SAMBAA K’E FIRST NATION PRESENTATION Enbridge Line 21 Replacement Segment Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board Oral Public Hearing October 27, 2017
Presentation Summary The following presentation will be given jointly by the Sambaa K’e First Nation (SKFN) panel and will detail the following topics. Traditional and current land use and stewardship 1. Experiences with the Enbridge Line 21 pipeline 2. Traditional knowledge about landscape and ecosystem 3. changes and their relation to the pipeline Experiences with Enbridge and perspectives on engagement 4. Socio-economic implications of the project 5. Waste management & spill contingency 6. Monitoring 7. Summary and conclusions 8.
TRADITIONAL AND CURRENT LAND USE AND STEWARDSHIP
Traditional and current land use and stewardship Enbridge Line 21 Replacement Segment is near Fort Simpson, where many SKFN members live and work The Mackenzie river crossing is part of SKFN Members’ secondary land use area. It encompasses traditional trails that SKFN’s elders and late elders / ancestors used to travel to Fort Simpson. SKFN supports LKFN perspectives as the most directly affected First Nation Several hundred kilometres of pipeline pass through Sambaa K’e First Nation’s core / primary land use area.
Traditional and current land use and stewardship Over 100km of Line 21 passes through the watershed from which Sambaa K’e First Nation members get drinking water. . The project further extends the lifespan of a project that had a design intended for 25 years. (It is now at 32 years) . No Dehcho First Nation has consented to the pipeline nor has been appropriately compensated for infringed rights. The project allows for continued cumulative negative affects of the pipeline on SKFN land use and rights.
Traditional and current land use and stewardship Harvesting and other traditional land uses and stewardship are inseparable from the language, culture, well-being and identify of Sambaa K’e First Nation members. 2014 census data
Traditional and current land use and stewardship 2014 census data
SAMBAA K’E FIRST NATION EXPERIENCES WITH LINE 21
SKFN Experiences with Line 21 From interviews (Sambaa K’e First Nation Traditional Knowledge report for the proposed MGP, 2014) “They told us that in the past, even for myself, long ago, they wanted people who had traps on the pipeline route to sit in on meetings. They told us that but, they are not following what the people wanted, they are ignoring what the trappers told them to this day.” - Edward Jumbo, p. 121
SKFN Experiences with Line 21 From interviews (Sambaa K’e First Nation Traditional Knowledge report for the proposed MGP, 2014) “They sounded very positive but they only monitored it at the beginning, and the place it went to, they used only that areas but the actual pipeline route is not really monitored so it is not good. We have to monitor it even though we don’t get paid for it. At the beginning they said we will get paid if we monitored it but it didn’t last long.” - Edward Jumbo, p. 121
LANDSCAPE AND ECOSYSTEM CHANGES
Landscape and ecosystem change Over decades, SKFN members have lived with a barrage of oil and gas activities on their lands, including exploratory wells and construction and operation of Line 21. The current project, its direct and indirect effects, must be understood within that context. Oil and gas activity has and continues to affect SKFN way of life, change the landscape, and affect wildlife behaviour and populations.
Landscape and ecosystem changes From interviews (Sambaa K’e First Nation Traditional Knowledge report for the proposed MGP, 2014) “Well, the golôâ (small animals) wouldn’t go back into that area for a while if they are going to do two years of construction. It will take a while for the golôâ to get back into that area I guess that’s for sure, till about three years… not able to hunt over there third or forth year I guess.” - Dolphus Jumbo, p. 58
Landscape and ecosystem changes From interviews (Sambaa K’e First Nation Traditional Knowledge report for the proposed MGP, 2014) “When they drilled, gah (rabbit) ate with the mud that they drilled out. Since then the population of gah started going down and there is no gah now. In areas that they drilled for rocks, gah would eat the pile of mud and your grandfather said there were dead gah beside them. That was around 1958… 56, 57… around there. There are still no gah today.” - Sarah Ann Jumbo, p. 119
Landscape and ecosystem changes From 2014 Minutes of a meeting between SKFN Members and Enbridge staff: “In the beginning, they said that the pipeline had a 30-year life span through the permafrost. Since then in just short years, 25 years, there has been lots of rain for about three to four summers. The last two summers not so much rain, can’t even get down Trout River. If there is lots of water what happens to the permafrost, the cut lines are sunken, trees falling and coming down because of the melting. Recommend to look at the pipeline after the permafrost. Is the pipe getting rotten due to the extensive water and permafrost? With global warming the land changes and it takes everything with it. Out of curiosity we should take a look at it.” - Dolphus Jumbo
Landscape and ecosystem changes Science echoes the knowledge and questions of SKFN Members: As permafrost in the Fort Simpson region is discontinuous, thin (5-20m) relatively warm (>-1°C) it is susceptible to thaw. Between 1964 and 1990 the southern edge of discontinuous permafrost moved north by 120km (Kwong and Gan, 1994). Between 1943 and 2008 (65 years) there has been a 61 percent decrease in permafrost cover. (Quinton et al. 2011)
Landscape and ecosystem changes Science echoes the knowledge and questions of SKFN Members: Thaw depths have increased along the pipeline corridor over an 18- year period from 1985 to 2003. (Smith and Riseborough, 2010) At 4m depth, increases in ground temperature beneath the corridor are 2°C higher than those increases in adjacent undisturbed terrain. (Smith and Riseborough, 2010) Thaw depths over the same time period have increased by more than 3m. (Smith and Riseborough, 2010) Permafrost-pipeline interactions may include thaw settlement, frost heave, upheave buckling, buoyancy, slope instability and others (Oswell 2011)
EXPERIENCES WITH ENBRIDGE AND PERSPECTIVES ON ENGAGEMENT
Experiences with Enbridge and perspectives on engagement MVLWB Guidelines – Guiding Principles • Shared responsibility : Coordinated processes, which respect the responsibilities of the proponent, the Government of Canada, the Government of the NWT, Aboriginal governments/organizations, and the Boards to enable meaningful involvement of affected parties, is essential in our co-management system. • Appropriate disclosure : All information relevant to an application is made available in a timely and understandable manner and considers the particular culture(s), language(s), and traditions of the affected parties. • Inclusiveness : Those potentially affected, including youth, Elders, and women, should be given the opportunity to be heard and involved. • Reasonableness: Proponents, affected parties, the Boards, and the Crown must be reasonable when setting expectations for engagement and consultation processes and be willing to enter into these processes in the spirit of cooperation. This includes the provision of reasonable resources, where appropriate, for carrying out and participating in consultation and engagement processes.
Experiences with Enbridge and perspectives on engagement From the Board’s information for proponents • Ideally, the proponent and the engaged party will agree on the engagement record and engagement plan, and signatures from both parties on these documents will demonstrate this agreement to the Board. Signatures, although not required, represent agreement on the contents, and do not necessarily imply that the parties agree on the topics that were discussed.
Experiences with Enbridge and perspectives on engagement SKFN was not involved in the development of Enbridge’s engagement plan SKFN did not have an opportunity to review and sign-off on the engagement log provided by Enbridge Enbridge’s claim that there were no unresolved community issues was blatantly untrue and illustrates the insincerity of their engagement processes. SKFN Members’ frustration with Enbridge’s engagement has been consistent and long-standing.
Experiences with Enbridge and perspectives on engagement SKFN was not involved in the development of Enbridge’s engagement plan SKFN did not have an opportunity to review and sign-off on the engagement log provided by Enbridge Enbridge’s claim that there were no unresolved community issues was blatantly untrue and illustrates the insincerity of their engagement processes. SKFN Members’ frustration with Enbridge’s engagement has been consistent and long-standing.
Recommend
More recommend
