Contents

19         Assessment of Effects on Indigenous Peoples and Impacts to the Exercise of Aboriginal
and Treaty Rights. 19-6

19.1      Scope of the Assessment 19-6

19.1.1      Regulatory and Policy Setting. 19-6

19.1.1.1      Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. 19-9

19.1.2      Consideration of Input from Engagement and Consultation Activities. 19-15

19.1.3      Incorporation of Indigenous Knowledge. 19-19

19.1.4      Indigenous Peoples Values and Rights. 19-23

19.1.5      Spatial and Temporal Boundaries. 19-25

19.1.5.1      Spatial Boundaries. 19-25

19.1.5.2      Temporal Boundaries. 19-26

19.1.6      Identification of Project Interactions with Indigenous Peoples Interests and Rights. 19-28

19.2      Existing Conditions. 19-31

19.2.1      Methods. 19-31

19.2.1.1      Engagement and Consultation. 19-31

19.2.1.2      Collection and Analysis of Baseline Information. 19-31

19.2.1.3      Aboriginal and Treaty Rights Assessment Approach. 19-32

19.2.1.4      Gender Based Analysis Plus (GBA+) 19-34

19.2.1.5      Indigenous Knowledge and Land and Resource Use. 19-34

19.2.1.6      Summary of Data Sources. 19-35

19.2.2      Results. 19-36

19.2.2.1      Webequie First Nation. 19-36

19.2.2.2      Local Study Area. 19-55

19.2.2.3      Regional Study Area. 19-87

19.3      Potential Effects to Indigenous Peoples. 19-133

19.3.1      Change to Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for
Traditional Purposes. 19-140

19.3.1.1      Local Study Area: Webequie First Nation. 19-140

19.3.1.2      Local Study Area: Other LSA Communities. 19-152

19.3.1.3      Regional Study Area. 19-160

19.3.2      Change to Cultural Continuity. 19-162

19.3.2.1      Local Study Area: Webequie First Nation. 19-162

19.3.2.2      Local Study Area: Other LSA Communities. 19-167

19.3.2.3      Regional Study Area. 19-172

19.4      Mitigation and Enhancement Measures. 19-173

19.4.1      Change to Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for
Traditional Purposes. 19-173

19.4.1.1      Availability of Lands and Resources for Traditional Harvesting. 19-174

19.4.1.2      Sites and Areas Used for Traditional Harvesting. 19-176

Contents (Cont’d)

19.4.1.3      Access to lands and resources used for traditional harvesting. 19-177

19.4.1.4      Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights with Current and Historical
Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes. 19-178

19.4.2      Changes in Cultural Continuity. 19-180

19.4.2.1      Change/Loss to Quantity (number or ha) or Quality of Culturally and
Spiritually Important Sites and Areas (e.g., Ceremonial, sacred,
teaching) 19-181

19.4.2.2      Change to Access/Routes to Culturally and Spiritually Important
Sites and Areas Including Use of Navigable Waterways. 19-182

19.4.2.3      Change in Distance to Culturally and Spiritually Important Sites and
Areas. 19-183

19.4.2.4      Change to Sufficiency of Lands and Resources for Cultural Practices. 19-183

19.4.2.5      Change to Cultural Traditions or Practices. 19-184

19.4.2.6      Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights with Cultural Continuity. 19-185

19.4.3      Socio-economic, Health and Well-being. 19-186

19.4.4      Self-Determination and Self-Governance. 19-186

19.4.5      Summary. 19-187

19.5      Impacts on the Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. 19-194

19.5.1      Rights Related to Current and Historic Use of Lands and Resources for
Traditional Purposes. 19-194

19.5.1.1      Webequie First Nation. 19-194

19.5.1.2      Other LSA Communities. 19-196

19.5.1.3      RSA Communities. 19-197

19.5.2      Rights Related to Cultural Continuity. 19-198

19.5.2.1      Webequie First Nation. 19-198

19.5.2.2      Other LSA Communities. 19-200

19.5.2.3      RSA Communities. 19-201

19.5.3      Rights Related to Socio-Economic, Health and Well-Being. 19-201

19.5.3.1      Local Study Area: Other LSA Communities. 19-203

19.5.3.2      Regional Study Area. 19-203

19.5.4      Rights to Self-Determination and Self-Governance. 19-203

19.5.4.1      Webequie First Nation. 19-204

19.5.4.2      Other LSA Communities. 19-205

19.5.4.3      Regional Study Area. 19-205

19.6      Approach for Determining Severity of Impact on the Rights of Indigenous People. 19-206

19.7      References. 19-210

19.7.1      Assessment of Effects of the Project on Indigenous Peoples and Impacts to the
Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. 19-210

19.7.2      Section 19.1: Scope of the Assessment 19-210

Contents (Cont’d)

19.7.3      Section 19.2: Existing Conditions. 19-212

19.7.4      Section 19.3: Identification of Potential Effects, Pathways and Indicators. 19-229

19.7.5      Section 19.4: Mitigations and Enhancement Measures. 19-235

19.7.6      Section 19.5: Impacts on the Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. 19-236

19.7.7      Section 19.6: Assessment of Potential Impacts on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples. 19-237

In Text Figures

Figure 19‑1:       Map of Treaty No. 9. 19-11

Figure 19‑2:       Priority areas reflecting the Rights set out in the UN Declaration. 19-13

Figure 19‑3:       Study Areas Indigenous Peoples’ Interests and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. 19-27

Figure 19‑4:       Draft Attawapiskat First Nation Area of Interest for Planning – Attawapiskat First Nation AIP. 19-60

Figure 19‑5:       Draft Eabametoong First Nation and Mishkeegogamang First Nation Area of Interest for
Planning. 19-65

Figure 19‑6:       Draft Marten Falls First Nation Area of Interest for Planning. 19-74

Figure 19‑7:       Draft Weenusk Falls First Nation Area of Interest for Planning. 19-81

Figure 19‑8:       Weenusk First Nation Hunting and Fishing Windows. 19-82

Figure 19‑9:       Draft Constance Lake First Nation Area of Interest for Planning. 19-92

Figure 19‑10:     Constance Lake Reclaiming Our Language Plan. 19-94

Figure 19‑11:     Fort Albany First Nation and Kashechewan First Nation Traplines (Sutherland, 2017) 19-96

Figure 19‑12:     Draft Ginoogaming First Nation Traditional Territory. 19-102

Figure 19‑13:     Draft Kashechewan First Nation Area of Interest for Planning. 19-105

Figure 19‑14:     Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Habitat Sites and Travel Routs for Mammals,
Birds and Fish. 19-111

Figure 19‑15:     Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Traditional Land and Resource Use Map. 19-112

Figure 19‑16:     Métis Nation of Ontario Harvester Map. 19-117

Figure 19‑17:     Wawakapewin First Nation Draft Area of Interest for Planning. 19-129

In Text Tables

Table 19‑1:        Key Regulations, Legislations, Policies and Agreements Relevant to Indigenous Peoples and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. 19-7

Table 19‑2:        Indigenous Peoples Interests and Rights – Summary of Inputs Received During Engagement
and Consultation. 19-15

Table 19‑3:        Indigenous Peoples’ Interests and Rights – Summary of Indigenous Knowledge. 19-20

Table 19‑4:        Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights, Indicators and Rationale. 19-24

Table 19‑5:        Aboriginal and Treaty Rights Indicators and Rationale. 19-25

Table 19‑6:        Project Interactions with Indigenous Peoples Interests and Rights. 19-28

Table 19‑7:        Summary of Methods Data Sources for Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and
Treaty Rights. 19-35

Table 19‑8:        Webequie First Nation Cultural and Sacred Sites within the PF, LSA and RSA. 19-48

Table 19‑9:        Webequie First Nation Language Sites. 19-48

Table 19‑10:      Summary of Potential Effects, effect Pathways, effect Indicators, Nature of Interaction and
Linked Valued Components (VC’s) for Indigenous Peoples’ Values and Aboriginal and
Treaty Rights. 19-134

Contents (Cont’d)

In Text Tables (Cont’d)

Table 19‑11:      Summary of Potential Effects, effect Pathways, effect Indicators, Nature of Interaction and
Linked VCs for Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. 19-138

Table 19‑12:      Registered Traplines Potentially Fragmented by Road Use. 19-152

Table 19‑13:      Sites used for Traditional Activities in the LSA, Weenusk IK Study. 19-157

Table 19‑14:      Cultural, Spiritual, Sacred, Burial, and Language Sites and Areas potentially affected
by noise. 19-164

Table 19‑16:      Summary of Potential Effects, Mitigation Measures and Predicted Net Effects for Current
and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes and Cultural Continuity. 19-188

Table 19‑17:      Degree of severity for adverse impacts on rights of Indigenous peoples. 19-206

Table 19‑18:      Criteria for Characterization of Predicted Severity on Aboriginal and Treaty Rights* 19-207

Disclaimer

Due to potential sensitivity and confidentiality of some features referred to in this Section 19 of the EAR/IS, mapping or locations of such features have been redacted.

19                Assessment of Effects on Indigenous Peoples and Impacts to the Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

In preparing the Webequie Supply Road Project (the Project) Environmental Assessment Report/Impact Statement (EAR/IS), the effects of the Project on Indigenous Peoples and impacts to the exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights were considered, pursuant to requirements of the Provincial Terms of Reference (ToR) (Webequie First Nation, 2020; Appendix A-2) and the Federal Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines (TISG) (IAAC, 2020; Appendix A-1).

The EAR/IS assessment approach is supported by studies that characterized the existing conditions of Indigenous communities to identify and assess the effects of the Project on Indigenous Peoples and impacts to the exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.

The assessment of the potential effects of the Project on Indigenous Peoples and impacts on the exercise of their Aboriginal and Treaty Rights is presented as follows:

• Scope of the Assessment;
• Existing Conditions Summary;
• Potential Effects to Indigenous Peoples;
• Mitigation and Enhancement Measures;
• Impacts on the Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights; and
• Approach for Determining Severity of Impact on the Rights of Indigenous People.

19.1            Scope of the Assessment

19.1.1         Regulatory and Policy Setting

The effects of the Project on Indigenous Peoples and impacts to the exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights are assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Impact Assessment Act (IAA) and the TISG for the Project; the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act and the Terms of Reference (ToR) and EAR/IS guidance documents. Additionally, various regulatory requirements within the federal, provincial and community level regulatory framework.

Table 19‑1 outlines the key legislation, regulations, and policies relevant to the assessment of the effects of the Project on Indigenous Peoples and impacts on the exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights for the construction and operation phases of the Project.

Table 19‑1:       Key Regulations, Legislations, Policies and Agreements Relevant to Indigenous Peoples and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

19.1.1.1         Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

19.1.1.1.1         Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982

The Government of Canada recognizes First Nations, the Métis Nation, and Inuit as the Indigenous peoples of Canada, consisting of distinct, rights-bearing communities. Indigenous Rights (or Aboriginal Rights under the Constitution Act, 1982) are recognized as collective rights of distinctive Indigenous societies flowing from their status as the original peoples of Canada, which have been practiced since before European contact. Aboriginal and Treaty Rights are “recognized and affirmed” under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Act does not define Aboriginal Rights under Section 35, rather Aboriginal Rights have been defined and protected by the courts in Canada. These Indigenous Rights have generally included:

• Aboriginal title (ownership rights to land);
• Right to enter into treaties;
• Occupation and use of lands and resources such as hunting, fishing and wood harvest;
• Self-determination and self-government;
• Customs and traditions; and
• Traditional livelihood.

Inherent rights to self determination are described by the Centre for First Nations Governance as follows:

“Our people have an inherent right to govern ourselves and decision-making authority over our title lands. We are free to create our own form of governance to preserve our culture, foster healthy families, build vibrant communities, develop our economies and restore our nations.” (Centre for First Nations Governance, 2025).

19.1.1.1.2         James Bay Treaty/Treaty No. 9

The Project is located in the Treaty No. 9 area of Ontario, also known as the James Bay Treaty, which covers almost two-thirds of northern Ontario. Treaty No. 9 largely covers the James Bay and Hudson Bay watersheds that are the ancestral homelands of the Anishinaabe, and the Mushkeego Peoples and have been stewards of the land, holding inherent rights of self-determination, which are recognized under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. The Mushkeego live primarily in the James Bay and Hudson Bay lowlands. The Anishinaabe live closer to the interior of the territory, “closer to the height of land that divides the James Bay and Hudson Bay watershed” (Ministry of Public and Business Service Delivery, 2022).

In the mid-1800s, the Robinson-Huron and Robinson-Superior treaties were signed as a result of increasing conflict from mining prospectors and surveyors entering the traditional territories of the Anishinaabe and other Indigenous Peoples of the area. These earlier Robinson-Huron and Robinson-Superior treaties became the model for the numbered treaties, which were signed across Canada, including Treaty No. 9 signed in northern Ontario some years later. As railways heading west across Canada were being built north of Lake Superior by the early 1900s, the Anishinaabe and other Indigenous Peoples grew concerned about encroachment from non-Indigenous trappers and prospectors that were depleting wildlife resources in their traditional territories of the James Bay and Hudson’s Bay watersheds.

Treaty Rights are rights set out in historic and modern treaty agreements, including Treaty No. 9, where the Project is proposed, and these rights are recognized and affirmed by Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 (CIRNAC, 2023b). Treaties define specific rights, benefits, and obligations for the signatories that vary from treaty to treaty. Treaties and treaty rights also vary depending on the time and circumstances in which they were negotiated. Treaty rights can include annual payments, reserve lands and certain rights to trap, hunt, gather plants and fish. Treaties with Canada and Indigenous Nations in northern Ontario are shown on Figure 19.1.

The interpretation and implementation of Treaty No. 9 (and all the numbered treaties) remains a contested issue, but recent court decisions have supported the view that the honour of the Crown demands a liberal interpretation of the treaties. In the years following the signing of Treaty No. 9, First Nations have expressed dissatisfaction with the fulfillment of Treaty No. 9 promises, especially where allotment of reserve lands and hunting, fishing, and trapping rights conflicted with settler interests (Long 2010 as cited in Stantec, 2025).

The difference between the spoken words of the Treaty No. 9 negotiations and the notes taken by the government’s own officials, and the words of the Treaty are the subject of a 2023 lawsuit brought by ten Treaty No. 9 First Nations. The lawsuit asserts that Treaty No. 9 has violated First Nations’ jurisdiction over its traditional territories for over a century and claims $95 billion in compensation, and co-jurisdiction with Treaty No. 9 First Nations and the government on all activities being contemplated in the territory (The Narwal, 2023).

Figure 19.1:      Map of Treaty No. 9

19.1.1.1.3         Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada and Recognition of UNDRIP in Canadian Law

In 2007, the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, the largest class-action settlement in Canadian history was first implemented (Government of Canada, 2024). One of the elements of the agreement was to establish the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) to facilitate reconciliation among the former students, families, communities, and all Canadians.

The residential school system was set up by the Government of Canada and the Catholic Church to “civilize” and assimilate Indigenous children by forcibly taking them from their families and communities to attend schools often located far from their homes (InterGroup, 2024; Government of Canada, 2017; National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation – NCTR, n.d.a). Beginning in 1831, residential schools had the explicit intent to rid Indigenous children of their language and culture. Children were harshly punished for speaking their own languages, and thousands were abused physically and sexually by residential school staff. Survivors of residential schools have endured lasting trauma, resulting in intergenerational effects. The TRC concluded that the residential school system in Canada amounted to cultural genocide for over 150 years, with more than 150,000 children attending residential schools over this period, many of whom did not return (InterGroup, 2024; NCTR, n.d.a).

Between 2007 and 2015, the TRC travelled to all parts of Canada and heard from 6,500 witnesses (Government of Canada, 2024). Events were held to engage the Canadian public about the history and legacy of the residential school system and share with the national audiences the trauma that occurred. The outcome of the process was a final report that included 94 Calls to Action (or recommendations) for working towards reconciliation (Government of Canada, 2024).

In relation to the recognition of Indigenous rights, in its Calls to Action, the TRC recommended that the Government of Canada fully recognize and adopt the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples at all levels of government in Canada, as follows:

• Call to Action 43: We call upon federal, provincial, territorial, and municipal governments to fully adopt and implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as the framework for reconciliation.
• Call to Action 44: We call upon the Government of Canada to develop a national action plan, strategies, and other concrete measures to achieve the goals of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The completion of the TRC contributed to Canada’s adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, described below.

19.1.1.1.4         Canada’s United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (UNDA) and the UNDA Action Plan

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) is a human rights instrument that sets out the rights of Indigenous Peoples around the world (United Nations, 2007).

In June 2021, the federal government took an important step in fulfilling its pledge to adopt UNDRIP into Canadian law by passing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (UNDA). The UNDA provides a roadmap for the Government of Canada and Indigenous Peoples to work together to implement the Declaration based on lasting reconciliation, healing, and cooperative relations. The legislation requires the federal government to examine federal laws, policies and practices and to maintain consistency with the Declaration (Government of Canada, 2021). In the Government of Canada’s press release, it states:

“Today represents a critical step in recognizing, promoting, protecting and upholding the human rights of Indigenous Peoples in Canada. It marks another important move forward in the evolving history of the Crown‑Indigenous relationship, one that will help forge stronger relationships and support the path to self‑determination for First Nations, Inuit and Métis while taking action to advance reconciliation, together” (Government of Canada, 2021).

In June 2023, the Action Plan for implementing UNDA was released, this was led by the Department of Justice Canada, and included input from First Nations, Métis and Inuit groups (AFN, 2023).  The 2023-2028 Action Plan was prepared after two years of consultation with Indigenous Peoples and includes 181 measures, which are aimed at upholding the human rights of Indigenous Peoples; see Figure 19.2. This is considered a living document that will evolve through consultation and continued cooperation with First Nations, Métis and Inuit groups (AFN, 2023).

The UNDA is now being applied in interpreting Indigenous rights in Canadian courts. A recent court case in Quebec, R v White and Montour, reviewed Section 35(1) in a different way than previously looked at for Aboriginal Rights in Canada and the interpretation and application of UNDRIP to Section 35(1) Aboriginal Rights test (JFK Law LLP, 2023). The ruling is intended to “better recognize and protect generic Indigenous rights grounded in Indigenous legal systems instead of limiting Aboriginal Rights to specific pre-contact practices, traditions, or customs. The Court makes this move by recognizing the collective right as the generic right to freely determine and pursue economic development”
(JFK Law LLP, 2023).

The UNDA and UNDRIP is considered as part of the Indigenous rights context for the assessment presented in Section 19.3 and Section 19.5.

Figure 19.2:      Priority areas reflecting the Rights set out in the UN Declaration

Source: Government of Canada, 2023

19.1.1.1.5         Nishnawbe Aski Nation and First Nations/Tribal Councils

Indigenous rights have also been historically fought for by territorial organization and tribal councils. First Nations/ Tribal Councils play a crucial role in supporting Indigenous Rights, fostering self-governance, and promoting cultural preservation.

Nishnawbe-Aski Nation

The Nishnawbe Aski Nation represents 49 First Nations in northern Ontario, advocating for the rights and interests of its communities. First Nations within Nishnawbe-Aski Nation assert Treaty No. 9 and Section 35(1) rights. According to the Declaration of the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, the rights of Nishnawbe-Aski Nation people include (The Chiefs of Grand Council Treaty, 1977):

• The right to receive compensation for exploited natural resources;
• The right to receive compensation for the destruction and abrogation of hunting, fishing, and gathering rights;
• The right to renegotiate Treaty No. 9 as understood by Nishnawbe-Aki Nation people; and
• The right to approach other world nations to further the aims of the Cree and Ojibway Nations of Treaty No. 9.

19.1.1.1.6         Webequie First Nation Three-Tier Model and Comprehensive Community Plan

The Webequie First Nation CCP was completed in 2023 and was prepared over more than 4 years with Elders, community members, Webequie Administration staff and leadership (Webequie First Nation, 2023). The purpose of the Webequie First Nation CCP is to lay out a roadmap for the future of the Webequie community and how the community will work together to achieve its vision. The Webequie First Nation CCP builds on other plans and studies completed by the community, and is another community-led process, rooted in Webequie First Nation’s Three-Tier governance model that supports reconciliation, rebuilding and healing.

The roots of the Three-Tier governance model come from the Webequie Anishininniwuk Elders. Before Treaty No. 9 was signed, the Elders were able to see that change was imminent and were given the Three-Tier model to maintain their relationship with the Creator. Today, it offers a model for respectful relationships with neighbouring communities, government and industry (Webequie First Nation, 2023).

The land areas around the community that are inherent in the Three-Tier model include:

• Tier 1 – Tawin – Community Land Base: This is the home of Webequie People and where members live;
• Tier 2 – Tashiikawiin/Tashiiwiitoo – Protected Traditional Area: This is the area within a one-day walk
  (roughly 40-50 km radius) from the community. This area is used for traditional harvesting and Anishinabek cultural livelihood and supports who the Webequie people are; and
• Tier 3 – Bimachiiowiin Akkii – Area of Mutual Benefit: This is the area within another one-day walk and where Webequie people, neighbouring communities and outside parties can realize benefits from stewardship and development activities (Webequie First Nation, 2023).

The Webequie First Nation CCP focuses on eight “directions” as goals for the Webequie community:

1. Education and training;
2. Cultural Vibrancy and Traditional Life;
3. Housing and Infrastructure;
4. Environmental Quality and Relationship with the Land;
5. Community Health and Wellness;
6. Family and Social Conditions;
7. Economic Development; and
8. Community Leadership and Governance.

Each topic focuses on the strengths and challenges of each aspect and goals were created related to the topic. To reach these goals, four action categories were created, depending on the type of related project. The four action categories are: major capital projects, minor capital projects and community improvements, programs and plans and policies. The action categories included timing of when to start certain projects, outlined current progress status of projects, and provided a monitoring and evaluating tracker. Detailed action items are outlined within the document which specify steps required to address the issue, who needs to be involved and how they relate to the specific goals outlined in the plan (Webequie First Nation, 2023).

19.1.2         Consideration of Input from Engagement and Consultation Activities

The engagement and consultation activities for the Indigenous Peoples Interests and Rights, were carried out in several stages of the Project. The engagement and consultation program were guided by the Webequie First Nation Elders to uphold respect for the cultures and traditions of the Webequie people and their clans and neighbours outside the Webequie First Nation. In coordination with other provincial government agencies, Ontario (MECP) identified 22 potentially affected and/or interested Indigenous communities (First Nation communities and the Métis Nation of Ontario) that are to be consulted by the Webequie Project Team as part of its project planning. 16 of these Indigenous communities may be affected by the Project, whereas the other 6 Indigenous communities may have potential interest in the Project.

Table 19‑2 summarizes key feedback related to the Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights received during engagement and consultation activities listed above, and how the comments and inputs are addressed in the EAR/IS. This feedback includes concerns raised primarily by Indigenous communities/groups, but also includes concerns raised by the public and stakeholders prior to the formal commencement of the federal IA and provincial EA, during the Planning Phase of the IA and ToR phase of the EA.

 Table 19‑2:      Indigenous Peoples Interests and Rights – Summary of Inputs Received During Engagement and Consultation

19.1.3         Incorporation of Indigenous Knowledge

To enable Indigenous Knowledge communication and engagement, Webequie First Nation formed a Webequie Project Team, comprised of community members and elected councillors. The Webequie Project Team advised the consultant Project Team (AtkinsRéalis). The Webequie Project Team reports directly to the Chief and Council at crucial stages and decision-making junctures throughout the EAR/IS process. The Elders guide the Webequie Project Team to conduct respectful and inclusive engagement and consultation for the Project, aligning with the Elders’ guiding principles. This approach aims to reflect the culture and traditions of the Webequie people, including their clans, as well as neighbouring communities beyond the Webequie First Nation.

Section 19.1.2 provides a context of the feedback and concerns received through engagement and consultation with reference to this section, whilst Section 19.1.3 provides an understanding of how these concerns and feedback are addressed within this EAR/IS.

Following sequential engagement and consultation efforts, these First Nations provided knowledge via the Indigenous Knowledge and Land and Resource Use (IKLRU) study or the Socio-Economic Primary Data Collection Program as input for the EAR/IS to-date:

• Webequie First Nation;
• Marten Falls First Nation; and
• Weenusk First Nation.

Key Indigenous Knowledge that was shared and subsequently incorporated and/or considered in the assessment of the effects of the Project on Indigenous Peoples and impacts to the exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights is presented in Table 19‑3. Further details related to methods of IKLRU data collection are provided in the baseline report (Appendix L).

Table 19‑3:       Indigenous Peoples’ Interests and Rights – Summary of Indigenous Knowledge

Notes:   Names of First Nations and associated location-specific description in some instances are not presented in this table due to potential sensitivity and confidentiality of IKLRU information.

19.1.4         Indigenous Peoples Values and Rights

The assessment of effects of the Project on Indigenous Peoples and impacts on the exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights was undertaken with consideration of identified values of importance by Indigenous Peoples. The term “Indigenous values” is used in this section of the EAR/IS to describe the values of importance to Indigenous communities.

This understanding of Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights has been principally based on input and feedback from Indigenous communities that were identified as potentially affected by the Project, as well as professional experience, guidance and guidelines from federal and provincial government.

For the purposes of the EAR/IS, and as defined by the TISG, issued by the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) in 2020, the potential effects of the Project on Indigenous Peoples includes “both adverse and positive effects to the current use of land and resources for traditional purposes, physical and cultural heritage, and environmental, health, social and economic conditions of Indigenous peoples impacted by the Project” (IAAC, 2020).

In keeping with the TISG, the EAR/IS provides contextual information including the following:

• The current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes (including those uses that may have ceased due to external factors) (see Section 19.2);
• Physical and cultural heritage of each Indigenous group (see Section 20: Cultural Heritage and Archaeological Resources of the EAR/IS), including continuity of Indigenous culture (see Section 20);
• The environmental, health, social and economic effects of Indigenous peoples (see Section 14: Social Environment, Section 15: Economic Environment, and Section 17: Human Health of the EAR/IS); and
• Nature and extent of the rights exercised (see Section 19.5).

For the Project assessment, the Identification of Potential Effects, Pathways, and Indicators (Section 19.3) utilizes the following Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights and their associated indicators to assess effects on Indigenous Peoples and the impacts to Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.

These include:

• Indigenous Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes;
• Cultural Continuity (ability to practice and transmit cultural traditions including historical disruptions where Indigenous peoples have a desire to reinvigorate a cultural tradition); and
• Aboriginal and Treaty Rights:
  • Changes to rights related to current and historical use of lands and resources for traditional purposes and activities;
  • Changes to rights related to cultural continuity;
  • Socio-economic, Health and Well-being rights; and
  • Self-determination and Self-governance rights.

As presented in Table 19‑4 and Table 19‑5, the nature and extent of, and the potential impacts of the Project takes into consideration the range of identified Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights required for a holistic assessment. Further details on the approach taken for the assessment of the impacts of the Project on the exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights is described in Section 19.3.

Table 19‑4:       Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights, Indicators and Rationale

Table 19‑5:       Aboriginal and Treaty Rights Indicators and Rationale

19.1.5         Spatial and Temporal Boundaries

The following assessment boundaries have been defined for the Indigenous Peoples interests and exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. Project effects on the Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights will vary by Indigenous community due to differences in geographic proximity to the Project and where traditional land use is practiced, cultural connection to the Project area, community priorities and concerns and based on available information at the time of developing this EAR/IS.

19.1.5.1         Spatial Boundaries

The spatial boundaries for the assessment of effects on Indigenous Peoples interests and impacts on the exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights are shown onFigure 19.3 and include the following delineations:

• Project Footprint – the area of direct disturbance (i.e., the physical area required for project construction and operations). The Project Footprint is defined as the 35-metre wide right‑of-way (ROW) of the WSR; and temporary or permanent areas needed to support the Project that access roads, construction camps, laydown and storage yards, aggregate pits/quarries, and a maintenance and storage facility.
• Local Study Area (LSA) – the area where direct and indirect effects of the Project on Indigenous Peoples and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights are likely to occur. The LSA extends 1 km from the centreline of the preliminary recommended preferred route and 500 m from temporary or permanent support infrastructure (Figure 19.3). The LSA also encompasses the following communities which may be beyond the 500 m delineation of the preferred route and permanent support infrastructure:
  • Webequie First Nation;
  • Attawapiskat First Nation;
  • Eabametoong First Nation;
  • Kasabonika Lake First Nation;
  • Marten Falls First Nation;
  • Neskantaga First Nation;
  • Nibinamik First Nation; and
  • Weenusk First Nation;
• Regional Study Area (RSA) – The area where potential indirect and cumulative effects of the Project in the broader, regional context may occur. The RSA extends to include area of the quaternary watersheds crossed by the recommended preferred route for the RSA (Figure 19.3). The RSA also encompasses the following communities, which may be beyond the quaternary watersheds:
  • Aroland First Nation;
  • Constance Lake First Nation;
  • Fort Albany First Nation;
  • Ginoogaming First Nation;
  • Kashechewan First Nation;
  • Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation;
  • Kingfisher Lake First Nation;
  • Long Lake #58 First Nation;
  • Métis Nation of Ontario Region 2;
  • Mishkeegogamang First Nation;
  • North Caribou Lake First Nation;
  • Wunnumin Lake First Nation.
  • Wapekeka First Nation; and
  • Wawakapewin First Nation.

19.1.5.2         Temporal Boundaries

Temporal boundaries for the assessment address the potential effects of the Project over relevant timescales. The temporal boundaries for the Project consist of two main phases:

• Construction Phase: All activities associated with the initial development and construction of the road and supportive infrastructure from the start of the construction to the start of the operation and maintenance of the Project and is anticipated to be approximately five to six years in duration.
• Operations Phase: All activities associated with operation and maintenance of the road and permanent supportive infrastructure (e.g., operation and maintenance yard, aggregate extraction and processing areas) that will start after the construction activities are complete, including site restoration and decommissioning of temporary infrastructure (e.g., access roads, construction camps, etc.). The operations phase of the Project is anticipated to be 75 years based on the expected timeline when major refurbishment of road components (e.g., bridges) is deemed necessary.

The Project is proposed to be operated for an indeterminate period; therefore, future suspension, decommissioning and eventual abandonment was not evaluated in the EAR/IS (refer to Section 4.4 – Project Description).

Figure 19.3:      Study Areas Indigenous Peoples’ Interests and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

19.1.6         Identification of Project Interactions with Indigenous Peoples Interests and Rights

The identification of project interactions with Indigenous Peoples Interests and Rights provides a basis for the subsequent assessment of the potential effects of the Project. The potential interactions between the ‘Project Activity’ and the ‘Potential Effect’ are identified in Table 19‑6 with a check mark (ü). Where no interaction between activity and effect is anticipated, a dash (-) is shown.

The potential effects shown below are categorized according to the Indigenous value (Section 19.1.4):

• Current and Historical Use of Land and Resources for Traditional Purposes;
• Cultural Continuity; and
• Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.

The Project interactions shown in the table below take into consideration that several activities are interconnected and/or overlap, which can result in similar potential effects. The presentation of Project interactions below aims to streamline parameters to one primary pathway, thus reducing the need for duplicative discussion.

The interaction and effect pathways are presented in Section 19.3 and is the basis for mitigation and enhancement measures and the assessment of net effects.

Table 19‑6:       Project Interactions with Indigenous Peoples Interests and Rights

Notes:

✓ = Potential interaction

– = No interaction

19.2            Existing Conditions

This section summarizes existing conditions based on socio-economic data collection, engagement and consultation conducted for the Project, and the integration of IKLRU. A detailed description of the existing conditions, study methods and results are provided in Appendix L (Socio-Economic Existing Conditions Report).

19.2.1         Methods

To assess the current state of identified Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights within the project’s defined spatial and temporal boundaries, a combination of data collection methods was used. These methods were complemented by analytical frameworks that integrate information from various perspectives to enhance the understanding of these conditions. Data collection methods included secondary and primary data source research, combined with analytical framework considerations such as: Indigenous Knowledge, community knowledge, meaningful engagement, and GBA+.

Community profiles related to existing environmental, health, social and economic conditions were developed through the data collection process. The profiles are intended to present metrics that define the indicators used to assess changes based on the summary presented in Section 19.1.4. The following sections describe the mixed methods approach of using quantitative and qualitative data collection, with inputs from secondary and primary sources.

19.2.1.1         Engagement and Consultation

Overall engagement and consultation activities were conducted with Indigenous communities, stakeholders and the public related to the Project and/or effects predicted in the LSA and RSA. The assessment for the Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights focuses on engagement and consultation with Indigenous communities, in order to identify potential effects on Indigenous communities, preserve traditional and cultural heritage, and ensure transparency in the identification of effects. A full discussion of Project consultation and engagement is provided in EAR/IS Section 02 (Engagement and Consultation).

19.2.1.1.1         Proponent Indigenous Knowledge and Land and Resource Use and Data Validation

The IKLRU program was launched to gain insights into the social environment, foster engagement and collaboration with Indigenous communities, and take into account social information specific to each community’s experience. The IKLRU program was undertaken by the Indigenous communities and organizations / groups (and their selected advisors/ consultants/ contractors) with capacity support provided through the EAR/IS process.

Details of the engagement and consultation on IKLRU is presented in Section 19.2.1.5.

19.2.1.2         Collection and Analysis of Baseline Information

Collection of Socio-Economic baseline information for the Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights involved a mixed methods approach. Mixed methods refer to a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods. By combining these methods, a better understanding of issues and complex phenomena can be developed than by either method alone (Creswell and Clark, 2007).

Quantitative and qualitative data methods serve different study purposes and are designed to address different types of research questions and information needs. The quantitative approach allows the Project Team to collect information at a broader scale, on a wide range and across a number of indicators. The qualitative approach complements the quantitative approach as its purpose is to understand topics more in-depth from the perspective of lived experience, and the meanings attached to that experience (Winchester and Rofe, 2010). The Project Team and community facilitators have engaged interested communities where possible, to develop primary data using surveys, interviews, and focus groups.

The steps undertaken to collect and analyze data for social existing conditions, including the collection of secondary information, primary information and how GBA+ was incorporated, are described in detail in Appendix L (Socio‑Economic Existing Conditions Report (Part I).

19.2.1.2.1         Secondary Data Collection

Secondary data collection refers to information that has been collected, processed, and published by someone else, rather than being gathered firsthand by the person or organization using it. Secondary data research and analysis for the Socio-Economic Baseline has included collecting and analyzing information from a range of quantitative and qualitative information sources to present a narrative of the existing environmental, health, social and economic conditions of communities in the LSA and RSA.

Sources of Information

Desktop research involved collecting and reviewing, where available and permissible, community websites, and recent community documents such as comprehensive community plans, housing plans, community-based land use plans, and development plans.

19.2.1.2.2         Primary Data Collection

Primary data is information that is collected firsthand by a researcher or organization specifically for a particular purpose or study. Specific data collection related to the social condition of the LSA and RSA required data collection from Indigenous communities. A Socio-Economic Primary Data Collection Program was developed to gather information about Indigenous communities that wished to participate in the Program, and to support the assessment of the Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. The methods to gather primary data related to the social environment included:

• Community surveys: Indigenous communities in the LSA and RSA were invited to participate in surveys through the Socio-Economic Primary Data Collection Program. The survey format (i.e., online, in-person surveyors, and community sessions) and the survey content (i.e., questions posed to community members) was tailored to the needs of the community. Indigenous communities were able to choose to complete some or all of the surveys themselves and were provided with support via survey administrators or Project Team.
• Focus groups: Indigenous communities in the LSA and RSA were invited to participate in Socio-Economic focus group sessions, through the Socio-Economic Primary Data Collection Program. Diverse subsections of the community participated in small group discussions related to the existing conditions in the community. Information regarding focus groups are in Appendix L.
• Knowledge holder interviews: Indigenous communities in the LSA and RSA were invited to participate in Socio‑Economic knowledge holder interviews, through the Socio-Economic Primary Data Collection Program. A range of community representatives provided key first-hand knowledge and insights about community through interviews. Although all 22 Indigenous communities were invited to participate in the Key Informant Interviews, only Webequie First Nation engaged in these discussions.

19.2.1.3         Aboriginal and Treaty Rights Assessment Approach

The assessment of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights relies on information provided by Indigenous communities participating in the IKLRU Program., For those Indigenous communities who applied for the Participant Funding Initiative, it enabled them to complete studies on their rights and interests, and how rights could be impacted by the Project. In addition, publicly available literature was reviewed to gather relevant information. To date, most Indigenous communities have not taken part in the IKLRU Program; however, several communities have provided input about their values and interests at some point during the EAR/IS process and this has been considered as part of the assessment. The assessment approach presented in the sections that follow included the review of information provided by Indigenous Communities, through engagement and consultation activities, which, although limited in the circumstances, articulated the communities’ views on the Project’ potential impacts on the exercise of rights to the extent available.

The preliminary assessment endeavoured to identify pathways from Project-related activities to the biophysical environment, as well as social, economic and health conditions that affect the conditions needed to exercise rights, such as access, quantity and quality of resources available for traditional use, as well as community well-being that supports the exercise of rights.

Community-specific information, if available, and IKLRU report information provided by Webequie First Nation, Marten Falls First Nation and Weenusk First Nation are included in Section 19.2 and Section 19.3. The assessment considered information provided by Indigenous Nations about the potential impacts of the Project to understand the nature, scope, and extent of adverse impacts on rights.

The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (2023), notes that an Indigenous community’s “longstanding connection to, use of, or occupation of an area is indicative of a community’s rights”. An Indigenous community can assert an area of interest or traditional territory and that these assertions may consider many factors including, but not limited to, hunting and trapping areas, wildlife migration patterns, travel routes, watersheds, etc. However, these assertions “may not be well understood by all parties, they may raise uncertainty as they lack information, or there may be differing interpretations” (IAAC, 2023).

There is a potential for adverse effects on Aboriginal Rights where there is an interaction between construction and operation activities and resources that are essential to the exercise of the Aboriginal right, or to the access of a resource. In considering potential effects on Aboriginal and Treaty Rights, it is assumed these types of activities may occur in the vicinity of the Project, even if site-specific areas or activities were not well identified or characterized by the majority of the Indigenous communities.

The Project Team recognizes that each Indigenous community has specific values and interests that affect its exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. Potential impacts to Aboriginal and Treaty Rights will vary by Indigenous community, depending on its proximity and potential effect pathways from the Project. The Project Team will continue to engage with Indigenous communities as the EAR/IS progresses. The Project Team will make efforts to review and consider all additional input from Indigenous communities if received following the completion of this report. 

For the purposes of the EAR/IS, information on Aboriginal and Treaty Rights has been organized into the following areas:

• Rights related to current and historical use of lands and resources for traditional purposes and activities;
• Rights related to cultural continuity;
• Rights related to socio-economic, health and well-being conditions; and
• Rights related to self-determination and self-governance.

These indicators for the Aboriginal and Treaty Rights assessment were chosen for the EAR/IS as they reflect a holistic understanding of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights as they relate to Indigenous Peoples’ relationships with their lands, cultures, communities, and governance systems. 

In the absence of information currently available from the majority of the Indigenous communities, the assessment of impacts on Aboriginal and Treaty Rights has been largely inferred based on general information; however, this approach is in no way intended to indicate an absence of these rights. As described in Sections 6 to 18 and 20 of the EAR/IS, the Project has the potential to cause adverse environmental, social, economic and health effects, which may lead to adverse impacts on Aboriginal and Treaty Rights, as outlined above. Due to the connectivity of Indigenous communities in Treaty 9, potential impacts on Aboriginal and Treaty Rights as a result of the construction and operation of the WSR Project are described in Section 19.3 and Section 19.5.

19.2.1.4         Gender Based Analysis Plus (GBA+)

Gender Based Analysis Plus (GBA+) is a required analytical approach for any project operating under Section 22 of the IA Act and is considered part of this EAR/IS process. GBA+ is not a method unto itself, but an approach that is associated with a variety of standard quantitative and qualitative data collection tools.

GBA+ recognizes that historical and current power structures (e.g., laws, policies, governments, and other institutions) have shaped society and created inequalities. This is especially important with respect to legacies of colonialism and the impacts on Indigenous Peoples, and in particular, Indigenous women and Two-Spirited people.

In the context of the EAR/IS, GBA+ is intended as a means to understand and assess how potential Project effects could disproportionately impact more vulnerable groups, including women, youth, two-spirited and gender diverse persons, disabled persons, and Elders with respect to the Project. It is particularly important to consider how the impacts, benefits, and risks of the Project could be unequally distributed across diverse groups within a community, and to develop targeted plans and mechanisms that can be put in place to avoid and mitigate impacts, and/or compensate these groups.

19.2.1.4.1         GBA+ Data Validation Session

Validation of GBA+ information included in the Social-Economic Baseline took place on May 13 and 14, 2024 in Webequie First Nation with Webequie community members. Representatives of the Webequie Supply Road (WSR) Project Team visited Webequie First Nation to provide an update about the Project and to talk to community members and request feedback and validation on the socio-economic and health conditions as well as GBA+ information of the community that have been assembled into baseline study reports and circulated to the community leadership. The Project Team also heard from community members about concerns and issues related to the potential effects of the WSR Project on the community. 

19.2.1.5         Indigenous Knowledge and Land and Resource Use

The IKLRU program was initiated to engage and collaborate with Indigenous communities and groups on the collection and consideration of IKLRU information throughout the EAR/IS. It is important to note that the IKLRU program was undertaken by the Indigenous communities and organizations / groups (and their selected advisors/consultants/ contractors) with capacity support provided through the EAR/IS process.

The types of information that were sought with regard to Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights included:

• Sharing of historical, cosmological and spiritual learnings that provide context and direction to the community;
• Physical and cultural heritage of each Indigenous community, including burial sites, values of spiritual, cultural, sacred and/or historical importance and meanings attached to places, plants, animals, objects, beings, or things;
• Areas of Indigenous land and resource use for traditional purposes presently or historically practiced (e.g., hunting, trapping, fishing and plant harvesting areas); as defined by location, frequency, duration and/or timing of these activities; types of resources used and their habitats; the quantity and quality of resources; culturally important resources and places they are harvested; access to resources or places used;
• Cultural practices such as resource preparation and use; values associated with, and importance assigned to resources; and
• Knowledge regarding the existing environment and trends within the study area in both past and present, including locations or areas of specific importance for wildlife, fish, and/or vegetation (e.g., calving areas, spawning areas, plants).

The process of collecting Indigenous Knowledge for the EAR/IS involved multiple steps, including gathering, documenting, obtaining permission for use, and validating the information. Community validation involves the community and its knowledge holders verifying the accuracy, completeness and sensitivity of the Indigenous Knowledge collected for a project.

During Indigenous Knowledge data collection, the community’s practitioners and/or contractors may meet with community members, especially Indigenous Knowledge holders, to review Indigenous Knowledge collected, to discuss, questions, add to the information and verify that the community is comfortable and confident with the accuracy and completeness of the information presented. The process is consistent with the TISG and adheres to the following guiding principles: respect to Indigenous Knowledge holders; building relationships; carrying on an ongoing dialogue with community members; community involvement in ensuring the context and the meaning of the Indigenous Knowledge provided is understood and maintained; transparency of the process; gaining permissions from communities for usage; and Ownership, Control, Access and Possession. 

Community visits were carried out in Webequie First Nation (September 2024, January 2024, May 2024, August 2023, June 2023, May 2023, November 2021, October 2021), Weenusk First Nation (August 2023, July 2022), Constance Lake First Nation (September 2024, June 2023, June 2023), Nibinamik First Nation (August 2024), Marten Falls First Nation (August 2023), and Kashechewan First Nation (September 2023) during the EAR/IS preparation. Webequie First Nation, Weenusk First Nation and Marten Falls First Nation performed a validation workshops of collected Indigenous Knowledge data.

A data validation meeting was held with Webequie First Nation in August 2024, where information collected via the primary data collection methods were discussed and refined. This community visit validated primary and secondary information regarding Indigenous Knowledge, cultural heritage and GBA+.

A second data validation session was held in September 2024 with Elders of Webequie First Nation at Thunder Bay, where Elders’ knowledge on existing conditions and their concerns was identified and discussed.

Weenusk First Nation completed a draft version of Weenusk First Nation Existing Conditions Report for the Project. This draft was made available to the Project Team in July 2023 with the understanding that it was confidential, pending community verification/confirmation (MNP LLP, n.d). In November 2023, the community completed a verification of the reports, and January 2024, the final report for the Weenusk First Nation Existing Conditions Report for the Project was made available to the Project Team (MNP LLP, 2024).

Marten Falls First Nation completed a draft version of the Marten Falls First Nation Indigenous Knowledge, Land Use and Occupancy Study for the Northern Access Road. The draft report was made available to the Project Team in May 2024, and it was indicated that the report was subject to change (Suslop Inc., 2024).

19.2.1.6         Summary of Data Sources

Table 19‑7 identifies the method data sources that were used to define the existing Indigenous Peoples and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.

Table 19‑7:       Summary of Methods Data Sources for Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

19.2.2         Results

The existing health, social and economic conditions are described in relation to the indicators as presented in Section 19.1.4. Detailed descriptions of the baseline results, including results of the primary data collection and interpretations, are provided in Appendix L (Socio-Economic Existing Conditions Report). Furthermore, information regarding cultural heritage existing conditions is provided in Appendix S, along with country foods assessment in Appendix O.

19.2.2.1         Webequie First Nation

Webequie First Nation completed a project-specific Indigenous Knowledge Study for the Webequie Supply Road Project by a third-party.  Webequie First Nation used information compiled for the Indigenous Knowledge Study as the basis for the completion of the Webequie First Nation Indigenous and Treaty Rights Impact Assessment for the Webequie Supply Road (Stantec, 2025). The study included previously completed reports that provided information on traditional land and resource use, cultural continuity and other values and interests gathered by the Webequie First Nation as part of previous planning exercises, which included:

• Webequie First Nation Community Well-Being Baseline Study Summary (Webequie First Nation, 2014).
• Webequie First Nation Community-Based Land Use Plan. Webequie Anishininniwuk Ahki Ohnahchiikaywin. (Webquie First Nation, 2019a).
• Webequie First Nation On-Reserve Land Use Plan (Webequie First Nation, 2019b).
• Webequie First Nation Comprehensive Community Plan (Webequie First Nation, 2023).

Information gathered from the Socio-Economic Primary Data Collection Program for the Project, including interviews with Webequie knowledge holders, focus groups with identified subgroups in the community and community surveys results were also reviewed as part of the Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study, as well as other relevant secondary information (Stantec, 2025). 

Project-specific Indigenous Knowledge workshops and mapping sessions were convened with Webequie Indigenous Knowledge holders in Thunder Bay and in the Webequie community in 2023, with follow-up reviews and validation of results in 2024 (Stantec, 2025). The study compiled available mapping information from projects, including the Webequie Supply Road.  Types of spatial and intensity of use information mapped in the study include:

• Harvesting areas;
• Routes;
• Habitation areas;
• Cultural and spiritual areas;
• Important habitat; and
• Environmental changes.

The Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study focused on the following types of Indigenous Knowledge:

• Traditional ecological knowledge – Includes the community’s collective knowledge of the natural environment accumulated over generations, providing rich knowledge of the land and resources in which the community is surrounded. Traditional ecological knowledge includes knowledge of plants and animals, their population, distribution, habitat, movement and behaviour, as well as other understanding of the environment relating to water and navigation of waterways, seasons, climate and weather, and soils and landscapes (Stantec, 2024).
• Traditional land and resource use – Includes the community’s collective knowledge of the harvest of resources such as harvesting plants and organic materials, hunting, fishing and trapping. This also includes knowledge of trails, routes, and habitation sites, as well as ceremonial and spiritual sites and areas, such as sacred sites for burial and ceremonies. Details may include seasonality, historical context, and the use and meaning of the use of resources (Stantec, 2024). 

The Webequie First Nation Draft CBLUP (Webequie First Nation, 2019a) identifies recommended land use areas (“zones”) within the planning area proposed by Webequie First Nation, as well as descriptions, intent and management direction for each area (Webequie First Nation, 2019a). The planning area zones are described as follows:

• Zone #1 is known to have significant cultural and historic value to both the Webequie and Nibinamik people and includes traditional travel routes still used today. This area was and is still used for a variety of customary harvesting, fishing, hunting, and gathering activities. This area is of high value to Webequie First Nation as it contains gathering areas, historic village sites, occupation sites and burial sites.
• Zone #2A is said to be central to the community’s livelihood and has several traditional and cultural sites including, burial grounds, birth places, harvesting, and historical gathering areas. This area is a common interest between the Kasabonika Lake, Neskantaga, Nibinamik, and Weenusk communities. This area is actively used for harvesting activities and contains several traditional travel routes that connect to traditional harvest areas and neighbouring communities. This area has many fish and fish spawning sites, wildlife and plants for food and medicine.
• Zone #2B is significant to the community as it is said to contain cultural monuments left standing along ancestral travel routes that connect the community to their traditional area and neighboring communities. Zone #2B supports fish habitat, spawning sites, waterfowl habitat and medicinal plants and herbs. This area includes a number of community member trap cabins and community use cabins that support traditional harvesting activities.
• Zone #3 is a shared area with Marten Falls First Nation and Neskantaga First Nation and no specific planning direction has been outlined, pending further discussion between the three communities.
• Zone #4 contains traditional travel routes, campsites and historic camping areas and culturally sensitive sites. Indigenous traditional harvesting activities that are significant in the area include waterfowl, fish, Caribou/Aatiik, and moose/Moonz harvesting. This area also provides medicinal plants, which are used by First Nation people for a variety of purposes.
• Zone #5 contains culturally sensitive sites, named places and encompasses a historic waterway travel route to Kasabonika Lake. This zone is significant for fisheries, and it contains lakes, rivers and streams that are important for fish habitat and fish spawning sites. Hunting, fishing, and harvesting are also conducted by the community in the area.
• Zone #6 contains numerous culturally significant waterways, lakes, rivers and streams which are defining features of the area and connect with adjacent Kaa-shi-ti-kwayak Dedicated Protected Areas. Waterways such as Wahpiidotem (Wapitotem) River are monuments to the Webequie people due to longstanding traditional and historical use. The Corridor Enhanced Management Area (EMA) is a shared area with Neskantaga First Nation and Nibinamik First Nation and contains historic travel routes from Webequie to the two communities. Culturally significant and sensitive sites are located close to water as well as across the Corridor EMA. This area is important to Webequie First Nation as it contains high quality moose/Moonz habitat and calving sites as well as fish habitat and fish spawning areas. The area also has a high density of wolves/Mahiingun.
• Zone #7 is used by Webequie First Nation members throughout the year for harvesting of food and medicinal plants, Caribou/Aatiik, moose/Moonz, fish, and geese/nika

In addition, socio-economic, health and cultural continuity values information was also gathered as part of the Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study (Stantec, 2024). Other sections of the EAR/IS use Indigenous Knowledge in the understanding of baseline conditions and the effects assessment on the Social Environment (Section 14 of the EAR/IS), Economic Environment (Section 15 of the EAR/IS), Non-Traditional Land and Resources Use (Section 16 of the EAR/IS), Human Health (Section 17 of the EAR/IS), and further information regarding cultural continuity is provided later in this section, below. 

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

The description of Webequie First Nation’s current and historical use of lands and resources for traditional purposes draws on traditional ecological knowledge and traditional land and resource use information to provide context for potential changes to the availability of lands and resources for traditional purposes, sites and areas used for traditional harvesting, and access to lands and resources for traditional harvesting.

Availability of Lands and Resources for Traditional Harvesting

Webequie First Nation has a deep understanding of the lands and waters, and of the life which is sustained upon the landscape of its traditional territory which is referenced in the Indigenous Knowledge Study, and focused on the area delineated as the Regional Study Area for the Project and broader traditional territory (Stantec, 2024). Important aspects of environment which contribute to the understanding of availability of lands and resources for traditional harvesting, noted in the Indigenous Knowledge Study (Stantec, 2025) are described below. 

• Water quality and quantity:
  • Water is a sacred element with deep spiritual and cultural significance for Webequie First Nation (Stantec, 2024). The Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study reported that the community describes it as “water connects all life, whether it’s through consumption, honoured in ceremony or used as transportation” and that “[w]ater is the most precious element of Webequie First Nation’s livelihood. Areas where rivers or waterbodies are present are seen as highly spiritually important areas to which the Webequie community has the responsibility to protect”.
  • Historical and current waterways used by Webequie First Nation include Winisk Lake and surrounding tertiary watersheds and the Winisk River (Stantec, 2024). Webequie First Nation also uses the Upper Ekwan and Lower Attawapiskat tertiary watersheds, which flow east to James Bay. Water levels have been observed to have changed in recent years, which was attributed to climate change. It was noted that there has been less snowfall, and the ground does not freeze for as long during winter.
  • Some older community members continue to trap beavers for meat and pelts, but the practice is less common now. The decline in trapping has led to an increase in beaver population in the territory.
• Air quality:
  • Dust from existing roads in the community is present. Community members noted concerns about the health effects of inhalation of the dust, especially on youth.  
• Noise, light and visual disturbances:
  • Community members reported that when they go out on the land with their families, there is no industrial noise or other sensory disturbances.
• Climate and Weather:
  • Webequie First Nation has a rich history of living on its traditional lands and water, which involves moving throughout their territory to harvest resources in patterns that are influenced by climate and weather, and using knowledge of the surrounding environment to predict coming weather.
  • Webequie First Nation members have observed significant changes in the weather patterns over the years, with milder winters and less snowfall in recent years. There is less build up of ice on the river, which has made it less safe to use as a travel way in the winter.  Lower temperatures in winter used to mean thicker ice that was reliable to travel on. The snow was also different in character than it tends to be today, where it was thicker and could be walked on, compared to today, the snow is fluffy and less deep.  Thinner ice also affects winter fishing activities, making it harder to set up winter nets for fishing. The spring goose hunt is affected by earlier thaws than in past years.  Some community members reported that rain has become more variable, more of it some years, and other years there is more drought type conditions. It affects the availability of berries some years. There is a general concern that climate change may affect the ability to fish and hunt.  Wildlife and wildlife habitat: Webequie First Nation reports that the forests surrounding their community are mostly black spruce along with white spruce, balsam fir, and trembling aspen. These forest habitats are home to various wildlife, including Caribou, black bear, wolf, moose, lynx, rabbit, Canada goose, sharp-tailed grouse, and American black duck.  
• Furbearers:
  • The Webequie First Nation territory includes lynx, fox, muskrat, rabbit, beaver, mink, wolf, otter, and wolverine. Some community members indicated that higher populations of muskrats, rabbits and beavers were found during their youth. Others indicated there are more coyotes, wolverine and wolves than in past years.  
  • Moose and Caribou:
• Moose and Caribou are generally found throughout the territory. The most recent sighting of boreal Caribou was in April 2024 on Eastwood Island, marking the first sighting in five years.
• Caribou typically migrate from the northeast to the west in the spring, passing through the community in April. They can also be seen on Winisk Lake in March, with herds ranging from two to 30 animals.
• The lack of Caribou sightings may be attributed to an increased wolf population in the area, with a wolf den nearby. 
• Caribou migration routes change every year, but they can be seen at Goose Camp, north of the community, throughout the winter. 
• Participants expressed concerns that the Webequie Supply Road will further alter Caribou migration patterns, noting that Caribou usually stick close to the roads when passing through the community. 
• The traditional territory of Webequie First Nation includes high-quality moose habitat and calving sites. Land users have specific known areas for harvesting moose and Caribou. 
• Moose habitats can be found for instance at specific burnt areas in the Webequie First Nation territory. During the fall, moose move into open areas, making it easier to hunt them. In contrast, during the winter, they move to densely forested areas and hilly regions with thick bush (Stantec, 2024). Calving areas are considered sacred to traditional ways of life, and Knowledge Holders are hesitant to share this information with outsiders.
  • Bears:
• Community members have noted an increase in the bear population. Bears are now more frequently seen feeding on garbage rather than berries, and they are often spotted at the dump. There have been changes in bears’ hibernation periods as well.
  • Birds:
• It is an important teaching to not disturb the nests of migratory birds when they return in the spring. 
• There have been observed changes in geese migratory patterns, which sees birds returning later in Springtime. Migrating birds are being seen in fewer numbers, in different place and in different migration patterns.
• Fish and fish habitat:
  • Species that are present within Webequie First Nation’s territory include whitefish (lake and round), sturgeon, trout (brook, speckled, rainbow, brown, and lake), northern pike (jackfish), pickerel, meesshash/meenawshkoochosh (burbot), walleye (yellow pickerel), muskie, largemouth bass, suckers (white and longnose), and cisco.
• Vegetation:
  • Webequie First Nation is situated within the Ontario Shield – Hudson Bay Lowlands interface, an area rich in biodiversity. The region contains a mix of upland coniferous forests, large lake systems, and major rivers in the west, and lowland areas with high densities of wetland features, including bogs and fens, to the east. The forest surrounding the community is primarily composed of black spruce, white spruce, balsam fir, and trembling aspen. Drier sites feature stands of jack pine, trembling aspen, and white birch, along with some black and white spruce. Poorly drained, peat-filled depressions are dominated by closed and open stands of black spruce, Labrador tea, blueberry, bog rosemary, and sphagnum mosses. Cedar grows along the shorelines to the west of the community.
  • These long, snake-like rock and sand formations can stretch for several kilometers and provide important habitat for wildlife, especially small animals and migrating birds. Eskers also hold important medicines that cannot be found in the muskeg. 
  • Manoomin (wild rice) is seeded and harvested in three areas to the southwest of the community, including the Fish Basket River. However, it doesn’t grow well in many areas due to the high clay content in the soil.
  • Several waterways in the Winisk River Watershed are habitat for medicinal plants and herbs.

Traditional Land and Resource Use

Traditional land and resource use encompasses a wide range of activities, practices, and places related to the use of traditional resources. This includes the collection of plants and organic materials, as well as practices such as ceremonies, hunting, trapping, and fishing. Traditional land and resource use also involves any travel undertaken to engage in these harvesting practices, as well as habitation areas where these activities take place (Stantec, 2024). These practices were developed over many generations and allow for survival on the land, as well as cultural growth and development of the community (Stantec, 2024). For the purposes of the EAR/IS, sites and areas related to cultural and spiritual practices are described separately, below.

Most Webequie First Nation households continue to harvest traditional resources. Previous studies have indicated that traditional harvesting is widely practiced in the Webequie community. A 2013 study found that 62% of Webequie First Nation members fished, 51% hunted/set snares and 21% collected wild plant foods (FNFES, 2013a). The Webequie First Nation Community Well-Being Baseline Study (Webequie First Nation, 2014) indicated fishing as the most common harvesting activity with 80% of households participating. Most households reported that at least one adult member spent four or more consecutive days on their traditional lands during the past year. Almost half of Webequie First Nation households reported at least one adult member took trips to traditional lands for 14 days or more (Webequie First Nation, 2014).

Webequie First Nation Country Foods Assessment Report (Appendix O) reveals that country foods are consumed by Webequie members at least on a weekly basis. Around 71% of the country foods survey respondents stated that locally harvested fish are consumed for at least one meal per week, and few indicated two to three meals per week. Around 86% of the survey respondents stated that game meat is consumed for at least one meal per week, and a single respondent indicating four (4) or more meals per week. Around 64% of the survey respondents indicated consuming migratory birds at least one meal per week, with a few indicating up to three meals per week. Country foods consumed in Webequie at a less frequent basis include gooseberries, strawberries, blueberries, raspberries, June/saskatoon berries, Labrador (tea), muskrat root, mint, cedar (tea), and bear root (AtkinsRéalis, 2022b). Although the high cost is a burden on the community in terms of going out to the lands for traditional activities, it can be assumed that some of the members have regular access to country foods as a part of their diet, based on the survey findings.

According to the Webequie First Nation Well-Being Survey (Webequie First Nation, 2014 as cited in InterGroup, 2024), over 60% of households sometimes or regularly share food, wood, or help others, with sharing food between households being the most common practice as 86% of households indicated they share food sometimes or regularly with other households. This suggests that those who do have the means to go harvesting are able and willing to share their harvest with their fellow family and community members, indicating social connectedness of the community (InterGroup, 2024).

Hunting, trapping, and fishing continue to be important social activities for the Webequie community. These activities are often carried out in large family groups, including aunties, uncles, cousins, nephews, nieces, siblings, children, parents, friends, and other extended next of kin (Stantec, 2024). These trips typically last two to three weeks and occur at least twice each year, in the spring and the fall. Families stay at cabins and other camping sites during these trips (Stantec, 2024).

Webequie First Nation community members have emphasized the importance of the areas surrounding the Webequie reserve and the proposed route for the Project for traditional land and resource use. The community’s hunting, trapping, fishing, and habitation areas are tied to specific family groups and clans, and these lands have been passed down from generation to generation through paternal lines (Stantec, 2024).

As noted above, Webequie First Nation completed a project-specific Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study for the Project (Stantec, 2024), which incorporated previous studies and mapping exercises along with additional workshops and mapping sessions completed more recently with study participants from Webequie First Nation for the Project in 2023-2024. The Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study provides spatial mapping, intensity of use and other details of Webequie community members’ traditional land and resource use, including the following interests identified:

• Hunting (n=148 locations);
• Trapping (n=26 locations);
• Fishing (n=63 locations);
• Plant gathering (n=3);
• Spring water sources (n=20);
• Travel and access; (n=1,050 locations[1]);
• Habitation (n=120 locations); and
• Named Places (n=468 locations)

The Webequie First Nation IK Study reported that participants emphasized that the areas surrounding the Webequie reserve and the proposed route for the Webequie Supply Road are crucial for their families’ traditional land and resource use. The community’s hunting, trapping, fishing, and habitation areas are linked to specific family groups and clans, with these lands being passed down through paternal lines from generation to generation.

One study participant explained that while Webequie people are allowed to hunt, trap, and fish in another family’s traditional territory, it is customary to ask for permission from that family first. The participant noted, “You would only trap your own area back in the days. Or only if you were allowed to trap, those were the rules” (Stantec, 2024).

Hunting

Hunting has always been and continues to be a vital traditional activity for Webequie First Nation. Members hunt a wide variety of wildlife species that significantly contribute to their diets and serve as an important cultural activity, connecting the Webequie people to the land. Community members report that most of the food they ate while growing up was traditional food, with very little coming from the store (Stantec, 2024).

Webequie community members have identified moose (Moonz) and Caribou (Aatiik) as important species (Stantec, 2024). The species hunted by Webequie First Nation include, but are not limited to, moose (Moonz), Caribou (Aatiik), black bear (Mahkwah), deer, rabbit, muskrat (Wahjushk), beaver (Amik), wolverine (Weengohongaay), porcupine, squirrel, American wigeon, Canada goose (nika), snow geese, wood duck, ring-necked duck, American black duck, mallard, partridge, gadwall, northern pintail, bufflehead, redhead, goldeneye, merganser, scoter (surf, white, winged, and black), loon, grouse (blue, ruffed, and sharp-tailed), grey partridge, and swan (Stantec, 2024).

Several areas of importance for their hunting practices were identified by Webequie community members in the Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study, which are described in the context of the planning zones outlined above, and include:

• Waanaabiikan (Bowl Rock) (Zone #5);
• Eastwood Island on Winisk Lake;
• Western Upland EMA (Zone #1);
• Kaa-shi-ti-kwayak (Waterway) Dedicated Protected Areas (Zone #2B);
• Prime Lake EMA (Zone #7);
• James Bay Lowlands, including the Upper Ekwan and Lower Attawapiskat watersheds; and
• Other areas such as Lake Kanuchuan.

Knowledge Holders from Webequie First Nation have shared that hunters from Webequie First Nation adapt their hunting tactics based on the changing behavior of animals in each season. These practices highlight the deep connection between the community and the land, as well as the importance of traditional knowledge in sustaining their way of life (Stantec, 2024).

Harvesters use the majority of the animal which minimizes waste. In the past, meat was smoked and preserved for times when food was scarce. Bones were used to make tools and jewelry, and pelts and skins were used to make clothing and teepees (Stantec, 2024). Members have prepared hides for multiple uses such as mattresses, strips of leather for snowshoes, and the fat or “cream” can be scraped and rendered from hides (Stantec, 2024). Bear and moose can be rendered into grease that is used as food, medicine, and in ceremonies (Stantec, 2024). Game meat such as moose, beaver, swan, and goose is smoked. Goose can also be harvested for medicinal purposes, and their feathers are used to make pillows (Stantec, 2024).

Traditionally, extended families would travel to their hunting territories together. Men were responsible for hunting, while women were responsible for skinning and butchering animals, preserving game meat, and tanning hides. Boys were taught survival skills before they were allowed to marry, and girls learned how to prepare food, skin a beaver, fillet fish, and smoke moose meat for dry storage. This division of labor was considered an important prerequisite to marriage and was meant to establish an equal division of labor between spouses and men and women in the community (Stantec, 2024).

As per the Webequie First Nation IK Study, one study participant commented that their family hunts Caribou and moose in their traditional hunting territory to the east of the Webequie reserve, as far as the Muketei River and as far south as the proposed road site (Stantec, 2024).

Webequie First Nation community members report that the muskeg to the east of the Webequie community in the vicinity of ROW for the Project, is an area for the Spring goose hunt. In the area surrounding Prime Lake, Billinger Lake and Spence Lake, there are several duck blinds there, and families use the area to hunt geese, mallard, and American black ducks (Stantec, 2024). The Ekwan River is known for hunting moose, Caribou, wolverine, cranes and ducks (Stantec, 2024). Also, it is reported families hunt Caribou around Beaver Lake, Stockman Lake, Billinger Lake, Prime Lake, Dead Mouse Lake, and the Bear Head rapids (Stantec, 2024).

Knowledge Holders have shared important insights regarding the relationship between traditional practices and wildlife presence in the Webequie First Nation area. They emphasized that if Webequie people do not hunt, fish, or trap on their lands, traditional teachings dictate that wildlife will disappear from the area (Stantec, 2024).

The Elder’s insights highlight the sustainable practices of Webequie First Nation. Families cycle through different locations for hunting, trapping, and fishing to allow wildlife to repopulate. This practice supports that the natural balance is maintained and that wildlife populations remain healthy. Another Elder emphasized the importance of harvesting only what is needed. If there is an overkill, the excess is brought to the community and distributed to those who are poorer. This practice not only prevents waste but also supports the community by sharing resources (Stantec, 2024).

Plant Gathering

Webequie First Nation has emphasized the importance of plants for various purposes. Members continue to harvest berries and medicinal plants from the land for subsistence, medicinal, and utilitarian uses. These practices are deeply rooted in the community’s cultural heritage and traditional knowledge, passed down through generations.

Some of the plant species harvested include:

• Berries: Blueberry, wild strawberry, raspberry, gooseberry, currant, Saskatoon berry, lowbush cranberry (lingon berry and bog), highbush cranberry (squashberry, mooseberry), crowberry, bearberry, blackberry, blue huckleberry, cherry (pin, choke cherry, sand), hawthorn, juniper, bunchberry, thimbleberry (salmonberry).
• Medicinal Plants: Labrador tea, weekenz (muskrat root), chaga, mint, dandelion, wintergreen (teaberry), cedar.
• Other Plants: Manoomin (wild rice), maple syrup, willow bark, poplar (cottonwood) inner bark and buds, spruce (black and white) inner bark (Stantec, 2024).

Plant gathering typically takes place in the summer and fall months in preparation for winter. Berry picking occurs all over the traditional territory, not just in the community. Berries are often found in rocky areas compared to muskeg (Stantec, 2024). Community members typically seed and harvest wild rice at three different locations to the southwest of the community (Stantec, 2024).

Medicine is available wherever you go. Four sacred medicines: tobacco, cedar, sage and sweetgrass are used as offerings daily, and especially when out harvesting on the land (Stantec, 2024). Medicinal plants are used in various ways, some examples include:

• Cedar branches are used for cold and flu symptoms;
• Tree sap is used to treat burns;
• The steam from boiling the nuts of the spruce tree can help treat eye strain;
• Cedar water is used after birth as a cleansing and blessing;
• Labrador tea is used to strengthen infants’ teeth; and
• Birch bark with slits carved into it is used to prevent snow blindness.

Many younger people do not use traditional medicines as much as the older generation because they do nott know how to find them. While youth in the community value traditional medicines and use cedar and Weekenz because they are popular, they lack the knowledge to identify more complex or lesser-known medicines (Stantec, 2024).

Fishing

Fishing has always been and continues to be an important activity among community members of Webequie First Nation. Fish have served as a year-round crucial food source for Webequie First Nation ancestors and community members. According to the Webequie First Nation Community Well-Being Baseline Study in 2014, the majority of Webequie First Nation households participate in fishing (Stantec, 2024).

• The species fished by Webequie First Nation include:
• Whitefish (lake and round);
• Sturgeon;
• Trout (brook, speckled, rainbow, brown, and lake);
• Northern pike (jackfish);
• Pickerel;
• Meesshash/meenawshkoochosh (burbot);
• Walleye (yellow pickerel);
• Muskie;
• Largemouth bass;
• Suckers (white and longnose);
• Sauger; and
• Cisco.

In 2013, walleye, whitefish, and northern pike were among the top five country foods most frequently eaten by community members (FNFNES, 2013). Sturgeon, suckers, speckled trout, and burbot are also popular (Stantec, 2024). Smoked whitefish is considered a particular favorite. Lake sturgeon and brook trout, although rare to catch, are considered the best to eat. Both whitefish and walleye are preferred over northern pike, longnose suckers, and white suckers. Participants noted that northern pike will not rot if hung upside down, and it was a staple food in the wintertime (Stantec, 2024).

Webequie First Nation reported that fish species have a particular cultural use and is part of the fabric of the community stemming back generations. In addition to consumption, fish are used for a variety of purposes, including:

• Infant rattles from burbot;
• Fat or oil from skin of northern pike;
• Medicinal purposes;
• Whitefish grease used as a bug repellent;
• Dog food; and
• Bait for hunting.

Webequie Elders have shared a traditional method for fishing that involves four steps:

1. Setting the net and catching the fish – This is the initial step where the net is set up to catch the fish.
2. Cleaning the fish – Once the fish are caught, they are cleaned to prepare them for the next steps.
3. Smoking the fish – The cleaned fish are then smoked, which helps preserve them and adds flavor.
4. Making pemmican – The final step involves making pemmican out of fish flakes. Pemmican is a traditional food that combines dried fish flakes with fat and other ingredients to create a nutritious and long-lasting food source.

Traditionally, women in the Webequie First Nation community were responsible for preparing, cooking, and preserving fish, similar to their responsibilities for harvested game meat. While hunting was exclusively a male activity, women used to fish more because they stayed home while the trapper was out for about two weeks. Both boys and girls learned how to set fish nets between the ages of thirteen to sixteen (Stantec, 2024).

Around 1960s and 1970, Webequie First Nation Elders recalled the commercial fishing operations which were on Winisk, Chipai, Wapikopa and Kanachuan lakes and Winisk river which targeted walleye, whitefish and sturgeon (Stantec, 2024). The commercial fishery industry contributed to fish harvest income, tourism, and trading and purchasing power of community members. Community members acted as guides for tourists, and also had outfits equipped with motorized boats and snowmobiles to cater to tourist requirements.

The decline of the tourism and fishing industry occurred with loss of federal subsidies, inflation, and market decrease. Currently there is no market for commercial fishing following the discontinuation of purchasing by the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation, and community members expressed that the lack of opportunities for selling of fish as one of the reasons why there is a reduced engagement in traditional economic activities (Stantec, 2024).

Trapping

Trapping has always been and continues to be an important traditional activity for Webequie First Nation. Historically, trapping was both an important source of income for many families in the community, as well as a source of food and supplies. While fewer people in the community trap animals to obtain fur pelts or other materials compared to forty years ago, several members continue to trap animals such as beaver, muskrat, otter, mink, and rabbit as a food source (Stantec, 2024). Species that are trapped include beaver, muskrat, otter, mink, marten, wolverine, porcupine, and rabbit. Some people in the community still trap lynx and wolverines for furs, but there have been fewer of these two animals compared to previous years (Stantec, 2024).

Webequie community members eat almost all animals that are hunted or trapped out on the land, including beaver, muskrat, otter, mink, fox, lynx, and wolf (Stantec, 2024).

In 1946, the Ontario Registered Trapline System was implemented, which imposed sole ownership of trapping areas. This system did not align with Webequie First Nation’s cultural values. Knowledge Holders shared that some people are possessive of their traplines, while others continue to share the space (Stantec, 2024). Participants also reported that while they used to use snares and deadfalls for trapping, the MNR has since outlawed these practices (Stantec, 2024).

Drinking Water

The Webequie First Nation has a water treatment facility within the Webequie community.  In the past the community has experienced boil water advisories due to failures with the plant. Additional information on the water treatment facility is provided in Section 14 of the EAR/IS.

Today, community members can access drinking water from the taps in their homes. Most community members, however, access clean drinking water from spring water sites, as well as directly from Winisk Lake or other waterways within the community’s traditional territory. “People still drink water from the lake,” one community member has explained. “People like it better, lake water, instead of chlorine water, treated water. Most people haul the water from the lake” (Stantec, 2024).

Water harvested directly from the lakes and rivers surrounding the community still looks and tastes the same as it did when they were children, with no differences in color, it has been observed by community members (Stantec, 2024). There are several spring water sites that community members use (Stantec, 2024):

• A site located on a hill nearby Fly Island and the proposed location for Aggregate Source Pile 2, colloquially referred to as “Swinging Tits,” which is also considered a ceremonial area.
• A site to the northwest of Eastwood Island, colloquially referred to as “Swollen Balls”.
• A site across from the Webequie airport within the community.
• A site on Eastwood Island, near the community’s landfill.

Trails and Waterways

Waterways were historically a primary means of transportation and communication for Indigenous Peoples and European settlers. They have been referred to as “highways” due to their role in enabling travel across vast distances in the Far North. This has been integral to the Anishinaabe way of life (Stantec, 2024). Indigenous communities remain deeply connected with traditionally used waterways for social, economic, and cultural purposes. Community members used to travel on all rivers, including muskeg and creeks, as trapping and fishing were daily activities. Distance was measured by the number of days it took to travel from one point to another (Stantec, 2024). Knowledge Holders shared that the stars were used to navigate when traveling, and people could tell time and predict weather patterns using the stars (Stantec, 2024).

The Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study compiled available mapping showing historical and current travel routes that connect to traditional land and resource use areas and neighbouring communities, including Kasabonika Lake First Nation, Nibinamik First Nation and Neskantaga First Nation (Stantec, 2024). Webequie First Nation community members have a rich history of traveling to the coast of James Bay to hunt, fish, and trap alongside the Puwana people. During the winter months, the Puwana people would also travel to the current location of Webequie First Nation’s community (Stantec, 2024).

Dog sled teams were used to travel in the winter, while canoes were used in the summer. After the Webequie settlement was established in the 1950s, families would leave the community for their hunting camps in the fall by canoe and would not return until November when the ice was safe enough to walk on. Families stored their canoes at their camps and returned to the community by dog sled over the frozen ice. In the spring, the system was reversed, as community members would leave with their sled dogs in March, traveling over ice, and return to Webequie with their canoes when the water opened up again in June (Stantec, 2024).

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, families in Webequie First Nation began traveling by snowmobile, which created “competition” for the dogs. They also started buying boat motors fitted to Nor-West canoes, as gas was significantly cheaper and considered an affordable and convenient option at the time. However, one family member commented that travel was much cheaper when they used dogs (Stantec, 2024). Webequie First Nation reported that people used to travel by birch bark canoes up until the 1970s.

In the past, people in the community made their own snowshoes and sleighs. Snowshoes were crafted by both men and women as a team; men harvested the wood and formed the wooden part of the shoe, while women wove rawhide to complete the shoe and added other finishing touches. Tikinagans (cradleboards) used for carrying babies were similarly crafted by couples. However, in the 1980s, there was a shift towards store-bought sleighs and snowshoes (Stantec, 2024). One Elder recalled traveling their trapline every winter on foot to Kasabonika Lake, covering a total distance of 100 km each way. Another Knowledge Holder observed that people were healthier when they traveled by foot compared to those who travel by truck, motorized boat, and snowmobile (Stantec, 2024).

People bought trucks, motorized boats, and snowmobiles for travel when they had the financial means to do so. Elan skidoos became popular in the 1980s and significantly reduced travel time, changing what would have taken two days on foot to a single day by snowmobile. Elan skidoos were also more lightweight than modern snowmobiles and could glide over deep, packed snow with less effort to break the trail (Stantec, 2024). The rising cost of gasoline created barriers to accessing the land in this way. When the Webequie airport was proposed, it was meant to bring down the cost of fuel, but this did not end up happening (Stantec, 2024). By the time the airport was built, people had stopped using dog teams for travel altogether (Stantec, 2024).

Habitation

Members of Webequie First Nation continue to make use of hunting and trapping cabins when they are out on the land and have identified habitation areas in several locations (Stantec, 2024). Cabins and campsites are used frequently by community members, with even those with busy work schedules accessing their family cabins at least once every two weeks (Stantec, 2024). Traditional territory is home to many cabins that support traditional harvesting activities.

Cultural Continuity

The description of Webequie First Nation’s cultural continuity draws on traditional ecological knowledge and traditional land and resource use information to provide context for the consideration of potential effects on the following values:

• Sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes;
• Access to sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes; and
• Cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages.

The Webequie First Nation people have a deep-rooted history of customary stewardship of the land and water within their traditional territory. Their existence, identity, and culture are fundamentally connected to the land. The community emphasises the importance of maintaining traditional livelihood practices to sustain culture, support the community’s economy, and maintain the health of the land and water (Webequie First Nation, 2019a). A Webequie First Nation Elder described it as:

“Traditional practice helps balance the ecosystem – for the health of the land is reflected in the people.” Elder Josie Jacob (Webequie First Nation, 2019a).

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

As described in the Webequie First Nation CBLUP (Webequie First Nation, 2019a), its Three-Tier model identifies a Cultural Land Base within a one-day walking distance (roughly a 40-50 km radius) in any direction from the community. This area is extensively used for traditional harvesting and Anishinaabe cultural livelihood activities. It is at the heart of Webequie Anishininniwuk existence and provides protection for their culture and language through active Indigenous use. The Protected Traditional Area sustains the people physically, culturally, and spiritually, providing a space for healing (Webequie First Nation, 2019a)

Webequie First Nation people have a long history of customary stewardship of the land and water within their traditional territory. Webequie First Nation community members take part in traditional way of life as part of its culture, including hunting, trapping, fishing, ceremonies, and gathering/harvesting (Webequie First Nation, 2019a). Results of the Webequie First Nation Well-Being Survey (Webequie First Nation, 2014) suggest Webequie members are highly involved in traditional activities, with approximately 95% of respondents indicating that at least one family member participated in some type of cultural activity at least three times per year.

Webequie First Nation views water as the most precious element of its livelihood, traditional practices and cultural beliefs (Webequie First Nation, 2019a). Healthy rivers and lakes are indeed a cultural and spiritual necessity for the Anishinawbek people and all beings. Niibee (Water) is considered life-giving, supporting the people and the beings upon which Anishinawbek depend for their way of life. The interconnected series of lakes, wetlands, streams, and rivers in the area support healthy fish and wildlife populations that sustain the people. These waterways are central travel routes for Anishinawbek as they continue to practice their traditional way of life. Additionally, Niibee is used as a medicine for the well-being of individuals (Webequie First Nation, 2019a).

Areas where rivers or waterbodies are present are seen as spiritually important areas to which the Webequie community believes they have been endowed with the responsibility to protect. These areas include the Winisk Lake and surrounding tertiary watersheds and a series of maze-like channels connected to the Hudson Bay Coast (Webequie First Nation, 2019a).

The Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study (Stantec, 2024) documents many cultural, spiritual and ceremonial sites of significance identified through workshops and mapping sessions with community knowledge holders. The numbers identified below in Table 19‑8 are based on the PDF mapping provided by Webequie First Nation which has some limitations. Cultural and sacred sites could be historic villages, occupation sites, burials, cultural monuments and spiritual natural areas.

Table 19‑8:       Webequie First Nation Cultural and Sacred Sites within the PF, LSA and RSA

Table 19‑9 outlines the number of Webequie First Nation Language Sites within the LSA and RSA. Webequie First Nation did not define what a “language site” means, but it is assumed that it is a culturally significant site that is important to understand Webequie First Nation’s identity and connection to the land and a site to preserve traditional knowledge and history.  The numbers identified below in Table 19‑8 are based on the PDF mapping provided by Webequie First Nation which has some limitations

Table 19‑9:       Webequie First Nation Language Sites

As reported in the Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study (Stantec, 2024), in Anishinaabe culture, there is a profound relationship between the living and the dead, as well as ancestors and their descendants. It is considered the duty of the living to bury their relatives properly and protect them from disturbance or desecration. Ceremonies are held at burial areas to celebrate the dead. The present-day community on the north end of Eastwood Island was originally a summer gathering site for family groups. Elders speak of scattered graves around the north point of the community dating back to the 1800s (AtkinsRéalis 2023; Webequie First Nation 2019a; Stantec, 2024).

Within the present-day Webequie community, feasts, gatherings and pow-wows are held throughout the year, and sweat lodges offer healing space at three locations (AtkinsRéalis, 2023; Webequie First Nation, 2019a; Stantec, 2024).  Winisk Lake which covers a much of the Webequie reserve and beyond is an important ceremonial area, where marriage ceremonies, celebrations and gatherings occur at the lake side (Stantec, 2024).

The Webequie First Nation Draft CBLUP describes how its delineated planning area zones contains rich historical and cultural value to the Webequie community. For example, according to the Webequie First Nation Draft CBLUP (Webequie First Nation, 2019a; Stantec, 2024):

• Western Upland EMA (Zone #1) was identified as a place of cultural and historical value with many historical village sites, occupation sites, and burial sites;
• Winisk Watershed General Community Livelihood Use Dedicated Protected Area (Zone #2A) was reported to be central to the community’s livelihood and contains several traditional and cultural sites, including burial grounds, birth places, harvesting, and historical gathering areas;
• Kaa-shi-ti-kwayak (Waterway) Dedicated Protected Areas (Zone #2B) is noted to contain cultural monuments;
• General Use Area (Zone #4) is reported to contain culturally sensitive sites;
• Waanaabiikaan (Bowl Rock) EMA (Zone #5) contains culturally sensitive sites and named places;
• The Corridor EMA (Zone #6) contains numerous culturally significant waterways, lakes, rivers, and streams and culturally significant and sensitive sites are also located close to these water bodies; and
• Waterways such as the Wahpiidotem (Wapitotem) River, Winisk River and Winisk Lake are also considered monuments by Webequie First Nation due to longstanding traditional and historical use.

The Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study (Stantec, 2024) identifies many named areas within the traditional territory of Webequie First Nation.  In the study conducted for the Project, 38 named places are found in proximity to the Webequie reserve (Stantec, 2024). Webequie First Nation also identifies known burial sites and traditional meeting sites throughout its traditional territory (Stantec, 2024). For instance, along the Omaanichiikaning (Winisk River System), there are 18 locations found in proximity to the Webequie reserve. Other areas of importance include sites where sled dogs are buried and seeding of wild rice and harvesting ceremonials sites are found in three other areas. 

• Fly Island has been identified as a ceremonial area important to Webequie First Nation. It has been identified as:
• An important place for women especially as they use it “during fasting periods and ceremonies”;
• An area that Includes at least two burial sites;
• A former community garden where potatoes used to be grown;
• The historical site of a battle with Crane people about 100 years ago; and
• The setting of the story of a medicine man who walked on water and is sometimes referred to as a shaman.

Legends, stories and histories are associated with named places, which are passed down from generation to generation. Some sites and areas will not be shared with outsiders. The nature of the places include:

• Sacred areas where battles took place;
• Burial sites;
• Swimming and recreational areas;
• Sacred beings;
• Healing areas;
• Ceremonies;
• Pow-wows; and
• Pictographs (Stantec, 2024).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Webequie First Nation has an inherent way of life centred on its traditional cultural foundations and rooted in its religious and sacred beliefs. While there are many modern conveniences in its community, Webequie First Nation community members practice many of the old ways and traditions and strive to find harmony in community members’ daily lives by maintaining its ancestral way of life (Webequie First Nation, 2019a).

According to the Webequie First Nation’s Comprehensive Community Plan (Webequie First Nation, 2023), the bond that the Webequie community has to the environment is essential to their existence. This connection to the environment is regarded as critical for healing and reclaiming their identity and well-being:

“The land is who we are. Our physical being and its health and strength comes from the land. We have to maintain our connection to the land by being out there. We are spiritual beings first and therefore our connection to the land is spiritual. Everything has a spirit, we are all one, the animals, the water, the trees and plants, the grass, the rocks, even the soil. A blade of grass has a spirit. We are all one. We are all equal. Every form of creation is equal. There is no distinction. We all have our roles. We have animals and birds that sustain the earth, keeping it clean, and they also give themselves up to sustain us. They know where they are going. We give thanks and acknowledge them.” Webequie First Nation Community Wellness Coordinator (Webequie First Nation, 2023).

Webequie First Nation and their neighbouring communities existed long before European arrival in Canada and their way of life is deeply rooted in their relationship with the land (Government of Canada, 2017; InterGroup, 2024). The arrival of European settlers in Canada in the 17th century was the onset of severe changes to the way of life of Indigenous peoples (Government of Canada, 2017). Colonizers not only brought on the purposeful exposure of disease and alcohol to Indigenous peoples in Canada but increasingly sought to control their lands and eliminate their culture (Irving, 2021; InterGroup, 2024). The colonization and land dispossession experienced by Indigenous peoples in Canada have indeed contributed to a significant loss of culture, language, and the transmission of intergenerational traditional knowledge. This has ultimately led to the intergenerational trauma Indigenous peoples experience today (Ninomiya et al., 2023; InterGroup, 2024).

Settler colonization of Indigenous peoples in Canada was indeed a structure aimed at eliminating Indigenous societies by controlling Indigenous identity and displacing Indigenous peoples from their land. The establishment of reserves restricted First Nations peoples to specific parcels of land, making them dispossessed on their former lands (Government of Canada 2017; InterGroup, 2024). Settlers viewed British society and culture as superior and aimed to control Indigenous economies while denying Indigenous peoples their right to self-identification and self-governance (Government of Canada, 2017; Irving, 2021; Lawrence, 2003; InterGroup, 2024).  The Indian Act was one of the most notable ways that Indigenous identity, land and socio-economic structures have been controlled by the settler colonial governments (Irving, 2023, InterGroup, 2024).

As noted previously, Webequie First Nation was wrongfully designated as part of the Band members of Eabametoong First nation (Fort Hope Band). Webequie First Nation had to fight for decades for recognition as a distinct Band and gain a formal reserve with additional self-governance (Webequie First Nation 2019a). Additionally, the Indian Act of 1883 granted authority to the Department of Indian Affairs, enabling the department to make policy decisions, including defining who was considered “Indian,” managing lands and resources, and more (Government of Canada 2017; InterGroup, 2024).

The official policy on First Nations education in 1883 focused on residential schools and the forced assimilation of Indigenous children (Government of Canada, 2017; InterGroup, 2024). The residential school system was established by the Government of Canada and the Church to “civilize” and assimilate Indigenous children by forcibly taking them from their families and communities to attend schools often located far from their homes (Government of Canada, 2017; NCTR, n.d.a; InterGroup, 2024). The first Church-run residential school opened in 1831. The explicit intent of residential schools was to rid Indigenous children of their language and culture, with children being harshly punished for speaking their own languages (NCTR, n.d.a; InterGroup, 2024). The traumas brought on by residential school remain within the community and continue to negatively impact the mental health and addictions challenges of Webequie community members (Webequie First Nation, 2023; AtkinsRéalis, 2022a; InterGroup, 2024).

The colonization of Indigenous Peoples had severe effects on Indigenous women and their position and relative power in their own communities. The structure of Indigenous communities was altered due to the influence of settler society. Prior to colonization, communities governed themselves according to natural laws and their own structures. Women’s role in governance and stewardship was altered, particularly in those communities that had been historically matrilineal. Indigenous women sustained societies, relying on their close relationship with the land and a deep understanding that nurturing and caring for the land is key to life and livelihood (Bond & Quinlan 2018; Dalseg et al., 2018; InterGroup, 2024).

Webequie First Nation survived the severe impacts of colonization and residentials schools, but there has been a loss of language and other cultural skills. Residential schools had a major impact on the cultural identity of students, which led to intergenerational trauma that continues to be experienced today (Webequie First Nation, 2014; AtkinsRéalis, 2022a; InterGroup, 2024).

It is acknowledged in the Webequie community that healing from trauma, and understanding the peoples’ history, learning about language and culture, and spending more time on the land are ways in which the Nation can improve its mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual health (Webequie First Nation, 2023). Webequie is working to expand its ability to take youth and families out on the land to learn traditional skills, cultural teachings, and the language.

Some community members have connected with their culture later in life. Elders have shared that following the residential schooling, it wasn’t until the 1970s onward that people began to re-learn what they had lost in terms of culture. First, traditional healers and dancers began to come to the community to engage with members. Prior to this, traditional ceremony, dancing, drumming and healing was supressed through outsider influences such as through the church, schools and government officials (Stantec, 2024). There was often apprehension due to internalized racism from colonial society about practicing traditional culture, and this had an effect on passing traditional practices on to the next generation. For instance, community members noted that traditional drumming and dancing was associated with “evil” and the “devil” (Stantec, 2024).

Reconnecting with traditional culture has continued. In the 1980s and 1990s, Webequie community members resumed participating in sweat-lodges, pow-wows and other traditional activities. Although, outsider influences continue to create challenges and impediments, including modern technology such as television, internet and smartphones with social media. Although technology can be used for connecting communities, it can steer individuals away from traditional ways of life, and onto dangerous paths, leading to substance use and other problems (Stantec, 2024). 

Indigenous education and training pedagogy includes techniques such as observation practice, oral teaching, land‑based learning or ceremonial participation, where learners receive knowledge related to navigational skills, knowledge of the land and its changes, geometry, the complexities of language, ethics, natural law, governance, etc. (Baskatawang, 2023; Luby, 2014). Traditional knowledge learning and sharing is an important aspect of Webequie First Nation community. Webequie First Nation’s seven goals based on the seven directions identified in its Webequie First Nation Comprehensive Community Plan includes ‘cultural vibrancy/ traditional life’ as one aspect, where the community will work towards keeping the cultural and traditional way of life strong and continual and in honor of past and future generations (Webequie First Nation, 2023).

When asked if concerned about the loss of traditional culture in Webequie First Nation, the majority (75.2%) of survey respondents answered yes (AtkinsRéalis, 2022b). Of those concerned for loss of their traditional culture, 92% said they were concerned for loss of traditional land use and 90.2% said they were concerned for loss of traditional values. Webequie members have expressed specific concerns for loss of traditions amongst their youth, who face social isolation and boredom in the community as well as substantial expenses associated with getting out on the land, and desire for more involvement of Elders in youth events (AtkinsRéalis, 2022a; 2022b).

Elders can also be more vulnerable to social changes, as they are prone to loneliness and isolation, which can be linked to poorer health outcomes. This includes changes to their social circumstances, such as changes to or loss of family and social groups. Engagement in meaningful social activities is important to reduce the risk of loneliness and isolation for Elders (Tonkin et al., 2018). Elders are key to the transmission of traditional knowledge, values, and culture to younger community members (Viscogliosi et al., 2020), and Webequie members have expressed a desire to improve Elder participation in social events, particularly with youth, and to provide them with more community services (AtkinsRéalis, 2022a; 2022b).

The school allows a culturally sensitive schedule which allows students to engage in spring and fall hunts and to take leave with families for camping, hunting and family enrichment (Stantec, 2024).

“We do some of the activities, especially during the summer and sometimes during the winter. But it is like we do it maybe for a week or two, a week or two here and there, which is not very consistent. And we need to have a service that is operating at least six to 12 months a year, out on the land. We have to be able to offer that… We can take them out on the land, sightseeing, and special sites that are significant places where something happened. They will be more prepared to live out there. We do not trust them to survive out there now. Once I remember they went out for 11 days to Winisk and they loved that.” (AtkinsRéalis, 2022a).

Webequie also practices traditional education related to hunting, harvesting and other traditional activities such as world view, ceremonies, story telling and the production of goods. Schools on reserve focus on the land, so there are a lot of cultural programs for children (AtkinsRéalis, 2022c). Learning also extends beyond social sciences, as the schools integrate seasonality into their program (e.g., camping in the spring). (AtkinsRéalis, 2022c). Sioux Lookout First Nations Healthy Authority (2025) serves Webequie First Nation, providing traditional teachings and activities, such as cultural safety, seasonal feasts, land-based activities, traditional medicines and teachings (Creation Story, seven Grandfathers, Clans, Feather, Medicine Wheel, etc.).

In a 2022 socio-economic survey, approximately 30% of respondents indicated that they are concerned that the WSR will affect traditional land use, traditional values (22%), traditional language (19%), and traditional teachings (18%) (AtkinsRéalis, 2022). Approximately 9% of study participants are not concerned with potential effects of the Project on traditional culture.  The 2014 community well-being study identified that 52% of households have at least one child/youth who can speak Oji-Cree well enough to have a conversation with an Elder (Webequie First Nation, 2014). It also identified that 86% of households have one or more people who participate in faith or spiritual activities or ceremonies. The results of the 2022 community socio-economic survey showed that 75% of respondents sometimes participate in organized social and/or cultural events and activities, 19% always participate in them and 6% never participant in them. Excluding the WSR project, 61% of community survey participants indicated that they have concerns about the loss of culture, 21% do not and 19% are unsure/don’t know.

The Webequie First Nation is actively working towards preserving their ways and traditions, having established a Cultural Enrichment Department to achieve this desire (Webequie First Nation, 2023). They have identified the requirement of a permanent land-based camp for healing and teaching, to allow their traditions and culture to be taught and practised by community members.

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

The People of Webequie are traditional Ojibway, who’s first language is Oji-Cree, but most of the community speaks English as well (Webequie First Nation, 2023). Approximately 60% of households in Webequie First Nation speak English, with 28% speaking Oji-Cree, 12% speaking Ojibway (Section 14.2.2.1 Population and Demographics, Statistics Canada, 2022). About 0.3% speak French in communities in the LSA (Section 14.2.2.1 Population and Demographics). Community members have explained that “our culture is nothing without our language. Our language is nothing without the land” (Webequie First Nation, 2019a), and “our language is the language of the land” (Webequie First Nation, 2023). Traditional way of life helps sustain the Webequie Anishininniwuk culture and language, promoting healing by strengthening connections with the environment.

As described above, Webequie First Nation, like its neighbouring communities, have suffered impacts to its cultural identity and language through colonialization, including the intergenerational effects of the residential school system on community members. Modern technology and other outside pressures contribute to the challenges of preserving culture and Indigenous language. Webequie First Nation identified these challenges and opportunities in its Comprehensive Community Plan in light of potential future infrastructure and resource development in the region (Webequie First Nation, 2023).

The Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study for the Project also describes the importance of Indigenous language to the community and concerns about preserving Indigenous language which is facing challenges from outside pressures. Community members described concerns about Webequie First Nation losing its way of life and Indigenous language due to colonial processes that have forced members to live against or in contrast to traditional values. Many concerns are focused on the youth being passed down Indigenous Knowledge in their Indigenous language, since youth in the Webequie community are not learning as much Oji-Cree as they used to. Community members emphasize that Indigenous language is highly important to traditional culture as it ties in the activities of the People, the way people talk and the connection to the land (Stantec, 2024). Without opportunities to learn the language while hunting, fishing, trapping or other traditional activities, Webequie First Nation risks losing the unique place-based vocabulary and meaning behind the Nation’s dialect.

Webequie First Nation is an Anishinaabe and Cree community, with most people having Anishinaabe ancestry. People speak a mix of both Anishinaabowin/Ojibwe and Oji-Cree. Participants added that hundreds of years ago, people used to speak a different dialect of the language. Over time, people have adopted more slang words that resemble the English language. Anishinaabowin and Oji-Cree are verb-based languages, where a single word can represent an entire sentence in English. When people shorten the words into nouns, the language becomes closer in structure to English. Participants expressed concern that, in addition to language loss in the community, the language may one day lose its roots and meaning to Webequie people due to the influence of English (Stantec, 2024). Study participants in the Community Well-being Study (Webequie First Nation, 2014) indicated that 81% of households speak Oji-Cree in half or more of their conversations and that 74% of households has one or more members who have improved their language skills.

Although outside influences, in particular from modern technology, contribute to a loss of interest in traditional way of life, community members also have pointed out that it is beneficial for youth to be bilingual to help them be successful in both worlds (Stantec, 2024).

The curriculum in Webequie First Nation’s Simon Jacobs School includes Anishinaabowin or Oji-Cree from junior kindergarten to Grade 2 (Stantec, 2024). Bilingual education is beneficial, but it is also imperative for youth to learn while being on the land in the local dialect of Oji-Cree to preserve and enhance Indigenous Knowledge transfer to youth (Stantec, 2024). The Webequie Education Authority has worked to develop more community-focused curriculum based on its language and culture. Spending more time learning on the land and bringing Elders into the school can be helpful in addressing some of the health and wellness issues in the community, which could help improve student success. One department in the Webequie First Nation is the Cultural Enrichment Department which will also facilitate opportunities for traditional learning, language, culture, history and time on the land for youth and families.

As part of the Matawa Education Department, Matawa First Nations is committed to revitalizing first languages: Ojibway, Oji-Cree and Cree (Matawa Education, 2025). Many of the fluent language speakers within the communities will be lost within the next 5-10 years, and with them their traditional languages. A team of language specialists have been working on this with a program under the Matawa Education Department. Matawa Waka Tere is the language program it means ‘the meeting of the rivers on a fast-moving canoe’. Matawa Waka Tere incorporates accelerated learning techniques aimed at helping second language learners learn a language fast (Matawa Education, 2025). In 2024, 90 graduates graduated from the Year 1 language course. In April 2025, the program faces the threat of being suspended due to lack of funding (Matawa First Nation, 2025).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Webequie First Nation completed a project-specific Indigenous and Treaty Rights Impact Assessment for the Webequie Supply Road Project. The report on the study was authored by a third-party retained to complete a community-led participatory process to assess potential impacts on Webequie First Nation’s Indigenous and Treaty Rights as

a result of the proposed Webequie Supply Road (Stantec, 2025). Webequie First Nation used information compiled for the Indigenous Knowledge Study to support the Webequie First Nation’s Indigenous and Treaty Rights Impact Assessment for the Webequie Supply Road.

Webequie First Nation have identified their Indigenous and Treaty Rights as including the following rights (Stantec, 2025):

• Harvesting Rights;
• Right to Access Traditional Lands and Waters;
• Cultural/Experiential Rights;
• Socio-economic and Well-being Rights; and
• Rights related to Webequie First Nation’s customs, protocols, and laws.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are stated in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are stated in Section 15.2 and existing health conditions of Webequie First Nation are outlined in Section 17.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles and Responsibilities and Self Governance

Webequie First Nation’s land and resource use, planning, and decision-making is informed by its Three-Tier model, which is said to manifest the Creator’s natural models and promotes respectful relationships with neighbouring communities, government, and industry (Webequie First Nation, 2019a; Stantec, 2024). The Three-Tier model consists of integrated and interrelated values and systems: a core tier (community well-being); a relational tier (preserving Indigenous culture); and a foundational tier (Treaty relations and partnerships) (Webequie First Nation, 2019a; Stantec, 2024).

This governance model supports reconciliation, rebuilding, and healing. Its roots stem from the Webequie Anishininniwuk Elders, who, prior to the signing of Treaty No. 9, foresaw imminent change within the community and created the Three-Tier model to maintain their relationship with the Creator (Webequie First Nation, 2019a; Stantec, 2024).

Following the Three-Tier model fosters adherence to the Creator’s natural laws, emphasizes Webequie First Nation stewardship responsibilities, and encourages good relationships with the land (Stantec, 2024). Knowledge Holders reported that the Three-Tier model is very important to them, explaining that the community cannot survive standing on its own, and it must utilize every opportunity to survive and prevail (Stantec, 2024).

The Webequie First Nation People understand the Creator’s Earth Law, which emphasizes respecting and developing a harmonious connection with everything (AtkinsRéalis, 2022a). The Creator’s Earth Law contains three principles: first is the relationship with your creator, second is the relationship with the land and animals, and third is the relationship to the people around you (AtkinsRéalis, 2022a).

The community is formally affiliated with Nishnawbe Aski Nation.

[1]       This total represents multiple line features that create each route, and this sum represents all of the features (Stantec, 2024).

19.1.1.1         Local Study Area

A description of existing conditions of health, social and economic conditions can be found in Sections 14 (Socia Environment), Section 15 (Economic Environment), Section 16 (Non-Traditional Land and Resource Use), Section 17 (Human Health) and Section 20 (Cultural Heritage and Archaeological Resources).

Baseline data for Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes was collected through available information provided directly by Indigenous communities and data gathered specifically for the Project. Additional data was gathered through a review of internal reports received by AtkinsRéalis (formerly SNC-Lavalin) and publicly available sources relevant to the project study areas. Indigenous communities utilize land and resources for food, utility, travel, medicinal, cultural, and spiritual purposes. Indigenous communities could potentially experience changes to their traditional land and resource use as a result of the Project, as explained in Section 19.3.

The receipt of Indigenous Knowledge and traditional land and resource use information, collected and provided by Indigenous communities, was limited at the time of the EAR/IS preparation. However, some communities were involved in gathering this information through community-led studies. At the time of developing this report, Webequie First Nation, Marten Falls First Nation and Weenusk First Nation provided Indigenous Knowledge and traditional land and resource use studies. Additional information has been provided by other Indigenous communities throughout the EAR/IS preparation, and efforts were undertaken to integrate information from Indigenous communities.

Indigenous communities in the LSA and RSA customarily use the lands and the resources of their traditional territories for various purposes as part of traditional way of life, which can be described as the aspiration of Mino Bimaadiziwin (The Good Life) in Anishinaabe culture. Mino Bimaadiziwin is a cultural value that includes spiritual, physical, mental and emotional well-being, which is tied to a reciprocal relationship with Aki (Land). Anishinaabe way of life includes hunting, harvesting and stewardship of Aki while keeping in mind the respectful value of sustainability.

Indigenous Knowledge of traditional land and resource use practices is held by Indigenous communities and passed down from generation to generation. There is in-depth historical and current understanding of the physical, as well as spiritual context of lands, waters, plants, animals, and entire landscape and environment, which cannot be easily substituted by western scientific surveys. Traditional territories are, to some extent, shared between LSA and RSA communities, with a mutual understanding of their collective interests, roles, and responsibilities in environmental stewardship.

The lands and waters traditionally provide important resources for Indigenous communities for health and well-being, such as food, water, materials for clothing and shelter and medicine. Indigenous communities obtain these resources through traditional practices, including hunting, trapping, fishing, and gathering plants. Identifying sites and areas where traditional activities are practiced historically and currently is helpful to identify how the Project may affect those areas and affect Indigenous communities’ traditional way of life.

Culturally and spiritually important sites of Indigenous communities include trails, travel routes, burial sites, ceremonial and gathering sites, areas and landscapes. Cultural practices like traditional crafting, gatherings, teachings, ceremonies and traditional food harvesting do not always occur at a specific location, although some cultural activities and events, such as community feasts and pow-wows, may be associated with specific sites. The social and cultural value of these sites and areas is an important consideration for Indigenous communities.

Water as life is a recurrent theme for many Indigenous communities. Water, as a sacred element, has deep spiritual and cultural significance. Water connects all life, whether it’s through consumption, honoured in ceremony or used as transportation. These activities are integral to communities as they relate directly to identity, cultural reclamation and the transference of knowledge.

The Results section that follows describes, using available information, the nature and extent of sites and areas used by Indigenous communities within the LSA and RSA for traditional harvesting and cultural traditions and practices, and why these areas are important to Indigenous communities.

19.1.1.1.1         Attawapiskat First Nation

Information regarding Attawapiskat First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impacts assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

In 1930, an adhesion to Treaty No. 9 provided a reserve for Attawapiskat First Nation. The Treaty adhesion set aside Attawapiskat Indian Reserve 91 on the Ekwan River, a parallel river north of the Attawapiskat River, totalling approximately 27,040 ha. Attawapiskat Indian Reserve 91 is mainly used for traditional purposes (Five Nations Energy, 2025).  Local leaders established the community in its present location in 1964 on the Attawapiskat River due to an existing trading post and access to James Bay shipping routes (Library and Archives Canada, n.d). The new reserve was numbered Attawapiskat Indian Reserve 91A and is approximately 235.8 ha (CIRNAC, 2023a).

Attawapiskat First Nation has indicated that their traditional territory extends into the WSR Project Area due to the location of the Attawapiskat River. The Attawapiskat First Nation’s hunting lands extend from Kapiskau River in the south to Hudson Bay in the north, westwards along Hudson Bay towards the Winisk River, and from Akimiski Island in the east to Mississa Lake area in the west (Cummins, 1992).

Akimiski Island is the largest island in James Bay, and Attawapiskat First Nation is the closest community, located 80 km to the west. This area is a traditional hunting and trapping area of the Attawapiskat people and is located on land designated as Crown Land (Tsuji et al., 2019). Akimiski Island was also historically used for harvesting, gathering berries and trapping. Attawapiskat First Nation is surrounded by wilderness and waterways teeming with wild food, plants used in traditional medicines and other natural resources that for generations sustained Cree communities and became a central focus of their cultural stories (Smith, 2017).

A draft Area of Interest in Planning (AIP) was identified in the CBLUP Terms of Reference for Attawapiskat First Nation, which shows the approximate size of their AIP, and the portion that overlaps with the WSR (Figure 19.4).

Hunting, Trapping and Fishing

Attawapiskat First Nation’s traditional harvest focused on fish, waterfowl, moose, Caribou, rabbit, beaver, bear, Canada geese, blue geese, partridge, ptarmigan and fish (Cummins, 1992). Attawapiskat First Nation community members fish for whitefish, ling, jackfish, trout, coastal sucker, inland sucker, walleyed pike and sturgeon (Honigmann, 1948). Goose hunts continue to be of importance to Attawapiskat First Nation, and there are annual spring goose hunts along the James Bay and Hudson Bay Coast (Kataquapit, 2025).

Plant Gathering

Attawapiskat First Nation has historically gathered the following food and plants: low bush cranberries, blackberries, blueberries, black currant, labrador tea, tamarack roots, stone moss, spruce gum, juniper, willow, roots of a large tamarack (Honigmann, 1948). Berry picking was traditionally done by girls and women in the Attawapiskat community who went in groups of 2-3 during late summer to the first snowfall (Honigmann, 1948).

Travel and Access

The Attawapiskat River traditionally provided Attawapiskat First Nation with transportation routes, water sources, temporary camp sites and fishing and hunting locations (Cummins, 1992). Traditionally, the Attawapiskat Cree have hunted, fished, and trapped to support themselves, and moved their camps seasonally in pursuit of game. Original hunting territories extended from the Hudson Bay area to the north, to the Kapuskau River to the south. From the Terms of Reference comments received from Attawapiskat First Nation for the WSR, the Ekwan and Attawapiskat Rivers have been identified to be heavily used for harvesting by Attawapiskat First Nation traditional land users (Nakogee, 2020). These watersheds, including the headwaters are culturally and spiritually important to Attawapiskat First Nation. The subsistence economy is critically important to the economic vitality of the region and sustains Attawapiskat First Nation members culturally, physically, spiritually, and socially (Nakogee, 2020).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

The Attawapiskat River traditionally provided Attawapiskat First Nation with transportation routes, water sources, temporary camp sites and fishing and hunting locations (Cummins, 1992). Akimiski Island has been identified by Attawapiskat First Nation as an important place for social and cultural reasons and contains burial sites, spiritual sites and Cree seasonal camps (Tsuji et al., 2019). Akimiski Island includes a migratory bird sanctuary on the east side of the island (Kataquapit, 2022).

The Victor Diamond Mine was seeking approval to dispose of mine demolition waste which is being decommissioned and the proposed location within their traditional territory “is a place of critical cultural, spiritual and subsistence importance to the Attawapiskat Cree people” (Jamamie, 2021).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Attawapiskat First Nation Elders have used the term pimaatisiwi (living the good life), which is a holistic concept of life which includes everything imaginable in life and includes respect for ‘the other’ (Hookimaw-Witt, 1998). Several Elders have stated that “land is precious, rich and very important” (Hookimaw-Witt, 1998).

Community members have indicated in studies that the land is not only for hunting, “but to also renew your spirit” (Hookimaw-Witt, 1998). Protection of their traditional way of life and protection of water is a primary interest to the Attawapiskat First Nation People (Koostachin, 2005). Water is a sacred part of Attawapiskat ceremonies (Koostachin, 2005). Reconnecting to the community and land through traditional ceremony land-based activities of hunting, fishing and spending time in nature are important components of Attawapiskat First Nation’s right to well-being. The spring goose hunt is an important event every year and an important cultural activity that Attawapiskat First Nation members participate in (Smith, 2016).

In 2019, Omushkego Education Student Success hosted a Cree Language and Culture Teachers Gathering to create culturally relevant curriculum that utilized land based Omushkego culture (Omushkego Mushkegowuk Council, 2021).

Attawapiskat First Nation hosts Camp Chikepak, which is a two-week youth camp held at Camp Bickell on Chapman Lake open to youths aged 9-14 years old across the Mushkegowuk territory; the camp provides land-based cultural and traditional activities and knowledge. The costs for this annual camp are provided by Choose Life program implemented through a Nishnawbe Aski Nation program (Grech, 2022).

The Weeneebayko Area Health Authority (WAHA) offers various services that supports providing optimum health care as close to home as possible. This includes a holistic approach that reflects the distinct needs of all peoples in the Weeneebayko region. (Weeneebayko Area Health Authority, 2018). WAHA is committed to providing high-quality health services that include traditional and cultural healing methods (Weeneebayko Area Health Authority, 2025).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

The community’s traditional language is Omushkego Cree and is an important part of their culture and identity that is passed down by their Elders (Hookimaw-Witt, 1998). Attawapiskat means “people of the parting of the rocks” in Swampy Cree language; from the limestone island formations at the mouth of the Attawapiskat River (Reuters, 2016).

The Attawapiskat First Nation Education Authority (2025) is responsible for developing and implementing educational programs at Kattawapiskak Elementary School and Vezina Secondary School where students can learn Omushkego Cree as a subject course, and cultural education to learn traditional skills and teachings of the local area (211 Ontario North, 2023a).

The Mushkegowuk Council, which Attawapiskat First Nation is a member of, also supports these language preservation efforts by providing resources and programs aimed at maintaining and strengthening the Cree language among its member communities (Mushkegowuk Council, 2024).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Attawapiskat First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Attawapiskat First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Attawapiskat First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it  with future generations.

Attawapiskat First Nation is one of 10 northern First Nations who launched a lawsuit against the Ontario and federal government in April 2023 (McIntosh, 2023). They have requested that the Canadian government be barred from making any decisions about how land could be used in the Ring of Fire for mining and other purposes without Indigenous consent. The lawsuit centres on Treaty No. 9 and the contrast between the verbal and written promises of Treaty No. 9 as recorded (McIntosh, 2023). The First Nations assert that they did not cede or surrender their territories, and that Treaty No. 9 did not give the Ontario government the right to allow resource extraction (McIntosh, 2023). Attawapiskat First Nation expressed concerns about the Project regarding adequate consultation, regulatory process and cumulative effects on its community (Attawapiskat First Nation, 2021).

In August 2024, Attawapiskat First Nation was one of six First Nations who have filed a court case challenging a major section of Ontario’s mining law, an attempt to strike down the existing system for how mineral claims are staked (The Narwhal, 2024). The current system allows miners to stake claims without consulting First Nations which they outline violates their Treaty and Charter Rights.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-governance)

Attawapiskat First Nation has a Custom Electoral System, with one Chief, one Deputy Chief and twelve Councillors elected every three years. The next election will be in August 2025. 

The community is formally affiliated with Nishnawbe Aski Nation and Mushkegowuk Council.

Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

The Omushkego Wahkohtowin Project Finance for Permanence (PFP) is an Indigenous-led conservation initiative that enables First Nations to manage the lands, waters, and ocean, and that align and protect treaty and inherent rights (Mushkegowuk Council Lands and Resources Department, 2024). Protection will include ecological, economic, and cultural benefits to the Omushkego. Creating new protected and conserved areas will help maintain the rich biodiversity and ecological integrity of the homelands. Protecting the land also safeguards inherent rights, treaty rights and establishes a foundation for spirituality, culture, and traditions to be passed on to future generations.

Attawapiskat First Nation is part of the Omushkego Wahkohtowin Conservation Plan, which was written to provide people, especially Omushkego and adjacent Nations and communities, with information on community conservation planning their lands and waters (Mushkegowuk Council Lands and Resources Department 2024). This plan has a 10‑year implementation period, which outlines steps to manage lands and resources and a framework to carry out the vision for Omushkego Wahkohtowin. There are four streams within the plan:

• Stream 1: Create protected and conserved areas to ensure ecological integrity for the preservation of inherent, treaty, and harvesting rights, and spirituality, culture, and traditions;
• Stream 2: Establish Omushkego Wahkohtowin governance and management;
• Stream 3: Care for ecosystem health; and
• Stream 4: Economic and cultural development, sustainable livelihoods, and community well-being

Attawapiskat First Nation has not yet finalized its CBLUP and is concerned that Webequie’s potential exemption from certain provisions of the Far North Act will interfere with Attawapiskat’s decision-making authority over areas of shared use as per their comments provided for the WSR ToR (Nakogee, 2020).

Attawapiskat First Nation initially came to an impact benefit agreement (IBA) with De Beers Canada for the Victor diamond mine opening in 2005; a 2013 document showed that Attawapiskat’s diamond royalties earned as part of the IBA was around 0.5% of the mine’s annual revenue (Porter, 2013). As part of the IBA signed in 2005, De Beers makes payments to a trust fund that was set up by Attawapiskat First Nation (CBC News, 2013). The initial IBA promised numerous benefits, including training, employment, business opportunities, environmental management, and financial compensation (Canada Mining Journal, 2005). Attawapiskat First Nation Chief Nakogee stated “these expensive diamonds from my Nation’s homeland, in our backyard, and yet we continue to live in horrendous conditions where we can’t even drink the water here from the taps. We keep watching the wealth of our Traditional Territories from the waters and lands to the wildlife, get industrialized” (Socialist Project, 2020). Concerns in the community range from the environmental impact on the Attawapiskat River to how big a cut of the profits the first nation received (CBC News, 2016).

As a result, the Attawapiskat people have lost trust in future projects entering their community, given the broken promises and lack of equitable benefits from the previous agreement (Socialist Project, 2020).

Figure 19.4:      Draft Attawapiskat First Nation Area of Interest for Planning – Attawapiskat First Nation AIP

19.1.1.1.2         Eabametoong First Nation

Information regarding Eabametoong First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revisions of the EAR/IS. The following section and impacts assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

The Terms of Reference (ToR) for the Eabametoong and Mishkeegogamang First Nations’ CBLUP was signed in July 2013 (Eabametoong and Mishkeegogamang First Nations, 2013). The ToR is intended to guide the CBLUP, which outline the community’s values and objectives for land use planning. Eabametoong and Mishkeegogamang have identified a draft Area of Interest for Planning that encompasses an area of 2,487,752 ha (Figure 19.5). This Area of Interest for Planning is defined by Eabametoong First Nation and Mishkeegogamang First Nation. This is the traditional land use area that is bordered primarily by the Albany River on the south and approximately along the height of land of the Attawapiskat watershed on the north. This area is southwest of the project footprint for WSR. Traditional harvest areas have been used to help define the boundaries of the planning area, with respect for neighbouring First Nations.

Eabametoong First Nation and Mishkeegogamang First Nation describe their traditional use territory as Tassshikaywin, which means “our places on the Earth and in nature’s realm” (Eabametoong and Mishkeegogamang First Nations, 2013).

A report completed by the Firelight Group for the Greenstone Gold Mine project has outlined Indigenous values that were identified as critical conditions that must be present for the continued practice of Eabametoong First Nation culture: water and fishing, hunting and cultural continuity (The Firelight Group, 2017a).

Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

Eabametoong First Nation has outlined that water and fishing are important to their traditional way of life, food security and cultural continuity (The Firelight Group, 2017b). Many of the Anishinaabe people of Eabametoong First Nation divide their time between living in town and fishing and hunting in their traditional territory. During the Spring and Summer, Eabametoong First Nation members typically hunt for moose, ducks, and geese, and fish for suckers, and walleye. Throughout the year, many families will make trips by boat, truck, or snowmobile to hunting camps outside of town. During the spring and summer there are also cookouts and events hosted in the community to bring the community together (Kirton, 2020).

Moose are an important species that the Eabametoong First Nation use for food and cultural purposes. Other animals that they hunt, and trap include beavers, marten, mink, grouse, duck, wolves, bear and partridge (Stantec, 2017). Eabametoong First Nation traditionally process moose and other game to use in clothing, crafts, and tanning. Eabametoong First Nation identified Kenogamisis Lake as an important fishing location (Stantec, 2017). Fish species caught by Eabametoong First Nation include Northern Pike, minnow, pickerel/walleye and whitefish (Stantec, 2017). Miminiska is a tourist camp that is accessible by air or travel on a boat on the Albany River. Every fall, hunters from Eabametoong will fly to Miminiska to hunt for moose and set nets for sturgeon (Eabametoong First Nation, 2017).

Eabametoong First Nation is continuing to use the land and resources in keeping with treaty rights and those recognized and affirmed under the constitution. Traditional practices are deeply rooted in the community’s connection to the land and water.The land holds cultural and practical significance for the Eabametoong First Nation. Preserving the land enables community members to continue their traditional practices like fishing and hunting, which are vital for their way of life and culture. Protecting these lands from development is crucial for maintaining their connection to the environment and sustaining their cultural traditions (Shantz, 2018).

Travel and Access

Eabametoong First Nation members have outlined that there is a traditional route to Marten Falls First Nation from Eabametoong First Nation along the Wabasse River, to the north of the Albany River, which some families, including the Whiteheads, from Eabametoong and Marten Falls use (AtkinsRéalis Inc, 2023a). The route connects these communities. The Albany River continues to be used for travel and to carry on the community’s traditional customs and harvesting by hunting, fishing, and trapping (Teach for Canada, 2017a).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Area Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Eabametoong First Nation, previously known as Fort Hope First Nation, is located on the shores of Eabamet Lake along the Albany River System. The Albany River acts as an east-west highway that allows Eabametoong First Nation members to travel and carry on their traditional customs and harvesting by hunting, fishing and trapping and gathering (Teach for Canada, 2017a). The Eabamet Narrows – between Eabamet Lake and the Albany River – is a culturally important place because Eabametoong First Nation’s name is derived from where the reversing naturally occurs during the Spring river break up. Eabamet Lake has been occupied by Eabametoong First Nation people for generations, predating colonial contact and the fur trade. The lake is also an important cultural and historical site to the Eabametoong First Nation (The Firelight Group, 2017a).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Oral traditions and storytelling are vital for preserving history, culture, and teachings. Elders play a crucial role in sharing these stories with the younger generation (Eabametoong First Nation, 2004). Traditional crafts such as beadwork, birchbark canoes, and moccasin making are still practiced and passed down through generations (Eabametoong First Nation, 2004). Sioux Lookout First Nations Healthy Authority serves Eabametoong First Nation, providing traditional teachings and activities and wellness journeys through ceremonies.

The community practices various ceremonies that honour their ancestors and the natural world. These include seasonal celebrations and rituals that mark important life events (Eabametoong First Nation, 2004). Individuals participate in prayers, smudging, and sweat lodges to deepen their Indigenous spirituality and foster their well-being. Workshops and programs put on by Health and Social Services also incorporate these practices, as well as the teachings of the Medicine Wheel, to help facilitate healing for those who are interested (Kirton, 2020). The community has a mix of Christian and traditional spiritual practices. There are several churches, but many also follow traditional spiritual beliefs and practices (Eabametoong First Nation, 2004). Prior to baptisms, children received their name from an elder at a special naming ceremony. Names were kept as private and not used for everyday purposes. Nicknames were utilized for other groups and outsiders (Atlin, 2019). For Eabametoong First Nation, considering the wisdom and experience of Elders, and the needs and understandings of youth is crucial to decision-making (Atlin, 2019).

The Family Well-being Program is a Nishnawbe Aski Nation initiative that aims to support each Indigenous community in designing and delivering their own comprehensive and culturally appropriate services and programs to promote community health and family well-being.

Community recreational facilities include an arena, community hall, Pow-wow grounds, recreational trails and swimming spots where cultural traditions are practiced.

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

The Ojibwe language (spoken and written) is the working language used by the older generation while English (spoken and written) is predominant as the working language with the younger generation (Matawa First Nations, 2014). Children are taught in Ojibwe and English at John C. Yesno Education Centre as part of language revitalization. The school was burnt down in January 2024, but a temporary one was opened in November 2024 (Stimpson, 2024). The Ojibwe language is an important part of their cultural heritage.  The language of the Eabametoong people is part of the Algonquian group and the Ojibway subculture. Many dialects exist and Eabametoong has its own dialect. Ojibway ancestry is a verbal society (Teach for Canada, 2024).

As part of the Matawa Education Department, Eabametoong First Nation is included in the Matawa Waka Tere language program. See Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Use and Preservation of Indigenous Language’ for further details.

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Eabametoong First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Eabametoong First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Eabametoong First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it  with future generations.

Eabametoong First Nation is one of 10 northern First Nations who have launched a lawsuit against the Ontario and federal government in April 2023 (McIntosh, 2023). The other communities included in the lawsuit are Eabametoong First Nation (Fort Hope 64), Apitipi Anicinapek Nation, Aroland First Nation, Constance Lake First Nation, Fort Albany First Nation, Ginoogaming First Nation, Kashechewan First Nation, Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation and Neskantaga First Nation. These communities have requested that the Canadian government be barred from making any decisions about how land could be used without Indigenous consent. The lawsuit centres on Treaty No. 9 and the contrast between the verbal and written promises of Treaty No. 9 as recorded (McIntosh, 2023). The Nations are arguing that they did not cede or surrender their territories, and that Treaty No. 9 did not give the Ontario government the right to allow resource extraction (McIntosh, 2023).

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-governance)

The community is formally affiliated with the following Nishnawbe Aski Nation and Matawa First Nations. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

The community is governed by an elected Chief and five councillors, who serve for two-year terms.

Eabametoong First Nation formed an alliance with Neskantaga First Nation in 2018, to assert their principles, values and knowledge over the management and stewardship of their lands. The communities felt that their voices were being ignored or not invited into the discussions with the province on road projects (including the WSR) that may be constructed through their homelands (Mining Watch, 2018). Opening up their territory to mining in the Ring of Fire will change their way of life, increase risks to the fish and wildlife they depend upon, and pollute the lakes and rivers (Mining Watch, 2018). The communities have not said ‘no’ to these projects, and seek to safeguard their future through “positive community and regional development… that anything that happens in our region is a positive contribution to community life. We are declaring our role as informed decision-makers must be recognized in the planning, assessment, and final decisions for any projects in our area” (Neskantaga and Eabametoong First Nations, 2018). Using “bare-bones” environmental processes and not “an enhanced environmental assessment process on a regional basis [for] a ‘joint decision-making processes’ [that] involve[s] all of the Nations in the region” undermines their visions for a healthy and prosperous region, and their rights and responsibilities as stewards of the land.

In 2016, the Fort Hope First Nation (Eabametoong) participated in the identification of earth science, life science, and recreational values of the Mojikit Lake Conservation Reserve Management Statement. This conservation reserve is adjacent to the Wabikimi Provincial Park and covers an area of 62,000 ha. Three existing water control structures and 8 outpost camps are covered under the Land Use Permit (LUP). Management guidelines include no new resources roads, commercial forestry, mining, or hydroelectric power; and will continue to permit sport hunting and fishing, camping, ATV and snowmobiling. New outpost or tourism facilities may be considered through the LUP process. Aboriginal interests within this conservation reserve span from the remote outpost camp to west Ogoki Reservoir outpost camp, its ownership and operations, as well as hunting and trapping. “This Statement of Conservation Interest in no way affects any existing or future aboriginal or treaty rights” (MECP, 2016).

Figure 19.5:      Draft Eabametoong First Nation and Mishkeegogamang First Nation Area of Interest for Planning

19.1.1.1.3         Kasabonika Lake First Nation

Information regarding Kasabonika Lake First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revisions of the EAR/IS. The following section and impacts assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Kasabonika Lake First Nation is a fly-in Anishininiimowin (Oji-Cree) Nation in Treaty No. 9 territory located in Northern Ontario. Kasabonika Lake First Nation is located 570 km north of Thunder Bay and 448 km northeast of Sioux Lookout. The community is situated on the southwestern shores of Kasabonika Lake within the Winisk River watershed.  

Kasabonika Lake First Nation consists of more than 26,000 acres of land (Kehoe, 2014). Kasabonika Lake First Nation homeland is centred on the lakes of Kasabonika and Shibogama with heavy utilization of the lakes, and an overall east‑west orientation and important connection with Big Trout Lake to the west. The Kasabonika Lake First Nation utilizes the land for hunting, trapping, fishing, gathering and travelling between communities (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Kasabonika Lake First Nation has asserted that they share traditional territory with Webequie First Nation and actively use these shared lands for hunting and fishing (Archaeological Services Inc., 2021). The Webequie First Nation CBLUP denotes an area where there is shared use and interest with the Kasabonika Lake First Nation traditional territory (Webequie First Nation, 2019).

Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

Areas utilized for fishing include Kasabonika Lake, Shibongama Lake and Ashweig River, before it enters into Lake Kasabonika, north of Shibongama Lake and northwest of Croal Lake and Fawn River (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Kasabonika Lake First Nation members tend to focus on lakes and rivers to the south and west of Kasaobonika (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Moose hunting occurs near the Asheweig River, southeast of the community (Golder Associates, 2018). Historically, Kasabonika Lake First Nation members trap in the area surrounding the lakes of Kasabonika and Shibogama (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). There is a preference for hunting to the north of the community, but hunting did not occur in the Bug River-Mishawamakan Rier area (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Kasabonika Lake First Nation harvest the following species: moose, sable, Caribou, beaver, lynx, marten, rabbit, grouse, ptarmigan, walleye, labrador tea, blueberries and cedar (Golder Associates, 2018).

As the Kasabonika Lake First Nation was an established community site even before the signing of the treaty, there was no need for families to settle in Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug so there are almost no historical records of people from Kasabonika Lake First Nation utilizing the territories further to the north (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Travel and Access

Kasabonika Lake’s summer travel route focused on the heavy utilization of the route from the eastern end of Shibogama Lake to Post Island in Big Trout Lake (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). The route is not direct along the river, but it is important for Kasabonika Lake First Nation to maintain a connection to this route. Another summer travel route is along the Ashweig River from Shibongama Lake (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Winter travel routes focus on routes leading to the north, south and east of Kasabonika-Shibogama Lakes. Ashweig-Winisk Rivers are important to the Kasabonika Lake residents (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Kasabonika Lake First Nations have identified that Kasabonika Lake’s Old Settlement has some existing structures which have cultural value, including a cemetery (Sara Mai Chitty, 2016). Kasabonika Lake First Nation members have noted that most burial grounds are unmarked and are located along the shores of waterways (Golder Associates, 2018).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Kasabonika Lake First Nation continues to push for cultural reclamation, the community implements programs to foster intergenerational exchanges in order to combat cultural erosion (Kehoe, 2014). This involves engaging the younger generation and solidifying connections between Kasabonika Lake members, the land and culturally significant activities, such as promoting the importance of the teepee (Kehoe, 2014). When feasts are held within the community, the Elder women are responsible for the processing and preparation of the traditional food items. Traditional food items (depending on the season, these items may vary from fish, beaver, moose, duck, goose, etc.) are brought to the community by hunters (Kehoe, 2014). Kasabonika Lake First Nation members continue to partake in culturally significant practices around traditional land-based foods. Community members utilize the entire fish, often calling it “fish gut salad.” When cleaning and preparing Suckerfish or Whitefish, the innards (such as air sacs, fish roe, intestines, etc.) are set aside and fried in oil (Kehoe, 2014).

Sioux Lookout First Nations Healthy Authority (2025) serves Kasabonika Lake First Nation, providing traditional teachings, activities and wellness journeys through ceremonies.

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

The traditional language of Oji-Cree is used by many of the Elders living in Kasabonika Lake First Nation (Keewaytinook Okimakanak, 2014). Anishininimowin or Oji-Cree (sometimes called Severn Ojibway) is closely related to the Ojibway language, but has a different literary tradition based in Cree. The English language, both spoken and written, is the working language for most of Kasabonika Lake First Nation younger community members (Keewaytinook Okimakanak, 2014).

Shibogama Education Authority provides support and assistance in developing and delivering the education program and system in the community with a focus on enhancing and furthering traditional language acquisition for the community (Shibogama First Nations Council, 2025).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Kasabonika Lake First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Kasabonika Lake First Nation’s Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are of importance to Kasabonika Lake First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-governance)

Kasabonika Lake First Nation is a member of Shibogama First Nations Council and Nishnawbe Aski Nation (Shibogama First Nations Council, 2025; Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020a). Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

The community elects a Chief, Deputy Chief, and six councillors for two-year terms under a custom electoral system.

19.1.1.1.4         Marten Falls First Nation

Marten Falls First Nation completed a project-specific Indigenous Knowledge Study for the Northern Access Roads, which includes the Webequie Supply Road Project.  The report on the study was authored by a third-party retained to complete a community-led participatory process to review Marten Falls traditional land use. The study is not meant to be a complete depiction of Indigenous Knowledge and land and resource use by Marten Falls First Nation members. The data and information included in this Report were derived from Indigenous Knowledge and land and resource use interviews conducted with Marten Falls First Nation members. 25 interviews were conducted between March 2023 and May 2023 (Suslop Inc.,2024). Marten Falls First Nation Elders were prioritized in the Study as they possess the most Knowledge on land and resource use and occupancy (Suslop Inc., 2024). The data and information provided in the Study are only a representational account of Marten Falls First Nation IKLRU within the Study area considering the timeline, budgetary constraints, participants involved, and limited scope of the Study area (Suslop Inc., 2024). The study compiled available mapping information from projects, including the WSR. Types of spatial information mapped in the study include:

• Traditional territory;
• Harvesting areas;
• Travel Routes;
• Points of interest; and
• Fish and wildlife areas.

Marten Falls First Nation provided traditional ecological knowledge for the Indigenous Knowledge Study, which focused on the area delineated as a 50 km buffer zone from the proposed WSR route to establish the Study Area.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Marten Falls First Nation is a remote Anishininiimowin (Oji-Cree) Nation in Treaty No. 9 territory located in Northwestern Ontario, situated approximately 435 km northeast of Thunder Bay on the north shore of the Ogoki River, a tributary of the Albany River.  An Area of Interest in Planning (AIP) was identified in the CBLUP Terms of Reference for Marten Falls First Nations and shows the approximate size of their AIP (Figure 19.6).

Prior to the arrival of the Europeans, Marten Falls First Nation members travelled their traditional territory and lived autonomously. Traditional and spiritual ceremonies were practiced throughout, there were strong familial bonds, and the clan systems were maintained (Suslop Inc., 2024). Waterways were highways for transportation and travel and families travelled by canoe to “hunting grounds, trapline, fishing sites, resting areas and more” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Prior to European contact, Marten Falls First Nation were independent, self sufficient and deeply connected to the land. The arrival of the Europeans disrupted their lifestyle and relationships that Marten Falls First Nation members had with the land and each other (Suslop Inc., 2024). Marten Falls First Nation members were involved in the fur trade and the Marten Falls Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC) post was established on the Albany River in the late 1700s (Suslop Inc., 2024). The autonomy of Marten Falls First Nation members declined, and interdependencies were established between the Marten Falls First Nation community and European settlers (Suslop Inc., 2024). Colonial and assimilationist institutions (including but not limited to- Numbered Treaties, Indian Act and the residential school system) were also established which had lasting impacts on the Marten Falls First Nation community. Language, community structure and traditions were lost, which has impacted the cultural identities of Marten Falls First Nation members (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Marten Falls First Nation members shared that “Modern conveniences and technology have also negatively impacted land and resource use (Suslop Inc., 2024). The dependence on the land has been reduced and many things are store- bought with the younger generations not on the land as much as they previously were” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Traditional Land and Resource Use

Marten Falls First Nation members practice a traditional way of life, which includes hunting, trapping, fishing, and plant gathering. Currently, members have cabins and camps which they use for harvesting and hunting within their traditional territory. The Webequie First Nation CBLUP denotes an area as Zone 3, which depicts a shared area with Marten Falls and Webequie with a land mass of approximately 481,290 ha, which includes common interest by Webequie First Nation, Marten Falls First Nation and Neskantaga First Nation in the Ring of Fire mineral deposits. The IK study noted that “Marten Falls First Nation [community members] do not live off the land like their ancestors once did, especially younger members” (Suslop Inc. Inc., 2024).

The ancestral relationship with the land included ways to care, steward and/or manage lands and resources. The experience and history of the Northwest Company and Hudson’s Bay Company on one Marten Falls First Nation Indigenous Knowledge, Land use and Occupancy Study for the Northern Access Roads (Marten Falls First Nation IK Study) participant’s father noted that finding beaver/Amik took “two weeks into the land” and that the beaver/Amik were “getting all wiped out” (Suslop Inc., 2024). This altered their role which they described as “[w]e were our own MNRs taking care of the land … [s]o we governed ourselves … [t]aking care of the land, taking care of the animals, you know, respecting, respecting the animals” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Hunting

Hunting is an important part of Marten Falls First Nation identity. Traditionally, hunting spots were chosen and families would spend 2-3 weeks at that location before travelling to another location. Lifestyles were semi-nomadic and moose, Caribou geese, duck, partridge and other animals’ species were hunted (Suslop Inc., 2024). Hunting was traditionally carried out by men, but it was a family activity with women and children also part of hunting activities including preparing and preserving the meat. Hunting was seen as a spiritual endeavor as well as for sustenance.

Marten Falls First Nation members have identified moose as a traditionally important part of their diet and Caribou as a culturally significant species (Suslop Inc., 2024). Harvesters use the majority of the animal to minimize waste, with fur used for clothing and blankets. One fish and wildlife area was identified within the WSR study area, but this only based on the account of two Marten Falls First Nation members (Suslop Inc., 2024). This area was identified as a migratory route for Caribou during the spring and fall. There were concerns raised that the WSR would impact this route, as Caribou will continue to use this route.

Moose hunting was and continues to be popular, it is “so important for providing sustenance to the people of Marten Falls First Nation that the species is identified as culturally significant” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Participants of the Indigenous Knowledge study described Marten Falls First Nation members as proficient trappers and strong hunters (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Plant Gathering

Marten Falls First Nation members gather a diverse range of plant species for various purposes, including subsistence, medicinal, and utilitarian uses (Suslop Inc., 2024). Some of the plant species include:

• Food: Mooseberries, blueberries, chokeberries, saskatoon berries and gooseberries (Suslop Inc., 2024).
• Ceremonial purposes and healing: tobacco, sage, cedar, birch sweetgrass, willow bark, tamarack and moss (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Berries were traditionally used in pemmican or desserts and also played an important role in traditional ceremonies (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Medicinal plants are used in various ways, some examples include (Suslop Inc, 2024):

• Willow bark is used for healing cuts and preventing infections;
• Tamarack is used for healing boils;
• Gum from spruce or gumtree are used to heal small wounds and infections; and
• Cedar and birch are boiled to make teas to help treat respiratory ailments and detoxification.

Fishing

Fishing also played an important role in sustaining Marten Falls First Nation members and happened throughout the different seasons, but especially in the summer months. Pickerel, walleye, whitefish and sturgeon were commonly caught. Sturgeon is deemed to be culturally significant for Marten Falls First Nation (Suslop Inc. Inc. 2024).

Trapping

Trapping has always been and continues to be an important traditional activity for Marten Falls First Nation. Historically, trapping was both an important source of income for many families in the community, as well as a source of food and supplies. Marten Falls First Nation members were independent and known as a community of trappers. Families would go trapping for three months at a time in an area designated or preferred to them. Young children would be taught how to trap.  Beaver, muskrat, marten and otter were trapped, and trapping was seen as critical to survival and maintaining the family unit (Suslop Inc., 2024). Small game (e.g. skunks and rabbits) was also trapped and used for medicinal or healing purposes (Suslop Inc., 2024).

In 1946, the Ontario Registered Trapline System was implemented, which imposed sole ownership of trapping areas. This signalled a new path of land tenure and government regulation in the region. Prior to the Registered Trapline System, Marten Falls First Nation members would explore the land freely and meet with Indigenous Peoples from different nations.  Once this system was in place, it disrupted negotiated land use and traditional practices of sharing between Indigenous Peoples and nations (Finch 2020 as cited in Suslop Inc. 2024). Marten Falls First Nation members also outlined that they see less people trapping, and there is an ecological imbalance with people not as involved in traditional activities (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Drinking Water

Marten Falls First Nation has been on a boil water advisory since July 2005 (Suslop Inc., 2024).  While the existing water treatment facility was updated in June 2019, the community does not have the resources to operate the facility. Contaminated water is not drinkable, can result in repugnant smells, and affect the overall health (and taste) of species living in or using the water. 91 homes and 6 community buildings are affected and bottled water is flown into the community (Marten Falls First Nation, 2023a).

Travel and Access

The Marten Falls Indigenous Knowledge Land Use and Occupancy Study mapped historical and current travel routes that connect to traditional land and resource use areas and neighbouring communities. “Waterways were [and are] particularly important as lakes and rivers serve as highways for transportation and travel. Many families travelled by canoe to hunting grounds, traplines, fishing sites, resting areas, and more” (Suslop Inc., 2024). Some families also used dog teams during the winter to traverse large swaths of land for trapping (snowmobiles are more common today (Suslop Inc., 2024). Historically, snowshoes, wooden sleighs, toboggans and canoes were made by Marten Falls First Nation members as a means of travel and were essential for survival (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Travel routes along water were identified as areas that are utilized by Marten Falls First Nation members that should remain accessible. One travel route was mapped in the study area, and it is an access route to WabamikoZakaihgan/ White Beaver Lake (Suslop Inc., 2024). One historic trail was also identified, which was used to visit family in Attawapiskat, as well as one historic village site. The Marten Falls First Nation members who identified the historical trail and village sites did not have concerns about the impacts of WSR on the sites (Suslop Inc., 2024). The Albany River is a key waterway for travel for Marten Falls First Nation members and other communities but has seen reduced water levels due to the construction of dams and diversions (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Habitation

Members of Marten Falls First Nation continue to make use of their habitation sites when they are out on the land and these are sites where participants currently reside, spent their childhood, or places they stayed when on the land, including cabins, temporary structures, and/or camping locations (Suslop, 2024). No specific habitation sites were mapped in the Indigenous Knowledge study area of WSR.

Cultural Continuity

Before European contact, the people of Marten Falls First Nation were independent and self-sufficient and knew how to sustain and heal themselves by living off the land and did not need settler-colonial interventions like Western agriculture or medicine (Suslop Inc., 2024). Residential schools created a disconnect and the intergenerational sharing of knowledge and land and resource use was impacted. Language, community structure, and traditions were also lost amongst younger generations, affecting the cultural identities of Marten Falls First Nation people. Marten Falls First Nation’s traditional territory needs to be maintained for future generations so they can engage in activities within the land that are tied to their Indigenous culture and person (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Conservation is critical to maintaining Marten Falls First Nation members’ connection to the land and spirituality. This connection to the land is regarded as critical for healing and Marten Falls First Nation members have described their traditional territory as a place of “paradise” (Suslop Inc, 2024).

“When Marten Falls First Nation members do not use their traditional territory, they risk losing important aspects of their cultural identity. It is therefore important to protect the ecological integrity of Marten Falls First Nation’s traditional territory to ensure that future generations have the option and opportunity to engage in land and resource use which helps define them as an Indigenous person.” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

The community is deeply connected to the land, to wildlife, and to each other. Knowledge and wisdom were passed down intergenerationally through oral teachings and experiential learning. Land use was one of these teachings that was critical for maintaining ecological balance, meaning that the relationship between Marten Falls First Nation members and the land is reciprocal (Suslop Inc., 2024). Retaining the important customs and cultural teachings that are linked to the lands that form their way of life is of importance to the community.

Waterways were and are important to Marten Falls First Nation members. Lakes and rivers served as highways for transportation and travel (Suslop Inc., 2024). The Ogoki River and Albany River are waterways of importance for travel for Marten Falls First Nation members and other communities. Marten Falls First Nation members noted that prior to contact and settlement, they could drink the water from the rivers and streams flowing through their traditional territory (Suslop Inc., 2024). Today, Marten Falls First Nation members living in the community rely on a water treatment system that is not operational.

Marten Falls First Nations have culturally significant and sensitive sites throughout their traditional land. Pym Island, located southeast of the eastern terminus of the WSR, has historically been utilized for traditional purposes, including but not limited to goose and moose hunting. There is a sacred site known to be located to the southwest of the Eagles Nest mine esker camp. IK Study mentioned that there are also a number of known burial and birth locations, which are currently unknown and not identified within the Indigenous Knowledge study (Suslop Inc, 2024).

Previous development has significantly reduced water levels in the Albany River, changing wildlife habitat and how Marten Falls First Nation members use the Albany River today (Suslop Inc., 2024). As the project progresses, Marten Falls First Nation may identify additional culturally significant sites and travel routes.

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Marten Falls First Nation organizes community events such as feasts, facilitating family circles, counselling and child/youth support groups to assist with the connection and culture within the community. There is an outdoor education program which is made up of six land-based and outdoor learning credits and allows students to build that connection with the land and water. Activities in this program include (but are not limited to) trapping, outdoor skills, camping, canoeing, and fishing (Matawa Education, 2019). Students travel from one Matawa First Nation to another during this program.

Marten Falls First Nation has an Elders program which supports Elders going into the community to provide support to students with traditional activities such as smudging, big drum making, hand drum making, drumming, feasts, beading, traditional teachings, storytelling, workshops, traditional medicines, hide tanning, hunting and trapping (Matawa Education, 2019). Younger generations acquired skills by observing Elders, learning not only traditional harvesting methods, but also how to harvest wood, build tipis, tan moosehide, prepare for winter, deliver babies, and make foods like pemmican and medicines (Suslop Inc, 2024).

Marten Falls First Nation members have identified that blasting techniques used to break up rock formations as part of road construction or related development might negatively impact the homes of the Ma-ma-kwa-se-sak. In Marten Falls First Nation oral history and culture, the Ma-ma-kwa-se-sak are little people who live in the rocks (Marten Falls First Nation, 2024). 

Marten Falls First Nation hosts a cultural week break for school children in April. Children are taught skills such as trapping, skinning a beaver, setting up rabbit snares and creating dream catchers (Teach for Canada, 2017b). A youth retreat is held each July where traditional activities and way of life are practiced with young people. These activities are important to the health and well-being of individuals and communities, having cultural and spiritual significance. Cultural activities may also interact closely with traditional harvesting, including large animal hunting and fishing events (Teach for Canada, 2017b).

There are several ceremonies that Marten Falls First Nation members have identified. Traditional and spiritual ceremonies for Marten Falls First Nation are important for the development of children and youth (Suslop Inc., 2024). Ceremonies outlined in the Indigenous Knowledge study include:

• Walking out ceremonies are held for infants who would walk on the ground for their first time;
• Fasting ceremonies are held for boys and girls who are coming of age. Fasting is also common for spiritual quests;
• Pow wows, sunrise ceremonies, sweat lodges, pipe ceremonies, sharing circles, and smudging are also common and provide healing; and
• Berry ceremonies are held for women. These ceremonies are held to celebrate the rite of passage as a girl enters womanhood. The woman could consume berries as part of the celebration but would then abstain from eating them for up to one year afterward. . This tradition is known as the berry fast.

Marten Falls First Nation members spoke about the importance of tobacco, sage, cedar, and sweetgrass which are used for various ceremonial purposes and healing. The importance of plants for ceremonial purposes, along with everyday life, was expressed by the community (Suslop Inc., 2024).

The Sioux Lookout First Nations Health Authority offers various services that support community members’ wellness journeys through ceremonies. Please refer to Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Cultural Traditions and Practices for further information.

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

The traditional language spoken in Marten Falls is Ojibwe, a dialect of Anishinaabe with influences from the Cree language and is considered a distinct language and culture. 51% of households in Marten Falls First Nation spoke a traditional language in the home on a daily basis (Marten Falls First Nation, 2023). Marten Falls has developed programs and activities that include aspects to revitalize their Native language and include Indigenous Language and Culture classes (Teach for Canada, 2017b).

As part of the Matawa Education Department, Marten Falls First Nation is included in the Matawa Waka Tere language program. See Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Use and Preservation of Indigenous Language’ for further details.

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Marten Falls First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Marten Falls First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Marten Falls First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-governance)

Marten Falls First Nation is developing a Community Based Land Use Plan to identify and plan for socio-economic development strategies in Marten Falls First Nation traditional territory (Suslop, 2024). In August 2024, a preferred route for the Marten Falls Community Access Road was chosen and this road will further advance Marten Falls First Nation’s vision and development goals (Marten Falls Access Road, 2024).  “Marten Falls First Nation faces several challenges within the Marten Falls community because of a lack of self-government and economic independence. Despite these challenges, it should not be discounted the importance of governance, traditional laws and the roles and responsibilities of its community members and, chief and council (Suslop Inc., 2024).

The community is formally affiliated with Nishnawbe Aski Nation and Matawa First Nations. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

Figure 19.6:      Draft Marten Falls First Nation Area of Interest for Planning

19.1.1.1.5         Neskantaga First Nation

Information regarding Neskantaga First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Neskantaga First Nation is an Anishininiimowin (Oji-Cree) Nation in Treaty No. 9 territory located in Northwestern Ontario, approximately 435 km north of Thunder Bay. The community is situated on the north shore of Attawapiskat Lake. It is one of the closest Indigenous communities to Webequie First Nation, which is located less than 100 km to the north. 

Neskantaga First Nation is located at the headwaters of the Attawapiskat River, a waterway integral to fishing, travel, and cultural traditions (Archaeological Services Inc, 2024). The Attawapiskat and Otoskwin rivers surrounding the Neskantaga First Nation were once part of a major trade route. Many Neskantaga community members participate in traditional harvesting of wildlife and fish, plants, bark, trees and berries in the surrounding areas (Neskantaga, 2023).

According to the Webequie First Nation CBLUP, Neskantaga First Nation and Webequie First Nation share a common history of movement and Webequie First Nation, Marten Falls First Nation and Neskantaga First Nation have overlapping land use. Neskantaga First Nation has indicated direct impacts to their traditional territories by the WSR project (location unknown) (Archaeological Services Inc., 2021).  Neskantaga First Nation members practice a traditional way of life, which includes hunting, trapping, fishing, and plant gathering.

Hunting and Fishing

Neskantaga First Nation hunt moose and undertake an annual fall hunt (Hale, 2024). Sturgeon is also a critical part of Neskantaga First Nation and is an “important part of who we are as a nation” (CBC, 2022).

Plant Gathering

Many members participate in traditional harvesting of plants, bark, trees, berries and water from the cool, fresh springs located throughout the surrounding areas (Neskantaga First Nation, 2023).

Drinking Water

Neskantaga First Nation has been under a boil-water advisory since February 1, 1995 (Indigenous Services Canada, 2024). In 2021, Neskantaga First Nation shared videos of the importance of clean drinking water in their community. The effects of the 26-year boil water advisory has affected the quality of life of Neskantaga’s community members and has resulted in medical, health and safety issues.

“Still fighting for our water…we want to be recognized as human beings, and we need clean water too, at our homes. I don’t know why it’s so hard for the government not to recognize that. It’s heartbreaking to see everybody going through it in my community. Some people don’t want to talk about it, because they gave up hope. Some people say there’s no hope. It’s like we’re being punished, what are we being punished for? I don’t know. Maybe the government should tell us why they don’t support us. Why aren’t we recognized as Canadian citizens” (Know Indigenous History, 2021).

Traplines

Neskantaga First Nation has outlined that the project directly impacts Neskantaga traplines and falls within Neskantaga’s Area of Interest; the registered trapline holders and location of these traplines are currently unknown (ToR Review, Internal Document Review).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

The Attawapiskat River has long been essential for various purposes, including hunting, fishing, trapping and serving as a primary means of travel during the warmer months.

Many locations along the river hold deep cultural significance for the Neskantaga First Nation. One area identified by Canada Chrome Corporation as a potential bridge crossing (not as part of WSR), is regarded as a crucial gathering place and the site of an old village. According to the Neskantaga people, this location has high archaeological potential (Bell, 2015).

Neskantanga First Nation Elders have identified an area south of Mameigwess Lake on a ridge between two unnamed water bodies, as a winter and a summer travel route that extends the length of these two unnamed water bodies (White Spruce, 2008). Copper Point, located on the west side of Rowlandson Lake, on a large peninsula, was historically used for camps and historical mining activity (White Spruce, 2008).

A historically occupied hamlet site, Shay-kaah-chii-wii-nange, located along the Attawapiskat River about halfway between Pym Island and the historic Beteau Lake settlement has been identified to be in close proximity to the Ring of Fire mineral development area (Hamilton, 2015).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Traditional healing and ceremonies are practiced both actively and passively through a deep connection to and stewardship of the land (Neskantaga First Nation, 2023). Water symbolizes an eternal connection to the Creator and is revered as a sacred gift (Leonard, 2023). As such, it must be respected, conserved, and safeguarded for future generations, just as it has been by those who came before. This sentiment is powerfully echoed in community member Maggie Sakanee’s words: “Water is life” underscoring its significance as more than just a natural resource (Lansdowne House, 2022).

The Sioux Lookout First Nations Health Authority (2025) serves the Neskantaga First Nation by offering traditional teachings and activities, as part of its commitment to culturally grounded health services.

Birch bark has historically been used for crafting canoes, baskets, and medicinal purposes. Ash, Tamarack, and White Birch have traditionally been employed in snowshoe-making, ensuring mobility during the winter months (Macfie, 1991).

The community is rich with industrious individuals creating art, crafts, and other goods. Oral traditions remain strong, with many continuing to share legends and stories—such as the creation story—that unify members through a shared history and purpose (Neskantaga First Nation, 2023).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

The traditional language spoken in Neskantaga is Oji-Cree, a dialect of Anishinaabe with influences from the Cree language and is considered a distinct language and culture. Efforts are being made to support Indigenous youth in maintaining their language and cultural connections. Programs that incorporate traditional practices, oral histories, and cultural education are crucial in helping to preserve the Oji-Cree language and the cultural heritage of Neskantaga First Nation (Neskantaga First Nation, 2023).

As part of the Matawa Education Department, Neskantaga First Nation is included in the Matawa Waka Tere language program. See Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Use and Preservation of Indigenous Language’ for further details.

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Neskantaga First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Neskantaga First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that is important to Neskantaga First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities and Governance (Self-governance)

Neskantaga First Nation elects its officials under the Custom Electoral System  is a member of the Matawa First Nations Management (Tribal Council) and Nishnawbe Aski Nation, Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b). Neskantaga First Nation identified valued components during the terms of reference review for WSR including: way of life, capacity to govern and steward their territory; water, traditional knowledge and culture, local capacity (i.e., human resources); health and emergency services; and community health and well-being (ToR Review, Internal Document Review).

In 2018, Neskantaga First Nation formed a political alliance with Eabametoong First Nation to assert their principles, values and knowledge over the management and stewardship of their lands. See Section 19.2.2.2.2 for further details.

Neskantaga First Nation is working to start a sturgeon stewardship program to protect the fish from proposed development (Turner, 2022).

19.1.1.1.6         Nibinamik First Nation

Information regarding Nibinamik First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impacts assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Nibinamik First Nation (Summer Beaver Settlement) is an Anishininiimowin (Oji-Cree) Nation in Treaty No. 9 territory in Northwestern Ontario. Nibinamik First Nation is located 480 km north of Thunder Bay. It is located on the Summer Beaver settlement along the eastern shores of Nibinamik Lake on the Winisk River system.  

Nibinamik First Nation has outlined how important the land is to their members and how it is tied to their culture and tradition and as a place of healing. Community members hunt, fish, trap and gather traditional medicines on the land.

Canoes made out of birch tree bark was one of the main forms of transportation. Traditional food like sap from trees, carrots along the shore and edible grass were harvested. During the mid 1900s, there were 10 trap lines in the Nibinamik area (Nibinamik, 2014).

The Webequie First Nation CBLUP identifies shared areas with the Nibinamik First Nation that are used for traditional purposes (Webequie First Nation, 2019).

Hunting and Fishing

The Nibinamik First Nation economy was traditionally based on hunting and trapping. Beaver, Caribou, musquash, lynx, rabbit and fish were wildlife that they relied on for food, clothing and trading (Nibinamik First Nation, 2014).

A 2014 study showed that half of the community members in Nibinamik still hunt, trap and fish to provide food for their families, as food costs are significant in the area and food gathered on the land supplements what is bought in stores. Rabbit, moose, geese, partridge, beaver and fish are among their traditional foods (Nibinamik First Nation, 2014).  These activities remain central to the community’s way of life, providing food and materials for clothing and crafts; these activities are not only vital for sustenance but also for maintaining a balanced ecosystem (Nibinamik First Nation, 2024). Traditional traplines are important as ancestors were buried when families travelled and lived on the land during different seasons (Nibinamik First Nation, 2014).

Drinking Water

Nibinamik First Nation has been under several long-term drinking water advisories, including Sep 15, 2003 – Nov 10, 2004, Mar 23, 2007 – Nov 04, 2008, Feb 26, 2009 – Dec 05, 2011, Feb 05, 2013 – Jun 20, 2021 (First Nations Drinking Water Settlement, 2025).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Before Treaty No. 9, the Nibinamik people lived in four separate villages – Mameigwess Lake, Eyes Lake, Wigwashnis Lake and Old Summer Beaver (now Nibinamik). People no longer live in these villages, but they still conduct traditional ceremonies within the old village sites (Nibinamik First Nation, 2014). Nibinamik First Nation considers the land as somewhere to heal and where they feel at home. The land is tied to their culture and traditions (Nibinamik First Nation, 2014).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Hunting, fishing, and trapping are not only means of sustenance but also integral to Nibinamik First Nation’s cultural practices. These activities are passed down through generations, maintaining a deep connection to the land and traditional ways of life (Native Ministries International, 2022). The community participates in conservation planning and ecological stewardship initiatives. These programs aim to build skills and opportunities for sustainable land management (Begaye, 2017). By integrating traditional knowledge with modern conservation techniques, Nibinamik First Nation maintains the health and productivity of their traditional territory for future generations.

An annual youth wilderness retreat led by local Elders is usually held in July to teach youth about traditional practices. The retreat is held at the traditional O-ma-day-na-moh-win-nik (Breathing Grounds) site, which is a 25-minute boat ride from the community (Nibinamik First Nation, 2014).

Nibinamik First Nation community places a strong emphasis on educating the youth about their cultural heritage. This includes incorporating traditional knowledge and practices into the school curriculum and community programs. Moccasin making, wood carvings, and beadwork, continue to be important cultural expressions. These crafts are often taught to younger members of the community to keep the traditions alive (Native Ministries International, 2022). Youth engagement initiatives focus on fostering a sense of pride and identity among younger members, helping them carry forward the cultural legacy of Nibinamik First Nation.

A 2014 survey showed that 94% of community members who answered the survey outlined that teaching children about Ojibway culture was very important (Nibinamik First Nation, 2014). Many homes in Nibinamik are log cabins built using materials from the land, reflecting their resourcefulness and connection to their environment (Hutter, 2017). The community engages in traditional crafts such as moccasin making, wood carvings, and beadwork, which are both cultural expressions and sources of income and utilize natural resources sustainably, so that materials are harvested in a way that does not deplete the environment (Nibinamik First Nation, 2024).

Sioux Lookout First Nations Healthy Authority (2025) serves Nibinamik First Nation, providing traditional teachings and activities and wellness journeys through ceremonies, as part of its commitment to culturally grounded health services.

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Nibinamik First Nation speak Oji-Cree, also known as Severn Ojibwe (Summer Beaver, 2025). The community actively works to preserve the Oji-Cree language, which is a vital part of their cultural identity. Language programs and initiatives are in place to teach younger generations, keeping the language remains vibrant. (Nibinamik First Nation, 2025; National Centre for Collaboration in Indigenous Education, 2018). An immersion program for junior kindergarten to Grade 2 students has been running for 13 years to promote the use and preservation of the Oji-Cree language.

As part of the Matawa Education Department, Nibinamik First Nation is included in the Matawa Waka Tere language program. See Section 19.2.2.1‘Use and Preservation of Indigenous Language’ for further details.

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Nibinamik First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Nibinamik First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that is important to Nibinamik First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

Nibinamik First Nation’s traditional laws, roles, responsibilities, and governance system are rooted in their cultural heritage and ancestral knowledge, reflecting a connection to their land and community. The Band Administration office offers a number of services to its members, such as employment programs, financial assistance, and a variety of healthcare programs, including extended health benefits (Nibinamik First Nation, 2024).

In 1979, Nibinamik First Nation prepared their land use plan which was updated in 1983 (McNeil, 2018). This land use plan outlines Nibinamik’s traditional territory, includes strategies to address community concerns and plans for the future of the community (McNeil, 2018). No recent updates to the land use plan have been provided for the Project team’s review.

The chief, deputy chief and Band Council members are elected for two years under a custom electoral system. Nibinamik First Nation is a member of the Nishnawbe Aski Nation and Matawa First Nations. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

19.1.1.1.7         Weenusk First Nation

Weenusk First Nation completed a project-specific Existing Conditions Report for the Webequie Supply Road Project. The report was authored by a third-party retained to complete a community-led participatory process to review and document Weenusk First Nation existing conditions for inclusion and consideration in the EAR/IS.

Project-specific interviews were convened with 39 Weenusk First Nation Indigenous Knowledge holders within Peawanuck Band Administration Office or participants homes’ (MNP LLP, N.D.). Interview participants were selected through purposive sampling and as many Weenuski Inninowuk who are land users, and harvesters in this case were interviewed (MNP LLP, N.D.). Given the timeline, budgetary constraints, participants that were involved, and limited scope of the Study area, the data and information provided in the Study are only a representational account of Weenusk First Nation Indigenous Knowledge within the Study area (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Although the Project is located outside the main areas frequently accessed by Weenuski Inninowuk harvesters and land users, the interconnected nature of the environment is well understood. Participants recognized that contaminants and pollutants from future project development could be carried downstream, potentially impacting the environment and natural resources in Weenusk’s traditional areas (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Types of spatial information mapped in the study include:

• Traditional territory;
• Hunting Areas;
• Fishing Areas;
• Trapping Areas;
• Plant gathering Areas;
• Transportation Routes and;
• Important Sites.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Weenusk First Nation is a Muskkegowuk (Cree) Nation in Treaty No. 9 territory located in Northwestern Ontario, approximately 770 km north of Thunder Bay. The community settlement, known as Peawunuck, is located on the western shore of the Winisk River, at the mouth of the Asheweig River, approximately 35 km upriver of the Winisk River confluence with Hudson’s Bay.  An Area of Interest in Planning (AIP) was identified in the CBLUP Terms of Reference for Weenusk First Nations and shows the approximate size of their AIP (Figure 19.7).

The description of Weenusk First Nation’s existing use of lands draws on traditional ecological knowledge and traditional land and resource use information to provide context for potential changes to their Section 35 rights. This includes a review of the availability of lands and resources for traditional purposes, sites and areas used for traditional harvesting, and access to lands and resources for traditional harvesting.

Weenuski Inninowuk identity is connected to land, waters, and culture which includes a connection to harvesting activities such as hunting, fishing, trapping, gathering, and learning to survive on the land (MNP LLP, N.D.).Weenusk’s traditional area covers approximately 39,000 square kilometres (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Harvesting activities form an essential component of Weenusk’s Section 35(1) rights and are exercised throughout Weenusk’s traditional areas and are practiced regularly by Weenusk First Nation members (MNP LLP, N.D.). The continued ability of Weenuski Inninowuk to access and eat harvested foods is important for overall community health. “Harvesting is an essential component of Weenusk’s Section 35(1) rights, including Weenusk’s Treaty 9 rights. These rights are exercised throughout Weenusk’s traditional areas. Harvesting activities include hunting; fishing; trapping (Treaty 9 rights); and gathering plants, medicines, and berries (Section 35(1) rights). Traditional food harvested from the land accounted for 50-100% of 15 respondents’ diet (MNP LLP, N.D.). Within their harvesting rights, Weenuski Inninowuk have the right to access uncompromised lands and waters within their traditional areas, and to actively hunt, trap, fish, and gather in a meaningful, preferred manner.” (MNP LLP, N.D.) Traditionally harvested foods are preferred over store bought foods (MNP LLP, N.D.). Access to traditional lands and waters to exercise Weenusk First Nation’s Aboriginal and Treaty Rights is dependent on the availability of the trapping, migration and transportation routes identified within their traditional territory.

Figure 19.7:      Draft Weenusk Falls First Nation Area of Interest for Planning

Hunting

Key species harvested by Weenusk First Nation include Caribou, moose and waterfowl as important cultural resources for the community (MNP LLP, 2023). Moose are commonly hunted in the fall; waterfowl are hunted in the spring and Caribouare hunted year-round. Caribouare generally more preferred and culturally significant to Weenusk First Nation Members (MNP LLP, N.D.). Hunting sites frequented by Weenusk First Nation members were identified within the LSA and RSA for both Caribouand Moose (MNP LLP, N.D.). Weenusk First Nation members have seen a decline in waterfowl and migratory birds and their populations (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Caribou hunting sites were identified within the LSA (one site) and RSA (2 sites) (MNP LLP, N.D.). Cariboumigration routes were also identified within the LSA (one site) and RSA (2 sites) along with one Cariboubirthing ground in the RSA. One moose migration route was identified within the LSA and RSA. Weenusk First Nation members have noted that access to Caribouhas become more difficult as the sudden river thaws have affected their travel routes. Caribou and geese have been found to have “less fat” and geese have also been found sick or have parasites (MNP LLP, N.D.). Caribou numbers have also declined overall and that Weenusk First Nation members noted that the Caribou are sometimes “forced to move further inland for migration due to effects from climate…this ultimately changes the availability of Caribou in Weenusk’s traditional areas” (MNP LLP, N.D.). Weenusk First Nation members have stated that development in and around Weenusk’s traditional areas could change the quality of resources. Harvesters from other communities are also beginning to frequent Weenusk’s traditional areas to harvest, encroaching on their traditional areas (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Weenusk First Nation IK Study provided timing windows for their traditional hunting and fishing, shown graphically in Figure 19.8. The Weenuski Inninowuk harvesting seasonal cycle includes harvesting four different species—Caribou, fish, geese, and moose—at various times throughout the year to have a continuous supply for harvesters. Moose are typically hunted in the fall, especially in September and October. Geese are primarily hunted in the spring at the mouth of the Weenusk River on Hudson’s Bay after the ice breaks up. Fishing is most prevalent during the summer, with ice fishing occurring in the winter. Caribou are harvested year-round (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Figure 19.8:      Weenusk First Nation Hunting and Fishing Windows

Source: MNP LLP, N.D.

Plant Gathering

Weenusk First Nation has emphasized the importance of plants for various purposes. Members continue to harvest berries and medicinal plants from the land for subsistence, medicinal, and utilitarian uses. These practices are deeply rooted in the community’s cultural heritage and traditional knowledge, passed down through generations. Important plants and berries that support Weenuski Inninowuk harvesting practices are found throughout Weenusk’s traditional areas. Cloudberries, cranberries, and blueberries can be found in close proximity to Peawanuck (MNP LLP, N.D.). Medicinal plants such as labrador tea are also harvested; no medicinal sites were identified within the LSA or RSA (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Other important areas for plant gathering include areas for collecting firewood, and areas around family camps that support berry growth. No berry or plant gathering sites were identified in the Project LSA or RSA by participants (MNP LLP, N.D.). One peatland/important ecosystem was identified within the RSA (MNP LLP, N.D.). Peatlands are also considered important Weenusk traditional areas, as they connect with wildlife and vegetation that are important to health and well-being. 

Fishing

Fishing is a common harvesting activity, and net fishing is most common during the summer, with ice fishing in the winter (MNP LLP, N.D.). Some Weenusk First Nation members noticed that walleye population and fish quantities in general have declined over their lifetime, but that they can still be found and harvested (MNP LLP, N.D.). Fishing sites frequented by Weenusk First Nation members were identified within the LSA and RSA for Walleye, Pickerel and general fish species (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Trapping

Trapping is not as common today with Weenusk First Nation members as was during the fur trade. Trapping has significantly decreased since fur prices have dropped and trapping is no longer profitable (MNP LLP, N.D.). Trapped species included in the Project baseline data collection included: Snowshoe Hare, Beaver, River Otter, Muskrat and American Marten (AtkinsRéalis, 2020). No trapping sites were identified by Participants in the Project LSA or RSA (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Travel and Access

According to the Weenusk First Nation Existing Conditions study, members of the Weenusk First Nation expressed that waterways have an important intrinsic value to Weenusk identity (MNP LLP 2023). Weenuski Inninowuk travel extensively within their traditional territory to harvest and use the land. Specific sites for travel along the Winisk River have been identified within the LSA and RSA (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Water Resources

Weenusk First Nation (Peawanuck First Nation) traditional lands are within the secondary watersheds of Ekwan River – Coast and Winisk River – Coast. The Winisk River Provincial Park is located within the Winisk River – Coast secondary watershed. The Winisk River system provides water access throughout the traditional territory and connects with culturally significant areas (MNP LLP, N.D.).  

The Winisk River system is the primary source of drinking water and is an important resource for fishing, wildlife, and vegetation (MNP LLP, N.D.). Part of maintaining Weenusk First Nation identity is to maintain connections with the lands and waters in their traditional areas to promote a sense of healing and well-being. The Winisk River system and surrounding area also serve as an important area for traditional use including hunting, fishing, trapping, and harvesting wild plants (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Cultural Continuity

Weenusk First Nation members have expressed concerns about passing Weenusk culture and way of life to the next generation as development begins to encroach on their traditional areas.  Participants involved in the existing conditions study noted that the isolated nature of Weenusk’s traditional area means that “Weenuski Inninowuk have the freedom to travel and practice their way of life without interference or disturbance” (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Weenusk and Webequie First Nations have shared interest over the northern portion of the Webequie First Nation CBLUP planning area and includes areas of common interest with Weenusk First Nation peoples due to shared use and traditional travel routes. The mouth of the Weenusk River was a traditional gathering place in the spring and summer for both these communities. 

Areas along the Winisk River, the Shamattawa River, and Shamattawa Lake have been identified as important areas that have stories and are important places to the Weenusk First Nation community (MNP LLP, N.D.). Other important sites include the Sutton River and Sutton Lake, Mishamattawa River, Moshikopaw Lake, Fawn River, and Shagamu River (MNP LLP, N.D.). Other communities are often unaware of these locations. Elder documentation of these stories and places is essential, as much information has already been lost due to the lasting impacts of residential schools. The study identified one burial and one ceremonial site that hold significant importance to the community
(MNP LLP, N.D.).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Cultural Landscape and Connection to the Land can be understood as collectively recognized elements that are implicit and distinct to Weenusk First Nation (MNP LLP, N.D.). Any changes to the valued components identified by Weenusk First Nation would result in changes to the Cultural Landscape and Connection to the Land.

Living off the land and maintaining connections to the land are an integral component to Weenuski Inninowuk identity. Fostering and supporting connections with the lands and waters in Weenusk’s traditional areas, and by extension supporting connections to Weenusk culture, promote a sense of healing and well-being (MNP LLP, N.D.). Weenuski Inninowuk identity is tied closely to the traditional lands of the community and the self-sufficiency lifestyle the land provides for the people.

The connection to the land includes the connection to harvesting activities such as fishing, trapping, and gathering within that traditional territory along with culturally important places.  Stewardship of the land is another critical aspect of Weenusk identity, as it ensures that culturally significant resources are available to support future generations.. 87% of participants of the Existing Conditions Study stated that harvested food was shared with family, community members and Elders, and sharing is part of the Weenusk culture (MNP LLP, N.D.). This connection to land and ability to harvest resources is a way for Weenusk First Nation members to care for their community and support well-being.

An intact environment is essential for Weenuski Inninowuk to harvest in their preferred manner in their traditional areas and is intrinsically linked to the overall health and well-being of the community. In this sense, sharing harvested resources is a way for Weenuski Inninowuk to care for their community and support community connectedness and well-being. The lands in Weenusk’s traditional areas are described as “vast, the air is clean, and land is untouched by development” (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Weenuski Inninowuk also use the Winisk River and the waterways as a mode of local transportation (MNP LLP, N.D.). The Winisk River serves as the main water source for Weenusk’s traditional lands, flowing into various channels and tributaries. This water system sustains vital resources such as fish, wildlife, and vegetation within these areas. Additionally, it facilitates the Weenuski Inninowuk’s travel across their territory, enabling connections to culturally significant sites. Ultimately, the waters in Weenusk’s traditional areas are essential to supporting the Weenusk way of life (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Weenuski Inninowuk Identityis reinforced by the connection that community members have within the community and in their individual families.  The traditional areas identified for the community include culturally significant sites (discussed in the Cultural important places and resources section below) which promote the Weenuski identity and connection within the community.

“Weenuski Inninowuk Identity is composed of Weenuski Inninowuk connection to land, waters, and culture, including a connection to harvesting activities such as hunting, fishing, trapping, gathering, and learning to survive on the land. Weenuski Inninowuk Identity includes aspects of language, and connection to family and community” (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Part of Weenuski Inninowuk Identityis the ability to live sufficiently in a remote area and be tied to the traditional lands and water through traditional ways of living (MNP LLP, N.D.). The name for the community ‘Weenusk’ means groundhog in the Cree language (Feherty, 2006). Weenusk harvesters take only what is needed to sustain themselves, their families, and their community. Members only harvest what is needed for the community and their families.

Weenusk First Nation members expressed concern for the younger generation to practice Weenusk culture and way of life in the same manner and there are concerns that the lives of the younger generation will be drastically different from today (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Weenusk First Nation traditional area is the location of cultural sites, storied sites, and sites for teaching.  The mention of these locations was to identify the importance of traditional areas for the continued cultural practices of the community. By acknowledging the importance of traditional areas, this will continue to allow members to pass on teachings and practices for future generations. One of these teachings is the stewardship of the land and the understanding of how to care for and protect the land and water, since it is important in Weenusk culture. The transmission of stewardship practices and principles was mentioned by Weenusk members, and the significance of passing these teachings and locations from older to younger generations. This part of the culture not only relates to sharing resources among the community but also traditional teachings (MNP LLP, N.D.).

The teaching of harvesting (hunting, fishing, trapping, gathering) is another important teaching for Weenusk. Harvesters leave an offering of tobacco as a form of respect and appreciation for the land. Hunting and gathering practices are specific for the community and correlate to the teachings of sharing and stewardship. Harvests are shared with the community for feasting, further engraining the act of sharing in Weenusk culture, and contributing to overall cultural well-being. Members of Weenusk have stated that they are trying to revive the culture and that harvesting is an important aspect of culture that the community wants to preserve as part of their identity (MNP LLP, N.D.)

Weenusk First Nation members partake in sweat lodge ceremonies and flagged the importance of water in this particular ceremony.  Without water, these ceremonies could not occur (MNP LLP, N.D.). Ceremonies can occur during harvesting practices.  An example of this is if a female Caribou were accidentally harvested, then a ceremony would be held which shows respect to the animal and what is being provided by the land.  Ceremonial practices and the ability to conduct these are extremely important and are tied to the connection of land, water, animals and community.

Weenusk First Nation applied to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada in April 2023 to replace the existing pow-wow grounds with a new facility which will allow Weenusk First Nation to host pow-wows and other cultural celebrations in Peawanuck. This Project was approved and determined to not cause significant adverse environmental effects (IAAC, 2023).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Weenusk members identified the importance of language as an aspect of cultural identity. According to Census data from 2016, the community is primarily Swampy Cree as well as Oji-cree and Ojibwa (Statistics Canada, 2016).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Weenusk First Nation Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Weenusk First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that is important to Weenusk First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Weenusk First Nation shared information through consultation meetings and the Existing Conditions Report regarding their established or asserted Section 35(1) rights and values potentially impacted by the Project. This information forms the basis of the Project team’s understanding of the context in which impacts on Weenusk First Nation Section 35(1) rights could occur.

Potential effects of the Project on biophysical components are anticipated within Weenusk First Nation traditional area. Weenusk’s traditional area covers approximately 39,000 square kilometres and the nearest community is Webequie, which is approximately 240km southwest of Peawanuck (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are stated in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are stated in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles and Responsibilities and Governance (Self Governance)

“Weenusk governance relates to the rules and authority structures that make Weenusk unique and exist both within and without the colonial Indian Act. Weenusk’s governance gives Weenusk the right to govern and manage the environment and the natural resources within its traditional lands, including lands and waters.” (MNP LLP, N.D.). Community input and consensus are critical for decision-making within the community, as the traditional areas are formed from different families’ ancestral lands (MNP LLP, N.D.). Land is not “owned” but held by the respective families within Weenusk Fist Nation (MNP LLP, N.D.). Engaging both Elders and youth in governance decision-making is crucial. Elders provide valuable insights into the potential impacts on Weenusk’s traditional areas and way of life; while also involving youth so they have a voice in shaping their own futures (MNP LLP, N.D.). The majority of the participants (92%) who participated in the Weenusk Existing Study responded that Weenusk First Nation should be involved in the decision-making process for this Project and any future development (MNP LLP, N.D.). 

Stewardship of the Environment is also closely connected to Weenusk Governance and their identity. Changes to Weenusk stewardship practices or abilities to practice stewardship in a preferred manner interfere with the ability of Weenusk to govern and exercise authority over the environment and natural resources in their traditional areas (i.e., Weenusk Governance).  Weenusk First Nation members stated that “stewardship is passing cultural knowledge and teachings about the land to the younger generation” (MNP LLP, N.D.). Weenusk stewardship is closely tied with ensuring the availability of culturally significant species to sustain the community and future generations (i.e., Harvesting and Harvested Foods). Stewardship practices and protocols that are followed by Weenusk First Nation members while harvesting on the land include: no overharvesting, no waste – all parts of an animal are used, do not harvest females in the spring and leave an offering of tobacco (MNP LLP, N.D.).

Weenusk First Nation is part of the Omushkego Wahkohtowin Conservation Plan, which was written to provide people, especially Omushkego and adjacent Nations and communities, with information on community conservation planning for  there lands and waters (Mushkegowuk Council Lands and Resources Department 2024). This plan has a 10-year implementation period, which outlines steps to manage lands and resources and a framework to carry out the vision for Omushkego Wahkohtowin. There are four streams within the plan:

• Stream 1: Create protected and conservation areas to protect ecological integrity for the preservation of inherent, treaty, and harvesting rights, and spirituality, culture, and traditions;
• Stream 2: Establish Omushkego Wahkohtowin governance and management;
• Stream 3: Care for ecosystem health;
• Stream 4: Economic and cultural development, sustainable livelihoods, and community well-being.
• Weenusk First Nation is a member of the Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

19.1.1.2         Regional Study Area

19.1.1.2.1         Aroland First Nation

Information regarding Aroland First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited materials compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Aroland First Nation is located 260 km northeast of the City of Thunder Bay, 20 km west of Nakina, and 310 km south of Webequie First Nation in northern Ontario. It is situated near the southeastern shores of Wawong Lake along Highway 643, 75 km north of the Town of Geraldton within the Municipality of Greenstone. Aroland First Nation has access to the provincial highway system via an all-season road.

Aroland First Nation has a deep connection to the waters and lands in the traditional territory and a strong reliance on traditional land use activities, including fishing, hunting, trapping, and gathering (Aroland First Nation, 2022). Community members and groups continue to use their lands and resources for traditional purposes, maintaining a deep connection to their ancestral practices. Within Aroland First Nation’s traditional territory, 1,426 locations for hunting, fishing, trapping, gathering, travel routes, camp sites, cultural sites, habitation sites, and sites of traditional ecological knowledge have previously been mapped (Stantec, 2017). As a site-specific IK study was not received from Aroland First Nation for WSR, the extent of their traditional territory and specific mapped sites are unknown.

Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

Hunting and Trapping activities are crucial for sustenance and cultural practices. Community members hunt and trap various species, following traditional methods passed down through generations. Fishing remains a vital activity, both for food and cultural significance. The community fishes in local lakes and rivers, including Goldfield Lake and Kenogamisis Lake, using techniques that have been refined over centuries (Aroland First Nation, 2022). The following fish species of importance were identified by Aroland First Nation: whitefish, walleye, sucker, sturgeon, trout, dace, and minnows (Stantec, 2017). An academic study in 2010 found that 73% of Aroland First Nation members rely on moose as a source of meat, but that fewer people are participating in traditional activities like moose hunting (McLaren, 2012).

Plant Gathering

Aroland First Nation traditional territory is a highly productive source of blueberries (Stolz et. al, 2017). Aroland Youth Blueberries Initiative is a program for community youth to engage with land foraging and harvesting wild blueberries, which are sold as a fundraising activity. Berry picking is a way of life for Aroland First Nations and part of the traditional lifestyle (Stolz et. al, 2017).

Other wild plants and medicinal herbs are also gathered (Aroland First Nation, 2022).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Aroland First Nation’s traditional territory encompasses areas of cultural and traditional significance, including the following: Pow-wow grounds located on the south shore of Wawong Lake, approximately 1 km west of the community; traditional burial grounds on the shores of Kawashkagam Lake; a historic portage route between Wawong Lake and Kawashkagama River; and a historical campsite located at the southern end of the portage (Northern Policy Institute, 2014).

Sites used for traditional activities include the following: Potato Island; Blueberry Hill; Moose River; Ozhiski Lake; Pym Island; Attawapiskat River; Albany River; Winisk River; McFauld’s Lake; and Muketei River (LeBlanc, 2014).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

The community continues to engage in traditional activities such as hunting, fishing, trapping, and gathering. These practices are not only vital for their sustenance but also for maintaining a deep connection to their ancestral lands. Gathering wild plants, berries, and medicinal herbs is an important tradition. These resources are used for food, medicine, and ceremonial purposes (Aroland First Nation, 2022). Aroland First Nation is committed to conserving their traditional territory. This includes sustainable management of natural resources and protecting culturally significant sites, which is crucial to maintain the community’s cultural practices so that future generations can continue to live in harmony with the land (Aroland First Nation, 2022).

Aroland First Nation is constructing an Elders Lodge to bring Elders closer to home, which will further support their role in cultural continuity by providing a space for them to share their knowledge and engage in cultural activities (Campbell, 2024). Many Elders move out of the community to access better healthcare services, which can disrupt their ability to pass on cultural knowledge and participate in community life. The new Elders Lodge aims to address this by providing healthcare services within the community. Despite these challenges, initiatives like the Elders Lodge and community programs aim to support Elders in their vital role of cultural preservation (Government of Canada, 2024; Campbell, 2024).  Elders play a crucial role in maintaining cultural continuity within Aroland First Nation as they are the custodians of traditional knowledge, including stories, songs, and ceremonies. Their knowledge and wisdom are passed down to younger generations, preserving cultural practices and values.  Elders often take on the role of educators, teaching the community’s history, language, and traditional skills. This mentorship helps instill a sense of identity and pride in the younger members (Dei, 2022).

Sioux Lookout First Nations Healthy Authority (2025) serves Aroland First Nation, providing traditional teachings and activities, such as cultural safety, seasonal feasts, land-based activities, traditional medicines and teachings (Creation Story, 7 Grandfathers, Clans, Feather, Medicine Wheel, etc.) and supporting community members’ wellness journeys through ceremonies, as part of its commitment to culturally grounded health services.

The land is integral to various cultural practices and ceremonies, such as sweat lodges and naming ceremonies, which are conducted in natural settings to maintain a connection with the environment (Aroland First Nation, 2022). Regular cultural events and ceremonies, such as pow wows, are held to celebrate and reinforce their cultural identity. These gatherings provide opportunities for community members to come together, share stories, and pass on traditions (Indigenous Corporate Training Inc., 2018). Elders oversee spiritual practices and ceremonies, guiding these traditions to be carried out correctly and with respect. This spiritual leadership helps maintain the community’s connection to their ancestral beliefs (Heath, 2022).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Aroland First Nation offers Indigenous language courses for Junior Kindergarten to Grade 9 at Johnny Therriault School. High school students in grades 10-12 attend Geraldton Composite High School in the community of Geraldton, where community members can continue in the available Indigenous education program (Superior-Greenstone District School Board, 2024).

Efforts are made to teach the younger generation about their history, language, and cultural practices. This includes incorporating traditional knowledge into the education system and promoting the use of their native languages (Aroland First Nation, 2022).

As part of the Matawa Education Department, Aroland First Nation is included in the Matawa Waka Tere language program. See Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Use and Preservation of Indigenous Language’ for further details.

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Aroland First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Aroland First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that is important to Aroland First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Aroland First Nation is one of 10 northern First Nations which launched a lawsuit against the Ontario and federal governments in April 2023 (McIntosh, 2023). They have requested that the Canadian government be barred from making any decisions about how land is to be used without Indigenous consent. The lawsuit centres on Treaty No. 9 and the contrast between the verbal and written promises of Treaty No. 9 as recorded (McIntosh, 2023). The First Nations are arguing that they did not cede or surrender their territories, and that Treaty No. 9 does not give the Ontario government the right to allow resource extraction (McIntosh, 2023).

Aroland First Nation has expressed concern and dissatisfaction with the EAR/IS process for the Project. It emphasized the lack of adequate consideration given to the perception of connectivity of Webequie First Nation and the Project to the provincial highway system. . Aroland First Nation claims they have been excluded from the planning of these road projects, asserting their jurisdiction and the need for their valuable Indigenous Knowledge and insights to guide any road development activities in their territory (Aroland First Nation, 2020).

In January 2025, Aroland First Nation signed a “Shared Prosperity Agreement to drive economic growth and build and upgrade infrastructure in Northern Ontario. This agreement includes support for upgrades to Anaconda and Painter Lake Roads, which are important connections on the road to the Ring of Fire, as well as major new investments in infrastructure and energy transmission in the region. It also builds upon agreements that are in place with other First Nations partners along the entire proposed length of the roads to the Ring of Fire and helps set the stage for further potential partnerships” (Government of Ontario, 2025). The agreement includes “$20 million for community infrastructure projects that support business development, boost community well-being and preparedness to participate in economic activities related to mineral development in the region”.

In February 2025, Copper Lake Resources signed exploration agreements with Aroland First Nation for the Marshall Lake Project in Ontario, Canada. The Marshall Lake Project — prospective for volcanic massive sulphide copper, zinc, silver, and gold — comprises a 220 km² area located 120 km north of Geraldton, Ontario (Globe Newswire, 2025). The agreement contains measures to accommodate, compensate, prevent, mitigate, and address concerns, including impacts to Indigenous rights, cultural values, and the environment regarding planned activities. 

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-governance)

Aroland First Nation is part of the Matawa First Nations Management and the Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

Aroland First Nation holds interests in both stewardship of its traditional lands and in fostering the social and economic well-being and resilience of its members (Aroland First Nation, 2022).

Aroland First Nation has a Chief and seven Councillors and uses a custom electoral system. The next election is scheduled on November 26, 2025 (CIRNAC, 2023b).

19.1.1.2.2         Constance Lake First Nation

Information regarding Constance Lake First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Constance Lake First Nation is located in the District of Cochrane, 220 km east of Geraldton, Ontario. Constance Lake First Nation is a progressive and rapidly growing community of 1,605 members of Cree and Ojibway ancestry with approximately 820 living on reserve. The area of the reserve is 7,686 acres (3,110 hectares) of which approximately 18 acres are covered by water (Constance Lake First Nation and the Ministry of Natural Resources, 2014).

Constance Lake First Nation identified a draftarea of interest for planning in the ToR for Constance Lake First Nation CBLUP, which provides an indication of its traditional territory (Figure 19.9).

The abundance of creeks, rivers, and lakes, and large stands of poplar, birch, white and black spruce, jack pine, cedar, and tamarack are part of a historical connection to the land and play a vital role in the daily lives of community members (Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, 2021a).

Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

Wildlife hunted by Constance Lake First Nation include moose, deer and geese (Stantec, 2017). The species fished by Constance Lake First Nation include northern pike, trout, whitefish, pickerel, perch (Stantec, 2017). Wildlife trapped by Constance Lake First Nation includes rabbit, beaver, muskrat, mink, marten and lynx (Stantec, 2017).

Community members hunt, trap, and fish along the Kenogami, Kabinakagami, Nagagami, Pagwachuan, Wakashi, Awagakama, Squirrel, Fox, Pitukupi, Little Ash, Big Ash, Little Current, Drowning, Ridge, Albany and Shekak river systems and Pledger, Pitukupi, Constance, Trilsbeck, Serinack, Martison, Ridge, Melanson, Fushimi, Fox, Bannerman, Luhta (Medicine Creek) lake systems since time immemorial (Constance Lake First Nation, 2024). The rivers were utilized for developing the community’s economy. Barge and trade were known to the groups and families along these long stretches of water.

Constance Lake First Nation members trap on either side of Nagagami River, and south of Hornepayne (Collins, 2016).

Travel and Access

Mammamattawa (English River) is where the Kenogami River joins with the Kabinakagami and Nagagami Rivers. Throughout the area there is an abundance of birch, poplar, jack pine, white and black spruce, tamarack and cedar, which play a vital role in community members’ connection to traditional land (Constance Lake First Nation and Ministry of Natural Resources, 2014).

Figure 19.9:      Draft Constance Lake First Nation Area of Interest for Planning

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Constance Lake First Nation has identified sensitive areas through Indigenous Traditional Knowledge research. These areas include burial sites, historical camps and hunting sites, settlement locations, and culturally modified trees. These features testify to longstanding occupation by First Nations people, which is further confirmed through archaeological records (Constance Lake First Nation, 2024). The specific site locations have not been identified for the Project team.

Kenogami watershed provides wild harvested food among other traditional land uses, such as fishing, trapping, and hunting (Constance Lake First Nation, 2024). Historical use of the lake includes harvesting activities for sustenance.

Mamawmatawa was identified as a culturally significant location during a meeting with Constance Lake First Nation representatives (AtkinsRéalis Inc., 2023b)

Constance Lake has been a culturally significant area for fishing and harvesting; however, the community stated that they no longer had a connection with the lake due to a perception of leachate from Calstock Waste Disposal Site, and from forestry practices (Kelly, 2023).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

The community is dedicated to revitalizing their culture, language, and traditions. “Working together as one, community members are revitalizing our culture, our language and our traditions” (Constance Lake First Nation, n.d.). Constance Lake First Nation is deeply rooted in the traditional teachings and wisdom of their ancestors. These teachings are integral to their cultural identity and community practices. Families continue to maintain yearly goose hunts, beavertrapping, deer and moose hunting, fishing for pike and pickerel, and making tea and medicines from the trees (Daigle, 2010).

Constance Lake First Nation hold various traditional ceremonies that are integral to their cultural heritage and community life. Some of these are Powwows, smudging ceremonies, naming ceremonies and seasonal ceremonies that mark important times of the year, such as the changing of seasons, harvest time, and solstices. These ceremonies often include feasts, dances, and prayers. “Our seasonal ceremonies help us stay connected to the natural cycles and honour the gifts of the land” (Constance Lake First Nation, n.d.).

Constance Lake First Nation noted in discussion at the Three Road Projects Gathering hosted by Webequie First Nation and Marten Falls First Nation event in November 2023 in Thunder Bay that there is a harvest every spring. During this time, the community maintains burial sites in the area as well as completes data collection on the fish. A small bird hunt is also held every spring (AtkinsRéalis, 2023).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Constance Lake First Nation’s original language is Cree, and their language has changed due to migrating south. Throughout the 1920s-1930s, families moved south from English River (Mammamatawa) to Pagwa River, which resulted in Objibway and Oji-cree dialects being mixed with Cree. Constance First Lake First Nation has formed a grassroots group, Reclaiming Our Language Constance Lake First Nation, dedicated to revitalizing their language. Their goals are to establish a Constance Lake First Nation Language and Culture Authority to take responsibility for the future of their language through revitalization. 

Efforts are continuously made to revitalize and preserve the culture, language, and traditions of the Constance Lake First Nation. This includes initiatives like Cree language classes and traditional teachings combined with Bible studies (Anglican Diocese of Moosonee, 2023). A five-year plan has been created, refer to Figure 19.10 that outlines their objectives through community engagement and events, and the development of language classes and resources (Constance Lake First Nation, 2024).

Figure 19.10:    Constance Lake Reclaiming Our Language Plan

Source: Constance Lake First Nation, 2024

As part of the Matawa Education Department, Constance Lake First Nation is included in the Matawa Waka Tere language program. See Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Use and Preservation of Indigenous Language’ for further details.

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Constance Lake First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Constance Lake First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that is important to Constance Lake First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

Constance Lake First Nation’s self-governance is comprised of an elected Chief and six Councillors, who are elected by ballot from registered members who are 18 years of age and older; elected councillors serve for two terms.

Constance First Nation enacts laws and by-laws regarding the development, use, possession, and management of their reserve. Each member of council is involved in committees, external boards, and agencies (Constance Lake First Nation, 2022).

The Constance Lake First Nation emphasizes the importance of maintaining a strong relationship with the land. This connection is seen as vital for the community’s well-being and sustainability. As stated in their terms of reference for their draft CBLUP, “Maintaining a relationship to the land to support our Native way of life in conjunction with and through community-based land use planning is imperative” (Constance Lake First Nation and Ministry of Natural Resources, 2014).

As stewards of the Kenogami Watershed, the Constance Lake First Nation takes pride in protecting their lands and waters. They are involved in training and certification for aquatic biomonitoring to protect the health of their environment (Constance Lake First Nation, n.d.).

Traditional land users respect each other along the waterways such as creeks and lakes, with families recognizing each other’s designated harvest territories. This understanding led to protocols being followed, and customary laws governing the territory of Constance Lake First Nation (Constance Lake First Nation, 2024).

In November 2023, Constance Lake First Nation indicated that a draft CBLUP was almost complete; this has been not shared with the Project team (AtkinsRéalis Inc., 2023).

Constance Lake First Nation is a member of the Nishnawbe Aski Nation and Matawa First Nations. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

19.1.1.2.3         Fort Albany First Nation

Information regarding Fort Albany First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

The main water artery for Fort Albany First Nation is the Albany River (Kistachowan River), which is used to access areas for hunting, fishing, camping, connecting communities, teaching children and connecting to ancestors at points along the river (Restoule et. al, 2013).

Fort Albany First Nation community members rely on the land as their primary source of sustenance and food resources, particularly moose, fish, geese, berries, and other animals and plants. The land continues to be their grocery store, and that wildlife remains important to nutrition and food security in the community (Minkin, 2014).

Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

Wildlife hunted by Fort Albany First Nation community members include moose, Caribou, geese, duck and migratory birds (Minkin, 2014). Moose are hunted up the river to provide food for the year as food from the land is viewed as long-term food security for the community. Moose are one of the most commonly mentioned wild food items by Fort Albany First Nation members (Minkin, 2014).

One Elder explained how the unavailability of commercial meat contributes to the continuance of the hunting tradition (Minkin, 2014):

“…You know, we hardly have fresh meat in the store, so we eat almost [all] wildlife stuff. That’s what can happen with our generation, they gonna be doing the same thing what the people do in the past, catching wildlife…”

Wildlife trapped by Fort Albany First Nation include rabbits, beaver, otters, muskrat, marten, mink and lynx. Trapping was historically trapped for fur. Traplines form an almost unbroken patchwork over the entirety of the Fort Albany First Nation traditional territory. Furs from trapping are a culturally important resource from the land that was traded commercially. The registered trapline system were imposed upon Fort Albany First Nation by the Ministry of Natural Resources.

Fish caught by Fort Albany First Nation include whitefish and pike (Minkin, 2014).

Fort Albany traplines are mapped from a study on the registered trapline system in Kashechewan First Nation and shown in Figure 19.11 (Sutherland, 2017).

Figure 19.11:    Fort Albany First Nation and Kashechewan First Nation Traplines (Sutherland, 2017)

Fur and traplines, have been described as both a sustenance and a commercial resource. Trapping was the only traditional land use that that took place within territories with rigid boundaries to which individual families had exclusive rights (Minkin, 2014).

Plant Gathering

Blueberries and cranberries are a popular food item harvested by Fort Albany First Nation members. Medicinal plants, mushrooms, roots, and nuts and Labrador tea are also gathered (Minkin, 2014).

Another important resource for Fort Albany First Nation community members is timber because of the ecological services forests offer, such as wood (Minkin, 2014).

Travel and Access

Fort Albany First Nation community members use navigable rivers as travel routes and they use the waterways as their highways, which are used to access resources and neighbouring communities by boat (Minkin, 2014).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Water resources, specifically potable groundwater is highly important to Fort Albany First Nation community and that they value local rivers as an important source of drinking water (Minkin, 2014). The most cited purpose for river travel was moose hunting. Other purposes included trapping, fishing, commerce with other communities, visiting other communities, recreation and outside tourism. Besides the Albany River, the Pagwa River and the Attihamek River were also named as travel routes.  Communities named as destinations of river travel included Constance Lake, Ogoki and Hearst (Minkin, 2014).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

The community maintains a variety of traditional gathering practices that are integral to their cultural heritage and way of life (Minkin, 2014), such as:

• Berry Picking: Community members gather wild berries such as blueberries, raspberries, and cranberries. These berries are used for food, medicine, and in various traditional recipes.
• Medicinal Plants: Gathering medicinal plants is a crucial practice. Elders and knowledge keepers teach younger generations about the healing properties of various plants and how to use them in traditional medicine.
• Wild Edibles: In addition to berries, other wild edibles such as mushrooms, roots, and nuts are collected. These are important for both nutrition and cultural practices.
• Seasonal Cycles: Gathering activities are closely tied to the seasonal cycles. For example, certain plants and berries are harvested at specific times of the year, promoting sustainability and respect for the natural environment.
• Community Involvement: These practices are often communal activities involving multiple generations. This not only aids in gathering resources but also strengthens community bonds and facilitates the transmission of traditional knowledge (Minkin, 2014).

These gathering practices are essential for maintaining the cultural identity and sustainability of Fort Albany First Nation, ensuring that their traditions continue to thrive (Minkin, 2014).

Community members have spoken about the importance of traditional knowledge and regaining lost knowledge due to the residential school experience. Traditional knowledge is taught by Elders, immediate family, and in-laws/relatives on the land (Minkin, 2014). Elders share knowledge with youths about ways to live off the river and lands and note culturally significant sites (Restoule, 2013). Maintaining traditional values and knowledge was stated by some community members as necessary to prevent over-harvesting of the community’s resources.

Community members participate in sweat lodge ceremonies (Gadacz, 2006). A sundance ceremony was held in summer of 2016 for the first time (in modern history) at Fort Albany First Nation; the main purpose is to ask for forgiveness and guidance for a good life and reconnects community members to their culture (Kozak, 2017).

Community residents participate in various recreational activities on the land such as camping (colloquially referred to as “going to the bush”) with family along rivers; wintertime offers the most access to camping sites (Minkin, 2014). Community events such as farmer’s markets are hosted by Peetabeck Academy (Mundo Peetabeck Education Authority, 2022).

Community gardening initiatives were implemented by Fort Albany First Nation Chief and Council because there was a desire to help the community collectively find alternative agricultural practices that align with First Nation’s traditional food provisioning activities. The garden initiatives involved community-based training, community workshops, school field trips, class presentations, and community planting and harvesting events (Wilton, 2023).

WAHA offers various services that supports providing optimum health care as close to home as possible. This includes a holistic approach that reflects the distinct needs of all peoples in the Weeneebayko region. (Weeneebayko Area Health Authority, 2018). WAHA is committed to providing high-quality health services that include traditional and cultural healing methods (Weeneebayko Area Health Authority, 2025).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Fort Albany First Nation speak Swampy Cree, and Peetabeck Academy is committed to moving towards Cree immersion education. Mundo Peetabeck Education Authority’s mission is to promote traditional values, and the retention of the Cree language (Mundo Peetabeck Education Authority, 2022).

The Mushkegowuk Council, which Fort Albany First Nation is a member of, also supports these language preservation efforts by providing resources and programs aimed at maintaining and strengthening the Cree language among its member communities (Mushkegowuk Council, 2024).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Fort Albany First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Fort Albany First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that is important to Fort Albany First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

During the Three Projects Gathering and Expo, members of Fort Albany First Nation requested information regarding which inherent rights are examined in the EAR/IS, and about the process for the assessment. Additional statements/concerns were raised by an Elder regarding Indigenous engagement methods, the need for an independent Indigenous review of EAR/IS, a provision of clear and easily understood project information directly to community members, a need for additional Elders’ consultation and discussion with residential school survivors, and concerns on project impacts need for Indigenous involvement.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

Fort Albany First Nation has both a traditional and contemporary governance structure that is led by an elected Chief and Council. Decision-making within the community involves general meetings, and chief and council meetings, which operate by an informal consensus and a spirit of openness (Minkin, 2014).  Fort Albany First Nation is a formally affiliated with the Mushkegowuk Council and Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

Fort Albany First Nation is part of the Omushkego Wahkohtowin Conservation Plan which was written to provide people, especially Omushkego and adjacent Nations and communities, with information on community conservation planning for their lands and waters, with a 10-year implementation period (Mushkegowuk Council Lands and Resources Department 2024).

19.1.1.2.4         Ginoogaming First Nation

Information regarding Ginoogaming First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Ginoogaming First Nation (formerly the Long Lake 77 First Nation) is a small Anishinaabe (Ojibway) First Nation reserve located in Northern Ontario, located approximately 40 km east of Geraldton, Ontario, on the northern shore of Long Lake, immediately south of Long Lake #58 First Nation and the community of Longlac, Ontario. Figure 19.12 shows an approximate area of Ginoogaming First Nation traditional territory in relation to WSR (Ginoogaming First Nation, 2021). This map is from 2019 and was not provided for the WSR project; the accuracy of the map cannot be confirmed. This map identifies that Ginoogaming First Nation traditional territory does not extend within the LSA and RSA.

Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

Hunting an important traditional activity that Ginoogaming First Nation members practice as it is important for maintenance of tradition and culture. Ginoogaming First Nation hunt moose, geese, grouse and duck (Stantec, 2017). An academic study in 2010 found that 73% of Ginoogaming First Nation members rely on moose as a source of meat but that fewer people are participating in traditional activities like moose hunting (McLaren, 2012). This study found that the ability of Ginoogaming First Nation members to participate in food production activities has been restricted over time and become more of a “recreational activity than as participating in the traditional economy” (McLaren, 2012).

Ginoogaming First Nation identified the following as culturally significant in their traditional harvest: pike, perch, trout, walleye, moose, rabbit, martin, geese, grouse, and duck (Stantec, 2017). 

Kenogagmisis Lake is an area that Ginoogaming First Nation hunt and fish (Beringia Community Planning Inc., 2015).

Plant Gathering

Ginoogaming First Nation identified the following as culturally significant in their traditional harvest: cedar, red willow, bear root, bulrush, sweetgrass, juniper, and cranberries (Stantec, 2017).

Travel and Access

Ginoogaming First Nation people have also historically traveled on the Pagwachuan River drainage system, which flows north from Pagwachuan Lake eventually to the Albany River. Ginoogaming First Nation people have also historically traveled by river on the Nagagamisis River waterway, which also flows north from Nagagamisis Lake eventually to the Albany River. Ginoogaming First Nation families utilize ancestral connections to migration routes both northward (to the James Bay coast) and southward (to Lake Superior coast) (Omushkegowuk Women’s Water Council, n.d). The importance of these waterways is enshrined in their Nanagjitoong Nibi Water Protection Declaration.

“The Ginoogaming First Nation members, with respect to their ancestral family traditional territories, have maintained their inherent authority to take care of the land and the rivers that flow through it. We have a spiritual connection with the land and waters, by way of the natural laws that were given to us since time immemorial. Our natural laws supersede colonial policies, and we have not given up our right to practice our cultural customs which include hunting, fishing, trapping, gathering medicines, and spiritual ceremonies on our lands and water” (Omushkegowuk Women’s Water Council, nd).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Ginoogaming First Nation was granted an interim injunction in 2021 for any mining activities to take place in Wiisinin Zaahgi’igan, an area of land which is located within their territory (Garrick, 2021). The area is roughly 360 km² in size and located 300 km northeast of Thunder Bay (Turner, 2021a). This area is sacred and of cultural importance to Ginoogaming First Nation and includes burial sites, hunting areas and areas where ceremonies have been performed (Turner, 2021a).

Wiisinin Zaahgi’igan is an area considered sacred by Ginoogaming First Nation, and described as the “breadbasket, its church, its heartland, its graveyard and its hospital” (Turner, 2021a). The community works to protect sacred sites within their traditional territory. For example, they have sought legal measures to prevent mining exploration in areas of cultural and spiritual significance (Turner, 2021a).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

The community regularly hosts events to celebrate Anishinaabe heritage, including ceremonies, storytelling, and cultural workshops (Ginoogaming First Nation, 2024). Ginoogaming First Nation places importance in cultural education through programs in local schools and community centers, allowing younger generations to learn about history and traditions. Initiatives like the Aboriginal Head Start program and various youth programs help instill cultural values and practices from an early age (Ginoogaming First Nation, n.d.).

Ginoogaming First Nation held a powwow in August 2024 to honour their culture, and traditions (Ginoogaming First Nation, 2024).

Historic log drives have impacted the waterways and waterbodies within Ginoogaming First Nation’s Traditional Territory. Dams have changed the flow of the waters, impacting the fish that swim in the waters and causing confusion for people who fish. Significant forestry activity within Traditional Territory have displaced animals, affected harvesting of medicinal plants, and impacted hunters and trappers. Mineral exploration and mining have permanently changed certain areas and have caused significant adverse environmental impacts in the area (Greenstone Gold Mines, n.d.). Community members have seen a disruption of the sacred circle from industrial activities leading to adverse environmental impacts.

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Ginoogaming First Nation members have access to Ojibwe language courses at Our Lady of Fatima, Marjorie Mills Public School and Migizi Wazisin Elementary School (Ginoogaming First Nation, n.d.). Ginoogaming First Nation Training Centre has an educational program that promotes the community’s language, culture, traditions and history. Students are offered an all-ages after-school immersion program to learn Anishnaabemowin virtually (Mannella, 2022).

As part of the Matawa Education Department, Ginoogaming First Nation is included in the Matawa Waka Tere language program. See Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Use and Preservation of Indigenous Language’ for further details.

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Ginoogaming First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Ginoogaming First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Ginoogaming First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

During Round 1 of Engagement and Consultation of the EAR/IS, Ginoogaming First Nation outlined that their rights have the potential to be impacted by the WSR Project and believes that the cumulative effects from other project development in the Ring of Fire region should be considered.

Ginoogaming First Nation expressed that they have long inhabited and occupied the lands and waters of the area before Treaty 9 came into effect. Ginoogaming is seeking an interlocutory injunction to prevent mineral exploration on sacred land (Wiisinin Zaahgi’gan) in part of its traditional territory; seeking permanent protection and compensation for past harms; and wants any (possible) mining claims removed (TbnewsWatch Staff, 2023). In September 2021, they received an extension of an interim injunction preventing exploration firms from exploring an area that Ginoogaming First Nation had declared to be sacred and culturally significant (TbnewsWatch Staff, 2023).  Ginoogaming’s lawsuit includes seeking a declaration that it has Aboriginal Rights to protect sacred areas.

Ginoogaming is one of 10 northern First Nations which launched a lawsuit against the Ontario and federal governments in April 2023 (McIntosh, 2023). They have requested that the Canadian government be barred from making any decisions about how land is used without Indigenous consent. The lawsuit centres on Treaty No. 9 and the contrast between the verbal and written promises of Treaty No. 9 as recorded (McIntosh, 2023). The Nations are arguing that they did not cede or surrender their territories, and that Treaty No. 9 does not give the Ontario government the right to allow resource extraction (McIntosh, 2023).

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

Chief and council are elected for two terms in accordance with the Indian Band Election Regulations (Ginoogaming, 2024). Ginoogaming First Nation is a member of Matawa First Nations Management and of the Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

Ginoogaming First Nation is involved in several key initiatives related to their self-governance:

• Economic Initiatives: Ginoogaming First Nation is involved in partnerships with local businesses like Longlac Lumber Inc. (Ginoogaming First Nation, n.d.).
• Cultural Programs: The community places a strong emphasis on cultural education through programs in schools and community centers. These programs include language instruction, traditional crafts, and ceremonies, so that cultural knowledge can be passed down to younger generations.
• Community Engagement: Regular traditional gatherings, ceremonies, and cultural workshops foster a strong sense of identity and continuity. These events bring the community together and reinforce cultural values and practices (Ginoogaming First Nation, 2025).

Figure 19.12:    Draft Ginoogaming First Nation Traditional Territory

19.1.1.2.5         Kashechewan First Nation

Information regarding Kashechewan First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and an IK study was provided during finalization of the EAR/IS which will be incorporated into the next revision of this document. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Kashechewan First Nation is located 685 km northeast of the City of Thunder Bay and 390 km east of Webequie First Nation in northern Ontario. The community is situated immediately north of Fort Albany First Nation and south of Attawapiskat First Nation on the northern area of the delta of the Albany River, 15 km from where it empties into James Bay.

Kashechewan First Nation has identified traditional harvesting areas that include the adjacent islands and the waters of western James Bay, including areas that are within the jurisdiction of Nunavut (Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, 2021b). Kashechewan First Nation members engage in the traditional activities of hunting, fishing and trapping (Victor Diamond Project, 2004). Kashechewan First Nation faces flooding almost every spring due to ice breakup on the Albany River (Greco, 2025). Kashechewan First Nation has identified within their Terms of Reference for their CBLUP a draft area of interest for planning, see Figure 19.13 which includes territory that has been used by Kashechewan First Nation members (Government of Ontario, 2017). This map identifies a preliminary area of interest and traditional harvesting area for Kashechewan First Nation.

Hunting and Trapping

Kashechewan First Nation members hunt moose, Caribou and waterfowl (Victor Diamond Project, 2004). Beaver, muskrat and fur bearing animals are trapped. Figure 19.11 shows traplines within Kashechwan First Nation (Sutherland, 2017).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

James Bay (Wee-nee-peg-kook) waters and surrounding rivers and lakes have been used for generations (Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, 2021b).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Kashechewan First Nation traditions and practices are deeply influenced by their connection to the land and the teachings of their ancestors. Efforts to preserve and promote their cultural heritage include ceremonies, language revitalization, and community events that strengthen their identity (Pope, 2016).

WAHA offers various services that supports providing optimum health care as close to home as possible. This includes a holistic approach that reflects the distinct needs of all peoples in the Weeneebayko region. (Weeneebayko Area Health Authority, 2018). WAHA is committed to providing high-quality health services that include traditional and cultural healing methods (Weeneebayko Area Health Authority, 2025).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Kashechewan First Nation has a strong connection to the Cree language. The community actively works to preserve and promote the Mushkego Cree language through various initiatives and programs. Language revitalization efforts include teaching Cree in schools, offering community language classes, and incorporating Cree into daily activities and ceremonies (CBC, 2020).

The Mushkegowuk Council, which Kashechewan First Nation is a member of, also supports these language preservation efforts by providing resources and programs aimed at maintaining and strengthening the Cree language among its member communities (Mushkegowuk Council, 2024).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Kashechewan First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Kashechewan First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Kashechewan First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

During the Consultation Round 2 of the EA/IA process, Kashechewan First Nation requested to understand the local and regional study areas for the Aboriginal and Treaty Rights and Interests Valued Component and had questions regarding potential opportunities for employment associated with the construction of the various projects in the region.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

Kashechewan First Nation’s governance includes the election of a Chief, Deputy Chief, and nine Band Council members. These elections are held every three years under the Custom Electoral Code, with the last election scheduled for August 2024. The elected officials oversee community programs, services, and facilities, ensuring the well-being and development of the community (211 Ontario North, 2024a).

Kashechewan First Nation is a member of the Nishnawbe Aski Nation and Mushkegowuk Council. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

Kashechewan First Nation is part of the Omushkego Wahkohtowin Conservation Plan with a 10-year implementation strategy. This plan was developed to provide Omushkego and adjacent Nations and communities, with information on community conservation planning for their lands and waters (Mushkegowuk Council Lands and Resources Department, 2024).

Figure 19.13:    Draft Kashechewan First Nation Area of Interest for Planning

19.1.1.2.6         Kingfisher Lake First Nation

Information regarding Kingfisher Lake First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and effects assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Kingfisher Lake First Nation is located approximately 520 km north of the City of Thunder Bay and 165 km west of Webequie First Nation in northern Ontario. The community is situated on the western shore of Kingfisher Lake. 

Hunting, Fishing, Trapping

Kingfisher Lake First Nation exercise their right to hunt, fish and gather based on natural resources available within their territory (Kingfisher Lake First Nation, n.d.). Kingfisher Lake First Nation members hunt moose, Caribou, ducks and geese (Golder Associates, 2018).

The larger lakes in the Kingfisher Lake Area were historically used for both domestic and commercial fishing. The smaller lakes, creeks and rivers were solely fished for domestic use (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Kingfisher Lake First Nation historically fished commercially within the Ashweig and Pipestone Rivers.

In 1947, Ontario enacted the Trapline Registration and Fee Program, which eventually forced the Kingfisher Lake people to outline their ancestral hunting areas into trapping boundaries and to also pay for the land use requirements (Kingfisher Lake, N.D).

Travel and Access

Kingfisher Lake First Nation members have expressed a strong reliance on the rivers, specifically the Ashweig, and Pipestone (this connects Marie Lake and Wunnummin Lake) (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Kingfisher Lake community members have a number of traditionally important meeting places along the Pipestone‑Pineimuta River route (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). During the summer, groups from Windigo Lake, North Caribou Lake and Weagomow Lake will gather along this summer travel route (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). There are many summer routes that Kingfisher Lake community members utilize which include a northerly route to Big Trout Lake along the Ashweig River and a route south of Kingfisher Lake through Big Beaver House and then to Menako Lake and Obustiga Lake region (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). During the winter, there is significant movement between Kingfisher Lake, Big Beaver House and Wunnummin Lake (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Kingfisher Lake and Wunnummin Lake had very close integration of territorial use between Maria Lake and Wunnummin Lake (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). The hunting territory has historically been larger in area than the trapping area (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Areas that are south of Maria Lake and the west and south of Big Beaver House were traditionally heavily utilized for hunting (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

In 1808, the Hudson’s Bay Company established an outpost at Big Beaver House, located approximately 12 km southwest of the present Kingfisher Lake reserve (Kingfisher Lake First Nation, n.d.). Big Beaver House was frequented by Kingfisher Lake people for trading fur, community activity and freight hauling employment. Big Beaver House Lake has been identified as a culturally important site for Kingfisher Lake First Nation (Golder, 2018).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Sioux Lookout First Nations Health Authority (2025) serves Kingfisher Lake First Nation providing traditional teachings and activities and wellness journeys through ceremonies, as part of its commitment to culturally grounded health services; please refer to Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Cultural Traditions and Practices’ for further details.

Kingfisher Lake First Nation has a hunter’s festival every Fall, and this occasion brings the community together (Keewaytinook Okimakanak, 2014a).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Kingfisher Lake First Nation’s language is important for cultural continuity and the community speaks Oji-Cree, with more than half of the community being fluent in English (Kingfisher Lake First Nation, n.d.). Shibogama Education Authority provides support and assistance in developing and delivering the education program and system in the community with a focus on enhancing and furthering traditional language acquisition for the community (Shibogama First Nations Council, 2025).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Kingfisher Lake First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Kingfisher Lake First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Kingfisher Lake First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

Kingfisher Lake First Nation elects their chief and council for two-year terms through the Custom Electoral System (211 North). They are members of the Shibogama First Nations Council and the Nishbawbe‑Aski Nation. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

19.1.1.2.7         Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation

Information regarding Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation is located 605 km north of the City of Thunder Bay and 190 km northwest of Webequie First Nation in northern Ontario. The community is situated on an island close to the eastern shores of Big Trout Lake and is accessible via air, water and winter road. 

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug participate in traditional activities throughout their traditional territory. Between 2010 and 2015, Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation undertook several research projects to compile a comprehensive inventory of mapped cultural sites and locations of importance to their identity such as old settlements, gathering places, heritage habitations, burials and birth sites, death sites, spirit sites, ceremony sites, sacred areas, and other (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation, 2015). The Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug Cultural Atlas includes detailed maps showing over 20,000 sites where community members have engaged in activities such as hunting, fishing, trapping, and gathering.

Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation members hunt for moose, Caribou, black bear and deer. Other species such as ducks, geese, sandhill crane, loons, swans, partridge, ptarmigan and owl are also hunted. (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Cultural Atlas, n.d). Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation members fish for jackfish, pickerel, whitefish, maria, suckers, sturgeon, lake trout, speckled trout, yellow perch and other fish (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Cultural Atlas, n.d). Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation members trap for all furbearers including rabbits, marten, fisher, fox, mink, lynx and other small mammals (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Cultural Atlas, n.d).

Figure 19.14 Habitat Sites and Travel Routes for Mammals, Birds and Fish Map shows approximate locations of traditional activity areas of the community which are located outside of LSA and RSA (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Cultural Atlas, n.d).

Plant Gathering

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation members harvest berries, food plants, medicine, tobacco, plants used for dyes, moss, construction wood, speciality wood and firewood (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Cultural Atlas, n.d). Figure 19.15 Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Traditional Land and Resource Use Map shows approximate locations of plants and wood harvesting sites, which are located outside of the LSA and RSA (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Cultural Atlas, n.d).

Travel and Access

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug summer travel route historically focused on two segments of well travelled routes. The first route is the western half of Big Trout Lake to the east to Wapekeka Lake and the second is from Severn Lake, west of Big Trout Lake to Bearskin Lake (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Other summer travel routes exist to other communities, but the route is often more complicated with networks of rivers, lakes and portages (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Winter travel routes include a route that is diagonal from Wapekeka Lake to Otter River, an area around Long Dog Lake and south of Big Trout Lake from Lake Nemeigusabins to the Bug River-Mishwamakan River area (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation trapping and hunting areas encompasses a significant area including: Manitoba on the west side and Attawapiskat on the east side. Lands within the Fort Severn homeland are used for trapping and to the south Weagomow, North Spirit Lake and Lansdowne House lands are also utilized (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Traditionally, hunting in the areas north of the community was more popular. The areas around the Sachigo River and parts of the Fawn and Severn River are areas that are important to Caribou (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation has a rich cultural identity deeply rooted in their land and traditions. The Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation watershed declaration protects Fawn River and Big Trout Lake which includes Caribou, wolverine, moose and a variety of fish and birds (Talaga, 2018).

The Fawn River watershed has cultural importance to Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nations as it provides food, sustenance and cultural value to the community (Wildlife Conservation Society Canada, 2022).

A 4,600 year old burial was found at the mouth of the Bug River, near Big Trout Lake within Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation traditional area (Jarus, 2010).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Algace Chapman Education Centre offers programs from kindergarten to Grade 10 that focus on outdoor, land-based learning and on the community’s Elders to share traditional knowledge. Traditional activities are integrated into the school curriculum, such as cooking, snaring, ice fishing, and collecting firewood for Elders (Teach for Canada, 2024). Sioux Lookout First Nations Healthy Authority (2025) serves Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation, providing traditional teachings and activities and support community members’ wellness journeys through ceremonies; please refer to Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Cultural Traditions and Practices’ for further details.

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation celebrates various ceremonies that reflect their cultural heritage and community values. One notable ceremony is the celebration of the Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug Dibenjikewin Onaakonikewin (KIDO) Family Law, which marks a significant step in reclaiming jurisdiction over family well-being. Chief Donny Morris emphasized the importance of this ceremony: “Our children are a sacred gift from Kishe-Manidoo, our Creator. Through KIDO, we are reclaiming our inherent responsibility to nurture them according to our traditional ways” (NNL Digital News, 2025). This ceremony is celebrated annually and includes community gatherings, traditional practices, and virtual participation to honor the strength of families and the wisdom of ancestors.

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation holds various traditional ceremonies that are integral to their cultural identity and community life. These ceremonies often revolve around their connection to the land, water, and ancestral practices. One significant ceremony is the Spring Goose Hunt, which is a time for community members to gather and hunt geese, a practice that has been passed down through generations. This event not only provides food but also strengthens community bonds and cultural traditions (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation, 2015). Chief Donny Morris has spoken about the importance of these ceremonies: “Our traditional ceremonies are a way for us to connect with our ancestors and the land. They are vital for maintaining our cultural heritage and passing it on to future generations” (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation, 2015). Another important ceremony is the Fall Harvest, where community members come together to harvest wild rice and other traditional foods. This ceremony is a celebration of the bounty provided by the land and a time for communal sharing and gratitude (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation, 2015). The Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug Cultural Atlas documents these practices and highlights their significance in maintaining the community’s cultural identity.

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation community members speak Oji-Cree (Teach for Canada, 2024). Kitchenuhmaykoosib Education Authority (KEA) is responsible for the education of children and youths in the community and focuses on developing a child’s traditional language fluency and fostering their connection to their culture and heritage (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Education Authority, 2023). There are two native language teachers at Aglace Chapman Education Centre that promote Oji-Cree language and culture to help students honour and take pride in their heritage (Teach for Canada, 2024).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation is one of 10 northern First Nations who have launched a lawsuit against the Ontario and federal government in April 2023 (McIntosh, 2023). They have requested that the Canadian government be barred from making any decisions about how land could be used without Indigenous consent. The lawsuit centres on Treaty No. 9 and the contrast between the verbal and written promises of Treaty No. 9 as recorded (McIntosh, 2023). The Nations are arguing that they did not cede or surrender their territories, and that Treaty No. 9 did not give the Ontario government the right to allow resource extraction (McIntosh, 2023).

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation is also part of an alliance with Grassy Narrows First Nation, Wapekeka First Nation and Neskantaga First Nation to defend their lands and waters against mining prospectors (Alhmidi, 2023). In 2011, Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug held a community referendum that resulted in 96% of community members voting in support of the Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug Water Declaration (Kenora Daily Miner & News, 2011), that declared “all waters that flow into and out of Big Trout Lake, and all lands whose waters flow into those lakes, rivers, and wetlands, to be completed protected through our continued care under Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug’s authority, laws and protocols” (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug. N.D.). 

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation has a Chief, Deputy Chief and six Councillors, with a custom electoral system (CIRNAC, 2023o).  

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation passed a Water Declaration in 2011 that covers 13,025 square kilometres (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Cultural Atlas, n.d). This water declaration outlined that “Big Trout Lake and watersheds are to be protected from all industrial uses that disrupt, poison, or harm the lands and waters. The protocol outlines the procedure for discussions with government and outside companies over resource management in all the rest of Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug territory that hinges on prior informed consent” (Wolfson, 2011). This watershed is crucial for the community’s cultural, ecological, and economic well-being. Wildlife Conservation Society Canada highlighted the importance of this connection: “The Big Trout Lake Watershed is not only a vital source of freshwater for KI but also a key area for biodiversity and climate resilience. The community’s efforts in co-creating an adaptation strategy for this watershed are essential for protecting these resources” (Chetkiewicz, 2013). Additionally, the Fawn River Indigenous Protected Area is another significant initiative supported by Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation (WCS, 2022). This project aims to preserve the freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems within the Fawn River watershed.

The community’s commitment to protecting their freshwater resources is also evident in their resistance to mining activities that threaten their territory. Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug ‘s Chief and Council have been vocal about their dedication to safeguarding their land and water. (Korteweg and Root, 2016).

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug Dibenjikewin Onnakonikewin (KIDO) is Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation’s own welfare agency (Turner, 2023). The agency continues to work alongside Tikinagan Child and Family Services, which has been providing child welfare services across northern Ontario since the 1980s. KIDO’s services emphasize family healing and maintaining connections within the family and the community.

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug declared its independence from First Nation organizations in 1991 in order to pursue their own community aspirations and objectives (Independent First Nation Alliance, 2024). Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug is part of the Independent First Nation Alliance which provides technical advisory and development support programs to the community.  

Figure 19.14:    Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Habitat Sites and Travel Routs for Mammals, Birds and Fish

Figure 19.15:    Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Traditional Land and Resource Use Map

19.1.1.2.8         Long Lake #58 First Nation

Information regarding Long Lake #58 First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impacts assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Long Lake #58 First Nation is located 250 km northeast of the City of Thunder Bay, 30 km east of Geraldton in the Municipality of Greenstone, and 370 km south of Webequie First Nation. It neighbours the community of Longlac, Ontario along Highway 11.

Hunting and Fishing

Long Lake #58 First Nation community hunts moose, bear and birds along the shores of Long Lake, Kenogamisis Lake and Kenogamisis River (Stantec, 2017). A Traditional Land Use Survey prepared with Long Lake #58 First Nation for the Greenstone Gold Mine Project identified a number of specific hunting locations that Long Lake #58 First Nation use for hunting: Goldfield Road, McClusky Lake, Eldee Road Kenogamisis Lake, Kenogamisis River off Highway 11 (Aboriginal Business Network, 2015).  Long Lake #58 First Nation fish for pickerel, sturgeon, lake trout, poke, whitefish, wall eye and smelts (Aboriginal Business Network, 2015).

Plant Gathering

Long Lake #58 First Nation identified the following plants and species as culturally significant in their traditional harvest: cedar, sage, raspberries, sweetgrass, mountain ash, white willow, red willow, yarrow, birch, and balsam fir. Medicinal plants are often gathered along the shoreline of Kenogamisis Lake and the surrounding waterbodies including Nakina and MacLeod Lakes (Stantec, 2017). Medicine gathering locations occur east of Kenogamisis Lake south of Highway 11, in and around the Long Lake community, and west of Michael Power Boulevard (Stantec, 2017). A Traditional Land Use Survey prepared with Long Lake #58 First Nation for the Greenstone Gold Mine Project identified specific berry gathering locations: Goldfield Road, Wintering Lake, Blueberry Road, Eldee Landing, Nakina and Hardrock (Aboriginal Business Network, 2015).

Travel and Access

Travel routes that have been previously identified include a route on the north end of Wildgoose Lake, through the Southwest Arm of Kenogamisis Lake and continuing through Kenogamisis Lake and a route through Long Lake (Stantec, 2017). Campsites were identified between the Ward of Geraldton and Kenogamisis Lake, south of the Southwest Arm of Kenogamisis Lake and along the western shore of Long Lake (Stantec, 2017). Cabins and campsites are used intermittently, depending on the season, with cabins mainly being used in the winter. These are strategically located within Long Lake #58 First Nation’s traditional territory and an appropriate distance from sacred sites and natural resources (Stantec, 2017).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

The environmental assessment for the Greenstone Gold Mine Project identified that sacred sites have been identified near the railway, east of the Ward of Geraldton, along the shores of Long Lake and surrounding the community of Long Lake (Stantec, 2017). Narrows Lake is described as a sacred area. Medicine gathering locations occur east of Kenogamisis Lake south of Highway 11, in and around the Long Lake community, and west of Michael Power Boulevard (Stantec, 2017). MacLeod Provincial Park and the shores of Kenogamisis Lake were additionally recognized as ceremonial areas (Stantec, 2017).

Members of Long Lake #58 First Nation have also identified cabins near the railway between the Ward of Geraldton and the community of Long Lake, and along the shores of Long Lake. The location of cabins is typically an appropriate distance from sacred sites and near the natural resources being harvested (Stantec, 2017).

The Long Lake #58 Land Code emphasizes the community’s relationship with the land and water, stating: “Long Lake #58 First Nation has a profound relationship with the Land that is rooted in respect for the Spiritual value of the Earth and the gifts of the Creator and has a deep desire to preserve their relationship with the Land” (Long Lake #58 First nation, 2016).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Long Lake #58 First Nation Early Learning Centre implements daily Ojibway language and culture education along with the seven Grandfather Teachings into their curriculum. The community is committed to preserving and revitalizing their language. According to the Long Lake #58 First Nation website, “We strive to maintain our language and cultural practices through various community programs and initiatives” (Long Lake #58 First Nation, n.d.). Language education is a key component of the community’s efforts.

As part of the Matawa Education Department, Long Lake #58 First Nation is included in the Matawa Waka Tere language program. See Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Use and Preservation of Indigenous Language’ for further details.

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Migizi Wazisin Elementary School and Migizi Miigwanan Secondary School have education programming rooted in the Medicine Wheel and Seven Grandfathers teachings. Learning experiences at both schools are based on Anishinaabe tradition. At the beginning of each learning week, students gather in a Circle to hear announcements, say prayers, and to sing and drum (Long Lake #58 First Nation, 2025). Migizi Wazisin Elementary School and Migizi Miigwanan Secondary School play a significant role in holding community gatherings, feasts, ceremonies, and celebrations to share the goals, challenges, and successes of the students. The school grounds include a teaching lodge that holds classes and ceremonies throughout the seasons (Long Lake #58 First Nation, 2025). At the end of the school year, the community honour those students who are graduating Kindergarten and Grade 8 by having a ‘Moving on Celebration’ and pipe ceremony, the students also see the blessing of the berry and the water (Garrick, 2016).

Several camps have been held at Long Lake #58 including:

• Fasting and Traditional Teachings camp has been held for children 8 to 12 years old where they are taught the importance of traditional medicines and their uses (Garrick, 2016).
• Vision Quest Teachings camp has been held at Long Lake #58 and female youth and male youth attend at different times. Men guide the boys, imparting lessons on survival and responsibility, while women’s teachings center on caregiving (Garrick, 2016).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Long Lake #58 First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Long Lake #58 First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Long Lake #58 First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

The WSR Project Team met with Long Lake #58 First Nation in November 2023 and February 2025 in Thunder Bay to discuss the Project, and how Long Lake #58 First Nation can participate in the EAR/IS preparation, including the assessment of potential impacts on Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.

During the terms of reference stage for WSR, Long Lake #58 First Nation affirmed that under Mamow-Wecheekapawetahteewinn (Matawa First Nations, 2011) the collective traditional territories of the nine Matawa member First Nations are under their control and that approval to operate in their respective territories cannot be given by the Government or any other external entities. The nine Matawa member First Nations are connected through their language, cultural, social and economic interests and all live and rely upon the lands, water and resources entrusted to us by the Creator. Long Lake #58 First Nation expressed concerns that this project is undergoing an individual provincial EA process. During the second Aboriginal and/or Treaty Rights and Interest Forum in November 2023, Long Lake #58 First Nation expressed interest in training for jobs during construction and operation of the Project. Long Lake #58 First Nation indicated that there will be both positive and negative impacts from the Project and that they want to be a partner in building the road.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

The Long Lake #58 First Nation Land Code includes (Long Lake #58, 2016):

• The “description of reserve lands and how new lands can be added:
• General rules and procedures for the use and occupation of these lands by members and others;
• Financial accountability for revenues and expenditures;
• The making and publishing of land laws;
• Stringent conflict of interest rules;
• A process to develop rules and procedures applicable to land on the breakdown of a marriage;
• A dispute resolution process;
• Procedures by which Long Lake #58 First Nation can grant interests in land or acquire lands for community purposes;
• The delegation of land management responsibilities; and
• Any other matter respecting the management of Long Lake #58 First Nation Land.

The Land Code provides the community with greater control over land management, allowing them to make decisions about zoning, by-laws, land management, and more (Long Lake #58 First Nation, 2017a). The Land Code also includes provisions for protecting sites of cultural, historical, archaeological, anthropological, or spiritual importance, referred to as “Heritage Sites” (Long Lake #58 First Nation, 2016).

The First Nation community is governed by a Chief and Twelve Councillors, who are elected for two years under the Indian Act. Long Lake #58 First Nation is a member of Matawa First Nations Management and Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

19.1.1.2.9         Métis Nation of Ontario (Region 2)

Information regarding Métis Nation of Ontario (Region 2)’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impacts assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions. Information in this section is general to the Métis Nation of Ontario.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

The Métis stand as a unique Indigenous community with a distinct history, culture, language and territory that encompasses the waterways of Ontario, encircles the great lakes, and spans the historical Northwest region. Founded in the early 1990’s, the Métis Nation of Ontario represents the collective aspirations, rights and interests of Métis people and communities throughout Ontario.

Hunting and Fishing

Métis Nation of Ontario members hunt moose, deer, ruffed grouse, geese and various duck species, black bear, beaver, marten, mink, rabbit, partridge and lynx (Stantec, 2017).

Métis Nation of Ontario fish for the following species: bass, burbot (ling cod) northern pike (jackfish), yellow perch, walleye, rainbow smelt (smelt), sucker, trout, lake whitefish, salmon, lake sturgeonand other non-commercial fish (Stantec, 2017). Fishing areas of importance that Métis Nation of Ontario have previously outlined include Kenogamisis Lake, Goldfield Lake, Magnet Creek, and Moser Lake and Southwest Arm Tributary (Stantec, 2017).

Plant Gathering

Métis Nation of Ontario members gather ferns, berries (blueberries and raspberries), herbs, chanterelle, and shaggy mane mushrooms, chaga mushrooms and trees. These have multiple uses, including food, medicinal, ceremonial and construction purposes (Stantec, 2017).

Travel and Access

Métis Nation of Ontario have asserted regional rights for historic Métis communities throughout Ontario.

Métis sites and routes for cultural practices, land and water travel have been identified along Long Lake #58, Ginoogaming, Lake Nipigon, and areas near Longlac, reflecting the historical presence and mobility of Métis communities in Northwestern Ontario. While past Hudson’s Bay Company posts in the region are recognized as historic Métis sites, contemporary land use continues to reflect traditional patterns. Citizens of the Métis Nation of Ontario actively participate in seasonal and cultural camps that emphasize land-based learning, including trapping, navigation, and harvesting, often held in natural settings around Geraldton and Beardmore. These camps involve the use of cabins, bush camps, and temporary structures, reinforcing the community’s enduring connection to the land and traditional ways of life (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2022, 2024c, 2025h).

Métis Nation of Ontario Harvester map is shown in Figure 19.16 which includes their traditional harvesting territories.

Figure 19.16:    Métis Nation of Ontario Harvester Map

Source: Métis Nation of Ontario, 2025a

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Métis Nation of Ontario consider camping sites as having important spiritual or ceremonial connections (Stantec, 2017). Bush camps along the east side of Kenogamisis Lake and west of Goldfield Lake have been identified (Stantec, 2017). Kenogamisis Lake is also an important travel and cultural route. Other areas identified as areas of Métis cultural practice include near the outlet of Goldfield Creek, north of Mosher Lake, Rosedale Point, Barton Bay (West), MacLeod Provincial Park and in the Geraldton area (Stantec, 2017).

Waterways were integral to the Métis people and communities and continue to be an important part of Métis culture, identity and traditional use of lands and resources. Historically, Métis communities developed interconnected Métis populations at Michipicoten, Pic River, Fort William, Nipigon House, and Long Lake (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2017).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

The Métis are a distinct Indigenous people with a unique history, culture, language, and way of life. Distinct Métis settlements emerged as an outgrowth of the fur trade, along freighting waterways and watersheds. In Ontario, these settlements were part of larger regional communities, interconnected by the highly mobile lifestyle of the Métis, the fur trade network, seasonal rounds, extensive kinship connections and a shared collective history and identity (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2024).

The Métis Nation of Ontario emphasizes the importance of cultural identity, stating: “We, the Métis, are a people of the lands, which gave rise to our history and tradition and culture. These are the lands of our past which nurture us today and which we value as the lands of our future”. The Métis Nation of Ontario supports its communities in striving toward the Métis Nation of Ontario Statement of Prime Purpose, which includes promoting Métis identity, culture (including Michif), and community (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2017). 

The Métis Nation of Ontario emphasizes the importance of cultural ceremonies in preserving Métis identity and traditions. “The Métis are a distinct Indigenous people with a unique history, culture, language, and way of life. Cultural ceremonies and celebrations are vital in maintaining our collective history and identity” (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2025b). Louis Riel Day is held every year on November 16 across the Métis homeland, this is the anniversary of Riel’s execution in 1885 (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2025c).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

The traditional language spoken by Métis people is Michif. It serves as the distinctive language of the Métis community. The number of Michif speakers has diminished over time due to the colonization process which suppressed languages other than French and English in Canada. Ongoing initiatives are now dedicated to conserve the Michif language, fostering a new generation of speakers (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2025d).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

The Métis Nation of Ontario (Region 2) holds Section 35(1) rights, including the right to hunt, trap, fish, and gather material that are important to Métis culture. This includes being able to practice its culture and share it with future generations.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

The Métis Nation of Ontario is governed by the Provisional Council of the Métis Nation of Ontario. This structure guarantees that community and regional interests are represented, along with other demographic segments such as youth, women, and Senators (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2025e). The Métis Nation of Ontario is committed to preserving and sharing Métis history and truth. In 2021, the Métis National Council Annual General Assembly passed a resolution calling for the formation of an Expert Panel to review the history of the seven Métis communities in Ontario (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2024).

The Métis Nation of Ontario has a democratic, province-wide governance structure. Every four years Métis citizens have the opportunity to choose their provincial and regional leadership, by voting in province-wide ballot box elections (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2025f). Regional Métis Nation of Ontario communities have Aboriginal Rights in traditional territories in Ontario. These traditional territories support traditional activities such as hunting, fishing, trapping, plant gathering for food and medicines, and other social and cultural activities. Métis Nation of Ontario “Region 2” is located in Northwestern Ontario, generally in the Thunder Bay district census division, and is made up of three Métis Nation of Ontario Community Councils that represent the Lakehead/Nipigon/Michipicoten traditional Métis Nation of Ontario territory (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2025g). The three Métis Nation of Ontario Community Councils are as follows: 

• Superior North Shore Métis Council; 
• Greenstone Métis Council; and 
• Thunder Bay Métis Council.

On June 27, 2019, the Métis Nation of Ontario and the Government of Canada signed the Métis Nation of Ontario ‑Canada Métis Government Recognition and Self-Government Agreement. The signing of the Self-Government Agreement was an historic victory for Métis citizens and communities represented by the Métis Nation of Ontario. In the Self-Government Agreement, Canada recognizes that the Métis communities represented by the Métis Nation of Ontario hold the inherent right to self-government and self-determination (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2019). In 2023, The Métis Nation of Ontario and Canadian government signed an updated Self-Government Agreement. Canada officially recognizes that the MNO is the Indigenous government for the Métis communities represented by the MNO (Government of Canada, 2023). The Métis collectivity includes MNO citizens who are Métis rights-holders and those entitled to become citizens as well as Métis communities in Ontario.  In addition, the 2023 agreement recognizes (Government of Canada, 2023): 

• The Métis communities represented by the MNO are a successor to the historic Métis Nation and one of the Métis collectives that make up the Métis Nation today; 
• The Métis communities represented by the MNO hold the inherent right of self-government recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982; 
• The MNO has law-making powers in areas such as citizenship, leadership selection, and government operations; 
• The MNO is an Indigenous governing body for the purposes of An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families. 

In addition to the recognition set out above, the 2023 agreement includes a commitment to negotiate a self-government treaty between the MNO and Canada in the next two years (Government of Canada, 2023). 

Métis Nation of Ontario has a ‘Framework Agreement on Métis harvesting’ that was signed in 2018 that states that Métis harvesting rights means “hunting, trapping, fishing and gathering of natural resources for food, social or ceremonial purposes (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2018). From this framework agreement, Métis Nation of Ontario Harvesters Card holders are able to exercise their Métis harvesting rights—within the Métis Nation of Ontario identified Harvesting Areas—consistent with Métis laws and traditions as expressed in the Métis Nation of Ontario Harvesting Policy (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2018). Métis Nation of Ontario have identified 12 Métis Traditional Harvesting Territories where it asserts Métis harvesting rights exist (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2016). Harvesters Cards are issued within the Métis Harvesting Territories for Métis Nation of Ontario citizens, subject to certain criteria being met that is set out by the Métis Nation of Ontario Harvester Policy (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2023)

The Métis Nation of Ontario has developed a province-wide Métis Traditional Land Use or Métis Way of Life Framework to collect Métis Traditional Knowledge and help gain a better understanding of Métis interests, rights, harvesting patterns, and land use (Métis Nation of Ontario, 2020). The Métis Way of Life Framework approach has been implemented through numerous Métis Nation of Ontario led studies to document traditional use of lands and resources as part of EAR/IS processes throughout Ontario, including in the RSA of the Project. These studies are typically not publicly available.

19.1.1.1.1         Mishkeegogamang First Nation

Information regarding Mishkeegogamang First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material complied via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Mishkeegogamang First Nation, previously known as Osnaburgh House, is located 310 km north of the City of Thunder Bay and 283 km southwest of Webequie First Nation in northern Ontario. It is situated near the shores of
Lake St. Joseph along Highway 599 which runs between Ignace and Pickle Lake. See Figure 195 for a draft Area of Interest for Planning.

Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

Various animals are noted in proximity to the community on their website, but it is unclear which of these species are hunted. Moose, black bear, woodland Caribou, wolverine and deer are some of the species mentioned (Mishkeegogamang First Nation, 2025

Mishkeegogamang First Nation fish for the following species: whitefish, sturgeon, trout, pike pickerel and perch. A few community members fish commercially, selling through the Freshwater Fish Marketing Board (Miskeegogamang First Nation, 2025).

Around 100 Band members receive trapping licenses each year. Beaver, mink, otter, lynx, and muskratare trapped, and the furs are sent to auction houses such as the Fur Harvester’s Auction of North Bay, Ontario, which sells furs all around the world (Mishkeegogamang First Nation, 2025).

Plant Gathering

Community members practice traditional activities on the land, such as harvesting blueberries during July and August.  Wild rice has been grown in the past, but the practice has declined due to fluctuating water levels (Mishkeegogamang First Nation, 2025). Tobacco, cedar, sage and sweetgrass is also traditionally harvested, (Gray, N.d).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

The traditional territory of Mishkeegogamang First Nation is made up of the communities of the Main Reserve, Bottle Hill, Poplar Heights, Sandy Road, Doghole Bay, Rat Rapids, Cedar Rapids, Ten Houses, Eric Lake, Ace Lake, Metcalfe, Pashkokogan, Mile 50, Fitchie Lake, Mile 42, Mile 29, Menako, and the shores of Lake St. Joseph. (Mishkeegogamang First Nation, 2010a). Mishkeegogamang First Nation members have previously camped around Lake St. Joseph, and log cabins and wigwams were built along the 1900s (Mishkeegogamang First Nation, 2010a).

Osnaburgh House on Lake St. Joseph had been a meeting place for a cluster of family groups prior to the signing of Treaty No. 9 in 1905 (Mishkeegogamang First nation, 2010a). The newly formed Band members were told at the signing of the treaty, that they would not have to live on the reserves that were designated to Mishkeegogamang First Nation (known as Osnaburgh Band at the time) (Mishkeegogamang First Nation, 2010a). In the decades following the signing of the treaty, the family groups continued to live as they had before, by spending summers on the shores of Lake St. Joseph, and winters in the bush (Mishkeegogamang First Nation, 2010a).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Mishkeegogamang First Nation has a deep cultural connection to water resources which is integral to their way of life and traditions. Waterways are an integral part of community life. Waterways have been and continue to be an important socio-cultural and economic part of daily life of Indigenous communities. Waterways connect families and friends and provide an important part of the transportation network.

Mishkeegogamang First Nations tell stories (such as creations stories, legends, and certain life/well-being teachings) to pass knowledge to other generations (Mishkeegogamang First Nation 2010c).

Sioux Lookout First Nations Healthy Authority (2025) serves Mishkeegogamang First Nation, providing traditional teachings and activities and supporting community members’ wellness journeys through ceremonies, as part of its commitment to culturally grounded health services; please refer to Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Cultural Traditions and Practices for further details.

Participants in the Junior Canadian Rangers Program for youth (12-18 years) teaches various skills including but not limited to first aid, using rifles safely, hunting and fishing, Native customs and traditions, healthy living, staying in school and problematic alcohol and substance use awareness” (211 Ontario North, 2024b).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Approximately two-thirds of the people in Mishkeegogamang speak and understand Ojibwe. The language is written in syllabics, and today it is also written in the English alphabet (Mishkeegogamang First Nation, 2010a). The Ojibway language is integral to culture and community in Mishkeegogamang. A community member reflected on how information and communication technologies and translation programs could be very beneficial for community members, potentially supporting increased communication in Ojibway (Gibson et al, 2011).

Gaa-minwaajindizowaaj is an unincorporated, grassroots organization seeking to revitalize the Anishinaabe language among Indigenous youth founded by youth from Mishkeegogamang First Nation. The organization is community-driven, with an emphasis on relationship-building, (re)localization, Youth leadership, community healing and accessibility (Gaa-minwaajindizowaaj, n.d.). Their objectives are to:

• Create Anishinaabe language resources that support Anishinaabe language learning and revitalization efforts;
• Support Indigenous Youth in developing their language proficiency, building networks and developing leadership skills; and
• Facilitate Anishinaabe language classes that promote immersion-based learning.

Gaa-minwaajindizowaaj’s (2020) work includes developing Anishinaabe language classes, hosting workshops, presenting keynotes, and participating on panels to share about Indigenous language revitalization, Youth leadership and the community arts (Gaa-minwaajindizowaaj, n.d.).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Mishkeegogamang First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Mishkeegogamang First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Mishkeegogamang First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

The community is not formally affiliated with any First Nations tribal council, but it is part of the Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).  

The community is governed by a Band Council consisting of a Chief and five Councillors, nominated and elected by the members of the community for two-year terms. Four of the six council members must be present to make formal decisions (Mishkeegogamang First Nation, 2010d).

19.1.1.1.2         North Caribou Lake First Nation

Information regarding North Caribou Lake First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

North Caribou Lake First Nation is located 530 km north of Thunder Bay and 265 km northwest of Webequie First Nation. It is situated on the northern shore of Weagamow or Round Lake and is accessible year around by the all‑season Northern Resource Trail from Pickle Lake. 

Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

Hunting is central activities for the North Caribou Lake First Nation. These practices provide food and reinforce cultural traditions and knowledge. North Caribou Lake First Nation members hunt moose, woodland Caribou, and other game (North Caribou Lake First Nation, 2014). 

North Caribou Lake First Nation identified the following species that are caught: sturgeon, pike, bass and walleye (Golder, 2018). Other fish include whitefish, white sucker, longnose sucker and lake trout were also caught (Rogers, 1976).

North Caribou Lake First Nation identified the following species that are trapped: snowshoe hare, beaver, marten, (Golder, 2018). Hares are important in the food economy of North Caribou Lake First Nation (Rogers, 1976). Historically, there was less dependence on smaller game, such as beaver, muskrat, grouse, and waterfowl, for sustenance; smaller game was shot, snared or trapped (Rogers, 1976).

Plant Gathering

The community gathers various medicinal plants from their traditional lands, which are used for healing and wellness, following traditional knowledge passed down through generations (North Caribou Lake First Nation, 2014). 

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

The community has used a series of “home base camps” along the shores of Meagamow Lake and North Caribou Lake to the east, as well as temporary “satellite camps” (Gordon, 1983).

North Caribou Lake First Nation would historically gather every summer at the home of their leader, Gici David, located at Atikup Point. When Gici David died in 1907, the Anglican Church built a church at this location (Gordon, 1983). Atikup Point continues to be an important gathering area for North Caribou Lake First Nation.

Banksian pines stands are a culturally important place because hares prefer them as habitat, and North Caribou Lake First Nation members have historically used these stands for annual trapping (Rogers, 1976).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Traditional ceremonies, such as powwows, smudging, and naming ceremonies, are integral to the community’s cultural practices. These ceremonies provide opportunities for community members to connect and share their traditions. “Our ceremonies are a way to celebrate our culture and honor our ancestors” (North Caribou Lake First Nation, 2014).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

North Caribou Lake First Nation is actively involved in revitalizing their traditional language.  A new school for North Caribou Lake First Nation was built in 2022 and it includes an immersive Oji-Cree language program for younger students to preserve and promote the native language (211 North, 2022).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

North Caribou Lake First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. North Caribou Lake First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to North Caribou Lake First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

North Caribou Lake First Nation elect’s officials through a custom electoral system, which consists of a Chief and seven councillors. The most recent election was held on February 23, 2024 (CIRNAC, 2023c). They are members of the Windigo First Nations Council and the Nishnawbe Aski Nation (Windigo First Nations Council, 2025). Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

In 2015, North Caribou Lake First Nation entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Romios Gold Resources Inc. (Burega, 2015). In 2017, the community completed the Wa-Pik-Che-Wanoog Bridge, which connects to the Northern Ontario Resource Trail (NORT), providing year-round road access to Ontario’s highway system.

North Caribou Lake First Nation is also part of a formal agreement with Newmont Musselwhite Mine that includes revenue sharing, employment, training and business development opportunities (Thunder Bay Community Economic Development Commission, N.D). “The agreement sets targets for First Nations employment, opportunities for business development and environmental protection. The communities decide how the funds are managed” (Natural Resources Canada, 2015.)

19.1.1.1.3         Wapekeka First Nation

Information regarding Wapekeka First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Wapekeka First Nation is located 610 km north of the City of Thunder Bay and 193 km northwest of Webequie First Nation in northern Ontario. The community is situated on the shores of Angling Lake. 

In 1947, the origins of the Angling Lake community were formed as a satellite community used in winter by families from Big Trout Lake whose traplines were located in the area. Beginning in 1960, permanent communities apart from the Big Trout Lake Band were established. These communities were Kingfisher Lake, Wunnumin Lake, Bearskin Lake, Kasabonika, Muskrat Dam, Sachigo Lake and Wapekeka. Wapekeka received official Band status and two reserves in 1979. On August 28, 1981, the Angling Lake Band officially changed its name to Wapekeka First Nation (Wapekeka First Nation, 2025a).

In the absence of Project-specific information gathered by the Wapekeka community, the detailed land use and occupancy mapping published by the Kayahna Tribal Area Council in 1985, titled ‘The Kayahna Region land utilization and occupancy study’ (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985) was used to provide historical land and resource use information

The traditional lands of Wapekeka First Nation are vital to their cultural identity. These lands include areas used for hunting, fishing, and gathering, which are essential for sustaining their way of life. Wapekeka First Nation has several sacred sites that hold spiritual significance. These sites are used for ceremonies, rituals, and other cultural practices. The community has various facilities that support cultural activities, including the community center, school, and health center. These facilities provide spaces for cultural education, gatherings, and health services. The natural resources within Wapekeka First Nation’s traditional lands, such as forests, lakes, and rivers, are crucial for their cultural practices and sustainability. These resources are managed responsibly to protect their availability for future generations (Wapekeka First Nation, 2025c). 

Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

Hunting is a vital activity for Wapekeka First Nation, providing food and reinforcing cultural traditions. Community members hunt various game, including moose, Caribou, and small game. These practices are passed down through generations, preserving the continuation of traditional knowledge. During the fall Caribouhunt, families would meet at the confluence of the Sachigo and Severn Rivers (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Wapekeka First Nation heavily utilize the land around Big Trout Lake with a strong reliance on the Fawn River system. Hunting occurs throughout the Wapekeka First Nation community with multiple community members hunting the entire year. Moose, Caribou, beaverand martenhave been identified as species that are hunted (Golder Associates 2018).  

Fishing is equally important, with community members fishing in local lakes and rivers. Fishing not only supports the community’s dietary needs but also strengthens their connection to the land and water (Wapekeka First Nation, 2025a) Fishing in local lakes and rivers is a key part of Wapekeka First Nation’s connection to water. Sustainable fishing practices are employed to protect the health of fish populations and the continued availability of this vital resource. Water-related activities often involve community participation, with Elders teaching younger generations about traditional methods and the importance of respecting nature. There was a heavy dependence on rivers as a resource, especially Big Trout Lake, Long Lake, Wapekeka Lake and tributaries of the Severn and Fawn Rivers (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).  Fishing in the Asheweig River system for walleye, sturgeon, whitefish and pike are common (Golder Associates, 2018). Areas along Big Trout Lake, Long Dog, Fawn River and Bug River and Mishwamakan River are also important areas for fishing and trapping.

Trapping corridors and trails are used to access hunting areas. Some community members fly to the Asheweig River to hunt (Golder Associates, 2018). Trapping occurs mostly to the north as Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug traplines are to the south. Fishing in the Asheweig River system for walleye, sturgeon, whitefish, pike is common (Golder Associates, 2018). Areas along Big Trout Lake, Long Dog, Fawn River and Bug River and Mishwamakan River are also important areas for fishing and trapping. During the fall Caribou hunt, families would meet at the confluence of the Sachigo and Severn Rivers (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). 

Hunting and fishing are community activities, often involving group outings and shared knowledge. Elders play a crucial role in teaching younger generations about traditional methods and the importance of respecting nature (Wapekeka First Nation, 2025c).

Travel and Access

Fawn-Otter River is an important location for members of Wapekeka First Nation (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). There are multiple summer travel routes – two main ones have members travelling to Big Trout Lake from Wapekeka as well as north along the Fawn River (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Another summer route includes travel between Kasabonika and Big Trout Lake via Wapekeka Lake (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). There are two main winter travel routes for Wapekeka First Nation member – the first is north and east of Wapekeka Lake and Otter Lake between the Witegoo River on the west and Ghost Lake on the east. This route extends along Fawn River. The second winter route is south of Big Trout Lake, centred on the Bug and Mishwamakan Rivers (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

The traditional lands of Wapekeka First Nation are vital to their cultural identity. These lands include areas used for hunting, fishing, and gathering, which are essential for sustaining their way of life. Wapekeka First Nation has several sacred sites that hold spiritual significance. These sites are used for ceremonies, rituals, and other cultural practices. The community has various facilities that support cultural activities, including the community center, school, and health center. These facilities provide spaces for cultural education, gatherings, and health services. The natural resources within Wapekeka First Nation’s traditional lands, such as forests, lakes, and rivers, are crucial for their cultural practices and sustainability. These resources are managed responsibly to protect their availability for future generations (Wapekeka First Nation, 2025c). 

A precontact unmarked burial site was previously found in 1988 when the Wapekeka First Nation airstrip was under construction (Hamilton, 2004).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

Wapekeka First Nation offers various programs and services to support its community members, including health services, educational programs, and cultural initiatives. Efforts are continuously made to revitalize and preserve the community’s cultural traditions, including language and ceremonies. These initiatives are crucial for maintaining the community’s cultural identity (Wapekeka First Nation, 2025c).

The community practices hunting and fishing activities, food preparation (butchering, cleaning and cooking), community feasts, community cookouts, memorial feasts and informal meals. Wapekeka First Nation community members have a diet that consists of market food and food harvested from the land (Robidoux, 2021).

Sioux Lookout First Nations Healthy Authority (2025) serves Wapekeka First Nation, providing traditional teachings and activities and support community members’ wellness journeys through ceremonies, as part of its commitment to culturally grounded health services.

Wapekeka First Nation hunters train younger hunters to build community capacity that works towards addressing access to traditional food. Disruptions to the dissemination of land-based knowledge are a challenge when attempting to strengthen food security and food sovereignty (Loukes, 2022).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

The main language spoken in Wapekeka First Nation is Oji-Cree, a mixture of Cree and Ojibway. Language is a vital part of their cultural identity, connecting community members to their heritage and traditions. Traditional practices such as hunting, fishing, and gathering are central to the community’s way of life. These activities not only provide sustenance but also reinforce cultural traditions and knowledge passed down through generations. The teachings and wisdom of Elders are highly respected and form the foundation of many community practices. Elders play a crucial role in passing down knowledge and traditions (Wapekeka First Nation, 2025c).

Shibogama Education Authority provides support and assistance in developing and delivering the education program and system in the community with a focus on enhancing and furthering traditional language acquisition for the community (Shibogama First Nations Council, 2025).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Wapekeka First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Wapekeka First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Wapekeka First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

In 2005, Wapekeka First Nation joined with Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation, Muskrat Dam Lake First Nation and Wawakapewin First Nation to declare a moratorium on mining exploration and forestry on their traditional lands (Mining Watch, 2005). They outlined that they have the right to own, control and use the lands and territories as they have traditionally owned and occupied them (Mining Watch, 2005). Wapekeka First Nation is currently part of an alliance with Grassy Narrows First Nation, Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation and Neskantaga First Nation to defend their lands and waters against mining prospectors (Alhmidi, 2023). 

Wapakeka First Nation is a partner in the Thawikayhigan Limited Partnership (TKG Group), established in 2018, and which is owned equally by Kingfisher Lake, Kasabonika Lake, Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug, Wapekeka, Wawakapewin and Wunnumin Lake First Nations. The Group, based in Thunder Bay, works to generate new economic opportunities for its communities. “This is our first business acquisition that will directly service our First Nations,” said Jonathon Mamakwa, President of the TKG Group. “This is key in our overall plan in contributing to the development of healthy First Nation communities with vibrant economies that support future generations,” he adds (Dryden Now, 2023). 

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

Wapekeka First Nation’s Chief, Deputy Chief and four Band Council members are elected every three years under the Custom Electoral System (211 Ontario North, 2022).

Wapekeka First Nation is part of the Shibogama First Nations Council and the Nishnawbe Aski Nation (Shibogama First Nation Council, 2025). Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

The northern Ontario community was connected to the provincial power grid in December 2023. Upon grid connection, the community turned off the diesel generators which had previously provided them primary power (Wataynikaneyap Transmission Project, 2025).

19.1.1.1.4         Wawakapewin First Nation

Information regarding Wawakapewin First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

Wawakapewin First Nation is located 565 km north of Thunder Bay and 125 km west of Webequie First Nation in northern Ontario. The community is situated on the southeast shore of Long Dog Lake, which is part of the Asheweig River, a tributary of the Winisk River.

In the absence of Project-specific information gathered by the Wawakapewin community, the detailed land use and occupancy mapping published by the Kayahna Tribal Area Council in 1985, titled ‘The Kayahna Region land utilization and occupancy study’ (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985) was used to provide historical land and resource use information. Wawakapewin First Nation have identified within their ToR for their CBLUP a draft area of interest for planning which includes territory that has been used by Wawakapewin members (Ministry of Natural Resources, 2019). Wawakapewin First Nations participate in traditional activities throughout their traditional territory.

Hunting and Fishing

Wawakapewin First Nation members continue to hunt, fish and trap as a means of community sustainability (Smith, 2011). As residents within Wawakapewin First Nation were historically from Big Trout Lake, Kasabonika Lake or Wapekeka, their land utilization is very dispersed (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Trapping and hunting occur around the Otter River and Bug-Mishwamakan River and the area between Frog and Otter River (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Members typically utilize Big Trout Lake or Bug-Mishwamakan River for fishing, and Long Dog Lake (less often) (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Historically, Wawakapewin First Nation served up to 300 people in the region northeast of Pickle Lake with fish and game. Hunting, trapping, and fishing are activities that families do together in the surrounding areas. While the fish and game are still abundant in Long Dog Lake and the Ashewieg River, the community relies on external sources for other food. Community members have decided to relearn traditional harvesting and address their food insecurity (Smith, 2011).

Travel and Access

The community is accessible by chartered aircraft, with access depending on the time of year. A winter road provides seasonal access for approximately two months of the year. Wawakapewin First Nation is part of the Asheweig Winter Roads Corporation, a network of roads linking five other First Nations with each other and to southern centres through Pickle Lake, Ontario (Wawakapewin First Nation, 2025).

Summer travel routes include members moving to Wapekeka Lake for the summer and returning to Long Dog Lake in the fall to trap (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). There are two routes south of Long Dog Lake, one that leads to Osnaburgh House and Pickle Lake, and the other route is to Lansdowne House (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). There is a preference for east-west travel in the summer (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). The heavily used winter travel routes are from Big Trout Lake south towards Wawakapewin First Nation homeland (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Wawakapewin First Nation have identified within their Terms of Reference for their CBLUP an area of interest for planning which includes territory that has been used by Wawakapewin members (Figure 1917).

The history of Wawakapewin has been handed down through oral tradition from Elders. The Wawakapewuk are descendants of the people who lived and used this land and its resources for at least 7,000 years. The people of Wawakapewin maintain the practices of hunting, fishing, trapping, and plant gathering (Mason, 2017).

Cultural Traditions and Practices

The community emphasizes the importance of maintaining a strong relationship with the land. This connection is seen as vital for the community’s well-being and sustainability. Traditional practices such as hunting, fishing, and gathering are central to the community’s way of life. The teachings and wisdom of Elders are highly respected and form the foundation of many community practices. Elders play a crucial role in passing down knowledge and traditions. Efforts are continuously made to revitalize and preserve the community’s cultural traditions, including language and ceremonies. These initiatives are crucial for maintaining the community’s cultural identity (Wawakapewin First Nation, n.d.). Wawakapewin First Nation offers various programs and services to support its community members, including health services, educational programs, and cultural initiatives. These programs help preserve the community’s cultural heritage and protect the well-being of its members (Wawakapewin First Nation, n.d.).

Sioux Lookout First Nations Healthy Authority (2025) serves Wawakapewin First Nation, providing traditional teachings and activities and support for community members’ wellness journeys through ceremonies, as part of its commitment to culturally grounded health services; please refer to Section 19.2.2.1 ‘Cultural Traditions and Practices for further details.

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

The people of Wawakapewin First Nation communicate in two languages: Oji-Cree, a blend of Ojibway and Cree, and English. Most community members are fluent in both and use them with ease, however, some Elders may be less comfortable with English (Wawakapewin First Nation, 2025).

Shibogama Education Authority provides support and assistance in developing and delivering the education program and system in the community with a focus on enhancing and furthering traditional language acquisition for the community (Shibogama First Nations Council, 2025).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Wawakapewin First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Wawakapewin First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Wawakapewin First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

Wawakapewin First Nation has a Chief and one Councillor, with a custom electoral system.  The next election is scheduled for September 9, 2025 (CIRNAC, 2023t).  The community elects a Chief and Councillors through a custom electoral system. Wawakapewin First Nation is a member of Shibogama First Nations Council, and the Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

Wataynikaneyap Power is supplying power to the community of Wawakapewin First Nation (Wataynikaneyap Transmission Project, 2025). The northern Ontario community was connected to the provincial power grid on August 16, 2023. Upon grid connection, the community turned off the diesel generators which had previously provided them primary power. Wawakapewin Chief Anne Marie Beardy stated, “This is a big day for our little community. Lack of reliable power meant not being able to grow. It limited the amount of community members who could stay in Wawakapewin all year long, instead of just seasonally. We are proud to majority own this power system on the Homelands, bringing reliable power to First Nations” (Wataynikaneyap Power, 2023).

Figure 19.17:    Wawakapewin First Nation Draft Area of Interest for Planning

19.1.1.1.5         Wunnumin Lake First Nation

Information regarding Wunnumin Lake First Nation’s cultural and traditional existing conditions is limited. Information has been requested from the community, and when made available it will be incorporated into the next revision of the EAR/IS. The following section and impact assessment (Section 19.3) information has been developed based on limited material compiled via public sources and engagement and consultation sessions.

Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

In the absence of Project-specific information from the Wunnumin Lake First Nation, the detailed land use and occupancy mapping published by the Kayahna Tribal Area Council in 1985, titled ‘The Kayahna Region land utilization and occupancy study’ (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985) was used to provide historical land and resource use information.

Wunnumin Lake First Nation is located 500 km north of Thunder Bay, 166 km north of Pickle Lake and 125 km west of Webequie First Nation in Northwestern Ontario. The community is closest geographically to Kingfisher Lake First Nation and Nibinamik First Nation. Wunnumin Lake is situated where the Pipestone River meets the Winisk River. Today the community is situated on a peninsula of Wunnumin Lake.

Wunnumin Lake First Nation and Kingfisher Lake First Nation were historically connected with Big Beaver House as a meeting place and for trade. The Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC) trading post was established at Big Beaver House in 1808 (Wunnumin First Nation, 2010a). As a result of a forest fire that destroyed the buildings at Big Beaver House, the location was abandoned and communities relocated to two areas – Kingfisher Lake – 12 km north, and Wunnumin Lake – 40 km east of Big Beaver House (Wunnumin First Nation, 2010a).

Their traditional territory was known to overlap with those of other communities, and this formed an important connection between communities, and helped to sustain the communities on a social and economic basis (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). The Pipestone River has been identified as a common hunting area for hunting of mooseand geese and fishing (Golder Associates, 2018). The Ashweig River, Pipestone River and Big Trout Lake are also understood to be highly utilized for fishing. The area around Wunnumin Lake, including the areas extending from Big Beaver House on the west to Long Dog Lake in the north down to Reeb Lake on the east side and to Wallington Lake are important hunting grounds (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). There are areas around Wunnumin Lake which have had forest fires in the past and moose are often drawn to these areas and hunting activity is more frequent in these areas (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Wunnumin Lake and the Pipestone River took their names from a historical legend of the Broken Beaver Dam made by the Big Beaver that lived on the Pipestone River (Wunnumin First Nation, 2010a). In Oji-Cree, Wun-num-mun means red earth or red clay found in this area, which is explained by the historical legend (Wunnumin First Nation, 2010b).

Hunting, Fishing and Trapping

Historically, at Wunnumin Lake, trapping, hunting, and fishing were important sources of food and cash as well as familial and individual prestige (Sieciechowicz, 1986). Territory was known to overlap with other communities’ users, and this formed an important connection between communities, and helped sustain the community’s social and economic basis (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). The Pipestone River has been identified as a common hunting area for hunting of moose and geese and fishing (Golder Associates, 2018). Wunnumin Lake First Nation harvests birch, deer, beaver, moose, geese, Caribou, sturgeon and raspberries (Golder Associates, 2018).

The Ashweig River, Pipestone River and Big Trout Lake are also understood to be highly utilized for fishing. The area around Wunnumin Lake, including the areas extending from Big Beaver House on the west to Long Dog Lake in the north down to Reeb Lake on the east side and to Wallington Lake is  important hunting grounds (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). There are areas around Wunnumin Lake which have had forest fires in the past and moose are often drawn to these areas, and hunting activity is higher in these areas (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Travel and Access

A traditional summer route included canoeing from Wunnumin Lake to Kingfisher Lake via Maria Lake or via the Pipestone River (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). From Kingfisher Lake, members can go north on the Ashweig River with several portage routes to arrive at Big Trout Lake and Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). Historically, winter travel routes were more circular and were along trapping routes and did not always follow rivers or creeks. Winter travel routes typically were between Wunnumin Lake and Kingfisher Lake (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). The heaviest travelled route is the route southeast of Wunnumin Lake to the McKay Sturgeon/ Nemeh, Martin/Wahbeshayshiitrapping area (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Cultural Continuity

Sites and Areas Used for Cultural and Spiritual Purposes

Wunnumin Lake is used for fishing, trapping and hunting however, there has been a decline in fishing, trapping and hunting for sustenance (Wunnumin Lake First Nation, 2010a). The cultural identity of Wunnumin Lake First Nation is closely tied to the land and waters, reflected in historical legends and places. This includes the area known as “Broken Beaver Dam made by the Big Beaver, and the red clay that is said to have come from the Baby Beaver known as “Wun-num-mun”. The pipe created by Big Beaver in the centre of the Pipestone River is used to make pipes by Wunnumin Lake First Nation peoples (Wunnumin Lake First Nation, 2010a). Wunnumin means red clay, this special clay was used historically by the local community for painting and patching their birchbark canoes mixed with other vegetation.

Cultural Traditions and Practices

The importance of the presence and connection of the Wunnumin Lake First Nation with water and waterways is extensive based on historical land use mapping, which depicts fishing practices, and winter and summer travel routes that make use of waterways (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985). The Wunnumin Lake’s historical legends are connected with the colouring of the waters and the role of the beaver in its cultural identity (Wunnumin Lake First Nation, n.d).

The Wunnumin Lake First Nation community has historical kinship ties with Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug, and other related communities connected to its traditional territory (Kayahna Tribal Area Council, 1985).

Traditional way of life, language, ceremony and teachings all contribute to community well-being, including community cohesion in Wunnumin Lake First Nation. Norman Martin Community Hall hosts various engagements, such as conferences, meetings, gatherings and entertainment (Wunnumin Lake First Nation, 2010). The local recreation committee plans and implements annual events, such as Christmas activities and hockey and broomball tournaments. Various picnic and park areas have been designated for leisure activities. Beaches, lakes rivers, trails, and camping grounds surround the community for summer outdoor activities, such as swimming, camping, biking, fishing, canoeing and boating.

Sioux Lookout First Nations Health Authority (2025) serves Wuunumin Lake First Nation, providing traditional teachings, activities and support community members’ wellness journeys through ceremonies, as part of its commitment to culturally grounded heather services.

There has been a revival of sweat lodge ceremonies conducted and cared for by community Elders using Medaywin practices. This ceremony is to help people cleanse their mind, body and spirit (Wunnumin Lake First Nation, 2010a).

Use and Preservation of Indigenous Languages

Wunnumin Lake First Nation is an Oji-Cree speaking First Nation. John George Martin Memorial School offers an Oji‑Cree immersion program for junior kindergarten to Grade 2 students, who are taught entirely in Oji-Cree. Strengthening Oji-Cree in the community is one of the school’s mandates, and students are able to continue learning the language in a separate class until Grade 10, where students must go to Sioux Lookout, Winnipeg, Thunder Bay or Ottawa for their high school education (Law, 2023).

Shibogama Education Authority provides support and assistance in developing and delivering the education program and system in the community with a focus on enhancing and furthering traditional language acquisition for the community (Shibogama First Nations Council, 2025).

Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Wunnumin Lake First Nation holds Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982 as outlined in Section 19.1.1.1.1. Wunnumin Lake First Nation Aboriginal and Treaty Rights include but are not limited to the rights to hunt, trap, fish, and gather materials that are important to Wunnumin Lake First Nation culture. This includes being able to practice their culture and share it with future generations.

Socio-economic, Health and Well-being Conditions

Further details on existing social environment conditions are provided in Section 14.2. Further details on existing economic conditions are provided in Section 15.2.

Traditional Laws, Roles, Responsibilities, and Governance (Self-Governance)

The Wunnumin Lake First Nations people follow the Anishnabek Dodemag (The Clan System) and currently have one chief and five councillors, with one being a Deputy Chief (Shibogama First Nations Council, 2025). Chief and council are responsible for delivering various programs, such as health, education, administration and finance, and welfare and housing (Wuunumin Lake First Nation, 2010). Wuunumin Lake First Nation is a member of the Shibogama First Nations Council, and the Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Through the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, community members have access to departments within Nishnawbe Aski Nation that support finance and governance and treaty implementation (Nishnawbe Aski Nation, 2020b).

The lands and waters of Wunnumin Lake First Nation are used and preserved by the community as their homeland, where it is understood that rights to culture, language, fishing, gathering, hunting, and trapping were granted by the Creator (Wunnumin Lake First Nation, 2010a).

Wunnumin Lake First Nation in partnership with Shibogama First Nation is developing and implementing a community-led Source Water Protection Plan (SWPP) (O’Brien, 2025). The SWPP allows Wunnumin Lake First Nation to monitor the community’s water sources and evaluate potential health risks associated with water quality.

The Wunnumin Lake First Nation’s traditional territory also lies downstream from the Musselwhite Mine. This gold mine celebrated its 25^th anniversary recently, and Wunnumin Lake First Nation community is a signatory of an agreement with Newmont (NWOnewswatch.com, 2022).

19.2            Potential Effects to Indigenous Peoples

This section provides a description of potential effects of the Project on the Indigenous in consideration of the existing conditions (Section 19.2), their indicators of change (Section 19.1.4), the interactions with Project activities (Section 19.1.6) and the pathway of effects (Section 19.3).

Table 19‑10 summarizes the potential effect pathways and effect indicators for Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. The descriptions of effect pathways are grouped by their potential effect to avoid repetition, since many of the same effect pathways may occur during different phases of the Project.

As shown through the severe and long-lasting effects of colonization, destabilization of a community’s culture and cohesion can affect the identities of its members (Maracle, 2021). Analysis of potential project effects on Indigenous peoples and their land and culture must be done with acknowledgment of these colonial and historical contexts (Hoogeveen et al., 2021).

Table 19‑10:     Summary of Potential Effects, effect Pathways, effect Indicators, Nature of Interaction and Linked Valued Components (VC’s) for Indigenous Peoples’ Values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Table 19‑11 summarizes the potential effect pathways and effect indicators for the Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Table 19‑11:     Summary of Potential Effects, effect Pathways, effect Indicators, Nature of Interaction and Linked VCs for Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

19.2.1         Change to Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

This section provides an analysis of Project effects on Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes. The potential effects of the Project on Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes were identified as follows:

• Change to availability of lands and resources for traditional harvesting;
• Change to sites and areas used for traditional harvesting; and
• Change to access to lands and resources used for traditional harvesting.

The area that defines LSA and RSA for current and historical use of lands and resources for traditional purposes is shown on Figure 19.3.

19.2.1.1         Local Study Area: Webequie First Nation

The potential effects of the Project on Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes for Webequie First Nation are based on information provided by the Webequie First Nation for the Project and building on previous planning studies that defined traditional land and resource use of the Webequie community, as well as the EAR/IS results for the assessment on the biophysical environment.

Webequie First Nation defines their Harvesting Rights as: the right to hunt, trap, fish, gather plants and medicines, gather organic materials, and obtain fresh water. To meaningfully exercise harvesting rights Webequie First Nation requires the availability of sufficient quantity and quality of harvested resources and the ability to harvest preferred species at preferred locations using preferred methods (Stantec, 2025).

Webequie First Nation members continue to practice traditional land use practices surrounding the Webequie 240 reserve and along the proposed route for WSR (Stantec, 2025).

19.2.1.1.1         Construction activities → Loss and/or alteration of lands and resources for traditional harvesting → Availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources

The Project has the potential to affect lands and resources available to Indigenous communities for traditional harvesting during the construction phase and operations phase, as outlined in Table 19‑6. This includes the availability of wildlife, fish, plants, water, which are important for traditional purposes.

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

The Project has the potential to affect wildlife as a traditionally harvested resource during the construction phase of the Project. The wildlife considered as a resource traditionally harvested by the Webequie community is grouped based on input from the Webequie community (Stantec, 2024), as follows:

• Moose;
• Caribou;
• Furbearers (e.g., lynx, fox, muskrat, rabbit, beaver, mink, wolf, otter, and wolverine); and
• Birds (e.g., water birds, waders and gamebirds) (AtkinsRéalis 2023; FNFNES 2013; Stantec, 2024).

The availability (quality and quantity) of traditionally harvested wildlife may be affected by habitat loss
(i.e., vegetation removal, hydrological changes in riparian habitat or aquatic feeding habitat), habitat alteration/degradation (i.e., dust deposition, invasive species). These changes can lead to temporary or permanently altered wildlife movement (i.e., sensory disturbances, barriers such as fencing, avoidance of open spaces) and changes in wildlife distribution across the landscape; injury/death (i.e., greater predation on road, greater access to hunting, collisions, expansion of deer bringing disease). For the full assessment of the potential effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat in relation to traditionally harvested resources, see Section 12, and for wildlife species at risk (e.g., Caribou) see Section 13 of the EAR/IS.

Webequie First Nation requires the availability of sufficient quality and quantity of harvested resources and the ability to harvest preferred species at preferred locations using preferred methods as noted in the Webequie First Nation IK Study report. These traditional use resources, such as wildlife, fish, plants and water, are currently available in the LSA and RSA. The availability of these resources enables traditional activities such as hunting, fishing, trapping, and food and medicinal plant harvesting, which are mapped in the IK Study. As referenced below, the Webequie First Nation RIA report identifies several potential pathways of effects that may result in a change to the availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources in the LSA and RSA (Stantec, 2025).

Moose

Moose/Moonz is an important animal for the Webequie community that is traditionally hunted (Stantec, 2024) in the LSA and RSA. Construction activities may result in a degradation/alteration or loss of moose habitat due to vegetation clearing and hydrological changes.

Noise from construction activities may cause wildlife to avoid the area and adversely affect the population distribution of traditionally harvested animals such as moose (Stantec, 2025). Noise disturbance has been a concern raised by community members. Other sensory disturbances from lighting, odours and human activity assessed in Section 12.3 may also affect moose by reducing suitable habitat around the Project Footprint. As noted in Section 12.7.1, noise and light may degrade moose habitat by reducing the utilization of the area, especially during times of construction activities.

Reduced air quality, including an increase in dust, could affect moose health (Stantec, 2025). The Project will produce emissions and dust from construction activities including the roadbed construction and aggregate pit operations. As noted in Section 19.2, the Webequie First Nation IK Study report indicated that Webequie community members currently experience dust generation from existing roads and not only have health concerns related to dust from construction activities, but also the potential effects on traditionally harvested resources.

An increase in moose injury or mortality of individuals stemming from vehicular traffic is also a potential effect during the construction of temporary access roads and the WSR. Increased moose injury or mortality would reduce the availability of game and adversely affect traditional hunting activities.

Caribou

Caribou is an important animal for the Webequie community that is traditionally harvested (Stantec, 2024) in the LSA and RSA (Section 13). It is a species that is less commonly harvested than moose “because they are only present for a short time each year” (Stantec, 2024). Community concerns for caribou relate to the potential for the Project to alter their migration patterns, as caribou may choose to migrate close to the WSR when passing through the community. Construction related disturbances may shift migrating herds into the LSA and RSA from historical locations further east. The most recent Caribou observation in Webequie First Nation occurred in April 2024. Caribou have been observed in the Prime Lake area.

Caribou migration patterns that overlap with the Project have been documented within the Webequie First Nation reserve and north of the Project Footprint. These patterns could be altered due to vegetation removal, construction and use of supportive infrastructure (security fencing), vehicle use creating sensory disturbances, predator use of the corridor, and use of the corridor by competitors (e.g., moose). Activities such as blasting at quarries/pits, earth hauling and vegetation clearing, and the use of lights around facilities may reduce the ability of caribou to use habitat along the Project ROW and supportive infrastructure. Section 13.6.1 indicates that Caribou are likely to alter their movements as a result of sensory disturbances, which may be experienced 10-15 km from the source, can elicit anti-predator behaviours, and may result in home range sizes increasing or shifting.

Caribou calving is sacred to the traditional way of life of Indigenous peoples. Caribou calving grounds are found over an area which is approximately 2,010 ha, of which 511 ha is located within the LSA, and 1.2 ha is within the Project footprint (Stantec, 2024).

Caribou calving grounds within the LSA are described as “critical” in the Webequie First Nation IK Study. Calving sites are most typically in locations that are hard to access by predators and offer a safe environment for cows and nursing calves prior to returning to summer foraging grounds. Calves are most vulnerable to predators within the first 50 days of birth (Ontario 2020). These locations may also be abundant in high-quality forage, which is necessary during the sensitive calving period, which generally occurs between May and mid-July each year.

Construction activities may result in a loss of suitable caribou habitat that is critical to calving. Habitat loss may occur from vegetation clearing and hydrological changes during construction. These changes resulting from construction could also create easier access for predators to these calving sites. Construction activities could also cause sensory disturbance, such as noise, dust, light, smell and vibration, leading to changes in habitat use and impediments to seasonal migration to calving grounds. As per Section 13.6.1, sensory disturbances generated from the construction and operations phases are likely to impact habitat in the LSA, including Nursery Areas and Seasonal Ranges.

Bears

Black bears/Mahkwah isa big game species that is harvested as a “[w]ildlife species important to Indigenous harvesters” (Rogers and Smith, 1981 cited in Stantec, 2024). Black bears prefer forest habitat comprised of black spruce, white spruce, balsam fir and trembling aspen, all of which are commonly found in the LSA and RSA.

In recent years, there have been reports of increased bear sightings at the landfill within the LSA. Community concerns with these observations have been anecdotally linked to a decline in bear harvesting and the associated cultural and traditional practices such as medicinal uses of bear. Community residents perceived bears foraging at the landfill as undesirable for traditional harvesting (Stantec, 2024).

The potential effect of the Project regarding black bears includes creating increased access to the landfill within the LSA. By creating opportunities to access the landfill, there is a potential for the existing bear population to become increasingly reliant on food sources at the landfill. In turn, the health of bears could decrease as a result of a human-influenced diet, thus affecting the quality of the game and a lowered desire by community members to engage in traditional bear harvesting. Additionally, waste streams from construction activities, such as food scraps and other nonhazardous sources may be transported to the landfill and could contribute to a potential decline in bear health.

Furbearers

Trapping of furbearers is a current and historical traditional practice, although practiced less since the recession of the commercial fur trade industry, it continues to be an important activity in the Webequie community.

Harvesting beaver/Amik is part of the history in the development of establishing Treaty No. 9, as the Anishinaabe raised their concerns about the depletion of beaver/Amik due to non-Indigenous trapping and prospecting. Petitions to protect trapping, hunting, and fishing were one factor that led to the signing of Treaty No. 9. Beaver/Amik continues to be one the furbearing species that is commonly harvested. It is one of the more common species for trapping, is also consumed as a food source and used to make fur pelts as well, though it is not common. Some community members have noticed an increase in beavers/Amik through the territory as trapping has declined in the community although others have commented that “there are hardly any beaversnow compared to before when trapping was more popular in the community” (Stantec, 2024). Some Webequie First Nation IK Study participants are concerned about water levels attributing it to climate change, less snowfall, shorter ground freeze and an increase in beaver dams in the area. Knowledge Holders shared that if Webequie do not hunt, fish or trap, that wildlife will disappear from the area.

As per Section 12.3.3, the assessment of potential effects on furbearers used two indicator species: the American Marten, representing terrestrial furbearers, and the North American Beaver representing aquatic furbearers. The indicator species were chosen based on their importance to the Indigenous community, ecological importance, and their range of habitat use (Section 12.3.3).

As with assessments on moose and Caribou, the effects pathways identified considered habitat loss, habitat alteration, alteration of movement and death/injury (Section 12.3.3).

As noted in Section 12.7.2, for beaver, loss and degradation of habitat resulting from the construction phase of the Project is largely expected to be limited in geographic extent to the Project Footprint, apart from hydrological changes which may extend to the LSA. Beaver habitat is present throughout the LSA and RSA so the effect of the Project regarding beaver habitat loss is expected to be low (Section 12.7.2).

As summarized in Section 12.7.2, in terms of habitat alteration, hydrological changes to beaver habitat may occur as part of the roadway construction. Roadways through peatlands have a history of altering hydrology, obstructing surface and sub-surface water flows, these changes were assumed to be probable, and when they occur, they are assumed to be permanent. While the hydrology of some watercourses may be changed during construction, the effects are likely to be temporary. Additionally, hydrology of the Project Footprint may also directly be affected by beavers, which often use ROW as part of their dam construction. Overall, the significance is expected to be moderate.

As per Section 12.7.2, for the American marten, its habitat is present throughout the LSA and RSA.

The movement of the American marten may be affected in several ways. Physical barriers set up during construction such as fencing may affect the American marten. American marten may be negatively affected in terms of connectivity due to the road as they may avoid the open area. Sensory disturbance as a result of the Project, may lead to avoidance of the Project Footprint.

Further information on the assessment of furbearers is provided in Section 12 of the EAR/IS.

Five trapping areas are located within the LSA. Construction could affect traplines by disrupting wildlife habitats, displacing animals and altering migration routes, which directly affects the availability of species traditionally trapped. The construction of WSR may make it harder for trappers to locate and access game as well as result in competition from trappers not within the Webequie First Nation community.

Birds

Harvesting of geese and other waterfowl is an important traditional practice for the Webequie community. The Project may result in an adverse effect to birds from habitat loss and alteration; however, Section 12.6 noted that waterfowl are highly mobile, and habitat is not limiting in the RSA. Habitat modelling reported a loss of habitat within the Project Footprint, but no measurable change in the LSA and RSA for waterfowl.

The habitat loss or alteration could affect the ability of birds to utilize habitat within the Project Footprint for migratory stopovers (resting, foraging) or breeding. Construction activities such as vegetation clearing, water diversions, temporary access road building, in addition to accidental spills of deleterious materials, could result in habitat loss or alteration, or a reduced availability of suitable habitat. These changes could, in turn, result in an increased risk of injury/death of birds.

With the introduction of new road access and an increased presence of Project-related personnel (e.g., construction or adjacent sector activities), there is a potential for adverse effects on bird populations and traditional harvesting resulting from:

• Increased bird mortalities due to collisions with vehicles,
• Increased predation risk is directly related to improved access for predator species to suitable bird habitats;  
• Greater incidence of illegal harvesting activities on game birds.

Fish and Fish Habitat

Fishing is the most commonly practiced traditional use activity and fish are one of the most harvested foods by Webequie First Nation community (Stantec, 2024). The most commonly consumed fish are walleye/Ogaanze, whitefish/Attikohmeg, northern pike/ Njaabeh/ Gidagaa-ginoozhe, Sturgeon/Nahmehgoos, suckers/ Nahmehbin, Trout/Nahzahmehgoos and burbot meesshash/ meenawshkoochosh/Miinzhaash. Other fish species of importance include Muskie/Mashginoozhe, bass (largemouth), sucker/Nahmehbin, sauger, and cisco. “In March the spring spawn would begin, resulting in sucker, walleye and northern pike being more active within the shallows of lakes and rivers, near where nets would be cast” (Stantec, 2024).

The Project has the potential to affect fish as a traditionally harvested resource during the construction phase of the Project. Section 10 of the EAR/IS evaluates changes to the quantity and quality of fish habitat and changes to fish populations, including traditionally harvested fish. The potential effects identified include:

• Destruction/loss of fish habitat (i.e., construction of bridges and culverts);
• Harmful alteration and disruption of fish habitat (i.e., placement of materials erosion and sedimentation; accidental spills and air contaminants effects on surface water quality, change in surface water drainage patterns; removal of riparian vegetation; introduction of invasive species);
• Fish access to habitats (i.e., instream construction, culvert visual and debris barriers; potential for beavers to build beaver dams);
• Injury/death of fish (i.e., instream construction, shockwaves from blasting; fish isolation due to dewatering, beaver dam removal; reduced surface water quality due to over-land runoff); and
• Increased fishing activities from public access to fish and fish habitat (i.e., increased access for work crews, public and Webequie community members). The Webequie First Nation IK Study indicated that the Webequie community members expressed worries that the road could lead to an influx of people from the south who might fish indiscriminately (Stantec, 2024).

While fish habitat is anticipated to be preserved in most locations with arch open bottom culverts spanning the entire bankfull width of the watercourses, some destruction of fish habitat will be unavoidable during construction of bridge pier footings in-water (Section 10.5.2.1.1). These effects on fish habitat are limited to the Project footprint, whereas fish habitat is generally abundant, and the effect of the road is not expected throughout the LSA and RSA.

Concerns from the Webequie community included sedimentation from construction activities at watercourses, in part due to bridge and culvert installation, which could adversely affect fish and fish habitat. It is expected that some sediment accumulation may occur at culverts and immediately downstream.

Other potential effects on traditional fishing activities may relate to changing weather patterns. Webequie community members observed a decrease in the quality and quantity of fish populations, which could be attributed to changing weather patterns, which in turn could negatively affect fishing activities.

Additionally, there are concerns about elevated mercury levels in fish populations, which may be exacerbated by the Project (Stantec, 2024). As noted in Section 7.3.2, methylmercury and other water quality concerns (parameters) have been included in the surface water baseline investigation program. During construction phases of the Project, surface water parameters are proposed to be tested again at up and downstream locations from the road.

Vegetation and Wetlands

The Project has the potential to affect plants as a traditionally harvested resource during the construction phase. The potential effects of the Project on the availability, quality and quantity of plants as a traditionally harvested resource is considered in the vegetation and wetlands assessment (Section 11 of the EAR/IS), which evaluates loss or alteration of vegetation communities, species and biodiversity, wetland function, plant species at risk and plant species and communities of concern, and vegetation plant species and communities of traditional importance to Indigenous peoples.

According to the Webequie First Nation IK Study, plant species harvested by Webequie First Nation include but are not limited to blueberry, wild strawberry, raspberry, gooseberry, currant, Saskatoon berry, lowbush cranberry (lingon berry and bog), highbush cranberry (squashberry, mooseberry), crowberry, bearberry, blackberry, blue huckleberry, cherry (pin, choke cherry, sand), hawthorn, juniper, bunchberry, thimbleberry (salmonberry), Labrador tea, weekenz (muskrat root), manoomin (wild rice), chaga, mint, dandelion, wintergreen (teaberry), cedar, maple syrup, willow bark, poplar (cottonwood) inner bark and buds, spruce (black and white) inner bark (Stantec, 2024).

Medicinal plants from the land used by the Webequie community include Labrador tea, cedar, weekenz (muskrat root), beaver root, spruce, pine, birch, dandelion, poplar, tamarack, mint, wintergreen, chaga and beaver willow (Stantec, 2025).

Traditionally, moss has been used for various utilitarian purposes such as diapers, cleaning, insulation and toilet paper. Wood for heating is an important material in the Webequie community as many buildings and homes are heated with wood stoves. Wood is reportedly expensive and not easily procured in the Webequie community as particular stands of trees are required and not easily accessed (AtkinsRéalis, 2022). Another important resource from the land is rocks which have been collected for their medicinal and ceremonial value (Stantec, 2025). Additionally, rock is an important resource as a construction material for operations and maintenance of the Webequie community (Stantec, 2025).

Section 11 reports direct losses and alteration to vegetation communities is limited to the area of the Project Footprint. Due to the nature of the Project, the change will be permanent, and it will result in some fragmentation of vegetation with a number of vegetation patches being encroached upon and/or bisected (Section 11.7.1.1). Similarly, riparian vegetation will be removed during the construction of the roadway and associated watercourse crossings (Section 11.7.1.1). Negative changes to the function of the various wetland vegetation patches within close proximity to the road are expected via potential indirect effects (i.e., potential changes to water regimes, invasive species, sediment deposition, spills etc.). Vegetation that is removed or impacted by construction may hold medicinal, ceremonial, or nutritional value, and their loss can affect cultural practices and knowledge transmission.

Surface Water and Groundwater

The Project has the potential to affect drinking water as a traditionally harvested resource during the construction phase. The potential effects on the availability, quality, and quantity of drinking water are considered using the surface water assessment (Section 7 of the EAR/IS). This assessment evaluates changes in surface water quantity and quality, as well as sediment quality. The potential effects identified include change to surface water drainage patterns (i.e., dewatering, water takings; water discharge; alteration of vegetation coverage and runoff rates and volumes; stream discharge, channel flow depth/water level and velocity from waterbody crossings), surface water quality (i.e., elevated sediment levels in discharge water; accidental spills and leaks; generation of airborne particulate matter), sediment quality (i.e., dewatering and disturbance of subsoils; blasting of rocks and introduction of deleterious substances; deposition and transportation of sediment into waterbodies; accidental spills or leaks to sediment).  

Drinking water directly from lakes and rivers is preferred by some community members, especially around the Webequie First Nation reserve, where spring water sites are located. The taste of lake water is considered better, and community members often bring it back to their community. Participants in the Webequie First Nation IK Study have shared that the water from lakes is safe to drink, although there are ongoing concerns about potential mercury levels due to a tailings pond leak at the Musselwhite Mine, which eventually flows into the Winisk River system (Stantec, 2024).

19.2.1.1.2         Construction activities → Loss of and/or alteration of sites and areas used for traditional harvesting

Hunting

A potential effect of the Project is the loss or diminished use of traditional harvesting sites, which may significantly impact Webequie First Nation’s ability to maintain cultural practices tied to hunting and land stewardship. Community members have expressed concerns that the construction of the road could lead to increased access by non-local individuals, resulting in increased hunting and pressure on local wildlife populations. Additionally, concerns were raised about the potential for increased regulation and enforcement—such as the imposition of moose tags and heightened regulations. The road corridor and associated infrastructure may also alter wildlife movement patterns and increase predation risks, further disrupting traditional harvesting areas. These effect pathways are considered in the assessment of effects on wildlife and wildlife habitat, which is presented in Section 12 of the EAR/IS.

Loss of and/or alteration of sites used for hunting could lead to a loss of access to culturally significant sites and a shift in harvesting patterns, ultimately impacting the community’s connection to the land and the transmission of traditional knowledge.

Fishing

Fishing has always been and continues to be a significant activity among community members of Webequie First Nation. Fish have been plentiful for their ancestors and community members, serving as an important food source that is available year-round (Stantec, 2024).  The construction of the proposed road has the potential to result in the loss or alteration of traditional fishing sites that are essential to Webequie First Nation for subsistence, cultural continuity, and intergenerational knowledge transfer. Waterbodies may be directly or indirectly affected by construction activities such as land clearing, watercourse crossings, and changes to local hydrology. Disturbances can degrade aquatic habitats, increase sedimentation, and introduce contaminants, all of which may negatively impact fish populations and spawning grounds. These environmental changes can reduce the availability and quality of fish species traditionally harvested, affecting food security and cultural practices and affecting areas where Webequie First Nation traditionally harvest fish. These effect pathways are considered in the assessment of effects on fish and fish habitat, which is presented in Section 10 of the EAR/IS. These impacts may disrupt traditional harvesting patterns and reduce the community’s ability to maintain a strong connection to culturally significant fishing areas.

Trapping

The Project Footprint overlaps with registered trapline areas GE324, GE318, GE222, GE155 and GE160. Webequie First Nation utilizes but does not rigidly follow the trapline system. The traditional territory system is used by a family group that is based on a ‘dohdem’ (clan) system, where each group would use a particular area to harvest and rotate on a seasonal basis. In addition, while the family or clan system knew each trapping areas were located, “anyone could harvest anywhere” (Stantec, 2024).

The potential construction-related effect of the Project on trapping identified by the Webequie community through this trapping area and/or registered traplines may:

• Disrupt community or family group’s trapping practices;
• Intensify issues with the regulatory registered trapline system, which are considered to be culturally repressive (Sutherland, 2017) and Tsuji/Long 2017 cited in Stantec, 2024);
• Increased trapping occurring from non-community members.
• Decreased abundance of furbearers due to loss or alteration of habitat.
• Affect the beaver population as “[e]ver since trapping declined in the community, there have been more beavers in the territory” (Stantec, 2024).

Plant Gathering

Webequie First Nation harvests plants for food, medicinal and utilitarian purposes (Stantec, 2024). Berry picking is commonly practiced by Webequie community members (Stantec, 2025), which is often in rocky areas versus muskeg.  The community customarily seeds and harvests wild rice in three locations. Other growing takes place in the community, although not currently widespread (Stantec, 2025).

The Webequie First Nation RIA report identified potential adverse effects to harvested resources due to the disturbance of vegetation and altering critical habitat such as eskers and muskeg (Stantec, 2024). There are several eskers that are important to the Webequie community along the Project right of way (ROW) (Stantec, 2025). Community members described these eskers as long snake-like formations of rock and sand that stand out on the landscape and can be several kilometres in length.

The Project will cross eskers and some eskers may be used as a source of aggregate for road construction and operation and maintenance. This is a concern to the Webequie community since the esker formations can be important habitat for wildlife, especially small animals and migrating birds, as well as plants used for food and medicinal purposes. In particular, the disturbance of plants in these areas was identified as a concern, and it was emphasized that the Webequie community must be involved in finalizing the exact locations of eskers and aggregate source areas.

The Webequie First Nation IK Study includes areas of berry picking and medicinal plant gathering occurring throughout the Webequie First Nation traditional territory, within and outside the boundaries of the Webequie reserve (Stantec, 2024). Wild rice harvesting locations have also been identified, as well as areas where the Webequie community’s gardens have been located. Community members also emphasized the widespread availability of medicines throughout Webequie First Nation’s traditional territory (Stantec, 2024).

Vegetation clearing may cause the direct loss of harvesting areas (Stantec, 2025). Vegetation clearing for the construction of the road will remove plants used for food and medicine. Although it was noted by a participant of the Webequie First Nation IK Study that blueberry may grow in areas of increased light where trees have been removed (Stantec, 2024). The Webequie community has indicated that it wishes to have access to lumber and brush to use for firewood (Stantec, 2024).

As noted in Section 17.3.3.1 of the EAR/IS, a change in air quality can be a major direct determinant of health. Air emissions and dust from the Project will be largely associated with the combustion of diesel fuel and gasoline from land mobile equipment, heavy duty trucks, light duty vehicles during the construction and operations phases of the Project. Webequie community members identified that the Project has the potential to spread dust on berries, plants and waters within the LSA during the construction phase and operations phase (Stantec, 2025).

The Project health impact assessment (HIA) noted the effects of contamination on traditional food sources by construction and operations phase emissions are an important factor in assessing food security. As part of the HIA, the human health risk assessment (HHRA) identified possible exposure pathways for contaminants of concern to adequately characterize potential biophysical risks to human health (IAAC, 2020.). However, the HHRA concluded that increases in Project-related contaminants to country foods items are not expected to be appreciable.

Drinking Water

Many Webequie community members collect drinking water from Winisk Lake, although there have been concerns in recent years about increased cases of cancer in the community (Stantec, 2024). Webequie community members shared that Indigenous people in areas south of the community, such as southern Ontario, used to drink water from the lakes just like people in Webequie do now. However, there is a concern that in the future, Webequie First Nation may not be able to drink lake water anymore as outside influences push further north (Stantec, 2025).

Webequie community members access spring water sources throughout the study area including two sites within the LSA, 11 spring water sources within the RSA and seven more outside of the RSA (Stantec, 2024).  Webequie community members have expressed specific concerns about the potential impacts of the Project on a spring water site at the proposed Aggregate Source Pile 2. This site is also considered a ceremonial area (Stantec, 2024). Participants have noted that although Aggregate Source Pile 2 was moved in an earlier planning phase of the EAR/IS preparation to accommodate the spring water site, ongoing concerns still exist in the community that the ceremonial site will be affected by the road development, along with other drinking water sources (Stantec, 2024).

19.2.1.1.3         Construction activities → Loss of and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for traditional harvesting

The Project may impact Indigenous traditional use of lands and resources, primarily through the loss or alteration of access to areas used for traditional harvesting. These effects could arise from changes to trails, waterways, and habitation sites, as well as from increased activity in the region.

Access may be disrupted by the destruction or modification of trails, installation of barriers such as gates or fences, and increased noise or visual disturbances from traffic and construction. These changes can affect the ability to engage in traditional practices and alter the experience of being on the land. Additionally, the Project may increase access to traditional harvesting areas for non-resident workers, visitors, and Webequie community members, potentially leading to increased pressure on these resources.

Trails and Access

The Project has the potential to reduce the number of trails and access to traditional harvesting sites and areas, however, this is expected to be localized to the Project Footprint.

Waterways

Water is “the most precious element” and is “a gift from Keyshay-Manidoo (Creator)” which is a cultural and spiritual necessity for all beings. Waterways are “cultural monuments” as ancestral travel routes that connect people to their traditional area and to neighbouring communities (Webequie First Nation, 2019). The construction of the Project will include 31 waterbody crossings, varying in width from 1.3 m to 253 m and will be constructed with different structures including bridges and culverts. As discussed in Section 4.3.2.2 Waterbody Crossings – Bridges and Culverts describe the water crossings and proposed structure type for each crossing. Eight waterbody crossings were identified as navigable that were historically or currently used based on consultation with Webequie First Nation. These eight waterbody crossings were examined, and structural design parameters were included to allow minimum clearances for small motorized or unmotorized watercraft passage.

The use of water-based travel routes or “waterways” carries socio-cultural and spiritual importance for Webequie First Nation as “[w]aterways are cultural monuments due to their longstanding use as ancestral travel routes that connect Webequie People to their traditional area and neighbouring communities” (Webequie First Nation, 2019). Their frozen surfaces in winter also serve as winter roads to deliver essential goods and services to the Webequie community. The Webequie First Nation IK Study provides a compilation of mapped land-based and water-based travel routes that are used across the territory for traditional purposes (Stantec, 2024).

The Webequie First Nation IK Study noted that there are 1,050 travel route segments which includes 60 that “intersect” the LSA, 566 in the RSA and 424 outside of the RSA.

Webequie First Nation land users and harvesters may be affected by Project construction activities regarding waterways crossings which may impede access to locations, which were previously travelled by boat/ watercrafts during construction phase. During operations phase, due to the limited activities which will involve repairs and maintenance only, there are less effects predicted to occur regarding usage of traditional waterways.

Habitation Sites

The habitation sites and areas are known to be tied to specific family groups and clans and passed down through the paternal lines of each generation. These locations are used frequently by community members as “they [would] access their family cabins at least once every two weeks” (Stantec, 2024).

Webequie First Nation IK Study indicated the following:

• Outside the RSA, there are 9 cabins, 1 campground, 9 camp sites, 6 historical camps, 1 icehouse, 3 tent frame and 3 tourist camps;
• Inside the RSA there are 23 cabins, 2 tent frame, 8 historical camps and 12 camp sites; and
• Inside the LSA and Project Footprint there is one camp site.

A detailed review of the camp sites located within the Project Footprint is required to determine options to prevent or minimize direct adverse effects of construction.

During the construction phase, potential effects to habitation sites may include vegetation removal, fragmentation of landscape, and disruptions in access. However, WSR during operations phase will provide a convenient mode of access, making travel to the habitation sites easier.

19.2.1.1.4         Operations and maintenance activities → Loss and/or alteration of lands and resources for traditional harvesting → Availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

The Project has the potential to affect wildlife as a traditionally harvested resource during the operations phase of the Project. Similar to the construction phase, effects pathways considered quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources may be affected by habitat loss/destruction (i.e., vegetation removal, hydrological changes in riparian habitat or aquatic feeding habitat), habitat alteration/degradation (i.e., dust deposition, invasive species), alteration of wildlife movement (i.e., sensory disturbances, barriers such as fencing, avoidance of open spaces) and wildlife injury/death (i.e., greater predation on road, greater access to hunting, collisions, expansion of deer bringing disease). For the full assessment of the potential effects of the Project on wildlife and wildlife habitat in relation to traditionally harvested resources, see Section 12, and for wildlife species at risk (i.e., Caribou) see Section 13 of the EAR/IS.

Moose

During the operations phase, there will be periodic repairs of the roadway and clearing of the ROW, but these will result in disturbance of the same areas as development areas from construction, and will likely cause no, or negligible additional effects for loss/destruction of moose habitat (Section 12.3.2.1). Operations activities could cause sensory disturbance, such as noise, dust, light, smell and vibration, leading to changes in habitat use and migration of moose. Additionally, the road may lead to direct and indirect mortality stemming from vehicular traffic. As indicated for the construction phase, there is a concern in the Webequie community that wildlife such as moose will be disturbed by the noise of the road operation (Stantec, 2025). During operations, due to low traffic levels, little change is expected from dust deposition, and moose are expected to habituate to low traffic noise and light levels. The net effects regarding moose movement and injury/death of moose are considered to be low as a result of the Project (Section 12.3.1). As per Section 12.7.1, predation risk for moose may increase due to improved access along the ROW and access roads. However, some of this will be mitigated as access roads will be reclaimed and blocked; and the major predator of moose, grey wolves, avoid areas of active human use. As a result, the significance is expected to be low for the operation phases of the Project.

Caribou

The assessment on Caribou (Section 13) determined that road operations are unlikely to result in additional loss/ destruction of Caribou habitat areas, as regular maintenance will involve managing re-growth of vegetation along the ROW. Noise and light from vehicles travelling on the road as a result of operations will impact Caribou. It is predicted that the road will mainly be used during daylight hours, minimizing effects on Caribou habitat between dusk and dawn; however, road noise, scent, and other sensory disturbances generated during daylight hours have the potential to affect Caribou habitats located up to several kilometres from the ROW. The predicted effect of the Project on Caribou habitat alteration and degradation during the operations phase from habitat loss/destruction is expected to be lower in magnitude than the construction phase. However, the effects of alteration in the movement of Caribou are anticipated to be similarly moderate in magnitude during the operations phase, while the effects of injury or death due to collisions with vehicles are anticipated to be low in magnitude (Section 13).

Furbearers

In terms of habitat alteration, some Project areas are likely to moderately benefit beavers as they will result in the creation of early successional habitat during the operation phase, including deciduous shrubs, which are preferred by beavers for their browse availability (Section 12.5.2.1.3). Changes to hydrology could also occur during the operations phase due to culvert and drainage maintenance and temporary blockage of flow from woody debris at waterbody crossings. The residual effects on furbearer habitat are present; however, upon application of mitigation measures, the significance of the effects is considered to be generally moderate to negligible (Section 12.7.2).

Birds

The assessment of effects of the Project on birds was conducted, and it was determined that during the operations phase, the magnitude of potential effects will be low or negligible, with the exception of the potential effects of accidental spills and leaks, which could be high. As per Section 12.4.6, mitigation measures will be implemented to prevent or limit the effects of the Project on birds and other wildlife. This will include routing to avoid habitat such as mixed and deciduous forests, raptors nests, aquatic habitat, including no stopover or staging areas and setbacks near sensitive areas.

Fish and Fish Habitat

As per Section 10.5.2.1.1, destruction of fish habitat is not expected as a result of roadway operations. Repairs to the roadway and water crossing structures may be required over time, but these are not expected to result in destruction of fish habitat. As described in Section 10.4.1, similar to the effects of the construction phase, there could be effects on water quality during the operations phase of the Project from accidental spills and emissions of air contaminants, fugitive dust, and greenhouse gases. The magnitude of the effects of the Project on fish and fish habitat during the operations phase due to changes in water quality are predicted to be low, and not significant. According to the significance criteria defined in Section 10.6.1, the predicted net effects are not considered significant.

Vegetation and Wetlands

As indicated in Section 11.7.1, with respect to loss or alteration of wetland, the anticipated effects on vegetation and wetlands are indirect ones related to operational activities such as repairs to infrastructure and management of snow and vegetation. Potentially no direct loss of vegetation units is expected, and mitigation measures should either completely eliminate or minimize these indirect effects to negligible levels, resulting in no significant alteration of vegetation classes within the study area. During the operations phase of the project, the only effects on locally rare vegetation communities are indirect effects associated with repairs to the roadway and water crossing structures that may be required over time.

Surface Water and Groundwater

Changes in surface water quantity can potentially occur due to alterations in surface water drainage patterns and flows during the operations phase of the Project. These effects are largely covered under the construction phase mentioned above and described in detail in Section 7. There are no predicted significant effects on surface water quantity and quality, and sediment quality during the operations phase, with the effects being low in magnitude.

19.2.1.1.5         Operations and maintenance activities → Loss of and/or alteration of sites and areas used for traditional harvesting

Operations and maintenance activities → Loss of and/or alteration of access to lands and resources for traditional harvesting

The Project will provide year-round road access to areas of Webequie First Nation’s traditional territory from the Webequie community.  Webequie First Nation community members anticipate that the Project will provide “easier access to the traditional areas for community members, such as areas where moose and gooseare harvested” (Stantec, 2024). Increased access will also provide potential for the creation of new travel routes, as one Webequie First Nation IK Study participant noted that they would “likely build trails along the route to access other spring water sites, lakes and rivers” (Stantec, 2024).

The effects of road use on hunting preferred species are generally positive and include:

• Improved access to hunting areas;
• Potential improvements in the number of households and/or household members participating in hunting;
• Improved access and connection to the land;
• Potential improvements in frequency and/or duration of hunting as the delivery of hunting supplies can be sent to a base cabin noting that one participant in the Webequie First Nation IK Study shared that “families can now set up a base at one cabin and depart to several different nearby locations by snowmobile to increase their harvest” (Stantec, 2024); and
• Potential improvement to community health and well-being it provides connection to the landscape and helps maintain community and kinship ties and values.

The community well-being study (Webequie First Nation, 2014) noted that the participation rates for hunting were done by 70% of households in 2014 with at least one member of a household participating in that activity. The use of the road would allow for greater accessibility to residents and non-residents to Prime Lake, Billinger Lake and Ekwan River, which were identified as areas used for traditional harvesting in the Webequie First Nation IK Study.

The potential adverse effects during the operation and maintenance of the road may alter the harvesting practices in the following ways:

• Changes in the Webequie community’s practice to observe wildlife and adapt their hunting tactics;
• Increased conflict, tension, misunderstandings with enforcement and/or non-Indigenous harvesters;
• Imposition of new government and enforcement rules;
• Reduced quality and/or quantity or harvested wildlife and plant resources or concerns related to increased competition for wildlife resources;
• Reduced preparing, utilizing or teaching practices to identify and use different parts of the animal for sustenance, such as making nokihaygun (a type of pemmican), well-being, healing, health aids; and
• Introduction of invasive or non-native species.

Trapping

The registered trapline areas of Webequie First Nation that overlap the Project Footprint may be fragmented by the use of the road, as traffic is expected year-round. The road may act to confine trappers within one part of their trapline or make accessing the trapline on the other side of the WSR difficult.Table 19‑12 shows the estimated registered traplines, their size (ha) and the sizes of areas north and south of the WSR.

Table 19‑12:     Registered Traplines Potentially Fragmented by Road Use

Based on the effects assessed for vegetation and wetlands anticipated for the operations phase, it is anticipated that only indirect effects associated with maintenance and operation of the WSR. There is no anticipated direct loss of vegetation and subsequent to implementation of mitigation measures these effects are anticipated to be minimized to negligible level or prevented. There is no estimated significant alteration of vegetation classes (Section 11.7.1.2).

Repairs and maintenance to water crossings may be required over the operation and maintenance phase, which will include repairs to bridges, culverts, ditches, road surfaces, as well as snow and vegetation management.

This area is described as “the lungs of the earth” and disturbing it without stewardship may “cause it to become unstable” (Stantec, 2024). The experience and connection to land relates to teachings and the Creator and the related principles may also be drawn into the new experience of operation and maintenance activities. It may change the relationship of well-being and healing journeys and cultural traditions and practices at cultural and spiritual locations.

Study participants reported that if the Webequie Supply Road is built, community members will likely build trails along the route to access other spring water sites, lakes and rivers that are currently inaccessible to most people (Stantec, 2024).

Another participant expressed concern that the Webequie Supply Road would bring in “outside activity, outside foot traffic on our lands with regards to fishing; with regards to timber; with regards to our waters.” They said, “I’m not sure if it’s going to be good for our people” (Stantec, 2024).

The use of the road during the operations phase may provide increased access for non-resident visitors into areas of the Webequie First Nation traditional territory. Webequie community members identified potential adverse effects from hunting from roadway allowances, increased policing of the Webequie First Nation’s hunting practices by government regulators, harvesting, fishing, trapping, imposition of wildlife tagging, other hunting regulations that would conflict or undermine Indigenous responsibilities to maintain wildlife in the territory (Stantec, 2024). An influx of non-resident visitors from the south may lead to reduced availability, quantity and quality of traditional resources.

19.2.1.2         Local Study Area: Other LSA Communities

The potential effects on Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes on other LSA communities are described below, which considers the following communities:

• Attawapiskat First Nation;
• Eabametoong First Nation;
• Kasabonika Lake First Nation;
• Marten Falls First Nation;
• Neskantaga First Nation;
• Nibinamik First Nation; and
• Weenusk First Nation.

19.2.1.2.1         Construction activities → Loss and/or alteration of lands and resources for traditional harvesting → Availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources

The construction phase of the Project—including vegetation clearing, road building, and development of aggregate source areas—may affect the availability, quality, and quantity of traditionally harvested resources such as wildlife, fish, plants, medicinal herbs, and water. While these effects are expected to be most pronounced within the Project Footprint, they may also influence broader ecological patterns that extend into the LSA and RSA.

The predicted effects on availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources, based on the effects assessments contained in biophysical effects assessment sections of the EAR/IS, are presented in further detail in Section 19.3.1.1.

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

One fish and wildlife area were mapped in the Study Area by Marten Falls First Nation (Suslop, 2024). Community members from Marten Falls First Nation expressed concern that the Project could negatively impact moose and caribou populations—species that are not only vital for sustenance but also central to cultural identity. Participants emphasized the importance of protecting the species – the “negative impact on the health and size of animal population, particularly the moose”; therefore, “[i]t is critical that species like moose and Caribou are protected as much as possible (Suslop Inc., 2024). One participant recounted opposing a previous development that threatened a key moose habitat, underscoring the cultural and ecological sensitivity of such areas. The project was “going to go through a place where there is a lot of moose every Fall season, where they mate, where they calf, and I had to put my two cents on that. You can’t go there, I [said]. Those are my concerns.” Furthermore, the Marten Falls First Nation IK Study identified that “if certain species disappear (e.g., moose, Caribou, sturgeon), then Marten Falls First Nation cultural identity may be impacted as well” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

The Marten Falls First Nation IK Study also indicated their concern related to the Project’s effects on Caribou migration. Caribou is important for hunting, though some Marten Falls First Nation members do not hunt as they believe they are part of the Caribou Clan. Marten Falls First Nation also voiced concerns about how wildlife will respond to changes to the land and water, which may affect their health, population, size, and overall well-being (Suslop Inc., 2024). If the Project causes changes to the health of the Caribou or wildlife populations, it will affect how community members can harvest them. The potential disappearance of certain species, including Caribou, could alter the cultural identity Marten Falls First Nation (Suslop Inc., 2024).

One of the concerns noted in the Marten Falls IK study regarding LRU was disruption to migratory routes of Caribou (one fish and wildlife area identified which was stated as being used by Caribou for migration). Some community members have concerned that development will hinder their ability to use the land for these practices, which are crucial for maintaining balance, sustenance, culture, and identity (Suslop Inc., 2024).

The potential for perceived undesirable change to Caribou migration and calving is presented in Weenusk First Nation IK Study. While the resources in the traditional territory are considered to be “plentiful enough to sustain the community, and there is minimal concern about the quality of these resources”, some Weenusk First Nation IK participants indicated that they are concerned with Caribou that “they’re starting to decline” and having less fat (MNP LLP, n.d.). Fifteen Weenusk IK Study participants shared that they consume at least half of their diet from harvested foods. Harvested food sustains the community members. These foods are “generally more preferred” and are harvested year-round. Changes that may alter or impact Caribou migration routes (shown in the Traditional Ecological Knowledge map of Weenusk First Nation IK Study) may also lead to changes in the Weenusk First Nation harvesting, experience, availability, and quantity and/or quality of the species. The Caribou migration may shift as a result of development potential over-harvesting by non-Indigenous or non-Weenusk community members and other factors external to the Project. For example, Caribou have been moving further inland due to climate change and sudden thaw, which “ultimately changes the availability of Caribou in Weenusk’s traditional areas” making them difficult and dangerous to find (MNP LLP, n.d.). Protecting Caribou migration and birthing grounds may allow this culturally important species to be available in the future since calves and female cows are not harvested in the Spring season “to ensure the species can reproduce” (MNP LLP, n.d.). If a female Caribou is caught, a ceremony is conducted. This aligns with stewardship, so that “whatever we’re harvesting … harvested species] will come back again and again” (MNP LLP, n.d.). Part of this is to teach the younger generations about harvesting and also over harvesting, so the species can continue to sustain them.

Fish and Fish Habitat

The Marten Falls First Nation IK Study participants identified their concern that waterbody crossings could have a negative effect on fish, e.g., trout. Fishing was carried out as a year-round practice and had an important role in sustaining Marten Falls First Nation. One of their concerns is the disruption to fish habitat would “change, the fish would change location if, if their habitats are disturbed because I think it’s, I think it’s the trees that feed the rivers and [they] feed the rivers and the fish and everything else that’s in it.” Another participant shared an example from a reservation in Red Lake, Minnesota where they have a “dam [that] blocked off the river, but the river s[t]ill goes through. It’s not a big dam, it’s just – people go there [to] fish and you can see the fish jumping … I think what they should have done when they built the mines up north – at the bottom of the dam by the riverbed, you should have left an opening for the fish to swim back and forth to their spawning grounds.”

The Weenusk First Nation IK Study described the experience of the effects of shallow or shallower water levels on fish populations (MNP LLP, n.d.). One participant noted that “[w]alleye used to be plentiful. We used to fish every creek and we’d get something … how many we get, maybe 50 …” and another participant added that “[t]he number [of fish] has changed, and I think it’s because the river system has changed as well … The river system has become shallower every year and it’s hard for the fish to be … in the waters where it’s shallow”.

Vegetation and Wetlands

No areas of plants and berries for food harvesting are located in the LSA as shown in Medicine Gathering Sites map of Weenusk IK Study (MNP LLP, N.D.). Cloudberries, cranberries, and blueberries are harvested closer to Peawanuck. Teachings about medicine is a concern related to plant gathering for medicinal use, as one participant shared that knowledge was lost as his father was a residential school survivor and was told “not to believe our parents”. The loss of knowledge transfer to younger generations is also noticed as “[old people] used to know where to get [medicine] … now I don’t think our generation they know anything about this [medicine] except maybe a few.” (MNP LLP, N.D.). The pickerel and walleye fishing area covers the area downstream of the Project along the Winisk River (outside the RSA) 3,481 ha located in the LSA and 68.6 ha in the Project Footprint.

Surface and Groundwater

Attawapiskat First Nation members identified concerns that changes to hydrology may alter drainage patterns, which will have implications for soils, vegetation, and wildlife. Attawapiskat First Nation is concerned that “surface water” is one of the environmental components that is being evaluated in isolation, without looking at linkages with other parts of the ecosystem. The community has highlighted concerns such as potential effects to the Ekwan River and Attawapiskat River which are heavily used by Attawapiskat traditional land users, regional effects of the road on water, fish and wildlife and on downstream communities, potential effects to peatlands and disruptions to drainage for fish and wildlife outside of the Project footprint, potential effects on the subsistence economy as this sustains Attawapiskat First Nation culturally, physically, spiritually, and socially, potential effects of contamination of heavy metals including chromium and mercury methylation and cumulative effects (Attawapiskat First Nation, 2020).  

As noted in Section 7.3.2, methylmercury and other water quality concerns (parameters) have been included in the surface water baseline investigation program.

Cumulative Effects and Cultural Impacts

Kasabonika Lake First Nation expressed concerns regarding the cumulative impacts of development activities in the region, related to the Ring of Fire. Kasabonika Lake First Nation recommended a co-management and environmental monitoring group. They noted that co-management would be an important step to self-determination as they will all be impacted. Social, cultural and economic activities will be affected due to the Project, these could impact asserted or established Section 35(1) rights.

Neskantaga First Nation noted that preliminary research completed by them concluded that there are likely historic trails that intersect the proposed Project (Peerla, 2021a). There could be potential impacts from blasting on fish and aquatic resources, including incubating eggs and resident and migrating fish. Required buffer zones and timing windows will not mitigate all impacts to aquatic resources, including several species of resident fish (Peerla, 2021b). The community indicated that Neskantaga’s land use options will be permanently altered by the Project as the Webequie Supply Road will bisect Neskantaga’s lands and forever change the options for ensuring the continued practice of Neskantaga’s way of life on Neskantaga territory. Neskantaga First Nation noted that the project directly impacts Neskantaga First Nation’s traplines and falls within Neskantaga’s Area of Interest. Neskantaga First Nation has a sacred, legal obligation to protect, defend and steward the water, land, air, and resources of their territory. From Neskantaga’s perspective, they are uniquely vulnerable to the impact of the Supply Road and induced development of the entire Ring of Fire region, and will bear the burden of significant risks arising from the roads and mines.

No areas of plants and berries for food harvesting are located in the LSA as shown in Medicine Gathering Sites map of Weenusk IK Study (MNP LLP, N.D.). Cloudberries, cranberries, and blueberries are harvested closer to Peawanuck. Teachings about medicine is a concern related to plant gathering for medicinal use as one participant shared that knowledge was lost as his father was a residential school survivor and was told “not to believe our parents”. The loss of knowledge transfer to younger generations is also noticed as “[Elders] used to know where to get [medicine] … now I don’t think our generation, they know anything about this [medicine] except maybe a few.” (MNP LLP, N.D.). The pickerel and walleye fishing area covers the area downstream of the Project along the Winisk River (outside the RSA) 3,481 ha located in the LSA and 68.6 ha in the Project Footprint.

19.2.1.2.2         Construction activities → Loss of and/or alteration of sites and areas used for traditional harvesting

The construction phase of the Project—including vegetation clearing, road building, and development of aggregate source areas—has the potential to result in the loss or alteration of sites and areas traditionally used for harvesting. While these effects are expected to be concentrated within the Project Footprint, they may still impact culturally significant harvesting locations and traditional land use practices. The predicted effects on sites and areas used for traditional harvesting, based on the effects assessments contained in biophysical effects assessment sections of the EAR/IS, are presented in further detail in Section 19.3.1.1.

Disruption of Traditional Harvesting Areas, Overlapping Traditional Territories and Unidentified Harvesting Sites

Kasabonika Lake First Nation indicated that they share traditional territory with Webequie First Nation and actively use these shared lands for hunting and fishing (Archaeological Services Inc., 2021). The Webequie First Nation CBLUP denotes an area where there is shared use and interest with the Kasabonika Lake First Nation traditional territory (Webequie First Nation, 2019). However, this area boundary has not been shared with the Project team, and effects on the traditional territory cannot be assessed.

Marten Falls First Nation has culturally significant and sensitive sites throughout its traditional land. Pym Island, located southeast of the eastern terminus of the WSR has historically been utilized for traditional purposes including, but not limited to goose and moose hunting. There is potential for the WSR to impact the movement of species on the landscape and traditional hunting activities in the highly valued Pym Island area and other nearby locations (Marten Falls First Nation 2020). There is also the likelihood of burial sites, ceremonial features, sacred sites and important landscape features in the Project area, and there is the potential to impact these sites, although the exact geographical location is unknown (Suslop Inc., 2024). The ability for some Marten Falls First Nation community members to connect with the land may be altered by the changes that the Project may cause. Changes to lands may also affect the connection to land in terms of healing and well-being. One participant in the Marten Falls First Nation IK Study shared the following:

When people from here – when they want to get away from the city, they have a camp or somewhere to get away from things, which is a good thing. You have to be in tune with nature.

It’s a real healing place to be. That part there is the times I get scared, that I’ll lose, that we’ll lose that up there.

That connection with nature … It’s a very special place. It’s just like your place of paradise.”

According to the Webequie First Nation CBLUP, Neskantaga First Nation and Webequie First Nation share a common history of movement and Webequie First Nation, Marten Falls First Nation and Neskantaga First Nation have overlapping land use. Neskantaga First Nation has indicated direct impacts to their traditional territories by the WSR project (location not provided to WSR) (Archaeological Services Inc., 2021). A priority for Neskantaga First Nation is to minimize overlap and impact of the WSR on historic places, trails, portages, travel routes, sacred and burial places and habitations (Peerla, 2021a). At the time of this EAR/IS, these have not been identified to the Project team.

During engagement and consultation phase, Neskantaga First Nation expressed concerns of the Project as it directly impacts Neskantaga traplines and falls within Neskantaga’s Area of Interest (Moonias, 2019). Neskantaga First Nation noted that they have a sacred, legal obligation to protect, defend and steward the water, land, air, and resources of their territory. They outlined that the Neskantaga First Nation is uniquely vulnerable to the impact of the Project and induced development of the entire Ring of Fire region and will bear the burden of significant risks arising from the roads and mines. Neskantaga First Nation expressed concerns regarding the cumulative impacts of development activities in the region, related to the Ring of Fire and these could impact asserted or established Section 35(1) rights (Peerla, 2021a).

During engagement and consultation with Nibinamik First Nation, it was noted that there is no current baseline environmental information available for Nibinamik First Nation land and stated that a comparison between future benefits or impacts on the land cannot be made without baseline information (AtkinsRéalis Inc., 2023a).

As per the information provided in in the Weenusk First Nation IK Study for “harvesting and land use data that extended broadly over the Weenusk territory” (MNP LLP, n.d.), the amalgamated area of use included the entire 886,669 ha of the RSA and also extended beyond it. The Project Footprint overlaps with 548 ha and will reduce the lands available for harvesting and traditional land use. The Weenusk IK Study participants noted the following (MNP LLP, n.d.):

• “If they’re going to be doing that Ring of Fire, I know it’s [going to] affect our water [and] the animals … water contamination is big; and
• It’s going to impact the community regardless of how far some people say we’re safe distance, but … that spring run off is going to carry … the contaminants through the water system. “

The Weenusk First Nation IK Study identified types of hunting, fishing, transportation, and TEK sites in the LSA and RSA (MNP LLP, n.d.) however no trapping, berry or plant gathering sites were identified in the LSA and RSA.
Table 19‑13 shows the number of sites in the LSA that may be potentially affected by WSR construction activities.

Table 19‑13:     Sites used for Traditional Activities in the LSA, Weenusk IK Study

Source: MNP LLP, n.d.

19.2.1.2.3         Construction activities → Loss of and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for traditional harvesting

The construction of the Project is expected to alter access to traditional harvesting areas, particularly through the development of roads and waterbody crossings. These changes may influence how Indigenous communities reach and use lands and resources that are vital to their cultural and subsistence practices.

For Weenusk First Nation and the community of Peawanuck, the Winisk River watershed—including Winisk Lake and other waterbodies crossed by the Project—is central to traditional harvesting. “Ultimately, the waters in Weenusk’s traditional areas are a primary aspect that supports Weenusk way of life” as the water systems support resources for fish, wildlife, and vegetation and also travel through the territory to connect Weenusk community members to their traditional territory. Any disruption to these water systems could affect both the physical access to harvesting areas and the cultural and spiritual connection to the land.

For Neskantaga First Nation, traplines located within the RSA are an important part of traditional harvesting. Community members have expressed concern that the Project could affect their ability to continue trapping, due to potential changes in the availability, quality, and quantity of resources. Increased access to these areas—by both community members and non-Indigenous users—may also lead to greater pressure on wildlife populations and disrupt traditional practices (Neskantaga First Nation, 2020).

The Project may also increase accessibility to fishing locations, potentially leading to increased fishing pressure. While the effects are predicted to be limited to the Project Footprint and LSA, they may still influence the sustainability of fish populations and the ability of community members to harvest them.

19.2.1.2.4         Operations and maintenance activities → Loss and/or alteration of lands and resources for traditional harvesting → Availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources

The operations phase of the Project will involve activities such as road use, operation, maintenance and repair of the road and aggregate pit operation. The operations phase may affect the availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources within the Project Footprint. While the LSA and RSA are not expected to experience a similar level of biophysical changes as the Project Footprint, localized impacts may still influence traditional harvesting practices and resources. The predicted effects on availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources, based on the effects assessments contained in biophysical effects assessment sections of the EAR/IS, are presented in further detail in Section 19.3.1.1.

Environmental Contamination and Resource Quality

Marten Falls First Nation has raised concerns about the introduction of contaminants into the environment during road operations (Suslop Inc., 2024). These include risks of water contamination from industrial dust, litter, chemicals, and oil spills. A particular concern is the potential for fuel spills—such as from a tipped gasoline truck—which could cause “irreversible” damage to wildlife habitats, aquatic species, and drinking water sources.

Dust generated by heavy truck traffic is another major concern. Community members noted that dust can affect fish species like sturgeon, which are highly sensitive to environmental changes. Increased dust levels may also degrade air and water quality, impacting both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems that support traditional harvesting.

Sensory Disturbance and Wildlife Displacement

Noise and vibration from road traffic and maintenance activities may disturb wildlife and disrupt traditional harvesting. As one community member explained, unfamiliar vibrations can create fear and trauma—not only for people but for all living beings. These disturbances may alter animal behavior, making them more difficult to locate and harvest.

Caribou, a culturally significant and endangered species, are particularly vulnerable (Suslop Inc., 2024). Caribou are endangered species and require to “be protected as much as possible” and potential loss or disappearance of Caribou may impact Marten Falls First Nation culture and identity (Suslop Inc., 2024). Marten Falls First Nation expressed concern that road use could disrupt caribou migration routes. Sensory disturbances, increased predator access (e.g., wolves), and competition from other species (e.g., moose) may alter caribou movement patterns. Additionally, the risk of vehicle collisions with caribou is a concern, although the wildlife assessment (Section 13.6.1) predicted a low likelihood of injury or death after mitigation measures are applied.

Attawapiskat First Nation also voiced concerns about the effects of dust on caribou herds, particularly in the western portion of their territory (Archaeological Services Inc., 2021).

Some of the community members who participated in the Marten Falls First Nation IK study are concerned with the effects of dust from industrial traffic on sturgeon as “they are sensitive to changes in their environment or habitat.” Additional comments on road use also included the following:

• “The roads and all that stuff, it is going to change. It is going to change everything. You know, we’re gonna have more pollution and maybe less, less fish … because they would be polluted.”
• “The dust from those things … it’s humungous … If you’re going to have about 50 big trucks going up and down those roads every day, I can just imagine how much dust that’s going to make … that’s one of my biggest concerns … so I can see that as a problem for wildlife”

19.2.1.2.5         Operations and maintenance activities → Loss of and/or alteration of sites and areas used for traditional harvesting

During the operations phase of the Project, ongoing use and maintenance of the road may contribute to the loss or alteration of sites traditionally used by Indigenous communities for harvesting. These impacts are not only physical but also deeply cultural and psychological, affecting how communities’ access, experience, and relate to their traditional territories.

“Freedom” was also another term that ties into the experience and connection with land. It is a core aspect of traditional harvesting. Concern that the development will incur more regulations and controls, that “the roads will bring more rules and restrictions around where members can go, what type of activities they can engage in, and so on” (Suslop Inc., 2024). This experience of restrictions to access their traditional territory would be comparable to the trauma of “residential schools” or “prison” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

The fear of surveillance and enforcement—rooted in past experiences of government control—continues to shape how some community members approach traditional harvesting. A parent of one participant in the Marten Falls First Nation IK Study participant’s parents who were so afraid of MNR that they would whisper at night to make plans to set their fishing nets and collect them before they could be seen in the morning, “before the planes start flying. That’s psychological warfare. We got to get out of that way of thinking” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Pre-construction approval of the WSR may also raise the perception of additional infrastructure and development which would allow outsider influences from poachers to government rules and regulations that will restrict and challenge the experience of place and being on the land, which is also one source of healing for Marten Falls First Nation members, as the community is “just beginning to learn to heal from [past trauma]” and emphasize that their connection to nature makes their territory a “real healing place to be” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

19.2.1.2.6         Operations and maintenance activities → Loss of and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for traditional harvesting

During the operations phase, the Project may alter access to lands and resources traditionally used by Indigenous communities for harvesting. While the Project may facilitate more convenient travel, it also raises concerns about increased external access, competition for resources, and changes to the cultural landscape.

For Weenusk First Nation, the road is expected to provide easier access into their traditional territory for non-resident hunters. This increased accessibility may lead to “encroachment” by individuals from outside the community, including other Indigenous groups. Such changes could disrupt established patterns of land use and transportation within Weenusk territory, potentially limiting the ability of community members to access familiar harvesting areas
(MNP LLP, N.D.).

Weenusk First Nation places strong cultural value on the practice of sharing harvested resources within the community (MNP LLP, N.D.). This tradition supports not only physical sustenance but also social cohesion and intergenerational connection – within the community, with other families, extended family members, and Elders. It not only supports human consumption but also ties people together and is a common practice, as one Weenusk First Nation IK Study participant stated, “we do that [share] almost every time we go hunting.” It reinforces community and the importance of connection to each other.

“We do share like families, because, I mean, it’s a big family.

We’re all connected in town, so I guess you could say we harvest for the community.”

The potential for overharvesting, if non-Indigenous hunters are able to access Weenusk traditional territory, may make it more challenging for Weenusk First Nation community members to sustain themselves, as a high proportion of their community consumes traditional foods. It would also exacerbate or worsen their concerns about consuming store‑bought foods, which are expensive. Overharvesting is also a hunting protocol as the ability to harvest is tied to their own needs, as one participant noted “[w]e only harvest what we need for the community” (MNP LLP, n.d.).

Similarly, Marten Falls First Nation community members have expressed concern that the road will change how they experience and access their traditional lands. The experience of place and connection to land for Marten Falls First Nation community members of their territory is described in terms of beauty, tranquil, silent, and special (Suslop Inc., 2024). One Marten Falls First Nation IK Study participant noted that “I know the beauty, the landscapes, and the tranquility … Of just that silence. Being in tune with nature, you know, being there, this is the life.” The landscape of the traditional territory may change with the introduction of the Project and use of the roads, as it may alter the ways that Marten Falls First Nation community members experience connection to their land or landscapes (Suslop Inc., 2024):

“I think the way of life is going to change. You know, you’re gonna have people coming into the area, new people …  there might be some friction between Aboriginal hunters and hunters in the fall, you know … People coming in and sometimes people will block a road, and they say, “Oh we’re hunting here, you can’t come in.” And, you know, and that’s illegal to do that, right? You know, there’s been instances in Thunder Bay here, people haven’t, you know, a clash over an area … So, as that influx of new people coming in, I think it’s gonna be – I think that’s what people are fearful of … And I hear that [from] the community.”

19.2.1.3         Regional Study Area

The potential effects on Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes of RSA communities are described below, which considers Indigenous communities as outlined in Section 19.2.2.3.

Over the course of the EAR/IS preparation, the proponent invited all LSA and RSA communities to participate in the Indigenous Knowledge and Land and Resource Use Program for the Project. In the absence of information from Indigenous communities, to an extent secondary information has been used to provide context for the assessment of potential effects for communities that have not provided information.

19.2.1.3.1         Construction activities → Loss and/or alteration of lands and resources for traditional harvesting → Availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources

The construction phase of the Project will involve activities such as vegetation clearing, road construction and development of aggregate source areas. The construction phase is expected to generate effects on the availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources within the Project Footprint, however, the predicted effects are largely not anticipated to extend into the RSAs for the biophysical effects assessments. The predicted effects on availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources, based on the effects assessments contained in biophysical effects assessment sections of the EAR/IS, are presented in further detail in Section 19.3.1.1.

During consultation, Aroland First Nation noted that there would be direct impacts to their community and traditional territory that would result from the connection of the Project to the provincial highway system, as well as the potential for cumulative effects that would result from additional road and mining developments in the region. These could impact asserted or established Section 35(1) rights (Towedo, 2020)

During Consultation Round 3, Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation shared concerns of the Project’s potentially adverse effects to Caribou migration routes. However, the areas estimated to be currently in use are outside of the Project RSA (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Cultural Atlas, n.d).

During Round 1 Consultation, Ginoogaming First Nation outlined that their rights have the potential to be impacted by the WSR Project and believes that the cumulative effects from other project development in the Ring of Fire region should be considered.  While an approximate map of Ginoogaming First Nation traditional territory is shown in
Figure 19.12, this was not provided in support of the Project and its accuracy cannot be confirmed. Figure 19.12 shows that Ginoogaming First Nation traditional territory is shown to be outside of the LSA and RSA of the Project.

A draft Kashechewan First Nation Planning Area of Interest and Traditional Harvesting Area shows their traditional harvesting area to be located outside of the RSA (Figure 19.13) (Government of Ontario, 2017).

There is negligible disturbance to availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources expected to occur within the RSA during construction phase.

19.2.1.3.2         Construction activities → Loss of and/or alteration of sites and areas used for traditional harvesting

Direct effects on access to traditional areas are not anticipated within the RSA based on the current information. Similarly, the areas identified within the Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation areas of use (Figure 19.15) (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Cultural Atlas, n.d), Ginoogaming Traditional Territory (Figure 19.12) (Ginoogaming First Nation, 2025) and the Draft Kashechewan First Nation Planning Area of Interest and Traditional Harvesting Area (Figure 1913) (Government of Ontario, 2017) also fall outside the RSA boundaries (based on GIS analysis). As a result, it is anticipated that the Project will have minimal to no direct effects on these communities’ sites and areas used for traditional harvesting.

There are negligible effects in the RSA for loss of and/or alteration of sites and areas used for traditional harvesting during construction phase.

19.2.1.3.3         Construction activities → Loss of and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for traditional harvesting

No loss or alteration of access to lands and resources used for traditional harvesting is anticipated during the construction phase of the Project in the RSA, based on the approximated information provided in Figure 19.12, Figure 19.13 and Figure 19.15 (Ginoogaming First Nation, 2025, Government of Ontario, 2017, Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Cultural Atlas, n.d). This assessment is based primarily on the distance between the Project Footprint and the areas traditionally used for harvesting activities in the RSA. The construction activities are confined to a defined Project Footprint and LSA, which are situated at a considerable distance from the RSA communities. As a result, there are no expected physical overlap or encroachment on these culturally and ecologically significant areas.

There are negligible effects in the RSA for loss of and/or alteration of sites and areas used for traditional harvesting during construction phase.

19.2.1.3.4         Operations and maintenance activities → Loss and/or alteration of lands and resources for traditional harvesting → Availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources

Adverse effects on the availability, quality, or quantity of traditionally harvested resources are not expected during the operation and maintenance phase of the Project. This conclusion is based on the limited scope of activities during this phase and the spatial separation between the Project and areas traditionally used for harvesting. Operation and maintenance activities are typically low-impact and confined to previously disturbed areas within the established WSR.

As such, there are negligible effects in the RSA for availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources.

19.2.1.3.5         Operations and maintenance activities → Loss of and/or alteration of sites and areas used for traditional harvesting

There are currently no loss or alteration of sites and areas used for traditional harvesting expected as a result of the Project. This conclusion is based on the Project’s location, design, and the limited spatial extent of its activities. The operations phase is generally limited in activity and does not involve new land disturbance or expansion beyond the established WSR area.

The Project Footprint and associated activities have been carefully planned to limit and minimize the disturbance of the WSR. As such, within the RSA there is no anticipated overlap between operations and maintenance activities and the lands customarily used for harvesting practices such as hunting, fishing, trapping, and gathering.

Due to this, there are negligible effects in the RSA for loss of and/or alteration of sites and areas used for traditional harvesting.

19.2.1.3.6         Operations and maintenance activities → Loss of and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for traditional harvesting

Operation and maintenance activities are generally minimal and localized, involving routine inspections, equipment servicing, and minor repairs within the existing WSR. These activities do not require new land disturbance or the creation of barriers that could restrict movement or access. Within the RSA, there are no anticipated road closures, access restrictions, or other impediments that would interfere with Indigenous land users’ ability to reach and use traditional areas.

Negligible effects in the RSA are anticipated for loss or alteration of access to lands and resources used for traditional harvesting during the operation and maintenance phase of the Project.

19.2.2         Change to Cultural Continuity

This section provides an analysis of Project effects on Cultural Continuity as an Indigenous value/interest.

The pathways of the Project on Cultural Continuity have been identified as follows:

• Change to sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes;
• Change to access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes; and
• Change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages.

Indigenous communities identified within the LSA and RSA for cultural continuity are shown on Figure 19.3.

19.2.2.1         Local Study Area: Webequie First Nation

19.2.2.1.1         Construction activities → Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes

Construction activities →Loss and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes

Webequie First Nations defines their rights to “access traditional lands and waters” as “the right to access the locations, areas, and resources required for the exercise of Webequie First Nation’s Indigenous and Treaty rights, which is dependent on the availability of trails, travel ways and watercourses; the ability to access harvesting sites and areas; the ability to use habitation sites (e.g., camps and cabins), ceremonial and spiritual sites; the ability to access burials and cultural landforms; and the right to maintain a connection to the land” (Stantec, 2025).

Webequie First Nation defines their cultural and experiential rights as the “right to preserve and maintain a distinct Webequie First Nation cultural identity and is contingent on meaningful opportunities for intergenerational teaching and cultural transmission; the right to the quiet enjoyment of the land; the continued relevance of sharing and reciprocity for community cohesion; the ability to maintain language, traditions and cultural practices” (Stantec, 2025).

The construction phase of the Project will involve activities such as vegetation clearing, road construction and development of aggregate source areas. The construction phase may have effects to sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes. Webequie First Nation identified 1,190 cultural and sacred sites that overlapped with the LSA and RSA, but there could be potential sites that are also unidentified (Stantec, 2025). Webequie First Nation also identified 1,050 travel routes including 60 that overlap or intersect with the LSA (based on GIS analysis). There are 14 water-based travel routes and nine land-based travel routes shown in Webequie First Nation Travel Routes map that intersect or overlap with the Project Footprint (Stantec, 2024).

Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas and/or access to sites used for cultural and spiritual purposes during construction may lead to:

• Loss of Cultural Continuity – Many sites hold historical significance, serving as places for ceremonies, teachings, and passing down traditional knowledge. Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas and/or access can disrupt the transmission of cultural practices for the Webequie First Nation community.
• Erosion to Spiritual Practices – These locations are often sacred spaces for prayer, healing, and connection to the land. Loss and/or alteration of a site and areas and/or access may lead to feelings of displacement and spiritual disconnect for the Webequie First Nation community.
• Impact on Rights and Land Stewardship – Webequie First Nation have outlined that they have an inherent right to care for and govern their lands, so they remain protected for future generations. Loss and/or alteration of a site and areas and/or access can weaken their ability to uphold those responsibilities.
• Challenges to Community Well-being –Traditional lands contribute to mental, physical, and social wellness, whether through hunting, gathering medicines, or holding ceremonies. Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas and/or access can affect overall health and resilience.
• Loss of Historical and Environmental Integrity – the construction of WSR could lead to landscape changes, potentially damaging sacred sites, burial grounds, and areas of ecological importance.
• Sensory Disturbance – construction activities can introduce noise, vibration, dust, artificial lighting, and visual intrusions that disrupt the sensory environment of cultural and spiritual spaces used by Webequie First Nation. This can diminish the site’s spiritual ambiance and interfere with ceremonies or practices that rely on areas that are undisturbed.

“Access to traditional resources or culturally important sites and areas can be affected through the direct loss or alteration of trails or travelways, restrictions on the ability to navigate to and through harvesting areas and culturally important areas. Loss or alteration of access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes can result from direct physical disturbance or destruction (e.g., destruction or interruption of an established trail); physical deterrents or obstructions (e.g., the presence of work camps, aggregate pits/quarries, construction activities) that prevent access or increase effort required either spatially or temporally; changes in the landscape (e.g., vegetation clearing) that make an aspect of a trail or travelway unrecognizable either partially or completely; or changes in the conditions (e.g., vehicle traffic) required for current use of trails and travelways” (Stantec, 2025). Specifically, access to areas in the LSA may face temporary restrictions or limitations. Potential changes to land access patterns as a result of the Project may not only impact land users, but can impact who is able to participate in traditional activities, alienating certain sub-populations such as Elders, children, and individuals living with disabilities (Myette & Riva, 2021). Impeding access and adding distance to use other travel routes may have cultural, social, well-being and health implications.

Three Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHL) have been identified by the Project Team in Section 20 (Cultural Heritage and Archaeological Resources). These types of sites may include, but are not limited to, historic village sites, occupation sites, burial sites, cultural monuments, and spiritually significant natural areas (Stantec, 2024). Each CHL includes sites and areas that are located within and/or intersect with the LSA, many of which overlap. Net effects are not predicted for the Cultural Heritage and Archaeological Resources VC once mitigation measures are implemented (Section 20.5). See Table 1 in the Cultural Heritage Report: Existing Conditions and Preliminary Impact Assessment (Appendix S of this Draft EAR/IS) for a detailed description of potential cultural heritage value or interest. 

Previous engagement with Webequie First Nation identified eight water-based routes that overlapped with the Project as navigable.  Aquatic travel routes along the Winisk River could experience temporary access restrictions. Reductions in access would be experienced most heavily within the Project footprint and LSA. Temporary disturbances to access and use of access to cultural and sacred areas during the construction stage would be most noticeable where these areas are in close proximity to, or overlap with, the Project footprint and the LSA.

Vegetation removal will clear trees and shrubs and the topography changes for the construction of the road and supportive infrastructure could potentially directly impact sites and areas (unidentified and identified by Webequie First Nation in the IKLRU) used for cultural and spiritual purposes. There is an expected destruction of 548.49 ha caused by construction activities associated with clearing, grubbing, grading, and installation of crossing structures in the road ROW, camps and staging areas, aggregate extraction areas, and associated access roads. The loss or alteration of cultural and sacred sites may affect “Webequie First Nation’s ability to preserve and maintain a distinct Webequie First Nation cultural identity, which is contingent on meaningful opportunities for intergenerational teaching and cultural transmission. Without these locations, Webequie First Nation’s cultural and experiential rights would be impacted” (Stantec, 2025).

One of the Project’s anticipated effects is noise during the construction phase.  The Webequie community has indicated that, sensory disturbances could alter the perceived value of culturally important sites and areas and impact quiet enjoyment of the land. Noise from construction work (not blasting) will affect an area around ARA-2. The Noise and Vibration Technical Report identified that this construction noise will exceed 45 dBA by a maximum of 4dBA. The Noise and Vibration Technical Report indicated that a 165 m buffer around road construction and 300 m buffer around the waterbody crossing would constitute a noise sensitive area (SLR Consulting, 2024). Table 19‑14 identifies affected sites and areas and the size of the areas in Webequie First Nation Cultural and Sacred Sites map and Webequie First Nation Named Places and Language Sites map from the Webequie IK Study. The information in Table 19‑13 is based on the PDF mapping provided by Webequie First Nation which has some limitations.

Table 19‑14:     Cultural, Spiritual, Sacred, Burial, and Language Sites and Areas potentially affected by noise

The sacred element of water also has a deep spiritual significance as it “connects all life, whether it’s through consumption, honoured in ceremony or used as transportation” (Stantec, 2024). Waterbodies are highly spiritually important places that the Webequie community is responsible to protect. The waterways in CBLUP Zone #2B are also cultural monuments to the ancestral travel routes that connect with other communities and through the traditional territory. Changes to water quality and quantity of water may also change the ability of Webequie First Nation to practice ceremonies and connect with their culture. Further details on net effects to surface water and ground water can be reviewed in Section 7 and Section 8.

Sacred medicine may also be a component associated with the sacred areas and/or practices in these locations identified in the Webequie First Nation IK Study. Tobacco, cedar, sage and sweetgrass “are used as offerings daily, especially when harvesting from the land.” An area identified in Caribou Observations map also showed a Caribou calving area which is “considered sacred to traditional ways of life” (Stantec, 2024). Another example of sacred areas includes rock faces on the south side of Billinger Lake “where spirit beings live in the rocks and the calm water; it is known as the dwelling place of Memegwesic (little beings).”

The loss and/or alteration of sites and areas and/or access to sites used for cultural and spiritual purposes can cause loss of cultural continuity through a loss of connection to the land and a loss of identity, which can negatively impact physical and mental health and well-being (InterGroup, 2024; Ninomiya et al., 2023). This can have disproportionate effects on community members who are more vulnerable to changes. Youth were identified by Webequie First Nation as a population of concern due to the several challenges they face while living on reserve, such as social isolation, boredom, lack of education and employment opportunities, overcrowded homes, poor mental health, and addictions (InterGroup, 2024; AtkinsRéalis, 2022). Changes to the ability to practice one’s culture could have negative impacts on the physical and mental well-being of Webequie youth (InterGroup, 2024).

The construction of the WSR could also increase the presence of non-Indigenous people which may increase the opportunities for them to access sacred places and share them, which could compromise or damage the locations or knowledge of sacred areas (Stantec, 2024).

19.2.2.1.2         Construction activities → Expenditures and employment → Change to population and demographics → Change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages

The construction of WSR can lead to the following effects on change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages:

• Changes in land-based cultural activities – Traditional activities like hunting, trapping, and harvesting may be affected by land fragmentation, environmental disruption, or increased competition from non-Indigenous groups and non-members of Webequie First Nation during construction.
• Changes in language – The increased labour force into Webequie during construction may encourage cultural exchange and language revitalization efforts but could also pressure younger generations to prioritize English over Indigenous languages.
• Economic and social shifts – The construction phase will bring job opportunities that support Indigenous-led cultural initiatives, including language education programs. However, this could shift priorities away from traditional lifestyles.
• Risk of Cultural Dilution – With an influx of non-Indigenous people into Webequie, this could potentially impact the social and cultural dynamics in these communities. This could potentially influence Indigenous traditions and reducing the use of Indigenous languages within daily life.

Development and subsequent in-migration of non-Indigenous people nearby the community has the potential to exacerbate the erosion of Webequie language and culture, particularly amongst youth, who already face challenges in the loss of their cultural identity (Heid et al., 2022 as cited in Intergroup, 2024). The Project may impact Webequie members’ ability to access their lands and engage in traditional activities due to environmental disturbances.

Over the assumed five-year construction period, the population could rise by an average of 47 individuals during the winter season and 75 individuals in the summer season. Population increases are likely to peak during the summer season as construction activities increase. The largest increases in population are projected to occur during the second and third years of construction and will peak during the summer months. Project-related employment that is located on-site will require workers from LSA communities to commute and/or stay in temporary accommodations provided by the Project. Project-related employment will affect changes to populations and demographics in Webequie First Nation due to the workforce that is required. The Project will prioritize opportunities for Indigenous community members in the LSA and RSA. The changes in population and demographics may result in reduced out-migration, increased in-migration of Webequie First Nation community members, and/or an in-migration of temporary workers from outside the community (Section 14.3.1.1 LSA: Webequie First Nation). With the implementation of the Community Readiness Plan (CRP), the Proponent anticipates a positive increase in the member population within the Webequie community. The approach of the CRP is intended to be holistic and inclusive of the views shared by subgroups of the population of Webequie First Nation and the other LSA communities.

An adverse effect on traditional learning programming was identified in Section 14.5.2.4.3 as the potential increased demand for educational and training programming related to the Project could result in decreased interest in learning traditional land-based skills and reduced capacity for the Webequie community to offer traditional learning programming. The focus on Project-related skills could also require individuals to be away from their home community more often to attend courses only offered off-reserve. This represent a small change after mitigation measures are applied, including ongoing monitoring and adaptive management through the CRP.

• The Webequie First Nation IK Study indicated general concern of the Project on traditional cultural practice and what may be the threshold of a “change” to this indicator. “Outsiders” may disrupt or devalue traditional practices and teachings; more technology or digital communications access may amplify the “disruptions” on youth and use of Indigenous language. It may reduce participation in traditional activity and continue to the decreasing time spent on the land, and practices traditional activities. There could be a reduced interest by community members in traditional-based skills and programs in favour of skills training and education aimed at Project job opportunities. A reduced availability or offering of traditional programs could occur due to a lack of interest leading to potential changes to cultural traditions and practices.

Negative interactions between the construction workforce and the Webequie community population may still occur despite best efforts to keep them separate. As a result, community cohesion may decrease during the construction phase of the WSR depending on the extent and nature of the interactions between the construction workforce and members of Webequie First Nation and any conflicts that may arise. The net effects to health due to decreased community cohesion and cultural continuity are predicted to be limited as outlined in Section 17.5.2.2.8 once mitigation measures are in place.

Webequie First Nation identified language sites and areas within their IK mapping. Effects to language sites and areas during construction through vegetation removal and ground disturbance could lead to an erosion of cultural identity and heritage. The potential effects of these concerns may negatively affect cultural identity, way of life, community values, spiritual laws (Creator’s laws of relationships with Creator, lands and animals and other people) and seven ancestral teachings about how to treat the environment (truth, humility, respect, love, honesty, courage and wisdom). With the potential degradation of essential practices of Webequie First Nation, it may contribute to the broader context of concerns related to cultural continuity or knowledge transfer to future generations.

19.2.2.1.3         Operations and maintenance activities → Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes

Operations and maintenance activities →Loss and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes

With the operation and maintenance of WSR, the loss and/or alteration of sites and areas and or access to lands used for cultural and spiritual purposes by Webequie First Nation could be impacted and include the following effects:

• Increased access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes – Road use by the Webequie First Nation community members may create opportunities to make their own trails off the WSR and towards the culturally and spiritually important sites and areas. This is considered to be a beneficial effect of the Project, as the WSR may provide convenient or alternate mode of travel to important sites across the territory. Improved access to previously difficult-to-reach locations and areas will provide community members with more opportunities to visit and spend time on land
• Restricted access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes – Some sites may become harder to reach due to land fragmentation or other restrictions imposed by WSR.
• Impact on cultural identity and continuity – When access to cultural and/or sacred areas is lost or altered, it can weaken intergenerational knowledge transfer, making it harder for younger generations to engage with traditional practices and teachings.
• Increased risk of external interference – Once WSR is operational, there is a possibility of encroachment by, tourism, future development or non members of Webequie First Nation into the cultural and sacred sites that may not respect the cultural significance of the sites.

The change in noise that was predicted with noise traffic did exceed provincial guidelines at seven identified Noise Sensitive Areas (NSA) and indicated that “sound levels are highly dependent on the exact location of the noise-sensitive receptor” (SLR Consulting, 2024). NSAs including CHL-7, CHL-8, CHL-13, CHL-14, CHL-15 CHL-17, and CHL-25 are predicted to exceed the 5 dB change outlined in the MECP/MTO Joint Noise Protocol.  Operations of the Project will result in noise emissions; however, the magnitude of the releases will be limited and well managed with the implementation of best management practices and noise effects to culturally sensitive areas are anticipated to be low.

Section 20.3 identified potential effects to CHL and once mitigation measures are implemented, potential effects on the Cultural Heritage and Archaeological Resources VC will be effectively avoided or mitigated as noted in Table 20-8. Based on the effects assessed for vegetation and wetlands anticipated for the operations phase, it is anticipated that only indirect effects associated with maintenance and operation of the WSR, and water crossings may be required over the operation and maintenance phase, which will include repairs to bridges, culverts, ditches, road surfaces, as well as snow and vegetation management.

The use of the road can provide an alternate or convenient mode of travel to access the traditional territory. The WSR will provide year-round transportation access which can link Webequie First Nation community members to cultural, sacred and language sites and areas. The use of the road may provide convenient or alternative access to these sites that have been identified in the LSA and potentially within and outside the RSA. Road use is expected to serve commercial and personal vehicles as well. Road use will provide personal vehicle access across the greater geography of the traditional lands. Typical modes of travel are by foot, boat, snowmobile or ATV (all terrain vehicle). This may be a benefit for Webequie community members to get out onto the land for cultural and traditional purposes. Travel routes that access culturally and spiritually important places close to the WSR may be more convenient to access. This may be a positive effect and can reduce the time needed to access distant locations, increase the frequency of trips or reduce the cost of supplies. This benefit may be especially positive for youths who participate in programs and trip opportunities.

Operation of the WSR could open new areas or expand access to a broader range of sites, both on and adjacent to WSR. This could have a positive impact, such as increased access to cultural and sacred sites along the Project Footprint, or could be considered negative if the increased access results in impacts to the land and destruction or loss of cultural and sacred sites as well as increased access to these sites by non-members of Webequie First Nation.

19.2.2.1.4         Operations and maintenance activities → Expenditures and employment → Change to population and demographics → Change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages

The operation and maintenance of WSR can lead to the same effects from changes to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages as identified in 19.3.2.1.3, as follows:

• Changes in land-based cultural activities;   
• Changes in language;
• Economic and social shifts; and
• Risk of Cultural Dilution.

Changes in land-based cultural activities and effects to current and historical use of lands and resources for traditional purposes are assessed in Section 19.3.1.1.1. Culture and language knowledge transfer is an important focus for the Webequie community and no net effects were identified for the Population and Demographics VC which included a loss of Indigenous identity and a loss of language as indicators (Section 14.5.2.1). No net effects were identified to social cohesion and cultural continuity in Section 17.3.3.9.2. During the operations and maintenance phase, there are 3 direct, and 1 induced employment opportunity predicted for Webequie First Nation (Section 15.3.1.1). As there are a limited number of employment opportunities projected and in turn exposure to non-local workers, it is anticipated that there will be negligible impacts to change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages in Webequie First Nation during this phase.

19.2.2.2         Local Study Area: Other LSA Communities

The potential effects on Cultural Continuity of other LSA communities are described below, which considers the following communities:

• Attawapiskat First Nation;
• Eabametoong First Nation;
• Kasabonika Lake First Nation;
• Marten Falls First Nation;
• Neskantaga First Nation;
• Nibinamik First Nation; and
• Weenusk First Nation.

The Marten Falls First Nation IK Study and Weenusk First Nation IK Study were submitted to the Proponent for consideration as part of the preparation of the EAR/IS, and these documents are integrated in the following assessment.

19.2.2.2.1         Construction activities → Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes

Construction activities →Loss and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes

The construction phase of the Project will involve activities such as vegetation clearing, road construction and development of aggregate source areas.  Cultural and sacred sites, historical and current travel routes and cultural traditions and practices were identified for Marten Falls First Nation and Weenusk First Nation. The right to access traditional lands and water is reliant on access to their travel routes, access to preferred harvesting sites and access to ceremonial and spiritual sites. Access to traditional resources or culturally important sites and areas can be affected through the direct loss or alteration of trails or travelways, restrictions on the ability to navigate to and through harvesting areas and culturally important areas, or limitations on the ability to exercise Aboriginal and Treaty rights in proximity to the Project.

Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas and access to sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes during construction may lead to:

• Loss of Cultural Continuity – Many sites hold historical significance, serving as places for ceremonies, teachings, and passing down traditional knowledge. Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas or access to sites and areas can disrupt the transmission of cultural practices for the LSA communities.
• Erosion to Spiritual Practices – These locations are often sacred spaces for prayer, healing, and connection to the land. Loss and/or alteration of a site or access to a site may lead to feelings of displacement and spiritual disconnect for the LSA communities.
• Impact on Rights and Land Stewardship – Marten Falls First Nation and Weenusk First Nation have outlined that they have an inherent right to care for and govern their lands, so they remain protected for future generations. Loss and/or alteration of a site or access to sites can weaken their ability to uphold those responsibilities.
• Challenges to Community Well-being –Traditional lands contribute to mental, physical, and social wellness, whether through hunting, gathering medicines, or holding ceremonies. Loss and/or alteration or access to a cultural or sacred site can affect overall health and resilience.
• Loss of Historical and Environmental Integrity – the construction of WSR could lead to landscape changes, potentially damaging sacred sites, burial grounds, and areas of ecological importance.
• Sensory Disturbance – construction activities can introduce noise, vibration, dust, artificial lighting, and visual intrusions that disrupt the sensory environment of cultural and spiritual spaces used by LSA communities. This can diminish the site’s spiritual ambiance and interfere with ceremonies or practices that rely on areas that are undisturbed.

A historic village site was identified in the Marten Falls First Nation IK Study with the label of 3024-06 within the WSR Study Area (Suslop Inc., 2024). A study participant shared that they had lived there for a week at one time but do not have any concerns with it regarding the Project. The use of lands for aggregate extraction and blasting may affect the Ma-ma-kwa-se-sak (little people that live in the rocks) and have an adverse effect on the Marten Falls First Nation cultural sites. This is a potential adverse effect on the oral history and culture of Marten Falls First Nation if blasting impacts rock formations (Suslop, 2024). One travel route of Marten Falls First Nation was identified within the study area – it is an access route to WabamikoZakaihgan / White Beaver Lake within the RSA (Suslop Inc, 2024). The participant expressed concern that this would be impacted and that a safe pathway be created so this access route can continue to be used. Another historic trail was mapped within the study area, which leads to Attawapiskat First Nation but impacts to this trail are not anticipated (Suslop, 2024). “[T]he ecological integrity of Marten Falls First Nation’s traditional territory is to ensure that future generations have the open and opportunity to engage in land and resource use” (Suslop Inc., 2024). The risk of losing the ability to maintain traditional practices and harvest resources from the traditional territory can affect their cultural identity and their relationship with the land and other community members. “Marten Falls First Nation members want to protect their lands and resources for future use. Conservation is critical for maintaining their connection to the land and spirituality” (Suslop Inc., 2024). Marten Falls First Nation members have identified that construction and “outsiders” could dig up burials, historic and /or cultural sites (Suslop Inc. 2024). No sites of cultural importance within the 50km study area from the WSR were identified within the Marten Falls First Nation IKLRU Study (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Zone #2A of the Webequie First Nation CBLUP includes a shared area with Weenusk First Nation (Stantec, 2024). The Weenusk First Nation IK Study produced an Important Sites map with locations of burial sites, family territory and important sites. There is one burial and one family site in the RSA as assessed via GIS (MNP LLP, n.d.). No identified Weensuk First Nation sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes are anticipated to be impacted by construction.Weenusk First Nation medicine and berries and plant map identified medicine gathering sites, berry picking and plant harvesting sites outside of the Project Footprint, LSA and RSA (MNP LLP, N.D.).  Plants can continue to be harvested for subsistence, medicinal, and utilitarian purposes and no impacts from WSR are anticipated to these sites for Weensuk First Nation. Access to the harvested resources remain unchanged with the construction of WSR for Weensuk First Nation. Weenusk First Nation has expressed concerns about the ability to pass on their culture and way of life to future generations and that this will affect their community (MNP LLP, N.D.). Any impacts from development to these sites or the perception of these site being altered may impact the ability for Weenusk First Nation to transmit culture and way of life to future generations. During the construction phase, construction activities and road use are not anticipated to disturb areas identified by Weenusk First Nation. Effects to culturally sensitive sites identified by Weenusk First Nation are not anticipated during the construction phase as they do not overlap the Project Footprint. The Weenusk IK study also identified potential concerns with the Project’s effects on climate change which would affect their ability to travel to important cultural and spiritual sites and transmit their culture if water levels were affected (MNP LLP, n.d.). Section 8 of the EAR/IS presents the assessment of effects of the Project on groundwater resources (Table 8-22). Further details on net effects to surface water and ground water can be reviewed in Section 7 and Section 8.

The construction phase of WSR could also result in an influx of other Indigenous users who could hunt, trap, fish and gather resources within the areas. Increased active use resulting from expanded access could further reduce the availability of resources to harvest, as well as the remote character and values of the traditional land and resource use for the construction stage.

19.2.2.2.2         Construction activities → Expenditures and employment → Change to population and demographics → Change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages

The construction of WSR may lead to the following effects on change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages:

• Changes in land-based cultural activities;
• Economic and social shifts; and
• Changes in language.

Approximately 23 to 26 FTE workers per construction phase season from Other Local Study Area communities will be working on-site for the Project, which will be on a 14-days in and seven-days out schedule (Table 14-22 Increase in Webequie First Nation Population Attributed to the Temporary In-Migration of Workers from the Other Local Study Area Communities, Construction Phase). The effect of the Project on population and demographics is “expected to be minimal and temporary during the construction phase” (Section 14.3.1.2 Local Study Area: Other Communities). Project-related employment that is located on-site will require workers from LSA communities to commute and/or stay in temporary accommodations provided by the Project (Section 14.3.1.2 Local Study Area: Other Communities).

Section 14.2.2.1 Population and Demographics for Other Local Study Area Communities noted that 74% of households in the LSA (excluding Webequie First Nation) spoke English with another 26% who speak Indigenous languages (0.3% speak French). The Marten Falls First Nation IKLRU Study shared that they have been able to maintain their language despite efforts of colonizers, impacts of residential schools on intergenerational Knowledge sharing and continue to rebuild their nation. The Weenusk First Nation IK Study (MNP LLP, n.d.) noted that the “majority of community members speak the n-dialect of the Cree language” (Wakenagun, 2023). The Weenusk IK Study also included the VC of identity which included language as an aspect that expressed Weenuski Inninowuk identity. It is estimated that a change in population and demographics due to the Project will correspond to the effects assessed in Section 14.5.2 and the effects on LSA communities is assumed as relatively immaterial for population and demographics, which included an indicator on language.

19.2.2.2.3         Operations and maintenance activities → Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes

Operations and maintenance activities →Loss and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes

With the operation and maintenance of WSR, the loss and/or alteration of sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes by LSA communities could be impacted and include the following effects:

• Increased access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes – Road use by the LSA community members may create opportunities to make their own trails off the WSR and towards the culturally and spiritually important sites and areas. This is considered to be a beneficial effect of the Project, as the WSR may provide convenient or alternate mode of travel to important sites across the territory. Improved access to previously difficult-to-reach locations and areas will provide community members with more opportunities to visit and spend time on land.
• Restricted access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes – Some sites may become harder to reach due to land fragmentation or other restrictions imposed by WSR.
• Impact on cultural identity and continuity – When access to cultural and/or sacred areas is lost or altered, it can weaken intergenerational knowledge transfer, making it harder for younger generations to engage with traditional practices and teachings.
• Increased risk of external interference – Once WSR is operational, there is a possibility of encroachment by, tourism, future development or non members of LSA community members into the cultural and sacred sites that may not respect the cultural significance of the sites.

The WabamikoZakaihgan / White Beaver Lake travel route was identified by one Marten Falls First Nation IK Study participant. Mapped VCs in WSR Study Area with the label 3024-05 (Suslop Inc., 2024). This route has been historically used, but not within the last ten years, however the community member was concerned with the Project hindering access to this route. Based on GIS analysis, the route does not extend or overlap with the WSR. Effects to this route are not anticipated.

Non-Indigenous people may have access to the territory and the wildlife resources if they are able to use the WSR. This WSR may provide a link to the remote traditional territories from this new transportation access route. The preferred and meaningful manner that Weenusk First Nation harvesters prefer to hunt in is with many animals nearby, where it is quiet and where there are other Weenusk hunters. Their conservation and stewardship protocols include “Do Not Overharvest” and to take only what they and their community needs. One of the participants shared that they teach their children to “only kill what you need … [you] don’t kill random things and leave them there.” (MNP LLP, n.d.).

Some Marten Falls First Nation members outlined that the WSR could make their traditional territory more accessible (Suslop Inc, 2024). Having the road would make it easier for Marten Falls First Nation families to take children and youth out on the land…this will allow older generations to teach younger generations about LRU, and the passing on of IK intergenerationally.” (Suslop Inc., 2024).  The Project could potentially impact Marten Falls First Nation members well_‑being rights with easier access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes. There could be easier access to partake in traditional activities and community members could drive to their trapline, hunting and fishing spot instead of accessing this with an off-road vehicle, watercraft or by foot (Suslop Inc., 2024). This greater access to land could benefit Elders if the areas are easier to access as well as families who want to teach their children about traditional activities (Suslop Inc., 2024).

During the operations and maintenance phase, potential effects to loss and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes are not anticipated, based on current available information. All activities, including routine inspections, repairs, and maintenance tasks, will be confined strictly to the existing WSR. These activities will utilize established access routes and infrastructure, ensuring that there is no encroachment beyond the designated operational area.

19.2.2.2.4         Operations and maintenance activities → Expenditures and employment → Change to population and demographics → Change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages

The operation and maintenance of WSR can lead to the same effects on change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages as identified in Section 19.3.2.2.3.

• Changes in land-based cultural activities;
• Changes in language; and
• Economic and social shifts.

Changes in land-based cultural activities and effects to current and historical use of lands and resources for traditional purposes are assessed in Section 19.3.1.2.1. Culture and language knowledge transfer is an important focus for the Webequie community and no net effects were identified for the Population and Demographics VC which included a loss of Indigenous identity and a loss of language as indicators (Section 14.5.2.1). No net effects were identified to social cohesion and cultural continuity in Section 17.3.3.9.2. During operations and maintenance phase, there are 13 direct, and 3 induced employment opportunities anticipated for other LSA communities (Section 15.3.1.2- Economic Environment). As there are a limited number of employment opportunities projected and in turn exposure to non-local workers, it is anticipated that there will be negligible impacts to change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages in other LSA communities during this phase.

19.2.2.3         Regional Study Area

19.2.2.3.1         Construction activities → Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes

Construction activities →Loss and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes

Access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes supports the traditional land use activities discussed in Section 19.2.2.3 and are important for cultural continuity. Although the specific location and sites, areas and travel routes cannot be directly confirmed for the RSA communities, it is understood from information obtained through published sources that the identified sites, areas and travel routes that have historically been used for traditional cultural and spiritual practices remain an integral part of the community’s well-being.  Mapping that has been included in this EAR/IS for Section 19 for the RSA communities is from secondary sources and was not provided to the Project team from the RSA communities.

Constance Lake First Nation emphasized that the Project’s development must adhere to a to a respectful process to ensure that special and spiritual areas remain unaffected.

Based on the information in the Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Traditional Land and Resource Use area, (Figure 19.15), known occupancy and fixed cultural sites of the community are estimated to be located outside the Project LSA and RSA (Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation Cultural Atlas, n.d).

Based on Ginoogaming Traditional Territory (Figure 19.12) (Ginoogaming First Nation, 2025), and Draft Kashechewan First Nation Planning Area of Interest and Traditional Harvesting Area (Figure 19.13). (Government of Ontario, 2017), the cultural and spiritual site and areas for these two communities are presumed to be located outside the Project LSA and RSA.

The Project activities with regard to construction activities are expected to be limited to the Project Footprint and portions of the LSA only. As such, based on current information, there is negligible effects anticipated during the construction phase with regard to loss and/or alteration of sites and areas and access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes in the RSA.

19.2.2.3.2         Construction activities → Expenditures and employment → Change to population and demographics → Change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages

As per Section 15 (Economic environment), there are employment projections for WSR developed for the RSA which includes 133 labour opportunities in 2028, 164 labour opportunities in 2029, 133 labour opportunities in 2030, 64 labour opportunities in 2031, and 53 labour opportunities in 2032. RSA communities will be working on-site for the Project, with a planned 14-days in and seven-days out schedule (Table 14-22). With the RSA communities supporting employment during construction, it is estimated that a change in population and demographics due to the Project will correspond to the effects assessed in Section 14.5.2 and the effects on RSA communities is assumed as relatively immaterial for population and demographics, which included an indicator on language. Changes to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages during construction are not anticipated for RSA communities.

19.2.2.3.3         Operations and maintenance activities → Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes

Operations and maintenance activities →Loss and/or alteration of access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes

Operations and maintenance activities → Expenditures and employment → Change to population and demographics → Change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages

Based on currently available information regarding communities in the RSA, it is anticipated that operations and maintenance activities will result in minimal to no effects to sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes, access to the sites used for cultural and spiritual purposes changes to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages within the RSA communities. Operation and maintenance activities are typically low in intensity, short in duration, and confined to previously disturbed or developed areas. Routine tasks such as inspections, minor repairs, and clean ups are generally conducted using existing infrastructure and access routes, thereby avoiding new disturbances to the surrounding environment or community resources.

19.3            Mitigation and Enhancement Measures

This section describes the proposed measures to mitigate the predicted adverse effects of the Project, as well as proposed enhancements on the interests and rights of Indigenous Peoples. This includes a description of proposed mitigation and enhancement measures for Indigenous Peoples’ values and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights:

• Current and historical use of lands and resources for traditional purposes;
• Cultural continuity;
• Socio-economic and well-being rights; and
• Self-governance and self-determination rights.

The proposed mitigations require further engagement with the Proponent and stakeholders to be finalized. A Webequie Community Readiness Plan (CRP) has been developed for the Project (Appendix N). The CRP is a high level, dynamic plan that will require further engagement with the Proponent and stakeholders to be finalized. Mitigation measures described in the CRP are in consideration of the community strategies developed by Webequie First Nation and reflect the values and principles of the community.

Further related measures will be provided in the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and the Operation Environmental Management Plan (OEMP) that will be developed for the Project. Refer to Section 19.4.1 for details of the proposed framework for the development of the CEMP and OEMP.

Key mitigation and enhancement measures are outlined below.

19.3.1         Change to Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

The potential effects to current and historical use of lands and resources for traditional purposes will be mitigated through measures designed to reduce changes to:

• Availability of lands and resources for traditional harvesting,
• Sites and areas used for traditional harvesting, and
• Access to lands and resources used for traditional harvesting.

The predicted effects of the Project on the bio-physical environment are presented in the EAR/IS, in the following sections:

• Geology, Terrain, and Soils (see Section 6 of the EAR/IS);
• Surface Water Resources (see Section 7 of the EAR/IS);
• Groundwater Resources (see Section 8 of the EAR/IS);
• Atmospheric Environment (see Section 9 of the EAR/IS);
• Fish and Fish Habitat (see Section 10 of the EAR/IS);
• Vegetation and Wetlands (see Section 11 of the EAR/IS);
• Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat (see Section 12 of the EAR/IS); and
• Species at Risk (see Section 13 of the EAR/IS).

Each bio-physical environment discipline effects assessment section of the EAR/IS includes a mitigation and enhancement measures section, which is complemented with EAR/IS Section 22 Follow up and monitoring, Section 23 Accidents and Malfunctions, Section 26 Contributions to Sustainability, and Appendix E Mitigation Measures.

The Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) (Section 4 and Appendix E of the EAR/IS) covers predicted bio-physical environment effects and associated mitigation measures and monitoring requirements. The CEMP is a document that outlines how environmental effects will be managed during the construction phase of the Project. The Operation Environmental Management Plan Framework (OEMP) (Section 4 and Appendix E of the EAR/IS) provides specific guidance for managing bio-physical effects during the operations and maintenance phase of the Project. The OEMP will also include component management plans as required for the operation phase.

Webequie First Nation IK Study participants expressed concerns about increased enforcement of regulations, particularly regarding potential impacts on hunting due to roadway allowances. They were worried about stricter policies on Indigenous harvesting as a treaty right, the imposition of wildlife tagging, and other regulations that might conflict with or undermine Indigenous rights and responsibilities to maintain wildlife. Additionally, there were concerns about the loss of claims to traplines and other effects from outsider influence, which could lead to competition with harvesters or reduced wildlife populations.

Marten Falls First Nation expressed a preference for roads wide enough to safely accommodate both commercial and residential traffic, with wide shoulders enhancing safety. They also emphasized the need for bridges to be wide enough for two-way traffic and equipped with protective barriers to prevent vehicles from falling into the water and to reduce the risk of collisions. To further minimize unsafe driving, they recommended the inclusion of resting or pit stops and signage warning drivers of upcoming bridges. Marten Falls First Nation IK Study included the recommendation to adjust the location of the WSR to avoid sensitive areas, negative impacts to fish habitats and spawning areas. It also included “[s]pecial attention should be paid to sensitive areas in relation to road-river crossings” and to not build dams (Suslop Inc., 2024). Not building the road would prevent all negative impacts to waterways. Environmental monitoring was also recommended so that “government … should share authority with First Nations.” and would require technical training for their members to be involved in monitoring. In connection with concern regarding over harvesting, Marten Falls First Nation also recommended that “fishing locations or sensitive areas should be at least a 1-hour walk from the roads” as far away as possible (Suslop Inc., 2024).

19.3.1.1         Availability of Lands and Resources for Traditional Harvesting

This section provides measures for mitigating the effects to a potential reduction in the availability of lands and resources essential for traditional harvesting practices. By engaging with local communities, incorporating traditional ecological knowledge, and adopting environmentally sensitive planning and construction methods, we can minimize disruptions and protect traditional harvesting activities so they can continue with minimal to no interruptions during the Project construction and operation and maintenance phase.

19.3.1.1.1         Preferred and Culturally Important Species

Existing conditions of preferred and culturally important species along with identified effects are provided under Sections 19.2.2 and 19.3.1 respectively.

Caribou was the species selected for cultural keystone species for Marten Falls First Nation, Weenusk First Nation and Webequie First Nation, based on their IKLRU reports. Mitigation measures to reduce impacts on Caribou are presented in Section 13 (Species at Risk).

The following recommendations and suggestions have been made in the IKLRU studies shared by Weenusk First Nation, Webequie First Nation and Marten Falls First Nation related to reducing impacts to Caribou (Stantec, 2025, Suslop Inc., 2024 and MNP LLP, N.D):

• Installing signage and wildlife crossings along the road to alert traffic of Caribou migration areas and seasons;
• Appropriate routing of Project to minimize impacts to cultural keystone species;
• Physical deterrents to road access such as road tolls or fencing and signage;
• Follow Best Management Practices for Aggregate Activities and Forest Dwelling Woodland Caribou in Ontario;
• Minimize habitat change and fragmentation;
• Minimize the density of linear features to avoid an increase in predator efficiency;
• Minimize activities that would increase mortality;
• Minimize disturbances and sensory disturbances to the habitat;
• Aquatic feeding, calving and winter habitat with Late Winter Cover identified during baseline to be avoided as much as possible by the Project location;
• Aquatic feeding and calving areas to be flagged during construction monitoring and to schedule the activities outside of those timing windows. For example, construction work in riparian areas would be removed in winter when Caribou are less likely to be feeding;
• Caribou monitoring program prior to and throughout construction and operations phases which can also be used as baseline information for other development projects in the area;
• Scouting areas prior to construction for Caribou use;
• Installation of equipment or strategies to buffer sensory disturbances;
• Cleaning vehicles and equipment, strategic use of tarps and other materials to capture dust before entering waterbodies;
• Tracking and monitoring water quality prior to and throughout construction and the operations and maintenance phases; and
• Continued consultation and engagement with First Nations prior to initiation of construction work at habitats of culturally sensitive species.

Weenusk First Nation recommended a wildlife and fish monitoring program to test and sample contaminants in the water and wildlife, to start prior to construction and continuing throughout the operation and maintenance phase. This monitoring program would be long-term and support not only this Project but other development in the region as well. Multi-species monitoring was recommended, and Weenusk First Nation requested involvement in the monitoring program (MNP LLP, N.D).

Marten Falls First Nation has commented to have wildlife crossings, particularly for Caribou and moose, and signage for wildlife crossings (Caribou/Aatiik and moose/Moonz). Noise will also affect wildlife and would benefit from more regulations. Some members suggested not to build the roads, and to build it away from moose/Moonz and sensitive animal habitats if there is not a viable option. Environmental monitoring is also recommended so that “government … should share authority with First Nations.” This would also require technical training for their members who are involved in monitoring (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat (Section 12.4, 13.4, and Appendix E of the EAR/IS) describes mitigation measures for potential effects to wildlife due to Project which might create challenges to traditional ways of life such as hunting, trapping and gathering. Vegetation and Wetlands (Section 11.4 and Appendix E of the EAR/IS) describes mitigations measures for potential effects to vegetation and wetlands. Fish and Fish Habitat (Section 10.4) provides mitigations proposed for potential effects to fish and their habitats.

19.3.1.1.2         Timing/seasonality for Harvested Preferred Species

Following suggestions are provided as mitigations with regard to timing/ seasonality harvested species and distance to harvested species:

• Providing access and making accommodations for harvesters and/or wildlife observation and land users throughout the construction phase;
• Maintaining line of site for land users and keeping construction activities and equipment safely away from community members;
• Engage with First Nations communities early in the planning process to understand their harvesting schedules and cultural practices. This incorporates their needs and concerns into the construction schedule;
• Advanced notification to land users and planned trips to refine or modify the schedule of work in locations of use;
• Scheduling or planning timing of construction activities to avoid peak harvesting periods as much as possible;
• Prohibition from fishing for construction workers;
• Restricted access to public to Project area during construction phase;
• Employment provisions for community member participation in traditional activities without negatively affecting employment security;
• Ensure that access routes to traditional harvesting areas remain open and unobstructed. Temporary access roads or detours can be created to facilitate continued harvesting; and
• Provide environmental and cultural awareness training to all Project personnel. With the training to be developed with input from Indigenous Knowledge holders and be considered a part of the Project CEMP.

19.3.1.2         Sites and Areas Used for Traditional Harvesting

The following section provides mitigations for effects to sites and areas utilized for traditional harvesting, in view of effects identified under Section 19.3.1 and the existing condition identified in Section 19.2.2.

19.3.1.2.1         Stewardship and Environmental Management Strategy

A Stewardship and Environmental Management Strategy that integrates Indigenous knowledge and stewardship principles to encourage and support Webequie First Nation and other potentially affected communities to play an active role in protecting the environment, managing natural resources and monitoring potential project impacts is suggested to be developed and implemented (Appendix N- CRP). This strategy will recognize the inherent rights of Indigenous Peoples to oversee their lands and resources and aims to implement the following mitigation and enhancement measures that will allow Indigenous communities to participate in environmental stewardship, and monitoring to actively engage and protect the land and its resources.

Weenusk First Nation recommended a hydrology study of the peatlands to be undertaken as the water moves in different directions and would help determine mitigations for impacts to this area. This study would show how potential contaminants circulate through the peatlands. Weenusk involvement in this study was also recommended
(MNP LLP, N.D.).

The Marten Falls First Nation IK Study identified the following recommendations related to pollution, spills, contaminants (Suslop Inc, 2024):

• Design holding bays to reduce the likelihood of spills;
• A structure “or expectation” to respond to oil spills, such as a trench lined with cement to prevent seepage or burning the oil;
• Fuel stations “should monitor how people are filing their tanks or cans” with foremen and/or security devise as people tend to overfill;
• Adequate lighting at fuel stations and available spill kits so people can clean up;
• The road should have pits stops so drivers can check their vehicle conditions are in working order;
• Barriers along the bridge to “prevent oil or other chemicals from spilling into the waterways”;
• Implement stricter noise regulations;
• Not building the road will prevent all incidents of pollution; and
• Dust tarps or spraying the road with a water based solution.
• Surface Water and Storm Water Management and Monitoring (Section 7.4, Appendix E of the EAR/IS) describes mitigation measures for potential effects to surface water resources due to Project.

19.3.1.3         Access to lands and resources used for traditional harvesting

The following section provides mitigations for effects to the access of sites and areas for traditional harvesting, taking into account the effects identified under Section 19.3.1 along with existing condition identified in Section 19.2.2.

19.3.1.3.1         Preferred harvesting methods and Routes to harvested species including navigable waterways

Mitigation measures for preferred harvesting methods requires further engagement and consultation with First Nations, as there is a lack of sufficient information provided as mitigation measures may be unique to each First Nation. Enhancements for the potential benefits of getting out onto the land and use of employment income on fuel, for example, can improve the duration, distance or frequency of wildlife observation. This benefit of WSR is further explained in Sections 14 and 15.

Potential mitigations to predicted effects on preferred harvesting methods and routes to harvesting species can include the following (please refer to Section 19.4.1 for further mitigations for wildlife and vegetation):

• Timing of construction activities that may cause sensory disturbances outside of the wildlife movement patterns;
• Utilizing on-site controls to buffer the effect of sensory disturbances;
• Installing monitoring devices for sensory effects such as noise, to track and alert construction workforce when above a set threshold; and
• Establishment of road controls from control or access points to tolls, and enforcement.

Following mitigations and recommendations were suggested by First Nations that provided IK studies for the WSR:

• Design culverts and bridges to mitigate impacts to water quality (Webequie First Nation);
• To implement road user-fees for visiting hunters (Marten Falls First Nation).
• Setup requirements for visiting hunters to use a Webequie First Nation licensed hunting business (Webequie First Nation);
• Usage of dust suppressors to minimize the volume of airborne dust and effects on air quality (Webequie First Nation); and
• WSR designs to consider minimizing impacts to fish and fish habitat (Webequie First Nation).

19.3.1.3.2         Distance to Harvesting Preferred Species

As mentioned under Section 19.3.1, adverse effects on the distance to harvesting preferred species are not expected to be numerous, and instead WSR will provide easier access and reduce the inconvenience of travelling the distance for traditional activities. The following mitigations are proposed in addition to measures proposed under above section and under Sections 19.4.1.1 and 19.4.1.2:

• Establish buffer zones around key harvesting areas to the extent possible for protection against any direct effects; and
• Establish seasonal restrictions on construction activities to avoid critical periods for wildlife, such as breeding or migration seasons (please refer to Section 19.4.1.1 for further details.

19.3.1.4         Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights with Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

A Stewardship and Environmental Management Strategy will be implemented for the Project in consideration of effects on cultural and traditional land and resources, and effects on exercise rights; please refer to Section 19.4.1.2 and CRP (Appendix N) for further details on this strategy. Key comments received from the Indigenous Nations that provided IK studies and participated in the consultation focused on impacts on fish, wildlife resources and habitats, and the loss of areas used for the exercise of rights. Increased pressure on resources, and the potential for reduced access to hunting, trapping, fishing, and plant harvesting areas within the Project area, and effects on cultural areas of importance were also identified concerns.

The following recommendations were made by Webequie First Nation, Marten Falls First Nation and Weenusk First Nation to limit potential effects on their exercise of rights within their IK studies (Stantec, 2025, Suslop Inc., 2024 and MNP LLP, N.D):

• To keep an open and honest dialogue by the government and detailed information to be shared with the community regarding the Project (Webequie First Nation);
• Work with Webequie First Nation land users to mitigate changes to accessing traditional lands and waters through timing of Project activities, scheduling of construction, signage, and identification of potential alternate routes of access (Webequie First Nation);
• Implementation of measures or security by Webequie First Nation monitors that would allow the community to know who is using the road and for what purposes (Webequie First Nation);
• Industrial or commercial lands to be set aside near the “Ring of Fire” for Webequie First Nation community members to grow their own businesses and cater to those working at proposed mine sites; any lands zoned for this purpose should prioritize the establishment of businesses owned by Webequie First Nation first (Webequie First Nation);
• Possibility of searching individuals who are accessing the community by road for drugs and alcohol (Webequie First Nation);
• To receive equitable compensation, potentially through a 50/50 revenue sharing model with development corporations or companies operating in traditional territory (Marten Falls First Nation);
• Land to not be sold for development as it is considered invaluable for living, raising families, and preserving wisdom and survival skills (Marten Falls First Nation);
• Revenue generated from roads or related development projects should be directed towards acquiring equipment necessary for Marten Falls First Nation members to live off the land, thereby promoting cultural preservation and lifestyle maintenance (Marten Falls First Nation);
• Prohibition of Project workers bringing firearms or fishing gear to Project site while working (Webequie First Nation);
• Timber cut for the construction of the Project to be provided to Webequie First Nation to utilize (Webequie First Nation);
• Medicines along the proposed route to be identified by Webequie First Nation Elders and Knowledge Holders before construction begins (Webequie First Nation). Further information provided in Section 19.4.1.1;
• For construction activities to be staggered so that effects are felt in one location at a time rather than all throughout a particular area or zone (Webequie First Nation);
• To consider inclusion of Webequie First Nation monitors during construction phase (Webequie First Nation). Please refer to the CRP (Appendix N) for further details.
• Demarcate segments of traditional trails that will be disrupted by the Project (Webequie First Nation);
• Communicate the schedule of Project activities throughout site preparation, construction and operation to Webequie First Nation land users (Webequie First Nation); and
• Webequie First Nation to be allowed a measure of control over the section of the road that accesses the community (Webequie First Nation).

The mitigation measures identified in the following sections will also serve as measures to minimize or avoid potential impacts on potential or established Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. Discipline specific mitigation measures are outlined in the relevant sections of the EAR/IS.

WSR CEMP and OEMP that will be developed prior to construction phase provides information regarding identified environmental (vegetation, wildlife, nuisances, etc.) impacts, mitigation measures, and monitoring requirements. CEMP document outlines how environmental impacts are to be managed during the construction phase and includes mitigations for impacts to traditional hunting, fishing, gathering, air and noise and vibration and similar. The WSR CEMP will include, at a minimum, the project description, project roles and responsibilities, project contacts, environmental awareness and education, health and safety, environmental protection and controls, component management plans, along with the following plans and measures. Further information regarding measures provided for cultural and traditional land and resource use effects are described in the CRP (Appendix N).

The IK studies provided for the Project also suggested mitigations and recommendations for the construction and operation and maintenance phase of the Project. The following suggestions were provided within the Webequie First Nation rights assessment study (Stantec, 2025):

• Usage of dust suppressors to reduce effects on air quality and airborne dust contaminants entering the water or landing on nearby vegetation.
• Design of culverts and bridges to mitigate impacts on water quality. Further information provided under
  Section 19.3.1.1 and Project Description (Section 04) regarding design measures taken for waterbody crossings.
• The gravel which is located close to the community to be left for Webequie First Nation’s use.
• WSR to be designed to minimize impacts on fish and fish habitat. Further information provided under
  Section 19.3.1.1, Surface Water (Section 07), and Fish and Fish Habitat (Section 10).
• WSR to be designed to mitigate impacts to surface water and ground water. Further information provided under Section 19.3.1.1, Surface Water (Section 07), and Groundwater (Section 08).
• Restrict site preparation, construction and operation activities to the Project footprint as much as possible to reduce disturbances to adjacent forest land. Further information provided under Sections 19.4.1.1 and 19.4.2.1.
• Any timber and brush cleared for construction of the WSR to be cleaned up.
• Establish and utilize checkpoints to clean equipment and monitor for invasive species that are carried on boat motors and snowmobiles. Further information provided in Sections 19.4.1.1 and 19.4.2.1.
• Establish signage for reduced speed limits (seasonally or permanent) to reduce wildlife collisions and make drivers aware of important calving habitats.
• For construction activities to avoid any possible waterbody contamination during fish spawning times. Recommended to use best available technologies and materials to prevent this. Further information provided under Section 19.3.1.1, Surface Water (Section 07), and Fish and Fish Habitat (Section 10).
• Reduce the idling of heavy fleet vehicles when not operating. Further information provided under Air Quality Impact Assessment (Appendix G).
• Limit all clearing and environmental impacts to the greatest extent possible.
• Provide measures to reduce sensory disturbances caused by construction, road maintenance, and traffic conditions. Please refer to mitigations provided in Section 14 (Social Environment) and Section 17 (Human Health).

19.3.2         Changes in Cultural Continuity

The IKLRU program compiled and analyzed activities across the territory overlapping with the LSA and RSA. These activities include both Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) and Traditional Land and Resource Use (TLRU) such as harvesting, habitation, cultural and spiritual areas, areas of important habitat and environmental changes. Section 19.3.2 analyzed the effects pathways the project has on cultural continuity based on the information that has been shared by some first nations.  Further engagement is required to address all potential concerns of nations in both the LSA and RSA for the project.

The Heritage and Archaeological Resources Management Plan (Section 6 of Appendix S and Appendix E of the EAR/IS) describes mitigation measures for cultural heritage and archaeological resources, including:

• General procedures to identify, report, and manage heritage and archaeological resources during construction;
• Construction activities and staging to be carefully planned and executed to prevent impacts on identified Cultural Heritage Landscape areas;
• General procedures and protocol for encountering unexpected heritage or archaeological resources during ground disturbance via the heritage or archaeological finds contingency plan;
• Heritage or Archaeological Finds Contingency Plan with information to identify heritage or archaeological materials if encountered in the construction area, procedures for notification and reporting the find, and actions to follow to protect the site from impacts;
• Advanced detailed site visits with community members to identify specific locations of burials during the detailed design phase to determine changes to the Project to avoid impacts;
• Development of protocols to respect and protect burial and other cultural artefacts and/or to handle appropriately; and
• Recruiting of First Nation construction monitors during construction activities to oversee implementation of mitigations during construction.

Heritage consultants (ASI, 2024) have also identified cultural sensitivity training for construction workforce, consultation based on Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002, Truth and Reconciliation and UNDA, Canada. The Cultural Heritage Report (ASI, 2024) recommendations may also be considered here:

• Further consultation to identify sites and areas of significance;
• Determine mitigation measures or the appropriate use of the following:
  • Avoidance;
  • Alternative design or construction approaches;
  • Monitor;
  • Protect;
  • Relocation;
  • Remedial landscaping; and
  • Documentation.
• Training and involvement of spiritual monitors;
• Determine the need for Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports and/or Feature-Specific Heritage Impact Assessment Report; and
• Staging and construction activities to be “suitably planned and undertaken to avoid impacts to identified C.H.L.s.” (Cultural Heritage Landscape).

Cultural, sacred, spiritual or ceremonial, named and language places and areas may also be affected by construction activities and require further engagement on these locations, the ways they are used to develop appropriate mitigations that are culturally relevant to these specific locations.  

Access from non-Indigenous peoples may access these cultural and spiritually important areas and sites as the WSR and other proposed transportation corridors may connect to the provincial highway network. This can be mitigated by limiting access to non-Indigenous people, and enforcement of vehicle use.

19.3.2.1         Change/Loss to Quantity (number or ha) or Quality of Culturally and Spiritually Important Sites and Areas (e.g., Ceremonial, sacred, teaching)

Based on this analysis of effects in Section 19.3.1.3, this section provides recommendations and mitigations to minimize and/or prevent adverse effects to quantity (number or ha) or quality of culturally and spiritually important sites and areas.

The Cultural Heritage Report (ASI, 2024) summarized a number of mitigation measures or approaches with regard to this aspect, including the following:

• Further research and engagement with Indigenous communities to discuss significance and potential cultural heritage values for the purpose of obtaining further insights on the adverse impacts which can better inform appropriate mitigation measures.
• Consider mitigation framework or hierarchy to identify whether they require avoidance (of construction effects), alternative design or construction approaches, monitoring, other forms of protection, relocation, landscape remediation, documentation or a combination thereof.
• Implement mitigation measures suggested by the IK studies of Webequie First Nation, Weenusk First Nation and Marten Falls First Nation:
  • Establish checkpoints for equipment and vehicles (during construction and operations phases) including boats for invasive species and micro-organisms (Webequie First Nation);
  • Sacred areas to be monitored and protected by spiritual monitors trained and guided by Elders of the community (Webequie First Nation);
  • Additional studies such as a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report and/or feature-specific Heritage Impact Assessment (Webequie First Nation); and
  • Further engagement with Marten Falls First Nation regarding the aggregate extraction or blasting of rock where the Ma-ma-kwa-se-sak live as they are considered important to the community’s oral history and culture (Marten Falls First Nation).

The report for noise assessment (SLR Consulting Ltd., 2024), included the following mitigations (Appendix J):

• Consultation and engagement with the community when “noise levels during long-term construction result in a greater than 6.5% increase in %HA” for construction activities that are longer than 1 year per Health Canada guidelines;
• Construction to be limited to daytime period, especially near residences;
• Equipment to be kept properly maintained to limit noise emissions and utilize with muffling devices;
• Verify equipment to comply with MOE NPC-115 guidelines when handling complaints;
• Field investigations to better determine alternative noise measures; and
• The effects of noise and vibration from blasting at the aggregate sites did not predict extents of effects from the source of the blasts. Mitigation included controls in blast design which can be confirmed through monitoring.

Section 4.2 of the Webequie On-Reserve Land Use Plan (Cultural Protection Guidelines) may also be helpful to address negative effects to culturally and spiritually important areas. These guidelines include:

• Site planning and design including mapping to identify the areas and incorporation into site plans and other construction document;  
• Appropriate setbacks to be established based on the nature and use of each cultural area (e.g. archaeological sites, traditional use or cultural practices etc.);
• Vegetation removal and other land works are not included in the setback and should be indicated in the construction documents. Some exceptions to setbacks include construction for paths, boardwalks, viewing platforms, shelters where appropriate;
• Building design that celebrates and expresses Webequie culture includes space for expressing and practicing culture whether it is art, celebrations, gathering, making traditional crafts or other activities;
• Gateway and other similar features that indicate Webequie presence and reflect people, culture and reflect traditional building styles can also be considered; and
• Protection of the sensitive cultural areas and their setbacks to be indicated with high visibility materials or fencing during construction.

19.3.2.2         Change to Access/Routes to Culturally and Spiritually Important Sites and Areas Including Use of Navigable Waterways

Waterbody crossings that are part of existing travel routes may be affected by construction. These locations may impede access to cultural and spiritually important areas. Waterbody crossings that have not been designed for navigation may benefit from further engagement with community members to incorporate clearance for small watercrafts.

Community members may benefit from the WSR and use it for convenient and/or alternate mode of transportation to access the cultural and spiritually important sites and areas in the LSA and also in the RSA if it is combined with other modes of travel.

Section 7.4.4 (Mitigations for permanent waterbody crossings) provides details on mitigations for waterbody crossings. For potential changes to water quantity (flow/discharge, water levels), waterbody crossings are to be designed with single-span elements (bridges or culverts) where possible, to limit the encroachment of structures into stream channels and thereby minimize the effect on discharge under variable flow conditions. Three of the waterbody crossings require multiple spans (WB-1, WC-3, and WC-27), and 28 crossings were designed with single-span elements. Hydrology estimates were used to size waterbody crossing structures based on 100-year return period peak flood events and included an increase adjustment, or up-sizing, to account for climate change. From a hydraulic perspective, the structures have been designed to pass frequent floods or precipitation events (two-year return period) with minimal effect on stream discharge, accommodate fish passage requirements (MTO, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada [DFO]) and where navigable waterways were identified the design of culverts and bridges has made allowance for a minimum navigational clearance, or opening, for small motorized and unmotorized watercraft passage.

19.3.2.3         Change in Distance to Culturally and Spiritually Important Sites and Areas

The construction activities may impede the use of existing water-based and land-based routes during the construction phase. Advanced notification for planned events and engagement with land users to identify time periods in the workforce that may affect travel routes is proposed.

The following mitigations are proposed in addition to measures mentioned under Section 19.4.2 and mitigations for reclamation and restoration under Section 19.4.1.1.1:

• Consultation with First Nations to establish and communicate temporary alternative routes to culturally and spiritually important sites and areas during construction phase;
• Demarcation of areas and sites of cultural and traditional importance to the First Nations during construction phase; and
• Setup of protocols and schedules for working around culturally and traditionally important sites and areas.

19.3.2.4         Change to Sufficiency of Lands and Resources for Cultural Practices

Webequie First Nation and Marten Falls First Nation, along with other First Nations, have concerns related to stewardship regarding sufficiency of lands and resources. The communities have requested to be involved and have authority to make decisions that allow them to protect their resources, not only for harvesting wildlife but also waterbodies as many people prefer a source of water for consumption. Road use may provide access into the territory for non-Indigenous people which may affect overharvesting and trapping, as well as invasive plant species. The WSR can consider limitations or restrictions to access by non-Indigenous community members and visitors. Restricted access points can include security checks which can also have vehicle cleaning areas to prevent occurrences. The Ontario Invasive Plant Council includes a “Clean Equipment Protocol for Industry” (Halloran, 2013) for further consideration.

The Weenusk IK Study community members participants proposed meetings and visits with Webequie First Nation for “community-to-community” dialogue along with Marten Falls First Nation and be involved in resource management across their traditional areas. They also seek establishing an agreement with Marten Falls and Webequie First Nations to “offset any potential impacts” to their governance rights which includes quality of life improvements as well. Other Weenusk First Nation IK Study participants noted that there may be an opportunity to improve quality of life as the next generation “could generate something in the future. Like, for instance, our winter road is hard to travel on … we get limited access of lumber … each winter. That’s the only time we can haul our stuff, so everything is always rushed, so it’s expensive to live up here – very expensive.” (MNP LLP, N.D)

Marten Falls First Nation is also concerned with over harvesting and/or outside and external influences that would have a negative effect on lands and resources for future generations. Regulations or controls to prevent these issues from occurring are recommended and suggested “that something like a Public Lands Act be put into place” along with stricter licensing measures. Part of this effort includes enhanced enforcement which is balanced with the least disruption and harassment from them too, and so, suggested a “police force (or tribal police)” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

A physical deterrent such as a road toll would “limit the number of people using the roads and using Marten Falls First Nation’s traditional territory” would also address their concern of overharvesting, along with ‘no hunting or fishing’ signage, fences built along the rivers to prevent boat access. Another deterrent for outsiders or unknowledgeable travelers included signage around hazardous landscape elements for boulders, rapids, whirlpools and other unsafe conditions.

The following measures are proposed in addition to the above:

• Identify and demarcate areas of cultural significance to protect these areas and develop measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for effects on cultural practices to the extent possible;
• Engage with local communities which are affected to understand their cultural practices and needs and develop mitigations are necessary;
• Adopt a landscape-scale approach to assess and manage cultural resources by considering the broader cultural and historical context of the area and implementing mitigation measures that preserve the integrity of cultural landscapes;
• Implement adaptive management practices that allow for ongoing monitoring and adjustment of mitigation measures based on feedback from affected communities and changes in environmental conditions (please refer to Appendix N on monitoring and adaptive management); and
• Cultural awareness training be provided to the Project workers to provide comprehensive information about the importance of cultural practices and the need to protect cultural resources.

19.3.2.5         Change to Cultural Traditions or Practices

Webequie First Nation has general or non-specific concerns about Project-related effects on traditional land use, traditional values, language and teachings. Baseline information, including community well-being, of community members can be used for tracking and monitoring the social and cultural effects across subpopulations including youth, community members who leave or return to the reserve, Elders to understand any differences and determine appropriate options. The following measures can be considered:

• Opportunities for Elders and youth land use to get out onto the land and teach/learn stewardship and promote connection to land;
• Use of timber from removed vegetation for traditional or cultural purposes such as cabin-building, which also requires upgrades to a sawmill and potential professionally stamped lumber;
• Community members to be recruited as spiritual monitors and liaison with the community regarding any construction activities around culturally and spiritually important sites and areas;
• Developing opportunities to harmonize traditional knowledge and modern culture to protect and improve culture, as provided in CCP; and
• Targeted programs for youth involvement and interest in cultural values, practices and activities.

Marten Falls First Nation is concerned with overall access to drugs and recommended that recommended “limiting road access to outsiders and providing security along the roads” which would include tolls and/or inspection areas. Safety features with the road such as First Nation or Tribal police force, and mental health services and treatment covered by government and industry for First Nation community members would allow healing and reduce substance misuse. They would like to see healing “address[es] the mental or physical pain or distress … [and] not supplement […] members with prescription drugs to treat addictions”. In alignment with this is educational programing for younger generations on the effects of alcohol and drug misuse (Suslop Inc., 2024). Enforcement would also address drunk driving.

One broad concern to protect, enhance and “ensure culture, traditions, and language(s) are not lost” is to have cultural programs and activities geared to younger generations as they have a role to play in defining progress and development. This requires areas in and around the Marten Falls First Nation traditional territory to be protected and preserved for cultural activities and retreats.

The Marten Falls First Nation IK Study also included the following additional concerns and recommendations (Suslop Inc., 2024):

• Training and education to secure employment, such as driver training, which would encourage members to stay close to the community and region;
• Develop a strategy for youth and younger generations’ involvement regarding future development;
• Establish Unions so they “gain access to quality employment”;
• Fair compensation or 50/50 revenue sharing with development companies who are operating in their traditional territory;
• Using the revenue generated by the road or development for equipment they need to live off the land which would “promote more LRU and help Marten Falls First Nation members maintain their culture and lifestyles”; and
• No selling the land to development because “It doesn’t belong to anybody. It’s not for sale. It’s for living. It’s for bringing up kids, family. It taught us wisdom, taught us to survive”.

Marten Falls First Nation also identified that more consideration is required to determine recommendations on “preventing interferences with land use”, “preventing loss of connection to the land”, and “preventing negative impacts on Marten Falls First Nation members’ freedom”.

19.3.2.6         Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights with Cultural Continuity

The CRP (Appendix N) provides details measures proposed for mitigating effects on the biophysical environment as well as cultural continuity. Mitigations and recommendations with regard to cultural continuity are described in the following sections of CRP (Appendix N):

• Section N7.5.1 – Environmental Management Plans for Protecting Environmental Quality;
• Section N7.5.2 – Stewardship and Environmental Management Strategy within the CRP; and
• Section N7.6.1 – Cultural Enrichment Plan.

The following measures are proposed for effects identified under Section 19.3.1.3:

• Engage Indigenous Nations who have traditional territory overlapping the Project area in implementing measures to minimize effects on traditional land and resource us;
• CEMP Environmental and Cultural Awareness and Education Plan;
• Incorporation of traditional learning and cultural teachings into training and develop education, skills and training approach for community members to align with Project opportunities;
• Creation of policies that offer flexible work schedules and leave options for Indigenous employees, enabling them to participate in vital cultural practices such as harvesting, traditional learning, and healing activities;
• Enhancement of access and reduce obstacles for community members to engage in cultural activities; and
• Implementation of environmental training and awareness program for employees.

The following recommendations have been made by Webequie First Nation for mitigating effects on cultural continuity rights:

• Provide funding to support language revitalization efforts and the preservation of the community’s dialect;
• Provide funding to support the long-term success of the Choose Life program; and
• Protect sacred areas through the use of spiritual monitors that are trained by Elders in the community.

19.3.3         Socio-economic, Health and Well-being

Socio-economy, health and well-being mitigations are explored in detail in the following sections:

• Section 14 (Social Environment);
• Section 17 (Human Health);
• Appendix M (Gender Based Analysis+);
• Appendix N (CRP);
• Appendix P (Human Health Risk Assessment); and
• Appendix Q (Health Impact Assessment).

The following recommendations were made by Webequie First Nation to limit potential Project related effects on their exercise of Indigenous and Treaty Rights associated with socio-economic and well-being (Stantec, 2025):

• Implementation of measures or security by Webequie First Nation monitors that would allow the community to know who is using the road and for what purposes. Additionally, the possibility of searching individuals who are accessing the community by road for drugs and alcohol.
• Provide funding for housing to support the aging population, such as townhouses or old age homes.
• Provide funding for current issues related to housing and overcrowding, as well as treatment centres and a land-based healing program for people dealing with addictions.
• Priority should be given to economic development opportunities for Webequie First Nation members.
• Industrial or commercial lands should be set aside near the “Ring of Fire” for Webequie First Nation community members to grow their own businesses and cater to those working at proposed mine sites; any lands zoned for this purpose should prioritize the establishment of businesses owned by Webequie First Nation first.

19.3.4         Self-Determination and Self-Governance

The following recommendations were made by Webequie First Nation (Stantec, 2025) and Weenusk First Nation (MNP LLP, n.d) to limit potential Project related effects on their exercise of Indigenous and Treaty Rights associated with self-determination and self-governance:

Rights Related to Customs, Protocols, and Laws

• Implement measures to prevent accidents and spills, such as road signs, Indigenous monitoring, and speed enforcement.
• Webequie First Nation should be consulted on all aggregate source locations; studies are required to identify gravel east of the community.
• Webequie First Nation members should have input on how accidents will be managed and mitigated.
• Webequie First Nation Indigenous monitors should provide input on the Project’s overall design, including the proposed route, locations for camps, and all water crossings.
• Open, honest and transparent conversations with Webequie First Nation members regarding the Project are required.
• Development of the Project should be done in respect of Webequie First Nation’s Three-Tier model.
• Impacts associated with the Webequie Supply Road should be communicated to Nation members.

Right of Access and Governance Rights

• Continue to engage with Indigenous Nations regarding the development and promotion of cultural sensitivity training.
• Regularly communicate the schedule of project activities with Indigenous Nations throughout all project phases.
• Ongoing engagement with potentially affected Indigenous Nations would be conducted to address potential conflicts between project activities and scheduling of traditional practices and the exercise of rights, and potential impacts to harvesting areas and resources of importance for the exercise of rights.
• Direct meetings between Webequie First Nation, Marten Falls First Nation and Weenusk First Nation would represent an acknowledgement of Weenusk First Nation’s governance and right to manage the resources in their traditional areas.
• Establish an agreement between Weenusk and the communities of Marten Falls and Webequie to offset potential impacts to Weenusk’s governance rights and contaminants in traditional areas.
• Weenusk First Nation should be informed and involved in Impact Benefit Agreements (IBA) if any activities affect water or waterways (MNP LLP, n.d).
• Agreements with Webequie First Nation or Marten Falls First Nation should focus not only on mitigation but also on improving the quality of life for Weenusk members through investments in education, clean water, and economic infusion.

19.3.5         Summary

Table 19‑16 identifies key mitigation measures to eliminate, reduce or minimize potential adverse effects, or enhance positive effects of the Project identified in Sections19.3. Further measures will be provided in the CRP (Appendix N), as well as the CEMP and OEMP component plans.  

For the purposes of the summary table below, based on currently available information, the potential effects identified in relation to Aboriginal and Treaty Rights are understood to align with those associated with traditional land use and cultural continuity. Accordingly, the same mitigation measures proposed for traditional land use are considered applicable to the protection of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.

Table 19‑16:     Summary of Potential Effects, Mitigation Measures and Predicted Net Effects for Current and Historical Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes and Cultural Continuity

*C = Construction Phase; O = Operations Phase

19.4            Impacts on the Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

The following section provides identified potential effects of the Project that could lead to the infringement of Aboriginal and Treaty rights of Indigenous communities in the LSA and RSA. The information is based on Section 19.3, as well as other sections of the EAR/IS that described predicted effects on the social environment (Section 14), economic environment (Section 15) and human health (Section 17).  

19.4.1         Rights Related to Current and Historic Use of Lands and Resources for Traditional Purposes

19.4.1.1         Webequie First Nation

Webequie First Nation requires availability of sufficient quality and quantity of harvested resources and the ability to harvest preferred species at preferred locations using preferred methods as noted in the Webequie First Nation IK Study report. These traditional use resources such as wildlife, fish, plants and water are currently available in the LSA and RSA. The availability of these resources enables traditional activities such as hunting, fishing, trapping, and food and medicinal plant harvesting.

Caribou migration patterns that overlap with the Project have been documented within the Webequie First Nation reserve and north of the Project Footprint. These patterns could be altered due to vegetation removal, construction and use of supportive infrastructure (security fencing), vehicle use creating sensory disturbances, predator use of the corridor, and use of the corridor by competitors (e.g., moose).

Loss of and/or alteration of sites used for hunting could lead to a loss of access to culturally significant sites and a shift in harvesting patterns, ultimately impacting the community’s connection to the land and the transmission of traditional knowledge.

While fish habitat is anticipated to be preserved in most locations with arch open bottom culverts spanning the entire bankfull width of the watercourses, some destruction of fish habitat will be unavoidable during construction of bridge pier footings in-water.

Fishing has always been and continues to be a significant activity among community members of Webequie First Nation. Fish have been plentiful for their ancestors and community members, serving as an important food source that is available year-round (Stantec, 2024). The construction of the proposed road has the potential to result in the loss or alteration of traditional fishing sites that are essential to Webequie First Nation for subsistence, cultural continuity, and intergenerational knowledge transfer.

The potential construction-related effect of the Project on trapping identified by the Webequie community may:

• Disrupt community or family group’s trapping practices;
• Intensify issues with the regulatory registered trapline system, which are considered to be culturally repressive (Long, et al., (2017) and Tsuji/Long 2017 cited in Stantec, 2024);
• Increased trapping occurring from non-community members.

The Project will cross eskers and some eskers may be used as a source of aggregate for road construction and operation and maintenance. This is a concern to the Webequie community since the esker formations can be important habitat for wildlife, especially small animals and migrating birds, as well as plants used for food and medicinal purposes. In particular, the disturbance of plants in these areas were identified as a concern, and it was emphasized that the Webequie community must be involved in finalizing exact locations of eskers and aggregate source areas.

Many Webequie community members collect drinking water from Winisk Lake, although there have been concerns in recent years about increased cases of cancer in the community (Stantec, 2024). Webequie community members access spring water sources throughout the study area including two sites within the LSA, 11 spring water sources within the RSA and seven more outside of the RSA (Stantec, 2024).

Participants have noted that although Aggregate Source Pile 2 was moved in an earlier planning phase of the EAR/IS preparation to accommodate the spring water site at Swinging Tits, ongoing concerns still exist in the community that the ceremonial site will be affected by the road development, along with other drinking water sources (Stantec, 2024).

Access may be disrupted by the destruction or modification of trails, installation of barriers such as gates or fences, and increased noise or visual disturbances from traffic and construction. These changes can affect the ability to engage in traditional practices and alter the experience of being on the land.

Water is “the most precious element” and is “a gift from Keyshay-Manidoo (Creator)” which is a cultural and spiritual necessity for all beings. Waterways are “cultural monuments” as ancestral travel routes that connect people to their traditional area and to neighbouring communities (Webequie First Nation, 2019).

The use of water-based travel routes or “waterways” carries socio-cultural and spiritual importance for Webequie First Nation as “[w]aterways are cultural monuments due to their longstanding use as ancestral travel routes that connect Webequie People to their traditional area and neighbouring communities” (Webequie First Nation, 2019). Webequie First Nation land users and harvesters may be affected by Project construction activities regarding waterways crossings which may impede access to locations which were previously travelled by boat/ watercrafts during the construction phase.

The Project will provide year-round road access to areas of Webequie First Nation’s traditional territory from the Webequie community. Webequie First Nation community members anticipate that the Project will provide “easier access to the traditional areas for community members such as areas where moose and goose are harvested” (Stantec, 2024). Increased access will also provide potential for the creation of new travel routes as one Webequie First Nation IK Study participant noted that they would “likely build trails along the route to access other spring water sites, lakes and rivers” (Stantec, 2024).

The effects of road use on hunting preferred species include:

• Improved access to hunting areas;
• Potential improvements in the number of households and/or household members participating in hunting;
• Improved access and connection to the land;
• Potential improvements in frequency and/or duration of hunting as the delivery of hunting supplies can be sent to a base cabin noting that one participant in the Webequie First Nation IK Study shared that “families can now set up a base at one cabin and depart to several different nearby locations by snowmobile to increase their harvest” (Stantec, 2024); and
• Potential improvement to community health and well-being it provides connection to the landscape and helps maintain community and kinship ties and values.

The potential adverse effects during operation and maintenance of the road may alter the harvesting practices in the following ways:

• Changes in the Webequie community’s practice to observe wildlife and adapt their hunting tactics;
• Increased conflict, tension, misunderstandings with enforcement and/or non-Indigenous harvesters;
• Imposition of new government and enforcement rules;
• Reduced quality and/or quantity or harvested wildlife and plant resources or concerns related to increased competition for wildlife resources;
• Reduced preparing, utilizing or teaching practices to identify and use different parts of the animal for sustenance, such as making nokihaygun (a type of pemmican), well-being, healing, health aids; and
• Introduction of invasive or non-native species.

Webequie First Nation community may be confronted with changes or conflicts in the new ways of experiencing place and being on the land when they are actively working to maintain the Project over the course of the operations phase.

This area is described as “the lungs of the earth” and disturbing it without stewardship may “cause it to become unstable” (Stantec, 2024). The experience and connection to land relates to teachings and the Creator and the related principles may also be drawn into the new experience of operation and maintenance activities. It may change the relationship of well-being and healing journeys and cultural traditions and practices at cultural and spiritual locations.

19.4.1.2         Other LSA Communities

Community members from Marten Falls First Nation expressed concern that the Project could negatively impact moose and caribou populations—species that are not only vital for sustenance but also central to cultural identity.

Participants emphasized the of protecting the species – the “negative impact on the health and size of animal population, particularly the moose”; therefore, “[i]t is critical that species like moose and Caribou are protected as much as possible (Suslop Inc., 2024).

The Marten Falls First Nation IK Study also indicated their concern related to the Project’s effects on Caribou migration. (Suslop Inc., 2024). If the Project causes changes to the health of the Caribou or wildlife populations, it will affect how community members can harvest them. The potential disappearance of certain species, including Caribou, could alter the cultural identity Marten Falls First Nation (Suslop Inc., 2024). Some community members have concerned that development will hinder their ability to use the land for these practices, which are crucial for maintaining balance, sustenance, culture, and identity (Suslop Inc., 2024).

The potential for perceived undesirable change to Caribou migration and calving is presented in Weenusk First Nation IK Study. While the resources in the traditional territory are considered to be “plentiful enough to sustain the community, and there is minimal concern about the quality of these resources”, some Weenusk First Nation IK participants indicated that they are concerned with Caribou that “they’re starting to decline” and having less fat (MNP LLP, n.d.).

Harvested food sustains the community members. These foods are “generally more preferred” and are harvested year-round.

Changes that may alter or impact Caribou migration routes (shown in Traditional Ecological Knowledge map of Weenusk First Nation IK Study) may also lead to changes in the Weenusk First Nation harvesting, experience, availability, and quantity and/or quality of the species. The Caribou migration may shift as a result of development, potential over-harvesting by non-Indigenous or non-Weenusk community members and other factors external to the Project.

Attawapiskat First Nation members identified concerns that changes to hydrology may alter drainage patterns, which will have implications for soils, vegetation, and wildlife. Attawapiskat First Nation is concerned that “surface water” is one of the environmental components that is being evaluated in isolation, without looking at linkages with other parts of the ecosystem (Nakogee, 2020). The community has highlighted concerns such as potential effects to the Ekwan River and Attawapiskat River which are heavily used by Attawapiskat traditional land users, regional effects of the road on water, fish and wildlife and on downstream communities, potential effects to peatlands and disruptions to drainage for fish and wildlife outside of the Project footprint, potential effects on the subsistence economy as this sustains Attawapiskat First Nation culturally, physically, spiritually, and socially, potential effects of contamination of heavy metals including chromium and mercury methylation and cumulative effects (Nakogee, 2020).

Neskantaga First Nation noted that preliminary research completed by them concluded that there are likely historic trails that intersect the proposed Project (Peerla, 2021a). There could be potential impacts from blasting to fish and aquatic resources, including incubating eggs and resident and migrating fish. Required buffer zones and timing windows will not mitigate all impacts to aquatic resources, including several species of resident fish (Peerla, 2021b). The community indicated that Neskantaga’s land use options will be permanently altered by the Project as the Webequie Supply Road will bisect Neskantaga’s lands and forever change the options for ensuring the continued practice of Neskantaga’s way of life on Neskantaga territory. Neskantaga First Nation noted that the project directly impacts Neskantaga First Nation’s traplines and falls within Neskantaga’s Area of Interest.

Neskantaga First Nation has a sacred, legal obligation to protect, defend and steward the water, land, air, and resources of our territory. From Neskantaga’s perspective, they are uniquely vulnerable to the impact of the Supply Road and induced development of the entire Ring of Fire region, and will bear the burden of significant risks arising from the roads and mines.

For Weenusk First Nation and the community of Peawanuck, the Winisk River watershed—including Winisk Lake and other waterbodies crossed by the Project—is central to traditional harvesting. “Ultimately, the waters in Weenusk’s traditional areas are a primary aspect that supports Weenusk way of life” as the water systems support resources for fish, wildlife, and vegetation and also travel through the territory to connect Weenusk community members to their traditional territory (MNP LLP, n.d.). Any disruption to these water systems could affect both the physical access to harvesting areas and the cultural and spiritual connection to the land.

“Freedom” was also another term that ties into the experience and connection with land. It is a core aspect of traditional harvesting. Concern that the development will incur more regulations and controls, that “the roads will bring more rules and restrictions around where members can go, what type of activities they can engage in, and so on” (Suslop Inc., 2024). This experience of restrictions to access their traditional territory would be comparable to the trauma of “residential schools” or “prison” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

The experience of place and being on the land, which is also one source of healing for Marten Falls First Nation members, as the community is “just beginning to learn to heal from [past trauma]” and emphasize that their connection to nature makes their Ta “real healing place to be” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

Weenusk First Nation places strong cultural value on the practice of sharing harvested resources within the community (MNP LLP, N.D.). This tradition supports not only physical sustenance but also social cohesion and intergenerational connection – within the community, with other families, extended family members, and Elders. It not only supports human consumption but also ties people together and is a common practice, as one Weenusk First Nation IK Study participant stated, “we do that [share] almost every time we go hunting.” It reinforces community and the importance of connection to each other (MNP LLP, N.D).

19.4.1.3         RSA Communities

The predicted effects are largely not anticipated to extend into the RSAs for the biophysical effects assessments. The predicted effects on availability, quality and quantity of traditionally harvested resources, based on the effects assessments contained in biophysical effects assessment sections of the EAR/IS, are presented in further detail in Section 19.3.1.

19.4.2         Rights Related to Cultural Continuity

19.4.2.1         Webequie First Nation

Webequie First Nations defines their rights to “access traditional lands and waters” as “the right to access the locations, areas, and resources required for the exercise of Webequie First Nation’s Indigenous and Treaty rights, which is dependent on the availability of trails, travel ways and watercourses; the ability to access harvesting sites and areas; the ability to use habitation sites (e.g., camps and cabins), ceremonial and spiritual sites; the ability to access burials and cultural landforms; and the right to maintain a connection to the land” (Stantec, 2025).

Webequie First Nation defines their cultural and experiential rights as the “right to preserve and maintain a distinct Webequie First Nation cultural identity and is contingent on meaningful opportunities for intergenerational teaching and cultural transmission; the right to the quiet enjoyment of the land; the continued relevance of sharing and reciprocity for community cohesion; the ability to maintain language, traditions and cultural practices” (Stantec, 2025).

Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas and/or access to sites used for cultural and spiritual purposes during construction may lead to:

• Loss of Cultural Continuity – Many sites hold historical significance, serving as places for ceremonies, teachings, and passing down traditional knowledge. Loss and/or alteration of sites and areas can disrupt the transmission of cultural practices for the Webequie First Nation community.
• Erosion to Spiritual Practices – These locations are often sacred spaces for prayer, healing, and connection to the land. Loss and/or alteration of a site may lead to feelings of displacement and spiritual disconnect for the Webequie First Nation community.
• Impact on Rights and Land Stewardship – Webequie First Nation has outlined that it has the inherent right to care for and govern their lands, so they remain protected for future generations. Loss and/or alteration of a site can weaken their ability to uphold those responsibilities.
• Challenges to Community Well-being –Traditional lands contribute to mental, physical, and social wellness, whether through hunting, gathering medicines, or holding ceremonies. Loss and/or alteration of a cultural or sacred site can affect overall health and resilience.
• Loss of Historical and Environmental Integrity – the construction of WSR could lead to landscape changes, potentially damaging sacred sites, burial grounds, and areas of ecological importance.
• Sensory Disturbance – construction activities can introduce noise, vibration, dust, artificial lighting, and visual intrusions that disrupt the sensory environment of cultural and spiritual spaces used by Webequie First Nation. This can diminish the site’s spiritual ambiance and interfere with ceremonies or practices that rely on areas that are undisturbed.

Webequie First Nation’s ability to preserve and maintain a distinct Webequie First Nation cultural identity, is contingent on meaningful opportunities for intergenerational teaching and cultural transmission. Without these locations, Webequie First Nation’s cultural and experiential rights would be impacted (Stantec, 2025).

The sacred element of water also has a deep spiritual significance as it “connects all life, whether it’s through consumption, honoured in ceremony or used as transportation” (Stantec, 2024). Waterbodies are highly spiritually important places that the Webequie community is responsible to protect. Changes to water quality and quantity of water may also change the ability of Webequie First Nation to practice ceremonies and connect with their culture.

The construction of WSR can lead to the following effects on change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages:

• Changes in land-based cultural activities – Traditional activities like hunting, trapping, and harvesting may be affected by land fragmentation, environmental disruption, or increased competition from non-Indigenous groups and non-members of Webequie First Nation during construction.
• Changes in language – The increased labour force into Webequie during construction may encourage cultural exchange and language revitalization efforts but could also pressure younger generations to prioritize English over Indigenous languages.
• Economic and social shifts – The construction phase will bring job opportunities that support Indigenous-led cultural initiatives, including language education programs. However, this could shift priorities away from traditional lifestyles.
• Risk of Cultural Dilution – With an influx of non-Indigenous people into Webequie, this could potentially impact the social and cultural dynamics in these communities. This could potentially influence Indigenous traditions and reducing the use of Indigenous languages within daily life.

Development and subsequent in-migration of non-Indigenous people nearby the community has the potential to exacerbate the erosion of Webequie language and culture, particularly amongst youth, who already face challenges in the loss of their cultural identity (Heid et al., 2022 as cited in Intergroup, 2024).

Outsiders” may disrupt or devalue traditional practices and teachings; more technology or digital communications access may amplify the “disruptions” on youth and use of Indigenous language. It may reduce participation in traditional activity and continue to the decreasing time spent on the land, and practices traditional activities. There could be a reduced interest by community members in traditional-based skills and programs in favour of skills training and education aimed at Project job opportunities. A reduced availability or offering of traditional programs could occur due to a lack of interest leading to potential changes to cultural traditions and practices.

Webequie First Nation identified language sites and areas within their IK mapping. Effects to language sites and areas during construction through vegetation removal and ground disturbance could lead to an erosion of cultural identity and heritage. The potential effects of these concerns may negatively affect cultural identity, way of life, community values, spiritual laws (Creator’s laws of relationships with Creator, lands and animals and other people) and seven ancestral teachings about how to treat the environment (truth, humility, respect, love, honesty, courage and wisdom). With the potential degradation of essential practices of Webequie First Nation, it may contribute to the broader context of concerns related to cultural continuity or knowledge transfer to future generations. 

The operation of WSR can lead to the following effects on change to cultural traditions and practices, including use and preservation of Indigenous languages:

• Access to previously difficult-to-reach locations and areas will provide community members with more opportunities to visit and spend time on land.
• Restricted access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes – Some sites may become harder to reach due to land fragmentation or other restrictions imposed by WSR.
• Impact on cultural identity and continuity – When access to cultural and/or sacred areas is lost or altered, it can weaken intergenerational knowledge transfer, making it harder for younger generations to engage with traditional practices and teachings.
• Increased risk of external interference – Once WSR is operational, there is a possibility of encroachment by, tourism, future development or non members of Webequie First Nation into the cultural and sacred sites that may not respect the cultural significance of the sites.

The use of the road can provide an alternate or convenient mode of travel to access the traditional territory. The WSR will provide year-round transportation access which can link Webequie First Nation community members to cultural, sacred and language sites and areas. The use of the road may provide convenient or alternative access to these sites that have been identified in the LSA and potentially within and outside the RSA. Road use is expected to serve commercial and personal vehicles as well. Road use will provide personal vehicle access across the greater geography of the traditional lands. Typical modes of travel are by foot, boat, snowmobile or ATV (all terrain vehicle). This may be a benefit for Webequie community members to get out onto the land for cultural and traditional purposes. Travel routes that access culturally and spiritually important places close to the WSR may be more convenient to access. This may be a positive effect and can reduce the time needed to access distant locations, increase the frequency of trips or reduce the cost of supplies. This benefit may be especially positive for youths who participate in programs and trip opportunities.

19.4.2.2         Other LSA Communities

“[T]he ecological integrity of Marten Falls First Nation’s traditional territory is to ensure that future generations have the open and opportunity to engage in land and resource use” (Suslop Inc., 2024). The risk of losing the ability to maintain traditional practices and harvest resources from the traditional territory can affect their cultural identity and their relationship with the land and other community members. “Marten Falls First Nation members want to protect their lands and resources for future use. Conservation is critical for maintaining their connection to the land and spirituality” (Suslop Inc., 2024).

The Weenusk First Nation IK Study produced an Important Sites map with locations of burial sites, family territory and important sites. Weenusk First Nation has expressed concerns about the ability to pass on their culture and way of life to future generations and that this will affect their community (MNP LLP, N.D.). Any impacts from development to these sites or the perception of these sites are being altered may impact the ability for Weenusk First Nation to transmit culture and way of life to future generations.

The Marten Falls First Nation IKLRU Study shared that they have been able to maintain their language despite efforts of colonizers, impacts of residential schools on intergenerational Knowledge sharing and continue to rebuild their nation. The Weenusk First Nation IK Study (MNP LLP, n.d.) noted that the “majority of community members speak the n-dialect of the Cree language” (Wakenagun, 2023). The Weenusk IK Study also included the VC of identity which included language as an aspect that expressed Weenuski Inninowuk identity.

With the operation and maintenance of WSR, the loss and/or alteration of sites and areas used for cultural and spiritual purposes by LSA communities could be impacted and include the following effects:

• Increased access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes – Road use by the LSA community members may create opportunities to make their own trails off the WSR and towards the culturally and spiritually important sites and areas. This is considered to be a beneficial effect of the Project, as the WSR may provide convenient or alternate mode of travel to important sites across the territory. Improved access to previously difficult-to-reach locations and areas will provide community members with more opportunities to visit and spend time on land.
• Restricted access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes – Some sites may become harder to reach due to land fragmentation or other restrictions imposed by WSR.
• Impact on cultural identity and continuity – When access to cultural and/or sacred areas is lost or altered, it can weaken intergenerational knowledge transfer, making it harder for younger generations to engage with traditional practices and teachings.
• Increased risk of external interference – Once WSR is operational, there is a possibility of encroachment by, tourism, future development or non members of LSA community members into the cultural and sacred sites that may not respect the cultural significance of the sites.

Non-Indigenous people may have access to the territory and the wildlife resources if they are able to use the WSR. This WSR may provide a link to the remote traditional territories from this new transportation access route. The preferred and meaningful manner that Weenusk First Nation harvesters prefer to hunt in is with many animals nearby, where it is quiet and where there are other Weenusk hunters. Their conservation and stewardship protocols include “Do Not Overharvest” and to take only what they and their community need. One of the participants shared that they teach their children to “only kill what you need … [you] don’t kill random things and leave them there.” (MNP LLP, n.d.).

Some Marten Falls First Nation members outlined that the WSR could make their traditional territory more accessible (Suslop Inc, 2024). Having the road would make it easier for Marten Falls First Nation families to take children and youth out on the land…this will allow older generations to teach younger generations about LRU, and the passing on of IK intergenerationally.” (Suslop Inc., 2024). The Project could potentially impact Marten Falls First Nation members well‑being rights with easier access to lands and resources used for cultural and spiritual purposes. There could be easier access to partake in traditional activities and community members could drive to their trapline, hunting and fishing spot instead of accessing this with an off-road vehicle, watercraft or by foot (Suslop Inc., 2024). This greater access to land could benefit Elders if the areas are easier to access as well as families who want to teach their children about traditional activities (Suslop Inc., 2024).

19.4.2.3         RSA Communities

The predicted effects are largely not anticipated to extend into the RSAs for the biophysical effects assessments. The predicted effects on cultural continuity, based on the effects assessments contained in biophysical effects assessment sections of the EAR/IS, are presented in further detail in Section 19.3.1.1.1.

19.4.3         Rights Related to Socio-Economic, Health and Well-Being

Webequie First Nation defines their Socio-economic and Well-being Rights as the “right for Webequie First Nation members to support themselves from their land base and sustain individual and community wellness. This includes the ability to continue traditional economies (including trapping, commercial fishing, and guiding); participation in economic opportunities related to resource development; the right to adequate housing; access to culturally appropriate health care (including traditional healing); the ability to maintain individual and community health and mental wellness; the right to food security; and the right to safe drinking water” (Stantec, 2025).

Predicted effects that could cause the infringement of Aboriginal and Treaty rights of Webequie First Nation include:

• Alteration or deterrence of the harvest and consumption of traditional foods by changing the value or perceived quality of traditional foods;
• Community health impacts from Project-related emissions, mental health and substance use
• Quality of life, impacts from nuisances (i.e., noise, light, and visual disturbances)
• Community cohesion impacts from changes in demographics;
• Community safety of vulnerable groups;
• Economic development;
• Housing and infrastructure improvements;
• Education and training improvements.

The right for community members to support themselves from their land base and sustain individual and community wellness is an important aspect of socio-economic and well-being rights (Stantec, 2025). Any changes or the inability to practice traditional and treaty land rights could impact overall physical and mental health of Indigenous communities.

The Project has the potential to revive the commercial fishing and trapping industries by lowering transportation costs, and increasing profit margins for Webequie commercial fishers and trappers. This revival would benefit both Elders and youth by facilitating intergenerational knowledge transfer and preserving traditional economic activities. Additionally, improved access to the community is expected to boost outsider traffic and enhance employment opportunities in the tourism sector, attracting visitors for guided hunting, trapping, and fishing experiences. These developments would support Webequie First Nation’s socio-economic and well-being rights by providing more opportunities to sustain traditional economies.

The Webequie Supply Road is anticipated to enhance affordability, potentially lowering the cost of living and improving food security by reducing expenses for store-bought foods and goods. Additionally, it will increase access to harvesting areas for sourcing traditional foods. Webequie First Nation has noted that community members currently rely on the existing winter road to reach harvesting areas and city centers for goods and supplies. The new road will support all community members in sustaining themselves from their land base, thereby promoting individual and community wellness (Stantec, 2025).

“During operation, the Project has the potential to increase access to culturally appropriate health care (including traditional healing) through a more frequent presence of doctors, nurses, and other healthcare specialists (dentists, optometrists, etc.) and traditional healers (including midwives) in the community. The road may also improve access to medicinal plant harvesting areas, as the Project intersects with several areas where valued habitats and species identified by Webequie First Nation can be found. These impacts would benefit all members of the community.” (Stantec, 2025).

The WSR Project has the potential to improve employment and economic opportunities for Webequie First Nation members. However, certain subpopulations of Webequie face additional barriers to taking advantage of such opportunities, including women and youth. Many direct and indirect employment opportunities related to the Project will require education, training, and/or experience. Education and training attainment for Webequie members, particularly women and youth, is a challenge. While Project-related employment is anticipated to increase household income, a sudden change in discretionary income may also result in changes in spending decisions that could cause adverse social outcomes between individuals, families, or certain segments of the population, such as women and men.

The Project could also adversely impact commercial hunting, trapping and guiding by reducing opportunities for Webequie commercial guides or introducing competition from non-Indigenous outfitters. The traditional economy is another important aspect of the overall economy within the LSA communities.

The right to adequate housing is included in socio-economic, health and well-being rights and Webequie First Nation currently faces challenges in providing adequate housing due to insufficient community infrastructure. The Project aims to address these issues by facilitating the transportation of construction supplies via WSR, reducing costs significantly. The construction of WSR will not only support improvements in housing conditions but also enable the construction of essential community facilities, such as an Elders ‘ residence, community center, and healing spaces, promoting overall well-being. Additionally, upgrading utilities like water and sewage treatment systems will ensure access to safe drinking water for the community (Stantec, 2025).

“The reassertion of Webequie First Nation’s authority over community education supports their right to their own customs, protocols, and laws; and keeping children within the community supports their well-being and experiential rights; and their right to access their traditional lands and waters and engage in harvesting rights” (Stantec, 2025).

19.4.3.1         Local Study Area: Other LSA Communities

Marten First Nation members expressed concern over greater access to legal and illegal drugs and the negative impacts that this will have on the overall health and safety of Marten Falls First Nation members. Other health and safety risks that Marten Falls First Nation members have highlighted include unsafe driving conditions, wildfires, unknowledgeable travellers or outsiders, and human trafficking (Suslop, 2024). Marten Falls First Nation members are concerned about the increase in population from “outsiders” and how the increase in access and population can lead to overhunting/overfishing, greater access to legal and illegal drugs and increased government regulations (Suslop, 2024).

1. Regional Study Area

During the construction and operations phases of the Project, changes in population in the RSA communities are expected to be negligible. It is assumed that it will not be feasible to commute from the RSA communities, where workers from these communities will have to travel to the Webequie community and Project site and stay at temporary accommodations. The Project is not anticipated to cause a change in demand for Community Infrastructure in the RSA. The assessment of potential effects of the Project on the social environment of RSA communities identified no anticipated adverse effects to housing or temporary accommodations. Due to the distance of the RSA communities from the Project location and the fact that the road will not connect to these communities, the effects of the Project are assessed to be concentrated within the LSA communities, especially the Webequie First Nation during construction and operations.

19.4.4         Rights to Self-Determination and Self-Governance

It is recognized that there is a critical importance for the recognition of Indigenous Peoples’ inherent right to self‑determination, including self-government, which pre-existed European colonial settlement. The right of self‑determination, including the right to self-government, is reflected in UNDRIP and Canada’s UNDA, which is now part of Canada’s domestic law and is being upheld in the Supreme Court of Canada rulings (Government of Canada, 2024).

Indigenous peoples have an inherent right to self-government under Section 35. “Aboriginal peoples of Canada have the right to govern themselves in relation to matters that are internal to their communities, integral to their unique cultures, identities, traditions, languages and institutions, and with respect to their special relationship to their land and their resources” (CIRNAC, 2023). Governance over environmental stewardship, such as the protection and preservation of cultural keystone species population and habitat, is crucial for the continued exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.

Indigenous communities hold governance responsibilities towards their members, including future generations, in areas such as strategic planning, management, and stewardship of their traditional lands and resources. This governance and decision-making authority is outlined through the community’s specific laws, norms, language, and accountability mechanisms. Governance is intrinsically linked to concepts of self-determination, jurisdiction, stewardship, and nationhood. Indigenous communities possess the right to determine their own governance structures and leadership, in accordance with their unique laws, customs, organizational frameworks, and other pertinent factors as identified by the community through its own processes and traditions.

Governance over resources within First Nations traditional territories is supported under Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. Governance over environmental stewardship is crucial for the continued exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights. “Supporting self-determination and governance in First Nations communities means providing support to build and maintain culturally relevant governance structures in communities. Self-governance in First Nation’s communities is an important factor for the health and well-being of community members (Halseth & Murdock, 2020). Culturally relevant governance structures increase feelings of empowerment, and confirmation of identity which is associated with positive physical and mental health outcomes (Halseth & Murdock, 2020).” (Intrinsik, 2025).

Rights related to customs, protocols, and laws inform First Nation rights to manage lands and resources within their traditional territory and to participate in decision-making for sustainable land use for future generations. Governance over resources within their traditional territories is integral to the exercise of these rights. Governance over environmental stewardship, such as the protection and preservation of boreal Caribou populations and habitat, is vital to the continued exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights.

19.4.4.1         Webequie First Nation

As reflected in UNDRIP article 23, “Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for exercising their right to development.” Webequie First Nation defines their rights related to customs, protocols, and laws as: “the teachings and values that guide Webequie First Nation’s use of lands and resources, which ultimately inform Webequie First Nation rights to manage lands and resources within their traditional territory and the right to participate in decision-making for sustainable land use for the benefit of future generations” (Stantec, 2025).

Project activities with potential to impact Webequie First Nation’s rights related to customs, protocols and laws include (Stantec, 2025):

• Changes in the number of non-Indigenous peoples and outsiders entering the LSA and RSA due to Project development and operation;
• Change in ability for Webequie First Nation to manage stewardship areas, or carry out land use or management plans; and
• Lack of participation in Project- related decisions.

Traditional customs, protocols and laws continue to inform Webequie First Nation’s decision-making practices; evidence of which can be found in the community’s Three Tier Model and CBLUP. The community also continues to gather, engage in ceremonies and other traditional activities, reflecting the importance of Webequie First Nation’s ongoing relationship with the land (Webequie First Nation 2024; Stantec, 2025).

As part of Treaty No. 9, the Indigenous Peoples that make up Webequie First Nation hold Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1), including those related to the right of self-determination and self-government. One important aspect of self-determination and self-government is Indigenous community land use planning stewardship of lands and waters. Webequie First Nation indicates it has inherent right to self-governance and self-determination (Webequie First Nation, 2023).

“Webequie First Nation stated it is concerned that the community is losing its way of life and language due to colonial processes and systems forcing members to live against or in contrast to traditional values (Stantec, 2024). These and other existing concerns regarding the influence of technology and “outside influences” on the community may be exacerbated by the proposed Project during operation due to the influx of non-Indigenous peoples and goods into the community. For example, there is the possibility that the road could result in an increased transport of drugs and alcohol, which has the potential to worsen existing substance abuse concerns and prevent cultural and experiential on‑the-land healing.

Similarly, the presence of outsiders in the community during both construction and operation may infringe on language and cultural revitalization efforts and the ability to maintain the community’s unique dialect, traditions and cultural practices” (Stantec, 2025).

The Project is also predicted to have positive impacts on Webequie First Nation’s rights related to customs, protocols, and laws. As the Proponent of the Project, Webequie First Nation is directly involved in the in decision-making process for the Project. By leading the regulatory application for the Project, Webequie First Nation is meaningfully involved in the Project’s design, impact assessment, and overall approval. The Project will afford Webequie First Nation the ability to participate in the decision-making process for the Project in a manner consistent with Webequie priorities and values. A community exercising its Indigenous rights and sovereignty leads to positive health outcomes for the community. As the Proponent for the Webequie Supply Road Project, Webequie First Nation demonstrates the community’s need for the Project. Building the Webequie Supply Road would be a positive step towards Webequie First Nation increasing their self- determination and self-governance. (Intrinsik, 2024).

19.4.4.2         Other LSA Communities

It is recognized there is a critical importance for the recognition of Indigenous Peoples’ inherent right to self‑determination, including self-government, which pre-existed European colonial settlement. The LSA communities, as part of Treaty No. 9, hold Aboriginal and Treaty rights under Section 35(1), including those related to the right of self‑determination, and self-government. The Project could impact the exercise of Indigenous rights of communities within the study areas assessed as part of the EAR/IS and the nature and extent varies depending on proximity and pathways of effects of individual Indigenous communities. One important aspect of self-determination and self‑government is Indigenous community land use planning stewardship of lands and waters.

Marten Falls First Nation is currently exercising its right to self-determination and self-governance as they are the Proponent of the Marten Falls Community Access Road. The Marten Falls Community Access Road will connect the community to NRL, which links to the WSR. This proposed integrated transportation network has the potential to enhance economic development, create employment opportunities, and support the delivery of social, health, and community programming within the region. The Marten Falls First Nation provided an IK report for the Project team to consider for the EAR/IS and they have been to meaningfully participate in the EAR/IS for WSR.

As outlined in the existing conditions study by Weenusk First Nation, Weenusk Governance relates to the rules and authority structures tied to Weenusk’s rights, which give Weenusk the right to govern. This includes management of the environment and the natural resources within Weenusk’s traditional area.” (MNP LLP, N.D.) Authority and control over resources within Weenusk First Nation traditional area may be impacted with the construction and operation of WSR as outlined in the biophysical sections. Three key species harvested by Weenusk – Caribou, moose and fish and have been identified as important cultural resources for the community. The ability to manage these species is linked to Weenusk First Nation stewardship objectives, which include management of resources on the lands required to exercise their rights. Weenusk First Nation outlined that community input and consensus are critical to governance and decision making processes. Weenusk First Nation provided a report for the Project team to consider for the EAR/IS and they have been to meaningfully participate in the EAR/IS for WSR.

19.4.4.3         Regional Study Area

One important aspect of self-determination and self-government is Indigenous community land use planning and stewardship of lands and waters. No RSA communities provided land use planning documents, such as CBLUP documents for review by the Project team during the preparation of the EAR/IS. The assessment of potential effects of the Project on land use planning and stewardship as outlined in Section 16 of the EAR/IS included Kingfisher Lake First Nation and did not identify any net effects to Kingfisher Lake First Nation (Section 16.5.1). Other communities in the RSA are understood to be outside of areas with predicted net effects to land use planning and stewardship.

The potential biophysical changes to the environment, social, and economic changes due to the construction and operation of WSR may affect existing social, economic, and health conditions, and could impact the ability of RSA communities to exercise their Aboriginal and Treaty Rights, particularly those related to self-determination and self‑governance.

19.5            Approach for Determining Severity of Impact on the Rights of Indigenous People

IAAC provides guidance and identifies criteria that may be used to evaluate the severity of potential adverse effects on Aboriginal and Treat Rights. The assessment of the severity of impacts should be done collaboratively with each Indigenous community, recognizing that the criteria provided is a starting point for dialogue (IAAC, 2024). Evaluating the severity of a project’s potential adverse effects is essential to support informed decision-making by regulatory authorities and the public. The assessment should clearly describe how the project may affect both the biophysical environment and the socio-cultural context, including Indigenous rights and interests.

Effects may relate to multiple environmental or cultural criteria, and the assessment should take a holistic approach. Ongoing engagement with Indigenous communities is essential to and to ensure that Indigenous knowledge and perspectives are meaningfully integrated throughout the EA process. To rate the overall severity of impacts on rights, the highest degree of severity is used. If one adverse impact is determined to be high in severity, then the overall impact of the project on rights is determined to be high in severity (IAAC, 2024).

Table 19‑17 outlines the definition for low, moderate and high severity of impacts on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. Table 19‑18 presents definitions to measure the severity of impacts on the rights of Indigenous peoples. These criteria are considered together in the assessment, along with context derived from existing conditions (Section 19.2) description of effects (Section 19.3), and proposed mitigation measures (Section 19.4) to provide the severity of impacts on Rights.

Table 19‑17:     Degree of severity for adverse impacts on rights of Indigenous peoples

Table 19‑18:     Criteria for Characterization of Predicted Severity on Aboriginal and Treaty Rights*

*Characterization criteria were developed in view of the ‘Guidance: Assessment of Potential Impacts on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’ by IAAC (IAAC, 2024).

19.6            References

19.6.1         Assessment of Effects of the Project on Indigenous Peoples and Impacts to the Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC). (2020). Webequie Supply Road Project Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines. Retrieved July 6, 2023. Available: https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80183/133938E.pdf.

Webequie First Nation. (2020). Webequie Supply Road Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference. Retrieved July 3, 2023. Available: https://www.supplyroad.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/SNC Submission-ToR-for-Review-2020-08-12.pdf

19.6.2         Section 19.1: Scope of the Assessment

Assembly of First Nations (AFN). (2023). Assembly of First Nations Acknowledges the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) Action Plan and Calls for Concrete Implementation. Retrieved January 22, 2024. Available: https://afn.ca/all-news/press-releases/assembly-of-first-nations-afn-acknowledges-the-un-declaration-on-the-rights-of-indigenous-peoples-undrip-action-plan-and-calls-for-concrete-implementation/

Centre for First Nations Governance. (2025). Our Inherent Rights. Retrieved on January 29, 2025. Available: https://fngovernance.org/our-inherentrights/#:~:text=Our%20people%20have%20an%20inherent,economies%20and%20restore%20our%20nations.

Crown and Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC). (2013). Treaty Texts – Treaty No. 9, Retrieved August 30, 2023. Available: https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100028863/1581293189896

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC). (2023a). The Government of Canada’s Approach to Implementation of the Inherent Right and the Negotiation of Aboriginal Self-Government. Retrieved December 10, 2024. Available: https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100031843/1539869205136

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC). (2023b). About Treaties: What Are Indigenous Rights. Retrieved January 23, 2024. Available: https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100028574/1529354437231

Government of Canada. (2017). First Nations in Canada. Retrieved April 22, 2025. Available at https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1307460755710/1536862806124.  

Government of Canada. (2021). Joint Statement by Minister Lametti and Minister Bennett on the Senate Passing Bill C-15, An Act Respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Retrieved April 22, 2025. Available: https://www.canada.ca/en/department-justice/news/2021/06/joint-statement-by-minister-lametti-and-minister-bennett-on-the-senate-passing-billc-15an-act-respecting-the-united-nations-declaration-on-the-righ.html.

Government of Canada. (2023). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act Action Plan. Retrieved on February 5, 2025. Available: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/declaration/ap-pa/ah/index.html.

Government of Canada. (2024). Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Dated December 12, 2024. Retrieved February 5, 2025. Available: https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1450124405592/1529106060525.Government of Canada. (2025). First Nation Profiles. Aandc-Aandc.gc.ca. Retrieved January 13, 2025. Available: https://fnp-ppn.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNGovernance.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=204&lang=eng

Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC). (2020). Revised Environmental Impact Statement Guidelines: Bingay Main Coal Project. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80024/134156E.pdf

Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC). (2023). Practitioner’s Guide to Federal Impact Assessments. Retrieved January 23, 2025. Available: https://www.canada.ca/en/impact-assessment-agency/services/policy-guidance/practiotioners-guide-impact-assessment-act.html

InterGroup Consultants (Intrinsik). (2024). Gender Based Analysis Plus (GBA+): Webequie Supply Road. Retrieved: July 22, 2024. Internal Document Review. 

JFK Law LLP. (2023). Quebec Superior Court relies on UNDRIP to Prescribe New Section 35(1) test in R v White and Montour. Retrieved January 22, 2024. Available: https://jfklaw.ca/quebec-superior-court-relies-on-undrip-to-prescribe-new-section-351-test-in-r-v-white-and-montour/

Long, J.S. 2010. Treaty No. 9: Making the Agreement to Share the Land in Far Northern Ontario in 1905. McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Ministry of Public and Business Service Delivery. (2022). Before the Treaty – Treaty No. 9. Retrieved March 25, 2024. Available: https://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/explore/online/jamesbaytreaty/before_the_treaty.aspx

National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation (NCTR). (n.d.a). Residential School History. Retrieved December 4, 2023. Available: https://nctr.ca/education/teaching-resources/residential-school-history/  

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (2025). Webequie First Nation Indigenous and Treaty Rights Impact Assessment for the Webequie Supply Road. January 27, 2025. Internal Document Review.

The Chiefs of Grand Council Treaty. (1977). Declaration of Nishnawbe-aski. Retrieved March 25, 2024. Available: https://www.cwis.org/wp-content/uploads/documents/premium/293wb10112.pdf

The Narwal. (2023). 10 First Nations sue Ontario and Canada over resource extraction and broken Treaty 9 promises. Retrieved March 25, 2024. Available: https://thenarwhal.ca/ontario-treaty-9-lawsuit/

United Nations. (2007). United Nations Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Retrieved January 23, 2025. Available: https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf

Webequie First  Nation. (2019a). Webequie First Nation Draft Community Based Land Use Plan. Internal Document Review.

Webequie First Nation. (2019b). Webequie First Nation On-Reserve Land Use Plan. Internal Document Review.

Webequie First Nation. (2020). Webequie Supply Road Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference. Retrieved July 3, 2023. Available: https://www.supplyroad.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/SNC Submission-ToR-for-Review-2020-08-12.pdf

Webequie First Nation. (2023). Comprehensive Community Plan. February 2023. Internal Document Review.

19.6.3         Section 19.2: Existing Conditions

211 Ontario North. (2022). Wapekeka First Nation: Band Office. Retrieved February 4, 2025. Available: https://aeswellnessportal.ca/Services/Display/146066/Band_Office

211 Ontario North. (2023). Nibinamik First Nation Economic Development. Retrieved June 26, 2023. Available: Nibinamik First Nation – Economic Development | 211 Ontario North (211north.ca)

211 Ontario North (2024a). Kashechewan First Nation- Governance. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available – https://211ontario.ca/service/65281927/kashechewan-first-nation-governance/

211 Ontario North (2024b). Mishkeegogamang First Nation- Governance. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available – https://211north.ca/record/67353616/

AECOM. (2020). Marten Falls First Nation- Proposed Terms of Reference: Marten Falls Community Access Road – Environmental Assessment. Retrieved June 28, 2023. Available: https://www.martenfallsaccessroad.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/FULL_RPT_2020-09-09_Proposed-ToR_60593122_WEB-1.pdf

Anderson, K., Clow, B., & Haworth-Brockman, M. (2013). Carriers of water: aboriginal women’s experiences, relationships, and reflections. Journal of Cleaner Production, 60, 11–17. Retrieved March 25, 2024. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.023

Anglican Diocese of Moosonee (2023). St. Stephen’s Constance Lake First Nation. Retrieved April 12, 2025. Available: https://www.moosoneeanglican.ca/churches/constance-lake-first-nation/.

Archaeological Services Inc. (ASI). (2021). Cultural Heritage Report – Preliminary Desktop Data Collection Results – Webequie Supply Road – Draft Report. Internal Document Review.

Archaeological Services Inc. (2024). Cultural Heritage Report: Existing Conditions and Preliminary Impact Assessment. [Webequie Supply Road – Webequie First Nation and Distract of Kenora, Ontario]. Internal Document Review.

Aroland First Nation (2022) Aroland First Nation – Aroland, Ontario Canada – About Us. Retrieved March 25, 2024. Available: https://www.arolandfirstnation.ca/about-us.html

AtkinsRéalis Inc. (2022a). Webequie Supply Road Webequie First Nation Socio-Economic Survey. Internal Document Review.

AtkinsRéalis Inc. (2022b). Webequie Key Informant Interview with Councillor. Internal Document Review. May 12, 2022.

AtkinsRéalis Inc. (2022c). Webequie Key Informant Interview with Esteemed Elder. Internal Document Review. March 1, 2022.

AtkinsRéalis Inc. (2023). Constance Lake Comments at Three Road Projects Gathering hosted by Webequie First Nation and Marten Falls First Nation. November 2023

Atlin, C. (2019). Pushing for better: Confronting conflict, unsustainability & colonialism through sustainability assessment and regional assessment in the Ring of Fire. Retrieved March 25, 2024. Available: https://uwaterloo.ca/applied-sustainability-projects/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/cole_atlin_phd_dissertation_2019.pdf

Attawapiskat First Nation. (2015). Attawapiskat First Nation 2015 Community-based Land Use Plan Terms of Reference, Retrieved May 7, 2023. Available: http://www.attawapiskat.org/wp-content/uploads/20150706AFNCBLUPTermsofReference.pdf.

Baskatawang, L. (2023). Reclaiming Anishinaabe Law: Kinamaadiwin Inaakonigewin and the Treaty Right to Education. Retrieved August 8, 2023. Available: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423924000039

Beaumont, H. (2019). What Would It Look Like to Take the First Nations Water Crisis Seriously? The Walrus. Retrieved December 4, 2024. Available: https://thewalrus.ca/what-would-it-look-like-to-take-the-first-nations-water-crisis-seriously/

Begaye, L. (2017). Conservation Planning Builds Skills and Opportunities for Native Land Stewardship | First Nations Development Institute. Retrieved April 21, 2025. Available: https://www.firstnations.org/stories/conservation-planning-builds-skills-and-opportunities-for-native-land-stewardship/

Beringia Community Planning Inc. (2015). Community Needs Assessment & Social Impact Assessment: Ginoogaming First Nation. Retrieved July 5, 2023. Available: https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80068/119999E.pdf

Berkes, F., George, P. J., Preston, R. J., Hughes, A., Turner, J., Cummins, B. D. (1994). Wildlife Harvesting and Sustainable Regional Native Economy in the Hudson and James Bay Lowland, Ontario. Retrieved July 5, 2023. Available: https://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca//arctic/Arctic47-4-350.pdf

Bond, A., Quinlan, L. (2018). Indigenous Gender-based Analysis for Informing the Canadian Minerals and Metals Plan. 2018. Retrieved May 3, 2023. Available: https://www.minescanada.ca/sites/minescanada/files/2022-06/indigenous-gender-based-analysis-cmmp_.pdf

Brody, T. (2025). Kasabonika Lake First Nation celebrates connection to provincial power grid. Retrieved April 21, 2025. Available: https://www.siouxbulletin.com/kasabonika-lake-first-nation-celebrates-connection-to-provincial-power-grid

Burega, S. (2015). Romios Announces It Has Signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) With North Caribou Lake First Nation. Retrieved May 15, 2023. Available: https://www.juniorminingnetwork.com/junior-miner-news/press-releases/1320-tsx-venture/rg/14321-romios-announces-it-has-signed-a-memorandum-of-understanding-mou-with-north-Caribou-lake-first-nation.html

Campbell, A. (2024). Aroland First Nation to build their first Elders Lodge. Retrieved February 3, 2025. Available: https://www.snnewswatch.com/local-news/aroland-first-nation-to-build-their-first-Elders -lodge-8471788

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). (2011). More Ontario forest fire evacuees going home. Retrieved April 21, 2025. Available: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/more-ontario-forest-fire-evacuees-going-home-1.1105190

CBC News (2016). It takes two to Tango: DeBeers seeks Attawapiskat consent for new diamond mine. Retrieved April 21, 2025. Available: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/debeers-exploration-tango-diamond-mine-attawapiskat-1.3759588

CBC News (2020). Kashechewan grandfather explains why it’s important to pass down his Cree language. Retrieved April 13, 2025. Available: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/living-languages-jonathan-solomon-mushkego-cree-grandchildren-1.5488364

CBC News (2025). 4 teens face charges after fire razes Eabametoong First Nation’s only school. Retrieved April 10, 2025. Available: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/eabametoong-school-arson-update-1.7098204

Chetkiewicz. C. (2013). Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug (KI) and Climate Change, Co-creating an Adaptation Strategy for the Big Trout Lake Watershed. Wildlife Conservation Society Canada Workshop Report. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://global.wcs.org/Resources/Publications/Publications-Search-II/ctl/view/mid/13340/pubid/DMX1467300000.aspx

Collins. B (2016). “Regional Assessment and Opportunities Report for Constance.” Docslib. Retrieved January 14, 2025. Available: docslib.org/doc/8580644/regional-assessment-and-opportunites-report-for-constance.

Constance Lake First Nation. (n.d.) Constance Lake First Nation. Constance Lake First Nation, n.d., Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://constancelake.ca/.

Constance Lake First Nation. (n.d.) History. Retrieved April 21, 2025. Available: https://constancelake.ca/our-history/

Constance Lake First Nation. (2022). Chief and Council – Constance Lake First Nation. Retrieved April 21, 2025. Available: https://constancelake.ca/chief-and-council/

Constance Lake First Nation and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (2014). Terms of Reference for community-based land use planning in Constance Lake under the Far North Act. Retrieved September 5, 2024. Available: https://www.ontario.ca/page/constance-lake-terms-reference

Constance Lake First Nation. (2024). Reclaiming our language Constance Lake First Nation. Retrieved January 6, 2025. Available: https://clfnlanguages.com/home/history/

Creswell, J.W., Clark, V.L.P. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications, Inc. Retrieved May 3, 2023. Available: Psychnet.apa.org

Crown and Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC) (2013), Treaty Texts – Treaty No. 9. Available: https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100028863/1581293189896

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC). (2023a). First Nation Detail – Attawapiskat. Available: https://fnp-ppn.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=143&lang=eng

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC). (2023b). First Nation Detail – Aroland First Nation. Retrieved June 23, 2023. Available: https://fnp-ppn.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNMain.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=242&lang=eng

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC). (2023c). First Nation Detail – North Caribou Lake First Nation. Retrieved June 23, 2023. Available: https://fnp-ppn.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNReserves.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=204&lang=eng

Cummins, B. D. (1992). Attawapiskat Cree Land Tenures and Use (1901-1989). Retrieved June 23, 2023. Available: http://hdl.handle.net/11375/8611

Daigle, M. (2010). Awuwanainithukik: living an authentic Omushkegowuk Cree way of life: a discussion on the regeneration and transmission of Nistam Eniniwak existences (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved December 17, 2025. Available: https://dspace.library.uvic.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/a5aafd59-76f6-4f96-964a-b86e9afb3bdc/content

Dalseg, S.K., Kuokkanen.R, Mills. S, and Simmons. D. (2018). Environmental Assessments in the Canadian North: Marginalization of Indigenous Women and Traditional Economies. The Northern Review 47: 135-166. Retrieved May 2, 2025. Available: https://thenorthernreview.ca/index.php/nr/article/view/764

Dei, G.J.S., Karanja, W., Erger, G. (2022). The Role of Elders and Their Cultural Knowledges in Schools. In: Elders’ Cultural Knowledges and the Question of Black/ African Indigeneity in Education. Critical Studies of Education, vol 16. Springer, Cham. Retrieved January 9, 2025. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84201-7_6

Driben, P. and Trudeau, R. (1983). When Freedom is Lost, The Dark Side of the Relationship between Government and the Fort Hope Band. Retrieved May 13, 2023. Available: University of Toronto Press.

Dryden Now. (2023). First Nation group buys local business for $3.7 million. Accessed June 9, 2023. Available: https://www.drydennow.com/articles/first-nation-group-buys-local-business-for-37-million

Eabametoong and Mishkeegogamang First Nations. (2013). Community-Based Terms of Reference, July 15, 2013. Available: https://www.ontario.ca/page/eabametoong-and-mishkeegogamang-first-nations-far-north-community-based-land-use-planning-terms

Eabametoong First Nation. (2004). Tribal Name: Eabametoong First Nation. Retrieved November 20, 2025. Available: https://www.first-nations.info/eabametoong-first-nation.html.

Eabametoong First Nation. (2016). Our Story. Retrieved November 20, 2025. Available: http://eabametoong.firstnation.ca/community/our-story/

Eabametoong First Nation. (2017). Miminiska Lake. Retrieved November 20, 2025. Available: http://eabametoong.firstnation.ca/mininiska-lake/.

Energy East Pipeline Ltd. (2016). Appendix 10-81A :Long Lake #58 First Nation: Community Summaries. Retrieved: April 14, 2025. Available: https://docs2.cer-rec.gc.ca/ll-eng/llisapi.dll/fetch/2000/90464/90552/2432218/2540913/2995824/2968287/A76975-47_V10_Appendix_10-81A_Community_Summary_Long_Lake_58_First_Nation_ON_-_A5A5L1.pdf?nodeid=2968101&vernum=-2

Feherty, B. (2006). Peawanuck: The Promised Land [the Story of the Winisk Flood and the Weenusk First Nation’s Relocation to a New Reserve in Northern Ontario]. BookSurge, LLC.p10.

Fiddler, W. (2021) Blueberries feeling the heat as drought stress takes its toll on harvest. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved December 19, 2025. Available: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-blueberries-feeling-the-heat-as-drought-stress-takes-its-toll-on/

First Nations Food, Nutrition and Environment Study (FNFES) (2013). Results from Webequie First Nation, Ontario. University of Northern British Columbia, Université de Montréal, Assembly of First Nations. Retrieved March 11, 2025. Available at: https://www.fnfnes.ca/docs/Webequie_First_Nation_draft_report_%20Oct25_2013.pdf

Fiveable Inc. (2024). 9.6 Role of Elders in Oral Traditions. Retrieved November 25, 2024. Available: me.https://library.fivable.me/native-american-history/unit-9/role-Elders -oral-traditions/study-guide/4UDvSNRSZGvGFRiX

First Nations Drinking Water Settlement. (2025). Impacted First Nations List. Accessed on May 15, 2025. Available: https://firstnationsdrinkingwater.ca/impacted-first-nations/.

Five Nations Inc. (2025). Our Communities – Attawapiskat. Retrieved November 27, 2024. Available: https://www.fivenations.ca/communities-and-scholarships.

Fort Albany First Nation. (2024). About Fort Albany First Nation. Retrieved February 28, 2025. Available: https://www.fortalbany.ca/aboutGAAM.

Frogg, S. (2021). Wawakapewin Terms of Reference. Retrieved February 4, 2025. Available: https://www.ontario.ca/page/wawakapewin-terms-reference

Gadacz. R (2006). “Sun Dance | the Canadian Encyclopedia.” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Retrieved December 17, 2023. Available: www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/sun-dance

Gajadhar, A. (2013). Drinking water quality in Canadian First Nations communities: do divergent strategies for addressing the issue contribute to the problems? (Doctoral dissertation, Carleton University). Retrieved May 1, 2025. Available: https://carleton.scholaris.ca/items/12d87e00-42fd-438a-9d28-03413a607a0d

Garrick, R. (2021). Ginoogaming court case granted an injunction. Retrieved July 5, 2023. Available: https://wawataynews.ca/sites/wawataynews.ca/files/PDFissues/Sept%202021%20Wawatay.pdf

Garrick, R. (2016). Long Lake #58 teaching the youth of today to lead the youth of the future – Anishinabek News. Retrieved January 22, 2025. Available: https://anishinabeknews.ca/2016/08/19/long-lake-58-teaching-the-youth-of-today-to-lead-the-youth-of-the-future/

Gaa-minwaajindizowaaj. (n.d). About Us. Who We Are. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.northernvoices.ca/about/

Gibson, K., Gray-McKay, C., O’Donnell, S., & the People of Mishkeegogamang. (2011). Mishkeegogamang First Nation community members engage with information and communication technologies. Retrieved May 2, 2025.Available: http://firstmile.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/2011-Mishkeegogamang_Final.pdf 

Ginoogaming First Nation. (n.d.). Childcare – Ginoogaming First Nation. Retrieved May 2, 2025. Available: https://www.ginoogamingfn.ca/childcare/

Ginoogaming First Nation. (n.d.). Economic Development – Ginoogaming First Nation. Retrieved May 2, 2025. Available: https://www.ginoogamingfn.ca/economic-development/

Ginoogaming First Nation. (2024). Ginoogaming First Nation About Us. Available: https://www.ginoogamingfn.ca/about-us/

Ginoogaming First Nation. (2021). Review of Environmental Impact Statement on the Marathon Palladium Project. Retrieved May 1, 2025. Available: https://registrydocumentsprd.blob.core.windows.net/commentsblob/project-54755/comment-55802/210726_Letter_GFN_JRP_Marathon%20Palladium%20EA_Comments_Signed.pdf

Golden, D. M. (2017). First Nation observations and perspectives on the changing climate in Ontario’s Northern Boreal: forming bridges across the disappearing (Doctoral dissertation).

Golder Associates. (2018). Wataynikaneyap Phase 2 Final Environmental Study Report. Retrieved March 10. 2025. Available: https://www.oslp.ca/phase-2-blackline-final-esr

Gordon, L. D. (1983). North Caribou Lake Archaeology: Northwestern Ontario (Doctoral dissertation). Government of Canada. (1964). The James Bay Treaty – Treaty No. 9 (Made in 1905 and 1906) and Adhesions Made in 1929 and 1930. Ottawa: Queen’s Printer and Controller of Stationary, 1964. Available: https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100028863/1581293189896#chp1

Government of Canada. (2024). Aroland First Nation to build its first Elders lodge (ᑭᒋᐦᐊᐧᐃᑲᒥᒃ). Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Canada. Retrieved January 9, 2025. Available: https://www/canada/ca.en/housing-infrastructure-communities/news/2024/03/aroland-first-nation-to-build-its-first-Elders -lodge.html

Government of Canada. (2023). Canada and Métis Nation of Ontario sign updated Métis self-government agreement. Retrieved: April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.canada.ca/en/crown-indigenous-relations-northern-affairs/news/2023/02/canada-and-metis-nation-of-ontario-sign-updated-metis-self-government-agreement.html

Government of Canada. (2019). Government of Canada congratulates Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation on the design and construction of their new school. Retrieved: April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.canada.ca/en/indigenous-services-canada/news/2019/08/government-of-canada-congratulates-kitchenuhmaykoosib-inninuwug-first-nation-on-the-design-and-construction-of-their-new-school.html

Government of Canada. (2025). Musselwhite Mine – Ontario – Partnership Agreements. Retrieved: April 14, 2025. Available: https://natural-resources.canada.ca/maps-tools-publications/publications/musselwhite-mine-ontario

Government of Ontario. (2017). Kashechewan First Nation Planning Area of Interest and Traditional Area in Relation to Adjacent Communities. Retrieved April 15, 2025. Available: https://files.ontario.ca/figure-1-kashechewan-first-nation-planning-area-of-interest-and-traditional-harvesting-area.pdf

Gray, F. The Stores and Legends of My Grandfather.  Retrieved April 15, 2025. Available: https://www.mishkeegogamang.ca/stories.html

Greenstone Gold Mines. (n.d.). Indigenous Peoples Community Awareness Training: Exploring our Relationship and Responsibilities with Local Communities. Ginoogaming First Nation Community Profile.

Hale, A. S. (2024). Helicopters from Ring of Fire Road Construction Disturb Hunting: Neskantaga. The Trillium. Retrieved May 8, 2024. Available: https://www.thetrillium.ca/news/indigenous-rural-and-northern-affairs/helicopters-from-ring-of-fire-road-construction-disturb-hunting-9637951.

Hamilton, S. (2004). Early Holocene Human Burials at Wapekeka (FlJj-I), Northern Ontario. The Late Palaeo-Indian Great Lakes: Geological and Archaeological Investigations of Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene Environments. Mercury Series Archaeology Paper, 165, 337-368. Hamilton, Scott (2015). There Goes the Neighborhood: Recent History of the Upper Great Lakes, 1630-1930. Retrieved August 10, 2023, Available: https://glslcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/TheGoestheNeighborhoodRecentHistoryofUpperGreatLakes_Hamilton.pdf

Hamilton, Scott (2015). There Goes the Neighborhood: Recent History of the Upper Great Lakes, 1630-1930. Retrieved August 10, 2023, Available: https://glslcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/TheGoestheNeighborhoodRecentHistoryofUpperGreatLakes_Hamilton.pdf

Hanson, E. (2009). Reserves. University of British Columbia Indigenous Foundations. Retrieved June 5, 2024. Available at: https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/reserves/

Heath, N. (2022). What Indigenous culture can teach us about respecting our Elders. Retrieved January 9, 2025. Available: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-06/Elders -respect-aboriginal-torres-strait-islander-culture-naidoc/101206882

Heid, O., Khalid, M., Smith, H., Kim, K., Smith, S., Wekerle, C., … & Wekerle, C. (2022). Indigenous youth and resilience in Canada and the USA: A scoping review. Adversity and Resilience Science, 3(2), 113-147.

Hutter, K. (2017). Northern Ontario First Nation residents get to design their own homes in pilot project. CBC. Retrieved September 11, 2024. Available: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nibinamik-pilot-project-home-design-1.4374183

Honigmann, John (1948). Foodways in a Muskeg Community – An Anthropological Report on the Attawapiskat Indians. Retrieved April 16, 2025. Available: https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/aanc-inac/R42-3-1962-1-eng.pdf

Hookimaw-Witt, J. (1998). Keenebonanoh keemoshominook kaeshe peemishikhik odaskiwakh. We stand on the graves of our ancestors: native interpretations of treaty no. 9 with Attawapiskat Elders. National Library of Canada = Bibliothèque nationale du Canada. Retrieved January 28, 2025.

Hopper, M., and Power, G. 1991. The Fisheries of an Ojibwa Community in Northern Ontario. Arctic Institute of North America, 44(4): 267-274. Retrieved April 12, 2025. Available at: https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/download/64603/48517/.

Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC). (2023). Weenusk Cultural Ground Replacement, 2023. Retrieved May 6, 2023. Available: https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/evaluations/proj/84478

Independent First Nation Alliance. (2024). Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug. Retrieved April 28, 2025. Available: https://ifna.ca/communities/

Indigenous Corporate Training Inc. (2018) Why continuity of Indigenous cultural identity is critical. Retrieved January 9, 2025. Available: https://www.ictinc.ca/blog/why-is-indigenous-cultural-continuity-critical

Indigenous Services Canada. (2020). Nibinamik First Nation upgrades their Diesel Generating Station. Retrieved July 23, 2020. Available: https://www.canada.ca/en/indigenous-services-canada/news/2020/07/nibinamik-first-nation-upgrades-their-diesel-generating-station.html

Indigenous Services Canada. (2021). Map of long-term drinking water advisories on public systems on reserves. Retrieved October 28, 2024. Available: Sac-Isc.gc.ca. https://sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1620925418298/1620925434679

Indigenous Services Canada (2024). Neskantaga First Nation Water Treatment System Upgrade. Retrieved February 6, 2025, Available: https://sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1614887856664/1614887885919.

InterGroup Consultants. (2024). Gender Based Analysis Plus (GBA+): Webequie Supply Road. Retrieved: July 22, 2024. Internal Document Review. 

Intrinsik. (2023). Community Health Survey. Internal Document Review

Jamasmie, C. (2021). Canadian First Nation challenges DeBeers’ mine waste plans. Retrieved March 28, 2024. Available: https://www.mining.com/canadian-first-nation-challenges-debeers-mine-waste-plans/

Jarus, O. (2010). Rare 4,600-year-old Ontario burial lifts lid on prehistoric Canada. Retrieved June 10, 2024. Available: https://www.the-independent.com/life-style/history/rare-4-600yearold-ontario-burial-lifts-lid-on-prehistoric-canada-2008310.html

Kashechewan First Nation (2017). Terms of Reference, Community Based Land Use Planning. Kashechewan First Nation. Retrieved April 12, 2025. Available: https://files.ontario.ca/kashechewan_terms_of_reference_v13_2018-04-19_accessibility_version.pdf

Kataquapit, X. (2025). Spring goose hunt brings back many happy memories. Retrieved April 25, 2025. Available: https://www.northernnews.ca/opinion/spring-goose-hunt-brings-back-many-memories

Kataquapit, X. (2022). Going to Akamiski, Retrieved May 15, 2023. Available: https://windspeaker.com/under-northern-sky-xavier-kataquapit/going-akamiski

Kayahna Tribal Area Council. (1985). The Kayahna Region land utilization and occupancy study. Big Trout Lake, Ont.: Kayahna Tribal Area Council. 

Keewaytinook Okimakanak. (2014). King Fisher Lake First Nation | KO eHealth Telemedicine. Available: Kingfisher Lake First Nation | KO eHealth Telemedicine

Kehoe, M. (2014). Ethnographic Explorations of the Foodways of Three Generations of Women in Kasabonika Lake First Nation. Postgraduate Thesis. Retrieved April 22, 2025. Available: https://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/thesescanada/vol2/OOU/TC-OOU-30637.pdf

Kelly, E. (2023). Addressing Indigenous community concerns of lake health by assessing water quality in Constance Lake, ON and biomarker responses in freshwater mussels, Pyganodon grandis and Lampsilis siliquoidea (Doctoral dissertation). Available: https://ceelab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Kelly_Erin_sm.pdf

Khalafzai, M.-A. K., McGee, T. K., & Parlee, B. (2019). Flooding in the James Bay region of Northern Ontario, Canada: Learning from traditional knowledge of Kashechewan First Nation. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 36, 101100-. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101100

Kingfisher Lake First Nation. (n.d.). Kingfisher Lake First Nation. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: www.kingfisherlake.ca

Kirton, S. (2020). ” A Community of People Worthy of the Name Community”: The Engagement Practices, Wellness, and Self-Identity of Anishinaabe Young Women and Young Two-Spirit People of Eabametoong First Nation (Doctoral dissertation, University of Guelph).

Kitching, H. (2022). Neskantaga First Nation surpasses 10,000 days under a drinking water advisory. Available: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/neskantaga-water-advisory-anniversary-1.6494213

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Education Authority. (2023). Kitchenuhmaykoosib Education Authority. Retrieved April 29, 2024. Available: https://www.kitchenuhmaykoosibeducationauthority.ca/

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation. (2015). KI Cultural Atlas. Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug First Nation, 2015. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.ki-culturalatlas.ca/atlas/.

Kitching, H. (2022). Neskantaga First Nation surpasses 10,000 days under a drinking water advisory. CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/neskantaga-water-advisory-anniversary-1.6494213

Know Indigenous History. (2021). Water is Life, Neskantaga First Nation. Retrieved May 20, 2025. Available: https://indigenous.knowhistory.ca/stories/water-is-life-neskantaga-first-nation

Korteweg and Root. (2016). “Witnessing Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug’s Strength and Struggle: The Affective Education of Reconciliation in Environmental Education.” Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 21, 2016, pp. 178-197. ERIC., Retrieved April14, 2025. Available: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1151863.pdf.

Kozak, N. (2017, March 27). Peetabeck: Ontario First Nation is still healing decades following closure of residential school. True North Photo Journal. Retrieved August 17, 2024. Available: https://truenorthjournal.ca/2017/03/peetabeck/

Lansdowne House. (2020). Water is life for us in Neskantaga. Maggie Sakanee. Retrieved September 19, 2024. Available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n92asexdH8E

Leonard K, David-Chavez D, Smiles D, Jennings L, Anolani Alegado R, Tsinnajinnie L, Manitowabi J, Arsenault R, Begay R, Kagawa-Viviani A, Davis D, van Uitregt B, Pichette H, Liboiron M, Moggridge B, Carroll S, Tsosie R, & Gomez A. (2023). Water back: A review centring repatriation and Indigenous Water research sovereignty. Water Alternatives, 16(2), 374–428.

Library and Archives Canada. (n.d.). Attawapiskat – Treaty Areas and Reserves. Retrieved May 11, 2025. Available: https://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/205/301/ic/cdc/nativeterans/treatyareas/attawapiskat.htm

Local Employment Planning Council. (2017). Community Labour Market Report: Webequie First Nation. Retrieved July 6, 2023. Available: https://www.nswpb.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/CLMR-WebequieFN-EN-17.04.25.pdf

Long Lake #58 First Nation, n.d. Long Lake #58 First Nation. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.longlake58fn.ca/

Long Lake #58 First Nation. (2016). Long Lake #58 First Nation – Land Management. Available: https://www.longlake58fn.ca/upload/documents/long-lake-58-land-code.pdf

Long Lake #58 First Nation. (2017a). Lands. Long Lake #58 First Nation. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.longlake58fn.ca/lands

Long Lake #58 First Nation. (2017b). Education. Long Lake #58 First Nation. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.longlake58fn.ca/education 

Long Lake #58 First Nation. (2025). About Long Lake #58. Retrieved March 11, 2024. Available: https://www.longlake58fn.ca/about

Loukes, K. A., Anderson, S., Beardy, J., Rondeau, M. C., & Robidoux, M. A. (2022). Wapekeka’s COVID-19 Response: A Local Response to a Global Pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(18), 11562-. Retrieved February 4, 2025. Available: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811562

Luby, Brittany. (2014). Centering Anishinaabeg Studies: Understanding the World through Stories , edited by Jill Doerfler, Niigaanwewidam James Sinclair, and Heidi Kiiwetinepinesiik Stark. Retrieved August 8, 2023. Print.

Pugliese, Karyn. (2025). First Nation in Ontario signs $20M Ring of Fire deal. Retrieved March 27, 2025. Available: https://www.aptnnews.ca/national-news/first-nation-in-ontario-signs-20m-ring-of-fire-deal/

Macfie, J., & Johnston, B. (1991). Hudson Bay Watershed: a photographic memoir of the Ojibway, Cree and Oji-Cree. In Hudson Bay Watershed (1st ed.). Dundurn Press. Print

Mannella, R. (2022). Wisdom: Ginoogaming First Nation Training Center making a difference to students. Retrieved February 28, 2022. Available:https://www.tbnewswatch.com/wisdom/wisdom-ginoogaming-first-nation-training-center-making-a-difference-to-students-5108861

Maracle, G. (2021). Connections and processes: Indigenous community and identity’s place in the healing journey. Turtle Island Journal of Indigenous Health, 1(2). Retrieved June 05, 2024. Available: https://doi.org/10.33137/tijih.v1i2.36052

Marten Falls First Nation Comments on the Webequie Supply Road (2020). Comment Form – Information Regarding Participation in the Planning Phase. Internal Document Review. 

Marten Falls Access Road. (2024). Marten Falls First Nation (MFFN) Community Access Road – 2024 Year in Review. Available: https://www.martenfallsaccessroad.ca/2024/12/16/2024-year-in-review/

Marten Falls First Nation (Marten Falls First Nation). (2013). Marten Falls First Nation Community Based Land Use Plan. Available: https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/2301/marten-falls-community-based-land-use-plan-terms.pdf

Marten Falls First Nation. (2023). Existing Conditions Fact Sheet: Socio-Community. Marten Falls First Nation Community Access Road. Retrieved April 21, 2025. Available: https://www.martenfallsaccessroad.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Existing-Conditions_SocioCommunity.pdf

Matawa Education. (2019). Our Education Elders. Retrieved July 6, 2023. Available: https://www.matawaeducation.com/matawa-education-and-care-centre/Elders /#

Matawa First Nations. (2014). Eabametoong First Nation Community Profile. Available: http://community.matawa.on.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/CULPOR_Eabametoong-Com-Pro_2014.pdf.

Matawa First Nations. (2023). What ‘Matawa’ means. Available: https://www.matawa.on.ca/about-us/

Matawa First Nations. (2024). Unity Declaration. Retrieved March 25, 2024. Available: https://www.matawa.on.ca/about-us/unity-declaration/

Matheson, K., Seymour, A., Landry, J., Ventura, K., Arsenault, E., and Anisman, H. (2022). Canada’s Colonial Genocide of Indigenous Peoples: A Review of the Psychosocial and Neurobiological Processes Linking Trauma and Intergenerational Outcomes. International journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19 (6455). Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19116455

McGregor, D. (2016). Living Well with the Earth: Indigenous Rights and the Environment. In Lennox and Short 2016: 167–180

McLaren, B. E. (2012). First Nations Moose Hunt in Ontario: A Community’s perspectives and reflections. Alces, 47, 163–174. Retrieved from https://www.alcesjournal.org/index.php/alces/article/view/97

McNeil, Joelle (2018). Kitakiwi Masinahikanan (Our Map). Available: https://figshare.com/articles/thesis/Kitakiwi_Masinahikanan_Our_Map_/14650014?file=28130268

Métis Nation of Ontario (2018). Framework Agreement on Metis Harvesting. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.metisnation.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/metis-harvesting-framework-agreement.pdf

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2017). Métis Identity, Culture & Community. Métis Nation of Ontario. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.Métisnation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/commission-booklets-identity.pdf

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2019). Métis Government Recognition and Self-Government Agreement. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.Métisnation.org/governance/self-government/mgrsa/?doing_wp_cron=1744915710.0610361099243164062500

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2022). Educational and Cultural Camps. Retrieved May 15, 2025. Available: https://www.metisnation.org/programs-and-services/education-training/educational-and-cultural-camps/

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2023). Métis Nation of Ontario Secretariat Harvesting Policy. Available: https://www.Métisnation.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/MNO-Harvesting-Policy-2023-AGA-Amendments.pdf

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2024a). Telling Our Stories: Sharing Our History and Truth. Métis Nation of Ontario. Retrieved: April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.Métisnation.org/news/telling-our-stories-sharing-our-history-and-truth/

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2024b). Métis Nation of Ontario | Culture and Heritage | Métis of Ontario. Métis Nation of Ontario. Available: https://www.Métisnation.org/about-the-mno/culture-heritage/

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2024c).  Métis Early Learning Winter Family Culture Camp 2025. Retrieved May 15, 2025. Available: https://www.metisnation.org/news/join-us-for-the-metis-early-learning-winter-family-culture-camp-2025/

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2025a). Traditional Harvesting Territories Map. Retrieved February 26, 2025. Available: https://www.Métisnation.org/registry/harvesting/harvesting-map/

Métis Nation of Ontario (2025b). Culture & Heritage. Métis Nation of Ontario. Retrieved: April 14. 2025. Available: https://www.mnocc.ca/culture-heritage/

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2025c). Louis Riel Day. Retrieved: April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.metisnation.org/about-the-mno/culture-heritage/louis-riel-day/

Métis Nation of Ontario (2025d). Michif Resources. Métis Nation of Ontario. Retrieved: April 14. 2025. Available: https://www.Métisnation.org/about-the-mno/culture-heritage/michif-resources/

Métis Nation of Ontario (2025e). Provisional Council of the Métis Nation of Ontario (PCMNO). Métis Nation of Ontario. Retrieved: April 14. 2025. Available: https://www.metisnation.org/governance/governing-structure/pcmno/

Métis Nation of Ontario (2025f). Governing Structure. Métis Nation of Ontario. Retrieved: April 14. 2025. Available: https://www.metisnation.org/governance/governing-structure/

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2025g). MNO Regions. Métis Nation of Ontario. Retrieved May 15, 2025. Available: https://www.metisnation.org/governance/governing-structure/mno-regions/

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2025h). Home Page. Métis Nation of Ontario. Retrieved May 15, 2025. Available: https://www.metisnation.org/

Métis Nation of Ontario. (2020). Way of Life Framework. Retrieved April 25, 2025. Available: https://www.metisnation.org/programs-and-services/lands-resources-consultations/way-of-life-framework/

Mishkeegogamang First Nation (2025). Mishkeegogamang Ojibway Nation – Our Resources. Available: https://mishkeegogamang.ca/natural-resources/

Mining Watch. (2005). First Nations Declare a Moratorium on Mining Exploration and Forestry in the Far North: No Means No. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://miningwatch.ca/news/2005/10/27/first-nations-declare-moratorium-mining-exploration-and-forestry-far-north-no-means

Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. (2021a). Constance Lake terms of reference. Retrieved July 5, 2023. Available: https://www.ontario.ca/page/constance-lake-terms-reference

Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. (2021b). Archived – Kashechewan First Nation Terms of Reference. Retrieved June 28, 2023. Available: https://www.ontario.ca/page/kashechewan-first-nation-terms-reference

Ministry of Natural Resources. (2017). Kashechewan First Nation Terms of Reference. Retrieved November 16, 2024. Available: https://www.ontario.ca/page/kashechewan-first-nation-terms-reference

Ministry of Natural Resources (2019). Wawakapewin Terms of Reference. Retrieved May 1, 2025. Available: https://www.ontario.ca/page/wawakapewin-terms-reference.

Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. (2016). Mojikit Lake Conservation Reserve Management Statement. Retrieved May 20, 2025. Available: https://www.ontario.ca/page/mojikit-lake-conservation-reserve-management-statement

Minkin, D., Whitelaw, G. S., McCarthy, D. D. P., & Tsuji, L. J. S. (2014). Cultural Protection, Empowerment and Land Use Planning: Identification of Values in support of Fort Albany First Nation, Ontario, Canada, Community Based Land Use Planning. The Canadian Journal of Native Studies, 34(1), 129-150. Retrieved January 8, 2025. Available: https://ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/cultural-protection-empowerment-land-use-planning/docview/1626237958/se-2

Mishkeegogamang First Nation. (2010a). About. Retrieved May 15, 2023. Available: https://www.mishkeegogamang.ca/about-history.html

Mishkeegogamang First Nation. (2010b). Natural Resources. Retrieved May 15, 2023. Available: https://www.mishkeegogamang.ca/about-history.html

Miskeegogamang First Nation. (2010c). Stories. Retrieved January 22, 2025. Available: https://www.mishkeegogamang.ca/stories.html

Miskeegogamang First Nation. (2010d). Services. Retrieved January 27, 2025. Available: https://www.mishkeegogamang.ca/services.html

Mishkeegogamang Ojibway Nation. (2025). About Mishkeegogamang Ojibway Nation. Retrieved May 7, 2025. Available: https://mishkeegogamang.ca/about/

MNP LLP. (2023). Weenusk First Nation Financial Statements March 31, 2021. Retrieved May 8, 2023. Available: FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (TO PUBLISH) – (F-0080) – Annual Audited Financial Statement – 2020-2021 – 2021_07_29 (0146) 17679267 (1).PDF (aadnc-aandc.gc.ca).

MNP LLP. (n.d). Weenusk First Nation Existing Conditions Report. Internal Document Review.

Moonias, Raylah. (n.d.) The Trailblazer. Retrieved May 20, 2025. Available: https://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/iamindigenous/trailblazer.html

Mundo Peetabeck Education Authority (2022). Mundo Peetabeck Education Authority Events. Available: https://mpea.webflow.io/events

Murdocca, C. (2010). There Is Something in That Water: Race, Nationalism, and Legal Violence. Law & Social Inquiry, 35, 369—402

Mushkegowuk Council Lands and Resources Department (2024). Draft Omushkego Wahkohtowin Conservation Plan. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://mushkegowuk.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/DraftConservationPlan_March2024_web.pdf 

Nakogee, Chief David (2020). Attawapiskat First Nation Comments on Terms of Reference, Webequie Supply Road. Internal Document Review

NationTalk (2022) Wunnumin First Nation Calls on Canada to Ensure Community Members Receive Individual Compensation Under Class Action Settlement. Retrieved February 4, 2025. Available: https://nationtalk.ca/story/wunnumin-first-nation-calls-on-canada-to-ensure-community-members-receive-individual-compensation-under-class-action-settlement

National Centre for Collaboration in Indigenous Education. (2018, March 13). Nibinamik First Nations Language Immersion. Retrieved May 20, 2024. Available: https://youtu.be/qEUqUwI15_U?si=CyUF4m6b3uw4Hq0U.

National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation. (n.d). Canada’s Residential Schools: The History, Part 1 Origins to 1939. The Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Volume . Retrieved: April 30, 2025. Available: https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2015/trc/IR4-9-1-1-2015-eng.pdf

National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (Canada) (MMIWG). (2019a). Reclaiming power and place: The final report of the national inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women and girls. Retrieved July 6, 2023. Available: https://www.mmiwg-ffada.ca/final-report/

National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (NIMMIWG). (2019b). Calls for Justice. Retrieved December 20, 2024. Available: https://www.mmiwg-ffada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Calls_for_Justice.pdf

Native Ministries International. (2022). Nibinamik First Nation. Retrieved December 20, 2024. Available: https://data.nativemi.org/tribal-directory/Details/nibinamik-first-nation-1609952

Natural Resources Canada. (n.d.). Musselwhite Mine – Ontario. Government of Canada. Retrieved February 11, 2025, Available: https://natural-resources.canada.ca/maps-tools-publications/publications/musselwhite-mine-ontario

Neskantaga First Nation (2023). Who We Are. Retrieved May 16, 2023. Available: https://neskantaga.com/who-we-are/

Neskantaga and Eabametoong First Nations. (2018). Neskantaga and Eabametoong First Nations Issue Declaration of Alliance and Shared Regulatory Territory. Retrieved May 21, 2025. Available: https://miningwatch.ca/news/2018/11/9/neskantaga-and-eabametoong-first-nations-issue-declaration-alliance-and-shared

Nibinamik First Nation. (2014). Connections to Land, Culture and Language in Nibinamik First Nation. Internal Document Review.

Nibinamik First Nation. (2024). Living Conditions. Retrieved February 3, 2025. Available: http://www.nibinamik.ca/

Nibinamik First Nation. (2025). Language – ᐃᔑᑭᔐᐧᐃᐧᐣ – Nibinamik First Nation. Retrieved February 3, 2025. Available: https://summerbeaver.com/language/

Ninomiya, M. E. M., Burns, N., Pollock, N. J., Green, N. T., Martin, J., Linton, J., … & Latta, A. (2023). Indigenous communities and the mental health impacts of land dispossession related to industrial resource development: a systematic review. The Lancet Planetary Health, 7(6), e501-e517.

Nishnawbe Aski Nation. (2020a). First Nations in NAN. Retrieved January 3, 2025. Available: https://www.nan.ca/about/first-nations/

Nishnawbe Aski Nation. (2020b). About. Retrieved January 3, 2025. Available: https://www.nan.ca/about/departments/

Nishnawbe-Aski Legal Services. (2014). 2013-2014 Annual Report of the Nishnawbe-Aski Legal Services Corporation. Retrieved January 21, 2025. Available: https://nanlegal.on.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/nalsc-annual-report-2013-14.pdf

NNL Digital News, (2025) Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug Marks Second Anniversary of KIDO Family Law – A Celebration of Inherent Rights and Traditional Family Care. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.netnewsledger.com/2025/04/01/kitchenuhmaykoosib-inninuwug-marks-second-anniversary-of-kido-family-law-a-celebration-of-inherent-rights-and-traditional-family-care/

North Caribou Lake First Nation. (2014). North Caribou Lake First Nation. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: http://www.weagamow.firstnation.ca/

Northern Policy Institute. (2014). Aroland Community Profile. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.northernpolicy.ca/upload/custom/library/culpor_aroland-com-pro_2014.pdf

NWOnewswatch.com. (2022). Newmont Musselwhite celebrates 25 years of mining. Accessed on March 25, 2025. Available: https://www.nwonewswatch.com/local-news/newmont-musselwhite-celebrates-25-years-of-mining-5856571.

O’Brien, N. (2025). Centering Indigenous Knowledge in Wunnumin Lake’s Source Water Protection Plan. Retrieved February 5, 2025. Available: https://info.sharedvaluesolutions.com/blog/wlfn_swpp

Ohmagari, K., & Berkes, F. (1997). Transmission of indigenous knowledge and bush skills among the western James Bay Cree women of subarctic Canada. Human Ecology : An Interdisciplinary Journal, 25(2), 197–222. Retrieved April 3, 2025. Available: https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1021922105740

Omushkegowuk Women’s Water Council, n.d. Ginoogaming First Nation – Support for basic tenets and principles of a draft Water Protection Declaration prepared by: Jennifer Wabano. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://registrydocumentsprd.blob.core.windows.net/commentsblob/project-54755/comment-55802/210726_Letter_GFN_JRP_Marathon%20Palladium%20EA_Comments_Signed.pdf

Our World. (2018). Our World.  Retrieved February 4, 2025. Available: https://doi.org/10884773/1481320102954-OTV1609KUT9N2WDEX36T

Pope, A. (2006). Report on the Kashechewan First Nation and its People. Retrieved April 13, 2025. Available: https://central.bac-lac.canada.ca/.item?id=kfnp_e&op=pdf&app=Library

Restoule, J.-P., Gruner, S., & Metatawabin, E. (2013). Learning from Place: A Return to Traditional Mushkegowuk Ways of Knowing. Canadian Journal of Education, 36(2), 68–86.

Robidoux, M. A., Winnepetonga, D., Santosa, S., & Haman, F. (2021). Assessing the contribution of traditional foods to food security for the Wapekeka First Nation of Canada. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, 46(10), 1170–1178. Retrieved February 4, 2025. Available: https://doi.org/10.1139/apnm-2020-0951

Rogers, E. S., & Black, M. B. (1976). Subsistence Strategy in the Fish and Hare Period, Northern Ontario: The Weagamow Ojibwa, 1880-1920. Journal of Anthropological Research, 32(1), 1–43. Retrieved March 17, 2025. Available: https://doi.org/10.1086/jar.32.1.3629990

Chitty. S.M. (2016). Tagging Along in Kasabonika. Retrieved May 16, 2023. Available: https://jhr.ca/tagging-along-kasabonika

Shantz, J. (2018). Community Energy Planning in Remote Indigenous Communities: A Case Study with Eabametoong First Nation. Retrieved March 17, 2025. Available: https://atrium.lib.uoguelph.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/b03b8c47-a80d-4085-af74-296cfc9685f6/content

Shibogama First Nations Council. (2025). Home. Retrieved March 17, 2024. Available: https://www.shibogama.on.ca/

Shimo, A. (2016). Invisible north: the search for answers on a troubled reserve. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://archive.org/details/invisiblenorthse0000shim/mode/2up

Sieciechowicz, K. (1986). Northern Ojibwe Land Tenure. Anthropologica (Ottawa), 28(1/2), 187-202. Retrieved May 15, 2023. Available: https://doi.org/10.2307/25605199

Smith, D. (2016). Finding Healing Through a Return to Traditions in Attawapiskat. Retrieved. May 1, 2025. Available: https://pulitzercenter.org/stories/finding-healing-through-return-traditions-attawapiskat#:~:text=Attawapiskat%20is%20surrounded%20by%20wilderness%20and%20waterways%20teeming,became%20a%20central%20focus%20of%20their%20cultural%20stories.

Smith, J. (2011). Return to tradition. Retrieved July 5, 2023. Available: https://www.tbnewswatch.com/local-news/return-to-tradition-389095

Spade. T. (2015). How We Lived. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.anishinaabe.ca/healing-the-full-spectrum-of-traditional-medical-the-spirit/

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (2017). Hardrock Project: Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Assessment- Chapter 18.0 Assessment of Potential Environmental Effects on Traditional Land and Resource Use. Retrieved July 5, 2023. Available: https://www.greenstonegoldmines.com/upload/documents/final-eis-ea-2020/18_traditional_land_and_resource_use.pdf

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (2024). Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study for the Webequie Supply Road – Interim Report. Internal Document Review.

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (2025). Webequie First Nation Indigenous and Treaty Rights Impact Assessment for the Webequie Supply Road. January 27, 2025. Internal Document Review.

Statistics Canada. (2016). Census Profile, 2016 Census. Retrieved May1, 2025. Available: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CSD&Code1=3560091&Geo2=CD&Code2=3560&Data=Count&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=35&B1=All

Statistics Canada. (2021). Profile table, Census Profile, 2021 Census of Population – Ginoogaming First Nation, Indian reserve (IRI) [Census subdivision], Ontario. Statcan.gc.ca. Retrieved April 22, 2024. Available: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/dp-pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&DGUIDlist=2021A00053558067&GENDERlist=1&STATISTIClist=1&HEADERlist=0

Stefanovich, O. (2020). Neskantaga First Nation residents return to boil water advisory. In cbc.ca. Retrieved September 22, 2024. Available: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/neskantaga-2020-repatriation-water-emergency-1.5849643

Stimpson, M. (2024). Eabametoong school opens, almost complete. SNnewswatch.com. Retrieved April 22, 2025. Available: https://www.snnewswatch.com/local-news/eabametoong-school-opens-almost-complete-9873069

Stolz, W., Levkoe, C.Z. and Nelson, C. 2017. Blueberry Foraging as a Social Economy in Northern Ontario: A Case Study of Aroland First Nation, Arthur Shupe Wild Foods, Nipigon Blueberry Blast Festival, and the Algoma Highlands Wild Blueberry Farm and Winery. Centre for Sustainable Food Systems, Wilfrid Laurier University. Retrieved December 23, 2024. Available: http://nourishingontario.ca/blueberry-foraging-as-a-social-economy-in-northern-ontario/

Stroink, M. L., & Nelson, C. H. (2012). Understanding traditional food behaviour and food security in rural First Nation communities: Implications for food policy. Journal of Rural and Community Development, 7(3). Retrieved May 16. 2024. Available: https://journals.brandonu.ca/jrcd/article/view/607/0

Summer Beaver. (2022). About – ᑲᐊᓂᒧᒋᑲᑌᑭᐣ – Nibinamik First Nation. Retrieved January 9, 2025. Available: https://summerbeaver.com/about/

Superior – Greenstone District School Board (2024). Indigenous Education. Sgdsb.on.ca. Retrieved December 10, 2024. Available: https://www.sgdsb.on.ca/indigenous-education

Superior North Catholic District School Board. (2025). Indigenous Education. Retrieved December 10, 2024. Available: https://www.sncdsb.on.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=58534&pageId=61683#program

Stantec Consulting Inc. (2017). Hardrock project Final Environmental Impact Statement / Environmental Assessment. Retrieved April 13, 2025. Available: 18_traditional_land_and_resource_use.pdf

Stantec Consulting Inc. (2024). Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study for the Webequie Supply Road. Interim Report. October 4, 2024. Prepared for Webequie First Nation. Internal Document Review.

Suslop Inc. (2024). Marten Falls First Nation Indigenous Knowledge, Land Use and Occupancy Study for the Northern Access Roads. Proposed Webequie Supply Road Project. Internal Document Review

Talaga, T. (2018). All Our Relations US Edition: Finding the Path Forward. House of Anansi.

Teach for Canada (2017a). Welcome to Eabametoong First Nation. Retrieved April 24, 2023. Available: https://teachforcanada.ca/en/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Eabametoong-2023.pdf

Teach for Canada. (2017b). Welcome to Marten Falls First Nation/Ogoki Post. Retrieved April 24, 2023. Available: https://teachforcanada.ca/en/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Marten-Falls-2022-Web.pdf

Teach for Canada (2024). Welcome to Eabametoong First Nation. Retrieved April 24, 2023. Available: https://teachforcanada.ca/en/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Eabametoong-2024-.pdf

Teach for Canada (2025). Welcome to Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninwuwug. Retrieved February 5, 2025. Available: https://teachforcanada.ca/en/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/KI-2024.pdf

The Firelight Group. (2017a). Eabameetoong First Nation – Knowledge and Use Scoping Study. Retrieved May 5, 2023. Available: https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p80068/119995E.pdf

The Firelight Group. (2017b). Knowledge and Use Scoping Study – Greenstone Gold’s Proposed Hardrock Project. Internal Document Review.

Thunder Bay Community Economic Development Commission. (N.D.). Newmont Musselwhite Mine. Retrieved May 15, 2023. Available: https://gotothunderbay.ca/2021/07/22/newmont-musslewhite-mine/

Tonkin, R., Freeman, S., Martin, J., Ward, V., & Skinner, K. (2018). First Nations Elders ’ perspectives of engagement in community programs in Nak’azdli Whut’en, British Columbia, Canada. Canadian journal of public health, 109, 717-725.

Tsuji, L., General, Z., Tsuji, R., Powell, E., Latychev, K., Clark, J., and Mitrovica, J., Akimiski Island, Nunavut, Canada. (2019). The Use of Cree Oral History and Sea-Level Retrodiction to Resolve Aboriginal Title. Retrieved May 7, 2023. Available: https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/view/71481 

Turner, L. (2021). Legal battle brewing in northern Ontario over the protection of Indigenous sacred areas, mining rights. Retrieved July 3, 2021. Available: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/ginoogaming-injunction-wiisining-zaagiigan-1.6088706

Turner, L. (2021b). Legal battle brewing in northern Ontario over the protection of Indigenous sacred areas, mining rights. Retrieved July 5, 2023. Available: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/ginoogaming-injunction-wiisining-zaagiigan-1.6088706#:~:text=Ginoogaming%20First%20Nation%20considers%20Wiisinin,documents%20filed%20by%20their%20lawyers

Turner, L. (2023). Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug celebrates First Nation-led family law, one of the few in Canada. Retrieved April 11, 2023. Available : https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/ki-family-law-takes-effect-1.6806711

Understanding Our Food Systems. (2021). Long Lake #58 First Nation Community. Understanding Our Food Systems. Retrieved: April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.understandingourfoodsystems.com/community/ll58

Victor Diamond Project. (2004). Comprehensive Study Report. Retrieved July 5, 2023. Available: https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/80C30413-docs/report_e.pdf

Viscogliosi, C., Asselin, H., Basile, S., Borwick, K., Couturier, Y., Drolet, M. J., … & Levasseur, M. (2020). Importance of Indigenous Elders ’ contributions to individual and community wellness: results from a scoping review on social participation and intergenerational solidarity. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 111, 667-681.

Wakenagun. (2023). Wakenagun Community Futures Development Corporation. Retrieved January 26, 2024. Available: https://wakenagun.ca/

Wataynikaneyap Transmission Project. (2025) Background. Available: https://www.wataypower.ca/project/background

Wataynikaneyap Power. (2023). Wawakapewin First Nation energized by Wataynikaneyap Power. Retrieved May 8, 2025. Available: https://www.wataypower.ca/updates/wawakapewin-first-nation-energized-by-wataynikaneyap-power

Wapekeka First Nation. (2025a).”Wapekeka First Nation”. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://wapekeka.ca/

Wapekeka First Nation. (2025c). About, Communications. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://wapekeka.ca/about/

Wawakapewin First Nation. (n.d.) Wawakapewin First Nation. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: http://www.wawakapewin.ca/

Wawakapewin First Nation. (2025). About Wawakapewin. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://wawakapewin.netlify.app/about/

Webequie First Nation. (2014). Community Well-Being Baseline Study, 2014. Internal Document Review

Webequie First Nation. (2019a). Draft Community Based Land Use Plan. Internal Document Review

Webequie First Nation. (2019b). On-Reserve Land Use Plan, 2019. Internal Document Review.

Webequie First Nation. (2023). Comprehensive Community Plan. February 2023. Internal Document Review.

Webequie First Nation and Marten Falls First Nation. (2023). Aboriginal and / or Treaty Rights and Interests: Preliminary Existing Conditions Report. Marten Falls First Nation Community Access Road Project. Working Document. Internal Document Review

Weeneebayko Area Health Authority. (2018). WAHA Strategic Plan 2015–2018 (Version 7). Available: https://www.waha.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/WAHA-Strategic-Plan-2015-2018-vers-7.pdf

Weeneebayko Area Health Authority. (2025). About WAHA. Available: https://www.waha.ca/about/ 

Wildlife Conservation Society Canada. (2022). Fawn River IPA Ecological Atlas | Ontario Is More Than Minerals. Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://morethanminerals.ca/resource/fawn-river-ipa-ecological-atlas/

Wilton, M. J., Karagatzides, J. D., Solomon, A., & Tsuji, L. J. S. (2023). An Examination of Outdoor Garden Bed Designs in a Subarctic Community. Arctic, 76(1), 60–71. Available: https://doi.org/10.14430/arctic77061

Winchester and Rofe. (2010). Qualitative research and its place in human geography. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295443066_Qualitative_research_and_its_place_in_human_geography

Windigo First Nations Council. (2025). “North Caribou Lake First Nation.” Retrieved April 14, 2025. Available: https://www.windigo.on.ca/north-Caribou-lake-first-nation

Windsor, M. (2019). 2. Oji-Cree language vitality in a community of Northwestern Ontario.

Wunnumin Lake First Nation. (2010a). About Wunnumin in 2010. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://wunnumin.com/community-profile-2010/

Wunnumin Lake First Nation. (2010b). Community Services 2010. Retrieved June 26, 2023. Available: https://wunnumin.com/community-services-2010/.

Wunnumin Lake First Nation (n.d.). Legend of Wunnumin. Wunnumin Lake First Nation, Retrieved May 1, 2025. Available: https://wunnumin.com/legend-of-wunnumin/.

19.6.4         Section 19.3: Identification of Potential Effects, Pathways and Indicators

Adam, M. C., Kneeshaw, D., & Beckley, T. M. (2012). Forestry and road development: Direct and indirect impacts from an aboriginal perspective. Ecology and Society, 17(4). Retrieved March 19, 2025. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26269196?seq=1

Alberta Council of Women’s Shelters (ACWS). (2022). Annual Report. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://acws.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2023-07-17_ACWS-Annual-Report-2022-2023.pdf

Alhmidi, M. (2023). Four Ontario First Nations voice concerns over mining claims on their lands. Retrieved May 13, 2023. Available: https://globalnews.ca/news/9452452/ontario-first-nations-mining/

Archaeological Services Inc. (ASI). (2021). Cultural Heritage Report – Preliminary Desktop Data Collection Results – Webequie Supply Road – Draft Report. Internal Document Review.

AtkinsRéalis Inc. (2022). Webequie Supply Road Webequie First Nation Socio-Economic Survey. Internal Document Review.

Attawapiskat First Nation. (2020). Attawapiskat First Nation Comments on Terms of Reference. October 6, 2020. Internal document.

Avaanz Ltd (2024). Economic Impact Assessment – Draft Report. Internal Document Review. 

Baruah.B, Biskupski-Mujanovic. S. (2023). Indigenous women’s employment in natural resource industries in Canada: Patterns, barriers and opportunities. Women’s Studies International Forum, 99, 102784. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://www.academia.edu/108392612/Indigenous_womens_employment_in_natural_resource_industries_in_Canada_Patterns_barriers_and_opportunities

Batal, M., Chan, H. M., Fediuk, K., Ing, A., Berti, P. R., Mercille, G., … & Johnson-Down, L. (2021). First Nations households living on-reserve experience food insecurity: prevalence and predictors among ninety-two First Nations communities across Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 112(Suppl 1), 52-63. Retrieved May 2, 2025. Available: https://link.springer.com/article/10.17269/s41997-021-00491-x

Bond, A., Quinlan, L. (2018). Indigenous Gender-based Analysis for Informing the Canadian Minerals and Metals Plan. 2018. Retrieved May 3, 2023. Available: https://www.minescanada.ca/sites/minescanada/files/2022-06/indigenous-gender-based-analysis-cmmp_.pdf

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC). (2023). The Government of Canada’s Approach to Implementation of the Inherent Right and the Negotiation of Aboriginal Self-Government. Retrieved December 3, 2024. Available: https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100031843/1539869205136

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC). (2023b). First Nation Detail – Wawakapewin First Nation. Retrieved June 23, 2023. Available: https://fnp-ppn.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNReserves.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=234&lang=eng

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC). (2025). First Nation Detail. Retrieved March 3, 2025. Available: https://fnp-ppn.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNGovernance.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=217&lang=eng

Cummins, B. D. (1992). Attawapiskat Cree Land Tenures and Use (1901-1989). Retrieved June 23, 2023. Available: http://hdl.handle.net/11375/8611

Dalseg, S. K., R. Kuokkanen, S. Mills, and D. Simmons. (2018). Environmental Assessments in the Canadian North: Marginalization of Indigenous Women and Traditional Economies. The Northern Review 47: 135-166

Faid, M. S., Shariff, N. N. M., & Hamidi, Z. S. (2019). The risk of light pollution on sustainability, ASM Sci. J, 12, 134_‑142. Retrieved January 15, 2025. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Muhamad-Syazwan-Faid/publication/334986552_The_Risk_of_Light_Pollution_on_Sustainability/links/5faa016d458515157bfb419c/The-Risk-of-Light-Pollution-on-Sustainability.pdf?_sg%5B0%5D=started_experiment_milestone&origin=journalDetail

French-Constant, RH., Somers-Yeates, R., Bennie, J., Economou, T., Hodgson, D., Spalding, A., & McGregor, PK. (2016). Light pollution is associated with earlier tree budburst across the United Kingdom. Proc Biol Sci. 2016 Jun 29;283(1833):20160813. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2016.0813. PMID: 27358370; PMCID: PMC4936040. Retrieved May 11, 2024. Available: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rspb.2016.0813

Gibson, G., Yung, K., Chisholm, L., and Quinn, H. with Lake Babine Nation and Nak’azdli Whut’en. (2017). Indigenous Communities and Industrial Camps: Promoting healthy communities in settings of industrial change. Victoria, B.C.: The Firelight Group. Retrieved June 27, 2023. Available: https://firelight.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Firelight-work-camps-Feb-8-2017_FINAL.pdf

Globe Newswire. (2025). Copper Lake Signs Exploration Agreements with Aroland and Animbiigoo Zaagi’igan Anishinaabek First Nations for its Marshall Lake Copper-Zinc-Silver-Gold VMS Property. Retrieved February 28, 2025. Available: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2025/02/27/3033830/0/en/Copper-Lake-Signs-Exploration-Agreements-with-Aroland-and-Animbiigoo-Zaagi-igan-Anishinaabek-First-Nations-for-its-Marshall-Lake-Copper-Zinc-Silver-Gold-VMS-Property.html

Ginoogaming First Nation. (2025). Review of Environmental Impact Statement on the Marathon Palladium Project. Retrieved May 1, 2025. Available: https://registrydocumentsprd.blob.core.windows.net/commentsblob/project-54755/comment-55802/210726_Letter_GFN_JRP_Marathon%20Palladium%20EA_Comments_Signed.pdf

Golder Associates. (2018). Wataynikaneyap Phase 2 Final Environmental Study Report. Retrieved February 6, 2025 Available: https://www.oslp.ca/phase-2-blackline-final-esr

Gordon, L. D. (1983). North Caribou Lake Archaeology: Northwestern Ontario (Doctoral dissertation). Government of Canada. (1964). The James Bay Treaty – Treaty No. 9 (Made in 1905 and 1906) and Adhesions Made in 1929 and 1930. Ottawa: Queen’s Printer and Controller of Stationary, 1964. Retrieved November 11, 2024. Available: https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100028863/1581293189896#chp1

Government of Canada.(2017). Aboriginal Peoples Survey, 2017: Concepts and Methods Guide. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/catalogue/89-653-X2020001

Government of Ontario. (2017). Kashechewan First Nation Planning Area of Interest and Traditional Area in Relation to Adjacent Communities. Retrieved April 15, 2025. Available: https://files.ontario.ca/figure-1-kashechewan-first-nation-planning-area-of-interest-and-traditional-harvesting-area.pdf

Government of Ontario. (2025). Ontario and Aroland First Nation Sign Historic Agreement Connecting Roads to the Ring of Fire. Retrieved February 28, 2025. Available: https://news.ontario.ca/en/release/1005666/ontario-and-aroland-first-nation-sign-historic-agreement-connecting-roads-to-the-ring-of-fire

Halseth, R. and Murdock, L. (2020). Supporting Indigenous self-determination in health: Lessons learned from a review of best practices in health governance in Canada and internationally. Prince George, BC: National Collaborating Centre for Indigenous Health. Retrieved February 28, 2025. Available: https://www.nccih.ca/495/Supporting_Indigenous_selfdetermination_in_health___Lessons_learned_from_a_review_of_best_practices_in_health_governance_in_Canada_and_Internationally.

Hanson.E. (n.d). The Sixties Scoop: A Loss of Culture and Identity. Emily Hanson. My Education Journey. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://edusites.uregina.ca/emilyhanson/the-sixties-scoop-a-loss-of-culture-and-identity

Hoogeveen, D., Williams, A., Hussey, A., Western, S., & Gislason, M. K. (2021). Sex, mines, and pipelines: Examining ‘Gender-based Analysis Plus’ in Canadian impact assessment resource extraction policy. The Extractive Industries and Society, 8(3), 100921. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/society-societe/community-communite/ifca-iac/evidence_briefs-donnees_probantes/environmental_and_impact_assessments-evaluations_environnementales_et_impacts/hoogeveen_gislason-eng.aspx

Hopper, M., and Power, G. (1991). The Fisheries of an Ojibwa Community in Northern Ontario. Arctic Institute of North America, 44(4): 267-274. Retrieved January 23, 2024. Available at: https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/download/64603/48517/.

Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC). (2023) Practitioner’s Guide to Federal Impact Assessments. Retrieved January 23, 2025. Available: https://www.canada.ca/en/impact-assessment-agency/services/policy-guidance/practiotioners-guide-impact-assessment-act.html

Indigenous Services Canada (2022). Leadership Selection in First Nations. Indigenous Services Canada. Retrieved January 9, 2025. Available: https://sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1323195944486/1565366893158.

InterGroup Consultants. (2024). Gender Based Analysis Plus (GBA+): Webequie Supply Road. Retrieved: July 22, 2024. Internal Document Review. 

Intrinsik (2023). Community Health Survey. Internal Document Review.

Intrinsik. (2025). Health Impact Assessment (HIA) of the Webequie Supply Road Project. Internal Document Review.

Irving, C. (2021). What are the most prevalent modern effects of the legacy of colonialism on Indigenous communities in Canada? Retrieved: April 30, 2025. Available: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4060051

Kataquapit, X. (2022). Going to Akamiski, Retrieved May 15, 2023. Available: https://windspeaker.com/under-northern-sky-xavier-kataquapit/going-akamiski

Kayahna Tribal Area Council. (1985b). The Kayahna Region land utilization and occupancy study. Big Trout Lake, Ont.: Kayahna Tribal Area Council.

Kenora Daily Miner & News. (2011). Big Trout Lake holds referendum to protect lands and water from development. Jon Thompson. Retrieved May 5, 2025. Available: https://www.minesandcommunities.org/article.php?a=11053

Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug. (N.D.). Community. Retrieved June 27, 2023. Available: http://www.ki.firstnation.ca/?q=hotelcommunity

Kumar, M.B., & Tjepkema, M. (2019). Suicide among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit (2011-2016): Findings from the 2011 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort. Retrieved December 12, 2023. Available: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/99-011-x/99-011-x2019001-eng.htm

Lawrence, B. (2003). “Gender, Race, and the Regulation of Native Identity in Canada and the United States: An Overview.” Hypatia, 18(2), 3-31. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://philpapers.org/rec/LAWGRA-2

Maracle, G. (2021). Connections and processes: Indigenous community and identity’s place in the healing journey. Turtle Island Journal of Indigenous Health, 1(2). Retrieved March 10, 2024. Available: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/tijih/article/view/36052

Marten Falls First Nation (2020). Marten Falls First Nation Comments on Terms of Reference. Internal Document Review.

Marten Falls First Nation. (2024). Marten Falls First Nation Indigenous Knowledge, Land Use and Occupancy Study for the Northern Access Roads Proposed Webequie Supply Road Project. Internal Document Review.

Matawa First Nations. (2011). Unity Declaration. Retrieved March 25, 2024. Available: https://www.matawa.on.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Mamow-Wecheekapawetahteewiin-Unity-Declaration-Signed-July-13-2011.pdf

Matawa First Nations. (2024). Unity Declaration. Retrieved March 25, 2024. Available: https://www.matawa.on.ca/about-us/unity-declaration/

McIntosh, E. (2023). 10 First Nations sue Ontario and Canada over resource extraction and broken Treaty 9 promises. Retrieved May 12, 2024. Available: https://thenarwhal.ca/ontario-treaty-9-lawsuit/#:~:text=The%20communities%20behind%20the%20Ontario%20Superior%20Court%20case,Kitchenuhmaykoosib%20Inninuwug%20First%20Nation%20and%20Neskantaga%20First%20Nation.

Meyers Norris Penny (MNP) LLP (n.d). Weenusk First Nation Existing Conditions Report. Internal Document Review.

Mining Watch. (2005). First Nations Declare a Moratorium on Mining Exploration and Forestry in the Far North: No Means No. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://miningwatch.ca/news/2005/10/27/first-nations-declare-moratorium-mining-exploration-and-forestry-far-north-no-means

Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP). (2021). Best management practices for aggregate activities and forest-dwelling Woodland Caribou. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://www.ontario.ca/page/best-management-practices-aggregate-activities-and-forest-dwelling-woodland-Caribou

MNP LLP. (2023). Weenusk First Nation Financial Statements March 31, 2021. Retrieved May 8, 2023. Available: FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (TO PUBLISH) – (F-0080) – Annual Audited Financial Statement – 2020-2021 – 2021_07_29 (0146) 17679267 (1).PDF (aadnc-aandc.gc.ca).

Moonias, C. (2019). Comments Received from Neskantaga First Nation on Draft Terms of Reference. Internal Document Review

Mushkegowuk Council (2024). About Us. Retrieved May 1, 2025. Available: https://mushkegowuk.ca/about/

Myette, E., & Riva, M. (2021). Surveying the complex social-ecological pathways between resource extraction and Indigenous Peoples’ health in Canada: A scoping review with a realist perspective. The Extractive Industries and Society, 8(2), 100901. Retrieved May 1, 2025. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214790X21000460

National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation. (n.d). Canada’s Residential Schools: The History, Part 1 Origins to 1939. The Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Volume. Retrieved: April 30, 2025. Available: https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2015/trc/IR4-9-1-1-2015-eng.pdf

Noon, K., & De Napoli, K. (2022). First Knowledges Astronomy: Sky Country. Thames & Hudson Australia.

The NAN (n.d.) Nishnawbe Aski Nation. Home page. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://www.nan.ca/

NFN. (2020). Comments Received from Neskantaga First Nation- Webequie Supply Road. Internal Document Review.

Ninomiya, M. E. M., Burns, N., Pollock, N. J., Green, N. T., Martin, J., Linton, J., … & Latta, A. (2023). Indigenous communities and the mental health impacts of land dispossession related to industrial resource development: a systematic review. The Lancet Planetary Health, 7(6), e501-e517. Retrieved March 14, 2025. Available: https://sdgresources.relx.com/articles/indigenous-communities-and-mental-health-impacts-land-dispossession-related-industrial

Ontario. (2020). General habitat description for the Forest-dwelling Woodland Caribou. Retrieved May 07, 2025. Available: https://www.ontario.ca/page/general-habitat-description-forest-dwelling-woodland-caribou

Ontario North – Lakehead Social Planning Council. (2025). Healthy Babies Health Children, Webequie First Nation. Retrieved May 1, 2025. Available: https://www.northwesthealthline.ca/displayservice.aspx?id=141627

Peerla, D. (2021a). Information and Knowledge that can be considered across the Marten Falls Community Access Road[MFCAR] Project and Webequie Supply Road[WSR] Project. Internal document review.

Peerla, D. (2021b). Submission of Neskantaga First Nation: Comments on the proposed Terms of

Reference for the Webequie Supply Road Project. Internal document review.

Reed, M. (2008). Aboriginal Women and Family Violence. Public Health Agency of Canada. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2009/aspc-phac/HP20-10-2008E.pdf

Salerno, T., Tam, J., Page, J., Gosling, S. and Firelight Research Inc. (2021). Indigenous Mental Wellness and Major Project Development: Guidance for Impact Assessment Professionals and Indigenous Communities. Prepared for the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. Retrieved September 11, 2024. Available: https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/iaac-acei/documents/research/indigenous-mental-wellness-and-ia-en.pdf

SLR Consulting (Canada) Ltd. (2024). Noise and Vibration Technical Report: Existing Conditions and Impact Assessment. Webequie Supply Road Environmental Assessment. Internal Document Review.

Socialist Project. (2020). Attawapiskat First Nation versus De Beers Diamond Mine. Retrieved May 1, 2025. Available: https://socialistproject.ca/2020/10/attawapiskat-first-nation-vs-debeers-diamond-mine/

Stantec Consulting Inc. (2024). Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study for the Webequie Supply Road. Interim Report. October 4, 2024. Prepared for Webequie First Nation. Internal Document Review.

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (2025). Webequie First Nation Indigenous and Treaty Rights Impact Assessment for the Webequie Supply Road. January 27, 2025. Internal Document Review.

Suslop Inc. Inc. (2024). Marten Falls First Nation Indigenous Knowledge, Land Use and Occupancy Study for the Northern Access Roads. Proposed Webequie Supply Road Project. Internal Document Review.

The Narwhal (2024). ‘These are not lands to give away’: 6 First Nations take Ontario to court over mining law. Retrieved January 10, 2025. Available: https://thenarwhal.ca/ontario-indigenous-mining-claims-lawsuit/

Tsuji, L., General, Z., Tsuji, R., Powell, E., Latychev, K., Clark, J., and Mitrovica, J., Akimiski Island, Nunavut, Canada. (2019). The Use of Cree Oral History and Sea-Level Retrodiction to Resolve Aboriginal Title. Retrieved May 7, 2023. Available: https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/view/71481 

Towedo, Chief Dorothy. (2020). Aroland First Nation – Webequie Supply Road Project Final Terms of Reference Comments. Internal Document Review

Turner, N. J., Gregory, R., Brooks, C., Failing, L., & Satterfield, T. (2008). From invisibility to transparency: identifying the implications. Ecology and society, 13(2). Retrieved March 19, 2025. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26267989?seq=1

University of Northern British Columbia (UNBC), Université de Montréal, and Assembly of First Nations. (2013). First Nations Food, Nutrition and Environment Study, Results from Webequie First Nation, Ontario. Retrieved December 21, 2024. Available: https://www.fnfnes.ca/docs/Webequie_First_Nation_draft_report_Oct25_2013.pdf

Wakenagun. (2023). Wakenagun Community Futures Development Corporation. Accessed January 26, 2023. Available: https://wakenagun.ca/?404;http://www_wakenagun_ca:80/PDF/Peawanuck_Profile_pdf=&_rdr

Webequie First Nation. (2019). Draft Community Based Land Use Plan. Internal Document Review.

Webequie First Nation. (2014). Community Well-Being Baseline Study, 2014. Internal Document Review.

19.6.5         Section 19.4: Mitigations and Enhancement Measures

Archaeological Services Inc. (2024). Cultural Heritage Report: Existing Conditions and Preliminary Impact Assessment. [Webequie Supply Road – Webequie First Nation and Distract of Kenora, Ontario]. Internal Document Review.

Government of Canada. (2024). Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Dated December 12, 2024. Retrieved February 5, 2025. Available: https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1450124405592/1529106060525.Government of Canada. (2025). First Nation Profiles. Aandc-Aandc.gc.ca. Retrieved January 13, 2025. Available: https://fnp-ppn.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/FNGovernance.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=204&lang=eng

Halloran, Joe, Anderson, Hayley and Tassie, Danielle. (2013). Clean Equipment Protocol for Industry. Peterborough Stewardship Council and Ontario Invasive Plant Council. Retrieved April 25, 2025. Available: https://www.ontarioinvasiveplants.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Clean-Equipment-Protocol_June2016_D3_WEB-1.pdf

Indigenous Climate Hub. (2025). About – Indigenous Community-Based Climate Monitoring Program. Retrieved April 30, 2025. Available: https://indigenousclimatehub.ca/indigenous-community-based-climate-monitoring-program/#toggle-id-17

MNP LLP. (n.d). Weenusk First Nation Existing Conditions Report. Internal Document Review.

New Hampshire Public Radio (NHPR). (2017). Climate change is the leading cause of moose and loon population decline in New Hampshire. Retrieved December 21, 2024. Available: https://www.nhpr.org/science/2017-08-01/climate-change-is-the-leading-cause-of-moose-and-loon-population-decline-in-new-hampshire

SLR Consulting (Canada) Ltd. (2024). Noise and Vibration Technical Report: Existing Conditions and Impact Assessment. Webequie Supply Road Environmental Assessment. Internal Document Review.

Stantec Consulting Inc. (2024). Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study for the Webequie Supply Road. Interim Report. October 4, 2024. Prepared for Webequie First Nation. Internal Document Review.

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (2025). Webequie First Nation Indigenous and Treaty Rights Impact Assessment for the Webequie Supply Road. January 27, 2025. Internal Document Review.

Suslop Inc. (2024). Marten Falls First Nation Indigenous Knowledge, Land Use and Occupancy Study for the Northern Access Roads. Proposed Webequie Supply Road Project. Internal Document Review

The Narwhal. (2024). Funding for Indigenous Guardians is now Indigenous-led. Fatima Syed. Retrieved May 5, 2025. Available: https://thenarwhal.ca/indigenous-guardians-new-funding-system/

Webequie First Nation. (2019). On-Reserve Land Use Plan, 2019. Internal Document Review.

19.6.6         Section 19.5: Impacts on the Exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights

Halseth, R. and Murdock, L. (2020). Supporting Indigenous self-determination in health: Lessons learned from a review of best practices in health governance in Canada and internationally. Prince George, BC: National Collaborating Centre for Indigenous Health. Retrieved February 28, 2025. Available: https://www.nccih.ca/495/Supporting_Indigenous_selfdetermination_in_health___Lessons_learned_from_a_review_of_best_practices_in_health_governance_in_Canada_and_Internationally.

Heid, O., Khalid, M., Smith, H., Kim, K., Smith, S., Wekerle, C., … & Wekerle, C. (2022). Indigenous youth and resilience in Canada and the USA: A scoping review. Adversity and Resilience Science, 3(2), 113-147.

Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. (2024). Guidance: Assessment of Potential Impacts on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Retrieved May 5, 2025. Available: https://www.canada.ca/en/impact-assessment-agency/services/policy-guidance/practitioners-guide-impact-assessment-act/guidance-assessment-potential-impacts-rights-indigenous-peoples.html

InterGroup Consultants. (2024). Gender Based Analysis Plus (GBA+): Webequie Supply Road. Retrieved: July 22, 2024. Internal Document Review. 

Intrinsik. (2025). Health Impact Assessment (HIA) of the Webequie Supply Road Project. Internal Document Review.

Long, J. S., Preston, R. J., Srigley, K., & Sutherland, L. (2017). Sharing the land at Moose Factory in 1763. Ontario History, 109(2), 238–262. Retrieved January 25, 2024. Available: https://doi.org/10.7202/1041286ar

MNP LLP. (n.d). Weenusk First Nation Existing Conditions Report. Internal Document Review.

Nakogee, Chief David (2020). Attawapiskat First Nation Comments on Terms of Reference, Webequie Supply Road. Internal Document Review.

Peerla, D. (2021a). Information and Knowledge that can be considered across the Marten Falls Community Access Road[MFCAR] Project and Webequie Supply Road[WSR] Project. Internal document review.

Peerla, D. (2021b). Submission of Neskantaga First Nation: Comments on the proposed Terms of

Reference for the Webequie Supply Road Project. Internal document review.

Stantec Consulting Inc. (2024). Webequie First Nation Indigenous Knowledge Study for the Webequie Supply Road. Interim Report. October 4, 2024. Prepared for Webequie First Nation. Internal Document Review.

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (2025). Webequie First Nation Indigenous and Treaty Rights Impact Assessment for the Webequie Supply Road. January 27, 2025. Internal Document Review.

Suslop Inc. (2024). Marten Falls First Nation Indigenous Knowledge, Land Use and Occupancy Study for the Northern Access Roads. Proposed Webequie Supply Road Project. Internal Document Review

Wakenagun. (2023). Wakenagun Community Futures Development Corporation. Retrieved January 26, 2024. Available: https://wakenagun.ca/

Webequie First Nation. (2019). Draft Community Based Land Use Plan. Internal Document Review.

Webequie First Nation. (2023). Comprehensive Community Plan. February 2023. Internal Document Review.

19.6.7         Section 19.6: Assessment of Potential Impacts on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. (2024). Guidance: Assessment of potential impacts on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. Government of Canada. Retrieved May 10, 2025. Available: https://www.canada.ca/en/impact-assessment-agency/services/policy-guidance/practitioners-guide-impact-assessment-act/guidance-assessment-potential-impacts-rights-indigenous-peoples.html