http://www.mytelus.com/news/article.do?pageID=canada_home&articleID=1969850

Saturday, Jul 02, 2005

RCMP braced for reaction from sled dog slaughter report

(CP) - Nunavut RCMP are preparing themselves for the political bite of thousands of dead sled dogs.
An internal investigation is almost complete into allegations that officers deliberately shot the dogs in the 1950s and '60s as part of a policy to assimilate Inuit by keeping them off the land.

Inuit leaders are increasingly adamant in demands for a public inquiry to sniff out the truth behind what they believe was both a deliberate assault on their culture and a cruel tragedy for dog owners.

But after reviewing all existing RCMP records from the time and interviewing more than two dozen Inuit who then worked for the force, Insp. Paul Young has concluded no such plot existed.

"I'm really looking to see if there was any conspiracy or any direction given regarding the destruction of the dogs," he said.

"I've found nothing. In fact, I've found the opposite."

The finding, however, is sure to draw growls.

In March, the Nunavut legislature passed a unanimous motion in favour of an inquiry. A House of Commons committee in Ottawa has also recommended one.

"What I do know is that one way to bring people into town was to destroy the dogs," said Tagak Curley, an influential member of the territorial legislature and longtime northern leader.

"The public hearing must go through."

The dead dogs - "qimmiit" in Inuktitut - are real enough. Some estimates put the number of slaughtered animals across northern Quebec and Nunavut as high as 20,000.

Makivik Corp., which administers the Quebec Inuit land claim, has collected dozens of stories of uncomprehending dog owners watching animals that were both essential to the hunt and well-loved companions killed.

"Even though the men cherished the dogs, they tried picking the ones they cherished less than others and brought them down to the sea ice to be put to death," wrote Lucasi Nappaluk.

Sometimes the RCMP shot the dogs; sometimes it was the Hudson's Bay man or even the local teacher. Always, it was a "qallunaat" - white man - speaking a language as alien as the government he represented.

The slaughter came at a time before snowmobiles were common. The Inuit say it was meant to centralize them so children could receive a southern education, health care could be easily delivered, welfare could be distributed and officials could keep a paternal eye on them.

"It was one of the ways the government had to concentrate them," said Curley. "I remember 'assimilation' used to be the word."

That attempted assimilation is blamed for many of the social problems the Inuit struggle with today - problems that some now trace at least partly back to a pile of dead sled dogs on the ice.

But Young hasn't found a hidden agenda.

Some dogs were shot during distemper or rabies outbreaks, he said. Some were killed for public safety - free-roaming dogs may have been safe in traditional hunting camps but weren't in more populous communities.

"Some of these teams were put down at the request of hamlet councils of the leaders in the communities or the team owners themselves."

Young points out the RCMP delivered dog food and medicine and even brought in puppies to rebuild teams in some communities.

"There's no existence that I can find of any government-sanctioned killing of the dogs. It seems to have been decisions made locally."

Curley scoffs.

"They couldn't investigate themselves. It's too obvious an attempt to cover up."

Terry Audla, executive director of the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, has his own suspicions. His group is studying links between the dog slaughter and the Inuit move off the land.

"It all happened in the same era, and we figure the two are related in some way," he said.

"All the memos that related to the issue of dogs seem to be building to that. Then everything after that, there's no information, nothing. It seems like a whitewash."

Many RCMP records from the time have been destroyed. Young admits officers may have informally discussed plans that were never written down.

"If we (had) got together and discussed those things, there probably wouldn't be any records kept."

Young, however, isn't the only investigator who's found no plot. Frank Tester, a professor at the University of British Columbia who has studied the killings, is another.

"I have no evidence to that effect," he said.

He said the killings have to be seen in the context of the wrenching social change the Inuit were then experiencing. A single generation was expected to leap from tents and igloos to the technocratic world of 1950s Canada.

"There's no other group of indigenous people who went through so much change so fast."

As well, the Inuit were battered by famine and disease. Tester said infant mortality was then about 25 per cent. Among adults, tuberculosis was rampant.

And what income the Inuit did earn was disappearing. The introduction of synthetic fibres in the '50s left such mainstays as fox pelts at a 10th of their previous value.

"When the government set up nursing stations and health care, it sounded pretty good," said Tester. "It wasn't a case of government whipping people into town, but people were seduced into it."

Tester believes the resurgent anger over the dog slaughter is at least partly long-repressed mourning for a way of life that nearly disappeared overnight.

"It's highly symbolic as well as real. It has to do with the loss of a way of life.

"It has to do with how the Inuit were treated at the time. It's generalizable to a whole lot of situations."

Audla acknowledges the dead sled dogs are pulling other issues behind them.

"It still affects us today," Audla said. "This is the reason why there's so many individuals affected in such a way where they're bitter toward authority or bitter towards outsiders."

Just getting the facts straight will help, he suggested.

"All we're trying to do from our side of things is gather as much information as we can and eventually this will be part of the history books."

But as Young completes his report, he's concerned about the reception it will receive.

"It is an uphill battle," he said. "There's very little I can do to control the way people think about whether we should be doing this or not."

© The Canadian Press, 2005