1. Land Use Planning in the Deh Cho territory

2. Agenda 1)INTRODUCTION 2)WHAT IS LAND USE PLANNING? 3)UPDATE ON DCLUPC ACTIVITIES & PROGRESS 4)INPUT DATA (INFORMATION USED TO CREATE LAND USE OPTIONS) 5)LAND USE OPTIONS + ECONOMIC MODEL 6)COMMUNITY VISION AND LAND USE PRIORITIES 7)GENERAL DISCUSSION

3. What is Land Use Planning? Potential Land Uses Decisions (Planning Partners) (Staff & Committee) Zones (Planning & Management) Development Conservation Forestry - Green TLUO – RedForestry - Green TLUO – Red Tourism – Orange Wildlife – BlueTourism – Orange Wildlife – Blue Oil and Gas – Purple Archaeology - BlackOil and Gas – Purple Archaeology - Black Minerals – BrownMinerals – Brown Agriculture – YellowAgriculture – Yellow

4. Land Use Planning in the Deh Cho Land Use Planning means determining what types of land use activities should occur and where they should take place “The purpose of the plan is to promote the social, cultural and economic well-being of residents and communities in the Deh Cho territory, having regard to the interests of all Canadians.” Our planning area extends to the whole Deh Cho territory, excluding municipal areas and Nahanni National Park Reserve

5. Plan Area

6. Land Use Planning and the Deh Cho Process Land Use Planning is only one part of the larger Deh Cho Process of negotiations looking at land, resource management and governance issues –Draft Land Use Plan (2005) –Final Land Use Plan (March 2006) Land Use Plan used by three parties to negotiate in the Deh Cho Process Complete Deh Cho Process (~ 2008)

7. Planning Partners + Approve Plan 2 nd Priority Businesses, Associations, non- governmental organizations 1st Priority Residents

8. Committee & Staff Committee Members –2 DCFN reps (Tim Lennie and Petr Cizek) –1 GNWT rep (Bea Lepine) –1 Federal Government rep (Adrian Boyd) –Chairman selected by the 4 members (Herb Norwegian) 5 Staff Members –Executive Director (Heidi Wiebe) –Office Manager (Sophie Bonnetrouge) –GIS Analyst (Monika Templin) –Land Use Planner (Paul Wilson) –Land Use Planner Trainee (Priscilla A. Canadien)

9. Planning vs. Management Our mandate is to plan for future resource development – map potential, identify issues, write final plan to show “what” and “where” We are not involved in past or current resource applications – current government structures do that (DCFN, GNWT and Gov of Canada) May change with Deh Cho Process – Future Deh Cho Resource Management Authority

10. Update on Activities

11. Update on DCLUPC Activities & Progress  Staff Recruitment  Round 1 Consultation Feedback  Q & A Report  Further Research:  Wildlife Workshop,  Dene Nahodhe Workshop  Economic Development Model Completed  Reviewing Various Land Use Options

12. Question & Answers Report From 1 st Round of Information Sessions Report of Questions and Answers –Relationship with Deh Cho Process –Research and Information –Participation & Consultations in Planning –Development Sectors and Impacts –Trans-Boundary Issues

13. Wildlife Workshop Created New Wildlife Map (Conservation Layer) Held: November 24th – 28th, 2003 Wildlife Working Group Hunters, trappers, harvesters and biologists from the Deh Cho territory –To fill information gaps in Wildlife Research –To integrate traditional and scientific knowledge

14. Dene Nahodhe Workshop Held: March 29 th – April 2 nd, 2004 To integrate the spiritual component into the Land Use Plan decisions Elders, Youth and Guest Speakers from across the Deh Cho Yamoria Laws, Dene Customs, Holistic Approach to Land Use Planning Deh Cho Dene Nahodhe Statement Ongoing Process – People Implement Plan

15. “Yamoria came to the homeland of the Deh Cho Dene with laws from the Creator. These laws were given to the Dene to live by. The most important law was respect for Creation – Mother Earth. We were put here by the Creator to take care of Mother Earth. The foundation of our Deh Cho government and Mother Earth is Nahe Nahodhe. Nahe Nahodhe is who we are and where we came from. We stand firm behind this belief.” Accepted by the Elders and Youth at the Deh Cho Land Use Planning Committee’s Dene Nahodhe Workshop in Fort Providence on April 1, 2004. Deh Cho Dene Nahodhe

16. How should Dene values and principles be applied? New Land Uses Can you develop Oil and Gas and continue to respect the earth? –Ceremony i.e. Fire Feeding –Only taking what you need – pacing development –Not wasting resources – salvage logging along pipeline corridor –Monitoring and managing Wildlife – Cumulative Effects –Sharing and helping all Deh Cho Communities Deh Cho Dene Nahodhe

17. Resource Potential and Conservation Values

18. Conservation Zones Traditional Land Use and Occupancy Archeology, Rare Features, Historic Sites and Cabins Wildlife Habitat Value

19. Wildlife Traditional Knowledge & Expert Research Regional Wildlife Workshop - Held: November 2003 308 species in the Deh Cho territory (3 amphibians, 36 fish, 213 birds and 56 mammals) Key species include: –Caribou, Moose, Bison, Fish and Waterfowl for consumption –Trumpeter Swan, Whooping Crane, Peregrine Falcon (Endangered) –Black Bear, Grizzly Bear, Furbearers, Dall’s Sheep, and Mountain Goat (Trapping & Hunting species) Critical wildlife areas include: –Nahanni National Park Reserve –Mackenzie Bison Sanctuary (denning, staging and calving, etc.) –Edehzhie –Central area between Fort Liard & Wrigley Important consideration for Cumulative Effects Management

20. Wildlife Potential

21. Traditional Use Density Important to Traditional Dene Lifestyle’s Information gathered by DCFN Consulted over 386 harvesters and mapped information Reflects Wildlife Habitats and Archeology Harvest areas, kill sites, sacred sites, berry patches DCFN approved publication and use at Kakisa Assembly 2004

22. Traditional Use Density

23. Archeology, Cabins, Historic Sites & Rare features Evidence of past human use Important small sites i.e. fire rings, cabins, trails Buffer required for protection Development must avoid these areas Rare Features: –i.e. Hot Springs and Karst Formations Conservation Value is determined by distance from these important sites

24. Archeology, Rare features, Historic Sites & Cabins

25. Conservation Value Map

26. Development Zones Mineral Potential Oil and Gas PotentialForestry Potential Tourism Potential Agricultural Potential

27. Tourism Deh Cho Territory –Vast Pristine Wilderness Landscapes (210,000 km2), wild flowing rivers, lakes teeming with fish, flourishing Aboriginal cultures, and a place where caribou outnumber people –Potential for Tourism Deh Cho ~ 2,120 visitors or 4 % of NWT visitation of ~50,000 (RWED, 1998) Yukon ~ 300,000 visitors in 2002 (P. Gort, pers. comm., 2002). Reasons for low visitation: –Competition from more established northern destinations (i.e. Yukon and Alaska); –Marketing and Product of the Deh Cho not distinguished from similar, more accessible destinations (i.e. Northern Ontario, B.C. and Alberta, etc.); –Emerging destination with few market-ready products and little recognition in the global tourism marketplace. Canada 9th most popular global destination 2.9 % of the global tourists (www.canadatourism.com).www.canadatourism.com Of the non-resident NWT leisure visitors: –54.1 % Canadian, 16 % U.S.A. and 29.9 % from overseas (Japan, Germany & UK)\ NWT Tourists arrive by road (71 %) and by air (29 %) (RWED, 1998)

28. Tourism “Rubber Tire” Adventure, Driving the Deh Cho travel Connection (Loop along Mackenzie & Liard Highways from Northern BC and Northern Alberta). Sport Hunting or Fishing, i.e. Hunting Dall’s Sheep in the Mackenzie Mountains. Backcountry Adventure i.e. Guided canoe trip down the South Nahanni River through the Nahanni National Park Reserve

29. Tourism Product Categories HARD ADVENTURE Requires experience, element of risk, Physical and mental fitness Prepared for all weather conditions, sleeping arrangements and dietary restrictions, Multiple days in unusual / exotic wilderness destination, high levels of activity e.g. rock climbing, whitewater river rafting/canoeing, kayaking, multi-day backpacking Icons: Nahanni National Park Reserve, South Nahanni River whitewater canoeing, multi-day Mackenzie River canoeing etc.. SOFT ADVENTURE Little experience required, risks minimized, Low / modestly physically demanding, Standards of safety and comfort above average, Typically a day product not overnight Less demanding than hard adventure e.g. flat-water rafting/canoeing/kayaking, day camping, day hiking, wilderness lodge experience, Icons: boating the Mackenzie or North Nahanni Rivers, Nahanni Mountain Lodge, North Nahanni Naturalist Lodge, Virginia Falls flight etc. ECO-TOURISM Engaging, participatory and socially responsible travel, Focus on experiencing environment visited, Economic contribution to local community, Small groups and leader with local knowledge, Possible component of a hard & soft adventure product. e.g. bird and wildlife viewing, cultural tours, cultural camps, geological interest, etc. Icons: cultural camps along the Mackenzie or Liard Rivers, Mackenzie Bison Sanctuary, wildlife viewing in the Ram Plateau. CONSUMPTIVE TOURISM Tangible products / materials removed from natural environment as part of tourist’s commercial experience. e.g. fishing and hunting (Catch and release popular). Icons: sport hunting concession area or fishing lodges.

30. Data Collection PRIMARY SOURCES –Northern Land Use Information Series maps –Arctic Development Library CD –Stakeholder Interviews (phone or in person) Tourism Officers, Owner Operators, Biologists etc.. SECONDARY SOURCES –Print Documents Guides, Brochures, Surveys, Regulations –Websites Travel, Tourism Operators and Government CATEGORIZE DATA (Product, Service or Natural Attraction PSN) (Existing and Potential Tourism) RANK TOURISM POTENTIAL MAPPING

31. Categorizing Data Site Reference Number –Location of specific PSN. Source –Where data was collected, reinforced through multiple sources. Type of Activity –Descriptors: Mountain Climbing (MC), Backpacking/ Hiking (B), Scenic Viewpoint/Flightseeing (S), Wildlife Viewing (W), Canoeing/Rafting/Sea Kayaking (C), Boating (Bo), Lodge (L), Geological Feature (G), Camping Opportunities (Ca), Interpretive Attraction (I), Fishing (F), Hunting (H). Location Name –Actual name of location i.e. “area around Cli and Little Doctor Lakes”. Additional Information –To provide a greater sense of location Product/Market Category –Hard Adventure (H), Soft Adventure (S), Eco-tourism (E), Fishing (F) and Hunting (Hu). Day/Multi-Day –Specify length activity i.e. backpacking routes close to a community could be done either in a day or stretched out into two or three days with overnight camping. Tourism Potential Ranking –Rank (1-4) indicating lowest to highest levels of tourism potential General Rationale for Ranking –Overall reason for the ranking was briefly explained.

32. Tourism Potential Ranking · RANKSOURCES 10% LOCATION / ACCESS 20% MARKETABILITY 50% LOCAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS 20% POOR 1 FAIR 2 GOOD 3 EXCELLENT 4 1 source 2-3 sources 4-5 sources 6 + sources Remote, mainly helicopter access near remote communities Few transport options for access, far from access point Multiple options for access, closer to access point, near main corridor Multiple options for access, many commercial options, access from main corridor High market competition i.e. affordable, close, interesting i.e. random feature tourist comes across Less competition, better match for market, almost stand alone PSN i.e. Fisherman’s Lake Almost no competition, good match for market, stand alone or part of package, active viable and valuable service i.e Lindberg Landing Excellent match for market, stand alone product, valued by tourists, icon product i.e. Mackenzie River Independent Tourists, little outfitting / local support i.e. Mosquito Lake Independent Tourists, using some local products / services i.e. Bovie Lake Tourists using guided commercial services, pass through and benefit community i.e. Dogface Lake Multi-day guided commercial PSN, employ local personnel and services i.e. Trout Lake Lodge

33. Mapping Methods Base Maps:- Recreation Tourism Points and Polygons, Rivers1m and Rivers, Lakes, Elevation Contours, Outfitters Area, National Parks, All weather roads, Seasonal Roads Regional Scale Required (100 – 10,000km2 Polygons) Buffered to create Polygons of Tourism Potential for Deh Cho Area 142 Polygons (16 different products and 5 sectors, 15 included more than 1 site)

34. Tourism Potential

35. Tourism Day Use

36. Ecotourism Sector

37. Soft Adventure Sector

38. Hard Adventure Sector

39. Outfitter Areas

40. Tourism Potential Highest Tourism Potential along established corridors –Mackenzie and Liard River valleys and radiates out from communities (the “hub and spoke” effect.) –The river valleys are exceptionally scenic, offer various types of tourism experiences and have good access Key tourism destinations –Nahanni National Park Reserve, the Ram Plateau and North Nahanni River, Little Doctor Lake, Cli Lake, Keele River, Canol Road and lodges Characteristic of northern and rural tourism destinations –Not well developed but lots of potential, offering pristine wilderness free from commercial interruption Requires training, product development, positioning and marketing for positive growth Land use planning needs to support the general direction, growth and vision for the destination

41. Tourism Potential

42. Minerals Assessed 9 mineral types thought to have the most potential in the region The highest potential is in the western tip of the territory, moderate in the west-central portions and low in the remaining areas The most significant minerals types are Copper, Lead-Zinc & Tungsten (existing mines) The western portion has high to very high potential for Skarn (Lead-Zinc, Gold and Tungsten)

43. Minerals

44. Oil & Gas 20 hydrocarbon plays in the Deh Cho –9 confirmed –11 unconfirmed 419 hydrocarbon wells drilled, most are wildcat wells (exploratory) but 127 (25%) found hydrocarbons Current producing regions are Fort Liard and Cameron Hills; other significant discoveries found but not yet developed Greatest potential is in the Liard Plateau and the Great Slave Plain (northern extension of the western sedimentary basin)

45. Oil and Gas Potential

46. Forestry Potential Productive timber stands around Fort Liard, Nahanni region, Jean Marie River and the Cameron Hills Current timber harvest well below sustainable harvest levels (20 years harvest) Low prices $ and difficult access may impact commercial viability Potential for community use for log houses and cut lumber in fly-in communities

47. Forestry Potential

48. Agricultural Potential Agriculture is small scale generally within community boundaries Potential not developed – minor land use Limitations include; climate, soil type, difficulties with access and power requirements South have competitive advantage Cost of food - opportunities and potential for community use

49. Agricultural Potential

50. Composite of Development Potential

51. Land Use Options

52. Preliminary Land Use Options Conservation and Development Layers overlaid Change Priority for Conservation and Development Create 5 basic Land Use Options as benchmarks Economic Development Assessment Model to assess potential impacts Cumulative Effects Research to consider Communities & Planning Partners to review Land Use Options & Current Land Withdrawals Begin to develop a manageable Land Use Plan High Development Low Conservation 1 2 3 4 5 Low Development High Conservation Options

53. Input Data

54. Zones Multiple Use Zones: all development uses permitted subject to general regulations Conservation Zones: no development permitted Uncertain Zones: conservation and development hold equal priority, no decision possible Traditional Use Allowed EverywhereTraditional Use Allowed Everywhere

55. Land Use Option # 1 Priority given to development sectors (Multiple Use Zones) Other factors determine if development occurs Labor demand and inward migration of skilled labor Education, training and management a priority to secure benefits for communities Question’s remain for Uncertain Zones Fragmented habitats High disposable income and modern lifestyle Loss of traditional knowledge culture and language

56. Land Use Option # 1

57. Land Use Option # 2 Development emphasis although more weight to conservation than Option # 1 Conservation Zones protect key wildlife habitats and traditional areas i.e. Nahanni National Park Strong Economy – good employment opportunities, high disposable income, especially in the South Deh Cho Education, training and management a priority to secure benefits for communities No Uncertain Zones – clear what is permitted development Habitat fragmentation - may impact traditional harvesting Lifestyle changes may result in loss of traditional knowledge culture and language

58. Land Use Option # 2

59. Land Use Option # 3 Balance of Development and Conservation Priorities Uncertain Zones cover 40% of the Deh Cho - special conditions for development may apply Economic benefits available from development including employment given sufficient education and training High disposable income for some, immigration and pressure on housing and social and medical services Conservation Zones better able to sustain wildlife populations, traditional harvesting and seasonal employment Opportunity to balance maintaining a traditional lifestyle and the benefits of development

60. Land Use Option # 3

61. Land Use Option # 4 Focus on Conservation layers, Wildlife and TLUO Some Multiple Use Zones for Development - no Uncertain Zones Some benefits from development i.e. employment and tax revenue Young people may leave communities or Deh Cho for employment or education Local and regional government administrations would continue to be a major employer and play a lead role in skills development Expanded Conservation Zones around protected areas promote subsistence harvesting and traditional activities Social pressures of development may begin to impact traditional culture and values

62. Land Use Option # 4

63. Land Use Option # 5 Conservation Zones a Priority Development restricted to areas away from communities with high potential A few Uncertain Zones where decisions have to be made Lack of revenue and income from development may limit services and opportunities Lack of opportunities may increase social problems with alcohol and drugs Also expanded Conservation Zones provide opportunities for subsistence harvesting Young people may leave communities or even the Deh Cho for employment or education Key role for local and regional government in employment, training and controlling development

64. Land Use Option # 5

65. Interim Land Withdrawals Use the same process Land Withdrawals are a rough estimate Land Use Planning is a longer process, more information is collected and allows for informed decisions Land Use Plan will revise Land Withdrawals Land Use Planning Interim Land Withdrawals 5 years in parallel Approval

66. Interim Land Withdrawals

68. Economic Development Assessment Model

69. Determines costs & benefits for informed land use planning decisions Example: If a pipeline is developed how many jobs will be created, how much revenue? Model current economy then predict the next 20 years Turn on and off 5 key sectors (Development Layers) Will include traditional and wage economies Allows us to see the economic impact of developing each business sector, and a few specific projects Apply Economic Assessment Model to each of five Land Use Options and the existing land withdrawals Results are regional not community based

70. Economic Development Assessment Model

71. Economic Assessment Model Outputs Economic Assessment Model: generates direct, indirect and induced estimates reflecting the level of development in 5 key sectors for the following: 1. Gross Production 2. GDP or Value Added by Industry 3. Labour Income – Southern, Northern and Aboriginal 4. Employment by Industry– Southern, Northern and Aboriginal 5. Tax revenues to the Federal Government and the GNWT 6. Population and Labour Force

72. Tourism Economics Maximum of 92 polygons developed over 20 years (Option1) Difficult to compare with value of Resource Extraction Additional Benefits: –Supports Individuals outside traditional wage economy; –Can support Traditional and Subsistence Lifestyles; –Can offer Low Capital or Low Infrastructure Self-employment Opportunities; –Promotes cultural sharing and can renew interest in cultural values and Traditions (i.e. arts and crafts, oral languages, documents and interprets history); –Minimizes Impacts on the natural environment; –And a Sustainable Industry not subject to the boom and bust like Resource Extraction Industries

73. Tourism Sites Developed

74. Trends and Planning Implications TOURISM TRENDSLAND USE PLANNING IMPLICATIONS Increase in Hard Adventure: Multi-day backcountry tourism; canoeing expeditions, backpacking and also rafting/kayaking, mountain and climbing Areas: Northwest of Fort Simpson, north of Nahanni National Park Reserve, west of Ft Liard, and east of Tungsten and the Nahanni Range Road Preserve wilderness / wild uninterrupted spaces - according to customer expectations, limit encounters with resource extraction, sport- hunting and other incompatible uses Increase in “Rubber Tire” and Soft Adventure Tourism; Alaska Highway Traffic - market to develop the Deh Cho connection / loop. Fly drives – affordable, accessible wilderness package. Physically Oriented Day or Multi-Day Trips in demand i.e. day hike, day canoe, two overnight trip at lodge. Plan for 1 Day Access – from highway or community; typically boating, cultural camps or flight seeing. Flight Seeing Corridors – limit exposure of tourists to resource extraction industry and optimize wilderness experience. New focus on Learning and Enrichment Travel; Engaging, cultural and nature based products (not eco-tourism). Positioned for soft adventurers i.e. multi-day birch bark canoe building or moose hide tanning. Community driven i.e. niche culturally based “ed-venture” multi-day packaged trip to communities with low visitation i.e. Jean Marie Protecting nature and cultural resources – key importance Identify Pockets of Land – free of incompatible land-uses (i.e. oil & gas) to meet tourists expectations for wilderness Nahanni National Park Reserve Expansion Increase demand for this key backcountry destination and surrounding area. Encouraging access for the soft adventure “rubber tire” or motor coach tourists for guided day products i.e. cruise ship passengers in Kluane Park Avoid Resource Extraction within and immediately outside park - to ensure expectations for wilderness. Plan for increasing demand and access Encroachment / Competition for Land by resource-based extraction industries Tourism focus is on wilderness experience, but never sole economic engine Oil & Gas, mining, forestry will encroach on land base Preserve natural and cultural environment - especially backcountry used for hard adventurers. Soft adventure tourists more resilient if views intact.

75. Agricultural Hectares Developed

76. Forestry Volume Produced (Millions of M 3 )

77. Gas Development (Millions of M 3 )

78. Mining Development Large Developments – major impacts especially during construction Modeled 3 mines: MINE OPTION 1 OPTION 2 OPTION 3 OPTION 4 OPTION 5 CLW CantungIN OUTIN Prairie CreekINOUT IN Coates LakeINOUT IN

79. Total Direct Employment # 3

80. Impact on Gross Expenditure

81. Impact on Gross Domestic Product

82. Direct & Total Employment

83. Impact on Tax Revenue

84. Population Trends

85. Unemployment Rate (%)

86. Employment Rate (%)

87. Population

88. Indications! Terms and conditions of development Manage Potential Development Impacts Higher Lower Development Inward migration / fly-in workers Development / Capital Works Gross Domestic Product Gross Expenditure Labor Demand Employment Opportunities Tax Revenue

89. Social, Cultural and Ecological Values Social and Cultural Values not reflected in the Economic Model Need to be considered in Land Use Planning decisions Impacts may vary according to the pace and type of development Should be reflected in Land Use Priorities Cumulative Effects addresses social and cultural indicators

90. Cumulative Effects

91. Cumulative Effects Research Cumulative Effects identify the overall impact of many developments together, over time Land Use Objectives (Vision and priorities) Cumulative Effects Indicators – characteristics : –Physical-Chemical; Ecological; Land and Resource Use; and Social Thresholds - define the point indicator changes to an unacceptable condition in zone; –Levels of acceptable change or tiered thresholds –Balance human, ecological and social need Measure progress towards objectives Included in the Deh Cho Land Use Plan as Terms and Conditions for development and management

92. Limits of Acceptable Change

93. Ecological response curve and tiered habitat thresholds.

94. Indicators and Thresholds 1 Proposed Indicators: –Physical/Chemical Air Quality Water Quality –Ecological Habitat Availability Specialized Habitat Features e.g. Salt Licks Core Habitat Fish Habitat Woodland Caribou

95. Indicators and Thresholds 2 Proposed Indicators: –Land Use Total Disturbed Area Significant and Environmental Features Total Corridor Density Stream Crossing Density –Social Significant Cultural Features Community Population Labour Participation Area and Revenue by Sector Visual Quality

96. Core Area Conservation Zone –Cautionary >85% Large Core Areas –Target >75% Large Core Areas –Critical >65% Large Core Areas Development Zone –Cautionary >65% Medium Core Areas –Target >50% Medium Core Areas –Critical >40% Medium Core Areas Core Area 30%

97. Core Area

98. Total Corridor Density Conservation Zone –Cautionary – 1 km / square km –Target 1.2 km / square km –Critical 1.5 km / square km Development Zone –Cautionary – 1 km / square km –Target 1.5 km / square km –Critical 1.8 km / square km 100 sq km 60 km roads, trails, seismic = Density 0.6 km / square km

99. Total Corridor Density

100. Stream Crossing Density Cautionary – to be set by communities –Target 0.32 / square km –Critical 0.5 / square km Important for Fish Habitat 100 sq km Density = 0.02

101. Stream Crossing Density

102. Feedback Required Cumulative Effects Indicators and Thresholds will be a Major factor in managing overall development in the Deh Cho Planning Partners must agree on Threshold Values Requires feedback and discussion Working to meet the Objectives of the Land Use Plan

103. Community Priorities and Mapping

104. Community Vision & Land Use Priorities Look at Community Vision What currently exists? What do you wish to develop? protect? What do you want to see in 20, 50,100 years? What will be necessary? Jobs, taxes, migration What conditions are required? How quickly do you want to see this development?

105. Community Priorities Tourism Oil & Gas Forestry Mining Agriculture Traditional Land Use What is important to you?

106. Next Steps Mapping Session Digitize map from Community Mapping Session Copy for Communities Revise and Present new Land Use Maps at future consultations (fall 2004) Further consideration to: –social and economic analysis –cumulative effects research & landscape thresholds Land Use Plan Development –Draft Land Use Plan (2005) –Final Land Use Plan (March 2006)

107. Questions? www.dehcholands.org Mahsi Cho!