In Uqsuqtuuq (Gjoa Haven, Nunavut), we worked with Uqsuqtuurmiut (people of Uqsuqtuuq) on local priorities of caribou and well-being. We learned about the importance of relationality. In order to follow relations and their effects, we draw upon health geography concepts: therapeutic landscape and environmental dispossession. As therapeutic techniques, Uqsuqtuurmiut practice their knowledge and norms with people; animals; and the land, water and sea ice towards physical and emotional gains. They also make health discourses that can be beneficial. The social aspects of this environmental investment move beyond the individuation found in the hamlet to produce a sense of unity (or freedom) with emotional benefit. It was ultimately expressed as the happiness inherent to being ‘on the land’ and well-being. Moreover, we draw on relational materialism to illustrate not only a holistic form of well-being, but also how Uqsuqtuurmiut self-landscape encounters involve the spatialization of ontological difference. To better appreciate how this therapeutic worlding experience provides emotional gains related to self-determination, we reframe freedom from simply being the erasure of interpersonal borders to also include a sense of interdependence and collective autonomy. We further explain happiness as the therapeutic benefit of an Uqsuqtuurmiut spatial political ontology.

Qikiqtaq (King William Island), in the Kitikmeot region of Nunavut, has been largely overlooked in caribou research to date. Qikiqtaq is shown as blank, or as having uncertain status, in the majority of caribou herd range maps.Qikiqtaq (King William Island), in the Kitikmeot region of Nunavut, has been largely overlooked in caribou research to date. Qikiqtaq is shown as blank, or as having uncertain status, in the majority of caribou herd range maps. However, our work with Inuit Elders and hunters in Uqsuqtuuq (Gjoa Haven) on the southeastern coast of Qikiqtaq made it clear that caribou migrate on and off the island seasonally, and some remain on the island year-round. Caribou were identified as a local research priority in 2010, and we have worked together with Uqsuqtuurmiut (people of Uqsuqtuuq) from 2011 to 2016 to document and share Uqsuqtuurmiut knowledge of caribou movements, hunting, and habitat, as well as the importance of caribou for community diets, livelihoods, and cultural practices. In this process, it was important to understand appropriate Inuktitut terminology and local approaches to naming and distinguishing caribou in the region. Uqsuqtuurmiut do not generally distinguish caribou (tuktuit in Inuktitut) according to herds, in the way that biologists or wildlife managers do. Locally, people differentiate four main types of caribou: iluiliup tuktuit (inland caribou), kingailaup tuktuit (island caribou), qungniit (reindeer), and a mixture of iluiliup tuktuit and kingailaup tuktuit. Through these names, along with reviewing approaches to naming and distinguishing caribou in other Kitikmeot and Kivalliq communities, we emphasize how Inuit-caribou connections are articulated and enacted through language, place, and homeland. In efforts to support more inclusive and meaningful incorporation of Inuit knowledge in caribou co-management, we suggest that careful consideration of Inuit approaches to naming and distinguishing caribou could aid communication and mutual understanding. Key considerations that emerged include (1) accounting for dialectical differences, (2) understanding relative geographic references, and (3) recognizing historical and contemporary influences of traditional homelands and societies on terminology used. These considerations have potential implications for identifying and discussing caribou, as well as for new or refined approaches to monitoring caribou herds and habitats, since these approaches are often the result of how herds are defined.

Caribou (tuktuit) are embedded in northern life, and have been part of Inuit culture and seasonal rounds for generations. In Inuit Nunangat (Inuit homelands), tuktuit are the most prevalent of country foods consumed, and remain interconnected with Inuit values, beliefs and practices. Despite co-management mandates to consider Inuit and scientific knowledge equally, the intertwined colonial legacies of research and wildlife management render this challenging. In Uqsuqtuuq (Gjoa Haven, Nunavut), community members identified the importance of documenting Inuit knowledge in order to be taken more seriously by researchers and government managers. To address this priority we worked with Uqsuqtuurmiut (people of Uqsuqtuuq) to articulate which types of tuktuit are found on or near Qikiqtaq (King William Island), provide a historical perspective of tuktuit presence/absence in the region, and describe seasonal movements of tuktuit on and off the island. In reflecting on potential intersections of our work with the Government of Nunavut strategy “Working Together for Caribou”, we identify several considerations in support of Qanuqtuurniq (information and knowledge acquisition): defining information needs, recognising and valuing Inuit knowledge, and developing and implementing credible research. By sharing lessons from our collaborative process we aim to contribute to broader cross-cultural research and co-management efforts in Nunavut.

The land is where Inuit knowledge transfer has taken place for generations. Land-based programs for learning and healing have been increasingly initiated across Inuit Nunangat in support of Inuit knowledge transfer that was disrupted by colonial settlement policies and imposed governance systems. We worked with Elders in Uqšuqtuuq (Gjoa Haven, Nunavut) to develop a project to understand the connections between caribou and community well-being. They emphasized that Elder–youth land camps are the most effective means for Elders to share their knowledge, for youth to learn, and for researchers to engage in respectful research. We used the Qaggiq Model for Inuktut knowledge renewal as a guiding framework, and we followed the direction of a land camp planning committee to plan, facilitate, and follow-up on three land camps (2011–2013). The Qaggiq Model also outlines the Qaggiq Dialogue as a way of engaging in relational accountability according to Inuit context and values. In this paper, we reflect on the complexities of upholding relational accountability in cross-cultural research — as part of entering into a Qaggiq Dialogue — with particular emphasis on local leadership, ethics and safety, experiential learning, and continuity. Our intention is to help others evaluate the opportunities and limitations of land camps for their own community context and research questions. Inuit tama’nganituqaq ilihaivalau’mata nunamii’lutik. Ublumiuřuq Inuit nunaa’ni humituinnaq nunami ilihainahualiqpaktut nunamiinirmik, inuuhirmi’nik i&uaqhinahuaq&-utiglu qauřimanirmi’nik tunihinahuaq&utik nutaqqami’nut qablunaaqaliraluaqti’lugu Inuktut ilihattiaruiralua’mata. Qauřihaqtit taapkuat hanaqatiqaq&utik inutuqarnik Uqšuqtuurmiutarnik Nunavummi, nalunaiqhittiarahuaq&utik tuktut inuuhuqattiarutauni-ngi’nik, inutuqallu nunami katiqatigiiquři’lutik i&uarniqšaittuu’mat: inutuqarnut ta’na ilihaqtami’nik ilihaijuma’lutik, inuuhuktullu ilihattiatqiřaujungna’mataguuq, qauřihaqtillu ta’na qauřihattiatqijaujungna’mata atuutiqaqtunik inungnut. Atuqtut malik&utik qařginnguarmik pivaallirutaunahuaqtumik atuqtauvaktumik atu’magit, malik&utiglu katimařiralaat inuit pitquřai’nik, pingahuiqtiq&utik nunami katiqatigiingniqaralua’mata ukiut 2011-mit 2013-mut. Taamnalu qařginnguaq atuqtauvaktuq titiraqtauhimařuq nalunaiqhihima’mat iluani qanuq qapblunaat pittiarahuarniqšaujungnariakšaita qauřihaqti’lugit inuit pitquhiagut i&uatqiřauřumik. Tařvani titiraqtut unipkaaq&utik ilaagut atqunarnia’nik pittiarahuaq&utik ilitquhiqaqatigiinngiti’lugit – inuuqatigiigahuaq&utik qařgiqaqatigiiktutut ukunanik atuutikhaqarahuaq&utik hanařut: taamna qauřiharniq inungnit aulatau’luni, pittiarnirlu qanurinnginnirlu ihumagiřauřut, nunami ilihaq&utik, kajuhiinnarungnaqtumik aturahuaq&utik atuutiqaqtunik inungnut. Qauřihaqtit tařvani unipkaaqtut atuqtami’nik ikajurniqaqu’lugu ahiinut nunami ilihaqtittinahuaqtunut ima’natut hanalutik, atuutiqattiarnia’niglu atqunarnarnia’niglu ilaagut, ahiit na’miniq hanajumagutik nunami’ni qauřihaqrumagutik ima’natut pijungna’mata.

In spring 2022, pink salmon Oncorhynchus gorbuscha smolts were recorded in the UK. Fish were caught in the Rivers Thurso and Oykel in Scotland between 13 and 17 March. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first observation of O. gorbuscha smolts in Europe outside the Scandinavian and Kola peninsulas, including other tributaries of the White and Barents Seas. It also provides evidence of successful spawning in 2021 and completion of the freshwater phase of the life cycle, and indicates the possibility for potential establishment of an O. gorbuscha population in Great Britain.