We have identified areas that we would like to work in and we identify issues that we would like to work on. We approach Inuit organizations, such as in the case of Pond Inlet, for example, which sits more or less in the proposed Lancaster Sound national marine conservation area. We approach hunters and the hunters and trappers organization in Pond Inlet and say, “We're interested in working here on this issue. Is that something that's of some interest to you?”
lf it's of no interest to them, it's okay—well, we won't work on that, then. If it is of interest to them....
Floe edge monitoring is an example. The floe edge off Pond Inlet is critically important to the hunters for narwhal and seal. It's important to narwhal and seals, so from conservation perspectives and a sustainable use perspective, it's important. There's proposed shipping activity in that area.
We have worked with the people of Pond Inlet, the hunters and trappers organization of Pond Inlet, and set up cameras that do time-lapse photography to capture what's happening with the floe in advance of shipping activity during ice. That's just one example.
That's how we approach it basically everywhere. It can be the other way: they could approach us and say they would like to work on this. If it fits in with what we would like to work on, we'll partner with them. We don't do anything—we haven't done anything to my knowledge—without the Inuit leader of a relevant Inuit body duly constituted, so to speak, under the land claims agreement, signing some piece of paper that says they would like to work with us on this or they are partnering with us on this. To my knowledge, we have not. I could be wrong, but that's how we approach it, generally speaking.