|
571
|
Standards of Care (SOC) Research Survey Operations Arctic Waterways Safety Committee 22 Feb 2017
|
2017
|
Shipping
|
Academic - NGO - Indigenous People - Industry
|
Arctic Waterways Safety Committee
|
The purpose of this Standard of Care is to provide voluntary best management practices for research vessel operators, researchers, and agency funders operating in the Arctic Waterways to minimize potential conflicts between research vessel operations and Alaska Native subsistence users.
|
Guidelines
|
|
This document includes:
ƒ?½ A pre-season process to communicate upcoming research surveys with subsistence user groups early in the planning process:
ƒ?½ A pre-season process to help identify areas where there is a high likelihood for potential conflicts:
ƒ?½ In-season protocols for real-time communications during the field season should there be a potential for conflicts: and
ƒ?½ Post-season mechanisms for researchers to review any conflicts and share findings with the communities.
Sections
Applicable Research Funders, Authorizers And Participants
Applicable Alaska Marine Mammal Comanagement
Participants
Applicable Regional and Local Government and
Tribal Participants
Section Ii ƒ?? Communication and Conflict
Resolution Procedures
Research Community Awareness and Notification
Communication Triggers And Processes
ƒ?½ Communication Triggers
ƒ?½ Pre-Season Communication Process
ƒ?½ In-Season Subsistence Communication and Mitigation Process
ƒ?½ Post-Season Discussion of Research and any Conflicts
Section Iii ƒ?? Other Applicable Components
Partnership with Local Experts
Operating In Proximity to Marine Mammals
Marine Mammal Sighting Data
Sharing Research Findings and Conflict Issues
With Villages and Co-Management Organizations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
571_Standard of Care for Research Cruises_22 Feb 2017 version.pdf
|
|
572
|
HANDBOOK: Model Alaska Native Consultation Procedures, JANUARY 2016, Environmental Law Institute, the Indigenous Peoples Council for Marine Mammals and the Marine Mammal Commission.
|
2016
|
General
|
Academic - NGO - Indigenous Peoples
|
Environment Law Institute
|
This Handbook is meant to provide Alaska Native communities with guidance on how they can design their own policies and procedures for government-to-government consultation with federal agencies. Specifically, the Handbook focuses on consultation as it relates to federal actions that affect marine mammals and the communities that depend upon them, though its principles are meant to be broadly applicable to natural resource management issues faced by Alaska Native communities.
PART III. Activities Appropriate for Consultation
PART IV. Initiating Consultation
PART V. Information Sharing
PART VI. Meeting Procedures
PART VII. Accountability
|
Report
|
Meaningful discussions involve a two-way exchange of information
and perspectives, and the information provided will be considered and incorporated in the design, development, implementation, and revision of federal government actions:
|
|
Indigenous peoples, local communities
|
government-to-government, consultation, respect, trust, timely, meaningful
|
Under the Executive Order, federal agencies must consult on a government-to-government basis with
tribal officials and authorized intertribal organizations. While the consultation right lies with tribal
governments, the inclusion of authorized intertribal organizations in the Executive Order indicates that
other organizationsƒ??like marine mammal co-management bodiesƒ??may be authorized by tribes to
engage in consultation on behalf of (or alongside of) tribal governments.
|
All
|
community engagement: public participation: education: outreach
|
Federal agencies must consult when developing actions with tribal implications.Tribal implications include effects on tribal self-government, tribal trust resources, and Indian tribal treaty and other rights. Among Alaska Nativesƒ?? rights are rights to natural resources, including marine mammals. It is important to note that ƒ??actions with tribal implicationsƒ? may not always be clear. When unclear, the consultation mandate should be construed broadly to encompass a greater number of issues given the complex interdependence of natural resources and possibility of indirect implications.
|
|
|
|
572_model_consultation_procedures_handbookfinal.pdf
|
|
573
|
PISUNA, Namminersorlutik Oqartussat sinnerlugit, Aalisarnermut, piniarnermut nunalerinermullu pisortaqarfimmit ataqatigiissaarneqarpoq
Ilitsersuusiamik uuminnga suliarinnipput: Finn Danielsen,
Martin Enghoff, PǽviǽraK Jakobsen, Adam Hansen, Nette
Levermann, Peter LÇ÷vstrÇ÷m, Nuka MÇ÷ller Lund, Michael
K. Poulsen, Martin SchiÇ÷tz, Elmer Topp--ƒ?JÇ÷rgensen, Martin R. Nielsen, il.il Note: Used in 2016 Analysis. Needs translation
|
2015
|
Resource Development
|
Academic - NGO - Indigenous Peoples
|
PISUNA-net Local Observations
|
The PISUNA-net Local Observations database was developed to record, archive, and share indigenous and local knowledge and expertise on natural resources and resource use. This information is generously shared with the public by the observers and the communities within which the observers reside.
The information contained in this database was collected through the collaboration of citizens along the western and northern coasts of Greenland. The goal of this collaboration is to document status and changes of local natural resources, inform decision making for natural resource management, and preserve and pass on local and traditional knowledge of natural resources and resource use. Arctic communities have long recognized that natural resource conditions are not what they once were. Some species are disappearing. Some species are coming back after having been away for a long time: and some species are turning up in larger numbers than before. The status of the living natural resources has very direct impact on the incomes and lives of people. While such changes have been recorded in detail in the oral history, this knowledge has not been used to inform natural resource management decisions at national and policy maker level. This database serves as a tool for securing the documentation and use of the local and traditional knowledge of the people in the communities of Greenland. It serves as an archive and instruction tool for the collaborating fishermen, hunters and their communities. It is designed to be flexible enough to change in response to the evolving nature of the observations while providing a framework that allows community members and researchers to track and compare specific ecological, environmental and climatic features and events across geographic locations and over time.
Through quarterly (three-monthly) reports of natural resource conditions and explanations of local trends in resources and possible management interventions, observers assist the local authority and the central government in better understanding natural resource processes and interactions. This information is leading to better-informed government decisions on natural resource management. A wide range of management actions have been proposed of which some have been implemented, while others were declined or are still awaiting approval. The management actions proposed based on the local natural resource observer program have been locally different in nature. However, they all are directly related to utilization of specific resources or areas and are connected with how the resources and landscapes are being managed. The management proposals include amongst others: regulation of fishing in certain areas, changes in harvesting procedures, regulation of quotas and sustainable harvest, changes in hunting and fishing seasons, proposals on changes in fishing and hunting regulations, changes in access and means of transportation in certain areas, and development of new resource enterprises and ways of utilizing resources. Additionally, the database and interactive website are publicly accessible tools available to community members, educators, outside researchers and policy makers.
The local natural resource observer program was borne out of a long partnership between local Greenlandic natural resource experts and their communities, government staff and scientific researchers, originally through the Piniakkanik Sumiiffinni Nalunaarsuineq (PISUNA) project.
|
|
|
|
|
ƒ?½ Community Monitoring
ƒ?½ Collaboration
ƒ?½ Indigenous Knowledge
ƒ?½ Respect
ƒ?½ Decision Making participation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
573_Pisuna Manual GRL, FINAL 27Jan2015.Pdf
|
|
574
|
Building Partnerships with Native Americans in Climate-Related Research and Outreach, 2000, Diane Austin, Sherri Gerlak, and Carolyn Smith ISPE / CLIMAS, CLIMAS Report Series, CL2-00, Institute for the Study of Planet Earth University of Arizona, Tucson
|
2000
|
Science Research
|
Academic/NGO
|
University of Arizona
|
1. Defining the Partnership
2. Contacting the Tribes
3. Having an Orientation Meeting
4. Designing the Research/Outreach Activities
5. Conducting the Research/Outreach Activities
6. Analyzing and Sharing Results/Evaluation
When carefully planned and executed, partnerships among Native American tribes, bureaucrats, and researchers can be fruitful and satisfying. Just as the U.S. government has concluded that Native Americans are best served by strong, effective tribal governments, so have many tribal governments determined that they and their members benefit from appropriate relationships with their non-Indian neighbors.
A successful partnership among tribes, bureaucrats, and researchers requires time and resources. The participants must establish the bases for interaction, identify what each partner brings to and needs from the relationship, and create opportunities to adjust the process as circumstances change. Though centuries of abuse and mistrust cannot and should not be forgotten, we enter the 21st century with the information and tools upon which collaborative partnerships can be built. The models of interaction presented in this paper are offered as examples of those tools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
574_pdfcl2-00.pdf
|
|
575
|
Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador, Merits and Reparations, Judgment, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 242, ¶ô 164 (June 27, 2012).
|
2012
|
Resource Development
|
Academic/NGO
|
INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
|
To address claim by the Kichwa who sued Ecuador for granting a permit to a private oil company to carry out oil exploration and exploitation activities in the territory of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku in the 1990s, without previously consulting them and without obtaining their consent. Thus, the company began the exploration phase, and even introduced high-powered explosives in several places on indigenous territory, thereby creating an alleged situation of risk for the population because, for a time, this prevented them from seeking means of subsistence and limited their rights to freedom of movement and to cultural expression. In addition, this case relates to the alleged lack of judicial protection and the failure to observe judicial guarantees.
The court found for the Kichwa
|
Legal Ruling
|
|
|
|
Reparations
Rights To:
Consultation
Indigenous Communal Property
Life
Personal Integrity
Personal Liberty
Judicial Guarantees
Judicial Protection
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
575_Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People seriec_245_ing.pdf
|
|
576
|
Broderstad, E. et al, Political Systems, in Arctic Human Development Report at 93-97 (2004).
|
2004
|
General
|
Arctic Council - Academic/NGO
|
SDWG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
576_522_349_Arctic Human Development Report.pdf
|
|
577
|
Aboriginal Participation in Mining, Natural Resources Canada 2012
|
2012
|
Ressource Development
|
Government
|
Natural Resources Canada
|
|
Pamphlet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributing to Sustainable Communities
Partnering Together for Mutual Benefits
Aboriginal Employment in Mining
Business and Economic Opportunities
Environmental Practices
|
577_mining_infosheet_eng.pdf
|
|
578
|
NOAA National Marine Sanctuaries Engagement Summary
|
2015
|
Management
|
Government
|
US NOAA
|
This is a short summary by NOAA to PAME of forward-looking projects that involve meaningful engagement.within the Arctic Council PAME Expert Group on MPAs.
|
Summary Briefing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
578_10 - NOAA National Marine Sanctuaries Engagement Summary.docx
|
|
579
|
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA)¶õ810(a)(3)(C).
|
1980
|
Other-General
|
Government
|
US Congress
|
¶õ810. (a) In determining whether to withdraw, reserve, lease, or otherwise permit the use, occupancy, or disposition of public lands under any provision of law authorizing such actions, the head of the Federal agency having primary jurisdiction over such lands or his designee shall evaluate the effect of such use, occupancy, or disposition on subsistence uses and needs, the availability of other lands for the purposes sought to be achieved, and other alternatives which would reduce or eliminate the use, occupancy, or disposition of public lands needed for subsistence purposes. No such withdrawal, reservation, ]ease, permit, or other use, occupancy or disposition of such lands which would significantly restrict subsistence uses shall be effected until the head of such Federal agency--
(3) determines that--
(C) reasonable steps will be taken to minimize adverse impacts upon subsistence uses and resources resulting from such actions.
|
Law
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
579_ANILCA - Title 8.pdf
|
|
580
|
BOEM mitigation tracking table, Alternatives, Deferrals, Mitigations, and Other Areal Concerns Suggested From Public Involvement Opportunities 2012-2017 OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program (Last Updated July 2014).
|
2014
|
Resources
|
Government
|
US - BOEM
|
Informational
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
580_Tracking Table BOEM 2014-BOEM-AMMT.pdf
|
