Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Fisheries and Oceans
Issue 6 - Evidence - April 1, 2008
OTTAWA, Tuesday, April 1, 2008
The Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans met this day at 5:34 p.m. to examine and report on issues relating to the federal government's current and evolving policy framework for managing Canada's fisheries and oceans. Topic: Arctic study.
Senator Bill Rompkey (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Welcome to those who may be viewing these proceedings. I am Senator Rompkey and am from Newfoundland and Labrador, and this is the Standing Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans.
Within the ``oceans'' part of our mandate, we are focusing primarily on the Arctic and on the Canadian Coast Guard, in particular. We have, of course, an interest in fisheries. We have done studies on the Canadian fisheries that we will incorporate into any future report that we do. However, for the time being, we will be focusing on the present and future role of the Coast Guard. We have had some witnesses before us, including both the present and former director of the Canadian Coast Guard. We have also heard from Professor Michael Byers from British Columbia and from Professor Rob Huebert from Alberta, both of whom have given good testimony that has encouraged us and raised other questions for us to probe into.
I want to indicate who we have with us on the committee this evening. Senator Campbell is from Vancouver, British Columbia; Senator Comeau, Deputy Government Leader in the Senate, is from Nova Scotia; Senator Adams is invaluable to us because of his lifelong knowledge of the Arctic; Senator Cowan, the Opposition Whip, is from Nova Scotia; Senator Cochrane is the deputy chair of our committee and is also from Newfoundland and Labrador; and Senator Robichaud is from New Brunswick.
I want to welcome our witnesses. We have with us Mr. Duane Smith, President of the Inuit Circumpolar Council of Canada. Mr. Smith has represented the Inuvialuit at the local, regional and other levels concerning the environment, co-management and indigenous rights over the years. He is accompanied by Mr. Chester Reimer, Strategic and Policy Advisor. We welcome both of you to our deliberations.
Duane Smith, President, Inuit Circumpolar Council (Canada): Thank you very much. First of all, I would like to thank you for this opportunity to speak before all of you. I am not sure if you have read the background information I have provided, but I do not plan to read it all — I am going to point out some of the key issues because I think it would be more beneficial for all of us to have a dialogue.
I have reviewed Mr. Buyers and Mr. Huebert's comments and I agree with them regarding protecting Canada's sovereignty and those issues that you discussed with them.
The Inuit Circumpolar Council is made up of representatives from Russia, Alaska, the United States, Canada, Greenland and Denmark. We have representatives that are elected from each of those areas that make up the executive council, which is called the Inuit Circumpolar Council. We meet periodically in our respective countries to discuss issues of mutual interest and concern, and how to deal with those issues at an international level.
Our counterpart is Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, which is the national Inuit organization that deals with domestic issues within Canada. We have a very close working relationship with them because they are the domestic voice within Canada that speaks on our behalf. That organization gives us our indication and direction. We have the same board in regards to how to deal with issues that may overlap into the international arenas. Additionally, we bring issues of concern back from the international area to the regions where the Inuit live within Canada.
The Inuit region within Canada begins from the Alaska-Yukon border all the way to Labrador. The Inuit map in Canada covers two-fifths of Canada itself. That is the area that we deal with on a regular basis.
I would also point out that a few years ago, the last Inuit region within Canada, Nunatsiavut, signed their land claims with the government. Therefore, all the Inuit regions within Canada have land claims which are constitutionally protected. They recognize the various rights that the Inuit people have, economically, socio-culturally, et cetera, and how they organize themselves within their respective regions.
Some of the issues that I want to talk about is to do with Arctic sovereignty, again, from an Inuit perspective and some issues that periodically come up between Canada and other countries and how the Inuit are or are not involved.
One example is a little tiny island called Hans Island located between Greenland and Baffin Island. I believe if the Inuit were at full discretion to resolve that, we would have that resolved in a few minutes. It is recognized as a land that has been occupied and still is occupied by Inuit people from both of those areas.
We also have a jurisdictional dispute concerning the border between Alaska and the Yukon. That buffers up against the Inuvialuit Settlement Region or the Western Arctic Land Claim. Under that land claim, the border or jurisdiction is identified for the Inuit or the Inuvialuit of that area making up part of Canada.
In the past, some of our regional Inuit leaders have stated that the Government of Canada should work more closely with the Inuit people in expressing our sovereignty of the Arctic. We do that when we state there are Inuit-Canadian Rangers within all the communities throughout the Arctic. That is one good example of how to work with the people that live in the North. However, there are mechanisms to also demonstrate that.
Another crucial issue and one of the main reasons why the circumpolar Arctic is drawing so much attention from the around the world is climate change and what is happening in the Arctic. We know the ice is receding more rapidly than what has been imagined with the computer models. This may be the first year on record that there is no multi-year ice. Basically, the ice is much thinner and covering less of the circumpolar Arctic now and is receding more quickly.
I do not know if you are familiar with the Arctic Council, which is composed of the eight Arctic states and the permanent participants of the council reside throughout the circumpolar Arctic. The Inuit Circumpolar Council is a member of the council. It has taken the lead in gathering information on how Inuit people rely on ice conditions. Under the Arctic Council, we are presently doing an Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment, AMSA. The council hopes to finalize this report by the late fall and have it approved by the senior Arctic officials or the ministers in the member countries by February 2009. In that scenario, they are looking at ice conditions and possible shipping activities by the years 2020 and 2050.
ICC Canada has taken the lead to gather information for the Inuit in our areas on the potential impacts that may occur to our society. Other shipping issues are already affecting parts of the Arctic. In three years, tourist ships between Baffin Island and Greenland has increased to over 150 ships per year. Most of the ships are going to Greenland at this time and it has overwhelmed them. They are not able to manage presently. It is only a matter of time before more of the Arctic waters will open up allowing these tour ships that may not be capable of handling current Arctic ice conditions to go deeper into the Canadian Arctic as well.
It is a concern in regard to the environmental potential and effects that may occur in the event of an accident similar to the one that happened in the Antarctic last year. It points out the lack of infrastructure in Canada's Arctic to deal with such a disaster as well as the lack of training and skilled people to handle such issues throughout the Arctic.
The Arctic Council is also doing a circumpolar oil and gas assessment. I point this out, Mr. Chair, because you stated that you have another committee dealing with energy. The report is to be approved by February 2009 as well. It is to identify the known and unknown oil and gas reserves throughout the circumpolar Arctic. In the past, guidelines were developed stating that each respective country with oil and gas activity taking place in their part of the Arctic should maintain proper containment equipment at strategic locations in the event of an oil or gas spill. The guidelines also called for trained people to be available to handle such an incident. Canada has not met that guideline.
The impact on the Arctic ecosystems and biodiversity is another issue we see affecting us because of climate change. The Arctic is so vast and huge and it has many different isolated ecosystems. These systems are numerous and varied and can be either independent or dependent on each other.
The Inuit Circumpolar Council is dealing with the sealing issue right now. It is in the media again with the East Coast seal hunt and the council is conducting those activities as humanely as possible. We have discussions periodically with the sealers association through the Fur Institute of Canada. They coordinate and facilitate discussions on how to deal with the negative repercussions concerning Canada's sealing activity.
From a Canadian Inuit perspective, we have always depended and relied on the sealing industry within the Arctic for our cultural needs, our clothing needs and our diet. As an offshoot, it provides economic opportunity for some people to provide a source of income as well. The animals are taken on a sustainable basis as the land claim processes have established.
We have cooperative management boards that ensure we manage the population sustainably. Co-management bodies have been in place for about 20 years in most of the Arctic. This provides an opportunity to bring together the traditional knowledge and Western science. When they sit down together, they sit down to discuss the sealing issue in the area. They do research and studies utilizing the people to assist them in gathering information. That is an example of one species and they do this with each species in that area as part of their mandates.
The polar bear is another species receiving a lot of public media in regard to biodiversity and impacts we are seeing. It is the poster child for many environmental groups to raise funds for whatever purposes they want to use it. Under our co-management practices, each land claim area is a part of the national polar bear committee. An annual review is done of the management practices of all the polar bear sub-populations within Canada to see if they are sustainably managing those populations.
Canada has been very stringent and is a world leader in the science and methods applied towards polar bear management in Canada's Arctic. In some areas the populations are or may be in decline. It is still debatable from whatever perspective you want to look at it. Its status as a poster child for environmental groups is having an affect on those populations. However, the Inuit communities have sustainably managed and utilized that species. If you know anything about the Inuit culture, we respect every animal that we utilize. If we do not sustainably manage them, we are not managing our own livelihoods and our culture.
The Inuit people throughout the Arctic see themselves as a part of that ecosystem. We do not see ourselves apart from it, to manage it, to exploit it or to over-utilize it. We see ourselves as a part of it.
I would like to point out that I am on the International Polar Year, IPY, Canadian national body. I am also on the ArcticNet, which I pointed out very briefly to you earlier. They are conducting cutting-edge science and research throughout Canada's Arctic, and have been doing so for a number of years now. The Inuit are integrally involved and a part of these research bodies, especially the ArcticNet.
There is a lot of good research that is being conducted in the marine offshore in Canada, but it still needs to be designed in a way that it is readily available for the average person on the street to get access to it, so they can utilize that information as well. From my experience, it is still very hard to get the information. It is understandable that it is raw data that has to be deciphered and put into a readable report, and that everybody has to report to somebody; but that information needs to come back to the communities that need it as well.
When I say that, I mean the communities in Canada's Far North, so that they can get a better understanding of the issues and the effects that are taking place right in their own back yards. Many researchers come up from the universities, from B.C., Laval, Carleton, conducting various studies throughout Canada's Arctic; but they take that information back with them and they do their work back at those universities or at their respective government organizations. We need a better dialogue that comes back to the regions so that people can use that information to make informed decisions — not only the people, but also the governments of those areas that have a mandate to manage those jurisdictions.
Again, I very briefly pointed it out when you were asking me, Mr. Chair, how the Inuvialuit Settlement Region would feel if you snubbed them by not visiting that area. I stated that I do not think it would be a problem at this time, but it is something that this body needs to keep in mind. The Beaufort Sea is almost 1 million square kilometres in its own right, and contains many unknown marine resources. We need to be proactive and gather that information so that we maintain a lead ahead of the multinational companies that are already starting to look at that area to do exploratory fishing. Those are our resources, and we need to ensure that we maximize the benefits to the Canadian people.
The Chair: Thank you very much. Perhaps I should just clarify a few things. First, I want to welcome Senator Hubley from Prince Edward Island. We are now complete from coast to coast to coast.
We will be going to the Arctic the first week in June. It was originally decided that we would go in company with the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources. The question is where each committee will go.
We are still trying to determine travel as to what places we visit, and they are determining what places they will visit. However, we will share information and the two reports will come out simultaneously. Hopefully, there will be crossover between the two and the focus will be clear.
That is our intention. We thank you for your advice earlier as to where we might go and how we might conduct ourselves. We are looking forward to that visit.
Senator Cowan: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Smith. I think you said that you share a common board between ICC Canada and ITK. Is that correct?
Mr. Smith: That is correct. ITK is the domestic voice in Canada that deals with domestic issues; ICC Canada deals with the international issues. You have to be an international NGO to be on various international bodies like the World Conservation Union, IUCN and the International Whaling Commission, and only ICC can have those seats. We are members and/or observers of those respective international bodies.
Senator Cowan: The point of the common board membership is that nothing is lost in the translation between the two, the international and the domestic aspect, is that right?
Mr. Smith: That is correct. The mechanism works very well because the land claim organizations have the mandate under their land claims, and they have the networking system within their communities and regions. The feedback goes back and forth very well.
Senator Cowan: The chair mentioned in his introduction that a primary focus of the work that the committee is presently undertaking has to do with the Coast Guard and its relationship to the Arctic.
Could you tell us a bit about your impressions, your recommendations with respect to the role of the Coast Guard in the Arctic? How do you perceive the Canadian Coast Guard? Do you have any suggestions, either for things that we might look at or for things that you could suggest that they might improve with respect to their role and the capacity in the Arctic?
Mr. Smith: To finish off what I pointed out earlier to some of the members. In the Beaufort Sea, which is about as far away from shipping in Canada that you can get, there are many unknown resources. The presence of the Coast Guard is important in this sea. The Coast Guard presence should be visible in the Beaufort Sea to monitor and supervise the activities taking place in that part of Canada's Arctic.
The ships that are there on occasion are old. They do have two or three ships that periodically come to the area. One's primary activity is to put the moorings in on an annual basis to mark the channels down Canada's longest river, the Mackenzie River, and into the Beaufort Sea. That is its primary function, which is required for shipping to provide the annual supply of fuel and staple foods to communities that are dependent on getting those resources by ship during that short summer period.
That would be one area, to improve that activity. As well, as I pointed out earlier, we should have adequate equipment strategically located in some of the communities in the event of an oil or gas spill. The Coast Guard is equipped or capable of providing that type of assistance in those areas.
I would also point out that the Beaufort Sea has the largest beluga population of any population that is out there. The belugas are dependent on herring and the people are dependent on both those species.
We have already had exploratory fishery requests from two separate companies from British Columbia that want to come and conduct fisheries, both for shell and for other species in that area. For economic reasons, it just has not materialized. They have brought the vessels, but they have not conducted the activity.
The reason I go back to that again is that we need the Coast Guard present in that area to monitor that type of activity because ships are coming around. I have looked at the presentations that you have had already from other witnesses— Mr. Byers and Mr. Huebert — pointing out that other countries have built vessels to come and do research in the Arctic.
You know that activity is coming. It will go beyond IPY, so you must have the Coast Guard capability to monitor the activities of those ships. As well, it gives other countries a clear indication of sovereignty, that this is Canada's Arctic, and you have a lot of known oil and gas resources and reserves, as well as unknown resources.
Senator Cowan: Briefly, based our knowledge and experience and conversations with your colleagues in other countries as part of the council, how does our capacity with respect to Coast Guard surveillance and presence compare with the capacity of other countries?
Mr. Smith: In regards to Russia and the United States, there is no comparison to the capability and marine resources that they have. The United States actually provides access to Canadian researchers to do some of their activities. As for Denmark, I am not up to speed, and I apologize for that. I do not know what their capabilities are to monitor Greenland at the very least.
Senator Cowan: What about Russia?
Mr. Smith: Russia has been buying up a lot of Canada's oil and gas vessels over a number of years to use to commercialize their reserves offshore. Russia has many contracted vessels from multinational oil and gas companies to assist them in their offshore work and/or preparation work that is taking place off Alaska and in the Beaufort Sea. You were asking about visiting the Port of Churchill. Canada and Russia have been in meetings for almost two years now to look at the potential for keeping that port open on an annual basis, and the Russians have volunteered to allow the use of their icebreaking vessels to keep that port open on an all-year basis for commercial operations between Churchill and Murmansk. They have the capability already.
Senator Robichaud: You mentioned a few witnesses and one in particular talked about RADARSAT-2. In his view, that is about the best tool we can have to do surveillance of the traffic up there. Do you agree?
Mr. Smith: Yes, Senator Robichaud I agree with him. As far as my understanding of what that provides to the Coast Guard and other users such as scientists, not only from Canada but also from other areas, it is a vital tool, and that we need to ensure that is available to them for that purpose.
Senator Robichaud: Would you go so far as to say that it should stay in Canadian hands?
Mr. Smith: Yes, I would support RADARSTAT-2 staying in Canada. It is also a tool that could and should be utilized to monitor the changes that are taking place, because we need to start dealing with the issue of adaptation and sustainability of the communities in the Arctic. We need that. Everyone calls it the eye in the sky. We need that or access to it to gather information.
Senator Robichaud: You mentioned exploratory fisheries. From our experience with exploratory fisheries, those who go out and do the exploratory work usually get to keep a sizeable chunk of the quota when the quota is established. Quite often, it is interests from outside the region, and this leads to ill feelings from the local communities. You say nothing has happened yet in the Beaufort Sea.
Mr. Smith: That is correct. I go back to my earlier comments referring to the established land claims and constitutionally protected areas within the Canadian Arctic. Under those land claims, those organizations have the right and the opportunity to be meaningful parties to the northern and national economy. If that includes developing a commercial fishery, then that needs to be recognized prior to allowing these multinational companies and/or companies that are not based in the area to have the vast majority of the quotas that may be established in those areas.
Senator Robichaud: Has that been recognized?
Mr. Smith: To my understanding, in the Baffin area, it has not, which is why you have heard some frustration from the communities in that region. They have expressed concern about the lack of recognition or understanding of the Nunavut land claim.
Senator Robichaud: Are any of the communities trying to establish exploratory fisheries in the Beaufort Sea? Are efforts being made to be in a position to offer that kind of research and so get the big chunk of the quota, if ever it comes to that? You say that there are considerable stocks in the Beaufort Sea, are there not?
Mr. Smith: Yes, there are considerable stocks in that sea. At this time, the people do not have the capacity to set up fisheries nor is there a need to do so. They do not have the economy to invest in something that is not yet a developed market. They have tried to do that with other land-based species. In Nunavik or Northern Quebec and in the Baffin, the Inuit organizations in those two regions have the capability and have parts of those quotas allocated to them.
I understand that you are considering a visit to Pangnirtung. That community has the capability to establish a fishery. I hope you will have the time and the opportunity to see that first hand, if you do visit that community.
In Iqaluit, the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, QIA has commercial quotas allocated to them for that area and they do have ships that they operate in those areas.
Senator Robichaud: Are there no associations or groups that could do the same on the western side of the Arctic?
Mr. Smith: Not at this time.
Senator Robichaud: If the Department of Fisheries and Oceans were to grant exploratory privileges to some interests, is there no way you could stop them or offer an alternative?
Mr. Smith: Again, I would suggest that there may be legal challenges within that land claim stating that they have a right to be a meaningful part of the northern and national economy of that area. In my previous life, when I was the chair of the Inuvialuit Game Council, which represents the wildlife and environmental interests of that Beaufort Sea area, we negotiated a partnership with a company from British Columbia. That company realized that it needed to involve us in the process and took a proactive approach, as we suggested. We established this agreement, which in our minds, set some precedent to that area where we would be joint partners and ensure that we would train the people and be meaningful partners in this exploratory fishery, if it ever developed further than that.
Senator Robichaud: Are the stocks considerable? You must know that belugas depend on certain species, and those species depend on yet another species and so on. I do not know if you have Arctic surf clams there, but they are a popular commodity in my community. Are there such stocks in the Beaufort Sea?
Mr. Smith: I would say there is for the herring, at least. Again, I point out that the beluga population in that area, in a conservative estimate by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, is at least 40,000. That is triple all other beluga populations when you add them all up. That gives you an indication of the amount of herring in that area and there are a couple of different types. There are large amounts of shellfish and we have new and emerging species that are migrating to the area from British Columbia, where salmon are periodically coming around Alaska and migrating up the Mackenzie River.
Senator Robichaud: You should keep that a secret. It is happening. Is that a sign of climate change?
Mr. Smith: That is a definite sign of climate change. Predatory species are taking over areas of the traditional species in that area, such as the pike and Arctic char, because the water temperature is warming up and they can live in that area.
Senator Adams: Thank you for coming. Over a month ago, we heard from representatives of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. We discussed this issue with them.
You mentioned that have you have to use American equipment up there to do your research. I think they are currently mapping the ocean bottom. Canada did not have the equipment to do it. They had help from the Russians and Americans to do the work. Russia put a flag on the bottom of the ocean.
I received a phone call from BBC Radio in London, England. They knew I was a senator from Nunavut and they wanted to find out who should own the bottom of the sea, and why the Russians would put a flag in the Arctic. We asked the people from Foreign Affairs about that. He said it has nothing to do with Arctic sovereignty but has only to do with a photo opportunity. That is why the Russians put a flag on the bottom of the ocean.
Does your organization develop anything in the Arctic, in the sea or on the land? You mentioned that you have Hans Island back. Denmark was the owner. Does the Government of Canada and Foreign Affairs recognize your future in the Arctic? You settled a land claim. Do they sometimes talk about how they will do the gas and oil exploration? Do they look to you as partners? Do Alaska and Greenland recognize you? Especially in Canada, we talk about Arctic sovereignty. How do we deal with them? We are Canadians and we should work together. Those are the three countries.
Mr. Smith: I go back to the oil and gas assessment that is being conducted now under the Arctic Council. Foreign Affairs did approach the Inuvialuit, in this case, in the Western Arctic, as well as the other Aboriginal organizations up and down the Mackenzie Valley, to provide information for the oil and gas assessment.
The respective United States representatives did the same thing. They used the North Slope Burrow, which is made up of the Inuit people along the North Coast of Alaska, and their experiences concerning oil and gas activity in that area. Once this report comes out, it will reflect those practices.
The people in my area took the initiative some years ago to build a 45-kilometre natural gas pipeline to provide that community with natural gas. They built the pipeline with their own funds and investments. They used that experienced as an example in that report. They also used their experience with the proposed Mackenzie Valley pipeline being considered under the Mackenzie Gas Project. Those are two Canadian examples that will be in that assessment. It will also include the assessment from the North Slope Burrow in Alaska.
Senator Adams: Some years ago I dealt with the people from Baffin Island, zones OA and OB, before the land claims agreement was settled. DFO set up quotas for those two areas for shrimp and turbot. We still have a problem with the government. Part of the quota is for foreigners. I heard that so far we only have about 27 per cent in Nunavut, areas OA and OB. That area was adjacent water.
I wonder how we can we deal with the adjacent waters, not recognizing the 200-mile limit. About a year ago, a lawyer with Nunavut Tunngavik Corporation asked for not 12 miles but up to 100 miles up to the adjacent water. He asked the Government of Canada, and the government said we cannot own it.
Do you have a way to deal with adjacent water and make it part of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement?
Mr. Smith: I cannot speak of it firsthand. It is NTI's prerogative to raise those issues and negotiate them. According to my understanding of their allocation, they have roughly that percentage. I would only point out, again, that the warming trends of the waters, not only in the Western Arctic but also in the Eastern Arctic, are moving further north as well, and those species will move further north. This issue will only get elevated more and more, to the point where you will see these other ships coming into the area and the lack of regional involvement by those organizations. They will continue to raise those concerns as the situation progresses. Again, that is where you would need more Coast Guard vessels to be monitoring the activities of other ships that may be coming into those areas and exploiting our resources.
I go back to the part between Baffin and Greenland as well. That is an area where we have always tried to take a proactive approach and to recommend that the Inuit organizations from those respective areas get together to discuss managing the ecosystem in that area because they both utilize the beluga and the narwhals, all the fisheries in those areas, and they are both managing it independent from each other. We need to take a proactive approach, and approach Greenland and say we need to manage that area together.
Senator Adams: What about the boundary between Inuvialuit and Nunavut? Is it right up to the North Pole and Beaufort Sea, the water between Nunavut? People are drilling up there around the Beaufort Sea and further up in the Arctic Ocean. Is there a border in the adjacent water between Nunavut and Inuvialuit?
Mr. Smith: There is the natural boundary that makes up the two territories, the Nunavut territory and the Northwest Territories, and it is the same boundary that was used from the Inuvialuit land claim. The Inuvialuit land claim, if I recall correctly, goes up to the 80th parallel only. The co-management bodies from those two respective areas, the Inuit organizations, share their information concerning species that migrate back and forth, primarily land- based species. They share information in that area on polar bears.
Senator Cochrane: A recent European Union report on the global impacts of climate change suggests that as previously inaccessible regions open up due to the effects of climate change, the scramble for resources will intensify.
The report's co-author is Javier Solana, the European Union's foreign policy chief. He said:
What happens if the Northwest Passage becomes permanently passable? If handled well, this is a huge opportunity. But, without an agreed international framework, as is, for example, the case in the Arctic, on how to assess and adjudicate territorial claims, political tensions are bound to arise.
I want to invite your comments on these points, but I would also like to hear your thoughts on what this climate change issue means for your people. You are part of the ICC. What does it mean for your people?
The climate change discussion tends to focus on resource extraction and potential revenues, but not the people who live in the region. Could you give us some insight into how the ICC views the climate change issue? Have you had discussions about this with your counterparts in other countries? Let us get down to nitty-gritty — the people.
Mr. Smith: Thank you. That reminded me that one reason I was so pleased to be asked to speak before you was to try to put a human face to the issues you are looking at. I will answer your questions as best I can.
I go back to the circumpolar assessment that is being done by the Arctic Council, the Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment, where ICC Canada has taken on the initiative to gather the human aspect of the impacts; our past relationship with the ice conditions and how we utilize and need the ice to be stable and in the condition that it has been, not what it is now or what it will be in the next 20 years, when there may not be any ice.
If you look at the culture of the Inuit people throughout Canada's Arctic, we are very much interrelated with the ice. Much of our time is spent out on the ice. That is where we do much of our living and make our livelihood. There is already a detrimental effect on the way of living and the culture of the people.
I will give you the example of the potential EU sealing ban. I hope that it does not happen because 20 years ago when a similar ban was imposed there were many suicides among our people. A direct link between the suicides and the ban was established. I hope that will not happen again and it is something that we are trying to keep from happening this June.
Those are some of the impacts that I can point out first-hand, but again, I pointed out the need for us to be sustainable and to be able to adapt to the changing climate in the Arctic.
Some of our communities are dealing with erosion caused by the rising ocean levels. The ice is melting and filling the oceans and some of the communities are becoming overwhelmed. The tides are rising to a level that affects the communities so that they have to relocate further inland. One community in my area has already had to do that. The RCMP relocated their offices and residences further inland 10 years ago, and they have to relocate more buildings. That is happening in other communities throughout the Arctic as well, where the land is melting, the permafrost is shifting, thereby making some of the buildings unstable. The buildings are built on the permafrost. We are seeing that in many communities along Alaska's West Coast as well. They are in much more dire straits now than we are. That is just an indication of what we can expect to see in our communities in the future. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is designing brand new communities further inland and helping in the relocation of those communities because of the amount of erosion taking place on the coast is so rapid. They have to do it now as they have buildings falling into the ocean. Those are issues we are dealing with from the circumpolar aspect.
Senator Campbell: We have already seen, if I am not mistaken, that Tuk had to be moved because of erosion. What steps are being taken by your organization in concert with government to ensure that we do not wait until buildings are falling into the sea? We see that the ice is melting and the seas are rising faster than anyone thought they would.
Mr. Smith: It is coincidental you ask that question now as I just met with the minister of DIAND earlier today, stressing the need for us to work closely to deal with adaptation and sustainability issues.
Senator Campbell: This is an urgent matter. This is not something we should be looking at down the road. At the very least, we should be planning and saying we must do this now. Is there any planning going on for all of the coastal communities?
I travelled the North extensively when I was a coroner. Most of these communities are located on the ocean or on a river. My worry is that will we wake up one day and be in an emergency panic situation. We know what happens if we choose the wrong location for the relocation. We know historically what happens there. My question is not so much about the cooperation but whether we are preparing for such an emergency. Are we pushing for that now?
Mr. Smith: To my knowledge, we are not at this time. We are trying to recommend to our government that we should be dealing with the issue. We have stressed to them that we do not need to reinvent the wheel. As I pointed out, the Alaskans are trying to address that to a degree and we can learn from their experiences. We are doing it at the community level, but it is piecemeal. I agree that we must look at it on a much longer-term basis so that we are not dealing with it when it will cost us more in the future. We need to come up with a mechanism and plan that makes that community sustainable and adaptable at the same time.
Senator Campbell: I can give you an example of what you could use. We spend hundreds of millions of dollars earthquake-proofing British Columbia for an earthquake that will happen, we just do not know when. We are in the same position here. Right now, all our science says it will happen. The only difference is that we know when the sea will rise. This is something that should be brought forward.
I am not a conspiracy theorist but I just finished reading a book about Chilean sea bass. It is not important, but the reason I am bringing this up is that Chilean sea bass is an ugly, terrible fish that we have been able to make a market for. It is huge. Pirate fleets from all over the world have virtually fished it to extinction in just a matter of two decades. Is there a possibility that because of our lack of vigilance we could see the same thing happen in the Beaufort Sea? You just said how big it is. If there is open ice, can I not just sail a ship in there without anyone knowing I am there except for the satellite?
Mr. Smith: I think it was already pointed out to this committee that in 1999, a ship from China came into the port of Tuk. I have firs-hand knowledge of this event because some of the Chinese researchers went to my friend's wedding while they were there. My brother was the RCMP officer who had to deal with them. They got around Alaska. The United States, with all of its technology, was unaware of the researchers. The RCMP and the Coast Guard had to escort them back to the Alaskan border, and the Alaskans took over from there and escorted them around the Bering Sea.
Senator Campbell: I would say there is not only a probability but also likelihood, given the resources that you have just described and, given the world's need for food, that is a real possibility in our Canadian North, unless we do something about dealing with the surveillance.
Mr. Smith: I would say it is not a possibility; it is just a matter of when. I would also point out that some of the resources may not be depleted by overharvesting. Some of them may be depleted by the changing climate as well. That is something that has to be taken into consideration also.
Senator Robichaud: Can you tell the committee how many communities are challenged by climate change through either the permafrost or the high sea levels?
Mr. Smith: Well, there are fifty-six Inuit communities in Canada's Arctic, and all but three are along the coast and/ or the tidal waters. Those three communities are affected by climate change with the shifting permafrost, so they are all being affected in varying degrees. Some of them are much more visible than others at this time, but they are all experiencing some impacts already.
Senator Robichaud: Therefore, it is not a matter of a few but all of them.
The Chair: You mentioned training, and you mentioned oil and gas spills. How much of that could be done by local people? If you had your way, what sort of training programs would you institute to prepare people for some of the challenges that are coming, particularly with oil spills?
Is there a sufficient body in the Arctic to deal with search and rescue emergencies? Should there be? If there is not such a body and if there should be, how could local people become more involved in search and rescue? We have seen recent instances of search and rescue problems, and we have all dealt with them over the years.
Mr. Smith: In the past the Arctic Council, the EPPR, Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response, in 1996, they had drafted up guidelines that I made reference to earlier, recommending that the respective circumpolar countries strategically locate containment where there is a lot of oil and gas activity and train the people in the communities to do so, at least to contain things initially until adequate equipment can get into their area to clean it up. That was the initial process, and it is a question whether the countries have done so or not.
The Coast Guard in Canada's Arctic used to have the responsibility of having this equipment located in those areas. That has now fallen onto the territorial governments, and I am not sure whether they still maintain that equipment. I know there are some located in the Arctic, but the training is not being provided anymore due to lack of funds or whatever other reasons. It is not being done.
The ships, the barges and the tugs that do resupply the communities are required to provide that training to their crews, and they must have the equipment on those barges as well when they are resupplying the communities. That is part of their requirements, so that capability is there initially. However, if it is too large, then you have to turn to that community to assist you, and I am not sure if each community has the infrastructure in place to assist in that regard.
As for the search and rescue, again, depending on the issue, the calls will usually go to the Canadian military, and a person that answers the phone in North Bay, Ontario, deals with everything right across Canada's Arctic.
It is common knowledge for Inuit people because we have the north warning systems that are strategically located every 50 miles, roughly, and if you are caught in a storm, then they know that there is this facility there. There is a door that you can go into to get out of the storm, but as soon as you go in there, the phone starts ringing, and it is this person from North Bay asking you what you are doing there. That is the level of our sovereignty and our observations, right now, in that aspect, but I point that out because that is the same person that deals with the search and rescue.
In some regions, there is CASARA, which is the Canadian Arctic Search and Rescue Association, made up of volunteers in their respective communities, again, and they will conduct periodic flight exercises with the military in those areas. Again, if there is a natural disaster taking place or a large accident that takes place with a lot of people, and I use the example of commercial aircraft flying over the Arctic now, as Canada has opened up the air for commercial flights throughout the Arctic, the military have conducted different practices with communities and the Rangers to deal with the scenario where a 737 or whatever has crashed in the Arctic. Again, it is a reaction from North Bay to deal with the issue, and to try to ensure that there is some training in place to deal with those throughout the Arctic.
However, that is the extent of it.
The Chair: Do you have some recommendations for change? Should there be a centre other than North Bay that coordinates the activity? Do you have other recommendations for change?
Mr. Smith: I go back to the training: ensure that there is adequate and periodic training provided to people within the communities, at least to contain spills, because spills do occur. You will have those accidents to varying degrees, however small or large they may be, because you are transferring a lot of fuel to that community that needs it for that whole winter to ensure that they have enough supplies, and there are spills that do take place periodically. There should be equipment in place that is up to the standards to contain that spill and the people in those communities trained to do so.
That was one of the recommendations under the Arctic Council's guidelines, and it is up to each of the respective countries, again, to live up to it, because they all agreed to and accepted it.
As for the search and rescue, again, you are dealing with the lack of infrastructure that is not located in the Arctic, and if you are looking at that, then that is the most crucial way to deal with those issues for search and rescue and monitoring the Arctic. You need the infrastructure up there.
The Chair: Could you speak about specific infrastructure that you think is needed?
Mr. Smith: Well, it would be the facilities, for one thing. You have military sites that are based in Inuvik, Rankin Inlet and Yellowknife, which is the sub-Arctic. The nearest reactionary place for any air activity that may take place in Canada's Arctic is 800 kilometres south of the Canadian Arctic. If you want to have a more meaningful presence in the Arctic, then you have to be there. Again, it goes back to infrastructure to house the personnel and equipment in those areas. I cannot say the specifics, but they need a facility to have the people stay periodically.
Senator Robichaud: Are not there such facilities that are now being used in Iqaluit?
Mr. Smith: In Iqaluit there is the similar capability where six CF18s can be parked there periodically to conduct exercises and/or monitor that part of Canada's Arctic. There are similar facilities in Inuvik, Yellowknife and Rankin Inlet.
Senator Robichaud: How often are they used?
Mr. Smith: You would have to contact the military to find out how often they use those facilities. They send aircraft up occasionally to conduct exercises.
Senator Robichaud: We were up there a few weeks ago and saw those buildings; they are well kept and well maintained, but they are not being used or they are seldom used. I suppose they could be used for the purposes that you mentioned.
The Chair: I can show you a few in Goose Bay that are in a similar situation.
Senator Robichaud: Goose Bay is not the Arctic yet.
Senator Hubley: I was surprised to read that you are asking us for help concerning the U.S.A.'s threat to list our polar bear as a threatened species. Of course that will have a negative impact on your community. We can layer that with what is happening in the sealing industry, and you also brought up the herring. That seems to be a chipping away of Canadian sovereignty. If we are not going to protect our own species, somebody else is going to claim them it seems.
Would you comment on how we are dealing with our own natural resources, living and under the ground, as they relate to sovereignty?
Mr. Smith: That is a good observation because there are other species that are under the same process, such as the Pacific walrus and the yellow-billed loon. There are different grasses that are looked at being protected under the same process and that is to ensure that there is no exploratory or commercial development of those areas. That is the primary objective.
Canada is doing a good job in regards in sustainably managing most of our species in the Arctic. Some of them, again, are in decline primarily due to climate change and different vegetation moving further north taking over, as predatory species do, other vegetation such as lichen. One species that used to be so abundant throughout Canada's Arctic is the caribou. It is on our 25-cent coin. Much of Canada's Arctic is in drastic decline for various reasons: Climate change, freezing rain in the fall is having major impact on those species to sustain them; the lichen habitat is declining, et cetera.
Senator Hubley: How are your communities preparing for this eventuality? Is that a difficult thing to do? What would you need to assist you in getting that information? You mentioned the gathering of scientific evidence. Would it be helpful if the research were made available to the people of the North? Would an important step be the establishment of such a repository of information for all of the Canadian people? Would that be an important step?
Mr. Smith: That would be a crucial step, not only for that purpose but as an educational tool for all the educational facilities across the country, not only the Arctic. It is good for people to get a better understanding of that part of Canada as people do not think about the Arctic that often.
Senator Comeau: You brought up the issue of sealing and the impact that it had on the people of the North. Given the articulate and powerful way you are able to present your ideas, have you considered approaching an individual like Paul McCartney? An individual like this might show some interest in hearing about the impact of the anti-sealing measures that have been held over the years and the impact on your communities, the impact on your people, the way of life and not only the food but the jobs that were created with the use of the by-products of seals.
An individual such as yourself, who is very articulate and reasonable, might approach Paul McCartney and invite him to visit and see what your actions can do to your communities; come and see what it is that you attempt to do and how we deal with seals and so on.
If they get away with it on the East Coast and in the Magdalen Islands and off Newfoundland and so on, it will have an impact on your communities as well. It is going to be all-powerful throughout Canada.
Mr. Smith: We have tried that in the past, and we will take that under advisement to approach Mr. McCartney. As you are aware, we have had a former chancellor of Germany who has often visited Canada's Arctic and is supportive of our culture; as well, the former French president has done the same thing. There are respected people, who have supported that in the past, but again, we already have the EU recognizing an exemption for the Inuit, but again, it is the economics of it. If you wipe out one part of it there will not be a market, per se.
Senator Comeau: It is very degrading that they should say they would exempt the Inuit but try to stop the other Canadians from doing it. That is very degrading to your people and to the people of the North.
Mr. Smith: You should get the information provided to you to see the criteria that they will allow this exemption as well, because we might as well be in a live museum on display for them based on those criteria that they are saying how we should have this exemption applied to the Inuit people. I will not go into the details but it is pretty humbling.
The Chair: I want to thank you very much for being with us. You have been very helpful to us. You have given us insights that nobody else can give us and that has been extremely valuable. We appreciate the time you have taken and the frankness and the fullness with which you have answered the questions that we have put to you.
Mr. Smith: Thank you for the opportunity. If there is any more information we can provide to you, I will take it upon myself or our office to provide you with last year's annual reports so you have a better understanding of ICC Canada. We are in the process of putting together this year's report, but it will not be available right away. We will get you a copy of our reports from last year and any other information we can provide.
The Chair: Before we adjourn, on Tuesday, April 8, we are going to hear from Scott Borgerson, who is with the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. He is a former U.S. Coast Guard officer and he will provide the committee with some interesting insights.
On April 15, we will hear from Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and Nunavut Tunngavik, thereafter from Michelle Wheatley, who is the Regional Director of Science at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
We will work on a budget because we have discussed where we might go and how we might do the travelling. If we could put that into a budget by Thursday, would people be agreeable to a short meeting Thursday morning to go over budget and travel? We do not have a witness, but we could do that, get it out of the way and get it to the Internal Economy Committee.
Senator Robichaud: Before you adjourn the meeting, I passed out a notice regarding the Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association.
The Chair: Yes, Senator Robichaud brought this to my attention. The Canada-Europe Parliamentary Association invites its members to apply to participate in the meeting of the Standing Committee of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region in Vladivostok, May 28 to 30. The delegates will take part in discussions relating to Arctic issues and will be able to present Canadian views on topics of Canadian interest. The draft declaration of the Fairbanks Conference will also be debated. This is for your information.
Senator Campbell: It is close to Vancouver.
The Chair: Yes, just over the hill from Vancouver.
Senator Robichaud: If you read further, there will be one representative from each of the two parties in the House of Commons. As this committee has funds for conferences, we might decide to send a senator. Other senate committees will do the same. It might be wise for this committee to send a representative as the conference will cover some of this committee's issues. It might be wise to look into this conference.
The Chair: If anybody is interested, please let me know. Otherwise, the meeting is adjourned.
The committee adjourned.