Where is the real trap? Domination and mutualism in Teetl’it Gwich’in sensibilities about trapping

Abstract

Teetl’it Gwich’ins, NWT, Canada have consistently positioned trapping as a valuable exercise despite fluctuations in the price of furs. Materialist anthropological theories applied to the trapping economies of boreal forest First Nations created an image of trapping as an activity that necessarily leads to individualism, alienation, nucleated family structures and disenchantment because the furs were being produced for trade in the world economy. The rise of anti-fur sentiments and Canadian industrial intrusions helped cement this imaginary of the trapper as corrupt but, instead of simply being the victims of European domination, they were positioned to have abandoned the ‘traditional’ sensibilities of trust and reciprocity to adopt the cruelties of the steel trap. In contrast with these conjectural world histories, the author argues that trapping as it is practiced today is far from being an alienating practice. Indigenous trappers work with animals in ways that suit their pre-existing practices. In order to dispel the imaginary of the cruel dominator of animals, more recent thoughts on mutualism in human–animal relationships help but it would be difficult to argue that this activity does not require some deception. Indigenous trappers will create methods and tinker with their traps in ways that are counterintuitive to some of the human–environment dualisms found in the deception paradigm that posits that the human presence and the intention to trap is hidden from the animal and tricks it into making a fatal error. The author argues that trapping is effective and valued because it plays upon the signs and expectations which lie between the past and the present, and between domination and mutualism.

Inhabiting a transforming delta

“…The idea of volatility as foremost a problem originates in the point of view of the government or settler, both of which strive to bring about controlled environments for particular ends (Scott 1998). From the perspective of a delta inhabitant, however, the government's or settler's plans and policies only add to the other uncertain dynamics that delta inhabitants have to deal with, from unpredictable weather to fluctuating market prices (Wolforth 1971). In short, while volatility for the settler is disturbance, for the inhabitant it is the way things are.…”

“…Skills for handling sleds and attending to dogs quickly became redundant and were replaced by those for riding and fixing a snowmobile. Distances traveled in one stretch increased, and organizing fuel replaced extensive summer fishing for dog food (Wishart 2014). But even the fast dogsleds had been a historically specific product of the fur trade, which reigned in the delta from the late 19th century to the mid-20th century (Loovers 2015).…”

“…The settlement grew out of a fur‐trading post established in 1912, one that originally attracted the Inuvialuit and Gwich'in people in the region only seasonally to trade and celebrate. It was not until later in the century, with the establishments of hospitals, schools, and government‐subsidized housing that the inhabitants of the Mackenzie Delta made Aklavik, and similar settlements in the region, their home more permanently (Wolforth 1971). Danny's family came to Aklavik during the 1940s.…”