Keeyask Generation Project Environmental Overview
April 2015 - March 2016 Monitoring Advisory Committee Members
Tataskweyak Cree Nation Victor Spence Councillor Nathan Neckoway Joseph Harvey
War Lake First Nation Councillor Dwayne Flett Councillor Roy Ouskun
York Factory First Nation Roy Redhead Jimmy Beardy
Fox Lake Cree Nation Brandy Bone Councillor Shawna Henderson
Manitoba Hydro Carolyne Northover, Chair Kurt Fey Jodine MacDuff Mark Manzer Russ Schmidt Diana Mager, Recording Secretary
For more information on this report go to Keeyask.com Table of Contents
Message from the Chair ...... 2 Aquatic Effects Monitoring ...... 25 Introduction ...... 3 Water Quality ...... 25 Environmental Protection Program ...... 5 Benthic Invertebrates ...... 26 Generation Project Status ...... 7 Mercury in FIsh ...... 26 Environmental Protection Plan ...... 9 Lake Sturgeon ...... 27 Dewatering of Construction Areas ...... 9 . Fish Movements ...... 28 Fish Salvage ...... 10 Fisheries Mitigation ...... 31 South Access Road ...... 11 Sturgeon Stocking ...... 31 Erosion and Sediment Control ...... 12 Zebra Mussel Monitoring ...... 33 Spills and Spill Response ...... 12 Terrestrial Monitoring ...... 34 Clearing and Sensitive Sites ...... 13 Terrestrial Habitat ...... 34 . Pre-Clearing Nest Surveys ...... 13 Terrestrial Plants ...... 36 Species at Risk ...... 14 Birds ...... 38 Bald Eagle Nests ...... 14 Mammals ...... 41 Gull and Tern Control Program ...... 15 Terrestrial Mitigation ...... 43 Wildlife ...... 16 Wetland Development ...... 43 Bear Relocations ...... 16 Gull and Tern Habitat Replacement ...... 44 Bear and Wolf Dens ...... 17 Other Bird Habitat Replacement ...... 44 Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge Monitoring ...... 18 Frog Habitat Replacement ...... 45 Cree Nation Partners – An Overview of the ATK Monitoring Program ...... 18 Beaver and Muskrat Mitigation Measures ...... 45 York Factory First Nation – Askiy Nanakacihtakewin Stewardship Program ...... 19 Vegetation Rehabilitation ...... 46 Fox Lake Cree Nation – Aski Keskentamowin Monitoring ...... 20 Resource Use Monitoring ...... 47 Physical Environment Monitoring ...... 22 Waterways Management Program ...... 48 Water and Ice Regime ...... 22 Socio-Economic Monitoring ...... 50 Sedimentation ...... 23 Economic Monitoring ...... 50. Sediment Management ...... 24 Social Monitoring ...... 58 Mercury and Human Health ...... 68 Heritage Resources Protection and Mitigation ...... 69 Public Engagement ...... 71 Map of Monitoring Locations ...... 72
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview Message from the Chair of the General Partner of KHLP
On behalf of the Keeyask Hydropower Limited Partnership (KHLP), I am pleased to present the Keeyask Generation Project (the Project) Environmental Overview. The Environmental Overview summarizes the results of the Environmental Protection Program, which includes both western science and Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge. The 2015/2016 Overview outlines the first full year of environmental monitoring during Project construction.
Over the past year, a number of important milestones were achieved. Manitoba Hydro acting as the Project Manager on behalf of the KHLP received approval from the Province for all plans in the Environmental Protection Program. The first annual submissions of reports were submitted to the regulator in June 2015. These technical reports provide the environmental management, mitigation and monitoring results of the Project according to the terms and conditions of The Environment Act Licence, for the 2014/2015 year.
The partner First Nation communities worked together and with Manitoba Hydro to initiate development of community-specific Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge (ATK) monitoring programs for the Project. Work on these is underway and will provide important insights into our efforts to minimize Project effects on the environment.
The anticipated environmental effects experienced during the construction and operation of the Project are being carefully mitigated and monitored by the KHLP. A flexible and robust adaptive management program was developed to allow the Partnership to identify and address any unanticipated effects in a timely and comprehensive way.
Project updates are regularly provided through the KHLP website at www.Keeyask.com. The Environmental Protection Program plans, regulatory reports and other Project related activities can be found on the site as well.
The KHLP Board extends their thanks to all those who contributed their wisdom and time to developing environmental programs that will help provide long term benefits to the Project.
Sincerely,
Lorne Midford Chair of the General Partner of Keeyask Hydropower Limited Partnership (5900345 Manitoba Ltd.)) Introduction
For over a century, Manitobans have come to rely on Hudson Bay clean, renewable hydroelectricity to power their homes, SizeB Landscape BTB DEC- 2011 industries and businesses. With abundant water Thompson resources available for future development, Manitoba Lake Split Winnipeg is well-poised to take advantage of the public’s growing Lake RMA Winnipeg demand for electrical energy — both within the TL RC60 Keeyask Limestone PR 280 G.S. province and in export markets. The 695-megawatt G.S. Fox Lake Cree Nation Fox Lake (Bird) Henday C.S.
S Keeyask Generation Project will help meet that TE Long P H N E orth Acc N Spruce ess R S oad Kettle G.S. demand. Keeyask is located within the Split Lake G.S. Keeyask LAKE G.S. Gillam Radisson C.S. NELSON RIVER Resource Management Area and will be the fourth South Access R oad GULL LAKE Fox Lake Cree Nation AA Birthday A Kwis Ki Mahka Reserve A CLARK Rapids M A largest generating station (GS) in Manitoba with LAKE RR MM RR Tataskweyak Cree Nation ee kk Tataskweyak (Split Lake) ee a first unit in-service date of 2019. aa kk LL aa TL KS37 tt LL ii ll HUDSON BAY RAILWAY xx RIVER pp oo Manitoba Hydro and four Cree Nations known SS FF York Factory First Nation TL KN36 Kelsey York Landing (Kawechiwasik) Bipoles 1 & 2 collectively as the partner First Nations: Tataskweyak G.S. ralLocationMap_Update_21MARCH2014.mxd TL KH38 War Lake First Nation Ilford Cree Nation and War Lake First Nation (working Y o r k F a c t o r y R M A together as the Cree Nation Partners); Fox Lake Cree
DATA SOURCE: Manitoba Hydro; GovernmentLegend of Manitoba; Government of CanadaGeneratingLegend Station (Existing) Highway Transmission Line Nation and York Factory First Nation have formed the 50 10 Kilometers Highway Proposed Road Corridor General Project Keeyask GeneratingGenerating Station Station (Existing) Access Road Proposed Road Corridor CREATED BY: Access Road First Nation Reserve General Manitoba Hydro - Hydro Power Planning - GIS & Special Studies Keeyask Hydropower Limited Partnership (KHLP) to Keeyask Generating Station South Access Road Resource Management Area COORDINATE SYSTEM: DATE CREATED: REVISIONConverter DATE: Station South Access Road First Nation Reserve Location Rail Project Location40 8 Miles UTM NAD 1983 Z15N 03-AUG-11 21-MAR-14 Converter Station 0 5 10 Kilometres Transmission Line VERSION NO: QA/QC:Keeyask Principal Structures Rail Resource Management Area develop this Project in an environmentally and socially 2.0 Approved Keeyask Principal Structures 048Miles File Location: \\geodata\warehouse\Warehouse_Groups\Power_Supply\Projects\Keeyask\Maps\One_Offs\Carolyne_Northover\Keeyask_Gene Location: File responsible manner. The ongoing development of this Project is guided by the Joint Keeyask Development Agreement (JKDA) which outlines the terms for the partnership, ownership, construction, and operation of the Project.
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 3 Keeyask will be the fifth hydroelectric GS constructed During the Project planning and design process, This Environmental Overview describes the Program on the lower Nelson River and is located in the Split the KHLP identified measures to avoid or reduce and gives a summary of what was undertaken Lake Resource Management Area within the ancestral and mitigate the Project’s environmental effects and and learned in the 2015/2016 fiscal year homeland of all four partner First Nations. Manitoba determined what needed to be monitored to verify the (April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2016). Hydro and the partner First Nations have worked predicted effects. All measures identified are included together for well over a decade to develop the Project in a series of documents that describe in detail and, for the first time in their history, the partner what needs to be done to protect the environment. First Nations have the ability to provide meaningful Collectively these documents are called the Keeyask input into a hydroelectric development project. Also Environmental Protection Program (the Program). for the first time in their history, through various employment, business, as well as potential income opportunities, the partner First Nations are benefitting from a hydroelectric project in their homeland.
4 Environmental Protection Program
Environmental approvals, including a Manitoba Environmental Management Plans – focus on Environmental Monitoring Plans – describe the Environment Act Licence and a federal Fisheries Act specific environmental issues such as sediment activities to be undertaken for the monitoring of Authorization, were issued to the KHLP in July 2014 management, access management, fish habitat effects of construction and operational activities on the after a thorough regulatory and public review process. and heritage resources; and biological, physical and socio-economic environments.
Keeyask’s Environmental Protection Program was developed to mitigate, manage and monitor environmental effects identified during the regulatory review process. The Program is made up of a number Environmental Protection Program (The Program) of plans grouped in the following categories:
Environmental Protections Plans – provide detailed, site specific protection measures to be followed by Environmental Environmental Environmental Monitoring Plans Protection Management Plans the contractor and construction staff to minimize Plans (EnvPPs) • Sediment Management Technical Science Aboriginal environmental effects from construction of the • Generating Station • Fisheries Offsetting & Traditional Mitigation • Physical Environment GS and the south access road; • South Access Road Knowledge (ATK) • Access Management • Aquatic Effects • Terrestrial Effects • Tataskweyak • Heritage Resources Protection • Socio-Economic Cree Nation • War Lake First Nation • Vegetation Rehabilitation • Resource Use York Factory • Zebra Mussel • • Terrestrial Mitigation First Nation Implementation • Fox Lake Cree Nation • Waterways Management • Reservoir Clearing • Mercury & Human Health
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 5 The Environment Act Licence states that all of the environmental plans require approval by the regulator and must be executed during the Project. The regulator approved the plans in 2015. Manitoba Hydro is responsible for the environmental protection and management plans and is undertaking the technical science monitoring on behalf of the KHLP. Each of the partner First Nations will be implementing its own community-based monitoring programs. As with the Insert optional photo assessment studies the technical science monitoring and ATK will be given equal weight.
There is a Monitoring Advisory Committee (MAC), made up of partner First Nations’ members and Manitoba Hydro staff, responsible for reviewing and discussing the implementation and outcomes of the Program. The MAC meets every two months and advises the KHLP on environmental issues.
Monitoring Advisory Committee Left to right: Kurt Fey, Diana Mager, Carolyne Northover, Joseph Harvey, John Whitaker (CNP advisor), Russ Schmidt, Roy Redhead, Elly Bonny (YFFN advisor), Mark Manzer, Jimmy Beardy, Cam MacInnes (FLCN advisor).
Missing: Victor Spence, Councillor Nathan Neckoway, Councillor Dwayne Flett, Councillor Roy Ouskun, Brandy Bone, Councillor Shawna Henderson.
6 Generation Project Status
Construction of the Keeyask Generation Project began During 2015/2016, the General Civil Contractor in July 2014, once The Environment Act Licence and continued to work on river management structures the Fisheries Act Authorization and other permits and completed the Spillway Cofferdam and Central were in place. The General Civil Contract, the largest Dam Cofferdam. This allowed excavation of rock to contract on the Keeyask Project, was awarded to BBE occur in the dry areas behind the cofferdams and is Hydro Constructors Limited Partnership. The Keeyask necessary prior to concrete placement for the permanent General Civil Contract includes: rock excavation, structures including the spillway, central dam and concrete production for the powerhouse and spillway, powerhouse. Approximately one per cent of the total earth structures, electrical and mechanical work, and volume of the Project’s concrete was placed to build the the construction and removal of temporary cofferdams powerhouse service bay by the end of September 2015, needed to manage river flows during construction. which was ahead of schedule. The spillway excavation Construction activities began in the Nelson River at was completed in early 2016 and powerhouse excavation Gull Rapids on July 16, 2014. The focus of work during is nearing completion. The first pouring of concrete for the 2014/2015 year was constructing a majority of the the spillway occurred in March 2016, which starts the temporary river management structures that divert first of two peak construction seasons on the Project: Rock excavation for powerhouse – August 2015 or redirect the river away from where the permanent summer 2016 and summer 2017. In addition to work on structures will be built. the main GS structures, clearing along the north and south dykes occurred and in January 2016, placement of clay began to build the north dyke.
First concrete pour for the powerhouse service bay – September 2015
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 7 New ice boom installation - July 2015 Main Camp - December 2015
In winter 2014/2015, an ice boom was installed upstream Clearing the future reservoir of trees started in the fall Members of the partner First Nations are currently of the Project site. The purpose of the ice boom is of 2015 by Amisk Construction. Most of the clearing employed in a variety of construction and support service to initiate the development of ice cover which helps in the reservoir will be undertaken by heavy machinery. positions. Partner First Nations’ businesses continue to prevent ice damming and the backing up of water at the Environmentally sensitive sites will be hand cleared. provide important site services including catering, janitorial, structures. Unfortunately, the ice boom failed and was Clearing on the north side of the river is complete. security, employee retention and support, emergency destroyed by the ice. To prevent water overtopping the Crews will return in the fall of 2016 to complete medical services and camp maintenance for the Project. cofferdams, emergency heightening of structures with clearing on the south side prior to forebay impoundment, rock was undertaken. During the summer of 2015, two which is scheduled to begin in the fall of 2018. new ice booms were installed. These ice booms helped to form ice upstream of the work areas in November 2015. ± In 2015/2016, the Keeyask main camp was expanded from
its initial 500-person capacity to house over 2,000 workers. North Access Road The camp construction is now complete and can accommodate Quarry Q-7 the peak workforce required during the next two summers. North Channel Powerhouse Work on the South Access Road, which will provide a Cofferdam North Channel Quarry direct link between Gillam and the GS, began in January Cofferdam Cofferdam Central Dam North Channel Central Cofferdam 2015 on the south side of the Nelson River and will continue (North Extension) Rock Groin Island Channel Cofferdam through 2016. This work is being undertaken by Amisk William Smith Central Dam Island (West) Cofferdam Construction, a joint venture partnership consisting William Smith Island (East)
of the Cree Nation Partners (Tataskweyak Cree Nation Flow Direction" and War Lake First Nation) and Sigfusson Northern Ltd. South Channel Spillway Cofferdam
Satellite Imagery - March 20th, 2015 Legend Rock Groin Constructed Gull Nesting Habitat 0 0.5 1 Kilometres Infrastructure Completed 0 0.4 0.8 Miles July 16, 2014 to March 31, 2016 Cofferdam Haul & Site Road 8 Environmental Protection Plan
Two Environmental Protection Plans, one for Water containing more than 25 mg/L of TSS was the central channel had to occur to allow for repairs construction of the GS and one for the construction released to the river on August 9, 2015, because the to the Central Dam Cofferdam. This was reported of the South Access Road, were developed to provide contractor did not test the water prior to discharging to Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship detailed environmental protection measures. The plans it. Water exceeding the TSS limit was also released (MCWS) and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). are followed by contractors and construction staff to to the river during the month of October due to All dewatering pumps were fitted with fish screens minimize environmental impacts during construction. a high rate of water seeping through the Central on the intake that met DFO guidelines to prevent There is a Site Environmental Lead and team of Dam Cofferdam. This would have lead to the entire harm to fish. environmental inspectors who conduct compliance central channel being refilled with water during monitoring daily to confirm the measures outlined in construction. Pumping of this seepage water out of the Environmental Protection Plans and all regulatory requirements are followed. Dewatering of Construction Areas Dewatering of the Spillway Cofferdam and the Central Dam Cofferdam took place during August to late October 2015. Water from construction cannot be released into the river if it has more than 25 mg/L of total suspended solids (TSS - such as clay and sand) in it. Testing of water from construction for TSS was done during dewatering to see if it met the 25 mg/L criteria. When it met the criteria, water was discharged directly into the Nelson River. When TSS exceeded 25 mg/L, it was pumped into natural vegetation, which helps to filter out the sediment prior to it entering the river. Spillway Cofferdam - September 2015
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 9 Electrofishing during fish salvage work
were taken to salvage fish from the area closest to the There were a variety of fish caught, with Longnose cofferdam that had not previously been fished. These Sucker being the most common species. The vast efforts resulted in 1,209 fish caught and released. majority of the fish caught were small. They were either fish that do not grow very large, or in the case The Spillway Cofferdam area was a newly isolated area of the Longnose Sucker, were young fish. Large, mature in 2015. Twenty-one thousand three hundred forty- fish were rarely found during salvage activities and three (21,343) fish were caught and released from this no Lake Sturgeon were caught. area. Survival of fish following release from both areas Pulling in a net used to catch fish during fish salvage work was greater than 95 per cent.
Fish Salvage ± North Channel Before areas that become isolated from the river by cofferdams can be completely dewatered, the fish that remain in the pools of water need to be captured and Central released to the Nelson River. The area encircled by the Channel Spillway Cofferdam and the area upstream of the Central William Smith Central Dam Dam Cofferdam both required fish salvage in 2015. Island (West) Cofferdam William Smith Island (East) The salvage fishery took place periodically between July 8 and October 17, with the majority of the work occurring between October 4 to 17. Fishing ended due
to freezing conditions, but the majority of fish were South Channel Spillway salvaged. Cofferdam A large portion of the Central Dam Cofferdam was Satellite Imagery -August 8th, 2015 fished in 2014, but due to the high water levels over the winter of 2014-15, water refilled pools already fished. 2015 Fish Salvage Legend 0 0.25 0.5 Kilometres These areas were checked again for fish and efforts Locations 2015 Fish Salvage Boundary 0 0.2 0.4 Miles
10 South Access Road stream crossing
South Access Road Construction of the South Access Road during 2015/2016 included clearing the right-of-way and borrow areas, borrow area development, and both road and water crossing construction. Boundaries were clearly marked prior to construction to ensure clearing stayed within the licensed limits and avoided environmentally sensitive sites. Water crossings were designed and constructed in accordance with the Manitoba Stream Crossing Guidelines for the Protection of Fish and Fish Habitat. This included installing erosion protection to prevent loss of soil to streams. Culverts were installed at stream crossings that allow free passage for fish.
South Access Road borrow area development and road construction - July 2015
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 11 Rip rap installed at stream crossing along South Access Road
Erosion and Sediment Control Spills and Spill Response Of the 24 releases, two were releases to the Nelson River. The first release consisted of four litres of gasoline Various types of erosion and sediment control A Hazardous Materials Spill Response Plan (HMSRP) from a boat that was docked at the upstream boat launch. measures installed onsite helped to reduce erosion and is in place, which sets the standard for spill prevention The second in-water release consisted of 2,500 litres of protect surrounding water quality. Site environmental planning. This includes responding to hazardous partially treated sewage, which was accidently discharged personnel conducted regular inspections and materials spills, reporting requirements and clean-up during regular sewage treatment plant maintenance. monitored the erosion and sediment control measures of spills. All spills were cleaned up immediately. to confirm they were functioning correctly and being Of the remaining 22 spills, 11 were antifreeze spills, Between April 1, 2015 and March 31, 2016, there were maintained. Erosion and sediment control measures which ranged in volume from five litres to 40 litres. 24 hazardous material releases that exceeded reportable installed included silt fence and rip rap. These releases were a result of equipment failure. quantities according to legislation. Manitoba Hydro The remaining releases consisted of three hydraulic oil notified regulatory authorities about all of these releases. spills, which were all greater than 100 litres, one diesel fuel spill that was 150 litres, three cement powder spills, two concrete wash water spills and one windshield washer fluid release that was approximately 250 litres.
To confirm the spill locations were cleaned-up properly, soil and water samples were collected from around each spill site. All incident reports, including the results of samples analysed at an independent laboratory, were submitted to the regulators.
Silt fence installed to reduce erosion
12 Unoccupied nest found during survey
Clearing and Sensitive Sites Environmentally sensitive sites, which include the locations of rare plants, priority habitat types, heritage resources and areas close to surface water, are shown on maps in the Environmental Protection Plans. To make sure these sites were not disturbed during clearing activities, a walk-through with the contractor occurred prior to any construction starting. Purple flagging tape was put up to clearly mark the areas that were not to be disturbed. Pre-Clearing Nest Surveys Prior to clearing occurring during the breeding bird nesting period (April 24 to August 25), pre-clearing nest surveys are conducted. In 2015, four pre-clearing nest surveys took place. During one of the pre-clearing nest surveys, a savannah sparrow nest containing four young was found. To prevent disturbance to the nest, a 30 metre buffer was established around the nest and remained until the young left the nest.
Sparrow nest with young found during pre-clearing nest survey
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 13 Species At Risk Bald Eagle Nests to be inactive in the previous summer, permission was provided from MCWS to remove these On July 17, 2015, a common nighthawk nest with Ten bald eagle nests were within the reservoir clearing unoccupied nests and trees during the clearing. two eggs in it was observed within a borrow pit. area, all on the north side of the river. Of the 10 nests, As this species is listed as Threatened under the two were noted to be active in 2015. A 200 metre During the month of April 2015, a pair of bald eagles Species at Risk Act (SARA), a 200 metre buffer buffer was established around each of the recently was frequently lingering in a dead black spruce tree was put in place around the nest. The buffer was active nest locations to ensure that no clearing took that was within the construction area. After the local maintained until the young had left the nest. place around them. One of the recently active nests Natural Resource Officer inspected the tree, it was Environment Canada was notified about the was inadvertently removed during clearing because the removed as a precautionary measure to prevent nesting. presence of the nest. marker identifying the perimeter of the buffer Removal of the tree encouraged the eagles to move was obscured after a snowfall. MCWS was notified away from the construction area. of this immediately. As the other nests were known
Common nighthawk eggs found in Km 15 borrow area Bald eagle observed near Quarry 7
14 Peregrine patrolling for gulls and terns Gyrfalcon used in the bird control program
Gull and Tern Control Program The gull and tern control area was also checked daily Falconry, in combination with other bird control for the presence of ring-billed gull, herring gull and methods, was successful in moving gulls and terns Thousands of gulls and hundreds of terns can nest common tern nests and eggs. Under an Environment out of the active construction areas and encouraging in the Gull Rapids area each year. In order to protect Canada permit, eight nests and thirty eggs of ring- nesting in areas not disturbed by construction site workers and the birds, as well as prevent property billed gulls and one common tern egg were removed. activities. Gulls and terns responded to the daily damage, a bird control program was implemented in No herring gull nests or eggs were removed. presence of the raptors by moving away from the 2014. It continued in 2015, to deter gulls and terns active construction area. No gulls or terns were from nesting in active construction areas. killed by raptors during this control program. In 2015, the gull and tern control program began on May 7 and continued until July 23. Falconry, the use of trained birds of prey (raptors) to chase other birds, North Access Road ± was used as the main control method as raptors are an effective and natural way to deter gulls and terns. Quarry Q-7 North Channel Raptors are natural predators of gulls and terns, so the Powerhouse gulls and terns instinctively try to avoid them. Raptor Cofferdam North Channel Quarry species used during the 2015 control program included Cofferdam Cofferdam Central Dam North Channel Central Cofferdam gyrfalcons, peregrine falcons, and Harris’s hawks. (North Extension) Rock Groin Channel Island Cofferdam While falconry was the main method used in the gull William Smith Central Dam Island (West) Cofferdam William Smith and tern control program, it had some limitations. Island (East) For example, raptors could not be flown on snowy Flow Direction or extremely windy days. On days when the raptors " could not work, other deterrent methods such South Channel as stock whips, pyrotechnics, drones, audio Spillway deterrents and sport kites were used. Cofferdam Legend 0 0.25 0.5 Kilometres Active Construction Zone Active Construction Areas Gull and Tern Control Area Area Within 200m of Active Construction Rock Groin 0 0.2 0.4 Miles Constructed Gull Nesting Habitat Cofferdam Haul & Site Road
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 15 Snowy owl
Wildlife Bear Relocations Wildlife interactions within the Project area were In 2015, a total of four black bears were relocated monitored on a daily basis by the site environmental (August 26, September 2, September 3 and September and construction staff. Observations of wildlife 7). Of the four bears, three were relocated from the included caribou, black bear, ptarmigan, martin, Start-up Camp and one from the Main Camp. All bears red fox, wolf, snowy owl and bald eagles. were relocated from the site using a bear trap and sent to a location provided by the local Natural Resource During the reporting period, numerous sightings Officer. Notification of all the bear relocations was of foxes were observed throughout the Project site. provided to MCWS’ Natural Resource Officer prior To address this, site workers and staff were reminded to the bears being relocated. during their site orientation and at the daily morning contractor safety meetings to not feed or harass wildlife. Fences were also installed around the food waste bins at both the Start-up Camp as well as the Main Camp to discourage wildlife from coming near the waste bins.
Fence installed around food waste bins
16 Bear den found during bear den survey
Bear and Wolf Dens Bear den surveys were conducted from mid-October to the area permitted to be used for Project construction early November 2015 in areas scheduled to be cleared and one was found just outside of this area. Buffers Black bear and gray wolves use dens for birthing, during the winter months. Areas surveyed included the of 100 metres were installed around the potential rearing young and hibernating. Bear and wolf den reservoir, the south dyke excavated material placement dens to ensure no clearing activities took place. Trail surveys take place when the timing of Project clearing areas, and borrow areas along the South Access Road. cameras were installed to monitor the dens. Monitoring overlaps with the excavation and den use. If any A total of four potential dens were observed within confirmed that none of the dens were occupied. dens are found, they are protected from potential construction disturbance by placing a buffer around them prior to clearing. 280
River Ferris t ako Bay sw S In mid-April 2015, gray wolf den searches were Mo TE PH th EN Sou S conducted prior to clearing portions of areas for the LA Wilson KE Channel north dyke. Searches also occurred in areas of borrow 280 North Access Road g okin B pits N-5 and G-3 near the Main Camp. No active gray Lo ack C re wolf dens were found, however signs of gray wolf were ek observed in the areas surveyed. Fox Lake Cree Nation A Kwis Ki Mahka Reserve
ad Ro s s ce Ac h GULL LAKE ut Gillrat So Cache Lake Lake Bu tn au Carscadden Lake Joslin Ri ver Lake er Riv
r ve Ri tnau r Butnau Bu le ve tt Ri Lake Ke
North
u a tn u Legend B 0 5 10 Kilometres Bear Den Location Keeyask Angling Bear Den Locations 0 4 8 Miles Principal Structures Lakes
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 17 Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge Monitoring
Similar to the two-track approach used by the Keeyask Cree Nation Partners – CNP is in the process of developing a Keeyask ATK Hydropower Limited Partnership (KHLP) to identify An Overview of the ATK Monitoring Program. This program is intended to and assess the anticipated effects of the Project, contribute to an ongoing assessment of the monitoring the KHLP is using a two-track approach to determine Monitoring Program and mitigation measures for Keeyask. the usefulness, accuracy and efficacy of monitoring Tataskweyak Cree Nation (TCN) and War Lake Both TCN and WLFN negotiated Keeyask Adverse and mitigation measures. The first track consists of First Nation (WLFN), operating together as the Cree Effects Agreements with Manitoba Hydro. These Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge (ATK) monitoring Nation Partners (CNP), have occupied the lands and agreements contain unique programs to address the and the other track of western science monitoring. It waters of northern Manitoba since time immemorial. concerns of CNP members identified during their is important to note that during the environmental Over the centuries, CNP Members have accumulated environmental evaluation of Keeyask, including assessment of Keeyask, the KHLP determined that (and continue to accumulate) invaluable traditional effects on their constitutionally protected right ATK and western science would be given equal weight knowledge about their homeland ecosystem, including to exercise their customs, practices and traditions and that the intent of this principle is carried forward its many components and their relationships to each (such as hunting, fishing and trapping). into Keeyask monitoring activities. other and to themselves. CNP Members have also accumulated unique knowledge related to the effects CNP intend to engage their members in a variety of hydroelectric development, having lived in the midst of activities to elicit meaningful discussion and action of major developments for over five decades. regarding the effects of Keeyask. These include:
As expressed in the Cree Nation Partners’ • “On the land” monitoring activities, including the Environmental Evaluation Report for the Keeyask development of extensive photographic records of Generation Project (Keeyask), Aboriginal Traditional important cultural and spiritual locations; Knowledge (ATK) is, “ knowledge that reflects our • Including Elders and youth in on-site monitoring experience, understanding, wisdom, values, beliefs, norms to facilitate the transmittal of ATK to young people; and priorities governing our relationships with Mother Earth and all her beings, derived and developed through • Key person interviews to determine the direct and living in our homeland ecosystem since time immemorial. indirect effects of Keeyask on all members; ATK is inextricably linked to our culture and our worldview.”
18 • Open houses/information sessions for members York Factory First Nation • Developing a long-term stewardship plan to ask questions and provide information; – Askiy Nanakacihtakewin for 2016/2017 and beyond; • Identifying all unanticipated effects; Stewardship Program • Attending Partnership meetings, including those for the Monitoring Advisory Committee (MAC) • Contributing to the development of mitigation In September 2015, York Factory First Nation and Caribou Coordination Committee, measures for unanticipated effects; and (YFFN) reached an initial contribution agreement and Socio-Economic Monitoring Plan; and • Documenting the effects of Keeyask on resource with Manitoba Hydro and began activities under • Attending other key community and cultural users (hunting, fishing, and trapping). the Askiy Nanakacihtakewin Stewardship Program. The First Nation hired two staff members to develop events, including community gatherings, CNP’s participation in the monitoring programs and implement the program: a Stewardship and traditional ceremonies addressing the damage will be essential to recording and interpreting ATK Coordinator, and Stewardship Assistant. that construction is causing to Askiy. required for annual regulatory monitoring reports and TheAskiy Nanakacihtakewin Stewardship Program will be an invaluable asset for identifying long-term Since September 2015, the program’s staff has focused continues to be focused on understanding and environmental changes or unique environmental events on several streams of activity: reconciling with the effects that the Keeyask project that may otherwise be overlooked. • Organizing initial program activities including is having both on Askiy (the land, water, fish, and tours of the Keeyask site for members; CNP continue to consult their members to develop an other beings), and on the Ininiwak (Cree People) of ATK Monitoring Program which will meaningfully • Working with other First Nation monitoring YFFN. As the program develops, work will aim to contribute to the mitigation of Keeyask adverse effects programs to share ideas and experiences, and document Ininiw Kiskenihtamowin (Cree knowledge) on the environment and on their members. Currently, identify ways for the programs to collaborate; and foster respectful dialogue between scientists and it is anticipated that CNP’s ATK Monitoring Program Cree knowledge-holders, as well as amongst Manitoba • Surveying community members to identify will begin in the summer of 2016. Hydro and the partner First Nations. priorities for the YFFN stewardship program;
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 19 Keeyask Transmission Line and South Access Road observed during FLCN site visit Fox tracks along Keeyask Transmission Line
Fox Lake Cree Nation – Aski Planning and information gathering sessions were Regular monitoring updates are provided by the IAU Keskentamowin Monitoring conducted in 2015/2016 and will continue to occur to the community through the Fox Tracks newsletter, throughout the community monitoring program. FLCN Facebook page, FLCN website and general Fox Lake Cree Nation (FLCN) created the Impact This is to ensure frequent communication and notices. Regular follow-ups with Elders and resource Assessment Unit (IAU) to assess and monitor the traditional knowledge monitoring is completed users are done to ensure notification of construction environmental impacts of hydroelectric development with extensive community involvement. Elders and activity, permit alterations, site access and harvesting through Aski Keskentamowin (Traditional Knowledge). resources users participated in Keeyask site visits rights, wildlife sightings and interaction, and safety During the assessment phase of Keeyask and other to see the impacts and extensive change to the land of the Gillam community. proposed hydro projects, Aski Keskentamowin helped and view the stages of construction. During site Fox Lake’s IAU has a designated phone number identify and protect heritage sites, and harvesting areas visits, wildlife tracks and sightings were documented. community members and resource users can contact for geese, ducks, berries, caribou, medicinal plants, as Local resource users present during some of these sites for information, report concerns or issues, as well well as other traditional activities and practices. Aski visits provided additional insight on the area and its as request site follow-ups (431-285-3149). Keskentamowin will guide the IAU and traditional current harvesting activity. knowledge monitors in gathering information to build The IAU is monitoring the entire Keeyask Project a resource library for the community. This resource footprint, which includes the South Access Road, library will be a beneficial educational learning tool for Keeyask Transmission Lines and all known heritage the community, and will help ensure the preservation and cultural sites. These areas have been monitored since of Fox Lake’s traditional knowledge. the beginning of construction and will continue to be Fox Lake’s goal is to ensure traditional knowledge monitored through the construction and operational is transferred from Elders to the youth to help the phases of the Keeyask Project. community to carry on this knowledge and harvesting practices. Throughout the 2016/2017 year, more extensive traditional knowledge monitoring will be completed, along with continued collaboration with the partner First Nations.
Installation of SAR culvert observed during FLCN site visit
20 Sunset near Keeyask
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 21 Physical Environmental Monitoring
The physical environment includes the physical and construction ice booms also began holding ice back at Relative to open water conditions, ice effects caused chemical components that make up an area including this time, forcing an ice cover to form across the river’s water levels to rise by about three metres at the the air, water and land. Construction of Keeyask width. Satellite photos taken throughout the winter upstream end of Gull Lake, five metres below Birthday will change the physical environment by replacing were used to monitor how much ice cover there was in Rapids, one metre downstream of Clark Lake and half Gull Rapids with a dam and making Gull Lake the area. The ice cover grew in the upstream direction, of a metre on Clark Lake. These increases are similar a reservoir. Monitoring of the physical environment reaching about four kilometres above Birthday Rapids to those observed in winter during the first year is being undertaken to identify physical changes caused by the end of winter. The area further upstream to the of construction and conditions previously observed by the Project. It also provides information that may exit of Split Lake remained open as it normally does. before construction. help provide a greater understanding of the cause of a change to a biological and/or socio-economic effect of the Project. ± Water and Ice Regime In the summer of 2014, six water level gauges were installed on the Nelson River between Clark Lake and Gull Rapids to monitor water levels during Ice Boom construction of Keeyask.
Water levels in Gull Lake increased in 2014, as Ice Boom anticipated, due to the construction of the North Ice Boom Channel rock groin, which diverted the river’s flow to the south channel of Gull Rapids. No additional structures were constructed since then that affect the open water levels upstream of the Project.
The onset of colder conditions around mid-November Satellite Imagery - January 3rd, 2016 2015, resulted in increased ice formation that caused 0 0.75 1.5 Kilometres water levels to rise at each monitoring site. The two Ice Boom and Ice Formation Locations 0 0.6 1.2 Miles
22 Installing a continuous turbidity meter
(see monitoring location map on Page 64). Open water monitoring results showed little change in turbidity at the sites from Clark Lake to below Gull Rapids, indicating the Project did not noticeably affect turbidity. Water samples were also collected periodically at the same locations as the turbidity meters, as well as another 21 locations, to monitor how much sediment is suspended in the water. Suspended sediment generally varied between about eight to 18 milligrams per litre, and averaged about 12 to 14 milligrams per litre. Observed conditions were similar to pre-Project conditions. Ice cover at the entrance to Gull Lake Two sediment traps, which are tubes installed on the lake bottom to collect sediment that settles out of used for this program to monitor sediment between Sedimentation the water, were set up to gather data before reservoir Clark Lake and the Kettle GS. The majority of the Monitoring of sediment (materials such as clay and impoundment and will be used to see if the amount monitoring is upstream of the construction site and the sand) in the Nelson River is being undertaken for of sediment settling out changes after the reservoir information produced will add to baseline information the Project under two different monitoring programs, is formed. In addition, samples were taken from two collected prior to construction. This information for two different purposes. locations to measure bed load (or sediment) moving will be compared with monitoring information along the bottom of the river. Results found little to no Sedimentation is being studied as part of the Physical that is produced after impoundment of the reservoir bed load was being transported despite above average Environment Monitoring Plan to determine the to understand how sediment levels change. flow conditions. change in sediment concentrations over time due to Continuous turbidity meters, which are automated, the Project. It also helps determine where sediment electronic devices that measure the murkiness of is being carried during construction, and particularly water, were installed at five locations in the summer during operation of the GS. Various methods are of 2015, and three locations in the winter 2015/2016
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 23 Sediment Management
The sediment monitoring program described in the Sediment Management Plan for In-Stream Construction (SMP) is being carried out to monitor suspended sediment in the river that originated from constructing structures, such as cofferdams, which involves putting rock, clay and sand in the river. The SMP requires construction personnel to review suspended sediment data collected every 15 minutes, 24 hours-a-day, whenever in-stream construction is taking place. Three stations are used to monitor the change in suspended sediment under the SMP. One monitoring site is located upstream of the construction area and measures the background suspended sediment. There is another site just downstream of Gull Rapids, below the in-stream work area, and a third monitoring site is located about nine km downstream from the rapids. The data from these locations are graphed and measured against a threshold Setting up a solar powered turbidity monitoring station which was acceptable to the regulators. If there is a measured increase in suspended sediment above the threshold, the source of the extra sediment must be identified and action must be taken to reduce sediment inputs caused by the construction activity. In-stream construction did not exceed the threshold level described in the SMP and no action was required.
24 Aquatic Effects Monitoring
Aquatic effects monitoring activities take place during During the winter of 2015, there was increased dislodging loose soil, which entered the water. Another construction and operation to determine the Project sediment measured in water collected up and water quality measurement, chlorophyll-a, (related effects on the aquatic environment, including water downstream of the site, most notably in one sample to the amount of algae found in water), was elevated in quality, benthic invertebrates, and fish. Monitoring collected near the shoreline of an island in Stephens August. This increase was observed up and downstream will also determine if fish are using the mitigation Lake. This increase is believed to have been caused of the Project site and is not Project related. measures that will be constructed (such as the by erosion from ice moving against the shore and constructed rock reefs to promote Lake Whitefish spawning), and if Lake Sturgeon populations are stable as a result of annual stocking. Water Quality Water quality is an important part of the aquatic environment, as it affects the health of plants and animals that use it. The greatest effects of construction on water quality relate to increasing the amount of sediment such as sand and clay, in the Nelson River. This can be caused by building structures such as cofferdams in the river, changes to water levels or flows that increase shoreline erosion, and on-land activities such as clearing, where a site is stripped of vegetation and may cause soil to wash into the river. Other construction related activities that can affect water quality include things such as treated sewage being released from the construction camp. Studies have been ongoing since the start of construction to measure water quality. Collecting a sample for water quality testing
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 25 Frozen fish muscle sample for mercury analysis
Benthic Invertebrates Mercury in Fish Benthic invertebrates are young insects, clams and Mercury concentrations in Walleye (pickerel) and worms that live on the bottom of rivers and lakes. Northern Pike (jackfish) captured from the Aiken They are an important source of food for fish. The River and Gull Lake were higher than during previous benthic invertebrate community is monitored because studies in these waterbodies done during the Keeyask these animals give a good indication of the health assessment. The results show that mercury in fish can of a water body, and respond quickly to changes in change over time for other, non-Project related reasons. A biologist identifying and counting the environment. When the numbers and kinds of benthic invertebrates collected at Keeyask. Fish mercury concentrations measured in fish from invertebrates change, it may be an early warning signal Gull Lake, as well as from Stephens and Split Lake, that something is harming the aquatic environment. will be provided to the Keeyask Mercury and Human Benthic invertebrate sampling was done in Stephens Health Implementation Group. This group, made Lake at three locations downstream of the construction up of members from the KHLP, health professionals site (3 km, 11 km and 25 km). Samples were also taken and federal and provincial regulators, will annually in Split Lake to indicate conditions not affected by review the results to develop safe fish consumption Keeyask. The samples collected from three kilometres advice (see page 68). The Mercury and Human Health downstream of Keeyask showed decreases in the Implementation Group will share this information number and variety of benthic invertebrates present. with the MAC. The samples collected 11 kilometres downstream of Keeyask also showed decreases, but only in the samples collected close to shore. The decreases in invertebrate number and variety may have been related to inputs of sediment from construction, but are likely linked to shoreline erosion in the samples taken close to shore. The sites 25 kilometres downstream did not show any signs of change compared to sampling done in previous years. An Eckman dredge being used to collect benthic invertebrates from the bottom of a lake
26 Lake Sturgeon to see how many adults are spawning and how many the area. This is the highest number estimated since young born in the wild are surviving. The goal of the data collection began in 2001. In the Kelsey GS area, Lake Sturgeon (Namao in Cree) are being monitored KHLP is to have self-sustaining populations of Lake the 2015 population estimate was 426 Lake Sturgeon, for several reasons. They are important to the partner Sturgeon in this area in the future. which is higher than the previous estimates made since First Nations; the population prior to construction 2009. Annual survival (the percentage of fish that was declining; and the Project will change or destroy Population monitoring of adult Lake Sturgeon was done survive from one year to the next) of Lake Sturgeon important habitat. This includes the loss of Gull Rapids in the spring of 2015, in the Upper Split Lake Area, was estimated to be higher in the Burntwood River and creation of the reservoir, which will change water which includes Split Lake, the Burntwood River and compared to the Kelsey GS area. Annual survival in the levels upstream to Birthday Rapids. the area downstream the Kelsey GS. During the study, Kelsey GS area is also lower than survival of the Lake 256 Lake Sturgeon were caught. There were 234 fish Lake Sturgeon are being studied to understand how the Sturgeon population in the Clark to Gull lake stretch of that were determined to be adults, as they were more population is affected by construction. Studies include the Nelson River. than 10 years old and at least 800 mm long. Results monitoring changes after Keeyask is built and operating, from this study were used to estimate population sizes Juvenile Lake Sturgeon are fish that are typically between and identifying if the stocking of Lake Sturgeon is helping for both the Burntwood River and the area downstream one and 10 years old. Population monitoring took place the population (see Fisheries Mitigation section). Kelsey GS. In the Burntwood River, it was estimated in fall of 2015 at three locations: the Upper Split Lake Both adult and juvenile sturgeon are being monitored that in 2015 there were 570 adult Lake Sturgeon in Area, Gull Lake and Stephens Lake. In the Upper Split Lake Area, sturgeon of many different sizes and ages were Field team with adult Lake Sturgeon captured during 2015 monitoring work caught. This shows that Lake Sturgeon are successfully reproducing over many years. In Gull and Stephens lakes, sturgeon born in 2008 continue to dominate the catch. Young of year sturgeon (born in 2015) were caught in both Gull and Stephens lakes, which shows that successful spawning and a good rate of survival of the young fish occurred during construction. While it is too early to know the success of the stocking program, seven of the sturgeon recaptured in Gull and Stephens lakes were hatchery fish released in either 2014 or 2015. This indicates some stocked fish are surviving and able to live in the wild.
27 Fish Movements Adult Lake Sturgeon In-stream construction activities create a disturbance Fifty-nine adult Lake Sturgeon (about half in Gull and change where the water flows in the Nelson River Lake and half in Stephens Lake), were tagged in 2011. around Gull Rapids. When the construction of the The tags inserted into adult Lake Sturgeon are GS is complete, it will create a barrier for fish expected to continue to function for 10 years. movement. Fish will only be able to move downstream Monitoring in 2015 builds on what has been learned through the GS, or through the spillway when it is in the previous four years of fish studies. In 2015, adult operating. There will be no ability to move upstream Lake Sturgeon tagged upstream of Gull Rapids tended from Stephens Lake into Gull Lake unless a means to concentrate in three different areas i) Clark Lake, ii) of fish passage is put into place. For these reasons, the channel of the Nelson River between Clark Lake and the movement of fish is being studied to find out if fish Gull Lake, and iii) Gull Lake. The Lake Sturgeon tagged are avoiding the Project construction area and if fish in Stephens Lake tended to either remain within the need to move over Gull Rapids to live their life. Adult upper 15 km of Stephens Lake, or move between upper and juvenile Lake Sturgeon as well as Walleye and and lower Stephens Lake. Tagged fish were also observed Lake Whitefish are included in the movement studies. to continue to use the areas immediately upstream Fish movements are tracked using acoustic tags and downstream of Gull Rapids as they did prior surgically implanted inside fish. These tags send out to the Project. a unique sound called a “ping”, which is detected and Since 2011, six adult Lake Sturgeon moved upstream recorded by devices (called acoustic receivers) placed through Gull Rapids, but none since the start of in the Nelson River between Clark Lake and Gull construction. Since 2014, three tagged fish were Rapids, and in Stephens Lake. These receivers can observed to move downstream. One of those detect and record the “pings” up to 1 km away. was after construction began. By looking at the “pings” recorded by receivers in different places, the movement of each tagged Overall, since the start of construction, there has fish can be followed. been no observed change in the movement patterns Adult Lake Sturgeon of Lake Sturgeon.
28 Juvenile Lake Sturgeon Forty juvenile Lake Sturgeon were tagged in the fall of 2013; 20 in Stephens Lake and 20 in Gull Lake. These tags are expected to continue to work until 2017. Juvenile Lake Sturgeon in Stephens Lake moved around more during the year than those in Gull Lake. It is believed this is because there is more deep water there for them to live in.
The majority of the juveniles tagged in Stephens Lake were detected at some point near the downstream side of Gull Rapids but did not spend very much time there. Juveniles tagged in Gull Lake do not use the area close to the rapids/construction area.
Monitoring of juvenile Lake Sturgeon movements in 2015, showed that Lake Sturgeon tagged in Gull Lake continued to stay in Gull Lake and Lake Sturgeon tagged in Stephens Lake stayed there. Since monitoring began in 2013, tagged juvenile Lake Sturgeon have not moved through Gull Rapids. One fish was observed to pass successfully through the Kettle GS and into the Long Spruce Reservoir in 2014.
Juvenile Lake Sturgeon
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 29 Wallleye
Walleye Lake Whitefish Results from the first year of study show Lake Whitefish tagged upstream are not using the area The Walleye movement study involved tagging 80 Lake Whitefish movement monitoring started in immediately upstream of Gull Rapids, and are out walleye (40 upstream and 40 downstream of Gull September 2014. Sixty Lake Whitefish were tagged of the vicinity of the construction activities. A large Rapids) in fall 2013. During 2015 (and similar in for the study, 20 upstream and 40 downstream of Gull number of Lake Whitefish tagged in Stephens Lake 2014), Walleye tagged upstream of Gull Rapids stayed Rapids. All 40 Lake Whitefish tagged downstream of stayed in the upper reaches of Stephens Lake. Twenty- in wider lake areas with low flow. They stayed in Gull Rapids have remained in Stephens Lake after the three fish were detected near the base of Gull Rapids. Gull Lake or moved between Gull and Clark lakes. first year of study. These movements are likely related to spawning as Fish tagged in Stephens Lake generally stayed within Since the start of the study, one fish moved the rapids are known to provide important spawning 10 km of Gull Rapids. downstream through Gull Rapids. No fish habitat for whitefish in Stephens Lake. In total, five Walleye tagged upstream of Gull Rapids were detected moving upstream. have moved downstream into Stephens Lake, and one Walleye has moved upstream from Stephens Lake over Gull Rapids since the study began in June 2013. Two tagged fish have moved downstream through the Kettle GS and a single fish was captured as far upstream as the Odei River.
Since 2014, Walleye tagged in Gull Lake have not used the area immediately upstream of Gull Rapids and are therefore removed from the construction area. In contrast, the majority of Walleye tagged in Stephens Lake were observed in the area at the base of Gull Rapids, including during the spawning period.
Lake Whitefish
30 Fisheries Mitigation
Habitat to support all life stages of local fish species needs to continue to be available upstream and downstream of the GS after it is constructed and operational. Measures will be put in place to reduce the impacts of the Project on fish (e.g. fish salvage) and offset the loss of fish habitat. Habitat (including spawning shoals) will be constructed over the next few years. In addition to habitat creation, stocking will be used as an offsetting measure for Lake Sturgeon. This will help to address the current low population numbers and loss of spawning habitat during construction, prior to constructed habitat being available. Sturgeon Stocking Stocking has been identified as being crucial to the overall offsetting plan, due to concerns that the current Lake Sturgeon populations may be too low to recover unaided, even if the GS was not constructed. To increase Lake Sturgeon populations, the KHLP committed to produce and release hatchery reared Lake Sturgeon into the Burntwood River, the future Keeyask reservoir and downstream in Stephens Lake until a self-sustaining population was achieved. The stocking activities alternate between the Burntwood River and the lower Nelson River annually. Stocking one year old Lake Sturgeon
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 31 Stocked Fish On June 22, 2015, one-year-old (yearling) Lake Sturgeon (length 270 mm) hatched and raised at the Grand Rapids Fish Hatchery were stocked (released) into Gull Lake (221 fish) and Stephens Lake (218 fish). Additional fish (length 360 mm) were stocked at these two locations in September 2015; 200 were released into Stephens Lake on September 14, and 202 were released into Gull Lake on September 16. The stocking locations were chosen because they are areas where juveniles have been caught in the past.
The stocked fish were the offspring of wild Lake Sturgeon (one female and two males) captured from the Nelson River downstream of Birthday Rapids in June 2014. Mixing the eggs at the Burntwood River spawn camp
Spawn Camp and until the end of March 2016. Due to the low number Hatchery Production of Lake Sturgeon hatched, there was enough space at the hatchery to keep all of the fish over the winter. In the spring of 2015, wild Lake Sturgeon were captured from the Burntwood River below First Rapids. The milt It is unclear why so few Lake Sturgeon hatched and (sperm) of four males was mixed with the eggs of one survived in 2015, though field personnel at the spawn female providing an estimated 51,825 eggs. Fertilized camp did note the female sturgeon was small and eggs were driven from the spawn camp (collection produced smaller sized eggs than those observed location) to the hatchery. Approximately 100 Lake at other spawn camps in previous years. Sturgeon hatched from these eggs beginning on Fertilized eggs at the Grand Rapids Fish Hatchery June 16. Of the 100 larvae that hatched, 23 survived
32 Zebra Mussel Monitoring
The zebra mussel is a small, clam-like aquatic animal. They are considered an aquatic invasive species in North America due to their ability to aggressively invade new areas and reproduce quickly. They also lack natural predators. Zebra mussels are known to negatively affect native fish, and wildlife, and obstruct water-based infrastructure, including hydro-electric generating stations. In 2015, new Aquatic Invasive Species legislation was implemented at both the federal and provincial levels in an effort to contain and prevent the further spread of zebra mussels and other aquatic species.
Introduction of zebra mussels into non-infested water bodies may result from transportation of them by overland movement of boats and other water-based equipment. To date, zebra mussels have been found in the Red River, Lake Winnipeg, and Cedar Lake. Although not present in the Nelson River at this time, the free-floating larvae can be carried downstream from areas where zebra mussels grow. The Keeyask GS is located in an area where decontamination cleaning protocols must take place when removing boats and other equipment used in the water.
The Zebra Mussel Monitoring Plan is followed during the Project to monitor for zebra mussels and mitigate and adaptively manage zebra mussel impacts, Zebra mussel cluster enlarged, actual size of zebra mussel is usually less than 1.3 cm long if they occur.
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 33 Terrestrial Monitoring
Terrestrial Habitat Terrestrial habitat is important because plants and animals use it to live in and reproduce. Studying the terrestrial habitat can tell us the Project’s effects on plants and soils in the area. Habitat Loss and Disturbance Habitat loss and disturbance is being monitored to determine effects on terrestrial habitat due to clearing or other disturbances from construction. In September 2015, aerial and ground surveys confirmed the extent of disturbance. At the time of the surveys, construction activities had occurred along the North Access Road, the main camp and work areas north of Gull Rapids, and along the South Access Road. Portions of the north and south dyke areas had been cleared as well. As of September 2015, approximately 2,980 hectares were cleared or disturbed for the Project.
An area cleared for the construction of the South Access Road
34 Wetlands A wetland is an area where water covers the soil, or water is present near the surface of the soil all year, or for varying periods throughout the year. The water level determines the types of plant and animal communities living in and on the soil. Wetlands are important as their functions include converting sunlight into plant material, creating soil, protecting shorelines, contributing to biodiversity and providing high quality habitat for some plant Ground view of a marsh along the north dyke
and animal species. Wetlands also create good moose during construction is documenting wetland loss and and waterfowl hunting areas. Several medicinal and disturbance. During the summer of 2015, 16 marsh country food plant species used by members of the sites were selected for surveys because they are located partner First Nations are often found in wetlands close to construction areas. At the time of the surveys, (e.g. sweet flag, tamarack). none of the marsh sites showed evidence of disturbance from construction activities. Monitoring of these sites Wetlands make up most of the land area in the will be ongoing. Keeyask region (see map on page 72). The majority of wetlands are undisturbed. Past hydroelectric development along the Nelson River removed most of the natural shoreline wetlands. Wetland monitoring
Aerial view of a marsh near the north dyke
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 35 Terrestrial Plants No provincially rare plant species were found during to determine if at least 20 locations where this species pre-clearing surveys conducted in 2015. During the can be found exist and will not be disturbed. Muskeg Priority Plants 2014 pre-clearing rare plant surveys, the rare plant, lousewort was observed at 14 locations on both sides Terrestrial plants perform key functions in the muskeg lousewort was found within the Project area. of the Nelson River outside of the Project area. ecosystem. They convert sunlight to plant material, In order to decide whether avoidance, transplanting This increased the total number of known locations to which provides food and shelter for wildlife, or some other mitigation measure was needed for this 20, suggesting that muskeg lousewort is more common contributes to soil development, and stores carbon. rare plant, locations outside of the area affected by the in the Keeyask area than previously believed. Some plant species are important to the partner First Project were surveyed in August 2015. This was done Nations for food and cultural reasons, and/or are important for ecological reasons (e.g. they are rare species). These important plants are called “priority plants”. Priority plants were assessed prior to the start of construction, but it is likely that not all existing locations of these plants were found. Additional searches for these plants will be undertaken in Project areas prior to clearing. If priority plants are found, recommendations on suitable mitigation will be provided. Two possible mitigation measures include avoiding the identified locations or transplanting into areas that will not be affected by the Project.
Muskeg lousewort growing at a location outside of the construction area
36 Recording invasive species
Invasive Plants Invasive and/or non-native plants are of concern because they can crowd out native plant species. It was predicted that the Project would not result in invasive and/or non-native plants crowding out native species or changing the local vegetation. To verify this prediction, invasive plant surveys are carried out in and around the Project construction areas.
In the spring of 2015, invasive plant surveys in cleared Project areas identified 11 invasive and/or non-native plant species. There were four species found that were not recorded previously in the Keeyask region. Fall surveys identified 16 invasive and/or non-native plant species, with five new species to the area. The number of all these plants increased between the spring and fall, and one invasive plant species (lamb’s quarters) was observed in almost all cleared areas surveyed.
One scentless chamomile plant was found. This is a fast-spreading invasive plant of concern in Manitoba, therefore it was recommended that the plant be carefully removed by hand and disposed of properly. This was carried out by environmental site staff on September 5, 2015. Future monitoring will determine if the plant was successfully removed. Conducting a plant survey
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 37 Birds Drone photography in the Gull Rapids area showed that The helicopter survey found ring-billed gulls, common gulls and terns were present on both the large islands terns and herring gulls on numerous rocky islands Gulls and Terns and small rocky reefs. It was found that chicks were located between Kelsey GS and Limestone GS, easier to observe using drone photography compared to including Stephens Lake, Split Lake, Clark Lake, Gulls and terns are colonial waterbirds that observation from the helicopter surveys. No waterbird Assean Lake, Cyril Lake, Kettle Lake, Atkinson Lake traditionally nest in the Project area. Monitoring took nests were observed in dewatered or construction areas. and the Nelson River. place in 2015 to see how much breeding habitat for In early June, 1,209 gulls, 38 gull nests, 62 terns and gulls and terns was lost or changed due to the Project one tern nest were counted within the Gull Rapids area. and to count the number of gulls and terns in the area. In late June, 1,792 gulls, 81 gull nests, 10 gull chicks Drone surveys for colonial waterbirds occurred in early and 60 terns were counted. In July, 4978 gulls, 42 gull June, late June, and late July 2015. A drone was used chicks, and three terns were counted. in these surveys to photograph the Gull Rapids area. Helicopter-based aerial surveys also took place in mid- June and late July, 2015. The helicopter surveys covered Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV or drone) used to monitor gulls and terns a much larger area than the drone surveys. They took place along shorelines between the Kelsey GS and the Limestone GS, and also covered some waterbodies removed from the Nelson River system (known as reference sites).
38 • Ring-billed gulls were seen at 32 islands. Nesting Waterfowl was observed at 19 islands, and the number Waterfowl monitoring took place in April, May, June, of ring-billed gulls counted was 3,925 in June July and September 2015. Aerial surveys were done and 3,743 in July. by helicopter over this five-month period to study the • Common terns were seen at 25 islands. Nesting was different phases of the waterfowl life cycle, including observed at six islands, and the number of common arrival to and departure from the study area, breeding terns counted was 625 in June and 1,033 in July. and raising young. Monitoring is being conducted to document what, if any, changes to the number • Herring gulls were seen at 20 islands. The number and distribution of Canada geese, mallard, and other of herring gulls counted was 28 in June and 22 in July. species of waterfowl occur due to construction of the Project.
Canada goose near the construction site
Gulls near the future spillway location Twenty different species of waterfowl were observed during the surveys. The most common species were mallard, Canada goose, ring-necked duck, scaup and common goldeneye. Waterfowl abundance was highest in the spring and fall periods and relatively low during the breeding season, suggesting the area is used mainly for staging by migrating waterfowl.
39 Bald eagle nest on north shore of the Nelson River
Bald Eagles Bird Species At Risk In June and July, pilot ground surveys took place to determine how many nesting pairs of olive-sided Bald eagles are the most common raptor species along Both the rusty blackbird and the olive-sided flycatcher flycatcher and rusty blackbird were present in the the lower Nelson River and are important to local are considered species at risk under the federal area surveyed, to help design the detailed surveys for people. Bald eagle nests and habitat are often located Species at Risk Act and are found in the Project area. future years. Approximately 50 olive-sided flycatcher along waterbodies and their large stick nests can be Monitoring for these birds is taking place to consider and 60 rusty blackbird observations or territories were reused for many years. Monitoring of bald eagles is effects of the Project on olive-sided flycatcher and rusty mapped during the study. taking place to identify bald eagle nesting locations, blackbird due to noise and changes to their habitat. and to document how much habitat is lost or altered due to Project development.
Surveys for nesting bald eagles were done in May, June and July 2015 along shorelines of selected waterbodies in the Keeyask region. All surveys were conducted from a helicopter. A total of 64 bald eagle nests were found during the 2015 surveys. The nests were mostly found in spruce trees, with a few in aspen and birch trees. Of the 64 nests, 42 were active and 25 contained chicks in mid-July.
Rusty blackbird, a bird species at risk in the Keeyask region
40 Mammals Caribou Summer Resident Caribou Sensory Disturbance Bats Three migratory caribou herds (two coastal caribou Sensory disturbance studies took place to see if the herds and occasionally a barren ground herd) can be noise and light from Project construction are affecting Little brown bats were recently designated as an found in the Keeyask region in the winter. A fourth caribou use of calving habitats (islands in lakes and endangered species in Manitoba. Monitoring for little group stays near Keeyask year round, calving here peatland complexes). Both the distribution of caribou brown bats is occurring to see if there is a little brown during the summer (referred to as “summer residents”). on the land and their relative abundance were studied. bat population present in the immediate Project area. Three separate monitoring studies took place for Ground tracking was used to gather information on Bat surveys were conducted overnight for two nights caribou in 2015/2016. Two studies focused on the caribou (and other large mammals) use of lake islands, in mid-July and two nights in early August 2015. summer resident caribou and one focused on the peatland complexes, and other suitable habitat near the Bat surveys, using a bat detector, were conducted along migratory herds. north and south access roads. Ground tracking surveys the Project access roads and trails, and in the start-up and main camp areas. No bats were detected during the July or August surveys and no observations were reported in 2015.
Ultrasonic bat detector Group of summer resident caribou observed during winter survey
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 41 were conducted three times between the end of March Caribou Winter Abundance One ice crossing site was recorded on the Nelson River and late September. Trail cameras were also installed Aerial surveys for caribou occurred in January within between the Kettle GS and the Long Spruce GS, and to photograph caribou and other wildlife. Throughout the eastern half of the Keeyask region. The surveys another between Birthday Rapids and Gull Rapids. the calf-rearing period, caribou were present on 59 were conducted to see how many caribou are in the Keeyask Caribou Coordination Committee per cent of the lake island sites, with 16 per cent being region during the winter; and to evaluate if winter The Keeyask Caribou Coordination Committee used by calving cows. During the same visits, caribou habitat use, and/or river crossings, are affected (KCCC) includes members from TCN, WLFN, were present at 78 per cent of the peatland complexes by Project development. sampled, with 63 per cent being used by calving cows. FLCN, YFFN, and Manitoba Hydro and is a sub- Caribou were also present on 94 per cent of the access During the survey a total of 80 caribou in 12 groups committee of the Monitoring Advisory Committee. road sites, and 39 per cent contained calf sign. were observed south of the Nelson River and one During the 2015/2016 reporting period, the KCCC caribou was observed north of the Nelson River. met in July and November 2015, to share information Summer Resident Caribou Winter Range Group size ranged from one to 30 individuals. on caribou in the Keeyask region and discuss the To learn more about the winter range (an area where caribou monitoring being done for the Project. an animal can be found) of the summer resident caribou, an aerial survey took place in late November. The survey was conducted within the Keeyask region, between Split Lake and Gillam. A total of 27 caribou (including 10 calves) in three groups were observed during the survey. Fecal droppings were also collected and will be genetically tested to confirm the identity of the herd of caribou observed during the survey. A number of collared coastal caribou were photographed in one of the groups. These caribou were collared as part of a coastal caribou monitoring program being led by MCWS and is not part of the Project’s caribou monitoring activities. Summer resident caribou photo captured by a trail camera
42 Terrestrial Mitigation
The Terrestrial Mitigation Implementation Plan Starting in September 2015, wetland specialists outlines a number of planned terrestrial mitigation began seeking out local plants and seeds for use measures that will be implemented during the in the wetland and identifying areas with the right construction of the Project. The measures include characteristics, such as soils, for constructing nursery the development of a wetland, retaining woody debris sites. A community workshop was held in November, for frogs, replacement of habitat for gulls and terns, at which members of the partner First Nations could and habitat replacement for other birds. begin to identify the types of traditional plants and Looking at the soil conditions at a potential educational features to be included in the wetland. wetland plant donor site Wetland Development Impounding the Keeyask reservoir will lead to a loss of 12 hectares of marsh type wetland, which is rare in the Keeyask area. In order to compensate for this loss, a wetland will be constructed at the Project site to replace it. The wetland will be constructed in the dewatered area immediately downstream from the spillway.
In order to have enough marsh type plant material to create a wetland, local sources of wetland plants will be used and nursery sites will be developed to grow enough plants for transplanting into the wetland once it is constructed.
Potential wetland plant donor site
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 43 Gull decoys on the created gull habitat Installing the tern nesting platforms
Gull and Tern In order to mitigate the loss of tern nesting habitat Other Bird Habitat Replacement due to construction of the Project, two floating tern Habitat Replacement In order to mitigate the loss of other bird habitat resulting platforms were installed in June 2015 in Gull Lake. from Project development, planning is now underway on Project construction has resulted in the removal or Gravel was placed on the surface of the platforms. a number of habitat replacement measures. These include change in quality of some traditional gull breeding Wooden decoys of common terns, an audio system waterfowl nesting tunnels (to be installed in the wetland habitat. To mitigate this loss of habitat, some alternate that played calls of common terns, and a camera to area that will be developed), bald eagle nest platforms gull habitat was created. An area of approximately photograph the use of the platforms by common terns (to replace any recently active nests removed by Project one hectare was cleared on the south side of William were all installed on the platforms prior to being clearing), perching poles for olive-sided flycatcher (to be Smith Island and eight sea cans were placed in the positioned in the river. While no terns were observed installed in a decommissioned borrow area), and leaving cleared area to provide some elevated nesting habitat. to nest on the platforms in 2015, cameras caught 32 some open gravel areas for common nighthawk nesting Gravel was placed on top of the sea cans and on the terns spending time on the platforms. The earliest habitat. The implementation of these bird habitat ground within the cleared area. Decoy gulls and photograph of a tern using the platform was June 28 measures are planned to begin in fall 2016 and continue a sound system that played ring-billed gull calls were and the last tern was photographed on the platform on throughout the Project construction period. placed in the cleared area to help attract gulls to the September 1. The platforms were removed in October. newly created nesting area. Cameras were installed to photograph any use of the area by gulls. No gulls were documented using the constructed habitat in Aerial view of the gull nesting habitat constructed on William Smith Island 2015. Bird monitoring showed that gulls were able to find other areas of natural habitat in the region.
44 Frog Habitat Replacement Loss and disturbance of frog habitat will be temporarily mitigated by retaining piles of woody debris (slash piles) in cleared, decommissioned borrow areas until vegetation in these areas is re-established. Slash piles benefit frogs by providing nursery cover and a source of food for juvenile frogs, winter cover, and potentially, may enhance habitat connectivity between breeding ponds and upland foraging habitat. The current plan is to establish piles of woody debris in borrow areas that are no longer needed for the Project starting in the fall of 2016. Beaver lodge in the Keeyask region Beaver and Muskrat Mitigation Measures Beaver and muskrat are important species in the occurring on the north side of the Nelson River Beaver baffles (also commonly referred to as beaver Keeyask region, having cultural, economic, and in winter 2015/2016, beaver lodges were identified. bafflers or beaver deceivers) are physical structures ecological value. As the future reservoir impoundment Active lodges were marked and buffered prior to installed at or around culvert entrances to prevent will flood habitat for these species, beaver and muskrat clearing to avoid disturbance. In the winter of beavers from getting inside and blocking the flow will be humanely trapped from within the reservoir 2016/2017, beavers in these marked lodges will be of water. Along the South Access Road, culverts are to reduce the winter mortality that would likely occur. removed by registered trappers. Any muskrats located being monitored to determine if these devices are This mitigation measure is designed to minimize the in the vicinity of these lodges will also be trapped. needed. None have been installed to date however, distress of these furbearers by removing them prior A similar approach is also planned for the south they will be installed in the future, if required. to reservoir impoundment. Prior to reservoir clearing side reservoir clearing area.
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 45 Vegetation Rehabilitation
The KHLP is committed to rehabilitating areas Three borrow pits used for the Keeyask Infrastructure disturbed by construction and not needed for GS Project are no longer required for the Project, and operations. These include areas such as roadside rehabilitation plans have been developed for each area. ditches, camps, borrow areas, areas where excavated During the fall of 2015, a harrow was used at each material is placed and various access roads. The borrow pit to loosen the ground in which trees will proposed methods for rehabilitation include planting be planted to allow them to grow. An order was placed trees, grass and traditional plants, as well as facilitating early in 2015, with the provincial nursery to grow natural regeneration. All plants used in rehabilitation 235,000 jack pine seedlings and 20,000 black spruce will be native to the area and seedlings will be grown seedlings. The seedlings will be planted in 2016. Rome disc used to loosen the ground in a borrow pit from seed collected near the Project site.
Jack pine seedling bundle at the nursery Jack pine seedlings growing at the nursery
46 Resource Use Monitoring
Resource use is monitored to understand the Project Interviews with MCWS staff regarding changes effects on traditional harvest by people from local First in licensed fish, moose and caribou harvest in Nations. Onsite harvest by the Project workforce is not Game-Hunting Areas (GHA) 1, 2, 3 and 9 (most expected because hunting and fishing are prohibited of northern Manitoba above the 53rd parallel) took on the Project site. However, if the workforce harvests place. It was noted that the amount of catch and resources in off-site areas, this may affect the success release fishing by the workforce declined since the first of local First Nation people’s resource use. year of construction, the demand for moose licences has increased in GHAs 3 and 9 (although workforce In June 2015, a Keeyask construction workforce survey results do not suggest the Keeyask workforce harvest survey that reviewed the time period between contributed to these increases) and licensed caribou November 2014 and June 2015 was conducted. Email harvest has not changed. and in-person surveys took place and 244 surveys were completed. The survey included questions to determine whether or not the workforce participated in fishing, hunting and gathering activities. The workforce surveys indicated little to no increase in resource harvest in the local area.
Swimming moose
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 47 Waterways Management Program
The purpose of the Keeyask Waterways Management Some examples include transporting dignitaries and Program (WMP) is to reduce potential impacts and family members to attend a meeting with resource accommodate users of the waterway from Split Lake users at Clarke Lake and Assean River, transporting to Stephens Lake throughout the pre-flooding family members for a memorial service at Leon’s and operational stages of the Keeyask Project. Island, and assisting with the removal of the buoys at Gull Lake. The Keeyask WMP is currently in the pre-flooding Boat patrollers from Split Lake (SL) and Keeyask (K) l to r – Jack Kitchekeesik (K), Joshua Spence (SL), Eugene Kitchekeesik (K), phase, which consists of implementing two safety Kevin Keeper (SL), Harold Disbrowe (K) and Ivan Keeper (SL) initiatives focusing on safe water travel and safe ice travel. Through these two initiatives, members of the partner First Nations were employed to provide safe navigation on the waterways throughout the 2015/2016 year. Boat Patrol
The Northern Boat Patrol Program, running for 24 weeks from the end of May to October 2015, played a fundamental role in monitoring and minimizing the hazards of debris in the waterways. Throughout that time, there were approximately 68 kilometres patrolled as shown in the waterway routes in the map below.
The safe water travel initiative provided seasonal employment, to members of the four partner First Nations, through the operation of the Boat Patrol Program. In addition to patrolling the waterway, the crew also provided support for emergency responses and assistance to community members during the
open water season. Keeyask boat patrol route for the 2015 season
48 Snowmobiler on safe ice trail
Keeyask Safe Ice Trails The safe ice travel initiative is part of the Safe Ice Trail Program which is intended to provide safe travel on impacted waterways. Throughout the 2015/2016 winter season, one partner First Nation trap line holder, Jonathon Saunders, was contracted to install, monitor and maintain 85 kilometres of trails from mid-January to mid-April 2016, in and around Gull and Stephens lakes, as shown on the adjacent route map.
Keeyask safe ice trails route for 2015/2016 season
Resource user on safe ice trail
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 49 Socio-Economic Monitoring
Socio-economic monitoring for the Keeyask up a typical household budget. Adding up the direct, Generation Project looks at the effects the Project indirect and induced impacts, results in the total has on key components of the socio-economic economic impact of the Project. environment. This includes employment, purchases, Keeyask will influence the Manitoba economy by business opportunities, population, culture and providing employment (creating labour income) and spirituality, and mercury and human health. through the purchase of goods and services required Economic Monitoring to build the Project. In turn, these expenditures will result in incremental provincial tax revenues and Economic monitoring includes monitoring contributions to the provincial gross domestic product. of employment and training, business, The following sections discuss the major direct and income outcomes from the Project. economic impacts of the Project from the beginning Jude Flett, equipment operator for Amisk Economic impacts can be either direct, indirect of construction in July 2014 to March 31, 2016. or induced. Direct impacts result from Project expenditures and include employment, purchases, and Major Direct Economic Impacts income generated by the Project. Indirect impacts refer Person-years of direct employment 21581 (1439)2 to the employment, purchases and income created in Direct Project purchases ($ Millions) $ 1,274 2. other industries as the effects of project expenditures Direct labour income ($ Millions) $193 9.
work their way through the economy. For example, 1 This number is used for economic comparison purposes and is based on person years in terms there are indirect impacts on businesses supplying of a 2, 000 hour per year basis . 2 This number is used for construction planning purposes and is based on person years in terms materials and equipment to companies in the direct of 3 ,000 hour per year . impact segment. Induced impacts are created by additional income and profits earned by workers and company owners associated with the Project directly or indirectly. This additional income leads to more spending on food, housing, entertainment, transportation, and all of the other expenses that make Excavation for the construction of the north dyke
50 Rolling out geotextile fabric for South Access Road construction
Employment Holding the career sessions directly in the communities During the sessions, participants learn about the allowed a more hands-on approach to engage and upcoming work at Keeyask, apprenticeship and on- Employment Mitigation encourage individuals to consider the employment and the-job training programs, life at Keeyask camp, and In fall 2015, the Keeyask Advisory Group on apprenticeship opportunities on the Keeyask Project. an opportunity to talk directly with the contractors Employment (AGE) established a sub-committee on As construction activity ramps up in the Spring 2016, working on the Project. The Province of Manitoba’s training and employment. The sub-committee engages communication of available opportunities across the Job Referral Service (JRS) and community Job on a regular basis and is working to address identified Project – whether it’s carpentry, general construction, Seeker Managers are attending to ensure participants issues in the current formal systems and processes or support services – is necessary to attract and retain are properly registered in the JRS. Apprenticeship relating to the employment and training of partner workers with focus on the partner First Nations’ Manitoba staff are also attending to explain more First Nation members at Keeyask in both designated members. This was a very important initiative about what it means to be involved in the Provincial and non-designated trades. The sub-committee has undertaken to ensure job seekers are aware of the Apprenticeship Program. senior representatives from each of the partner First opportunities, so they can apply for the jobs that Nation communities, Manitoba Hydro, the General most interest them. Civil Contractor (BBE) and the Province of Manitoba (Apprenticeship Manitoba, Training and Employment Services, Job Referral Service and Workforce Education Manitoba).
Throughout the 2015/2016 winter months, members of the AGE Sub-committee held information sessions in the four partner First Nation communities, as well as in the communities of Thompson, Gillam, Churchill, Winnipeg and at the Keeyask site.
Laura Kematch, Sodexo kitchen staff member
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 51 Devon Massan, first level electrician
Employment Monitoring Of the 80 per cent of employees already living Breakdown of Hires The objective of monitoring employment opportunities in Manitoba: is to determine the overall employment outcomes • Northern Manitobans represent 45 per cent, of Project construction, with particular emphasis or 766 (511) person-years; Southern Northern on Aboriginal and northern resident participation. Manitoba Manitoba Non-Manitoba Manitoba Non-Aboriginal • Other Manitobans represent 55 per cent, Aboriginal 20% 80% 37% 47% Employment can be measured in different ways, or 948 (632) person-years; including hires, employees and person-years. Hires • Aboriginal employment represents 56 per cent, refer to the number of people hired for any amount or 952 (635) person years; and of time at the Project site. One individual may be hired Northern Manitoba Southern Manitoba more than once and each hire is recorded separately. • Non-Aboriginal employment represents Non-Aboriginal Aboriginal 3% 13% 44 per cent, or 762 (508) person-years of Person-years of Employment Hires the Manitoba employment. A person-year of employment means one full-time From the start of construction to March 31, 2016, position for one year. This usually means about 2,000 there were 4,276 hires on the work site. Of the total hires, hours of work per year using a standard 40 hour Total Person Years of Employment Breakdown 3,411 or approximately 80 per cent were Manitobans. work week in most industries; whereas for Keeyask As the figure above illustrates, of the 80 per cent construction work, a person-year of employment of hires from Manitoba: represents 3,000 hours of work per year. The person- years of employment are shown both at 2,000 hours • Total northern Manitoban hires represent Northern Southern of work per year, for economic comparisons to other Manitoba Manitoba 50 per cent (1,721 hires); Non-Manitoba Manitoba Non-Aboriginal industries, as well as at 3,000 hours (identified Aboriginal 40% 20% 80% 41% • Aboriginal hires represent 60 per cent (2,058 hires); and in parentheses) of work per year. • Non-Aboriginal hires represent approximately From the start of construction to March 31, 2016, 40 per cent (1,353) hires. direct employment of the Project totalled 2,158 (1,439) Northern Manitoba Southern Manitoba person-years. As the figure on the right illustrates, Non-Aboriginal Aboriginal Total hires by job classification are provided in the 80 per cent, or 1,714 (1,143) of these person-years, 4% 15% table on the following page. For employee privacy and represent people already living in Manitoba. confidentiality reasons, the numbers of hires by residency cannot be disclosed. 5252 Packing the ground of the South Access Road
Per cent of Non- Northern Total Hires by Job Classification Total Hires Total Hires CBN Aboriginal Aboriginal MB Other MB Non-MB
Labourers 798 19% 368 540 476 107 172 150 Security Guards 84 2% 13 35 29 21 55 <5 Crane Operators 30 1% <5 7 <5 <5 24 <5 Equipment Operators 544 13% 104 232 151 75 235 158 Teamsters 418 10% 171 275 227 86 149 42 Carpenters 251 6% 30 107 52 22 168 31 Milwrights 5 <1% <5 <5 <5 <5 5 <5 Painters 6 <1% <5 <5 <5 <5 6 <5 Floor Covering Installers 9 <1% <5 <5 <5 <5 8 <5 Insulator Workers 58 1% <5 6 <5 <5 46 11 Lathing and Drywall Workers 42 1% <5 8 <5 <5 14 27 Cement Masons 12 <1% <5 6 <5 <5 7 <5 Sheet Metal Workers 10 <1% <5 <5 <5 <5 10 <5 Roofers 10 <1% <5 <5 <5 <5 10 <5 Sheeters, Deckers and Cladders 25 1% <5 7 <5 <5 24 <5 Bilermakers 8 <1% <5 <5 <5 <5 6 <5 Worker surveying dewatered area Iron Workers 109 3% <5 31 9 6 91 9 Rodmen 14 <1% <5 8 <5 <5 11 <5 Electrical Workers 182 4% 20 43 36 15 139 7 Plumbers and Pipefitters 70 2% 8 23 8 <5 62 <5 Refrigeration Workers <5 <1% <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 Sprinkler System Installers <5 <1% <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 Office and Professional Employees 237 6% 54 104 81 30 10155 Caterers 586 14% 418 563 552 184 18 16 Elevator Constructors 6 <1% <5 <5 <5 <5 6 <5 Other* 758 18% 60 124 93 61 320 345 Total Hires 4276 100% 1251 2124 1721 614 1690 865
For employee privacy and confidentiality reasons, categories with less than five hires are shown as <5 *The “Other” category refers to hires in job classifications not covered by the Burntwood Nelson Agreement, i .e . “out of scope” positions . This would include managerial and supervisory staff (both Contractor and Manitoba Hydro)
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 53 Worker conducting heritage resources survey
Individual Employees Breakdown of Employees A total of 3,242 individual employees were hired on the Project. Of this, 76 per cent (2,475 individual employee hires) were Manitobans. Southern Northern The breakdown of total Keeyask Generation Project Manitoba Manitoba Non-Manitoba Manitoba Non-Aboriginal Aboriginal individual employees can be seen in the graph on 24% 76% 40% 43%
the right. Brian Wayne Chapman, rock truck driver The total number of employees is less than the total
number of hires (4,276) because the same individual Northern Manitoba Southern Manitoba may have been hired more than once. The difference of Non-Aboriginal Aboriginal 3% 14% 1,034 identifies the number of re-hires at the Project site.
George Ponask working for Sodexo in the dining hall
54 Adam Cook, wastewater treatment plant operator
Business Opportunities Direct Purchases Project construction will present direct and indirect business opportunities locally, regionally and across the province as a whole. Business outcomes of Project construction are being tracked, with a particular Outside of Manitoba Other Northern Manitoba Manitoba focus on Aboriginal and northern Manitoba business Manitoba $514.2 $206.1 Aboriginal participation, to understand indirect business $759.9 40% 40% $305.3 60% 59% opportunities generated from Project-related expenditures in Gillam, Thompson and the Other partner First Nation communities. $0.1 Other Northern Manitoba <1% $2.8 1% Purchases There was $1,274.2 million spent on goods and services for the Project. Of this, $514.2 million were Manitoba purchases. Total northern Manitoba (Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal) purchases represent $308.1 million or 60 per cent of the total Manitoba purchases. The graph summarizes the breakdown of total purchases to March 31, 2016. This information reflects direct purchases of the Project for contractors and services. Indirect purchases made by contractors, in turn, would include purchases of goods and services from Manitoba based businesses.
At the peak of Keeyask’s General Civil Contract, Key Person Interviews will take place to determine any indirect business opportunities that may be generated Concrete batch plant installation nearly complete as a result of the Project.
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 55 Boom lift being used by worker to examine rock excavation
Income The Project generated $193.9 million in total labour income. Of this, Manitoba labour income represented Project construction will generate income from $143.4 million or approximately 74 per cent of total a number of sources including employment, business labour income. Of total Manitoba labour income, opportunities and payment of taxes. Partner First Aboriginal labour income represented approximately Nations’ construction income will originate mainly $71.6 million (50 per cent), northern Manitoba from employment and to a lesser extent from business Aboriginal labour incomes represented approximately opportunities, while employment will be the main source $48.6 million (34 per cent), northern Manitoba non- of income for Aboriginal residents in the Regional Study Aboriginal represented approximately $6.5 million Area. During the operation phase, the partner First (5 per cent), and non-Aboriginal represented $71.8 Nations will receive additional equity income as a result million (50 per cent). Partner First Nation labour income of being partners in the Project. represented approximately $25.8 million (13 per cent) Labour income is an important indicator of the direct of total Manitoba labour income. Adam Spence, grader operator for Northern Maintenance Services economic impact of a Project. The estimate of labour income reflects the direct income earned by workers Total Project Labour Income Breakdown from employment on the Project. It is the sum of wages and salaries associated with direct person-years of employment. Monitoring will determine the levels of employment income generated by construction Northern of the Project. Southern Manitoba Manitoba Non-Manitoba Manitoba Non-Aboriginal Aboriginal 26% 74% 45% 34%
Northern Manitoba Southern Manitoba Non-Aboriginal Aboriginal 5% 16%
56 Pouring concrete for powerhouse
Rate of Turnover It is also useful to look at the amount of turnover within Of this, turnover among Aboriginal employees has certain time periods throughout the life of the Project. ranged from 11.9 per cent to 21.2 per cent and among The cumulative rate of turnover is calculated as total When looking at a specific period within the life non-Aboriginal employees from 4.5 per cent to 10.2 incidents of separation, for discharges and resignations, of the Project, turnover is expressed as total incidents of per cent. While there has been variation in the amount divided by hires from the start of construction to a given separation (for discharges and resignations), divided by of turnover across each quarter, overall the amount of point in time. The cumulative rate of turnover does not hires3 working on site within that specific time period. turnover for the workforce in Q1, 2016 is lower than in include layoffs or transfers to other positions or contracts. Since the start of construction, and as shown below in Q3, 2014. Among Aboriginal workers the amount of From the start of construction to March 31, 2016, the the graph, the amount of turnover within a given quarter turnover is slightly higher in Q1, 2016. cumulative turnover rate for the Project is 26.4 per (e.g. Jan., Feb., Mar. 2015 is Q1 2015) has ranged from 3 Hires for calculating turnover has been modified to exclude Contract 016125 cent for total hires, 36.2 per cent for Aboriginal hires 9.3 per cent to 13.9 per cent. (Emergency Medical Services) as hiring and work scheduling practices for this and 16.5 per cent for non-Aboriginal hires. contract can misrepresent the true turnover rate . Quarterly Turnover 25 0. %
20 0. %
15 0. %
10 0. %
5 0. %
0 0. % Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 2016
Aboriginal Non-Aboriginal Quarterly TO Preparing for concrete pour
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 57 Social Monitoring Partner First Nation Communities 397 people, representing an average annual growth The partnership has monitored the total on-reserve and rate of 1.6 per cent. Between 2014 and 2015 specifically, Population on own Crown land populations of each of the partner TCN’s on-reserve and on own Crown land population The Project’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) First Nations. The total on-reserve and on own Crown increased by 49 people. In the pre- and post-construction predicted that the Project would not result in notable land population of the partner First Nations represents periods, the average annual changes were 1.5 per cent changes to the number of people in the partner First the population assumed to be most likely to access and 2.1 per cent, respectively. Nation communities and that there will not be many housing, infrastructure and services on reserve. Between 2003 and 2015, the total on-reserve and on people moving into the communities because of Population monitoring is based on data from own Crown land population of WLFN increased by the Project construction. Similarly, Gillam was not Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, from 8 people, representing an average annual growth rate predicted to see any substantial population growth December 31, 2003 to December 31, 2015. The growth of 0.5 per cent. Between 2014 and 2015 specifically, as a result of Project-related construction and rate in the pre- (2003-2014) and post-construction WLFN’s on-reserve and on own Crown land population Thompson was also not expected to see any major (2014-2015) periods are reported to show change that decreased by 8 people. In the pre- and post-construction construction-related population change. has occurred since the Project began. periods, the average annual changes were 1.1 per cent and -5.8 per cent, respectively. However, accurately identifying the precise levels of Between 2003 and 2015, the total on-reserve and on in- and out-migration is difficult and the partner First own Crown land population of TCN increased by Nations have noted that any in-migration to their communities could stress services already at capacity. Total On-Reserve and On Own Crown Land Population at Partner First Nations Population is being monitored to confirm the extent of Project-induced migration in the partner First Nations’ 2,350 2,301 2,271 2,240 2,248 2,216 2,210 2,145 communities and Gillam. 2,134 2,088 2,075 2,039 2,000 1,953
1,000 435 423 434 413 391 381 373 373 395 395 396 403 403 245 248 244 217 212 215 215 225 220 194 253 253 206 121 124 124 138 130 111 111 122 125 123 128 108 123 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 WLFN FLCN YFFN TCN Source: Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada
58 Between 2003 and 2015, the total on-reserve and on Town of Gillam total population of Gillam decreased by 34 people. own Crown land population of YFFN decreased by Based on data from Manitoba Health’s annual health In the pre- and post-construction periods, the average 28 people, representing an average annual growth rate statistics, the total population at Gillam increased annual changes were 2.3 per cent and -2.5 per cent, of -0.6 per cent. Between 2014 and 2015 specifically, from 1,171 to 1,305 – an increase of 134 people, respectively. YFFN’s on-reserve and on own Crown land population between June 1, 2008 and June 1, 2015. This represents A comparison of the Gillam population from 2008 to increased by 14 people. In the pre- and post-construction an average annual growth rate of 1.6 per cent over 2015 (as of June 1) is demonstrated in the graph below. periods, the average annual changes were -0.9 per cent the period. Between 2014 and 2015 specifically, the and 3.7 per cent, respectively. Between 2003 and 2015, the total on-reserve and on own Crown land population of FLCN decreased by Gillam Population (2008-2015) 19 people, representing an average annual growth rate 1,400 of -0.7 per cent. Between 2014 and 2015 specifically, 1,379 FLCN’s on-reserve and on own Crown land population 1,300 1,367 1,339 increased by five people. In the pre- and post-construction 1,336 1,314 1,305 periods, the average annual changes were -0.9 per cent 1,268 and 2.3 per cent, respectively. 1,200
A comparison of partner First Nations’ on-reserve 1,171 and on own Crown land populations from 2003 1,100 to 2015 is demonstrated in the graph on the previous page (all population statistics reported as of 1,000 December 31, 2015). 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Source: Manitoba Health
WLFN FLCN YFFN TCN
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 59 Public Safety and Worker Interaction Housing, Infrastructure and Services Transportation Infrastructure, A Worker Interaction Subcommittee was established Little new demand for housing in the partner First Travel, Access and Safety by Manitoba Hydro prior to the beginning of Nation communities and in Gillam is anticipated While the EIS predicted that existing transportation Keeyask construction. This Subcommittee is part during Project construction. Also, minimal effects on networks and plans for Provincial Road (PR) 280 of a corporate-wide initiative to address anticipated infrastructure and services in the partner First Nations upgrades would be able to accommodate the changes increases in the Gillam area workforce resulting from are expected. in road use associated with Project construction, Keeyask and other Manitoba Hydro projects being community concerns remain regarding traffic safety One-time Key Person Interviews will take place during constructed in an overlapping timeframe. and road conditions. Manitoba Infrastructure (MI, Project construction to identify any apparent Project formerly Manitoba Infrastructure and Transportation) The Subcommittee is intended as a forum for effects on housing or infrastructure and services in the is responsible for the existing provincial highway system, information sharing and communication for early partner First Nations’ communities. Manitoba Hydro including the maintenance and upgrading to PR 280. identification of potential worker interaction concerns, and the partner First Nations have initiated discussions Monitoring efforts are being undertaken in collaboration prevention of issues to the extent possible, and regarding the design and implementation of the Key with Manitoba Public Insurance (MPI) and MI to assess identification of ways to work cooperatively to address Person Interviews planned for 2016/2017. issues as they arise including any related increases EIS predictions and respond to community concerns. Pertinent information related to the effects of non-local in the demand for services and accommodation construction workers on the demand for infrastructure in Gillam. In addition to Manitoba Hydro, FLCN, and services in Gillam is also available through the and the Town of Gillam, other stakeholder members Gillam Worker Interaction Subcommittee. are determined on an as-needed basis.
In the period between from January 1, 2015 to March 31, 2016, the Subcommittee met three times – in June 2015, September 2015, and January 2016.
60 SOUTH BAY DIVERSION CHANNEL
Keewatinohk Converter StationXW ± Fox Lake Cree Nation Fox Lake (Bird) Limestone G.S.
N orth Site 11 Site 3 Acce (! ss R Site 2 oa (! (! ¾À290 d Kettle G.S. (! ¾À280 Stephens Lake Site 10 Keeyask Gillam Long Spruce G.S. South G.S.A cc ss R NELSON RIVER e oad Fox Lake Cree Nation ¾À632 A Kwis Ki Mahka Reserve Tataskweyak Cree Nation Site 11 Tataskweyak (Split Lake) (! (!Site 3 od Split Lake wo R iver 290 nt York Factory First Nation ¾À ur B York Landing (Kawechiwasik) Kelsey G.S. Site 10 War Lake First Nation (! Ilford (Mooseocoot)
¾À 280 Fox River Long Spruce G.S. ¾À391 (!Site 1
633 ¾À Site 1 391¾À (!
North Access Road
¾À6
¾À375 280¾À ¾À391 280¾À Site(! 2
NELSON RIVER
Legend Traffic Monitoring Station (! Traffic Monitoring Stations First Nation Reserve 0 20 40 Kilometres Locations Generating Stations Under Construction Rail 0 10 20 Miles Generating Stations Existing
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 61 Traffic Volumes To better monitor traffic patterns during construction, The traffic monitoring counter locations are shown on Traffic volume data is typically collected by MI every Manitoba Hydro worked with MI to have five the map on the previous page. The traffic volume data two years and published through the Manitoba permanent traffic counters installed in PR280 and collected at these locations, between July 2015 and Highway Traffic Information System (MHTIS). PR290. Installation of the counters was completed March 2016, are shown in the graphs below. Traffic data from the MHTIS for PR 280 is divided in the fall of 2015 and data is being collected by MI. into three segments: PR 391 to Split Lake, and Split Lake to the PR 280/PR 290 intersection and PR 280/ PR 280 Traffic Volumes - Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) from 2003 to 2015 PR 290 intersection to Gillam. A summary of the Annual Average Daily Traffic annual average daily traffic for past years (rounded Highway Segment 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 to the nearest five) can be seen in the PR280 Traffic PR 391 to Split Lake 230 155 135 175 210 270 340 Volumes table to the right. PR 280 Split Lake to PR 280/290 115 95 95 120 140 160 230 PR 280/290 to Gillam 205 210 235 225 255 375 450
Total Traffic Volume North Bound - Daily Variations per Month Total Traffic Volume South Bound - Daily Variations per Month (July data based on 16 days . Oct data based on 14 days . Site 1 Nov data based on 17 .5 days due to monitor malfunction) (July data based on 16 days . Oct data based on 14 days . Site 1 Nov data based on 17 .5 days due to monitor malfunction)
Site 1 - PR280 Site 1 - PR280 Between PR391 Between PR391 250 and Split Lake (NB) 250 and Split Lake (SB)
200 Site 2 - PR280 200 Site 2 - PR280 Between Split Lake and Between Split Lake and West of Keeyask Gate (NB) West of Keeyask Gate (SB) 150 150 Site 3 - PR290 Site 3 - PR290 Between PR280 and Between PR280 and 100 Keewatinohk Gate (WB) 100 Keewatinohk Gate (EB)
Site 10 - PR280 Site 10 - PR280 50 Between PR290 50 Between PR290 and Gillam (WB) and Gillam (EB) Average Daily Vehicle Counts DailyAverage Vehicle (ADT) Counts DailyAverage Vehicle (ADT)
0 Site 11 - PR280 Between 0 Site 11 - PR280 Between July 15 Aug 15 Sept 15 Oct 15 Nov 15 Dec 15 Jan 16 Feb 16 Mar 16 East of Keeyask Gate July 15 Aug 15 Sept 15 Oct 15 Nov 15 Dec 15 Jan 16 Feb 16 Mar 16 East of Keeyask Gate and and PR290 (NB) PR290 (SB) Month Month 62 Collision Data Collision rate is measured as the number of collisions As mentioned previously, partner First Nations’ Collision data for PR 280 for the years 2005 to 2015 per million vehicle-kilometres of travel (MVKT) on a communities have expressed concern about the quality were provided by MPI. There were a total of 139 roadway section during the analysis period, which in and safety of PR 280. In response, MI is undertaking collisions on PR 280 between 2005 and 2015; an this case is the 11-year period from 2005 to 2015. Based a number of construction projects and enhanced average of 12.6 collisions per year. Collisions during on the average annual daily traffic and the number of maintenance plans to address these concerns. the spring (March, April and May) and fall (September, collisions for 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2013 and 2015, MI also established the PR 280 Joint Advisory October and November) months were most frequent, PR 280 had a collision rate of approximately 0.57 Committee in the fall of 2014. The committee is accounting for 62 per cent of all collisions over the incidents per MVKT over the six study years. Due to comprised of representatives from the Province of 11-year period. Single vehicle collisions were most the age and lack of details associated with the collision Manitoba, Manitoba Hydro, the Town of Gillam and frequent, accounting for approximately 92 per cent of data provided, it is difficult to determine any site the partner First Nations’ communities to involve the all collisions during the analysis period. Of the total specific conditions or locations that may influence latter directly in the planning of upcoming upgrades collisions reported along PR 280 during the assessment the collision rate. The current collision rate on PR 280 to PR 280. The PR 280 Joint Advisory Committee phase of Keeyask and other proposed hydro projects, is well below MI’s standard threshold of 1.5 MVKT. met twice in 2015 (spring and fall). nine resulted in non-fatal injuries. This is normally the indicator that is used to trigger an examination of roadway geometry, safety measures and signage.
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 63 Security gate
Keeyask Site Access The tables below provide a summary of traffic use The Keeyask North Access Road connects PR 280 to on the North Access Road from August 2014 to the construction site. It is a private road with restricted December 2015. On average, 92 vehicles per day used access, which is controlled by a security gate at the the road during the final six months of 2014 and a 104 PR 280 access road intersection. The gate office is vehicle average was realized in 2015. These numbers staffed 24 hours per day, seven days per week and provide information to measure and identify changes security staff document all authorized vehicles entering that may be related to the Project. and exiting the road. Monitoring of traffic volume on the access road takes place through the gate’s records and through security reports from patrols.
Partnership sign at the security gate Keeyask Monthly Access Road Traffic Volumes
2014 Traffic Count Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Summary Total Vehicles 2,919 3,425 3,008 2,531 2,124 14,007 Daily Average 94 114 97 84 69 92
2015 Traffic Count Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Summary Total Vehicles 2,605 2,693 3,759 2,549 2,440 2,875 2,852 2,696 4,312 5,308 3,495 2,376 37,960 Daily Average 84 96 121 85 79 96 92 87 144 171 117 77 104
64 The tables on this page provide a breakdown of the 2014 North Access Road Use by Vehicle Classification previous traffic count tables into the type of vehicles 2014 accessing the Keeyask site on the North Access Road Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Summary from August 2014 to December 2015. On average, Site Personnel 2,228 2,620 2,575 1,790 1,560 77% personnel vehicles account for 75-80 per cent of all Suppliers/Deliveries 144 230 192 235 235 7% traffic, delivery vehicles account for approximately Visitors/Guests 547 575 241 506 329 16% 15 per cent of traffic with the remainder of traffic Resource Users 0 0 0 0 0 0% attributed to visitors. These numbers provide Total information to measure and identify changes 2,919 3,425 3,008 2,531 2,124 that may be related to the Project.
2015 North Access Road Use by Vehicle Classification
2015 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Summary Site Personnel 2,004 2,151 3,052 2,092 1,986 2,368 2,423 2,255 2,840 3,378 2,799 2,057 78% Suppliers/Deliveries 330 375 433 328 321 299 323 312 1,206 1,623 350 217 16% Visitors/Guests 271 167 274 129 133 208 106 129 266 307 346 102 6% Resource Users 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% Total 2,605 2,693 3,759 2,549 2,440 2,875 2,852 2,696 4,312 5,308 3,495 2,376
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 65 Drum used in cultural ceremonies
Culture and Spirituality Manitoba Hydro and the Fox and York Keeyask Aboriginal Awareness Training Processes and measures were put in place to encourage Joint Venture Company who endeavoured to include On-site training workshops are provided for staff working retention of Aboriginal employees and to mitigate the all partner First Nation interests. The Employment at the Keeyask site. Fifty-one training workshops were potential effects of Project construction and operation Retention and Support contractor began delivery of held in 2015/2016. The purposes of training workshops on Cree culture and spirituality. These measures services during the Keeyask Infrastructure Project are to: include on-site Aboriginal awareness activities and and services are continuing into the Keeyask • increase understanding and appreciation of the cultural retention support programs, orientation programming, Generation Project. differences, beliefs and values of individuals within the cultural awareness training for employees, voluntary Partner First Nations Members Orientation various parties/communities working at the site; counseling services and cultural ceremonies prior The purpose of these orientation sessions, delivered in to many key construction activities. A worker family • enhance comfort in living, working and/or doing the communities, is to prepare partner First Nations’ survey will also be completed to assess the experiences business in a culturally diverse environment; members for the construction camp experience and of partner First Nations’ members employed on Project enhance their prospects of achieving the benefits from • identify barriers and issues between the various parties construction and their families. employment on the Project. The focus is on key factors working at the site; Aboriginal Awareness Activities that affect the economy, culture and social conditions • identify common goals; and Retention Support Programs of each community. This includes the historical and • develop strategies and an action plan for addressing Since the start of construction, various measures ongoing effects of hydro development and relationships issues/barriers, reaching common goals and developing were put in place to support the retention of northern with Manitoba Hydro. Seven sessions have been held and maintaining long-term harmonious relationships; and Aboriginal employees at the job site, and to to date. ensure that sensitivity and respect for local culture • increase participants’ understanding of contemporary is maintained throughout construction of the Project. issues facing Aboriginal peoples; These measures include orientation sessions for partner • challenge participants to re-think their assumptions First Nation members, on-site Aboriginal awareness and personal biases about Aboriginal peoples; and training for employees, voluntary counseling services and cultural ceremonies marking key construction • provide participants with information that will activities. These are being delivered through the promote understanding and respect of Aboriginal Employment Retention and Support Services contract Sign at the entrance of the Main Camp cultures, enabling participants to work effectively with Employee Retention and Support Services office where the scope was developed jointly between Aboriginal peoples. 66 Sweet grass
On-site Counseling Cultural Site Ceremonies Worker and Family Survey On-site counseling is available to help all employees, Site ceremonies are being held at key construction During the upcoming year, the Partnership will on a voluntary basis, to deal with any issues milestones to help mitigate the effect of the Project conduct a worker and family survey of a sample experienced while working on the Project. This could on partner First Nations’ culture, and to demonstrate of partner First Nation workers employed on include, work adjustment problems, vocational/career respect for the land and all that is supported by Project construction and their families to assess issues, cultural adjustments, family stresses and money the land. Attendance at ceremonies is welcome and their employment experience. Manitoba Hydro management. The intent is to reduce the number of voluntary. Participation has consisted of various and the partner First Nations have initiated people who leave the Project, particularly for Northern community members at large, staff of the contractors discussions regarding the design and implementation Aboriginal workers of Cree heritage, by assisting and Manitoba Hydro. Between April 2015 and of the worker and family survey. them in dealing with challenges directly affecting March 2016, there were eight ceremonies held for their work performance. various purposes, including opening of the Main Camp, the first concrete placement, for the south access road and the stream crossings.
Cultural ceremony for first concrete pour
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 67 Mercury and Human Health
Mercury is a metal found naturally in small amounts in environment as a result of the Project. The goals rock, soil, water, living organisms, as well as in synthetic of future monitoring include activities to support products. Flooding of forested lands with soils with high discussion and build understanding around mercury organic content, or flooding of wetlands, commonly and fish; to allow individuals and families to confidently results in a temporary increase in mercury (in the form assess and manage the benefits and risks associated with of methylmercury) in the water, and subsequently eating wild fish in the Project area; to support and in the organisms that live and use those environments. enhance local practices of fishing for sharing, and eating The vast majority of mercury exposure to people occurs wild fish at levels that are healthy for all community through the consumption of fish. members. A group made up of the partner First Nations, Manitoba Hydro, and provincial and federal health Because Project effects of mercury in the reservoir, and specialists will oversee carrying out the plan. to a lesser extent in Stephen’s Lake, will occur post- flooding, the majority of related monitoring will occur in the operation phase. Mercury levels in fish from Gull Lake are expected to peak three to seven years after impoundment in 2018 and then to decline over the next 20 to 30 years until they reach pre-Project levels or stable concentrations.
The Partnership has prepared a Mercury and Human Health Risk Management Plan in consultation with provincial and federal regulators, in order to identify, assess, respond to, communicate and monitor risks to human health from increased mercury in the
The majority of the monitoring work looking at mercury in pickerel and other fish will occur when the Project is in operation
68 Heritage Resources Protection and Mitigation
The Construction Heritage Resources Protection Plan On July 26, 2015, the Project’s archaeological (HRPP) sets out the KHLP’s commitment to safeguard team conducted surveys of the dewatered Spillway heritage resources and appropriately manage human Cofferdam to recover any heritage resources that may remains or heritage objects discovered or disturbed be present on the newly exposed riverbed. No heritage during the development of the Project. resources were located during the surveys.
No human remains were found between April 2015 Between July and September 2015, the Project’s and March 31, 2016. archaeological team conducted monitoring and mitigation at 38 archaeological sites. Of these sites, In June 2015, boat patrol crews working around five were newly identified with site types consisting Birthday Rapids came across what appeared to be bones. of an early 20th century cabin foundation, The crew immediately stopped all work, flagged the area Heritage resource found during archaeological work a Pre-European campsite with pottery, a lithic (stone) and noted the GPS location. The HRPP protocols were tool, and two Pre-European pottery finds. Nearby immediately implemented by the Project Archaeologist. the cabin foundation, two rock piles that were They determined the following day that the bones were flagged as potential heritage features were assessed from a caribou, therefore no further action was required. by the Historic Resources Branch in October 2015 This was the only incident that triggered activation and determined to be natural features. Over 1,250 of the HRPP in 2015/2016. artifacts were recovered, cleaned, analyzed, catalogued In addition to implementation of the HRPP as required, and prepared for submission to the Historic the Partnership protects heritage resources in the Resources Branch. The methods implemented for Project area through measures, such as the following, mitigation of sites in the Project area include intensive undertaken in 2015/2016. shovel testing and extensive shoreline surveys.
Examining an archaeological site
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 69 A cemetery intended for the reburial of any human of the cemetery. A ceremony including partner remains found during the Project was selected in First Nations’ community members, Elders and consultation with all Project partners. An archaeological students, took place on October 21, 2015, to re-inter assessment was conducted on July 7 and 8, 2015, to 4,000-year-old human remains discovered in 2010. ensure no heritage resources were present in the vicinity ± Keeyask Cemetery North Access Road
¾À280
Historic Cabin Foundation and Debris Pottery Concentrations and Stone Tool Debris Isolated Swede saw discovered at site known as Trapper’s cabin Stone Tool Pottery Shard Spillway Cofferdam
South Access R oad A memorial, consistent with local culture and
Birthday spirituality, is also located at the cemetery site to pay Rapids Caribou Bones tribute to those who died previously in the vicinity of the Project area, so that they may be remembered. Birthday Rapids Upriver Site The map (left) shows the locations of the heritage mitigation field work conducted in 2015.
Legend Heritage Protection and New Registered Archaeological Site (2015) 0 2.5 5 Kilometres Heritage Protection Location (2015) 0 2.5 5 Miles Mitigation Fieldwork e[ Heritage Protection Location (2015) June 28, 2015 – October 21, 2015 Keeyask Principal Structures
70 Public Engagement
The KHLP is committed to providing the public with The open houses provided up-to-date information on information about its environmental activities and the what is being undertaken to manage environmental results of monitoring studies undertaken each year. The issues and monitor the effects of Keeyask construction. Monitoring Advisory Committee (MAC) produces MAC members and other Manitoba Hydro staff this Environmental Overview document annually and were on hand to explain what is occurring, answer it is distributed to TCN, WLFN, YFFN and FLCN questions and demonstrate some of the equipment members. MAC also held open houses in each of the used in monitoring programs. partner communities and at Keeyask in March 2016:
• Ilford (WLFN) – March 1, 2016; Discussing heritage resources at Spilt Lake open house • York Landing (YFFN) – March 2, 2016;
• Split Lake (TCN) – March 3, 2016;
• Gillam (FLCN) – March 29, 2016; and
• Keeyask Main Camp – March 30, 2016.
Open House at Keeyask Main Camp Demonstrating monitoring equipment to students at open house in York Landing
Keeyask Generation Project - Environmental Overview 71 Created By:jlidgett Size A - Portrait BTB- JUL2015 Scale: 1:350,000 FileLocation: \\geodata\GIS_groups\GISS\Keeyask\Analysis\_EnviroSoc\EnvironmentalOverviews\2016\MXDs\Keeyask_EO_2016_MonitoringLocationMap_View22X8_5_Inset_v12.mxd
P e l l e t i e r
La ke ER V R I ON Environmental MonitoringEL S N
ST LocationsFox Lake Cree Nation Keeyask EP H E Fox Lake (Bird) N G.S. Nelson River S S T April 1, 2015 - March 31, 2016 E L P A H E KE K N S LA E
E K
A L SP LI T
Burntwood River 290 280
STEPHENS LAKE
0 25 50Kilometres NELSON RIVER
0 20 40 Miles GULL Gillam RAPIDS Fox Lake Cree Nation GULL LAKE A Kwis Ki Mahka Reserve
BIRTHDAY RAPIDS
NELSON RIVER
Tataskweyak Cree Nation Split Lake SPLIT LAKE 280
ASSEAN LAKE
North Access Road
SP LIT LAKE
York Factory First Nation York Landing (Kawechiwasik)
Caribou 0 3.5 7Kilometres War Lake First Nation Island Ilford (Mooseocoot) William Smith GULL Island RAPIDS 0 2.5 5 Miles
GULL Sample / Survey Type LAKE South Access Road Bedload Turbity Greenhouse Gas Fish Community Adult Sturgeon Bird (Species at Risk) Plant Wildlife Den
Total Suspended Solids Water Quality Benthic Invertebrate Fish Mercury Juvenile Sturgeon Bird (Shoreline) Caribou (Ground) Keeyask Region 0 1 2 Kilometres
Sediment Deposition Water Level Wetland Fish Movement Lake Sturgeon Stocking Bird (UAV) Caribou (Aerial) 0 1 2 Miles 72 Created By:jlidgett Size A - Portrait BTB- JUL2015 Scale: 1:350,000 FileLocation: \\geodata\GIS_groups\GISS\Keeyask\Analysis\_EnviroSoc\EnvironmentalOverviews\2016\MXDs\Keeyask_EO_2016_MonitoringLocationMap_View22X8_5_Inset_v12.mxd
P e l l e t i e r
La ke ER V R I ON Environmental MonitoringEL S N
ST LocationsFox Lake Cree Nation Keeyask EP H E Fox Lake (Bird) N G.S. Nelson River S S T April 1, 2015 - March 31, 2016 E L P A H E KE K N S LA E
E K
A L SP LI T
Burntwood River 290 280
STEPHENS LAKE
0 25 50 Kilometres NELSON RIVER
0 20 40 Miles GULL Gillam RAPIDS Fox Lake Cree Nation GULL LAKE A Kwis Ki Mahka Reserve
BIRTHDAY RAPIDS
NELSON RIVER
Tataskweyak Cree Nation Split Lake SPLIT LAKE 280
ASSEAN LAKE
North Access Road
SP LIT LAKE
York Factory First Nation York Landing (Kawechiwasik)
Caribou 0 3.5 7 Kilometres War Lake First Nation Island Ilford (Mooseocoot) William Smith GULL Island RAPIDS 0 2.5 5 Miles
GULL Sample / Survey Type LAKE South Access Road Bedload Turbity Greenhouse Gas Fish Community Adult Sturgeon Bird (Species at Risk) Plant Wildlife Den
Total Suspended Solids Water Quality Benthic Invertebrate Fish Mercury Juvenile Sturgeon Bird (Shoreline) Caribou (Ground) Keeyask Region 0 1 2 Kilometres
Sediment Deposition Water Level Wetland Fish Movement Lake Sturgeon Stocking Bird (UAV) Caribou (Aerial) 0 1 2 Miles 73 Keeyask Hydropower Limited Partnership www.keeyask.com