Open the Peel to industrial development: Cathers

Wednesday February 15, 2012

By John Thompson

Ian Stewart/Yukon News

P3peel
The Bonnet Plume River in the Peel Watershed area. The Yukon government supports some mining access in the region.

The Yukon government wants to allow industrial development in most of the Peel Watershed, Energy, Mines and Resources Minister Brad Cathers announced Tuesday.

“We see that as taking a balanced approach that shifts the debate from whether to protect the Peel, to how to protect the Peel,” said Cathers.

“Yukoners value wilderness beauty and healthy ecosystems, but also want a diversified economy that provides employment for their friends, family and community.”

Key areas would receive full protection, either through the creation of a park or special management area. That likely includes the Turner Lake wetlands and

“the confluence” of the Snake, Bonnet Plume and Wind rivers, said Cathers.

But “the majority” of the 68,000-sq.-kilometre watershed in northeast Yukon, would be open to development, he said.

That’s a big change from the planning commission’s recommendations to protect four-fifths of the watershed.

Miners that hope to dig up iron, coal and uranium in the region will be pleased. Conservationists are furious.

“They aren’t looking to the future and they certainly don’t respect all sectors of the economy,” said Karen Baltgailis, executive director of the Yukon Conservation Society, in a release.

“How are wilderness tourism and outfitting businesses supposed to coexist with industrial development in the Peel?” Baltgailis said.

Cathers wants to see a land-use plan for the Peel that resembles the one crafted for northern Yukon.

There, half the region is protected, with the remaining half open to a sliding scale of development, with stricter safeguards required for sensitive areas.

Similarly, the government wants to see in the Peel “active management of the landscape rather than prohibitions to use and access,” according to eight principles announced on Tuesday.

Cabinet hasn’t yet decided what percentage of the Peel it would like to see protected, said Cathers.

More details will be released when the government holds a final round of community consultations on the Peel plan later this year. A schedule is to be hammered out soon with affected First Nations, he said.

The government hopes to have a Peel plan signed off by the fall, said Cathers. That’s when a mineral staking ban for the Peel expires.

For that to happen, the territory and affected First Nations will need to broker a compromise. First Nations initially called for the entire watershed to be protected, and later endorsed the proposed plan.

Miners should be allowed to keep claims in the Peel, said Cathers. And they should be allowed to build “reasonable” access roads, he said.

Roads had been ruled out in the proposed plan, for fear they would spoil the region’s pristine character. Miners howled with indignation at this, saying that such a scheme would be tantamount to expropriation.

The Peel plan should also be amendable by the government to allow “for additional conservation or development,” according to the government’s principles.

And it shouldn’t cost too much.

“Ultimately, the plan must be one that can be implemented within fiscally responsible means and human resources capacity,” it states.

The Yukon Party government has, until now, said very little about what it wants to see done in the Peel, other than it thought the commission’s plan went too far.

Cathers denied there was anything amiss with the territory announcing its position only now.

“It’s a different step in the process,” he said.

Contact John Thompson at

(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Bookmark and Share 10 Comments

12:11pm 02/20/12  |  susie rogan wrote:

There is very good money to be made guiding people in the wilderness. Why does this factor so small when debating the best use of this region for our economy?  Guides make excellent money and it is income that can go forward forever into the future.  Not only do we make money today but as a bonus, the wilderness is left intact for its own sake and for the next generation of Yukon workers to use it and profit from it.  Surely we can see past the short term millions in profit for resource companies?  The Yukon has suffered enough boom and bust from mining.  It is time to adapt to a sustainable future.  Most Yukoners want to give it a go by protecting the Peel almost in its entirety.

By the way, the sound bite, ‘Not whether to protect the Peel but how to protect the Peel’, is nothing but vapid double-speak straight out of an amateur PR agency cook book.  I can just imagine them sitting around the board room table, flushed with triumph and excitement coming up with that one.  “This is it!  We’ll say we are PROTECTING the Peel by opening it up to industry!  Ya, there’s the ticket!”, and expecting Yukoners to swallow it.

5:34pm 02/19/12  |  Denise wrote:

I am totally not against mining or oil and gas development, BUT there are places that need protection and there are places that can be developed. If YTG isn’t listening to the recommendations that were put forward, one really has to ask why? Is there more out in the that area then mining? Perhaps a large oil and gas potential. And can you imagine the royalties lost to the Yukon Government if they close this area off for development? If Yukon people, First Nation Governments, environmental groups really do feel strongly that the Yukon Government isn’t listening to their plans then maybe its high time that road blocks and other demonstrations need to start happening? And maybe put all Mining activities at a standstill. Block the North Klondike and Dempster Highways and see what happens? I’m sure someone will notice? The intent of Land Claims was to work together and to have a shared respect for each other, but if governments are going against this intent then they are going against the Land Claims Agreements. So these agreements mean nothing? First Nation Governments and Chiefs need to realize they have power and need to work together and back each other up and show your true power to the Yukon Government! Take them to court and do what you have to do to protect your interests to lands and resources - Water!

7:34am 02/17/12  |  Mike Grieco wrote:

Surprise…no surprise!

2:22pm 02/16/12  |  hardcorehenry wrote:

the yukon party is full of cowards. I bet they had all this ready to go by election time and sat on it because they knew it was such a controversial topic. how much money generated from developing the peel will actually stay in the territory? if it’s anything like Holland America, we’ll get sweet tweet but the yukon party will get fatter, you can count on that

12:36pm 02/16/12  |  Mark Peschke wrote:

I have yet to see a strong argument for industrial development in the Peel. Were it needed, then the staking moratorium would have impacted our current economic boom. Clearly, it has not.
This government claimed that taking a position on the Peel was irresponsible during the election as the planning process was incomplete. That to do so was to prejudge the process. Post-election, suddenly it’s ok to act in complete contradiction to their earlier position and espouse a set of principles in the middle of the process.
The majority of Yukoners voted for parties which supported the Recommended Plan and were shown by independent polling and public consultations to prefer conservation values over industrial development in the Peel. How does this government feel they have a mandate to do the opposite? I’m sick of politicians elected by 40% of the popular vote, be it Harper or Pasloski, telling me they have a “strong mandate”. They have a legal right to govern, obviously, but clearly there is no logical or ethical mandate. Given that this issue has had a multi-million dollar planning process, independent polling, and public consultations all showing overwhelmingly the opposite view, this government is clearly choosing the “might is right” over the true spirit of democracy. Their real mandate is for legitimate consultation, rather than cynically going through the motions, ignoring the results (and scientific evidence for that matter) and then behaving like tyrants.

5:12am 02/16/12  |  redscuba wrote:

Not a comment either for or against the opening up of mining in the Peel, but rather on the motivations behind the opinions.  It is high time the Yukon bureaucracy, First Nations, and ENGO’s were weaned off the incredible handouts that come from the “southern Canadians” so many Yukoners believe should not have a say in what goes on in Yukon.  Its easy to sit back and be sanctimonious when someone else is apying the bills.  Many Yukoners in the afore-mentioned categories have long forgotten that only real productive work (like mining) creates the waelth that they feed upon. For example, I observed large annual $ handouts to YCS from YTG with no accountability reports other than how many meetings they attended, how many free lunches they ate, etc.  No wonder YCS is so up in arms!

4:56pm 02/15/12  |  JJYukon wrote:

It is important to utilize a region to its fullest extent within the want and desires of Yukoners.  The original purpose of Land-Use Planning when discussed for in the UFA was to ensure that land based decision making was driven by the Yukon people as opposed to outside industry.
I think the Peel Planning Commission did an amazing job in preparing the final recommended plan and came to a comprehensive conclusion based on extensive consultation.  Its frustrating that YTG seems to be trying to take lead on something that they are meant to be 1/4th equal partners in.

4:42pm 02/15/12  |  K wrote:

I can see why they waited til after the election to drop this bombshell.

3:20pm 02/15/12  |  Molly Shore wrote:

Best of luck to the Dawson Regional Planning Commission.

Here’s to another round of wasted time, energy, and money on recommendations that YG will ultimately ignore.

2:45pm 02/15/12  |  A_yukon_heart wrote:

The Yukon has a very long history of supporting the mining and exploration industries. Yes, without question, the Yukon has benefited economically from the support and policies of previous governments. Once again the right-wing approach is to sell the benefits of ‘progress’ with the prime mover of the pitch being employment. It starts to sound very much like George W. Bush talking about the war of terrorism. You know the statement, “If you aren’t with us, you against us.” So, you are either with development and jobs, or you are against the betterment of the people of the Yukon. The Yukon represents one of the last places of wilderness on the planet. Yukoners need to be very wary of any sales pitch that uses guilt and fear tactics to promote the agenda. As for any of this coming from Mr. Cathers - he is simply a voice to promote the party line/lie…

Add a comment

The Yukon News has provided readers with the opportunity to post their views and opinions regarding any stories published on its website to foster dynamic discussions. Comments on this site are not the opinions of the Yukon News and comments with vulgar language, libelous statements or falsified facts will be removed. If you have a complaint regarding a comment or have a question please contact the web administrator at webadmin@yukon-news.com. Comments will be added once approved by a moderator.

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.