Final Report of theMoose River Basin

Environmental Information PartnershipSteering Committee

June 1999

ii

The Environmental Information Partnership (EIP)for the Moose River Basin

George A. DuckworthEIP, Team Leader

John WalkerChairperson, EIP Steering Committee

Robert McCreaChairperson, EIP Science Program

John Turner & Jason BatiseChairperson, EIP Traditional Ecological Knowledge Committee

EIP Steering Committee

George Stanclik Abitibi-Consolidated Inc.Greg Pope/Don Chubbuck Ontario Power Generation Inc.Jim Grayston Northern Ontario Tourist OutfittersBrennain Lloyd NorthwatchFred Poulin Cochrane North Municipal CoalitionJim Deem Provincial Government (MOEE)Jason Batise Wabun Tribal CouncilJohn Turner Mushkegowuk Tribal CouncilRobert McCrea Federal Government (Environment Canada)John Walker Chairman

EIP Study Office

George A. Duckworth Team Leader (1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999)Rick Recoskie GIS Systems Analyst (1997, 1998, 1999)Dennis Fraser GIS Data Specialist (1997, 1998, 1999)Karen Legasy Comm. & Marketing Spec. (1995, 1996, 1997)Karen Stokes Biologist (1997, 1998, 1999)Mark Petric Computer Programmer (1997)Carmen Roy Administrative Asst. (1997, 1998)Andy Todd GIS Systems Analyst (1995, 1996)Paul Jurjans GIS Systems Analyst (1997)Dan Lasante GIS Data Specialist (1997)Jim Finnigan GIS Data Technician (1997)Matias Espinoza Data Technician (1998, 1999)Greg Cooper Data Technician (1998)Nicole Henry Administration (1996)Denise Henry Administration (1996)

1

Table of ContentsTABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................................................... 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... 3

BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................... 6

EIP STEERING COMMITTEE............................................................................................... 8

GOAL AND OBJECTIVES OF THE EIP ................................................................................ 8

IMPLEMENTATION.............................................................................................................. 9

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT........................................................................................... 9

INFORMATION CATALOGUES ................................................................................................... 9VALUED ECOSYSTEM COMPONENTS (VECÕS).............................................................................. 9MR BIMS (MOOSE RIVER BASIN INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM)..................................... 11

What Is MRBIMS?........................................................................................................... 11Information Holdings ...................................................................................................... 11What You Can Do with MRBIMS?..................................................................................... 12

SCIENCE PROGRAM .......................................................................................................... 15

SYNTHESIS REPORTS............................................................................................................ 15IMPACT CLASSIFICATION....................................................................................................... 15IMPACT STUDIES ................................................................................................................. 16HYPOTHESES OF EFFECTS....................................................................................................... 17FRAMEWORK TO SUPPORT CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT (CEA) IN THE MOOSE RIVER BASIN ... 18

TRADITIONAL ECOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE ................................................................... 19

CHAPLEAU CREE................................................................................................................. 21MISSINABI CREE ................................................................................................................. 21MOOSE CREE...................................................................................................................... 22NEW POST ......................................................................................................................... 22MATTAGAMI...................................................................................................................... 22

SUMMARY OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS................................................................................. 23

MR BIMS......................................................................................................................... 23TECHNICAL REPORTS........................................................................................................... 23

Information Management Reports ...................................................................................... 23First Nations Related Reports ........................................................................................... 25Science Synthesis Reports ................................................................................................. 25Development Potential Reports .......................................................................................... 25Literature Review Reports ................................................................................................ 26Aquatic Impact Studies..................................................................................................... 26

CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT........................................................................................ 27VALUED ECOSYSTEM COMPONENT (VEC) MAPPING .................................................................. 28COMMUNICATIONS, MARKETING AND CONSULTATIONS............................................................. 28

Displays ........................................................................................................................ 28Presentations ................................................................................................................. 29Communication Products ................................................................................................. 29Home Page .................................................................................................................... 30

OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION PROGRAMS OR PRODUCTS FOR THEMOOSE RIVER BASIN........................................................................................................ 31

2

EIP BUDGETS (1995 TO 1999) ............................................................................................. 32

REVIEW OF THE EIP PROGRAM....................................................................................... 33

A PREAMBLE TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................. 34

RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................................ 37

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT................................................................................................ 371.0 Moose River Basin Information Management System (MRBIMS)....................................... 372.0 Information and Map Products .................................................................................. 383.0 Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK).................................................................... 384.0 Reports .................................................................................................................. 385.0 Environmental Assessment Processes-Information Access ................................................ 386.0 DATA, INFORMATION AND KNOWLEDGE GAPS.................................................................. 397.0 DISSEMINATION OF EIP RESULTS, STEERING COMMITTEE REPORT ETC. ................................. 398.0 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT & PLANNING........................................................................ 399.0 CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS......................................................................... 3910.0 COORDINATION STRATEGIES ........................................................................................ 41

APPENDIX 1........................................................................................................................ 42

APPENDIX 2........................................................................................................................ 43

3

Executive Summary

The Environmental Information Partnership (EIP) operated from March 1995 to April1999 with the main goal to develop an information management system for the MooseRiver Basin that would assist in the identification and evaluation of cumulativeenvironmental effects for planning and development purposes. The EIP was formed as anOntario Government response to issues raised by First NationÕs with Ontario HydroÕshydraulic development plan for the Moose River Basin.

The EIP has completed four years of what was initially planned as a nine year project.Funding was not extended beyond the initial first four year allocation. The programcreated a number of products and initiated a number of processes in the following keyareas: information management, science and cumulative effects assessment, government,stakeholder and First Nation consultation and a traditional ecological knowledge program.In a number of areas it has accomplished more than was originally planned within the firstfour years.

A large catalogue database was created. There are 9,400 georeferenced informationholdings covering the following disciplines; biophysical and geo sciences, socio-economics, development activities and traditional ecological knowledge. A computerizedapplication called Moose River Basin Information Management System (MR BIMS) hasbeen developed to provide access to this large database where information can be searchedspatially or textually. This is available on CD ROM.

The science program area was integrated with the information management area. Thescience practitioners have used the information base in order to define gaps inunderstanding, and has been filling those gaps through the completion of a number ofaquatic studies that are designed to answer specific questions. Known environmentalimpacts of development activity within the Moose River Basin have been classified inorder to facilitate retrieval of this information. A conceptual framework to supportcumulative effects assessment was derived and includes the elements of a watershed scalestudy, watershed planning and project specific environmental assessment. The combinedactivities of consolidating the information base and preparing for and conducting thescience impact studies has provided a wealth of information which provides acomprehensive base for cumulative environmental assessment and for the support ofenvironmental studies and research.

The EIP Steering Committee was the primary method of securing stakeholder, FirstNation and government input to the EIP program. The committee had membership fromthe major industrial sector interests, three levels of government, First Nations, tourismand environmentalist interests. Since its first meeting on June 4 to 5, 1996 the committeehas met 12 times to provide direction to the program and to review program progress.

4

A Traditional Ecological Knowledge program (TEK) was developed over the last twoyears of the EIP project. It was led by a sub-committee which was co-chaired byrepresentatives from each of the local tribal councils. Focusing on the collection anddocumentation of TEK, the program had participation from five First Nationcommunities. It was the prime interest of those involved with this program to ensure thatFirst Nations values were appropriately documented and used in the decision makingprocess associated with the approval of development proposals.

There was considerable effort in the communications and marketing aspects of theprogram including displays at forestry, mining, hydropower and MNR symposia andworkshops. Thirty presentations were delivered to a wide array of industrial andgovernment staff audiences. A EIP Home Page has been available on the MNR internetweb site since July of 1998.

The actual budget for the program did not meet the initial planned expenditures through acombination of reasons. In some years reduced funding was received from treasury boardand/or internal MNR budget reductions claimed some of the funds. Also some of theseinitial constraints were considered permanent and were repeated in successive years.From fiscal year 1995/1996 through to 1998/1999 $2.5 million was provided for theprogram although originally $6 million was to be allocated.

A strategic review of the program revealed its strengths, weaknesses, and opportunitiesfor the program. Strengths included the core competency in systems development andinformation management highlighted by the MR BIMS application. The science programis noteworthy for the partnerships developed to conduct aquatic impact studies and thesolid baseline of topographical and thematic data compiled for the Moose River Basinarea. In addition an assessment of aquatic impacts was made and a conceptual frameworkto support cumulative effects assessment in the Moose River Basin was created. TheTEK program initiated projects in five communities.

Weaknesses generally relate to the fact that demand for the EIP information has beentempered by the reality that the anticipated development activity has not been realized.However, with low actual demand to supply information to clients the EIP study officestaff have been able to concentrate on the completion of the information products. As aresult, the information management system has been completed in advance of any majordevelopments and will be most useful for cumulative environmental impact assessmentsin the near future. Currently a lack of a watershed planning approach to compliment thewatershed studies component has been raised as an issue. There is a need to definewatershed or sub-watershed objectives.

Opportunities for the future include linkage with the anticipated planning anddevelopment activity in the geography north of the ÒArea of the UndertakingÓ as defined

5

by the Class Environmental Assessment for Timber Management where EIP productsand processes could be of use. Waterpower lease renewal activity and the requirement ofproponents to create Water Management Plans will create some needs for ariver/watershed based science and information that can be secured from a number of theEIP products.

The recommendations of the steering committee touch on a number of areas. In the areaof information management, recommendations for providing access to and maintenance ofthe Moose River Basin Information Management System (MRBIMS) are made.Publishing of all EIP reports and maps on CD ROM is recommended. Recommendationsrelated to data, information and knowledge gaps are listed which identify geographic areasand development activities to be studied further.

Recommendations related to defining management objectives through watershed planningand to affirming valued ecosystem components are offered. Specific recommendationswhich would further the consideration and understanding of cumulative environmentaleffects are stated. Finally a recommendation to ensure future investment in river andwater management science is made.

6

Background

The Moose River Basin, defined as the watershed of the Moose River (Fig. 1), covers anarea of approximately 109,000 square kilometers in northeastern Ontario (15 percent ofthe provinceÕs total land base) and supports a population of 90,000 people. It is thesubject of considerable interest and attention because of its wealth of natural resources.This wealth of natural resources provides for existing and potential development andincludes; forest resources, mineral resources, fish and wildlife based tourismopportunities and water resources for hydroelectric development. The EIP program wasestablished in 1995 to build an information management system that would assist withthe identification and evaluation of cumulative environmental effects for planning anddevelopment purposes.

Figure 1: The Moose River Basin, Ontario.

In 1991, there was a growing concern about environmental and social impacts of OntarioHydroÕs hydraulic development plan for the Moose River Basin. The Cabinet of theOntario Government directed that consultations be carried out to find ways to resolveplanning issues with regard to resource development and the potential conflict over theproposals for hydroelectric development. A government appointed representative (DavidDelaunay) was assigned the task of completing the consultations with First Nations,

7

Tribal Councils, stakeholders, and government staff and officials to hear their concerns.De LaunayÕs report recommended the development of a baseline data collection initiativeto assist with future cumulative environmental assessments within the Moose RiverBasin. Cabinet endorsed the report in 1992.

In 1993, the Moose River Basin Interim Task Team comprised of three governmentpartners, First Nations (Wabun and Mushkegowuk Tribal Councils), federal government(Environment, Fisheries and Oceans, & Indian and Northern Affairs), and the provincialgovernment (Environment and Energy, Northern Development and Mines, and NaturalResources), prepared a proposal for an Environmental Information Partnership. Theproposal represented first steps towards addressing concerns of First Nations, provincialand federal governments, and stakeholder groups. This proposal described the generalgoals, objectives, and operational structure of the EIP.

The original EIP proposal was designed as a comprehensive project over a nine yearperiod. This project was to include a three phase implementation. Values would beidentified in Phase 1. Developing an information management system including thecompilation and evaluation of existing environmental information, identifying informationgaps and initiating studies would complete Phase 2. Finally a modeling phase wouldcomplete Phase 3. Phase 1 was envisioned to take one year followed by five years forPhase 2 and three years for Phase 3. The proposal for EIP was submitted to theOntarioÕs Management Board of Cabinet in 1994. The proposal was well received andapproved, and funding was provided by the Ontario Government for the first four yearsof the program.

The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources administered the EIP program and providedstaff for the Study Office, which was led by George Duckworth. Chairperson of the EIPScience Program (Robert McCrea) and Chairs of the Traditional Ecological Knowledge(TEK) Program (John Turner and Jason Batise) were Steering Committee members andwere also members of the former Moose River Basin Interim Task Team. The EIPSteering Committee considered and approved projects proposed by the Science and TEKChairs. Formulation of the projects was carried out jointly by the EIP Study Office andother partners.

8

EIP Steering Committee

A steering committee of Moose River Basin stakeholders was established in May of 1996to set priorities and provide direction for EIP. The steering committee consisted of tensector representatives and a chair. Hydroelectric, forestry, mining, and tourism sectors,First Nations, federal government, provincial government and an environmental group hadrepresentation on the EIP steering committee. The members are listed on the first pageafter the title page in this report.

The steering committee was chaired by John Walker, a retired MNR manager who hasextensive experience in the Moose River Basin area.

The purpose of the EIP steering committee was to:

• provide advice and recommendations to the Northeast Region, RegionalDirector of MNR concerning the implementation of the EIP program and theactivities of the EIP Study Office

• approve the inclusion of science advice and technical input to the program;review, amend if necessary, and confirm the goal and objectives of EIP

• ensure that local First Nations and stakeholder interests of municipal,provincial and federal governments are addressed and prioritized

• recommend the methods and extent of consultation that should take place withstakeholders within the Moose River Basin

Goal and Objectives of the EIP

Goal

The goal of EIP is to

Develop an information management system for the Moose RiverBasin to assist in the identification and evaluation of cumulativeenvironmental effects for planning and development purposes.

Objectives

EIP will respond to government, First Nations and stakeholdersÕ concerns with regards toa lack of a framework to address Cumulative Effects Assessment (CEA) in the MooseRiver Basin by:

9

• providing a forum in which to share and prioritize values• compiling and evaluating existing information based on priorities and

identifying data and information requirements in a cost effective manner• identifying critical benchmarks through continuous evaluation which will enable

the EIP to be dynamic and responsive to evolving priorities.

Implementation

The EIP Steering Committee, in reviewing the above objectives approved the followingfour key elements for program delivery:1) An information management component that created an information management

system.2) A science component that focused on developing an understanding of the impacts of

development activity on the aquatic environment, and strategies and approaches tosupport cumulative effects assessments.

3) A forum to discuss stakeholder values-the EIP Steering Committee.4) A Traditional Ecological Knowledge component that conducted studies on traditional

ecological knowledge of First Nations communities.

Information ManagementInformation Catalogues

An intensive process to collect information (metadata) about the Moose River Basin wasconducted. This resulted in a series of information catalogues and over 9,400 references toinformation holdings as of March, 1998. These information holdings include publishedarticles and reports, books, taped interviews, maps and databases. (ESSA Technologies,1996a &1996b; Geomatics International Inc., 1996a & 1996b; Symbion Consultants,1996). In each case, a metadata standards manual was closely followed in order thatinformation quality and consistency was assured (Todd, 1995). Covering the five subjectdisciplines of biophysical sciences, geosciences, socioeconomic sciences, developmentactivities, and traditional ecological knowledge, these catalogues are a comprehensiveenvironmental information base for the Moose River Basin and all the informationincluded is geo-referenced to a point or area on the earth.

Valued Ecosystem Components (VECÕs)

Valued ecosystem components are defined as those things or elements of the environmentthat are important to people. Valued ecosystem components for the Moose River Basinwere identified through two consultation based workshops. Information on thedistribution, density and other descriptive attributes of these VECÕs was researched,compiled and mapped on a series of 1:250,000 scale maps of the Moose River Basin.

10

These data and maps are available on a CD ROM and will be valuable for environmentalassessment and planning purposes. A total of 62 different coverages were created thatdescribe the following VECÕs:

VECÕs identified for the Moose River Basin

Fish Wildlife Biophysical HumanLake sturgeondistribution

Moose distribution Hydrologicalregimes: representedby river regulationand modes ofoperation ofgenerating stations

Recreational fishing

Walleyedistribution

Black bear density Water qualitysampling sites

Moose hunting (kills/km2)

Northern pikedistribution

Caribou concentration(based on areas of mainconcentration)

Hydrometricstations

Black bear hunting(kills/km2)

Brook troutdistribution

Known Whitetail deerdistribution

Aquatic studies Trapping: Harvestdensities/100km2

(timberwolf, beaver, otter,marten, fisher, mink, weasel,lynx, bobcat, red fox, andarctic fox)

Beluga whale distribution TraplinesLake troutdistribution

Timberwolf density Transportation andnavigation: Canoe routes,roads, and railways

Lake whitefishdistribution

Beaver density Settlement: Communitiesand their respectivepopulations

Sauger distribution Otter density Tourism: Identified tourismsites, camping, snowmobileroutes, canoe routes

Smallmouth bassdistribution

Marten density Parks and protected areas(natural environment, naturereserves, recreation,waterway, and wilderness)

Special/Endangeredspecies: Areas ofAquatic Interest

Fisher density Native values (Indianreserves, treaties, tribalcouncils, land base,language, industry, access toeducation, and religion)

Mercurycontamination inwalleye

Mink density

Weasel densityLynx densityBobcat densityRed fox densityArctic fox density

11

MR BIMS (Moose River Basin Information Management System)

What Is MRBIMS?

MRBIMS, often pronounced ÒMr. BimsÓ, is a user-friendly, Geographic InformationSystem (GIS)-based software program. It is designed to provide access to a digitalcatalogue of geographically-referenced records in a unique and thorough manner. Theserecords are bibliographic references of information holdings that are about the MooseRiver Basin. Currently, the catalogue contains over 9,400 records. Developmentproponents, consultants, researchers and resource managers are the most likely users ofMRBIMS.

Access to the bibliographic references using MRBIMS is unique because records can beretrieved based on their relationship to the land. MRBIMS allows you to interactivelyhighlight an area of interest on the map of the Moose River Basin then the program usesthat input to retrieve records from the catalogue. This search method is referred to as aÒspatial searchÓ. MRBIMS also retrieves records by searching the text of the records ofthe many databases, a Òtextual searchÓ.

MRBIMS was created using Visual BASIC v5.0 development software with MapObjectsv1.1 add-on. Access v7.0 database software was used to manipulate the Catalogue data.ArcView GIS v3.0a was used to manipulate coverages and convert them into ArcViewShapefile format. (Fraser D. G. and R. Recoskie, 1998). A digital routine is available toupdate MRBIMS with new information.

Information Holdings

The information holdings fall within five categories:1. Development Reports (information on actual developments, land uses etc.)2. Socio-Economic (information on sociological and/or economical characteristics)3. Biophysical Sciences (information on the aquatic and terrestrial ecology)4. Geosciences (information on the geology)5. Traditional Ecological Knowledge (information on First Nations peoples knowledge of

the ecology and environment).

The records collected under each category are collectively stored in one database file,referred to as Òthe catalogueÓ. Each record includes metadata such as the title, the author,the scale, the number of pages, the size, the medium, the date, the source, an abstract andother information about the information holding. Each record is tied in to a geographiclocation within the MRB (geo-referenced). For example, if a university thesis comparesthe species composition of two cold-water streams within the MRB, the catalogue would

12

record the bibliographic information about this thesis and the record would begeographically referenced to the location of the two study streams.

Other themes of information provided include information on the major developmentactivities within the MRB, a summary of studies which investigated impacts on theaquatic environment, and general thematic maps including information on lakes, rivers,roads etc.

What You Can Do with MRBIMS?

You can search for records of interest by doing either spatial or textual based searches.Independent of your search method, you can view the information contained in theresulting records by using a browser. The browser also allows you to view the area on themap that the record is about. You can print out the content of any record displayed in abrowser.

Spatial Query: Figure 2 illustrates one example of a spatial query using the catalogue database. In this example the map display is set to zoom in on the area around a large lake-Lake Abitibi. Themes turned ÒonÓ to assist you with orientation include: Roads,Railways. Lakes, and Rivers. Catalogue is chosen from the Features list box. TheBiophysical category is being searched and ÒToolÓ is chosen in the Shapes list box. Thiswill allow use of either a point, a rectangle, a line or a polygon as a selection tool. In thiscase the Òpolygon search toolÓ is used. From the Search Method list box Òshape containsfeatureÓ is chosen. This method will include all those records that lie wholly within theshape. Other methods include Òshape and feature intersectÓ and shape is within (searchdistance) of feature. A polygon is drawn on the map display around Lake Abitibi. Oncethe polygon is closed the Execute Spatial Search button is ÒclickedÓ and a single cataloguerecord browser window appears which provides the details on each record. In thisexample we have selected record 15 of the search which is geo-referenced to Lake Abitibias shown by the filled in area on the map. The single catalogue record browser displaysinformation on the record number, title, author, date, document type, spatial reference,and other citation details. Additional information from the record is shown including theassociated abstract, notes section and source of the original document. There is also anoption to display the records eight at a time in a multiple catalogue record browser (notshown). The multiple record browser permits rapid scrolling through the records.

13

Figure 2. Example of a Spatial Query

In addition to using a user defined spatial search (using point, rectangle, line or polygon) aspatial search can be done using existing predefined areas such as management units,watersheds, townships etc. The use of predefined areas will facilitate the compilation andanalysis of background information for environmental assessments and other studieswhich are specific to those areas.

Textual Query: The information holdings in MRBIMS can also be searched using textbased search (Figure 3). The objective of this search will be to find those informationholdings that have something to do with the fish species ÒwalleyeÓ. In this example theBiophysical category is searched and the text query builder window is accessed. A newsearch is conducted with the field name set to ÒtitleÓ. The operator is set to ÒlikeÓ and thevalue is entered as ÒwalleyeÓ. The results are displayed in this case using a singlecatalogue record browser. As in the first example a multiple catalogue record browsercould also be used. As each individual record is displayed with the single record browserwindow their geo-referenced locations on the landscape can be highlighted record byrecord.

14

Figure 3. Example of a Textual Query

MR BIMS main features provides the facility to query the database both spatially andtextually, it also provides detailed information on aquatic impact classification results;can display hypothesis of effects diagrams concerning the impact of development on theaquatic environment, complete with annotated references on the impact of hydroelectricdevelopment on aquatic resources; and finally can display considerable thematicinformation about the Moose River Basin area.

Version 1.0 of the software application is available on CD ROM and options are beingpursued to develop a web enabled version on MR BIMS with the Land InformationOntario project that will be accessible to a broad array of people.

15

Science Program

The Science Program has been developed by the Chair of the Science Program and theStudy Office Leader through consultation with scientists and stakeholders by way ofmeetings, workshops, the establishment of working groups, and presentations togovernment and industry management teams. The steering committee established anaquatic focus for the EIP program soon after it was formed. This decision reflects theimportance that stakeholders placed on the aquatic resources in the Moose River Basinand the reality of reduced funding for the program. The science program was primarilyfocused on the collection, synthesis, assessment and analysis of existing knowninformation in order that key knowledge gaps about the aquatic environment could beidentified and filled. These knowledge gaps became the subject of approved EIP scienceprojects.

Synthesis Reports

One of the key steps in the development of the EIP science program was the preparationof synthesis reports on each of the catalogues. For each of these reports the consultantswere asked to prepare a synthesis of information from the catalogue that would addressthe questions:

1. What known impacts (positive and negative) have been documented to occuron government and stakeholder values in the aquatic environment of theMoose River Basin as a result of the four main development activities ofhydro-electric power generation, mining, forestry, and tourism?

2. What are the values associated with the aquatic environment that have beenimpacted in the Moose River Basin?

Synthesis reports on the development activity and biophysical catalogues providedsubstantive information to answer these questions. The synthesis reports for both thesocioeconomic and geoscience catalogues took a different approach. In the case of thesocioeconomic synthesis report, there was very little information on impacts and thereport was expanded to include a section on values held within the Moose River Basin,and a section which summarizes socioeconomic information collected by Statistics Canadafor the local area.

Impact Classification

Once the impacts on the aquatic environment were summarized in the synthesis reports,it was important to evaluate the individual studies (in terms of their accuracy,

16

appropriateness, and acceptability) and then to classify the relevant information withregard to reaches of the Moose River and its tributaries, into four broad categories asfollows: physically altered, chemically altered, biologically altered, and unaltered. Aworkshop was held to pursue this objective and a working group was subsequentlyformed which included stakeholders and government staff. Cam Portt & Associates wascontracted to facilitate the work of the work group and to conduct the classification of theimpacts. Review of the impact information was undertaken using the following screeningcriteria:

1) Does the study attempt to determine if an impact has occurred?2) Is the study design adequate?3) Were the data collected using acceptable techniques?4) Were the data analyzed appropriately?5) Are the conclusions supported by the data and the analyses?

The working group approved the criteria and reviewed the findings prior to completion ofthe analysis. A report on the impact classification was completed and is available on theEIP home page. Citation:

Portt C. B., B.W. Kilgour and R. K. Recoskie, 1999. Development Impacts in the Moose River BasinÑClassification, Data Gaps, and Management Needs. March 1999 Final Report. Submitted to the Moose River Basin Environmental Information Partnership, Northeast Region, Ministry of Natural Resources, SouthPorcupine.

In total 38 studies met the criteria listed above and are included in the georeferenceddatabase. As a result of this effort all known studies of aquatic impacts of developmenthave been identified, screened, catalogued and mapped in the MR BIMS softwareapplication where they can be accessed from the thematic menu.

Impact Studies

Several studies were initiated by way of collaborative research agreements, grants andcontracts, concerning impacts on the aquatic environment related to forestry, mining, andhydroelectric developments. These have involved funding new research studies, andextending the scope of existing collaborative studies appropriate to the objectives of theEIP. Citations for the reports associated with each of these studies can be found in theSummary of Accomplishments section.

Studies were developed to answer the following questions:

¥ How prevalent and wide spread is the distribution of mercury in fish flesh of thefish populations within the Moose River Basin? How has this changed overtime?

17

¥ How are the aquatic communities downstream of hydroelectric peaking operationsaffected by the water regulation in those facilities?

¥ How have lake sturgeon, a regionally significant fish species, been affected byhydroelectric dam operations?

¥ What mechanisms are involved in registering cumulative impacts of pulp mills andhydroelectric dams on the health of resident fish species?

¥ What is the distribution of benthic macroinvertebrates (aquatic bugs) throughoutthe Moose River Basin, and how are these communities altered by developmentactivity such as mining, forestry and hydroelectric development?;

¥ How does forest harvesting activity impact the hydrologic cycle?

¥ How has the landscape level changed over the last 25 years, and are thereassociated changes in ecosystem condition?

Additionally, a literature review and an annotated bibliography have been produced:

A literature review on the Impacts of Mining Exploration on the AquaticEnvironment

Annotated bibliography on the Impacts of Hydroelectric Development on theAquatic Environment.

As of April 1999 most of these studies have been completed and a number of finalreports have been submitted.

Hypotheses of Effects

A Moose River Basin workshop sponsored by Fisheries and Oceans Canada in 1992provided a series of hypotheses of effects diagrams that describe the cause and effectrelationships between a set of disturbances such as forestry, mining or hydroelectricdevelopment and the aquatic environment.

During the 1998/1999 fiscal year a staff person, working for both the EIP Study Officeand for the Northeast Science and Technology Unit, put together an AnnotatedBibliography which addressed the impact of hydroelectric development on the aquaticenvironment. As an extension of this product and the earlier 1992 workshop a digitalproduct was created and included in MR BIMS. This product displays the hypotheses

18

of effects diagrams and, for each link in the diagram, provides a detailed listing of thescientific literature found in the annotated bibliography. The literature is associated withthe link through key words. From this product a quick reference to the science whichdescribes a given development activity and its impact on the aquatic environment isprovided. These hypotheses of effects diagrams for hydroelectric development representthe state of the art knowledge with respect to impacts on the aquatic environment.

Framework to Support Cumulative Effects Assessment (CEA)in the Moose River Basin

A workshop, sponsored by Environment Canada, was held at the Canada Centre forInland Waters in Burlington in March of 1998. The objective of the workshop was todevelop a conceptual framework and identify considerations for cumulative environmentalassessment in the Moose River Basin. A conceptual framework was created as a productfrom this workshop. It includes the combined elements of a watershed scale study(similar to the EIP efforts to date) as well as a watershed planning component (new) andan individual project approach using the Federal GovernmentÕs Guidelines for CEApractitioners. This conceptual framework provides an approach to CEA in the MooseRiver Basin. The following schematic illustrates this proposed framework.

Cumulative Effects Assessment Frameworkfor the Moose River Basin

Watershed-scale Study

Scientific ComponentIdentifying

¥ sources of change¥ pathways and processes¥ ecological thresholds

Information Management

Watershed Planning

Public Consul tation

Identifying¥ societal objectives

¥ societal thresholds

Project-specific CEA in the Moose River Basin

Figure 2: Cumulative Effects Assessment Framework for the Moose River Basin.

In addition to the conceptual framework a series of recommendations were made. Anumber of these are presented in this report.

19

Traditional Ecological Knowledge

Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) has been defined in the EIP project as follows:

A body of knowledge about the environment that has been accumulated by aboriginalpeoples who have lived in an area for generations, observing and being a part of thenatural world. (John Turner, Moose Factory, 1995).

The EIP TEK program was led by a subcommittee established by the EIP SteeringCommittee. This subcommittee consisted of representatives from each of the Wabun andMushkegowuk Tribal Councils who also co-chaired a TEK Advisory Committee toimplement the program.. The TEK advisory committee was comprised of the two co-chairs and includes several academic experts. The advisory committee was assisted by acontracted First Nations person acting as the co-ordinator.

TEK Advisory Committee Membership

Co-chairs John Turner, Mushkegowuk Tribal CouncilJason Batise, Wabun Tribal Council

Members Dr. Richard Preston, McMaster UniversityDr. Fikret Birkes, University of ManitobaJohn Long, John S. Long ConsultingCraig Baker, First Nations Engineering

Lily Menominee was hired as the TEK co-ordinator.

In addition a member of the EIP Study Office team would sit on the meetings as aresource person.

As set out in the terms of reference, the objectives of the TEK Advisory Committee wereas follows:

• to recognize TEK as a valued and important body of knowledge• to provide a meaningful and useful process for First Nations and their members

to participate in research and data-collection on their own terms• to provide a meaningful and useful source of information to apply to future

planning and environmental assessment• to demonstrate the value of TEK in describing cumulative historical changes in

the environment and in predictions of future environmental changes

20

Specific responsibilities of the TEK Advisory Committee were:

• To identify the specific TEK data needs and priorities of the First Nationpartners to the EIP.

• To identify for the EIP, gaps in existing documentation of the TEK of theFirst-Nation partners.

• To evaluate and recommend proposed studies to document TEK relevant tothe Moose River Basin.

• To evaluate and recommend methods for applying TEK to land-use planningand development decisions relevant to the Moose River Basin.

• To review studies documenting TEK relevant to the Moose River Basin.• To establish data quality standards for TEK documented under the auspices of

the EIP.• To develop protocols for the documentation, summary, interpretation and

application of TEK.• To establish protocols for the use and protection of TEK that is documented

under the auspices of the EIP.• To establish a work plan and schedule for the TEK program of the EIP.

The TEK program was intended to focus on the collection and documentation of thetraditional ecological knowledge of First Nations peoples within the Moose River Basinwith the intent that such knowledge would be useful input to the decision making processassociated with the approval of development proposals. The challenge of the programwas to link it to environmental science where information and knowledge is usuallysecured through the application of the scientific method.

Five projects were initiated in a number of First Nation communities in the Moose RiverBasin as shown in the following map:

21

TEK Study:TEK Study:

Chapleau Cree

Missinabi Cree

Moose Cree

New Post

Mattagami

First Nations Involved

Figure 5: Locations of First Nations involved in TEK study.

A summary of the interests of these studies by community follows:

Chapleau Cree

The information collected was mainly from a historical perspective covering early beliefsand some traditional use. Four themes are proposed for further study. These include;traditional Cree economics, history of the fur trade and relationships with fur traders,family hunting and trapping through the seasons, and lastly the world view and spiritualvalues guiding the Chapleau CreeÕs relationship with the land.

Missinabi Cree

This First Nation also focused on historical research including the documentation ofculturally significant sites. There were three objectives for further study; completemapping of the traditional land base, traditional and contemporary patterns of land andresource use and ecological effects of a gold mine.

22

Moose Cree

The Moose Cree First Nation focused their efforts on defining the boundaries oftraditional territory. Some elders were interviewed and a historical report has beenprepared by an archeologist. The Moose Cree First Nation is using the format fromGitksan First Nation in B.C. in planning their work. They have a long term plan forresearch and maintenance of their own data with GIS mapping capability, the creation of aresource management entity, and they are actively seeking external funds.

New Post

New Post were interested in defining traditional hunting, fishing, and trapping areas. Also,the documentation of the practice and survival skills of their elders, native names oflakes and rivers was a focus. Another interest is information on medicinal herbs, plantsand animal parts. No report has been submitted from this First Nation.

Mattagami

The assessment of traditional fish harvesting techniques and review of habitat change, anddetermining why fish populations have decreased were important here.

Preliminary reports have been received on all but one of these studies. While the reportscontain information on significant values to First NationÕs, they do not contain a body ofknowledge about the environment as described in the above definition of TEK.

23

Summary of Accomplishments

MR BIMS

MR BIMS is one of the main products from the EIP program. It is described in detail onpage 11 and it is the key essence of the EIP program goal of developing an informationmanagement system that will assist with the understanding of cumulative environmentaleffects for planning and development purposes. Please refer to the recommendationssection regarding its maintenance and currency.

Technical Reports

Two initial reports lead to the formation of the EIP, they are:

de Launay, David. 1992. Report of the Provincial Representative Moose River BasinConsultations. Timmins, Ontario.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 1994. A Proposal for an EnvironmentalInformation Partnership in the Moose River Basin, Timmins, Ontario.

A wide array of technical reports have been prepared for the EIP as key products fromeach of the studies conducted. The citations for these reports are as follows:

Information Management Reports

Todd, A. 1995. Metadata Standards for the Creation of Catalogues of Information. June,1995. Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, EnvironmentalInformation Partnership, Northeast Region,.

Essa Technologies Ltd. 1996. Report on the Preparation of a Development ActivitiesCatalogue of information Pertaining to the Moose River Basin. Prepared for the ,Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Environmental Information Partnership,Northeast Region.

24

Symbion Consultants 1996. Report on the Preparation of a Socio-economic Catalogue ofinformation Pertaining to the Moose River Basin. Prepared for the Ontario Ministryof Natural Resources, Environmental Information Partnership, Northeast Region.

Geomatics International Inc., 1996. Report on the Preparation of a Biophysical Catalogueof information Pertaining to the Moose River Basin. Prepared for the OntarioMinistry of Natural Resources, Environmental Information Partnership, NortheastRegion.

Geomatics International Inc., 1996. Report on the Preparation of a Geoscience Catalogueof information Pertaining to the Moose River Basin. Prepared for the OntarioMinistry of Natural Resources, Environmental Information Partnership, NortheastRegion.

Environmental Information Partnershi, 1996. EIP Catalogue Bibliography. A digitalversion in bibliographic format of material taken from the Geoscience, Biophysical,Socio-economic, Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Development ReportsCatalogues of Information.

Environmental Information Partnership 1996. Development Reports Bibliography.

Environmental Information Partnership 1996. Socioeconomic Sciences Bibliography.

Cooper, G., 1998. Environmental Information Partnership, Moose River Basin -Research, Data Collection and Data Entry Procedures. March, 1998.

Fraser, D. G. and R. Recoskie. 1999. Moose River Basin Information ManagementSystem (MRBIMS) Software: Version 1.0 Manual. March 1999. Prepared for the ,Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Environmental Information Partnership,Northeast Region.

Fraser, D. G. and R. Recoskie. 1999. Moose River Basin Information ManagementSystem (MRBIMS) Software: Metadata Manual for Data Entry. March 1999.Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Environmental InformationPartnership, Northeast Region.

Duckworth, G. A. & C. Chang. 1999. GIS Applications for Watershed Management inthe Moose River Basin. Published in the Proceedings of the Thirteenth AnnualConference on Geographic Information Systems-Geosolutions: Integrating OurWorld, March 1-4, 1999, Vancouver, B.C.

25

First Nations Related Reports

Stringer, J. and K. Legasy, 1995. Report on the Research and Cataloguing of DocumentedTraditional Ecological Knowledge for the Moose River Basin. Prepared for theOntario Ministry of Natural Resources, Environmental Information Partnership,Northeast Region.

Legasy, K. 1996 An Introduction to the Terminology, Symbols and Practices ofAboriginal Peoples in the Moose River Basin. Prepared for the Ontario Ministry ofNatural Resources, Environmental Information Partnership, Northeast Region.

Science Synthesis Reports

Miller, B., C. Portt and B. Kilgour, 1997. Synthesis Report of the Information Containedwithin the Biophysical Reports Catalogue Pertaining to the Moose River Basin withParticular Reference to the Aquatic Environment. Prepared for the Ontario Ministryof Natural Resources, Environmental Information Partnership, Northeast Region.

Poehlman and Associates, 1997. Synthesis Report of the Information Contained withinthe Geoscience Catalogue Pertaining to the Moose River Basin with ParticularReference to the Aquatic Environment. Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of NaturalResources, Environmental Information Partnership, Northeast.

Commerce Management Group,1997. Synthesis Report of the Information Containedwithin the Development Reports Catalogue Pertaining to the Moose River Basinwith Particular Reference to the Aquatic Environment. Prepared for the OntarioMinistry of Natural Resources, Environmental Information Partnership, NortheastRegion.

Commerce Management Group, 1997. Synthesis Report of the Information Containedwithin the Socio-economic Catalogue Pertaining to the Moose River Basin withParticular Reference to the Aquatic Environment. Prepared for the Ontario Ministryof Natural Resources, Environmental Information Partnership, Northeast Region.

Development Potential Reports

Essa Technologies Ltd., 1996. Planned and Potential Future Development Activities inthe Moose River Basin. Final Report. Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of NaturalResources, Environmental Information Partnership, Moose River Basin.

Poehlman and Associates. 1997. Mining and Exploration Activity Potential of the MooseRiver Basin. Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, EnvironmentalInformation Partnership, Northeast Region.

26

Literature Review Reports

Environmental Information Partnership (EIP). 1998. Cumulative Effects Assessment inthe Moose River Basin - A Literature Review. Prepared for the EnvironmentalInformation Partnership, South Porcupine, Ontario. Prepared by D.M. Abraham,ESSA Technologies, Ltd., Richmond Hill, Ontario, 62pp

Stokes, K. 1998. Potential Impacts of Mineral Exploration on Aquatic EnvironmentsWithin the Moose River Basin: A Discussion Paper. Prepared for the OntarioMinistry of Natural Resources, Environmental Information Partnership, NortheastRegion.

Stokes, K, S. McGovern and W. Fiset. 1998. Potential Impacts of HydroelectricDevelopment on Aquatic Environments: A Selected Annotated Bibliography withEmphasis on the Moose River Basin. Draft Report.

Aquatic Impact Studies

Bailey, R. C. 1998. Moose River Basin Benthic Bioassessment-Sampling Design andProtocol, Sampling Sites. Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources,Environmental Information Partnership, Northeast Region The University ofWestern Ontario by Department of Zoology,.

Fiset, W. 1998. Response of Benthic Macroinvertebrate Communities Downstream of aPeaking Hydroelectric Generation Station in Northeastern Ontario. NEST TechnicalReport TR-036. Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources,Environmental Information Partnership (EIP), Northeast Region, by the Large RiverEcosystem Unit, Northeast Science and Technology.

Seyler, J. 1998. Walleye Contaminant Levels in the Moose River Basin: A Synthesis ofHistorical Data from the Provincial Sport Fish Contaminant Monitoring Program(1970-1995). Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources,Environmental Information Partnership, Northeast Region, by the Large RiverEcosystem Unit, Northeast Science and Technology.

Buttle, J.M., R.A. Metcalfe, A. Story, and H. Wilson. 1998. Hydrologic Conditions,Forest Management and Forest Disturbance History of the Moose River Basin.Prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Environmental InformationPartnership, Northeast Region, by the, Trent University Department of Geography.

27

Portt, C.B., B.W. Kilgour and R.K. Recoskie. 1999. Development Impacts in the MooseRiver BasinÑClassification, Data Gaps, and Management Needs. Final ReportPrepared for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Environmental InformationPartnership, Northeast Region.

McKinley, R.S. 1999. Variation in Plasma Nonesterified Fatty Acids of Adult LakeSturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in the Vicinity of Hydroelectric Facilities. Preparedfor the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Environmental InformationPartnership, Northeast Region by the University of Waterloo, WaterlooBiotelemetry Institute, Department of Biology,.

Cumulative Effects Assessment

Greig, L., G. A. Duckworth, R. McCrea, and C. Daniel. 1999. Conceptual Framework &Considerations for Cumulative Effects Assessment in the Moose River Basin:Workshop Report. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Moose River BasinEnvironmental Information Partnership, South Porcupine, Ontario.

This framework will assist developers and regulators who may need to deal with thequestion of cumulative effects of development within the Moose River Basin.

A considerable amount of work has been completed by scientists at the National WaterResearch Institute (NWRI) of Environment Canada on developing methods for cumulativeeffects assessments using fish populations in the Moose River Basin. Funding from theEIP thorough a collaborative research agreement was an important contribution to thiseffort and is leading to the following publications:

A book of the following description:

Munkittrick, K.R., M.E. McMaster, C.B. Portt, W.N. Gibbons and M.A. Grey.Development of Methods for Cumulative Effects Assessment Using Fish Populations:Moose River Project (1991-1999) Final Report. In Preparation.

Published Papers and Books

Munkittrick, K.R., M.E. McMaster, L.H. McCarthy, M.R. Servos, G.J. Van Der Kraak.1997. An overview of recent studies on the potential of pulp mill effluents to alterreproductive parameters in fish. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health.: In Press. NWRI 97-19

Munkittrick, K.R. and M.E. McMaster. Assessment of multiple stressors in aquaticecosystems by directed assessment of cumulative effects using fish populations.Submitted to ILSI, Washington DC, November 1998.

28

Munkittrick, K.R., M.E. McMaster, C. Portt, W.N. Gibbons, A. Farwell, L. Ruemper,M.R. Servos, J. Nickle and G.J. Van Der Kraak. The development of cumulativeeffects assessment tools using fish populations. In: Integrated Assessment ofEcosystem Health, K. Scow et al. (Eds), Ann Arbor press, May, 1999 Publication.NWRI 97-12.

In addition to the papers listed above, a number of other manuscripts will be written thatwill include;

1. Reference site variability in white sucker populations in the Moose River Basin.2. Reproductive effects of the bleached kraft mill in Smooth Rock Falls and following its

possible recovery following process and treatment changes.3. A study examining growth and reproductive alterations in white sucker downstream

of the pulp mill in Iroquois Falls.4. Studies examining the influence of hydro developments on white sucker populations.5. One paper on food web related stable isotope studies for the Mattagami River.

Valued Ecosystem Component (VEC) Mapping

A set of maps and an accompanying data base was developed that provides acomprehensive description of these important values that will be very useful for futureplanning and environmental assessment initiatives.

Communications, Marketing and Consultations

Initial efforts included communications and marketing plans for the program. Thesedirected the carrying out of a number of activities and the creation of a number ofproducts. These include the following :

Displays

Displays on the EIP Program were held at the following venues:

• the Annual Mines and Minerals Symposium in Sudbury (1995)• the Annual Forestry Exposition in Timmins (1995, 1996)• the Annual Independent Power Producers conference in Toronto (1996)• the MNR Northeast Science and Technology Workshop Week (1996)

29

Presentations

Presentations to inform and market the EIP program were given to:

• MNR senior management meeting (FSD), Cochrane (1995, 1996)• Northeast Science and Technology First Nations Workshop, Timmins (1996)• EMAN (Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network - Environment

Canada)Workshop on the Hudson Bay Lowlands , Churchill, Manitoba, 1996.• Ontario Hydro managers, Toronto (1996, 1997)• Abitibi-Price managers and staff, Iroquois Falls (1996)• Falconbridge staff and manager, Porcupine (1997)• MNR staff in Chapleau, Hearst and Kapuskasing (1997)• Ecosystem Health Division EC-OR, CCIW, Burlington (1997)• EMAN Workshop on the Hudson Bay Lowlands, Toronto (1997)• Environmental Assessment Coordinating Committee, EC-OR, and CEA

Agency staff & other Federal Departments, National Capitol Region (1997)• MNR Science and Technology Workshop, Timmins (1997)• Matachewan First Nation (1997)• Cumulative Environmental Effects workshop, Burlington (1998)• MOE Managers Meeting, North Bay (1998)• MOE and MNDM technical staff, Sudbury (1998)• National Laboratory for Environmental Testing, CCIW, Burlington (1998)• EMAN Office, CCIW, Burlington, (1998)• MNRÕs annual Water Management Forum (1998)• Native Affairs section meeting, Peterborough (1998)• MNR Science and Technology Workshop GIS Session, Timmins (1998)• The Elk Forest Management Planning open house, Matachewan First Nation

(1998).• Environmental Conservation Branch, EC-OR , Director and Management

Team, CCIW, Burlington (1998)• Canadian Wildlife Service staff WRI ÒRaisonÓ experts, CCIW, Burlington,

(1998)• MNDM staff, Timmins, (1998)

Communication Products

In addition there have been a number of trilingual (English, French and Cree) productscreated. These include the EIP newsletter Etawin with issues in December 1995 andFebruary 1997. Three fact sheets have been produced. One in 1995 on the EIP programand one on the EIP Catalogue in 1996 as well as one on Traditional Ecological Knowledgein 1997. Annual reports for the 1995/1996 and 1996/1997 fiscal years have been

30

produced and distributed. Other communication products include the creation and use ofEIP report covers, business cards, pens, lapel pins and folders.

Newsletters:

Etawin newsletter. December, 1995. Vol. 1, No. 1.

Etawin newsletter. February, 1997. Vol. 2, No. 1.

Fact Sheets:

Environmental Information Partnership (EIP) Fact Sheet. December 1995.

Environmental Information Partnership (EIP) Catalogue Fact Sheet. December 1996.

Traditional Ecological Knowledge. December 1996.

Annual Reports:

1995-96 Environmental Information Partnership Annual Report. August, 1997.

1996-97 Environmental Information Partnership Annual Report. August, 1998.

Home Page

During 1998 EIP developed and established an EIP home page attached to the MNRinternet web site. The home page has been active since July and its URL is:http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/MNR/EIP/index.html.

A full outline of the EIP program is provided on this home page and it is being updatedwith new information on a regular basis. All of the EIP technical reports are beingpublished on the home page.

31

Other Environmental Information Programs or Productsfor the Moose River Basin

Environmental Effects Monitoring (EEM), an on-going cyclic program to assess pulp milleffluents and the MNR River Information Management System (RIMS), are programsand products of significant importance to Moose River Basin environmental informationbase that complements the work done by the EIP in many areas.

The EEM program is mandated by the federal government through regulations under theFisheries Act. It is a mandatory monitoring program for pulp and paper mills and is usedto assess the need for adjustments in the associated effluent control regulations. Thethree pulp mills in the Moose River Basin located at; Iroquois Falls, Smooth Rock Fallsand Kapuskasing are all on a schedule of monitoring the aquatic environment within theirrespective river locations. A similar program to evaluate mine mill effluents isanticipated within the next few years.

RIMS was developed by the Large River Ecosystem Unit (LREU) of the NortheastScience and Technology Unit, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. RIMS is a GIS-based multi-media system designed to assist in the management of physical, biological andchemical information pertaining to rivers. Moose River Basin information included inRIMS are taken from four synthesis reports on; hydrology, fisheries, aquaticinvertebrates and water quality.

32

EIP Budgets (1995 to 1999)

Funding allocated to the Moose River Basin EIP since its inception has been quitevariable. The following table summarizes the funding:

Actual Funds ($) Allocated to Project

1995/1996 900k**1996/1997 576k1997/1998 800k1998/1999 367k1999/2000 67k

**Not all funds used due to 120k constraint and civil service strike.

33

Review of the EIP Program

The three main streams of the science, information and traditional knowledge programsrepresent the EIP strategic plan to support cumulative effects assessment in the MooseRiver Basin. The elements of the program are shown in Figure 4. This figure indicateshow the different elements of the EIP project fit together to develop an understanding ofcumulative environmental assessment.

The Steering CommitteeÕs review of the accomplishments of the EIP program from itsinception in 1995 through until March of 1999 indicates that the planned phase I andphase II components described in the background section of this report have generallybeen completed during a four year period compared to the six years initially scheduled forthis activity. Much more work was actually accomplished in the areas of aquatic impactstudies and cumulative effects assessment than was initially envisioned.

Strategic Plan to Support CEA in Moose River Basin

Catalogues

Synthesis Reports

Classification of Impacts

Decision SupportSystem for CEA

Review of ResourceBased IndustriesImpacts on RiverineSystems (mining exploration,hydroelectric development)

Review of CEA

approaches

in watersheds

Recommend Framework for CEA in MRB

Impact Studies

Hydro Peaking

Contaminants in Fish

Cumulative Effects using Fish Populations

Lake Sturgeon Health and Hydroelectric Dams

Reference Site Database

-benthic invertebrates

Forest Hydrology

Landcover Analysis

TraditionalEcologicalKnowledge¥natives values mapping¥traditional hunting,fishing & trapping areas

Figure 4: Summary of the EIP Program.

34

A Preamble to the Recommendations

Through the EIP project the MNR has established a solid core competency in systemsdevelopment and information management within a GIS environment. This is highlightedby the rather unique MR BIMS application which provides a user-friendly means forpeople to access the fully geo-referenced, comprehensive environmental and developmentactivity information system on the Moose River Basin (see description on page 11). Aproponent of a development proposal for the Moose River Basin area will be betterpositioned to complete an environmental assessment and secure its approval once theyhave secured information from MR BIMS.

A number of studies have been conducted to increase our scientific understanding of howdevelopment activity may be affecting the aquatic environment of the Moose River Basin.Partnerships in these studies include Environment Canada, University of WesternOntario, University of Toronto, Forest Science Co-operative, the Large River EcosystemUnit of MNR, Trent University, Ontario Hydro, and the University of Waterloo.

A comprehensive holding of information and knowledge has been created through thecollection and compilation of key baseline data on the Moose River Basin during thepreliminary science aquatic impact studies. This information and knowledge willstimulate further studies and research on the impacts of development activity on theaquatic environment. In turn the understanding of cumulative effects of development onthe aquatic environment will be enhanced. A researcher from Trent University hasalready committed his NSERC based research funding for forest hydrology research in theMoose River Basin area.

The Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) program has been notable in the approachtaken to devolve the operational management of this program to the tribal councils and aTEK advisory committee. Five of the First Nations communities have been involved withoperating projects on TEK. Results to date do not validate whether this was theappropriate strategy for the steering committee to approve.

Strong support for the program has been shown by Steering Committee representativesfrom Ontario Hydro, Mushkegowuk and Wabun Tribal Councils, Ontario Ministry ofEnvironment, Northwatch and Environment Canada. Representatives fromMushkegowuk and Wabun Tribal Councils and Environment Canada have been involvedwith the program since its early development in 1993.

The anticipated level of development activity in the Moose River Basin for the 1990Õshas not been realized. This has meant that the demand for the environmental informationcompiled by EIP has not been great. The potential to develop the considerablehydroelectric potential in the Moose River Basin remains and activity could easily

35

commence within the next five years. Once the deregulation of OntarioÕs electrical powerindustry comes into affect in the year 2000 there will be an open market for electricity inOntario and Ontario Power Generation IncorporatedÕs (OPGI) (formerly Ontario Hydro)monopoly on large scale generation projects in Ontario will be eliminated.

The EIP program has taken stock of the science studies done to date and realize that whilesuch work can continue in a productive manner the benefits derived will be much greater ifthe watershed based studies are complimented by a planning focus. A new planningfocus is defined. This would include the opportunity for stakeholders, First Nations andgovernments to input into a watershed based planning process where such things aswatershed or sub-watershed objectives and desired future conditions are addressed andthe acceptable levels of change to identified values are described.

There are strong linkages between what has been accomplished within the EIP programand what would be anticipated for other northern planning initiatives. In particular thedesign and implementation of an information management system and the EIP approachto the collection of Traditional Ecological Knowledge could be used.

The imminent renewal dates (2002) for a number of waterpower leases withinNortheastern Ontario and the requirement for proponents of waterpower lease renewal toconduct Water Management Planning creates a renewed focus on the management of largerivers. By the year 2002 there are 20 waterpower leases up for renewal in the province.MNRÕs Northeast Region has 16 of these distributed as follows; Wawa-8, Cochrane-4,Sudbury-3. It also necessitates the need for compilation of suitable backgroundinformation on the affected rivers and their watersheds. The knowledge and informationcompiled by the EIP program will be of value to the water management planning process.The anticipated science work to identify appropriate ecological indicators and todetermine appropriate environmental monitoring requirements will benefit from the initialwork done in this area within the EIP program.

The draft Sustainable Water Strategy for Ontario, initially developed by MNR, has as oneof its key principles that Òwater management should be based on an ecosystemapproach É.The watershed should form the basic geographic unitÉÓ. The physicalhydrology of the Moose River system is considered to be a prime determinate of thebiological productivity of the system. Therefore, in order to sustain these bioticcomponents, decisions need to be made within a watershed context. This focus on thewatershed is also of prime importance to those people living in the downstream sectionsof the Moose River Basin-the Cree and non-native people living on the lower reaches ofthe Moose River and at Moosonee and Moose Factory. Their use of the riverenvironment, including such values as water quality and quantity, can be affected by thecumulative effects of development activities occurring further upstream.

36

The National Water Research Institute (NWRI) of Environment Canada, based out ofCCIW in Burlington Ontario has undertaken considerable research on resourcedevelopment impacts as measured through ecological indicators. In their view it isessential that a continued partnership with government and industry be maintained inorder that programs which are tied to assessing ecological impacts of developments areaccepted by all parties.

An opportunity currently exists to promote the EIP for the Moose River Basin as a goodexample of integrating the complimentary efforts of information management and sciencestudies-a key thrust in MNR.

Due to lack of funding the EIP is now coming to a close. The original plans associatedwith a nine year time frame will not be fully realized. There currently is a limited numberof actual development issues requiring the use of the MRBIMS information managementsystem. However, depending on the available investment dollars and the demand forpower, there is a real likelihood for extensive hydroelectric development in the next fiveyears. During this time it is expected that MRBIMS and other EIP products will proveto be very useful.

37

Recommendations

Information Management

1.0 Moose River Basin Information Management System (MRBIMS)

1.1 The current version 1.0 of MRBIMS should be copied onto CD ROMS and providedto each partner to the Environmental Information Partnership complete with usermanual and appropriate copyright licensing authority.

1.2 Copies of MRBIMS on CD ROM should be made available to the Northeast Scienceand Technology Library, Ministry of Natural Resources at the Ontario GovernmentComplex (OGC) in South Porcupine and at the Ministry of Natural Resources MainOffice Library in Peterborough for the purposes of lending to interested privatecompanies and government agencies. Copyright license information shouldaccompany each loan transaction.

1.3 MRBIMS should be kept up to date through the use of the update routine includedwith the software application. Anyone given a copy of MRBIMS or borrowing itfrom the library should be asked to provide new information for future updates. Anagent needs to be identified to complete the updates and maintain the currency ofMRBIMS. Revised versions of MRBIMS would then be provided to the NESTlibrary. The Geomatics Service Centre at the OGC could be asked to fulfill thisfunction.

1.4 The option of providing access to the MRBIMS metadata on the World Wide Webshould be pursued through negotiations with other agents such as the LandInformation Ontario project.

1.5 The results of new environmental assessment studies and other research activity inthe Moose River Basin should be compiled centrally and used to update MRBIMS.New knowledge gained from these studies should be used to update the hypothesis ofeffects diagrams, the current understanding of how development activity impacts theaquatic environment.

38

2.0 Information and Map Products

2.1 A CD ROM copy of all digital files of all EIP map products with a reference set ofhard copy maps should be provided to the Geomatics Service Centre for stewardshipand distribution purposes.

3.0 Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK)

3.1 TEK is very useful information about past conditions, and historical variation inenvironmental conditions including the response of the environment to humandevelopment. In order to ensure effective delivery of products a clearly defined setof objectives, operating principles, operating guidelines and a solid accountabilityframework is required.

4.0 Reports

4.1 During the 1999/2000 fiscal year the technical reports should continue to be madeavailable on the EIP home page.

4.2 All reports should be published on a CD ROM with multiple copies produced andprovided to key partners and also made available on a loan out basis through theNEST library of the Ministry of Natural Resources at the Ontario GovernmentComplex in South Porcupine and at the Ministry of Natural Resources Main OfficeLibrary in Peterborough. Physical copies of all reports should also be provided to thelibraries for loan out purposes.

5.0 Environmental Assessment Processes-Information Access

5.1 A digital file should be developed, similar to the example in Appendix 2, whichconsiders each step in the Federal CEA process and illustrates the informationproducts that relate to these steps.

5.2 Consideration should be given to hot link the objects in this diagram so that it couldprovide ready access to reports, databases and other information about the MooseRiver Basin that are accessible online.

39

6.0 Data, Information and Knowledge Gaps

6.1 Monitoring of ecological conditions in the lower reaches of the Moose River Basinshould be considered. Water quality, water quantity, contaminant levels and fishpopulation health are key values that should be considered.

6.2 The impacts of the harvest of fish by anglers on resident fish populations, andmunicipal sewage treatment plants and agricultural land use on the aquaticenvironment needs to be fully explored.

6.3 The impacts of hydroelectric water regulation as well as facilities spillway andturbine operations on the aquatic environment needs to be explored.

6.4 The impacts of forestry operations on hydrology regimes needs to be furtherexplored.

6.5 Research into the importance of natural variability on ecosystem conditions thatmay also be impacted by development activity should be conducted.

7.0 Dissemination of EIP Results, Steering Committee Report etc.

7.1 MNR should disseminate widely to all federal and provincial governmentagenciescopies of this report and information on the results of the EIP project.

8.0 Watershed Management & Planning

8.1 Consistent with the conceptual framework for cumulative effects assessment in theMoose River Basin, the Ontario Government needs to develop a watershed basedplanning process that will clearly identify the management objectives for the MooseRiver Basin drainage including its majors rivers and tributaries.

8.2 The valued ecosystem components (VECÕs) previously identified and mappedduring the EIP program need to be revisited and affirmed by any future planningprocesses involving public consultation.

9.0 Cumulative Environmental Effects

9.1 The conceptual framework for Cumulative Effects Assessment in the Moose RiverBasin, a product of the EIP program described on page 18, should be adopted bygovernment and industrial stakeholders.

40

9.2 A State of the Environment Report for the Moose River Basin should be preparedwhich would characterize and assess the environmental conditions in the differentwatersheds within the Moose River Basin. This would be particularly useful forlarge scale development such as multiple hydroelectric site development proposalswhere cumulative effects assessment will be an issue. A collective synthesis of theEIP aquatic impact study results, the baseline and impact information accessible inthe MR BIMS and the ecological information on the Moose River Basin held withinthe River Information Management System (RIMS) developed by the Large RiverEcosystem Unit of MNR could form the basis of this report.

9.3 To develop further understanding of cumulative impacts of development activity onthe aquatic ecosystem it is recommended that efforts be made to conduct a watershedclassification of the basin in order that modelling of developed versus undevelopedsystems can be attempted.

9.4 Further monitoring efforts on aquatic ecosystems in the Moose River Basin whereappropriate, should focus on indicator species/biota already investigated during theEIP project, i.e. common white suckers, lake sturgeon and benthic invertebrates. Ascience review of the hypothesis of effects diagrams should be conducted to furtherrefine the list of indicators for future monitoring.

9.5 To facilitate much of the requisite processes for dealing with cumulative effects, it isrecommended that the Ontario Government adopt an adaptive management approachto water and land use allocation decisions and to the further study and accumulationof knowledge on the relationship of development to the aquatic environment in theMoose River Basin.

41

10.0 Coordination Strategies

10.1 Future investigations related to cumulative effects, ecological indicators,thresholds, valued ecosystem components, and planning objectives should beundertaken where appropriate in partnership between government, First Nationsand industry so that the results and recommendations are accepted by all parties.

10.2 The MNR should invest in a program of river and or water science developmentthat will further the work already accomplished by the EIP and the Large RiverEcosystem Unit in understanding river ecosystems and their response todevelopment activity. This will facilitate partnership opportunities.

10.3 MNR should consider EIPÕs strategies for integrating information management andscience studies as a model of further application in environmental decision making.

42

Appendix 1

Locations and dates of the EIP Steering Committee Meetings:

Cochrane June 4 & 5, 1996 Timmins Feb 24 & 25, 1998Timmins July 10, 1996 Timmins June 9, 1998Moosonee September 17, 1996 Timmins Sept 24, 1998Timmins November 19, 1996 Conference Call Dec 18, 1998Timmins April 22 & 23, 1997 Timmins Mar 24/25, 1999Wakami P P Sept 23 & 24, 1997 Conference Call April 23, 1999

43

Appendix 2

Linkage of EIP Products to the Cumulative Environmental Assessment (CEA) Process

An environmental assessment usually has a number of necessary steps in order to complete it. Theseinclude scoping, analysis of effects, identification of mitigation, evaluation of significance, and follow-up.The proposed product would be digital and accessible through MR BIMS. It would illustrate the EIPinformation products to date and how they relate to the CEA process. This will allow people eitherpreparing or reviewing an environmental assessment quick and easy access to the information that may beavailable but not otherwise directly accessible. When using this product one would simply just click onthe subject area of interest and a full description of the information product would open up or in an onlinesituation you would be hot linked to another web site. The following, which illustrates the situation withrespect to the scoping step in an environmental assessment, is an example of what this digital product willlook like:

Assessment Framework

Other Information Sources MRB/EIP Products

Scoping

¥id Key issues and concerns

¥id Regional VECÕs

¥id spatial and temporal boundaries

Analysis of Effects

Identification of Mitigation

Evaluation of Significance

Follow-up

Hypothesis Effects Workshop

Ontario Hydro Hydraulic Plan for MRB

Lands for Life Data

Fisheries and Aquatic NeedsAssessment

Watershed Planning

Socio-economic Workshop Report - VECÕs

Planned and Potential Development Acitivities Report

MRBIMS

Synthesis Reports

Aquatic Impact Classification

Mining/Mineral Potential Report

RIMS

EIP Science Studies

Figure 3: Example of an assessment framework linking EIP products to the environmentalassessment process.