Conflict over Boreal Forest in Canada

CONFLICTS OVER BOREAL FOREST IN CANADA
Name:
Grade Course:
Tutor`s Name:
(6th December 2012)
Conflicts over Boreal Forest in Canada
Introduction
The Canadian Boreal forest is among the largest forests and wetland ecological unit considered untouched in the world. It represents about 25 percent of the remaining intact forests in the world. Indeed, Boreal Forest is the only place left on the entire planet that has the ability to sustain a fully operating ecosystem with such abundances. This is based on the fact that, there are a wide range of wildlife like migrating songbirds, bears, wolves, lynx among others. Some of the wildlife supported by this forest is the largest on the planet, and some of them are the only ones remaining. A boreal forest provides not only habitat, but also livelihood to more than 700 Aboriginal communities in Canada. This community entirely depends on Boreal Forest for cultural identities, spiritual as well as economic values.
Boreal forest also hosts several lakes and wetlands, apart from acting as greatest carbon sink in the world. According to Anielski and Sara (2005), the environmental benefits from Boreal forest amounts much more, compared to resource extraction through mining, energy and forestry from the forest. Additionally, mining, forestry and energy extraction has been providing various resources that generate business opportunities leading to employment opportunities, translating to a wealthy nation, however this has been the major source of conflicts in Boreal forest. The aim of this paper is to outline the conflicts surrounding Boreal forest.
Free Entry Systems
Canadian industries especially the mining industry enjoys the freedom of accessing land with the aim of exploring minerals without any restriction. Across Boreal forest, there are various mineral exploitation activities taking place as permitted by the ‘free entry` tenure. Under this tenure, the mineral explorer needs just to register with the government after staking land as mineral claims; after which, the right to explore the resource is given by the government. As compared to other projects like forestry and agriculture, there are no public reviews, or prior planning in the process of staking mining resources. These reviews are only carried out after the mining project has attained an advanced stage. In addition, staking land without prior consultations is one issue that has been undermining the efforts made by regional planning departments in ensuring that resource and land utilization is fair and just.
Moreover, legal land rights in Canada have been accelerating Boreal forest conflicts year after year. According to Slanina (2008), land rights allow the one to lease or even own the surface interest for various purposes like tourism, agriculture or forestry. At the same time, the sub-surface interest can be leased or owned by another person for exploration purposes. In such a case, the surface owner is required to allow sub-surface exploration as well as mineral development. It doesn`t matter whether surface and sub-surface activities are compatible or not, the surface owner has to pave way for exploration.
In 2007, more than 500,000Km2 of mineral claims were stalked in Boreal forest against the wish of aboriginal community wish, and the wish of environmental conservatism. This acts escalated conflicts in the boreal region. Based on the fact mining companies enjoy the rights of staking land in whichever place provided that minerals exist, the government has no discretion, or even the right to refuse registering prospectors who have complied with the staking process. As an effect, in case of conflicts between mining industry and the aboriginal community or even the public, the Canadian government has little to offer as a solution. For instance, it is either the government that will let the exploration practices to continue, or stop the exploration activities, and incur extra expenses of compensating exploration firms for the claims (Notzke 1994).
Other stakeholders in Boreal Forest like forest sector have recognized the need for better land management strategies that can avoid conflicts between them and other stakeholders, for instance, the importance of prior planning as stated by the Forest Product Association of Canada. The Association has prioritized on prior planning for ecological and cultural values before issue new land tenures in Boreal Forest. This has been effective in ensuring that the constitutional rights of Boreal Aboriginal communities are respected. Based on this example, improving land use is very important everyone benefit from land resources. To attain this, the Canadian government should encompass the interest of all involved parties are considered before allowing some development projects to continue (Hipwell, et al. 2002).
Aboriginal Rights
On the other hand, it is until late 1980s that mineral exploration rights started respecting the rights of Boreal Aboriginal communities. This change occurred after recognizing treaty rights as well as aboriginal communities in the Canadian constitution. Before this recognition, mineral exploration companies were undertaking their activities without considering the rights of the aboriginal communities. Even after the recognition of aboriginal communities and treaty rights, various between the aboriginal community organizations and the government as a result of conflicting meaning of such rights and treaties, which have lead to the exploration blockage in some instances. In other cases, mining communities have reached at consensus with the aboriginal communities through negotiations before starting their exploration activities. However, though there have been slight improvement in the mining industry, but a large percentage of mining firms in Boreal Forest are still staking claims apart from continuing with their exploration activities without making any agreement with the aboriginal communities (Slanina 2008).
The driving force of this behavior in Boreal forest is the government sluggishness in taking actions. As a result of free entry system which the Canadian mining industry still enjoys, to date, mining companies are acquiring land rights automatically without considering surface interests, or other land use practices. This free entry system is still denying the aboriginal communities the right to be informed before implementing the mining activities. As an effect, most of them have not seen, or enjoyed the benefits of mining industry in Boreal forest, leading to various conflicts between the community and mining industries.
Based on the fact that Aboriginal laws are developing in Canada, this coupled with emerging legal precedence in the current times, especially the ‘Haida Nation, Taku and Mikisew Cree`, the government is being forced to undertake consultations with the aboriginal communities, and accommodate their opinions before registering development rights. This imply that the government is required to consult local communities before making any fundamental decision that will affect them in one way or the other. However, free entry system does not give room for these consultations to occur; hence increasing conflicts among the aboriginal communities, the government and the mining firms. In supporting this consultation issue, the B.C. Supreme Court during Tsilhqotin case emphasized those resource tenures failing to meet consensus requirement risk being termed as unconstitutional.
Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement
Another issue accelerating Boreal forest conflict is the deal announced by the Ministry of Forest, twenty one large timber companies and environmental conservation organizations. According to the deal`s stakeholders, the agreement will spearhead Boreal Forest, apart from providing forestry jobs across the Boreal region. However, this agreement is being considered as a treaty between two principle logging parties. However, the aboriginal communities in around Boreal region are left out of the agreement, yet the environmentalists at the community level claims that the deal will ensure corporate management of forests in Canada.
In real sense, Craik and Quaile (2012), sees the deal as resembling the Great Bear Rainforest Agreement that was opposed by many Canadians. This is based on the fact that the agreement is unacceptable to the aboriginal communities around Boreal region. The multiple use concept introduced by the forest industry worthless as depicts that the community efforts are useless.
Bore making any agreement, it is important to understand the significance of forest resources especially the boreal forest resources on the Canadian citizens. More than eighty percentages of aboriginal Canadian communities live around or in Boreal forest (Anielski & Sara 2005). However, based on the rigidity of the Canadian government and the Timber industries on monopolistic management and utilization of Boreal forest resources have denied the aboriginal communities the opportunity to benefit from the forest`s social, economic, and environmental resources. This has impacted n...