DOCSLIB.ORG

ACFN Shell FINAL TUS April 20, 2011 CLEAN

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ACFN Shell FINAL TUS April 20, 2011 CLEAN Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Integrated Knowledge and Land Use Report and Assessment for Shell Canadaʼs Proposed Jackpine Mine Expansion and Pierre River Mine April 20, 2011 Craig Candler (Ph.D) and the Firelight Group Research Cooperative with the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Integrated Knowledge and Use Report and Assessment for Shell Canada’s Proposed Jackpine Mine Prepared and authored by: Craig Candler (Ph.D) and the Firelight Group Research Cooperative On behalf of: Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) Submitted to: Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Industry Relations Corporation ACFN Integrated Knowledge and Use Report for JPME and PRM 4/20/2011 Executive Summary This report provides baseline information and impact assessment regarding Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) knowledge and use in the area of two proposed oil sand mines: the Jackpine Mine Expansion (JPME), and the Pierre River Mine (PRM). Eleven individual mapping interviews specific to JPME and PRM were conducted and information from previous studies was integrated. ACFN mapped (site-specific) information include data from approximately 100 interviews conducted with more than 50 ACFN elders and land users. Assessment was based on project footprints and included local study areas (LSAs) within 5km of project footprints, and a larger regional study area (RSA) based on ACFN cultural protection areas (ACFN 2010), and downstream portions of the Athabasca River, including the Athabasca delta. Lands within the LSAs and RSA contain unique and culturally important resources and landscapes that are integral to the practice of ACFN use and knowledge. Maps illustrate ACFN use within, adjacent to, and down stream of the proposed projects. Fifty-five ACFN use values were reported within the JPME LSA including thirteen habitation values, preferred hunting, berry gathering, and fishing sites, trails, and water routes. The JPME LSA also includes a large portion of ACFN trapline RFMA #1714. 45 use values were reported within the PRM LSA including 14 habitation values, hunting sites, fishing sites, important wood bison and moose habitat, and trails and water routes. The PRM LSA includes portions of a historic ACFN trapline. Likely effects are characterized by standard criteria including magnitude and duration. The JPME and PRM projects, either separately or taken together, are considered likely to have significant adverse residual effects on specific ACFN knowledge and use values, including but not limited to effects on use in the vicinity of RFMA #1714, effects on wood bison, and downstream loss of use due to perceived contaminants and effects on the Athabasca River at low flow levels. It is recommended that the proponent, ACFN, and Federal and Provincial Crown undertake a process to ensure adequate quantity and quality of resources exist for the continuation of ACFN knowledge and use into the future. This process should prioritize avoiding and reducing impacts over mitigating them. Where project effects on ACFN knowledge and use cannot be avoided they should be mitigated to below a significant level, as defined in this report, using effective strategies agreeable to the ACFN. If impacts to ACFN knowledge and use cannot be avoided, reduced, or mitigated to below a significant level, then permissions for JPME and PRM should require consent from the Federal and Provincial Crown, and authorized representatives of the ACFN. www.thefirelightgroup.com 3 ACFN Integrated Knowledge and Use Report for JPME and PRM 4/20/2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 3 List of Figures and Tables................................................................................................. 8 List of Appendices............................................................................................................. 9 Acronyms and Abbreviations .......................................................................................... 10 Section 1: Outline of the Report ..................................................................................... 11 1.1 About the Authors ............................................................................................... 12 1.2 What is a Project Specific Traditional Use Study? .............................................. 13 1.3 Limitations of the Report ..................................................................................... 14 Section 2: The Projects and Existing Studies ............................................................... 15 2.1.1 Jackpine Mine Expansion ............................................................................. 16 2.1.2 Pierre River Mine .......................................................................................... 17 2.1.3 Redclay Compensation Lake ........................................................................ 17 2.1.4 Water Withdrawals ........................................................................................ 17 2.2 Existing Studies................................................................................................... 18 2.2.1 Proponent’s Consideration of ACFN Traditional Knowledge and Land Use Within the Applications ................................................................. 18 2.2.2 Summary of the 2008 ACFN Study for JPME and PRM ............................... 21 Section 3: Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation ............................................................... 24 3.1 Culture and History ............................................................................................. 24 3.2 Treaty 8 and Dené Livelihood ............................................................................. 26 3.3 ACFN Reserves and Traplines ........................................................................... 28 3.4 Population and Demographics ............................................................................ 29 3.5 ACFN Vision and Planning.................................................................................. 31 3.5.1 ACFN Cultural Protection Areas ................................................................... 32 www.thefirelightgroup.com 4 ACFN Integrated Knowledge and Use Report for JPME and PRM 4/20/2011 Section 4: Methods for Baseline Collection and Impact Assessment ............................ 35 4.1 Baseline Collection Methods............................................................................... 35 4.1.1 Identification of Key Valued Components ..................................................... 35 4.1.2 Temporal and Spatial Boundaries................................................................. 37 4.1.3 Interview and Mapping Methods ................................................................... 39 4.1.4 ACFN Baseline Information Sources ............................................................ 40 4.2 Impact Assessment Methods .............................................................................. 42 4.2.1 Valued Components for Assessment............................................................ 42 4.2.2 Temporal and Spatial Boundaries................................................................. 43 4.3 Assessment Methods.......................................................................................... 43 4.3.1 Residual Effects Characterization ................................................................. 43 4.3.2 ACFN Sensitive Receptors ........................................................................... 45 4.3.3 Environmental Consequence ........................................................................ 45 4.3.4 Significance Threshold.................................................................................. 46 4.3.5 Confidence in Predictions ............................................................................. 47 Section 5: JPME Project Baseline and Assessment ...................................................... 48 5.1 Baseline for Site-specific VCs within the JPME LSA and RSA ........................... 48 5.2 Baseline Summary for Non-site-specific VCs Within the JPME LSA and RSA... 53 5.2.1 Water and River values – Quantity ............................................................... 56 5.2.2 Water and River Values – Quality ................................................................. 57 5.2.3 Culturally Important Species – Bison ............................................................ 59 5.2.4 Culturally Important Species – Woodland Caribou and Barren Ground Caribou.......................................................................................................... 59 5.2.5 Culturally Important Species – Migratory Birds ............................................. 61 5.2.6 Culturally Important Species – Plants ........................................................... 61 5.2.7 Access and Enjoyment of ACFN lands – Traplines ...................................... 62 5.2.8 Access and Enjoyment of ACFN Lands – Reserves and Cultural Protection Areas............................................................................................ 62 5.2.9 Intangible Cultural Resources – ACFN Knowledge and Language .............. 64 5.3 Assessment of JPME Project Effects.................................................................. 65 5.3.1 Anticipated JPME Project Effects on Site-specific VCs within the LSA and RSA.......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Volume 2: Baseline, Section 13: Traditional Land Use September 2011 Volume 2: Baseline Studies Frontier Project Section 13: Traditional Land Use
    R1 R24 R23 R22 R21 R20 T113 R19 R18 R17 R16 Devil's Gate 220 R15 R14 R13 R12 R11 R10 R9 R8 R7 R6 R5 R4 R3 R2 R1 ! T112 Fort Chipewyan Allison Bay 219 T111 Dog Head 218 T110 Lake Claire ³ Chipewyan 201A T109 Chipewyan 201B T108 Old Fort 217 Chipewyan 201 T107 Maybelle River T106 Wildland Provincial Wood Buffalo National Park Park Alberta T105 Richardson River Dunes Wildland Athabasca Dunes Saskatchewan Provincial Park Ecological Reserve T104 Chipewyan 201F T103 Chipewyan 201G T102 T101 2888 T100 Marguerite River Wildland Provincial Park T99 1661 850 Birch Mountains T98 Wildland Provincial Namur River Park 174A 33 2215 T97 94 2137 1716 T96 1060 Fort McKay 174C Namur Lake 174B 2457 239 1714 T95 21 400 965 2172 T94 ! Fort McKay 174D 1027 Fort McKay Marguerite River 2006 Wildland Provincial 879 T93 771 Park 772 2718 2926 2214 2925 T92 587 2297 2894 T91 T90 274 Whitemud Falls T89 65 !Fort McMurray Wildland Provincial Park T88 Clearwater 175 Clearwater River T87Traditional Land Provincial Park Fort McKay First Nation Gregoire Lake Provincial Park T86 Registered Fur Grand Rapids Anzac Management Area (RFMA) Wildland Provincial ! Gipsy Lake Wildland Park Provincial Park T85 Traditional Land Use Regional Study Area Gregoire Lake 176, T84 176A & 176B Traditional Land Use Local Study Area T83 ST63 ! Municipality T82 Highway Stony Mountain Township Wildland Provincial T81 Park Watercourse T80 Waterbody Cowper Lake 194A I.R. Janvier 194 T79 Wabasca 166 Provincial Park T78 National Park 0 15 30 45 T77 KILOMETRES 1:1,500,000 UTM Zone 12 NAD 83 T76 Date: 20110815 Author: CES Checked: DC File ID: 123510543-097 (Original page size: 8.5X11) Acknowledgements: Base data: AltaLIS.
    [Show full text]
  • Northwest Territories Territoires Du Nord-Ouest British Columbia
    122° 121° 120° 119° 118° 117° 116° 115° 114° 113° 112° 111° 110° 109° n a Northwest Territories i d i Cr r eighton L. T e 126 erritoires du Nord-Oues Th t M urston L. h t n r a i u d o i Bea F tty L. r Hi l l s e on n 60° M 12 6 a r Bistcho Lake e i 12 h Thabach 4 d a Tsu Tue 196G t m a i 126 x r K'I Tue 196D i C Nare 196A e S )*+,-35 125 Charles M s Andre 123 e w Lake 225 e k Jack h Li Deze 196C f k is a Lake h Point 214 t 125 L a f r i L d e s v F Thebathi 196 n i 1 e B 24 l istcho R a l r 2 y e a a Tthe Jere Gh L Lake 2 2 aili 196B h 13 H . 124 1 C Tsu K'Adhe L s t Snake L. t Tue 196F o St.Agnes L. P 1 121 2 Tultue Lake Hokedhe Tue 196E 3 Conibear L. Collin Cornwall L 0 ll Lake 223 2 Lake 224 a 122 1 w n r o C 119 Robertson L. Colin Lake 121 59° 120 30th Mountains r Bas Caribou e e L 118 v ine i 120 R e v Burstall L. a 119 l Mer S 117 ryweather L. 119 Wood A 118 Buffalo Na Wylie L. m tional b e 116 Up P 118 r per Hay R ark of R iver 212 Canada iv e r Meander 117 5 River Amber Rive 1 Peace r 211 1 Point 222 117 M Wentzel L.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges and Benefits of Approaches Used to Integrate Regional Monitoring Programs
    POLICY AND PRACTICE REVIEWS published: 07 July 2021 doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2021.666698 Challenges and Benefits of Approaches Used to Integrate Regional Monitoring Programs T. J. Arciszewski 1*, D. R. Roberts 1, K. R. Munkittrick 2 and G. J. Scrimgeour 3 1Resource Stewardship Division, Alberta Environment and Parks, Calgary, AB, Canada, 2Department of Biological Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada, 3Office of the Chief Scientist, Alberta Environment and Parks, Edmonton, AB, Canada Although challenging to develop and operate, some degree of integrated monitoring is often necessary, especially at regional scales, to address the complex questions of environmental management and regulation. The concept of integration is well- understood, but its practice across programs and studies can be diverse suggesting a broader examination of the existing general approaches is needed. From the literature, we suggest integration of monitoring can occur across three study components: interpretation, analysis, and design. Design can be further subdivided into partial and full integration. Respectively combining information, data, and designs, we further define these types of integration and describe their general benefits and challenges, such as Edited by: Juergen Pilz, strength of inference. We further use the Oil Sands Monitoring program in northern Alberta University of Klagenfurt, Austria as an example to clarify the practices common among integrated monitoring programs. Reviewed by: The goal of the discussion paper is to familiarize readers with the diverse practices of Costica Nitu, fi Politehnica University of Bucharest, integrated monitoring to further clarify the various con gurations used to achieve the wider Romania goals of a program. Paul Makar, Environment and Climate Change Keywords: environmental monitoring, integrated monitoring, oil sands, regional monitoring program, environmental Canada, Canada managemenent *Correspondence: T.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 18.0 – Socio-Economic Impact Assessment Table of Contents
    Suncor Energy Inc. Lewis In Situ Project Volume 2 – Environmental Impact Assessment February 2018 SECTION 18.0 – SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 18.0 SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT ...........................................................18 -1 18.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................18 -1 18.2 Study Area ......................................................................................................18 -1 18.2.1 Temporal Boundary ..........................................................................18 -1 18.2.2 Spatial Boundary ..............................................................................18 -1 18.3 Assessment Approach ....................................................................................18 -3 18.3.1 Regulatory Framework .....................................................................18 -3 18.3.2 Socio-economic Issues Identification ................................................18 -3 18.3.3 Valued Socio-Economic Components and Key Indicators ................ 18-3 18.3.4 Assessment Cases ...........................................................................18 -4 18.3.5 Assessment Criteria .........................................................................18 -5 18.3.6 Constraints Planning ........................................................................18 -6 18.4 Methods ..........................................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • Enter Filename
    MOOSA CROSSOVER PROJECT ESA 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC SETTING This section of the ESA presents a summary description of the existing biophysical and socio-economic environment potentially affected by the Project. Results of field surveys conducted in 2012 and winter 2013 have been included in this ESA report. Vegetation and wildlife reconnaissance surveys were conducted in September 2012, and additional wildlife surveys were conducted in October 2012 and March 2013. Aquatic surveys were conducted in October 2012, and winter fisheries surveys were conducted in February 2013. Methods used to determine baseline conditions for each environmental or socio-economic resource are described in the relevant subsection. The Project is located in northeast Alberta, approximately 35 km northwest of Fort McMurray. The Project footprint is located within the Northern Alberta Lowlands Physiographic Region, and crosses Crown land in the Green Area of Alberta, including two watercourses. 5.1 Study Areas The spatial boundaries or study areas considered in the description of environmental setting and assessment of potential Project effects on the environmental components include one or more of the following: Project footprint, LSA, RSA, and socio-economic study area. These study areas were used to capture the potential direct and indirect effects of the Project on each VC and their associated KI, as well as to understand the context within which the effects can occur. The LSAs and RSAs used in the effects assessment vary by environmental and socio-economic element. The LSAs were established to assess the potential, largely direct effects of the Project on the local environment. Each VC and baseline setting component is considered in defining the LSAs.
    [Show full text]
  • Zone a – Prescribed Northern Zones / Zones Nordiques Visées Par Règlement Place Names Followed by Numbers Are Indian Reserves
    Northern Residents Deductions – Places in Prescribed Zones / Déductions pour les habitants de régions éloignées – Endroits situés dans les zones visées par règlement Zone A – Prescribed northern zones / Zones nordiques visées par règlement Place names followed by numbers are Indian reserves. If you live in a place that is not listed in this publication and you think it is in a prescribed zone, contact us. / Les noms suivis de chiffres sont des réserves indiennes. Communiquez avec nous si l’endroit où vous habitez ne figure pas dans cette publication et que vous croyez qu’il se situe dans une zone visée par règlement. Yukon, Nunavut, and the Northwest Territories / Yukon, Nunavut et Territoires du Nord-Ouest All places in the Yukon, Nunavut, and the Northwest Territories are located in a prescribed northern zone. / Tous les endroits situés dans le Yukon, le Nunavut et les Territoires du Nord-Ouest se trouvent dans des zones nordiques visées par règlement. British Columbia / Colombie-Britannique Andy Bailey Recreation Good Hope Lake Nelson Forks Tahltan Liard River 3 Area Gutah New Polaris Mine Taku McDames Creek 2 Atlin Hyland Post Niteal Taku River McDonald Lake 1 Atlin Park Hyland Ranch Old Fort Nelson Tamarack Mosquito Creek 5 Atlin Recreation Area Hyland River Park Pavey Tarahne Park Muddy River 1 Bear Camp Iskut Pennington Telegraph Creek One Mile Point 1 Ben-My-Chree Jacksons Pleasant Camp Tetsa River Park Prophet River 4 Bennett Kahntah Porter Landing Toad River Salmon Creek 3 Boulder City Kledo Creek Park Prophet River Trutch Silver
    [Show full text]
  • Alberta, 2021 Province of Canada
    Quickworld Entity Report Alberta, 2021 Province of Canada Quickworld Factoid Name : Alberta Status : Province of Canada Active : 1 Sept. 1905 - Present Capital : Edmonton Country : Canada Official Languages : English Population : 3,645,257 - Permanent Population (Canada Official Census - 2011) Land Area : 646,500 sq km - 249,800 sq mi Density : 5.6/sq km - 14.6/sq mi Names Name : Alberta ISO 3166-2 : CA-AB FIPS Code : CA01 Administrative Subdivisions Census Divisions (19) Division No. 11 Division No. 12 Division No. 13 Division No. 14 Division No. 15 Division No. 16 Division No. 17 Division No. 18 Division No. 19 Division No. 1 Division No. 2 Division No. 3 Division No. 4 Division No. 5 Division No. 6 Division No. 7 Division No. 8 Division No. 9 Division No. 10 Towns (110) Athabasca Banff Barrhead Bashaw Bassano Beaumont Beaverlodge Bentley Black Diamond Blackfalds Bon Accord Bonnyville Bow Island Bowden Brooks Bruderheim Calmar Canmore Cardston Carstairs Castor Chestermere Claresholm Coaldale Coalhurst Cochrane Coronation Crossfield Crowsnest Pass Daysland Devon Didsbury Drayton Valley Drumheller Eckville Edson Elk Point Fairview Falher © 2019 Quickworld Inc. Page 1 of 3 Quickworld Inc assumes no responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions in the content of this document. The information contained in this document is provided on an "as is" basis with no guarantees of completeness, accuracy, usefulness or timeliness. Quickworld Entity Report Alberta, 2021 Province of Canada Fort MacLeod Fox Creek Gibbons Grande Cache Granum Grimshaw Hanna Hardisty High Level High Prairie High River Hinton Innisfail Killam Lac la Biche Lacombe Lamont Legal Magrath Manning Mayerthorpe McLennan Milk River Millet Morinville Mundare Nanton Okotoks Olds Oyen Peace River Penhold Picture Butte Pincher Creek Ponoka Provost Rainbow Lake Raymond Redcliff Redwater Rimbey Rocky Mountain House Sedgewick Sexsmith Slave Lake Smoky Lake Spirit River St.
    [Show full text]
  • Metis Settlements and First Nations in Alberta Community Profiles
    For additional copies of the Community Profiles, please contact: Indigenous Relations First Nations and Metis Relations 10155 – 102 Street NW Edmonton, Alberta T5J 4G8 Phone: 780-644-4989 Fax: 780-415-9548 Website: www.indigenous.alberta.ca To call toll-free from anywhere in Alberta, dial 310-0000. To request that an organization be added or deleted or to update information, please fill out the Guide Update Form included in the publication and send it to Indigenous Relations. You may also complete and submit this form online. Go to www.indigenous.alberta.ca and look under Resources for the correct link. This publication is also available online as a PDF document at www.indigenous.alberta.ca. The Resources section of the website also provides links to the other Ministry publications. ISBN 978-0-7785-9870-7 PRINT ISBN 978-0-7785-9871-8 WEB ISSN 1925-5195 PRINT ISSN 1925-5209 WEB Introductory Note The Metis Settlements and First Nations in Alberta: Community Profiles provide a general overview of the eight Metis Settlements and 48 First Nations in Alberta. Included is information on population, land base, location and community contacts as well as Quick Facts on Metis Settlements and First Nations. The Community Profiles are compiled and published by the Ministry of Indigenous Relations to enhance awareness and strengthen relationships with Indigenous people and their communities. Readers who are interested in learning more about a specific community are encouraged to contact the community directly for more detailed information. Many communities have websites that provide relevant historical information and other background.
    [Show full text]
  • TREATY 8 FIRST NATIONS of ALBERTA to Protect, Promote, Bring to Life, Implement and Sustain the True Spirit and Intent of Treaty No
    ACFN Advice to Alberta Regarding LARP November 22, 2010 Appendix 1: October 19, 2010 Joint Submission of Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, Chipewyan Prairie Dene First Nation, Mikisew Cree First Nation Regarding Comments on the Lower Athabasca Regional Advisory Council’s Advice to the Government of Alberta Regarding a Vision for the Lower Athabasca Region Appendix 1 Joint Submission of ACFN, CPFN and MCFN on the RAC Vision A1-1 Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Mikisew Cree First Nation Chipewyan Prairie Dene First Nation Industry Relations Corporation Government and Industry Relations Industry Relations Corporation 110B -9816 Hardin Street Suite 208, 9715 Main Street Suite 205, 10020 Franklin Avenue Fort McMurray, AB T9H 4K3 Fort McMurray, AB T9H 1T5 Fort McMurray, AB T9H 2K6 October 19, 2010 Dave Bartesko Land Use Secretariat 9th Floor, 10035‐108 Street Centre West Building Edmonton, AB T5K 2G8 [email protected] Dear Mr. Bartesko: Re: Comments on the Lower Athabasca Regional Advisory Council’s Advice to the Government of Alberta Regarding a Vision for the Lower Athabasca Region (“the RAC Document”) This letter sets out some of the Mikisew Cree First Nation, the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation and the Chipewyan Prairie Dene First NNation’s (“First Nations”) comments on the RAC Document and Cabinet’s powers in respect of the Lower Athabasca Regional Plan (“LARP”). We have also attached an appendix to this letter which provides a chart showing all of the references to “aboriginal peoples” in the RAC Document, the RAC vision for each item, and the problems with the vision. Please note that the First Nations will be providing additional information to the Government of Alberta, including their respective visions for the LARP, on or before November 11, 2010, as per Melody Lepine’s discussion with Dave Bartesko on October 15, 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Download/2014-Ghg-Emissions-From-Oil-Sands-Tailings-Ponds-Overview- And-Modelling-Based-On-Fermentable-Sub.Pdf (Accessed on 14 May 2021)
    minerals Review Geochemical Stability of Oil Sands Tailings in Mine Closure Landforms Heidi L. Cossey 1, Anya E. Batycky 1 , Heather Kaminsky 2 and Ania C. Ulrich 1,* 1 Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 1H9, Canada; [email protected] (H.L.C.); [email protected] (A.E.B.) 2 Centre for Oil Sands Sustainability, Northern Alberta Institute of Technology (NAIT), Edmonton, AB T5G 0Y2, Canada; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-780-492-8293 Abstract: Oil sands surface mining in Alberta has generated over a billion cubic metres of waste, known as tailings, consisting of sands, silts, clays, and process-affected water that contains toxic organic compounds and chemical constituents. All of these tailings will eventually be reclaimed and integrated into one of two types of mine closure landforms: end pit lakes (EPLs) or terrestrial landforms with a wetland feature. In EPLs, tailings deposits are capped with several metres of water while in terrestrial landforms, tailings are capped with solid materials, such as sand or overburden. Because tailings landforms are relatively new, past research has heavily focused on the geotechnical and biogeochemical characteristics of tailings in temporary storage ponds, referred to as tailings ponds. As such, the geochemical stability of tailings landforms remains largely unknown. This review discusses five mechanisms of geochemical change expected in tailings landforms: consolidation, chemical mass loading via pore water fluxes, biogeochemical cycling, polymer degradation, and surface water and groundwater interactions. Key considerations and knowledge gaps with regard Citation: Cossey, H.L.; Batycky, A.E.; Kaminsky, H.; Ulrich, A.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Resources for Cultural and Subsistence Purposes (E.G., Hunting, Trapping, and Fishing)
    Cenovus TL ULC Telephone Lake Project Volume 2 – Environmental Impact Assessment December 2011 SECTION 17.0 – SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 17.0 SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT ............................................................ 17-1 17.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 17-1 17.2 Study Area ........................................................................................................ 17-1 17.2.1 Spatial .............................................................................................. 17-1 17.2.2 Temporal .......................................................................................... 17-3 17.3 Assessment Approach ..................................................................................... 17-3 17.3.1 Issues Identification ......................................................................... 17-3 17.3.2 Scoping Considerations ................................................................... 17-3 17.3.3 Socio-Economic Indicators .............................................................. 17-4 17.4 Methods ............................................................................................................ 17-6 17.4.1 Characterization of Baseline Conditions .......................................... 17-6 17.4.2 Impact Assessment .......................................................................... 17-6 17.5 Baseline Case .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Athabasca Regional Plan 2012 - 2022
    Lower Athabasca Regional Plan 2012 - 2022 Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Background ................................................................................................................................................. 2 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 Land-use Planning in Alberta ................................................................................................................... 3 Informing Land-use Decisions ................................................................................................................. 5 Plan Structure ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Regulatory Details Plan Part 1 General ....................................................................................... 7 Strategic Plan ...................................................................................................................................... 13 The Region Today .................................................................................................................................... 14 Economic Development .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]