SIKU: Knowing Our Ice Igor Krupnik · Claudio Aporta · Shari Gearheard · Gita J. Laidler · Lene Kielsen Holm Editors SIKU: Knowing Our Ice Documenting Inuit Sea Ice Knowledge and Use 123 Editors Dr. Igor Krupnik Dr. Claudio Aporta Smithsonian Institution Carleton University National Museum of Natural Dept. Sociology & History, Dept. Anthropology Anthropology 10th and Constitution Ave. 1125 Colonel By Dr. NW., Ottawa ON K1S 5B6 Washington DC 20013-7012 B349 Loeb Bldg. USA Canada [email protected] [email protected] Dr. Shari Gearheard Dr. Gita J. Laidler University of Colorado, Boulder Carleton University National Snow & Ice Data Dept. Geography & Center Environmental Studies Clyde River NU 1125 Colonel By Drive X0A 0E0 Ottawa ON K1S 5B6 Canada Canada [email protected] [email protected] Lene Kielsen Holm Inuit Circumpolar Council, Greenland Dr. Ingridsvej 1, P. O. Box 204 Nuuk 3900 Greenland [email protected] This book is published as part of the International Polar Year 2007–2008, which is sponsored by the International Council for Science (ICSU) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) ISBN 978-90-481-8586-3 e-ISBN 978-90-481-8587-0 DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-8587-0 Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York Library of Congress Control Number: 2010920470 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010 No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Front cover photo: Lucian Read, Qaanaaq, North Greenland, April 2008 Back cover photo: Gita J. Laidler, Cape Dorset, Nunavut, January 2005 Cover design: Anya Vinokour, 2009 Printed on acid-free paper Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com) Foreword Helena Ödmark Ice and traditional knowledge of ice continue to play a role in modern society in ways that may surprise many people who live in warmer regions. Ice is still a big factor of life in my native area of northern Sweden, even though the large ice sheet that covered Scandinavia and neighboring regions during the last ice age had melted away several thousand years ago. Long after the ice sheet has melted, the land here is still rising from the sea, almost 1 cm a year in some areas. Certain ports along the Swedish Baltic Sea coast have been moved several times because of that land rise and are now located many kilometers away from where they were originally built. When I was growing up in a small town on that coast, the ice was used for several months every year for winter roads across lakes and to the offshore islands. People went fishing on the ice on weekends. We had to be very careful in the areas where big icebreakers kept water channels open for commercial shipping into our town’s port and to the surrounding industrial harbors. We knew how to “read” the ice in the fall, in the winter, and in the spring to determine if it was safe to use. That was a part of my life and it is still a very important part of everyday knowledge to millions of people who live along the ocean, lakes, and rivers that are commonly covered with ice for some portion of the year. The climate warming may shorten or shift the ice season, but frozen water and ice-covered sea will continue to be our shared reality for generations to come. I first heard about the “International Polar Year 2007–2008,” or “IPY,” at the Arctic Science Summit Week in Kiruna, Sweden, in March 2003. There, a presenta- tion was made on the initial plans for a new IPY. One PowerPoint slide in particular caught my attention. It listed six key themes in a left-hand column and an additional explanatory wording in a right-hand column. The last entry in the left-hand column was “human dimension.” That made sense to me. But I was confused and very sur- prised to see a big question mark, a “?”, in the corresponding box in the right-hand column. The explanation was simple. The presenters did not know what to write in that “human dimension” box. At that time, I was not aware of the almost total lack of communication within the polar research community between scientists working in natural and physical sci- ences and those working in the field of social and human sciences. But I knew that a priority for the Arctic Council was to “strengthen cooperation in Arctic research.” v vi Foreword The Arctic Council had also started a very ambitious project to compile an Arctic Human Development Report (eventually published in 2004), which would rely heav- ily on research from the social and human sciences. Trying to be helpful, I showed the IPY presenters a folder that outlined the chapter headings for that report and suggested that they might provide inspiration for a text that could replace the “?” in the box on their slide. At the next meeting of the Senior Arctic Officials in April 2003, I informed the chair and my colleagues on the Arctic Council that an “International Polar Year” was being planned. We all found the issue to be of great interest. It was difficult for us to envisage a successful “IPY 2007–2008” without the active participation of the Arctic Council. After all, the scientific community was planning an “International Polar Year,” not an “International Polar Research Year.” At the Senior Arctic Officials meeting in October 2003, we decided to invite the IPY planners. Dr. Chris Rapley made an excellent presentation about the emerg- ing IPY science program at our meeting in May 2004. The reaction in the room confirmed the strong interest from the Arctic Council member states, permanent participants, and observers in the IPY planning process. In particular, the group was pleased to hear that the once brief reference to “human dimension” would be translated into substantive input by social and human sciences, as well as the full attention to the needs and interests of Arctic residents. The planners were encour- aged to involve indigenous and other local communities in IPY research activities, to appreciate the value of traditional knowledge, and to share the results of their work with Arctic residents. The meeting adopted a special statement to reiterate the Arctic Council’s commitment to IPY. We also launched a public diplomacy effort to emphasize the importance of including a “human dimension” in IPY. The Declaration adopted at the Arctic Council Meeting of Foreign Ministers in Reykjavik in October 2004 welcomed “the continuing contribution of indigenous and traditional knowledge to research in the Arctic” and “recognized the IPY 2007– 2008 as a unique opportunity to stimulate cooperation and coordination on Arctic research.” The Declaration adopted at the next Arctic Council Meeting of Foreign Ministers in Salekhard, Russia, in October 2006 specifically endorsed “(the) expansion of the IPY to include the human dimension.” The Ministers also supported “the inclusion of (research) programs initiated by Arctic residents, the effective involvement of Arctic indigenous peoples in IPY activities and recognize(d) that their traditional and indigenous knowledge is an invaluable component of IPY research.” They also emphasized “the importance of climate change in the context of the IPY, and to achieve a legacy of enhanced capacity of Arctic peoples to adapt to environmen- tal, economic and social changes in their regions, and enabling Arctic peoples to participate in and benefit from scientific research.” Almost 3 years later, at the conclusion of the IPY observational period in spring 2009, the Declarations adopted at the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting–Arctic Council Joint Meeting in Washington, DC, and at the Arctic Council Ministerial Meeting in Tromsö in April 2009 highlighted “that for the first time [the IPY] con- sidered the human dimension and concerns of local and indigenous peoples and Foreword vii engaged Arctic residents.” The Ministers specifically urged for “continued interna- tional coordination to maximize the legacy of IPY,” including “benefits to local and indigenous peoples.” In short, for all these years, the Arctic Council has championed the very type of scientific work that the SIKU project has accomplished in four of the Arctic Council member states. I am honored to be associated with that work and I have found this book to be fascinating and extremely inspirational reading. It conveys valuable new knowledge that needs to be presented to a wide audience and also to be incorporated into the further work of the Arctic Council. Our works goes on, and it will be reinforced by the outcomes and the legacy of the SIKU project. Thank you, the SIKU team, for your eye-opening book. This is exactly what we had in mind when we were voicing Arctic Council’s support for IPY 2007–2008 and argued for the value of bringing the social and human studies fully into its science program. Lasalie Joanasie (left) and Shari Gearheard, an Inuit hunter and a researcher, both residents of Clyde River, Nunavut, keep an eye on a passing polar bear while traveling the sea ice off the coast of Baffin Island near Clyde (Photo: Edward Wingate, 2009) Preface Joelie Sanguya and Shari Gearheard There is a special time of the year, just before freeze up, when our community is buzzing with anticipation. We are waiting for ice. This is “the waiting season” and it goes back to traditional times. Families would gather at certain camps in the fall to await the arrival of sea ice.