Agenda introduction to the committee what is land use planning?

Agenda

• INTRODUCTION TO THE COMMITTEE

• WHAT IS LAND USE PLANNING?

• LAND USE PLANNING AND THE DEH CHO PROCESS

• UPDATE ON DCLUPC ACTIVITIES & PROGRESS

• INPUT DATA FOR LAND USE OPTIONS

• LAND USE OPTIONS + ECONOMIC MODEL

• CUMULATIVE EFFECTS RESEARCH

• QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION

Committee & Staff

• Committee Members

• 2 DCFN reps (Tim Lennie and Petr Cizek)
• 1 GNWT rep (Bea Lepine)
• 1 Federal Government rep (Adrian Boyd)
• Chairman selected by the 4 members (Herb Norwegian)

• 5 Staff Members

• Executive Director (Heidi Wiebe)
• Office Manager (Sophie Bonnetrouge)
• GIS Analyst (Monika Templin)
• Land Use Planner (Paul Wilson)
• Land Use Planner Trainee (Priscilla Canadien)

What is Land Use Planning?

Land Use Planning in the Deh Cho

• Land Use Planning means determining what types of land use activities should occur and where they should take place

• “The purpose of the plan is to promote the social, cultural and economic well-being of residents and communities in the Deh Cho territory, having regard to the interests of all Canadians.”

• Our planning area extends to the whole Deh Cho territory, excluding municipal areas and Nahanni National Park Reserve

Plan Area

Deh Cho Process

• The Deh Cho Process is the process of negotiations on lands and resource management and self-governance between the Deh Cho First Nations, Government of Canada and the Government of the Northwest Territories

• Began in 1993 and is on-going

• May 2001- Signed a Framework Agreement and Interim Measures Agreement

• April 2003 – Signed Interim Land Withdrawals and Interim Resource Development Agreement

• Currently working towards an Agreement in Principle (AIP)

• Aiming for a Final Agreement by 2008

Interim Land Withdrawals

Interim Land Withdrawals

• Land Withdrawals identified critical areas for interim protection

• Land Use Plan will revise Land Withdrawals

Deh Cho Process

• Will address ownership/sovereignty over land

• Not following the typical land selection model

• Negotiating Shared Stewardship over entire 210,000 km2

• For more information go to:

• http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/dehcho/ or
• http://www.dehchofirstnations.com/

Land Use Planning and the Deh Cho Process

• Land Use Planning is only one part of the larger Deh Cho Process

• Land Use Plan must be completed before the Deh Cho Process to be used by the three parties to negotiate in the Deh Cho Process

• Draft Land Use Plan (2005)

• Final Land Use Plan (March 2006)

• Complete Deh Cho Process (~ 2008)

• Land Use Plan will be revised to be consistent with the final agreement and every 5 years after

Planning Partners

Planning vs. Management

• Our mandate is to plan for future resource development – map potential, identify issues, write final plan to show “what” and “where”

• We are not involved in past or current resource applications – current government structures do that (DCFN, GNWT and Gov of Canada)

• May change with Deh Cho Process – Future Deh Cho Resource Management Authority

Update on DCLUPC Activities & Progress

• Staff Recruitment

• Round 1 Consultation Feedback

• Q & A Report

• Further Research:

• Wildlife Workshop,
• Dene Nahodhe Workshop

• Economic Development Model Completed

• Reviewing Various Land Use Options

Land Use Options

• Draft Land Use Options represent different visions for the final land use map

• Represent 5 different levels of development

• Based on information (mostly scientific) gathered to date – little community or planning partner input yet

• Will be revised based on feedback and presented at the next round of meetings

Options Development

Wildlife

• Traditional Knowledge & Expert Research

• Regional Wildlife Workshop - Held: November 2003

• 308 species in the Deh Cho territory (3 amphibians, 36 fish, 213 birds and 56 mammals)

• Key species include:

• Caribou, Moose, Bison, Fish and Waterfowl for consumption
• Trumpeter Swan, Whooping Crane, Peregrine Falcon (Endangered)
• Black Bear, Grizzly Bear, Furbearers, Dall’s Sheep, and Mountain Goat (Trapping & Hunting species)

Wildlife Potential

Traditional Use Density

• Important to Traditional Dene Lifestyles

• Information gathered and maintained by DCFN

• Consulted 386 harvesters and mapped information

• Harvest areas, kill sites, sacred sites, berry patches

• DCFN approved publication and use at Kakisa Assembly 2004

• Planning Committee only gets generalized density of use, not raw data

Traditional Use Density

Archeology, Cabins, Historic Sites & Rare features

• Evidence of past human use

• Important small sites i.e. fire rings, cabins, trails

• Buffer required for protection

• Development must avoid these areas

• Rare Features:

• i.e. Hot Springs and Karst Formations

Archeology, Rare features, Historic Sites & Cabins

Conservation Value Map

Minerals

• Knowledge-driven mineral potential mapping approach based on geological favourability and known mineral occurrences

• Assessed 9 mineral types thought to have the most potential in the region

• Sedimentary Exhalative Sulphides (SEDEX)
• Sedimentary-hosted Stratiform Copper
• Mississippi Valley-type Lead-Zinc
• Vein Copper
• Skarn Lead-Zinc-Silver
• Skarn Gold
• Skarn Tungsten
• Granitic Pegmatite
• Primary Diamonds

Information Sources

• Geological Base: 1:1,000,000 digital map by Journey and Williams (1995)

• Mineral Occurrences: NORMIN Database

• Mineral Deposit Type Information: Geology of Canadian Mineral Deposit Types by Eckstrand (1996)

Mineral Potential Rankings

Stratiform Iron (CMDT 3.0)

SEDEX (CMDT 6.1)

Sediment-Hosted Copper (CMDT 8.3)

MVT Lead-Zinc (CMDT 10.0)

Vein Copper (CMDT 17.0)

Skarn Lead-Zinc (CMDT 20.1)

Skarn Gold (CMDT 20.3)

Skarn Tungsten (CMDT 20.5)

Pegmatites (CMDT 21.0)

Primary Diamonds (CMDT 25.0)

Minerals

• Produced a final cumulative mineral potential map showing geological favourability and ranking of Resource Assessment Domains (RADS)

• The highest potential is in the western tip of the territory

• There is significant potential for:

• Sedimentary exhalitive sulphides (SEDEX) zinc-lead,
• Sediment-hosted stratiform copper,
• Mississippi Valley-type lead-zinc,
• Vein copper,
• Skarn deposits (emerald, gold, tungsten, copper, and lead-zinc).

Cumulative Mineral Potential

Mineral Priority Areas

• Combines geological information with synoptic level economic factors to identify priority areas for development

• Geographical factors (remoteness, infrastructure)
• Size of potential deposit
• Inclusion of precious metal in a base metal deposit increases development potential
• Reduced emphasis on Stratiform Fe, Sedimentary Cu and Vein Cu and increased emphasis on SEDEX, MVT Pb-Zc and Skarn deposits.
• World markets
• Ease/Costs of mineral extraction
• Presence of existing deposits

Mineral Priority Areas

Mineral Development Potential

Oil and Gas Potential

• Canadian Gas Potential Committee estimates 69,177x106m3 natural gas has been discovered in the Deh Cho plus 31,075x106m3 in undiscovered nominal marketable gas

• 419 hydrocarbon wells drilled, most are wildcat wells (exploratory) but 127 have found hydrocarbons

• Hydrocarbon Potential was assessed by defining hydrocarbon plays and identifying the number of confirmed and conceptual plays existing in a given region

• 20 hydrocarbon plays in the Deh Cho

• 9 confirmed
• 11 unconfirmed

• Current producing regions are Fort Liard (natural gas) and Cameron Hills (gas with oil); other significant discoveries found but not yet developed

• Greatest potential is in the Liard Plateau and the Great Slave Plain (northern extension of the western sedimentary basin)

Oil and Gas Potential

Tourism

• The greatest potential is along the Mackenzie and Liard River valleys and radiates out from communities (the “hub and spoke” effect.)

• Exceptionally scenic, offer various types of tourism experiences and have good access

• Key tourism destinations include Nahanni National Park Reserve, the Ram Plateau and North Nahanni River, Little Doctor Lake, Cli Lake, Trout Lake and some lodges

• Deh Cho tourism is not well developed but has lots of potential - it can still offer tourists pristine wilderness free from commercial interruption

Tourism Potential

Forestry Potential

• Productive timber stands around Fort Liard, Nahanni region, Jean Marie River and the Cameron Hills

• Current timber harvest well below sustainable harvest levels (20 years harvest)

• Low prices $ and difficult access may impact commercial viability

• Potential for community use for log houses and cut lumber in fly-in communities

Forestry Potential

Agricultural Potential

• Agriculture is small scale generally within community boundaries

• Potential not developed – minor land use

• Limitations include; climate, soil type, difficulties with access and power requirements

• South have competitive advantage

• Cost of food - opportunities and potential for community use

Agricultural Potential

Composite of Development Potential

Preliminary Land Use Options

• Change Priority of Conservation and Development

• Create 5 Land Use Options

• Shows a range of possibilities available

• Compare to Current Land Withdrawals

• Use Economic model to compare effects on economy

Zones

• Multiple Use Zones: all development uses permitted subject to general regulations

• Conservation Zones: no development permitted

• Uncertain Zones: conservation and development hold equal priority, no decision possible

Land Use Option # 1

Land Use Option # 2

Land Use Option # 3

Land Use Option # 4

Land Use Option # 5

Interim Land Withdrawals

Economic Development Assessment Model

• Determines costs & benefits for informed land use planning decisions

• Model current economy then predict the next 20 years

• Driven by level of development in 5 key sectors

• Allows us to see the economic impact of developing each resource sector, and some specific projects

• Apply Economic Assessment Model to each of five Land Use Options and the existing land withdrawals

• Results are regional not community based

• Results are preliminary – more refinement required

Economic Development Assessment Model

Economic Assessment Model Outputs

• Economic Assessment Model: generates direct, indirect and induced estimates reflecting the level of development in 5 key sectors for the following:

• Gross Production
• GDP or Value Added by Industry
• Labour Income – Southern, Northern and Aboriginal
• Employment by Industry– Southern, Northern and Aboriginal
• Tax revenues to the Federal Government and the GNWT
• Population and Labour Force

Mining Development

• Large Developments – major impacts especially during construction

• Modeled 3 mines:

Mining Economics

• Production (tons/yr)

• Value of Production ($)

• Capital Investment

• Operating Costs

• Direct Mine Operating Resource Income

• Mine Operating Resource Profits and Taxes

• Employment

Gas Development (Millions of M3)

Agricultural Hectares Developed

Forestry Volume Produced (Millions of M3)

Tourism Sites Developed

Timing of Development

Gross Expenditure # 3

Gross Domestic Product # 3

Total Direct Employment # 3

Direct & Total Employment # 3

Federal & GNWT Tax Revenue # 3

Change in Population # 3

Employed & Unemployed no. # 3

Employed & Unemployed % # 3

Impact on Gross Expenditure

Impact on Gross Domestic Product

Direct & Total Employment

Impact on Tax Revenue

Population Trends

Unemployment Rate (%)

Employment Rate (%)

Population

Indications!

• Terms and conditions of development

• Manage Potential Development Impacts

Feedback

• Input and output values are preliminary and need refining

• Requesting feedback and assistance to ensure we model costs and values appropriately (Volunteers?)

• Is there a way to model the economic value of mineral potential?

Social, Cultural & Ecological Values

• Social, Cultural and Ecological Values not reflected in the Economic Model

• Need to be considered in Land Use Planning decisions

• Impacts may vary according to the pace and type of development

• Should be reflected in Land Use Priorities

Cumulative Effects Research

• Cumulative Effects identify the overall impact of many developments together, over time

• Guided by Land Use Objectives (Vision and priorities)

• Indicators – Environmental or social parameter to monitor

• Thresholds - The point at which indicator changes to an unacceptable condition

• To be included in the Deh Cho Land Use Plan as Terms and Conditions for development and management

Limits of Acceptable Change

Ecological response curve and tiered habitat thresholds.

Indicators and Thresholds 1

• Proposed Indicators:

• Physical/Chemical
• Air Quality
• Water Quality
• Ecological
• Habitat Availability
• Specialized Habitat Features e.g. Salt Licks
• Core Habitat
• Fish Habitat
• Woodland Caribou

Indicators and Thresholds 2

• Proposed Indicators:

• Land Use
• Total Disturbed Area
• Significant and Environmental Features
• Total Corridor Density
• Stream Crossing Density
• Social
• Significant Cultural Features
• Community Population
• Labour Participation
• Area and Revenue by Sector
• Visual Quality

Core Area

• Conservation Zone

• Cautionary >85% Large Core Areas
• Target >75% Large Core Areas
• Critical >65% Large Core Areas

• Development Zone

• Cautionary >65% Medium Core Areas
• Target >50% Medium Core Areas
• Critical >40% Medium Core Areas

Core Area

Total Corridor Density

• Conservation Zone

• Cautionary – 1 km / square km
• Target 1.2 km / square km
• Critical 1.5 km / square km

• Development Zone

• Cautionary – 1 km / square km
• Target 1.5 km / square km
• Critical 1.8 km / square km

• Considerations include size of study area and age / regrowth of cutlines

Total Corridor Density

Stream Crossing Density

• Cautionary – to be set in important areas (e.g. spawning)

• Target 0.32 / square km
• Critical 0.5 / square km

• Important for Fish Habitat

Stream Crossing Density

Feedback Required

• Cumulative Effects Indicators and Thresholds will be a Major factor in managing overall development in the Deh Cho

• Planning Partners must agree on Threshold Values

• DCLUPC would like feedback and discussion on the report and proposed indicators

• All recommendations are under consideration by the Committee

Next Steps

• Community Mapping Sessions

• Identifying community priorities, where lands should be protected, where development should be permitted and general terms and conditions
• Identifying compatible and incompatible uses

• Refine:

• social and economic analysis
• cumulative effects research

Next Steps

• Present Revised Land Use Options (2-3) at future consultations (late fall 2004/early 2005)

• Revise based on feedback to one or two options

• Hold regional gathering for all planning partners to discuss final land use map

• Develop Draft Land Use Plan (2005)

• Final Land Use Plan (March 2006)

Feedback

• Have we captured the information for your sector appropriately / accurately (please review appropriate reports and provide feedback if necessary)

• Are there important areas your sector would like to see opened up over the next 20 years?

• Review and comment on economic modeling of the mining industry in the Deh Cho.

• Are there any points you would like to see the land use plan address relating to your industry?

• Please provide feedback on our process and methods.

Questions?