Introduction
The taxonomy of the animal world is an essential concept for understanding how all living species are linked. Species are organized and categorized according to the Linnaeus system based on shared traits. For some, understanding the natural world – the landscape, plants, wildlife, climates, and natural variability – has been a core part of their lives and belief systems since the beginning of time (Chyleńska and Rybska 2145). Their knowledge about the natural realm is complex and extensive. The state of nature, now frequently referred to as the ecosystem, is considered as one interrelated part of the total rather than as a distinct entity. This interdependence translates into a moral need to care for, live in peace and harmony, and appreciate the natural environment (de Azevedo and Young 1019). Many Indigenous Peoples argue that animals have ghosts and join the people realm to provide humanity with nourishment, clothing, and other resources. When their meat is depleted, the animals come back home, regrow new skin, and re-enter the people’s realm at their leisure.
The ancient ideals of tolerance and cooperation that underpin the Aboriginal way of life are based on the seven universal forces of holy traditions. Animals hold enormous spiritual importance in many Indigenous cultures (Tuckett 313). Each lecture recognizes one of the fundamental characteristics essential to living a healthy and fulfilling existence. An animal embodies each law to emphasize that all man’s decisions and actions are evident on a physical plane. The animal world educated humanity on how to live in close proximity to the soil, and the link that has been built between the animal world and that of humankind has ingrained respect for all life in those who follow the traditional Aboriginal lifestyle. This work was written in order to compare the Eurocentric system of classification of animals and the Canadian aboriginal system using the example of the beaver and the bear.
Bear Classification
Bears are carnivorous animals belonging to the Ursidae group; they are categorized as caniforms or doglike carnivorans. Although only eight species of bears are known to exist, they are ubiquitous, inhabiting a broad range of habitats in the Northern Hemisphere and, to a lesser extent, the Southern Hemisphere. Bears may be found in North America, South America, Europe, and Asia. Large vessels with portly legs, big proboscis, tiny spherical ears, messy hair, bipedal locomotion feet with five nonretractile talons, and stubby tails are common traits of contemporary bears.
The regard that Aboriginal peoples have for brown bears (Ursus arctos) is generally known, although it is rarely discussed in northern Canadian wildlife management discourse. Respectful behaviors toward bears were examined and classified into four categories: language, storytelling, reciprocal, and ceremony. Practices in all four types establish a cohesive qualitative resources management program in southwestern Yukon, which may improve the overall resilience of the bear-human ecosystem. This ecosystem also illustrates the prospect of a previously unappreciated human involvement in the maintenance of productive riparian habitats and salmon flows, which might provide a variety of valuable social-ecological effects. Respect practices provide the potential for novel ways for managing bear-human relations, but such work to the best may be immutable, comparatively tiny, and location-specific.
Beaver Classification
Beavers are huge semi-aquatic mammals of the family Castor that are endemic to the subtropical Northern Hemisphere. There are two main varieties of beaver left in the world: the North American beaver (Castor canadensis) and the European beaver. After capybaras, beavers are the second-largest living mammals. They feature huge heads, strong bodies, long chisel-like sharp teeth, brown or grey hair, hand-like front paws, bunched back legs, and flattened slippery tails. The European beaver has a longer cranium with a triangle frontal skull aperture, brighter fur color, and a slimmer tail than the North American beaver. The creatures live in a variety of water settings, including streams, rivers, reservoirs, and ponds. They eat pine needles, native organisms, grasslands, and reeds and are plant eaters.
Beaver civilization in British Columbia and Alberta constructed poles fencing alongside the beaver home door to prevent the animal from escaping and then dug a hole in the ice on top of its home to kill it with a weapon if it came out through the holes. The Tahltan of the Stikine Plateau set snares weighted with rock weights in deep water beaver dams or coastlines and covered them with castoreum. They also utilized babiche fishing nets, which were put in waterways or beneath the ice near beaver houses or eating areas. Holes were drilled in a single direction if put beneath the ice, and the netting was installed underwater. The net’s edges were held together by poles, one of which held a noise composed of dried caribou or moose horns. When a beaver was imprisoned, they produced a sound. In order to wait for it, the hunter frequently sets up a temporary camp onshore. Its cadaver was returned to camp to be skinned and butchered.
The Tutchone, Tagish, and Tlingit considered North American beavers powerful mystical creatures and regarded them with great reverence. For example, camps would be properly scrubbed in the past, and new spruce needles would be spread out before any beaver was brought back to the village (Turaeva 360). Beavers also earned the fabled title of “Wisdom.” Beavers were linked with a number of taboos. Its head was never eaten, and its head and limb bones were returned to the ocean. It had to be skinned carefully so as not to damage its “bone fragments.” It was also frowned upon if a captive beaver defecated before being dragged from a net. As a result, muscular young men were frequently assigned the laborious chore of pulling the beaver out to complete the process as effectively and swiftly as possible.
Summary
As the study showed, many sources of the Canadian classification speak of animals as spiritual beings, which are described as deities. European classifications speak of a detailed description of the animal as an ordinary creature that lives on the planet. The difference between the classifications lies in the details of the description of the species and their life. For a better study of the species, the European classification should be considered as the main one.
A clear advantage of the European system will be the detailed description of animals; such a description helps people to study animal species thoroughly. The Canadian system, on the contrary, does not show details, which makes the maximum informational for those who want to truly study a certain type of animal. The evolution of the Canadian system has not happened for a long time since the European global one replaced it. The European system is developing every day, studying new and already known species so that scientists can turn to this system if they need to search for information about a particular species.
Works Cited
Chyleńska, Zofia Anna, and Eliza Rybska. “Understanding students’ ideas about animal classification.” EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 14.6 (2018): 2145-2155.
de Azevedo, Cristiano Schetini, and Robert John Young. “Animal personality and conservation: basics for inspiring new research.” Animals 11.4 (2021): 1019.
Tuckett, Jonathan. “Spirituality and intersubjective consensus: A response to Ciocan and Ferencz-Flatz.” Human Studies 41.2 (2018): 313-331.
Turaeva, Bahor. “The Expression of the Spirituality of the Human and Animal in the Novels by Chingiz Aitmatov based on Amebey Composition.” International Journal of Progressive Sciences and Technologies 28.2 (2021): 360-364.