gure 2) that provides exceptional opportunity to intercept spring-migrating, as well as summering narwhals (Kingsley et al. 1994; Koski and Davis 1994; Richard et al. 1994; Silverman 1979; Smith et al. 1985). More recently, the introduction of modern hunting and transportation technologies (notably high-powered rifles, motor-equipped canoes and snowmobiles) has allowed Mittimatalingmiut to continue to exploit narwhals despite centralization from their former dispersed pattern of settlement to residence in modern Pond Inlet (Brody 1975; Damas 2002; Matthiasson 1967).
Mittimatalingmiut commence narwhal hunting in spring (approximately mid-May) and continue hunting from the floe-edge until break-up (approximately mid-June). In early May, the first narwhals begin to arrive at the eastern floe-edge (Hay 1984; Silverman 1979), and a few hunters, considered by their peers to be particularly adept at floe-edge hunting, begin to seek whales at this time. These hunters often stage their forays onto the sea ice from Button Point (Sannirut) on southwest Bylot Island where there are two community-supported cabins (Figure 2).
By mid-May, the number of narwhal at the eastern floe-edge substantially increases (Hay 1984; Silverman 1979). At this time, the movement pattern of hunters undergoes a shift. While a few individuals continue to camp at Button Point, most hunters now stop there only to rest briefly and to acquire information on floe-edge and weather conditions, narwhal sightings, and camp locations along the floe-edge from other Inuit camped and moving through Button Point. This pattern of proceeding to Button Point before actually beginning operations along the floe-edge continues into early June; by then, whales are present along the entire extent of the floe-edge, except when pack ice jams along the floe.
Human behavioural ecology: mode of foraging
Our study of Inuit hunting behaviour adds to the present literature of human behavioural ecology (HBE; see Winterhalder and Smith 2000) through our analysis of mode of foraging. Historically, since the mid 1970s, HBE studies have applied optimal foraging models to study the subsistence practices of indigenous peoples (e.g., Hawkes et al. 1991; Hawkes and O’Connell 1982, 1985, 1992; Hames and Vickers 1982; Hill 1988; Sih and Milton 1985; Smith 1991; Winterhalder 1977, 1983). Optimal foraging models assume that foragers attempt to maximize their immediate energy gains over time (Stephens and Krebs 1986). These are mathematical models where ecological parameters are entered in formulated equations to make testable predictions of foraging behaviour such as diet composition, group size and patch selection among different groups in different habitats. As robust as the optimal foraging approach is in its predictions, it has received criticism for its lack of descriptive utility and its inability to incorporate the rich qualitative data found in ethnographic studies (e.g., Smith 1983).
We address such criticisms by departing from an optimal foraging approach as applied in HBE studies; instead, we focus on the role of foraging mode (see Holling 1959; Kramer 2001). Whereas optimal foraging models attempt to condense and generalize foraging behaviour in order to address universal questions such as what individuals eat, where they look for food, and how long they search for their food, our proposed focus on foraging mode offers a more descriptive and qualitative analysis of specific search behaviour of prey. We hope this alternative theoretical perspective will place Inuit hunting behaviour in a richer and more realistic context. Our application of foraging mode to a human population is the result of our extensive observations which suggest a strong correspondence between the foraging mode of Inuit and other animals. The application of foraging mode is useful because it describes the actual hunting behaviour Inuit display in their habitats. It also elucidates some of the observable ecological factors that influence this behaviour.
In the ethological literature on animal foraging mode, it was ob