What boundary? What whale? Whose responsibility? - Governing Transboundary Waters: Canada, the United States, and Indigenous Communities - page 177

choice. The plan included Mowachaht/Muchalaht canoes leading Tsu-xiit out of
Nootka Sound, and down the west coast of Vancouver Island to the San Juan
Islands. The DFO rejected the plan as too dangerous. Thus, Luna was in troubled
waters - allowed to stay in the traditional waters with his people, but still putting
himself (and others) at danger; free to choose, but not fully protected; between
multiple boundaries: jurisdictional, cultural, species, and epistemological. Ultimately,
this middle ground led to Luna's demise.

Conclusion
[N]ature is something imagined and real, external yet made, outside history but fiercely
contested at every turn.

—Castree and Braun, 2001

In this chapter, I examined the case of Luna, a single whale with multiple identities,
whose very existence challenged the concept of transboundary governance. Luna's
story highlights the tensions associated with governing a single being that transgresses
multiple and often competing categories. Analyzing the public unfolding of Luna's
story illustrates how contemporary environmental governance frameworks are often
ill-equipped to handle these transgressions - jurisdictional, species, cultural, or
epistemological.
Although the concept of social construction of nature is well established in
the academy, much work is needed to translate these ideas to the practice of
environmental management. Analyzing the discourses created around Luna sheds
light on the complex power dynamics and value systems embedded in the
“bounding” of space and the “ideologies” associated with governance practices
and how these “well-practiced” narratives influence policy decisions. The dominant
narrative of the “whale as out of place and in need of 'saving'” was rationalized
in many ways - through scientific studies on behavior, through economic concern
for property loss, through governmental protocols and fixed jurisdictions. The less-
practiced narrative of the “whale coming home” as the chief incarnate challenged
multiple conceptual, ideological, and jurisdictional boundaries. This transgression
opened up space to insert a strong Indigenous worldview into the narrative, which
had previously been largely unconsidered. A key outcome of these tensions (and
the clearing or lichtung that they created) is the need to reposition Luna as an
individual, fleshy being with agency.
I sought to answer questions related to managing species across borders and the
power dynamics associated with privileging the “rightful voice”, which translates
to the “rightful place”. The engagement with these inquiries led to three key
insights:

• Governance systems require greater flexibility to accommodate multiple

boundaries and worldviews.

• A significant need remains for governmental and non-governmental agencies

to prioritize sustained and meaningful consultation with First Nations in
matters relating to traditional territories and cultural beliefs.