Public Registry: Archives

This is a GNWT commitment made during the WRRB's Science Technical Session on October 5, 2020 to provide an updated Table 33 from the Technical Report.

This is a written summary of the WRRB's Science Technical Session held on October 5, 2020 via Zoom.

Unlike all other members of the deer family, subpopulations of barren-ground caribou (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus) are typically sine-cyclic. We used Bayesian Information Criteria (BIC) to rank competing population dynamics models for 11 North American barren-ground caribou subpopulations. Nine of these subpopulations were best described as sine-cyclic with periods ranging from a minimum of 26 years (Bluenose-East and Porcupine) to a maximum of 55 years (Western Arctic); and amplitudes ranging from a minimum of 8 455 (Cape Bathurst) to a maximum of 327 432 (George River). Time series estimates of subpopulation abundance generated by the sine cycle models showed good correspondence to published subpopulation estimates of abundance for all nine sine-cyclic subpopulations (r = 0.978; p < 0.001). Lack of demographic closure (migration between subpopulations) was evident in both of the subpopulations that were not identified as sine-cyclic. Barren-ground caribou subpopulation amplitudes were mostly determined by subpopulation total range size and summer range productivity (R2 = 0.962; p < 0.001) and subpopulation periods were mostly determined by amplitude, total range productivity, and land surface temperature (R2 = 0.950; p < 0.001). Time series estimates of subpopulation abundance generated from the respective environmental regression models were highly correlated (r = 0.964; p < 0.001) to the published subpopulation estimates of abundance for the set of 9 sine-cyclic subpopulations. Extended (> 3 generations) subpopulation declines are a natural feature of cyclic barren-ground caribou subpopulations. Trends in species abundance based on pooled assemblages of asynchronous cyclic subpopulations should be interpreted with caution.

Key words: Bayesian Information Criteria; BIC; barren-ground caribou; species designation; COSEWIC; IUCN; cyclic species; cycle analysis; climate change; population dynamics; Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus; subpopulation

This is correspondence from E. Bongelli to the WRRB providing comment on the 2020 Wolf Management Proceeding.

This is Appendix 11.9 of the Wolf (Dı̀ga) Management Pilot Program Technical Report, which shows the winter range analysis as completed by Caslys.  The methods are described in the Technical Report. This is Part 2 or 2.

This is Appendix 11.9 of the Wolf (Dı̀ga) Management Pilot Program Technical Report, which shows the winter range analysis as completed by Caslys.  The methods are described in the Technical Report. This is Part 1 or 2.

The Wolves of Heaven is a most unusual and challenging work. Published more than half a century after the classic Cheyenne studies of George Bird Grinnell and G. A. Dorsey, it is a singular reinterpretation of the Cheyennes’ world view, shamanism, and major cultural features. It is the product of the author’s blending of the principles of action anthropology with those of cognitive anthropology, his long field association with the Southern Cheyennes, and his close personal relationship with Edward Red Hat, the Cheyenne Keeper of the Sacred Arrows, who instructed him in Cheyenne religion for more than ten years. Along with important oral testimony, the book makes use of the great volume of works in the ethnography, ethnohistory, prehistory, and linguistics of the northern plains, the Subarctic, and northern Siberia. The core of the book is a reconstruction of the Massaum, the most elusive of Cheyenne tribal ceremonies, extinct since 1927. In a detailed interpretation of the ritual, provided here for the first time, the author defines the Massaum as an earth-giving ceremony. The gift of this ceremony between 500 and 300 B. C. in what is now South Dakota brought about the formation of the Cheyennes as a tribal unit with the right to occupy a large region of the grasslands.

Key words: early Tsistsistas material and ceremonial culture derived largely from the bodies and spirits of animals, guardian or patron spirit or ‘a familiar’, Massaum ritual as an earth-giving ceremony

The aim of this study was to reconstruct population dynamics of barren-ground caribou (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus) herds from the frequency of trampling scars on tree roots of black spruce (Picea mariana [Mill.] BSP) in the forest-tundra of central Northwest Territories, Canada. Two groups of sites were sampled that roughly corresponded with the migration routes of the Bathurst and Beverly caribou herds. The caribou migrate annually for long distances from the forest to the open tundra in late spring, and return to the forest in the autumn. The scar frequency distribution was determined by careful crossdating and the influence of root age was assessed to account for the increasing underestimation of caribou abundance with the increasing age of the roots. The scar frequency distributions (dated from A.D. 1760 to 2000) from both groups of sites showed similar abundance patterns through time. Caribou numbers were high during the mid-1940s, and 1990s, and were very low during the 1920s, 1950s–1970s, and at the turn of the 21st century. These abundance patterns determined from scar frequencies correlate strongly with data obtained from traditional knowledge of Dogrib elders in the region and animal counts based on aerial photography. The scar frequency distribution developed in this study is the longest proxy record of caribou abundance to date.

The current decline in the Bathurst barren-ground caribou herd has led to strong public concerns about the future of the herd. Comprehensive planning for both range and herd management is currently underway. Harvest restrictions started in 2010 and reached a quota of zero by 2017 in the Northwest Territories. Without a Bathurst caribou harvest, there are strong concerns over food security and lost chances to transfer traditional knowledge and experience between generations. In 2015, adult and calf caribou survival in the Bathurst herd were still low and, despite a decline in wolf numbers, wolf predation likely accounts for a high proportion of caribou deaths. Importantly, if current environmental trends and caribou population dynamics continue, and if no additional management is implemented, e.g. wolf management or land use planning restrictions, the Bathurst herd is expected to continue to decline. Unfortunately, implementation of management initiatives does not always guarantee a reversal of population trends.
The Wolf Feasibility Assessment Technical Working Group (WG) was formed to compile information about wolf management options and their risks. These options are to be provided to management authorities, who in turn, and depending on their decisions, will submit specific management proposals for review in a public forum to allow for further discussion. The WG examined options for reducing wolf predation through lethal and non-lethal removal of wolves. Each option was reviewed under four criteria: humaneness, cost efficiency, likely effectiveness, and risks and uncertainties. The main text of this document was kept relatively brief with details provided in appendices. The WG applied detailed criteria to assess the humaneness and welfare of each option as well as examining the relative cost, while acknowledging that more details will be required for specific proposals. Risks include the limited information about wolf numbers and predation rates, and overlapping distribution of Bathurst caribou with neighbouring herds in recent winters. The overlap may locally increase caribou and wolves, but, in spring, the herds separate and return to their calving and summer ranges, and the wolves typically return to their dens on the herd’s summer range.
Through evaluation of technical opinions and computer modelling, the WG found that removing about 124 wolves in the first year and maintaining low wolf numbers for 5 years, gives the highest likelihood of halting the Bathurst herd’s decline and starting it toward recovery. Although the options are evaluated individually, combinations of options may have an increased probability of success.

In the creation story of the Ojibwe1, Original Man was created by Kitche Manitou; the Great Spirit. Original Man was given the task to walk across the world and name all the living things. While he was completing this task, Original Man noticed that all the other animals were in pairs. When Original Man mentioned this, the Great Spirit created a companion for him. Not a woman, as in the Christian story of
creation, but a wolf: Ma’iingan, meaning ‘brother’. When Original Man and Ma’iingan traveled the world together, they became very close and developed a unique brotherhood. After the journey was over, Kitche Manitou told them they would be forever linked: “What shall happen to one of you shall also happen to the other. Each of you will be feared, respected, and misunderstood by the people” (Benton-Banai 1988).
The wolf has since been considered a brother to the Ojibwe people. This perception of the wolf continues to exist today in their tribal culture and directly influences Ojibwe wolf policy, which has important implications for state wildlife management policies.

In January 2019, the Tłı̨chǫ Government (TG) and GNWT submitted the Joint Proposal on Management Actions for the Bluenose-East Ɂekwǫ̀ (Barren-ground caribou) Herd 2019-2021 to the Board, outlining proposed management actions for the Sahtì ekwǫ̀ herd in Wek’èezhìı. The management actions proposed by TG and GNWT in the Joint Proposal were grouped under the five categories: harvest, predators, habitat and land use, and education as well as research and monitoring. More specifically, TG and ENR proposed implementing a herd-wide total allowable harvest of 300 bulls only for the Sahtì ekwǫ̀ herd. The WRRB has determined that any specific numerical restriction of a harvest or a component of harvest constitutes a total allowable harvest (TAH). A proposal for a TAH requires a public hearing under Section 12.3.10 of the Tłı̨chǫ Agreement. The WRRB held a public hearing in Behchokǫ̀, NT on April 9-11, 2019.

In January 2019, the Tłı̨chǫ Government (TG) and GNWT submitted the Joint Proposal on Management Actions for the Bathurst Ɂekwǫ̀ (Barren-ground caribou) Herd 2019-2021 to the Board, outlining proposed management actions for the Kǫ̀k’èetı̀ ekwǫ̀ herd in Wek’èezhìı. The management actions proposed by TG and GNWT in the Joint Proposal were grouped under the five categories: harvest, predators, habitat and land use, and education as well as research and monitoring. More specifically, TG and ENR proposed continuing a herd-wide total allowable harvest of zero for the Kǫ̀k’èetı̀ ekwǫ̀ herd. Following an initial assessment of the management proposal, the Board determined that a Level 2 review was appropriate, as per its Rule for Management Proposals. Therefore, the Board established a proceeding and an online public registry on February 4, 2019. 

In December 2015, the Tłı̨chǫ Government (TG) and ENR submitted the Joint Proposal on Management Actions for Bluenose-East Caribou 2016-2019 to the Board, which proposed new restrictions on hunter harvest, predator management and ongoing monitoring.  More specifically, TG and ENR proposed implementing a herd-wide total allowable harvest of 950 bulls-only and allocation for the Bluenose-East caribou herd and conducting a feasibility assessment of a full range of dìga (wolf) management actions.  The WRRB considers any specific restriction of harvest or component of harvest as the establishment of a total allowable harvest (TAH).  After review and analysis of the proposal, the WRRB complied with Section 12.3.10 of the Tłı̨chǫ Agreement and held a public hearing in Behchokǫ̀, NT on April 6-8, 2016.

The WRRB concluded, based on all available Aboriginal and scientific evidence, that a serious conservation concern exists for the Bluenose-East ɂekwǫ̀ herd and that additional management actions are vital for herd recovery. In making its decision about harvest limitations, the WRRB considered the risks to the herd from a recent high rate of decline, uncertainties about the underlying mechanisms for the decline and the importance of ɂekwǫ̀ for food security and cultural strength.  Additionally, evidence from the Tłı̨chǫ elders and public suggested a willingness to restrict harvesting, and leave the ɂekwǫ̀ alone. Therefore, the WRRB determined that a TAH of 750 bulls-only shall be implemented for all users of the Bluenose-East ɂekwǫ̀ herd within Wek’èezhìı for the 2016/17, 2017/18, 2018/19 harvest seasons.  Further, the Board determined that that the proportional allocation of the TAH of the Bluenose-East ɂekwǫ̀ herd for the 2016/17, 2017/18, 2018/19 harvest seasons shall be as follows: Tłı̨chǫ Citizens – 39.29%, and Members of an Aboriginal people who traditionally harvest Bluenose-East ɂekwǫ̀ (including Nunavut) – 60.71.

In December 2015, the Tłı̨chǫ Government (TG) and ENR submitted the Joint Proposal on Caribou Management Actions for the Bathurst Herd: 2016-2019 to the Board, which proposed new restrictions on hunter harvest, predator management to reduce dìga (wolf) populations on the winter range of the Bathurst ɂekwǫ̀ herd and ongoing biological monitoring.  The WRRB considered any specific restriction of harvest or component of harvest as the establishment of a total allowable harvest (TAH).  After review and analysis of the proposal, the WRRB complied with Section 12.3.10 of the Tłı̨chǫ Agreement and held a public hearing in Yellowknife, NT on February 23-24, 2016.

The WRRB concluded, based on all available Aboriginal and scientific evidence, that a serious conservation concern exists for the Bathurst ɂekwǫ̀ herd and that additional management actions are vital for herd recovery.  As the Bathurst ɂekwǫ̀ herd situation is so dire, the Board feels that it would be irresponsible to address harvest management only as there is a real risk that the herd will be extirpated within a few short years.  Therefore, this second report, Part B, will deal with self-regulation, additional predator management actions, biological and environmental monitoring, and cumulative effects.

In December 2015, the Tłı̨chǫ Government (TG) and ENR submitted the Joint Proposal on Caribou Management Actions for the Bathurst Herd: 2016-2019 to the Board, which proposed new restrictions on hunter harvest, predator management to reduce dìga (wolf) populations on the winter range of the Bathurst ɂekwǫ̀ herd and ongoing biological monitoring.  The WRRB considered any specific restriction of harvest or component of harvest as the establishment of a total allowable harvest (TAH).  After review and analysis of the proposal, the WRRB complied with Section 12.3.10 of the Tłı̨chǫ Agreement and held a public hearing in Yellowknife, NT on February 23-24, 2016.

The WRRB concluded, based on all available Aboriginal and scientific evidence, that a serious conservation concern exists for the Bathurst ɂekwǫ̀ herd and that additional management actions are vital for herd recovery. The WRRB determined that a total allowable harvest of zero shall be implemented for all users of the Bathurst ɂekwǫ̀ herd within Wek’èezhìı for the 2016/17, 2017/18, 2018/19 harvest seasons.