Inuit leaders pleased Supreme Court will hear Clyde River case

More than 100 people take to the streets of Clyde River in July 2014 to protest the National Energy Board’s approval of seismic testing in Baffin Bay and Davis Strait. (FILE PHOTO)

Inuit leaders say they’re pleased that Canada’s highest court has agreed to hear a case that will help clarify the powers Inuit have over what happens on the land and waters where they live.

On March 10, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to hear the appeal of Jerry Natanine and others in Clyde River who are fighting to stop seismic testing in Davis Strait and Baffin Bay.

Olayuk Akesuk, a member of the Qikiqtani Inuit Association’s executive committee, said last week that Baffin’s Inuit organization stands behind Natanine, the Hamlet of Clyde River and the Nammautaq Hunters and Trappers Organization.

“I think it’s very good news for us as Inuit, along with the people who are there, Jerry Natanine and Clyde River. I’m happy the Supreme Court gets a chance to look at the court documents… This is a big step for Inuit,” Akesuk said, reached March 11 at his home in Cape Dorset.

“We need to know what’s happening and what the purpose of the project is, and any testing that will be done, prior to any government or department approving any project. A lot of the time, this impacts us — our traditions, our hunting lifestyle. We want the government to have more communication.”

Natanine’s fight began in 2014 when the National Energy Board gave permission to a group of Norwegian companies — TGS-NOPEC Geophysical Company, Multi Klient Invest and Petroleum GeoServices — to begin a five-year seismic testing program offshore of Baffin Island.

Many Inuit, scientists and environmental groups are opposed to seismic testing, which involves using explosive sound to map the seabed for hydrocarbon reservoirs.

Opponents believe those sound blasts will impact marine animals in a number of ways including disrupting animal migratory patterns, interfering with their communication, disorienting them and perhaps even damaging their hearing.

Natan Obed, president of Inuit Tapiriit of Canada, said he will pay close attention to the outcome of this case.

“A lot of the rights that we have right now are a result of legal precedent. So whenever anything like this comes before the Supreme Court or works its way through the different levels of the justice system, we learn more about how we legally fit within Canada,” Obed told Nunatsiaq News March 11.

“I don’t have a comment on the issue of seismic testing itself. But I am happy to see that Inuit concerns are being seriously considered by the court system and I look forward to seeing how all this plays out.”

Akesuk said the government should complete a strategic environmental assessment of the area to examine broader impacts of offshore, industrial development, before seismic testing and oil and gas exploration are permitted in Arctic waters.

The previous federal government began a strategic environmental assessment of offshore oil and gas development in February 2014 with a serious of consultations.

But it’s unclear if work on that assessment work will continue under the Liberal government and if so, how much has been done.

Akesuk said last year the QIA did its own consultations on seismic testing in Arctic Bay, Pangnirtung, Kimmirut, Pond Inlet, Clyde River, Qikiqtarjuaq and Iqaluit.

Akesuk attended the Clyde River meeting and he said most people in that community talked about their reliance on marine life for food.

“Most of the information we wanted from those communities was the migration routes, the animals that migrate through there, including birds, along with the movement of the icebergs — how do they move and where do they come from? — and what times of year are busiest for the animals.

“It’s very important. As an Inuit organization, it’s our job to make sure we have knowledge of what the potential impacts will be if there’s seismic testing in the area.”

In the past, the QIA has given Clyde River seismic opponents money to help pay for their legal bills.

Akesuk said it would be up to the QIA board to consider whether they will continue offering financial help in the future.

“I don’t believe Jerry Natanine and Clyde River has approached us yet for any request for funding but I do believe if there was one, QIA would certainly look at what the possibilities would be for us to help support this court case.”

With files from Jim Bell