KLFN SURVEY COMMENT RESULTS

A map is provided with this survey which shows proposed planning area boundaries.  Do you have any suggestions or comments on the proposed boundaries?

-recognize values that are used daily, animals, fish, wildlife, minerals-anything that will help the community

-uncertain because it might help get jobs for people

-boundary should be expanded around GE 376

-as long as traditional areas are correctly marked so we can continue to hunt, trap and fish; make boundaries bigger

-Boundary should be extended to North and East

-use trap line boundaries  see map

-about time, need to engage young people and protect traditional lands, mineral development and traditional activities, need to co-exist, boundaries need to be extended, important for future generations.

-protect 376

-important in general

-wants a good working relationship between land use and planning without stopping traditional activities

-youth are getting a lot of traditional knowledge but more is needed

-land should be used for traditional purposes

-important for the future, should be bigger

-important for people to be heard and lands respected

-very important to define boundaries and land use activity, we need to show where we can harvest natural resources, the trap line boundaries will work fine but we should square out the overall boundaries

-Kasabonika has a growing population which will need room, should involve trappers in planning process

-Should be bigger; the plan needs to be done with KLFN and MNR together; also, we all need to share the land like in the old days.
-more land  (2)

-no (15)


 

Are there any areas within the proposed planning areas that are shared with other communities?  ( If so please note on the provided map)


-adjacent trap line boundaries
-no idea
-no
-overlap with trap lands of Summer Beaver, Webequay and Wunimin in GE 176
-think there is one close to Summer Beaver, see 39 for marked map
-Yes, NW side in map
-don’t know
-Important to work together with other communities
-Long Dog, Peawanuk, Wapeka  (2)
-Wapeka is inside PA
-yes, see map
-boundaries should be closer to Wapeka and Webequay
-all trapline areas are important
-will be hard to work out with other communities
-work with other communities on shared lands
-there will be conflicts if other communities become involved in our LUP
-hard to work with other communities
-need to work with nearby communities
-Wapeka and BTL
-all the nearby FNs
-there are overlaps between communities, no need to overturn these
-Webequay for sure, plus KI and Wawakapewin; need to work with nearby communities
-Long Dog
-let’s work with other communities . 
Do you have suggestions about what type of process the community should use for approving the land use plan?
-Trapping; long ago people covered the whole area where they trapped and fished.  This showed that they were using the land for their families.  They lived in the forest and traveled year round going into different hunting grounds.

-make sure community has a say

-Community meeting, call in radio show

-make sure young people are included

-no

-lots of information for community

-All wild creatures are important; a referendum is needed to approve plan

-All trappers should be involved

-community consensus  (2)

-community referendum

-isn’t there a process in place

-more surveys  (2)

-more land

-work with MNR; need to be careful with selection

-radio, posters, newsletters, polls, etc.

-referendum

-public meeting (2)

-community meeting

-Community feedback needed

-community consultation first, then leaders approve it, don’t know

-community input, more community members involvement

-whatever is best for the future

-wants future generations to benefit from this plan

-need less talk and more action (2)

-need to know what processes are available

-talk to community and see what is important

-kito

-should do videos and CDs, also record community comments

-make sure all members participate and documents those who opt out

-need more land

-need to have community approve it so Chief can sign on our behalf

Do you think the community collective process (KITO) would be suitable?


- Input information that requires stronger communication
- need to make sure there are community benefits
- don't skip any steps
- no mining claims should be allowed on TL
- what is kito (3)
- need community team work
- all community members should participate in planning process
- getting information from the community is beneficial
- we need to show evidence of our work on this plan so it will stand up to questions in future
- likes 10 step process, but people need to be told where we are at in process and how long it will take
- needs info on Kito,
- make sure all involved
- involve community

 

What specific concerns do you have about the mining company activity in the area?

- need to share resource if developments from mining sector occur
- afraid of water pollution and damage to wildlife (2)
- fuel spills and water pollution
- negative effects on wildlife
- concerned about impact on wildlife and the environment (3)
- concerned about environment (4)
- need 50/50 sharing
- water pollution (3)
-none  (4)
- need equal sharing
- Very apprehensive about potential for damage, need lots more information. Wonder if mining is really needed
- pollution of lands and water and scaring animals away (5)
- concerned about pollution from mining (5)
- pollution of land and water
- protection of way of life
- mining may destroy the land
- claim staking w/o consultation
- waste mgt
- land concerns
- no community awareness of mining activity
- Mining companies need to respect KLFN Trad lands
- no concerns
- should benefit members and protect the environment
- will we have to work for food
- band needs to have a referendum-also concerned about wildlife
- don't like what mining companies are doing
- impact of mining on the land and water
-helicopters scare animals
- need opportunities for all of klfn
- members need jobs but we must protect environment
- pollution (2)
- to have young people involved
- we weren’t informed about staking on our trapline areas, mining companies should have asked our permission
- don't know
- people need to benefit but environment must be protected
- oil spills are a concern
- benefits from mining could give young people an easier life in future
- need to be better informed and there should be compensation if individuals are effected
- worried about traditional hunting and camping areas
- depends on how much impact there will be on hunting
- need more information on mining, concerned about water quality
- land and water pollution
- concerned about mining companies proceeding before we finish LUP
- good to see community involvement
- concerned about mining company impact on land, need a FN monitor to work with them;  also concerned that people aren’t ready for mining jobs due to a lack of education
- need more information
- protect land for future generations


Should developments by outside parties within the traditional lands (i.e. mining, renewable energy, all the weather roads) be put on hold until KLFN has completed their community land use plan?

-We need to focus on the areas where we could have a clear territory for hunting and fishing

- Need more information
- need 50/50 sharing agreement
- consultation first
- KLFN should be notified of all activity
- need to extend community boundaries
- complete LUP first
-no staking during LUP process

-activity already

-pursue existing

- let industry know we are in LUP process
-wait until LUP is done

- wants winter road to be used to bring in supplies
- FN people need to make all the decisions on their traditional lands
- water contamination
- give everyone a chance to speak their minds and make suggestions
- OK to have developments continue during planning process
- need to closely monitor mining development so we are included; need good planning as some people may not be ready for economic development; also need people to communicate their concerns within the community
- keep working on LUP at same time but work closely with industry and govt
- LUP should be done first


Are there cultural areas within the traditional lands where mineral staking and mineral exploration not occur?

- protect hunting and fishing areas
- not aware of any
- T376 area already staked with no consultation
- need to do this
- old settlement (2)
-elders
- no mining in trap line areas
- burial sites, campsites
- people could benefit from development
- Government should not be able to decide on our land base
- stop staking
- elders to identify burial sites
- need to compromise a bit if it means opportunities for our people
- respect special areas
- identify areas before mining goes ahead

 

During the development of the actual plan, (stage 2 which should start in July)  would you or a family member be interested in participating in a workshop to locate and mark on a map sites which  require protection and special status?

-agree to participate

- workshop good idea
- leave to elders
- need to defend treaty rights
- get elders to teach us where sensitive areas are located
- no outside parties
- need youth to be involved
- God gave us land to use for peoples benefit
- need to educate young people about how to treat the land and benefit from it


 

Do you have any other comments or suggestions about the Land Use Planning Process?

- Need group discussions to make our youth understand the basic requirements of our traditional land
- no mining
- Whole page of comments See no 38
- keep community informed (2)
- LUP must be a positive based on peoples needs
- involve the whole community
-involve elders
- need more land -ghost lake (2)
- FN concepts should be explored
-good luck
- need to protect old settlement
- community consultation needed
- important for sensitive lands to be protected
- people need to be included and informed before any activity takes place
- lots of consultation, teach youth about claim process
- put sensitive areas on the map
- need to discuss the plan so young people can benefit from it in future
-#89 needs to be translated

- need a video presentation ,  not all of us learn from written words
- very worried about water pollution from mining
-why is work proceeding out there before we have completed our plan

-need more teaching community so the people know what is happening

-It is only the beginning to get people to talk about the future of the community.  We need a series of topic  forums to discuss opportunities and negative impacts.  All issues must be on the table.

-put LUP material on a local TV channel

-need translation

-need more information

-this survey from elder Jimmy Anderson needs to be read in full 

Home | Community Profile | General News | Resource Development | Infrastructure | Contact Us | Private Login

© 2009 - Kasabonika First Nation | Powered by: Firedog Communications | Admin