digital indigenous democracy

UPDATE TONIGHT Wednesday June 6th 8-10pm: Walrus, Wildlife and Baffinland?
• What do hunters think about Baffinland’s supertankers and marine mammals?
• Will shipping through Foxe Basin damage the wildlife? Is it safe?

Thursday June 7th 8-10pm: Have Inuit Had Their Say?
• Do you understand Baffinland’s Environmental Impact Statement?
• Are you informed? Do your opinions count?

Listen at Live Radio  Call-in 1.819-934-8080, or 8082.

Get your opinions on the record.
Call-in radio shows will be submitted to NIRB July Public Hearings as part of DID’s Formal Intervention led by Zacharias Kunuk and human rights lawyer Lloyd Lipsett

From Nunatsiaq News www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/article/65674are_qia_nirb_and_governments_ignoring_pangnirtung/

May 30th letter to the editor, written by Andrew Nakashuk and Levi Ishulutak of Pangnirtung:

Tune in TONIGHT, May 30, from 8-10 pm EST to listen to the next online call-in radio show in the series Nipivut Nunatinnii Our Voice at Home, broadcast locally and worldwide by Igloolik Community Radio Online at www.isuma.tv/DID/radio/igloolik. Zacharias Kunuk, Igloolik Hamlet Councilor and representative to the Board of Qikiqtani Inuit Association (QIA), will make his first radio report to the community following the recent QIA Board meetings. Two phone lines will be open for call-in questions and comments at +1-867-934-8080 and -8082. Questions and comments also can be submitted on Facebook at www.facebook.com/radiostation.igloolik

Let your voices be heard!

Nipivut Nunatinnii Our Voice at Home Igloolik Community Radio Online +1.867.934.8080 or 8082 www.facebook.com/radiostation.igloolik or www.facebook.com/isumaTV

DID News Alert Mining and caribou– What is a “significant impact”?

On May 21st, the Baker Lake Hunters and Trappers Organization made public a paper written in response to AREVA’s (a French mining company) Environmental Impact Statement for their proposed “Kiggavik” uranium mine near Baker Lake.

They were concerned with the results of the DEIS concerning the effect of the proposed mine on local caribou population, and saw some problems with what AREVA considered was a “significant impact” when it came to the caribou population. For example, any impact that does not affect the population as a whole on the long-term is not considered significant. But this does not take into account the location of the herd. So if the herd population stays somewhat the same, but they stop coming to the Baker Lake region, the impact is not significant. But for the people of Baker Lake, this would be a very significant impact. This scientific approach does not seem to take into account the social impact of a change in caribou population. In their impact statement, AREVA says that the mine will only significantly impact caribou migration if 10% or more of the caribou population does not reach the calving grounds. But the report does not take into account how migration will be affected specifically around Baker Lake. AREVA does not seem to be bothered by this, claiming that caribou herds are constantly moving, and so Inuit should just adjust their hunting habits.

They said that AREVA did not really take into account Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (IQ) as much as they would have liked. In the report, they claim AREVA only focused on information about hunting and wildlife, but did not investigate Inuit values and “what sort of future Inuit want for themselves.” This is a very important part of IQ, and if AREVA really valued the importance of IQ, according to the Baker Lake Hunters and Trappers Organization, they should have focused more on this specific point. They also found that IQ was not really used when it came to study caribou population and migration. Instead AREVA focused only on scientific studies and collar data.

AREVA claim that they are respecting IQ ways, but the Baker Lake Hunters and Trappers Organization feel that this approach shows that AREVA does not really respect the situation of Baker Lake Inuit and their hunting traditions. They believe more of an effort must be made to consult elders and people from the community when it comes to caribou population, and that a better balance of scientific data and consultation and respect for Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit will bring better results.

With the Baffinland/NIRB July hearings fast approaching, the question of how to assess wildlife impact seems more important now than ever before.

Click to your left (under "attached files") for a PDF file of the Baker Lake Hunters And Trappers document.

DID News Alert  May 28, 2012. With the July community hearings coming soon, Baffinland presented a document called “"What to Expect When You Are Expecting," on May 3rd in Iqaluit. In this document, the company explains how the public hearings will take place. At the community hearings, there will be TWO types of intervenors.

1) Formal Intervenors: According to this document, formal intervenors must present a written submission to the NIRB by May 30th and wait to be approved. If approved, then these formal intervenors will be able to present their documents to the full NIRB board on the first day of community meetings, which is the technical presentations. These presentations, and the NIRB’s response, will be put on the official publicrecord.

2) Informal Intervenors: This is everyone else. People from the community who have not filed a written submission to be a formal intervenor will still be able, according to the NIRB, to speak to some members of the board and ask questions and raise their concerns about the project. This is what is called the “community roundtables.” They will take place on the second and third day of the hearings. They will be open to anyone, so people do not have to be approved in order to come and talk.

What does not seem clear from the NIRB guidelines, is whether the community roundtables will be recorded or put on the official public record. The formal intervenors will, and their questions will be put on record. But for the rest of the community, those who have not made written submissions but still have lots of questions or concerns they want to express to the NIRB board, it is not clear if any of what they say will be recorded in the official transcript. Will their opinions and concerns be lost?

It is also not clear what the NIRB means by “community representatives.” In the document “What to Expect When You Are Expecting,” it says on page 14 that "The NIRB will be soliciting up to five (5) representatives from each of the 11 communities to attend the Final Hearing in Iqaluit." Some sources say there are 7 communities that will be represented at the final Iqaluit hearing, not 11. This is confusing.

ALSO, this document does not explain how the NIRB will be selecting these representatives, or where they will be coming from. If they are not selected by the NIRB, then what organization will be selecting them? The Mary River Projects Committee? The Hamlet Council? QIA?

This last question is important, since the people of the communities should know who will represent their town at the final Iqaluit hearings.

Look to your left (under "attached files") to download a PDF version of the Baffinland presentation "What to Expect When You Are Expecting"

DID News Alert On May 15th the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA), an independent economic regulator under the authority of the Canadian Parliament that regulates air, rail and marine transportation according to the Canada Transport Act, met to discuss the Baffinland Mary River project’s railway and marine transportation plan.

They concluded that Baffinland still had many steps to take before they could start building a railway across Baffin Island. They needed to apply for a Certificate of Fitness, which would require Baffinland to declare who would insure the railway. They would have to provide the CTA with the three most recent years of audited financial statements from the railway company in question. The CTA also demanded that Baffinland produce a detailed explanation of the risks of each work of construction that is part of the railroad project.

On the subject of the caribou, the CTA demanded that Baffinland give a more detailed and precise explanation of how the proposed “working group” (composed of members from QIA, EC and GN wildlife biologists) would operate. The CTA felt that Baffinland was not very clear about this in the FEIS. The CTA also noted that QIA was not pleased with Baffinland’s original caribou monitoring plan, and wants to make sure Baffinland will work with Inuit to design caribou crossings as promised.

Finally, the CTA was not too pleased with Baffinland’s emergency rescue plan, claiming it “was short on tangible details for emergency response.” They also wanted to see Arcelor-Mittal’s railway experience, which was supposed to be in the FEIS but Baffinland left it out.

What was Baffinland’s response to this last point? That the “Railway management plan and emergency response plan are mainly conceptual at this stage.”
Does this seem like an adequate response? The CTA is looking for something more than conceptual. From these criticisms from the CTA, it is clear Baffinland still has a long way to go before their proposed railway is accepted.

To your left under "attached files" is the CTA document from where this information came from.

DID News Alert “Nunavut’s lands and natural resources rightfully belong to Nunavummiut to develop and protect…reclaiming the ability to make decisions about how our lands and resources are managed is the next chapter in building self-reliance.” These are Nunavut Premier Eva Aariak’s words concerning her government’s interest in renewing talks with the federal government on devolution. At the moment, all royalties from land resources in Nunavut go directly to the federal government, who then decides how much to give back to the territory. For the Nunavut government this is no longer acceptable. The two other territories, Yukon and N.W.T., have made agreements with the federal government that allow them to receive direct royalties from resource development just like the Canadian provinces. These territories receive royalties that are 50% of their expenditures on resource development. So for example, in 2010 the N.W.T. spent $1.2 billion on land resources, so they received $60 million in royalties. For many people this is still inadequate, but it is at least a start in the right direction.

The situation is complicated in Nunavut because of the NLCA, and a devolution deal with Ottawa would have to be consistent with the terms of the NLCA. Some private organizations like Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. have already started receiving royalties, see link here: http://www.isuma.tv/lo/en/did-news-alert/important-inuit-land-claim-gets-first-royalty-payment-for-22-million, and NTI predicts these royalties be in the hundreds of millions. But where that money will be invested does not seem to be certain.

There were talks of devolution in 2007, but they stopped when the federal government judged that the administrative staff of the Nunavut government was unprepared and not trained enough to manage a transfer of land resource rights. Aariak says that this is no longer the case, and that there is a large number of Inuit who are competent and well trained for management positions. Also, if Ottawa is so concerned with the management capacity in Nunavut, perhaps it should help create programs that would train Nunavummiut for such positions. This is something Aariak says the federal government has promised to do.

Here are links to some recent articles on devolution (pdf files of the articles are to your left under 'attached files') 

www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/article/65674ottawa_names_nunavut_devolution_negotiator/

www.huffingtonpost.ca/news/nunavut-mining

www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/article/65674ottawa_nunavut_revive_dormant_talks_on_land_resource_devolution/

Listen LIVE online to Igloolik Community Radio Wednesday May 23rd at 8PM for a follow-up show on NIRB and the upcoming Public Hearings in July, with NIRB's Amanda Hanson and human rights lawyer Lloyd Lipsett answering questions live online. Follow link here: www.isuma.tv/hi/en/did/radio/igloolik

The mining company Canadian Orebodies has announced an exploration program this summer to find iron ore at Haig Inlet and the Belcher Islands. They have three different sites they want to open.