April 7, 2006
It's yes to Kitikmeot,
no to Repulse Bay
Wildlife board ponders
narwhal quotas
JANE
GEORGE
NWMB
Chair Joe Tiqurallaq. (PHOTO BY JOHN THOMPSON)
|
Hunters in Kugaaruk, Taloyoak
and Gjoa Haven can plan on hunting 30 more narwhals this year than last year,
but hunters in Repulse Bay must keep their hunt within their current quota of
72.
That's what the Nunavut
Wildlife Management Board decided last week when it looked at requests from
these communities, along with recommendations from the Department of Fisheries
and Oceans.
Under the Nunavut land
claim agreement's Article 5.3.3, Inuit harvests may be restricted or limited
only for a conservation purpose.
In the case of the narwhal
harvest shared by the three Kitikmeot communities, the DFO recommendation said
"increasing the narwhal harvest from 45 to 75 whales should not have a
detrimental impact on the Gulf of Boothia population of narwhal." The NWMB
then approved the increase.
But the DFO recommendation
said there would be a "high risk of population decline" if Repulse
Bay continued to kill 103 narwhal a year for 10 years.
There's even some concern
for the health of the stock, said the DFO recommendation, if the current Kivalliq
quota of 102 narwhal per year continues.
Repulse Bay hunts from
the northwestern Hudson Bay population of narwhal, which Rankin Inlet, Chesterfield
Inlet, Coral Harbour and Hall Beach hunters also harvest.
Repulse Bay's Arviq Hunters
and Trappers Organization said that last year, they landed 72 narwhal and that
another 25 were wounded and lost.
The Arviq HTO said they
want a bigger quota for 2006 because 72 narwhal "is no longer sufficient"
for the community's growing population.
Before 1999, Repulse Bay's
quota was 50 narwhal per year. After the federal quota system was lifted that
year, the community set a quota of 100.
But in 1999, hunters there
took 156 narwhal and reported another 100 lost or sunk. Under a revised quota
system, the community's quota finally settled on 72.
During the NWMB's discussions
last week about whether to increase Repulse Bay's quota, several members said
increases couldn't always be granted.
Joannie Ikkidluak said
there isn't always a balance between the number of Inuit and animals, while
Harry Flaherty underlined the need to "plan for the future."
In the end, board members
decided they don't have enough information to grant the increase.
Glenn Williams of Nunavut
Tunngavik Inc., said NTI needs more information before it can say whether the
NWMB's decisions are respecting Inuit rights under the land claim.
"NTI and Inuit should
have a right to review this," Williams told the meeting.
Williams also said the
NWMB must start setting "basic needs levels," derived from information
gathered in the Nunavut harvest study.
Setting these is even more
important when the basic needs exceed what can be sustainably harvested. Basic
need levels and total allowable harvests were to be set within one year of the
NWMB's creation.
TOP
|