KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Section 13.0
Nisga’a Background and Setting
VE51988
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART C – NISGA’A NATION RIGHTS AND INTERESTS...... 13-1
13.0 NISGA’A BACKGROUND AND SETTING ...... 13-3 13.1 Overview ...... 13-3 13.1.1 Regulatory Requirements ...... 13-3 13.1.2 Information Sources and Methods ...... 13-4 13.1.3 Introduction ...... 13-5 13.2 Social Context ...... 13-9 13.2.1 Population and Demographics ...... 13-9 13.2.2 Contemporary Education ...... 13-10 13.2.3 Infrastructure ...... 13-10 13.3 Cultural Context ...... 13-11 13.3.1 Language ...... 13-11 13.3.2 Cultural Practices and Customs ...... 13-13 13.3.3 Resource Use ...... 13-13 13.4 Economic Context ...... 13-15 13.4.1 Major Employment Sectors ...... 13-15 13.4.2 Labour Force ...... 13-15 13.4.3 Unemployment ...... 13-17 13.4.4 Occupations ...... 13-18 13.4.5 Earnings and Income ...... 13-20 13.4.6 Educational Attainment...... 13-22 13.4.7 Skills and Training ...... 13-24 13.5 Health Context ...... 13-28 13.5.1 Overview ...... 13-28 13.6 Lands and Areas ...... 13-28 13.6.1 Overview ...... 13-28 13.7 Water ...... 13-29 13.7.1 Overview ...... 13-29 13.8 Forest Resources ...... 13-29 13.8.1 Overview ...... 13-29 13.9 Access, Roads and Right-of-Ways ...... 13-31 13.9.1 Overview ...... 13-31 13.10 Fish and Aquatics ...... 13-32 13.10.1 Overview ...... 13-32 13.11 Wildlife and Birds ...... 13-37 13.11.1 Overview ...... 13-37 13.12 Nisga’a Lisims Government and Nisga’a Villages ...... 13-39 13.12.1 Overview ...... 13-39 13.13 Cultural Artefacts and Heritage ...... 13-39 13.13.1 Overview ...... 13-39 13.14 Nisga’a Issues Raised During Consultation ...... 13-40 13.14.1 Overview ...... 13-40
List of Tables
Table 13.1.2-1: Summary of Nisga’a Survey Response by Residence and Method of Survey ...... 13-5 Table 13.1.3-1: Summary of Nisga’a Nation Rights and Interests Related to the Kitsault Mine Site and Access Road ...... 13-8 Table 13.3.1-1: Summary of Nisga’a Language Capability among Nisga’a Citizens ...... 13-11
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 TOC 13-i
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Table 13.3.1-2: Comparison on Nisga’a Language Capability Based on Residence ...... 13-12 Table 13.3.1-3: Language Spoken with Children ...... 13-12 Table 13.4.2-1: Labour Force in the Nisga’a Villages, 2006 ...... 13-16 Table 13.4.2-2: Nisga’a Employment Status (2011) ...... 13-16 Table 13.4.5-1: Total Income Among Nisga’a Respondents in 2010 ...... 13-21 Table 13.4.5-2: Total Income from Government Assistance ...... 13-21 Table 13.4.5-3: Change in Personal Income Since 2006 ...... 13-22 Table 13.4.6-1: Post-Secondary Graduation Rates for Nisga’a Citizens, 2008-2009 ...... 13-23 Table 13.4.6-2: Education Levels among Nisga’a Survey Respondents ...... 13-23 Table 13.4.7-1: Types of Technical Skills Among Nisga’a Respondents ...... 13-26 Table 13.4.7-2: Types of Vocational Skills Among Nisga’a Respondents ...... 13-26 Table 13.4.7-3: Types of Professional Skills Among Nisga’a Respondents ...... 13-27 Table 13.7.1-1: Nisga’a Water Volumes (Schedule C of Chapter 4 in the Nisga’a Final Agreement) ...... 13-29 Table 13.10.1-1: Summary of Nisga’a Nation Salmon Allocations per Species ...... 13-33 Table 13.10.1-2: Nisga’a Nation Allocations and Nisga’a Harvest of Salmon and Steelhead Species ...... 13-34 Table 13.10.1-3: Summary of Annual Nisga’a Steelhead Allocation ...... 13-35 Table 13.10.1-4: The Number of Sales Permits and Associated Openings ...... 13-35 Table 13.11.1-1: Nisga’a Nation Wildlife Allocations of Designated Species ...... 13-37 Table 13.11.1-2: Summary of Available Data on Nisga’a Nation Allocations and Harvest of Designated Species ...... 13-38 Table 13.14.1-1: Nisga’a Nation Issues Identification and Consultation Activity ...... 13-40 Table 13.14.1-2: Issues Identification at Nisga’a Nation Urban Locals Open Houses ...... 13-43
List of Figures
Figure 13.1.3-1: Nisga’a Lands, Areas, Rights, and Interests ...... 13-7 Figure 13.3.3-1: Consumption of Wild Meat, Berries / Plants, and Fish among Nisga’a Survey Respondents Who Live on Nisga’a Lands ...... 13-14 Figure 13.3.3-2: Consumption of Wild Meat, Berries / Plants, and Fish among Nisga’a Survey Respondents Who Live off Nisga’a Lands ...... 13-14 Figure 13.4.2-1: Months of Employment among Nisga’a Survey Respondents ...... 13-17 Figure 13.4.2-2: Activities among Unemployed Nisga’a Respondents ...... 13-17 Figure 13.4.4-1: Labour Force by Occupation in the Nisga’a Villages, 2006 ...... 13-18 Figure 13.4.4-2: Type of Occupation among Nisga’a Survey Respondents ...... 13-19 Figure 13.4.4-3: Experience in Mining Industry Among Nisga’a Respondents ...... 13-20 Figure 13.4.6-1: Educational Attainment of People Aged 15 Years and Older in the Nisga’a Villages, 2006 ...... 13-22 Figure 13.4.7-1: Skills Level(s) of Nisga’a Respondents ...... 13-25 Figure 13.8.1-1: Summary of Nisga’a Timber and Pine Mushroom Harvest and Sales (2000-2008) ...... 13-31
List of Appendices
Appendix 13.0-A: Kitsault Project Nisga’a Nation Rights, Interests, and Values Report
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 TOC 13-ii
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
PART C – NISGA’A NATION RIGHTS AND INTERESTS
The Nisga’a Nation is a treaty nation as defined by the Nisga’a Final Agreement (NFA) (British Columbia Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation (BC MARR) 2000) in effect as of May 2000 under the Constitution Act (Government of Canada 1982). The purpose of this section is to summarise the existing Nisga’a Nation social, cultural, economic, health, resource use, rights, title, issues, concerns, and interests on Nisga’a Lands and in the Nass Wildlife Area (NWA) and Nass Area relevant to the proposed Kitsault Mine Project (proposed Project) as described in the NFA and Nisga’a Lisims Government (NLG) publications.
Nisga’a Nation rights, title, issues, concerns, and values were identified during desk-based research of publicly available sources with particular focus on the NFA. The results were considered, incorporated, and assessed by a multi-disciplinary team of biophysical and social science specialists. Consideration of a treaty nation is stipulated by several sources of provincial and federal legislation and orders, including the NFA (Chapter 10, paragraphs 6 to 10), British Columbia Environmental Assessment Act (BCEAA) (Government of British Columbia (BC) 2002), BC Environmental Assessment Office’s (BC EAO) “Supplemental to Environmental Assessment Office 2009 User Guide: Application Information Requirements and Treaty Nations”, Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEA Act) (Government of Canada 1992), the proposed Project section 11 Order (BC EAO 2010), and the Application Information Requirements (AIR) for the proposed Project.
The Nisga’a Nation has law-making authority and jurisdiction over Nisga’a Lands. When the Environmental Assessment (EA) is carried out under provincial or federal law, the NFA grants specific rights to the Nisga’a Nation to participate in the process. The NFA also enumerates various requirements that are additional to the requirements under EA legislation. The NFA sets out the requirement for the preparation of an Economic, Social and Cultural Impact Assessment (ESCIA), for which NLG issued guidelines in November 2010 (NLG 2010a). Specifically, the NFA (Chapter 10, paragraph 8) requires that a Nisga’a Nation EA will:
a. coordinate to the extent possible the environmental assessment requirements placed by the Parties upon a project proponent; b. require the project proponent to provide information or studies, as appropriate, about the project and its potential environmental effects and the measures that can be taken to prevent or mitigate those effects; c. ensure that all information relevant to the assessment of the project is available to the public, other than information that is required to be kept confidential under applicable law; d. provide for public participation in the assessment process, including public notice of the project, an opportunity to make submissions, and, when deemed appropriate by the Party conducting the assessment, public hearings conducted by an independent review panel;
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-1
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
e. assess whether the project can reasonably be expected to have adverse environmental effects on residents of Nisga’a Lands, Nisga’a Lands, or Nisga’a interests set out in this Agreement and, where appropriate, make recommendations to prevent or mitigate those effects; f. assess the effects of the project on the existing and future economic, social and cultural well-being of Nisga’a citizens who may be affected by the project; g. set out time periods within which the assessor must make its recommendation in respect of whether or not the project should proceed; h. provide for recommendations, based on the assessment, to the Party or Parties with decision-making authority over the project, in respect of whether the project should proceed; i. take into account any agreements between the project proponent and the Nisga’a Nation or a Nisga’a Village concerning the effects of the project; and j. be conducted and completed by a Party before that Party issues final approval. (BC MARR 2000)
The results of the research provide limited site-specific information about the location, seasons, level, and type of Nisga’a Nation social, cultural, economic, health, and use and access considerations related to the proposed Project. This section contains summaries of matters relevant to the proposed Project important to the Nisga’a Nation. At the time of writing, the proponent and its consultants are working with NLG to develop a work plan for collecting environmental, social, cultural, and land use information to supplement the quantitative and desk-based sources compiled and summarised to date.
Detailed information and data on each of the topics covered in this section is included in the Economic Background Baseline Report and the Social Background Baseline Report (Appendix 7.0-A; Appendix 8.0-A; Rescan 2010a), Land and Resource Use Baseline Report (Appendix 8.0-B; Rescan 2010b), Nisga’a Rights, Interests, and Values Report (Appendix 13.0-A, Dialectic 2011), and the Nisga’a Nation Overview Report (Rescan 2010c). Relevant parts of the proponent’s Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate for the proposed Project, made under section 16 of the BCEAA (Application), which reference Nisga’a Nation interests and rights, include Section 7.0 (Economic), Section 8.0 (Social), and Section 9.0 (Heritage).
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-2
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
13.0 NISGA’A BACKGROUND AND SETTING 13.1 Overview This section provides a summary of the relevant Nisga’a Nation rights, interests, issues, concerns, and values of the area in and around the proposed Project. The section is organised under 12 headers, including: social context; cultural context; economic context; health context; Nisga’a Lands and areas; water; forest resources; access roads; Right-of- Ways (ROW), fish and aquatics; wildlife and birds; NLG and Nisga’a Villages, cultural artefacts and heritage, and Nisga’a issues raised during consultation.
13.1.1 Regulatory Requirements Nisga’a Nation, provincial, and federal legislation require the consideration and incorporation of information on the Nisga’a Nation within the EA process. The Nisga’a Nation has law- making authority and jurisdiction over Nisga’a Lands with the option of requiring an EA for impacts to its lands and treaty rights, including areas outside of Nisga’a Lands. The NFA stipulates the preparation of an Economic, Social, and Cultural Impact Assessment (ESCIA), which has been further defined in the “Economic Social and Cultural Impact Assessment Guidelines” issued by NLG in November 2010. In particular, the NFA (Chapter 10, paragraph 8) requires that a Nisga’a-specific assessment be conducted “assess the effects of the project on the existing and future economic, social and cultural well-being of Nisga’a citizens who may be affected by the project” (BC MARR 2000).
The provincial government also highly encourages the collection and integration of Aboriginal group information into the effects assessment of resource development. The BCEAA and the BC EAO’s “Supplemental to Environmental Assessment Office 2009 User Guide: Application Information Requirements and Treaty Nations” outline provincial expectations and steps suggested for inclusion of Aboriginal treaty rights, interests, and values.
[A] proponent is assigned certain responsibilities for engaging with treaty First Nations in order to assist the Province to comply with its treaty obligations. This includes responsibility to gather information about how a First Nation’s treaty rights, land, citizens and interests may be impacted by the proposed project, and about possible ways in which those impacts can be avoided or mitigated. (BC EAO 2010a)
The section 11 Order, issued on 24 November 2010, and section 13 Order (amendment to Section 11 Order), issued on 28 March 2011, specify the following requirements during the Pre-Application and Post-Application review phases:
Proponent must consult with the Nisga’a Nation in a manner that enables British Columbia to comply with applicable provisions of the Nisga’a Final Agreement, and particularly, Chapter 10 (Environmental Assessment and Protection) of the Nisga’a Final Agreement. (BC EAO 2011)
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-3
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Overall, the proponent worked toward fulfilling NLG’s ESCIA Guidelines to address 8(f) of Chapter 10 in the NFA. In November 2010, NLG provided the proponent with the ESCIA Guidelines, from which a work plan was developed between and agreed upon by NLG, the proponent, its consultants, the province, and federal agencies. The Nisga’a ESCIA (Rescan 2012) specifically addresses potential effects of the proposed Project on Nisga’a Nation rights, interests, and concerns as they relate to the NFA.
13.1.2 Information Sources and Methods Nisga’a background information is derived from desk-based research of publicly available sources (especially the NFA and NLG publications), and the results of the Nisga’a Social, Economic, Resource Use and Cultural Survey (Rescan 2012). The survey was conducted among registered Nisga’a citizens to study the social health, economic and cultural effects of two proposed mines (i.e., the proposed Project and the Kerr-Sulpherets Mitchell (KSM) Project). The primary objectives of the survey were to:
Identify awareness of the mining projects; Assess current employment status; Assess interest of registered Nisga’a citizens in working on the proposed mine projects; and Understand the impact of the proposed projects on Nisga’a citizens.
Frequency tables presented in this section have either two or three columns:
Frequency - provides the number of respondents answering in a particular category; Valid percent - provides the frequency converted to a percentage by dividing by the number of respondents who gave valid responses, which excludes “no response,” “don’t know,” and “Refusal”; and Cumulative percent - provides the cumulative percentage for questions with a natural ordering to the categories, such as seven-point scales or actual values (i.e., number of members in a household).
The survey was administered face-to-face to four villages – Kincolith (now Gingolx); Greenville (now Laxgalts'ap); Canyon City (now Gitwinksihlkw); and New Aiyansh (now Gitlaxt'aamiks) – as well as to two urban settings – Terrace and Prince Rupert / Port Edward. Telephone interviews were done with a sample of Nisga’a citizens living in other regions – Vancouver / other BC / other Canada/ United States (US). The survey collected responses from a total sample of 405 registered Nisga’a citizens; 340 (84%) via face-to-face interviews and 65 (16%) via telephone interviews. Table 13.1.2-1 summarises the survey response by residence and method of survey.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-4
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Table 13.1.2-1: Summary of Nisga’a Survey Response by Residence and Method of Survey
Telephone Frequency Valid Percent Vancouver 31 7.7 Rest of British Columbia 21 5.2 Outside of British Columbia 13 3.2 Face-To-Face Frequency Valid Percent Kincolith (now Gingolx) 42 10.4 Greenville (now Laxgalts'ap) 53 13.1 Canyon City (now Gitwinksihlkw) 32 7.9 New Aiyansh (now Gitlaxt'aamiks) 98 24.2 Prince Rupert / Port Edward 57 14.1 Terrace 58 14.3 Total 405 100
The subject areas and topics addressed in the survey are summarised in the following list:
Overall awareness of the proposed mine projects; Wild resources use; Language comprehension and use; Employment status (2010) and experience; Mining industry employment experience; Education and skill levels; Interest (reasons for lack of interest) in mine employment during construction; Interest (reasons for lack of interest) in mine employment during operations; Disparity in interest and skill levels; Camp and remote worksite effects on lifestyle and culture; Mobility – intentions to move to/from Nass Valley; Perceived personal barriers to employment; Positive and negative effects of mine employment; Perceived impacts of mining projects; and Selected demographics: age, gender, community of residence, income.
13.1.3 Introduction The Nisga’a Nation is a self-governing Aboriginal people as of 2000 when the NFA, a tripartite, constitutionally-binding agreement between the Nisga’a Nation, BC, and Canada was put into effect. The NFA outlines Nisga’a Nation rights and title on Nisga’a Lands, the NWA, and the Nass Area. Nisga’a Nation governance and administration is provided by NLG and the Nisga’a Village governments. NLG has law-making authority and jurisdiction over Nisga’a Lands. A number of Nisga’a Nation laws, objectives, policies, and regulations
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-5
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING have been enacted in the areas of forestry, fisheries, wildlife, and lands. NLG also co- manages fishery and wildlife resources in collaboration and coordination with the province and federal governments via the Nass Wildlife Committee (NWC) and the Joint Fisheries Management Committee.
The Nisga’a Nation people have and continue to inhabit and use the area in and around the Nass River since time immemorial. The lives of Nisga’a Nation people are closely tied to the land and its resources in the Nass Valley and beyond. Traditional activities followed the seasons; the Nisga’a Nation people fish, trap, and hunt a wide variety of marine and terrestrial species, and use a variety of aquatic and terrestrial plants. Salmon and oolichan also are central to Nisga’a Nation history, economy, and way of life. Other recent activities include tourism, recreation, and hydroelectric developments. Trade has played an important role since before Euro-Canadian colonial systems were imposed upon the Nisga’a Nation in the 19th century, which did not recognise Nisga’a Nation rights or the Nisga’a Nation’s matrilineal system.
While the location of the proposed Project mine site lies outside of Nisga’a Lands within the NWA and Nass Area, the NFA requires the consideration of Nisga’a rights in a number of areas. The Kitsault FSR (Alice Arm Road) intersects Nisga’a Lands for 10 kilometres (km). Figure 13.1.3-1 depicts Nisga’a Lands, NWA, and Nass Area in relation to the proposed Project. The map also represents Nisga’a rights and interests spatially. Table 13.1.3-1 provides an overview of the rights and interests related to the Kitsault mine site and access road, which have been considered and incorporated into previous sections of the Kitsault effects assessment. Sections 7.0 and 8.0 of the Application also contain economic, social, and cultural baseline information and assessment of effects relevant to the Nisga’a Nation. Also, Nisga’a information appears as a leitmotif throughout the Kitsault EA Application in relevant biophysical disciplines (e.g., wildlife, fish, and vegetation) in Section 6.0, which provide summaries of Valued Component (VC)-specific Nisga’a Nation information in the Cultural, Ecological and Community Knowledge sections.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-6
Iskut Eddontenajon
Tatogga
Fort Ware
Legend Kitsault Mine Project
R Populated Place E
V
I
R Road
T L 37 Highway
Bob Quinn Lake U Grease Trail A KITSAULT FSR Tsay Keh Dene S Rail Nass Area T (ALICE ARM ROAD) I K International / Provincial Border IVER CE R Stream ALICE ARM ILLAN Waterbody Bell II KITSAULT TOWNSITE Government Guide Outfitting Area Stikine CLARY CREEK Parks, Protected Areas and Convervancies L ALICE ARM IM Nass Area E C R Nass Wildlife Area E
E Nisga’a Archaeology Site K Nisga’a Recreation Site Kitsault Mine Project Nisga’a Angling Guide Rivers L Nisga'a Lands 'A T A Nisga’a Guide Outfitting Area H IN Nisga’a Traplines W G I Nisga’a Fee Simple Lands S K Nisga’a Commercial Recreation Tenure
U C Bear Lake Nisga’a Intertidal Bivalve Area
N A SKII ALASKA I K S N E L T Nisga’a and Public Pine Mushroom Harvesting Area T C E A R Nass Wildlife Area 37 E KEY MAP D DA E S Meziadin Junction K NORTHWEST TERRITORIES T YUKON ATE S 37A Robert Milligan BRITISH COLUMBIA Fort Nelson Juneau BRITISH COLUMBIA ALBERTA Stewart
Fort St. John Stewart Germansen Landing
Project Location Edmonton Kitimat Prince George Manson Creek Bulkley House 37 Kitsault River
Calgary
Tchitin River Kamloops Kelowna
Vancouver Illiance River Gits’oohl Cranberry Takla Landing Junction Victoria Alice Arm UNITED STATES Kshadin Creek
UNITED STATES Ksi Gwinhat'al Scale:1:1,200,000 37 Kwinamuck Lake Kispiox Ksi' Xts'at'kw Kitsault Fort Babine 05 10 20 30 40 50 Mine Project Gwinmilit Dragon Lake Glen Vowell Reference Kilometres Ts'im Anwiihlist Gitanyow Gitlaxksiip 'Ksan Base Data Nass Camp South Hazelton Geobase 1:20,000 (TRIM) Xlukwskw Hazelton 16 Land and Resource Data Warehouse 1:20,000 (TRIM) Gitwinksihlkw New Aiyansh Atlas of Canada scale 1:1,000,000. Leo CreekCLIENT: Nisga'a Lands Kitwanga Smithers Landing Woodcock Kitseguecla Old Fort Avanti Kitsault Mine Ltd. Xmaat'in 113 Wii Lax Kap Xhlawit Moricetown
Wil Milit Gingolx PROJECT:
t Laxgalts'ap le Middle RiverKitsault Mine Project n I Granisle d n la rt o Ts'im K'ol'hl Da oots'ip 113 Dorreen Topley Landing P 37 Nisga'a Lands, Areas, Rights Smithers Xk'aat'aapgwit X'anmas Lax Bilak and Interests Txaalaxhatkw Sunnyside Tachie Telkwa DATE: ANALYST: Round Lake November 2011 MY Yekooche Figure JOB No: QA/QC: PDF FILE: Dixon Usk VE51988 KS 17-50-020_map_overview.pdf Entrance 16 Pendleton BayGIS FILE: Lax Kw'alaams Perow Donald Landing17-50-020.mxd Wiley PROJECTION: DATUM: Topley Georgetown Mills Barrett Lake UTM Zone 9 NAD83 Y:\GIS\Projects\VE\VE51988_Kitsault\Mapping\17_non-traditional-res\Baseline\17-50-020.mxd 16 Broman Lake 37 Houston 16 Wet'suwet'en Village Lakelse Lake Metlakatla Decker Lake Prince Rupert Burns Lake Tintagel Port Edward 16 Endako Osland Tchesinkut Lake Stellako Old Massett François Lake Fraser Lake Hunts Inlet Colleymount Southbank Delkatla Masset Kitimat Porcher Island Danskin Noralee Tatalrose Grassy Plains Kitamaat Village Clemretta Oona River Takysie Lake Wistaria Cheslatta
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Table 13.1.3-1: Summary of Nisga’a Nation Rights and Interests Related to the Kitsault Mine Site and Access Road
Location Description of Right or Interest Mine site Within 5 km of the proposed Project the Nisga’a Nation has fee simple title to (overlaps with Gits’oohl (former Gitzault Indian Reserve 24) and a commercial recreation NWA and Nass tenure (until 2027) as defined in the NFA. Area) Nisga’a have rights to use 10% of the volume in Kwinatahl River (approximately 2.5 km southeast of the proposed Project) for domestic, commercial, and industrial purposes. Further from the Kitsault site, Nisga’a also have treaty-based rights to a percentage of the water in Kshadin and Tchitin Rivers. Nisga’a have rights to harvest wildlife in the NWA, in particular, allocations for grizzly bears, moose, and goats. Nisga’a have trapping rights to four traplines within the Kitsault area (none overlap directly with the proposed Project). Nisga’a have the right to harvest migratory birds in the Nass Area. Nisga’a have the right to harvest salmon, steelhead, aquatic plants, oolichan, and intertidal bivalves within in the Nass Area. Much of Nisga’a salmon harvest occurs along the Nass River and estuary. Nisga’a oolichan and intertidal bivalves harvest are designated near Red Bluff northern portion of Observatory Inlet up to southern part of Alice Arm, respectively. Sockeye and pink salmon have the highest harvest among Nisga’a citizens. Nisga’a have red and yellow cedar interests in and around the proposed Project. Transportation Nisga’a citizens harvest and consume a variety of plants, berries, and Route mushrooms as part of their diet within Nisga’a Lands. (overlaps with The Nisga’a Nation owns timber rights on Nisga’a Lands. Nisga’a Lands, Nisga’a Nation has rights to regulate and manage pine mushroom harvest NWA, and on Nisga’a Lands. Nass Area) The Nisga’a Land Use Plan (NLG 2002) has designated agriculture, botanical, silvicultural, wildlife, and archaeological zones. There are numerous recreation opportunities throughout Nisga’a Lands, including Kwinamuck Lake (2.5 km south of the Nass-Kwinatahl FSR past the Nass River crossing) and Dragon Lake. The NFA defines Crown rights to secondary roads on Nisga’a Lands, including the proposed Kitsault FSR (Alice Arm Road) (i.e., Special Use Permit 9228). The Crown cannot unduly limit Nisga’a citizens’ ability to access areas outside of Nisga’a Lands to fulfill treaty rights. According to the NFA, future discovery and repatriation of Nisga’a artefacts are governed by NLG-provincial custodial agreements. Nisga’a Nation has interests in repatriation of Nisga’a artefacts to Nisga’a Museum. There is an overlap between the Grease Trail and the Kitsault FSR (Alice Arm Road). Alice Arm Nisga’a Nation has right to harvest intertidal bivalves (including cockle, littleneck clam, butter clam, mussels, and manila clam) in the northern part of Observatory Inlet extending to the southern portion of Alice Arm as per Appendix I of the NFA (15 km southwest of the proposed Project).
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-8
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Location Description of Right or Interest According to the annual fishing plans the harvest is designated between 1 October and 31 March. Nisga’a allocations for dungeness, tanner, and king crabs, halibut, prawns / shrimp, herring, and aquatics plants may be negotiated with the province and Canada at a future date. Nisga’a The Nisga’a population residing on Nisga’a Lands was 1,919 in 2006 with Villages 42% residing in New Aiyansh. Nisga’a population has fluctuated from 1996 to 2006 with a slight downward trend. 52.6% of the Nisga’a population is male and the population is younger than the provincial average. Education in the Nass Valley is administered by the School District No. 92 and post-secondary education provided by the Wilp Wilxo’oskwhl. Nisga’a Villages have 400 private dwellings, mostly owned, with manyin need of major repair. Nisga’a Villages have tourism accommodations, public utilities, landfill, and high speed internet. Compared to the provincial average a high percentage (28.8%) of Nisga’a know their Aboriginal language High level of Nisga’a resource use with 21% of Nisga’a hunting, 50% fishing, and 28% gathering plants. Natural resource industries, including forestry and fisheries, are major Nisga’a employers. High unemployment among a Nisga’a labour force of 665 people. Average median annual Nisga’a income was $13,556 in 2005. Of the 22 Nisga’a businesses surveyed, four have worked in the mining, quarrying, oil and gas sector and six have worked in the construction sector. The most common services provided by Nisga’a businesses are catering (27.3%), accommodation / food (27.3%), and infrastructure and maintenance (36.4%). Note: CMT - culturally modified tree; FSR - Forest Service Road; km - kilometre; NLG - Nisga’a Lisims Government; NWA - Nass Wildlife Area; NVHA-Nass Valley Health Authority; % - percent
13.2 Social Context This section summarises the social characteristics of the Nisga’a Nation, including population and demographics, skills development and training, contemporary education, and infrastructure. The summary provides available data for the Nisga’a Villages of Laxgalts’ap (Greenville), Gingolx (f Kincolith), Gitwinksihlkw (Canyon City), and Gitlaxt’aamiks (New Aiyansh). More information is available in Section 8.0 (Assessment of Potential Social Effects) and Appendix 8.0-A (Social Background Baseline Report).
13.2.1 Population and Demographics Census data from 2006 indicates that 1,919 Nisga’a citizens live on Nisga’a Lands with 42 percent (%) residing in New Aiyansh and the remainder in the other three Nisga’a
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-9
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Villages and 97 people who live outside Nisga’a Villages on Nisga’a Lands. Most of Nisga’a citizens live outside of Nisga’a Lands in urban centres in northwest BC (e.g., Terrace and Prince Rupert) and the Lower Mainland (e.g., Vancouver). Nisga’a citizens living on the Nisga’a Lands are much younger compared to the provincial average, with greater percentages of Nisga’a under the age of 20 years. There are also fewer people aged 55 years and older on Nisga’a Lands compared to the provincial average (Appendix 8.0 – Social Background Baseline Report). In 2006, males accounted for 52.6% of the population.
The population of Nisga’a Lands has fluctuated from 1996 to 2006 with a decline of 8.8% from 1996 to 2001 and an increase in 5.5% from 2001 to 2006. Drivers of the population change from 1996 to 2006 have been a mix of birth and deaths, and in-migration (with 180 people moving to Nisga’a Villages).
Household composition is comprised mostly of married couples families (52.7%), followed by lone-parent families (25.7%) headed by females, lastly, common-law couple families (23.0%). The average Nisga’a Nation family size is 3.3 people per family.
13.2.2 Contemporary Education The Nisga’a Nation School District No. 92 administers education services to the Nisga’a Villages. Education facilities provided by the school district include:
Alvin McKay Elementary; Gitwinksihlkw Elementary; Nisga’a Elementary; Nathan Barton Elementary; and Nisga’a Adult and Continuing Education (ACE).
The Wilp Wilxo’oskwhl Nisga’a Institute also provides Nisga’a Nation citizens with post- secondary education opportunities for a variety of academic and vocational purposes, including courses and programs for justice, education, health, trades, language, and undergraduate courses in First Nations studies.
13.2.3 Infrastructure The 2006 census data indicates that Nisga’a Villages had a total of 400 occupied, private dwellings, of which 25.3% were rented and 74.7% were owned. The age of Nisga’a Nation housing is almost equally divided between pre- and post-1986. Many of the dwellings have been classified as in need of major repair (40%).
Accommodation for tourists is available in New Aiyansh and Gitwinksihlkw, including hotels, motels, bed and breakfast, campgrounds, and a RV park with a total capacity of 272.
Public utilities are operated by NLG and the individual Nisga’a Villages in Nisga’a Lands (Rescan 2010a). All the Nisga’a Villages are currently connected to the provincial electricity grid.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-10
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Nisga’a Nation water reservation, as defined in the NFA, provides water for industrial, domestic, and agricultural purposes. The particular water reservation uses 300,000 cubic decametres (dam3) from the Nass River and adjacent streams within Nisga’a Lands (Rescan 2010a).
There is a landfill near New Aiyansh that is operated by one of the Nisga’a Villages. This landfill serves the surrounding area. Regional District (RD) of Kitimat-Stikine contributes financially to its operation.
High-speed internet is provided by enTel, a collaboration by NLG and Nisga’a Corporation Group (NCG). Fibre optic internet services are supplied to all Nisga’a Villages, including government, businesses, and residences (Rescan 2010a).
13.3 Cultural Context This section summarises the Nisga’a Nation cultural context, including language, resource use, family and cultural customs and practices, and traditional learning.
13.3.1 Language Language use and retention is often used as a measure of cultural vitality and strength. Generally, Nisga’a citizens have higher recorded use and fluency of their language compared to the provincial average among other Aboriginal groups.
According to the 2006 census, 28.8% of Aboriginal people in Nisga’a Villages have knowledge of an Aboriginal language compared to the provincial average of 9.2%. Knowledge of an Aboriginal language was highest among the residents of Gingolx (39.7%) compared to 24.8% in New Aiyansh. For 24.2% of residents in the Nisga’a Villages, their mother tongue was an Aboriginal language, which is four times the BC average of 6.0%.
The Nisga’a Social, Economic, Resource Use and Cultural Survey conducted in 2011 in the four Nisga’a Villages, Terrace, Prince Rupert, and Vancouver, asked Nisga’a citizens if they speak, understand, read and / or write the Nisga’a language. Table 13.3.1-1 summarises the survey responses of 405 Nisga’a citizens interviewed. Of the 405 respondents, 72 (17.8%) understood the Nisga’a language completely with 42 (10.4%) able to speak the language completely; 28 (6.9%) can write and read the language completely. However, the survey results indicate that the majority of respondents have limited ability to understand, speak, read or write the Nisga’a language.
Table 13.3.1-1: Summary of Nisga’a Language Capability among Nisga’a Citizens
Understand Speak Read and Write Survey Scale Percent (Frequency) Percent (Frequency) Percent (Frequency) 1 Not At All 20.7 ( 84) 34.6 ( 140) 48.8 ( 197) 2 17.8 ( 72) 24.7 ( 100) 14.6 ( 59) 3 17.0 ( 69) 12.3 ( 50) 10.4 ( 42) 4 12.1 ( 49) 9.1 ( 37) 7.4 ( 30)
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-11
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Understand Speak Read and Write Survey Scale Percent (Frequency) Percent (Frequency) Percent (Frequency) 5 7.9 ( 32) 6.7 ( 27) 6.4 ( 26) 6 6.7 ( 27) 2.2 ( 9) 5.4 ( 22) 7 Completely 17.8 ( 72) 10.4 ( 42) 6.9 ( 28) Total 100.0 ( 405) 100.0 ( 405) 100.0 ( 404) Source: Rescan 2012
Nisga’a language capability varies based on Nisga’a residence. Table 13.3.1-2 provides a comparison of language skills of those living on Nisga’a Lands and those living off Nisga’a Lands. Generally, the survey indicates that Nisga’a citizens living on Nisga’a Lands have a comparatively higher comprehension, ability to speak, read, and write the Nisga’a language compared to those living off Nisga’a Lands.
Table 13.3.1-2: Comparison on Nisga’a Language Capability Based on Residence
Understand Speak Read Write On Nisga'a Land Mean (SD) 4.16 (2.02) 3.33 (2.05) 3.16 -2.07 Off Nisga'a Land Mean (SD) 2.89 (2.07) 2.06 (1.56) 1.73 -1.44 Note: SD - standard deviation Source: Rescan 2012
In terms of future use of the Nisga’a language, the level of transfer among Nisga’a children is important to understand. The survey results indicate that the language most often spoken with Nisga’a children is predominantly English with 46 respondents (25.4%) indicating a mix of Nisga’a and English. Table 13.3.1-3 summarises the language spoken with Nisga’a children based on survey responses.
Table 13.3.1-3: Language Spoken with Children
Survey Scale Frequency Valid Percent Cumulative Percent 1 English only 83 45.9 45.9 2 21 11.6 57.5 3 9 16 73.5 4 English and Nisga’a equally 46 25.4 98.9 5 1 0.6 99.4 6 1 0.6 100 7 Nisga'a only 0 0 100 Total 181 100 Source: Rescan 2012
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-12
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
13.3.2 Cultural Practices and Customs Cultural practices and customs (e.g., feasts, totem pole raising, stone moving, weddings, funerals, dances, gatherings, games, drumming, and oral histories (Adaawks)) are important to the Nisga’a Nation and its citizens. The NFA (Chapter 2) states that “Nisga’a citizens have the right to practice the Nisga’a culture, and to use the Nisga’a language, in a manner consistent with this Agreement” (BC MARR 2000). The Ayuukhl Nisga’a Department (AND) of the NLG is specifically tasked with the protection and promotion of Nisga’a culture and language. Some of the projects undertaken by the Ayuukhl Nisga’a Department include:
Territorial Binders (compilation of archival information, historical information, and oral histories information); Nisga’a Traditional Name Repository; Cataloguing AND Collection; Exhibit designs; Council of Elders Resource; Academic research requests; and Editing Nisga’a materials (NLG 2011).
The Nisga’a Community Centre (Say’t K’ilim Goot) (NNKN 2011) lists ongoing cultural events and gatherings on Nisga’a Lands throughout the year. Also, NULs living off Nisga’a Lands attend cultural events held by the Terrace Nisga’a Society.
13.3.3 Resource Use An important and enduring aspect of Nisga’a Nation culture is the sustenance derived from resource harvesting activities, including hunting and trapping game for food and fur, fishing, collecting other aquatic resources, and gathering vegetation for food, medicines and supplies. The 2001 Aboriginal Peoples Survey provided data on resource harvest levels among Nisga’a citizens. According to the survey, 21% of adults in the Nisga’a Nation participated in hunting, and 92% of these people were hunting for food. Half the adult Nisga’a Nation population (50%) fished and 88% of these were fishing for food. About 28% of the adult Nisga’a Nation population gathered wild plants and 82% of these people were gathering wild plants for food.
The Nisga’a Social, Economic, Resource Use and Cultural Survey (2011) indicates similar harvesting and consumption levels (Rescan 2012). Figure 13.3.3-1 and Figure 13.3.3-2 provides a summary of Nisga’a consumption of wild meat, berries / plants, and fish on and off Nisga’a Lands. The survey data indicates that the majority of Nisga’a respondents consume wild fish on a weekly basis (89% on Nisga’a Lands and 73% off Nisga’a Lands) and 31.9% of Nisga’a respondents consume wild meat and wild berries / plants on a weekly basis. The consumption patterns differ between Nisga’a who live on Nisga’a Lands and those who live off Nisga’a Lands. Wild food consumption among Nisga’a citizens who live on Nisga’a Lands is consistently higher across all categories of foods compared to those citizens who live off Nisga’a Lands.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-13
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
3a. Wild 6% 40% 22% 26% 6% meat
3b. Wild 12% 36% 27% 21% 5% plants
3c. Wild fish 24% 65% 8% 3%
Daily 1‐2 per week Once per month Once every few months Never Base= Live on Nisga’a Land, n=225
Source: Rescan 2012 Figure 13.3.3-1: Consumption of Wild Meat, Berries / Plants, and Fish among Nisga’a Survey Respondents Who Live on Nisga’a Lands
3a. Wild 2% 21% 18% 41% 17% meat
3b. Wild 7% 27% 22% 38% 6% plants
3c. Wild fish 8% 65% 17% 9% 1%
Daily 1‐2 per week Once per month Once every few months Never
Base= Live off Nisga’a Land, n=180
Source: Rescan 2012 Figure 13.3.3-2: Consumption of Wild Meat, Berries / Plants, and Fish among Nisga’a Survey Respondents Who Live off Nisga’a Lands
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-14
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
13.4 Economic Context This section summarises the economic context of the Nisga’a Nation, including major employment sectors, labour force, participation rate, unemployment rates, earning and income, and educational attainment. The summary provides available data for the Nisga’a Villages of Laxgalts’ap (Greenville), Gingolx (Kincolith), Gitwinksihlkw (Canyon City), and Gitlaxt’aamiks (New Aiyansh).
In its 2006 Labour Market Census, the Skeena Native Development Society (SNDS) reported a total of 63 businesses in Nisga’a Villages, including 27 privately owned businesses, 19 communally-owned businesses, and 17 artists (Rescan 2010a).
13.4.1 Major Employment Sectors The natural resource industries, including fisheries, are the most prominent employers in Nisga’a Villages with 12% of total employment. The forest industry represented 3% of total employment in 2006, and was most important in Laxgalts’ap (8%) (Rescan 2010a).
The Nisga'a Nation’s business ventures are overseen by the NCG, whose objective is to improve and sustain the economic wealth and well-being of the Nisga’a Nation and its citizens. Business development initiatives include:
A tourism department that provides natural and cultural tours in the Nass Valley; Nisga’a Fisheries Ltd., which sells Nisga’a salmon; Lisims Forest Resources LLP, which manages the harvesting, marketing, and sale of Nisga’a forest resources (including non-timber products such as pine mushrooms) nationally and internationally; and enTel Communications Inc., which provides broadband Internet access to the Nass Valley (Rescan 2010a).
13.4.2 Labour Force In 2006, there were estimated to be 665 people1 in the labour force in the four Nisga’a Villages (i.e., number of people who were either working or were actively seeking work), representative of 66.2% of the total adult population (people aged 15 years and older) in the four villages (Table 13.4.2-1). Gitwinksihlkw had the highest percentage of individuals in the labour force (with a labour force participation rate of 74.2%), followed by New Aiyansh (66.1%), Gingolx (61.2%), and Laxgalts’ap (62.9%).
1 Inclusive of an estimated 220 people in Laxgalts’ap.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-15
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Table 13.4.2-1: Labour Force in the Nisga’a Villages, 2006
Total Aboriginal Community Count Percent Count Percent of Total Nisga’a Communities 665 65.2% 845 95.5% Gitwinksihlkw 115 74.2% 115 100.0% Gingolx 150 61.2% 145 96.7% New Aiyansh 400 66.1% 375 93.6% Laxgalts'ap n/a n/a n/a n/a
Note: Labour force includes people working or actively seeking work as of census day in 2006; n/a - not applicable Source: SC (2007a, 2007b)
The results of the Nisga’a Social, Economic, Resource Use and Cultural Survey (Rescan 2012) indicate that the majority of Nisga’a respondents are employed full- or part-time (281 respondents). Table 13.4.2-2 provides a summary of the employment status of Nisga’a survey respondents.
Table 13.4.2-2: Nisga’a Employment Status (2011)
Frequency Percent 1 Full-time 111 27.5 2 Part-time 170 42.2 3 Unemployed 81 20.1 4 Retired 41 10.2 Total 403 100 Source: Rescan 2012
Figures 13.4.2-1 summarises the number of employment months among Nisga’a survey respondents in 2010. Figure 13.4.2-2 indicates the main employment-related activities among survey respondents who indicated they were unemployed in 2010. One third of respondents were employed for 12 months in 2010. Differences exist between those living on and off Nisga’a Lands, such that those on Nisga’a Lands were more likely to have been employed 12 months of the year (39% vs. 28%), and those off Nisga’a Lands were more likely to have not been employed at all in 2010 (39% vs.23%). Also, of those who were not employed in 2010, one third (34%) were retired, 21% were looking for work and 17% were on disability.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-16
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
34% 12 months 39% 28% 20% 6 to 11 months 24% 16% 15% Total 1 to 5 months 15% On Nisga'a land 16% Off Nisga'a land 30% 0 months 23% 39%
Base=All respondents, n=405. On Nisga’a Land n= 225, Off Nisga’a Land n=180. Source: Rescan 2012 Figure 13.4.2-1: Months of Employment among Nisga’a Survey Respondents
34% Retired 31% 35% 21% Looking for work 25% 18% 17% On disability 14% 20% 16% Family obligations 12% 18% 7% Attending school 8% 7% Total 3% On Nisga'a land Not looking for work 6% Off Nisga'a land 1% Base=Those employed for 0 months, n=122. On Nisga’a Land n= 51, Off Nisga’a Land n=71. Source: Rescan 2012 Figure 13.4.2-2: Activities among Unemployed Nisga’a Respondents
13.4.3 Unemployment In 2006, an estimated 205 residents of the four communities were unemployed, representing an unemployment rate of 30.8%, which is greater than the provincial average of 6.0%. There is a range of unemployment rates among the Nisga’a Villages with Gingolx having the highest unemployment rate at 46.7%. There is no unemployment data for Laxgalts’ap.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-17
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Between 2001 and 2006, the unemployment rate remained the same in the Nisga’a Villages. Increased unemployment in Gingolx is partly due to steady population growth since 1996, as Nisga’a people migrate back to this community.
13.4.4 Occupations According to 2006 census data, 22.3% of the Nisga’a labour force was employed in sales and service, followed by occupations in social science, education and government service (20.7%), and trades, transport and equipment operators (14.9%). Other important occupations in the region included business, finance and administration (12.4%) and primary industry (10.7%). Figure 13.4.4-1 provides a breakdown of the occupations of the Nisga’a labour force.
Art; culture; Sales and service, Social science; recreation and 22.3% education; sport, 1.7% government service & religion, 20.7% Trades; transport and equipment operators and related, 14.9% Health, 1.7%
Primary industry, 10.7% Natural and applied sciences and Business; finance Processing; related, 4.1% and administration, manufacturing and 12.4% Management, 9.9% utilities, 1.7% Source: SC (2007a) Figure 13.4.4-1: Labour Force by Occupation in the Nisga’a Villages, 2006
More recent Nisga’a surveys (Rescan 2012) conducted among Nisga’a citizens both on and off Nisga’a Lands indicate that the Nisga’a government is the most frequently mentioned source of employment (21%), especially for those who live on Nisga’a Lands (32%). Fishing and construction complete the top three types of employment, with 10% respectively. Health care, education and tourism were mentioned by 9% of Nisga’a respondents. Only one individual had worked in the mining industry in 2010. Figure 13.4.4-2 summarises the type of occupation among Nisga’a survey respondents.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-18
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
21% Nisga'a Government 32% 4% 10% Fishing 8% 15% 10% Construction 11% 7% 9% Health care/Social services 10% Total 7% 9% On Nisg'a' Land Education 12% 5% Off Nisga'a Land 9% Tourism and Hospitality 5% 16% 7% Retail trade 3% 13%
0% Mining 1% 0%
Base=Respondents employed at least 1 month, n=281. On Nisga’a Land n= 173, Off Nisga’a Land n=108. Note: Only responses greater than 5 % are shown, with the exception of mining
Source: Rescan 2012 Figure 13.4.4-2: Type of Occupation among Nisga’a Survey Respondents
Figure 13.4.4-3 indicates that most Nisga’a survey respondents do not have any experience in the mining industry (90%). Of the respondents, 7% had worked in the mining industry. Of those with experience in the mining industry, 40% had worked in the construction or operation of a mine. Of these, 70% had less than five years of experience.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-19
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Worked in mine construction/ operation, 3% Don't Know/Refused, 2% Worked in mining industry, 4%
No mining experience, 90%
Source: Rescan 2012 Figure 13.4.4-3: Experience in Mining Industry Among Nisga’a Respondents
13.4.5 Earnings and Income According to 2006 census data, median earnings for all workers in the two Nisga’a Villages (Gingolx and New Aiyansh) in 2005 averaged $13,566. This ranged from a low of $8,721 in Gingolx to a high of $14,989 in New Aiyansh. These relatively low-income numbers are partly due to the relatively low percentage of workers who were employed full-time and year round (30.5%) with higher median earnings averaging $38,608.
The average median incomes in the Nisga’a Villages decreased from $17,664 in 2000 to $13,556 in 2005. This represents a decrease of 23.2%. Median census family incomes in the Nisga’a Villages averaged $28,285 and median incomes for all households averaged $31,233, which are both lower than the median average for Aboriginal households ($34,471) in the Nisga’a Villages.
According to more recent survey data among Nisga’a citizens on and off Nisga’a Lands, the majority of Nisga’a respondents indicated a total 2010 income below $25,000. Table 13.4.5-1 summarises the breakdown of total incomes among Nisga’a survey
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-20
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING respondents. Of the Nisga’a respondents, Table 13.4.5-2 summarises the income received from government assistance.
Table 13.4.5-1: Total Income Among Nisga’a Respondents in 2010
Frequency Valid Percent 1 Under $10,000 108 27.4 2 $10,000 to $24,999 136 34.5 3 $25,000 to $39,999 63 16 4 $40,000 to $54,999 40 10.2 5 $55,000 to $69,999 19 4.8 6 $70,000 to $84,999 11 2.8 7 $85,000 or More 17 4.3 Total 394 100 Source: Rescan 2012
Table 13.4.5-2: Total Income from Government Assistance
Frequency Valid Percent 0 173 46.4 2 2 0.5 3 2 0.5 5 9 2.4 6 1 0.3 10 13 3.5 15 4 1.1 20 8 2.1 25 6 1.6 27 1 0.3 30 10 2.7 40 8 2.1 50 38 10.2 55 1 0.3 60 9 2.4 70 4 1.1 75 3 0.8 78 1 0.3 80 7 1.9 90 7 1.9 95 1 0.3 100 65 17.4 Total 373 100 Source: Rescan 2012
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-21
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Table 13.4.5-3 shows the change in person income since 2006 for the Nisga’a respondents.
Table 13.4.5-3: Change in Personal Income Since 2006
Frequency Valid Percent Cumulative Percent 1 Decreased a lot 74 18.5 18.5 2 Decreased a little 49 12.3 30.8 3 Stayed the same 79 19.8 50.5 4 Increased a little 117 29.3 79.8 5 Increased a lot 81 20.3 100 Total 400 100 Source: Rescan 2012
13.4.6 Educational Attainment According to 2006 census data, the lowest levels of educational attainment were found in the village of Gingolx, where 40.8% of residents had less than a high school education. In Gitwinksihlkw, the percentage of those with less than a high school education was 31.3%. Gitwinksihlkw also had the highest number of individuals with a high school education (28.1%), as well as those with post-secondary education, including a trades certificate (15.6%), college (9.4%), some university (6.6%), and those with a university certificate, diploma or degree (12.5%). Figure 13.4.6-1 provides a summary of Nisga’a Nation educational attainment.
New Aiyansh
Gingolx
Gitwinksihlkw
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
No certificate; diploma or degree High school certificate or equivalent Apprenticeship or trades certificate or diploma College; CEGEP or other non‐university certificate or diploma University certificate or diploma below the bachelor level University certificate; diploma or degree
Source: SC (2007a; 2007b) Figure 13.4.6-1: Educational Attainment of People Aged 15 Years and Older in the Nisga’a Villages, 2006
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-22
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
According to data from NLG, the highest level of enrolment among Nisga’a citizens was in private and public college with 69 female and 65 male students; however, completion rates are relatively low with 34.8% and 51.5% for women and men, respectively. Nisga’a citizens had the highest completion rates at private post-secondary institutions (such as the Wilp Wilxo’oskwhl Nisga’a Institute) with 100% for both males and females. Female Nisga’a students had the next highest rates at the institute level (75.0%), followed by the university college (66.7%) and the university level (61.0%). Male Nisga’a students had higher graduation rates at the institute (100%) and college level (75.0%) than their female counterparts. Overall, males (52.2%) had higher graduation rates than did females (48.4%), although the total number of women graduating is greater than men (i.e., 62 women versus 48 men), given the greater female enrolment rate. Table 13.4.6-2 lists the post-secondary graduation rates for Nisga’a citizens from 2008 to 2009.
Table 13.4.6-1: Post-Secondary Graduation Rates for Nisga’a Citizens, 2008-2009
Enrolment Completion Rates Educational Institution Female Male Female Male University 41 12 61.0% 41.7% University college 3 9 66.7% 44.4% College (public / private) 69 65 34.8% 51.5% Open Learning Agency 2 0 50.0% 0.0% Institutes 12 4 75.0% 100.0% Private post secondary institutions 1 1 100.0% 100.0% Total 128 92 48.4% 52.2% Note: % - percent Source: NLG 2009
Recent Nisga’a surveys (Rescan 2012) conducted among Nisga’a citizens on and off Nisga’a Lands indicate over half of respondents (55%) have a high school diploma or equivalency certificate (see Table 13.4.6-2). Furthermore, those who live off Nisga’a Lands are less likely to have completed high school or obtained an equivalency certificate than those who live on Nisga’a Lands. Twice as many males as females have apprenticeship or trades certificates (21% vs. 9%); however, females are more likely than males to have college certification (38% vs. 24%).
Table 13.4.6-2: Education Levels among Nisga’a Survey Respondents
Live on Nisga’a Lands Live off Nisga’a Lands Total Education (n=225) (n=180) (n=405) Less than a high school diploma or 21% 34% 27% equivalency certificate Secondary (high) school diploma 67% 39% 55% or equivalency certificate
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-23
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Live on Nisga’a Lands Live off Nisga’a Lands Total Education (n=225) (n=180) (n=405) Registered apprenticeship or 13% 16% 14% trades certificate or diploma College, College of General or 33% 29% 32% Vocational Education, or other non-university certificate or diploma University certificate, diploma or 15% 9% 12% Bachelor's degree Advanced university degree (i.e., 2% 2% 2% Master’s or PhD)
Note: This table includes multiple mentions Bold text indicates significant differences between on and off Nisga’a Lands % - percent Source: Rescan 2012
13.4.7 Skills and Training Based on household surveys conducted among Nisga’a citizens in 2011 on and off Nisga’a Lands, two thirds (65%) indicate they have general labour skills, while half indicate having vocational skills. Management is the third most frequently mentioned skill level, with 25% indicating management skills. Those who live off Nisga’a Lands are more likely to have general labour (71%) and professional (10%) skills than those on Nisga’a Lands (60% and 3%, respectively). Figure 13.4.7-1 summarises the types of skills among Nisga’a survey respondents.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-24
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
65% General labour 60% 71% 51% Vocational 52% 49% 25% Management 25% 24% 17% Technical 17% 17% 10% Other 11% Total 10% On Nisga'a land 6% Off Nisga'a land Professional 3% 10%
Base=All respondents, n=405. On Nisga’a Land n= 225, Off Nisga’a Land n=180.
Source: Rescan 2012 Figure 13.4.7-1: Skills Level(s) of Nisga’a Respondents
Based on the skills identified by the Nisga’a respondents in Figure 13.4.7-1, additional detail was collected on the subset of skills for each skill category. Table 13.4.7-1 summarises the types of technical skills, Table 13.4.7-2 provides information as to the types of vocational skills, and Table 13.4.7-3 summarises the types of professional skills among Nisga’a survey respondents. Most of the Nisga’a respondents who indicate they had technical skills are trained as carpenters, mechanics, and welders (64.1% of responses). Those respondents who have vocational skills are trained in camp, catering, and cooking (19.1%), first aid and safety (18.9%), and secretarial, book keeping, accounting, and clerical (18.7%) skills. Most who indicated professional skills responded in the “other” category (80%) with a few indicating skills with professional designations, such as engineer, lawyer, accountant, and human resources.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-25
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Table 13.4.7-1: Types of Technical Skills Among Nisga’a Respondents
Percent of Percent of Apprentice Journey Occupation Count Responses Cases Count Count 1 Millwright 5 4.9 7.2 3 2 2 Mechanic 15 14.6 21.7 9 6 3 Electrician 8 7.8 11.6 7 1 4 Welder 13 12.6 18.8 9 3* 5 Pipefitter 7 6.8 10.1 4 3 6 Carpenter 38 36.9 55.1 24 12** 95 Other 17 16 5 24 6 -- -- Total 103 100 149.3 56 27 Note: Percent of cases is based on 69 valid cases (0 missing cases) Total percent of cases exceeds 100% due to multiple responses * no response; ** no response Source: Rescan 2012
Table 13.4.7-2: Types of Vocational Skills Among Nisga’a Respondents
Percent of Percent of Occupation Count Responses Cases 1 Heavy equipment operator 40 9 19.4 2 Miner or logger 19 4.3 9.2 3 Truck driver 32 7.2 15.5 4 Bus driver 8 1.8 3.9 5 Secretarial/bookkeeping/acct/clerical 83 18.7 40.3 6 Construction 43 9.7 20.9 7 Camp/catering/cook 85 19.1 41.3 8 Security 21 4.7 10.2 9 First aid/safety 84 18.9 40.8 10 Health care 5 1.1 2.4 11 Education 9 2 4.4 95 Other 16 3.6 7.8 Total 429 100 216 Note: Percent of cases is based on 206 valid cases (0 missing cases) Total percent of cases exceeds 100% due to multiple responses Source: Rescan 2012
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-26
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Table 13.4.7-3: Types of Professional Skills Among Nisga’a Respondents
Percent of Percent of Professional Skill Count Responses Cases 1 Professional Engineer (P. Eng.) 1 4 4 2 Accounting designation (CA, CMA, CGA) 2 8 8 3 Lawyer (LLB) 1 4 4 4 Certified Human Resources Prof. (CHRP) 1 4 4 95 Other 20 80 80 Total 25 100 100 Note: Percent of cases is based on 25 valid cases (0 missing cases) Source: Rescan 2012
13.4.8 Nisga’a Businesses The Nisga’a Business Survey results presented in the Nisga’a Economic, Social, Cultural Impact Assessment (Rescan 2012) indicates a total of 32 businesses in Nisga’a Villages and Nisga’a Urban Locals of Terrace and Prince Rupert. Section 7.0 provides a detailed summary of the Nisga’a business survey results. This section provides a succinct summary of key information regarding Nisga’a businesses.
Of the 22 businesses that participated in the survey, 12 are sole proprietorships, one is a privately incorporated company, 8 are Nisga’a Village Corporations, and one is a NLG Corporation (Rescan 2012). Most of the businesses have been established in the last decade (66.7%).
Of the 22 Nisga’a businesses that participated in the survey, “about 20% of businesses (four businesses) have worked in the mining, quarrying, oil and gas sector. Six businesses (27.3%) have work in the construction sector, five have worked in the forestry sector (22.7%), and another five (22.7%) have worked in the transport sector” (Appendix 14.0-A). The most common services provided by Nisga’a businesses are catering (27.3%), accommodation / food (27.3%), and infrastructure and maintenance (36.4%).
“The most reported costs of running the business were infrastructure and equipment maintenance, supplies, and fuel and transportation, mentioned by over 50% of respondents” (Appendix 14.0-A). The businesses surveyed generally employ Nisga’a citizens with 68.2% male employees. In terms of number and types of clients, most Nisga’a businesses indicated greater than 25 clients with predominantly municipalities and/or governments.
Fifteen survey respondents provided information about annual business revenues, which for most respondents is $50,000 or less. The range of annual revenues among Nisga’a survey respondents is $1,500 to $6,300,000.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-27
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
13.5 Health Context 13.5.1 Overview The Nisga’a Valley Health Authority (NVHA) was established in 1984 and operates a health centre in each Nisga’a Village. The main centre is the James Samuel Gosnell Health Centre located in New Aiyansh (Rescan 2010a).
The NVHA’s approach to healthcare is rooted in Nisga’a Nation culture and healing practices. Services include primary health care services, community health and preventive services, including: public health; home support and resident care; cultural and community health; mental health and wellness; and youth enrichment (Rescan 2010a). Despite the Nisga’a Nation’s treaty-defined rights to administer and operate health care services for its citizens, there are considerable Nisga’a Nation health challenges and issues.
The Nisga’a Local Health Area (LHA) reported life expectancy at 73.8 years, compared to 81.4 years provincially. In the Nisga’a LHA, the potential years of life lost (PYLL) due to death from natural causes averaged 53.5 years per 1000 population. This rate is 20 years higher than the provincial rate of 33.4 per 1000. PYLL due to suicide / homicide (32.6 years) per 1000 population in the Nisga’a LHA was also considerably higher than the provincial average (3.8 years).
13.6 Lands and Areas 13.6.1 Overview The proposed Project is within the Nass Area and the NWA as defined by the NFA. The mine site falls outside of Nisga’a Lands owned by the Nisga’a Nation in fee simple under the terms of the NFA. Nisga’a Lands are approximately 25 km to the east of the Kitsault mine site at their closest point. The Kitsault FSR (Alice Arm Road) overlaps with approximately 10 km of Nisga’a Lands (i.e., after the Nass Bridge toward Alice Arm parallel to the Nass River on the west side). There are also two transportation route options being considered in the Application. The first option along the Cranberry Connector and south on Highway (Hwy) 37 to Kitwanga overlaps with about 75 km of the NWA and the second option along the Nisga’a Hwy to Terrace overlaps with approximately 25 km of Nisga’a Lands and 25 km of NWA.
The proposed Project is approximately 5 km southeast of Category A lands (i.e., Gits’oohl, former Gitzault Indian Reserve No. 24). Adjacent to these lands held in fee simple by the Nisga’a Nation, there is a Nisga’a Nation commercial recreation tenure with use and activity described in the “Nisga’a Commercial Recreation Tenure Management Plan” (1998). The tenure term is 27 years until 2027. The province has committed to avoiding issuing any other competing commercial tenures in the same area.
There are no parks and protected areas as defined in the NFA that overlap with or are within close proximity to the proposed Project. The closest park is approximately 25 km south of the proposed Project (i.e., Gingietl Creek Ecological Reserve).
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-28
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
13.7 Water 13.7.1 Overview Under the NFA, the Nisga’a Nation is entitled to a water reservation of 300,000 decametres (dam) per year from the Nass River and other streams for domestic, industrial, and agricultural purposes, as well as a Nisga’a Hydro Power Reservation. Under the Hydro Power Reservation, the Nisga’a Nation may investigate the hydroelectric potential of all unrecorded waters of all streams, other than the Nass River, that are wholly or partially within Nisga’a Lands (BC MARR 2000). Water licenses issued before March 1996 have priority over Nisga’a water entitlements. Schedule C of the NFA (Table 13.7.1-1) specifies percentages of total stream flow that the Nisga’a water reservation may not exceed per stream. For those streams not listed in Schedule C, the percentage is 50% of total flow. Three of the eight streams listed in Schedule C are proximate to the proposed Project and / or the access road, including Kwinatahl, Tchitin, and Kshadin Rivers. It is not known where and how much of the Nisga’a water entitlement is taken.
Table 13.7.1-1: Nisga’a Water Volumes (Schedule C of Chapter 4 in the Nisga’a Final Agreement)
Stream Name Percentage of Available Flow Scowban Creek 50% Ishkheenickh River 26% Ksemamaith Creek 29% Kshadin Creek 10% Tseax River 10% Kwinatahl River 10% Tchitin River 10% Ksedin Creek 12% Note: % - percent
13.8 Forest Resources 13.8.1 Overview The NFA defines rights and responsibilities of the Nisga’a Nation in terms of timber and Non-Timber Forest Product (NTFP) resources on Nisga’a Lands and in the Nass Area (Chapter 5 of the NFA). All forest resources on Nisga’a Lands belong to the Nisga’a Nation. Transitional licensees on Nisga’a Lands are subject to the laws of BC. Other forestry and timber management activities will be subject to relevant legislation enacted by NLG. Fire control and suppression are the responsibility of the province. Under the NFA, Canada and BC are obligated to inform the Nisga'a Nation of forest development plans applicable to the Nass Area (BC MARR 2000).
The NFA also provides for the possibility of NLG applying and acquiring a Tree Farm License (TFL) with the requirement that the TFL overlap with a part of Schedule A Lands. Currently, TFL #1 (owned and operated by Coast Tsimshian Ltd.) intersects the northern
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-29
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING part of Nisga’a Lands (near the Kitsault FSR (Alice Arm Road) and 25 km east of the mine site).
Pine mushrooms are harvested in many areas throughout Nisga’a Lands. Locations of specific harvesting areas are generally not disclosed as they are confidential. There is a general reference to pine mushroom harvest in the area of Kwinamuck Lake (2 km south of the Kitsault FSR (Alice Arm Road)) (NLG 2003). This area is also designated as Area B (Nisga’a citizens only harvest) in the Nisga’a Botanical Forest Products Harvest Area Map (NLG 2004a). The Kitsault FSR (Alice Arm Road) also traverses approximately 10 km of pine mushroom harvest Area A, which is open to the general public. NLG manages and regulates pine mushroom harvest within Nisga’a Lands by requiring all Nisga’a and non- Nisga’a harvesters to apply for a permit. Figure 13.8.1-1 summarises Nisga’a harvest and sales of timber and non-timber forest products since 2000.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-30
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Source: NLG 2009 Figure 13.8.1-1: Summary of Nisga’a Timber and Pine Mushroom Harvest and Sales (2000-2008)
13.9 Access, Roads and Right-of-Ways 13.9.1 Overview The NFA identifies public, Government of Canada, and provincial rights to access Nisga’a Lands. Chapter 6 of the NFA defines situations, agencies, and limitations to access of Nisga’a Lands. The NFA stipulates temporary access to Nisga’a Lands for non-Nisga’a citizens for non-commercial and recreational purposes. NLG also agrees to allow reasonable public access to Nisga’a Public Lands for harvesting of wildlife and fish within the limits established by the annual management plans, abiding by provincial, federal, and Nisga’a Nation laws. The Nisga’a Nation has the right to regulate public access to Nisga’a Village Lands and Nisga’a Private Lands. The Crown, including police and armed forces, may gain access to Nisga’a Lands, and the Nisga’a Nation may have access to Crown Lands to fulfill its obligations under the NFA and during emergencies as long as reasonable notice is given before or as soon as possible after entry. Nisga’a citizens also have the right to access areas outside Nisga’a Lands to exercise their treaty rights, including hunting, fishing, and trapping in the NWA and Nass Area. If access is prohibited, alternative access is required by the NFA to support Nisga’a citizens’ treaty-granted resource use.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-31
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Chapter 7 of the NFA describes ownership and maintenance costs and responsibilities for roads within Nisga’a Lands, including the Nisga’a Hwy, Nass Forest Service Road (FSR), and Alice Arm Road (Special Use Permit (SUP) 9228). The province has rights to a total of 800 hectares (ha) of ROW on Nisga’a Lands, including roads and transmission lines. The province owns the Nisga’a Hwy with a corridor width of 30 metres (m). NFA makes provisions for the extension of the Hwy 37, including the Cranberry Connector from Nass Camp to Hwy 37. The NFA also stipulates Nisga’a issuance of grants to the Crown for secondary provincial roads listed in Appendix C-1, Part 3, including the Kitsault FSR (Alice Arm Road). The Nisga’a Nation road grant provides the Crown with “full, free and uninterrupted right, liberty and ROW, in perpetuity, for the purpose of using, constructing, re- constructing, repairing, improving, upgrading, and maintaining” (BC MARR 2000) these roads for public, industrial, resource use, and utility purposes. The secondary road ROW includes a road width of 20 m. SUP 9228 is included in the appendix of the NFA and described as the road from Khsadin to Alice Arm with a note that the road straddles the boundary of Nisga’a Lands.
Crown access to areas outside of the Nisga’a Hwy and secondary road ROWs on Nisga’a Lands is permitted under the NFA only if there is prior notification and approval from the NLG and it is for the purposes of drainage construction, slope maintenance, and danger tree removal. Access to Nisga’a Lands for emergency purposes is permitted by the NFA with written notification to the Nisga’a Nation. The NFA stipulates consultation with the Nisga’a Nation for traffic regulations on Nisga’a Hwy and secondary roads. The Crown has the right to install intersections, signage, lanes, and ramps on the Nisga’a Highway and secondary provincial roads.
13.10 Fish and Aquatics 13.10.1 Overview The NFA defines the rights and responsibilities of the Nisga’a Nation and NLG with regard to managing, harvesting, and enhancing Nass watershed fishery resources (BC MARR 2000). The Nisga’a Nation have the collectively held right to harvest fish and aquatic plants for domestic (i.e., food, ceremonial, and social) purposes subject to conservation and safety measures.
According to the NFA, aquatic plants include keIp, marine flowering plants, benthic and detached algae, brown algae, red algae, green algae, and phytoplankton (BC MARR 2000). The definition of fish in the NFA includes the following:
a. Fish, including anadromous fish; b. Shellfish, crustaceans, and marine animals; c. The parts of fish, shellfish, crustaceans, and marine animals; d. The eggs, sperm, spawn, larvae, spat, juvenile stages and adult stages of fish, shellfish, crustaceans and marine animals; and e. But not wildlife fish. (BC MARR 2000).
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-32
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
The Nisga’a Nation has salmon and steelhead allocations based on a percentage of the annual allowable harvest (Tables 13.10.1-1 and 13.10.1-3). BC and Canada do not require licenses or fees and royalties for Nisga’a fish harvest with the exception of the use of firearms and fish sales. Nisga’a citizens also have the right to barter or trade fish resources amongst themselves or with other Aboriginal groups (BC MARR 2000).
Table 13.10.1-1: Summary of Nisga’a Nation Salmon Allocations per Species
Species Sockeye Pink Chinook Coho Chum Nisga’a have (%) of return to 10.5% 0.6% 21.0% 8.0% 8.0% Canada Return to Canada: small 160,000 300,000 13,000 40,000 30,000 Return to Canada: large 600,000 1,100,000 60,000 240,000 150,000 Nisga’a fish allocations: 16,800 1,800 2,730 3,200 2,400 threshold (at small return) Nisga’a fish allocations: 63,000 6,600 12,600 19,200 12,000 maximum (at large return) Note: % - percent Source: BC MARR 2000
Based on the Nisga’a Nation entitlements outlined in Chapter 8 of the NFA, Table 13.10-2 summarises the annual Nisga’a Nation allocation as well as the actual Nisga’a Nation harvest since 2000 per salmon species and steelhead in the Nass Area. In some years, the Nisga’a Nation harvest exceeds the treaty-defined allocation. This may occur if there is adjustment in subsequent years.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-33
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Table 13.10.1-2: Nisg a’a Nation Allocations and Nisga’a Harvest of Salmon and Steelhead Species
Nisga’a Allocation Nisga’a Harvest Steel- Sockeye Pink Chinook Coho Chum Sockeye Pink Chinook Coho Chum head 2000 93,855 28,033 7,031 9,072 3,326 93,179 6,086 9,326 1,950 1,067 495 2001 62,524 143,952 10,421 14,877 4,068 77,183 79,378 11,764 14,706 1,617 403 2002 195,288 53,031 6,489 19,200 3,533 140,660 2,043 5,431 9,016 132 557 2003 162,364 173,146 9,404 14,114 12,000 140,861 18,949 6,709 14,882 318 445 2004 118,015 122,098 7,057 11,659 8,026 145,241 10,528 5,548 20,336 1,030 512 2005 89,624 225,029 6,086 17,231 4,468 113,345 4,519 6,015 14,969 698 244 2006 111,590 5,683 9,214 8,296 8,604 88,021 3,752 7,250 8,425 1,110 253 2007 56,244 129,530 8,645 11,822 0 53,863 6,159 6,714 9,515 932 117 2008 47,799 0 6,919 10,635 0 45,648 4,372 4,402 3,449 506 173 2009 65,255 115,364 8,171 19,200 7,654 69,446 24,572 5,435 13,795 139 253 2010 54,500 900 5,900 15,200 4,900 67,702 2,421 4,438 10,098 103 674 Source: NLG 2010
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-34
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
The Nisga’a Nation harvest of summer- and winter-run steelhead is dependent on conservation considerations. If there are no conservation concerns that arise from the review of studies conducted for steelhead, the Nisga’a Nation has the right to harvest steelhead for domestic purposes. If conservation concerns exist, the Nisga’a Nation has the right to harvest steelhead according to Schedule D of Chapter 8 of the NFA up to a maximum harvest of 1,000 steelhead per year (Table 13.10.1-3).
Table 13.10.1-3: Summary of Annual Nisga’a Steelhead Allocation
Percentages Adjusted total allowable catch 95% of return to Canada – annual escapement goal Nisga’a Nation allocation 5% of total returns 25% of adjusted allowable catch Maximum 1,000 steelhead Note: % - percent Source: BC MARR 2000
Table 13.10.1-4 provides a summary of the number of sales permits NLG issued to individuals and Elders (over 60 years) as well as the openings for which the permits were valid.
Table 13.10.1-4: The Number of Sales Permits and Associated Openings
Individual Sales Elder Sales Permit Fishing Season Openings Permits Issued (free over 60 years) 2006-2007 270 60 9 sockeye and 2 coho 2007-2008 222 49 6 sockeye and 2 coho 2008-2009 52 16 4 marine sockeye (no in-stream) Source: NLG 2008; NLG 2009
The NFA defines the Nisga’a Nation’s right to harvest intertidal bivalves, including cockle, littleneck clam, butter clam, mussels, and manila clam for food, social, and ceremonial purposes (BC MARR 2000). Appendix I of the NFA (Figure 13.1-1) delineates the area in Observatory Inlet and Alice Arm that is designated for exclusive Nisga’a Nation harvest of intertidal bivalves (i.e., 15 km southwest of the proposed Project). Harvest of intertidal bivalves is subject to conservation measures and legislation regarding public health and safety. Nisga’a Nation allocations are based on the total annual harvest and have the same priority as commercial and recreational interests in the area (BC MARR 2000).
The Nisga’a Nation may request a Nisga’a Nation fish allocation for non-salmon species or aquatic plant. For non-salmon species or aquatic plants, the Nisga’a fish allocation of each non-salmon species or aquatic plant will be 125% of the basic Nisga’a Nation fish entitlement to that species (BC MARR 2000). The Joint Fisheries Management Committee
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-35
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING will consider and provide their input into the basic Nisga’a entitlement of non-salmon species and any studies and / or research necessary to support entitlement determination. After the signing of the NFA, Canada, the province, and NLG may decide to negotiate the basic Nisga’a entitlement for non-salmon species and aquatic plants, including:
Dungeness, tanner, and king crab; Halibut; Prawns and shrimp; Herring; and Aquatic plants used in the herring roe-on-kelp fishery.
There is limited publicly available, desk-based information on Nisga’a Nation harvest of marine species along Alice Arm, including location, season, frequency and intensity of harvest at the time of writing. NLG publications indicate harvest activity for Dungeness crab in the Nass estuary (NLG 2004b). The Nisga’a Nation shellfish harvest is designated in the NFA to occur in the northern portion of Observatory Inlet and the southern part of Alice Arm. The Nisga’a Nation annual fishing plan for 2010 to 2011 indicates an intertidal bivalve harvest period from 1 October to 31 March (NLG 2010). The plan also specifies minimum length requirements for harvest of certain intertidal bivalve species as well as crabs, including:
38 millimetres (mm) in the case of littleneck clams; 63 mm in the case of butter clams; 38 mm in the case of cockles; 165 mm in the case of a dungeness crab; 115 mm in the case of a red rock crab; and 178 mm in the case of a king crab (NLG 2010).
Nisga’a Nation harvesters are required to report their marine harvest in the Nass Area within seven days of the catch. Nisga’a Nation harvesters are also requested to follow several Best Management Practices (BMP) including:
Refraining from harvesting clams on beaches where high numbers of under-sized bivalves are found; Reburying all undersized clams; Avoiding leaving holes in the beach from digging activities; Refraining from harvest or retention of female crabs (for conservation reasons), unless the crab is infected by parasite Briarosaccus colossus; and Requiring particular types and uses of crab traps (NLG 2010).
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-36
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
13.11 Wildlife and Birds 13.11.1 Overview The Nisga’a citizens have the right to harvest wildlife in the NWA, an area (16,101 kilometres squared (km2)) surrounding Nisga’a Lands, and migratory birds within the Nass Area, according to provincial and federal laws. This harvest is subject to measures that are necessary for conservation and legislation enacted for the purposes of public health or safety. It must be consistent with the communal nature of the Nisga’a Nation domestic (i.e., food, social, and ceremonial purposes) harvest and Nisga'a Nation traditional harvest seasons. It must not interfere with other authorised uses of Crown land (BC MARR 2000).
The right to hunt is related to initially designated species, including grizzly bears, mountain goats, and moose. The hunting rights are for domestic purposes and the Nisga’a citizens have the right to trade or barter wildlife and wildlife with other Aboriginal groups and / or amongst themselves.
The NFA defines the Nisga’a Nation annual hunting allocation based on the annual allowable harvest of the designated species. The Nisga’a Nation hunting right has the same priority as recreational and commercial harvesting interests. Table 13.11.1-1 summarises the allocation percentages of the allowable harvest per designated species.
Table 13.11.1-1: Nisga’a Nation Wildlife Allocations of Designated Species
Designated Species Total Allowable Harvest Nisga’a Wildlife Allocation Moose First 50 moose 80% Next 50 moose 32% Remaining 56% Maximum 170 moose Mountain goat Any number 25% of TAH Grizzly bear 1-6 grizzly bears 40% of TAH 7-8 grizzly bears 50% of TAH 9-10 grizzly bears 40% of TAH 10> 40% of 10 + 30% of remaining Note: % - percent Source: BC MARR 2000
The NFA also affords Nisga’a Nation trap lines outside of Nisga’a Lands rights to trap in accordance with provincial and federal laws. Four of the secondary trap lines within the Kitsault land use study area, but not overlapping any mine infrastructure, are listed in Schedule C of Chapter 9 in the NFA, including:
TR614T 090; TR614T 092;
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-37
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
TR614T 094; and TR614T 096.
At the time of writing, it is not known from desktop research where, how, and when Nisga’a citizens harvest treaty designated species within the NWA. Comments from the Nisga’a citizens during Kitsault consultation activities indicate Nisga’a Nation hunting and fishing cabins in the vicinity of the proposed Project, which may support possible lengthy Nisga’a Nation hunting and fishing excursions. The number of hunting licenses issued by NLG for hunting in the NWA varies annually. Nisga’a Nation allocations are distributed on an application and lottery basis. Desk-based information on Nisga’a Nation allocations and actual harvest is sparse. Table 13.11.1-2 summarises the available allocation and harvest data, where available.
Table 13.11.1-2: Summary of Available Data on Nisga’a Nation Allocations and Harvest of Designated Species
Designated Year Population in NWA Nisga’a Allocation Nisga’a Harvest Species Moose 2001 1,600 70 n/a 2000 n/a n/a 111 2002 1,400 126 n/a 2007 800 n/a n/a 2010 n/a 46 bulls, no cows n/a Grizzly bear 2001 n/a 2 0 2002 n/a 0 0 Mountain goat 2001 n/a 34 n/a 2000 n/a n/a 0 Source: BC MARR 2001; BC MOE 2008; NLG 2003; NLG 2008; NLG 2010; and NLG 2009 Note: n/a - not available; NWA - Nass Wildlife Area
During consultation activities between the Nisga’a Nation and the proponent (i.e., NLG meetings and open houses in Nisga’a Villages), NLG raised concerns regarding the depressed state of the moose population in the NWA. In 2007, NLG conducted an aerial survey of the moose population in the NWA and determined that it declined by 50% since 2001 (i.e., 1,600+ to 800+). In order to address the depreciation of the moose population, NLG and the province have reduced the moose harvest by issuing conservative moose allocations to both Nisga’a citizens and resident / non-resident hunters. NLG has introduced a five-year moose conservation plan to encourage the reestablishment of the population and mitigate for the impacts of commercial development (NLG 2008; BC Ministry of Environment (BC MOE) 2008; NLG 2010).
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-38
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
13.12 Nisga’a Lisims Government and Nisga’a Villages 13.12.1 Overview The Nisga’a Nation has the right to self-governance with law-making authority within a democracy. The NFA established a governance structure and institutions to fulfill this right. NLG and the Nisga’a Villages are established to fulfill the NFA, Nisga’a Law, and the Nisga’a Constitution. NLG has the authority to establish laws to administer and operate the government, regulate Nisga’a Nation citizenship, Nisga’a Nation culture and language, Nisga’a Nation property, expropriation of Nisga’a Lands, Nisga’a Nation assets, accommodation, industrial relations, human resources, building, structures, and public works, traffic and transportation on Nisga’a Nation roads, marriage, social, child and family, and health services, Aboriginal healers, adoption, elementary, secondary, and post- secondary education, gambling and gaming, liquor, and cultural property. The Nisga’a Nation also has the authority to declare a local-level emergency with all the rights, responsibilities, and duties needed to fulfill an emergency preparedness plan.
13.13 Cultural Artefacts and Heritage 13.13.1 Overview The NFA (Chapter 17) describes Nisga’a Nation rights and responsibilities related to heritage resources. Section 9.0 of the Application provides additional detail on the specific locations and content of previously discovered archaeological sites and results of archaeological potential modeling in the area of the proposed mine site.
This section focuses on the NFA-defined Nisga’a Nation rights and jurisdiction associated with past and future discoveries of Nisga’a Nation cultural resources. The NFA identifies Nisga’a Nation ownership of several hundred specific artefacts currently stored at the BC Royal Museum and the Museum of Civilization targeted for repatriation to Nisga’a Lands contingent on the construction of a suitable facility to house the Nisga’a artefacts for viewing, education, and research purposes. The NFA also describes the ownership of heritage resources discovered in the future within and outside of Nisga’a Lands and Category A lands. If Nisga’a artefacts are discovered outside Nisga’a Lands and Category A lands and are transferred to the BC Royal Museum or the Museum of Civilization, the province and Canada agree to lend the artefact to the Nisga’a Nation (BC MARR 2000). BC and Canada may also transfer the Nisga’a artefact by developing appropriate agreements.
NLG and the province may negotiate custodial agreements on various matters, including determining the conditions under which NLG lends Nisga’a artefacts for temporary display, developing replicas of Nisga’a artefacts, providing training on technical issues relating to Nisga’a artefacts, providing public education on the Nisga’a Nation at the BC Royal Museum, and on any other issues as they may arise (BC MARR 2000).
The Nisga’a Nation is constructing a 10,000 square feet museum, including a class A climate-controlled gallery space, in the Nisga’a Village of Lax-galts’ap to house Nisga’a artefacts, records, and archives. Repatriation of nearly 300 Nisga’a artefacts currently held by BC and Canada at the BC Royal Museum (180 Nisga’a artefacts) and Museum of
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-39
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Civilization (100 Nisga’a artefacts) is central to the establishment of the museum. The museum will also serve as “a permanent place for Nisga’a people and visitors to experience the rich life and legacy of Nisga’a culture” (NLG 2009) and “a place for sharing traditions and ideas, and a venue for showcasing a rich and resurgent culture” (NLG 2011).
13.14 Nisga’a Issues Raised During Consultation 13.14.1 Overview The proponent initially contacted the Nisga’a Nation in February 2008, prior to its purchase of the property. Since the first meetings in April 2008, approximately 25 meetings have taken place between the proponent and representatives of NLG; numerous letters, emails, and phone calls have been exchanged. A consultation summary and record of engagement and correspondence with the Nisga’a Nation is provided in Appendix 4.3-A. Meetings continue to be held on an ongoing basis, and in accordance with the Communications Protocol, and have resulted in the sharing of detailed information about the proposed Project, the exploration work permits, and discussions about the regulatory and permitting processes – in particular, how the proponent should comply with the NFA.
In June 2010, the proponent held a series of open houses to introduce the proposed Project in the four main villages of the Nisga’a Nation, namely: Gingolx; Gitwinksihlkw; Laxgalts’ap; and Gitlakst’aamiks. Open houses used a drop-in format with display boards lining the perimeter of a main hall with access to handouts, factsheets, and employment materials readily available.
In addition to the above noted efforts, consultation also occurred during the development of the AIR document, as part-of the BC EAO Working Group, which consisted of government agencies and NLG. The proponent documented all comments received, the details of which are captured in the Issues Tracking Tables (Appendix 4.1-A). The feedback received during the open houses, as well as the information gathered from the proponent’s desk-based literature review, and the results of the direct engagements with NLG are summarised in Table 13.14.1-1. The engagement record is in Appendix 4.3-A.
Table 13.14.1-1: Nisga’a Nation Issues Identification and Consultation Activity
Issue Theme(s) Key Issues / Concerns / Comments Raised By The Nisga’a Nation
Air Quality (Section Nisga’a citizens are concerned about pollutants generated from mine 6.2) activities. Marine Water Quality Nisga'a citizens are concerned about previous contamination of Alice Arm (Section 6.8.2) from past tailings management (which affected food safety and availability). Marine Biota Nisga’a citizens are interested in the protection and preservation of Nisga’a (Section 6.8.3) marine resources and their habitat, including food sources (e.g., cockles, halibut, and king crab). Surface Water Quality Nisga’a citizens are concerned about seepage from the TMF and its (Section 6.5) effects on the receiving environment.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-40
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Issue Theme(s) Key Issues / Concerns / Comments Raised By The Nisga’a Nation
Surface Water Quality Nisga’a citizens are interested in the level of effort of water quality (Section 6.5) monitoring during reclamation of previous project. Surface Water Quality Nisga’a citizens are interested in a better water management system at the (Section 6.5) mine site. Surface Water Quality Nisga’a citizens are concerned about possible effects of the proposed (Section 6.5) Project on the Nass River. Freshwater Fish Nisga’a citizens concerned about adjacent spawning creeks for coho Aquatics (Section 6.7) salmon in the area. Freshwater Fish Nisga’a citizens would like to maintain salmon stocks (in the Nass Area) to Aquatics (Section 6.7) ensure sustainable salmon supply for the Nisga’a Nation. Economic Nisga'a citizens are interested in employment and business opportunities (Section 7.0) at Kitsault. Nisga'a citizens would like to attract their families back to the Nass area with sustainable, long-term employment. Economic Nisga'a citizens are interested in training and education in order to take full (Section 7.0) advantage of opportunities at the mine. Economic Nisga'a citizens are interested in Nisga’a preferential hiring policies at the (Section 7.0) proposed Project. Economic Nisga’a citizens are concerned about the consistency and longevity of (Section 7.0) Nisga’a preferential hiring. Economic Nisga’a citizens are interested in revenue and profit sharing options, (Section 7.0) including part ownership in Avanti. Economic Nisga’a citizens are interested in scholarships and bursaries for Nisga’a (Section 7.0) youth to pursue educational opportunities. Social (Section 8.0) Nisga'a citizens would like mine employee support (including treatment) for transitioning to camp environment. Social (Section 8.0) Nisga'a citizens are concerned about the work schedule and its effects on families. Social (Section 8.0) Nisga'a citizens are concerned about safety related to mine employee transportation to and from the mine site. Social (Section 8.0) Nisga'a citizens are concerned about increased demands on and need for community infrastructure and services, such as policing. Social (Section 8.0) Nisga’a citizens wonder why the proponent is proposing a 500-person camp if the Kitsault Townsite (adjacent to the proposed Project) already exists. Human Health Nisga’a citizens are concerned about the health and safety of mine (Section 10.0) employees, especially exposure to molybdenum. Human Health Nisga'a citizens are concerned about possible linkage between water (Section 10.0) quality and cancer. Land and Resource Nisga'a citizens are concerned about the possible decline in furbearers Use (Section 14.0) and the resulting effects on Nisga’a trap line. Land and Resource Nisga'a citizens are concerned about Nisga'a hunting / fishing cabins (one Use (Section 14.0) along the Kitsault Townsite). Land and Resource Nisga'a citizens noted that the mine site location is an important seafood Use (Section 14.0) gathering area for Nisga'a, so protection of water and food is paramount.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-41
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Issue Theme(s) Key Issues / Concerns / Comments Raised By The Nisga’a Nation
Land and Resource NLG indicated that the Nisga’a Nation owns property on Alice Arm (i.e., Use (Section 14.0) Gitshool). Land and Resource Nisga'a citizens have concerns about spiritual sites, migratory birds, and Use (Section 14.0) food sources from the sea. Land and Resource Nisga’a citizens are concerned about the effects of the Kitsault Use (Section 14.0) transportation route on overlapping Nisga’a pine mushroom harvesting areas. Vegetation NLG noted the importance of Yellow and Red cedar, especially the (Section 6.10) availability of older cedar trees. In particular, Red cedar is highly valued ecosystem component and the cultural impact of the removal of such trees should be considered and identified. Vegetation Nisga’a citizens are interested in the protection and preservation of Nisga’a (Section 6.10) vegetation resources, including food sources (e.g., berries). Wildlife (Section 6.11) Nisga’a citizens are interested in a wildlife monitoring system.
Wildlife (Section 6.11) NLG considers moose to be an important species and requested that it be included as a VC in the EA. Wildlife (Section 6.11) Nisga’a citizens are concerned about helicopter disturbance of mountain goats. Wildlife (Section 6.11) Nisga’a citizens are interested in the protection and preservation of Nisga’a wildlife resources and their habitat, including food sources (e.g., ducks and mountain goats). Closure Nisga'a citizens are concerned that the sudden closure of previous Kitsault (Section 11.2.14) operations in 1980s due to decline in moly prices may occur again. Closure Nisga'a citizens would like the Kitsault area to be restored for future use. (Appendix 3.0-K) Accidents and Nisga'a citizens are concerned about the structural integrity of the tailings Malfunctions facility during seismic activity. (Section 21.6) Notes: EA - Environmental Assessment; NLG - Nisga’a Lisims Government; TMF - Tailings Management Facility
In addition to holding open houses held in four Nisga’a Villages, the proponent also hosted open houses in April 2011 with three NULs, including Prince Rupert, Terrace, and Vancouver. The attendance included 43 Nisga’a citizens in Prince Rupert, 23 Nisga’a citizens in Terrace, and 25 Nisga’a citizens in Vancouver. The key issues and concerns identified during NUL open houses are summarised in Table 13.14.1-2.
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-42
KITSAULT MINE PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NISGA’A NATION BACKGROUND AND SETTING
Table 13.14.1-2: Issues Identification at Nisga’a Nation Urban Locals Open Houses
Key Issues / Concerns / Comments Raised by the Nisga’a Issue Theme Area Urban Locals Sessions Economic (Section 7.0) NULs are interested in economic benefits to Nisga’a citizens – distributing benefits throughout entire Nisga’a Nation population. Specific reference to a project benefits trust that would provide a real and long-term economic legacy to the Nisga’a Nation. Training and employment programs that are accessible to all Nisga’a citizens; the ability for the proposed Project to proactively develop relevant and marketable skills within Nisga’a Nation populations; and providing relocation and specialised training as needed. Legacy A desire for the proposed Project to have a net positive effect on the surrounding areas and to address ongoing legacy issues with the site. Human Health (Section 10.0) Long-term health programming benefits for all Nisga’a citizens, with specific emphasis monitoring and accountability for long-term health and safety effects to mine workers and surrounding communities. Surface Water Quality (Section 6.2) Accountability on environmental effect, with regard to water quality and ongoing monitoring over the life and closure of the mine. Note: NUL - Nisga’a Urban Local
Version 1.0 VE51988 – Section 13.0 April 2012 Page 13-43