Hunting and Harvesting in the Baffin Region, 1950 to 1975

Summary

Hunting and harvesting was and is an integral part of Inuit culture and survival. The importance and relationship with animals and birds for Inuit is sacrosanct. In a hunting culture, being a competent hunter is not only a means for continued survival of the group, but it also grants status and value within society.

Inuit have always had their own laws, customs and practices with respect to hunting and harvesting. They have also adapted new techniques of their own making or those introduced by outsiders to increase the chance of successful hunts and harvests. While the introduction of guns in the 19th century and power boats in the early 20th century altered some hunting strategies, many Inuit still continued to use kayaks, sled dogs, spears and harpoons into the 1950s and 1960s. An intimate knowledge of the ice, sea and land allowed them to move hundreds of kilometres in search of food.

Since early Qallunaat contact with whalers and fur traders, Inuit became active participants in these two additional forms of harvests. The income Inuit derived from them was very important to the hunter and his family, to the point that many Inuit had become dependent on this supplementary income source to help subsidize purchasing their hunting and trapping equipment along with basic food staples. When whaling ceased, Inuit became more reliant on fur trading. However, fox fur or sealskin prices fluctuated yearly depending on the free market demand and, as such, the price paid by the Hudson’s Bay Company or other fur traders to Inuit also fluctuated, which Inuit often found incomprehensible or suspicious. There was often only one trading post for Inuit to sell their furs. This monopolization is often understood to create inequality in the bargaining relationship. Inuit were paid in store tokens used as a form of monetary payment and credit rather than cash. When fur prices steadily declined after the Second World War, Inuit had few options. They could harvest more animals; suffer from bouts of starvation; or rely more on social assistance from government.

When the Canadian state began to exert its presence over the North in the early 1920s by posting Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) officers in the Arctic, Canadian hunting laws and regulations were also introduced and then sporadically enforced. Canadian wildlife laws focused on preserving and conserving species, as a result of several notable extinctions or near extinctions, such as the carrier pigeon, bison and bowhead whales. The Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) was very concerned that Aboriginal peoples, including Inuit, would over-harvest animals in switching from traditional to modern technologies, including motor boats and rifles. The government ignored Inuit hunting culture and conditions, which still relied on traditional hunting strategies and applied traditional knowledge in choosing where, when and how much to hunt. In spite of a lack of reliable scientific information about Arctic game populations, the federal government adopted the precautionary-principle approach to achieve the goal of conservation. Game laws were developed to regulate hunters’ access to animals through strict prohibitions and restrictions concerning the dates of hunting seasons and types and number of animals that could be taken. The RCMP was given responsibility for enforcing laws and observing game numbers and conditions. In practice, however, they relied almost entirely on hunters themselves for information.

Both Inuit and RCMP officers living in the Baffin Region recognized that the CWS game laws were unduly restrictive, based on unproven theories and irreconcilable with the region’s hunting–trading economy. Data was incomplete, normal animal population cycles observed by Inuit were ignored and the nutritional requirements of a hunting family and its dogs were miscalculated.

While the CWS put pressure on the RCMP to inform Inuit about game laws and the penalties for their violation, many RCMP officers observed that the laws were impractical and that violations were reasonable or necessary. For other officers, discretion about applying the laws became another tool they could use to manage their relations with Inuit. In general, Inuit disregarded game laws in favour of their own hunting laws and customs.

After the Second World War, however, Inuit adopted a series of important technologies –transistor radios, cheaper boats, lighter rifles and snowmobiles – for hunting. They also moved in increasing numbers to settlements where they had access to wage employment, education, permanent housing and social benefits. Fewer men hunted, boys were less likely to combine hunting and schooling, and more hunting activity focused around settlement life. Snowmobiles provided hunters with a means to travel long distances quickly (which became even more necessary as game numbers dwindled around settlements) without having to sustain a team of Inuit sled dogs year-round. As a result, the number of dogs kept by Inuit dropped quickly.

Some Inuit testified before the Commission that Canadian hunting laws were wholly inappropriate and inconsiderate of Inuit and their reliance on game for their survival. Inuit noted that Canada failed to appreciate that Inuit had their own game laws that were based on respect for and conservation of wildlife, that wildlife research was poorly conceived and that the data was flawed. As a result of known or perceived unreasonable hunting laws, Inuit often had to hunt “illegally” and hide such hunting from the authorities; otherwise, they could face significant financial penalties and/or threatened incarceration. Some Inuit also said that they shared their illegal catches with RCMP members, silently delighting in their guest’s ignorance and co-opting them in breaking game laws.

The archival record shows that up until the 1950s the government understood the importance of hunting in the Baffin Region both to Inuit and to traders. The record also demonstrates an evolution in official thinking about hunting. Government studies in support of the wildlife laws in the 1950s do not mention using traditional knowledge (even knowledge captured to a certain extent in the RCMP reports of the period) to develop conservation rules or to choose places where Inuit would eventually settle. In the 1960s and 1970s, hunting was no longer important in the minds of most officials who were focusing on community economic development programs and on major development projects such as mines. A few programs, such as guiding for sport hunting, were sustained or resurrected over time to address the limited availability of jobs in communities and to raise income levels, improve community life and keep Inuit occupied. Both levels of government – federal and territorial – also supported hunting as a means to improve nutrition and to keep cultural traditions alive over generations.

While many government officials rarely if ever consulted with Inuit in the policy or decision making on any issue, their laws, regulations, policies and decisions about hunting and harvesting almost always had an immediate and disproportionate affect on Inuit.