This article concerns the impact of terminology used in land claims agreements on the concepts and interests of aboriginal parties. Specifically, it examines how well the word 'wildlife' describes the Dene/Metis concept of the animals they hunt. It suggests that alternatives exist that are reconcilable to Euro-Canadian ideas and provide a better approximation of Dene/Metis perceptions and interests in these animals than does the term 'wildlife'. The article concludes by arguing that the impasse to adopting more appropriate terminology lies not in finding conceptual parallels but rather in the lack of political will on the part of Canadian governments to incorporate such terminology into these agreements.