A patchwork of roads, ditches and unauthorized dams are scarring First Nations territories in north east B.C. while water sources are being jeopardised by natural gas companies using hundreds of thousands of cubic metres of water for fracking, according to a study conducted for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

A sharp increase in fracking operations is underway in B.C. but First Nations have little say in decisions about how the companies operate on their traditional lands, finds the study, written by Ben Parfitt, CCPA resource policy analyst.

“Today, in the more remote reaches of northeast B.C., more water is used in fracking operations than anywhere else on earth — and substantial increases in water use will have to occur in the event a liquefied natural gas industry emerges in B.C.,” the paper states.

Fracking is the practice of pressure-pumping immense quantities of water, deep below the earth’s surface, to fracture rock in order to release trapped gas.

“It is easy to see how all that water use, which ultimately results in the water becoming heavily contaminated, poses increased risks both to surface waters and below ground or groundwater sources such as aquifers,” says the study, which points out that more water is used in B.C. fracking operations than anywhere else in the world.

A previous CCPA study found that, between 2012 and 2014, water use at fracked gas wells in the Montney and Horn River Basins, the region’s two major basins, climbed by about 50 per cent.

“Natural gas drilling and fracking operations have devastated local First Nations, steadily eroding their ability to hunt, fish, trap and carry out other traditional practices, which are supposed to be protected by Treaty 8,” said Parfitt, who last month revealed that dozens of unauthorized dams had been built in the same area to trap water used in fracking operations.

Parfitt found that two of the dams built by Progress Energy, a subsidiary of Malaysian-owned Petronas, were so large they should have been reviewed and approved by the province’s Environmental Assessment Office.

First Nations Bear Brunt of B.C.’s Sprawling #Fracking Operations: New Report https://t.co/4klbtq8lxJ @LavoieJudith @ccpa #bcpoli #LNGinBC pic.twitter.com/xaQbGmcxC4

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) July 4, 2017

In addition to the effect on First Nations lands, there is concern that fracking operations are known to trigger earthquakes and there is no guarantee that the dams are safe.

The B.C. Oil and Gas Commission found that, in 2015, fracking by Progress Energy, north of Fort St. John, triggered a 4.6 –magnitude earthquake.

Now, with growing concerns about the amount of water being used by the industry, it is time First Nations were given more control over what happens on their land, Parfitt said.

Although First Nations receive advanced notice of fossil fuel industry development planned for their territories, they have little influence on the timing, rate or location of company operations and there is growing frustration over the inability to look at cumulative impacts or what constitutes a reasonable amount of industrial activity within a watershed, according to the study.

Some First Nations are resorting to legal action and the Fort Nelson First Nation, a Treaty 8 signatory, succeeded in having a water licence within its’ territory cancelled while the Blueberry River First Nations is suing the provincial government for cumulative damages to its territory from multiple industrial developments.

Three-quarters of Blueberry River territory is just 250 metres away from a variety of industrial disturbances, according to members. The potentially precedent-setting case is likely to be heard next year.

The new NDP government in B.C., propped up by support from the Green party, has not made any promises regarding fracking in B.C. although a joint agreement signed by both parties vowed to honour the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Green party Leader Andrew Weaver has previously called for a moratorium on fracking in B.C. until the risks of the process can be more fully understood.

Parfitt said that, if B.C. is going to respect the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, there must be changes.

“To start, we need to end the current death-by-a-thousand-cuts approach, where First Nations are simply asked to respond to one proposed industrial development after another, and, instead, place First Nations firmly in the driver’s seat when it comes to guiding activities in local watersheds,” Parfitt said.

Meaningful consultation needs to take place well before activities occur, he said, noting that disturbance to the land for fracking operations ranges from logging to construction of wastewater containment ponds.

The report recommends that, instead of First Nations simply being asked to respond to government and industry referrals, the province should bring in new co-management regimes, with First Nations and government working together.

The system could be similar to that on Haida Gwaii, where the Haida Nation co-manages the Gwaii Haanas national park reserve and Haida heritage site with the federal government and co-manages forest resources on the north of the islands with the provincial government.

Other recommendations include:

• Setting maximum natural gas extraction limits on a watershed-by-watershed basis.
• Creating no-go, drill-free and frack-free zones, including protected areas where healthy, functioning ecosystems are maintained so that indigenous rights can be fully exercised.
• Charging more for industrial use of water, in hopes of encouraging conservation, and investing those funds in water studies and enhanced water protection.
• Requiring fossil fuel companies to detail exactly where they intend to operate over the long-term, so decisions on industry development and water withdrawals can be made in the context of cumulative regional impacts. The system would be similar to requirements that the logging industry give 20-year development plans detailing where they are proposing to build roads or log.

“There is an urgent need to embrace these recommendations — and more — in light of what First Nations contend with in the face of modern-day natural gas industry operations,” says the study.

“All natural resources, particularly water resources, are finite. They sustain lands and resources that First Nations have relied on since time immemorial. They must be managed with that in mind.”

Image: Caleb Behn, indigenous rights advocate, has fought for years to prevent the negative impacts of fracking on indigenous lands in B.C. Photo: Fractured Land

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Many Indigenous leaders have expressed disappointment that only the leaders of the national organizations representing Inuit, Métis and First Nations were allowed to fully participate in the talks at a climate strategy meeting with the prime minister and premiers earlier this month. Other Indigenous leaders in attendance for the meeting in Vancouver were relegated to the role of spectators.   “Limiting conversation to three Indigenous voices from over 600 Indigenous communities across Canada is a vast under representation,” Melina Laboucan-Massimo, a climate and indigenous rights activist, said. “At a bare minimum, the regional chiefs should be at the table as well, but also Indigenous leaders and experts who work on climate should be as well.”   Regional chiefs were also frustrated that their input into the pan-Canadian framework for clean growth and climate change is limited, despite Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s promise of a “renewed, nation-to-nation relationship” with Indigenous people in Canada.   “We thought we’d have a chance to speak, but it was the national chief who was permitted to speak for about ten minutes. Ten minutes for all First Nations in Canada? That is a slap in the face to First Nations and embarrassment for Canada,” Ontario Regional Chief Isadore Day told DeSmog Canada. “Climate change is a matter of life and death. Our kids and grandkids will suffer if we fail to act and we only have a 20-year window to act. Clearly, we all need to work together.”

Treaty 6 Grand Chief Tony Alexis, an Alberta regional chief, said First Nations had been merely “asked to come and visit” the climate meeting. Chief Allan Adam of the Athabasca Fort Chipewyan First Nation in Alberta declared the federal government and premiers had “failed terribly” in addressing Indigenous concerns about climate change and protecting the environment.

“We Were Not Welcome At The Table": Chief Day   Two days of meetings took place in Vancouver: a meeting on March 2nd for Indigenous leaders, premiers and the prime minister and a meeting the following day exclusively for the provinces, territories and the federal government. Last-minute invitations to join the Alberta and Ontario provincial delegations allowed Day and Alexis to be present at the final meeting.   “We were not welcome at the table. If the meeting is an indication of how things will proceed moving forward, Indigenous peoples and Canadians should be concerned,” Day said.   Not all provinces appear comfortable with Indigenous leaders playing a significant role in the crafting of a Canadian climate framework either.   “From what I heard some provinces indicated during the meeting they would like to limit Indigenous involvement in the climate framework. I find this very concerning, not to mention deeply disrespectful,” Laboucan-Massimo told DeSmog Canada. “It is of immense importance for Indigenous governments to be engaged from start to finish at the four climate tables, and I hope that all levels of government respect that.”   Before the summit in Vancouver had begun, the federal government came under fire for failing to invite two other national Indigenous organizations — Native Women’s Association of Canada and the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples — to the talks. NDP Leader Tom Mulcair blasted Trudeau in Parliament for the “slight” and Manitoba Premier Greg Selinger pointed out in the past all five national organizations have been invited to attend first ministers meetings.   Indigenous Peoples To Be Consulted On The Climate Change Framework   A “broader engagement process with Indigenous peoples” is meant to take place alongside the work of four federal-provincial working groups studying key climate policy areas such as clean technology, carbon pricing mechanisms and greenhouse gas reductions strategies. If the recommendations are approved at a first ministers meeting this fall, they will make up the bulwark of a national framework shaping Canada’s responses to climate change.   The details of the consultation process have not been made available yet, but both Day and Laboucan-Massimo agree the process needs to be as comprehensive as possible for Indigenous concerns to be heard and incorporated.   "I think a climate change accord in Canada is necessary going forward. It would spell out how a constructive dialogue between Indigenous people and the federal government could take place," Day said.   Indigenous knowledge could also strengthen a national plan to address climate change. Scientists have already begun using Inuit knowledge and observations for studying weather patterns in the Arctic. Firsthand information like this can be used to test climate models.   “Because of the innate connection to the land, Indigenous people notice changes in the ecosystem, animals and water that others may dismiss. We’ve had centuries of observation, experience and intimate relationships to the land that has built this unique knowledge and sensitivity,” Laboucan-Massimo told DeSmog Canada. Laboucan-Massimo is a member of the Sakaw Nehiyawak (“Northern” or “Bush” Cree in English).   Laboucan-Massimo also sees the low-carbon economy as much more in line with Indigenous worldviews than fossil fuels economies.

“For the first time since the age of industrialization, there finally exists a technology that produces energy that is not in complete contradiction with Indigenous values and our way of life,” Laboucan-Massimo said. “The time is now for our communities to begin integrating renewable energy technology such as solar photovoltaic to help us become less reliant on fossil fuels.” 

Image: Melina Laboucan Massimo at a solar installation in her community of Little Buffalo in northern Alberta.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

James Anaya, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Aboriginal Peoples, upon completion of his 8-day visit to Canada said the country “faces a crisis when it comes to the situation of indigenous peoples of the country.”

The overarching message in Anaya's concluding statement, released yesterday, is that over the last decade Canada has failed to make any meaningful progress on the very serious threats faced by aboriginal communities. 

Anaya's visit comes 10 years after the 2003 visit by UN Special Rapporteur Rodolfo Stavenhagen who, at the time, stressed “the economic, social and human indicators of well-being, quality of life and development are consistently lower among Aboriginal people than other Canadians.”  In 2004 Stavenhagen noted poverty, infant mortality, unemployment, morbidity, suicide, criminal detention, children on welfare, women victims of abuse, child prostitution are significantly higher in Aboriginal populations compared to any other sector of Canadian society, while education, health, housing conditions, family income, and equal access to economic and social opportunities are much lower.

Canada, Stavenhagen assured the international community in 2003, had “taken up the challenge to close this gap.”

Upon completion of Anaya’s current visit he stated Canada still has a very long way to go in its work to tighten the “well-being gap” between Aboriginal and non-aboriginal Canadians.

Canada, notes Anaya, was one of the first countries to extend constitutional protection to indigenous peoples’ rights, yet, he says “despite positive steps, daunting challenges remain” for Canada.

“The well-being gap between aboriginal and non-aboriginal people in Canada has not narrowed over the last several years, treaty and aboriginal claims remain persistently unresolved, and overall there appear to be high levels of distrust among aboriginal peoples toward government at both the federal and provincial levels,” he said.

Although Canada ranks high on international indices of human development standards, he said, “amidst this wealth and prosperity, aboriginal people live in conditions akin to those in countries that rank much lower and in which poverty abounds.”

He noted dismal living conditions, poor education and high suicide rates in aboriginal communities were alarming. This is not new information, said Anaya, who added the Canadian Human Rights Commission “has consistently said that the conditions of aboriginal peoples makes for the most serious human rights problem in Canada.”

He also said that the “disturbing phenomenon” of murdered and missing aboriginal women forms part of the “long shadow” of oppression that includes residential schools and other aspects of Canadian First Nations’ history.

Of additional concern, says Anaya, is the fact that Canada’s ‘solutions’ to the variety of social and economic hardships faced by aboriginal communities “has not appropriately included nor responded to aboriginal views.” He added one hundred and thirty years of Indian Act policies have persistently undermined, and continute to undermine, First Nation’s and Inuit people’s self-governance, which is essential to “creating socially and economically healthy and self-sufficient aboriginal communities.”

Anaya’s preliminary recommendations, reported by Roger Annis on the Vancouver Observer, are listed below. A more in-depth report will be presented to the UN Human Rights Council in 2014.

• Granting an extension to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that is examining the history of the residential school policy that dates back more than one century. He says the extension should last “as long as may be necessary.” The Commission’s mandate expires on July 1, 2014, but its work has been obstructed and delayed because the federal government has refused to divulge extensive documentation about residential schools.

• Slowing a “rush forward” with planned legislation this fall to reform the Aboriginal education system. He says there is “profound distrust” among First Nations over the proposed First Nation Education Act. It will set standards for teaching staff, curriculum and students. Aboriginal leaders are concerned the act will impose standards that disregard Indigenous language and culture and that education funding will not be increased. They want immediate increases to education funding, but Minister of Aboriginal Affairs Minister Bernard Valcourt says there will be no funding increases considered until the new act is passed.
• Establishing a public inquiry into the cases of missing and murdered aboriginal women, whose numbers are estimated at more than 600. The federal government has flatly rejected this, and is ignoring calls from international organizations and provincial governments on the matter.
• Treating the housing situation on First Nations reserves and Inuit communities “with the urgency it deserves.” He says housing conditions are unacceptable and it is “abundantly clear” that funding for aboriginal housing is “woefully inadequate.”
• Adopting a much less “adversarial” approach to dealing with aboriginal land claims and treaty disputes.
• Recognizing that “resource extraction” should not occur on lands subject to aboriginal claims without “adequate consultations” and the “free, prior and informed consent” of the Aboriginals affected.

First Nation’s children on reserves in Canada receive 22 percent less per child in federal funding and more than 500 reserve schools lack access to basic amenities like running water in libraries. The average child on reserve receives $2000 to $3000 less per year in education funding.

In addition First Nation’s communities have been on the front lines of some of Canada’s most ground-breaking – and expensive – legal challenges to environmentally harmful resource extraction. The Beaver Lake Cree Nation is undertaking what could become Canada’s most important challenge to the ever-expanding Alberta tar sands. And the Chilcotin people in Northern British Columbia are just weeks away from what might be the most significant land title hearing in Canada since the precedent-setting 1997 Delgamuukw decision.

Remote front-line communities often face the greatest impacts of resource extraction that threaten land-based ways of life. First Nations, through constitutionally-protected rights and treaty rights, must be ‘adequately consulted’ before resource projects are approved – a requirement often overlook by the Government of Canada.

In addition the lack of meaningful investment into First Nations’ land, economies and culture has led to difficult socio-economic conditions for younger generations. Child poverty is the most striking indicator of the well-being gap that is widening between on and off reserve children.

This graphic, produced by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, shows the disparity between indigenous and non-indigenous Canadian children according to province.

First Nations child poverty by the numbers:

• Each on-reserve First Nations child receives 22% less funding than each child off of reserve.
• 50 per cent of status First Nations children in Canada live in poverty.
• Approximately 3 times as many First Nations children are now in child welfare care than were ever in the residential school system.
• First Nations children are 6 to 8 times more likely to go into child welfare care than non-aboriginal children.
• 65% of kids in child welfare care in Alberta are First Nations (who account for less than 10% of the population).
• 53% of kids in child welfare care in British Columbia are First Nations.
• 1 in 6 children on reserves in Canada doesn't have clean water to drink.
• The cost to pull all First Nations children out of poverty: $1 billion.
• The World Health Organization says, for $1 properly invested in children, the taxpayer saves $7 down the line.
• That’s a net profit of $6 billion.  

For more of James Anaya’s reflections on his visit to Canada, see his written statement on the UN's website.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.