Mayo, Dawson FNs ink deal with Yukon miners

In what may mark a significant turning point for Peel protection, the Yukon Chamber of Mines has agreed to work with the Na-cho Nyak Dun and Tr’ondek Hwech’in First Nations “for their mutual benefit.” 



Blackstone River

The seven-page Memorandum of Understanding, signed this week at the Yukon Geoscience Forum, doesn’t mention the Peel specifically, but it does mention land use planning and respecting the process.
 

The deal follows in the wake of unprecedented mining activity in both the Mayo and Dawson regions. The two First Nations have said repeatedly they're not opposed to mining in the southern portion of their territories, but they do not want mining in the northern portion - the Peel watershed. 



Promises made in the deal include:

• to work together to leave a positive legacy for future generations and ensure that the essential characteristics and productive capacity of the land in Yukon remains substantially unchanged  
• to respect land use planning processes and work to ensure that social, cultural, economic and environmental policies are applied to the management, protection and use of land, water and resources in an integrated and co-ordinated manner so as to ensure sustainable development  
• to support each other in protecting and advancing their respective rights and interests  
• to work collaboratively to identify issues arising from applicable legislation and regulatory processes, and where appropriate, recommend solutions  
• to encourage proactive and transparent consultation between Yukon First Nations and the mining industry, as soon as practicable after a miner decides to explore for minerals in the First Nations’ traditional territories
• to do their best to encourage the application of this MOU to all mining activity in Yukon and all interaction between miners and Yukon First Nations, recognizing that the Chamber cannot bind its members, nor can the First Nations bind Yukon First Nations
• to encourage increased partnerships between the mining industry and Yukon First Nation communities and businesses, investigate and increase investment potential, establish and foster procurement practices that benefit Yukon First Nations, and enhance human resources development and labour force development activities with Yukon First Nation communities and people
• to encourage open and transparent communications and to develop a communications protocol between the Parties which embraces principles such as timely and frank exchange of information and a commitment to converse prior to contentious or difficult matters becoming public 
• to develop a dispute resolution process  
• to endeavour to develop and advocate a common position in respect of the resource royalty regime in Yukon

A steering committee, supported by a working group, will be set up to guide and implement the deal. It's promised to meet at least three times a year to identify priorities and finalize annual work plans.

In two years time, the parties will decide if they want to continue with the agreement or whether it needs changes. The deal can be terminated at any time by either side.

The Paz on the Peel: post election

Now safely ensconced in the powerful corner office, Yukon Premier Darrell Pasloski says cutting a deal on the Peel is one his new government's top priorities.

Here's what he said during a CBC-TV interview this week:

"Well what we’re going to do is we’re going to finish the process that was agreed upon with the four First Nations and the Yukon government. There’s still a bit of consultation work to be done. And then, as I had said, it’s really about bringing all the players back to the table so that we can come up with something that works.

"That's really what Yukoners want. There’s been a lot of polarization, a lot of division happening and really sort of this whole atmosphere of picking winners and losers.

"And we believe, as happened in the North Yukon land use plan, when they couldn’t get it done at first, that they took a step back and came back to the table and they were able to come up with something that worked for everybody and that’s our goal....

"I can’t give you a set date yet. This is a priority for us....We’re going to move forward with this and it’s going to be something that needs to be dealt with in the very near future."

His comments raise a number of troubling questions.

1. Has Pasloski already dismissed the results of the upcoming consultations before they are even held?

2. Is he going to reject the plan no matter what the public says or wants? Is the government about to make a mockery of the consultation process?

3. As for getting "the players" around the table behind closed doors, is that even legal? The Umbrella Final Agreement's land use planning chapter makes no mention of private deals. And even if it did, who would Pasloski invite? Who would accept? And what would he do if said "players" could not agree as would be the case?

4. Why does he mention the early failures of the North Yukon plan? Is he raising the spectre that the government is preparing to pull the plug on the Peel plan despite the fact it's mere pen-strokes from completion? Even though six plus years and more than $1 million worth of research, analysis, consultation and plain old hard work have gone into its making?

5. Finally, what happened to Pasloski's Yukon Party that had so much respect for the Peel planning process that it didn't want to tell voters it hated the plan for fear it would taint the consultations?

Let the political games begin

Yukon Party captain Darrell Pasloski named his starting lineup: an eight-member cabinet of four veterans and four rookies, with three left on the sidelines as potential referees.

Former party rebel Brad Cathers has finally been rewarded for standing up to his old boss, Dennis Fentie. Cathers gets his old job back – the powerful post of energy, mines and resources minister. That’s the department in charge of land use planning and also the department which worked overtime to scuttle Peel protection.

Perhaps both the department and the Peel will benefit from the respect for truth and democracy Cathers has shown in the past. Whether he'll have the jam to accept the Peel plan - six long years in the making - is the million dollar question.

Elaine Taylor, the lone woman invited to sit in cabinet, has been shuffled to community services from tourism where, in her nine years as minister, she never once publically defended the Peel and isn't likely to start.  

Her replacement likely won't either. Newcomer Mike Nixon, the son-in-law of Conservative Senator Dan Lang, hid behind the planning process when he first ran in the Whitehorse Centre byelection last December.

Now Nixon's in charge of not only tourism but also justice. Interesting combo. Especially since some pundits predict the Peel plan will go directly to court if the Yukon government rejects it.

Twenty-six-year-old Currie Dixon, who took out Liberal leader Arthur Mitchell in Copperbelt North, is the new minister of economic development and environment. In that order.

Fresh out of university with a master's in political science, he may soon realize they're the same thing - the environment and the economy - but given his inexperience he's not likely to carry much weight in cabinet.

Still he'll have more credibility than former Liberal cabinet minister Scott Kent, who recently switched political horses, then led the anti-Pasloski-for-leader campaign and now sits as education minister. The former executive director of the Yukon Chamber of Mines has been a vocal opponent of Peel protection and that's not likely to change.

Rounding out the field is former Whitehorse councilor, Doug Graham, who also jumped from the Liberals to the Yukon Party at the 11th hour. He's now the minister of health and social services while Wade Istchenko – who just days ago confessed to falsifying his wilderness tourism licence application – is in charge of highways and public works.

Like his predecessor, Pasloski will oversee finance and the executive council office.

Of the three remaining Yukon Party MLAs - Porter Creek Centre’s David Laxton, Pelly-Nisutlin’s Stacey Hassard and Watson Lake’s Patti McLeod – one will become the speaker and another will chair the committee of the whole.

Pasloski recently told the business community his new "team" will get to play its first legislative game sometime before Christmas but he hasn't released any dates to the public yet.

Tombstone mining plan still too hazy: YESAB

More information is needed before assessors can review a second application to mine for gold in the middle of the Yukon’s Tombstone Territorial Park.

“We have reviewed your supplementary information submission dated Oct. 14, 2011 and have determined that additional information is required in order to consider the proposal adequate and commence the evaluation,” says an Oct. 25 letter from the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board to Canadian United Minerals.

This is the second request for more details since the company submitted a new application to work it controversial Horn claims in the Peel's upper Blackstone River region.

Its first attempt to renew its five-year mining land use permit in 2010 sparked a huge public outcry.

That proposal was eventually rejected because of its impact on wildlife and park visitors. It included a winter trail along the Blackstone to the Dempster to haul out the ore by snow machine.

The winter trail is no longer part of the 2011 application. Instead, the company says it would only use helicopters in both winter and summer. It would fly directly from Dawson City or from a staging area on the Dempster Highway - possibly the gravel pit at Kilometre 66 which serves as the trailhead for Grizzly Valley hikers.

As for the claims, it plans to dig more trenches (8M X 4M X 2M) with a backhoe, use dynamite to blast rock and house between two to eight workers at its camp.

YESAB's latest list of questions includes concerns about the disturbance of sheep. This was an issue during the first review and the board wants to know how this new plan is any different.

It's asked for more information on how the company plans to reduce its impact on the local hunting company and other park visitors.

“Your response to question 1d [about potential impact on park visitors] is insufficient as it argues preferential rights rather than demonstrating how the project proposal considers minimizing, controlling or eliminating significant adverse effects associated with helicopter access in particular,” says the YESAB letter.

The board also wants to know where the company plans to burn its garbage. And it's asked for more detail on the potential of metal leaching and acid rock drainage.

Although Canadian United Minerals says it’s cleaned up its old mess on the claims, as required under its previous permit, the board wants to see the reports and photographs of the work done.

“The information is relevant to this assessment because it will provide a better understanding of the current state of environmental conditions as well as aid in determining future (potential) project effects,” YESAB says.

All of the YESAB documents for the Horn Quartz Exploration - Tombstone Application #2011-0134 can be viewed the board's website http://www.yesab.ca/.

The aftermath of the Yukon election

The dust has settled and it’s not pretty. Especially for the Peel.

Although the Yukon Party only garnered 40% of the vote, it has walked away with its third majority, thanks to vote-splitting between the NDP and Liberals.

But it wasn’t exactly a resounding victory.

The right-wing regime went into the election holding 11 of the territory’s 18 seats. It came out 31 days later with 11 of 19 seats and minus three cabinet ministers - Glenn Hart, Steve Nordick and Marian Horne.

Voters closest to the Peel watershed wanted nothing to do with Darrell Pasloski and his Yukon Party.

Residents of Mayo-Tatchun picked NDP Jim Tredger to go the legislature, the Vuntut Gwitchin returned Liberal Darius Elias, and Klondike voters turfed Economic Development Minister Steve Nordick, opting instead for Liberal school teacher Sandy Silver.

Protection of the Peel was a major issue. Mostly the public wanted to know if the parties would support the final recommended land use plan – a plan that’s been six years in the making and protects 80% of the watershed from industrial development.

Only the Yukon Party refused to commit to it.

First Pasloski said he couldn’t share his party’s position on the Peel because of an agreement signed with the Na-cho Nyak Dun, Tr’ondek Hwech’in, Vuntut Gwitchin and Gwich’in Tribal Council.

But those four First Nation leaders - who all support the plan - were quick to dispell that excuse.

“This is false,” they said in a full-page ad, chastising Pasloski for misleading the public and spelling out just what those agreements do say.

They also took exception to comments he made that they were irresponsible for going public with their Peel positions.

Taking a new tack, the Yukon Party then turned its guns on the potential cost of protecting the Peel. Compensating claim-holders could run into the millions, meaning Yukoners would go without other things, Pasloski said.

"The recent assertion by Premier Pasloski that implementing the plan would bankrupt the Yukon is misguided, verging on fear-mongering,” said the chiefs.

“The plan doesn’t call for expropriation of mining claims. It is also interesting to note that the Yukon Party government allowed the number of mining claims in the Peel to quintuple during the planning process.”

The final round of public consultations for the Peel land use plan are expected to begin within the next couple of months.

Once the new government is in place, one of its first orders of business should be to extend the current staking moratorium - due to expire in early February - for at least another year until the plan is finalized.

Related reading:
The Peel is not Windy Craggy (Yukon News, Oct. 7, 2011)
Parties pronouce promises on Peel, platform (Whitehorse Star, Oct. 6, 2011)
Pasloski pounded over Peel (Yukon News, Sept. 23, 2011)
ATIPP shows Yukon Party government ignored Peel public input
Environment ATIPP records on Peel consultation (Oct. 3, 2011)

All-party forum to target environment

A Yukon election forum focused on environmental issues, such as the future of the Peel watershed, will be held Sept. 27 in Whitehorse.

CPAWS-Yukon, the Yukon Conservation Society, Friends of McIntyre Creek, the Wilderness Tourism Association of the Yukon and Raven Recycling have invited candidates from all political parties to attend.

The environment is an important issue in this election, said Karen Baltgailis, YCS executive director, in a news release.

Although Yukoners are getting benefits from the mining boom, they also have concerns about the environmental impacts, she said.

“All this new mining is opening a Pandora’s box of issues," said Baltgailis. "Where will the power come from? What are the impacts on wildlife and water? Will the Yukon still be the place we love when the dust settles and the mines go away?”

CPAWS-Yukon executive director Mike Dehn said Yukon Party leader Darrell Pasloski had said he didn't want the Peel watershed to be an issue but it is whether he wants it to be or not.

“I’m sure people will be very interested in trying to get an answer about where all of the parties stand on the Peel,” he said.

Big, wild places like the Peel are also essential to the wilderness tourism industry. It wants to know how the parties plan to maintain a diversified economy and provide a strong foundation for tourism.

Another issue is the protection of Middle McIntyre Creek from housing and road development.

Raven Recycling executive director Joy Snyder expects the public will want to know how the next government will increase waste diversion rates. They have remained at 11% for the past five years.

She thinks there will also be questions about Yukon Energy's idea of burning garbage to create power.

The two-hour forum is at the High Country Inn beginning at 7 p.m.

Yukon News tries to pin down Pasloski on Peel

Yukon News reporter John Thompson interviewed Yukon Party Darrell Pasloski about the Peel. The following is his Sept. 16 story.

When Darrell Pasloski campaigned to become the Yukon Party’s leader this spring, he cautioned his party faithful to not let the fate of the Peel Watershed become an election issue.

Too late. The Liberals, NDP and Greens have all promised to act on a plan to protect four-fifths of the vast swath of northeast Yukon that’s twice the size of Vancouver Island.

Four affected First Nations have also thrown their support behind the final plan. And they want Pasloski to make his position clear.

But Pasloski insists that, by doing so, the chiefs are breaking a deal.

“You have to be responsible,” he told the Yukon News Friday morning during a sit-down interview. “You have to follow agreements that you sign.”

But which agreement? Pasloski’s predecessor, Dennis Fentie, often hid behind a copy of the Umbrella Final Agreement to dodge questions on the Peel, to justify what many people saw as his meddling in the process.

But Pasloski isn’t talking about the UFA. He’s referring to a joint letter of understanding, signed by the territory and First Nations in January.

It sets the rules for how to behave during the final steps of the planning process, with the aim of having a plan signed by all parties in early November.

What’s far from clear is why Pasloski asserts this letter prevents him from speaking his mind on the Peel Watershed.

So, with the four-page agreement splayed before Pasloski, the News asked him to identify the section that forbids him from taking a public position on the Peel.

He wouldn’t.

So we asked again. And again.

In all, Pasloski was asked six times in 15 minutes.

He never did cite a particular section. Instead, Pasloski stuck to generalities.

Afterwards, this reporter gave the letter one more thorough read and couldn’t find any part that would prevent Pasloski from speaking to the matter.

But Pasloski insists doing so would be wrong, because it would mean he had prejudged a process that hasn’t wrapped up.

A timeline agreed to in January includes one more final round of public consultations. Meetings were slated from mid-August to mid-September, in Whitehorse, Mayo, Old Crow, Dawson City and Fort McPherson. But they never happened.

And, with an election underway, these talks won’t start until a new government is in place.

Consultations were delayed so that miners, who are busy hunting for shiny metal in the summer, could attend, said Pasloski.

But didn’t his government help set the timetable it’s no longer meeting? To this, Pasloski passes the blame to the Peel planners.

They completed their final plan nearly a month late, he said.

It’s a puzzling point to make, because even if the talks were held a month earlier than scheduled, this would be an equally inconvenient time for miners.

The Yukon government has already conducted one round of public talks on the Peel, in the summer of 2010. It never released the results.

But when conservationists hired DataPath Systems to determine the outcome of the consultations, it concluded that the vast majority of respondents wanted most of the watershed protected.

Pasloski offered a comparison to explain his position, or lack thereof.

The territory recently extended public consultations for its revamped wolf management plan. It would be premature for the territory to state it’s position on that now, before everyone has had a chance to speak.

So it goes with the Peel, he said.

“It would be like the government coming out and saying, ‘This is what we’re going to do,’ today, without finishing the consultation process. As a government, we need to be responsible. And I think that’s what people want to see.”

But Pasloski isn’t just refusing to say what his government will do with the Peel plan. He’s refusing to offer any specific criticism of the proposal.

It’s clear the Yukon Party thinks the plan goes too far and doesn’t allow enough mining. But the only people to say so out loud are candidates that drifted away from the Liberals to recently join the Yukon Party: Scott Kent and David Laxton.

It would be “irresponsible” to make any comment about the final Peel plan at this point, said Pasloski.

The Yukon Party would protect part of the Peel, said Pasloski. But he won’t say how much.

“I won’t put a number on it,” he said.

“I think that’s not responsible, for people to come out and make a final decision before all the information is out.”

Contact John Thompson at  johnt@yukon-news.com