land use planning in the deh cho territory n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Land Use Planning in the Deh Cho territory PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Land Use Planning in the Deh Cho territory

Land Use Planning in the Deh Cho territory

215 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Land Use Planning in the Deh Cho territory

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Land Use Planning in the Deh Cho territory



  4. What is Land Use Planning? Potential Land Uses Decisions (Planning Partners) (Staff & Committee) ? ? ? ? • DevelopmentConservation • Forestry - Green TLUO – Red • Tourism – Orange Wildlife – Blue • Oil and Gas – Purple Archaeology - Black • Minerals – Brown • Agriculture – Yellow Zones (Planning & Management)

  5. Land Use Planning in the Deh Cho • Land Use Planning means determining what types of land use activities should occur and where they should take place • “The purpose of the plan is to promote the social, cultural and economic well-being of residents and communities in the Deh Cho territory, having regard to the interests of all Canadians.” • Our planning area extends to the whole Deh Cho territory, excluding municipal areas and Nahanni National Park Reserve

  6. Plan Area

  7. Land Use Planning and the Deh Cho Process • Land Use Planning is only one part of the larger Deh Cho Process of negotiations looking at land, resource management and governance issues • Draft Land Use Plan (2005) • Final Land Use Plan (March 2006) • Land Use Plan used by three parties to negotiate in the Deh Cho Process • Complete Deh Cho Process (~ 2008)

  8. Planning Partners + + 2nd Priority Businesses, Associations, non- governmental organizations 1st Priority Residents Approve Plan

  9. Committee & Staff • Committee Members • 2 DCFN reps (Tim Lennie and Petr Cizek) • 1 GNWT rep (Bea Lepine) • 1 Federal Government rep (Adrian Boyd) • Chairman selected by the 4 members (Herb Norwegian) • 5 Staff Members • Executive Director (Heidi Wiebe) • Office Manager (Sophie Bonnetrouge) • GIS Analyst (Monika Templin) • Land Use Planner (Paul Wilson) • Land Use Planner Trainee (Priscilla A. Canadien)

  10. Planning vs. Management • Our mandate is to plan for future resource development – map potential, identify issues, write final plan to show “what” and “where” • We are not involved in past or current resource applications – current government structures do that (DCFN, GNWT and Gov of Canada) • May change with Deh Cho Process – Future Deh Cho Resource Management Authority

  11. Update on Activities

  12. Update on DCLUPC Activities & Progress • Staff Recruitment • Round 1 Consultation Feedback • Q & A Report • Further Research: • Wildlife Workshop, • Dene Nahodhe Workshop • Economic Development Model Completed • Reviewing Various Land Use Options

  13. Question & Answers Report • 1st Round - Information Sessions • Report of Questions and Answers • Relationship with Deh Cho Process • Research and Information • Participation & Consultations in Planning • Development Sectors and Impacts • Trans-Boundary Issues

  14. Wildlife Workshop • Held: November 24th – 28th, 2003 • Wildlife Working Group • Hunters, trappers, harvesters and biologists from the Deh Cho territory • To fill information gaps in Wildlife Research • To integrate traditional and scientific knowledge • Created New Wildlife Map (Conservation Layer)

  15. Dene Nahodhe Workshop • Held: March 29th – April 2nd, 2004 • To integrate the spiritual component into the Land Use Plan decisions • Elders, Youth and Guest Speakers from across the Deh Cho • Yamoria Laws, Dene Customs, Holistic Approach to Land Use Planning • Deh Cho Dene Nahodhe Statement • Ongoing Process – People Implement Plan

  16. Deh Cho Dene Nahodhe “Yamoria came to the homeland of the Deh Cho Dene with laws from the Creator. These laws were given to the Dene to live by. The most important law was respect for Creation – Mother Earth. We were put here by the Creator to take care of Mother Earth. The foundation of our Deh Cho government and Mother Earth is Nahe Nahodhe. Nahe Nahodhe is who we are and where we came from. We stand firm behind this belief.” Accepted by the Elders and Youth at the Deh Cho Land Use Planning Committee’s Dene Nahodhe Workshop in Fort Providence on April 1, 2004.

  17. Deh Cho Dene Nahodhe • How should Dene values and principles be applied? • New Land Uses • Can you develop Oil and Gas and continue to respect the earth? • Ceremony i.e. Fire Feeding • Only taking what youneed – pacing development • Not wasting resources – salvage logging along pipeline corridor • Monitoring and managing Wildlife – Cumulative Effects • Sharing and helping all Deh Cho Communities

  18. Resource Potential and Conservation Values

  19. Conservation Zones Traditional Land Use and Occupancy Archeology, Rare Features, Historic Sites and Cabins Wildlife Habitat Value

  20. Wildlife • Traditional Knowledge & Expert Research • Regional Wildlife Workshop - Held: November 2003 • 308 species in the Deh Cho territory (3 amphibians, 36 fish, 213 birds and 56 mammals) • Key species include: • Caribou, Moose, Bison, Fish and Waterfowl for consumption • Trumpeter Swan, Whooping Crane, Peregrine Falcon (Endangered) • Black Bear, Grizzly Bear, Furbearers, Dall’s Sheep, and Mountain Goat (Trapping & Hunting species) • Critical wildlife areas include: • Nahanni National Park Reserve • Mackenzie Bison Sanctuary (denning, staging and calving, etc.) • Edehzhie • Central area between Fort Liard & Wrigley • Important consideration for Cumulative Effects Management

  21. Wildlife Potential

  22. Traditional Use Density • Important to Traditional Dene Lifestyle’s • Information gathered by DCFN • Consulted over 386 harvesters and mapped information • Reflects Wildlife Habitats and Archeology • Harvest areas, kill sites, sacred sites, berry patches • DCFN approved publication and use at Kakisa Assembly 2004

  23. Traditional Use Density

  24. Archeology, Cabins, Historic Sites & Rare features • Evidence of past human use • Important small sites i.e. fire rings, cabins, trails • Buffer required for protection • Development must avoid these areas • Rare Features: • i.e. Hot Springs and Karst Formations Conservation Value is determined by distance from these important sites

  25. Archeology, Rare features, Historic Sites & Cabins

  26. Conservation Value Map

  27. Development Zones Tourism Potential Mineral Potential Agricultural Potential Oil and Gas Potential Forestry Potential

  28. Minerals • Assessed 9 mineral types thought to have the most potential in the region • The highest potential is in the western tip of the territory, moderate in the west-central portions and low in the remaining areas • The most significant minerals types are Copper, Lead-Zinc & Tungsten (existing mines) • The western portion has high to very high potential for Skarn (Lead-Zinc, Gold and Tungsten)

  29. Minerals

  30. Oil & Gas • 20 hydrocarbon plays in the Deh Cho • 9 confirmed • 11 unconfirmed • 419 hydrocarbon wells drilled, most are wildcat wells (exploratory) but 127 (25%) found hydrocarbons • Current producing regions are Fort Liard and Cameron Hills; other significant discoveries found but not yet developed • Greatest potential is in the Liard Plateau and the Great Slave Plain (northern extension of the western sedimentary basin)

  31. Oil and Gas Potential

  32. Tourism • The greatest potential is along the Mackenzie and Liard River valleys and radiates out from communities (the “hub and spoke” effect.) • Exceptionally scenic, offer various types of tourism experiences and have good access • Key tourism destinations include Nahanni National Park Reserve, the Ram Plateau and North Nahanni River, Little Doctor Lake, Cli Lake, Trout Lake and some lodges • Deh Cho tourism is not well developed but has lots of potential - it can still offer tourists pristine wilderness free from commercial interruption

  33. Tourism Potential

  34. Forestry Potential • Productive timber stands around Fort Liard, Nahanni region, Jean Marie River and the Cameron Hills • Current timber harvest well below sustainable harvest levels (20 years harvest) • Low prices $ and difficult access may impact commercial viability • Potential for community use for log houses and cut lumber in fly-in communities

  35. Forestry Potential

  36. Agricultural Potential • Agriculture is small scale generally within community boundaries • Potential not developed – minor land use • Limitations include; climate, soil type, difficulties with access and power requirements • South have competitive advantage • Cost of food - opportunities and potential for community use

  37. Agricultural Potential

  38. Composite of Development Potential

  39. Land Use Options

  40. Land Use Options + EDA • What level of development? • 5 Land Use Options + Current Land Withdrawals • Economic Development Assessment Model to understand potential impacts • Cumulative Effects Research to consider • Refine Community Vision and Land Use Priorities • Ensure Land Use Plan is Manageable

  41. Preliminary Land Use Options • Conservation and Development Layers overlaid • Change Priority for Conservation and Development • Create 5 basic Land Use Options • Shows a range of possibilities available • Communities & Planning Partners to review Land Use Options and Current Land Withdrawals • Begin to develop the Land Use Plan Low Development High Conservation High Development Low Conservation Options 1 2 3 4 5

  42. Input Data

  43. Zones • Multiple Use Zones: all development uses permitted subject to general regulations • Conservation Zones: no development permitted • Uncertain Zones: conservation and development hold equal priority, no decision possible • Traditional Use Allowed Everywhere

  44. Land Use Option # 1 • Priority given to development sectors (Multiple Use Zones) • Other factors determine if development occurs • Labor demand and inward migration of skilled labor • Education, training and management a priority to secure benefits for communities • Question’s remain for Uncertain Zones • Fragmented habitats • High disposable income and modern lifestyle • Loss of traditional knowledge culture and language

  45. Land Use Option # 1

  46. Land Use Option # 2 • Development emphasis although more weight to conservation than Option # 1 • Conservation Zones protect key wildlife habitats and traditional areas i.e. Nahanni National Park • Strong Economy – good employment opportunities, high disposable income, especially in the South Deh Cho • Education, training and management a priority to secure benefits for communities • No Uncertain Zones – clear what is permitted development • Habitat fragmentation - may impact traditional harvesting • Lifestyle changes may result in loss of traditional knowledge culture and language

  47. Land Use Option # 2

  48. Land Use Option # 3 • Balance of Development and Conservation Priorities • Uncertain Zones cover 40% of the Deh Cho - special conditions for development may apply • Economic benefits available from development including employment given sufficient education and training • High disposable income for some, immigration and pressure on housing and social and medical services • Conservation Zones better able to sustain wildlife populations, traditional harvesting and seasonal employment • Opportunity to balance maintaining a traditional lifestyle and the benefits of development

  49. Land Use Option # 3

  50. Land Use Option # 4 • Focus on Conservation layers, Wildlife and TLUO • Some Multiple Use Zones for Development - no Uncertain Zones • Some benefits from development i.e. employment and tax revenue • Young people may leave communities or Deh Cho for employment or education • Local and regional government administrations would continue to be a major employer and play a lead role in skills development • Expanded Conservation Zones around protected areas promote subsistence harvesting and traditional activities • Social pressures of development may begin to impact traditional culture and values