Alaska (U.S.A)

March 2014 r

¯ e FIGURE 11.11-1 v i GITXSAN NATION ASSERTED R i t TRADITIONAL TERRITORY u D PROPOSED WESTCOAST CONNECTOR GAS TRANSMISSION PROJECT

8018 Ing M enik us a River Application Routes ka bo Cypress to Cranberry Route o C re ek Kitsault Route Kitsault Marine Route Nasoga Route Nasoga Marine Route

S Alternate Route

k e e Project Facilities n a Prince Rupert LNG R ^_ B i e v )" K1-K4 Compressor Stations ll e -I r rv )" K5B Compressor Station in g R )" K5A Compressor Station i v e 892 Highway r UV Road ilinka Railway Os Ri ve O r Watercourse m Waterbody i n e c Municipality a Allaasskkaa ! R First Nation Land iv Stewart e Park/Protected Area ((U..SS..A)) 37 r UV KULDOE 1 (E) Gitxsan Nation Asserted Traditional Territory KISGEGAS (A) SCALE: 1:1,600,000 ! km KP 500 K4 .! .! )" 0 10 20 30 40 KP 450 (All Locations Approximate) KP 600 KP 550 .! .! WAULP 10 (E) ! Cranberry AGWEDIN 3 (E) ANDAK 9 (E) .! Junction Alice Arm KISPIOX 1 (E) SIDINA 6 (E) KP 680.4 !.! KP 622 GUL-MAK 8 (E) !)" KP 400 NAD83 BC Albers Route current to February 5, 2014 .! ! .! KIS-AN-USKO 7 (E) Hillshade: TERA Environmental Consultants, derived from Kitsault K5B SIK-E-DAKH 2 (D) Takla Landing Natural Resources Canada 2008; Highways/Roads: ESRI 2005; Railways: United States National Imagery and KP 650 GUN-A-CHAL 5 (E) Mapping Agency 2000; Hydrography: IHS Inc. 2004; d x ANLAW 4 (A) Municipalities and Regional Districts: BC Forests, Lands and m

. QUAN-SKUM-KSIN-MICH-MICH 4 (E) Natural Resource Operations 2007; Populated Places: n Natural Resources Canada 2010; First Nation Land: a KP 650 ! s .! GITANMAAX 1 (A) Government of Canada 2014; Treaty Settlement Land: IHS x Kispiox t i ! Inc. 2013; Parks/Protected Areas, Concervancy Areas: BC G KSOO-GUN-YA 2A (A) Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations 2008. _

1 Gitlaxt'aamiks _ Fort Babine 1 Hazelton TSITSK 3 (A) Although there is no reason to believe that there are 1 GITWANGAK 2 (C) !

_ ! any errors associated with the data used to generate 1 Gitwinksihlkw ! this product or in the product itself, users of these data 1 KP 50 ! g i ! r GITWANGAK 1 (C) are advised that errors in the data may be present. F . e New Hazelton _ v 8 i 1

0 R TUM-BAH 5 (C) Mapped By: AJS Checked By: JW 8 t

\ Laxgalts'ap s 1 s ! 1 a n Kitwanga ! o N i ! Fort Nelson t .! c ! B R IT I S H e

S Gingolx

_ ! s KP 700 KITS-KA-HAWS 6 (C) NEW GITSEGUKLA 2 (B)

e C O LU MB I A r Fort u Map g i SQUIN-LIX-STAT 3 (C) GITSEGUKLA 1 (B) F Extent ! St. John

_ Kitseguecla

A K5A ! E GITSEGUKLA LOGGING 3 (B) \ KOONWATS 7 (C) 0 .!" Dawson

1 ) v e ANDIMAUL 1 (B) r Creek \ R Granisle U KP 750.9 m iver ! L u ! T KP 100 l ! \ a 16 Prince

S ! AB . k

E Prince

L UV

I Trembleur m Rupert F P

_ George

P u s Smithers Lake a A t ! c i KWA-TSA-LIX 4 (C) ! M i

\ f K i 8 c Williams 1

0 CHIG-IN-KAHT 8 (C) O 8

\ Telkwa Lake c Kamloops P ! e !

M a -

S n I .! ! Kelowna ! G \ : ! ! P V!ancouver US A Victoria Kelowna ! ! !

! ! ! !

March 2014 r

¯ e FIGURE 11.11-2 v i GITXSAN NATION R i WILP BOUNDARIES t u D PROPOSED WESTCOAST CONNECTOR GAS TRANSMISSION PROJECT

I 8018 ngen M ika us R iver Application Routes ka bo o C Cypress to Cranberry Route re ek Kitsault Route Kitsault Marine Route Nasoga Route Nasoga Marine Route

S Alternate Route k e e n Project Facilities a B R Prince Rupert LNG el ^_ l i -i v rv e )" K1-K4 Compressor Stations in r g " R ) K5B Compressor Station i v )" K5A Compressor Station e 37 r UV iver 892 R UV Highway s

a silin Road O O ka R N iv m er Railway i n e Watercourse c a R Waterbody ! Stewart i v Municipality Allaasskkaa er (U.S.A) Park/Protected Area (U.S.A) Gitxsan Nation Wilp Boundary SCALE: 1:1,600,000 ! km KP 500 K4 .! .! )" 0 10 20 30 40 KP 450 (All Locations Approximate) KP 600 .! .!

! KP 550 K5B ! Cranberry . ! Alice Arm ! KP 680.4 Junction . .! KP 400 d !)" NAD83 BC Albers Route current to February 5, 2014 x KP 622 ! .! m .! . Hillshade: TERA Environmental Consultants, derived from p l i Kitsault Takla Landing Natural Resources Canada 2008; Highways/Roads: ESRI

W 2005; Railways: United States National Imagery and n

o KP 650 Mapping Agency 2000; Hydrography: IHS Inc. 2004; i t Municipalities and Regional Districts: BC Forests, Lands and a

N Kispiox Natural Resource Operations 2007; Populated Places: n Natural Resources Canada 2010; First Nation Land: a ! s .! Takla Government of Canada 2014; Treaty Settlement Land: IHS x t Fort Babine i Gitlaxt'aamiks ! Inc. 2013; Parks/Protected Areas, Concervancy Areas: BC G KP 650 Lake Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations 2008. _ 2 _

1 Hazelton Although there is no reason to believe that there are

1 !

_ ! any errors associated with the data used to generate 1 Gitwinksihlkw ! this product or in the product itself, users of these data 1 KP 50 ! g i ! r are advised that errors in the data may be present. F . e New _

8 v

1 i

0 Hazelton Mapped By: AJS Checked By: JW

8 R t

\ Laxgalts'ap 1 s ! 1 s n a Kitwanga ! o i ! B R IT I S H Fort Nelson t N .! c ! e S Gingolx C O LU MB I A _ ! s KP 700 Kitseguecla e r Fort u Map g i

F Extent ! St. John _

A ! E \ 0 .!" 16 Dawson

1 ) v UV e

r Creek \ Granisle U KP 750.9 ! L KP 100 Rive ! T m r ! \ lu Prince S .! a AB E K5A k Prince L I Rupert F m P _ u George

P Trembleur s Smithers a A t ! c i ! M i \ Lake f K i 8 c Williams 1

0 O 8

\ Lake c Kamloops P ! e !

M a -

S Usk n I .! ! Telkwa Kelowna ! G

\ Lax Kw'alaams : ! !

P KP 50 V!ancouver US A Victoria Kelowna ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! ! Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

11.11.1.3 Traditional Land and Resource Use Setting Gitxsan Nation’s asserted traditional territory occupies an area of 33,000 km2 in the Coast Range mountains of northwest BC. The territory lies north of Terrace, east of Prince Rupert, Stewart and Meziadin Lake, and south of Bob Quinn and Dease Lakes. Hazelton and New Hazelton are located in the southern portion of the territory. Territorial neighbours of the Gitxsan Nation include Nisga’a Nation, Tsimshian, Haisla, Tahltan, Carrier-Sekani and the Wet’suwet’en (Smith 2004).

Traditionally, the Gitxsan Nation followed a seasonal cycle of resource procurement focused on fishing, hunting, trapping, and medicinal and food plant gathering within the Skeena and Nass watersheds. The basis of their economy was salmon, which was not only a dietary staple, but also an important trade item that was used to procure oolichan [eulachon] grease and other items from coastal First Nations. Hunting and trapping was common, providing dried meat, hides and fur for personal consumption and trade. The Gitxsan Nation also harvested and processed a variety of berries, including soapberries, which were given to coastal First Nations in exchange for seaweed and shellfish.

Trails and Travelways The majority of trails and travelways were used by the Gitxsan Nation as trade routes, or to connect villages to hunting, fishing, trapping and plant gathering sites. Bridges were constructed at strategic locations along watercourses, such as at the confluence of the Nass and Cranberry rivers (Daly 2005). The Skeena River was also an important corridor for transporting goods and people between the coast and the interior by canoe, however, trails beside watercourses or overland were considered more reliable for year-round travel (McDonald 1989).

Habitation Desktop traditional land and resource use information related to habitation sites in the Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA for Gitxsan Nation was not available during compilation of this report.

Hunting and Trapping Culturally relevant wildlife species for the Gitxsan Nation include deer, moose, mountain goat, and black and grizzly bear. Woodland caribou are also hunted in the northern portion of Gitxsan Nation territory; however, populations have declined significantly over the last century (Vescor 2009). Various aquatic bird species, such as geese, ducks and swans, are also hunted for subsistence purposes (People of ‘Ksan 1980).

Trapping Trapping occurs for canids, rodents and other small mammals. Target species include: fox; wolf; coyote; mink; marten; beaver; weasel; and otter. These animals are trapped for fur, or are rendered for grease. When trapline registration was introduced by the provincial government in the 1920s, regulations stipulated that trap lines must pass from father to son. This conflicted with the Gitxsan’s Nation traditional concept of matrilineal descent; therefore, Gitxsan Nation Chiefs did not register trap lines under an individual name but rather as a “company” or group (People of ‘Ksan 1980).

Fishing Gitxsan Nation territory is divided into nine watersheds – the Babine, Kispiox, Gitsegukla, Lower Skeena, Middle Skeena, Nass, Suskwa, Sustut and the upper Skeena – which serve as the basis for economic planning and policy making. All are home to abundant salmon and steelhead runs which are important both culturally and for sustenance. Salmon are harvested during the summer sockeye runs and the fall coho runs and steelhead trout are fished at various times throughout the year. In winter, char, Dolly Varden and cutthroat trout are harvested. Oolichan [eulachon] are also harvested on the lower Nass River in the early spring (Forest Service British Columbia [FSBC] 2008).

Page 11-225

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

Plant Gathering Forests in Gitxsan Nation territory are primarily spruce, subalpine fir, hemlock, cedar and pine. The undergrowth consists of moss-covered soil which provides fertile growing areas for plants and mushrooms. A variety of edible mushrooms grow, including the pine mushroom, which is picked for export to Japan. Medicinal plants such as fireweed and stinging nettles are collected in the summer and early fall. Berries, including huckleberry, soapberry, blueberry, saskatoon, cranberry, cloudberry, Kinnikinnick, raspberry, strawberry and rose hips, are harvested as a dietary supplement, a delicacy, for trade or for medicinal purposes (Budhwa 2007a). Berries are commonly picked in clear-cut areas and along roadsides.

In the past, the Gitxsan Nation used controlled burning as a means of enhancing and managing wild berry habitat, as well as to control for invasive species and encourage earlier spring regeneration of important plants and ungulate browse. In the 1930s, the provincial government banned Aboriginal burning. This, combined with the effects of logging, has severely decimated Gitxsan Nation berry patches throughout the asserted traditional territory (Budhwa 2007a).

Gathering Places Desktop traditional land and resource use information relative to gathering places in the Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA for Gitxsan Nation was not available during compilation of this report.

Sacred Sites Desktop traditional land and resource use information relative to sacred sites in the Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA for Gitxsan Nation was not available during compilation of this report.

Where available, approximate distances and directions of specific geographic areas known to be used by Gitxsan Nation for traditional land and resource use in relation to the application Corridor centerline were determined based on the information compiled through a review of the available literature and are provided in Table 11.11-1.

TABLE 11.11-1

GITXSAN NATION TRADITIONAL LAND AND RESOURCE USE LOCATIONS WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL LAND AND RESOURCE USE REGIONAL STUDY AREA

Approximate Distance and Direction from the application Corridor Activity/Site Description Trails/Travelways Crosses at KP 544 Skeena River 2.8 km west of KP 622 Confluence of Nass River and Cranberry River Fishing Kitsault alternate (9.9 km) Lower Nass River Sources: Daly 2005; MacDonald 1989

11.11.2 Consultation Activities Undertaken This Section of the application summarizes the consultation activities undertaken by WCGT since August 20, 2011, when Gitxsan Nation was initially approached by WCGT. Gitxsan Nation was formally notified of the proposed Project on September 10, 2012, in alignment with the Aboriginal Consultation Plan for the proposed Project. The information in this Section is drawn from the May 15, 2013 (July 2013) and December 31, 2013 (March 2014) Aboriginal Consultation Reports for the proposed Project.

11.11.2.1 Past and Planned Consultation Activities WCGT provided the proposed Project notification letter to Gitxsan Nation on September 10, 2012. WCGT has continually shared Project information with Gitxsan Nation since that date and will continue to do so as the proposed Project evolves.

Page 11-226

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

WCGT first met with Gitxsan Nation on August 20, 2012 to share Project-related information, to determine the community’s interest and to develop a process for their involvement in proposed Project activities. Through a series of subsequent meetings both in-person, over the phone and via e-mail, Gitxsan Nation elected to participate in biophysical field studies and to conduct TLU and socio-economic studies for the proposed Project. To date, Gitxsan Nation has completed their socio-economic study and TLU study. The final results of the TLU study will form the basis for on-going dialogue between WCGT and Gitxsan Nation to inform detailed planning for the proposed Project.

A Capacity Funding agreement was signed in November 2013 with the Gitsxan Nation (GDC and Schedule B Hereditary Chiefs, with the exception of Haiwass). This funding agreement is intended to support ongoing consultation in meetings and other activities with WCGT and the regulatory agencies, related to the proposed Project and to identify relevant effects of the Project on the Gitsxan Nation, if any and identify and consider relevant mitigation to address those effects.

Throughout the consultation process, Gitsxan Nation and WCGT have held discussions and met on various Project-related subjects. These discussions have included: review of proposed route; stream and river crossings; geophysical surveys;, contracting and employment opportunities; economic benefits; compressor stations; geotechnical drilling; upstream extraction methods; marine pipeline corridor landfall at Ridley island; pipeline maintenance; pipeline safety and emergency response; LNG plant and liquefaction process; construction practices; and routing of the proposed Project corridor through their asserted traditional territory. Community meetings have been held with Gitxsan Nation community members.

Gitxsan schedule B chiefs have expressed concern particularly about the affects of upstream extraction methods, the effect of liquefaction plants on Skeena salmon returns and the possibility of future drilling for natural gas in Gitxsan asserted Territory.

Planned consultation activities by WCGT with Gitsxan Nation include: the distribution and review of a draft ancillary site map outlining the proposed features such as access roads, compressor stations, campsites, etc.; providing an overview of biophysical field data results compiled for the proposed Project; submission of Aboriginal Consultation Reports for review and comment; discussion of mitigation options; presentation on the process and content of the application for an EAC; discussion of training, employment and contracting opportunities; meeting and review of safety requirements for contracting and procurement; community meetings and discussion of economic benefits.

11.11.2.2 Village Councils WCGT has offered to meet with and provided Project information to Gitsxan Village councils. for those Villages that have accepted this offer, formal information session have been conducted and for the remainder, informal discussions with Chiefs, Councillors and Village administrators has occurred. The basis of all these presentations and discussions are that this is information sharing and that consultation on lands matters is the responsibility of the affected Hereditary Chiefs. Open House type meetings are planned for the Villages in 2014.

An outline of consultation activities with the village councils associated with the Gitxsan are provided in Table 11.11-2.

TABLE 11.11-2

SUMMARY OF PAST AND PLANNED CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES WITH GITXSAN VILLAGE COUNCILS FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT

Comments on First Project Information Presentation to Open Aboriginal CFA, Community Communication Package Village Council House Consultation Plan etc Main Concerns Gitanmaax November 15, 2012 November 15, 2012 April 3, 2013 ------Kisgegas Reserve, also to find survey monument of reserve to confirm boundaries

Page 11-227

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-2 Cont'd

Comments on First Project information Presentation to Open Aboriginal CFA, Community Communication Package Village Council House Consultation Plan etc Main Concerns Gitsegukla September 10, 2012 November 15, 2012 N/A N/A N/A N/A Work directly with Gitxsan Hereditary Chiefs Glen Vowell September 10, 2012 November 15, 2012 ------Employment and (Sik-e-Dak) workforce training Kitwanga/ September 10, 2012 November 15, 2012 July 12, 2013 ------Employment Gitwangak opportunities, skills training, economic benefits Kispiox February 16, 2012 September 10, 2012, -- -- N/A -- Conversion to Oil, November 15, 2012 Pipeline Safety, Natural Gas for Community, Effects on Fisheries

11.11.2.3 Hereditary Chiefs – Schedule B WCGT has met with and provided project information to the Schedule B Hereditary Chiefs (with the exception of Haiwass, who has declined to meet or be engaged in any capacity) on a regular basis. This includes formal and informal presentations, and meetings of the Simgiigyet. Overview flights of the application Corridor have been offered to all Schedule B Chiefs, although not all have accepted.

An outline of consultation activities with the Schedule B Smigiigyet/Hereditary Chiefs associated with the Gitxsan are provided in Table 11.11-3.

TABLE 11.11-3

SUMMARY OF PAST AND PLANNED CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES WITH GITXSAN SCHEDULE B SMIGIIGYET/HEREDITARY CHIEFS FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT Smigiigyet/Hereditary Chief Hereditary Chief (English) KP Comments on Wing Chiefs(English) Range(Rev 10/Rev dAIR sent for review Project Access Permission Permission Access Foll Consultation Plan TLU ow First Meeting First

3rd Meeting - in up Meeting

Aboriginal volvement CFA, formation formation Package Granted

etc D) . ?

Laxwwyip

Djil Djila Haiwas Gloria ------September April ------N Y N Wilson 10, 2012 18, 2103 Lax an Tsa Buk Wilmer -- -- August 16, September April May -- -- N Y Y Hakw Johnson 2012 10, 2012 18, 9, 2013 2013 Luu andilgan Geel Catherine -- -- August 16, September April May November -- N Y Y Blackstock 2012 10, 2012 18, 9, 14, 2013 2013 2013 Nax Dax Gitludhal Alvin Weget -- -- August 16, September April May November -- N Y Y Deet 2012 10, 2012 18, 9, 14, 2013 2013 2013 Sgan Snaat Wii Art Wilson -- -- August 16, September April May November -- N Y Y Mulgulsxw 2012 10, 2012 18, 9, 14, 2013 2013 2013 Tsuwunhl Gwoimt Sadie Harris -- -- August 16, September April May November -- N Y Y Geets 2012 10, 2012 18, 9, 14, 2013 2013 2013

Page 11-228

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-3 Cont'd Smigiigyet/Hereditary Chief Hereditary Chief (English) KP Comments on Wing Chiefs(English) Range (Rev dAIR sent for review Folloow Project Access Permission Permission Access Consultation Plan TLU First Meeting First

3rd Meeting - in up Meeting

Aboriginal volvement CFA,etc formation formation 10/Rev Package Granted D) . ?

Laxwwyip

Wii Gyet Wii Gyet Lloyd -- -- August 16, September April May November -- N Y Y Morrison 2012 10, 2012 18, 9, 14, 2013 2013 2013 Wii Tax Millulak Alice Jeffery -- -- August 16, September April May November -- N Y Y 2012 10, 2012 18, 9, 14, 2013 2013 2013 Xis adeea Millulak Alice Jeffery -- -- August 16, September April May November -- N Y Y 2012 10, 2012 18, 9, 14, 2013 2013 2013 Xsi Git Gat Gwii Yeelh Brian -- -- August 16, September April May November -- N Y Y Gaitin Williams 2012 10, 2012 18, 9, 14, 2013 2013 2013 Xsu Willi Delgamuukw Earl Muldoe Delgamu -- August 16, September April -- November -- N Y Y Wakw ukw 2012 10, 2012 18, 15, 2013 (Axgiigii) 2013 – (George - Sadie Muldoe Mowatt attended as Earl Muldoe’s designate) Xsugwin Nii Kyap Rena Nii Kyap -- August 16, September April -- November -- N Y Y Liginsxw Benson (Stuutxw 2012 10, 2012 18, 15, 2013 m lax ha) 2013 - George Sampere

11.11.2.4 Hereditary Chiefs(Laxwwyip) – Schedule C Schedule C Hereditary Chiefs consultation can be summarized as being included in regular Simgiigyet meetings. Project information has been provided to those Chiefs who request it, or ask questions or provide comments during meetings. Meetings with individuals have also been held on an as requested basis. Information for all Gitsxan is made available through the Gitxsan Chiefs office and employees funded for this purpose, by the Gitxsan Capacity Funding agreement.

11.11.2.5 Changes to the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Aboriginal Consultation Reports WCGT shared the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Aboriginal Consultation Reports (1 and 2) with Gitxsan Nation for review and comment prior to final submission to the EAO. Through consultation activities to date, Gitxsan Nation has not identified any proposed changes to the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Reports for the proposed Project.

11.11.2.6 Practices, Traditions or Customs Identified Through Consultation Activities Gitxsan Nation elected to conduct a third-party TLU study for the proposed Project. A third-party consultant, Gitxsan Environmental Services, collected baseline information through interviews and archival and historical research. Members of the twelve house groups whose lands fall directly within the application Corridor were first contacted to participate in the study. Participation was open to Gitxsan members not in the directly affected house groups, although these participants were limited in number. Documents generated by Gitxsan members, contained in the Gitxsan archive library, were prioritized. Primary research was gathered through ground reconnaissance and interviews about TLU on Gitxsan asserted traditional territory. Ground reconnaissance was conducted in key areas of concern by

Page 11-229

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

participants, and the report notes that time constraints did not allow for complete ground truthing of reported TLU sites.

The results of Gitxsan Nation’s interim TLU, WCGT – Gitxsan Nation TLU Study, received on December 15, 2013 are summarized below. Where available approximate distances and directions of specific geographic areas from the application Corridor were determined by TERA based on the information provided and are described in Tables 11.11-4 to 11.11-8.

Trails and Travelways Many trails, some several centuries old, were identified as being used to access communities, fishing sites, traplines, berry harvesting locations and other culturally important locations. Several watercourses in Gitxsan Nation’s asserted traditional territories are historically and currently used as travelways when frozen in the winter months. Traditional trails include the Oolichan, also known as the Grease Trail, Kuldo, Atna Pass, Kispiox and Sedina Mountain Pass trails.

Community members indicated that there are likely many cultural archaeological features surrounding trail networks within the Gitxsan territory which remain either undocumented or currently unknown. It is important to community members that these trails and the cultural and archaeological features that accompany them are protected.

Gitxsan Nation identified several trails and travelways during the TLU study for the proposed Project, detailed in Table 11.11-4. No site-specific mitigation for trails and travelways was requested by Gitxsan Nation.

TABLE 11.11-4

TRAILS AND TRAVELWAYS IDENTIFIED BY GITXSAN NATION

Approximate Distance and Direction from application Corridor Site Description Age Requested Mitigation Crosses at KP 482.6 to KP 483: Trail crossing Current None along east and west banks of the Nilkitwa River Crosses at KP 496.3 Crosses at KP 501.9 Crosses at KP 506.8 and KP 507.2: along east and west banks of the Shelagyote River Crosses at KP 511.1 Crosses at KP 514.2 Crosses at KP 516 Crosses at KP 518 Crosses at KP 519.8 Crosses at KP 522.1 Crosses at KP 525.2 Crosses at KP 529.1 Crosses at KP 531 Crosses at KP 533.5 Crosses at KP 533.9 Crosses at KP 537.5 Crosses at KP 545.5 Crosses at KP 551.8 Crosses at KP 552.3 Crosses at KP 555.4 Crosses at KP 560.8 Crosses at KP 567 Crosses at KP 529.1 Crosses at KP 531 Crosses at KP 533.5 Crosses at KP 533.9 Crosses at KP 537.5

Page 11-230

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-4 Cont'd

Approximate Distance and Direction from application Corridor Site Description Age Requested Mitigation Crosses at KP 545.5 See above See above See above Crosses at KP 551.8 Crosses at KP 552.3 Crosses at KP 555.4 Crosses at KP 560.8 Crosses at KP 567 Crosses at KP 571.2 Crosses at KP 574.8 Crosses at KP 576.3 Crosses at KP 577.8 Crosses at KP 578.3 Crosses at KP 579.7 Crosses at KP 580.7 Crosses at KP 582 Crosses at KP 583.2 Crosses at KP 583.8 0.2 km south of KP 534.4 Trail junction Current None 0.4 km north of KP 583.2 to KP 583.8 Parallels from KP 551.8 to KP 552.3 Trail overlaps application Corridor Current None Parallels from KP 578.3 to KP 579.7 Source: Gitxsan Environmental Services 2013

Habitation Sites Campsites are used for hunting and trapping, often providing central access to numerous traplines. Campsites are also used as places to dress game and set up smokehouses to prepare fish.

The ancestral village of Gisgega’as is important to Gitxsan Nation, both for historical and cultural reasons. Gitxsan Nation have requested that absolute care be taken not to disturb the village in the course of any field assessments for the proposed Project. Community members indicate that the village was an occupation site for thousands of years, and that the surrounding regions are rich in archaeological sites and signs of early occupation. The Gisgega’as traditional village site is 0.6 km east of KP 537.

Gitxsan Nation identified several habitation sites during the TLU study for the proposed Project, detailed in Table 11.11-5 Gitxsan Nation expressed concerns regarding the possible increased access to the ancestral village of Gisgega’as due to Project construction, the destruction of cultural artifacts in surrounding areas, and possible illegal removal of cultural artifacts. They have requested avoidance of this area.

TABLE 11.11-5

HABITATION SITES IDENTIFIED BY GITXSAN NATION

Approximate Distance and Direction Requested from Application Corridor Description Age Mitigation 2.5 km south of KP 529.4 Abandoned habitation site Historic None 2 km south of KP 531.7, 2.2 km south of KP 532.2 0.8 km south of KP 526.3 Archaeological site Historic None 1 km north of KP 528.3 1.7 km south of KP 530.7 Crosses at KP 531.1 1 km south of KP 531.5 Crosses at KP 532.1 Crosses at KP 532.6 1.1 km south of KP 533.2 2 km north of KP 535.4

Page 11-231

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-5 Cont'd

Approximate Distance and Direction Requested from Application Corridor Description Age Mitigation 0.5 km south of KP 535.9 See above See above See above Crosses at KP 537.2 0.1 km south of KP 537.3 0.3 km north of KP 538.1 1 km south of KP 530.8 Cabin Historic/Current None Crosses at KP 531.2 1.1 km south of KP 533.3 1 km south of KP 533.6 1 km south of KP 533.9 0.5 km southeast of KP 535 5 km south of KP 573.2 1.2 km south of KP 573.8 1 km south of KP 575.9 0.8 km south of KP 575.9 0.6 km east of KP 537 Traditional village site of Gisgega’as Historic Avoidance Source: Gitxsan Environmental Services 2013

Plant Gathering Plant gathering continues to be an important traditional activity for Gitxsan Nation community members. Community members harvest a variety of plants for medicinal and nutritional purposes, including root vegetables, green vegetables, berries, fruits, and hemlock and other cambiums. Pine mushrooms, which require a lot of water, are vital to many community members since they are harvested and sold between August and November. Pine mushroom harvesting locations are proprietary. Because of their value as a source of income, the protection of the pine mushroom is an important consideration to Gitxsan Nation community members. Other culturally important plant species identified by Gitxsan Nation community members include wild rice, soap berries, Saskatoons, thimbleberries, blueberries (including low bush blueberries), huckleberries, high bush cranberries, wax berries (snow or ghost berries), and wild crab apples.

Medicinal plants identified during community interviews include devil’s club, water lily, poplar buds and juniper berries, alder, fir, arnica, trembling aspen, bearberry, birch fungus, black hawthorn, cow parsnip, high bush cranberry, horsetail, Indian hellebore, Labrador tea, lodgepole pine, red elderberry, Solomon’s seal, wild sarsaparilla, yarrow. These plants are harvested within Gitxsan Nation’s asserted traditional territories, and are highly prized for their medicinal properties. Cattail, red willow, devil’s club bark, cedar tips and spruce buds are boiled together and used in sweat lodge ceremonies. Gitxsan Nation community members harvest cedar which has important ceremonial uses. Every part of the cedar is used, including roots, bark, the wood and the withes. The wood is used for totem poles, ceremonial regalia, chests, bentwood boxes and building materials. Inner barks and roots of the cedar tree are used for weavings such as baskets and mats.

Gitxsan Nation identified two plant gathering sites during the TLU study for the proposed Project, detailed in Table 11.11-6.

TABLE 11.11-6

PLANT GATHERING SITES IDENTIFIED BY GITXSAN NATION

Approximate Distance and Direction Requested from application Corridor Site Description Age Mitigation 1.8 to 2 km south of KP 529.7 to KP 532.5 Berry patch Current None Crosses from KP 535 to KP 536.7 Source: Gitxsan Environmental Services 2013

Page 11-232

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

Community members expressed concern over the effects of logging and habitat disruption during proposed Project construction on many plant species, including berry patches, cedar and pine mushrooms. In addition, the community has concerns that pipeline construction will compound the effects of past logging in the area, and that increased access to highly proprietary pine mushroom patches may result in excess harvesting. Concerns regarding restoration were expressed and community members are worried that replanting of corridors will not happen quickly enough. Community members would like to know what will be done with harvested timber if a corridor is cut through wooded areas. Community members added that pine mushroom habitat will not recover after construction activities and poplar bud harvesting will be impacted since poplar trees grow along the application Corridor.

Hunting Gitxsan Nation community members reported that goat, caribou, deer, porcupine, beaver, groundhog, lynx and rabbit are hunted, although caribou are scarce due to loss of habitat and low reproduction rates. Black bear is also less commonly hunted for sustenance, based on seasonal availability, regional occurrence and personal taste. Birds, including blue grouse, grouse, goose, duck, ptarmigan, swan and on occasion, seagull are all traditionally harvested. Wetland ecosystems are prime moose habitat and are used in all seasons for foraging. Community members indicated that moose is often hunted and the meat is distributed to friends and family members who are unable to hunt.

Due to the development of new roadways from forestry activity in the region, increased access to many previously remote locations have caused a reported increase in trapping and hunting.

Gitxsan Nation identified several wildlife habitats used for hunting and trapping during the TLU study for the proposed Project, detailed in Table 11.11-7.

TABLE 11.11-7

WILDLIFE HABITAT USED FOR HUNTING AND TRAPPING IDENTIFIED BY GITXSAN NATION

Approximate Distance and Direction from application Corridor Description Age Requested Mitigation 2 km south of KP 572.2 to KP 573.8 Deer habitat Current None 1.1 km south of KP 574.7 to KP 575.4 0.5 km south of KP 575 to KP 576 1.2 km south of KP 577.3 to KP 578.3 1.5 km south of KP 577.3 to KP 577.9 Crosses at KP 577.7 to KP 578.3 2 km south of KP 578.2 to KP 579 2 to 3 km south of KP 482 to KP 484 Bear habitat Current Ensure continued access for black Crosses at KP 544.8 to KP 546.2 bears to waterways and salmon-rich Crosses at KP 540 to KP 542 streams. Crosses at KP 545 to KP 551.5 Crosses at KP 551.6 to KP 556.5 Crosses at KP 554.2 to KP 567 Crosses at KP 571.5 to KP 576.8 Crosses at KP 577.7 to KP 578.3 Crosses at KP 578.1 to KP 578.5 1 to 2 km north of KP 579.5 to KP 583.8 1 km south of KP 474.7 to KP 475.6 Moose habitat Current Avoid construction during May through from 0.5 km north to 5.5 km southeast of KP 505.1 June to avoid disturbing calving to KP 506.3 moose; 1 km south of KP 508.4 to KP 509.9 Preserve mineral licks where possible 0.2 km south of KP 522.5 by avoiding the disturbance of 1 km north of KP 524 to KP 526.8 drainage patterns and groundwater 2 km north of KP 529 to KP 534.2 Crosses at KP 534.2 to KP 537.8 Crosses at KP 538.1 to KP 541.5 less than 0.5 km north of KP 547.3 less than 0.5 km north of KP 548

Page 11-233

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-7 Cont'd

Approximate Distance and Direction from application Corridor Description Age Requested Mitigation less than 0.5 km north of KP 548.2 See above See See above 0.25 km north of KP 556.1 above less than 0.25 km north of KP 556.9 to KP 567.2 less than 0.25 km south of KP 566.9 to KP 567.2 KP 567.1 to KP 567.3 less than 0.1 km north of KP 568.7 to KP 569 less than 0.1 km south of KP 569.5 to KP 570 0.2 to 1.5 km north of KP 573.4 to KP 574.2 Crosses at KP 574.4 to KP 575 0.5 km north of KP 575.2 to KP 576.1 1.5 km north of KP 580 to KP 581.6 Crosses at KP 580.1 to KP 580.8 Crosses at KP 581 to KP 583 less than 1 km north of KP 583.1 to KP 584 less than 0.25 km south of KP 584.2 to KP 585.1 Crosses at KP 474 to KP 480 Mountain goat Current None 1 km south of KP 484.7 to KP 486.2 habitat 1 km north of KP 553.6 to KP 556.1 between 2.5 and 3 km south of KP 582.5 to KP 585 0.5 to 1.5 km south of KP 586 to KP 588 Crosses at KP 529 to KP 534.2 Wildlife habitat Current None Source: Gitxsan Environmental Services 2013

Community members expressed concerns that pipeline development will cause a reduction in moose habitat and that elk herds may abandon their home ranges if excessively disturbed.

Gitxsan Nation’s mitigation requests concerning hunting sites include: avoiding construction during May through June to avoid disturbing calving moose; preserving mineral licks where possible by avoiding the disturbance of drainage patterns and groundwater; and ensuring continued access for black bears to waterways and salmon-rich streams.

Fishing Fish are a staple food source for Gitxsan Nation community members and they have managed their fisheries for many generations through traditional sustainable practices. It is important to Gitxsan community members that waterways remain healthy ecosystems for multiple fish and wildlife species, to support vegetation, and be preserved as travelways during winter months. Sockeye, coho, steelhead, spring, pink, chum, dolly varden, white fish, squawfish, eulachon, and brook trout are all food sources and are culturally important to the community. The sockeye salmon run provides Gitxsan Nation community members with the majority of high quality dried fish needed to sustain the community over the winter months and is important for trade with other Aboriginal groups and between community members.

Gitxsan Nation identified several waterways used for fishing during the TLU study for the proposed Project, detailed in Table 11.11-8.

TABLE 11.11-8

WATERWAYS USED FOR FISHING IDENTIFIED BY GITXSAN NATION

Approximate Distance and Direction from Application Corridor Site Description Age Requested Mitigation 50 km south of KP 568 Babine Lake Current None Crosses at KP 537.8 Babine River Current None Crosses at KP 576.6 Clifford Creek Current None

Page 11-234

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-8 Cont'd

Approximate Distance and Direction from Application Corridor Site Description Age Requested Mitigation Crosses at KP 582 Beaver Lodge Creek - Current None supports salmon spawning areas Crosses at KP 583.2 Brown Paint Creek Current None Crosses at KP 571.2 Corral Creek Current None Crosses at KP 561 Cullen Creek Current None Crosses at KP 556.2 Carrigan Creek Current None 5.1 km south of KP 563 Elizabeth Lake Current None Crosses at KP 495.9 Hanawald Creek- salmon and Current None trout spawning areas Crosses at KP 567.3 Ironside Creek Current None Crosses at KP 578.1 Kispiox River Current None 28 km south of KP 571 Kitwancool Lake Current None Location unknown Klen’sun Current None 5.5 km south of KP 559 Kline Lake Current None Location unknown Little Fish Lake Current None Location unknown Lukdeduk Current None 6.8 km south of KP 568 Mitten Lake Current None Location unknown Naadaxteet Gillian Lagit Current None 0.1 km northwest of KP 537.8 Sam Green Creek Current None 23 km south of KP 520 Shegunia (Salmon) River Current None Crosses at KP 507 Shelagyote River Current None Crosses at KP 544.5 Skeena River Current None 0.2 km south of KP 574.5 to KP 576 Skunsnat Creek Current None 0.5 km south of KP 574 Skunsnat Lake Current None 21 km south of KP 532 Sterritt Creek Current None 13 km north of KP 600 Stevens Lake Current None Crosses at KP 579.8 Steep Canyon Creek Current None 12.5 km northwest of KP 600 Swan Lake Current None 2.4 km north of KP 580 Sweetin River Current None Location unknown Twin Lakes Current None Source: Gitxsan Environmental Services 2013

Community members expressed concerns that fish stocks are low, and fewer fish are returning each year. Other concerns regarding fishing include construction disturbance along waterways, water and water quality, erosion along the Shelagyote River bank, and disturbance to the Babine/Skeena confluence spawning area.

Gitxsan Nation’s mitigation requests concerning fishing sites include: that all water and high value spawning areas be avoided; environmental monitors be employed to ensure integrity of habitats and water quality; construction should avoid following watercourses; damage to water crossings should be avoided or reduced as much as possible; construction be kept at least 100 m from marshlands and waterways; and moving the line slightly to reduce contact with watercourses. Community members also request that the felling of tress along the waterways or marshes be prohibited because riparian vegetation cools the water for its inhabitants in the summer and provides shelter and warmth in winter.

Trapping Gitxsan Nation community members report that porcupine, beaver, groundhog, lynx and rabbit are trapped for sustenance. Muskrat, wolverine and squirrel are also hunted for sustenance although less commonly, based on seasonal availability, regional occurrence and personal taste. Animals trapped for fur and used in traditional trading and for supplemental income include marten, fox, fisher, wolf, mink, coyote, otter, weasel, rat and mouse.

Page 11-235

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

Community members report that they trap mink and marten around the Kispiox River and Skunsnat Creek from KP 574.1 to KP 576.1. No mitigation was requested for trapping sites by Gitxsan Nation.

Gathering Places Gitxsan Nation community members did not identify known locations of any culturally important gathering places within Gitxsan Nation asserted traditional territories. No mitigation was requested for gathering sites by Gitxsan Nation.

Sacred Sites The lands bordering Ironside Creek, from KP 567 through to KP 571, has been identified as a site of cultural importance. No mitigation was requested for sacred sites by Gitxsan Nation.

11.11.2.7 Issues, Concerns and Resolutions Key issues and concerns raised by Gitxsan Nation are provided in Section 11.19. This information was collected primarily through consultation activities with Gitxsan Nation and through their participation on biophysical field studies for the proposed Project (see Section 3.2.2 ) and their preliminary TLU study mapping. WCGT’s responses to these key issues and concerns raised are also provided in Section 11.19 as well as cross-references to where these issues are considered in the application.

11.11.3 Potential Effects to Aboriginal Interests The identification of Gitxsan Nation’s present, past and anticipated future uses and traditional use of the proposed Project area described in Sections 11.11.1 and 11.11.2 was conducted through literature/desktop review, biophysical field participation and a review of Gitxsan Nation’s Project-specific TLU study and socio-economic study. The issues identified from these sources also have informed the potential effects of the proposed Project on Gitxsan Nation’s identified Aboriginal Interests (Section 11.11.2). Where potential interactions were likely to occur, the potential effect is identified in Table 11.11-9. Table 11.11-9also identifies specific geographic areas compiled from these sources to be important (as available) as well as the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate those effects. Where there is overlap between an Aboriginal interest and a VC, the information from other Sections of the application are cross-referenced and summarized in Table 11.11-9.

Based on the information collected to date and presented in Section 11.11.1.3, known interactions of the proposed Project with Gitxsan Nation’s Aboriginal Interests include crossings of trapping sites from KP 574.1 to KP 576.1, berry patches from KP 535 to KP 536.7 and Fishing sites at KP 495.9, KP 507, KP 537.8, KP 544, KP 556.2, KP 561, KP 567.3, KP 571.2, 5KP 576.6, KP 578.1, KP 579.8, KP 582 and KP 583.2. A number of hunting sites are crossed by the pipeline including general hunting sites from KP 529 to KP 534.2, and specific hunting sites associated with deer habitat at KP 577.7 to KP 578.3, bear habitat at KP 544.8 to KP 546.2, KP 540 to KP 542, KP 545 to KP 551.5, KP 551.6 to KP 556.5, KP 554.2 to KP 567, KP 571.5 to KP 576.8, KP 577.7 to KP 578.3, KP 578.1 to KP 578.5, moose habitat at KP 534.2 to KP 537.8, KP 538.1 to KP 541.5, KP 574.4 to KP 575, KP 580.1 to KP 580.8, KP 581 to KP 583, and mountain goat at KP 474 to KP 480. A number of trails and travels ways are crossed by the project, and are at , KP 482.6 to KP 483,KP 496.3, KP 501.9, KP 506.8, KP 507, KP 511.1, KP 514.2, KP 516, KP 518, KP 519.8, KP 522.1, KP 525.2, KP 529.1, KP 531, KP 533.5, KP 533.9, KP 537.5, KP 545.5, KP 551.8, KP 552.3, KP 555.4, KP 560.8, KP 567, KP 529.1, KP 531, KP 533.5, KP 533.9, KP 537.5, KP 545.5 , KP 551.8, KP 552.3, KP 555.4, KP 560.8, KP 567, KP 571.2, KP 574.8, KP 576.3 , KP 577.8, KP 578.3, KP 579.7, KP 580.7, KP 582, KP 583.2, and at KP 583.8 and two trails are paralleled by the project from KP 551.8 to KP 552.3 and from KP 578.3 to KP 579.7. Habitation sites crossed by the project include archaeological sites at KP 531.1, KP 532.1, KP 532.6, KP 537.2 and a cabin at KP 531.2. A sacred site is crossed from KP 567 to KP 571. At this time, no known gathering places are known to interact within 140 m of the proposed Project route (Kisgegas IR). As a result, no identified potential effects for these Aboriginal Interests have been identified. Should additional interactions on Aboriginal Interests be identified through ongoing consultation with Gitxsan Nation’s then the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate potential effects will be implemented as outlined in Table 11.11-9.

Page 11-236

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-9

POTENTIAL EFFECTS TO ABORIGINAL INTERESTS IDENTIFIED BY GITXSAN NATION

Page 11-237

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-9 Cont'd

Page 11-238

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-9 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Identified Interest: Trapping Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities and registered Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence trappers involved in the WCGT Aboriginal Engagement Program of subsistence RSA (trapping trapping work locations and construction schedules a minimum of 14 days prior activities during activities are activities to the commencement of construction. construction and known to occur • Prohibit the vandalism or theft of trapper equipment or trapped animals operations in the RSA, by Project workers. Report all violators to BC’s Fish and Wildlife (Section 6.1.5 - trapping sites authorities. Current Use of are known to • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of Lands and occur from new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Resources for KP 574.1 to Traditional • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where KP 576.1) Purposes). feasible. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of components/ trapping Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify trapping sites that subsistence RSA (trapping sites warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during sites are known measures: construction and to occur from − maintaining access to the trap line; operations KP 574.1 to − moving of trap line equipment by the trapper prior to construction; (Section 6.1.5 - KP 576.1). and Current Use of Lands and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Resources for participating Aboriginal communities. Traditional • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric Purposes). environment, vegetation, wetlands and wildlife (Sections 4.1, 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 of the application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence trapping activities and wildlife habitat. Identified Interest: Fishing Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA fishing schedules, as required, prior to the commencement of construction. activities during (subsistence activities • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of construction and fishing activities new clearing and land disturbance necessary. operations are known to • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where (Section 6.1.5 - occur within the feasible.¶. Current Use of RSA.Known Lands and • Prohibit recreational fishing in freshwater environments by project fishing sites Resources for personnel on or in the vicinity of the construction right-of-way, access occur at at Traditional roads, permanent facility sites, work camps and ancillary sites. The use KP 495.9 Purposes). of the construction right-of-way or Project access roads by Project KP 507KP 537. personnel for fishing is prohibited during the construction phases of the 8, KP 544. Project. KP 556.2 • KP 561 Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance KP 567.3 activities. KP 571.2 • Implement measures outlined in the finalized AMP (see the AMP 5KP 576.6 Framework [Section 6.1]) to prevent increased access along new KP 578.1KP 57 corridors created by the construction right-of-way and access roads, 9.8KP 582 thereby minimizing potential for effects on fish due to activities such as KP 583.2 fishing and off-road vehicle access (e.g., forded crossings).

Page 11-239

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-9 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of Operations components/ fishing sites Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify fishing sites that subsistence (cont’d) RSA (Known warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during fishing sites measures: construction and occur at at − recording and mapping of fishing locales; operations KP 495.9 − strict adherence to the regulations, standards and guidelines set (Section 6.1.5 - KP 507KP 537. by provincial and federal regulatory agencies for watercourse Current Use of 8, KP 544. crossings; and Lands and KP 556.2 Resources for − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by KP 561 Traditional participating Aboriginal communities. KP 567.3 Purposes). • KP 571.2 Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the marine 5KP 576.6 ecosystems, fish and wetlands (Sections 4.4, 4.5 and 4.7 of the KP 578.1KP 57 application, respectively). 9.8, KP 582 • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance KP 583.2) activities. Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence fishing activities and the aquatic environment. Identified Interest: Plant Gathering Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA plant schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of activities during (subsistence gathering construction. construction and plant gathering activities • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of operations activities are new clearing and land disturbance necessary. (Section 6.1.5 - known to occur • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Current Use of within the RSA. feasible. Lands and Known plant Resources for • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance gathering sites Traditional activities. occur from Purposes). • KP 535 to Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP KP 536.7). (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. Construction, All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of Operations components/ plant Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify plant gathering subsistence RSA (known gathering sites that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the resources during plant gathering sites following measures: construction and sites occur t − limiting the use of chemical applications; operations from KP 535 to − replacement of plant species during restoration; (Section 6.1.5 - Current Use of KP 536.7.) − avoidance of the site; and Lands and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Resources for participating Aboriginal communities. Traditional • All construction equipment must be clean and free of soil or vegetative Purposes). debris prior to its arrival on the construction site to reduce the risk of weed introduction. Any equipment which arrives in a dirty condition will not be allowed on the work site until it has been cleaned off at a suitable location. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of marine ecosystems, vegetation and wetlands (Sections 4.1, 4.6 and 4.7 of this application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence plant gathering activities, wetlands and vegetation.

Page 11-240

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-9 Cont'd

Page 11-241

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-9 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, All Project Reduced • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ use of Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction habitation site use RSA (habitation habitation schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction sitess are sites construction. and operations known to occur • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 - in the RSA new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of Archaeological • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Lands and habitation sites feasible. Resources for are known to Traditional • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable occur at Purposes). Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify habitation sites that KP 531.1, warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following KP 532.1, measures: KP 532.6, , − KP 537.2 and a detailed mapping, photographic recording and avoidance of the cabin is known location by the proposed development; to occur at − should avoidance of a site not be feasible, mitigation consisting of KP 531.2. detailed recording and controlled excavations may be implemented; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved rights-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority (e.g., MFLNRO or landowner). This restriction applies to all biophysical surveying and land surveying activities. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. Identified Interest: Cultural Pursuits Construction, All Project Disturbance • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disturbance of Operations components/ of gathering Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction gathering places RSA (gathering places schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction places exist construction. and operations within the RSA. • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 – there are no new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of gathering • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Land and places known to feasible. Resources for occur closer Traditional • than 140 m Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Purposes Effects from the Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify gathering places assessment). proposed that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the Project Route: following measures: Kisgegas IR) − detailed recording, mapping and avoidance; − assess visual impact; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved rights-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority (e.g., MFLNRO or landowner). This restriction applies to all biophysical surveying and land surveying activities. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric environment (Section 4.1 of this application). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities.

Page 11-242

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-9 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, All Project Disturbance • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disturbance of Operations components/ of sacred Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction sacred sites during RSA (sacred sites schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of construction and sites exist within construction. operations the RSA. A • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 – sacred site is new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of known to occur • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Land and from KP 567 to feasible. Resources for Traditional KP 571). • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Purposes Effects Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify sacred sites that assessment). warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following measures: − detailed recording, mapping and avoidance; − assess visual impact; − additional mitigation will be refined and optimized through community discussions; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved right-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric environment (Section 4.1 of this application). • Implement the contingency measures identified in the TLU Sites Discovery Contingency Plan (Section 5.15) in the event TLU sites not previously identified are found during construction. • If archaeological, paleontological or historical sites (e.g., modified bone, pottery fragments, fossils) are discovered during construction, suspend work in proximity (i.e., within 30 m). No work at that particular location shall continue until permission is granted by the appropriate regulatory authority. Follow the contingency measures identified in the Heritage Resources Discovery Contingency Plan (see Section 5.8). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. Notes: 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA. 2 Detailed mitigation are outlined in the proposed Project-specific EMPs (Appendices 3-A and 3-B of this application).

11.11.4 Mitigation and Environmental Management Strategies Consistent with the methodology described in Section 3.0, Table 11.11-9 summarizes the mitigation or environmental management strategies that address identified and potential effects to Gitxsan Nation’s Aboriginal Interests. Notably, WCGT has been refining the crossing design and routing in proximity to the Babine, Skeena and Kispiox Rivers in consultation with the Gitxsan Heritary Chiefs to minimize potential impacts to traditional activities and resources.

Should additional interactions on Aboriginal Interests be identified through ongoing consultation with Gitxsan Nation then the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate potential effects will be implemented as outlined in Table 11.11.9 and refined on a site specific basis where agreed upon.

Page 11-243

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

11.11.5 Characterization of Effects to Aboriginal Interests after Mitigation This subsection of the Application presents an assessment of the potential residual effects of the proposed Project on Gitxsan Nation’s Aboriginal Interests via the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC.

Evaluation of Potential Residual Effects In accordance with the methodology set out in section 3.0, all assessment criteria were considered when determining each residual effect, however, the most influential assessment criteria were magnitude and reversibility. Qualitative determinations incorporate professional judgment, which allows for integration of all effects criteria ratings to provide relevant conclusions that are sensitive to context and facilitate decision-making (Lawrence 2007).

The potential residual effects of the proposed Project on Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC are discussed in a qualitative manner by analysing the relative likelihood and consequence of each of the potential effects occurring on short segments of the proposed Project. Context is not an appropriate factor for the characterization of social effects and is, therefore, not provided. WCGT has consulted with participating Gitxsan Nation members who have historically used or currently use the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC RSA to identify potential resource use issues, features and activities which may be disturbed by construction and cleanup activities of the proposed Project. The implementation of appropriate mitigation will reduce the potential adverse effects arising from construction and operations activities within the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes LSA and RSA.

The known potential residual adverse effects of the proposed Project on Gitxsan Nation’s Aboriginal Interests are:

• disruption of subsistence activities during construction and operations;

• alteration of subsistence resources (specifically trapping sites from KP 574.1 to KP 576.1, berry patches from KP 535 to KP 536.7, fishing sites at KP 495.9, KP 507, KP 537.8, KP 544.5, KP 556.2, KP 561, KP 571.2, KP 567.3, KP 576.6, KP 578.1, KP 579.8, KP 582, and at KP 583.2, and hunting sites associated with good wildlife habitat from KP 529 to KP 534.2,and specific huting sites associated with deer habitat at KP 577.7 to KP 578.3, bear habitat at KP 544.8 to KP 546.2, KP 540 to KP 542, KP 545 to KP 551.5, KP 551.6 to KP 556.5, KP 554.2 to KP 567, KP 571.5 to KP 576.8, KP 577.7 to KP 578.3, KP 578.1 to KP 578.5, moose habitat at KP 534.2 to KP 537.8, KP 538.1 to KP 541.5, KP 574.4 to KP 575, KP 580.1 to KP 580.8, KP 581 to KP 583, and mountain goat at KP 474 to KP 480) during construction and operations;

• disruption of trail and travelway use,(specially trails crossed at KP 482.6 to KP 483:,KP 496.3, KP 501.9, KP 506.8, KP 507., KP 511.1, KP 514.2, KP 516, KP 518, KP 519.8, KP 522.1, KP 525.2, KP 529.1, KP 531, KP 533.5, KP 533.9, KP 537.5, KP 545.5, KP 551.8, KP 552.3, KP 555.4, KP 560.8, KP 567, KP 529.1, KP 531, KP 533.5, KP 533.9, KP 537.5, KP 545.5 , KP 551.8, KP 552.3, KP 555.4, KP 560.8, KP 567, KP 571.2, KP 574.8, KP 576.3 , KP 577.8, KP 578.3, KP 579.7, KP 580.7, KP 582, KP 583.2, and at KP 583., 8, and two trails paralleled by the project Project Route from KP 551.8 to KP 552.3 and from KP 578.3 to KP 579.7) during construction and operations;

• disruption of habitation site use (specifically a habitation sites at KP 531.1, KP 532.1, KP 532.6, , KP 537.2 and at KP 531.2) during construction and operations;

• disturbance of gathering places during construction and operations; and

• disturbance of sacred sites during construction and operations.

Page 11-244

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

A qualitative evaluation informed by the technical (quantitative) EAs was determined to be the most appropriate method to evaluate potential residual adverse effects of the proposed Project on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC. The determination considers:

• feedback from Gitxsan Nation;

• the established or accepted thresholds and standards for environmental VCs, since the potential Project-related effects on current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes are expected to be related to the availability, sensitivity and resiliency of environmental resources that support these activities;

• relevant land use planning objectives and strategies (see Section 6.1.4);

• previous EAs reviewed and approved under provincial environmental regulatory processes, where appropriate; and

• the professional judgment of the assessment team that includes members with over 15 years of pipeline construction and environmental and socio-economic impact assessment experience.

As indicated by the cross-references present in Table 11.11-3, all components of the biophysical environment are understood to support the land base and habitat conditions essential to the practice of traditional activities. Therefore, many potential residual effects discussed below, although presented with respect to current use of land and resources for traditional purposes, are assessed in consideration of all pertinent biophysical resources known or assumed to be of importance to Gitxsan Nation for traditional use.

Table 11.11-10 provides a summary of the evaluation of the potential residual social effects of the construction and operations of the proposed Project on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes. The rationale used to evaluate each of the residual social effects is provided below.

TABLE 11.11-10

EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL EFFECTS OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Temporal Context 1

Potential Residual Effects Spatial Boundary Spatial Duration Frequency Reversibility Magnitude Probability Confidence 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Subsistence Activities 1.1 Disruption of subsistence activities. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High High 2 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Subsistence Resources 2.1 Alteration of subsistence resources. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short to long-term Medium High Moderate 3 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Trails and Travelways 3.1 Disruption of trail and travelway use. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 4 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Habitation Sites 4.1 Disruption of habitation site use. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 5 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Cultural Sites 5.1 Disturbance of gathering places. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 5.2 Disturbance of sacred sites. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate Notes: 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA.

Page 11-245

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation of existing activities or reasonably foreseeable developments acting in combination with the proposed Project, as well as the cumulative effect and, if warranted, additional mitigation.

An evaluation of the proposed Project’s contribution to cumulative effects was conducted. Details of the evaluation are also discussed in each of the following subsections.

Activities and Projects Considered for the Cumulative Effects Assessment The list of potential projects and activities outlined in Appendix 3-E were reviewed to determine which projects and activities are located within the RSA for Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes. This will facilitate the identification of any overlapping residual effects from other projects and activities on Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes.

Appendix 3-E provides a list of the reasonably foreseeable developments located within the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA considered in the evaluation of cumulative effects on the KIs. A description of these developments is provided in Section 3.0 and shown on Appendix 3-F.

The potential residual effects for Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes were described in Section 11.11.3 and appear in Table 11.11-11 along with the identification of potential projects and activities that could act in combination with the proposed Project.

TABLE 11.11-11

POTENTIAL RESIDUAL EFFECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS OF THE PROJECT ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES CONSIDERED FOR THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

Page 11-246

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-11 Cont'd

Potential Existing Activity/Reasonably Foreseeable Residual Project Spatial Temporal Potential Developments Acting in Combination with the Effect Activity Boundary1 Boundary Cumulative Effect Proposed Project Disruption of All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock trail and components operations disruption of trail grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial travelway use and travelway use development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Disruption of All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock habitation site components operations disruption of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial use habitation site use development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Disturbance All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock of gathering components operations disturbance of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial places gathering places development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Disturbance All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock of sacred components operations disturbance of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial sites sacred sites development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Note: 1 RSA = Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA.

Table 11.11-12 describes additional mitigation that the proposed Project will implement to manage the risk of potential cumulative effects on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes. After implementation of proposed mitigation, residual cumulative effects on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes are described.

Page 11-247

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-12

MITIGATION FOR POTENTIAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS AND IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Potential Cumulative Effect Additional Mitigation Potential Residual Cumulative Effect Cumulative disruption of • Continue to notify Gitxsan Nation of the schedule updates for the proposed Project contribution to cumulative effects subsistence activities Project when changes occur. on disruption of subsistence activities • Communicate with Gitxsan Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative alteration of • Consult with Gitxsan Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable Project contribution to cumulative subsistence resources future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any alteration of subsistence resources cumulative concerns related to the habitation sites within the RSA. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disruption of trail • Continue to notify Gitxsan Nation of the schedule updates for the proposed Project contribution to cumulative and travelway use Project when changes occur. disruption of trail and travelway use • Consult with Gitxsan Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the trails and travelways within the RSA. • Communicate with Gitxsan Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disruption of • Continue to notify Gitxsan Nation of the schedule updates for the proposed Project contribution to cumulative habitation site use Project when changes occur. disruption of habitation site use • Consult with Gitxsan Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the habitation sites within the RSA. • Communicate with Gitxsan Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disturbance of • Continue to notify Gitxsan Nation of the schedule updates for the proposed Project contribution to cumulative gathering places Project when changes occur. disturbance of gathering places • Consult with Gitxsan Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the gathering places within the RSA. • Communicate with Gitxsan Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules.

Cumulative disturbance of • Continue to notify Gitxsan Nation of the schedule updates for the proposed Project contribution to cumulative sacred sites Project when changes occur. disturbance of sacred sites • Consult with Gitxsan Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the sacred sites within the RSA. • Communicate with Gitxsan Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Note: 1 RSA = Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA.

Evaluation of Potential Residual Cumulative Effects Table 11.11.13 provides a summary of the evaluation of the potential cumulative environmental effects of the proposed Project on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC. Summary of Assessment of Potential Effects on Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Page 11-248

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.11-13

EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Temporal Context 1

Potential Residual Cumulative Effect(s) Spatial Boundary Spatial Duration Frequency Reversibility Magnitude Probability Confidence 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Subsistence Activities 1.1 Project contribution to cumulative effects on disruption of RSA Short-term Isolated Short-term Medium High Moderate subsistence activities. to periodic 2 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Subsistence Resources 2.1 Project contribution to cumulative alteration of RSA Short-term Isolated Long-term Medium High Moderate subsistence resources. to periodic 3 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Trails and Travelways 3.1 Project contribution to cumulative disruption of trail and RSA Short-term Isolated Short-term Medium High Moderate travelway use. to periodic 4 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Habitation Sites 4.1 Project contribution to cumulative disruption of habitation RSA Short-term Isolated Short-term Medium High Moderate site use. to periodic 5 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Cultural Sites 5.1 Project contribution to cumulative disturbance of RSA Short-term Isolated Short-term Medium High Moderate gathering places. to periodic 5.2 Project contribution to cumulative disturbance of sacred RSA Short-term Isolated Short-term Medium High Moderate sites. to periodic Note: 1 RSA = Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA.

Project Contribution to Cumulative Effects on Disruption of Subsistence Activities As discussed in Section 11.11.3, the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes LSA and RSA are used for various subsistence activities including hunting, fishing, trapping and plant gathering. These subsistence activities will be disturbed during the construction and operations phases of the proposed Project at particular locations and specific times.

Reasonably foreseeable developments may also disturb subsistence activities (Appendix 3-E). For example, multiple pipeline projects such as the Coastal GasLink Pipeline Project (Coastal GasLink Pipeline Ltd.), Prince Rupert Gas Transmission (Prince Rupert Gas Transmission Ltd.), North Montney Project (NGTL), and Enbridge NGP (Northern Gateway Pipelines) will cross some of the same asserted traditional territories as the Gitxsan Nation by the proposed Project. Existing activities contributing to disturbances of nature-based activities include natural resource, and oil and gas developments. Existing and reasonably foreseeable developments occurring within the wider Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA will contribute to cumulative disruptions to subsistence activities at the regional scale.

The mitigation proposed in Table 11.11-12 will reduce the proposed Project-related cumulative effects on disruption of subsistence activities. WCGT will continue to notify Gitxsan Nation of the schedule updates for the proposed Project when changes occur and review the proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules.

As identified in Tables 11.11-10 and 11.11-13, there are no situations where there is a high probability of occurrence of a permanent or long-term social effect or cumulative effect on the Current Use of Land and

Page 11-249

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

Resources for Traditional Purposes VC of high magnitude that cannot be technically or economically mitigated.

The identification of issues raised and potential effects to Gitxsan Nation’s Aboriginal Interests did not identify any interactions not already identified in Section 6.1.5 (Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes Effects Assessment). The assessment of potential effects on Gitxsan Nation’s Aboriginal Interests is consistent with the assessment of potential effects on Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes provided in Section 6.1.5. The characterization of effects with regard to Gitxsan Nation’s Aboriginal Interests remain fully consistent with Section 6.1.5. Readers should refer to Section 6.0 for the complete assessment discussion of the potential adverse residual social effects listed above, which includes the characterization of these potential adverse residual social effects, the determination of significance and confidence in the prediction as well as the rationale for the determination of significance.

11.11.6 Other Interests of Gitxsan Nation and Mitigation The identification of issues raised by Gitxsan Nation with respect to potential environmental, economic, social, heritage and health effects of the proposed Project did not identify any interactions not already identified in Sections 11.11.3 and 11.19. Readers should refer to the Sections of the application cross- referenced in Table 11.11-9 for the complete effects assessment discussion related to each of Gitxsan Nation’s other identified interests.

11.12 Gitanyow Nation The following Sections report on the results of the Aboriginal Consultation Plan for Gitanyow Nation. "Gitanyow Nation” refers to Gitanyow (and to the extent directed by the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs, Village Council)".

11.12.1 Background Information This Section provides available background information that describes the practices, traditions or customs that Gitanyow Nation is currently engaging in within the vicinity of or in relation to, the proposed Project area.

The literature/desktop review was conducted in a manner consistent with the methods described in Section 3.2 of the application.

11.12.1.1 Community Profile Gitanyow Village, also known as Kitwancool, is located 20 km north of Gitwangak (or Kitwanga), and approximately 140 km northeast of Terrace, B.C. Gitanyow Nation land is comprised of three reserves situated in the Skeena and Nass river areas, specifically in the mid-Nass River watershed, and upper Kitwanga and upper Kispiox rivers. Gitanyow Nation has 822 band members (AANDC 2013). Gitanyow Nation cultural heritage is closely tied to the Gitxsan Nation, however, the Gitanyow Nation have remained independent of the Gitxsan Nation, due to issues of territorial boundaries and rights date back to the fur trade era (Rescan 2012b).

The traditional language of Gitanyow Nation is the Gitwangak dialect of Gitxsanimxw, which is part of the Tsimshiani language family. Approximately 25% of Gitanyow Nation houses (huwilp) speak Gitxsanimxw fluently, and just over half of the youth understand some words and phrases, with 25% being taught the language in school. The majority of youth report wanting to learn Gitxsanimxw, and some are learning through traditional song, drumming, dance and singing. Additionally, language revival efforts have been made available online and through social media (Avanti Mining inc. [Avanti] 2011).

Gitanyow Nation’s governance system is comprised of hierarchical and matrilineal clans (pdeek) and houses (wilp). There are eight Gitanyow Nation wilp (houses): four belong to the wolf clan (Lax Gibuu); and four to the frog clan (Lax Ganada). The fireweed clan did not have any territorial control, and thus the wolf and frog clans emerged dominant and each of the eight wilp now associates with either wolf or frog (Rescan 2012b; Avanti Mining inc. 2011). Each house has oral histories (adawaak), ancient songs, wilp

Page 11-250

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

crests (ayuuks), poles (git’mgan) and territories (lax yip). These are recorded on the Git’mgan, which confirms the wilp’s authority (daxgyet) over its territory.

Houses are governed by eight Hereditary Chiefs (Simooghet), who carry the wilp name, in addition to sub chiefs and members. Hereditary Chiefs and their traditional law (ayoowkwx) remain strong within Gitanyow Nation culture, with feasts (li’ligit) at the core of their governance system. Gitanyow Nation Hereditary Chiefs have numerous responsibilities within their wilp, including maintaining supernatural connectedness and well-being, showing respect for animals and spirits in the harvesting of all territorial resources, conducting ceremonies and dances, initiating young people into ritual roles, and leading secret societies (Rescan 2012b). If a Chief or a sub chief dies, the wilp gathers and there is open discussion regarding succession. Succession is based upon certain criteria as defined by the elders, who also know the criteria to succeed a Chief. The Chiefs are responsible for dealing with the governments, other nations and industry, with decisions made collectively and openly within the Houses. The office of the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs entered the treaty process in December 1993 and is now in stage four of the six stage treaty process. The huwilp are governed by the Gitanyow Huwilp Society, which is a central body to represent the huwilp on matters which affect numerous wilp (Rescan 2012b).

Gitanyow Nation Huwilp territorial boundaries are summarized as follows: Wii’Litswx territory is located south of Meziadin Lake to south of Bowser Lake. The territory south of Meziadin Lake became Wii’Litswx territory after an 1860 peace ceremony with the Tsetsaut, who were traditional trading partners for eulachon oil in the area. Gwass Hlaam territory covers Nine Mile Creek to Derrick Lake, the Kitwanga River, and the east side of Kitwancool Lake and Cranberry River. Gitanyow village is in Gwass Hlaam. Malii territory is from the Sweeten River to the Brown Bear and Kwinageese Rivers. Haizimsque territory includes Swan Lake and Swan Lake Provincial Park. Gamlaxyeltxw territory includes the Cranberry River near its confluence with the Nass River, and the east and west sides of the Nass to south of the Meziadin River. Luuxhon territory includes the Kinskuch River and the east portion of the Nass River into which the Kinskuch River flows. Gwinuu territory extends from the west shore of Kitwancool Lake/Kitwanga River to the Cranberry River. Lastly, Wataxhayetsxw territory is on the east side of the Kiteen River and Ridge, and the Nass River. Gitanyow Village is located directly upstream from the junction of Kitwanga River and Kitwancool Creek (Philpot 2006).

Gitanyow Nation’s economy is focused on fishing, hunting, trapping, and medicinal and food plant gathering. The eight huwilp continue to rely on these traditional resources within their respective territories both culturally and economically, with fish being the primary food resource. Distribution of huwilp territory resources at feasts is pivotal to Gitanyow social structure and trade.

11.12.1.2 Asserted Traditional Territory Gitanyow Nation traditional territories are a complex patchwork of overlapping tenure. Two land-tenure systems simultaneously operate within the Gitanyow Nation traditional territories, a hereditary system and Government of British Columbia cadastral system. under the cadastral system, the Gitanyow Nation has 3 reserves, including: Gitanyow 1 (463.10 ha), Gitanyow 2 (115.30 ha) and Gitanyow 3A (272 ha). Following the hereditary system, Gitanyow has 8 wilps, these are Wilp Lax Gibuu of Gwass Hlaam, Wii Litsxw, Malii, and Haizimsque and the Wilp Lax Ganeda of Gamlakyeltxw, Gwinuu, Luuxhon and Watakhayetsxw (Gitanyow Nation 2014). A map of Gitanyow Nation asserted traditional territory, including wilp boundaries, and also showing Indian Reserves and Aboriginal Communities is provided below (Figure 11.12-1).

Page 11-251

March 2014 ¯ FIGURE 11.12-1 GITANYOW NATION ASSERTED B ell-i TRADITIONAL TERRITORY rvin g R PROPOSED WESTCOAST iv CONNECTOR GAS er TRANSMISSION PROJECT

8018

Application Routes ass Rive Cypress to Cranberry Route N r Kitsault Route Kitsault Marine Route Nasoga Route Nasoga Marine Route Alternate Route

Project Facilities ^_ Prince Rupert LNG )" K1-K4 Compressor Stations )" Allaasskkaa ! K5B Compressor Station )" ((U..SS..A..)) Stewart K5A Compressor Station UV892 Highway Road Railway Watercourse Waterbody Municipality First Nation Land UV37 Park/Protected Area Gitanyow Nation Asserted Traditional Territory Ba SCALE: 1:850,000 bi ne km R KP 600 KP 550 iv 0 5 10 15 20 .! .! e r (All Locations Approximate)

! Cranberry .! Junction K5B KP 622 NAD83 BC Albers Route current to February 5, 2014 ! KP 680.4 Hillshade: TERA Environmental Consultants, derived from Alice Arm .! Natural Resources Canada 2008; Highways/Roads: ESRI 2005; Railways: United States National Imagery and d ! )" x KP 650 Mapping Agency 2000; Hydrography: IHS Inc. 2004; m

. Municipalities and Regional Districts: BC Forests, Lands and w Kitsault .! Natural Resource Operations 2007; Populated Places: o y Natural Resources Canada 2010; First Nation Land: n Government of Canada 2014; Treaty Settlement Land: IHS a t i Inc. 2013; Parks/Protected Areas, Concervancy Areas: BC G Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations 2008. _ 1 _

2 Although there is no reason to believe that there are 1

_ any errors associated with the data used to generate 1 this product or in the product itself, users of these data 1 g i are advised that errors in the data may be present. F _ 8 1

0 Mapped By: AJS Checked By: JW 8 t \ ! ! 1 . ! 1 GITANYOW 3A Kispiox n

o KP 650 i Fort Nelson t c B R IT I S H e S _ s

e C O LU MB I A r Fort u GITANYOW 1 g i

F Map Extent ! St. John _ New Hazelton A Hazelton ! ! E ! \ Gitlaxt'aamiks 0 Dawson

1 ! v

e !

r Creek \ Gitwinksihlkw U .! ! L

T ! \ KP 50 r Prince

S e AB

E iv Prince L I R Rupert F P _ ss George P a a A c ! M N GITANYOW 2 i \ 16 f i 8 c Williams 1 UV 0 O 8

\ Lake c Kamloops P ! e !

M a -

S n I ! Kelowna ! G .! \ : P ! Vancouver US A ! Victoria Kelowna

! March 2014 ¯ FIGURE 11.12-2 GITANYOW WILP B ell-i BOUNDARIES rvin g R PROPOSED WESTCOAST iv CONNECTOR GAS er TRANSMISSION PROJECT

8018

Application Routes ass Rive Cypress to Cranberry Route Wii N r Litsxw Kitsault Route Malii Kitsault Marine Route Axwindesxw Nasoga Route Nasoga Marine Route Alternate Route

Project Facilities ^_ Prince Rupert LNG Allaasskkaa )" K1-K4 Compressor Stations ! )" ((U..SS..A..)) Stewart K5B Compressor Station )" K5A Compressor Station

UV892 Highway Gwaas Hlaam Road Bii Yosxw Railway Watercourse Haitsimsxw Waterbody Municipality Malii Luux Hon Park/Protected Area Gamlakyeltxw Gitanyow Wilp Boundary

Ba SCALE: 1:850,000 bi ne km R KP 600 KP 550 iv 0 5 10 15 20 .! .! e r (All Locations Approximate)

! .! Cranberry Junction K5B KP 622 NAD83 BC Albers Route current to February 5, 2014 ! d KP 680.4 Hillshade: TERA Environmental Consultants, derived from x Alice Arm .! Natural Resources Canada 2008; Highways/Roads: ESRI m . ! 2005; Railways: United States National Imagery and p )" l i KP 650 Mapping Agency 2000; Hydrography: IHS Inc. 2004;

W Municipalities and Regional Districts: BC Forests, Lands and w Kitsault .! Natural Resource Operations 2007; Populated Places: o y Natural Resources Canada 2010; First Nation Land: n Government of Canada 2014; Treaty Settlement Land: IHS a t i Inc. 2013; Parks/Protected Areas, Concervancy Areas: BC G Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations 2008. _ Watakhayetsxw 2 Gwinuu _

2 Although there is no reason to believe that there are 1

_ any errors associated with the data used to generate 1 this product or in the product itself, users of these data 1 g i are advised that errors in the data may be present. F _ 8 1

0 Mapped By: AJS Checked By: JW 8 t \ ! ! 1 . ! 1 Kispiox n

o KP 650 i Fort Nelson t c B R IT I S H e S _ s

e C O LU MB I A r Fort u Gwaas-Hla'am g i

F Map Extent ! St. John _ New Hazelton A Hazelton ! ! E ! \ Gitlaxt'aamiks 0 Dawson

1 ! v

e !

r Creek \ Gitwinksihlkw U .! ! L

T ! \ KP 50 r Prince

S e AB

E iv Prince L I R Rupert F P _ ss George P a a A c ! M N i

\ f i 8 c Williams 1

0 O 8

\ Lake c Kamloops P ! e !

M a -

S n I ! Kelowna ! G .! \ : P ! Vancouver US A ! Victoria Kelowna

! Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

11.12.1.3 Traditional Land and Resource Use Setting Gitanyow Nation land use is seasonally driven, based on resource availability. In autumn the Bell Irving River near Bowser Lake, approximately 105 km north of KP 660 (Kitsault Option), brings abundant coho salmon. This influx of coho salmon also attracts grizzly bears into the area, where Gitanyow Nation members hunt them. Alpine blueberries are picked in the autumn before snowfall, and feasting begins late autumn into early winter. Steelhead ice fishing happens in the winter (Rescan 2012b). Gitanyow Nation community members use every portion of their territories for harvesting resources and performing cultural and spiritual practices (Philpot 2006).

By the early 1900s, European settlement in Gitanyow traditional territories was considerable, and the protection of resources was very important to Gitanyow Nation huwilp. Development intensified during the early 1900s, and by the 1950s clear-cutting was permitted on Gitanyow Nation territory. Industrial development introduced the wage economy in Gitanyow Nation and strained reliance on traditional practice and land resources. This did not eliminate traditional practice and land resources as traditional culture still thrives in Gitanyow Nation by means of feasting and teaching youth traditional practices (Avanti 2011, Rescan 2012b).

Trails and Travelways Many historic and modern trails and travelways in Gitanyow Nation territory connect fishing, hunting, gathering and trapping areas, as well as camps, villages and areas with a high concentration of culturally modified trees (CMT). Kitwancool trail (the “Grease Trail”) starts in Gitwangak, continues to Kitwancool Lake, heads west to Cranberry River’s junction with the Nass River, and on to aiyansh (Rescan 2012b). In the Cranberry-Kitwanga valleys some portions of the Kitwancool Trail remain untouched by development. Kitwancool Trail connected Grease Harbour on the Nass River with inland areas and was a major travel and trade route (Rescan 2012b).

Habitation Gitanyow Nation members have maintained traditional huwilp territories in the upper Nass region through oral histories, songs, and poles, as well as European and community created maps throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. oral histories tell that the Gitanyow Nation members once lived along the Nass River (near the coast), but warfare pushed them further into interior B.C. And a fortress was built on a hill at Kitwancool to protect their land (Avanti 2011).

Hunting Game, including moose, goat, black bear, grizzly bear, deer, waterfowl and marmots are important hunting species for Gitanyow Nation members. Hunting sites include Meziadin Lake, extending north to Surveyors Creek and Bell-Irving River. The Hanna and Tintina watersheds provide ideal grizzly bear hunting grounds because the abundance of salmon attracts grizzly bears. The grizzly bear is of particular importance to the Malii wilp as the grizzly is their house crest (Philpot 2006). The increase of human activity and habitat interference has meant caribou no longer migrate through Gitanyow Nation territory, and the moose population has declined (Rescan 2012b).

Trapping Since 1930 the Gitanyow Nation owns a single registered trap line that covers all of their traditional territory. Wildlife hunted on this trapline includes mink, marten, beaver and fox (Rescan 2012b). Trap lines were used predominantly after snowfall and following periods of feasting, usually January (Rescan 2012b).

Fishing The Kitwanga River was a main source of fish for Gitanyow Nation members. As a result, the main historic settlement of the Gitanyow Nation is within the Kitwanga Watershed along the “Grease Trail” between the Skeena and Nass rivers. This location is particularly rich with sockeye salmon originating from Kitwancool Lake. Sockeye is the fish of choice for Gitanyow Nation members because of its high nutritional value. The fattiness of sockeye also made it very good for smoking and drying (Kingston

Page 11-254

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

et al. 2003). Protecting the salmon spawning habitat is important to Gitanyow Nation huwilp, especially along the Cranberry and Kiteen rivers, and in Brown Bear Creek (Philpot 2006, Rescan 2012b).

Gitanyow Nation and the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans signed a Comprehensive Fisheries agreement on May 21, 1999. The agreement involves Gitanyow Nation members in the management and protection of the fish habitat and resources. The agreement also includes provisions regarding how many fish of each species Gitanyow Nation members can harvest each year, dates and times for harvesting, and waters in which Gitanyow Nation members can fish. The Gitanyow Fisheries authority (GFA) is managed by the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs office (GHCO) (Gitanyow Fisheries authority [Gitanyow] 2013; Kingston et al. 2003; Rescan 2012b) and states:

“…A driving force behind the creation of the GFA was the perilous state of the Kitwanga River sockeye salmon. This stock was historically a key food fish for the Gitanyow people, as well as a vital component of the highly productive Kitwanga River Watershed ecosystem. The Gitanyow have taken the lead by volunteering to not harvest Kitwanga sockeye as a Food, Social and Ceremonial (FSC) fish since the early 1970's” (Gitanyow 2013).

In 2002 the GFA performed three Treaty Related Measure Programs to explore rebuilding salmon stocks in the Kitwanga River Watershed. It hoped to raise public awareness of the depressed Kitwanga sockeye stocks by explaining the critical importance of spawners returning to their natal spawning grounds. Sports fishermen and native food fishers were asked by the GFA not to fish in the confluence of the Kitwanga to protect sockeye stocks. An 87% compliance rate was reported and in 2002 over 12,000 fry and smolts returned to the Kitwanga River mainstem (Kingston et al. 2003).

By 2010, the GFA had operated the Kitwanga River Salmon Enumeration Facility (KSEF) for 8 consecutive years. The purpose of the KSEF is to enumerate and collect biological information for sockeye, Chinook, chum, pink and coho salmon returning to the Kitwanga River. In 2010 the sockeye escapement of 20,804 including 338 hatchery sockeye was the highest ever recorded, indicating that “Kitwanga sockeye experienced very good ocean survival” (Kingston 2011).

Plant Gathering Gitanyow Nation members harvest devil’s club, water lily roots, hellebore, Labrador tea, nettles, soapberries, balsam bark, red alder bark and wild mint, in addition to other plants; they are used both medicinally and for food. Gitanyow Nation members pick berries seasonally. Berries harvested include blueberries, wild cranberries and soapberries. Pine mushroom harvesting is an important source of income in Gitanyow Nation traditional territories with coarse, well-drained soil, typically Western hemlock and Lodgepole pine forests (Rescan 2012b). Western cedar is used extensively in Gitanyow Nation culture, and historically provided “a decay resistant wood for houses, smokehouses, totems, bowls, and utensils” (Philpot 2006) and was also used for making clothing, mats, and baskets.

Gitanyow Nation huwilp territories are affected by logging, with 12 forest licences overlapping the territories (Marsden 2005). Cedar has been heavily logged from Gitanyow Nation traditional territory, raising concerns that it has prevented Gitanyow Nation members from carrying on cultural practices involving cedar (Philpot 2006).The Gitanyow Nation Hereditary Chiefs say that huwilp territory forestry development proceeds without consultation, and that “many Village sites, sacred sites, trails, cabins, traditional resource gathering sites have been destroyed by logging” (Marsden 2005). Among other points within a model for a new relationship with the Crown, the Gitanyow Nation Hereditary Chiefs want “joint land use planning for the Cranberry and Kispiox on Gitanyow Territories, and development of formal forestry consultation and accommodation agreements” (Marsden 2005). The office of the Gitanyow Nation Hereditary Chiefs states:

“…Gitanyow and the Skeena-Stikine forest District completed a draft Landscape Unit Plan for Gitanyow House territories within the Kispiox and Cranberry Timber Supply areas. The plan covers approximately fifty per cent of Gitanyow territories. Further work and resources are required to prepare for implementation, maintenance and evaluation of the completed plan. The Kalum forest District is also prepared to commit to a joint planning initiative on Gitanyow territories, which would cover the balance of the house territories” (Marsden 2005).

Page 11-255

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

The goal of these plans and agreements is to provide economic return to Gitanyow Nation huwilp for the purpose of maintaining Gitanyow Nation traditional economic systems and cultural practices (Avanti 2011; Devlin 2009; Marsden 2005; Philpot 2006). In 2008, the B.C. Supreme Court issued judgment in the case of Wii’Litswx v B.C. Minister of forests, in which the house of Wii’Litswx challenged the Minister of forests regarding the replacement of six forest licenses in Gitanyow Nation traditional territories. Judge Neilson concluded that the Crown had not carried out adequate consultation and due accommodation with Gitanyow Nation (Devlin 2009).

Gathering Places The GHCO reports that “many village sites, sacred sites, trails, cabins, [and] traditional resource gathering sites have been destroyed by logging” (Philpot 2006).

Sacred Sites Known sacred sites for the Gitanyow are petroglyphs near Cranberry River, and sites at Kitwancool Lake near Moonlit Creek and at Kitwancool Lake Island (Philpot 2006). Numerous archaeological sites exist throughout Gitanyow Nation traditional territory (Philpot 2006). Additionally, there are CMTs throughout Gitanyow Nation traditional territory, ranging in origin from 1846 to the present. Gitanyow huwilp have taken measures to protect their CMTs as an important cultural marker and proof of territory. The house of Gwass Hlaam has a formal CMT protection and management policy (Philpot 2006).

Where available, approximate distances and directions of specific geographic areas known to be used by Gitanyow Nation for traditional land and resource use in relation to the application Corridor centerline were determined based on the information compiled through a review of the available literature and are provided in Table 11.12-1.

TABLE 11.12-1

GITANYOW NATION TRADITIONAL LAND AND RESOURCE USE LOCATIONS WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL LAND AND RESOURCE USE REGIONAL STUDY AREA

Activity/Site Approximate Distance and Direction from the Proposed Project Description Trails/Travelways 1.8 km west of KP 622 Kitwancool Trail/“Grease Trail” (Gitwangak to Kitwancool Lake to Cranberry River at Nass River to aiyansh) Hunting 59 km north of KPK 661.6 Meziadin Lake (North to Surveyors Creek and Bell-Irving River) Fishing 21.3 km northwest of KP 611 Brown Bear Creek 1.8 km west of KP 622 Cranberry River 1 km west of KP 625 Kiteen River Sacred Sites 1.8 km west of KP 622 Petroglyphs near Cranberry River Sources: Rescan 2012b; Philpot 2006

11.12.2 Consultation Activities Undertaken This Section of the application summarizes the consultation activities undertaken by WCGT since April 17, 2012, when Gitanyow Nation was initially approached by WCGT. Gitanyow Nation was formally notified of the proposed Project on September 10, 2012, in alignment with the Aboriginal Consultation Plan for the proposed Project. The information in this Section is drawn from the May 15, 2013 (July 2013) and December 31, 2013 (March 2014) Aboriginal Consultation Reports for the proposed Project.

Page 11-256

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

11.12.2.1 Past and Planned Consultation Activities WCGT provided the proposed Project notification letter to Gitanyow Nation on September 10, 2012. WCGT has continually shared Project information with Gitanyow Nation since that date and will continue to do so as the proposed Project evolves.

WCGT first met with Gitanyow Nation on April 17, 2012 to share Project-related information, to determine the community’s interest and to develop a process for their involvement in proposed Project activities. Through a series of subsequent meetings both in-person, over the phone and via e-mail, Gitanyow Nation elected to participate in biophysical field studies through the GFA and to conduct a socio-economic study as well as a Lax’yip Cultural Impact study, which replaced their TLU for the proposed Project. To date, Gitanyow Nation has completed their socio-economic study and Lax’yip Cultural Impact study. The final results of the Lax’yip Cultural Imact study form the basis for on-going dialogue between WCGT and Gitanyow Nation to inform detailed planning for the proposed Project.

A Capacity Funding agreement was signed in March 2013. This funding agreement is to support ongoing consultation in meetings and other activities with WCGT and the regulatory agencies, related to the proposed Project and to identify relevant effects of the Project on the Gitanyow Nation, if any and identify and consider relevant mitigation to address those effects.

Throughout the consultation process, Gitanyow and WCGT have held discussions and met on various Project-related subjects. These discussions have included: review of results of archaeological assessment; facility tour in northeastern BC; helicopter tour of existing pipeline operations in northeastern BC; review of proposed route; stream crossings; geophysical surveys; contracting and employment opportunities; economic benefits; and routing of the proposed Project corridor as proposed by Gitanyow through their asserted traditional territory. The majority of engagement with Gitanyow has been regarding Gitanyow's interest in working with Spectra Energy to create a pipeline route that is in compliance with the Gitanyow Land Use Plan.

Gitnayow has expressed concerns that they would no longer be consulted on changes to the proposed route after the EAO process is complete. Gitanyow has also expressed concern about the ecological connectivity corridors defined in their Land Use Plan and how they will be impacted by the proposed right-of-way. Gitanyow is also concerned with the protection of heritage sites and have expressed particular concern about a CMT site located in their asserted territory.

Planned consultation activities by WCGT with Gitanyow Nation include: the distribution and review of a draft ancillary site map outlining the proposed features such as access roads, compressor stations, campsites, etc.; providing an overview of biophysical field data results compiled for the proposed Project; submission of Aboriginal Consultation Reports for review and comment; discussion of mitigation options; presentation on the process and content of the application for an EAC; discussion of training, employment and contracting opportunities; meeting about safety compliance for contracting and procurement; routing of the proposed Project corridor through Gitanyow lands, a community meeting and discussion of economic benefits.

11.12.2.2 Changes to the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Aboriginal Consultation Reports WCGT shared the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Aboriginal Consultation Reports (1 and 2) with Gitanyow Nation for review and comment prior to final submission to the EAO. Through consultation activities to date, Gitanyow Nation has identified proposed changes to the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Reports and its reports for the proposed Project.

Page 11-257

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-2

GITANYOW NATION REQUESTED CHANGES TO THE ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION PLAN/REPORT

Source of Change First Nation Comment Proponent Response Section Aboriginal Consultation It would be helpful to add a definition or • As the meaning of this term is so dependent on Aboriginal Plan criteria for the term “appropriate and the surrounding facts, it is not, by its very nature, Consultation Plan (September 1, 2013) reasonable” in reference to consultation capable of concise definition. The term is, in fact, and mitigation measures. This term is used used in only three places in the draft Plan, throughout the Draft Plan and Gitanyow always in the context of potential mitigation understands that this can have significant measures. What is appropriate and reasonable implications in practice, and that clear and as mitigation in a particular circumstance will be mutually agreed upon definition would be dependent on numerous factors which WCGT beneficial for WCGT, the BC and Gitanyow will need to discuss. Ultimately it is Environmental assessment office, and the the regulator (be that the EAO or the OGC) which Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs. decides, in the form of conditions, what is appropriate and reasonable. Given that the Draft Plan intended to • WCGT documents all comments received and Section 11 of the identify the entire consultation process for changes made to the Plan as a result, and this EA and the all of the affected First Nations and information will be included in the Plan which is Aboriginal Aboriginal organizations (24 in total), it filed with the EAO for all First Nations to see. Consultation Plan. would be beneficial to provide greater Where WCGT knows or understands that one clarity on how the various comments from change may adversely affect another, we will these First Nations and organizations will attempt to work through both parties (or more) to be incorporated fairly and equally into the come to a common understanding as to what is final Plan and how potential acceptable to all. inconsistencies will be addressed amongst affected First Nations. Given that the Draft Plan intended to • WCGT documents all comments received and Section 11 of the identify the entire consultation process for changes made to the Plan as a result, and this EA and the all of the affected First Nations and information will be included in the Plan which is Aboriginal Aboriginal organizations (24 in total), it filed with the EAO for all First Nations to see. Consultation Plan. would be beneficial to provide greater Where WCGT knows or understands that one clarity on how the various comments from change may adversely affect another, we will these First Nations and organizations will attempt to work through both parties (or more) to be incorporated fairly and equally into the come to a common understanding as to what is final Plan and how potential acceptable to all. inconsistencies will be addressed amongst affected First Nations. Given that Gitanyow and WCGT have • WCGT will add a line in the Plan stating that Section 11 of the recently signed a Consultation Process where agreements have been entered into EA nd Section C.3 agreement, it would be beneficial and between WCGT and FN’s, WCGT will live up to of the Aboriginal provide greater certainty to Gitanyow if a those agreements. Consultation Plan. clause was included somewhere in the Draft Plan that stipulates that part of the overall consultation process will include Spectra’s ongoing commitment to live up to the terms and objectives of any such signed agreements. Gitanyow is currently involved in several • Upon request, WCGT will attempt to provide Section 11 of the environmental assessments, and it would Gitanyow with traditional territory specific EA. be helpful if WCGT included in the Draft documents for review, recognizing however, that Plan some level of commitment to not all assessments can be separated to this separating out EA materials for review by level. As such, WCGT does not consider this to individual First Nation territory. be appropriate for inclusion in the Plan. Aboriginal Consultation Reference: Page 2 Part 1: • WCGT agrees that the EA process on its own Section 2.3 of the Plan “The EA process provides a mechanism to may not fulfill all consultation duties of the Crown. EA and (September 1, 2013) ensure that the Crown fulfills its duty to The above sentence will be changed to read Section B.1 of the consult with Aboriginal peoples.” It should “The EA process provides a mechanism to Aboriginal be clearly stated the EA process on its own support the Crown’s duty to consult with Consultation Plan. does not guarantee such a duty is fulfilled. Aboriginal peoples.”

Page 11-258

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-2 Cont'd

Source of Change First Nation Comment Proponent Response Section Aboriginal Consultation In many cases additional consultation and See above See above Plan accommodation measures are required. (September 1, 2013) Given the scale, proposed location, and (cont’d) potential impacts from the WCGT proposed project, it is anticipated that additional consultation and mitigation measures will be required for Gitanyow. WCGT should not assume that the EA process alone will fulfill the Crown’s duty to consult. Reference: Page 2 Part B-1: • We refer to our response to comment 3, namely Section 11 of the “The EAO may propose conditions for an that WCGT will add a line in the Plan stating that EA and environmental assessment certificate, if where agreements have been entered into Section B.1 of the issued in order to ensure that the Crown’s between WCGT and FN’s, WCGT will live up to Aboriginal duty to consult Aboriginal groups has been those agreements. Consultation Plan discharged.” Section C.3 of the It would be beneficial to add “The Aboriginal Proponent may also volunteer certain Consultation Plan conditions, under agreement with affected First Nations.” Gitanyow is hopeful that through the Consultation agreement with WCGT, and the commitment to reach an Environmental accord, may likely result in additional and ideally voluntary conditions can be included in the EAO Certificate. Reference: Page 4 Part 1: • It is incumbent upon the EAO under applicable Section 11 of the “Assessment of Consultation”. law to make a prima facie determination of EA and Gitanyow is requesting the addition of the strength of claim at the time the environmental Section C.1(e) of following consideration: “an assessment of assessment decisions are made, not the the Aboriginal the strength of claim of the affected FN to Proponent. As such, it is not for WCGT to Consultation Plan support the determination of the determine strength of claim. However, WCGT is appropriate level of consultation, as per quite prepared to consider any strength of claim relevant case law” (i.e., Haida spectrum). information that is provided by the Province. A The need for this clause is highlighted by new subsection will be added to Part C.1 of the the following point under Part 3 “Depending Plan referring to “any information provided to the on the appropriate level of consultation in Proponent by the Province related to the strength respect of each Aboriginal Community or of claim of Aboriginal Communities that assert Nisga’a Nation, the Proponent may engage Aboriginal rights or title;” with them through a variety of activities including.” Reference: Page 5 final paragraph • WCGT will add to the end of the above Section 11 of the “At an early stage in the consultation paragraph “Where the Province enters into EA and process, the Proponent will discuss with agreements with other Aboriginal Communities Section C.3 of the Aboriginal Communities and Nisga’a such as, for example, “Shared Decision Making Aboriginal Nation their preferred practices for agreements”, WCGT will abide by any provisions Consultation Plan engaging in consultation, receiving of such agreements that it is directed to by the information and providing feedback. The EAO.” Proponent will also ensure that consultation with Nisga’a Nation adheres to requirements of the Nisga’a Final agreement.”

Gitanyow is requesting the following addition at the end of the paragraph: “…and any Shared Decision Making agreements with affected First Nations.” Reference: Page 6 Part 4-C: • WCGT agrees that reference to “feedback Section 11 of the “The Proponent will create feedback mechanism” and “defined mechanism” in Part EA and mechanism that will provide information C.4(c) is confusing. The subparagraph can be Section C.4(c) of regarding issues and concerns that have written much more simply and directly as follows: the Aboriginal been raised to the Proponent Project team, Consultation Plan so that there is a defined mechanism in place to ensure the results of consultation are integrated in to project planning and design.”

Page 11-259

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-2 Cont'd

Source of Change First Nation Comment Proponent Response Section Aboriginal Consultation Gitanyow is requesting additional clarity on • “The Proponent will ensure that issues and See above Plan what is meant by “feedback mechanism” concerns that have been raised during (September 1, 2013) and “defined mechanism”. Gitanyow’s consultation are provided to the Proponent (cont’d) interests in consultation are largely focused Project team so that the results of consultation on ensuring that, as it states, “the results of are integrated into project planning and design. consultation are integrated into project The Proponent’s procedure for responding to planning and design.” Simply stating that providers of issues and questions will include there will be a “defined mechanism” does processes such as responding directly to the not provide Gitanyow the needed certainty concerned party, posting responses on the on how the results of the consultation Proponent Project website and/or providing process will be integrated in to project written Project updates and summaries to the planning and design. We are requesting EAO for inclusion on its website. specific references to the Consultation • As for the comment on the Consultation agreement between Gitanyow and WCGT agreement, we refer to our response to be included to provide greater clarity and comment 3, namely that WCGT will add a line in certainty. the Plan stating where agreements have been entered into with FNs and WCGT will live up to those agreements. Reference: Page 7 Part 5--: • WCGT respects the concern raised. However, Section 6 and 11 “whether all or some of the identified the above referenced subsection (e) of Part C.5 of the EA and practices, traditions and customs can be is not stated to be a “main objective of Section C.3 of the engaged in elsewhere within Aboriginal consultation”. The subsection merely states that Aboriginal communities’ asserted traditional territory, the Proponent will work with Aboriginal Consultation Plan and if so, what such Aboriginal Communities and Nisga’a Nation to identify communities’ views are as to the whether all or some of the identified practices, meaningfulness of opportunity to do so.” traditions and customs can be engaged in elsewhere within Aboriginal communities’ This approach demonstrates a significant asserted traditional territory ,and if so, what such lack of knowledge and understanding of Aboriginal communities’ views are as to the the Gitanyow ayookxw (Law) and meaningfulness of the opportunity to do so” relationship to Lax’yip (Territory). Gitanyow (underlining added). In other words, it is merely has been very pro-active in informing one of the areas to be explored. There may very WCGT and its consultants of our ayookxw well be good reasons why the answer to this and system of title and rights to the Lax’yip. question is “no”. To include the above as a main objective of consultation on Traditional Land Use fundamentally contravenes the Gitanyow Huwilp Recognition and Reconciliation agreement, which is a guiding document for all consultation within Gitanyow Lax’yip Gitanyow is requesting that this clause be removed or significantly altered. Aboriginal Consultation “…required for the operation of the • WCGT will incorporate wording in Section B(g) Section B(g) of Report 1 (July 2013) proposed Project.” add: “operation, Aboriginal decommissioning, and restoration.”. Consultation Report 1 “Gitanyow (including Hereditary Chiefs • WCGT will make the change in Section C.1( n) Section 11 of the and, to the extent directed by Gitanyow, EA and Village Councils)" Change to: “to the extent Section C.1( n) of directed by the Gitanyow Hereditary Aboriginal Chiefs, Village Council.” Consultation Report 1. “Need to maintain traditional foods” • WCGT will add Gitanyow Nation to applicable Sections 6 and 11 (e.g., berries, fish and game)” Section. of the EA and add:“Gitanyow Nation” to “Interested Table F-1 – Item Aboriginal Communities”. 18 of Aboriginal Consultation Report 1. “Potential adverse effects on wetlands” • WCGT will add Gitanyow Nation to applicable Sections 4.7 and add: “Gitanyow Nation” to “Interested Section. 11 in the EA, and Aboriginal Communities”. Table F-1 – Item 22 of Aboriginal Consultation Report 1.

Page 11-260

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-2 Cont'd

Source of Change First Nation Comment Proponent Response Section Aboriginal Consultation “…required for the operation of the • WCGT will incorporate wording in Section B(g) Section B(g) of Report 1 (July 2013) proposed Project.” add: “operation, Aboriginal decommissioning, and restoration.”. Consultation Report 1 “Gitanyow (including Hereditary Chiefs • WCGT will make the change in Section C.1( n) Section 11 of the and, to the extent directed by Gitanyow, EA and Village Councils)" Change to: “to the extent Section C.1( n) of directed by the Gitanyow Hereditary Aboriginal Chiefs, Village Council.” Consultation Report 1. “Need to maintain traditional foods” (e.g., • WCGT will add Gitanyow Nation to applicable Sections 6 and 11 berries, fish and game)” add:“Gitanyow Section. of the EA and Nation” to “Interested Aboriginal Table F-1 – Item Communities”. 18 of Aboriginal Consultation Report 1. “Potential adverse effects on wetlands” • WCGT will add Gitanyow Nation to applicable Sections 4.7 and add: “Gitanyow Nation” to “Interested Section. 11 in the EA, and Aboriginal Communities”. Table F-1 – Item 22 of Aboriginal Consultation Report 1. “Concern that the route opens up their • WCGT has noted Gitanyow Nation as one of the Section 6 of the territory for access they cannot control or interested Aboriginal Communities included in >5 EA and Table F-1 monitor – pipelines to be limited to for the applicable Section. – Item 29 of common corridors.” Add: “Gitanyow Nation” Aboriginal to “Interested Aboriginal Communities”. Consultation Report 1. “Concern that the proposed Project would • The Project Description confirms that the Section 1 of the be converted to an oil pipeline” add: under proposed Project is a natural gas pipeline. EA and Table F-1 “Topic and aIR Reference” column, WCGT is not seeking approval for any other – Item 36 of “Certified Project Description”. WCGT has project and has designed the proposed Project Aboriginal made a firm commitment to “design the only to transport natural gas. The EA certificate Consultation pipeline…for transportation of natural gas will not authorize conversion of the proposed Report 1 only.” This commitment should be solidified Project to an oil pipeline. in the Certified Project Description. “The provision of natural gas to • The provision of natural gas to communities Table F-1 – Item communities along the proposed route that along the proposed route is outside the scope of 45 of Aboriginal do not currently have natural gas available the proposed Project as currently contemplated. Consultation for business, industrial and residential use.” Report 1 add: under the “Topic and aIR Reference” column, “Project Benefits S 1.5”. Gitanyow has raised concerns over the • WCGT recognizes Gitanyow’s concern but the -- impact of the carbon footprint of the LNG facilities are outside of the scope of this proposed Project, in combination with other project. WCGT can confirm that Gitanyow’s LNG projects. Gitanyow has proposed concerns have been raised with the BG Group on alternate options for the energy needs of their proposed LNG facility. the LNG plant (run-of- river hydro electric projects), as well as the sale of carbon credits to offset carbon effects. “Concern that the route opens up their • WCGT has noted Gitanyow Nation as one of the Section 6 of the territory for access they cannot control or interested Aboriginal Communities included in >5 EA and Table F-1 monitor – pipelines to be limited to for the applicable Section. – Item 29 of common corridors.” add: “Gitanyow Nation” Aboriginal to “Interested Aboriginal Communities”. Consultation Report 1. “Concern that the proposed Project would • The Project Description confirms that the Section 1 of the be converted to an oil pipeline” add: under proposed Project is a natural gas pipeline. EA and Table F-1 “Topic and aIR Reference” column, WCGT is not seeking approval for any other – Item 36 of “Certified Project Description”. WCGT has project and has designed the proposed Project Aboriginal made a firm commitment to the “design the only to transport natural gas. The EA certificate Consultation pipeline…for the transportation of natural will not authorize conversion of the proposed Report 1 gas only.” this commitment should be Project to an oil pipeline. solidified in the Certified Project Description.

Page 11-261

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-2 Cont'd

Source of Change First Nation Comment Proponent Response Section Aboriginal Consultation “The provision of natural gas to • The provision of natural gas to communities Table F-1 – Item Report 1 (July 2013) communities along the proposed route that along the proposed route is outside the scope of 45 of Aboriginal do not currently have natural gas available the proposed Project as currently contemplated. Consultation for business, industrial and residential use.” Report 1 add: under the “Topic and aIR Reference” column, “Project Benefits S 1.5”. Gitanyow has raised concerns over the • WCGT recognizes Gitanyow’s concern but the -- impact of the carbon footprint of the LNG facilities are outside of the scope of this proposed Project, in combination with other project. WCGT can confirm that Gitanyow’s LNG projects. Gitanyow has proposed concerns have been raised with the BG Group on alternate options for the energy needs of their proposed LNG facility. the LNG plant (run-of- river hydro electric projects), as well as the sale of carbon credits to offset carbon effects. Gitanyow has raised concerns regarding • WCGT recognizes this concern and has Sections 4.2, 4.3, the potential for flooding on major river and incorporated it as part of the concerns expressed 4.5, 9 and 10 of stream crossings, and the potential for for negative effects on the aquatic environments, the EA. exposed pipes and subsequent ruptures. and including fish and fish habits. Gitanyow has expressed clear interest in • WCGT recognizes Gitanyow Nation’s interests in Section 3 of the being involved in field studies, not only for field studies and local employment benefits, and EA. local employment benefits, but to ensure to the extent reasonable, is working with accuracy and comprehensiveness of Gitanyow Nation and including them in field studies completed in the territory. studies to ensure the accuracy and comprehensiveness, and local employment. Following column titled “Draft aIR provided • WCGT will be responding to all comments Section 2 of the by EAO” add another column “Response to received on the dAIRs, and will be responding as EA. Draft aIR from Aboriginal Community”. part of that process. The dAIR response is not Gitanyow provided detailed comments on yet concluded and therefore cannot be the Draft aIR, and would like certainty that incorporated into this document. WCGT has addressed and incorporated these comments.

11.12.2.3 Practices, Traditions or Customs Identified Through Consultation Activities Gitanyow Nation elected to conduct a third-party TLU study for the proposed Project, titled the Gitanyow Lax’yip Cultural Impact Field Study (Vegh 2013). Gitanyow Huwilp Society conducted ground reconnaissance studies in the vicinity of the application Corridor to identify culturally important and TLU sites. GPS data was collected for sites along the application Corridor with a variance of 20 m and its entirety submitted as part of their TLU study (Vegh 2013). Lax’yip (asserted traditional territory) refers to the land itself, while Huwilp refers to the collective of clans within Gitanyow Nation traditionally responsible for stewardship of the land and resources. The Gitanyow Nation TLU report requested that further assessment should take place prior to the application date of March 14, 2014.

Gitanyow Nation used a modified version of the final application Corridor for their TLU study, which they considered to have the least negative effects on the landscape and overall environment and the least infringement upon Gitanyow rights and title. This “Gitanyow Preferred Route” (GPR) was chosen due to closest adherence with existing cut-blocks and disturbed areas, specifically the Mitten forest Service Road, and areas with limited forest productivity. The study area used by Gitanyow Nation was within 3 km on either side of the application Corridor. Figure 11.12-3 illustrates the Gitanyow Preferred Route.

Page 11-262

103P15F 103P15G 103P16E 103P16F 103P14H 103P15E x River pio is K

N s

a a Pa s ¯w s E Cr R e i e v k e r

Swan Lake Kispiox River Provincial Park

Brown Bear ree S 103P16C 103P14A 103P15D r C k 103P15B 103P15A 103P16D ea Lake w n B Swan ee w t k o i ee r n Lit aw Cr B Lake Stephens tle P R i v Lake e r

N K ange is es pi e ox R R r iv i ve er Relocation 2

103P11I 103P10L 103P10K 103P10J 103P10I 103P9L 103P9K

Al uk KP 590 C !. r ee 37 k UV KP 585 !. Relocation 1 !. !. KP 600 KP 595 !.

Relocation 3 103P10E 103P10F 103P10G 103P9E 103P9F KP 605 103P10H K !. i n KP 610 s !. k u c h R C iv ra e nb r er ry KP 615 !. R Douse T i c v h er Lake i ti n R i Gin v m e r i ltk KP 620 un !. C re e 103P11A 103P10B k 103P10A 103P9D 103P9C

We ber Creek er iv R s as N

103P6I 103P7L 103P7K 103P7J 103P7I 103P8L 103P8K

K iteen R iver er iv y R rr e b n a r

NISGA'A Kwinamuck 103P7E 103P7F 103P7G 103P7H 103P8E 103P8F Lake

r e iv R ga k an e e tw r i C Dragon K h s i Lake n in k s a e S h t r Bould o er C N reek 103P6A 103P7D 103P7C 103P7B 103P7A 103P8D 103P8C

Fort Nelson ! Cypress to Cranberry Application Route UV892 Highway Previous Application Routes (December 2012) BR I T I S H Road FIGURE 11.12-3 AB P1 Route CO L U M B IA Fort Kitsault Route Option Watercourse Map Extent St. John PROPOSED GITANYOW ! Kitsault A Route Option ! Waterbody Dawson Kitsault B Route Option PIPELINE REROUTE OPTIONS Creek SCALE: 1:200,000 er Proposed Reroutes Gitanyow Traditional Territory d iv x ! km m . Prince Gitanyow Priority 1 R s PROPOSED WESTCOAST CONNECTOR e 0 1 2 3 4 5 s t ! Treaty Settlement Land s u Rupert Prince o a r Gitanyow Alternate e N R George (All Locations Approximate) GAS TRANSMISSION PROJECT w

o Kitsault A Relocation Park/Protected Area y n a t i G

_ NAD83 UTM Zone 9N. Route current to February 5, 2014

3 ! _

2 Williams Imagery: NASA Geospatial Interoperability Program 2005; Hillshade: TERA Environmental Consultants, derived from Natural Resources Canada 2008; March 2014 8018 1 _

1 Lake Populated Places: Natural Resources Canada 2010; Highways/Roads: Natural Resources Canada 2013; Hydrography, 1 g

i Parks/Protected Areas: BC Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations 2008; Treaty Settlement Lands: IHS Inc. 2013. F _

8 Although there is no reason to believe that there are any errors associated with the data used to generate this product 1 ! Mapped By: JW Checked By: JS 0 Kamloops

8 or in the product itself, users of these data are advised that errors in the data may be present. t Kelowna Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

In addition to TLU and cultural sites, the report highlights several areas of concern for the Gitanyow Nation and recommendations to WCGT. These recommendations are intended to preserve existing ecological conditions for several culturally important vegetation and wildlife species, and to ensure the food security of the Gitanyow Lax’yip. Specific recommendations are listed in Section 6.0.

The results of the Gitanyow TLU study, received by TERA on August 31, 2013 are summarized below. Where available approximate distances and directions of specific geographic areas from the application Corridor were determined by TERA based on the information provided and are described in Tables 11.12-3 to 11.12-6.

Trails and Travelways Logging roads overgrown with foliage are used by moose and other wildlife for food and protection from the elements. These inactive access roads are also used by Gitanyow Nation community members to sustain cultural activities such as hunting, fishing and trapping and to maintain food supplies. There are concerns that opening these access roads could lead to animal displacement and has the potential to impact community members’ ability to harvest resources and further demarcate Gitanyow Nation’s Lax’yip.

Trails and travelways identified by Gitanyow Nation community members during the TLU study are detailed in Table 11.12-3.

TABLE 11.12-3

TRAILS AND TRAVELWAYS IDENTIFIED BY GITANYOW NATION

Approximate Distance and Direction from Application Corridor Site Description Age Requested Mitigation 81 m southeast of KP 590.6 Trail cleared with chains unused for 20 years Historical None 111 m northwest of KP 603.2 Trail made before 1950, now wildlife trail. Historical Further archaeological study required Source: Vegh 2013

Habitation Sites Several fishing camps and habitation sites were identified by Gitanyow Nation community members whose locations remain confidential. Suggested mitigation for these sites is found in the Gitanyow Cultural Heritage Management Policy (Gitanyow Nation 2014a) and the GLLUP Management Objectives and Consideration for Cultural Heritage (Gitanyow Nation 2014b).

Plant Gathering Pine mushrooms are an important economic mainstay for Gitanyow Nation community members. Both pine and chanterelle mushrooms grow in several locations in and around the application Corridor. Gitanyow Nation community members have requested further assessment of mushroom growth. The Gitanyow Vegetation Management Plan should be referred to when mushrooms are identified (Gitanyow Nation 2014b).

Huckleberries are an important resource for Gitanyow Nation community members. The berries are typically found and harvested in cut blocks. However, the forest canopy is closing over some older cut blocks, preventing sunlight from reaching the huckleberry plants, therefore inhibiting the plants’ ability to bear fruit. Productive huckleberry plants are said to be rare in the region. Community members are concerned about the few remaining productive huckleberry patches along the application Corridor and effects to the remaining plants due to pipeline construction.

Gitanyow Nation reported several plant harvesting sites and habitat for culturally valued vegetation during the TLU study for the proposed Project, detailed in Table 11.12-4.

Page 11-264

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-4

PLANT GATHERING SITES IDENTIFIED BY GITANYOW NATION

Approximate Distance and Direction from Application Corridor Site Description Age Requested Mitigation 4 m northwest of KP 592.6 Chanterelle and pine mushrooms Current Additional assessment of possible effects of the 210 m south of KP 597.0 proposed Project on mushrooms, old-growth forest and 1.4 km south of KP 607.7 pileated woodpeckers. 1.4 km south of KP 608.4 1.8 km south of KP 610.3 2.3 km southeast of KP 612.8 2.4 km southeast of KP 612.9 2.3 km southeast of KP 613.5 680 m southeast of KP 615.9 203 m southeast of KP 617.2 114 m southeast of KP 617.5 88 m southeast of KP 617.6 291 m northwest of KP 621 292 m northwest of KP 621.3 292 m northwest of KP 621.3 280 m northwest of KP 621.8 746 m west of KP 623.0 589 m west of KP 623.2 617 m west of KP 623.3 627 m west of KP 623.4 1.4 km northwest of KP 624.9 1.4 km northwest of KP 625.2 1.3 km north of KP 626.3 1.3 km north of KP 626.4 939 m north of KP 626.5 751 m north of KP 626.6 704 m north of KP 626.7 184 m north of KP 627.7 273 m north of KP 627.4 136 m north of KP 627.8 98 m north of KP 627.9 97 m north of KP 628 13 m northwest of KP 628.7 Crossed at KP 628.2 350 m southeast of KP 629.8 395 m southeast of KP 630.0 489 m southeast of KP 630.1 854 m southeast of KP 630.6 129 m north of KPE 0.4 22 m north of KPE 0.6 1.4 km south of KPE 1.1 273 m south of KPE 1.1 636 m south of KPE 1.1 129 m north of KPE 0.4 14 m south of KPE 0.7 273 m south of KPE 1.1 636 m south of KPE 1.1 413 m south of KPE 1.1 941 m east of KPN 631.2 969 m east of KPN 631.3 941 m east of KPN 631.5 962 m east of KPN 631.6 971 m east of KPN 631.7 Crosses at KPN 633.3 1 km east of KPN 632 to KPN 634.8 173 m southwest of KP 589.4 Huckleberry, coastal huckleberry, Current Implementation of a “Huckleberry Management 152 m southwest of KP 589.4 high bush blueberry, cranberry, false Strategy” to determine effects of the proposed Project 205 m southwest of KP 589.5 azalea, thimbleberry on recorded huckleberry patches deemed important to 20 m south of KP 588.3 Gitanyow Nation for cultural and subsistence purposes. 3 m south of KP 588.4 1 m southeast of KP 592.4 57 m northwest of KP 593.5 41 m south of KP 594.1 42 m south of KP 594.7

Page 11-265

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-4 Cont'd

Approximate Distance and Direction from Application Corridor Site Description Age Requested Mitigation 46 m south of KP 595.7 See above See above See above 806 m south of KP 597.9 881 m south of KP 598 868 m south of KP 598.4 887 m south of KP 598.5 991 m south of KP 598.6 1.9 km southeast of KP 612.2 27 m southeast of KP 618 610 m southeast of KP 616 292 m northwest of KP 621.3 209 m southeast of KP 629.4 962 m east of KPN 631.6 2.3 km east of KPN 636.3 1.7 km east of KPN 634.8 2.2 km east of KPN 636.3 2.3 km east of KPN 636.4 1.7 km east of KP 615.1 Labrador Tea Current Further consultation with Gitanyow may be required through the EA process. 1.7 km east of KP 615 Siberian crab apple Current Further consultation on mitigation throughout the EA process with Gitanyow may be required 100 m southeast of KP 590.5 Wuu’uums (Devil’s Club) Current Further consultation on mitigation throughout the EA 214 m southeast of KP 590 process with Gitanyow may be required. 48 m northwest of KP 593.3 60 m southeast of KP 595.9 71 m southeast of KP 596.5 1.5 km south of KP 608.5 1.6 km south of KP 608.6 Source: Vegh 2013

Fishing Water quality and quantity is reported to be diminishing in all watercourses and waterbodies throughout the Lax’yip study area and throughout the proposed Project area. Community members believe this decline in water and associated resources results, in part, from a combination of deforestation and global warming, causing less surface flow in watercourses and waterbodies. This occurrence is more apparent in smaller watercourses and waterbodies in the region.

Water quality concerns identified by Gitanyow Nation community members include:

• increased sedimentation;

• erosion during stream crossing construction; and

• pipeline breaks and ruptures during construction.

Gitanyow Nation reported one currently used fishing site during the TLU study for the proposed Project, 7 m northwest of KP 605. Gitanyow Nation requested WGCT follow GLLUP Management Objectives & Considerations for Fisheries and further consultation with Gitanyow Fisheries Biologist throughout the aEA process.

Hunting Gitanyow Nation has indicated that all concerns with regards to wildlife and wildlife habitat are linked to their food security, and therefore applicable to traditional land and resource use, including hunting. Gitanyow Nation reported several wildlife signs and habitat features during the TLU for the proposed Project. Hunting and trapping locations are in Table 11.12-5. Sites identified were primarily wildlife signs and habitat, and not specific use sites.

Page 11-266

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

According to Gitanyow Nation community members, moose populations in their asserted traditional territories are shrinking and have decreased within their asserted traditional territory by 68% in the last 10 years. Fresh moose signs including droppings, rubs, beds and browse were observed along the application Corridor. It was reported that moose inhabit this region year round; and some areas identified are important wintering habitats for the moose.

Bears, and signs of bear, are often found in areas near cut blocks, since they offer cover, water and a shaded place for the animals to forage for food. Several stumps and logs disturbed by foraging bears were identified in Gitanyow Nation’s TLU study. Scratch and bite marks on trees were also observed, indicating bears in the region as well. Gitanyow Nation community members are concerned about grizzlies and increased road access, since they already have low reproduction and may be displaced with increased access. Community members report that they only hunt bear when other protein resources are low.

Birds play an important ecosystem and subsistence role for Gitanyow Nation community members. Pileated woodpeckers play an important role in the ecosystems of old growth forests in the region. The holes they peck in trees are often used by other animals as dens or a place to nest. Grouse are common in the region, typically found along roads and in cut blocks. Several were observed during the study. Grouse is used as a meat source by Gitanyow Nation community members. Community members reported that grouse numbers were high in 2013. Other species of birds that were observed include: chickadees, pine siskin, woodpeckers, blue jay or camp jays and on occasion, loons and sandhill cranes.

General wildlife concerns identified by Gitanyow Nation community members include concerns that reopening old forestry roads to cut blocks will displace and disorient animals that use the cut blocks, and increased access could increase hunting and as a result may lead to a decline in already shrinking animal populations in the region.

Trapping Gitanyow Nation has indicated that all concerns with regards to wildlife and wildlife habitat are linked to their food security, and therefore applicable to traditional land and resource use, including trapping. Gitanyow Nation reported several hunting trapping sites, as well as wildlife signs and habitat, during the TLU study for the proposed Project, detailed in Table 11.12-5

Rabbit is reported to be common throughout the application Corridor and droppings were observed. Rabbits prefer dense, forested places such as hemlock stands and cut blocks where food is abundant. Porcupine browse on hemlock and pine bark were found and one sighting occurred.

Beaver signs such as dams, browse, trails and lodges were identified and it was noted that beaver dams are situated in and around the application Corridor. A beaver dam was identified at KP 13 and is said to have grown over the application Corridor.

Furbearers are not common in Gitanyow Nation’s asserted traditional territory due to a lack of low elevation old growth forest, as a result of logging activities. Scattered den sites, scat and maternal colonies were identified indicating furbearers in the region. Squirrel and rodent signs were identified along the application Corridor; however it was unclear if their populations were steady. Ermine is an important resource to community members. Ermine fur is used to decorate the Chief’s headdress.

Page 11-267

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-5

HUNTING AND TRAPPING SITES IDENTIFIED BY GITANYOW NATION

Approximate Distance and Direction from Application Corridor Site Description Age Requested Mitigation Crosses at KP 588.2 Ungulate/Moose signs/habitat Current Implement “Forage Crosses from KP 592.4 to 618.3 availability/Cutblock assessment” 50.5 m north of KP 594.9 as outlined in GLCIFS. Avoidance 443.9 m north of KP 626.9 of riparian zones. 354.7 m north of KP 627.2 42.4 m south of KP 594.4 Crosses from KP 634.3 to KP 636.1 285.1 m northwest of KP 621.1 642.7 m southeast of KP 596 Access roads (access to traditional hunting Current Implement “Forage 2.1 km south of KP 597.5 grounds) availability/Cutblock assessment” as outlined in GLCIFS Implement “Access Roads assessment” as outlined in GLCIFS 0.7 m southeast of KP 592.4 Bear signs (scat, evidence of feeding) Current Implement “Forage 697.3 m south of KP 597.7 availability/Cutblock assessment” as outlined in GLCIFS Follow Management Objectives & Considerations for Grizzly Bears as outlined in GLLUP 214.4 m southeast of KP 590 Marten, fisher and ermine signs/habitat Current Request further consultation with 83 m southeast of KP 590.6 GItanyow Wildlife Biologist 10.6 m northwest of KP 592.1 Follow Management Objectives & 5.5 m northwest of KP 592.1 Consideration for Furbearers in 184.9 m south of KP 596.9 GLLUP 197.5 m south of KP 598.5 Recommend wildlife surveys to determine exact rearing area 321.4 m southeast of KP 602.6 Request further consultation with 1.43 km south of KP 608.3 Gitanyow to determine mitigation 1.57 km south of KP 608.6 for stoat. 36.7 m northwest of KP 619.3 165 m west of KP 620 943.6 m east of KP 631.4 1.53 km east of KPN 634.2 1.46 km east of KPN 633.3 1.53 km east of KPN 633.4 29.4 m south of KP 593.9 Rabbit signs (droppings) Current Request further consultation with 37.3 m northwest of KP 604.3 Gitanyow Wildlife Biologist 82.7 m north of KP 605.5 494.6 m south of KP 606.5 1.85 km east of KP 614.9 1.9 km east of KPN 635.4 2.19 km east of KPN 636.3 27.6 m northwest of KP 593.2 Unidentified rodent den Current Request further consultation with Gitanyow Wildlife Biologist 1.05 km southeast of KP 595.9 Beaver signs (tracks, dams, water source, feeding Current Request further consultation with 32.1 m northwest of KP 605.1 ground) Gitanyow Wildlife Biologist 72.2 m northwest of KP 605.9 757 m south of KP 606.8 827.6 m southeast of KP 630.5 1.68 km east of KP 635 8.3 m south of KP 588.1 Loon Current Request further consultation with Gitanyow Wildlife Biologist 50.4 m northwest of KP 593.1 Sandhill cranes (flying overhead) Current Request further consultation with 40.7 m south of KP 594.1 Gitanyow Wildlife Biologist 24 m south of KP 594.3 Grouse signs/habitat Current Request further consultation with 40 m south of KP 594.3 Gitanyow Wildlife Biologist 172 m south of KP 596 1.29 km south of KP 597.1 1.53 km south of KP 598.4

Page 11-268

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-5 Cont'd

Approximate Distance and Direction from Application Corridor Site Description Age Requested Mitigation 1.98 km south of KP 598.4 See above See See above 1.83 km south of KP 598.4 above 1.71 km south of KP 598.4 1.34 km south of KP 598.6 111 m north of KP 605.3 105 m north of KP 605.3 8 m north of KP 605.6 18 m south of KP 606 1.67 km south of KP 610.3 814 m south of KP 610.3 1.55 km east of KP 615.3 1.45 km east of KPN 634.1 1.79 km east of KPN 635.2 1.86 km east of KPN 635.4 2.16 km east of KPN 636.2 807 m south of KP 598.4 Chickadees Current Request further consultation with Gitanyow Wildlife Biologist 929.5 m south of KP 598.1 Woodpecker signs (feeding, wildlife trees) Request further consultation with 962.1 m east of KPN 631.7 Gitanyow Wildlife Biologist 1.51 km east of KPN 634 Effects of construction on 1.54 km east of KPN 634.4 woodpecker and woodpecker habitat. Request further assessment to determine mitigation. Source: Vegh 2013

Gathering Places No gathering places were identified during the TLU study by Gitanyow Nation community members within the application Corridor. No mitigation was requested for gathering places by Gitanyow Nation.

Sacred Sites Several hemlock cambium harvest CMTs were identified by Gitanyow Nation community members during the TLU study, as detailed in Table 11.12-6. When CMTs are found within the Gitanyow Lax’yip the Gitanyow Cultural Heritage Management Policy should be referred to for requested mitigation policies. CMTs are an important historical connection to the land and Gitanyow Nation’s culture.

TABLE 11.12-6

SACRED SITES IDENTIFIED BY GITANYOW FIRST NATION

Approximate Distance and Direction from Application Corridor Site Description Age Requested Mitigation 1.3 km south of KPE 1.1 CMT birch bark strip Historical Follow Gitanyow Cultural Heritage Management Policy.(Gitanyow Nation 2014a) 5.5 km south of KP 567.8 Cultural area (non-specified) unknown Follow GLLUP Management Objectives & 740 m south of KP 597.7 Considerations for Cultural Heritage and 806 m south of KP 597.9 Gitanyow Cultural Heritage Management Policy (Gitanyow Nation 2014b) Further fieldwork required.

Implement an “Access Roads assessment” within each Wilp Lax’yip to determine which roads will be upgraded for the proposed Project then determine how the road networks impact the environment and cultural resources.

Page 11-269

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-6 Cont'd

Approximate Distance and Direction from Application Corridor Site Description Age Requested Mitigation 15 m south of KP 588.0 CMT Western hemlock cambium Historical Follow GLLUP Management Objectives & 6 m south of KP 588.0 harvest Considerations for Cultural Heritage and 122 m south of KP 588.9 Gitanyow Cultural Heritage Management Policy (Gitanyow Nation 2014a). Further fieldwork required.

Follow-up assessment of CMTs and trails identified on route and incorporation of Gitanyow Cultural Heritage Management Policy (Gitanyow Nation 2014a) and GLLUP Management Direction for cultural heritage resources into mitigation and consultation activities (Gitanyow Nation 2014b). 2.9 km southeast of KP 601.5 The “Hoodoo” cultural area current Avoidance requested

Source: Vegh 2013

Recommendations and Requests • Alignment of the application Corridor to existing cutblock in the Borden Mountain area.

Gitanyow Nation also listed several general recommendations for WCGT, including:

• Adherence to the Gitanyow Lax’yip Land Use Plan (GLLUP), which will address concerns regarding several key environmental values, including: furbearers; pine mushrooms; cultural heritage; moose; and water quality.

• Adherence to the Gitanyow Cultural Heritage Management Policy, which will address concerns regarding several key heritage values, including: CMTs; trails; and village and fishing sites.

• Discuss the parameters of a stand-alone Environmental accord between Gitanyow Nation and WCGT that will incorporate all of the above recommendations.

• Cumulative effects assessment for water focused on greenhouse gas emissions and global warming and drying trends.

• Additional field work to determine how further development in the region will affect the environment, wildlife, water and cultural resources. Specifically:

− Winter and spring snow tracking for wildlife to determine presence of species.

− Further assessment of wildlife trails to determine type of wildlife using trails.

− Archaeological dating of the two CMT sites identified and development of recommended action based on the Gitanyow Cultural Heritage Management Policy.

− Archaeological assessment of potential grease trail crossing in some areas, following direction in the Gitanyow Cultural Heritage Management Policy.

• Focus and parameters for further consultation on wildlife specifically martin, fishers, grouse, pileated woodpecker, black bear, rabbit, beaver and ermine.

• Steps towards an environmental accord that will outline the commitments made by the proponent to Gitanyow on key issues including, but not limited to:

− Route selection.

Page 11-270

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

− Consultation and accommodation for any post-EA certificate permits or regulatory process.

− GLLUP compliance measures.

− Construction phase environmental monitoring.

− Operation phase monitoring and reporting for leaks and malfunctions.

− Other mitigation and protection measures as they arise through the EA process.

Site-specific Recommendations:

1. Assess and determine if KP 604.3 and KP 614.3 are critical moose winter areas, and follow recommendations of the GLLUP. 2. Initiate early winter and early spring snow tracking between KP 611 and KP 616.1 and between KP 593.1 and KP 595.7 to determine importance of habitat for furbearers 3. The route over Borden Mountain is very close to the northwest Transmission Line. If the proposed pipeline route is placed in the current position then the impact to this Lax’yip is great. The two rights- of-way should be in alignment to reduce effects 11.12.2.4 Issues, Concerns and Resolutions Key issues and concerns raised by Gitanyow Nation are provided in Section 11.19. This information was collected primarily through consultation activities with Gitanyow Nation and through their participation on biophysical field studies for the proposed Project (see Section 3.2.2) and their preliminary Lax’yip Cultural Impact study mapping. WCGT’s responses to these key issues and concerns raised are also provided in Section 11.19 as well as cross-references to where these issues are considered in the application.

11.12.3 Potential Effects to Aboriginal Interests The identification of Gitanyow Nation’s present, past and anticipated future uses and traditional use of the proposed Project area described in Sections 11.12.1 and 11.12.2 was conducted through literature/desktop review, biophysical field participation and a review of Gitanyow Nation’s Project-specific TLU study and socio-economic study. The issues identified from these sources also have informed the potential effects of the proposed Project on Gitanyow Nation’s identified Aboriginal Interests (Section 11.11.2). Where potential interactions were likely to occur, the potential effect is identified in Table 11.12-7. Table 11.12-7 also identifies specific geographic areas compiled from these sources to be important (as available) as well as the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate those effects. Where there is overlap between an Aboriginal interest and a VC, the information from other Sections of the application are cross-referenced and summarized in Table 11.12-7.

Based on the information collected to date and presented in Section 11.12.1.3, known interactions of the proposed Project with Gitanyow Nation’s Aboriginal Interests include crossings of trapping sites associated with fur bearer habitat for marten at KP 592.1 and KP 619.3, rabbit at KP593.9 and KP 604.3, and beaver at KP 605.1 and KP 605.9, a fishing site at KP 605, berry patches at KP 592.4, KP 593.5, KP 588.4, KP 588.3, KP 594.1, KP 594.7, KP 595.7 and KP 618, mushroom harvest sites at KP 628.2 and KPN 633.3, and medicinal plants at KP 593.3, KP 595.9 and KP 596.5. A number of hunting sites are crossed by the proposed Project Route including specific hunting sites associated with moose habitat KP 588.2, from KP 592.4 to KP 618.3, and from KP 634,3 to KP 636.1, bear habitat from KP 592.4, and grouse habitat at KP 594.3 and KP 605.6. Additionally two sacred sites are known to occur at KP 588.0 and KP 588.9. Gitanyow habitation site locations remain confidential. At this time, no known trails occur within 81 m of the proposed Project Route, and no known gathering places are known to interact within 1.8 km of the proposed Project route. As a result, no identified potential effects for these Aboriginal Interests have been identified. Should additional interactions on Aboriginal Interests be identified through ongoing consultation with Gitanyow Nation’s then the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate potential effects will be implemented as outlined in Table 11.12-7.

Page 11-271

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-7

POTENTIAL EFFECTS TO ABORIGINAL INTERESTS IDENTIFIED BY GITANYOW NATION

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Identified Interest: Hunting Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ hunting Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA (hunting activities schedules, as required, prior to the commencement of construction. activities during activities are • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of construction and known to occur new clearing and land disturbance necessary. operations in the RSA, A • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where (Section 6.1.5 - number of feasible.¶ Current Use of specific hunting Lands and • All work site personnel will be oriented on proper response to wildlife sites and known Resources for encounters. No firearms are permitted on worksites unless previously to occur and are Traditional authorized by WCGT for use by qualified Wildlife Monitor(s) for the associated with Purposes). purpose of protecting workers from wildlife under specified conditions. moose habitat • KP 588.2, from No hunting will be allowed by Project construction personnel on or near KP 592.4 to proposed Project site during working hours, or while staying in Project KP 618.3, and accommodations. from KP 634,3 • Use of construction right-of-way or Project access roads by Project to KP 636.1, personnel for hunting is prohibited during construction of the Project. bear habitat • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance from 592.4, and activities. grouse habitat • Implement the AMP Framework including access control measures at KP 594.3 and (e.g., signage, road closures, restrictions, access control structures, KP 605.6 vegetation screens) to reduce unauthorized motorized access. All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of components/ hunting sites Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify hunting sites that subsistence RSA (A number warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during of specific measures: construction and hunting sites − adhering to species-specific timing constraints; operations and known to − leaving breaks in the pipeline trench to allow animals to cross; (Section 6.1.5 - occur and are Current Use of − limiting the use of chemical applications; and associated with Lands and − moose habitat alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Resources for KP 588.2, from participating Aboriginal communities. Traditional KP 592.4 to • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric Purposes). KP 618.3, and environment, marine ecosystems, fish, vegetation, wetlands and wildlife from KP 634,3 (Sections 4.1, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 of the application, respectively). to KP 636.1, • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance bear habitat activities. from 592.4, and • Implement EMP, AMPF, Restoration and Waste Management Plans to grouse habitat reduce potential effects on subsistence hunting activities and wildlife at KP 594.3 and habitat. KP 605.6

Page 11-272

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-7 Cont’d

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Identified Interest: Trapping Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities and registered Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence trappers involved in the WCGT Aboriginal Engagement Program of subsistence RSA (trapping trapping work locations and construction schedules a minimum of 14 days prior activities during activities are activities to the commencement of construction. construction and known to occur • Prohibit the vandalism or theft of trapper equipment or trapped animals operations in the RSA, by Project workers. Report all violators to BC’s Fish and Wildlife (Section 6.1.5 - trapping sites authorities. Current Use of are known to • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of Lands and occur that are new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Resources for associated with Traditional • Use existing access roads to access pipeline right-of-way, where fur bearer Purposes). feasible. habitat for • marten at Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance KP 592.1 and activities. KP 619.3, rabbit • Review and adhere to the measures identified within finalized AMP (see at KP593.9 and AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure contractor personnel are KP 604.3, and aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. beaver at KP 605.1 and KP 605.9 All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of components/ trapping Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify trapping sites that subsistence RSA (trapping sites warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during sites are known measures: construction and to occur that are − maintaining access to the trap line; operations associated with − moving of trap line equipment by trapper prior to construction; and (Section 6.1.5 - fur bearer Current Use of − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by habitat for Lands and participating Aboriginal communities. marten at Resources for • KP 592.1 and Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric Traditional KP 619.3, rabbit environment, vegetation, wetlands and wildlife (Sections 4.1, 4.6, 4.7 Purposes). at KP593.9 and and 4.8 of the application, respectively). KP 604.3, and • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance beaver at activities. KP 605.1 and • Implement EMP, AMPF, Restoration and Waste Management Plans to KP 605.9) reduce potential effects on subsistence trapping activities and wildlife habitat. Identified Interest: Fishing Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA fishing schedules, as required, prior to the commencement of construction. activities during (subsistence activities • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of construction and fishing activities new clearing and land disturbance necessary. operations are known to • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where (Section 6.1.5 - occur within the feasible. Current Use of RSA. A known Lands and • Prohibit recreational fishing in freshwater environments by project fishing site Resources for personnel on or in vicinity of construction right-of-way, access roads, occurs at Traditional permanent facility sites, work camps and ancillary sites. The use of the KP 605). Purposes). construction right-of-way or Project access roads by Project personnel for fishing is prohibited during the construction phases of the Project. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement measures outlined in the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework [Section 6.1]) to prevent increased access along new corridors created by the construction right-of-way and access roads, thereby minimizing potential for effects on fish due to activities such as fishing and off-road vehicle access (e.g., forded crossings).

Page 11-273

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-7 Cont’d

Page 11-274

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-7 Cont’d

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of Operations components/ plant Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify plant gathering subsistence RSA (known gathering sites that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the resources during berry patches sites following measures: construction and occur at − limiting the use of chemical applications; operations KP 592.4, − replacement of plant species during restoration; (Section 6.1.5 - 593.5, 588.4, Current Use of − avoidance of the site; and 588.3, 594.1, Lands and − 5947, 595.7 and alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Resources for KP 618, participating Aboriginal communities. Traditional mushroom • All construction equipment must be clean and free of soil or vegetative Purposes). harvest sites debris prior to its arrival on the construction site to reduce the risk of occur at weed introduction. Any equipment which arrives in a dirty condition will KP 628.2 and not be allowed on the work site until it has been cleaned off at a suitable KPN 633.3, and location. medicinal plant • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of marine sites occur at at ecosystems, vegetation and wetlands (Sections 4.1, 4.6 and 4.7 of this KP 593.3, 595.9 application, respectively). and KP 596.5) • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence plant gathering activities, wetlands and vegetation. Identified Interest: Ability to Practice Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of trail Operations components/ use of trails Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction and travelway use RSA(trails and and schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction travelway use is travelways construction. and operations known to occur • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 - in the RSA. No new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of known trails are • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Lands and known to occur feasible. Resources for closer than Traditional • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable 81 m from the Purposes). Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify trails and proposed travelways that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more Project route at of the following measures: KP 590.6) − detailed mapping, photographic recording and avoidance of the location by the development; − should avoidance of a site not be feasible, mitigation consisting of detailed recording and controlled excavations may be implemented; and/or − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved right-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the transportation and access related to marine and freshwater navigability and marine safety. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements.

Page 11-275

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-7 Cont’d

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, All Project Reduced • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ use of Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction habitation site use RSA (habitation habitation schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction sitess are sites construction. and operations known to occur • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 - in the RSA, site new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of Gitanyow • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Lands and Nation specific feasible. Resources for habitation site Traditional • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable location remain Purposes). Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify habitation sites that confidential) warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following measures: − detailed mapping, photographic recording and avoidance of the location by the proposed development; − should avoidance of a site not be feasible, mitigation consisting of detailed recording and controlled excavations may be implemented; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved rights-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority (e.g., MFLNRO or landowner). This restriction applies to all biophysical surveying and land surveying activities. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. Identified Interest: Cultural Pursuits Construction, All Project Disturbance • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disturbance of Operations components/ of gathering Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction gathering places RSA (gathering places schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction places exist construction. and operations within the RSA. • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 – there are no new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of gathering • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Land and places known to feasible. Resources for occur closer Traditional • than 1.8 km Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Purposes Effects from the Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify gathering places assessment). that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the proposed Project Route) following measures: − detailed recording, mapping and avoidance; − assess visual impact; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved rights-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority (e.g., MFLNRO or landowner). This restriction applies to all biophysical surveying and land surveying activities. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric environment (Section 4.1 of this application). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities.

Page 11-276

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-7 Cont’d

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, All Project Disturbance • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disturbance of Operations components/ of sacred Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction sacred sites during RSA(sacred sites schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of construction and sites exist within construction. operations the RSA. • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 – Sacred sites are new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of known to occur • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Land and at KP 588.0 and feasible. Resources for Traditional KP 588.9). • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Purposes Effects Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify sacred sites that assessment). warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following measures: − detailed recording, mapping and avoidance; − assess visual impact; − additional mitigation will be refined and optimized through community discussions; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved right-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric environment (Section 4.1 of this application). • Implement the contingency measures identified in the TLU Sites Discovery Contingency Plan (Section 5.15) in the event TLU sites not previously identified are found during construction. • If archaeological, paleontological or historical sites (e.g., modified bone, pottery fragments, fossils) are discovered during construction, suspend work in proximity (i.e., within 30 m). No work at that particular location shall continue until permission is granted by the appropriate regulatory authority. Follow the contingency measures identified in the Heritage Resources Discovery Contingency Plan (see Section 5.8). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. Notes: 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA. 2 Detailed mitigation are outlined in the proposed Project-specific EMPs (Appendices 3-A and 3-B of this application).

11.12.4 Mitigation and Environmental Management Strategies Consistent with the methodology described in Section 3.0, Table 11.12-7 summarizes the mitigation or environmental management strategies that address identified and potential effects to Gitanyow Nation’s Aboriginal Interests.WCGT has significantly refined the proposed Project Route within Gitanyow Nation’s traditional territories to reduce impact to Gitanyow Nation traditional activities and resources. The revisions include rerouting of approximately 40 km of the proposed Project Route through consultation with the Gitanyow Nation. WCGT will continue to consult with Gitanyow Nation to refine site-specific mitigation measures to reduce effects to Gitanyow Nation’s Aboriginal Interests.

Should additional interactions on Aboriginal Interests be identified through ongoing consultation with Gitanyow Nation then the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate potential effects will be implemented as outlined in Table 11.12.7 and refined on a site specific basis where agreed upon.

Page 11-277

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

11.12.5 Characterization of Effects to Aboriginal Interests after Mitigation This subsection of the Application presents an assessment of the potential residual effects of the proposed Project on Gitanyow Nation’s Aboriginal Interests via the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC.

The potential residual effects of the proposed Project on Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC are discussed in a qualitative manner by analysing the relative likelihood and consequence of each of the potential effects occurring on short segments of the proposed Project. Context is not an appropriate factor for the characterization of social effects and is, therefore, not provided. WCGT has consulted with participating Gitanyow Nation members who have historically used or currently use the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC RSA to identify potential resource use issues, features and activities which may be disturbed by construction and cleanup activities of the proposed Project. The implementation of appropriate mitigation will reduce the potential adverse effects arising from construction and operations activities within the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes LSA and RSA.

The known potential residual adverse effects of the proposed Project on Gitanyow Nation’s Aboriginal Interests are:

• disruption of subsistence activities during construction and operations;

• alteration of subsistence resources during construction and operations; (specifically trapping sites associated with fur bearer habitat for marten at KP 592.1 and Kp 619.3, rabbit at KP593.9 and KP 604.3, and beaver at KP 605.1 and KP 605.9, a fishing site at KP 605, berry patches at KP 592.4, 593.5, 588.4, 588.3, 594.1, 5947, 595.7 and KP 618, mushroom harvest sites at KP 628.2 and KPN 633.3, and medicinal plants at KP 593.3, 595.9 and KP 596.5, and a number of hunting sites are crossed by the pipeline including specific hunting sites associated with moose habitat KP 588.2, from KP 592.4 to KP 618.3, and from KP 634,3 to Kp 636.1, bear habitat from 592.4, and grouse habitat at KP 594.3 and KP 605.6).

• disruption of trail and travelway use during construction and operations;

• disruption of habitation site use during construction and operations;

• disturbance of gathering places during construction and operations; and

• disturbance of sacred sites (specifically at KP 588.0 and KP 588.9) during construction and operations.

• feedback from Gitanyow Nation;

Page 11-278

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

• relevant land use planning objectives and strategies (see Section 6.1.4);

• previous EAs reviewed and approved under provincial environmental regulatory processes, where appropriate; and

• the professional judgment of the assessment team that includes members with over 15 years of pipeline construction and environmental and socio-economic impact assessment experience.

As indicated by the cross-references present in Table 11.12-3, all components of the biophysical environment are understood to support the land base and habitat conditions essential to the practice of traditional activities. Therefore, many potential residual effects discussed below, although presented with respect to current use of land and resources for traditional purposes, are assessed in consideration of all pertinent biophysical resources known or assumed to be of importance to Gitanyow Nation for traditional use.

Table 11.12-8 provides a summary of the evaluation of the potential residual social effects of the construction and operations of the proposed Project on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes. The rationale used to evaluate each of the residual social effects is provided below.

TABLE 11.12-8

EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL EFFECTS OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Temporal Context 1

Potential Residual Effects Spatial Boundary Spatial Duration Frequency Reversibility Magnitude Probability Confidence 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Subsistence Activities 1.1 Disruption of subsistence activities. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High High 2 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Subsistence Resources 2.1 Alteration of subsistence resources. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short to long-term Medium High Moderate 3 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Trails and Travelways 3.1 Disruption of trail and travelway use. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 4 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Habitation Sites 4.1 Disruption of habitation site use. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 5 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Cultural Sites 5.1 Disturbance of gathering places. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 5.2 Disturbance of sacred sites. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate Note: 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA.

Potential Cumulative Effects The potential and likely residual effects associated with the proposed Project on Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes are identified in the following subsections along with the identification of existing activities or reasonably foreseeable developments acting in combination with the proposed Project, as well as the cumulative effect and, if warranted, additional mitigation.

An evaluation of the proposed Project’s contribution to cumulative effects was conducted. Details of the evaluation are also discussed in each of the following subsections.

Page 11-279

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

Purposes. This will facilitate the identification of any overlapping residual effects from other projects and activities on Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes.

The potential residual effects for Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes were described in Section 11.12.3 and appear in Table 11.12-9 along with the identification of potential projects and activities that could act in combination with the proposed Project.

TABLE 11.12-9

POTENTIAL RESIDUAL EFFECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS OF THE PROJECT ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES CONSIDERED FOR THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

Potential Existing Activity/Reasonably Foreseeable Residual Project Spatial Temporal Potential Developments Acting in Combination with the Effect Activity Boundary1 Boundary Cumulative Effect Proposed Project Disruption of All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock subsistence components operations disruption of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial activities subsistence development, transportation and infrastructure activities development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Alteration of All Project RSA Past Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock subsistence components development, alteration of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial resources construction, subsistence development, transportation and infrastructure operations resources development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Disruption of All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock trail and components operations disruption of trail grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial travelway use and travelway use development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance.

Page 11-280

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-9 Cont'd

Potential Existing Activity/Reasonably Foreseeable Residual Project Spatial Temporal Potential Developments Acting in Combination with the Effect Activity Boundary1 Boundary Cumulative Effect Proposed Project Disruption of All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock habitation site components operations disruption of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial use habitation site use development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Disturbance All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock of gathering components operations disturbance of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial places gathering places development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Disturbance All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock of sacred components operations disturbance of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial sites sacred sites development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Note: 1 RSA = Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA.

Table 11.12-10 describes additional mitigation that the proposed Project will implement to manage the risk of potential cumulative effects on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes. After implementation of proposed mitigation, residual cumulative effects on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes are described.

TABLE 11.12-10

MITIGATION FOR POTENTIAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS AND IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Potential Cumulative Effect Additional Mitigation Potential Residual Cumulative Effect Cumulative disruption of • Continue to notify Gitanyow Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative effects subsistence activities proposed Project when changes occur. on disruption of subsistence activities • Communicate with Gitanyow Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules.

Page 11-281

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-10 Cont'd

Potential Cumulative Effect Additional Mitigation Potential Residual Cumulative Effect Cumulative alteration of • Consult with Gitanyow Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable Project contribution to cumulative subsistence resources future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any alteration of subsistence resources cumulative concerns related to the habitation sites within the RSA. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disruption of trail • Continue to notify Gitanyow Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative and travelway use proposed Project when changes occur. disruption of trail and travelway use • Consult with Gitanyow Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the trails and travelways within the RSA. • Communicate with Gitanyow Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disruption of • Continue to notify Gitanyow Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative habitation site use proposed Project when changes occur. disruption of habitation site use • Consult with Gitanyow Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the habitation sites within the RSA. • Communicate with Gitanyow Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disturbance of • Continue to notify Gitanyow Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative gathering places proposed Project when changes occur. disturbance of gathering places • Consult with Gitanyow Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the gathering places within the RSA. • Communicate with Gitanyow Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disturbance of • Continue to notify Gitanyow Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative sacred sites proposed Project when changes occur. disturbance of sacred sites • Consult with Gitanyow Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the sacred sites within the RSA. • Communicate with Gitanyow Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Note: 1 RSA = Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA.

Evaluation of Potential Residual Cumulative Effects Table 11.12-11 provides a summary of the evaluation of the potential cumulative environmental effects of the proposed Project on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC. Summary of Assessment of Potential Effects on Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Page 11-282

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.12-11

EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Temporal Context 1

Project Contribution to Cumulative Effects on Disruption of Subsistence Activities As discussed in Section 11.12.3, the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes LSA and RSA are used for various subsistence activities including hunting, fishing, trapping and plant gathering. These subsistence activities will be disturbed during the construction and operations phases of the proposed Project at particular locations and specific times.

Reasonably foreseeable developments may also disturb subsistence activities (Appendix 3-E). For example, multiple pipeline projects such as the Coastal GasLink Pipeline Project (Coastal GasLink Pipeline Ltd.), Prince Rupert Gas Transmission (Prince Rupert Gas Transmission Ltd.), North Montney Project (NGTL), and Enbridge NGP (Northern Gateway Pipelines) will cross some of the same asserted traditional territories as the Gitanyow Nation by the proposed Project. Existing activities contributing to disturbances of nature-based activities include natural resource, and oil and gas developments. Existing and reasonably foreseeable developments occurring within the wider Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA will contribute to cumulative disruptions to subsistence activities at the regional scale.

The mitigation proposed in Table 11.12-10 will reduce the proposed Project-related cumulative effects on disruption of subsistence activities. WCGT will continue to notify Gitanyow Nation of the schedule updates for the proposed Project when changes occur and review the proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules.

As identified in Tables 11.12-8 and 11.12-11, there are no situations where there is a high probability of occurrence of a permanent or long-term social effect or cumulative effect on the Current Use of Land and

Page 11-283

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

Resources for Traditional Purposes VC of high magnitude that cannot be technically or economically mitigated.

The identification of issues raised and potential effects to Gitanyow Nation’s Aboriginal Interests did not identify any interactions not already identified in Section 6.1.5 (Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes Effects Assessment). The assessment of potential effects on Gitanyow Nation’ Aboriginal Interests is consistent with the assessment of potential effects on Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes provided in Section 6.1.5. The characterization of effects with regard to Gitanyow Nation’s Aboriginal Interests remain fully consistent with Section 6.1.5. Readers should refer to Section 6.0 for the complete assessment discussion of the potential adverse residual social effects listed above, which includes the characterization of these potential adverse residual social effects, the determination of significance and confidence in the prediction as well as the rationale for the determination of significance.

11.12.6 Other Interests of Gitanyow Nation and Mitigation The identification of issues raised by Gitanyow Nation with respect to potential environmental, economic, social, heritage and health effects of the proposed Project did not identify any interactions not already identified in Sections 11.12.3 and 11.19. Readers should refer to the Sections of the application cross-referenced in Table 11.12-7 for the complete effects assessment discussion related to each of Gitanyow Nation’s other identified interests.

11.13 Lax Kw’alaams Nation The following Sections report on the results of the Aboriginal Consultation Plan for Lax Kw’alaams Nation

11.13.1 Background Information This Section provides available background information that describes the practices, traditions or customs that Lax Kw’alaams Nation is currently engaging in within the vicinity of or in relation to, the proposed Project area. The literature/desktop review was conducted in a manner consistent with the methods described in Section 3.2 of the application.

11.13.1.1 Community Profile Lax Kw’alaams Nation is a Coast Tsimshian tribe with 78 reserves on B.C.’s north coast, with a combined area of approximately 11,898.7 ha. Most of this land is situated on the Skeena River, Portland inlet and Work Channel (Government of B.C. [GBC] 2013).The main community, Lax Kw’alaams IR 1 is located in Port Simpson B.C. (GBC 2013). As of September 2013, the registered population of Lax Kw’alaams Nation was 3,654 members (AANDC 2013). In 1834 Port Simpson was a Hudson Bay Company trading post (called fort Simpson at that time) (Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2013).

The name Lax Kw’alaams comes from an ancient camp site used by the Gispaxlo’ots tribe called “Laxlgu’alaams” which translates to “Island of the wild roses” (Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2013). Today the Coast Tshmian tribes are made up of 14 tribes, 9 of which reside on the lower Skeena River and are represented by the allied Tsimshian Tribes (Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2013). The traditional language of Lax Kw’alaams Nation is Sm’algyax (Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2013). Tsimshian traditional society was matrilineal, meaning children inherit property and social ranking through their mother’s family (Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2013). Waap (houses), controlled the territory and resources necessary to sustain waap members, such as habitation sites, fishing sites, property, legends and dances (Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2013).

Historically, Tsimshian societal structure was complex, and community members closely followed their roles in that structure (Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2013). The rich history of the Tsimshian is preserved mostly through an oral tradition called adaawx which means ‘truth telling’ (Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2013). Lax Kw’alaams Nation was divided into nine tribes with their own unique lands, bounded by rivers and other natural features (Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2013). It was understood that each tribe had “exclusive use and control of the natural resources” within these natural boundaries (Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2013). Any group wanting to trade or use resources in these territories would need permission from that tribe, sometimes paying a toll to do so (Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2013).

Page 11-284

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

11.13.1.2 Lax Kw’alaams Nation asserted Traditional Territory Lax Kw’alaams Nation has a total of 78 reserves, including: alastair 80 (4a), alastair 81 (4 ha), alastair 82 (4 ha), alder Creek 70 (4 ha), Bill Lake 37 (1.40 ha), Birnie Island 18 (45.90 ha), Burnt Cliff Islands 20 (27.10 ha), Carm Creek 38 (2 ha), Channel Islands 33 (ha), Dashken 22 (3 ha), Dundas Island 32B (18.20 ha), Dzagayap 73 (8.10 ha), Dzagayap 74 (4.10 ha), Ensheshese 13 (18.20 ha), Ensheshese 53 (2.30 ha), Far West Point 34 (4 ha), Finlayson Island 10 (165.90 ha), Gitandoiks 75 (4 ha), Gitandoiks 76 ( 4 ha ), Iakgwas 69 (0.40 ha), Iakvas 68 (20 ha), Iakwylgyiyaps 78 (4.20 ha), Imkusiyan 65 (5 ha), Kasika 36 (2.50 ha), Kasika 71 (3.80 ha), Kasika 72 (4.20 ha), Kateen River 39 (1.60 ha), Ketai 28 (1.90 ha), Khtahda 10 (1.40 ha), Khutzemateen 49 (2.60 ha), Khyek 8 (15.40 ha), Klakelse 86 (14.20 ha), Knamadeek 52 (2 ha), Knames 45 (6.60 ha), Knames 46 (11.10 ha), Knokmolks 67 (2.20 ha), Kasbasn 50 (1.60 ha), Ksadagamks 43 (2.30 ha), Ksadsks 44 (1.80 ha), Ksagwisgwas 62 (19.30 ha), Ksagwisgwas 63 (3.50 ha), Ksames 85 (8.10 ha)., Kshaoom 23 (2.60 ha), Kstus 83 (11.40 ha), Kstus 84 (14.60 ha), Ktamgaodzen 51 (4.40 ha), Kyex 64 (3.10 ha), Lachmach 16 (11.20 ha), Lakelse 25 (1.70 ha), Lakgeas 87 (4.90 ha), Lax Kwa’alaams 1 (10857.30 ha), Maganktoon 56 (3.60), Maklaksadagmaks 41 (3.60 ha), Maklaksadagmaks 42 (17.30 ha), Me-Yan_Law 47 (2.90 ha), Meanlaw 24 (8,40 ha), Metanlow 58 (33.40 ha), Ndakdolk 54 (2.10 ha), Nishanocknawnak 35 (49.40 ha), Pitt Island 27 (2.20 ha), Prince Leboo Island 32 (83.40 ha), Psacelay 77 (3.90 ha), Red Bluff 88 (135.50 ha), Salvus 26 (1.30 ha), Scuttsap 11 (1.50 ha), Scuttsap 11a (11.30a), Spakels 17 (7.70 ha), Spanaknok 57 (1.80 ha), Spayaks 60 (1.10 ha), Spokwan 48 (2 ha), toon 15 (8.10 ha), Tsemknawaloan 79 (4.80 ha), Tymgowzan 12 (29.50 ha), Union Bay 31 (41.20 ha), Wilskaskammel 14 (3.20). Wudzimagon 61 (2.20 ha) and Zayas Island 32A (6.40 ha). Lax Kw’alaams Nation asserted traditional territory is include in the Strategic Land Use Planning agreement between Lax Kw’alaams First Nation and the Province of British Columbia (Government of British Columbia 2014). A map of Lax Kw’alaams Nation asserted traditional territory, Indian Reserves and Aboriginal Communities is provided below (Figure 11.13-1).

Page 11-285

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

11.13.1.3 Traditional Land and Resource Use

Fishing, hunting, trapping and gathering plant resources are traditional activities that continue to be practiced by Lax Kw’alaams Nation community members (the EAO 2008). Lax Kw’alaams Nation community members report that culturally modified trees are common in their asserted traditional territory as well (the EAO 2008).

Trails and Travelways Trails used by Lax Kw’alaams Nation members include the Skeena Trail, which connects Metlakatla inland towards Terrace. This trail was used as a trade route. Another trail, the Work Channel Trail, ran from the mouth of the Skeena River northward to the Nass River, eventually connecting with Meziadin Lake. Dense vegetation made such trails essential; however other travel was often via waterways (Rescan 2009b).

Habitation An ancient Lax Kwa’laams village at the Lakelse River ancient city is known to occur (BCEAO 2008, Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2010, Rescan 2009).

Hunting Desktop traditional land and resource use information related to hunting in the Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA for Lax Kw’alaams Nation was not available during compilation of this report.

Trapping Desktop traditional land and resource use information related to trapping in the Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA for Lax Kw’alaams Nation was not available during compilation of this report.

Fishing Fishing is a central element of Lax Kw’alaams Nation culture. Lax Kw’alaams Nation members continue to use fishing sites in northwest BC, primarily along and between the Lower Skeena and Nass Rivers, as well as the north end of the Grenville Channel (Rescan 2009b). The salmon and eulachon harvests remain important, and historically these fish species “dictated the movement of Coast Tshimshian peoples” (Lax Kw’alaams Indian Band v. Canada 2008).

Plant Gathering Desktop traditional land and resource use information related to plant harvesting in the Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA for Lax Kw’alaams Nation was not available during compilation of this report.

Gathering Places Known Lax Kwa’laams gathering places occur at Lakelse Lake, Dundas Island and at Stephens Island (BCEAO 2008, Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2010, Rescan 2009).

Sacred Sites Desktop traditional land and resource use information relative to sacred sites in the Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA for Lax Kw’alaams Nation was not available during compilation of this report.

Where available, approximate distances and directions of specific geographic areas known to be used by Lax Kw’alaams Nation for traditional land and resource use in relation to the application Corridor centerline were determined based on the information compiled through a review of the available literature and are provided in Table 11.13-1.

Page 11-287

! !

.! !

! Gitlaxt'aamiks ! ! ! .! Gitwinksihlkw KP 50 er ¯ iv R s RED BLUFF 88 s Kitwanga a N ! Laxgalts'ap .! ! ! KP 700 Kitseguecla ! Gingolx KNAMES 45 MAKLAKSADAGMAKS 42 KNAMES 46 MAKLAKSADAGMAKS 41 K5A ME-YAN-LAW 47 KSADAGAMKS 43 KP 750.9 .!)" SPAKELS 17 KSADSKS 44 SPOKWAN 48 sumkalum Rive TYMGOWZAN 12 KP 100 it r BIRNIE ISLAND 18 .! K FINLAYSON ISLAND 19 KHUTZEMATEEN 49 KATEEN RIVER 39 ! KSABASN 50 CARM CREEK 38 KSAMES 85 ZAYAS ISLAND 32A KTAMGAODZEN 51 UNION BAY 31 KLAKELSE 86 ^_ ! DUNDAS .! Usk )" KP 50 Lax Kw'alaams KNAMADEEK 52 ! ISLAND 32B ! ENSHESHESE 53 TOON 15 LAKGEAS 87 )" CHANNEL LAX ENSHESHESE 13 MEYANLOW 58 )" KSTUS 84 LAKELSE 25 PRINCE LEBOO ISLANDS 33 KW'ALAAMS 1 SPANAKNOK 57 Terrace UV892 WILSKASKAMMEL 14 ISLAND 32 KSTUS 83 ! NISHANOCKNAWNAK 35 FAR WEST KP 150.! BILL LAKE 37 KASIKA 36 POINT 34 Metlakatla SPAYAKS 60 BURNT CLIFF ISLANDS 20 ! KSAGWISGWAS 62 Lakelse Lake NDAKDOLK 54 !Prince Rupert KASIKS RIVER 29 ! KASIKA 72 MAGANKTOON 56 WUDZIMAGON 61 KASIKA 71 er v LACHMACH 16 ! i GITANDOIKS 76 .! R ^_ Port Edward a GITANDOIKS 75 KP 102.7 een KP 182.1 Sk DZAGAYAP 74 PSACELAY 77 KHYEX 8 DZAGAYAP 73 ! Proposed Prince Rupert KYEX 64 IAKWULGYIYAPS 78 LNG (on Ridley Island) TSEMKNAWALQAN 79

KSAGWISGWAS 63 SALVUS 26 ! Kitimat IMKUSIYAN 65 DASHKEN 22 KHTAHDA 10 ALASTAIR 80

ALASTAIR 81

KSHAOOM 23

ALASTAIR 82 Kitamaat Village

Morice

MEANLAW 24

ALDER CREEK 70 Lake

KNOKMOLKS 67 Although there is no reason to believe that there are

any errors associated with the data used to generate SCUTTSAP 11A this product or in the product itself, users of these data Kitkatla ! are advised that errors in the data may be present.

SCUTTSAP 11

IAKVAS 68 !

B R IT I S H

KETAI 28

C O LU MB I A

! PITT ISLAND 27 !

Map Extent

! IAKGWAS 69

a c ! i

f i c

c e !

n ! Vancouver ctoria US A ! Vi ! ! Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.13-1

LAX KW’ALAAMS NATION TRADITIONAL LAND AND RESOURCE USE LOCATIONS WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL LAND AND RESOURCE USE REGIONAL STUDY AREA

Approximate Distance and Direction from the Proposed Project Activity/Site Description Trails and Travelways 55.6 km southwest of KPN 751 Skeena Trail 59 km north of KPK 654 Work Channel Trail Habitation Sites 77.4 km southwest of KPN 714 Lakelse River ancient city Fishing Crosses at KP 544 Skeena River Crosses Kitsault alternate (9.9 km) Nass River 3 km north of KPN 717.5 Fishery Bay- Nass Valley 63.2 km southwest of KP 750.9 Dundas Island Group Gathering Places 91 km southeast of KPN 696 Lakelse Lake 54.3 km southwest of KPN 751 Dundas Island 87.9 km southwest of KPN 751 Stephens Island Sources: BCEAO 2008, Lax Kw’alaams First Nation 2010, Rescan 2009

11.13.2 Consultation Activities Undertaken This Section of the application summarizes the consultation activities undertaken by WCGT since April 19, 2012, when Lax Kw’alaams Nation was initially approached by WCGT. Lax Kw’alaams Nation was formally notified of the proposed Project on September 10, 2012, in alignment with the Aboriginal Consultation Plan for the proposed Project. The information in this Section is drawn from the May 15, 2013 (July 2013) and December 31, 2013 (March 2014) Aboriginal Consultation Reports for the proposed Project.

11.13.2.1 Past and Planned Consultation Activities WCGT provided the proposed Project notification letter to Lax Kw’alaams Nation on September 10, 2012. WCGT has continually shared Project information with Lax Kw’alaams Nation since that date and will continue to do so as the proposed Project evolves.

WCGT first met with Lax Kw’alaams Nation on April 19, 2012 to share Project-related information, to determine the community’s interest and to develop a process for their involvement in proposed Project activities. Through a series of subsequent meetings both in-person, over the phone and via e-mail, Lax Kw’alaams Nation elected to participate in biophysical field studies when participants were available and to conduct TLU and socio-economic studies for the proposed Project. To date, Lax Kw’alaams Nation has agreed to our request that they conduct a socio-economic or TLU study. Should they be completed, the final results of the TLU study will form the basis for on-going dialogue between WCGT and Lax Kw’alaams Nation to inform detailed planning for the proposed Project.

Capacity funding in support of ongoing consultation has been offered. To date, an agreement for funding has not been reached. The intent of this funding is to provide for meetings and other activities with WCGT and the regulatory agencies, related to the proposed Project and to identify relevant effects of the Project on Lax Kw’alaams Nation, if any and identify and consider relevant mitigation to address those effects

Throughout the consultation process, Lax Kw’alaams Nation and WCGT have held discussions and met on various Project-related subjects. These discussions have included: review of proposed route; contracting and employment opportunities with the next meeting scheduled for Mar 2014; economic benefits; and routing of the proposed Project corridor through their asserted traditional territory. A technical marine review meeting including marine construction and underwater pipeline methodology has been requested but not arranged to date. To date there has been some involvement in marine activities

Page 11-288

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

and invitations for all biophysical activities were offered. Community meetings have been offered for Lax Kw’alaams Nation community members, but not confirmed date has been agreed upon.

The Planned consultation activities by WCGT with Lax Kw’alaams Nation include: the distribution and review of a draft ancillary site map outlining the proposed features such as access roads, compressor stations, campsites, etc; providing an overview of biophysical field data results compiled for the proposed Project; submission of Aboriginal Consultation Reports for review and comment; discussion of mitigation options; Marine technical review; invitation to participate in marine studies and investigations where applicable presentation on the process and content of the application for an EAC; discussion of training, employment and contracting opportunities; community meeting(s) and discussion of economic benefits.

11.13.2.2 Changes to the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Aboriginal Consultation Reports WCGT shared the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Aboriginal Consultation Reports (1 and 2) with Lax Kw’alaams Nation for review and comment prior to final submission to the EAO. Through consultation activities to date, Lax Kw’alaams Nation has not identified any proposed changes to the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Reports for the proposed Project.

11.13.2.3 Practices, Traditions or Customs Identified Through Consultation Activities Information related to the practices, traditions or customs Lax Kw’alaams Nation traditionally engaged in or is currently engaging in, in the vicinity of or in relation to, the proposed Project area is provided in Section 11.12.1. This information was collected through literature and desktop review.

11.13.2.4 Issues, Concerns and Resolutions Key issues and concerns raised by Lax Kw’alaams Nation are provided in Section 11.19. This information was collected primarily through consultation activities with Lax Kw’alaams Nation (see Section 3.2.2. WCGT’s responses to these key issues and concerns raised are also provided in Section 11.19 as well as cross-references to where these issues are considered in the application.

11.13.3 Potential Effects to Aboriginal Interests The identification of Lax Kw’alaams Nation’s present, past and anticipated future uses and traditional use of the proposed Project area described in Sections 11.13.1 and 11.13.2 was conducted through literature/desktop review. The issues identified from these sources also have informed the potential effects of the proposed Project on Lax Kw’alaams Nation’s identified Aboriginal Interests (Section 11.13.2). Where potential interactions were likely to occur, the potential effect is identified in Table 11.13-2. Table 11.13-2 also identifies specific geographic areas compiled from these sources to be important (as available) as well as the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate those effects. Where there is overlap between an Aboriginal interest and a VC, the information from other Sections of the application are cross-referenced and summarized in Table 11.13-2.

Based on the information collected to date and presented in Section 11.13.1.3, known interactions of the proposed Project with Lax Kw’alaams Nation’s Aboriginal Interests include crossings of fishing sites at KP 544, and KPK 9.9. At this time, no known hunting sites, trappings, sites, travelways, plant harvesting sites, gathering places or sacred sites, trails occur within 54.3 km of the proposed Project Route. As a result, no identified potential effects for these Aboriginal Interests have been identified. Should additional interactions on Aboriginal Interests be identified through ongoing consultation with Lax Kw’alaams Nation’s then the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate potential effects will be implemented as outlined in Table 11.13-2.

Page 11-289

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.13-2

POTENTIAL EFFECTS TO ABORIGINAL INTERESTS IDENTIFIED BY LAX KW’ALAAMS NATION

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Identified Interest: Hunting Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ hunting Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA (No activities schedules, as required, prior to the commencement of construction. activities during hunting • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of construction and activities are new clearing and land disturbance necessary. operations known to occur • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where (Section 6.1.5 - in the RSA feasible. Current Use of Lands and • All work site personnel will be oriented on proper response to wildlife Resources for encounters. No firearms are permitted on worksites unless previously Traditional authorized by WCGT for use by qualified Wildlife Monitor(s) for the Purposes). purpose of protecting workers from wildlife under specified conditions. • No hunting will be allowed by Project construction personnel on or near the proposed Project site during working hours, or while they are staying in Project accommodations. • The use of the construction right-of-way or Project access roads by Project personnel for hunting is prohibited during the construction phases of the Project. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the AMP Framework including access control measures (e.g., signage, road closures, restrictions, access control structures, vegetation screens) to reduce unauthorized motorized access. All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of components/ hunting sites Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify hunting sites that subsistence RSA(No hunting warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during sites are known measures: construction and to occur in the − adhering to species-specific timing constraints; operations RSA − leaving breaks in the pipeline trench to allow animals to cross; (Section 6.1.5 - Current Use of − limiting the use of chemical applications; and Lands and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Resources for participating Aboriginal communities. Traditional • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric Purposes). environment, marine ecosystems, fish, vegetation, wetlands and wildlife (Sections 4.1, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 of the application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce potential effects on subsistence hunting activities and wildlife habitat. Identified Interest: Trapping Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities and registered Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence trappers involved in the WCGT Aboriginal Engagement Program of subsistence RSA(No trapping work locations and construction schedules a minimum of 14 days prior activities during trapping activities to the commencement of construction. construction and activities are • Prohibit vandalism or theft of trapper equipment or trapped animals by operations known to occur Project workers. Report all violators to BC’s Fish and Wildlife (Section 6.1.5 - in the RSA) authorities. Current Use of • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of Lands and new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Resources for Traditional • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Purposes). feasible. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements.

Page 11-290

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.13-2 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of Operations components/ trapping Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify trapping sites that subsistence RSA(No sites warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during trapping sites measures: construction and are known to − maintaining access to the trap line; operations occur in the − moving of trap line equipment by the trapper prior to construction; (Section 6.1.5 - RSA and Current Use of Lands and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Resources for participating Aboriginal communities. Traditional • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric Purposes). environment, vegetation, wetlands and wildlife (Sections 4.1, 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 of the application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence trapping activities and wildlife habitat. Identified interest: Fishing Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA(subsistenc fishing schedules, as required, prior to the commencement of construction. activities during e fishing activities • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of construction and activities are new clearing and land disturbance necessary. operations known to occur • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where (Section 6.1.5 - within the RSA. feasible. Current Use of Known fishing Lands and • Prohibit recreational fishing in freshwater environments by project sites occur at Resources for personnel on or in the vicinity of the construction right-of-way, access KP 544 and Traditional roads, permanent facility sites, work camps and ancillary sites. The use KPK 9.9). Purposes). of the construction right-of-way or Project access roads by Project personnel for fishing is prohibited during the construction phases of the Project. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement measures outlined in the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework [Section 6.1]) to prevent increased access along new corridors created by the construction right-of-way and access roads, thereby minimizing potential for effects on fish due to activities such as fishing and off-road vehicle access (e.g., forded crossings). All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of components/ fishing sites Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify fishing sites that subsistence RSA( Known warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during fishing sites measures: construction and occur at KP 544 − recording and mapping of fishing locales; operations and KPK 9.9). − strict adherence to the regulations, standards and guidelines set (Section 6.1.5 - by provincial and federal regulatory agencies for watercourse Current Use of crossings; and Lands and Resources for − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Traditional participating Aboriginal communities. Purposes). • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the marine ecosystems, fish and wetlands (Sections 4.4, 4.5 and 4.7 of the application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence fishing activities and the aquatic environment.

Page 11-291

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.13-2 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Identified Interest: Plant Gathering Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA (no plant schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of activities during subsistence gathering construction. construction and plant gathering activities • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of operations activities are new clearing and land disturbance necessary. (Section 6.1.5 - known to occur • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Current Use of within the RSA) feasible. Lands and Resources for • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance Traditional activities. Purposes). • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of components/ plant Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify plant gathering subsistence RSA(no gathering sites that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the resources during subsistence sites following measures: construction and plant gathering − limiting the use of chemical applications; operations sites are known − replacement of plant species during restoration; (Section 6.1.5 - to occur within Current Use of − avoidance of the site; and the RSA Lands and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Resources for participating Aboriginal communities. Traditional • All construction equipment must be clean and free of soil or vegetative Purposes). debris prior to its arrival on the construction site to reduce the risk of weed introduction. Any equipment which arrives in a dirty condition will not be allowed on the work site until it has been cleaned off at a suitable location. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of marine ecosystems, vegetation and wetlands (Sections 4.1, 4.6 and 4.7 of this application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence plant gathering activities, wetlands and vegetation. Identified Interest: Ability to Practice Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of trail Operations components/ use of trails Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction and travelway use RSA(trails and and schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction travelway use is travelways construction. and operations known to occur • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 - in the RSA. No new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of known trails are • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Lands and known to occur feasible. Resources for closer than Traditional • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable 55.6 km from Purposes). Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify trails and the proposed travelways that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more Project route) of the following measures: − detailed mapping, photographic recording and avoidance of the location by the development; − should avoidance of a site not be feasible, mitigation consisting of detailed recording and controlled excavations may be implemented; and/or − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved right-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority.

Page 11-292

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.13-2 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, See above See above • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the See above Operations transportation and access related to marine and freshwater navigability (cont’d) and marine safety. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. Construction, All Project Reduced • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ use of Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction habitation site use RSA (habitation habitation schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction site are known sites construction. and operations to occur in the • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 - RSA. No known new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of trails are known • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Lands and to occur closer feasible. Resources for than 7.4 km Traditional • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable from the Purposes). Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify habitation sites that proposed warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following Project route) measures: − detailed mapping, photographic recording and avoidance of the location by the proposed development; − should avoidance of a site not be feasible, mitigation consisting of detailed recording and controlled excavations may be implemented; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved rights-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority (e.g., MFLNRO or landowner). This restriction applies to all biophysical surveying and land surveying activities. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. Identified Interest: Cultural Pursuits Construction, All Project Disturbance • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disturbance of Operations components/ of gathering Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction gathering places RSA(gathering places schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction places exist construction. and operations within the RSA. • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 – there are no new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of gathering • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Land and places known to feasible. Resources for occur closer Traditional • than 54.3 km Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Purposes Effects Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify gathering places from the assessment). proposed that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following measures: Project Route) − detailed recording, mapping and avoidance; − assess visual impact; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements.

Page 11-293

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.13-2 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, See above See above • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be See above Operations confined to approved rights-of-way, access roads or trails except where (cont’d) specifically authorized by the appropriate authority (e.g., MFLNRO or landowner). This restriction applies to all biophysical surveying and land surveying activities. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric environment (Section 4.1 of this application). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. Construction, All Project Disturbance • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disturbance of Operations components/ of sacred Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction sacred sites during RSA(No known sites schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of construction and sacred sites construction. operations exist within the • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 – RSA). new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Land and feasible. Resources for Traditional • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Purposes Effects Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify sacred sites that assessment). warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following measures: − detailed recording, mapping and avoidance; − assess visual impact; − additional mitigation will be refined and optimized through community discussions; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved right-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric environment (Section 4.1 of this application). • Implement the contingency measures identified in the TLU Sites Discovery Contingency Plan (Section 5.15) in the event TLU sites not previously identified are found during construction. • If archaeological, paleontological or historical sites (e.g., modified bone, pottery fragments, fossils) are discovered during construction, suspend work in proximity (i.e., within 30 m). No work at that particular location shall continue until permission is granted by the appropriate regulatory authority. Follow the contingency measures identified in the Heritage Resources Discovery Contingency Plan (see Section 5.8). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. Notes: 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA. 2 Detailed mitigation are outlined in the proposed Project-specific EMPs (Appendices 3-A and 3-B of this application).

11.13.4 Mitigation and Environmental Management Strategies Consistent with the methodology described in Section 3.0, Table 11.13-2 summarizes the mitigation or environmental management strategies that address identified effects to Lax Kw’alaams Nation’s Aboriginal Interests.

WCGT will continue to consult with Lax Kw’alaams Nation to refine site-specific mitigation measures to reduce effects to Lax Kw’alaams Nation’s Aboriginal Interests.

Page 11-294

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

11.13.5 Characterization of Effects to Aboriginal Interests after Mitigation This subsection of the Application presents an assessment of the potential residual effects of the proposed Project on Lax Kw’alaams Nation’s Aboriginal Interests via the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC.

The potential residual effects of the proposed Project on Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC are discussed in a qualitative manner by analysing the relative likelihood and consequence of each of the potential effects occurring on short segments of the proposed Project. Context is not an appropriate factor for the characterization of social effects and is, therefore, not provided. WCGT has consulted with participating Lax Kw’alaams Nation members who have historically used or currently use the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC RSA to identify potential resource use issues, features and activities which may be disturbed by construction and cleanup activities of the proposed Project. The implementation of appropriate mitigation will reduce the potential adverse effects arising from construction and operations activities within the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes LSA and RSA.

The known potential residual adverse effects of the proposed Project on Lax Kw’alaams Nation’s Aboriginal Interests are:

• disruption of subsistence activities during construction and operations;

• alteration of subsistence resources (specifically fishing sites at KP 544 and KPK 9.9) during construction and operations;

• disruption of trail and travelway use during construction and operations;

• disruption of habitation site use during construction and operations;

• disturbance of gathering places during construction and operations; and

• disturbance of sacred sites during construction and operations.

• feedback from Lax Kw’alaams Nation;

• relevant land use planning objectives and strategies (see Section 6.1.4);

• previous EAs reviewed and approved under provincial environmental regulatory processes, where appropriate; and

• the professional judgment of the assessment team that includes members with over 15 years of pipeline construction and environmental and socio-economic impact assessment experience.

Page 11-295

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

As indicated by the cross-references present in Table 11.13-2, all components of the biophysical environment are understood to support the land base and habitat conditions essential to the practice of traditional activities. Therefore, many potential residual effects discussed below, although presented with respect to current use of land and resources for traditional purposes, are assessed in consideration of all pertinent biophysical resources known or assumed to be of importance to Lax Kw’alaams Nation for traditional use.

Table 11.13-3 provides a summary of the evaluation of the potential residual social effects of the construction and operations of the proposed Project on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes. The rationale used to evaluate each of the residual social effects is provided below.

TABLE 11.13-3

EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL EFFECTS OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Temporal Context 1

Potential Residual Effects Confidence Spatial Boundary Spatial Duration Frequency Reversibility Magnitude Probability 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Subsistence Activities 1.1 Disruption of subsistence activities. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High High 2 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Subsistence Resources 2.1 Alteration of subsistence resources. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short to long-term Medium High Moderate 3 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Trails and Travelways 3.1 Disruption of trail and travelway use. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 4 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Habitation Sites 4.1 Disruption of habitation site use. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 5 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Cultural Sites 5.1 Disturbance of gathering places. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 5.2 Disturbance of sacred sites. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate Note: 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA.

An evaluation of the proposed Project’s contribution to cumulative effects was conducted. Details of the evaluation are also discussed in each of the following subsections.

The potential residual effects for Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes were described in Section 11.13.4 and appear in Table 11.13-4 along with the identification of potential projects and activities that could act in combination with the proposed Project.

Page 11-296

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.13-4

POTENTIAL RESIDUAL EFFECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS OF THE PROJECT ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES CONSIDERED FOR THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

Potential Existing Activity/Reasonably Foreseeable Residual Project Spatial Temporal Potential Developments Acting in Combination with the Effect Activity Boundary1 Boundary Cumulative Effect Proposed Project Disruption of All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock subsistence components operations disruption of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial activities subsistence development, transportation and infrastructure activities development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Alteration of All Project RSA Past Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock subsistence components development, alteration of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial resources construction, subsistence development, transportation and infrastructure operations resources development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Disruption of All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock trail and components operations disruption of trail grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial travelway use and travelway use development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Disruption of All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock habitation site components operations disruption of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial use habitation site use development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance.

Page 11-297

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.13-4 Cont'd

Table 11.13-5 describes additional mitigation that the proposed Project will implement to manage the risk of potential cumulative effects on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes. After implementation of proposed mitigation, residual cumulative effects on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes are described.

TABLE 11.13-5

MITIGATION FOR POTENTIAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS AND IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Potential Cumulative Effect Additional Mitigation Potential Residual Cumulative Effect Cumulative disruption of • Continue to notify Lax Kw’alaams Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative effects subsistence activities proposed Project when changes occur. on disruption of subsistence activities • Communicate with Lax Kw’alaams Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative alteration of • Consult with Lax Kw’alaams Nation regarding known reasonably Project contribution to cumulative subsistence resources foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address alteration of subsistence resources any cumulative concerns related to the habitation sites within the RSA. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules.

Page 11-298

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.13-5 Cont'd

Potential Cumulative Effect Additional Mitigation Potential Residual Cumulative Effect Cumulative disruption of trail • Continue to notify Lax Kw’alaams Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative and travelway use proposed Project when changes occur. disruption of trail and travelway use • Consult with Lax Kw’alaams Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the trails and travelways within the RSA. • Communicate with Lax Kw’alaams Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disruption of • Continue to notify Lax Kw’alaams Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative habitation site use proposed Project when changes occur. disruption of habitation site use • Consult with Lax Kw’alaams Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the habitation sites within the RSA. • Communicate with Lax Kw’alaams Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disturbance of • Continue to notify Lax Kw’alaams Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative gathering places proposed Project when changes occur. disturbance of gathering places • Consult with Lax Kw’alaams Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the gathering places within the RSA. • Communicate with Lax Kw’alaams Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disturbance of • Continue to notify Lax Kw’alaams Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative sacred sites proposed Project when changes occur. disturbance of sacred sites • Consult with Lax Kw’alaams Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the sacred sites within the RSA. • Communicate with Lax Kw’alaams Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Note: 1 RSA = Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA.

Evaluation of Potential Residual Cumulative Effects Table 11.13-6 provides a summary of the evaluation of the potential cumulative environmental effects of the proposed Project on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC. Summary of Assessment of Potential Effects on Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Page 11-299

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.13-6

EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Temporal Context 1

Project Contribution to Cumulative Effects on Disruption of Subsistence Activities As discussed in Section 11.13.3, the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes LSA and RSA are used for various subsistence activities including hunting, fishing, trapping and plant gathering. These subsistence activities will be disturbed during the construction and operations phases of the proposed Project at particular locations and specific times.

Reasonably foreseeable developments may also disturb subsistence activities (Appendix 3-E). For example, multiple pipeline projects such as the Coastal GasLink Pipeline Project (Coastal GasLink Pipeline Ltd.), Prince Rupert Gas Transmission (Prince Rupert Gas Transmission Ltd.), North Montney Project (NGTL), and Enbridge NGP (Northern Gateway Pipelines) will cross some of the same asserted traditional territories as the Lax Kw’alaams Nation by the proposed Project. Existing activities contributing to disturbances of nature-based activities include natural resource, and oil and gas developments. Existing and reasonably foreseeable developments occurring within the wider Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA will contribute to cumulative disruptions to subsistence activities at the regional scale.

The mitigation proposed in Table 11.13-5 will reduce the proposed Project-related cumulative effects on disruption of subsistence activities. WCGT will continue to notify Lax Kw’alaams Nation of the schedule updates for the proposed Project when changes occur and review the proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules.

As identified in Tables 11.13-3 and 11.13-6, there are no situations where there is a high probability of occurrence of a permanent or long-term social effect or cumulative effect on the Current Use of Land and

Page 11-300

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

Resources for Traditional Purposes VC of high magnitude that cannot be technically or economically mitigated.

The identification of issues raised and potential effects to Lax Kw’alaams Nation’s Aboriginal Interests did not identify any interactions not already identified in Section 6.1.5 (Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes Effects Assessment). The assessment of potential effects on Lax Kw’alaams Nations’ Aboriginal Interests is consistent with the assessment of potential effects on Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes provided in Section 6.1.5. The characterization of effects with regard to Lax Kw’alaams Nation’s Aboriginal Interests remain fully consistent with Section 6.1.5. Readers should refer to Section 6.0 for the complete assessment discussion of the potential adverse residual social effects listed above, which includes the characterization of these potential adverse residual social effects, the determination of significance and confidence in the prediction as well as the rationale for the determination of significance.

11.13.6 Other Interests of Lax Kw’alaams Nation and Mitigation The identification of issues raised by Lax Kw’alaams Nation with respect to potential environmental, economic, social, heritage and health effects of the proposed Project did not identify any interactions not already identified in Sections 11.13.3 and 11.19. Readers should refer to the Sections of the application cross-referenced in Table 11.13-2 for the complete effects assessment discussion related to each of Lax Kw’alaams Nation’s other identified interests.

11.14 Metlakatla First Nation The following Sections report on the results of the Aboriginal Consultation Plan for Metlakatla First Nation

11.14.1 Background Information This Section provides available background information that describes the practices, traditions or customs that Metlakatla First Nation is currently engaging in within the vicinity of or in relation to, the proposed Project area. The literature/desktop review was conducted in a manner consistent with the methods described in Section 3.2 of the application.

11.14.1.1 Community Profile Metlakatla First Nation is one of two First Nations that make up the Coast Tsimshian Nation, which also includes Lax Kw'alaams First Nation. The name Metlakatla derives from the Sm’algyax word Maaxłakxaała, which, depending on the source, means either “a passage connecting two bodies of water,” or “the saltwater pass” (Enbridge 2011, Metlakatla 2013). The name refers to Metlakatla Pass, a narrow, protected ocean channel at the northern entrance to Prince Rupert Harbour on BC’s northern coast, which became a National Historic Site in 1972. Metlakatla Pass was traditionally the place where the Coast Tsimshian established their wintering villages (Parks Canada 2013a). Metlakatla First Nation, as with all Coastal Tsimshian groups, is comprised of both land and marine traditional territories. Tsimshian territories overall span the northwest Coast, including Prince Rupert and Terrace. The five Tsimshian communities are Gitga'at, Kitasoo/Xaixais, Kitselas, Kitsumkalum and Metlakatla First Nations (Metlakatla 2013.

Metlakatla First Nation has 16 reserves located within their asserted traditional territory, totalling 3,464.4 ha of land, seven of which are shared with Lax Kw’alaams (AANDC 2013, Avanti 2011). The main and most populated reserve, S1/2 Tsimspean IR2 (Avanti 2011), is located approximately 7 km northwest of Prince Rupert, BC, and is accessible only by sea or air. Metlakatla Ferry Services (MFS), which is owned and operated by the Metlakatla Development Corporation, provides transportation between Prince Rupert and Metlakatla (Metlakatla 2013).

As of 2013, the AANDC reported the registered population of Metlakatla First Nation to be 860 total band members, with 775 of these members living off reserve (AANDC 2013). The majority of the off-reserve population resides in Prince Rupert, BC (Metlakatla 2013).

Metlakatla First Nation's asserted traditional territory extends from coastal islands in the eastern Hecate Strait to Lakelse Lake near Terrace, BC, to Portland Canal and Observatory inlet in the north, to the

Page 11-301

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

headwaters of the Ecstall River in the south. Metlakatla First Nation’s asserted traditional territory also includes the lower portions and the mouth of the Skeena River as well as its tributaries. for thousands of years the Metlakatla people have occupied and used the resources of the Skeena watershed, the Tsimpsean Peninsula and its offshore islands, Work Channel, Portland inlet and coastal areas surrounding Prince Rupert (Metlakatla 2013). Both archaeological and genetic studies regarding Metlakatla First Nation’s asserted traditional territory have supported this claim of thousands of years of continuous habitation and land use (Cui et al. 2013, McLaren 2008).

The traditional language of the Metlakatla is the Tsimshianic language Sm’algyax, which means “the real language” which is closely related yet distinct from Southern Tsimshian. Very few Metlakatla First Nation community members are fluent in Sm’algyax, a result of residential schools as well as Metlakatla First Nation’s close proximity to Prince Rupert. Many of the Elders who were fluent in Sm’algyax have passed on (Enbridge 2011). Metlakatla First Nation has a number of qualified teachers who are working diligently to bring the language back to life. Sm’algyax classes are offered to Metlakatla First Nation community members both in Metlakatla and Prince Rupert (AANDC 2013).

The community members of Metlakatla First Nation are the present-day descendents of nine organized First Nations societies, known as the “nine tribes” of the Coast Tsimshian. Every House of the nine tribes asserts territory along the Skeena River and its tributaries, each with a summer village and several resource-use camps throughout the territory with territorial boundaries corresponding to watershed boundaries. under the Indian act, both the Metlakatla and the Lax Kw’alaams are the legal representatives of the members of the nine tribes; however, each of the tribes continues to exist today, having their own distinctive traditional political governments. The basic political, economic and social unit that governed affairs in traditional Coast Tsimshian culture was the waap or house. Each waap is part of a network of waaps sharing a common matrilineage. Each of these lineages is part of a larger matrilineal group, the p'teex or clan. The four clans of the Coast Tsimshian are the Gisbudwa'ada (Killer Whale or orca), the Lax Giik (Eagle), the Lax Gyibuu (Wolf) and the Ganhada (Raven). Membership in a waap conveys rights of access and resource use in that waap’s laxyuup or territories. Tsimshian law requires that only the hereditary chief responsible for a given laxyuup, or persons authorized by the chief, may claim ownership of that laxyuup and speak to its management. The chief manages the health of the laxyuup and is also responsible for the well-being of the waap. Present day Metlakatla hereditary chiefs are matrilineal descendants of the generations of chiefs before them who acquired, managed, defended and passed on intact the laxyuup of their waaps (Avanti 2011, Enbridge 2011).

In addition to traditional governance systems, Metlakatla First Nation also has an elected Governing Council, which is the representative government of the Metlakatla membership. The Governing Council is comprised of an elected chief and six councillors, each of whom serve 3 year terms. In March 2007, the members of Metlakatla First Nation ratified a custom election code that removed election provisions from under the jurisdiction of the Indian Act. The Governing Council functions as the governing unit of the band, administering social programs and services and collaborating with band members to steward the lands and resources through land and marine use planning, monitoring and mapping. The Governing Council also works in conjunction with the Metlakatla Development Corporation, an independent business arm of the Governing Council, to achieve the band’s economic development goals (Enbridge 2011, Metlakatla 2013).

11.14.1.2 Metlakatla First Nation Asserted Traditional Territory Metlakatlak First Nation has a total of 16 reserves, including: Avery Island 92 (20.40 ha), Dashken 22 (3 ha), Edye 93 (0.40 ha), Khtahda 10 (1.40 ha), Khyex 8 (15.40 ha), Kshaoom 23 (2.60 ha), Lakelse 25 (1.70 ha), Meanlaw 24 (8.40 ha), Rushton Island 90 (6.80 ha), S1/2 Tsimpsean 2 (3270 ha), Scuttsap 11 (1.50 ha), Shoowahtlans (Shawtlans) 4 (0.50 ha), Squaderee 91 (2.20 ha), Tuck inlet 89 (1.60 ha), Tigwell Island 21 (126.20 ha), and Wilnaskancaud 3 (2.30 ha), Metlakatla First Nation asserted traditional territory is included in the Territorial Stewardship section of the Metlakatla First Nation’s website (Metlakatla Stewardship office 2014). A map of Metlakatla Nation asserted traditional territory, Indian Reserves and Aboriginal Communities is provided below (Figure 11.14-1).

Page 11-302

Stewart !

March 2014 ¯ FIGURE 11.14-1 METLAKATLA FIRST NATION ASSERTED .! TRADITIONAL TERRITORY KP 600 KP 550 PROPOSED WESTCOAST .! .! CONNECTOR GAS TRANSMISSION PROJECT ! 8018 K5B .! Cranberry ! KP 680.4 KP 622 Junction Application Routes Allaasskkaa Alice Arm !.)" .! Cypress to Cranberry Route ( U. S . A . ) Kitsault Kitsault Route ( U. S . A . ) KP 650 37 UV Kitsault Marine Route Kispiox Nasoga Route .! ! KP 650 Nasoga M!arine Route Hazelton Alternate Route Gitlaxt'aamiks ! !New Hazelton ! Project Facilities KP 50.! Gitwinksihlkw ! Prince Rupert LNG er ^_ iv R )" K1-K4 Compressor Stations s Kitwanga s ! )" K5B Compressor Station Laxgalts'ap Na .! ! ! )" K5A Compressor Station !Gingolx KP 700 Kitseguecla UV892 Highway K5A Road .!)" Railway KP 750.9 m R Watercourse KP 100 alu iver .! k Waterbody m u s Municipality t 16 i UV ! K First Nation Land Park/Protected Area ! Metlakatla First Nation .! KP 50 Usk! Asserted Traditional Territory ! Lax Kw'alaams SCALE: 1:1,500,000 Terrace km TUCK INLET 89 0 10 20 30 40 ! (All Locations Approximate) KP 150 .! LAKELSE 25 TUGWELL ISLAND 21 Metlakatla SHOOWAHTLANS 4 ! Lakelse Lake S 1/2 TSIMPSEAN 2 ! WILNASKANCAUD 3 ! ! Prince Rupert KHYEX 8 RUSHTON ISLAND 90 NAD83 BC Albers Route current to February 5, 2014 ! Hillshade: TERA Environmental Consultants, derived from .! Natural Resources Canada 2008; Highways/Roads: ESRI d Port Edward 2005; Railways: United States National Imagery and x ^_ AVERY ISLAND 92 KP 102.7 37 Mapping Agency 2000; Hydrography: IHS Inc. 2004; m . a R

a UV n i Municipalities and Regional Districts: BC Forests, Lands and l e t e ve Natural Resource Operations 2007; Populated Places: a KP 182.1 k r k S Natural Resources Canada 2010; First Nation Land: a l SQUADEREE 91 t Government of Canada 2014; Treaty Settlement Land: IHS

e ! SCUTTSAP 11 Inc. 2013; Parks/Protected Areas, Concervancy Areas: BC M Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations 2008. _ 1 _

4 Although there is no reason to believe that there are

1 KHTAHDA 10

_ any errors associated with the data used to generate 1 ! Kitimat this product or in the product itself, users of these data 1 MEANLAW 24 g i are advised that errors in the data may be present.

F EDYE 93 _ 8

1 KSHAOOM 23 0 Proposed Prince Rupert Morice Mapped By: AJS Checked By: JW 8 ! t \

1 LNG (on Ridley Island) ! 1 DASHKEN 22 Lake n Kitamaat Village o i Fort Nelson t c B R IT I S H e S _ s C O LU MB I A e Fort r AB u ! g i St. John

F !

_ ! A Kitkatla Map ! E \ Extent 0

1 Dawson v e r

\ Creek ! U L

T ! \ ! S Tlell

E Prince L I

F P

_ George

P a Prince Rupert

A c ! M i

\ f 16 i 8 c Williams 1 VU

0 O 8

\ Lake c Kamloops P e !

M a -

S n I Kelowna ! G \ : P Vancouver US A Victoria Kelowna ! ! ! Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

11.14.1.3 Traditional Land and Resource Use Setting Metlakatla First Nation’s traditional land use continues to be seasonally driven with specific resources harvested from the same tracts of land and water year after year. Their traditional seasonal land use patterns involve winter occupation at large, permanent village sites throughout the Metlakatla Pass and Kaien Island, living on stores of smoked fish and dried berries, supplemented by hunting activities and intertidal food harvesting. In early spring the Metlakatla relocated to sites on the lower Nass River where eulachon were harvested in vast numbers for grease production. The grease could be consumed and traded with other communities. In late spring they travelled to intertidal fish traps on the coast of Chatham Sound where other intertidal resources like abalone, seaweed and other shellfish were collected and dried. In early summer they settled at fishing villages along the Skeena River and its tributaries where salmon, berries and various other edible and medicinal plants were harvested. Hunting and trapping activities were also practiced. In the fall hunting grounds were inhabited and resource collection centered around hunting and trapping. In the fall after the last salmon run, community members returned to the wintering villages for the ceremonial season where feasts validated successions of new chiefs, as well as marriages and the supernatural order of their territories (Avanti 2011, Metlakatla 2013.

Metlakatla First Nation is actively involved in land use planning initiatives that impact land and resource use on their traditional territory. In 2006, Metlakatla First Nation signed a Land and Resource Protocol agreement as well as a Strategic Land Use Planning agreement with the BC government. These agreements support a collaborative approach to implementation of land use decisions and an Ecosystem Based Management (EBM) system that reconciles Metlakatla First Nation’s stewardship ethics and land use interests. In 2011, Metlakatla First Nation signed a forest Consultation and Revenue Sharing agreement which implemented sharing of BC government forestry revenues with the community based on forestry activities in their asserted traditional territory. The agreement also provides opportunities to support social, cultural, and economic initiatives within the community and reaffirms the use of an Engagement Framework set out in the Reconciliation Protocol signed in 2009 (Metlakatla 2013).

There are four agencies that are involved in the administration of Metlakatla First Nation’s engagement with organizations proposing development within their asserted traditional territory: the Governing Council, which has influence related to management and use of reserve lands through passing of Council Resolutions; the Treaty office, which oversees inter-governmental and jurisdictional matters as they relate to project development and proposed treaty settlements; the Development Corporation, which oversees Metlakatla First Nation’s economic initiatives; and, the Stewardship Society, which oversees the Stewardship office and its EA process (Metlakatla 2013).

Trails and Travelways Trading of Coast Tsimshian marine resources, most notably eulachon grease, necessitated the use of trails connecting to interior villages and other coastal villages. These “grease trails” allowed trade of coastal resources such as eulachon grease, herring roe-on-kelp, abalone and other shellfish in exchange for interior resources such as dried berries and furs (Enbridge 2011).

Habitation Metlakatla First Nation community members have used and continue to use the Dundas Islands to harvest resources, since the Canada/Alaska border was established in 1903 (Mclaren 2008, Lundberg 2013). The harvest follows a seasonal round and during the harvest, many of the reserve lands and cabins on the island are used as temporary habitation sites (Mclaren 2008).

Hunting Due to seasonal availability and need, hunting and trapping were traditionally practiced from early summer to late fall. During these seasons, Coast Tsimshian people hunted deer, mountain goat, moose and bear, and trapped mink, marten, beaver, porcupine, racoon and marmot. By the late nineteenth century, with the growth of the fur trade, Coast Tsimshian people began hunting and trapping more frequently along Skeena River tributaries (Avanti 2011, Enbridge 2011).

Hunting and trapping are practiced by many Metlakatla First Nation members within their traditional territory. Species of greatest value include deer, moose, mountain goats and bears (Enbridge 2011).

Page 11-304

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

Trapping Currently, trapping beaver, mink and river otter and hunting seal occurs in the winter on Dundas Island (Mclaren 2008).

Fishing Harvesting of traditional resources by modern day Metlakatla members is common and includes eulachon, salmon, clams, seaweed, octopus, herring roe-on-kelp (Avanti 2011, Enbridge 2011, Metlakatla 2013).

Marine and freshwater resources were used for food, social, spiritual and commercial purposes and their abundance created a surplus to use in times of food scarcity or for trade. Historically, a diversity of species were harvested including all five salmon species (sockeye, coho, spring, Chinook and pink), eulachon, abalone, herring roe-on-kelp, seaweed, halibut, rock fish, sea lion, seal, seagull eggs, sea urchin, sea cucumber, sea prunes, giant kelp, crab, clams, cockles, mussels, geoduck, shrimp, prawns and chitons. Salmon were abundant in Metlakatla traditional territory and the primary salmon harvesting area was the Skeena River and its tributaries.

The primary sites for eulachon harvest include the Ecstall River, Observatory inlet, Pearse Canal, Zymoetz River, Nass River and Skeena River. Abalone, important to Metlakatla for food and as a tradeable commodity, was traditionally harvested around Stephen Island. The prevalence of shell middens at various sites within Metlakatla territory, including Metlakatla Pass, Stephens Island and Douglas Island, illustrates the importance of shellfish as a traditional food source. As a substrate for herring roe-on-kelp, both bull and giant kelp are important marine species and were gathered from sites near the Tree Nob Islands, Stephen Island and Porcher Island (Avanti 2011, Enbridge 2011). Metlakatla First Nation members continue to fish for halibut on Dundas Island (Mclaren 2008).

Plant Gathering Due to its historical and cultural significance, Metlakatla people have a strong interest in preserving and using cedar. Cedar wood and bark is used for making canoes, totem poles and for weaving (Avanti 2012). Coast Tsimshian people traditionally harvested Hudson Bay tea, fireweed, devil’s club, licorice fern root, rose hips, bog cranberry, salal berries, raspberries, gooseberries, elderberries, huckleberries, dwarf blueberries, red and black currants, bunchberries, salmonberries, soapberries, high-bush cranberries and wild crab-apples during the late summer and early fall months with the berries being either dried or stored in grease for preservation (Enbridge 2011). Seasonal berry picking, medicinal plant gathering and cedar and hemlock bark collecting are activities that are still practiced by the Metlakatla (Avanti 2012). Marine vegetation such as seaweed is also harvested from Dundas Island (Mclaren 2008).

Gathering Places The region around Metlakatla Pass was traditionally a site of winter settlements for Coast Tsimshian people. Archaeological sites around Metlakatla Pass include campsites, shell middens, petroglyphs, pictographs, canoe runs, traps, weirs and burial sites (Parks Canada 2013b, Enbridge 2011). The Tree Nob Islands, Stephens Island and the Triple Islands are all important sites due not only to the presence of archaeological sites (campsites and shell middens) but also because of their historic and continued use as rich harvesting areas for marine resources such as shellfish, seaweed, chitons and salmon (Enbridge 2011). Through negotiations in 2008 between the Coast Tsimshian First Nations and the BC Government, both Stephens Island and the Lucy Islands, which support a well-known sea bird colony, have been set aside as Conservancies under the BC Parks act. The ancient Coast Tsimshian village of Lax Gota is located at the Rushton Island 90 Reserve. The occupation and use of Coast Tsimshian watershed is evident due to the number of cultural sites, archaeological sites, spiritually sensitive areas, culturally modified trees, heritage trails and burial sites present today (Enbridge 2011).

Sacred Sites Desktop traditional land and resource use information relative to sacred sites in the Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA for Metlakatla First Nation was not available during compilation of this report.

Page 11-305

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

Where available, approximate distances and directions of specific geographic areas known to be used by Metlakatla First Nation for traditional land and resource use in relation to the application Corridor centerline were determined based on the information compiled through a review of the available literature and are provided in Table 11.14-1.

TABLE 11.14-1

METLAKATLA FIRST NATION TRADITIONAL LAND AND RESOURCE USE LOCATIONS WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL LAND AND RESOURCE REGIONAL STUDY AREA

Approximate Distance and Direction from the Proposed Project Activity/Site (relative to Kitsault Marine Route) Description Habitation 13.1 km west Dundas Island Plant Gathering 13.1 km west Dundas Island Fishing 25.6 km southeast Eulachon harvest on Ecstall River 14 km northwest Eulachon harvest in Pearse Canal Crosses at KP 638.7 Eulachon harvest on Nass River In shipping lane Eulachon harvest in Observatory inlet 81.9 km southeast of KP 689 Eulachon harvest on Zymoetz River 16.9 km southwest Abalone harvesting around Stephens Island 8.1 km northeast Abalone harvesting in Metlakatla Pass 19 km southwest Herring Roe-on-Kelp harvested around Tree Nob Islands 16.9 km southwest Herring Roe-on-Kelp harvested around Stephens Island 13 km south Herring Roe-on-Kelp harvested around Porcher Island 13.1 km west Dundas Island Trapping areas 13.1 km west Dundas Island Gathering areas 19 km southwest Archaeological sites on Tree Nob Islands 16.9 km southwest Archaeological sites on Stephens Island 20.8 km west Archaeological sites on Triple Islands 17.9 km southwest Ancient Coast Tsimshian Village of Lax Gota Sources: Avanti 2012, Enbridge 2011

11.14.2 Consultation Activities Undertaken This Section of the application summarizes the consultation activities undertaken by WCGT since February 15, 2012, when Metlakatla First Nation was initially approached by WCGT. Metlakatla First Nation was formally notified of the proposed Project on September 10, 2012, in alignment with the Aboriginal Consultation Plan for the proposed Project. The information in this Section is drawn from the May 15, 2013 (July 2013) and December 31, 2013 (March 2014) Aboriginal Consultation Reports for the proposed Project.

11.14.2.1 Past and Planned Consultation Activities WCGT provided the proposed Project notification letter to Metlakatla First Nation on September 10, 2012. WCGT has continually shared Project information with Metlakatla First Nation since that date and will continue to do so as the proposed Project evolves.

WCGT first met with Metlakatla First Nation on February 15, 2012 to share Project-related information, to determine the community’s interest and to develop a process for their involvement in proposed Project activities. Through a series of subsequent meetings both in-person, over the phone and via e-mail, Metlakatla First Nation elected to participate in biophysical field studies and to conduct TLU and socio-economic studies for the proposed Project. To date, Metlakatla First Nation has not completed their

Page 11-306

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

socio-economic and TLU studies. The final results of the TLU study will form the basis for on-going dialogue between WCGT and Metlakatla First Nation to inform detailed planning for the proposed Project.

A Capacity Funding Agreement was signed in August 2013. This funding agreement is in support of ongoing consultation in meetings and other activities with WCGT and the regulatory agencies, related to the proposed Project and to identify relevant effects of the Project on Metlakatla First Nation, if any, and identify and consider relevant mitigation to address those effects.

Throughout the consultation process, Metlakatla First Nation and WCGT have held discussions and met on various Project-related subjects. These discussions have included: stream crossings; geophysical surveys; compressor stations and methodology; treaty land entitlement areas, contracting and employment opportunities; economic benefits; and routing of the proposed Project corridor through their asserted traditional territory including marine construction and underwater pipeline methodology. WCGT has presented at two community meetings to review the proposed Project with community members, one was focused on industry in 2013 and Spectra presented at an AGM for Metlakatla Development Corporation in 2012

Planned consultation activities by WCGT with Metlakatla First Nation include: the distribution and review of a draft ancillary site map outlining the proposed features such as access roads, compressor stations, campsites, etc.; providing an overview of biophysical field data results compiled for the proposed Project; submission of Aboriginal Consultation Reports for review and comment; discussion of mitigation options; presentation on the process and content of the application for an EAC; marine technical review; invitation to participate in marine studies and investigations where applicable discussion of training, employment and contracting opportunities; community meeting(s) and discussion of economic benefits.

11.14.2.2 Changes to the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Aboriginal Consultation Reports

WCGT shared the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Aboriginal Consultation Reports (1 and 2) with Metlakatla First Nation for review and comment prior to final submission to the EAO. Through consultation activities to date, Metlakatla First Nation has identified changes to the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Reports for the proposed Project.

TABLE 11.14-2

METLAKATLA FIRST NATION REQUESTED CHANGES TO THE ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION PLAN/REPORT

Where Issue Addressed Source of Change Issue or Concern WCGT Response in Application Aboriginal The items listed in Section D.3 are all • Section D.3 has been revised as follows: Sections 2.3 and 11 of Consultation Report 1 important aspects of building a relationship “The following descriptions apply to both the EA, and Section D.3 (July 2013) with Metlakatla, completing these steps does Aboriginal Communities and Nisga’a of Aboriginal not necessarily fulfill the proponent’s or the Nation based on engagement and Consultation Report 1 Crown’s legal Duty to Consult. A statement consultation activities to date, and do not should be made in this Section stating that reflect all aspects of engagement and the items listed in Section 3a-e are all consultation may occur during the EA preliminary actions being proposed and process. Further engagement and undertaken by the proponent, additional consultation will occur in accordance with aspects of consultation will continue to be the Plan and will be informed by requests developed and addressed with First Nations made by Aboriginal Communities or as their agreements and working Nisga’a Nation”. relationships evolve.

Page 11-307

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.14-2 Cont'd

Where Issue Addressed Source of Change Issue or Concern WCGT Response in Application Aboriginal Additional information is required within the • WCGT has adopted this Aboriginal Consultation Reports Consultation Report 1 column “Interested Aboriginal Communities”. approach in recognition that not 1 and 2. (July 2013) Metlakatla First Nation requests that each all Aboriginal communities wish to interested Aboriginal community is listed in have their names associated with this column, instead of in quantitative form any particular item in this list, (i.e., >5), in order to clarify for all parties and/or that some of these topics which issues and concerns are of interest to have been raised in discussions individual Aboriginal communities, and to and it is not clear that that those ensure Metlakatla First Nation concerns comments constitute an Issue, have been appropriately captured. Concern or interest. WCGT also has grouped some issues or topics together (such as concerns with a particular species or type of fish, or wildlife, etc), which makes listing of each response on its own difficult. WCGT will leave the list as is, but will work with Metlakatla First Nation to ensure their Issue, Concern Interest is addressed. Additional information is required regarding • WCGT has not yet developed the Section 6 of the EA, and the statement, “WCGT will develop a training process or format for the creation Table F.1 – Item 3 of Aboriginal and education plan that looks to create of a training and education plan. Consultation Report 1 opportunities associated with the proposed When the draft plan is completed, Project for Aboriginal Communities”. WCGT will review and work with Metlakatla First Nation should be involved in Aboriginal groups on ensuring the development of any training and this plan creates opportunities for education plan. If already developed, their communities. Metlakatla First Nation requests a copy of the training and education plan and an opportunity for review and input. In regards to all potential adverse effects • WCGT will respond directly to Section 4.8 of the EA, and concerning the Metlakatla First Nation Metlakatla First Nation on which Table F.1 of Aboriginal (i.e., “potential adverse effects on birds,” studies are currently underway Consultation Report 1 etc.), have any of these studies been and/or completed, and will ensure completed? In previous working group that the meetings, Metlakatla First Nation (and other contractors/subcontractors First Nations) have requested to be better contact and engage with informed of the methods and work plans to Metlakatla First Nation in complete studies. Also, to date, Metlakatla undertaking these studies. First Nation has not been able to develop meaningful engagement with WCGT’s subcontractors to participate in studies. Metlakatla First Nation requests an update of the planned field work, including methodology and timelines, as well as any final reports when completed, and asks for WCGT support in solidifying agreements with TERA and archipelago to participate meaningfully in field studies. In regards to the “Project Overview and/or • WCGT will add a note stating that Section 11 of the EA and Google Earth fly-over,” this was only offered in the proposed Project Overview appendix a – Summary to the Working Group Meeting and not to the and/or Google Earth fly-over” cell of Consultation of Aboriginal Metlakatla First Nation community. The for Metlakatla First Nation reads, Consultation Report 1. “Project Overview and/or Google Earth “Yes, at working group.” flyover” cell for Metlakatla First Nation should read, “Yes, at working group.” In regards to the “notification/discussion for • WCGT will change both columns Section 11 of the EA and field work and studies, and an invitation to to read “Under negotiations”. appendix a – Summary participate,” and “participating in TEK and of Consultation of Aboriginal TLU Study,” Metlakatla First Nation has been Consultation Report 1. in conversation with WCGT and TERA about both aspects of consultation, however no commitments have been made.

Page 11-308

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.14-2 Cont'd

Where Issue Addressed Source of Change Issue or Concern WCGT Response in Application Aboriginal The “notification/discussion for field work and See above See above Consultation Report 1 studies, and an invitation to participate” and (July 2013) (cont’d) “participating in TEK and TLU Study” cells for Metlakatla First Nation should both read, “Under negotiations.” Aboriginal Although Metlakatla was involved in early • WCGT has extended offers to Sections 3 and 11 of the EA. Consultation Report 2 discussions with WCGT following the meet at the request of any (July 2013) announcement of their Proposed Project, we Nation, including Metlakatla, from have largely been unengaged by WCGT – the Project’s inception spare the presence of a few Metlakatla First • WCGT will continue to work Nation representatives in the field – with closely with Metlakatla regards to understanding and meaningfully Stewardship Society Staff to participating in project EA activities. Until provide project specific updates very recently, Metlakatla First Nation has and identify employment been largely unaware of the work being opportunities where they may carried out or results produced thus far. We exist. wait to find these details in the application, • On January 29th WCGT hosted a however, it would be beneficial if Metlakatla Marine specific meeting to were to have the majority of this information identify all Marine based beforehand, particularly considering the time programs which occurred or are constraints around review of the application. planned within the Territory to provide an update and share results. Final results of all studies completed to date will be included in the EA application. • WCGT will endeavour to provide an outline of proposed field activities including offshore activities to assist Metlakatla Stewardship Society with planning and to ensure meaningful participation. • Project specific information will be provided when confirmed. • TERA Environmental will continue to provide invitations to participate in all field activities in Metlakatla First Nation’s territory. • If Metlakatla was unable to participate in field studies WCGT and TERA Environmental will host a meeting upon Metlakatla First Nation’s request to review the program and current results. Metlakatla traditional use studies and socio- • WCGT has provided funding to Sections 6 and 11 of the EA. economic studies are ongoing. Once Metlakatla for a TLU study. complete, we expect that WCGT will make • WCGT will continue to integrate concerted efforts to integrate the results of information received from our studies into the application. Once again, Metlakatla First Nation studies we emphasize the importance of including into the EA application which Metlakatla First Nation in this process. have been received to date. • Any TLU or TEK data which may be provided after the EA application filing will be taken into account by WCGT during planning and construction. Avoidance of critical species timing windows: • WCGT will commit to reviewing Sections 3, 4.5 and 4.8 of the One of the mitigation measures for impacts construction schedules, including EA. to fish and wildlife WCGT intends to employ timing windows for specific is scheduling clearing and construction purposes with First Nations. activities outside of critical life cycle stages • WCGT has not completed the for important species (i.e., bird nesting, bear construction schedule in respect denning, fish spawning times etc.) to timing windows.

Page 11-309

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.14-2 Cont'd

Where Issue Addressed Source of Change Issue or Concern WCGT Response in Application Aboriginal Timelines should be developed in concert See above See above Consultation Report 2 with Metlakatla to ensure inclusion of TEK (July 2013) (cont’d) and TUS information and ensure timelines are appropriate to local conditions.

11.14.2.3 Practices, Traditions or Customs Identified Through Consultation Activities Information related to the practices, traditions or customs Metlakatla First Nation traditionally engaged in or is currently engaging in, in the vicinity of or in relation to, the proposed Project area is provided in Section 11.13.1. This information was collected through literature and desktop review.

11.14.2.4 Issues, Concerns and Resolutions Key issues and concerns raised by Metlakatla First Nation are provided in Section 11.19. This information was collected primarily through consultation activities with Metlakatla First Nation and through their participation on biophysical field studies for the proposed Project (see Section 3.2.2 ). WCGT’s responses to these key issues and concerns raised are also provided in Section 11.19 as well as cross-references to where these issues are considered in the application.

11.14.3 Potential Effects to Aboriginal Interests The identification of Metlakatla First Nation’s present, past and anticipated future uses and traditional use of the proposed Project area described in Sections 11.14.1 and 11.14.2 was conducted through literature/desktop review, biophysical field participation and a review of Metlakatla First Nation’s Project- specific socio-economic study. The issues identified from these sources also have informed the potential effects of the proposed Project on Metlakatla First Nation’s identified Aboriginal Interests (Section 11.14.2). Where potential interactions were likely to occur, the potential effect is identified in Table 11.14-3. Table 11.14-3 also identifies specific geographic areas compiled from these sources to be important (as available) as well as the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate those effects. Where there is overlap between an Aboriginal interest and a VC, the information from other Sections of the application are cross-referenced and summarized in Table 11.14-3.

Based on the information collected to date and presented in Section 11.14.1.3, known interactions of the proposed Project with Metlakatla First Nation’s Aboriginal Interests include crossings of fishing sites at KP 638.7 and throughout Observatory Inlet. At this time, no known hunting sites, trappings, sites, travelways, plant harvesting sites, gathering places or sacred sites, trails occur within 13.1 km of the proposed Project Route. As a result, no identified potential effects for these Aboriginal Interests have been identified. Should additional interactions on Aboriginal Interests be identified through ongoing consultation with Metlakatla First Nation’s then the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate potential effects will be implemented as outlined in Table 11.14-3.

Page 11-310

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.14-3

POTENTIAL EFFECTS TO ABORIGINAL INTERESTS IDENTIFIED BY METLAKATLA FIRST NATION

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Identified Interest: Hunting Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ hunting Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA(hunting activities schedules, as required, prior to the commencement of construction. activities during activities are • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of construction and known to occur new clearing and land disturbance necessary. operations within the RSA. • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where (Section 6.1.5 - No known feasible. Current Use of hunting sites Lands and • All work site personnel will be oriented on the proper response to are known to Resources for wildlife encounters. No firearms are permitted on worksites unless occur closer Traditional previously authorized by WCGT for use by qualified Wildlife Monitor(s) than 13.1 km Purposes). for the purpose of protecting workers from wildlife under specified from the conditions. proposed • Project route No hunting will be allowed by Project construction personnel on or near the proposed Project site during working hours, or while they are staying in Project accommodations. • The use of the construction right-of-way or Project access roads by Project personnel for hunting is prohibited during the construction phases of the Project. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the AMP Framework including access control measures (e.g., signage, road closures, restrictions, access control structures, vegetation screens) to reduce unauthorized motorized access. Construction, All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of Operations components/ hunting sites Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify hunting sites that subsistence RSA (no warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during hunting sites measures: construction and are known to − adhering to species-specific timing constraints; operations occur closer − leaving breaks in the pipeline trench to allow animals to cross; (Section 6.1.5 - than 13.1 km Current Use of − limiting the use of chemical applications; and from the Lands and − proposed alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Resources for Project route participating Aboriginal communities. Traditional • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric Purposes). environment, marine ecosystems, fish, vegetation, wetlands and wildlife (Sections 4.1, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 of the application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence hunting activities and wildlife habitat. Identified Interest: Trapping Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities and registered Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence trappers involved in the WCGT Aboriginal Engagement Program of subsistence RSA (trapping trapping work locations and construction schedules a minimum of 14 days prior activities during activities are activities to the commencement of construction. construction and known to occur • Prohibit the vandalism or theft of trapper equipment or trapped animals operations within the RSA. by Project workers. Report all violators to BC’s Fish and Wildlife (Section 6.1.5 - No trapping authorities. Current Use of sites are known • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of Lands and to occur closer new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Resources for than 13.1 km Traditional • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where from the Purposes). feasible. proposed • Project route Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements.

Page 11-311

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.14-3 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of Operations components/ trapping Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify trapping sites that subsistence (cont’d) RSA (no sites warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during trapping sites measures: construction and are known to − maintaining access to the trap line; operations occur closer − moving of trap line equipment by trapper prior to construction; and (Section 6.1.5 - than 13.1 km Current Use of − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by from the Lands and participating Aboriginal communities. proposed Resources for • Project route Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric Traditional environment, vegetation, wetlands and wildlife (Sections 4.1, 4.6, 4.7 Purposes). and 4.8 of the application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence trapping activities and wildlife habitat. Identified Interest: Fishing Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA fishing schedules, as required, prior to the commencement of construction. activities during (subsistence activities • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of construction and fishing activities new clearing and land disturbance necessary. operations are known to • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where (Section 6.1.5 - occur within the feasible. Current Use of RSA. Known Lands and • Prohibit recreational fishing in freshwater environments by project fishing sites Resources for personnel on or in the vicinity of the construction right-of-way, access occur at Traditional roads, permanent facility sites, work camps and ancillary sites. The use KP 638.7 and Purposes). of the construction right-of-way or Project access roads by Project throughout personnel for fishing is prohibited during the construction phases of the Observatory Project. Inlet). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement measures outlined in the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework [Section 6.1]) to prevent increased access along new corridors created by the construction right-of-way and access roads, thereby minimizing potential for effects on fish due to activities such as fishing and off-road vehicle access (e.g., forded crossings). Construction, All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of Operations components/ fishing sites Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify fishing sites that subsistence RSA.(known warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during fishing sites measures: construction and occur at − recording and mapping of fishing locales; operations KP 638.7 and − strict adherence to the regulations, standards and guidelines set (Section 6.1.5 - throughout by provincial and federal regulatory agencies for watercourse Current Use of Observatory crossings; and Lands and Resources for Inlet). − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Traditional participating Aboriginal communities. Purposes). • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the marine ecosystems, fish and wetlands (Sections 4.4, 4.5 and 4.7 of the application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence fishing activities and the aquatic environment.

Page 11-312

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.14-3 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Identified Interest: Plant Gathering Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA plant schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of activities during (subsistence gathering construction. construction and plant gatherig activities • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of operations activities are new clearing and land disturbance necessary. (Section 6.1.5 - known to occur • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Current Use of within the RSA. feasible. Lands and No subsistence Resources for • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance plant gathering Traditional activities. sites are known Purposes). • to occur within Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP 13.1 km from (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor the proposed personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety Project Route). requirements. Construction, All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of Operations components/ plant Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify plant gathering subsistence RSA (no gathering sites that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the resources during subsistence sites following measures: construction and pland gathering − limiting the use of chemical applications; operations sites are known − replacement of plant species during restoration; (Section 6.1.5 - to occur within Current Use of − avoidance of the site; and 13.1 km from Lands and − the proposed alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Resources for Project Route). participating Aboriginal communities. Traditional • All construction equipment must be clean and free of soil or vegetative Purposes). debris prior to its arrival on the construction site to reduce the risk of weed introduction. Any equipment which arrives in a dirty condition will not be allowed on the work site until it has been cleaned off at a suitable location. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of marine ecosystems, vegetation and wetlands (Sections 4.1, 4.6 and 4.7 of this application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence plant gathering activities, wetlands and vegetation. Identified Interest: Ability To Practice Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of trail Operations components/ use of trails Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction and travelway use RSA (trails and and schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction travelways are travelways construction. and operations used within the • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 - RSA. No trails new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of and travelways • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Lands and are known to feasible. Resources for occur within Traditional • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable 13.1 km from Purposes). Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify trails and the proposed travelways that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more Project Route). of the following measures: − detailed mapping, photographic recording and avoidance of the location by the development; − should avoidance of a site not be feasible, mitigation consisting of detailed recording and controlled excavations may be implemented; and/or − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved right-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority.

Page 11-313

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.14-3 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, See above See above • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the See above Operations transportation and access related to marine and freshwater navigability (cont’d) and marine safety. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. All Project Reduced • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of components/ use of Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction habitation site use RSA(habitation habitation schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction site are known sites construction. and operations to occur in the • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 - RSA. No known new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of trails are known • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Lands and to occur closer feasible. Resources for than 13.1 km Traditional • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable from the Purposes). Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify habitation sites that proposed warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following Project route) measures: − detailed mapping, photographic recording and avoidance of the location by the proposed development; − should avoidance of a site not be feasible, mitigation consisting of detailed recording and controlled excavations may be implemented; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved rights-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority (e.g., MFLNRO or landowner). This restriction applies to all biophysical surveying and land surveying activities. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. Identified interest: Cultural Pursuits Construction, All Project Disturbance • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disturbance of Operations components/ of gathering Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction gathering places RSA(gathering places schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction places exist construction. and operations within the RSA. • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 – there are no new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of gathering • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Land and places known to feasible. Resources for occur closer Traditional • than 16.9 km Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Purposes Effects Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify gathering places from the assessment). proposed that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following measures: Project Route) − detailed recording, mapping and avoidance; − assess visual impact; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements.

Page 11-314

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.14-3 Cont'd

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, See above See above • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be See above Operations confined to approved rights-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority (e.g., MFLNRO or landowner). This restriction applies to all biophysical surveying and land surveying activities. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric environment (Section 4.1 of this application). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. All Project Disturbance • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disturbance of components/ of sacred Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction sacred sites during RSA (sacred sites schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of construction and sites are known construction. operations to exist within • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 – the RSA. there new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of are no sacred • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Land and sites known to feasible. Resources for occur closer Traditional • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable than 16.9 km Purposes Effects Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify sacred sites that from the assessment). warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following proposed measures: Project Route) − detailed recording, mapping and avoidance; − assess visual impact; − additional mitigation will be refined and optimized through community discussions; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved right-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric environment (Section 4.1 of this application). • Implement the contingency measures identified in the TLU Sites Discovery Contingency Plan (Section 5.15) in the event TLU sites not previously identified are found during construction. • If archaeological, paleontological or historical sites (e.g., modified bone, pottery fragments, fossils) are discovered during construction, suspend work in proximity (i.e., within 30 m). No work at that particular location shall continue until permission is granted by the appropriate regulatory authority. Follow the contingency measures identified in the Heritage Resources Discovery Contingency Plan (see Section 5.8). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. Notes: 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA. 2 Detailed mitigation are outlined in the proposed Project-specific EMPs (Appendices 3-A and 3-B of this application).

11.14.4 Mitigation and Environmental Management Strategies Consistent with the methodology described in Section 3.0, Table 11.14-3 summarizes the mitigation or environmental management strategies that address identified and potential effects to Metlakatla First Nation’s Aboriginal Interests.

WCGT will continue to consult with Metlakatla First Nation to refine site-specific mitigation measures to reduce effects to Metlakatla First Nation’s Aboriginal Interests.

Page 11-315

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

11.14.5 Characterization of Effects to Aboriginal Interests after Mitigation This subsection of the Application presents an assessment of the potential residual effects of the proposed Project on Metlakatla First Nation’s Aboriginal Interests via the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC.

The potential residual effects of the proposed Project on Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC are discussed in a qualitative manner by analysing the relative likelihood and consequence of each of the potential effects occurring on short segments of the proposed Project. Context is not an appropriate factor for the characterization of social effects and is, therefore, not provided. WCGT has consulted with participating Metlakatla First Nation members who have historically used or currently use the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC RSA to identify potential resource use issues, features and activities which may be disturbed by construction and cleanup activities of the proposed Project. The implementation of appropriate mitigation will reduce the potential adverse effects arising from construction and operations activities within the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes LSA and RSA.

The known potential residual adverse effects of the proposed Project on Metlakatla First Nation’s Aboriginal Interests are:

• disruption of subsistence activities during construction and operations;

• alteration of subsistence resources (specifically fishing sites at KP 638.7 and in Observatory Inlet) during construction and operations;

• disruption of trail and travelway use during construction and operations;

• disruption of habitation site use during construction and operations;

• disturbance of gathering places during construction and operations; and

• disturbance of sacred sites during construction and operations.

• feedback from Metlakatla First Nation;

• relevant land use planning objectives and strategies (see Section 6.1.4);

• previous EAs reviewed and approved under provincial environmental regulatory processes, where appropriate; and

Page 11-316

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

• the professional judgment of the assessment team that includes members with over 15 years of pipeline construction and environmental and socio-economic impact assessment experience.

As indicated by the cross-references present in Table 11.14-3, all components of the biophysical environment are understood to support the land base and habitat conditions essential to the practice of traditional activities. Therefore, many potential residual effects discussed below, although presented with respect to current use of land and resources for traditional purposes, are assessed in consideration of all pertinent biophysical resources known or assumed to be of importance to Metlakatla First Nation for traditional use.

Table 11.14-4 provides a summary of the evaluation of the potential residual social effects of the construction and operations of the proposed Project on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes. The rationale used to evaluate each of the residual social effects is provided below.

TABLE 11.14-4

EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL EFFECTS OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Temporal Context 1

2.1 Alteration of subsistence resources. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short to long-term Medium High Moderate 3 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Trails and Travelways 3.1 Disruption of trail and travelway use. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 4 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Habitation Sites 4.1 Disruption of habitation site use. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 5 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes – Cultural Sites 5.1 Disturbance of gathering places. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate 5.2 Disturbance of sacred sites. RSA Short-term Isolated to periodic Short-term Medium High Moderate Note: 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA.

An evaluation of the proposed Project’s contribution to cumulative effects was conducted. Details of the evaluation are also discussed in each of the following subsections.

Page 11-317

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

The potential residual effects for Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes were described in Section 11.14.5 and appear in Table 11.14-5 along with the identification of potential projects and activities that could act in combination with the proposed Project.

TABLE 11.14-5

POTENTIAL RESIDUAL EFFECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS OF THE PROJECT ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES CONSIDERED FOR THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

Potential Existing Activity/Reasonably Foreseeable Residual Project Spatial Temporal Potential Developments Acting in Combination with the Effect Activity Boundary1 Boundary Cumulative Effect Proposed Project Disruption of All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock subsistence components operations disruption of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial activities subsistence development, transportation and infrastructure activities development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Alteration of All Project RSA Past Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock subsistence components development, alteration of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial resources construction, subsistence development, transportation and infrastructure operations resources development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Disruption of All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock trail and components operations disruption of trail grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial travelway use and travelway use development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance. Disruption of All Project RSA Construction, Cumulative • Existing activities include agriculture and livestock habitation site components operations disruption of grazing, rural/urban residential and commercial use habitation site use development, transportation and infrastructure development, utility activities, recreation, forestry, energy development, mineral resource exploration and development, and oil and gas exploration and development. • Reasonably foreseeable developments within the RSA listed in Appendix 3-E. • Project-related activities that could interact with the above activities include clearing and topsoil salvage, grading, trenching, backfilling, reclamation and maintenance.

Page 11-318

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.14-5 Cont'd

Table 11.14-6 describes additional mitigation that the proposed Project will implement to manage the risk of potential cumulative effects on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes. After implementation of proposed mitigation, residual cumulative effects on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes are described.

TABLE 11.14-6

MITIGATION FOR POTENTIAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS AND IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Potential Cumulative Effect Additional Mitigation Potential Residual Cumulative Effect Cumulative disruption of • Continue to notify Metlakatla First Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative effects subsistence activities proposed Project when changes occur. on disruption of subsistence activities • Communicate with Metlakatla First Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative alteration of • Consult with Metlakatla First Nation regarding known reasonably Project contribution to cumulative subsistence resources foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address alteration of subsistence resources any cumulative concerns related to the habitation sites within the RSA. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules.

Page 11-319

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.14-6 Cont'd

Potential Cumulative Effect Additional Mitigation Potential Residual Cumulative Effect Cumulative disruption of trail • Continue to notify Metlakatla First Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative and travelway use proposed Project when changes occur. disruption of trail and travelway use • Consult with Metlakatla First Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the trails and travelways within the RSA. • Communicate with Metlakatla First Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disruption of • Continue to notify Metlakatla First Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative habitation site use proposed Project when changes occur. disruption of habitation site use • Consult with Metlakatla First Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the habitation sites within the RSA. • Communicate with Metlakatla First Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Cumulative disturbance of • Continue to notify Metlakatla First Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative gathering places proposed Project when changes occur. disturbance of gathering places • Consult with Metlakatla First Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the gathering places within the RSA. • Communicate with Metlakatla First Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules.

Cumulative disturbance of • Continue to notify Metlakatla First Nation of the schedule updates for the Project contribution to cumulative sacred sites proposed Project when changes occur. disturbance of sacred sites • Consult with Metlakatla First Nation regarding known reasonably foreseeable future developments and activities (Appendix 3-E) to address any cumulative concerns related to the sacred sites within the RSA. • Communicate with Metlakatla First Nation regarding additional site-specific measures for access points along the Project Footprint. • Review proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules. Note: 1 RSA = Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA.

Evaluation of Potential Residual Cumulative Effects Table 11.14.7 provides a summary of the evaluation of the potential cumulative environmental effects of the proposed Project on the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes VC. Summary of Assessment of Potential Effects on Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Page 11-320

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.14-7

EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL RESIDUAL CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ON CURRENT USE OF LAND AND RESOURCES FOR TRADITIONAL PURPOSES

Temporal Context 1

Project Contribution to Cumulative Effects on Disruption of Subsistence Activities As discussed in Section 11.14.3, the Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes LSA and RSA are used for various subsistence activities including hunting, fishing, trapping and plant gathering. These subsistence activities will be disturbed during the construction and operations phases of the proposed Project at particular locations and specific times.

Reasonably foreseeable developments may also disturb subsistence activities (Appendix 3-E). For example, multiple pipeline projects such as the Coastal GasLink Pipeline Project (Coastal GasLink Pipeline Ltd.), Prince Rupert Gas Transmission (Prince Rupert Gas Transmission Ltd.), North Montney Project (NGTL), and Enbridge NGP (Northern Gateway Pipelines) will cross some of the same asserted traditional territories as the Metlakatla First Nation by the proposed Project. Existing activities contributing to disturbances of nature-based activities include natural resource, and oil and gas developments. Existing and reasonably foreseeable developments occurring within the wider Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA will contribute to cumulative disruptions to subsistence activities at the regional scale.

The mitigation proposed in Table 11.14-6 will reduce the proposed Project-related cumulative effects on disruption of subsistence activities. WCGT will continue to notify Metlakatla First Nation of the schedule updates for the proposed Project when changes occur and review the proposed schedules of other projects to coordinate reclamation schedules.

As identified in Tables 11.14-4 and 11.14-7, there are no situations where there is a high probability of occurrence of a permanent or long-term social effect or cumulative effect on the Current Use of Land and

Page 11-321

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

Resources for Traditional Purposes VC of high magnitude that cannot be technically or economically mitigated.

The identification of issues raised and potential effects to Metlakatla First Nation’s Aboriginal Interests did not identify any interactions not already identified in Section 6.1.5 (Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes Effects Assessment). The assessment of potential effects on Metlakatla First Nations’ Aboriginal Interests is consistent with the assessment of potential effects on Current Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes provided in Section 6.1.5. The characterization of effects with regard to Metlakatla First Nation’s Aboriginal Interests remain fully consistent with Section 6.1.5. Readers should refer to Section 6.0 for the complete assessment discussion of the potential adverse residual social effects listed above, which includes the characterization of these potential adverse residual social effects, the determination of significance and confidence in the prediction as well as the rationale for the determination of significance.”

11.14.6 Other Interests of Metlakatla First Nation and Mitigation The identification of issues raised by Metlakatla First Nation with respect to potential environmental, economic, social, heritage and health effects of the proposed Project did not identify any interactions not already identified in Sections 11.14.3 and 11.19. Readers should refer to the Sections of the application cross-referenced in Table 11.14-3 for the complete effects assessment discussion related to each of Metlakatla First Nation’s other identified interests.

11.15 Kitselas First Nation The following Sections report on the results of the Aboriginal Consultation Plan for Kitselas First Nation

11.15.1 Background Information This Section provides available background information that describes the practices, traditions or customs that Kitselas First Nation is currently engaging in within the vicinity of or in relation to, the proposed Project area. The literature/desktop review was conducted in a manner consistent with the methods described in Section 3.2 of the application.

11.15.1.1 Community Profile Kitselas, (historically Gitselasu) means “people of the canyon” (Simon Fraser University [SFU] 2013). Kitselas First Nation entered the treaty process in 1993 and belongs to the Tsimshian Treaty Society (Province of British Columbia 2013). Their name refers to Kitselas Canyon, which became a National Historic Site in 1972 (Parks Canada 2013b). Two poles were raised at the National Historic Site in 2007 and in August 2011 the dog salmon pole was raised outside of the longhouses on the site (First Nations in British Columbia 2011a).

The traditional language of the Kitselas First Nation is Sm’algyax meaning “the real language” which is closely related to Southern Tsimshian. Kitselas First Nation is partnered with Kitsumkalum First Nation to form the Kitselas-Kitsumkalum Language authority, which promotes traditional language teaching. The Kitselas-Kitsumkalum Language authority believes that understanding Sm'algyax helps build a culturally relevant world view for their people (FPLM 2013).

Kitselas First Nation has eight reserves, with IR 1 commonly referred to as Kitselas Canyon, the pre- contact home of the Kitselas First Nation (Kitselas 2013). As of December 2013, Aboriginal affairs and northern Development Canada reported that 612 Kitselas First Nation members live on reserve (AANDC 2013). Kitselas First Nation provides members education programs including child, youth and adult continuing education and post secondary funding, a health department with home care and community health initiatives, social development and aid, employment counselling, home acquisition and improvement funding and assistance with obtaining status cards (Kitselas 2013).

Kitselas First Nation society is comprised of four hierarchical matrilineal clans and matrilineal houses called walp. Kitselas First Nation shares the four Tsimshian clans, which are Laxsgiik (Eagle), Gispudwada (Killer Whale), Ganhada (Raven) and Laxgiboo (Wolf). Specific territorial rights belong to each walp and governance is managed through feasts of various types (cleansing, funeral [responsibility

Page 11-322

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

of the father clan], naming, marriage and house building). Events are validated by the witness of feast guests and feast gifts and seating arrangements for guests are according to rank and clan. In this social system kinship relations are paramount (Avanti 2011). Traditional governance systems are maintained by Kitselas First Nation Elders and clan land ownership is being considered for reinstatement post-treaty (Kitselas 2013). Menzies and butler (2008) report that:

“…the social and cultural authority of the customary leadership continues to this day. Few decisions can be made or enacted without the support of the established elders and leaders.”

Kitselas First Nation members elect a Chief and Council every 2 years to provide governance to the Kitselas First Nation administration. Council meetings are held monthly with Kitselas First Nation staff (Kitselas 2013). The Kitselas First Nation Land Use Plan (2012) provides detail on the vision, objectives and priorities of each Kitselas First Nation Indian Reserve (IR) in addition to land use on each IR, future goals for land use designations such as cultural tourism, Elders housing area, cemeteries and ideas from community members for development on their particular IR. The Kitselas First Nation takes a holistic view of project development and decisions (Kitselas 2008). Kitselas First Nation has expressed concern about increased marine traffic carrying dangerous goods, especially in the Douglas Channel (Enbridge 2010). Kitsumkalum First Nation signed an incremental Treaty agreement with the Province of BC on January 31, 2013. under this agreement, the band will receive three land parcels which a total size of 252 he. one parcel will support land access to a lake for community use, another parcel is for a campground and RV park, and the third parcel is associated with industrial development by the Terrace airport.

11.15.1.2 Kitselas First Nation Asserted Traditional Territory Kitselas First Nation has 10 reserves, including: Chimdimash 2 (65.10 ha), Chimdimash 2A (119.30 ha), Ikshenigwolk 3 (28.70 ha), Ketoneda 7 (40.80 ha), Kitselas 1 (434.60 ha), Kshish 4 (includes Kshish 4A)(258.30 ha), Ksish 4B (4 ha), Kulspai 6 (6.90 ha), Port Essingston (2 ha) and Zaimoetz 5 (109.40 ha). Kitselas First Nation asserted traditional territory is included in the interim Treaty agreement (Kitselas First Nation 2013). A map of Kitselas First Nation asserted traditional territory, Indian Reserves and Aboriginal Communities is provided below (Figure 11.15-1).

Page 11-323

! ! .!

KP 650 .! Kispiox ! March 2014 ¯ FIGURE 11.15-1 Hazelton New Hazelton ! KITSELAS FIRST Gitlaxt'aamiks 37 ! ! ! UV NATION ASSERTED Allaasskkaa .! Gitwinksihlkw TRADITIONAL TERRITORY KP 50 r PROPOSED WESTCOAST ((U..SS..A..)) e v i CONNECTOR GAS R TRANSMISSION PROJECT s Kitwanga s a ! 8018 N Laxgalts'ap .! ! ! Kitseguecla Application Routes !Gingolx KP 700 Cypress to Cranberry Route Kitsault Route Kitsault Marine Route KETONEDA 7 K5A Nasoga Route .!)" IKSHENIGWOLK 3 Nasoga Marine Route KP 750.9 Alternate Route Kitsumkalum Riv KP 100 er Project Facilities .! ^_ Prince Rupert LNG )" K1-K4 Compressor Stations )" K5B Compressor Station ! )" K5A Compressor Station UV892 Highway Road ! Railway .! KP 50 Usk KSHISH 4B ! Watercourse !Lax Kw'alaams CHIMDIMASH 2A KSHISH NO 4 (INCLUDES KSHISH 4A) Waterbody CHIMDIMASH 2 Municipality Terrace First Nation Land ! KITSELAS 1 Park/Protected Area Kitselas First Nation Asserted Traditional Territory .! ZAIMOETZ 5 KP 150 SCALE: 1:1,000,000 km 0 5 10 15 20 25 !Metlakatla KULSPAI 6 (All Locations Approximate) ! ! Lakelse Lake Prince Rupert UV16 UV37 ! Port Edward r NAD83 BC Albers Route current to February 5, 2014 ^_ Riv e KP 102.7 eena Hillshade: TERA Environmental Consultants, derived from Sk Natural Resources Canada 2008; Highways/Roads: ESRI KP 182.1 2005; Railways: United States National Imagery and Mapping Agency 2000; Hydrography: IHS Inc. 2004; d x Municipalities and Regional Districts: BC Forests, Lands and m

. Natural Resource Operations 2007; Populated Places: s

a Natural Resources Canada 2010; First Nation Land: l e Government of Canada 2014; Treaty Settlement Land: IHS s Proposed Prince Rupert t i PORT ESSINGTON Inc. 2013; Parks/Protected Areas, Concervancy Areas: BC K Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations 2008. _ 1

_ LNG (on Ridley Island)

5 Although there is no reason to believe that there are 1

_ any errors associated with the data used to generate 1 this product or in the product itself, users of these data 1 g i are advised that errors in the data may be present. F

_ Kitimat

8 ! 1

0 Mapped By: AJS Checked By: JW 8 t \

1 ! 1 n o i Fort Nelson t c B R IT I S H e ! Morice S _ s e Lake C O LU MB I A r Kitamaat Village Fort u g i

F ! St. John _

A !

E Map Extent \

0 Dawson 1 v e

r Creek \

U ! L

T ! \ Kitkatla

S ! AB

E Prince L I Prince F P

_ George

P a Rupert A c ! M i

\ f i 8 c Williams 1

0 O 8

\ Lake c Kamloops P e !

M a -

S n I Kelowna ! G \ : P Vancouver US A Victoria Kelowna Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

11.15.1.3 Traditional Land and Resource Use Setting Kitselas First Nation territory includes the Skeena Valley from Kitselas Canyon, west to Terrace and east to Lorne Creek (SFU 2013). The Kitselas First Nation were a powerful and wealthy people because of their strategic position at the Kitselas Canyon and are understood to be less nomadic than other Tsimshian neighbours (Avanti 2011; SFU 2013). The Kitselas First Nation controlled the lucrative trade route for marine and inland items along the Skeena River and a toll was paid to Kitselas First Nation chiefs to pass through their territories, that contributed to their overall wealth both before and after European contact, including trade control with the Hudson’s Bay Company (Avanti 2011; SFU 2013).

Archaeological artifacts in Kitselas have been carbon-dated to 10,000 years, confirming their traditional lands to “time immemorial” (Pacific Trail Pipelines Limited Partnership [PTPLP] 2007a). Kitselas First Nation traditional land use is seasonally driven based on resources available near Kitselas Canyon such as fishing, berry picking and plant harvesting including multiple use sites outside of Kitselas First Nation’s asserted traditional territory (Enbridge 2010, PTPLP2007a).

Trails and Travelways The Skeena River was a core trade route between the coast and interior for soapberries and other berries, furs and meat in exchange for shellfish, seaweed, halibut, red snapper, herring eggs and eulachon grease on the “grease trail” (Rescan 2009c). Some Kitselas First Nation members went to the Nass for eulachon grease and others may have acquired it from the Kitimat of Douglas Channel (Avanti 2011, Rescan 2009c). Kitselas First Nation members travelled primarily by river valleys (Avanti 2011).

The Royal BC Museum (2002) describes the Kitsumkalum and Skeena Trails which could have been used by the Kitselas First Nation:

“…In the south, the Kitsumkalum Trading Road connected to the Skeena Trade Route that ran along the north bank of the river from possibly as far downstream as the Khyex River to the Kitsumkalum River near Terrace, where it linked with a trail past Lake Kitsumkalum to the Nass River. From Kitsumkalum the Skeena Trail continued through the Kitselas Canyon, past Usk to Kitwanga where it met the Kitwankul Trail.” (Royal BC Museum 2002).

These roads are now covered in brush and modern access is done by motorized vehicles on logging roads (Royal BC Museum 2002).

Habitation There are five known historical village sites in Kitselas First Nation territory with associated petroglyphs. These five early villages are Tsunyow, Gitaus, Paul Mason site (named after a Kitselas First Nation Elder present at the 1981 site find), Gitlaxdzawk and Gitsaex. Gitlaxdzawk and Gitsaex were abandoned in the 1870s as a result of deaths from small pox brought by European contact. The town of Kitselas was built on the village of Gitaus in the 1890s as development and industry (notably fisheries and railroad) increased. Additional historic village sites were located in the canyon at Dry Island and Ringbolt Island and though uninhabited, petroglyphs were found and are believed to be associated with the village of Gitlaxdzawk based on proximity (Kitselas 2013).

The climate in Kitselas First Nation territory is diverse and influenced by the surrounding steep slopes. Four climatic zones exist in Kitselas First Nation territory from valley to alpine (Rescan 2009c) and more variety is found dependent on distance from the Pacific coast.

Hunting Many legislative barriers were instituted on hunting practices within Kitselas First Nation territory during the late 1800s and early 1900s (Rescan 2009c). Kitselas First Nation members however, still hunt for moose, deer, black and grizzly bear, snowshoe hares, red squirrels and ptarmigan in the upper Kitsumkalum watershed and along Lakelse River. Kitselas First Nation members also hunt for grouse, geese and ducks near Hellsgate Slough, the Skeena substation and at the confluence of the Skeena and Lakelse rivers, as well as off roads and around wetlands (Avanti 2011, Enbridge 2010, PTPLP2007a, Rescan 2009c).

Page 11-325

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

Trapping Many of the Kitselas First Nation trap lines were lost due to provincial licensing requirements. Presently, the main trapping areas are the upper Kitsumkalum River (north of Kitsumkalum Lake), near the Skeena substation and the Kitimat River and tributaries (Avanti 2011, PTPLP2007a, Rescan 2009c). Kitselas First Nation members currently own four active trap lines in the upper Kitimat watershed (Enbridge 2010). Trapping cabins are present at Chist Creek, Bolton Creek, north Kitimat River to Hunter Creek, upper Kitimat River and at the Kitselas Band trapline (Enbridge 2010).

Fishing Kitselas First Nation members rely heavily on salmon fishing (Rescan 2009c) particularly from the Skeena watershed. Kitselas First Nation traditional fish harvest areas includes the Skeena Watershed downstream of Lorne Creek to the mouth of the Skeena River. Kitselas First Nation members fish with salmon nets both culturally and for food under a communal licence issued to by the DFO. The Kitselas First Nation members harvest all species of Pacific salmon, steelhead, cutthroat trout, dolly varden, lamprey eel and in multiple use areas, finfish (salmon, groundfish, cod, etc.), shell fish and crustaceans. Fish are cured by jarring, salting, drying, smoking or freezing (Avanti 2011, Enbridge 2010, PTPLP2007a).

Plant Gathering Kitselas First Nation is home to diverse vegetation because of the proximity to the coast. Unique coastal species within Kitselas First Nation territory include salal, salmonberry, crab-apple and Alaskan Blueberry. northern Kitselas First Nation territory is less humid and rugged, with open forests (Rescan 2009c). The land in Kitselas First Nation territory is also rated as very high quality for agriculture (Avanti 2011). Traditionally, the Kitselas First Nation members used red and yellow cedar, Sitka spruce, western hemlock, maple, birch, alder, Douglas fir, yew, polar and cottonwood trees for canoes, longhouses, totem poles, wood-crafting, basketry, cooking utensils and clothing (Avanti 2011, PTPLP2007a).

Kitselas First Nation members harvest medicinal plants and berries including: huckleberries; salmon berries; raspberries; thimble berries; black hawthorn; blueberry (bog, oval-leafed); bunchberry; cloudberry; crabapple; cranberry (bog, high and low bush); crowberry; black and red currant; elderberry; black gooseberry; hazelnut; huckleberry; lily of the valley; soapberry; salal; Saskatoon; strawberry; devils club; mushrooms; skunk cabbage; fireweed; lichen; licorice; Pacific silverweed; riceroot; springbank clover; wild onion; cinquefoil; common juniper; copperbush; cow parsnip; Indian helebore; Labrador tea; lupine; sylvan goat's beard; and wild rose (Avanti 2011, Enbridge 2010, PTPLP 2007a, Rescan 2009c).

Gathering Places A gathering place for trading is known on the Skeena River (Enbridge 2010; Avanti 2011; PTPLP2007).

Sacred Sites Kitselas First Nation traditional culture includes Shamanism and transformation (the power of the Shaman to transform to other beings). Petroglyphs on Dry and Ringbolt islands within Kitselas First Nation territory could be associated with shamanism. A particularly interesting example of art depicting transformation is found on the petroglyph faces of Dry Island (Avanti 2011):

“…When viewed with your back to the river, the carving appears to be a human face or a mask; however, when it is viewed from the other side, the face transforms into that of an animal or another mask. Other petroglyph figures on Ringbolt Island and other art objects show a veneration for multiple culturally importance animals. The small 'Blackfish' petroglyph is thought to represent a killer whale.” (Avanti 2011).

Where available, approximate distances and directions of specific geographic areas known to be used by Kitselas First Nation for traditional land and resource use in relation to the application Corridor centerline were determined based on the information compiled through a review of the available literature and are provided in Table 11.15-1.

Page 11-326

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.15-1

KITSELAS FIRST NATION TRADITIONAL LAND AND RESOURCE USE LOCATIONS WITHIN THE TRADITIONAL LAND AND RESOURCE USE REGIONAL STUDY AREA

Activity/Site Approximate Distance and Direction from the Proposed Project Description Trails/Travelways Crosss at KPK 9.9 km Nass River 130 km southeast of KPN 750.98/166 km southeast of KPK 672.9 Kitimat Trading areas/Gathering Place Crosses at KP 544 Skeena River Fishing areas 82.2 km south of KPN 751 Skeena River 14 km south of KPM 102.5(Ridley Island) Mouth of the Skeena River Hunting areas 77 km southeast of KP 665 Kitselas Canyon Trapping areas 77 km southeast of KP 665 Kitselas Canyon Plant Gathering areas 77 km southeast of KP 665 Kitselas Canyon Habitation area 77 km southeast of KP 665 Kitselas Canyon Sacred sites 77 km southeast of KP 665 Kitselas Canyon Sources: Enbridge 2010; Avanti 2011; PTPLP2007

11.15.2 Consultation Activities Undertaken This Section of the application summarizes the consultation activities undertaken by WCGT since February 15, 2012, when Kitselas First Nation was initially approached by WCGT. Kitselas First Nation was formally notified of the proposed Project on September 10, 2012, in alignment with the Aboriginal Consultation Plan for the proposed Project. The information in this Section is drawn from the May 15, 2013 (July 2013) and December 31, 2013 (March 2014) Aboriginal Consultation Reports for the proposed Project.

11.15.2.1 Past and Planned Consultation Activities WCGT provided the proposed Project notification letter to Kitselas First Nation on September 10, 2012. WCGT has continually shared Project information with Kitselas First Nation since that date and will continue to do so as the proposed Project evolves.

WCGT first met with Kitselas First Nation on February 15, 2012, 2012 to share Project-related information, to determine the community’s interest and to develop a process for their involvement in proposed Project activities. Through a series of subsequent meetings both in-person, over the phone and via e-mail, opportunity has been offered to Kitselas First Nation to participate in biophysical field studies and to conduct TLU and socio-economic studies for the proposed Project. To date, Kitselas First Nation has not agreed on a scope for their socio-economic study and TLU study. The final results of any TLU study will form the basis for on-going dialogue between WCGT and Kitselas First Nation to inform detailed planning for the proposed Project.

An interim Capacity Funding agreement was signed in September 20, 2013. This funding agreement is in support of ongoing consultation in meetings and other activities with WCGT and the regulatory agencies, related to the proposed Project and to identify relevant effects of the Project on Kitselas First Nation, if any and identify and consider relevant mitigation to address those effects.

Throughout the consultation process, Kitselas First Nation and WCGT have held discussions and met on various Project-related subjects. These discussions have included: review of proposed route; economic benefits; and routing of the proposed Project corridor through their asserted traditional territory. A

Page 11-327

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

community meeting has been offered for Kitselas First Nation community members, but a date has not yet been confirmed.

Planned consultation activities by WCGT with Kitselas First Nation include: facility tours in Northeastern BC; a technical team presentation to Chief and Council; the distribution and review of a draft ancillary site map outlining the proposed features such as access roads, compressor stations, campsites, etc.; providing an overview of biophysical field data results compiled for the proposed Project; submission of Aboriginal Consultation Reports for review and comment; discussion of mitigation options; presentation on the process and content of the application for an EAC; discussion of training, employment and contracting opportunities; discussion about safety training and compliance for contracting and procurement; discussions on stream crossings; contracting and employment; community meeting(s) and discussion of economic benefits.

11.15.2.2 Changes to the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Aboriginal Consultation Reports WCGT shared the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Aboriginal Consultation Reports (1 and 2) with Kitselas First Nation for review and comment prior to final submission to the EAO. Through consultation activities to date, Kitselas First Nation has not identified any proposed changes to the Aboriginal Consultation Plan and Reports for the proposed Project.

11.15.2.3 Practices, Traditions or Customs Identified Through Consultation Activities Information related to the practices, traditions or customs Kitselas First Nation traditionally engaged in or is currently engaging in, in the vicinity of or in relation to, the proposed Project area is provided in Section 11.14.1. This information was collected through literature and desktop review.

11.15.2.4 Issues, Concerns and Resolutions Key issues and concerns raised by Kitselas First Nation are provided in Section 11.19. This information was collected primarily through consultation activities with Kitselas First Nation and through their participation on biophysical field studies for the proposed Project (see Section 3.2.2). WCGT’s responses to these key issues and concerns raised are also provided in Section 11.19 as well as cross-references to where these issues are considered in the application.

11.15.3 Potential Effects to Aboriginal Interests The identification of Kitselas First Nation’s present, past and anticipated future uses and traditional use of the proposed Project area described in Sections 11.15.1 and 11.15.2 was conducted through literature/desktop review and biophysical field. The issues identified from these sources also have informed the potential effects of the proposed Project on Kitselas First Nation’s identified Aboriginal Interests (Section 11.15.2). Where potential interactions were likely to occur, the potential effect is identified in Table 11.15-2. Table 11.15-2 also identifies specific geographic areas compiled from these sources to be important (as available) as well as the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate those effects. Where there is overlap between an Aboriginal interest and a VC, the information from other Sections of the application are cross-referenced and summarized in Table 11.15-2.

Based on the information collected to date and presented in Section 11.15.1.3, known interactions of the proposed Project with Kitselas First Nation’s Aboriginal Interests include crossings of a travelway at KPK 9.9 and a gathering place at KP 544. At this time, no known hunting sites,fishing sites, trapping, sites, plant harvesting sites, sacred sites, occur within 14 km of the proposed Project Route. As a result, no identified potential effects for these Aboriginal Interests have been identified. Should additional interactions on Aboriginal Interests be identified through ongoing consultation with Kitselas First Nation’s then the measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate potential effects will be implemented as outlined in Table 11.15-2.

Page 11-328

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.15-2

POTENTIAL EFFECTS TO ABORIGINAL INTERESTS IDENTIFIED BY KITSELAS FIRST NATION

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Identified Interest: Hunting Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ hunting Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA (hunting activities schedules, as required, prior to the commencement of construction. activities during activities are • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of construction and known to occur new clearing and land disturbance necessary. operations within the RSA. • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where (Section 6.1.5 - No hunting sites feasible. Current Use of are known to Lands and • All work site personnel will be oriented on proper response to wildlife occur closer Resources for encounters. No firearms are permitted on worksites unless previously than 77 km from Traditional authorized by WCGT for use by qualified Wildlife Monitor(s) for the the proposed Purposes). purpose of protecting workers from wildlife under specified conditions. Project route) • No hunting will be allowed by Project construction personnel on or near the proposed Project site during working hours, or while they are staying in Project accommodations. • The use of the construction right-of-way or Project access roads by Project personnel for hunting is prohibited during the construction phases of the Project. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the AMP Framework including access control measures (e.g., signage, road closures, restrictions, access control structures, vegetation screens) to reduce unauthorized motorized access. All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of components/ hunting sites Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify hunting sites that subsistence RSA (No warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during hunting sites measures: construction and are known to − adhering to species-specific timing constraints; operations occur closer − leaving breaks in the pipeline trench to allow animals to cross; (Section 6.1.5 - than 77 km from Current Use of − limiting the use of chemical applications; and the proposed Lands and − Project route) alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Resources for participating Aboriginal communities. Traditional • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric Purposes). environment, marine ecosystems, fish, vegetation, wetlands and wildlife (Sections 4.1, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 of the application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence hunting activities and wildlife habitat. Identified Interest: Trapping Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities and registered Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence trappers involved in the WCGT Aboriginal Engagement Program of subsistence RSA(trapping trapping work locations and construction schedules a minimum of 14 days prior activities during activities are activities to the commencement of construction. construction and known to occur • Prohibit the vandalism or theft of trapper equipment or trapped animals operations within the RSA. by Project workers. Report all violators to BC’s Fish and Wildlife (Section 6.1.5 - No trapping authorities. Current Use of sites are known • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of Lands and to occur closer new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Resources for than 77 km from Traditional • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where the proposed Purposes). feasible. Project route • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements.

Page 11-329

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.15-2 Cont’d

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of Operations components/ trapping Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify trapping sites that subsistence (cont’d) RSA (no sites warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during trapping sites measures: construction and are known to − maintaining access to the trap line; operations occur closer − moving of trap line equipment by trapper prior to construction; and (Section 6.1.5 - than 77 km from Current Use of − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by the proposed Lands and participating Aboriginal communities. Project route). Resources for • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric Traditional environment, vegetation, wetlands and wildlife (Sections 4.1, 4.6, 4.7 Purposes). and 4.8 of the application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence trapping activities and wildlife habitat. Identified Interest: Fishing Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA(subsistenc fishing schedules, as required, prior to the commencement of construction. activities during e fishing activities • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of construction and activities are new clearing and land disturbance necessary. operations known to occur • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where (Section 6.1.5 - within the RSA. feasible. Current Use of No known Lands and • Prohibit recreational fishing in freshwater environments by project fishing sites Resources for personnel on or in the vicinity of the construction right-of-way, access occur within Traditional roads, permanent facility sites, work camps and ancillary sites. The use 14 km of the Purposes). of the construction right-of-way or Project access roads by Project proposed personnel for fishing is prohibited during the construction phases of the Project Route). Project. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement measures outlined in the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework [Section 6.1]) to prevent increased access along new corridors created by the construction right-of-way and access roads, thereby minimizing potential for effects on fish due to activities such as fishing and off-road vehicle access (e.g., forded crossings). All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of components/ fishing sites Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify fishing sites that subsistence RSA (No known warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following resources during fishing sites measures: construction and occur within − recording and mapping of fishing locales; operations 14 km of the − strict adherence to the regulations, standards and guidelines set (Section 6.1.5 - proposed by provincial and federal regulatory agencies for watercourse Current Use of Project Route). crossings; and Lands and Resources for − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Traditional participating Aboriginal communities. Purposes). • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the marine ecosystems, fish and wetlands (Sections 4.4, 4.5 and 4.7 of the application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence fishing activities and the aquatic environment.

Page 11-330

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.15-2 Cont’d

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Identified Interest: Plant Gathering Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of Operations components/ subsistence Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction subsistence RSA(subsistenc plant schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of activities during e plant gatherig gathering construction. construction and activities are activities • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of operations known to occur new clearing and land disturbance necessary. (Section 6.1.5 - within the RSA. • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Current Use of No subsistence feasible. Lands and plant gathering Resources for • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance sites are known Traditional activities. to occur within Purposes). • 77 km from the Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP proposed (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor Project Route). personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. Construction, All Project Alteration of • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Alteration of Operations components/ plant Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify plant gathering subsistence RSA (no gathering sites that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the resources during subsistence sites following measures: construction and plant gathering − limiting the use of chemical applications; operations sites are known − replacement of plant species during restoration; (Section 6.1.5 - to occur within Current Use of − avoidance of the site; and 77 km from the Lands and − proposed alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by Resources for Project Route). participating Aboriginal communities. Traditional • All construction equipment must be clean and free of soil or vegetative Purposes). debris prior to its arrival on the construction site to reduce the risk of weed introduction. Any equipment which arrives in a dirty condition will not be allowed on the work site until it has been cleaned off at a suitable location. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of marine ecosystems, vegetation and wetlands (Sections 4.1, 4.6 and 4.7 of this application, respectively). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Implement the EMP, AMPF, Restoration Plan and Waste Management Plan to reduce the potential effects on subsistence plant gathering activities, wetlands and vegetation. Identified Interest: Ability to Practice Construction, All Project Disruption of • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of trail Operations components/ use of trails Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction and travelway use RSA(trails and and schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction travelways are travelways construction. and operations used within the • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 - RSA. A new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of travelway is • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Lands and known to occur feasible. Resources for Traditional at KPK 9.9). • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Purposes). Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify trails and travelways that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following measures: − detailed mapping, photographic recording and avoidance of the location by the development; − should avoidance of a site not be feasible, mitigation consisting of detailed recording and controlled excavations may be implemented; and/or − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved right-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority.

Page 11-331

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.15-2 Cont’d

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, See above See above • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the See above Operations transportation and access related to marine and freshwater navigability (cont’d) and marine safety. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. All Project Reduced • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disruption of components/ use of Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction habitation site use RSA(habitation habitation schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction site are known sites construction. and operations to occur in the • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 - RSA. No known new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of trails are known • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Lands and to occur closer feasible. Resources for than 77 km from Traditional • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable the proposed Purposes). Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify habitation sites that Project route) warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following measures: − detailed mapping, photographic recording and avoidance of the location by the proposed development; − should avoidance of a site not be feasible, mitigation consisting of detailed recording and controlled excavations may be implemented; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved rights-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority (e.g., MFLNRO or landowner). This restriction applies to all biophysical surveying and land surveying activities. • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. Identified Interest: Cultural Pursuits Construction, All Project Disturbance • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disturbance of Operations components/ of gathering Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction gathering places RSA(gathering places schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of during construction places exist construction. and operations within the RSA. • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 – A known new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of gathering • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Land and places is feasible.¶. Resources for crossed at Traditional • KP 544) Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable Purposes Effects Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify gathering places assessment). that warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following measures: − detailed recording, mapping and avoidance; − assess visual impact; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements.

Page 11-332

Westcoast Connector Gas Transmission April 2014 Aboriginal Consultation

TABLE 11.15-2 Cont’d

Potential Residual Effect Potential (VC Cross- Project Phase Location1 Effect Proposed Measures to Avoid, Reduce or Mitigate Potential Effects2 Reference) Construction, See above See above • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be See above Operations confined to approved rights-of-way, access roads or trails except where (cont’d) specifically authorized by the appropriate authority (e.g. MFLNRO or landowner). This restriction applies to all biophysical surveying and land surveying activities. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric environment (Section 4.1 of this application). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. All Project Disturbance • Notify representatives of Aboriginal communities involved in the WCGT Disturbance of components/ of sacred Aboriginal Engagement Program of work locations and construction sacred sites during RSA (sacred sites schedules a minimum of 14 days prior to the commencement of construction and sites are known construction. operations to exist within • Use existing clearings (i.e., shared workspace) to reduce the amount of (Section 6.1.5 – the RSA. there new clearing and land disturbance necessary. Current Use of are no sacred • Use existing access roads to access the pipeline right-of-way, where Land and sites known to feasible. Resources for occur closer Traditional • Complete pre-construction TLU study discussions with applicable than 77 km from Purposes Effects Aboriginal communities where necessary to identify sacred sites that the proposed assessment). warrant mitigation. Mitigation may include one or more of the following Project Route measures: − detailed recording, mapping and avoidance; − assess visual impact; − additional mitigation will be refined and optimized through community discussions; and − alternative site-specific mitigation strategies recommended by participating Aboriginal communities. • Review and adhere to the measures identified within the finalized AMP (see the AMP Framework in Section 6.1). Ensure that contractor personnel are aware of applicable traffic, road use and safety requirements. • All motorized vehicle traffic, including all terrain vehicle traffic, will be confined to approved right-of-way, access roads or trails except where specifically authorized by the appropriate authority. • Implement mitigation outlined under the assessment of the atmospheric environment (Section 4.1 of this application). • Implement the contingency measures identified in the TLU Sites Discovery Contingency Plan (Section 5.15) in the event TLU sites not previously identified are found during construction. • If archaeological, paleontological or historical sites (e.g., modified bone, pottery fragments, fossils) are discovered during construction, suspend work in proximity (i.e., within 30 m). No work at that particular location shall continue until permission is granted by the appropriate regulatory authority. Follow the contingency measures identified in the Heritage Resources Discovery Contingency Plan (see Section 5.8). • Implement applicable mitigation listed above during maintenance activities. Notes: 1 Current Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes RSA. 2 Detailed mitigation are outlined in the proposed Project-specific EMPs (Appendices 3-A and 3-B of this application).

11.15.4 Mitigation and Environmental Management Strategies Consistent with the methodology described in Section 3.0, Table 11.15-2 summarizes the mitigation or environmental management strategies that address identified effects to Kitselas First Nation’s Aboriginal Interests.

WCGT will continue to consult with Kitselas First Nation to refine site-specific mitigation measures to reduce effects to Kitselas First Nation’s Aboriginal Interests.

Page 11-333