According to a May 12 new release, Yukon’s government has released its “What We Heard” report on proposed updates to its Public Lands Act.
The sharing of feedback comes following consultations with the public, First Nations, “transboundary” Indigenous governments and various stakeholder groups.
The 33-page report “summarizes feedback received during the engagement period from May and August 2024,” notes the release.
“Key themes included the management of activities on the land, permits and tenure, compliance, monitoring and enforcement as well as land planning and decision-making.”
Yukon Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources John Streicker said modernizing the legislation “will have positive outcomes for all land users.”
“We appreciate all the Yukoners who participated in the … public engagement,” said Streicker in a statement. “Your feedback will help us to create a new Yukon Public Lands Act that supports development, sustainability and manages land responsibly into the future.”
In its introduction, the report notes that laws currently used to manage public land “were set in place a long time ago.”
“Our vision is to create a modernized regime that upholds Aboriginal and Treaty rights, ensures collaboration with Indigenous governments, balances the multitude of interests on public land, and provides a clear and efficient framework for authorizing land use activities while promoting the ecological health and sustainability of the land,” it states.
As for responses from the public and First Nations, the report notes most “support the vision of new public lands legislation.”
But questions arose around how to balance different interests.
Case in point: Some respondents prioritized making land available for Yukon’s growing population; some focused on protecting the ecological health of the land; while others worry about the “overregulation” of public land.
In terms of compliance, monitoring and enforcement, some supported more — and even direct — First Nations involvement, while others felt that having multiple governments enforcing the new legislation “would be difficult and confusing.” Others felt that if First Nations had their own officials to enforce the Public Lands Act, then they should have the same training as Yukon government officials.
As for decision-making, some supported more First Nations input, while others felt public “views and input” are not being given enough consideration.
Some leaned toward increased decision-making on the part of department officials, in the name of reducing political interference.
The consultation also involved stakeholder groups — of which there were around 50 — ranging from industry associations, to non-governmental organizations, to environmental assessment boards, to chambers of commerce, to renewable energy councils.
While stakeholders had various views, there was general support for new legislation.
Some felt a vision statement around use planning should also reference “land use and land protection”; some said the new Act should set standards for “sustainability and ecosystem health”; while others recommended a principle supporting Yukon’s economic growth through the use of land by all of Yukon’s residents.
While stakeholders generally supported Frist Nation involvement in compliance, monitoring and enforcement, some felt the need for First Nation officials to have the same training as that of government officials.
If you have any information, story ideas or news tips for Law360 Canada, please contact Terry Davidson at t.davidson@lexisnexis.ca or 905-415-5899.