Explore the vast range of titles available.

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.

This article examines the translation of key terms about climate change from English into Inuktitut, considering not only their literal translation but also the broader context within which words make sense. We argue that notions of resilience, adaptation, and climate change itself mean something fundamentally different in Inuktitut than English and that this has implications for climate policy and politics. To the extent that climate change is translated into Inuktitut as a wholly environmental phenomenon over which humans have no control, both adaptation and resilience come to be seen as appropriate and distinctly Inuit modes of relating to shifting climatic conditions, calling on practices of patience, observation, creativity, forbearance, and discretion. If translated as a matter of unethical harm of sila, however, Inuit frameworks of justice, relationality, and healing would be activated. In the context of a broader global shift away from mitigation and toward enhancing the adaptive capacities and resilience of particular populations, current modes of translating climate change, we argue, are deeply political.

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. Jusqu'à présent, les recherches sur le caribou ont largement fait abstraction de l'île Qikiqtaq (île du Roi-Guillaume), dans la région de Kitikmeot, au Nunavut. La majorité des cartes montrant l'aire de répartition du caribou laissent l'île Qikiqtaq en blanc, ou indiquent que son statut est incertain. Toutefois, notre travail auprès d'aînés et de chasseurs inuits à Uqsuqtuuq (Gjoa Haven) sur la côte sud-est de Qikiqtaq a bien prouvé que les caribous migrent sur l'île et en repartent de façon saisonnière, et que certains restent sur l'île toute l'année. Le caribou a été décrété comme sujet de recherche prioritaire à l'échelle locale en 2010, et de 2011 à 2016, nous avons travaillé en collaboration avec les Uqsuqtuurmiut (le peuple d'Uqsuqtuuq) pour documenter et partager les connaissances des Uqsuqtuurmiut sur les déplacements, la chasse et l'habitat des caribous, ainsi que l'importance du caribou pour le régime alimentaire des gens, les moyens de subsistance et les pratiques culturelles. Dans le cadre de ce processus, il était important de comprendre la terminologie appropriée en inuktitut et les approches locales prises pour nommer et distinguer les espèces de caribous de la région. Les Uqsuqtuurmiut ne distinguent généralement pas le caribou (tuktuit en inuktitut) par hardes, comme le font les biologistes ou les gestionnaires de la faune. À l'échelle locale, les gens distinguent quatre principaux types de caribous : le caribou des terres intérieures (iluiliup tuktuit), le caribou des îles (kingailaup tuktuit), le renne (qungniit) et un mélange d'iluiliup tuktuit et de kingailaup tuktuit. En ayant recours à ces noms, ainsi qu'en revoyant les approches employées pour nommer et distinguer le caribou dans les autres collectivités de Kitikmeot et de Kivalliq, nous mettons l'accent sur la façon dont les relations entre les Inuit et les caribous se manifestent et sont exprimées selon la langue, l'endroit et la patrie. Dans le but d'appuyer l'intégration plus inclusive et significative des connaissances des Inuit aux fins de la cogestion du caribou, nous croyons qu'un examen attentif des approches utilisées par les Inuit pour nommer et distinguer les caribous pourrait faciliter la communication et la compréhension mutuelle. Les principales considérations qui en découlent sont : 1) la prise en compte des différences de dialecte, 2) la compréhension des références géographiques relatives et 3) la reconnaissance des influences historiques et contemporaines des patries et sociétés traditionnelles sur la terminologie employée. Ces considérations ont des répercussions potentielles sur l'identification du caribou et les discussions à leur sujet, ainsi que sur l'établissement d'approches nouvelles et plus perfectionnées pour surveiller les hardes et les habitats de caribous, puisque ces approches sont souvent le résultat de la façon dont les hardes sont définies.

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.

ABORTION in sheep flocks is estimated to have a national annual incidence of 2 to 3 per cent, although some flocks may experience abortion storms involving large numbers of ewes. This article, the first of two on ovine abortion, discusses the priorities in the event of an outbreak, and reviews the diagnosis, and available options for control and prevention, of the most common infectious causes of abortion in the UK: namely, Chlamydophila abortus (the agent of enzootic abortion of ewes), Toxoplasma gondii and Campylobacter species. Together, these make up over 70 per cent of diagnoses based on submissions of abortion material at veterinary disease surveillance centres throughout England, Scotland and Wales. Part 2, to be published in the next issue, will discuss other common infectious causes, as well as some exotic diseases that pose an abortion risk to UK flocks.

Moredun Research Institute recovered DNA from formalin-fixed, paraffin wax-embedded tissues using the Ambion RecoverAllTM system (Life Technologies) and forwarded it to AHVLA - Weybridge where, by 18S rRNA PCR plus sequencing, the organism was identified as Cryptosporidium baileyi. There is currently no effective treatment for cryptosporidiosis, and even if one was available, effective medication of free-living wild birds would be problematic. [...]current options for control of the disease on grouse moors are probably limited, but might include culling of obviously affected birds, and reducing the opportunity for disease transmission by increasing the number of gritting areas and ceasing to use those where the ground and any adjacent water source may have become heavily contaminated with cryptosporidial oocysts.

A carcase and faecal material were sent to the Veterinary Laboratories Agency (now the Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency [AHVLA]) - Penrith by a farmer who was keen to investigate four deaths that had occurred in a batch of 60 two-month-old lambs with diarrhoea in June 2010. The case described here has been reported to the Veterinary Medicines Directorate under the Suspected Adverse Reaction Surveillance Scheme and the Sustainable Control of Parasites in Sheep committee has been kept informed of the situation.

THIS is the second of two articles on abortion in sheep. Part 1 discussed the investigation of abortion outbreaks and reviewed the three most common infectious causes of ovine abortion in the UK, namely, Chlamydophila abortus (the agent of enzootic abortion of ewes), Toxoplasma gondii and Campylobacter species (In Practice, January 2007, volume 29, pp 40–46). This article focuses on other common infectious causes of abortion in sheep, as well as exotic diseases that could pose an abortion risk to UK flocks.