As we move forward in our readings from Arctic Voices, the focus moves from more the more personal and philosophical to the more collective and political. The voices of Indigenous peoples, in particular, become far more central, with writings from Iñupiaq scholar Maria Tláa Williams, Gwich'in Chief Dacho Alexander, and Athabascan writer Velma Wallis. It's somewhat unfortunate, to my mind, that no Inuit writers are included in these sections; certainly the work of the internationally-admired environmentalist
Sheila Watt-Cloutier ought to have been part of this conversation. To remedy this, I'm asking everyone to read her essay "
Upirngasaq: Arctic Spring," whose title (as one may guess) is meant to resonate with Rachel Carson's.
These writings, widely arrayed as they may be, are of course only the "tip of the iceberg" of the many historical, cultural, and scientific writings that seek to understand and defend the extraordinary beauty and value of the Arctic regions of our planet. It's also been nearly a decade since it first appeared, and much has happened, for good and bad, in terms of all these modes of resistance. So, as you choose a writing to respond to this week, do a little research on the side: what has changed about the issues presented in your chosen article or excerpt? Has its author written more about the subject since? Or are there some new voices now within the range of our hearing that should command our attention?
Isabella Santoro
ReplyDelete“ but in a larger way, both the celebration and defense— in this case, stewardship— of 23 million acres of one of nation’s only Arctic ecosystems will depend upon the voices of humans, who also speak for this wild earth” (page 401). I found this quote to be very interesting because it’s so true that entire ecosystems and our planet as a whole depends on what we do as humans to make it either a worse or better place to live. The reason why global warming has skyrocketed in these last 40 or so years is because of the things that we do in our daily lives. Just driving cars and polluting the earth with millions of acres of trash and how capitalism affects pollution and global warming are some of the ways in which we are seeing out earth grow weaker. I think it’s true that we may be able to survive what we’ve done to our earth but at this point it feels very irreversible. It feels like something that is not going to change unless people take action. It’s very hard for people to take action and we all live in a society where to take action basically means to change their lives completely. Realistically if we wanted to save this earth we shouldn’t have as much technology. We shouldn’t be driving cars, we shouldn’t be using plastic or as much paper or basically doing anything that we need to survive in a capitalist society. And the sad part is that realistically this won’t happen but the hard thing is that it’s up to us to make it happen
In part four, chapter three, the author relishes on the moments they were able to experience the Inupiats music to repair the relationship between themselves and the whales. Besides their desire to bring the whales back with traditional music, they also brought legal attention to the matter and challenged to not allow Shell to operate during whaling seasons and whaling migraiton. The chapter continues to go into detail about the effects the change in climate is having on the Artic in terms of the ice thinnig, leading to breaking records of minimum levels of sea ice which further causes havoc on the whales considering that they may not survive if theres no ice. Accoriding the NASA, there’s a 12.6% decrease in the rate of change of ice per decade. Less ice also means more available ocean to hunt sea life and more traffic through the water also distresses the whales communication with each other. Since 2011, after The Inutpiats won the battle with Shell, the whales unfortunately have still had a downward slope in population and this is widely due to the ice thinning and in an article by the Oregon State University published on February 22, 2023 they state just that, ““Without that ice, there could be changes in bowhead availability for the Indigenous people who rely on the whales. The lack of ice also opens the door for other species to move into the Arctic, resulting in competition for resources, potential predation and increased human interaction due to ship strikes or entanglement in fishing gear.” They’re many different organizations and people that are continiously worried about the depleting conditions of the Artic but unfortunantly there’s a greater context that needs to be dealt with and it’s global warming as a whole.
ReplyDelete-Hannah D.
https://today.oregonstate.edu/news/sea-ice-declines-arctic-bowhead-whales-are-adjusting-their-migration-patterns
In "A Brief History of Native Solidarity," the text talks about how animal rights activists are tampering with the lifestyles of the Inuit and other communities in the Arctic. Multiple bans on hunting various animals have been placed, despite the fact that these animals are essential to the Inuit way of life. The book talks about how in 1916 the United States signed a treaty with Canada and Mexico that prevented people from hunting waterfowl from March to September, the same time these birds are in Alaska. Many indigenous hunters relied on these birds for food, and now they couldn't hunt them. The documentary "Angry Inuk" talked about similar bans being passed in the early 2000s, this time against seal hunting. Many animal rights activists disagreed with the seal skin trade, even though seal meat and skin is very important for the Inuit. This to me is very frustrating, because the Inuit and other indigenous hunters respect nature. Even though they participate in the seal skin trade, they do not hunt seals purely for profit. They rely on seals and other animals for food and clothing, but at the same time they take only what they need. Also, they use as much of the seals they catch as possible. They don't just skin the seal and leave the body to rot - like what elephant poachers do with elephant tusks for example - but rather they eat the meat, and use other body parts for various tasks. Because of these factors, I believe the Inuit and other indigenous groups have the right to hunt these animals - and this is coming from someone who loves animals and hates poachers. On that note, it also infuriated me that these animal rights activist groups did as much as they could do degrade the seal hunters in the documentary, but whenever the Inuit tried to meet them face to face, they never showed. This tells me that these activists don't care about animals - especially since apparently seals aren't considered endangered animals, but these activists still fight for them because it gives them easy money. This is just another example of wealthy people trying to control nature and trying to control "lesser-than's." It is also an example of corrupt people taking advantage of the oblivious public to make money by masking their intentions using sympathy and false claims. However, according to the documentary and various other sources, one of the animal rights acitivist groups, the Greenpeace Foundation, publicly apologized to the Inuit for the trouble it has caused them, and has since stopped its anti-sealing campaigns. Hopefully, this is a step toward a brighter future for the Inuit and other indigenous communities.
ReplyDelete- Elliot Varone
https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/nov/01/animal-rights-activists-inuit-clash-canada-indigenous-food-traditions
The section "Caribou Time" by Nick Jans, is not quite about caribou. The opening quote from Jans detailing his response to his parents' question of "When are you coming home?", clearly highlights that this section will tie together both nature and humanity. In particular, Jans' stories subtly show the interconnectedness of man, animal, and nature in northwest Arctic Alaska, a sense that is viscerally highlighted during the biannual migration of more than 150,000 caribou, the largest herd of mammals on earth. The first section, "The Rivers of Their Passing", highlights a feeling of mankind being a small actor, an individual lost in the throng of nature as symbolized by the caribou, and here there's a focus on the primacy of nature with the caribou being in peak condition, described in glowing terms as strong and vivid in life. Meanwhile, "The Hardest Season" showcases the opposite, detailing the caribou in the eponymous "hardest season", plagued by starvation, disease, and pestilence, run down by their long march. The last section, "The Calving Ground", focuses on the caribou's critical resting place, where they rejuvenate after their long journey, and how it may be threatened by future oil and coal mining prospects. In showing how the entire environment in the region hinges on the caribou, Jans neatly shows how such a massive destruction of their lifecycle would innately destroy the entire ecosystem, including the human component, of the entire Alaskan Arctic.
ReplyDeleteI found it really fascinating when they discussed how the arctics future depends on only humans. It made me wonder how many people don't know what's going on or just don't care to make a change. It really is true that at the end of the day we as humans should take some responsibility for our actions and own up to the damage we have done to the artic. All the contribution we have made for it to end up the way it is. It's to the point that even if we made small impacts like we are now like reducing plastic is that even enough to reverse the damage we have done? I hope so but it makes me sad to think about us never being able to get to a place where our actions do not impact our environment.
ReplyDeleteMirna Soto Razo