Increasingly, fisheries researchers and managers seek or are compelled to “bridge” Indigenous knowledge systems with Western scientific approaches to understanding and governing fisheries. Here, we move beyond the all‐too‐common narrative about integrating or incorporating (too often used as euphemisms for assimilating) other knowledge systems into Western science, instead of building an ethic of knowledge coexistence and complementarity in knowledge generation using Two‐Eyed Seeing as a guiding framework. Two‐Eyed Seeing (Etuaptmumk in Mi’kmaw) embraces “learning to see from one eye with the strengths of Indigenous knowledges and ways of knowing, and from the other eye with the strengths of mainstream knowledges and ways of knowing, and to use both these eyes together, for the benefit of all,” as envisaged by Elder Dr. Albert Marshall. In this paper, we examine the notion of knowledge dichotomies and imperatives for knowledge coexistence and draw parallels between Two‐Eyed Seeing and other analogous Indigenous frameworks from around the world. It is set apart from other Indigenous frameworks in its explicit action imperative—central to Two‐Eyed Seeing is the notion that knowledge transforms the holder and that the holder bears a responsibility to act on that knowledge. We explore its operationalization through three Canadian aquatic and fisheries case‐studies that co‐develop questions, document and mobilize knowledge, and co‐produce insights and decisions. We argue that Two‐Eyed Seeing provides a pathway to a plural coexistence, where time‐tested Indigenous knowledge systems can be paired with, not subsumed by, Western scientific insights for an equitable and sustainable future.

1. Ocean systems, and the culturally and commercially important fishes that inhabit them, face growing threats. Increasingly, unconventional data sources are being used to inform fisheries research and management for data-poor species.2. Listed as a species of special concern in Canada, yelloweye rockfish (Sebastes ruberrimus) are vulnerable to exploitation, and have historical and cultural value to Indigenous people. In this study, Indigenous fishers of British Columbia, Canada, were interviewed and asked about observed changes to the body sizes (length) and abundance of this species over the last~60 years, and the factors driving these changes. Their current and historical estimates of size and abundance were compared with current biological survey data.3. Forty-two semi-directed interviews were carried out and 89% of respondents observed a decrease in yelloweye rockfish body sizes since the 1980s. The median historical (1950s-1980s) length was 84 cm, compared with the median modern (2010-2015) length of 46 cm. All but one respondent reported substantial decrease in yelloweye rockfish abundance since their earliest fishing experiences (1950s to1980s, depending on participant's age), with a third suggesting the change was most evident in the early 2000s, followed by the 1980s (21%) and 1990s (17%).4. Sizes of modern yelloweye rockfish estimated by participants resembled estimates derived from ecological data recorded concurrently at the study region.5. This study illustrates a repeatable method for using traditional and local knowledge to extend baselines for data-poor species, and highlights the value of integrating Indigenous knowledge into fisheries research and management.

Policy-makers ideally pursue well-informed, socially just means to make environmental decisions. Indigenous peoples have used Indigenous knowledge (IK) to inform decisions about environmental management for millennia. In the last 50 years, many western societies have used environmental assessment (EA) processes to deliberate on industrial proposals, informed by scientific information. Recently EA processes have attempted to incorporate IK in some countries and regions, but practitioners and scholars have criticized the ability of EA to meaningfully engage IK. Here we consider these tensions in Canada, a country with economic focus on resource extraction and unresolved government-to-government relationships with Indigenous Nations. In 2019, the Canadian government passed the Impact Assessment Act, reinvigorating dialogue on the relationship between IK and EA. Addressing this opportunity, we examined obstacles between IK and EA via a systematic literature review, and qualitative analyses of publications and the Act itself. Our results and synthesis identify obstacles preventing the Act from meaningfully engaging IK, some of which are surmountable (e.g., failures to engage best practices, financial limitations), whereas others are substantial (e.g., knowledge incompatibilities, effects of colonization). Finally, we offer recommendations for practitioners and scholars towards ameliorating relationships between IK and EA towards improved decision-making and recognition of Indigenous rights.

Introduction: Fisheries management is often data-limited, and conducted at spatial scales that are too large to address the needs of Indigenous peoples, whose cultures depend upon the local availability of marine resources. Outcomes: We combined Indigenous ecological knowledge with simulation modelling to inform modern fishery management. Semi-structured interviews with Indigenous fishers in coastal British Columbia, Canada, uncovered severe declines in the abundance and catches of Dungeness crab (Cancer magister) since the 1990s. We modelled the current probability of "successful" crab harvesting trips-as defined by expectations from past catches by Indigenous fishers-using fishery-independent data from nine sites. These probabilities were very low (<20%) for all sites except one. Discussion: Our study highlights that local depletions, which Indigenous fishers attribute to commercial and recreational fisheries, have been widespread and undetected by federal managers who manage Dungeness crab at regional scales without fishery-independent data. Further, local depletions impacted the ability of Indigenous fishers to access traditional foods. Conclusion: Integrating Indigenous knowledge with scientific research is crucial to inform locally-relevant fisheries management and conservation.

Continuity of coastal Indigenous cultures relies on healthy ecosystems and opportunity to fulfill cultural practices. Owing to resource stewardship practice over millennia, Indigenous nations possess Indigenous knowledge that positions them as leaders in contemporary resource management. However, Indigenous peoples possibly face social-ecological traps, situations in which feedbacks between social and ecological systems result in an undesirable state, that are challenging to overcome. Centuries of compounding colonization and environmental degradation have negatively impacted Indigenous knowledge and culturally mediated stewardship practices. Our partnership, comprising academics and four First Nations on the Central Coast of British Columbia, Canada, mobilized information from semistructured interviews with knowledge holders to explore Indigenous knowledge of a culturally important but vulnerable species, yelloweye rockfish (Sebastes ruberrimus). We analyzed interviews and discovered evidence of an extant but transcendable social-ecological trap. The emergent themes represent an exploration beyond our original project goals and research questions. Our study revealed that external forces of colonization, i.e., via forced assimilation, and species declines created a socialecological trap. However, participants ubiquitously described stewardship principles, and noted ongoing cultural revitalization efforts, active recovery of depleted species, and reassertion of Indigenous management rights as ways they are rebelling against, and overcoming, the trap. Although the framing of a social-ecological trap may be perceived as diminishing the authority of Indigenous governance systems, we found the opposite to be true. Despite external pressures, coastal First Nations are reasserting cultural and management rights and shaping their futures. We suggest that ongoing Indigenous cultural renewal and ecosystem recovery in the face of the historically entrenched trap be supported through recognizing and implementing inherent Indigenous marine management rights. The social-ecological trap described here differs from others in the literature in that the creation of the trap was external; moving beyond it is happening through internal, i.e., led by the First Nations, efforts.

The social license to operate framework considers how society grants or withholds informal permission for resource extractors to exploit publicly owned resources. We developed a modified model, which we refer to as the social license to hunt (SLH). In it we similarly consider hunters as operators, given that wildlife are legally considered public resources in North America and Europe. We applied the SLH model to examine the controversial hunting of large carnivores, which are frequently killed for trophies. Killing for trophies is widespread, but undertaken by a minority of hunters, and can pose threats to the SLH for trophy-seeking carnivore hunters and potentially beyond. Societal opposition to large carnivore hunting relates not only to conservation concerns but also to misalignment between killing for trophies and dominant public values and attitudes concerning the treatment of animals. We summarized cases related to the killing of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos), wolves (Canis lupus), and other large carnivores in Canada, the United States, and Europe to illustrate how opposition to large carnivore hunting, now expressed primarily on social media, can exert rapid and significant pressure on policy makers and politicians. Evidence of the potential for transformative change to wildlife management and conservation includes proposed and realized changes to legislation, business practice, and wildlife policy, including the banning of some large carnivore hunts. Given that policy is ultimately shaped by societal values and attitudes, research gaps include developing increased insight into public support of various hunting policies beyond that derived from monitoring of social media and public polling. Informed by increased evidence, the SLH model can provide a conceptual foundation for predicting the likelihood of transient versus enduring changes to wildlife conservation policy and practice for a wide variety of taxa and contexts.

No abstract

No abstract