Use of traditional ecological knowledge in environmental assessment of uranium mining in the Athabasca Saskatchewan

Abstract

Use of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) is now a requirement of many environmental review panels. It was in the remit for the investigation into uranium mining in northern Saskatchewan, but there was a mismatch between the narrow, often technical, treatment of TEK and the broader, more cultural comments of the Dene Aboriginal intervenors. It is essential to recognize when a developmentproposal'splanning needs and social issues exceed the scope of environmental assessment (EA). TEK can relate to EA on three levels: detailed information from localpeople on the environment and wildlife; gaining insight in to socio-cultural effects of a project; and changes to a landscape or a people's relationship with it that may threaten their deep identification with their environment. The last may not be a part of an ordinary EA.

Challenges and strategies when mapping local ecological knowledge in the Canadian Arctic: the importance of defining the geographic limits of participants’ common areas of observations

“…Knowing that local ecological knowledge (LEK) studies with a mapping component are increasing in frequency, and are now often required when proposing and assessing the potential impacts of new development projects (e.g., mining) (Wiles et al 1999;Ellis 2005), there is a pressing need to increase rigor in the methods used to document and map LEK. In this study, we explored potential biases and limitations and examined strategies to address them in mapped observations collected from 27 interviews with local walrus hunters as part of a larger project on walruses and population health in Nunavik (Northern Quebec, Canada).…”

Indigenous knowledge and federal environmental assessments in Canada: applying past lessons to the 2019 impact assessment act

“…These authors noted that, while Indigenous Nations frequently make their interpretation of unresolved title or treaty rights clear, the federal EA process fails repeatedly to do so explicitly (Booth and Skelton 2011b). This failure, combined with the unsettled answer of legal land rights in locations where developments are proposed, is recognized as a core obstacle preventing the meaningful incorporation of IK in EA processes (Wiles et al 1999;O'Faircheallaigh 2007;Booth and Skelton 2011b;Udofia et al 2017). A pervasive challenge for Indigenous participants in EA processes is that Canadian EA as legislated does not provide the appropriate process to settle these lingering, unresolved, and consequential legal queries (Wiles et al 1999).…”

“…However, without explicit requirements for these practices, proponents and government authorities often establish research and assessment agendas without best practices in mind, missing opportunities to engage IK and improve relationships with involved Indigenous Nations (Sallenave 1994;Wiles et al 1999;O'Faircheallaigh 2007;Tsuji et al 2011;Gardner et al 2015;Sandlos and Keeling 2016).…”

Meaningful Consideration? A Review of Traditional Knowledge in Environmental Decision Making

“…Because of its acknowledged connection with environmental sustainability and the empowerment of marginalized peoples, it has been variously analyzed, systemized, and incorporated into a myriad of environmental decisionmaking processes. These include environmental assessment (Stevenson, 1996;Wiles et al, 1999), land-claim and treaty entitlement processes (Freeman, 1976;Teed, 2002), wildlife management (Usher, 1987;Gunn et al, 1988), and land-use regulation (Duerden and Kuhn, 1998). A variety of strategies have been used in an attempt to bring traditional knowledge into these processes.…”