2014-15 cimp proposal guide - northwest...

CIMP Proposal

Guide

October, 2013

Table of Contents

1 About CIMP ........................................................................................................ 3 1 CIMP OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................... 3 2 CIMP PRIORITIES ...................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Priority valued components and geographic areas of study ............................................... 3 2.2 Traditional knowledge and community capacity building .................................................... 4

3 AVAILABLE FUNDING ............................................................................................................... 4 4 KEY DATES FOR 2014/15 PROPOSALS .................................................................................. 5 5 NWT CIMP CONTACT ............................................................................................................... 5

2 Request for Proposal Process ............................................................................ 6 1 LETTERS OF INTENT ................................................................................................................ 6 2 FULL PROPOSALS .................................................................................................................... 6 3 HOW PROPOSALS ARE EVALUATED ..................................................................................... 6

3 Pathways Approach ............................................................................................. 9

4 Eligible Recipients and Costs ........................................................................... 11 1 ELIGIBLE RECIPIENTS ........................................................................................................... 11 2 ELIGIBLE COSTS ..................................................................................................................... 11

5 Reporting and Communication ......................................................................... 12 APPENDIX A: KEY NWT DECISION-MAKERS .............................................................................. 13 APPENDIX B: PRIORITY VALUED COMPONENTS DETAILED INFORMATION ......................... 14 1 PRIORITY THEME: WATER .................................................................................................... 14

1.1 Current condition and trend information............................................................................ 14 1.2 Current status of monitoring and the main organizations involved ................................... 14

2 PRIORITY THEME: FISH ......................................................................................................... 15 2.1 Current condition and trend information............................................................................ 15 2.2 Current status of monitoring and the main organizations involved ................................... 15

3 PRIORITY THEME: CARIBOU ................................................................................................. 16 3.1 Caribou monitoring blueprint ............................................................................................. 16 3.2 Current condition and trend information............................................................................ 19 3.3 Current status of monitoring and the main organizations involved ................................... 20

APPENDIX C – SELECTED REFERENCE LIST FOR PRIORITY VALUED COMPONENTS ........ 22 APPENDIX D: LETTER OF INTENT ................................................................................................ 24 APPENDIX E: FULL PROPOSAL SUBMISSION FORM ................................................................. 27

CIMP Proposal Guide October, 2013 | p. 3

1 About CIMP

The NWT Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program (CIMP) Proposal Guide is an essential tool for applicants seeking funding through CIMP’s Request for Proposals (RFP) process. The Guide provides an overview of CIMP’s goals and details the CIMP project funding process.

1 CIMP OBJECTIVES CIMP’s vision is: To watch and understand the land and use it respectfully forever.

• Watching implies that CIMP and its partners will collect both scientific and traditional knowledge data.

• Understanding means that CIMP and its partners will add value to the information through analysis and the generation of knowledge.

• Using the land respectfully forever implies that the knowledge generated through CIMP-funded studies will help NWT decision-makers (see Appendix A) to make informed regulatory decisions that will support the sustainable of use NWT’s resources. More information on CIMP’s objectives is available in our five-year Strategic Plan.

CIMP supports research and monitoring activities that address the cumulative impacts of human activities on the environment. To focus its resources, the CIMP Working Group has adopted the key monitoring and research priorities of NWT decision makers.

2 CIMP PRIORITIES 2.1 Priority valued components and geographic areas of study A prioritization exercise with decision makers in the NWT held in November 2011 identified key Valued Components and regional hot-spots, providing focus for CIMP and its partners until 2015, and allowing for a more efficient use of CIMP’s resources. Current Priority Valued Components of CIMP are:

• Water quality and quantity; • Fish and fish habitat; and • Caribou

For further information on the priority Valued Components, see Appendix B. For caribou-related proposals, funding priorities are detailed in the Caribou Monitoring Blueprint (Appendix B). The following geographic locations have been identified as areas of primary importance:

• Slave River and delta at Alberta border • Mackenzie River • Great Slave Lake • Lac de Gras • NWT Communities • Range of Bathurst caribou herd • Nahanni Region


• Central Mackenzie Valley (area of increased oil and gas exploration interest) • Peel River watershed

Project proposals that address cumulative impact monitoring questions related to these key Valued Components within these locations will be given priority. Additional information regarding study design and data collection protocols for the three priority VC areas can be found in Appendix C.

2.2 Traditional knowledge and community capacity building To ensure that cumulative impact monitoring of environmental impacts and trends in the NWT is successful and adaptable, projects must incorporate meaningful involvement and two-way communication with regions and communities. A priority for CIMP during the RFP process will be projects that are based on traditional knowledge (TK) and build long-term community capacity. TK-based projects will research TK of community members in the CIMP priority areas of caribou, fish, and water with a goal to improve understanding of cumulative environmental impacts for communities and decision-makers and to reincorporate Aboriginal elders into the decision-making process. During the documentation and compilation of TK, projects should adhere to local or regional TK policies, and actively facilitate the transfer of this knowledge to youth through their continued engagement. These projects will mutually benefit CIMP, northern communities, and the NWT by improving long-term capacity and generating knowledge that is complementary to existing and ongoing science. A science specialist may be included in a TK-based project to observe and participate in the process. This integration will provide Aboriginal youth with an understanding of the mutual benefits of both TK and science systems.

Examples of activities that CIMP supports: – Developing and implementing community-based scientific and/or traditional knowledge-

based monitoring that address cumulative impact questions; – Developing and implementing scientific research projects that address cumulative impact

monitoring gaps; – Analysis of data, including evaluating environmental trends and assessing cumulative

impacts; and – Sharing of knowledge between traditional knowledge holders and scientists that address

cumulative impact questions.

3 AVAILABLE FUNDING One of the ways that CIMP supports research and monitoring of the cumulative impacts of human activities on the environment is by providing funding to researchers through the Request for Proposal process. The total amount of funding available for 2014/15 is unknown due to devolution of the program to the Government of the Northwest Territories. Proposals will be assessed in anticipation of continued funding in 2014/15. CIMP will consider both single-year and multi-year project proposals. The maximum amount of funding considered per project is $60,000.00 per year, though additional funding may be considered for larger collaborative projects.


4 KEY DATES FOR 2014/15 PROPOSALS • Letter of Intent Issued: October 8, 2013 • Letter of Intent Deadline: November 1, 2013 (4:00pm MDT) • Call for Proposals Issued: December 2, 2013 • Proposal Deadline: January 31, 2014 (4:00pm MST) • Announcement of Project Funding: April, 2014 (exact date dependent on program funding)

5 NWT CIMP CONTACT Proposals can be sent by email, fax or regular mail to:

Attn: DonnaMarie Ouellette Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada Environment & Conservation Division - CIMP 4923-52nd Street P.O. Box 1500 Yellowknife, NT X1A 2R3 Phone: (867) 669-2627 Fax: (867) 669-2701 Email: [email protected]


2 Request for Proposal Process

1 LETTERS OF INTENT To apply for CIMP funding, applicants must first submit a Letter of Intent (LOI) (Appendix D). The LOI is a short description of the proposed project that will allow CIMP to assess if the project is eligible for funding. Specifically, the LOIs must address the following questions:

i. Does the proposed project have a robust study design that will contribute to our understanding of cumulative impacts in the NWT?

ii. Does the proposed project address one of CIMP’s priority valued components in a location of primary importance?

iii. Does the proposed project involve NWT community members, decision makers (see Appendix A), and/or Aboriginal organizations in its design and implementation?

CIMP encourages multidisciplinary, collaborative studies, and LOIs will be used to connect and encourage collaboration among researchers who are working in similar locations or addressing similar questions. Reviewers may make suggestions to the applicant to help improve the proposed project’s relevance to CIMP. Once the LOI review is completed, applicants will receive one of the following responses:

i. The project is eligible for funding, and the applicant is encouraged to submit a full proposal under the RFP process;

ii. The project is eligible for funding, if suggested changes or collaborations with other applicants are made. The applicant is encouraged to submit a full proposal addressing the suggested changes; or,

iii. The project is not eligible for funding because it does not meet the funding criteria. Letters of Intent are due by 4:00pm MDT, November 1, 2013.

2 FULL PROPOSALS Applicants will be invited to submit a full proposal using the Proposal Submission Form (Appendix E) based on CIMP’s acceptance of their Letter of Intent. If the application is for multi-year funding please detail the Project Description and Budget for each year. Proposals are due by 4:00pm MST, January 31, 2014.

3 HOW PROPOSALS ARE EVALUATED CIMP projects are reviewed and evaluated using the criteria set out in Table 1. In addition to these criteria, previous recipients of CIMP funding will also be assessed based on their past results including submission of preliminary results, summaries of project results, final reports, publications and other deliverables. Further information on project reporting for current CIMP-funding recipients is available in Section 4.


Project proposals are more likely to be successful if each of the review criteria is addressed. Please contact CIMP staff for further clarity on the review criteria or advice on how to meet the criteria. Community support and decision-maker engagement are two criteria that may be unfamiliar to new applicants. CIMP staff are available to help establish linkages with these groups. It is advised that applicants contact CIMP staff well in advance of proposal submission.

This year CIMP is encouraging the submission of projects that are based on traditional knowledge (TK) and build long-term community capacity. These projects should be designed to generate knowledge that is complementary to existing and ongoing science, and can be used in NWT decision-making.

While CIMP supports community capacity building, projects must also generate scientific or TK information that furthers understanding of cumulative impacts. Projects that focus solely on community capacity building are unlikely to be funded. The following are some examples of capacity building and training activities that could be a component of a cumulative impact monitoring project:

– community involvement in monitoring / data collection that would help share knowledge with community members; and

– scientific or traditional knowledge hands-on training that would increase the ability of community members to continue longer-term monitoring or encourage young people to build careers related to the environment. For instance, project components may include student mentoring, apprenticeships or internships.

Table 1: Proposal Review Criteria

Please note that previous recipients of CIMP funding will also be assessed on each of the review criteria based on their past results. Review Criteria (% weight)

Description

Study Design (20%)

Reviewers look for a well-described, feasible and appropriate study design. Projects that are multi-disciplinary in nature will be scored more highly. The proposal should describe all monitoring protocols or methodologies and approaches that will be used (for examples see Appendix C). It can be noted if study design was developed with input from community members or others currently undertaking CIMP monitoring projects.

CIMP Priorities (15%)

Proposed projects must address stated CIMP priorities. Reviewers look for a strong alignment between the proposed monitoring and the monitoring priorities identified annually through a consideration of community and regulators needs. Project results must help improve understanding of cumulative impacts in the NWT.

Project Purpose, Objectives and Deliverables (15%)

The proposal should clearly describe the purpose, objectives and deliverables of the project, as well as how project results will advance cumulative impact monitoring in the NWT.

Community Support and Engagement (15%)

Community engagement and support for the proposed monitoring project is an important element of CIMP funded projects. Ideally, Northern community members and Aboriginal organizations are


Review Criteria (% weight)

Description

involved in defining the purpose of the monitoring, the project’s design, and how it will be implemented. When a project will build longer-term capacity within NWT communities or Aboriginal organizations, CIMP support is more likely. A letter of support from a community or regional organization to show their support or involvement in the project strengthens the application.

Decision-maker Engagement (15%)

Proposals must identify how results can be used by those who make key decisions regarding how NWT resource development is carried out. Projects should clearly describe how the data and knowledge generated from the project could be used to make effective resource management decisions. A letter of support from decision-maker(s) to show their support or involvement in the project strengthens the application.

Reporting and Communications (10%)

Proposals must contain a reporting and communications plan that indicates how results will be delivered and communicated to CIMP, affected communities and decision-makers. Researchers must report their preliminary results to CIMP staff. Final publications resulting from CIMP-funded projects must also be submitted to CIMP staff.

Leadership and Project Team Experience / Expertise (5%)

Strong CIMP projects have a designated lead to coordinate project partners and ensure community and regional interests are well integrated. Evidence that a technical expert(s) supports the development of the proposal and that the proposed team includes a balance of technical experts and northern experience (ie. community members, regulators, boards) strengthens the application.


3 Pathways Approach

CIMP has developed the Pathways Approach which describes a shared approach to monitoring to help communities and their research partners discuss monitoring questions and design a program that best suits their needs. Use of the Pathways Approach will help applicants design a better study in collaboration with communities and decision makers. The Pathways Approach is just one model of many available to help guide scientific work and engagement with communities. Figure 1 shows the main steps of the approach. Figure 1: Pathways Approach

Here are step-by-step instructions for how to use the Pathways Approach: Step 1: Define a purpose. Why is monitoring needed? The first and most important step in the Pathway is to clearly define the purpose for monitoring. This may be broad – ls water quality changing? – or specific – ls seismic activity altering woodland caribou habitat? A shared understanding of the purpose will help shape all other steps along the Pathway, from identifying what indicators you should monitor to how the information will be used. Step 2: Identify important connections. How do things connect and what should we track? A clear purpose to your monitoring program will help you identify exactly what you should track. In turn, by bringing partners together to discuss key connections between different parts of the environment, you can identify additional indicators and stressors to include in your study.

1. Define a purpose

2. Identify key

connections

3. Review current

information

4. Ask the right

questions

5. Make a plan

6. Collect information

7. Analyze information

8. Report findings

9. Adapt to changes

NWT Environment


Step 3: Review current information. What is already known? This step involves reviewing traditional and scientific knowledge about the issue you want to monitor. It will help you identify similar studies, existing information sources, and appropriate methods to collect and analyze data. It may also help refine study ideas about how things connect – “conceptual model” – and sharpen the study’s purpose. Step 4: Ask the right questions. What needs to be answered? At this point you should have a clear purpose, know what you want to monitor and have a good sense of available information. Building on this foundation, you can now define specific research questions that will guide the collection and analysis of information. Step 5: Make a plan. How will we find answers? This step is all about finding ways to answer the questions posed in step 4. It results in a detailed plan, or study design, that spells out how, where, when, and by whom information will be collected, stored, analyzed and reported. Logistics for transportation, equipment, safety, and environmental protection are an important part of the planning process. Step 6: Collect Information. How do we gather the observations or data? Data collection is typically the most costly step in northern monitoring. This makes it critical that the methods to gather observations – whether through field work or interviews – be clearly defined, well understood, and carried out by a well-trained team. Step 7: Analyze Information. How can we turn observations into useful knowledge? Analysis is the key that unlocks the knowledge contained within the observations (or data) that has been collected. Statistical tests, graphs, and other analytical methods help researchers reveal changes and trends in what is being tracked which might otherwise remain hidden. Such insights can go a long way in answering key monitoring questions. Traditional stories and observations from communities also provide valuable insights into what’s happening on the land. Step 8: Report findings. How should we tell our story? The “story” revealed by the monitoring efforts needs to be told in the right way to the right people. Know the target audience. Decide on what key messages should be delivered. Most importantly, report on how the results shed light on better ways to manage the land. Step 9: Adapt to changes. What has changed? Should we adjust our monitoring program? Keeping an eye on change is at the heart of monitoring. But it’s not only the environment that may be changing. As time goes on, the original monitoring partners, team leaders, funding levels, community values, or government priorities might change too. These changes need to be tracked and, where necessary, the monitoring program adjusted to stay relevant and effective.


4 Eligible Recipients and Costs

1 ELIGIBLE RECIPIENTS All groups/individuals are eligible for funding, including:

NWT communities or groups; Aboriginal, federal and territorial government departments and agencies; Academia; Non-governmental organizations; and Private sector (for example: oil and gas, and mines).

2 ELIGIBLE COSTS Costs that are eligible under CIMP funding are outlined below.

Professional Fees and Services – Wages of people hired specifically for the CIMP-funded project (i.e. employees; including

students, Aboriginal, and/or local employment). Double counting of contracted employees should not occur. This category should not include the salaries of full-time, continuous, or term employees participating in the proposed project who have not been hired specifically for the project (i.e. employees with “regular jobs” outside of the project).

Equipment and Facilities

– Equipment costs (purchase, lease, and maintenance). Only equipment that is specifically purchased, leased or developed for the particular project can be funded. Note: The maintenance cost of equipment already owned by the government and used as part of the project is considered in-kind support;

– Laboratory analysis.

Travel – Travel, accommodation and meals associated with the project and reporting; – The cost of establishing and operating field camps, vehicle and aircraft rental, gas

purchase and shipping (i.e. freight) charges.

Other Costs – Miscellaneous costs, such as office supplies and operating expenses (e.g., office space,

rental, phone, printing, computer time, fax, photocopying and postage).

Administration Fee (excluding federal and territorial governments) – Administrative expenses associated with the project activity (must not exceed 10% of the

total project budget).


5 Reporting and Communication

In the Proposal Submission Form, applicants will be asked to plan the project’s reporting and communications activities and how CIMP, affected communities and decision-makers will be informed of the project and its results (e.g. public events, meetings, publications, and website). Successful applicants are required to provide information to CIMP staff several times throughout the year. The reporting requirements are:

Northern Meeting (mandatory) – Recipients of funding must include costs in their estimated budget to travel to a relevant

northern meeting for the presentation of their results. When working in the communities, the recipient should seek opportunities to present findings.

– One possibility of a meeting opportunity is the CIMP Results Workshop held annually which aims to bring together researchers, NWT community members and decision- makers to discuss current research results, priorities and collaborations. Funding recipients are encouraged to participate in the workshop by presenting their project and preliminary findings.

Summary of Project Results Report (mandatory)

– Funding recipients must submit a summary report of their project results to CIMP staff on February 3, 2014. The content of these reports help technical reviewers to determine if a project has been successful and if it should be supported for another year.

Final Report (mandatory)

– Final reports are due by April 30, 2014. In addition to final reports, CIMP funding recipients are required to submit all final publications resulting from CIMP-funded projects to CIMP staff.

Accounting of funds (mandatory)

– Funding recipients must account for the funds spent by submitting a project financial statement/audit in July of the following fiscal year.

NWT Discovery Portal (mandatory)

– Funding recipients are required to make their metadata and project reports available to CIMP and the public by uploading information to the NWT Discovery Portal: http://nwtdiscoveryportal.enr.gov.nt.ca.


APPENDIX A: KEY NWT DECISION-MAKERS The purpose of this list is to assist applicants in identifying key organizations that have a role in northern resource management decision-making and is not meant to be comprehensive. CIMP encourages all applicants to become familiar with the mandates and roles of decision-makers in the region in which applicants work, in order to design monitoring and research studies that help protect the environment through better informed decision-making. Aboriginal Governments/Organizations Akaitcho Territory Government Dehcho First Nations Inuvialuit Joint Secretariat Inuvialuit Regional Corporation Gwich’in Tribal Council North Slave Métis Alliance Northwest Territory Métis Nation Sahtu Secretariat Incorporated Tåîchô Government Northern Resource Management Boards Environmental Impact Review Board Gwich’in Land and Water Board Gwich’in Land Use Planning Board Gwich’in Renewable Resources Board Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board NWT Water Board Sahtu Land and Water Board Sahtu Land Use Planning Board Sahtu Renewable Resources Board Wek’èezhìi Land and Water Board Wek’èezhìi Renewable Resources Board Government of Canada Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans Environment Canada National Energy Board Natural Resources Canada Parks Canada Transport Canada Government of the Northwest Territories Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations Education, Culture and Employment (Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre; Aurora Research Institute) Environment and Natural Resources Industry, Tourism and Investment (Northwest Territories Geosciences Office) Municipal and Community Affairs Transportation


APPENDIX B: PRIORITY VALUED COMPONENTS DETAILED INFORMATION

1 PRIORITY THEME: WATER 1.1 Current condition and trend information Broad trends include:

Earlier breakup of rivers and timing of peak spring flows Decrease in the thickness and duration of winter ice cover Increasing discharge in rivers, in particular increasing winter base flows Increasing geochemical trends, including DOC, major ions and nutrients Long-range transport of contaminants from other jurisdictions Biomagnification in fish tissues due to climatic warming and enrichment Enhanced disturbance regimes (fire, permafrost degradation) are impacting water quality of

rivers and lakes Increased intensity and duration of coastal storm surges – inundation and ecosystem change

in major freshwater arctic deltas (Mackenzie and Anderson) Water use is variable, but is anticipated to increase with industrial activity; variation in the flow of

transboundary rivers are a major concern; disentangling influence of multiple users (pulp and paper, oil sands, agriculture, hydroelectric) from natural variability makes establishing trends and causality a major challenge and a key consideration in designing cumulative impact monitoring design.

Current trend information exists in numerous scientific publications and is summarized in: GNWT State of Environment report

(http://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/_live/pages/wpPages/SOE_Welcome.aspx) NWT Environmental Audit (http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100027504) Mackenzie River Basin Board (http://www.mrbb.ca/information/34/index.html)

It must be noted that the NWT is immense and covers several physiographic, geologic, climatic and ecologic zones. Water indicators may show varying responses to similar stressors depending on the nature of the watershed. Furthermore, the relevance of indicators is likely to vary among regions as a function of the environment and nature of the environmental stressor. These are all important considerations when designing monitoring programs and reporting on environmental trends.

1.2 Current status of monitoring and the main organizations involved There are four primary groups who collect water related information in the NWT:

1. Federal departments, primarily Environment Canada, AANDC and Parks Canada, maintain baseline data collection on several streams and rivers across the NWT.

a. Environment Canada, with support from AANDC, maintains the National Hydrometric Network. Some stations have long-term records while others have been maintained sporadically in response to resource development pressure.

b. Federal departments also maintain some water quality monitoring programs. The frequency of data collection and parameters measured vary between sites.

c. Multiple departments collect information on stream health by using the CABIN protocol (Environment Canada). There are numerous sites throughout the NWT where these data have been collected and the data resides on the Environment Canada CABIN website.


d. The contaminated sites and remediation directorate at AANDC collects project-specific water quality data. Some water quantity data is also collected.

2. Academic researchers from various universities undertake the collection of water quality and water quantity data. These studies are typically short-term in nature; however they often help to address community concerns.

3. Municipal and Community Affairs: The territorial government maintains some water quality monitoring around communities in relation to drinking water quality and waste water.

4. Proponent driven monitoring: This monitoring is conducted by project proponents and relates to regulatory obligations. It includes some baseline data collected for environmental assessments as well as compliance related monitoring dictated by regulatory requirements. Typically the monitoring is project specific and the nature of the monitoring and the design is tailored to the particular project component of regulatory concern. Some of the monitoring data may be baseline data on stream flows or water quality (i.e. in reference areas). A high quantity of data has been collected by industry around the Diamond Mine developments and some was also collected by the oil and gas industry for the Mackenzie Gas Project.

2 PRIORITY THEME: FISH 2.1 Current condition and trend information Information on fish habitat, populations and harvest exists to varying degrees in different lakes and rivers in the NWT. The expansive geographic area, short open water season, small and localized human population, and high costs associated with work in the north have all contributed to a limited amount of research being carried out on fish species, and on potential fish management and habitat issues that are not of immediate economic or subsistence importance.

2.2 Current status of monitoring and the main organizations involved There are four primary groups who collect water related information in the NWT:

1. Federal departments, primarily Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Environment Canada, AANDC and Parks Canada, work together to ensure sustainable fish populations.

a. Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) is primarily responsible for administering the Fisheries Act. DFO works to protect and conserve resources in support of a stable and sustainable fishing industry. In the Northwest Territories, DFO carries out research in 4 areas: fish ecology, stock assessment, marine mammal and ecology assessment and environment and contaminants. DFO partners with co-management boards to manage fisheries.

b. Environment Canada is responsible for administration and enforcement of the pollution preventions provisions under the Fisheries Act, which prohibit the deposit of deleterious substances in water frequented by fish. Environment Canada administers the Metal Mining Effluent Regulations and uses results generated by Environmental Effects Monitoring programs, to assess the adequacy of regulations in protecting the environment.

c. Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) monitors cumulative impacts related to fish as a requirement of the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act. AANDC also manages water resources, which indirectly relates to ensuring sustainable fish habitat.

d. Parks Canada protects and presents nationally significant examples of Canada’s natural and cultural heritage and ensures ecological integrity of natural resources


within Nahanni National Park Reserve, Wood Buffalo National Park, Tuktut Nogait National Park and Aulavik National Park.

2. Academic researchers from various universities undertake the collection of fish and fish habitat data. These studies are typically short-term in nature; however they often help to address community concerns.

3. Municipal and Community Affairs: The Environment and Natural Resources Division within the territorial government promotes and supports the sustainable use and development of natural resources and has partnered with AANDC in the development of the Water Stewardship Strategy. This strategy helps protect fish habitat through its objective to protect water resources.

4. Proponent driven monitoring: This monitoring is conducted by project proponents and relates to regulatory obligations. It includes some baseline data collected for environmental assessments as well as compliance related monitoring dictated by regulatory requirements. Typically the monitoring is project specific and the nature of the monitoring and the design is tailored to the particular project component of regulatory concern. A high quantity of data has been collected by industry around the Diamond Mine developments through Aquatic Effects Monitoring Program and some was also collected by the oil and gas industry during the Joint Review Panel hearings for the Mackenzie Gas Project.

Many partners in the Northwest Territories work together towards the goal of sustainable fish populations and fish habitat through the implementation of monitoring programs. These partners include:

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Environment Canada Government of the Northwest Territories Gwich’in Renewable Resources Board Industry Fisheries Joint Management Committee Sahtu Renewable Resources Board Tåîchô Government Wek’èezhìi Renewable Resources Board

3 PRIORITY THEME: CARIBOU 3.1 Caribou monitoring blueprint Cumulative effects program for Bathurst barren-ground caribou Objective: Develop a cumulative effects monitoring approach for the Bathurst barren-ground caribou herd Rationale: Traditional and scientific knowledge suggest that barren-ground caribou herds cycle naturally. Management actions to conserve barren-ground caribou herds when they are in low numbers are often directed at reducing adult female and calf mortality, either through reductions in harvest or predator management. However, a number of other factors have been cited as driving the population declines, including changes in range condition, increasing development pressure, and fire. Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development (AANDC), the Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT), and Environment Canada believe that a regionally based cumulative effects monitoring approach is necessary to assess and monitor how human and natural factors affect barren-ground caribou habitat, and the size and trend of barren-ground caribou herds. Currently,


emphasis is placed on the Bathurst herd and its historical range, which includes the Lac de Gras area, as well as parts of Nunavut and Saskatchewan. Based on a 2012 population survey, the Bathurst herd has stabilized at 35,000 animals after a rapid decline; however, current herd size is still low relative to historical highs (476,000 in 1986). There has been no change in the number of breeding females since 2009, and calf recruitment has been low for the past two years. Corresponding to the declines has been an increase in the overall amount of human disturbance within the historical Bathurst caribou range. More developments are proposed in the range, including a number of projects on the Bathurst calving grounds in Nunavut. A cumulative effects approach is necessary to determine how these developments – in combination with natural factors like fire, and human factors like roads and increased harvest – impact Bathurst caribou and their habitat. Knowing this will help decision makers to understand what factors can be managed and what factors are the most important to manage. For example, this information can be used as inputs in cumulative effects models that can help guide management actions related to harvest, land use activities, and fire management. Components of a cumulative effects approach for the Bathurst herd include a comprehensive understanding of how the herd is doing in terms of size and trend, combined with an understanding of how natural and human factors affect herd dynamics across its historic range. Currently, the GNWT conducts a regional monitoring program for the Bathurst herd across its range. This program has been peer reviewed and includes information on herd size and trend, calf recruitment, fall sex ratio, health, disease, and condition. What is lacking is an understanding of those factors that affect the size and trend of the herd. Funding priorities: AANDC is seeking proposals that: • Establish a comprehensive regionally-based cumulative effects monitoring approach that tracks the Bathurst herd population trends and those human and natural factors that affect them. • Calculate and track landscape metrics in the Bathurst range (e.g., amount of human and natural disturbance, including fire, human development, road access, and range condition); • Identify thresholds of disturbance above which the size and trend of the Bathurst herd is negatively impacted; • Determine the impact of a number of human and natural factors on Bathurst herd demographics and/or habitat, including:

• Fire • Predation • Climate change • Environmental variation • Harvest, including the impact of increased access • Range condition – habitat quality and/or quantity • Developmental footprint within the historic range of the herd – including • both physical and functional habitat loss

AANDC is also seeking proposals that serve to synthesize existing information on Bathurst caribou and its historical range:

• Collating historical monitoring data, including industry data to determine if it can be used in a regional cumulative impact assessment for the Bathurst herd.

• Identifying ways in which transboundary issues across Nunavut, NWT, and Saskatchewan can be addressed.

Proposals should clearly indicate how all sources of knowledge (local, traditional, and science) will be used to address funding priorities. Proposals should also clearly indicate how proposals will build capacity within communities. Cumulative effects approach for boreal caribou in the NWT Objective: Develop a cumulative effects monitoring approach for boreal caribou


Rationale: Boreal caribou are a priority Valued Component that are listed as threatened under the federal Species at Risk Act and have been assessed as threatened by the Species at Risk Committee under the Species at Risk (NWT) Act. Local studies indicate that boreal caribou in the northern NWT are self-sustaining, while those in southern NWT are declining. In addition to concerns about the sustainability of boreal caribou in southern NWT, there is increasing concern about how potential oil and gas development will impact boreal caribou in the Sahtu region. Declines in southern NWT are attributed to the cumulative impact of human and natural disturbance on the landscape, which, based on extensive research in southern Canada, increases predation pressure on boreal caribou. Based on the National Recovery Strategy for Woodland Caribou, boreal population in Canada, maintaining or recovering boreal caribou requires that 65% of boreal caribou range remain free of human or natural disturbances. As defined in the Strategy, disturbed habitat is habitat showing i) anthropogenic disturbance (e.g., linear features) visible on Landsat at a scale of 1:50,000, including habitat within a 500 m buffer of the disturbance and ii) fire disturbance for the last 40 years. In the Strategy, 31% of boreal caribou range in the NWT is considered disturbed. Most disturbance is driven by fire (23%), although there is some human disturbance as well (8%). Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development (AANDC), the Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT), and Environment Canada believe that regionally-based cumulative effects monitoring approaches are necessary to assess and monitor how human and natural factors affect the size and trend of NWT’s boreal caribou population. Knowing this will help decision makers to understand what factors can be managed and what factors are the most important to manage for boreal caribou. For example, this information can be used as inputs in cumulative effects models that can help guide management actions related to land use activities and fire management. A cumulative effects approach for NWT’s boreal caribou population requires a comprehensive understanding of how the population is doing in terms of size and trend, combined with an understanding of how natural and human factors drive population dynamics across its range. This first requires that a standardized approach to monitoring boreal caribou across its range is established. The standardized approach must provide scientifically defensible data. It also requires more information on those natural and human factors that affect population size and trend in the NWT. Funding priorities: AANDC is seeking proposals that:

• Establish a standardized method that provides robust information on boreal caribou population size and/or trends across its range in NWT

• Establish a comprehensive regionally‐based cumulative effects monitoring approach that tracks local boreal caribou population trends and those human and natural factors that affect them.

• Calculate and track landscape metrics in the boreal caribou range (e.g., amount of human and natural disturbance within the range, including fire and human development)

• Determine rates of forest regeneration following fire and/or human disturbance in boreal caribou range

• Determine when disturbed habitat (human or natural) becomes functional again for boreal caribou • Determine the impact of a number of human and natural factors on boreal caribou demographics

and/or habitat: o Fire o Predation o Alternative Prey o Climate change o Harvest, including the impacts of increased access o Range condition – habitat quality and/or quantity o Developmental footprint within the historic range of the herd – including both physical and

functional habitat loss o Health, condition, and disease


AANDC is also seeking proposals that serve to synthesize existing information on boreal caribou and its range: • Collating historical monitoring data, including industry data, to determine if it can be used in a

regional cumulative impact assessment for boreal caribou. • Identifying ways in which transboundary issues across NWT, the Yukon, and Alberta can be

addressed.

Proposals should clearly indicate how all sources of knowledge (local, traditional, and science) will be used to address funding priorities. Proposals should also clearly indicate how proposals will build capacity within communities.

3.2 Current condition and trend information Note: This section on caribou is largely based on information available from the GNWT and Environment Canada (web-based and documents; see Appendix C for some examples). Also, some portions of this section are taken near-verbatim from the source material.

There are four subspecies of caribou found in the NWT:

• Barren-ground caribou (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus) have the widest distribution. Herds range over the taiga forests and tundra of the NWT mainland. Barren-ground caribou are the most abundant subspecies in the NWT and have great cultural and economic importance.

• Grant's caribou (Rangifer tarandus granti) are found mainly in Alaska and Yukon, but part of the Porcupine herd migrates through the northwest corner of the NWT in the spring and fall to its calving and wintering grounds.

• Woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) are divided into two distinct populations in the NWT: Boreal and Northern Mountain. Northern Mountain caribou gather in groups numbering in the thousands during late summer to late spring. These herds have distinct seasonal migrations and live in the Mackenzie Mountains. Boreal caribou live in the forests east of the Mackenzie Mountains and tend to live in small groups. They prefer to stay within the forest for most of the year and do not migrate.

• Peary caribou (Rangifer tarandus pearyi) / Dolphin-Union Caribou (Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus x pearyi) range throughout the Arctic Archipelago.

Barren-ground caribou herds in the NWT have a history of cycling, with peak numbers occurring at intervals of 30-60 years. Barren-ground caribou populations throughout North America are designated as “herds” based on where adult females calve in June. Each herd has an identifiable, distinct calving ground. Calving grounds are defined and mapped based on satellite telemetry and aerial surveys. Nine barren-ground caribou herds spend all or a portion of their annual cycle within the NWT. These migratory herds are hunted by Dene, Inuvialuit, Métis, and non-Aboriginal people from communities in the NWT, and most NWT herds are also shared with harvesters outside of the NWT. The Cape Bathurst and Bluenose West herds have been stable since 2006. Results from the 2010 surveys indicate the Porcupine and Bluenose East herds have increased, while the Bathurst herd may have stabilized, though other NWT herds (Tuktoyaktuk Peninsula, Beverly and Ahiak) have yet to recover. Historically, woodland caribou were found throughout most of the boreal and sub-alpine forest of Canada. Today their range has been reduced across much of southern Canada. In the NWT, their range has remained relatively unchanged. The Northern Mountain population is found on the east slopes of the Mackenzie Mountains to the NWT-Yukon Border. The Boreal population is primarily found in the NWT’s boreal forest between the Mackenzie Mountains and west to the Canadian Shield. Habitat loss and reduced distribution in southern Canada contributed to the federal government listing boreal caribou as “Threatened” under the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA). Although the federal listing of boreal caribou applies throughout Canada, boreal caribou in the NWT are not considered to


be currently at risk. The NWT General Status Ranking Program ranked boreal caribou as “Sensitive.” There is little information about historical populations of woodland caribou. In 1982, the woodland caribou population in Canada was estimated at 193,000 animals. Since then, there has been a downward trend in almost all populations across Canada. In the NWT however, the Boreal population of woodland caribou is not considered to be at risk and is estimated to be between 6000 and 7000 based on traditional knowledge and scientific studies. The Northern Mountain population of woodland caribou is made up of about 36 herds in the NWT, Yukon, and northern British Columbia. There are approximately 45,000 adult caribou within the range of Northern Mountain caribou however numbers in the NWT are unknown Peary caribou have declined since 1961 are classified as Endangered under SARA (2011). Results from a 2007 survey conducted by the Government of Nunavut on the Dolphin and Union herd are still undergoing analysis. Melting arctic sea ice and increasing development are concerns for this herd.

3.3 Current status of monitoring and the main organizations involved Monitoring programs in the NWT are designed (primarily) to collect information relevant to tracking population (herd size) and demographic changes. Key information for management actions includes:

Population size (herd level) Population trend, and rate of change Recruitment (cow / calf ratios) Bull-to-cow ratio Body condition and health

Additional information related to caribou population and demographics, and which is required for addressing cumulative impact questions includes:

Harvest levels Predator dynamics Environment and habitat (including fire history and habitat quality) Anthropogenic disturbances

There are a number of groups who assist in the collection of caribou-related information in the NWT:

1. Territorial Government: Environment and Natural Resources, Government of NWT (ENR GNWT) is responsible for the monitoring and management of caribou in the NWT, which has included the development of an Action Plan for boreal woodland caribou, and a Management Strategy for barren-ground caribou (Appendix C). ENR GNWT Wildlife division primarily collects demographic data on caribou, and collaborates with a number of organizations while doing so. ENR Forestry division has interest in habitat and fire-related data, which are applicable to caribou habitat planning and management (such as for boreal caribou).

2. Federal Government: Environment Canada, Parks Canada, and AANDC (CIMP) a. Environment Canada is responsible for development of the National Recovery

Strategy as required under the Species at Risk Act (SARA), and accountable for recovery planning in cooperation with various agencies (such as wildlife management boards). Canadian Wildlife Service staff have also assisted with selection of important areas for boreal caribou via the Protected Areas Strategy (PAS) process.

b. Parks Canada conducts boreal caribou research and monitoring various parks outside the NWT where boreal caribou are classified as threatened (e.g. Jasper and


Banff). In the NWT, Parks has assisted with research on barren-ground caribou in Tuktut-Nogait National Park.

c. AANDC (CIMP) provides funding to various caribou-related projects, concentrating on projects that address cumulative impacts- related questions.

3. Renewable Resource Boards: Co-management processes have been established under land claim agreements in the Inuvialuit, Gwich’in, Sahtu and Tli’cho regions to provide direction and advice to governments on management of caribou and their habitat using traditional and scientific knowledge. These boards are: Wildlife Management Advisory Council (NWT) (WMAC-NWT) (Inuvialuit); Gwich’in Renewable Resources Board (GRRB) (Gwich’in); Sahtu Renewable Resources Board (SRRB) (Sahtu); and Wek’eezhii Renewable Resources Board (WRRB) (Tåîchô).

4. Caribou Management Boards (herd specific): There are Boards established to cooperatively manage specific barren-ground caribou herds, including review of technical information related to herd management, and communication with communities and harvesters facilitating participation in the management of the herd. Three caribou management boards have been established through inter-jurisdictional agreements. The Porcupine Caribou Management Board (PCMB), with representation from Alaska, Yukon and NWT governments and communities, advises governments and communities on monitoring and management. The International Porcupine Caribou Board (IPCB) has representatives from Canada and the United States, and provides advice on those aspects of the conservation of the Porcupine herd and its habitat requiring international coordination, cooperation and communication. The Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Board (BQCMB), with representation from Nunavut, NWT, Saskatchewan and Manitoba governments and communities, advises on monitoring and management of these two herds.

5. Proponent driven monitoring: This monitoring is conducted by project proponents and relates to regulatory obligations. It includes some baseline data collected for environmental assessments, as well as compliance-related monitoring dictated by regulatory requirements. Typically the monitoring is project specific, and the nature of the monitoring and the design is tailored to the particular project component of regulatory concern. Examples include the existing Wildlife Monitoring Program (WMP) at the Diavik Diamond Mine.

6. Academic researchers: Researchers from various southern universities approach caribou monitoring with specific questions, often related to graduate student research. Research is often conducted in collaboration with a number of the previously mentioned groups.


APPENDIX C – SELECTED REFERENCE LIST FOR PRIORITY VALUED COMPONENTS

Water:

• EMAN-North. 2005. Northern Waters: A Guide to Designing and Conducting Water Quality Monitoring in Northern Canada. Northern Ecological Monitoring and Assessment Network (EMAN- North). http://www.ec.gc.ca/Publications/04EFFA40-F0FA-4D3C-9E56-6C18F7586C38%5CFreshwaterMonitoringProtocolNorthernWaters.pdf

• Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME), 2006. A Canada-wide Framework for Water Quality Monitoring in Canada. http://www.ccme.ca/assets/pdf/wqm_framework_1.0_e_web.pdf

• Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME), 2011.Protocols Manual for Water Quality Sampling in Canada. http://www.ccme.ca/assets/pdf/protocols_document_e_final_101.pdf

• Environment Canada, Canadian Aquatic Biomonitoring Network (CABIN) 2010. National CABIN Science Forum Proceedings, November 17-18, 2010 - Vancouver, British Columbia. http://www.ec.gc.ca/Publications/4C111093-DCE4-4D87-B7FA-DB3E46435D9E/NationalCABINScienceForumProceedings2010.pdf

• Environment Canada, Canadian Aquatic Biomonitoring Network (CABIN) 2010. Laboratory Methods: Processing, Taxonomy, and Quality Control of Benthic Marcoinvertebrate Samples. http://www.ec.gc.ca/Publications/CDC2A655-A527-41F0-9E61-824BD4288B98/CABIN-Laboratory-Methods-manual_July2011_EN.pdf

• Schindler, D. and Smol, J.2006. Cumulative Effects of Climate Warming and Other Human Activities on Freshwaters of Arctic and Subarctic North America. Ambio 35: 160-168.

• Dube, M. 2003. Cumulative effect assessment in Canada: a regional framework for aquatic ecosystems. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 23: 723-745.

• Dube, M., Johnson, B., Dunn, G., Culp, J., Cash, K., Munkittrick, K., Wong, I., Hedley, K., Booty, W., Lam, D., Resler, O., and Storey, A. 2006. Development of a New Approach to Cumulative Effects Assessment: A Northern River Ecosystem Example. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 113: 87-115.

Fish:

• Tyson, J.D., W.M. Tonn, S. Boss, and B.W. Hanna. 2011. General fish-out protocol for lakes and impoundments in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2935: v + 34 p.

• Arciszewski, T., Gray, M.A., Munkittrick, K.R., and Baron, C. 2010. Guidance for the collection and sampling of slimy sculpin (Cottus cognatus) in northern Canadian lakes for environmental effects monitoring (EEM). Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2909::v +21 p.

• Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) 1995. Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe Fish Screen Guideline. Department of Fisheries & Oceans Publication DFO/5080. www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/Library/223669.pdf

Caribou:

• Advisory Committee for Cooperation on Wildlife Management (ACCWM), 2011. Taking Care of Caribou, The Cape Bathurst, Bluenose-West, Bluenose-East Barren Ground caribou herds management Plan. Submitted by The Bluenose Caribou Management Plan Working Group in partnership with Terriplan Consultants. http://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/_live/documents/content/DRAFT%20_Management%20_Plan_Northern_Herds_May_2011.pdf


• Circum-Arctic Rangifer Monitoring and Assessment network (CARMA), 2008. Monitoring Rangifer Herds (Population Dynamics) Manual. A. Gunn, D. Russel, eds. http://www.carmanetwork.com/display/public/Field+Protocols

• Circum-Arctic Rangifer Monitoring and Assessment network (CARMA), 2008. Rangifer Health & Body Condition Monitoring, Monitoring Protocols Level 1. A. Gunn, W. Nixon, eds. http://www.carmanetwork.com/display/public/Field+Protocols

• Circum-Arctic Rangifer Monitoring and Assessment network (CARMA), 2008. Rangifer Health & Body Condition Monitoring, Monitoring Protocols Level 2. A. Gunn, W. Nixon, eds. http://www.carmanetwork.com/display/public/Field+Protocols

• Environment Canada. 2008. Scientific Review for the Identification of Critical Habitat for Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), Boreal Population, in Canada. http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/Caribou_Full_0409_e.pdf

• Environment and Natural Resources (ENR), 2011. Caribou Forever - Our Heritage, Our Responsibility NWT Barren-ground Caribou Management Strategy (2011-2015). http://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/_live/documents/content/2011-2015_Barren-ground_Caribou_Management_Strategy.pdf

• Environment and Natural Resources (ENR), 2010. The Action Plan for Boreal Woodland Caribou Conservation in the Northwest Territories. http://nwtspeciesatrisk.ca/pdf/BorealCaribouActionPlan2010-2015(FINAL).pdf

• Environment and Natural Resources (ENR), 2010. Implementation Plan for: The Action Plan for Boreal Woodland Caribou Conservation in the Northwest Territories. http://nwtspeciesatrisk.ca/pdf/BWC_Implementation_Plan_FINAL20Jul2010.pdf


APPENDIX D: LETTER OF INTENT

Instructions:

• Please read the Proposal Guide (Oct. 2013) to assist in your completion of this form • Maximum 3 page limit • If this is a multi‐year funding request, please briefly provide details for each year for up to 3

years • Letters of intent must be submitted in MS Word by November 1, 2013 at 4:00pm MDT to

[email protected] • An e‐mail confirmation will be sent upon receipt of your letter of intent. If you do not

receive confirmation then your letter has not been received and will not be considered • It is your responsibility to ensure that your letter is submitted on time


NWT Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program 2014/15 Letter of Intent Form

1. Applicant Information

Project Title: Project Lead: Organization:Address: Phone: Email: Funding Request: Single year Multi‐year Main Area of Study: Science Traditional knowledge

2. Project Team Provide the name and organization for each team member/collaborator. 3. Priority Valued Component and Geographic Area of Study Identify the priority Valued Component of interest and geographic area of study. For caribou‐related proposals refer to the Caribou Blueprint (Dec 2012). Both lists are located in Section 2 of the Proposal Guide. 4. Project Objectives In point form, please outline up to 3 main objectives of the study. 5. Project Description Provide a brief summary of your proposed project (rationale, questions, methods, expected results & impacts). How will this project address the cumulative impacts of human activities on the environment? (≤300 words). 6. Deliverables Provide a bullet list of the expected deliverables and approximate timelines for their completion. Examples of key outputs of relevance to CIMP include peer‐reviewed publications, non peer‐reviewed reports, presentations, community/decision‐maker meetings, websites, models, software, and posters. 7. Community support and engagement Describe how NWT community members and Aboriginal organizations will be involved in defining the purpose of the monitoring, project design, and implementation. How will this project build longer‐term community capacity? (≤150 words) 8. Decision‐maker engagement Describe how a key decision‐maker has been/will be involved in defining the purpose of the monitoring, project design, and implementation (see Appendix A for key NWT decision makers). How will information generated from this project directly impact a NWT decision‐making process? (≤150 words) 9. Project steps, timeline and funding In point form, provide an overview of the main project steps, timelines and approximate amount of funding allocated for each year.


Contact Us!

You are encouraged to contact the NWT CIMP Office well in advance of your submission to discuss your project idea, to answer your questions, to receive general guidance or to submit your letter of intent. DonnaMarie Ouellette Environment & Conservation ‐ CIMP Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada P.O. Box 1500 Yellowknife, NT X1A 2R3 (867) 669‐2627 (867) 669‐2701 (fax) cimp@aandc‐aadnc.gc.ca


APPENDIX E: FULL PROPOSAL SUBMISSION FORM

Instructions:

• Please note that only applicants with a successful letter of intent will be invited to submit a full proposal

• Please read the Proposal Guide (Oct. 2013) to assist in your completion of this proposal submission form

• Ensure that you also submit a proposed project budget using the Proposal Budget Template (Oct. 2013)

• If this is a multi‐year funding request, please provide Workplan and Budget details for each of up to 3 years

• Proposals and budgets must be submitted in MS Word and MS Excel, respectively by January 31, 2014 at 4:00pm MST to [email protected]

• Please provide us with the name, title and contact information of a recommended external reviewer who would be willing and able comment on the technical aspects of your proposal

• An e‐mail confirmation will be sent upon receipt of your proposal. If you do not receive confirmation then your application has not been received and will not be considered

• It is your responsibility to ensure that your proposal is submitted on time


NWT Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program 2014/15 Proposal Submission Form

1. APPLICANT INFORMATION

Project Title:

Contact Person: Must be knowledgeable on the contents of the submission Organization Name:

Phone: Fax:

Email:

Address:

2. PROJECT BASICS Funding Request: Single year Multi‐year

Start Date: Year/month

Projected End Date: Year/month

Length: # years Current Project Year ___ of 3

Main Area of Study: Science Traditional Knowledge

Priority Valued Components: Check all that apply

Caribou Fish Water Other Please specify

Priority Geographic Areas of Study: Check all that apply

Lac de Gras Mackenzie River Great Slave Lake Slave River & Delta NWT Communities

Nahanni Region Range of Bathurst caribou herd Peel River watershed Central Mackenzie Valley

(Sahtu Region)

Other Please specify

Monitoring/Research Gap Addressed: Please identify the specific priority monitoring/research gap addressed by the project. For caribou‐related proposals see the Caribou Blueprint (Dec 2012), in Section 2 of the Proposal Guide.


3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

a) Project Purpose and Objectives

Provide an informative summary of your proposed project, including rationale; research/monitoring questions; expected results; and impacts on the understanding of NWT environmental systems relevant to decision making. (≤500 words)

b) Study Design

Please identify planned activities to be carried out, including the techniques and/or methods that will be used. If your project is multi‐year, indicate the planned activities for each year of the project. If relevant, reference published work where similar techniques have been used. (≤300 words)

c) Deliverables

Clearly list the expected deliverables and indicate timelines for their completion. Examples of key outputs relevant to CIMP include peer‐reviewed publications, non peer‐reviewed reports, presentations, community/decision‐maker meetings, websites, models, software, and posters. In addition to listing the key outputs, highlight the intended users of the outputs, the significance of the outputs, and how they will be made available. (≤300 words)

d) Significance to Cumulative Impact Monitoring

Please describe how this project will address the cumulative impacts of human activities on the environment. CIMP defines cumulative impacts as changes to the biophysical, social, economic and cultural environment caused by concurrent or sequential human actions. (≤300 words)

e) Community Support and Engagement

Please describe how the project is supported by NWT community members and Aboriginal organizations. For instance, what groups have you contacted and how would they like to be involved in your project? What capacity development or training opportunities will your project provide? Successful proposals are generally submitted with letters of support to show that the project is supported and driven by NWT community(s). (≤300 words) Points to consider:

• How will local traditional knowledge be used? • A local traditional knowledge perspective should be incorporated when reviewing long‐term trends • Encourage a two‐way dialogue between science and traditional knowledge to ensure knowledge integration • How will community contributions be acknowledged and recognized? • How will data be shared/given back? • Incorporate a community member to interpret scientific findings to plain language and communicate them • Request for appropriate levels of funding to communicate and share results with northerners


f) Decision‐maker Engagement

Please describe how the project is supported by NWT decision‐maker (see Appendix A for key NWT decision makers). How has a key decision‐maker been involved in defining the purpose of the monitoring, project design and implementation? How will information generated from this project directly impact a NWT decision‐making process? Successful proposals are generally submitted with letters of support to show that the project is supported by NWT decision‐maker(s). (≤300 words)

f) Human Resources and Project Team Experience

i. Please describe the position(s) (Project Coordinator, Consultant, Technical Experts, Volunteers, etc.) identified in Part 1 of the budget, including all project partners and collaborators.

ii. Identify the expertise and relevant experience of your organization and project team. Please identify all members of the project team, if known at the time of application. Describe relevant qualifications. (≤300 words)

g) Reporting and Communications PlanPlease provide a detailed, chronological plan for how the project’s activities and deliverables will be reported and communicated to a variety of audiences, including NWT communities, decision‐makers, and the scientific community (eg. public events, meetings, publications or website). It is best practice to inform communities of results prior to the general public. Estimated costs to travel to a relevant northern meeting for the presentation of results must be included and a CIMP final report is required. Funding recipients will be required to upload and publish their metadata and final report to the NWT Discovery Portal. For further instructions see Section 5 of the Proposal Guide. (≤300 words)

4. PROJECT HISTORY

Identify if your project group is a new or returning applicant/recipient of funding from NWT CIMP.

First time applicant Previously applied but did not receive funding Past recipient of funding. How many years? _____

If you are a past recipient of NWT CIMP funding, please provide the project title and, if applicable, briefly explain how this project will build on the results from previously funded project(s). (≤300 words) 5. OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION

This space is provided for inclusion of any other relevant project information that was not captured in other sections. 6. BUDGET

Please use CIMP budget template 2014‐15.xlsx to enter your proposed budget for up to 3 years. 7. EXTERNAL REVIEWER

Please provide us with the name, title and contact information of a recommended external reviewer who would be willing and able comment on the technical aspects of your proposal


Proposal Submission Form Checklist

Completed forms can be received by e‐mail, mail, fax or in‐person (see contact information below) and must be received on or before the deadline date to be considered eligible for funding. Except for letters confirming cash and/or in‐kind support from other funding sources, which may be sent at a later date, all information required for the evaluation of your project must accompany the form. Additional information received after the deadline will not be taken into consideration.

• A complete application form, including all budget and funding source information (ensure all budget items are eligible by referring to the Proposal Guide)

• Letters of support (highly recommended that letters reflect that the project is supported and driven by NWT communities and decision‐makers)

• Other supporting information (if applicable) such as site maps, photos, plans and specifications

Contact Us!

You are encouraged to contact the NWT CIMP Office well in advance of your submission to discuss your project idea, to answer your questions, to receive general guidance or to submit your letter of intent. DonnaMarie Ouellette Environment & Conservation ‐ CIMP Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada P.O. Box 1500 Yellowknife, NT X1A 2R3 (867) 669‐2627 (867) 669‐2701 (fax) cimp@aandc‐aadnc.gc.ca

2014-15 cimp proposal guide - northwest...

Documents