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. (Hons.University of 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 this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1979 (c) Nancy Juna Russell, 1979 In presenting this thesis i n partial fulfillment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Br i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make i t freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my department or his It i s understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. I n 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 o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y 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 r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r 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 t h e Head o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t Of CJnhnnl n f rnmmnnify and Rpg inna l P l a n n i n g The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 2075 W e s b r o o k P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , C a n a d a V6T 1W5 D E - 6 B P 75-51 1 E - i i -ABSTRACT INTERNATIONAL BIORESOURCE AGREEMENTS: THE CASE OF THE PORCUPINE CARIBOU This study analyses thirteen selected international w i l d l i f e conventions as the basis for the recommended elements for an international convention on the conservation and management of the Porcupine Caribou herd and i t s ecosystem. The nature of the study stems from the confusing array of overlapping proposals for northern Yukon Resources. The o i l , gas and mining industries continue to exert pressure on the p o l i t i c a l decision-makers to provide incentives and release the area for future exploitation. The Committee for Original Peoples Entitlement and the Council for Yukon Indians have traditional land claim settlements to the area, including provisions for involvement in 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 to advocate and strive for provincial status. The federal government has displayed continuing inter-departmental and inter-agency ri v a l r y evidenced by competing proposals for the area. Parks Canada wishes to establish a national wilderness park, and the Department of the Environment's Canadian Wildlife Service, a Canada w i l d l i f e area. Across the international boundary, decisions pending on the wilderness status, and possible o i l and gas exploration i n northeastern Alaska also bear directly on the northern Yukon's future. The focus of attention has been on the Porcupine Caribou, one of the world's largest herds, migrating over a vast, unique and fragile * - i i i -ecosystem with no regard for physical or jurisdictional boundaries. Conservation of this population depends to a large degree on the success of planning and management of the ecosystem of which i t i s a part. This struggle for authority and control of the area i s a major stumbling block to comprehensive planning. Caribou can only be adversely affected by the potential results — over-harvesting, reduction of winter ranges, disruption of calving grounds and barriers to migration. The northern Yukon i s an important challenge to those who would adopt an ecosystem approach to planning the environment. One proposed solution i s the draft convention between Canada and the United States on the Conversation of Migratory Caribou and Their Environment as an element of a comprehensive planning and management framework. Having studied the social, economic, ecological and p o l i t i c a l issues i n the northern Yukon, a set of principles and c r i t e r i a for future resource management are proposed. These provide the evaluative framework for analysing the thirteen international conventions. The principles embody the concepts of conservation and enhancement of 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 wi l d l i f e management and planning, and the development of a flexible management framework. Based on this analysis, elements for an international convention on the conservation and management of the Porcupine caribou herd and i t s ecosystem are recommended. This i s followed by a critique of the May 1979 draft Convention for the Conservation of Migratory Caribou and Their Environment. - i v -The method of investigation has been a literature review, extensive interviewing of personnel involved i n a l l aspects of the problem, and a comparative analysis of international w i l d l i f e agreements. Major conclusions include: - the proposed caribou convention should provide for legally-entrenched reservation of lands for the protection of the herd and i t s habitat; - these lands must include c r i t i c a l or sensitive habitat areas, i.e. calving grounds, to remain inviolate to a l l forms of development; - native peoples must have pr 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, specifically the migratory caribou; - an independent commission on the conservation and management of the caribou and their ecosystem should be provided for i n the convention; and - this commission must also have an active role i n future land use planning and management committees and agencies. - v -T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S ^ A b s t r a c t i ± . L i s t o f T a b l e s v i i : L i s t o f F i g u r e s y i j f A c k n o w l e d g e m e n t s i x C h a p t e r I I n t r o d u c t i o n 1 C h a p t e r I I H i s t o r i c a l S k e t c h o f t h e P r o p o s a l f o r a n 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 R a n g e . 5 2 . 1 T h e E a r l y Y e a r s 5 2 . 2 O i l a n d G a s D i s c o v e r i e s a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n I n i t i a t i v e s 7 2 . 3 T h e B e r g e r I n q u i r y 9L 2 . 4 N a t i v e P r o p o s a l s 10 . 2 . 5 G o v e r n m e n t S t u d i e s a n d T a s k F o r c e s 1 4 2 . 6 C a r i b o u C o n v e n t i o n 2 2 2 . 7 C O P E / F e d e r a l G o v e r n m e n t A g r e e m e n t -i n - P r i n c i p l e 2 4 2 . 8 A d d i t i o n a l P r o p o s a l s 2 6 2 . 9 C o n c l u s i o n ' . 2 9 C h a p t e r I I I C a r i b o u M a n a g e m e n t 3 0 3 . 1 W h y b e C o n c e r n e d ? 3 0 3 . 2 R a n g e s a n d M i g r a t i o n R o u t e s 3 2 3 . 3 P o p u l a t i o n C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 4 5 3 . 3 . 1 S i z e a n d C o m p o s i t i o n 4 5 3 . 3 . 2 P r e d a t i o n a n d M o r t a l i t y F a c t o r s 49. 3 . 4 M a n a g e m e n t 5 4 C h a p t e r I V T h e S o c i o e c o n o m i c C o n t e x t f o r C o n s e r v a t i o n a n d D e v e l o p m e n t C o n c e r n s 5 9 4 . 1 S o c i a l a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n I s s u e s 5 9 4 . 1 . 1 N a t i v e C o n c e r n s 59 . 4 . 1 . 2 A r c h a e o l o g i c a l P o t e n t i a l 6 3 4 . 1 . 3 C o n s e r v a t i o n a n d R e c r e a t i o n C o n c e r n s 6 5 4 . 2 I n d u s t r i a l C o n c e r n s 6 7 4 . 2 . 1 D e m p s t e r H i g h w a y a n d L a t e r a l P i p e l i n e 6 7 4 . 2 . 2 O i l , G a s a n d M i n e r a l E x p l o r a t i o n 7 7 4 . 3 C a r i b o u , R e n e w a b l e R e s o u r c e s a n d D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n n i n g 8 3 - v i -Page Chapter V Elements for an International Convention on the Conservation and Management of the Porcupine Caribou Herd and its Ecosystem 85. 5.1 Evaluative Framework 85 5.1.1 Conservation 86. 5.1.2 Regulation 87 5.1.3 Management 89. 5.1.4 Research 91 5.1.5 Native Use 93 5.1.6 Other Environmental Concerns 95 5.1.7 Review 98 Chapter VT Critique of the Draft Convention for the Conservation of Migratory Caribou and Their Environment 100. 6.1 Overview 1Q0. 6.2 Conservation of Lands 101 6.3 Management and Regulation 104 6.4 Coordinated Research 107 6.5 Native Use and Involvement 107 6.6 Compatible/Incompatible Land Uses and Activities 109. 6.7 Review 110 6.8 Conclusion H I Literature Cited - 113 Appendix I Review of Selected International Wildlife Conventions 121 Appendix II Convention Between the United States of America and Canada for the Conservation of Migratory Caribou and Their Environment, May 1979 163 Curriculum Vitae - v n -LIST OF TABLES Relative Strengths and Weaknesses of Conservation Options Seasonal A c t i v i t i e s and D i s t r i b u t i o n of the Porcupine Caribou Herd . 1972 and 1977 Porcupine Caribou Herd Population Estimates Porcupine Caribou Herd Composition Observed During Post-Calving Migration, 1972 - 1976 Porcupine Caribou Harvest Data Comparative Analysis of International W i l d l i f e Agreements: A Summary - v i i i -L I S T O F F I G U R E S Page 1 . T h e R a n g e 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 2 2 . T h e D e m p s t e r H i g h w a y 1 1 3 . T h e W e s t e r n A r c t i c R e g i o n 1 3 4 . T h e N o r t h e r n Y u k o n 1 5 5 . W i l d e r n e s s W i t h d r a w a l a n d t h e P o r c u p i n e C a r i b o u 2 0 6 . C O P E ' s N a t i o n a l W i l d e r n e s s P u b l i c D e d i c a t i o n , Y u k o n T e r r i t o r y 2 5 7 . S p r i n g M i g r a 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 , 1 9 7 1 - 1 9 7 8 3 5 8 . C a l v i n g G r o u n d s o f t h e P o r c u p i n e C a r i b o u , 1 9 7 2 - 1 9 7 4 39. 9 . P o s t - C a l v i n g A g g r e g a t i o n s , 1 9 7 4 4 0 1 0 . P o s t - C a l v i n g a n d A u g u s t D i s p e r s a l M o v e m e n t s , 1 9 7 1 - 1 9 7 4 4 2 1 1 . C u r r e n t G e n e r a l W i n t e r R a n g e o f t h e P o r c u p i n e C a r i b o u , 1 9 7 0 - 1 9 7 8 4 4 1 2 . T h e D e m p s t e r H i g h w a y A c r o s s t h e P o r c u p i n e C a r i b o u ' s W i n t e r R a n g e 6 8 1 3 . M i n e r a l C l a i m s i n t h e N o r t h e r n Y u k o n W i t h d r a w a l L a n d s , 1 9 7 9 7 9 1 4 . M i n e r a l P o t e n t i a l - N o r t h e r n Y u k o n , 1 9 7 9 8 0 - i x -A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S I w o u l d l i k e t o t h a n k D r . W i l l i a m R e e s f o r h i s e n c o u r a g e m e n t , a d v i c e a n d e d i t o r i a l a s s i s t a n c e i n t h e p l a n n i n g a n d p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s d o c u m e n t . S i m i l a r l y , I w o u l d l i k e t o t h a n k D r . A n d r e w T h o m p s o n f o r h i s g u i d a n c e a n d . c o m m e n t s 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 , p a r t i c u l a r l y h i s l e g a l a d v i c e . T h i s s t u d y w a s s u p p o r t e d b y t h e C a n a d i a n A r c t i c R e s o u r c e s C o m m i t t e e , a n d g r a n t s t o D r . R e e s f r o m t h e C a n a d i a n A r c t i c a n d A l p i n e R e s e a r c h C o m m i t t e e , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , V a n c o u v e r . - 1 -C H A P T E R I I N T R O D U C T I O N T h i s s t u d y f o c u s e s o n k e y e l e m e n t s o f a p r o p o s e d i n t e r n a t i o n a l m i g r a t o r y c a r i b o u c o n v e n t i o n b e t w e e n C a n a d a a n d t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . T h e g e o g r a p h i c a r e a o f c o n c e r n i s t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n , e n c o m p a s s i n g t h e r e g i o n n o r t h o f D a w s o n , g e n e r a l l y d e s c r i b e d b y t h e r a n g e 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 ( s e e F i g u r e 1). T h e u n i q u e 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 a n d 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 Y u k o n a r e p a r t o f a n 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 a n d i n t e r n a t i o n a l i m p o r t a n c e . T h e m i g r a t o r y P o r c u p i n e C a r i b o u h e r d i s s y m b o l i c o f t h i s h e r i t a g e . T h e p o t e n t i a l c a r i b o u c o n v e n t i o n w h i c h f o c u s e s o n t h e P o r c u p i n e h e r d i s o n l y o n e e l e m e n t i n a c o n f u s i n g a r r a y o f p r o p o s a l s f o r t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n , i n c l u d i n g t h e s u g g e s t e d 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 R a n g e a n d a p o s s i b l e n a t i o n a l w i l d e r n e s s p a r k . T h e s c o p e i s t h e r e f o r e b r o a d e n e d f r o m c a r i b o u t o c o m p r e h e n s i v e l a n d u s e p l a n n i n g a n d m a n a g e m e n t . T h i s b r o a d e r c o n t e x t w i l l p r o v i d e t h e f r a m e w o r k f o r i d e n t i f y i n g t h e e l e m e n t s o f i m p o r t a n c e . F o r e x a m p l e , s p e c i f i c p r o b l e m s o f c o n c e r n i n t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n , s u c h a s n a t i v e r i g h t s , r e c r e a t i o n a l p r e s s u r e s a n d i n d u s t r i a l p o t e n t i a l r e c e i v e a t t e n t i o n i n t h i s c o n t e x t . A s s u m i n g t h a t i n t e r e s t i n n o r t h e r n w i l d e r n e s s c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d w i l d l i f e p r o t e c t i o n a n d m a n a g e m e n t r e m a i n a h i g h p r i o r i t y w i t h i n t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f I n d i a n a n d N o r t h e r n A f f a i r s ( D I N A ) a n d t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f t h e E n v i r o n m e n t ( D O E ) . , c o n s e r v a t i o n v a l u e s o f t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n ' s - 2 -'PRUDHOE BAY FIGURE i THE RANGE OF THE PORCUPINE CARIBOU DAWSON S P R I N G M I G R A T I O N S U M M E R M O V E M E N T S ' F A L L M I G R A T I O N N L I M I T O F W I N T E R R A N G E A P P R O X I M A T E N O R T H E R N rTjXlJlT]^ A P P R O X I M A T E L I M I T _ OF C A R I B O U R A N G E C A L V I N G G R O U N D • » » ! D E M P S T E R C O R R I D O R P R O P O S E D G A S P I P E L I N E G A S F I E L D S A (ALASKA HIGHWAY PIPELINE PANEL, 1978b) - 3 -land and resources are of primary importance, and industrial potential of secondary importance to the government of Canada. This i s the context of comprehensive planning i n this analysis. I have also assumed that some form of international agreement w i l l be realized 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 to: a. develop an analytic framework to approach the problem of an international migratory caribou agreement, with emphasis on overall land use planning and resource management issues; and b. propose a schedule of essential elesments that must be included in any eventual agreement i f the multiple socio-economic-ecological principles of such an agreement are to be observed. The thesis i s divided into several chapters. It begins with a brief treatise of the development of the concept of an international w i l d l i f e range and the subsequent myriad of proposals for the northern Yukon. A discussion of biological characteristics of the Porcupine caribou herd follows, drawing upon past research and interviews of ,ca£ibou biologists who have worked with the herd. Social, conservation and industrial issues are then outlined i n the context of land and resource planning and management. Special reference i s made here to the role of native peoples regarding use of the land and resources for traditional purposes, as well as their involvement i n long-term - 4 -p l a n n i n g a n d m a n a g e m e n t . E x i s t i n g i n t e r n a t i o n a l w i l d l i f e a g r e e m e n t s a r e t h e n c r i t i c a l l y e v a l u a t e d a c c o r d i n g t o a s e t o f p r i n c i p l e s a n d c r i t e r i a . T h e s t u d y c o n c l u d e s w i t h p o s s i b l e e l e m e n t s o f a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l a g r e e m e n t a n d a c r i t i q u e o f t h e m o s t r e c e n t d r a f t C o n v e n t i o n B e t w e e n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s o f A m e r i c a a n d C a n a d a f o r 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 a n d T h e i r E n v i r o n m e n t . - 5 -CHAPTER I I HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE PROPOSAL FOR AN ARCTIC INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE RANGE ; INTRODUCTION The unique landforms,ecological d i v e r s i t y , and c u l t u r a l and archaeological s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the northern Yukon are part of an irr e p l a c e a b l e natural heritage of 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 migratory Porcupine Caribou herd i s symbolic o f t h i s heritage. However, various i n d u s t r i a l developments pose a serious threat to the region and i t s resources. The re c e n t l y completed Dempster Highway, the plans of Dome Petroleum f o r access across the North Slope to the Beaufort Sea, and possible a u t h o r i z a t i o n of o i l and gas exploration i n northeastern Alaska, are examples o f immediate concern. 2.1 THE EARLY YEARS The h i s t o r y of the 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 implications f o r i t s current and future status. The term AIWR (Canada) was coined i n 1970 a t a conference i n whitehorse and r e f e r s t o the same general area of northern Yukon lands t e n t a t i v e l y withdrawn from future development by Hugh Faulkner, former M i n i s t e r o f Indian and Northern 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 reserve adjoins the A r c t i c National W i l d l i f e Refuge (ANWR) i n northeastern Alaska. I t was o r i g i n a l l y anticipated' that AIWR would become the name of the combined Canadian and United States area. Today, however, AIWR has come to represent the p o t e n t i a l Canadian reserve only. - 6 -The proposal f o r a n o r t h e r n Yukon reserve o r i g i n a t e s from the 1920's when Olaus and Mardy Murie conducted f i e l d studies on the Porcupine Caribou herd's range i n northeastern Alaska. They were able then to impress upon U.S. o f f i c i a l s the conservation value o f the A r c t i c ecosystem. Nevertheless, research d i d not begin u n t i l the 1950's, headed by George L. C o l l i n s , then Chief of Land Use Planning f o r the Western Region of the National Park Service; Lowell Sumner, Chief N a t u r a l i s t of the Service; and A. Starker Leopold, zoology professor at the U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a (Leonard 1978a). As part 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 the Muries, surveyed the upper Sheenjek River drainage i n the eastern Brooks Range i n 1956. Their studies were supported by the Wilderness Society, the Conservation Foundation and the New York Zoological Society, and provided part o f the i n i t i a t i v e f o r the 1957 S i e r r a Club Wilderness Conference. This meeting focused on northeastern Alaska and the northern Yukon, and was attended by heads of a l l the U.S. f e d e r a l land management agencies and environmentalists from across North America. The U.S. A r c t i c National W i l d l i f e Refuge stemmed from the conference's major recommendation f o r formal p r o t e c t i o n of the caribou and other w i l d l i f e i n the Brooks Range area. In part because of objections by mining i n t e r e s t s , the formal establishment of such a reserve was not taken up by Congress u n t i l December 1960 when, i n the f i n a l days of the Eisenhower administration, I n t e r i o r S e c r e t a r y S e a t o n w i t h d r e w 8 . 9 m i l l i o n a c r e s b y p u b l i c l a n d o r d e r t o e s t a b l i s h 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 R e f u g e (ANWR) ( L e o n a r d 1 9 7 8 a ) . L o b b y i s t s f o r t h e ANWR a l s o a t t e m p t e d t o h a v e a C a n a d i a n c o u n t e r p a r t w i t h d r a w n , b u t a s t h e r e w a s n o e v i d e n c e o f a n y t y p e o f t h r e a t i n t h e A r c t i c , t h e r e w a s n o C a n a d i a n g o v e r n m e n t s u p p o r t f o r t h i s p r o p o s a l . 2 . 2 O I L A N D G A S D I S C O V E R I E S A N D C O N S E R V A T I O N I N I T I A T I V E S I n 1 9 6 8 t h e s i t u a t i o n c h a n g e d d r a m a t i c a l l y . T h e d i s c o v e r y o f o i l a n d n a t u r a l g a s a t P r u d h o e B a y , A l a s k a , a n d s u b s e q u e n t e x p l o r a t i o n i n t h e w e s t e r n C a n a d i a n A r c t i c , r e s u l t e d i n i n c r e a s e d p r e s s u r e o n t h e C a n a d i a n g o v e r n m e n t t o p r o t e c t t h e r a n g e o f t h e P o r c u p i n e h e r d i n t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n a s a w i l d l i f e r e s e r v e a d j o i n i n g t h e ANWR. G e o r g e C o l l i n s a n d h i s c o n s e r v a t i o n - o r i e n t e d a s s o c i a t e s a t t e n d e d t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o n f e r e n c e o n P r o d u c t i v i t y o f C i r c u m p o l a r L a n d s i n E d m o n t o n i n 1 9 6 9 w i t h t h e i n t e n t i o n o f u r g i n g C a n a d i a n A r c t i c s p e c i a l i s t s t o l o b b y f o r p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n l a n d s ( L e o n a r d 1 9 7 8 b ) . D r . A n d r e w T h o m p s o n , a c o n s e r v a t i o n i s t a n d l a w p r o f e s s o r a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , s u b s e q u e n t l y o r g a n i z e d t h e 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 R a n g e C o n f e r e n c e , w h i c h t o o k p l a c e i n w h i t e h o r s e i n O c t o b e r , 1 9 7 0 . T h i s m e e t i n g a t t r a c t e d 6 6 A r c t i c w i l d l i f e s p e c i a l i s t s , r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f s t a t e , t e r r i t o r i a l a n d f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t s , m i n i n g , o i l a n d g a s c o m p a n i e s a n d n a t i v e g r o u p s . A m a j o r i t y o f p a r t i c i p a n t s a g r e e d u p o n s e v e r a l r e s o l u t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a C a n a d i a n w i l d l i f e r e f u g e . T h i s m a j o r i t y s t r e s s e d t h e n e e d f o r f o r m a l p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n u n d e r S e c t i o n 1 8 ( e ) o f t h e T e r r i t o r i a l - 8 -Lands Act, and for research into possible international agreements for the management of the resources. The principal recommendation suggests: ... that the governments of Canada and Yukon establish an area to be known as the Arctic International Wildlife Range (Canada), with boundaries to be established with reference to suitable landmarks approximately following the Porcupine and Bell Rivers and thence to the Blow River near i t s mouth, along the Arctic coast to the international border and south along that border to the Porcupine River (U.B.C. Law Review 1971).. The AIWR (Canada) Society was also formed, with Dr. Thompson as president and George Collins as vice-president. Following the. conference, the Hon. Jean Chretien, then Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs (DINA)., and participant at the two-day meeting, acknowledged the recommendations and resolutions passed at the conference, and indicated his support for the Range. Additional support came from the 12th Technical Meeting of the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCNL 1972, where a resolution was passed urging the governments of Canada and the United States to cooperate i n establishing an international range for the protection of the Porcupine Caribou herd. The AIWR conference resolution reached the Order-in-Council stage, but was subsequently dropped by Chretien's office in 1973. The key factor at this time was the increasing concern over land claim negotiations, and the concomitant pressure on government (specifically DINA) to disallow any further land dispositions (Thompson 1978).. A second factor was the attitudes of inining - 9 -i n t e r e s t s and l o c a l chauvinism, expressed through Commissioner Smith's (Yukon) objection. L o c a l residents f e l t that the f e d e r a l government should not proceed on decisions having a major e f f e c t on the Yukon u n t i l the issue of provincehcod was s e t t l e d (Thompson 1978). 2.3 THE BERGER INQUIRY DINA therefore kept the proposal shelved u n t i l an upsurge i n i n t e r e s t occurred during the Berger Inquiry 1974 - 1977. In conducting hearings on the environmental impact o f a Mackenzie V a l l e y gas p i p e l i n e proposed by the Canadian A r c t i c Gas consortium, Commissioner J u s t i c e Berger heard extensive evidence on the value o f wilderness, which he defined as a non-renewable resource (Berger 1977, Vol.1, p.30). 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 proposed route was incompatible with the environment, i n c l u d i n g w i l d l i f e and hunting, trapping and f i s h i n g a c t i v i t i e s o f native people. He argued f o r the p r o t e c t i o n o f the resource base: In the North, c e r t a i n ecosystems and c e r t a i n migratory populations can be protected and preserved only by recognizing the i n v i o l a b i l i t y of wilderness (Berger 1977, Vol.1, p.31). He therefore recommended the withdrawal of lands north of the Porcupine River f o r establishment as a n a t i o n a l wilderness park: The wilderness park that I am proposing here would cover approximately the same area as the Canadian part of the proposed A r c t i c International W i l d l i f e Range, and i t would adjoin the 9 m i l l i o n acre A r c t i c National W i l d l i f e Refuge i n Alaska. ... Together, these two areas would c o n s t i t u t e a magnificent area of 18 m i l l i o n acres spanning the i n t e r n a t i o n a l boundary (Berger 1977, Vol.1, p.48). - 10 -The s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h i s proposal i s fur t h e r emphasized by J u s t i c e Berger's recognition of the need f o r a new type o f "wilderness park". He noted 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 associated with Canadian n a t i o n a l parks are incompatible with the i n t e r e s t s o f w i l d l i f e p r o t e c t i o n . Berger thus suggested a r e v i s i o n t o Canadian n a t i o n a l parks l e g i s l a t i o n to include a new statutory c r e a t i o n , wilderness parks (Berger 1977, Vol.1). On J u l y 4, 1977 the National Energy Board (NEB), following the Berger Inquiry and r e s u l t s from t h e i r own hearings, r e j e c t e d the Mackenzie V a l l e y Gas P i p e l i n e route proposed by Canadian A r c t i c Gas (Rees 1978). As an a l t e r n a t i v e , they recommended the l a s t minute proposal by F o o t h i l l s Pipe Lines (Yukon) Limited, whose route would follow the Alaska o i l p i p e l i n e t o the Alaska Highway and thence southeast t o Al b e r t a . Included i n t h i s proposal was a spur l i n k c a l l e d the Dempster L a t e r a l which would eventually f a c i l i t a t e the tran s p o r t a t i o n of Mackenzie Delta gas to southern markets. The Dempster route would approximately p a r a l l e l the Dempster Highway from Inuvik to Dawson, and continue southeast to the Alaska Highway P i p e l i n e (see Figure 2). A p p l i c a t i o n f o r the Dempster L a t e r a l must be submitted t o the NEB by J u l y 1, 1979 i n conjunction with an environmental impact assessment o f the p i p e l i n e . 2.4 NATIVE PROPOSALS The pace o f events increased through t h i s period. The Committee f o r O r i g i n a l Peoples Entitlement (COPE), an organization representing - 11 -FIGURE 2 T H E D E M P S T E R HIGHWAY _0 River : o mile l£3 (I89 km)3 09' BEAUFORT SEA iAKMWKX v . mile 97I (I563 km) 'SiNUVIK m o "5-I i > FORT MbPHERSON] \ ) 'tmile_29Q/i46J.Jim) I -1-mile 254\(409 krA) -mile 237 (Sm kmSs mile 4I7 (I490 km) = mile 93I * ...Mackenzie Hwy ARCTIC IED RIVER -mile I78 (286 km) I lEAGLE .INTON CREEK .DAWSON* -mile 78 (I25.5km) • mile 0 (0 km) 50 100 I00 miles 200 km C O N S T R U C T E D » UNDER C O N S T R U C T I O N — — — P R O P O S E D C O N S T R U C T I O N R E C O N S T R U C T I O N July I978 (NORTHERN PERSPECTIVES, Vol. VII, No.l, 1979) - 1 2 -t h e 2 , 5 0 0 I n u v i a l u i t ( I n u i t o f t h e W e s t e r n A r c t i c ) , p r e s e n t e d i t s I n u v i a l u i t N u n a n g a t l a n d c l a i m s e t t l e m e n t p r o p o s a l t o t h e f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t i n M a y 1 9 7 7 . W h i l e t h i s e m p h a s i z e d t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f A r c t i c w i l d l i f e a s a p r i m a r y g o a l , c r e a t i o n o f a s p e c i f i c w i l d e r n e s s p a r k w a s n o t s u g g e s t e d . " ^ C O P E o r i g i n a l l y e n v i s a g e d t h a t w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t p r o t e c t i o n w o u l d f a l l u n d e r a L a n d U s e P l a n n i n g a n d M a n a g e m e n t C o m m i s s i o n , w h i c h w o u l d b e e m p o w e r e d t o m a n a g e a n a r e a d e s i g n a t e d a s t h e W e s t e r n A r c t i c R e g i o n . W i l d e r n e s s a r e a s o r w i l d l i f e p r e s e r v e s c o u l d t h e n b e s e t a s i d e w i t h i n t h i s R e g i o n b y t h e C o m m i s s i o n ( I n u v i a l u i t N u n a n g a t 1 9 7 7 ) . T h i s " W e s t e r n A r c t i c R e g i o n " o v e r l a p s w i t h t h e p r o p o s e d A I W R a l o n g t h e c o a s t l i n e , a s w e l l a s w i t h t h e l a n d s i d e n t i f i e d f o r a l a n d c l a i m s e t t l e m e n t b y t h e C o u n c i l f o r Y u k o n I n d i a n s ( s e e F i g u r e 3 ) . T h e O l d C r o w p e o p l e , t h e o n l y n a t i v e g r o u p l i v i n g w i t h i n t h e p r o p o s e d A I W R , s u b s e q u e n t l y a g r e e d u p o n a j u r i s d i c t i o n a l b o u n d a r y t o s e p a r a t e t h e i r t r a d i t i o n a l l a n d s a n d t h o s e o f t h e I n u v i a l u i t u n d e r t h e C O P E c l a i m . I n F e b r u a r y 1 9 7 8 , t h e O l d C r o w p e o p l e , u n d e r t h e C o u n c i l f o r Y u k o n I n d i a n s , s u b m i t t e d t h e i r p r o p o s a l f o r m u c h o f t h e a r e a i n q u e s t i o n t o t h e W o r k i n g G r o u p o n P a r k s a n d S c i e n t i f i c P r e s e r v e s a t a C a n a d i a n A r c t i c R e s o u r c e s C o n f e r e n c e i n E d m o n t o n . T h i s p r o p o s a l i n c l u d e d a p r o v i s i o n f o r a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l w i l d l i f e r a n g e : 1 . A s n o t e d i n a l a t e r s e c t i o n , C O P E , f o l l o w i n g o n J u s t i c e B e r g e r ' s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n , l a t e r p r o p o s e d t h e c r e a t i o n o f a N a t i o n a l W i l d e r n e s s P a r k . - 13 -FIGURE 3 WESTERN 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 in 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 will not include the Old Crow Flats area, as i t is 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 2 approximately 16,988 mi (44,000 km ). The Northern Yukon: An Ecological Land Survey was completed in August 1978, and is 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). Parks 2 2 Canada's proposal covers about 8,200 mi (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 -F IGURE 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, felt 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 will: Identify the manner in which a National Park and other conservation mechanisms could be established so that they could exist in the most complementary way in 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 (all 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 2 the Porcupine, Bell and Rat Rivers (16,000 mi or 41,440 km ). These are: 1. No action (status quo) 2. 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. - 1 7 -E a c h o p t i o n w a s d i s c u s s e d a c c o r d i n g t o i t s a d v a n t a g e s a n d d i s a d v a n t a g e s i n t e r m s o f f l e x i b i l i t y ( m u l t i p l e u s e ) , e a s e o f i m p l e m e n t a t i o n , a n d l e v e l o f p r e s e r v a t i o n . T a b l e 1 s u m m a r i z e s t h i s a n a l y s i s . S i g n i f i c a n t l y , t h e T a s k F o r c e c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e s e t t l e m e n t o f N a t i v e l a n d c l a i m s w a s a n o v e r r i d i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n , a n d t h a t t h e c o n f u s i n g v a r i e t y o f p r e s e r v a t i o n i n t e r e s t s a n d m a n a g e m e n t d e c i s i o n s n e c e s s i t a t e d a c o n s e r v a t i o n p l a n t o p r o v i d e a m e c h a n i s m f o r c o o r d i n a t e d a n d c o o p e r a t i v e m a n a g e m e n t . T h e y t h e r e f o r e w e r e u n a b l e t o p r o p o s e a n y r e a d y - m a d e s o l u t i o n s a n d i n s t e a d , r e c o m m e n d e d t h e f o l l o w i n g t o t h e M i n i s t e r o f I n d i a n a n d N o r t h e r n A f f a i r s : 1 . T h a t t h e N o r t h e r n Z o n e b e w i t h d r a w n u n d e r 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) p e n d i n g f u r t h e r s t u d y a n d c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h t h e c o n c e r n e d p a r t i e s . T h e w o r d i n g o f w i t h d r a w a l O r d e r - i n - C o u n c i l s t i p u l a t e s t h a t : a . s u c h a w i t h d r a w a l w i l l n o t p r e j u d i c e n a t i v e l a n d s e t t l e m e n t s ; a n d b . l o c a l p e o p l e m a y c o n t i n u e t o h a r v e s t r e n e w a b l e r e s o u r c e s a s t h e y h a v e d o n e p r e v i o u s l y . 2 . T h a t t h e c u r r e n t e f f o r t s t o w a r d a c h i e v i n g a m a n a g e m e n t p l a n f o r t h e D e m p s t e r H i g h w a y b e a c c e l e r a t e d a n d i m p l e m e n t e d b y t h e Y u k o n a n d N o r t h w e s t T e r r i t o r i a l G o v e r n m e n t s . T h i s i s c o n s i d e r e d u r g e n t . 3 . T h a t t h e Y u k o n M i n e r a l A c t b e p a s s e d t o e n a b l e 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 m e a n s o f t h e T e r r i t o r i a l L a n d s A c t . 4 . T h a t t h e N o r t h w e s t T e r r i t o r i a l G o v e r n m e n t b e 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 o t h e r w i s e s p e c i f i e d i n N a t i v e C l a i m s S e t t l e m e n t s . T h i s w o u l d n o t p r e c l u d e i n t e r s e t t l e m e n t t r a d e o r b a r t e r . - 18 -Table 1: Relative Strengths and Weaknesses of Conservation Options *Rank in terms of: Conservation Option Flexibility _ , . . . Preservation Implementation No Action 1 1 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 in the table as i t is 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 in January 1978 of the initiation of public consultation respecting six potential wilderness areas in 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 will not prejudice land claims discussions nor traditional native hunting, fishing and trapping activities in 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 - 20 -PORCUPINE CARIBOU O o o o yHERSCHEL ISLAND o 1/ >x #^ Wilderness is a non-renewable resource ...wilderness constitutes an Important — perhaps an invaluable — part of modern-day life; its preservation is a contribution to, not a repudiation of, the civilization upon which we depend. Justice Thomas Berger (NORTHERN PERSPECTIVES, Vol. VII, No. 2, 1979) OLD CROW I V / / , -I ' .* I . '„ i , ' J T V , ) f LAND WITHDRAWAL -CARIBOU RANGE LIMIT CARIBOU WINTERING AREA CARIBOU MIGRATION ROUTE CARIBOU CRITICAL AREA J ( \ \ I 2 > O - 21 -Wilderness Park" (DINA, Task Force Terms of Reference, 1979). The Task Force is 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 - Oil 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 is 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 is continuing the public consultation program for a national wilderness park announced by Faulkner in 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 is considerable overlap between this last (committee and the DINA Task Force in terms of membership and objectives. Indeed, COPE feels that the Task Force is encroaching upon the responsibilities of the Steering Committee regarding concerns inside the Wilderness Park: ...the primary responsibility of the Steering Committee is to consider the area that is withdrawn including both the 5,000 sq.miles which is the imnimum area to be dedicated as a National Wilderness Park and the additional 11,000 sq. miles which is 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... is the need to manage the entire herd and its 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 its habitat in 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 is 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 in the performance of its 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 is encouraged, public participation on the Commission's annual reports and recommendations. - 24 -2.7 C O P E / F E D E R A L GOVERNMENT A G R E E M E N T - I N - P R I N C I P L E T h e I n u v i a l u i t L a n d R i g h t s S e t t l e m e n t i s a l s o o f s i g n i f i c a n c e i n t h i s c o n t e x t . O n O c t o b e r 31, 1978 C O P E a n d t h e f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t s i g n e d a n A g r e e m e n t - i n - P r i n c i p l e o n t h e C O P E c l a i m . R e g a r d i n g t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n ' s p o t e n t i a l a s a w i l d e r n e s s r e s e r v e , t h e A g r e e m e n t s t a t e s i n Section 12 t h a t a s a m i n i m a l a g r e e m e n t : 12(1) C a n a d a a g r e e s 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 P a r k f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f w i l d l i f e p r o t e c t i o n a n d 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 s q u a r e m i l e s o f t r a d i t i o n a l l a n d s o f t h e I n u v i a l u i t i n t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n s h o w n a s t h e a r e a m a r k e d " A " i n A n n e x E a n d i n p u r s u a n c e t h e r e o f h a s w i t h d r a w n f r o m d i s p o s a l u n d e r t h e T e r r i t o r i a l L a n d s A c t c e r t a i n l a n d s t h e r e i n a s d e s c r i b e d i n t h e P r o h i b i t i o n a n d W i t h d r a w a l 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). H o w e v e r , t h e A g r e e m e n t r e c o m m e n d s t h a t t h e g o v e r n m e n t a c t u a l l y w i t h d r a w t h e m u c h l a r g e r a r e a 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 t h i s p u r p o s e a s o u t l i n e d b y B e r g e r (1977 V o l . 1 ) . A s p r e v i o u s l y n o t e d , t h i s d e v i a t e s f r o m t h e o r i g i n a l C O P E p r o p o s a l t h a t c a l l e d f o r a L a n d U s e P l a n n i n g a n d M a n a g e m e n t C o m m i s s i o n w h i c h h a d a u t h o r i t y t o s e t a s i d e w i l d e r n e s s a r e a s o r w i l d l i f e r e s e r v e s . I t s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t a t p r e s e n t t h e r e i s n o l e g a l b a s i s f o r " N a t i o n a l W i l d e r n e s s P a r k s " i n C a n a d a . W h i l e d i s c u s s i o n i s u n d e r w a y c o n c e r n i n g p o s s i b l e p o l i c y f o r s u c h r e s e r v e s i n f u t u r e , i t i s c u r r e n t l y u n c e r t a i n g i v e n t h e s t r o n g d e v e l o p m e n t - o r i e n t a t i o n h i s t o r i c a l l y o f P a r k s C a n a d a ( T u r n e r a n d R e e s 1973) w h e t h e r a N a t i o n a l W i l d e r n e s s P a r k o r o t h e r f o r m o f c o n s e r v a t i o n r e s e r v e w o u l d b e s t s e r v e t h e m u l t i p l e o b j e c t i v e o f s o c i e t y i n t h e d i s p u t e d l a n d s o f t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n . - 25 -F IGURE 6. COPE'S NATIONAL WILDERNESS PUBLIC DEDICATION YUKON TERRITORY MINIMUM 5 0 0 0 SQUARE M I LE PARK A R E A V/ JV .V . ' P A R A G R A P H 12 ( 1 ) [V.TTV.V S O U T H E R N B O U N D A R Y R E F E R R E D TO IN 1 2 ( 1 ) B E R G E R ' S A R E A O F R E C O M M E N D A T I O N PARKS C A N A D A P R O P O S E D N A T I O N A L W I L D E R N E S S 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 in the rich and internationally-significant archaeological and palaeontological resources in the northwest area of the Yukon. Current research is 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 in 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 in 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 will 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 in the Northwest Territories comprise a natural heritage of regional, national and international importance for its unique landforms, plant and animal species, including migratory birds and marine l i f e , and for its cultural and archeological significance; AND WHEREAS the migratory Porcupine Caribou Herd is symbolic of this natural heritage; AND WHEREAS conservation of the Porcupine Caribou Herd, its habitat and the ecosystem of which i t is a part is 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 in 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 in planning and management by such means as monitoring, reporting, educating, and by representation at hearings; 7. there must be timely implementation of these principles; - 2 8 -A N D W H E R E A S 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 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 a n d t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t i s u n d e r n e g o t i a t i o n , a n d t h e p r o p o s e d 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 m a k e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s g o v e r n i n g h a r v e s t o f c a r i b o u , c o n s e r v a t i o n o f c a r i b o u h a b i t a t , a n d t h e e c o s y s t e m o f w h i c h c a r i b o u a r e a p a r t , a n d a n y o t h e r m e a s u r e s i t d e e m s n e c e s s a r y t o e n s u r e t h e l o n g - t e r m c o n s e r v a t i o n o f t h e c a r i b o u ; A N D W H E R E A S 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 i n t o 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 W i l d e r n e s s P a r k o f n o t l e s s t h a n 5 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e m i l e s i n t h e N o r t h e r n Y u k o n b e e s t a b l i s h e d f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f w i l d l i f e p r o t e c t i o n a n d w i l d e r n e s s c o n s e r v a t i o n ; A N D W H E R E A S 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 t h e C o u n c i l f o r Y u k o n I n d i a n s a r e n e g o t i a t i n g a n A g r e e m e n t -i n - P r i n c i p l e t h a t w i l l h a v e a d i r e c t , l o n g - t e r m e f f e c t o n t h e l a n d s a n d w i l d l i f e o f t h e N o r t h e r n Y u k o n ; A N D W H E R E A S 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 l a n d s n o r t h o f t h e P o r c u p i n e a n d B e l l R i v e r s ( 1 5 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e m i l e s ) i n t h e Y u k o n f o r a n a t i o n a l w i l d e r n e s s p a r k a n d o t h e r c o n s e r v a t i o n p u r p o s e s : B E I T R E S O L V E D T H A T : 1 . 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 c o n v e n t i o n b e t w e e n C a n a d a a n d t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s f o r 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 a n d t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t . 2 . U n d e r t h e 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 b e e s t a b l i s h e d a u n i f i e d r e g i m e o f l a n d m a n a g e m e n t , h a b i t a t m a n a g e m e n t a n d s p e c i e s m a n a g e m e n t t o e n s u r e t h e a c c o m p l i s h m e n t o f t h e p r i n c i p l e s s t a t e d a b o v e f o r t h e e n t i r e r a n g e 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 A l a s k a , Y u k o n a n d N o r t h w e s t T e r r i t o r i e s . 3 . T h i s m a n a g e m e n t r e g i m e m u s t p r o v i d e f o r c e r t a i n r e s t r a i n t s t h a t a r e b a s i c t o t h e p r i m a r y o b j e c t i v e o f c o n s e r v a t i o n o f t h e h e r d , i t s h a b i t a t a n d t h e e c o s y s t e m o f w h i c h i t i s a p a r t . T h e s e a r e : 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 a n y s p e c i e s b e g i v e n p r i o r i t y w i t h i n t h e s u s t a i n i n g c a p a c i t y o f t h e e c o s y s t e m , b . t h a t a n y o t h e r u s e o f t h e r e g i o n m u s t n o t b e p r e j u d i c i a l t o t h e p r i m a r y o b j e c t i v e ; a n d t h e o n u s 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 u s e i s n o t p r e j u d i c i a l m u s t r e s t o n t h e p o t e n t i a l u s e r . - 29 -4. Within the withdrawn portion of the region and the adjacent portion of the caribou range in 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 is likely. Cooperation between Canada and the U.S. on planning and management policies for the Porcupine Caribou and their habitat is 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 in conjunction with the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge must be emphasized in order to realize the comprehensive scope outlined by Marchand in 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, is one of the largest herds in existence. Since the herd's range covers the northern Yukon and portions of the Northwest Territories and northeastern Alaska, i t is 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 is 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 in the north? "Conservation" is usually meant to include "wise use" of a resource for future generations. In its 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 its 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... is the need to manage the entire herd and its 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 its habitat in 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'1 baseline or control areas is an insurance policy for the ecological viability 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 its 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 political battles with a focus on the Porcupine caribou. As with other herd animals, the caribou have migratory habits which follow the seasons. With the difficulties of surviving in 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 in 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 will be affected" 1 (Laycock 1976). For these reasons, some type of comprehensive reserve is 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. The accepted definition of a caribou herd is a group of animals that calves in a traditional area different from areas used by other groups (Skoog 1968 and Thomas 1969). The herd is 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 Annual Cycle ^ Area-of Range ^ f ^ , ^ Average Year Stage Available toinposition Densrty per Day April Spring Richardson Mountain Variable Variable between -May Migration Mtns., Eagle ridges years. Groups up Plains, Boreal 30 30,000 may be Porcupine Forest encountered. Plateau, Cows, yearlings, Keele Mtns. young bulls Old Crow precede mature Flats, Barn bulls by 2-4 & British weeks. Mtns. May 31 Calving Coastal Tundra 4,000mi2 Small groups -June Plain sedge usually (10 animals) 15 Northern meadows. limited to gradually Foothills of Eriophorum 2,500nu~ coalescing into British tussocks, loose aggregat-Barn & drier ions of several Romanzov uplands thousand cows Mtns. to and calves, 3,500 f t . pregnant cows, level. and yearlings only. June 15 Post- Coastal Tundra, 7,500mi2 Entire populat--July calving Plain and new Very large ion present in 30 aggregation Foothills willow & herds use one small area, until sedge only a few a l l ages and July 8. forage sq.mi. of sexes present. Foothills particul- this area only after arly at any July 8. import- time. ant. Variable 10-20 mi. 12/mi" 6 mi. 50,000/mi^ 15 mi. August-Sept. 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/mi2 15 mi. during dispersal, less after. Oct.10-Oct.20 Nov.-April Rut Winter Depends on progress of migration. Ogilvie Mtns. Chandalar River drainages, Eagle Plains. Wintering on Old Crow Flats and Coastal tundra not as common. Same as for f a l l migration. Mountain ridges, Boreal forest, river flats. Variable 60,000mi Never a l l used in one year. Large loose aggregations 20-100 animals. Segregation between sexes occurs. Up to 1,000/mi^  10/mi and more in late winter. Up to 30 mi. but usually less. less than 1 mi. Adapted from Calef (1974) Table 1 and references in text. - 35 -F I G U R E 7. SPRING MIGRATION OF THE PORCUPINE CARIBOU, 1971-1978 - 36 -Spring migration normally begins with small groups (about 100) drifting northward in 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 in 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 — the Richardson Route and the Old Crow Route — which have been used consistently since 1971 (Jakimchuk et al 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 al 1974, and Foothills 1978b). The Old Crow Route is travelled by caribou wintering in 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 al 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 killed 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 drift 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 in 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 al 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 is also variable, depending on the chronology of migration and use of wintering areas. "If caribou... are able to migrate earlier in the spring they will probably calve further west along the Alaskan coast. When conditions inhibit early migrations caribou will likely calve in the Yukon" (Surrendi and DeBock 1976). Immediately after calving, the cows and calves join the yearlings, dry cows and bulls in 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 is 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 F IGURE 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 REMAINING A S L A T E AS 18 | July • 15-16 July HERSCHEL ^ ' CZ> ISLAND OINUVIK AKhAVIK ({s ~ a o o \(ARCTIC GAS BIOLOGICAL REPORT SERIES Vol. 32, 1975) - 41 -British Mountains, and thence southeast to another staging area in the Richardson Mountains - Driftwood Hills locale (Roseneau, Curatolo and Moore 1975, and Surrendi and DeBock 1976) . Animals that in i t i a l l y do not move east appear to travel south into the Brooks Range and continue in 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 al 1974, Roseneau, Curatolo and Moore 1975, and Surrendi and DeBock 1976, see Figure 10). Some caribou did not move westward into Alaska, but, as in past years, remained scattered in 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). Fall migration begins with small groups drifting southwastwards back towards Old Crow Flats in 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 in number, then moves south through the Nahoni Range and Ogilvie Mountains towards the Ogilvie and Tatonduk winter ranges. Another group of F I G U R E 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 al 1974, Roseneau, Curatolo and Moore 1975, and Surrendi and DeBock 1976). The rut takes place during the f a l l migration, generally in mid-October. Because of the variability of the f a l l migration, there is no characteristic locality for the rut, although i t usually occurs in the Forest-Tundra, particularly in 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 al (1974), McCourt et al (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 in 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 in the Ogilvie - Peel Region since 1970, with major use of the Chandalar River drainage only in the winters of 1972/73 and 1978/79. Within the two general areas, however, distribution is variable and extensive. Topography and vegetation are key factors in 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 al 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 POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS  3.3.1 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 in 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 in 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 in the late 1920's; and during the 1930's, Fort Yukon's f a l l harvest steadily increased. Despite the numerous studies in the early 1900's, most were of a general nature, and hence scientific reporting of age, sex and numbers is 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 in 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 will continue as long as either population remains high, facilitated by the overlap which occurs on the wintering grounds when both herds utilize 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 in relation to the proposed natural gas pipelines. The Canadian Wildlife Service and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game expanded this work in 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 in 1972 (LeResche) and in 1977 (Bente and Roseneau) by aerial photography. The "aerial photo - direct count - extrapolation technique" was used in both the 1972 and 1977 estimates, and involves the collection of: an estimate of the number of caribou in 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 is 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 in 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. Fall 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 final population estimate, one must: a. count a l l animals on the photographs; b. add any other unphotographed animals in the post-calving area; and c. add the bulls and yearlings not in the post-calving area when the areal photographs were taken (i.e. compare the ratio of bulls and yearlings to cows in 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 is seriously limited (Bente and Roseneau 1978). As the magnitude of the error sources is 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 circling cows and calves on the calving grounds and have apparently killed a few calves (Roseneau and Curatolo. 1976). Grizzly bears have been observed near calving grounds and following post-calving aggregations. They will k i l l caribou i f the opportunity arises, and are often found feeding on Carrion (Calef and Lortie 1973, Jakimchuk et al 1974). Wolves are considered the most effective predator of caribou in North America. Jakimchuk et al (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 is unknown (Curatolo and Moore 1975). Human predation of the Porcupine caribou herd is 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 is 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 Number of caribou (including calves) counted in peripheral groups Total caribou in post-calving concentration groups Composition of post-calving group a. cows b. calves c. bulls d. yearlings Number of cows in post-calving group (and therefore minimum number of cows in entire sub-population) Composition of entire herd, as determined: by Lortie during rut ('72) and from Nov. composition counts, assuming random nrixing at each time a. cows b. calves c. bulls d. yearlings 82,680 10,080 92,760 51,405 8,992 60,397 No.Counted a "5 No.Counted % 6,157 52. 5 36,856 61. 0 3,052 26. 0 14,464 24. 0 1,433 12. 2 combined 1,079 9. 2 9,026 15. 0 48,727 36,856 No.Counted No.Counted 1,461 48.7 3,487 39.0 443 14.8 1,657 18.5 837 27.9 2,707 30.3 257 8.6 1,089 12.2 2,997 100.0 8,940 100.0 Minimum size of entire herd assuming: a. 48,726 cows represents 48.1\ the herd (1972) of 99,959 c. 36,856 cows represents 39.0% of the herd (1977) 48,726 cows (1972. figure) represents 39.0% of the herd 94,503 124,938 Adapted from Davis (1978): Appendix I and II. Table 4 - Porcupine Caribou herd composition observed during post-calving migration - 1972-1976. Year Source* Cows Calves Calves/ Yearlings Bulls Total NO. Q. "O No. a "O lOOCows No. g. *5 No. o, "5 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 1975 1976 RRCS RRCS RRCS 7818 9823 7579 55 52 55 5176 4986 4456 37 27 32 66 51 59 437 1711 1428 3 9 10 696 2294 299 5 12 2 14,127 18,814 13,762 1972 - 1976 x = 54.6 x = 29.8 x = 54.6 x= 7.4 x = 8 .2 1977 ADF&G/ RRCS 15675 61 6057 24 39 2786 11 1002 4 25,520 Adjusted 1977 data based on assumption that 54.6 calves/100 cows were present 15675 56 8559 31 54.6 2786 10 1002 4 28,002 * Alaska Department of Fish and Game = ADF&G Renewable Resources Consulting Services = RRCS Adapted from Davis 1978. - 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 is 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 sub-units 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 killed in the Yukon and 57 in Alaska by sport hunters in the 1977/78 season. A 5-mile no-hunting zone on either side of the Dempster Highway is proposed by the Yukon Territorial Government's Wildlife Branch to help reduce the potential increase in sport hunting, but enforcement of this regulation presents serious difficulties. In Alaska, sport hunting of the herd is 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 will 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 Arctic Village Caribou 1,000 Kaktovik 300 Venetie, Fort Yukon, Chalkyitsik Other TOTAL: 4,175 100 100 1,500 Canada Aklavik, Inuvik, Fort MacPherson, Arctic Red River, Tuktoyaktuk Old Crow Dempster Highway and Other Caribou 2,000 600 75 2,675 b. Total Harvest for the 1977 - 1978 season (Davis, Roseneau) Alaska Kaktovik Arctic Village Sport Hunting Caribou Yukon 200 Old Crow 450-550 Caribou NWT 470 Ft. Mc Pherson 200-300 Dempster Hwy. Hunters Collission 57 32 3 505 Caribou 350 Aklavik Inuvik, Arctic Red River 114 100 564 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 is an institutional means for manipulating the elements and interactions between habitat, wildlife and man in order to achieve specific social goals and objectives. It is essentially goal-oriented, i.e. a desired result is identified and subsequent management reflects the spectrum of biological, social and political 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 in 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 its 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 m a n a g e m e n t s c e n a r i o s a r e p o s s i b l e , i n c l u d i n g m a x i m i z a t i o n o f m e a t p r o d u c t i o n t h r o u g h g a m e r a n c h i n g , m a x i r r d z i n g t h e t o u r i s t p o t e n t i a l f o r n o n - c o n s u m p t i v e u s e s s u c h a s p h o t o g r a p h y a n d " g a m e w a t c h i n g " , o r m a n a g i n g f o r t h e h e r d ' s e x p a n s i o n a n d h a b i t a t e n h a n c e m e n t . T h e s e s c e n a r i o s a r e n o t s t a t i c , b u t w i l l l i k e l y c h a n g e a c c o r d i n g t o s o c i e t y ' s c h a n g i n g v a l u e s a n d p r i o r i t i e s . A s s u m i n g t h e P o r c u p i n e c a r i b o u w i l l b e m a n a g e d a c c o r d i n g t o s o m e c o n s e n s u s o n o b j e c t i v e s o u t l i n e d b y t h e i n t e r e s t g r o u p s , t h e r e i s a c o m m o n s t o c k o f b i o l o g i c a l d a t a f o r a n y m a n a g e m e n t s c e n a r i o . T h e f o l l o w i n g d a t a a r e u s e d i n f o r m u l a t i n g m a n a g e m e n t p o l i c i e s a n d p l a n s , h o w e v e r t h e e l e m e n t s c h o s e n d e p e n d o n w h i c h m a n a g e m e n t s c e n a r i o a n d c o n c o m i t a n t o b j e c t i v e s a r e f o c u s e d o n i n c u r r e n t p o l i c y . D a t a o f P r i o r i t y I n t e r e s t P o p u l a t i o n S t a t i s t i c s : 1. s i z e a n d d e n s i t y o f h e r d 2. a g e a n d s e x c o m p o s i t i o n s 3. b i r t h s a n d d e a t h s ( r e c r u i t m e n t r a t e ) 4. c a l f / c o w a n d c o w / b u l l r a t i o s 5. s u r v i v a l o f c a l v e s ( r a t e s a t d i f f e r e n t a g e s ) B e h a v i o u r P a t t e r n s : 1. m i g r a t i o n p a t h s : w h e r e , w h y , t i m i n g , a l t e r n a t i v e s 2. r e s p o n s e t o a r t i f i c i a l b a r r i e r s : r o a d s , p i p e l i n e s b u i l d i n g s , a n d t o m o v i n g o b j e c t s : t r a f f i c , a i r c r a f t 3. t o l e r a n c e o f c u m u l a t i v e i m p a c t s : r o a d + p i p e l i n e c o r r i d o r , e t c . 4. e f f e c t s o f h a r a s s m e n t M o r t a l i t y D a t a : 1. h a r v e s t : # o f a n i m a l s k i l l e d ( a g e a n d s e x ) # o f h u n t e r k i l l s / y e a r ( s u c c e s s f u l a n d u n s u c c e s s f u l ) s e l e c t i v i t y o f h a r v e s t : b y w h o m , t i m i n g , l o c a t i o n , n u m b e r p r e d a t o r / p r e y r a t i o e f f e c t s o f m a n a g e m e n t o n k i l l r a t i o 2. m o r t a l i t y b y t y p e a n d a g e o f a n i m a l s . - 5 6 -D a t a o f S e c o n d a r y I n t e r e s t ( t h e a b o v e p l u s . . . ) . P o p u l a t i o n S t a t i s t i c s : 6 . i i n m i g r a t i o n a n d e m i g r a t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g e x i s t e n c e o f d i s c r e t e s u b - u n i t s ) 7 . c a r r y i n g c a p a c i t y 8 . b r e e d i n g h a b i t s 9 . g e n e t i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ( i . e . p h y s i o l o g y ) B e h a v i o u r P a t t e r n s : 5 . r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n c a r i b o u a n d t h e i r h a b i t a t 6 . s t r e s s o f w e a t h e r a n d d i s e a s e 7 . r a t e o f t r a v e l 8 . i n t r a - r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n c a r i b o u ; i n t e r - r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n c a r i b o u a n d o t h e r s p e c i e s R a n g e a n d V e g e t a t i o n S t u d i e s : 1 . i t u n i m u m a m o u n t 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 o c c u p y 2 . r a n g e r e q u i r e m e n t s : s i z e , t y p e , d i v e r s i t y , v e g e t a t i o n ; t y p e s 3 . h a b i t a t a n d v e g e t a t i o n p r e f e r e n c e , i . e . e l e m e n t s o f s e l e c t i v i t y s u c h a s f o o d p r e f e r e n c e , a b i o t i c f a c t o r s ( s n o w c o n d i t i o n s ) a n d s u b - u n i t p r e f e r e n c e s 4 . e f f e c t s o f c a r i b o u o n t h e i r h a b i t a t 5 . r e g e n e r a t i v e c a p a c i t y o f t h e r a n g e s s e l e c t e d 6 . e f f e c t s o f f i r e , f r e q u e n c y o f f i r e s , s u c c e s s i o n o f l a n d i n r e l a t i o n t o f o r a g e p r e f e r e n c e s M o r t a l i t y D a t a : 3 . i l l e g a l a n d c r i p p l i n g l o s s e s 4 . a r e a / k i l l r a t i o . I n t h e e x i s t i n g p o l i t i c a l a n d s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n o f t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n , h i g h p r i o r i t y w i l l u n d o u b t e d l y b e g i v e n t o n a t i v e c o n c e r n s o n t h e i s s u e s o f w i l d l i f e m a n a g e m e n t . B e c a u s e n a t i v e l a n d c l a i m s e t t l e m e n t s i n c l u d e t h e o b j e c t i v e o f " p r o t e c 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 a n d o t h e r w i l d l i f e " , a s w e l l a s o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e p l a n n i n g a n d m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e h e r d o n a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l b a s i s , a n d b e c a u s e t h e n a t i v e s a r e c u r r e n t m a j o r u s e r s o f t h e h e r d f o r s u b s i s t e n c e p u r p o s e s , i t i s l i k e l y t h a t p r i o r i t y s h o u l d b e g i v e n t o t h e i r o b j e c t i v e s , r-. 5.7 -with the. caveat of consistency with. the. sustaining capacity of the herd and its ecosystem. This does not mean that rigid or entrenched arrangements, pertaining to subsistence harvesting are necessarily in the. interests of native peoples. Such, a situation would be in direct conflict with future management options for non-consumptive use and tourism. If concern for the social and economic well-being of native people is of high, priority, provision should be made in future ii^agement policies to ensure the preferential involvement of natives in I? non-intensive recreational pursuits and management planning. Clearly, the above discussion indicates the critical elements of flexibility 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 its 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 will 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 link between the caribou population and i t s range requirements relates to the broader issue of comprehensive land planning and management i s clearly an important factor. The inter-relationships of local subsistence users, researchers, resource developers, and government regulatory and management agencies, from the local to the international levels, must somehow be c l a r i f i e d . Institutional mechanisms for such involvement need to be developed (Mair 1978) . - 59 -CHAPTER IV THE SOCIOECONOMIC CONTEXT FOR CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT CONCERNS  4.1 SOCIAL AND CONSERVATION ISSUES Social and political 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 is 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 is viewed by many natives as a permanent source of security and sense of well-being, in contrast to employment which is often temporary and unreliable (Usher 1976). An important negotiating point respecting land claims is 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 lifestyle, in conjunction with development of renewable resources, is 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 is 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 ; (iii) 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-in-Principle. Respecting northern Yukon lands, this area was deleted from the Region, hence the western-most boundary is the Yukon/NWT border, rather than the Yukon/Alaska border. It should be noted that the area is subject to reversionary rights on 5,000 sq.miles of the northern Yukon should wilderness designation and protection be abandoned. - 61 -(iv) the p r e f e r e n t i a l r i g h t s t o harvest a l l other species o f w i l d l i f e (except migratory non-game b i r d s and migratory insectivorous birds) f o r subsistence usage, through the Western A r c t i c Region. In the event harvesting r i g h t s are extended t o other native peoples pursuant t o paragraph 14(2)(d), t h e i r requirements as t o subsistence usage w i l l be taken i n t o account as w e l l when s e t t i n g the subsistence quotas; ... ( I n u v i a l u i t Land Rights Settlement, Agreement-in-Principle 1978). F i n a l l y , following J u s t i c e Berger's recommendation (Berger 1977, Vol.1), the COPE Agreement advocates establishment of a National Wilderness Park t o achieve these 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" in 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 in the international treaty for management of the Porcupine Caribou herd: 1. Protection of a l l lands utilized by the Porcupine Caribou herd in an International Wildlife Range (as opposed to National Wilderness Park) in 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, strictly 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 in 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 in 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 is 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 critical 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 its 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 is in danger of slipping from sight. Whether the new institution is named a "wildlife range" or "wilderness park", the stated concern of native groups is the protection, conservation and management of the wildlife and habitat. What ultimately counts is the description of the range and its management practices that are incorporated into law. This will 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. It should be noted that the identification of National Wilderness Parks does not appear in the of f i c i a l Policy, but that this type of area is handled within their zoning classification. Wilderness is found under section 2.4.2 and is a Class II area. - 64 -o f C a n a d a . D r . R i c h a r d M o r l a n , w o r k i n g u n d e r t h e M u s e u m o f M a n , i s c u r r e n t l y h e a d i n g a m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y t e a m o n a s t u d y o f t h e l a t e P l e i s t o c e n e p a l e o e n v i r o n m e n t s o f a l l u n g l a c i a t e d a r e a s i n t h e Y u k o n T e r r i t o r y . T h i s " Y u k o n R e f u g i u m P r o j e c t " i n i t i a t e d i n 1975, p l a c e s p a r t i c u l a r e m p h a s i s " o n t h e e a r l i e s t a p p e a r a n c e o f m a n a n d h i s s u b s e q u e n t r o l e i n t h e c h a n g i n g e c o s y s t e m s o f B e r i n g i a " — a g e o g r a p h i c a l p r o v i n c e o f u n g l a c i a t e d i n t e r i o r Y u k o n , A l a s k a , t h e B e r i n g L a n d B r i d g e a n d i c e - f r e e p o r t i o n s o f n o r t h e a s t e r n S i b e r i a ( M o r l a n 1978). D r . W i l l i a m I r v i n g , u n d e r c o n t r a c t t o P a r k s C a n a d a , h a s o r g a n i z e d t h e " N o r t h e r n Y u k o n R e s e a r c h P r o g r a m " . T h i s s t u d y , a l s o a m u l t i -d i s c i p l i n a r y e f f o r t , i s e x a m i n i n g a l l p h a s e s o f h u m a n p r e h i s t o r y i n t h e O l d C r o w a r e a ( M o r l a n 1978). A m o n g t h e n u m e r o u s a r t i f a c t s c o l l e c t e d t o d a t e a r e b o n e a r t i f a c t s d a t i n g 25,000 - 29,000 y e a r s B P , c o l l a g e n o f 33,000 - 35,000 B P ( t h o u g h t t o r e p r e s e n t m i d - W i s c o n s i n a n f a u n a ) , i n d i g e n o u s p e a t i n t h e O l d C r o w R e g i o n o f 35,500 B P a n d 41,100 + 1,650 B P , a n d o r g a n i c r e m a i n s o l d e r t h a n t h e l i m i t s o f t h e r a d i o c a r b o n d a t i n g m e t h o d ( M o r l a n 1978 a n d H a r r i n g t o n 1977). B e r i n g i a i s t h e o r i z e d a s p l a y i n g a k e y r o l e i n t h e i n i t i a l c o l o n i z a t i o n o f N o r t h A m e r i c a b y h u m a n s e m i g r a t i n g f r o m n o r t h e a s t e r n A s i a , b u t t h e l a c k o f e v i d e n c e o n l a t e P l e i s t o c e n e h u m a n o c c u p a t i o n i n B e r i n g i a h a s f r u s t r a t e d a r c h a e o l o g i s t s f r o m c o n c l u d i n g t h e i r t h e o r i e s w i t h p r o o f . " N o r t h e a s t e r n B e r i n g i a f i n a l l y h a s b e g u n t o y i e l d s u c h e v i d e n c e i n t h e f o r m o f a d i s t i n c t i v e b o n e t e c h n o l o g y f o u n d p r i m a r i l y i n n o r t h e r n Y u k o n T e r r i t o r y " ( M o r l a n 1978). - 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 is 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 is "rich in wildlife and includes the most northwesterly ; occurrence of Dall sheep in Canada" and trails 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 2 [12,950 km2] — Arctic alpine tundra and low arctic alpine forest section of the northern boreal forest. The site is 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 is an area suitable for preservation for the study of the relationship between game and furbearing animals and humans who utilize them almost exclusively for their livelihood. A "solar bowl", i t is protected on a l l sides by mountain ranges, ... - 66 -Site 6: Firth Pdver - 2,300 mi 2 [5,957 km2] — (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 in Sub-Arctic Canada 1975). As mentioned in Chapter Two, Parks Canada has prepared a proposal for a national Wilderness reserve in 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 in providing dollars for the Yukon economy, has an increased potential in light of the varied park and wildlife range proposals. This may be illustrated by Kenya, where wildlife-oriented tourism is the major source of foreign exchange. Similarly, Yukon wildlife may eventually become valued more for aesthetic and recreational purposes than consumptive ones, resulting in economic and social benefits for the Yukon populace. The unexplored economic and social opportunities for Yukoners in - 67 -t h e Y u k o n ' s s p e c t a c u l a r w i l d l i f e c o n c e i v a b l y e x c e e d t h o s e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h c e r t a i n f o r m s o f i n d u s t r i a l d e v e l o p m e n t a n d t h e r e f o r e s h o u l d n o t b e i g n o r e d . 4 . 2 I N D U S T R I A L C O N C E R N S I n d u s t r i a l i s s u e s h a v e d i r e c t b e a r i n g o n c o m p r e h e n s i v e l a n d u s e p l a n n i n g i n t h e n o r t h , e s p e c i a l l y i n l i g h t o f p a s t g o v e r n m e n t a l p o l i c i e s o f i n c r e a s e d e c o n o m i c a n d i n d u s t r i a l g r o w t h a t t h e e x p e n s e o f s o c i a l a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l v a l u e s . T h e g o v e r n m e n t ' s n o r t h e r n d e v e l o p m e n t p o l i c y i s p r e d i c a t e d o n t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t m a n a g e d o r m u l t i p l e u s e c a n o c c u r i n t h e n o r t h w i t h n o - o n e ' s i n t e r e s t b e i n g p r e j u d i c e d . " . . . s i n c e t h e l a n d s i n q u e s t i o n a r e C r o w n l a n d s , a l l c o m p e t i n g u s e r s a r e o n e q u a l f o o t i n g , a n d t h e g o v e r n m e n t ' s r o l e i s a s n e u t r a l a r b i t e r a m o n g t h e m " ( U s h e r 1 9 7 8 ) . I n l i g h t o f t h i s p h i l o s o p h y , i n d u s t r i a l i s s u e s o f t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n m u s t b e c o n s i d e r e d w h e n o n e t a l k s a b o u t p l a n n i n g a n d m a n a g e m e n t o f w i l d e r n e s s p a r k s a n d w i l d l i f e r a n g e s . 4 . 2 . 1 D e m p s t e r H i g h w a y a n d L a t e r a l P i p e l i n e T h e D e m p s t e r H i g h w a y , p a r t o f t h e 1 9 6 0 ' s " N o r t h e r n V i s i o n " o f J o h n D i e f e n b a k e r ( N o r t h e r n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n B r a n c h 1 9 6 4 ) , w a s c o m p l e t e d i n 1 9 7 8 , y e t t h e i m p a c t t h e H i g h w a y w i l l h a v e o n w i l d l i f e a n d n a t i v e l i f e s t y l e s i s u n k n o w n . T h e H i g h w a y c r o s s e s t h e m i g r a t o r y r o u t e s o f t h e P o r c u p i n e c a r i b o u f r o m t h e e a s t e r n s l o p e o f t h e R i c h a r d s o n M o u n t a i n s i n t h e n o r t h , t o t h e v i c i n i t y o f t h e j u n c t i o n o f t h e O g i l v i e R i v e r a n d t h e H i g h w a y i n t h e s o u t h . I t t h e r e f o r e h a s t h e p o t e n t i a l o f i n h i b i t i n g t h e u s e o f w i n t e r r a n g e s e a s t o f t h e H i g h w a y ( A l a s k a H i g h w a y P i p e l i n e P a n e l 1 9 7 8 b , s e e F i g u r e 1 2 ) . - 68 _ - 69 -In June 1977, the Alaska Highway Pipeline Panel, an independent group of environmental scientists funded by Foothills Pipe Lines Limited to undertake environmental studies of their pipeline 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 setting for the Dempster Highway route (McLeod 1978). Accordingly, the Panel initiated an environmental evaluation of the Highway and the proposed Dempster Lateral pipeline 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 activity, and the appearance of an elevated roadbed could prevent caribou from crossing the highway ... which could result in abandonment of a major portion of winter range, and eventually lead to large-scale population declines. Even without range abandonment, continued hunting and harassment associated with highway use could increase mortality and reduce productivity (Alaska Highway Pipeline Panel 1978a). The Dempster Highway thus poses several threats to the Porcupine caribou. Increased hunting pressure and other harassment affecting mortality along a 300 km stretch are of particular 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 Pipeline Panel 1978a; McLeod 1978). The potential disruption of the herd's movements and abandonment of the winter ranges east of the road would involve approximately one-third of the to t a l winter range. Although the forces contributing to migratory patterns and choice of winter range are not f u l l y understood, - 7 0 -I t s e e m s t h a t c a r i b o u p o p u l a t i o n s h a v e a s t r o n g h o m i n g t e n d e n c y t o t r a d i t i o n a l r a n g e s a n d t r a d i t i o n a l p a t h w a y s . I n a s e n s e t h e y l e a r n w h e r e t h e b e s t r a n g e s a r e a n d h o w t o r e a c h t h e m b y f o l l o w i n g e x p e r i e n c e d a n i m a l s . T h e y c a n a l s o ' u n l e a r n * e s t a b l i s h e d p a t t e r n s i f t h e y a r e r e p e a t e d l y d e f l e c t e d o r b l o c k e d f r o m t r a d i t i o n a l a r e a s , a p r o c e s s t h a t c o u l d p r o b a b l y t a k e s e v e r a l y e a r s a n d i n v o l v e s e v e r a l g e n e r a t i o n s ( C a l e f 1 9 7 4 ) . Contributing f a c t o r s t h i s " b a r r i e r e f f e c t " include high berms, snowbanks along the roadside, and l a t e r a l ditches f i l l e d with snow (Alaska Highway P i p e l i n e Panel 1978b). Highway t r a f f i c compounds the disturbance p o t e n t i a l . This "... would enhance the b a r r i e r e f f e c t and g r e a t l y increase the r i s k of range p a r t i t i o n i n g " (Alaska Highway P i p e l i n e Panel 1978a). A t h i r d t h r e a t p o s e d b y t h e H i g h w a y i s t h e f a c t o r o f d e l a y o r d e f l e c t i o n d u r i n g m i g r a t i o n . T h i s w o u l d m e a n t h a t t h e c a r i b o u . . . w o u l d h a v e t o s p e n d e n e r g y r e s e r v e s t o g e t b a c k o n c o u r s e o r o n s c h e d u l e . I f d e l a y e d t o o l o n g i n s p r i n g , c a l v e s c o u l d b e b o r n o u t s i d e t h e c a l v i n g g r o u n d w h e r e t h e y w o u l d p r o b a b l y b e m o r e v u l n e r a b l e t o p r e d a t o r s ; i f d e l a y e d i n f a l l , t h e y c o u l d b e c a u g h t b y h e a v y s n o w s 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 b e c o m e s t r e s s e d , w a s t e l i m i t e d e n e r g y r e s e r v e s , a n d b e m o r e s u s c e p t i b l e t o d i s e a s e , p r e d a t i o n a n d s t a r v a t i o n ( A l a s k a H i g h w a y P i p e l i n e P a n e l 1 9 7 8 a ) . C a r i b o u - h i g h w a y i n t e r a c t i o n s t u d i e s h a v e b e e n i n s u f f i c i e n t t o u n d e r s t a n d f u l l y t h e i m p a c t o f t h e H i g h w a y a n d r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s o n t h e a n i m a l s . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f r o a d s a n d r a i l r o a d s e l s e w h e r e h a v e c a u s e d d e c r e a s e s i n c a r i b o u p o p u l a t i o n s a s d o c u m e n t e d i n t h e B e r g e r I n q u i r y : - 71 -Dr. George Calef presented an analysis of recorded changes in 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 its population stands today at something like 6,000 animals. The Nelchina herd of south-east Alaska consisted of 70,000 animals in 1962; by 1973, i t had been reduced to only 8,000 animals. ... Dr. David Klein has written about the gradual abandonment of ranges in Scandinavia by reindeer, after their migration routes had been interrupted by r a i l or highway traffic (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, in 1976 Manfred Hoefs monitored the caribou's response to road construction activity and highway traffic, and mapped the important crossing locations for the purpose of establishing hunting and traffic 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, in November 1977, DINA initiated and financed a study of the impacts of the Dempster Highway and traffic on the caribou. The Yukon Game Branch is 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 in the Study. (Russell et al (1978). - 72 -As data accumulates in 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, in January 1978 the Northern Roads and Airstrips Division of DINA completed a revised draft of its 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 its users on the environment. Conservation and management are to be regarded as interdependent; 2. To introduce a method of control that is technically and economically feasible as well as being socially and environmentally acceptable. It is 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 is hoped, however, that the plan will 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 is 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 traffic 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 will 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 is partly due to the absence of any legal requirement for the government to undertake environmental impact studies, and to hold hearings for its 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 territorial legislation provides the Yukon and NWT governments with statutory authority to establish regulatory mechanisms for traffic 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 in 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 in the Yukon, including their management, regulation and control of access road establishment, to the territorial 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 territorial government to claim the highway as a "development area". The benefit of such a designation is seen in 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 in 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. fire protection; f. animals; g. the regulation or the prohibition of the discharge of guns or other firearms within a development area. Therefore, in 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 will be released to the public shortly.''" A long-term plan will be drafted in 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 is 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 is 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 field 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 is 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 width1" (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, in 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 is hundreds of miles from the pipeline; hence transmission lines and support stations will 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, is 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 will have to be exported, benefitting few in the Yukon. 4.2.2 Oil, Gas and Mineral Exploration While the overall o i l , gas and mineral potential of the northern Yukon presently appears fairly moderate (Mining Division, Oil and Gas Division, DTJMA, 19791, especially in relation to other values at stake, one cannot discount the future possibilities. As technology, prices and demands for non-renewable resources increase., the area will be under increasing developmental pressure. The only producing mine in the northern Yukon is 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 is 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 is 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 is in the seaward portion of the Coastal Shelf in 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 is maintained through various permits. PetroCan and Dome are actively exploring the Beaufort area west of Herschel Island, and Imperial Oil 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 is feared that as offshore o i l and gas development proceeds, the Coastal Plain will 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 is considered by many northerners and conservation groups - 7 9 -FIGURE 13. MINERAL CLAIMS IN THE NORTHERN YUKON WITHDRAWAL LANDS, 1979 4-69 140 139 / / i 138 y 7 Lapsed' Private 0*CfAqultane 4-68 Aquitane Archer Cathro j Assoc. I J v V 138 69 68 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 is favourable for this commodity but i t is 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 in 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) - 81 -F I G U R E 14. MINERAL POTENTIAL -NORTHERN YUKON, 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 latter suffering the consequences of industrial plans. The hard-line development of o i l and gas i n Arctic off-shore areas i s not unique. ... During the past 20 years, the federal Ctovernment has actively encouraged the multinational resource corporations to explore for and develop non-renewable resources north of the 60th parall e l . Offshore d r i l l i n g i s simply one facet of a northern policy which was articulated by John Diefenbaker 20 years ago (Pimlott et a l 1976). The Old Crow Flats, although currently under a Land Use Permit moratorium, shows good prospects for o i l and gas. Indeed, the Flats do have o i l and gas obligations owned by Great Plains-Trindex-Noranda. This means that the government either 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 in 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 Plains and Peel Plateau. Three or four significant discoveries of o i l and gas have been made in the Eagle Plains area to date, under lease to Brascan Resources. The Peel Plateau has not yielded any significant 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 well close to the Peel River i n this latter area. - 83 -4.3 CARIBOU, RENEWABLE RESOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT PLANNING If we assume a primary goal of conservation planning in 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 in 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 is l i t t l e evidence of rational development planning in the current situation in the northern Yukon, especially pertaining to conservation issues. If government policy, as stated in 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 is only limited potential in the renewable resource base, 'a realistic assessment is that in major terms that can affect the overall wealth of Canada, the economic future of the North lies in the ground'. Accordingly, while 'priorities in the north' include commitments to 'social development' and the 'natural environment', the emphasis to date has been to 'encourage and assist strategic projects... in the development of non-renewable resources and in which the•joint participation of the government and private enterprise is 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 is nothing in the observed pattern that remotely resembles a rational" planning framework... (Quotations are from Canada North 1970- 1980, 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 political issues in 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 its habitat is 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 in 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 The principles guiding this analysis are: PRINCIPLES 1, The agreement should advance conservation and enhancement of the Porcupine Caribou herd and its ecosystem as principle-management objectives. 2. The agreement should recognize the. aboriginal priority of use of the resources and make provisions for native involvement in caribou conservation and management planning consistent with social and scientific principles. - 86 -3. The agreement should recognize that social 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 flexible and responsive to these changing conditions consistent with (1) and (2). The study of the northern Yukon situation, together with the analysis of the 14 international conventions, resolved into the seven c r i t e r i a stated below. Each criterion i s followed by i t s rationale and applicability i n this case study. CRITERIA 5.1.1 Conservation what i s the legal status of reserved lands, and to what extent i s the agreement and i t s administrative process, capable of ensuring the protection of the wil d l i f e and i t s habitat? Does the agreement provide for absolute protection of c r i t i c a l habitat sites? Is overall ecosystem management inherent in the management framework? Rationale and Recommendation: Conservation of the caribou herd and i t s habitat i s a high priority of government and a guiding principle of ecosystem management. The  convention should therefore commit the parties to establishing some  sort of reserve or special-status lands to achieve this objective. We should recognize, however, that while a l l components of the caribou's habitat require "adequate" protection, this does not necessarily mean "equal" protection for a l l parts of the animals' range. For example, i t may be necessary to identify " c r i t i c a l habitat zones" devoted to exclusive use by the caribou within any reserve. The relatively restricted calving grounds would certainly be a candidate for classification as essential habitat. A workable hierarchy of zones might vary from this critical-habitat/ - 87 -single-purpose category, to larger ihtegrated-use zones where certain other development activity is permitted but controlled in light of the overall conservation objective. To be effective, any such reserve and its system of habitat zones should have same sort of formal legal status. This will prevent arbitrary changes in boundaries, permissible activities, etc., without adequate public review and political 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. Critical habitat sites should be designated immediately by both countries. Precedents for habitat protection have been set in 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 critical 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 its 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. If this commission is to have any significant authority, i t must be independent of the government of the day. Neither Canada, the United States, nor state or territorial 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 in 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 flexibility 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 cxranission1 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 critical habitat reserves established by legislation in support of the convention; c. to include the commission for review and comment on any project and development planning in 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. - 89 -5.1.3 Management To what extent does the agreement, and i t s administrative process, allow for active management of the wi l d l i f e and i t s habitat (authority, funding and personnel) to implement management plans? Rationale and Recommendation: "* The competing array of proposals for use and development of northern Yukon lands and resources necessitates the establishment of an  adaptive management plan to ensure the protection of the herd and  the ecosystem of which i t i s a part. Indeed, as conservation of the Porcupine Caribou depends largely on maintenance of the herd's extensive ecosystem/habitat, a managerial organization capable of responding to both naturally occurring changes and external threats i s a p r i o r i t y of any convention. Therefore, the commission should  be given authority and financial resources to appoint an operational  arm comprised of advisory boards and f i e l d technicians to aid in  development and implementation of a comprehensive management plan. Implementation of management policy 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 stipulate that financial and technical support be supplied by the contracting parties. Comparable authority given to the Canada/ United States Salmon and Halibut commissions has proved successful in implementation of the conventions' objectives. Factors f a c i l i t a t i n g this include: - 90 -- the conventions are between two countries with a h i s t o r y o f t r u s t and cooperation on i n t e r n a t i o n a l problems; - each agreement i s concerned with only one resource; - the conventions' objectives and commissions' authority are c l e a r l y defined as to the problem of r e b u i l d i n g the f i s h stocks (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 the proposed migratory caribou convention which i s between the same two countries p r i m a r i l y concerned with one resource. C r i t e r i a 2 and 3 and the associated recommendations e s s e n t i a l l y e s t a b l i s h a two-tiered i n s t i t u t i o n a l mechanism as shown below: Level Composition Role Executive International - P o l i c y development Migratory Caribou - Master planning and Commission conceptualization - Decision-making Operational a. Secre t a r i a t e - Implementation o f p o l i c y and planning - Coordinate research b. Advisory Boards - Recommendations, i . e . harvest, research needs, e t c . The operational arm i s e s s e n t i a l l y a management-oriented wing comprised o f a Secre t a r i a t e t o act as l i a i s o n between the Advisory Boards and the Commission, and the Advisory Boards on native harvest, and s c i e n t i f i c / t e c h n i c a l management issues. Comparable to the IJC's authority, the "IMCC" could commission the Advisory Boards t o undertake s p e c i f i c research and management problems. The Advisory Boards in turn, would have the authority to call upon necessary field and financial support from the respective countries to carry out the commission's requests. The kinds of responsibilities and duties as outlined in 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 field 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 in 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 -subsistence use and c o n f l i c t i n g land-use i s poorly developed. In a d d i t i o n t o basic research however, monitoring o f management  impacts i s e s s e n t i a l to provide the feedback necessary to adapt  t o changing e c o l o g i c a l and s o c i a l conditions. As o u t l i n e d i n Chapter Three, s p e c i f i c a t t e n t i o n should be paid to developing an annual census, obtaining accurate harvest data from native communities, and determining how the Dempster Highway a f f e c t s caribou behaviour and migration patterns, i n c l u d i n g response t o highway-associated a c t i v i t i e s and b a r r i e r s i n general. Several conventions s t i p u l a t e research and monitoring programs. The Salmon Treaty provides f o r research, i n c l u d i n g such s p e c i f i c elements as the n a t u r a l h i s t o r y of the salmon, spawning grounds, e t c . The Fur Seals Convention coordinates research e f f o r t s towards determining the required measures f o r achieving the goal o f maximum sustained y i e l d . This convention emphasized research as an i n t e g r a l element i n a s c e r t a i n i n g the i n t e r - r e l a t i o n s h i p s of f u r seals and other l i v i n g marine resources. S i m i l a r l y , the d r a f t Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species o f Wild Animals s p e c i f i e s i n a r t i c l e V that each agreement entered i n t o s h a l l : ... deal with a l l aspects o f conservation and management of the migratory species and s h a l l , ... provide f o r : a. p e r i o d i c review of the conservation status o f the migratory species concerned and the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f the f a c t o r s which may be harmful t o tha t status; c. research i n t o the ecology and population dynamics o f the migratory species concerned, with s p e c i a l regard t o i t s migration; - 93 -d. 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; ... 5.1.5 Native Use To what extent does the agreement, and its 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 will continue to be dependent on the caribou for some time, the convention should provide for native priority use in 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 is consistent with government policy which states that a l l government agencies and departments involved in 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 fire wardens) for native peoples, and expanding well-established programs providing cultural outlets for indigenous peoples so that they will 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 its 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 its habitat." A possible solution to native priority use of caribou is 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 sell i t in 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 in 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 will take place later this year at Baker Lake. To date, the Management Group has been successful in 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 is also an element in the COPE/ Canadian government Agreement-in-Principle under section 14 (.3) (b) and (c). Reference here is to subsistence quotas as being part of the harvestable quota set by the Inuvialuit, federal and territorial governments. It should also be noted that since October 1978, subsistence use of wildlife resources is the legal priority among various consumptive uses in 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 is available. Consistent with the policy "... that the needs of the people in the North are more important than resource development and that the maintenance of ecological balance is essential ... and the heaviest emphasis in current thinking is on the needs and aspirations of the native peoples..." (DIAND 1972), the caribou convention  should provide for native involvement in long-term planning and  management of the caribou and their ecosystem. Indeed, the unique situation in the northern Yukon demands new and creative solutions to native long-term involvement. For example, natives could receive special training as midlife biologists and technicians, native participation on research teams could be encouraged, and use could be made of local hunters and trappers associations in guiding programs. It is possible that wildlife-oriented tourism - 9 6 -a n d r e c r e a t i o n w i l l b e c o m e t h e s o c i a l l y a n d e c o n o m i c a l l y m o s t v a l u a b l e u s e o f t h i s r e s o u r c e , a n d n a t i v e p e o p l e s s h o u l d t h e r e f o r e  h a v e p r i o r i t y i n r e a l i z i n g t h e e c o n o m i c a n d s o c i a l b e n e f i t s o f  d e v e l o p i n g t h i s p o t e n t i a l . 5 . 1 . 6 O t h e r E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n c e r n s T o w h a t e x t e n t d o e s t h e a g r e e m e n t a n d i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r o c e s s , a d d r e s s t h e q u e s t i o n o f f u t u r e u s e s o f t h e e n v i r o n m e n t w h i c h a r e : (a ) c o m p a t i b l e , a n d (b) i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e s t a t e d g o a l s ? D o e s t h e a g r e e m e n t p r o v i d e m e a s u r e s t o m i t i g a t e o r a l l e v i a t e p r e s e n t u s e s w h i c h a r e d e s i g n a t e d a s i n c o m p a t i b l e ? R a t i o n a l e a n d R e a D m m e n d a t i o n : E x p l o i t a t i o n o f , a n d p r e s s u r e f o r i n c r e a s e d e x p l o r a t i o n f o r o i l , g a s a n d m i n e r a l p o t e n t i a l s , a n d t h e i n c r e a s i n g l y i m p o r t a n t t o u r i s m a n d r e c r e a t i o n i n d u s t r y , n e c e s s i t a t e t h e i n t e g r a t i o n o f w i l d l i f e m a n a g e m e n t a n d h a b i t a t p l a n n i n g w i t h o t h e r l a n d u s e s a n d a c t i v i t i e s . B o t h c o m p a t i b l e a n d i n c o m p a t i b l e d e v e l o p m e n t s s h o u l d b e a n a l y s e d a g a i n s t t h e g o a l s a n d o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e a g r e e m e n t , a n d t h e l a t t e r s h o u l d b e s e e n t o b e p a r a m o u n t i n t h e a r e a c o v e r e d b y t h e a g r e e m e n t . E x i s t i n g l a n d u s e s s u c h a s t h e D e m p s t e r H i g h w a y s h o u l d a l s o b e e x a m i n e d , w i t h p r o v i s i o n f o r m i t i g a t i v e m e a s u r e s t o c o n t r o l o r a l l e v i a t e a d v e r s e i m p a c t s . T h e c o n v e n t i o n s h o u l d c o m m i t t h e p a r t i e s  t o d e v e l o p a c o m p r e h e n s i v e m a n a g e m e n t p l a n . D e v e l o p m e n t o f a l l  l a n d u s e s a n d a c t i v i t i e s s h o u l d b e a d d r e s s e d i n t h i s p l a n t o r e s u l t  i n t h e ' e c o d e v e l o p m e n t ' o f t h e n o r t h e r n Y u k o n . - 97 -The e l i m i n a t i o n or s a t i s f a c t o r y m i t i g a t i o n of the adverse impacts o f obstacles and disturbances which a f f e c t the caribou's migration, behaviour and c r i t i c a l habitats should a l s o be addressed i n the convention. Haul roads, support s t a t i o n s f o r o i l and gas exploration and a i r t r a f f i c are but a few o f the disturbances associated with the ever-increasing e x p l o i t a t i o n o f northern resources. Adverse impacts are i n e v i t a b l e , hence the conservation o f migratory caribou necessitates that these impacts be c o n t r o l l e d , mitigated or eliminated. Precedents f o r handling these concerns are found i n the Salmon Treaty and the US/USSR Migratory Birds Convention. The Salmon Treaty provides f o r removal o f obstructions t o salmon migration; and the Migratory B i r d Convention provides 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 adversely impacting a c t i v i t i e s on the b i r d s or t h e i r environment. The d r a f t convention on Migratory Species a l s o contains strong statements of a s i m i l a r nature: b. prevent, remove, or compensate f o r the adverse e f f e c t s o f , disturbances and obstacles t h a t s e r i o u s l y impede or prevent the migration o f the migratory species concerned; c. prevent, reduce or c o n t r o l f a c t o r s t h a t are l i k e l y to influence unfavourably the conservation status o f the migratory species concerned or prevent improvement o f that status; ... ( A r t i c l e I I I (2)). - 98 -Connected with this is the need for consideration of the incremental effects of proposed projects which may have beneficial or adverse impacts on the herd and its ecosystem. As explained in Chapter Four, the Dempster is first in 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 its 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 flexibility to permit reorientation of management objectives in light of changing needs and perceptions? Rationale and Recommendation: Review is required for feedback on the implementation and success of the management plans according to their objectives. There are numerous examples of failures in 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 of the advisory boards or commission. Experimentation i n management and institutional arrangements should also be included. A comparative review of 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 its environment. These criteria 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 will 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 in 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 territorial governments and native communities in Canada, the Canadian draft of March 1979 was released. This draft was discussed at a meeting in Whitehorse on April 30 - May 1, where representatives from federal and territorial 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 - 1 0 1 -1 4 d r a f t ( A p p e n d i x I I ) . w h i c h i s d i s c u s s e d b e l o w . I t s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t t h e M a y 1 4 d r a f t i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y w e a k e r t h a n t h e M a r c h v e r s i o n i n r e g a r d t o t h e e n f o r c e a b i l i t y o f t h e b a s i c r a t i o n a l e o f t h e c o n v e n t i o n — c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e c a r i b o u a n d t h e i r p h a b i t a t , a n d n a t i v e p r i o r i t y u s e o f t h e c a r i b o u . T h e p r e a m b l e s t r o n g l y a s s e r t s t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f c o n s e r v a t i o n o f t h e h e r d a n d h a b i t a t , a b o r i g i n a l p r i o r i t y u s e a n d i n v o l v e m e n t i n m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e c a r i b o u , a n d c o o p e r a t i v e a c t i o n t o p r o t e c t t h e h e r d , i t s e n v i r o n m e n t a n d s e n s i t i v e h a b i t a t s i t e s . T h e s e p r i n c i p l e s f o r m t h e b a s i c r a t i o n a l e f o r t h e c o n v e n t i o n w i t h t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f a g r e e m e n t a n d c o m m i t m e n t t o s o c i a l , e c o l o g i c a l a n d c o n s e r v a t i o n o b j e c t i v e s s o o f t e n e s p o u s e d b y t h e g o v e r n m e n t . W i t h i n t h e b o d y o f t h e c o n v e n t i o n , h o w e v e r , t h i s c o m m i t m e n t b r e a k s d o w n b e c a u s e o p e r a t i v e c l a u s e s h a v e n o e n f o r c e a b i l i t y . 6 . 2 C O N S E R V A T I O N O F L A N D S T h e p r e a m b l e c l e a r l y s t a t e s t h e i n t e n t o f t h e p a r t i e s t o c o n s e r v e t h e c a r i b o u h e r d s w h i c h " . . . c o n s t i t u t e a u n i q u e n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e o f g r e a t a n d i r r e p l a c e a b l e v a l u e " a n d t o c o n s e r v e t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t — " . . . t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a n d t h e h a b i t a t u t i l i z e d b y t h e s e c a r i b o u h e r d s m u s t b e p r o t e c t e d a g a i n s t d e g r a d a t i o n i f . . . [ t h e y a r e ] t o b e c o n s e r v e d " . F o l l o w i n g t h e p r e a m b l e , A r t i c l e 1 1 ( 1 ) r a t h e r a m b i g u o u s l y s t a t e s t h e g e n e r a l o b j e c t i v e o f t h e c o n v e n t i o n : T h e 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 a n d t h e e c o s y s t e m o f w h i c h c a r i b o u a r e p a r t f o r t h e l o n g -t e r m w e l l - b e i n g o f c a r i b o u a n d s o a s t o n a x i m i z e t h e t o t a l s o c i a l b e n e f i t , . . . a n d s o t h a t r i s k o f i r r e v e r s i b l e c h a n g e o r l o n g - t e r m a d v e r s e e f f e c t s a s a r e s u l t o f u s e 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. - 102 -The first 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 its habitat (i.e. the ecosystem)! yield the greater social benefit. Such, use obviously could lead to the ultimate destruction of both. The second half is equally puzzling as to how the intent can be implemented. If i t is 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 in 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 political boundaries", once again implying the need for preservation of large tracts of land. The proposed convention however, fails to suggest mechanisms to reserve these lands. There is 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 or not? Thi s d i s c r e t i o n , presumably l e f t t o the contracting governments, once again opens the door t o p o t e n t i a l habitat degradation. Respecting the immediate need f o r p r o t e c t i o n of " c r i t i c a l h a b i t a t " zones such as c a l v i n g and staging areas, the d r a f t contains an escape clause that renders the whole clause meaningless. A r t i c l e IV(3) recognizes the need by empowering the ODmmission t o i d e n t i f y such s e n s i t i v e areas and t o "... recommend to the P a r t i e s measures t o govern the use or modification o f such areas". However, these recommendations are t o be implemented: except where, i n the opinion o f a Party, the net b e n e f i t s o f compliance are appreciably outweighed by the net b e n e f i t s o f other competing r e g i o n a l or 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). This o v e r r i d i n g caveat implies t h a t some s o r t o f economic a n a l y s i s (e.g. cost/benefit) w i l l be applied t o proposed p r o j e c t s within the 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" (Rees 1979). The problem, as v i r t u a l l y any resource economist w i l l r e a d i l y admit, i s the f a i l u r e of economics t o adequately measure aesthetic or i n t a n g i b l e values. I f a q u a n t i f i a b l e monetary value i s the o v e r r i d i n g c r i t e r i o n then, given the pressures to open up the North to i n d u s t r i a l development and resource 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 and habitat. As recommended i n Chapter Five , an hierarchy o f conservation lands, i n c l u d i n g p r o h i b i t e d uses within s e n s i t i v e zones, i s necessary to protect the caribou and t h e i r environment. Any such concept 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 in a central position. This emphasis is missing from the draft convention. 6.3 MANAGEMENT AND PJJX5ULATION Management authority is provided for by the establishment of a Migratory Caribou Commission and the specification of its powers and duties. The Migratory Caribou Commission, established under Article III, is 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 is the possibility of neutral bureaucrats being appointed rather than conservation and wildlife-oriented individuals. As recommended in Chapter Five, the International Joint Commission (IJC), comprised of renowned and dedicated individuals in the resource disciplines, may be a good model to follow., in 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 in 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 is set out in Article IV. The powers include recommendations on establishing the maximum allowable harvest of caribou and its 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 in implementation of the intent of the convention. Enforcement and monitoring of these measures and the development of any pursuant management plan is 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 then whether the Ctommission has any management aut h o r i t y whatsoever. Of furt 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 states t h a t : The P a r t i e s s h a l l provide i n a timely fashion to the Ctommission information on proposals 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 or detrimentally a f f e c t the conservation o f caribou and t h e i r h a b i t a t . This may seem a step i n the r i g h t d i r e c t i o n , yet there i s no recommendation tha t the Ctommission be able to review proposals e a r l y i n the planning stage, and to have membership on future land use committees or s i m i l a r decision-making bodies. As the Department o f Indian and Northern A f f a i r s (DINA) manages most Crown lands i n the North, with c l e a r l y defined o b j e c t i v e s towards exploration and development o f northern resources, a balance requires that the Ctommission be involved i n decisions concerning land uses wit h i n and outside of reserved 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 the Commission's recommendations i s provided f o r under A r t i c l e VT(2) and (3). An emergency clause authorizes waiver of the process 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 the Commission ( A r t i c l e V I ( 4 ) ) . This i n i t s e l f i s not s u f f i c i e n t . The p u b l i c should 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 process. For example, A r t i c l e 11(4) c i t e d above should be changed to allow f o r p u b l i c comment i n advance o f any commitment being made rather than as vaguely stated — " i n a timely fashion". - 107 -6.4 (XORDINATED RESEARCH A r t i c l e VII b r i e f l y sets 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 the research necessary to meet the purposes and objectives of t h i s Convention. To achieve these ends, the P a r t i e s may request the S c i e n t i f i c Committee t o coordinate the cooperative undertaking o f such research. I t appears t h a t each country w i l l undertake independent research and discuss r e s u l t s i n the 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 concern however, i s the lack of e x p l i c i t mention o f monitoring programs and experimental measures to t a c k l e such e x i s t i n g major problems as the Dempster Highway and s i m i l a r b a r r i e r s . This should 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) of the d r a f t convention on the Conversation of Migratory Species contains a s i m i l a r clause. The lack of s p e c i f i c research f o c i i s a general problem, since the May d r a f t does not l i s t any research elements as d i d the March d r a f t i n A r t i c l e VTI ( 2 a-i). 6.5 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 conservation and management planning and to p r i o r i t y a b o r i g i n a l use i s b o l d l y stated i n the preamble by the following: KNOWING that c e r t a i n indigenous people of Alaska i n the United States and a b o r i g i n a l people of the Yukon and Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s i n Canada depend upon caribou f o r t h e i r s u r v i v a l and existence e i t h e r wholly or i n part, recognizing that t h i s dependence w i l l continue, and convinced that such people should be involved i n management of caribou; - 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 territorial 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 is not the case. The omission of aboriginal priority use and dependency on the caribou is puzzling, especially in light of i t s previous inclusion in Article II (5) of the March 1979 draft — "The Parties agree that the domestic use of caribou by indigenous people will have priority over any other use". The May draft therefore again ignores its own noble intent, and denies aboriginal peoples a legal basis for priority use. These defects will cause certain rejection of the draft convention by native organizations and will exacerbate the animosity created by government promises which subsequently are not carried to fruition. The only opportunity for native participation is provided in 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 in Article V are purely of an advisory capacity. There is no recommendation for native involvement in 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 -important considerations t o be implemented p a r a l l e l t o the provisions o f any convention. This point should be c a r e f u l l y examined with na t i v e communities and t h e i r organizations. 6 .6 COMPATIBLE/INCCayiPATIBLE LAND USES AND ACTIVITIES Respecting negatively impacting land uses, A r t i c l e 11.(6) contains the clause: The P a r t i e s s h a l l avoid to the extent 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 or other a c t i v i t i e s that would s i g n i f i c a n t l y impede, delay or d i s r u p t caribou herd movement or a f f e c t e s s e n t i a l caribou behaviour, and to modify, 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 features t h a t have that e f f e c t . Once again the pro t e c t i o n o f f e r e d by t h i s clause i s dubious due to the phrase "to the extent p r a c t i c a b l e " and "where f e a s i b l e " . The concepts of compensation to natives f o r disturbances t o the caribou and t h e i r habitat, or r e h a b i l i t a t i o n o f hab i t a t temporarily used f o r resource e x p l o i t a t i o n are not included. This i s an important omission which should be c l o s e l y examined. With the inc r e a s i n g pressure to e x p l o i t the North's o i l , gas and mineral resources, 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 of the hab i t a t i s a necessary element. So, too, i s compensation t o native harvesters f o r the p o t e n t i a l l o s s o f n u t r i t i o n a l values i n caribou and f o r h a b i t a t degradation o f t r a d i t i o n a l native lands. The convention does not e x p l i c i t l y deal with compatible or p o t e n t i a l l y b e n e f i c i a l land uses and a c t i v i t i e s other than by s t a t i n g that the Commission be provided with information o f proposals f o r such - 110 -p r o j e c t s ( A r t i c l e 11(4)). As previously stressed, the changing s o c i a l values and perceptions of w i l d l i f e and wilderness require consideration of a l l types of conservation-oriented management plans outside o f the reserve areas, i . e . within the hierarchy of conservation lands. Of importance here i s the s o c i a l and economic values of caribou and t h e i r h a b i t a t f o r various forms of non-intensive r e c r e a t i o n a l p u r s u i t s . There simply 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 of a clause to allow i t to occur i n the future. Linked with t h i s must be the r i g h t o f native peoples f o r p r i o r i t y bids on any involvement i n t h i s type of planning and resource use. The convention does express an ecosystem approach t o conservation, management and planning. This includes the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of c r i t i c a l h a bitat and s p e c i a l p r o t e c t i v e measures over the use o f these areas, (within the o v e r r i d i n g caveat of greatest net b e n e f i t ) . This ecosystem approach however, must be c a r r i e d a step f u r t h e r , and become the focus o f northern Yukon land use planning. Indeed, establishment of a hierarchy o f conservation lands as described i n Chapter F i v e should be a key element i n the o v e r a l l planning framework. This framework must then be d i r e c t l y l i n k e d with the conservation and management o f the Porcupine herd and i t s habitat. As such, the linkage should appear i n the proposed convention, 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 land use planning framework f o r the area. 6.7 REVIEW The f i n a l element i s the review of the mandate, obj e c t i v e s and success - I l l -of the convention and i t s management plans. The only consideration of t h i s i s found i n A r t i c l e X(3) which states: At the request o f e i t h e r Party consultation s h a l l be conducted with a view of convening a meeting o f representatives of the two P a r t i e s t o amend t h i s convention. As stressed i n Chapter Five , a review mechanism i s an e s s e n t i a l element f o r providing feedback i n the planning and management process. The clause as stated i s not adequate, and should follow along the l i n e s recommended i n the previous chapter. 6.8 CONCLUSION In summary, the May d r a f t Migratory Caribou Convention i s unacceptable. In the general area o f conservation and management of the caribou and t h e i r h a b i t a t , t h i s d r a f t represents a s i g n i f i c a n t step backwards i n comparison with e a r l i e r d r a f t s and other conventions. The caveats of "where f e a s i b l e " and "to the extent p r a c t i c a b l e " dominate the key a r t i c l e s respecting conservation o f the herd and i t s ecosystem. The implied economic t e s t i n A r t i c l e 11(2) provides an easy out f o r proposals to be given the go-ahead due to t h e i r "regional and n a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t s " . The d r a f t convention as stated, can hardly be regarded as a sincere commitment to conservation o f caribou and t h e i r h abitat, claimed as "a unique natural resource of great and i r r e p l a c e a b l e value". On another l e v e l , t h i s proposed convention has the p o t e n t i a l o f strengthening the perspectives f o r g l o b a l conservation s t r a t e g i e s , but i t must be renegotiated to be acceptable and to r e a l i z e that - 112 -potential. There has never been a comprehensive planning and management conservation strategy on the global scale. Support for such a common goal is nevertheless of urgent importance. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN). is currently working in 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 political 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 will be exploited and we have to argue for its sustainable exploitation and the retention of habitat" (Allen 1978). It is towards these goals that conservation organizations in 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" in Initial 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", in International Wildlife, Vol.8, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 1978, p.17. Allison, Lorraine, "Migratory Bird Sanctuaries in 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" in Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Vol.30, No.12, Part 2, 1973, pp.1936-1947. Bell, Howard F., Agreements, Conventions and Treaties Between Canada and the United States of America with Respect to the Pacific Halibut Fishery, International Pacific Halibut Commission Report No. 50, 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 in the Aggregation, Movement and Disturbance Behaviour of Caribou, pp.552-584, in V. Geist and F. Walter (eds.) The Behaviour of Ungulates and its 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, in 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 in 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 in 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.) in the Eastern Brooks Range, Alaska, in 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 in 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 in 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 in Northern Development in 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 in 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 in Northern Canada (ed.) David N. Nettleship and Pauline A. Smith, Canadian Committee for the International Biological Programme, Conservation Terrestrial - Panel 9, 1975. Ecological Sites in 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 in 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 in 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 in the Northern Yukon. Inuvialuit Nunungat, The Proposal for an Agreement-in-Principle to Achieve the Settlement of Inuvialuit Land Rights in 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 Radiocarbon-Dated 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 in 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 in Them, with Special Reference to Wildlife Biology. Canadian Wildlife Service, unpublished typescript. Klein, David R., 1979, The Alaska Oil Pipeline in 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" in the Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science, Vol.32, No.2, 1976, pp.149-163. Leonard, Richard M., 1978a, "Arctic Progress Report, Cooperation Along Alaska's Border" in 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 in 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 Vital Resource, in 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 in R.D. Jakimchuk (ed.) The Porcupine Caribou Herd in Canada, Arctic Gas Biological Report Series Vol.4. Mining Division, Oil 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 in Northern Yukon Territory: Perspectives as of 1977" in Early Man in 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 in the Arctic" in 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, Oil Under the Ice, Canadian Arctic Resources Committee, Ottawa, Canada. Porcupine Caribou Committee, 1978, Meetings held in 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, in 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 in Northeastern Alaska, 1972. Arctic Gas Biological Report Series, Vol.7. Rees, William E., 1979, letter to Minister John Fraser, DINAf June 28* - 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 a n d M o v e m e n t s 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 , 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 M a m m a l P o p u l a t i o n s i n N o r t h e r n A l a s k a , Y u k o n a n d N o r t h w e s t 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 , Vo l.22. , J . C u r a t o l o a n d G . M o o r e , 1975, T h e D i s t r i b u t i o n a n d M o v e m e n t s 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 , 1974, C h . I I I i n S t u d i e s o f L a r g e M a m m a l s A l o n g t h e P r o p o s e d M a c k e n z i e V a l l e y G a s P i p e l i n e R o u t e f r o m A l a s k a t o B . C . ( e d . ) R . D . J a k i m c h u k , 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 e r i e s , Vol.32. , 1976, T h e D i s t r i b u t i o n a n d M o v e m e n t s 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 ( e d . ) S t u d i e s o f M a m m a l s A l o n g t h e P r o p o s e d M a c k e n z i e V a l l e y G a s P i p e l i n e R o u t e , 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 e r i e s , Vol.36. , 1979, p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , Jan.2.3, 1979. R u s s e l l , F . , 1898, E x p l o r a t i o n s i n t h e F a r N o r t h , S t a t e U n i v . I o w a , I o w a C i t y . R u s s e l l , J o h n e t a l , 1978, P r o g r e s s R e p o r t o n D e m p s t e r H i g h w a y S t u d y b y Y u k o n Game B r a n c h , f o r N o r t h e r n R o a d s a n d A i r s t r i p s , D I A N D , A p r i l 10, 1978. R u s s e l l , J o h n , 1979, p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , A p r i l 15. S c o t t , A n t h o n y , " T h e I . J . C . A f t e r 5 Y e a r s " , u n p u b l i s h e d p a p e r , 1977. , p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , M a r c h 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 in 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, Oil 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 Barren-Ground 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 is 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 in Canada and the United States" in Nature Canada, Vol.2-.1:31-36, Jan/March 1973. Usher, Peter J., 1976, The Significance of the Land to Native Northerners, in Canadian Association in 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 in Northern Canada: Working Group Paper in 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", in 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 in 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 in their Natural State - 1933; 4. Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in 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 criteria as outlined in Chapter Five. The objective is to ascertain whether elements of current agreements are applicable to the proposed Migratory Caribou Convention. Concern is therefore focused on the substance of appropriate elements, and not on the style, wording or specific context. This analysis is not an exhaustive substantive evaluation of a l l the listed conventions, as such was beyond the scope of this research. The analysis is appropriate, however, in sifting out the strengths and weaknesses of the conventions towards recommending elements for inclusion in 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 in order to provide a measure of protection for migratory game birds (waterfowl, cranes, rails, shorebirds and pigeons), migratory insectivorous birds, and migratory non-game birds. The Convention mainly addresses itself to closed hunting seasons, prohibition of the taking of nests or eggs and the export of migratory birds or their eggs. An important clause is Article VTII by which the parties undertake "... necessary measures for insuring the execution of the present Convention". In Canada, this undertaking has resulted in the Migratory Birds Convention Act, R.S. 1970, 123 Table 6 - Comparative Analysis of International Wildlife Agreements - Summary Cri t e r i a Convention Conservation Management Native Use 1. Migratory Birds 1916 hunting prohibited permit system within reserves - Game officers development allowed Yes Sockeye Salmon Treaty 1930 principles of protection, preservation and enhancement of a fishery -flexible to changes in environment via Commission and pursuant regulations -fragmented authority No Preservation of Fauna and Flora 1933 only i f area i s established indirectly Yes Nature Protection only i f area i s indirectly 1940 established No 5. Regulation of Whaling 1946 managed exploit-ation of resource - regulations established and amended by Commission on conservation via Commission and advisory committees Yes, limited to certain species Preservation of Halibut Fishery 1953 Conservation of Fur Seals 1957 maximum sustained yield as a goal maximum sustainable productivity - levels of catch amendable according to actions taken by Commission - fragmented authority par t i a l l y through a Commission No Yes, limited to subsistence users and method. 123a Other Environmental Concerns Research Regulation Review 1. limited to pollution 2. removal of obstructions to migrations - consideration of pollution problems 3. addressed in definition of 4. addressed in definition of reserves 5. not explicit no specific provision wide scope via Commission no specific provision agreement to cooperate on research coordination on research and monitoring via Commission No International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission No No International whaling Commission No No No No 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 Convention Conservation Management Native Use 8. African Convention 1968 according to type of reserve established - within land use planning framework limited authority - no funding not explicit World Cultural and Natural Heritage 1972 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 killing except by natives -protection of critic a l areas No limited to natives 1 essential needs 12. Migratory Birds US/USSR 1976 13. Draft Convention of Migratory Species strict prohibition measures and encouragement of preserves strong commitment towards concluding agreements between parties and advisory committees Yes, for habitat Yes, through the conference of the parties and advisory committees limited to essential needs ambiguous 123c O t h e r E n v i r o n m e n t a l R e s e a r c h R e g u l a t i o n R e v i e w C o n c e r n s 8. l i m i t e d t o d e f i n i t i o n o f r e s e r v e s e s t a b l i s h e d p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n a n d r e s e a r c h p r o g r a m t o b e i n i t i a t e d N o A f t e r f i v e y e a r s 9 . N o 1 0 . l i m i t e d t o p o l l u t i o n 1 1 . N o 1 2 . p o l l u t i o n -r e h a b i l i t a t i o n a n d m i t i g a t i n g 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 c o o r d i n a t e d r e s e a r c h e n c o u r a g e d c o o r d i n a t e d r e s e a r c h c o o r d i n a t e d r e s e a r c h e n c o u r a g e d c o o r d i n a t e d r e s e a r c h W o r l d H e r i t a g e C o m m i t t e e N o N o N o NO N o N o i n d i r e c t l y 1 3 . r e m o v a l o r c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r a d v e r s e i m p a c t s o n m i g r a t o r y s p e c i e s , t h e i r c o n s e r v a t i o n s t a t u s a n d t h e i r m i g r a t i o n c o o r d i n a t e d r e s e a r c h s t r o n g l y e n c o u r a t e d t h e c o n f e r e n c e o f t h e p a r t i e s . a n d a d v i s o r y c o m m i t t e e s a t l e a s t e v e r y t h r e e y e a r s . - 124 -and pursuant Regulations amended each year, and the Migratory Birds Sanctuary Regulations amended in 1974.''" Conservation The general purpose is 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 is in 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 is 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. - 1 2 5 -A c t w a s e n a c t e d i n 1 9 7 3 : 1 0 . ( 1 ) T h e G o v e r n o r i n C o u n c i l m a y a u t h o r i z e t h e M i n i s t e r t o p u r c h a s e , a c q u i r e o r l e a s e a n y l a n d s o r i n t e r e s t s t h e r e i n f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f r e s e a r c h , c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n r e s p e c t o f (a ) m i g r a t o r y b i r d s ; . . . S i n c e t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f I n d i a n a n d N o r t h e r n A f f a i r s ( D I N A ) c o n t r o l s m o s t o f t h e l a n d i n t h e n o r t h a s i f i t w e r e a p r o v i n c i a l g o v e r n m e n t , i t w i l l n o d o u b t b e r e l u c t a n t t o t r a n s f e r l a r g e t r a c t s o f l a n d t o t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f t h e E n v i r o n m e n t (DOE) f o r s a n c t u a r y p u r p o s e s . I n d e e d , s u c h h a s b e e n t h e c a s e i n t h e NWT w h e r e s a n c t u a r i e s a r e o n l a n d l e a s e d f r o m D I N A . I n t h e Y u k o n , D I N A r e f u s e s t o l e a s e l a n d s f o r s a n c t u a r y p u r p o s e s u n t i l n a t i v e l a n d c l a i m s a r e s e t t l e d ( A l l i s o n 1 9 7 7 , p . 2 5 6 ) . D I N A a l s o m a y i s s u e e x p l o r a t i o n a n d d e v e l o p m e n t p e r m i t s w i t h i n t h e s a n c t u a r i e s a s d i s c u s s e d b e l o w . N o e x p l i c i t a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t i s m a d e o f t h e ' e c o s y s t e m c o n c e p t ' . M a n a g e m e n t A s n o t e d a b o v e , A r t i c l e V T I I o f t h e C o n v e n t i o n a l l o w s t h e p a r t i e s t o t a k e t h e m e a s u r e s r e q u i r e d t o i m p l e m e n t t h e C o n v e n t i o n . T h e s u b s e q u e n t A c t a n d R e g u l a t i o n s h a v e a d d r e s s e d t h e m a n a g e m e n t i s s u e t h r o u g h p r o v i s i o n o f g a m e o f f i c e r s a n d a u t h o r i t y t o c a r r y o u t t h e R e g u l a t i o n s a n d A c t . F u n d i n g b e y o n d t h e i s s u a n c e o f p e r m i t s a n d t h e c o l l e c t i o n o f f i n e s i s n o t i n d i c a t e d . U n d e r s e c t i o n 4 ( 2 ) ( f ) , t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f m a n a g e m e n t o f p r e s c r i b e d a r e a s i s s u g g e s t e d : - 1 2 6 -. . . t h e r e g u l a t i o n s m a y p r o v i d e , ( f ) f o r t h e p r o h i b i t i o n o f t h e k i l l i n g , c a p t u r i n g , t a k i n g , i n j u r i n g o r m o l e s t i n g o f m i g r a t o r y g a m e , 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 , d e s t r u c t i o n o r m o l e s t a t i o n o f t h e i r n e s t s o r e g g s , w i t h i n a n y p r e s c r i b e d a r e a , a n d f o r t h e  c o n t r o l a n d m a n a g e m e n t o f s u c h a r e a s ; " ( e m p h a s i s a d d e d ) N a t i v e U s e T h e C o n v e n t i o n r e f e r s o n l y t o n a t i v e u s e o f m i g r a t o r y n o n - g a m e b i r d s . H o w e v e r , n a t i v e h u n t i n g i s a u t h o r i z e d b y t h e r e g u l a t i o n s . S u b s e c t i o n 5 ( a ) p e r m i t s I n d i a n s a n d I n u i t t o h u n t m i g r a t o r y game b i r d s a n y w h e r e i n C a n a d a w i t h o u t a m i g r a t o r y g a m e b i r d h u n t i n g p e r m i t . E x c e p t i o n s a r e s u b s e c t i o n s 7 a n d 8 w h i c h d i s a l l o w n a t i v e h u n t i n g o f c e r t a i n m i g r a t o r y n o n - g a m e b i r d s w i t h i n m i g r a t o r y b i r d s a n c t u a r i e s w i t h o u t a s p e c i a l p e r m i t . H u n t ( 1 9 7 9 ) i n d i c a t e s t h a t r e c e n t c o u r t d e c i s i o n s h a v e r u l e d t h a t " . . . t h e a c t a n d i t s r e g u l a t i o n s d o a p p l y t o I n d i a n s a n d E s k i m o s o n o r o f f r e s e r v e s , r e g a r d l e s s o f t r e a t y r i g h t s o r c l a i m s b a s e d u p o n a b o r i g i n a l t r e a t y " . T h e r e i s n o i n s t i t u t i o n a l m e c h a n i s m f o r n a t i v e i n v o l v e m e n t i n p l a n n i n g a n d m a n a g e m e n t i n a n y o f t h e t h r e e p i e c e s o f l e g i s l a t i o n . O t h e r E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n c e r n s U n d e r t h e a u t h o r i t y o f A r t i c l e V I I I , t h e r e g u l a t i o n s h a v e a d d e d s e c t i o n 3 5 ( 1 ) a n d (2) t o d e a l w i t h p o l l u t i o n o f w a t e r s f r e q u e n t e d b y m i g r a t o r y b i r d s . S u b j e c t t o r e g u l a t i o n s u n d e r o t h e r A c t s o v e r d u m p i n g o f s u b s t a n c e s i n t o w a t e r s , a n d a u t h o r i z a t i o n t o d o s o f o r s c i e n t i f i c p u r p o s e s , t h i s s e c t i o n p r o h i b i t s t h e d u m p i n g o f - 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 is the case, and there is 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 is no specific provision for coordinated research and monitoring programs or establishment of a regulatory commission except for what is possible through the appointment of Game Officers. Review is similarly not explicitly dealt with, although the migratory bird regulations are amended each year and the sanctuary regulations were amended in 1974. This limited degree of amendment provides some form of review. - 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 in response to the depletion of sockeye salmon in the Fraser River system. The convention in 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, is managed exploitation of a fishery, as is 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. Flexibility to' respond to changing environmental conditions is built into the Commission's authority over catch limits. Management and Regulation The International Pacific Salmon Fisheries Commission established under Article II, is comprised of six representatives, three appointed by each federal government. The Commission is 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 call upon an independent research staff to carry out specific studies. Koers (1973) indicates that more than 50 scientists were employed in 1970 by the Commission. Funding for any work done pursuant to the Convention is 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 facilities ... 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, in 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 in 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 is 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 in the 1940's to solve the blockage of migration at Hell's Gate in 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 itself in the early 1960's an expansion "... to consider the pollution problems that will 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 in the fishing industry (Crutchfield and Pontecorvo 1969). Research and Review The wide scope of the Commission's authority in both research and regulation, and its scientific orientation marks an important step forward from previous conventions. Thorough research into - 1 3 1 -t h e n a t u r a l h i s t o r y o f t h e s a l m o n , t h e i r s p a w n i n g g r o u n d s , h a t c h e r y s c i e n c e a n d o t h e r c o n c e r n s i s a n i n t e g r a l p a r t o f t h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s f u n c t i o n , a n d e v e n t u a l l y h a s l e d t o r e s t o r a t i o n o f t h e s o c k e y e r u n s . E x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o a r e v i e w o f t h e c o n v e n t i o n o r i t s s u c c e s s d o e s n o t a p p e a r i n t h e a g r e e m e n t , a l t h o u g h i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f i t s p r o v i s i o n s h a s a c h i e v e d t h i s e l e m e n t o f r e v i e w . 3 . C O N V E N T I O N R E L A T I V E T O T H E P R E S E R V A T I O N O F F A U N A A N D F L O R A . I N T H E I R N A T U R A L S T A T E - 1 9 3 3  T h e t h e m e o f t h i s c o n v e n t i o n i s t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f f l o r a a n d f a u n a b y t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n o f s p e c i a l p a r k s a n d r e s e r v e s w h e r e h u n t i n g , k i l l i n g o r c o l l e c t i o n o f f a u n a a n d f l o r a i s p r o h i b i t e d . T h e g e o g r a p h i c f o c u s w a s A f r i c a , w i t h t h e f u r t h e r i n t e n t o f , r e g u l a t i n g h u n t i n g a n d t r a f f i c i n t r o p h i e s i n t h e c o n t r a c t i n g c o u n t r i e s ' t e r r i t o r i e s . T h e c o n t r a c t i n g p a r t i e s w e r e B e l g i u m , E g y p t , I n d i a , I t a l y , P o r t u g a l , S o u t h A f r i c a , S u d a n , T a n z a n i a a n d t h e U . K . C o n s e r v a t i o n T h e c o n s e r v a t i o n o f f l o r a a n d f a u n a i s d i r e c t l y a d d r e s s e d i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e s p e c i a l a r e a s - n a t i o n a l p a r k s , a n d s t r i c t n a t u r a l r e s e r v e s - w h i c h a r e o n l y e n c o u r a g e d t o b e e s t a b l i s h e d . T h e s e a r e a s a r e s t r i c t l y d e f i n e d a s t o p u r p o s e , a n d a s t o a l l o w a b l e a n d i n c o m p a t i b l e a c t i v i t i e s i n c l u d i n g h u n t i n g , n e v e r t h e l e s s e c o s y s t e m m a n a g e m e n t i s n o t i n h e r e n t i n t h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s c h e m e . T h e g r e a t e s t d e g r e e o f p r o t e c t i o n i s p o s s i b l e i n a " s t r i c t n a t u r a l r e s e r v e " : . . . a n a r e a p l a c e d u n d e r p u b l i c c o n t r o l , t h r o u g h o u t w h i c h a n y f o r m o f h u n t i n g o r f i s h i n g , a n y u n d e r t a k i n g s c o n n e c t e d 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 m i n i n g , a n y e x c a v a t i o n s o r p r o s p e c t i n g , d r i l l i n g , l e v e l l i n g o f t h e g r o u n d , o r c o n s t r u c t i o n , a n y w o r k i n v o l v i n g t h e a l t e r a t i o n - 132 -of the configuration of the soil 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 strictly forbidden; which i t shall be forbidden to enter, traverse or camp in 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, killing or capturing of fauna and flora is prohibited except by special permit (Article 7(1) and (2)); provisions for special protective status for species declared to be in urgent need for such protection (Article 8(1)); measures to regulate traffic in wildlife trophies (Article 9); and methods, of hunting and capture which are prohibited (Article 10). Management Consideration is given to the establishment of necessary measures or controls to undertake the provisions in 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 is 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 territorial authorities are not prejudiced by the provisions contained in 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 is intimated. Neither is there specific provision for direct native involvement in 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 is 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 is 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 is 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 is not explicitly mentioned in the preamble, but is addressed in the body of the convention. Signatories are: the United States, Cuba, Bolivia, El 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 strict wilderness reserves (Article 1). Migratory birds are given special attention. Once again, i t is the responsibility of the contracting countries to "explore the possibility of establishing" these areas. There is 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 in management schemes are not implied. By way of definition, the national parks and reserves and strict 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 in parks, the prohibition of resource exploitation for commercial profit in 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 is set up to control the importation, exportation and traffic of protected flora and fauna. Native Use Unlike the 1933 convention, there is no provision for continuance of native traditional hunting rights. Hunting is 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 strict wilderness reserves, where the inviolate nature is supreme. - 136 -Other Environmental Concerns The control over competing or compatible land uses is not as strictly defined, either in the definition of the special area, or subsequent Articles, as is the case in the 1933 convention. The exception is in strict wilderness reserves which, are defined to exclude motorized transportation and commercial developments. Commercial exploitation of resources in national parks and reserves is also prohibited but an-exception clause may render this prohibition difficult to implement. The phrase, "... except by the competent legislative authority" is 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 in cooperative research, and field 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 in 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 is the managed exploitation of the resource. Detailed regulations and amendments to the convention are provided which control the killing of whale populations, designate the areas in which whaling can occur, specific size limits, etc. The authority to deal with these matters is 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 is 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 is 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 in the convention is 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 in 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 in modern fishing vessels. ... [furtherJ ... the main reason for its [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 its advisory experts is to be paid by each respective contracting government. There is no specific reference to funding of research or management programs. Native Use The only reference to native hunting of whales is 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 is 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 is 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 in Hudson Bay. Evidence heard at the Berger Inquiry indicated that activities such as o i l and gas exploration and development in these waters could lead to a major loss of calves and a future reduction in productivity of the herd. "In time, the herd would die out" (Berger 1977, Vol.1, p.65).. Research and Review Research is addressed in 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 is 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 is a revision of a 1937 convention to enable more effective conservation of the halibut fishery. The convention process actually began in the late 1800's, with several agreements having been signed. Conservation The stated goal of the convention is maximum sustained yield and maintenance of the stocks at the appropriate level. This goal has proven restrictive in 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, in 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 likely 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 is 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 will 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, in 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 in terms of membership, objectives and functions. - 141 a. divide the Convention waters into areas; b. establish one or more open or closed seasons, as to each area; c. limit the size of the fish and the quantity of the catch to be taken from each area within any season during which fishing is allowed; d. 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. fix the size and character of halibut fishing appliances to be used in any area; g. 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; h. 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 is the lack of provision for emergency action by the Commission. A further weakness identified by Skud (1976) is the fragmentation of management and enforcement authority. As noted on p.(1301 this arrangement is 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 will 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 in restocking the halibut fishery. Koers (1973) suggests its success is derived from a combination of unique factors: 1. A the Ctommission has its own independent research staff; 2. i t has only two contracting parties which traditionally cooperate on international resource problems; 3. i t is 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 in obvious danger of depletion was a non-controversial one. Native Use, Other Environmental Concerns, Research and Review These are not addressed in the convention or in 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 will provide the largest harvest each year, conservation measures are laid out. The principle of maximum sustained productivity is used in developing a 1. Throughout this convention, the tern maximum sustainable productivity is used instead of the more common term maximum sustained yield, which is probably what was intended. Yield to man is always a fraction of annual productivity since natural mortality also takes t o l l . - 143 -conservation-oriented management plan in relation to the productivity of other living marine resources of the area. This plan is itself based on coordinated scientific research programs and an element of flexibility in the Commission's determination of total harvest levels. Management and Regulation Authority and funding is given to the North Pacific Fur Seal Commission, which is 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 killing, taking or hunting of seals at sea in any manner (pelagic sealing), in conjunction with land seals, could continue in 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" official to oversee whether the convention's rules are carried out, and whether any offences are ccmmitted. It 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 its provisions with appropriate penalties for violation thereof" (Article X). The convention also has a unique aspect in that i t has distinguished between access to the wealth of a resource and access to its 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 is 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. The research includes the following: a. size of each, fur seal herd and its age and sex composition; b. 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. with regard to each of the herds, the effect upon the magnitude of recruitment of variations in the. size and the age and sex composition of the annual k i l l ; d. migration routes of fur seals and their wintering areas; e. numbers of seals from each herd found on the migration routes and in wintering areas and their ages and sexes; f. extent to which the food habits of fur seals affect commercial fish catches and the damage fur seals in f l i c t on fishing gear; g. effectiveness of each method of sealing from the viewpoint of management and rational utilization of fur seal resources for conservation purposes; h. quality of sealskins by sex, age and time and method of sealing; and i . other subjects involved in 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 in the convention. The omnibus clause in 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 drilling. Possibly the convention should be reviewed and altered so as to specifically handle recent development pressures. Review The convention was reviewed in 1963 and was amended according to the Protocol of,1964. Provision for further review is contained in 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 is 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, is an updated version of the 1933 agreement on the Preservation of Fauna and Flora in their Natural State. Conservation and Management The fundamental principle is "... to adopt the measures necessary to ensure conservation, utilization and development of soil, 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 strict nature reserve and national park are very similar to the 1933 definitions; a third category - special reserve - is added, which i s comprised of "game reserve", "partial reserve" or "sanctuary" and "soil", "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 its habitat, b. within which the hunting, killing 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 in 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 in 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 is 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 is provision in Article XXIV for specific revision of any part or the whole of the convention after five years of implementation. This is 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 in safeguarding areas of cultural and natural heritage, this convention was adopted in 1972 and entered into force in 1975 under the auspices of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). This convention is included in the analysis because of its attempt at comprehensive conservation policy and its establishment of a World Heritage Committee, despite the fact that Canada is s t i l l not a member. (Only a few criteria are applicable.) Conservation and Management This convention essentially attempts to rally 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 is a fundamental principle of the convention. Regulation The convention establishes an Intergovernmental Committee for the Protection of the Cultural and Natural Heritage. It is popularly known as the World Heritage Committee within UNESCO. An important function of the Committee is the definition of criteria upon which areas of cultural and natural heritage may be included in the World Heritage Lists, and the decisions on whether such areas will be ultimately included. The Committee may also lend assistance to countries involved in 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 in 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 traffic 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 is 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 is included (Article VII); however there is no mandate for funding or authority in a coordinating body. Native Use Native use is 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 is 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 is encouraged beyond the normal exchange of data and research by each country. There is no provision for a regulatory commission, and review of the convention is 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, killing 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 is addressed in 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 is a significant departure from past agreements, for i t recognizes firstly the need for an "ecosystem" approach, and secondly for special protection of criti 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 rifles, 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 in Canada regarding Canadian management practices pursuant to the convention (Hunt 1979). Research, Regulation and Review Coordinated research is 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 is 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 in form, the content is more explicit. Conservation and Management "Preservation and maintenance of stocks of migratory birds" is the stated aim. The approach is 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 is addressed in 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 in 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 is encouraged in Article VII: Each Contracting Party shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake measures necessary to establish preserves, refuges, protected areas, and also facilities 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 is addressed in Article II, sections 1(c) and 2. Native taking of migratory birds and the collection of their eggs is 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 is to be established to aid in combatting environmental degradation. Cooperation for this purpose i s also endorsed: - 156 -... the competent authorities of the Contracting Parties shall establish necessary procedures for such warnings and will 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 is noteworthy in that i t represents the f i r s t stated inclusion in a convention. Review Article XII states that the convention will remain in force for fifteen years, after which time i t will be automatically renewed annually. As Robinson (1976) has noted: Unlike the 1916 Treaty ... where no evaluation has occurred and there is 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 is 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 will 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 is seen in 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 strict controls for endangered species, is 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 in restoring that species to a favourable conservation status or in 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 is 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 is threatened. Respecting habitat conservation, the agreements should also include provision for: e. conservation and, where required, restoration of the habitats of importance in 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 is 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 in 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 in Appendix II which, are to be covered by agreements between Range States, each agreement is 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 its effectiveness, and to prepare reports for the Conference of the Parties; (Article V(4)). The "supreme" decision-making body however, is 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 is not clear whether subsection (c). above may be applied to cover funding of required research and personnel. There is 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 is 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 in any one country, ...There is 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 is composed of three commissioners from each country, appointed by the respective federal governments. The Commission and its 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 is uniquely important is that these Board reports are, and must be, unanimous. The I.J.C. will 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 in offices that are also advising national (or local) politicians, the report produced for the I.J.C. is 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 flexibility, the IJC has been able to perform a significant decision-making role in 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 is very contentious and local passions are aroused, the I.J.C.'s greatest contribution is to provide a means of obtaining agreed and trusted technical and social data. Rarely, by the time i t reports, are there facts in 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 itself. 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 is conserved and where utilized, is used wisely; KNOWING that certain indigenous people of Alaska in 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 will 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 territorial governments of the Parties have implemented policies to this end; CONSIDERING that caribou are social wild animals whose continued existence in large viable herds depends upon the maintenance intact of populations over large areas of land and that caribou in 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 is 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 is 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 air, land and water that caribou inhabit, utilize 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 is 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 its duties under this Convention. 4. The Parties shall provide in 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 political 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 in 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 its 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 fi 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 its duties under this Convention: a Scientific Committee consisting of specialists in 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 its powers and perform its 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 its anticipated expenses and submit i t to each Party. Each Party shall determine and pay the expenses of its Delegation. Joint expenses incurred by the Commission and its 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 in the official languages of the Parties and, where the Commission is so requested by the Subsistence Committee, in 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 in 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 its responsibilities under this Convention, shall focus its 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 its 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 in 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, in addition to any other procedures i t may establish: 1. 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 final; 3. The Commission shall consider the advice of its 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 in 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 in 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 in this Convention shall conflict with any Agreements either Party has made with its 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