Beluga whale stewardship and collaborative research practices among Indigenous peoples in the Arctic

Breton-Honeyman, Kaitlin; Huntington, Henry P.; Basterfield, Mark; Campbell, Kiyo; Dicker, Jason; Gray, T. G.; Jakobsen, Alfred E.R.; Jean-Gagnon, Frankie; Lee, David; Laing, Rodd; Loseto, Lisa L.; McCarney, Paul; Noksana, John; Palliser, Tommy; Ruben, Lawrence; Tartak, Clayton; Townley, Joseph; Zdor, Eduard

doi:10.33265/polar.v40.5522

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the historic and current challenges, consumption of country foods is an integral part of contemporary Inuit culture (Lamalice et al, 2020), and the majority of Inuit regularly consume at least some country foods (68.5% reported low to high consumption of country foods in this population survey). There has been a resurgence in interests surrounding country food consumption due to their important cultural connections, superior nutritional quality, and potential to contribute to community and household food security (Breton-Honeyman et al, 2021;Duhaime et al, 2004;Huet et al, 2012;Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, 2017;ITK, 2021;Kenny et al, 2018;Lawn & Harvey, 2003;Little et al, 2021;NIEDB, 2019). In fact, previous research has shown that Inuit households reporting having time and resources to harvest (i.e., money, equipment, etc.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sociodemographic patterning of dietary profiles among Inuit youth and adults in Nunavik, Canada: a cross-sectional study

Aker

Ayotte

Furgal

et al. 2022

Can J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Country (traditional) foods are integral to Inuit culture, but market food consumption is increasing. The Qanuilirpitaa? 2017 Nunavik Health Survey (Q2017) reported similar country food consumption frequency compared to that in 2004; however, examining food items individually does not account for diet patterns, food accessibility, and correlations between food items. Our objective was to identify underlying dietary profiles and compare them across sex, age, ecological region, and food insecurity markers, given the links among diet, health, and sociocultural determinants. Methods Food frequency and sociodemographic data were derived from the Q2017 survey (N = 1176). Latent profile analysis identified dietary profiles using variables for the relative frequencies of country and market food consumption first, followed by an analysis with those for country food variables only. Multinomial logistic regression examined the associations among dietary profiles, sociodemographic factors, and food insecurity markers (to disassociate between food preferences and food access). Results Four overall dietary profiles and four country food dietary profiles were identified characterized by the relative frequency of country and market food in the diet. The patterns were stable across several sensitivity analyses and in line with our Inuit partners’ local knowledge. For the overall profiles, women and adults aged 30–49 years were more likely to have a market food–dominant profile, whereas men and individuals aged 16–29 and 50+ years more often consumed a country food–dominant profile. In the country food profiles, Inuit aged 16–29 years were more likely to have a moderate country food profile whereas Inuit aged 50+ were more likely to have a high country food–consumption profile. A low country and market food–consumption profile was linked to higher prevalence of food insecurity markers. Conclusion We were able to identify distinct dietary profiles with strong social patterning. The profiles elucidated in this study are aligned with the impact of colonial influence on diet and subsequent country food promotion programs for Inuit youth. These profiles will be used for further study of nutritional status, contaminant exposure, and health to provide context for future public health programs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sociodemographic patterning of dietary profiles among Inuit youth and adults in Nunavik, Canada: a cross-sectional study

Aker

Ayotte

Furgal

et al. 2022

Can J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consultations with different knowledge holders can also provide unique perspectives on behaviour and habitat use. In the Arctic, many Indigenous communities have a long history of harvesting beluga whales, which is reflected in Indigenous knowledge (IK) (Breton-Honeyman et al 2016a;Breton-Honeyman et al 2021). IK observations of group behaviour, associations, and use of the environment have been recorded in Alaska, Russia, and Canada (Kilabuk 1998;Huntington et al 1999;Mymrin et al 1999;Huntington 2000;Lewis et al 2009;Breton-Honeyman et al 2016b;Waugh et al 2018).…”

Section: Potential Of Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Summer distribution and habitat preference of beluga whale social groups in the Eastern Beaufort Sea

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In social animals, group composition can cause variations in individual needs that can influence responses to habitat trade-offs, such as predator exposure or foraging opportunities. The Eastern Beaufort Sea beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas (Pallas, 1776)) form different group types and cover multiple habitat types in summer. This study compares the habitat preference of three beluga social group types: 1) individual belugas, 2) groups of adults, and 3) groups at least one calf. Observations were collected during aerial surveys in July and August 2019. For each month, beluga distribution was analyzed with hierarchical generalized additive models, as a function of group type and four covariates: sea surface temperature, bathymetry, slope, and distance to the coastline. Group type, water temperature and bathymetric features best explained beluga distribution. In July, groups of adults preferred the continental shelf, whereas individual belugas and groups with calves preferred the continental slope. In August, groups of adults and groups with calves were found in Amundsen Gulf at similar depths. For both months, individual belugas associated more with deeper and colder areas. The preferences often corresponded to previously published distributions of the beluga’s main prey species, suggesting that foraging opportunities and size-related energy requirements strongly influence habitat use.

show abstract

“…This study is part of a larger research program focused on Arctic marine ecosystem health using beluga whale health, diet, and movement ecology in the Beaufort Sea (Breton-Honeyman et al 2021). Within this region and co-management context, government researchers and Inuvialuit routinely work together to identify research priorities and to design and conduct studies (e.g., Loseto et al 2018aLoseto et al , 2018bOstertag et al 2018).…”

Section: Research Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group characteristics and spatial organization of the Eastern Beaufort Sea beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) population using aerial photographs

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While it is known that beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas (Pallas, 1776)) are social animals, sociality within populations remains complex and poorly understood. Using aerial photographs taken in mid-July and early August 2019, we examined group characteristics and spatial organization of the Eastern Beaufort Sea beluga population in two distinct summering areas: (1) the continental shelf and offshore region of the southeast Beaufort Sea, and (2) the inshore of the Mackenzie Estuary. Observations revealed that the average group size was similar in both environments. A piecewise regression analysis showed that belugas were found to be most frequently within 24.6 m of another beluga in the offshore, and within 22.0 m in the inshore. The average inter-individual distance of groups composed of subadults and/or adults was greater than that of groups including younger whales in both environments. Also, the swimming direction of individuals in a group differed less in the offshore than in the inshore. We suggest that habitat shapes the types of activity conducted and that spatial cohesion within groups persists across environmental conditions but changes with age composition. By identifying elements of social structure and important areas for Eastern Beaufort Sea belugas, our results highlight the value of habitat conservation.

show abstract

Beluga whale stewardship and collaborative research practices among Indigenous peoples in the Arctic

Cited by 15 publications

References 69 publications

Sociodemographic patterning of dietary profiles among Inuit youth and adults in Nunavik, Canada: a cross-sectional study

Sociodemographic patterning of dietary profiles among Inuit youth and adults in Nunavik, Canada: a cross-sectional study

Summer distribution and habitat preference of beluga whale social groups in the Eastern Beaufort Sea

Group characteristics and spatial organization of the Eastern Beaufort Sea beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) population using aerial photographs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About