Algonquin Aki Sibi Indigenous Protected Area Project

The above was presented at the March 9-12, 2021 Virtual Research Summit.

Ce qui précède a été présenté au Sommet de Recherche Virtuel du 9 au 12 mars 2021.


The following was an ePoster/eMedia submission to the March 9-12, 2021 Virtual Research Summit by Kebaowek First Nation and Rosanne Van Schie of University of Toronto. Click on the video below to view.

Voici une présentation ePoster/eMedia au Sommet de Recherche Virtuel du 9 au 12 mars 2021 par Kebaowek First Nation et Rosanne Van Schie avec l’Université Toronto. Cliquez sur la vidéo ci-dessous pour la visualiser.

ABSTRACT

(Lisez la version française ci-dessous.)

Beginning in June 2019 the Algonquin Aki Sibi Project is an effort to conserve and promote Algonquin traditional ecological knowledge via land and waterway Aki-Sibi community conservation projects. These projects are led by seven partner Algonquin communities Kebaowek, Mitchikinibikok-Inik Barriere Lake, Winneway- Long Point, Kichisakik, Wolf Lake, Kitigan Zibi and Temiskaming The Aki Sibi Protected Area vision is for a network of Algonquin Protected and Conservation Areas and other effective conservation measures (OECMs) that are shaped by the participating communities’ individual cultures and characters, offering a variety of landscapes and values to meet this national challenge.

ABSTRACT

A partir de juin 2019, le projet Algonquin Aki Sibi est un effort pour conserver et promouvoir les connaissances écologiques traditionnelles des Algonquins par le biais de projets de conservation des terres et des voies navigables de la communauté Aki-Sibi. Ces projets sont menés par sept communautés algonquines partenaires : Kebaowek, Mitchikinibikok-Inik Barriere Lake, Winneway- Long Point, Kichisakik, Wolf Lake, Kitigan Zibi et Temiskaming La vision de la zone protégée d’Aki Sibi est celle d’un réseau de zones protégées et de conservation algonquines et d’autres mesures de conservation efficaces (OECM) qui sont façonnées par les cultures et les caractères individuels des communautés participantes, offrant une variété de paysages et de valeurs pour relever ce défi national.

Go back to eMedia presentations.

Retournez aux présentations eMedia.

Aboriginal Peoples and Canada’s Parks and Protected Areas (2007)

Report

“Best Practices” in Collaborating with Aboriginal Communities

Canada’s park agencies have a long and diverse history of working with Aboriginal communities. One of the Council’s strategic directions  is to “support agencies’ efforts to address Aboriginal interest in parks and protected areas.”

In 2000, the CPC prepared and presented to Parks Ministers a discussion paper on Aboriginal tourism in parks. This was followed-up in 2001 with Parks Canada convening a Round Table on Aboriginal Tourism. 

At their fall 2006 meeting, Parks Ministers directed the Council to enhance its work on this strategic direction. In response, the Council has developed a series of “best practices” case studies profiling leading collaborative work between park agencies and aboriginal communities. This approach will help to identify recent innovations and successes, common challenges, and opportunities for shared learning.

Case study text reviewed by profiled communities to ensure their concurrence. Designed by aboriginal-owned communications company. Preface authored by Patterk Netser, Nunavut’s Minister responsible for Parks. 

Les « bonnes pratiques » de collaboration avec les collectivités autochtones

Les organismes responsables des parcs au Canada ont une longue expérience de la collaboration avec les collectivités autochtones sous diverses formes. Le CCP a pour orientation stratégique, entre autres, d’appuyer les efforts déployés par les organismes pour tenir compte des intérêts des Autochtones dans les parcs et les aires protégées. 

En 2000, le CCP a préparé un document de travail sur le tourisme autochtone dans les parcs, document qu’il a présenté aux ministres responsables des parcs. Parcs Canada a ensuite organisé une table ronde sur le tourisme autochtone en 2001. 

Lors de leur rencontre de l’automne 2006, les ministres responsables des parcs ont demandé au Conseil d’axer ses efforts dans cette direction. En réponse, le Conseil a rassemblé une série d’études de cas mettant en évidence les « bonnes pratiques » de collaboration entre les collectivités autochtones et les organismes responsables des parcs.

Cette approche permettra de cerner de façon stratégique les innovations et les réussites récentes ainsi que les occasions d’apprentissage et les défis communs.

On a demandé aux collectivités concernées de revoir le texte des études de cas, au besoin, afin d’obtenir leur accord. Le document a été conçu par une entreprise de communication autochtone. La préface a été rédigée par Patterk Netser, ministre responsable des parcs du Nunavut. 
 

CPCIL Webinar: Speaking Histories about Parks and Protected Areas (Recorded)

Recording of Webinar

Facing many changes and opportunities, the stories of parks and protected areas need to be shared, understood—and reconsidered—to reflect the role of parks in efforts of conservation, connection, and now Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples.

This webinar was the result of a CPCIL invitation to present the national history of parks and protected areas in Canada, while including the perspective of an Indigenous scholar reconnecting to their land and language. One of the panelists is a biologist and manager in federal protected areas, while the other an Indigenous languages advocate whose ancestors had been removed from what is now referred to as Wood Buffalo National Park. Both presenters hope to spark a meaningful conversation about the historical contexts of parks and protected areas, and the involvement and inclusion of Indigenous Peoples and their rights when co-developing parks and protected areas.

Panelists          

Olaf Jensen

Protected Areas Program Director        

Canadian Wildlife Service                     

Kyle Napier

Dene/nêhiyaw Métis

Northwest Territory Métis Nation

CCIUCN Webinar on IPCAs & Indigenous Leadership in Conservation (Recording)

With an increased global interest in Indigenous-led conservation, the Canadian Parks Collective for Innovation and Leadership is excited to host this webinar as an overview of Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas (IPCAs) and Indigenous leadership in conservation in Canada.  The emphasis will be on the development of an Assembly of First Nations IPCA Working Group, the Conservation Through Reconciliation Partnership and progress in Pathway to Target 1 through its IPCA working group, and how these three initiatives–in concert with others–are collaborating in support of efforts such as meeting Canada’s international conservation targets.

Panelists: 

 Curtis Scurr,Associate Director, Environment Sector, Assembly of First Nations, Co-Chair Pathway IPCA Working Group

Wesley Johnston,Federal Lead on IPCAs, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Co-Chair Pathway IPCA Working Group

Robin Roth,Associate Professor of Geography, Guelph University, and Co-Lead, Conservation Through Reconciliation Partnership

Ninna Piiksii – Mike Bruised Head, “Obtaining Indigenous Knowledge: Really Knowing From Place”

Nov. 15, 2018
Hosted by the Canadian Parks Research Network at the University of Alberta

Summary Notes

  • Indigenous knowledge should not be “academicized”
  • Waterton’s Indigenous name reflects glacial-time
  • Combine western science-thinking with Indigenous thought (to bring back free roaming bison)
    • Rancher opposition – worry tuberculosis will transfer to their cattle
  • The natural, spiritual laws of the land – Indigenous knowledge
  • No consultation when names were removed from parks, landscapes, and mountains
  • Wants signage to include both names in Waterton
  • Indigenous knowledge incorporates animals

Notes from Workshop Facilitator, Thomas Snow

  • Another common theme from today is displacement (of Indigenous Peoples from parks)

Notes from breakout session

  • Indigenous voices first – guiding questions limit the conversations
  • Brady Highway – what do the settler communities want from Indigenous communities?
  • To take away knowledge?
  • Find a place to create space for Indigenous people to lead the way in conservation
  • Tension between “taking away knowledge” and wanting to engage with Indigenous communities
  • How can a single representative from Indigenous communities speak on behalf of a large amount of people (who all have varying values and opinions)?
  • Comparing differences between communities is not productive
  • “How to make this more human for Indigenous People” – with regards to collaboration on parks management and conservation
  • Challenges with framing PR – ensuring information shared to the public is fair to everyone
  • What about revenue generation for the local Indigenous communities?
  • Creating a place for productive conversations to occur and facilitate these discussions – the communities will decide what is appropriate for conservation management

Robert Grandjambe, “Observations from the Land: Insights from 27 Years of Trapping, Hunting and Fishing on the Alberta Landscape”

Nov. 15, 2018
Hosted by the Canadian Parks Research Network at the University of Alberta

Summary Notes

  • Rapid change – consumers demand more than is available
  • Trapping has now transformed into a more humane method and this is important to maintaining sustainability
  • People need to be more aware of the changes that will impact animals
  • Trappers try to understand the complexities of the environment and learn from previous experiences
  • Collaboration needed to manage species and ensure their continuity
  • Pine Lake – Wood Buffalo National Park
    • Set trap lines for trapping within the park – he was identified as a nuisance to parks by the park’s superintendent
    • Parks Canada claims his trap line interrupted hiking paths and an active beach
    • He was considered a commercial trapper by Parks Canada and was under surveillance. No charges
    • Court case with Parks Canada over dismantling of Robert’s trapping cabin, the loss of trapping opportunities and trapping equipment
    • Shows a mindset of the dominant society – to build bridges forward we must start off on the same path
    • According to Parks Canada, he is the only active trapper within the park – this shows the removal of Indigenous Peoples from the land
  • Attaching monetary values to trapping to manage it is not beneficial

Notes from Workshop Facilitator, Thomas Snow

  • How many people are aware things like this are happening?
  • Some policies restrict people from carrying on with their way of life (trapping, etc.)

Notes from Workshop Breakout Session

  • Indigenous voices first – guiding questions limit the conversations
  • Brady Highway – what do the settler communities want from Indigenous communities? To take away knowledge?
  • Find a place to create space for Indigenous people to lead the way in conservation
  • Tension between “taking away knowledge” and wanting to engage with Indigenous communities
  • How can a single representative from Indigenous communities speak on behalf of a large amount of people (who all have varying values and opinions)?
  • Comparing differences between communities is not productive
  • “How to make this more human for Indigenous People” – with regards to collaboration on parks management and conservation
  • Challenges with framing PR – ensuring information shared to the public is fair to everyone
  • What about revenue generation for the local Indigenous communities?
  • Creating a place for productive conversations to occur and facilitate these discussions – the communities will decide what is appropriate for conservation management

Dr. Leroy Littlebear – “Big Thinking and Rethinking: Blackfoot Metaphysics Working in the Wings, Reflections by a Blackfoot”

Nov. 15, 2018
Hosted by the Canadian Parks Research Network at the University of Alberta

Summary

  • How does the foundational basis of actions become established?
    • How are these foundations articulated?
    • Can they be articulated?
  • Science, within Western society, has been seen as one of these unquestionable foundations—a form of analyzing that assumes objectivity—however, the authority of science can be questioned and many Indigenous ways of knowing challenge the authority of objective science
  • Land may be seen as a source of metaphysics
    • The paradigms of a society are shaped by interactions with the land. The paradigms then determine the beliefs, behaviours and relationships of the society, so then the metaphysics of societies are determined.
  • Language is a tool of metaphysics. The nature and structure of language create a loop where forms of knowing are both created and reinforced through the form of a language
    • Language itself can be colonizing
    • What are the ways in which language (or other manifestations of knowledge and culture) shape individuals?
    • The structuring of both Western mentality and language create the apparent need for an ‘other’
  • Land’s relationship to metaphysics ties land to identity and culture
  • Place is a determinant of identity
  • Ensoulment: a foundation of human psychology
  • Ex. Axiology of Blackfoot Culture:
    • In science: Time and space being the same, non-locality, Higgs particle, special dimensions,
    • In economics: sustainability
    • In psychology: Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (holistic approach rather than hierarchical?)
    • In law: oral histories
    • Relationships: Dealing with complexity
  • Current practice continues to reproduce Western metaphysics of practice formed centuries ago.
  • Demonstrates the clear need for a transition to a new application of knowledges, axiology, and metaphysics

Comments from Workshop Facilitator, Thomas Snow

  • Cannot have Indigenous knowledge without Indigenous people
    • The knowledge has been gained throughout thousands of years
    • Often people will try to take shortcuts to incorporate the knowledge, but they need to build a relationship first
  • Example: Tom often dealt with entry-level parks people who had no training with regards to Treaty 6. He would have to step in to provide them with crucial information

Notes from Workshop Breakout Session

  • Indigenous voices first – guiding questions limit the conversations
  • Brady Highway – what do the settler communities want from Indigenous communities? To take away knowledge?
  • Find a place to create space for Indigenous people to lead the way in conservation
  • Tension between “taking away knowledge” and wanting to engage with Indigenous communities
  • How can a single representative from Indigenous communities speak on behalf of a large amount of people (who all have varying values and opinions)?
  • Comparing differences between communities is not productive
  • “How to make this more human for Indigenous People” – with regards to collaboration on parks management and conservation
  • Challenges with framing PR – ensuring information shared to the public is fair to everyone
  • What about revenue generation for the local Indigenous communities?
  • Creating a place for productive conversations to occur and facilitate these discussions – the communities will decide what is appropriate for conservation management

Scott Duguid, Executive Director, Alberta Land Use Secretariat, “Collaboration and Relationship Building in Pathway to Canada Target 1”

Nov. 15, 2018
Hosted by the Canadian Parks Research Network at the University of Alberta

Link to Pathway to Target One

Summary Notes

  • Target 1: 17% terrestrial and 10% coastal marine protected in Canada (right now 13% terrestrial in Alberta)
  • Questions: is the conservation the right type of conservation? Is it meaningful?
  • Ecological considerations -> scientific perceptions about conservation can create challenges in Indigenous communities
  • There is a focus on renewed relationships that respect the rights, responsibilities, and priorities of Indigenous peoples to create collaborative partnerships
  • Duguid highlights self-determination as a big part of interaction between colonial and Indigenous governments. There needs to be recognition of the validity of Indigenous governments
  • Indigenous inclusion in the pathway process -> typically it has been federal/provincial/territorial (FPT) efforts with Indigenous partners in a National Steering Committee to guide FPT (Duguid believes this is not a good process)
  • Instead, develop a National Advisory Panel (NAP) to bring together various interests in Canada and report directly to the ministers.
  • It is important to include Indigenous Peoples in the NAP to advise ministers and involve the community (this is a change the government is trying to make)
  • Embed Indigenous knowledge into the entire governance of the project (with Minister McKenna and Minister Phillips as co-leads)
  • Creation of an Indigenous Circle of Experts (ICE) to work with NAP and advise ministers and produce recommendations on how a spectrum of Indigenous Protected and
  • Conserved Areas (IPCAs) could be realized in Canada to contribute to Target 1
  • However, ICE lacks representation from coastal Inuit groups and this reflects a challenge in the process (which communities are represented and which are not)
  • As well, Metis representation is different in each province
  • In the ICE membership structure, FPT government representatives are on the peripheral
  • 17% of terrestrial land isn’t meaningful to communities – what does it look like?
  • Strong youth involvement is needed
  • ICE takes a regional approach to incorporate the very different geopolitical landscape across Canada (treaties, land titles, no treaties, etc.)
  • ICE Report and Recommendations – 28 recommendations to support and recognize the establishment of IPCAs
  • “Lands and waters where Indigenous governments have a role in protecting and conserving culture and ecosystems through Indigenous laws, governance, and knowledge systems. Culture and language are at the heart and soul of an IPCA”
  • IPCAs are a space for elders to transfer key knowledge to youth – something they feel is disappearing but critical
  • IPCAs provide a space for cultural healing – there is a strong need for land and water to provide an area for this and get back to a way of life to heal as a community and culture
  • The land is under stress and needs to rest and heal – IPCAs will provide this space
  • IPCAs will provide a place to practice a traditional way of life (hunting, trapping, gathering, ceremonies, etc.)

Response from Workshop Facilitator, Thomas Snow

  • His mother is part of ICE – she feels rushed to transfer knowledge before completion (a challenge with government timelines)
  • He feels it is evident this is guided by Indigenous people
  • An ethical space and a ceremony guides how meetings are conducted and how advise generated and decisions and approvals are made
  • FPT members participate as individuals and leave behind the “government mandate” approach
  • This considers geopolitical realities
  • A care for land is at the foundation

Response from Mike Bruised Head

  • How is membership to ICE gathered? Not everyone is aware. Consider those with tribal or organizational mandates as well.

Workshop Breakout Session Comments

  • Indigenous voices first – guiding questions limit the conversations
  • Brady Highway – what do the settler communities want from Indigenous communities?
  • To take away knowledge?
  • Find a place to create space for Indigenous people to lead the way in conservation
  • Tension between “taking away knowledge” and wanting to engage with Indigenous communities
  • How can a single representative from Indigenous communities speak on behalf of a large amount of people (who all have varying values and opinions)?
  • Comparing differences between communities is not productive
  • “How to make this more human for Indigenous People” – with regards to collaboration on parks management and conservation
  • Challenges with framing PR – ensuring information shared to the public is fair to everyone
  • What about revenue generation for the local Indigenous communities?
  • Creating a place for productive conversations to occur and facilitate these discussions – the communities will decide what is appropriate for conservation management

Brady Highway, “Thundering Ahead: Campaign for Canada’s Wanuskewin Heritage Park”

Indigenous knowledge and conservation workshop.
November 15, 2018

Hosted by the Parks Research Network at the University of Alberta

Summary Notes

  • Partnerships need to make sense and involve local communities
  • Sharing in the resources and educating people – not just transferring knowledge for economic benefit
  • Unique part of the park – Elders council (contrast to Parks Canada which is very centrally focused) that helps to ensure their vision is implemented in the park
  • If research proposal does not make sense to the community it cannot be engaged with – Indigenous communities present the issues they would like to explore to researchers and government
  • Focus on education to visitors (40,000 visitors/year – this will likely triple)
    • Many visitors from school (K-12)
  • Indigenous communities want to be able to engage in their own research and publish their own findings
  • The park is considered a learning beacon with relationships to universities (with Indigenous methodologies in mind)
  • Hope to increase the size of the park – need partnerships and investments (in the local communities) for this
  • As capacity is built in parks – it needs to transfer into the local communities

Comments from Workshop Facilitator, Thomas Snow

  • How do we speak to important issues while we work within an institution?
    • Institutions are not always interested in changing, especially when driven by monetary means
    • Underlying theme in workshop – the need to build bridges, create relationships, and create allies within work places
  • One of the ways to do this – put Indigenous voices first

Workshop Breakout Session Notes

  • Indigenous voices first – guiding questions limit the conversations
  • Brady Highway – what do the settler communities want from Indigenous communities? To take away knowledge?
  • Find a place to create space for Indigenous people to lead the way in conservation
  • Tension between “taking away knowledge” and wanting to engage with Indigenous communities
  • How can a single representative from Indigenous communities speak on behalf of a large amount of people (who all have varying values and opinions)?
  • Comparing differences between communities is not productive
  • “How to make this more human for Indigenous People” – with regards to collaboration on parks management and conservation
  • Challenges with framing PR – ensuring information shared to the public is fair to everyone
  • What about revenue generation for the local Indigenous communities?
  • Creating a place for productive conversations to occur and facilitate these discussions – the communities will decide what is appropriate for conservation management

Connecting Canadians to Nature

Our national, provincial and territorial parks play an important role in connecting Canadians to nature, pro- viding unparalleled natural classrooms and playgrounds for Canadians of all ages. As hosts to natural areas of exceptional beauty, and with a mandate and expertise to reach the public and set them on a path to discover and experience nature, Canadian park agencies are passionately committed to connecting all Canadians with nature. We see this as a fundamental priority and critical investment in both this generation and generations to come. Connecting Canadians with nature is an essential investment in Canada’s long-term prosperity.

Download Report (English)

No one sector or level of government alone can ensure that Canadians benefit from contact with nature. We need collaboration across a wide range of interests — from educators to health care professionals to urban planners and beyond – to forge new bonds between Canadians and nature. Only in working together can we nurture healthy lifestyles, support strong, vibrant communities, and provide our children with the best future we possibly can.

Federal, provincial and territorial park agencies in Canada, working through the Canadian Parks Council, have prepared “Connecting Canadians with Nature — An Investment in the Well-Being of our Citizens”, a report synthesizing the growing evidence related to the benefits of connecting Canadians with nature. 

Downloads