Debates of January 28, 2010 (day 17)

Date
January
28
2010
Session
16th Assembly, 4th Session
Day
17
Speaker
Members Present
Mr. Beaulieu, Ms. Bisaro, Mr. Bromley, Hon. Paul Delorey, Mrs. Groenewegen, Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Jacobson, Mr. Krutko, Hon. Jackson Lafferty, Hon. Sandy Lee, Hon. Bob McLeod, Hon. Michael McLeod, Hon. Robert McLeod, Mr. Menicoche, Hon. Michael Miltenberger, Mr. Ramsay, Hon. Floyd Roland, Mr. Yakeleya
Statements

QUESTION 200-16(4): CARIBOU MANAGEMENT MEASURES

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am convinced that the Minister has faced this decision, the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, for a hunting ban of caribou on careful and thorough consideration of the information available on the caribou. However, my understanding is that there was only one meeting with the Yellowknives Dene First Nation, a meeting on the 1st of December, in which the Yellowknives Dene expressed disagreement with the ban. I am also aware that, in contrast, there were repeated meetings with the Tlicho and, of course, the Wekeezhii Renewable Resource Board through the same time frame and earlier. Relying on the Wekeezhii Renewable Resource Board process and timetables does not honour the Yellowknives Dene rights to consultation and involvement and decision making.

Given that this is an area where, in the chief drawing in each territory, there is no co-management board and you would think there would, therefore, be a focus of consultations with that particular group of people, why was there not a focus on meaningful consultation with the Yellowknives Dene so they could have a partnership in the development of these restrictions? Thank you.

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There were, in October for example, open group meetings that the Yellowknives were invited to but did not attend. There were meetings that we did have at the regional leaders’ meetings. As well, we did have a discussion about the caribou and we have to separate two issues here. The issue -- and we recognize it and I acknowledged that in one of my previous replies -- is that the Wekeezhii process is critical but that is only part of the process to look at an overall management plan for the Bathurst herd, as the Member well knows. We have to consult fully with the Akaitcho, the Yellowknives, the Northwest Territories Metis Nation and other stakeholders as well as the aboriginal governments. In the case of this emergency interim measures, there was a very compressed time frame. We did a lot of work and then we shared the whole list of work that was done with the Members, trying to consult as much as possible about the need for an interim ban because of the slippage in the process set out by the Wekeezhii board. We believe that we could stand the test set out by Sparrow about our…have we hit the right criteria and have we done the right things to respond to his very specific short-term emergency measures. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, given that there is no land claim settlement or binding co-management process with the Yellowknives Dene First Nation Chief Drygeese region and that the Yellowknives Dene stated its opposition before the ban was announced, what authority does GNWT have to implement this ban? Thank you.

The enabling authority would come under the Northwest Territories Act. Two sections come to mind, 16 and 18 with subsequent amendments to 18, as well as the Wildlife Act which flows under the Northwest Territories Act. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, when the GNWT assumed responsibility for the management of this herd, they inherited from aboriginal residents a healthy population of caribou. Yet, over the last 20 years we have seen this catastrophic decline and its management practices and efforts have failed. The Yellowknives Dene have indicated that if the situation requires, they would reduce their harvest to one caribou per person, say per hunter, per year. So they are ready and willing to engage and apply their authority to conserve caribou. Did the government try to bring them into the determination of hunting restrictions in an engaged, authoritative and responsible partner? Mahsi.

Mr. Speaker, we worked with the Yellowknives to look at the issue of...because there wasn’t going to be the report, the Wekeezhii report, or any other plan for the harvest restrictions which we announced back in late September were going to needed because of the draconian drop in numbers, that we would need to be put those restrictions in place. We have worked with them. The issue of the ban, the focus has been the need for the ban and what mitigating measures and accommodating measures we can put in place to offset the lack of access to this specific area recognizing that there was still an ability to subsistence hunt to the east and to the west of the no-hunting zone. Thank you.

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that had there been meaningful engagement, the Yellowknives Dene have the authority and would have been a meaningful partner in implementing the action required. My final question is: what plans does the government have for coming out of this ban with a new and even revolutionary approach to ensuring future cooperation that is effective and prevents such new confrontations? Mahsi.

I would be interested in the Member’s definition of a revolutionary approach before I could answer fully that specific question, but I can indicate to the Member that we have already started the discussions and the planning to bring together the chairs of the co-management boards and representatives where there are no co-management boards to look at the overlap areas, to look at, as we pointed out yesterday in our presentation, the decline of herds all across the Northwest Territories and how do we come to an understanding similar to what’s being attempted with the Porcupine Caribou herd, some understanding between all the government parties and signatories as to the steps to be taken when numbers are in decline and what response does a decline require when a certain point is hit. For example, the Porcupine Caribou Harvest Management Plan has a trigger of 45,000 animals and it is a similar size right now to what the Bathurst was in 2006. If it hits 45,000, the automatic trigger is there’s no hunting for anybody of any of the Porcupine herd. That has been negotiated and has been worked on now for many years. We have to come to those kinds of understanding among ourselves, because there’s a significant overlap of almost every herd. Thank you.

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.