In Ontario, moose\u2014the second-largest land animal in North America\u2014support several predators in the ecological food chain and provide food security to Indigenous residents. The people of Shawanaga use every part of the animal in daily practices and cultural traditions. Even the dew claws of hooves become part of their cultural regalia as chimes during ceremonial dancing. The mammals also increase the biodiversity of wetlands by moving seeds and redistributing resources into the environment when they die, Kell noted.<\/p>\n
Though the researchers suspected climate change might be a factor in declining moose populations, understanding exactly how is more complicated. Using two worldviews offers different perspectives on the same subject, Kell said: First Nations tribal members interpret ecology through generations of observations, while contemporary scientists rely on controls and detailed measurements in the field.<\/p>\n
To draw from both schools of thought, the research team applied a \u201ctwo-eyed seeing\u201d approach. They interviewed 66 members of the Biigtigong Nishnaabeg, Magnetawan, and Shawanaga First Nations in Ontario, and they reviewed 52 Western scientific papers about moose ecology in the region. Then, they wove together the differences and similarities.<\/p>\n
Both traditional ecological knowledge and Western scientific studies agree that climate change, diseases and parasites are the key drivers of the dwindling moose populations. But interviews with Indigenous hunters and elders also revealed hunting pressures, barriers and risks posed by highways, and a new green warty skin disease as potential issues.<\/p>\n
The Indigenous observations often emphasized smaller-scale changes, the team noted: displacement of moose by encroaching local populations of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus); declining use of the area\u2019s wetlands; and shorter mating seasons as temperatures warm.<\/p>\n \u201cTypically when you get a bull in the fall and it\u2019s [ ready to mate], it stinks. But the bulls didn\u2019t stink yet,\u201d said Donald Michano of the Biigtigong Nishnaabeg First Nation in an interview from the study. Charles Blacksky noted these more localized changes in the Shawanaga First Nation: \u201cOne winter, we didn\u2019t see [any] calves \u2026just\u2026the two-year-olds or whatever\u2026 No small ones.\u201d<\/p>\n This cultural information showcased aspects of moose decline that one type of science could not uncover alone, said Tyler Jessen, a doctoral candidate in applied conservation science at the University of Victoria, British Columbia. \u201cOverall, it\u2019s a great example of how two different knowledge systems can come together to provide a greater understanding of a particular topic,\u201d said Jessen, who was not involved in the study.<\/p>\n The study could have included other details for a fuller picture of challenges faced by the region\u2019s moose, said postdoctoral researcher Andrew Kadykalo of the McGill University Department of Natural Resource Sciences in Montreal, Quebec. The scientific literature review only used Google Scholar to find academic papers, leaving out perspectives from places such as government agencies that publish wildlife management reports, he noted. \u201cThat\u2019s a great piece of literature that could be captured,\u201d Kadykalo said. \u201cI thought it was a great start, but I feel like this method could be built upon.\u201d<\/p>\n Still, Kadykalo said, conservation and wildlife management groups now have more nuanced information provided by both types of science about the challenges faced by moose in the region: \u201cThe next question is, are there any innovative or potential solutions to mitigate these impacts?\u201d<\/p>\n Priadka, P., Moses, B., Kozmik, C., Kell, S., and Popp, J.N., \u201cWeaving Indigenous and Western Knowledge Systems to Discern Drivers of Mooz (Moose) Population Decline.\u201d People and Nature, 6: 1812-1821 (2024). doi:10.1002\/pan3.10706<\/p>\nCitation:<\/h2>\n