Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't know if I'll be able to respond to all of the concerns that were raised by the honourable Member; however, I will make an attempt. The first concern was in the area of fire suppression, which my department has been concentrating heavily on over this past winter, with consultations directly by departmental staff in, I believe, most of the communities within the treeline. There have been some very good suggestions by people in the communities. It's an area that not only this department, but a number of the other GNWT departments are also very concerned with. We have discussed it at length at all levels of the department. The department, as Mr. Antoine says, is a major contributor to the fiscal situation that we're in.

Mr. Chairman, we have been consulting and I believe that our consultations have resulted in some very good suggestions and we are taking those recommendations and will be turning them around. There is a report that is being written by departmental staff. Hopefully, this report will be completed by the end of March. The general question that has been raised is how we could reduce the costs of fire suppression. I believe there are a number of ways and we'll be able to give more detail once the report has been completed and has gone through Cabinet. I know that the Standing Committee on Finance Members have raised this concern that the holding figure of $7 million is way too small in a bad fire season. One of the ideas that is being considered is to change that from a holding figure to a target figure, where we could look at a target which will be looked at throughout the fire season, something that could be looked at half-way through the fire season to consider various ways of being able to meet that target.

There are also other areas where I believe that we could do more in terms of pre-suppression, in terms of the various developments that have taken place out in the bush; so that whenever there are cabins being built in the bush, there are plans that are going to be laid out for those cabins that are built. Any type of commercial development within the treeline would require a fire plan. I think those are the general types of considerations that are being made which have also been recommended by community groups.

This, I believe, is a major area in which the department has heard from the communities. Another measure that has been suggested and will be considered is the compensation program that we have is also very limited. We are looking at the compensation program, how it is that we could improve on the compensation program. Those recommendations or suggestions that have been made as well as the preparation work, pre-suppression work that would be required, I believe, would be able to reduce the expenditures that we have in fighting fires. I believe that addresses two concerns: one, that whenever the fire season is upon us, there is an open chequebook. That is the impression that Members seem to be concerned about, and people of the Northwest Territories. So that changes the appearance of an open-chequebook concept to a closed-chequebook one because there would be a target that the fire crew and everybody in the Northwest Territories would be able to see. There would be a limit to the number of dollars that would be spent for the summer. Also, it would enable more of the dollars to end up in the communities, which I think has been another concern that has been raised by Members of the House.

I've indicated that this report, from the consultation that has been made in the communities, should be ready by the end of March. It will have to be brought into Cabinet and, eventually, a submission would be made for the Financial Management Board to consider.

In terms of the concerns raised by Mr. Antoine on the stumpage fees, the stumpage fees will be increased. Firewood fees have not increased. Reforestation fees have been increased to $5. The stumpage fees are also being considered, but there will be consultation on the increase to those fees.

The costs of managing the trees is something that has to be considered, much the same way as big game hunters are charged a fee for the management of wildlife we have in the Northwest Territories. The fees raised by the government are put directly back into the forests in the Northwest Territories. The increase of the reforestation fees, I believe, is very small,

as the amounts received by the person doing the work is approximately $190. Of that, they pay a $5 fee.

In terms of the identification of timber that is to be cut in any area, I believe the department is making more of an effort to consult with and work with the various communities, and bands in the communities, to decide where any forestry work will be done in their particular area. I've encouraged that consultation has to take place, that the communities, the bands and the organizations in the communities have to know where forests are being considered for cutting because it is their resource and they should be involved in how their area is developed.

I believe that the concerns raised in Mr. Antoine's constituency, in particular, have been and will continue to be consulted, and hopefully, will have direct involvement in the planning of where trees will be cut.

In terms of the furs, which is another major concern to people at the community level all across the Northwest Territories, it is an area that we really do not have a lot of control over, but we have been making a great deal of effort to inform people who are in the market to buy furs and those who have the power to control the market; namely, the European Parliament and European commission.

Mr. Antoine has a very good understanding of what has been done. He has been very involved in what has gone on, and we appreciate the assistance he's given us.

I think we are continuing to lobby the European commission. We are hoping we will be able to make another trip in the not-too-distant future. I believe that the European commission or the Parliament will be gathering in the spring. Before this gathering takes place, we should make another trip to try to convince those in the market, the buyers, that the wild fur we sell is very good quality fur.

With respect to the specific committees Mr. Antoine has raised and the concerns he has about the amount of dollars that have been spent in the Northwest Territories, I believe even though we have not yet been given the standards of what types of traps should be used in the Northwest Territories, we should be proactive and continue to try to show that we are making every effort that we possibly can to improve on the type of standards the market is looking for. That is where we have been spending our dollars: in the research and in the training of the users of the quick kill traps. I believe we should continue to work to try to improve on the traps we use.

The International Standards Organization, which is the group that will create standards for the type of trap that should be used, I believe it has been difficult for them to come up with a definition of what humane is. Until that definition has been cleared up, it is very difficult to try to come up with any kind of quick kill trap that meets a certain standard because there really isn't a standard at this point. But we are working on it, and I believe the traps that have been produced are strong enough and powerful enough that they will be able to meet the standards that are set.

I believe we have a standard of trap that could be considered humane. The kind of trap that is being used, from the indications we've received from the market, is that the fur that is coming out of the Northwest Territories is very good quality fur when they use the quick kill traps.

In terms of the auction houses and the work the department was starting to do for the grading house we had talked about at one point in time in this Assembly, it is still a target that we, as a department, are trying to meet. But with the situation we have in the Northwest Territories, it makes it very difficult to try to meet what was recommended.

We had started by hiring a person to work in the department on furs and to train someone on how to grade furs properly. To say that there will be a facility that will be used to grade furs and will route all furs from the Northwest Territories would be difficult to do at this point. But, it is goal we are still working towards.

In terms of the garments, during my opening remarks, I handed out samples of work that is currently being done. I believe this is an area that the department started working on, using seals, which was probably the hardest hit in terms of wild fur. It is an area the department thought best to start on. I think we will continue to work, not only with sealskin, but other types of fur as well. So, it will not be limited to one area of the Northwest Territories. I hope, in conjunction with the Department of Economic Development and Tourism, we will be able to work with other areas of the Northwest Territories over the next few years.

In terms of the lynx being caught live, I asked my deputy Minister and staff here with me about that and, because this happened a number of years ago, we weren't able to determine exactly what the reason for catching live lynx was. What we know at this point is that they weren't going to be sent to farms because we don't know of any lynx farms anywhere in Canada. That's as much as we know at this point, but I'd be willing to find out exactly what took place. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have a lot of general comments about the fire management program, in particular, but there are also a number of other areas I would like to comment on. Mr. Chairman, I know that 47 per cent of the overall budget is for fire suppression and management. Last year, the Minister's main estimates totalled $17 million; however, he ended up spending $35 million. The department came in for two supps during the year: one in August for $15 million, and then an extra $5 million in September.

Last year, compared to the previous year, we spent an additional $11 million. It seems that every year, the department keeps requesting $17 million. If you look at our budget book, it has basically doubled. I guess the concern I have, which a number of people have indicated, is with the way the fires have been addressed. Previous Ministers commissioned a review on fire management and suppression. This review was completed, I believe, in February 1994. It took just about a year to complete. Some of the studies relating to the review were brought forward to the Minister and concluded in July, I believe, of 1993. I asked the Minister at one point during oral questions how much we paid for the review. I wonder if he has found out how much that review cost. I also know that the review came up with 33 recommendations for the department and I would like to know how many of those recommendations have been addressed or will be implemented.

When you look at the reviews discussing firefighting, it always indicates that there is an excessive amount spent on this. They have indicated, many times, that there has got to be a way to save money with regard to forest fire management and suppression. The Minister assured Members that he would do a review last year about this. If I understand correctly, the cost of fighting fires last year escalated from about $200,000 a day up to $400,000, which is a phenomenal amount of money.

In times of restraint, it seems adequate measures aren't taken to try to curb that expenditure. In the review that was completed, the reviewers basically encouraged the Minister to achieve a $1 million savings. They stated that if the Department of Renewable Resources could resolve the misfit of fire crew shift times with the distribution of actual fire occurrences, that would save them some money. That's the same concern my colleague for Nahendeh has raised with regard to firefighting times under the union agreement, which results in very high costs.

The review also looks at ways to curb funding when you are going to address firefighting. In talking to firefighting crews, they seem to know that there is a lot of unnecessary expenditure. Many of the older people have said that, years ago, when they fought fires, they would go as close to the fire as they could, start fighting fires and then set up camp. Now, they go quite a distance away, set up a hotel system and then they fly fighters into the fires. It really costs a lot of money because they are flying people back and forth on a daily basis, probably sometimes twice a day because they have to come in for meals and what not.

So, while our technology is better today, it seems that the cost of fighting fires and the amount of forest that burns are a lot more than years ago when we didn't have what we have today. It seems that there is certainly a real problem. I was hoping, when the Minister told us in November that his department was going to have community meetings with regard to a fire review, that many of these comments would come out in community meetings. I said in the House that the community of Fort Smith is still waiting for this community meeting on how to address fires. There are many experienced firefighters in Fort Smith, as the community is surrounded by trees.

There has got to be many ways to look at this. Last year was a bad fire year and this year, I suspect, will be just as bad. We're going to be looking at something like $35 million again this year. It takes care of a supp for about $20 million, which is what they looked at.

It just seems like there's no effort from the department to look at how you cut down on the cost of fire suppression. I thought the department would find a way when they commissioned this fire suppression review and start implementing some of these recommendations, but it seems like it's not being done.

So there are many outstanding concerns with regard to fighting fires that have to be addressed. There are a lot of common complaints you get, not only in the way they set up their camps or hotels or whatever people want to call them, but with regard to unnecessary flying of people back and forth to basically the same areas where the fire is actually fought. There are also a lot of comments with regard to the burying of food because it's going to cost too much to bring it back. Apparently, there's a lot of wastage with regard to unnecessary expenditures for food that the department pays for, sends out to a fire. If the fire is out, it seems that a decision is made that it's too costly to bring the food back so they find methods of disposing of it, which is shameful to hear.

Of course, there is also the high cost of ways to attack fires. Not only firefighters -- it's good that we create a lot of jobs for firefighters but there are also a lot of costs with regard to aerial fighting of fires, with respect to the department's methods of addressing firefighting.

Mr. Chairman, when you look at a department like this with 47 per cent of its budget going to address fighting fires, and then knowing that that 47 per cent comes back with a supplementary request, that causes a concern. They just don't seem to be making a serious effort deciding how to address fighting fires.

I guess what I would like to hear from the Minister is whether or not his forest fire management reviews were conducted. What types of methods are they going to be looking at to try to curb the expenditure of funds when they address the whole area of fire management and fire suppression with regard to departmental expenditures?

Mr. Chairman, I noticed you had the 10-minute time limit clock ticking, but I still have further general comments, but in different areas of Renewable Resources.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the concern raised by the Member about how much is being spent by this department for fire suppression. I believe it is a major part of our budget, therefore it is a major concern to the department. It seems regardless of what we do, there will always be somebody who is not happy with what we're doing. We are making an effort to try to meet some of the reasonable suggestions being made by people. Department staff have been to all the communities in the Northwest Territories that are within the treeline. The only community where they have not yet held public consultations is Fort Smith. This coming Wednesday, my deputy minister will be in Fort Smith, meeting with the various leaders. I believe they'll be determining at that point whether there should be a public meeting.

There was concern raised by one of the leaders in Fort Smith about holding a public meeting. Therefore, it has been delayed until this upcoming meeting on Wednesday. With the number of dollars that were spent in the last year, I'm sure all Members and all people in the Northwest Territories realize that last year was an unusual year for forest fires, that it was considerably worse than other years. The staff indicated to me last week that, on average, the amount of dollars that have been spent every year since the time forest fire management was taken over by the Government of the Northwest Territories, was about $11 million. When they took last year into consideration, it raised the average to $13 million a year.

So last year has really made a difference in the average number of dollars that have been spent per year since the time we took over forest fire management.

With that, the consultants who were hired well before my time to consult with the communities, to come up with a report, and recommendations to the department have since been completed. I apologize to the Member, I had indicated I would give her a copy. We have just recently put that together and a package will be coming to the Member in the next day or so.

With regard to how the department came upon this review and the consultation that has taken place over the winter, many Members of the House raised this as a concern that departments should be consulting with the communities. I took the concerns that were raised by Members and felt that direct involvement by departmental staff who are involved in the management of fires should be talking to people in the communities directly and hearing from them directly about the concerns that are being raised in the communities. I think the suggestions that are being made are reasonable. We will be taking those recommendations from the report that was made by the consultants, as well as the consultation that was done by department staff, and come up with a submission to Cabinet and to the Financial Management Board as to how we will be able to spend our money on forest fires at a more manageable level. From what I understand, the consultations have been very good. It has been in consultation with those who are fighting the fires every summer, and elders who have fought fires before, and people who are generally concerned about forest fires in and around their communities.

The concerns that are being raised are very widely varied. Some of the responses given by elders were that they used to fight fires in the evenings as soon as they got to a fire, just as the Members have indicated, and fight fires at night when it was cool and how that has changed to the way fires are being fought today. Much of that change, I believe, has to do with the collective bargaining. Many of the people who are fighting fires today do not want to fight fires at night even though many of the elders have indicated and many of the people who know about firefighting have said that it is easier to try to fight fires at night. It has become a collective bargaining issue because, from what I understand, many of the people who fight fires do not want to fight fires at night.

Some of the other concerns that I've heard are statements such as we should be letting the fires burn because it's natural and it creates new growth in the area. I've heard staff saying this was told to them by elders in the communities. And there are others who have said that every single little fire that's starting up, we should be after. There are a wide variety of concerns being raised by people across the western Northwest Territories. We are taking them seriously. Mr. Pollard has indicated to us that we really have to take a serious look at how much we are spending in terms of our forest fires. I believe that we will come up with a reasonable submission, one that has taken into account the concerns raised by people in the community and concerns that have been raised by our Finance Minister as well as Members of this House.

I've indicated that I hope that this report will be completed by the end of March. We should have a submission into Cabinet and the Financial Management Board within the next few weeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to let the Minister know that I recognize that he can't make everybody happy and I'm not saying that he should. I guess what I'm basically saying is that his department, first of all, completed a review -- I still haven't found out the cost of that review -- last year with 33 recommendations on how to address fire suppression, and he's indicated that the average per year to fight fires is $13 million. However, our budget book reveals that last year we spent $35 million, the year before we spend $24 million, so we're way up and over the average. Alarms should be ringing and saying what are we doing, what's causing the costs?

He also indicated that when he wrote to the Members sometime in late October or November, he said he was going to take the time to talk to communities. So he was doing another review because of the cost being so high. I think there were some Members who just about wanted an inquiry as to why the cost of fighting fires had escalated to $35 million. Instead, what he said is we would look at doing this review, we would go talk to communities. He's now stating that talking to communities and taking recommendations from communities is all done except in Fort Smith.

He also mentioned that there was some concern with holding a public meeting and he mentioned that a leader was concerned with holding a public meeting. Now, what leader in Fort Smith is concerned about holding a public meeting is beyond me to try to figure out. So, I'd like to ask the Minister what community organization doesn't want to hold a public meeting? Because the cost of fighting fires has really concerned many of my constituents. They're saying that spending at the level that the government is spending, there's no need for it. What I'm mentioning to him is he did one review, now he's done another and if the costs continue at that rate, as the government, we're going to be broke and we're going to have no more trees to cause any forest fires at the rate they're going. What's he doing to try to avoid it?

The only other concern that I have is with regard to fire suppression and the rate that we're spending has to be addressed immediately. It has to be addressed before we go into the next fire season because of the fact that we've got an extremely dry winter, particularly around my area.

Mr. Chairman, with regard to the study now, I did want to make a comment with regard to addressing aircraft maintenance while fighting fires. The Minister's same department with the same review took into account this whole portion of how to address fighting fires and one of the recommendations, when you look in this particular review, indicates that when you look at the executive summary, it states -- for all types of aircraft -- maintenance that should be used during fire suppression, with respect to initial fire attack.

One particular area, when you look at fighting fires, indicates that you should attack fire successfully within the first 24 hours. I think sometimes some of the problems are that when they try to address this within 24 hours, there are so many levels and chains of command to go through within the department before a decision can be made on how to fight a fire and what fire should be fought. I don't know who determines particularly what areas, whether you're looking at a migrating area, examples of where fires should be fought, areas where caribou migrate or other types of areas. But it seems that there are so many chains of command in the department that I know, particularly in Fort Smith as an example, the band has a contract on how to fight fire before they can get approval. Sometimes they'll send their guys out, put the fire out before they can get a decision made saying to go fight that fire. That's what's causing a lot of these fires to really get big in the territories.

When you look at the methods to fight fires successfully, I think the decision-making process has to be tightened up and brought to the community level, and allow the fire bosses to determine the priorities of fire attacks.

As I was saying, Mr. Chairman, when you look through these recommendations on how to address firefighting and how to address the aircraft portion of it, it basically states in one of the recommendations that you require two DC-6 aircraft, prime machines with back-up being based in the north and with maintenance and overhaul being carried out in the north. If you look at this study and this review, the advantages of a DC-4 in comparison to a DC-6, it states that when you replace a DC-6 with two DC-4s, you have an advantage of increasing benefits to northern business, which we know is good for the north. When you look at attempting to fight fires you have many disadvantages. You are basically taking into account varying cost ratios, functional capacities. Two DC-4s would cost almost twice as much as a DC-6 to lay a given length of line. So I'm somewhat concerned that this upcoming year to lower the standards to DC-4s may also address a further concern. They had a hard time fighting fires last year, you can imagine how they will address it this year. Possibly the whole country can burn up.

When you look at the disadvantages compared to two advantages of replacing, Mr. Chairman, you have something like eight to 10 disadvantages with using a DC-4. So I certainly hope, for the Minister's sake, that they can address these firefighting methods within their average cost which they said is $13 million.

Another area I wanted to speak on with regards to Renewable Resources, I'm somewhat concerned as a Member that this department doesn't do that much with respect to addressing the environment. There are no initiatives, I believe, in the department with respect to any type of recycling methods. There are some, I believe, through the Liquor Board or in that particular area. There is some type of rebate given for liquor bottles, but there is nothing with respect to overall recycling or anything like that from Renewable Resources.

I just spoke to an elder recently who told me over the winter months he had been taking old pop cans from Fort Smith to Fort McMurray for sale, which had netted him a profit of $3,000. I think he mentioned to me he had 70,000 cans he brought south. But there are none of those types of systems set up in the north, and as a result, there are some people who care and are going to look at the environment and try to recycle where they can. But there are some people who don't care, and a lot of the environment is getting tampered with and nothing seems to be addressed with regard to programs. I think the Minister should seriously look at a good reuse/recycle type of concept for the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Chairman, two other areas. One with regard to my constituency is the bison ranch. I know the department has been caretaking that particular ranch and it's been costing them a phenomenal amount of money. I saw in the supp where they came in and asked for $200,000 to operate the ranch, if I recall correctly. It has been brought to the attention of this department year after year since that ranch has been there that the ranch is located on the wrong side of the river. It's located in a place where you have to bring the feed by chopper if you don't bring enough in by the winter road. You have it quartered off to the point where in the spring you're up to your knees in mud and water because of the low water level in that particular area. It's costly because of where it's located. I think if it was located on the other side of the river it probably wouldn't be as costly.

That's probably one of the good reasons why the Minister wants to export these live wood bison because of the amount they would bring in at an auction. I know they would bring in anywhere up to $6,000 per bison at an auction. And if you send out five, you're looking at $30,000 to offset the costs. I think what many of my constituents are concerned with is when you start putting prices like that on live renewable resources, they start getting concerned because they don't feel that many of our renewable resources in the north you can basically put a price on. That's what the seniors have basically said.

I'm really happy to hear the Minister say he would hold a public meeting in the community on this particular bison ranch. I believe there's a desire by the native groups, particular the band who want to take over that bison ranch. They feel the cost of operating is extremely high. They feel the location is the wrong place. There's no doubt that maintaining and servicing the animals under the present arrangement with respect to feeding, with respect to animals being repeatedly flooded during spring and early summer, is costing this government a lot of money, a lot more than they feel they would be able to manage it for.

I'm sure when they have this public meeting, they will hear not only from the people with regard to their concerns of exporting live wood bison, but with regard to the operations and maintenance and the location of that particular bison ranch. I certainly hope he takes those requests seriously, and looks at trying to find ways to address this bison ranch.

Mr. Chairman, my last comments with regard to Renewable Resources. Fort Smith renewable resources has an administration area where people are charged not on a consistent basis, not on a fair basis, but basically on...I would say they apply the policy where they want to. They apply the regulations when they want and on whomever they want. There is a really bad attitude. It has been brought to the deputy minister's attention with regard to the superintendent, with regard to one particular wildlife officer there, that the native people don't appreciate their services and it just seems that nothing can get done with them.

For example, the incident of the chief park warden who was cutting wood on the wrong side of the river. That river is a big, wide river where I'm sure you can tell the difference from east and west. But when he was found cutting wood on the wrong side, all they did was give him a warning ticket.

If you went in the park and the chief park warden saw you cutting wood on the wrong side of where your park permit stipulates -- and you're not even allowed to cut wood in the park, but if you even took wood -- let me assure you, he would be the one to charge you. Renewable Resources just lets that go under the carpet. I think a lot of local people, particularly native people, are very upset with that. They are applying rules to whomever they want, whenever they want. I really believe the department has to get out of that attitude complacently with regard to addressing renewable resources.

There are a few good people, there is no doubt, in Renewable Resources but I'm sure this department, next to DPW, creates the most problems in Fort Smith. Renewable Resources has a tendency to have personnel who get more comfortable and complacent and, as a result, the new ones who want to start new initiatives have a difficult time implementing them. As I said, there are a few good people who mean well and do mean to protect renewable resources.

This particular department, Mr. Chairman, was supposed to set up a wildlife committee to oversee all of the hunting and trapping activities and all the funding for trappers. They were supposed to do that, I think, two years ago and, as of this date, there is still no wildlife committee. Again, I blame the superintendent and his staff for not taking the initiative to get it done. They are so busy politicking at the Renewable Resources office that they are forgetting their mandate. This type of stuff with this department has to stop.

Mr. Chairman, I would certainly appreciate hearing some comments from the Minister with regard to when he will address such things as the setting up of this wildlife committee, the issue of the bison ranch and charging people when they violate regulations. Let me tell you, Mr. Chairman, Renewable Resources is not -- I guess I can say -- a highly-respected department in the community of Fort Smith because of the way they are dealing with the people.

They consult with people whenever it is convenient for them, and whenever it's inconvenient they say things like the leaders don't want a public meeting. I really can't understand that. Those are my general comments on this department. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There was considerable information about Fort Smith and I don't know if I'll be able to address it all, but I will certainly make an effort. With regard to the way we fight fires with aircraft -- which I believe was the first issue raised by the honourable Member -- from the consultation that has been made, we have been criticized for spending far too much money on aircraft when we fight fires and not enough in the communities. I believe that some very sound recommendations have been made by people in the communities and they will be considered. Some of these recommendations are being included in the submission that will be made to Cabinet.

With regard to how we should be compensating those who lose their cabins or any capital items in the bush, I believe there will be a more reasonable amount of funds left in the communities. We're looking at how more of the dollars could end up in the communities, perhaps by doing more presuppression work before the fire season starts and by requiring the clearing of brush around communities, cabins and lodges which will leave money for people in the communities. Rather than a holding figure under fire suppression, the creation of a target will force us to look at how we can make better use of manpower.

The Member indicated how fires should be attacked within a 24-hour period from the time they start. We can't dispute that. It is something that has been proven. Each of the fire bosses that are out there decide which fires should be attacked and how they should be attacked. That responsibility lies with each fire boss in each area. It makes it very difficult when we have very limited aircraft if, at any one time, 70 fires are starting up on a day; and there have been days when up to 70 fires will start up. It makes it very difficult for aircraft to get to all the fires. I think this was especially the case last year when we had such large fires which got away.

The fire bosses who are in the camps in the fire areas are probably the closest to the communities. Usually, they are from the general area they are managing and they usually decide which fires require the use of aircraft. The success rate of fires being fought has been up to 90 per cent in some years. Some years, like last year, the success rate was probably 70 per cent, which is somewhat lower but still a considerably high rate where firefighters were successful. Because the department no longer has an open chequebook in terms of firefighting but rather, has a target that they have to meet, they will have to make some tough decisions concerning future forest fires they have to fight. They will be looking at a target and have to decide which fires really do have to be fought. That is one thing we are looking in order to try to reduce the dollars that are used.

In terms of the type of aircraft that will now be used: in year one, it is proposed that two DC-4's would be used; in year two, one DC-4 and one DC-6; in year three, two DC-6's will be used; and, in year four and year five, the two DC-6's will be used as well. This contract has been let to a northern contractor. There are times when we have to pay a price for contracting with northern businesses and this is one of those cases where we are paying a price for contracting with a northerner, but it is something that, I believe, most northerners are agreeable with.

In terms of the type of work that is being done by the department, specifically on recycling, there was a submission made to the Financial Management Board on how we could carry out a recycling program with beverage containers. However, the Financial Management Board turned that down because it was too costly to try to operate the recycling of beverage containers.

The other large consideration to us is the environment. Beverage containers may be unsightly but they are not hazardous to the environment. The number one area that the department looks at when it considers environmental protection priorities is the disposal of hazardous wastes such as PCBs. The second in priority would be the air quality guidelines, which the department has considered making into regulations in consultation with the federal government. But at this point they are still guidelines.

The third of the environmental protection priorities is used-oil disposal guidelines. These three areas are areas that are hazardous to our environment and have been a high priority for the department. In terms of the beverage containers, I have indicated that they may be unsightly but are not hazardous. Again, a submission had been made to try and recycle beverage containers, but it was turned down by the Financial Management Board because it was too costly.

In terms of the bison ranch, I had committed myself earlier this afternoon to holding a public meeting regarding the bison which were to be brought down south. To my understanding, the people who run the ranch have never used choppers -- the bison ranch has used choppers but it has never used choppers to transport feed for the bison -- and the location of the ranch was something that the department inherited when they took over the running of the ranch. To try to relocate the ranch to another location would be too costly. At one point, it was being proposed that we should close the ranch down. I had debated that and thought that we should continue to try to make the ranch a viable operation. At the present time, we have 185 bison. From what I understand, in order to make it a viable operation they would require 200 cows, so we are nowhere near the requirement to make it a viable operation. Hence, the department's decision to try and sell off live bison to try to retrieve some of the costs that have been incurred by the department to run the ranch.

The area that we have run into in terms of wanting to hold public meetings in the town of Fort Smith has come from the chief, who is new. He wants to get to know more about what is required of him before he attends public meetings. That is where our fallback has been; we have taken the chief's suggestion and have said we will wait a little longer. Now, I believe it's time the department staff will be able to meet with the community leaders and try to agree that there should be public meetings. But it makes it difficult -- especially in the town of Fort Smith where the Dene band and the Metis are not willing to work together -- for the department to come in and work with all community groups, which we have made every effort to do in all the communities. It makes it difficult to try to get anything done when there is this dispute, this disagreement.

Next is in terms of the chief park warden who started cutting on the wrong side of the river. I've seen it in some of the communities where I've run into the renewable resource officers. There are many warnings that are given by the renewable resource officers before charges are laid. I've seen many, many warnings being given by the officers before they lay any charges. I believe that this is one case where the chief park warden had started cutting on the wrong side. It was the view of department officials that this was not really a sensitive area because if the request had been for the individual to cut on one side in a particular area, then the permit would have been issued. So a warning was given but he was not charged. The individual was allowed to carry on with his permit, except on the other side. He was allowed to cut the same amount as he would have been allowed in the original site.

In terms of the wildlife committee, this is an issue that I believe the department has made efforts to try to resolve. I believe it is one where the department would have been able to effectively work in the community with regard to departmental issues. However, when the various organizations that were approached, such as the Dene band, the chief-in-council, and the Metis, are not willing to work together, it makes it very difficult to form a committee. The individuals were not even willing to face each other on such a committee. The department made an effort to form a wildlife committee but was unsuccessful in doing so.

I hope I've addressed most of the concerns that were raised by the honourable Member. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I just have a couple more comments to make before we get into the budget. I tabled a letter this afternoon from some concerned citizens in Fort Smith who indicated they have repeatedly made suggestions to the Government of the Northwest Territories through Mr. Bourque -- who used to be the deputy minister of Renewable Resources -- and also through Mr. Handley, about relocation of the ranch. The Minister said it would be too costly. I don't think it would be costly if it is done in the wintertime. It would be, no doubt, phenomenal, if it were done any time after the spring once the winter road is out.

The present location is costing the government a lot of money. At one point in time, way before the Minister's time and before Mr. Handley's time, there was feed brought out by a chopper. It's not something I am saying for the sake of saying. It's the way money was spent to operate that ranch.

I have a great concern about the Minister's comments about the Dene band and the Metis not willing to work together. I want to explain to the Minister why I have this concern. It is my understanding that the band and the Metis have always wanted to work together. But, what has happened -- and this is why I made the comment that your department officials play politics all the time in Fort Smith -- is part of the Metis board is made up of old HTA members to whom your department officials are closely affiliated. What happens is they want to do one thing, the band wants to do another thing and, unfortunately, the most critical thing in trying to manage renewable resources is forgotten about. Your department officials lose sight of their mandate.

They are so busy trying to please the old HTA board which was disbanded, and part of the Metis, that they overlook the band. The band, I can sense, is very frustrated about how some of the concerns just can't be addressed; basic fundamental renewable resource concerns like funding and the wildlife committee. It keeps dragging on. I really believe that unless you consider changing your superintendent in Fort Smith and some of your renewable resource wildlife officers, you will continue to have the problem of the band and the Metis not working together. They are creating that problem. That's basically my reason for saying your officials play politics. They play one side against the other and it's unfortunate.

It is not unless Mr. Handley is called or Mr. McLeod is called that some of these concerns are straightened out. And I know they are called numerous times by different people in Fort Smith. It is really unfortunate but that's what creates a lot of the disrespect towards your officials in Fort Smith. I wouldn't go as far as to say, Mr. Minister, that these two organizations don't work together so that they can't even face one another. I don't believe that one bit. I think you're getting some wrong advice by making those comments.

I certainly would like to see a wildlife committee set up by the community. That is what your department's mandate was about two or three years ago and it is still not done. I'm sure that if they can make a concerted effort they will get it done.

And, I would like you to address the issue of the bison ranch. The way it's operating now is costing the government a lot of money and it doesn't necessarily have to be spent in that manner. I know you've thought about possibly closing it down and saving the money, but you have invested a lot of money and it would be a shame to close it down. I can assure you that if you turned it over to the Salt River First Nations as they had requested or to the Metis, they would operate it in an efficient manner because the first thing they would do is relocate it where they can easily drive to the bison, as opposed to having to worry about a winter road or flying in with a chopper. It's something you may want to consider.

Until you make some fundamental changes in your department, let me assure you that you will continually have these problems. And these problems haven't been created over the past year, they have been there for many years and I've talked about them with your department time and time again. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

No, Mr. Chairman. I believe the honourable Member has made a point and we will consider her comments. Thank you.

Agreed.

---Agreed

Line By Line

Directorate

Agreed.

---Agreed

Wildlife Management

Agreed.

---Agreed

Conservation Education And Resource Development

Agreed.

---Agreed

Policy And Planning