Parties prepared to return to court in lawsuit over Peel
The parties in the Peel trial will be back before a Yukon Supreme Court judge next week,
The parties in the Peel trial will be back before a Yukon Supreme Court judge next week, having recently made submissions that expand their arguments for and against extensive protection of the pristine watershed.
Two First Nations and a pair of environmental groups detailed earlier this month how, in their opinion, the government overstepped its bounds when it approved a plan for the Peel River region they say violated the Umbrella Final Agreement and the honour of the Crown.
In the wake of a court battle that ran July 7 to 10 and garnered national attention for a New Brunswick-sized swath of Yukon wilderness, the plaintiffs are seeking one of two declarations.
The first — and most ideal in their view — would confirm as the official blueprint the final recommended plan, which shields the bulk of the mineral-rich watershed from development.
The “alternate remedy” would see the government return to a late stage of consultation with the First Nation of Na-cho Nyak Dun and the Tr’ondek Hwech’in First Nation as well as affected communities, precluding the territory from “a frolic of its own.”
The government would be bound by court-defined limits on its degree of departure from the commission’s final recommended plan — a highly protective one — and from area residents’ wishes.
The government responded today with submissions of its own. The argument is straightforward: “the appropriate remedy in this case is for the action to be dismissed.”
Should the Yukon Supreme Court Justice Ron Veale rule that out, the territory hopes the case will be remitted back for consideration by the commission or the government — untethered to court restrictions or the commission’s final recommended plan.
“The court should not dictate the result of the reconsideration,” wrote Vancouver-based lawyer John Hunter, who represents the government in the Peel case. “It is clear that the commission is not a decision-making body, but rather a recommending body.”
Pioneering aboriginal rights lawyer Thomas Berger, representing the four plaintiffs, saw things differently.
“The government of Yukon was at pains to flout the approval process from the time it received the commission’s final recommended plan in July 2011,” he wrote in the plaintiffs’ submission Oct. 3.
“Continuing errors in interpretation by the Yukon government could result in a serious infringement of the rights of First Nations and the affected communities and further litigation.”
The parties, which include the Yukon Conservation Society and the Yukon chapter of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, are scheduled to appear before Veale on Oct. 24 for further arguments.
Following the conclusion of the four-day trial, Veale asked the parties in August to clarify the remedies they were seeking in the lawsuit filed by the First Nations and environmental organizations.
Comments (13)
Up 2 Down 0
Yukon 2nd Nation on Oct 24, 2014 at 6:59 am
@The Thumbs Up and Down does not count
"I am not sure if anyone else has noticed. There are folks on this site that have the ability to vote with a thumbs up or down multiple times. Therefore that feature should just be removed. What purpose does it serve if a person can vote multiple times?"
Up 4 Down 4
The Thumbs Up and Down does not count on Oct 23, 2014 at 8:53 am
I am not sure if anyone else has noticed. There are folks on this site that have the ability to vote with a thumbs up or down multiple times. Therefore that feature should just be removed. What purpose does it serve if a person can vote multiple times?
Up 6 Down 3
Zelmo on Oct 21, 2014 at 5:09 pm
$898,000,000.00 per year to Yukon for the next 100 years. What's the difference ?
Up 16 Down 15
Mark Smith on Oct 20, 2014 at 9:07 pm
The $10,000,000 annually spent for the Faro mine cleanup is a blockbuster for both job creation and government oversight.
This cleanup demonstrates the need for YESAB and environmental guidelines that do not roll over for the mining industry. Come to think of it, miners are very much like puppies, although puppies usually stop whining after 6 months.
Up 18 Down 27
Rick O'Shea on Oct 20, 2014 at 3:20 pm
@Yukon 2nd Nation
"The last election was supposed to be all about the Peel, the Yukon Party won a majority."
Nice revisionism. While the Peel was a major election issue Paz refused to say what the YP's stance was and the simple reason was that they would lose the election if he tipped his hand.
Read the last line: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/liberals-reiterate-peel-watershed-plan-support-1.998005
Further, the majority of Yukoners voted against the Yukon Party.
Up 23 Down 9
Yukon 2nd Nation on Oct 20, 2014 at 12:09 pm
"Faro mine reclamation. $10,000,000.00 + per year for the next 100 years. I don't believe the original owners of the mine ever made that much in revenues."
I can guarantee you that that yearly expenditure by the federal government is far less than what it costs to service 150 Faronians who live in the middle of nowhere.
Lets call a spade a spade here and put things in perspective.
The revenues generated by the mining industry in Canada far surpass the cost of reclamation.
Up 19 Down 18
Faroite on Oct 20, 2014 at 7:52 am
Faro mine reclamation. $10,000,000.00 + per year for the next 100 years. I don't believe the original owners of the mine ever made that much in revenues.
Up 18 Down 28
Home and Native Land on Oct 19, 2014 at 1:34 pm
This is all about respecting FN Final Agreements. FNs ceded, released and surrendered ownership of 95% of their traditional territories to YTG, in exchange for things like Land Use Planning. If the Yukon Party had common sense and respect for FNs they would see that. Look at a Final Agreement and you will see the spirit and intent of FNs to work with and share resources with all. There are areas that are off limits though and the Peel is one of those places.
Up 14 Down 20
The Peel on Oct 19, 2014 at 1:24 pm
The Peel is part of the Yukon that will not see any more than 1% percent developed. It is not about saving the Peel it is about letting progress take place in a proper manner for the betterment of all. Look at northern European Countries that have 100's of years developing their resources and the resources are managed in a positive way. All these social democratic countries are progressive in resource development and have opened up all of their lands for development in a positive manner which the Yukon is doing in the Peel.
Up 30 Down 13
Yukon 2nd Nation on Oct 19, 2014 at 11:47 am
This is the government's decision plain and simple not the Peel Planning Commissions. No judge is going to rule that an elected government has to restrict 20% of its landmass from development.
The last election was supposed to be all about the Peel, the Yukon Party won a majority. No one from the Peel Planning Commission came knocking on my door or phoning to ask my opinion.
The current stance adopted by the government protects a generous 30% and is so restrictive that there will be no development in this area from fly by night companies period.
The government has the pro development crowd and the save the planet crowd equally ticked off.
Up 26 Down 23
yukon56 on Oct 18, 2014 at 3:08 pm
Pave the Peel!!!
Up 42 Down 21
Community Gal on Oct 18, 2014 at 2:34 pm
We need a balanced approach here. Look around you - rocks everywhere. It is what we have a lot of and so we should make an effort to contribute to the national economy instead of being a financial burden. We should also boost our own economy by actively promoting and encouraging mining. We need the careers and the economic boost it gives to Yukon. Come on people - we are talking rocks here.
Some go out in the bush and look for a moose, prospectors go out and look for a mineral deposit that is rich enough to mine economically and this depends on many factors including infrastructure, access to transportation, availability of skilled labour, sufficient financing, and a myriad of bureaucratic hoops and miles of red tape to go through.
The Yukon has NOT been destroyed by mining and, thanks to modern regulations and mining technology, it never will be. But the Yukon will surely be destroyed by people who insist upon shutting down any and all human endeavours to have an economy here.
Criticism is always easier than creativity.
We need responsible development so our many talented young people graduating from Yukon College programs and returning to the Yukon from their educational pursuits outside can have careers with good salaries.
Up 30 Down 39
Mark Smart on Oct 18, 2014 at 12:23 pm
We have to Protect the Peel, it's what Yukoners want.
YESAB needs time to complete environmental reviews, fracking has no place in the Yukon. The three party political system here is not needed, we need people who actually represent us and get along with First Nations- pretty simple really!
If transfer payments were greatly reduced and local governments reduced their staff we would be alright. If the climate for exploration and mining and oil and gas was intolerable there would be more opportunities developed in the tourism industry. I do, however, advocate LNG and oil production that is environmentally friendly. And no problem with a few mines that are green. If companies think the Yukon will be like Alberta they do not know how effective the 30 plus year old guard residents will be. We have just begun to fight for our vision of the Yukon and there is no doubt we will win. Just look at all the wisdom and grey and white hair at the protests.
The race for natural resources has devastated most areas around the world. Pristine wilderness draws tourists and it highlights how messed up most areas are. Think about why China is so interested in securing our mineral resouces. The world has not learned to live in harmony with the natural environment.
The old guard in Yukon will slow down and halt all the insidious activities that have messed up most of the world. Sure it's hypicritical that we will still use metal and gas- however, our backyards will be wild and people will come to see the Yukon because we will protect what we have.