In December 2023, Hilu Tagoona was sent a pair of maps depicting the area around her Nunavut community of Baker Lake. One map showed mining claims as of August that year. The other showed claims as of December. Tagoona was struck by the scale of the staking. Over a matter of months, the area under active mining claims had overtaken a large swath of land to the west of her community.
Tagoona is senior Arctic advisor for Oceans North, an organization that supports marine conservation. She is also involved with Friends of Land Use Planning, a small group run partly by volunteers that has been advocating for the adoption of the Nunavut Land Use Plan — a document that outlines where development should be allowed and where environmental protection needs to be prioritized.
The process of building this plan started nearly two decades ago. When The Narwhal spoke to Tagoona three years ago, there was some hope a draft of the plan from 2021 would soon be adopted. But even after being revised in 2023, it remains in limbo, and the claims keep piling up.
The area around Baker Lake (Qamani’tuaq, at the centre of the maps) has seen a dramatic increase in mining claims over the last few years. In 2020, existing claims are shown in yellow. In 2025, new claims staked since are shown in pink. Maps: Nikita Wallia / The Narwhal
Tagoona was not only surprised by the amount of land being staked, but by the fact some mining claims overlapped with zones proposed as “limited use” under the latest draft of the land use plan, including caribou calving grounds and freshwater crossings. In these areas, industrial development would generally be off-limits.
“This is cause for concern,” Tagoona says. “The staking of these sites is almost challenging or going against what communities and Inuit Knowledge Keepers have indicated are areas that need to be protected.”
Hilu Tagoona, an advisor with Oceans North and part of the volunteer-run Friends of Land Use Planning, is concerned about the dramatic increase in mining claims in her home territory of Baker Lake, Nvt. — particularly since the land use plan that would govern activities in the region remains in limbo. Photo: Caleb Qappik Little / Supplied by Hilu Tagoona.
The region around Baker Lake isn’t the only area that has seen a staking rush in recent years. Across the territory, upwards of 52,000 square kilometres of active mining claims have been staked, according to federal data — an area almost twice the size of Vancouver Island. More than half of these claims have been issued in the past two years.
Friends of Land Use Planning recently commissioned a series of maps that show where mining claims overlap with proposed limited use areas. Drawing on federal and territorial data, they found that, as of May 2025, 14,962 square kilometres have been staked within areas that would be designated limited use zones had the plan been approved.
“Honestly, it’s crazy,” Qajaaq Ellsworth, an outfitter and cinematographer in Iqaluit who is also involved in Friends of Land Use Planning, says. “There seems to be a concentrated effort to stake as much as possible before any limitations are put in.”
In the last few years, mining claims in Nunavut have increased dramatically in what some advocates see as an effort to stake claims before limitations are enacted through the Nunavut Land Use Plan. Existing claims prior to 2020 are shown in yellow on this map, with newly added claims marked in pink. Zoom in to see the increase in claims staked across the territory. Map: Nikita Wallia
Land use plan is a key piece of Nunavut’s creation
The Nunavut Land Use Plan is the largest outstanding piece of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, signed in 1993 by the federal government, the Government of the Northwest Territories and Tunngavik Federation of Nunavut, which represented Inuit at the time and later became Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.
The agreement led to the creation of Nunavut, which previously fell within the borders of the Northwest Territories. It gave Inuit surface rights to roughly 18 per cent of the land in Nunavut and subsurface rights to two per cent of the territory. It also mandated the creation of co-management institutions, including a commission responsible for land use planning, that would give Inuit a say in decision-making about land, waters and wildlife. Once finalized, the land use plan will be the largest of its kind in the world.
Developing such a sprawling plan has been a monumental endeavour, ongoing for the past 19 years. It has involved five drafts and extensive consultation with communities, governments, Inuit organizations, industry and conservation groups, among others
To come into effect, the plan needs to be approved by the Government of Nunavut, the Government of Canada and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., which is responsible for ensuring promises made under the territory’s land claims agreement are carried out. Since the latest draft was released two years ago, however, none of the signatories have signed off on it. And it’s not entirely clear why.
Maps commissioned by the Friends of Land Use Planning showed a significant increase in mining claims staked in recent years across Nunavut, including around the community of Cambridge Bay. Photo: Gavin John / The Narwhal
All the while, northern development has become a major talking point. In March, the federal government committed to reaffirming Arctic sovereignty by “unleashing the North’s economic potential.” Similarly, the Government of Nunavut and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. — along with the mining industry — have proposed that unlocking the territory’s critical mineral potential could strengthen Canada’s economy, security and sovereignty.
Mining forms the backbone of Nunavut’s economy, comprising nearly half of the territory’s GDP in 2023. In a region marked by high levels of unemployment and limited economic opportunities, the industry supports employment, training and community development.
“No one is arguing against the fact that we need more investment in the North,” Brandon Laforest, lead specialist in Arctic conservation for the World Wildlife Fund Canada, says.
But without a plan in place to guide development, Laforest adds, continued staking in limited use areas and intense pressure to develop the Arctic is likely to create conflict.
“There’s just a major storm brewing,” he says.
A plan nearly two decades in the making stalls out
In 2006, the Nunavut Planning Commission began work on the land use plan to direct resource use and development, starting with broad planning policies and goals. Since then, it has undertaken a behemoth effort of gathering input and information on various types of land use, including culturally important areas, wildlife habitat, future conservation areas and regions with economic potential.
The land use plan aims to promote the well-being of Nunavut residents, striving for a balance between environmental protection and sustainable economic development. It covers the entirety of the Nunavut Settlement Area, which encompasses one-fifth of Canada’s land mass, as well as marine areas between Arctic islands.
Over the past 19 years, the commission has conducted in-person meetings in all Nunavut communities, held hours of public hearings and received hundreds, if not thousands, of written submissions.
The latest draft of the plan assigns areas to one of three land use designations: limited use, conditional use and mixed use.
Limited use are those areas with year-round prohibitions on certain activities. They include caribou calving grounds and freshwater crossings, as well as some migratory bird habitats and certain watersheds that supply communities’ drinking water. In these areas, land uses such as mineral exploration and production, quarries, roads and hydroelectric infrastructure are generally not allowed. Overall, about 20 per cent of land is designated limited use.
Conditional use areas make up about 12 per cent of the territory. These areas permit all types of activities — including mining and other industrial developments, roads, research and tourism — although there are certain restrictions during specific seasons. For instance, icebreaking for shipping is not allowed in some areas when caribou typically migrate across sea ice, and activities can’t take place too close to polar bear dens during denning season. Mixed use areas, which allow all activities with no restrictions, make up 65 per cent.
“The beauty of this draft is that it was designed by Inuit Knowledge Keepers in the communities,” Tagoona says.
Although there have been some changes to the plan over the years, from a high-level perspective, the past few drafts have held fairly constant, Paul Crowley, a lawyer and consultant in Iqaluit who is involved with Friends of Land Use Planning, says.
Some parties, including the World Wildlife Fund Canada, Friends of Land Use Planning and community and wildlife groups, hoped to see the 2021 draft adopted. In a 2023 letter to the Nunavut Planning Commission, however, the signatories highlighted several issues.
One area of concern was that limited use and conditional use areas on Inuit-owned lands would impinge on the rights of Inuit organizations to manage those lands. Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., in particular, objected to the impact the draft plan would have on Inuit-owned lands.
Legal questions were also raised about the plan’s approach to grandfathering pre-existing land use rights, such as mineral claims. Usually, if a project were to undergo a “significant modification” — for instance, if an exploration project were to advance to a mining project — it would be required to conform to the land use plan. The 2021 draft, however, lists 52 projects with existing mineral rights in limited use areas that would be exempt from prohibitions.
The Nunavut Land Use Plan has involved in-person community meetings across the territory, public hearings and hundreds of written comments over the past 19 years. According to Jacinthe Goulet, a media relations officer with Indigenous Services Canada and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, the federal government is considering, among other things, whether or not the planning process was appropriate as it weighs whether to accept or reject the proposed plan. Photo: Supplied by Emina Ida / World Wildlife Fund Canada
In their 2023 letter, the signatories pointed out this approach, which doesn’t give the commission the authority to exempt some projects and not others, does not align with the Nunavut Project Planning and Assessment Act.
Projects with existing rights would also only be subject to some of the land use plan’s restrictions, depending on the work being conducted and when the rights were acquired, according to a legal analysis commissioned by Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.
Ultimately, the signatories rejected the 2021 draft. The Nunavut Planning Commission released a revised version of the plan in June of 2023.
In the latest draft, prohibited activities are allowed to proceed in limited use areas that overlap with Inuit-owned lands, provided they have support from the relevant Inuit organization.
The draft also lists 89 projects with existing rights as of September 30, 2023 — 37 more than the previous draft. These projects, which include 86 mineral rights and exploration agreements, as well as three licenses that give companies exclusive rights to explore for or develop fossil fuels, are exempt from prohibitions when they undergo significant modifications, as long as the project remains within the same footprint.
The federal government still administers mineral rights in most of the territory. But with a devolution agreement signed last year, the territorial government is expected to take over responsibility for lands and resources, including minerals, by 2027.
If the 2023 draft land use plan were approved, projects with rights acquired after September 30, 2023, would not be eligible for exemptions, according to Jonathan Savoy, the Nunavut Planning Commission’s director of policy and planning.
It’s unclear if the commission has the power to set this cut-off date, however. According to the legal analysis on the 2021 draft, the commission’s use of a “specifically prescribed and limited list” of projects raises jurisdictional concerns.
Since the 2021 draft of the land use plan, 37 more projects — 89 in total — have been proposed in limited use areas, which would be exempt from prohibitions if the draft was to be implemented. Photo: Supplied by Emina Ida / World Wildlife Fund Canada
And still, not everyone is happy with the latest draft. In a 2024 letter, the NWT and Nunavut Chamber of Mines urged the signatories to reject the plan. The draft imposes substantial restrictions on areas with high mineral potential, the chamber wrote. The approach to existing rights also doesn’t allow for the development of infrastructure needed to support mining, such as all-season roads, airstrips and power generation facilities.
The draft plan “could notionally negate around 60 per cent of Nunavut’s currently known critical mineral potential,” the chamber wrote in an email to The Narwhal.
Others see the plan as good enough.
“We’re not happy with every aspect of it. No one is happy with every aspect of it,” the World Wildlife Fund’s Laforest says.
Given the plan will be reviewed and amended periodically, he added, it doesn’t need to be perfect. It just needs to be finalized.
Since the draft was released in 2023, the signatories have shared little information on the plan’s status.
In an email to The Narwhal, Jacinthe Goulet, a media relations officer with Indigenous Services Canada and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, said the Government of Canada is collaborating with Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. and the Government of Nunavut to understand their perspectives before each party makes a final decision on whether to accept or reject the plan.
“The decision-making process is taking time, given that the plan is complex and has weighed many interests and objectives, some of which are competing,” she wrote.
Goulet added the federal government is examining the plan for legal compliance and consistency with federal policies, as well as whether it can be easily implemented, whether it contributes to the regulatory system’s efficiency, and whether the planning process was appropriate.
The Government of Nunavut’s Department of Environment and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., meanwhile, did not respond to requests for interviews or written comments before publication, despite several attempts to contact them over the past month.
“There hasn’t been a lot of movement,” Ellsworth says. “It seems to be kind of a waiting game.”
Qajaaq Ellsworth, an Inuk cinematographer, is also involved in Friends of Land Use Planning. He worries time is running out to finalize the Nunavut Land Use Plan as more and more mining claims are staked. Photo: Supplied by Qajaaq Ellsworth
A missing piece of the regulatory process
Over the past few months, several members of the legislative assembly have sought updates in Nunavut’s Legislative Assembly.
“Many of my colleagues have been asking questions about why it is taking so long for the draft Nunavut Land Use Plan to be approved by the three parties,” Joseph Inagayuk Quqqiaq, MLA for the Netsilik riding, said in May.
“Can the minister provide a clear explanation today as to what specific issues have been causing the delays, and can he clarify what our government’s position is regarding these issues?” he asked.
In June, MLA for Iqaluit-Tasiluk George Hickes similarly pressed the territorial minister of environment for answers.
“When are we going to find out the timeline for the Nunavut Land Use Plan approval or denial?” he asked.
The response to these questions has generally been that the plan is still under review, and that specific issues and legal considerations are being worked out.
“It is with considerable effort that we are trying to balance the needs of different stakeholders,” David Joanasie, the territory’s minister of environment, told the Legislative Assembly in June. He added the three signatories are meeting weekly to discuss the plan.
Hickes told The Narwhal that his understanding is recent elections at the federal government and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. have caused delays. With a territorial election scheduled to take place in October, decisions about the land use plan may fall to the next government, which Hickes worries could cause further delays.
Indecision about the draft plan creates uncertainty about how projects will be allowed to proceed, according to Hickes, which affects investment in the territory.
A lack of an approved land use plan also means a layer of the regulatory system is missing. The Nunavut Planning Commission is supposed to provide the first level of screening to check whether proposed projects align with any applicable land use plan before they can move on to the next stage in the regulatory process.
In the absence of an approved territory-wide plan, the regulatory system has become heavily reliant on the Nunavut Impact Review Board, which generally assesses the impacts of individual projects rather than cumulative effects, according to Laforest.
Relying on the review board also places a heavy burden on communities, he says. It means residents have to keep tabs on individual projects proposed around their communities and make sure they take the time to submit comments, often reiterating their concerns about development in some areas — the same areas they have indicated should be off-limits in the land use plan.
“The tragedy of it is, there’s so much happening all the time around our communities, and many of us don’t have the resources and capacity to continuously submit to every single project,” Tagoona says.
If the land use plan were adopted, she added, it would direct companies away from areas where projects are bound to face local opposition. As an example, she points to a massive, proposed exploration project near Baker Lake, which the Nunavut Impact Review Board recently decided should be modified or abandoned due to its potential for unacceptable environmental and socio-economic impacts. The project would have overlapped with limited use areas.
Tagoona worries about other proposed projects around her community, especially in light of the recently passed federal Bill C-5, the One Canadian Economy Act, which would allow projects determined to be in the national interest to be expedited for development.
While the Act is not expected to change regulatory processes in the territory, Tagoona is concerned the focus on fast-tracking might reduce opportunities for community consultation.
According to Crowley, recent political pressure to develop the Arctic underscores the need for the land use plan.
“There’s only so much investment you can get into this territory. It’s best placed where it’s going to have the best chance of success,” he says.
Crowley added the plan could support the implementation of the One Canadian Economy Act by outlining where projects of national interest might be supported. The latest draft outlines corridors for linear developments, like roads and power lines, some of which territorial leaders have pitched as nation-building projects. One of them is the so-called Arctic Security Corridor, a proposed all-season road and deepwater port that would provide access to mineral-rich areas in Nunavut and the Northwest Territories.
According to Goulet, with Indigenous Services Canada and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, northern and Indigenous governments and organizations are informing the federal government about their priorities, including nation-building infrastructure projects.
With big decisions on large-scale projects ahead, Laforest says it’s high time the plan is adopted.
As the signatories’ review drags on, however, the staking continues.
Reflecting on the delays, Ellsworth refers to John Amagoalik, an Inuk leader who played a crucial role in the signing of the Nunavut Agreement.
Speaking about the motivation for pursuing land claims in 1976, Amagoalik said: “We want to protect as much as possible of what we have left.”
The longer the process for finalizing the land use plan goes on, Ellsworth says, the less and less there is left.
“Time is not working in our favour,” he says.
