Federal government says “significant adverse environmental effects” on Indigenous peoples
After several years of planning and consultation, the provincial NDP government is putting the breaks on the Lake Manitoba and Lake St. Martin outlet channels project after a federal assessment concluded the outlets could have significant adverse environmental effects on Indigenous peoples’ use of land and impact their Aboriginal and treaty rights.
The delay, which the NDP are calling a “pause,” has one Lake Manitoba community association feeling unnerved and the opposition Conservatives critical of the NDP “squandering” a project over 10 years in the making with millions already invested.
The 2011 flood on Lake Manitoba destroyed and damaged homes, cottages and Indigenous communities and was estimated to have cost about $1 billion. Another flood in 2014 had property owners along the lake thinking of bailing out.
Both floods were the result of the province releasing excessive volumes of water into the lake from the Portage Diversion, a 29-kilometre-long (18 miles) water-control structure that diverts water from the Assiniboine River to the lake. Built in 1970, the diversion helps prevent the flooding of farmland in southern Manitoba, communities such as Portage la Prairie and Headingley, and the City of Winnipeg. Without an outlet at the other end of the lake that’s able to shunt huge volumes of water into Lake St. Martin and out to Lake Winnipeg, people living along Lake Manitoba – and Lake St. Martin – may be subject to future flooding disasters.
The provincial and federal governments announced in June 2018 they’d cost share up to $540 million for the construction of two outlets that were deemed a “major priority” and would help provide flood protection to communities and farmland around the lake and reduce flood damage to First Nations along Lake St. Martin.
Under the requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act [CEAA], the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) evaluated the two proposed outlets, gathered feedback from stakeholders and released a report in June titled Lake Manitoba and Lake St. Martin Outlet Channels Project Environmental Assessment Report.
“The Agency [IAAC] concludes that the Project is likely to cause direct and cumulative significant adverse environmental effects, as defined in section 5 of CEAA 2012, on Indigenous peoples’ current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes, physical and cultural heritage, and structures, sites, and things of historical, archaeological, paleontological, or architectural significance despite the implementation of mitigation measures, monitoring, and follow-up programs,” states the report, and it’s “likely to cause impacts to the exercise of Aboriginal and treaty rights, including moderate to high severity of impacts to fishing rights and cultural continuity of those Indigenous groups that are more directly impacted by the Project.”
The IAAC said it recognizes the project’s aim is to reduce flooding, but Indigenous groups feel the outlets would “enable the continued flooding of the region” and they “remain in opposition” to it.
Manitoba’s transportation and infrastructure minister Lisa Naylor said during house proceedings on Oct. 16 that she had asked the federal government to “pause” the project given the IAAC’s conclusions.
“So there were very strong cautions from the federal government. They had not yet passed, and may not have passed … the legislation that would be required for us to proceed with this project,” said Naylor in response to a request for an update on the two outlets. “And … we have asked the federal government to put a pause on the environmental assessment because we want to address those problems first. Ultimately, we want the federal government to be able to give us a go-ahead on the environmental assessment. … we think that the concerns that they raised about the impact on Indigenous people was a substantial priority. And so we’ve asked them to pause.”
The province needs federal approval to move forward with the cost-shared project.
Naylor added that the “failing” of the previous Conservative government is the reason for “why we are at this point,” with respect to Indigenous groups, and that the NDP will have to “start again with building relationships.”
After the 2011 flood, the then NDP government started the process of identifying ways to reduce flood risks along Lake Manitoba and Lake St. Martin, and the process continued when the Conservatives took power in 2016.
The proposed outlets will each be 24 kilometres long. The Lake Manitoba outlet would be built west of Moosehorn, on the lake’s east shore at Watchorn Bay – where lakefront lots are currently for sale. It would carry water northward to Birch Bay on Lake St. Martin. The second outlet on Lake St. Martin would convey the water north to Sturgeon Bay on Lake Winnipeg.
Both outlets would provide “additional capacity” to move water from Lake Manitoba to Lake St Martin and into Lake Winnipeg during flood events, and they’d reduce “extreme flooding” around Lake Manitoba and Lake St. Martin communities, according to the IAAC report.
The Conservatives finalized consultations with 39 Indigenous communities and groups, according to the IAAC. Some of consultation occurred at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and the government offered online tools to support Indigenous feedback.
The IAAC’s report lists numerous concerns raised by Indigenous communities about the outlets, including the adequacy of modelling and baseline data, lack of Indigenous engagement in the EIS [Environmental Impact Statement] development, lack of meaningful Indigenous engagement by the Proponent [provincial government] in the development of methodology, project planning, and the mitigations and accommodations process, the effects to fish, habitat and fishing (e.g., lake sturgeon), lack of consideration of effects to Indigenous health and socio-economic conditions (e.g., methyl mercury and human health), the effects to sites and resources of heritage and cultural importance, adequacy and anticipated effectiveness of the Proponent’s proposed mitigation and follow-up and monitoring measures, lack of Indigenous knowledge incorporation on project design, changes to resource use (e.g., land use and fishing), the effects to wildlife including terrestrial plants, birds and species at risk, and changes to water, including groundwater and surface waters.
Although the report states Indigenous groups were consulted, several – including the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, Dauphin River First Nation, Interlake Reserves Tribal Council and the Manitoba Metis Federation – indicated they weren’t satisfied with the process.
“In particular, Indigenous groups raised concerns regarding the Proponent’s lack of meaningful engagement, lack of responsiveness, inadequate consideration of Indigenous Knowledge in the Project design and studies, and lack of engagement in the consideration of alternatives to the Project,” states the IAAC.
The Express reached out to the Interlake Reserves Tribal Council for comment but did not receive a response.
In addition to Indigenous groups opposing the outlets, the RM of Grahamdale is not onside. It said it “welcomes” the provincial government’s decision to pause the project and consider alternatives.
Chief administrative officer Shelly Schwitek said the RM agrees with the province that some form of flood mitigation is needed for residents along the Assiniboine River and Lake Manitoba, but the RM is “opposed to the current route and design of the Lake Manitoba Outlet Channel,” and feels water retention options on the Assiniboine River weren’t fully explored.
The RM’s involvement with the outlet project goes back to 2016 and it has “repeatedly” raised a number of important concerns that it feels were “never adequately addressed” by the province.
“The proposed Lake Manitoba to Lake St. Martin portion of the channel splits our municipality in half, and required the province to expropriate approximately 5,200 acres of deeded agricultural land from our residents,” said Schwitek. “This has been a source of terrible stress for a number of our farmers, forced to fight for fair compensation for their land, and in some cases losing homes, and being forced to completely relocate their farm operations.”
Whether or not the outlets move forward, Schwitek said the RM feels the province has “an obligation to work with our expropriated landowners in good faith, and make them whole.”
The RM feels there were a number of environmental issues that weren’t addressed, including contamination of the aquifer where residents get their drinking water, loss of artesian [water] pressure that will affect domestic and farm water up to seven kilometres from the channel, impacts on surface water runoff, loss of wetlands that will affect wildlife and birds, loss of fish habitat, impacts to ground water and drainage “caused by splitting our municipal watershed in half,” impacts on wildlife, including risks to fish spawning habitats relied on by traditional, recreational and commercial fishers, said Schwitek.
The flood of 2011 resulted in significant overland flooding in the RM of St. Laurent. An estimated 700 dwellings in communities including Twin Lakes Beach, Sandpiper, Laurentia and Johnson beaches were destroyed or damaged and property owners evacuated for several months. A dyke was built to protect town infrastructure, leaving lakefront properties unprotected.
Jack King, president of the Twin Lakes Beach Association, said the association is concerned and disappointed the province is pausing the outlets as there had already been a delay of three or four years while the environmental review occurred. Property owners at Twin are feeling very anxious about future flooding events.
“The pause is troubling because we’re no further ahead than when the flood hit in 2011. We have water coming in from the Portage Diversion and we don’t have a proper outlet at the northern end of the lake. As a matter of fact, we’re a little worse off than in 2011 because the Portage Diversion was shored up after the flood and there’s even more capacity to put water into the lake now,” said King. “It’s been frustrating. We feel fortunate the weather has kept water levels reasonable – and I do give the government credit for operating the Portage Diversion in a responsible manner – but people are not very happy with this situation.”
Many property owners who had homes and cottages destroyed or damaged in the flood had decided to start over and re-build in “good faith,” holding on to the provincial and federal government’s promise of outlet channels that would mitigate massive floods in the future, he said.
“We are feeling nervous,” said King. “It’s a shallow lake and we’re very susceptible to wind events. We had one about a month ago where the winds were about 100 kilometres an hour, and even with lower lake levels at present it still pushed water right up to the barriers people have to protect their homes.”
With more flood events on the lake after 2011, the province installed geotextile tubes and super sandbags along lakefront properties but removed them after a number of years.
“That was a government decision to take the geotubes and sandbags down. They said it wasn’t intended to be a permanent solution; it was only temporary until the channels got built,” said King. “We felt we were misled because the obviously the channels haven’t been built and it’s not in the plans right now.”
King said there were several recommendations made by a provincial commission following the 2011 flood. Those included improving the capacity of the Assiniboine River to hold more water and dyke-building in the Assiniboine basin, but he’s unsure whether any were acted on apart from the upgrades to the Portage Diversion.
The Twin Lakes Beach Association will be reaching out to the area’s MLA Derek Johnson, MP James Bezan and other associations to register their concerns with what feels more like a “stoppage than a pause” in the project, said King.
With climate models predicting more frequent and extreme weather events, Interlake-Gimli MLA Derek Johnson said Manitoba has to prepare for future flood disasters.
“Look at the situation we had this summer with nine inches of rain in southeastern Manitoba. I think we can all agree that climate extremes are already upon us. We’re getting storms that dump huge volumes of precipitation in one go,” he said. “We have to be prepared as a society to handle these extremes.”
Johnson said the NDP’s asking the federal government to pause the process was “unnecessary.” The government can still carry out additional consultations with Indigenous groups without incurring increased costs.
“Lisa Naylor definitely did not have to put this on pause. If the feds think the environmental impacts are too severe, all they have to do is say no and not grant the licence. And it will be over with. It’s up to the federal government whether it moves forward or not,” said Johnson. “When premier [Wab] Kinew was the official opposition, he was calling this project urgent and demanded our PC government move more quickly. But now that he’s premier, he’s paused it. This will result in higher costs. With a short delay of six months by the NDP approving the construction of the PCH in Lac du Bonnet that our party had approved, the cost has risen by $6 million. Can you imagine what delaying these channels is going to cost, how many tens of millions it will cost for every few years of delay?”
All the land for the outlets has already been purchased, Johnson added, and the engineering is completed. He estimates about $50 million in eligible costs has already been spent.
Although a class-action lawsuit launched by flooded Lake Manitoba property owners against the province for fairer compensation is nearing resolution, Johnson said the badly needed flood protection for the lakes is no closer to being realized.
When the provincial Conservatives were in power, Johnson said he served as legislative assistant in the infrastructure department and was part of lots of meetings with Indigenous groups on the outlets. The government complied with “every request” from the feds and carried out all the environmental studies.
“We had 250 meetings, 1,000 letters and 5,000 emails and calls with 39 different Indigenous groups,” said Johnson. “Complex projects do take time. Our government was listening throughout that consultation process. It is important to consult but also keep moving forward with this project.”
A Oct. 19 Conservative caucus news release says the NDP are squandering the now 13-year project and Interlake communities remain vulnerable.
La Verendrye MLA Konrad Narth said the Conservative government engaged in extensive consultations with 39 Indigenous groups, but all of that is “out the window because the NDP want to play politics instead of preventing another disaster.”
A spokesperson for the province said the project “continues to progress through the federal environmental assessment process.”
“In September, the province requested that the federal government not proceed with further review at this time, in order to allow time for the province to work to reset relationships with Indigenous groups involved in the project,” said the spokesperson. “The province continues to work closely with Indigenous communities to address concerns raised and to move forward collaboratively. The province continues to prioritize flood mitigation in this area to protect nearby communities and residents.”
The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada told the Express the outlets project is still undergoing a federal environmental assessment by the agency, and that IAAC works to ensure assessments respect federal jurisdiction, protect the environment and Indigenous rights, and collaborate with other governments.
“The final federal project decision has not yet been made. The Honourable Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, issued his section 52 decision under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, and determined the project is likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects,” said an IAAC spokesperson. “The Minister must now refer the matter to the Governor in Council who will determine if the significant adverse environmental effects likely to be caused by the project are justified.”
As to a timeline of when a decision could be made, the IAAC said the federal government recognizes the importance of timely decision-making, but it has received a request from Manitoba Transportation and Infrastructure “to wait to refer the project to [the] Governor in Council at this time as Manitoba works with Indigenous groups.”
“Once the matter is referred to the Governor in Council, a final decision will be made when it has taken the time it requires to properly consider all the available and relevant scientific information, including Indigenous Knowledge provided by Indigenous Peoples involved in the environmental assessment of the project,” said the spokesperson. “There is no legislated timeline for the Governor in Council’s decision under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.”
Note: the Governor in Council refers to the Governor General acting on the advice of the federal cabinet.
