|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||
 Download
PDF (96K) Printer
Friendly |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
NUNAVUT WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT BOARD
10-12 FEBRUARY 1998 GJOA HAVEN, NT
Agenda Call to Order and Opening Preliminaries
Swearing-in Ceremony for Re-Appointed Members Welcome by Community Representatives Financial and Administrative Business Executive Committee Report and Recommendations Chairman, Staff, and Members' Reports
Implementation of Assignments and Resolutions from Last Meeting Environment Canada (CWS) Presentations/Decisions
Executive Committee Report and Recommendations
Meetings, Workshops and Other Pertinent Events Date and Location of Next Meeting
Several other presenters and members of the public at large
Tuesday, 10 February 1998
1. Call to Order and Opening Preliminaries
The Chairperson Ben Kovic convened the meeting at 9:00 a.m. in the Admundsen Hotel in Gjoa Haven. He welcomed the Members to Gjoa Haven, and asked all persons present to introduce themselves. Ben gave a brief overview of the agenda for the week. He noted that in addition to the regular Board business it would be necessary to swear-in the three Board Members who were recently re-appointed.
Swearing-in Ceremony for Re-Appointed Members
Michael d’Eça, the NWMB Legal Advisor, swore-in or affirmed those Members who were recently re-appointed by the Governor in Council:
Welcome by Community Representatives
His Worship, Michael Angottitaurquq, welcomed the NWMB Members to Gjoa Haven on behalf of the Hamlet Council and the residents of the community. He stated that Gjoa Haven was proud to be hosting this NWMB meeting. He invited the Board to take advantage of amenities available in the Hamlet office.
Uriash Paukinaq, Chairperson of the Gjoa Haven Hunters and Trappers Association, also welcomed the NWMB to the community. He identified a shortage of trained candidates and a high turnover in the secretary/manager position as very detrimental to the operations of the HTA. He also urged that a greater effort be made to develop inter-settlement trade in country food between the Baffin and Kitikmeot Regions.
Members reviewed and accepted the agenda for this the 17 th regular Meeting of the NWMB. (Resolution 98- 082) 3. Minutes: Review and Adoption
The Minutes for Regular Meeting No. 16, held on 15-20 November 1997, were adopted with noted corrections. (Resolution 98- 083)
The Minutes for Conference Call No. 35, conducted on 19 December 1997, were adopted as presented. (Resolution 98- 084)
4. Financial and Administrative Business
4.A Financial Report to 31 December 1997
Jim Noble gave an overview of the December 31 financial report. Harry Flaherty questioned the under-expenditure on Salaries and the over-expenditure on the Office Lease. Jim explained that the former was due to the delayed staffing of the Assistant Director of Wildlife Management position, whereas the latter was due to an escalation from about $5.00 to about $12.00 per square foot in the “common-area expense” component. Jim noted that the Board’s earlier authorization for staff to explore alternative office accommodation arrangements stemmed from the imposition of this higher charge. The property management function for the building was recently taken over by Qikiqtaaluk Corporation. The Board’s lease has 14 months remaining.
The Board accepted the report as presented, with the admonition that future reports include an explanation of significant variances. (Resolution 98- 085)
4.B Budget for 1998/99: Review and Approval
Jim Noble referred to the budget estimates for the coming year, included in the briefing material for the Meeting. An expenditure of $4,838,620 is projected. This compares with this year’s (1997/98) budget of $5,080,285. Jim stressed that this is the Board’s operating budget only; the bulk of the research that the Board supports is funded out of the Research Trust.
At Gordon Koshinsky’s request, Jim provided an overview of the budget in the context of the first 10-year planning period under the Implementation Contract. It was noted that the Board’s funding and expenditure profiles seem to be satisfactorily on track in this regard. The Board is currently operating in its fifth year under the Contract. Michael d’Eça observed that the parties to the Implementation Contract are required, at least one year prior to the expiry of any planning period, “to enter into negotiations for the purpose of determining the amount of funding that shall be provided under the Contract to implement the Nunavut Final Agreement in the following planning period.”
Kevin McCormick noted that, in contrast to previous years, there was no provision in this draft budget for Public Hearings. He expressed concern about this, but also expressed dissatisfaction about the simple way in which this item was budgeted in the past. A Public Hearing would pose a major expenditure if it happened, but was impossible to predict. Kevin and others felt that there ought to be a better way to protect funds for such an eventuality other than merely showing it as a line item that tended not to be actually used. There were suggestions that it might be useful to amalgamate funds for Public Hearings with some other line item. Dan Pike suggested amalgamating it with “NWMB-Funded Research” (=Community Research); Michael d’Eça preferred amalgamating it with “Other Meetings/Workshops”. In the final analysis no acceptable alternative mechanism was identified, but the Executive Director was assigned to investigate the matter further.
The Board decided to approve an operating budget for 1998/99 in the amount of $4,938,620. This was as per the draft presented, except with the additional inclusion of a line item for Public Hearings in the amount of $100,000. (Resolution 98- 086)
5. Executive Committee Report and Recommendations
This item was deferred until after the Executive Committee had opportunity to meet. The item was revisited Thursday morning, February 12.
6. Chairman, Staff, and Members' Reports
Ben Kovic referred to the reports by NWMB senior staff members and Advisors provided in the briefing material for the information of the Board.
Ben suggested that unless Board Members had specific questions, he did not intend to review his report or associated materials in the course of the meeting. The same would apply to the reports of staff members and Advisors, unless they had any particular highlights or concerns they wanted to emphasize.
6.B Executive Director's Report
In response to a question from Kevin McCormick, Jim advised that the NWMB Web Site is now accessible in a draft format. Favourable comments are already being received. Minutes of the Board’s Meetings and Teleconferences are currently being re-formatted for inclusion.
6.C Director, Wildlife Management Report
Further to item 5 in his summary of achievements, Dan Pike reported that 11 of the 13 charr that had been radio-tagged at Nettilling Lake were re-located in a small area at the south end of the lake in the course of a late-January over-flight. Invitations have been sent to the RWOs regarding the narwhal workshop and discussion papers are being drafted.
6.D Director, Finance and Administration Report
Jim Noble noted that Pierre Chartrand had been unable to develop a policy for purchase and disposition of property as he had been assigned prior to his departure. Pierre has offered his help and advice to the Board until his replacement is hired.
Michael d’Eça expressed concern about the lack of any positive response from DIAND officials to date about a new Funding Agreement for 1998/99. He noted three federal legislative initiates (Endangered Species Protection, Marine Conservation Areas, Fisheries) that are expected to start or be re-initiated soon, and asked for guidance on if and when to develop input. For the most part appropriate documents, or at least very good drafts, already exist. The Board agreed that it was important to be proactive and to introduce (or re-introduce) the Board’s point of view early in these legislative proceedings.
6.F Fisheries Advisor's Report
Ray Andews noted in his report that the final TAC of 5500 metric tonnes (mt) of turbot for the Sub-Area 0 (Division 0B) fishery in 1997 was exceeded by 628 mt. The overrun occurred in the competitive gillnet component of the fishery. The 0A exploratory/experimental catch was about 200 mt. 6.G Member's Reports and Concerns
Joan drew attention to ongoing financial and administrative difficulties at the Baker Lake HTA. She noted that the Chairperson and the Secretary Manager are brothers, and suggested that a policy is needed to prevent such arrangements. Jim Noble suggested that the key to having functional HTAs is to have strong RWOs, and cited the Baffin Region as an example. Members deemed it impractical for the NWMB to take an active role in the operation of the HTOs, and noted that Board funds flow to the HTOs via the RWOs.
Kevin reported plans by Natural Resources Canada to further diminish funding for the Polar Continental Shelf Project (PCSP). This agency provides logistic support for Arctic research projects. As its ability to provide such support is diminished, research funding provided by agencies (including NWMB) will need to stretch further. Inevitably, fewer research projects will be funded in the Arctic and some kinds of work may be precluded entirely. The PCSP operating budget was traditionally about $4 million. This year it is about $2 million. Next year it is scheduled to drop to about $1 million. The Board agreed to write to the Minister of Natural Resources Canada to register concern about the past and proposed PCSP funding reductions.
Kevin reported that compensating communities for polar bear defence-kills remains a matter of contention and concern. From the DOE perspective, a defence-kill near Kimmirut last summer has become an escalating issue. Grise Fiord perceives a long-standing grievance and refuses to permit further research in that area until it is resolved. Some researchers are negotiating their own agreements, which is jeopardizing any comprehensive approach. Kevin encouraged development of a permanent solution. As part of that solution it will be necessary among other things to:
The Board agreed that the matter warranted attention. An exploratory meeting among Stephen Atkinson (RWED), Kevin McCormick (NWMB), Dan Pike (NWMB) and Michael d’Eça (NWMB) was arranged by Kevin, to discuss the matter and possible options. Stephen will attempt to consolidate this material and on that basis to consult with the RWOs.
7. Implementation of Assignments and Resolutions from Last Meeting Jim Noble reported verbally on this matter. He used a reverse-reporting procedure, bringing to attention only items for which progress was slower than expected or which were stymied for whatever reason. Members remarked on the very good progress that had generally been achieved.
In response to a request for clarification about the Canada Foundation for Innovation, Jim explained that this was a new Federal program of capital funding to support research. A possible candidate item might be a research facility in Iqaluit; DIAND used to have such a facility here.
8. Environment Canada (CWS) Presentations/Decisions 8.A The Canada Endangered Species Protection Act (CESPA): Update
Kevin McCormick briefed Members on the status of legislation and related efforts to protect species at risk. Bill C-65, the Canada Endangered Species Protection Act , died on the Order Paper when the federal election was called in the spring of 1997. The Canadian Wildlife Ministers recently affirmed this as a matter of continuing priority, and identified a need to focus initially on moving forward with the National Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk. The Ministers acknowledged three aspects of the Bill as previously drafted that require attention: civil actions, transboundary species, and the relationship between the Ministers’ Council and COSEWIC. An updated Bill will likely be introduced in the fall of 1998.
8.B Snow Goose Over-Population Issue
Kevin McCormick reminded Members that the focus of concern is the mid-continent population of Lesser Snow Geese. He indicated that one option being considered, albeit unlikely to have the potential for very significant impact, is to encourage a larger snow goose harvest in the Arctic.
Kevin reported that the 1997 surveys did indicate that the component of the population summering in the SW Hudson Bay area now seems to be declining, or at least stabilizing. Gordon Koshinsky asked how this could be reconciled with the fact that this area shows perhaps the greatest habitat destruction by geese in the Arctic. Kevin suggested some possible explanations:
8.C Migratory Birds Convention Amending Process
Kevin McCormick reminded Members that the Canadian incentive for amending the Convention derives in large part from the various Land Claims Agreements. The process has been proceeding according to a Protocol developed in 1995. Amendments endorsed by both countries include:
It still remains for the US President to sign off on the Protocol and for the two countries to exchange instruments of ratification. Canada will then need to make appropriate changes to legislation and regulations to bring the ratified new Convention into force. The USA is also amending its Migratory Birds Convention with Mexico and this may delay ratification of the new Convention between Canada and the USA. The process is on track, but once the Convention is amended it will still be necessary for CWS to bring its legislation and regulations in line to permit implementation. Certain challenges remain, such as defining “aboriginal community” with respect to trading and distribution of bird harvests. The Board agreed that it would be worthwhile to declare at the outset what amendments to legislation and regulations it would consider appropriate.
8.D Arctic Contaminants Program
Kevin McCormick advised that this Program has been extended at a level of $6 million per year for the next five years.
9. Fisheries and Oceans (DFO): Presentations/Decisions Note: No DFO representative was present at the meeting; neither did the Department provide any briefing materials.
9.A Walrus Management: Regulatory Options
Dan Pike noted that at the August Board meeting DFO undertook to develop an options paper on this subject for the November meeting. It was not completed then, and has not been delivered yet.
9.B Beluga Live Capture Proposal
Dan Pike advised that DFO has received notice of a pending application for the live-capture and removal of five beluga whales from the Churchill area. Although the capture would take place in waters off Manitoba, the whales would be from the Western Hudson Bay stock and the application would thus be of some interest to the NWMB.
9.C Walrus Management Plan: Update
Dan Pike reminded Members that NWMB staff reviewed the draft plan that DFO tabled at the August Board meeting. DFO is awaiting response from Makivik before doing the next draft. Timing is now a matter of concern, since applications are already being received for sport hunting ventures this summer.
9.D Bowhead Hunt: Non-Quota Limitations
Dan Pike was unable to advise what DFO had in mind when they asked that this item be placed on the agenda for this Board meeting.
9.E Quota for Striped Pink Shrimp in the NSA: NWMB Final Decision
Dan Pike reviewed the recent history in the management of the northern shrimp and striped pink shrimp fisheries. In 1996 the DFO Minister established a new overall competitive quota of 3800 metric tonnes for striped pink shrimp for Shrimp Fishing Areas 2, 3 and 4. The NWMB then decided to establish a quota of 1000 metric tonnes for striped pink shrimp in NSA waters, and to limit participation in the NSA fishery to the three Inuit-owned companies. The Minister acted illegally when he varied this decision by making the NSA quota part of the overall competitive quota. This had and has the effect of forcing the fishery within the NSA to close if/when the competitive quota is reached. In 1997 the NWMB again decided to establish a 1000-tonne quota for striped pink shrimp in the NSA. This time the Minister rejected the NWMB decision. He proposed instead a temporary quota of 500 tonnes for the NSA. The uncertainty about quota levels may have contributed to there being no shrimp fishing within the NSA in 1997. There was also none in 1996.
As per instructions from the Board at the last meeting, Dan reported that he did consult with the industry and did develop options for the Board’s consideration. Qikiqtaaluk Corporation expressed preference for a system that would allow flexibility to fish within the NSA when shrimp are abundant there, but would have the quota available outside the NSA when this is not the case. The Board then examined the three options that Dan set forth.
The Board made its final decision, in response to the Minister’s rejection of the earlier decision, with respect to harvesting restrictions for striped pink shrimp in the Nunavut Settlement Area. The Board decided to establish a quota of 500 metric tonnes in the NSA for 1998 and ongoing, along with a total catch limit of 1000 metric tonnes. (Resolution 98- 087) This would provide certain access to 500 tonnes for allocation by the NWMB, plus potential access to an additional 500 tonnes to the same parties.
9.F Integrated Fishery Management Plan for Northern Shrimp
Dan Pike advised that DFO had responded to the critique by NWMB staff regarding DFO’s draft Management Plan. Recognition of the NWMB role in the fishery was still inadequate, and this was again brought to the attention of the DFO Minister. The next version of the Plan is expected to arrive soon, for NWMB consideration and approval.
9.G Judicial Proceedings on Turbot: Review and Update
Michael d’Eça indicated that he considered it unlikely that the current DFO appeal, and more particularly the second judicial review, would be heard before it is necessary to establish the Davis Strait turbot quotas and allocations for 1998. He confirmed that Makivik Corporation was successful in its application to intervene in the DFO appeal, and is currently seeking approval to intervene in the second judicial review.
Discussion turned to what the NWMB could/should do at this point. Michael suggested that it was probably not worthwhile for the NWMB to seek to intervene directly in the DFO appeal, on the assumption that NTI, through their factum and other initiatives, will convey the same message that the Board would convey. Michael recommended that the NWMB:
With respect to trying to improve the relationship with DFO, the forthcoming visit of the Minister to Iqaluit and the anticipated Baffin tour by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Fisheries, were seen as key opportunities. Gordon Koshinsky reminded Members about the paper on this subject that he and Michael had started to draft but that had been put in abeyance.
Wednesday, 11 February 1998
10. GNWT Wildlife (RWED): Presentations/Decisions 10.A Peary Caribou Recovery Plan: Update
Stephen Atkinson reported that a draft framework for a co-management plan has been developed for Peary and other High-Arctic caribou. A three-day workshop is scheduled for Yellowknife at the end of this month, to provide input for the continuing development of this plan. It is hoped to formulate criteria for deciding when it would be appropriate to implement particular management interventions. It is still planned to conduct a full-scale caribou survey in the Eastern High Arctic this summer, along with a reconnaissance survey in the Western Queen Elizabeth Islands. In response to questions, Stephen advised that:
10.B Muskox Management Area N/MX/13 (Kent Peninsula): Delineation
Joe Tigullaraq reported that the Kitikmeot Inuit Association has expressed dissatisfaction about the creation of a new and separate Muskox Management Area to encompass Kent Peninsula. The rationale for this initiative was to complement a process for tighter management and protection of Victoria Island caribou. These caribou are at a low ebb of abundance and they utilize Kent Peninsula extensively as winter range. The HTO at Cambridge Bay and also the RWO (KHTA) were involved throughout the development of this change, and have not expressed substantive concerns.
Makabe Nartok confirmed that KIA officials have stated that they want Kent Peninsula reincorporated with the rest of Bathurst Inlet for muskox management purposes. Kevin McCormick asked if there is a management issue here. Stephen Atkinson replied that there is none of which the Department is aware. The debate hinges on what agencies have authority and who should be consulted. Muskox harvesting has in fact not been affected. Isaac Klengenberg stated that the KHTA does not understand what the concern of the KIA is. Ben Kovic confirmed the primacy of the RWO/HTO in these types of wildlife management matters. He suggested that the KIA consult with the RWO if it has concerns of this nature.
10.C Polar Bear Handling Effects: Status Report
Stephen Atkinson reported that the Department has contracted Dr. Francois Messier at the University of Saskatchewan to conduct an analysis of all data that have been generated by all agencies since researchers began using Telazol as a tranquilizer in the mid 1980s. The report should be available by late summer. The analysis will encompass the full range of handling treatments, not just tranquilizers. The report will not provide highly definitive statements, but rather a basis for the NWMB to decide if a more work, perhaps by a third party, is required.
Makabe Nartok asked if the newest tranquilizers dissipate more quickly than those used previously. Stephen replied that this comparison is not yet possible because there are no field data for the newest drugs. Health and Welfare Canada declares the meat to be safe to eat after 12 months, but this surely incorporates a very large margin of safety.
10.D South Baffin Caribou Research Project: Status Report
Joe Tigullaraq tabled a synopsis of the research that has been conducted over the past 20 years. Much data yet remain to be analyzed and extensive community consultations will be needed for development of a management plan. The target for completion is April 1999, but competing priorities will probably force a delay.
Harry Flaherty expressed frustration about the protracted time to completion of this project. He urged that discrete components of the database be identified and dealt with in an organized manner. Stephen Atkinson observed that the work has a very substantial TEK component and there is not much precedent for analyzing and reporting results of this nature. Dan Pike drew attention to the maps on display that show some of the TEK data.
10.E North Baffin Caribou: Research Strategy
Joe Tigullaraq tabled a preliminary assessment of research priorities that was prepared by the Department in 1996 in consultation with the six pertinent communities. Joe reported that there is much local impetus to commence the actual studies but the Department has been unable to identify and allocate the necessary resources. One of the biggest concerns being expressed by the hunters centres on the incidence of Brucellosis which, at around 30%, is the highest known for any caribou population.
Dan Pike pointed out that a similar but not identical document was tabled by the Qikiqtaaluk Wildlife Board on behalf of the North Baffin communities at the recent workshop on research priorities . He mentioned that he had anticipated that the document to be tabled at the present Board meeting would be oriented more to research plans than to research priorities
10.F Polar Bear Mgmt Boundary: Taloyoak/Pelly Bay
Joe Tigullaraq reminded the Board, as had also been confirmed by Makabe Nartok, that the Taloyoak HTA had questioned the boundary between the Gulf of Boothia and M’Clintock Channel Polar Bear Management Areas. Community consultations were conducted (in which Makabe participated) in December. The HTA accepted the explanation that the Department provided, but did refuse to grant permission to use radio collars to study the matter further. With the issue thus resolved, it has been possible to scale back somewhat the scope and the cost of the polar bear research plan for this area.
10.G Conservation Education: Update
Steve Pinksen advised that the Department is rebuilding a conservation education capability. An education specialist will be hired very soon, to train field officers in their interactions with resource users, particularly in the context of the new legislation being prepared (see 10.H below). A second PY may also be allocated. The Department is very interested to develop a partnership with the NWMB for work in this area.
The Board agreed that Jim Noble should work with the Department on this initiative. Stephen Atkinson agreed to provide copies of the job descriptions.
10.H Wildlife Act Revisions: Update
Steve Pinksen advised that the Department has awarded a contract to the Canadian Institute of Resources Law at the University of Calgary to identify matters pertaining to the Wildlife Act that merit revision, either from the perspective of the NLCA or for other reasons. This report is expected by the end of March. The next step will be to produce a workplan for actually developing the new Act. It is hoped to have a good draft of the new Act by the end of the calendar year. The Department does not anticipate a single two-part Act, but believes that the legislation for the two Territories (NWT and Nunavut) will be completely separate.
The Board urged that the Department work on this initiative with its co-management partners on an incremental basis. In other words, it will be more productive to obtain input in respect to individual stages and sections rather than drafting the initial version unilaterally.
10.I Quota for Kane Basin Polar Bears: NWMB Final Decision
Dan Pike reviewed the history pertinent to this issue, including the sequence of management decisions. He advised that as the outcome of a recent conference call, the Iviq HTA at Grise Fiord agreed to accept a quota of one polar bear from the Kane Basin population for 1997/98. The HTA also expects that a new management agreement will be negotiated for the following (1998/99) season. It now remains for the Board to render its final decision.
The Board decided to reduce the Grise Fjord quota of polar bears from the Kane Basin population to one bear for the 1997/98 hunting season. (Resolution 98- 088)
10.J Traditional Polar Bear Hunt Proposal: Coral Harbour
Dan Pike reviewed the extensive file on this matter. He also tabled some new information besides own his briefing note, specifically:
On the basis of his analysis of the available information Dan concluded that:
Following from these conclusions, Dan suggested that if the Board did approve the hunt, the Board should consider:
On the matter of liability, Michael d’Eça advised that while recourse to suing the Board in the event of an accident or injury would be difficult and unlikely, it could nonetheless not be ruled out completely. The Board’s key defences would rest in having acted in good faith as per NLCA 5.2.39, and in having made what is known in law as a “policy decision,” assuming it could so demonstrate. Michael also suggested a number of conditions if the hunt were to proceed. In addition, he suggested that once the precedent was set it would be very difficult to confine such a hunt to a one-time event. Any other beneficiaries with the same qualifications who came forward with a similar proposal in future would justifiably have to be found eligible.
Gordon Koshinsky proposed obtaining a very complete inventory of the proponent’s qualifications, with a view to disqualifying other/future applicants by way of comparison. It might also be reasonable to require certification of medical fitness. Harry Flaherty and Pauloosie Keyootak did not consider the hunt as it was proposed to be particularly risky, but wondered whether Inuit interests overall would benefit or be harmed by it. Ben Kovic noted that the proponent had declared his willingness to assume accountability. Could he be held accountable if Inuit interests were harmed? Michael d’Eça indicated that he might have a moral liability, but nothing more than that.
Kevin McCormick suggested that the film message could be portrayed without any actual footage of a/the kill. If such footage did come into existence, then Kevin felt that he could safely predict that it would eventually be used to the detriment of Inuit interests.
Ben Kovic questioned if a hunt that had benefit of back-up personnel with rifles could properly be interpreted as traditional. A traditional polar bear hunt according to his (Ben’s) father involved hiding among the sled dogs to deceive the bear, then killing the bear with a snow knife. Gordon Koshinsky asked if it was traditional to hunt polar bears with harpoons, 30-foot spears, and tethering lines as was indicated in the proposal. Ben noted that the proponent spoke of trying to revive the traditional hunting tradition, but at the same time identified this as a one-time occasion. This seems not to be a consistent perspective.
Members expressed a desire for more time to consider the proposal and to obtain the reaction of the communities. It was decided to ask staff to request the RWOs to approach the HTOs on the subject, and particularly to obtain input on the matter of hunting techniques and the implications of filming.
10.K Commercial Caribou Quota: Qamanirjuaq Herd
Dan Pike advised that the Beverly/Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Board had concurred with the earlier tentative decision of the NWMB to increase the Arviat commercial caribou quota from the Qamanirjuaq herd to 220 animals. The NWMB decision has accordingly been conveyed to the RWED Minister.
10.L Arctic Charr Development Proposal Joe Tigullaraq reminded the Board of the proposal that was brought forward earlier by Icy Waters International to develop a superior strain of Arctic charr and commercialize the progeny for aquaculture purposes. As per instructions from the NWMB, the firm has continued consulting on the proposal with potentially participating communities. Clyde River has declined to participate in such discussions, and the firm has now set its sights on Pond Inlet. In response to ongoing concerns about potential negative effects of charr culture on the wild-fish fisheries, the Department commissioned a consultant to review the matter. Joe tabled the consultant’s report.
Gordon Koshinsky reviewed the Board’s earlier response to this proposal, as embodied in NWMB Resolution 98-032. He stressed that the Board was not interested just to see predictions, no matter how convincing they might sound, that Arctic charr culture posed no threat to the wild-fish fisheries. The Board wanted to see an examination of the possibilities for integrating the two kinds of operations for the potential benefit of both. The key aspect of such an examination would be in the areas of customer satisfaction and product marketing. It is theorized that there is a body of consumers who prefer the wild-fish product, and are willing to pay extra to get it, but who tend to forget about the existence of this product during the intervals when no wild charr of suitable quality are made available in stores.
11. NWMB Internal Items: Presentations / Decisions
Dan Pike presented Johnny McPherson’s briefing report on Johnny’s behalf. A new Data Entry Clerk had been hired for the Kitikmeot Region, two Field Workers were recently replaced in the Keewatin, and an extra Field Worker was hired for Iqaluit. More promotional work is being done. Dan referred Members to the transcript of a recent interview by Johnny on CBC Radio. A full-page ad was placed in “Above and Beyond” magazine. It is intended to convene the new Harvest Study Committee for the first time in conjunction with the forthcoming Special Meeting of the Board in Iqaluit.
Dan indicated that Johnny has been doing an excellent job as Harvest Study Co-ordinator. The intention is to extend his term for the duration of the Study.
Dan presented the 1998/99 budget estimates for the Harvest Study. The amount identified for 1998/99 is $1,330,605. The projected total expenditure to the end of the Study in 2002 is $7,152,278, or about 3% less than what has been set aside.
David Tagoona reported that the Field Worker at Baker Lake is having a difficult time obtaining locational data from hunters because the maps being used do not have Inuktitut place names.
11.B Inuit Bowhead Knowledge Study: Update
Dan Pike presented Keith Hay’s briefing material on Keith’s behalf. All the data collection and treatment is finished except for a small amount of map digitizing that is out on contract. Keith is writing the report but he has been ill and will not make his first-draft target of March 31.
Dan presented a preliminary 1998/99 budget estimate to complete the Inuit Bowhead Knowledge Study. The amount identified is $66,600 to the end of July. This estimate will be exceeded to the extent that slippage develops in the completion date for the final report. Printing costs have probably been under-estimated as well.
11.C Southeast Baffin Beluga TEK Study: Update
Dan Pike advised that all deliverables have now been received from the consultant. Keith Hay is reviewing the report. The intent is to publish it using NWMB funds allocated to Wildlife Conservation Education.
11.D Southeast Baffin Beluga Management Committee: Update
Dan Pike tabled the report from the last meeting of the Committee in December, along with related materials. Highlights included:
The Committee developed three research recommendations for the consideration of the Board:
The Committee developed three management recommendations for the consideration of the Board:
Ben Kovic noted that availability and distribution of beluga sampling kits is often used as a mechanism to control the harvest. He wondered if cessation of sampling would jeopardize this. Dan observed that Pangnirtung is really the only community that uses this method. It would be up to the HTA and DFO to work out an alternative quota-monitoring system.
Gordon Koshinsky noted that the Southeast Baffin Beluga Co-Management Plan called for further hunting restrictions if the population was not shown to have increased by 1998. Postponing the 1998 survey would prevent any such demonstration. Dan replied that it may be necessary to extend the existing provisions for an additional year. It makes more sense to do the tagging first as a way to assist the survey planning, and the two operations cannot realistically be done in the same year.
The Inuvialuit experience was cited as a possible model for developing local hunting by-laws in the Southeast Baffin. Kevin McCormick confirmed that the Inuvialuit Final Agreement makes provision for this, but in actual practice such by-laws are run through the RWED system and emerge as GNWT regulations. Dan Pike observed that any organization can make “rules” applying to its members that it enforces internally. Michael d’Eça stated that, under the NLCA, if the intent is to develop “rules” that apply to the public generally, and that are to be enforced by a Resource Officer, then the HTA would need to convince the NWMB to formally establish such rules . Under the NLCA, only NWMB decisions can be made into federal or territorial regulations that control quotas or non-quota limitations.
The Board decided to accept the six recommendations brought forward by the Southeast Baffin Beluga Management Committee from its December meeting in Kimmirut. (Resolution 98- 089)
11.E NWMB Resource Centre: Update
Dan Pike reported on behalf of Rebecca Mike that L&B Consulting was contracted to develop a filing system for information that will be shared electronically by NWMB, RWED, DFO and CWS. The four agencies will each maintain their own material collections. The second component of the Resource Centre will be a stock database, designated the Nunavut Wildlife Stock Information System. This database will incorporate information for each species pertaining to life history, stock delineation, vital rates, harvest, research, management, traditional knowledge, and literature. RWED is taking the lead in developing this database, but the other two government agencies intend to participate as full partners. A challenge for the future will be to obtain the participation of the other IPGs under the NLCA.
11.F NWMB General By-law: Update
Michael d’Eça advised that he had made the changes that the Board had identified with respect to his earlier draft, along with some other ones on his own initiative. He then elaborated the major new changes, including:
The Board assigned the Executive Director to work with Michael to ensure that all the minutiae of the by-law are in conformity with the Board’s actual practice or vice-versa. Michael was also assigned to:
11.G NWMB Public Hearing Process: Update
Michael d’Eça reminded Members that the Board’s draft “Rules of Practice for Public Hearings” was distributed for comment to a number of agencies recently. The other IPGs have directed their legal advisors to examine the document with a view to standardizing procedures as much as possible. Michael applauded this intention. He predicted that lack of commitment to date by the federal government to provide intervenor funding will be a matter of common concern.
The Board assigned Michael to acknowledge on behalf of the Board the responses received to date, to follow up with phone calls as he might consider appropriate, and to amend the current draft in light of this interaction as he considered beneficial. The Board will be prepared to review the matter further at the next Board meeting.
11.H Nunavut Marine Council: Update
Michael d’Eça reviewed the history leading up to the Board’s decision not to actively involve itself in the formation of a Nunavut Marine Council until there was opportunity for further discussion with the other IPGs in particular. The matter was subsequently discussed at the IPGs’ meeting in December, where NIRB tabled a proposal. Michael provided a review and response whereupon NIRB circulated another draft. Comments were again provided, this time by Michael in concert with Gordon Koshinsky. There has been no reply to date. It has not been made clear how an NMC would provide a basis for increasing the effectiveness or adding value to what the NWMB can already do.
Ben Kovic advised that the other IPGs are meeting in Yellowknife this week. They have been in telephone contact with the NWMB’s Executive Director and Legal Advisor to urge the NWMB to decide in favour of supporting their initiative. They have just sent (by Fax) a draft outline for an MOU to underpin the establishment of an NMC. They would like to meet with the NWMB to discuss this matter further, and have suggested April in Iqaluit.
Jim Noble explained that the other IPGs see a relatively urgent need to respond to marine initiatives, such as the one pertaining to Marine Protected Areas, that the federal government has recently put in motion. They believe that a joint response from all the IPGs (as per an NMC) would be most effective. They propose that the IPGs acting together should hire someone on contract to begin developing such a response.
Kevin McCormick suggested that the next communication of the NWMB to the other IPGs should be framed as a set of questions designed to establish more precisely what they envision that an NMC would do that cannot be done already, especially with reference to the NWMB mandate. Kevin disputed the contention that a single voice would carry more weight than a number of co-ordinated voices speaking to a particular issue. Gordon Koshinsky expressed disappointment that the other IPGs seem to be stepping up their pressure on the Board in this matter while failing to even acknowledge the Board’s substantial response to the material that they circulated in December.
The Board decided to invite the other IPGs to meet with the NWMB in conjunction with the Special Board Meeting planned for March or, if that is not convenient, in conjunction with the next Regular Board Meeting in May. In preparation for such a meeting the Board will develop and forward a detailed draft agenda. The Board will also withhold participation in interim contracting for assistance to further the aims of an NMC until such time as those aims are clarified and agreed.
| |||||||||||||||
