Fish and wildlife in Alaska’s major watersheds are threatened by six British Columbia mines close to the Alaska border, according to a new petition that asks U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross to investigate the threat of acid-mine drainage, heavy metals pollution and the possibility of catastrophic dam failure originating in the Canadian province.

The formal petition, organized by a coalition of Alaskan tribal governments and conservation groups, calls for the International Joint Commission to investigate threats from B.C. mines that will continue to hang over the watersheds for centuries after their closure.

“It’s a very urgent issue and it’s important to a lot of people and their families,” Kenta Tsuda of Earthjustice, a signatory of the petition, told DeSmog Canada. “Their communities are at risk.”

B.C. experienced an explosion in mine growth under the former BC Liberal government, which expedited new project approvals under the 2011 jobs program.

The resource-rich corridor straddling the B.C.-Alaska border has been at the epicentre of new mine projects but also bears the legacy of B.C.’s old, abandoned mines, such as the Tulsequah Chief mine, which for decades has leaked acid mine drainage into a tributary of the salmon-rich Taku River.

Guy Archibald of the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council pointed to the lack of enforcement of mining regulations by the B.C. government and the scathing report last year from B.C.’s auditor general that said the Ministry of Environment could not guarantee the safety of any of the mines.

ICYMI: Public Inquiry Formally Requested to Investigate B.C.’s Shoddy Mining Rules

“For 60 years the Tulsequah Chief has been leaking acid mine drainage into a very productive salmon watershed and the B.C. government is doing nothing about this,” Archibald said.

In addition to Tulsequah, the petition names Brucejack mine, which started production earlier this year, Red Chris, Schaft Creek, Galore Creek and Kerr-Sulphurets-Mitchell (KSM), which will be the largest open-pit gold and copper mine in North America.

Ten mines in various stages of development are situated along the B.C./Alaska border and within a transboundary watershed. Source: Salmon Beyond Borders

The new petition — and a previous petition submitted to the Department of the Interior — show that B.C. mines are diminishing the effectiveness of two treaties that protect Pacific salmon, steelhead trout, grizzly bears and woodland caribou, Tsuda said.

“We think the facts that we present in the petition do invoke their duty to investigate,” Tsuda told DeSmog Canada.

The Taku, Stikine and Unuk rivers flow across the Canada-U.S. border from headwaters in B.C.’s Coast Mountains and the wildlife and salmon sustain local communities and support hundreds of Alaskan workers and their families, he said.

The International Joint Commission is the body that administers the 1909 Boundary Waters Treaty, with a mandate to investigate disputes between the two countries.

A provision of the treaty states that “waters flowing across the boundary shall not be polluted on either side to the injury of health or property on the other.”

The group’s petition has been submitted under what is known as the Pelly amendment to the Fishermen’s Protective Act that requires the U.S. Commerce and Interior Departments to investigate when other countries may be harming U.S. conservation treaties.

The amendment emphasizes the need, under international agreements, to protect habitat, but, if all the mines planned for the B.C. side of the border are developed, it will destroy fish habitat, Archibald predicted.

“We are willing to use every tool in the toolbox to enforce this — and the International Joint Commission looks pretty good versus a trade war,” he said.

Fred Olsen Jr., tribal president of the Organized Village of Kasaan and Southeast Alaska Indigenous Transboundary Commission chairman, said in an interview that awareness of threats posed by the B.C. mines is growing among Southeast Alaskans, along with frustration about the lack of action.

“Native people have relied on salmon and caribou from these watersheds for generations and communities continue to do so today. Commercial fishermen from Southeast Alaska also rely on these watersheds, catching tens of millions of dollars worth of salmon from these three river systems annually,” says the coalition news release.

The former provincial government promised the Tulsequah Chief would be cleaned up, but nothing happened and, on the federal front, hopes were high that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would be sympathetic to environmental concerns, but that has been a disappointment, Olsen said.

“He has a Haida tattoo, but then look at the things he does. Everything you hear is either neutral or in favour of mining,” he said.

Eleven southeast Alaskan tribes have signed the petition and, over the next two months, other tribes will be asked to send letters of support, Olsen said.

ICYMI: Canada’s Environmental Fines are Tiny Compared to the U.S.

Enforcement of mining regulations in Canada needs to be tightened, according to Ugo Lapointe, Canada program coordinator for MiningWatch Canada, but there also needs to be a close look at the inadequate fines levied when there is a spill or an accident, he said.

On both sides of the border there is incredulity at the lack of charges after the Mount Polley disaster three years ago when the mine’s tailings dam failed, spewing millions of cubic metres of toxic waste and sludge into nearby waterways.

Lapointe also pointed to the recent $20,000 fine handed to Coalmont Energy Corp., a company which, in 2013, expelled 60,000 litres of mine waste into a tributary of the Tulameen River in the Okanagan-Similkameen region.

“$20,000 for dumping mining waste into a river is another pitiful environmental fine, showing the weakness of both B.C. and federal environmental laws and the enforcement regime. It is not setting a proper example for the industry as a whole,” Lapointe wrote in an e-mail.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Water quality in a tributary of one of Southeast Alaska’s prime salmon rivers will improve once a new mine opens on the B.C. side of the border according to spokesmen for Seabridge Gold Inc, the Toronto-based company planning to open the Kerr-Sulpherets-Mitchell (KSM) mine.

The copper, gold and molybdenum mine, 65 kilometres northwest of Stewart and 30 kilometres from the Alaska border, received federal and provincial environmental assessment approvals last year and the company is now seeking a joint venture partner for the $5.4-billion project.

But the prospect of a massive mine close to a tributary that runs into the Unuk River has alarmed Alaskan fishing, First Nations and environmental groups who say the risk is unacceptable and are pushing for transboundary mining issues to be referred to the International Joint Commission.

“The long term risks of KSM far outweigh any short-term improvements to water quality the mine may create,” Chris Zimmer, Rivers Without Borders Alaska campaign director, said.

The KSM tailings pond, with a massive 239-metre tailings dam, will be built in the Bell Irving/Nass watershed in B.C., but the mine operation will be close to Sulpherets Creek which runs into the Unuk River.

“The open pits and waste rock piles are located in (the Unuk) watershed,” Heather Hardcastle of Salmon Beyond Borders said.

“They’re essentially using the Unuk, all the way up to the border as a mixing zone.”

However, Brent Murphy, Seabridge Gold vice president environmental affairs, in an interview with DeSmog Canada, said water quality in the creek is already bad because of natural erosion of copper, iron and zinc deposits.

“The acidity will basically eat your boots off,” he said.

Federal and provincial regulators agree there will not be any impact in Alaska from the mine, Murphy said.

“The operation of the KSM water management system will, in fact, improve the overall water quality,” he said, pointing to company photos of discoloured creek water.

“We will treat the water that comes into contact with the mine site and improve the water running into Sulphurets Creek and ultimately the Unuk River,” Murphy said.

But Alaskan groups say the photos are misleading and point to a 2014 report by Skeena Wild Conservation Trust that concluded KSM would release metals into the Unuk watershed that would exceed levels known to have serious impacts on salmon.

“I am especially concerned when people make statements to the effect that they can improve natural systems. Seems the height of hubris,” said Guy Archibald, Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, Inside Passage waterkeeper coordinator.

“There is more complexity in a mud puddle than science will ever understand and a massive intervention such as the KSM mine will no doubt have massive unforeseen negative consequences.”

Following the 2014 collapse of the Mount Polley tailings pond dam there has been increased concern about earthen tailings dams and the expert panel looking into the disaster recommended that mining companies should adopt best available technologies and consider dry stacking tailings when possible.

However, Peter Williams, Seabridge vice-president of technical services said location is the paramount concern when choosing how to dispose of tailings and, after considering dry stacking, it was decided the KSM site was ideal for wet tailings, with a lined tailings pond to ensure no discharge into the environment.

“We have put it into a valley and most of the walls are valley walls, so they are very strong,” he said.

“It makes this location very safe.”

The u-shaped valley will have gently-sloping dams at either end, constructed of sand from the tailings, Murphy said.

That is very different from the Mount Polley dam which consisted of a steeply-sloping ring dyke constructed of locally-sourced till material, he said.

“Most importantly, after treatment, water from the proposed KSM facility will be discharged on an annual basis, preventing the build-up of any water within the facility as occurred at Mount Polley where there was no treatment of water for discharge,” he said.

Zimmer, who emphasized that Alaskan groups are concerned about the effect of the mine on any rivers, whether Canadian or Alaskan, said one of the major worries is what happens over time.

“What happens after 250 years? What if the water treatment fails or doesn’t work as proposed — Seabridge has no contingency plans for this,” he said.

Williams said there should be no concerns after closure as, after the tailings are topped and revegetated, there will be minimal water flow.

During the six-and-a-half-year review process, Seabridge held numerous meetings with Alaskan groups and regulators, including a public meeting in Ketchikan, Murphy said.

There was also a detailed assessment by independent federal regulators so there was no need for a panel review — as requested by Alaskans — because it would duplicate work already done, Murphy said.

Neither would a referral to the International Joint Commission be the correct process, Murphy believes.

“In our opinion [the IJC] is a political dispute resolution process and we are continuing to support efforts of the B.C. and Alaska governments who are working on increasing cooperation between the two governments on transboundary projects and we encourage them to work towards a memorandum of understanding,” he said.

But Zimmer said most of the meetings were open only to agency and company officials and many questions remain — such as lack of funds to deal with major accidents or proof that Seabridge can treat water for selenium.

“The arrogance demonstrated by Seabridge’s blind faith in their engineering in the face of the forces of Mother Nature and time, is the same arrogance that resulted in the Titanic, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Mount Polley,” he said.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.