Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
2008 March 14, 2008 Shell EIA ACFN TEK Email (Out going) TEK/TLU information for JPME & PRM EIA. Follow up to email March 11, 2008 Coordinator Consultant (refer to Jun-July bi-monthly report). Acknowledged receipt of email and that final report was soon to be completed. Responded to question re: next steps noting delivery of report would complete project requirements. Requested resend of status report as not able to open.
March 17, 2008 Shell EIA ACFN TEK Email (In coming) TEK/TLU information for JPME & PRM EIA. Provided status report. Asked for Coordinator Consultant clarification on assistance with figures for report. October 23, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Telephone (Out 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 disposition Called about progress on the Environment Rep going) applications for oil sands exploration review of the various applications activities in the Jackpine and Pierre River and to set up a meeting to discuss areas. any concerns. No reply.
Page 1 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
October 23, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Meeting (Fort MLP 970076 Amendment and TFA request Hand delivered information Environment Rep McMurray) for Pierre River area. package for OSE programs for Pierre River and Jackpine areas to ACFN IRC office in Fort McMurray. Spoke with Environment Rep about the campsite required for the Jackpine OSE and the issues Shell was having with the assignment from SRD. Informed that once the assignment was completed Shell would be submitting an application to amend the location to accommodate a 400-man camp. At the time, no concerns were noted.
October 29, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Email/Mail (Outgoing) Compensation lake and TFA application for Consultation package, including Environment Rep Pierre River area. composite map, shape files/meta files and/or survey plans, mailed and emailed to the IRC office in Fort McMurray. November 6, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Telephone (Out Compensation lake and TFA application for Called about progress on the Environment Rep going) Pierre River area. review of the compensation lake/TFA application and set up a meeting to discuss any concerns. No reply to call or previous information emailed. November 6, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Email (Out going) MLP 970076 Amendment and TFA request Emailed about progress on the Environment Rep for Pierre River area. review of the OSE programs/campsite and set up a meeting to discuss any concerns. No reply to email.
Page 2 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
November 6, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Email (Out going) 2008-2009 OSE Pierre River exploration and Contacted about progress on the Environment Rep hydrogeological winter drilling programs. review of the OSE programs and set up a meeting to discuss any concerns. No reply to email.
November 14, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Telephone (Out Compensation lake and TFA application for Called about progress on the Environment Rep going) Pierre River area. review of the compensation lake/TFA application. ACFN asked if this compensation lake was a new project that had gone to the ERCB for approval. Landman noted they did not have the information but would get an answer. Followed up with response noting that the winter drilling program was for PRM, dispositions for the various components were being applied for separately. November 14, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Telephone (Out 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 disposition Called about the various Environment Rep going) applications for oil sands exploration applications that Shell had made activities in the Jackpine and Pierre River for OSE programs. Informed areas. Landman that ACFN had no concerns about the applications.
November 14, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Email/Mail (Outgoing) MLP 970076 Amendment and TFA request Consultation package, including Environment Rep for Pierre River area. composite map, shape files/meta files and/or survey plans, mailed and emailed to the IRC office in Fort McMurray.
Page 3 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
November 15, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Telephone (Out Compensation lake and TFA application for Called to explain that the Environment Rep going) Pierre River area. compensation lake was approved under the Jackpine Mine site. The reason for the location and timing was due to the fact of finding a location that the ERCB would allow. At the time, ACFN had no concerns about the application.
November 27, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Email & Telephone MLP 970076 Amendment and TFA request Contacted to discuss the OSE Environment Rep (Out going) for Pierre River area. programs and the campsite MLP 970076. Asked if there were any concerns or questions. ACFN noted they were sending a fax/email stating concerns with Shells OSE program. They did not have any concerns about the campsite at this time.
November 27, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Email (Out going) 2008-2009 OSE Pierre River exploration and Provided notice that Shell was Environment Rep hydrogeological winter drilling programs. required to split and resubmit its application for exploration and drilling work into oil sands exploration activity and non-oil sands exploration activity. Noted wells to be drilled do not change. The difference is the information would be submitted in four applications instead of two. Asked if ACFN had reviewed Shell's applications provided on October 23, 2008 or if they had any questions.
Page 4 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
December 8, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Telephone (Out 2008-2009 OSE Pierre River exploration and Contacted to find out about any Environment Rep going) hydrogeological winter drilling programs. concerns ACFN may have. Email reply sent to confirm they have no conflicts. December 8, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Email (In coming) 2008-2009 OSE Pierre River exploration and Provided notice that information Environment Rep hydrogeological winter drilling programs. on winter exploration and drilling programs had been reviewed and December 9, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Program Meeting (Fort 2008-2009 OSE Pierre River exploration and theyFollow had up no re: conflicts December with 8, the 2009 Manager McMurray) hydrogeological winter drilling programs. email from IRC Environment Rep noting no concerns about the drilling programs. Talked about the application process for land leases. December 9, 2008 SPAC ACFN IRC Program Email (In coming) Monthly IRC meeting. Acknowledged receipt of Consultation Manager documents for meeting and Coordinator requested copies be made. Noted items that ACFN wanted to focus on at meeting. Requested call in arrangements be made for ACFN IRC Environment Rep to call in.
December 9, 2008 SPAC ACFN IRC Email (Out going) Monthly IRC meeting. Provided call-in arrangements for Consultation Environment Rep the meeting. Coordinator December 9, 2008 SPAC ACFN IRC Email (Out going) Monthly IRC meeting. Provided updated call-in Consultation Environment Rep arrangements due to changes in Coordinator attendance. December 9, 2008 SPAC ACFN IRC Email (In coming) Monthly IRC meeting. Requested notes from December Consultation Environment Rep 3, 2008 Advisory Committee Coordinator meeting. Notes were finalized and provided to Advisory Committee on February 5, 2009.
Page 5 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
December 10-11, 2008Shell Landman & ACFN IRC Email (Out going) 2008-2009 OSE Pierre River winter drilling Copy of consultation logs for Land Agent Environment Rep programs and related dispositions. Pierre River winter drilling related dispositions emailed to IRC by land agent on behalf of Shell. Noted Shell considers consultation on these dispositions complete and informed IRC to contact Shell with any questions.
December 11, 2008 Shell Landman ACFN IRC Director Email (Out going) 2008-2009 OSE Pierre River winter drilling This is a clarification on the & Environment Rep programs and related dispositions. original December 11, 2008 & SRD communication record with ACFN IRC re: winter drilling programs. Consultation summary sent to SRD and copy emailed to ACFN. Shell confirms that it adhered to the consultation requirements as per the Aboriginal Consultation Policy Guidelines and deems consultation complete. This submission included submissions for all dispositions pertaining to the winter drilling program, including, 2008-2009 OSE Pierre River exploration and hydrogeological programs, and related dispositions for access roads, piezometer sites, campsites and remote sumps.
April 2009
Page 6 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
April 24, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Director Email (Out going) TEK/TLU information for JPME & PRM EIA. Requested permission to include a table, listing issues/concerns from the 2008 ACFN TEK/TLU report, in the JPME & PRM update reports being prepared for AENVand to include the report as an appendix to the EIA update report.
April 28, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Director Email (Out going) TEK/TLU information for JPME & PRM EIA. Provided notice that Shell would not be including a table, listing issues/concerns from the 2008 ACFN TEK/TLU report, in the PRM update report due to printing deadline. However, indicated that Shell would still like to include the report as an appendix to the EIA update report.
May 2009
Page 7 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
May 1, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Director, Email (In coming) TEK/TLU information for JPME & PRM EIA. Provided notes on teleconference ACFN to provide TEK Use License. Shell Program Manager & meeting. Discussed the email to provide the signed TEK Sharing Project Manager request of April 24, 2009 re: use of Agreement and confirm if a confidential TEK/TLU report. ACFN noted appendix is possible for JPME & PRM TEK/TLU study could only be used updates. Shell to respond re: format for as a confidential appendix and a addressing issues and concerns from TEK use License was to be signed TEK/TLU study. Progress on these items by Shell and a TEK Sharing is pending further discussion. ACFN to Agreement should be put in place. provide scope of work for incorporating Discussed options for addressing TEK into NNLPs. Shell to provide list of issues and concerns from the NNLPs under development and direction TEK/TLU study. Discussed for TEK scope of work. TEK work scope including ACFN TEK in NNLPs. for MRME NNLP provided, ACFN provided noticed they were not going to participate in NNLP discussions for JPME & PRM. ACFN requested March 20, 2009 NNLP meeting notes, provided on May 6, 2009.
May 20, 2009 SPAC Rep Ft McKay IRC Email (Out going) PRM No Net Loss Planning meeting. Confirmed time and place for Director & Program October 13, 2009 meeting for Manager, MCFN PRM NNLP discussions. GIR Director & Regulatory Affairs Coordinator & ACFN IRC Director June 2009 June 25, 2009 SPAC ACFN IRC Program Email (Out going) No Net Loss Planning meeting for JPME & Follow up re: electronic copies of Consultation Manager PRM, March 20, 2009 presentations from meeting. Noted Coordinator CD containing all NNLP presentations had been provided at June 2, 2009 NNLP meeting. July 2009
Page 8 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
July 10, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Director Email (In coming) Monthly IRC meeting. Suggested adding update/discussion re: select existing commitments to meeting agenda for July 14, 2009.
July 10, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Director Email (Out going) Monthly IRC meeting. Agreed to adding discussion re: select existing commitments to meeting agenda. July 13, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Program Email (Out going) Monthly IRC meeting. Noted would provide information Manager by end of day for July14th meeting discussion. July 13, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Program Email (Out going) Monthly IRC meeting. Provided information for July 14th Manager meeting discussion. July 14, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Program Email (Out going) Advisory committee meeting and MRM tour, Provided response to questions Manager May 12-13, 2009. raised re: visitor and photo consent forms. July 16, 2009 SPAC ACFN IRC Director Email (Out going) JPME & PRM Technical Review. Received invoice for services from Consultation consultant. Forwarded invoice to Coordinator ACFN IRC with request for invoice to come from IRC.
July 17, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Director Email (Out going) JPME & PRM Technical Review. Provided response to ACFN's & Program Manager clarification requests to support their review of the JPME and PRM application. August 2009 August 6, 2009 SPAC ACFN IRC Office Email (In coming) ACFN community contact. Provided notice of change in Consultation Manager ACFN Fort Chipewyan community Coordinator contact. August 6, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Program Email (In coming) Shell's oil sands projects. Request for map showing location Shell to provided map October 14, 2009. Manager of Shell's oil sands locations.
Page 9 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
August 7, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN IRC Project Email/Letter (In Consultation for JPME & PRM Applications Copied on letter sent by ACFN to Manager coming) Ministers for AENV and Environment Canada noting concerns re: consultation for JPME & PRM, and ACFN's Aboriginal and treaty rights. August 12, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN IRC Director Email (In coming) IRC funding. Request to industry for additional funding support. August 18, 2009 SPAC ACFN Community Email (In coming) ACFN Advisory Committee meeting and Follow up re: Shell-ACFN Consultation Contact camping trip. camping trip. Suggested alternate Coordinator dates. August 18, 2009 SPAC ACFN Community Email (Out going) ACFN Advisory Committee meeting and Follow up re: camping trip Consultation Contact camping trip. suggested dates OK but need to Coordinator confirm with the team. Requested confirmation of Advisory Committee meeting on Sept 16th in light of suggested camping dates. August 18, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN IRC Program Email (In coming) ACFN Statement of Concern letter. Detailed statement of concerns re: Manager to AENV JPME & PRM Projects provided to AENV, focus on ACFN Aboriginal and treaty rights, consultation and impacts on traditional use.
August 18, 2009 SPAC Rep Ft McKay IRC Email (Out going) Invitation for PRM NNLP meeting. Shell to confirm venue and provided pre- Director & Program information materials. Manager, MCFN GIR Director & Regulatory Affairs Coordinator & ACFN IRC Director
August 19, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN Project Email (In coming) JPME & PRM traditional use study and Provided scope of work for Shell responded September 8, 2009. Manager community engagement. additional traditional use study work. Page 10 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
August 19, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN Advisory Telephone (In Advisory committee meeting and camping Called to confirm date and plans Committee Co-chair coming) trip. for meeting and camping trip. Message left. August 19, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN Project Email (Out going) JPME & PRM traditional use study and Acknowledged receipt of scope of Manager community engagement. work, indicating Shell would review and respond. August 19, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN IRC Director Email (In coming) IRC funding. Requested additional information in support of additional funding request of August 12, 2009.
August 21, 2009 SPAC ACFN Advisory Telephone (Out Advisory committee meeting and camping Called to confirm date and plans Consultation Committee Co-chair going) trip. for meeting and camping trip. Coordinator Message left. August 25, 2009 SPAC ACFN Advisory Telephone (Out Advisory committee meeting and camping Called to confirm date and plans Consultation Committee Co-chair going) trip. for meeting and camping trip. Coordinator Message left. August 25, 2009 SPAC ACFN Advisory Telephone (In Advisory committee meeting and camping Returned call, confirmed meeting Shell to follow up re: plans. Consultation Committee Co-chair coming) trip. date for September 15, 2009 and Coordinator camping trip for September 16-18, 2009. Discussed plans for both events.
August 25, 2009 SPAC ACFN Community Telephone (Out Advisory committee meeting and camping Discussed dates for advisory Consultation Contact going) trip. committee meeting and camping Coordinator trip. Noted would confirm after talking to ACFN Co-chair.
August 25, 2009 SPAC ACFN Community Email (In coming) Advisory committee meeting and camping Follow up to August 18, 2009 Consultation Contact trip. email to ACFN, requested Coordinator confirmation on dates. August 25, 2009 SPAC ACFN Community Telephone (Out Advisory committee meeting and camping Noted dates for meeting and Consultation Contact going) trip. camping trip confirmed with ACFN Coordinator Co-chair. Requested pre-approval and budget for trip.
Page 11 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
August 26, 2009 SPAC ACFN Advisory Telephone (Out Advisory committee meeting and camping Follow up to August 25, 2009 Consultation Committee Co-chair going) trip. discussion. Noted ideas for plans Coordinator OK. August 28, 2009 SPAC ACFN Community Email (In coming) Advisory committee meeting and camping Requested confirmation on Consultation Contact trip. number of Shell participants for Coordinator campout and start time for advisory committee meeting on September 16th. September 2009 September 1, 2009 SPAC ACFN IRC Director Email (Out going) AENV June-July 2009 bi-monthly Provided June-July 2009 bi- Consultation & Program Manager consultation report. monthly consultation report. Coordinator September 4, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Director Email (Out going) No Net Loss Planning for JPME & PRM. Follow up seeking clarification on invoice provided for meeting attendance. Requested copy of report being prepared. September 8, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN IRC Project Email (Out going) JPME & PRM traditional use study and Provided response to August 19, Manager community engagement. 2009 request. September 9, 2009 SPAC Managers, ACFN IRC Program Telephone (Out No Net Loss Planning for JPME & PRM and Discussed site-specific TEK Shell to provide information requirements Aboriginal Manager going) MRME. collection for NNLP. Requested and maps to ACFN. ACFN to confirm Consultation & scope of work. whether Shell can provide current TEK Social study to DFO in relation to the NNLP. Performance
September 9, 2009 SPAC ACFN Office Email (Out going) Advisory Committee meeting and camping Provided update on plans for Consultation Manager trip. meeting and camping trip, and Coordinator provided draft agenda for the meeting. September 9, 2009 SPAC ACFN IRC Program Email (Out going) Monthly IRC meeting. Asked re: availability for Consultation Manager September 29, 2009 IRC meeting. Coordinator Also noted interest in visiting the community gardens while in Fort Chipewyan, September 15-18, 2009.
Page 12 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
September 10, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN IRC Project Email (In coming) JPME & PRM traditional use study and Acknowledged receipt of Manager community engagement. September 8, 2009 response. Noted will review and respond with scope of work. September 10, 2009 SPAC ACFN IRC Program Email (In coming) Monthly IRC meeting. Requested confirmation of Consultation Manager meeting on September 29, 2009, Coordinator and also noted decision to separate regulatory and existing business discussions. September 10, 2009 SPAC ACFN Office Email (In coming) Advisory Committee meeting and camping Requested confirmation of Consultation Manager trip. meeting time on September 16, Coordinator 2009. September 10, 2009 SPAC ACFN Office Email (Out going) Advisory Committee meeting and camping Confirm meeting time for ACFN provided further information for Consultation Manager trip. September 16, 2009. Provided invoice on September 16, 2009. Coordinator update on plans for camping trip. Requested further information on invoice received. September 11, 2009 SPAC ACFN Office Email (In coming) Advisory Committee meeting and camping Provided pre-approval form. Consultation Manager trip. Coordinator September 11, 2009 SPAC ACFN IRC Program Email (In coming) Advisory Committee meeting and camping Responded re: draft agenda Consultation Manager trip. provided September 9, 2009, Coordinator noted requested changes. Indicated that discussions with advisory committee should focus on approved projects, with discussions on future projects kept to IRC meetings. September 14, 2009 SPAC ACFN Office Email (Out going) Advisory Committee meeting and camping Provided signed pre-approval Consultation Manager trip. form. Coordinator
Page 13 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
September 14, 2009 SPAC ACFN Office Email (Out going) Advisory Committee meeting and camping Provided draft meeting notes for Consultation Manager trip. May 12-13, 2009 meeting, and Coordinator revised meeting notes for February 9, 2009 meeting with changes as discussed on May 13, 2009. September 15, 2009 SPAC ACFN Office Email (In coming) Advisory Committee meeting and camping Informed that two ACFN Consultation Manager trip. councilors would like to attend the Coordinator camping trip. September 16, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN Advisory Meeting (Fort Quarterly meeting. Discussed agenda content, Committee Chipewyan) agreed to remove JPME & PRM update and related items at IRC request. Provided update on MRM activities. Followed up on action items from May meeting. September 16, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Director Email (Out going) No Net Loss Planning for JPME & PRM. Follow up on email sent September 4, 2009 seeking clarification on invoice provided for meeting attendance. Requested copy of report being prepared.
September 16, 2009 SPAC ACFN Office Email (In coming) Advisory Committee meeting and MRM tour, Provided back up for invoice as Consultation Manager May 12-13, 2009. requested September 10, 2009. Coordinator September 17, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Director Email (Out going) Introduction of new Community Confirmed name and contact Representative for Fort Chipewyan. information of Shell's new community representative for Fort Chipewyan.
Page 14 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
September 18, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN Chief Telephone (Out Chief to Chief meeting. Follow up to request for a meeting Shell to confirm availability for a meeting. going) made at September 17, 2009 at NAABA AGM re: to discuss economic opportunities, Shell- ACFN Advisory Committee TOR and consultation process. Chief requested meeting on September 25, 2009 in Fort Chipewyan.
September 18, 2009 SPAC ACFN Office Email (In coming) Advisory Committee meeting and camping ACFN provided copy of pre- Consultation Manager trip. approval for trip. Coordinator September 18, 2009 SPAC ACFN IRC Program Email (Out going) Monthly IRC meeting. Requested confirmation of Consultation Manager September 29th meeting date, Coordinator and provided draft meeting notes from July 14th and draft agenda for meeting. Note draft agenda was structured to reflect direction from ACFN on July 14, 2009 to separate discussions re: regulatory and existing business discussions. September 21, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Program Email (Out going) ACFN Elders/Youth camp. Requested dates for Elder/Youth Manager camp, asked for confirmation re: invitation. September 21, 2009 SPAC ACFN Office Email (Out going) Advisory Committee meeting and MRM tour, Follow up re: pre-approval sent Consultation Manager May 12-13, 2009. September 18, 2009. Question re: Coordinator councilors at meeting. September 21, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN Office Email (In coming) Advisory Committee meeting and MRM tour, Second request re: invoice for Manager May 12-13, 2009. May meeting and tour. September 21, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN Office Email (Out going) Advisory Committee meeting and MRM tour, Requested clarification on charges Manager May 12-13, 2009. for aircraft charters.
Page 15 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
September 21, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN Office Email (In coming) Advisory Committee meeting and MRM tour, Follow up to earlier email on Manager May 12-13, 2009. September 21, 2009 re: councilors at meetings and payment. Noted Shell has paid honoraria for councilors in the past.
September 21, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN Office Email (In coming) Advisory Committee meeting and MRM tour, Noted will follow up and respond. Manager May 12-13, 2009. September 21, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Program Email (In coming) ACFN Elders/Youth camp. Informed Shell that camp was Manager postponed due to illness of one of the Elders. September 21, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Program Email (Out going) ACFN Elders/Youth camp. Acknowledged receipt of email re: Manager Elder/youth camp postponement.
September 22, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Email (In coming) No Net Loss Planning for JPME & PRM. Acknowledged receipt of email Consultant sent September 4, 2009 re: question on invoice. September 22, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Director Email (In coming) No Net Loss Planning for JPME & PRM. Acknowledged receipt of email sent September 4, 2009 re: question on invoice. Suggested conference call to discuss. September 23, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Director Email (Out going) No Net Loss Planning for JPME & PRM. Indicated available for conference call. Noted scope of work was required for invoice approval.
September 23, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN Chief Email (Out going) Chief to Chief meeting. Follow up re: meeting request on September 17, 2009. Noted Shell reps not available on September 25th, but could be available in Calgary on September 28th or alternatively would be open to another date.
Page 16 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
September 23, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN Chief Telephone (Out Chief to Chief meeting. Follow up on email sent earlier in going) day re: meeting request. Confirmed he had received email and arranged time for a follow up to discuss alternate arrangements.
September 23, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN Chief Telephone (Out Chief to Chief meeting. Follow up re: meeting request. going) Confirmed Chief open to meeting on September 29th or 30th. Shell to confirm availability. Also, noted want to introduce new VP for HSE & SD.
September 24, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Program Email (In coming) ACFN Elders/Youth camp. Informed Shell that camp was to Manager proceed Sept 25-29, 2009. Note Elder involved was now doing well. Reconfirmed invitation to Shell.
September 24, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Program Email (Out going) ACFN Elders/Youth camp. Acknowledged receipt of email, Manager noted pleased that Elder doing well. Indicated that Shell not able to attend. September 24, 2009 SPAC Rep Ft McKay IRC Email (Out going) PRM No Net Loss Planning meeting. Informed notes from May 7, 2009 Director & Program NNLP meeting now finalized. Manager, MCFN Forgot to include attachment. GIR Director & Regulatory Affairs Coordinator & ACFN IRC Director
Page 17 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
September 25, 2009 SPAC Rep Ft McKay IRC Email (Out going) PRM No Net Loss Planning meeting. Provided attachment with final Director & Program notes from May 7, 2009 meeting Manager, MCFN notes. GIR Director & Regulatory Affairs Coordinator & ACFN IRC Director September 25, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN Elder Telephone (In Existing commitments and consultation for Discussed concerns re: Shell to raise matter at next IRC meeting. coming) JPME & PRM projects. information on status of existing commitments and communication re: JPME & PRM. Elder reiterated offer for Shell to present to ACFN Elders Council on JPME & PRM, offer originally made at Advisory Committee meeting on September 16th. Noted Shell would discuss with IRC at next meeting.
September 26, 2009 Shell Landman TPA 1714 (ACFN Meeting Pierre River winter drilling programs. Noted Shell currently has no plans Member) & ACFN for winter drilling. Discussed IRC Program employment opportunities. Manager Trapper asked re: consultation with traditional trappers. Noted Shell consults with IRC.
September 28, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN Chief Email (Out going) Chief to Chief meeting. Follow up to September 23, 2009 telephone call. Confirmed Shell available for meeting on September 30th. ACFN to confirm availability.
Page 18 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
September 28, 2009 SPAC Manager ACFN IRC Director Email (In coming) Chief to Chief meeting. Confirmed ACFN Chief, IRC Director and legal counsel available for meeting on September 30th. September 28, 2009 SPAC ACFN IRC Program Email (In coming) Monthly IRC meeting. Requested confirmation of Consultation Manager September 29th meeting date, Coordinator and travel expense reimbursement. September 28, 2009 SPAC ACFN IRC Program Email (Out going) Monthly IRC meeting. Confirmed meeting time and noted Consultation Manager Shell would reimburse for travel Coordinator costs. September 29, 2009 SPAC Rep Ft McKay IRC Email (Out going) PRM No Net Loss Planning meeting. Provided access information for Director & Program documentation for the October 13, Manager, MCFN 2009 meeting to discuss PRM GIR Director & NNLP. Requested scope of work Regulatory Affairs for participation, noted required Coordinator & ACFN approved scope of work before IRC Director invoice payments can be authorized. Noted this is last NNLP meeting for JPME and PRM for 2009, would inform of 2010 schedule when available.
September 29, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Project Email (In coming) Traditional knowledge sharing agreement. Provided draft traditional Manager knowledge sharing agreement for review. September 29, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Email (In coming) Participation in the JPME/PRM and MRME Provided updated invoices for Executive Assistant NNLP meeting with DFO participation in the JPME/PRM and MRME NNLP meeting with DFO on May 7 and June 6, 2009, respectively.
Page 19 of 20 Shell Canada Consultation Report to Alberta Environment, August - September 2009 Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Application Stakeholder: Athasbasca Chipewyan First Nation Comunication/Activity Log Date of First Nation Proponent Individuals/Groups Method of Contact Summary of Issues Discussed Outcomes Follow Up / Outstanding Issues (these Contact Primary Contacted (For and/or activity should link back to previous reports) Lead/contact Elders, note number (Direct mail; Phone Call; in attendance) Email; Meeting*; Other)
September 29, 2009 SPAC Rep ACFN IRC Project Meeting (Ft Monthly IRC meeting. Provided updates on current Manager McMurray) approved projects and detailed discussion on select existing commitments. Discussion on matters related to JPME & PRM projects subject to regulatory review were postponed to a later meeting at request of IRC Director and Project Manager.
Page 20 of 20
Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Aboriginal Consultation Plan – January 2010
Project : Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Projects
The Athabasca Oil Sands Project (AOSP) is a joint venture among Shell Canada Energy (60%), Chevron Canada Limited (20%) and Marathon Oil Sands LP (20%). While formerly operated by Albian Sands Energy inc., Shell Canada Energy now operates the Muskeg River Mine (MRM) and the Jackpine Mine Phase 1 (JPM-1) on behalf of the joint venture owners.
As previously disclosed in January 2007, Shell has filed regulatory applications for the following projects: • Jackpine Mine Expansion (JPME): Expand the approved JPM-1 mining area, increasing approved production capacity from 200,000 bbls per calendar day (bbls/cd) to 200,000 bbls/cd • Pierre River Mine (PRM): Develop a new mining area with production capacity of approximately 200,000 bbls/cd.
The extent of the JPME and PRM proposed project areas are shown in Figure 1.
Project Proponent :
Shell Canada Energy (Oil Sands) 400 – 4th Avenue S.W. Calgary, AB T2P 2H5
Contacts: Linda Jefferson, Manager Social Performance and Aboriginal Consultation
Heather Taylor, Manager, Consultation
Jason Plamondon, Consultation Coordinator
Regulatory Process:
In 2005, Shell evaluated the next expansion stages of its existing development in the Athabasca region. In January 2007, a project description was disclosed to stakeholders through distribution of a public disclosure document. Stakeholders include federal, provincial and municipal government agencies, area First Nations, Métis communities, environmental non- governmental organizations, community groups and industry participants.
Alberta Environment issued the final Terms of Reference for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in November 2007. Applications for the Approval of JPME and PRM were
1
CONFIDENTIAL
submitted to the Energy Resources and Conservation Board and Alberta Environment in December 2007 and copies were also forwarded to other federal and provincial regulators.
Figure 1 – Proposed JPME and PRM Development Areas
Shell provided an update to its EIA and SEIA in May 2008. This was followed by Supplemental Information Requests (SIRs) from the ERCB and AENV in October 2008. A PRM Project Update including responses to the first round of SIRs were provided in June 2009 to regulators and key stakeholders, including First Nations and Métis communities.
In 2009, Shell will continue working with stakeholders to try to address concerns with the Project applications through consultation, information exchange and review of the EIA.
2
CONFIDENTIAL
The expected regulatory schedule for the JPME and PRM projects includes the following milestones:
• Public Disclosure in January 2007 • Terms of Reference issued November 2007 • Government application submitted Dec 2007 • EIA and SEIA updated May 2008 • Notice of Application published June 19th, 2008 • Statements of Concern received October 2nd, 2008 • PRM Project Update and first round of Supplemental Information Request (SIR) responses submitted in June 2009 • JPME Project Update and first round of SIR responses expected to be completed in late 2009 • Stakeholder consultation will continue through 2009 – 2010 and beyond • Anticipate a Joint Provincial / Federal public hearing review in 2010
Project schedule following public hearings will entirely depend on the outcome of those proceedings, in addition to market conditions and economic decisions.
The Projects are subject to the environmental assessment processes as set out in the Alberta Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (including all relevant regulations).
Additional regulatory permits will also be required, including the following: • ERCB approval pursuant to the Oil Sands Conservation Act; • Alberta Environment approval pursuant to the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act and the Water Act; • Alberta Sustainable Resource Development approval pursuant to the Public Lands Act; • Transport Canada approval pursuant to the Navigable Waters Protection Act; • Fisheries and Oceans Canada approval pursuant to the Fisheries Act; and • Various other ancillary provincial and municipal approvals.
Key federal regulators or coordinating agencies to be contacted for purposes of consultation on the regulatory requirements of the Application Approval process are provided in Table 1.
3
CONFIDENTIAL
Table 2 – Regulators to be consulted
Regulator Contact Email Phone Federal Government Canadian Shauna Sigurdson Shauna.sigurdson@ceaa- 780-495-2236 Environmental acee.gc.ca Assessment Agency Fisheries & Brian Makowecki, Manager Oil brian.makowecki@dfo- 780-495-3889 Oceans Canada Sands Major Projects mpo.gc.ca (DFO) Transport Karmen Klarenbach, Manager, [email protected] 780-495-3814 Canada Coordination and Policy a Advice Major Projects Lauren Knowles lauren.knowles@NRCan- 613- 996-1060 Management Senior Operational Officer - RNCan.gc.ca Office (MPMO) Western Ops Provincial Government Alberta Pat Marriot [email protected] 780-427-7033 Environment District Approvals Manager (AENV) AENV Sarah Tredger [email protected] (780) 415-9640 Environmental Assessment Coordinator AENV Alvaro Loyola, Advisor [email protected] (780) 644-4883 Energy Tara Rogers [email protected] (780) 788-6406 Conservation & Utilities Board (ERCB)
Aboriginal Consultation Program:
Shell’s consultation program for the JPME and PRM applications is a continuation and expansion of Shell’s 10+ year history of engaging and consulting with stakeholders in the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo (RMWB). The program utilizes established consultation principles and policies, provided in Appendix I, including: o Sustainable Development Principles o Good Neighbour Policy o Consultation Principles o Dialogue, Decide and Deliver Model
These principles guide stakeholder engagement, and build upon existing relationships with neighbouring communities, including First Nations and Métis, special interest groups and non- government organizations representing the broader public interest, and many multi-stakeholder forums and initiatives within the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo. For example, Shell is one of the founding members of the First Nations Industry Relations Corporation in the Wood Buffalo Region.
The objective of Shell’s consultation program is to engage potentially impacted parties in open and substantive discussion about their respective concerns in an attempt to address these concerns through negotiation, and where possible, accommodation and agreement. Shell will consult with all interested parties through information sharing and notification of development
4
CONFIDENTIAL
plans. Timely and comprehensive information on the JPME and PRM applications is provided through a variety of means including documents, one-on-one meetings, newsletters, toll-free telephone number, websites and open houses.
Consultation Process Early consultation with the key stakeholders, including interested Aboriginal communities, is conducted in order to provide an overview of the proposed development plans. During these discussions appropriate consultation processes are established for the various stakeholders. As may be required, stakeholders are provided with the necessary information and resources to allow their review of the potential impacts associated with the development of the JPME and PRM projects. Shell will tailor the depth of consultation for those communities in respect of which the Crown (or Shell, through its carrying out delegated procedural aspects of Crown consultation) has knowledge of the potential existence of an Aboriginal or Treaty right, that could be impacted by decisions related to Shell's applications. By assessing the strength of claim, Shell is able to engage more appropriately with those groups that may be directly impacted by development.
Consultation activities for key stakeholders could include: o Capacity building and participant funding through Industry Relations Corporation (IRC) funding, fee for service or other means; o Funded independent technical review of application materials and involvement in regulatory processes (i.e. No Net Loss Planning); o Site tours; o Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Traditional Land Use collection; o Development of long-term beneficial mitigation strategies. o Joint consultation meetings involving relevant Crown agencies and Aboriginal groups / communities.
In addition, Shell continues to be actively involved in initiatives in the RMWB. These initiatives provide excellent opportunities for further consultation with multi-stakeholder groups and communities. Regional multi-stakeholder initiatives include Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA), The Regional Aquatics Monitoring Program (RAMP), the Wood Buffalo Environmental Association (WBEA) the Athabasca Tribal Council/Industry Working Group, the Oil Sands Development Group (OSDG) and others. Shell will continue to take an active role in these initiatives as part of its consultation program.
Table 2 – Aboriginal Stakeholders to be consulted
Aboriginal Contact Email Phone Fax Group First Nations to be Consulted Fort McKay FN Lisa [email protected] (780) 828-2480 (780) 828-2481 (FMFN) Schaldemose, ext. 5 IRC Director Athabasca Lisa King, IRC [email protected] (780) 791-3311 (780) 791-3632 Chipewyan FN Director (ACFN) Mikisew Cree FN Melody Lepine, [email protected] (780) 714-6500 (780) 715-4098 (MCFN) GIR Director ext 222 Fort McMurray Doreen Somers, [email protected] (780) 334-2400 (780) 334-2927 #468 FN (FMFN IRC Director
5
CONFIDENTIAL
468) Chipewyan Shannon [email protected] (780) 715-3401 (780) 715-3463 Prairie Dene FN Crawley, (CPDFN) Director, Environment Métis Groups to be Consulted Fort McKay Métis Lisa [email protected] (780) 828-2480 (780) 828-2481 Nation Local 63 – Schaldemose, ext. 5 through the IRC Director FMFN IRC Fort Chipewyan Jumbo Fraser, [email protected] (780) 697-3111 (780) 792-7559 Métis Local 125 President Métis Local 1935 May-Britt [email protected] (780) 743-2659 (780) 791-2654 (Fort McMurray) Jahelka, General Manager Willow Lake Métis Tony Punko, [email protected] (780) 748-7601 (780) 748-4620 Local 780 – CEO through the Wood Buffalo Métis Corporation (WBMC) Chard Métis Tony Punko, [email protected] (780) 748-7601 (780) 748-4620 Local 214 – CEO through the WBMC Other Groups to be Consulted Wood Buffalo John Malcolm (780) 334-2545 (780) 334-2550 First Nation Elders’ Society Trappers Individual Trappers are identified by their RFMA’s
Consultation Action Plan:
Project Specific Information The following documents provide information on the Projects and have or will (in the case of future documents) been made available to the public and to First Nations and Métis stakeholders:
• Shell Oil Sands Expansion: Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine – Public Disclosure, January 2007 Document • JPME/PRM Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)/Socio-economic Impact Assessment (SEIA) Final Terms of Reference • JPME and PRM Applications • Shell Oil Sands Expansion: Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mining Areas • Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mining Areas – Project Description • Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Applications – Project Description - March 2009 • Pierre River Mine Project Update & Responses to Supplemental Information Requests (SIRs) (June 2009)
6
CONFIDENTIAL
• Jackpine Mine Expansion Project Update & Responses to Supplemental Information Requests (SIRs) (to be released Q4 2009)
Delivery Methods Communications Delivery Methods required or recommended by regulatory processes (federal and/or provincial) include: • Public Disclosure • Proposed Terms of Reference and Public Notice of PTOR • Final Terms of Reference and Public Notice of FTOR Applications / environmental and socioeconomic impact assessments (hardcopy and CD) and project updates • Supplementary Information in response to Requests • Open House with information displays, information handouts, graphs, charts, illustrations and photo images, as well as presence of discipline experts
Based on past experience and feedback from stakeholders, it is likely that the Projects will be the subject of joint federal – provincial review panel hearings in Q4 2010. Stakeholders, Aboriginal groups and other members of the public will have further opportunity for consultation and input through involvement in this public hearing process as it progresses.
Consultation Delivery Methods: • Meetings with stakeholder representatives (IRC) and technical experts as appropriate (monthly for key stakeholders) • Meetings with Elders (with translator if necessary) • Meetings with First Nation Advisory Committees • Workshops on issues of interest or particular concern • Project Updates in community newsletter/newspaper using plain language, and supported by photos, charts and illustrations as appropriate • Multi-stakeholder meetings, supported by technical experts as appropriate • Stakeholder-led Technical Reviews of the EIA/SEIA for key stakeholders
Public Communication (Media) List Newspapers in which Notice of Proposed/Final Terms of Reference will be published: • Calgary Herald • Calgary Sun • Edmonton Journal • Edmonton Sun • Fort McMurray Today* • Slave River Journal* (serving Fort Smith and Fort Chipewyan) • Alberta Native News* • Fort McKay community newspaper published 1st week monthly* • The Sweetgrass* monthly newsletter * = includes Aboriginal stakeholder audience
Potential Adverse Impacts to Aboriginal and Treaty Rights and Traditional Uses The Projects may have the potential to affect the exercise of Aboriginal or Treaty rights of the following Aboriginal communities. The Projects are situated within the traditional lands of five Treaty 8 First Nations. Ft. McKay is the closest Treaty 8 First Nation to the planned development areas. The Project area is encompassed in the southern portion of Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation’s and Mikisew Cree First Nation’s traditional land use area and these First Nations live in the community of Ft. Chipewyan which is situated about 200 km
7
CONFIDENTIAL
downstream of the Jackpine Mine Expansion Project and 120 km of the proposed Pierre River Mine Project. The Projects are near the northern limit of the traditional land use areas for Ft. McMurray 468 First Nation and Chipewyan Prairie Dene First Nation. Ft. McMurray 468 First Nation is located upstream of the Projects, near the community of Anzac, which is approximately 100 km south of the proposed Jackpine Mine Expansion Project and 200 km south of the Pierre River Mine. Chipewyan Prairie Dene First Nation is located upstream of the proposed developments, in the community of Janvier, which is 170 km south of the proposed Jackpine Mine Expansion Project and 270 km south of the Pierre River Mine.
Detailed information on the extent of Métis traditional land use in the proposed development area is not available. Members of Métis Locals 63 and 125 have likely traditionally used portions of the proposed development area. Shell is also currently seeking information on the extent of possible exercise of Aboriginal rights in the area of the Projects by members of Métis Locals 214 (Chard), 780 (Willow Lake) and 1935 (Fort McMurray).
Consultation will be focussed on sharing information on the Projects and exchanging information with Aboriginal stakeholders to determine how the proposed developments may impact on their Aboriginal or Treaty rights, and ensuring that the relevant Crown agencies are fully apprised of these potential impacts to allow accommodation, where appropriate and necessary. Depending on the potential impact of the Projects on Aboriginal and Treaty rights, consultation will be tailored for each First Nation and Métis Local in keeping with the judicially recognized consultation spectrum. For those Aboriginal groups thought to be at the low end of the consultation spectrum, consultation will be focused on the provision of information on the proposed Projects. More in-depth consultation will be carried out with Aboriginal groups that have demonstrated an increased likelihood that the proposed Projects may impact its Aboriginal or Treaty rights. Through consultation and where possible, cooperation with relevant Crown agencies, Shell will seek to identify ways to minimize any potential negative impacts on Aboriginal and Treaty rights. Part of minimizing impacts may involve the negotiation of benefits agreements with Aboriginal groups whose Aboriginal or Treaty rights may be impacted by the proposed developments. Subjects for benefits agreement negotiations may include provisions for cultural protection, capacity building, environmental protection (including a role in or information sharing on environmental monitoring and reclamation planning), business and employment opportunities.
Timelines and Schedules for Consultation Consultation will continue for the life of the Projects, from pre-filing through to reclamation and closure. In the early phases of the Projects, the schedule for consultation activities will be driven by the regulatory schedule.
Reporting on Consultation Consultation activities specific to the proposed Projects are reported to governments on a bi- monthly basis. Please see past consultation bi-monthly reports for a detailed record of consultation activities. Copies of past bi-monthly reports may be obtained from Margwyn Zacaruk at [email protected]. Bi-monthly consultation reports identify and/or provide information on:
• Stakeholder consulted • Type of consultation activity (e.g., meeting, open house) • Date of consultation activity • Issues
8
CONFIDENTIAL
• Follow-up actions or future consultation actions
As the Duty to Consult with impacted Aboriginal communities rests with the Crown, and Shell has been and will be undertaking various procedural aspects of crown consultation activities, Shell has met and will continue to meet and correspond with those Crown agencies having responsibility for consultation. Shell has been and will continue to provide information on potential impacts, issues of concern, Aboriginal viewpoints, and possible need for accommodation to the appropriate Crown agencies. In addition, Shell has been and will continue to facilitate direct joint meetings and other consultation activities involving Crown agencies and Aboriginal representatives. The aim of Shell’s consultation program is to ensure that any Crown decisions regarding Shell’s projects will be made based on a full consideration of impacts to relevant Aboriginal rights, and - where appropriate – accommodation of those rights.
9
CONFIDENTIAL
Appendix I
10
CONFIDENTIAL
11
CONFIDENTIAL
12
CONFIDENTIAL
13
CONFIDENTIAL
DIALOGUE, DECIDE AND DELIVER
A consultation tool that Shell has used successfully is the ‘Dialogue, Decide and Deliver’ model.
• Dialogue – input is gathered in consultation with communities, individuals and groups. We consult with stakeholders to identify and understand their issues and concerns through: o Individual and multi-stakeholder meetings o Multi-stakeholder working groups and committees o Workshops o Project updates and presentations
• Decide – we have learned to involve our neighbours in decisions regarding their concerns so that opportunities are identified to mitigate their issues and concerns. A decision is made on what can and cannot be implemented and reviewed with stakeholders. Our experience demonstrates that their involvement improves the sustainability of our decisions. • Deliver – once we take a clearly defined decision, we then strive to deliver faultlessly what has been promised. This is important to Shell’s reputation in the stakeholder community. ‘Under commit and over deliver’ is a common phrase amongst Oil Sands staff.
14
CONFIDENTIAL
Mary Coffey
From: Lionel Lepine Sent: September-27-12 3:53 PM To: Jenny Biem; Eamon Murphy Subject: FW: Shell PRM&Jackpine Mine Expansion - ACFN Fort McMurray Interviews - Preliminary Issues List Attachments: EAApproachFMA-Jun06.pdf; FMA-TK InterviewGuide-Sept2005.pdf
LionelLionel Lepine
TEK/TLU Facilitator
Watchers of The Land
From: To: Subject: FW: Shell PRM&Jackpine Mine Expansion - ACFN Fort McMurray Interviews - Preliminary Issues List Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:07:51 -0600
Sherri Labour, MA Senior Community Liaison Aboriginal Community Affairs FMA Heritage Resources Consultants Inc. Bus: (780) 697-3271
Calgary office: (403) 245-5661
Web: www.fma-heritage.com
From: Sherri Labour [mailto: Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 12:40 PM To: 'Lionel Lepine' Cc: ' Subject: RE: Shell PRM&Jackpine Mine Expansion - ACFN Fort McMurray Interviews - Preliminary Issues List
Answers from Lionel and myself below.
1 Lionel will be coming to pick you up tomorrow evening.
Sherri Labour, MA Senior Community Liaison Aboriginal Community Affairs FMA Heritage Resources Consultants Inc. Bus: (780) 697-3271
Calgary office: (403) 245-5661 Email: Web: www.fma-heritage.com
From: : Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 9:20 AM To:
Subject: RE: Shell PRM&Jackpine Mine Expansion - ACFN Fort McMurray Interviews - Preliminary Issues List
Sherri,
Thanks for the issues...as discussed earlier, could you also provide me with information for my presentation: Specifically...
1) Persons interviewed, Dates of each interview [Sherri Labour] During week of July 30th, eight ACFN members currently living in Fort McMurray and Fort McKay were interviewed:
- Marvin L'Hommecourt - Lawrence L'Hommecourt - Beatrice Degranger - John Mercredi - Leonard Flett - Raymond Cardinal - Jack Flett - Les Cardinal
2) List of questions asked [Sherri Labour] FMA does not use a questionnaire format, but rather question checklist/guideline. As this is first EIA Lionel has worked on, we used this. What ACFN uses in the future may be different from this. Pls find FMA guide attached. This is what we use for our interviews, and for training new people. 3) General approach to TLU collection [Sherri Labour] I have attached standard FMA write up about methods/approach for EIAs. Basically, approach is that this is an assessment of potential project effects from community perspective, as say, wildlife tries to determine what potential project effects might be on wildlife. It is qualitative. (Most of this is either moot or blatantly obvious to your audience Thursday.) So then, informed consent becomes critical, as does collection of mitigation recommendations, which may include socio-economic remedies, among other things. In this case, where ACFN is taking control of their own TEK, the approach is somewhat different, as there is more community input and control. 4) ACFN hired youth being trained in TLU collection [Sherri Labour] Lionel Lepine on Shell. [Two young men were hired; Lionel is one, Mike Mercredi is the other.] 5) Approach to training and their feedback on training [Sherri Labour] Here’s some stuff from ACFN Capacity-Building Workplan, and from Lionel himself. In short, I’m training Lionel as I would new FMA hire. Workplan – “The capacity building approach for the two trainees will involve both on-the-job training in the form of job shadowing, and external job training in the form of safety and other training courses. The intent of the program is to build capacity with two ACFN members to independently be able to do all of the work
2 required for any TEK projects within their traditional territory, from writing proposal and drafting budgets; designing TEK programs suitable for different types of projects; collecting, organizing, maintaining and archiving TEK information; to writing reports and communicating the results of these projects back to community members. One of the two positions may be developed into a part-time role as a GIS technician…. Basic training on EIA (environmental impact assessment) process, the collection, management and storage of TEK, interview techniques and writing will be provided as part of the on-the-job training.” Lionel – “On July 12th, 2007, I was interviewed for a position to collect TEK from members of the ACFN. The training is a capacity building program which requires job shadowing and training courses. An experienced facilitator is providing the on-the-job training on EIA process, the collection, management and storage of TEK. It was explained to me that interviews must be conducted to collect the TEK from elders and community members who have used and are still using the traditional land. We have learned the basics of writing up budgets and proposals and did a lot of background research on various topics of interest such as Project Descriptions, EIA's, and reviewed an application for approval on the Synenco Northern Lights Project. I am currently working on the Shell's Jackpine mine and Pierre River mine expansion project and have conducted eight interviews at the end of July and early August in the communities of Ft. McMurray and Ft. McKay. The information collected was recorded on a digital recorder and 3 were videotaped. This information will be put into a report that will make up the EIA and will be part of the application for approval. The job shadowing, to me, is very important and it helps me to fully understand what it is that has to be done and what to expect. I'm very happy to have been chosen to fill this position and I hope to accomplish the goal of gathering TEK from the Dene people and apply it accordingly.”
6) Status - what we believe is left to do for ACFN [Sherri Labour] I talked to Lionel about this this morning. He feels more interviews need to be done, and my professional judgment is largely guided by what community feels is required. [In absence of any real guidance from Alberta government on how best to fulfill TLU/TEK for EIAs, we work closely with community to address the work.] A reminder of work scope we have for interviews - we assumed 10; Lisa and Judy discussed 12; 8 were completed. As per the work scope and budget that I was instructed to submit to Shell/Golder, we also have to complete transcriptions and reporting. [I would seriously recommend that you add some wording here around asking Elders what more they think needs to be done, but obviously your call.] 7) what we did for TEK, if anything [Sherri Labour] TEK information collection is part of stuff we ask questions about in interviews. See #2 above. 8) what Lisa's guidance has been - very important to communicate how she guided us [Sherri Labour] Most of Lisa’s guidance has been through dialogue directly with Shell/Judy as to fact that ACFN is now taking control of own TEK, engaging of ACFN youth in work, and discussion of 12 interviews with Fort McMurray-ACFN members. Lionel and I dialogue with her regularly on project progress, as we do with Pat Marcel and/or other Elders. Otherwise, I am acting as project manager with Lionel as right-hand man. That’s my current understanding and modus operandi at any rate.
[Sherri Labour] Okay, I think that’s it. And, Lionel, I didn’t change a word. Bill, I’m out of office at 4pm today in case you still have questions, but back at desk tomorrow.
I'll need these before end of day so I can put presentation together tonight. Please call if you have any questions or concerns.
Thanks,
Bill
-----Original Message----- From: Sherri Labour [mailto Sent: August 13, 2007 5:10 PM To: Kovach, William SCAN; Jefferson, Linda SCAN; Hodgson, Roxanne M SCAN; 'Collard, Tod'; Mcbride, Denise
3 SCAN-SCAN Cc: 'Lionel Lepine' Subject: Shell PRM&Jackpine Mine Expansion - ACFN Fort McMurray Interviews - Preliminary Issues List
Hi all,
As promised, here is the preliminary issues list from work we’ve conducted to date. Look forward to seeing some of you Thursday.
Here are some of the main concerns brought up by participants who were interviewed in Fort McMurray and Fort McKay. After conducting eight interviews, the main issue of concern is the loss of the traditional way of life due to the cumulative effects of the industrial development.
Issues related to this are, and specific to users of Marvin L’Hommecourt’s trapline (RFMA #1714), are: - Loss of spiritual connection to the land. - Dramatic decrease in numbers of animals such as Moose, Bears, Squirrels, Wolves, Beavers, and various other types of trapping animals in the last 10 years. - Dramatic decrease of birds such as Ducks, Geese, Chickens, Whiskey Jacks, and song birds. Some have observed that the Ducks and Geese are now flying further west; the Athabasca River was once a major migration route. - Traffic has significantly increased, such that ‘chickens’ and rabbits are no longer seen, berries are inedible, and travel is felt to be dangerous. - An area to the southwest of Kearl Lake was identified as being ‘special’ and spiritually significant.
Other larger issues expressed relate to: - Concerns of water contaminates in the Athabasca River and surrounding rivers and streams. - The fish is not eaten by anyone because of fear of contamination. - Most areas once flush with berries and other edible plants have now been eliminated due to industrial activities. - Some people are afraid to hunt in the region because of unsafe hunting practices by sport hunters; a couple of hunters are currently hunting outside of the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo (RMWB) due to low animal numbers and/or competition of outside hunters. - Traditional practices, language and culture are being jeopardized by industrial activities; hunting, camping and other land-based activities are now difficult, if not impossible, to carry out in the oil sands, all of which are integral to maintaining traditional lifeways. - Desecration of gravesites has been identified in current tailings ponds in Albian Sands and there is fear that other gravesites will be destroyed in the areas around the RMWB. - Birch Mountains are described as being of great importance from both a traditional use and spiritual perspective. - Questions about the function of water structures along the Athabasca River were also raised.
Regards, Lionel Lepine, ACFN TEK Facilitator and Sherri Labour, MA Senior Community Liaison Aboriginal Community Affairs FMA Heritage Resources Consultants Inc. Bus: (780) 697-3271
Calgary office: (403) 245-5661
Web: www.fma-heritage.com
4 5.1.1 Effects Assessment Approach 5.1.1.1 Framework The Aboriginal concept of ‘the land’ is integral to the assessment process as it “encompasses their personal and cultural identities, their histories, and their religions embedded within complex oral traditions” (Oakes et al. 1998). The ‘land’ is the matrix containing communities of plants, animals, and humans created by spiritual beings. Humans are integral parts of those communities, not set apart from them. The cosmologic view is holistic. No one place in a landscape is more significant than any other. All are significant to the individual and collective psyche and worldview (Oakes et al. 1998). “Many of Canada’s Indigenous people define themselves in terms of the homelands that sustained their ancestors. These are the places where their spiritual roots lie. Drawing from their natural surroundings, Aboriginal groups have developed powerful metaphors, symbols, and narrative traditions to express their religious and philosophical views. Some groups named the features of the landscape to recall important events in their individual and collective lives. In effect, the land was their history book” (Ray 1996). The emerging future with its rapidly changing technologies and demand for resources is resulting in irreversible changes to people around the world. Nowhere is this change more evident than in Aboriginal cultures. The assessment of effects of a proposed resource extraction project on traditional land use is of cultural, environmental and, ultimately, socio-economic relevance because it pertains to the social and physical well-being of not only a community, but of the individuals within that community (see Figure 5.3-4, McCullough & McCullough 2005). Cultures, past and present, are dynamic works in progress; they are shaped from within as well as by outside influences. Irreversible changes are inevitable but ultimately each culture’s goal is to maintain its identity and well-being by adapting to the forces of change rather than being subsumed (see Figure 5.3-5, McCullough & McCullough 2005). Mitigation measures serve to support this process of adaptation. 5.1.1.2 Study Facilitation
This assessment approach takes into account the perceived effects of a proposed development on traditional lands as well as the direct effects these changes may have on the culture, practices and lifestyles of Aboriginal peoples whose homeland is being affected. The Aboriginal community’s perceptions of the proposed development’s interactions in combination with past and existing projects are also documented. Recommendations for mitigation of any perceived adverse project effects are reported as provided by study participants. Project personnel serve as facilitators, working collaboratively with Aboriginal community members to collect information about the Project’s perceived effects on occupancy and use, and cultural practices and traditions from the participants’ perspective. This includes information that Elders consider to be relevant for providing a cultural and environmental context. Observations and concerns are fully documented and reported to the Project proponent. Although the proponent may add responses in the report, original recommendations and comments are not changed. On completion of the draft assessment report, Aboriginal participants are provided with the opportunity to review study results to ensure their observations and concerns have been accurately reported. Follow up processes ensure that the communities and participants know how their input has contributed to the proposed Project and allows them to review, correct, and potentially add to the information collected. It can also provide an opportunity for community members to review proposed mitigation, follow-up and monitoring activities. 5.1.1.2.1 Nature of the Information Aboriginal peoples who have ‘lived on the land’ have memories and sensory perceptions that are vivid and detailed. This is related to cultural conditioning in which accurate perception and memory of environmental features and changes is essential for survival. Traditional knowledge is passed on orally and current observations can often have a multi-generational time perspective. Information collected from Aboriginal participants is primarily qualitative and is based on sensory data, oral traditions, and cultural norms and values. Traditional knowledge “is generally grounded in specific uses of particular ecosystems. It is inseparable from landforms, environmental quality, survival of particular species, and subsistence activities. Knowledge is taught, learned, tested and expanded through traveling and using a specific territory. Modifying the landscape, biodiversity or human ecology jeopardizes knowledge” (Battiste and Youngblood 2000). Two types of information are collected during impact assessment – occupancy and use information, and ecological knowledge. Occupancy and use information focuses on locations and sites of cultural significance that may be impacted by a proposed development. Métis ecological knowledge is the wisdom and understanding of a particular natural environment that has accumulated over countless generations and can serve to aid Western scientific disciplines in analyzing project effects. It can be relevant to a proposed project (e.g., design, safety, noise, visual aesthetic, mitigation, reclamation, and abandonment), to the environment (e.g., wildlife, vegetation, fisheries and aquatic resources, hydrogeology, geology and terrain, climate, soils, palaeontology, and air quality), and to Aboriginal culture (health, socio-economics, traditional land use, archaeology, and heritage). It also relates to the cumulative effects of past and existing activities to both culture and the environment (see Table 5.3-1 and Figure 5.3-6).
5.1.1.3 Effects Assessment The effects assessment addresses the primary and secondary effects the Project may have during construction, operations and abandonment phases. The perceived cumulative effects of past and existing activities within the RSA are also considered, as are potential positive effects.
5.1.1.3.1 Primary Effects Construction: Potential effects to occupancy and use during the construction phase are directly related to the Project footprint and typically include primary impacts to Aboriginal dwellings, spiritual sites, gravesites, trails, resource harvesting locales, or specific resource (e.g., wildlife, vegetation) habitats or features (e.g., bear dens). Operations: At the operations phase the potential primary effects that are considered relate to the environment, health and well-being of the resources, and the health and well-being of the Aboriginal peoples who traditional territories may fall within the RSA. Included are all aspects of life that the Aboriginal group feels may be affected by the facilities and/or by its by-products over the project's lifespan. They are not usually site-specific. Abandonment: Effects considered for this phase are related to decommissioning activities and overall reclamation or restoration as it pertains to Aboriginal use and well-being. Perceived effects typically address both site-specific and cumulative effects. 5.1.1.3.2 Secondary Effects Secondary effects include perceived changes in land use that arise from changing social and economic conditions related to Project construction, operations and abandonment. These effects can include demographic shifts, land use restrictions, increased outsider access, and changes to the local and regional economy. Cumulative Effects: Cumulative environmental effects include the Aboriginal group's perceptions of the proposed Project's interaction with past and existing projects and activities overa a period of time within a designated region. Potential Positive Effects: Assessment work carried out using the approach outlined above offers potential for creating positive effects, one of which is the opportunity to better understand Aboriginal history, traditional practices and cultural perspectives. There is also much to be learned from knowledgeable Elders about a region’s biodiversity (passed on through generations) which can lead to innovative models of sustainability (e.g., through co-management strategies, community monitoring programs).
5.1.1.3.3 Mitigation Project-specific mitigation measures may include site avoidance, buffering, enhancement, further studies, monitoring or co-management programs, restoration or conservation measures, or compensatory action. Irreversible changes to cultural traditions necessitated by changing economic and environmental circumstances over time (cumulative effects) may require long-term mitigation strategies to assist in developing alternate livelihoods (economic systems) congruent with the values and worldview of the Aboriginal group (see Figure 5.3-6). Mitigation of cumulative effects can preserve the cultural identity, heritage, and well-being of the group. Determining appropriate mitigation measures requires the participation of the community, governments and industries operating within the traditional territory.
Interview Checklist Traditional Knowledge Interviews © FMA Heritage Resources Consultants Inc. September 2005
This document provides a generic checklist of topics to be covered when gathering traditional land use (Part A) and traditional ecological knowledge (Part B) information. While traditional users make little or no distinction between their traditional environmental knowledge and their traditional land use activities, for impact assessment purposes, these two types of information are used in different ways. Part A below provides a guideline for the types of questions that need to be discussed when collecting information about traditional land use. If our work also requires us to discuss traditional environmental knowledge with participants, then the facilitator would also cover the topics provided in Part B. Part C contains a generic reference list that presents, by assessment component, the types of information that may be available from traditional users and useful to the impact assessment.
Part A: Assessment of Potential Impacts – Traditional Land Use (TLU)
The topics below are introduced to provide us with a picture of where and how the proposed project may interact with or affect traditional use. This information is needed to conduct an assessment of the potential impacts that the project may have on traditional land users.
Traditional land use information may be collected on a wide variety of things. Some examples include things such as camps, graves, fishing areas, travel routes, hunting spots, and spiritual sites. For each activity and or site, the questions of who, what, when, where, why and how should be asked. A ‘mark-up map’, along with notes on associated activities, will be used to record these activities. Topics to be covered include: ‹ Which animals, birds, fish and plants do you use? Please include local names if they are not already recorded. ‹ How is the species used and what role does it play in traditional use? For example, is it used for food, ceremonial purposes, to strengthen social customs (e.g., communal sharing of meat)? ‹ What is the relative importance of species harvested? ‹ What is the relative importance of areas used? ‹ Please identify areas of concentration by: o Types of activities taking place there (e.g., harvesting, camping, traveling) o Location (on map) o Type(s) of species o Time of year, season o Animal movements, migration ‹ Please identify landmarks (i.e., terrain or physiographic features repeatedly used, for example, as trail markers, camping or meeting areas). These locations are likely to be mentioned numerous times in stories or descriptions of traditional use.
© FMA Heritage Resources Consultants Inc. 1 ‹ Please identify type and methods of harvest: o Group or solitary hunting/gathering? o Family or group camps? Who, where, when? o What species are being harvested? Age, sex? o How harvested? Tools or equipment used? ‹ Please ensure that you have gained an understanding of the following information for various traditional use locations: o Number of different types of resources harvested near or from that location o Number of seasons used o Number of generations that have used that particular area o Number of years that it has been used o Number of people using (currently or in the past; note if there has been a change and why) o Number of different groups or communities using
‹ Please discuss the significance of relevant species and/or locations. ‹ Identify the changes that may result from project, and any impacts that the participant may be concerned about. ‹ Does the participant have any recommendations regarding project design or implementation? On how the impact assessment and scientific studies are being conducted? For mitigation? Or monitoring?
© FMA Heritage Resources Consultants Inc. 2 Traditional Knowledge Interview Checklist
Part B: Collection of Traditional Environmental Knowledge (TEK)
Information gathered regarding TEK would be summarized and provided to the various, relevant discipline leads that are working on other components of the impact assessment. For some impact assessments, some components may be included. The components discussed below are fairly standard.
Many of the generic questions regarding hunting and gathering will likely be covered in the traditional land use part of the interview (see Part A above). These questions have been italicized in the text below. If you have already covered them, skip these and go on to questions in plain text.
‹ Wildlife: o Where is participant hunting? o When are they hunting in those areas? o What species are they hunting? o What are most important species and/or hunting locations? o Will there be any potential impacts on the hunting activities described above from the proposed project? o Does the participant foresee any impact on animal habitat or animal migrations? o Do any of the indicator species using areas in or around the area targeting for development? o Are there any other wildlife species that may be affected by the proposed project? o Trends and changes (e.g., changes in species presence or abundance, health). Note any changes have been observed and over what time period. Were changes noticed in participant’s lifetime or in stories heard from Elders? What is the cause of the changes (obviously, from their perspective)? o Recommendations for mitigation or monitoring?
‹ Fish: o Where is participant fishing? o When are they fishing in those areas? o What species are they fishing for? o What are most important species and/or fishing locations? o Does the participant foresee any potential impacts on the fishing activities described above resulting from the proposed project? o Does the participant foresee any impact on fish habitat or fish migrations? o What is participant’s knowledge of fish species presence? Season? Movement? Size of fish populations, or observed changes to this? How close are the fish to shore? o Trends and changes (e.g., population, presence, movement, spawning areas, health). Note any changes have been observed and over what time period. Were changes noticed in participant’s lifetime or in stories heard from Elders? What is the cause of the changes? o Recommendations for mitigation or monitoring?
‹ Vegetation: o Where is participant gathering plants? o What types of plants are they gathering, and why (provides indication of importance)?
© FMA Heritage Resources Consultants Inc. 3 Traditional Knowledge Interview Checklist
o What times of year are critical for plant gathering (may be different for different species, e.g., some medicinal plants mid-summer, berries in fall)? o Are there some plants that are more’ important’ than others? Why? o Does the participant foresee any potential impacts on the plant gathering activities described above resulting from the proposed project? o Does the participant foresee any impact on particular plant species or locations? o Trends and changes (e.g., presence, quality). Note any changes have been observed and over what time period. Were changes noticed in participant’s lifetime or in stories heard from Elders? What is the cause of the changes? o Recommendations for mitigation or monitoring?
‹ Water Quality and Quantity (hydrology and hydrogeology): o Does the participant have any information to share regarding groundwater movement or natural springs, role of water in ecosystem, etc.? o Does the participant have any issues or concerns regarding the impacts of the proposed project on water quality or quantity? o Trends and changes. Note any changes have been observed in water quality and over what time period. Were changes noticed in participant’s lifetime or in stories heard from Elders? What is the cause of the changes? o Recommendations for mitigation or monitoring?
‹ Air Emissions: o Locations of prime berry-picking or plant gathering areas (may be relevant to air emissions, but usually covered by vegetation assessment). o Does the participant have any issues or concerns regarding the impacts of the proposed project on air quality? o Trends and changes (e.g., changes to weather and storm patterns). Note any changes have been observed and over what time period. Were changes noticed in participant’s lifetime or in stories heard from Elders? What is the cause of the changes? o Recommendations for mitigation or monitoring?
‹ Noise: o Locations of occupied or currently used cabins. o Does the participant have any issues or concerns regarding the potential negative impacts of the proposed project on noise levels? o Trends and changes. Note any changes in noise levels that have been observed and over what time period. Were changes noticed in participant’s lifetime or in stories heard from Elders? What is the cause of the changes? o Recommendations for mitigation or monitoring?
‹ Socio-economic: o Changes to traditional land use and/or cultural values? o Impacts on overall community health and well-being? o Trends and changes. Note any changes have been observed and over what time period. Were changes noticed in participant’s lifetime or in stories heard from Elders? What is biggest change participant has seen in their lifetime? What caused this change? o Recommendations for mitigation or monitoring? o Issues and concerns with respect to changes in employment, family income, cost of living, community infrastructure and demands on family life?
© FMA Heritage Resources Consultants Inc. 4 Traditional Knowledge Interview Checklist
‹ Soil Conditions and Terrain: o Important terrain or soil features? This may include features such as high ground used by the caribou, or areas of permafrost that were used as food caches. o What are the flood patterns in the area (if relevant)? o Does the participant have any comments on terrain stability (e.g., erosion, subsidence)? o Trends and changes (e.g., permafrost, moisture and drainage patterns). Note any changes have been observed and over what time period. Were changes noticed in participant’s lifetime or in stories heard from Elders? What is biggest change participant has seen in their lifetime? What caused this change? o Recommendations for mitigation or monitoring?
‹ Land and Resource Use: o Discipline lead may need information on traditional hunting, trapping, fishing and gathering areas or species. o Record any mention of potential impacts to sport, commercial or recreational activities on the land. o Comments about visual aesthetics of proposed development? o Comments about access management? o Recommendations for mitigation or monitoring?
‹ Archaeological and Palaeontological (fossils) resources: o Heritage resource discipline lead may need information on archaeological sites and their significance to Aboriginal community. o Some Aboriginal groups/cultures place special significance on fossils or areas containing palaeontological resources. Does the participant have any comments on palaeontological resources and/or their cultural significance?
‹ Human Health: o Preferred traditional foods, and any observed changes in the quality of these. o Perceived risks or recent changes in human health. o Trends and changes. Note any changes have been observed and over what time period. Were changes noticed in participant’s lifetime or in stories heard from Elders? What is biggest change participant has seen in their lifetime? What caused this change? o Recommendations for mitigation or monitoring?
‹ Other: o Comments on environmental degradation, cumulative effects, overall environmental health or long-term ecosystem effects and trends. o Does the participant have any other issues or concerns that they want to express? o Are there any topics that they want to discuss that have not been covered in the interview thus far?
© FMA Heritage Resources Consultants Inc. 5 Traditional Knowledge Interview Checklist
Part C: TEK Reference List by Assessment Component
The following is a reference list of the generic types of information that can be applied to various assessment components. • Soil conditions and terrain – location of permafrost, changes in permafrost conditions, trends in moisture conditions, changes in drainage patterns, flood patterns, and terrain stability; • Air quality – climatic conditions (variability, change), such as, precipitation conditions, wind conditions, micro-climate temperatures, seasonality of climate, and changes in air quality; • Hydrology and hydrogeology - stream conditions, watershed effects, water temperatures, water quality (potable, colour, odour), seasonal flow levels, unusual flow levels, locations of or changes in underground aquifers, locations, changes and, seasonal ice conditions; • Vegetation - abundance, diversity, health, animal forage, food collection, seasonal and timing issues, and traditional use (medicinal, ceremonial, construction (e.g., bark)); • Fisheries - abundance, diversity, habitat, health, spawning grounds, seasonal or timing issues, or disturbance leading to avoidance behaviour; • Wildlife - abundance, diversity, habitat, health, nesting or denning areas, bird staging areas or flyways, seasonal or timing issues, disturbance leading to avoidance, important movements and migration corridors and changes to these, location of important sites (e.g., salt licks, grouse leks, calving grounds), and predator-prey relationships (i.e., movements, cycles); • Heritage resources – traditional camp sites, cabins and cabin sites, burial sites, spiritually significant sites, other historical or spiritual locations; • Palaeontological resources – fossils, ‘old bones’, palaeontological sites; • Noise – trends in noise levels, location of important wildlife habitat, disturbance leading to avoidance, location of cabins or other traditionally used sites; • Resource use – hunting, trapping, plant collection, fishing areas, trends, species, timing; • Socio-economic – community or family relationship concerns, cultural retention and transmission concerns; and • Human health – perceived risks or recent changes in human health, preferred traditional foods, general idea of how much of diet is comprised of traditional foods (a dietary study is very different from a traditional knowledge study), and quality or trends in traditional foods.
More generic information relevant to the assessment process may be obtained by discussing the following issues with traditional knowledge participants: • Overall environmental degradation, cumulative effects, long-term ecosystem effects and trends; • Concerns about the impact of the proposed development, and its potential impact on the environment and the community; • Mitigation recommendations to minimize impacts; and • Suggestions for monitoring.
© FMA Heritage Resources Consultants Inc. 6 Mary Coffey
From: Eamon Murphy Sent: September-30-12 11:14 PM To: Jenny Biem Subject: FW: Shell comments on Draft ACFNEL TLU/TEK Report for JPME&PRM Project Attachments: ACFNEL Draft TLU Report for Review - Jan 7 08 - Shell Comments.ZIP
From: Lionel Lepine Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 3:33 PM To: Jenny Biem; ; Eamon Murphy Subject: FW: Shell comments on Draft ACFNEL TLU/TEK Report for JPME&PRM Project
Lionel Lepine
TEK/TLU Facilitator
Watchers of The Land
From To: Subject: FW: Shell comments on Draft ACFNEL TLU/TEK Report for JPME&PRM Project Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 11:35:42 -0500
Hopefully this might explain a little more.
Lionel Lepine
TEK/TLU Facilitator
Watchers of The Land
1
Subject: Shell comments on Draft ACFNEL TLU/TEK Report for JPME&PRM Project Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:46:27 -0700 From: To: CC:
Lionel,
Shell has finished its first review of the document. To start, we all thought you did a very good job on it. The effort is appreciated. Of course, we have a number of suggested edits and requested modifications. The attached document should highlight the changes we made and be full of comments. If you cannot see the comments, please let me know. Here's the main points:
1) The figures used are great. However, they reflect some Shell leases and not the Project. We need to be sure the people reading the report understand the Project area and where it overlaps with TLU/TEK resources. Moreover, it will then align with rest of EIA. I suggest you call Golder (Tod Collard - 403-532-5730) to ask for the appropriate Project footprint [electronically]. I'm not sure who is completing your figures, but let me know if you need Golder to manage - we can subtract their costs from your budget if need be.
2) We need to be careful with how we maintain objectivity and, therefore, credibility. We have some pretty strong statements in the report that are not backed up with a citation of the interview participant(s) who said it. The assumption would then be that you as author are adding your own bias to the report. This weakens the report. We would suggest thoroughly reviewing the document for these "un-referenced" statements and putting in the appropriate citation. If it is your opinion, we suggest omitting the statement(s).
3) As this is ultimately a report Shell has paid for, we need to give final approval before we add to our update (as per our contract). We also know you need to get the Elders' approval. We trust these initial comments will guide you but we will also need to see any changes made due to the verification process or the Elder review. While we don't expect any issues, Shell will have to give final approval.
Again, great job! We trust the comments are helpful and we look forward to seeing any changes requested by the participants or the Elders. If you'd like to further discuss our comments, please don't hesitate to contact me at (403) 691-3381.
Thanks again,
Bill
-----Original Message----- From: Lionel Lepine Sent: January 7, 2008 3:48 PM To: Kovach, William SCAN-DOD/14
2 Cc: Lisa King; Kuni Albert Subject: Draft Report 02
Hey Bill
Here is the second draft, still without the approval or review of the Elders. I inserted a couple of more maps and re-wrote some of it. Can you please reply soon, so I can start with the final draft after you review it as well as the Elders and/or participants.
Thanks
Lionel Lepine
HO HO HO, if you've been nice this year, email Santa! Visit asksanta.ca to learn more!
Internet Explorer 8 makes surfing easier. Get it now!
3 Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Environment Limited
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Traditional Environmental Knowledge and Traditional Land Use Study for the proposed
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Project Environmental Impact Assessment (DRAFT)
Lionel Lepine
2007 AUTHORSHIP
TEK/TLU Study Lead Facilitator: Lionel Lepine
Maps Provided by: FMA
Report Author: Lionel Lepine
Senior Review: Kuni Albert of Albert & Associates Ltd.
Page | 2
Athabasca Chipeywan First Nation Environmental Ltd. Box 366 Fort Chipewyan, Alberta T0P-1B0
William G. Kovach Environmental Coordinator Shell Canada Limited 400 4th Avenue S.W. P.O. Box 100 Station M Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 2H5
December 20, 2007
Re: Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Traditional Environmental Knowledge and Traditional Land Use Study for the Jackpine Mine Expansion...Project
Enclosed is the Draft Report on the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) Traditional Environmental Knowledge and Traditional Land Use Study requested by Shell Canada Ltd. in support of the proposed Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Project(s) for its Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Application for Approval.
This report contains information that has not been reviewed by the Elders of the ACFN. The Draft Report is tentatively set to be reviewed by the Elders in January of 2008. Following the review, a final report will be submitted.
As per stated in the Intellectual Property, any information regarding traditional knowledge and traditional land use will be considered the property of the ACFN and will be returned to the ACFN Industry Relations Corporation (IRC) for archival purposes and no copies of any documents created will take place without the articulated consent of the ACFN IRC. I think you say later but that doesn't apply to this report, correct as Shell paid for it. I trust the above meets your needs. Please contact the undersigned if you would like to discuss further. Lionel - I think we need to discuss process here a little. Given this report is ultimately Shell's, I think we need to get the participants to validate, then one more Shell review and lastly one Elder review Shell would have to see and changes made by the Elders prior to completion. Report prepared by:
Lionel Lepine ACFN TEK/TLU Facilitator
Page | 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1. INTRODUCTION...... 7
1.2 The Denesuline and Intellectual Property…...... 7 1.3 Methods and Participant Selection...... 8
2. BASELINE INFORMATION...... 10
2.1 The Denesuline…...... 10 2.2 A Migrating People (Livelihood)...... 12 2.3 Sacred Areas & Gatherings ...... 13 2.4 Traditional Foods and Materials...... 14
3. ATHABASCA CHIPEWYAN FIRST NATION TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND LAND USE HISTORICAL DATA AND TODAY...... 15
3.1 Water 3.1.1 Historical Data...... 15 3.1.2 Today...... 16
3.2 Air Quality 3.2.1 Historical Data...... 17 3.2.2 Today...... 17
3.3 Wildlife 3.3.1 Historical Data...... 20 3.3.2 Today...... 20
3.4 Fish and Aquatics 3.4.1 Historical Data...... 21 3.4.2 Today...... 21
3.5 Vegetation 3.5.1 Historical Data...... 22 3.5.2 Medicinal Use...... 22 3.5.3 Today...... 22
Page | 4
SECTION PAGE
4. ATHABASCA CHIPEWYAN FIRST NATION TRADITIONAL TERRITORY...... 23
4.1 Travel and Access 4.1.1 Historical Data...... 23 4.1.2 Today...... 23
4.2 Camps, Cabins and Settlements 4.2.1 Historical Data...... 24 4.2.2 Today...... 24
4.3 Sacred Sites 4.3.1 Historical Data...... 26 4.3.2 Today...... 26
5. LOSS OF TRADITIONAL VALUES AND THE IMPACT ON FUTURE GENERATIONS...... 28
6. RECOMMENDATIONS...... 29
6.1 Introduction...... 29
6.2 Mitigation Recommendations...... 29
6.2.1…………Lionel, I think we should omit these or add titles……………………………...29
6.2.2………………………………………………………………………………………………...29
6.2.3………………………………………………………………………………………………..29
6.2.4………………………………………………………………………………………..…..…..29
6.2.5……………………………………………………………………………………………..….30
6.2.6………………………………………………………………………………………………...30
7. CONCLUSION...... 30
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………………………...30
Page | 5
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (ON SEPARATE PAGE) FIGURE PAGE
Fig 1.1 Shell proposed leased areas. 9
Fig 1.2 Map of ACFN Traditional Territory. 11
Fig 1.3 Map of Traditional Use Sites. 19
Fig 1.4 Map of Trap line in Relation to the Leased area. 25
Fig 1.5 Map of Denesuline Gravesites. 27
TABLE
Table 1.0 Denesuline Usable Species List 18
Page | 6
1. Introduction
The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) members reside in northeast Alberta adjacent to the Lake Athabasca. Approximately 200 members live in the community of Fort Chipewyan and approximately 300 members live in and around the Fort McMurray, Fort McKay area. Members of the Nation historically and continue to carry out traditional activities within the Wood Buffalo Region. This area of Alberta is under increasing development pressure from the oil and gas, forestry and other industries which add to these pressures. The ACFN members have expressed concern regarding the impacts of these activities. The purpose of conducting a Traditional Knowledge and Land Use Report is to identify resources and locations that have been of traditional use and cultural significance to the ACFN. The Shell Canada Ltd. Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Project Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Traditional Knowledge and Land Use Report is based on interviews conducted by Lionel Lepine, Traditional Environmental Knowledge/Traditional Land Use Facilitator, of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Environment Limited (ACFN EL).
1.2 The Denesuline and Intellectual Property
Each traditional knowledge program in which Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Environment Limited (ACFN EL) has participated has been unique. Because the information under discussion is the property of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, the program is designed in consultation with, and the approval of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, as generally voiced through their respective Industry Relations Corporation (IRC) and/or Chief and Council. In all aspects of the communication of traditional land use information, ACFN EL is committed to maintaining the confidentiality and propriety of information shared by participants and community members. We stress that Our role is only to interpret and edit those aspects of information that participants choose to share with developers and the general public. In this context, all information, whether it be in tape and/or transcribed form, is the property of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation respectively, and is returned to them at the completion of the program. Apart from the submission of reports for the regulatory process, ACFN EL will not make copies of any documents produced without the expressed permission from the ACFN IRC of the ACFN Chief and Council and/or members Lionel - do you really mean members?.
Page | 7
1.3 Methods and Participant Selection
The interviews were conducted over a 10 day period in 2007 in Fort McMurray, Fort McKay and Fort Chipewyan all located within the Northeastern Region of Alberta. The interviewees were chosen based on their proximity and livelihood activities within the Shell leased expansion areas. The interviewees were Elders, community members and hunter-gathers.
Verification Meetings - The Draft report will be presented to the interviewees for their review and confirmation of the data supplied to the ACFN TK Facilitator.
Page | 8
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Development Areas
Fig 1.1 Page | 9
2. BASELINE INFORMATION
2.1 The Denesuline
The Denesuline people, or the Athabasca Chipewyan people, have occupied traditional territories based on the migration route of certain ungulates which they hunted for food. It is believed the Denesuline people migrated across the Bering land bridge some 20,000 years ago. From an archaeologist’s perspective, they lived off of a number of different extinct species of animals, most of which were gigantic – such as Mammoths, giant Camels, saber-toothed tigers, giant sloths, and horses. Today, only legends tell of giant creatures of which they hunted and of great floods, which were probably caused by the melting of the glaciers at the end of the ice age. Today the glaciers provide water to the land and also to all the plant and animals in which the Denesuline sustains life in the midst of a drastic impact on the environment and their livelihood. With the companies developing at such a fast rate, the livelihood of the Denesuline will be lost forever.
Page | 10
Map of ACFN Traditional Territory
Fig 1.2
Page | 11
2.2 A Migrating People (Livelihood)
The Denesuline people migrated in a circular pattern based on the migration route of the caribou and fish, which were their primary food of choice. Figure 1.2 above shows the area which the Denesuline used to sustain their way of life. The Denesuline would not reside in one particular area due to the migration routes of animals; they would travel from place to place according to where the resources they needed to live were located. The Denesuline were seasonal travellers who hunted and trapped in the area shown on Figure 1.2, but they also travelled outside of the area (northern round?) shown as far away as Manitoba and further south into the Lac la Biche, Alberta area. Given that the traditional livelihood of the Denesuline were secure and affluent because of the abundance of food, there was no need to travel outside of their traditional hunting and trapping areas. The northern round also involved trading at Ile á Crosse and wintering at Black Birch Lake where they hunted and trapped in smaller family groups, west and southwest of Cree Lake. At break up the entire group assembled at the headwaters of Clearwater River and travelled to Fort McMurray and Fort Chipewyan to trade. They then would travel north of Lake Athabasca to hunt barren land caribou for food and winter clothing. In the late fall and early winter they followed the caribou south and returned to mid-winter hunting and trapping areas in northern Saskatchewan. These annual rounds reflect the current locations of Chipewyan settlements in Saskatchewan and Alberta (ACFN 2003a). This occurred after the arrival of Europeans, who brought material that were not previously needed or used by the Denesuline when they began the fur trade in the 1680s. The annual round was, in fact, a tradition that was practiced for thousands of years by the entire Dene nation across Canada and even in the United States.
Page | 12
2.3 Sacred Areas & Gatherings
During these annual rounds, the Denesuline stopped at various places during the winter months where they found good sources of fish and easy access to trap lines. Some of the Denesuline occupied a lot of the western area now known as Wood Buffalo National Park and other groups occupied the east side of Lake Athabasca. A lot of territories along the Athabasca River were very abundant with food, so a lot of spots became known as sacred areas where the Denesuline would stop and camp for nights until they felt it was time to move again, and then they would travel again up north then back around again. The Birch Mountains were considered a pristine area to hunt fish and trap to beyond the Saskatchewan border. “Well, those mountains, the old people talked about them, they always said that there is something different about that mountain…and those are traditional stories about that mountain” (Participant A06 2007). The “micro – villages” along the Athabasca River were home to small families for short periods of time during their annual rounds, and in the 1920s the Denesuline started staying at some of these places permanently, which became “reserves”, other areas remained “crown land”. The Athabasca River holds Denesuline gravesites close to its banks from just north of Fort McMurray to Lake Athabasca, along with numerous other historic places in and around the ACFN Traditional Lands (Figure 1.2).
Page | 13
2.4 Traditional Foods and Materials
The barren land caribou were the main source of food for the Denesuline people for hundreds of generations, along with fish and waterfowl. The caribou used to migrate through the Fort Chipewyan area up until a few major fires in the early 1950s and the caribou have not yet returned. Traditionally, the caribou were not only used for food, but for clothing and other material items made from their hide or from the antlers. The hide was turned into clothing and used also for their tipis and various other materials. The antlers were carved into knives and other basic hand tools used for a number of different tasks. The Denesuline would not let any part of an animal go to waste; they used every part of the animal for a different purpose and still maintain that tradition today. After the arrival of Europeans, the Denesuline were introduced to guns and other newer tools to hunt, fish, and trap, which changed their land use significantly. The materials brought with the fur traders also changed a lot of their clothing and basic items used to maintain their livelihood. Moose became one of the prime sources of food when the caribou stopped migrating through the Fort Chipewyan area, but there was still an abundance of different varieties of fish. The Denesuline were also gatherers, picking berries in the fall season and making jams and other tasty treats.
Page | 14
3. ATHABASCA CHIPEWYAN FIRST NATION TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND LAND USE HISTORICAL AND TODAY
3.1 Water
3.1.1 Historical
The Athabasca (River) begins in the Columbia Icefield of the Rocky Mountains and winds 1,500 kilometres through Alberta's boreal forest, past pulp mills and through the oilsands around Fort McMurray, before emptying into Lake Athabasca in the northeast corner of the province (Edmonton Journal, 2007). The community of Fort Chipewyan is on the exact location where the water channels through to the Des Roche River and flows north; and the people of Fort Chipewyan depended on Lake Athabasca for their drinking water, fishing, hunting and the sustenance of their traditional practices. The Peace/Athabasca delta in those days (prior to 1967) was a vibrant ecosystem, teaming with thousands of muskrats. But a development in 1967 doomed the muskrats and devastated the Dene people’s traditional way of life. That year the Government of British Columbia completed the building of the W.A.C Bennett Dam, blocking the Peace River at Hudson Hope and creating a reservoir at Williston Lake which took years to fill. By diverting the water into the reservoir, the dam decreased the seasonal floods that normally filled the perched basins in the Peace/Athabasca delta. But this water was the lifeline of the Dene people because the muskrats needed new water in the basins in order to live and multiply. As the frequency of the floods diminished, the delta and the basins dried out and the muskrats were gone (ACFN 2003b).
The delta is a natural filter and is a continuously moving body of water. The Denesuline use the delta to sustain their livelihood as they have for generations by using what it has to offer. The animals depend on the delta just as much as the Denesuline to maintain their natural way of living and this creates a cycle that circulated through this region for millennium. Water has always been the key source of human life and the Aboriginal people hold a true respect for water and all of nature’s commodities. The Denesuline have a keen respect for water and only take what is needed and do not disrespect the water at any given time. There were times when an individual could not imagine that water would be of any great concern because of the abundance of it. Refence???
Page | 15
The Denesuline used the Athabasca River as a way of navigation to follow their annual rounds on a yearly basis, even in the winter; water is an important aspect to the Denesuline livelihood. There are legends that tell of prophetic visions of seeing the water turned to the color of blood and still flowing. Occam’s razor says that the simplest answer may be the right one, and the ACFN participants are convinced that the “blood” as the legend says, is actually oil (Participant A05 2007). There is also another concern about rare cancers being diagnosed to Fort Chipewyan community members and who are dying. The cause of the cancers, again, according to the Denesuline, can be attributed to the fast paced development in the region that was once their Traditional homeland where they sustained a beautiful livelihood. “my auntie Josephine actually told me this last year, I mean but Margaret Marcel did tell me this too, that was maybe two or three years ago that ah, everybody has their prediction I guess, they have their prophets, I guess we had it too I guess, in the future, that river is just going to actually flow like blood, going to come down, and I kind of thought about it. Then I told your grandmother there I said, I don’t, I can’t see that happening cause we don’t have that population, if we had millions and millions of people maybe I can see it then. If people were blown open, I could see blood. The only thing it could refer to was oil. If Suncor blew or terrorist attack, look how close to the river it is. The color of oil is the color of blood. So that’s coming, that was predicted many, many years before I was born, many centuries ago, that’s how long the story goes…Like the amount of people getting cancer around this region is another concern that I always have, they’re a lot of younger people dying from cancer, and they’re not sure what kind of cancer”(Participant A05 2007).
3.1.2 Today
The ACFN participants showed a grave concern about the water quality and quantity in today’s standards. They reported that in the past, they never had to bring their own water into the forest; they simply would just bring a cup. Today, they have to purchase water to carry into the bush with them. “…in the lake, and you know, it wouldn’t smell like oil or gas, it would smell like water and it would be clear and you could see the bottom, and you could see fish swimming, you know, and was just nice to have sun tan and go in a nice clean lake that you could even drink the water from the lake when you went for a walk in the bush, you could just bring a cup with you and just drink from the river, the lake, anywhere, now you have to bring your own water into the bush” (Participant A01 2007).
Page | 16
Water levels are reported as being lower than usual as one participant stated “we have to take all our water from here. (Inaudible) the water should be up to the trees. A lot of people are concerned. We used to go by boat up the Muskeg River. You can’t go that way now. There’s no water” (Participant A04 2007) There is a concern that Lake Athabasca is going to dry up to the point where you can’t fish in certain areas anymore. The interviewees indicated that water removed from the Athabasca River for use upstream by industries is felt to be far too much at one time. The main concern related is that there will be no more clean water left to drink resulting in health concerns of both the people of Fort Chipewyan and the wildlife in which the Denesuline depend upon.
3.2 Air Quality
3.2.1 Historical
There were no reports of any type of decrease in air quality. The Denesuline were able to harvest berries without worrying about what has blown over the plants. They had no indications of a change in air quality to come, so they are very aware of any changes happening today.
3.2.2 Today
ACFN members actively using the land today report “dust” as a concern of particular berry patches they gather from. Due to an increase in traffic near the trap line by a participant’s cabin, the dust builds up from the roads and is carried by the wind over the preferred berry harvesting areas. One participant reported waking up one morning to find a “film” of some sort covering his car, which can only be attributed to the oil sands (Participant A08 2007). The biggest concern overall was of the odors that are increasing in their region. Some people are concerned that their children may be getting sick from it. “just me and my boy went there (Fort McKay) a couple of times there, and he got sick from that smell, that…smell, that cat [urine] smell and he was fine until he went there that day” (Participant A02 2007). The only attribute to this smell that the participants can relate it to is to the industries and there are days that the odour is not as evident as other days “some days you smell it and some days you don’t, it’s the smell of money…and I say it’s just the smell of (something) disrupting what is sacred on this Mother Earth” (Participant A06 2007).
Page | 17
Denesuline Usable Species List
Names of Wildlife Latin Names Dene Name Moose Alces alces Deneee Caribou Rangifer tarandus Et’ thenn Buffalo Bison bison Edsheere Black Bear Ursus americanus Sass Wolf Canis lupis Nunneea Fox Vulpes vulpes Nageechtaroy Trapping Animal Names Lynx Lynx lynx Tseeshe Wolverine Gulo gulo Nabe Weasel Mustela frenata Techkale Squirrel Tamiasciurus Gleee hudsonicus Fisher Martes pennanti Sa Tsho Mink Mustela vison Tehjuzi Beaver Castor canadensis Tsha Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus Tshenn Coyote Canis laterans Names of Birds Canada Goose Branta Canadensis Cha Mallard Anas platyrchynchos Tsheth tshok Berries Blueberries ? Tsatchoth Cranberry ? Ji_sutin_
Fish
Pike Exox lucius Uldai
Pickerel Americanis Ehch ui
vermiculatus
Whitefish Coregonus Tu clupeaformis Grayling Thymallus arcticus Sat ie/Ts et ite Lake trout Salvelinus fontinalis Tuezane
Table 1.0
Page | 18
Denesuline Traditional Use Sites
Fig 1.3
Page | 19
3.3 Wildlife
3.3.1 Historical
Traditionally, the Denesuline main food supply consists of hunted moose, bear, and buffalo as their prime source of meat along with fish and birds (Table 1). When a moose was tracked, the men would walk as far as 15 – 20 miles inland to kill it. Once killed, they returned with a few more hunters and dogs with dog packs to assist in bringing the meat back to camp. During trapping season, they would be gone for months. They would leave in September and return by March with everything they caught; which included lynx, martin, wolf, fisher, fox, wolverine, mink, and number of other fur bearing animals that were worth a few dollars to make a living. That was part of their annual rounds, and they had micro-villages along the way as temporary camps.
3.3.2 Today
The participants reported hunting and trapping today as almost a thing of the past. With limited access to their trap lines and normal hunting spots, they find it hard to find any game. They feel that the animals are being chased away by the noise or traffic that has increased in the last ten+ years. One participant observations were that he has to travel further Northeast to kill a moose and with the restrictions on guns, it gets to be too much of annoyance. “Actually, the moose was kind of chased out of there too…: Yeah before there was a whole whack, but they used to come right across here eh, from here, (pointing to map, a traditional crossing migration route across the Athabasca River directly were the southern portion of the Pierre River Mine lease is located going from East to West.) But now they’re kind of going a little north here, by the Firebag and now they across there kind of thing, right from the Birch Mountains kind of thing… Yeah, pretty much cross, yeah pretty well anywhere in here, but ah, yeah. Now I noticed they’re crossing way over here, that’s where to get them (Participant A04 2007).There were no reports of any species of caribou throughout the region; however some tracks were seen in the area around RFMA #1716. Trapping is not practiced there (RFMA 1716??) a lot by the Denesuline. They have to travel further away from their traditional areas to trap for any type of animal, also, the price of fur is not at a reasonable amount to make a living and provide for a family at today’s cost of living. There some reports on waterfowl as changing their migration route. One participant noticed the water fowl, songbirds fly around the hazy atmosphere above the development areas. “… and they
Page | 20
(geese) used the Athabasca (River) for the gravel and the sand and they need it as they went down, but with the amount of industry that’s going on now today, the birds don’t even want to travel here anymore. They’re going around; they’re finding different routes where they’re going to get their natural intakes, right. So that’s affected the use of harvesting for us as Native people eating wild birds” (Participant A06 2007).
3.4 Fish and Aquatics
3.4.1 Historical
Fish species within the Athabasca watersheds were abundant to sustain a family for their entire year during their traditional migration cycles. Fish were harvested directly from the Athabasca River and Lake. No reports of illness due to the eating of the fish were ever recorded. Commercial fishing was an annual thing that started in the early 1950s and continued on until as recently as 2007, until reports of contaminants in the fish. The commercially fished species were mainly white fish. The Denesuline set nets on the north shore of the lake and also in land around their micro-villages including Richardson Lake, traditionally known as Jackfish Lake. They would fish for white fish, walleye, pike, lake trout, inland lake fish, and numerous others (Table 1.).
3.4.2 Today
In the past 10 years there have been numerous reports of the traditionally and commercially fish species being contaminated. None of the participants would dare eat the fish from the Athabasca River due to fear of the river being polluted. “Obviously you can’t do that anymore, and I know this Athabasca River, its common knowledge that you don’t eat the fish. Nobody eats the fish, absolutely nobody eats the fish on the river” (Participant A08 2007).
There have been report of deformities in the fish from the Athabasca River and only add to their fear of eating the fish. “There was a big difference you can see in the fish, deforming” (Participant A05 2007). The participant witnessed fish with cysts of a dissimilar type which were larger than normal, as typical cysts on fish are diminutive, but rare.
Page | 21
3.5 Vegetation
3.5.1 Historical
The traditional way of life for the Denesuline consisted on having a constant supply of berries and medicinal plants for use of food and first aid measures. Rat root was just one of the many type of medicinal plants in the area where they harvested their plants and the medicine was very important to the Denesuline. Berries were of abundance; blueberries, cranberries, saskatoons, and choke cherries were just a few of the types of berries collected and stored then ultimately turned into jam or other delicious snacks.
3.5.2 Medicinal Purposes
The Denesuline used a variety of plants used as medicinal antidotes when they experienced headaches, upset stomachs, and other illnesses that were treated with medicine found in their own backyard.
3.5.3 Today
ACFN participants reported that their traditional medicinal plant gathering area will be lost forever. The importance of the medicine to the Denesuline have remained with them for the last ten centuries and now they feel it is threatened or been destroyed by development. “There were a lot of berries; there were a lot of medicines, medicinal herbs. To my understanding now, some of the areas that we’re harvesting, even the Shell Jackpine, there are medicines there. There’s one heart medicine there that’s not there anymore, can’t find it anywhere” (Participant A08 2007). The Denesuline have been practicing these traditions for hundreds of years and seem to find it difficult to accomplish today.
Page | 22
4. ACFN-TRADITIONAL TERRITORY
4.1 Travel and Access
4.1.1 Historical
The Denesuline were able to travel and hunt wherever they felt they would kill or trap something. That was their traditional way of making a living. There were no boundaries and no trap lines, they simply shared the land respectively and took what was necessary to maintain their families. Before the industries, there was no need for permits or any type of documentation to allow the Denesuline to hunt where they please, as stated in their treaty rights. They lived off the land with the respect and guidance from Creator and lived in harmony.
4.1.2 Today
With the amount of traffic increasing, the participants felt that it may be a danger to themselves as well as animals. The increase of people employed with industries means an increase of traffic such as trucks, cars, busses, and semi-trucks. The Denesuline can’t even enjoy sitting around the cabin, as stated by a participant “being peaceful in your cabin, you can’t really, there’s dust flying around when you go sit there, there’s so much dust from the vehicles driving through there, it’s too far, it’s too close to the road, my granny's cabin, it’s too close to the road now … “(Participant A02 2007). Another concern is of participants is people trespassing through their cabin area where, at one time, you never had to lock your cabin door. “Yeah, a lot of traffic, and people are even coming to the trap line asking, you know, and there’s people going to the trap line when we’re not there and they’re just partying and drinking there”(Participant A02 2007). With the amount of increased traffic, participants felt that there will be more foreign visitors to areas of sacred values. With traditional medicine plants all over the area, the concern is that they will be scampered over by All Terrain Vehicle operators and destroyed. The use of All Terrain Vehicles is also a concern because it gives the foreigners access to areas that the Denesuline traditionally hunted and gathered for survival. The increase of traffic only threatens more plants that cannot be replaced and have the same purpose.
Page | 23
4.2 Camps, Cabins and Settlements
4.2.1 Historical
The Denesuline people used to travel on a yearly basis in seasonal rounds. Throughout their travels they made temporary camps, cabins, and settlements; most of which are still seen and used today. The micro-villages were the camps which they settled in during certain times of the season. They had already started building houses on certain settlements which became home on the reserve. They sustained a traditional lifestyle by living in these establishments. Along the Athabasca River was where they spent time to gather and feast. There are also graves along the Athabasca River which remain there today.
4.2.2 Today
ACFN participants recalled cabins and certain areas of settlement which still exist today. They are concerned that what remaining cabins and gravesites may be threatened due to the fast rate of industry development. “Right here is a little lake, it’s called Isadore Lake, some people call it Creeburn, but I believe its Isadore Lake, and that right here is a 3000 year old Dene graveyard” (Participant A07 2007). A cabin on RFMA #1714 is owned by ACFN participant A03 and he feels as if he is being hard- pressed out of his trap line and not receiving any sort of compensation. There are at least six different oil sands leases on his trap line including Shell (see figure 1.4). “…and they ah, trade ah, leases and lands without my knowledge and anybody else’s knowledge… They got a whole whack of them, we got a, six oil companies, six oil leases… all around 1714” (participant A03 2007). The participants feel they are losing a battle that they cannot fight because of their admiration for the land and their faith in peace.
Page | 24
Jackpine Mine Expansion Area in Relation to RFMA #1714
Fig 1.4
Page | 25
4.3 Sacred Sites
4.3.1 Historical
There are a lot of areas throughout the ACFN Traditional Territory that include graves, cabins and sacred areas. The Denesuline used this area as their way of sustaining their traditional way of living. Some graves are believed to be lost forever and ACFN members feel others may be destroyed in the future. The Birch Mountains are considered very sacred and there were a lot ceremonies practiced there. The areas around the Project lease also contain areas that the Denesuline knows to be of sacred value to their well-being. The Denesuline have not previously been put in a situation where they actually have to consider that a certain area of sacred value may be destroyed.
4.3.2 Today
Participant information sharing of sacred sites and the areas in which they are found were limited due to the Denesuline belief in preserving their traditional knowledge as part of their respect for their culture and traditional way of living, however, there was still a lot of concern. They are fully aware of the reality that once a place of sacred value is destroyed, it cannot be replaced; the spirit is gone “once you move them or take them out you can’t replace them, you know. It’s like digging out the side of something sacred” (Participant A06 2007). One participant recalled feeling the ancient spirits of the Denesuline ancestors “past Kearl Lake in (inaudible) there’s a valley there, and if you go and look at where, into that valley, you can actually feel echoes from ancient times and you can actually feel something very powerful there, and I hope they don’t destroy that place” (Participant A01 2007). There are also gravesites throughout the traditional territory which the participants feel may be destroyed and/or tampered with by a company who wants to expand. The Shell oil sands leases for the Pierre River Mine have graves located within their boundaries and without appropriate consultation with the Elders of the Denesuline; the graves may be mined out without respect for the departed and the Denesuline (see Figure 1.5).
Page | 26
Traditional Gravesites on Leased Area
Fig 1.5
Page | 27
5. LOSS OF TRADITIONAL VALUES AND THE IMPACT ON FUTURE GENERATIONS
There were great concerns of the Denesuline in terms of their distinctiveness, and one of the key essentials to their custom is language. The Denesuline are losing their language at rate so fast that it is believed that they will lose their traditional language forever. “I think our language is going too…” Participant A05 (2007) stated, as he feels the language is threatened. The participants were silent on the subject of traditional values lost. They felt that future generations of children are the ones who will witness and feel the impacts of what we do today as a human race. The Denesuline pray that future generations don’t suffer as a result of what is being done today and could have been done and only time will tell. One participant stated that there may be nowhere to teach his children and grandchildren their traditional way of living by means of hunting and trapping…” And what about my little guy, he’s only four years old, you know, and eventually I’m going to teach him…but… we have to travel all the way to Chip to go teach him how to do use the traditional use of things, and I’m not able to access any of the traditional uses of the other land that’s around us.”(Participant A06 2007). With so much activity in the area, it is becoming close to impossible for the Denesuline to carry out their traditional ways of living and there is apprehension that they ultimately may not be capable of practicing their rights at all on their traditional land. The children are being taught at school the importance of working for these mining operations and are not being taught the values of their livelihood for years to come if the children do not preserve their culture.
Page | 28
6. Recommendations
6.1 Introduction
The ACFN participants articulated mitigation measures during the interviews due to the grave concerns they have of their livelihood and the livelihood of the future Denesuline generations. It is in the ACFN participants’ opinion that Shell Canada Ltd. commit to and follow up on the recommendations. The recommendations are concise, but the benefits of committing and following the recommendations will greatly increase the ACFN members’ hopes of restoring their rich heritage, culture and environment prior to the arrival of the oil sand companies.
6.2 Mitigation Recommendations
6.2.1 The first recommendation for Shell from the participants was to hold a moratorium on the projects until accurate studies are done on all water, air, wildlife, fish, birds, plants, and human health. The participants reported that people in their home community of Fort Chipewyan were dying of rare cancers that are unexplained by Alberta Health & Wellness and Health Canada. These cancers are diagnosed at a ratio of one in every 100,000 people; and there were 4-5 people who expired due to these cancers in a community of approximately 1,200 people. Studies conducted on the Athabasca River and the Athabasca Lake should be carried out by the local community members of Fort Chipewyan and to have private studies conducted and access to industry sponsored studies.
6.2.2 The participants suggested that royalties should be administered to the ACFN membership on a yearly basis for the reason that the leases cover their traditional territory and they can no longer hunt, fish, and trap in that area.
6.2.3 The participants felt that ACFN members will have to be actively involved in the reclamation process due to their relationship with the land. The ACFN members were in the region prior to the development of the oil sands projects and will be here after the industries have left.
6.2.4 The participants felt that ACFN members should be hired at a more accessible rate and have tax incentives because of the location in which they live, Fort Chipewyan.
Page | 29
6.2.5 Participants felt that paving roads to construction sites will benefit the vegetation in the leased areas with a decrease in dust. The participants who still have cabins would like to see admonition signs put up to notify people that they are on an occupied trap line.
6.2.6 The participants felt that communication with Shell should be more accessible in the event of in an emergency while on their trap lines or if they have any questions in regards to construction activities in their region or any other concerns. ACFN participants recalled cabins and certain areas of settlement which still exist today. They are concerned that what remaining cabins and gravesites may be threatened due to the fast rate of industry development. They recommend that surveying be done by a registered archaeologist.
7. Conclusion
The demand for natural resources in Canada has and continues to expand at an unprecedented rate. Some aspects of this growth include overlapping needs for access to public land, competition for renewable resources such as water and wildlife, and the increased potential for adverse effects on environmental quality, species diversity and abundance, along with human health and cultural viability. When the Denesuline of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation participants were interviewed, one could see and almost feel the pain along with the heartache the Denesuline are experiencing at that very moment. In the last ten years the Denesuline felt that they were under attack by these multi-billion dollar companies and that they could not provide for their families the way they had been for centuries. As an alternative, they started working for these companies to provide a lifestyle for their families and for future generations. By uniting and working together, the participants felt we can truly assess the impacts to the Denesuline nation and all who live in the region. Unless the recommendations are implemented, the Denesuline traditional way of life may not be lost forever.
Page | 30
References Cited
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN). 2003a. Traditional Land Use Study. Fort Chipewyan, AB.
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN). 2003b. Footprints on the Land: Tracing the Path of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation. Fort Chipewyan, AB.
Edmonton Journal, 2007. Edmonton, AB.
Appendixes I, II, III Tables, Glossary, Interviews, discs of the oral interviews
Page | 31
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Environment Limited
2008 Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Traditional Environmental Knowledge and Traditional Land Use Study
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion and Pierre River Mine Environmental Impact Assessment (DRAFT)
Lionel Lepine
AUTHORSHIP
TEK/TLU Study Lead Facilitator: Lionel Lepine Maps Provided by: FMA AUTHORSHIP
TEK/TLU Study Lead Facilitator: Lionel Lepine Report Author: Lionel Lepine Senior Review: Kuni Albert of Albert & Associates Ltd.
Page | 2
Athabasca Chipeywan First Nation Environmental Ltd. Box 366 Fort Chipewyan, Alberta T0P-1B0
William G. Kovach
Environmental Coordinator Shell Canada Limited 400 4th Avenue S.W.
P.O. Box 100 Station M Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 2H5 December 20, 2007
Re: Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Traditional Environmental Knowledge and Traditional Land Use Study
Enclosed is the Draft Report on the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) Traditional Environmental Knowledge and Traditional Land Use Study requested by Shell Canada Ltd. for the proposed Jackpine Mine Expansion and Pierre River Mine Project(s) for their Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Application for Approval.
This report contains information that has not been reviewed by the Elders of the ACFN. The Draft Report is tentatively set to be reviewed by the Elders in January of 2008. Following the review, a final report will be submitted.
As per stated ACFN’s in the Intellectual Property Policy, any information regarding traditional knowledge and traditional land use iswill be considered the property of the ACFN and will be returned to the ACFN Industry Relations Corporation (IRC) for archival purposes and no copies of any documents created will take place without the writtenarticulated consent of the ACFN IRC.
I trust the above meets your needs. Please contact the undersigned if you would like to discuss further.
Report prepared by:
Lionel Lepine ACFN TEK/TLU Facilitator
Page | 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1. INTRODUCTION...... 7 1.2 The Denesuline and Intellectual Property...... 7 1.3 Methods and Participant Selection...... 8 2. BASELINE INFORMATION...... 10 2.1 The Denesuline...... 10 2.2 A Migrating People (Livelihood)...... 12 2.3 Sacred Areas & Gatherings ...... 13 2.4 Traditional Foods and Materials...... 14 3. ATHABASCA CHIPEWYAN FIRST NATION TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND LAND USE HISTORICAL DATA AND TODAY...... 15 3.1 Water 3.1.1 Historical Data...... 15 3.1.2 Today...... 16 3.2 Air Quality 3.2.1 Historical Data...... 17 3.2.2 Today...... 17 3.3 Wildlife 3.3.1 Historical Data...... 20 3.3.2 Today...... 20 3.4 Fish and Aquatics 3.4.1 Historical Data...... 21 3.4.2 Today...... 21 3.5 Vegetation 3.5.1 Historical Data...... 22 3.5.2 Medicinal Use...... 22 3.5.3 Today...... 22 Page | 4
SECTION PAGE
4. ATHABASCA CHIPEWYAN FIRST NATION TRADITIONAL TERRITORY...... 23 4.1 Travel and Access 4.1.1 Historical Data...... 23 4.1.2 Today...... 23 4.2 Camps, Cabins and Settlements 4.2.1 Historical Data...... 24 4.2.2 Today...... 24 4.3 Sacred Sites 4.3.1 Historical Data...... 26 4.3.2 Today...... 26 5. LOSS OF TRADITIONAL VALUES AND THE IMPACT ON FUTURE GENERATIONS...... 28 6. RECOMMENDATIONS...... 29 6.1 Introduction...... 29 6.2 Mitigation Recommendations...... 29 6.2.1 . 6.2.6...... 29 7. CONCLUSION...... 30 REFERENCES...... 30
Page | 5
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (ON SEPARATE PAGE) FIGURE PAGE Fig 1.1 Shell proposed leased areas. 9 Fig 1.2 Map of ACFN Traditional Territory. 11 Fig 1.3 Map of Traditional Use Sites. 19 Fig 1.4 Map of Trap line in Relation to the Leased area. 25 Fig 1.5 Map of Denesuline Gravesites. 27 TABLE Table 1.0 Denesuline Usable Species List 18
Page | 6
1. Introduction The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) members reside in northeast Alberta adjacent to the Lake Athabasca. Approximately 200 members live in the community of Fort Chipewyan and approximately 300 members live in and around the Fort McMurray and , Fort McKay area. Members of the Nation historically and continue to carry out traditional activities within the Wood Buffalo Region. This area of Alberta is under increasing development pressure from the oil and gas, forestry and other industries which add to these pressures. The ACFN members have expressed concern regarding the impacts of these activities. The purpose of conducting a Traditional Knowledge and Land Use Report is to identify resources and locations that have been of traditional use and cultural significance to the ACFN in relation to . tThe Shell Canada Ltd. Jackpine Mine Expansion/Pierre River Mine Project Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Traditional Knowledge and Land Use Report is based on interviews conducted by Lionel Lepine, Traditional Environmental Knowledge/Traditional Land Use Facilitator, of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN).
1.2 The Denesuline and Intellectual Property Each traditional knowledge program in which Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Environment Limited (ACFN EL) has participated has been unique. Because the information under discussion is the property of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, the program is designed in consultation with, and the approval of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation as represented generally by its voiced through their respective Industry Relations Corporation (IRC) and/or Chief and Council. In all aspects of the communication of traditional land use information, ACFN EL is committed to maintaining the confidentiality and propriety of information shared by participants and community members. We stress that our role is only to interpret and edit those aspects of information that participants choose to share with developers and the general public. In this context, all information, whether it be in tape and/or transcribed form, is the property of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation respectively, and is returned to it them at the completion of the program. Apart from the submission of reports for the regulatory process, ACFN EL will not make copies of any documents produced without the expressed permission from the ACFN IRCRC of the ACFN Chief and council and/or members.
Page | 7
1.3 Methods and Participant Selection (how many interviews should be stated here) The interviews were conducted over a 10 day period in 2007 in Fort McMurray, Fort McKay and Fort Chipewyan all located within the Northeastern Region of Alberta. The interviewees were chosen based on their proximity and livelihood activities within the Shell leased expansion areas. (lionel note that you don’t actually state in the body of the report that acfn members are using the shell expansion area – an important fact)The interviewees were Elders, community members and hunter- gathers and other members of the ACFN.
Verification Meetings - The Draft report will be presented to the interviewees for their review and confirmation of the data supplied to the ACFN TK Facilitator.
Page | 8
Fig 1.1 Shell proposed leased areas
Page | 9
2. BASELINE INFORMATION 2.1 The Denesuline The Denesuline people, or the Athabasca Chipewyan people, have occupied traditional territories based on the migration route of certain ungulates which they hunted for food. It is believed the Denesuline people migrated across the Bering land bridge some 20,000 years ago. TFrom an archaeologist.s perspective, they lived off of a number of different extinct species of animals, most of which were gigantic . such as Mammoths, giant Camels, saber-toothed tigers, giant sloths, and horses ( are you sure about horses? Ie they are not extinct and I believe horses th were not in north americal until the 17 century). Today, only legends tell of Formatted: Superscript giant creatures of which they hunted and of great floods, which were probably caused by the melting of the glaciers at the end of the ice age. Today the glaciers provide water to the land and also to all the plant and animals in which the Denesuline sustains life in the midst of a drastic impact on the environment and their livelihood. With the resource development occurringcompanies developing at such a fast rate, the livelihood and traditional culture of the Denesuline maywill be lost forever.
Page | 10
Fig 1.2 Map of traditional Territory
Page | 11
2.2 A Migrating People (Livelihood) The Denesuline people migrated in a circular pattern based on the migration route of the caribou and fish, which were their primary food of choice. The map above shows the area which the Denesuline used to sustain their way of life. The Denesuline didwould not reside in one particular area due to the migration routes of animals; they would travel from place to place according to where the resources they needed to live were located. The Denesuline were seasonal travellers who hunted and trapped in the area shown on the map, but they also travelled outside of the area shown as far away as Manitoba and further south into the Lac la Biche, Alberta area.,
As caribou hunters, tThe traditional livelihood of the Denesuline were secure and affluent because of the abundance of food and felt no need to travel outside of their traditional hunting and trapping areas.
th With advent of the fur trade in the early 18 century, the annual arounds of Formatted: Superscript the Denesuline changed to include lands south of Lake Athabasca in the boreal forest. This adaptation was made to trap, harvest and trade fur bearing animals. Greater reliance on fish and ungulates such as moose resulted from this change. The hunting of caribou continued after the expansion into the boreal forest and remained important to the livelihood of the Denesuline until the 1950’s.
Along with the expansion into the boreal forest, the Denesuline established micro villages and communal trapping areas, generally centered around the trading posts in the Fort Chipewyan area.
The Densuline’s northern round includedalso involved trading at Ile á Crosse and wintering at Black Birch Lake where they hunted and trapped in smaller family groups, west and southwest of Cree Lake. At break up the entire group assembled at the headwaters of Clearwater River and travelled to Fort McMurray and Fort Chipewyan to trade. They then would travel north of Lake Athabasca to hunt barren land caribou for food and winter clothing. In the late fall and early winter they followed the caribou south and returned to mid-winter hunting and trapping areas in northern Saskatchewan. These annual rounds reflect the current locations of Chipewyan settlements in Saskatchewan and Alberta (ACFN/TLUS page 42). This occurred after the arrival of Europeans, who brought material that were not previously needed or used by the Denesuline when they began the fur trade in the 1680s. The annual round was, in fact, a tradition that was practiced for thousands of years by the entire Dene nation across Canada and even in the United States.
Page | 12
2.3 Villages, Sacred Areas & Gatherings During these annual rounds, the Denesuline stopped at various places during the winter months where they found good sources of fish and easy access to trap lines. Some of the Denesuline occupied a lot of the western area now known as Wood Buffalo National Park and developmented villages along the Birch River. Oand other groups travelledoccupied the east side of Lake Athabasca into Saskatchewan and the NWT (the ACFN ancestors are related to the members of the First Nations at Fondulac and Balck Lake in Saskatchewan). These groups established villages on the south shore of Lake Athabasca at Old Fort, in the Athabasca delta at Jackfish (a.k.a. Richardson lake) and along the Athabasca River at Point Bruhle and Popular Point, and other points. Some of these micro villages were designated and set aside for the ACFN as Indian reserves.
The riparian landsA lot of territories along the Athabasca River were very abundant with food, so a lot of spots became known as sacred areas where the Denesuline would stop and camp for nights until they felt it was time to move again, and then they would travel again up north then back around again. The Birch Mountains were considered a pristine area to hunt fish and trap to beyond the Saskatchewan border. .Well, those mountains, the old people talked about them, they always said that there is something different about that mountain.and those are traditional stories about that mountain. (Participant A06). The .micro . villages. along the Athabasca River were home to small families for short periods of time during their annual rounds, and in the 1920s the Denesuline started staying at some of these places permanently, which became .reserves., other areas remained .crown land.. The Athabasca River holds gravesites close to its banks from just north of Fort McMurray until the lake itself, along with numerous other historic places in and around the RSA.
Page | 13
2.4 Traditional Foods and Materials The barren land Caribou were the main source of food for the Denesuline people for hundreds of generations, along with fish and waterfowl. The caribou used to migrate through the Fort Chipewyan area south to the vicinity of Fort McKay up until a few major fires in the early 1950s and the caribou have not since returned. Traditionally, the caribou was not only used for food, but for clothing and other material items made from its hide or from the antlers. The hide was turned into clothing and used also for their tipi.s and various other materials. The antlers were carved into knives and other basic hand tools used for a number of different tasks. The Denesuline would not let an entire animal go to waste; they used every part of the animal for a different purpose and still maintain that tradition today. After the arrival of Europeans, the Denesuline were introduced to guns and other newer tools to hunt, fish, and trap, which changed their land use significantly. The materials brought with the fur traders also changed a lot of their clothing and basic items used to maintain their livelihood. Moose became one of the prime sources of food when the caribou stopped migrating through the Fort Chipewyan area, but there was still an abundance of different varieties of fish. The Denesuline were gatherers, they picked berries in the fall season and made jams and other tasty treats.
Page | 14
3. ATHABASCA CHIPEWYAN FIRST NATION TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND LAND USE HISTORICAL AND TODAY 3.1 Water 3.1.1 Historical The Athabasca (River) begins in the Columbia Icefield of the Rocky Mountains and winds 1,500 kilometers through Alberta’s boreal forest, past pulp mills and through the oilsands around Fort McMurray, before emptying into Lake Athabasca in the northeast corner of the province (Edmonton Journal, 2007). The community of Fort Chipewyan is on the exact location where the water channels through to the Des Roche River and flows north; and the people of Fort Chipewyan depended on Lake Athabasca for their drinking water, fishing, hunting and the sustenance of their traditional practices. The Peace/Athabasca delta in those days was a vibrant ecosystem, teaming with thousands of muskrats. But a development in 1967 doomed the muskrats and had a devastating effect on ed the ACFN’s muskrat harvesting. Dene people.s traditional way of life. That year the Government of British Columbia completed the building of the
W.A.C Bennett Dam, blocking the Peace River at Hudson Hope and creating a reservoir at Williston Lake which took years to fill. By diverting the water into the reservoir, the dam decreased the seasonal floods that normally filled the perched basins in the Peace/Athabasca delta. But this water was the lifeline of the Dene people because the muskrats needed new water in the basins in order to live and multiply. As the frequency of the floods diminished, the delta and the basins dried out and the muskrats were gone (Footprints on the Land/Tracing the Path of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, 2003). The delta is a natural filter and is a continuously moving body of water. The Denesuline use the delta to sustain their livelihood as they have for generations by using what it has to offer. The animals depend on the delta just as much as the Denesuline to maintain their natural way of living and this creates a cycle that circulated through this region for millennium. Water has always been the key source of human life and the Aboriginal people hold a true respect for water and all of nature.s commodities. The Denesuline have a keen respect for water and only take what is needed and do not disrespect the water at any given time. There were times when an individual could not imagine that water would be of any great concern because of the abundance of it. Page | 15
The Denesuline used the Athabasca River as a way of navigation to follow their annual rounds on a yearly basis, even in the winter; water is an important aspect to the Denesuline livelihood. There are legends that tell of prophetic visions of seeing the water turned to the color of blood and still flowing. Occam.s razor says that the simplest answer may be the right one, and the ACFN participants are convinced that the .blood. as the legend says, is actually oil (participant A05). There is also another concern about rare cancers being diagnosed to Fort Chipewyan community members and who are dying. The cause of the cancers, again, according to the Denesuline, can be attributed to the fast paced development in the region that was once their Traditional homeland where they sustained a beautiful livelihood. .my auntie Josephine actually told me this last year, I mean but Margaret Marcel did tell me this too, that was maybe two or three years ago that ah, everybody has their prediction I guess, they have their prophets, I guess we had it to I guess, in the future, that river is just going to actually flow like blood, going to come down, and I kind of thought about it. Then I told your grandmother there I said, I don.t, I can.t see that happening cause we don.t have that population, if we had millions and millions of people maybe I can see it then. If people were blown open, I could see blood. The only thing I could refer to was oil. If Suncor blew or terrorist attack, look how close to the river it is. The color of oil is the color of blood. So that.s coming, that was predicted many, many years before I was born, many centuries ago, that.s how long the story goes.Like the amount of people getting cancer around this region is another concern that I always have, they.re a lot of younger people dying from cancer, and they.re not sure what kind of cancer.(participant A05).
3.1.2 Today The ACFN participants showed a grave concern about the water quality and quantity in their traditional area.today.s standards. They reported that in the past, they never had to bring their own water into the forest; they simply would just bring a cup. Today, they have to purchase water to carry into the bush with them. ..in the lake, and you know, it wouldn.t smell like oil or gas, it would smell like water and it would be clear and you could see the bottom, and you could see fish swimming, you know, and was just nice to have sun tan and go in a nice clean lake that you could even drink the water from the lake when you went for a walk in the bush, you could just bring a cup with you and just drink from the river, the lake, anywhere, now you have to bring your own water into the bush. (participant A01).
Page | 16
Water levels are reported as being lower than usual as one participant stated .we have to take all our water from here. (Inaudible) the water should be up to the trees. A lot of people are concerned. We used to go by boat up the Muskeg River. You can.t go that way now. There.s no water. (participant A04) There is a concern that the lake is going to dry up to the point where you can.t fish in certain areas anymore. The water removed from the Athabasca river for use upstream by industries is felt to be far too much at one time. The main concern is that there will be no more clean water left to drink resulting in health concerns of both the people of Fort Chipewyan and the wildlife in which the Denesuline depend upon. The ACFN member are also concerned that there will not be enough water in the river to support fish in the river and, in utrn, fish in Lake Athabasca.
3.2 Air Quality 3.2.1 Historical There were no reports of any type of decrease in air quality. The Denesuline were able to harvest berries without worrying about what has blown over the plants. They had no indications of a change in air quality to come, so they are sensitive to the very aware of any changes happening today.
3.2.2 Today ACFN members actively using the land today report .dust. as a concern of particular berry patches they gather from. Due to an increase in traffic near the trap line by a participant. cabin, the dust builds up from the roads and is carried by the wind over the preferred berry harvesting areas. One participant reported waking up one morning to find a .film. of some sort covering his car, which can only be attributed to the oil sands (Participant A08). The biggest concern overall was of the odors that are increasing in their region. Some people are concerned that their children may be getting sick from it. .just me and my boy went there (Fort McKay) a couple of times there, and he got sick from that smell, that.smell, that catfish smell and he was fine until he went there that day. (Participant A02). The only attribute to this smell that the participants can relate it to is to the industries and there are days that the odour is not as evident as other days .some day.s you smell it and some day.s you don.t, it.s the smell of money.and I say it.s just the smell of (something) disrupting what is sacred on this Mother Earth. (participant A06).
Page | 17
Table 1.0 Denesuline Usable Species List
Names of Wildlife Latin Names Dene Name Moose Alces alces Deneee Caribou Rangifer tarandus Et. thenn Buffalo Bison bison Edsheere Black Bear Ursus americanus Sass Wolf Canis lupis Nunneea Fox Vulpes vulpes Nageechtaroy Trapping Animal Names Lynx Lynx lynx Tseeshe Wolverine Gulo gulo Nabe Weasel Mustela frenata Techkale Squirrel Tamiasciurus hudsonicus Gleee Fisher Martes pennanti Sa Tsho Mink Mustela vison Tehjuzi Beaver Castor canadensis Tsha Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus Tshenn Coyote Canis laterans Names of Birds Canada Goose Branta Canadensis Cha Mallard Anas platyrchynchos Tsheth tshok Berries Blueberry Vaccinium myrtilloides Tsatchoth Cranberry Vaccinium vistis-idaea Ji_sutin_ Fish Pike Exox lucius Uldai Pickerel Americanis vermiculatus Ehch ui Whitefish Coregonus clupeaformis Tu Grayling Thymallus arcticus Sat ie/Ts et ite Lake trout Salvelinus fontinalis Tuezane (Burbot is missing from this list – Pat Marcel says Burbot was an important fish for food in winter) Page | 18
Fig 1.3 Denesuline Traditional Use Sites
Page | 19
3.3 Wildlife 3.3.1 Historical Traditionally, the Denesuline main food supply consists of caribou,hunted moose, bear, and buffalo as their prime source of meat along with fish and birds (Table 1). When a moose was tracked, the men would walk as far as 15 . 20 miles inland to kill it. Once killed, they returned with a few more hunters and dogs with dog packs to assist in bringing the meat back to camp. During trapping season, they would be gone for months. They would leave in September and return by March with everything they caught; which included lynx, martin, wolf, fisher, fox, wolverine, mink, and number of other fur bearing animals that were worth a few dollars to make a living. That was part of their annual rounds, and they had communal trapping areas in which individual trap lines, marked by trails, were respected.micro-villages along the way as temporary camps.
3.3.2 Today The participants reported hunting and trapping today as greatly reduced.almost a thing of the past. With limited access to their trap lines and normal hunting spots, it.s hard to find any game. They feel that the animals are being chased away by the noise or traffic that has increased in the last ten or so+ years. One participant observations were that he has to travel further Northeast to kill a moose and with the restrictions on guns, it gets to be too much of annoyance. .Actually, the moose was kind of chased out of there too.: Yeah before there was a whole whack, but they used to come right across here eh, from here, (pointing to map, a traditional crossing migration route across the Athabasca River directly were the southern portion of the Pierre River Mine lease is located going from East to West.) But now they.re kind of going a little north here, by the Firebag and now they across there kind of thing, right from the Birch Mountains kind of thing. Yeah, pretty much cross, yeah pretty well anywhere in here, but ah, yeah. Now I noticed they.re crossing way over here, that.s where to get them (participant A04).There were no reports of any species of caribou throughout the region; however some tracks were seen in the area around RMFA # 1716. Trapping is not practiced there (where) a lot by the Denesuline. They have to travel further away from their traditional areas to trap for any type of animal, also, the price of fur is not at a reasonable amount to make a living and provide for a family at today.s cost of living.
Trapping and hunting still remain important cultural and recreational activities for the ACFN. Country foods are still a preferred source of sustenance. ACFN members still go out on the land to their traplnes and camping areas where they feel ‘at home’ and can carry on their traditional practices and customes and teach skills to their children.
There some reports on waterfowl as changing their migration route. One participant noticed the water fowl, songbirds fly around the hazy atmosphere above the development areas. .. and they
Page | 20
(geese) used the Athabasca (River) for the gravel and the sand and they need it as they went down, but with the amount of industry that.s going on now today, the birds don.t even want to travel here anymore. They.re going around; they.re finding different routes where they.re going to get their natural intakes, right. So that.s affected the use of harvesting for us as Native people eating wild birds. (participant A06).
3.4 Fish and Aquatics 3.4.1 Historical Fish species within the Athabasca watersheds were abundant to sustain a family for their entire year during their traditional migration cycles. Fish were harvested directly from the Athabasca River and Lake. No reports of illness due to the eating of the fish were ever recorded. Commercial fishing was an annual thing that started in the early 1950.s and continued on until as recently as 2007, until reports of contaminants in the fish. The commercially fished species were mainly white fish. The Denesuline set nets on the north shore of the lake and also in land around their micro-villages including Richardson Lake, traditionally known as Jackfish Lake. They would fish for white fish, walleye, pike, lake trout, inland lake fish, and numerous others species (Table 1.).
3.4.2 Today In the past 10 years there have been numerous reports of the traditionally and commercially fish species being contaminated. None of the participants would dare eat the fish from the Athabasca River due to fear of the river being polluted. .Obviously you can.t do that anymore, and I know this Athabasca River, its common knowledge that you don.t eat the fish. Nobody eats the fish, absolutely nobody eats the fish on the river. participant A08).
There have been report of deformities in the fish from the Athabasca River and only add to their fear of eating the fish. .There was a big difference you can see in the fish, deforming. (participant A05). The participant witnessed fish with cysts of a dissimilar type which were larger than normal, as typical cysts on fish are diminutive, but rare.
Page | 21
3.5 Vegetation 3.5.1 Historical The traditional way of life for the Denesuline consisted on having a constant supply of berries and medicinal plants for use of food and first aid measures. Rat root was just one of the many type of medicinal plants in the area where they harvested their plants and the medicine was very important to the Denesuline. Berries were of abundance; blueberries, cranberries, saskatoons, and choke cherries were just a few of the types of berries collected and stored then ultimately turned into jam or other delicious snacks.
3.5.2 Medicinal Purposes The Denesuline Used a variety of plants used as medicinal antidotes when they experienced headaches, upset stomachs, and other illnesses that were treated with medicine found in their own backyard.
3.5.3 Today ACFN participants reported a high level of cocern that their traditional medicinal plant gathering areas will be lost forever. The importance of the medicine to the Denesuline have remained with them for the last ten centuries and now they feel it is threatened or been destroyed by development. .There were a lot of berries; there were a lot of medicines, medicinal herbs. To my understanding now, some of the areas that we.re harvesting, even the Shell Jackpine, there are medicines there. There.s one heart medicine there that.s not there anymore, can.t find it anywhere. (participant A08). The Denesuline have been practicing these traditions for hundreds of years and seem to find it difficult to accomplish today.
Page | 22
4. ACFN-TRADITIONAL TERRITORY 4.1 Travel and Access 4.1.1 Historical The Denesuline were able to travel and hunt wherever they felt they would kill or trap something. That was their traditional way of making a living. There were no boundaries and no trap lines, they simply shared the land respectively and took what was necessary to maintain their families. Before the industries, there was no need for permits or any type of documentation to allow the Denesuline to hunt were they please, as stated in their treaty rights. They lived off the land with the respect and guidance from Creator and lived in harmony.
4.1.2 Today With the amount of traffic being increased, the participants felt that it may be a danger to themselves as well as animals. With the increase of people employed with industries means an increase of traffic such as trucks, cars, busses, and semi-trucks. The Denesuline can.t even enjoy sitting around the cabin, as stated by a participant .being peaceful in your cabin, you can.t really, there.s dust flying around when you go sit there, there.s so much dust from the vehicles driving through there, it.s too far, it.s too close to the road, my grannies cabin, it.s too close to the road now . .(participant A02). Another concern is of people trespassing through their cabin area where, at one time, who never had to lock your cabin door. .Yeah, a lot of traffic, and people are even coming to the trap line asking, you know, and there.s people going to the trap line when we.re not there and they.re just partying and drinking there.(participant A02). With the amount of increased traffic, participants felt that will mean more foreign visitors to areas of sacred values. With traditional medicine plants all over the area, the concern is that they will be scampered over by All Terrain Vehicle operators and destroyed. The use of All Terrain Vehicles also gives the foreigners access to areas that the Denesuline traditionally hunted and gathered for survival. The increase of traffic only threatened more plants that cannot be replaced and have the same purpose. (Lionel is there a concern about traveling the rivers such as Athabasca and Muskeg etc because of low water levels? Isn’t parts of the delta has to access due to low water levels?) Page | 23
4.2 Camps, Cabins and Settlements 4.2.1 Historical The Denesuline people used to travel on a yearly basis in seasonal rounds. Throughout their travels they made temporary camps, cabins, and settlements; most of which are still seen and used today. The micro-villages were the camps which they settled in during certain times of the season. They had already started building houses built cabins on certain settlements which became home on the reserve. They sustained a traditional lifestyle by living in these establishments. Along the Athabasca River was where they spent time to gather and feast. There are also graves along the Athabasca River which remain there today.
4.2.2 Today ACFN participants recalled cabins and certain areas of settlement which still exist today. They are concerned that what remaining cabins and gravesites (the discussion of graves overlaps with the next section – I suggest moving all references to gravesites to the next section) may be threatened due to the fast rate of industry development. .Right here is a little lake, it.s called Isadore Lake, some people call it Creeburn, but I believe its Isadore Lake, and that right here is a 3000 year old Dene graveyard. (participant A07). A cabin on RMFA #1714 is owned by ACFN participant A03 and he feels as if he is being hard- pressed out of his trap line and not receiving any sort of compensation. There are at least six different leases on his trap line including Shell. ..and they ah, trade ah, leases and lands without my knowledge and anybody else.s knowledge. They got a whole whack of them, we got a, six oil companies, six oil leases. all around 1714. (participant A03). The participants feel they are losing a battle that they cannot fight because of their admiration for the land and their faith in peace. (not sure what this sentence means?) how does their admiration for the land stop them from fighting) - isn’t there also a problem of non aboriginal hunters and recreationists using and vandalizing members cabins and traplines?
Page | 24
Fig 1.4 Leased Area in Relation to RMFA #1714
Page | 25
4.3 Sacred Sites 4.3.1 Historical There are a lot of areas throughout the Regional Study Area (RSA) that include graves, cabins and sacred areas. The Denesuline used this area as their way of sustaining their traditional way of living. Some graves are believed to be lost forever and ACFN members feel others may be destroyed in the future. The Birch Mountains are considered very sacred and there were a lot ceremonies practiced there. The areas around (how close?) the Project lease also contain areas that the Denesuline knows to be of sacred value to their well-being. The Denesuline has not previously been put in a situation where they are facing possible destruction of an an areaactually have to consider that a certain area of sacred value. may (this last sentence should be in next section) be destroyed.
4.3.2 Today Participant information sharing of sacred sites and the areas in which they are found were limited due to the Denesuline belief in preserving thiseir traditional knowledge as part of their respect for their culture and traditional way of living., Hhowever, there was still a lot of concern. They are fully aware of the reality that once a place of sacred value is destroyed, it cannot be replaced; the spirit is gone .once you move them or take them out you can.t replace them, you know. It.s like digging out the side of something sacred. (participant A06). One participant recalled feeling the ancient spirits of the Denesuline ancestors .past Kearl Lake in (inaudible) there.s a valley there, and if you go and look at where, into that valley, you can actually feel echoes from ancient times and you can actually feel something very powerful there, and I hope they don.t destroy that place. (participant A01). There are also gravesites throughout the RSA which the participants feel may be destroyed and/or tampered with by a company who wants to expand. The Shell lease for the Pierre River Mine has graves located within its boundaries and without appropriate consultation with the Elders of the Denesuline; the graves may be mined out without respect for the departed and the Denesuline.
Page | 26
Fig 1.5 Traditional Gravesites on Leased Area
Page | 27
5. LOSS OF TRADITIONAL VALUES AND THE IMPACT ON FUTURE GENERATIONS There were great concerns of the Denesuline in terms of their culture and distinctiveness, and one of the key essentials to their custom is language. The Denesuline are losing their language at rate so fast that it is believed that they will lose their traditional language forever. .I think our language is going to.. (Participant A05) stated as he feels the language is threatened. The loss of traditional ways of life and livelihood is linked to the lose of language. Hunting, trapping and gathering with family members provides an opportunity to share cultural and environmental knowledge and history in the Dene language.
The participants were silent on the subject of traditional values lost. The future generations of children are the ones who will witness and feel the impacts of what we do today as a human race. The Denesuline pray that future generations don.t suffer as a result of what is being done today and could have been done and only time will tell. One participant stated that there may be nowhere to teach his children and grandchildren their traditional way of living by means of hunting and trapping.. And what about my little guy, he.s only four years old, you know, and eventually I.m going to teach him.but. we have to travel all the way to Chip to go teach him how to do use the traditional use of things, and I.m not able to access any of the traditional uses of the other land that.s around us..(Participant A06). With so much activity in the area, it is becoming very difficultclose to impossible for the Denesuline to carry out their traditional ways of living and there is apprehension that they ultimately may not be capable of practicing their rights at all on their traditional land. The children are being taught at school the importance of working for these mining operations and are not being taught the values of the Dene traditional way of life. The opportunities to teach the children are lost when the areas that Elders are familiar with for harvesting medicines and foods, and traditional gathering areas are lost or interfered with. eir livelihood for years to come if the children do not preserve their culture.
Page | 28
6. Recommendations 6.1 Introduction The ACFN participants articulated mitigation measures during the interviews due to the grave concerns they have of their livelihood and the livelihood of the future Denesuline generations. It is in the ACFN participants. opinion that Shell Canada Ltd commit to and follow up on the recommendations. The recommendations are concise, but the benefits of committing and following the recommendations will greatly increase the ACFN members. hopes of restoring their rich heritage, culture and environment prior to the arrival of the oil sand companies.
6.2 Mitigation Recommendations 6.2.1 The first recommendation for Shell was to ensure that hold a moratorium on both projects until accurate studies are done on the project specific and cumulative effects of oils sands mining and processing on all water, air, wildlife, fish, birds, plants, and the ACFN as a community. The later includes an assessment of the cumulative effects on membersand human physicalhealthsocial, economic, and cultural health. The ACFN members need to understand what the long term and short term impacts of the porpopsed projects will have on their treaty rights and way of life. It is recommended these studies be done before Shell submits its applications to the Alberta and Federal regulators for approval. These studies can also form the basis of Shell’s consultation with the ACFN.
The participants reported that people in their home community of Fort Chipewyan were dying of rare cancers that are unexplained by Alberta Health and Health Canada. These cancers are diagnosed at a ratio of one in every 100,000 people; and there were 4-5 people who expired due to these cancers in a community of approximately 1200 people. Studies conducted on the Athabasca River and the Athabasca Lake should be carried out by the local community members of Fort Chipewyan and to have private studies conducted and access to industry sponsored studies. (Lional – the discussion of cancer/health should be in the main body of the report; not the recommendations. Also – stress and fear effect health – I would guess that the fear of cancer and other illness that may be related to oil sands development is in itself a health effect).
6.2.2 The participants suggested that royalties should be administered (do you mean that a portion of the roylties and other revenue collected by the federal and provincial governments be paid to the ACFN to compensate them for increased costs and inconvenience of finding replacement areas to hunt and gather and to compensate them for loss of traditional foods, hunting fishing and trapping opportunites and other adverse effects?)to the ACFN membership on a yearly basis for the reason that the leases cover their traditional territory and they can no longer hunt, fish, and trap in that area. (who are these recommendations to? If shell, shell has no control over royalties. instead of being this specific consider recommending that Shell enourage the federal and provincial governments to enter into a comprehensive benefits and accommodation agreement with the ACFN to ensure ACFN’s important land use areas are protected and losses are off-set by benfits). 6.2.3 The ACFN members will have to be actively involved in the reclamation process due to their relationship with the land. (what does “actively involved” mean? You might want to be more specific: be involved in the setting that standards, performance measures and timing for reclamation and the process for verifying the success of any reclamation?) The ACFN members were in the region prior to the development of the oil sands projects and will be here after the industries have left. 6.2.4 ACFN members should be hired at a more accessible rate (not sure what an “accessible rate” is?)and have tax incentives(tax incentives are not something shell has control over – this would be a recommendation to government) because of the location in which they live, Fort Chipewyan. Page | 29
6.2.5 Paving roads to construction sites will benefit the vegetation in the leased areas with a decrease in dust. The participants who still have cabin‘s would like to see admonition signs put up to notify people that they are on a occupied trap line. 6.2.6 The participants feel that communication with Shell should be more assessable accessible in the event of in an emergency while on their trap lines or if they have any questions in regards to construction activities in their region or any other concerns.
6.2.7. ACFN gravesites and cabin sites should be surveyed by an registered archeologist with the assistance of the ACFN and these sites protected from development and tresspass. ACFN participants recalled cabins and certain areas of settlement which still exist today. They are concerned that what remaining cabins and gravesites may be threatened due to the fast rate of industry development. They recommend that surveying be done by a registered archeologist. 7. Conclusion The demand for natural resources in Northeastern AlbertaCanada has and continues to expend at an unprecedented rate. Some aspects of this growth include overlapping needs for access to public land, competition for renewable resources such as water and wildlife, and the increased potential for adverse effects on environmental quality, species diversity and abundance, along with human health and cultural viability. Most importantly, it is creating competing demands and use of ACFN’s traditional areas which is conflicting with traditional Denesuline land use and occupation and the ecosytems and environmental values it depends upon. So far, the ACFN has been on the losing end of this land use conflict.
When the Denesuline of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation participants were interviewed, one could see and almost feel the pain along with the heartache the Denesuline are experiencing. at that very moment. OverIn the last ten years the Denesuline have feltfelt that they were under attack by the large international se multi-billion dollar companies who have moved into their area. ACFN members and that they could not provide for their families the way they and their ancestors havehad donebeen for centuries, as an alternative theyhave started working for these companies to provide a lifestyle for their families. and for future generations. By uniting and working together, we can truly assess the impacts to the Denesuline nation and all who live in the region; unlesstil the recommendations are implemented the Denesuline traditional way of life may not be lost forever.
Page | 30
References Cited
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN). 2003a. Traditional Land Use Study. Fort Chipewyan, AB.
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN). 2003b. Footprints on the Land: Tracing the Path of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation. Fort Chipewyan, AB.
Edmonton Journal, 2007. Edmonton, AB.
Page | 31
Mary Coffey
From: Eamon Murphy Sent: September-30-12 11:14 PM To: Jenny Biem Subject: FW: report Attachments: Final draft 04 without maps.doc
From: Lionel Lepine Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 3:42 PM To: Jenny Biem; ; Eamon Murphy Subject: FW: report
Lionel Lepine
TEK/TLU Facilitator
Watchers of The Land
From: To: Subject: report Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 15:48:15 -0600
Hey Bill
Can you help me to decide where and what maps should be inserted. I know what type of maps are needed, I just need your input. Here is a copy of the latest draft without maps, just the one sent from Golder. Also, I need to know how to cite an elder who's name I don't know.?!
Thanks
Lionel
1 Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Environment Limited
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Traditional Environmental Knowledge and Traditional Land Use Study for the Proposed Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Project
(DRAFT) Lionel Lepine
2008
Notice to Reader
This report contains information that is intended solely for Shell’s Jackpine Mine Expansion and Pierre River Mine application for an approval from the Energy Resources Conservation Board, and no other purpose. Errors or omissions can or may occur in the preparation of this report. The authors do not warranty or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this report.
Information contained in this report regarding current and recent historical land use was derived from interviews with elders and other community members and its completeness is affected by:
° confidentiality. Some information is considered sacred or otherwise confidential by the elders and was therefore not provided by the interviewee or not included in the report;
° elder fatigue. Some members of the community declined to participate or participate fully due to having participated in several previous interview projects. Many elders believe that their past participation in land use studies or interviews have not led to any beneficial changes or their needs and recommendations were ignored and are therefore disinclined to participate or participate fully;
° traditional land use is complex and not readily reduced to isolated site specific practices. ACFN land use is interactive over a large harvesting area and is shaped by changing social and ecological dynamics; and
° traditional land use is composed of various practices, traditions, customs and beliefs, the significance of can only be interpreted by the ACFN.
The recordings, transcriptions, interview notes and other working documents created for the preparation of this report are the property of the ACFN and retained by the ACFN Industrial Relations Corporation. Interviews given by community members were given on the condition of confidentiality.
Before any action or decision is taken on the basis of any material in this report the user must obtain appropriate authorization from the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN).
Anyone who wishes to reference, copy, publish, or reproduce this report MUST have the authorized consent of the ACFN.
Page | 2
Maps Provided by: FMA
AUTHORSHIP
TEK/TLU Study Lead Facilitator: Lionel Lepine
Report Author: Lionel Lepine
Senior Review: Kuni Albert of Albert & Associates Ltd.
Page | 3
Athabasca Chipeywan First Nation Environmental Ltd. Box 366 Fort Chipewyan, Alberta T0P-1B0
William G. Kovach Environmental Coordinator Shell Canada Limited 400 4th Avenue S.W. P.O. Box 100 Station M Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 2H5
December 20, 2007
Re: Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Traditional Environmental Knowledge and Traditional Land Use Study for the Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Project
Enclosed is the Draft Report on the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) Traditional Environmental Knowledge and Traditional Land Use Study requested by Shell Canada Ltd. in support of the proposed Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Project.
This report contains information that has not been reviewed by the Elders of the ACFN. The Draft Report is tentatively set to be reviewed by the Elders in January of 2008. Following the review, a final report will be submitted.
I trust the above meets your needs. Please contact the undersigned if you would like to discuss further.
Report prepared by:
Lionel Lepine ACFN TEK/TLU Facilitator
Page | 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1. INTRODUCTION......
1.2 The Denesuline and Intellectual Property…...... 1.3 Methods and Participant Selection......
2. BASELINE INFORMATION......
2.1 The Denesuline…...... 2.2 A Migrating People (Livelihood)...... 2.3 Sacred Areas & Gatherings ...... 2.4 Traditional Foods and Materials......
3. ATHABASCA CHIPEWYAN FIRST NATION TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND LAND USE HISTORICAL DATA AND TODAY......
3.1 Water 3.1.1 Historical Data...... 3.1.2 Today......
3.2 Air Quality 3.2.1 Historical Data...... 3.2.2 Today......
3.3 Wildlife 3.3.1 Historical Data...... 3.3.2 Today......
3.4 Fish and Aquatics 3.4.1 Historical Data...... 3.4.2 Today......
3.5 Vegetation 3.5.1 Historical Data...... 3.5.2 Medicinal Use...... 3.5.3 Today......
Page | 5
SECTION PAGE
4. ATHABASCA CHIPEWYAN FIRST NATION TRADITIONAL TERRITORY......
4.1 Travel and Access 4.1.1 Historical Data...... 4.1.2 Today......
4.2 Camps, Cabins and Settlements 4.2.1 Historical Data...... 4.2.2 Today......
4.3 Sacred Sites 4.3.1 Historical Data...... 4.3.2 Today......
5. LOSS OF TRADITIONAL VALUES AND THE IMPACT ON FUTURE GENERATIONS......
6. RECOMMENDATIONS......
6.1 Introduction......
6.2 Mitigation Recommendations......
6.2.1 – 6.2.7………………………………………………………………………….
7. CONCLUSION......
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………………………...
Page | 6
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (ON SEPARATE PAGE) FIGURE PAGE
Fig 1.1 Shell proposed leased areas.
Fig 1.2 Map of ACFN Traditional Territory.
Fig 1.3 Map of Traditional Use Sites.
Fig 1.4 Map of Trap line in Relation to the Leased area.
Fig 1.5 Map of Denesuline Gravesites.
TABLE
Table 1.0 Denesuline Usable Species List
Page | 7
1. Introduction
The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) members reside in northeast Alberta adjacent to Lake Athabasca. Approximately 200 members live in the community of Fort Chipewyan and approximately 300 members live in and around Fort McMurray and Fort McKay. Members of the Nation historically and today continue to carry out traditional activities within the Wood Buffalo Region. This area of Alberta is under increasing development pressure from the oil and gas, forestry and other industries. The ACFN members have expressed concern regarding the impacts of these activities. The purpose of conducting a Traditional Knowledge and Land Use Report is to identify resources and locations that have been of traditional use and cultural significance to the ACFN. The Shell Canada Ltd. Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Project Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Traditional Knowledge and Land Use Report is based on interviews conducted by Lionel Lepine, Traditional Environmental Knowledge/Traditional Land Use Facilitator, of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Environment Limited (ACFN EL).
1.2 The Denesuline and Intellectual Property
Each traditional knowledge program in which Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation Environment Limited has participated in has been unique. The information under discussion is the property of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, the program is designed in consultation with and the approval of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, as represented by its Industry Relations Corporation (IRC) and Chief and Council. In all aspects of the communication of traditional land use information, ACFN EL is committed to maintaining the confidentiality and propriety of information shared by participants and community members. Our role is only to interpret and edit those aspects of information that participants choose to share with developers and the general public. In this context, all information, whether it is in tape and/or transcribed form, is the property of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, and is returned to the ACFN at the completion of the program. Apart from the submission of reports for the regulatory process, ACFN EL will not make copies of any documents produced without the expressed permission from the ACFN IRC or the ACFN Chief and Council.
Page | 8
1.3 Methods and Participant Selection Collection of ACFN TLU/TEK information for the Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Project consisted of a review of written materials previously validated by ACFN and through interviews with ACFN members who have or once had undertaken significant activities in the Project area or near the vicinity of the project.
There were eight interviews conducted over a 10 day period in 2007 in Fort McMurray and Fort McKay located within the Northeastern Region of Alberta.
The participants were chosen based on their proximity and livelihood activities in and around the Shell leased expansion areas. The participants were Elders, hunter-gathers and other members of the ACFN who actively use the land for traditional purposes today. The interviews were digitally taped, video taped and photographs were taken for archival purposes with the consent of the participants. The interviews were transcribed on paper as well as audio compact disks were made and copies were provided to each participant. Maps were provided to the participants in relation to the leased areas and surrounding traditional ACFN traditional territory.
Information provided in this report was based primarily on the interviews conducted as well as discussions with ACFN Elders who orally pass on Traditional Knowledge, therefore citations and references are basic. Also, information gathered were from studies done on the Denesuline in the late 1990`s and are cited within the report.
Verification Meetings - The Draft report will be presented to the participants for review and confirmation of the data supplied to the ACFN TK Facilitator.
Page | 9
Fig 1.1 Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion & Pierre River Mine Development Areas
Page | 10
Page | 11
2. BASELINE INFORMATION
2.1 The Denesuline
The Denesuline people, or the Athabasca Chipewyan people, have occupied traditional territories based on the migration route of certain ungulates which they hunted for food. It is believed the Denesuline people migrated across the Bering land bridge some 20,000 years ago. They lived off of a number of different extinct species of animals, most of which were gigantic – such as Mammoths, giant Camels, saber-toothed tigers and giant sloths. Today, only legends tell of giant creatures of which they hunted and of great floods, which were probably caused by the melting of the glaciers at the end of the ice age. Today the glaciers provide water to the land and also to all the plant and animals in which the Denesuline sustains life in the midst of a drastic impact on the environment and their livelihood (2003a.). With the resource developing at such a fast rate, the ACFN participants feel the livelihood and traditional culture of the Denesuline may be lost forever if mitigation strategies are not met.
Page | 12
Fig 1.2 Map of ACFN Traditional Territory
2.2 A Migrating People (Livelihood)
The Denesuline people migrated in a circular pattern which was their annual northern route based on the migration route of the caribou, which were their primary food of choice. Figure 1.2 represents the area in which the Denesuline used to sustain their way of life. The Denesuline did not reside in one particular area due to the migration routes of animals; they would travel from place to place according to where the resources they needed to live were located. The Denesuline were seasonal travellers who hunted and trapped in the area shown on Figure 1.2, but they also travelled outside of the area shown, their northern round, as far away as Manitoba and further south into the Lac la Biche, Alberta area. Given that the traditional livelihood of the Denesuline was secure and affluent because of the abundance of food, there was no need to travel outside of their traditional hunting and trapping areas. With advent of the fur trade in the early 18th century, the annual rounds of the Denesuline changed to include lands south of Lake Athabasca in the boreal forest. This adaptation was made to trap, harvest and trade fur bearing animals. Greater reliance on fish and ungulates such as moose resulted from this change. The hunting of caribou continued after the expansion into the boreal forest and remained important to the livelihood of the Denesuline until the 1950’s. Along with the expansion into the boreal forest, the Denesuline established micro villages and communal trapping areas, generally centered around the trading posts in the Fort Chipewyan area. The Denesuline’s northern round included trading at Ile á Crosse and wintering at Black Birch Lake where they hunted and trapped in smaller family groups, west and southwest of Cree Lake. At break up the entire group assembled at the headwaters of Clearwater River and travelled to Fort McMurray and Fort Chipewyan to trade. They then would travel north of Lake Athabasca to hunt barren land caribou for food and winter clothing. In the late fall and early winter they followed the caribou south and returned to mid-winter hunting and trapping areas in northern Saskatchewan. These annual rounds reflect the current locations of Chipewyan settlements in Saskatchewan and Alberta (ACFN 2003a).
Page | 13
2.3 Villages, Sacred Areas & Gatherings
During these annual rounds, the Denesuline stopped at various places during the winter months where they found good sources of fish and easy access to areas of greater trapping commodities. Some of the Denesuline occupied a western area now known as Wood Buffalo National Park and developed villages along the Birch River. Other groups occupied the east side of Lake Athabasca into Saskatchewan where the ACFN ancestors are related to the members of the First Nations at Fond Du Lac and Black Lake, Saskatchewan. These groups established villages on the south shore of Lake Athabasca at Old Fort, in the Athabasca Delta at Jackfish (also known as Richardson Lake) and along the Athabasca River at Point Brule and Popular Point, and other points. Some of these micro villages were designed and set aside for the ACFN as Indian reserves. The riparian lands along the Athabasca River were very abundant with food, so a lot of spots became known as sacred areas where the Denesuline would stop and camp for nights until they felt it was time to move again, and then they would travel again up north then back around again. The Birch Mountains were considered a pristine area to hunt fish and trap to beyond the Saskatchewan border. “Well, those mountains, the old people talked about them, they always said that there is something different about that mountain…and those are traditional stories about that mountain” (Participant A06 2007). The Athabasca River holds Denesuline gravesites close to its banks from just north of Fort McMurray to Lake Athabasca, along with numerous other historic places in and around the ACFN Traditional Lands (Figure 1.2).
Page | 14
2.4 Traditional Foods and Materials
The barren land caribou were the main source of food for the Denesuline people for hundreds of generations, along with fish and waterfowl. The caribou used to migrate through the Fort Chipewyan area south to the vicinity of Fort McKay up until a few major fires in the early 1950s and the caribou have not since returned. The caribou were not only used for food, but for clothing and other material items made from their hide or antlers. The hide was turned into clothing and used also for their tipis and various other materials. The antlers were carved into knives and other basic hand tools used for a number of different tasks. The Denesuline would not let any part of an animal go to waste; they used every part of the animal for a different purpose and still maintain that tradition today. After the arrival of Europeans, the Denesuline were introduced to guns and other newer tools to hunt, fish, and trap, which changed their land use significantly. The materials brought with the fur traders also changed a lot of their clothing and basic items used to maintain their livelihood. Moose became one of the prime sources of food when the caribou stopped migrating through the Fort Chipewyan area, but there was still an abundance of different varieties of fish. The Denesuline were also gatherers, picking berries in the fall season and making jams and pemmican.
Page | 15
3. ATHABASCA CHIPEWYAN FIRST NATION TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND LAND USE HISTORICAL AND TODAY
3.1 Water
3.1.1 Historical
The Athabasca (River) begins in the Columbia Icefield of the Rocky Mountains and winds 1,500 kilometers through Alberta's boreal forest, past pulp mills and through the oilsands around Fort McMurray, before emptying into Lake Athabasca in the northeast corner of the province (Edmonton Journal, 2007). The community of Fort Chipewyan is on the exact location where the water channels through to the Des Roche River and flows north; and the people of Fort Chipewyan depended on Lake Athabasca for their drinking water, fishing, hunting and the sustenance of their traditional practices. The Peace/Athabasca delta in those days (prior to 1967) was a vibrant ecosystem, teaming with thousands of muskrats. In 1967 the Government of British Columbia completed the building of the W.A.C Bennett Dam, blocking the Peace River at Hudson Hope and creating a reservoir at Williston Lake which took years to fill. This development doomed the muskrats and had a devastating effect on the ACFN`s muskrat harvesting. By diverting the water into the reservoir, the dam decreased the seasonal floods that normally filled the perched basins in the Peace/Athabasca delta. But this water was the lifeline of the Dene people because the muskrats needed new water in the basins in order to live and multiply. As the frequency of the floods diminished, the delta and the basins dried out and the muskrats were gone (ACFN 2003b). The delta is a natural filter and is a continuously moving body of water. The animals depend on the delta just as much as the Denesuline to maintain their natural way of living and this creates a cycle that circulated through this region for millennium (ACFN Elder 2007). Water has always been the key source of human life and the Aboriginal people hold a true respect for water and all of nature’s commodities. The Denesuline have a keen respect for water and only take what is needed and do not disrespect the water at any given time. There were times when an individual could not imagine that water would be of any great concern because of the abundance of it (ACFN Elder 2007). The Denesuline used the Athabasca River as a way of navigation to follow their annual rounds on a yearly basis, even in the winter; water is an important aspect to the Denesuline livelihood. There
Page | 16 are legends that tell of prophetic visions of seeing the water turned to the color of blood and still flowing. Occam’s razor says that the simplest answer may be the right one, and the ACFN participants are convinced that the “blood” as the legend says, is actually oil (Participant A05 2007). There is also another concern about rare cancers being diagnosed to Fort Chipewyan community members and who are dying. The cause of the cancers, again, according to the Denesuline, can be attributed to the fast paced development in the region that was once their Traditional homeland where they sustained a beautiful livelihood. “my auntie Josephine actually told me this last year, I mean but Margaret Marcel did tell me this too, that was maybe two or three years ago that ah, everybody has their prediction I guess, they have their prophets, I guess we had it too I guess, in the future, that river is just going to actually flow like blood, going to come down, and I kind of thought about it. Then I told your grandmother there I said, I don’t, I can’t see that happening cause we don’t have that population, if we had millions and millions of people maybe I can see it then. If people were blown open, I could see blood. The only thing it could refer to was oil. If Suncor blew or terrorist attack, look how close to the river it is. The color of oil is the color of blood. So that’s coming, that was predicted many, many years before I was born, many centuries ago, that’s how long the story goes…Like the amount of people getting cancer around this region is another concern that I always have, they’re a lot of younger people dying from cancer, and they’re not sure what kind of cancer” (Participant A05 2007).
3.1.2 Today
The ACFN participants showed a grave concern about the water quality and quantity in their traditional area. The Denesuline use the delta to sustain their livelihood as they have for generations. They reported that in the past, they never had to bring their own water into the forest; they simply would just bring a cup. Today, they have to purchase water to carry into the bush with them. “…in the lake, and you know, it wouldn’t smell like oil or gas, it would smell like water and it would be clear and you could see the bottom, and you could see fish swimming, you know, and was just nice to have sun tan and go in a nice clean lake that you could even drink the water from the lake when you went for a walk in the bush, you could just bring a cup with you and just drink from the river, the lake, anywhere, now you have to bring your own water into the bush” (Participant A01 2007).
Page | 17
Water levels are reported as being lower than usual as one participant stated “we have to take all our water from here. (Inaudible) the water should be up to the trees. A lot of people are concerned. We used to go by boat up the Muskeg River. You can’t go that way now. There’s no water” (Participant A04 2007). There is a concern that Lake Athabasca is going to dry up to the point where you can’t fish in certain areas anymore. The interviewees indicated that water removed from the Athabasca River for use upstream by industries is felt to be far too much at one time. The main concern related is that there will be no more clean water left to drink resulting in health concerns of both the people of Fort Chipewyan and the wildlife in which the Denesuline depend upon. The ACFN members are also concerned that there will not be enough water in the river to support fish in the river and, in turn, fish in Lake Athabasca.
3.2 Air Quality
3.2.1 Historical
There were no reports of any type of decrease in air quality. The Denesuline were able to harvest berries without dust particles covering the vegetation. There were no indications of a change in air quality to come, so they are sensitive to the changes happening today.
3.2.2 Today
ACFN members actively using the land today report “dust” as a concern of particular berry patches they gather from. Due to an increase in traffic by a participant’s cabin, located on a trapline in close proximity to the Shell project lease area reported that dust build up from the roads is carried by the wind and rests on the preferred berry harvesting areas. One participant reported waking up one morning to find a “film” of some sort covering his car, which can only be attributed to the oil sands (Participant A08 2007). The biggest concern overall was of the odors that are increasing in their region. Some people are concerned that their children may be getting sick from it. “just me and my boy went there (Fort McKay) a couple of times there, and he got sick from that smell, that…smell, that cat [urine] smell and he was fine until he went there that day” (Participant A02 2007). The only attribute to this smell that the participants can relate it to is to the industries and there are days that the odour is not as evident as other days “some days you smell it and some days you
Page | 18 don’t, it’s the smell of money…and I say it’s just the smell of (something) disrupting what is sacred on this Mother Earth” (Participant A06 2007).
Page | 19
Names of Wildlife Latin Names Dene Name Moose Alces alces Deneee Caribou Rangifer tarandus Et’ thenn Buffalo Bison bison Edsheere Black Bear Ursus americanus Sass Wolf Canis lupis Nunneea
Fox Vulpes vulpes Nageechtaroy Trapping Animal Names
Lynx Lynx lynx Tseeshe Wolverine Gulo gulo Nabe Weasel Mustela frenata Techkale Squirrel Tamiasciurus Gleee hudsonicus Fisher Martes pennanti Sa Tsho Mink Mustela vison Tehjuzi Beaver Castor canadensis Tsha Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus Tshenn Coyote Canis laterans
Names of Birds Canada Goose Branta Canadensis Cha Mallard Anas platyrchynchos Tsheth tshok Berries Blueberry Vaccinium myrtilloides Tsatchoth Cranberry Vaccinium vistis-idaea Ji_sutin_ Fish Pike Exox lucius Uldai Pickerel Americanis Ehch ui vermiculatus
Whitefish Coregonus Tu clupeaformis Grayling Thymallus arcticus Sat ie/Ts et ite Lake trout Salvelinus fontinalis Tuezane
Table 1.0 Denesuline Usable Species List
Page | 20
Page | 21
Fig 1.3 Denesuline Traditional Use Sites Page | 22
3.3 Wildlife
3.3.1 Historical
Traditionally, the Denesuline main food supply consisted of caribou, moose, bear, and buffalo as their prime source of meat along with fish and birds (Table 1). When a moose was tracked, the men would walk as far as 15 – 20 miles inland to kill it. Once killed, they returned with a few more hunters and dogs with dog packs to assist in bringing the meat back to camp. During trapping season, they would be gone for months. They would leave in September and return by March with fur bearing animals; which included lynx, martin, wolf, fisher, fox, wolverine, mink, and number of other fur bearing animals that were sold for currency and goods. This was part of their annual rounds, and they had communal trapping areas in which individual trap lines, marked by trails, were respected.
3.3.2 Today
The participants reported hunting and trapping today as greatly reduced or nonexistent. With limited access to their trap lines and normal hunting spots, it is difficult to find any game. They feel that the animals are being chased away by the noise or traffic that has increased in the last ten or so years. One participant observations were that he has to travel further Northeast to kill a moose and with the restrictions on guns, it gets to be too much of annoyance. “Actually, the moose was kind of chased out of there too…: Yeah before there was a whole whack, but they used to come right across here eh, from here, (pointing to map, a traditional crossing migration route across the Athabasca River directly were the northern portion of the Pierre River Mine lease is located going from East to West.) But now they’re kind of going a little north here, by the Firebag and now they cross there kind of thing, right from the Birch Mountains kind of thing… Yeah, pretty much cross, yeah pretty well anywhere in here, but ah, yeah. Now I noticed they’re crossing way over here, that’s where to get them (Participant A04 2007).There were no reports of any species of caribou throughout the region; however some tracks were seen in the area around RFMA # 1716. Trapping is not practiced there in and around RFMA # 1716 by the Denesuline. They have to travel further away from their traditional areas to trap for any type of animal, also, the price of fur is not at a reasonable amount to make a living and provide for a family at today’s cost of living. Trapping and hunting still remain important cultural and recreational activities for the ACFN. Country foods are still a preferred source of sustenance. ACFN members still go out on the land to Page | 23 their trap lines and camping areas where they feel ‘at home’ and can carry on their traditional practices and customs and teach skills to their children. There are reports on waterfowl changing their migration route. One participant noticed the water- fowl and songbirds fly around the hazy atmosphere above the development areas. “… and they (geese) used the Athabasca (River) for the gravel and the sand and they need it as they went down, but with the amount of industry that’s going on now today, the birds don’t even want to travel here anymore. They’re going around; they’re finding different routes where they’re going to get their natural intakes, right. So that’s affected the use of harvesting for us as Native people eating wild birds” (Participant A06 2007).
3.4 Fish and Aquatics
3.4.1 Historical
Fish species within the Athabasca watersheds were abundant to sustain a family for their entire year during their traditional migration cycles. Fish were harvested directly from the Athabasca River and Lake. No reports of illness due to the eating of the fish were ever recorded. Commercial fishing was an annual thing that started in the early 1950s and continued on until as recently as 2007, until reports of contaminants in the fish. The commercially fished species were mainly white fish. The Denesuline set nets on the north shore of the lake and also in land around their micro-villages including Richardson Lake, traditionally known as Jackfish Lake. They would fish for white fish, walleye, pike, lake trout, inland lake fish, and numerous other species (Table 1.).
3.4.2 Today
In the past 10 years there have been numerous reports of the traditional and commercial fish species being contaminated. None of the participants would dare eat the fish from the Athabasca River due to fear of the river being polluted. “Obviously you can’t do that anymore, and I know this Athabasca River, its common knowledge that you don’t eat the fish. Nobody eats the fish, absolutely nobody eats the fish on the river” (Participant A08 2007).
There have been reports of deformities in the fish from the Athabasca River and that only adds to their fear of consuming fish. “There was a big difference you can see in the fish, deforming” Page | 24
(Participant A05 2007). The participant witnessed fish with cysts of a dissimilar type which were larger than normal, as typical cysts on fish are diminutive, but rare.
3.5 Vegetation
3.5.1 Historical
The traditional way of life for the Denesuline consisted on having a constant supply of berries and medicinal plants for use of food and first aid measures. Rat root was just one of the many type of medicinal plants in the area where they harvested their plants and the medicine was very important to the Denesuline. Berries were of abundance; blueberries, cranberries, saskatoons, and choke cherries were just a few of the types of berries collected and stored then ultimately turned into jam or other delicious snacks (ACFN Elder 2007).
3.5.2 Medicinal Purposes
The Denesuline used a variety of plants used as medicinal antidotes when they experienced headaches, upset stomachs, and other illnesses that were treated with medicine found in their own backyard. (ACFN Participants A01, A02, A03, A04, A05, A06, A07, A08).
3.5.3 Today
ACFN participants reported a high level of concern that their traditional medicinal plant gathering area will be lost forever. The importance of the medicine to the Denesuline have remained with them for the last ten centuries and now they feel it is threatened or been destroyed by development. “There were a lot of berries; there were a lot of medicines, medicinal herbs. To my understanding now, some of the areas that we’re harvesting, even the Shell Jackpine, there are medicines there. There’s one heart medicine there that’s not there anymore, can’t find it anywhere” (Participant A08 2007). The Denesuline have been practicing these traditions for hundreds of years and find it difficult to practice these traditions today.
Page | 25
4. ACFN-TRADITIONAL TERRITORY
4.1 Travel and Access
4.1.1 Historical
The Denesuline were able to travel and hunt wherever they felt they would kill or trap something. That was their traditional way of making a living. There were no boundaries and no trap lines, they simply shared the land respectively and took what was necessary to maintain their families. Before the industries, there was no need for permits or any type of documentation to allow the Denesuline to hunt where they please, as stated in their treaty rights. They lived off the land with the respect and guidance from Creator and lived in harmony.
4.1.2 Today
With the amount of traffic increasing, the participants felt that it may be a danger to themselves as well as animals. The increase of people employed with industries means an increase of traffic such as trucks, cars, busses, and semi-trucks. The Denesuline can’t even enjoy sitting around the cabin, as stated by a participant “being peaceful in your cabin, you can’t really, there’s dust flying around when you go sit there, there’s so much dust from the vehicles driving through there, it’s too far, it’s too close to the road, my granny’s cabin, it’s too close to the road now … “(Participant A02 2007). Another concern is of participants are people trespassing through their cabin area where, at one time, you never had to lock your cabin door. “Yeah, a lot of traffic, and people are even coming to the trap line asking, you know, and there’s people going to the trap line when we’re not there and they’re just partying and drinking there”(Participant A02 2007). With the amount of increased traffic, participants felt that there will be more foreign visitors to areas of sacred values. With traditional medicine plants all over the area, the concern is that they will be scampered over by All Terrain Vehicle operators and destroyed. The use of All Terrain Vehicles is also a concern because it gives the foreigners access to areas that the Denesuline traditionally hunted and gathered for survival. The increase of traffic threatens more plants that cannot be replaced and have the same purpose (Participant A02 2007).
Page | 26
4.2 Camps, Cabins and Settlements
4.2.1 Historical
The Denesuline people used to travel on a yearly basis in seasonal rounds. Throughout their travels they made temporary camps, cabins, and settlements; most of which are still seen and used today. The micro-villages were the camps which they settled in during certain times of the season. They built cabins on certain settlements which became home on the reserve. They sustained a traditional lifestyle by living in these establishments. Along the Athabasca River was where they spent time to gather and feast. There are also graves along the Athabasca River which remain there today.
4.2.2 Today
ACFN participants recalled cabins and certain areas of settlement which still exist today. They are concerned that what remaining cabins and gravesites may be threatened due to the fast rate of industry development. “Right here is a little lake, it’s called Isadore Lake, some people call it Creeburn, but I believe its Isadore Lake, and that right here is a 3000 year old Dene graveyard” (Participant A07 2007). A cabin on RFMA #1716 is owned by ACFN Participant A03 and he feels as if he is being hard- pressed out of his trap line and not receiving any sort of compensation. There are at least six different oil sands leases on his trap line including Shell (see figure 1.4). “…and they ah, trade ah, leases and lands without my knowledge and anybody else’s knowledge… They got a whole whack of them, we got a, six oil companies, six oil leases… all around 1714” (Participant A03 2007). The participants feel they have to fight because of their admiration for the land and their faith in peace.
Page | 27
Fig 1.4 Jackpine Mine Expansion Area in Relation to RMFA #1714
Page | 28
4.3 Sacred Sites
4.3.1 Historical
There are a lot of areas throughout the ACFN Traditional Territory that include graves, cabins and sacred areas. The Denesuline used this area as their way of sustaining their traditional way of living The Birch Mountains are considered very sacred and there were a lot ceremonies practiced there. The areas around the Project lease also contain areas that the Denesuline knows to be of sacred value to their well-being.
4.3.2 Today
Participant information sharing of sacred sites and the areas in which they are found were limited due to the Denesuline belief in preserving this knowledge as part of their respect for their culture and traditional way of living. However, there was still a lot of concern. The Denesuline have not previously been in a situation where they actually have to consider that a certain area of sacred value may be destroyed. Some graves are believed to be lost forever and ACFN members feel others may be destroyed in the future. They are fully aware of the reality that once a place of sacred value is destroyed, it cannot be replaced; the spirit is gone “once you move them or take them out you can’t replace them, you know. It’s like digging out the side of something sacred” (Participant A06 2007). One participant recalled feeling the ancient spirits of the Denesuline ancestors “past Kearl Lake in (inaudible) there’s a valley there, and if you go and look at where, into that valley, you can actually feel echoes from ancient times and you can actually feel something very powerful there, and I hope they don’t destroy that place” (Participant A01 2007). There are also gravesites throughout the traditional territory which the participants feel may be destroyed and/or tampered with by a company who wants to expand. The Shell oil sands leases for the Pierre River Mine have graves located within their boundaries and without appropriate consultation with the Elders of the Denesuline; the graves may be mined out without respect for the departed and the Denesuline (see Figure 1.5).
Page | 29
Fig 1.5 Traditional Gravesites on Leased Area
5. LOSS OF TRADITIONAL VALUES AND THE IMPACT ON FUTURE GENERATIONS
There were great concerns the Denesuline expressed in terms of their culture and distinctiveness, and one of the key essentials to their custom is language. The Denesuline are losing their language at rate so fast that it is believed that they will lose their traditional language forever. “I think our language is [disappearing]…” (Participant A05 2007) stated, as he feels the language is threatened. The loss of traditional ways of life and livelihood is linked to the loss of language. Hunting, trapping and gathering with family members provides an opportunity to share cultural and environmental knowledge and history in the Dene language. The participants were silent on the subject of traditional values lost. They felt that future generations of children are the ones who will witness and feel the impacts of what is being done today. The ACFN participants pray that future generations don’t suffer as a result of what is being done today in addition to what could have been done and only time will tell. One participant stated that there may be nowhere to teach his children and grandchildren their traditional way of living by means of hunting and trapping…” And what about my little guy, he’s only four years old, you know, and eventually I’m going to teach him…but… we have to travel all the way to Chip to go teach him how to do use the traditional use of things, and I’m not able to access any of the traditional uses of the other land that’s around us.”(Participant A06 2007). With so much activity in the area, it is becoming very difficult for the Denesuline to carry out their traditional ways of living and there is apprehension that they ultimately may not be capable of practicing their rights at all on their traditional land. The children are being taught at school the importance of working for these mining operations and are not being taught the values of the Dene traditional way of life. The opportunities to teach the children are lost when the areas that Elders are familiar with for harvesting medicines and foods, and traditional gathering areas are lost or interfered with (ACFN Elder 2007).
Page | 30
6. Recommendations
6.1 Introduction
The ACFN participants articulated mitigation measures during the interviews due to the grave concerns they have of their livelihood and the livelihood of the future Denesuline generations. It is in the ACFN participants’ opinion that Shell Canada Ltd. commit to and follow up on the recommendations. The recommendations are concise, but the benefits of committing and following the recommendations will greatly increase the ACFN members’ hopes of restoring their rich heritage, culture and environment prior to the arrival of the oil sand companies.
6.2 Mitigation Recommendations
6.2.1 The first recommendation for Shell from the participants was to ensure that studies are done on the project specific and cumulative effects of oil sands mining and processing on water, air, wildlife, fish, birds, plants, and the ACFN as a community. The later includes an assessment of the cumulative effects on members’ physical, social, economic, and cultural health. The ACFN members need to understand what the long term and short term impacts of the proposed project will have on their treaty rights and way of life. It is recommended these studies be done before Shell submits its applications to the Alberta and Federal regulators for approval. These studies can also form the basis of Shell’s consultation with the ACFN. The participants reported that people in their home community of Fort Chipewyan were dying of rare cancers that are unexplained by Alberta Health & Wellness and Health Canada. These cancers are diagnosed at a ratio of one in every 100,000 people; and there were 4-5 people who expired due to these cancers in a community of approximately 1,200 people. Studies conducted on the Athabasca River and the Athabasca Lake should be carried out by the local community members of Fort Chipewyan and have private studies done with admission to industry sponsored studies.
6.2.2 The participants suggested that Shell encourage the federal and provincial governments to enter into a comprehensive benefit and accommodation agreement with the ACFN to ensure ACFN’s traditional land use areas are protected and losses are off-set by royalties. The royalties and other revenue collected by the federal and provincial governments be paid to the ACFN to compensate them for increased costs and inconvenience of finding replacement areas to hunt and Page | 31 gather and to compensate them for loss of traditional foods, medicines, hunting, fishing and trapping opportunities and other adverse effects.
6.2.3 The participants felt that ACFN members will have to be more involved in the setting that standards, performance measures and timing for reclamation and the process for verifying the success of any reclamation.
6.2.4 The participants felt that ACFN members should be hired at a more convenient rate and have tax incentives provided by the government because of the location in which they live, Fort Chipewyan.
6.2.5 Participants felt that paving roads to construction sites will benefit the vegetation in the leased areas with a decrease in dust. The participants who still have cabin’s would like to see signs put up to notify people that they are on an occupied trap line.
6.2.6 The participants felt that communication with Shell should be more accessible in the event of an emergency while on their trap lines or if they have any questions in regards to construction activities in their region or any other concerns.
6.2.7 The participants also felt that ACFN gravesites and cabin sites should be surveyed by a registered archeologist with the assistance of the ACFN and these sites protected from development and trespass.
Page | 32
7. Conclusion
As the participants stated, the demand for natural resources in Northeastern Alberta has and continues to expand at an unprecedented rate. Some aspects of this growth include overlapping needs for access to public land, competition for renewable resources such as water and wildlife, and the increased potential for adverse effects on environmental quality, species diversity and abundance, along with human health and cultural viability. Most importantly, it is creating competing demands and use of ACFN’s traditional areas which is conflicting with traditional Denesuline land use and occupation and the ecosystems and environmental values it depends upon. So far, the ACFN has been on the losing end of this land use conflict (ACFN Elder 2007). When the Denesuline of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation participants were interviewed, one could see and almost feel the pain along with the heartache the Denesuline are experiencing. Over the last ten years the Denesuline participants have felt under attack by the large international companies who have moved into their area. ACFN members could not provide for their families the way they and their ancestors have done for centuries, and have started working for these companies to provide for their families as stated by a participant. By uniting and working together, the participants felt we can truly assess the impacts to the Denesuline nation and all who live in the region. Unless the recommendations from the participants are implemented, they feel the Denesuline traditional way of life may be lost forever (ACFN Participants 2007).
Page | 33
References Cited
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN). 2003a. Traditional Land Use Study. Fort Chipewyan, AB.
Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN). 2003b. Footprints on the Land: Tracing the Path of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation. Fort Chipewyan, AB.
Edmonton Journal, 2007. Edmonton, AB.
Page | 34
Mary Coffey
From: Lionel Lepine Sent: September-27-12 3:40 PM To: Jenny Biem; Eamon Murphy Subject: FW: Status report Attachments: Monthly Status Report for February.doc
LionelLionel Lepine
TEK/TLU Facilitator
Watchers of The Land
From: To: Subject: RE: Status report Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:56:29 -0500
Hi Bill
The final draft will be completed as soon as I recieve the proper maps. I'm still a bit confused as to what maps are going in to this report, and I'm unclear as to who will provide the maps. From my assumption, it's golder who should be assisting me? I must be tired, I'll get back to you by the end of the week with one more update. Sorry the report is very brief, the monthe was taking up by the program.
Thanks
Lionel Lepine
TEK/TLU Facilitator
Wathchers of The Land
1
Subject: RE: Status report Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:30:43 -0600 From: To:
Hey Lionel. Sounds like you're pretty close to wrapping this up.
I'm sorry to say that once this report is finalized, our contract is complete. I've really appreciated the effort you put into this project and am excited about receiving the final report. If we do more of this in the future, I'll be happy to engage you again.
That said, Shell through the ACFN IRC may have more work, but the work specifically being done for me is over. Other Shell projects are something you should perhaps speak to Lisa about - she may have some ideas.
I look forward to seeing the final draft report.
Take care,
Bill
PS: I couldn't open your monthly report that was attached. Can you please send in Work or Excel so I can read? If so, much appreciated. -----Original Message----- From: Lionel Lepine Sent: March 11, 2008 4:22 PM To: Kovach, William SCAN-DOD/14 Subject: Status report
The Elder's want to hold a meeting on the 20th of this month with myself and my corresponding person. They're going to be asking what to expect in the near future. Do you have any comments or suggestions I can bring up at the meeting? After this report is completed, then what? Right now, with the program, I'm just waiting for a little direction from all parties.
Lionel Lepine
TEK/TLU Facilitator
Wathchers of The Land
2
At a loss for words? Find them by playing Seekadoo! Play now!
Your chance to win great prizes with Windows Live Mail and Rogers MobileMail. Click here to learn how.
3