UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

International bioresource agreements : the case of the Porcupine Caribou Russell, Nancy Juna 1979

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1979_A8 R98.pdf [ 8.65MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0100222.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0100222-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0100222-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0100222-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0100222-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0100222-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0100222-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0100222-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0100222.ris

Full Text

9t  INTERNATIONAL BIORESOURCE AGREEMENTS:  THE. CASE. OF  THE PORCUPTJSJE CARIBOU  by NANCY JUNA RUSSELL B.A. ( H o n s . U n i v e r s i t y o f Winnipeg, 1977 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES SCHOOL OF COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING  We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming t o the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1979 (c)  Nancy Juna Russell, 1979  In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f the requirements for an advanced degree a t the University o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r reference and study. I further agree that permission f o r extensive copying o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head o f my department o r h i s I t i s understood that copying o r publication o f t h i s thesis f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission.  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l  f u l f i l m e n t of  an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t  of  the L i b r a r y I further for  shall  the U n i v e r s i t y  make i t  agree that  of  freely available for  permission for  this  thesis for  It  r e f e r e n c e and  gain shall  that  not  CJnhnnl  nf  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h 2075 W e s b r o o k P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T 1W5  DE-6  B P 75-51 1 E  rnmmnnify  Columbia  that  study.  this  be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t  and R p g i n n a l  for  thesis or  copying or p u b l i c a t i o n  written permission.  D e p a r t m e n t Of  I agree  by t h e Head o f my D e p a r t m e n t  i s understood  financial  Columbia,  extensive copying of  s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d  by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s .  British  the requirements  Planning  my  - ii ABSTRACT INTERNATIONAL BIORESOURCE AGREEMENTS:  THE CASE OF THE PORCUPINE CARIBOU  This study analyses t h i r t e e n selected international w i l d l i f e conventions as the basis f o r the recommended elements f o r an i n t e r n a t i o n a l convention on the conservation and management o f the Porcupine Caribou herd and i t s ecosystem.  The nature of the study  stems from the confusing array o f overlapping proposals f o r northern Yukon Resources.  The o i l , gas and mining industries continue t o exert pressure on the p o l i t i c a l decision-makers t o provide incentives and release the area for future e x p l o i t a t i o n .  The Committee f o r O r i g i n a l Peoples  Entitlement and the Council f o r Yukon Indians have t r a d i t i o n a l land claim settlements t o the area, including provisions f o r involvement i n w i l d l i f e and habitat management.  The Yukon T e r r i t o r i a l Government  continues t o advocate and s t r i v e f o r p r o v i n c i a l status.  The federal  government has displayed continuing inter-departmental and inter-agency r i v a l r y evidenced by competing proposals f o r the area.  Parks Canada  wishes to e s t a b l i s h a n a t i o n a l wilderness park, and the Department of the Environment's Canadian W i l d l i f e Service, a Canada w i l d l i f e area. Across the i n t e r n a t i o n a l boundary, decisions pending on the wilderness status, and possible o i l and gas exploration i n northeastern Alaska also bear d i r e c t l y on the northern Yukon's future.  The focus o f attention has been on the Porcupine Caribou, one o f the world's largest herds, migrating over a vast, unique and f r a g i l e  *- iii ecosystem with no regard f o r physical or j u r i s d i c t i o n a l boundaries. Conservation o f t h i s population depends t o a large degree on the success o f planning and management o f the ecosystem o f which i t i s a part.  This struggle f o r authority and c o n t r o l o f the area i s a major  stumbling block to comprehensive planning.  Caribou can only be  adversely affected by the p o t e n t i a l r e s u l t s — over-harvesting, reduction o f winter ranges, disruption o f c a l v i n g grounds and b a r r i e r s to migration.  The northern Yukon i s an important challenge t o those  who would adopt an ecosystem approach to planning the environment. One proposed solution i s the d r a f t convention between Canada and the United States on the Conversation o f Migratory Caribou and Their Environment as an element o f a comprehensive planning and management framework.  Having studied the s o c i a l , economic, e c o l o g i c a l and p o l i t i c a l issues i n the northern Yukon, a set o f p r i n c i p l e s and c r i t e r i a f o r future resource management are proposed.  These provide the evaluative  framework f o r analysing the t h i r t e e n i n t e r n a t i o n a l conventions.  The  p r i n c i p l e s embody the concepts o f conservation and enhancement o f the Porcupine Caribou herd and i t s ecosystem, aboriginal p r i o r i t y use of the resources and native long-term involvement i n w i l d l i f e management and planning, and the development o f a f l e x i b l e management framework.  Based on t h i s analysis, elements f o r an i n t e r n a t i o n a l convention on the conservation and management of the Porcupine caribou herd and i t s ecosystem are recommended. This i s followed by a c r i t i q u e o f the May 1979 d r a f t Convention f o r the Conservation of Migratory Caribou and Their Environment.  - iv The method of investigation has been a l i t e r a t u r e review, extensive interviewing of personnel involved i n a l l aspects of the problem, and a comparative analysis of i n t e r n a t i o n a l w i l d l i f e agreements.  Major conclusions include: - the proposed caribou convention should provide f o r l e g a l l y entrenched reservation of lands f o r the protection of the herd and i t s habitat;  - these lands must include c r i t i c a l o r sensitive habitat areas, i . e . c a l v i n g grounds, to remain i n v i o l a t e t o a l l forms of development;  - native peoples must have p r i o r i t y use of resources and be involved i n long-term management and planning of the w i l d l i f e and habitat, s p e c i f i c a l l y the migratory caribou;  - an independent commission on the conservation and management of the caribou and t h e i r ecosystem should be provided f o r i n the convention;  and  - t h i s commission must also have an a c t i v e r o l e i n future land use planning and management committees and agencies.  -  v  -  T A B L E OF CONTENTS  ^  Abstract L i s t of Tables List of Figures Acknowledgements  i±. v i i : yi j f i x  Chapter  I  Introduction  Chapter  II  Historical  Sketch of  International 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 Chapter  III  IV  the  Wildlife  Proposal  for  an  Arctic  Range  .  The E a r l y Years O i l and Gas D i s c o v e r i e s and Conservation Initiatives The B e r g e r I n q u i r y Native Proposals Government S t u d i e s and Task Forces Caribou Convention COPE/Federal Government Agreementin-Principle Additional Proposals Conclusion  5 5 7 9L 10. 14 22 24  '  .  26 29  C a r i b o u Management  30  3.1 3.2 3.3  30 32 45 45 49. 54  3.4 Chapter  1  Why b e C o n c e r n e d ? Ranges and M i g r a t i o n Routes Population Characteristics 3.3.1 S i z e and Composition 3.3.2 P r e d a t i o n and M o r t a l i t y Management  The Socioeconomic Context and Development 4.1  4.2  4.3  for  Factors  Conservation  Concerns  Social 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 Indust 4.2.1  59  and Conservation Issues Native Concerns Archaeological Potential Conservation and R e c r e a t i o n Concerns r i a l Concerns Dempster Highway and L a t e r a l Pipeline 4.2.2 O i l , Gas and M i n e r a l E x p l o r a t i o n C a r i b o u , Renewable Resources and  59 59. 63 65 67  Development  83  Planning  67 77  - vi Page Chapter V  Elements for an International Convention on the Conservation and Management of the Porcupine Caribou Herd and i t s Ecosystem 5.1  Chapter VT  Critique of the Draft Convention for the Conservation of Migratory Caribou and Their Environment 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8  Literature Cited Appendix I Appendix II  Evaluative Framework 5.1.1 Conservation 5.1.2 Regulation 5.1.3 Management 5.1.4 Research 5.1.5 Native Use 5.1.6 Other Environmental Concerns 5.1.7 Review  Overview Conservation of Lands Management and Regulation Coordinated Research Native Use and Involvement Compatible/Incompatible Land Uses and Activities Review Conclusion -  85. 85 86. 87 89. 91 93 95 98  100. 1Q0. 101 104 107 107 109. 110 HI 113  Review of Selected International Wildlife Conventions  121  Convention Between the United States of America and Canada for the Conservation of Migratory Caribou and Their Environment, May 1979  163  Curriculum Vitae  - vn  -  L I S T OF TABLES  R e l a t i v e S t r e n g t h s and Weaknesses o f C o n s e r v a t i o n Options  S e a s o n a l A c t i v i t i e s and D i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e P o r c u p i n e C a r i b o u Herd .  1972 and 1977 P o r c u p i n e C a r i b o u Herd P o p u l a t i o n Estimates  P o r c u p i n e C a r i b o u Herd Composition Observed D u r i n g P o s t - C a l v i n g M i g r a t i o n , 1972 - 1976  P o r c u p i n e C a r i b o u H a r v e s t Data  Comparative A n a l y s i s o f I n t e r n a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e Agreements: A Summary  -  v i i i  -  L I S T OF FIGURES  Page 1.  The  Range o f  the  Porcupine  2.  The  Dempster Highway  3.  The Western  4.  The N o r t h e r n  5.  Wilderness  6.  COPE's National  7.  Spring Migration of  8.  C a l v i n g Grounds  9.  Post-Calving Aggregations,  Caribou Herd  2  11  A r c t i c Region  13  Yukon  15  Withdrawal  the  Wilderness  of  10.  P o s t - C a l v i n g and  11.  Current  12.  The  13.  Mineral Claims  14.  Mineral Potential  General  and  the  the  Public  Porcupine  Porcupine  August  Winter  the  -  Caribou  Dedication,  Caribou,  Caribou,  20  Yukon T e r r i t o r y  1971  1972  -  -  1978  1974  39.  40  Dispersal  Range o f  the  Northern  Northern  25  35  1974  Dempster Highway A c r o s s  in  Porcupine  Movements,  the  Porcupine  Porcupine  1971  1974  Caribou,  Caribou's  Yukon Withdrawal  Y u k o n , 1979  -  1970-1978  Winter  Lands,  42  1979  Range  44  68  79  80  -  i x  -  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I would l i k e t o thank D r . W i l l i a m Rees f o r h i s encouragement, a d v i c e and e d i t o r i a l a s s i s t a n c e i n the planning and preparation o f t h i s document. S i m i l a r l y , I would l i k e to thank Dr. Andrew Thompson f o r h i s g u i d a n c e and . comments o n l a t e r d r a f t s o f t h e m a n u s c r i p t , particularly his legal advice. T h i s study was supported by the Canadian A r c t i c Resources Committee, and g r a n t s t o D r . Rees from the Canadian A r c t i c and A l p i n e Research Committee, U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver.  - 1 CHAPTER  I  INTRODUCTION This  study  migratory  focuses caribou  The geographic the  region  the  Porcupine  convention  area  north  ecological  on key elements o f  of  of  of  the  of  regional,  concern  Dawson,  Caribou herd  diversity,  northern  and  Yukon are  national  and  Porcupine Caribou herd  The p o t e n t i a l is  o n l y one  Yukon, and  broader  and  the  i n a  (see  part  of  w i l l  northern  Yukon,  Arctic  provide  such as  native  receive  Department  of  Environment  a  on the  framework  migratory  Porcupine for  is  rights,  for  Range  management.  of  the  concern pressures  context.  high priority within  of  northern  identifying  conservation  (DINA)  herd  therefore  recreational  i n this  values  the  p l a n n i n g and  s p e c i f i c problems  wilderness  conservation  heritage  Wildlife  scope  l a n d use  and Northern A f f a i r s  (DOE).,  significance  proposals  The  attention  i n northern  and management r e m a i n Indian  the  landforms,  The  International  comprehensive  of  heritage.  of  park.  For example,  potential  interest  array  range  natural'  importance.  this  States.  encompassing  by the  irreplaceable  symbolic of  wilderness  importance.  industrial  the  Yukon,  archaeological  international  protection  of  an  United  The unique  1).  and  international the  described  Figure  cultural  and  northern  generally  suggested  national  context  Assuming t h a t  the  confusing  from caribou to  elements o f in  element  a possible  This  is  is  Canada  caribou convention which focuses  including the  broadened  between  a proposed  and  wildlife  the  and  the  Department  the  northern  Yukon's  - 2 -  FIGURE  'PRUDHOE  BAY  i THE RANGE OF THE PORCUPINE CARIBOU  DAWSON APPROXIMATE LIMIT OF C A R I B O U R A N G E SPRING SUMMER FALL  MIGRATION  C A L V I N G GROUND • » » !  MOVEMENTS'  DEMPSTER  MIGRATION  CORRIDOR  PROPOSED GAS PIPELINE  A P P R O X I M A T E N O R T H E R NN LIMIT OF WINTER  _  RANGE  rTjXlJlT]^  GAS FIELDS A (ALASKA HIGHWAY PIPELINE  PANEL,  1978b)  - 3 -  land and resources are o f primary importance, and i n d u s t r i a l p o t e n t i a l of secondary importance t o the government o f Canada. This i s the context o f comprehensive  planning i n t h i s analysis.  I  have a l s o assumed that some form of i n t e r n a t i o n a l agreement w i l l be r e a l i z e d between Canada and the United States on migratory caribou and the ecosystem of which they are a part.  Given these assumptions, the objectives of the study are t o : a.  develop an a n a l y t i c framework t o approach the problem o f an international migratory caribou agreement, with emphasis on o v e r a l l land use planning and resource management issues;  b.  and  propose a schedule of e s s e n t i a l elesments that must be included i n any eventual agreement i f the multiple socio-economice c o l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e s o f such an agreement are to be observed.  The t h e s i s i s divided into several chapters.  I t begins with a b r i e f  t r e a t i s e of the development of the concept of an i n t e r n a t i o n a l w i l d l i f e range and the subsequent myriad of proposals f o r the northern Yukon. A discussion of b i o l o g i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Porcupine caribou herd follows, drawing upon past research and interviews of ,ca£ibou b i o l o g i s t s who have worked with the herd.  S o c i a l , conservation and  i n d u s t r i a l issues are then outlined i n the context o f land and resource planning and management.  Special reference i s made here  to the r o l e o f native peoples regarding use of the land and resources for t r a d i t i o n a l purposes, as well as t h e i r involvement i n long-term  - 4 planning  and management.  are  c r i t i c a l l y  then  criteria.  The  agreement and the  evaluated  study a  of  M i g r a t o r y C a r i b o u and  of  America Their  international  according to  concludes  critique  United States  Existing  a  with possible  the and  most  recent  Canada  Environment.  for  wildlife  set  of principles  elements o f draft the  agreements  an  Convention  Conservation  and  international Between of  - 5CHAPTER I I HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE PROPOSAL FOR AN ARCTIC INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE RANGE ; INTRODUCTION The unique l a n d f o r m s , e c o l o g i c a l d i v e r s i t y , a n d c u l t u r a l and a r c h a e o l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e n o r t h e r n Yukon a r e p a r t o f an i r r e p l a c e a b l e n a t u r a l h e r i t a g e o f r e g i o n a l , n a t i o n a l and i n t e r n a t i o n a l importance.  The m i g r a t o r y P o r c u p i n e  t h i s heritage.  C a r i b o u h e r d i s symbolic o f  However, v a r i o u s i n d u s t r i a l developments pose a  s e r i o u s t h r e a t t o t h e r e g i o n and i t s r e s o u r c e s .  The r e c e n t l y  completed Dempster Highway, t h e p l a n s o f Dome Petroleum  f o r access  a c r o s s t h e N o r t h S l o p e t o t h e B e a u f o r t Sea, and p o s s i b l e a u t h o r i z a t i o n o f o i l and gas e x p l o r a t i o n i n n o r t h e a s t e r n A l a s k a , a r e examples o f immediate  2.1  concern.  THE EARLY YEARS  The h i s t o r y o f t h e proposed A r c t i c . I n t e r n a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e Range (AIWR) has important  i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r i t s c u r r e n t and f u t u r e s t a t u s .  The t e r m AIWR (Canada) was c o i n e d i n 1970 a t a c o n f e r e n c e i n whitehorse  and r e f e r s t o t h e same g e n e r a l a r e a o f n o r t h e r n Yukon  l a n d s t e n t a t i v e l y withdrawn from f u t u r e development by Hugh F a u l k n e r , former M i n i s t e r o f I n d i a n and N o r t h e r n A f f a i r s , i n J u l y 1978 (Communique #1-7821, J u l y 6, 1978).  The proposed Canadian r e s e r v e  a d j o i n s t h e A r c t i c N a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e Refuge Alaska.  (ANWR) i n n o r t h e a s t e r n  I t was o r i g i n a l l y a n t i c i p a t e d ' t h a t AIWR would become t h e  name o f t h e combined Canadian and U n i t e d S t a t e s a r e a .  Today,  however, AIWR has come t o r e p r e s e n t t h e p o t e n t i a l Canadian r e s e r v e o n l y .  - 6 The p r o p o s a l f o r a n o r t h e r n Yukon r e s e r v e o r i g i n a t e s from t h e 1920's when O l a u s and Mardy M u r i e conducted  f i e l d s t u d i e s on t h e  C a r i b o u herd's range i n n o r t h e a s t e r n A l a s k a . impress upon U.S. ecosystem.  Porcupine  They were a b l e t h e n t o  o f f i c i a l s the conservation value o f the A r c t i c  N e v e r t h e l e s s , r e s e a r c h d i d n o t b e g i n u n t i l t h e 1950's,  headed by George L. C o l l i n s , then C h i e f o f Land Use P l a n n i n g f o r t h e Western Region o f t h e N a t i o n a l Park S e r v i c e ; L o w e l l Sumner, C h i e f N a t u r a l i s t o f t h e S e r v i c e ; and A. S t a r k e r L e o p o l d , professor a t the U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a  (Leonard  zoology  1978a).  As p a r t o f t h i s renewed i n t e r e s t , b i o l o g i s t s , i n c l u d i n g t h e  Muries,  surveyed t h e upper Sheenjek R i v e r d r a i n a g e i n t h e e a s t e r n Brooks Range i n 1956.  T h e i r s t u d i e s were supported by t h e  S o c i e t y , the Conservation Foundation  and t h e New  Wilderness  York Z o o l o g i c a l  S o c i e t y , and p r o v i d e d p a r t o f t h e i n i t i a t i v e f o r t h e 1957 C l u b W i l d e r n e s s Conference.  T h i s meeting f o c u s e d on  A l a s k a and t h e n o r t h e r n Yukon, and was U.S.  Sierra  northeastern  a t t e n d e d by heads o f a l l t h e  f e d e r a l l a n d management a g e n c i e s and e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s from  a c r o s s N o r t h America.  The U.S.  A r c t i c N a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e Refuge stemmed from t h e  conference's  major recommendation f o r f o r m a l p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e c a r i b o u and o t h e r w i l d l i f e i n t h e Brooks Range a r e a . o b j e c t i o n s by m i n i n g a r e s e r v e was  In p a r t because o f  i n t e r e s t s , the formal establishment o f  n o t taken up by Congress u n t i l December 1960  such when,  i n t h e f i n a l days o f t h e Eisenhower a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , I n t e r i o r  Secretary to  Seaton withdrew 8.9  establish  Lobbyists  for  withdrawn, the  In  Arctic  the  but  Arctic,  2.2  the  as  acres  National Wildlife  ANWR a l s o  attempted  to  t h e r e was no e v i d e n c e  by p u b l i c l a n d  Refuge have  of  a  any  t h e r e was no C a n a d i a n government  1968  the  situation gas  at  changed d r a m a t i c a l l y .  Prudhoe Bay, A l a s k a ,  in  the  western  on  the  Canadian government  herd  i n the  ANWR.  Lands  the  specialists  and h i s  to  the  place  protect  a wildlife  and n a t i v e  several  refuge.  protection  of  the  the  range o f reserve  intention of  this  i n proposal.  o i l  exploration pressure  the  Porcupine  adjoining  the  associates  Wildlife  groups.  This majority  northern  Yukon  conservationist Columbia,  subsequently  Range C o n f e r e n c e ,  specialists,  governments,  A majority of  regarding  Canadian  which  1970.  wildlife  federal  urging  the  of British  i n October,  northern  for  subsequent  protection of  66 A r c t i c  resolutions  threat  Conference on P r o d u c t i v i t y o f Circumpolar  International  attracted  1978a).  counterpart  The d i s c o v e r y o f  conservation-oriented  University  t e r r i t o r i a l and  companies  wildlife  Arctic  the  of  i n increased  the  (Leonard  Canadian type  order  INITIATIVES  D r . Andrew Thompson, a  i n whitehorse  This meeting state,  at  resulted  lobby for  (Leonard 1978b).  organized  upon  Yukon as  International  law professor  took  to  i n Edmonton i n 1969 w i t h  Arctic  and  northern  George C o l l i n s  attended  lands  Canadian A r c t i c ,  and  (ANWR)  support  O I L AND GAS DISCOVERIES AND CONSERVATION  and n a t u r a l  of  million  the  Yukon under  mining,  the  o i l and  participants  establishment  stressed  representatives  need  for  S e c t i o n 18(e)  of  gas  agreed a  Canadian  formal of  the  Territorial  - 8Lands Act, and f o r research i n t o possible i n t e r n a t i o n a l agreements f o r the management o f the resources.  The p r i n c i p a l recommendation  suggests: ... that the governments of Canada and Yukon e s t a b l i s h an area t o be known as the A r c t i c International W i l d l i f e Range (Canada), with boundaries t o be established with reference t o suitable landmarks approximately following the Porcupine and B e l l Rivers and thence t o the Blow River near i t s mouth, along the A r c t i c coast t o the i n t e r n a t i o n a l border and south along that border t o the Porcupine River (U.B.C. Law Review 1971).. The AIWR (Canada) Society was also formed, with Dr. Thompson as president and George C o l l i n s as vice-president.  Following the. conference, the Hon. Jean Chretien, then M i n i s t e r o f Indian and Northern A f f a i r s (DINA)., and p a r t i c i p a n t a t the two-day meeting, acknowledged the recommendations and resolutions passed at the conference, and indicated h i s support f o r the Range. Additional support came from the 12th Technical Meeting o f the International Union f o r Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCNL 1972, where a r e s o l u t i o n was passed urging the governments of Canada and the United States t o cooperate i n e s t a b l i s h i n g an international range f o r the protection o f the Porcupine Caribou herd.  The AIWR conference resolution reached the Order-in-Council stage, but was subsequently dropped by Chretien's o f f i c e i n 1973.  The  key factor a t t h i s time was the increasing concern over land claim negotiations, and the concomitant pressure on government ( s p e c i f i c a l l y DINA) t o disallow any further land d i s p o s i t i o n s (Thompson 1978)..  A second factor was the attitudes o f inining  - 9 i n t e r e s t s and l o c a l chauvinism, e x p r e s s e d t h r o u g h Commissioner Smith's  (Yukon) o b j e c t i o n .  L o c a l r e s i d e n t s f e l t t h a t the f e d e r a l  government s h o u l d n o t p r o c e e d on d e c i s i o n s h a v i n g a major e f f e c t on t h e Yukon u n t i l t h e i s s u e o f p r o v i n c e h c o d was  2.3  settled  (Thompson 1978).  THE BERGER INQUIRY  DINA t h e r e f o r e k e p t t h e p r o p o s a l s h e l v e d u n t i l an upsurge i n i n t e r e s t o c c u r r e d d u r i n g t h e B e r g e r I n q u i r y 1974  - 1977.  In conducting  h e a r i n g s on t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact o f a Mackenzie V a l l e y  gas  p i p e l i n e proposed by t h e Canadian A r c t i c Gas c o n s o r t i u m , Commissioner J u s t i c e Berger h e a r d e x t e n s i v e e v i d e n c e on t h e v a l u e o f w i l d e r n e s s , which he d e f i n e d as a non-renewable r e s o u r c e (Berger 1977, J u s t i c e Berger concluded t h a t the c o a s t a l p o r t i o n o f the r o u t e was  i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e environment,  V o l . 1 , p.30). proposed  including w i l d l i f e  h u n t i n g , t r a p p i n g and f i s h i n g a c t i v i t i e s o f n a t i v e p e o p l e .  He  and argued  f o r t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e r e s o u r c e base: I n t h e N o r t h , c e r t a i n ecosystems and c e r t a i n m i g r a t o r y p o p u l a t i o n s can be p r o t e c t e d and p r e s e r v e d o n l y by r e c o g n i z i n g t h e i n v i o l a b i l i t y o f w i l d e r n e s s (Berger 1977, V o l . 1 , p.31). He t h e r e f o r e recommended t h e w i t h d r a w a l o f l a n d s n o r t h o f t h e P o r c u p i n e R i v e r f o r establishment as a n a t i o n a l wilderness park: The w i l d e r n e s s park t h a t I am p r o p o s i n g here would c o v e r a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e same a r e a as t h e Canadian p a r t o f t h e proposed A r c t i c I n t e r n a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e Range, and i t would a d j o i n t h e 9 m i l l i o n a c r e A r c t i c N a t i o n a l W i l d l i f e Refuge i n A l a s k a . ... Together, t h e s e two a r e a s would c o n s t i t u t e a m a g n i f i c e n t a r e a o f 18 m i l l i o n a c r e s spanning t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l boundary (Berger 1977, V o l . 1 , p.48).  - 10  -  The s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h i s p r o p o s a l i s f u r t h e r emphasized B e r g e r ' s r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e need f o r a new  by J u s t i c e  type o f "wilderness park".  He n o t e d e x p l i c i t l y t h a t c e r t a i n r e c r e a t i o n and  development-oriented  a c t i v i t i e s u s u a l l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h Canadian n a t i o n a l p a r k s a r e incompatible with the i n t e r e s t s o f w i l d l i f e protection.  Berger  thus  suggested a r e v i s i o n t o Canadian n a t i o n a l p a r k s l e g i s l a t i o n t o i n c l u d e a new  s t a t u t o r y c r e a t i o n , wilderness parks  On J u l y 4, 1977  t h e N a t i o n a l Energy Board  I n q u i r y and r e s u l t s from t h e i r own  (Berger 1977, V o l . 1 ) .  (NEB), f o l l o w i n g t h e B e r g e r  hearings, r e j e c t e d the  V a l l e y Gas P i p e l i n e r o u t e proposed by Canadian A r c t i c Gas  Mackenzie (Rees  1978).  As an a l t e r n a t i v e , t h e y recommended t h e l a s t minute p r o p o s a l by F o o t h i l l s P i p e L i n e s (Yukon) L i m i t e d , whose r o u t e would f o l l o w t h e A l a s k a o i l p i p e l i n e t o t h e A l a s k a Highway and thence s o u t h e a s t t o Alberta.  I n c l u d e d i n t h i s p r o p o s a l was  a spur l i n k c a l l e d t h e  Dempster L a t e r a l w h i c h would e v e n t u a l l y f a c i l i t a t e t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o f Mackenzie  D e l t a gas t o s o u t h e r n markets.  The Dempster r o u t e  would a p p r o x i m a t e l y p a r a l l e l t h e Dempster Highway from I n u v i k t o Dawson, and c o n t i n u e s o u t h e a s t t o t h e A l a s k a Highway P i p e l i n e Figure 2). t o t h e NEB  A p p l i c a t i o n f o r t h e Dempster L a t e r a l must be by J u l y 1, 1979  impact assessment  2.4  (see  submitted  i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h an e n v i r o n m e n t a l  o f the p i p e l i n e .  NATIVE PROPOSALS  The pace o f e v e n t s i n c r e a s e d through t h i s p e r i o d .  The Committee  f o r O r i g i n a l P e o p l e s E n t i t l e m e n t (COPE), an o r g a n i z a t i o n r e p r e s e n t i n g  -  FIGURE  2  11  -  THE DEMPSTER  _0  HIGHWAY  BEAUFORT SEA  v . mile 97I (I563 km) 'SiNUVIK  iAKMWKX  mile 4I7 (I490 km) = mile 93I * ...Mackenzie Hwy  I i  ARCTIC IED RIVER  > FORT MbPHERSON] \ )  River  m o  'tmile_29Q/i46J.Jim)  "5-  I  -1-mile 254\(409 krA) -mile 237 (Sm kmSs I  -mile I78 (286 km)  :o mile l £ 3 (I89 km)  3  09' lEAGLE  -mile 78 (I25.5km)  I00 miles  50  200 km  100  .INTON CREEK  CONSTRUCTED  »  UNDER C O N S T R U C T I O N  .DAWSON* • mile 0 (0 km)  —  — —  PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION RECONSTRUCTION July I978  (NORTHERN  PERSPECTIVES,  Vol. VII, No.l, 1979)  the  2,500  Inuvialuit  (Inuit  Inuvialuit  Nunangat  government  i n May 1977.  Arctic park  wildlife  was n o t  habitat  the  could  (Inuvialuit  This the  set  "Western A r c t i c  claim  settlement  fall  The O l d Crow people,  their  traditional  proposal  emphasized creation  under  of  to  the a  the  to  protection  specific  envisaged  manage an  that  area  Wilderness areas or this  Region by the  its  federal of  wilderness wildlife  a Land Use P l a n n i n g and  empowered  within  Region" overlaps as  by the  subsequently  this  presented  Management  designated  wildlife  preserves  Commission  1977).  well  AIWR,  settlement  Region.  aside  as  Western A r c t i c ) ,  COPE o r i g i n a l l y  would  Nunangat  coastline,  the  While  which would be  be  -  a primary goal,  Western A r c t i c then  of  land claim  suggested."^  protection  Commission, as  as  12  the  Council  the  lands  for  only native  agreed lands  with  upon a  and  with  the  proposed  AIWR  identified for  Yukon  Indians  group  living  (see  a  the  land  Figure  within  the  j u r i s d i c t i o n a l boundary  those o f  along  proposed  to  I n u v i a l u i t under  3).  separate  the  COPE  claim.  In  February  Indians, to  the  Arctic  the  submitted  O l d Crow people,  their  proposal  Working Group on Parks Resources  provision  1.  1978,  for  an  Conference  and  under  f o r much o f Scientific  i n Edmonton.  international  the  wildlife  A s n o t e d i n a l a t e r s e c t i o n , COPE, recommendation, l a t e r proposed the Wilderness Park.  the  Council  for  Yukon  area  in  question  Preserves  at  a  This proposal  Canadian  included  a  range:  following on Justice Berger's creation of a National  -  FIGURE  3  WESTERN  13 -  ARCTIC REGION  INUVIALUIT  NUNANGAT,  1977)  - 14 We the residents of Old Crow do hereby resolve that: 1.  The Government of Canada legislate and negotiate with the Government of the United States, an Arctic Wildlife Range i n northeastern Alaska and northern Yukon;  2.  That the±)irds and wildlife in the above areas are international in status and therefore require international protection;  3.  That the above request w i l l not include the Old Crow Flats area, as i t i s negotiable under the Yukon Indian Land Claims Package. (Northern Transitions 1978, p.251)  2.5  GOVERNMENT STUDIES AND TASK FORCES  Meanwhile, various branches of the federal government initiated a confusing array of studies of the northern Yukon lands.  Parks  Canada commissioned the Lands Directorate to do an ecological land survey of the area north of the Porcupine and Bell Rivers, covering 2 approximately 16,988 mi  2 (44,000 km ).  The Northern Yukon: An  Ecological Land Survey was completed in August 1978, and i s available to the public. This survey was in response to the need for greater knowledge of an area identified in March 1977 by Parks Canada for a proposed National Park Reserve (DINA 1977, see Figure 4). 2 2 Canada's proposal covers about 8,200 mi  Parks  (21,238 km ) with examples  of major Arctic landscapes, i.e. the Old Crow wetlands, the unglaciated British Mountains, the Firth River Valley, the Arctic coastal plains and offshore waters.  Important habitats for waterfowl,  barren-ground caribou, grizzly, black and polar bears, Dall's sheep, Arctic fox and hare, ringed seal, beluga whale and others are also included.  - 15 FIGURE  4. THE  NORTHERN YUKON  Index to Ecological Generalizations A- Ecoregions, ecodistricts, and ecosections. B- Ecoregions and ecodistricts.  (THE  NORTHERN  YUKON:  AN  ECOLOGICAL  LAND  SURVEY,PARKS  CANADA,  1978)  - 16 Dr. Art Pearson, then Commissioner of the Yukon Territory, f e l t that the proposed park would not provide adequate protection for the Porcupine caribou. The Department of Indian and Northern Affairs therefore organized a Northern Yukon Conservation Planning Task Force. The Task Force w i l l : Identify the manner i n which a National Park and other conservation mechanisms could be established so that they could exist i n the most complementary way i n the context of other identified interests (Terms of Reference, Appendix I, Northern Yukon Conservation Planning Task Force, 1978).  The Task Force's membership included representatives from the Northern Program, Office of Native Claims and Parks Canada ( a l l agencies of DINA), Canadian Wildlife Service of the Department of the Environment, the Yukon Territorial Government and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Task Force produced an internal report in 1978 which presented six options for the area north and west of 2 the Porcupine, Bell and Rat Rivers (16,000 mi  2 or 41,440 km ).  These are: 1. 2.  No action (status quo) Special Land Management Zone under the Territorial Lands Act  3.  Canadian Wildlife Area under the Canada.Wildlife Act  4.  National Wilderness Park using the National Parks Act  5.  Combinations of (3) and (4)  6.  Withdrawal under section 19 of the Territorial Lands Act, as an interim measure only.  -  17  -  Each o p t i o n was d i s c u s s e d  according to  disadvantages  flexibility  i n terms o f  implementation,  and  level  of  its  advantages  (multiple use),  preservation.  Table  and ease  of  1 summarizes  this  analysis.  Significantly, Native  variety of  necessitated  cooperative  the 1.  Minister  preservation  management. solutions of  the  settlement  an o v e r r i d i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n ,  a conservation  any ready-made to  Task Force concluded that  l a n d c l a i m s was  confusing  and  the  Indian  and  interests  plan to  and  that  and management  p r o v i d e a mechanism f o r  They therefore instead,  were  recommended  and Northern  unable the  of  to  the  decisions coordinated propose  following  Affairs:  That t h e N o r t h e r n Zone be w i t h d r a w n under s e c i t o n ( s i c ) 1 9 o f t h e T e r r i t o r i a l L a n d s A c t ( C p t i o n 6) pending further study and c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h the concerned parties. The w o r d i n g o f w i t h d r a w a l Order-in-Council stipulates that: a.  such a withdrawal w i l l land settlements; and  b.  l o c a l people resources as  not  prejudice  native  may c o n t i n u e t o h a r v e s t renewable t h e y have done p r e v i o u s l y .  2.  That the current efforts toward achieving a management p l a n f o r t h e Dempster H i g h w a y be a c c e l e r a t e d and implemented by the Yukon and Northwest T e r r i t o r i a l Governments. This i s considered urgent.  3.  That the Yukon M i n e r a l A c t be passed t o enable c o n t r o l o f m i n e r a l a c t i v i t i e s b y means o f t h e T e r r i t o r i a l Lands A c t .  4.  That the Northwest T e r r i t o r i a l Government be r e q u e s t e d t o p r o h i b i t t h e s a l e o f game m e a t e x c e p t i f otherwise specified i n Native Claims Settlements. This would not preclude intersettlement trade or barter.  - 18 Table 1:  Relative Strengths and Weaknesses of Conservation Options  Conservation Option  *Rank i n terms of:  Flexibility  No Action  _ , . . . Implementation 1  1  Preservation  5  Special Zone  2  3  4  Wildlife Area  3  2  3**  Combination  4  4  2**  Wilderness Park  5  5  1  1 = greatest; 5 = least allows for a measure of conservation for the areas south of the Porcupine and Bell Rivers through a OtfS/YTG agreement Option 6 was not rated i n the table as i t i s regarded as a temporary measure only. (Northern Yukon Conservation Planning Task Force, 1978)  - 19 5.  That the Canadian Wildlife Service (DOE) be requested to negotiate a caribou research and conservation agreement with the agencies responsible for the management of the Porcupine Caribou herd with a view to achieving cohesive management (North Yukon Conservation Planning Task Force, 1978).  Background information supplied by the Task Force report led to the Hon. Hugh Faulkner's announcement i n January 1978 of the initiation of public consultation respecting six potential wilderness areas i n the Arctic "... as reserves for future national parks" (DINA Communique #7792). The proposed package included the Northern Yukon as one of the six. On July 6, six months after this initiation, Mr. Faulkner announced the withdrawal of 9.6 million acres (3.87 x 10  ha) of northern Yukon lands, between the Porcupine River and  the Beaufort Sea, as an i n i t i a l step towards establishing a northern wilderness park (see Figure 5). I have concluded that the conservation values of the region exceed the development potential and we must reserve a l l the land north of the Porcupine and Bell Rivers. ... The action w i l l not prejudice land claims discussions nor traditional native hunting, fishing and trapping activities i n the area. ... Existing mineral claims and o i l and gas interestes are not affected by the withdrawal, and exploration on such proterties (sic) may proceed under normal government regulatory controls. [However], the withdrawal stops further disposal of land under the Territorial Lands Act for o i l and gas exploration, ends the sale or lease of surface rights, and prohibits entry for staking of mineral claims... (DINA Communique #7821). The Minister also announced the establishment of a second Task Force to "... develop and recommend a comprehensive Resource Management Plan covering the Canadian range of the Porcupine Caribou herd, including definition of boundary options for a National  FIGURE  5.  WILDERNESS WITHDRAWAL AND THE PORCUPINE  y  - 20 -  CARIBOU  Wilderness is a non-renewable resource ...wilderness constitutes an Important — perhaps an invaluable — part of modernday life; its preservation is a contribution to, not a repudiation of, the civilization upon which we depend.  HERSCHEL ISLAND  Oo o o o  Justice Thomas Berger  (NORTHERN  PERSPECTIVES, No. 2,  Vol. VII,  1979)  1/ > #^ x  OLD  CROW  IV//,-  ) f I ' .* I .  '„ i , ' J T V ,  J (  \  \ I  L A N D WITHDRAWAL CARIBOU RANGE  -  LIMIT  CARIBOU WINTERING A R E A  CARIBOU MIGRATION ROUTE CARIBOU CRITICAL AREA  2 >  O  - 21 Wilderness Park" (DINA, Task Force Terms of Reference, 1979). The Task Force i s comprised of one representative from: -  Government of Yukon (Chairman) Government of Northwest Territories Department of Fisheries and Environment Northern Program, DINA Parks Canada, DINA Committee for Original Peoples Entitlement Council for Yukon Indians Old Crow Community Communities of Fort McPherson, Arctic Red River and Aklavik Yukon Chamber of Mines O i l and Gas Industry Conservation organization under auspices of the Yukon Conservation Society.  The Terms of Reference were internally drafted from November 1978 to January 1979, and were circulated to the participants.  The  study i s underway and final recommendations are to be submitted to the Minister by December 1979.  Herman Dirschl, Executive Secretary of this Northern Yukon Task Force, has indicated that the Task Force would act as an umbrella organization to coordinate working groups on northern Yukon land use:  planning and management. For example, the Territorial  Governments of Yukon and Northwest Territories have a joint Dempster Highway Working Group which has recently completed an Interim Plan for the management of the Dempster Highway; Parks Canada i s continuing the public consultation program for a national wilderness park announced by Faulkner i n January 1978; and under the COPE/ Canadian Ctovernment Agreement-in-Principle, a National Wilderness Park Steering Committee has been established to make recommendations to the Minister by October of 1979 on the possible.purpose, functions and management of the 5,000 square mile (mLnimum) Wilderness Park.  - 22 There i s considerable overlap between this last (committee and the DINA Task Force i n terms of membership and objectives. Indeed, COPE feels that the Task Force i s encroaching upon the responsibilities of the Steering Committee regarding concerns inside the Wilderness Park: ...the primary responsibility of the Steering Committee i s to consider the area that i s withdrawn including both the 5,000 sq.miles which i s the imnimum area to be dedicated as a National Wilderness Park and the additional 11,000 sq. miles which i s recommended to be dedicated as the National Wilderness Park. We feel that i t i s not the responsibility of the Task Force ... to review and evaluate options for the ultimate disposition of the withdrawn area particularly the 5,000 sq. miles (COPE letter to Minister Faulkner, March 6, 1979). Conflict may arise therefore when broad land allocations, including the delineation of wilderness park boundaries, are decided upon within the Steering Committee that are contrary to the other interests represented on the Northern Yukon Task Force.  This, with other  interdepartmental rivalries, may seriously hamper coordinated land use planning and management.  2.6  CARIBOU CONVENTION  Concurrently on July 6, 1978, Environment Minister Len Marchand, stated that the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) would open discussions with the U.S. Department of the Interior on a Canada/U.S. agreement on the protection of the Porcupine Caribou herd which migrates between the Yukon, NWT and Alaska. The central idea... i s the need to manage the entire herd and i t s range, on both sides of the border, as an ecological unit. In other words, there needs to be a ccmprehensive approach, which means close and continuing cooperation between the various agencies responsible for caribou and i t s habitat i n both  - 23 -  countries (Environment Canada Press Release, July 6, 1978). Accordingly, the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) organized a committee, headed by Mr. Anthony Keith, to draft an international convention.  Representatives of the CWS and the U.S. Fish and  Wildlife Service have met on several occasions to discuss basic concepts and to draft proposed conventions.  The main concepts  include (compiled from American and Canadian drafts): -  long-term conservation and management of the caribou and the ecosystem of which they are a part;  -  establishment of a flexible management model based on the principles that: consumptive and non-consumptive values are optimized on a continuing basis, present and future options are to be ensured, risk of irreversible change or long-term adverse impact i s to be minimized, subsistence use of the caribou must have priority over any other consumptive use;  -  a ten-member Migratory Caribou Commission would be established, five from each country. A scientific advisory committee and an advisory committee of traditional subsistence users would be established by the Commission for direct assistance i n the performance of i t s duties;  -  the powers and duties of the Commission include: the recommendations on measures for harvest quota allotment including establishment of maximum allowable take (total numbers and per country), taking seasons, methods, etc., recotimendations on measures to ensure conservation and enhancement of caribou habitat, including long-term measures, coordinated research i s encouraged, public participation on the Commission's annual reports and recommendations.  - 24 C O P E / F E D E R A L GOVERNMENT  2.7 The  I n u v i a l u i t Land  context.  AGREEMENT-IN-PRINCIPLE  Rights Settlement  On O c t o b e r  31,  COPE a n d  1978  an Agreement-in-Principle on the Yukon's in  potential  as  S e c t i o n 12 t h a t  the  withdraw the purpose this  as  It  Agreement  recommends  much l a r g e r  o u t l i n e d by Berger  (1977  from the  s h o u l d be n o t e d  original  areas  that  at  or  policy  currently uncertain  given the  historically  of  Agreement  i n  this  signed northern  states  of  Parks  serve  the  the  northern  of  government  the  Porcupine River  Vol.1).  Canada  that  this  noted,  called for  a  there  strong  to  reserves.  i s  no  While  legal basis  for  discussion is i n future,  i t  underway is  development-orientation  (Turner and  Rees  form o f  multiple objective Yukon.  for  As previously  such reserves  other  actually  Commission which had a u t h o r i t y  wildlife  for  National Wilderness Park or  lands  the  the  i n Canada.  concerning possible  best  government  Regarding the  COPE p r o p o s a l  present  Wilderness Parks"  would  that  north  wilderness  "National  federal  reserve,  area  deviates  aside  significance  agreement:  Land Use P l a n n i n g and Management set  the  of  Canada agrees t o e s t a b l i s h a N a t i o n a l W i l d e r n e s s Park f o r the purpose o f w i l d l i f e p r o t e c t i o n and w i l d e r n e s s c o n s e r v a t i o n o f n o t l e s s t h a n 5,000 square m i l e s o f t r a d i t i o n a l lands o f the I n u v i a l u i t i n t h e n o r t h e r n Yukon shown a s the area marked " A " i n Annex E and i n pursuance t h e r e o f has withdrawn from d i s p o s a l under the T e r r i t o r i a l Lands A c t c e r t a i n lands t h e r e i n as d e s c r i b e d i n the P r o h i b i t i o n and Withdrawal o f C e r t a i n L a n d s f r o m D i s p o s a l O r d e r , 1978 SOR/78 568, 6 J u l y 1978 ( C O P E 1978, s e e F i g u r e 6).  12(1)  However,  a minimal  also  COPE c l a i m .  a wilderness  as  is  of  1973)  whether  conservation society  a  reserve  i n the  disputed  - 25 FIGURE  6.  COPE'S NATIONAL WILDERNESS  PUBLIC DEDICATION  YUKON TERRITORY  MINIMUM  5 0 0 0 SQUARE MILE PARAGRAPH  PARK  AREA  V/JV.V.'  [V.TTV.V  12 (1)  S O U T H E R N B O U N D A R Y R E F E R R E D T O IN 1 2 ( 1 ) BERGER'S PARKS  AREA  CANADA  WILDERNESS  O F RECOMMENDATION PROPOSED  NATIONAL  PARK  (INUVIALUIT  LAND  RIGHTS  SETTLEMENT,  AGREEMENT-IN-PRINCIPLE,  1978)  2.8  ADPniONAL PROPOSALS  Several other proposals for the preservation of northern Yukon lands have also been promulgated.  There are six proposed  Ecological Reserves of the International Biological Programme Panel 9: Site 4-1 (Canoe Lake, Richardson Mountains); 4-7 (Herschel Island); and 4-10  (Firth River) - Panel 10: Site 5 (Old Crow  Basin); Site 6 (Firth River - larger than Site 4-10); and Site 7 (Rat River, Yukon/NWT Border).  The National Museum of Canada has  great . . interest i n the rich and internationally-significant archaeological and palaeontological resources in the northwest area of the Yukon. Current research i s being carried out by Dr. Richard Morlan for the National Museum of Man under the "Northern Yukon Refugium Project", and By Dr. William Irving under a Parks Canada contract i n the Old Crow Flats are area: .(Morlari 19781v; Discussion within several federal agencies also continues on the possibility of a joint submission by Canada and the U.S. to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization World Heritage List, to cover the ANWR and the lands within the withdrawn area.  Meanwhile, private environmental organizations from Canada and the U.S. held a special strategy meeting i n whitehorse on March 16-18. Representatives of the Yukon Conservation Society, the Alaska Conservation Society, the Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, the Canadian Nature Federation, the Sierra Club of Western Canada, and the Arctic International Wildlife Range Society, agreed to form a united front to support a comprehensive approach to  - 27 conservation and development for northern Yukon lands and resources. To carry this forward, the Arctic International Wildlife Range Society w i l l be revitalized.  The resolutions steitming from the  Whitehorse meeting represent a firm commitment to comprehensive planning and management.  Resolutions on Northern Lands WHEREAS Northeast Alaska, the Northern Yukon, and the northwestern part of the District of Mackenzie i n the Northwest Territories comprise a natural heritage of regional, national and international importance for i t s unique landforms, plant and animal species, including migratory birds and marine l i f e , and for i t s cultural and archeological significance; AND WHEREAS the migratory Porcupine Caribou Herd i s symbolic of this natural heritage; AND WHEREAS conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd, i t s habitat and the ecosystem of which i t i s a part i s the primary objective for this region; AND WHEREAS we believe the following principles must govern the activities of man within this region: 1. there must be an international regime for the region; 2. to achieve the primary objective, there must be unified management and planning based on thorough research and carried out by effective implementation and enforcement; 3. there must be recognition of native interests and rights; 4.  regional interests must be reflected i n the research, management, planning, implementation and enforcement;  5. there must be security for the region by entrenchment of these essential principles through legislation or agreement; 6. there must be continuing involvement of the public i n planning and management by such means as monitoring, reporting, educating, and by representation at hearings; 7. there must be timely implementation of these principles;  -  28  -  AND WHEREAS a C a n a d a - U n i t e d S t a t e s c o n v e n t i o n f o r conservation o f migratory c a r i b o u and t h e i r environment i s under n e g o t i a t i o n , and the proposed c o n v e n t i o n w i l l e s t a b l i s h a n i n d e p e n d e n t C o m m i s s i o n t o make r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s governing harvest of caribou, conservation o f caribou h a b i t a t , and the ecosystem o f which c a r i b o u are a p a r t , a n d any o t h e r m e a s u r e s i t deems n e c e s s a r y t o e n s u r e the long-term conservation o f the caribou; AND WHEREAS t h e G o v e r n m e n t o f C a n a d a h a s e n t e r e d into a n A g r e e m e n t - i n - P r i n c i p l e w i t h I n u v i a l u i t (COPE) t h a t a N a t i o n a l Wilderness Park o f not l e s s than 5,000 square m i l e s i n the N o r t h e r n Yukon be e s t a b l i s h e d f o r the purpose o f w i l d l i f e p r o t e c t i o n and w i l d e r n e s s c o n s e r v a t i o n ; AND WHEREAS O l d C r o w P e o p l e i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the C o u n c i l f o r Yukon Indians are n e g o t i a t i n g an Agreementi n - P r i n c i p l e t h a t w i l l have a d i r e c t , long-term e f f e c t on the lands and w i l d l i f e o f the Northern Yukon; AND WHEREAS t h e C t o v e r n m e n t o f C a n a d a h a s w i t h d r a w n a l l lands n o r t h o f the Porcupine and B e l l R i v e r s (15,000 square miles) i n the Yukon f o r a n a t i o n a l w i l d e r n e s s park and other conservation purposes: BE 1.  I T RESOLVED THAT: We s t r o n g l y e n d o r s e t h e s p e e d y c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l convention between Canada and the U n i t e d States for the conservation o f migratory caribou and t h e i r  environment.  2.  Under the u m b r e l l a o f t h i s c o n v e n t i o n t h e r e be e s t a b l i s h e d a u n i f i e d regime o f l a n d management, h a b i t a t management a n d s p e c i e s management t o e n s u r e the accomplishment o f the p r i n c i p l e s s t a t e d above for the e n t i r e range o f the Porcupine Caribou Herd i n A l a s k a , Yukon and Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s .  3.  T h i s management r e g i m e restraints that are basi of conservation o f the ecosystem o f which i t i  must p r o v i d e f o r c e r t a i n c to the primary objective herd, i t s habitat and the s a part. These are:  a.  t h a t s u b s i s t e n c e h a r v e s t i n g o f any s p e c i e s be given p r i o r i t y w i t h i n the sustaining capacity of the ecosystem,  b.  t h a t any o t h e r use o f the r e g i o n must not be p r e j u d i c i a l t o the primary o b j e c t i v e ; and the onus o f e s t a b l i s h i n g t h a t a p a r t i c u l a r use i s p r e j u d i c i a l must r e s t on the p o t e n t i a l user.  not  - 29 4. Within the withdrawn portion of the region and the adjacent portion of the caribou range i n the Northwest Territories we support a national park of a wilderness character, a national wildlife area, or a combination of these, following appropriate agreements with native peoples but only i f the legislation establishing such a national wilderness park or national wildlife area f u l f i l l s the principles stated above.  2.9 CONCLUSION The various overlapping and/or conflicting proposals for much of the northern Yukon suggest that some form of permanent conservation status for at least part of the area i s likely.  Cooperation between  Canada and the U.S. on planning and management policies for the Porcupine Caribou and their habitat i s of course a central issue, and essential to the success of any future reserve.  Although  current conflict and debate focuses on the withdrawal lands, management of the entire range i n conjunction with the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge must be emphasized i n order to realize the comprehensive scope outlined by Marchand i n July of 1978.  - 30 . CHAPTER III CARIBOU MANAGEMENT Caribou herds are like a geological force as they flow over the land. ...Forever on the move, they appear on one distant horizon and vanish on the other... dominating the landscape and the lives of the people who hunt and depend on them (Calef 1976). 3.1  WHY BE CONCERNED?  The Porcupine caribou herd, currently stable at approximately 100,000 animals, i s one of the largest herds i n existence.  Since  the herd's range covers the northern Yukon and portions of the Northwest Territories and northeastern Alaska, i t i s a major international resource.  Until recently, white society has been  satisfied knowing that the caribou herds were there. However, industrial development has now begun to threaten the wilderness of the caribou. Society i s now asking: do we have sufficient knowledge of the behaviour and movements of the caribou to confidently predict the effects of this development push?  Should we be concerned  about the preservation of wildlife i n the north?  "Conservation" i s usually meant to include "wise use" of a resource for future generations. In i t s broad definition, i t includes management measures, and means the collection and application of biological information for the purposes of increasing and maintaining the number of animals within species and populations at some optimum level with respect to their habitat (Holt and Talbot 1978).  - 31 Conservation of wildlife necessarily includes protection of the species' habitat.  No species exists in isolation from i t s habitat,  and any impact on one species has an impact on the other components of the entire ecosystem. As a result, an ecosystem approach must be taken to wildlife conservation and management. This approach was endorsed by Environment Minister Len Marchand on July 6,  1978  regarding international protection of the Porcupine herd in the northern Yukon: The central idea... i s the need to manage the entire herd and i t s range, on both sides of the border, as an ecological unit. ...There needs to be a comprehensive approach, which means close and continuing cooperation between the various agencies responsible for caribou and i t s habitat i n both countries (Environment Canada Press Release, July 6, 1978).  There are a number of arguments for preservation and conservation of species and habitat, including scientific, educational, social, spiritual and moral factors (Robbins 1963).  Central to a l l these  concerns i s the use of nature as a laboratory for research on the elements of ecosystem integrity and interrelationships.  Maintenance,  intact, of ecosystems provides a base datum with which man's impact can be compared.  Sinclair (1977) urges that "the establishment  of unexploited' baseline or control areas i s an insurance policy 1  for the ecological v i a b i l i t y of a country".  Preservation of  wildlife and wildlife habitat ultimately ensures the preservation of the basic resource systems upon which man depends. ... unless better conservation measures are implemented, society stands to lose a substantial part of i t s heritage in species and genetic resources within a few decades (Myers 1976).  - 32 The establishment of a northern Yukon wildlife range involves both biological and p o l i t i c a l battles with a focus on the Porcupine caribou.  As with other herd animals, the caribou have migratory  habits which follow the seasons.  With the d i f f i c u l t i e s of  surviving i n the Arctic, there are limited areas capable of supporting large numbers of these animals.  Consequently, each major  component of their habitat, i.e. winter and summer ranges, represents a potential weak link i n the chain of survival.  Hence were any  major ranges significantly disrupted or migration routes between them altered, the future of the herd would be jeopardized. "'Once important patterns of one or a few major species have been disrupted, ultimately an entire ecosystem w i l l be affected"  1  (Laycock 1976).  For these reasons, some type of comprehensive reserve i s required for the protection of the entire ecosystem.  3.2 RANGES AND MIGRATION ROUTES The barren-ground caribou (Rangifer, tarandus, granti) of northeastern Alaska, northern Yukon and Northwest Territories, emboy a single group known as the Porcupine herd. caribou herd i s  The accepted definition of a  a group of animals that calves i n a traditional  area different from areas used by other groups (Skoog 1968 and Thomas 1969). The herd i s currently numbered between 100,000 and 110,000. The caribou annual cycle can be divided into seven phases distinguished by distribution and behaviour:  spring migration,  calving, post-calving aggregation, late summer dispersal, f a l l migration, rut, and winter (see Table 2 and Figure 7).  Bergerud  (1971a), Calef (1974) and Skoog (1968) have recognized similar phases.  Table 2 - Seasonal Activities and Distribution of the Porcupine Caribou Herd Tine of Year  Annual Cycle Stage  ^  Area-of Range Available  ^ f ^ , ^ toinposition  Average Densrty per Day  April -May  Spring Migration  Richardson Mtns., Eagle Plains, Porcupine Plateau, Keele Mtns. Old Crow Flats, Barn & British Mtns.  Mountain ridges Boreal Forest  Variable  Variable between years. Groups up 30 30,000 may be encountered. Cows, yearlings, young bulls precede mature bulls by 2-4 weeks.  Variable  10-20  May 31 -June 15  Calving  Coastal Plain Northern Foothills of British Barn & Romanzov Mtns. to 3,500 f t . level.  Tundra sedge meadows. Eriophorum tussocks, drier uplands  4,000mi usually limited to 2,500nu~  Small groups (10 animals) gradually coalescing into loose aggregations of several thousand cows and calves, pregnant cows, and yearlings only.  12/mi"  6 mi.  June 15 -July 30  Postcalving aggregation  Coastal Plain and Foothills until July 8. Foothills only after July 8.  Tundra, new willow & sedge forage particularly important.  7,500mi Very large herds use only a few sq.mi. of this area at any time.  Entire population present in one small area, a l l ages and sexes present.  50,000/mi^  2  2  mi.  15 mi.  AugustSept. 15  August dispersal  Most of area north of Porcupine River, especially Sheenjek & Colleen River drainage & surrounding mountains.  Alpine tundra, river flats.  20,000mi  Less than 100, some aggregation probable (not well documented)  Variable Overall density less than 5/mi  15 mi. during dispersal, less after.  2  Oct.10Oct.20  Rut  Depends on progress of migration.  Variable Same as for f a l l migration.  Large loose aggregations  Up to 1,000/mi^  Up to 30 mi. but usually less.  Nov.April  Winter  Ogilvie Mtns. Chandalar River drainages, Eagle Plains. Wintering on Old Crow Flats and Coastal tundra not as common.  Mountain ridges, Boreal forest, river flats.  20-100 animals. Segregation between sexes occurs.  10/mi and more in late winter.  less than 1 mi.  60,000mi Never a l l used i n one year.  Adapted from Calef (1974) Table 1 and references i n text.  - 35 FIGURE  7. SPRING  MIGRATION  PORCUPINE  OF  THE  CARIBOU, 1971-1978  - 36 Spring migration normally begins with small groups (about 100) drifting northward i n mid-March. The groups of thousands typifying migratory movement do not occur until late March or early April (Roseneau and Curatolo 1976).  Snow conditions along the routes  appear to be important i n initiating migration, however: Based on the results of studies by Pruitt (1959) and Henshaw (1968), the actual timing of caribou movements and selection of migration paths are probably the result of a combination of snow conditions, the presence of favourable geographic and physiographic features, and the stimulus of advanced pregnancy of the adult female (Surrendi and DeBock 1976).  There are two major spring migration routes — and the Old Crow Route — 1971  the Richardson Route  which have been used consistently since  (Jakimchuk et a l 1974, and Foothills Pipe Lines (Yukon) Ltd.  1978b, herein referred to as "Foothills", see Figure 7).  The  Richardson Route follows the axis of the Richardson Mountains. Commencing from the Trevor Range - Bonnet Plume area, and the Wind, Snake and Arctic Red Rivers, migrants cross the Peel River and proceed up the east slope of the Richardson Mountains.  Some groups move  west across the mountains and follow the west slope, while the remaining animals continue along the east slope. Upon reaching the Fish Creek - Rapid Creek - Blow River area, the groups mass again and continue northwest along the Barn and British Mountains to the Alaska border (Jakimchuk et a l 1974, and Foothills 1978b).  The Old Crow Route i s travelled by caribou wintering i n the Ogilvie and Central Yukon areas.  Extending north from the Hart, Blackstone,  Ogilvie and Tatonduk Rivers, the caribou pass through the Keele Range  (between the Alaska border and the Porcupine River), cross the Porcupine River at traditional crossing sites, and continue through the Old Crow Flats.  These herds join the Richardson Route animals  near the western edge of the Barn Mountains, and proceed in a broad front to the Firth River (Jakimchuk et a l 1974, and Foothills 1978b).  Based on the summary of available information on the herd's migration 1950 to 1970  (Kevan 1970), and Foothills' own data survey  1971 - 1977, Foothills concludes that the migration patterns have been consistent since 1950.. Archaeological records also support this conclusion.  Morlan (1978) and Irving and Harrington (1973)  have found evidence that northern Yukon natives have k i l l e d caribou at traditional crossing points of the Porcupine River for at least 30,000 years.  According to long-time residents of Old Crow, the  predictability of caribou migration determined the location of hunting camps and settlements such as Old Crow. Moreover, Warbelow, Roseneau and Stern (1975) have presented evidence on the distribution and orientation of Kutchin caribou fences —  "large, corral-like structures  or d r i f t fences... were built by the Kutchin or Loucheux peoples ... across traditional migration routes... to guide and entrap caribou" —  which suggests that the herd's movements have been consistent for  the past 200 years.  Calving occurs on the Coastal Plain and in the foothills up to 1,100 meters above sea-level. The herd's calving grounds extend between the Blow River drainage i n the Yukon to the Canning River in Alaska, and inland from the Arctic coast as f a r south as the  - 38 northern slopes of the Brooks Range in Alaska and the northern portion of the Old Crow Flats (Roseneau, Curatolo and Moore 1975, Roseneau and Curatolo 1976, and McCourt et a l 1974, see Figure 8).  Habitats  of wet sedge meadows to dry ridges are used, with preference for dry uplands.  The distinguishing feature i s the absence of snow,  but sheltered areas with growths of cotton grass seem important. Calving generally occurs between May 31 and June 15, but may vary by seven to ten days (Calef 1974, and Roseneau, Curatolo and Moore, 1975).  The exact area of calving i s also variable, depending on the chronology of migration and use of wintering areas.  "If caribou... are able  to migrate earlier in the spring they w i l l probably calve further west along the Alaskan coast.  When conditions inhibit early migrations  caribou w i l l likely calve in the Yukon" (Surrendi and DeBock 1976).  Immediately after calving, the cows and calves join the yearlings, dry cows and bulls i n loosely aggregated concentrations of 25,000 50,000 (Roseneau and Curatolo 1976).  These post-calving aggregations  have also been known to reach 80,000 - 100,000 animals with densities 2 over 50,000/mi , especially when crossing rivers (Calef 1974).  By  early July, the herd which calved in northeastern Alaska begins to re-enter the Yukon and join the Yukon segment on their eastward movement (see Figure 9).  The majority cross the Malcolm River,  sometimes pausing to congregate, at what i s therefore known as a staging area, on the Firth River.  They continue their trek in  loosely aggregated groups through the foothills of the Barn and  FIGURE  9  POST-CALVING AGGREGATIONS, 1974  10-11 J U L Y A G G R E G A T I O N A R E A WITH S U B S T A N T I A L N U M B E R S R E M A I N I N G A S L A T E A S 18  | July  HERSCHEL  • 15-16 July ^  '  CZ> ISLAND  o  AKhAVIK ~  \(ARCTIC  GAS BIOLOGICAL  REPORT  OINUVIK ({ a s  o  SERIES  Vol. 32, 1975)  - 41 British Mountains, and thence southeast to another staging area i n the Richardson Mountains - Driftwood H i l l s locale (Roseneau, Curatolo and Moore 1975, and Surrendi and DeBock 1976) . Animals that i n i t i a l l y do not move east appear to travel south into the Brooks Range and continue i n a southeasterly direction (Roseneau and Stern 1974).  .  •  By early August the concentrations disperse rapidly westward from the Driftwood River area, crossing the Old Crow Flats and the Yukon/Alaska border, reaching the Arctic Village - Sheenjek River area, by mid to late August.  The East Fork Chandalar River  appears to form the western boundary of their dispersal (Calef 1974, Jakimchuk et a l 1974, Roseneau, Curatolo and Moore 1975, and Surrendi and DeBock 1976, see Figure 10). Some caribou did not move westward into Alaska, but, as i n past years, remained scattered i n various areas of the British and Barn mountains, northern Richardson mountains and probably around the periphery of the Old Crow Flats (Roseneau, Curatolo and Moore 1975).  F a l l migration begins with small groups drifting southwastwards back towards Old Crow Flats i n early September. Movements are leisurely.  By mid-September, snowfalls accelerate the migration.  Larger concentrations rapidly return to the Yukon, apparently always crossing the Porcupine River between the confluence of the Driftwood and Porcupine Rivers and the Yukon/Alaska border.  One  major portion of the herd, approximately 40,000 - 50,000 i n number, then moves south through the Nahoni Range and Ogilvie Mountains towards the Ogilvie and Tatonduk winter ranges.  Another group of  FIGURE  io. POST-CALVING  AND AUGUST DISPERSAL  MOVEMENTS, 1971-1974 1971 ooooooo 1972 973' 1974 HERSCHEL ISLAND  OINUVIK  MCPHERSON  - 43 -  about 25,000 - 35,000 crosses the Coleen River, travels east through the Barn and British Mountains towards Eagle Plains and the Richardson Mountains ranges.  A third group, speculated at 10,000  to 15,000, travel southwest into the Chandalar drainage area to winter (Calef 1974, Jakimchuk et a l 1974, Roseneau, Curatolo and Moore 1975, and Surrendi and DeBock 1976).  The rut takes place during the f a l l migration, generally i n midOctober. Because of the variability of the f a l l migration, there i s no characteristic locality for the rut, although i t usually occurs i n the Forest-Tundra, particularly i n the open spaces or flats among the conifers (Calef 1974).  The winter ranges of the Porcupine herd are extensive;  research  suggests that "the winter distribution patterns of the Porcupine herd have altered l i t t l e since at least 1828"  (Foothills 1978a).  Since 1970, more detailed information on winter ranges has been reported in Calef and Lortie (1971) and (1973), Jakimchuk et a l (1974), McCourt et a l (1974), Roseneau and Stern (1974) , Roseneau, Curatolo and Moore (1974 and 1975), LeResche (1975), Surrendi and DeBock (1976), Curatolo and Roseneau (1977) and Foothills (1978a). Figure 11 shows the entire range with two major areas highlighted, as reported by Foothills.  Area 1, the Ogilvie - Peel Region,  2 embodies over 80,000 km  including the headwaters of the Porcupine  River and the upper segment of the Peel River drainage i n Canada, and a small section between the Porcupine and Yukon Rivers in Alaska (Foothills 1978a).  - 45 2 Area 2 encompasses over 25,000 km of northeastern Alaska, including most of the Chandalar River drainage, the mid and upper reaches of the Sheenjek Pdver drainage, the upper Christian River drainage and portions of the Dall, Hodzana and Hadweenzic river headwaters (Foothills 1978a). The majority (over 90%) of the Porcupine herd has wintered i n the Ogilvie - Peel Region since 1970, with major use of the Chandalar River drainage only i n the winters of 1972/73 and 1978/79. Within the two general areas, however, distribution i s variable and extensive. Topography and vegetation are key factors i n the amount of snow cover in any given area, and snow cover determines the available winter range for caribou use (Surrendi and DeBock 1976, Bergerud 1974, and McCourt et a l 1974).  It appears that medium density black spruce  and alpine tundra with abundant lichens are the chief vegetation types for winter range use.  3.3 3.3.1  POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Size and Composition  The limited data on the size and composition of the Porcupine herd date from the early explorers' records of the 1800's. No specific numbers were recorded, just reports indicating that caribou were common year-round at Herschel Island and were "in abundance" along the Arctic Coastal Plain and the Mackenzie Delta (Skoog 1968).  The  reports by Russell (1898) suggest that winter ranges and distribution patterns are similar today as i n the 1800's, with semi-annual crossings of the lower Porcupine River during migration.  During the early 1900's, caribou continued to be reported numerous in northeastern Alaska and northern Yukon.  "Riggs (1920:6) estimated  - 46 60,000 animals present i n herds along the northern Alaska/Yukon boundary;  O.J. Murie (1935:66) considered this estimate to be  conservative" (Skoog 1968). Porsild (1945) reported that "millions" migrated southward along the eastern Richardson Mountains i n the late 1920's; and during the 1930's, Fort Yukon's f a l l harvest steadily increased. Despite the numerous studies i n the early 1900's, most were of a general nature, and hence scientific reporting of age, sex and numbers i s inadequate for a population estimate of the herd.  Skoog's analysis of historical data of the 1940's and 1950's  indicates that the Porcupine herd suffered a "drastic decline i n total numbers".  Skoog subsequently suggested that the decline was  actually a population shift, either east or west, to other herds.  Since 1953 the herd has increased. "During the winter of 1957-1958 there were large numbers of caribou along the entire arctic slope, between Point Barrow on the west and Barter Island on the east" (Skoog 1968).  In June of 1961, Skoog censused the Porcupine's  calving grounds and arrived at an estimate of 110,000 - 117,000 animals. In the spring of 1964, 15,000 - 20,000 caribou from the Fortymile herd to the south joined the Porcupine herd, although Skoog suggests that most of them returned to the south later on. The historical information presented earlier, however, indicated a rather frequent interchange of animals between this herd [Porcupine] and the Fortymile herd. Such interchanges probably w i l l continue as long as either population remains high, facilitated by the overlap which occurs on the wintering grounds when both herds u t i l i z e the Ogilvie Mountains (Skoog 1968).  - 47 -  Using "systematic censusing techniques", Skoog estimated the 1964 herd to be 140,000 caribou excluding calves, which probably contained the 20,000-odd caribou from the Fortymile herd.  In 1970-1971, Renewable Resources Consulting Services, Limited, and Interdisciplinary Systems Limited, were given contracts by Arctic Gas and Environment Protection Board to undertake impact assessment studies i n relation to the proposed natural gas pipelines. The Canadian Wildlife Service and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game expanded this work i n 1972.  These studies provided the f i r s t  documentation of range use, migration patterns and estimates of population characteristics.  However, many of the data are simply  descriptive, based on small samples.  The most recent population estimates were derived i n 1972 (LeResche) and i n 1977 (Bente and Roseneau) by aerial photography.  The "aerial  photo - direct count - extrapolation technique" was used i n both the 1972 and 1977 estimates, and involves the collection of: an estimate of the number of caribou i n post-calving aggregations by using aerial photography and aerial surveys as supplements, the simultaneous age and sex classifications of the post-calving aggregations, and the age and sex classifications of the caribou during the rut (Pegau and Hemming 1972, LeResche 1975, and Bente and Roseneau 1978).  This technique involves four basic assumptions  that must hold true i f an accurate estimate of the total population i s to be achieved:  - 48 1.  M l animals in the post-calving aggregations, including peripheral groups, can be located, photographed and counted at nearly the same time.  2.  M l of the 2+ [2 years and older] females i n the total populations are present and accounted for at the time of aerial photography and associated reconnaissance.  3.  Summer classifications of post-calving groups represent the correct proportion of 2+ females present among a l l the animals accounted for at the time of aerial photography and associated reconnaissance.  4.  F a l l classifications are obtained from a randomly mixed herd during the rut, such that the classifications represent the true composition of the entire herd (Bente and Roseneau 1978).  To arrive at the f i n a l population estimate, one must: a.  count a l l animals on the photographs;  b.  add any other unphotographed animals i n the post-calving area; and  c.  add the bulls and yearlings not in the postcalving area when the areal photographs were taken (i.e. compare the ratio of bulls and yearlings to cows i n the post-calving aggregations with the ratio of bulls and yearlings to cows during the rut) (Bente and Roseneau 1978).  Bente and Roseneau later conclude that the assumptions associated with this technique are often suspect with variable error sources.  ... depending on the methods and data selections, several estimates of the 1977 total f a l l population ranging from 88,659 + 22,949 to 105,176 + 28,009 are possible. The large confidence intervals limit the usefulness of these estimates. ...until better estimates are possible, the practical application of the technique i s seriously limited (Bente and Roseneau 1978). As the magnitude of the error sources i s unknown, both over and under estimates of herd size are possible.  Nevertheless, the  "best estimates" for the Porcupine caribou herd's population during  - 49 the 1972 and 1977 seasons are included in Tables 3 and 4.  3.3.2  Predation and Mortality Factors  Outside of human predation, golden eagles, grizzly bears and wolves are the main predators on the Porcupine caribou.  Golden eagles  have been noted c i r c l i n g cows and calves on the calving grounds and have apparently k i l l e d a few calves (Roseneau and Curatolo. 1976). Grizzly bears have been observed near calving grounds and following post-calving aggregations.  They w i l l k i l l caribou i f the opportunity  arises, and are often found feeding on Carrion (Calef and Lortie 1973, Jakimchuk et a l 1974). Wolves are considered the most effective predator of caribou in North America.  Jakimchuk et a l (1974),  during their surveys in the northern Yukon in 1971, reported 131 wolf k i l l s of Porcupine caribou, the majority being calves.  Later  surveys observed low numbers of wolves and few wolf-kills (Roseneau and Curatolo 1976), apparently partially due to the efficiency of aerial and snowmobile hunting of the wolves (mainly in the U.S.). The numbers of wolves and grizzly bears are reported to be greater south of the calving grounds, but the amount of predation i s unknown (Curatolo and Moore 1975).  Human predation of the Porcupine caribou herd i s by far the greatest source of loss.  Spring and f a l l migrations are the main seasons  for hunters from the Alaskan villages of Arctic Village and Kaktovik, Old Crow in the northern Yukon, and Aklavik, Fort McPherson, Arctic Red River, Inuvik and Tuktoyaktuk in the Northwest Territories. Annual native harvest i s estimated at 3,000 to 5,000 caribou  - 50 Table 3 - Calculation of the 1972 and 1977 Porcupine herd population estimates using the areial photo - direct count extrapolation technique: 1972  1977  Number of caribou (including calves) counted on areial photos of post-calving concentrations  82,680  51,405  Number of caribou (including calves) counted i n peripheral groups  10,080  8,992  Total caribou i n post-calving concentration groups  92,760  60,397  Composition of post-calving group a. b. c. d.  cows calves bulls yearlings  No.Counted 6,157 3,052 1,433 1,079  Number of cows i n post-calving group (and therefore minimum number of cows i n entire subpopulation)  a "5  52. 5 26. 0 12. 2 9.2  48,727  Composition of entire herd, as determined: by Lortie during rut ('72) and from Nov. composition counts, No.Counted assuming random nrixing at each time a. b. c. d.  cows calves bulls yearlings  No.Counted  %  36,856 61.0 14,464 24.0 combined 9,026 15.0 36,856  No.Counted  1,461 443 837 257  48.7 14.8 27.9 8.6  3,487 1,657 2,707 1,089  39.0 18.5 30.3 12.2  2,997  100.0  8,940  100.0  Minimum size of entire herd assuming: a.  48,726 cows represents 48.1\ of the herd (1972) 36,856 cows represents 39.0% of the herd (1977)  c.  48,726 cows (1972. figure) represents 39.0% of the herd  Adapted from Davis (1978): Appendix I and II.  99,959 94,503  124,938  Table 4 - Porcupine Caribou herd composition observed during post-calving migration - 1972-1976.  Year  Source*  Cows NO.  1972  ADF&G  6157  53  3052 26  50  1079  9  1433  12  11,721  1973  RRCS/ ADF&G  11037  58  5144  27  47  1070  6  1830  10  19,101  1974  RRCS  7818  55  5176  37  66  437  3  696  5  14,127  1975  RRCS  9823  52  4986  27  51  1711  9  2294  12  18,814  1976  RRCS  7579  55  4456  32  59  1428  10  299  2 13,762  1002  4 25,520  1972 - 1976 x = 54.6  1977  ADF&G/ RRCS  15675  Q. "O  Calves No.  x = 29.8  61  6057  a "O  Calves/ Yearlings g. lOOCows No. *5  x = 54.6  24  Bulls o, No. "5  Total No.  x = 7.4 x = 8 .2  39  2786  11  Adjusted 1977 data based on assumption that 54.6 calves/100 cows were present 15675  56  8559  31  54.6  *Alaska Department of Fish and Game = ADF&G Renewable Resources Consulting Services = RRCS Adapted from Davis 1978.  2786  10  1002  4 28,002  - 52 -  (Roseneau 1979), although the 1977/78 harvest data estimates report 1,700 animals (Porcupine Caribou Committee 1978, Davis 1978, see Table 5.  '  An additional factor regarding harvest levels i s the existeneejdf potentially discrete sub-units within the total population, i.e. the Richardson Mountain sub-group.  Over-harvest by Fort McPherson  and Delta natives of this sub-unit must be considered a possibility, especially with the increased access provided by the Dempster Highway. Empirical evidence exists both for and against the subunits being discrete;  hence the problem requires further scientific  study (Porcupine Caribou Committee 1978).  Sport hunters have been responsible for a relatively minor havest of the herd, mainly near the Dempster Highway. As Table 5 shows, 32 caribou were k i l l e d i n the Yukon and 57 i n Alaska by sport hunters in the 1977/78 season.  A 5-mile no-hunting zone on either side of  the Dempster Highway i s proposed by the Yukon Territorial Government's Wildlife Branch to help reduce the potential increase i n sport hunting, but enforcement of this regulation presents serious difficulties.  In Alaska, sport hunting of the herd i s expected  to increase. Due to President Carter's recent land withdrawals in Alaska, and their restrictions on hunting, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which remains one of the few areas where hunting w i l l be permitted, may be subjected to increased hunting pressure (Roseneau 1979).  Specific herds, including the Porcupine herd,  may come under concentrated hunting beyond their harvesting capabilities (Keith 1979).  - 53 Table 5 - Harvest Data a.  Estimated Harvests, Spring 1972 - Spring 1973 (LeRosche)  Alaska  Caribou  Arctic Village  1,000  Canada  Caribou  Aklavik, Inuvik, Fort MacPherson, Arctic Red River, Tuktoyaktuk  Kaktovik  300  Old Crow  Venetie, Fort Yukon, Chalkyitsik  100  Dempster Highway and Other  Other  100  b.  600  1,500  TOTAL: 4,175  2,000  75  2,675  Total Harvest for the 1977 - 1978 season (Davis, Roseneau)  Alaska Kaktovik Arctic Village Sport Hunting  Caribou 200 200-300  Yukon  Caribou  Old Crow Dempster Hwy. Hunters Collission  470  32 3  57  450-550  505  NWT  Caribou  Ft. Mc Pherson  350  Aklavik  114  Inuvik, Arctic Red River  100 564  TOTAL: 1,519 - 1,619 (estimated at about one-third average annual harvest)  Other mortality factors include disease and insect harassment of new-born calves and weak animals, severe weather conditions, and "crippling loss" due to harassment and wounding by predators.  3.4  MANAGEMENT  Wildlife management i s an institutional means for manipulating the elements and interactions between habitat, wildlife and man in order to achieve specific social goals and objectives.  It i s  essentially goal-oriented, i.e. a desired result i s identified and subsequent management reflects the spectrum of biological, social and p o l i t i c a l needs involved in the ecosystem to accomplish this result.  This diversity of needs necessitates that management be  flexible and knowledgeable —  flexible to allow for changes i n  objectives, information and interested parties, and cognizant of the priorities of interest groups and their objectives.  Regarding the Porcupine caribou, there are diverse interest groups, each with i t s own objectives and management priorities.  The Yukon  Indians, the Inuvialuit (under COPE) and the Northwest Territories Indians, while differing on numerous elements of their respective land claims, are concerned with retaining traditional hunting rights as well as protecting the herd.  White consumptive users are  interested in maintaining the herd for hunting; and non-consumptive users and many environmental organizations (among others) desire protection and conservation objectives to be applied.  - 55 V a r i o u s management of  meat  production through  potential  according to  scenarios  society's  objectives  data  used  elements  objectives  in  Data o f  for  focused  Priority  Population  static,  but  interest  groups,  a n y management  and  "game  there  i s  likely  scenario  consensus a  common  The  following  and  Statistics:  age and sex c o m p o s i t i o n s b i r t h s and deaths (recruitment rate) c a l f /cow and c o w / b u l l r a t i o s survival o f calves (rates at different  and d e n s i t y  of  herd  ages)  Patterns:  1. 2.  m i g r a t i o n paths: where, why, t i m i n g , alternatives response to a r t i f i c i a l b a r r i e r s : roads, p i p e l i n e s b u i l d i n g s , and t o moving o b j e c t s : t r a f f i c , aircraft  3.  tolerance o f cumulative impacts: corridor, etc. effects of harassment  1.  concomitant  Interest  2. 3. 4. 5.  Mortality  however  policy.  size  4.  change  Assuming  p o l i c i e s and p l a n s ,  1.  Behaviour  some  scenario.  o n w h i c h management  on i n current  w i l l  according to  tourist  habitat  and p r i o r i t i e s .  f o r m u l a t i n g management  chosen depend  are  not  be managed  photography  expansion and  changing values  data  including maximization  such as  herd's are  outlined by the  of biological are  uses  the  Porcupine caribou w i l l  stock  the  These  possible,  game r a n c h i n g , m a x i r r d z i n g t h e  o r managing f o r  enhancement.  on  are  for non-consumptive  watching",  the  scenarios  road +  pipeline  Data:  harvest:  # of  animals k i l l e d  (age  and  sex)  # o f hunter k i l l s / y e a r (successful and unsuccessful) s e l e c t i v i t y o f h a r v e s t : b y whom, t i m i n g , l o c a t i o n , number predator/prey ratio e f f e c t s o f management o n k i l l ratio 2.  m o r t a l i t y by type  and age  of  animals.  Data o f  Secondary  Population  Interest  iinmigration and emigration discrete sub-units)  7. 8.  carrying breeding  9.  genetic  plus...).  (including existence  of  capacity habits characteristics  (i.e.  physiology)  Patterns:  relationships  6. 7. 8.  s t r e s s o f weather and disease rate of travel i n t r a - r e l a t i o n s h i p s between c a r i b o u ; between c a r i b o u and other species  2.  between  c a r i b o u and  their  habitat  inter-relationships  Studies:  itunimum amount o f r a n g e w h i c h t h e s p e c i e s c a n s u c c e s s f u l l y occupy range requirements: s i z e , type, d i v e r s i t y , vegetation ; types  3.  h a b i t a t and v e g e t a t i o n preference, i . e . elements o f s e l e c t i v i t y such as food preference, a b i o t i c factors (snow c o n d i t i o n s ) a n d s u b - u n i t preferences  4. 5. 6.  effects o f caribou on t h e i r habitat regenerative capacity o f the ranges selected effects o f f i r e , frequency o f f i r e s , succession i n r e l a t i o n to forage preferences  Mortality 3. 4.  the  i l l e g a l and c r i p p l i n g area/kill ratio.  existing political  and  issues  management.  of wildlife the  objective  wildlife",  management natives  of  are  likely  land  the  as  that  well  herd  current  of  be  as  situation  given to  Because  "protection  on an  major  losses  social  undoubtedly  include  of  Data:  high priority w i l l  is  above  5.  1.  i t  (the  Statistics:  Range and V e g e t a t i o n  other  -  6.  Behaviour  In  56  of  of  native  native the  the  concerns  land claim  users  of  the  p r i o r i t y should be  herd  on  basis, for  given to  planning  their  the  and and  and because  subsistence  Yukon,  settlements  Porcupine caribou  o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the international  northern  the  purposes,  objectives,  r-.  5.7 -  with the. caveat of consistency with. the. sustaining capacity of the herd and i t s ecosystem.  This does not mean that r i g i d or entrenched arrangements, pertaining to subsistence harvesting are necessarily i n the. interests of native peoples.  Such, a situation would be i n direct conflict  with future management options for non-consumptive use and tourism. If concern for the social and economic well-being of native people i s of high, priority, provision should be made i n future ii^agement policies to ensure the preferential involvement of natives i n I?  non-intensive recreational pursuits and management planning.  Clearly, the above discussion indicates the c r i t i c a l elements of f l e x i b i l i t y and cognizance of priorities that are necessary for a comprehensive plan.  This plan may require special unanagement  strategies and regulation even for range areas outside of any legal reserve that Is eventually established by international agreement. The Hon. Len Marchand's July 1978 statement on the Porcupine herd's protection points out that to manage "the herd and i t s range... as an ecological unit requires a comprehensive approach to habitat preservation on the long-term scale", Although, any agreement between Canada and the United States w i l l partially achieve this goal, wider habitat protection necessitates that land users and regulatory agencies commit themselves to this objective within their management policies.  In other words:  - 58 ... How the l i n k between the caribou population and i t s range requirements r e l a t e s to the broader issue of comprehensive land planning and management i s c l e a r l y an important factor. The i n t e r - r e l a t i o n s h i p s of l o c a l subsistence users, researchers, resource developers, and government regulatory and management agencies, from the l o c a l t o the international l e v e l s , must somehow be c l a r i f i e d . I n s t i t u t i o n a l mechanisms f o r such involvement need t o be developed (Mair 1 9 7 8 ) .  - 59 CHAPTER IV THE SOCIOECONOMIC CONTEXT FOR CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT CONCERNS 4.1 SOCIAL AND CONSERVATION ISSUES Social and p o l i t i c a l considerations are central to any international agreement for management of the Porcupine caribou.  Native groups are  presently the primary users of the caribou and their habitat for food and supplementary income. Accomodating the interests of native groups i s therefore important to the ongoing negotiation of an international agreement. However, the terms and conditions of an agreement should not be limited to the present time horizon, nor to the socio-political climate of today.  4.1.1 Native Concerns In recent years, native peoples' organizations have been primarily concerned with land claim settlements by which they hope to gain control over the land (see for example, Council of Yukon Indians Claim Proposal, COPE/Canadian Government Agreement-in-Principle 1978, and Usher 1976). Land i s viewed by many natives as a permanent source of security and sense of well-being, in contrast to employment which i s often temporary and unreliable (Usher 1976).  An important negotiating point respecting land claims i s provision for maintaining traditional hunting, trapping and fishing activities. Wildlife continues to provide a major source of highly nutritional food, as well as supplementary income. The maintenance of this l i f e s t y l e , in conjunction with development of renewable resources, i s seen as a viable alternative to the either/or situation of  - 60 "... development as industry and government have planned i t , or a return to the stone age" (Usher 1977). Very simply, native people desire jobs and hunting, and not jobs rather than hunting.  Respecting the northern Yukon, both the Old Crow Indians and the Committee for Original Peoples Entitlement (COPE) have outlined their positions on traditional use of the resources.  COPE's basic principles  on wildlife include the following: 14(1)(a) A basic goal of the Inuvialuit Land Rights Settlement i s to protect and preserve the Arctic wildlife, environment and biological productivity, through the application of conservation principles. 14(1)(b) In order to achieve effective protection ... the Settlement should ensure an integrated result of wildlife management and land management ... (Inuvialuit Land Rights Settlement, Agreement-in-Principle 1978). In addition, COPE insists that aboriginal subsistence use of caribou and other wildlife must also be maintained through preferential harvesting rights.  The Agreement-in-Principle calls for:  14(2)(a)(i) the exclusive right to harvest game on Inuvialuit lands and i f agreed upon, other areas; (ii) the exclusive right to harvest furbearers, including black and grizzly bears, ^ throughout the Western Arctic Region ; ( i i i ) the exclusive right to harvest polar bear and musk-oxen throughout the Western Arctic Region;  1.  The Western Arctic Region boundaries were subsequently changed between COPE's original Inuvialuit Nunangat proposal and the Agreement-inPrinciple. Respecting northern Yukon lands, this area was deleted from the Region, hence the western-most boundary i s the Yukon/NWT border, rather than the Yukon/Alaska border. It should be noted that the area i s subject to reversionary rights on 5,000 sq.miles of the northern Yukon should wilderness designation and protection be abandoned.  - 61 (iv) t h e p r e f e r e n t i a l r i g h t s t o h a r v e s t a l l o t h e r s p e c i e s o f w i l d l i f e (except m i g r a t o r y non-game b i r d s and m i g r a t o r y i n s e c t i v o r o u s b i r d s ) f o r s u b s i s t e n c e usage, through t h e Western A r c t i c Region. I n t h e event h a r v e s t i n g r i g h t s a r e extended t o o t h e r n a t i v e p e o p l e s p u r s u a n t t o paragraph 14(2)(d), t h e i r requirements as t o s u b s i s t e n c e usage w i l l be t a k e n i n t o account as w e l l when s e t t i n g t h e s u b s i s t e n c e quotas; ... ( I n u v i a l u i t Land R i g h t s S e t t l e m e n t , A g r e e m e n t - i n - P r i n c i p l e 1978).  F i n a l l y , f o l l o w i n g J u s t i c e B e r g e r ' s recommendation Vol.1),  t h e COPE Agreement advocates  (Berger  1977,  establishment of a National  W i l d e r n e s s Park t o a c h i e v e t h e s e ends:  12(1) Canada agrees to establish a National Wilderness Park for the purpose of wildlife protection and wilderness conservation of not less than the 5000 square miles of traditional lands of the Inuvialuit in the northern Yukon shown as the area marked "A" i n Annex E ..." (See Figure 6; Section 12, Inuvialuit Land Rights Settlement Agreement-in-Principle 1978).  In response to the October signing of the Agreement-in-Principle between COPE and the Canadian government, a meeting was convened at Old Crow on November 16, 1978 between the Old Crow Indians and a coalition of Alaskan native villages or Gwitcha-Gwitchen-Ginkhye (Yukon Flats People Speak).  These groups also passed resolutions  advocating protection and management of wildlife, specifically the Porcupine caribou. The following management regulations are endorsed and (sic) by the undersigned villages and organizations of the United States and Canada and are recommended for inclusion i n the international treaty for management of the Porcupine Caribou herd:  1.  Protection of a l l lands utilized by the Porcupine Caribou herd i n an International Wildlife Range (as opposed to National Wilderness Park) i n such manner as to prevent detrimental human changes.  2.  An annual census of the Porcupine Caribou involving local peoples working with biologists.  3.  Maintenance of an overall safe harvest level.  4.  No aerial hunting of the Porcupine Caribou.  5.  No commercial selling of meat from animals of this herd.  6.  Restricted use of the U.S. pipeline haul road and of the Canadian Dempster Highway so as not to cause i l l effects to the herd; i.e. restricted use by permit, seasonal road closure, s t r i c t l y controlled hunting in the vicinity of the roads.  The above quotation indicates substantial agreement on the protection and management of the Porcupine herd.  However, the native groups  appear to be at odds over the appropriate mechanism. COPE favours a "National Wilderness Park", while the Alaskan coalition and the Old Crow Indians, fearful of the recreational aspects and development associated with existing national parks i n Canada (Turner and Rees, Nature Canada 1973), advocate an "International Wildlife Range". They emphasize this latter point by specifically noting their opposition to a National Wilderness Park i n Resolution 1 above.  This problem appears more semantic than substantive. The current National Parks Act makes no specific provision for "national wilderness parks" and hence there i s as yet no legal description of such an entity.  Conceivably, therefore, a l l native concerns could  be incorporated into this concept as i t evolves. Indeed, the 1978 "draft" Policy Statement for National Parks provides for the following  - 63 6.1 Selection 6.1.1 National Wilderness Parks would be selected only in places in Canada's north, which, are identified as representing natural areas of Canadian significance. 6.1.2  The opportunity to protect c r i t i c a l habitat for renewable, resources upon which local people have traditionally depended would be a selection consideration.  6.3 Protection 6.3.1 Appropriate legislation would be required for national wilderness parks to ensure exclusion of a l l activities inconsistent with the preservation of the wilderness character of the landscape and i t s natural and cultural values (Parks Canada "Draft" Policy 19.78 L. 1 The concept of an international wildlife range stemming from the 1970 Whitehorse conference similarly remains undefined.  As debate  about the appropriate kind of reserve continues, the primary concern i s i n danger of slipping from sight. Whether the new institution i s named a "wildlife range" or "wilderness park", the stated concern of native groups i s the protection, conservation and management of the wildlife and habitat.  What ultimately counts i s the description  of the range and i t s management practices that are incorporated into law.  This w i l l determine the kind and intensity of activity allowed  within the bounds of the management area.  4.1.2 Archaeological Potential The internationally significant archaeological and palaeontologieal resources of the area are of prime interest to the National Museum  1. After this thesis was prepared, Parks Canada released their Policy Statement. I t should be noted that the identification of National Wilderness Parks does not appear i n the o f f i c i a l Policy, but that this type of area i s handled within their zoning classification. Wilderness i s found under section 2.4.2 and i s a Class II area.  - 64 of  Canada.  is  currently  late  Dr.  Richard Morlan,  heading  Pleistocene  paleoenvironments This  places  emphasis  particular  subsequent r o l e  geographical Bering  Land  i n the  province of Bridge and  "on the  ice-free  the  "Northern Yukon Research  disciplinary  I r v i n g , under  effort,  O l d Crow area  collected collagen fauna),  to of  date  are  i s  indigenous  bone  peat  theorized  lack of  has  frustrated  proof.  of  of  i n  i n  the 1975, and  Beringia" —  Yukon,  Alaska,  northeastern  evidence  form o f  Parks  as  on  Canada,  This  study,  BP  Among t h e  a the  Siberia  (thought  to  Yukon T e r r i t o r y "  human numerous  remains  the  1978  older and  than  Harrington  i n the  artifacts years BP,  BP  and  limits of  has  begun  technology  1978).  to  the  1977).  i n i t i a l  human o c c u p a t i o n  from concluding t h e i r  (Morlan  multi-  colonization  from northeastern A s i a ,  Pleistocene  bone  a  prehistory  35,500  Beringia finally  a distinctive  also  represent mid-Wisconsinan  playing a key r o l e  archaeologists  organized  O l d Crow Region o f  (Morlan  late  has  25,000 - 29,000  dating  b y humans e m i g r a t i n g  "Northeastern  northern  artifacts  i n the  Beringia  the  1978).  B P , and organic  North America  to  Program".  (Morlan  d a t i n g method  the  the  areas  initiated  examining a l l phases o f  radiocarbon  is  contract  33,000 - 35,000  41,100 + 1,650  in  interior  portions  of  a p p e a r a n c e o f man  ecosystems  unglaciated  study  a l l unglaciated  earliest  changing  William  of  of  "Yukon Refugium P r o j e c t "  Dr.  the  Museum o f M a n ,  1978).  (Morlan  in  the  a m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y team on a  Yukon T e r r i t o r y .  his  working under  i n Beringia  theories yield  but  with  such  found p r i m a r i l y  i n  evidence  - 65 4.1.3  Conservation and Recreation Concerns  Besides the proposed Arctic International Wildlife Range, several additional proposals for preservation have been put forth.  Six  ecological sites have been proposed under the International Biological Programme. These are: Region 9: 2 Site 4-1: Canoe Lake, Richardson Mtns. - 225 km — low Arctic sub-alpine system noted for the diverse plant l i f e (more than 400 plant species identified). 2 4-7: Herschel Island - 176 km on the Yukon coast — low Arctic, insular system noted for the presence of rich vegetation and fauna in both marine and terrestrial habitats. It i s also an important nesting site for various ducks and birds, including the Black Guillemot. 2 4-10: Firth River - 4820 km — the recline, coastal, sub-alpine and alpine system i s "rich in wildlife and includes the most northwesterly ; occurrence of Dall sheep in Canada" and t r a i l s of the Porcupine caribou herd. The area also "includes the most northerly extension of forest (white spruce) in Canada with more than 15 major landscape units " delineated (Ecological Sites in Northern Canada 1975). Region 10: Site  5:  Old Crow Basin - 5000 mi [12,950 km ] — Arctic alpine tundra and low arctic alpine forest section of the northern boreal forest. The site i s a unique marsh-like area containing important geological, archaeological, palaeontological, zoological and botanical elements. Important as a breeding area for waterfowl, i t contains habitat and breeding grounds for several rare and endangered species including the peregrine falcon and barren-ground grizzly. But more importantly, i t i s an area suitable for preservation for the study of the relationship between game and furbearing animals and humans who u t i l i z e them almost exclusively for their livelihood. A "solar bowl", i t i s protected on a l l sides by mountain ranges, ... 2  2  - 66 Site  6: Firth Pdver - 2,300 mi [5,957 km ] — (larger area than Region 9's Site 4-10, see latter description).  Site  7: Rat River^ Yukon/NWT Border - 775 mi2 [2,007 km ] — Arctic-alpine tundra, low Arctic alpine forest section and lower Mackenzie section of the northern boreal forest. ... of interest for botanical, glacial and northern mammal population studies, with areas of unique flora" (IBP Ecological Sites i n Sub-Arctic Canada 1975).  2  2  As mentioned i n Chapter Two, Parks Canada has prepared a proposal for a national Wilderness reserve i n the northwestern Yukon 2 encompassing 21,238 km . " the area extending from the Old Crow Flats to the Arctic coast offers outstanding representation of the natural heritage values of the northern Yukon (Region 9) and would qualify for inclusion in the National Parks System" (Parks Canada 1977, see Figure 4).  Recreational concerns for the northern Yukon also include tourism potential.  For the 1978 season, the highest on record, 300,000  tourists mainly from the United States, visited the Yukon, spending $30 million (Globe and Mail, January 23, 1979).  Tourism, already  second after mining i n providing dollars for the Yukon economy, has an increased potential i n light of the varied park and wildlife range proposals.  This may be illustrated by Kenya, where w i l d l i f e -  oriented tourism i s the major source of foreign exchange. Similarly, Yukon wildlife may eventually become valued more for aesthetic and recreational purposes than consumptive ones, resulting i n economic and social benefits for the Yukon populace. The unexplored economic and social opportunities for Yukoners i n  the  Yukon's spectacular  with not  certain be  4.2  forms  INDUSTRIAL  i n the  policies  of  social  direct  north,  those  policy  m u l t i p l e use  i s  as n e u t r a l  are  arbiter  should  the  issues  talks  parks  ranges.  Dempster  lands  footing,  of  about  the  of  northern  interest  In  Yukon must  1960's  lifestyles the  i n the  River  potential (Alaska  unknown.  Highway w i l l  of  north,  and the  have  The Highway c r o s s e s  Porcupine c a r i b o u from the  Mountains Ogilvie  is  to  the  eastern  vicinity  Highway i n the  inhibiting  the  use  Highway P i p e l i n e Panel  this  be of  wilderness  "Northern Vision"  impact  the  role  Pipeline  in  the  lands,  light of  (Northern A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Branch 1964),  yet  being  government's  John Diefenbaker 1978,  managed  p l a n n i n g and management  the  expense  northern  Crown  and the  (Usher 1978).  Highway and L a t e r a l  The Dempster Highway, p a r t  are  the  that  no-one's  i n question  use  governmental  assumption  north with  on equal  c o n s i d e r e d when one  4.2.1  i n the  land  The government's  on the  among them"  industrial  and w i l d l i f e  on comprehensive  i n d u s t r i a l growth at  values.  predicated  since  competing users  bearing  economic and  can occur  " . . .  philosophy,  of  associated  and therefore  especially i n light of past  and environmental  prejudiced.  is  conceivably exceed  i n d u s t r i a l development  have  increased  development  a l l  wildlife  CONCERNS  issues  planning  or  -  ignored.  Industrial  of  of  67  south.  of winter 1978b,  the  see  of  the  Richardson  therefore  ranges e a s t Figure  12).  native  routes  junction of  It  completed  and  migratory  slope  of  was  on w i l d l i f e  the  of  of  the has  the  the Highway  - 68 _  - 69 In June 1977, the Alaska Highway P i p e l i n e Panel, an independent group o f environmental s c i e n t i s t s funded by F o o t h i l l s Pipe Lines Limited t o undertake environmental studies o f t h e i r p i p e l i n e proposals, concluded that there was s t i l l v i r t u a l l y no research available on the environmental s e t t i n g f o r the Dempster Highway route (McLeod 1978). Accordingly, the Panel i n i t i a t e d an environmental evaluation of the Highway and the proposed Dempster L a t e r a l p i p e l i n e during the 1977-1978 season, and a socio-economic impact study i n the 1978-1979 season (Fox 1978).  Regarding the Porcupine herd, the environmental  evaluation report concluded that: Unregulated public use of the Dempster Highway threatens the welfare and possibly the existence of the Porcupine caribou herd. Hunting and harassment of caribou within the Corridor combined with disturbance from t r a f f i c and human a c t i v i t y , and the appearance of an elevated roadbed could prevent caribou from crossing the highway ... which could r e s u l t i n abandonment o f a major portion of winter range, and eventually lead t o large-scale population declines. Even without range abandonment, continued hunting and harassment associated with highway use could increase mortality and reduce p r o d u c t i v i t y (Alaska Highway P i p e l i n e Panel 1978a). The Dempster Highway thus poses several threats t o the Porcupine caribou.  Increased hunting pressure and other harassment a f f e c t i n g  mortality along a 300 km s t r e t c h are of p a r t i c u l a r concern i n winter, when the caribou are i n the v i c i n i t y of the road or cross i t during migration (Alaska Highway P i p e l i n e Panel 1978a; McLeod 1978).  The p o t e n t i a l disruption of the herd's movements and abandonment of the winter ranges east of the road would involve approximately one-third of the t o t a l winter range.  Although the forces  contributing t o migratory patterns and choice of winter range are not f u l l y understood,  -  70  -  I t seems t h a t c a r i b o u p o p u l a t i o n s have a s t r o n g homing tendency t o t r a d i t i o n a l ranges and t r a d i t i o n a l pathways. In a sense they l e a r n where the b e s t r a n g e s a r e a n d how t o r e a c h t h e m b y f o l l o w i n g experienced animals. They can a l s o 'unlearn* established patterns i f they are repeatedly deflected or blocked from t r a d i t i o n a l areas, a process that c o u l d p r o b a b l y take s e v e r a l years and i n v o l v e s e v e r a l generations (Calef 1974).  Contributing  factors this  "barrier effect"  i n c l u d e h i g h berms,  snowbanks a l o n g t h e r o a d s i d e , and l a t e r a l d i t c h e s f i l l e d snow  ( A l a s k a Highway P i p e l i n e P a n e l 1978b).  the disturbance p o t e n t i a l .  This  with  Highway t r a f f i c  compounds  " . . . would enhance t h e b a r r i e r  e f f e c t and g r e a t l y i n c r e a s e t h e r i s k o f range  partitioning"  ( A l a s k a Highway P i p e l i n e P a n e l 1978a).  A third  threat  deflection  posed  by the  Highway i s  during migration.  the  factor  T h i s w o u l d mean  that  of  delay  the  or  caribou  . . . would have t o spend energy reserves t o get back on course o r on schedule. I f delayed too long i n s p r i n g , c a l v e s c o u l d be born o u t s i d e the calving ground where t h e y w o u l d p r o b a b l y be more v u l n e r a b l e to predators; i f d e l a y e d i n f a l l , they c o u l d be c a u g h t b y heavy snows e n r o u t e t o w i n t e r i n g a r e a s . I n b o t h c a s e s , c a r i b o u w o u l d become s t r e s s e d , waste l i m i t e d energy r e s e r v e s , and be more s u s c e p t i b l e to d i s e a s e , p r e d a t i o n and s t a r v a t i o n (Alaska Highway P i p e l i n e Panel 1978a).  Caribou-highway understand on the  animals.  railroads as  fully  interaction the  have  been  insufficient  impact of  the  Highway and  Nevertheless,  the  construction  elsewhere  documented  studies  i n the  have  caused  Berger  decreases  Inquiry:  related of  activities  roads  i n caribou  to  and  populations  - 71 Dr. George Calef presented an analysis of recorded changes i n the size of various caribou herds during their contact with industrial man. The Fortymile herd used to roam the Yukon Territory and east-central Alaska. In 1920, Olas J. Murie estimated this herd to be 568,000 animals, but i t s population stands today at something like 6,000 animals. The Nelchina herd of south-east Alaska consisted of 70,000 animals i n 1962; by 1973, i t had been reduced to only 8,000 animals. ... Dr. David Klein has written about the gradual abandonment of ranges i n Scandinavia by reindeer, after their migration routes had been interrupted by r a i l or highway t r a f f i c (Berger 1977, Vol.1).  Since 1972, only piecemeal monitoring of the caribou-highway interaction along the Dempster has been undertaken by government biologists.  For example, i n 1976 Manfred Hoefs monitored the  caribou's response to road construction activity and highway t r a f f i c , and mapped the important crossing locations for the purpose of establishing hunting and t r a f f i c regulations as mitigative measures (McLeod 1978).  These attempts have been descriptive and  sporadic.  No overall scientific framework for analysis has been  designed;  no generalized hypotheses have been tested.  Finally, i n November 1977, DINA initiated and financed a study of the impacts of the Dempster Highway and t r a f f i c on the caribou. The Yukon Game Branch i s carrying out the program with the following objectives: 1.  To monitor the distribution of caribou along the Dempster corridor.  2.  Map the important crossings used by the caribou.  3.  To carry out age and sex counts to compare with summer and f a l l counts.  4. Employ native trainees to assist i n the Study. (Russell et a l (1978).  - 72 As data accumulates i n successive years, an accurate picture of caribou response to the Highway and associated uses may be attained.  Until such time, much of the reporting remains descriptive.  Despite the current lack of data, i n January 1978 the Northern Roads and Airstrips Division of DINA completed a revised draft of i t s Dempster Highway Management Plan.  The stated aims of the  Management Plan are: 1.  To allow year-round use of the highway with minimum adverse impact of the highway and i t s users on the environment. Conservation and management are to be regarded as interdependent;  2.  To introduce a method of control that i s technically and economically feasible as well as being socially and environmentally acceptable. It i s recognized that certain aspects that are environmentally or socially acceptable to one sector of our society are often unacceptable to another group. Conflict of this nature would possibly occur among the following highway users: native people, tourists, hunters, truckers, hikers, campers, canoeists, photographers, artists, miners, petroleum and mineral exploration crews. It i s hoped, however, that the plan w i l l be able to accommodate the needs and interests of the majority of people;  3.  To ensure a comprehensive programme i s implemented before the highway i s completed;  4.  To make management sufficiently flexible so that modifications can easily be made to accommodate the conditions of the settlement of native land claims; and  5.  To be receptive to the findings of the research activity pertaining to the northern environment.  Respecting the impact of t r a f f i c on the caribou, the Management Plan recommends speed restrictions, road closure during peak migration  - 73 and a convoy system during the winter period.  The Plan also  recommends a land use plan for controlling general construction of roadside services and a 5-mile, no-hunting zone, either side of the Highway to apply to natives and non-natives alike.  The  questions of what environmental impact of the Highway would be acceptable, and whether mitigative measures w i l l be effective are not addressed.  Neither does the Plan resolve the issue of  overhunting of caribou due to increased access ... The government's failure to resolve these issues i s partly due to the absence of any legal requirement for the government to undertake environmental impact studies, and to hold hearings for i t s major projects. ... The Minister of the Environment has recently confirmed that 'Since the decision to proceed [with the highway] had already been made,a formal review under the federal process concerning the project's acceptability was not possible.' Such a position suggests that the conflict of interests between the government's position [DINA] as promoter of the project and the government's position as regulator, has limited the degree of environmental study (McLeod 1978).  The rationale for development of this Plan leaves clear room for dispute as to whether DINA actually has the jurisdiction to enforce this or any management plan for the Dempster.  Existing federal  and t e r r i t o r i a l legislation provides the Yukon and NWT governments with statutory authority to establish regulatory mechanisms for t r a f f i c control, hunting and development alongside and within highway corridors, and allows the imposition of restrictions to carry out these mechanisms. For example, the Yukon Act (sec.46-c). gives the Cfcran^ssioner-in-KDouncil the right to maintain, control and regulate the use of roads i n the Yukon Territory.  The Comrnissioner-  in-Council may also legislate necessary restrictions respecting  - 74 a l l public roads and their rights-of-^way.  This authority has  been exercised by enactment of the Highways Ordinance for the Yukon. These two legislative mechanisms then, give complete jurisdictional authority over a l l highways i n the Yukon, including their management, regulation and control of access road establishment, to the t e r r i t o r i a l government. DINA also implemented a policy in 1975 to give the Yukon government authority to control a l l development along remote highways, such as Dempster.  This authority  can be enforced through the Territorial Area Development Ordinances which authorize the t e r r i t o r i a l government to claim the highway as a "development area".  The benefit of such a designation i s seen i n section 4 of the Ordinance which states in part: (1)  The Commissioner may make regulations for the orderly development of a development area respecting a.  the zoning of the area, including the allocation of land i n the area for agricultural, residential, business, industrial, educational, public or other purposes;  b.  the regulation or prohibition of the erection, maintenance, alteration, repair or removal of buildings;  e.  f i r e protection;  f.  animals;  g.  the regulation or the prohibition of the discharge of guns or other firearms within a development area.  Therefore, i n response to DINA's Management Plan (which really has suspect jurisdictional authority) , and a comtitment made at the  - 75 Lysyck Inquiry 1977, the Yukon Territorial Ctovernment and the Ctovernment of the N.W.T. formed a study group on highway, park and wildlife concerns in relation to the Dempster.  Their  Interim Management Plan has been completed and w i l l be released to the public shortly.''" A long-term plan w i l l be drafted i n 1982.  Highway impacts may be compounded by the construction of the Dempster Lateral, a proposed gas pipeline which approximately parallels the Highway north from Dawson to Inuvik in. the Mackenzie Delta. The pipeline would carry Canadian gas from the Delta area south to Canadian markets by connecting with the proposed Alaska Highway Pipeline (Lysyck 1977).  Foothills Pipe Lines (Yukon) Ltd., the  proponent of the Dempster Lateral, concluded: It i s considered most likely that any restriction in access of caribou which could be related directly to the pipeline would occur only during the relatively brief period of construction. Serious conflicts are not anticipated during the operational phase of the pipeline. ... Further, i t i s likely that mitigative measures, such as the scheduling of construction activities outside of the migration periods can be successfully employed to avoid most interactions of the pipeline project with caribou (Foothills Pipe Lines (Yukon) Ltd. 1978a).  While many in the f i e l d agree with these general conclusions, several questions were raised at the recent Porcupine Caribou Committee meeting in Delta:  1.  After this thesis was prepared, the Interim Plan was released.  - 76 - Is there adequate information on the impact of construction and operation of a pipeline with respect to caribou behaviour? - What about long-term management of the pipeline? - What of the incremental effects of construction and operation of a pipeline over and above the impact from a highway? - If information i s inadequate, what kinds of studies are required? Is there enough knowledge on existing impacts without the pipeline? While a buried gas pipeline may not cause serious impacts on the herd, incremental spin-off effects may.  "'Each new pipeline, road,  or railroad inevitably brings with i t a host of second-order human activities affecting more than just a corridor of a few hundred feet in width " 1  (Laycock 1976). To further complicate the situation,  the federal government, in a move that seems puzzling from the perspective of energy conservation, has required Foothills to design the pipeline's compressor stations for possible conversion to hydroelectric power. The intent of the requirement comes into focus in light of a proposal by the Northern Canada Power Commission (NCPC) to dam the Yukon River for hydroelectric power generation. The compressor stations represent a certain market for the power, and are said to provide a rationale to proceed with "development" of the Yukon. Surplus generating capacity could then be used to stimulate potential mining and export markets. One of the potential stimulants for a hydroelectric development would be the guarantee of a base-load demand for power from the compressor stations along the pipeline route. If the hydroelectric development had excess capacity that could be diverted to the mining industry, then the opening of new mines would be encouraged (Lysyck 1977).  The uncertainty of the cumulative effects: of these proposed projects looms large, i n many people's minds.  Further, the rationale  for these projects emphasizes DINA's continuing philosophy of opening the north, for industrial development without considering possible alternatives.  The scheme for converting the compressor  stations to hydroelectric power may be an inefficient means of supplying power for compressor stations.  Moreover, the proposed  dam site i s hundreds of miles from the pipeline;  hence transmission  lines and support stations w i l l have to be built, further scarring the wilderness.  Finally, demand for the proposed 1000- megawatt  capacity of the NCPC scheme, phased through the 19.80.'s, i s now virtually non-existent.  Even with, increased mining requirements  for hydro power, speculated to be less than 100 megawatts (Globe, and Mail, January 23, 1979).., much of the proposed power w i l l have to be exported, benefitting few i n the Yukon.  4.2.2  O i l , Gas and Mineral Exploration  While the overall o i l , gas and mineral potential of the northern Yukon presently appears f a i r l y moderate (Mining Division, O i l and Gas Division, DTJMA, 19791, especially i n relation to other values at stake, one cannot discount the future possibilities.  As  technology, prices and demands for non-renewable resources increase., the area w i l l be under increasing developmental pressure.  The only producing mine i n the northern Yukon i s United Keno H i l l Mines Ltd., 50 km northeast of Mayo, producing silver, lead, zinc and cadmium; Cassiar Asbestos Corporation at Clinton Creek,  - 78 80 km northwest of Dawson City, closed their operations in 1978 (DINA - Mines and Minerals Activities 1977). The most current information on mineral potential in the northern Yukon i s illustrated on Figure 14.  Regarding the withdrawal area, Figure  13 shows the small extent of existing claims.  Most of these are  owned by Aquitane Company of Canada Ltd., which i s also involved in uranium exploration in the Blow River area.  Much of the northern  Yukon outside of the withdrawal bounds has also not been staked.  The greatest pressure for o i l and gas development i s in the seaward portion of the Coastal Shelf i n the Beaufort Sea.  In relation to  the rest of the northern Yukon, this area has high o i l and gas potential, hence continued interest i s maintained through various permits.  PetroCan and Dome are actively exploring the Beaufort  area west of Herschel Island, and Imperial O i l has claims on the coastline and on Herschel Island.  Imperial's evaluation work  southeast of Herschel has been disappointing. However, i t hopes to attain a greater understanding of the Coastal Shelf and Plains formations with these exploratory wells (Sullivan 1979).  It i s feared that as offshore o i l and gas development proceeds, the Coastal Plain w i l l look attractive for construction and access sites.  This could lead to increased onshore exploration of  moderate to low areas, and the expansion into the interior of northern Yukon for large-scale development projects. This wave of demands i s considered by many northerners and conservation groups  -  FIGURE 13.  79  -  MINERAL CLAIMS IN THE NORTHERN YUKON WITHDRAWAL LANDS, 1979 139  140  /  138  /  i  Private y  4-69  7  69  Lapsed'  0*CfAqultane  68  4-68  Aquitane  Archer Cathro j Assoc.  I  J  v  V  138  SCALE:  1 = 1,500,000  - 80 FIGURE 14 •  - Significant Deposit with Past or Present Prduction or reserves  X - Significant Deposit or Mineral Occurrence Cu - Copper  W - Tungsten  Zn - Zinc  Sn - Tin  Pb - Lead  Ni - Nickel  Au - Gold  Mo - Molybdenum  CI - Coal Fe - Iron U - Uranium  Areas have been classified on the basis of mineral occurrences and associated rock lithologies and ages.  Boundaries of areas tend to  follow rock units. B —  Indicates favourable area for a large number of the commodities; where followed by a commodity, this indicates area i s favourable for this commodity but i t i s at a C level for other commodities.  C —  Indicates low potential where no significant deposits are found but mineral occurrences do not occur.  Thismay be due to a lower  level of exploration i n these areas or abundant overburden. (Abstracted from the Mineral Potential Map of the Northern Yukon area, which was prepared by the Geology Section of Indian and Northern Affairs, September 11, 1978.) Deposits shown on Map:  5) Keno-Galena H i l l (Ag-Pb) 6) Crest Iron Formation (Fe) 11) Clinton Creek (Asbestos) 12) Klondike Goldfields (Placer Au)  -  FIGURE  14.  81 -  MINERAL P O T E N T I A L NORTHERN  Y U K O N , I979  - 82 across North America, to be incompatible with competing land uses such as wilderness parks and w i l d l i f e refuges, with the l a t t e r suffering the consequences of i n d u s t r i a l plans. The hard-line development of o i l and gas i n A r c t i c off-shore areas i s not unique. ... During the past 20 years, the federal Ctovernment has a c t i v e l y encouraged the multinational resource corporations to explore f o r and develop non-renewable resources north of the 60th p a r a l l e l . Offshore d r i l l i n g i s simply one facet of a northern p o l i c y which was a r t i c u l a t e d by John Diefenbaker 20 years ago (Pimlott e t a l 1976).  The Old Crow F l a t s , although currently under a Land Use Permit moratorium, shows good prospects f o r o i l and gas.  Indeed, the F l a t s  do have o i l and gas obligations owned by Great Plains-Trindex-Noranda. This means that the government e i t h e r must allow future exploration to occur, or that the claims must be bought or expropriated by the government.  The denial of access to the Old Crow area since  1972, has discouraged further exploration i n the northern Yukon i n general as industry faces large uncertainties respecting the p o l i t i c a l climate and lease structure (Sullivan 1979).  Other moderately prospective areas include Eagle P l a i n s and Peel Plateau.  Three or four s i g n i f i c a n t discoveries of o i l and gas have  been made i n the Eagle P l a i n s area to date, under lease to Brascan Resources.  The Peel Plateau has not yielded any s i g n i f i c a n t finds  although the area has always been regarded as a good prospect. Aquitane i s the only active company presently d r i l l i n g a w e l l close t o the Peel River i n t h i s l a t t e r area.  - 83 4.3 CARIBOU, RENEWABLE RESOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT PLANNING If we assume a primary goal of conservation planning i n management of the caribou and their habitat, then Hon. Len Marchand's original Press Rlease of July 1978 was an encouraging development. He indicated that a comprehensive approach to management should be undertaken.  Elements of this include the international aspect of  herd and habitat management with an "ecological unit" approach. Surely this should require the consideration of every proposed development — industrial or recreational — with this question foremost i n mind: Will i t interfere with the wildlife and their habitat?  Yet the past track record of conflicting institutional and  development-oriented  issues (especially within DINA) does not  indicate such consideration of alternatives.  In short, there i s l i t t l e evidence of rational development planning in the current situation i n the northern Yukon, especially pertaining to conservation issues. If government policy, as stated i n 1972, places priority on "a higher standard of living, quality of l i f e and equality of opportunity for northern residents...", and "maintain[ing] and enhanc[ing] the northern environment...", surely alternative uses of the Yukon's resources must be considered. For example, after construction, hydro dams employ only a handful of people;  wildlife-oriented tourism and various forms of outdoor  recreation on the other hand, may well be able to provide hundreds of opportunities for outfitters, guides, wildlife managers, etc., opportunities from which native people are particularly able to  - 84 benefit.  This inability of the key "land department" - DINA -  to coordinate a broadly conceived management and planning effort, and to articulate sound policies and alternative scenarios for the north, has been well documented by Rees (1978). He concluded: The government's approach has been based on the belief that, while there i s only limited potential in the renewable resource base, 'a r e a l i s t i c assessment i s that i n major terms that can affect the overall wealth of Canada, the economic future of the North l i e s i n the ground'. Accordingly, while 'priorities i n the north' include commitments to 'social development' and the 'natural environment', the emphasis to date has been to 'encourage and assist strategic projects... i n the development of nonrenewable resources and i n which the•joint participation of the government and private enterprise i s generally desirable'. While the requirements for balanced growth have been clearly stated, including the need for 'a rational plan for developing the territories systematically', there i s nothing i n the observed pattern that remotely resembles a rational" planning framework... (Quotations are from Canada North 19701980, Chretien 1972).  - 85 y CHAPTER Y ELEMENTS FOR AN INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE PORCUPINE ' CARIBOU HERD AND ITS ECOSYSTEM 5.1 EVALUATIVE FRAMEWORK The preceding discussion of socioeconomic, ecological and p o l i t i c a l issues i n the. northern Yukon has highlighted several central realities.  These provide a basis for the following normative-  assumptions : 1. Conservation of the. Porcupine Caribou herd and i t s habitat i s a national and international conservation priority based on the variety of aesthetic, scientific and social values inherent in this ecosystem. 2. Since northern wilderness conservation and wildlife protection and management are a high priority for the Canadian government, planning and management of industrial development must be. integrated with., and i n harmony with conservation planning. 3.  The traditional dependence of natives on northern resources and ethical considerations demand that natives have priority use of the resources,  In turn, these assumptions suggest an evaluative framework, for analysing the 14 international conventions (see Appendix principles guiding this analysis are: PRINCIPLES 1, The agreement should advance conservation and enhancement of the Porcupine Caribou herd and i t s ecosystem as principle-management objectives. 2. The agreement should recognize the. aboriginal priority of use of the resources and make provisions for native involvement i n caribou conservation and management planning consistent with social and scientific principles.  The  - 86 3.  The agreement should recognize that s o c i a l values and perceptions respecting w i l d l i f e and wilderness evolve over time. As such, the management framework must be consciously f l e x i b l e and responsive t o these changing conditions consistent with (1) and (2).  The study o f the northern Yukon s i t u a t i o n , together with the a n a l y s i s of the 14 i n t e r n a t i o n a l conventions, resolved i n t o the seven c r i t e r i a stated below.  Each c r i t e r i o n i s followed by i t s r a t i o n a l e  and a p p l i c a b i l i t y i n t h i s case study. CRITERIA 5.1.1  Conservation  what i s the l e g a l status o f reserved lands, and t o what extent i s the agreement and i t s administrative process, capable o f ensuring the protection o f the w i l d l i f e and i t s habitat? Does the agreement provide f o r absolute protection o f c r i t i c a l habitat s i t e s ? Is o v e r a l l ecosystem management inherent i n the management framework?  Rationale and Recommendation: Conservation o f the caribou herd and i t s habitat i s a high p r i o r i t y of government and a guiding p r i n c i p l e o f ecosystem management. The convention should therefore commit the p a r t i e s t o e s t a b l i s h i n g some sort o f reserve or special-status lands t o achieve t h i s objective. We should recognize, however, that while a l l components o f the caribou's habitat require "adequate" protection, t h i s does not necessarily mean "equal" protection f o r a l l parts o f the animals' range.  For example, i t may be necessary t o i d e n t i f y  "critical  habitat zones" devoted t o exclusive use by the caribou within any reserve.  The r e l a t i v e l y r e s t r i c t e d c a l v i n g grounds would  c e r t a i n l y be a candidate f o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n as e s s e n t i a l habitat. A workable hierarchy of zones might vary from t h i s c r i t i c a l - h a b i t a t /  - 87 single-purpose category, to larger ihtegrated-use zones where certain other development activity i s permitted but controlled i n light of the overall conservation objective.  To be effective,  any such reserve and i t s system of habitat zones should have same sort of formal legal status. This w i l l prevent arbitrary changes in boundaries, permissible activities, etc., without adequate public review and p o l i t i c a l accountability.  Further, the lands  must be designated and managed according to ecosystem principles, including the relationships between caribou, their habitat requirements, native dependence, and other competing and compatible land uses, i.e. tourism, recreation, industrial development, etc. C r i t i c a l habitat sites should be designated immediately by both countries.  Precedents for habitat protection have been set i n the African Convention of 1968 and the Polar Bear Agreement of 1973. The latter Agreement specifically states that the contracting parties should "... take appropriate action to protect the ecosystem of which polar bears are a part,...", as well as c r i t i c a l habitat areas.  5.1.2  Regulation  Is there provision within the agreement for establishment''of an independent regulatory body or commission to coordinate the planning and management of the wildlife and i t s habitat?  Rationale and Recommendation: The international nature of the management problem demands that  - 88 the convention establish a politically-independent commission vested with the authority to coordinate the inplementation of the proposed agreement and pursuant cooperative research and management plans.  I f this commission i s to have any significant authority,  i t must be independent of the government of the day.  Neither Canada,  the United States, nor state or t e r r i t o r i a l agencies alone possess the authority or financial and technical commitment to allocate harvest, coordinate research, or regulate large-scale industrial developments with international implications.  Some of the principles  inherent i n the International Joint Commission (IJC) and fisheries commissions discussed in Appendix I provide elements of independence, authority in decision-making, coordination of planning, management and research, and f l e x i b i l i t y to react to changing conditions and perceptions.  A similar rationale supports the establishment of  royal commissions to investigate various types of problems from an independent position.  The caribou convention should state that the countries agree: a.  to implement the cxranission s recommendations through the enactment of domestic laws such as a Migratory Caribou Act;  b.  to give absolute decision-making authority to the commission on management of c r i t i c a l habitat reserves established by legislation i n support of the convention;  c.  to include the commission for review and comment on any project and development planning i n the caribou's range, and any future comprehensive management and planning agency established pursuant to the agreement; and  d.  to give the commission authority to review and comment on enforcement of the agreement and pursuant management plans.  1  - 89 5.1.3  Management  To what extent does the agreement, and i t s administrative process, allow f o r active management o f the w i l d l i f e and i t s habitat (authority, funding and personnel) t o implement management plans?  Rationale and Recommendation:  "*  The competing array o f proposals f o r use and development o f northern Yukon lands and resources necessitates the establishment o f an adaptive management plan t o ensure the protection o f the herd and the ecosystem o f which i t i s a part.  Indeed, as conservation o f  the Porcupine Caribou depends l a r g e l y on maintenance o f the herd's extensive ecosystem/habitat, a managerial organization capable o f responding t o both n a t u r a l l y occurring changes and external threats i s a p r i o r i t y o f any convention.  Therefore, the commission should  be given authority and f i n a n c i a l resources to appoint an operational arm comprised o f advisory boards and f i e l d technicians t o a i d i n development and implementation  o f a comprehensive management plan.  Implementation o f management p o l i c y w i l l f a i l i f the administrator lacks the authority over management, funding and personnel.  This  i s recognized i n the Salmon, whaling and Fur Seal conventions which s t i p u l a t e that f i n a n c i a l and technical support be supplied by the contracting p a r t i e s .  Comparable authority given t o the Canada/  United States Salmon and Halibut commissions has proved successful i n implementation o f the conventions' objectives. Factors f a c i l i t a t i n g t h i s include:  - 90 - t h e c o n v e n t i o n s a r e between two c o u n t r i e s w i t h a h i s t o r y o f t r u s t and c o o p e r a t i o n on i n t e r n a t i o n a l problems; - e a c h agreement i s concerned w i t h o n l y one r e s o u r c e ; - t h e c o n v e n t i o n s ' o b j e c t i v e s and commissions' a u t h o r i t y a r e c l e a r l y d e f i n e d as t o the problem o f r e b u i l d i n g t h e f i s h s t o c k s (as o u t l i n e d i n Appendix I ) .  A p a r a l l e l s i t u a t i o n i s obvious  i n t h e proposed m i g r a t o r y  caribou  c o n v e n t i o n w h i c h i s between t h e same two c o u n t r i e s p r i m a r i l y concerned w i t h one r e s o u r c e .  C r i t e r i a 2 and 3 and t h e a s s o c i a t e d recommendations e s s e n t i a l l y e s t a b l i s h a t w o - t i e r e d i n s t i t u t i o n a l mechanism a s shown below: Level  Composition  Role  Executive  International Migratory Caribou Commission  - P o l i c y development - M a s t e r p l a n n i n g and conceptualization Decision-making  Operational  a. S e c r e t a r i a t e  - Implementation o f p o l i c y and p l a n n i n g - Coordinate research  b. A d v i s o r y Boards  - Recommendations, i . e . harvest, research needs, e t c .  The o p e r a t i o n a l arm i s e s s e n t i a l l y a management-oriented wing comprised o f a S e c r e t a r i a t e t o a c t a s l i a i s o n between t h e A d v i s o r y Boards and t h e Commission, and t h e A d v i s o r y Boards on n a t i v e h a r v e s t , and s c i e n t i f i c / t e c h n i c a l management i s s u e s .  Comparable t o t h e  I J C ' s a u t h o r i t y , t h e "IMCC" c o u l d commission t h e A d v i s o r y Boards t o undertake s p e c i f i c r e s e a r c h and management problems.  The  Advisory Boards i n turn, would have the authority to c a l l upon necessary f i e l d and financial support from the respective countries to carry out the commission's requests.  The kinds of responsibilities  and duties as outlined i n the Salmon, Whaling and Halibut conventions and the proposed Migratory Species agreement are examples of the type of operational base suggested.  5.1.4  Research  Is there provision within the agreement for on-going, coordinated research and monitoring programs for both wildlife and habitat?  Rationale and Recommendation: Effective regulation and management as specified above require resources for f i e l d research and monitoring programs. Any convention should therefore commit the parties to providing the operational support for the corirnission.  Scientific and technical personnel are  required i n both countries to advise the commission on ecological conditions, research needs and management options within their respective portions of the reserve system.  The commission should  strive to coordinate both integrated and independent research programs undertaken by the parties.  The need for research stems from many uncertainties respecting caribou and habitat management and the great potential for conflict with industrial, recreational and other activities.  Scientific  understanding of the relationships among caribou, their habitat,  -  92  -  s u b s i s t e n c e use and c o n f l i c t i n g land-use  i s poorly  developed.  I n a d d i t i o n t o b a s i c r e s e a r c h however, m o n i t o r i n g o f management impacts i s e s s e n t i a l t o p r o v i d e t h e feedback n e c e s s a r y t o changing e c o l o g i c a l and s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s .  t o adapt  As o u t l i n e d i n  C h a p t e r Three, s p e c i f i c a t t e n t i o n s h o u l d be p a i d t o d e v e l o p i n g an annual c e n s u s , o b t a i n i n g a c c u r a t e h a r v e s t d a t a from n a t i v e communities, and d e t e r m i n i n g how t h e Dempster Highway a f f e c t s c a r i b o u behaviour  and m i g r a t i o n p a t t e r n s , i n c l u d i n g r e s p o n s e t o highway-  a s s o c i a t e d a c t i v i t i e s and b a r r i e r s i n g e n e r a l .  Several conventions  s t i p u l a t e r e s e a r c h and m o n i t o r i n g programs.  The Salmon T r e a t y p r o v i d e s f o r r e s e a r c h , i n c l u d i n g such s p e c i f i c elements a s t h e n a t u r a l h i s t o r y o f t h e salmon, spawning grounds, e t c . The F u r S e a l s Convention determining  c o o r d i n a t e s r e s e a r c h e f f o r t s towards  t h e r e q u i r e d measures f o r a c h i e v i n g t h e g o a l o f  maximum s u s t a i n e d y i e l d .  T h i s c o n v e n t i o n emphasized r e s e a r c h a s  an i n t e g r a l element i n a s c e r t a i n i n g t h e i n t e r - r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f f u r s e a l s and o t h e r l i v i n g marine r e s o u r c e s . Convention  Similarly, the draft  on t h e C o n s e r v a t i o n o f M i g r a t o r y S p e c i e s o f W i l d A n i m a l s  s p e c i f i e s i n a r t i c l e V t h a t each agreement e n t e r e d i n t o  shall:  ... d e a l w i t h a l l a s p e c t s o f c o n s e r v a t i o n and management o f t h e m i g r a t o r y s p e c i e s and s h a l l , ... p r o v i d e f o r : a.  p e r i o d i c review o f t h e conservation s t a t u s o f t h e m i g r a t o r y s p e c i e s concerned and t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e f a c t o r s which may be harmful t o t h a t s t a t u s ;  c.  r e s e a r c h i n t o t h e e c o l o g y and p o p u l a t i o n dynamics o f t h e m i g r a t o r y s p e c i e s c o n c e r n e d , with s p e c i a l regard t o i t s migration;  - 93 d.  5.1.5  the exchange of information on the migratory species concerned, special regard being paid to the exchange of the results of research and of hunting and trade statistics; ...  Native Use To what extent does the agreement, and i t s administrative process, permit the pursuit of traditional activities, and involve natives in wildlife and habitat management planning?  Rationale and Recommendation: Since native peoples are currently the major user of the resource, and w i l l continue to be dependent on the caribou for some time, the convention should provide for native priority use i n the pursuit of traditional activities.  Native groups have stated in land claim .  settlement negotiations a desire for long-term involvement in wildlife and habitat management. This criterion i s consistent with government policy which states that a l l government agencies and departments involved i n planning and development of the North should: Maintain opportunities for traditional pursuits (hunting, fishing, trapping), encouraging a shift to analogous activities (campsite supervisors, tourist guides, game and f i r e wardens) for native peoples, and expanding well-established programs providing cultural outlets for indigenous peoples so that they w i l l be involved increasingly in a l l phases (including marketing) (DIAND 1972).  Of course native harvests should not exceed the productive capacity of the herd and i t s ecosystem. Moreover, the harvest must be regulated in a way that involves the users and educates them to be  - 94 aware of the impact of their activities on the herd and i t s habitat." A possible solution to native priority use of caribou i s through a quota system. Each community would be allocated a quota to be detemined annually, which could embody age and sex restrictions on the harvestable caribou.  The community could then decide whether  to use the quota for subsistence or to s e l l i t i n whole or in 2 part to sport hunters on a competitive bidding system.  Such  transferable quotas may be one way of satisfying the demand for caribou by sport hunters, while conforming to the principle of native priority. A precedent for such a system can be found in the Canadian Explanatory Declaration of the Polar Bear Agreement; 2(c) In the exercise of these traditional polar bear hunting rights, the local people in a settlement may authorize the selling of a polar bear permit from the sub-population quota to a non-Inuit or non-Indian hunter, but with additional restrictions providing that the hunt be conducted under the guidance of a native hunter and by using a dog team, ...  1.  This has been a serious problem with the Kaminuriak herd i n the Northwest Territories. The communities, spread over a large area, were not aware of the individual effects of their harvests on the overall decline of the herd. When biologists presented them with reports of the declining population due to native harvests, with often conflicting advice, the natives refused to believe the reports or blamed the decline on other factors. In response to the situation, a : Caribou Management Group was organized to inform the natives of the problems and design a management plan for the herd. A l l native communities and the biologists conducting research on the herd met last year to discuss the problem. A second meeting on management issues w i l l take place later this year at Baker Lake. To date, the Management Group has been successful i n broadening the perception of the Kaminuriak problem and hopes to reach solutions by the f a l l (Simmons 1979).  2.  This solution should be an option open to native peoples and not a stipulation of the convention. If the natives do not support such a solution, others should be promulgated.  - 95 The concept of a quota system i s also an element i n the COPE/ Canadian government Agreement-in-Principle  under section 14 (.3) (b)  and (c). Reference here i s to subsistence quotas as being part of the harvestable quota set by the Inuvialuit, federal and t e r r i t o r i a l governments.  I t should also be noted that since October  1978, subsistence use of wildlife resources i s the legal priority among various consumptive uses i n Alaska (Skoog 1979).  Alternative solutions include establishing percentage quotas between native and sport hunters; and setting a itdnimum subsistence quota for natives with sport hunters bidding on the remaining quota when such i s available.  Consistent with the policy "... that the needs of the people i n the North are more important than resource development and that the maintenance of ecological balance i s essential ... and the heaviest emphasis i n current thinking i s on the needs and aspirations of the native peoples..."  (DIAND 1972), the caribou convention  should provide for native involvement i n long-term planning and management of the caribou and their ecosystem.  Indeed, the unique  situation i n the northern Yukon demands new and creative solutions to native long-term involvement.  For example, natives could  receive special training as m i d l i f e biologists and technicians, native participation on research teams could be encouraged, and use could be made of local hunters and trappers associations i n guiding programs.  I t i s possible that wildlife-oriented tourism  and  recreation  valuable  use  w i l l  of  become  this  96  -  the  s o c i a l l y and  resource,  and n a t i v e  have p r i o r i t y i n r e a l i z i n g the developing  5.1.6  this  Other  economic  economically  peoples  and  most  should  therefore  social benefits  of  potential.  Environmental  Concerns  To what e x t e n t does the agreement and i t s administrative process, address the question o f future uses o f the environment which are: (a) c o m p a t i b l e , a n d (b) incompatible w i t h the stated goals? Does the agreement provide measures to m i t i g a t e o r alleviate p r e s e n t uses w h i c h are designated as incompatible?  Rationale  and  Exploitation gas  ReaDmmendation: of,  and m i n e r a l  and  pressure  potentials,  and r e c r e a t i o n  industry,  management and  habitat  Both  compatible  against  the  should be Existing  and  goals  seen  to  land uses  and  and o b j e c t i v e s paramount  such  as  the  alleviate  adverse  land in  uses  the  impacts.  a  comprehensive  and  activities  'ecodevelopment'  the  of  the  i n the  land uses  Dempster  covered  The c o n v e n t i o n  should  management p l a n . addressed  northern  analysed the  latter agreement.  also  be  control  or  commit the  Development in this  Yukon.  tourism  activities.  by the  Highway should  o i l ,  wildlife  and  and  m i t i g a t i v e measures to  the  of  should be  agreement,  area  for  important  integration  developments  should be of  exploration  increasingly  planning with other  with provision for  develop  the  incompatible  be  increased  necessitate  examined,  to  for  plan  of to  parties a l l result  - 97 The e l i m i n a t i o n o r s a t i s f a c t o r y m i t i g a t i o n o f t h e adverse  impacts  o f o b s t a c l e s and d i s t u r b a n c e s which a f f e c t t h e c a r i b o u ' s m i g r a t i o n , behaviour  and c r i t i c a l h a b i t a t s s h o u l d a l s o be a d d r e s s e d  convention.  i n the  H a u l r o a d s , s u p p o r t s t a t i o n s f o r o i l and gas  e x p l o r a t i o n and a i r t r a f f i c a r e b u t a few o f t h e d i s t u r b a n c e s associated with the ever-increasing e x p l o i t a t i o n o f northern  resources.  Adverse impacts a r e i n e v i t a b l e , hence t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n o f m i g r a t o r y c a r i b o u n e c e s s i t a t e s t h a t t h e s e impacts be c o n t r o l l e d , m i t i g a t e d or eliminated.  Precedents  f o r h a n d l i n g t h e s e c o n c e r n s a r e found  i n t h e Salmon  T r e a t y and t h e US/USSR M i g r a t o r y B i r d s Convention.  The Salmon  T r e a t y p r o v i d e s f o r removal o f o b s t r u c t i o n s t o salmon m i g r a t i o n ; and t h e M i g r a t o r y B i r d Convention  p r o v i d e s f o r r e h a b i l i t a t i o n and  m i t i g a t i o n o f a d v e r s e l y i m p a c t i n g a c t i v i t i e s on t h e b i r d s o r t h e i r environment.  The d r a f t c o n v e n t i o n on M i g r a t o r y S p e c i e s a l s o c o n t a i n s s t r o n g statements o f a s i m i l a r  nature:  b.  p r e v e n t , remove, o r compensate f o r t h e adverse e f f e c t s o f , d i s t u r b a n c e s and o b s t a c l e s t h a t s e r i o u s l y impede o r p r e v e n t t h e m i g r a t i o n o f t h e m i g r a t o r y s p e c i e s concerned;  c.  prevent, reduce o r c o n t r o l f a c t o r s t h a t a r e l i k e l y t o i n f l u e n c e unfavourably the conservation status o f the migratory species concerned o r p r e v e n t improvement o f t h a t s t a t u s ; ... ( A r t i c l e I I I (2)).  - 98 Connected with this i s the need for consideration of the incremental effects of proposed projects which may have beneficial or adverse impacts on the herd and i t s ecosystem.  As explained i n Chapter Four,  the Dempster i s f i r s t i n a l i s t of development projects, including pipelines, hydro projects and increased mining activities, which may seriously impinge upon the welfare of the herd and i t s habitat. Incremental effects of proposed projects have not been addressed in previous conventions.  5.1.7 Review To what extent does the agreement provide for automatic review of the mandate, objectives and success of the management plans? Is there f l e x i b i l i t y to permit reorientation of management objectives i n light of changing needs and perceptions?  Rationale and Recommendation: Review i s required for feedback on the implementation and success of the management plans according to their objectives.  There are  numerous examples of failures i n planning and management processes due to a lack of feedback as to implementation, success and needed adaptation to changing environmental and social conditions. The African convention of 1968 has a review mechanism for 5-year intervals, and the draft Migratory Species convention for at least four years.  The caribou convention should be reviewed at least  every five years, and more often i f the contracting governments or commission state the need for such a review.  The management  - 99 plan should be reviewed when necessary, upon recommendation o f the advisory boards or commission.  Experimentation i n management  and i n s t i t u t i o n a l arrangements should a l s o be included.  A  comparative review o f these approaches can then provide a stronger management framework.  - 100 CHAPTER VI CRITIQUE OF THE DRAFT CONVENTION' FOR THE CONSERVATION OF MIGRATORY CARIBOU AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT 6.1  OVERVIEW  The preceding chapter has outlined numerous essential elements for an international convention on the conservation and management of the Porcupine Caribou herd and i t s environment.  These c r i t e r i a are then  expressed in the form of recommendations respecting a proposed Migratory Caribou Convention between Canada and the United States. With these points in mind, we w i l l now examine the latest draft (May 14, 1979) of a proposed Convention currently being negotiated between the two countries.  To put this analysis in perspective, a brief overview of the contents of the draft convention follows.  The Convention Between the United  States of America and Canada for the Conservation of Migratory Caribou and their Environment has been i n the drafting stages since the Hon. Len Marchand announced the intention of discussion with the U.S. on an agreement to protect the Porcupine Caribou in July of 1978. Following consultation with the t e r r i t o r i a l governments and native communities in Canada, the Canadian draft of March 1979 was released.  This draft was discussed at a meeting i n Whitehorse on April 30 - May 1, where representatives from federal and t e r r i t o r i a l governments and native organizations met with their U.S. counterparts.  This meeting,  together with subsequent discussions between the Canadian Wildlife Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, resulted in a May  14 d r a f t that in  (Appendix II). w h i c h  the  M a y 14 d r a f t  regard  to  convention  habitat, asserts  the  —  aboriginal  for  the  social, the  significantly  weaker  the  basic  p r i o r i t y use  of  the  p r i o r i t y use  and  action to  habitat  sites.  convention with ecological  commitment breaks  than  These  the  the  the  of  the  the  herd,  of  body o f  down because  the  and  of  the  basic  agreement  strongly  caribou, and  rationale  and commitment  so often  clauses  their p  habitat,  environment  convention,  operative  the  The preamble  herd  i t s  of  noted  version  c a r i b o u and  p r i n c i p l e s form the  appearance  March  rationale  and c o n s e r v a t i o n o b j e c t i v e s  Within  s h o u l d be  i n v o l v e m e n t i n management  protect  the  It  caribou.  principles of conservation of  government.  6.2  discussed below.  c o n s e r v a t i o n and management  and cooperative sensitive  i s  -  enforceability of  and n a t i v e the  is  101  espoused  however,  to  by  this  have  no  enforceability.  parties  to  conserve  CONSERVATION OF LANDS  The  preamble  the  caribou herds  great  and  clearly states  the  environment  must  be p r o t e c t e d  Following  " . . .  the  and the  against  preamble,  objective  of  the  intent  of  constitute  irreplaceable value"  "...  general  which  the  and  to  habitat  degradation  Article  11(1)  the  a unique natural  conserve utilized i f  . . .  rather  their  resource  environment  by these caribou [they  are]  to  be  The P a r t i e s s h a l l c o n s e r v e c a r i b o u h e r d s and t h e ecosystem o f which caribou are part for the longt e r m w e l l - b e i n g o f c a r i b o u and so as t o n a x i m i z e the t o t a l social benefit, . . . and so t h a t r i s k o f i r r e v e r s i b l e change o r l o n g - t e r m adverse e f f e c t s as a r e s u l t o f use o f c a r i b o u o r t h e i r h a b i t a t i s r e d u c e d t o a inunimum.  —  herds conserved".  ambiguously states  convention:  of  the  - 102  -  The f i r s t half states the laudable objective of long-term conservation of the herd and habitat.  Nevertheless, a key phrase requires  iimximizing total social benefit.  This requirement leaves the door open,  for development interests to assert that alternate land uses affecting the herd and/or i t s habitat (i.e. the ecosystem)! yield the greater social benefit.  Such, use obviously could lead to the ultimate  destruction of both.  The second half i s equally puzzling as to how  the intent can be implemented.  If i t i s agreed that the caribou herd  truly does represent,a "unique resource" of "irreplaceable value", then proposals with any risk of "irreversible change" or "long-term adverse effects" simply should not be allowed to reach, fruition.  Provisions, regarding the legal status of conservation areas or reserves are weaker s t i l l .  The preamble states that the "continued  existence"  lof caribouj i n large viable, herds depends upon the maintenance intact of populations over large areas of land (emphasis added),. Article II (.71 emphasized this point by stating that "... caribou populations and habitats must be understood as ecological units without regard to p o l i t i c a l boundaries", once again implying the need for preservation of large tracts of land.  The proposed convention however, f a i l s to  suggest mechanisms to reserve these lands.  There i s no clause which  explicitly recommends that the contracting governments set aside: .reserves necessary to ensure the conservation of the caribou and their habitat. Further, any recommendations by the proposed Migratory Caribou Commission (established under Article III) for measures "... to ensure the conservation and enhancement of caribou.habitat and the ecosystem of which caribou are a part" (Article rv(2)), are subject to the caveat:  - 103 "to the extent p r a c t i c a b l e " .  Who  detemuines what i s f e a s i b l e o r n o t ?  T h i s d i s c r e t i o n , presumably l e f t t o the c o n t r a c t i n g governments, once a g a i n opens t h e door t o p o t e n t i a l h a b i t a t  degradation.  R e s p e c t i n g t h e immediate need f o r p r o t e c t i o n o f " c r i t i c a l zones such a s c a l v i n g and  staging areas,  t h e d r a f t c o n t a i n s an  c l a u s e t h a t r e n d e r s t h e whole c l a u s e m e a n i n g l e s s . recognizes  habitat"  Article  escape  IV(3)  t h e need by empowering t h e ODmmission t o i d e n t i f y s u c h  s e n s i t i v e a r e a s and  t o "...  recommend t o t h e P a r t i e s measures t o  govern t h e use o r m o d i f i c a t i o n o f such a r e a s " . recommendations a r e t o be  However, t h e s e  implemented:  e x c e p t where, i n t h e o p i n i o n o f a P a r t y , t h e n e t b e n e f i t s o f compliance a r e a p p r e c i a b l y outweighed by t h e n e t b e n e f i t s o f o t h e r competing r e g i o n a l o r n a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t s ( A r t i c l e 1 1 ( 2 ) , emphasis added). T h i s o v e r r i d i n g c a v e a t i m p l i e s t h a t some s o r t o f economic a n a l y s i s (e.g. c o s t / b e n e f i t ) w i l l be a p p l i e d t o proposed p r o j e c t s w i t h i n i d e n t i f i e d " s e n s i t i v e h a b i t a t components" a s v i r t u a l l y any r e s o u r c e  (Rees  1979).  The  the  problem,  economist w i l l r e a d i l y admit, i s t h e  failure  o f economics t o a d e q u a t e l y measure a e s t h e t i c o r i n t a n g i b l e v a l u e s . I f a q u a n t i f i a b l e monetary v a l u e g i v e n the p r e s s u r e s and r e s o u r c e and  i s the o v e r r i d i n g c r i t e r i o n then,  t o open up t h e N o r t h t o i n d u s t r i a l development  e x t r a c t i o n , t h i s caveat s p e l l s d e s t r u c t i o n o f the herd  habitat.  As recommended i n C h a p t e r F i v e , an h i e r a r c h y o f c o n s e r v a t i o n  lands,  i n c l u d i n g p r o h i b i t e d uses w i t h i n s e n s i t i v e zones, i s n e c e s s a r y t o p r o t e c t t h e c a r i b o u and  t h e i r environment.  Any  such c o n c e p t i s  - 104 lacking from the proposed convention and represents a serious weakness. Further, Chapters Two through Five clearly substantiate the need for the planning and conservation of lands (i.e. ecosystems), not just The situation calls for an initiative on land use planning in the northern Yukon with conservation objectives i n a central position. This emphasis i s missing from the draft convention.  6.3  MANAGEMENT AND PJJX5ULATION  Management authority i s provided for by the establishment of a Migratory Caribou Commission and the specification of i t s powers and duties. The Migratory Caribou Commission, established under Article III, i s comprised of 10 members, 5 from each country.  Native peoples from  each country must be represented on the Commission. As the other members are not specified, there i s the possibility of neutral bureaucrats being appointed rather than conservation and w i l d l i f e oriented individuals.  As recommended i n Chapter Five, the International  Joint Commission (IJC), comprised of renowned and dedicated individuals in the resource disciplines, may be a good model to follow., i n conjunction with an operational arm at the management and research level.  Article 111(4) provides the Commission with the powers to appoint two advisory committees - a Scientific Committee composed of specialists in caribou conservation from the scientific community, and a Subsistence Committee.  Both the Commission and the advisory committees  may hold public hearings.  The Commission has the additional power of  appearing and presenting evidence before any public body regarding the conservation of caribou and their habitat.  The powers and duties  - 105 of the advisory committees are outlined i n Article V. The cxammittees are essentially concerned with advising the Ctommission on matters of harvest, conservation and enhancement of the ecosystem of which caribou are a part, and on the need for research and management programs.  Funding and further personnel support appear to be adequately handled in Article 111(6) and (8).  The Commission's authority i s set out i n Article IV. The powers include recommendations on establishing the maximum allowable harvest of caribou and i t s allocation between parties;  recommendations on  measures for the long-term conservation and enhancement of caribou habitat and the ecosystem of which caribou are a part; identification of, and recommendations on the measures for the use of sensitive habitat components; and the publication of annual summary reports on actions taken by the Commission and the parties i n implementation of the intent of the convention.  Enforcement and monitoring of these measures  and the development of any pursuant management plan i s not addressed.  Nevertheless, as noted above, the recommendations of the Commission respecting allocation of harvest (Article IV (1)) and the preservation of sensitive habitat ccmponents (Article IV(3)) are to be implemented except where they provide a lesser net benefit than another proposal for the area.  Recommendations on general habitat protection  (Article IV(2)) and other unspecified conservation measures (Article IV(4)) are to be implemented "to the extent practicable".  One might  - 106 w e l l ask t h e n whether t h e Ctommission has any management a u t h o r i t y whatsoever.  Of f u r t h e r s i g n i f i c a n c e i s A r t i c l e 11(4) which s t a t e s t h a t : The P a r t i e s s h a l l p r o v i d e i n a t i m e l y f a s h i o n t o the Ctommission i n f o r m a t i o n on p r o p o s a l s f o r major a c t i v i t i e s which may b e n e f i c i a l l y o r d e t r i m e n t a l l y a f f e c t t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n o f c a r i b o u and t h e i r h a b i t a t . T h i s may  seem a s t e p i n t h e r i g h t d i r e c t i o n , y e t t h e r e i s no  recommendation i n the planning  t h a t t h e Ctommission be a b l e t o r e v i e w p r o p o s a l s stage,  early  and t o have membership on f u t u r e l a n d use  committees o r s i m i l a r d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g b o d i e s . I n d i a n and N o r t h e r n A f f a i r s  As t h e Department o f  (DINA) manages most Crown l a n d s i n t h e  N o r t h , w i t h c l e a r l y d e f i n e d o b j e c t i v e s towards e x p l o r a t i o n and development o f n o r t h e r n  resources,  a balance requires that the  Ctommission be i n v o l v e d i n d e c i s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g outside o f reserved  l a n d u s e s w i t h i n and  lands.  P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n by means o f commentary on t h e Commission's recommendations  i s provided  f o r under A r t i c l e VT(2) and  (3).  An  emergency c l a u s e a u t h o r i z e s w a i v e r o f t h e p r o c e s s o f p u b l i c comment i n order  f o r immediate a c t i o n t o be taken by t h e Commission  VI(4)).  This i n i t s e l f i s not s u f f i c i e n t .  (Article  The p u b l i c s h o u l d  be  provided with a d d i t i o n a l opportunities t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the d e c i s i o n making p r o c e s s .  F o r example, A r t i c l e 11(4) c i t e d above s h o u l d  be  changed t o a l l o w f o r p u b l i c comment i n advance o f any commitment b e i n g made r a t h e r t h a n a s v a g u e l y s t a t e d —  " i n a timely  fashion".  - 107 6.4  -  (XORDINATED RESEARCH  A r t i c l e V I I b r i e f l y s e t s out the i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r research: The P a r t i e s s h a l l undertake t h e r e s e a r c h n e c e s s a r y t o meet t h e purposes and o b j e c t i v e s o f t h i s C o n v e n t i o n . To a c h i e v e t h e s e ends, t h e P a r t i e s may r e q u e s t t h e S c i e n t i f i c Committee t o c o o r d i n a t e t h e c o o p e r a t i v e u n d e r t a k i n g o f such r e s e a r c h . I t appears t h a t e a c h c o u n t r y w i l l undertake  independent  r e s e a r c h and  d i s c u s s r e s u l t s i n t h e S c i e n t i f i c Committee, as suggested i n Chapter F i v e o f t h i s t h e s i s .  Of c o n c e r n however, i s t h e l a c k o f  e x p l i c i t mention o f m o n i t o r i n g programs and e x p e r i m e n t a l measures t o t a c k l e such e x i s t i n g major problems as t h e Dempster Highway and s i m i l a r b a r r i e r s .  T h i s s h o u l d be c l e a r l y s p e c i f i e d as a p r i o r i t y  research area i n A r t i c l e VII.  A r t i c l e V(2-c) o f t h e d r a f t  convention  on t h e C o n v e r s a t i o n o f M i g r a t o r y S p e c i e s c o n t a i n s a s i m i l a r c l a u s e . The l a c k o f s p e c i f i c r e s e a r c h f o c i i s a g e n e r a l problem, s i n c e t h e May  d r a f t does n o t l i s t any r e s e a r c h elements as d i d t h e March d r a f t  in Article  6.5  VTI(2a-i).  NATIVE USE AND  INVOLVEMENT  The p r i n c i p l e g i v i n g r e c o g n i t i o n t o a b o r i g i n a l involvement  i n caribou  c o n s e r v a t i o n and management p l a n n i n g and t o p r i o r i t y a b o r i g i n a l i s b o l d l y s t a t e d i n t h e preamble by t h e  following:  KNOWING t h a t c e r t a i n i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e o f A l a s k a i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s and a b o r i g i n a l p e o p l e o f t h e Yukon and Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s i n Canada depend upon c a r i b o u f o r t h e i r s u r v i v a l and e x i s t e n c e e i t h e r w h o l l y o r i n p a r t , r e c o g n i z i n g t h a t t h i s dependence w i l l c o n t i n u e , and c o n v i n c e d t h a t such p e o p l e s h o u l d be i n v o l v e d i n management o f c a r i b o u ;  use  - 108 RECOGNIZING that use of caribou by indigenous or aboriginal people for their own nutritional or other essential domestic needs should have priority over any other use and that state and t e r r i t o r i a l governments of the Parties have implemented policies to this end. One would assume these concepts would be embodied in the text of the convention, but such i s not the case.  The omission of aboriginal  priority use and dependency on the caribou i s puzzling, especially in light of i t s previous inclusion i n Article II (5) of the March 1979 draft —  "The Parties agree that the domestic use of caribou  by indigenous people w i l l have priority over any other use".  The  May draft therefore again ignores i t s own noble intent, and denies aboriginal peoples a legal basis for priority use.  These defects w i l l  cause certain rejection of the draft convention by native organizations and w i l l exacerbate the animosity created by government promises which subsequently are not carried to fruition.  The only opportunity for native participation i s provided i n the establishment of a Subsistence Committee under Article 111.(4) "... consisting of representatives of those people who traditionally take caribou for their own nutritional or other essential domestic needs". The duties and powers of this Committee as outlined i n Article V are purely of an advisory capacity. There i s no recommendation for native involvement i n training programs or on research and management teams. Nor does there appear to be any attempt at tapping the intuitive knowledge held by natives concerning caribou and their habitat.  While these requirements need not be specified as the  articles of the convention, they should at least be recognized as  -  109  -  i m p o r t a n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n s t o be implemented p a r a l l e l t o t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f any c o n v e n t i o n .  T h i s p o i n t s h o u l d be c a r e f u l l y examined w i t h  n a t i v e communities and t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n s .  6.6  COMPATIBLE/INCCayiPATIBLE LAND USES AND ACTIVITIES  Respecting the  n e g a t i v e l y impacting  l a n d u s e s , A r t i c l e 11.(6) c o n t a i n s  clause: The P a r t i e s s h a l l a v o i d t o t h e e x t e n t p r a c t i c a b l e t e r r a i n a l t e r a t i o n o r o t h e r a c t i v i t i e s t h a t would s i g n i f i c a n t l y impede, d e l a y o r d i s r u p t c a r i b o u h e r d movement o r a f f e c t e s s e n t i a l c a r i b o u b e h a v i o u r , and t o m o d i f y , where f e a s i b l e , e x i s t i n g a r t i f i c i a l f e a t u r e s t h a t have t h a t e f f e c t .  Once a g a i n t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f f e r e d by t h i s c l a u s e i s d u b i o u s due t o t h e p h r a s e " t o t h e e x t e n t p r a c t i c a b l e " and "where f e a s i b l e " .  The  c o n c e p t s o f compensation t o n a t i v e s f o r d i s t u r b a n c e s  t o the caribou  and t h e i r h a b i t a t , o r r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f h a b i t a t t e m p o r a r i l y used f o r resource  e x p l o i t a t i o n are not included.  w h i c h s h o u l d be c l o s e l y examined. e x p l o i t t h e North's o i l ,  T h i s i s an i m p o r t a n t  omission  With the i n c r e a s i n g pressure t o  gas and m i n e r a l r e s o u r c e s ,  and i t s hydro  p o t e n t i a l , r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f t h e h a b i t a t i s a n e c e s s a r y element. t o o , i s compensation t o n a t i v e h a r v e s t e r s  So,  f o rthe potential loss o f  n u t r i t i o n a l v a l u e s i n c a r i b o u and f o r h a b i t a t d e g r a d a t i o n o f traditional native  The  convention  lands.  does n o t e x p l i c i t l y d e a l w i t h c o m p a t i b l e o r p o t e n t i a l l y  b e n e f i c i a l l a n d u s e s and a c t i v i t i e s o t h e r t h a n by s t a t i n g t h a t t h e Commission be p r o v i d e d w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n o f p r o p o s a l s  f o r such  - 110 projects  ( A r t i c l e 11(4)).  As p r e v i o u s l y s t r e s s e d , t h e c h a n g i n g  social  v a l u e s and p e r c e p t i o n s o f w i l d l i f e and w i l d e r n e s s r e q u i r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f a l l t y p e s o f c o n s e r v a t i o n - o r i e n t e d management p l a n s o u t s i d e o f the reserve areas, i . e . w i t h i n the h i e r a r c h y o f conservation lands. Of importance h e r e i s t h e s o c i a l and economic v a l u e s o f c a r i b o u and t h e i r h a b i t a t f o r v a r i o u s forms o f n o n - i n t e n s i v e r e c r e a t i o n a l p u r s u i t s . There s i m p l y must be examination  o f t h i s p o t e n t i a l and i n c l u s i o n o f  a clause t o allow i t t o occur i n the f u t u r e .  L i n k e d w i t h t h i s must  be t h e r i g h t o f n a t i v e p e o p l e s f o r p r i o r i t y b i d s on any i n t h i s t y p e o f p l a n n i n g and r e s o u r c e  involvement  use.  The c o n v e n t i o n does e x p r e s s an ecosystem approach t o c o n s e r v a t i o n , management and p l a n n i n g .  This includes the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f  critical  h a b i t a t and s p e c i a l p r o t e c t i v e measures o v e r t h e use o f t h e s e (within the o v e r r i d i n g caveat o f g r e a t e s t net b e n e f i t ) .  areas,  T h i s ecosystem  approach however, must be c a r r i e d a s t e p f u r t h e r , and become t h e f o c u s o f n o r t h e r n Yukon l a n d use p l a n n i n g .  Indeed, e s t a b l i s h m e n t  o f a h i e r a r c h y o f c o n s e r v a t i o n l a n d s as d e s c r i b e d i n Chapter s h o u l d be a key element i n t h e o v e r a l l p l a n n i n g framework. framework must then be d i r e c t l y l i n k e d w i t h t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n management o f t h e P o r c u p i n e h e r d and i t s h a b i t a t .  Five This and  As such, t h e l i n k a g e  s h o u l d appear i n t h e proposed c o n v e n t i o n , as f o r example, by a  statement  o f agreement on e s t a b l i s h i n g a l a n d use p l a n n i n g framework f o r t h e area.  6.7 The  REVIEW f i n a l element i s the r e v i e w o f t h e mandate, o b j e c t i v e s and  success  - Ill o f t h e c o n v e n t i o n and o f t h i s i s found  i t s management p l a n s .  The o n l y c o n s i d e r a t i o n  i n A r t i c l e X(3) w h i c h s t a t e s :  At the request o f e i t h e r Party c o n s u l t a t i o n s h a l l be conducted w i t h a v i e w o f c o n v e n i n g a meeting o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e two P a r t i e s t o amend t h i s convention. As s t r e s s e d i n C h a p t e r F i v e , a r e v i e w mechanism i s an  essential  element f o r p r o v i d i n g feedback i n t h e p l a n n i n g and management p r o c e s s . The c l a u s e as s t a t e d i s n o t adequate, and l i n e s recommended i n t h e p r e v i o u s  6.8  should f o l l o w along  the  chapter.  CONCLUSION  In summary, t h e May  d r a f t M i g r a t o r y C a r i b o u Convention  is  unacceptable.  I n t h e g e n e r a l a r e a o f c o n s e r v a t i o n and management o f t h e c a r i b o u and t h e i r h a b i t a t , t h i s d r a f t r e p r e s e n t s a s i g n i f i c a n t s t e p backwards i n comparison w i t h e a r l i e r d r a f t s and o t h e r c o n v e n t i o n s . c a v e a t s o f "where f e a s i b l e " and  " t o t h e e x t e n t p r a c t i c a b l e " dominate  t h e key a r t i c l e s r e s p e c t i n g c o n s e r v a t i o n o f t h e h e r d and The  i m p l i e d economic t e s t i n A r t i c l e 11(2)  p r o p o s a l s t o be g i v e n t h e go-ahead due national interests". regarded  The  i t s ecosystem.  p r o v i d e s an e a s y o u t f o r  t o t h e i r " r e g i o n a l and  The d r a f t c o n v e n t i o n as s t a t e d , can h a r d l y be  as a s i n c e r e commitment t o c o n s e r v a t i o n o f c a r i b o u and  h a b i t a t , c l a i m e d as "a unique n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e o f g r e a t  their  and  irreplaceable value".  On another  l e v e l , t h i s proposed c o n v e n t i o n has t h e p o t e n t i a l o f  strengthening the perspectives f o r g l o b a l conservation  strategies,  but i t must be r e n e g o t i a t e d t o be a c c e p t a b l e and t o r e a l i z e t h a t  - 112 potential.  There has never been a comprehensive planning and  management conservation strategy on the global scale. Support for such a common goal i s nevertheless of urgent importance. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN). i s currently working i n conjunction with the World Wildlife Fund and the United Nations Environmental Program on a World Conservation Strategy, represented by the draft convention on Conservation of Migratory Species.  The draft strategy calls  for p o l i t i c a l and financial cxDimdtment to conservation principles and practices, for conservation educational programs, and for national conservation strategies.  Regarding wildlife and harvest  pressures, the comment was recently made that "... i f we are to have a balanced relationship with wildlife, we have to accept the fact that wildlife w i l l be exploited and we have to argue for i t s sustainable exploitation and the retention of habitat" (Allen 1978). It i s towards these goals that conservation organizations i n Canada and the United States should be oriented regarding caribou and habitat resources in northeastern Alaska, northern Yukon and northwestern Northwest Territories.  - 113 LITERATURE CITED Alaska Highway Pipeline Panel, 1978a "Mammals" i n I n i t i a l Environmental Evaluation of Highway Use and Pipeline Development Within the Dempster Corridor, Yukon and Northwest Territories, Vol.1: Physical and Biological Environments - Dempster and Klondike Segments, Winnipeg, 1978. 1978b, The Porcupine Caribou Herd and the Dempster Corridor, pamphlet. Allen, Robert, 1978 "IUCN's World Conservation Strategy... New Battle for Wildlife", i n International Wildlife, Vol.8, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 1978, p.17. Allison, Lorraine, "Migratory Bird Sanctuaries i n the Northwest Territories: A Background Paper" (Canadian Wildlife Service, 1977, Preliminary Report for review purposes only). Alverson, D.L. and G.J. Paulik, "Objectives and Problems of Managing Aquatic Living Resources" i n Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Vol.30, No.12, Part 2, 1973, pp.1936-1947. Bell, Howard and the Halibut No. 50,  F., Agreements, Conventions and Treaties Between Canada United States of America with Respect to the Pacific Fishery, International Pacific Halibut Commission Report 1969.  Bente, P.J. and D.G. Roseneau, 1978, An Aerial Photo-Estimate of the 1977 Porcupine Caribou Herd Population, Renewable Resources Consulting Services Ltd., Fairbanks, Alaska. Berger, Justice Thomas, 1977, Northern Frontier Northern Homeland: The Report of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry, Vol.1 (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services, 1977). Bergerud, A.T., 1971, The Population Dynamics of Newfoundland Caribou, Wildlife Monograph Series, No. 25. , 1974, The Role of the Environment i n the Aggregation, Movement and Disturbance Behaviour of Caribou, pp.552-584, i n V. Geist and F. Walter (eds.) The Behaviour of Ungulates and i t s relation to Management: The Papers of an International Symposium held at the University of Calgary, Alberta, 2-5 Nov. 1971, IUCN Publ. New Series No. 24. Calef, G.W. and G.M. Lortie, 1971, Observations of the Porcupine Caribou Herd April 1 - Sept. 22, 1971. App.l: Wildlife, i n Interim Report No. 1. Towards an . Environmental Impact Assessment of a Gas Pipeline from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, to Alberta. Environment Protection Board, Winnipeg.  - 114 , 1973, Observations of the Porcupine Herd, 1972. Sec.l, App.l: Wildlife; Interim Report No. 3. Towards an Environmental Impact Assessment of the Portion of the Mackenzie Gas Pipeline from Alaska to Alberta. Environment Protection Board, Winnipeg. Calef,G. 1974 The Predicted Effects of the Canadian Arctic Gas Pipeline Project on the Porcupine Caribou Herd. Ch.5 i n Environmental Impact Assessment of the Portion of the Mackenzie Gas Pipeline from Alaska to Alberta, Vol.IV, Research Reports, Environment Protection Board, Winnipeg. , 1976, Numbers Beyond Counting, Miles Beyond Measure. Audubon 78:4 (1976). Committee for Original Peoples Entitlement, 1977, Agreement i n Principle for the Boundary Between Old Crow Lands and Inuvialuit Lands, dated March 9, 1977. , 1979, Letter to Minister Faulkner, March 6, 1979. Convention Between the United States of America and Canada for the Conservation of Migratory Caribou and their Environment (various unpublished drafts, 1978 and 1979). Crutchfield, James A. & Giulio Pontecorvo, The Pacific Salmon Fisheries: A Study of Irrational Conservation, Johns Hopkins Press, Maryland, 1969. Curatolo, J. and G. Moore, 1975, Home Range and Population Dynamics of Grizzly Bears (ursus arctus h.) i n the Eastern Brooks Range, Alaska, i n L.P. Horstman & K.H. McCourt (eds.) Studies of Large Mammals along the Proposed Mackenzie Valley Gas Pipeline Route from Alaska to B.C.: Arctic Gas Biological Report Series, Vol.32, Ch.l. & D.G. Roseneau, 1977, The Distribution and Movements of the Porcupine Caribou Herd i n Northeast Alaska and the Yukon Territory, 1976. Renewable Resources Consulting Services Ltd., unpublished report prepared for Canadian Arctic Gas Study Ltd. and Alaskan Arctic Gas Study Ltd. Davis, James L., 1978, Sex and Age Composition of the Porcupine Caribou Herd. Final Report: Federal Aid i n Wildlife Restoration W179 and 1710, Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, Juneau, Alaska. Dempster Highway Management Plan, Northern Roads and Airstrips Division, DINA, January 1978. Department of Fisheries and Environment, June 6, 1975 Press Release, Romeo LeBlanc, Fisheries and Marine Service.  - 115 , July 6, 1978 Press Release, Len Marchand, "Canada Seeks Agreement with the United States to Protect Northern Caribou Herd". Department of Indian and Northern Affairs (DINA), 1972, Canada's North 1970-1980, Statement of the Government of Canada i n Northern Development i n the 1970's, March 28, 1972. , 1977, Northern Yukon: New Parks Resource Analysis Report, (ed.) Ian MacNeil, Parks Canada, March 1977. , Parks Canada Policy Draft 1978. , 1978, The Northern Yukon: An Ecological Land Survey, Parks Canada. , Mines and Minerals Activities 1977, Minister of Supply & Services, Ottawa, 1978. , Communique #1-7792, Jan.23, 1978, "Faulkner Announces Public Consultation for Six Arctic Wilderness Areas i n National Park System". , Communique #1-7821, July 6, 1978, "Faulkner Announces Northern Yukon Land Withdrawal". , Northern Yukon Conservation Planning Task Force Report, 1978 (internal.'- document). , Terms of Reference for the Task Force on the Porcupine Caribou Range, March 1979. Dosman, Edgar J. The National Interest: The Politics of Northern Development 1968-1975, McClelland and Steward Limited, Toronto, 1975. Ecological Sites i n Northern Canada (ed.) David N. Nettleship and Pauline A. Smith, Canadian Committee for the International Biological Programme, Conservation Terrestrial - Panel 9, 1975. Ecological Sites i n Subarctic Canada (ed.) Dorothy K.B. Beckel, Canadian Committee for the International Biological Programme, Conservation Terrestrial - Panel 10, 1975. Foothills Pipe Lines (Yukon) Ltd., 1978a, Winter Distribution of the Porcupine Caribou Herds i n Relation to the Proposed Dempster Lateral Pipeline Route. Prepared by Renewable Resources Consulting Services Ltd., Edmonton, unpublished. , 1978b, Spring Migration of the Porcupine Caribou Herd i n Relation to the Proposed Dempster Lateral Pipeline Route. Prepared by Renewable Resources Consulting Services Ltd., Edmonton, unpublished. Fox, Irving, 1978 - personal ccsmjunicatipn^  - 116 -  Gamble, Don J., Is Arctic Offshore Drilling for the Birds: Some Technical and Policy Concerns of Environmentalists, Paper presented to the 44th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, Toronto, March 24-28, 1979. Gwitcha-C^itchen-Ginkhye (Yukon Flats People Speak), letter dated Novi 16, 1978, Old Crow, Yukon Territory, re: Management Regulations for the Porcupine Herd. Harr±ngton,C.R., 1977, Pleistocene Mammals of the Yukon Territory, PhD. Dissertation, University of Alberta, Edmonton. Holt, S.J. and L.M. Talbot, 1978, New Principles for the Conservation of Wild Living Resources. Wildlife Monographs 59: April 1978. Hunt, Constance D., 1979 draft: Legal and Institutional Alternatives for a Wilderness Park i n the Northern Yukon. Inuvialuit Nunungat, The Proposal for an Agreement-in-Principle to Achieve the Settlement of Inuvialuit Land Rights i n the Western Arctic Region of the Northwest and Yukon Territories (Inuvik: Committee for Orignal Peoples Entitlement, 1977). Inuvialuit Land Rights Settlement: Agreement-in-Principle (1978). Irving, W.N. and CR. Harrington, 1973, Upper Pleistocene RadiocarbonDated Artifacts from the Northern Yukon. Science 179 (4071): 335-340. Jakimchuk, R.D., E.A. DeBock, H.J. Russel and G.P. Sememchuk, 1974, A Study of the Porcupine Caribou Herd, 1971. Ch.l i n R.D. Jakimchuk, ed. The Porcupine Caribou Herd - Canada. Arctic Gas Biological Report Series Vol.4. Kelsall, J.P., 1968, The Migratory Barren-Ground Caribou of Canada. Canadian Wildlife Service Monograph Series No. 3. Kevan, P.G., 1970, The Caribou of the Northern Yukon Territory: A History of Man's Interest i n Them, with Special Reference to Wildlife Biology. Canadian Wildlife Service, unpublished typescript. Klein, David R., 1979, The Alaska O i l Pipeline i n Retrospect: Paper presented to the 44th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, Toronto, March 24-28, 1979. Knight, H.Gary, 1975 (ed.) The Future of International Fisheries Management, The American Society of International Law, Minnesota. Koers, Albert W., 1973, International Regulation of Marine Fisheries: A Study of Regional Fisheries Organizations, Fishing News (Books). Ltd., England. Keith, Anthony, March. 28, 1979 - personal communication.  - 117 Larkin, Peter, 1979, personal communication, April 1979. Laycock, G., 1976, Our Last Arctic Wilderness - A Gift Denied?, Audubon 78:4 (1976), pp.80-102. Lernarquand, David and Anthony Scott, "Canada-U.S. Environmental Relations" i n the Proceedings of the Academy of P o l i t i c a l Science, Vol.32, No.2, 1976, pp.149-163. Leonard, Richard M., 1978a, "Arctic Progress Report, Cooperation Along Alaska's Border" i n The Living Wilderness, Vol.42, #142, July/Sept. 1978. , letter to Andrew Thompson, "Arctic International Wildlife Range, 1978b. LeResche, Robert E., 1975, Porcupine Caribou Herd Studies. Federal Aid Wildlife Restoration Report W175, Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, Juneau, Alaska. Lysyk, Kenneth M., E.E. Bonmer and W.L. Phelps, 1977, Alaska Highway Pipeline Inquiry (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada, 1977). MacLeod, William G., 1979, The Dempster Highway i n Northern Transitions: Northern Resource and Land Use Policy Study, Vol.1 (ed.) E.B. Peterson and J.B. Wright, Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, Ottawa, 1979. Mair, W.W., 1978, Caribou: Management of a V i t a l Resource, i n Northern Transitions Vol.11, pp.210-211 (ed.) E.B. Peterson and J.B. Wright, Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, Ottawa. McCourt, K.H., J.J. Russell, D. Doll, J.D. Feist and W. McCrory, 1974, Distribution and Movements of the Porcupine Caribou Herd in the Yukon, 1972. Ch.II i n R.D. Jakimchuk (ed.) The Porcupine Caribou Herd i n Canada, Arctic Gas Biological Report Series Vol.4. Mining Division, O i l and Gas Division, DINA, personal communication, Feb.15, 1979. Morlan, R.E., 1973, The Later Prehistory of the Middle Porcupine Drainage, Northern Yukon Territory, National Museum of Man, Archaeological Survey of Canada, Mercury Series, Paper No. 11. , 1978, "Early Man i n Northern Yukon Territory: Perspectives as of 1977" i n Early Man i n America From a Circum-Pacific Perspective (ed.) Alan L. Bryan, Univ. of Alberta, Dept. of Anthropology: Occasional Papers No. 1, pp.78-95, Edmonton, 1978. Myers, N., 1976, An Expanded Approach to the Problem of Disappearing Species. Science Vol.193, pp.198-202.  - 118 Nelson, Gordon J., "The Future Role of Conservation Reserves i n the Arctic" i n Contact Vol.IV :4, 1976. Northern Administration Branch, 1964, A Northern Roads Policy for the Future, DIAND, (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services, Jan.1964). Northern Transitions, Vol.11, 1978. Second National Workshop on People, Resources and the Environment North of 60°, Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, Ottawa, February 1978. Pegau, R.E. and J.E. Hemming, 1970, Caribou Report: Annual Project Segment Report, Federal Aid Wildlife Restoration Project, Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game. Pimlott, Douglas, D.Brown and K.Sam, 1976, O i l Under the Ice, Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, Ottawa, Canada. Porcupine Caribou Committee, 1978, Meetings held i n Delta, B.C., November 27 and 28. Porsild, A.E., 1945, Mammals of the Mackenzie Delta, Canadian Field Naturalist 59(1):4-22. Proceedings of the Arctic International Wildlife Range Conference, University of British Columbia Law Review, Vol.6, No. 1, Supplement, June 1971. Rees, William E., 1978, Development and Planning North of 60°: Past and Future, i n Northern Transitions Vol.11, (ed.) E.B. Peterson and J.B. Wright, Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, Ottawa, pp.42-62. , "Resource Development and the Quality of Life: Exploration on Two Frontiers", Urban Ecology, 3 (1978) 320-324. Robbins, W.J., 1963, Report by the Advisory Committee to the National Park Service on Research, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. Robinson, N.A., 1976, "Migratory Bird Species Conventions: Precedents and the U.S. - U.S.S.R. Agreement of November 1976", Earth Law Journal, Vol.2, Issue TV, Nov. 1976, p.415-422. Roseneau, D.G. and P.M. Stern, 1974, Distribution and Movements of the Porcupine Caribou Herd i n Northeastern Alaska, 1972. Arctic Gas Biological Report Series, Vol.7. Rees, William E., 1979, letter to Minister John Fraser, DINA June 28* f  - 119 a n d C . W a r b e l o w , 1974, D i s t r i b u t i o n and Movements o f the P o r c u p i n e C a r i b o u H e r d i n N o r t h e a s t e r n A l a s k a , Ch.4, i n K . H . M c C o u r t a n d L . P . H o r s t m a n ( e d s . ) S t u d i e s o f T a r g e Mammal Populations i n Northern A l a s k a , Yukon and Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s , 1973, A r c t i c G a s B i o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s S e r i e s , Vol.22. , J . C u r a t o l o a n d G . M o o r e , 1975, The D i s t r i b u t i o n and Movements o f the Porcupine Caribou Herd i n Northeastern A l a s k a and the Y u k o n T e r r i t o r y , 1974, C h . I I I i n S t u d i e s o f L a r g e Mammals A l o n g t h e Proposed Mackenzie V a l l e y Gas P i p e l i n e Route from A l a s k a t o B . C . (ed.) R . D . Jakimchuk, A r c t i c Gas B i o l o g i c a l R e p o r t S e r i e s , Vol.32. , 1976, The D i s t r i b u t i o n and Movements o f t h e P o r c u p i n e C a r i b o u H e r d i n N o r t h e a s t e r n A l a s k a a n d t h e Y u k o n T e r r i t o r y , 1975. C h . l i n R . D . J a k i m c h u k (ed.) S t u d i e s o f Mammals A l o n g t h e Proposed Mackenzie V a l l e y Gas P i p e l i n e Route, A r c t i c Gas B i o l o g i c a l R e p o r t S e r i e s , Vol.36. , 1979, Russell, Iowa  F.,  personal 1898,  communication,  Explorations  Scott, ,  the  1979.  Far North,  State  Univ.  Iowa,  City.  R u s s e l l , J o h n e t a l , 1978, b y Y u k o n Game B r a n c h , A p r i l 10, 1978. Russell,  i n  Jan.2.3,  John,  1979,  Progress Report on Dempster Highway Study f o r N o r t h e r n Roads and A i r s t r i p s , DIAND,  personal  Anthony,  "The  I.J.C.  personal  communication,  communication,  After  5 Years",  March  April  15.  unpublished  paper,  1977.  1979.  Simmons, Norman, 1979, personal communication, March 1979. Skoog, R.O., 1968, Ecology of the Caribou (Rangifer Tarandus granti) in Alaska. PhD Dissertation, Univ. of California, Berkeley. , 1979, Native Claims Settlements and Resource Management i n Alaska, paper presented to the 44th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, Toronto, March 24-28, 1979. Skud, Bernard E., Jurisdictional and Administrative Limitations Affecting Management of the Halibut Fishery, International Pacific Halibut Commission, Scientific Report No. 59, Seattle, Wash., 1976. Submission of the Council for Yukon Indians, Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry, November 1976.  - 120 Sullivan, P., 1979, Chief, O i l and Gas Division, DINA, personal ccmmunication, February 15, 1979. Surrendi, D.C. and E.A. DeBock, 1976, Seasonal Distribution, Population Status and Behaviour of the Porcupine Caribou Herd. Canadian Wildlife Service, Mackenzie Velley Pipeline Inquiry, Ottawa. Thomas, D.C, 1969, Population Estimates and Distribution of BarrenGround Caribou in Mackenzie District, Northwest Territories, Saskatchewan and Alberta. March to May 1967, CWS Report Series No. 9. Thompson, Andrew R., personal communication, Oct. 23, 1978. Toronto Globe and Mail, "Virtually Untapped Hydro Potential Holds Key to Long-Term Development of Yukon" by Thomas Kennedy, Jan.23, 1979. Treaties and Other International Agreements Containing Provisions on Commercial Fisheries, Marine Resources, Sport Fisheries and Wildlife to which the United States i s a Party, A Report prepared for the Committee on Commerce, U.S. Senate, by the Legislative Reference Service, Library of Congress, January 1965, pp.214-238. Turner, Robert D. and William E. Rees, 1973, "A Comparative Study of Parks Policy i n Canada and the United States" i n Nature Canada, Vol.2-.1:31-36, Jan/March 1973. Usher, Peter J., 1976, The Significance of the Land to Native Northerners, i n Canadian Association i n Support of the Native Peoples Bulletin, Vol.17 #1, March 1976, pp.4-8. , 1977, The Myths Behind Canadian Northern Development Policy, edited for Northern Perspectives Vol.6, No.l, 1978, as "Native Northerners: Are They Obstacles to Progress?". , 1978, Renewable Resource Development i n Northern Canada: Working Group Paper i n Northern Transitions Vol.11, Second National Workshop on People, Resources and the Environment North of 60°, Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, Ottawa, pp.154-162. Warbelow, C., D.G. Roseneau and P. Stern, 1975, The Kutchin Caribou Fences of Northeastern Alaska and the Northern Yukon. Ch.4 in R.D. Jakimchuk (ed.) Studies of Large Mammals Along the Proposed Mackenzie Valley Gas Pipeline Route from Alaska to B.C., Arctic Gas Biological Report Series, Vol.32. Wilimovsky, N.J. and D.L. Alverson "The Future of Fisheries", i n Modern Fishing Gear of the World: 3 (ed.) Hilmar Firstjonsson, Fishing News (Books) Ltd., 1971.  - 121 APPENDIX I REVIEW OF SELECTED INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE CONVENTIONS This appendix presents an analysis of selected international agreements currently i n force for the protection and management of wildlife, including birds and marine resources.  The agreements are  as follows: 1.  Migratory Birds Convention - 1916;  2.  Convention for the Protection, Preservation and Extension of the Sockeye Salmon Fishery of the Fraser River System - 1930;  3.  Convention relative to the Preservation for Fauna and Flora i n their Natural State - 1933;  4.  Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation i n the Western Hemisphere - 1940;  5.  International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling - 1946;  6.  Convention between the United States of America and Canada for the Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea - 1953;  7.  Interim Convention on Conservation'of"North"Pacific Fur Seals - 1957;  8.  African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources - 1968;  9.  Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage - 1972;  10. Convention between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Japan for the Protection of Migratory Birds in Danger of Extinction and their Environment - 1972; 11. Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears - 1973; 12. Convention between the US and the USSR concerning the Conservation of Migratory Birds and their Environment - 1976; 12. Second Revised Draft Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals with Explanatory Notes - 1978; 13.  The International Joint Commission.  - 122 Each agreement i s analysed within a common framework based on the principles and c r i t e r i a as outlined i n Chapter Five.  The objective i s  to ascertain whether elements of current agreements are applicable to the proposed Migratory Caribou Convention.  Concern i s therefore  focused on the substance of appropriate elements, and not on the style, wording or specific context.  This analysis i s not an  exhaustive substantive evaluation of a l l the listed conventions, as such was beyond the scope of this research. The analysis i s appropriate, however, i n sifting out the strengths and weaknesses of the conventions towards recommending elements for inclusion i n the proposed caribou convention.  Table 6 provides a summary of the  conventions to facilitate comparison between conventions on the seven elements.  1. MIGRATORY BIRDS CONVENTION - 1916 In 1916, the U.S. and Great Britain (on behalf of Canada) signed the Migratory Birds Convention i n order to provide a measure of protection for migratory game birds (waterfowl, cranes, r a i l s , shorebirds and pigeons), migratory insectivorous birds, and migratory non-game birds.  The Convention mainly addresses i t s e l f to closed hunting  seasons, prohibition of the taking of nests or eggs and the export of migratory birds or their eggs. An important clause i s Article VTII by which the parties undertake "... necessary measures for insuring the execution of the present Convention".  In Canada, this undertaking  has resulted i n the Migratory Birds Convention Act, R.S. 1970,  123 Table 6 - Comparative Analysis o f International W i l d l i f e Agreements - Summary Criteria Convention  Conservation  Management  Native Use  hunting prohibited within reserves development allowed  permit system Game o f f i c e r s  Yes  Sockeye Salmon Treaty 1930  principles of protection, preservation and enhancement o f a fishery flexible to changes i n environment  v i a Commission and pursuant regulations fragmented authority  No  Preservation o f Fauna and F l o r a 1933  only i f area i s established  indirectly  Yes  Nature Protection 1940  only i f area i s established  indirectly  No  managed e x p l o i t ation o f resource - regulations established and amended by Commission on conservation  v i a Commission and advisory committees  Yes, l i m i t e d to c e r t a i n species  Preservation o f Halibut Fishery 1953  maximum sustained y i e l d as a goal  according t o actions taken by Commission - fragmented authority  No  Conservation o f Fur Seals 1957  maximum sustainable productivity - levels of catch amendable  partially through a Commission  Yes, l i m i t e d to subsistence users and method.  1. Migratory Birds 1916  5. Regulation o f Whaling 1946  123a Other Environmental Concerns  Research  Regulation  Review  1. limited to pollution  no specific provision  No  No  2. removal of obstructions to migrations - consideration of pollution problems  wide scope via Commission  International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission  No  3. addressed i n definition of  no specific provision  No  No  4. addressed i n definition of reserves  agreement to cooperate on research  No  No  5. not explicit  coordination on research and monitoring via Commission  International whaling Commission  Implied through an amendment procedure  6. not explicit  no specific provision  International Pacific Halibut Commission  No  7. not explicit  coordinated research through  North Pacific Fur Seal Commission  In amended Convention  123b Conservation  Management  Native Use  according to type of reserve established - within land use planning framework  limited authority - no funding  not explicit  general policy on international protection and conservation of certain areas  yes, through the Committee  No  10. Migratory Birds US/Japan 1972  general policy on international protection and conservation of certain areas  No  Natives are exceptions to prohibition rule, for essential needs  11. Conservation of Polar Bears 1972  according to an ecosystem approach prohibition of k i l l i n g except by natives protection of c r i t i c a l areas  No  limited to natives essential needs  12. Migratory Birds US/USSR 1976  strict prohibition measures and encouragement of preserves  Yes, for habitat  limited to essential needs  13. Draft Convention of Migratory Species  strong commitment towards concluding agreements between parties and advisory committees  Yes, through the conference of the parties and advisory committees  ambiguous  Convention 8. African Convention 1968  World Cultural and Natural Heritage 1972  1  123c Other Environmental  Research  Regulation  Review  public education and research program to be  No  After years  Concerns  8. l i m i t e d  to definition of reserves established  five  initiated No  coordinated research encouraged  World Heritage Committee  NO  10.  limited to pollution  coordinated research  No  No  11.  No  coordinated research encouraged  No  No  12.  pollution rehabilitation and m i t i g a t i n g of adversely impacting activities  coordinated research  No  indirectly  13.  removal or compensation for adverse impacts on migratory species, their  coordinated research strongly encourated  the conference of the parties . and advisory committees  at least every three years.  9.  conservation s t a t u s and their migration  - 124 and pursuant Regulations amended each year, and the Migratory Birds Sanctuary Regulations amended in 1974.''"  Conservation The general purpose i s to protect migratory birds.  Together, the  Convention, the Act and Regulations provide specific rulings which regulate hunting methods, seasons, bag limits, the types of birds that may be hunted and exportation controls.  Habitat protection was  rendered less ambiguous in 1974 when the sanctuary regulations were amended.  "Sections 9 and 10 now authorize the minister to  issue such permits as are necessary 'to protect migratory birds or the eggs, nests or habitat of migratory birds within a migratory bird sanctuary' ... however doubt about the validity of the amendment remains" (Hunt 1979, p.39).  Hunt points out that the constitutional  validity of this legislation for migratory bird protection i s i n debate, and that a more secure status would be found in classifying bird sanctuaries as wildlife areas under the Canada Wildlife Act (Hunt 1979, p.40).  A serious deficiency from a conservation point of view i s the lack of provision for acquiring land for sanctuaries or reserves. Recognizing this weakness, section 10(1)(a) of the Canada Wildlife  1.  It should be noted that the Migratory Birds Convention has special constitutional status under section 132 of the B.N.A. Act. This section gives constitutional authority to Canada to carry out a l l obligations stemming from agreements made by the British government on Canada's behalf. As the Migratory Bird Convention was signed in 1916 by Britain, on behalf of Canada, the federal government has retained jurisdiction over migratory birds.  A c t was enacted  i n  125  -  1973:  1 0 . ( 1 ) The G o v e r n o r i n C o u n c i l may a u t h o r i z e t h e M i n i s t e r t o purchase, acquire o r lease any lands or interests t h e r e i n for the purpose o f research, conservation and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n respect o f (a) Since  migratory birds;  the  Department o f  most o f  the  i t  no doubt  w i l l  the  Department  Indeed, land for  land  be  permits within  No e x p l i c i t  been  the  i f  to  were  transfer  a  tracts  sanctuary  i n the  NWT w h e r e  the  Yukon,  DINA r e f u s e s  until  native  sanctuaries  acknowledgement  as  land  to  claims are  discussed  the  controls  government,  of  land  to  purposes.  sanctuaries  e x p l o r a t i o n and  i s made o f  (DINA)  provincial  large  (DOE) f o r  DINA a l s o may i s s u e the  i t  case  In  purposes  p.256).  north as  Environment  from DINA.  sanctuary  Indian and Northern A f f a i r s  reluctant  o f the  such has  leased  1977,  i n the  ...  are  lease  on  lands  settled  (Allison  development  below.  'ecosystem  concept'.  Management As noted to  take  above, the  subsequent  Article  measures  of  the  required to  of  and A c t .  the  collection  the  possibility  of  Convention allows the  implement the  A c t and Regulations have  through provision Regulations  VTII  addressed  Convention. the  game o f f i c e r s a n d a u t h o r i t y Funding beyond the  fines  is  not  o f management  indicated.  parties  issuance  management to  carry out  of permits  Under s e c t i o n  of prescribed areas  The  is  issue the and  4(2)(f),  suggested:  ...  the  (f)  Native  -  126  -  regulations  may  provide,  for the p r o h i b i t i o n o f the k i l l i n g , capturing, taking, injuring or molesting of migratory game, m i g r a t o r y i n s e c t i v o r o u s o r m i g r a t o r y n o n - g a m e b i r d s , o r the t a k i n g , i n j u r i n g , destruction or molestation of their nests or eggs, w i t h i n any p r e s c r i b e d area, and f o r the c o n t r o l and management o f s u c h a r e a s ; " (emphasis added)  Use  The C o n v e n t i o n r e f e r s However, 5(a) in  native  permits  hunting  Indians  Canada w i t h o u t  are  subsections  only to is  and  7 and  a  Hunt  ruled that  " . . .  and Eskimos on o r  Inuit  to  the  within (1979) act  based  upon a b o r i g i n a l  treaty".  There  is  a n d management  Under the  of Article  authority  35(1)  and  (2)  by migratory b i r d s .  for  bird  its  substances  to  deal  Subject  with to  this  birds  recent  of  three  the  section  certain  decisions  do apply to  treaty  rights  involvement  pieces  of  regulations  under  the  Indians or  claims  i n  legislation.  have  other  authorization prohibits  without  court  p o l l u t i o n o f waters  and  anywhere  Exceptions  sanctuaries  native  regulations  into waters,  s c i e n t i f i c purposes,  that  birds.  Subsection  hunting of  regulations  the  VIII,  game  hunting permit.  regardless  i n any o f  Concerns  dumping o f  migratory  i n s t i t u t i o n a l mechanism f o r  Other Environmental  section  hunt  regulations.  migratory bird  and  reserves,  planning  by the  indicates  off  no  o f m i g r a t o r y non-game  8 which d i s a l l o w native  birds  special permit.  use  authorized  a m i g r a t o r y game  m i g r a t o r y non-game  have  native  to  added  frequented Acts do  so  dumping o f  over  - 127 -  o i l , o i l wastes or other substances harmful to migratory birds in waters or areas frequented by migratory birds.  A problem continues to exist regarding competing land uses witliin sanctuaries.  Section 9 of the Sanctuary Regulations empowers the  Minister of the Environment to issue permits for activities within migratory bird sanctuaries, subject to "... such conditions as ... are necessary to protect migratory birds or the eggs, nests or habitat of migratory birds" (section 9(3)).  The agency responsible  for implementing the regulations, the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS), has stated the following policy: Land secured primarily for preservation of migratory bird habitat may be used for other productive purposes, i f they are compatible. Where such i s the case, and there i s local need and economic justification for i t , such uses may be permitted by agreement with provinces, other government agencies, corporations or individuals (Allison 1977, p.266, emphasis added). As Nelson (1976) has documented, the DINA has issued permits and leases for o i l and gas, and mining exploration and development within migratory bird sanctuaries.  Research, Regulation and Review There i s no specific provision for coordinated research and monitoring programs or establishment of a regulatory commission except for what i s possible through the appointment of Game Officers. Review i s similarly not explicitly dealt with, although the migratory bird regulations are amended each year and the sanctuary regulations were amended in 1974. provides some form of review.  This limited degree of amendment  - 128 2. CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION, PRESERVATION AND EXTENSION OF THE SOCKEYE SALMON FISHERY OF THE FRASER RIVER SYSTEM - 1930 This convention between Canada and the United States was signed in 1930 i n response to the depletion of sockeye salmon i n the Fraser River system. The convention i n effect, established a controlled fishery that was previously non-existent, with agreement to regulate an equal catch of fish stocks by each country. Conservation Conservation measures, to be carried out under the authority of a Fisheries Commission, were promulgated from the principle of protection, preservation and extension of the sockeye salmon fishery.  The focus then, i s managed exploitation of a fishery,  as i s the case in other fishery conventions.  Detailed investigations  into the natural history of the Fraser River sockeye salmon, hatchery methods, spawning ground conditions and other related matters would provide a basis for determining whether catch should be either limited or prohibited at various times.  F l e x i b i l i t y to'  respond to changing environmental conditions i s built into the Commission's authority over catch limits.  Management and Regulation The International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission established under Article II, i s comprised of six representatives, three appointed by each federal government. The Commission i s authorized to establish an advisory committee composed of five people from each country who represent various facets of the fishing industry  - 129 to comment on a l l regulations and recommendations made by the Commission.  The Commission may also c a l l upon an independent research  staff to carry out specific studies.  Koers (1973) indicates that  more than 50 scientists were employed i n 1970 by the Commission. Funding for any work done pursuant to the Convention i s to be supplied equally by the two governments.  The Commission's authority includes managing salmon culture operations ...to that end i t shall have the power to improve spawning grounds, construct and maintain hatcheries, rearing ponds and other f a c i l i t i e s ... for the propagation of sockeye salmon in any of the waters covered by this Convention, and to stock any such waters with sockeye salmon. ... The Commission shall also have authority to recommend to the Governments .. removing or otherwise overcoming obstructions to the ascent of salmon, that may now exist or may from time to time occur, i n any of the waters covered by this Convention— (Article III). The Commission also has the authority, unlike many other fisheries organizations, to make specific decisions which are directly binding on fishermen.  They are to limit or prohibit sockeye salmon fishing  during specific seasons and i n certain waters (Article IV), and to limit the size of meshes in fishing gear and appliances (Article V).  Annual reports and reccmmendations are sent to each government. Necessary legislation to enact and enforce the Commission's recommendations and regulations following the general provisions of the Convention are to be made by each government.  Each government  then has the responsibility of enforcing the orders and regulations adopted by the Commission, and handing out appropriate penalties for violations  (Articles VTII, IX and X). This arrangement,  - 130 typical of international agreements, unfortunately has the effect of fragmenting enforcement authority from the body that sets the orders.  Native Use  Native use i s not addressed in the Convention.  Other Environmental Concerns As noted above, Article III empowers the Commission to remove obstructions to salmon migration.  This power was used i n the  1940's to solve the blockage of migration at Hell's Gate i n the Fraser River (Crutchfield and Pontecorvo 1969). Pollution and other forms of encroaching development are not specifically addressed. However, authority to improve spawning grounds may help to alleviate this omission.  The Commission did take upon i t s e l f i n the early  1960's an expansion "... to consider the pollution problems that w i l l ensure from the inevitable growth of population and development of industry within the Fraser River watershed" (U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce 1965).  The Commission has not dealt with questions of  economic efficiency and overcapitalization i n the fishing industry (Crutchfield and Pontecorvo 1969). Research and Review The wide scope of the Commission's authority i n both research and regulation, and i t s scientific orientation marks an important step forward from previous conventions.  Thorough research into  the  natural  science  history  and other  function, Explicit  i n the  has  achieved this  a  i s  has  an  their  integral  led to  review of  part  of  restoration  the  agreement,  although  element  review.  of  spawning grounds, the  of  Commission's  the  convention or  hatchery  sockeye  its  implementation o f  runs.  success its  does  provisions  CONVENTION R E L A T I V E TO THE PRESERVATION OF FAUNA AND FLORA . I N T H E I R NATURAL STATE - 1933  The theme o f  or  to  -  salmon,  concerns  reference  appear  the  the  and e v e n t u a l l y  not  3.  of  131  this  convention  constitution of collection of  was A f r i c a , trophies parties Sudan,  i n the were  the  special parks  fauna  with  i s  the  and  and reserves  flora  is  further intent  contracting  Belgium,  protection  of, r e g u l a t i n g  India,  flora  where  prohibited.  countries'  Egypt,  of  fauna  hunting,  hunting  Portugal,  The  by  k i l l i n g  The geographic  territories.  Italy,  and  and  focus  traffic  i n  contracting  South  Africa,  Tanzania and the U . K .  Conservation The c o n s e r v a t i o n definition  of  reserves  which are  are  -  the  of  inherent  is  fauna -  as  to  i s  purpose,  i n a  and  established.  and  as  to  the natural  These  a l l o w a b l e and  degree  areas  incompatible  e c o s y s t e m management  The g r e a t e s t  natural  i n  strict  be  nevertheless  "strict  parks,  to  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme.  possible  d i r e c t l y addressed  national  o n l y encouraged  including hunting,  i n this  protection  and  special areas  s t r i c t l y defined  activities  flora  of  reserve":  . . . an area p l a c e d under p u b l i c c o n t r o l , throughout which any form o f hunting o r f i s h i n g , any undertakings connected w i t h f o r e s t r y , a g r i c u l t u r e , o r mining, any excavations or prospecting, d r i l l i n g , l e v e l l i n g o f the ground, o r c o n s t r u c t i o n , any work i n v o l v i n g the alteration  i s  not  - 132 of the configuration of the s o i l or the character of the vegetation, any act likely to harm or disturb the fauna or flora, and the introduction of any species of fauna or flora, whether indigenous or imported, wild or domesticated, shall be s t r i c t l y forbidden; which i t shall be forbidden to enter, traverse or camp i n without special written permit from the competent authorities; and in which scientific investigations may only be undertaken by permission of those authorities (Article 2:2).  The convention addresses administrative arrangements which should be considered i f lands are designated as either a national park or natural reserve. These include wildlife and habitat protection as defined by permitted uses and activities; "intermediate zoning" around the reserve or park for control of hunting (Article 4(2)); zoned areas within a party's territory, supplemental to national parks or natural reserves, where hunting, k i l l i n g or capturing of fauna and flora i s prohibited except by special permit (Article 7(1) and (2)); provisions for special protective status for species declared to be i n urgent need for such protection (Article 8(1)); measures to regulate t r a f f i c i n wildlife trophies (Article 9); and methods, of hunting and capture which are prohibited (Article 10).  Management Consideration i s given to the establishment of necessary measures or controls to undertake the provisions i n the Convention.  These  include permits regarding hunting and trophy export or import where allowed and personnel to regulate these activities.  Article 5  contains an cmnibus clause respecting establishment of the parks or reserves themselves.  Mention here i s made of "legislation" and  - 133 -  "methods of administration and control" required when setting aside these areas.  This represents the most specific reference to authority,  funding and personnel elements of management. In the remainder of the convention, these elements are generally merely implied.  Native Use Prior hunting or other rights held by natives which have been recognized by t e r r i t o r i a l authorities are not prejudiced by the provisions contained i n the Article on hunting control or licencing.  Therefore  natives are allowed to continue traditional hunting of animals, but no  control or surveillance of their activities i s intimated. Neither  i s there specific provision for direct native involvement i n management of wildlife and habitat.  Other Environmental Concerns Compatible and incompatible uses of the environment are specifically addressed in the definitions of a "national park" and "strict natural reserve".  If such areas are established, i t i s clear what types of  uses are permitted and not permitted.  However, wildlife and habitat  protection from incompatible uses cannot be enforced i f areas are not designated under the special status. . Mitigative measures for existing uses are not addressed.  Research, Regulation and Review There i s no . explicit statement for either coordinated research and monitoring programs, formation of a regulatory body, or review of the mandate, objectives and success of the convention, nor i s there a single management plan put forth.  - 134 4.  CONVENTION ON NATURE PROTECTION AND WILDLIFE PRESERVATION IN THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE - 1940  This convention between the United States and certain Pan-American countries was modelled after that of the 1933 convention relative to the Preservation of Fauna and Flora in their Natural State.  The  preamble indicates a wide scope of application. Included are extraordinary scenic areas, unique geologic formations, areas and landmarks of aesthetic, historic or scientific value, and areas characteristic of primative conditions.  Wildlife i s not explicitly  mentioned in the preamble, but i s addressed in the body of the convention.  Signatories are:  the United States, Cuba, Bolivia,  E l Salvador, Nicaragua, Peru, The Dominican Republic, Venezuela, Ecuador, Costa Rica, Mexico, Uruguay and Brazil.  Conservation Similar to the 1933 convention, there are provisions for establishing national parks, national reserves, nature monuments and s t r i c t wilderness reserves (Article 1). attention.  Migratory birds are given special  Once again, i t i s the responsibility of the contracting  countries to "explore the possibility of establishing" these areas. There i s agreement however, to adopt, or "propose such adoption", of laws and regulations respecting preservation of flora and fauna outside park or reserve boundaries, as well as laws on general preservation of "... the natural scenery, striking geological formations, and regions and natural objects of aesthetic interest or historic or scientific value" (Article V).  This at least attempts to approach  the issue of overall preservation of habitat and wildlife.  However,  - 135 ecosystem principles incorporated i n management schemes are not implied.  By way of definition, the national parks and reserves and s t r i c t wilderness reserves exclude certain forms of development and use. Articles III and IV indicate a specific commitment to this exclusion by prohibiting hunting and collection of flora and fauna i n parks, the prohibition of resource exploitation for commercial profit i n parks and reserves, and the inviolate nature of wilderness reserves.  Management Funding and personnel are not addressed.  Management authority stems  from the laws and regualtions passed by each country pursuant to the convention for wildlife and habitat protection.  A permit system i s  set up to control the importation, exportation and t r a f f i c of protected flora and fauna.  Native Use Unlike the 1933 convention, there i s no of native traditional hunting rights.  provision for continuance Hunting i s generally prohibited  "... except by or under the direction or control of park authorities, or for duly authorized scientific investigations" (Article III). Presumably, then, natives might be able to continue to hunt i f they can secure permission from park authorities.  Native hunting does  not appear to be possible in s t r i c t wilderness reserves, where the inviolate nature i s supreme.  - 136 Other Environmental Concerns The control over competing or compatible land uses i s not as s t r i c t l y defined, either i n the definition of the special area, or subsequent Articles, as i s the case in the 1933 convention. The exception i s in s t r i c t wilderness reserves which, are defined to exclude motorized transportation and commercial developments.  Commercial exploitation  of resources i n national parks and reserves i s also prohibited but an-exception clause may render this prohibition d i f f i c u l t to implement. The phrase, "... except by the competent legislative authority" i s attached to the "thou shalt not alter boundaries or alienate portions of national parks" statement.  In effect, i f industrial or commercial  pressures are strong enough, the authority may reduce the park size and thus incrementally reduce the protected habitat to the point of possibly endangering the wildlife.  Mitigative measures are not addressed.  Research, Regulation and Review Article VI states the agreement of parties to engage i n cooperative research, and f i e l d operations.  Regulation and review are not discussed.  5. INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION FOR THE REGULATION OF WHALING - 1946 This convention focuses on safeguarding the future whale resource through the orderly development of the whaling industry.  Entered  into force i n 1948, the signatories are: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, South Africa, the U.S.S.R., the U.K. and the United States.  - 137  -  Conservation The explicit goal i s the managed exploitation of the resource. Detailed regulations and amendments to the convention are provided which control the k i l l i n g of whale populations, designate the areas in which whaling can occur, specific size limits, etc.  The authority  to deal with these matters i s specifically set out in Article V(f): The Commission may amend ... the provisions of the Schedule by adopting regulations with respect to the conservation and utilization of whale resources, fixing (a) protected and unprotected species; (b) open and closed seasons; (c) open and closed waters, including the designation of sanctuary areas; (d) size limits for each species; (e) time, methods, and intensity of whaling (including the maximum catch of whales to be taken in any one season); (f) types and specifications of gear and apparatus and appliances which may be used; (g) methods of measurement; and (h) catch returns and other statistical and biological records. It i s further stated that these amendments should "provide for the conservation and optimum utilization of the whale resource".  Management and  Regulation  The convention states that each contracting government should take the necessary measures to ensure the application of the objectives and provisions of the convention.  Pursuant regulations enacted by each  comtry thereby give authority to implement the agreement's provisions.  The management function i s explicitly addressed in the powers and duties of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) under Articles III, IV and V.  The major responsibilities of the IWC have been to  recommend amendments to the convention (Article V) and to promote scientific research (Article IV).  A key weakness i n the convention  i s the IWC's lack of authority over the allocation of catch.  Further,  - 138 the IWC must regulate whaling based on blue whale units, and not on individual stocks.  The major concern of the IWC with prevention of overfishing and  how  to regulate the whaling industry was a debated issue. The interests of contracting governments did not coincide on this issue and consequently the IWC was not effective i n substantially reducing catch limits until 1965. The major obstacle to a more timely reduction of the catch limit was the fact that such a reduction would prevent the whaling companies from recovering their investment i n modern fishing vessels. ... [furtherJ ... the main reason for i t s [IWC] inability to prevent the overharvesting of the resource was the unwillingness of the whaling States, ... to accept effective conservation measures (Koers 1973, p.90-91). Subsection 4 of Article III empowers the IWC to set up advisory committees of virtually any nature to "...perform such functions as i t may authorize".  Funding of the Commission and i t s advisory experts  i s to be paid by each respective contracting government. There i s no specific reference to funding of research or management programs.  Native Use The only reference to native hunting of whales i s amendment 2 of the attached schedule which allows aborigines to k i l l only gray and white whales for local consumption.  Other Environmental Concerns There i s no evidence of clauses pertaining to other uses of the waters inhabited by whales.  For example, the Migratory Bird Convention  addressed the issue of dumping of o i l and harmful substances into  - 139 waters frequented by migratory birds.  Such i s not the case here.  This amission may therefore have serious implications for whale stocks like the Beluga, which calve in the restricted warm waters of the Mackenzie Delta and mouth of the Seal Pdver i n Hudson Bay.  Evidence  heard at the Berger Inquiry indicated that activities such as o i l and gas exploration and development i n these waters could lead to a major loss of calves and a future reduction i n productivity of the herd. "In time, the herd would die out" (Berger 1977, Vol.1, p.65)..  Research and Review Research i s addressed i n Article IV which empowers the IWC to promote, analyse and publish scientific research on whale stocks and whaling. Coordinated research and monitoring are suggested.  Review i s implied  through the amendment procedure.  6.  CONVENTION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND CANADA FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THE HALIBUT FISHERY OF THE NORTHERN PACIFIC OCEAN AND BERING SEA - 1953  This 1953 convention i s a revision of a 1937 convention to enable more effective conservation of the  halibut fishery.  The convention  process actually began i n the late 1800's, with several agreements having been signed.  Conservation The stated goal of the convention i s maximum sustained yield and maintenance of the stocks at the appropriate level.  This goal has  proven restrictive i n terms of both control and cooperative management with, other fisheries.  Wilimovsky and Alverson (1971)  - 140 noted that biological factors alone should not dictate management strategies: "Most of the legal, economic, social and educational questions have not been tackled on a broad base; and, indeed, effective management must consider these non-biological areas".  It has also  been suggested that under certain conditions, maximum sustained yield fishing can result in fish stock depletion (Skud 1976).  Further, i n  1975 the Minister of the Environment, Romeo LeBlanc, indicated that this goal was in conflict with national goals of optimum utilization "We must move away from the unworkable concept of iraximum sustained yield to a concept of optimum economic yield" (Press Release, June 6, 1975, Environment Canada).. Unfortunately, optimum economic yield i s even more l i k e l y to deplete the stocks.  Management and  Regulation  Article 111(2) spells out fishery management objectives to be carried out by the International Pacific Halibut Commission, which i s comprised of six members, three appointed by each contracting government"'": 2. The Contracting Parties that for the purpose of developing the stocks of halibut of the Northern Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea to levels which w i l l permit the maximum sustained yield from that fishery and for maintaining the stocks at those levels, the International Pacific Halibut Commission, ... may, after investigation has indicated such action to be necessary, i n respect of the nationals and inhabitants and fishing vessels and boats of the United States of America and of Canada, and in respect of halibut:  1.  It should be noted that the Commission was originally established in 1923. At that time i t was called the International Fisheries Commission and had a much more limited scope i n terms of membership, objectives and functions.  - 141 a. b. c. d.  f. g.  h.  divide the Convention waters into areas; establish one or more open or closed seasons, as to each area; limit the size of the fish and the quantity of the catch to be taken from each area within any season during which fishing i s allowed; during both open and closed seasons, permit, limit, regulate or prohibit, the incidental catch of halibut that may be taken, retained, possessed, or landed from each area or portion of an area, by vessels fishing for other species of fish; f i x the size and character of halibut fishing appliances to be used in any area; make such regulations for the licencing and departure of vessels and for the collection of statistics of the catch of halibut as i t shall find necessary to determine the condition and trend of the halibut fishery and to carry out the provisions of this Convention; close to a l l taking of halibut such portion or portions of an area or areas as the Commission finds to be populated by small, immature halibut and designates as nursery grounds.  A shortcoming of this convention i s the lack of provision for emergency action by the Commission.  A further weakness identified by Skud (1976)  i s the fragmentation of management and enforcement authority. As noted on p.(1301 this arrangement i s typical of international agreements where enforcement authority over regulations recommended by the Commission rests with federal agents specified in the enabling acts of each country for the convention.  Therefore, .the Commission has  authority over managing the halibut stocks and the federal agents have responsibility of enforcing the regulations.  This dichotomy has often  led to disregard for regulations due to the belief that offenders w i l l not be punished (Skud 1976)...  Finally, with the restricted mandate of maximum sustained yield, the Commission also lacks the authority to implement updated and progressive management schemes and to deal with other issues such as over-  - 142 capitalization of the fisheries.  Nevertheless, the Halibut Ctommission  has been successful i n restocking the halibut fishery.  Koers (1973)  suggests i t s success i s derived from a combination of unique factors: 1. A the Ctommission has i t s own independent research staff; 2. i t has only two contracting parties which traditionally cooperate on international resource problems; 3. i t i s concerned with only one species; 4. i t receives "active" support from the fishing industry; 5. the Commission's task of rebuilding the stocks of halibut i n obvious danger of depletion was a noncontroversial one.  Native Use, Other Environmental Concerns, Research and Review These are not addressed i n the convention or i n the Canadian enabling Act - the Northern Pacific Halibut Fishery Convention Act, 1953.  7.  INTERIM CONVENTION ON CONSERVATION OF NORTH PACIFIC FUR SEALS - 1957  The governments of Canada, Japan, the U.S.S.R. and the United States agreed to conserve the fur seal resources of the North Pacific according to the principle of maximum sustained productivity."'"  Coordinated  scientific research and the establishment of a Fur Seal Ctommission are key factors in this convention.  Conservation Based on the goal of attaining fur seal levels which w i l l provide the largest harvest each year, conservation measures are laid out. The principle of maximum sustained productivity i s used in developing a  1.  Throughout this convention, the tern maximum sustainable productivity i s used instead of the more common term maximum sustained yield, which i s probably what was intended. Yield to man i s always a fraction of annual productivity since natural mortality also takes t o l l .  - 143 conservation-oriented management plan i n relation to the productivity of other living marine resources of the area.  This plan i s i t s e l f  based on coordinated scientific research programs and an element of f l e x i b i l i t y i n the Commission's determination of total harvest levels.  Management and Regulation Authority and funding i s given to the North Pacific Fur Seal Commission, which i s comprised of one member from each country, to formulate, coordinate and conduct research programs on the North Pacific fur seals, to study the resultant data, and to recommend to the contracting governments appropriate measures to ensure that the convention's provisions are followed (Article V). A Protocol which entered into force in 1964 expanded the Commission's responsibility to include the study and pursuant recommendations on whether or not the k i l l i n g , taking or hunting of seals at sea i n any manner (pelagic sealing), i n conjunction with land seals, could continue i n certain circumstances without adversely affecting the convention's principle and objectives (amendment to Article V(2)(e)).  This Protocol therefore gave the  Commission review and recommendation powers over the continuance of pelagic sealing.  The Commission may also submit recommendations to the countries for measures regarding size, sex and age composition of the seasonal commercial k i l l , sealing methods, and any other matters relating to fur seal resources.  The convention also provides for a "watchdog"  o f f i c i a l to oversee whether the convention's rules are carried out, and whether any offences are ccmmitted. I t also requires the countries  - 144 -  to "... enact and enforce such legislation as may be necessary to guarantee the observance of this Convention and to make effective i t s provisions with appropriate penalties for violation thereof" (Article X).  The convention also has a unique aspect i n that i t has distinguished between access to the wealth of a resource and access to i t s harvest. Article IX states that the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. must compensate Canada and Japan for losses from the prohibition of pelagic sealing by delivering a certain number of sealskins to these two countries.  Native Use Article VII addressed the question of subsistence pelagic sealing. It essentially allows subsistence native hunting constrained by the mode of transportation, weaponry and subsequent use of the seal consistent with traditional native subsistence practices.  There i s  no quota or monitoring program indicated for native hunting.  Research As previously noted, coordinated scientific research programs were recognized as being an integral part of achieving the principles of detentiining the necessary measures for achieving maximum sustainable productivity, and of detentiining the interrelationships of fur seals and other living marine resources. a. b.  The research includes the following:  size of each, fur seal herd and i t s age and sex composition; natural mortality of the different age groups and recruitment of young to each age or size class at present and subsequent population levels;  - 145 c.  d. e. f. g. h. i.  with regard to each of the herds, the effect upon the magnitude of recruitment of variations i n the. size and the age and sex composition of the annual kill; migration routes of fur seals and their wintering areas; numbers of seals from each herd found on the migration routes and in wintering areas and their ages and sexes; extent to which the food habits of fur seals affect commercial f i s h catches and the damage fur seals i n f l i c t on fishing gear; effectiveness of each method of sealing from the viewpoint of management and rational utilization of fur seal resources for conservation purposes; quality of sealskins by sex, age and time and method of sealing; and other subjects involved i n achieving the objectives of the Convention, as deternuned by the Commission established under Article V, paragraph 1 (Article II, paragraph 2).  Other Environmental Concerns These are not explicitly dealt with i n the convention.  The omnibus  clause i n Article V (a), which allows the Commission "... to make recommendations on any matter which relates to the fur seal resources..." may be used regarding environmental concerns.  However, this mandate  may not be enough to directly deal with pollution and industrial matters such as high Arctic d r i l l i n g .  Possibly the convention should  be reviewed and altered so as to specifically handle recent development pressures.  Review The convention was reviewed i n 1963 and was amended according to the Protocol of,1964.  Provision for further review i s contained i n the  amended convention, based on the principle of sustainable productivity. This principle may prove somewhat limiting i f authority to look into other management goals and subsequent enforcement i s not considered,  - 146 8. AFRICAN CCNVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION OF NATURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES - 1968 This convention, adopted by several African nations, including Egypt and Kenya, i s an updated version of the 1933 agreement on the Preservation of Fauna and Flora in their Natural State.  Conservation and Management The fundamental principle i s "... to adopt the measures necessary to ensure conservation, utilization and development of s o i l , water, flora and faunal resources in accordance with scientific principles and with due regard to the best interests of the people" (Article II).  Various forms of conservation areas are defined •— the s t r i c t  nature reserve and national park are very similar to the 1933 definitions; a third category - special reserve - i s added, which i s comprised of "game reserve", "partial reserve" or "sanctuary" and " s o i l " , "water" or "forest" reserves.  The game and partial reserves are of particular  significance as wildlife, habitat and other activities are a l l considered within an ecosystem framework: i.  "game reserve" which shall denote an area a.  set aside for. the.conservation, management and propagation of wild animal l i f e and the protection and management of i t s habitat,  b.  within which the hunting, k i l l i n g or capture of fauna shall be prohibited except by or under the direction or control of the reserve authorities;  c.  where settlement and other human activities shall be controlled or prohibited;  i i . "partial reserve" or "sanctuary" which shall denote an area  - 147 a.  set aside to protect characteristic wildlife and especially bird cx^mmunities, or to protect particularly threatened animal or plant species and especially those listed i n the /Annex to this Convention,, together with the biotopes essential for their survival,  b.  in which a l l other interests and activities shall be subordinated to this end;  Article VII addresses the conservation and management of faunal resources, and places these functions within a land-use planning framework. This framework represents a more comprehensive approach to conservation of resources than previously evident i n conventions. 1.  The Contracting States shall ensure conservation, wise use and development of faunal resources and their environment, within the framework of land-use planning and of economic and social development. Management shall be carried out in accordance with plans based on scientific principles, and to that end the Contracting States shall: a.  manage wildlife populations inside designated areas according to the objective of such areas and also manage exploitable wildlife populations outside such areas for an optimum sustained yield, compatible with and complementary to other land uses; ...  There i s also provision for adopting legislation on hunting, capture and fishing of faunal resources, and for special status of protected species.  tost of the management objectives as stated are to be carried out by each contracting government,with as much coordination and cooperation with other governments as possible. "Each Contracting State shall establish, i f i t has not already done so, a single agency impowered to deal with a l l matters covered by this Convention, but, where this  I  - 149 Review There i s provision i n Article XXIV for specific revision of any part or the whole of the convention after five years of implementation. This i s a clear break from prior agreements which either omitted or merely implied such an element.  9.  CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE - 1972  Recognizing the importance of international participation and cooperation i n safeguarding areas of cultural and natural heritage, this convention was adopted i n 1972 and entered into force i n 1975 under the auspices of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). This convention i s included in the analysis because of i t s attempt at comprehensive conservation policy and i t s establishment of a World Heritage Committee, despite the fact that Canada i s s t i l l not a member.  (Only a few c r i t e r i a  are applicable.)  Conservation and Management This convention essentially attempts to r a l l y support from the contracting governments for international protection and conservation of areas of cultural and natural heritage within their territories. Areas with natural heritage are defined as: natural features consisting of physical and biological formations or groups of such formations, which are of outstanding universal value from the aesthetic or scientific point of view; geological and physiographical formations and precisely delineated areas which, constitute the habitat of threatened species of animals and plants of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science and conservation;  - 150 natural sites or precisely delineated natural areas of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science, conservation or natural beauty (Article 2). The convention states that the governments should endeavour to adopt a general policy on conservation of cultural and natural heritage areas as being important within community functions and comprehensive planning; and that appropriate administrative, financial and technical resources should be made available for conservation programs as well as research (Article 5).  Research Cooperative research, for the purposes of studying and ultimately establishing areas of cultural and natural heritage i s a fundamental principle of the convention.  Regulation The convention establishes an Intergovernmental Committee for the Protection of the Cultural and Natural Heritage.  It i s popularly known as the  World Heritage Committee within UNESCO. An important function of the Committee i s the definition of c r i t e r i a upon which areas of cultural and natural heritage may be included in the World Heritage Lists, and the decisions on whether such areas w i l l be ultimately included. The Committee may also lend assistance to countries involved i n identifying or establishing cultural or natural heritage areas.  This  assistance may be for studies, provision of technical experts, training of staff, supply of equipment, loans and subsidies.  - 151 10.  CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN FOR THE PROTECTION OF MIGRATORY BIRDS IN DANGER OF EXTINCTION, AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT - 1972  Recognizing the value of migratory birds for recreational, aesthetic, scientific and economic purposes, and the need to cooperate in the protection and management of migratory birds in danger of extinction, the United States and Japan agreed upon this convention i n 1972.  Conservation As several species of migratory birds were in danger of extinction, the convention takes a strong approach to conservation.  It essentially  prohibits the taking of migratory birds or their eggs and any t r a f f i c in such birds or eggs. Exceptions to this prohibition include taking for scientific or propagative purposes, for protection of person or property, during open hunting seasons, and by natives of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands for personal food and clothing. Special status for birds in danger of extinction, and provision of "sanctuaries for the protection and management of migratory birds" are endorsed. Article VI specifically states that the parties should attempt to preserve and enhance migratory bird habitat, especially respecting measures to prevent pollution damage, and the importation of incompatible flora and fauna.  This i s a significant refinement  over the 1916 treaty which had no reference to habitat or management.  Management The objectives of protection and conservation, and maintenance of. populations at optimum numbers, are endorsed throughout the convention,  - 152 -  but steps to ensure these are not addressed.  The typical clause  of agreement to take necessary measures to carry out the convention's intent i s included (Article VII); however there i s no mandate for funding or authority in a coordinating body.  Native Use Native use i s allowed as an exception to the major prohibition clause, and refers to Eskimos, Indians and indigenous peoples of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands regarding the use of the birds for personal clothing and food.  Other Environmental Concerns This area of concern i s primarily discussed respecting habitat protection and management. Article III recommends establishing sanctuaries but does not indicate the nature and type of activities permitted within them. Article VT addresses damage to migratory birds and their environment: Each Contracting Party shall endeavour to take appropriate measures to preserve and enhance the environment of birds protected under this Convention and shall: a.  seek means to prevent damage to such birds and their environment, including, especially, damage resulting from pollution of the seas; ...  Research, Regulation and Review Coordinated research i s encouraged beyond the normal exchange of data and research by each country.  There i s no provision for a regulatory  commission, and review of the convention i s limited to the l i s t of migratory birds considered in need of protection., defined in. the. Annex,  - 153 11.  AGREEMENT ON THE CONSERVATION OF POLAR BEARS - 1973  This agreement between Canada, Denmark, Norway, the U.S.S.R. and the United States recognized an immediate need for protecting the polar bear in the Arctic Region.  It primarily prohibits the hunting,  k i l l i n g and capturing of the polar bear, with exceptions relating to scientific study, local people using traditional methods and for conservation purposes (defined to include management by Canada).  Conservation Conservation of polar bears and their ecosystem i s addressed i n the fundamental principle of the convention: Each Contracting Party shall take appropriate action to protect the ecosystem of which polar bears are a part, with special attention to habitat components such as denning and feeding sites and migration patterns, and shall manage polar bear populations in accordance with sound conservation practices based on the best available scientific data (Article II).. This i s a significant departure from past agreements, for i t recognizes f i r s t l y the need for an "ecosystem" approach, and secondly for special protection of c r i t i c a l areas, such as denning and feeding sites.  Native Use As indicated above, natives are permitted to continue to exercise their traditional hunting rights on polar bears, using traditional methods. These include the use of r i f l e s , snowmobiles and small boats.  The  Canadian Ctovernment Explanatory Declaration explains that the Canadian Polar Bear Technical Committee recommends annual management quotas for each sub-population, including native quota allotments.  There  - 154 has been extensive consultation with native organizations i n Canada regarding Canadian management practices pursuant to the convention (Hunt 1979).  Research, Regulation and Review Coordinated research i s encouraged, beyond national research programs: The Contracting Parties shall conduct national research programmes on polar bears, particularly research relating to the conservation and management of the species. They shall as appropriate, coordinate such research with research carried out by other Paries, consult with other Parties on the management of migrating polar bear populations, and exchange information on research and management programmes, research results and data on bears taken (Article VTI). There i s no provision for a regulatory commission or review of the success of management programs and intent of the convention.  12.  CONVENTION BETWEEN THE U.S. AND THE U.S.S.R. CONCERNING THE CONSERVATION OF MIGRATORY BIRDS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT - 1976  This convention represents the most recently signed international wildlife agreement with significant improvements over past conventions on the same subject.  Similar to the U.S./Japan convention i n form, the  content i s more explicit.  Conservation and Management "Preservation and maintenance of stocks of migratory birds" i s the stated aim.  The approach i s to prohibit the "taking of migratory birds, the  collection of their nests and eggs and the disturbance of nesting colonies" (Article II (i))...  Hunting seasons are set for both sport  hunters and indigenous peoples — the latter restricted to the use of  - 155 the birds and eggs for "nutritional and other essential needs" (Article II (1)(c)).  Habitat protection i s addressed i n Article IV:  1. To the extent possible, the Contracting Parties shall undertake measures necessary to protect and enhance the environment of migratory birds and to prevent and abate the pollution of detrimental alteration of that environment. Other measures are explained i n remaining sections, including the stipulation that areas of specific importance to the conservation of migratory birds (i.e. breeding and feeding areas) should be identified and ultimately protected. More generally — conservation and environmental protection i s encouraged i n Article VII: Each Contracting Party shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake measures necessary to establish preserves, refuges, protected areas, and also f a c i l i t i e s intended for the conservation of migratory birds and their environment, and to manage such areas so as to preserve and restore the natural ecosystems.  Native Use Native hunting i s addressed i n Article II, sections 1(c) and 2. Native taking of migratory birds and the collection of their eggs i s permitted during specific hunting seasons for nutritional and other essential needs only.  The open seasons are based on the principle of preservation  and maintenance of migratory bird stocks.  Other Environmental Concerns These are generally addressed under the heading of habitat protection in Article IV, as indicated above. A warning system i s to be established to aid i n combatting environmental degradation. this purpose i s also endorsed:  Cooperation for  - 156 ... the competent authorities of the Contracting Parties shall establish necessary procedures for such warnings and w i l l cooperate ... in preventing, .. reducing or eliminating such damage to migratory birds and their environment and in providing for the rehabilitation of their habitat (Article IV(2)(a)). This reference to rehabilitation i s noteworthy in that i t represents the f i r s t stated inclusion in a convention.  Review Article XII states that the convention w i l l remain i n force for fifteen years, after which time i t w i l l be automatically renewed annually.  As Robinson (1976) has noted:  Unlike the 1916 Treaty ... where no evaluation has occurred and there i s no required or sure diplomatic forum to press implementation, the U.S./U.S.S.R. Convention renewal clause should encourage analysis and review (emphasis added). The remaining Articles are essentially the same as those in previous agreements respecting special status to birds in danger of extinction. Again, there i s no provision for a regulatory commission to ensure that the strongly-endorsed measures for conservation and enhancement of migratory birds and their habitat are achieved.  13.  SECOND REVISED DRAFT CONVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION OF MIGRATORY SPECIES OF WILD ANIMALS - 1978  This convention arises from the Action Plan of the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment.  This draft by the Federal  Republic of Germany w i l l be the focus of an international conference in Bonn, June 11-23, 1979 for the purpose of adopting the convention. The draft focuses on protection of two classes of migratory species those requiring "immediate and stringent protection", and those  - 157 selected for conservation and management under agreements between concerned parties of "Range States".  "A major purpose of the Convention  i s seen i n providing a framework for the inclusion of these agreements, which, while covering the whole of the range of the species concerned, are to deal with groups of species for maximum impact" (Munroe, March 23, 1979).  Conservation A strong isamtnitment to conservation and management of migratory species, with particularly s t r i c t controls for endangered species, i s evident. For example, the contracting governments are to: a.  conserve, and where required take action to restore, those habitats of the migratory species concerned which are of importance i n restoring that species to a favourable conservation status or i n maintaining i t in such a status, and, wherever appropriate, establish or maintain protected areas for that species;  b.  prevent, remove, or compensate for the adverse effects of, disturbances and obstacles that seriously impede or prevent the migration of the migratory species concerned;  c.  prevent, reduce or control factors that are likely to influence unfavourably the conservation status of the migratory species concerned or prevent improvement of that status, including prohibiting the introduction of, or eliminating already introduced, exotic species; and  d.  prohibit taking of animals belonging to the migratory species concerned.  Exemptions are permitted only under exceptional circumstances which "shall not adversely affect the conservation status of the migratory species concerned and not prevent improvement of that status" (Article 111(3)).  Unfortunately, this standard i s not precisely  defined nor are exemptions subject to review by a commission or council.  - 158 For migratory species not classified as endangered or requiring urgent protection, the convention states that agreements should be made between Range States to "... deal with a l l aspects of the conservation and management of the migratory species concerned and... to maintain that species in a favourable conservation status or to restore i t to such a status" (Article V(l)).  These include provision  for research, information exchanges, monitoring programs, periodic review of conservation status, a common management plan, harvesting measures and emergency procedures when the conservation status of the species i s threatened.  Respecting habitat conservation, the  agreements should also include provision for: e.  conservation and, where required, restoration of the habitats of importance i n maintaining a favourable conservation status, and protection of such habitats from disturbances including prohibition of the introduction of, or control of already introduced, exotic species detrimental to the migratory species;  f.  maintenance of a network of suitable habitats appropriately disposed in relation to the migration routes so that migration may always take place without difficulty;  g.  where i t appears desirable, the provision of hew habitats favourable to the migratory species or reintroduction of the migratory species into favourable habitats;  h.  elimination of, to the maximum extent possible, or compensation for obstacles and disturbances which hinder or impede migration;  i.  prevention, reduction or control of the release into the habitat of the migratory species of substances harmful to that migratory species; (Article V(5)).  Native Use Native traditional use of migratory species i s not addressed. Nevertheless, a case might conceivably be made for subsistence hunting  - 159 as an exemption under Article 111(3). for endangered species, and be under some form of control stated in Article V(5)(j).  Therefore,  treatise of native use of migratory species remains ambiguous.  Management, Regulation and Review For species listed i n Appendix I which are in need of immediate and stringent protection, Article III outlines immediate action to be implemented by each Range State without the negotiation, conclusion and ratification of formal agreements.  For species listed i n Appendix II which, are to be covered by agreements between Range States, each agreement i s to: c.  provide for the designation of national authorities concerned with the implementation of the Agreement; and  d.  establish appropriate common machinery which may use existing institutions, to carry out the aims of the Agreement, to monitor i t s effectiveness, and to prepare reports for the Conference of the Parties; (Article V(4)).  The "supreme" decision-making body however, i s the Conference of the Parties, an umbrella organization advised by a Secretariat (an executive secretarial role to organize meetings, maintain liaison between countries, etc.); and a Scientific Council (a broadly-based group specializing in ecology and biology of migratory species). The Conference of the Parties must meet at least every three years to review the implementation of the convention, subsequent agreements, and the conservation status of migratory species (Article VII). It may also:  - 160 c. make such provision and provide such guidance as may be necessary to enable the Scientific Council and the Secretariat to carry out their duties; d.  receive and consider any reports presented by the Scientific Council, the Secretariat, any Party or any standing body established pursuant to an Agreement;  f.  make recommendations to the Parties for improving the effectiveness of this Convention;  g.  make recommendations to the parties to any Agreement for improving the effectiveness of that Agreement; and  h.  decide on any additional measure that should be taken to implement the objects of this Convention (Article VII(5)).  It i s not clear whether subsection  (c). above may be applied to cover  funding of required research and personnel.  There i s no explicit  reference to funding in any Article of the Convention.  This draft convention has recently came under attack.  The International  AssociationojC Fish and Wildlife Agencies has strongly opposed the agreement. The Association submits that: ... The Convention treats a l l parties as unitary states, which have exclusive authority as opposed to federal states. In federal states, including the United States and Canada, legislative power i s divided between the legislature of the federation (e.g. the U.S. Congress) and legislatures of constituent units (the states and provinces). State and federal authority would be preempted, according to the Association, through the majority vote in the Conference of the Parties (Outdoor News Bulletin, April 1979, p.3-4).  Concern was further expressed by Mr. Daniel Poole, president of the Wildlife Management Institute over costs of encouraging and assisting governments:  - 161 ... in terms of disruption of long-established relationships among levels of government i n any one country, ...There i s uncertainty, too, about the integration of such new authority with carefully drafted agreements such as already exist for migratory birds involving Canada, Mexico, the U.S., the Soviet Union, and Japan (Outdoor News Bulletin, April 1979, p.5). Despite these and other problems inherent in this draft as proposed, the convention does have potential for providing a framework upon which international agreements on migratory species could be negotiated.  14.  THE INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION (IJC).  In 1909, the Boundary Waters Treaty between Canada and the United States was signed in order to deal with the increasing number of complex inland water problems along the international boundary..  The  treaty contained a provision to create an International Joint Commission (IJC), "... a problem-solving institution that was  not  to be a mere fact-finder, ... but to be a permanent joint tribunal with final decision-making powers and equal U.S. and Canadian membership.  The Members were appointed to act as a single body  seeking single solutions..." (Scott, 1977,  p.4).  The IJC i s composed of three commissioners from each country, appointed by the respective federal governments.  The Commission and i t s Boards  must act in accordance with a joint or "common interest" and not according to national policies or politics.  It has been well  documented that neither the commissioners nor the two delegations collectively make a practice of imposing a selfish national interest on the decision-making of the Commission.  "Indeed, i t has rarely  - 162 divided at a l l : unanimity has been the most common outcome" (Scott 1977, p.6).  The real success of the IJC has been the authority  to establish "expert boards" to advise and report on the problem to the Commission. What i s uniquely important i s that these Board reports are, and must be, unanimous. The I.J.C. w i l l not allow the public servants and private consultants who serve on them also to serve their own country's cause, as they may see i t . Even though most of the data, and even the recommendations may be generated i n offices that are also advising national (or local) politicians, the report produced for the I.J.C. i s composed by experts who are told they must attempt to 'wear two hats' - one for their own country, the other for the I.J.C. Board (Scott 1977, p.11-12). The Commission also has authority to hold public hearings at several stages of the review process and to publish reports and recommendations on their findings.  With these elements of authority and f l e x i b i l i t y ,  the IJC has been able to perform a significant decision-making role i n Canada/U\S. environmental relations. Thus the I.J.C. provides a mechanism to produce impartial solutions that can be accepted by both sides. When the issue i s very contentious and local passions are aroused, the I.J.C.'s greatest contribution i s to provide a means of obtaining agreed and trusted technical and social data. Rarely, by the time i t reports, are there facts i n dispute (Lemarquand and Scott 1976, p.161). Although final decision-making rests with the two governments, past history suggests that the IJC's recommendations are generally accepted and implemented, often through the IJC i t s e l f .  Specific responsibilities  and authority are vested with the IJC to, among other things, monitor, implement and enforce the agreed-upon disposition (Scott 1979).  - 163 -  APPENDIX II CONVENTION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND CANADA FOR THE CONSERVATION OF MIGRATORY CARIBOU AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT The Governments of the United States of America and Canada,  RECOGNIZING that caribou form an important part of the common heritage of mankind and that each generation of man holds the resources of the earth, including wild animals, for future generations and has an obligation to ensure that this legacy i s conserved and where utilized, i s used wisely;  KNOWING that certain indigenous people of Alaska i n the United States and aboriginal people of the Yukon and Northwest Territories in Canada depend upon caribou for their survival and existence either wholly or in part, recognizing that this dependence w i l l continue, and convinced that such people should be involved in management of caribou;  RECOGNIZING that use of caribou by indigenous or aboriginal people for their own nutritional and other essential domestic needs should have priority over any other use and that state and t e r r i t o r i a l governments of the Parties have implemented policies to this end;  CONSIDERING that caribou are social wild animals whose continued existence i n large viable herds depends upon the maintenance intact of populations over large areas of land and that caribou i n their great herds constitute a unique natural resource of great and irreplaceable value;  - 164 RECOGNIZING that specific caribou herds migrate across the international boundary between the United States and Canada and have common breeding, calving, summering, wintering, staging and feeding areas and migration routes which must be protected;  UNDERSTANDING that the environment and the habitat utilized by these caribou herds must be protected against degradation i f caribou herds shared between the two countries are to be conserved;  RECOGNIZING that the Parties have made, and Canada contemplates making in the future, certain Agreements which affect caribou with their indigenous and aboriginal people with respect to the settlement of their aboriginal land or other rights;  CONVINCED that neither the United States nor Canada can by acting alone conserve these shared migratory caribou herds and their habitat and that cooperative action i s essential;  DESIRING to take immediate and continuing action for the long-term conservation of migratory caribou and their environment;  HAVE AGREED AS FOLIiOWS:  Article I For the purpose of this Convention: 1.  "Caribou" means any caribou north of 60°N which (a) regularly  - 165 -  migrates between the United States and Canada for the purpose of breeding, calving, rearing young, feeding, summering or wintering; or (b) constitutes the remnants of groups or herds for which there i s clear evidence of historic regular migration between the United States and Canada. The term "caribou" shall connote a l l values and every aspect of such caribou, including their behavior as individuals and as members of groups and herds, and the behavioral and survival value of the great herds themselves.  "Conserve", "conserving", "conservation" and "long-term conservation" means to use, and the use of, a l l methods and procedures which are necessary to ensure the health and preservation of caribou, their habitats, and the ecological system of which they form a constituent element.  Such methods and procedures include, but  are not limited to, a l l activities associated with modern scientific wildlife management and land management such as research, census, monitoring, law enforcement, habitat acquisition, habitat preservation and enhancement, information and education,  propagation,  hunting, live trapping, and transplantation.  "Habitat" means the whole or any part of the ecosystem upon which the caribou depend including a l l a i r , land and water that caribou inhabit, u t i l i z e or cross at any time.  "Sensitive habitats" means those, areas of special importance to the conservation and enhancement of caribou because of their  - 166 value for breeding, calving, rearing young, feeding, summering or wintering, staging or being located along migration routes.  "Take" or ."taking" means to harvest, hunt, shoot, k i l l , trap, capture, collect and includes a l l activities related to such conduct.  "Commission" means the Ctommission established pursuant to Article III.  Article II The Parties shall conserve caribou herds and the ecosystem of which caribou are a part for the long-term well-being of the caribou and so as to maximize total social benefit, particularly for those indigenous and aboriginal people who have a continuing dependance on caribou, and so that risk of irreversible change or long-term adverse effects as a result of use of caribou or their habitat i s reduced to a minimum.  The Parties shall implement the recoramendations of the Ctommission made pursuant to Article IV, paragraphs 1 and 3 except where, in the opinion of a Party, the net benefits of compliance are appreciably outweighed by the net benefits of other competing regional or national interests.  The Parties shall implement, to  the extent practicable, the recommendations of the Commission made pursuant to Article IV, paragraphs 2 and 4.  - 167 3.  The Parites shall provide the Commission with a l l data, information, and any other assistance deemed necessary and feasible by the Parties for the Commission to perform i t s duties under this Convention.  4.  The Parties shall provide i n a timely fashion to the Commission information on proposals for major activities which may beneficially or detrimentally affect the conservation of caribou and their habitat.  5.  The Parties shall refrain from taking any action for the protection of caribou that may have substantial long-term adverse effect on other wild fauna and flora.  6.  The Parties shall avoid to the extent practicable terrain alteration or other activities that whould significantly impede, delay or disrupt caribou herd movement or affect essential caribou behaviour, and to modify, where feasible, existing a r t i f i c i a l features that have that effect.  7.  The measures taken by the Parties to conserve caribou, their habitat and the ecosystem of which they are a part, shall be based on sound scientific principles and existing knowledge and on recognition that caribou populations and habitats must be understood as ecological units without regard to p o l i t i c a l boundaries.  - 168 Article III 1.  The Parties shall establish- and maintain a Migratory Caribou Commission.  The Commission shall have ten members, five of  whom shall be appointed by each Party.  The representatives of  the respective parties shall function as an integral unit i n the conduct of a l l business before the Commission.  The five  representatives of each Party shall constitute a Delegation. Each Delegation shall include representation of native people who depend on caribou.  2.  Each Delegation shall have one vote.  A decision or recommendation  of the Commission shall require the approval of both Delegations.  3.  The Commission shall elect from i t s members a Chairman and a Vice-Chairman.  The Chairman shall be elected from one Delegation  and the Vice-chairman from the other Delegation.  The offices of  Chairman and Vice-chairman shall alternate annually between the Delegations, with the chairmanship assumed f i r s t by a member of the Canadian Delegation; except that where the Commission meets in the territory of one of the Parties, the Chairman shall be from that Party's delegation.  4.  The Commission shall apoint two Advisory Committees to aid i t in the performance of i t s duties under this Convention:  a Scientific  Committee consisting of specialists i n caribou conservation from the scientific community, and a Subsistence Committee consisting  - 169 of representatives of those peoples who traditionally take caribou for their own nutritional or other essential domestic needs. The Ctommission may appoint or recognize other public advisory groups as i t may deem advisable.  5.  The Ctommission may hold public meetings at such times and places as i t may decide.  The Ctommission shall provide public notice  preceding those meetings.  6. The Parties shall provide the Ctommission with personnel and funds required by i t to exercise i t s powers and perform i t s duties under this Convention.  7.  The Ctommission may communicate with the Parties and appear and present evidence and arguments before, and make submissions to, public bodies on a l l matters pertaining to the conservation of caribou and their habitat.  8. The Ctommission shall prepare an annual budget of i t s anticipated expenses and submit i t to each Party.  Each Party shall determine  and pay the expenses of i t s Delegation.  Joint expenses incurred  by the Commission and i t s Advisory Ctommittees shall be paid by contributions made by the Parties.  The form and proportion of the  contributions shall be those approved by the Parties after the recommendation of the Ctommission.  - 170 9. The reccmtrendations, public notices, and other public coranunications issued by the Commission shall be i n the o f f i c i a l languages of the Parties and, where the Commission i s so requested by the Subsistence Committee, i n the languages of the people that use the caribou.  Article IV The Commission shall have the following powers and duties: 1.  The Commission shall, when advisable for the conservation of caribou herds, recommend to the Parties the number of caribou that may be taken consistent with the long-term conservation of caribou and their habitat.  These recommendations shall include establishing  the maximum allowable take of caribou and allocating the maximum allowable take between the Parties. When advisable for the conservation of caribou, the Commission may recommend time and area taking restrictions i n areas i t identifies as sentitive habitats.  When recommending the allocation of the take of caribou,  the Commission shall take into consideration the availability, subject to sound conservation principles, of other species of wild animals.  2.  The Commission shall recommend to the Parties measures to ensure the conservation and enhancement of caribou,habitat and the ecosystem of which caribou are a part.  These recommendations may  include, but are not limited to, measures relating to habitat modification that may impede, delay or disrupt caribou movement, alter traditional use of caribou habitat, or affect caribou  - 171  behaviour patterns.  -  These recommendations may refer to the entire  habitat of caribou protected by this Convention or any portion of i t .  3.  The Commission shall identify sensitive habitat components requiring special protection and shall recommend to the Parties measures to govern the use or modification of such areas.  4.  The Commission shall recommend to the Parties other measures i t deems advisable to ensure the long-term conservation of caribou and their habitat.  These recommendations may include measures  restricting the harassment and harming of caribou.  5.  The Commission, in carrying out i t s responsibilities under this Convention, shall focus i t s attention primarily on the Porcupine Caribou Herd and give priority to the conservation and enhancement of that herd.  6.  The Commission shall prepare and publish annual summary reports on the status of caribou populations, their habitat, and the ecosystem of which they are a part; actions taken by the Commission in the discharge of i t s duties; and the actions taken by the Parties to implement the purpose and terms of this Convention.  The Commission  may prepare and publish such other reports as i t deems advisable. The (Commission shall make available to the public a l l reports, recommendations, and data collected or prepared by the Advisory Committees, and any information provided by the Parties.  - 172 Article V The Advisory Committees shall have the following powers and duties: 1.  The Advisory Committees shall provide advice, data or other services as directed by the Commission, and more particularly they shall a) advise the Commission on a l l matters relating to taking needs, distribution of take, allowable take levels, and allocation of take between the Parties. b> advise the Commission on a l l aspects of the conservation and enhancement of habitat and the ecosystems of which caribou are part.. . c) advise the Commission on the need for research and management studies.  2.  The Advisory Committees shall meet regularly to exchange information to aid them i n developing their recommendations to the Commission, and may hold public meetings to consider any matter relating to their duties.  Article VI When making recommendations authorized by Article IV, the Commission shall comply with the following procedures, i n addition to any other procedures i t may 1.  establish:  The Commission shall request the views of the Advisory Committees, and any other committee i t may appoint or recognize;  - 173 2. The Commission shall make provision for public comments on recommendations before they are made f i n a l ;  3. The Commission shall consider the advice of i t s Committees and the comments of the public, and other relevant data, and issue final recommendations to the Parties along with the rationale upon which they are based;  4. In an extraordinary situation requiring immediate action by the Commission, the procedure i n paragraph 2 may be waived.  Article VII The Parties shall undertake the research necessary to meet the purpose and objectives of this Convention.  To achieve these ends, the Parties  may request the Scientific Committee to coordinate the cooperative undertaking of such research.  Article VIII This Convention shall i n no way affect the rights of the Parties to adopt stricter domestic measures to conserve caribou or their habitat or to establish domestic measures protecting caribou not covered by this Convention.  Article IX Nothing i n this Convention shall conflict with any Agreements either Party has made with i t s indigenous peoples whether before or after the date that this Convention comes into force, with respect to the  - 174 settlement of their aboriginal, land or other rights, and the Parties agree not to take any action whatsoever which may be contrary to such Agreements without the consent of the respective Party and the indigenous peoples.  Article X 1. This Convention shall be ratified and the instalments of ratification exchanged as soon as possible.  2. This Convention shall enter into force on the date that the instruments of ratification are exchanged.  3.  At the request of either Party consultation shall be conducted with a view to convening a meeting of representatives of the two Parties ;  to amend this Convention.  4. Either Party may terminate this Convention by written notice to the other Party. Temination shall take effect twelve months after the other Party has received such notice.  IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, being duly authorized by their Governments, have signed this Convention.  

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.831.1-0100222/manifest

Comment

Related Items