Gérin-Lajoie, José, Alain Cuerrier, and Laura Siegwart Collier, eds. 2016. “The Caribou Taste Different Now”: Inuit Elders Observe Climate Change. Iqaluit: Nunavut Arctic College Media.

It is always pleasing to find a new book that provides views by Inuit Elders. In the last twenty years, Elders have contributed extensively to our understanding of Inuit societies and traditions. They are no more “hiding in the stem of a pipe,” to borrow Akisu Joamie’s words (Therrien and Laugrand 2001, 3). This book, edited by José Gérin-Lajoie, Alain Cuerrier, and Laura Siegwart Collier, fits very well into the rich collections produced in the 1990s by Nunavut Arctic College (see their series Interviewing Inuit Elders, Inuit Perspectives on the 20th Century, etc.). The title is very appropriate and inspiring. From an Inuit perspective, taste clearly reveals the real nature of things; that is, any substantial change is usually expressed by a change of taste. In this book, not only caribou meat but also fish (71–72) and berries (269) are now said to taste different, an indication that the Arctic environment has been transformed. The statement that “the caribou taste different now” refers to the major environmental changes affecting humans, animals, and the land. But these changes are not related solely to climate change. Some changes observed by Elders are due to noise from helicopters (e.g., fewer berries, according to Martha Nukik in Qamanittuaq, 85) and new activities with the opening of mining sites (e.g., more fish dying, according to Mary Anogak from Kangiqsujuaq, 244). In a word, change is due to humans growing in number and becoming more widespread. The editors of the book also conducted interviews in 8 Canadian Arctic communities with 145 Elders, two-thirds of whom were women and one-third men. In Nunavut, there were 18 interviewees from Kugluktuk, 24 from Qamanittuaq, 19 from Pangnirtuuq, and 15 from Mittimatalik. In Nunavik, there were 19 Elders from Umiujaq, 18 from Kangiqsujuaq, and 9 from Kangiqsualujjuaq. In Nunatsiavut, there were 23 from Nain. The editors should be praised for such a broad cross-community study that goes beyond the classical borders of Nunavut, Nunavik, and Nunatisiavut. It is also nice to have more women than men, since women’s voices have been much less recorded than men’s. However, the book does not really offer a comparative study, and the few full-page diagrams in the appendix do not tell us very much. Also, we are not told how the editors went about selecting the communities and the Elders, and why some communities with many Elders were passed over. It is also a real pity that we do not have more details about each community, or more substantial and personal information for each of the Elders involved in the project. The editors say they joined forces to understand how environmental changes across the Canadian Arctic are affecting tundra vegetation, focusing especially on the ecology of tundra berry plants, and they say they conducted both field research and community-based monitoring after establishing partnerships with knowledge holders. They conducted oral interviews and mapping consultations, and clearly communicated with many people, and even created thematic posters (7–8). As an anthropologist, however, I see one weakness in this book: we have no access at all to the questions that the interviewers put to the Elders. The interviewers mention that a similar questionnaire was used for all interviews (11), but they should have inserted a copy of the questionnaire in an appendix. This is a serious weakness, since the lack of such information obscures the context in which the knowledge was produced. Elders and readers alike need to know the questions to gain insight into the interactions between the interviewer and the interviewee and the content of the answers. Hence, although the editors mention creation and …