The Carcross-Tagish First Nation (CTFN) has launched a lawsuit against the Yukon government and Quest Engineering for what it alleges are breaches of its land claims and self-government agreements over a project that would see a second access into the Taku subdivision.

By entering CTFN property without consent and not consulting the first nation on plans for the road, it states the first nation has suffered a number of losses.

'There are no provisions within the final agreements that authorizes a government, inclusive of the Government of Yukon, its agents or contractors to enter or access Carcross-Tagish First Nation settlement lands without the first nation's consent, for the purposes of developing or constructing a road,' it's noted in the document.

On Feb. 20, 2006, the first nation discovered that Quest workers, contracted by the territorial government, had gone onto the parcel of land without the first nation's consent, 'causing significant damage to the land and surrounding area and causing interference for Carcross-Tagish First Nation's use and peaceful enjoyment of the settlement land at issue,' the lawsuit alleges.

The land claims and self-government agreements had come into effect a little over a month before on Jan. 9, 2006 after the documents had been signed by the first nation, federal and territorial governments on Oct. 22, 2005.

The agreements gave the first nation ownership of about 1,554 square kilometres of privately-held land throughout its traditional territory.

On the same day the final agreements came into effect, Community Services Minister Glenn Hart issued correspondence to CTFN which outlined the options the territorial department was looking at to build a second access into the Taku subdivision.

After it was learned Quest employees had gone onto the property, CTFN Chief Mark Wedge went to a meeting hosted by the Tagish Advisory Council where Quest's project manager, Rick Savage, made a presentation about the Taku subdivision, it's noted in the court documents.

'Mr. Savage publicly acknowledged and apologized to CTFN for the cutline that ran through the Carcross-Tagish settlement land parcel C-47,' it continues.

Brian Ritchie, a manager in the Department of Community Services, was also at the meeting where Wedge told him all activity happening in the area was to stop until a proper community land use plan could be developed, the lawsuit states.

Four days later, in a letter, Wedge replied to Hart's correspondence on Jan. 9. He confirmed the first nation's position that the CTFN didn't support developing another road into the Taku subdivision partly because it would affect the habitat of the Southern Lakes caribou herd, it's noted.

In that letter, Wedge stated that there had been an understanding the area would be protected with a no-development zone to assist in the recovery of the caribou herd. It was also pointed out that the first nation had learned of the cut line through caribou habitat and onto the first nation's parcel of land.

The territory was also informed that at no time had permission been sought or obtained to enter the land.

On March 7, 2006, the first nation's lawyer, Dave Joe, sent a letter to the territory about it, with the CTFN inviting the territory to have the matter resolved through mediation.

Pointing to sections of the Yukon Environmental and Socioeconomic Assessment Act (YESAA), the first nation noted the road development is a project that's being contemplated.

It also notes requirements under the legislation.

'The plaintiff (CTFN) asserts that prior to a YESAA assessment of the proposed road development and construction the (Yukon government) had a duty to consult directly with the Carcross Tagish First Nation as prescribed by section 50 (3) of YESAA,' the lawsuit notes.

That section states: 'Before submitting a proposal to the executive committee, the proponent of a project shall consult any first nation in whose territory, or the residents of any community in which, the project will be located or might have significant environmental or socioeconomic effects.'

The lawsuit also goes on to point out further sections of YESAA along with several sections of CTFN's final agreements highlighting consultation requirements when developing near or going onto first nation land.

Any land development affecting the CTFN's harvesting rights is required to be consistent with the final agreements, it's argued.

The proposed road development and construction affects the habitat for caribou as well as established moose calving grounds, therefore impacting the first nation's reliance on subsistence harvesting, which is protected under the final agreements, it's noted.

The territory has a duty to consult with CTFN prior to proceeding on any road development in the first nation's traditional territory.

'The plaintiff also asserts that the Government of Yukon has a duty to consult with the Carcross-Tagish First Nation prior to exercising limitations on the first nation's harvesting rights....' it's stated.

The territory is also required to uphold the 'honour of the Crown,' act with due diligence and in good faith in developing lands near or next to settlement lands, in particular, those impacting caribou habitat, the lawsuit argues.

There's also a duty to get permission to enter settlement lands.

The first nation argues YTG and Quest Engineering are trespassers.

'The plaintiff asserts that both defendants, the Government of Yukon and Quest Engineering Group, have acknowledged that the Feb. 20, 2006 incident was without consent of the Carcross-Tagish First Nation,' the lawsuit reads.

On March 3, 2006 in a letter to Wedge, Savage acknowledged Quest was not informed and aware of the first nation's land selections in the area, and that the company's work had encroached and disturbed first nations land.

That was followed by a March 22, 2006 apology by Premier Dennis Fentie acknowledging the 'trespassing and cutting down of trees on Carcross-Tagish First Nation settlement land parcel C-47B, which was carried out by a contractor for the Government of Yukon.'

Finally last June 15, Hart issued a letter to Wedge stating the government was moving forward with the development of a second access into the Taku subdivision and that the cut line trespassed onto settlement lands.

CTFN then goes on to argue that the territory and Quest did not have consent to enter or access the land. The defendant, the first nation argues, knew or should have known the land was a settlement area, with that information being available from the territory's lands branch; that the defendants were negligent with YTG failing to advise Quest of the land's status and Quest failing to confirm the land's status.

It's also argued that the territory failed to exercise care and diligence by providing a contract to Quest in an area affecting caribou habitat and that the territory failed to consult with it as required.

The first nation has suffered costs from the incident including the loss of timber, harvesting opportunities, recreation, tourism, settlement land value and enjoyment of the land due to it.

The first nation is seeking damages, interest, costs and anything else the court deems just.