-5 cm below the soil surface is relevant. We chose to also run our model using the 19 bioclimatic variables from WorldClim, because this is a common approach to species distribution modelling. We wanted to compare model performance between a tailored set of predictors, including anthropogenic variables, and the standard climate predictors. Using the 19 bioclimatic variables also allowed for model transfer to the future and a direct quantification of suitable habitat change between the present-day and future by comparing the realized and potential Bioclim Models. Multicollinearity Multicollinearity: We identified and removed highly correlated predictor variables (Pearson’s R > 0.8) from analysis, prior to inclusion in the model. Tidysdm has a built in function for recommending which predictors to remove. Model settings <maxent> default <random forest> default <Model settings (extrapolation)> 157 Model estimates Coefficients: We inputted the ensemble model into our predictions. Models with AUC < 0.8 were excluded from our predictions. Variable importance: Variables were assessed for their contribution to the model based on mean dropout loss (1 - AUC loss after permutations). 1.0 indicates no dropout from the model, 0.0 indicates no inclusion in the model output. The variable with mean dropout loss closest to 1.0 is the most important contributor. The variable with mean dropout loss closest to 0.0 is the least important contributor. Model selection - model averaging - ensembles Model averaging: Mean average of the model predictions were combined into an ensemble. Analysis and Correction of non-independence Threshold selection Threshold selection: Predictions were thresholded to binary suitable/unsuitable using tss_max (optimized true skill statistic). Assessment Performance statistics Performance on training data: AUC Performance on validation data: AUC Performance on test data: AUC Plausibility check Response shapes: Marginal response plots Expert judgement: Map display Prediction Prediction output Prediction unit: Probability of occurrence, suitable vs unsuitable habitat Post-processing: Binary predictions were projected to BC Albers equal area (EPSG:3005) for suitable area calculations. 158 Appendix F - Pseudoabsence sampling Differing Informed model performance with differing pseudoabsence sampling disc sizes, using Ranunculus glaberrimus occurrences and an ensemble model with the GLM, GBM, MaxEnt, and random forest models. 5 – 10 km discs: 5 – 25 km discs: 5 – 50 km discs: 5 – 75 km discs: 159 10 - 25 km discs: 10 – 50 km discs: 10 – 75 km discs: 20 – 50 km discs: 160 20 – 75 km discs: 50 – 75 km discs: 50 – 100 km discs: (> 16 GB RAM required)
Thesis/Dissertation
eng
Biology
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Graduate
Pither, Jason
Ensing, David
A two-eyed seeing approach to predicting the distribution of skʷenkʷínem (Claytonia lanceolata), a culturally significant plant
Text