Proceedings of the 2012 9th International Pipeline Conference IPC2012 September 24-28, 2012, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

IPC2012-90346

The Contribution of Aboriginal Traditional Ecological Knowledge to the Environmental Assessment Process for Canadian Pipelines
Wanda Lewis TERA Environmental Consultants Calgary, Alberta Canada

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION Northern British Columbia (BC) and Alberta are sparsely populated forested lands under provincial jurisdiction (also known as Crown land) which are under intensive oil & gas exploration and pipeline development. Local Aboriginal people continue to implement traditional practices that maintain viable land and productive ecosystems by annual rotation of trap lines, hunting and gathering areas and similar activities. Aboriginal people can exert tremendous influence on pipeline projects through various means. Regulators and enlightened pipeline companies recognize the value of assessing traditional knowledge that has been collected over generations and passed down from the Elders to contribute to final routing, siting and project design identifying effects on environmental resources and traditional land and resource use and developing mitigation opportunities. Traditional knowledge includes experiential and secondary knowledge as well as accepted scientific research in the context of environmental assessments. Robust applications consider sources from all land users while being mindful of the intricacies inherent with Aboriginal engagement in order to gather substantive input for projects on Crown land. This paper explores the contribution of Aboriginal Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) in the environmental assessment process on selected case studies involving recent natural gas pipeline projects in northern BC and Alberta from a balanced perspective. It also describes the evolution of a program developed by the author from its initial emphasis on Traditional Land Use (TLU) studies to the present day application of TLU studies, and TEK studies, focusing on lessons learned and regulatory and engagement challenges and successes. Opposition and Aboriginal interventions against recent major project applications, including the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines Project, focus on the impacts to Aboriginal rights due to potential adverse project-related effects to the environment. In response, proponents continue to rely heavily on the collection of Aboriginal traditional land and resource use gathered through routine TLU studies. Conversely, Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge (ATK) is typically documented as a means to preserve historical and familial connections, territorial occupation, land and resource use, and temporal execution strategies, etc. Further, ATK has, in past, been collected as lore and memories, in absence of a western application for Environmental Assessment (EA). From a regulatory perspective, pipeline developers are required to determine impacts to present use of the land for traditional purposes (NEB 2010) in an effort to assist the Crown in their determination of impacts to Treaty rights through the EA process. A need for and, thus, an application of the TLU study evolved, to determine impacts to traditional activities. TLU studies could be considered complete and successful from the perspective of an environmental assessment practitioner since sites were identified and mitigation strategies developed to reduce or avoid impacts to these sites. Unfortunately, ATK cannot strictly be defined as areas of use (i.e., site-specific TLU), but must also include TEK, the proprietary, generational knowledge which is known about the land but is not conditional upon use or occupation of that specific area or location. A brief examination of TEK and TLU follows below.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

TEK OR TLU? The understanding of the biotic and physical world by indigenous peoples is described as TEK, while TLU is the actual and former use of the land and its resources by indigenous peoples. There are fundamental differences between these two concepts, both by nature of the knowledge, and definition, and in the context of constitutionally protected Treaty and Aboriginal Rights. TEK is the long-standing knowledge of the natural and spiritual world by indigenous peoples. It includes the generational observations of the biotic world, perceptions of interrelationships between species, local names for plants and animals, the spiritual nature of the plants and animals (i.e. in an animist worldview), the origins of the plants and animals, and observed changes over time in these communities. TEK has non-spatial and spatial elements. Non-spatial elements include taxonomic identification of plants, often more detailed than Linnaean systems, knowledge of typical animal behaviour, and such. Spatial elements include known species areas, locations of moose licks, calving areas, bear dens, migration corridors, and so forth. TLU is the demonstrated use of the landscape by indigenous peoples. This is primarily spatial in nature, documenting known locations of human activities. Although rare, some nonspatial elements are known, and are manifested in oral traditions as origin myths, transformer cycles and prophecies. In the context of constitutionally protected Treaty and Aboriginal Rights, TLU documents active use of those rights, including rights to hunt, fish, trap, harvest plants, and the use of sacred sites to conduct ceremonies. In TLU, these rights are documented as hunting areas, fishing areas, traplines, berry patches, medicinal areas, gathering sites, ceremonial sites, and sacred sites. Furthermore, travel corridors, such as trails and waterways, used to get to other TLU areas (i.e., hunting grounds), or are used themselves (i.e., traplines), can be protected as TLU. Examples of TEK include beaver lodges, muskrat push-ups, game trails, squirrel dens, and Labrador tea in muskeg. TLU is identified by the people who harvest these resources, for example, setting a trapline for beavers and muskrats along game trails, or specific locations where one might harvest Labrador tea for consumption or medicine.

was essentially a work program. At the insistence of the participating Aboriginal communities the Consultant was working with, more effort was made to integrate TEK into the EA process by the inclusion of Aboriginal assistants in the execution of the biophysical field programs and, by natural extension, the collection of TEK. The Consultants first real attempt at integrating TEK was during the EA of the Groundbirch Pipeline Project for TransCanada Pipelines. The Groundbirch program was different than programs conducted previously by TERA and other EA practitioners in that a TEK Facilitator position was created. This position enabled conveyance of TEK to the western science practitioners in a non-judgmental fashion and the TEK Facilitator acted as liaison between parties, encouraging communication and understanding. TLU studies with participating communities were also undertaken and this information complemented the TEK collected during the biophysical field program. Although the Groundbirch Project was executed successfully and the majority of Aboriginal participants were satisfied with their involvement on the project, TERA struggled to integrate the provided information and discussions into the EA appropriately and thus a TEK deficit was assumed. HORN RIVER PROCESS SUCCESS! Learning from the experience at the Groundbirch Mainline Project NEB Hearing, TERA then improved its documentation and integration process for the Horn River Mainline Project EA. Again, individual community TLU studies were undertaken and the information collected in both the TLU and TEK taken back to the respective communities, vetted and utilized during the development of mitigation plans for the project. This effort, along with an effective field program and unprecedented client engagement commitment, was rewarded by the NEB with project approval, without the requirement for an oral hearing. Since the inception of the NEB in 1959, no other Section 52 application has been granted approval without first undergoing an oral hearing. Finally, the framework for integrating ATK into the EA was established through TERAs mechanism for identifying, documenting, integrating and determining mitigation strategies and assessing project-related effects. Although the biophysical field programs, socio-economic studies, TLU studies and TEK program are reported as individual programs, each are inherently interconnected to one another. The field component of the TEK program was undertaken concurrently with the biophysical field programs. The TEK field crew consisted of Aboriginal participants that accompanied the biophysical field crew and contributed TEK to these field programs. The TEK field crew also included a TERA TEK Facilitator that accompanied the Aboriginal participants to facilitate and document the shared TEK.

EVOLUTION OF TEK IN THE CONSULTANTS EA A TEK program was proposed for SemCams ULC Redwillow Pipeline Project evolving into an Aboriginal Assistants program however, no collection of TEK was undertaken and it

Copyright 2012 by ASME

TERA TEK facilitators accompanied the Aboriginal participants from Fort Nelson First Nation (FNFN), Dene Tha First Nation (DTFN) and Prophet River First Nation (PRFN) during the biophysical field programs to identify potential impacts of the project on resources, collect and synthesize information related to TEK, and ensure proprietary information was kept in confidence. Potential mitigation measures to reduce any project-related impacts on a resource were also discussed during the TEK program. This information was documented as spoken and reviewed at the end of each field day with the participants. Aboriginal participants typically had extensive experience on the land as a result of their TLU activities (i.e., hunting, fishing, trapping and harvesting) but were primarily experts at identifying the biological components of the land regardless of the area selected for study on a given day during the TEK program. Participants included Elders with a broad and deep knowledge of the biophysical world and the interactions and interdependencies of the apparently, discrete ecosystems within, as well as individuals informed through prior discussions with Elders. Morning meetings were held during each study to discuss the field plan and locations to be assessed that day. This provided an opportunity to review locations prior to arrival. Aboriginal participants were actively involved in outlining access routes when snow conditions made access difficult during the winter surveys. Open discussions were regularly held between participants and project scientists regarding the resources present and available to Aboriginal communities. These discussions were an important method used to help build relationships among the field crews. These discussions occurred almost daily during the winter and less frequently during the summer. In the winter they were an important time to rest and get warm around a fire and in the summer, the time spent around the fire provided relief from insects while waiting for the helicopter. The time spent around the fire also provided project scientists and participants with an opportunity to slow down from the physically demanding work (e.g., trail blazing), share food, share stories about the area, and get to know the other team members. Aboriginal participants spoke about aspects of the environment that were important to them, such as the meaning of water and animals. The importance of the resource from a western science perspective was also discussed. This almostdaily practice of spending time around a fire introduced a different pace to the field programs by giving participants time to think and talk about the programs being undertaken and reflect on the information they had seen and gathered. The TEK facilitators encouraged ongoing communication between western and traditional sciences, and these discussions became a valuable experience for both.

WinterWildlifeSurvey The winter wildlife survey was conducted by helicopter and with the assistance of a tracking expert from DTFN. The tracker identified and classified tracks from the helicopter, enabling accurate and quick documentation of wildlife in the area. Discussions about habitats to visit and wildlife inhabiting the area were held. AquaticsSurvey During the aquatic surveys, each proposed watercourse crossing was visited and a DTFN member gave a tobacco offering at the first and last crossing. At each proposed crossing, the FNFN, PRFN and DTFN participants examined the site, and a discussion of the crossing methods took place. In general, participants would identify if they used the crossing area, or if the stream or river was used for navigation, cultural use or traditional use. Habitat assessments, in terms of whether a stream would or would not support fish, were undertaken by the Aboriginal participants and this information was conveyed to the team. Open discussions were held at each watercourse crossing which yielded such additional information as the expected species use of the waterbody. Aboriginal participants worked on the field crew setting minnow traps, recording water quality, counting fish, identifying species and assisting with habitat documentation. During the winter field program, Aboriginal participants led the crew in cutting new access through extremely deep snow. RarePlantSurvey During the rare plant surveys, sampling areas were accessed by helicopter and open discussions were held at each drop location. Discussion topics included general plant use, rarity, general abundance and availability throughout their traditional territory. WetlandSurvey During the wetland survey, classification of wetland areas was conducted by aerial and ground reconnaissance. Wetland classifications were discussed at the morning meeting and, although terminology between western and traditional scientists differed, the classifications were comparable. Aboriginal participants assisted in the classification of wetland areas and offered information concerning which plants and wildlife occupied the different wetland transition zones. PurposeofTraditionalEcologicalKnowledge Identification of TEK, potential project-related impacts and discussions of possible mitigation strategies were undertaken directly with the participating community representatives during the field reconnaissance. Confidential and proprietary information was reviewed during follow-up meetings with the communities that shared their information for use in the project.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

These follow-up meetings were held to confirm the accuracy of the information to be incorporated into project reports and to provide approval for the inclusion of any confidential and proprietary information within the public summary report. 2. While TEK did not have a stand-alone section in the ESA for this project, the purpose of the program was to capture relevant TEK that has accumulated over generations and passed down from the Elders to inform the baseline environmental conditions as well as to inform the projects final routing, siting and design. 3. The TEK program documented Aboriginal TEK shared during the biophysical field programs; while in the field, provided TEK input into the design and execution of the biophysical field programs; updated the ATK issues for the project; established baseline environmental and socio-economic conditions informed by TEK; and identified mitigation opportunities to contribute to final routing, siting and project design. Projects where TEK has since been integrated:
Project Name Alaska Pipeline Project Groundbirch Mainline Project Groundbirch Mainline Project (Saturn Section) Ground Birch Mainline Project (Aitken Creek Section) Horn River Mainline Project Northwest Mainline Expansion (Kyklo, Timberwolf and Cranberry sections) Location Yukon, Northeastern BC Northeastern BC Northeastern BC Northeastern BC Components 1,564 km, 48 inch diameter mainline 77 km, 914 mm diameter pipeline 24 km, 36 inch diameter pipeline 240 km, 36 inch diameter pipeline 72 km, 762 mm diameter pipeline 111.2 km (29.1 km in BC and 82.1 km in Alberta), 1,067 mm (BC) and 1,219 mm (Alberta)

4.

NEB approved EPP A1T8T0 - Letter to NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd - Groundbirch Pipeline Project Certificate GC-115 Filing of Environmental Protection Plan Condition 12 NGTL Groundbirch Mainline Project: Willow stakes from the right-of-way were collected prior to construction to be used in the reclamation process (TERA 2009a, 2010d). NEB approved EPP A1T8T0 - Letter to NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd - Groundbirch Pipeline Project - Certificate GC-115 Filing of Environmental Protection Plan Condition 12 NGTL Cutbank River Lateral Loop (Bald Mountain Section): A rare-medicinal plant area was identified on the paralleling right-of-way. Mitigation for this location, consisted of fencing and avoidance, where feasible, and, where avoidance is not feasible and vehicle traffic is expected, ramps or matting over with geotextile fabric overlain with excavated subsoil to minimize compaction (NGTL 2011, TERA 2010a). NGTL Groundbirch Mainline Project: Avoidance of a medicinal plant on the right-of-way was not possible, so community monitors harvested the plant prior to construction (NGTL 2010a).

To the Proponent The Consultant continues to recommend the engagement of Aboriginal communities at a very early stage in a project, providing the opportunity of preliminary involvement and to: provide sufficient time for Aboriginal community meetings and inputs into the project; reduce timing risks/constraints by avoiding realignments of the route late in the planning process; ensure concerns/issues are identified, mitigated and addressed in the EA rather than post-submission; provide a complete EA with minimal supplemental reporting; and create positive industry presence in sensitive regions.

Northeastern BC Northeastern BC and Northwest Alberta

BENEFITS OF INCORPORATING TEK: To the EA Active roles in the biophysical field programs allow TEK to influence the scope and direction of an EA. The TEK program encourages all field crew members, western and Aboriginal, to bring forth their assessment observations, review and weigh all aspects and develop collaborative mitigation strategies to reduce potential impacts to the environment. Some examples of TEK influence on Projects are as follows: 1. NGTL Groundbirch Mainline Project: The EPP dictates spot spraying as well as manual measures for weed control in ecologically rare and/ or environmentally sensitive locations (TERA 2010d).

To the Community Including TEK in the biophysical assessments ensures that Traditional Knowledge is given adequate consideration in the EA and creates certainty in decision-making that supports a traditional lifestyle. Potentially affected Aboriginal communities have a much earlier review of the proposed project as well as permutations of the right-of-way that may come from the assessments. Because of this program, Aboriginal Participants have identified potentially impacted TLU sites and areas much earlier on in the process, thus enabling refinement of the project footprint prior to regulatory submission.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Incorporating Aboriginal people and their TEK in the EA ensures a process that is inclusive of all knowledge, and validates peoples expertise and experiential knowledge. Below are some quotes from Aboriginal Participants who have contributed to the consultants process: It was nice to see a Mineral Lick that they asked to be avoided roped off and not impacted by construction. Its nice to see our requests taken seriously and our input into the TEK process valued. Sylvia Anderson Horse Lake First Nation I loved how TERA wanted to know about Native culture, and that no one was shy of asking questions. I loved telling my stories about the Beaver people. The TEK Facilitator really wanted to know my culture and I loved this. No one was ever shy about asking questions. My culture is very different from the city so I loved sharing this. I have worked with other consultants and they are not as interested in Native culture as TERA is. Robert Dominic Doig River First Nation Darlene felt very valued during her time with TERA and really hopes to work with TERA again in the near future. She had fun learning about both Aquatics and Archaeology and felt I feel respected and everyone treats you very well. I feel included and my input matters. TEK helps us preserve our land and lessen impacts. Im informed by Oil & Gas last minute and do not like this. I respect the TERA team and feel respected back. Maxine Davies Doig River First Nation I feel that the information I provide is valued. Its good to be included in all aspects of environmental studies and to be involved with mitigation measures to lessen impact. I want my future children to have the same opportunities to use land like I do now. I feel respected by the field teams and this information is equally shared. I feel TERA is moving forward in the right direction. Ricky Pastion Dene Tha First Nation If you have anything to speak about, TERA listens. He feels comfortable sharing what he feels about the process and if he encounters any problems. I have seen what the biophysical studies do and have had no problems with it. In the past, there was no consultation process and companies would come in and just install the pipeline. These companies did not care about who used the land or the environment. I like being part of the TEK process and being out in the field because it allows me and the communities to see for ourselves what is going on. Jerry Knott - North East Mtis Association I like all TERA TEK Facilitators I have worked with and that Kelly Lake really likes that TERA is made up of good people

and they are not prejudice. She enjoys the TEK process because she feels it is important to share her knowledge to TERA. TERA needs to know and learn about our knowledge and through the TEK process and biophysical studies she feels she has contributed. TERA listens to my mitigation requests and protects the water; moose licks and understands my concerns. This allows future generations to be able to continue the traditional way and use the land to grow food and hunt. I do not like to see land and water ways destroyed by pipelines and TERA has listened to my requests. Shirley Letendre - Kelly Lake Mtis Settlement Society It was a good experience being able to see where the pipelines will go, meeting new people, and exchanging knowledge of the environment, science and culture with TERA. TERA staff was very knowledgeable about environmental issues and it was a time well spent in the field with the crews. TERA staff did listen when I spoke and I saw them document when I spoke about concerns I had of the area. I felt like I was not only making a contribution to TERA but to my community, my family, my people when I expressed concerns of the pipeline and requested mitigation. There are some areas that need to be protected and this process with TERA helps a lot. Josh Hallock - Mtis Local 1994 CONCLUSION It is the responsibility of EA practitioners to consider all information available when making recommendations for mitigation that assist in the approval of a development. This does not just include the conventionally accepted western scientific values but must include those values developed through generations. The inclusion of Aboriginal people in the biophysical assessments and the incorporation of their shared TEK enables the western scientists to view their aspect of the assessment from a different angle. The inclusion of TEK has assisted the author in understanding that it is not only important to quantify resources in an area in an attempt to identify impacts, but to also qualify the value of a resource from the perspective of the user in order to wholly conduct a representative assessment of potential impacts and projectrelated effects. Some of the projects the Consultant has included TEK on since the Horn River Project: Alaska Pipeline Project Alliance Pipeline Fort. St. John Lateral Loop S 58 NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Cutbank River Lateral Loop (Bald Mountain Section) Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Groundbirch Mainline (Saturn Section) Project NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Komie Extension Pipeline Project

Copyright 2012 by ASME

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Northwest Mainline Loop (Pyramid Section) NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Hidden Lake North Compressor Station and Moody Creek Compressor Station NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Provident Energy Pipeline Inc. Beatton River Replacement and Taylor to Boundary Lake Pipeline Replacement Project

[5] TERA Environmental Consultants. 2009b Construction Monitoring Report for the TMX- Anchor Loop Jasper National Park. [6] TERA Environmental Consultants. 2010a Late Summer Rare Plant Survey for the Proposed NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Cutbank River Lateral Loop (Bald Mountain Section). [7] TERA Environmental Consultants. 2010b Status Report on Traditional Land Use Study for the Proposed Pembina Pipeline Ltd. Nipisi Heavy Oil and Mitsue Condensate Pipeline Projects. [8] TERA Environmental Consultants. 2010c Final Report for the Traditional Land Use Studies for the Proposed NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Groundbirch Mainline Project. [9] TERA Environmental Consultants. 2010d Environmental Protection Plan for the NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Groundbirch Mainline Project. (A1T8T0 - Letter to NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd - Groundbirch Pipeline Project - Certificate GC-115 Filing of Environmental Protection Plan Condition 12) [10] TERA Environmental Consultants. 2011a. Traditional Knowledge Report for the Proposed NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Horn River Mainline (Komie North Section). [11] TERA Environmental Consultants. 2011b. Supplemental Traditional Knowledge Report for the Proposed NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Cutbank/Musreau Area Expansion. [12] NEB 2011. Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Section of Filing Manual Draft Copy November 2010. Website: http://www.neb-one.gc.ca/clfnsi/rpblctn/ctsndrgltn/flngmnl/flngmnl-eng.html. Accessed February 2011. AUTHOR PROFILE Wanda Lewis TERA Environmental Consultants, Suite 1100, 815 - 8th Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 3P2, wlewis@teraenv.com, 1-403-265-2885. Wanda Lewis has been head of the Cultural Resources Department at TERA Environmental Consultants since 2006 and a Partner since 2009. She has over 13 years of experience in heritage resource and traditional land use management. Her expertise is in the management of historical resource studies for pipelines and oil and gas projects in western Canada, including the 1555km Alaska Pipeline Project. She has assisted numerous clients in the areas of Aboriginal Engagement, Traditional Land Use and Traditional Ecological Knowledge. Ms. Lewis has established effective working relationships with most of the Aboriginal groups in Alberta, northeastern BC and Yukon.

The present rate of pipeline development does not appear to be slowing, even with the most successful mitigation plans there will be a changes to the appearance of the land. Why wouldnt we ask for the help of people so intimately connected with it? ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to thank Angela Isaac for her expert writing and moral support, Carrie Dunn, Paul Anderson, Mallory Bjella and the rest of the TEK/TLU team for their indomitable perseverance of whats right. As well, Dean Mutrie for allowing me the freedom to do whatever you do. The author would especially like to thank those Aboriginal peoples involved in past, present and future TERA projects for sharing themselves, their unlimited patience and motivation. In addition to those individuals above, the author would like to thank and point out that this entire program would not be possible without the belief, financial support and perseverance of TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. Thank you Heather Bishop and the entire CS&E Group. REFERENCES [1] NGTL 2010a Groundbirch Pipeline Project Condition 18Additional Information- Medicinal Plant letter. NEB File:OFFac-Gas-N81-2009-01 01 (A1T8K5 - 2010 07 29 Certificate GC-115 Condition 18 Medicinal Plant Clarification) [2] NGTL 2010b Groundbirch Pipeline Project Certificate GC115, Condition 21(a)- Horizontal Directional Drilled (HDD) Crossings letter. NEB File: OF-Fac-Gas-N81-2009-01 01 (A1W0C8 - 2010 11 05 GC-115 Condition 21a Groundbirch Pipeline) [3] NGTL 2011 Cutbank River Lateral Loop (Bald Mountain Section) Project Order XG-N081-19-2010- Condition 9Construction Progress Report. NEB File: OF-Fac-Gas-N0812010-12 01 (A1X6Y4 - 2011-02-11 - Order XG-N081-19-2010 Cond 9-Construction Progress Report - Cutbank) [4] TERA Environmental Consultants. 2009a Rare Plant Survey for the Proposed NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Groundbirch Mainline Project.

Copyright 2012 by ASME