Integrated Pest Management

Ministry of Environment Workshop
Summary of Meeting — Integrated Pest Management and Wildlife Act
April 25, 2007 — Cranbrook, BC

Agenda of meeting is condensed into one day because of time constraints and previous commitments of First Nation representatives.

Ktunaxa land and resource council agreed to participate in workshop as part of their regularly scheduled meeting.
The workshop focused on two topics: (i) the development of First Nation consultation guidelines around integrated pest management; and (ii) First Nation perspectives on a review of the Wildlife Act.

The Ministry of Environment (MOE) provides a presentation on the Integrated Pest Management Act and the development of First Nation consultation guidelines. MOE wants to hear from First Nations about how they would like to be consulted on pest management activities.

The referral system is overwhelming and First Nations simply cannot respond to all of the requests that they receive.
The Ktunaxa are able to review only about 5% of all referrals because of a lack of resources. When First Nations do not respond to referrals it is not because they are not interested, but it is because there is not enough time, money or resources to respond. Industry has to understand this and should not be able to claim that they can proceed because they tried to engage a First Nation but did not receive a response.
Everyone is consulting with First Nations, and First Nations are overwhelmed. It is even difficult for government to engage First Nations on high-priority issues because of the huge demand.
In order to build capacity, First Nations need consistent cash flow.
First Nations need to prioritize what referrals to review. Factors that are considered when determining priority of projects include:

	(i)	magnitude and potential impacts: larger projects like coal mines and coalbed methane often get attention because of their magnitude and ability to impact Ktunaxa interests;
	(ii)	potential economic benefits: if there is a potential economic return to First Nation communities, there is more likely to be an interest in engaging with industry;
	(iii)	resources from companies: many companies bring money to the table when talking to First Nations and this is a factor in determining priority of issues; and
	(iv)	likelihood to impact outcome: if there is a greater likelihood that a First Nation will impact a resource decision, then they are more willing to engage in consultation.

Many of the pest management plans presented to First Nations are extremely complex and there is not enough capacity to review the plans in any level of detail. There is often not enough information and knowledge to even know what components of the plans should be reviewed and what should be examined.
To be able to respond to pest management plans takes a lot of time and research, and First Nations are conducting all of this business on treaty-borrowed dollars.
A consistent format for pest management plans and some training for First Nations regarding the key components of pest management plans would be helpful so that at least there would be some understanding of what issues to consider.

Issues like revenue sharing and employment are important. There is a perception that industry makes money off of First Nation territories without sharing any of the benefits.
First Nations have no ability to influence market sources — it is always bottom-line driven.

First Nations need to be consulted at the beginning of any process.
Any referrals should include due diligence to determine whether there are any areas within traditional territories that should be protected from pesticides. First Nations should have some input into what industry can and cannot spray in their territory.
Most companies are developing protocols with individual First Nations to manage working relationships. This is often helpful; communities need to be dealt with at an individual level.

There are conflicting messages regarding whether individuals need licenses to spray pesticides on Reserve. Application and licensing does not apply on Reserve; however, distributors cannot sell pesticides unless they have an applicator's license. Each vendor who sells pesticides has to pass a licensing course. Vendors need to be educated about the fact that pesticide applicators on Reserve do not require a license — MOE will follow-up with vendors.

Pesticides can do damage to traditional use medicines even if spraying is not applied directly to those plants.
Cross-contamination is an issue of concern for some First Nations (i.e. birds eating bugs that were sprayed and carrying those herbicides to other areas). Proponents should be able to provide information about how pesticides will be applied and whether or not they will impact other species.
Pesticides in the ground compound and do not break down, and this potentially impacts the vegetation system. Compounds are often left on weeds etc. that animals eat, and then people eat.
First Nations are not always aware of what has been treated. For example, an individual may pick sage in the territory without knowing whether or not it has been treated.
Many First Nations believe that all pests have a place in the world, including mice and ants, and do not necessarily support the treatment of these, especially when it is more about human preference to help forest companies.

First Nations were not aware that the legislation regarding integrated pest management had even changed.
The Integrated Pest Management act needs to have enough "clout" to impact industry's "bottom line".
First Nations may need to step back from dealing with issues one-by-one and instead look at dealing in a more integrated way with all issues from industry and government.