Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

International cooperation in the Alaska-British Columbia-Yukon Region Gray, Glenn Thomas 1989

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1989_A8_3 G72.pdf [ 9.79MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0097992.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0097992-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0097992-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0097992-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0097992-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0097992-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0097992-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0097992-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0097992.ris

Full Text

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN THE ALASKA-BRITISH COLUMBIA-YUKON REGION By GLENN THOMAS GRAY B . S c , The U n i v e r s i t y of C o n n e c t i c u t , 1976 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES School of Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l 1989 © Glenn Thomas Gray, 1989 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of Graduate Studies, School of Community and Regional Planning The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada r w - 2 1 A P r i l 1 9 8 9 DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT The primary purpose of this thesis is to investigate tzansboundary cooperation in the Alaska-British Columbia-Yukon Region (ABCY Region). The study focuses on p o l i t i c a l relations about environmental and natural resource issues. It is argued that there are more appropriate means for cooperative planning in the transborder region than presently employed. Current relations between the three jurisdictions w i l l be evaluated followed by recommendations for improving them. Government cooperation occurs through a complex network of federal, sub-national, regional and local channels. International conflicts in the region have occurred throughout recorded history but means addressing them have changed throughout time. Despite some persistent problems, Alaska-Canadian relations are for the most part amicable. The federal governments have h i s t o r i c a l l y had a major presence in Alaska and the Yukon while B.C. manages most of i t s land. Resource economies of a l l three jurisdictions follow cycles of booms and busts. Subsistence hunting and fishing and government payments help soften the busts. Access, distances to markets, power shortages, and poor resource markets provide substantial economic dilemmas. International institutions have been developed for a wide spectrum of issues yet few of them are capable of addressing the relationships between resource sectors. Three notable institutions have been used to address i i multi-sector issues: the Trialteral-Heads-of-Government (THOG) meetings, legislative exchanges, and meetings between Juneau and Whitehorse. Institutions for cooperation are generally Insufficient, they are short-lived, and cooperation occurs on an ad hoc basis. Because most of the region is undeveloped, an excellent opportunity exists to design institutions capable of anticipating and mitigating future environmental and land use problems early on. It is recommended that a proactive, integrated approach involving regional and local interests be instituted. Relations need to be structured enough to encourage regular interaction yet flexible enough to respond to change. The relationship could be strengthened by augmenting existing institutions and creating a fev new ones. It is recommended that general guidelines for cooperation be developed. Annual THOG meetings should be supplemented by meetings of a coordinating committee and sectoral subcommittees. Communication between on-the-ground managers should be encouraged. Conflict resolution procedures should also be considered to assure timely response to problems. A major recommendation of this thesis is the creation of international regional conferences. These meetings would provide a foundation for future negotiations about the major issues in each of five sub-regions along the border. TABLE OF CONTENTS A b s t r a c t i i A b b r e v i a t i o n s x Chapter 1. Parameters of the Study 1.1. Purpose 1 1.2. Northern Regions 2 1.3. The ABCY Region 7 1.4. Approach 8 1.5. T h e o r e t i c a l c o n t e x t 9 1.6. T h e s i s O r g a n i z a t i o n 15 Chapter 2. The ABCY Region 2.1 The S e t t i n g . . 16 2.2 H i s t o r i c a l Overview 17 2.2.1. A b o r i g i n a l H a b i t a t i o n 19 2.2.2. The Fur Trade 21 2.2.3. The Gold Rushes 2 3 2.2.4. The Twentieth Century 25 2.3. Major C u r r e n t Issues 27 2.3.1. H y d r o e l e c t r i c Power 27 2.3.2. Timber Harvest 29 2.3.3. M i n e r a l and Petroleum Development 30 2.3.4. F i s h and W i l d l i f e 32 2.3.5. Wild e r n e s s and Tourism 33 2.3.6. T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and U t i l i t y C o r r i d o r s 35 2.4. Summary 41 Chapter 3. C o o p e r a t i v e Transboundary P l a n n i n g 3.1. Transboundary C o o p e r a t i o n 45 3.2. B e n e f i t s of C o o p e r a t i o n 45 3.3. Kinds of C o o p e r a t i o n 45 3.4. Avenues of C o o p e r a t i o n 47 3.5. F a c t o r s A f f e c t i n g C o o p e r a t i o n 47 3.5.1. P o l i t i c a l W i l l 50 3.5.2. P e r s p e c t i v e 51 3.5.3. Approach Towards C o o p e r a t i o n 52 3.5.4. Resources 53 3.6. H i s t o r y of Transboundary C o o p e r a t i o n 54 3.6.1. I n t e r n a t i o n a l P l a n n i n g 54 iv 3.6.2. U.S-Canadian R e l a t i o n s 58 3.6.2.1. P e r s p e c t i v e 59 3.6.2.2. B i l a t e r a l Trends 61 3.6.2.3. I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o i n t Commission 69 3.7. Summary 7 4 Chapter 4. The I n s t i t u t i o n a l S e t t i n g 4.1. U.S. and Canadian Governance 7 7 4.2. U.S. I n s t i t u t i o n s i n the ABCY Region 84 4.2.1. F e d e r a l Government 85 4.2.1.1. USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e 87 4.2.1.2. Bureau of Land Management 88 4.2.1.3. N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e 89 4.2.1.4. F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e 89 4.2.1.5. N a t i o n a l Marine F i s h e r i e s S e r v i c e 90 4.2.1.6. Department of S t a t e 90 4.2.1.7. Army Corps of E n g i n e e r s 91 4.2.2. S t a t e Agencies 91 4.2.2.1. O f f i c e of the Governor 91 4.2.2.2. A l a s k a Dept. of F i s h and Game 94 4.2.2.3. Dept. of Environmental C o n s e r v a t i o n ... 94 4.2.2.4. Dept. of N a t u r a l Resources 94 4.2.2.5. Dept. of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s 95 4.2.2.6. A l a s k a Power A u t h o r i t y 95 4.2.3. R e g i o n a l and L o c a l Government 95 4.3. Canadian I n s t i t u t i o n s i n the ABCY Region 96 4.3.1. F e d e r a l Government 9 7 4.3.1.1. Dept. of I n d i a n A f f a i r s and Northern A f f a i r s 97 4.3.1.2. Dept. F i s h e r i e s and Oceans 97 4.3.1.3. Environment Canada 9 8 4.3.1.4. Dept. of E x t e r n a l A f f a i r s 98 4.3.2. P r o v i n c i a l I n s t i t u t i o n s 99 4.3.2.1. M i n i s t e r of R e g i o n a l Development.< .... 103 4.3.2.2. M i n i s t e r R e s p o n s i b l e f o r Parks 103 4.3.2.3. M i n i s t e r R e s p o n s i b l e f o r Environment . 103 4.3.2.4. M i n i s t r y of A g r i c u l t u r e and F i s h e r i e s . 104 4.3.2.5 M i n i s t r y of Energy Mines and Petroleum Resources 104 4.3.2.6. M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s 105 4.3.2.7. Other P r o v i n c i a l M i n i s t r i e s 106 4.3.2.8. Crown C o r p o r a t i o n s 106 4.3.3. R e g i o n a l and L o c a l Government 107 4.3.4. Yukon T e r r i t o r y I n s t i t u t i o n s 107 4.3.4.1. Department of Renewable Resources 108 4.4.4.2. Department of Economic Development and Small Business I l l 4.4.4.3. Tourism Yukon I l l 4.4.4.4. Department of Community and T r a n s p o r t a t i o n S e r v i c e s 112 4.4. I n t e r n a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t i o n s i n the ABCY Region .. 112 4.4.1. F e d e r a l L e v e l C o o p e r a t i o n 112 v 4.4.2. S u b - n a t i o n a l R e l a t i o n s 115 4.4.2.1. T r i l a t e r a l Heads-of-Government 119 4.4.2.2. S t i k i n e - I s k u t R i v e r s I n f o r m a t i o n Exchange Committee 123 4.4.2.3. L e g i s l a t i v e Exchanges 124 4.4.3. L o c a l and R e g i o n a l C o o p e r a t i o n 124 4.4.4. Non-governmental C o o p e r a t i o n 125 4.5. Summary 128 Chapter 5. C r i t i q u e of I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o o p e r a t i o n i n the ABCY Region 5.1. I n t r o d u c t i o n 130 5.2. C r i t e r i a f o r E v a l u a t i o n of C o o p e r a t i o n 132 5.3. E v a l u a t i o n of I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o o p e r a t i o n 134 5.3.1. F i s h and W i l d l i f e Issues 136 5.3.1.1. Forum f o r Regular Meetings 136 5.3.1.2. O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r C o n s u l t a t i o n 148 5.3.1.3. J o i n t P l a n n i n g 140 5.3.1.4. Compatible Land Use D e s i g n a t i o n s 140 5.3.1.5. J o i n t Programs 141 5.3.2. W i l d l a n d and Tourism Issues 142 5.3.2.1. Forum f o r Regular Meetings 133 5.3.2.2. O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r C o n s u l t a t i o n 133 5.3.2.3. J o i n t P l a n n i n g 144 5.3.2.4. Compatible Land Use D e s i g n a t i o n s 145 5.3.2.5. J o i n t Programs 147 5.3.3. Energy and M i n e r a l Issues 148 5.3.3.1. Forum f o r Regular Meetings 148 5.3.3.2. O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r C o n s u l t a t i o n 149 5.3.3.3. J o i n t P l a n n i n g 150 5.3.3.4. Compatible Land Use D e s i g n a t i o n s 151 5.3.3.5. J o i n t Programs 152 5.3.4. T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Issues 153 5.3.4.1. Forum f o r Regular Meetings 153 5.3.4.2. O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r C o n s u l t a t i o n 155 5.3.4.3. J o i n t P l a n n i n g 155 5.3.4.4. Compatible Land Use D e s i g n a t i o n s 156 5.3.4.5. J o i n t Programs 156 5.3.5. F o r e s t r y Issues 157 5.3.5.1. Forum f o r Regular Meetings 158 5.3.5.2. O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r C o n s u l t a t i o n 158 5.3.5.3. J o i n t P l a n n i n g 159 5.3.5.4. Compatible Land Use D e s i g n a t i o n s 159 5.3.5.5. J o i n t Programs 159 5.3.6. Other Issues 160 5.3.7. M u l t i - S e c t o r I n s t i t u t i o n s 163 5.3.7.1. T r i l a t e r a l Heads-of-Government Meetings 163 5.3.7.2. L e g i s l a t i v e Exchanges 165 5.3.7.3. F e d e r a l M u l t i - S e c t o r I n s t i t u t i o n s 166 5.4. Summary 166 Chapter 6. F i n d i n g s 6.1. Dynamics of I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o o p e r a t i o n 171 v i 6.2. Overview of Canadian-U.S. R e l a t i o n s 172 6.3. C o o p e r a t i o n i n the ABCY Region 174 6.4. C o n c l u s i o n s 175 6.5. Probable Future Trends 179 6.6. Future Options 180 6.7. S p e c i f i c Recommendations 182 6.7.1. N a t i o n a l L e v e l Recommendations 183 6.7.2. S u b - n a t i o n a l Recommendations 183 6.7.3. I n t e r n a t i o n a l R e g i o n a l Conferences 187 6.8. Summary 191 B i b l i o g r a p h y 194 Appendix A - Major Events i n the ABCY Region 218 Appendix B - S e l e c t e d L i s t of B i l a t e r a l Agreements 219 Appendix C - S e l e c t e d L i s t of THOS Meetings 220 Appendix D - Important Events i n the Development of H y d r o e l e c t r i c P r o p o s a l s 221 v i i LIST OR TABLES Table 5-1 F i v e Q uestions Used t o E v a l u a t e I n t e r n a -t i o n a l C o o p e r a t i o n i n the ABCY Region 133 Table 5-2 Major Issue Areas i n the ABCY Region 135 Table 6-1 Recommended G u i d e l i n e s f o r C o o p e r a t i o n i n the ABCY Region 185 v i i i LIST OF FIGURES F i g u r e 1-1. Map of the Circumpolar Region 4 F i g u r e 1-2. Map of the Alaska-Yukon-NWT Region 5 F i g u r e 1-3. Map of the ABCY Region 6 F i g u r e 2-1. Map of the Alaska-Canada Border 17 F i g u r e 2-2. Map of N a t i v e Language Groups 19 F i g u r e 2-3. T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Routes 36 F i g u r e 3-1. Avenues f o r C o o p e r a t i o n i n the ABCY Region 48 F i g u r e 4-1. Land Management i n the ABCY Region 82 F i g u r e 4-2. St a t e of A l a s k a Government S t r u c t u r e ... 92 F i g u r e 4-3. P r o v i n c e of B.C. Government S t r u c t u r e . 100 F i g u r e 4-4. Yukon Government S t r u c t u r e 110 F i g u r e 5-1. W i l d l a n d D e s i g n a t i o n s 145 F i g u r e 6-1. Recommended Sub-Regions 188 ix A b b r e v i a t i o n s ABCY A l a s k a , B r i t i s h Columbia, Yukon ADF&G A l a s k a Department of F i s h and Game ANCSA Al a s k a N a t i v e Claims Settlement Act ANILCA A l a s k a N a t i o n a l I n t e r e s t Lands C o n s e r v a t i o n Act ANWR A r c t i c N a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e Range APA A l a s k a Power A d m i n i s t r a t i o n B.C. B r i t i s h Columbia B.C. Hydro B r i t i s h Columbia H y d r o e l e c t r i c and Power A u t h o r i t y BNA B r i t i s h North America A c t BWT Boundary Waters T r e a t y DEC Department of Environmental C o n s e r v a t i o n DFO Department of F i s h e r i e s and Oceans DIAND Department of Ind i a n and Northern A f f a i r s DNR Department of N a t u r a l Resources DOTPF Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s EARP Environment Assessment and Review Panel EEC European Economic Community EIS Environmental Impact Statement ELUC Environment and Land Use C o u n c i l ELUCS Environment and Land Use S e c r e t a r i a t ELUCTC Environment and Land Use T e c h n i c a l Committee FEARO F e d e r a l Environmental Assessment Review O f f i c e FWS F i s h and W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e GLWQA Great Lakes Water Q u a l i t y Agreement IJC I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o i n t Commission IUCN I n t e r n a t i o n a l Union f o r C o n s e r v a t i o n of Nature and N a t u r a l Resources MLPH M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing MEPR M i n i s t r y of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources MOEP M i n i s t r y of Environment and Parks MOF M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s MOFL M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s and Lands MUSY M u l t i p l e Use S u s t a i n e d Y i e l d Act NAWAPA North American Water and Power A l l i a n c e NDP New Democratic P a r t y NEPA N a t i o n a l E n vironmental P o l i c y A c t NMFS N a t i o n a l Marine F i s h e r i e s S e r v i c e OECD O r g a n i s a t i o n f o r Economic Development and Co o p e r a t i o n RCMP Royal Canadian Mounted P o l i c e RRMC Re g i o n a l Resource Management Committee Socred S o c i a l C r e d i t P a r t y TSL Timber S a l e s L i c e n s e U.S. U n i t e d S t a t e s USDA Un i t e d S t a t e s Department of A g r i c u l t u r e WAC Wilder n e s s A d v i s o r y Committee X 1 CHAPTER 1 PARAMETERS OF THE STUDY 1.1. Purpose The primary g o a l of t h i s s t u d y i s t o e x p l o r e the dynamics of environmental and land use c o o p e r a t i o n a l o n g the Alaska-Canada b o r d e r . S i x s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s r e l a t e to t h i s g o a l . F i r s t , an i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o the h i s t o r y of the r e g i o n i s p r o v i d e d t o g i v e the reader a background i n t o p a t t e r n s of i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i o n and economic development. The second o b j e c t i v e i s t o to e x p l o r e the dynamics of i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i o n i n g e n e r a l . T h i s d i s c u s s i o n p r o v i d e s an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of what f a c t o r s a f f e c t c o o p e r a t i o n , avenues through which i t may occur, and the d i f f e r e n t k i n d s of c o o p e r a t i o n . The t h i r d o b j e c t i v e i s to i n v e s t i g a t e worldwide t r e n d s i n transboundary p l a n n i n g . The purpose of t h i s d i s c u s s i o n i s t o p l a c e U.S.-Canadian c o o p e r a t i o n i n p e r s p e c t i v e . The f o u r t h o b j e c t i v e i s t o o u t l i n e the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of government ag e n c i e s i n the r e g i o n . T h i s i n s t i t u t i o n a l background i s n e c e s s a r y f o r an und e r s t a n d i n g of how each j u r i s d i c t i o n manages i t s r e s o u r c e s and how t h e i r a g e n c i e s r e l a t e to other j u r i s d i c t i o n s . 2 F i f t h , c o o p e r a t i o n i n the r e g i o n w i l l be e v a l u a t e d u s i n g f i v e c r i t e r i a . The f i n a l o b j e c t i v e i s to recommend i n s t i t u t i o n a l changes t h a t would l i k e l y improve r e l a t i o n s . T h i s s t u d y i s w r i t t e n from an A l a s k a n p e r s p e c t i v e and focuses on the a r e a where A l a s k a , B r i t i s h Columbia (B.C.) and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y meet. Few s t u d i e s have been completed about transboundary p l a n n i n g i n the North. I t i s hoped t h a t t h i s t h e s i s w i l l s t i m u l a t e f u r t h e r debate and a t t e n t i o n t o i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i o n i n n o r t h e r n r e g i o n s . The scope of t h i s t h e s i s i n v o l v e s p l a n n i n g f o r the management of a v a r i e t y of programs w i t h i n one i n t e r n a t i o n a l r e g i o n . Although t h i s s t u d y focuses on l a n d use and environmental i s s u e s , other r e l a t e d concerns w i l l be b r i e f l y mentioned. The c h o i c e to review so many s e c t o r s p r e c l u d e s d e t a i l e d i n v e s t i g a t i o n of any one s e c t o r . T h i s s t u d y f o c u s e s on the p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s r a t h e r than s p e c i f i c outcomes. The remainder of t h i s c h apter p r o v i d e s a background to the r e s t of the study. The concept of n o r t h e r n r e g i o n s i s d i s c u s s e d f i r s t , f o l l o w e d by an i n t r o d u c t i o n to the A l a s k a - B r i t i s h Columbia-Yukon Region. The methods used to complete the s t u d y are then d e s c r i b e d . R e l e v a n t t h e o r e t i c a l concepts are d i s c u s s e d f o l l o w e d by an o u t l i n e of the r e s t of the t h e s i s . 1.2. Northern Regions A r e g i o n i s a f l e x i b l e concept. R e g i o n a l boundaries may be manipulated to serve almost any purpose. Both 3 n a t u r a l and man-made f a c t o r s may be used to d i s t i n g u i s h one r e g i o n from another. Regions may be d e l i n e a t e d f o r economic, ge o g r a p h i c , v e g e t a t i v e , e c o l o g i c , h y d r o l o g i c , s o c i o l o g i c , h i s t o r i c , a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l , p o l i t i c a l , or a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e a s o n s . A w i l d l i f e b i o l o g i s t ' s r e g i o n i s based on h a b i t a t and m i g r a t i o n p a t t e r n s . A h y d r o l o g i s t 1 s r e g i o n i s d i v i d e d by the r i d g e tops which determine which d i r e c t i o n the water d r a i n s . A h e a l t h a d m i n i s t r a t o r , on the other hand, may work i n r e g i o n s d e l i n e a t e d by s e t t l e m e n t p a t t e r n s or by p u r e l y p o l i t i c a l c r i t e r i a . The s i z e of a r e g i o n v a r i e s w i t h the s p e c i f i c purpose of the r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g e f f o r t . Regions may range from c o n t i n e n t a l p r o p o r t i o n s such as the c i r c u m p o l a r a r e a , to s m a l l e r e n t i t i e s such as B.C.'s r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l b orders o f t e n s l i c e through the landscape c r e a t i n g a r t i f i c i a l b a r r i e r s between other k i n d s of r e g i o n s such as those based on b i o l o g i c , geographic and s o c i o l o g i c f a c t o r s . A l a s k a may be i n c l u d e d i n s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t n o r t h e r n r e g i o n s . I t i s l a r g e r than B.C. and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y combined but o n l y about h a l f the s i z e of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . The c i r c u m p o l a r r e g i o n i s perhaps the most obvious r e g i o n i n the f a r n o r t h ( F i g u r e 1-1). T h i s area i s a l o g i c a l r e g i o n because of the s i m i l a r i t i e s i n c l i m a t e , v e g e t a t i o n and indigenous people. C u r r e n t i n t e r n a t i o n a l 4 Figure 1-1. Map of the Circumpolar Region issues in t h i s region include a r c t i c haze , o i l and gas development, a r c t i c sovereignty (of waterways), and location of maritime borders. The area where the northern portion of Alaska, the Yukon T e r r i t o r y and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s i n t e r s e c t is another region (Figure 1-2). This region may be viewed as an e n t i t y because i t encompasses North America's a r c t i c and A r c t i c haze i s a r e l a t i v e l y newly discovered phenomenon where pollutants from southern areas are suspended in the a i r and also deposited on the ground 5 Figure 1-2. Map of the Alaska-Yukon-Northwest Territories Region Beaufort Sea Source: Adapted from U.S. Geological Survey 1980 sub-arctic holdings. The region shares a similar vegetation climate and wil d l i f e and is inhabited by Inuit people. The primary international issue in this region is the mitigation of possible effects to the people and their food sources from o i l development. S t i l l another large northern region is the Alaska-B.C.-Yukon (ABCY) Region (Figure 1-3). While one may argue that this region is actually made up of parts of several distinctive natural regions, i t is a p o l i t i c a l region. Decisions along the entire border are made from the three subnational capitals of Victoria, Juneau and Whitehorse or 6 Figure 1-3. Map of the ABCY Region IfU»4t from Washington D.C. and Ottawa. Boundaries of transborder regions are necessarily f l u i d , changing from issue to issue. While some problems are limited to a fev miles either side of the border, other issues extend far from i t . The contested boundary between B.C. and Alaska is an example of an issue contained to a small area. Yukon River salmon allocation and caribou management are examples of far reaching issues because of extensive migration patterns. This region has been chosen for this study because i t provides a suitable example for study of the dynamics of transboundary cooperation. 7 1.3. The ABCY Region A vide range of complex issues provide policy-makers in the ABCY Region vith many challenges. Because the area is rela t i v e l y undeveloped, issues often revolve around hov development v i l l occur and at what expense to environmental quality, wilderness and subsistence l i f e s t y l e s . Major development issues include hydroelectric power projects, petroleum development, forest harvest, mineral development, and the location of transportation and u t i l i t y corridors. Other issues include allocation and management of fish and wildli f e as well as tourism development. A potpourri of federal, state, provincial, and t e r r i t o r i a l land management agencies have jurisdiction over resource development and environmental protection. Management of each nation's resources occurs in isolation with only a minimum amount of coordination. One objective of this study is to recommend processes that w i l l enhance planning for the region as a whole rather than to promote specific outcomes. Because the ABCY Region is relatively undeveloped and Canadian-U.S. relations are amicable, a rare opportunity exists to plan proactively. Options for cooperative planning between any two sovereign states diminish as the land becomes committed to specific uses. It is s t i l l possible to create a flexible international planning effort in the region before major conflicts make highly structured negotiations imperative. Options to experiment with innovative international institutions are s t i l l available. 8 Some development proposals are mutually exclusive and w i l l require trade-offs. Early cooperation can, however, prevent problems common to nations in more developed regions: pollution, incompatible land uses and inadequate institutions to deal with complex problems. The ABCY Region w i l l be described in more depth in the next chapter. 1.4. Approach Data for this study were collected through a variety of means including literature reviews and research of government archives and f i l e s . Information was also obtained through written correspondence, telephone c a l l s and interviews. Originally this study was to be confined to the Stikine River basin. Environmental group newsletters, government publications and newspaper ar t i c l e s provided an i n i t i a l background to the issues, key actors and identification of relevant literature. As the research progressed, i t became clear that to understand the dynamics of international planning in a specific s i t e , i t would be necessary to investigate other cases of international cooperation. The focus on the Stikine River basin was abandoned for an overall view of the ABCY Region. Literature pertaining to this region as well as other international frontier regions was examined. General planning theory literature was also examined. This information was used to develop an analytical framework for evaluating frontier region planning. These c r i t e r i a were then applied to the ABCY Region as a whole. 9 The last phase of the study involved recommending alternative institutional arrangements to foster cooperative planning. Experience of other international regions was studied as v e i l as literature on conflict resolution, bargaining and environmental mediation. Personal intervievs vith planners, managers and politicians vere conducted to obtain insight to factors vhich f a c i l i t a t e cooperation. 1.5. Theoretical Context The author's regional planning outlook and specific biases v i l l be discussed in this section. A major premise behind this study is that society v i l l benefit from a more appropriate international regional planning process than presently employed. The current approach is reactionary, piecemeal, and i t is not conducive to anticipating future problems. A more appropriate planning process is structured but at the same time f l e x i b l e . It is integrative, conceptualizing the region and i t s various sectoral components as a vhole system. It is participative involving local and regional interests including on-the-ground managers, interest groups and concerned citizens. A good planning process is also strategic and proactive. These concepts v i l l be discussed further in the next fev paragraphs. Regional planning concepts in transboundary regions can di f f e r vith time and place (Prieur 1979). For the purpose of this study regional planning is defined as the formation 10 of alternatives to help decision-makers arrive at informed decisions for management of large areas. It involves an overall vision of the planning of society for man going beyond physical and economic planning to a new way of organising space capable of providing mankind vith a better l i f e setting (Prieur 1979, 112). Social, economic and environmental factors are considered. Resource use, economic development, transportation links, and the rural-urban relationship are a l l factors considered by the regional planner. The regional planning effort may be limited to sectoral or physical planning of a single area, focus upon regional development, or i t may involve a more general approach. Regional integration occurs vhen nations voluntarily mingle, merge, and mix vith their neighbors so as to lose the factual attribute of sovereignty while acquiring new techniques for resolving conflicts between themselves (Lindberg and Scheingold 1971, 6). This definition could also suffice to capture the essence of the highest level of transboundary regional planning. An ideal planning process is proactive. It involves planning for the future with the idea of preventing significant problems before they arise, rather than reacting to them after they occur. A proactive approach anticipates future trends and considers l i k e l y implications of present actions. Loss of future options, environmental quality concerns, economic ramifications, and social impacts are identified. [Pllanning has too often been in a position of correcting mistakes after they have happened rather than in the position of deleting and removing trouble spots before they lead to major mistakes (Meyerson 1956, 133). 11 Transboundary institutions have been "designed to react to issues as they arise, rather than to anticipate them" (Sewell 1986, 5). Proactive planning encourages creation of institutions to better deal with recurring problems, reducing the need to set up ad hoc groups. Proactive planning also necessitates a negotiation-mediation role for the planners. They work towards identifying joint gains acting as a communicators, f a c i l i t a t o r s and educators (Susskind and Ozawa 1984). Processes are used to anticipate and resolve potential controversial issues before they get out of hand (Keystone Center 1987). The mediator-planner mediates between conflicting groups while representing his or her own interests (Forester 1987). In an international situation, negotiators from both sides can be expected to promote their own concerns while f a c i l i t a t i n g consensus building among various interests. Planning should also be strategic. Such an approach is action-oriented, i t concentrates on c r i t i c a l issues and considers the a v a i l a b i l i t y of resources (Sorkin et a l . 1988). Rather than looking at a l l the variables in a comprehensive manner, strategic planning deals with key issues expending the minimum amount of resources necessary. Information gathering should focus on areas where i t w i l l be most useful. While there are many interpretations of strategic planning, i t generally follows specific steps. A mission statement is identified, the internal environment is assessed and external forces are considered. Once a consensus is reached on how to reach goals, p r i o r i t i e s are 12 ranked and plans for implementation are developed (Hershberg and Rubin 1988). An integrated approach to transboundary planning is preferable to ad hoc, incremental planning. Integrated resource management considers the concerns of the different functional sectors including a l l levels of government, private organizations and the general public. It is strategic and informative (Lang 1986). The antithesis of an integrated approach is piecemeal planning. According to Corbett (1981), [p]iecemeal planning is the result of our tendency to try to deal vith each goal or problem as i f i t existed in a vacuum, as i f our attempts to deal vith i t had no impact on other values and problems (2). Because private i n i t i a t i v e s are often oriented to one sector, i t is important that government takes the lead. The functional sectors mentioned above refer to renevable and nonrenevable natural resources . Renevable resources located in the ABCY Region include fis h and v i l d l i f e , vater, recreation, and forestry. Examples of nonrenevable resources are minerals, undisturbed vilderness, petroleum, certain groundvater aquifers, and specific fish and v i l d l i f e stocks. Nonrenevable resources are important because once they are f u l l y u t i l i z e d , they are gone forever. Integrated resource management is important because the economies of the Yukon, B.C. and Alaska are resource dependent. Economic opportunities revolve around the use and export of natural resources. 13 An ideal transboundary planning process is participa-tive. It f a c i l i t a t e s cooperation between a l l groups vith a stake in the outcome. Padilia (1975) points out that planning should not focus solely on the concerns of special interests. Planning is not direction vhen i t is at the service of special interests of society; i t becomes direction only vhen i t can effect economic divisiveness, becoming a unifying, cohesive, constructive, and truly general force (157). A participative process vhich involves people early on v i l l foster a stake in the outcome. Special attention should be focused on regional and local interests. There is a need for integration of local and higher level interests. The man who vears the shoe knovs best vhere i t pinches, even i f the expert shoemaker is the best judge of hov the trouble is to be remedied (Devey 1927, 207). The OBCD (1979) emphasizes cooperation betveen "equivalent entities in the neighboring country . . . " (OECD 1979, 13). Cadieux (1981, 101) called for the intervention of lower levels of governments at every stage - before, during, and after - in the interna-tional negotiating process, in every aspect covered by the agreement . . . Inclusion of the various interests is not enough. The participants should also be informed i f their input is to be useful (Dorcey 1986b). It is also important that the cooperative effort be structured enough to motivate the governments to meet regularly. At the same time i t must be fle x i b l e , encourage innovation and be capable of adapting to unforeseen situations. Referring to U.S.-Canadian relations in 14 general, Carroll (1983) argues that more structure is needed at the expense of f l e x i b i l i t y to assure international issues are given proper attention. Increased structure is also needed to develop means to respond effectively to future conflicts before they become unmanageable. The governments should be encouraged to experiment vith different mechanisms that would l i k e l y foster greater cooperation. The OECD (1979) reaffirms that there is no one institutional solution applicable in a l l trans-frontier regions. F l e x i b i l i t y also means that the effort should not be over planned (Webster 1980). The process should also be iterative, permitting return to a previous step when an unexpected turn of events warrants i t . Throughout this study, the term institution v i l l be used. Fox (1976, 743) defines an institution as "an entity; an organization or an individual, or a rule; a lav, regulation, or established custom". Institutional arrangements are interrelated processes or structures used to reach decisions or for information exchange. Examples of non-governmental institutions vould be international environmental coalitions, s c i e n t i f i c research groups and professional organizations. Government institutions include task forces, inter-agency committees, inter-disciplinary teams, formal impact assessment procedures, binding legislation, and structured negotiation. An example of an institutional arrangement vould be the protocol that must be followed vhen one government vishes to have input into a matter that is controlled by a different country. 15 1.6. Thesis organization The remainder of this thesis v i l l be organized as follows. Chapter 2 presents a description of the ABCY Region including a his t o r i c a l overview and description of the current situation. Chapter 3 explores the dynamics of transboundary planning. It also includes an overview of some important agreements worldwide as well as a history of U.S-Canadian relations. Chapter 4 outlines the i n s t i t u -tional structures in the region. Chapter 5 presents an evaluation of international cooperation in the ABCY Region. Recommendations for alternative institutional arrangements are then proposed in the f i n a l chapter along with a summary of the major conclusions of this study. 16 CHAPTER 2 THE ABCY REGION 2.1. The Setting The line separating Alaska and Canada travels nearly 2500 kilometers through several natural regions. The border begins in contention in the maritime waters between Prince of Wales Island and the Queen Charlotte Islands (Figure 2-1). It then skirts the rugged mountain tops of the Coast Range, separating the moist coastal rain-belt of Southeast Alaska from the drier and colder Interior. Few rivers pierce this formidable barrier. Above the Panhandle, the border follows a straight line towards the Beaufort Sea. Along this stretch, i t provides a purely p o l i t i c a l division across the r o l l i n g taiga of the Interior. The boundary then crosses the steep slopes of the Brooks Range and across the arctic tundra. Once at the Arctic Ocean, the border ends in contention. This chapter explores the history of the region and some of the challenges facing i t s people today. The purpose of the his t o r i c a l sketch is to outline patterns of Figure 2-1. Map of the Alaska-Canada Border 17 U.S. Claim B e a u f o r t S e a Canada Claim Source: Adapted from U.S. Coast Guard 1989 c o o p e r a t i o n and economic development. I t i s easy to r e p e a t the same mistakes twice when one i s i g n o r a n t of the p a s t . T h i s chapter begins w i t h an overview of i n t e r a c t i o n s between d i f f e r e n t n a t i o n s and the r e s o u r c e s t h a t brought them to the r e g i o n . The chapter ends wi t h a d e s c r i p t i o n of some c u r r e n t major i s s u e a r e a s . Appendix C l i s t s some of the more important h i s t o r i c a l e v e n t s . 2.2. H i s t o r i c a l Overview The f o l l o w i n g h i s t o r i c a l s k e t c h i s p r o v i d e d to g i v e the reader background t o the ABCY Region. The economic h i s t o r y of the r e g i o n r e f l e c t s t h a t of many other n o r t h e r n areas dependent on both o u t s i d e income and a s u b s i s t e n c e economy. 18 Cycles of booms and busts have sequentially fuelled and then drained the economy. The booms revolved around the fur trade, gold discoveries, fisheries, petroleum development, and related spin-offs. Tripp (1975) found that in the Stikine-Cassiar region, each of these short boom periods was followed by a relatively longer bust. During the booms, the region was dependent on commodities and cash flow from outside. During the busts, people either went south or lived more of a subsistence l i f e s t y l e . Before foreign explorers arrived, Native people subsisted on fish and w i l d l i f e , actively trading with each other for thousands of years*. Today, government spending, petroleum, minerals, forestry, fi s h and w i l d l i f e , and tourism are other important elements of the economy. Major international developments proposed in the 1960s were not completed. For the most part, the ABCY Region has retained i t s wilderness character throughout the many small surges of economic development. While Americans looked towards Canada during the gold rushes, Hoagland (1969) astutely observed that Southeastern Alaskan communities such as Wrangell are now dependent upon economic forces in a different direction. The Stikine is not an object of interest here [in Wrangell) now. Its mouth is seven miles off and except for the pleasure-boat owners, nobody much cares. Wrangell faces Seattle and Japan (Hoagland 1969, 24). The region has been inhabited since the " l i t t l e ice age," about 10,000 years ago. 19 Pacific Rim countries provide major markets for Canadian and Alaskan resources. 2.2.1. Aboriginal Habitation The major Native groups in the ABCY Region include the Inupiaq or Inuit Eskimos along the north coast, the Athabascans of the Interior and the T l i n g i t , Haida and Tsimshian Indians of the Southeast coast (Figure 2-2). Figure 2-2. Map of Native Language Groups Source: Redrawn from Alaska Geographic 1979 and Jenness 1974 The importance of trade between coastal and interior Indians has been well documented by explorers and anthro-pologists (Boaz 1966; Dawson 1888; Duff 1964; Krause 1956; Swanton 1970). In the southern part of the region this contact greatly influenced the two cultures. The Tahltans display a distinct T l i n g i t influence in their language, songs, dances, and ceremonial clothing (Duff 1964, Canada Department of Indian and Northern Affairs 1982). Through the mid-portion of the region Athabascans are even more intertwined and the border separates relatives from each other. Along the Arctic Ocean, the Eskimo people share a similar culture. Although indigenous people exerted control over each other, they lived in relative harmony with the environment. Respect for the s p i r i t s of a l l l i f e forms and t e r r i t o r i a l claims of land by different groups reduced incidents of over 2 harvest . Resources were used only for personal consumption and small-scale trading. This balanced coexistence with nature was disrupted with the arr i v a l of foreign explorers. Newcomers sought to increase their wealth by s e l l i n g resources to markets outside the region. For example, the Tlingits allocated fishing rights to certain salmon streams to specific family groups. 21 2.2.2. The Fur Trade A rich resource of fur bearing animals brought Russian, Spanish, French, British , and American explorers to the Coast. In the 1780's, a lucrative market developed in China for sea otter furs. New demands on the resources sometimes exceeded the supply. The abrupt over-harvest of the Stellar sea cow by Russian fur traders proved that technology was available to make a species extinct. Fierce competition developed for the fur trade. Spain, Russia, Great Britain, and the U.S. established settlements on the Northwest coast. France sent one expedition to the area but the revolution at home hindered further exploration (Naske and Slotnick 1987). In 1788, Spain boldly claimed the west coast of the Americas from Cape Horn to 60° north latitude (N.L.). Following this proclamation, two British ships were seized near Nootka Sound on Vancouver Island. Protests by Great Britain led to the Nootka Convention of 1790. This settlement provided that Spain surrender Nootka Sound to the British . . . relinquishing at last the claim to Pacific supremacy which she held for 300 years (Huculak 1971, 17). The Czar of Russia claimed the territory south of 55° N.L. in a ukase (edict) issued in 1799. The Russian-American Company was given exclusive use of the Panhandle, displacing smaller private operations. Spain gave up i t s claim to the west coast north of 42° N.L. in the 1819 Treaty of Washington. This gave the U.S. a more powerful role in the Pacific. Two years later, Russia issued two new edicts claiming control of a l l lands south to 51° N.L. The Russian-American Company's monopoly was also extended another ten years. This move was unfavorably received by both Great Britain and the U.S. Meticulous negotiations continued for several years. The Convention of 1824 between the U.S. and Russia resulted in free navigation and trade throughout the Coast, excluding sale of arms and s p i r i t s to the Indians. It was agreed that Russia would not settle south of 54° N.L. nor the U.S. north of this latitude. A treaty was reached between Great Britain and Russia the following year. The navigation and trade terms mirrored the U.S. agreement. Russia retained sole settlement rights north of 54° 40' N.L. including Prince of Wales Island. The agreement also established the Alaska boundary. These treaties worked well until 1834 when the Hudson's Bay Company set out to establish a base on the Stikine River. The insatiable Hudson's Bay company, ever ready to extend their t r a f f i c by force, or fraud i f necessary, conceived the audacious idea of establishing a fort on the Russian territory (Dall 1870, 337). When the Russians heard of the intention of the Br i t i s h to settle on the Stikine River, Ft. St. Dionysius was hastily constructed at the mouth of the river. The Br i t i s h ship Dxy££L was turned back in 1833. This same year, the Russians withdrew navigation privileges for Americans because of alleged liquor and firearm sales to the Indians. Great Britain protested the Drvad a f f a i r and sought retribution of 20,000 pounds sterling for their losses. The two governments decided to leave negotiations to the Russian-American Company and the Hudson's Bay Company directly. By this time, sea otter populations had been severely decimated and in an unexpected move the Russians offered to lease a s t r i p of the mainland including Ft. St. Dionysius. The Hamburg Agreement of 1839 completed terms to lease the mainland coast to Britain's Hudson's Bay Company. A clause in the agreement protected the British from American competition. The next year, Ft. St. Dionysius became Ft. Stikine. 2.2.3. The Gold Rushes By the 1860s, the fur trade fervor was replaced by a hunger for gold. Several discoveries in the Stikine-Cassiar region were followed by strikes near Juneau. The Klondike gold strike of 1896 attracted prospectors from around North America. Through successive negotiations, the lease to the Hudson's Bay Company was extended until 1865. Because of a decline in the fur industry and the i n a b i l i t y of Russia to keep out competition, an offer by the financially burdened Russian-American Company to lease a l l of the Panhandle was refused. Unexpectedly, the U.S. purchased a l l of Russia's North American holdings in 1867 for $7,200,000. Until this time, the region was controlled primarily by private companies rather than directly by governments. The U.S. Consul in Victoria attempted to have B.C. join the U.S. just after the Alaska purchase (B.C. Studies 1988). Boundary and navigation rights again became an issue with American control of Alaska. A B r i t i s h ship was turned away from the Stikine River. Protests led to the Treaty of Washington in 1871. Although the navigation issue was resolved, the exact location of the boundary was not. The border question became inflamed when Canadian o f f i c i a l s transported an American prisoner from the upper Stikine River across the border. Peter Martin escaped, was recaptured but released after i t was determined that he was in American terr i t o r y (Ball 1971). This incident sparked new concern about establishing a mutually agreeable border. Canada's claim to land (including Skagway) was found to be unwarranted by an o f f i c i a l of the U.S. Corps of Engineers in 1896. The following year, the U.S. army was dispatched to Wrangell, Dyea and Skagway. Both governments agreed to set up a commission to settle the boundary dispute in 1898 but this effort was to no avail (Naske and Slotnick 1987). The Yukon's Klondike gold rush provided a major mining related boom to the region by 1989. It was the greatest concentration of placer gold in the world (Canada Department of External Affairs 1982). The primary access to the gold fields was through the Chilkoot Pass above Skagway. Victoria attempted to capture Seattle's role as an out-f i t t i n g center by marketing the Stikine as an all-Canadian route to the Yukon. This failed and by July 1898, "the Stikine Gateway served as much an exit from the interior as a route to the Cassiar and the Yukon" (Tripp 1975, 153). Also during t h i s period, a telegraph l i n e from Hazelton to the Yukon was completed. Tripp found that the periods of bust served as an opportunity to consolidate the gains of the boom years into a framework that provided the basis for the next period of expansion (1975, 105). 2.2.4. The Twentieth Century After the Alaska Purchase, Canadians became alarmed that the U.S. had gained such c o n t r o l . The border dispute was eventually resolved in what a Toronto Star Weekly e d i t o r i a l c a l l e d a miscarriage of j u s t i c e which was brought about by Teddy Roosevelt, then president, threatening to back American claims with troops; the threat was used to coerce B r i t i s h support for U.S. aims on an " i m p a r t i a l " Canadian-British-American Commission (1959, 2). The 1903 agreement s e t t l e d the disputed land boundary (U.S. 1903, Ireland 1939) but the two maritime boundaries remain in contention. The 1903 treaty set up a t r i b u n a l of three Americans, two Canadians and one Englishman to decide the exact l o c a t i o n of the border. The two Canadian members refused to sign the agreement because Great B r i t a i n ' s representative, Lord Alverstone, agreed with the American p o s i t i o n . The phrase "to be Alverstoned" thereafter was used by many Canadians when someone was sold out (Colombo 1986) . Four decades of slow economic growth followed the Klondike Gold rush. Subsistence hunting and f i s h i n g were important means of existence for many of the residents. Trapping, placer mining, guide-outfitting, and government spending also maintained the relatively stagnant economy (Cross et a l . 1966, Tripp 1975). The Yukon telegraph line was abandoned in 1936 with the advent of wireless communication. During this period, many salmon canneries were built along the Coast to take advantage of the new resource boom. The fisheries were poorly managed and entire runs were wiped out, seriously depleting salmon stocks. Handlogging also provided income for a small portion of the population. World War II brought another boom to the region. Construction of the Alaska Highway opened up a new route to Alaska motivated by defense considerations. The highway also fostered future growth of the region. After two decades of a depressed economy, governments looked to the ABCY Region as a new economic frontier. During the 1960s and early 1970s, a vision of a limitless bounty grew with fervor. Massive hydroelectric, mineral, transportation, petroleum, and forest "megaprojectsn were planned. A Canadian federal Ministry of Transport report claimed that railroads would "have a key influence on the related economic and social development of the Canadian Northwest" (1972, 4). Rail connections to Whitehorse, Dawson City and Alaska were planned. The Dease Lake extension of the B.C. Railway was thought to be the sole stimulus that would spark a wave of forest harvest and mineral development. Large-scale hydroelectric power development proposals were also devised. These development schemes have yet to be realized. The same obstacles exist today that were a problem a decade ago: access, capital, power, and stable markets. These factors and an economic slump in the early 1980s have hampered the dream for rapid economic expansion of the region. 2.3. Current Major Issues Major issues in the region include: hydroelectric development, timber harvest, mineral exploitation, petroleum development, fish and wildl i f e harvest, tourism, wildland protection, and transportation and u t i l i t y corridors. These issues w i l l be discussed below. 2.3.1. Hydroelectric Power Several major hydroelectric developments have been proposed for the ABCY Region in the past few decades. Ventures Ltd. proposed harnessing waters of the upper Yukon through a water diversion to the Coast via the Taku River. The project was stalled in 1955 by the Canadian federal government (Halsey-Brandt 1965). It was further inhibited in the 1970s when B.C. created a park near Atlin Lake (Johannson 1976, 50). The Yukon-Taiya project concerned a proposal for an inter-basin water transfer from the Upper Yukon River to a powerhouse at tidewater near Skagway. 28 3 Another water diversion scheme, NAWAPA , received less regional support. Major events concerning hydroelectric development in the region are summarized in Appendix A. The most controversial recent hydroelectric development proposal involved B.C. Hydro's scheme to harness the Stikine and Iskut Rivers. The plan called for two dams above Telegraph Creek on the Stikine River and three dams on the Iskut River. B.C. Hydro shelved the plans after i t became clear in 1983 that the power wasn't needed. If this dam had been completed on schedule, i t would have been the most costly and the greatest power producer of any such project in the Province. Originally, hydroelectric development was thought to be the answer to problems associated with other forms of power generation. Today hydroelectric proposals produce a heated debate. Opponents point to concerns about possible damage to f i s h , w i l d l i f e and wilderness. Proponents envision a future where the untapped resources of the North w i l l bring economic gains to people within and outside the region. Exact effects of the dams are d i f f i c u l t to predict but i t is l i k e l y that some changes w i l l occur. Studies for the Stikine project found that increased water flows in winter, decreased water flows in the summer, a reduced sediment supply in the delta, warmer water The North American Water and Power Alliance plan proposed inter-basin transfers of waters from the ABCY Region to California. temperatures in the winter, and reduced flooding would be l i k e l y results (B.C. Hydro 1982d). Changes in river flow, temperature, and a supersaturation of nitrogen may effect both juvenile and spawning salmon. The estuary would be adversely affected without the annual spring flood carrying s i l t and nutrients to the delta. Reduced side channeling would decrease spawning habitat. The mountain goat population in the Grand Canyon would also be displaced. The local economy would be altered but i t is uncertain just how tourism and employment would be affected. Over 30 groups have opposed this project (Canada Department of Indian and Northern Affairs 1982). In 1982 B.C. Hydro was the second largest borrower on the world bond market and one-half of the provincial debt was attributed to i t (Bassett 1984). Today, for the f i r s t time in 25 years, B.C. Hydro is not involved in the construction of a major hydro project (Swainson 1986). 2.3.2. Timber Harvest The coastal area supports a forest of Sitka spruce, western hemlock, red cedar, yellow cedar, cottonwood, and alder. The interior boreal forest consists of birch, pine, white spruce, and black spruce. Coastal forestry in Northwest B.C. and Southeast Alaska has become a major part of those economies. A new strategy by the Yukon government to use local materials in the mid-1980s has increased the importance of interior timber. The timber market of interior Alaska has yet to realize i t s f u l l potential (Alaska State Legislature 1986). The Stikine drainage is one of the largest areas for potential cottonwood tree harvesting on the B.C. coast and i t also contains marketable spruce (Stenerson 1985). The f i r s t timber sale license (TSL) on the B.C. side of the border was issued in 1964. It was not economical and failed due to the isolated area and the problems associated vith dealing vith the various levels of governments. More recently another timber sale vas completed in the area. Timber harvested in B.C. vas floated dovn the Stikine, loaded on ships in Wrangell and exported to China. 2.3.3. Mineral and Petroleum Development Mining has played an important role in the ABCY Region. Today several large mines are either in production or are in the planning stages. The Alaskan mining industry declined during the early 1980s (Thorstad 1987) but tvo significant sites are being developed in Southeastern Alaska: The Green's Creek mine on Admiralty Island and the Borax mine near Ketchikan. During the early 1980s, the depressed mineral market led to nearly a 40% reduction in the Yukon's economy (Dector 1988). During the mid-1980s the mining industry experienced a resurgence. The reopened zinc-lead-sil v e r mine at Faro is operating at a greater profit than before i t vas closed. Northvest B.C. has several operating mines and many potential ones. The Cassiar mine in Northvestern B.C. is a major producer of asbestos. The Stikine River basin also has outstanding mineral potential (Sevensma 1985). Gold was once the most important mineral in the Stikine region but today deposits of anthracite coal, copper, s i l v e r , zinc and molybdenum are also promising. During the 1960s, a great surge of mining a c t i v i t y occurred in the Stikine. The Vancouver Board of Trade reported that the entire lover Stikine-Iskut area is perhaps of greatest interest and speculation in Northern B.C. to-day . . . It has been reported that during the summer of 1964 a total of 2000 mineral claims were staked and 11 helicopters worked at f u l l capacity a l l season (McFeely and Brynelsen 1965, 19). The level of optimism was high. Patterson (1966, 35) predicted that i t "may prove to be one of the great copper areas of North America, perhaps even the world". A 1983 B.C. Cabinet Committee on Economic Development report identified three mines l i k e l y to be developed by the end of the century: The Stikine, Kutcho Creek and Mt. Klappan. Skyline Resource's prospect near the Iskut River has an estimated one b i l l i o n dollars worth of gold (Dickson 1987). About 300 people were employed in the area in 1987 (Schiller 1988). Lack of access, power and stable markets are the primary obstacles to mineral development. Environmental concerns further hamper development. There are ongoing negotiations to encourage transportation corridors to the Coast and to use Alaskan power to develop the mineral potential of B.C. Petroleum resources of the region are also important. Alaska's economy is fuelled primarily by petroleum royalties. The discovery of the Prudhoe Bay reserves in 1968 provided money for rapid growth during the 1970s. By the mid-1980s however, a world o i l glut sent Alaska into a recession. Prospects for o i l development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge may once again revive the economy. Oil development in the Canadian northwest has been less eventful. Although o i l reserves exist, they have been too small to make large scale development feasible. 2.3.4. Fish and Wildlife A rich biologic diversity characterizes the ABCY Region. Five species of salmon spawn in the rivers. Other fi s h include Dolly Varden, grayling, rainbow trout, char, and whitefish. Brown and black bear, caribou, moose, wolves, wolverine, lynx, stone sheep, mountain goats, and deer migrate across the border. Otter, beaver, and martin are also prevalent. Allocation of the fishery resource between Canada and the U.S. provides one of the biggest challenges in the region. Intricate institutions have been established to negotiate the amount of fish to be intercepted by each nation. The 1985 U.S.-Canadian Pacific Salmon Treaty created the Pacific Salmon Commission to determine the catch allocations other than in the Yukon River. This agreement w i l l be discussed further in Chapter 4 and Chapter 5. Wildlife is an important economic resource for local residents. In addition to subsistence hunting, many rural residents add to their income by trapping (B.C. Ministry of Lands Parks and Housing 1984). Big game hunting and guiding also provides revenue to residents. L i t t l e is known about the exact effect developments might have on specific populations of w i l d l i f e . It is generally agreed, however, that the wil d l i f e populations in the Stikine region have suffered from over hunting as a result of increased opportunities for vehicular access. The most controversial w i l d l i f e issue along the Alaska-Canada border relates to proposed o i l and gas exploration of Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Subsistence users of this region are concerned that development of the range w i l l reduce caribou populations. The Yukon T e r r i t o r i a l government initiated a campaign to prevent development in the area. The House of Commons Standing Committee on Energy, Mines and Resources released a report supporting the opening of ANWR to exploration as well as a transportation corridor through Mackenzie Valley to the wild l i f e refuge (Canadian Arctic Resources Committee 1987). 2.3.5. Wilderness and Tourism Wilderness is a term that has many interpretations throughout the world. The U.S. federal Wilderness Act mandates that designated wilderness be managed as "area[si where the earth and i t s community of l i f e are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a vi s i t o r who does not remain" 34 (U.S. Forest Service 1978, 202). The 1980 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) included special exemptions in Alaska wilderness areas. Existing plane access, motor boat use and construction of cabins for public safety were permitted. There is no one definition for wilderness in Canada (Ahrens 1986, 6). The B.C. government has a flexible interpretation of wilderness. Unless s p e c i f i c a l l y noted, the terms wilderness and vildlands w i l l be used in this study to describe large tracts of undeveloped land. The wild character of the ABCY Region attracts v i s i t o r s from more populated areas. Tourism is increasing in economic importance in a l l three jurisdictions. Income from tourism almost equalled the economic importance of mining in B.C. during the early 1980s (Dorcey 1986b). The opening of Highway 37 in 1972 led to increased travel through Northwestern B.C. Cruise ship t r a f f i c through Southeast Alaska also has increased dramatically in recent years as well as surface t r a f f i c through the Yukon. The B.C. government's Minister of Environment set up the Wilderness Advisory Committee (WAC) in 1985. It developed a process to assess use of certain wild areas of the province and recommended future use of 24 specific areas. The report recommended a scenic corridor for Stikine River from Highway 37 south to the U.S. border. The wild nature of Alaska attracts visito r s to the state. Over one third of Alaska is within some kind of protective designation (Gray 1984). A great portion of U.S. 35 national parks are in Alaska. Increased overland t r a f f i c to Alaska also benefits the Yukon. While the Yukon may be the destination of some travellers, most stop off here on their way to Alaska. The challenge for the Yukon is to find ways to increase the length of stay. Tourism is an inviting economic enterprise but i t does have limitations. The degree of i t s future economic importance is connected to the amount of disposable income available to travellers as well as their choice of destination. The unprecedented success of the 1986 and 1987 tourism seasons have been p a r t i a l l y attributed to threats of terrorism abroad. Additionally, the seasonal nature of the industry does l i t t l e to help these local economies through the winter. 2.3.6. Transportation and U t i l i t y Corridors Transportation and u t i l i t y corridors in the ABCY Region have been topics of concern since the area was f i r s t inhabited. Control of the major transportation routes was coveted by early aboriginal groups. Although the Hudson's Bay Company made i t as far West as Ft. Yukon, Alaska, the more common routes were from the Coast. At one time, the Stikine River, the White Pass and the Dalton T r a i l were the primary gateways to the Interior, penetrating the rugged Coast Mountains. The location of highways, r a i l routes, pipelines, and power transmission lines is s t i l l a topic of major concern today. Figure 2-3 illustrates the major highways in the region. Figure 2-3. Transportation Routes 36 Source: Adapted from U.S. Geological Survey 1980 Railways were considered as early as the 1890s to link the Coast to the Interior. Construction of the White Pass and Yukon Route provided miners an easier route to the Klondike than the Chilkoot T r a i l . A r a i l route from Glenora to Teslin Lake, the Casslar Central, never made i t to the construction stage (Dawson 1888). A load of r a i l arrived on the scene but before i t could be installed, the Canadian Senate defeated the proposal, exerting i t s seldom exercised power (Tripp 1975). The r a i l ended up rusting on a small island in the middle of the Stikine River (Patterson 1966). Other attempts have been made to connect Alaska to the continental U.S. by r a i l . An 1949 proposal was halted due to lack of Canadian and U.S. military support. The U.S. C o n g r e s s c r e a t e d t h e A l a s k a I n t e r n a t i o n a l R a i l a n d H i g h w a y C o m m i s s i o n i n 1957 t o p r o d u c e what was known a s t h e B a t t e l l e R e p o r t . C o m p l e t e d i n 1 9 6 1 , i t was more f a v o r a b l e t o h i g h w a y s t h a n r a i l w a y s . A f t e r t h e m a n a g e r o f t h e A l a s k a R a i l w a y p r o t e s t e d t h e c o m m i s s i o n r e v e r s e d i t s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a n d c o n c l u d e d t h a t r a i l w a y s w o u l d h a v e p r i o r i t y o v e r h i g h w a y s ( A l a s k a S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e 1 9 7 9 ) . A 1 9 7 5 A l a s k a S t a t e L e g i s l a t i v e R e s o l v e l e d t o a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l r a i l c o n f e r e n c e . Two y e a r s l a t e r , a n A l a s k a D e p a r t m e n t o f Commerce a n d E c o n o m i c D e v e l o p m e n t s t u d y r e c o m m e n d e d B . C . R a i l w a y ' s D e a s e L a k e r o u t e a s w e l l a s a j o i n t U . S . - C a n a d i a n s t u d y . T h e D e a s e L a k e e x t e n s i o n was h a s t i l y c o n s t r u c t e d w i t h t h e e x p e c t a t i o n o f s t i m u l a t i n g m i n e r a l d e v e l o p m e n t a n d f o r e s t h a r v e s t . E l l s w o r t h ( 1 9 7 2 ) s p e c u l a t e d t h a t P r e m i e r W . A . C . B e n n e t t p l a n n e d t h e r a i l e x t e n s i o n t o l u r e t h e Y u k o n T e r r i t o r y t o become p a r t o f B . C . T h e o u t l o o k f o r t h e e x t e n s i o n became more g l o o m y w i t h d e c r e a s e d e c o n o m i c a c t i v i t y d u e t o t h e o i l c r i s i s o f t h e 1 9 7 0 s . I t s c o n s t r u c t i o n was h a l t e d i n 1977 j u s t a f t e r c o m p l e t i o n o f a t h r e e m i l l i o n d o l l a r r a i l b r i d g e o v e r t h e S t i k i n e R i v e r ( C a n a d a D e p a r t m e n t o f I n d i a n a n d N o r t h e r n A f f a i r s 1 9 8 2 ) . T h e r a i l w a y g r a d e was f i n i s h e d o v e r t h e e n t i r e r i g h t - o f - w a y b u t o n l y 350 k i l o m e t e r s o f t r a c k i s o p e r a b l e . I n 1 9 7 9 , t h e A l a s k a S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s c o m p l e t e d a r e p o r t t h a t o u t l i n e d a r o u t e f r o m t h e A l a s k a R a i l r o a d t o t h e C a n a d i a n b o r d e r . 38 Plans for road access to Alaska began as early as the 1930s. A U.S. Department of Interior study proposed the Pacific Yukon Highway to Alaska. The route was to begin in Hazelton and end in Fairbanks travelling through A t l i n , Whitehorse, and Dawson City. A spur road through Telegraph Creek to Wrangell was also planned. This route was never realized due to completion of the Alaska Highway. This effort created an upswing in the local economy with the a r r i v a l of 34,000 U.S. soldiers to the region between 1942 and 1945 (Staples 1988). During this period, U.S. military personnel outnumbered Canadian residents in the North (Abele 1987). A Stikine route to the Interior has been alternately promoted and discouraged for decades. Concerns were raised between 1949 and 1956 but i t was decided that the Canadian need for access wasn't strong enough. The B.C. Yukon Chamber of Mines passed a resolution promoting the Stikine route in 1953 (Halsey-Brandt and Charles 1965). By 1959, the route was surveyed and the Petersburg Chamber of Commerce passed a resolution that the road be approved. U.S. Senator Bartlett of Alaska proposed that Canada receive a corridor in exchange for Canadian approval of the Yukon-Taiya hydroelectric project (Halsey-Brandt and Charles 1965, Siddle 1957, Haduk 1952, Buss 1956). At the f i r s t Alaska-Yukon-B.C. Conference, an Alaskan o f f i c i a l described the Stikine route as the "most actively pursued route in Alaska to-day" (British Columbia 1960). The Battelle Report identified a Stikine route for the transportation of ore (U.S. Congress 1961). In 1968, the question of access was again opened up for discussion at the insistence of the Americans but no progress was made. The decision to complete the Dease Lake extension of the B.C. Railway in 1969 decreased the perceived need for access to the Coast. The 1969 Canadian Transportation Study focused on r a i l access and didn't mention a road to the Coast. A 1971 Regional D i s t r i c t of Kitimat-Stikine report claimed that the Stikine-Wrangell route would benefit the Americans more. After the Dease Lake railway extension was halted, Canadian o f f i c i a l s became worried that future options for access through Southeastern Alaska might be precluded. The Alaska Commissioner of Natural Resources described the Stikine access route as "extremely high p r i o r i t y " (LeResche 1978). Canadian concerns resulted in the inclusion of Section 1113 in the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. This section stated that the President shall consult with the Government of Canada and shall submit a report to the Congress containing his findings and recommendation concerning the need, i f any, to provide for such access [through the Stikine watershed! (U.S. Congress 1980). Talks were held in Ottawa in September 1985. The Canadian position paper asserted Canada's rights for access due to the navigation clauses in the Russian treaty of 1825, the 1871 Treaty of Washington and the 1909 Boundary Waters Treaty. The Chief Forester of the USDA Forest Service, however, stated that i t wasn't clear i f the treaty just covered water or land also (U.S. Congress 1984). The position paper focussed on the need for a process to permit selection of routes throughout the Alaskan Panhandle. The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public F a c i l i t i e s (DOTPF) claimed that the Stikine route vas the only r e a l i s t i c alternative. It supported the Canadian position for a better process to designate transportation corridors. DOTPF noted that although there were provisions in the ANILCA legislation to permit u t i l i t y and transportation corridors within Alaskan wilderness areas, they were "lengthy, cumbersome, and potentially flawed" (Alaska Department of Transportation and Public F a c i l i t i e s 1985, 1). Because the U.S. portion of the Stikine is a designated wilderness area, an Alaskan transportation group has looked more closely at a route further south (Meketa 1988). Funds to study p o s s i b i l i t i e s for a road down the Iskut River valley to the Coast were appropriated by Alaska in 1988 and B.C. and Canada in 1989 (Kleeschulte 1989). U t i l i t y corridor proposals throughout the region have been proposed for o i l and gas pipelines as well as power transmission lines. Proposed routes were identified in Canada for the transport of Alaska petroleum. While an all-Alaskan route was chosen for the o i l pipeline, a proposed gas pipeline s t i l l could be constructed through Canada. A 1979 Canadian Environmental Assessment addressed this p o s s i b i l i t y . A work group between the Alaska Power Authority, the Alaska Power Administration and the Northern Canada Power Commission was established in 1983 to study possible power interties (Alaska Power Authority 1988). Routes have been proposed between Skagway and the Yukon, between the Quartz H i l l mineral deposit and B.C. and most recently between the Tyee Lake Project (near Wrangell) and the Johnny Mountain Mine site in B.C. A letter from Alaska Power Authority to the Commissioner of Commerce and Economic Development recommended that o f f i c i a l s of Alaska, B.C. and the Yukon Territory develop a joint effort to determine the "economic, technical, and institutional f e a s i b i l i t y of an Alaska-Canada power system" (Alaska Power Authority 1983). An agreement was f i n a l l y reached in 1988 to jointly study needs for power interties. Direct air links between Alaska and Canada are few. There is limited service between Juneau and Whitehorse. A 1988 proposal by the Juneau Economic Development Council recommended that direct service be instituted between Juneau and Vancouver (Peter 1989). 2 .4. Summary Conflicts between the major powers in the ABCY Region have occurred throughout recorded history. Institutions u t i l i z e d to resolve these conflicts have, however, changed throughout time. The earliest struggles concerned t e r r i t o r i a l claims and trade rights between native groups. After the ar r i v a l of explorers, relations were further aggravated by disagreements over resource allocation, navigation rights and location of boundaries. Early conflicts were resolved by physical force. During the fur harvest years international conflicts generally followed a standard scenario with one country's claims being transgressed by another. The original country retaliated by seizing property. Protests by the second nation inevitably resulted in some form of compromise. The Hamburg Agreement of 1839 is of special interest because two private companies were directed to negotiate an agreement without direct government participation. Although military intervention was threatened during the Alaska boundary dispute, international negotiations after the 1867 Alaska purchase were generally conducted in a peaceful manner. Boards, commissions, tribunals, and meetings between leaders were used to resolve c o n f l i c t s . Although the actors have changed, many of the issues remain the same: allocation of resources (e.g., fisheries), t e r r i t o r i a l disputes (e.g., maritime borders, arctic sovereignty) and navigation rights 4 (e.g., Jones Act ). The economies of the region have h i s t o r i c a l l y been dependent on resource development. The people of this region are dependent on export of raw resources and import of finished goods. Booms and busts have sequentially fuelled and then drained the economies. Before foreign explorers arrived, Native people subsisted off of a rich bounty of resources. A lucrative market for sea otter furs The U.S. Jones Act prohibits a foreign made ship from sai l i n g between two American ports. then attracted competition from around the world. Once this resource was depleted, gold discoveries continued to attract outsiders to the region. World War II, minerals, petroleum, fisheries, forestry, and government spending have a l l provided booms of varying degrees in different parts of the region. Subsistence hunting and fishing and government spending helped soften the slow periods between booms. One can learn much by reviewing the history of the ABCY Region. Without some kind of structure and commitment to cooperate, relations v i l l occur on an ad hoc basis. Personality clashes, such as the one between Alaska's governor and B.C.'s premier in the mid-1960s, can lead to a break in relations for many years. Another lesson from the past relates to the tone of the relationship. Without regular communication and coordination significant problems are not l i k e l y to be jo i n t l y addressed early on. During the periods when regular meetings between the three heads-of-government occurred, a continuing dialog assured that transboundary issues were discussed. Additional meetings between other government workers enabled them to seek solutions to problems as well as explore opportunities to work together. Within each jurisdiction, a history of a boom and bust economy has been the result of a failure to diversify. Unless new approaches to cooperation are implemented, international conflicts are also l i k e l y to grow. Govern-ments in the region have often ignored lessons of the past. They apply short-term fixes to long-term problems. They usually deal with issues after they reach a c r i t i c a l stage rather than establish and maintain institutions capable of anticipating issues. A look to the region's past experience, however, can help prevent repeating the same mistakes. 45 CHAPTER 3 COOPERATIVE TRANSBOUNDARY PLANNING 3.1. Transboundary Cooperation This chapter provides the theoretical background for evaluating international cooperation in the ABCY Region. The f i r s t part of the chapter explores reasons for cooperation, kinds of cooperation and possible avenues countries may use to cooperate. Major factors affecting international cooperation w i l l then be presented. A discussion of international experiences v i l l be followed by an overview of hi s t o r i c a l Canadian-U.S. relations. 3.2. Benefits of Cooperation There are many compelling reasons for fostering better relations. While i t is possible to cooperate without receiving benefits, international cooperation can lead to mutual gains not available i f the nations were to act independently. Economies of scale may be present where joint development of a resource would provide greater returns for each country than i f they worked independently (LeMarquand 1986). An increase in cooperation can also lead 46 to economic alliances such as Europe's EEC or the 1988 Canada-U.S. free trade agreement. Joint studies and information exchanges can save money by reducing duplication. Concern over environmental degradation may lead to pollution prevention, thereby decreasing health risks to citizens on both sides of the border. A cooperative s p i r i t can also improve a nation's international image. Lastly, a nation may want to cooperate in a situation even i f there are no immediate benefits. They may wish to build a reservoir of good w i l l to drav upon vhen they are in a future disadvantage (LeMarquand 1977). 3.3. Kinds of Cooperation International cooperation ranges from informal exchange of information to complex agreements approved by legislative bodies. It may be useful to categorize cooperation into three areas: information exchange, joint planning and joint programs. Information exchange involves the sharing of information vithout any obligation to act. Joint planning occurs vhen representatives of both nations vork together to evaluate future options. Planning processes may be completed for transboundary land use issues or for health, education, communications, and lav enforcement issues. The decision to cooperatively plan doesn't necessarily mean that an agreement v i l l be reached. Joint programs occur vhen governments agree to act in concert. Joint programs include cooperative management of a resource or any instance vhere 47 nations co-sponsor a program. The highest level of cooperation is the treaty (Svanson 1974, Berber 1959). Although information exchange and joint planning may be activated by informal oral agreements, they may also be documented in writing. Joint programs are usually the result of meticulous negotiations resulting in formal written agreements. These a c t i v i t i e s may occur separately or they may also be closely linked (e.g., joint planning may be initiated by an existing joint program). While joint programs receive much attention, i t is interesting to note that former Governor Curtis of Maine, once an IJC commissioner, found that the most effective interactions are those based upon a handshake rather then upon written, unenforceable agreements (Curtis and Carroll 1983). 3.4. Avenues of Cooperation Cooperation between two or more nations usually occurs on a variety of levels. Between two federated countries, i t involves federal, subnational, and local government entities as well as private corporations and special interest groups. Figure 3-1 illustrates the complexity of communication channels in the ABCY Region. Cooperation in transboundary regions often occurs simultaneously on several different levels. It may take place horizontally between similar levels of government, obliquely between different levels or ve r t i c a l l y within one country (Leach, et a l . 1973). The Figure 3-1. Avenues for Cooperation in the ABCY Region 48 Private Sector •'.•'.•i * i" " '*'" "i Governments | | Central Office Regional Level Local Level Yukon Agencies mm A B . C . Agencies Federal Agencies Canada Private Sector JLocaT**' Governments Alaska Agencies F A^ edera „encie ,1 s >;•;•;•;•;•;•;•;•; vXv*v >::: 1111 sHiEssHsHi U.S. most common avenues of cooperation between the U.S. and Canada occur through provincial-state contacts, private industry relations, interest group linkages, and between Washington D.C. and Ottawa (Sadler 1986). 3.5. Factors Affecting Cooperation Many factors influence a nation's choice i f , when and how to cooperate with i t s neighbors. Intergovernmental coordination "in a complex and uncertain setting is always a d i f f i c u l t and arbitrary task" (Boschken 1982, 188). According to LeMarquand (1976) there is no easy way to eliminate barriers to cooperation. Unless there are tangible benefits, obstacles to cooperation w i l l l i k e l y 49 overshadow the need to consult other governments. The mere existence of a border is often enough to inhibit consideration of the region as a whole system. Maps of Alaska rarely contain topographical depiction of Canada and some maps of B.C. leave out the outlines of Alaska. Additionally, former relations between governments may affect cooperation. A history of amicable relations between diplomats or on-the-ground managers w i l l enhance bargaining and negotiation across the border. A multitude of institutions may have bearing on international relations. A country's constitution, i t s laws, agency regulations, and policy mandates provide direction for or limitations to cooperation. Existing treaties and other kinds of agreements may provide a framework for cooperation. Joint bodies such as interna-tional commissions, task forces, working groups, and information exchange committees also set the tone for future cooperation. The degree of cooperation l i k e l y to occur over a particular transboundary issue depends on a complex web of variables. Each issue may involve a different subset of variables. Pour general factors which affect the success of transboundary cooperation w i l l be discussed in more d e t a i l : p o l i t i c a l w i l l , s i m i l a r i t i e s in perspectives, the approach towards cooperation, and the resources used to foster cooperation. 50 3.5.1. P o l i t i c a l Will The bottom line in any effort to cooperate is the willingness of the parties to work together. P o l i t i c a l w i l l of the nations involved is necessary before meaningful cooperation can begin (LeMarquand 1986). International arrangements encourage recognition of international obligations and provide mechanisms to reconcile conflicts of interest, but they depend on the w i l l of both countries to make use of them (Canada Inquiry on Federal Water Policy 1985, 81). Mo amount of new programs, commissions, task forces, or summits w i l l be successful without a motivation to cooperate. A long-term commitment from the leaders of each country to improve relations w i l l foster meaningful interactions at lower levels of government. Several factors may contribute to p o l i t i c a l w i l l . A nation's commitment to cooperate in a specific instance is dependent upon the p r i o r i t y placed on the issue. There may be more pressing concerns with other countries or more important issues at other locations along the border. If both nations stand to gain or lose over the outcome of a specific issue, they w i l l work harder to reach agreement (LeMarquand 1976). The temper of the relationship is also important (Sadler 1986). Precedent established by the nations' institutions strongly influences the cooperative s p i r i t . Linkage of the situation to other b i l a t e r a l events may also increase interest (LeMarquand 1976, Scott 1974) but i t often complicates the overall relationship (Doran 1984). Nations may desire to develop a pool of good w i l l for future 51 use or they may decide to retaliate against the other party for some past action. P o l i t i c a l pressure from special interest groups may either promote cooperation or fuel nationalistic feelings. 3.5.2. Perspective The degree of si m i l a r i t y between planning, management and development perspectives, affects how well nations w i l l interact with each other. The way issues are perceived and problem solving techniques chosen to resolve conflicts are also important. Similar kinds of institutions can be expected to f a c i l i t a t e cooperation while dissimilar institutional structures can inhibit i t . Different regional planning concepts employed in shared regions can provide barriers to cooperation (Prieur 1979). Similar backgrounds of experts, on the other hand, can Improve relations (Scott 1974). Different kinds of laws may place a further burden on negotiations (Bothe 1979). Development perspectives are also important considerations. Attitudes toward how international environmental conventions relate to transborder developments w i l l either alleviate or agitate problems. The common practice of placing industrial complexes or power generating f a c i l i t i e s near borders may set a negative tone for relations (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development 1979, Despax 1979). 52 3.5.3. Approach Towards Cooperation The approach towards international cooperation sets the stage for success or failure. An open-minded approach emphasizing interests and common concerns is l i k e l y to be more successful than hard bargaining using concrete position statements (Sewell and Utton 1986). This has also been found to be quite important in mediation (Bingham 1986) and negotiation in general (Fisher and Ury 1981). It is important that major actors are directly represented (Sewell 1986). Bingham (1986), in a review of ten years of environmental mediation, found that involving decision-makers in the process was the most important factor for success. Maxwell Cohen, a one time UC commissioner related five factors that f a c i l i t a t e cooperation: don't catch each other by surprise, replace "unilateral rhetoric" with joint fact finding, anticipate future threats to both countries, and where there is an non-negotiable valid legal claim, consider referral to the International Court of Justice (Carroll 1986). Another factor that influences overall relations is whether problems are resolved on an ad hoc basis or through a more integrated approach. Lack of institutions to proactively plan and anticipate future problems results in a reactive relationship. Concerning U.S. resource planning, today few voices are heard for the need to integrate -to the putting of fragmented pieces of policy together -perhaps because we lack the constitutional and 53 intellectual capacity, as well as the societal guts to even undertake the task (Wengert 1980, 25). Bureaucratic jealousy, strongly divided sectoral planning, and different planning perspectives inhibit an integrated approach. Line agencies with a narrow focus also thwart integration (Mitchell 1986). When nations are not accustomed to integrative planning within their own borders, the task of international planning becomes much more d i f f i c u l t . 3.5 .4. Resources Even i f p o l i t i c a l w i l l , like perspectives and similar planning approaches are present, international cooperation w i l l flounder without sufficient resources. Nations must be able to provide sufficient funding and personnel. Funding should be on an equal basis: common planning requires common funding (Bothe 1979). Equal support lessens perceptions that one nation is doing more than i t s f a i r share. Resources should be expended to provide sufficient knowledge to reach informed decisions. Government structures must also be capable of international cooperation (United Nations 1975). Unfortunately, institutions evolve slower than technical development and socioeconomic values (Sadler 1986). Thus, institutions charged with the task of international cooperation w i l l often be outdated or awkward. In summary, before meaningful cooperation can take place, nations must want to cooperate. Even when p o l i t i c a l 54 v i l l exists, other substantial obstacles must be overcome. Differences in perspective need to be recognized vhen negotiating terms for cooperation. Cooperative efforts must be designed to complement the planning approaches of both nations. Finally, for cooperation to vork, sufficient resources must be allocated by both countries. 3.6. History of Transboundary Cooperation Transboundary cooperation is a rel a t i v e l y nev concept. While isolated incidents of early cooperation may be found, i t vas not u n t i l the 1960s that a major thrust began. As land use became more intensified and technology advanced, nev pressures affected transboundary areas. Nuclear pover plants, hydroelectric developments, l a n d f i l l s , and industrial parks vere often situated near borders. Resource developments including mines and timber harvest also occurred adjacent to other jurisdictions. Air and vater pollution passed easily across international boundaries. An overviev of some important responses to transboundary conflicts vorldvide v i l l be followed by a closer look at U.S.-Canadian relations. After that, a c t i v i t i e s of the International Joint Commission (UC) v i l l be examined more closely. 3.6.1. International Planning Integrative planning in transboundary regions occurred as early as the mid-nineteenth century in the Rhine River basin (Teclaff and Teclaff 1985) but really did not mature 55 u n t i l the 1960s. Major transboundary issues usually related to pollution or water distribution problems. A major international agreement, the Boundary Waters Treaty, established a joint commission to address water quality and quantity issues between the U.S. and Canada. A con f l i c t over air quality between these two countries led to a landmark decision by an ar b i t r a l tribunal (Carroll 1986). The 1941 T r a i l Smelter case between the U.S. and Canada developed a precedent that placed responsibility for transborder pollution on the country of origin. In 1956, Article 8 of the the Dubrovnik Conference of the International Law Association called for a multipurpose river management approach concept. [Rliparian states should join vith each other to make f u l l u t i l i z a t i o n of the vaters of a river both from the vievpoint of the river basin as an integrated vhole, and from the vievpoint of the videst variety of uses of the vater, so as to achieve the greatest benefit to a l l (Teclaff 1967, 153). The U.N. advocated multipurpose river basin development in a 1956 Economic and Social Councils resolution (Saha 1981). The International Lav Association adopted vhat is nov known as the Helsinki Rules at their 1966 meeting. Although these rules have not been formally adopted, they do have some influence and are often quoted. Each basin state is entitled within i t s te r r i t o r y to a reasonable and equitable share in the beneficial uses of the water of an international drainage basin (Utton 1973, 299). During the 1960s several international river basin agreements reflected an increase in transfrontier planning. The River Niger Development Agreement in Africa brought 56 eight countries together to study navigation and development issues. It contained great powers of integration and coordination compared to European agreements (Despax 1979). Africa's Senegal River Basin agreement established cooperation about navigation and economic development issues. Asian agreements include the 1960 Treaty of Karachi (India and Pakistan) and the 1966 Mekong Convention. Five South American countries agreed to share data as a result of the 1969 River Platte Agreement (Despax 1979, Dupuy 1979a, United Nations 1975). During the 1970s an emphasis was placed on the river basin as the ultimate international region. People supporting this perspective believed institutional structures should be created to jointly plan and manage common watersheds. Utton (1973) describes the potential river basin authorities in detail but admits i t is unlikely that countries w i l l cooperate to that extent. Like water, p o l i t i c a l bodies often follow the path of least resistance. Scott captured the dilemma faced by two countries managing a common basin: It is not helpful to regard the two national halves of the basin as halves of a self-contained region a r t i f i c i a l l y s p l i t by the frontier. From the point of view of the two countries, each half is merely one region out of the several that make up the whole economy (Bruce and Quinn 1979, 7). It may be easier to disregard another nation's a c t i v i t i e s than to wade through cumbersome diplomatic processes. The fact remains, however, that a c t i v i t i e s occurring upstream in an international river basin may ultimately affect 57 downstream water quality or quantity. Pollution complaints from downstream nations are often the main catharsis for international environmental negotiations. During the 1970s, as a direct result of a growing pollution problem, more emphasis was placed in viewing border areas as regions. The OECD Secretariat (1979) recommended that nations engaged in transboundary problems envision solutions that would be possible i f there were no boundaries. Institutions to help countries view the connectedness of transfrontier regions were created. Many new agreements were forged during this decade. The 1972 Belgium, France and Luxembourg agreement established a permanent t r i p a r t i t e commission (Despax 1979). Two years later, the OECD adopted environmental standards to address frontier region pollution. Scandinavia was the focus of several developments beginning in 1971 with establishment of the Finland Swedish Frontier Rivers Commission. This powerful commission was empowered to enforce regulations, set conditions for permits and to impose penalties. The decisions, however, were subject to appeal by either government (Dupuy 1979b). A few years later the Nordic Convention between Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland permitted access to each other's courts for legal remedies. Scott (1986) sees the concept of equal right of access "most f u l l y embodied" (344) in this treaty. The 1972 United Nations Stockholm Declaration of the Human Environment called for an integrated and coordinated approach to international river basin planning and for equal 58 right of access to courts regarding l i a b i l i t y and compensation for pollution damages (United Nations 1975). 3.6.2. U.S.-Canadian Relations Canada and the U.S. share the longest demilitarized border between any two countries in the world. The 5,335 mile frontier separates the northern portion of North America into two major p o l i t i c a l zones often ignoring natural regions. The physical characteristics are more similar in a north-south than an east-west orientation (Johannson 1975). The mostly straight line border is a "triumph of geometry over geography" (Bruce and Quinn 1979, 6). The two countries share boundary waters, river basins, fish and game resources, and airsheds. Two-thirds of Canadians live in drainage basins shared with their southern neighbors. Early industrialization in the U.S. along with a greater population has assured that "Canada is more often the victim than the v i l l a i n in transboundary issues" (LeMarquand and Scott 1976, 157). Relations between the U.S. and Canada are far from optimal but in a worldwide perspective, they are a best case scenario (Sadler 1986, LeMarquand 1977, Souto-Maior 1981). Ironically, a l l four U.S. maritime borders are in some form of dispute (Curtis and Carroll 1983). O i l , gas and fishery resources have prolonged contention over these boundaries. There were 22 treaties between the U.S. and Canada in 1977 (United Nations 1977), 180 treaties by 1984 (Doran 1984) and 59 over 227 treaties by 1988 (Canada Embassy 1988). Appendix D l i s t s some of the more important Canadian-U.S. agreements. 3.6.2.1. Perspective Canadians and Americans are similar in many respects yet some basic differences exist. To an undiscerning observer these two cultures might at f i r s t appear more similar than they actually are. Most of the people speak the same language, dress alike and feel similarly toward the environment. They are acculturated by media which cross the border with ease. Some of the more subtle differences between these two peoples w i l l be explored in this section. Perspectives d i f f e r on several planes. F i r s t , the general geographical outlook of each country is almost opposite. Eighty percent of a l l Canadians live within 100 miles of the border and 90% live within 200 miles of the border (Carroll 1983). Optimum lands for development in Canada l i e to the south. Land use in the Okanagan Valley in B.C. and Washington State provides an example of differing perspectives. To Canadians, the climate and growing conditions are unique resulting in an emphasis in peach, pear and cherry production. The Okanagan's agricultural potential is considered poor quality to Americans and is planted primarily in apple crops (Bruce and Quinn 1979). Conflicting wilderness perspectives occur along the border. Canada's prime development land is located there while Americans look north towards the border for wilderness quality. Canadians see the far North as true wilderness. 60 Additionally, because so much of Canada is undeveloped there is less of a need to preserve wilderness (LeMarquand 1986). During the 1970s, Canadians spoke resentfully of a U.S. tendency to designate rivers flowing from Canada to the United States as "national wild and scenic," and rivers flowing from the United States to Canada as public sewers (Carroll 1986, 215). Because the U.S. put the most pressure on the environment until the 1970s, Canadians resent America's new concern for protecting border areas (Bruce and Quinn 1979). Another major difference in perspectives relates to U.S. dominance. A high concentration of U.S. corporations are involved in Canadian resource development (Curtis and Carroll 1983). The U.S. invests more in Canada (20% of a l l foreign investments) than in any other country (Doran 1984). Canadians are also greatly dependent on exports to the U.S. They place much importance on bi l a t e r a l a f f a i r s while the U.S. perceives the Canadian relationship secondary to other international a f f a i r s . These factors have led to an increase in Canadian nationalism. Perhaps another major difference in perspective is citizen attitude towards government. American interest in citi z e n participation arose in the 1960s and resulted in a greater public role in government. There is far less legislation in Canada mandating public involvement. Canadians are more apt to trust government and tolerate more secrecy than Americans. Canadians are more deferential toward authority than Americans, Canadians value order more than Americans and equate liberty less often with freedom . . . Canada 61 is a much more hierarchically organized society in which the existence of authority is assumed (Doran 1984, 58). The American system of checks and balances appears to Canadians "to encourage p o l i t i c a l diffusion, chaotic administration, and demagoguery" (Doran 1984, 90). Relating to foreign policy, the two countries were "more and more at odds" by the early 1980s (Curtis and Carroll 1983, 87). For example, Canadians have c r i t i c i z e d American foreign policy in Central America and the Middle East (U.S. 1984). Foreign policy outlooks have become more similar since the Mulroney administration came into power. 3.6.2.2. Bilateral Trends No clear trends exist in the Canadian-U.S. relationship. Instead, a kaleidoscope of patterns . . . may emerge from a slight change in leadership, policy, and mood or from dramatic events at home or abroad (Riekhoff, et a l . 1979, 56). Keeping this in mind, the following w i l l be an attempt to only identify some basic trends. I n i t i a l contact between Canada and the U.S. was tumultuous. During the American revolution, the U.S. invaded Montreal and there was a "constant threat of invasion elsewhere" (Curtis and Carroll 1983, 5). The war of 1812 brought five invasions by the U.S. into Canadian terr i t o r y . Troops burnt the town of York (Toronto) and removed the o f f i c i a l Mace. British soldiers retaliated by setting f i r e to the White House and the Capitol. 62 Another conflict vas kindled betveen Great Britain and the U.S. over the Oregon Territory boundary in 1844. A popular slogan "Fifty-four forty or fight" reflected a desire to expand the U.S. border up to Alaska. East Coast fisheries disputes in the late 1880s led to the following j ingle: We do not vant to fight, But, by jingo, i f ve do We'll scoop in a l l the fishing grounds And the vhole Dominion, too (Walton 1970, 59). The U.S. purchase of Alaska in 1867 led to a nev sense of concern and defensiveness. British Columbians did not vant to be treated in their ovn ter r i t o r y by the United States as the Indians of the interior had been treated by the coastal tribes (Tripp 1975, 46). The 1871 Treaty of Washington permitted free navigation on a number of eastern rivers as v e i l as the Yukon, Porcupine and the Stikine Rivers. Relations grev more tense during Alaska border negotiations. President Roosevelt threatened to use military force i f the boundary tribunal didn't meet his expectations (Classen 1965). The 1903 Treaty of Washington settled the border dispute but vas negatively received by many Canadians (Toronto Star Weekly 1959, Doran 1984). Management of U.S. and Canadian transboundary vatersheds gained in importance vith the establishment of the 1905 International Watervays Commission. This advisory body vas concerned vith the Great Lakes-St. Lavrence region (Canada Inquiry on Federal Water Policy 1985). Its recommendations led to the 1909 Great Britain-U.S. Boundary Waters Treaty. The International Joint Commission (IJC) vas 63 established to carry out provisions in the treaty and f i r s t met in 1912. Because the IJC is often heralded as one of the best examples of international cooperation, i t w i l l be further discussed at the end of the chapter. Between establishment of the IJC and World War II, other international environmental agreements were negotiated. The Migratory Birds Convention was signed in 1916 preceding the Lake of the Woods Convention of 1925. The International Pacific Halibut Commission of 1923 required that one member of the commission be an Alaskan. The 1930 International Pacific Fisheries Commission gave authority for joint management of the Fraser River salmon stocks. The 1930s and 1940s brought the Rainy Lake Convention, the Joint Board of Defense and the Hyde Park Declaration (Holmes 1981). During this period, President Roosevelt became the f i r s t president to ever meet a Canadian prime minister in Canada. Roosevelt returned the Mace stolen from York 121 years before (Colombo 1986). Post war issues led to an increase in cooperation. During the 1950s, the Niagara River Water Diversion (1950) and the St. Lawrence Seaway Project (1952) were negotiated. A federal level exchange of legislators, the Canada-United States Interparliamentary Group, began annual meetings in 1959. The Columbia River Treaty (1961) and Protocol (1964) permitted power export after two decades of negotiations. B.C.'s insistence to s e l l i t s downstream benefits in the Columbia River basin against the desire of the federal government marked a new era in federal-provincial relations. 64 The province successfully asserted i t s power to affect more control over the resources within i t s boundaries (Sewell 1986). During the 1960s, bil a t e r a l relations soured. Prime Minister Diefenbaker and President Kennedy had major differences over foreign policy approaches towards Cuba and China and the placement of nuclear warheads in Canada. Diefenbaker held an election on the later issue and lost. Both gains and losses to the b i l a t e r a l relationship occurred during the 1970s. Riekhoff et a l . (1979) claim that relations deteriorated between 1970-1976 and gradually improved through the end of the decade. During this period Canada instituted an era of economic nationalism to assert i t s sovereignty and independence from the U.S. (Colombo 1986). President Nixon's economic policy ended a special relationship with Canada by eliminating exemptions for import surcharges. Arctic sovereignty became an issue when the Manhattan, an American o i l tanker, traversed Canadian waters without obtaining permission. Canada reacted by passing the Arctic Waters Pollution Act regulating a l l shipping within a hundred miles of the coastline. Prime Minister Trudeau's Third Option sought a future where Canada would be more independent of the U.S. The IJC's growing presence provided gains to the relationship. It's influence was paramount in reaching agreement for water quality in the Great Lakes region in 1972 and 1975. Lemarquand and Scott (1976) remarked that i t was also "as much the culmination of diplomatic exchange and agreement between the two sovereign authorities of Ontario and Canada as between Canada and the 65 U.SH (158). Carroll (1983) marks the 1970s as a period when the U.S. began efforts to protect the border from Canadian development. Relations between state and provincial governments began as early as 1960 but flourished during the 1970s and 1980s. At one time, the Washington D.C.-Ottawa connection was the primary link between the two countries. Today the federal government couldn't manage a l l of the day-to-day contacts between the two countries (Curtis and Carroll 1983). Links between the subnational governments became more important by the 1970s (Leach et a l . 1973, Swanson 1978). An early subnational group was established in 1960 with the f i r s t meeting of the Alaska-Yukon-British Columbia conferences. Other regions followed with similar institutions. The Conference of New England Governors and Canadian Premiers f i r s t met in 1973. Annual meetings of this East Coast institution have led to establishment of permanent committees: the New England International Committee on Energy and the International Tourism Regional Foundation. Alberta and the Rocky Mountain States have cooperated in an effort spearheaded by Montana (Curtis and Carroll 1983). Additionally, the Conference of Great Lakes and Midwest Governors was instrumental in the attainment of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. Referring to the Atlantic and Pacific groups, Curtis and Carroll 1983 predict that relations are l i k e l y to continue to grow, with achievement largely determined by the rise and f a l l of individual key governments and premiers and the level of interest that both maintain (75). 66 Private groups gained more influence in b i l a t e r a l relations during the 1970s and 1980s. The Canadian-U.S. Environmental Coalition meets at least once per year. It is made up of the Canadian Nature Federation, the Wilderness Society and many additional national and regional groups (Curtis and Carroll 1983). Another organization, the Flathead Coalition, was organized primarily by Montanans but also had some B.C. constituents. Canadian-Alaskan environmental groups also joined forces to develop a joint plan for the Stikine during the mid-1980s. Because the U.S. government has more avenues for input, Canadian groups are more l i k e l y to lobby U.S. government leaders than vise versa (Souto-Maior 1981). The Canadian Coalition on Acid rain lobbies in Washington (Sewell 1986). Topics of concern range from release of flood waters to smoke from slash burns (Scott 1974) . The 1980s r e a l i t y along the Canadian-U.S. border is a situation of fast increasing transborder, transnational networks and coalition building by countless individuals, aided by many hundreds of non-governmental organizations and institutions (Carroll 1986, 219). Scott (1974) characterizes private groups as operating on an ad hoc basis due to changing membership and outlook. They can be a unifying force as long as their interests are not too parochial (Curtis and Carroll 1983). There may be a greater role for environmental groups in the future. The lesson for bureaucracy is clear: environmentalists and other publics must be brought sincerely and openly into the planning process early, not for co-option but for conscientious consideration of alternative viewpoints as p o s s i b i l i t i e s (Kirn and Marts 1986, 287). 67 The 1980s continued bittersweet relations. Some authors indicate that the relationship is deteriorating (Sewell 1986, Carroll 1983, Curtis and Carroll 1983). The unprecedented annual Reagan-Mulroney summits, however, have provided s t a b i l i t y to bi l a t e r a l relations (U.S. Department of State 1988). An increase in Canadian nationalism and protectionist attitudes in both countries added to the complexity of issues. Gains in the bil a t e r a l relations parallel an increasing d i f f i c u l t y in reaching agreements on a growing number of issues (Sewell 1986). Acid rain, arctic haze, water pollution, o i l development, and American domination of Canadian corporations are persistent problems. Canada's 1980 National Energy Policy sought more Canadian control in the o i l industry with an objective of 50% Canadian ownership. This policy was developed without consultation with the t e r r i t o r i e s (Abele 1987). A negative reaction from U.S. petroleum companies resulted in a reduction in exploration and eventually led to the downfall of the i n i t i a t i v e . The IJC was instrumental in negotiating an innovative alternative to raising water levels in the Skagit River Treaty of 1984. Two important agreements in the ABCY Region were also completed in the mid 1980s: the 1985 salmon treaty and in 1987 the Porcupine Caribou agreement. A monumental free trade agreement was placed into effect during 1989. Although free trade became a major issue of the 1988 Canadian federal elections, voters backed the government. 68 Trends in Canadian-U.S. relations are summarized by a observations that the Canada-U.S. experience can be seen as a linear progression of eras of great collaboration and great joint works, evolving into eras of caution, hesitancy, sniping, argument, disagreement, and threats, and then again into eras of amity and cooperation (Carroll 1986, 218). Relations between the U.S. and Canada reflect an unbalanced effort (Sewell and Utton 1986, Carroll 1983, Curtis and Carroll 1983, Sadler 1986, Doran 1984). While Canadian government structure reflects a p r i o r i t y with U.S. relations, the converse is not true. Canada's largest embassy is in Washington D.C. and i t is staffed four to five times higher than the American embassy in Ottawa (Doran 1984). A special division within the Canadian Department of External Affairs is dedicated to U.S. relations. The small U.S. office of Canadian Affairs is within the Bureau of European Affairs and only one diplomatic officer is assigned f u l l time to Canadian af f a i r s (Carroll 1983). Unlike that with any other nation, the U.S. interaction with Canada tends to be managed in an ad hoc dispersed manner (Curtis and Carroll 1983, 10). Canadian o f f i c i a l s feel insulted at the lack of U.S. commitment or attention. It is not unusual for a State Department o f f i c i a l to be dispatched to inform Canada and ask for i t s cooperation on a policy hours after i t has been announced through the media (Curtis and Carroll 1983, 9). Although these two nations are each other's greatest trading partners, the U.S. is preoccupied with i t s foreign policy programs elsewhere. The size of the entire Canadian market 69 has been compared vith that of California (Karmin 1987). While 21% of U.S. exports end up in Canada, 77% of Canadian exports end up in the U.S. Although U.S.-Canadian institutions dealing vith transboundary issues have been c r i t i c i z e d , many countries look to this relationship for guidance. One institution in particular, the UC, is often used as a benchmark by other countries vhen developing transboundary agreements. 3.6.2.3. International Joint Commission (UC) The IJC has existed for over three-quarters of a century and is the only permanent Canadian-U.S. institution concerned vith environmental relations (Carroll 1986). This overviev of the IJC begins vith a description of i t s duties followed by a brief h i s t o r i c a l overviev. A discussion of its attributes and limitations v i l l then be presented along vith recommendations by other authors for future changes. U.S.-Canadian transboundary issues gained importance after the turn of the century vith the establishment of the International Watervays Commission (IWC). The Commission vas concerned vith pover developments and vater levels along the eastern part of the border. It vas "weak but symbolically significant" (Carroll 1986, 21). Dreisziger (1981) claims that the failure of the IWC to induce p o l i t i c a l action vas due to negative feelings resulting from the 1903 Alaska boundary treaty. IWC recommendations for a more structured institution to deal vith the groving number 70 of transboundary problems resulted in the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 and the establishment of the IJC. The Boundary Waters Treaty (BWT) provided basic procedural guidelines for negotiating future issues. It settled a few existing disputes, protected navigation rights, contained an anti-pollution clause, established the principle of equal rights for both countries, and developed a prioritized hierarchy of water uses. Sections of the treaty gave the IJC administrative (IV), quasi j u d i c i a l (III, IV, VII), a r b i t r a l (X) and investigative (IX) powers (Carroll 1983). Arbitral powers, however, have never been exercised. The two major roles are investigating references and approving projects that would alter levels of boundary waters. The BWT prohibits construction of dams that would effect the water level of international navigable rivers unless approved by the IJC. The IJC is a unitary agency made up of three commissioners from each country. Canadian commissioners are appointed for fixed terms while American commissioners serve at the pleasure of the President, pending Senate approval. Only two commissioners, the co-chairmen, work for the commission f u l l time. Although the IJC has few permanent staff, i t does appoint boards to collect and evaluate information. The boards are composed of federal, state, provincial, and municipal employees, and occasionally private citizens. The IJC operates on a consensus basis. Although sometimes c r i t i c i z e d , the IJC is generally considered a success. The Commission rarely divides along 71 national lines and 80% of i t s recommendations have been accepted by the governments. It has prevented many problems through i t s approval process for a c t i v i t i e s that vould alter the vater levels (LeMarquand and Scott 1976). Until the 1950s, most of the vork done by the IJC involved i t s quasi-judicial role of project approval (Canada Inquiry on Federal Water Policy 1985, Sadler 1986). Pollution and navigation issues vere not referred to commission. Since the 1950s, i t has received more references and has addressed such hot spots as the Great Lakes, the Garrison Diversion, the Flathead River and the Skagit River. The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) of 1972 gave i t additional duties (Willoughby 1981). It vas empovered to act on issues in this region vithout specific referrals. This agreement led to the largest step tovards evolution of management process that recognized substantial interrelationships, integration, ecology or stated another way, the "t o t a l i t y of the vhole" (Dvorsky 1986, 328). Others are somevhat less enthusiastic. Utton found that the 1972 agreement strengthened the role of the IJC but that i t vas " s t i l l largely restricted to coordination, monitoring and surveillance" (Utton 1973, 301). The IJC has been c r i t i c i z e d for other reasons. One author claimed that the IJC entered an "era of benign neglect" (Carroll 1983, 55) at the outset of the Reagan administration. References are not given vhen results vould l i k e l y be to a government's disadvantage (Carroll 1983, Canada Inquiry on Federal Water Policy 1985, Sadler 1986). 72 There is some speculation that the IJC is sometimes used as a pawn for p o l i t i c a l motives (Carroll 1983). The level of confidence in the IJC by government o f f i c i a l s declined markedly in the late 1970s (Munton 1981). Governments have avoided using i t s f u l l capabilities (LeMarquand 1986). No new investigative assignments occurred between 1977 and 1985. Suggestions for improving the IJC are wide ranging. Curtis and Carroll (1983) have recommended that additional offices be created with more provincial-state representa-tion. Reformers recommend expanding i t s investigatory and fact finding roles (Sadler 1986, LeMarquand 1986), describing and monitoring functions (Scott 1974), quasi. -jud i c i a l role in regulating water flows (Sadler 1986, Canada Inquiry on Federal Water Policy 1985), and even power to in i t i a t e i t s own references (Curtis and Carroll 1983). The Canadian-U.S. University Seminar recommends that the IJC use mediation and surveillance techniques (Munton 1981). The IJC's a b i l i t y to address potential problems before they arise has been targeted for improvement. Sewell and Utton (1985) recommended more of an a b i l i t y to anticipate future problems. Dvorsky (1986, 326) called for a "futures orientation toward planning and management" in the Great Lakes region. He has also recommended the IJC consider linkages between existing programs. New problems not mentioned in the BWT need to be addressed. Outer Continental Shelf exploration, hydrocarbon development, marine water quality, a i r pollution, arctic 73 resources development, television broadcasts, forestry, parks, v i l d l i f e , and vilderness issues have a l l been identified (Canada Inquiry on Federal Water Policy 1985, Carroll 1983). There have been ca l l s for both governments to increase support for the IJC. Curtis and Carroll (1983) recommend direct funding as v e i l as a separation from the U.S. State Department. The 1985 Canada Inquiry on Federal Water Policy called for increased Canadian support by providing personnel, s c i e n t i f i c support and timely replacement of commissioners. There have also been recommendations to appoint the U.S. commissioners for fixed terms and to make commissioners f u l l time employees (Curtis and Carroll 1983). Some authors believe that p o l i t i c a l r e a l i t i e s preclude expanding IJC povers. It is generally acknovledged that a similar treaty couldn't be negotiated today. Munton (1981) believes that most reformers don't f u l l y understand consequences of their proposed changes. He believes increasing the IJC's horizon to other fields may press i t beyond i t s capabilities. If i t initiated i t s ovn referrals, i t could lose i t s impartiality, becoming a victim to lobbying efforts. Lack of IJC involvement in the ABCY Region may be due to a reluctance by states to involve the IJC or because transboundary vater problems have not reached a c r i t i c a l level yet. Sutto-Maier (1981) found that provincial and state authorities vere reluctant to use the IJC in the St. John River dispute. During the Stikine hydroelectric 74 controversy, there were ca l l s to involve the IJC (United Fishermen of Alaska 1981, Taylor 1984, International Joint Commission 1987, Johannson 1976). 3.7 Summary Cooperation between Canadian and U.S. o f f i c i a l s in the North can provide many benefits to the people of both countries. By working together, i t is possible to obtain mutual gains not available by acting independently. Joint endeavors can also lead to f i s c a l savings. Cooperation occurs through a complex network of communication channels and is affected by many factors. The three jurisdictions share information, execute joint planning projects and complete joint programs. They cooperate through federal, subnatlonal, regional, and local channels. Cooperation is affected by factors such as p o l i t i c a l w i l l , regional planning and decision making approaches, and the amount of resources expended. A genuine desire to cooperate is perhaps the most important factor; without sufficient p o l i t i c a l w i l l , meaningful cooperation w i l l not occur. Throughout history, nations of the world have placed more emphasis upon protecting their boundaries from cross border Intrusions than cooperation with their neighbors. The result has been incompatible land uses, pollution problems and water quantity problems. Few examples of transboundary planning exist before the 1800s. Although transboundary agreements have increased dramatically since 75 the 1960s, few countries have given up their sovereignty to joint institutions. Bilateral relations between the U.S. and Great Britain concerning Canada began with military incursions but have evolved to a best case scenario. At the turn of the century relations began to improve. The Boundary Waters Treaty led to the creation of the powerful International Joint Commission. Other important agreements followed. Today, the relationship provides a positive example to the rest of the world. Even with persistent problems such as acid rain, fishery allocation problems, and the location of the maritime borders, relations remain amicable. The two countries are each others' major trading partners and have recently completed a free trade agreement unparalleled by any other two countries (Karmin 1987, Terry et a l . 1987). Although in a worldwide perspective relations are excellent, there are no clear trends and the degree of cooperation often changes with elections of new administrations. The Reagan-Mulroney yearly summits and annual meetings between legislative bodies provided s t a b i l i t y . People of Canada and the U.S. are alike in many ways but also have subtle differences. They speak the same language, are exposed to the same media and share the same continent. Attitudes toward government, however, contrast sharply on either side of the border. The s t r i c t separation of powers between the branches of the U.S. government differs from the mingling of executive and legislative powers in Canada. Canadians trust their governments with 76 more power than Americans do. Differences in geographical and psychological perspectives also complicate relations. Important institutions in the ABCY Region w i l l be described in more detail in the next chapter. Each country w i l l be covered separately followed by international institutions. The international cooperative effort w i l l then be evaluated in Chapter 5. 77 CHAPTER 4 THE INSTITUTIONAL SETTING This chapter provides an institutional background to Canadian-U.S. relations with an emphasis on the ABCY Region. The f i r s t section compares the general differences between the two systems of governance. Major institutional systems of the ABCY Region w i l l be then be discussed. The fi n a l section provides an overview of the arrangements for cooperation between Canadian and American interests. 4.1. U.S. and Canadian Governance Canada and the U.S. are "Children of a Common Mother."* Both nations are democracies as well as federations but the separation of powers and responsibilities for resource management di f f e r in each country. Perhaps of greater importance, the differences in style and philosophies affect how regional planning and resource management occur. Inscription on the Peace Arch at the international border at Blaine, Washington and Douglas, B.C. 78 The U.S. was created in 1776 after a bloody revolution while Canada's autonomy evolved more gradually. Independence from Great Britain began with the British North America Act (BNA) in 1867 and culminated with the passage of the 1982 Constitution Act. Canada retained the parliamentary system of government and remained part of the Commonwealth. In contrast, America's clean break with Britain enabled i t to modify i t s system of government. The designers of the American constitution were influenced by the writings of a Frenchman named Montesquieu. Montesquieu was c r i t i c a l of too much consolidation of power. [W]hen the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty (1823, 152). A s t r i c t separation of powers between the le g i s l a t i v e , j u d i c i a l and executive branches of government resulted. The legislative chambers of the U.S. federal and a l l but one state governments are divided into two bodies: the Senate 2 and the House of Representatives . Before a b i l l becomes law, i t must be approved by both legislative bodies. The president and governors are elected by popular vote but the leaders of state and federal departments are appointed. The U.S. federal government has power to control commerce, defense, treaties, federal property, and inter-state compacts. When federal and state laws c o n f l i c t , Nebraska has the only unicameral U.S. state legislature. 79 federal lav supersedes. The U.S. has greater federal powers at the expense of the states. The states don't have the province's powers over industry, transportation, property, c i v i l rights, water, and other natural resource issues (LeMarquand and Scott 1976, 158). Residual powers not spelled out in law belong to the states. A less distinct separation of powers exists in the Canadian parliamentary system, especially in regard to the executive and legislative functions. The party which elects the most legislators appoints the prime minister or premier. This leader then appoints other elected party members as cabinet ministers. They serve concurrently as members of the cabinet, ministers of a department and as elected members of the legislative body. This results in an inevitable mingling of p o l i t i c s and administration which some find disturbing but is never-theless l i k e l y to continue (Morely, et a l . 1983, 65). The cabinet is extremely powerful in both federal and provincial governments. In a situation such as B.C. where 30% of the legislature are members of the cabinet, their powers are astronomical when compared to executive power in the U.S. Although technically the lieutenant-governor-in-council (the governor-general in the federal government) holds executive power, the premier (or prime minister) and the cabinet actually make most decisions. Through a vehicle known as an order-in-council, the cabinet acts l e g i s l a t i v e l y in a way not possible in the U.S. It also administers laws and may act as a judi c i a l tribunal. "The cabinet in a real sense is the government" (Morley, et a l . 1983, 75). It 80 decides the content of l e g i s l a t i o n , when i t i s introduced and when i t becomes law. Ministers are strongly discouraged from p u b l i c l y dissenting with cabinet d e c i s i o n s . The cabinet speaks with only one voice based on one unanimous vote and that voice and that vote are t o t a l l y and absolutely binding on a l l ministers (Nichols 1986, 3). Should l e g i s l a t i o n introduced by the government leader f a i l to pass the l e g i s l a t i v e body, a vote of no confidence occurs and an e l e c t i o n i s held. The parliamentary system provides an e f f i c i e n t way to accomplish goals. L e g i s l a t i v e debate serves p r i m a r i l y as a forum to bring issues to the attention of the p u b l i c . Cabinet reaches i t s objectives with a minimum of delay. At times, decisions are even approved r e t r o a c t i v e l y . The Canadian Parliament i s a bicameral body although the Senate r a r e l y exercises i t s powers. B.C.'s l e g i s l a t i v e assembly i s a unicameral body. The B r i t i s h North America l e g i s l a t i o n , enacted by Great B r i t a i n , created a federal system for Canada. Responsi-b i l i t i e s outlined in t h i s act resulted i n a cobweb of j u r i s d i c t i o n s with some uncertai n t i e s . The provinces manage most natural resources although the federal government does have some overlap of r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . The Canadian federal government has j u r i s d i c t i o n for navigable r i v e r s , seacoast and inland f i s h e r i e s , Indian band administration, and many transboundary concerns. Residual powers not covered by the act are federal r e s p o n s i b i l i t y yet compared to the U.S. s i t u a t i o n , the provinces have much more c o n t r o l of t h e i r 81 destiny. There are, however, s t i l l j u r isdictional gray areas. One such ambiguity occurs in the f i e l d of international cooperation. Although Section 132 of the BNA Act gave the federal government responsibility for international obligations, in practice the provinces often become di r e c t l y involved in international relations. This topic w i l l be discussed in more detail at the end of this chapter. Provisions for management of anadromous fish vary but in B.C. the federal government has responsibility for salmon. A protective clause in the amended federal fisheries act giving the federal government broad powers is often used as a bargaining tool. It has been labelled an essential element in achievement of environmental control in Canada where provincial regulatory resources or w i l l are weak (Nemetz 1986, 607). Responsibilities for land management d i f f e r in B.C., Alaska and the Yukon (Figure 4-1). The provincial government manages most of the land while the federal government has l i t t l e presence. Areas managed by government are referred to as Crown land. In the U.S., the East is mostly in state and private ownership while in the West the federal government has a more significant role. Division of responsibilities between federal and state governments in Alaska is almost the direct opposite of the situation in B.C. For example, in Southeastern Alaska, 96% of the land is under federal jurisdiction. Management of the Yukon more closely parallels Alaska but the federal government has even more power. £961 BJfseiV '6961 AJOJIIMX nojmA 'S961 inqramco usrjug UKMJ ej*a :aMnos %60Z " »1«1S %8 8 - a*!l«N %£*0 -» l*A | Jd i.jauoissnniiioo % g n - ai«APd %6 0 -f«Jrai»d %6"S - OIKAUJ 38 uoffan A38V aqi or juauia2euew pmri wnSy 83 On several accounts, the style of governance dif f e r s between the two nations. The Canadian government relies more on broad ministerial powers than on public consultation or definitive legislation. Liberal use of the phrase, "the minister may," assures ministerial discretion (Aberley 1985). The U.S., on the other hand, more often uses the terms "sha l l " and "must" in legislation. There is a greater role for the media to inform the public in Canada while lobbying and l i t i g a t i o n have more importance in the U.S. (Carroll 1983). Public involvement has become an expected American institution, often l e g i s l a t i v e l y mandated. The average U.S. ci t i z e n has the power to f i l e class action suits against the government, a recourse not available in 3 Canada . Controversial projects are often reevaluated as a direct result of public lawsuits. A v a i l a b i l i t y of information also d i f f e r s between the two governments. The U.S. Freedom of Information Act reflects a commitment to permit open access to federal information. This strong piece of legislation enables people to obtain many kinds of information from federal agencies within ten days of being requested (U.S. General Services Administration 1981). Although Canada has a similar act, i t is not as strong as the U.S. act and at times, Canadians have used U.S. sources to find out about At one time i t was also d i f f i c u l t in the U.S. to get standing for class action suits unless a party was directly affected by some government action. 84 Canadian issues. Alaska's access to information legislation provides less discretion about what may be disclosed than in B.C. The approach of the two countries to environmental pollution control also d i f f e r s . In Canada, the control is by overall ambient standards for each body of water and the system fosters bargaining (Carroll 1983). Negotiations work from objectives back to the causes of pollution. Discharge licenses are then issued (LeMarquand 1986). Nemetz (1986) characterizes the Canadian approach as being closed, consensual with a small number of prosecutions. In the U.S., s t r i c t point source effluent standards don't permit much negotiation. This system results in much l i t i g a t i o n and h o s t i l i t y . Methods for establishing parks d i f f e r in the U.S. and Canada. B.C. for example, may establish parks by an act of the legislative assembly, administrative arrangements or an order-in-council. Parks established by an order-in-counci1 may also be dismantled or boundaries changed by a similar action (B.C. Wilderness Advisory Committee 1986). U.S. parks are generally created by an act of the federal or state legislatures. 4.2. U.S. Institutions in the ABCY Region The federal government is the primary land manager in Alaska but state agencies, local governments and Native corporations have some importance. These agencies w i l l be b r i e f l y discussed below. 85 4.2.1. Federal Government The federal government is an important actor in Alaska because i t manages 70% of the state. Federal land manage-ment agencies are housed within two departments. The Forest Service is the primary management agency of Southeast Alaska and is a part of the Department of Agriculture. The Fish and wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of Indian Affairs also manage land under direction of the Department of the Interior. Important federal legislative acts in the U.S. have had a profound effect on resource management and planning. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) was enacted to improve federal plans, increase coordination and to protect the environment. Federal agencies are encouraged to u t i l i z e a systematic, interdisciplinary approach which v i l l insure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts in planning and decisionmaking (USDA, Forest Service 1978, 250) . A detailed statement of environmental impacts for major federal actions is required. Alternatives to the proposed action, including a "no go" alternative must be addressed. The environmental impact statement (EIS) must consider how short-term uses relate to long-term productivity of the resource. The Wilderness Act of 1964 established the mechanism for designation of wilderness. It permits Congressional designation of wilderness on federal lands. 86 The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1969 set the stage for a wilderness debate that would last more than a decade. It was primarily concerned with Native land claims but section 17 (d) (2) directed the secretary of the interior to withdraw from a l l forms of appropriation . . . up to but not to exceed eighty million acres of unreserved public lands, which the Secretary deems are suitable for addition to or creation as units of the National Park, Forest, Wildlife Refuge, and Wild and Scenic Rivers Systems (United States Congress 1971, 322). Although never mentioned in ANCSA, the designation of wilderness areas became a major issue throughout the next eleven years. A bitter struggle ensued between preservationists and those who supported unrestricted resource development. The protection ran out for the lands in 1978. Exercising a rarely used power granted by the 4 Antiquities Act , President Carter established a series of national monuments. The Secretary of the Interior withdrew further lands from development. In 1980, 11 years after the Native Claims Act was passed, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) was approved by Congress and signed by President Carter, just days before he l e f t o f f i c e . ANILCA relaxed some of the s t r i c t Wilderness Act require-ments by permitting existing float plane and motorboat The Antiquities Act empowers the President to create national monuments to protect areas of archeological significance. The Forest Lands Policy Management Act of 1976 gave the Secretary of the Interior power to withdraw unreserved federal lands from development. 87 a c c e s s a s w e l l a s c o n s t r u c t i o n o f some c a b i n s f o r p u b l i c s a f e t y . I t r e s u l t e d i n o v e r one t h i r d o f t h e s t a t e b e i n g p l a c e d i n t o some k i n d o f p r o t e c t i v e s t e w a r d s h i p . 4.2.1.1. USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e T h e USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e m a n a g e s f o r e s t , r a n g e , m i n e r a l , w a t e r , a n d r e c r e a t i o n r e s o u r c e s a s w e l l a s f i s h a n d game h a b i t a t w i t h i n n a t i o n a l f o r e s t s . T h e o r e t i c a l l y , n a t i o n a l f o r e s t s a r e m a n a g e d a c c o r d i n g t o f i r s t c h i e f f o r e s t e r G i f f o r d P i n c h o t ' s p r i n c i p l e o f " t h e g r e a t e s t g o o d f o r t h e g r e a t e s t number o f p e o p l e . " P l a n n i n g p r o c e s s e s i n c l u d e p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f t h e g e n e r a l p u b l i c , b u t s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t g r o u p s a r e o f t e n more v o c a l . T h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e i s a l a r g e h i e r a r c h i c a l a g e n c y w i t h d e c e n t r a l i z e d o f f i c e s . P o l i c y m a k i n g i s g e n e r a l l y a t o p - d o w n p r o c e s s . A v o l u m i n o u s s e t o f m a n u a l s a n d h a n d b o o k s p r o v i d e s a " c o o k b o o k " a p p r o a c h w i t h a n i n t r i c a t e l y c r o s s - r e f e r e n c e d l i s t o f r e c i p e s t o c o v e r a l m o s t a n y 5 s i t u a t i o n . L o c a l d i r e c t i o n i s s e t o u t i n r e g i o n a l a n d a r e a s u p p l e m e n t s . T h e F o r e s t S e r v i c e ' s A l a s k a R e g i o n i n c l u d e s two n a t i o n a l f o r e s t s : t h e C h u g a c h a n d t h e T o n g a s s . T h e T o n g a s s i s f u r t h e r s u b d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e a r e a s : t h e C h a t h a m A r e a , t h e S t i k i n e A r e a a n d t h e K e t c h i k a n A r e a . S i d e - b y - s i d e t h e USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e ' s m a n u a l s y s t e m e x t e n d s n e a r l y t h r e e m e t e r s . 88 Management of the Tongass National Forest evolved from an early emphasis in timber harvest to one of multiple use. The f i r s t forest reserve in Southeastern Alaska was created by presidential proclamation in 1907, later expanding to cover almost a l l of the Panhandle. Until the 1970s, v i r t u a l l y a l l Forest Service decision makers were trained as foresters. During the 1960s and 1970s, the U.S. Congress responded to popular environmental concerns by passing several c r i t i c a l acts. Section 1 of the 1960 Multiple Use and Sustained Yield Act (MUSY) directed that national forests are established and sh a l l be administered for outdoor recreation, range, timber, watershed, and wildlife and fish purposes (USDA Forest Service 1978, 197). This act led to a greater diversification of professionals working for the agency. Today, fish and w i l d l i f e biologists, s o i l scientists, hydrologists, and recreation specialists help manage the Tongass National Forest. The act also mandated sustained yield of renewable resources. The National Forest Management Act of 1976 and the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Act of 1974 provide the primary direction for planning. Specific direction is set out in manuals. Plans are completed at five levels: national, regional, forest, management area, and project (Gallagher 1987). 4.2.1.2. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) The Bureau of Land Management is housed within the Department of the Interior. The BLM orig i n a l l y was a land 89 disposal agency for a l l federal agencies with additional responsibilities for protection of lands from forest f i r e s . The agency was given a land management and planning mandate in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (U.S. Forest Service 1978). This legislation gave the BLM a role similar to the Department of Agriculture's Forest Service. While there have been attempts to merge these two agencies, they currently remain in separate federal departments. Four kinds of plans are completed using a nine step planning process: policy, land use, acti v i t y , and project (Gallagher 1987 ). 4.2.1.3. National Park Service The National Park Service is housed within the Department of the Interior and manages national parks, national preserves, national monuments and national historic areas. The Park Service's mandate to protect areas contrasts with the Forest Service's multiple use approach. The National Park and Recreation Act of 1978 and the 1980 ANILCA legislation require the agency to prepare management plans (Gallagher 1987). Parks along the border include the Klondike Gold Rush National Historic Park, Wrangell-St. Elias and Glacier Bay. The Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve also abuts Canada. 4.2.1.4. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) The Fish and Wildlife Service is a part of the Department of the Interior. It is concerned with the 90 management of fisheries and wildlife including migratory birds and eagles. The agency manages three w i l d l i f e areas at or near the border: the Arctic, Yukon Flats and Tetlin National Wildlife Refuges. The primary mission of this agency is the protection of fish and wi l d l i f e habitat. Refuges accommodate other uses as long as they do not interfere with i t s primary mission. The FWS receives statutory direction from the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966. Specific planning direction is provided by statutes (50 CFR Part 36) and Section 304 of ANILCA (Gallagher 1987). 4.2.1.5. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) The National Marine Fisheries Service, a division of the U.S. Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, becomes involved with some of the committees set up by the salmon commissions. NMFS is also involved with marine mammal management and participates in cooperative fishery research with Canada. 4.2.1.6. The Department of State The Department of State is the primary U.S. federal agency for international a f f a i r s . It becomes involved in formal federal level international negotiations. This department negotiates directly with Canada's External Affairs. 91 4.2.1.7. Army Corps of Engineers The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for maintaining the navigability of rivers and issues permits for use and development of wetlands. It becomes involved in international a f f a i r s by overseeing log transport, moorage and navigability of international rivers. 4.2.2. State Agencies The State manages 21% of Alaska's lands. Similar to the federal government, administrative, j u d i c i a l and legislative branches are separate en t i t i e s . Elected o f f i c i a l s include members of the legislature (senators and representatives), the governor and the lieutenant governor. The governor leads the administrative branch. The majority of Alaskans are not a f f i l i a t e d with any p o l i t i c a l party but most elected o f f i c i a l s belong to either the Republican or Democratic parties. State resource management agencies are described below. Alaska's government structure seldom changes and there has been a tendency to place resources under the jurisdictions of a few large agencies. Figure 4-2 illustrates the government structure of the State of Alaska. 4.2.2.1. Office of the Governor The Governor's Office is responsible for overseeing fifteen departments and the University of Alaska. Before 92 Figure 4-2. State of Alaska Government Structure LEGISLATIVE BRANCH The Senate JUDICIAL BRANCH Supreme Court AppellateCburt Superior Court District Court Department of Transportation & Public Facilities Source: Adapted from Alaska 1988 any b i l l becomes law, the governor has the option to sign i t into law, veto i t or let i t become law without signature 6. The governor becomes involved with international affairs ranging from informal meetings to written agreements. The governor is also commander-in-chief of the state's armed forces. Although he or she may have some influence in setting the federal agenda for international cooperation, the governor's major role is deciding how Alaska w i l l become involved in international affairs within i t s jurisdiction. The Division of Governmental Coordination is responsible for coordination between the federal government and Alaska. Federal acts such as the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, ANILCA, and Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 a l l require the federal government to consult with the governor. The NEPA legislation mandates that federal agencies cooperate with state and local agencies using an interdisciplinary approach. Most major development proposals are therefore sent to this office for review. Specific direction for planning is found in the Alaska Coastal Zone Management Act of 1977. Although there are at times animosities between national and subnational jurisdictions, stringent mandates to cooperate assure that a continuing dialogue occurs. A governor's veto may be overridden by a two-thirds majority vote of the legislature. 94 4.2.2.2. Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) ADFG has been responsible for management and enhancement of fish and wildlife on a l l state lands since i t was created in 1959. It also manages fi s h and game, other than habitat, on Alaska's national forests. The agency becomes involved in international a f f a i r s such as fisheries allocation and caribou management negotiations. ADFG cooperated with U.S. and Canadian agencies during the Stikine-Iskut hydroelectric studies of the mid-1980s. The legal base for planning is found in T i t l e 16 of the Alaska Statutes (Gallagher 1987). 4.2.2.3. Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) DEC is responsible for water and air quality control, pollution prevention as well as other a c t i v i t i e s to protect the environment and public health. The department may become involved in international aff a i r s should an ac t i v i t y by another country threaten the health or safety of Alaskans. 4.2.2.4. Department of Natural Resources (DNR) DNR manages a l l resources other than fish and game on state land. This includes water, mineral, timber, petroleum, and agriculture resources. The department is also responsible for the state park system. Of a l l the states, Alaska is the only one with a separate a r t i c l e in its constitution dedicated to natural resources (Gallagher 1987). T i t l e 38 of the Alaska Statutes provides more specific direction for planning. The Division of Land and Water Management completes statewide, area and management plans using an eight step process. The Division of Forestry receives planning direction from T i t l e 41 of the state statutes and uses a seven step process. The Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation completes statewide, regional, park unit, and site plans using a nine step process. 4.2.2.5. Department of Transportation and Public F a c i l i t i e s The department is responsible for developing and maintaining buildings, road systems and the Alaska Marine Highway. The agency works with the federal government and the Office of the Governor concerning international transportation planning matters. 4.2.2.6. Alaska Power Authority (APA) APA is a public corporation within the Department of Commerce and Economic Development but technically separate from the State. It is responsible for hydroelectric developments, power interties and other energy matters. APA is involved with planning future interties to share power between Alaska, B.C. and the Yukon. 4.2.3. Regional and Local Government Most agencies have some form of regional level administration but the borough is the level of government charged solely with region-wide governance. In many areas, 96 c i t y and borough governments are amalgamated into one. The twelve boroughs cover half of the state but they actually own only a small percentage of the land. T i t l e 29 of the Alaska Statutes requires boroughs to complete plans and deliver educational services (Gallagher 1987). Although much of the land within boroughs is managed by federal or state agencies, boroughs are responsible for taxation. In practice they act more as local government entities than as regional governments. 4.3. Canadian Institutions in ABCY Region There are five levels of government involved in the Canadian portion of the ABCY Region: federal, provincial, t e r r i t o r i a l , regional, and local. Large private sector corporations also wield strong influence in B.C. According to Morely, et a l . (1983, 275), the federal government, the provincial government and the major resource industries form a "complex triangular interaction". The BNA Act outlined the responsibilities the federal and provincial governments would have over the various resources. This act set the stage for an ongoing conflict between these two levels of government. During the years B.C. was lead by W.A.C. Bennett, the province was isolated geographically and p o l i t i c a l l y from the federal government. Bennett discouraged regular government contacts (Morely, et a l . 1983). Better relations between the two levels of government were fostered by the NDP government and by the present Socred government. B.C., however, s t i l l refuses to 97 participate in federal i n i t i a t i v e s such as Native claims negotiations and the Heritage Rivers system. "It has often been easier to resolve international than interprovincial problems" (Bruce and Quinn 1979, 4 ) . 4.3.1. Federal Government The federal government is responsible for most of the resources in the Yukon but has less influence in B.C. The major Canadian federal actors are discussed below. 4.3.1.1. Department of Indian and Northern Affairs (DINA) The Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development is responsible for this department as well as many aspects of administration of the Yukon and Northwest Territories. The department is responsible for resource development north o of 60 latitude. This agency also is responsible for Indian reserves and Native a f f a i r s in the t e r r i t o r i e s and B.C. 4.3.1.2. Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) The BNA legislation gave the federal government jurisdiction over the coastal and inland fishery resource. Federal o f f i c i a l s are responsible for maintaining habitat and regulating commercial fisheries. This agency was formerly called the Department of Environment (1970), and the Department of Fisheries and Environment (1972), and became DFO in 1977 (Dorcey 1986a). The Federal Fisheries Act was strengthened in 1970 and 1977. It gave DFO broad powers to protect fish habitat. Section 31 (c) states that 98 [n]o person shall carry on any work or undertaking that results in harmful alterations, disruption or destruction of fish habitat. The Pearse Royal Commission on Pacific Fisheries Policy (Pearse 1982) recommended that this provision remain intact even though i t received strong criticisms. Pearse recommended that fisheries authorities be more involved in planning for integrated resource management. 4.3.1.3. Environment Canada Environment Canada became a department in 1967. This agency is currently responsible for enforcing environmental protection laws, providing information about climatic conditions, protecting and managing migratory birds, and for completing research on environmental and land use matters. The Minister of Environment is responsible for a c t i v i t i e s of the Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office (FEARO). This agency was created by an order-in-counci1 in 1973 and oversees completion of federal environmental assessments. Parks Canada, another division of Environment Canada, manages three areas in the ABCY Region: Kluane, Chilkoot T r a i l , and the North Yukon National Parks. The agency has recommended establishment of a national park in the Stikine region but the B.C. government has been reluctant to provide lands for this purpose. 4.3.1.4. Department of External Affairs The Department of External Affairs becomes involved during formal federal level international negotiations. 99 Many federal and provincial agencies work through this department when they cooperate with the U.S. External Affairs Canada often works directly with the U.S. State Department. 4.3.2. B.C. Provincial Institutions B.C. has had only four different premiers in the last three decades yet the government structure has been reorganized many times. Between 1986 and 1988, agencies have been under three different organizational structures. After the 1986 reorganization, B.C.'s premier called for a "continual process of re-evaluation and reorganization" (Vander Zalm 1986, 2). Figure 4-3 illustrates the structure as of the July 1988 change. This most recent restructuring has resulted in a shuffling of existing ministries and the addition of regional ministries (B.C. 1988). A legislator may hold more than one t i t l e , being the minister of state for a region, minister responsible for a program or head a ministry. This overview of the B.C. government begins with a discussion of past structures and trends. It ends with an outline of a few selected ministries important in the ABCY Region. Several trends occurred in B.C. during the past few decades. Between 1952 and 1972, Premier W.A.C. Bennett led the province as leader of the Social Credit (Socred) party. He operated the government with a highly centralized power 100 Figure 4-3. Province of British Columbia Government Structure Minister of Regional Development Ministry of Attorney General Minister Responsible for Parks Minister Responsible for Environment Minister Responsible for Native Affairs Minister Responsible for Science and Technology Ministry of Agricult and Fisheries Ministry of Finance and Corporate Relations Ministry of Forests Ministry of Government Management Services Ministry of Health Ministry of Social Services and Housing Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Recreation and Culture Ministry of Labour and Consumer Services t r h r 1 Ministry of International Business1 and Immigration Source: Data from British Columbia 1988 101 base. The New Democratic Party (NDP) gained control of the province for a brief period between 1972-1975. During this time opportunities for public participation and decentrali-zation increased. Some of these reforms have been at least p a r t i a l l y retained by the Socred party since regaining control in 1975. Poor world resource markets have resulted in an era of retrenchment and many programs have been discontinued. Early on, individual resources were managed in isolation but a few institutions have been developed to provide more integration. A committee of cabinet ministers representing major resource departments was established in 1969 to resolve conflicts between resource agencies. Two years later, the passage of the Environment and Land Use Act formally established the Environment and Land Use Committee (ELUC). This committee had the power to overrule any act or regulation. The Environment and Land Use Committee Secretariat (ELUCS) was established in 1973 to share the high work load and foster interdepartmental coordination. ELUCS became a de facto central agency and "ranked as the New Democrat's major institutional response to the environmental movement" (Morely, et a l . 1983, 146). Two divisions were formed within the Secretariat. The Resource Planning Unit was responsible for preparation of resource plans while the Special Projects Unit coordinated major project planning and resource allocation (Crook 1976). This unit developed a review process for B.C. Hydro proposals. A committee of deputy ministers, the Environment Land Use 102 Technical Committee (ELUTC), was also formed to advise ELUC and direct the Regional Resource Management Committees (B.C. Environment and Land Use Committee 1982). It coordinated provincial resource planning programs and a c t i v i t i e s of local governments and Crown corporations. ELUTC is responsible for integrated land and resource use policy planning, pro-ject impact assessment, land use conflict resolution, and developing and implementing procedures for administering above (B.C. Ministry of Forests 1984b). Regional Resource Management Committees (RRMCs) were created to assist in interagency communication and conflict resolution. They assisted in forming regional resource policy statements and coordinating land use planning using a task force approach (Heayn 1977). The province was divided into seven resource management regions on the basis of Watersheds in 1975 (Aberley 1985). The ELUCS and RRMCs were abolished in January 1984 as part of the restraint program. Because ELUC and ELUTC deal solely with matters perceived to be of great importance, they are supplemented by other coordination measures. An example of a this may be found in the Cabinet Committee on Economic Development's investigation into development potential of Northwest B.C. A preliminary investigation resulted in the 1982 publication t i t l e d : The Northwest Region. Six committees studied the development potential of the region. The most common method for interagency coordination between ministries occurs through the referral process. Proposals for resource developments are circulated by the 103 responsible agency to other agencies that have a concern in the matter. A 30 day response period is usually provided. Day-to-day communication between agency staff members supplements the referral system. 4.3.2.1. Minister of Regional Development This new ministerial position was created to make recommendations about which services could be delivered on a regional basis. Other responsibilities include the review of funding sources for regional development and to make recommendations about the coordination of economic and environmental issues in an attempt to reach a consensus. 4.3.2.2. Minister Responsible for Parks At the beginning of this study parks were the responsibility of the Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housing. Parks then were transferred to the Ministry of Environment and Parks. The Minister Responsible for Parks administers park programs, outdoor recreation, ecological reserves and vi s i t o r services. Provincial parks in the ABCY Region include the Spatsizi Wilderness Park, the Gladys Lake Ecological Reserve and At l i n Provincial Park. 4.3.2.3. Minister Responsible for Environment Before the 1986 government reorganization the Ministry of Environment was a separate entity. It was then consolidated into the Ministry of Environment and Parks and responsible for a l l renewable resources other than salmon 104 and timber. The current minister manages water, air quality, wastes, recreational fisheries, and w i l d l i f e . Because these responsibilities are located on lands managed by other ministries, close coordination with other ministers is necessary. A strategic planning process was initiated in 1981 for the Ministry of Environment when the eight management regions were divided by watersheds into 40 resource management units. Separate strategic plans were created to establish policy direction. Strategic plans would be used in the bargaining process involving several resource agencies when preparing integrated land and resource plans for the Province (O'Riordan 1981, 19). These plans were created in an effort to determine resource demands, the capability of the environment to meet these demands, evaluation of options, establishment of targets, the development and execution of programs, and monitoring. 4.3.2.4. Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries This ministry is responsible for agriculture, aquaculture, and commercial fisheries. Its t i t l e survived the most recent organizational change. Prior to the 1986 reorganization agriculture was a responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food and fisheries were within the Ministry of Environment. 4.3.2.5. Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources The Ministry of Mines, Energy and Petroleum Resources (MEPR) manages the various resources liste d in its t i t l e . 105 It is responsible for forecasts, project analysis, evaluation, and energy policy development. This ministry is one of the few that have retained the same t i t l e since 1978. The main legislation directing this agency is the Minerals Act. Amendments to the act in 1973 and 1974 gave discretionary powers to the Minister to approve mining operations. These powers were revoked in a 1979 amendment which stated that the minister "shall issue a mining lease to a holder of a mineral claim" to those who apply. The Minerals Act is a powerful piece of legislation because i t takes precedence over a l l other acts other than the Environment and Land Use Act. 4.3.2.6. Ministry of Forests The Ministry of Forests (MOF) was s p l i t from the Ministry of Lands, Forests and Water Resources in 1976 to become a separate entity. It was given additional responsibilities in 1986 when i t was consolidated with the Lands Branch (formerly of the Ministry Lands, Parks and Housing). The 1988 reorganization again created a separate entity. The MOF is responsible for timber marketing, inventory, supply, forest protection and integrated resource management. The Stikine Provincial Forest is located within the Cassiar Timber Supply Area and is adjacent to Alaska. The d i s t r i c t office is based at Dease Lake. The Cassiar Forest Di s t r i c t is a subdivision of the Prince Rupert Forest 106 Region. Acts important for MOF p o l i c y guidance include the Mi n i s t r y of Forests Act, the Forest Act and the Range Act. Forest planning occurs on a v a r i e t y of d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s from p r o v i n c i a l to l o c a l resource use plans. Broad guidelines e x i s t for l o c a l plans but the d i s t r i c t manager has much d i s c r e t i o n . 4.3.2.7. Other P r o v i n c i a l M i n i s t r i e s Two other p r o v i n c i a l m i n i s t r i e s which operate in the ABCY Region w i l l be b r i e f l y discussed. The M i n i s t r y of Transportation and Highways i s responsible for highway cor r i d o r planning, a i r p o r t s and maintenance. It becomes involved in i n t e r n a t i o n a l transportation planning. The M i n i s t r y of Tourism i s responsible for in t e r n a t i o n a l tourism marketing. The minister i s also responsible for the P a c i f i c Rim I n s t i t u t e of Tourism and the P r o v i n c i a l Tourist Advisory Council. 4.3.2.8. Crown Corporations Two important Crown corporations involved i n the ABCY Region are B.C. Hydroelectric and Power Authority (B.C. Hydro) and B.C. Railway. They are e s s e n t i a l l y private corporations whose board i s responsible to the government. B.C. Hydro has eithe r authored or sponsored an impressive array of reports on the possible e f f e c t s of the Stikine h y d r o e l e c t r i c proposal. A l i s t of reports i s included in the reference section of t h i s paper. B.C. Railway is 107 responsible for development of r a i l transportation including the Dease Lake extension in northwest B.C. 4.3.3. Regional and Local Government Regional government in B.C. is represented by twenty-nine regional d i s t r i c t s . They were created in 1965 by an amendment to the Municipal Act. The Kitimat-Stikine Regional District and the Stikine Regional D i s t r i c t border Southeast Alaska. The Stikine Regional D i s t r i c t is the only one in the province without representation or an administra-tive staff. Regional d i s t r i c t s were originally directed to develop plans and control building in unorganized areas. Additional powers have been given to them resulting in "a dazzling array of 78 functions which range from pest control to economic development commissions" (Aberley 1985, 87). Regional d i s t r i c t s are composed of elected and appointed o f f i c i a l s . Voting rights are weighted according to the population that a member represents. The Technical Planning Committee provided a liaison between the regional d i s t r i c t s and other agencies. It was abolished in 1984 and the authority to produce plans was revoked. The regional government concept brought negative reactions from other ministries and the private sector. 4.3.4. Yukon Territory Institutions The Yukon Territory's constitution is based on the Yukon Act and the Government Organization Act. The Yukon 108 Act established the Commissioner and the Yukon Legislative Assembly. The Government Organization Act gave the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs (DINA) responsibility for governmental coordination (Canada External Affairs 1982). Prior to the introduction of party p o l i t i c s in 1978, the commissioner was the head of the executive committee. He vas responsible for administration of the territory and reported directly to DINA. Since 1978, more responsibility has been delegated to the territory. The government leader heads the Executive Council (Cabinet) and is also an elected member of the Yukon Legislative Assembly. This position is similar to the premier in other provinces except that in the t e r r i t o r i e s , the subnational government has fever resource 7 management responsibilities . After the f i r s t election along party lines in the Yukon, the Progressive Conservative party formed a majority government betveen 1978 and 1985. The Nev Democratic Party gained control in 1985 and vas returned to power in the 1989 election. There are sixteen ridings in the territory. A certain amount of f r i c t i o n between the federal and t e r r i t o r i a l governments exist. Tony Penikett, the present Government Leader, remarked in 1982 that the t e r r i t o r i a l legislature had l i t t l e information to work with because of The t e r r i t o r i a l government is responsible for wildlife management. 109 the lack of a strong freedom of information act (Alaska State Legislature 1982). A federal Access to Information Act vas passed in 1983 but some people s t i l l report problems. The Canadian Arctic Resources Committee (1988, 7) reports "that i t is sometimes easier to obtain information from Moscov" than from Ottava. Yukon's Government Leader has also pointed out that the YTG vas never consulted during the free trade negotiations (Penikett 1988). The Yukon government instituted a strategic planning process in 1986 called Yukon 2000. The creation of the Yukon Development Strategy occurred through a bottom-up process incorporating a considerable public involvement process. The process vas initiated in reaction to a dovnturn in the minerals sector which resulted in eliminating nearly forty percent of the economy (Dector 1988). The organizational structure for the Yukon Territory Government (YTG) is illustrated in Figure 4-4. The trend of devolution can be expected to gradually pass on more responsibilities on to the territory. Federal agencies such as DFO and DIAND s t i l l have a significant presence in northern Canada. A few of the major YTG departments w i l l be discussed below. 4.3.4.1. Department of Renewable Resources The department is responsible for wild l i f e resources in the Yukon. Most of the other resources are under federal jurisdiction but the Yukon is gaining more responsibilities. Figure 4-4. Yukon Territory Government Structure and Human Resources Source: Data from Yukon Territory 1989 I l l Fisheries are managed under the federal Fisheries Act but the Yukon government is responsible for enforcement, promotion, licensing, and monitoring harvest (Yukon Territory 1987). Transfer of the freshwater fishery to the YTG is currently under negotiation. Forestry is also a federal responsibility but i t is also to be transferred to the YTG. Neither federal or t e r r i t o r i a l legislation exists for forest management in the Yukon. 4.3.4.2. Department of Economic Development: Mines and Small Business This department has wide ranging responsibilities for economic concerns. Minerals provide the territory with most of i t s income from resources. A downturn in the minerals market during the early 1980s was responsible for a major recession in the Yukon. The YTG responded by negotiating a development agreement with the territory's largest private sector employer to reopen the mine in Faro (Penikett 1988). 4.3.4.3. Tourism Yukon This department is responsible for expanding tourism in the Yukon. Most of the current tourism t r a f f i c is from people travelling to Alaska over the highway. Even so, tourism accounts for over fifteen percent of the labor force (Yukon Territory 1988). 112 4.3.4.4. Department of Community and Transportation Services This department is responsible for assisting in the development of community infrastructure and transportation. The department also assists communities in the development of plans. 4.4. International Institutions in the ABCY Region Cooperation between Alaska and Canada occurs both through formal and informal channels. Formal cooperation has traditionally been obtained through high level negotiations leading to treaties or other written agreements. There has been a trend in the last two decades to deal on a more informal basis. Some kind of cooperation occurs through almost every possible link between the federal, state, provincial, t e r r i t o r i a l , regional, and local governments. Nongovernmental groups also interact with many of these agencies. 4.4.1. Federal Level Cooperation Bilateral negotiations concerning Canada originally occurred between the U.S. and Great Britain. Today, Canadian and U.S. federal o f f i c i a l s work together through contacts between their embassies, between the U.S. Department of State and External Affairs Canada, through negotiations of senior-level o f f i c i a l s , through the Canada-United States Interparliamentary Group, and through other special organizations. Rather than the federal 113 government acting as a single entity, i t s many different agencies provide cooperation through constellations of different actors (Svanson 1978). Cooperation between federal o f f i c i a l s in the ABCY Region occurs for a wide variety of topics. Boundary negotiations, national defense matters, international w i l d l i f e agreements, energy issues, and international trade concerns are addressed between the U.S. Department of State and External Affairs Canada. Some of the most formal institutions have been established for fish and wildli f e issues. Three fishery institutions include the Canada-U.S.-Japan North Pacific Fishery Management Council, the Canada-U.S. International Halibut Commission, and the Pacific Salmon Commission. The latter was created by the U.S.-Canadian Pacific Salmon Treaty of 1985. This institution provides an ongoing opportunity to negotiate agreements about salmon catch allocations. Once i n i t i a l quotas outlined by this treaty lapsed, the Pacific Salmon Commission vas unable to reach agreement on new quotas during the summer of 1987 (McAllister 1987). After one season without an agreement, The Commission agreed to raise the allowable catch for Canada and entered into a joint enhancement project. Problems in reaching other quotas continued during 1989. The International Porcupine Caribou Board is an institution set up in 1987 to advise the two nations about issues related to the caribou resource. The Porcupine Caribou herd is located in the northern part of the region. 114 The Canada-U.S. Interparliamentary Group is a multi-sector forum used to discuss topics of national interest. This group of elected Canadian and U.S. federal representatives have met annually since 1959. Twenty-four members of each legislature meet off-the-record to discuss issues. No votes are taken (Swanson 1978). They discuss issues ranging from specific border conflicts to U.S. foreign policy. The 1979 meeting occurred in Anchorage (U.S. Congress 1979). Informal meetings between senior-level federal o f f i c i a l s also occur. In January 1979 representatives of the Canadian Ministry of Environment and DINA met with Secretary of Interior Andrus to talk about possible U.S. Scenic River designations along the Alaska border (Bruce and Quinn 1979). The USDA Forest Service and the B.C. MOF occasionally meet and refer reports to each other. The Forest Service has also worked closely with B.C. Hydro about potential Stikine developments (Sheridan 1985). Cooperation also occurs between the federal level of one country and the subnational level of the other. An example of this occurred during the West Coast Oil and Gas Environmental Assessment Review Process (EARP). The Canadian Federal Assessment and Review Office (FEARO) met with the Governor of Alaska about possible cross border effects of the o i l exploration. State ADFG personnel also meet regularly with Canadian federal DFO employees. 115 4.4.2. Subnational Relations Different powers granted to states and provinces affect what kinds of agreements they may sign. Both countries, however, s t i l l have ambiguities concerning the extent sub-national jurisdictions may enter into agreements. The Canadian federal government is unable to legally bind provinces into some kinds of agreements with the U.S. (Canada Senate 1975). For instance, in respect to international relations, the uncertainty l i e s in determining how far the federal hand may reach into spheres that are otherwise provincial in order to carry out i t s international obligations (Thompson and Eddy 1973, 79). Canada received complete international powers from Great Britain in 1931. A court decision gave the federal government power for administering treaties before 1931 but it s powers to complete new treaties concerning resources managed by the provinces is less clear. Older treaties such as the Boundary Waters Treaty and Migratory Birds Convention are under federal jurisdiction (Canada Inquiry on Federal Water Policy 1985). "[P]rovinces retain jurisdiction over implementation of treaties in the f i e l d of their legislative competence1* (Leach, et a l . 1973, 471). The te r r i t o r i e s have less of an a b i l i t y to carry out international agreements. The states on the other hand, are prohibited from entering into treaties. Article 1, section 10 of the American constitution prohibits them from entering into agreements or compacts with other states or nations. The 74th and 88th sessions of the U.S. Congress stated that the 116 terms compact and agreement didn't apply to every kind of cooperative arrangement (Svanson 1978). According to Schechter, et a l . (1982, 47), states work out "a variety of meaningful working arrangements" with each other and foreign governments. One of the original drafts of Alaska's constitution contained a provision for cooperation with foreign nations in Article XII, Section 2. It was l e f t out of the f i n a l constitution because of fears of a negative reaction from Congress . According to Schechter et a l . (1982, 3) Alaska's "unique geohistorical position" could put i t in a leading role to expand states' jurisdiction in international cooperative efforts. The Canadian Senate's 1975 study on provincial-state relations categorized three kinds of cooperation: mini summits of leaders, administrative contact between government o f f i c i a l s and inter-legislative conferences. Swanson's 1974 study found that there were 766 interactions between states and provinces. Before this study, l i t t l e had been documented about subnational relations. A 1985 meeting of fifteen states and several provinces occurred to discuss acid rain. The National Governor's Association's U.S.-Canadian Task Force met in 1987 to discuss free trade and other issues (Cowper 1987). Alaska Legislative Resolve 79 (Alaska State Legislature 1988a) Resolutions have been introduced into the Alaska legislature to put this provision back into the state Constitution but they have not received much support. requested state participation in federal boundary negotiations. Topics for cooperation include attempts to arrive at compatible land use designations, cooperative economic development strategies, health and education programs, communications f a c i l i t i e s , transportation and u t i l i t y corridors, and fish and v i l d l i f e management. Mineral development, timber harvest, pover projects, and pipelines are just a fev kinds of developments that lead to cooperation. Trade, defense and navigation issues are also targets of cooperation. Information exchange is the most common form of cooperation because i t involves the smallest commitment. Reports are occasionally referred across the border. A simple form of information exchange occurs through day to day contact between on-the-ground managers. Government workers who have met during o f f i c i a l exchanges or during meetings of professional organizations sometimes share information through the mail or on the telephone. Topics for cooperation include sharing of regional planning strategies, public involvement, environmental mitigation, development proposals, educational programs, and economic issues. Joint planning occurs somewhat less often because parties must f i r s t agree on the topics to be discussed and the forum that w i l l be used. Before this level of cooperation occurs, participants must f i r s t be able to conceptualize a region larger than the area within their 118 jurisdictions. Approval by government leaders is often necessary. Joint planning normally begins with a simple exchange of information or identification of issues. It sometimes occurs in response to large development proposals Cooperative planning occurs between government leaders, senior level managers, corporate employees, and environmental group members. S t i l l another level of joint planning includes cooperation of subnational governments to pressure their national governments to reconsider trade policies. Joint programs are even less common than information exchange or joint planning because they require an agreemen to work together. Joint programs include such topics as reciprocal medical evacuation arrangements, joint in-state tuition relationships for universities, small-scale power 9 sales, education in isolated border towns , sharing of moto vehicle infraction information, tourism development programs, and joint f i r e fighting and pollution control arrangements. Cooperation in the ABCY Region on the state-provincial level has a relatively long history. Four important vehicles include: T r i l a t e r a l Heads-of-Government meetings (THOG), the Stikine-Iskut Rivers Information Exchange Committee, legislative exchanges, and informal contacts Hyder, Alaska uses Canadian currency and power and i t children are educated in Stewart, B.C. 119 between agency o f f i c i a l s . THOG meetings w i l l be discussed in-depth because they serve to il l u s t r a t e the dynamics of multi-level subnational cooperation in this region. 4.4.2.1. T r i l a t e r a l Heads-of-Government (THOG) The Alaska-B.C.-Yukon conferences between government leaders began in 1960. These meetings covered a multitude of topics including tourism development, Panhandle access, ferry routes, r a i l development, Pacific Rim trade potential, communications, and hydroelectric development. Before Alaska gained statehood status in 1958, international relations were primarily a federal responsibility. The f i r s t state legislature established the International Development Commission to plan for joint hydroelectric development of the upper Yukon, explore the po s s i b i l i t y of leasing Alaskan land to Canada and to seek cooperation in the development of mineral, power and forest resources along the border. The state initiated commission was composed of local, state and federal o f f i c i a l s . Governor Egan wrote the commissioner of the Yukon Territory and B.C.'s Premier Bennett soon after i t s establishment suggesting that the three leaders meet. The f i r s t THOG meeting occurred in Victoria during 1960. A joint technical committee on highways met in Victoria later that year. The next year a THOG meeting was held in Juneau. The Mannual M meetings were postponed until 1964 when the three leaders met in Whitehorse. An interim 120 power committee was formed at this meetings to explore hydroelectric p o s s i b i l i t i e s . The importance of personalities became evident early on. After the f i r s t meeting, Yukon Commissioner C o l l i n s wrote Egan about the second THOG meeting. If B.C. shies around too much there are many Yukon-Alaska problems of mutual concern which can be discussed without the presence of Bri t i s h Columbia and I think so far as the Yukon is concerned this is what we should do (I960, 1). The Commissioner may have been wary of B.C.*s expansionist motives. Premier Bennett wanted to annex the Yukon and the Mackenzie Valley portion of the Northwest Territories (Johannson 1975). A conflict between Alaska and B.C. arose after the third meeting. The U.S. Jones Act prohibited B.C. ferries from travelling between Alaskan ports. The press claimed Bennett had held a Prince Rupert ferry out of service for almost a year in order to force changes in the Jones A c t 1 0 . Governor Hickel, Alaska's new leader, and Premier W.A.C. Bennett exchanged comments through the press, refusing to speak directly to one another. Governor Hickel declared that relations with B.C. had reached an all-time low (The Sun 1969) . During this period the southern terminus of the Alaska Marine Highway was Prince Rupert. Poor road conditions made the B.C. Ferry routes to Vancouver Island an essential link. 121 THOG meetings were terminated for more than a decade as a result of the conflict between the two leaders. A 1969 letter from Governor Miller inviting Bennett to v i s i t Alaska did not manage to improve relations. Governor Egan sent a telegram to Bennett in 1972 during Egan's second term in another unproductive attempt to mend the relationship. Soon after this, Bennett refused to grant a right-of-way on the B.C. portion of the proposed Carcross-Skagway road. In 1972 Premier W.A.C. Bennett's two decade term ended when the New Democratic Party took control of the B.C. government. Barrett met with Egan and Commissioner Smith of the Yukon in November 1972 to sign an agreement permitting the right-of-way for the Skagway-Carcross Road (now called the Klondike Highway). Bennett told the press i t was a "giveaway." Governor Egan wrote Barrett soon after the meeting offering B.C. free communication with Alaskan author i t i e s . {Ylou, your staff and Ministers who head your various segments of government are free to phone or otherwise contact any of the Commissioners of the principal departments of State of Alaska government or to communicate in any other way with our public servants that is deemed advisable (Egan 1972, 1). This marked a new foundation for cooperation. Premier Barrett, however, was wary of U.S. intentions. He was discouraged by the proposal to increase flooding of the Skagit Valley and had misgivings over the Columbia River Treaty and Alaska's choice for an all-Alaskan pipeline (Johannson 1975). Barrett's short term ended in 1975 when 122 Premier B i l l Bennett (son of the former Premier) gained leadership of B.C. Eight o f f i c i a l s from the Yukon visited Alaskan Governor Hammond in 1975. The meeting resulted in a proposal for a joint economic planning council. The idea was expanded to include topics such as transportation, environment, wi l d l i f e , law enforcement, and to include B.C. By the end of the year, the Alaska-B.C.-Yukon Coordinating Committee (1976) was formed to exchange information and to identify common problems. Governor Hammond's administration took the t r i p a r t i t e relationship seriously. By December 1976 the f i r s t revived THOG meeting was held in Victoria. Briefs from senior government o f f i c i a l s and private citizens were reflected in Hammond's presentations. Yukon's Commissioner A.M. Pearson (1976, 1) described the "Northwest corner of North America . . . as a compact economic unit with dynamic potential for economic development". In a news release about the meeting, Alaska's governor outlined the purpose of the relationship. Despite the fact that boundaries place us into three separate governments, our citizens have much in common. Since i t is clear the action of one government can impact another, we are a l l better served by exploring mutual experiences (Hammond 1976, 1). The meetings were revived in a somewhat different format than in the 1960s. They were held informally with the three leaders and minimal staff support. Public observers and the large contingent of federal and state government employees characteristic of the 1960s meetings were absent. The newly 123 formed coordinating committee, however, provided a forum for state government o f f i c i a l s to communicate. The next THOG meeting was held in Whitehorse in January 1978. Later that spring, the three leaders met in Anchorage during the Alaska-Canada Rail Congress. The 1979 THOG meeting was held in Victoria. Four more THOG meetings were held between 1981 and 1984. After a four year hiatus, the next meeting was held in Fairbanks, Alaska. These meetings have received varying degrees of interest. During the 1980s, there hasn't been a strong commitment to meet on a regular basis. 4.4.2.2. Stikine-Iskut Rivers Information Exchange Committee During the early stages of the B.C. Hydro Stikine-Iskut proposal, the Alaskan State government became concerned about possible downstream effects of the dams. After a year of negotiations between Governor Hammond and Premier Bennett, the Stikine-Iskut Rivers Information Exchange arrangement was signed in 1982. This state-provincial committee was composed of six representatives. The agreement required annual reports and provided opportunities for information exchange for socioeconomic and environmental issues in an attempt to minimize overlap of studies. A memorandum of understanding between U.S. federal and state agencies directed them to share information about the project. After the proposal was postponed, the need for this institution ended. 124 4.4.2.3. Legislative Exchanges Legislative exchanges have occurred between Alaska, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon. The Yukon and Alaskan legislative delegations have met each year since 1982 in either Juneau or Whitehorse. The meetings are usually informal with presentations given to various committees followed by a question and answer period. A major topic during the meetings of the late 1980s was the proposed development of the core calving ground of the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). References to Canada in Alaska legislative committee meetings have increased dramatically. During the sixteenth Legislature (1987-1988) more references were made to Canada than during the prior two legislatures (1982-1986). 4.4.3. Local and Regional Cooperation L i t t l e cooperation occurs on the local and regional level. A letter from the Regional District of Kitimat-Stikine in 1971 to Alaska Governor Egan promoted more exchange but not much came of this. The one exception of cooperation on this level is an effort between the c i t i e s of Juneau and Whitehorse. This local government i n i t i a t i v e has resulted in discussion on many issues of concern to the ABCY Region as a whole. In Skagway, Yukon residents attended a municipal meeting about commercial use of the Klondike Highway (Hamme 1987). 125 4.4.4. Non-governmental Cooperation Relations between Canada and the U.S. occur on more of a non-governmental level than in most other b i l a t e r a l relations. Labor and trade organizations, multinational corporations, citizen groups, s c i e n t i f i c and professional organizations, academic institutions, and the media connect citizens of both countries (Carroll 1983). The influence of labor, trade organizations and multinationals should not be underestimated. Canada and the U.S. are each others major trading partners. Canadian subsidiaries of U.S. based corporations are involved in many fie l d s . Nongovernmental actors "use personnel, funds, research, and propaganda media to obtain favorable domestic Canadian or IJC decisions" (LeMarquand and Scott 1976, 160). The role of U.S. and Canadian corporations is growing (Carroll 1983). The Canadian-American Committee was formed in 1957 to study economic factors which influence the relationship. The committee is represented by the National Planning Association of the U.S. and the CD. Howe Institute of Canada. The chamber of commerces also work together. At the national level, the Canada-United States Relations Committee has been in existence since 1933. Two meetings each year deal with economic and environmental issues. At the local level, during the 1970s, the chamber of commerces had a joint organization known as the Northwest B.C. Chamber of Commerce and Alaskan A f f i l i a t e s (1974). The meetings have 126 resulted in resolutions being sent to government o f f i c i a l s about the Cassiar-Stewart road connection through the Stikine River basin. The joint chamber organization has dissolved but there is some interest in reviving i t (Kitimat Chamber of Commerce 1987). Universities also play a role in aiding cooperation. The University of Alaska's Anchorage branch has a Canadian Studies program. Nationwide, the U.S. Association for Canadian Studies encourages the study of Canadian a f f a i r s . Environmental coalitions generally have a small role in bila t e r a l relations but do have influence in site specific issues (Carroll 1983). Canadian interest groups have also t e s t i f i e d before a tribunal about the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. Another coalition of private environmental groups focussed on the Stikine River basin. In 1985, environmental groups from Southeast Alaska, B.C. and the Yukon met in Telegraph Creek with Canadian national and B.C. governmental o f f i c i a l s to discuss future plans for the watershed. Sports events are another way that people of both nations work together. The Arctic Winter Games involve people of the circumpolar nations. People from Whitehorse and Juneau also compete regularly in S o f t b a l l and hockey tournaments. A yearly relay race from Skagway to Whitehorse also involves teams from both nations. Cooperation between Native people in the region is substantial. People cooperate informally between friends and through more formal channels. Former Tanana Chiefs 127 President Spud Williams explained how Native people cooperate. We don't care about borders, they are false lines. The state cannot manage across state lines, but ve can; ve have brothers and sisters on the other side of the border (North Slope Borough 1984). The Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC) provides a structured forum for people of the North to cooperate (Lauritzen 1983). This private i n i t i a t i v e of northern Native people meet regularly to discuss issues common to the arctic region. The ICC contracted vith Justice Thomas Berger during 1983 to reviev the effectiveness of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (Berger 1985). This private i n i t i a t i v e drev upon the experience Justice Berger gained through his Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry. Litigation is one of the fev alternatives for private organizations or individuals to seek redress vhen cooperation f a i l s . According to Carroll (1983) a demand exists for cross border l i t i g a t i o n but the institutions are slov in evolving. The American Bar Association-Canadian Bar Association has called for equal access to courts. Utton (1973) echoed this recommendation. The Boundary Waters Treaty (Article II) states that in l i t i g a t i o n due to injuries resulting from vater diversions, the courts of the upstream country must give the same access to inhabitants from the dovnstream country as i f the injury occurred in the same place as the diversion. Attempts by U.S. citizens to recover damages in Canada vould probably f a i l , hovever, because Canadian courts vould hold that they lack pover to 128 hear such cases (Carroll 1983). Specific ramifications of international environmental l i t i g a t i o n between private parties of Canada and the U.S. are uncertain. There are few cases to use as precedent and the situation is complicated because each nation is a federation with both federal and subnational courts. McCaffrey (1973) suspects that under optimal conditions, i t would be possible for transboundary pollution victims to find r e l i e f but many obstacles would have to be overcome. 4.5. Summary International cooperation between the Yukon, Alaska and B.C. occurs through many different channels. The primary actors in the region are federal, state, provincial, t e r r i t o r i a l , and local authorities. Relations become even more complex when agencies have central, regional and local offices. The federal governments have had a major presence in Alaska and the Yukon while the provincial government manages most of the resources in B.C. International institutions have evolved for a myriad of individual issues yet few are capable of multi-sector review. Three notable exceptions to this situation are the Trilateral-Heads-of-Government (THOG) meetings, legislative exchanges and on the local level, meetings between the c i t i e s of Juneau and Whitehorse. Private cooperation is expressed through chambers of commerces, tourism alliances, environmental groups, professional organizations, cultural exchanges, and corporations. 129 Although mechanisms exist for international communication, i t should be noted that in general, the boundary between the two countries reflects separate management and planning philosophies. Different approaches to planning and management occur without much integration. Cooperation between the countries occurs on an issue related basis rather than through an overall proactive planning effort. The next chapter w i l l provide a more detailed critique of the relations in the ABCY Region. 130 Chapter 5 CRITIQUE OF INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN THE ABCY REGION 5.1 Introduction A critique of international cooperation in the ABCY Region w i l l be evaluated in this chapter against five c r i t e r i a . These c r i t e r i a were chosen to determine i f existing institutions are sufficient to address present or l i k e l y future issues. These questions w i l l be applied to five important land use issue areas: fish and wi l d l i f e , wildlands and tourism, energy and minerals, transportation, and forestry. Four other issue areas not direc t l y related to land use w i l l be b r i e f l y discussed. At the end of the chapter, the overall condition of the international relationship in the ABCY Region v i l l be summarized. The primary purpose of this critique is not to point out vhat the governments have not done. Instead, i t is hoped that i t v i l l provide insight to the dynamics of transborder cooperation and opportunities available for future cooperative efforts. Both countries are s t i l l struggling to solve major enigmas common to northern 131 resource areas. Booms and busts plague the economies. The rural-urban s p l i t persists; rural regions import much of their finished goods while exporting raw materials. Striking a balance between development and preservation s t i l l provides one of the most challenging tasks for politic i a n s , planners and managers. When these dilemmas have not been solved w i t h i n each country, one could hardly expect i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i o n to meet Utopian ideals. When i t does occur, the sharing of information between different jurisdictions at least points out that there are different approaches to similar problems. If cooperation does nothing else, i t can promote a multiple perspective outlook. The boundary between Alaska and Canada acts as more of a conceptual delineation between the two countries than as a separation between natural regions. Although in the southern portion of the region i t separates the dry Interior from the wet Coast, river basins provide a connection between the two natural regions. The boundary, however, makes i t easier to ignore these natural connections. Issues common to both countries are often treated intra-nationally rather than with cross border dialogue. Across much of i t s breadth the boundary currently has l i t t l e meaning. For the near future, the land is l i k e l y to remain rock, ice and tundra. Transboundary conflicts can be expected to increase as the region is further developed. 132 5.2 Criteri a for Evaluation of Cooperation The international cooperative effort along the Alaska-Canada border v i l l be evaluated by posing five questions (Table 5-1). These c r i t e r i a vere chosen to evaluate the process of cooperation rather than the merit of the outcomes of the decision-making processes. The c r i t e r i a have been tailored to objectively evaluate the current status of bi l a t e r a l relations in the region. By using more subjective evaluative c r i t e r i a , conclusions vould be based more on the author's biases and vould be d i f f i c u l t to defend. The f i r s t question addresses the sufficiency of opportunities for information exchange. Are there regular meetings between the different agencies concerned with the particular issue? While regular meetings w i l l not necessarily lead to joint benefits, they at least expand the po s s i b i l i t i e s for identifying opportunities for joint gains. Regular meetings can lead to the identification of future Issues. Information sharing can result in a reduction in duplication of effort by identifying opportunities for joint planning and joint programs. Comparing the results of one management approach to another may also provide new ideas of how to approach similar problems faced by northern people. Are there opportunities for input in the other country's planning process? Most often each country plans 133 Table 5-1. Five Questions Used to Evaluate Cooperation in the ABCY Region Question 1: Are there regular meetings between people of both countries concerned with the issue? Question 2: Are there opportunities for consultation by one jurisdiction in another's planning process? Question 3: Are opportunities for joint planning taken advantage of? Question 4: Have decision making processes led to compatible land-use designations? Question 5: Has cooperation led to joint programs? for i t s own resources without seeking input from the other nation. This question explores the opportunities for consultation across the border through meetings, telephone c a l l s , or correspondence. Are opportunities for joint planning taken advantage of? Joint planning is defined as interactions where representatives from both countries work together to identify similar goals and possible alternatives. Joint planning infers that there is some action greater than information exchange. There is a reaching out to determine how the resources of the region could be managed. Have cooperative processes led to a consideration of compatible land use designations along the border? This question w i l l explore i f land use designations were influenced by international cooperation. While a jurisdiction may choose a land use that is not compatible with an adjoining area, failure to at least consider designations across the border may close the door to future 134 opportunities. Bothe (1979) found that incompatible land use can provide a major obstacle to cooperation. Many designations are mutually exclusive and w i l l permanently affect options for future land use. Has cooperation led to joint programs? Joint programs are defined as instances where both nations agree to undertake projects together. This action may either be in the form of joint research or other a c t i v i t i e s . Joint research occurs when the countries work together in the gathering or analyzing of data. Other joint programs include joint resource development or enhancement, joint training programs, and the creation of international decision-making bodies. Joint programs represent the highest form of cooperation. 5.3. Evaluation of International Cooperation The five questions outlined above w i l l be applied to cooperation in issue areas. For the purpose of this critique the issues have been separated into nine areas (Table 5-2). For a more detailed background about these issues, refer to Chapter 2. Although these issue areas are discussed separately, they may in practice be closely associated with one another (e.g., caribou and ANWR o i l exploration, Stikine wilderness and hydroelectric power, minerals and transportation corridors, or fisheries and the southern maritime border). Some non-land use issues to be b r i e f l y discussed without applying a l l of the c r i t e r i a include: health, education, boundary negotiations, and 135 T a b l e 5-2. Major Issue Areas i n the ABCY Region 1. F i s h and W i l d l i f e Issues 2. W i l d l a n d and Tourism Issues 3. Energy and M i n e r a l Issues 4. T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Issues 5. F o r e s t r y Issues 6. H e a l t h Issues 7. E d u c a t i o n Issues 8. A r c t i c S o v e r e i g n t y and Maritime Borders 9. Trade Issues t r a d e . These t o p i c s may not appear to be d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to transboundary environment and land use i s s u e s but w i l l be addressed here f o r two re a s o n s . F i r s t , d u r i n g m u l t i - s e c t o r forums, such as the T r i l a t e r a l Heads of Government meetings and l e g i s l a t i v e exchanges, a l l of these i s s u e s may be d i s c u s s e d d u r i n g the same meeting. Second, these i s s u e s o f t e n a re i n t e r c o n n e c t e d . For example, the h e a l t h of the r e g i o n ' s people may be d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by transboundary developments. The c o n t e n t i o n over maritime borders are r e l a t e d t o f i s h and petroleum i s s u e s . Trade between the two c o u n t r i e s may i n c l u d e e x p o r t of r e s o u r c e s . F i n a l l y , e d u c a t i o n agreements may i n v o l v e d i s c u s s i o n s about any of the other i s s u e s . 136 5.3.1. F i s h and W i l d l i f e Issues F i s h and w i l d l i f e concerns have l e d to the most i n t r i c a t e i n t e r n a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t i o n s i n the ABCY Region. The f i s h e r y r e s o u r c e , e s p e c i a l l y i t s a l l o c a t i o n , has l e d to n a t i o n a l i s t i c f e e l i n g s on both s i d e s of .the b o r d e r . P o s s i b l e e f f e c t s on the Porcupine c a r i b o u herd from o i l and gas e x p l o r a t i o n i n the A r c t i c N a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e Refuge (ANWR) i s another emotion r i d d e n i s s u e . The f e d e r a l governments, t h e i r s u b n a t i o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s and p r i v a t e o r g a n i z a t i o n s have a l l become i n v o l v e d i n f i s h and w i l d l i f e i s s u e s . 5.3.1.1. Forum f o r Regular Meetings Meetings between the two c o u n t r i e s c o n c e r n i n g salmon occur o f t e n . Each October, the P a c i f i c Salmon Commission (Canada-U.S.) meets to determine i s s u e s t h a t w i l l be n e g o t i a t e d d u r i n g t h a t y e a r . The Commission, c r e a t e d i n 1985, i s composed of four Canadians and four Americans. A d d i t i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s are appointed to p a n e l s . These panels meet to e x p l o r e i s s u e s o u t l i n e d i n the October meeting. The Northern Panel i s concerned w i t h i s s u e s a s s o c i a t e d with the B.C.-Southeast A l a s k a r e g i o n . I t i s composed of t e n members, f i v e from each c o u n t r y . The Commission meets to monitor the work of the p a n e l s . Panel recommendations are then accepted or r e j e c t e d a t the F e b r u a r y meeting. The I n t e r n a t i o n a l H a l i b u t Commission (Canada-U.S.) i s another b i l a t e r a l i n s t i t u t i o n concerned 137 with f i s h e r y management. The North P a c i f i c F i s h e r y Management C o u n c i l (Canada-Japan-U.S.) a l s o meets once each year t o n e g o t i a t e i n t e r c e p t i o n of salmon i n the high s e a s . The k i n g salmon f i s h e r y of the Yukon R i v e r has been the t o p i c of meetings between o f f i c i a l s of the two governments. There i s no r e g u l a r forum f o r n e g o t i a t i n g t h i s i s s u e but four meetings have o c c u r r e d i n the past few years between A l a s k a and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y . C o o p e r a t i o n between the Department of F i s h e r i e s and Oceans and the A l a s k a Department of F i s h and Game (ADFG) a l s o o c c u r s . During 1987, A l a s k a became i n t e r e s t e d i n the Canadian m o d e l l i n g p r o c e s s f o r f o r e c a s t i n g salmon p o p u l a t i o n s g i v e n c e r t a i n management and enhancement o p t i o n s . ADFG c o n t a c t e d the Department of F i s h e r i e s and Oceans t o l e a r n more about t h e i r f o r e c a s t i n g system (A l a s k a Department of F i s h and Game 1987). Concerns over management of the Porcupine c a r i b o u herd have a l s o l e d to r e g u l a r meetings. The 1987 j o i n t U.S.-Canadian Agreement c o n c e r n i n g the c a r i b o u herd c r e a t e d the I n t e r n a t i o n a l Porcupine C a r i b o u Board. The board was preceded by a 1982 N a t i v e i n i t i a t i v e c a l l e d the I n t e r n a t i o n a l Porcupine C a r i b o u Commission. The e i g h t member a d v i s o r y board hadn't met y e t a t the time t h i s t h e s i s was completed*. E a r l y n e g o t i a t i o n s f o r the t r e a t y were The f i r s t meeting was scheduled f o r January 1989 but the American d e l e g a t i o n f a i l e d to show up ( K a s s i 1989). 138 completed by the C a r t e r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . During the be g i n n i n g of the Reagan a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , n e g o t i a t i o n s vere g i v e n l e s s p r i o r i t y ( S c h e c h t e r , e t a l . 1982). There vas a l s o a p e r c e p t i o n , hovever, t h a t the f e d e r a l governments used t h e i r i n f l u e n c e t o s t o p s u b n a t i o n a l n e g o t i a t i o n s (North -Slope Borough 1984). Other o f f i c i a l s from the Yukon and A l a s k a meet about game i s s u e s . B i o l o g i s t s d i s c u s s i s s u e s c o n c e r n i n g c a r i b o u a n n u a l l y i n e i t h e r Whitehorse or F a i r b a n k s . The D i r e c t o r of Game f o r the A l a s k a Department of F i s h and Game (ADFG) and Yukon's M i n i s t e r f o r Renevable Resources meet o c c a s i o n a l l y a t i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o n f e r e n c e s . Annual l e g i s l a t i v e exchanges between the Yukon T e r r i t o r y and A l a s k a have a l s o i n c l u d e d d i s c u s s i o n s about the r e g i o n ' s f i s h and v i l d l i f e . 5.3.1.2. O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r C o n s u l t a t i o n Although o p p o r t u n i t i e s e x i s t f o r c o n s u l t a t i o n about f i s h and v i l d l i f e i s s u e s , c o n f l i c t s do a r i s e . Some Canadians f e l t t h a t they were not a f f o r d e d enough c o n s u l t a t i o n p r i o r t o the issuance of the d r a f t e n v ironmental impact statement f o r ANWR. U.S. Senator Murkowski (1988) s t a t e d t h a t S e c r e t a r y of the I n t e r i o r Hodel was " j u s t i f i a b l y o u traged" because Canada had been g i v e n the same o p p o r t u n i t y t o respond t o the d r a f t as any U.S. c i t i z e n . The sen a t o r p o i n t e d out t h a t "No s t a t u t e r e q u i r e s t h a t our (U.S.] government c o n s u l t with the Canadians p r i o r to the b e g i n n i n g of the p u b l i c comment p r o c e s s " (Murkowski 139 1988, 6). The senator stated that Canada created the North Yukon National Park because o i l and gas exploration didn't lead to the discovery of major o i l f i e l d s . During February of 1988, the Yukon T e r r i t o r i a l government mounted a media campaign to discourage the opening of ANWR to o i l and gas development (Livingstone 1988). The federal government helped distribute publications through the Canadian Embassy in Washington D.C. and consulates in twelve other c i t i e s . Assistant Deputy Minister of the Yukon Executive Council Office, William Oppen (1988), spoke of "the lack of attention paid to transboundary concerns" in U.S. proposals, especially ANWR. The Canadian Parliament's Standing Committee on Energy, Mines and Resources, however, recommended an o i l and gas corridor from ANWR across the Mackenzie Valley (Canadian Arctic Resources Committee 1988). As far as fisheries issues are concerned, there are many opportunities for consultation through meetings held by the various fisheries commissions. Although a framework for consultation exists, each country may take as much of the fish as they please i f no agreements are in force. Unless s p e c i f i c a l l y negotiated, there are no requirements to consult about fishery harvests. Where joint management bodies, such as the Pacific Salmon Commission, negotiate allocation close cooperation is almost assured. Consultation about other projects which potentially could affect the fish and wildl i f e resources may or may not occur. Major projects would l i k e l y lead to consultation. An example of this is the agreement between Alaska and B.C. 140 that led to the creation of the Stikine-Iskut Information Exchange Committee. At the national l e v e l , the NEPA l e g i s l a t i o n requires the U.S. government to consult with foreign governments should major federal actions a f f e c t them. Most smaller projects proceed without a mandate for consultation. 5.3.1.3. Jo i n t Planning Joint planning for f i s h and w i l d l i f e issues occurs occ a s i o n a l l y . Before the Canada-U.S. Salmon Treaty and the Porcupine Caribou agreement, ADFG often met with Canadian o f f i c i a l s . It met with both the Yukon M i n i s t r y of Renewable Resources and the Federal Department of F i s h e r i e s and Oceans. Meetings included discussions about possible management options open to t h e i r respective decision-makers. Jo i n t planning also occurs in the i n t e r n a t i o n a l f i s h e r i e s commissions. These bodies plan for the enhancement, protection and a l l o c a t i o n of f i s h . They w i l l be discussed i n more d e t a i l below under j o i n t programs. 5.3.1.4. Compatible Land Use Designations ANWR and the North Yukon National Park are an example of incompatible land use designations. While much of the caribou range on either side of the border i s somewhat protected, the designations are not completely compatible. Canada closed o i l and gas exploration on i t s side of the border with the creation of the national park. The debate about permitting exploration in ANWR was in progress at the 141 t i m e t h i s was w r i t t e n . I n t e r n a t i o n a l n e g o t i a t i o n s h a v e n o t y e t b e e n s u c c e s s f u l i n r e s o l v i n g t h e c a r i b o u i s s u e . The S e n a t e o f t h e A l a s k a S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e r e s p o n d e d t o o p p o s i t i o n t o o p e n i n g ANWR t o e x p l o r a t i o n b y p a s s i n g S e n a t e R e s o l v e 9 . T h i s r e s o l u t i o n c o n g r a t u l a t e d t h e C a n a d i a n s on t h e i r s u c c e s s i n d e v e l o p i n g t h e o i l a n d g a s r e s o u r c e s ( A l a s k a S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e 1 9 8 7 a ) . W h i l e on t h e s u r f a c e , t h e r e s o l u t i o n a p p e a r e d t o be c o n g r a t u l a t o r y , i t c a n be i n t e r p r e t e d a s a s a r c a s t i c m e s s a g e t o j u s t i f y o i l a n d g a s e x p l o r a t i o n i n ANWR. 5 . 3 . 1 . 5 . J o i n t P r o g r a m s J o i n t w i l d l i f e p r o g r a m s b e t w e e n C a n a d a a n d t h e U . S . b e g a n a s e a r l y a s 1939 when a c o o p e r a t i v e b o r d e r p a t r o l was i n s t i t u t e d t o e n f o r c e game v i o l a t i o n s ( W h i t e a n d R h o d e 1 9 3 9 ) . T h e p r o g r a m was i n s t i t u t e d b y two w i l d l i f e a g e n t s o f t h e U . S . F i s h a n d W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e (FWS) a n d t h e R . C . M . P . T h i s s e t t h e s t a g e f o r a c o o p e r a t i v e e f f o r t w h i c h c o n t i n u e s t o d a y w h e r e FWS p e r s o n n e l c o o p e r a t e w i t h C a n a d a t o c o m p l e t e w i l d l i f e s u r v e y s . The f i s h e r i e s t r e a t i e s s e t t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r j o i n t m a n a g e m e n t . T h e P a c i f i c S a l m o n C o m m i s s i o n n e g o t i a t e s a l l o c a t i o n o f t h e f i s h e r y a s w e l l a s e n h a n c e m e n t p r o j e c t s . S i n c e e a c h c o u n t r y h a s o n l y one v o t e , a n y d e c i s i o n r e a c h e d b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n m u s t be u n a n i m o u s . T h e c o m m i s s i o n a g r e e d i n 1988 t o c o o p e r a t e i n a j o i n t s a l m o n e n h a n c e m e n t p r o j e c t . E g g s t a k e n f r o m t h e C a n a d i a n p o r t i o n o f t h e w a t e r s h e d a r e r e a r e d i n A l a s k a n h a t c h e r i e s a n d r e t u r n e d t o t h e T a k u a n d 142 Stikine Rivers. There i s also a j o i n t research project in the Kluane-Glacier Bay area (Tobin 1988). Another instance of cooperation occurred in 1982 when the Alaska Department of F i s h and Game transferred $50,000 to the Yukon T e r r i t o r y ' s Department of Renewable Resources for caribou studies (North Slope Borough 1982). The agreement concerning the Porcupine caribou also may be considered a j o i n t program. Although the board acts only in an advisory capacity, the i n s t i t u t i o n i s a j o i n t body recognized by both countries. Board members may obtain input from management agencies, l o c a l communities and researchers. B i o l o g i s t s from the Yukon and Alaska cooperate in j o i n t research e f f o r t s . They complete winter surveys, inventory and monitoring of the caribou herds. 5.3.2. Wildland and Tourism Issues Wildland and tourism issues are often intertwined with other resource issues. As wild areas are a l t e r e d by resource development, there i s a perception that wilderness values and thus tourism d o l l a r s w i l l be e f f e c t e d . Wildland and tourism issues include both creation of protective designations as well as a c t i v e l y marketing the area to a t t r a c t v i s i t o r s . These two issues have been lumped together with the understanding that some kinds of tourism developments might be incompatible with wilderness designations. 143 5.3.2.1. Forum f o r Regular Meetings Meetings occur between both p r i v a t e and p u b l i c s e c t o r groups c o n c e r n i n g w i l d e r n e s s and t o u r i s m i s s u e s . Government r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s work t o g e t h e r t o j o i n t l y promote t o u r i s m . The Yukon and A l a s k a t o u r i s m departments have met r e g u l a r l y s i n c e the l a t e 1970s t o c r e a t e an annual j o i n t b r o chure. Some p r i v a t e i n t e r n a t i o n a l groups a l s o work towards j o i n t g a i n s . Managers of the K l o n d i k e Gold Rush H i s t o r i c Park and the C h i l k o o t N a t i o n a l Park meet a n n u a l l y . Other p r i v a t e groups have worked t o g e t h e r a c r o s s the border to p r e s e r v e w i l d e r n e s s q u a l i t i e s . Although s p o r a d i c meetings do occur, t h e r e are few forums f o r r e g u l a r i n t e r c h a n g e c o n c e r n i n g w i l d e r n e s s and t o u r i s m i s s u e s . 5.3.2.2. O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r C o n s u l t a t i o n Most w i l d e r n e s s or park d e s i g n a t i o n s are made without c o n s u l t a t i o n a c r o s s the border. C o n s u l t a t i o n has o c c u r r e d i n some s p e c i f i c i n s t a n c e s . During land use d i s c u s s i o n s about the area i n A l a s k a s u r r o u n d i n g Kluane N a t i o n a l Park, Canadian o f f i c i a l s recommended the d e s i g n a t i o n of the Wr a n g e l l - S t . E l i a s N a t i o n a l Park. During C o n g r e s s i o n a l o v e r s i g h t h e a r i n g s about A l a s k a , however, USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e o f f i c i a l s expressed r e l u c t a n c e to encourage w i l d e r n e s s d e s i g n a t i o n s on the Canadian s i d e of the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n (U.S. Congress 1984). I t was noted t h a t the F o r e s t S e r v i c e does express concerns about a c t i v i t i e s t h a t might a f f e c t the w i l d e r n e s s q u a l i t y on the 144 U.S. s i d e of the border. During the B.C. W i l d e r n e s s A d v i s o r y Committee meetings, few Americans submitted comments to the Committee. Elsewhere i n the p r o v i n c e , U.S. environmental groups e x e r t e d p r e s s u r e to d e s i g n a t e South Moresby I s l a n d as a n a t i o n a l park. 5.3.2.3. J o i n t P l a n n i n g J o i n t p l a n n i n g i n t o u r i s m and w i l d l a n d i s s u e s occurs o c c a s i o n a l l y but not to a g r e a t e x t e n t . The K l o n d i k e Gold Rush N a t i o n a l H i s t o r i c Park i s an example of a j o i n t p l a n n i n g e f f o r t . T h i s i n t e r n a t i o n a l park r e t r a c e s the s t e p s of miners d u r i n g the K l o n d i k e g o l d r u s h . During e a r l y THOG meetings, the t h r e e l e a d e r s d i s c u s s e d r e f u r b i s h i n g the t r a i l . P r i v a t e environmental groups have a l s o i n i t i a t e d j o i n t p l a n n i n g endeavors. One of the few e f f o r t s to p r o v i d e an o v e r a l l view of the S t i k i n e watershed was spearheaded by environmental groups. Although t h e i r p e r s p e c t i v e was somewhat p a r o c h i a l , i n May 1985 four environmental groups from B.C., A l a s k a and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y met i n T e l e g r a p h Creek to d i s c u s s the f u t u r e of the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n . R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l a g e n c i e s attended t h i s p r i v a t e l y sponsored c o n v e n t i o n as w e l l as the A s s o c i a t i o n of U n i t e d T a h l t a n s . A c o n f e r e n c e r e s o l u t i o n recommended management of the S t i k i n e as a s i n g l e e c o l o g i c a l u n i t ( F r i e n d s of the S t i k i n e 1985a). 145 5.3.2.4. Compatible Land Use D e s i g n a t i o n s For the most p a r t Canada and A l a s k a have used s e p a r a t e p r o c e s s e s t o a l l o c a t e p r o t e c t i v e s t a t u s t o w i l d l a n d s . F i g u r e 5-1 i l l u s t r a t e s where these d e s i g n a t i o n s o c c u r . P r i o r t o e s t a b l i s h m e n t of w i l d e r n e s s d e s i g n a t i o n s i n A l a s k a , a b r i e f i n g paper submitted t o Governor Hammond f o r the 1976 THOG meeting c o n t a i n e d one of the few c a l l s f o r c o o r d i n a t i n g lan d use d e s i g n a t i o n s . The S t a t e might f u r t h e r urge the e s t a b l i s h m e n t of c o r r e s p o n d i n g management areas a c r o s s the i n t e r n a t i o n a l boundary a t the p r o v i n c i a l , s t a t e or n a t i o n a l government l e v e l (Conover 1976, 1 ) . An example of a compatible l a n d use d e s i g n a t i o n s may be found a l o n g the border where Kluane and the W r a n g e l l - S t . Figure 5-1. Wildland Designations in the ABCY Region Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge Wrangell-Saint Ettas National Park and Preserve Klondike Gold Rush National Historic Park Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve Herschel Island Territorial Park Kluane National Park ChilKoot Trail Park N Tongass National Forest Spatsizi Wilderness Provincial Park Mt. Edziza Provincial Park Stikine River Recreation Corridor Atlin Provincial Park Source: Adapted from U.S. Geological Survey 1980 146 E l i a s N a t i o n a l Parks meet. Another compatible l a n d use d e s i g n a t i o n occurs between Skagway and Whitehorse where an i n t e r n a t i o n a l park has been c r e a t e d to commemorate the K l o n d i k e Gold Rush. The d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s l e a d i n g t o l a n d use d e s i g n a t i o n s i n the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n e x e m p l i f y how governments are r e l u c t a n t to c o n s i d e r compatible d e s i g n a t i o n s a l o n g the boundary. While c r o s s border c o o p e r a t i o n may not l e a d to s i m i l a r l a n d uses, a l a c k of communication r e s u l t s i n l o s t o p p o r t u n i t i e s to j o i n t l y c o n s i d e r a range of a l t e r n a t i v e s . The U.S. p o r t i o n of the S t i k i n e i s managed with a s t r i c t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of w i l d e r n e s s . J u s t over the border the area i s managed f o r timber, m i n e r a l and water development. A r e c r e a t i o n c o r r i d o r was e s t a b l i s h e d a l o n g p a r t of the r i v e r i n 1987 but r e s o u r c e development w i l l s t i l l occur i n the a r e a . Governments have been r e l u c t a n t to become i n v o l v e d i n each o t h e r ' s p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s e s . Even w i t h i n the B.C. p o r t i o n of the watershed t h e r e are c o n f l i c t i n g l a n d use p l a n s . B.C. Railway c o n s t r u c t e d a r a i l grade to Dease Lake and a t h r e e m i l l i o n d o l l a r b r i d g e a c r o s s the r i v e r w h i l e the same area was planned to be f l o o d e d by B.C. Hydro. Both p r o j e c t s are c u r r e n t l y on h o l d . A f t e r the B.C. W i l d e r n e s s A d v i s o r y Committee completed i t s f i n d i n g s , the F r i e n d s of the S t i k i n e remarked t h a t the Committee never v i s i t e d the S t i k i n e and d i d not mention the area's i n t e r n a t i o n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e i n the f i n a l r e p o r t ( F r i e n d s of the S t i k i n e 1986). 147 The d e s i g n a t i o n of the A t l i n P r o v i n c i a l Park i s another example of one c o u n t r y a c t i n g on i t s own a c c o r d . T h i s d e s i g n a t i o n o c c u r r e d a f t e r the New Democratic P a r t y gained c o n t r o l of B.C. I t s apparent purpose was to p r o h i b i t c o n s t r u c t i o n of a l a r g e h y d r o e l e c t r i c development. The a r e a a c r o s s the border i s managed by the USDA, F o r e s t S e r v i c e . Other than managing the growing number of h e l i c o p t e r s , the area r e c e i v e d no s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n . The n o r t h e r n p a r t of the ABCY Region p r o v i d e s an example of how s u b t l e t i e s of an apparent s i m i l a r d e s i g n a t i o n can l e a d t o c o n f l i c t . While ANWR and the North Yukon N a t i o n a l Park are both p r o t e c t i v e d e s i g n a t i o n s , t h e r e are d i f f e r e n c e s . O i l and gas development c o u l d occur i n the w i l d l i f e r efuge w i t h C o n g r e s s i o n a l a p p r o v a l . E x p l o r a t i o n i s not p e r m i t t e d i n the North Yukon N a t i o n a l Park. 5.3.2.5. J o i n t Programs J o i n t t o u r i s m development programs have a l s o been s u c c e s s f u l . An i n t e r n a t i o n a l e f f o r t l e a d i n g t o the c r e a t i o n of an annual t o u r i s m brochure f o r Al a s k a and the Yukon l a s t e d f o r about a decade. The A l a s k a D i v i s i o n of Tourism worked with Tourism Yukon t o produce t h i s brochure (Wright 1988). A l a s k a ' s 1989 t o u r i s m brochure, however, was not j o i n t l y produced. During the 1988 THOG meeting, the l e a d e r s of A l a s k a , B.C. and the Yukon agreed t o change t h e i r t o u r i s m marketing programs to a t t r a c t more v i s i t o r s a l o n g the Al a s k a Highway. Tourism North was formed by the t h r e e s u b n a t i o n a l governments and a j o i n t marketing agreement was si g n e d on 148 January 3, 1989. They have j o i n e d with the f e d e r a l governments t o complete a j o i n t marketing e f f o r t t o c e l e b r a t e the f i f t i e t h a n n i v e r s a r y of the A l a s k a Highway. An i n t e r a g e n c y committee was a l s o formed t o develop a j o i n t e x h i b i t a t the border ( A l a s k a 1988). J o i n t t r a i n i n g of employees i s another a r e a where some c o o p e r a t i o n has o c c u r r e d . G l a c i e r Bay N a t i o n a l Park and Kluane N a t i o n a l Park have cooperated i n some j o i n t t r a i n i n g of n a t u r a l i s t s . S i m i l a r e x e r c i s e s have a l s o o c c u r r e d between p e r s o n n e l of W r a n g e l l - S t . E l i a s and Kluane N a t i o n a l P a r k s . 5.3.3. Energy and M i n e r a l Issues Energy i s s u e s to be e v a l u a t e d i n c l u d e o i l and gas e x p l o r a t i o n , development and t r a n s p o r t . H y d r o e l e c t r i c development and power ex p o r t are a l s o c o v e r e d . C o o p e r a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g m i n e r a l i s s u e s w i l l a l s o be d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n . 5.3.3.1. Forum f o r Regular Meetings Cross border meetings c o n c e r n i n g energy and m i n e r a l i s s u e s tend t o be e p i s o d i c . The S t i k i n e - I s k u t R i v e r s I n f o r m a t i o n Exchange Committee i s an example of an instrument c r e a t e d t o keep communication channels open on a s p e c i f i c i s s u e . The USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e m a i n t a i n s t h a t the group " f a c i l i t a t e d c o n s i d e r a b l e i n f o r m a l c o n t a c t between s p e c i a l i s t s of the F o r e s t S e r v i c e and Canada on t e c h n i c a l m a t t e r s " (Lynn 1986, 1 ) . During the p l a n n i n g of the 149 h y d r o e l e c t r i c p r o j e c t much i n f o r m a t i o n was exchanged between the governments. I n t e r e s t d i m i n i s h e d as i t became c l e a r t h a t the p r o j e c t would not be pursued i n the near f u t u r e . During the 1988 THOG meeting, the t h r e e l e a d e r s agreed to have energy o f f i c i a l s meet on a r e g u l a r b a s i s . A memorandum of u n d e r s t a n d i n g was s i g n e d by the t h r e e l e a d e r s t o j o i n t l y determine the f e a s i b i l i t y to c o n s t r u c t power i n t e r t i e s . Before an a l l - A l a s k a n r o u t e was chosen f o r the A l a s k a P i p e l i n e , a Canadian r o u t e was a l s o c o n s i d e r e d . Meetings between government o f f i c i a l s and i n d u s t r y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o c c u r r e d r e g u l a r l y . During the l a t e 1970s F o o t h i l l Pipe L i n e s L t d . proposed a Canadian r o u t e to t r a n s p o r t A l a s k a n n a t u r a l gas. T h i s was the s u b j e c t of Canada's t e n t h f e d e r a l assessment pan e l r e p o r t . To date, the p i p e l i n e and i t s r o u t e have not been approved. Meetings about m i n e r a l s i s s u e s a l s o o c c u r . A y e a r l y n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e development confe r e n c e sponsored i n p a r t by the B.C. and Yukon Chamber of Mines p r o v i d e d a chance f o r Alaskans and Canadians to meet. Alaskan o f f i c i a l s have a l s o v i s i t e d Canada t o l e a r n about mining i n the North. During 1989, a mining c o n f e r e n c e was h e l d i n Juneau with p a r t i c i p a n t s from the t h r e e a r e a s . 5.3.3.2. O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r C o n s u l t a t i o n G e n e r a l l y , each c o u n t r y develops i t s own energy p l a n without much i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o n s u l t a t i o n . C o o p e r a t i o n has o c c u r r e d i n r e l a t i o n t o s p e c i f i c p r o p o s a l s such as o i l and gas p i p e l i n e s , tanker t r a f f i c and h y d r o e l e c t r i c development. 150 During development of the S t i k i n e - I s k u t H y d r o e l e c t r i c p l a n s , B.C. o f f i c i a l s d i d meet w i t h A l a s k a n o f f i c i a l s . The Governor and Premier met i n Juneau and s i g n e d the informa-t i o n exchange agreement. As w e l l , B.C. Hydro o f f i c i a l s h e l d a meeting i n Juneau to s o l i c i t i n p u t . The A l a s k a S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e (1981) passed a r e s o l u t i o n r e q u e s t i n g f u t u r e c o n s u l t a t i o n about t h i s i s s u e . I f the development c o n t i n u e d i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t a U.S. EIS would have been completed. Such an EIS p rocess would have i n c r e a s e d p r e s s u r e f o r more c o n s u l t a t i o n . 5.3.3.3. J o i n t P l a n n i n g J o i n t energy p l a n n i n g was one of the o r i g i n a l reasons A l a s k a , B.C. and the Yukon began meeting i n the 1960s. S e v e r a l l a r g e - s c a l e h y d r o e l e c t r i c developments were proposed. The c o o p e r a t i v e p l a n n i n g e f f o r t d i d not get v e r y f a r due to the Canadian f e d e r a l government's r e l u c t a n c e • t o e x p o r t power. U.S. r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s suggested t h a t Canada be g i v e n a c o r r i d o r through Southeast A l a s k a to Skagway i n exchange f o r power s a l e s . I r o n i c a l l y , as a r e s u l t of the Columbia R i v e r i s s u e , the e xport ban was e v e n t u a l l y l i f t e d but without any c o r r i d o r p r o v i s i o n through Southeast A l a s k a . Enthusiasm f o r l a r g e , i n t e r n a t i o n a l h y d r o e l e c t r i c schemes i n the r e g i o n d i m i n i s h e d d u r i n g the next two decades. More r e c e n t l y , j o i n t p l a n n i n g has a l s o o c c u r r e d c o n c e r n i n g power i n t e r t i e s . The Yukon, B.C. and A l a s k a c u r r e n t l y have s e p a r a t e power g r i d s . There used to be a s u r p l u s of power i n the Yukon but now t h a t mines are open 151 t h e r e i s a g r e a t e r demand. The Johnny Mountain mining o p e r a t i o n i n B.C. w i l l need a power s u p p l y once the mine opens. P r e s e n t l y , f u e l i s flown i n from W r a n g e l l . Nearby i n A l a s k a , U.S. Borax's molybdenum mine at Quartz H i l l w i l l e v e n t u a l l y need more power than can be s u p p l i e d l o c a l l y . The S t i k i n e - I s k u t h y d r o e l e c t r i c f a c i l i t y , i f b u i l t a t a l l , would not l i k e l y be completed u n t i l 2020. A Memorandum of Understanding was s i g n e d by the l e a d e r s of the Yukon, A l a s k a and B.C. a t the 1988 THOG meeting to encourage j o i n t s t u d y of the f e a s i b i l i t y f o r power i n t e r t i e s . J o i n t p l a n n i n g a l s o o c c u r r e d d u r i n g the o i l and gas p i p e l i n e p r o p o s a l s f o r A l a s k a ' s Prudhoe Bay. An a l l - A l a s k a n p i p e l i n e was e v e n t u a l l y chosen but t h e r e i s s t i l l a p o s s i b i l i t y a gas p i p e l i n e may be r o u t e d through Canada. Contingency p l a n n i n g f o r p o s s i b l e o i l s p i l l s a l o n g Canada's West Coast from o i l t a n k e r s i s another a r e a where t h e r e has been c r o s s - b o r d e r c o o p e r a t i o n . 5.3.3 .4 . Compatible Land Use D e s i g n a t i o n s Where major developments have been proposed or c o n s t r u c t e d , t h e r e has been few examples of p r o c e s s e s l e a d i n g to j o i n t energy development d e s i g n a t i o n s . Along the n o r t h e r n end of the Alaska-Canada border, the land on the Canadian s i d e i s c l o s e d to o i l and gas e x p l o r a t i o n while Alaskans are pushing f o r renewed e x p l o r a t i o n of ANWR. The second a r e a with i n c o m p a t i b l e d e s i g n a t i o n i s the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n . While the Canadian s i d e has land r e s e r v e d f o r 152 h y d r o e l e c t r i c development, the American s i d e i s b eing managed under a s t r i c t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the W i l d e r n e s s A c t . 5.3.3.5. J o i n t Programs Canada and the U.S. agreed to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a j o i n t s t u d y about u t i l i z a t i o n of the power p o t e n t i a l of the upper Yukon R i v e r i n 1968. The study f o c u s s e d upon the market p o t e n t i a l of the power. An i n t e r - b a s i n water t r a n s f e r from the Yukon r i v e r through the Coast Range to a powerhouse at Skagway was c o n s i d e r e d . T h i s s t u d y i n v o l v e d U.S. and Canadian f e d e r a l governments, the S t a t e of A l a s k a and the p r o v i n c e of B.C. ( H i c k e l 1968). Another e a r l y example of a j o i n t energy program o c c u r r e d i n Hyder. T h i s s m a l l Alaskan town used e l e c t r i c i t y o r i g i n a t i n g i n Stewart, B.C. d u r i n g a time when power export from t h i s p a r t of Canada was t e c h n i c a l l y p r o h i b i t e d . Hyder s t i l l o b t a i n s i t s power from a c r o s s the border. C o o p e r a t i o n i n the mining i n d u s t r y has o c c u r r e d i n the r e c e n t development of the Johnny Mt. d e p o s i t i n B.C. M a t e r i a l s are being a i r l i f t e d from Wrangell A l a s k a to the remote mining camp. F u r t h e r North, mining companies from the Yukon t r u c k t h e i r ore to the p o r t of Skagway, A l a s k a f o r shipment o u t s i d e . The two c o u n t r i e s have a l s o worked out a j o i n t c o n t i n g e n c y p l a n f o r o i l s p i l l s i n the a r c t i c . In the event of an o i l s p i l l on e i t h e r s i d e of the b o r d e r , r e s o u r c e s of both c o u n t r i e s would be used to c o n t a i n i t ( C a r r o l l 1986, U.S. Congress 1981). A f t e r the f a i l u r e of o i l companies to 153 c o n t a i n the 1989 Valdez o i l s p i l l , i t can be expected t h a t i n t e r n a t i o n a l o i l s p i l l c o n t i n g e n c y p l a n s w i l l a g a i n become an i s s u e . 5.3.4. T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Issues T r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s s u e s i n c l u d e the development of r a i l , highway, a i r , and water r o u t e s . T r a n s p o r t a t i o n r o u t e s i n the ABCY Region have been a major t o p i c d u r i n g many meetings between U.S. and Canadian o f f i c i a l s . The c o n s t r u c t i o n of the A l a s k a Highway d u r i n g World War II completed a ground l i n k to A l a s k a through Canada t h a t was proposed as e a r l y as the 1930s. Another major t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s s u e i n v o l v e s l e g i s l a t i o n r e g u l a t i n g the t r a n s p o r t of marine f r e i g h t . 5.3.4.1. Forum f o r Regular Meetings T r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s s u e s were the s u b j e c t of the e a r l i e s t meetings between Canadian and A l a s k a i n t e r e s t s . Meetings i n the l a s t c e n t u r y l e d to a t r e a t y a s s u r i n g unimpeded n a v i g a t i o n through A l a s k a t o Canada. The f e d e r a l governments h e l d meetings b e g i n n i n g i n the 1930s c o n c e r n i n g t r a n s p o r t a t i o n through Canada. Although the r o u t e was s e l e c t e d and c o n s t r u c t e d i n the 1940s, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n has c o n t i n u e d to be the s u b j e c t of many meetings. During the 1960s, the U.S. Congress commissioned the B a t t e l l e I n s t i t u t e t o complete a stud y about r a i l and highway l i n k s t o A l a s k a r e s u l t i n g i n a d d i t i o n a l meetings. Since the f i r s t THOG meeting i n 1960, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n has been a major t o p i c . During the 1960 meeting, a 154 t r a n s p o r t a t i o n subcommittee was c r e a t e d . During 1972, the th r e e s u b n a t i o n a l l e a d e r s met i n V i c t o r i a and agreed t o 2 permit c o n s t r u c t i o n of a road from Skagway to Whitehorse . More r e c e n t l y , the 1988 THOG meeting r e s u l t e d i n a j o i n t committee to s t u d y the p o s s i b i l i t y of ex t e n d i n g o p e r a t i o n of the White Pass and Yukon R a i l r o a d t o Whitehorse. P e r s o n n e l from the Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s (DOTPF) o f t e n communicate wi t h c o u n t e r p a r t s i n the Yukon and B.C. governments. They t a l k about highway improvement i s s u e s and p o s s i b l e new r o u t e s . DOTPF a l s o meets a n n u a l l y with the B.C. f e r r y p eople. R a i l l i n k s have been the t o p i c a t many meetings. The most n o t a b l e meeting, the Alaska-Canada R a i l Congress, was h e l d i n 1978. T h i s meeting p r o v i d e d f e d e r a l and sub-n a t i o n a l o f f i c i a l s a chance t o e v a l u a t e o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r r a i l l i n k s between the two c o u n t r i e s . There are a l s o ongoing meetings between the Department of S t a t e and E x t e r n a l A f f a i r s Canada about t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r o u t e s through the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n and other c o r r i d o r s through Southeast A l a s k a t o the Coast. While t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s s u e s are not always the s o l e reason f o r meetings, they are o f t e n brought up a t g e n e r a l meetings between Canadians and A l a s k a n s . Highway maintenance, c r e a t i o n of new r o u t e s , improvement of a i r Former Premier W.A.C. Bennett r e f u s e d t o grant the easement through the s m a l l p o r t i o n of B.C. and h e l d up c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h i s r o u t e . 155 t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , and c o o r d i n a t i n g marine t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r e q u i r e c l o s e c o n t a c t between the two c o u n t r i e s . 5.3.4.2. O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r C o n s u l t a t i o n C o n s u l t a t i o n o c c u r r e d between the two c o u n t r i e s when p l a n n i n g t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r o u t e s because without such c o o p e r a t i o n , r o u t e s would end a t the bor d e r . A n o t a b l e i n s t a n c e of c o n s u l t a t i o n o c c u r r e d with a p r o v i s i o n i n c l u d e d i n the U.S. ANILCA l e g i s l a t i o n . S e c t i o n 1113 of t h a t a c t d i r e c t e d the P r e s i d e n t to c o n s u l t with the government of Canada c o n c e r n i n g a c c e s s through the S t i k i n e - L e C o n t e W i l d e r n e s s Area. 5.3.4.3. J o i n t P l a n n i n g J o i n t p l a n n i n g f o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p r i m a r i l y occurs a t the f e d e r a l l e v e l and a t the s t a t e l e v e l d u r i n g THOG meetings. Be s i d e s p l a n n i n g f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of new t r a n s p o r t a t i o n l i n k s , o f f i c i a l s a l s o p l a n f o r maintenance, upgrades and a l l year o p e r a t i o n of e x i s t i n g r o u t e s . J o i n t t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n n i n g began i n the 1930s with p l a n s f o r a c o r r i d o r through Canada to A l a s k a . These p l a n s were brought to f r u i t i o n d u r i n g World War II with the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the Alaska-Canada Highway. The f e d e r a l government has a l s o been i n v o l v e d with n e g o t i a t i o n s f o r other t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r s such as the p r o v i s i o n f o r a c o r r i d o r through the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n as d i r e c t e d i n the ANILCA l e g i s l a t i o n . 156 5.3.4.4. Compatible Land Use D e s i g n a t i o n s Although the Alaska-Canada border c o v e r s a g r e a t expanse, t h e r e are o n l y a f e v major t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r s . The c o m p a t i b i l i t y of l a n d use d e s i g n a t i o n s may or may not be an i s s u e i n p l a n n i n g f o r f u t u r e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r o u t e s . The T a y l o r Highvay and A l a s k a Highvay p r o v i d e the o n l y two major lan d c o n n e c t i o n s a l o n g the s t r a i g h t l i n e d border of A l a s k a and the Yukon. Land use d e s i g n a t i o n s do not seem to be an i s s u e i n t h i s a r e a . A c o n f l i c t d u r i n g the 1970s about a r i g h t - o f - v a y through B.C. s t a l l e d the K l o n d i k e Highvay c o n s t r u c t i o n but t h i s vas due more to a p e r s o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t than i n c o m p a t i b l e l a n d uses. Along the remainder of the border between Southeast A l a s k a and B.C., land use d e s i g n a t i o n s may become more of an i s s u e i n the f u t u r e . S p e c i f i c a l l y , i n the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n the d e s i g n a t i o n of w i l d e r n e s s i n the American s i d e has p r o v i d e d an a d d i t i o n a l o b s t a c l e f o r those who d e s i r e more r o u t e s through the Panhandle. While t h e r e i s a p r o v i s i o n i n the ANILCA l e g i s l a t i o n f o r a S t i k i n e r o u t e , p l a n s f o r highway c o n s t r u c t i o n through a w i l d e r n e s s a r e a would b r i n g n a t i o n a l a t t e n t i o n to the i s s u e . I t i s l i k e l y t h a t f u t u r e r o u t e s through the Panhandle w i l l occur o u t s i d e of t h i s watershed. 5.3.4.5. J o i n t Programs J o i n t programs occur i n l a n d , water and a i r t r a n s p o r t a -t i o n l i n k s between Canada and A l a s k a . The P r i n c e Rupert terminus f o r the A l a s k a Marine Highway was n e g o t i a t e d a t the 157 f i r s t THOG meeting. A l a s k a l e a s e s the f e r r y t e r m i n a l a t P r i n c e Rupert from T r a n s p o r t Canada. The B.C. F e r r y C o r p o r a t i o n and the A l a s k a Marine Highway a l s o j o i n t l y p u b l i s h a brochure. C l o s e c o o p e r a t i o n between the f e d e r a l and s u b n a t i o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s have l e d to the many improvements i n the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n network. Recent c o o p e r a t i o n between the two c o u n t r i e s r e s u l t e d i n r e s u r r e c t i o n of the White Pass and Yukon r a i l r o u t e . J o i n t programs have a l s o l e d to the c r e a t i o n of and improvement t o the major land l i n k s between A l a s k a and Canada. P r e s s u r e e x e r t e d by the s u b n a t i o n a l a u t h o r i t i e s on t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e f e d e r a l governments has r e s u l t e d i n j o i n t f u n d i n g schemes f o r highway improvements. C o o p e r a t i v e a i r t r a n s p o r t programs f a c i l i t a t e a i r l i n k s between the two c o u n t r i e s . The governments a l s o r e c i p r o c a t e i n f o r m a t i o n about motor v e h i c l e v i o l a t i o n s . The c o n s t r u c t i o n of the A l a s k a Highway was perhaps.one of the best examples of c o o p e r a t i o n i n the f i e l d of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . T h i s e f f o r t , however, was met wit h some s k e p t i c i s m . Prime M i n i s t e r W.L. Mackenzie King s t a t e d t h a t the highway p r o j e c t was l e s s intended f o r p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t the Japanese than as one of the f i n g e r s of the hand which America i s p l a c i n g more or l e s s over the whole of the Western hemisphere ( G r a n a t s t e i n 1976, 34). 5.3.5. F o r e s t r y Issues F o r e s t r y management i s s u e s are g e n e r a l l y addressed s o l e l y w i t h i n each c o u n t r y . An e x c e p t i o n to t h i s are some 158 p e r s o n n e l exchanges, r e p o r t r e f e r r a l s and c o o p e r a t i o n between environmental groups. 5.3.5.1. Forum f o r Regular Meetings O c c a s i o n a l meetings on timber i s s u e s w i t h i n the p u b l i c s e c t o r occur between B.C. and A l a s k a . The USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e meets a n n u a l l y w i t h the B.C. M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s . T o p i c s d i s c u s s e d i n c l u d e c u r r e n t f o r e s t r y a c t i v i t i e s a l o n g the border and w i l d f i r e preparedness p l a n s . Informal c o n t a c t o c c u r s on the c e n t r a l l e v e l ( S h e r i d a n 1985) and a t the l o c a l l e v e l (Lynn 1984) of these a g e n c i e s . 5.3.5.2. O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r C o n s u l t a t i o n For the most p a r t , the o p i n i o n of the n e i g h b o r i n g c o u n t r y about f o r e s t r y o p e r a t i o n s a l o n g the border i s not s o l i c i t e d . An e x c e p t i o n t o t h i s occurs when r e p o r t r e f e r r a l s are c i r c u l a t e d a c r o s s the border. For example, the M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t ' s (MOF) Landscape Assessment p l a n f o r the I n s i d e Passage was r e f e r r e d to the USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e (Wood 1987). The MOF a l s o r e f e r r e d the Hal-Pac s a l e p r o p o s a l i n the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n t o the USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e and the A l a s k a Department of Environmental C o n s e r v a t i o n f o r comment (Kriowken 1986). Most U.S. timber h a r v e s t p l a n s are s u b j e c t t o p u b l i c comment and no t h i n g would prevent Canadian c i t i z e n s or ag e n c i e s from s u b m i t t i n g t h e i r o p i n i o n . 159 5.3.5.3. J o i n t P l a n n i n g A l a s k a ' s 1959 l e g i s l a t i v e a c t c r e a t i n g the I n t e r n a -t i o n a l Development Commission promoted c o o p e r a t i o n i n d e v e l o p i n g the r e g i o n ' s n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s i n c l u d i n g timber. THOG meetings have a c t u a l l y seldom covered timber i s s u e s . C o o p e r a t i v e p l a n n i n g has o c c u r r e d i n the t o p i c of f i r e p r o t e c t i o n . B.C. and A l a s k a p e r s o n n e l have agreed to help each other out i n the event of s e r i o u s f i r e s a l o n g the b o r d e r . 5.3.5 .4. Compatible Land Use D e s i g n a t i o n s The most s t r i k i n g example of i n c o m p a t i b l e l a n d use d e s i g n a t i o n s o c c u r r e d i n the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n . While the A l a s k a p o r t i o n i s d e s i g n a t e d as w i l d e r n e s s , timber h a r v e s t o c c u r r e d j u s t a few m i l e s over the border. T h i s i s s u e has been d i s c u s s e d i n more d e t a i l e a r l i e r i n t h i s c h apter i n the w i l d l a n d and t o u r i s m s e c t i o n . 5.3.5.5. J o i n t Programs While some minor i n s t a n c e s of j o i n t programs have o c c u r r e d , the timber r e s o u r c e i s g e n e r a l l y managed ind e p e n d e n t l y . One e x c e p t i o n i s the c o o p e r a t i v e f i r e - f i g h t i n g arrangement between the USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e and B.C. 160 5.3.6. Other Issues Although not d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o land use, s e v e r a l other i s s u e areas w i l l be b r i e f l y d i s c u s s e d . H e a l t h , e d u c a t i o n , border n e g o t i a t i o n s , a r c t i c s o v e r e i g n t y and tr a d e can a f f e c t the g e n e r a l tone of the r e l a t i o n s . As noted e a r l i e r , they w i l l be addressed here because t h e y may have d i r e c t c o n n e c t i o n s to environmental and land use i s s u e s . These i s s u e s have been t o p i c s a t THOG meetings, l e g i s l a t i v e exchanges, and d u r i n g meetings between agency p e r s o n n e l . During such m u l t i - s e c t o r forums, government o f f i c i a l s may address any of these i s s u e s and the r e l a t i o n s between them. S e v e r a l forums e x i s t to cooperate i n h e a l t h i s s u e s . An agreement between the A l a s k a Department of H e a l t h and S o c i a l S e r v i c e s and the M e d i c a l S e r v i c e s Branch of the Department of N a t i o n a l H e a l t h and Welfare of Canada was s i g n e d d u r i n g F e b r u a r y 1988. T h i s s t a t e - f e d e r a l agreement f a c i l i t a t e s exchange of i n f o r m a t i o n , j o i n t meetings and c o o p e r a t i o n on r e s e a r c h . Meetings of the I n s t i t u t e f o r Circumpolar H e a l t h a l s o p r o v i d e a forum f o r to d i s c u s s s i m i l a r h e a l t h problems. E d u c a t i o n i s s u e s are addressed through s e v e r a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . The Canadian-Alaskan I n s t i t u t e f o r Northern N a t i v e Languages p r o v i d e s a forum f o r r e g u l a r meetings. Another Alaska-Canada avenue f o r c o o p e r a t i o n i s through the u n i v e r s i t i e s . There i s c u r r e n t l y an i n s t i t u t e f o r Canadian S t u d i e s a t the U n i v e r s i t y of A l a s k a ' s Anchorage branch. The Canadian government has donated $10,000 f o r guest l e c t u r e r s . During the 1988 THOG meeting, l e a d e r s agreed to j o i n t 161 membership on an a d v i s o r y board f o r the Canadian s t u d i e s program. T u i t i o n waivers e x i s t f o r r e s i d e n t s of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s and Yukon when a t t e n d i n g the U n i v e r s i t y of A l a s k a . A d d i t i o n a l l y , the A l a s k a S t a t e L i b r a r y i s a d e p o s i t o r y f o r Canadian p u b l i c a t i o n s . A unique c o o p e r a t i v e e f f o r t o ccurs between Hyder, A l a s k a and Stewart, B.C. where Alaskans a t t e n d s c h o o l i n Canada. Other programs i n c l u d e the Canada-Alaska I n s t i t u t e f o r Northern N a t i v e Languages, the B o r e a l I n s t i t u t e f o r Northern S t u d i e s , the Circumpolar Committee on R u r a l E d u c a t i o n ( I n u i t C i r c u m p o l a r C o n f e r e n c e ) , and t e a c h e r t r a i n i n g exchanges. Disputed maritime boundaries a l s o p r o v i d e an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r c o o p e r a t i o n . The A l a s k a Senate S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e passed L e g i s l a t i v e Resolve 79 (1988) r e q u e s t i n g the Department of S t a t e to i n c l u d e a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e from A l a s k a d u r i n g boundary n e g o t i a t i o n s w i t h Canada and the S o v i e t Union. The Department of S t a t e has never i n c l u d e d A l a s k a n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s i n the n e g o t i a t i o n s . T h i s t o p i c has a l s o been d i s c u s s e d a t THOG meetings. A r c t i c s o v e r e i g n t y i s another area where more c o o p e r a t i o n i s needed. The U.S. doesn't r e c o g n i z e Canada's c l a i m t o A r c t i c waters and i n 1969 sent the o i l tanker Manhattan to t e s t v i a b i l i t y of o i l t r a n s p o r t a c r o s s the Northwest Passage without s e e k i n g Canadian p e r m i s s i o n . T h i s a c t i o n was repeated i n 1985 when the U.S. sent the Coast Guard i c e b r e a k e r P o l a r Sea through the a r e a . Canadians were f u r t h e r enraged when th r e e U.S. n u c l e a r submarines t r a v e l l e d t o the North P o l e i n May 1986 ( B r a d l e y 1987). An agreement 162 was reached on January 11, 1988 where the U.S. agreed to ask Canada's p e r m i s s i o n b e f o r e n a v i g a t i n g through these waters without a d d r e s s i n g l e g a l c l a i m s (Canada 1988). Although the waters are s t i l l i n d i s p u t e , the agreement should prevent former i n t e r n a t i o n a l i n c i d e n t s from being r e p e a t e d . C a r r o l l (1986) has recommended t h a t the q u e s t i o n of s o v e r e i g n t y s h o u l d be s o l v e d by t h i r d p a r t y a r b i t r a t i o n , i f n e c e s s a r y . The f r e e t r a d e t r e a t y n e g o t i a t e d on the f e d e r a l l e v e l i s an example of how c o o p e r a t i o n can l e a d to a major agreement. While the b e n e f i t s or d e t r i m e n t s of the agreement are y e t to be proven, t h i s c o o p e r a t i o n has l e d to a t r a d e agreement unmatched by any other two c o u n t r i e s . Some i n d u s t r i e s i n each n a t i o n w i l l undoubtedly s u f f e r but many new o p p o r t u n i t i e s can be expected to a r i s e from t h i s agreement. The Yukon government expressed r e s i s t a n c e to f r e e t r a d e because i t goes a g a i n s t some of the t e r r i t o r y ' s economic r e c o v e r y p l a n s . The agreement i s l i k e l y to r e s u l t i n more i m p o r t a t i o n of food product from the U.S. through Skagway to the Yukon. There w i l l be minor b e n e f i t s to the Yukon mining i n d u s t r y . Equipment and s u p p l i e s w i l l be l e s s expensive as a r e s u l t of removing t a r i f f s . Free t r a d e w i l l a l s o open energy markets and w i l l end the p r a c t i c e c h a r g i n g more f o r power export than s a l e s w i t h i n the c o u n t r y . A major concern of the Yukon government r e l a t e s t o the p o s s i b l i t y t h a t c u r r e n t development programs w i l l be d i s p u t e d . The t o t a l impact of the agreement, however, w i l l be e v i d e n t o n l y a f t e r i t i s f u l l y implemented (Canadian A r c t i c Resources Committee 1988). While the Yukon had 163 l i t t l e i n p u t , A l a s k a ' s governor was ap p o i n t e d to a commission about the t r e a t y . 5.3.7. M u l t i - S e c t o r I n s t i t u t i o n s Few i n s t i t u t i o n s examine i s s u e s i n more than one s e c t o r . S e v e r a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , however, p r o v i d e o c c a s i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o look a t the r e g i o n as a whole. At the s u b n a t i o n a l l e v e l , T r i l a t e r a l Heads-of-Government (THOG) meetings and l e g i s l a t i v e exchanges permit an o v e r a l l view of the r e g i o n . At the l o c a l l e v e l , meetings between the c i t i e s of Juneau and Whitehorse have addressed a v a r i e t y of r e g i o n a l i s s u e s . At the f e d e r a l l e v e l , i s s u e s i n the ABCY Region may be d i s c u s s e d a t meetings between the Department of S t a t e and E x t e r n a l A f f a i r s Canada as w e l l as d u r i n g l e g i s l a t i v e exchanges. These i n s t i t u t i o n s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d below. 5.3.7.1. T r i l a t e r a l Heads-of-Government (THOG) Meetings The l e a d e r s of A l a s k a , B.C. and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y have conducted t r i l a t e r a l meetings s i n c e 1960. There i s no t h i n g t o prevent THOG meetings from c o l l a p s i n g under u n f a v o r a b l e c o n d i t i o n s . S e v e r a l attempts t o h o l d these meetings a n n u a l l y have been f r u s t r a t e d by events p e r c e i v e d to be of g r e a t e r importance and by p e r s o n a l i t y c l a s h e s . The r i f t between A l a s k a and B.C. l e a d e r s i n the 1960s l e d to a te n year h i a t u s i n the meetings. Appendix B l i s t s the THOG meetings between 1960 and 1988. 164 THOG meetings p r o v i d e a s e m i - i n f o r m a l forum to d i s c u s s any t o p i c . The meetings a l s o p r o v i d e an e x c e l l e n t o p p o r t u n i t y f o r the l e a d e r s t o t a l k i n f o r m a l l y a f t e r the s t r u c t u r e d meetings. P a r t i c i p a n t s a t the f i r s t few THOG meetings e n v i s i o n e d the b e g i n n i n g of a r e l a t i o n s h i p t h a t would i n c l u d e j o i n t r e s o u r c e developments, h y d r o e l e c t r i c schemes, r a i l r o a d s , and Panhandle a c c e s s r o u t e s . These dreams have y e t to be r e a l i z e d . S p e c i f i c agreements have, however, f o l l o w e d d i s c u s s i o n s a t THOG meetings. The S t i k i n e - I s k u t R i v e r s I n f o r m a t i o n Exchange Committee was announced a t the 1976 meeting. Before t h i s , a meeting between the thr e e l e a d e r s i n V i c t o r i a l e d to an agreement about a l o n g - s t a n d i n g r i g h t - o f - w a y d i s p u t e d e l a y i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n of the Kl o n d i k e Highway. C o n s t r u c t i o n and maintenance of other highways, t o u r i s m p l a n n i n g , and i n f o r m a t i o n s h a r i n g agreements have a l s o r e s u l t e d from these meetings. Although THOG meetings p r o v i d e an o p p o r t u n i t y to d i s c u s s a v a r i e t y of i s s u e s a t one t a b l e , meeting agendas p a r t i t i o n s u b j e c t s i n t o s e p a r a t e d i s c u s s i o n s . A few people have suggested a broader approach. Dr. A.M. Pearson, Commissioner of the Yukon T e r r i t o r y , suggested the f o l l o w i n g d u r i n g the 1976 THOG meeting. The Northwest c o r n e r of North America, c o n s i s t i n g of A l a s k a , Yukon and B r i t i s h Columbia can be viewed as a compact economic r e g i o n with dynamic p o t e n t i a l f o r economic development and c o n t a i n i n g the r e s o u r c e s , e n t r e p r e n e u r s h i p and the i n i t i a t i v e to c a r r y i t f o r -ward. Developmental p l a n n i n g i n any area s h o u l d not be r e s t r i c t e d t o the c o n f i n e s of e x i s t i n g p o l i t i c a l bound-a r i e s which are e c o n o m i c a l l y meaningless (1976, 1 ) . 165 Two years l a t e r , Yukon Government Leader C.W. Pearson welcomed d i s c u s s i o n a t the 1978 Heads of S t a t e meeting about the t r a n s - b o r d e r a s p e c t of p o l i c y developments w i t h r e s p e c t to management of e n t i r e eco-systems such as the Northern Alaska/Yukon a r e a , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n systems, s p o r t s and c u l t u r a l exchanges and p i p e l i n e r e l a t e d matters (Yukon T e r r i t o r y 1978, 9 ) . For the most p a r t , c a l l s f o r a broader approach have soon been f o r g o t t e n . The amount of i n t e r e s t i n t h i s i n s t i t u t i o n changes from one a d m i n i s t r a t i o n t o another. There i s no guarantee t h a t meetings w i l l be h e l d from year to y e a r . U n t i l new i n s t i t u t i o n s are c r e a t e d , THOG meetings w i l l p r o v i d e one of the few o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r an o v e r a l l outlook f o r the ABCY Region. 5.3.7.2. L e g i s l a t i v e Exchanges L e g i s l a t i v e exchanges between A l a s k a and the Yukon-have o c c u r r e d almost e v e r y year s i n c e 1982 ( P h i l l i p s 1988). T h i s forum p r o v i d e s an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r s e l e c t e d lawmakers to meet and d i s c u s s transboundary problems as w e l l as d i f f e r e n t approaches to common problems. L e g i s l a t o r s a t t e n d committee meetings and f l o o r s e s s i o n s . During the evenings, they speak more i n f o r m a l l y and forge f r i e n d s h i p s t h a t c o u l d prove v a l u a b l e d u r i n g times of f u t u r e transboundary c r i s e s . Meetings r e s u l t p r i m a r i l y i n i n f o r m a t i o n exchange but they a l s o serve t o s e t the stage f o r f u t u r e agreements. 166 5.3.7.3. F e d e r a l M u l t i - S e c t o r I n s t i t u t i o n s On the n a t i o n a l l e v e l , p e r i o d i c meetings occur between E x t e r n a l A f f a i r s Canada and the U.S. S t a t e Department. Annual meetings are a l s o h e l d between the two f e d e r a l l e g i s l a t u r e s through the I n t e r p a r l i a m e n t a r y Group. Alaskan -Canadian a f f a i r s are sometimes d i s c u s s e d a t these meetings and the 1979 meeting was h e l d i n A l a s k a . A danger e x i s t s t h a t when a n a t i o n a l approach i s taken, i t becomes e a s i e r to l i n k r e g i o n a l i s s u e s . Speaking about the Porcupine c a r i b o u i s s u e , M i n i s t e r Bruce McLaughlin of the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s thought t h a t f e d e r a l l e v e l n e g o t i a t i o n s c o u l d end up t r a d i n g " c a r i b o u f o r crabs on the E a s t Coast" (Alaska S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e 1987b). Norma K a s s i , a member of the Yukon T e r r i t o r y L e g i s l a t u r e , f e a r e d the ANWR i s s u e c o u l d be l i n k e d to a c i d r a i n n e g o t i a t i o n s ( T a y l o r 1989). 5 .4 . Summary Co o p e r a t i o n between Canada and Al a s k a i n the ABCY Region oc c u r s through many d i f f e r e n t c h a n n e l s . F e d e r a l , s u b n a t i o n a l , and l o c a l governments as w e l l as p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s work t o g e t h e r i n response to a wide spectrum of i s s u e s . Instances of c o o p e r a t i o n are u s u a l l y i n response t o a s p e c i f i c i s s u e s w i t h i n an i n d i v i d u a l s e c t o r . Few i n s t i t u t i o n s are capable of a d d r e s s i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s between s e c t o r s . I n f o r m a t i o n exchange p r o v i d e s the most common form of c o o p e r a t i o n between A l a s k a and Canada f o l l o w e d by j o i n t 167 p l a n n i n g and j o i n t programs. Although few arrangements mandate the exchange of i n f o r m a t i o n , i t occurs through r e p o r t r e f e r r a l s , i n - p e r s o n meetings and over the t e l e p h o n e . Government o f f i c i a l s r a r e l y comment on the plans of other j u r i s d i c t i o n s a l t h o u g h i s o l a t e d i n s t a n c e s have o c c u r r e d . Canadians have commented on p l a n s t o develop the A r c t i c N a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e Refuge (ANWR); they have suggested road c o r r i d o r s through a U.S. w i l d e r n e s s a r e a , and have expressed support f o r c e r t a i n park d e s i g n a t i o n s . On the l o c a l l e v e l , c i t i z e n s of Whitehorse have t e s t i f i e d a t m u n i c i p a l meetings i n Skagway. U.S. i n t e r e s t s have p a r t i c i p a t e d i n meetings about proposed Canadian h y d r o e l e c t r i c power developments and o i l and gas e x p l o r a t i o n . Governments are g e n e r a l l y r e l u c t a n t to i n t e r f e r e with each o t h e r ' s p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s e s u n l e s s they have a d i r e c t stake i n the outcome. Before s t a t e h o o d i n 1959, j o i n t p l a n n i n g i n the ABCY Region o c c u r r e d p r i m a r i l y through the two f e d e r a l governments. Once A l a s k a was granted more powers, o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r c o o p e r a t i v e p l a n n i n g were e x p l o r e d . Because of the m i n g l i n g of r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , the f e d e r a l government o f t e n becomes i n v o l v e d . C o o p e r a t i v e p l a n n i n g o c c u r s f o r f i s h e r y a l l o c a t i o n , c o n n e c t i o n of power g r i d s , p i p e l i n e p r o p o s a l s , t o u r i s m marketing, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n networks, c a r i b o u management, and w i l d f i r e s u p p r e s s i o n . Compatible la n d use d e s i g n a t i o n s do occur a l o n g the border y e t they have been more the r e s u l t of p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s e s w i t h i n each government. Because of the w i l d 168 c h a r a c t e r of the ABCY Region, the f u l l r a m i f i c a t i o n of i n c o m p a t i b l e l a n d use d e s i g n a t i o n s w i l l not become e v i d e n t u n t i l the a r e a i s f u r t h e r developed. Two i n c o m p a t i b l e d e s i g n a t i o n s a l r e a d y have caused some concern. Probable o i l development i n A l a s k a ' s ANWR has r e s u l t e d i n a s t r o n g n e g a t i v e r e a c t i o n by the Yukon government. F u r t h e r south, a w i l d e r n e s s d e s i g n a t i o n i n the U.S. p o r t i o n of the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n borders an a r e a s l a t e d f o r r e s o u r c e development i n Canada. Because governments are r e l u c t a n t t o reduce f u t u r e o p t i o n s , few i n s t a n c e s of j o i n t management e x i s t . F i s h e r i e s i n s t i t u t i o n s are an e x c e p t i o n . Other k i n d s of j o i n t programs occur f o r t o u r i s m , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , energy, w i l d l i f e , e d u c a t i o n , n a t u r a l i s t t r a i n i n g , and f i r e - f i g h t i n g . N a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s , e s p e c i a l l y b i o l o g i c a l ones, are o f t e n the b a s i s f o r i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o n f l i c t s i n the r e g i o n . E l a b o r a t e i n t e r n a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s have been s e t up to r e s o l v e d i f f e r e n c e s i n f i s h and w i l d l i f e i s s u e s . I n t e r n a -t i o n a l f i s h e r y commissions meet on a r e g u l a r b a s i s to d i s c u s s f i s h a l l o c a t i o n a l t h o u g h they do not d i s c u s s Yukon R i v e r f i s h e r y i s s u e s . The I n t e r n a t i o n a l Porcupine C a r i b o u Board has a l s o been e s t a b l i s h e d to p r o v i d e a d v i c e to the governments. Methods f o r d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n are s t i l l i n t h e i r i n f a n c y . Again, the f i s h e r i e s commissions have some of the most e l a b o r a t e methods f o r r e s o l v i n g d i f f e r e n c e s . Meetings between o f f i c i a l s a l s o s e r v e to r e s o l v e c o n f l i c t s . There are few e s t a b l i s h e d procedures f o r c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n and 169 problems o f t e n simmer f o r many years without being a d e q u a t e l y addressed. The 1988 Free Trade Agreement c r e a t e s a d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n board but i t remains to be seen i f i t w i l l address i s s u e s i n the r e g i o n . Although c o o p e r a t i o n i s growing i n the ABCY Region t h e r e i s much room f o r improvement. R e l a t i o n s are ad hoc, r e a c t i o n a r y , and i s s u e s a re i n c r e m e n t a l l y addressed i n i s o l a t i o n . An o v e r a l l p i c t u r e i s o f t e n l o s t t o s t r o n g s e c t o r a l approaches. Three n o t a b l e arrangements have been used t o address m u l t i - s e c t o r i s s u e s : the T r i l a t e r a l Heads-of -Government (THOG) meetings, l e g i s l a t i v e exchanges, and meetings between the c i t i e s of Juneau and Whitehorse. Other than these m u l t i - s e c t o r i n s t i t u t i o n s t h e r e a re few o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r p r o a c t i v e p l a n n i n g f o r the e n t i r e r e g i o n . Each n a t i o n has i t s own agenda and w i t h i n each n a t i o n competing i n t e r e s t s o f t e n erode o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r i n t e g r a t i v e p l a n n i n g . Except f o r a few i s o l a t e d i n s t a n c e s where i n s t i t u t i o n s have been h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d , they e v e n t u a l l y e i t h e r f a i l to meet r e g u l a r l y or are a b o l i s h e d a l t o g e t h e r . The people of t h i s r e g i o n share a r e l a t i v e l y u n p o l l u t e d environment, abundant f i s h and game, and unsurpassed r e c r e a t i o n o p p o r t u n i t i e s . M i n e r a l s , petroleum and water power add to the r e g i o n ' s wealth. C u r r e n t d e c i s i o n s w i l l e f f e c t long-term la n d use a l o n g the border y e t each n a t i o n tends t o p l a n f o r s h o r t - t e r m c o n c e r n s . U n l e s s a p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s i s undertaken f o r the e n t i r e r e g i o n , i n c r e a s i n g c o n f l i c t s over i r r e v e r s i b l e l a n d use d e s i g n a t i o n s can be 170 expected i n the' f u t u r e . J u s t a m a r g i n a l i n c r e a s e i n e f f o r t by the governments c o u l d r e s u l t i n a d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y g r e a t e r r e t u r n . An e f f o r t to i n i t i a t e long-term i n t e g r a t i v e p l a n n i n g f o r the transboundary r e g i o n c o u l d f u n c t i o n t o encourage the i n d i v i d u a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s t o improve t h e i r own p l a n n i n g and d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s e s . The f i n a l chapter o u t l i n e s s p e c i f i c s t e p s t h a t the governments can take to p r o a c t i v e l y p l a n f o r the ABCY Region without g i v i n g up s o v e r e i g n t y . 171 CHAPTER 6 FINDINGS T h i s f i n a l c h a p t e r I n c o r p o r a t e s the major p o i n t s of the p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r s . I t begins w i t h a summary of the dynamics of i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i o n . The o v e r a l l U.S.-Canadian r e l a t i o n s h i p i s then d i s c u s s e d f o l l o w e d by a look a t the h i s t o r y of the ABCY Region. C o n c l u s i o n s from the e v a l u a t i o n of c o o p e r a t i o n i n the r e g i o n are then summarized. F i n a l l y , s p e c i f i c a c t i o n s t o improve r e l a t i o n s are recommended. 6.1. Dynamics of I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o o p e r a t i o n Throughout h i s t o r y , n a t i o n s of the world have p l a c e d more emphasis upon p r o t e c t i n g t h e i r boundaries from c r o s s -border i n t r u s i o n s than upon c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h t h e i r n e i g h b o r s . The r e s u l t has been i n c o m p a t i b l e l a n d uses, p o l l u t i o n problems and water q u a n t i t y c o n c e r n s . Although t h e r e were i s o l a t e d i n s t a n c e s of e a r l y c o o p e r a t i o n , transboundary p l a n n i n g d i d n ' t mature u n t i l the 1960s. I n t e r n a t i o n a l agreements have i n c r e a s e d d r a m a t i c a l l y i n the past few decades but few c o u n t r i e s have g i v e n up t h e i r s o v e r e i g n t y t o j o i n t b o d i e s . 172 The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of a transboundary p l a n n i n g e f f o r t i s dependent on many f a c t o r s . I t i s a f f e c t e d by the p o l i t i c a l w i l l of the n a t i o n s to c o o p e r a t e , c o m p a t i b i l i t y of p l a n n i n g and d e c i s i o n making approaches, and the amount of r e s o u r c e s expended. A genuine d e s i r e to cooperate i s perhaps the most important f a c t o r ; without s u f f i c i e n t p o l i t i c a l w i l l , m eaningful c o o p e r a t i o n w i l l not o c c u r . An important o b s t a c l e to i n t e g r a t e d management of transboundary r e g i o n s i s the border i t s e l f . Boundaries are not always l o g i c a l l y l o c a t e d . While we laugh a t people of the Middle ages because they thought the e a r t h was f l a t , we o u r s e l v e s have a c t e d as i f the c o n t o u r s of i t s r o t u n d i t y were n o n e x i s t e n t (Mumford 1927, 277). C o u n t r i e s u s u a l l y take the border s e r i o u s l y , seldom l o o k i n g at the transboundary r e g i o n as a whole. Transboundary c o o p e r a t i o n can p r o v i d e many b e n e f i t s to people of both c o u n t r i e s . By working t o g e t h e r , i t i s p o s s i b l e to o b t a i n mutual g a i n s not a v a i l a b l e by a c t i n g i n d e p e n d e n t l y . F i s c a l burdens can be reduced by e l i m i n a t i n g d u p l i c a t i o n of e f f o r t . A p o s i t i v e c o o p e r a t i v e s p i r i t may a l s o improve a n a t i o n ' s i n t e r n a t i o n a l image. When i n an advantageous p o s i t i o n , a c o u n t r y may wish to develop a r e s e r v o i r of good w i l l t o draw upon when they are i n a f u t u r e d i s a d v a n t a g e . 6.2. Overview of Canadian-U.S. R e l a t i o n s E a r l y r e l a t i o n s between the U.S. and B r i t i s h North America began wi t h tumultuous i n t e r a c t i o n s . M i l i t a r y 173 s k i r m i s h e s s e t a n e g a t i v e tone f o r the f u t u r e . The 1867 A l a s k a purchase w o r r i e d Canadians because i t c u t t h e i r a c c e s s o f f to the Coast. The A l a s k a boundary d i s p u t e r e s u l t e d i n s e v e r a l decades of acrimonious i n t e r a c t i o n s . R e l a t i o n s improved d u r i n g the e a r l y p a r t of t h i s c e n t u r y . The e s t a b l i s h m e n t of such a powerful i n s t i t u t i o n as the I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o i n t Commission was an anomaly i n U.S. f o r e i g n r e l a t i o n s . As t h i s j o i n t body matured more r e f e r r a l s were e n t r u s t e d to i t . Other important agreements f o l l o w e d . Today, the sweet-sour r e l a t i o n s h i p c o n t i n u e s between Canada and the U.S. Transboundary d i s p u t e s are d r a m a t i c a l l y i n c r e a s i n g . A growing number of problems are not being s o l v e d or even, f o r t h a t matter, c o n t a i n e d . They are l e a v i n g a r e s i d u e of bad f e e l i n g s i n both c o u n t r i e s and p a r t i c u l a r l y Canada ( C a r r o l l 1983, 301). There are no c l e a r t r e n d s and the degree of c o o p e r a t i o n o f t e n changes with e l e c t i o n s of new l e a d e r s . Unsolved problems f r u s t r a t e r e l a t i o n s . On the other hand, annual meetings between the p r e s i d e n t and the prime m i n i s t e r and between the l e g i s l a t i v e b o d ies p r o v i d e s t a b i l i t y . The u n p a r a l l e l e d f r e e t r a d e agreement i s an example of the e x t e n t the two c o u n t r i e s can c o o p e r a t e . Canada and the U.S. have s i m i l a r c u l t u r e s . Radio, t e l e v i s i o n and p r i n t e d media c r o s s the border w i t h ease. The people a l s o have s i m i l a r development p e r s p e c t i v e s . They share the same c o n t i n e n t and most of them speak the same language. The d i f f e r e n c e i n government s t r u c t u r e , however, p r e s e n t s o b s t a c l e s t o c o o p e r a t i o n . The s t r i c t s e p a r a t i o n of 174 powers between the branches of the U.S. government d i f f e r s from the m i n g l i n g of e x e c u t i v e and l e g i s l a t i v e powers i n Canada. Canadians t r u s t t h e i r governments with more power than Americans do. A d i f f e r e n c e i n the openness of the governments may l i m i t i n f o r m a t i o n exchange. Canadian o f f i c i a l s have expressed s u r p r i s e t h a t c o n f i d e n t i a l documents become p u b l i c i n f o r m a t i o n once g i v e n to a f e d e r a l agency. D i f f e r e n c e s i n g e o g r a p h i c a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s a l s o c o m p l i c a t e r e l a t i o n s . During the e a r l y p a r t of t h i s c e n t u r y transboundary i s s u e s were g e o g r a p h i c a l l y c o n t a i n e d . T e c h n o l o g i c a l advances such as r a i l w a y s and highways l e d to economic development being " l i b e r a t e d from the t y r a n n y of p l a c e " (Weaver 1984, 64). At one time we shared a border. Today, with a c i d r a i n and other f a r r e a c h i n g i s s u e s , we share a c o n t i n e n t . 6.3. R e l a t i o n s i n The ABCY Region C o n f l i c t s between the major powers i n the ABCY Region have o c c u r r e d throughout r e c o r d e d h i s t o r y . I n s t i t u t i o n s u t i l i z e d to r e s o l v e these c o n f l i c t s have, however, changed throughout time. E a r l y c o n f l i c t s were o f t e n h a s t i l y r e s o l v e d by t h r e a t s of p h y s i c a l f o r c e . They concerned t e r r i t o r i a l c l a i m s , t r a d e and n a v i g a t i o n r i g h t s , r e s o u r c e a l l o c a t i o n , and l o c a t i o n of boundaries. I n t e r n a t i o n a l c o n f l i c t s a f t e r the 1867 A l a s k a purchase were g e n e r a l l y conducted i n a p e a c e f u l manner. Boards, commissions, t r i b u n a l s , and meetings between l e a d e r s were used to 175 n e g o t i a t e s e t t l e m e n t s . Although e l a b o r a t e transboundary p l a n n i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s have e v o l v e d , many major i s s u e s are s t i l l u n r e s o l v e d : f i s h e r i e s a l l o c a t i o n , maritime b o r d e r s , a r c t i c s o v e r e i g n t y , e f f e c t s of o i l development on c a r i b o u , w i l d e r n e s s d e s i g n a t i o n , and n a v i g a t i o n r e s t r i c t i o n s . The r e s o u r c e economies of the r e g i o n have h i s t o r i c a l l y been dependent on f o r e i g n markets and have been s u s c e p t i b l e to c y c l e s of booms and b u s t s . Raw r e s o u r c e s have been exported and f i n i s h e d goods imported. Booms r e v o l v e d around export of sea o t t e r f u r s , f i s h e r i e s , m i n e r a l s , petroleum, and m i l i t a r y a c t i v i t y . F o r e s t r y , t r a p p i n g , and t o u r i s m have a l s o f u e l l e d the r e g i o n . Economic s t a b i l i t y has been f r u s t r a t e d by a c c e s s problems, d i s t a n c e s to markets, power l i m i t a t i o n s , and poor p r i c e s f o r r e s o u r c e s . S u b s i s t e n c e h u n t i n g and f i s h i n g and government spending helped s o f t e n the b u s t s . Booms and busts w i l l l i k e l y c o n t i n u e i n the near f u t u r e d e s p i t e attempts to d i v e r s i f y the economies. Unless new approaches are implemented, i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o n f l i c t s are a l s o l i k e l y to grow. Governments i n the r e g i o n , tend to ignore l e s s o n s of the past by a p p l y i n g s h o r t - t e r m f i x e s t o l o n g -term problems. A look t o the r e g i o n ' s past e x p e r i e n c e , however, can h e l p prevent r e p e a t i n g the same mis t a k e s . 6.4. C o n c l u s i o n s A wide range of c o o p e r a t i o n between Canada and i n the ABCY Region occurs through a complex network f e d e r a l , s u b n a t i o n a l , and l o c a l governments as w e l l A l a s k a of as 176 p r i v a t e i n t e r e s t s . The f e d e r a l governments have had a major presence i n A l a s k a and the Yukon while the p r o v i n c i a l government manages most of the r e s o u r c e s i n B.C. Because of o v e r l a p p i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , the f e d e r a l governments become i n v o l v e d i n some s u b n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i v e e f f o r t s . P r i v a t e c o o p e r a t i o n i s expressed through chambers of commerces, t o u r i s m a l l i a n c e s , e n vironmental groups, p r o f e s s i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s , c u l t u r a l exchanges, and through c o r p o r a t i o n s . The I n u i t Circumpolar Conference (ICC) i s an important p r i v a t e i n t e r n a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n r e p r e s e n t i n g Eskimo people of Canada, the U.S. and Greenland. The ICC i s concerned wi t h d i v e r s e i s s u e s such as environmental p r o t e c t i o n , a r c t i c p o l i c y , and N a t i v e s e l f government. T h i s i n s t i t u t i o n a l s o addresses Canadian-Alaskan i s s u e s . I n f o r m a t i o n exchange p r o v i d e s the most common form of c o o p e r a t i o n f o l l o w e d by j o i n t p l a n n i n g and j o i n t management. Although few arrangements mandate the exchange of i n f o r m a t i o n , i t occurs through r e p o r t r e f e r r a l s , i n - p e r s o n meetings and over the t e l e p h o n e . Before A l a s k a ' s s t a t e h o o d s t a t u s i n 1959, j o i n t p l a n n i n g o c c u r r e d p r i m a r i l y through the two f e d e r a l governments. A f t e r A l a s k a was granted more powers, o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r i n c r e a s i n g c o o p e r a t i v e p l a n n i n g were e x p l o r e d . J o i n t p l a n n i n g has o c c u r r e d f o r f i s h e r y a l l o c a t i o n and enhancement, c a r i b o u management, t o u r i s m marketing, energy development, p i p e l i n e p r o p o s a l s , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n networks, and w i l d f i r e s u p p r e s s i o n . 177 Government o f f i c i a l s r a r e l y comment on each o t h e r ' s p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s e s u n l e s s they have a d i r e c t stake i n the outcome. Compatible lan d use d e s i g n a t i o n s do occur a l o n g the border y e t they have been more the r e s u l t of p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s e s w i t h i n each government than between them. Proposed o i l development i n A l a s k a ' s A r c t i c N a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e Range (ANWR) a d j a c e n t to the North Yukon N a t i o n a l Park i s an example of a c o n f l i c t i n g land use. U.S. w i l d e r n e s s d e s i g n a t i o n a b u t t i n g r e s o u r c e development i n the B.C. p o r t i o n of the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n i s another example. The f u l l r a m i f i c a t i o n s of land use c o n f l i c t s w i l l not be e v i d e n t u n t i l the area becomes more developed. Because governments are r e l u c t a n t t o commit themselves t o u n d e r t a k i n g s t h a t may reduce f u t u r e o p t i o n s , few i n s t a n c e s of j o i n t programs e x i s t . The suc c e s s of f i s h e r i e s i n s t i t u t i o n s i s an e x c e p t i o n . Less s t r u c t u r e d j o i n t programs a l s o occur f o r t o u r i s m , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , energy, e d u c a t i o n , and f i r e s u p p r e s s i o n m a t t e r s . Although c o o p e r a t i o n i s growing i n the ABCY Region t h e r e i s much room f o r improvement. I n t e r n a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s are g e n e r a l l y ad hoc, lack power and i s s u e s are i n c r e m e n t a l l y addressed i n i s o l a t i o n from each o t h e r . They are more s u i t e d t o r e a c t t o problems r a t h e r than to p r o a c t i v e l y p l a n . Except f o r a few i s o l a t e d i n s t a n c e s where i n s t i t u t i o n s have been h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d , they e v e n t u a l l y e i t h e r f a i l t o meet r e g u l a r l y or are a b o l i s h e d a l t o g e t h e r . I n t e r n a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s i n the r e g i o n have been developed f o r a wide spectrum of i n d i v i d u a l i s s u e s y e t few 178 are capable of a d d r e s s i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e c t o r s . An o v e r a l l p i c t u r e i s o f t e n l o s t to s t r o n g s e c t o r a l approaches. J o i n t bodies s p e c i a l l y c r e a t e d f o r s e c t o r a l c o o p e r a t i o n i n the ABCY Region i n c l u d e the I n t e r n a t i o n a l Porcupine C a r i b o u Board, the S t i k i n e - I s k u t R i v e r s I n f o r m a t i o n Exchange Group and s e v e r a l f i s h e r y commissions. Three n o t a b l e government arrangements have been used to address m u l t i - s e c t o r i s s u e s : the T r i l a t e r a l - H e a d s - o f -Government (THOG) meetings, l e g i s l a t i v e exchanges, and meetings between the c i t i e s of Juneau and Whitehorse. Methods f o r d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n are s t i l l i n t h e i r i n f a n c y . F i s h e r i e s commissions and meetings between l e a d e r s are some of the few i n s t i t u t i o n s a v a i l a b l e to r e s o l v e c o n f l i c t s . The 1988 Free Trade Agreement's d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n board may or may not address i s s u e s i n the r e g i o n . Without i n - p l a c e c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n procedures, many problems have been long l a s t i n g and i n a d e q u a t e l y addressed. Although r e l a t i o n s between the U.S. and Canada began on a c o n f r o n t a t i o n a l note, i n a worldwide c o n t e x t they have e v o l v e d t o a bes t case s c e n a r i o . B i l a t e r a l r e l a t i o n s are amicable and the r e g i o n i s r e l a t i v e l y undeveloped. T h i s s i t u a t i o n p r o v i d e s an e x c e l l e n t o p p o r t u n i t y t o p r o a c t i v e l y p l a n b e f o r e s i g n i f i c a n t problems r e q u i r e a h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d p r o c e s s . A m a r g i n a l i n c r e a s e i n e f f o r t c o u l d l e a d t o d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y b e t t e r r e s u l t s . Each n a t i o n has i t s own agenda and w i t h i n each n a t i o n competing i n t e r e s t s o f t e n erode o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r i n t e g r a t i v e p l a n n i n g . An i n i t i a t i v e 179 a t the i n t e r n a t i o n a l l e v e l , however, can p r o v i d e n e c e s s a r y checks and b a l a n c e s t o encourage an i n t e g r a t i v e approach w i t h i n each n a t i o n . Because the r e s t of the world looks to the U.S.-Canada r e l a t i o n s h i p as an example, a p r o a c t i v e approach i n the ABCY Region c o u l d p o t e n t i a l l y have worldwide r a m i f i c a t i o n s . The growing s e r i o u s n e s s of transboundary i s s u e s w i l l i n c r e a s e f u t u r e needs f o r c o o p e r a t i o n . F i s h and w i l d l i f e , w i l d l a n d , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , energy development, and p o l l u t i o n i s s u e s are p o t e n t i a l problem areas i n the ABCY Region. C u r r e n t dilemmas i n c l u d e m i t i g a t i n g e f f e c t s of o i l development, p o s s i b l e o i l tanker s p i l l s , border and a r c t i c s o v e r e i g n t y d i s p u t e s , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r s , power exchanges, w i l d e r n e s s , and ongoing f i s h e r i e s a l l o c a t i o n . 6.5. Probable Future Trends Many authors agree t h a t new i n s t i t u t i o n s are needed but s p e c i f i c recommendations d i f f e r (Utton 1973, Sewell 1986, Johannson 1975, Dupuy 1979a, S a d l e r 1986). While i t i s tempting t o d e s i g n Utopian i n s t i t u t i o n s , i t i s o f t e n n e c e s s a r y t o work w i t h i n e x i s t i n g systems. I t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t Canada and the U.S. w i l l cede a u t h o r i t y t o new j o i n t management bodies (LeMarquand 1976). Arms-length, y e a r - t o - y e a r b a r g a i n i n g would appear to dominate the agenda, r a t h e r than commitment to accept f u t u r e d e c i s i o n s of j o i n t boards or commissions ( S c o t t 1974, 847). Utton (1973) expects to see f l e x i b l e , open ended arrangements i n the f u t u r e . A complete revamping of 180 i n s t i t u t i o n a l systems w i l l not work i f p a r t i c i p a n t s have not made i n t e l l e c t u a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s n e c e s s a r y to e f f e c t i v e l y u t i l i z e them. T h i s f a c t s h o u l d not, however, i n h i b i t e x p e r i m e n t i n g w i t h i n n o v a t i o n s t h a t f o s t e r c o o p e r a t i o n . A p r o a c t i v e a n t i c i p a t o r y approach i n v o l v i n g r e g i o n a l and l o c a l i n t e r e s t s i s d e s i r a b l e . R e l a t i o n s need to be s t r u c t u r e d enough to encourage r e g u l a r i n t e r a c t i o n yet f l e x i b l e enough to respond to change. R e d e s i g n i n g e x i s t i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s and c r e a t i n g new ones may be n e c e s s a r y . They can be d e s i g n e d to a n t i c i p a t e and m i t i g a t e f u t u r e problems e a r l y on. Unless a p r o a c t i v e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s i s undertaken f o r the e n t i r e r e g i o n , i n c r e a s i n g c o n f l i c t over i r r e v e r s i b l e l a n d use d e s i g n a t i o n s can be expected. 6.6. F u t u r e Options Future r e l a t i o n s between Canada and the U.S. w i l l e i t h e r improve, become more tense or s t a y the same. C a r r o l l (1983) l i s t s t h r e e a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r the f u t u r e of U.S.-Canadian r e l a t i o n s . The f i r s t a l t e r n a t i v e i s to c o n t i n u e the s t a t u s quo, a pproaching each i s s u e as i t a r i s e s . The second a l t e r n a t i v e i s to adopt an i n c r e m e n t a l approach w i t h some a d d i t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e . C a r r o l l ' s recommended approach would be c r e a t i o n of a new o r d e r , i n c l u d i n g a b l a n k e t t r e a t y t o p r o v i d e more guidance. C l e a r r u l e s would be e s t a b l i s h e d f o r d e a l i n g with transboundary i s s u e s . S a d l e r (1986) suggests t h a t the c u r r e n t ad hoc approach be r e p l a c e d with an o v e r a l l system f o r c o n f l i c t s e t t l e m e n t . 181 He a l s o recommends i n s t i t u t i o n of a " f l e x i b l e form of 'umbrella' u n d e r s t a n d i n g i n which broad p r i n c i p l e s and o b l i g a t i o n s are s t a t e d i n g e n e r a l terms" ( S a d l e r 1986, 375). He recommends d e v e l o p i n g an " a n t i c i p a t o r y c a p a b i l i t y , " a p r o a c t i v e approach to emerging problems based upon r e s e a r c h and m o n i t o r i n g and empowered by i n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l and p u b l i c c o n s u l t a t i o n s ( S a d l e r 1986, 365). Improving the r e l a t i o n s h i p w i l l r e q u i r e a c o n c e r t e d approach between the two f e d e r a l and t h r e e s u b n a t i o n a l governments to experiment with d i f f e r e n t mechanisms t a i l o r e d to the r e g i o n . The problem t h e r e f o r e i s not to seek out a "one best way" but, i n s t e a d , to d e v i s e d e c i s i o n p r o c e s s e s t h a t are both e f f i c i e n t i n p r o v i d i n g d e s i r e d output and e f f e c t i v e i n a c h i e v i n g f a i r outcomes f o r a l l a f f e c t e d p a r t i e s (Boschken 1982, 13). The OECD (1979) a s s e r t s t h a t t h e r e i s no one i n s t i t u t i o n a l s o l u t i o n a p p l i c a b l e i n a l l t r a n s - f r o n t i e r r e g i o n s . Because each f r o n t i e r r e g i o n has a unique s e t of c i r c u m s t a n c e s , f l e x i b i l i t y to experiment i s n e c e s s a r y . Increased s t r u c t u r e i s a l s o needed to develop means to respond e f f e c t i v e l y t o e x i s t i n g and f u t u r e c o n f l i c t s b e f o r e they become unmanageable. [ P l l a n n i n g of development and expansion must be embodied w e l l b e f o r e an acute need f o r i t i s u r g e n t l y f e l t (Glos 1961, 95). Another purpose f o r i n c r e a s e d s t r u c t u r e would be to develop ways to assure r e g u l a r meetings occ u r . 182 6.7. S p e c i f i c Recommendations The recommended approach f o r improving i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i o n i n the ABCY Region i s to use e x i s t i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s as much as p o s s i b l e augmenting them with new s t r u c t u r e s when n e c e s s a r y . Recommendations w i l l be se p a r a t e d from those a c t i o n s t h a t can be i n i t i a t e d a t the n a t i o n a l and s u b n a t i o n a l l e v e l s . Because of d i v i d e d j u r i s d i c t i o n s i n both the U.S. and Canada, a c t i o n s i n i t i a t e d a t one l e v e l w i l l o f t e n need to have c o o p e r a t i o n from other l e v e l s of government. 6.7.1. N a t i o n a l L e v e l Recommendations D e t a i l e d recommendations f o r improving f e d e r a l c o o p e r a t i o n a l o n g the Canada-U.S. border are beyond the scope of t h i s s tudy. S e v e r a l g e n e r a l needed improvements, however, w i l l be noted. B i l a t e r a l r e l a t i o n s would be v a s t l y improved i f the two f e d e r a l governments were to adopt g e n e r a l g u i d e l i n e s to d i r e c t f u t u r e c o o p e r a t i o n . C a r r o l l ' s recommendations f o r an environmental t r e a t y and a formal n a t i o n a l l e v e l c i t i z e n a d v i s o r y committee sh o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d . The recommendation of the American Bar A s s o c i a t i o n - C a n a d i a n Bar A s s o c i a t i o n (ABA-CBA) to e s t a b l i s h an a r b i t r a t i o n commission sh o u l d a l s o be c o n s i d e r e d . More a t t e n t i o n s h o u l d a l s o be d i r e c t e d to making e x i s t i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s work smoother. The Washington D.C.-Ottawa c o n n e c t i o n would be best t o focus on p r e s s i n g f e d e r a l l e v e l i s s u e s such as t r a d e , a i r p o l l u t i o n and major development 183 p l a n n i n g . Increased i n p u t of s u b n a t i o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s i n f e d e r a l l e v e l n e g o t i a t i o n s i s a l s o encouraged. While f e d e r a l - f e d e r a l c o o p e r a t i o n i s u s u a l l y l i m i t e d to i s s u e s of n a t i o n a l importance, f e d e r a l a g e n c i e s are r e s p o n s i b l e f o r many programs i n ABCY Region. They work with s t a t e , p r o v i n c i a l , t e r r i t o r i a l , and l o c a l i n t e r e s t s . The f e d e r a l governments sh o u l d take a more a c t i v e r o l e i n improving c r o s s - b o r d e r c o o p e r a t i o n . F e d e r a l o f f i c i a l s based i n the r e g i o n s h o u l d be encouraged to cooperate more o f t e n w i t h s i m i l a r a g e n c i e s on the other s i d e of the b o r d e r . S p e c i f i c employees i n each agency s h o u l d be t r a i n e d i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l a f f a i r s and a s s i g n e d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r c o o r d i n a t i o n . 6.7.2. S u b n a t i o n a l Recommendations S t a t e , p r o v i n c i a l , t e r r i t o r i a l , and l o c a l governments are the most important p l a c e s to expand t r a n s - b o r d e r c o o p e r a t i o n . C o o p e r a t i o n on the r e g i o n a l l e v e l on a s p e c i f i c i s s u e i s l e s s l i k e l y to be i n h i b i t e d by l i n k a g e to other i s s u e s . Linkage can be a s t i m u l u s to i n v o l v e f e d e r a l governments i n i s s u e s they would otherwise ignore but i t s s h o r t - t e r m advantages can have long-term c o s t s (Doran 1984). Linkage of i s s u e s reduces the f l e x i b i l i t y t o n e g o t i a t e about a p a r t i c u l a r i s s u e . The check and balance of a r e g i o n a l and l o c a l i n t e r e s t s p r o v i d e s an important r o l e . S u b n a t i o n a l governments may not c a r e to see a l o c a l i s s u e used as a b a r g a i n i n g c h i p i n an u n r e l a t e d i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s s u e . These governments are a l s o c l o s e r t o problem areas than Washington 184 and Ottawa. A d d i t i o n a l l y , r e g i o n a l l e v e l governments are more ada p t a b l e to change. I n t r i c a t e f e d e r a l l e v e l p r o t o c o l a s s u r e s a slow process and i t i s o f t e n unresponsive to u n f o r e s e e n c i r c u m s t a n c e s . T h i s r e g i o n i s f o r t u n a t e to have over t h r e e decades of s u b n a t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s s i n c e the f i r s t Alaska-B.C.-Yukon confer e n c e i n 1960. These T r i l a t e r a l Heads-of-Government (THOG) meetings c o u l d be more p r o d u c t i v e with a few minor changes. I t i s recommended t h a t a broad agreement between the h e a d s - o f - s t a t e s of the t h r e e j u r i s d i c t i o n s be approved to p r o v i d e g e n e r a l g u i d e l i n e s f o r c o o p e r a t i o n . Seven items sh o u l d be covered by t h i s agreement (Table 6-1). G u i d e l i n e s would h e l p e s t a b l i s h s t a n d a r d procedures f o r s c o p i n g e x e r c i s e s and f o r d e v e l o p i n g terms of r e f e r e n c e f o r j o i n t p l a n n i n g and j o i n t program development. F i r s t , the agreement sh o u l d e s t a b l i s h y e a r l y THOG meetings. By d e s i g n a t i n g a month when the annual meetings w i l l o c cur, they w i l l be l e s s l i k e l y to be postponed. Should unexpected events p r o h i b i t a l e a d e r from a t t e n d i n g , audio or v i d e o t e l e c o n f e r e n c e s c o u l d be used. Second, a C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee s i m i l a r to the one i n use d u r i n g the 1970's sh o u l d be c r e a t e d . T h i s committee would c o o r d i n a t e day-to-day c o o p e r a t i o n and prepare l e a d e r s f o r the annual THOG meetings. The c o o r d i n a t i n g committee should have r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s from the major s u b n a t i o n a l government a g e n c i e s most l i k e l y t o be i n v o l v e d i n transboundary i s s u e s . Each r e p r e s e n t a t i v e would a l s o be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r c o o r d i n a t i n g Alaska-Canadian c o o p e r a t i o n 185 w i t h i n h i s agency. At a minimum, q u a r t e r l y meetings should be h e l d . Again, these meetings c o u l d be t e l e c o n f e r e n c e d i f n e c e s s a r y . T h i r d , the o v e r a l l agreement should e s t a b l i s h THOG subcommittees composed of e x p e r t s i n major i s s u e a r e a s : h y d r o e l e c t r i c i t y , power i n t e r t i e s , w i l d e r n e s s , t o u r i s m , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , m i n e r a l s , o i l and gas, f o r e s t r y , f i s h and w i l d l i f e , s u b s i s t e n c e , and economic development. Members of these committees s h o u l d be chosen from f e d e r a l , s t a t e , p r o v i n c i a l , t e r r i t o r i a l , and l o c a l governments. These groups s h o u l d a t l e a s t meet by t e l e c o n f e r e n c e once per y e a r . More meetings c o u l d be h e l d as needed. Three major t a s k s should be a s s i g n e d to these groups: i n f o r m a t i o n exchange, i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r j o i n t g a i n , and m i t i g a t i n g p o t e n t i a l problems. The e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a Table 6-1. Recommended G u i d e l i n e s f o r C o o p e r a t i o n i n the ABCY Region 1. Designate a month f o r annual THOG meetings. 2. E s t a b l i s h a THOG C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee. 3. Create THOG subcommittees f o r major i s s u e s . 4. Encourage c o o p e r a t i o n between management l e v e l employees. 5. E s t a b l i s h a c i t i z e n a d v i s o r y board. 6. Document a l l i n t e r n a t i o n a l meetings. 7. O u t l i n e c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n procedures and p r o v i d e n e g o t i a t i o n and d i s p u t e t r a i n i n g . 8. E s t a b l i s h i n t e r n a t i o n a l r e g i o n a l c o n f e r e n c e s . 186 working r e l a t i o n s h i p i n each of these i s s u e areas should i d e n t i f y p o t e n t i a l c o n f l i c t s b e f o r e they become unwieldy. F o u r t h , the agreement s h o u l d encourage communication between on-the-ground managers and p l a n n e r s . While d e c i s i o n s would be approved by higher l e v e l o f f i c i a l s , i n f o r m a t i o n exchange s h o u l d be a v a i l a b l e t o a l l government workers. Report r e f e r r a l s , comparison of management te c h n i q u e s and p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s e s s h o u l d be encouraged. F i f t h , a c i t i z e n a d v i s o r y committee i n each government c o u l d a l s o be formed, r e p o r t i n g to C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee members. T h i s committee of nongovernmental employees would r e p r e s e n t e n v i r o n m e n t a l , r e s o u r c e development, and other i n t e r e s t s concerned with transboundary i s s u e s . S i x t h , the agreement s h o u l d promote a means of documenting a l l meetings. During the 1960s, formal minutes were p u b l i s h e d on a r o t a t i n g b a s i s of the A l a s k a - B r i t i s h Columbia-Yukon Conf e r e n c e s . When the meetings were r e e s t a b l i s h e d i n the 1970s, minutes were a g a i n kept a l t h o u g h l e s s formal i n n a t u r e . Other than handwritten notes, the meetings have not been w e l l documented i n A l a s k a d u r i n g the e a r l y 1980s. Minutes or tapes of these meetings s h o u l d be f i l e d c o n s i s t e n t l y i n government a r c h i v e s f o r f u t u r e review by government workers and r e s e a r c h e r s . Seventh, t h i s agreement s h o u l d o u t l i n e c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n p r o c e d u r e s . T r a i n i n g government employees i n v o l v e d i n transboundary i s s u e s i n c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n and b a r g a i n i n g and n e g o t i a t i o n s k i l l s would be a f i r s t s t e p to encourage b e t t e r r e l a t i o n s . Wondolleck (1988) found t h a t 187 c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n t r a i n i n g f o r r e s o u r c e managers has proven to be b e n e f i c i a l . When problems not r e s o l v e d through n e g o t i a t i o n reach a c r i t i c a l l e v e l , they s h o u l d be s u b j e c t to m e d i a t i o n . Techniques such as f o c u s i n g on i n t e r e s t s r a t h e r than p o s i t i o n s and win-win approaches s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d ( F i s c h e r and Ury 1981). L a s t l y , i n t e r n a t i o n a l r e g i o n a l c o n f e r e n c e s s h o u l d be h e l d f o r each of the major r e g i o n s i n the ABCY Regions. T h i s idea w i l l be f u r t h e r e x p l a i n e d i n the f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n . 6.7.3. I n t e r n a t i o n a l R e g i o n a l Conferences A major recommendation r e s u l t i n g from t h i s r e s e a r c h i s the c r e a t i o n of a m u l t i - s e c t o r mechanism to d e a l with i s s u e s l o c a l i z e d t o s m a l l e r areas w i t h i n the ABCY Region. The c r e a t i o n of f i v e s u b - r e g i o n s would focus d i s c u s s i o n s to more manageable u n i t s . Recommended s u b - r e g i o n s are the North Slope, I n t e r i o r , Kluane, Upper Yukon-Taku, and S t i k i n e ( F i g u r e 6-1). These s u b - r e g i o n s have been chosen a f t e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n of n a t u r a l f e a t u r e s and l o c a t i o n of i s s u e s . Sub-region boundaries c o u l d be changed to accommodate new i s s u e s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l r e g i o n a l c o n f e r e n c e s would be h e l d f o r each a r e a on a r o t a t i n g b a s i s . The importance of c u r r e n t i s s u e s w i l l determine how o f t e n these c o n f e r e n c e s s h o u l d occur and which s u b - r e g i o n s s h o u l d be addressed f i r s t . They would permit on-the-ground managers and r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s from c i t i z e n and p r o f e s s i o n a l groups to i n i t i a t e p r o a c t i v e p l a n n i n g e x e r c i s e s . These meetings would 188 a l s o p r o v i d e an e x c e l l e n t o p p o r t u n i t y to h o l d s h o r t workshops on communication and n e g o t i a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s . The c o n f e r e n c e s s h o u l d occur near the ar e a of concern and be l i m i t e d t o a manageable number of p a r t i c i p a n t s , 100 people or l e s s . An agreement s i g n e d by r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the v a r i o u s governments would o u t l i n e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and e x p e c t a t i o n s . Because of d i v i d e d j u r i s d i c t i o n s f o r re s o u r c e management i n both c o u n t r i e s , f e d e r a l , p r o v i n c i a l , s t a t e , and t e r r i t o r i a l a g e n c i e s would be i n v o l v e d . The confer e n c e should be designed t o f o s t e r n o n - c o n f r o n t a t i o n a l i n t e r a c t i o n . 189 The purpose of the c o n f e r e n c e s i s to e s t a b l i s h working r e l a t i o n s h i p s , h e l p p a r t i c i p a n t s e n v i s i o n the border area as a r e g i o n and to address i s s u e s , concerns and o p p o r t u n i t i e s . I t i s recommended t h a t f o u r documents be d r a f t e d d u r i n g each c o n f e r e n c e : a statement of the areas of consensus, a l i s t of p o i n t s of c o n t e n t i o n , a l i s t of s e v e r a l r e a l i s t i c f u t u r e s c e n a r i o s , and l a s t l y , a p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n f o r f u t u r e c o o p e r a t i o n . B e s i d e s working towards these g o a l s , workshops, l e c t u r e s and c u l t u r a l events c o u l d be p r e s e n t e d i n the e v e n i n g s . A p o s s i b l e schedule f o r an i n t e r n a t i o n a l r e g i o n a l c o n f e r e n c e i s o u t l i n e d here f o r the purpose of d i s c u s s i o n . The i n t e r n a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e of p a r t i c i p a n t s and i s s u e s s p e c i f i c to the s u b - r e g i o n may make i t n e c e s s a r y to p l a c e an emphasis i n d i f f e r e n t a r e a s . The f i r s t day of the proposed c o n f e r e n c e would begin with an overview of c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n s and o b j e c t i v e s of the c o n f e r e n c e . Short s e c t o r a l p r e s e n t a t i o n s would occur through the r e s t of the morning. These p r e s e n t a t i o n s would p r o v i d e an unbiased d e s c r i p t i o n of transboundary i s s u e s and o p p o r t u n i t i e s a l o n g with c u r r e n t p l a n n i n g and management s t r a t e g i e s . These i n i t i a l p r e s e n t a t i o n s would s e t the stage f o r d i s c u s s i o n s l a t e r i n the c o n f e r e n c e . The f i r s t a f t e r n o o n would be spent i n workshops. I t may be more e f f e c t i v e to d i v i d e the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t o s m a l l e r groups and r o t a t e them from one workshop to another. Suggested workshops i n c l u d e : e f f e c t i v e communication, n e g o t i a t i o n and b a r g a i n i n g ; e x p e r i e n c e s of other 190 i n t e r n a t i o n a l r e g i o n s ; o b s t a c l e s and o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r the ABCY Region; and c u r r e n t r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g t e c h n i q u e s f o r i n t e g r a t i o n of s e c t o r a l p l a n n i n g . During the second morning p a r t i c i p a n t s would break i n t o s e c t o r a l groups. A f a c i l i t a t o r t r a i n e d i n group p r o c e s s e s would be a s s i g n e d to each group. The groups would be encouraged to f u r t h e r d e l i n e a t e i s s u e s and to i d e n t i f y o b s t a c l e s t o and o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r c o o p e r a t i o n . During the a f t e r n o o n / a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e from each s e c t o r a l group would meet t o g e t h e r . These people would be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r d r a f t i n g a statement of consensus, p o i n t s of c o n t e n t i o n and a p r e l i m i n a r y p l a n f o r f u t u r e c o o p e r a t i o n . The r e s t of the p a r t i c i p a n t s would form m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y groups. They would then d r a f t s e v e r a l a l t e r n a t i v e f u t u r e s f o r the s u b - r e g i o n g i v e n d i f f e r e n t v a r i a b l e s of e v e n t s . During the l a s t hour of the a f t e r n o o n , a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s would meet tog e t h e r and a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e from each group would p r e s e n t t h e i r f i n d i n g s . C o n t r o v e r s i a l i s s u e s are not l i k e l y to be r e s o l v e d d u r i n g a t h r e e day c o n f e r e n c e . These meetings would, however, permit on-the-ground managers to meet and e s t a b l i s h a network f o r f u t u r e c o o p e r a t i o n and c o o r d i n a t i o n . The recommendations of the i n d i v i d u a l groups would not be b i n d i n g on the governments but c o u l d be used to s t i m u l a t e f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n s . I t i s recommended t h a t a l i s t of p a r t i c i p a n t s , t h e i r addresses and telephone numbers be mailed to each p a r t i c i p a n t . Continued i n f o r m a l communication, c o o r d i n a t i o n and r e p o r t exchange would be 191 encouraged. Future plans for cooperation would be l e f t to the three subnational leaders with input from the coordinating committee. 6 . 8 . Summary Canadian-U.S. r e l a t i o n s have become more c i v i l i z e d since e a r l i e r i n teractions but there i s room for improvement. Controversial issues common to the lower border are almost absent along the Alaska-Canada boundary. Cooperation in the ABCY Region has h i s t o r i c a l l y been issue oriented occurring in a piecemeal fashion. Unless there i s a targeted e f f o r t to encourage more structured interactions between the governments of the region, i t i s l i k e l y that complex problems w i l l a r i s e . Without increased cooperation, i t i s also l i k e l y that many opportunities to improve or maintain the q u a l i t y of l i f e for the region's residents w i l l be missed. The governments in the ABCY Region w i l l be reluctant to cede any. of t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s to an i n t e r n a t i o n a l organization. More structure could, however, be introduced into the r e l a t i o n s h i p without loss of i n d i v i d u a l sovereignty. S t a b i l i t y could also be accomplished while r e t a i n i n g a b i l i t y to respond to sudden change. Development of an o v e r a l l agreement would provide guidelines to increase cooperation in the region. It i s recommended that leaders meet r e g u l a r l y , a Coordinating Committee be established and a dispute r e s o l u t i o n strategy be implemented. F i n a l l y , i t i s recommended that the ABCY 192 Region be d e l i n e a t e d i n t o f i v e s u b - r e g i o n s . R e g i o n a l c o n f e r e n c e s h e l d i n s u c c e s s i v e years would p r o v i d e an o p p o r t u n i t y to p r o a c t i v e l y p l a n f o r the r e g i o n b e f o r e major developments are completed, an o p t i o n not a v a i l a b l e to many other transboundary r e g i o n s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , c r o s s border c o o p e r a t i o n u s u a l l y occurs i n response to l a r g e development p r o p o s a l s or t h r e a t s of p o l l u t i o n . The i n i t i a t i o n of such an i n t e r n a t i o n a l r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g process would p r o v i d e an i n c e n t i v e f o r each n a t i o n to reduce piecemeal p l a n n i n g w i t h i n t h e i r own j u r i s d i c t i o n s a l o n g the Alaska-Canada border. Increased c o o p e r a t i o n w i l l r e q u i r e a commitment of time and f i s c a l r e s o u r c e s but the b e n e f i t s of c o o p e r a t i o n f a r outweigh i t s c o s t s . C o o p e r a t i o n can l e a d t o g a i n s both i n the near f u t u r e and over a longer time p e r i o d . Many b e n e f i t s have a l r e a d y r e s u l t e d from c o o p e r a t i o n . The two n a t i o n s have l e a r n e d from each o t h e r ' s approaches to f i s h and w i l d l i f e management and o p e r a t i o n of p a r k s . Methods f o r the treatment of a l c o h o l i s m i n the North have a l s o been shar e d . By working t o g e t h e r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r s have been c o n s t r u c t e d , o i l s p i l l c o n t i n g e n c y p l a n s completed, f i s h and w i l d l i f e p o p u l a t i o n s p r o t e c t e d and enhanced, and r e s u l t s of r e s e a r c h have been sha r e d . C o o p e r a t i o n has a l s o r e s u l t e d i n arrangements t o respond q u i c k l y to medical emergencies. Another b e n e f i t of c o o p e r a t i o n between A l a s k a , B.C. and the Yukon has been t h a t more a t t e n t i o n has been p a i d to r e g i o n a l i s s u e s by the n a t i o n a l governments. While c o o p e r a t i o n f o r long-range b e n e f i t s may be not be 193 immediately t a n g i b l e , long-term b e n e f i t s w i l l undoubtedly be r e a l i z e d . Land use and environmental d e c i s i o n s made today w i l l g r e a t l y a f f e c t o p t i o n s a v a i l a b l e t o f u t u r e g e n e r a t i o n s . Regular c o o p e r a t i o n can l e a d t o e a r l y r e c o g n i t i o n and m i t i g a t i o n of f u t u r e problems, reduce i n s t a n c e s of transboundary p o l l u t i o n , i d e n t i f y o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r j o i n t g a i n s , and s i m p l y make one j u r i s d i c t i o n aware of other p o s s i b l e approaches t o common problems. 194 BIBLIOGRAPHY Abele, F r a n c e s . 1987. Canadian c o n t r a d i c t i o n : F o r t y years of n o r t h e r n p o l i t i c a l development. A r c t i c 40, 4: 310-320. A b e r l e y , Douglas C a r r o l . 1985. B i o r e g i o n a l i s m : A t e r r i t o r i a l approach to governance and development of Northwestern B r i t i s h Columbia. Masters T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Ahrens, Robert A. 1986. W r i t t e n submission to the p r o v i n c i a l government's Wild e r n e s s A d v i s o r y Committee. Pp. 1-11 i n Parks and p r o t e c t e d areas i n B r i t i s h Columbia i n the Second Century. Vancouver: B.C. Caucus H e r i t a g e f o r Tomorrow. A l a s k a . 1987. A l a s k a Blue Book 1987. Juneau: S t a t e of A l a s k a . A l a s k a . 1988. Minutes from meeting of the Interagency Committee on Al a s k a Highway. In author's p o s s e s s i o n . Juneau. December 12. A l a s k a . Department of F i s h and Game. 1987. Memorandum from J e f f Hartman, Economist t o B r i a n A l l e e , D i r e c t o r of FRED D i v i s i o n . In aut h o r ' s p o s s e s s i o n . Juneau. June 24. A l a s k a . Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s . 1985. L e t t e r from Commissioner Knapp to U.S.D.A. F o r e s t S e r v i c e R e g i o n a l F o r e s t e r M i c h a e l B a r t o n . In author's p o s s e s s i o n . Juneau: A l a s k a Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s . October 3. Al a s k a Power A u t h o r i t y . 1983. Memorandum from E r i c Yould to Commissioner Lyon. In aut h o r ' s p o s s e s s i o n . Juneau: A l a s k a Department of Commerce and Economic Development. September 19. . 1988. Southeast A l a s k a i n t e r t i e : S t a t u s r e p o r t January 1988. In author's p o s s e s s i o n . Mimeograph. Juneau: A l a s k a Department of Commerce and Economic Development. January. 195 A l a s k a S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e . 1959. C r e a t i o n of the I n t e r n a t i o n a l Development Commission. Chapter 61. . 1979. The A l a s k a r a i l r o a d . Prepared by Cleonne R. Compton. L e g i s l a t i v e Committee on T r a n s p o r t a t i o n . Juneau: A l a s k a S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e . . 1981. R e l a t i n g to the proposed S t i k i n e dam p r o g r e s s i n Canada. L e g i s l a t i v e Resolve No. 8, 1981. Juneau: A l a s k a S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e . . 1982. Minutes of the House Resources Committee. March 10. . 1986. The timber i n d u s t r y i n i n t e r i o r A l a s k a . House Research Agency Report 86-B. Juneau: A l a s k a State L e g i s l a t u r e . 1987a. R e l a t i n g to Canadian development of o i l r e s e r v e s i n the A r c t i c . Senate Resolve No. 9. Juneau: A l a s k a S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e . . 1987b. Tape of the House T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Committee Juneau: A p r i l 3. . 1988a. R e l a t i n g to the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of the S t a t e ' s boundaries with the S o v i e t Union and Canada. Senate J o i n t R e s o l u t i o n No. 12. Juneau: A l a s k a S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e . . 1988b. Handbook on A l a s k a S t a t e Government. Juneau: A l a s k a S t a t e Government. A l a s k a and B r i t i s h Columbia. 1982. S t i k i n e - I s k u t R i v e r s c o o p e r a t i v e i n f o r m a t i o n exchange arrangement between the P r o v i n c e of B r i t i s h Columbia and the S t a t e of A l a s k a . Juneau: A l a s k a and B r i t i s h Columbia. May 3. A l a s k a , B r i t i s h Columbia and Yukon C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee. 1976. Minutes. Juneau. June 22. A l a s k a Geographic. 1979. A l a s k a ' s N a t i v e people. A l a s k a  Geographic. 6, 3. A l a s k a Geographic. 1981. A l a s k a n a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t l a n d s . A l a s k a Geographic. 8, 4. A l h e r i t i e r e , Dominique. 1985. Settlement of p u b l i c i n t e r n a t i o n a l d i s p u t e s on shared r e s o u r c e s . N a t u r a l  Resources J o u r n a l 25, 3: 701-712. A q u a t i c Environments L t d . 1982. F i s h p o p u l a t i o n s 196 a s s o c i a t e d with proposed h y d r o e l e c t r i c dams on the S t i k i n e and Iskut R i v e r s . Mimeograph. Vancouver: B r i t i s h Columbia. B a l l , Georgiana. 1971. The Peter M a r t i n case and the p r o v i s i o n a l s e t t l e m e n t of the S t i k i n e boundary. BC  S t u d i e s 10 (Summer): 35-55. B a s s e t t , Lamont. 1984. R i v e r f o r the taming. Harrowsmith 53 (February March): 32-45. Berber, F . J . 1959. R i v e r s i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l law. London: Stevens and Sons L t d . Berger, Thomas, R. 1985. Behind the facade: What the A l a s k a N a t i v e Claims Settlement Act means to v i l l a g e A l a s k a . Northern P e r s p e c t i v e s 13,4: 1-10. Bingham, G a i l . 1986. R e s o l v i n g environmental d i s p u t e s : A  decade of e x p e r i e n c e . Washington: The C o n s e r v a t i o n Foundation. Boaz, F r a n z . 1966. The I n d i a n t r i b e s of the North P a c i f i c c o a s t . Pp. 1-7 i n Indians of the North P a c i f i c Coast, e d i t e d by Tom McFeet. Toronto: New C a r l e t o n L i b r a r y . Boschken, Herman L. 1982. Land use c o n f l i c t s : O r g a n i z a t i o n a l  d e s i g n and r e s o u r c e management. Urbana: U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s P r e s s . Bothe, M. 1979. L o c a l c o - o p e r a t i o n on t r a n s f r o n t i e r e nvironmental problems. Pp. 91-109 i n Environmental  p r o t e c t i o n i n f r o n t i e r r e g i o n s . P a r i s : OECD. Br a d l e y , J e f f . 1987. U.S., Canada squabble over access to N.W. Passage. The Juneau Empire. May 6: 15. B.C. S t u d i e s . 1988. The U n i t e d S t a t e s Consul i n V i c t o r i a , 1862-1870. B.C. S t u d i e s B r i t i s h Columbia. 1960. Minutes from the f i r s t Alaska-Yukon- B r i t i s h Columbia c o n f e r e n c e on matters of mutual  i n t e r e s t . V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . . 1988. R e s t r u c t u r i n g of Government of B r i t i s h Columbia. V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B r i t i s h Columbia. C a b i n e t Committee on Economic Development. 1982. The new f r o n t i e r : A p o l i c y approach to economic  development i n Northwest B r i t i s h Columbia. V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . . 1983. Northwest economic development s t u d i e s : Summary r e p o r t . V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . 197 B r i t i s h Columbia. Environment and Land Use Committee. 1982. B.C. r o l e s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s : Environment and Land  Use T e c h n i c a l Committee and r e g i o n a l r e s o u r c e  management committees. V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B r i t i s h Columbia H y d r o e l e c t r i c and Power A u t h o r i t y . 1966. I n t e r i m r e p o r t on h y d r o - e l e c t r i c p o t e n t i a l of the Iskut  S t i k i n e R i v e r s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l Power and E n g i n e e r i n g C o n s u l t a n t s , L t d . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1970. A background study of a v a i l a b l e knowledge of the lower S t i k i n e R i v e r and e s t u a r y . A l a s k a : Report  to B.C. Hydro. S h u l t z I n t e r n a t i o n a l , L t d . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1979a. S t i k i n e - I s k u t S t u d i e s . B i o l o g i c a l C o n s u l t a n t s . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1980a. S t i k i n e - I s k u t environmental s t u d i e s : F o r e s t r y r e p o r t . P r o j e c t F953. Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1980b. S t i k i n e - I s k u t h y d r o e l e c t r i c development: Progress r e p o r t of f e a s i b i l i t y s t u d i e s . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1980c. S t i k i n e - I s k u t r e c r e a t i o n and t o u r i s m s t udy. DPA C o n s u l t i n g , L t d . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. • 1980d. S t i k i n e - I s k u t r i v e r s h y d r o e l e c t r i c p r o j e c t e nvironmental f e a s i b i l i t y s t u d i e s : Economic geology. Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1980e. F o r e s t r y Report S t i k i n e - I s k u t environmental s t u d i e s . F o r e s t a l I n t e r n a t i o n a l , L t d . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1980f. P r e l i m i n a r y a r c h e o l o g i c a l study of the proposed S t i k i n e - I s k u t H y d r o e l e c t r i c development. ARESCO, L t d . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1980g. S t i k i n e - I s k u t f i s h e r i e s s t u d i e s 1979. P. McCart B i o l o g i c a l C o n s u l t a n t s , L t d . Nanaimo. . 1981a. P r e l i m i n a r y a n a l y s i s of the p o t e n t i a l impact of h y d r o e l e c t r i c development of the S t i k i n e  R i v e r system on b i o l o g i c a l r e s o u r c e s of the S t i k i n e  e s t u a r y . Beak C o n s u l t a n t s . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1981b. S t i k i n e - I s k u t h y d r o e l e c t r i c development e x p l o r a t i o n program and access requirements. Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1981c. S t i k i n e - I s k u t f e a s i b i l i t y study: 198 Hydrology, r i v e r regime and morphology. H y d r o e l e c t r i c G e n e r a t i o n P r o j e c t s D i v i s i o n . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. • . 1981d. E l e c t r i c i t y i n Northwestern B.C. Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1981e. S t i k i n e - I s k u t H y d r o e l e c t r i c development e x p l o r a t i o n program and access r e q u i r e m e n t s . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1982a. P r e l i m i n a r y p l a n n i n g r e p o r t f o r the S t i k i n e - I s k u t t r a n s m i s s i o n system: A summary of system  p l a n n i n g , route e n g i n e e r i n g and environmental s t u d i e s . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1982b. Quick f a c t s about Hydro's proposed S t i k i n e - I s k u t h y d r o e l e c t r i c i t y development. Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1982c. S o c i a l and e c o l o g i c impacts. B e n t l e y LaBaen. Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1982d. S t i k i n e - I s k u t hydro development: Environmental s t u d i e s i n A l a s k a . Vancouver: B.C. Hydro. . 1982e. S t i k i n e - I s k u t development s t a t u s r e p o r t . Vancouver. B r i t i s h Columbia. M i n i s t r y of Economic Development. 1977. The northwest r e p o r t 77. V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . . 1982. B r i t i s h Columbia r e g i o n a l index: 1978. V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . . 1983. S t u d i e s of Settlement O p t i o n s . V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B r i t i s h Columbia. M i n i s t r y of Energy Mines and Petroleum Resources. 1983. Environmental overview task f o r c e on  northwest economic development o p p o r t u n i t i e s . Environment and S o c i a l Impact Working Group. V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . B r i t i s h Columbia. M i n i s t r y of Environment. 1978. E c o l o g i c a l  r e s e r v e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia. By V . J . K r a j i n a , J.B. F o s t e r , J . P o j a r and T. Carson. E c o l o g i c Reserves U n i t . V i c t o r i a : Queens P r i n t e r . B r i t i s h Columbia. M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s . 1978. F o r e s t P l a n n i n g  Handbook. V i c t o r i a : Queens P r i n t e r . . 1981. P u b l i c involvement handbook. V i c t o r i a : Queens P r i n t e r . 199 . 1984a. Lower S t i k i n e p l a n n i n g r e p o r t . P r i n c e Rupert F o r e s t P l a n n i n g S e c t i o n . Mimeograph. Smithers: B.C. M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s . . 1984b. F o r e s t and range r e s o u r c e a n a l y s i s i n accordance with s e c t i o n 7 M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s A c t . V i c t o r i a : Queens P r i n t e r . . 1985. Lower S t i k i n e R i v e r landscape assessment. Mimeograph. J.S. Peepre and A s s o c i a t e s . Vancouver: B.C. M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s . B r i t i s h Columbia. M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t s and Lands. 1987. Lower S t i k i n e l o c a l r e s o u r c e use p l a n . Mimeograph. Dease Lake: C a s s i a r F o r e s t D i s t r i c t . B r i t i s h Columbia. M i n i s t r y of I n d u s t r y and Small Business Development. 1982. The northwest r e g i o n . V i c t o r i a : Queens P r i n t e r . . 1983a. Task f o r c e on northwest development o p p o r t u n i t i e s : Summary r e p o r t . V i c t o r i a : Queens Pr i n t e r . . 1983b. Northwest economic development s t u d i e s : Settlement o p t i o n s . V i c t o r i a : Queens P r i n t e r . B r i t i s h Columbia. M i n i s t r y of Lands Parks and Housing. 1980. S p a t s i z i p l a t e a u w i l d e r n e s s park master p l a n . V i c t o r i a : Queens P r i n t e r . . 1982. Upper S t i k i n e d e f e r r e d area study. Parks and Outdoor D i v i s i o n . Mimeograph. Vancouver: M i n i s t r y of Lands, Parks and Housing. . 1984. T e l e g r a p h Creek s u b - d i s t r i c t Crown land p l a n n i n g r e p o r t . V i c t o r i a : Queens P r i n t e r . . 1985. B r i t i s h Columbia land s t a t i s t i c s . V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . . M i n i s t r y of M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s and Housing. 1977. Community p r o f i l e f o r T e l e g r a p h Creek. V i c t o r i a : Queen's P r i n t e r . . B r i t i s h Columbia R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t of K i t i m a t - S t i k i n e . 1966. K i t i m a t - S t i k i n e R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t r e g i o n a l r e s o u r c e i n v e n t o r y . Map. T e r r a c e : R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t of K i t i m a t - S t i k i n e . . 1971. Economic development of the R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t of K i t i m a t - S t i k i n e B.C. E.M. Bandor and A.V. Gray. Vancouver: AVG Management S c i e n c e . 200 • 1982a. K i t i m a t - S t i k i n e r e g i o n a l economic p r o f i l e . Vancouver: DPA C o n s u l t i n g , L t d . . 1982b. Community P r o f i l e s . Vancouver: DPA C o n s u l t i n g . B r i t i s h Columbia. U t i l i t i e s Commission. 1983. In the matter of the u t i l i t i e s commission a c t S.B.C. 1980, as.amended and i n the matter of B r i t i s h Columbia Hydro and Power A u t h o r i t y a p p l i c a t i o n f o r r a t e r e l i e f d e c i s i o n . Vancouver: B.C. U t i l i t i e s Commission. . Wilderness A d v i s o r y Committee. 1986. The Wilderness Mosaic. Vancouver: Queen's P r i n t e r . Bruce, James P. and Frank J . Quinn. 1979. What d i f f e r e n c e do boundaries make? Canadian Water Resources J o u r n a l 4, 3: 4-13. B u r i , Thomas. 1976. A p r e l i m i n a r y annotated b i b l i o g r a p h y of the S t i k i n e R i v e r c o u n t r y and i t s people. Mimeograph. In author's p o s s e s s i o n . T e l e g r a p h Creek. . 1983. P r e l u d e to power. Telkwa Foundation Ne w s l e t t e r 6, 1: 9-11. Burnet, P e t e r . 1985. Paper s o v e r e i g n t y . Northern  P e r s p e c t i v e s 13, 3: 1-7. Cadieux, M a r c e l . 1981. The view from the Pearson b u i l d i n g . Pp. 98-105 i n The I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o i n t Commission  Seventy Years On, e d i t e d by Robert Spencer, John K i r t o n and Kim N o s s a l . Toronto: Centre f o r I n t e r n a t i o n a l S t u d i e s U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto. Canada. Department of E x t e r n a l A f f a i r s . 1982. The Yukon. Ottawa: Department of E x t e r n a l A f f a i r s . . 1985. A l a s k a Panhandle t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a c c e s s : Canadian p o s i t i o n paper. Mimeograph. Ottawa: Department of E x t e r n a l A f f a i r s . Canada. Department of Indian and Northern A f f a i r s . 1982. The  f u t u r e of the S t i k i n e b a s i n . John Faustman. S p e c i a l A f f a i r s I s s u e . B.C. Region Volume 1. Vancouver: Indian A f f a i r s B.C. Region. Canada. Embassy. 1988. Canada Today. 19, 1. Canada. Environment Canada. 1974. A n a t i o n a l w i l d r i v e r  system. N a t i o n a l Park Branch. Doc I.0634R1 . 1976a. R e g i o n a l a n a l y s i s of n a t u r a l r e g i o n 7: Northern I n t e r i o r P l a t e a u and Mountains. 201 . 1976b. Monograph on comprehensive r i v e r b a s i n p l a n n i n g . Toronto: Thorn Press L t d . . 1985., N a t u r a l areas and s i t e s of Canadian s i g n i f i c a n c e i n N a t u r a l Region 7. P r e s e n t a t i o n to the S t i k i n e Workshop h e l d i n T e l e g r a p h Creek, B.C. May 22-23 1985. Canada. E x t e r n a l A f f a i r s . 1982. The Yukon. Ottawa: E x t e r n a l A f f a i r s Canada. Canada. F e d e r a l Environmental Assessment Review O f f i c e . 1979. A l a s k a Highway Gas P i p e l i n e . Ottawa: FEARO. . 1984. B e a u f o r t Sea hydrocarbon p r o d u c t i o n and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n : F i n a l r e p o r t of the environmental  assessment p a n e l . H u l l , Quebec: FEARO. Canada. I n q u i r y on F e d e r a l Water P o l i c y . 1985. C u r r e n t s of  change. By. P. Pearse, I. B e r t r a n d and J . MacLaren. Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r . Canada. M i n i s t r y of T r a n s p o r t . 1972. The Canadian Northwest T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Study: F i n a l Report. Canada. Senate Standing Committee on F o r e i g n A f f a i r s . 1975. Canada-U.S. R e l a t i o n s . Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r . Canadian A r c t i c Resources Committee. 1987. L e t t e r to membership from John M e r r i t t , E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r . F a l l . . 1988. Along f o r the r i d e ? Northern P e r s p e c t i v e s 16, 3: 1-7. C a r r o l l , John E. 1981. P a t t e r n s of o l d and new. Pp. 43-59 i n The I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o i n t Commission Seventy Years On. e d i t e d by Robert Spencer, John K i r t o n and Kim N o s s a l . Toronto: Centre f o r I n t e r n a t i o n a l S t u d i e s U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto. . 1983. Environmental diplomacy: An examination of Canadian-U.S. environmental r e l a t i o n s . Ann Arbor, MI: U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan P r e s s . . 1986. Water r e s o u r c e s management as an i s s u e i n environmental diplomacy. N a t u r a l Resources J o u r n a l 26, 2: 207-220. _ _ , and Newell B. Mack. 1982. On l i v i n g t o g e t h e r i n North America: Canada the U n i t e d S t a t e s and i n t e r n a t i o n a l environmental r e l a t i o n s . Denver J o u r n a l  of I n t e r n a t i o n a l Law and P o l i c y 12, 1: 35-50. Chambers, A l a n . 1978. Towards a s y n t h e s i s of mountains, 202 people, and i n s t i t u t i o n s . Pp. 123-52 i n I n t e g r a t e d  Management of Resources. Vancouver: U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Centre f o r C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n . C l a s s e n , H. George. 1965. T h r u s t and c o u n t e r t h r u s t : The  g e n e s i s of the Canada-U.S. Boundary. Chicago: Rand McNally. C o l l i n s , F. H. 1960. Commissioner of the Yukon T e r r i t o r y . L e t t e r to Governor Egan. Whitehorse. September 26. Colombo. 1986. 1001 q u e s t i o n s about Canada. Toronto: Doubleday. C o r b e t t , M i c h a e l . 1981. A b e t t e r p l a c e to l i v e : Nev designs  f o r tomorrow's communities. Emmaus, P e n n s y l v a n i a : Rodale P r e s s . Conover, Mathew C. 1976. R e s e a r c h - A n a l y s t f o r the A l a s k a Department of N a t u r a l Resources. L e t t e r to Chuck Meachum. In author's p o s s e s s i o n . Juneau. October 22. Cowper, Steve. 1987. Governor of A l a s k a . L e t t e r to the author. Juneau. F e b r u a r y 12. Crook, Raymond L. 1976. Towards a land use management p h i l o s o p h y i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Paper presented a t Conference on M o n i t o r i n g f o r Environment P r o t e c t i o n , sponsored by the U.B.C. A s s o c i a t i o n of P r o f e s s i o n a l E n g i n e e r s Environment P r o t e c t i o n Service-Environment Canada. D i s t r i b u t e d by the ELUC S e c r e t a r i a t . February 12-13. Cro s s , W.K., G.F. Boulson and H.R. L o f f . 1966. The B.C.  source book. V i c t o r i a : S u t t o n . C u r t i s , Kenneth M. and John E. C a r r o l l . 1983. Canadian-American R e l a t i o n s . L e x i n g t o n , Mass: Lex i n g t o n Books. Dale, Norman and M. Gregory McKay. 1979. Northern shore zone  management: Lessons from the U.S. e x p e r i e n c e with water  and r e l a t e d land r e s o u r c e management. For the Water Resources D i v i s i o n , Department of Indian and Northern A f f a i r s . D a l l , W i l l i a m H. 1870. A l a s k a and i t s r e s o u r c e s . Boston: Lee and Shepard P u b l i s h e r s . Dawson, George M. 1888. Report on an e x p e d i t i o n i n the Yukon  N.W.T. and a d j a c e n t n o r t h e r n p o r t i o n of B r i t i s h  Columbia. M o n t r e a l : Dawson B r o t h e r s . Dector, M i c h a e l B. 1988. F a b i a n s o c i a l i s m or comprehensive 203 p l a n n i n g ? Northern P e r s p e c t i v e s 16, 2: 23-26. Demchuck, Andrea M.K. 1985. The S t i k i n e : T a h l t a n s , e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s , and B.C. Hydro. Masters T h e s i s . U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Despax, M. 1979. The j o i n t management of i n t e r n a t i o n a l h y d r o g r a p h i c b a s i n s and p o s i t i v e i n t e r n a t i o n a l law. Pp. 177-199 i n Environmental P r o t e c t i o n i n F r o n t i e r  Regions. P a r i s : O r g a n i s a t i o n f o r Economic C o o p e r a t i o n and Development. Dewey, John. 1927. The p u b l i c and i t s problems. New York: Henry H o l t . Dickson, E l l s w o r t h . 1987. Northwest B r i t i s h Columbia. World Investment News J u l y : 35-37. Doherty, M i c h a e l . 1984. Environmental Non-Governmental O r g a n i z a t i o n s i n Canada & the U.S.A. Mimeograph. Paper p r e s e n t e d to the Conference of the Northwest A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Environmental S t u d i e s . V i c t o r i a : Northwest A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Environmental S t u d i e s . Doran, C h a r l e s F. 1984. F o r g o t t e n p a r t n e r s h i p : U.S.-Canada  r e l a t i o n s today. B a l t i m o r e : John Hopkins U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Dorcey, A.H.J. 1986a. The management of super, n a t u r a l B r i t i s h Columbia. Mimeograph. In author's p o s s e s s i o n . Vancouver. 1986b. B a r g a i n i n g i n the governance of P a c i f i c c o a s t a l r e s o u r c e s : Research and reform. Vancouver: Westwater Research C e n t r e . U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. , and B r i a n R. M a r t i n . 1986. Reaching agreement i n impact management: A case study of the Utah and Amax  mines. Vancouver: Westwater Resource C e n t r e . U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. D r e i s z i g e r , N.F. 1981. Dreams and d i s a p p o i n t m e n t s . Pp. 43-59 i n The I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o i n t Commission Seventy Years On, / e d i t e d by Robert Spencer, John K i r t o n and Kim N o s s a l . Toronto: Centre f o r I n t e r n a t i o n a l S t u d i e s U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto. Duff, W i l s o n . 1964. The impact of the white man. V o l . 1 of The Indian h i s t o r y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Anthropology i n B r i t i s h Columbia Memoir No. 5. V i c t o r i a : P r o v i n c i a l Museum of N a t u r a l H i s t o r y and Anthropology. Dupuy, P. 1979a. Normative and i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o p o s a l s f o r 204 the i n t e g r a t e d management of i n t e r n a t i o n a l hydrographic b a s i n s . Pp. 151-176 i n Environmental P r o t e c t i o n i n  F r o n t i e r Regions. P a r i s : O r g a n i s a t i o n f o r Economic C o o p e r a t i o n and Development. . 1979b. The j o i n t management of i n t e r n a t i o n a l h y d r o g r a p h i c b a s i n s and p o s i t i v e i n t e r n a t i o n a l law. Pp. 177-199 i n Environmental P r o t e c t i o n i n F r o n t i e r  Regions. P a r i s : O r g a n i s a t i o n f o r Economic C o o p e r a t i o n and Development. Dworsky, Leonard B. 1986. The Great Lakes 1955-1985. N a t u r a l  Resources J o u r n a l 26, 2: 291-336. Egan, W i l l i a m A. 1959. Governor of A l a s k a . L e t t e r to Commissioner of the Yukon T e r r i t o r y T.H. C o l l i n s . Juneau. J u l y 17. . 1972. Governor of A l a s k a . L e t t e r to B.C. Premier B a r r e t t . November 30. E l l s w o r t h Paul Gamble. 1972. The B r i t i s h Columbia Railway and r e g i o n a l development. Masters T h e s i s . U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. F i s h e r , R. and W. Ury. 1981. G e t t i n g to yes. New York: Penguin. F i s s e h a , Yimmer. 1981. S t a t e s u c c e s s i o n and the l e g a l s t a t u s of i n t e r n a t i o n a l r i v e r s . Pp. 177-202 i n The l e g a l  regime of i n t e r n a t i o n a l r i v e r s and l a k e s , e d i t e d by Ralph Z a c k l i n and L u c i u s C a f l i s c h . London: M a r t i n i s N i j h o f f P u b l i s h e r s . F o r e s t e r , John. 1987. N e g o t i a t i o n and m e d i a t i o n s t r a t e g i e s i n l o c a l land use r e g u l a t i o n . J o u r n a l of the American  P l a n n i n g A s s o c i a t i o n 53, 4: 303-14. Fox, I r v i n g K. 1976. I n s t i t u t i o n s f o r water management i n a changing world. N a t u r a l Resources J o u r n a l 16 ( O c t o b e r ) : 743-58. . 1980. R e g i o n a l Resource P l a n n i n g i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Mimeograph. Peggy J . Eyre, and Winston Mair. 1983. Yukon water r e s o u r c e s management p o l i c y and i n s t i t u t i o n a l  i s s u e s . Vancouver: Westwater Research C e n t r e . F r a n c e s , R.S. 1956. Why Canada wants r i g h t s a c r o s s the Alaskan Panhandle. Canadian Business (August): 90-94. F r i e n d s of the S t i k i n e . 1981. F r i e n d s of the S t i k i n e 205 Newsletter No. 1. January. Vancouver: F r i e n d s of the S t i k i n e . . 1986. S t i k i n e the Great R i v e r . F r i e n d s of the S t i k i n e N e w s l e t t e r Newsletter No. 13. Vancouver: F r i e n d s of the S t i k i n e . G a r f i e l d , V i o l a E. 1947. H i s t o r i c a l a s p e c t s of T l i n g i t c l a n s i n Angoon, A l a s k a . American A n t h r o p o l o g i s t 49: 438-52. G a r l i n , Hamlin. 1966. T r a i l of the G o l d s e e k e r s . New York: M a c m i l l a n . G a r r e t s o n , A.H., R.D. Hayton, and C.J. Olmstead, eds. 1967. The law of i n t e r n a t i o n a l d r a i n a g e b a s i n s . Dobbs F e r r y : Oceana P u b l i c a t i o n s . G l o s , George E r n e s t . 1961. I n t e r n a t i o n a l r i v e r s : A p o l i c y - o r i e n t e d p e r s p e c t i v e . Singapore: G.H. K i a t and Company. Gorsuch, L e n n i e . 1988. Deputy Commissioner of the A l a s k a Department of N a t u r a l Resources. I n t e r v i e w with a u t h o r . A p r i l 1. Graham, G e r a l d . 1981. I n t e r n a t i o n a l r i v e r s : The Canadian-American regime. Pp. 3-22 i n The L e g a l Regime of  I n t e r n a t i o n a l R i v e r s and Lakes, e d i t e d by Ralph Z a c k l i n and L u c i u s C a f l i s c h . London: M a r t i n i s N i j h o f f P u b l i s h e r s . G r a n a t s t e i n , J.L. 1976. A f i t of absence of mind: Canada's -n a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t i n the North to 1968. Pp. 13-33 i n The A r c t i c i n Q u e s t i o n , e d i t e d by Edgar Dosman. Totonto: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Gray, Glenn. 1984. The Ala s k a n w i l d e r n e s s . Pp. 294-6 i n Wi l d e r n e s s : The Way Ahead, e d i t e d by Vance M a r t i n and Mary I n g l i s . F o r r e s , S c o t l a n d : F i n d h o r n P r e s s . Hadwik, W.G. 1957. Changing C o r r i d o r s of A l a s k a . Annals of  the A s s o c i a t i o n of American Geographers. September 1957: Halsey-Brandt, Gregory C h a r l e s . 1965 An a n a l y s i s of the changing f u n c t i o n and contemporary impact of the A l a s k a - B r i t i s h Columbia boundary. Master T h e s i s . The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Hamme, E v e r e t t . 1987. I n t e r v i e w with author. Juneau. June 17 . Hammond, J.S. 1976. Governor of A l a s k a . News Relea s e . In author's p o s s e s s i o n . Juneau. December 3. 206 Harmon, Chuck. 1986. B.C. Hydro Engineer. Telephone interview with author. Vancouver. A p r i l 2. Heayn, Bruce Irwin. 1977. Integrated resource management: B.C.'s regional resource management committees. Masters Thesis. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Hershberg, Theodore and Michael Rubin. 1988. Strategic Planning: Finding solutions to future challenges. Pp. 49-56 in America's C i t i e s : Strategic Planning for the  Future. Edited by Roger L. Kemp. Danville, I l l i n o i s : The Interstate P r i n t e r s and Publishers, Inc. Hickel, Walter J. 1968. Governor of Alaska. News Release. In author's possession. Juneau. December 24. Hoagland, Edward. 1969. Notes from the century before: A •journal from B r i t i s h Columbia. New York: Random House. Holmes, John W. 1981. The IJC and Canada-U.S. r e l a t i o n s . Pp. 3-7 in The International Joint Commission Seventy  Years On, edited by Robert Spencer, John Kirton and Kim Nossal. Toronto: Centre for International Studies U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto. H o l s t i , K.J. 1967. International p o l i t i c s : A framework f o r  analys i s . Englewood C l i f f s : Prentice H a l l . H o l s t i , K.J., and T.A. Levy. 1967. B i l a t e r a l i n s t i t u t i o n s and trans-governmental r e l a t i o n s between Canada and the U.S. International Organization 28, 4: 875-901. Huculak, Mykhaylo. 1971. When Russia was in America: The  Alaska boundary treat y negotiations 1824-25 and the  role of Purie de P o l i t i c a . Vancouver: M i t c h e l l Press, Ltd. International Joint Commission. 1985. International Joint  Commission a c t i v i t i e s report 1985. Ottawa: International Joint Commission. . 1987. Letter to the author from Alan Clance. Ottawa. January 26. International Law Association. 1967. Helsinki rules on the  uses of the waters of i n t e r n a t i o n a l r i v e r s . London: Cabrian News. Ireland, Willard E. 1939. The evolution of the boundaries of B r i t i s h Columbia. B r i t i s h Columbia H i s t o r i c a l  Quarterly. 3, 4: 263-82. Jenness, D. 1974. Indian of Canada. Map adapted in Canada Department of Energy Mines and Resources, The National 207 A t l a s of Canada, p. 181. Ottawa: M c M i l l a n Johannson, P e t e r Rogg. 1975. B r i t i s h Columbia's i n t e r g o v e r n m e n t a l r e l a t i o n s with the U n i t e d S t a t e s . PHD D i s s e r t a t i o n . John Hopkins U n i v e r s i t y . .1976. A study i n r e g i o n a l s t r a t e g y : The A l a s k a - B r i t i s h Columbia-Yukon c o n f e r e n c e s . BC S t u d i e s 28 (Winter) 1975-1976: 29-52. Juurand, P r i i d u . 1985. W r i t t e n submission to the B.C. Wilderness A d v i s o r y Committee. Vancouver. December. Karmin, Monroe W. 1987. From the a r c t i c to the Yukatan? U.S. News & World Report October 19: 67. K a s s i , Norma. 1989. Member of the Yukon T e r r i t o r y L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly. I n t e r v i e w with a u t h o r . Juneau. March 20. Keystone Center. 1987. The Keystone F o r e s t S e r v i c e land  managagement p r o j e c t : I n n o v a t i v e approaches f o r  managing f o r e s t p l a n n i n g d i s p u t e s . Keystone, Color a d o : Keystone Center. K i r n , J a c k i e and Marion Marts. 1986. The S k a g i t - H i g h Ross C o n t r o v e r s y . N a t u r a l Resource J o u r n a l 26, 2: 261-90. K i t i m a t Chamber of Commerce. 1987. L e t t e r from Manager G. Guise to a u t h o r . K i t i m a t . November 27. K l a v e r , B r i a n . 1974. D i r e c t o r of the R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t of Mount Waddington. L e t t e r to the Governor of Alaska'. In author's p o s s e s s i o n . P o r t M c N e i l l , B.C. November 8. K l e e s c h u l t e , Chuck. 1989. Canada announces road study; l o c a l study c o n t i n u e s . Juneau Empire. F e b r u a r y 16: 3. Krause, A u r e l . 1956. The T l i n g e t I n d i a n s : R e s u l t s of a t r i p  to the Northwest c o a s t of America and the B e r i n g  S t r a i t s . T r a n s l a t e d by Erna Gunther. S e a t t l e : U n i v e r s i t y of Washington P r e s s . Kriwoken, Lynn Ann. 1986. M i n i s t r y of F o r e s t ' s l o c a l r e s o u r c e use p l a n n i n g i n the lower S t i k i n e , B r i t i s h Columbia: An e v a l u a t i o n . Masters T h e s i s . Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y . Lang, Reg. 1986. A c h i e v i n g i n t e g r a t i o n i n r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g . Pp. 27-50 i n I n t e g r a t e d Approaches to Resource P l a n n i n g  and Management, e d i t e d by Reg Lang. C a l g a r y : The U n i v e r s i t y of C a l g a r y P r e s s . L a u r i t z e n , P h i l i p . 1983. O i l and amulets: I n u i t : A people at 208 the top of the world. R.E. Buehler ed. St. Johns Newfoundland: Breakwater Books. Leach, R i c h a r d H., Donald E. Walker and Thomas A l l e n Ledy. 1973. P r o v i n c e - S t a t e transboundary r e l a t i o n s : a p r e l i m i n a r y assessment. Canadian P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 16, 1: 468-482. LeMarquand, David G. 1976. P o l i t i c s of i n t e r n a t i o n a l r i v e r b a s i n c o o p e r a t i o n and management. N a t u r a l Resources  J o u r n a l 16, 4: 883-901. . 1977. I n t e r n a t i o n a l R i v e r s : The p o l i t i c s of c o o p e r a t i o n . Vancouver: Westwater Research Centre. . 1986. P r e c o n d i t i o n s to C o o p e r a t i o n i n Canada-U n i t e d S t a t e s boundary waters. N a t u r a l Resources  J o u r n a l 26, 2: 221-242. , and Anthony D. S c o t t . 1976. Canada-U.S. environmental r e l a t i o n s . Proceedings of the Academy of  P o l i t i c a l Science 32, 2: 149-163. LeResche, Robert. Commissioner of the A l a s k a Department of Resources. L e t t e r to USDA R e g i o n a l F o r e s t e r . In a u t h o r ' s p o s s e s s i o n . Juneau. 4 August 1978. L i n d b e r g , Leon N. and S t u a r t A. S c h e i n g o l d . 1971. R e g i o n a l  I n t e g r a t i o n Theory and Research. Cambridge: U n i v e r s i t y Press . L i v i n g s t o n e , Dianna. 1988. YTG j o i n s a n t i - e x p l o r a t i o n b a t t l e . Yukon News 28, 4: 1-2. Loken, Marty, ed. 1979. The S t i k i n e R i v e r . A l a s k a  Geographic 6, 4: 1-93. Lynn, Robert E. 1986. F o r e s t S u p e r v i s o r S t i k i n e Area, Tongass N a t i o n a l F o r e s t . L e t t e r to Brahm Wiesman. In author's p o s s e s s i o n . P e t e r s b u r g . January 23. M c A l l i s t e r , K i r k . 1987. I n t e r n a t i o n a l Salmon Commission to meet here next week. Juneau Empire June 5: 1. McCaffrey, S t e r n C. 1973. P r i v a t e remedies f o r t r a n s f r o n t i e r  environmental d i s t u r b a n c e s . IUCN Environmental P o l i c y and Law Paper No. 8. Morges S w i t z e r l a n d : IUCN. McFeely, P. and B.O. B r y n e l s e n . 1965. M i n e r a l r e s o u r c e of Northern B r i t i s h Columbia. Pp. 16-32 i n The Vancouver  Board of Trade r e p o r t on Northern B r i t i s h Columbia  r e s o u r c e development. Vancouver. Malkinson, Wally. 1984. D i r e c t o r R e g i o n a l Resource 209 A n a l y s i s Branch, M i n i s t r y of I n d u s t r y and Small Business Development. L e t t e r to Andrew Weber. A s s i s t a n t Economic Development Commissioner f o r the R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t of K i t i m a t - S t i k i n e . In author's p o s s e s s i o n . December 20. Meketa, Ray. 1988. C h i e f of P l a n n i n g Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s . L e t t e r to a u t h o r . Juneau. February 3. Melnyk, Walter. 1986. Land Grab Fear. P r o v i n c e February 9: 26. M i l l e r , K e i t h . 1969. Governor of A l a s k a . L e t t e r to W.A.C. Bennett. In author's p o s s e s s i o n . Juneau. A p r i l 2. M i t c h e l l , Bruce. 1986. The e v o l u t i o n of i n t e g r a t e d r e s o u r c e management. Pp. i n I n t e g r a t e d Approaches to Resource  P l a n n i n g and Management, e d i t e d by Reg Lang. C a l g a r y : U n i v e r s i t y of C a l g a r y P r e s s . Meyerson, M a r t i n . 1956. B u i l d i n g the middle-range b r i d g e f o r comprehensive p l a n n i n g . J o u r n a l of the American  I n s t i t u t e of P l a n n e r s 22, 2: Montesquieu, Baron de. 1823. The s p i r i t of laws. V o l I. London: J . C o l l i n g w o o d . Morley, J . T e r r e n c e , Norman J . R u f f , N e i l A. Swainson, R. Jeremy Wilson and Walter Young. 1983. The r e i n s of  power: Governing B r i t i s h Columbia. Vancouver: Douglas and M c l n t y r e . Mumford, Lewis. 1927. R e g i o n a l i s m and i r r e g i o n a l i s m . The  S o c i o l o g i c a l Review V o l . 19: 277-88. Munton, Don. 1981. Paradoxes and p r o s p e c t s . Pp. 98-105 i n The I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o i n t Commission Seventy Years On, e d i t e d by Robert Spencer, John K i r t o n and Kim N o s s a l . Toronto: Centre f o r I n t e r n a t i o n a l S t u d i e s U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto. Murkowski, Frank. 1987. Canada's ANWR p o s i t i o n deserves s c r u t i n y . Resource Review March: 6. Naske, Claus M. and Herman E. S l o t n i c k . 1987. A l a s k a : A  H i s t o r y of the 49th S t a t e . London: U n i v e r s i t y of Oklahoma P r e s s . N a t i o n a l P l a n n i n g A s s o c i a t i o n . 1987. A two year r e p o r t  1985-1986. Washington D.C: N a t i o n a l P l a n n i n g A s s o c i a t i o n . Nemetz, Pe t e r N. 1986. F e d e r a l environmental r e g u l a t i o n . 210 N a t u r a l Resource J o u r n a l 26, 3: 551-608. N i c h o l s , M a r j o r i e . 1986. Of course Rogers must r e s i g n . The  Sun January 21: 3. North Slope Borough. 1982. I n u p i a t , o i l execs c l a s h d u r i n g ANWR EIS h e a r i n g s . A r c t i c P o l i c y Review November: 7-11. . 1984. V i l l a g e s win new s t a t e a c c o r d on c a r i b o u c o n v e n t i o n . A r c t i c P o l i c y Review June: 2-5. Northwest B.C. Chamber of Commerce and Alas k a n A f f i l i a t e s . 1974. L e t t e r from John Gray, S e c r e t a r y T r e a s u r e r to R. Heim. In author's p o s s e s s i o n . K i t i m a t , B.C. June 7. Oppen, W i l l i a m . 1988. A neighbor's view of ANWR. The Alaska  P u b l i c A f f a i r s J o u r n a l 4, 3: 34-36. O r g a n i s a t i o n f o r Economic Co-Operation and Development. 1978. T r a n s f r o n t i e r p o l l u t i o n i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l water  b a s i n s . P a r i s : OECD. . 1979. Environmental p r o t e c t i o n i n f r o n t i e r r e g i o n s . P a r i s : OECD. O ' R i o r d i n , Jon. 1981. New s t r a t e g i e s f o r water r e s o u r c e p l a n n i n g i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Canadian Water Resource  J o u r n a l . 6, 4: 13-43. P a d i l l a , Salvador M. Ed. 1975. Tugwell's thoughts on p l a n n i n g . San Juan: U n i v e r s i t y of Puerto R i c o P r e s s . P a t t e r s o n , R.M. 1966. T r a i l to the i n t e r i o r . New York: W i l l i a m Morrow and Company. Pearse, Peter H. 1982. T u r n i n g the t i d e : A new p o l i c y f o r  Canada's P a c i f i c f i s h e r i e s . Vancouver: The Commission on P a c i f i c F i s h e r i e s p o l i c y . . 1986. B r i e f to the Wilderness A d v i s o r y Committee. Mimeograph. Vancouver. January 28. . 1987. F o r e s t p o l i c y and timber s u p p l y i n c o a s t a l B r i t i s h Columbia: P r o g r e s s and p r o s p e c t s . Prepared f o r p r e s e n t a t i o n t o the 44th Annual Convention of the Truck Loggers A s s o c i a t i o n . Vancouver. January 14. Pearson, Dr. A.M. 1976. Commissioner of the Yukon T e r r i t o r y . Address to the Meeting of the Premier of B r i t i s h Columbia, Governor of Al a s k a and Commissioner of the Yukon. Juneau. December 6. P e n i k e t t , Tony. 1988. Northern P e r s p e c t i v e s i n t e r v i e w : Tony P e n i k e t t . Northern P e r s p e c t i v e s 26, 2: 14-18. 211 Peter, E r i c . 1989. Council charting economic future. Juneau  Empire. 20 January 20: 7. Penlington, Norman. 1972. The Alaska boundary dispute: A  c r i t i c a l r e a p p r a i s a l . Toronto: McGrae-Hill Ryerson. Petersburg Chamber of Commerce. 1959. Resolution. In author's possession. Petersburg. November 23. P h i l l i p s , Randy. 1988. L e g i s l a t o r Alaska House of Representatives. Interview with Author. Juneau. March 5 . Prieur, M. 1979. Regional planning in f r o n t i e r regions. Pp. 110-150 in Environmental Protection in Frontier  Regions. P a r i s : Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Rees, William E. and Erik Karlsen 1973. The Regional D i s t r i c t s and environmental management in B. C. Uni v e r s i t y of B.C. Centre for Continuing Education. Papers on Local Government. Vol. 1, No. 6 . Vancouver: Unive r s i t y of B.C. Rey, L. 1986. The impact of human and i n d u s t r i a l a c t i v i t i e s on the A r c t i c environment: legal considerations and i n t e r n a t i o n a l l i a b i l i t i e s . Pp. 271-280 in A r c t i c Air  P o l l u t i o n , edited by B. Stonehouse. Cambridge: Cambridge Un i v e r s i t y Press. Riekhoff, Harold von; John H. S i g l e r and Brian W. Tamlin 1979. Canadian-U.S. Relations. Canada-U.S. Prospects a Series Sponsored by CD. Howe Research I n s t i t u t e (Canada) and National Planning Association (U.S.) Ri l e y , Tom and Harold Rolyea. eds. 1983. Freedom of information: Trends in the information age. London: Frank Cass and Co. Rosebluth, Gideon and William Schworm. 1984. The new p r i o r i t i e s of the Social Credit government in B r i t i s h  Columbia. Paper No. P-84-3 P a c i f i c Group for P o l i c y Alternat ives. Sadler, Barry. 1986. The management of Canada-U.S. boundary waters: Retrospect and prospect. Natural Resource  Journal 26, 2: 359-376. Sadouski, Mary. 1975. The Stikine incident: A Russo-British confrontation in the P a c i f i c Northwest. Masters Thesis. Queens University. Saha, Suranjit K. 1981. River basin planning: Theory and 212 P r a c t i c e . E d i t e d By S u r a n j i t K. Saha and C h r i s t o p h e r J . Barrow. New York: John Wiley Schechter, Steven and D a n i e l J . E l a z a r with the a s s i s t a n c e of G a i l C h a r e t t e . 1982. The r o l e of the s t a t e s as  p o l i t i e s i n the American f e d e r a l system. P h i l a d e l p h i a , PA: Center f o r the Study of F e d e r a l i s m . S c o t t , A.D. 1974. F i s h e r i e s , p o l l u t i o n and Canadian-American t r a n s n a t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l O r g a n i z a t i o n 28, 4: 827-48. . 1986. The Canadian-American problem of a c i d r a i n . N a t u r a l Resource J o u r n a l 26, 2: 337-358. Sevensma, P.H. 1985. T r i p l e P Resources, L t d . L e t t e r to B.C. W i lderness A d v i s o r y Committee. December 17. S e w e l l , W.R. D e r r i c k . 1986. The r o l e of s t a t e and p r o v i n c i a l o f f i c i a l s i n transboundary i s s u e s . Paper presented a t the annual meeting of the Conference of Western A t t o r n e y s G e n e r a l , Santa Fe 16-18 J u l y 1986. S e w e l l , W.R. D e r r i c k and A l b e r t E. U t t o n . 1986. " G e t t i n g to yes" i n U n i t e d S t a t e s - C a n a d i a n water d i s p u t e s . N a t u r a l  Resource J o u r n a l 26, 2: 201-206. Sher i d a n , Walter. 1985. Planner f o r the USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e . I n t e r v i e w with a u t h o r . Juneau. June 18. S i n c l a i r , Margaret. 1975. The I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o i n t Commission and i t r e l a t i o n s h i p with the p u b l i c . Pp. 83-116 i n I n s t i t u t i o n a l Arrangements f o r Water Management:  Canadian E x p e r i e n c e s . Waterloo: U n i v e r s i t y of Waterloo. S i v e r t z , B.G. 1961. D i r e c t o r of the Northern a d m i n i s t r a t i o n Branch of the Department of I n d i a n and Northern A f f a i r s . L e t t e r to Governor Egan. October 5. S o r k i n , Donna L., Nancy B. F e r r i s and James Haduk. 1988. What i s s t r a t e g i c p l a n n i n g ? Pp. 49-56 i n Amer i c a ' s  C i t i e s : S t r a t e g i c P l a n n i n g f o r the F u t u r e . E d i t e d by Roger L. Kemp. D a n v i l l e , I l l i n o i s : The I n t e r s t a t e P r i n t e r s and P u b l i s h e r s , Inc. Souto-Maior, J o e l . 1981. The a n a l y s i s of complex d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g : N e g o t i a t i o n of the S a i n t John R i v e r b a s i n agreement (Canada-U.S.A.). PHD D i s s e r t a t i o n . U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. S t a p l e s , L i n d s a y . 1988. Toward a n o r t h e r n development s t r a t e g y . Northern P e r s p e c t i v e s 16, 2: 4-6. Stenerson, Ken. 1985. S c o t t Paper employee. L e t t e r to 213 the B.C. Wilderness A d v i s o r y Committee. Vancouver. December 19. Sun. 1969. B.C.-Alaska r e l a t i o n s sink over b a t t l e of f e r r y f l e e t s . The Sun 18 December: 30. S u s s k i n d , Lawrence and Connie Ozawa. 1984. Mediated n e g o t i a t i o n i n the p u b l i c s e c t o r : The planner as mediator. J o u r n a l of P l a n n i n g E d u c a t i o n and Research. 4, 1: 5-25. Svainson, N e i l A. 1986. The Columbia R i v e r T r e a t y - Where do we go from here? N a t u r a l Resources J o u r n a l 26, 2: 243-260. Swanson, Roger. 1974. S t a t e / P r o v i n c i a l I n t e r a c t i o n - A study of r e l a t i o n s between U.S. S t a t e s and Canadian p r o v i n c e s . Washington: O f f i c e of E x t e r n a l Research, Department of S t a t e . Swanton, John R. 1970. S o c i a l c o n d i t i o n , b e l i e f s , and  l i n g u i s t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p of the T l i n g i t I n d i a n s . Washington, D.C: The Smithsonian I n s t i t u t i o n , 1904; r e p r i n t ed., New York: The Johnson R e p r i n t C o r p o r a t i o n . T a y l o r , A l i s t a i r . 1989. Canada's environment groups q u i e t on ANWR. Yukon News. March 8. T a y l o r , Hugh. 1984. A d i s c u s s i o n of the p o s s i b l e o p t i o n s and i n f l u e n c e s c o n c e r n i n g the p r o t e c t i o n and management of the S t i k i n e R i v e r watershed. For T a h l t a n T r i b a l C o u n c i l . C o o r d i n a t e d by Cheona Holdings L t d . T e c l a f f , L. 1967. The R i v e r B a s i n i n h i s t o r y and law. 152 The Hague Martinus N i j h o f f . 1976. Harmonizing water r e c o u r s e s development and use with environmental p r o t e c t i o n i n m u n i c i p a l and i n t e r n a t i o n a l law. N a t u r a l Resource J o u r n a l 16 ( O c t ) : 807-861. T e c l a f f , L. and E i l e e n T e c l a f f . 1985. Transboundary t o x i c p o l l u t i o n and the d r a i n a g e b a s i n concept. Natura1  Resource J o u r n a l 25, 3: 589-612. T e r r y , E d i t h , B i l l J a v e t s k i and Steven J . Dryden. 1987. A f r e e - t r a d e m i l e s t o n e . Business Week. October 19: 52-53. Thompson, Andrew and H.R. Eddy. 1973. J u r i s d i c t i o n a l problems i n n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e management i n Canada. In Essays on a s p e c t s of r e s o u r c e p o l i c y . Toronto: Southam Murry. 214 Thompson, Berwick, P r a t t and P a r t n e r s . 1979. B r i t i s h Columbia r i v e r r a f t i n g study. Thompson Berwick and P a r t n e r s . Mimeograph. Vancouver. Thompson, F r e d , and W.T. Stanbury. 1979. The p o l i t i c a l economy of i n t e r e s t groups i n the l e g i s l a t i v e process  i n Canada. I n s t i t u t e f o r Research on P u b l i c P o l i c y . O c c a s i o n a l Paper 9. M o n t r e a l . T h o r s t a d , L i n d E. 1987. The f a r n o r t h : A l a s k a , Yukon, Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s . World Investment News August 1987. Thunderstorm, Lynne. 1986a. The S t i k i n e : B o y c o t t s and f e s t i v a l s . New C a t y l y s t 1, 3: 15. Tobin, Chuck. 1988. Pact g i v e s more salmon to Canada. Whitehorse Star F e b r u a r y 25: 1-2. Toronto S t a r Weekly. 1959. B u r s t the b a r r i e r of A l a s k a ' s Panhandle. Star Weekly January 17: 1. T r i p p , G.A. 1975. The S t i k i n e gateway and the C a s s i a r r e g i o n : A s t u d y i n f r o n t i e r development. Masters T h e s i s . U n i v e r s i t y of Western O n t a r i o . U n i t e d Fishermen of A l a s k a . 1981. R e s o l u t i o n 81-25. Uni t e d N a t i o n s . 1975. Management of i n t e r n a t i o n a l water r e s o u r c e s : I n s t i t u t i o n a l and l e g a l a s p e c t s . N a t u r a l Resources/Water Ser i e s . N o . 1. New York: U n i t e d N a t i o n s . . 1977. R e g i s t r y of i n t e r n a t i o n a l r i v e r basins'. Report of the S e c r e t a r y G e n e r a l . Geneva: U n i t e d Nat i o n s . . 1983a. E x p e r i e n c e s i n the development and management of i n t e r n a t i o n a l r i v e r and lake b a s i n s . N a t u r a l Resources/Water S e r i e s No. 10. New York: U n i t e d Nations . . 1983b. E x p e r i e n c e s of the U n i t e d Nations i n t e r r e g i o n a l meeting of i n t e r n a t i o n a l r i v e r  o r g a n i z a t i o n s : Dakar Senegal 5-14 May 1981. Department of T e c h n i c a l C o - o p e r a t i o n f o r Economic Development. New York: U n i t e d N a t i o n s . U n i t e d S t a t e s . A l a s k a Boundary T r i b u n a l . 1903. The argument  of the U n i t e d S t a t e s b e f o r e the t r i b u n a l convened at  London. Washington: Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e . U n i t e d S t a t e s . Congress. 1961. T r a n s p o r t a t i o n requirements  f o r the growth of Northwest North America. Report by  the B a t t e l l e Memorial I n s t i t u t e on I n t e g r a t e d 215 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Systems to encourage economic  development of the Northwest of North America. House Document No. 176. 21 May 1961. . 1971. P u b l i c Law 92-203 92nd Congress, H.R. 10367. The A l a s k a N a t i v e Claims Settlement A c t . December 18. . 1980. P u b l i c Law 96-487 96th Congress, H.R. 39. A l a s k a N a t i o n a l I n t e r e s t Lands C o n s e r v a t i o n A c t . December 2. . 1981. Hearings b e f o r e the Subcommittee on the Panama Canal/Outer C o n t i n e n t a l S h e l f of the Committee on Merchant Marine and F i s h e r i e s . House of Representa-t i v e s . March 26, 31, and May 5. . 1984. P u b l i c Land Management P o l i c y Implementation of the A l a s k a N a t i o n a l I n t e r e s t Lands C o n s e r v a t i o n Act. House of R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s Subcommittee on P u b l i c Lands and N a t i o n a l Parks. Committee on I n t e r i o r and I n s u l a r A f f a i r s Washington D.C. June 22. U n i t e d S t a t e s . Department of S t a t e . 1988. Department of State B u l l e t i n . 88, 2136. Washington, D.C: Department of S t a t e . U n i t e d S t a t e s . F e d e r a l Power Commission and the F o r e s t S e r v i c e . 1947. Water powers Southeast A l a s k a . U n i t e d S t a t e s . F e d e r a l R e g i s t e r . 1978. Implementation of P r o c e d u r a l P r o v i s i o n s , F i n a l R e g u l a t i o n s . C o u n c i l on Environmental Q u a l i t y . F e d e r a l R e g i s t e r 43, 230. November 29. U n i t e d S t a t e s . F o r e s t S e r v i c e . 1978. The p r i n c i p l e laws r e l a t i n g to F o r e s t S e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s . A g r i c u l t u r a l Handbook No. 453. . 1984. S t i k i n e - L e C o n t e environmental assessment. Tongass N a t i o n a l F o r e s t . Mimeograph. In author's p o s s e s s i o n . P e t e r s b u r g . U n i t e d S t a t e s . General S e r v i c e s A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and Department of J u s t i c e . 1981. Your r i g h t to f e d e r a l r e c o r d s : Questions and answers i n the Freedom of I n f o r m a t i o n A c t . Washington: General P u b l i c a t i o n s O f f i c e . U n i t e d S t a t e s . G e o l o g i c a l Survey. 1980. Map or A l a s k a N a t i o n a l I n t e r e s t C o n s e r v a t i o n Lands A c t . Washington U n i t e d S t a t e s . I n t e r p a r l i a m e n t a r y Group. 1979. Twentieth 216 meeting of the Canada-United S t a t e s I n t e r p a r l i a m e n t a r y Group. August 9-17. . 1984. T w e n t y - f i f t h meeting of the Canada-United S t a t e s I n t e r p a r l i a m e n t a r y Group. Washington. March 8-12. Utton, A l b e r t E. 1973. I n t e r n a t i o n a l water q u a l i t y law. N a t u r a l Resource J o u r n a l 13, 2: 282-314. . 1985. In s e a r c h of an i n t e g r a t i n g p r i n c i p l e f o r i n t e r s t a t e water law: R e g u l a t i o n versus the market p l a c e . N a t u r a l Resource j o u r n a l 25, 4: 985-1004. Vander Zalm, W i l l i a m . 1986. Premier of B.C. Press r e l e a s e . November 6. Walton, R i c h a r d J . 1970. Beyond diplomacy: A background on  American m i l i t a r y i n t e r v e n t i o n . New York: Parents Magazine P r e s s . Weaver, C l y d e . R e g i o n a l development and the l o c a l community: P l a n n i n g , p o l i t i c s and s o c i a l c o n t e x t . New York: John Wiley and Sons. Webster, Douglas R. 1980. R e g i o n a l development p l a n n i n g : P e r s i s t e n t paradigm or new consensus. Ek i s t i c s 284, 47: 343-45. Weeden, Robert B. 1985. The Northwest: Tending the o r g a n i c c o n n e c t i o n . Pp. 23-44 i n Proceedings of the O f f s h o r e  Symposium Across the Border: Transboundary  Environmental Issues i n the P a c i f i c Northwest, E d i t e d by C h e r y l Alexander and John Baldwin. V i c t o r i a : Northwest A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Environmental S t u d i e s . Wengert, Norman. 1980. A c r i t i c a l review of the r i v e r b a s i n as a focus f o r r e s o u r c e s p l a n n i n g , development and management. Pp. 9-27 i n Symposium p r o c e e d i n g s : U n i f i e d  r i v e r b a s i n management, e d i t e d by Ronald M. North, Leonard B. Duarsky and David J . A l l e e . M i n n e a p o l i s : American Water Resources A s s o c i a t i o n . White, Sam and C l a r e n c e Rhode. 1939. Report on Alaska-Yukon Boundary P a t r o l . Juneau. Wilkes, B. and R. T a y l o r . 1984. An e v a l u a t i o n of some c u r r e n t environmental p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia. In author's p o s s e s s i o n . Mimeograph. Willoughby, W i l l i a m R. 1981. E x p e c t a t i o n s and e x p e r i e n c e . Pp. 23-42 i n The I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o i n t Commission Seventy  Years On, e d i t e d by Robert Spencer, John K i r t o n and Kim 217 N o s s a l . Toronto: Centre f o r I n t e r n a t i o n a l S t u d i e s U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto. Wondolleck, J u l i a . 1988. The r o l e of t r a i n i n g i n p r o v i d i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r environmental and n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n . Environmental Impact Assessment  Review 8, 3: 233-248. Wood, Ron. 1987. R e g i o n a l Landscape A r c h i t e c t USDA F o r e s t S e r v i c e . Telephone i n t e r v i e w with author. Juneau. May 6. Wright, James. 1988. P r o j e c t Manager, Department of Tourism. Telephone i n t e r v i e w with author. Juneau. August 23. Yukon T e r r i t o r y . 1978. Minutes of the 24 January 1978 Heads of S t a t e meeting i n Whitehorse. Yukon T e r r i t o r y . 1987. The t h i n g s t h a t matter: A r e p o r t of  Yukoners' views on the f u t u r e of t h e i r economy and  t h e i r s o c i e t y . Whitehorse: Yukon T e r r i t o r y . Yukon T e r r i t o r y . 1988a. The Yukon economic s t r a t e g y . Whitehorse: Yukon T e r r i t o r y . . 1988b. Tourism a c t i o n p l a n . Whitehorse: Yukon T e r r i t o r y . . 1989. News Relea s e . February 23. 2 1 8 Appendix A Important Events i n the Development of H y d r o e l e c t r i c P r o p o s a l s 1940s P r o p o s a l by Aluminum Company of America to d i v e r t Yukon R i v e r water to T a i y a I n l e t 1947 U.S. F e d e r a l Power Commission Report on hydro-e l e c t r i c p o t e n t i a l of r e g i o n 1950 A f t e r a surve y T a i y a p r o p o s a l r e j e c t e d by Canada 1952 P r o p o s a l f o r an a l l - C a n a d i a n p r o j e c t on Taku 1954 Survey of Taku area by Ventures-Frobisher-Quebec M e t a l l u r g i c a l I n d u s t r i e s L t d . 1954 B.C. Government approves p r o j e c t 1955 Ventures L i m i t e d p r o j e c t h e l d up 1964 B.C. r e s e r v e s land f o r h y d r o e l e c t r i c development i n the S t i k i n e R i v e r b a s i n 1966 B.C. Hydro c r e a t e d 1968 U.S. and Canada agree to study Upper Yukon h y d r o e l e c t r i c p o t e n t i a l 1971 B r i n c o L t d . d i s c o v e r e d d o ing work i n the S t i k i n e 1972 B.C.'s NDP government s t a l l s S t i k i n e p r o j e c t 1975 Socred government c o n t i n u e s S t i k i n e p l a n n i n g 1978 F i v e dam scheme proposed f o r S t i k i n e - I s k u t R i v e r s 1973 A t l i n Park c r e a t e d i n attempt to thwart h y d r o e l e c t r i c p r o j e c t 1980 P u b l i c meetings by B.C. Hydro h e l d i n Juneau 1980 R e s i d e n t s f o r A Free Flowing S t i k i n e Formed 1980 F r i e n d s of the S t i k i n e Formed 1981 Premier Bennett and Governor Hammond meet 1981 Hammond expresses o p p o s i t i o n to S t i k i n e p r o j e c t 1981 A l a s k a L e g i s l a t i v e Resolve c a l l s f o r meaningful' input i n t o B.C.'s S t i k i n e p r o j e c t p l a n n i n g p rocess 1982 S t i k i n e - I s k u t R i v e r s C o o p e r a t i v e I n f o r m a t i o n Exchange Group formed 1982 Memorandum of Understanding si g n e d by A l a s k a and U.S. a g e n c i e s to exchange i n f o r m a t i o n about S t i k i n e 1983 B.C. U t i l i t i e s Commission c h a s t i s e d B.C. Hydro 1983 B.C. Hydro postpones S t i k i n e p r o j e c t f o r 5 years 1984 B.C. Hydro postpones S t i k i n e p r o j e c t i n d e f i n i t e l y 1984 Four dam pool approved by Al a s k a f o r Panhandle 219 Appendix B A P a r t i a l L i s t i n g of Meetings Between A l a s k a , B r i t i s h Columbia and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y 4/1/59 I n t e r n a t i o n a l Development Commission (IDC) c r e a t e d by the f i r s t A l a s k a State L e g i s l a t u r e . 7/7/59 IDC members meet f o r the f i r s t time. 7/19/60 F i r s t T r i l a t e r a l Heads-of-Government (THOG) meeting between l e a d e r s of A l a s k a , B r i t i s h Columbia (B.C.) and the Yukon T e r r i t o r y h e l d i n V i c t o r i a . 9/18/60 THOG subcommittee on highways meet i n V i c t o r i a . 6/20/61 THOG meeting i n Juneau. 9/14/64 THOG meeting i n Whitehorse. 11/3/64 THOG power subcommittee meets i n V i c t o r i a . 11/67 Ak.-B.C. r e l a t i o n s sour. THOG meetings t e r m i n a t e d . 11/72 Three l e a d e r s meet i n V i c t o r i a to s i g n a r i g h t - o f -way agreement f o r Skagway-Carcross Road. 2/25/75 Yukon and Alaskan o f f i c i a l s meet i n Juneau to t a l k about resuming THOG meetings. 12/75 THOG C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee i s e s t a b l i s h e d . 6/22/76 C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee meets i n Juneau. 9/21/76 C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee meets i n Whitehorse. 12/6/76 THOG meeting i n V i c t o r i a . 5/18/77 C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee meets i n Anchorage. 10/3/77 C o o r d i n a t i n g Committee meets i n Vancouver. 1/24/78 THOG meeting i n Whitehorse. 5/30/78 Alaska-Canada R a i l Congress meets i n Anchorage. 8/79 Canada-U.S. I n t e r p a r l i a m e n t a r y Group meets i n Anchorage. 8/29/79 THOG meeting i n V i c t o r i a . 1/29/81 THOG meeting i n Whitehorse. 5/3/82 THOG meeting i n Juneau. 9/27/83 THOG meeting i n Vancouver. 9/7/84 THOG meeting i n Dawson C i t y . 3/13/88 THOG meeting i n F a i r b a n k s . 220 Appendix C Important Events i n the ABCY Region 1799-1912 1790 Nootka Convention betwen Spain and B r i t a i n 1799 Mouth of S t i k i n e d i s c o v e r e d by American f u r t r a d e r s 1799 Russian e d i c t c l a i m s t e r r i t o r i e s to 55° N.L. 1818 J o i n t o c c u p a t i o n agreement 1819 Spain g i v e s up c l a i m s n o r t h of 42 N.L. 1824 Convention of 1824 g i v e s Americans f r e e n a v i g a t i o n 1825 Anglo-Russian agreement m i r r o r s American one 1833 Hudson's Bay Company turned away from S t i k i n e 1839 Hudson's Bay Company l e a s e s A l a s k a Panhandle 1846 T r e a t y s e t t l e s Oregon Dispute 1849 Vancouver I s l a n d became c o l o n y 1858 B.C. mainland becomes c o l o n y 1859 S t i k i n e T e r r i t o r y d e s i g n a t e d by Great B r i t a i n 1861 Gold S t r i k e near T e l e g r a p h Creek 1863 S t i k i n e Area i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o the B.C. Crown Colony 1865 Hudson's Bay Company f a i l s to renew l e a s e of A l a s k a 1866 T r a n s - S i b e r i a t e l e g r a p h l i n e c o n s t r u c t i o n begins 1866 Vancouver I s l a n d and mainland become one c o l o n y 1867 U.S. Purchase of A l a s k a 1867 BNA Act s e p a r a t e s powers between p r o v i n c e s & Dominion 1871 B.C. becomes 6th p r o v i n c e 1871 T r e a t y of Washington permits B r i t i s h f r e e n a v i g a t i o n of the S t i k i n e R i v e r 1872 Gold S t r i k e at Dease R i v e r 1876 Escape of Canadian p r i s o n e r i n t o A l a s k a sparks boundary d i s p u t e 1880 Gold d i s c o v e r y a t Juneau 1882 U.S.-Great B r i t a i n Boundary survey t r e a t y 1884 Organic Act c r a t e s c i v i l government f o r A l a s k a 1887 G e o l o g i c s u r v e y of Canadian p o r t i o n of the r e g i o n i s completed 1892 T r e a t y c a l l s f o r a s u r v e y of the boundary 1893 J o i n t i n t e r n a t i o n a l s u r v e y f o r Panhandle 1896 K l o n d i k e g o l d d i s c o v e r y 1898 Yukon T e r r i t o r y s e p a r a t e d from Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s 1900 Code of laws and c o u r t system e s t a b l i s h e d i n A l a s k a 1903 A l a s k a Boundary Agreement completed 1911 A l a s k a Boundary Survey 1912 A l a s k a r e c e i v e s f u l l t e r r i t o r i a l s t a t u s 221 Appendix D S e l e c t e d L i s t of Canadian-U.S. Agreements 1854 Free t r a d e agreement e s t a b l i s h i n g f r e e t r a d e between Canada and the U.S. (Terminated by the U.S. i n 1866) 1903 T r e a t y of Washington - A l a s k a Boundary T r e a t y 1909 Boundary Waters T r e a t y (IJC) 1911 North P a c i f i c Fur S e a l Agreement (Canada, USSR, Japan and U.S.) 1916 Convention f o r the P r o t e c t i o n of M i g r a t o r y B i r d s i n the U.S. and Canada 1923 Canada & P a c i f i c H a l i b u t Convention ( f i r s t t r e a t y i n d e p e n d e n t l y s i g n e d by Canada) 1925 Lake of the Woods Convention and P r o t o c o l 1930 I n t e r n a t i o n a l P a c i f i c Salmon F i s h e r i e s Convention (Canadian-U.S. agree t o manage F r a s e r R i v e r s t o c k s ) 1940 Rainy Lake Convention 1941 Hyde Park D e c l a r a t i o n (defense c o o p e r a t i o n ) 1950 Ni a g r a R i v e r Water D i v e r s i o n T r e a t y 1952 St Lawrence Seaway P r o j e c t 1952 I n t e r n a t i o n a l North P a c i f i c F i s h e r i e s Convention (Canada, Japan and the U.S.) 1957 North American A i r Defense Agreement (Norad) 1961 Columbia R i v e r T r e a t y (1961) and P r o t o c o l (1964)p 1965 Auto Pact e s t a b l i s h i n g C o n d i t i o n a l t r a d e i n automotive p r o d u c t s . 1972 Great Lakes Water Q u a l i t y Agreement and 1978 1975 S t i k i n e - I s k u t R i v e r s I n f o r m a t i o n Exchange Group Agreement 1980 Memorandum of i n t e n t c o n c e r n i n g transboundary a i r p o l l u t i o n 1981 P a c i f i c Coast Tuna T r e a t y g o v e r n i n g use of p o r t ' f a c i l i t i e s . 1982 Agreement on management of r a d i o a c t i v e waste 1984 S k a g i t R i v e r T r e a t y 1985 U.S-Canadian P a c i f i c Salmon T r e a t y 1982 S t i k i n e - I s k u t R i v e r s I n f o r m a t i o n Exchange Committee 1986 North American Waterfowl Management Agreement 1987 Porcupine C a r i b o u Herd Agreement ( e s t a b l i s h e s the I n t e r n a t i o n a l Porcupine C a r i b o u Board) 1988 Agreement on Free Trade 1988 A r c t i c Pact (U.S. agrees to seek Canadian consent b e f o r e sending i c e b r e a k e r s through waters claim e d by Canada 1988 Alaska-B.C.-Yukon Agreement to study power i n t e r t i e s 1988 Alaska-B.C.-Yukon Tourism marketing agreement 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0097992/manifest

Comment

Related Items