It’s yes to Kitikmeot, no to Repulse Bay

Hunters in Kugaaruk, Taloyoak and Gjoa Haven can plan on hunting 30 more narwhals this year than last year, but hunters in Repulse Bay must keep their hunt within their current quota of 72.

That’s what the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board decided last week when it looked at requests from these communities, along with recommendations from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

Under the Nunavut land claim agreement’s Article 5.3.3, Inuit harvests may be restricted or limited only for a conservation purpose.

In the case of the narwhal harvest shared by the three Kitikmeot communities, the DFO recommendation said “increasing the narwhal harvest from 45 to 75 whales should not have a detrimental impact on the Gulf of Boothia population of narwhal.” The NWMB then approved the increase.

But the DFO recommendation said there would be a “high risk of population decline” if Repulse Bay continued to kill 103 narwhal a year for 10 years.

There’s even some concern for the health of the stock, said the DFO recommendation, if the current Kivalliq quota of 102 narwhal per year continues.

Repulse Bay hunts from the northwestern Hudson Bay population of narwhal, which Rankin Inlet, Chesterfield Inlet, Coral Harbour and Hall Beach hunters also harvest.

Repulse Bay’s Arviq Hunters and Trappers Organization said that last year, they landed 72 narwhal and that another 25 were wounded and lost.

The Arviq HTO said they want a bigger quota for 2006 because 72 narwhal “is no longer sufficient” for the community’s growing population.

Before 1999, Repulse Bay’s quota was 50 narwhal per year. After the federal quota system was lifted that year, the community set a quota of 100.

But in 1999, hunters there took 156 narwhal and reported another 100 lost or sunk. Under a revised quota system, the community’s quota finally settled on 72.

During the NWMB’s discussions last week about whether to increase Repulse Bay’s quota, several members said increases couldn’t always be granted.

Joannie Ikkidluak said there isn’t always a balance between the number of Inuit and animals, while Harry Flaherty underlined the need to “plan for the future.”

In the end, board members decided they don’t have enough information to grant the increase.

Glenn Williams of Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., said NTI needs more information before it can say whether the NWMB’s decisions are respecting Inuit rights under the land claim.

“NTI and Inuit should have a right to review this,” Williams told the meeting.

Williams also said the NWMB must start setting “basic needs levels,” derived from information gathered in the Nunavut harvest study.

Setting these is even more important when the basic needs exceed what can be sustainably harvested. Basic need levels and total allowable harvests were to be set within one year of the NWMB’s creation.