Special issue: Indigenous research and co-stewardship of wildlife

Indigenous People have occupied the North American continent since time immemorial, and yet, most North Americans are unaware of the sheer number or diversity of Indigenous groups or the scale of the landscape they manage and influence (Thorstenson 2023). To provide some context, the Indigenous groups of just the United States and Canada oversee over 850,000 km² of land, an area larger than all but 34 of the world's countries. These vast landscapes hold a plethora of culturally and economically important natural resources. For example, in the United States, Indian Nations manage over 178,000 km² of rangelands, 72,000 km² of commercial forests, and 16,000 km of streams and rivers, all of which provide important habitat for fish and wildlife populations, including >500 threatened and endangered species (Thorstenson 2023).

The management of these resources varies because of the diversity of values, goals, and perspectives of the unique groups that have resided here for millennia. To exemplify this, we briefly describe the diversity of Indigenous groups that reside in North America within the context of government recognitions. Each of these groups are considered sovereign entities with government-to-government relationships. Thus, differences in Indigenous culture, history, policy, and legal designations all merge to create diversity and complexity across Indigenous Fish and Wildlife Management agencies responsible for the management of these wildlife resources (Stricker et al. 2020, Hoagland and Albert 2023).

In the United States, Indigenous Peoples are generally divided into 3 groups: those that belong to a state or federally recognized tribe, descendants of state or federally recognized tribes without membership or recognition from the tribe, or descendants of a tribe that has no legal recognition. There are 574 federally recognized tribes, which are commonly separated into 2 groups: those within the contiguous states (i.e., Native American, Indian) and Alaskan Native. This delineation is due to the recent timing in which Alaska was settled, and the lack of treaties established between Alaskan tribes and the United States Government. These groups are separate from other non-federally recognized Indigenous groups such as Native Hawaiians, which are of Polynesian descent.

In Canada, Indigenous groups are commonly identified as First Nations, Inuit, or Métis. First Nations refers to the Indian people recognized by the Canadian Constitution, regardless of their status as federally recognized. The governing units that make up First Nations groups, referred to as bands, are the equivalent of Native American tribes in the United States. Inuit are the Indigenous groups that reside across Arctic Canada who did not sign treaties with the Canadian Government but have negotiated modern land claims. Métis are people of mixed First Nation and European ancestry who have no current federal recognition status but have a unique culture different from both Inuit and First Nations.

Indigenous groups in Mexico are also unique. They do not have clear legal recognition at a state or federal level, clarity on their rights to hold title to land, or access to traditional land bases.

It is important to consider this diversity and complexity across Indigenous groups because of the ever-growing interest and awareness of Indigenous Knowledge (IK). Such IK is increasingly being recognized and sought out as part of wildlife management and conservation solutions (Gadgil et al. 2022). The IK held by Indigenous people can enhance our understanding of wildlife and their habitats (Popp et al. 2019) and local IK can fill gaps in scientific understanding that may be difficult to obtain through other means (Stern and Humphries 2022). Indigenous Knowledge provides information that has been collected over lifetimes and the use of IK and Western science (WS) together will yield more comprehensive information about wildlife species than either method alone (Service et al. 2014).

Indigenous Knowledge is also increasingly being incorporated into research and management projects for numerous benefits (Fisk et al. 2024, Moore et al. 2024, Werdel et al. 2024; this issue). It is because of these benefits that non-Indigenous entities are increasingly aware of the contributions that IK can provide in addressing our pressing conservation and stewardship challenges. These benefits have also led to legislative policies related to IK. For example, in the United States the Federal joint Secretarial order 3403 maintains that the United States Department of Interior and Department of Agriculture will benefit by incorporating tribal IK into federal land and resources management. At the same time, professional societies are forming working groups and holding symposia on the role of IK in their respective disciplines. This has led peer-reviewed journals to seek articles using IK, some of which have devoted entire issues to the subject (Journal of Forestry [2017], Climate and Development [2021], Journal of Great Lakes Research [2023], Molecular Ecology [2024], Journal of Wildlife Management [JWM; this issue]).

It is for these reasons, and a desire to respectfully use this knowledge to bring differing perspectives into wildlife ecology and management, that The Wildlife Society (TWS) and the JWM have facilitated this special issue on Indigenous research and co-stewardship. This effort originated following discussions between K. L. Nicholson and P. R. Krausman, and later supported by past TWS President G. Batcheller and all subsequent presidents, and TWS Council to highlight the importance and relevance of IK to wildlife management. Following these conversations, we were asked to lead this effort. In attempting to accomplish this goal, we initiated extensive discussions with the membership of TWS's Native Peoples' Wildlife Management Working Group and staff of the Native American Fish and Wildlife Society to develop a vision for what this special issue would include. Part of this vision was to provide perspectives of the Indigenous community on the role of IK in wildlife management and TWS. It was clear from these discussions that a special issue that encompassed IK and much of the previous and ongoing wildlife research occurring in partnership with Indigenous groups was warranted. Thus, we assembled a range of manuscripts that exemplify the type of work currently occurring on tribal lands or in coordination with tribal entities. In doing so, we have been able to assemble a diversity of work that reaches across boundaries to incorporate policy issues, tribally driven research, management activities, and IK.

The phrase tribally driven research has different meanings to different people (Mariella et al. 2009). In the case of this special issue, we included articles that approach tribal research from an Indigenous perspective but also presented examples from a more traditional WS style of research on tribal lands in collaboration with tribal institutions with the research questions originating from the tribes. Additionally, some of these manuscripts may not fit the traditional mold regular readers of JWM may expect. For example, some papers may not have a traditional introduction, methods, results, discussion framework commonly seen in other scientific articles. This was intentional as Indigenous Science and IK is in many ways different than the traditional WS approach. Such science is no better or worse than these WS approaches, but such accommodations are necessary if we are to disseminate this information fairly and accurately to the scientific community or incorporate such information into our scientific practices.

From here, we introduce readers of JWM to concepts common within Indigenous Science that they may not be familiar with but will likely encounter throughout the subsequent articles. Following this, we have taken this opportunity to highlight challenges within the scientific publishing process that we have encountered while undertaking this endeavor. As this represents the first attempt by TWS and JWM to facilitate a special issue on Indigenous Knowledge and research, this provides the ideal time to highlight such concerns so that the members of TWS can better understand IK so it can more easily be incorporated into all aspects of TWS.