Who is taking care of the land in Nunavut?

Sara Minogue and Nunatsiaq News are to be congratulated for recent articles on Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.’s behind-closed-doors efforts to change longstanding Inuit policy regarding uranium mining, and your coverage of the Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Board’s concerns regarding the future of caribou.

The NTI Lands Department should simply be renamed for what it really is — the NTI Mining Department — because so far NTI, along with the Government of Nunavut and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, have shown very little interest in ensuring that sufficient land remains useful as caribou habitat.

Some communities have spoken up. But what has been the response so far from their “leaders?”

• The Baker Lake HTO, in January, expressed concern about issuing new mineral permits until they decide what balance they want between protection and development on the calving grounds of the Beverly herd. Rather than getting support from their political leaders, their request was shut down, and they were pressured to change their mind.

• The Gjoa Haven HTO, over a year ago, requested follow up on consultation that the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board proposed regarding the upgrade of the Queen Maud Migratory Bird Sanctuary to a National Wildlife Area, in particular, to protect the calving grounds of the Ahiak herd. No response.

• The Hudson Bay Neighbours Regional Round Table, comprised of the mayors of Baker Lake, Arviat, Whale Cove, Rankin Inlet, Repulse Bay, Coral Harbour, Fox Lake, Gillam, and Churchill, unanimously passed a resolution in May 2005, supporting in principle the September 2004 recommendations of the BQCMB to permanently protect the calving areas of the Beverly and Qamanirjuaq herds, because existing caribou protection measures are not adequate. The mayors then wrote to all relevant ministers and officials. The result? No action, except for issuing hundreds of mineral permits in these very areas.

• The community of Clyde River has waited nearly 20 years for designation of a marine protected area for critical bowhead feeding habitat off north Baffin Island. They are still waiting.

You can get a prospecting permit for virtually anywhere in Nunavut in 10 minutes; but getting action on community requests to protect the land takes decades, if ever. It takes only months to come up with a Mineral Strategy for Nunavut; but there is still no Conservation Area Strategy, and land use planning has been deliberately ground to a halt.

No one could reasonably deny the need for jobs and new economic prospects for Nunavut, including mining. But where’s the balance?

Every other jurisdiction in Canada is also pursuing mining. And every one of them has a conservation area strategy. But not Nunavut. Instead, your leadership seems determined not to establish any new protected areas, and to revisit existing ones with the intent of abolishing them, making them smaller, or opening them up for industrial development.

For example, the Kitikmeot Inuit Association recently wrote: “The KIA will only participate in developing such a strategy [a conservation area strategy] if the current boundaries and conservation status of all existing conservation areas in the Kitikmeot be open for negotiation.”

Is this what the people of Nunavut really want? Is this what you voted for?

The BQCMB has said: “At some point there’s going to be a threshold crossed.” If the caribou upon which people depend are to be conserved, then protection of their habitat needs to be addressed now.

My own organization, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) — one of the largest conservation organizations in the world — has been branded an unwelcome “outsider” whenever we raise such questions. This, despite the fact that we were the first conservation organization to establish an office in Nunavut, and to have Inuit on our board of directors.

We have been invited, cited and even thanked for standing by Inuit on the seal hunt issue — in fact, we have lost thousands of members worldwide because of that stand. It has been the same for trapping and aboriginal whaling, especially for bowheads.

We have worked co-operatively with Nunavummiut in the international arena on climate change and reducing toxic contaminants in northern wildlife.

But whenever we support a community interested in protecting the land (at their request), we suddenly become “outsiders.” Worse, we are accused of being “against mining.”

Well, WWF is certainly not against mining. In fact, we have worked successfully with many companies and other jurisdictions in Canada to ensure a sustainable mining industry. But when we have offered the same to Nunavut the response we get is, “not interested.” Nevertheless, the offer still stands.

Paradoxically, Nunavut’s lack of interest in conservation is jeopardizing the future of its own diamond, gold and uranium industry in international markets. Because those markets now expect higher standards of their suppliers than to promote mining at the expense of everything else.

And why should the federal government devolve authority for managing natural resources to a jurisdiction that has not demonstrated balanced policies for the exercise of such authority?

Frankly, there is only so much an “outside” organization can (and should) do. It is now time to hear from the founders of Nunavut. Is what’s going on there today really consistent with your original vision, as stated in the NLCA?

And it’s time to hear from the people of Nunavut. When you have accountability sessions with the premier, his ministers and your MLA’s. When you hear back from the elected leadership of NTI and Regional Inuit Associations. And when you talk to your federal MP, who is supposed to make sure departments like INAC reflect your wishes.

It is time to ask them all: “Who is taking care of the land in Nunavut?”

Monte Hummel OC
President Emeritus
World Wildlife Fund Canada