NUNAVUT
The fate of caribou in the territory is inspiring people to speak out against the top politicians who represent them.

Alex Ishalook, left, chairperson of the Arviat Hunters and Trappers Organization, and manager Hilda Panigoniak show a petition the organization started in mid-March calling for an "immediate moratorium of any mining activity in and around the Kivalliq region's caribou calving grounds." - photo courtesy of Arviat Hunters and Trappers Organization

Across the Kivalliq region and on the Internet, petitions are circulating in opposition to the Government of Nunavut's (GN) recent surprise decision to oppose prohibitions on sensitive caribou habitat. The GN now suggests a case-by-case decision-making process, rather than comprehensive prohibitions.

Alex Ishalook, chairperson of the Arviat Hunters and Trappers Organization, spoke with Nunavut News/North March 21.

"At first the GN was on our side with the protection of calving grounds and post-calving grounds just north of Arviat. A few weeks ago, our board was very shocked they might support mining companies in the sensitive areas," said Ishalook.

"The board decided to do something - a petition, collecting names."

HTOs in the other Kivalliq communities are also collecting names. The plan is to present these to the territorial government and the Nunavut Planning Commission.

Ishalook says elders are insistent that calving grounds must be kept clean even when caribou are not present. Caribou calving takes place roughly from mid-May into June, sometimes later. In the legislative assembly, Iqaluit-Sinai MLA Paul Okalik said, according to the latest plans, calving grounds make up a scant six per cent of Nunavut's land mass.

"They must be kept clean even of potential cabins, even just from camping, even including the water crossing. When we use rocks, when we use tents, we do not camp around water crossings," said Ishalook.

Caribou are sensitive and easily disturbed, he says. For example, on their front legs they have a scent.

"The first caribou leaves a scent for the back caribou who are following the leaders. If you disturb them, they will go off, further out, and all the caribou behind them will do the same and follow their scent."

Ishalook hosted community radio call-in shows in September, when elders and residents had the opportunity to express themselves.

"Local people don't understand why mining companies would want to work in the zone where it's very sensitive," he said.

"The mining would only last a few years and the disturbance of the caribou will last hundreds of years. And the Qamanirjuaq herd is the last strongest herd."

Discord amongst representative bodies

The hunters and trappers organizations, regional wildlife board, and the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board have all come out decrying the government's position reversal, with one notable exception - the Kugluktuk Hunters and Trappers Organization. In an e-mail to the Kitikmeot Inuit Association president and to Premier Peter Taptuna, the MLA for Kugluktuk, chairperson Larry Adjun couldn't be clearer. The e-mail is dated Feb. 19, two weeks before the GN informed the Nunavut Planning Commission of the cabinet-driven position change.

"It is not in the interest of the Kugluktuk HTO to give a letter of support to the GN DOE (Department of Environment) recommendation to have a 'prohibitive approach on activities' imposed on the Bathurst caribou calving grounds. Our recommendation as stated earlier was 'seasonal/restrictive season' during peak/post caribou calving to help with the declining Bathurst caribou population from our side of the NWT/Nunavut border," wrote Adjun.

Adjun outlines in the e-mail Kugluktuk's long history of being "pro-active with mineral activities" dating back to the early 1940s.

The Kugluktuk HTO's position is not unlike the position the regional Inuit associations have taken. In the Kivalliq, for instance, the Kivalliq Inuit Association, while insisting on protection, nevertheless splits hairs on technicalities.

"We have suggested this (protection) occur with a combination of full protection (Protected Area status) within portions of the core calving grounds (which we term core calving areas), and mobile protection measures (termed mobile caribou conservation measures) applied to within 25 km of the mapped core areas. These mobile measures would allow case-by-case examination and regulation of potential exploration to ensure caribou are not disturbed when most sensitive to disturbance." wrote president David Ningeongan in a letter dated March 11 and widely distributed, including to the Nunavut Planning Commission, Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. (NTI) and wildlife management boards.

The Kitikmeot Inuit Association also weighed in, in a letter to Taptuna dated March 15, also widely distributed.

"The Government of Nunavut's current position on restriction rather than prohibitions on caribou habitat is more closely aligned with the perspectives of the Kitikmeot Inuit Association," wrote president Stanley Anablak.

"In a submission to the Nunavut Planning Commission in June 2015, the Kitikmeot Inuit Association supported the implementation of mobile protection measures."

E-mails to Baffin organizations and NTI remained unanswered by press time. However, NTI has requested further consultation on the draft Nunavut Land Use Plan.

Technical meeting

The Nunavut Land Use Plan is being developed through an exhaustive consultation process. It's currently in draft form and is unlikely to be finalized in the near future. This plan will ultimately direct the way forward. It was within the context of a three-day technical meeting about caribou protections, in anticipation of a public hearing now planned for March 2017, that Nunavummiut heard about the GN's reversal.

Okalik confronted Taptuna in the legislative assembly the week the news came out, accusing the premier of scare tactics and, later, of backroom deals.

"We had no idea how this came about," Okalik told Nunavut News/North March 22.

"There was no discussion in the house. No discussion with members impacted on concerns they may have, and no announcement from a minister or the premier on the decision. Normally, a government announces their decisions as ministers and they are held accountable for their decision. And they explain the details of their decision.

"None of that happened."

Pointedly, Okalik says, "All that came was a poor assistant deputy minister attending a planning commission meeting and announcing this change."

Further, Okalik notes that although the Kivalliq region seems to be at the forefront of protests, "it's something that concerns not just the Kivalliq but all of us. Such an important matter for the territory, where caribou are in decline, is something that warrants some discussion. It never happened. I think there's a disconnect."

Addressing the mining industry's position, the NWT and Nunavut Chamber of Mines released a statement March 23.

"We recognize that mining projects in Nunavut will likely interact with caribou, however Northerners should know that for many years now, industry has been subject to stringent Northern regulatory processes designed to ensure that there are no significant adverse environmental effects on caribou. These can include reducing or modifying activities at important times such as the calving season," stated president Gary Vivian.

"No definitive link has been established between the current decline in caribou populations across the North and exploration or mining."

The Chamber of Mines agrees with the new GN position, Vivian says.

In all cases, those in the opposite camp who do support prohibitive measures for protected areas also support development. However, they draw a boundary around the most sensitive places where caribou are at their most vulnerable - calving grounds, post-calving grounds and water crossings.

Ishalook compares the calving grounds to modern-day human hospitals.

"Calving grounds are their hospitals. It's where they go and give birth. Same thing. Us humans we go to the south to have a baby. If mining goes invading the hospital, where would you go? Where would we go if we needed to go to a clean environment? Same thing with caribou, they need to go to a clean environment. "And in the calving grounds, there are very special plants and habitat. That's why they produce good milk. It's special, very special habitat. That's why caribou go up in that area."