The Yukon government filed its appeal of the Dec. 2 Yukon Supreme Court regarding the land use plan for the Peel River watershed on Tuesday afternoon.

The government is asking the Yukon Court of Appeal to quash three specific orders issued by Justice Ron Veale, including the order to accept 80 per cent wilderness protection and limited surface access throughout the region.

It’s also asking the superior court to strike down Veale’s finding that the government did not follow the proper process in consulting on a final land use plan, and that it had introduced new provisions at the 11th hour that nobody had seen before.

“We are looking for clarity that the democratically elected government will retain the authority to make decisions on Yukon public land,” Energy, Mines and Resources Minister Scott Kent said in an interview this morning.

“It’s very much about protecting our democracy as well as the economic future of the territory.”

Kent said Veale’s decision certainly restricts the government’s ability to manage the Peel watershed in a manner it feels is best for the territory.

The decision ties the government to a land use plan developed by the Peel planning commission that it does not agree with or accept, the minister said.

“The key message, the most important thing we are trying to get across, is public government must have the last say on what happens on public land.”

Kent also announced the government will be reinstating a freeze on staking new mineral claims inside the Peel and will not require companies to pay their annual fees to keep existing claims in good standing while the uncertainty remains.

After years of planning, the government rejected the final land use recommended by the Peel planning commission.

It instead developed its own plan, and formally adopted it last January, prompting an immediate legal challenge from First Nations and two environmental organizations.

Veale heard the case last July, and sought further clarification from the parties during a one-day hearing in October.

The Peel River watershed is 68,042 square kilometres in size, accounting for 14 per cent of the Yukon’s total area.

The Yukon aboriginal land claim agreements provide for regional land use planning across the entire territory. The North Yukon Land Use Plan was the first to be completed, and was signed off in 2009 without any public controversy.

The Peel planning exercise was the second regional exercise, and was controversial before the ink was dry on the initial three draft plans. In one corner were the four affected First Nations, environmental organizations and a large segment of the Yukon population calling for maximum wilderness protection of what they argued was one of the last pristine areas in the world.

In the other corner was the government, industry and another large segment of the Yukon population calling for a more balanced land use plan which allowed for economic development while providing wilderness protection.

Veale found the government, however, was not upfront and open during the land use planning exercise; that it never really put its cards on the table until the very end.

That approach is not acceptable when dealing with modern-day aboriginal treaties, as enunciated by the Supreme Court of Canada, he explained in his 92-page decision.

Veale said the law of the land these days requires governments to act honourably when dealing with matters of modern day treaties, to give those treaties liberal, not narrow, interpretation.

The government, he found, relied on a narrow interpretation of the agreements.

It relied on the clause that said at the end of the day it had the ability to “approve, reject or modify” land use plans recommended by planning commissions, the judge said in his decision.

“It was an ungenerous interpretation not consistent with the honour and integrity of the Crown,” wrote Veale.

He ordered the government to return to the planning table, but only to the point where it had begun to provide meaningful input.

The judge specifically said the government is permitted now to go all the way back to the beginning, and must now accept a large part of the plan recommended by the Peel commission – including the vast wilderness protection and restricted road and rail access.

Kent said the government cannot accept the direction provided for in Veale’s decision.

“What that remedy does is limit our ability to make decisions,” he said.

Kent said it’s also about future land use planning exercises.

The Dawson regional land use planning exercise is well advanced but was put on hold just before Veale’s decision was issued.

Kent explained all parties to the Dawson plan agreed it would be best to put the exercise on hold until the matter of the Peel land use plan was finally resolved.

It would be premature to discuss whether the government is prepared to take its case all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada if it loses its appeal, said Kent

Under the land claim agreements, owners of the land have the final say over land use plans recommended by a planning commission, whether it be aboriginal settlement land or territorial Crown land.

Ninety-seven per cent of the Peel watershed is Yukon government land.

See related coverage.